by Michael H. Blank
We have just witnessed a clearly stated political hit executed as planned upon a former President of the United States of America performed by an Attorney General of New York and enshrined in legal precedent by a self-proclaimed activist elected to his judicial role on the Supreme Court 1st Judicial District of New York. The short sightedness and idiocy of these actions are almost beyond comprehension.
Let’s start with the very basic concept of law by which this country was founded and grown. We aren’t some country that has just done alright following our legal tradition. We are a country that has grown from a rag tag bunch of colonies into what was, at least until recently, the most prestigious, free, and powerful country in the world, perhaps even in history.
We certainly have obtained a level of wealth that has never before been seen by so many and been so available to so many more. Do we still have our poor, our impoverished, and our downtrodden? Yes, absolutely, but even then, they enjoy goods obtained from what the rest of us discard that would have been beyond comprehension for all but the wealthiest of times past. I think we forget ourselves. I think we forget how we’ve gotten here. We have allowed ill-intended activists from all sorts of degenerative ideologies to play on our pettier emotions to tear all of this down. And for what? Justice? Progress? If so, by whose standards? Clearly none that are objective and beneficial to anyone outside their closed-minded causes. Vengeance against ourselves, is not a social good in any functional society.
For those who haven’t realized the impact of the ruling of Judge Arthur Engoron, who sat smug jester over this farcical affair, real estate developers are declaring openly that they are no longer willing to look at or start projects in New York, and not just the city proper, but the whole state. The smartest in the room should be worried about any future home equity loans, or at this moment, any they may have now. Why? Because what was decided here was that saying, I believe my property to be worth X, even when the banks basically agree with you, but a report comes back saying because of certain factors right now it will only appraise at X-1, you’ve now committed fraud. I find this particularly galling and ironic as that is basically a description of all of the equity, commodity and bond markets most famously centered in New York City. What else is that whole system other than one party saying I believe my shares, or bonds, or barrels of oil (aka property) is worth X while the counter party says, I disagree and offer Y.
We have grown, nay, thrived as a country because while we have always held the highest of ideals, we were also practical people. We believed that disagreeing with each other was part of the process, that compromised, and inclusion of beliefs and attitudes made for a better foundation and a stronger future. Just as alloys are almost inevitable stronger than any pure metal, we believe that it was the push and pull that hammered out the strongest blade with which to forge our future. This ruling is nothing less than the embodiment of the political belief of the age that disagreement is now illegal. It is the tainting of the legal process with blind ideological dogma. The destructiveness of it, unless it is overturned and extracted from the records like the cancerous growth it is, will be unimaginable. The only solace to be found historically is that those who implement such regimes of thought are usually some of the first to be consumed by it in short order. But personally, I prefer to see fires put out, not to sit back and see all whom they consume. Then again, I am but a pragmatist, without a fiddle to play, you may feel differently.
