Current news

We in Flight 93. The plane is headed directly to the ground. Trump is in the cockpit fighting the hijackers, but even if he wins, that is no guarantee he can pull the plane out of the dive.

I normally don’t pay much attention to the latest political events, nor cover them in this blog, because it is mostly a distraction, intended to confuse and mislead. It is more important to cover the long term trends. The democrats crossed the Rubicon with Sheriff Joe.

However the coup is starting to go critical, and it might make a difference. Judge Roberts is a deep state operative who is connected to the infamous Trump Dossier, in that he is running cover for the Fisa court, hence the Republicans correctly insist he follows precedent by reigning over the impeachment, rather than ruling over the impeachment. We shall see what happens, but even if he puts lipstick on the pig, not going to make a difference the outcome of the Senate trial itself. He will be working with Schiff, openly or furtively, but Schiff’s dog won’t hunt. What might well make a difference is a change in who is providing security during the trial.

Trump plans to call Wheres Hunter, Adam Schiff, and the “Whistleblower” Eric Ciaramella.

Eric Ciaramella is a low level deep state operative who was involved in the infamous Trump Dossier, which gets mighty close to incriminating Judge Roberts personally. He is part of the FBI coverup of misconduct related to the dossier, and if low level operatives get busted in a Trump self coup, they will probably have no end of dirt on higher ups, thereby likely opening up another Trump supreme appointment.

Attorney General Barr understands what is going on – a holiness spiral that leads to the holy abandoning the rules that make peace possible within the elite.

Their holy mission is to use the coercive power of the State to remake man and society in their own image, according to an abstract ideal of perfection. Whatever means they use are therefore justified because, by definition, they are a virtuous people pursing a deific end. They are willing to use any means necessary to gain momentary advantage in achieving their end, regardless of collateral consequences and the systemic implications.

He is preparing for a situation of duelling arrest warrants, where each faction in the political elite orders the arrest of the other faction, which was obviously going to happen eventually once they arrested Sheriff Joe, the only question being how long before the proverbial hits the fan. Barr is campaigning like a politician for support among the cops on the beat, and Trump is going after warrior support in ways quite disproportionate to their voting weight.

I don’t expect it to happen soon, though it well might – but it is looming near enough to impact political behavior. If the Durham report is not another greywash, it may well lead to the arrest of low level operatives who will likely finger Judge Roberts, leading to his impeachment. I am still betting on the shooting to start around 2026 or so, but the Democrats eagerness to get this off to the Senate, where it would go down in flames if normality continues, suggests the deep state has or had plans for a big surprise during the Senate trial.

During the House hearings, they were fishing for support among the brass. I am inclined to believe that what happened is that they found support among the brass, hence the desire to get impeachment done in a hurry, rather than continue milking it forever, but after the last minute the brass discovered that they lacked support among the praetorians, and changed their minds, hence the desire to stall.

A less dramatic and conspiratorial explanation is that Judge Roberts is in their pocket, and the Clinton precedent denies him the power to rig the trial, so they want to ditch the Clinton precedent in any way that they can. They are arguing about how the trial should be conducted so that the conduct of the trial gets thrown into Judge Robert’s lap.

The trial, assuming it is not interrupted by a change in security at the Senate and the arrest of key people in the Trump administration, is likely to sink the narrative, and, more importantly, get Judge Roberts out of a position where he could give constitutional color to a coup. If the Durham report opens with an arrest of deep staters, they are likely to attempt to respond by arresting Trump and his administration. We are likely to get dueling arrest warrants, and we don’t want Judge Roberts in a position where he has judicial authority over Trump while we have duelling arrest warrants.

The obvious risk is that the deep state, instead of sitting on its ass waiting for Barr and Durham to launch arrest warrants against the deep state, pre-emptively arrests all key personnel suspected of loyalty to Trump during the Senate trial and replaces Senate security, whereupon Judge Roberts issues a ruling that this is completely normal and entirely legal. I think that was their plan during the house hearings, though I think that Trump and Barr have forestalled this plan by securing praetorian support.

If the deep state do sit on their ass, we are not going to get the Durham report until after the trial.

We have known since 2012 that the deeps state has been acting illegally. If they continue to get away with acting illegally, the hijackers are still in the cockpit and are still flying the plane into the ground. Removal from the cockpit will manifest as a storm of arrests. Which is likely to result in duelling arrest warrants.

If Barr arrests the deep state without himself being arrested, they are going to sing like canaries, giving Trump autocratic power, because he will be able to purge the government and the Democratic party.

The conservative projection is that Trump leaves power in 2024, when his second term runs out, that the Republic continues as normal

I think it more likely he will leave power to prison, or become Caesar Augustus and bequeath the role of Imperator to Don Junior.

Once the elite started using direct state coercion on each other, it became inevitable that we will eventually get Bonapartist government. The only question is how soon, and how much bloodshed?

What I hope for is that after the Senate Trial, then the Durham report opens with a sudden storm of arrests, and Trump gets coronated as Caesar Augustus in 2020. What I fear is more likely is increasing use of violence and coercion by the elite with inconclusive and indecisive outcomes, eventually leading to full scale war around 2026 or so, possibly involving nuclear weapons, followed, after years, decades, or centuries, by a Stalin restoring order.

Let us pray that Trump Senior becomes Caesar Augustus, and Trump Junior becomes Emperor Constantine.

319 Responses to “Current news”

  1. Unquestionably believe that which you said. Your favorite reason seemed to be
    on the internet the simplest factor to bear in mind of.
    I say to you, I definitely get annoyed while other people consider concerns that
    they plainly don’t realize about. You controlled to
    hit the nail upon the top as well as defined out the entire thing with no need side-effects , other people can take a
    signal. Will likely be again to get more. Thanks

  2. Theshadowedknight says:

    Check out this little gem. The money quote is buried, but it’s there: “During today’s hearing, the court ruled that the matter is now moot as the subject was never admitted into the United States, the subject is no longer in custody, and the court does not have jurisdiction to order his return.” (emphasis mine) That sounds an awful lot like a judge recognizing that a border patrol agent outranks him and ruling accordingly. It could be a harbinger of things to come.

    • The Cominator says:

      I don’t think that is the same thing.

      A judge recognizing that the men with guns outrank him is something like SCOTUS rules something really absurd (like that remain in Mexico is unconstitutional even though its black letter law that the AG has plenary power in this) and Trump ordering it enforced anyway and then the courts backing down like bitches.

      This is merely the court refusing to rule something absurd.

      However remain in Mexico is being attacked by the Cathedral within Mexico though… I doubt its going to have much of an impact in a corrupt semi anarchistic racial herrenvolk (99% of the upper class in Mexico are prettymuch Castillian Spaniards) state like Mexico though.

      • theshadowedknight says:

        The usual form for this is that the judge orders that the poor, innocent foreigner be allowed to enter the US, and that kicking him out was wrong. They kicked him out despite an order to the contrary and instead of reiterating that the foreigner is allowed to enter the US at his pleasure, the judge backed down. The judge said that he does not have the power to allow the foreigner into the US once Border Patrol kicked him out.

        The judge ruled one way. Then, once the men on the ground blew him off, he ruled the complete opposite, and dismissed the case. That’s a pretty big development.

      • jim says:

        Judicial review and appeal is Kayfabe, and we have just seen a sudden change in the Kayfabe script.

        The men with guns unquestionably blew the judge off. A low level judge, though backed by the full might of the Democratic party, Harvard, and the mass media, unquestionably backed down, ruling blowing him off legal.

        This is not as critical as the Tamil case in Australia, where the high court backed down after a decisive display of might by air force commandos. But it is the same principle. Only a low level judge, not a complete panel of the highest level judges as in Australia, and only one man deported, not an entire boat load of “refugees”, but this case has been boiling along for a long time, with maximum outrage from the Cathedral, and great jubilation from the mass media, and now the men with guns have settled it decisively.

        After the Tamil incident in Australia, the entire judiciary, as one man, stone walled all subsequent lawfare on the immigration issue, with the result that now there is Judge Dredd style law enforcement on immigration in Australia.

        In Australia, there is zero illegal immigration, except for people who come on a visa, and then violate the terms of their visa. No illegal border crossers, not a one. And if someone shows up at hospital, or gets stopped at a traffic stop, they run an identity check, which automatically notifies border patrol if he is out of compliance with his visa, and border patrol shows up, throws him in jail, no lawyers, no appeal except to the minister.

        And if someone funny comes in to Australia on an entirely legal visa, border patrol have a chat with him at the airport, and if his visa smells, it gets cancelled by border patrol at the airport and off he goes to jail. Thus, for example, two traitorous Saudi journalists, who were working simultaneously for the Saudi Government, and for the enemies of the Saudi Government, the mainstream media, came to Australia on a tourist visa. Border control threw them in jail, because they were not doing tourism, they were on the lam from the Saudi Government. Lawfare was attempted, but the judges, ignoring the mainstream media, stone walled. Eventually mainstream media caused the minister to bend, but the judges kept their heads down.

        It seems unlikely a low level American judge would make this decision on his own. He would have talked to someone at the top, probably Judge Roberts, who told him the judiciary was out on a limb, and the branch was making ominous cracking sounds.

        If one judge backs off from lawfare in one case, every judge will as one man back off from lawfare in every case. Judges do as they are damn well told without regard for the facts or the law, as academics uniformly and unvaryingly say what they are told to say regardless of the facts, and it is obvious that this judge was told to pull his head in.

        This is likely a reaction to the refusal of the formerly cucked Republican party to allow blatantly illegal conduct of the Fisa court to pass unnoticed. Seeing that the Republican party was unwilling to treat criminal wrongdoing by judges with respect, the men with guns were emboldened, and the judiciary intimidated. The judge heard an alarming creak from the branch on which the Fisa court sits.

        • Karl says:

          “Judges do as they are damn well told without regard for the facts or the law…”

          Very hard to separate “law” from “what judges are damn well told”. Whatever judges are told is law – at least for any practical purposes I can think of.

          It all comes down to the question who can make law.

          • jim says:

            A little while ago they were told to exercise unlimited power to ensure that whosoever set foot in America would receive welfare and vote. Today they have been told to avoid confronting the government and not overreach their authority.

            Neither of these is law. In the case that lead to the recent confrontation, they were acting to ensure that an illegal immigrant who committed a multitude of crimes, among them aggravated assault and battery on a police officer, got let off.

            That is the opposite of law, it is lawlessness.

    • jim says:

      Traitors in the Judiciary and the Democratic Party collaborate with enemies of America. A warrior pulls the plug on them, and the Judiciary hastily stuffs a sock in its mouth.

      A sudden and startling outbreak of humility in the judiciary.

      This had far reaching consequences in Australia.

    • Atavistic Morality says:

      Not long ago I surmised here and other dark evil places that ICE might become a future right wing death squad. CBP too? Man, this makes my day.

      • Not Tom says:

        “Getting iced” has long been a euphemism for getting whacked, so they’ve got the branding going for them already.

        Let’s be real, though; disobeying a district judge is a long way from RWDS.

        • jim says:

          > disobeying a district judge is a long way from RWDS.

          It is remarkably close to imprisoning and/or deporting people without judicial review or access to lawyers. If the men with guns stop obeying judges, might as well close the courts.

          And here is another one on the same lines:

          An illegal alien was arrested for aggravated battery of a police officer, plus a laundry list of smaller stuff. So, deportation. He appealed. Naturally the courts ruled in his favor, something that was clearly beyond their authority and outrageously improper. Deported anyway.

          The court huffed and puffed, but I foresee a sudden and total silence from here on. If one judge fails to huff and puff, no further huffing and puffing from any judge.

          What are they going to do? Order the men with guns to arrest the men with guns? I bet the cop that got battered would carry out that order with great alacrity🙃

          • Not Tom says:

            Was he deported? Reading the article and a lot of the comments, I got the impression that he was still in the country, just had the U visa denied.

            The comments there are something else. One guy wrote a pretty concise explanation of who the different players are here and who the authority rests with (the AG, obviously), and in classical spergatarian faggot form, another commenter indignantly replied:

            8) It is emphatically the province of the judiciary to say what the law is.

            Stated with no irony whatsoever. This is on the Reason blog, not the Washington Post. They honestly think it’s no problem to both play the game and make the rules of the game at the same time – that judges can never be questioned except by another judge. To say they’re infected by progressive memes is an understatement; they’ve got the full-blown syndrome, just another organ of the cathedral at this point.

            I disagree with you on this, though:

            If the men with guns stop obeying judges, might as well close the courts.

            The courts could always go back to their proper delegated role of following the law and ruling on facts, rather than ignoring the facts and making up law as they go along. Judiciaries do have a useful authority role in society, they just need to be severely punished when they try to usurp executive authority.

            • jim says:

              It is not only the judiciary usurping executive authority that is the problem, it is that decisions are made in secret for corrupt secret reasons. The court process is obviously kayfabe.

              Watch all the courts swerve in mysterious unison, as the judge in the Dehghani case abruptly swerved.

              Duterte’s death squads were a huge improvement over the Philippine court system, and the Australian Border Patrol a huge improvement over the judicial system, even if your problem is something boring, complicated, and non political.

              In the Jorge Baez-Sanchez case the appeals court invited him to apply for finding of contempt against the Attorney General. But that the judge in the Dehgani case abruptly swerved tells me that if Baez-Sanchez tries it, his application is going to get mysteriously delayed and lost.

              When one judge gives an unreasonably, arbitrary, false, and lawless decision that serves an unadmitted ulterior purpose in one case, they all give unreasonably, arbitrary, false, and lawless decisions in all cases where it serves the same unadmitted ulterior purpose in all cases. It is obvious kayfabe and corruption – judicial decisions are made in secret for secret reasons by a secret process.

              • Not Tom says:

                All true, but not inherent to every judiciary in history, only the Cathedral’s judiciary.

                If you gave me a nation to run, I would institute courts, because military tribunals and death squads don’t scale to a country of 300 million. I would want a judiciary, just not the judiciary we have today. Specifically, I’d probably want a criminal justice system, but either not bother with the federal judges and circuit courts, or have them formally under direct control of the executive branch, which IIRC is what Russia and a number of Eastern European countries have been trying to do.

                • jim says:

                  Yes, English law functioned fine for several centuries with law being “writs” – written commands of the King – no different in form to “wash my socks” – often commands to specific people performing judicial rules on their handling of specific cases.

  3. Yul Bornhold says:

    The Chinese coronavirus introduces a disturbing possibility: that the Chinese government could have–or might in the future–deliberately introduce a pandemic to cull their unbalanced demographic pyramid. Cheaper, probably, than taking care of a massive population of the elderly.

    There’s a symmetry to the social need for religion. The elites need the peasants to believe so that they’ll behave without imposition of a police/surveillance state. However, the peasants need the elite to believe so that they can trust their elites not to murder them for convenience.

    • Samuel Skinner says:

      That is silly. If you can tailor bioweapons like that, us them against foreign men and steal their women.

      “Cheaper, probably, than taking care of a massive population of the elderly.”

      Or just not provide them pensions. Elderly without children are not a threat to the state.

  4. Pooch says:

    It will be disappointing if the Bidens aren’t allowed to testify. I think that could be a bad omen for the Durham report, signaling that the Republican leadership is still willing to protect the rampant corruption of the democrats.

  5. TBeholder says:

    and if low level operatives get busted in a Trump self coup, they will probably have no end of dirt on higher ups, thereby likely opening up another Trump supreme appointment.

    Probably. There’s plausible deniability, but they got increasingly confident and careless lately.
    But it’s not very useful until the other guys demonstrate that spilling the beans (or as much as expressing readiness to do so) is not likely to end the way it did for Epstein.

  6. President Trump is a master of political judo — he is adept at making the democrat/media complex use their own strength against themselves. It is my hope that this continues and the orchestrators of the “impeachment” coup destroy themselves before they destroy the nation.

  7. Mister Grumpus says:

    Well my money is on some characters in brand new “Don’t Tread on Me” hoodies and MAGA hats getting themselves filmed in HD plugging a sweet dopey and well-meaning rookie school teacher at that thing coming up in Virginia. And not a fat one either.

    Freak those R Senators the fuck out and Run Forrest Run.

    This brilliant prognostication on my part reveals an IQ of at least 91.

    In fact, simply if it does not happen, I will revere Trump as the most brilliantly shrewd man alive.

    If anyone here thinks I’m simple-minded and/or black-pilling on this needlessly, then by all means please take the floor and do me a much-needed favor.

    • jim says:

      Because everyone is aware of this, they will find it harder to do this time around.

      You need someone to take the fall, and the usual pattern is that they manipulate some idiot into taking the fall. The idiots are wising up.

    • The Cominator says:

      People are not going to care the way they used to… Trump supporters are starting to see leftists the way leftists have long seen us.

      If Antifa provacteurs plug some liberals nobody will care.

      • Mister Grumpus says:

        Now there’s a Rubicon for you.

        It’s probably been a part of Trump’s strategy since, oh heck, since the Birther thing, hasn’t it? To intentionally drive the left so crazy with rage that he can point to them with his thumb, turn to his “hail fellow R’s” and ask them “You sure you’re safer with them than with me? You sure?”

        Note no public defections from R to D lately. That dog isn’t barking.

        • TBeholder says:

          In a way, that’s what Trump does simply by sitting on that chair and not nodding to every demand.
          De-synchronization. Holiness spiral has its own inertia, but it includes virtue signaling and enforcement. When enforcement slows down, but virtue signaling accelerates, the whole thing may well end up in the ditch.
          They get more frantic, but since KGB isn’t going after those who dare to call CNN and Antifa “bugfuck insane”, everyone who isn’t in their basket eventually just openly calls them bugfuck insane.

          Of course, the screeching crowd are not strategists. The zealots and short-sighted opportunists are mere pawns. But since so much was outsourced to them, their puppeteers find many of the tools lost or weakened.

          • Chelby says:

            At the decadent societalcide stage of an empire retrenchment, stealing is more profitable than restoration, expansion and conquest. Wars are constructed so the elite can rape the collective. Allowing the left singularity to proceed to its self-destructive end is tantamount to promoting harvesting gold fillings, kidneys, and anything else that can’t be well hidden. We’ll get to the kidney harvesting by 2095.

    • Mister Grumpus says:

      Well well! I’m frankly mystified, if also relieved, that nothing big happened at the gun rights thing in Virginia. Explaining why an event did not happen is of course a Rorschach test that reveals more about the explainer than the null event itself, but here are my best takes.

      Please chime in with your own.

      One is that I’m just a gutless Chicken Little, always bummed out and moaning in his confirmation-biased echo chamber, for no better root reason than his relative alienation from pussy, while the real men are actually out above ground in the sunshine and taking care of things.

      Another is that the left/Cathedral is all Ivy League Chiefs now and completely out of competent Indians, or at least approaching as much asymptotically. Chief-hood will still get you grant money and a TED talk, but Indian-hood can get you punched in the nose now, so “Pass the Playstation instead please.” Compare the still evolving Jussie Smollet story to the Trayvon Martin one from a few years ago. No deification, no perpetration.

      Another is that no matter how rabid and holy an Antifa someone might signal himself to be back at the squat, he’s just naturally and reflexively less likely to actually try something against someone carrying a rifle. If superior holiness won’t deflect an ass whipping anymore, then “Whoa now hang on a second what are they paying us again?”

      Another is similar, but on the flip side this time. Since we’ve already had a James Fields, even people who are just as alienated and messed up as he was now have a cautionary negative outcome in mind that they very much want to avoid themselves. “I’ll go scroll Twitter at KFC for a couple hours and come back for my car then.” No glory, no guts.

      And then the last, my Q-est, is that 2-3-4 blood-lettings were in fact intended and planned, but Trump’s Praetorian Ninjas on the inside monkey-wrenched them somehow. “I did everything right, boss, but dammit the ammo were all duds.”

      • Samuel Skinner says:

        The authorities dramatically underestimated the number of people who would show up and backed down; the kill box they set up was too small for the number of demonstrators.

        • jim says:

          The authorities needed some antifascist martyrs to to be horribly martyred by the horrible gunners to show how evil the gunners are. All the antigunners knew that some of them were going to be martyred and declined to show up.

          Antifa said “hell no”, and vigil people (realizing that they were ideal martyrs) said no.

          The normal tactic is to attack the protesters, and all the press says “See how evil they are. When attacked they fight back.” The protesters had enough guns to conquer a small nation. If attacked, they might have conquered Virginia.

          Observe. Not a single counterprotester. Not one. A few shills, but the protesters were on their guard for shills and spotted them immediately.

        • jim says:

          Yes, they set up a kill box, but it was sized for the number of protesters that they could safely beat up. They were going to push them all into a small area in the no guns allowed section

  8. Starman says:

    Speaking of current news:

    Crew Dragon inflight abort test successful. Praise the Holy StarProphet!

  9. Mister Grumpus says:

    “The democrats crossed the Rubicon with Sheriff Joe.”

    Did you have a particular phase or event in mind when stating this?

    • alf says:

      My guess is when they convicted Arpaio for doing his job. I read that he was pardoned by Trump before he was given his sentence, but color me surprised if the democrats didn’t intend to lock him up with the same illegal aliens he arrested.

      • Mister Grumpus says:

        Dr. Phil: “Rule what again?”

        Sheriff Joe: “Rule of law.”

        Dr. Phil: “How’s that working out for you?”

  10. info says:


    I am interested in your opinion on a particular subjection. Could America have won the Vietnam war?

    And expanding on the previous topic of discussion of the Nazi invasion of Russia.

    Could the Soviet Union have been defeated sooner? As in of course after the Russian Civil War and before death of Stalin

    • Dave says:

      America did win the Vietnam War. Bombed the North to bits, forced them to the negotiating table, signed a treaty ending the war and guaranteeing the sovereignty of the South.

      Then the Communists took a different tack: Dig up something Nixon’s men did during his re-election campaign (which made no difference as he won a 49-state landslide), force him out of office, then have their fellow-travelers in Congress cut off all aid to South Vietnam.

      Democrats always throw away the military victories of previous Republican presidents e.g. Lincoln in the Civil War and Bush in Iraq. Republicans never said, “Ha ha, Roosevelt’s dead, let’s give fascism another chance!”

      • Javier says:

        On top of that, by the time Vietnam happened the military was infested with career offices whose chief concern was making themselves look good.

        There’s a funny story on John Reed’s blog about when he was in vietnam he was posted to a company which had a 100% combat ready vehicle status despite having only two working helicopters out of dozens. He found everyone was just lying to make themselves look good because that’s how you get promoted and NCOs have no reason to tell the truth when it makes their lives shit. The mechanics were cannibalizing parts of the remaining helicopters to get the two working but they were being overused as a result and were constantly breaking down leading to unsafe missions.

        So like a good officer John reported the actual true number of combat ready vehicles which caused a shitstorm going all the way up to a colonel. Eventually he gets asked how many helicopters they need to be up to standards and gets them, followed by immediate reassignment to a different company. Lol.

        When the military promotes ass-kissing liars over men who win battles, you get what you deserve.

      • TBeholder says:

        Sort of, but it’s a scope too narrow. It was a war which couldn’t end well.
        Leaving Vietnam to USSR would be bad, but whether Vietnam is run by Soviet or American advisors, expenses of the war itself were too great.
        So, USA defaulted on gold and introduced petrodollar. And it’s no secret how many troubles this created.

        • Dave says:

          The war could have ended with South Vietnam as a garrisoned vassal state of the American Empire, like Germany, Japan, South Korea, and (later) Iraq. These states pay tribute by agreeing to use US dollars as their reserve currency.

          Our big mistake was keeping the draft after WW2 ended. Conscription, like rationing and price and wage controls, is only for dire national emergencies; it’s not a sustainable way to maintain an empire.

    • TBeholder says:

      The only way Germany (oil-starving and already stumbling in Poland) could stop Soviet Union was to just use locals and let the next civil war take care of Party and Dear Comrade Stalin. Most soldiers didn’t see much good from Communists, after all. And commanders remembered how precarious their status and life is (even if they didn’t like Trotskyites themselves). Even without the decisive victory of counter-revolution, oil fields of Romania would remain secure. Best case scenario, add some oil from Caucasus.
      It was actually proposed, too. See memoirs of Bazhanov. But since this plan implicitly required someone who is not a carpet-munching schizophrenic on top…
      Then again, signing the pact with Stalin was a bad sign already.

  11. Starman says:

    My comment got stuck in moderation, I was asking FBI/CIA asset Setarcos a RedPill on women question.

  12. Viking says:

    Rule of law muh rights and power moldbergs and gagggggg
    Besides moldberg being a Jew neoneocon cucking hipster faggots into edgy neobeoconjob about how muh capitalist bros the techno Jews should rule with an iron fisting cuz the kangs
    Well white boys say bring it jew we waitin
    This is always true so moldbergs power idea true he just like all Jews misunderstands white power structure
    Before so many Jews white kangs always limited in power so rule of law is simply what can nominal power get away with at this point in time it’s a fluid equation no one ever knows for sure last election or battle of barrons plus re don’t e ents divided by possible interlopers
    Where moldberg fails is not u derstanding that in white civilizations white men are sovereigns yes they are reluctant to wreck their civilizations over the quarrels of the serpents they employ to rule but they can at whim
    These servants and Jews think if they can divide white men they can really rule but all that really happens is they can temporarily rule the piece they break off and still only as long as another doesn’t challenge them on that piece. White men treat their so called rulers like a guy with a bunch of wives.
    See the problem is power derives from the ability of superior violence e which of course has an intelligence element and well white men have so much of it you can’t really just conquer them only appease them bore them annoy only to the point they calculate your not worth smashing.
    Louisiana is a state full of niggers yet trump was hailed like Ceasares entering the colosseum the niggers on the south shit their pants in genetic memory when white men chose to use them as beasts. Similarly when he pardoned the seal who murdered the wounded sand nigger in cold blood on camera then fired the faggot generals who protested. Kill the chicken scare the monkey by proxy. Brennan comey and clapper shit their pants that night and wept thinking of prison. Trumps an idiot but he has the instincts of the average white man. It may be enough or maybe theirs still a few smart white men in power not chucked by the Jews
    But it doesn’t matter the Jew has gone as far as he can in fact too far as he always does thinking he’s so much cleverer. The Jew is now cornered himself he will try and brazen it out rather than sue for peace it’s a tinder box and they think they are on the verge of using us like beasts with moldberg and lands techno corporatism
    It’s really best to understand this not as another whole episode but rather as the last round in a thousand year fight.

    • Setarcos says:

      Viking! It’s good to see you once more. You were always one of my favorites.

      And yea. You were right all along.

      It’s now illegal to “notice” in most states, and some employers in some places now require that their employees swear fealty to a foreign government.

      It isn’t coincidence that every single NRx weirdo without exception is a spectrumy tech dweeb. Two words: “crypto guns.” They say it all, really.

      I hope your enterprise is booming.

      • Starman says:


        You failed to answer the last time I asked you a RedPill on women question.

        Maybe you will deviate from your FBI/CIA supplied script this time:

        This is multiple choice, pick one.

        Most effective method for a father to keep his daughter from various sexual troubles and immorality?
        [A] Beat the shit out of any man who dares to touch her.
        [B] Shoot to death every man who looks at her the wrong way.
        [C] Marry her young to a husband who’ll take care of her.
        [D] Send her to a good school in a low-crime environment.
        [E] Trust her wisdom to make the best choices for herself.

      • The Cominator says:

        LOL we are overrun with wignat shills lately.

        Tech dweebs and spergs many of us may be but your political “philosophy” such as it is glows in the dark and is controlled op for the enemy, ours was the inspirational force behind Trump’s camarilla and the meme warriors.

        • Setarcos says:


          • jim says:

            Deleted for refusing to answer Starman’s question.

            Your non answer makes it obvious that you are being paid to write this stuff. If you were writing it on your own account, you could commit thought crimes.

            It is the inability to commit thought crimes that reveals the shills. Your work is reviewed by HR.

            If you are not yet another FBI shill, say something that HR would object to.

            • Setarcos says:

              Okay, sure. Let me explain why you’re wrong, and incidentally a fucking moron.


              Fed shills are literally above the law. They can promote terrorism, distribute drugs, supply weapons, or whatever else they think will win you over. They aren’t subject to crimestop and they don’t “have their work reviewed by an HR department.” That claim is so stupid it enrages.

              I’ve explained why you’re wrong. Now let me explain why you’re a fucking moron.

              “You’re clearly and obviously a psychotic freak living in a mental ward. Somehow you’ve acquired Internet access and set up a blog.

              “This explains why you have the time to respond to people at all hours of the day. Your inability to commit thoughtcrimes (9-11, Q, etc.) and your proclivity to accuse every dissenting opinion (no matter how varied) of Marxism and censor like a marauding Stalinist censor reveals this to be incontrovertibly true.

              “If you are not in fact a psychotic freak living in a mental ward, lay off the delete button and reply coherently to parent comments.

              “You are a psychotic freak, everyone knows you are a psychotic freak, and all argument to the contrary will be taken as evidence that you are indeed a psychotic freak.”

              • jim says:

                Sure, the FBI allows you to murder people. But you cannot commit crimethink in material that is likely to be reviewed by HR.

                You cannot commit crimethink the material you are posting, because you are posting from an FBI office on an FBI computer and your shilling is watched by your supervisor and HR has access to it.

                If I am wrong, prove me wrong by posting crimethink.

                The inability to speak, or even acknowledge, crimethought, is a dead giveaway. Shill posts suffer from the same inhibitions and restraint as any other government email.

                They require you to pose as a white male Christian Nazi Jew hating homophobic mysogynic racist who wants to murder blacks, gays, Jews and women, but will not let you suggest that blacks are not magical, women are not wonderful, and so on and so forth. You supposedly hate all these people, but you are not allowed to notice that any of them cause any actual problems or inconvenience, or are prone to any stereotypical misconduct, or are in any way favored by the state. You supposedly hate them, but are not allowed to have any reasons for hating them, or even reasons for thinking it might be a good idea to have separate spheres of activity for men and women.

                If you were trying to infiltrate us IRL, you would probably be allowed to kill a few blacks and women to prove your bona fides, but would not be allowed to have any good reasons for killing them.

                • Allah says:

                  One reason many commenters refuse to answer your tests is because it comes across as an order or an interrogation and obeying makes them low status. Next time a suspected shill appears, state why you need to test them, then ask politely.


                • The Cominator says:

                  A noob who comes here and states shill script views IS low status here already.

                • ten says:

                  Yes, “Allah”, like a dog the prospective shill must lay on its back and bare its vitals, and supply adequate thoughtcrime inimical to a hidden enemy payload to indicate there is no such enemy payload.

                  Xenosystems allowed shills, hoping the acidic cybernetics of adversarialism, where thoughtcrime is merely allowed, would result in good signal, which it did not – the shills just repeated their signal with no regard to countersignal, and in the drowning noise there was no purpose in maintaining signal.

                  Coming down hard on shills allows this forum to not drown in noise, without it reading and writing in it would be a nuisance, soon abandoned.

                  It would be much nicer for shills and the innocently suspected to be treated like respected gentlemen, but not nicer for everyone else. Deal with it.

                • Allah says:

                  I know how shills are, I absolutely support attacking them. My suggestion is simply giving suspects the benefit of the doubt to avoid misunderstandings. Keep in mind shill doesn’t mean enemy.

                • jim says:

                  Shills spam – they don’t hear our ideas, they are not allowed to hear our ideas, and they just say the same thing over and over and over with trivial variations. It is one way communication, just as ads are. They don’t respond to evidence or argument. Waste of reader bandwidth. I am not censoring them because they are in the pay of the enemy. If the enemy had something interesting and new to say, or the enemy was willing to debate our ideas, I would listen. I am censoring them for wasting reader bandwidth.

                  All our other shills are commie/progressive shills. You are a Mohammedan shill.

                  Shills pretend to be what they obviously are not “Hail fellow white male”. You pretend you are a Turkish nationalist, but you are on the side of people killing Turks in Syria for being the wrong kind of Mohammedan, and you oppose the nationalism of Kemal Atatürk, who wanted to rule the Turkish nation, not the anti Turkish empire. He wanted a nation based on Turkish identity, rather than an empire based on Sunni identity. You seem suspiciously keen on empire based on Shia identity. If he had wound up with an empire based on Sunni identity, Sunni priests would have had too much power, thus the Turkish empire was anti Turkish, as the State Department’s “International Community” is anti American.

                  You are analogous to all those “Hail fellow anti semite” shills who harp on about an evil Jewish conspiracy ruling us from Tel Aviv, but cannot mention George Soros or Victoria Nuland, and will not acknowledge that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. You are not a Turkish nationalist, any more than those guys are anti semites. You are not arguing for Turkish nationalism, but for the universal empire of Mohammed, much as all the other shills argue for the universal empire of Harvard.

                • Allah says:


                • jim says:

                  I am not censoring you for being a shill. I would love to debate shills, but they don’t debate, and especially I would like to debate a Mohammedan shill, because we have never had one here before, and I initially thought you had to be yet another Cathedral shill. I am censoring you for being unresponsive.

                  If you don’t want to be censored, post something that it is responsive to the blog post, or to the comment you are supposedly replying to. Trouble with shills is that they are not here to debate. They are here to transmit their master’s message – which is always a message we have heard before far too many times.

                  I am not censoring you for what you say, but for what you don’t say. You don’t respond to our ideas, arguments, and positions.

              • Not Tom says:

                Fed/FBI shill doesn’t mean you have to actually be a federal agent with a 007 license to kill, that’s a deliberate and stupid strawman and you’re not fooling anyone with it.

                Chans have been shill-aware for years and so are we.

      • Atavistic Morality says:

        “spectrumy tech dweeb”

        That could be said about almost every great intellectual our civilization has produced, from Aristotle and his obsession for botany, to Leonardo da Vinci and his technological ingenuity.

        And guess what, Alexander loved Aristotle and shared his passion for botany. And Leonardo da Vinci was highly valued by the aristocratic warriors of his time and he provided them with their first wheel-lock musket.

        You think you smear the NRx movement when you insult them like that, but in reality you just oust yourself as a progressive feminist faggot. Because your bosses are degenerate priests that prefer drugs and black cock, you believe that men who prefer the solitude of late hours work in laboratories are laughable.

        I don’t find them laughable, I find them admirable: their productivity and their genius are one and the same with the word civilization.

        Warriors don’t disregard their technicians and doctors, they give them special status inside their group as “sparkles” and “docs”, and they are protected and respected. But that’s not something a Cathedral lapdog would know, so every time you retards open your mouth to sound tough it is plain enough for everyone with a working brain cell that you are not what you purport to be.

        • Setarcos says:

          I don’t know any “progressive feminist faggots” (your words) who think Ted Kaczynski was right about everything except bombing people.

          Your technological “civilization” is a scourge upon the planet, a scourge upon liberty, and scourge upon the soul.

          • jim says:

            You are a progressive feminist faggot who thinks that Ted Kaczynski was right about everything except bombing people.

          • Starman says:


            You’re a progressive feminist faggot who refuses to answer my RedPill on women test because you’re a progressive feminist faggot.

            You prefer a future overrun by Turd World vermin where Mankind’s fate sinks into the Fermi Paradox… instead of the glorious future where Mankind rightfully expands to the planets and stars.

            • Mike says:

              Wanting to expand into Space is a Reddit meme at this point. Way more important things to worry about than that.

              • Not Tom says:

                Lots of things become reddit memes. That doesn’t mean reddit owns them any more than white nationalists using Pepe means they own Pepe.

                If you don’t have dreams, you don’t have ambition, and if you don’t have ambition, then you’re on a straight path to mediocrity.

              • Starman says:


                Opposing expansion into space is profoundly anti-natalist, and anti-natalism is what one would expect from a progressive feminist faggot.

                • Mike says:

                  Don’t see how it is anti-natalist at all, if anything (at least in the West, this does not apply to China), most of the people I see clamoring for space exploration are urban bugmen who have no families and post about how they “FUCKING LOVE SCIENCE” on Reddit. I’m just telling you how I’ve seen it. People like Trump (other than the Space Force) and especially Tucker Carlson don’t give a shit about space exploration, and for good reason. We need to fix our devastated country, not waste precious resources chasing the stars when our people are overdosing on opiods. As of right now, it’s mainly limp-wristed soyboys from university that clamor for space.

                  Obviously the NASA of yore was badass as all hell, but that’s not what we have right now. I understand of course that you want the NASA of Neil Armstrong back, not the pozzed NASA of today, which is great, but lets fix literally everything else that’s wrong with our society before we give two shits about space exploration.

                • jim says:

                  Trump is backing Musk’s space effort, and kicked NASA’s ass to deal with him. Musk, who has six children, wants to settle Mars.

                  The eye of Soros has fallen on him, which is likely to block Musk’s efforts to build a re-usable earth to orbit second stage, but if Trump arrests the deep state, the eye of Soros will not matter any more.

                • Starman says:


                  “ most of the people I see clamoring for space exploration are urban bugmen who have no families”

                  Prophet Elon Musk has six children, do you have six children with child #7 on its way? Is Jim a “childless bugman” because he supports a future where the Star Emperor conquers the Solar System?

                  “ We need to fix our devastated country, not waste precious resources chasing the stars”

                  That sounds exactly what George Soros’s astronomerettes say when they demand that Starlink and Starship/Superheavy be banned. And the low cost of SpaceX’s reusable rocket development has revealed your phrase “waste precious resources” to be a lie.

                  Can you even tell the difference between SLS and Starship? One costs tens of billions, the other only millions to develop the first flight article.

                • Mike says:

                  Elon Musk is great, I don’t have anything against him, as he seems to be one of the last real entrepreneurs left in this country who hasn’t kowtowed to HR catladys. He’s also a bona-fide genius and gets way more done, with way less resources, then NASA has in at least two decades, maybe more.

                  I guess I was mistakenly assuming we were talking about space exploration in the public sphere, it would be incredibly silly for me to call Elon’s space exploration endeavors “a waste of resources” because it’s his private enterprise. It’s his money, his vision, I can’t disagree with that.

                  And about the bugmen, that’s just what I see. I browse Reddit, I browse Twitter, and all the space nuts are “I fucking love science” atheist soyboys with neckbeards. Hopefully that changes back to Neil Armstrong and Dune in the near-future.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Engineers aren’t priests. Astrophysicists aren’t going to help reinstate patriarchy, and lawyers aren’t going to help us get into space. These are entirely orthogonal concerns, with nearly mutually exclusive personnel. Saying that “we” or “society” should focus on one or the other reeks of central-planning memes.

                  It’s totally stupid to say “we should stop all speculative R&D until I am personally satisfied with our domestic policy and culture”. Maybe expanding into space will be the solution to those problems – maybe we need to totally start over with a new frontier where shitlibs and their brown pets know they can’t even survive, let alone profit.

                  Maybe in our state of advanced technological development and resource abundance, we need to enter a new environment where a single error could kill the whole colony, in order to rediscover what that’s like and select for an intelligent, low-time-preference population. You don’t know, and I don’t know.

                • Mike says:

                  True, I can’t claim to know. But just based off of past history, a society that is in decline (and until Trump pulls off the Restoration America is indeed a declining society) doesn’t typically expand, it contracts, to preserve what it already has.

                  And that isn’t me saying that expansion isn’t the right move, just that historically it usually isn’t seen. That’s why at the beginning of the thread I said that it wouldn’t surprise me to see China’s Space Program rapidly surpass ours, because they’re on the rise.

                • jim says:

                  We are not going to expand until we make marriage legal again, because expansion has to be biological at its root.

                  But access to space will lift our eyes to the skies and make it easier to make marriage legal again. Chicks dig the adventurer, the explorer, and most of all, dig the conqueror. Their shit tests against old type marriage will be feebler if we are looking at the skies.

                  Suppose marriage is re-legalized at about the same time as we get a re-usable spacecraft to Mars. It will take a generation after the first landing before substantial expansion to Mars becomes feasible. But a permanent Mars station will make it easier to legalize marriage, and legalizing marriage will make it easier have a permanent Mars station.

                  We should be getting the infrastructure that makes Mars settlement possible at the same time as we make biological expansion possible. Each will inspire the other.

                • Mister Grumpus says:

                  “The Eye of Soros has fallen on him, which is likely to block Musk’s efforts to build a re-usable earth to orbit second stage…”

                  This, right here, is some red-hot subject matter to dig into. Chan-ready for sure. It’s something about the ruthless math and logic of space flight that exposes things that could otherwise be “optics’ed away.”

                  At Normie Tier, we have the fact that an exiled South African genius (sound familiar?), with relatively little money but also some great memeing genius, is just straight-up humiliating the MIC and making them obsolete.

                  “But OUR crappy spaceship was assembled by women and negroes!”

                  “But OUR crappy spaceship has a Rolodex of government speed-dials!”

                  Not good enough guys.

                  And then lean a little more in the Danky direction, and we have the very arguable position that once the Falcon Heavy worked, Elon could have easily made a reusable 2nd stage for it. It would eat up most of the payload, but would still be reusable, and I thought reusable was the whole point here, guys. No?

                  But no. Instead Elon decided to shoot for the moon with the Battlestar Galactica.

                  And now here we have Jim’s implicit take (and correct me if I’m off) that the Starship vehicle’s whole point is to capture so much imagination and excitement that he can use that coalition of totally-not-racist-or-sexist enthusiast nerds as a new “column” against the Eye of Soros.

                  I mean shit, maybe it’s not even meant to work. Maybe it’s just armor-plating his brand against Soros attack in the short term. Maybe even that’s worth it.

                  I feel like a Chihuahua trying to read Plato.

                • jim says:

                  To land humans on Mars, you need a rocket capable of landing, and going back up again, which means it has to land on a column of fire, and be capable of going up again, which is much the same design as re-usable earth to orbit rocket capable of carrying astronauts up to orbit and down back again, which NASA does not like at all.

                  The Falcon Heavy was designed to carry humans to the moon, but NASA nitpicked it to death, looking for excuses to not use it, and they are nitpicking Starship to death. They don’t like Musk building rockets, and they really strongly don’t want an earth to orbit reusable rocket that astronauts ride back to earth, and are doing whatever they can to prevent it, looking for any excuse, and every excuse.

                  They have in effect ruled the Starship design inherently unfit for carrying humans. To satisfy NASA, a reusable rocket would have to come back separately from the astronauts and that seems to be what Musk is now building. But though he can put a NASA crew module on top of a Starship rocket, that design really does not work for the Moon or Mars.

                  To have a viable business, he has to focus on launching commercial stuff, and wait for more politically favorable winds, hence his Starlink project.

                  For cheap transport to planets, the rocket that took people there has to return, and land on earth on a column of fire. The way to do this is you launch a two stage rocket to orbit, with both stages capable of returning, and, to get beyond low earth orbit, send up some more tankers to refuel the orbiting second stage. To refuel on mars, you land some nuclear reactors, and use their power to generate LNG and LOX from Martian air and Martian water. Mars escape velocity is considerably less than earth escape velocity. The Starship second stage, and the Falcon heavy second stage, is sufficient to reach orbit from any body in the solar system that humans can walk around on, so a single rocket design is capable of any mission to anywhere interesting in the solar system, some trips requiring more tankers and more in space refueling than others.

                  which NASA does not like at all. A single rocket design that can go anywhere interesting in the solar system puts them out of business.

                • Mister Grumpus says:

                  I understand and agree.

                  A Falcon Heavy reusable 2nd stage for getting stuff to LEO and the Full Starship Battlestar Galactica are very different things.

                  A reusable 2nd stage to LEO is good for cutting costs and humiliating all competition, namely the NASA-MIC Wakanda Space Program.

                  The Full Starship Battlestar Galactica, on the other hand, is for actually doing all the 2001 Space Odyssey stuff with one single vehicle. It’s laser guns vs. slingshots at that point.

                  But the cost-cutting (which is really helpful!) and competitor-humiliation functions could have been finished by now, or at least much sooner, if Elon had gone for that Falcon Heavy reusable 2nd stage, and sewn up the LEO market for good.

                  And he didn’t do it.

                  So. Please give us your take on why Elon didn’t reach for the relatively-humble reusable 2nd stage right now, instead of dropping it and running after the Full Starship Battlestar Galactica, which will be much more expensive, risky, time consuming and difficult to pull off.

                  This isn’t a throw-down by the way. I really want to hear your angle on this, because at face value, their choice makes no dang sense, but these people aren’t stupid either.

                  My best guess is that NASA-MIC is at the bargaining stage of grief here, and bribing Elon with taxpayer cash to not humiliate them quite so badly, quite so soon. “Look Elon, here’s some ISS crew missions, as long as you don’t kill us off this year.”

                • jim says:

                  > So. Please give us your take on why Elon didn’t reach for the relatively-humble reusable 2nd stage right now, instead of dropping it and running after the Full Starship Battlestar Galactica, which will be much more expensive, risky, time consuming and difficult to pull off.

                  Stuck. NASA decreed a moonflight on superheavy did not meet health and safety standards. Even if he got one hundred percent private funding for a moonshot, Nasa would not let him. Nasa has just flat out prohibited men going into space and landing on a pillar of fire. Hence flat out banned men going into space on re-usable rockets. Health and Safety regulations (which are in practice always “Stop any new technology” regulations.

                • Mister Grumpus says:

                  Also, when Elon talks about his rockets, and especially with NASA people within earshot (which of course is every single moment in a YouTube world), he stutters and stammers a lot. And I mean a lot. I can barely stand listening to him.

                  He’s much smoother and more relaxed when talking about the cars and even the silly trucks.

                  To me, this supports your hypothesis that exactly these sorts of battles and struggles are going on behind the curtain. He’s threading the needle between hiding stuff and and just straight up lying to people, and that just has to be hard.

                • Cloudswrest says:

                  Elon Musk strikes me as a real life Gomez Addams (the John Austin version). Going from blowing up trains to blowing up rockets.

                • Not Tom says:

                  which NASA does not like at all. A single rocket design that can go anywhere interesting in the solar system puts them out of business.

                  That’s the part that’s so irritating to me. It’s obvious that NASA thinks that, but it’s also obviously not true. A universal design isn’t the end, it’s the beginning. Even if we assume that no spacefaring vessel would ever need any kind of military capabilities, which is far from a sure thing if we’re looking hundreds of years into the future, there is still endless room for innovation. Better efficiency, faster travel times, greater crew/passenger capacity, alternative fuel and power sources, the list just goes on and on.

                  There would be so much more for everyone involved to gain by cooperation, because NASA is more concerned with promoting global-warming alarmism and proving that women and Africans make great engineers and astronauts than actually getting out into space, the entire space program is essentially on hold.

                  I’m pretty sure that the Trump Space Force was always just an attempt to route around NASA, their excessive bureaucratic bloat, their ideologically-driven properties and their overall pettiness.

                • jim says:

                  What I hope is that the Trump Space Force will contract with Musk, bypassing NASA. And of course, the military is not subject to civilian health and safety regulations (which usually make things unsafe and unhealth, as with health and safety restrictions on building that force everyone to use long obsolete unsafe methods, such as restrictions on cherry pickers in favor of scaffolding, and of course the NASA insistence on a capsule landing in the sea.)

                  He has the generals on board with bypassing NASA. They hate NASA, have hated NASA ever since the Challenger disaster.

                  When Musk is a NASA, observe he is obviously terrified. They hate him, and want to destroy him. You can see it in his speech and body language.

                • Mister Grumpus says:

                  Hold up. By “reusable 2nd stage for the Falcon Heavy” I meant something strictly robotic, at face value just for letting a Falcon Heavy do Falcon 9 type payloads to LEO, but reusably. That’s all I meant.

                  It would also humiliate NASA-MIC even more and further lock out the Chinese, Indians and Russians, but at least not intrude on the whole moon situation.

                  Why not just do that? It looks so obvious through naive eyes.

                • jim says:

                  Musk wants a re-usable for people. He wants men to go up in space on a column of fire, and come down again on the same vehicle that lifted them into orbit – because that is a vehicle that can settle Mars. To return from Mars or the moon, you have to go up in the same vehicle you came down on. A reusable robotic superheavy is hard, and is just a distraction. If he has to kill time, might as well build a superheavy that is a superheavy, and not a bunch of not so heavy rockets strapped together.

                  Superheavy was a quicky for getting men to the moon. But that is stalled, so doing it over, this time as one big rocket instead of a pile of rockets strapped together. Worst case outcome, the robot carries a NASA approved capsule into space on an expendable rocket, then he makes the second stage reusable, and has the second stage land separately from the capsule with far less drama and danger than the NASA approved capsule.

                • Mister Grumpus says:

                  “Even if he got one hundred percent private funding for a moonshot, Nasa would not let him.”

                  I’m embarrassed for not knowing this. If such a situation is even possible at all then it makes Space Force obvious in an instant. Wow.

                • Starman says:

                  Note how President Trump is aware that rocketships should land on a tail of fire like real reusable rockets should land:

                  “ I never saw it where the engines come down with no wings, no anything, and they’re landing.”

                  And surprise, surprise! Rocketships aren’t airplanes.

                • Starman says:

                  Mike Snead called for making it illegal for vtvl reusable rocketships to carry people. He wanted spaceplane boosters to be mandatory.

                  And surprise! After the cancellation of XS-1 spaceplane booster, Mike Snead deleted the comment section on his post.

                • Starman says:

                  @Mister Grumpus

                  “So. Please give us your take on why Elon didn’t reach for the relatively-humble reusable 2nd stage right now (reusable Falcon 9/heavy upper stage), instead of dropping it and running after the Full Starship Battlestar Galactica,”

                  It’s much cheaper for the StarProphet to develop the full Starship reusable upperstage because it is easier to build with stainless steel instead of Falcon’s aluminum-lithium alloy.

                  Aluminum lithium alloy rocket stages must be made at or near clean-room conditions. Stainless steel just needs wind protection. The Starship sections are literally being garage-built.

                  Also, aluminum lithium alloy needs to be fully covered in thick thermal protection tiles (fragile) and thick thermal protection blankets glued on every square centimeter of surface (all uniquely shaped, Shuttle had 22,000 unique tiles). Stainless steel only needs identical, thin and robust bolted-on tiles on the windward surface. On the rest of the upperstage, stainless steel is its own thermal protection.

                • Mister Grumpus says:

                  “It’s much cheaper for the StarProphet to develop the full Starship reusable upperstage because it is easier to build with stainless steel instead of Falcon’s aluminum-lithium alloy.”

                  OK fine. A reusable unmanned 2nd stage for the Falcon Heavy… out of stainless steel.

                • Chelby says:

                  Nothing against Musk’s entrepreneurial nor even his gamesmanship of the government for tax credits which makes his businesses work economically. But we don’t need Mars exploration to make marriage work again. That’s an extremely roundabout and inefficient proposal. All we need are 50,000 men with 50 caliber machine guns who have pledged their life to protect the edicts of a county, e.g. 2nd amendment haven and no family law haven. Has to start with a devout religion and deep education of the facts. We start the restoration by retaking counties. County by county. Mars colonization would accomplish nothing if we haven’t first fixed our soft power, education, churches, and political constitutions.

                • jim says:

                  Obviously marriage worked in the past without Marx exploration. But a frontier helps spiritually.

          • If you want a BAPian freedom of the steppe, it has to be space. Unless plague reduces world population to like under one billion, mankind will live on this planet more like a hive-dweller than a steppe nomad. But there is a lot of freedom to be had out there. This has been a recurring theme of midcentury libertarian-leaning sci-fi: freedom is to be found out on the frontier.

      • Not Tom says:

        You were always one of my favorites.

        And when Bizarro Socrates praises your work, you know you’ve made it to the top. Congratulations, shill!

      • Viking says:

        Thx I write so badly I wonder if anyone can understand though reading a bunch of things at lands place I think I made a lot of good arguments and as you say predictions if not eloquently.
        My problem is I do t really fall into NRx or alt right so both attack without listening. Essentially my argument is if NRx didn’t cherry pick hbd and other tenets of power dynamics they become a more Intellectual alt right and if they font they are simply an edgier neocon again founded by Jews trying to get ahead of the inevitable.
        For instance I. The above I’m not championing the white workers of the world unite just pointing out white men as a whole can withstand any force and eventually will and expect to pay them for their effort. Elite whites can not run off to elsium with or without Jew help not enough no matter how smart in fact this idea of moldberg/ land is exactly the Davos we now watch crumbling. Is it really so distasteful to have to rub elbows with one left half o stead of some other occupiers right half what the fuck is wrong with these race traitors. If you do t like to shoot the shit with loggers then shoot the shit with elite whites who are not race traitors. I would accept the Jews but they are simply incapable of assimilating if hitler couldn’t teach them to stop that shit nothing can
        Similarly while a capitalist Vienna type since teens I had to admit if were going hbd/ e o Wilson we have to admit apes are both socialist and capitalist both being subordinated to survival of close relations. We had to know ourselves as well as niggers Jews and women. White men flip tortoises treat our women better ok so within what limits can we accept our natures yet not make same mistakes. Obviously we can’t allow multiculturalism but the niggers and spics didn’t overthrow us the Jews did using niggers and spics and women and faggots. Anyway thx

  13. jack boot says:


    • jim says:

      Bored now. After famine and mass murder, Marxist economics is unlikely to persuade.

      I am not going to debate Marxist economics on this blog after the truth of the libertarian critique of Marxist economics was repeatedly proven in such a devastating bloody, brutal, and spectacular manner.

      • info says:

        An FAQ or already laid out arguments that they can get referred to.

        • Samuel Skinner says:

          Marxist economics is labor theory of value; it is difficult to find people willing to defend it.

          • jack boot says:


            • jim says:

              Not going to debate the Marxist theory of value. It is a dead horse, refuted by logic, reason, and the stupendous rivers of blood that flowed over and over and over again during the twentieth century.

              Marginal value, subjective value, subjective marginal value, and supply and demand are the correct theories of value, which theories have been proven over and over again by the famines and mass murders of those who doubted these theories.

              The Marxist theory of value is just elaborate pseudo intellectual dress for the same theory that the Democratic Party organizer tells blacks, that if they burn the supermarket down, they will get free stuff and the supermarket will be magically replaced by a supermarket run by black people who will let them shop lift with impunity.

              It is a dead horse, and letting you flog it is a waste of bandwidth. You are telling us the same story Democrats tell blacks, but dressing it in our shibboleths.

  14. jack boot says:

    the coal jobs came back, jim sez

    “Report: Coal Plants Shut Down At Second Fastest Rate On Record During Trump’s Third Year In Office”

    “More Than 50 Coal Companies Have Been Wiped Out Since Trump’s 2016 Victory”

    want more? quotes, not headlines

    “Coal plants shuttered at the second fastest rate in U.S. history in 2019, Reuters reported Monday, citing federal data.”

    “Energy companies retired nearly 15,100 megawatts (MW) of coal-fired electricity that year, enough to electrify millions of homes, the report notes, citing data from the Energy Information Administration. The closures come despite President Donald Trump’s promise to bring back the industry.”

    “The report also shows that an estimated 39,000 MW of coal-fired power plant capacity have gone offline since Trump’s first year in 2017. More coal plants will have shut during Trump’s first four years than Obama’s second term if that trend continues, Reuters reported.”

    “One of the largest coal companies in the western U.S. closed Monday, making it among the more than 50 coal producers to shutter since voters elected President Donald Trump in 2016 on a promise to rescue the industry.”

    wtf jim?

    • jim says:

      Trump derangement syndrome.

      Coal production has in fact risen since Trump was elected, though only moderately, after collapsing under Obama, while oil and gas production has risen spectacularly.

      Wickepedia admits that coal production has risen, which is an admission against interest, since they are clearly committed to the same narrative as your sources.

      And when we see such fanatical and deranged commitment to a narrative, there is a high likelihood that those telling us the narrative are just flat out bare faced lying, mistaking what they wish had happened for reality.

      Supposedly fifty coal companies closed their doors under Trump. Name one.

      Similarly, umpteen zillion species supposedly went extinct over the last few years due to global warming, and yet no one can name one of these species.

      If fifty coal companies have closed, name one.

      • Davilan says:

        Murray Energy went bankrupt in 2019. It’s likely that coal plants are switching to natural gas, as one in my area recently did. The Wikipedia graph showing slightly increased coal production ended in 2018, and production in 2019 likely decreased

        I think the fact that the government no longer wants to reduce the production of fossil fuel energy in general and the rise in oil and gas production outweighs this though.

        • jim says:

          Despite bankruptcy, caused by lawfare, not caused by unprofitability of mining coal, Murray Energy is still mining coal, and its coal mining is still profitable.
          It did not close its doors, just changed its management.

          The claim was that fifty coal companies have closed.

          No coal companies have closed, and lawfare against Murray Energy sent them through bankruptcy to shed legal liabilities, but did not stop them mining coal.

          Poster girl principle applies. One lie, all lies.

          • Reziac says:

            A few strip mines in Montana closed because they were worked out. This was, of course, completely expected and nothing to do with Trump or anything else.

            And you may hear that Signal Peak Energy is bankrupt and closing down. Not exactly.

            we’re hiring… wut?? funny way to close down…

            Mine worth nothing, crows the owner… to one of the most leftarded papers in the state:

            …maybe this is why, tho nothing to do with coal:

            And I see loaded coal cars going down the tracks every day. If coal mining has ended, where are they getting all those black rocks, and why are they hauling ’em back and forth??

            • Not Tom says:

              This is a great example of “figures don’t lie, but liars can figure”.

              If you look only at the number of mines and companies closing down, and see that number tick up, that might point to a decline in the industry. Or it could point to growth in the industry, as more mines get mined out, more competition weeds out more new entrants, and more speculative bets fail in the first year.

              Looking only at closures and bankruptcies is like looking only at the number of pastries a baker throws out. Is he emptying his stock, or is he baking a lot more and throwing out the bad batches? We don’t know; the data is incomplete.

              The exact pattern of turnover might point us to the correct conclusion, but a much easier way is to just look at the positive indicators: new companies, new mines, revenue, production, etc. Articles that talk only about closings and not “openings” are highly suspicious.

              The only corollary we have is production, and while it didn’t skyrocket after 2016, it did tick back up, and minor year-to-year fluctuations are perfectly normal. We need more data, it’s simply too early to tell whether the industry is making a rebound because it takes forever for new mines to open up and reach full production.

              • jim says:

                > Looking only at closures and bankruptcies is like looking only at the number of pastries a baker throws out. Is he emptying his stock, or is he baking a lot more and throwing out the bad batches?

                That bankruptcy merely results in a change of management – the coal continues to be dug and shipped, indicates the latter.

                Further all these bankruptcies appear to be related to Obama lawfare. Just as they are still cooking up grounds to jail people connected to Trump, they are still cooking up grounds to ruin coal miners.

    • Starman says:

      @jack boot

      Let’s see if jack boot can deviate from his script.

      This is multiple choice, pick one.

      Most effective method for a father to keep his daughter from various sexual troubles and immorality?
      [A] Beat the shit out of any man who dares to touch her.
      [B] Shoot to death every man who looks at her the wrong way.
      [C] Marry her young to a husband who’ll take care of her.
      [D] Send her to a good school in a low-crime environment.
      [E] Trust her wisdom to make the best choices for herself.

      • RedBible says:

        Not enough “black pilled” options, So I propose adding this new option:
        [F] She’s already doomed to become a whore no matter what I do, so mas as well make some money by having my daughter become a porn star.

        (Just kidding, black pillars don’t have any daughters.)

    • Samuel Skinner says:

      The second dailycaller link goes from ‘since 2016’ to ‘since 2015’ between the headline and the second bullet point.

      It is possible the article is incredibly insightful, but I don’t trust sources that are incoherent before they get to the actual article.

  15. Reziac says:

    Have you read the Bender affidavit? if even a fraction of it is true, much is explained.

    TL;DR: most mainstream news media and a lot of prominent politicians are in Qatar’s pocket. It names names. (And abruptly makes it easy to spot who else is in that pocket.)

    Trump is not named (tho Kushner is). I conclude that this entire hoorah is because, starting back when Trump came to financial prominence, they tried to corrupt him in their usual way — and FAILED (repeatedly) — so he knows where the bodies are buried, even if it’s not yet safe to dig ’em up. And the best way for the guilty to avoid arrest (not to mention an end to the gravy train) is to remove Trump. To the corrupted, he is the most dangerous man alive.

    This would also explain why some formerly jelly-spined congresscritters have found their balls: for the first time in living memory, it is safe to NOT be one of the corrupt, because Trump has their back as no president before.

    [I probably repeat myself; I am nothing if not redundant. But it bears repeating. I’ve been saying for years that the Muslim Brotherhood stepped straight into the KGB’s vacated shoes… well, apparently so did Qatar.]

  16. Chelby says:

    What I fear is more likely is increasing use of violence and coercion by the elite with inconclusive and indecisive outcomes, eventually leading to full scale war around 2026 or so, possibly involving nuclear weapons, followed, after years, decades, or centuries, by a Stalin restoring order.

    So Jim finally realizes I was correct. What took you so long to wake up to the economic realities and thus how this plays out?

    • Chelby says:

      Btw, atheists and progressive wolves in sheepskin such as Eric S. Raymond will not be allowed into our in-group. We will leave the traitors out in the cold (outside the gates of our enclaves in the South) with the progressives they implicitly supported. The South and rural areas will declare independence from the coastal cities and this will lead to UN troops and nuclear weapons deployed on U.S.A. soil against the patriots. Prepare for a maelstrom and the economic collapse of the West into the abyss.

      • Chelby says:

        P.S. I probably decided to come back and fight to my death. My ancestor was Isaac Shelby. My father looks very much like Isaac Shelby Jr.. Warriors have to spill their blood now. We fought the first Civil War against the abusive King and now the same elite bastards are employing demo[n]cracy to attempt to enslave us again. The only peace we will ever have is with Jesus. Our problem is organization. We disagree on too many issues. For example, I do not support standing armies which inevitably are used against the people. We should have warrior militias only with a gun under every blade of grass. No voting for females. No voting period. This is the problem of how to design a stable system of governance. It’s impossible because due to the inviolable power-law distribution of wealth, the flies take control of the honey regardless.

          • Chelby says:

            Says the guy who is coming closer and closer to my well researched scenario with every new blog post.

            • jim says:

              You are out of contact with reality.

            • jack boot says:

              the world is coming closer and closer to alex jones

              ten years ago he was just a raving lunatic talking about things that couldn’t possibly be true

              but he’s since been proved right on mass government surveillance, worse than martial law government lawlessness, child raping pedos, global blackmail rings and gender bending chemicals in the water

              pretty much all that’s left to be proved is psychic vampires and interdimensional offworld technology

              and maybe flying saucers

              • jim says:

                Alex Jones is an enemy agent, hence unsurprising that one enemy agent supports another enemy agent.

                • jack boot says:

                  alex jones campaigns relentlessly for guns poker alcohol pretty women, clean water and the american way. and against surveillance pedophiles human traffickers and post partum baby killers and psychic vampires

                  he’s popularized starfish prime operation gladio and let us know about government had nuclear submarines in the 50s.

                  he’s willing to talk about the interdimensional advanced technology transfers (computers) from the one whose not of this world (satan)

                  he interviewed ufo people a decade ago and now the navy admits there are aerial phenomena it can’t explain and would “jeopardize national security”

                  all while you shill for your libertarian tech mega corporate overlords like facebook because they have shiny skyscrapers and therefore deserve status of hereditary aristocracy

                  and accuse all dissent of COMMUNISM. maybe because libertarianism was founded by communist ex jews???

                • jim says:

                  Alex Jones is an entryist like you. Like you, “Hail fellow white male”, and like you, then tells us that we agree with enemy memes, reinterpreting our memes as the memes of the enemy.

                  Alex Jones version of what we think is the opposite of what we think, lies issued by people who hate us and intend to kill us.

                  All his conspiracy theories contain enemy payloads like 911, while he ignores real conspiracies, like Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming, where the internal emails of the conspiracy leaked. He also fails the red pill test.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I think Alex Jones is well meaning but misguided or trying to keep a large audience who include people who have internalized cathedral memes but well meaning…

                  He did explicitly and strongly back Trump all the way and has continued to do so. Those who back Trump except in rare cases where they do so to backstab latter (Jeff Sessions) are not enemies…

                  He is just wrong about some things. But he should not go on the helicopter which is where all those who are anti-Trump should go.

                • jim says:

                  He is undoubtedly well meaning, and supports Emperor Trump, but to avoid demonetization and deplatforming, plays footsie with our enemies.

                  Should not get a helicopter flight, but at best, Havel’s Greengrocer.

                  His memes are enemy memes. When he covered Drag Queen story hour, he told us it was demonic, but played down the fact that they were not recruiting children for satanism, but small boys for sex. So he was signaling “I am on your side – see, I am Christian and I oppose Drag Queen story hour”, but was not in fact on our side. Any report on Drag Queen Story Hour that does not talk about sex and sexuality is an enemy report, no matter how extravagantly is signals against Drag Queen Story Hour.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Alex Jones is an entertainer, who traffics in wild-assed speculation and makes hundreds of insane predictions every day, approximately 1-2% of which turn out to be sort of accurate if you look at them from just the right angle and ignore the crazier bits.

                  Nostradamus was in this racket long before Alex Jones was. It’s a lucrative racket. Say enough random crazy shit and eventually something will turn out to be right. Then convince your followers to ignore all the random crazy shit that turned out to be wrong. Hey, look, I must be psychic and/or an insider and/or have inside sources!

                  Nah. Just some guy spouting a bunch of random and crazy shit.

      • Blige_Pump says:

        “Btw, atheists and progressive wolves in sheepskin such as Eric S. Raymond will not be allowed into our in-group. We will leave the traitors out in the cold (outside the gates of our enclaves in the South) with the progressives they implicitly supported.”

        Now wait a minute, I thought it was called the “Cathedral” not the “Atheistedral”?

        If anyone is to blame for this I think it would be Christians, for their “the meek shall inherit the earth” philosophy. Not hard to see how that principle has lead to the expansion of the orcs goblins and trolls

        • Chelby says:

          Thanks for confirming my point that we are divided culturally now.

          Eric S. Raymond wrote a long blog The Great Inversion recently which can be summarized as Marxism in the West shifted from stealing production to stealing via entitlements. That’s obvious. Just another form of the lie told to stupid people en masse, in order to concentrate wealth among the elite and enslave us via the power of the masses against us (either via democrazy or color revolution).

          I agree that many if not most Christians are lost and do not understand Christianity.

          My point is that where we’re headed in the West is scorched earth devastation over the next several decades. At the end, we will have nothing but our spiritual understanding.

          I would like to fight but how can we fight when most guys (including most here) have their head filled with incorrect conceptualizations. Support for standing armies and wanting to kill “terrorists” they have fallen right into the Zionist pysops trap. It’s all bullshit and fabricated false-flag lies. Yet we stupid goyim fall for it over and over again.

        • ten says:

          “The meek” should be “those wary to draw weapons”, ie predators and hotheads go to hell.

          It is true and wise. Those wary to draw their weapons will cooperate better than predators and hotheads, and will defeat predators and hotheads. They will indeed inherit the earth.

          The cathedral spirals christian virtues and wisdoms, expands or shrinks their categories and domains, until they become self destructive through explosion (everyone is your neighbour) or short circuit (don’t defend yourself).

        • TBeholder says:

          See “How Dawkins got PWNed”.

      • jim says:

        Civil war and revolution never happens from the ground up. It is always a dispute within the elite that gets out of hand.

        • Chelby says:

          And you can’t see how Trump is being set up for this.

          Our enlisted military will not likely turn on us in the homeland. They will though be ordered into stupid foreign wars by the Zionist puppet masters. Trump falling right into the trap.

          America is a melting pot. We do not agree. Our differences will be amplified by the economic devastation.

          • Samuel Skinner says:

            “They will though be ordered into stupid foreign wars by the Zionist puppet masters.”

            It is alot simpler just to redeploy them to foreign countries we already have bases in. The foreign wars we fight aren’t casualty intensive enough to destroy the military.

            “America is a melting pot.”

            Not really.

            • Leon says:

              That is a great website. The US appears to be screwed considering nearly a quarter of the country identifies as Muslim.


              I wonder how many of those are converts or recent immigrants?

              • jim says:

                That is not what your link shows.

                Looks like about two percent Muslim.

                Five percent Muslim is an intolerable crime problem.

                Ten percent Muslim is an intolerable crime problem that sometimes becomes low level civil war.

                Twenty percent Muslim is low level civil war.

                Thirty percent Muslim is low level civil war that from time to time boils over into high level civil war.

                • Not Tom says:

                  There are two graphs; the first one is for Canada, the second is for the U.S. The U.S. graph shows 21% Muslim.

                  It’s clearly wrong, but that’s what the page says. I think they added a zero or something. Their cited source is “”, but that actual site shows 0.5% Muslim in its “most recent” (20 years old!) data.

                  Conclusion: Don’t rely on Weebly for your research projects.

                • Leon says:

                  That is my bad. Should have checked the data out first before just reposting it. A quick bing search shows other sites and research painting the Muslim population at around 2% for the US. Could the rest of the data be as bad for Weebly, including the graph posted by Skinner?

                • Not Tom says:

                  Could the rest of the data be as bad for Weebly, including the graph posted by Skinner?

                  I’m sure it was an honest mistake, but to overlook such a glaring and obvious error when publishing that page does not bode well for their overall accuracy. I’m not sure exactly what that site is about, seems like it might be a content farm assembling snippets from drones at Mechanical Turk wages.

                • Samuel Skinner says:

                  I just used image search ‘US map ethnicities’; others are largely the same aside from colors used.

                  That said if you are interested in demographics I’d recommend the racial dot map.

            • Chelby says:

              Troops loyal to the Constitution trapped in wars overseas by order of the future Democrat controlled Federal government can’t defend the homeland if foreign mercenaries are brought in to fight a Civil War, squelch conservative separatism. The body count of our troops overseas is not relevant. Understand everything about the corrupt Magnitsky Act. I wrote one of the most thorough compilations because I couldn’t find one on the Internet:


              Even a 100% European heritage would still be a melting pot. War has been the constant theme of Europe.

              I do not know where Jim gets this stable monarchy idea from. Certainly not from Anglo-Saxon Europe. As I had pointed out on a previous blog, the Western Roman Empire was significantly decentralized affair with very low taxation which is why is survived 1000 years. Highly centralized affairs are not stable.

              Jim apparently has some romantic fantasy about restoration to an unstable paradigm. Besides Western civilization has to crash and burn into fragments to create the power vacuum for the next great centralization paradigm. And I agree with Jim, it could be the left singularity outcome we don’t want.

              Anyway Armstrong’s model has the USA declining until 2095. Probably be a third world backwater by then.

              • Chelby says:

                Another way of looking at the problem of restoration is that the elite earn more selling us out than building us up. And war is the one of the great industries of the USA, so we will have perpetual war by any means, until we are just worthless, expendable carcass.

                Fight for what? Jump off the Titanic.

                • jim says:

                  > the elite earn more selling us out than building us up.

                  Anarcho tyranny. When your elite lacks social cohesion, you need a single stationary bandit – a God King, like Stalin or Mao, or, preferably, a Divine Right Monarch under God, like Charles the Second.

                  When your elite loses social cohesion (diversity plus proximity equals war) your elite become mobile bandits, and you have to transition to a single stationary bandit.

                  And when your elite lose social cohesion, and thus disintegrate into mobile banditry, sooner or later one bandit makes himself supreme, and you get a stationary bandit. Trump, if we are brave and lucky. If he does not arrest them, they will arrest him.

                • Chelby says:


                • jim says:

                  Deleted for plugging Armstrong Economics. Armstrong is a spammer.

                  There is nothing wrong with his politics, which is sound, nor anything wrong with his investment advice, which is sound. But there is something very wrong with the way he relentlessly promotes his investment advice.

              • The Cominator says:

                You absolutely cannot project that far out into the future.

                Social democracy is somehow going to be replaced by the rule of one man and the quality of the man as a ruler and how bloody his ascension is absolutely makes a difference, the reason the Eastern Roman Empire survived and the West didn’t was not that they had a stronger economy or that they were in any better strategic straights in the mid 5th century. At the time neither was really true (the Eastern economy improved greatly LATER because of what I’ll describe).

                The East survived because they had an extraordinarily brilliant Emperor (little noticed by history) in Marcian who made them great again who ended paying tribute, ended the command economy, dispersed the barbarians Theodosius the Great (cuck) allowed to run wild, and largely brought about social harmony in regards to religious controversies.

                The West was not so blessed.

              • Not Tom says:

                Troops loyal to the Constitution

                I stopped reading right there. Anyone who could utter such an absurdity with a straight face is not operating in the real world.

    • jim says:

      You are an idiot, and what you envisage can never happen.

    • Not Tom says:

      It is not “economic realities”, but political, social and ideological realities that are leading up to either societal collapse or civil war.

      And neither of those outcomes are going to look the way you imagine them. Collapses happen over hundreds of years and manifest as a gradual decline in living conditions; civil war would probably end with a string of secessions and physical partitioning; neither of these look like The Walking Dead.

      Maybe there’d be nukes involved, but I actually doubt that, not because I think the Cathedral would be unwilling to use them, but because the nukes we have probably don’t work anymore and no one in the Cathedral knows how to make more.

      • Atavistic Morality says:

        >because the nukes we have probably don’t work anymore and no one in the Cathedral knows how to make more.

        Actually that sounds very likely, considering they are more interested on proving that women and niggers can be engineers rather than effectivity.

        • Starman says:

          It will be quite interesting if the Cathedral’s nukes don’t work, and China and Russia finds out that the Cathedral’s nukes don’t work.

          • jack boot says:

            america is too evil for me. a long tradition recently corrupted of civil liberties, local limited and representative government, broad prosperity and guns and alcohol isn’t a place i call home.

            hey you know what would be great? rule by russia! or even better? china! governments renowned for their long proud traditions of freedoms and virtues and corruption free hajnal bred societies


            you tread awfully close to sedition, let me tell you.

            the american republic was a fine place. the finest in the world, finer than britain and germany the finest of them all. i want the republic back

            of by and for the people

            the nobility of self rule

            • jim says:

              You are a Marxist and you hate the Republic.

              You tell us you are on the side of farmers, and revealed you hated farmers, and you told us you were on the side of engineers, and revealed that you hated engineers.

              And now you are telling us you are on the side of the Republic.

              You don’t want self rule. You want rule by an imported brown majority, because you figure it will shortly be followed by rule of the party. The brown masses are going to vote for socialism, and the Venezuela sequence will play out if voting continues to matter. Which it will not.

            • Not Tom says:

              the american republic was a fine place. the finest in the world

              Which you know because you were there? How old are you, 120?

              the nobility of self rule

              An idea that the founders themselves found incoherent and stupid, which is why they did everything they could at the time to conserve the original ruling class. Sadly, being Whigs, they were not very good at conserving and only last 2-3 generations.

              As for the rest of it, Jim is obviously correct here. Literally days before you were babbling incoherently with this stale Republican rhetoric, you were telling us how you seethe with hate over all of these things. You can’t seem to make up your mind, which suggests that you’ll simply say anything that you think will give you momentary advantage, which implies you’re a communist who wants to kill all of us and take our stuff.

      • Chelby says:

        Declines over hundreds of years is the Dark Age scenario. The public never fights back because it’s so gradual. Not all left singularities end in Dark Ages.

        A precipitous economic decline is a Schelling point that will precipitate war. Such an economic decline is likely coming to the West this decade.

        I did not predict the Madmax outcome (at least not within the next 2 decades), so I don’t know what you are responding to and incorrectly attributing to me?

        We won’t be shooting nukes at ourselves. It will be some other foreign power (perhaps via a proxy) shooting them at us. Nukes are mostly psychological warfare, because their impact is highly localized. A prepared, vast rural population can’t be harmed with nukes.

        The Cathedral has been building the narrative against Russia. See my comment about the Magintsky Act.

        • jim says:

          > Such an economic decline is likely coming to the West this decade.

          Nuts. The economy is downstream of power.

          True economic decline is a dark age phenomenon, and always set in gradually. There is a lot of ruin in a nation.

          “Abrupt Economic decline”, for example the great depression, is always secondary to political crisis, as with Venezuela and the Holodomor. If Benie Sanders gets elected we will have abrupt economic decline once he runs out of other people’s money, but as in Venezuela, the economic crisis will be the least of our troubles.

          If Trump and his dynasty continues in power, we will continue to see the prosperity and rapid economic growth that we have been seeing. If the elderly democrats return (Biden), we will get a return of Obama centralization, social decay, and stagnation. If the new democrats get power, Venezuelan style economic collapse. But the economic collapse of Venezuela was caused by politics. Politics was not caused by economics.

          • alf says:

            for example the great depression

            Assuming you’re talking about the 1930’s great depression – what WAS the cause for that, if not capitalist over-investment?

            • The Cominator says:

              Herbert Hoover unlike Coolidge and Harding was a progressive cuckservative. So unlike them he regulated… This hurt the economy, then he responded to the contraction by raising taxes and the fed also contracted the money supply. Some banks failed and as there was no FDIC the account holders also got wiped out. Cash kept getting more valuable so those who had it were motivated to hoard it..

              Then the New Deal mostly made things worse but i mostly agree with the FDIC.

            • Karl says:

              “capitalist over-investment” is peculiar wording. What would non-capatalist investment be in the legal frame of the 1920s in the USA?

              Why should over-investment have such disastrous consequences? Under-investment surely doesn’t.

              In my opinion the great depression was the result of a bursting credit bubble. Credit bubbles are necessarily tied to (monetary) policts. So I agree with Jim. Politics caused the great depression.

              • alf says:

                The story in my high school history books was that capitalists produced too much and then fired everyone and that’s what caused the crisis. Which in hindsight sounds ridiculous but that’s what it said.

              • jim says:

                Bursting the credit bubble caused a depression.

                Government intervention turned it into The Great Depression.

                Credit bubbles had burst before, but the effects had been transient.

            • jim says:

              A bunch of banks went belly up for the usual reasons, resulting, as usual, in monetary contraction, as had happened before. The government responded to monetary contraction with price controls and regulation, to prevent the economy from correcting, the way it had corrected before.

              The government tried to prevent deflation by directly intervening in prices and wages, rather than by printing money.

              A financial crisis was used as an excuse to move to a command economy, with the usual results. After World War II, the command economy was dismantled.

              What made the period from 1944 to 1963 so great was low levels of both socialism and feminism.

              1930 was a financial crisis. 1933 to start of the world war a crisis of socialism. The socialist economy continued to suck mightily during the war, but everyone blamed it on the war. In England and Australia, however, they continued socialism to 1949, and it went right on sucking.

              The bottom line of history is that allowing monetary contractions with no government action is painful, but the pain is short lived, and the net effect is zero inflation. Trying to prevent the pain by regulation is catastrophic. (A monetary contraction being the absolute worst time to implement socialism) Trying to prevent the pain by printing money works, but then you get chronic low level inflation.

              If you have a stable volume of money, for example gold, then from time to time you get inflation and from time to time deflation, which cancel out for zero long term inflation. The price of bread in terms of gold is approximately what it was in Roman times. If you try to eliminate the periods of deflation, then you get what we have got – but what we have got is a whole lot less nasty than the great depression.

              • The Cominator says:

                “What made the period from 1944 to 1963 so great was low levels of both socialism and feminism.”

                I think you mean 1946 rationing and price controls went on for a bit after the war.

                Oh and to anyone who mentions the 90% tax bracket yes it existed but there were loopholes in that you could sail a yacht through, Elvis Presley was probably among the only people who ever paid a dime at the 90% tax bracket (because he was terrified of the IRS and told his accountants not to use any loopholes).

                • jim says:

                  My recollection is that rationing and price control ended quite abruptly in the US when the war ended, together with most of the New Deal, but lingered on till 1949 in Australia and England, with the result that famine loomed in England and the lifts in the Treasury building stopped working.

                  Australians were sending food parcels to friends and relatives in England. As a result, the 1949 socialist government in England, finding they had to walk up the stairs and the lights were going out, decided to drop socialism. In Australia, the socialists lost power, and stayed out of power for a very long time.

                  Also in America, there were mass layoffs of all those women working in men’s jobs that the planners had commanded them to hire, the excuse being that men returning from the war needed jobs, but the employers were suspiciously public spirited in their determination to employ men in men’s jobs.

                • BC says:

                  I think you mean 1946 rationing and price controls went on for a bit after the war.

                  Both had largely collapsed by 1944. The public simply wasn’t obeying them and there were so many violators that the enforcement boards couldn’t even try to enforce them.

                • The Cominator says:

                  It appears they did for most things but sugar rationing went on until 1947, im pretty sure meat had price ceilings until 1946 or so but can’t find this online.

              • Karl says:

                Quite so. Although Germany’s history suggests that preventing pain by printing money only works for a limited time and that the chronic low level inflation tends to get higher and higher until it is no longer low level at all.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Weimar’s hyperinflation was due to impossible payments to the allies, Keynesian money printing doesn’t work all that well (it works a little if you have good Trumpist economic policies but not at all with socialist policies) but you can’t compare Weimar’s hyperinflation to it.

                • jim says:

                  Not exactly. The reparations were never actually paid, at least not enough of them to be a significant contributor to hyperinflation. Hitler’s account of hyperinflation is correct. Paying people to not work and not fight. Big low interest loans to the well connected.

                  The reparations would have caused the problem if they had ever actually been paid, and arguably cheerfully bankrupting itself was a way for the Wiemar Republic to not make the reparations, but Hitler favored a solution of remaining solvent and just not paying, rather than cheerfully printing money till it is worthless.

                  His favored solution was to just refuse to pay, and tell them to come and get it.

                  When the Weimar Republic was pissing away money, Hitler argued for what later economists called the real bills theory – that it was OK for the government to print money, but only if it acquired assets in exchange for the money it printed, though the major asset he had in mind was victory.

              • Not Tom says:

                Insane and erratic trade policy also helped things along. Yo-yoing from no tariffs to ridiculous tariffs, targeting the wrong industries, etc. But that just made a bad situation worse.

                Moldbug explained how the boom-bust cycle is actually a banking cycle. Maturity transformation and the resulting credit expansion were a huge part of the problem then, and continue to be a huge part of the problem now. Plus it was just after they had pillaged Europe in the wake of WWI, and WWII didn’t come as quickly as they wanted; FDR wanted to employ the Hitler strategy of loot-‘n-spend, but it didn’t fail as catastrophically as Hitler’s attempt because the USA was isolated geographically and most of Europe was in economic disarray (so not much competition).

                Plus, it was the first depression in which female suffrage was on the scene, and there were incessant demands for government intervention, aka “stimulus”. America had just come out of a depression about a decade earlier, IIRC, and it was no big deal because they just allowed the problem to correct itself.

                There were a lot of reasons why the depression happened, and more reasons why it was much worse than it should have been. Capitalist over-investment isn’t one of them; the concept does not even sound coherent to me.

  17. Shinmen Takezo says:

    I like the unvarnished truth in this post.
    Well done.

    I have suspected that Judge Roberts (just another degenerate in a black robe) is part of the deep state cabal–especially after his vote on the Obummer-Care thing a few years back. There was speculation that he was coerced and blackmailed over some dodgy foreign adoption scam he was part of.

    We have sunk so low in this country that we rely upon these degenerates in black robes (of all political flavors) to decide how we should live and what our rights are.

  18. revjen45 says:

    IIRC, Matt Bracken (or maybe somebody else) pointed to certain events as being signposts on the Highway to Hell. One of those was various factions within .gov and the Deep State arresting each other as enemies of the Regime.
    As I recall an iconic photo of rats/dogs/adorable orphinks eating corpses in the gutter or something like that was another.
    Buckle up and please remain seated while reality is in motion.

  19. […] Speaking of reaction, Jim reckons there will be civil war by 2026. […]

  20. Chimp Sackless says:

    2026? are you kidding? this country won’t last more than a year – “last” in the sense of any civil decorum/peace in the urban/surrounding areas — plan on gettin’ yer boogaloo on – low-level to begin with – “wide-the-f-ck-open” shortly thereafter

    • Ex says:

      My experience of history is that events consistently happen slower and weaker than predicted in the short term, faster and stronger than predicted in the long term.

      So, yes, 2026.

      Virginia, to take the current flashpoint, is likely to be a repeat of Charlottesville and not a boogaloo.
      The gun owners will probably be peacefully, politely, tyrannically corralled, antifa and false-flaggers will be set on them until someone’s shot dead, and the death will be THE media story for a month or two, “look at these savage murderous rednecks”.
      Most of the people talking about boogaloo will nod sagely and sadly and say “we didn’t mean it like THAT” and promise themselves they will certainly boogaloo at a later time if it becomes necessary, just not for this.

      • Mysteerious Rooshian Vooman says:

        Not bad. Clear insight into the psyches of internet warriors, too. But the correct date is 2032. After all, there’s the solar minimum and the banking crisis now beginning to boil over in Europe. Then the worldwide currency crisis, which will take several years to reach us, during which time the dollar will go sky high, and the stock market to 40,000. Bugaloo will not come until AFTER all of that. Bugaloo will not happen until people are FORCED into it. Jefferson told us that in the Declaration, and he was right. The Senate “trial,” if there is one, will not amount to much o’ nuttin. A Big Yawn. People will want to sit before their TV sets and watch some Negroes play with a ball. While people have Grub Hub and TV, there ain’t gonna be no bugaloo. But you already know that.

        • jim says:


          The Solar Minimum has already arrived, and its effect on climate, if there is any, is, like anthropogenic carbon dioxide, imperceptibly small.

          People have been predicting financial doomsday since the Bank of England was formed. Fiat money is a bubble that never comes down, and is remarkably resilient to anything except the elite running crazy with the printing press. Trump has stabilized the debt to GDP ratio. It is dangerously high, but only dangerous in that it will cause problems if some unrelated crisis happens. It will not in itself cause crisis unless the Democrats get power and it starts soaring even further than it soared under Obama. And if the US dollar crisis comes, everyone who knows what he is doing will unload in plenty of time, as every white male real estate speculator unloaded in plenty of time for the Great Minority Mortgage Meltdown. There were plenty of red flags before the Great Minority Mortgage Meltdown, and there will be plenty of red flags before a US dollar crisis.

          There will be no dollar crisis while Trump and his descendants are running things

          There have been civil wars before, and the twentieth century was a long string of big mass murders, some of them, like the genocide of the Tutsi, backed by Harvard, the State Department, and the Cathedral.

          All the signs of civil war that preceded 1860 are now flashing red again, and a civil war post twentieth century is likely to be accompanied by twentieth century style genocide, because as the left gets ever lefter, it gets ever more genocidal. There have been enormous mass murders over most of the world during the twentieth century and the root cause of those mass murders is coming to head today in Washington and Harvard.

          At the start of the bloody twentieth century, Russians thought they were immune, because rational, civilized, affluent, and economically developed. Like Venezuela, they found that politics can undevelope you mighty fast.

          • Yul Bornhold says:

            If the Cathedral runs most of the world, doesn’t that imply worldwide carnage as a necessary consequence of any ‘American’ civil war?

          • Chelby says:

            The problem is unload into what?

            I have researched this extensively. That Bitcoin is a trap created by the Deep State (deeper than the names we know) will become more evident as several events I have predicted some to fruition.

            Gold is useless. Can’t transport it.

            The elite are planning to eviscerate the Southern cities and push us into the rural areas so they can decimate us economically. It will be an economic war of attrition. Also we will bicker among ourselves, as you and I do Jim.

            They have a plan for how to deal with Trump and it is part of their plan to incite the Civil War and illicit world support against us and for Democrats. We will be isolated in the world.

            • jim says:

              I know who created bitcoin and a greater enemy of the deep state there never was.

              Plus, when the red flags go up, you can also unload into the redback and the ruble.

              • Mister Grumpus says:

                “I know who created bitcoin and a greater enemy of the deep state there never was.”

                OK that’s the biggest name-drop on this blog like ever. And also rad if true.

                Is there any way to back it up without getting yourself or someone else into trouble?

                • Javier says:

                  Yeah, holy shit, did I just read that right?

                  Is this “I know the guy personally” or “I think I know who it is through extensive research and deduction.”


                • Not Tom says:

                  Maybe Jim is Satoshi. Ever think of that?

                  *spooky music*

            • Not Tom says:

              I have researched this extensively. That Bitcoin is a trap created by the Deep State

              I’ve seen your “research” on this and I’m not impressed. You don’t have evidence for this claim, only a series of increasingly improbable if-thens.

              Gold is much easier to transport than it was 100 years ago, and the world could even move to a different fiat reserve if necessary; China, Russia and Iran have been loosely coordinating to do exactly that (so it should be no surprise why the Cathedral wants them all destroyed).

              • James says:

                Russia, China, and Iran have zero chance of making a world reserve currency. Their financial systems are too inflexible to rapidly grow and shrink the money supply, and they’re too dependent on trade with economies they can’t control. Not to mention they are utterly dependent on currency manipulation and lack the collective will to confront inflation and deflation.

                Really, there is no substitute for the US dollar, but if there were, it would be the Pound or the Yen, where there is adequate policy stability, low inflation, and open financial systems. Nobody will want the Ruble-Yuan-whatever because it will exclusively be a tool for actively trading oil for cheap manufactured goods. You won’t want to hold it because the bonds are manipulated, the exchange rates are manipulated, and all of the holders are wannabe auarks.

                • jim says:

                  All you need for a reserve currency is that you can easily make transactions in it, and lots of other people are already making transactions in it.

                  Yuan are useful, because everyone buys stuff from China. So everyone is happy to be paid in renminbi. So increasing numbers of non Chinese have a renminbi account. When critical mass of people have a renminbi account, it will be a reserve currency.

                • Dave says:

                  There is no *paper* substitute for the dollar because the collapse of the US dollar destroys the entire concept of government-issued money. This is actually a great thing for humanity because it’s the end of “monetary policy”; governments will have to balance income and expenses just like everyone else, while also providing law and order.

                  As governments will no longer be able to pacify restive, unproductive minorities with truckloads of freshly-printed money, they’ll have to pacify them with bullets instead. If your government fails to do this, you can get a bunch of guys together and do it yourself, then retroactively declare yourself the government.

                • jim says:


                  If China allowed foreigners to operate renminbi check accounts, I and a whole lot of other people would open one tomorrow, and the renminbi would be an international reserve currency in a year.

                  They already allow foreigners to operate savings accounts, so people are already free to move from the greenback to the redback. It is just that the redback is considerably less convenient, for lack of check accounts.

                  More and more people are using Alipay, and we are increasingly seeing businesses in the American hegemony, but on the edge of the Chinese hegemony, accept Alipay. If a business accepts Alipay, it is already using renminbi as an international reserve currency, despite the inconvenient absence of yuan check accounts.

                • Not Tom says:

                  A few links for you, and this is all easily obtainable from a Google search:

                  Now, you could say “bah, who cares what the Chinese and Russian media have to say about China and Russia!” And you’d be right. But the Americans, and Wall Street especially, are also worried about this.

                  You won’t hear about it in the normie media, but in the business media which is read by the elites – Forbes, Bloomberg, Business Insider, etc. – it’s been a common subject for a few years now. This is happening, and the people who are closest to the issue are the ones who are the most worried.

                  It doesn’t matter how fragile their economies are if the U.S. starts to become abusive with its currency, and from an outsider point of view, it’s hard to look at U.S. currency as anything other than abusive, considering the debt they take on in both capital and trade.

                • Chelby says:

                  Jim the Chinese currency will always be highly limited from a reserve perspective because nobody trusts them. Asia will rise and China’s currency will increase in status, but it will never reach the heights of the dollar. Instead legacy Bitcoin is likely to rise into the void left as the dollar hegemony declines along with our military and economic influence hegemony.

                  The West will splinter so that we Anglo-Saxons can do what we do best, which is kick ass in more lean and decentralized paradigm such as the manorialism and the Western Roman empire that made us great. It remains to be seen what level of scale will work best for us. I do think the civil war has never been finalized. The South is likely to break away from the yanks. We never fully trusted nor liked them anyway.

                • jim says:

                  Trouble is, no one trusts the US either. Hence bitcoin.

              • Chelby says:

                Clueless, the transportation has nothing to do with the mass of gold. Don’t you know that cops take your cash or gold under the pretense it was drug money. This is civil asset forfeiture. Has been going on all over the country.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Moving the goalposts again, I see. “Oh, when I said you can’t transport gold, I didn’t really mean you can’t transport it, I meant other people will take it somehow. And they can take anything else too so it doesn’t matter what you use. And Bitcoin is just a government trap.” You just redefine and rearrange everything until the pieces look like the picture you’re trying to paint.

                  Fucking retarded. And you make these retarded arguments, then pretend people don’t notice how retarded they are, and come back months later insisting that you won the exchange. And then say you’re quitting (promises, promises!) and keep rambling on for another week.

            • ten says:

              The lonely philosopher king who walks into someone elses living room once a month and drunkenly declares his mental supremacy only to return in stupor to the dark depths of nowhere until the next visit. Always a blast.

  21. Jrod says:

    At least use his correct title: Chief Justice Roberts

  22. Karl says:

    “The obvious risk is that the deep state, instead of sitting on its ass waiting for Barr and Durham to launch arrest warrants against the deep state,…”

    There is that, but the stakes are high and getting higher. Another obvious risk would be to make a create a Senate majority that convicts Trump regardless of facts. The Democrats are expected to vote against Trump anyway. Democrat leadership will try to ensure that Democrat senators vote as expected. The Democrats then need only a few Republican senators to vote with the Democrats – wheter by bribe or threat. In a situation like the present I expect both the bribes and the threats to be much higher than in political business as usual.

    • The Cominator says:

      They need 2/3rds not a majority. The three women (Romney being among them) is not enough.

  23. Omar is just a Trump card now. says:

    The timing could not be better for Trump. Victory over Iran, more economic victories over China and Pelosi (USMCA), Brexit and impending US-UK trade deal further crushing the EU, insane negotiation leverage against EU, refugee problem under control, wall getting built, RBG approaching death. Depressingly clear to all voters that Democratic presidential candidates for 2020 are a parade of losers. One dud Trump scandal after another has come up dry for the deep state to the point the public factors in “Trump scandal bogosity” whenever there’s a new one. They failed with Kavanaugh and Mueller and it is all downhill since then.

    The USMCA alone will quickly unleash at least a +1 percent of GDP growth.

    The problem is that the 80+ percent of Senate that is anti-Trump, owned by one of (deep state, K street, Wall St, Chamber of Commerce), or involved in foreign corruption just like Biden —- all want a greywash, some very desperately so. Nobody other than Rand Paul wants to allow Trump to call whatever witnesses he wants. McConnell already talking about requiring a majority vote for every witness.

    • jim says:

      With Judge Roberts looking for a whitewash, and Mitch McConnell looking for a greywash, the Senate trial is likely to be less entertaining than Trump would prefer.

      But once Judge Roberts is back in the Supremes and out of the Senate, Trump has the Durham report. Barr seems to be girding up for the possibility of war in the streets, which hints that the Durham report will set the feathers flying.

      The wall is well behind schedule, and draining the swamp has not started, but when Trump promised to bring the jobs back, he was planning to reverse the great centralization, and it is looking like the census will reveal that the blue megalopoli have no more seats in the house than they had ten years ago, indicating that Trump reversed seven years of Obama centralization in three years.

      This was prep for the 2020 election. The Dems were expecting Obama’s great centralization to give them twenty to thirty new seats in the house and the electoral college when the 2019 census was performed.

      The census result strongly hints that Trump has been carefully getting all his ducks in a row. Draining the swamp is going to look very like a self coup, so has to start with a bang. While the delay on the wall is troubling, the delay on nailing criminal wrongdoing by the Democrats, the ngos, and the Deep State is not an indicator.

      • Omar is just a Trump card now. says:

        The wall is Lawfare Galore. Protecting the FBI and maintaining legal and illegal immigration at high levels are absolute core objectives on which the entirety of prog, deepstate, Uniparty the MSM, and pre-Trump judiciary are in full and orchestrated agreement. As I mentioned in one of the recent threads, although Trump has put Kushner in charge of getting the wall done on time, it looks qualitatively harder than anything else Kushner has worked on (including Mideast peace and winning the 2016 election), and I don’t know how much power he has to speed up the inevitable litigation that will try to slow it down. Trump will probably have to assign the military to build the wall to get it actually done, as many people said from the beginning and as would not be a bad election strategy for 2020.

      • Omar is just a Trump card now. says:

        Similar to the re-centralization, the de-globalization under Trump allows him to reconcentrate resources in the USA from abroad, including military manpower for things such as the wall and border enforcement, but also pockets of funding that can be reallocated to get around domestic political obstruction. The economic deglobalization (e.g. tariffs and repatriation of US corporate assets) have created a similar flexibility where Trump can, for example, take tariff money and use it to pay farmers or manufacturers hit by China/EU trade retaliation. This is what using power intelligently looks like.

        • jim says:

          I think you meant decentralization, not recentralization.

          • Omar is just a Trump card now. says:

            Yes, the de-centralization that you have pointed out.

            Not Tom says Kushner is more or less getting the wall done. Trump recently reallocated a few billion dollars of the defense budget (that is, savings from squeezing NATO countries to pay more of their share) toward wall construction but I don’t know what effect, if any, Kushner has had other than to breathe down the neck of bureaucrats and make sure they understand the boss is watching. Have there been any articles on the state of things?

            If Kushner gets the promised wall mileage done by fourth quarter of 2020, that would be a Rubicon he can’t uncross in his relations with Prog. It would mean he, Ivanka and the kids have zero chance of survival if Trump is defeated. So whatever misgivings people have had about Kushner, his incentives must either be totally aligned with Trump if he is doing the wall, or he is there in order to tank it. The second seems less likely and it looks to me like he has been all-in for some time after seeing what is personally at stake for him with the ongoing attempted coup.

            • Not Tom says:

              To be clear, I am in no way suggesting that Kushner is doing anything heroic with the wall. Only that he is, more or less, doing what Trump told him to do, and does not appear to be intentionally sabotaging it or faking sudden incompetence.

              If it were otherwise, we’d be hearing about it non-stop from the media. Their general silence on the wall these days is an admission against interest.

              It’s possible that a lot of individuals could do the job, and perhaps do better than Kushner is doing, but the important thing is that he is actually doing the work, unlike his predecessors who were clearly not doing the work and in many cases actively impeding the work.

              • jim says:

                Failing to actively impede the work is pretty heroic.

                • Omar is just a Trump card now. says:

                  If the wall-building is neutralized, Kushner’s outcomes should Democrats come to power will be things like asset confiscation, some jail time, or POW style forced denunciation of Trump and forced labor on behalf of the new (old) overlords.

                  If significant wall is built by 2020 and Trump wins election, worse outcomes.

                  But if Kushner succeeds and gets 400 miles built in time to hand Trump not only the election but the house, Kushner and his family are dead meat.

              • jack boot says:


  24. Gunny says:

    Inquiring minds want yo know will King Kushner’s post war slogan be: MIGA
    Make Israel Great Again.

    Burn it ALL down.

    • jim says:

      A Jewish King would be a problem for reaction, as a Catholic King and a dissenter King were problems for Anglicanism.

      Fortunately, King Donald is going to be succeeded by Donald Junior.

      • The Cominator says:

        If you mean William of Orange I don’t think he was a problem. Also any commentary on Harvard’s legal proposal to turn DC into 100+ Democrat states would be appreciated.

        • jim says:

          No, I refer to the sons of William the Conqueror, William the Second and Henry the first.

          British common law was based on writs (written commands of the King) and, perhaps as a result of William the second getting into hot water, Henry the first regularized and made systematic and explicit the laws that his father had unsystematically and informally followed in his writs.

          These writs kept judges in line.

          • The Cominator says:

            So who was the “dissenter king”, William of Orange is generally the one who gets labeled as the dissenter king.

            • jim says:

              Yes, I meant William of Orange when I referred to the dissenter King. I got confused because I was thinking of the thread on law.

              • The Cominator says:

                Okay so now that we’re off of interesting and relevant topics why was William of Orange a problem (I agree James II was a huge problem and Charles II should have acceded to him being removed from the succession in favor of Monmouth).

                • jim says:

                  William of Orange let puritan descended entryists into the state Church. It was like commies in the state department

                • The Cominator says:

                  I thought the Anglican Church only really became a problem in the age of George IV/Victoria… and the leftists manifested themselves not generally as puritans but as the crypto papist “Oxford movement”.

                • jim says:

                  Entryism became a problem under William of Orange, and the entryist problem grew steadily in severity. It became a devastating problem in time of Queen Victoria. William Wilberforce’s “Saints” were leftists, and crypto Puritans, not crypto Papists. The movement to end sexual restraints on women (initially dressing itself as a movement to impose sexual restraints on men) was crypto puritan. A massive bastardy problem ensued in early Victorian times, resulting in the welfare state being substituted for marriage.

                  Similarly, revolutionary war was lost by Whig treason.

    • Samuel Skinner says:

      We are an agnatic cognatic realm; Ivanka Trump will only ascend if she has a male child and there are no direct male heirs.

    • Not Tom says:

      King Kushner

      You mean the guy who Trump told a few months ago to build the wall and who has been, for the most part, building the wall? That Kushner?

      I suppose we’re all just supposed to start foaming at the mouth because Trump has a Jewish son-in-law and kind of trusts him to get things done even if his politics are kind of dumb – like most of us do every day with various cuckservative or shitlib-leaning white dudes. But yo, never trust a joo, lol amirite? ISRAEL ISRAEL ISRAEL JOO JOO JOO

      • jim says:

        Building the wall is not only that Trump trusts family to do work where government top level government employees are apt to be disloyal – it also ensures that Kushner sinks or swims with the rest of the Trumps.

        If the Democrats ever return to power, he will be imprisoned, or possibly killed, for his part in the horrid war crime of building the wall. It seems he is running into a great deal of resistance.

        That he is running into trouble indicates that he is genuinely trying to build the wall.

        • Not Tom says:

          Trump delegating the task to Kushner may of course be more than just an act of trust, may be intended to have political consequences for Kushner. But the salient point for now is that Kushner is doing it; many sections have been built or are being built, other sections involve active lawfare.

          Which means that he is either (a) reasonably dependable, (b) more interested in getting things done than playing politics, or (c) smart enough to know which way the wind is blowing. Either way, the 3-year-old “President Kushner” narrative is looking pretty chuckleheaded at this point.

          • The Cominator says:

            Everything Trump delegates to Kushner does well, there are a lot of bad jews but the good jews make good servants. Stephen Miller and Kushner are who Trump can most rely upon.

            • Pooch says:

              You could say the bad Jews are also good servants for their (evil) masters. American Jews tend to back the strong horse. The left has been the strong horse for a long long time. Perhaps as Trump becomes the strong horse he will attract more young Jews to his side?

              • Not Tom says:

                He already has peeled off a number of them – not that they’re really an important voting bloc, it’s the high-profile defectors like Dershowitz who are significant here.

                “Strong horse” is likely true, but can be ambiguous. Jews tend to back the priests, or the official state religion. If the priests wage holy war against the warriors, Jews tend to back the priests even if the priests are weaker at that moment. That’s why having them in powerful state positions is generally a bad idea.

                It appears that Jews are good at being either merchants or priests, and as merchants they tend to have occasional ethical lapses, which is manageable through straightforward contract law, but as priests they tend to wage holy war against the sovereign, which is a lot harder to manage. It might still be useful to have just a few in priestly positions because, again, they’re good at it – but if so, then the numbers have to be kept low.

                Thus Jim’s oft-repeated points about open entry in the priesthood and why it should never be allowed. There can never be any expectation in society that this is a career path open to anyone and everyone; existing members will induct new members whenever and wherever they choose, and part of that is going to be paying close attention to the demographics.

                • Pooch says:

                  Fair enough. I’d imagine in the restored reactionary society Jim proposes, priests would need to be actual Christians. This essentially removes Jews from the priest equation anyway except the very few who convert (which should be allowed).

                • Not Tom says:

                  Depending on your definition of “Christian”, yes. Priests have to follow the official state religion, which is the Canon, which to me is sort of a combination of St. Paul’s Christianity and Old Testament patriarchy.

                  I’d still be leery of having a lot of ethnic Jews in the new priesthood, regardless of conversion. Religious conversion isn’t going to change Jewish legalism and holiness competition, that’s in the blood.

  25. DMV GRINGO says:

    “We in Flight 93. The plane is headed directly to the ground. Trump is in the cockpit fighting the hijackers….” Drumpf ain’t fighting shit, you deluded cuck.

    • Starman says:


      Do women have fantasies of being raped and beaten by a train of Turd World thugs?

      If so, can you explain why?

      If you try to obfuscate, I’ll go nuclear by asking a multiple choice question.

      • Yul Bornhold says:

        This is why the paid shill/glow-in-dark/FBi agent/etc. tempts one to roll the eyes.

        Rocket encounters an obviously antagonistic poster. So, he prepares a subtle ideological test to determine whether said poster is secretly antagonistic.

        • jim says:

          Subtle ideological test is necessary, since the black pillers could be upset that Trump has not already declared himself God Emperor, which is the reason that Coulter gets black pilled, or they could be pushing the black pill because they are leftists who think the arc of history is on their side, so their victory is inevitable, or they could be pushing the black pill because the FBI is paying them to push the black pill.

          • The Cominator says:

            Coulter is actually a shill who has a lot of people fooled, Styx said a long time ago that is what she was and I think he is right… Styx and Scott Adams tend to be right about things more often than anyone.

            She was ordered to support Trump back when they thought he couldn’t win to maintain credibility (after helping tip the nomination away from Gingrich and towards Romney in 2012) but was ordered to blackpill and sabotage soon after he won…

            • Karl says:

              Styx? Sounds like he is worth reading. Please provide a link.

              I tried a search engine, but couldn’t find anything relevant

              • The Cominator says:

                Hes a very weird youtuber (and kind of a political moderate actually if you are looking for hard right ideology he ain’t your guy) but his predictions overwhelmingly tend to be right.

                Also he has an almost autistic disregard for his appearance…


                I don’t know if hes ever specifically made a video on Coulter but he accused her of being a fake right winger and shill a long time ago and then later he said I told you so.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Here is a good one about Coulter and blackpilling.


                • jim says:

                  He follows the news by the minute, he makes lots of predictions, so he is good at predicting, having done a lot of it, and good at predicting what will happen in two weeks or a month.

                  But what happens in two weeks or a month never matters much. What happens in a few years is vastly more important, what the cumulative effect of years of events happening every few days is going to add up to is vastly more important. And that is hard to predict. How do you get less bad at that? By looking at the past centuries.

            • Not Tom says:

              Still not buying it. Styx is pretty good with political predictions, but he is not good at analysis and character judgment; those are very different skill sets.

              Ann Coulter was writing about some of the main issues vexing American politics right now, especially immigration, long before they became popular issues under Trump. She was often the only one beating that drum.

              OK, she gets hysterical, like all women. She’s obviously never going to talk about the WQ. Let’s take what we can get at this point – an actual mainstream pundit, one who every normie conservative knows, who doesn’t care about the PC line on immigration and race relations. I know that seems like nothing to a lot of people here because it’s a third-tier issue in the reactionary canon, but some of you are forgetting just how far behind the common man is right now.

              • The Cominator says:

                Actually she has said the 19th amendment was a mistake. But between helping tip the nomination in 2012 to Romney over Newt and blackpilling in a very dishonest way about Trump I don’t trust her.

                • Not Tom says:

                  I don’t trust my own family on most matters political or philosophical. Trust isn’t essential in this situation. Either she’s being useful or she isn’t. Most of the time, including some of the time when she black-pills, she is being useful.

                  Notice that when she black-pills it is generally along the lines of “Trump isn’t building the wall fast enough, here’s what I think he should do” followed by something that is perhaps legally or strategically unsound. That is very different from the shill black-pilling script that “Trump has failed, he’s a moron, he’ll lose in 2020, it’s all over, vote for Yang instead, and if you want anything to get fixed then you’ll have to ‘take action’ yourself, if you know what I mean”.

                  That’s not a minor difference, it’s a different category entirely.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I have found her blackpilling to be very dishonest, she said that Trump could merely order the military to build the wall on day one without going through a long budget and legal skullduggery…

                  No politically and realistically he could not. The military is building it now but it could not have been done in the super rushed way she wanted. Nor can Trump carry out the kind of deportations she wants… that is a coup complete problem. If she were honest about that I’d be inclined to trust her, but given that she has been so dishonest in her blackpilling I must conclude like most childless single women she is on the side of the enemy.

                  I agree that her blackpill script is different than the shareblue or wignat shill scripts. But its worse… her blackpill script is more effective at turning off mainstream Trump followers.

                • jim says:

                  Single childless women always turn crazy and evil. But she is not a shill, in the sense that she is not taking orders from the enemy.

                • Not Tom says:

                  I have found her blackpilling to be very dishonest, she said that Trump could merely order the military to build the wall on day one without going through a long budget and legal skullduggery…

                  Why is that dishonest, and not just naive and wrong and hysterical, as I said above? It’s the kind of obliviousness to reality that I expect from most women and many men, but doesn’t suggest malicious intent to me.

                  her blackpill script is more effective [than shareblue/wignat] at turning off mainstream Trump followers.

                  Really? I don’t know anyone who’s been turned off of Trump by Ann Coulter. Do you?

                • The Cominator says:

                  IRL no but almost everyone loves Trump in this part of Florida (and in Mass where I’m from originally the Trump fans were other than me and a very few other people reluctant to admit it publically), there is another forum where there is a guy who WAS a real Trump supporter (not a faker) who listens way way too much to Anne Coulter.

                  I’m not saying the numbers are huge but they exist.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Its dishonest because she is a good enough lawyer and has enough Washington DC insider knowledge to know what she is saying is not true. Its not naive its deliberately dishonest, while single childless women DO turn crazy and evil Anne has enough reason agency and expertise in politics to know what she is saying is not true. 100% its a deliberate lie.

                • Not Tom says:

                  while single childless women DO turn crazy and evil Anne has enough reason agency and expertise in politics to know what she is saying is not true

                  Attributing both agency and reason to a woman? Did I accidentally click the wrong link and end up at the National Review?

                • The Cominator says:

                  CONDITIONALLY on these topics…

                • alf says:

                  Attributing both agency and reason to a woman? Did I accidentally click the wrong link and end up at the National Review?


                  Yea I like Ann Coulter for the first twenty seconds in this bit, which was a really quick call. Otherwise, I don’t know why I should attach weight to the political opinion of a woman.

          • Not Tom says:

            I think the “Drumpf” kind of gives it away though. An FBI shill wouldn’t use that dumb meme because it immediately fails any entryism attempt; and a genuine blackpiller wouldn’t use that dumb meme because it’s fucking dumb. So obviously a garden-variety leftist.

  26. […] “Current News”, at Jim’s Blog. […]

  27. The Cominator says:

    FYI this tells me they aren’t ousting Trump, the Cathedral’s intended legal cover to its usurpation and final solution to us is as follows above this comes from the high unholy synod.

    Luckily I think the radical “woke” left will lack discipline… we need pissed off leftists to do something stupid after Trump got elected Kyle Jurek don’t fail us.

    • I like that proposal because just how obviously insane and openly elitist it is. I mean, it should make HLvM utterly obvious to every Plumber Joe – Washingtonite elites enacting a more majority-representative voting through a very extremely non-representative vote.

      • Mister Grumpus says:

        And for the new guys: “HLvM” stands for “High and Low vs. the Middle”.

    • Mister Grumpus says:

      Guys look at it.

      What could be less “disciplined” than Harvard University allowing its name to be attached to a proposal to split DC into 127 little states?

      It’s not April 1st and it’s not the Onion. WTF.

      Maybe someone over there is trolling from inside the house. It has to be that. Right?

      • Samuel Skinner says:

        I think the simpler explanation is they are aware no one can stop them and so are escalating to ever more craziness to show piety.

        • jim says:

          Piety from Harvard always get implemented eventually.

          I am pretty sure that the plan was to launch a whole bunch of arrests of everyone Trump aligned during the impeachment trial, whereupon any Republicans remaining in the Senate would cuck out, while Judge Roberts blessed the arrests on television as legal and constitutional.

          I think this plan has been cancelled due to lack of praetorian support, but had it been carried out, the Harvard constitutional amendments would have followed in order to ensure that the 2020 election had the correct result.

          • The Cominator says:

            They need to be able to pass the bills 1st so they have to wait out Trump but dont need an amendment but this is the left’s final plan to take over… Followed by mass murder.

          • Pooch says:

            If Harvard is the center of Leftism, why is Dershowitz allowed to be on the Trump defense team?

            • jim says:

              Dershowitz is a notorious maverick. Harvard doe not control him, and he has opposed impeachment from the beginning, on the grounds that none of this is a crime – it is a policy disagreement, which the framers disallowed as grounds for impeachment, and which past precedents have repeatedly rejected.

              Hiring Dershowitz showcases disunity among Trump’s enemies. Trump regularly mentions that some Democrats did not vote for impeachment, and one of them left the party over it. He welcomed the Democrat who came over, and he is welcoming Dershowitz

    • Bilge_Pump says:

      From the gay ass harvardlaw article

      “For most of the twenty-first century, the world’s oldest surviving democracy has been led by a chief executive who received fewer votes than his opponent in an election for the position.The first of these executives started a war based on false pretenses that killed hundreds of thousands of civilians. The second — a serial abuser of women. who hired as his campaign manager a lobbyist for violent dictatorships — authorized an immigration policy that forcibly separated migrant children from their families and indefinitely detained them in facilities described as “concentration camps.”

      I could have heard this on the daily show holy shit. Their solution is to allow one of the greatest strongholds of niggerdom in the country to decide for everyone else how things go? Doesn’t surprise me, but it doesn’t convince me that Harvard needs to be allowed to continue to exist, either.

  28. Yul Bornhold says:

    “since 2012 that the deep state has been acting illegally”

    This is the sort of sentence Moldbug would consider insane.

    • jim says:

      Divided power. The Deep State has certainly been acting illegally with regard to laws passed by the merely elected congress, and enforced by the merely elected president.

      Is there no such thing as legality, merely power?

      But no man rules alone, and in order to cooperate successfully, a group needs shared ideas on what constitutes cooperation, and what constitutes the sort of defection that makes a violent and coercive response right.

      And if a violent and coercive response is right, our word for acts that justify a violent and coercive response are “crimes”.

      The acts of the deep state were arguably legal under President Bush’s 9/11 order. But Bush rescinded that order in 2007, and its subsequent continuation of those acts was illegal after 2007. And to stop them, it is going to be necessary to arrest them. Which arrests, if they happen, are going to be entirely constitutional, will conducted in accordance with a presidential order, originally issued by Bush and likely re-issued by Trump, and in accordance with acts of congress.

      Violence and coercion within the elite is certainly happening. So someone must be acting illegally.

      • The Cominator says:

        “Is there no such thing as legality, merely power?”

        Yes. So called rule of law is the Emperor’s clothes of feminist social democracy. It has ALWAYS been a lie.

        • jim says:

          No man rules alone.

          Even if law is simply the will of the King, as it often is, he will find it inadvisable to change his mind too often, or to for his mind to be unclear to the people he depends on to carry out his will.

          English common law was originally the writs (written orders) of the King. But the King found it advisable for those writs to accord with custom, tradition, ancient Romano British law, and social consensus, and inadvisable (and far too much work) to issue a new writ to deal with each separate case.

          William the Conqueror’s writs were for the most part one writ per case, so not a whole lot of explicit legality, but there was quite a fair bit of implicit legality, in that his writs were issued with a fair bit of concern for what was proper to be done. Henry the First’s writs start to look a lot like English common law, with a lot of explicit legality.

          William the Conqueror was succeeded by William the Second, who died violently, in large part because of a great deal of illegality. Henry the First followed him, in large part by promising to restore the legality of William the Conqueror, hence the explicit legality in his writs, explicit law that survived for seven centuries replacing the implicit law of the writs of William the Conqueror.

          A writ was simply a written command of the King, in principle no different from “Wash my socks”, but there is such a thing as writ issued to prevent crime and enforce legality, and William the Second died of the difference.

          • The Cominator says:

            Law has its use as making the king’s will known and understood but this fiction of rule of law is something that we should always denounce as the bullshit of the lawyer priests.

            Rule of law or as I often call it on fagbook when I’m in political arguments muh law is an evil meme from our enemies we should constantly mock and chip away with. It is an evil meme whos purpose is to subordinate warriors to priests.

            • jim says:

              The rule of law is in practice the rule of priests, and is apt to be dangerously unpredictable, vague, obscure, and capricious. Men rule, laws cannot rule.

              But there are such things as illegal and legal, and William the Second died of the difference. You have to have social consensus, at least among the gentlemen, as to when violence and coercion is appropriate, and if an act merits violence and coercion, it is unlawful.

              • Mike says:

                First read this forever ago, but I always find myself coming back to it because it attempts to prove whether “rule of law” as a concept is irrefutably a part of the Western tradition or merely a hostile memplex:

                • jim says:

                  As Saint Augustine redefined biblical literalism to be not literalism, Aristotle is redefining rule of law to be not rule of law.

                • aswaes says:

                  ‘Rule of law’ means manipulation of procedural outcomes in prog-speak. That is, rule by partisan, unaccountable, faceless bureaucrats.

                  Hard to say if this usage is in accord with original English etymology, or if it’s yet another prog semantic corruption.

                  Aristotle, in that quote, is clearly talking about the game theoretic meaning — which seems to completely go over RF’s power fantasizing head.

                  Rule of law, in this sense, is implementation of a social protocol for administration and discovery of commensurate punitive violence in a way approximating algorithmic consistency, so that a Pareto optimum of wide scale cooperate/cooperate is also Nash equilibrium (so that the protocol incentivizes its own defense).

                  The deep heuristic of the Anglo Natural Common Law tradition is algorithmic law: consistently applicable rules for adjudication of disputes where such judgements must survive the veto of the militia that will implement them (with the knowledge that the judgements they uphold are jurisprudential upvotes that will apply to them personally).

                  Rulers and adjudicators in manifest contempt of rule of law, are apt to find out their orders are not transcendent commandments that work without a ground of possibility: incentives in view of latent anarchy.

                  This tradition must discover, and constantly refine methods of ascertaining truth, in a way that will rely as little as possible on corruptible single point of failure authorities. So it discovers the scientific method.

                  First it constructs a society-wide measure for reckoning: property (Domesday Book). You can query this society-wide inventory of titles in everything, to detect imposition of costs. Like all scientific measures, property is constantly refined through new instrumentation. Every now and then there are unprecedented disputes that require discovery of new rules. But like discovery of scientific laws, such rules must survive the market for cooperation-apt rules.

                  It’s not infallible, but it’s the best there is.

                • Recall Filmer saying “saying the law rules is like saying the measurement tools of the carpenter builds the house” and THAT was the traditional view because Filmer was a bit of the unimaginative, “this is how we are doing it so this is the only possible way to do it” type.

                  So rule of law or its opposite, arbitrary rule, has two different meanings.

                  1) If the carpenter is not using his measurement tools but just making random decisions based on how he feels like. That is bad.

                  2) OTOH the carpenter is using his measurement tools, not the tools are using him. He decides what tools are good enough, how to read them and if a plank is measured to be a little long then if that is within the tolerance or not. When you see someone trying to push him to be allowed to be used by his tools, what he is actually doing is usurping the decision himself that the carpenter is ought to make.

                  Of course who gets to decide if the carpenter is doing 1) or 2) ? I think that is a relatively easy decision to make.

                  And you see ultimately when you are discussing any political system, you are discussing legal action. Extralegal action from revolution to assassination is always on the table, too.

                  So the point is, the carpenter decides how to use the measuring tools, the king decides how to use the laws, period. Legally. In this sense, his decisions are arbitrary.

                  But if the carpenter or king is a reckless idiot who does not use them at all, and in that specific sense is acting “arbitrary”, then that is obvious to everybody and that is when revolution, assassination and similar extralegal action comes into the picture.

                  In the extralegal sense, every system is aristocratic-democratic because when the elites and the people are angry enough, the elites will cast law aside and lead the people into a revolution. Or use poison. It is within legality and only within legality that the monarch decides what is legal. There is always that Plan B.

        • Mysteerious Rooshian Vooman says:

          THANK YOU. I keep trying to get that through people’s thick skulls: LAWS DO NOT ENFORCE THEMSELVES. Therefore the “rule of law” does not exist and never HAS existed. Men rule over other men. Period.

      • Not Tom says:

        And if a violent and coercive response is right, our word for acts that justify a violent and coercive response are “crimes”.

        Yes. The word “criminal” has a different flavor from the word “illegal” and that’s the one I prefer here. Illegal suggests that they broke some law that apparently nobody in power cares about or is able to enforce, so it might as well not be law at all.

        But criminal implies deliberate and conscious abuse of others for personal gain. It implies that maybe they can get away with it today, but if the whip ever changes hands then there will be hell to pay. Criminal behavior doesn’t require explicit laws to be recognized and understood as criminal. A John soliciting a prostitute is illegal but not criminal; Epstein running a honeypot operation of teenage prostitutes for kompromat was not illegal, but obviously criminal.

        The Strzoks and Ciaramellas are self-evidently crooks and criminals plotting against the legitimate government, regardless of whether their conduct breaks the letter of the law, and irrespective of who holds the whip.

  29. Mr.P says:

    Jim, in your post, shouldn’t “During the Senate hearings….” be “During the House hearings….”?

  30. Octavian says:

    Impeachment Kabuki is best Kabuki.

    “What I hope for is that after the Senate Trial, then the Durham report opens with a sudden storm of arrests, and Trump gets coronated as Caesar Augustus in 2020. What I fear is more likely is increasing use of violence and coercion by the elite with inconclusive and indecisive outcomes, eventually leading to full scale war around 2026 or so, possibly involving nuclear weapons, followed, after years, decades, or centuries, by a Stalin restoring order.

    Let us pray that Trump Senior becomes Caesar Augustus, and Trump Junior becomes Emperor Constantine.”


    • Omar is just a Trump card now. says:

      The State of the Union speech will look like an audition for an anointment as Holy American Emperor in early 2021.

      Trump can just act like supreme alpha and master of the Universe, reel off an enviable list of accomplishments, casually state the latest economic data, and conclude with a few seconds of joking about the impotence of the impeachment comedy. Or finish with a Godfather style threat, on national television, to his enemies. The fundamentals are so absurdly in his favor that he can turn the event into a humiliating work of performance art, sort of like the professional wrestling that he likes to watch.

    • Gack says:

      Yesterday Schiff was an answer on Jeopardy. they even showed his picture, and nobody knew who he was. the president is impeached, and the markets are going up up up. he walks into the national championship football game, and the crowds roar and roar. if it weren’t for all this, and Q, I would be worried about impeachment.

      I’d believe Q long before I believed UA 93 actually flew around making cell phone calls before burying itself in Pennsylvania with virtually no visible residue, while the guy who picked Roberts was listening to a class performing The pet goat, a thinly veiled Luciferian legend.

      • The Cominator says:

        Yep I saw (Jeopardy is one of the only things I still watch regularly the other is Its Always Sunny in Philadelphia) that and the contestants were all women, and the chink broad who is the current champion is pretty smart.

        That tells me that normies and especially female normies have tuned out the impeachment.

        • Gack says:

          And yet nearly a thousand legal scholars abandoned all constitutional principle to sign a letter endorsing the impeachment, and a liberal friend of mine actually thought this might be persuasive to me. what fraction of the population is TDS? to the rest the whole thing is theater.

      • jim says:

        Q is an enemy shill.

        Identifiable bits of the Pentagon plane, and bits of the passengers, were covering the ground outside the Pentagon. There was so much plane debris that it was impossible to walk without crunching on bits of plane and keeping an eye out for bits of passenger. There is absolutely no doubt that a plane load of people hit the pentagon. I have not checked out the flight 93 debris, but the Pentagon debris makes it absolutely undeniable that civilian airliners were hijacked.

        • Gack says:

          That does not agree with anything I have read or any video I have seen. why do you believe it? Were you there walking around and crunching? or do you have a link to something credible?

          also, a week or two ago, Trump retweeted Q supporters 22 times in a single day. some weeks before that he held aloft a baby with Q prominently displayed on its onesie. If Q is an enemy shill, why has Trump done this, and why has no mainstream reporter ever asked him about Q directly?

          • Not Tom says:

            Oh just shut up already, fucking Qtards. You take literally everything as “proof”. It’s worse than the Da Vinci Code insanity.

            Trump gets seen with Q nutcases because they’re constantly in his orbit. It’s not because he supports them, it’s because they fanatically support him. That part, I don’t mind, but it doesn’t change the fact that they’re a bunch of gullible morons. He’s never confirmed anything about the fake and gay Q narrative, they’re just a useful votebank.

            • Gack says:

              Not Tom, trump chose to retweet few followers 22 times in a single day. This was a deliberate show of support. now maybe he just did it piss off the mainstream media.
              Even if Q is “real”, of course, that just means he’s an intelligence operation. intelligence operations often spread disinformation.
              however in the case of Q, much of what he says is backed by hard evidence, and just confirm stuff I’ve known for years, but it is controversial stuff- you don’t believe it still. so that’s a very good sign that there’s a lot of truth to be had there.

              Jim- so it sounds like you don’t really have a good picture that would confirm a plane hit the Pentagon and you are really just taking their word for it. since they are known liars, I find that less than compelling. I disbelieve in airplanes on 9/11 since:
              1) They never would have made it through the thick steel façade of the World Trade Center, much less made a plane shaped hole that looks cartoonish. Trump realized this on 9/11/01 and said as much in a radio interview. what was broadcast is CGI. Newton’s third law says the plane, basically a shell of one quarter-inch thick aluminum, would have splashed off the thick steel I-beams.

              2) they lost the key frames from the surveillance video at the Pentagon, just as the FBI claims to have lost the surveillance video of McVeigh dropping off the bomb in Oklahoma City.

              3) not much airline debris at any of the three sites, but they did find hijackers passports. also airplane engines that did not come from passenger jets.

              etc. etc. etc. when we are dealing with known liars, and so much is obvious BS, I don’t believe anything they tell me.

              • Starman says:

                A +200 metric ton object traveling at Mach 0.6 will punch straight thru heavy steel beams and disintegrate into confetti at the same time. At orbital velocity (Mach 25), both the +200 metric ton object and the heavy steel beams will convert into an expanding ball of plasma.

                • Gack says:

                  Right, and leave a plane shaped hole including the tail, strangely reminiscent of a coyote shaped hole in a cliff, and also provide enough energy to *pulverize* the hundred and 20 story building. no wait, that last was the fire. But it won’t damage a concrete and steel wall as shown in test videos.
                  And you believe this why?

                • jim says:

                  I saw it happen live on television, with millions of Americans, tens of thousands of whom saw it live with their own eyes.

                  When the second airliner hit the second trade tower, it was absolutely obvious that it was reduced to confetti, and enormous amounts of steel and concrete instantly reduced to rubble.

                  The tail of the airliner that hit the pentagon did not penetrate, because the Pentagon is reinforced against bombs, but it left a mark.

                  The body of the airliner, and the wings engine to engine penetrated the Pentagon, leaving an airliner sized and shaped hole. The wingtips and tail did not penetrate, but they left a mark.

                • Gack says:

                  I saw the CGI live on television too, and believed it was real for at least a decade.

                  “To return to the faculty of observation possessed by crowds, our conclusion is that their collective observations are as erroneous as possible, and that most often they merely represent the illusion of an individual who, by a process of contagion, has suggestioned his fellows.”…
                  “The events with regard to which there exists the most doubt are certainly those which have been observed by the greatest number of persons. To say that a fact has been simultaneously verified by thousands of witnesses is to say, as a rule, that the real fact is very different from the accepted account of it.”… G LeBon 1895 The Crowd

                • jim says:

                  > I saw the CGI live on television too

                  The firefighters saw the damage to building seven, and everyone around building seven expected it to fall from the damage that they saw terrorists do to it, fall in the way that it did fall, into the square to the south of it.

                  That is not the crowd being convinced after the fact that they saw something different from what they saw. They saw with their own eyes what was happening at the time, and said in their own words at the time what was happening.

                  What we saw live on television, people saw with their own eyes, and at the time said that it was what it quite obviously was. They saw what we saw.

                • Starman says:


                  You demonstrated gross ignorance of physics. A+200 metric ton object at 0.6 Mach and 25 Mach impact will behave differently than a 60 metric ton object at 60 mph impact.

                  You want me to ask you a RedPill on Women question?

                  It’s already obvious that you’re repeating Robert Mueller’s ajitprop over and over again.

              • Not Tom says:

                however in the case of Q, much of what he says is backed by hard evidence

                Name one prediction out of QAnon that was objective, falsifiable, proven true and demonstrative of inside knowledge.

                It has to be specific. No bullshit like “there will be suicides” or “there will be arrests” or other glaringly obvious “predictions” for which there are guaranteed to be dozens of headlines every day.

                Go on, I’ll wait.

                • gack says:

                  I am no expert in Q. most of the predictions I’ve seen are sufficiently poorly specified as to not rule out chance. however his broad picture of the world ruled by the cabal, who are Satan/Baal worshipers and exploit children sexually, is clearly basically correct.

                • jim says:

                  When you follow Q or Alex Jones, you get some well known truths, mixed with a payload of Cathedral memes Hence your use of Cathedral memes “children”, “pedophile”

                  There are a lot of real conspiracies, such as Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming, but enemy shills inject crazy conspiracy theories, to discredit the real exposures of real conspiracies, such as the Climategate files. And these crazy conspiracy theories are always, like 911, flat earth, and no moon landing, loaded with Cathedral payload.

                  Pedophiles are not real. Gays, drag queens, and bisexuals who fuck children are real – but they have a marked and obvious preference for male children.

                  You can tell a shill anti semite from a real anti semite, because the shill fails to acknowledge any of the real problems with Jews, for example their deplorable lack of artistic talent and artistic taste, and focuses like a laser on Jews=Capitalism, and because he says “Tel Aviv”, but will never say “George Soros, Victoria Nuland, and the ngos”. Also, he has strange difficulty saying “Jerusalem”. The leadership of Israel is in Jerusalem, not Tel Aviv, and has been there for quite some time. A real anti semite will post crazy stuff, but the crazy stuff will frequently be about something located in Jerusalem. A shill anti semite will not acknowledge that the capital of Israel is Jerusalem.

                  A shill invariably believes that the “arc of history” goes all the way back. We have supposedly always been progressing. Everyone else believes that dark ages and collapses keep happening, and if you are a reactionary, you figure the west is entering a dark age now.

                  But the biggest give away for shills is the red pill. Lots of genuine reactionaries are blue pilled or purple pilled, but a shill will not even acknowledge that anyone else is red pilled. (Shills for Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE will acknowledge the red pill fine, but Cathedral shills, who are our big problem, never will.)

                  Shills also will not acknowledge that recently imported minorities are making the cities unlivable and the schools dangerous for normals.

                  Red pill is the litmus test for Cathedral shills.

                  Words mean what they are used to mean. A man who receives a naughty selfie on facebook messenger from a seventeen year old girl is a pedophile and is likely to go to prison. A drag queen who has sex with a nine year old boy in public during Drag Queen Story hour is not a pedophile, and is “stunning” and “brave”. It is an enemy word. Notice that during the uproar that followed a drag queen having sex in public on the floor of the library with a nine year old boy nobody called the drag queen a “pedophile”, any more than they called Trayvon Martin or Jose Ines Garcia Zarate a “racist”.

                  The payload of the comet pizza conspiracy theory is “pedophile” The payload of the moon landing and flat earther conspiracy theories is to deny technological decline. And the payload of the 911 conspiracy theory is to cover Mueller’s ass.

                • Not Tom says:

                  however his broad picture of the world ruled by the cabal, who are Satan/Baal worshipers and exploit children sexually

                  And by children, you mean 8-year-old boys or 14-year-old girls? Be specific.

                  And don’t use words like “clearly”. That is arguing from false consensus. It is not clear at all to most of us, or most sane people.

                • Starman says:


                  “exploit children sexually”

                  Put down that God-damned gender neutral language crap.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “for example their deplorable lack of artistic talent and artistic taste”

                  This is a mixed bag. Jews on average have far better musical taste than non jews. The music industry was at its best when they ran it… the classical music fan community is disproportionately jews.

                  Jews have good taste in comedy… but their visual aesthetic tends to be horrible jews have a cultural tendency towards feminism (and their women to being more feminist) even absent cathedral memes and it bleeds into their writing of anything romance or any depiction of female characters.

                • jim says:

                  Granted, music industry was better when Jews ran it, good taste, but Jewish musicians not so good. Jewish visual art and architecture is, however, terrible.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Billy Joel is fantastic one of my absolute favorites…

                • Not Tom says:

                  Jewish visual art and architecture is, however, terrible.

                  Also the cuisine. Just awful.

                  Really about what you’d expect from a people with a higher verbal than spatial IQ – music and also math being associated with the verbal, not spatial side of things.

                  A lot of the most famous classical performers were Jewish, but not in any modern genres, and as far as I know, the majority of Jewish composers in almost every genre have been crap – heavy focus into unlistenable atonal/12-tone “modern” classical that for some reason I tend to associate with brutalistic modem architecture – the same high precision and technical proficiency at producing utterly abhorrent art.

                • Mister Grumpus says:

                  I really appreciate the “payload” metaphor. That really helps.

                • Gack says:



                  I would guess that well more than half of the great violinists have been Jewish, and maybe conductors as well.

                  ”’Cathedral memes “children”, “pedophile”’– what the actual fuck?

                  I like you Jim but I think you are way too credulous.. you seem to believe if you saw it on TV it happened. I think now if I don’t see actual verifiable proof it’s probably a lie, for basically everything.

                  I expect we will find out about Q in the next year or two one way or the other.

                  where do you think the energy came from to pulverize World Trade Center? why in your opinion have no other buildings been pulverized and dust blasted up in pyroclastic flows? thousands of buildings burned.

                • jim says:

                  Every tall building that comes down is thoroughly pulverized. The size of the fragments is inversely proportional to the height of the building. If the building is twice as tall. the fragments are half as big. The trade tower rubble is small, because tall, and the shorter towers, such as World Trade Tower Seven, had proportionately larger rubble fragments.

                  The rubble of the trade towers is absolutely typical of what happens bits of a building fall from a great height, just as the fact that the airliner that hit the pentagon was reduced to tiny fragments that crunched under the feet of the firemen is absolutely typical of every full speed civilian airliner crash.

                  Very tall buildings hit by very fast objects. Hence tremendous amounts of energy released. What I saw, what everyone saw, looked exactly like what it was, looked exactly like what happens in similar events involving similarly enormous uncontrolled release of enormous energy.

                  Trooferism is spread by FBI shills to cover Mueller’s ass and the FBI’s ass. Ever since 911, the FBI has been running a cover for the fact that they were under orders, Mueller enforcing those orders, to find White Male Christian terrorism regardless of whether it existed or not, and ignore Mohammedan terrorism even if it got in their faces. The big suspicious thing about 911 is not any of the stuff the troofers talk about. It is the fact that the FBI ignored the terrorists even though their opsec was nonexistent, about which distinctly suspicious behavior the troofers remain absolutely silent.

                  Mueller should have been fired, it should have been an enormous scandal, and it was all covered up. As far as the Washington elite thinks, the great tragedy of 911 is not that thousands of people were murdered, it is that it makes their efforts fight “Islamophobia” look bad. Mueller got a pass because he was fighting Islamophobia, just as the people responsible for the Great Minority Mortgage Meltdown and the Fort Hood massacre got a pass.

                • Not Tom says:

                  you seem to believe if you saw it on TV it happened

                  Yeah. That’s what we believe, says Mr. Perceptive over there. Are you completely retarded yourself or just following a completely retarded script?

                • polifugue says:

                  As a classical pianist, I can speak with regard to Jews in music. It’s important for reactionaries to be cultured people.

                  Artur Rubinstein, Daniel Barenboim, Emil Gilels, Jascha Heifetz, Murray Perahia, Issac Stern, not to mention many others, are among the greatest musicians of all time. Jews are overrepresented among great professional performers.

                  As for classical music, this is true when looking at Schoenberg, and Meyerbeer is mediocre, but there is a lot of great work in Mendelssohn and Mahler.

                  One of the great contributions that Jews have made to western civilization, and which they continue to make, is their involvement in the classical music world (they’re being replaced by the Chinese now, but they’re still prevalent). Issac Stern saved Carnegie Hall in New York, arguably the best sounding hall in the Western Hemisphere, which if it had been lost would have been akin to the destruction of Penn Station. There is not much in architecture, but there is a lot in music.

                • polifugue says:

                  Typo, corrected

                  As for classical music, composers such as Schoenberg are awful, and Meyerbeer is mediocre, but there is a lot of great work in Mendelssohn and Mahler.

                • Omar is just a Trump card now. says:

                  >The size of the fragments is inversely proportional to the height of the building.

                  Interesting. Is there a name (or reference, or physics heuristic) for the 1/height scaling law?

              • jim says:

                > trump chose to retweet few followers 22 times in a single day. This was a deliberate show of support.


                Not a deliberate show of support. Trump probably did not know those guys were Q followers, because Trump does know that Q is an enemy agent.

              • Steve Johnson says:

                I disbelieve in airplanes on 9/11 since

                You are a stupid liar.

                I (and thousands of others) personally witnessed the second plane hitting the WTC.

                (Many) people I know personally witnessed the path of the first plane over lower Manhattan.

              • gack says:


                • jim says:

                  Deleted for presupposing universal agreement on obviously absurd claims about the fall of the towers.

                  Deleted for arguing from fake consensus.

              • Omar is just a Trump card now. says:

                >>> “1) They never would have made it through the thick steel façade of the World Trade Center, much less made a plane shaped hole that looks cartoonish.”

                uh, finite element simulations of a plane hitting WTC were done as engineering thesis projects many times over. Some of the videos available on Youtube. The plane penetrates the outer shell and leaves a cartoonish airplane shaped hole. If this were something hard to “replicate” I’m pretty sure we would have heard about it, and dissident engineering PhD’s would be speaking out on troofer mailing lists and so forth.

                >>> Trump realized this on 9/11/01 and said as much in a radio interview.

                Trump was suspicious of the building collapsing without the structure having been sabotaged in advance e.g. with prepared bombs in place. He has never said anything about the airplane not being able to penetrate the structure; not in the famous interview and not anywhere else, as it would be Internet-famous since his election if it existed.

          • jim says:

            The Pentagon debris looks like every other civilian plane crash field, just as World Trade tower falls towards the fire and hole made by the impact of debris 911.

            The aftermath looks much as one would expect from the impact of a civilian airliner.

        • jack boot says:

          for the benefit of all the haters i posted a picture of the pentagon showing the massive and undeniable boeing 747 airliner debris field and empennage

          where is it?

          • jim says:

            The image was taken from too far away to show any chunks of debris smaller than a truck. Since the debris from a commercial airliner crash is generally finger size, it was an uninformative image and a waste of space.

            If we were debating a semi trailer running into the pentagon at sixty miler per hour, the image might have been relevant.

            To be relevant, you need a close up image of the debris.

Leave a Reply