Was Trump Really an Exception?

Republican strategy should be focused on playing up Democratic scandals before their adversaries start the mudslinging. The hell with striking a “positive note”!

by Paul Gottfried for American Greatness

In considering whether conservatives should welcome another run by Donald Trump, Roger Kimball observes the following:

I think it likely that, should Trump be the nominee, and should he be reelected in 2024, the forces arrayed against him will suffer a nervous breakdown that will make the anti-Trump hysteria of 2016-2020 look like an Oxford Union debate. 

This warning led me to thinking about whether nominating another Republican with populist proclivities, say Ron DeSantis, would produce less of a leftist backlash than occurred during Trump’s run for the presidency. Would the mainstream media, the woke academy, Hollywood, and the rest of the cultural Left behave less belligerently if the Republican nominee and possibly next president avoided being “controversial”? 

According to Kimball, what made Trump so divisive was at least partly owing to the invectives unleashed against him by the media and Democratic politicians. Without the Steele dossier and the bogus charge of colluding with Russia, Trump’s presidency would not have aroused as much contention as it did. Trump raged so often because he was responding to serious defamations. 

Still, we are left with the question: Could a “nicer” Republican running for the presidency or sitting in the Oval Office have avoided these complications? Perhaps in some significant way Trump’s uniquely pugnacious demeanor did contribute to the anti-Trump hysteria of 2016-2021. If that is the case, then Trump’s conduct could have an explosive effect if he became his party’s nominee again. But perhaps we shouldn’t exaggerate the impact of this factor. Vicious assaults on Republican presidential nominees did not begin when opinion leaders declared war on Trump. They have been going on for decades, no matter how non-confrontational Republicans have been. 

Recently Glenn Greenwald expressed wonder in a Tucker Carlson-interview that George W. Bush managed to go from being the Left’s favorite punching bag to a “darling of the liberals.” Of course, if Bush were still a Republican president rather than the Left’s useful instrument, it is doubtful that his old enemies would still be so effusively well-disposed toward him. Would the Left continue to fawn over Liz Cheney if she were running for the Senate in Colorado as a “Republican hawk,” advocating “traditional Republican interventionism.” That was exactly how the leftist Denver Post characterized her in 2019, before Liz became the Left’s favorite Republican to ankle-bite Trump.  

The media hardly spared candidate Mitt Romney when he was running against Obama for the presidency in 2012. It kept interviewing workers who claimed that Romney fired them while he was chief executive for Bain Capital. The media fanned the flames further by manufacturing anti-Mitt rumors just about every hour. That of course was before that one-time heartless capitalist became serviceable to the Left as an outspoken Trump-hater. The leftist media also went to town defaming John McCain when he ran against Obama in 2008. As John McIntyre showed on RealClearPolitics, the Left began battering McCain as a far rightist political figure as soon as he became a presumptive Republican nominee for 2008. Since McCain was a good loser and later turned into Trump’s adversary, the media stopped slamming him. Why waste ammunition on someone who could no longer keep the Democrats from occupying the presidency?

One is reminded of the scene in “Kill Bill: Volume 2” where the bound heroine is about to be buried alive. When she protests, her executioner gives her a choice. If she makes too much noise, he’ll burn her alive and then bury her remains. Otherwise, he’ll simply stick his captive into the ground in a wooden coffin. This seems to be what Republican presidential candidates confront in their battle with the media. If they go down quietly, they will be conventionally defamed but will suffer no further consequences. But if they squawk too much, they may receive the harsher treatment reserved for Trump.  

The only way Republican presidential candidates can avoid their own destruction is if they go on the offensive first. Although Trump did not develop this strategy as skillfully as he might have done, he was entirely right to take the war to the other side. But he should have documented his charges more carefully and help create the necessary outlets to make sure everyone was hearing them. Investigative journalists like Julie Kelly, Miranda Devine, and the staff of Project Veritas have provided more than enough to drive the other side back on its heels. Unfortunately, their revelations have not reached a broad enough public because of the Left’s domination of the media and its cancellation of those who talk out of turn. 

This is where Republicans should be placing their efforts in presidential campaigns, building the resources to put the other side and their media allies on the defensive. Republican strategy should be focused on playing up Democratic scandals before their adversaries start the mudslinging. The hell with striking a “positive note”! That should come much later, when—or if—the Left decides to play fair.   

X22, Christian Patriot News, and more-Feb 10

 

Another busy day. Here's tonight's news:

Can The ‘Downton Abbey’ Formula Be Transported Into America’s ‘Gilded Age?’

Like its British model, it’s great fun and the stars of the show

 are the clothes and settings, not the historical insight.

posted by Jeffrey S. Tobin at The Federalist

The British television series “Downton Abbey” was catnip for audiences who like their escapism with a dollop of history. The period drama depicted the lives of English aristocrats and their servants as they navigated the transition from the pre-World War I Edwardian era to the 1920s as cultural mores shifted and the rigid caste system that was the foundation of the old order began to crack up.

The question for HBO Max as it launches an American version of “Downton” written by the British show’s creator Julian Fellowes is whether the formula that captivated an international audience can work as well when set in 1883 New York. The short answer is yes.

If you like soap operas set in the past where the viewer can vicariously enjoy the lifestyles of the rich and famous as well as savor the loyalty and resentments of the people who were the servants, there’s no reason you won’t think Fellowes’ new show “The Gilded Age,” currently running on the premium cable channel turned streaming service, is great fun.

The story lines are different. While the initial conception for “The Gilded Age” was as a prequel for “Downton,” any crossover between the two was ultimately discarded.

The conceit of the new show is the conflict between the new money of a railroad robber baron and his social-climbing wife and the old-money families that controlled high society in late 19th century New York who don’t wish to treat them as equals. In theory, that ought to be more compelling than whether a British earl who married an American heiress can keep his family and his estate together in a changing world. But those looking for any deep historical insights into American history or the ability of entrepreneurs to buy their way into social respectability should look elsewhere.

“Downton” has received extravagant praise from those who have believe that the kind of television with a British accent presented by PBS’s “Masterpiece” series — where “Downton” appeared from 2010 to 2016 — was both entertaining and elevating.

“Masterpiece Theater,” as it was initially called, was both an expression of snobbery and a recognition that British television could often produce shows that were better than the prime-time fare the three broadcast networks were feeding American audiences before cable and internet. In addition to making Americans who watched it feel superior to their fellow citizens who eschewed such upscale diversions, some of the adaptations of classic literature or historical dramas shown were excellent.

Lacking Historical Insights

Perhaps the best British product “Masterpiece Theater” brought to America was “Upstairs, Downstairs,” which appeared from 1973 to 1977. Roughly covering the same period as “Downton,” “Upstairs, Downstairs” was the first show to treat both the servants and their masters as equally compelling subjects. More importantly, its scripts expertly weaved historical incidents and trends into the lives of its characters in a way that was both genuinely informative as well as compelling.

Fellowes’ “Downton” was a knock-off of that program, but the comparison was telling. As much as he is often spoken of as the Shakespeare of television scripts, his ability to depict history through the lives of his characters was far below the achievement of “Upstairs, Downstairs.” That’s true even if the feature film production values lavished on “Downton” — shot at Highclere Castle, an actual country home of an earl — put to shame its predecessor, which was filmed on a tight budget on cramped studio sound stages.

“Downton” benefited from a great cast headed by the indomitable Maggie Smith. But it succeeded best when it wasn’t trying to awkwardly shoehorn history into the story — its World War I episodes failed miserably — and just concentrated on the loves and schemes of the characters as well as the visual presentation.

Hits and Misses

The same strengths and weaknesses that were features of “Downton” are equally present in “The Gilded Age.” The show is beautiful to look at. As with “Downton,” the clothes and the settings are the real stars of the show.

Although Fellowes was not able to take over a standing relic of the mansions built by robber barons or their old money rivals, clearly no expense was spared in the building of sets or the recreations of the New York of 140 years ago. Even more spectacular are the costumes, with which the production team has taken infinite care to be historically accurate and to reflect just how much clothes defined a person’s status.

But equal insight into New York society is lacking in “The Gilded Age.”

Fellowes does his audience the favor of not depicting either of the main protagonists of his story as entirely good or evil. Like many of his main characters in “Downton,” they are fully realized and presented with some sympathy — with the new-money couple of Bertha and George Russell played by Carrie Coon and Morgan Spector, and their formidable old-money opponents Agnes von Rhijn and her sister Ada played by Christine Baranski and Cynthia Nixon.

Less successful are the characters who are there as plot devices or politically correct ticket punches. The story is largely told through the eyes of Agnes’ penniless niece Marian Brook, who comes to New York to live with the old-money sisters. But though Louisa Jacobson is charming, she gives us little reason to care much about which, if any, of the potential contenders for her hand succeed.

Another problem in the early episodes is Fellowes’ failure to make his “downstairs” characters as vivid as the ones he created for “Downton.” Indeed, in the early episodes available for viewing, the only downstairs character of any interest is not actually one of the servants.

Peggy Scott, played by Denée Benton, is a young African-American woman and aspiring writer who, through a contrivance that strains credulity, becomes Marian’s sidekick and then Agnes’ private secretary. Although she lives and eats with the servants, she doesn’t share their struggles or, for good or for ill, live vicariously through their employers’ exploits, as do others below stairs in both this show and its predecessor.

Although a story about African-Americans in 1880s New York might be interesting, Peggy is entirely tangential to the main plot and is merely a reminder that in the Black Lives Matter world, it is impossible for an American television show to not have black characters and story lines. As a result, regardless of Peggy’s merit, it’s hard to think of her as anything more than a distraction from the rest of the proceedings.

More evidence of Fellowes’ less than sure grasp of an American subject is his decision to conflate some of the members of the city’s society establishment with members of New York’s Board of Aldermen, who are bribed by Russell. Even a cursory knowledge of New York politics in that period involves the understanding that the city was largely dominated by the Democrats’ Tammany Hall machine and its immigrant supporters rather than old money aristocrats. Even Tammany’s sometimes successful Reformist foes were not led by members of New York’s “400” families that are at the heart of “The Gilded Age’s” drama, a mistake that Fellowes would never make in a British story.

While all this make it a lesser effort than “Downton,” there is still enough glamor and drama among the protagonists to reward the fans of the British show for indulging Fellowes’ excursion across the pond. If you’re interested in a deep dive into the society that inspired the novels of Henry James and Edith Wharton and that was the setting for Martin Scorses’ 1993 film “The Age of Innocence,” look elsewhere. If you tune in to “The Gilded Age” for the clothes, the opulent settings, and some romance and intrigue, you’ve come to the right shop.

DHS: American Thought Police

The transition from tracking terrorism to chasing thought crime has a major advantage. It exonerates U.S. counterterrorism officials from the meddlesome job of catching actual terrorists.

by Kyle Shideler for American Greatness

The Department of Homeland Security, which under the Biden Administration routinely lets watch-listed terrorists cross the southern border unmolested, and which approved entry to the United States for Colleyville Synagogue hostage-taker Malik Faisal Akram despite his being known to British authorities as a terror risk, has taken upon its broad bureaucratic shoulders an even more challenging job.

Stopping the flow of MDM.

MDM isn’t the latest flavor of fentanyl, produced by the Communist Chinese regime for sale to Mexican drug cartels, and now the leading cause of death for Americans between the ages of 18 to 45. No, MDM stands for mis- dis- and mal-information, the latest government acronym from which you must be protected.  

DHS’ latest “Summary of Terrorism Threat to the U.S. Homeland,” released Monday, has much to say about the dangers of American minds being polluted with MDM, and curiously little to say about actual terror threats.

MDM is a term developed by the DHS Cybersecurity Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) to replace the old-fashioned phrase “foreign influence.” Now let us caveat that the U.S. government does indeed have a responsibility to monitor and to identify foreign influence operations. This was the remit of the Reagan-era Active Measures Working Group, which worked tirelessly to identify Soviet lies being spread to undermine the United States’ global standing in the world, and then countered them with the truth.  

But under the latest iteration, DHS is no longer concerned solely with enemy lies spread abroad, but increasingly with information spread by “domestic threat actors” (read: American citizens). And no longer are they merely concerned with disinformation, false material spread to manipulate an opponent, but with misinformation, which DHS considers information that is false but not intended to cause harm, and “mal-information,” which means information which is true but the government considers harmful anyway. 

This raises the question of who put a government intelligence and law enforcement agency in the position of declaring not only what is true or false but also determining whether information is good or harmful for consumption by free citizens. Of course, no law prohibits American citizens of spreading information of any kind, whether true or false. 

Ironically, the DHS MDM effort itself is a result of disinformation, created in the tumult of the Russian collusion hoax, in response to lunatic assertions that the Russian government had somehow thrown the 2016 election to Donald Trump through the use of a handful of Facebook ads.  

The Department of Homeland Security certainly has no remit to determine what information its bureaucrats regard as “harmful” for American ears to hear. 

And why are government efforts to counter information appearing in what is supposed to be a bulletin aimed at countering terrorism?

U.S. intelligence increasingly has asserted that the cause of terrorism isn’t groups or individuals seeking to achieve identifiable political ends through criminal violence and intimidation (which is, by the way, the legal definition of terrorism). Rather, U.S. counterterrorism gurus insist that terrorism springs fully formed from mis-, dis-, or mal-information adrift in cyberspace, like Athena from the forehead of Zeus.

They did not arrive at this conclusion all at once, but rather over a period of two decades during the Global War on Terrorism, which over the years became defined as domestic not global, a social problem not a war, and ultimately not about terrorism at all.

The transition from terrorism to chasing thought crime has a major advantage. It exonerates U.S. counterterrorism officials from the meddlesome job of catching actual terrorists. For years the U.S. government’s security apparatus insisted that with a little bit more money, and ever more constant surveillance, they could nip the terrorism problem in the bud. But more surveillance brought only more stories of terrorists that the government knew about in advance, yet still failed to stop, which was embarrassing to say the least. 

If literally anyone sufficiently marinated in ideas the government doesn’t like might turn out to be a terrorist, how can federal law enforcement be held responsible for dropping the ball on any specific plot? Isn’t policing the ideas themselves a better use of the government’s time and money? 

Covering thought policing under the rubric of counterterrorism has another advantage too. It changes the discussion from whether a given idea is true or false, to whether it is safe or dangerous. Have concerns about election integrity, COVID-19 mandates, or school boards? You better shut up; such ideas are inspiring to terrorists.

And of course, the DHS bulletin provides absolutely no evidence or citation to affirm its claims regarding what motivates these “extremists.” One is left only with vague assertion, backed by claims of secret “intelligence,” which ought not be satisfying to any serious interlocutor.

But it is certainly curious that, according to Homeland Security, terrorists always seem to be most interested in topics on which Joe Biden is polling poorly, and on which his administration faces growing criticism from the broader American electorate.

Putin kept Macron at a distance for snubbing COVID demands: sources

 

PARIS, Feb 10 (Reuters) - French President Emmanuel Macron refused a Kremlin request that he take a Russian COVID-19 test when he arrived to see President Vladimir Putin this week, and was therefore kept at a distance from the Russian leader, two sources in Macron's entourage told Reuters.

Observers were struck by images of Macron and Putin sitting at opposite ends of 4-metre-long (13 ft) table to discuss the Ukraine crisis on Monday, with some diplomats and others suggesting Putin might be wanting to send a diplomatic message.  

But the two sources, who have knowledge of the French president's health protocol, told Reuters Macron had been given a choice: either he accepted a PCR test done by the Russian authorities and was allowed to get close to Putin, or he refused and had to abide by more stringent social distancing. 

"We knew very well that meant no handshake and that long table. But we could not accept that they get their hands on the president's DNA," one of the sources told Reuters, referring to security concerns if the French leader was tested by Russian doctors. 

A Kremlin spokesman did not immediately respond to a message from Reuters seeking comment. 

The second source in Macron's entourage confirmed Macron declined to take a Russian PCR test. The source said Macron instead took a French PCR test before departure and an antigen test done by his own doctor once in Russia.

"The Russians told us Putin needed to be kept in a strict health bubble," the second source said.

 On Thursday, three days after Macron and Putin had their socially-distanced meeting, the Russian leader received Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev. The two men shook hands, and sat close to each other, divided only by a small coffee table.  

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/putin-kept-macron-distance-snubbing-covid-demands-sources-2022-02-10/  

Psaki shrugs off possible DC trucker protest for Biden SOTU speech

Steven Nelson reporting for NYPost

White House press secretary Jen Psaki said Tuesday that “everybody can peacefully protest” when asked about the possibility that a disruptive trucker convoy could arrive in Washington during President Biden’s first State of the Union address on March 1.

The threatened demonstration draws inspiration from truckers in Canada, who blocked a major cross-border bridge this week after snarling traffic in Ottawa for several days to oppose that country’s COVID-19 vaccine mandates.

“A group of US truckers say they’re planning a similar protest in Washington, DC — possibly for March 1 to oppose COVID vaccine mandates. That date obviously would coincide with President Biden’s State of the Union address,” USA Today reporter Joey Garrison said at Psaki’s regular briefing.

“As you know, the trucker convoy in Ottawa has been very disruptive and paralyzed parts of the city’s downtown. Is the administration making preparations to be ready for an upcoming Freedom Convoy planned for DC? And does the White House have any concerns about similar protests happening here in the nation’s capital?”

After replying that “I’d have to check with our team on security preparations,” Psaki told reporters: “I think what I would just reiterate here is that we know that [vaccine] requirements work. 

“We have not seen a disruption as it relates to requirements to the industry. Where we have seen disruptions has been related to these convoys and protests,” she added. “Now, everybody can peacefully protest. We fully support that. But it’s important to note where the disruption is occurring.”

In response to a different question, Psaki noted that the Canadian truckers have many grievances against the government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in addition to their original anti-mandate cause.

“Truckers of Canada last night shut down the Ambassador Bridge [between Michigan and Ontario], which carries about a quarter of US-Canada trading goods,” noted reporter Jordan Fabian of Bloomberg News, who asked if the US is taking “any preventative steps … to address a possible blockade on the Michigan side of that bridge?”

“It is clear that these disruptions have broadened in scope beyond the vaccine requirement implementation,” Psaki said in response. “We are, of course, in touch with our Canadian counterparts. But I don’t have any updates in terms of specific steps.”

The US Supreme Court last month struck down Biden’s attempt to impose a COVID-19 vaccine mandate on private employers with 100 or more workers while leaving in place a more narrow mandate for health care workers. There are other US mandates for federal workers and federal contractors.

Since last month, the US government has required non-citizen “essential” workers such as truckers to be vaccinated in order to cross US land borders.

Facebook removed a page last week promoting a planned “Convoy to DC 2022” over alleged links to the QAnon conspiracy theory — but visually striking images of protests in Canada gained widespread US coverage as well as support from some Republican politicians.

Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.) said he was “proud” of truckers protesting in Canada, while Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said, “The Canadian truckers are heroes, they are patriots and they are marching for your freedom and for my freedom.”

Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson declared a state of emergency on Sunday, saying the situation was “completely out of control,” while Ottawa City Councilor Diane Deans described it as “a nationwide insurrection.”

Although Biden’s attempt to mandate vaccination for most US workers failed in court, many local governments have imposed their own vaccine requirements to enter public businesses or attend school and the White House is encouraging employers to voluntarily adopt vaccine mandates for staff.

US truckers previously threatened to bring large convoys to DC to protest Democrats. When Biden was vice president in 2013, a group threatened to shut down traffic on the Beltway and “arrest” then-House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) for allegedly violating the Constitution. But those efforts flopped.

A major demonstration in DC would trigger intense security preparations to prevent a recurrence of the 2021 Capitol riot, when a wild mob disrupted certification of Biden’s victory in the Electoral College.

Rerun Abrams Unmasked!

And here we thought Kamala had zero political instincts.

posted by Dianny at Patriot Retort

I’ve come to the conclusion that Rerun Abrams is the most over-rated politician since Hillary Clinton.

And here we thought Kamala had zero political instincts.

After Rerun got blowback for posting pictures of her unmasked self sitting in front of a sea of masked children, she and her campaign made a hash of the inevitable blowback.

First, Rerun tried to solve the problem by deleting the image from Twitter.

But it was too late for that. The picture had already spread far and wide so it was rather a lot like shutting the barn door after the horse already made it clear across the country.

Then her campaign issued a statement blaming her Republican opponents for a so-called “false political attack.”

Hello! Rerun Abrams posted the picture to her Twitter account. What was false about it?

Unless Team Rerun is claiming Brian Kemp or the other Republican whose name escapes me hacked her Twitter account, they had nothing to do with it.

When Lauren Groh-Wargo from Team Rerun posted the statement on Twitter, she tweeted “Our opponents took a brief break from licking Trump’s boots … to issue baseless attacks.”

For crying out loud, Trump said in a recent rally that Rerun Abrams would’ve made a better governor than Brian Kemp. Trump endorsed the other guy whose name escapes me over Kemp and said if Kemp wins the primary, Rerun would beat him. I think the last person in Georgia who can be accused of licking Trump’s boots is Brian Kemp.

If the only weapon Rerun Abrams and her team have in their arsenal is smearing Brian Kemp as a Trump clone, these guys are tremendously stupid.

How’d that work out for Terry McAuliffe in Virginia?

The Trump clone smear will slide off Brian Kemp the same way it slid off Glenn Youngkin.

Then Team Rerun announced it was looking for someone to take on the role of social media engagement.

That’s one sure-fire way to signal to the world that you know your candidate screwed up by posting that picture to social media. Talk about bad timing.

Finally, four days after Maskgate broke, Rerun Abrams went on CNN to apologize for doing the very thing her campaign said was a “false political attack.”

Rerun Abrams’ face wasn’t the only thing unmasked during this.

The whole embarrassing story unmasked just how inept a politician this woman is.

Democrats and the media treat this clueless nit like she has the political instincts of a shark when in reality she is so bad at this she makes Kamala Harris look like Margaret Thatcher.

Let’s be honest, if Rerun Abrams wasn’t a black woman, none of us outside of Georgia would have ever heard of her.

Don’t believe me?

Try naming the woman who ran against Texas Governor Greg Abbott in 2018.

I’m guessing unless you live in Texas, you have no earthly idea what her name is. And there’s no guarantee my Texas readers can remember her name either.

Meanwhile, this 2018 gubernatorial loser with the political instincts of a mollusk is a household name.

Just months after she lost to Brian Kemp, Chuck Schumer invited her to give the Democrat response to Trump’s 2019 State of the Union Address.

In 2020, she was actually one of the women in the running to be Joe Biden’s Veep.

If Rerun Abrams was a plus-sized white woman do you think all that would have happened? Not on the likely.

There’s failing up and then there’s Rerun Abrams.

Rerun is treated like a political heavy-hitter when in reality she’s such a lightweight that even the mildest political storm tosses her around like a plastic bag caught in an updraft.

And for a woman of her girth, that ain’t easy.

Freedom Convoy 2022: Russian Truckers to Organize Freedom Convoy

 

Source: https://welovetrump.com/2022/02/10/freedom-convoy-movement-continues-spreading-across-the-globe-russian-truckers-to-organize-freedom-convoy/

Canada’s Freedom Convoy continues to inspire the world to take action against tyrannical COVID-19 mandates and restrictions. 

The trucker convoy movement has reached Russia as the Association of Carriers of Russia(OPR) will organize its own convoy.

*Source – The COVID World*

Follow on Telegram @WeLoveTrumpNoah

Russia’s Free Press writes (translated):

The Association of Carriers of Russia (OPR) intends to support its colleagues from Canada, who organized the “Convoy of Freedom”. The demands of truckers and all those who sympathize with them are shared by the overwhelming majority of citizens of the Russian Federation. Most likely, protests will begin when the weather warms up, and they can become the catalyst that will blow up our society. The patience of the people is at its limit, and no one believes one iota in the “patriotic” spells of our “guarantor”, which he was recently struck by.

“Convoy of Russia” – the future action of the ODA is a purely local project, no “proletarian internationalism”. Support for Canadians is only at the ideological level, because the citizens of each country solve their own problems. However, for the most part they are common.

And not only ours and Canadians. There is also serious unrest in the European Union, even the Baltic nationalists are going to protest. And all on the same topic. More precisely, with one starting point, which was the actions of the authorities to restrict the rights and freedoms of citizens in connection with the so-called “coronavirus”.

The officials of the whole world and the “oligarchs” behind them (again on a planetary scale!) got a taste, they are jointly building an “electronic concentration camp Earth”. The people, of course, do not like this.

cont.

The abolition of compulsory vaccination, in any of its manifestations, as well as the elimination of digital slavery and its implementation are the two main messages of the future Convoy Russia. However, it is rather on the seed. The requirements are generally more fundamental.

“As early as 2017, the Association of Russian carriers put forward the thesis of distrust in the president and the current government. Since then, the government has partially changed, but does not inspire confidence because the standard of living of Russians is changing by no means, not for the better. The person who can drastically change your life looks at you from the mirror. And the future of your children is in your hands!” the ODA said in a statement.

On February 4th, the group announced its support for the Canadian truckers and said it would begin organizing its own convoy.

OPR reported (translated):

To organize the Convoy of Russia , the ODA calls out to everyone, not only truckers, but also to all caring people in the regions of the country for further unification in order to use their right to achieve the goals of the Convoy, to openly express their will, their disagreement with the blatant violation of fundamental rights person. Namely:

 

– abolition of compulsory vaccination, in any of its manifestations;

 

– the elimination of digital slavery and its implementation. 

Sergey Vladimirov, head of the OPR, was interviewed on February 8th about the current status of the convoy.

Edward Slavsquat, a Moscow-based writer, noted these highlights from the interview on his Substack:

“If a sufficient number of people gather a sufficient number of truckers supporting people, then the convoy can take place. But we must understand that we have one big difference between Canada and Russia. Firstly, the repressive pressure in Russia is much more serious than in Canada. Secondly, truckers in Russia are not so affected by this story with restrictions at the moment, because in our country, all the strictness of the laws is compensated by their non-compliance.”

NATIONAL POLL: Do You Still Support President Trump?

“Toll roads are being expanded, that is, there are more and more of them, the price of fuel is rising and so on. All this very much hits the pocket of both the trucker and the ordinary citizen in general, and as a citizen, since this whole story affects prices.”

“There is now a severe shortage of drivers, it is not even only in our country, it is happening all over the world, but in our country now it is already clearly visible. There are not enough professionals… The cars are parked because they can’t find drivers.”

It’s interesting Vladimirov notes how non-compliance has softened the severity of Russia’s COVID decrees. Your humble Moscow correspondent agrees with this assessment, although it’s important to recognize enforcement measures vary from region to region.

For example, in Volgograd, Andrei Purshev, an OPR representative, told local media at the end of January:

There is a stratification, a division of society into vaccinated and unvaccinated, between QR-coded and ordinary people. The situation is very tense… This is especially noticeable in public transport. People without a mask are attacked.

We’ll keep an eye on the OPR and report any convoy developments.