The Black plague

When it comes to governments' response to the COVID pandemic, there is plenty of scope for civil disagreement. We can all come up with ways that our local jurisdiction, whether at the national or sub-national level, could have done a better job. With the benefit of hindsight, we might conclude that an earlier, much tougher but very short lockdown would have arrested the spread of the disease, allowing us to rely on localized measures and shielding the vulnerable once the peak had passed. You might have a different view, but it should be something we can address rationally.

What we probably can't discuss civilly, however, is the whole idea that the pandemic is some kind of a hoax or giant conspiracy -- the "scamdemic".  Conspiracy theories are always hard to credit because it is an observable fact that people are terrible at keeping secrets: someone is always going to blurt the story out, usually for personal gain or glory. In the particular case of COVID, there is the added question of cui bono?  If there is a giant conspiracy under way, who is benefiting from it? 

All of which brings us to this article from Conrad Black, which manages in remarkable fashion to combine reasoned discussion of policy alternatives with a fully-fleshed out version of the conspiracy theory, including an answer to the cui bono question. 

Black's cavalier treatment of the statistics related to the pandemic is bizarre: if you don't believe that all the deaths reported as being caused by COVID are in fact virus related, then to what do you attribute the hundreds of thousands of "excess deaths" being reported around the world? The latest figure for "excess deaths" in the US is actually larger than the number of deaths attributed to COVID, which seems to suggest the virus death toll is actually being under-counted.  That said, however, Black's preference for targeted measures to protect the vulnerable, together with mandatory mask wearing, is clearly a better policy choice than a full lockdown. 

So far so good, but now Black goes full-on conspiracy theorist. Let's hear it in his own words:

The incumbent administration was practically certain of re-election prior to the outbreak of the COVID-19 crisis. The Democratic opposition saw a path to victory by agitating for a gigantic economic shutdown, which would lead to an economic recession that could then be portrayed as a needless depression generated by incompetent public-health management on the part of the Trump administration, even though the administration was following its opponents’ advice in shutting down, and is bringing the nation back to work more quickly than had been thought possible. The U.S. economic growth rate was 32 per cent in the third quarter and the United States has vastly outperformed all other advanced countries in the world since coming out of lockdown.

So much is factually wrong there. Opinion polls prior to the pandemic certainly did not suggest that Trump was "practically certain of re-election". The administration has never followed its opponents' advice in shutting down -- to the extent that there has been any effective response to the virus in the US, it has been at the State and local level. Lastly, despite Black's attempt to exaggerate the recovery by annualizing the third quarter growth rate*, it simply is not true that the US economy has "vastly outperformed". Since he now lives in Canada, you might think that Black would know that the True North has recouped a significantly larger proportion of the jobs lost in the early stages of the pandemic than the US has.

Still, at least we now know, courtesy of Conrad Black, the answer to that maddening cui bono question. It's the Democratic Party, of course!  Anyone surprised? 

* Actually he has done more than annualize it!  The advance estimate for this measure is not due for release until October 29, so it is not clear what number His Lordship is using here. Would that be "fake news"?

Black markets

This is an equal opportunity blog.  Since I dissed David Olive's leftish musings in the Toronto Star a couple of pots ago, it's only fair that I do the same to a piece in today's National Post by none other than Conrad ("Lord") Black, he of no fixed citizenship.  Black has a well-deserved reputation as a fine (if somewhat florid) writer on history; today we learn why he doesn't say much about economics.

The difference between Olive's piece a couple of days ago and Black's today is this: with Olive, I could see the points he was trying to make and could attempt to refute them, whereas with Black, I have no idea what he's trying to say.  It's economics, Jim, but not as we know it.  The Post doesn't like people copying bits out of its articles to paste into blogs -- they ask you to obtain a license, with vague threats of consequences if you don't -- so I invite you to follow the link and read the article for yourself.  Just don't go leaving it around for impressionable young economists to read.  

Citizen Black

It's been a while since we checked in on our old friend Conrad "Lord Black of Crossharbour" Black.  After his conviction on a small number of fraud-related charges in the US, Black knuckled down and served his time in a Florida "Club Fed"-style jail. After doing his bit,  with a few months off for good behaviour,  he was expelled from the USA, as a convicted felon of foreign citizenship.  Of course, many years ago (we'll come back to this), Black renounced his Canadian citizenship in order to be able to accept a UK peerage -- that's the Crossharbour title -- so he had to get the government's special permission, as a convicted felon, to re-establish himself in Canada.  In effect, he's only living in his native land at the pleasure of the government.

So much for the entertaining backstory.  Now there are new developments.  Conrad's back to his old tricks as a serial court-botherer, and he's had a very bad week.  First off, his latest attempt to have the charges against him in the US quashed has been rejected.  Black's rather cheeky grounds for giving it another go were that the justice system had intentionally deprived him of the cash he needed to employ his first choice of lawyers.   There's no word as to how the lawyers who actually ended up representing him are taking this implied insult.  However, Judge Amy St Eve, who heard the original case and must be thoroughly fed up with the sight of Black, gave the request short shrift, noting that in all the long months of the trial, nobody had ever seen fit to mention that Black did not have his first choice of counsel by his side.

Meanwhile, back in Canada, it's come to light that Black also received a setback at the hands of the Federal Court of Appeal a few weeks ago.  An advisory panel recommended some time ago that Black should be stripped of the Order of Canada, the country's highest civilian honour.  Black went to the appeals court to try to expedite a hearing on whether he should be allowed to plead his case to keep the award, but has now been told he has to wait his turn with everyone else.

You have to wonder whether the eventual decision in this matter will take any account of Black's opinion of the award and indeed of Canada itself, eloquently expressed in his decision to renounce his citizenship and accept the peerage in Britain.  That peerage itself may effectively no longer be available to him anyway -- he would almost certainly face expulsion from the House of Lords, again on the grounds of his felony conviction,  if he ever showed up there.

Still, you can't keep a good man down, especially if he needs to put bread on the table, and Black is now reinventing himself as a chat show host.  He's landed a gig on something called Zoomer TV, whose programming is aimed at active baby boomers, a category into which Black presumably fits.  He's promised to use his contacts to land some big name guests, starting with.....Henry Kissinger.  Well, by your friends shall you know them, I guess.    

"Worthwhile Canadian initiative"

So you're actually reading this, are you? That's a relief, but also a bit of a surprise. A good number of years ago, The New Republic ran a contest to find the dullest newspaper headline, the one least likely to induce you to read the associated article, and the winner was, yes, "Worthwhile Canadian initiative".

Maybe it's time for TNR to re-run the contest, because the last few weeks have produced some Quite Interesting Canada-related stories, not all of them reflecting well on the Great White North. The appalling riots that took place after the Vancouver Canucks lost a hockey match have already been done to death, so let's start with the business pages. (Just as an aside, though, what sort of team nickname is "Canucks"? It's like calling a team "Manchester Limeys" or "Paris Froggies").

Anyway, yesterday the London Stock Exchange (LSX) abandoned its friendly takeover bid for the Toronto/Montreal equivalent, TMX, in a move that appears to confirm Canada's chosen role as the most xenophobic country, business-wise, in the developed world. The bid had prompted a group of Canadian financial institutions to wrap themselves in the gaudy national flag as "Maple Group" and launch a counter offer, muttering darkly about the threat to Canada's financial sovereignty. The shamelessness of this beggars belief. The Canadian banks backing Maple Group have all been enthusiastically expanding in the US; Canadian pension funds, also behind the Maple bid, have been acquiring all sorts of assets in Europe, notably in the UK, without any impediment.

Although TMX management had accepted the LSX bid, it had become evident that the necessary two-thirds approval by existing shareholders would not be forthcoming, so LSX has swallowed its pride and walked away. It's not clear what will happen next to TMX. It has never been keen on the Maple Group deal, and local regulators have started to express concerns over its competitive implications, as it would control 80% of equities dealing within Canada. Most likely a deal will get done, however; with global bourses in a consolidation mode, failure to do the deal now might well bring to the table another foreign suitor, one that might be even less palatable to delicate Canadian sensibilities than LSX.

Poor old LSX was scared off without the Ottawa government even getting involved, but of course, just last year the government did stir itself to torpedo the planned acquisition of Potash Corp. by the multinational BHP Billiton. The Canadian media seem remarkably relaxed about all this, and the usual justification is being trotted out: that Canada needs to safeguard its sovereignty in the face of its noisy and assertive southern neighbour. Well maybe, but it's hard to see how that applies in dealing with approaches by the LONDON Stock Exchange or BHP Billiton, whose long-standing nickname is "Big Australian".

And here's an interesting thought. Maple Group has hinted that if it gets control of TMX, it might look at some acquisitions of its own. There's not a lot out there, so what price a cheeky bid for LSX? If it happens, one can only hope that the UK offers the traditional Canadian welcome, best expressed by the long-defunct comedy duo Bob and Doug Mackenzie: "Take off, ya hosers!"

Another hoser who may also get told to "take off" is our old buddy, Conrad Black, now back in the hoosegow after being resentenced in a Chicago courtroom. He's to serve a further thirteen months, and immediately he's released he will be expelled from the US as a foreign felon. Apparently he'd like to return to Canada, which is where he was born and has lived for almost all his life. But there's a problem: Black renounced his Canadian citizenship in order to accept a British peerage, so Canada has no obligation to take him back. In fact, it would be a breach of current Canadian immigration rules to let him into the country, given his criminal record.

So Black may be forced to up stakes and move to the UK, though there'd be another problem if he did that. As a convicted felon, he would surely risk being stripped of his precious peerage. You could argue that it couldn't happen to a nicer guy, but hey, cut Conrad a break -- he's always good value on a slow news day.

Riots! Rampant xenophobia! Displaced and disgraced peers! Still think Canada's boring? Well, take off, ya hoser!

Black out

Dear old Conrad "Baron of Crossharbour" Black has been released from a US penitentiary on bail. His convictions for fraud are being reassessed in light of a change in US law that came into effect after his trial. Although his conviction for obstructing justice stands, it's possible that his sentence will be reduced to time served, meaning that he never has to go back to the Club Fed in Florida where he's spent a bit more than two years.

His trial back in 2007 was a lot less interesting than I'd expected, but the next little while should be fun, at least for the lawyers. Lots of people are after Conrad: see this, for example, from the Toronto Globe and Mail:

The Internal Revenue Service is after him for $70-million in unpaid taxes and penalties, the Securities and Exchange Commission has a lawsuit against him and there are dozens of actions in Canada and United States.

At the same time, though, Conrad's after a lot of people, probably starting with his "unofficial" biographer, Tom Bower. Bower has declared himself "amazed" at Black's release, but is unlikely to be equally taken aback when a libel comes zinging his way. That's assuming, of course, that Black can afford a lawyer, as it's not clear how much of his previous fortune he has been able to squirrel away (either from the authorities or from his notoriously extravagant wife, Barbara Amiel). Even if Black finds the wherewithal to sue all of his enemies (a pretty long list), any money he succeeds in shaking out of them is likely to touch down in his accounts for no longer than it takes for those litigating against him (an equally long list) to get their hands on it.

Then there's the question of where he's going to live. He gave up his Canadian citizenship in order to accept a British peerage, so he has no automatic right to return to Canada, which may anyway refuse him entry as a convicted felon. His UK passport has expired. And although his wife has continued to live in the couple's Palm Beach mansion, it's not clear that the Blacks actually own it anymore.

What with the loomimg tsunami of BP-related litigation and now the return of the Conrad Black soap opera, the US legal community must be in hog heaven right now. That's something we can all be happy about.

Forgive me, you reeking perjurers!

The United States, usually so punctilious about the division of powers, still allows departing Presidents to issue pardons to convicted felons. (Even to unconvicted ones -- President Ford used his powers to ensure that Richard Nixon never saw the inside of Sing Sing). Reportedly there are about 700 people hoping to catch a break when Dubya heads off to Texas.

Among them is dear old Conrad (Lord) Black, the disgraced newspaper baron, currently doing time in Florida. His lawyers are busily preparing a submission to the President in hopes of securing an outright pardon, or at least a reduction in sentence.

How odd, then, that Conrad has seen fit to publish this extraordinary attack on the entire US justice system. It first appeared in something obscure called Spear's Wealth Management Survey magazine. The Sunday Times (R. Murdoch, prop.) helpfully reprinted it on the weekend, just to make sure the US Justice Department didn't miss it.

Conrad is well known for his forcefully expressed opinions, but even by his standards this is an exceptionally pungent piece of writing. For example: "The system is based on the plea bargain: the barefaced exchange of incriminating testimony for immunity or a reduced sentence. It is intimidation and suborned or extorted perjury, an outright rape of any plausible definition of justice." He calls the US a "carceral state" (i.e. the country is one big prison) and rails at "US federal prosecutors, almost all of whom would be disbarred for their antics if they were in Britain or Canada".

How is President Bush likely to feel about pardoning a man who remains entirely unrepentant and thinks he was stitched up by a corrupt justice system? Conrad, old pal, I realise it must be hard not seeing your name in print all the time, but don't you think it might have been a teeny bit smarter to hold off on your rantings for just a little longer?

Back to Black

In mid-March I posted a piece recommending that everyone should pay close attention to the Conrad Black trial, which was just getting underway in Chicago. I styled it as a "celebrity death match". Well, if anyone died, it was probably from boredom. I had expected legal tantrums, outrageous tales of high living and who knows what else. There was some of that, but mostly it was about non-compete agreements, the workings of audit committees and the technicalities of mail fraud. Despite that, I've been following it avidly, which just goes to show how a lifetime spent in the financial sector can mess you up.

Black has now been found guilty on four of the thirteen counts against him -- three of mail fraud, relating to the non-competes, and one of obstructing justice. (It almost came out much worse for him: according to one of the jurors quoted in the Toronto Globe and Mail, earlier in the week a majority of the jurors also wanted to convict on another of the fraud charges, plus a racketeering charge, but were finally dissuaded by the minority). Black plans to appeal the convictions, and sentencing will not take place until late November, so he won't be heading for the Big House any time soon.

The prosecution did not make a particularly strong case against Black, and came in for a lot of criticism for pushing the "class envy" button a little too hard. In the event, Black was acquitted of the major lifestyle-related charges -- spending company money on a party for his wife, and buying his Manhattan apartment from the company at an unduly low price -- but it may still have been this part of the case that led to his conviction on the charge of obstructing justice, which carries the longest potential jail term.

Why do I say this? Well, the charge related to an incident in which Black was captured on CCTV carrying boxes of papers from his Toronto office. The lifestyle evidence must have had some part in convincing the jury that carrying boxes was not a normal activity for Black. After all, he famously attended a fancy-dress ball dressed as Cardinal Richelieu, not as a UPS deliveryman.

The lifestyle evidence also produced one of the great quotes of the whole affair, though it was penned before the actual trial began. Peggy Wente of the Toronto Globe and Mail wrote that "there are only a handful of women in the world who can afford to dress the way Lady Black does. Unfortunately, Lady Black may not be one of them".

There could still be some fun and games to come here, but given the tedium of the trial itself, it may not be worth trying to bag a ringside seat. Pity, then, poor Mark Steyn, who sat through and blogged the whole thing as one of Black's very few sympathisers, only to miss the day of the verdicts because of a prior commitment in Madrid!