Donald Trump – Modern Day Walpole?

Nelson Hultberg

January 2, 2018

“Hatred of Walpole was almost the only feeling which was common to them. On this one point they concentrated their whole strength. With gross ignorance, or gross dishonesty, they represented the Minister as the main grievance of the state. His dismissal, his punishment, would prove the certain cure for all the evils which the nation suffered. What was to be done after his fall, how misgovernment was to be prevented in the future, were questions to which there were as many answers as there were noisy and ill-informed members of the Opposition. The only cry in which all could join was, ‘Down with Walpole!'”

– Thomas Babbington Macaulay
English Historian and Politician, 1800-1859

England’s first Prime Minister, the exuberant Whig politician, Sir Robert Walpole, reigned from 1721–1742. Possessed of brilliant administrative skills and a tenacious personality, he generated great influence on the politics of his day to promote the Whig Party and general prosperity throughout England, while severely inhibiting the power of the opposition Tory Party.

His political career began in 1701, and with the onset of Queen Anne’s rule in 1702, he became a dominant player among the Whigs, rising to the position of Secretary of War. But because of his outspoken combativeness toward the Tories, he acquired numerous powerful enemies in the hallowed chambers of Westminster Hall.

As a consequence the Tories relentlessly hounded him, seeking to discredit his integrity and stature. In 1712, they claimed that he was guilty of flagrant corruption as Secretary of War and brought impeachment charges against him in the House of Commons. The charges were concocted, however, based totally on hatred rather than any wrong doings. But nevertheless the House of Lords found Walpole guilty and expelled him from Parliament. They even threw him into prison in the Tower of London for six months.

The intense hatred that Tories held for Walpole backfired, though, because the public rightly perceived him as a victim of a bogus trial and re-elected him to office in 1713. From there he went on to become the first Prime Minister of England in 1721 and served until 1742, which makes him the longest serving PM in English history. He died in 1745 with a notable career of peace, low taxes and freedom as his legacy to his country.

Does History Repeat?

Mark Twain’s famous comment, “History doesn’t repeat, but it often rhymes,” is appropriate here. Trump and Walpole are certainly not identical; but it can be said that the history of our era is “rhyming” with that of Sir Robert Walpole’s and his tumultuous career as a Whig politician in 18th century England.

Hatred of Trump is the constant cry of the political left today from clowns like Maxine Waters to flimflam ideologues like Chuck Schumer. They have no substantive policy to put forth, no rational opposition with which to appeal to the people, only “hatred of today’s Walpole.” Donald Trump is the target of their overweening animosity and vacuity. Love of America and freedom are nowhere to be found in their specious observations. This is the pitiful denouement of liberalism and the bankrupt Democrat Party.

Herein lies immense danger. Because of their ideological blindness and lack of policy substance, liberals have become like a severely wounded animal with nothing left to lose. This is spurring them toward a desperate “Hail Mary” philosophy of politics in an effort to regain power in Washington. Thus their approach is now built around vile smears and treasonous corruptions like Robert Mueller’s Special Counsel probe of alleged Russian collusion. Devoid of rationality, the left is reduced to criminality and lies. This bodes well for American patriots, but only if the majority of the people are able to perceive the truth in face of a partisan media’s relentless fake reporting. And the jury is still very much out on that question.

Invoking the 25th Amendment

The 25th Amendment to the Constitution states that whenever the President asserts that he is no longer capable of discharging his powers and duties of office the Vice-President shall assume the office of President.

Political consultant and former Trump campaign advisor, Roger Stone, has recently come forth with the claim that members of the Trump Cabinet have had detailed discussions about removing Trump from office because of incapacity. They are allegedly forming a back-up plan of governance under the justification that Trump’s bombastic personality and governing style are dangerous to the stability of the country. [1]

“Mr. Stone claimed during a recent interview aired on C-SPAN that…some members of Mr. Trump’s administration have weighed whether they can invoke the 25th Amendment to take him out of office.”

When quizzed by Associated Press reporter Tom LoBianco as to whether he had evidence of anyone actively plotting or laying the groundwork inside the Cabinet – inside the administration – to make such a removal, Stone replied, “Yes…there are some who have had this discussion. This is both outside the Cabinet and in. I think it’s the fallback plan for the establishment. That’s why I’m trying to sound the clarion call.”

Stone declined to disclose specifics when pressed for further details, but he insisted his claim wasn’t baseless. “Like you, Tom, I cannot reveal [my] sources…but this is not a conspiracy theory,” he replied. “There are members of the Cabinet who have had this discussion. Let me just leave it at that.”

“You’re going to see an enormous uptick in…irresponsible stories smearing this president as, you know, non compos mentis – not up to the job, and so on – particularly if Mr. Mueller should shoot and miss. So I’m being realistic about what I believe is the resolve of many in the political establishment to remove the president under any means necessary,” Mr. Stone said during the C-SPAN interview. [2]

Any perceptive patriot today can see that there is a hysteria loose amidst the leftist political sectors of America. Liberalism has gone bonkers because of the humiliating defeat administered to its creed at the polls in November of 2016. Democrats put their faith in the Hildebeast, and it turned out to be a resoundingly naïve faith.

Whither Now, Mr. Trump?

But can The Donald make good on his promises to the outraged voters who voted him into office this past Election Day? Can he restore economic growth, political legitimacy, tax justice, immigration sanity, and American greatness? He has taken a promising step with his new tax plan, say many conservatives. But in this writer’s view it is miniscule reform in light of what is really needed.

It is highly doubtful whether the GOP has fashioned something robust enough to genuinely restore economic growth. Our economy is suffering from monumental ideological fallacies plaguing us that stem from Keynesianism in the colleges, the Congress, the Federal Reserve, the Wall Street banks, and the media. This plague has been in existence since 1936 when John Maynard Keynes came to visit us with his “fiat money fakery” and “pseudo-wealth creation.”

Until we thrust off the shams of Keynes’ gross misunderstanding of economic law, we as a nation cannot restore, or rediscover, or return to anything resembling the free American republic that the Founders gave us. The GOP is operating under the flaws of “supply-side economics,” which came into prominence with Ronald Reagan. It maintains that there is no need to be concerned with prevailing deficits because large tax reductions will generate enough growth to overcome such deficits and bring about a balanced budget over time.

Unfortunately the supply-siders are making their wishes father to their facts. Reagan gave us prodigious growth, yes, but at the expense of monstrous budget deficits and a national debt that are now growing like wildfires in California. Because budgetary discipline was not addressed in any responsible manner under Reagan’s administration, America entered into the age of Governmental Gluttony, which has led us to a $20 trillion dollar debt burden today. Bill Clinton ran budget surpluses in 1998-2000, and George W. Bush ran a surplus in 2001. But all other years from 1975-2017 have had large deficits. Barack Obama led the pack of prodigals by adding $7.3 trillion dollars in deficits while in office – far more than any president in history. [3]

What will Trump’s Presidency bring us regarding fiscal solvency? The prognosis, I fear, is not good. Trump’s economic advisors are captive to Arthur Laffer’s supply-side fallacies that stress only tax cuts and not spending cuts. Granted, Laffer’s guiding tax ideology is sound. The only problem is that Congress doesn’t have enough courage to implement equal logic on the spending side of the ledger.

Tax cuts necessitate spending cuts. Without them deficits will explode as sure as mushroom clouds will shoot skyward from nuclear blasts. Reagan’s brilliant Director of the Office of Management and Budget, David Stockman, has attested to this truth over the past several decades with searing logic in The Triumph of Politics: Why the Reagan Revolution Failed (1986) and The Great Deformation: The Corruption of Capitalism in America (2013). Unfortunately his message is ignored by an obtusely corrupt Congress. Thus the National Debt for our country will continue to grow unless our politicians bring their spending incontinence under control when seeking to reduce oppressive taxes from the federal government.

Laffer aficionados disagree and preach that “supply-side economics” won’t work if we try to cut spending along with tax cuts to ignite more economic growth. But this is only true because we have adopted the flawed Keynesian model, which leads to massive credit-debt expenditures via fiat money inflation on the part of Washington. A political-economic system that supports sound money, low taxes and low spending will always produce substantial growth. As evidence, merely observe America’s exceptional economic growth between the years of 1870-1913, which averaged 4.3% annually [4] when both taxes and spending were extremely low and budgets were balanced.

Our conclusion is that economic growth via supply-side economics is not “healthy growth” if deficits and the total debt of the country explode in the bargain. Laffer’s supply-side economics is not the answer to Keynes’ demand-side economics. Both lead to massive deficits. The answer is to restore a free market, and the economy will produce constant and substantive growth without the need to stimulate the demand side or the supply side.

Trump’s Advisors in the Dark

Unfortunately Trump’s advisors don’t grasp this fundamental truth. If there is hatred for Trump right now, what will there be in three years as the GOP tax plan explodes the deficit because of the fallacy of “supply-side economics?” The levels of hatred for Walpole will reach even more hysterical levels. Even if economic growth reaches 4% and above, if the annual deficits exceed $1 trillion dollars, how can the GOP justify itself for the 2020 elections? Liberal demagogues will exploit such a scenario viciously. “Down with Walpole!”, will be the cry. “He is bankrupting the nation,” they will lament.

I endorsed Donald Trump back in the summer of 2015. I endorse him today, and I will steadfastly endorse him in the future. He is the only politician with the strength of personality capable of taking on the Swamp Creatures. But if the GOP supply-side tax plan repeats what took place under Reagan, then Donald Trump is in trouble for 2020. And America is in trouble as a solvent nation. There are natural laws at work in this universe, and they cannot be violated with impunity. The next three years are going to be tumultuous. Fasten your seat belts, America. It’s going to be a bumpy ride.

Notes

1. The Washington Times, December 26, 2017, https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/dec/26/roger-stone-former-trump-adviser-claims-cabinet-me/

2. Ibid.

3. “U.S. Deficit by Year: Compared to GDP, Increase in Debt and Events,” The Balance, October 27, 2017  https://www.thebalance.com/us-deficit-by-year-3306306

4. The Statistical History of the United States from Colonial Times to the Present (Stamford, CT: Fairfield Publishers, 1960), p. 141.

Print Article


Share