1. A brief thread on why we should not panic but should worry, even be a bit...alarmed.

I've been speaking with former Trump Administration officials and with other former senior national security types who remain plugged in to the Pentagon.

2. They think we'll most likely "be ok;" but they are worried about what one called the three I's:
Iran.
The Insurrection Act.
and (White House and civilian DOD leadership) Insanity.
3. Iran.

January 3 is the anniversary of Suleimani's killing, followed shortly by the end of the 40-day mourning period for Fakhrizadeh. So there is the prospect of Iranian retaliation, to which a U.S. response (or conceivably preemptive action) would certainly be legitimate.
4. Iran (cont'd)

But of course there's also the possibility of the Trump Administration using an Iranian provocation to launch an action that's way beyond proportionate, as well as the possibility of simply inventing a predicate for U.S. action.
5. Iran (cont'd)

This obviously wouldn't stop the transition or even endanger it; but it would create an atmosphere of crisis and even chaos in which the second possibility--the Insurrection Act--might seem more doable.
6. The Insurrection Act.

As one former national security official put it to me, when you play out this scenario it's hard to see how it works--but even trying to invoke the Insurrection Act would create a full-blown constitutional and governmental crisis.
7. The Insurrection Act (cont'd)

The only reasons to worry about this are that Trump apparently has mention this to allies in recent days, and, I'm told, the senior civilians at DOD have been asking around--just in case!--about how it would work.
8. The Insurrection Act (cont'd)

And of course Trump is encouraging his supporters to come to D.C. on January 6; it's not at all unlikely there'll be turmoil, disturbances, perhaps violence, which would obviously be Trump's excuse for trying to invoke the Act.
9. The Insurrection Act (cont'd)

There have been preparations for such an eventuality among senior uniformed officials and others at the Pentagon who are on the side of constitutional government, and the reaction would be serious and even dramatic. And I think Trump knows that.
10. Insanity.

This the third "I" is kind of a catchall, meant to capture the real craziness of many of those with whom Trump is consulting, but also of many of the newly installed Trump civilians in the Pentagon.
11. Insanity (cont'd)

And even though the Trump appointees are serving in "acting" capacities, and are totally out of their depth, they do have actual authorities that are worrisome. Their orders could be resisted or appealed or leaked or challenged as unlawful--but...
12. Insanity (cont'd)

...as one person put it to me, these civilian officials do have levers to pull or at least try to pull, and that's worrisome.

"Let us therefore have that salutary fear of the future that makes one watchful and combative..."
-- Tocqueville, DA II 4.7

END

More from Government

You May Also Like

MASTER THREAD on Short Strangles.

Curated the best tweets from the best traders who are exceptional at managing strangles.

• Positional Strangles
• Intraday Strangles
• Position Sizing
• How to do Adjustments
• Plenty of Examples
• When to avoid
• Exit Criteria

How to sell Strangles in weekly expiry as explained by boss himself. @Mitesh_Engr

• When to sell
• How to do Adjustments
• Exit


Beautiful explanation on positional option selling by @Mitesh_Engr
Sir on how to sell low premium strangles yourself without paying anyone. This is a free mini course in


1st Live example of managing a strangle by Mitesh Sir. @Mitesh_Engr

• Sold Strangles 20% cap used
• Added 20% cap more when in profit
• Booked profitable leg and rolled up
• Kept rolling up profitable leg
• Booked loss in calls
• Sold only


2nd example by @Mitesh_Engr Sir on converting a directional trade into strangles. Option Sellers can use this for consistent profit.

• Identified a reversal and sold puts

• Puts decayed a lot

• When achieved 2% profit through puts then sold
The UN just voted to condemn Israel 9 times, and the rest of the world 0.

View the resolutions and voting results here:

The resolution titled "The occupied Syrian Golan," which condemns Israel for "repressive measures" against Syrian citizens in the Golan Heights, was adopted by a vote of 151 - 2 - 14.

Israel and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/HoO7oz0dwr


The resolution titled "Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the Palestinian people..." was adopted by a vote of 153 - 6 - 9.

Australia, Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No' https://t.co/1Ntpi7Vqab


The resolution titled "Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the occupied Syrian Golan" was adopted by a vote of 153 – 5 – 10.

Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/REumYgyRuF


The resolution titled "Applicability of the Geneva Convention... to the
Occupied Palestinian Territory..." was adopted by a vote of 154 - 5 - 8.

Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/xDAeS9K1kW