Sunday, October 11, 2020

Vast Hoard of Lucre

"How The DNC Hired CrowdStrike To Frame Russia For The Hack: Excerpt" (Farnan) (it seems to be ZeroHedge that Blogger refuses to link to, presumably for political reasons:  "").  "Pelosis Take a Big Stake in CrowdStrike, Democrat-Connected Linchpin of Russia Probe" (Maté).

"'White Supremacist' Narrative Unravels: Whitmer Kidnap Suspect Attended BLM Rally, Another Called Trump A 'Tyrant'" (Durden) (ZeroHedge link:  "").  "Two Types of Terror in Michigan" (Bovard).

"Navalny’s ‘Novichok’ Hoax: Who are the Instigators?" (Watzal).  "“I Am Russia” — Navalny Story Collapses in Self-Contradiction" (Helmer).

"Did the SPLC's 2019 Scandals Sap Its Vast Hoard of Lucre?" (Sailer).  "French Court Sentenced Alain Soral to Pay Jewish Organization $158,500 for Re-Releasing 128-Year-Old Book" (Durocher).

"No 2nd stimulus? Time to admit both parties want to destroy the average American" (Mazaheri):

"It’s incredibly devilish, but just to achieve their short-term goal of winning the November elections both parties have proven that the ruin of Main Street is a perfectly acceptable price to paid.

Republican intransigence at least has an ideological component, albeit a terrible one: the largest pillar of neoliberal ideology is to slash the size of government at all levels – this explains why they refuse to concede to the Democrats’ intelligent call for hundreds of billions in stimulus funding for state and local governments.

Yet Republicans’ don’t seem to understand that their beloved “democracy with American characteristics” does have a flaw or two: the US is a federal system – the fundamental structure of this type of government is to empower local government and to reduce the power of the central government. Therefore, in any type of crisis the federal government is handicapped from the very start – US citizens are forced to depend on local governments. Yet a crisis like this – which saps local funding and tax revenue – makes a federal/national response the difference between life or death.

Democratic intransigence is harder to understand: why did they go months without even mouthing condemnation towards anarchic situations in places like Portland and Minneapolis, or against cases of violent looting which topples far more small-business households than corporate insurance companies? Why do they refuse President Trump’s call for a stand-alone stimulus package consisting of another $1,200 check to households? Everyone reading this is aware of the general statistics: as recently as two weeks ago 42% of all US households said they have endured job losses or reductions in wages – more aid is urgently, urgently needed and has been for months.

It is irresponsible to not objectively consider the widespread claim over here: Democrats are sowing as much disorder and suffering as possible in order to oust the incumbent because – of course – how can an incumbent possibly survive this catastrophe? Democrats have history on their side (if perhaps not the popular vote): the only one-term presidents in the past 50 years – Jimmy Carter and George Bush I – were doomed by recessions far, far more minor than this one.

So it seems as if Republicans are fine with – on an ideological level – the social chaos necessarily caused by a people without a government. It seems that Democrats are fine with – on a practical level – months and months of hellish social and individual suffering if it means they can win back the presidency."

"The Lancet censors Gaza health letter after pro-Israel pressure" (Karmi).  People consistently underestimate the sheer depths of depravity of Khazars:  tweet (Johnathan Cook):

"Why would the Lancet fold on reporting Gaza's suffering? Maybe because editor Richard Horton had an earlier run-in with the Israel lobby. It included a boycott against the publication, his wife was verbally attacked and his daughter told by classmates her father was an antisemite"

blog comments powered by Disqus