As I looked over another fraudulent, U.S. GDP report , I could hardly believe my eyes. In concocting its latest GDP number, the U.S. Commerce Department reported that consumer spending had risen by 1.6 % in the second quarter.

Having recently written a commentary which focused on the huge plunge in U.S. retail sales, I didn't even have to review the data to know that this was a total fabrication.

For the benefit of readers, I will review that data. U.S. consumer spending was flat in April (i.e. unchanged). It (supposedly) rose 0.2% in May. In order for U.S. consumer spending to have risen by an aggregate 1.6% in the second quarter (as reported by the government), June consumer spending would have had to rise approximately seven times the amount of May consumer spending.

Sadly, the Commerce Department refused to include the consumer spending number for June, only the fabricated number for the second quarter. The reason is obvious: there is no rational number for June consumer spending which could create a coherent set of data.

Keep in mind that U.S. June retail sales plummeted 0.5%, after a much large drop of 1.1% in May. There is simply no possibility that U.S. June retail sales could be a large, negative number, while U.S. consumer spending for June could be a larger, positive number.

In other words, this is not the case of some statistician making a dubious adjustment or estimate in order to come up with this final total for second quarter consumer spending. This is a matter of a statistician not liking the numbers he was looking at, so he simply erased those numbers and wrote in new ones.

While we're talking about fabrications regarding consumer spending, given that retail sales in May collapsed by -1.1%, the reported 0.2% gain in May consumer spending is also not a rational number -- but almost certainly another fabrication. Thus, even the initial fabrications of data weren't good enough for the U.S. government, so it is apparently resorting to re-fabricating numbers.

For those optimists (naïve zealots?) who still want to believe that the reported U.S. consumer spending could be true: two separate private sector organizations both estimated that U.S. consumer spending for June was either flat or falling -- hardly the enormous leap higher which would be required for the official U.S. number to be remotely plausible.

As I pointed out in a recent commentary , there are consequences for engaging in serial lying. One of those consequences is that logical disconnects are created. By this, I mean that the lies become incompatible with each other. For instance: the way that U.S. "new home starts" cannot possibly be reconciled with "new home sales" (month after month, year after year). Consequently, the U.S. propaganda-machine never mentions "new home starts" and "new home sales" in the same article.

Another logical disconnect is how the aggregate, monthly employment numbers which are reported individually by states are not remotely compatible with the national monthly jobs reports foisted upon us by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. These are not mere statistical anomalies, but huge, gaping chasms between one set of numbers and another.

If U.S. new home starts exceed U.S. new home sales by a huge amount -- every month -- it is simply not even feasible that inventories could have fallen to their lowest level in decades, as the U.S. government continues to pretend. Similarly, it's attempts to pretend that U.S. retail sales and U.S. consumer spending can be opposites of each other is also not even faintly possible.

Indeed, the reason it was necessary for the U.S. government to create a logical disconnect between the monthly reports for consumer spending and the aggregate quarterly total was because if it had reported actual consumer spending for the quarter (either totally flat, or negative), then no one would have believed the GDP lie. A consumer economy cannot have solid, GDP growth when consumer spending is totally flat, or even falling. In other words, they had to create one logical disconnect in order to hide another one.

It is time for other reputable commentators to stand up and say what I have been saying for many months: the "Emperor" is naked!
This commentary comes from an independent investor or market observer as part of TheStreet guest contributor program. The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of TheStreet or its management.