I've noted a right-wing backlash against Fuentes for meeting with Trump. In summary, "You're ruining his reputation!" I understand this...but it strikes me as deriving largely from jealousy. I don't blame Fuentes for meeting with the rich and powerful. I would certainly do (and have done) the same thing.

Yesterday, we learned that the most significant documents Trump held onto in Mar-a-lago relate to Iran's missile systems and China.

washingtonpost.com/national-secur… I don't quite know what to make of the China-related material. But might the Iran documents tell us something about the dynamics at play with regard to Trump, Iran, the Saudis and UAE—and, yes, Russia?

Steve Bannon has earned the fanatical, irrational support of MAGA, who have no concept of politics or policy outside owning the libs. Lib-owning martyrdom will certainly appeal to them. Four months is a small price to pay for decades-long grift.

bloomberg.com/news/articles/… In a way, I'm surprised that Bannon could accomplish this. Back in 2017, he was fired for disrespecting Trump to various journalists and authors, even floating the use of the 25th amendment. (Perhaps he imagined himself taking over MAGA in Trump's place?).

The notion that Elon is sitting on $44 billion in cash is ridiculous. He’ll sell Tesla stock to purchase Twitter, and that stock is crashing as a result. It’s a vicious cycle, which, in a worst case scenario, eventuates in Musk losing his stake in the Tesla. Currently, Elon’s 17% of Tesla is worth $128 billion dollars. But again, selling large chunks of this directly lowers the overall value, creating a cascade effect: The price keeps going down, forcing Elon to sell more shares.

In the weeks leading up to the 2020 election, Tim Pool made some rather remarkable predictions.

My point is not to dunk on a person who's clearly dumb, or call Pool a "grifter." What's most important is that Pool paid no real price, in terms of his audience's reaction, to his idiotic claims. In fact, his audience still loves him and treats him like a brave truth-teller.

#AlexJones dug his own grave. He can’t whine about the 1A when he actively ignored and defaulted in the trial where that was very much at stake. A plausible, if not necessarily winning, defense could have been attempted based on the *Snyder v. Phelps* decision, in which SCOTUS upheld the Westboro Baptist Church’s right to demean the memory of fallen soldiers at their own funerals (!)—provided it was political speech.

I happened upon this video, my ears perked up when I was name-checked around 1:30. @JasonVanTatenh1 claimed that the Oath Keepers “courted Richard Spencer.” I’ve never been in contact with this man or anyone connected with the Oath Keepers, nor would I want do.

One thing about pro-lifers, which is rarely remarked upon, is that they, ultimately, lack the courage of their convictions. If abortion is “murder,” then, of course, the mother must be held to account. Yet no pro-lifer (save the occasional schizo on Twitter) is willing to demand the death penalty for a woman who chooses to have an abortion. The pro-lifers always demand to punish the doctor and treat the woman as if she lacks agency and is a victim.

#TheNorthman is a great film. It's probably the best, most memorable, and gut-wrenching I've seen this year. On one level, *The Northman* is a "White Nationalist Epic," though, of course, the writer-director didn't mean it to be propaganda. But the "historically accurate" casting ... the Norse mythology...the obsession with fathers and sons and blood lines...it's all there.

A lot of mainstream commentators have reacted to this saying, "She's ignorant." Candace Owens is not ignorant; she's been given pro-Russian talking-points, and any effective talking-point has at least some basis in reality.

https://twitter.com/RealCandaceO/status/1504273197046321160

These were my talking points, too, in 2014, when there was something of an anti-war Left and Right consensus against Maidan. When I reiterated them, I recognized them as talking-points. I reject them now, of course.

Declaring a #NoFlyZone over Ukraine (more specifically, the western half) is realistic; it need not lead to WWII or nuclear winter; and should at least be in NATO's quiver of available options. I support it.🧵 As the saying goes, "In for a penny, in for a pound." The U.S. and NATO are already in for much more than a penny in Russia's invasion of Ukraine. This is not a far-off conflict of little relevance. The Cold War has remerged and territorial demarcations must be established.

Across the Western media, a new Traitors Coalition has emerged in support of Russia: Dirtbag leftists and rightists, “America First” Groypers, Q holdouts, LARPing “traditionalists,” Ultra MAGAists, literal Commies, and the occasional neoreactionary and paleoconservative. The Traitors Coalition roughly tracks with those who either enthusiastically endorsed or apologized for January 6. Some “fellow travelers” in this coalition, notably Trump himself and Tucker Carlson, have already back-tracked and reversed their positions.

*The Batman* is a great film. I loved it. As many noted, it evokes *The Godfather* and *Chinatown*, but mainly Batman: The Animated Series. A “sad and rainy reboot”—an interesting twist on the “dark and gritty” reboots of the 2000s. I don’t think *The Batman* is quite as definitive a vision as the Nolan series… but I appreciate the “noir detective” and slow-pacing.

America and the West went insane over the past 30 years. Whether it was a matter of too much luxury or something deeper—we had no enemy abroad and turned on ourselves. A Neo-Cold War environment is where we are headed (though, of course, with some important differences). Many hysterically loathe such an outcome: fearing the potential dangers—WWIII or even nuclear annihilation—and the imperial burden such an arrangement entails.

The conflict in Ukraine is depressing and sickening—and could have been avoided. But I ultimately think it is a positive and necessary development for European civilization and consciousness. We are returning to the 20th century, to a divided world (probably a trifurcated, instead of a bifurcated one). The 30-year period of true globalism—"The End of History," Unipolar Moment"—is over. It was America's time, when it projected itself across the globe, and it is over.

There’s a funny rhyming or symmetry to Russia’s current invasion of Ukraine and America’s 2003 Iraq debacle. Both Moscow and Washington justified war as “liberation,” “protecting minorities,” and even “de-Nazification.” The Donbas region, supporting anti-Saddam liberals, the Azov battalion, and sending Iraqi girls to college can all be mixed and matched.

Putin has already sent forces of some kind into the break-away regions. A full invasion of the country, including Kyiv, is more that possible. I’d say it’s probable, and I’ve been saying this for a while. The reasoning behind my assessment is the basic structure of the conflict. Returning Ukraine to the Russian sphere—the long-term Russian empire, which stretches back further than the USSR—means quite a bit to Moscow, and, apparently, Putin in particular. It means more to Moscow than the option of Ukraine entering NATO does to Washington.

Amassing 150k troops is a curious way of “trying to deescalate all along.”

Bringing all of Ukraine back into the Russian sphere is a long-term geopolitical objective (as Putin understands Russia’s interests).

https://twitter.com/calebmaupin/status/1495198050721177601

Returning Ukraine to the Russian sphere is far more important to Moscow than bringing Ukraine into NATO is to Washington—which is why Biden explicitly said he won’t send in troops. Putin, however, *is* willing to invade.

Perhaps the oddest thing about the Whoopi Goldberg controversy is the actress’s choice of stage names—“Goldberg.” To make matters even odder, Whoopi—born Caryn Johnson—truly believes that she has Jewish heritage. According to Whoopi: “My mother did not name me Whoopi, but Goldberg is my name, it's part of my family, part of my heritage. Just like being black."

thejc.com/news/uk/whoopi…

A typically stupid statement by Scott Adams. PF would never be able prove they’re *not* feds to his satisfaction; any evidence to the contrary would be spun by this loon as part an even deeper conspiracy.

https://twitter.com/scottadamssays/status/1480185461079351296

That said, reactions like this, which are widespread, seem to reveal something important about where Alt-Right activism and “optics” have ended up in 2022.

There is no evidence, and no reason to believe, that Patriot Front are "feds," in the sense that they are government agents on a mission to "make conservatives look bad," provoke another J6, or whatever it is they're being accused of. Conservatives making the "fed accusation" are acting in bad faith, and I bristle at this, as someone who's been called a "fed" by various right-wing figures, with no evidence offered or required.