Monday, November 8, 2021

Kyle Rittenhouse Doesn’t Need Reasonable Doubt. His Prosecutors Do

In a weird turn of events, it’s lawyers for the state of Wisconsin who are the ones trying to argue that what’s seen on the surface is not what it seems.



Prosecutors in the murder trial of Kyle Rittenhouse so far have a case that comes down to this: What if the things our witnesses say they saw and thought during that fateful night of rioting last year are all wrong?

If this were a legitimate murder trial, and not one instigated by Democrats and the media for political purposes, that’s the kind of argument that a defense team would be making. It’s a concept otherwise known as “reasonable doubt.”

But in a very weird turn of events, it’s lawyers for the state of Wisconsin who are the ones trying to argue that what’s seen on the surface is not what it seems (despite eye-witness testimony and a lot of video evidence showing that, yes, it’s exactly what it seems).

Key testimony was presented Thursday when prosecutors called journalist Richie McGinniss to the stand to explain exactly what he saw in August 2020, back when riots had engulfed Kenosha, Wis., over the police shooting of Jacob Blake, a black man.

McGinniss had briefly interviewed Rittenhouse, then 17, about why he was downtown carrying an AR-15 and a medic kit. He had also been in tow of Rittenhouse when the latter was seen on video darting across a parking lot, pursued by another male, who McGinnis said he saw trying to grab Rittenhouse’s firearm.

McGinniss said Thursday that he saw the man, since identified as 36-year-old Joseph Rosenbaum, yell “f— you” at Rittenhouse before reaching for the gun. Rittenhouse did a kind of swerve with the gun to evade Rosenbaum’s grasp, then fired multiple shots.

Ryan Balch, who was also present the night of the incident, similarly testified the same day that moments prior to the shooting, Rosenbaum had said to him and Rittenhouse, “If I catch any of you guys alone tonight I’m going to f—ing kill you.”

Both McGinniss and Balch were called by the prosecution. They are both the state’s witnesses. They are both portraying a scene where Rosenbaum was a hostile individual who had made physical and verbal threats to Rittenhouse. The state’s response has been to ask: What if what you saw and heard is not actually what you saw and heard?

Kenosha Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger asked Balch at one point, “What gave you the right to go around and police that area?”

That’s the you “shouldn’t have been there” line of argument that Balch had earlier answered beautifully when he was asked about Rittenhouse’s presence at the scene. “He had as much right as anybody else to be there,” Balch had said. Sure, if nobody had been there that night, we wouldn’t be where we are today. So what?

During McGinniss’s testimony, all of which is backed up by video recordings, Binger asked him about a TV news interview he had given shortly after the shooting, during which McGinniss had said he saw Rosenbaum fall forward before Rittenhouse shot him.

It’s supposed to be a significant detail because the state is attempting to make the case that Rittenhouse needlessly fired his weapon at Rosenbaum when he was off balance and therefore, presumably, nonthreatening.

As McGinniss maintained that Rosenbaum was only tipping forward because he was maneuvering to grab Rittenhouse’s gun — surely a threatening move — Binger proposed to McGinniss, “I mean, you have no idea what Mr. Rosenbaum was ever thinking at any point in his life. You have never been inside his head. You’ve never met him before. … So your interpretation of what he was trying to do or what he was intending to do or anything along those lines is complete guess work, isn’t it?”

Without skipping a beat, McGinniss said, “Well, he said ‘f— you’ and then he reached for the weapon.”

McGinniss and Balch said what they saw. Binger asked them to recall their impressions of that night without the benefit of hindsight. They did. But the prosecution’s case continues to rest on a possibility that maybe they got it wrong. Maybe their eyes and ears deceived them.

It wouldn’t make a difference even if they did. Rittenhouse is charged with murder, not with a failure to read the room.

And this only addresses witness testimony, not the trove of video footage that backs up everything that McGinniss and Balch said.

There’s only one way that a jury, on the merits, can side with the state against Rittenhouse: They have to find a reasonable doubt. Not on behalf of the defense, but in favor of the baseless questions proposed by the prosecution.


Indictments By John Durham Tell Us The Mueller Investigation Was Always A Charade

Digging too deep would have shown all roads led back to Perkins Coie & the Clinton Camp -- so they didn't.



The two recent indictments obtained by Special Counsel John Durham combine to reveal that the Mueller Special Counsel Office was created, at least in part, to keep hidden the role of the Clinton Campaign and Democrat operatives in the Trump-Russia Hoax.

Robert Mueller - Education, Special Counsel & Life - Biography
Michael Sussmann, a high profile attorney working for the Clinton Campaign, and Igor Danchenko, the “Primary Sub-source for the Christopher Steele Reports, are charged with lying to the FBI at moments in time, and as to specific subjects about which truthful answers would have exposed the involvement of the Clinton Campaign in the operation to falsely smear GOP candidate and later President Donald Trump.

Let’s reset the scene in May 2017 when Mueller was appointed. Both the House and Senate were in control of the GOP, each with subpoena power for purposes of oversight of DOJ and the FBI.

President Trump had fired James Comey as Director of the FBI. Nothwithstanding the persistent chorus of the media that he did so to stop the Russia investigation, the FACT is that he told Lester Holt of NBC News that he did so because Comey was not going fast enough in conducting the investigation and he had lost faith in Comey.

While their reasons were different, the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General had both recommended Comey’s firing as well.

Comey’s reputation among the Special Agent workforce cratered after he took it upon himself to exonerate Hillary Clinton in connection with her handling of classified information. FBI Agents knew that if an agent had handled classified information in the same fashion, he/she would be prosecuted for doing so. FBI Agents investigate and are involved in prosecutions of other government employees who did less than Hillary Clinton did. Anyone who tells you that Comey was “popular” inside the FBI after that decision doesn’t know what they are talking about. He was not “of” the Bureau. He was a career DOJ prosecutor — he was an “outsider” in the Bureau’s culture.

Politically connected individuals in government and politics knew in May 2017 that what the FBI had been working on for 10 months was now subject to exposure either by congressional investigators or Trump Administration appointees.

Not only the “whats,” but the “hows” and “whys” too.

I can’t explain how the “decision-making” took place — express or intuitive — but the steps that followed solved both those problems, at least temporarily.

The appointment of Robert Mueller to be Special Counsel was made by a Trump appointee, Rod Rosenstein. Rosenstein was an odd choice for so critical a position and is a prime example of Pres. Trump accepting advice on appointees from people who did not necessarily have his best interests in mind. Rosenstein was a career official at DOJ who had been named by Pres. Obama as the U.S. Attorney for Maryland — a deep blue state with two Democrat Senators.

That position would normally go to a loyal partisan Democrat — it went to Rosenstein. Was Rosenstein actually a loyal partisan Democrat? When the topic of how Rosenstein came to be named, there were reports that when his name was given to Chuck Schumer, his reaction was that the Senate Democrats could live with Rosenstein. That should have been a red flag right there.

Robert Mueller had been the U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts in the 1980s when Rosenstein was a law student, and Rosenstein interned in that office. Given the DOJ career that Mueller went on to have, there was probably no person that Rosenstein would have been more reluctant to “push back” against in his role as the “supervisor” of the Special Counsel’s Office than Robert Mueller. Rosenstein admitted as much in testimony before Congress where he said that the SCO wrote up what it was they wanted in their “Scope Memo” and he just signed it.

Mueller may have been the singular individual in the DC establishment who could accomplish the following goals just by being named:

  1. Make Rosenstein a non-factor in the Special Counsel decision-making.

  2. Force Congressional Republicans to pull back so as to allow the Special Counsel the ability to work unimpeded.

  3. Command whatever workforce he wanted, with the issue of staffing and budget left 100% to him.

  4. Set whatever timetable worked best for him, without outside pressure.

  5. Create anticipation of a final work product that would be difficult to attack because of his professional and political bona fides.

That is pretty much exactly what happened. To avoid claims that they were interfering with Mueller’s investigation, Congressional Republicans and the Trump Administration had to go silent for the most part.

Staffing ended up as a fully partisan hit squad — made possible by Mueller’s tenure at the FBI where he brought in partisan Democrats from DOJ to staff senior positions in the Bureau. I don’t think Mueller really cared about politics when he was staffing the Bureau Management as Director. But that history brought all those partisan Clinton supporters into his orbit as he got older.

Here is how the Mueller Report described the scope of the SCO investigation, quoting from Rosenstein’s Authorization Order:

“The Special Counsel is authorized to conduct the investigation confirmed by then-FBI Director James Comey in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on March 20, 2017, including:

i. any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump;

ii. any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and

iii. any other matters within the scope of 28 CFR Sec. 600.4(a).

Noteworthy in “ii” is the use of both past and present tense — any matters that “arose” from the FBI investigation referenced by Comey before the House. That seems to suggest that anything which had spun out of the FBI investigation would be subject to the SCO’s authorization, even if previously closed.

The indictment of Michael Sussmann has at its core a series of events which were claimed to be indicators of an ongoing relationship of some undetermined character between Trump Inc. and Alfa Bank, the largest “privately” owned bank in Russia, the owners of which are reputed to have close connections to the Putin government.

Donald Trump and Trump Inc. have been dogged by allegations of nefarious business dealings with Russian interests as part of real estate projects around the world. The most common allegations in a non-legal sense are that Trump accessed funding from Russian interests to keep Trump Inc. projects moving when US lenders would no longer provide him such capital, and for that reason it was alleged that he was beholden to Putin and others in Russia.

It has also been the case for years that various Trump-branded projects have attracted buyers who sourced their wealth to corrupt actors and government officials in Russia. The allegations leveled at Trump — usually by legally illiterate reporters — was that such transactions involved Trump in “money laundering” on behalf of those buyers.

If the internet communications at issue in the “Alfa Bank” matter were bona fide exchanges of substantive data between Alfa Bank and Trump Inc., the task of determining whether there was an illegal or illegitimate relationship between the Trump Campaign and Alfa Bank, or Russian state actors connected to Alfa Bank, certainly would have been within the purview of the Mueller SCO under the Appointment Order quoted above.

It is not contested that Clinton Campaign lawyer Sussmann walked those claims into the FBI, and the materials he brought were delivered to the original Crossfire Hurricane investigation that was then in its early stages. Peter Strzok has said publicly he received the material from James Baker, the FBI General Counsel who received them from Sussmann. Strzok then delivered the materials to the appropriate individuals working with the Crossfire Hurricane team.

It is also true that the information Sussmann gave to the FBI was carefully evaluated. As has been reported, the data was not terribly complicated for persons in the business of evaluating and understanding the types of internet traffic that were reflected in the Sussmann material. Durham’s indictment reflects that the computer science experts that Sussmann worked with to assemble the materials admitted in internal communications that the package would not withstand much scrutiny.

And it did not. FBI cyber experts dismissed the suspicions and conclusions that Sussmann offered along with the data just as expected. But Sussmann persisted and took much of the same information to the CIA in February 2017.

Given that the Mueller SCO took over the entirety of the FBI investigation that Comey had confirmed to the House, what did the Mueller SCO do with regard to the Alfa Bank matter?

The Mueller Report makes no mention of the episode at all. This was confirmed by no less than Natasha Bertrand, the in-house stenographer for whatever the Intelligence Community wants to see in print, who wrote in Politico on April 19, 2019:

Several lines of inquiry that Mueller and the FBI … had reportedly been pursuing went unaddressed in the copious document. They include mysterious interactions between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank computer servers….

It may be innocuous, but of interest in that passage is Bertrand’s reference that the Mueller SCO did look into the Alfa Bank issue, but simply failed to address it in the report. Ultimately, it makes no difference whether the Mueller SCO ignored the subject altogether, or looked into it and opted to now report on what it found. Either way, it is a fact that because of Durham’s investigation we now know the data behind the claimed Alfa Bank connection was 1) fabricated, and 2) had the fingerprints of Clinton Campaign operatives all over it.

Closer evaluation of the data would have involved scrutiny of Sussmann; Sussmann leads to Crowdstrike and the supposed Russian hack of the DNC; Crowdstrike leads Perkins Coie and Fusion GPS; Fusion GPS leads to Glenn Simpson telling Christopher Steele about the Alfa Bank-Trump Inc. internet contacts; Alfa Bank leads you back to Sussmann.

Those connections would have been readily discovered by Mueller’s SCO. Maybe they were discovered by Mueller’s SCO. But that wasn’t the purpose for why the SCO was needed. No one wanted to uncover that spider’s web of connections with the Clinton Campaign and Perkins Coie at the center.

Oftentimes overlooked in an analysis of actions taken by a group under scrutiny are the decisions made about what actions to not take that, in retrospect, seem to have been called for.

The Mueller SCO prosecutors either pursued the Alfa Bank issue or they did not.

There has never been a public answer or explanation given for what was — or was not — done. But it only takes a whisper from one well-placed party operative to a single partisan member of the Mueller SCO to ‘Not got there” for the potential implications to be obvious. The Mueller SCO prosecutors were too smart to not realize early on that the information in the Steele reports was unreliable.

To draw attention away from that reality, the Mueller SCO first went after Paul Manafort, a long-time Washington political consultant with longstanding ties to the GOP, and a lengthy history of doing business in Russia and Ukraine.

The Mueller SCO also went hard after Russian “active measures”. When the SCO unveiled two “speaking indictments” spinning wild tales of Russian influence over the Red State hinterlands with millions in Facebook ads, it gave the media the exact “Shiny Object” needed to draw attention to the Russians.

Given what Durham uncovered about the bogus origins of the Alfa Bank story, the failure to pursue or report on Alfa Bank while focusing efforts on two ridiculous indictments that were never going to see the inside of a courtroom — or at least the Mueller SCO didn’t expect that for either — takes on a more suspicious light.

This is why witnesses who were inside the investigation on a day-to-day basis are key to finding out the “whys” as to these subjects.

Witnesses like Kevin Clinesmith and William Barnett.

I’m going to save for Part II the issues surrounding the indictment of Igor Danchenko and why it was that the Mueller SCO was not interested in the lies he told to the FBI.

The same Mueller SCO that could find nothing better to do on their way out of town than to string up Roger Stone for lying to Congress.

I might even write a Part III that goes back and re-examines the farce that were the two Russian-related indictments which the Mueller SCO did pursue.

How COVID Vaccine Coercion Drove Me Out Of West Point

My unvaccinated friends and I were mocked for being in the 'dirty' platoon of only unvaccinated cadets, while officers told trainees to stay away from us.


In the spring of 2021 during my first year at the U.S. Military Academy, I was told that my decision to reject getting the “optional” COVID-19 vaccine would not negatively affect my time as a cadet at West Point.

That quickly changed. My Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act medical privacy rights were violated when my vaccination status was released to members of the freshman class and upperclassmen who were planning our summer details, to which an officer stated, “HIPAA isn’t the be-all, end-all.”

Before leaving for the summer, the unvaccinated were forced to attend a “re-education brief” led only by vaccinated personnel. Unvaccinated personnel were not allowed on the panel and it became a very hostile environment of us-versus-them. In this three-hour brief, our questions about natural immunity and health concerns were disregarded and labeled “unscientific.”

During summer training, my unvaccinated friends and I were segregated, ostracized, and mocked. We endured rude comments, while others pointed and laughed at us for being in the “dirty” platoon of only unvaccinated (and therefore masked) cadets. Cadets yelled that we were the “sick” or “dirty” or “anti-science” platoon. Officers told trainees to stay away from us.

After returning to the academy in the fall, unvaccinated cadets were subjected to COVID testing twice a week at 6:00 a.m., even if we didn’t have COVID symptoms. Even though the vaccinated can also contract and transmit COVID, they were not tested, and those who felt sick were denied COVID tests. The leadership purposefully made life miserable for unvaccinated cadets, in what I can only conclude was an attempt to convince us to violate our consciences and blindly follow the rest of the herd.

Denied a pass for being unvaccinated, I was not allowed to leave campus with my friends because our radius was restricted compared to the vaccinated cadets. I could not even take an overnight pass to my sponsor’s house on post, even though the same policy that restricted me from staying overnight allowed me to spend the day there.

I was visibly cast as the “other” when only the unvaccinated had to wear masks (indoors and outdoors). This made it easier for teachers to identify me as unvaccinated, and during my summer class I was the only one in our hot classroom forced to wear a mask for our three-hour class. Ironically, now, everyone must be in masks in the classroom. Many of my teachers scoffed at the idea of students remaining unvaccinated and for making such an unscientific and selfish choice.

I was subjected to this treatment while knowing that some of my fellow cadets had an adverse reaction to the vaccine, including life-changing heart problems. One of these adverse reactions resulting in heart issues happened on the Crew team. That same team kicked my best friend off for being unvaccinated, with her coach saying it “went against [her] ethics” to coach an unvaccinated cadet.

Around the same time, guidance was pushed down that we could not even attend our religious clubs. While this guidance then changed shortly after, no one questioned the unethical nonsense of telling cadets they could sit shoulder to shoulder in a classroom to study calculus, but it was too much of a “health threat” to have us in the same classroom six hours later discussing the one thing that gave us hope and comfort.

The coercion grew worse when the official vaccine mandate paperwork came down on Sept. 27, 2021. The other unvaccinated cadets and I were escorted to an auditorium at 5:45 a.m. We were not allowed to leave without signing a document acknowledging that we were disobeying direct orders.

We had a choice to either be vaccinated, separate, or apply for a religious or medical exemption. At the meeting, we were denied any legal counsel. There were no judge advocate generals or legal advisers available for us to talk to before signing this document, and I was personally told by a colonel that I could not receive counsel before signing the documents.

When I raised the point that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved vaccine (Pfizer’s Comirnaty) with the proper lot numbers had yet to be distributed in the United States, that the only available vaccines were under emergency use authorization and that vaccination must be voluntary under those conditions according to the Nuremberg Code, I was told this small legal distinction didn’t matter.

My friends’ medical exemptions pleading natural immunity have been denied by West Point, contrary to science. We are not aware of any medical exemptions that have been granted. The religious exemptions are still being processed, but denial is assumed. Although I filed a religious exemption, I decided to separate from West Point because the U.S. Army is no longer an organization I can serve in.

I personally refused the vaccine because I had COVID and now have natural immunity, the vaccine has harmed way more people I know than the actual virus, and I believe the entire push to vaccinate has been rooted in deceit. Because I follow a God who demands absolute truth, I cannot participate in something that has been built on a mountain of lies.

I could no longer stay at an institution that claims to fight for freedom while using people as puppets to convince the public to give up their freedoms for a political show. Title VII of the U.S. Civil Rights Act prohibits religious discrimination, and while I am by no means against vaccines, I am against unjust mandates, vaccine passports, the violation of HIPAA, and the violation of personal rights to bodily autonomy.

Unfortunately, serving my country and serving in the Army don’t seem to be so similar anymore. I have deep respect for West Point’s legacy, for the sacrifices of our soldiers to protect and defend our country, for the cadets who work tirelessly, for the training officers and teachers who devote themselves to raising leaders, and for the amazing family I have made through some of the most wonderful people I have ever met.

I tell my story not to stain the name of West Point, but to raise awareness of the persecution our military is under because of our higher leadership. I do blame the Biden administration for ignoring the pleas of thousands of soldiers. I blame Anthony Fauci for shamelessly lying time and again. I blame Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin for his lack of leadership and integrity. And I blame the leaders who have the power to make change and yet remain silent.

Hannah MacDonald is a former cadet who recently left the U.S. Military Academy at West Point over unethical treatment and vaccine coercion.


X22, SGT Report, and more-Nov 8th

 



Evening. Here's tonight's news:


The Biden Regime Will Turn the Military on the People Unless We Push Back

What Christopher Rufo did with critical race theory 
must be done with the post-9/11 security state.


“The coldest of all cold monsters.” That is what the modern state is. Nietzsche’s devastating analysis in Thus Spoke Zarathustra hit the nail on the head: the state is an engine of death. It wages war on the people, its agents are “annihilators” who seek the destruction of everything vital and potent.

All who witnessed the last 18 months of the COVID regime and the biomedical tyranny imposed by Joe Biden and his handlers implicitly understand what Nietzsche meant. The bureaucrats who make up the arm of the state, who serve this cold monster, hate the people. They make their lives miserable. Lockdowns, vax mandates, mask orders, critical race theory in schools, transgender bathrooms . . . the list goes on and on.

Ritual humiliation is the point. The agents of state power see themselves as the rightful masters of the people. To these creatures of the institutions, citizens are nothing but human resources to be bent to their malformed will.  

This perverse view extends even to the American military. The time is coming, soon, in which the armed forces will be turned openly against the people. The Biden inauguration lockdown in D.C.—replete with checkpoints, thousands of national guardsmen, and the full weight of the nation’s security apparatus—was only a taste of things to come.

The Biden regime has no moral compunction against using force at home to impose its will. The barriers are practical, not ideological. Biden, in June of this year, mocked “gun-rights advocates” as a defense against tyranny. They would need “F-15s and nuclear weapons” to defeat the state, Biden claimed.

Implicit in this apparently weird statement is the acknowledgement that his administration would not hesitate to turn its full military might, including atomic bombs, against the populace in a war. The state, the coldest of cold monsters, headed by an endless mob of Anthony Faucis would not hesitate to impose its will in the most brutal manner possible.

The “pattern in the mount” is America’s wars overseas. The Bush Administration didn’t launch the war in Iraq and Afghanistan simply as punitive measures for 9/11. Rather, the aim was to radically transform the political and cultural way of life of these peoples. The American state declared war not on a few individuals or specific governments, but on entire modes of being. Afghanistan and Iraq would become democracies, even if they had to be bombed to smithereens to make that happen.

This hubristic project failed, of course. But not until after an enormous outpouring of money and blood. The United States used massive surveillance programs, biomedical data collection, secret prisons, extraordinary rendition, and a drumbeat of drone strikes to impose its will.

Everything our scientifically trained  and sanctimonious elites did abroad to foreigners and “terrorists” will be done here at home. These chickens were always meant to come home to roost. The response of the bureaucracy, of the state, to 9/11 was to implement invasive security in every airport in America, spy on Americans without warrants, and launch bloody wars based on lies, with no accountability to boot.

It does not take a wild imagination to see the endgame. Tactics used against terrorists abroad will be used to beat down “insurrectionists” here at home. The decrepit conditions in D.C.’s “deplorables jail” and the ferocity with which federal law enforcement has gone after Boomers for wandering around the Capitol and making mischief shows the radicalization of our regime.

This has happened before. In the 1990s, the Clinton Administration had no qualms using armored vehicles, snipers, and heavy weapons against dissidents. The FBI burned 76 men, women, and children alive at the Branch Davidian compound in Waco. At Ruby Ridge, a government sniper killed a mother in cold blood while she held her 10-month-old child.

As America becomes more divided and as the political class becomes more and more unhinged in its attempt to cling to power, the likelihood of state violence against the people increases. America is lucky. So far, there has been no real right-wing acts of terror against the regime. If there were, the situation might already have gotten out of hand.

The attempts by America’s national security apparatus to instigate provocations (in order to justify its own overreach) have failed . . . so far. The boobery surrounding the attempted “kidnapping plot” against Governor Gretchen Whitmer is instructive. The FBI managed to entrap a bunch of low-IQ rednecks in an elaborate plot to kidnap and possibly kill Whitmer, but it required immense effort and goading.

This could change in a heartbeat, however. The vaccine mandates, the endless drumbeat of anti-white racism from the Left, and the anti-Trump hysteria that animates the ruling class, is a toxic mixture. It could easily explode under the right circumstances.

In that situation, we can expect the Biden regime to deploy the military and national guard against its political enemies just as it did when it felt threatened by the January 6 “insurrection.” The Russiagate collusion hoax and General Mark Milley’s attempt to wrest control of the nation’s nuclear weapons from the elected president in the wake of the 2020 election show that our regime will no longer tolerate real opposition or dissent. We live in a regime of edicts and emergency “public health” measures. The Constitution is long dead.

If Americans on the Right are to prevent the use of the military and national security apparatus against the people, we must defang these institutions. The most powerful weapon at our disposal right now is mockery. We must strip America’s surveillance state and our bloated military industrial complex of honor and deference.

As a practical measure, we need to get public approval for the military to below 40 percent. Without a majority backing its actions, the armed forces cannot be used domestically without significant problems. What Christopher Rufo did with critical race theory must be done with the post-9/11 security state.

The Right needs to stay on message, pointing out over and over again that the military establishment is ideologically leftist and defends its own bureaucratic interest. The Pentagon has lost interest in winning wars and preserving the rights of the people. It exists to increase its own budget and follow “the process.” The bureaucrats who populate the military-industrial complex swamp feel no loyalty to ordinary Americans. They are loyal only to their own “expert” interests.

Patriotic Americans have no choice but to wage unceasing spiritual warfare against our degenerate and corrupt ruling class within the foreign policy establishment. Social media provides an excellent avenue for doing so. Twitter, for one, is populated with a horde of high and mid-level military officers who are both extremely liberal and extraordinarily hostile to the citizenry. They must be exposed for what they are.

My own presence on Twitter is bent entirely to this end—I have a mandate from heaven to fight back against this “coldest of cold monsters” using every spiritual weapon at my disposal. This mission has so far proven a success. My following continues to grow as I “ratio” multi-star generals, war planners, and recruiters who spend more time worrying about their fingernails, LARPing as military geniuses (despite repeated failure), and flying the flags of foreign powers in uniform.

This spiritual battle is just getting started, but there is no time to waste. Americans must join the fray. Unless we push back, the use of America’s institutions of “national defense” will be turned against the people. Spiritedness in defense of our rights is our best weapon.  


Trickle-Down Bidenism - VDH

This Biden socialist cadre who engineered these self-induced calamities has no clue about the damage they have done to America.


Can 10 months really make a real difference in America? Not normally.

But weld together a hard-left socialist agenda with the control of the White House and Congress onto the combined forces of progressive woke media, Silicon Valley, the corporate boardrooms, the entertainment industry, academia, and the Wall Street borg—all in the age of instant and intrusive communications—and it’s no wonder a country, even a nation as resilient as the United States, can descend quite quickly in ways that make America almost unrecognizable.

In other words, 40 weeks of relentless Bidenism finally permeates most of the nation. 

Fuel Prices, Inflation, and Border Chaos

Out in the California foothills and Central Valley, relatively “cheap” propane now has more than doubled to a rate of $3.91 a gallon.

At about the same time that I got the propane bill, I filled up the truck with diesel fuel. It was $4.87 a gallon with a credit card, up in price almost $2 a gallon from over a year ago. I thought myself lucky since the week prior in Palo Alto it was about $5.29 a gallon.

I spoke not long ago in Bakersfield to an oil man. He described impending California new rules on the horizon concerning almost every aspect of horizontal drilling and fracking—as part of his own larger fears that the entire industry is shrinking even as demands and profits soar, and consumers need more natural gas and gasoline than ever.

Has anyone ever heard of liberal Americans deliberately not pumping oil and gas, but still needing so much more output that they beg the illiberal Saudis and Russians to bail us out? At other times in our history, we have suffered plenty of fossil fuel scarcities due to war, embargoes, and declining reserves. But never has America deliberately created shortages amid a sea of our own gas and oil.

What has been the reaction from those who slashed natural gas and oil production by cancelling new federal leases and pipelines, and oil fields in Alaska, or warned frackers that new regulations and taxes were just the prerequisites to a rapid phase out of their existence altogether—on the pathway to a wind and solar nirvana?

When asked if the United States would at least increase (e.g., restore previous levels of) oil production, Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm laughed, “That is hilarious.”

To whom is that comical? The guy with an older model pickup doing daily landscape work for his wealthy clients? The waitress who drives 20 miles to work? The broke student who commutes to campus?

I drove today along a rural avenue next to my farm. Both sides of the street were littered—far more than usually so—with trash. They were not just the usual garbage bags and tires, but washers, dryers, refrigerators, car seats, furniture—and mattresses of all shapes and sizes. It was an intensification of the now old story of rural California as an open dumping ground of refuse.

I stopped to inspect the flotsam and jetsam. The dumpers are careful to glean out their personal addresses. They rarely leave traceable material. But all the magazines, newspapers, and printed material were in Spanish. Note there are no green regulators out here who patrol rural avenues to stop the pollution and desecration of the natural landscape; in the hierarchy of wokeness, illegal immigration trumps the environment.

So, I assumed, as is the case when I find people in the actual act of dumping their garbage and refuse on my property (like last week), that they are likely illegally here (no English). And the current clutter may represent recent spikes in crossings from a nonexistent border and redirects of illegal aliens from Texas. (If 2 million illegal entrants will cross the current fiscal year, and if they are being bused or dispersed by the Biden Administration throughout the United States, then small communities of recent immigrants will likely feel the surge).

The reaction? The Biden Administration is planning to settle “claims” of “wrong” treatment lodged by those who feel that after crossing illegally into the United States, and continuing to reside illegally in America, that they are entitled to $450,000 per family. Otherwise, Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas preened of the nonexistent border that it “is no less secure than before.” 

“No less secure” means 2 million will cross this year?

When acting White House deputy press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre was asked why the Biden Administration would lavish nearly a half a million dollars on illegal aliens who broke federal law, but not upon legal immigrants who obey America’s laws, she seemed bewildered at any criticism of rewarding only the unlawful: “Why would we be giving people who are coming here the right way money?”

Ms. Jean-Pierre gave a rare unguarded summation of the essence of woke progressivism: If we are going to give free stuff to Americans, those who do things the “right way” deserve nothing; those who do things the wrong way certainly do. Asymmetrical application of the law is the hallmark of wokeism.

I have been looking at new cars at the large regional car dealers. Whereas a year ago there were 200 or so new ones on lots to inspect, now there are not more than 10 or so—mostly subcompacts with prices upon inquiry well over the sticker MSRP figure. Almost overnight the lots have changed from premium new car marts into vast used car dealerships, but with a twist: today’s used cars sell at last year’s new car prices.

Wood is now a bit cheaper than three months ago, but still about triple the price of a year ago. I talked to a Mexican American contractor I know not long ago at Home Depot who was sorting and sifting through a small pile of what was left of overpriced 2’x6’s. “Just the junk left. It’s all junk,” he said.

When pressed about these disruptions in the supply chain, empty shelves, scarce inventories, delayed or cancelled shipments, and soaring prices, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki snarked, “The tragedy of the treadmill that’s delayed.”

Yes: cars, lumber, food—all the irrelevant treadmill trinkets that people don’t need.

After disappearing in the midst of the crisis due to his paternity leave, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg returned to weigh in with:

I think there have always been two kinds of Christmas shoppers. There is the ones who have all their list completed by Halloween, and then there’s people like me who show up at the mall on Christmas Eve . . . .   [I]f you’re in that latter bucket, obviously there’s going to be more challenges.   

Yes, that’s it, Pete. The bucket of self-employed handymen who make their living repairing roofs will just have to plan ahead better and quit waiting to fix eaves and gutters on Christmas Eve.

Farmers are not procrastinating but they still aren’t always being paid.  Some hear their almond containers are stuck at Asian ports abroad, rotting for lack of longshoreman—and months after shipping the grower is getting nothing for his crop. Other payments freeze because California crops can’t get onto ships to cross the Pacific from Los Angeles or Long Beach. Growers are not whining about late-arriving Pelotons.

I’ve been looking at house prices too, again partly out of curiosity, partly because a family member is looking for a home. Homes in a development in October 2020 that were outrageously priced at $850,000 for a 2,400 square foot home near the central California coast are now listed between $1.3-4 million!

Interest may be about 2-3 percent, and so monthly mortgage costs don’t fully or immediately reflect the burdensome sale prices. Nonetheless, who could afford the $15,000-20,000 minimum property tax, the soaring insurance, the exorbitant cost to landscape the dirt lot in the backyard—and with a price increase on what we used to call a “middle-class home” of some $400,000 plus in just a year? Translated, the house went up over $1,000 a day, from unaffordable to a sick joke.

Medical bills are skyrocketing. A daughter’s health insurance deductible is $5,0000—per person in a five-person family. This year almost every family member’s bill will exceed that deductible. Of such spiraling prices, White House chief of staff Ron Klain reweeted former Obama advisor and Harvard professor Jason Furman’s shrug about the soaring inflation, “Most of the economic problems we’re facing (inflation, supply chains, etc.) are high class problems.”

Ron and Jason are right: Rent, a ruptured appendix, and mammograms are just the “high class problems” stuff of America.

Retribalizing America

The country is rapidly retribalizing—the most toxic and sickest of all of Joe Biden disastrous gifts to America over the last 10 months. The Biden fixation with race reverberates throughout the intelligence agencies, the bureaucracy, the Pentagon, and the White House, as left-wing furies are unleashed shrieking and searching for mythical “white rage” and “white supremacy.” The Left’s new message is that of Bull Connor and Lester Maddox to the core: you are what you look like. Your race defines you and everyone who looks like you—and as well all those who don’t look like you. Individuals don’t exist; the tribe tolerates no exceptions, no traitors to their racial allegiances.

When I go into local large national discount retail stores, I notice that in the early morning hours one group of Americans shops. And by 10 a.m. they are replaced by quite another. Another strange new development: someone of your own race, a total stranger, will abruptly greet you with enthusiasm, as if some new tie, some previously unrecognized bond, now exists between you at a time when apparently the “color of your skin” fixation is supposedly the new normal.

Critical race theory’s legacy will entail the complete destruction of the message of Martin Luther King, Jr. When asked about the consequences of mandating the teaching of critical race theory racism to “combat” racism in Virginia, and the statewide pushback against Democratic candidates who endorsed such retrograde tribalism, Deputy Press Secretary Jean-Pierre scoffed, “Great countries are honest, right? They have to be honest with themselves about the history, which is good and the bad. And our kids should be proud to be Americans after learning that history.”

Yes, of course, that explains the Democratic implosion in Virginia: Those poor dishonest Virginians who were previously deluding themselves that their country was only half good!

The electoral anger in New Jersey and Virginia, but also throughout the country, reflects not just the chaos of the Biden first year, but the way in which the nearly 10 months of disasters have so rapidly damaged millions of American lives. The Biden team’s smug responses to the messes they made remind us that socialists care little for the millions of broken eggs necessary to cook a vast toxic omelet.

Does the Biden socialist cadre who engineered these self-induced calamities have any clue about the damage they have done to America? Or do they believe the chaos is tolerable collateral destruction to achieve an otherwise unattainable socialist paradise?

Or do they assume that their own wealth, power, and influence will provide them exemption from the baleful, concrete consequences of their own abstract ideologies?

Will trickle-down Bidenism always harm someone else, someone poorer, someone less important, someone culturally repugnant to them—like Joe Biden’s dregs and chumps, Barack Obama’s clingers, and Hillary Clinton’s deplorables and irredeemables?


Meet the anti-Faucci: Florida’s sane surgeon general, Joseph Ladapo

Meet the anti-Fauci: 

Florida’s sane surgeon general, Joseph Ladapo

America has had 20 long months with Dr. Anthony Fauci as the spokesman for the government’s COVID response, poorly explaining to us both the pandemic and the concurrent illogical restrictions.

Perhaps it’s time for some new voices.

The media dub Joseph Ladapo, Florida’s surgeon general awaiting confirmation, a “firebrand” who’s “controversial.” He opposes mask and vaccine mandates — and so is erroneously called “anti-vax” by his foes.

But Ladapo came off as none of these things when I spoke to him for an exclusive interview last week. Calm and poised, Ladapo became a national figure after a clip of him saying the obvious — “The data do not support any clinical benefit for children in schools with mask mandates” — went viral.

In so many ways, the Nigerian-born Ladapo is the anti-Fauci. While the oft-criticized Ladapo has stayed consistent, frequent television-guest Fauci has reversed himself many times on many details of pandemic policy without showing any data to support those reversals.

In August 2020, Fauci said, “The default position with K-12 schools should be to reopen them.” In November and December of that year, he praised reopening schools in New York City, though the city was in the middle of a COVID spike, famously saying: “Close bars, open schools.”

But in January, shortly after President Joe Biden was sworn in, Fauci had a change of heart. After meeting with teachers unions that month, Fauci openly pushed for schools to wait on reopening until Biden’s recovery bill had passed.

Dr. Fauci has been inconsistent on key issues including vaccine mandates and opening schools.
Dr. Fauci has been inconsistent on key issues including vaccine mandates and opening schools.
AP Photo/Alex Brandon

Similarly, in August 2020, Fauci opposed mandating vaccines, the very position that gets Ladapo labeled an anti-vaxxer. “I don’t think you’ll ever see a mandating of vaccine, particularly for the general public. If someone refuses the vaccine in the general public, then there’s nothing you can do about that. You cannot force someone to take a vaccine.”

By September 2021, Fauci was calling for “many, many more mandates” to end the pandemic. Last week he said, “We know that vaccines absolutely save lives. And we know that mandates work.”

The flip-flopping and the open politicization of national health-care policy to fit Democrats’ desires have done a lot of damage to health officials’ public trust. Ladapo’s measured consistency is a refreshing change.

While Fauci said even post-vaccination, he wouldn’t go to restaurants or events, Ladapo stressed to me the importance of living “a fulfilling life.” He said, “COVID is a health risk people have to manage. So is cancer, strokes, heart disease, accidents, injuries. That should have been the goal throughout the pandemic — to live a fulfilling life while managing risk.”

Throughout our conversation, Ladapo stressed the importance of vaccines as a tool to fight COVID. It’s the belief in using other tools as well that has made people wrongly refer to him as “anti-vax.”

“Vaccines are available. Treatments are available,” Ladapo said. “If you do get COVID, get treated early.”

Ladapo believes medical leadership has not stressed the importance of a healthy lifestyle to defeat both COVID and other ailments. He thinks doctors should encourage people to “become as healthy as possible. It’s good for all prevention: heart disease, diabetes, etc.,” he said. “The big picture is not COVID, the big picture is health.”

Gov. Ron DeSantis pushed the idea that life should go on throughout the pandemic. He too is being wrongly portrayed as “anti-vax” because of his opposition to mandates, a view Biden shared last year. Our family spent nearly five months in Florida in the winter of 2021, drawn by the normalcy of the state, especially where children were concerned. The governor was on television daily, urging people to get vaccinated. My husband and I were both vaccinated in Florida under his program.

But vaccination can’t be the only way forward. Thousands of people are hospitalized across the country with breakthrough infections.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has pushed against vaccine and mask mandates.
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has pushed against vaccine and mask mandates.
Ellen Schmidt/Las Vegas Review-Journal via AP

Ladapo argued doctors haven’t made enough effort on the treatment side: “The other component that other states should adopt is both preventative and treatment. Makes me sad as a scientist and a doctor that more effort is not made to connect patients with treatments. That has cost many lives during the pandemic.”

He believes it’s political. “150,000 Floridians got monoclonal antibody treatment. It reduces hospitalizations by 70 percent or more. Because of the politics, the treatment wasn’t used in many other places.” Florida was famously using the treatment during the summer spike when the Biden administration took over distribution and cut Florida’s supply.

Ladapo refers again and again to the data. It’s his passion. While at Harvard Medical School pursuing his M.D., he also got a PhD. “You only do that,” he told me, “if you love data and data analysis.”

To Ladapo, being the “anti-Fauci” means “being considerate of the fact that health means more than avoiding a virus. It’s been a terrible time with social isolation, loneliness. What we’ve done to children has been criminal, disconnecting them from their peers and disrupting their education even though they’ve always been at low risk. There are multiple components of health.”

COVID isn’t everything, in other words. Go live.