SUPREME COURT CODIFIES MORE BUSH MACHINE GOALS

         Before jetting off on a three-month holiday, the United States Supreme Court handed the New Right some major victories in its goal of establishing Uniparty rule. The first of these rulings overturned a 1935 law restricting Presidential authority in creating and establishing Federal agencies without consent of Congress. Overturning that Act has been a goal of the New Right since Bush 1.0. Bush Sr. was a great proponent of the so-called Unitary Executive Theory which was also one of the cornerstones of the Deep-State Heritage Foundation's Project 2025. 

        Chief Justice Jack Roberts, a Bush 2.0 appointee, bragged that “If anything more is left of Humphrey’s, {the 1935 law} we overrule it...We hold that such protection from removal is contrary to the separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution.” Head-of-State Trump added on Social Media: “It is such an Honor to be the sitting President who won this Historic and Unprecedented Ruling, one of the most important ever given with respect to Presidential Powers.”

       The purpose of the 1935 law was to restrain the Chief Executive from wholesale purges of regulatory agencies such as those carried out by Elon Musk and his DOGE goon-squads and the replacement of such agents with ideologues. Congress passed the law during the New Deal Era when several new agencies were being created; because they rightly feared the concentration of power in agencies in which a measure of independence was necessary. From the attacks on the law under Bush to the present time, the Democrats have offered token resistance to the Unitary Executive Theory, but always pushed their own purges to the maximum when in power themselves. As we enter the Accelerationist Phase of the Great Reset, the law no longer stands as an obstacle. 

      In a separate ruling, the Court discreetly exempted one agency---the Federal Reserve Board---from such wholesale purges. The Administration had sought to remove regional Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook; the Court ruled ostensibly against the White House. Roberts wrote again---completely contradicting his earlier ruling that "Were Cook not provided an opportunity to contest the charge, it “would in effect transform the Federal Reserve’s for-cause protection into at-will employment—an interpretive leap out of step with the statute Congress enacted and our Nation’s tradition of central banking protected from political interference.”

      While this appeared to be a defeat for the Uniparty, it was actually welcomed by the Financial Oligarchs who will maintain a measure of autonomy over the national financial system. It also in a fashion helps accelerate the drive towards Central Bank Digital Currency, which the Administration already has prohibited from the Federal Reserve Board but thrown the floodgates wide open for the Financial Cartels to impose it. In fact, enabling CBDC under the guise of preventing it was one of the first acts of the Administration following orders from the WEF. 

     The Court also overturned any further restrictions---as if the ones remaining after previous decisions had any force---striking down the Federal Elections Campaign Act's provisions on how much a political party may spend on its own candidates. The decision follows the longstanding Bush Machine efforts in such cases as Kelo vs. New London (2005), Citizens United v. FEC (2010) and McCutcheon v. FEC (2014). Kelo ruled that vested financial interests can seize private property if a government rules such confiscations in the 'public interest.' Citizens United unleashed unlimited independent Corporate spending and McCutcheon removed the aggregate cap on what a single donor can give. Today's ruling allows donations to a party to serve as de facto donations to a given candidate. Under the previous 'Election regulations', an individual could donate a maximum of $7,000 to a candidate for public office, but that same individual could give hundreds of thousands---or even millions---of dollars to that candidate’s political party every 'Election' cycle, funneled through various state committees. If the Party can give any or all of that money to the same candidate, there is no significance to the $7,000 limit. A candidate now has access to all the cash the Oligarchs pump into the system. 

     It ought to be obvious by now---even to the somnambulant American public---that, as we approach the 250th Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, that we're back roughly where we started when the Republic was founded. Unitary Executives, Royal Monopoly Charters, Rump Parliaments, Houses of Lords---our so-called 'Democracy' is a dead letter and has been for some time. We're not going to vote our way out by swapping one side of the Uniparty for the other---any more than the British Whigs or Tories or the Crown's High Court helped bring about needed reforms in the American Colonies. Today, however, few Americans seem willing to fight for independence; instead they line up behind whatever faction promises them a greater share of the loot.

      

      

        

IMMUNITY FROM LAWFARE

      It's really somewhat of a sad commentary on the state of our society when the Supreme Court actually doing its job for a change is a topic of national debate. The recent decisions overturning Roe v. Wade and repealing the abominable Chevron Doctrine was enough to send the Whacko Left Wing into chimp-out mode alone; but yesterday's decision to extend justice to President-in-Exile Trump has thrown Trump Derangement Syndrome into the mix. We really haven't seen paroxysms of rage at this level from the Left in over three years. 

    If we look at the US Constitution, it's noteworthy that half of our first Ten Amendments (4-8) are specifically designed to prevent weaponization of the Legal System. Both parties have been trying to turn all five of them into a Dead Letter for decades have succeeded in doing so in some cases. The Political Class didn't care so much as long legal abuses effected everybody else, but until yesterday it was starting to spread even to that previously untouchable group. Immunity under the Color of Office was put into our Founding Principles for a reason. Without it, nobody in a position of authority could make a decision without putting themselves at personal risk. Our Founders restrained legal abuses as much as possible; today all one has to do is look at the British Government with its pompous poseurs strutting around in their ruffled robes and ridiculous powdered wigs screaming at each other on the floors of Parliament over the most trivial policies to get an idea of what we escaped. 

   

     Likewise, we managed (mostly) to avoid the scenes of many South American Republics who make a regular habit of throwing their political opponents in jail. A Judicial Tyranny is still a tyranny. The legal issues surrounding President Trump and the equally execrable calls from the Right to take legal revenge on the Democrats was leading us into that very kind of Vicious Circle. 

    Americans today aren't in the habit of stopping to think and reflect; but they should look at yesterday's decision a sign that our Legal System is in serious need of reform. The Whacko Left---now that their ox has been gored---is talking about 'reforms;' which, as usual, means making the situation worse. When we speak of reform, we mean reining in a system that's largely out of control and danger to our liberties moreso than being a protector of them. 

   The actual purpose of the Judiciary is not to validate political agendas, exact personal revenge, or enrich lawyers as most Americans seem to believe. The Judiciary is part of a Balance of Powers that protects the general population from both Executive and Legislative over-reach. Unfortunately, too many Americans seem satisfied with the idea of over-reach in those branches too, which is part of the problem. 

   Via the Corporate Media and well-publicized fat Court judgements and sensationalized trials, the American Public has come to venerate the Legal System with an air of sanctimony formerly devoted to religion. This has led to the Legal System becoming an industry with the most egregious corruption and venality being disguised as a Pursuit of Justice. All of the judicial persecutions of President Trump highlights the depths of depravity to which the System has sunk. Trump was vindicated in this case and Justice was served; but we can see from the circumstances leading up to yesterday's decision that the system, metaphorically speaking, is on life-support. The few remaining Jurists and honest lawyers that our country has are all that's holding this System together from plunging into complete anarcho-tyranny.

   The ultimate problem is that there is neither the political nor the popular will to change the Status Quo since too many people benefit from the injustice and corruption that has now become systemic. Again, this is a problem entirely of our own making: we've looked the other way too long, grabbing our slice of the pie instead of holding lawyers and judges accountable and demanding that our government enforces the Constitution. Instead, we hear croaking from the Punditocracy on both the Left and the Right that the Court doesn't favor Interest Groups enough. Yesterday's decision was a good start; but until we address the root of the problem, it may only be a temporary victory.

   

ARIZONA SUNSET

     The billionaires who met at Mar-a-Lago last weekend certainly have been getting their money's worth. After nearly five decades of promising to repeal Roe v. Wade and doing absolutely nothing, the US Supreme Court shocked everyone by suffering a sudden and involuntary spasm of Humanity and actually did it. Republican State Governors, who just a few months before had no problem imposing Mask Mandates and illegal curfews and quarantines, couldn't muster more than a half-dozen or so of their numbers to ban the deliberate killing of unborn children. There's been no effort from Christian Conservatives in our Red Wave Congress to ban the safe, legal procedure although they have found sufficient initiative to attempt to expand domestic espionage and seize Tik-Tok for the benefit Wall Street Media Overlords. We shouldn't be surprised. The Bush Machine has a long history of crushing Pro-Life candidates within in its ranks, and was the first Administration to fund Big Pharma in fetal research trafficking with American tax dollars. AstraZeneca, a WEF Strategic Partner, is the largest Corporation currently involved in this trade, as well as Uniparty lobbying. The GOP has found Big Pharma in general to be a lucrative source of funding, and we can rest assured that stakeholders in such enterprises will be well protected.

    Most Republican leaders probably never really believed that Roe would be overturned, and so for public consumption, many left in place State laws banning abortion enacted during more rational eras which would be reinstated if the Court overturned the decision. The State of Arizona was one of these and by default banned abortion. The Pro-Abortion crowd sprung into action and challenged the law in Arizona's Supreme Court which, in another surprising move actually upheld it. 

   One would think that a Pro-Life victory of this magnitude would encourage the American Right, but sadly, the reverse happened. In the appropriately-nicknamed Land of the Setting Sun, GOP gadfly Kari Lake, currently running for US Senate, has denounced Arizona's stand for life. Not only that: Ms. Kari has criticized the Democrat leaders of the State for being weenies and too soft on a woman's right to choose. 

     "As the only woman and mother in this race, I oppose today’s ruling and call on Katie Hobbs and the State Legislature to come up with an immediate common sense solution that Arizonans can support. Ultimately, Arizona voters will make the decision on the ballot come November,” she opined. The President-in-Exile and the RNC---which was supposedly turning in a more Conservative direction---wholeheartedly embraced Kari Lake's woke positions.  

   Like many other so-called Tradcon women, Kari Lake is probably suffering from Penis Envy, which sometimes manifests itself in status-driven females as they approach middle-age. It's somewhat analogous to the so-called mid-life crisis experienced by some males. Former celebrities like Kari Lake are especially vulnerable to it: when younger they sublimated their hatred for men by seeking constant attention from them, and this not infrequently re-emerges as political activism later on. This isn't meant to be a diagnosis, simply an observation of a general tendency. In our culture of very weak and passive men, such dominant types appeal to males raised in fatherless homes and under strict and often sadistic female teachers, social workers etc. Conservative men fawn over these frustrated 'Supermom' types, while Liberals and Male Feminists prefer the disciplinarian, frustrated 'school marm' types. In either case, American men are eager to submit to whatever their surrogate mother-figures demand, and most of them simply need to grow up and start thinking like adults.

   Unfortunately, because Abortion Racketeers have far more cash to spread around than Pro-Life activists, many children never get a chance to be born let alone to become adults. That little detail is rarely discussed in any of the high-brow debates among our expert class. The very fact that there's even any debate about what 'defines a human life' alone proves that we are a culture made up of arrant ignoramuses about even the most fundamental issues. 

   The Right to Life is not debatable. Either people have a Right to Live or they haven't. It's much like the controversy over chattel slavery in the United States. Back then, though, it was Republicans and Libertarians who stood against the settled science which then taught that Blacks were inferior and needed to be put to work and treated like livestock. That generation rightly argued that either humans were born free or they weren't. Today, however, our Postmodern Right sides with both the enemies of life and of freedom in general.

   

     

NEOCONS GRAB SLICES OF THE POLICY PIE

      We've documented here many times the ongoing collusion between the Democrat and Republican Political Establishments and their abject subservience to the Corporate Deep State ongoing behind the scenes in 2024's most important election of our lifetime which will decide the future of America. I can't recall a single election in the US that wasn't billed exactly the same way; although I somewhat recall the elections of the mid-20th Century when actual Liberals and actual Conservatives were still campaigning over actual issues and the US Government still had some actual power of enforcing laws. Probably 1984 was the last such election, meaning that now a whole generation has grown up in this poisoned political atmosphere and don't remember anything but today's conditions as normative. 

     

     Some recent Supreme Court decisions have highlighted this type of collusion, although the Controlled Opposition wing of the Corporate Media discreetly has been passing over them in silence---focusing instead on the political-legal persecutions of President-in-Exile Trump and his supporters while the Republican leadership is making absolutely no effort to stop any of it. The Court recently ruled against States excluding Trump from the ballot---a policy which we've noted was wholly instigated by Republican operatives. Immigration---one of the few issues that the GOP actually has left in its campaign---has also been discussed, though it's noteworthy that the Republicans not only have blocked any attempt to secure the Border; some of their members are actively encouraging illegal immigration. 

   A case regarding censorship also came up before the Court. We regularly hear complaints in the Controlled Opposition about public officials censoring opposing viewpoints. Any guesses as to who was on the pro-censorship side? "The Biden administration and a bipartisan group of 17 states and National Republican Senatorial Committee sided with officials, arguing in favor of their blocks."

   What a surprise---just as we learned this week that a consortium headed by GOP operative Steve Mnuchin is planning to cash in if the State-sponsored seizure of Tik-Tok becomes law. Mnuchin was one of the continual revolving-door personnel from WEF Top 100 Strategic Partner Goldman-Sachs, which effectually has captured the US Treasury Department. Mnuchin attended the 2019 and 2020 World Economic Forum meetings where the Great Reset was devised; and was one of a group of Trump Cabinet officials to abandon the President during the Electoral dispute that year. Mnuchin hasn't disclosed his partners, but I think that we can guess about what they'll look like. 

    It's not just time for cashing in on domestic issues: foreign policy is a ripe field for investment, according to former White House top advisor Jared Kushner. Kushner sees tremendous real estate development potential in Gaza once it's ethnically cleansed. "The thing that I would try to do if I was Israel right now is I would just bulldoze something in the Negev. I would try to move people in there. I know that won’t be the popular thing to do, but I think that’s a better option to do so you can go in and finish the job… Gaza’s waterfront property could be very valuable," Kushner remarked recently. The Zionist Government---which has a full monopoly on real estate throughout Palestine---already has been angling to sell off the prime properties. Kushner is a real estate mogul in his own right, who married into the Trump family. He took over the company from his father who was sentenced to the Penitentiary on 18 counts of corruption in connection with illegal donations to the Democratic Party. 

    Ukraine, too, is coming back as a potential cash-cow. After some grandstanding, the GOP-controlled Congress is relenting on continuing propping up Zelensky's Regime. This isn't surprising considering the fat donations that Republican Senators rake in from the Ukraine lobby while Congress frets over Hunter Biden's dealings with that country. Another top GOP operative, Mike Pompeo, recently grabbed a share of Ukraine's telecom industry; hence it's important to keep those arms sales up in exchange for these kinds of Corporate perks; not to mention all that cash up for grabs if the Republicans succeed in seizing frozen Russian assets. One of the new heroes of the West's War for Existence, WEF Young Global Leader and French strongman Emmanuel Macron, has been inciting tensions by suggesting direct involvement of NATO troops in Ukraine. Macron has become a hero to the New Right despite his recent despotic moves against protests and the enshrinement of Abortion as a constitutional right. Macron has been increasingly dictatorial under the influence of his new President, homosexual activist Gabriel Attal who, in turn, appointed his non-binary lover to be Foreign Minister.  

     This are examples of what we're told on a regular basis are better than the Democrats, and that our survival as a nation depends upon giving them more power. Anyone who believes this seriously is either not well-informed or is deceiving themselves. We certainly don't need any more of the Democrats, but I've yet to hear a solid reason as to why the Republicans are suitable replacements. 

   

RINOS IN THE MIST

      In the run-up to the Big Event this Sunday (commonly known as the Super Bowl), the U.S. Supreme Court began hearing arguments in America's second-biggest spectator sport, the Presidential Elections. The case centers on Colorado's unilateral decision to remove the President-in-Exile from this November's electoral ballot. Cheering sections for each team were on hand outside the Court.

    The Controlled Opposition is excited because preliminary remarks from our black-robed friends on the bench seemed to indicate a decision favorable to the President's cause, even though this is exactly the same bunch who, in 2020, ignored hearings on voter fraud. Another interesting bit of irony is that. less than two weeks ago, the same experts and influencers on the Right were proclaiming that Texas had every justification to ignore the Supreme Court's rulings regarding Border jurisdiction. Applying the Right's own logic here, it would seem that States have a right to determine who is and isn't on their ballots (this incidentally is what Colorado's attorneys are arguing). We're not arguing here that Colorado has a valid case; but the double-standards here ought to raise a few questions.

    More interesting though is the near-universal silence from the Conservative Media about their own Party's overt complicity in bringing these disqualification suits against Trump in the first place---just like they've been silent over Neocon double-dealings on the Border issue. The Supreme Court case is no different in this respect. This week, for example, three former Republican Governors---one of whom was RNC Chair under Bush Jr.---filed an Amicus Brief with the Supreme Court in support of Colorado's case. 

   Marc Racicot, former Governor of Montana, said: "Trump violated his oath through actions that were elevating his own political interests over the governmental stability secured by the peaceful transition of power. Should Mr. Trump be permitted to stand again for election to the presidency, despite his past actions, neither Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment nor the oaths that undergird the bedrock premise that public officials serve to advance the welfare of the people and our common national project will ever be the same. They will have been rendered meaningless in their legal force and stripped of their moral authority and power.”

   Racicot was former RNC Chair overseeing the 2002 midterms and was involved in Bush's 2004 re-election campaign. He served two terms as Montana Governor. The other two endorsing Racicot's Brief were Bush's former Education Commissar and ex-New Jersey Governor Christine Todd-Whitman and former Massachusetts Governor and Harvard University President William Weld. Weld is also active in the Libertarian Party. 

   One would assume that such actions from the GOP leadership would draw at least a little scrutiny from the GOP's trained seals in the Punditocracy, but they've been strangely silent. Bringing these matters to attention though would undermine the Official Counter-Narrative that the Republican Party is standing as a united front against the Junta's abuses of power. It also might start causing a few of the true believers out there to start questioning whether they're being told the whole truth about the Neocons' actual objectives in 2024. 

   In spite of media-driven fantasies on the Right, Conservatives shouldn't forget that the never-Trump Bush Machine, Koch Family Foundation, and Neocon elements of the Deep State are still in actual control of what the Republican Party does. In today's system of Inverted Totalitarianism, a million dollars can cancel a million votes fairly easily. Both Parties are committed not to repeat their blunders in 2016 and allow another populist into power. 

  To underscore this point, the actual Government of the United States (and the West generally), the World Economic Forum issued an urgent message from its unofficial Party spokesxhe, Noah Harari this week. 

      Harari's warning, of course, was neatly timed with the fear-mongering whipped on about Right-Wing extremist violence should the Trump disqualification be allowed to stand. It also very coincidentally dovetails with Bush Machine asset Greg Abbott's escalation of tensions at the Southern Border. Suspicious minds might be wondering that the ruling Elite might actually desire some of the "disorder, chaos, and violence" that Harari hints at. 

    Sadly, though, many on the Right would rather cling to the illusion that there really is an opposition party; that voting really does matter; and that the threats to America all come from foreign elements instead of our own Corporate Deep State. No amount of evidence to the contrary is going to convince them: the show must go on; Super Bowl or Super Tuesday, it's all part of the same performance.

   

THIS WON'T END WELL

       Texas Governor Greg Abbott is at it again: this time one of his anti-immigration publicity stunts is about to spiral out of control. Abbott first made headlines by ethnically cleansing deporting migrants who'd been cleared for entry by INS through forced bussing 'voluntary' transports to Democrat cities. These deportations notoriously recruited these 'volunteers' outside churches, gave them no provisions for a long bus trip and typically dumped them in bad weather conditions in cities ill-prepared to deal with them. While it's true that Texas gets more money from the Federal Trough for immigration than any other State except California, it's noteworthy that Abbott---despite all of his rhetoric about 'Federal failure' at the Border hasn't turned down any Federal money and volunteered to let Texas pay for border security itself.

    Abbott since has been pushing the envelope, including installing razor wire on an international border (which is unconstitutional); mobilizing his secret police to enforce immigration laws (which is also unconstitutional); mobilizing his private army to usurp Federal authority (ditto); erected barriers in international waters (ditto and in violation of International Law). Yesterday, he defied a Supreme Court Order and declared a 'State of Emergency' over a 'foreign invasion.' 

    This has met with considerable applause from the so-called Political Right---the ones who believe in the sanctity of the Constitution and the Rule of Law (but only when it suits them). One Alpha blowhard in the Texas Legislature quoted Andrew Jackson about a Supreme Court Decision "they have made their decision now let them enforce it." Besides taking this quote out of context, the also forget that when South Carolina took a similar position over the Tariff of 1832, the same President Jackson vowed to lead the US Army personally into South Carolina and "hang anybody taken in treason." 

    

      

       The Junta so far has restricted its response to these outrages to legal challenges, and Abbott's flying monkeys have been egging on even more extreme rhetoric. Before they go too far here, they should consider a few points (aside from the illegality and immorality of Abbott's actions):

      1. Abbott is a pawn of the Bush Machine.

      2. The GOP-controlled Congress has been blocking funding for increased Border Security.

      3. It's a rather dubious claim that any 'invasion' is actually occurring. 

      To try and pretend that there's some great principle involved here, consider how bravely the American Right stood up to Obamacare, homo 'marriage,' the Scamdemic, the Floyd Riots, the Election Steal, the anti-Trump witch hunts, and have slavishly rubber-stamped all of the Junta's nominees and policies. It's out of character for them to stand for anything. Then there is the WEF's dictates about restoring trust and fighting online extremism. Then there is the fact that the Junta seems to be waiting for some situation where they clearly have to act. Finally, consider that this is an Election Year and the Establishment would like nothing more than another False Flag like 2020.

     Abbott's actions and rhetoric are bound to lead to violence of some kind; indeed, that seems to be what he desires. Let us not forget that the Junta and the Oligarchy also desire it. Nothing would give them a greater excuse for a crackdown on 'extremists' than violence stemming from the clearly illegal actions and borderline-psychopathic speeches coming from the contemporary Right. 

     In other words, this isn't going to end well and it is very likely being orchestrated for that exact purpose. Recall the Strategy of Tension which, we'll remind everyone was devised by a former general---now a Fox News 'security analyst' and a Satanic Cult leader. If one is inclined to doubt that that can be done, just remember the George Floyd Riots. The Oligarchy has no shortage of rent-a-mobs, patsies, trolls, and other stooges---not to mention a servile Media at its disposal. 

    Unfortunately, the American Right seems to be living in this Cloud-Cuckooland fantasy world where everyone is suddenly going to roll up their sleeves, turn into Rambo, and take their country back. It isn't going to happen. Realistically, the American Right is a lot closer to having a jackboot come down on their throats than they are of merrily waltzing into the Beltway singing God Bless America after fighting the Regime in a Homeric battle. We're being set up again for a hard fall. The Junta hasn't made any secret of their intentions and it's an even bigger illusion to believe that the political Right won't cave in and support them as they always have.

WILL THE PALESTINIAN CIVIL WAR EXPAND?

      The New Year has gotten off to a rough start for the Global Oligarchs. Hamas has turned out to be a tougher opponent than the Zionists and their Pentagon overlords reckoned. The Ukraine conflict not only failed to bring about the downfall of the Oligarchs' arch-enemy Russia; it's made the Russians stronger. The BRICS nations are about to expand, with all five new members in the strategic Middle East (four of which are OPEC members). To top it all off, Beltway bullying in East Asia has not only not intimidated China: the Chinese economy grew at twice even the fudged admitted numbers of the US economy and Chinese port traffic and exports in several sectors surpassed the US for the first time.

    I'm certain that what most of the Western political class is really dreading is that the Corporate Board of Directors who actually run our governments are meeting in Davos this month. Their top agenda item is "Rebuilding Trust" which they define as "a back-to-basics spirit of open and constructive dialogue between leaders of government, business and civil society,"  which seems to imply that the bosses aren't totally happy with the way that their managers are running things. 

   To deflect as much attention away from these setbacks as possible; the Democrats and their flying monkeys on the Neocon Right have been stirring up controversies over things like ballot access and dredging up the Epstein sex-scandals. The Supreme Court is supposed to hear Trump's appeal: sure, like they did in 2020 when 17 States presented evidence of Electoral Fraud, I'm sure they'll side with Trump this time. As we pointed out here, both States which disqualified Trump did so at Republican instigation. This weekend, Illinois and Massachusetts filed for disqualification: they don't seem too worried about the Supreme Court. We don't have all of the details yet, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if Republican were behind these moves as well---a little detail that nobody in the Controlled Opposition seems to bring up. 

    If this farce runs true to form, the Court will rule against Trump. The Republican Governors, using the Blue States as shields, immediately will cave in too saying that the Court has ruled and their hands are tied. Just look at the homo 'equality' decision for a precedent of GOP behavior.

   The Epstein Scandal is an even bigger sham: these supposed secrets have been known for nearly 10 years. Epstein supposedly hung himself in Federal Prison--- despite being on 'suicide watch'--- after his guards decided to take a nap together at coincidentally the same moment the security cameras malfunctioned. The guards were later exonerated at an inquest of any negligence and anyone who thought that any of that appeared suspicious was pooh-poohed as a Conspiracy Theorist. None of that will be brought out during this media circus, but no doubt there'll be plenty of flame-wars online with Whacko Leftists screeching about toxic masculinity and Neocon pundits clutching their bowties over the moral decay that just started under Biden. 

     Nothing unifies a country though, like a good external threat, as both 9/11 and the Scamdemic have proven. Americans love a good panic attack and the chance to LARP through an 'emergency' makes them feel like they're part of something greater and justifies all of the pointless sacrifices of our freedoms that they make. There is more than a little suspicion right that the Junta and its overseas colonies are preparing for some 'wider conflict' in the Middle East. 

    The Conservative-Industrial-Complex is beating the war-drums too; though it isn't likely that such a decisive step will be taken unless they get permission from their Masters in Davos next week. Nevertheless, the Junta sent Deep State spook Amos Hochstein over to meet with the Zionists about the "future of Lebanon." As it happens, of course, Israel has been praised by Klaus Schwab as a model State and Netanyahu and his henchman Yuval Hariri are both influential WEF members, so I think that we can guess what the Directorate will decide. 

   Amos Hochstein has an interesting backstory of his own. He first came to the Beltway as a lobbyist, later working exclusively for Marathon Oil. He then worked for Obama as an Energy Affairs Coordinator, and during the Trump years served on the Board of Tellurian Natural Gas, a corporation which coincidentally has major holdings in House Speaker Mike Johnson's home state. He also served on the Board of Ukrainian petroleum conglomerate Naftogaz. Naftogaz has been implicated quite deeply in corrupt lobbying practices involving both Hunter Biden as well as top Republicans. What a coincidence that a man of Hochstein's background was chosen for such a mission where control of the East Mediterranean Oil Fields are in play.  

    If one actually engages in the art---now lost in America---of being able to read maps, one can see how all of the countries potentially involved in this expansion of the conflict might impact world geopolitics quite severely. 

     We can see from the countries involved in this region two things: one: both the  conflicts in Palestine and Ukraine are all about control of oil reserves, and two, expanding the conflict is very likely lead to a major confrontation between the Western Corporate Oligarchy and Russia. Russia currently has an oil trade corridor with Iran that soon will include the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt. They have a military defense pact with Syria and are already engaged in a US proxy-war in Ukraine, as well as mediating a US-instigated clash between Armenia and Azerbaijan: the latter country hosting the Russian pipeline. 

    The US Deep State and their Corporate Overlords have been engaging in a deliberate policy of trying to undermine---and eventually seize control of---Russia's vast oil reserves which dates to the phony Kosovo Crisis engineered by Bill Clinton in 1999. The dangerous thing here is that the Oligarchs are both too stupid and too arrogant to realize that Russia is just as capable of defending their interests as the bully-boys are determined to take them.

   Iran isn't going to be a pushover on its own---with or without Russian help---and when one reads some of the utterly moronic articles coming from 'conservative' pundits these days, it's clear that our side has absolutely no understanding of Iran, or even of the objectives of the Biden/Harris Junta. These creatures routinely talk out of both sides of their mouths: condemning the 'woke' military and clutching their bowties over the (genuine) weakness of our younger generation one minute; while carrying on as though we could swat Iran down easily the next a la World War 2. They're living in some kind of fantasy world and one gets the overall impression that we need World War 3 to instill the discipline and national commitment that they failed as parents to impart to the young. In reality, World War 3 would most likely end in a devasted US suing for peace under terms of Unconditional Surrender; but these idiots don't care as long as they can own the Libtards and blame it all on the Democrats.

   As for the Democrats, they are only concerned with taking marching orders from Wall Street and probably hope to limit military responses to stealing as much as they can get away with. Taking on Yemen and Lebanon while Israel ethnically cleanses Palestine are about as far as they can reasonably go without igniting a global conflict. Since they have complicit Republicans, the Mass Media, and the Academic Establishment on their side, they can spin some relatively risk-free interventions as some sort of great victory without really accomplishing anything. Their policy of Containment is premised on creating a strategic stalemate which allows the Oligarchs to profit---or at least not lose any investments---while keeping the threat from foreign enemies alive for when they need to play that card again. 

   Ultimately, I think that's the decision that the WEF will relay to their satraps: secure Corporate interests in the Middle East and Ukraine first and foremost and proceed with implementing the Great Reset at home for the time being. Use some military showboating here and there for political purposes, but don't bring on a war that they can't win. Thus the status quo is probably going to continue for awhile, and only the rhetoric will heat up. 

   

    

   

SUPREME COURT SLAPS DOWN REVERSE DISCRIMINATION

      So yesterday morning, while checking out the news headlines, I actually saw some good news that was so shocking that I thought I was still asleep and dreaming the whole thing.

    "The US Supreme Court has ruled that colleges and universities can no longer take race into consideration when choosing who to admit. The decision overturns a system that critics say has unfairly penalized whites and Asians for almost four decades."

   

    Yes, I did go out and celebrate. It's not every day that an injustice that one's fought against for over three decades gets vaporized by the Supreme Court. I was one of the early victims of this abominable policy which literally has disenfranchised probably millions of American men---cheating them out of positions they'd earned and marginalizing them in favor of more compliant and more easily manipulated mediocrities willing to serve vested interests. Although various schools have been doing this since the 1970s, Reverse Racism didn't become national policy until the Administration of that great Conservative George Bush Sr in 1991 and expanded vastly during the Clinton Co-Presidency.

    I'm certain that, even as we speak, the Academic Mafia is working overtime to devise new ways of circumventing the law. But it's going to be a lot tougher for them now. This wasn't a milquetoast ruling like the one overturning Roe vs. Wade that shifted the problem to the States. The Supreme Court ruled that university admissions policies are in violation of the 14th Amendment---which means that this applies universally, across the nation. Hopefully this will mark the first step in a long-overdue cleaning of the Augean Stables that postmodern Academia has turned into. 

  Thanks go out to all the individuals, organizations, attorneys, and judges who fought to make this day possible. Have a great 4th of July weekend everybody: the holiday's taken on a whole new hue. 

CANCEL CULTURE AND THE CONSTITUTION

    As if we needed any further evidence that American Cultural Rot has reached the terminal stage, a Heartland Institute Poll was released this week indicating that a growing number of Ameroboobs believe that Cancel Culture should be extended to the U.S. Constitution. Granted, very little of the Constitution is still enforced anymore anyway; but the popular attitude towards it represents a very dangerous cultural shift.

   "53 percent of Democrats voice their support for eliminating the Supreme Court altogether, in favor of replacing it with a new, democratically elected court with justices chosen by the American people directly...In the same poll, a slightly larger majority of voters between the ages of 19 and 39 want to abolish the high court, at 54 percent." The author of the article seems to take comfort in the fact that "only" 1/5 of Republicans and 2/5 of Independents agree with the idea. Frankly, I don't take much solace in such statistics. 

   The especially troubling aspect of this poll is the cavalier attitude of the respondents to one of the most important foundational parts of the structure of our Republic. Political polls usually indicate that the people's dissatisfaction arises from the Government's failure to follow or enforce the Constitution: this is the first I've encountered where the public is actually stating that Constitutional provisions themselves ought to be jettisoned. 

    "67 percent of Democrats believe that the Supreme Court is a 'fundamentally sexist institution that favors men over women,' only 18 percent of Republicans share this sentiment, as do 36 percent of independents. Similarly, 56 percent of Democrats called the court a 'fundamentally racist institution,' with only 14 percent of Republicans and 29 percent of independents saying the same thing."

   The Supreme Court is not without its problems, but like most of our national issues, they are problems entirely of our own making. The problems that the Supreme Court has are precisely because of appointments being made through partisan cronyism (e.g. David Souter, John Roberts); or appointing incompetents because they represent 'diversity' (e.g. Ginsberg, Jackson, Sotomayor). The intention of the Founding Fathers was that men who were recognized as the top Constitutional experts and most experienced jurists would be selected for the job. The American People have not only allowed our Courts to become compromised by cheap politicians, they've encouraged it. And the numbers cited among younger Americans show that we've also failed considerably teaching the basic principles of self-government both at home and in schools.

   If you're over a certain age in America, you probably recall learning about the System of Checks and Balances sometime between the ages of 10 and 12; one again has to wonder where American parents in the postmodern era have been all this time. Actually, it's not much of a mystery.

     Which leads to a question I posed in the comments to the linked article:

   "Here's a question for all the True Believers out there: Say that we have a Red Wave this November and have all the investigations into Hunter's porn-surfing. How is that going to solve the problem of so many Americans willing to abolish the Supreme Court and replace it with diversity councils? How are they going to reverse the damage done by 'more than a half-century of liberals running America’s K-12 schools and colleges?'"

   The answer is, of course, that it can't and it won't---that's assuming even if by some chance we actually have anything like a normal election to begin with. There's nothing that the Great Reset Oligarchs would enjoy more than having the Third Branch of Government abolished because it's the only one that can veto their plans and carries the legal authority to do it. 

  And they're going get it abolished (or radically altered) too: those poll numbers show that we're not very far from at least a plurality demanding it. We've already been tolerating utterly illegal show trials---more recently they've become even more blatant: like the 'trial' of Derrick Chauvin, Ghisalline Maxwell, the Jan. 6 protesters, and soon Julian Assange.  As bad as it is now, we are really going to regret it when we have real Peoples' Tribunals based upon ideology over the Rule of Law.

    
   That goes too for those on the Right who thought that going-along-to-get-along was the best policy and that what went on in the Culture didn't effect them. We lose the Federal Judiciary and residing in "a safe Red State" isn't going to help very much; and when they do finally come, we'll have nobody to blame but ourselves. 

   

LEGAL ABORTION IS NOT A COST-BENEFIT ISSUE

    Since our last post on the downfall of the Roe v. Wade decision, quite a number on the Right have been receiving some criticism for their positions that the Supreme Court's ruling was only the beginning  and not the end of the fight for life; and also for calling out the hypocrisy of many so-called 'Conservative' sentiments on the issue. Since the decision was handed down, the Conservative leadership---which has ignored the issue since the 1970s---is doing its best to sweep the issue under the rug and to convince us all that we should continue doing what the Right usually does: look the other way and be thankful we don't live in a libtard state where Abortion is legal. It's rather telling that less than two weeks after the historic ruling, the subject has nearly disappeared from the opinion pages of the Controlled Opposition Conservative press.

  At my suggestion on another site that the SCOTUS Decision could end federally-funded abortions and open the door for a Constitutional ban, one such realistic Conservative commented:

  "J. Alito's well supported Dobbs opinion makes your idea, as well as federal abortion as a federal constitutional rights, absurd...The court didn't say abortion is illegal on federal level. It said that the Constitution is silent. States may authorize it, and most Americans live in states where most abortions are legal post Dobbs. Abortion's here to stay."

  And furthermore: ."First trimester abortions eventually will be upheld everywhere even by state constitutions. The 'potential' life is far different than the post viability person the law should protect. Roe was, as Alito stated, not backed by any amendment-Fifth, Fourteenth, Ninth - or vague liberty provision. But privacy is in some state constitutions, and where it's not it's an attractive alternative for allowing first trimester abortions since a 'person' doesn't exist in the womb at that stage."

  Aside from his utter ignorance of Biology, the one thing noteworthy in this type of argument is a complete disregard for the whole premise of Human Rights: specifically the Right to Life. One of the issues which clearly defines a real Conservative as a opposed to a fake one is that life begins at conception and that this position is not open to debate. Common Sense alone should tell anybody that Life either begins at certain point, or it doesn't. Just like the completely arbitrary 'six-foot social distancing' rule during the height of the COVID hysteria, Conservatives are buying into this whole Trimester nonsense when it's completely obvious that the time from the formation of an embryo to natural birth is a continuum in a single process. A 'trimester' is nothing but a general medical description of various stages in the process.

   But such reasoning is about what we'd expect from a culture that seriously believes gender is something assigned by doctors.

    Now that the Conservative punditocracy has found itself neatly painted in the proverbial corner---with too many constituents demanding that they take action, one of their number Prof. Walter Block wrote a piece on Independence Day justifying the virtue of compromising on the Abortion issue. This article was so bad that I actually thought it was satire at the first reading, but no: this guy really means it. 

   Block argues that: "it might be a good time to consider the philosophical case for and against abortion. Which is correct: The pro-choice view or the pro-life position? Neither. The only tenable stance is a compromise between the two of them, called evictionism...What, then, is evictionism? It is the view that the mother has a right to evict her baby at any stage of its development, but not, ever, to kill him (except in self-defense when her life or health is at stake). At the present level of medical technology, this means that when and if evictionism is adopted as the law of the land, the baby’s life will be protected during the last trimester, when it is viable outside the womb, but not during the first two trimesters, during the time that it is not capable of living on its own (even with help, of course). Hence, evictionism constitutes a compromise position between pro-life and pro-choice."

   No, it doesn't offer a "compromise position," it's a 'pro-choice' position if there ever was one. Stripped of it's pseudo-Libertarian catch-phrases, it's simply "my body, my choice" repackaged to sound appealing to the types of voters who reflexively pull the levers for anyone with an "R" after his name. And now we come  to the philosophical justification for this:

  "How, ever, do we arrive at any such position as this? We do so on the basis of private property rights. The mother is the complete and total owner of her own body. She has “mixed her labor” with this physique of hers, in the words of philosopher John Locke, hence she is the proper owner of it. What about the fetus? The unwanted pre-birth baby is a trespasser!"

  And many on the Right seriously wonder how Conservatives get the reputation of being selfish louts with no regard for the lives or welfare of others? Really? Getting pregnant is no different than signing a rental contract? A woman's body is no different than an undeveloped piece of land? As for John Locke, he'd probably vomit if he heard his name invoked with such ideals.

   As if this actually needed explaining, pregnancy is actually a 'co-ownership' to use Block's rather debased terminology. But as one can see, the whole premise of his argument is based on economics and not on actual biology. His whole concept of the family in general is a reductionist argument as a Cost-Benefit analysis based on the individual profitability of the principals involved. If anyone's inclined to doubt this, Block once elsewhere wrote that:

  "Suppose that there is a starvation situation, and the parent of the four year old child (who is not an adult) does not have enough money to keep him alive. A wealthy NAMBLA man offers his parents enough money to keep him and his family alive – if he will consent to his having sex with the child...Would it be criminal child abuse for the parent to accept this offer? Not on libertarian grounds. For surely it is better for the child to be a live victim of sexual abuse rather than unsullied and dead. Rather, it is the parent who consents to the death of his child, when he could have kept him alive by such extreme measures, who is the real abuser."

   Besides the obvious absurdity of imagining this situation occurring in real life (and we do have to wonder about Block's own inclinations in thinking it up in the first place), this same type of reasoning behind Evictionism is at play here. The child is not a human being, but a commodity; and actually by his logic, selling one's children to purchase narcotics is a perfectly rational decision. In an area near where I live, there's a missing 5-year old girl whose parents are widely suspected of having done exactly that. I strongly tend to believe that the reaction of most of Block's followers would be simply to shake their heads and say "Well that's what she gets for living in a Blue State." After all, Block argues, "Being born is merely a slight change of address."

   Bear in mind that this arrant nonsense isn't being spouted by some drugged-up Leftist at a 'woke' university: these are the sentiments of a full professor of Economics who holds a Chair at the supposedly Conservative Loyola University and another at the prestigious Von Mises Institute, at allegedly Conservative Auburn University. The only Evictionism I would favor is evicting people like this from our schools before they warp any other young minds. I'm all for the freedom of creatures like Block to express their opinions, but to take patently Leftist positions and disguise them as Conservative is a deceptive practice; and proves nothing other than that Conservative schools are just as much a dishonest racket as the 'Woke' neo-Liberal slimepits. 

   The argument that childbirth is nothing more than an economic factor is not a Conservative position, but a Neo-Marxist one. Recall that both Maoist China and the Khmer Rouge encouraged abortion and population control---as a purely economic calculation. Both Mao and Pol Pot believed that their populations were too large to be sustained so they advocated population control as a means of keeping the Collective economically viable. Block and the fake Conservatives are making the same argument except spinning it to the benefit of the individual instead of to the community. 

   This pretense isn't fooling anybody; and the Conservative Movement is not suffering politically because it is 'Pro-Life'; but because it is very much pro-abortion and trying to pose as though the lives of the unborn actually mattered to them. In reality, they embrace a variation of Social Darwinism and their only real disagreement with the Left is who should be declared 'unfit.' Our real problem, the real source of these social divisions we're experiencing is not because we're engaged in some great clash of principles, but instead we're led around by the nose by frauds who are only fighting over who gets a bigger share of the spoils. 

   Again, our problem is a spiritual one. As a society, we need to start thinking more about our accountability to God than to our earthly accountants figuring out the Bottom Line. We need to think helping our neighbors instead of helping ourselves to the Public Trough. Otherwise, nothing is going to change. 

   

   

THE FIGHT FOR LIFE ISN'T OVER

      So a week has passed since Roe vs. Wade was toppled. About a dozen states have taken action and banned abortion altogether; a few RINO-run jurisdictions are looking for loopholes; and the Whacko Left has gone on a counter-offensive. Needless to say, the Globalist Oligarchy is not pleased with this decision. Half-hearted and long-overdue as it was, the decision was a major setback for their population control schemes. Legal Abortion was never about a woman's right to choose, but about a child's right to life. 

    Now in neo-Fascist Police States like our cheery neighbors to the North in Canada---a country that's running ahead of schedule in implementing the Great Reset---action is more easily taken. Since the downfall of Roe, the Ottawa Regime has crowned all of its crimes by announcing an outright persecution of Pro-Life organizations. The Junta and its Republican enablers here envision doing the same thing.

    The Corporate Oligarchy---since it is the actual government here---is already circumventing the State laws. In conjunction with the Insurance Cartels, a growing number of Wall Street Robber Barons and NWO fanatics are putting up cash to female employees willing to fly first-class out of Right-to-Life jurisdictions and supply China with their children's fetal tissues. Dick's Sporting Goods CEO Lauren Hobart declared to MSN that "Dick’s $4,000 death benefit will also cover the travel of one support person for employees who live in states with abortion restrictions, so they can choose what is best for them." Hobart, incidentally, formerly was an executive with J.P. Morgan, PepsiCo, and Wells Fargo---all World Economic Forum 'partners.' WEF-affiliated banks and trusts control about 1/3 of Dick's Sporting Goods stocks.

    “Starbucks, Tesla, Yelp, Airbnb, Microsoft, Netflix, Patagonia, DoorDash, JPMorgan Chase, Levi Strauss, PayPal, Amazon…Reddit…Walt Disney Company, Meta…and Condé Nast,” are among the others so far offering such corporate 'perks' for infanticide, according to the New York Times. Such is the price we're paying for allowing Corporations to become more powerful than the Government. 

   The con-job that the Neocons sold us around the Turn of the Century was that economic regulation was 'socialism' and 'interfered with the Free Market.' Some of us warned that power in the hands of a Government accountable to the People was preferable to power in the hands of unelected and unaccountable financial and economic combines, but personal greed carried the day over the national interest.

  Today. the Republican leadership---which has hidden behind Roe as an excuse for inaction for nearly 50 years--- finds itself in a delicate spot. They can't continue to pose as Pro-Life without at least making a token effort to ban the procedure but they're also conspicuously not making any effort to push for a nationwide ban, or legally challenge pro-abortion States, or rein in these Corporate thugs thumbing their noses at laws protecting life. 

  Unfortunately, too, there seems to be little will among rank-and-file 'Conservatives' who, frankly speaking, for the most part could care less about babies conceived in so-called 'Blue States.' There are plenty of comments on Conservative websites such as the following:

  "I'm pro life, but I have to admit there are some people whose mothers should have chosen the alternative!!! Can imagine the welfare and crime problem we'd have if abortion had not been legal!!! Not to mention some of the worthless human beings that have infested our nation's politics the past 50 to 100 years???"

  "Federal welfare should go the same way as Roe v. Wade. If we abolish welfare, then that would go along way to stopping illegitimate births. Males in the big, Democrat-run cities commit crimes because they have no connection with the community they live in. The women don't want them either as husbands or breadwinners. They are sperm and drug donors whose purpose in life is to provide women with babies to qualify for welfare and subsidized housing. When they are rejected by their own community and they have no job skills, they prey on that community that has rejected them."

   "The Dobbs ruling is beneficial because it follows the principle of moving government away from a center so that it becomes diffuse. This increases liberty. If Plato's understanding of justice is true, those states that outlaw abortion should experience more harmony among their citizens. And those states that keep abortion legal should experience more civil disintegration to some noticeable degree. I therefore, agree with Dennis Prager: that the increased justice brought about by the Dobbs ruling will directly affect individuals, especially women, in a healthy manner."

    All of these observations betray the fact that many on the so-called Right have bought into the same Cultural Marxist mythology that Abortion is about a woman's right to choose---as opposed to a human being's right to life. The second comment in particular doesn't materially differ from policies like those in Canada where dissenters essentially are frozen out of society and left to rot on the margins. In fact, it's even more inhumane because it punishes children who have no say in the matter. 

    Dennis Prager, a thrice-divorced Neocon poltroon who fancies himself an authority on traditional families and relationships in general, was referenced in the third comment because of an article he recently penned blaming the abortion problem on men,  It illustrates too that Right has also swallowed much of the same Feminist philosophy on human sexuality even though the article's premise is allegedly anti-Feminist. 

  "Have men ever called for a sex strike" Prager snorts, "even on college campuses, where a hookup gone wrong can result in a sexual assault allegation and punishment without due process? The idea is preposterous." Actually a lot of men have: the most extreme version being the MGTOW movement. But that aside, his whole premise that  "the feminist insistence that, except for physical differences, men and women are basically the same. This includes the central feminist belief about men’s and women’s sexual natures" is responsible for the abortion problem is absurd. Both Feminism and Abortion are not premised on radical sexual egalitarianism: they based in Misandry. The hookup culture that Prager decries is practiced by people of both genders who see the opposite sex as mere sexual objects and abortion is only an incidental outcome of an already-corrupted mindset. 

   Again, our problems as a culture are neither Left or Right: they are essentially a spiritual problem. If we actually believed in the spiritual principle enunciated in our Declaration of Independence that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness, then none of this would even be a debatable issue. But we've relegated such writers to Dead White Males, and the lives of the innocent unborn are still treated as expendable commodities.