Tuesday, September 7, 2021

Reminder: New Home

Just a reminder that meaning in history has a new home (with initial caps)--this is where new content will appear. This link will take you directly to the archive of all posts. I wish it could be broken down by year/month, but:

As you'll see if you go back a bit in the archive, while all prior posts were imported, 1) not all embedded content appears as in the original, and 2) comments were not imported.

If you subscribe to this substack--which you can do for free--new posts will be emailed directly to you as they appear. That may prove more convenient. I have no plans to try to monetize this.

Alternatively, there is an RSS feed available if you use a feed reader:

For me that required a restart of the application to get it working correctly.


Friday, September 3, 2021

NEW UPDATE: RSS Feed For Meaning In History

Don't ask me why Substack hides this, but for those--like me--who use RSS readers, this is what you want:

UPDATE: I spoke too soon. While that address will fetch the titles of items, 

1) I can't mark them as read, and 

2) the items don't appear to link to anything--i.e., if I double click on them they don't open in a browser tab/window.


NEW UPDATE: I just tried the substack feed in my RSS reader (Akregator) this morning and it's working perfectly now. As far as I can tell the restart did the trick.

Comments at Substack

Still learning. At Substack I have to manually enable free commenting on a per-post basis. All the archived posts from here that were imported are default pay-to-comment except for "You're not a dog, Ya'll!" which I just now manually changed to test it. I'll check for an alternative setting, but that's what I'm stuck with for now.

The result is I'll need to get to editing some of the recent posts. A pain. Going forward I can do that as part of writing and publishing a post. 


Thursday, September 2, 2021

My New Home

Regular readers will be aware that I've been looking for a place to write where I won't be unreasonably unpublished with no real recourse. Blogger has been a good home and there are lots of things I like about it. Because it's relatively simple, it has allowed me to just let it run on its own without much managing.

You may have noticed that I only did one brief post today. Besides it's being a slow news day, I've been setting up a new home--with major help from MC:

My plan for now is to try to do my new writing there. The setup is all new to me, and I don't really understand it fully. It seems that if you subscribe you may get new posts sent by email--or is it just a notification? Not sure.

I'm not planning on trying to monetize anything, so that part stays the same.

One thing that may change--comments. Comments are enabled. As most of you know, I've managed all comments here--meaning, I've enabled all comments individually and in a relatively small number of cases have declined to enable comments. The benefit in that for me has been that it has kept me close to readers who care to comment, since I've read every single comment that has appeared. I'd like to continue in that mode, but right now I don't see how to do that. 

Thanks to MC I've been able to import all the posts here--incredibly, to me, the number is approaching 2800. Unfortunately, as I said above, the archive section at Substack isn't at all user friendly, and for now I don't see any way to change that. Two additional things about the imported posts:

1. We couldn't import comments. So we'll be starting from scratch.

2. Substack has a method for embeds that's different than Blogger's. As a result, if you look at an old post that has a video or a tweet or image embedded, there will be a link, but not embed. You can follow the link, or come over here and look up the original.

Some of you understand Substack better than I do. If you want to make suggestions, feel free--I'll appreciate any help I can get. This will be a work in progress for some time.

Thanks for your support here. I hope to see you at the new place.


You're Not A Dog, Ya'll!

Start the day with a laugh:

Totally unrelated, but also gave me a good laugh. This knucklehead thought he was gonna change the world by leaking DIOG? He was obviously living in a complete fantasy world. Thought leaking DIOG would lead to a new Church Commission? As if the Church Commission didn't enable the modern Deep (National Security) State as we know it--the one that took out Trump--by establishing the partnership between the Legislative Branch and the Intel agencies:

‘I Helped Destroy People’

Wednesday, September 1, 2021

Another Sign That The Narrative Is Breaking Down

Today the NYT ran an article, the significance of which is not so much what is said, but the fact that the article appeared in such an ueber-MSM outlet. The article is a call to America to ask the "hard Covid-19 questions." The point is that, two years on, we have yet to really face up to those questions:

The Hard Covid-19 Questions We’re Not Asking

The authors, two public health professors, focus on the issue of how to deal with children's health concerns. Nevertheless, the manner in which the entire article is framed basically throws the doors wide open to discuss just what we've been doing and to re-examine what we should be doing. Make no mistake about it--the authors are not anti-vaxxers, However, one position they stake themselves to is that Zero Covid is not a realistic goal. But that, tacitly, has been the goal up until know, and to that extent this article is a frontal assault on the official narrative--the Covid Regime as we have known it. The editors at the NYT certainly understood that.

An open discussion that accepts that Zero Covid is not a realistic policy goal necessarily opens the door to any number of ideas that, until the Israeli study blew the doors open, were considered heretical. That dynamic is changing day by day, and this article could be a significant marker of progress toward questioning everything that's been going on.


What Is Kevin McCarthy Talking About?

A number of commenters have questioned the efficacy of GOP pushback against the Dem House's request for  telecom records that probably targets GOP representatives in the context of the January 6 Event "insurrection" witchhunt that Pelosi hopes will save her House. Initial reports characterized these requests as congressional subpoenas, but it now appears that they are simply request letters issued by the Dem House. Commenters questioning the efficacy of any GOP pushback assume that the telecom companies will simply and joyfully turn over all records to the Dems, ignoring McCarthy's threats of payback if or when the GOP retakes the House.

Commenter aNanyMouse cites a sentence from The Hill's generally good account, which questions McCarthy's assertion that it's illegal for the telecom companies to comply with these request letters:

"McCarthy did not cite which law prohibits telecommunications companies from complying with the committee’s request."

To understand what's in play here, we need to review some basic matters of criminal and national security investigations.

Tuesday, August 31, 2021

MAJOR UPDATE: Is This Pelosi's Master Plan For Election 2022?

If so, my bet is that it's headed for a fail. Perhaps even a backfire.

Law prof Jonathan Turley has the story at The Hill:

Democrats' Jan. 6 subpoena-palooza sets dangerous precedent

For "Dems" I think it's entirely fair to read: Pelosi. As Turley details, the Dems are going full witch hunt on the GOP side in the House, issuing an tidal wave of subpoenas for their phone records. Given that the FBI has announced that, woops! there really wasn't any "insurrection", one assumes that the idea behind this tactic is to find in the phone records contacts that might prove embarrassing for GOP members and useful in the campaigns of endangered Dems.

My view is that Americans, for all their foibles and gullibility, have a constitutional aversion to witch hunts. This will NOT distract them from the many manifest failures of the Zhou regime. It just may anger many Americans, who all polling shows have moved past January 6.

Anyway, Turley has some points to make, and they're worthwhile.  This tactic may never get the chance to backfire--it could get quashed in court:

Another Sign The Wheels Are Coming Off?

This article appeared yesterday at the Epoch Times. If a former medical school professor, a current Pfizer board member, and former head of the FDA--that's all one person--is openly saying that natural immunity needs to be included in policy discussions, does that signal that the wheels are coming off the establishment narrative of the Covid Regime? The person in question is Scott Gottlieb, and he specifically cites the recent Israeli study everyone's been talking about:

Pfizer Board Member: ‘Natural Immunity’ Against COVID-19 Needs to Be Included in Policy Discussions

Former Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, who is also a Pfizer board member, noted that “natural immunity” gained from a prior COVID-19 infection needs to be included in discussions about virus-related policies and mandates.

“The balance of the evidence demonstrates that natural immunity confers a durable protection,” Gottlieb said during an Aug. 30 interview, referring to a landmark new preprint Israeli study that found that prior COVID-19 infection confers more protection against the virus than any of the vaccines. “It’s fair to conclude that.”

Although Gottlieb said he would “be careful” about concluding whether natural immunity provides better protection against transmitting the virus, officials “should start assimilating that into our policy discussions.”

“Natural infection confers robust and durable immunity,” he said, citing the Israeli study and others.


Last week, researchers from Maccabi Healthcare and Tel Aviv University said that individuals who had recovered from COVID-19 had superior protection against the Delta variant of the CCP virus compared to those who received the Pfizer mRNA vaccine, the most commonly used shot in Israel.

“This analysis demonstrated that natural immunity affords longer-lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease, and hospitalization due to the Delta variant,” the study reads, noting that the findings came from the “largest real-world observational study” in the world.

Support from a figure like Gottlieb is important for a reset of the narrative. The feeling is hard to shake--the establishment is on the defensive.

Updating The Boost Stage

Well, first a brief political update--although, really, it's all politics. And in a very real sense it seems almost pointless. Election 2022 is pointing toward being one of the few most consequential elections in American history, but until that happens most of the real political news is at the grass roots level. As Emerald Robinson recounted recently (How The GOP Committed Suicide Trying to Stop Trump), once Mitch McConnell and the RNC conspired with state GOP organizations to install Zhou in the White House, the stage was set. We're seeing the results of Mitch's perfidy and the only real question is what happens when people get to register their views. The Federalist summarizes the current situation well, and the highly predictable future for the next year: 

Biden’s Presidency Is Already A Total Disaster

The first seven months of Joe Biden’s presidency have been fraught with crises. First it was the coronavirus pandemic and the vaccine rollout. Then it was the border crisis. Then it was the economy.

And now Afghanistan, ...

The administration is stumbling from one disaster to the next, with no end in sight and public opinion plummeting on nearly every major issue. ...


The corporate press, keenly aware that things are not going well for this White House, will soon back away from their critical tone on Afghanistan and resume their usual routine of running cover for Biden. In the coming days we’ll almost certainly see outlandish polls showing that, aside from Afghanistan, Biden is doing pretty well, actually, considering all the crises his young administration has had to face.

But don’t buy this line. Biden has not been overtaken by events, he is not a hapless victim of history or coincidence. Every problem his White House has encountered, it has made worse. Every crisis his administration has faced has been of its own making. And as bad as things have been thus far, they are going to get even worse.

There's plenty more at the link, if you need the reminder. Remarkably, the author leaves out the near collapse of NATO, under the pressure of the Zhou regime's fecklessness. But there are just so many disasters you can cover in one article. 

Monday, August 30, 2021

Briefly Noted: Serious Pushback In WA, More

The Federalist carried a very interesting article this morning on a topic that's been out there--more or less waiting in the wings. I'm referring to the issue of mandates for employees to submit to experimental gene therapy injections. We're talking about two different but related issues. One is the issue of private companies issuing such mandates, while the other relates to governments doing so. The article in question has to do with an extremely broad mandate issued by Dem governor of Washington state, Jay Inslee. I've been predicting, based on early indications, that mandates of this sort will arouse opposition--especially now that the Dread Delta has revealed that the mandates could quickly develop into open ended demands with no set time limits. The initial time frame for a boost, for example, was 8 months, which has now decreased to 5 months--but these are all averages. The actual rate of decrease in effectiveness will clearly differ among individuals. Some wags have suggested IV implants so that a constant drip can be administered.

With that in mind, skepticism regarding these medications is increasing--what, people are asking, was the point of the "vaccines" in the first place? In the face of these developments, some Dem rulers on the state and local level have gone ahead with mandates for their employees, and opposition has quickly developed--usually led by unions:

Mass Resistance Arises As Washington Makes It Nearly Impossible To Get Vaccine Exemptions

It’s unlikely Washington state Gov. Jay Inslee expected this level of pushback. In progressive Washington, it’s rare to see such bipartisan ire towards an Inslee policy. How will he respond?

The most controversial element of the mandate is a gotcha question that all employees seeking a religious exemption must answer:

Sunday, August 29, 2021

Briefly Noted: Recommended Reads 8/29/21

Yesterday I recommended an article by Paul Gottfried,  The Emerging One-Party State. Today Emerald Robinson has an article at her Substack (H/T Ray So-Cal) that offers a bit of a contrast:

How The GOP Committed Suicide Trying to Stop Trump

America Has Never Been Closer to Uni-Party Rule

As you can see, each perceives our traditional two party system--traditional, but never actually envisioned by the Founders--as in danger of giving way to One Party Rule under the form of two parties. Robinson focuses on the GOP leaders--McConnell and McCarthy--and understandably so. The picture she paints is dark, and that's also understandable. I accept that. Gottfried sees possibilities for moving past the situation we find ourselves in, and I accept that, too. I see hope, especially, in the House, where the Representatives are in closer contact with the People.

See what you think.

Matt Welch today hits on another topic that we covered yesterday in the same post referenced with regard to Paul Gottfried: Christian Schools Vastly Outperforming Public Schools During COVID-19, According to New Survey of Parents.

I won't repeat the data here, but I do recommend Welch's article, which is written specifically from a New York City perspective:

Families Are Fleeing Government-Run Schools

Brooklyn elementary loses one-third of its student population and eight teachers, as the first 2021–22 enrollment numbers straggle in.

Saturday, August 28, 2021

Reminder: Things Could Always Be Worse

Everyone complains about the GOP, but here are three articles--all related in a general way--that remind us that things could be worse and that our votes and choices really do matter:

Paul Gottfried sees the threat clearly enough. Voters need to somehow get through to their representatives

The Emerging One-Party State

Republicans would do well to abstain from misleading talk about “bipartisanship” and refer to the Democrats as what they really are: a totalitarian threat to our constitutional system.

Amid Gottfried's warnings of the dangers we face and of the frustratingly myopic GOPe, there is this:

Despite all these obstacles, Republican victories in 2022 and beyond are still possible, providing the party pays attention to the guile and determination of its well-organized adversary. Republicans should not approach elections as ritualized contests in which sportsmanship is de rigueur. At stake will be the very possibility of meaningful opposition to the Left. Republicans would do well to abstain from misleading talk about “bipartisanship” and refer to the Democrats as what they really are: a totalitarian threat to our constitutional system.

Can this make a difference? In fact, yes.

Jonathan Turley On The Byrd Interview

Law prof Jonathan Turley weighs in on the shooting of Ashli Babbitt. This follows the exoneration of the Capitol police lieutenant who shot her and his subsequent interview. The point that Turley makes that is most remarkable is that Byrd, in his interview, demolished the rationale that had been advanced to exonerate him. One wonders--at least I do; Turley doesn't mention this--was he not represented by counsel? How could his lawyers have possibly allowed him to say the things he said--in public, on TV? What does this say about America?

Here's Turley's Twitter advert for his article at The Hill. I reviewed some of the comments and the majority of them were ... pretty wild, from the perspective of this lawyer and retired LE guy. Who knew Lefties were such hard assed--not to say, bloodthirsty--law and order types?

I have long expressed doubt over the Babbitt shooting, which directly contradicted standards on the use of lethal force by law enforcement. But what was breathtaking about Byrd’s interview was that he confirmed the worst suspicions about the shooting ...
...Of all of the lines from Byrd, this one stands out: “I could not fully see her hands or what was in the backpack or what the intentions are.” So, Byrd admitted he did not see a weapon or an immediate threat from Babbitt beyond her trying to enter through the window... 
...No other officers facing similar threats shot anyone in any other part of the Capitol, even those who were attacked by rioters armed with clubs or other objects. Under Byrd's interpretation, hundreds of rioters could have been gunned down on Jan. 6.

Turley's article today goes into the specifics of the case from the standpoint of legal principles that have long been "settled". In a way, DoJ's handling of the shooting seems similar to FDA's recent "authorization" of Pfizer's vaccine--or whatever actually happened.

Justified shooting or fair game? Shooter of Ashli Babbitt makes shocking admission

At the time, some of us familiar with the rules governing police use of force raised concerns over the shooting. Those concerns were heightened by the DOJ’s bizarre review and report, which stated the governing standards but then seemed to brush them aside to clear Byrd.

The DOJ report did not read like any post-shooting review I have read as a criminal defense attorney or law professor. The DOJ statement notably does not say that the shooting was clearly justified. ... It seemed simply to shrug and say that the DOJ did not believe it could prove “a bad purpose to disregard the law” and that “evidence that an officer acted out of fear, mistake, panic, misperception, negligence, or even poor judgment cannot establish the high level of intent.”

While the Supreme Court, in cases such as Graham v. Connor, has said that courts must consider "the facts and circumstances of each particular case," it has emphasized that lethal force must be used only against someone who is "an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others, and ... is actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight." ...

Under these standards, police officers should not shoot unarmed suspects or rioters without a clear threat to themselves or fellow officers. ...

Byrd went public soon after the Capitol Police declared "no further action will be taken" in the case. He proceeded to demolish the two official reviews that cleared him.

Byrd described how ... their failure to comply required me to take the appropriate action to save the lives of members of Congress and myself and my fellow officers."


Of all of the lines from Byrd, this one stands out: “I could not fully see her hands or what was in the backpack or what the intentions are.” So, Byrd admitted he did not see a weapon or an immediate threat from Babbitt beyond her trying to enter through the window. Nevertheless, Byrd boasted, "I know that day I saved countless lives." ... No other officers facing similar threats shot anyone in any other part of the Capitol, even those who were attacked by rioters armed with clubs or other objects.

Legal experts and the media have avoided the obvious implications of the two reviews in the Babbitt shooting. Under this standard, hundreds of rioters could have been gunned down on Jan. 6 — and officers in cities such as Seattle or Portland, Ore., could have killed hundreds of violent protesters who tried to burn courthouses, took over city halls or occupied police stations during last summer’s widespread rioting. ... According to the DOJ’s Byrd review, officers in those cities would not have been required to see a weapon in order to use lethal force in defending buildings.

Politico reported that Byrd previously was subjected to a disciplinary review when he left his Glock 22 service weapon in a bathroom in the Capitol Visitor Center complex. He reportedly told other officers that his rank as a lieutenant and his role as commander of the House chambers section would protect him and that he expected to “be treated differently.”

Is This Some Sort Of Parable Or Metaphor?

This story has been out there for a few days, but now we have a link to a pretty detailed account:

Secret Service Records Show Biden Dog Major Repeatedly Bit Secret Service Personnel

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it received 36 pages of records communications from the Secret Service that show the Bidens’ dog Major was responsible for numerous biting incidents of Secret Service personnel. One email notes that “at the current rate an Agent or Officer has been bitten every day this week (3/1-3/8) causing damage to attire or bruising/punctures to the skin.” The documents show that agents were advised to protect their “hands/fingers” by placing their hands “in their pockets.” Photos of the dog bite injuries were redacted (blacked out) by the agency.


“We’re sure Major is a good dog but these records show he was involved in many more biting incidents than the Biden White House has publicly acknowledged,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “It is disturbing to see a White House cover-up of numerous injuries to Secret Service and White House personnel by the Bidens’ family pet.”


Law prof Jonathan Turley has written about the law of dog bites in the past, and he reengages today with a link to an article he wrote back in March:

Briefly Noted: Full Disclosures

This should come as news to no one--I've always assumed that Dr. Robert Malone is liberal in his inclinations. It's just one of things that goes with the territory he has inhabited all his life, so I assume liberal inclinations on those that live and work there. I'm always happy to be wrong, but it's one of those show-me things.

To his credit, this morning he provides that full disclosure, and to his greater credit he acknowledges at least part of it to being mistaken rather than offering it as a belated effort to return to the woke world's good graces:

Robert W Malone, MD


To those that think I am posting due to my political bias.  News 4 you - it is because of my upbringing. I was taught to not lie. And I got fed up with the lies, misrepresentations, obfuscation, censorship, and imbicilic factchecking. I actually donated to the Biden campaign.

9:28 AM · Aug 28, 2021·Twitter Web App


Replying to 


And I am not the only one that made a mistake that I regret in this case.  I am confident that there are many others.  We all make mistakes, including myself. I should not have taken Moderna after having been infected in late Feb 2020.  That was also a mistake.

I see two major admissions in these tweets.

Friday, August 27, 2021

Covid Update 8/27/21

It's been a bit of a rough day, but I'm finally catching up with things--well, with some things. The big Covid news today was a new Israeli study. Israeli, perhaps the most vaxxed country on earth, has developed into a sort of canary in the coal mine. Also, along with the UK, they've been pushing out some good quality data and analysis.

This is the study that has created a real buzz:

Comparing SARS-CoV-2 natural immunity to vaccine-induced immunity: reinfections versus breakthrough infections

Here's a summary--but the long and short is simply that natural immunity is significantly superior to vaccine immunity (if that's the correct terminology):


This morning I received the following email from Blogger:


          As you may know, our Community Guidelines  
( describe the boundaries for what we  
allow-- and don't allow-- on Blogger. Your post titled "Fascinating  
Interview With Dr. Peter McCullough" was flagged to us for review. We have  
determined that it violates our guidelines and have unpublished the URL,  
making it unavailable to blog readers.

     Why was your blog post unpublished?

     Your content has violated our Misleading Content policy. Please visit  
our Community Guidelines page linked in this email to learn more.

     If you are interested in republishing the post, please update the  
content to adhere to Blogger's Community Guidelines. Once the content is  
updated, you may republish it at  
This will trigger a review of the post.

     For more information, please review the following resources:

     Terms of Service:
     Blogger Community Guidelines:


     The Blogger Team

My take on this is that the team of lawyers that has been targeting Dr. McCullough has been scouring the internet looking for opportunities to erase content that references his work.

As a result I've been trying to set up a new site--and I'm finding it a very hard job. Blogger has the virtue of being dead simple to use and manage. Right now, I'm floundering--and haven't had time to read a single bit of news. I'll take time to enable comments.

This is all very discouraging.

Thursday, August 26, 2021

Does The Sergeant Major Want Me In The Room With Him?

Because I'm pretty sure I don't think like Sergeant Major Grinston.

For example, I'm open to the idea that cohesiveness and thinking differently (diversity?) may actually militate against each other. How can a group of people who all think differently be cohesive? And lethal? I can't imagine how low morale must be if our soldiers have to put up with this sort of bafflegab from on high.

Jessie Jane Duff is a Marine vet. I get the impression she isn't interested in being in the room with Grinton, a guy who's willing to mouth whatever nonsense it takes to stay in charge. Maybe that's part of how this happened today:

UPDATED: Who Wrote The List?

There's not much point in discussing the utter shame that the political and Deep State establishment has brought America to. They think we deserve this. So be it. It's up to us to react and prove that we don't. I doubt anyone actually cares what Zhou said--I know I don't, and I can't imagine any serious person caring. The interesting question is: Who wrote the list? Ron Klain or someone else? Miss-Information? 

The great thing would have been if Kelly O'Donnell had asked: Uh, who wrote that list?

Sadly, that's not the most shameful list we heard about today. That would be the list of Americans and Afghan friends that we reportedly turned over to the Taliban.

UPDATE 1: As usual, ER is on to something--it's not just Zhou's credibility (did he ever have any?) that's swirling downward ...

Docs For Covid Ethics

A week or two ago--it's hard to keep track--I summarized Session II of the Doctors for Covid Ethics symposium. That session focused on economic and technocracy issues and featured, among others, Richard Werner and Catherine Austin Fitts. I spent part of this morning watching a major portion of Session I of the Doctors For Covid Ethics Symposium. I found Michael Palmer's presentation on Covid Origins quite powerful. The science that he presented in support of the conclusion that Covid-19 is "indisputably" a lab engineered virus was simply overwhelming. Then I read that our Intel agencies will continue the coverup: Biden’s intelligence agencies bow to Beijing and claim they can’t make a conclusion on COVID. That's not going to go down well with normals smarting under the Covid Regime's jackboot on their necks:

No kidding. China has been covering up from the start of the pandemic that’s killed 4 million worldwide, which is just one of many clues that COVID likely leaked from a Wuhan lab. But Biden’s intel agencies don’t want to go there.

Another presentation I found quite compelling was the one by Denis Rancourt. Rancourt is a retired physicist who has turned his expertise in statistical analysis to the epidemiological data--and then has drilled down to determine exactly what is behind "The False Pandemic." Rancourt began his work by examining "all cause mortality" statistics, and concluded that--with the partial exception of the United States--there was in fact no pandemic.  By drilling down into the data he was able to pinpoint those areas where a type of pandemic could be said to have been instigated by the authorities. He doesn't cavil to term what happened an attack on old people--although he also speaks movingly of young males, especially, reduced to despair. With regard to the elderly he places the blame for the die-off that he has documented on public policies that blatantly violated everything we've learned since WWII about public health: old people isolated in care facilities, sick patients from hospitals inserted among them, treatment--especially antibiotics--withdrawn, panic driven healthcare workers abandoning their posts. The resulting genocide was a foregone conclusion. I highly recommend the presentation.

However, I found among Rancourt's publications a statement: What I believe about COVID. Rancourt, a Canadian, appears not to be a fan of America. Nevertheless, I offer this excerpt:

Polling: Major Problems For Zhou Regime

Right. I know that subject line sounds pretty obvious. However, an interesting article in The Atlantic examines some of the recent polling more closely, and comes up with some interesting insights that go beyond the usual day to day issues in the news.

It’s the Pandemic, Stupid

What new polls reveal about American priorities

First of all, all the polls and aggregations skew liberal, so the numbers may well actually be worse than represented. The polls that The Atlantic looks at are: the RealClearPolitics average, the FiveThirtyEight trend line, a USA Today/Suffolk University poll, and an NBC News poll (which got the most media buzz).

All the polling data shows Zhou's numbers plunging--virtually in freefall. The author, Russell Berman, sets up the "easy explanation" for the terrible ratings: the debacle in Afghanistan. That's pretty obvious, after all, and it's reflected in the polls. However, Berman then goes on to point out that a closer examination reveals bigger trouble ahead--Afghanistan doesn't even make the list of important issues for poll respondents. That means something else is driving the plunge in the polls:

Wednesday, August 25, 2021

Boost Stage At Six, Not Eight--And More

Remember when boosting at eight months was a thing? That always seemed weird, given that the Israelis are boosting at five, I think. But now it seems the US is catching up. Eight is old hat:

How do you keep up with this? Anyway, it seems checking for antibodies is still cheating--otherwise you might find out that you need your boost at two months, like that pathologist who did his own test.

Speaking of keeping up with things, remember the vax immunity v. natural immunity debate? Here's some news from the gene therapy petri dish that is Israel that may put that one to rest, too:

Berenson also has an interesting thread on the state of Twitter censorship. Twitter "fact checking" is having trouble keeping up with developments, too. And that suggests that the Grand Narrative is close to collapse. Berenson claims he's considering a defamation action against Twitter--more power to him if he does:

Follow The Hope

In a remarkable interview, Doc Rochelle was asked about the basis for the CDC's support for boosting people--was it based on hope or, preferably, data? asked the interviewer. Rochelle's forthright answer was that they had "hope, not data" that the boosts will work. Don't believe me? Here it is:

Also of interest, re Covid origins. The US intel report is still under wraps, will probably be heavily redacted, but the Epoch Times is reporting (excerpts from a much longer article):

‘Nudging’ The Public To Comply

Recently I presented by theory that what drives social conformity--including compliance with patently unreasonable mandates against normal human behavior--is the rootedness of human nature as social, and especially as rooted in the most basic of human institutions: the family, NOT the individual. From that I extrapolated to the natural human tendency to comply with the wishes or demands of authority (father/mother) figures, and to attempt to 'get along with' sibling figures--authorities at lower public levels as well as friends and neighbors. The point being that it takes an unusual degree of independence to actually resist the tendency to conform.

In support of that I presented some videos on related topics, which focused largely on totalitarian regimes of the past, especially from the 20th century. While I'm certainly not about to say that such regimes will not arise again, that isn't the model of social control that our power elite is following. The techniques are similar in that they play on the same tendencies of human nature, but these current techniques are less overtly coercive. They rely on fostering a desire to conform and to persuade others to do so, as well.

Dr. Gary Sidley, a psychologist in the UK, has two articles that examine all this in the specific context of the Covid Regime. The first article is a response to the failure of his professional association, the British Psychological Society, to condemn what Sidley sees as unethical use of psychological techniques used to 'nudge' the subject population into compliance with irrational mandates:

The Dubious Ethics of ‘Nudging’ the Public to Comply With Covid Restrictions

Sidley begins by providing examples of irrational, hysterical, or even overtly aggressive behavior, on the part of otherwise normal people. From there he moves to the 'nudges'--conscious manipulation of the population by the government utilizing psychological techniques--that have induced such behavior:

Covid Update 8/25/21

Is peak Covid Panic starting to wane? Or is the ban on thinking losing its efficacy--a bit like the gene therapy injections losing their efficacy over time? It seems beyond coincidence that these "breakthrough articles" are coming out at the same time as the rising tide of reports concerning the loss of efficacy and the rapid increase in breakthrough Covid cases.

Three developments in recent reporting point in that direction. The significance of the developments really lies in where they come from--mainstream media outlets and institutions. My summaries are from Zerohedge.

The first article relates to two articles--one by the BBC and one by Bloomberg--which came out last week. Neither article is great, but the fact that they appeared at all in MSM outlets raised eyebrows. And there have been a few other similar articles hinting at questions slowly fermenting in woke skulls. These are questions that were strictly verboten for wokesters--until now? Excerpt:

About The Attempted Federal Takeover Of Elections

I can see that readers are aware that the Dem House passed their longed for Federal takeover of elections--authority which the Constitution explicitly reserves to the States. There's a brief article on this at American Greatness:

House of Representatives Passes Bill That Would Enable Federal Control Over State Elections

Here are some relevant excerpts:

The bill passed along party lines in the lower chamber, by a margin of 219-212. No Republicans voted in favor of the bill, which is named after the far-left Georgia congressman who died in office last year. The bill seeks to restore a statute from the original 1965 Voting Rights Act that had been struck down by the Supreme Court in 2013; the statute would permit the federal government to conduct its own review of local and statewide election laws and procedures if the state is considered to have “a history of voter discrimination.”

In the 2013 decision, Shelby v. Holder, the nation’s highest court ruled that demanding the states first seek permission from the federal government before changing voting laws was unconstitutional.


The bill now heads to the evenly-divided United States Senate, where Republicans are just as opposed to the bill as House Republicans were. Even several moderate Democrats have questioned the integrity of the bill, thus putting its future in doubt.

Shelby v. Holder was a 6-3 decision and is based in the constitutional principle of federalism:

UPDATED: Vax 'Authorization': Short And Long Versions

The other day we asked--tongue in cheek--why would anyone not trust their government.  As if on cue, the government has provided a perfect, well, reminder of that basic fact of life. The FDA 'authorization' of a Covid 'vaccine' is another one of those now-you-see-it-now-you-don't government actions. One is left wondering, What does it mean? Fortunately, there are people who can explain it.

First the short version, via Twitter:

Tuesday, August 24, 2021

The Covid - Kabul Connection

Alex Berenson really nails this. I think a lot of people had been sensing the connection, but he really gets its:

The kid gets it, too:

Bring On The Variants!

No sooner is Pfizer's gene therapy injection given full authorization--to be followed by clinical trials; go figure--than a Japanese study comes out that's like a bucket of cold water over the head. But let's not get ahead of ourselves. Here's Dr. Robert Malone explaining some of the legalities of the FDA authorization, or maybe "authorization"--Pfizer Seeking Full Indemnification:

It's all quite complicated, but notice something very important that Malone says--the boost isn't actually available now and won't be available for quite some time. Meanwhile the vax induced antibodies are getting weaker and weaker. Which brings us back to that Japanese study:

Dr. Malone points out that the study is confirmatory of what Belgian vaccinologist Geerd Vanden Bossche has been warning about (ADE) for months:

Briefly Noted: Scope Of Afghan Debacle Grows

Over the last week or so we've been reading about the scope of the debacle in Afghanistan. Much of the reporting has focused on the sheer quantity of military materiel that we've gifted to the Taliban, as well as the humanitarian crisis at the airport in Kabul.

This morning it appears that things are about to, if anything, get worse.

Thanks to a leaked State Department cable, we now have a handle on critical numbers. It appears that there are as many as 20,000 Americans still in Afghanistan. In the meantime, the US evacuation has been focusing--as far as one can speak of "focus" in this debacle--on evacuating Afghans. The upshot is that it appears unlikely, for reasons given below, that all Americans will be evacuated. Red State runs the numbers:

With the exact number in hand, educated guesses are no longer required. We know for a fact that this evacuation is going to fail. There are only 4-5 days left to get these people out due to the logistics of the 8/31 deadline, and according to the cable, there are perhaps 20,000+ Americans still stranded throughout Afghanistan. Even if you take the low-end estimate that only 10,000 Americans were originally stuck, that means we are still way behind schedule, and the situation on the ground in regards to getting to the airport is only getting worse. In other words, you will likely see fewer, not more Americans making it to planes over the next few days.

The Taliban is insisting on that 8/31 deadline, and the US, from all indications, isn't in a position to do anything about it. Or doesn't intend to. Word was that Zhou's CIA chief met with the Taliban to plead for an extension. It seems the Taliban are like most feral types--signs of weakness only encourage them. They told the CIA to pound sand. The result? The situation I speculated on last week:

The Taliban Just Pantsed Joe Biden and Signaled a Coming Hostage Crisis

I mean, if you're the Taliban you were probably saying long ago: 'Take American hostages? Hell yeah! That's the kind of thing we do.' That result was a no-brainer all along:

Monday, August 23, 2021

After All, Why Would You NOT Trust The Government, Right?

Totally brilliant post from Babylon Bee:

According to sources, the Food and Drug Administration is completely trustworthy and has never approved harmful drugs for the public before. Those sources further confirmed that the FDA is a part of the government, which has never lied or been incompetent or corrupt in any way. 

"Yeah, I've always trusted the government and drug companies, so I guess I'm ok to get the vaccine now," said Bubba Snugglebrugg, who was previously a militant anti-vaxxer. "I can't wait to get my 'Fauci Ouchie' and wear my Pfizer sticker! Thanks, FDA!"

Sources within the FDA say the vaccine went through a rigorous approval process of various government bureaucrats saying "Oh well, what the heck—we may as well approve this now", and signing a very important-looking document with a government seal and some big words on it. 

Sunday, August 22, 2021

Briefly Noted: Israeli Booster Crashes Back To Earth?

Sooner or later the facts will catch up with the hype:

Bull Durham v. Marc Elias?

Breitbart has a report concerning Dem top election law attorney Marc Elias. Elias is leaving his long time firm of Perkins Coie, taking with him 11 partners and some other lawyers to start a new election law firm:

Democrat Election Lawyer, Russia Hoaxer Marc Elias Leaves Perkins Coie Ahead of Durham Report

The article is very worthwhile as a refresher on Elias' involvement in the Russia Hoax. It also goes into Elias' background as one of the very top lawyers for the Dems--which means, for the Clinton organization.

For our purposes the important point is that Elias was the person who arranged for the Clinton Campaign to hire Fusion GPS to do opposition research, while funneling payments to Fusion GPS through Perkins Coie. My understanding--subject to correction--is that such an arrangement would have been in violation of election laws.

Fusion, in turn, hired Christopher Steele, the British former MI6 agent who wrote the fictional "Steele Dossier" that ultimately ended up being delivered to the FBI in Fall of 2016. This "dossier" served as the basis for the FBI's "Crossfire Hurricane" investigation. I say that, even though the attempt has been made to conceal that by claiming that Crossfire Hurricane was predicated on George Papadopoulos' conversations with Australian "diplomat" Alexander Downer.

For the last few weeks we've been treated to articles claiming that Durham's investigation is drawing to a close. Durham's investigation is said to have focused on the origins of Crossfire Hurricane and the possibility that non-government actors may have provided the FBI with false information. That appears to be a broad hint that Durham has been investigating the roles played in the Russia Hoax by key Dem operatives: Fusion GPS and its head, Glenn Simpson (also other Fusion employees such as Nellie Ohr); Marc Elias; and Michael Sussmann--a key Clinton lawyer who personally delivered the "dossier" to the FBI's top lawyer, James Baker.

UPDATED: Proof Of Crash And Burn?

 Think about this ...

The relative silence of the GOP probably means they're content to allow this to metastasize:

They know that this isn't going to go away. Not only will the fallout be with us in 2022 but likely for many years to come. This is crash and burn on steroids--or so it appears to me.

And this is like the definition of damned if you do, damned if you don't. So--what do you do? One can imagine that any problem-solving outreach by Dems to GOPers receives the not-my-problem-man response.

OTOH, there is another reason for general GOP silence:

UPDATE: Things aren't getting better--more crash and burn. Zhou has dementia, but what's Blinken's excuse? Oh, whatever, he was some foreign guy?

UPDATED: The Rules Just Don't Matter Anymore

Since I can't embed Rumble videos, I'm linking to a number of video segments from Steve Bannon's Warroom. This isn't the full program but a major portion of it. The guests were chosen generally with an eye on the reported full authorization of the Pfizer gene therapy injection come Monday. Bannon had Dr. Robert Malone on as a guest host to help with the med tech stuff. What I've done is I've provided a succinct summary of the main points discussed. I've also provided the total time each segment runs, so you can see how much more each goes beyond my little summary. I found these presentations quite compelling.

The first guest was also featured in the transcript/summary I did recently for the symposium with Richard Werner, Catherine Austin Fitts, and David Skidmore.

Saturday, August 21, 2021

Briefly Noted: The Threat

Two very diverse seeming links--but as with so much else going on these day, it all ties together.

I've featured Catherine Austin Fitts previously, in a transcript I did of a symposium in which she spoke with--among others--Richard Werner and David Skidmore. You can read about her background here. A reader sent me a link to a video interview Fitts did recently--she actually does most of the talking, which is a good thing. The interview reprises what she said at the symposium I referenced above, but also goes beyond that. You can watch the video here:


Financial Expert and former White House Official, Catherine Austin Fitts, reveals how the central banking system has utilized economic turmoil during the #Covid19 pandemic, to advance a plan to centralize wealth, reengineer the financial system, and what we can do to stop it.

A major point that Fitts makes is that injection mandates and passports are simply a backdoor way of instituting internal control passports. These will integrate with the projected digital currencies that will give the authorities 1) control over every purchase you make, and 2) the ability to easily turn the screws on anyone

UPDATED: Further Reflections On Chris Wray's Turnaround Re January 6 Event

NOTE: Since publishing this, I've revised it somewhat, adding a third consideration. I'm still digesting Tucker's entire monologue because it covers more than just the January 6 Event--yet most of what is currently going on in DC seems connected.

If I understand what Thomas Lifson is saying that Tucker Carlson is saying, then the motive behind the FBI's change of stance regarding the January 6 Event has to do with concealing federal involvement in that event. Lifson writes:

“If there was organization going on, some of it came from the feds.”


Dropping the allegations of coordinated activity, aka, insurrection from the charges  would allow these unindicated co-conspirators to avoid being called as witnesses by those who otherwise might have been charged with crimes of conspiracy.


But--in bigger picture terms--organization coming from the feds means federal agency involvement in the coup against Trump. I read that as arguing that The January 6 Event, to the extent it was directed by the feds, was an op with the goal of providing a legal basis for removing Trump if push came to shove. An insurance policy of sorts against the unthinkable--Trump staging a comeback by showing election fraud before Zhou could be installed.

Now, why would the FBI be concerned at this point in time to conceal that--the Zhou regime is a fait accompli for now, right? Is there something important about this point in time? At least two reasons come to mind, and they ultimately revolve around the crash and burn of the Zhou regime that is now undeniable.

Friday, August 20, 2021

Reflecting On Legitimacy

It's a bad sign for the health of our political establishment that more and more articles are popping up with people writing about issues of legitimate governance. I don't think I've ever been naive about the American political order, but I'll be the first to admit I didn't think the country would ever sink to this level. Trump has revealed to all: The Empire's clothing is threadbare at best. And now serious people are asking: What comes next. That may seem extreme at this point, but events have a way of taking on a life of their own. Once a rock starts downhill it gathers momentum.

So I plan here to provide examples of the type of commentary that's out there, and increasing. First, however, I'll sketch out the traditional ideas on government in the Western tradition.

Aristotle's classical formulation of good and bad types of government has retained its usefulness. Aristotle came up with three categories, based on : Rule by one, by several, and by many, and divided each category in two: good and corrupt forms. Thus, there could be good or bad forms of government in any of the three categories (simplified): 

One:  Monarchy  Dictatorship

Several: Aristocracy  Oligarchy

Many: Timocracy  Democracy

Aristotle and other ancients were advocates of a governments in which all three levels of society were involved.

During the Middle Ages, Thomas Aquinas was also a strong advocate for a mixed constitution, in which all elements of society received representation under a strong executive. Aquinas presents his reasoning in favor of a mixed constitution in three elements, which explictly includes the idea of what we now term "checks and balances":

Is Chris Wray Bailing On The Regime?

Has Chris Wray held his finger up to test the political winds, and does he see a GOP Congress coming? Is he looking to ingratiate himself with those he sees as his future masters in Congress?

That could be one way to interpret the latest FBI leak, which totally undercuts DoJ's already struggling inquisition against January 6 Event participants. Via Red State:

According to four current and former law enforcement officials, the FBI has “found scant evidence that the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election result.” The FBI doesn’t believe that the riot was “centrally coordinated by far-right groups or prominent supporters of then-President Donald Trump, according to the sources, who have been either directly involved in or briefed regularly on the wide-ranging investigations.”

Obviously this is speculation. Nevertheless, this is not what a prosecutor wants to read in the news. What kind of witnesses will FBI agents make?

Further evidence of regime collapse?

UPDATED: Briefly Noted: Considerations Going Forward

America is in a pretty unique constitutional situation at present. However it turns out, whoever occupies the White House, I just can't see anything going back to something resembling normal. Nor should it. To complicate matters, the crisis will be deepened by challenges to the Dem narrative of a new normal--which increasingly looks like the bad old normal of the Carter years, but worsened by an out of control and divided Left.

The Covid Regime will be increasingly challenged in the coming months. The CDC is now openly admitting that the gene therapy injections have only a very limited period of effectiveness. This is confirmed from the Israeli data, where the government is warning of "mortal danger" to induce people to get "boosted" after only 5 months. Serious "breakthrough" cases in Israel--cases of infection by new variants after the gene therapy has lost protective strength--are multiplying rapidly and are a clear majority of cases. How long will it be before the general public tumbles to the reality of ADE--that it's the gene therapies that are inducing the new variants and leaving the vaxxed with less protection. People will realize that sooner rather than later. There will be a lot of unhappy people.

Here in the US, the narrative or rareness is being challenged on multiple fronts.

Thursday, August 19, 2021

Two Interesting Articles

 But I don't have time to summarize:

Former Pfizer VP: COVID vaccines pose ‘severe risk’ of infertility for women

There's a lot in here, so this is just a teaser:

Both Moderna’s and Pfizer’s mRNA vaccines use specialized nanoparticle lipids or lipoproteins as carriers for their main ingredient – unstable mRNA protein that causes cells to produce the notorious coronavirus spike protein and elicit an immune response. These are the molecules that required the extremely low temperatures to preserve stability of the lipid encasing the fragile mRNA.

Accumulation in reproductive organs

German researchers reported in their paper published nine years ago, “Accumulation of nanocarriers in the ovary: A neglected toxicity risk?,” that there is a “potential toxicity risk of all nanoscaled drug delivery systems” and an accumulation of different microscopic carrier molecules in rodent ovaries. Their research involved injection of lipid “nanocarriers,” including some with an ingredient common to both Pfizer’s and Moderna’s mRNA COVID vaccines: polyethylene glycol. 

I'm not a math guy. Malone recommends:

Estimating Vaccine-Induced Mortality, Part I

Turley On The Regime's Assault On Our Constitutional Order

I understand that Professor Turley would prefer a more nuanced title to this post, but in a practical sense it's hard to characterize what's going on much differently. Turley has written two good articles, both arising from the Covid Regime, which illustrate a shocking disregard both for the federal republic that the US is supposed to be under its Constitution, as well as for the rights of the individual citizens.

I'll keep this brief.

The first article addresses the outrageous scheme by the regime to pay Florida teachers to break Florida laws:

What's The State Of Play For Zhou?

Obviously from our distance we can only speculate, but rationally it's hard to see how he can continue to occupy the White House--in fact, there are reports that he doesn't even want to sleep there anymore. That sounds like a dementia case who can't think past his next meal and a comfy place to sleep. Can you imagine how weird things are in the regime right now? He was given a couple of tries at blustering through, but blew them--including a shambolic performance whiffing at Stephanopoulos soft balls. 

On top of that we're getting truly disturbing reports from the UK that Zhou refused or--more likely--wasn't allowed to take calls from Boris Johnson for something like 36 hours. I assume that whenever Zhou disappears for a few days he's under intensive medical care. He probably wasn't in a condition to take those calls. 

Think about that. A vote in the UK parliament to condemn a White House occupant? That's how low we've fallen:

Can An Entire Population Become Mentally Ill?

I think I've mentioned that my father was a professor--and practitioner--of clinical psychology. One of the things he used to say that has always stuck with me is that people actually may choose to become insane. It's an escape mechanism for coping with reality that some people find preferable to dealing with the real world on its own terms. The title of this blog--meaning in history--is related to the idea that my father propounded. Humans, as rational animals, are geared toward the discovery of meaning and order in existence. History records that search for meaning in history. All societies exist in history and seek to express on a societal level the meaning of their existence. 

When that meaning is threatened, when it is challenged to the extent that severe doubt arises, humans and societies can react in a number of ways. They can, for example, seek to refine their understanding of the meaning and order of existence. They can redefine that meaning in relatively new terms--although the nature of reality usually limits at least limits the possibilities for a re-understanding of existence. More radically, individuals and societies can attempt to deny reality--refuse to recognize existential threats for what they are. Alternatively, people can rush to embrace illusory meanings that seem preferable. We see many examples of the reactions both in history and in the contemporary world around us.