Source: Wall Street Journal (free link).

The writer salvages some hope from the crashing of expectations related to the Durham investigation. She suggests that we may not see the perp walks some have wanted, but at least the FBI’s grievous sins are revealed.

Continue reading “Durham’s FBI Indictment” →

Source: Wall Street Journal (free link).

Two sentences summarize the editorial completely:

There is no evidence so far that Mr. Trump was communicating or coordinating with the Proud Boys or other nefarious elements in the runup to Jan. 6…

What the committee has accomplished, however, is to cement the facts surrounding Mr. Trump’s recklessness after Nov. 3 and his dereliction of duty on Jan. 6.

Well, if that’s all the committee has accomplished, so what?

Mr. Trump’s “recklessness” is as much a feature as a bug as far as I’m concerned; and when a president is guilty of “dereliction” the appropriate remedy is to lose the office, which has already happened.

The committee has done enough. It is time for it to dissolve.

I posted a video in another thread yesterday in which two YouTube lawyers critique the outcome of the Alex Jones trial in Connecticut. I have since reviewed the video again in order to jot up some notes describing problems with the trial. The essence of the lawyers’ critique seems to me (inexpertly) to revolve around the application of anti-SLAPP law.

Continue reading “Some Notes on the Alex Jones Case Video I Posted” →

Source: A Son of the New American Revolution.

All my life the U.S. has been at war somewhere in the world. The big ones — Vietnam, the Middle East, Afghanistan — were all failures. To the extent that past performance can predict future outcomes, our proxy war against Russia in Ukraine may prove a failure, too.

But one also can forecast outcomes from present facts on the ground. The article at hand points out that Ukraine’s ability to wage war is degrading. Ukraine’s military may soon have to divide itself to fight on multiple fronts. And it is unlikely that NATO can resupply Ukraine any time soon.

This is a message idealists and warmongers in the West don’t want to hear. But not wanting to hear at this point has become irrelevant.

What’s up with this?

Source: The Unz Review.

A good summary of the realist perspective on how the 2022 war in Ukraine started.

Missing are the details of Russia’s original invasion of Ukraine in 2014. Actually, invasion is the wrong word. Russia’s early engagement in the Donbas was somewhat like the U.S. early engagement in the Vietnam war. That is, Russia at first provided materiel and advisory support to an indigenous Donbas resistance against Kiev. This later escalated to providing boots on the ground to support the Donbas local militias. One could say that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine back in 2014 was by invitation, but this nuance is ignored by many commentators.

Russia Launches Large-Scale Strikes On Some 20 Ukrainian Cities In Response To “Terrorist” Crimea Bridge Blast

Biden Should “Back Off” Armageddon Language, Quickly Get Russians To Negotiating Table: Adm. Mullen

Russia appears to be initiating a new, more aggressive phase of its war plan in Ukraine. This makes Adm. Mullen’s advice to begin preparing for a diplomatic solution even more urgent than it might have been as a response to President Biden’s reckless rhetoric about Armageddon.

Source: Wall Street Journal (free link).

Eventually it may sink in for those who don’t know it that the United States doesn’t run the world anymore and isn’t particularly well liked by much of it. Higher gas and heating oil prices this winter should — since nothing else will — help to educate them.