Several geneticists had also expressed their concerns about the possible interference between active or dormant cancer cells and the activity of gene therapy on lymphocytes in particular.

Months have passed, and the vaccine madness has amplified, leading to the refusal of patients without a passport in hospitals (which, as is well known, are intended to receive only healthy people) and to the demand that patients be vaccinated  before receiving any treatment, including cancer patients.

We are in a world gone mad and yet these stories are multiplying, such as this young man of 22 years who had a chronic cough leading to an X-ray discovering a mediastinal mass. The two big Paris hospitals that received him refused to start the treatment (without it being explained in detail) if the patient refused the experimental injection, of absolutely unknown effects on the development of cancers.

The doctors’ justification? None: “that’s the way it is”, and we have accepted it!

Silence on the colleagues suspended for lack of obedience and even more on the objective reasons that made them prefer to lose their jobs, their remuneration, their houses, their families intolerant to these decisions as well, rather than submit to the presidential ukase to accept experimental drugs…

Would more than three hundred thousand caregivers (a figure that is probably highly underestimated given the number of hospitals and clinics currently forced to close beds and postpone interventions due to lack of personnel) be crazy, conspiratorial or delusional to the point of putting themselves in great personal, social, family, professional and psychological danger?

Have the doctors who claim that vaccination is safe taken the time to look at the statistics of the effects reported and accepted by the official agencies? Are the FDA, EMA, MHRA also “conspiratorial” when they release statistics as in the case of VAERS, which is entity of the CDC:

VAERS as of September 26, 2021

More than 726,000 Covid vaccine-related adverse events reported to VAERS as CDC and FDA overturn advisory committee recommendations on Pfizer’s third vaccine.

VAERS data released by the CDC included a total of 726,965 adverse event reports from all age groups following Covid vaccines, including 15,386 deaths and 99,410 serious complications between December 14, 2020, and September 17, 2021.[1]

Or Eudra Vigilance pharmacovigilance body of the European Medicines Agency

Or even the ANSM, our French agency, which shows more than 1200 deaths accepted as at least possibly related to these experimental injections.

All therapeutic trials for fifty years were stopped after a few deaths for investigation (53 deaths stopped the H1N1 vaccine). Here, thousands of deaths throughout the world and children are shamelessly attacked[2]. How can we continue to believe that this is a health policy?

Why this denial of the most solid sects on the part of theoretically educated doctors, capable of obtaining information directly from reliable sources and equipped with a brain?

Fear of the boss, of the director, who in a few months’ time will inevitably be called into question, since many countries are backtracking and even Germany wants to get out of vaccine terrorism, perhaps on the occasion of Mrs Merkel’s departure[3].

“The leading organizations of contracted physicians in Germany are demanding an immediate end to the “anti-corona” measures and an end to the “horror rhetoric and panic politics”. Obviously, French hospital doctors in Paris and elsewhere do not read German newspapers and are terrorized by the threats of their professional association, their minister, and become kapos[4] and terrorize their patients.

More and More Testimonies are Coming In 

Whatever their unacceptable reasons, testimonies are multiplying.

A young girl accompanies her friend to her mother’s funeral… such a mother, mother of a high school friend, 34 years old, in remission from breast cancer for two years, who is injected with the vaccine and collapses a few days later in a coma and dies after three days of hospitalization… Politically correct explanation: the cancer exploded and took her away. Close the chapter and the coffin.

What would Maigret have said? [Historic Police Investigator] 

But too many coincidences shock the police investigators in front of a corpse. Only doctors would not have the right to think about coincidences of time, for example: “temporality” is their key word…

Like the misleading slogan, “the numbers are always right”. Yes, if they are true and observed in the real world.

But how much confidence can we have in the rigged simulations that the government and the media feed us without ever specifying that they are only predictions or estimates? 5] But one can do what one wants with the figures, when one chooses them, or creates them to justify the chosen hypothesis, and the the results are totally blurred.

In any case, as far as “cancer and gene injection” is concerned, the vagueness unfortunately dissipates in front of the multitude of terrible stories.

From the colleague who sees multiple “balls” appearing under her armpits, which the check-ups in the hospital do not explain… Obviously no possible link with the vax. And yet the ganglions that appear some time after the injection are a frequent observation after these vax.

So clearly there seems to be three situations:

• The appearance of a cancer rapidly after the injection (two weeks to a few months) and very progressive, in a person who was previously free of known carcinological pathologies.
• The resumption of cancer in a patient who has been in complete remission for several months or years.
• The rapid, even explosive, evolution of a cancer that is not yet controlled.

Beyond the testimonies that are pouring in from relatives and friends and on social networks, a Swiss newspaper has finally addressed the subject in a broader way.

Here are some excerpts from their article[6] and their references[7]:

“Can covid vaccines cause cancer?

In some cases, the answer seems to be yes. Certainly, there is no evidence that the covid vaccines themselves are carcinogenic. However, it has been shown that in up to 50% of vaccinees, covid vaccines can induce temporary immunosuppression or immune dysregulation (lymphocytopenia) that can last for about a week or possibly longer.

Furthermore, covid mRNA vaccines have been shown to “reprogram” (i.e., influence) adaptive and innate immune responses and, in particular, to downregulate the so-called TLR4 pathway, which is known to play an important role in the immune response to infections and cancer cells.”

Thus the authors conclude that it is quite possible that these immune changes could have unintended consequences on the condition of the recipient of the gene injection. A matter of common sense indeed!

“Thus, if there is already a tumor somewhere – known or unknown – or if there is a predisposition to a certain type of cancer, such a state of vaccine-induced immune suppression or immune dysregulation could potentially trigger sudden tumor growth and cancer within weeks of vaccination. It should be noted that lymphocytopenia was also frequently observed in cases of severe covid.

Post-vaccination reactivation of latent viral infections, including shingles virus, EBV (Epstein-Barr) and hepatitis virus, has also been observed.

“Vaccine-induced temporary immunosuppression is also a factor that may contribute to the post-vaccination spike in coronavirus infections seen in many countries.”

Frequency of Vaccine Related Adverse Event in Cancer 

There are already a few thousand observations in official adverse event reporting and online patient groups. There are certainly true coincidences or diagnostic delays due to delayed diagnosis related to containment. But we should not dismiss the huge problems that these real people affected in their daily lives and even more the responsibility that cancer doctors take by imposing the injection before any treatment or protocol continuation. Their main argument: “we did it right, without discussion” does not seem worthy of a once thoughtful profession.

In August 2021, Dr. Ryan Cole,[8] an American pathologist for many years, described a significant increase in certain types of cancer (e.g. endometrial cancer, uterine cancer) since the beginning of the covid mass vaccination campaign. More recently, German pathologists have also noted the problem of post-vaccination immune dysregulation and sudden tumor growth in some patients.

On the French networks, several testimonies coincide with the reappearance of vaginal hemorrhages in women over 85 years of age leading to the diagnosis of endometrial cancer and rapid death… The spike protein produced by the body following the injection is particularly attracted to the genitals, and this would be a new demonstration of this.

So until we know more, let’s be careful, both doctors and caregivers, and not play the sorcerer’s apprentice!

Caution is required with all experimental treatments and even more so when they are the result of a technique never used before in infectious pathology. First, do no harm must guide the decisions of any physician faithful to his Hippocratic oath.

 Dr. Nicole Delépine: Pediatrician, oncologist, former head of the pediatric oncology department at the R Poincaré Garches Hospital APHP France

Website www.docteurnicoledelepine.fr and ametist.org for the defense of children with cancer

The board of the LA Unified School District voted 7-0 to cancel 496 employee contracts on Tuesday, according to the Associated Press, after they missed a deadline to become fully immunized by November 15. Those who declined to take their first dose in mid-October had previously been placed on leave.

“Parting ways with individuals who choose not to be vaccinated is an extremely difficult, but necessary decision to ensure the safety of all in our school communities,” interim district Superintendent Megan Reilly said after the vote. “We wish everyone the best in their future endeavors and encourage everyone to get vaccinated.”

Though most of the fired employees were non-credentialed staff, some served in critical roles, including custodians, cafeteria workers and teacher’s aides, among other positions.

In contrast to many districts around the country, LA’s has established its own Covid-19 vaccine mandate for staff and students alike, getting ahead of a statewide requirement that will only come into effect once federal agencies hammer out approvals for all age groups. Currently, Los Angeles is urging students to meet a January 10 deadline for the second semester of class, a date many are unlikely to meet, as some 34,000 students in LA remain partially or completely unvaccinated.

However, as of Wednesday, the district said that a large majority of its 600,000 or so students had received their shots as required, or about 85% in total so far.

While noncompliant LA school employees are already getting their pink slips, students who decline vaccination and who receive no official exemption will be required to either enter an “independent study” program, or leave the school district altogether, potentially setting up a massive exodus of students from campus due to the mandate. (read more)

In mid-November, Germany’s Euthanasia Society declared COVID vaccination a requirement for physician-assisted suicide. Citing public health concerns, the nation that identified “life-unworthy-of-life” (Lebensunwertes Leben) redesigned the concept to include a newly despised caste. Unvaccinated sufferers wanting to die are no longer eligible for assisted suicide. They can be left to their torments, condemned to the anguish of living as a lesson to everyone else. In effect, they have been deemed “life-unworthy-of-death.”

History gives a glimpse into the mutation of cultural pathogens. In the early 1930s Germany embraced the notion of racial hygiene. An offshoot of Social Darwinism, racial hygiene advanced previous emphasis on social hygiene with its stress on public health.

That earlier social hygiene movement, begun in the 19th century, reached a peak in the Weimar years. It laid the foundation for German eugenics and became a prerequisite for the well-being of the German people. Under National Socialism, the health and welfare of an individual was subordinated to the health of the nation.

A variant of that moral infection returns under its old cover of public health. Here is the November 19 press release from Germany’s Euthanasia Society (Verein Sterbehilfe). Google translates:

Euthanasia and the preparatory examination of the voluntary responsibility of our members willing to die require human closeness. Human closeness, however, is a prerequisite and breeding ground for corona virus transmission. . . . In the difficult task of balancing the protection of our members, employees and doctors with the practical organization of our everyday life in the association, Dr. Martin Goßmann, the head of our medical team, is on hand to advise. More details can be found in our Code of Ethics.

The Code presents assisted suicide (Suizidassistenz) as an extension of palliative care. It “expands the patient’s options for action.” The unvaccinated are now excluded from that option.

The press release uses the term menschliche Nähe. Many media reports, using Google Translate, interpret it as “human closeness.” However, an ample German dictionary suggests “human contact.” In this instance, contact is more suitable than closeness. To English speakers, the word closeness carries implication of emotional connection. But that does not apply here. Germany’s euthanasia enthusiasts stake their claim strictly on spatial distance, not personal intimacy.

A more sensitive definition of nähe—nearby, at close range, within reach—better illustrates the lunacy at work here. Vaccination itself requires close contact between the jabber and the jabbee. The two must be physically adjacent, within touching distance. Likewise, the two common methods of assisted suicide—infusion or injection—require the same proximity. In the main, distinction between means of vaccination and assisted suicide is a distinction without a difference.

Moreover, there exits a no-hands alternative to supervised suicide that completely dispenses with “human contact.” Oral anesthetic combined with barbiturates or a sedative (typically phenobarbital) can be taken by individuals themselves. The attending angel can oversee from a distance to ensure that the patient falls into a deep sleep prior to succumbing to cardiac arrest from the barbiturate.

If the euthanizer has already been vaccinated and boosted, why not add a hazmat suit for surefire protection? Answer: protection is beside the point. Risk of contagion is a smokescreen for something more lethal than COVID.

Call it malice. Hatred of vaccine dissidents—even ones in pain or despair—expresses itself first in marginalization and demonization. Then it advances to punishment of the non-compliant. We are in the early stages of coercive retribution. But the Society’s vindictive decision hints at a larger end game that has little to do with public health.

Some media greeted the Society’s mandate as an absurdity. But no. It is much more than that. What appears absurd has purpose behind it.

Germany is the seedbed of Klaus Schwab’s megalomania and the aligned ambitions of globalist elites. They view nonconformity to vaccination diktats as insubordination, a threat to the utopian bottom line. Resistance to the reigning narrative is denounced as irrational. In the mind of our betters, it suggests mental illness, and poses a danger to the common good. Science denial is an error that has no rights.

The death penalty has been illegal in Germany for decades. Were it not for the ban, a few pellets of Zyklon B could be dropped into the would-be suicide’s oxygen tank. Again, no contact needed. But that would recall—among other things—the murder of psychiatric patients in Germany and its occupied territories.

In 1939, Adolf Hitler ordered the “mercy death” of mentally ill and handicapped patients. He authorized certain physicians, appointed by name, to assess incurables to be granted the kindness of death. By 1945, after some 70,000 “compassionate” killings, it was public knowledge that “psychiatry had renounced the care of the individual in favor of Medizin für das Ganze (Health for the Nation as a Whole), the stated goal of the Third Reich.”

Canada’s New Brunswick province has given food stores the right to ban the unvaccinated. Austria is proposing fines or imprisonment. True, Western democracies are not killing vaccine refuseniks. It is enough, so far, to tighten the screws gradually.

But there is a stench in the air. (read more)

Here is the quick takeaway:

By February of 2021, Pfizer had already received more than 1,200 reports of death allegedly caused by the vaccine and tens of thousands of reported adverse events, including 23 cases of spontaneous abortions out of 270 pregnancies and more than 2,000 reports of cardiac disorders. 

Bear in mind, this is Pfizer’s own data.

***

This report provides the data on deaths and adverse events recorded by Pfizer from the outset of the vaccine project in December 2020 to the end of February 2021, namely a very short period (at most two and a half months).

The Pfizer BioNTech vaccine was launched in the US on the 14th of December after the granting of Emergency Use Authorization on December 11, 2020. 

What is contained in this report is detailed evidence on the impacts of the “vaccine”, which can be used to confront Big Pharma, as well as the media and the governments. Bear in mind: data which is reported and recorded. 

This is a de facto Mea Culpa on the part of Pfizer.

We invite the “Covid-19 Fact Checkers” to peruse this Pfizer report.

Washington Post editor Fred Hiatt suffered “sudden cardiac arrest on November 24” and did not regain consciousness. Hiatt was a recipient of the jab after his employer imposed a vaccine mandate in July to “help safeguard the health and safety” of the newspaper’s staff.

The dramatic upswing in heart failure has been linked to vaccination.

Hiatt was directly involved in spreading false news, including the Russiagate hoax and lies to justify the attack on Syria. He published “at least” 27 editorials pushing for war in the six months preceding the invasion of Iraq, according to PBS’s Bill Moyers.

Lately, Hiatt had excelled in publishing editorials advocating forced vaccines, Big Tech censorship, hate speech laws, mass immigration, gun control, transgenderism and Critical Race Theory (CRT).

He had also relentlessly attacked Florida governor Ron De Santis for not imposing vaccine mandates, accusing him of “jaw-dropping cynicism”.(read more)

New York Post:

A New Jersey mom who admitted to killing her 5-month old daughter told police she did it in order to “fulfill the last of her sins, murder,” according to court documents.

Kristhie Alcazar, 26, made her first court appearance on Monday after she was charged with murder for stabbing her baby to death at a home in Penns Grove on Friday night. She faces a maximum sentence of life in prison if convicted.

A remorseless Alcazar reportedly told police “she would not change any of the events surrounding the murder,” according to an affidavit, obtained by ABC 6.

She also said she was of “sound mind and body” at the time.

According to the Salem County Prosecutor’s Office, police responded to a call with loud disturbances in the background Friday night.

When police arrived they found Alcazar arguing with another person as well as the body of the dead baby.

The infant had visible stab wounds to her chest, officials said. Multiple knives and evidence were recovered from the scene. The baby’s father was not home at the time of the homicide.

The infant’s cause of death was determined to be a homicide as a result of multiple stab wounds to the chest area.

She is due back in court again on Thursday.

A memorial has grown out front of the apartment building, ABC 6 reported.

“It’s a tragedy,” neighbor Wandy Burgos told the outlet. “She was a nice, nice lady.”

Yeah, I believe she was a nice lady.

Then all of a sudden she snapped and decided to stab her baby to death.

Single mother, of course – something which is also the fault of our Hebrew occupation government.

The masks, the vax, the endless vax regime, the lockdowns, the unbelievable fear of a fake virus and a brutal government, the fact of no conceivable finality to this endless void of progressively mutating nonsense and gibberish – all of this has collapsed the fabric of the social order. The media won’t print “this bitch killed her infant because all of this virus mania drove her insane.” (read more)

Constitutional scholars were taken aback by her injection of politics:

“Will this institution survive the stench that this creates in the public perception – that the Constitution and its reading are just political acts?” Sotomayor asked. “I don’t see how it is possible.”

And her casual rejection of the Constitution as the arbiter of Supreme Court decision-making:

Justice Sonia Sotomayor even said at one point that the Supreme Court comes up with decisions all the time that aren’t directly grounded in the Constitution. This is a line of argument that, if taken seriously, would justify the Supreme Court swinging free of all restraint and rewriting the nation’s laws on the fly.

A major aspect of this invulnerability propaganda, helped by containment itself, amounts to an enforced system of preference falsification. They want to compel or strongly encourage people to misrepresent their own desires and opinions all of the time. Masks are an excellent tactic here. Not only do they represent an effort to make the virus visible and omnipresent; they are also easily interpreted as a sign of belief in containment policies. If the medically indefensible and ridiculous community masking went away, we would be halfway to achieving our goals already. Social isolation and saturation press coverage are other important mechanisms for obscuring the true nature of public opinion and making you feel alone in your beliefs. Former Soviet-bloc countries also demanded that their citizens falsify their preferences, and we know from their experience that the project is a costly one, and the equilibrium it achieves is highly unstable and liable to unexpected shifts or even sudden collapse.

Dissent, therefore—even of the kind I engage in here—has a purpose. It is not just words, and it is not mere preaching to the choir. We have to sow doubt among true believers and ridicule the official line at every opportunity, but we also have to create a broader cultural space that is more interesting and more dynamic and more explanatory than their flat, boring world of interconnected largely false doctrines preserved in amber. Here the advantage lies wholly with us: The pervasive propaganda means many true believers on our side are intimidated into silence, while many false cynical followers on their side must always be goaded into miming sincerity. We want their true believers to be intellectually isolated, left on an island of absurd beliefs all by themselves. The more they seem out-of-touch, bizarre, and uncool, the more we are succeeding in this project. Here we have had substantial success already: Have a look at containment Twitter and see for yourself. It is nothing but a collection of the most unappealing, ridiculous, embarrassing people you could ever imagine. You would never want to be seen in public with any of them. They are a mess. We must have more of this.

Many object that our arguments are simply ignored or papered over by regime propaganda, and that nothing we say here gets anywhere. It is also common to hear about the futility of protests, and I have been known on occasion to express pessimism about the possibilities of legal challenges. This is the wrong view to take. They have to win every day, and we only have to win a few times. This is the great asymmetry at the heart of all dissident movements, it is why we seem small and powerless and yet they act with such inordinate rage and fear against the points we make.

Once they acknowledge more than handful of our arguments, once high courts uphold more than a few challenges, once a protest somewhere causes a country to back down on vaccine mandates, it is over for them. But it is a long way from here to there, and we can’t expect to get there immediately. Right now, we hope above all to increase the costs of containment and universal vaccination policies as much as possible. We want governments to pour more efforts into dumb fact checking, into awkward propaganda, and into enforcement. All of this has to be as expensive as we can make it. Most of our governments have already fully committed their resources. Effort spent on propping up lies is effort that the regime cannot spend on something more lucrative and interesting to them.

So that is what we can do. But the truth is that there are natural forces working also on our side, every minute. We aren’t alone in this, all of nature is bent against them.

To begin with, what is happening now is a self-imposed crisis. It a moment of transitional hysteria. I don’t know what things will look like on the other side, but periodic unannounced seasonal closures and forced mass vaccinations have never been part of the natural order of human society anywhere. This will end. This winter, it has been harder for the press to work up the hysteria they achieved last winter, and last winter they had to work harder to drive the hysteria than they did during the first infections of March and April. Next year, if they want to do this again, it will get harder for them still. One of the reasons the press love variants so much, is that they’re desperate for novelty. Corona more and more threatens to become uninteresting.

Here we encounter a simple truth of human psychology, that high levels of religious or ideological fervour cannot be maintained. These things wax and wane. The more intensely the initial mania is felt, the more likely it is to burn out before too long. The bureaucrats have been seized by the allures of containment ideology, and this has caused them to behave in very extreme ways. Sooner or later, however, their excitement will peak and begin to decline. They won’t abandon their beliefs, but after a time these beliefs will cease to be the most important thing to them. Corona will begin to compete with other priorities. Here Wokeness is an important comparison. A lot of Anglosphere faculty had long since signed on to the tenets of antiracism, before Wokeness ever took off as a cultural phenomenon. They balanced their concerns for equity with other matters, until Floyd’s  [fentanyl overdose] death and cynical press agitation set off a parareligious revival. They entered a period of intense manic excitement, and they are now coming down from that. The same thing will happen with containment. Already interest in lockdowns has steeply declined, compared to Spring or even Fall 2020. The same thing will happen to the vaccines, I promise. We just have to hold on.

Remember always that it is an enormous help to us, that none of this nonsense actually works. It is a complete joke, everything that they do. This makes containment, especially at the political level, a very awkward constellation of policies. As I’ve said before, containment hardliners can win temporary support for harsh closures, but these alienate reasonable people and they also fail to do anything about infections, at which point hardline politicians find themselves in a self-isolating political death spiral. The CDU, Angela Merkel’s centre-right pro-containment party, was badly hurt precisely by this dynamic, and the new coalition government has moved very slowly indeed to take up the same disastrous policies, because they know where they lead.

A final reason to hope that this will end soon, is more powerful but also less positive. For reasons I don’t fully understand, the bureaucracies which rule us have grown vastly more volatile and erratic over the past decade. This is probably down to informal changes that occurred after populist backlashes like Trump’s election and Brexit. These encouraged tighter alliances among different bureaucratic factions in the press, the government and academia. Before 2010, these different sectors functioned like semi-detached silos, and it was genuinely difficult for a single mania to sweep the whole system at once. I remember an exasperated university administrator in 2009, rolling her eyes at attempts by the WHO to foment panic over the Swine flu. Imagine a conversation like that unfolding in our world, where all the public health recommendations are absolute gospel at every institution of higher learning.

This tendency towards erratic, unstable policy choices has an obvious downside, and we are living through it. But it also means that they are at any moment likely to be seized by a new mania, and abandon the pandemic hell they have created to its own devices. Containment fanaticism has done a good job of seeding all manner of incipient crises, any one of which might set off a new bureaucratic stampede. If you doubt this possibility, consider America, where mass containment never really recovered from the BLM protests in summer 2020. The United States is far from over this mess, but there is even political space there for some states, like Florida and Texas, to opt out of the circus entirely. This is unthinkable for continental Europe right now.

Here at the bottom of this overlong piece, two concluding points:

1) Look at what gets banned and censored. This is what they are especially sensitive about, it is where they feel the most vulnerable. Vaccine side effects are the locus of their greatest anxiety; it is here also that they blatantly withhold data and even lie the most. Note the great contrast with lockdowns and masks, which hardly anybody has ever been banned for criticising. This is a place to push, even though I’m not totally sure how right now.

2) Some words for those who [correctly] insist that containment policies are centrally planned and directed by a global cabal: Not only [do I want to believe] this [is] wrong, but it risks blinding you to the broader, very human processes at work here, to their failures, and to the openings these failures provide. In my experience, these views also discourage among their adherents rigorous engagement with the facts of the virus (which almost always work in our favour), and in extreme forms they can be a thin disguise for resignation to the reigning political order, which is why I write against them now and then. But I also think that argument and dispute is generative more often than not, so I’m happy to disagree even harshly. I want above all to avoid a uniformity of discussion, of the kind they’ve created. (read more)

Now the United States and especially Europe have vaccinated vast numbers of their citizens with mRNA and DNA vaccines that appeared hugely effective in [sham] clinical trials. In many European countries, over 90 percent of all adults are vaccinated.

Yet not only has Covid not disappeared, many of those same countries, like Denmark, are now seeing record levels of infections.

If the vaccines work, what’s going on?

And if they don’t, why on earth would anyone not at very high risk from Covid agree to participate in further rounds of this failed experiment? Much less allow their kids to be vaccinated?

One question. One that leads to a hundred more. (read more)

According to the survey of Capitol Hill staffers, 62 percent of Democrat aides claimed they wanted Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer replaced whether or not the party makes gains in the House or Senate or not. Seventeen percent of Democrat staffers said Pelosi and Schumer should only be replaced “if Democrats underperform” while 20 percent testified they were content with keeping leadership the same.

From the @punchbowlnews Hill staff survey: two-thirds (62%) of Democratic staff say their leadership should be replaced regardless of 2022 outcome pic.twitter.com/JSfqWMtnVE

— Myra Miller (@myramiller) December 6, 2021

While the 81-year-old Pelosi has maintained a grip on the House for years, there is clear discontent in her party, especially among progressives. Combine that discontent with the Democrat-controlled Congress’s failure to pass bills key to a blue victory in 2022 and the frustration that came with a massive loss for Democrats in Virginia and you have a recipe for a possible leadership change, which has been discussed before.

The report follows apparent discontent in the White House as well, coming the same week that a key member of Vice President Kamala Harris’s staff, senior adviser and chief spokeswoman Symone Sanders, is set to depart the White House before the end of the year following the Democrat’s terrible poll numbers.

“I’m so grateful to the VP for her vote of confidence from the very beginning and the opportunity to see what can be unburdened by what has been. I’m grateful for [Harris chief of staff] Tina [Flournoy] and her leadership and her confidence as well. Every day, I arrived to the White House complex knowing our work made a tangible difference for Americans. I am immensely grateful and will miss working for her and with all of you,” Sanders wrote in a note to her colleagues.

The vice president’s communications director Ashley Etienne also resigned from her role a few weeks prior citing “other opportunities.” Her departure followed a series of reports from several corporate media outlets detailing internal conflict and friction between staffers and Harris in the vice president’s office.

Politico reported in June that Harris’s team often experienced a “tense and at times dour office atmosphere” as staffers were forced to deal with the fallout caused by the vice president’s refusal to visit the U.S. southern border and infamous laughing on camera when asked why. (read more)

The Associated Press ran an emotional plug for efforts to nix the term “alien” to describe an illegal entrant to the United States last week. It’s no secret what the opinion of the AP is, after the corporate outlet updated its stylebook in 2013 to remove not just “illegal alien” but even “illegal immigrant.”

But journalists and lawmakers alike would be prudent to brush up on their history. After all, “alien” is a reasonable and just term deeply baked into the founding of this country — contrary to the talking points of demagogues from Justice Sonia Sotomayor to the Biden administration.

Under a Biden order last April, U.S. immigration enforcement agencies were instructed to no longer use “alien” or “illegal alien” or “assimilation” in reference to immigrants. Alien was adjusted to “noncitizen or migrant,” illegal to “undocumented,” and assimilation to “integration.”

“As the nation’s premier law enforcement agency, we set a tone and example for our country and partners across the world,” Troy Miller, U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s acting commissioner, wrote in a memo at the time. “We enforce our nation’s laws while also maintaining the dignity of every individual with whom we interact. The words we use matter and will serve to further confer that dignity to those in our custody.”

California removed the term “alien” from its labor and education codes in 2015 and 2016, and New York City amended its charter and administrative code to ban the word in 2020. And a Colorado law signed in 2015 scrubbed “illegal alien” from government contracts in favor of the term “worker without authorization.”

Democrats are not letting up on the terminology fight. It’s a language battle. Lora Ries, a senior research fellow in homeland security at The Heritage Foundation, told me the left is pushing the linguistic change to erase the line between legal and illegal immigration.

“Under federal law, any individual in this country who is not a citizen is an alien,” Ries said. “And any alien who is here without permission is here illegally. If we are going to discuss and debate the issue of immigration and what our public policy should be, we should at least use accurate, precise terms.”

The linguistic initiative is fueled by the erroneous notion that there ought to be open borders. This much was signaled by Democrat state Sen. Julie Gonzalez in Colorado, the co-sponsor of the state’s new law. “That language has been offensive for many people,” she told the AP. “And some of the rationale behind that is really rooted in this idea that a person can certainly commit an illegal act, but no human being themselves is illegal.”

While California and Colorado are currently the only two states that have adjusted state statutes to fit the politically correct lingo, at least seven states this year have seen lawmakers try to squeeze through the terms “undocumented” and “noncitizen” into law. But “alien” is a term with a rich history in the U.S. There is nothing racist, xenophobic, or nativist about it.

William Blackstone’s description of the term “alien” in his 1770 “Commentaries on the Laws of England,” in which he described an alien as someone born outside the “dominions” of the king, set the bar for America’s usage of the term. Blackstone made a clear distinction between “natural-born” citizens and those from a foreign land — who he did not determine ought to maintain the same legal rights.

Twenty years after Blackstone’s work, President George Washington would approve the first Naturalization Act and instill the word “alien” into the American statutory lexicon. In 1798, President John Adams signed the Alien and Sedition Acts. The acts granted the president the power to expel “aliens” thought to be “dangerous to the peace and safety of the United States” or who may be engaged in “any treasonable or secret machinations against the government.”

“And in case any alien, so ordered to depart, shall be found at large within the United States after the time limited in such order for his departure. . . every such alien shall, on conviction thereof, be imprisoned for a term not exceeding three years, and shall never after be admitted to become a citizen of the United States,” section I of the acts state.

Fast forward and “alien” has been deployed on a federal and state level to identify those who are living in the United States without permission. Its definition from Merriam-Webster is “a foreign-born resident who has not been naturalized and is still a subject or citizen of a foreign country.”

“Proponents [of changing terms] want to persuade the American public that those here illegally are no different than those who followed the rules to come here lawfully,” Ries also said. “But America, like every other country, has a sovereign right to a lawful and orderly immigration system. And Americans, including lawful immigrants, want immigration laws enforced.”

As we have witnessed, the left is engaged in a battle to alter meaning. But it’s vital to look at the broader trend. There is a language war in general, and immigration is just the tip of the iceberg. Whether it be the pertinent word “riot,” terms about sex, “black,” or the phrase “pro-life,” transforming words remains a foremost concern of elite institutions captured by the left. Look no further than the attempts to conceal critical race theory, too.

Meanwhile, the Biden administration has fiddled while a record number of illegal aliens come into the U.S. There were 164,303 encounters at the Southern border in October alone, more than double last October’s 71,929 apprehensions. And the surge continues.

Not only is it pointless to denigrate reasonable norms through language reconstruction, but it is harmful. Using “illegal alien” when America faces a significant border surge is the moral thing to do. It’s long past time to stop pretending otherwise. (read more)

In 2019, before the coronavirus crash, Trump’s deputies removed 267,000 illegal migrants nationwide, including many who committed violent crimes in the United States.

Mayorkas’s likely deportation of 40,000 migrants in all of 2021 from the 25 cities is less than just one month of arriving “got-aways” — illegal migrants who are detected yet successfully evade the border patrol. So far, roughly 400,000 job-seeking migrants have sneaked across the border under Mayorkas’ lax rules.

The Biden ICE data does not include migrants who were turned back from the border — and sometimes deported to their homelands — under the Title 42 anti-epidemic rules.

Mayorkas is a Cuban immigrant and a pro-migration zealot. In a November Senate hearing, for example, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) asked him: “What should be a higher priority of the United States Government? Securing our border or giving amnesty to illegal aliens who are already here?”

“Justice is our priority,” Mayorkas responded, adding “That includes securing our border and providing relief to those [migrants] who qualify for it under our laws.”

No Democrats voted against Mayorkas’ confirmation in February. His confirmation was also backed by several GOP senators, including Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Mitt Romney (R-UT), Dan Sullivan (R-AK), Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV),  Susan Collins (R-ME), and retiring Senator Rob Portman (R-OH).

Mayorkas’ policies reflect the U.S. government’s post-1990 policy of extracting migrants from other countries to work, rent, and spend in the United States. This economic policy pulls migrants from other countries via several channels — legal migration, visa workers, and illegal migration — so flatlining wages for employees, but spiking real estate values and the stock market for investors.

Mayorkas DHS refused to release some data that was formerly made public, according to CIS:

ICE has so far refused to provide information on whether the removed alien was arrested at the border or in the interior. Therefore, these statistics should be interpreted with caution because it is not clear to what extent they may reflect the level of enforcement at the border as well as in the interior. Nevertheless, it is possible to see in these records just how dramatically the new Biden policies have reduced ICE enforcement activity.

Mayorkas and his allies say they are using taxpayer funds to focus on the “worst of the worst.”

“ICE officers are not actually doing more effective enforcement, but are simply doing less enforcement” because of imposed bureaucratic barriers, CIS wrote:

According to ICE sources, because of the cumbersome process, and also because of sanctuary policies in some large jurisdictions, most ICE arrests are now handled by fugitive operations teams rather than by ICE officers working in jails, as had been the norm before the Biden policies were implemented. Routine arrests, once approved, now require a team of several officers who work for days to prepare a plan and execute each arrest, which now must take place in the community in an area not designated a “sensitive” location.

One ICE staff member told me that the process is extremely inefficient: “Instead of having one person working in a jail who can arrest four or five criminal aliens in a shift, now we have to send five or six guys out to make one or maybe two arrests in a shift.”

In addition to requiring what is essentially pointless busywork to seek an extra layer of approval for each arrest, agency leadership has also reduced interior enforcement by downsizing the number of working officers. This has been accomplished in many ways, including sending officers to work at the border and even by paying officers not to work. For example, ICE personnel recently were given extra “administrative leave” days off for Veteran’s Day and the Friday after Thanksgiving, which are not typically federal holidays.

Pending the arrival of new leadership in the agency, states should use their powers to ease deportations, Vaughan wrote:

With less immigration enforcement, American communities will continue to be saddled with the costs associated with illegal immigration, including displacement of U.S. workers, wage depression, more spending on social services and education, and additional crime problems. While Congress theoretically could intervene to impose stricter enforcement mandates and spending requirements, in the meantime state and local governments should act to discourage illegal settlement, penalize illegal employment, maintain strict eligibility requirements for all public benefits and driver’s licenses, and ensure that state and local law enforcement agencies are cooperating fully with ICE to identify criminal aliens.

Blagojevich, who Chicago Magazine characterized as “real-life cartoon character, popular culture’s best example of a bombastic, narcissistic, devious politician since the fictional Senator Claghorn,” served 7.5 years of a 14-year sentence in a Colorado federal prison after being impeached and accused of trying to sell former President Barack Obama’s vacated Senate seat while he was governor, among other charges. 

“He charmed everyone but the General Assembly that impeached him and the jury that convicted him at his federal trial,” Chicago Magazine reported. 

The main charges surrounding the accusation were eventually vacated by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, though his sentence remained notably lengthy, and his request for Supreme Court review of his case was rejected twice. Former President Trump was his final hope, and in a highly controversial move, Trump commuted his sentence. Blagojevich went home on February 18, 2020 to his wife and children, and his supervised release officially ended in June 2021.

Blagojevich, whose story has regained public interest partly because of the release of Hulu’s new four-part miniseries Being Blago, was the speaker at the Arts and Ideas Exchange Speakers Series on Wednesday night at the Railway Exchange Building in Chicago, Illinois, the city where he grew up. In front of a room full of seated, attentive dinner guests in a hall laden with Christmas trees, red ribbons, and wreaths, the ex-governor blasted Pritzker for reportedly calling Trump “not once, but twice” requesting to keep him behind bars.

“J.B. called Trump not once, but twice, joining with most Republicans to say, ‘Keep him in, don’t let him out. Keep him in, don’t let him out,'” he told the attendees, his voice echoing and his hands moving excitedly as he recounted the story.

“….Why did he do it? ” he continued, before foreshadowing his willingness to expose the underbelly of his former party:

I truly believe its because J.B. Pritzker, Governor Pritzker and some of the Democratic political establishment is very fearful. They’re very fearful of what I know, and what I can say, and what I’m likely to say, and what I will say soon. That’s why I think that he did that.

Blagojevich also quipped that if anyone would try to sell a Senate seat, it would be Pritzker, who allegedly called the former governor asking to be considered for the seat at the time.

Former Gov. @realBlagojevich tells audience in Chicago that the idea that he would try and sell Obama’s high profile Senate seat and get away with it is preposterous. Said if he wanted to sell the Senate seat, JB Pritzker is your guy. pic.twitter.com/298EAGNv2X

— Mark Vargas (@MarkAVargas) December 2, 2021

“Ok, by the way, if you want to sell the Senate seat, you’ve got your guy,” he said, drawing chortles from various guests in the crowd.

“…We had a nice relationship, and then calamity and [I] never heard from him again,” he said. (read more)

• Soros donated $2million to a PAC that supported the reelection campaign of Cook County State's Attorney Kim Foxx
• Cook County's murder rate is the highest  it has been since 1994
• He also donated to a PACs that prop up Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascón and Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner 
• Soros is most known for donating to Democratic presidents Clinton and Obama
• The Hungarian billionaire spent $3m on seven local DA races in 2016 
• In 2020, he pumped $28million into Democratic elections across the US
  

This time, a big one has flown the coop, a veritable whale of a woman in significance, spokeswoman Symone Sanders.  She's by far the highest-ranking Kamala official now to get the heck out of Dodge.  Her exit follows a lot of other exits, which I wrote about here.  And apparently, it's not going to be the last one.  These guys (and this other one) plan to leave next. The herd is moving.

So why would Sanders do that?  Two reasons stand out.

One, working for Kamala Harris is reportedly hell.

Back in June, Politico wrote this sort of thing about being a staffer at House Kamala, as described by the New York Post:

"People are thrown under the bus from the very top, there are short fuses and it's an abusive environment," said the same source who claimed staffers are "treated like s---." "It's not a healthy environment and people often feel mistreated."

Sanders defended Kamala at the time, so it's not known if she was the reason staff felt as though they were "treated like s---" or she was just as badly treated by Kamala or her henchwomen as the others.  Maybe she did the anonymous quote for Politico as well as the on-the-record quote, talking out of both sides of her mouth.  But whatever the reason, it's well known that working for Kamala has always been a living hellscape.  Now that Kamala's polling favorability has fallen to 28%, she might be getting even meaner.

The other reason that Sanders is likely leaving is that she's written Kamala off as a lost cause, a sinking ship, a date with a loser.

According to the Washington Post in this glowing May 2021 profile, people said this sort of thing about her:

She is something of a classic — and often derided — Washington archetype: the consummate operator, able to skate from one type of politician (a democratic socialist) to another (an establishment favorite) depending on whose coattails seem more promising. She carries herself with a kind of self-promotional swagger that can rub people the wrong way. Not a lot of political staffers publish memoirs at age 30; hers is peppered with advice about getting ahead. "No one is going to hand you power or open the door for you to voice your opinion or your desires," she writes. "You have to demand it."

...and this:

"I think she has integrity," said Cornel West, a prominent Bernie supporter who has heard complaints about "Sister Symone" being a turncoat for eschewing Bernie for Biden. "Still, I was surprised by her shift. She spoke for Bernie with such heart and such power." Ultimately, West said, "I think she just wanted to go with a winner."

And some others said similar.  Those are just two quotes.

So if she's leaving Kamala, it's not surprising.  Sanders, based on her biography, is 31, an ambitious young political operative whose career has pretty well been meteoric, and she has said in the past that she might actually be interested in running for office herself.

Why spend years on a clearly sinking ship with a no-hoper like Kamala who currently polls at 28% and still doesn't know how to improve even her image, let alone her job prowess?

For someone like Sanders, being tied to Kamala may just be too much.

Sanders, on the other hand, has been pretty impressive in a "bite and claw her way to the top" sort of way. 

She's the daughter of a U.S. army officer who hails from Nebraska, non-Ivy, having gone to Creighton University and taken a gut major.

She's a former community organizer, from what looks like a Soros-backed group called the "Coalition for Juvenile Justice," one of whose organizational "core principles" is to "divert youth from the justice system," as well as "reduce institutionalization" and "eliminate racial and ethnic disparities," presumably in the sentencing of gang-bangers, thugs, and criminals.  She ran the shop that gave "fellowships" to formerly "justice-involved youth."  I found no evidence that she herself has a criminal record.

She worked for the Bernie Sanders campaign, then the Democrats in general, then as a commentator on CNN.  She gave TEDx Talks.

She famously body-tackled a snowflake protester who rushed the stage against Joe Biden (whom the Democrats got together and slated to win, muscling out the other candidates) on Super Tuesday, so we can tell she's a party loyalist and an insider on the big stuff.  Of her linebacker-style block, she proudly tweeted: "I broke a nail."

She's the author of a book titled No, You Shut Up: Speaking Truth to Power and Reclaiming America, whose blurb on Amazon reads:

In this rousing call to leadership, the self-described millennial spokesperson for the culture, CNN's designated "woke AF" former commentator, and the youngest national press secretary in the history of the United States shares her take-no-prisoners approach to life, politics, and career success, and shows a new generation how to be loud and powerful in their own right.

Many people — most notably white older men — may try to stop Symone Sanders from speaking up and out. But Symone will not shut up. And neither should you. In this inspiring call to action, Symone tells stories from her own life of not-shutting-up alongside loud young revolutionaries who came before her to help you find your authentic voice and use it to your advantage; to fight ideological battles more effectively; and to resist those who try to silence you. 

After that, she got the Kamala job, at what appears to have been a six-figure, likely $200,000 salary.

She was in the top tier of Kamala officials, one of the big 14.

Her live-in boyfriend is someone who was until recently known as the "night mayor of Washington, D.C.," AKA the "culture and nightlife" official of WDC, so to combine it with her youth and Creighton cred, she's probably a party girl.  It might have been why the Democrats decided to match her up with Kamala.

But now the verdict from Sanders is in: Kamala is a sinking ship.

Good alert: 'Rats always get off the sinking ship before the inevitable happens. (read more)

Ms. Petra Mayer began her career at NPR in 1994. She’s essentially worked for the organization ever since. NPR reported that Ms. Mayer, 46, “died suddenly” at Holy Cross Hospital this past Saturday. Fox 40 in Sacramento also reported that Ms. Mayer “died suddenly.” Of course we know that “died suddenly” and “died unexpectedly” are mainstream media code phrases for post-injection deaths.

There is no concrete evidence that Ms. Mayer received mRNA or viral vector DNA injections. But there is plenty of circumstantial evidence that would effectively meet the preponderance standard in civil court.

Occam’s Razor strikes again

First, Ms. Mayer was a die-hard liberal. Her Twitter profile says “she/her,” and she frequently tweeted about “trans” stuff. A September Gallup poll found that 92% of self-identified Democrats have received at least one injection. An August survey by the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) Foundation, the self-professed “largest LGBT rights organization in the United States,” found that 92% of self-identified “LGBT” have received at least one injection.

Ms. Mayer appeared eager to receive the injections back in March. She utilized a sad-face emoji in expressing disappointment that she wasn’t yet eligible for the shots at that time. Another Twitter user mentioned the vaccination site at Six Flags America in Annapolis that commenced in February.

Distrust of federal law enforcement was, until quite recently, a markedly Left-wing attitude, but it now represents a baseline among Republican voters. In February 2015, a Reuters poll found that almost 84% of Republicans reported a “favorable” view of the FBI. By February 2018, only two years into Donald Trump’s presidency, a different Reuters poll showed 73% of Republicans agreeing that “members of the FBI and Department of Justice are working to delegitimise Trump through politically motivated investigations.” Imagine how those same people feel now, after Special Counsel John Durham’s indictments have exposed the FBI’s role in perpetrating the Trump-Russia dossier fraud.

What does it mean when America’s law-and-order party comes to see law enforcement, along with much of the federal government, as fundamentally illegitimate? The answer is being worked out by a crop of Republicans whose project is to extend the politics of Trumpism beyond Trump. Blake Masters, a close business partner of tech investor Peter Thiel who’s running for a Senate seat in Arizona, has called for “standing up to the bureaucratic national-security state.” In a campaign ad, Masters describes a nation under siege from within, “up against a media that lies to us, schools that teach our kids to hate our country, and corporations that have gotten so big, they think they’re bigger than America.”

There are clear echoes in that message of Steve Bannon, Trump’s original campaign manager and another Thiel associate, who championed a war against the administrative state on behalf of American workers. Bannon lasted less than a year in the White House, but he now runs one of the most popular podcasts on iTunes, War Room, which has more than 100 million total downloads. In an appearance on the podcast this week, Masters told Bannon: “I consider that you simply don’t negotiate with terrorists. And I believe the Democratic Party, Schumer, Pelosi and Biden are holding us hostage.”

Masters, along with two other Thiel-backed political candidates — Hillbilly Elegy author J.D. Vance, who’s running for the Senate in Ohio, and Army Special Forces veteran Joe Kent, a self-described “Trump endorsed America 1st Congressional candidate,” who’s running for a House seat in Washington state — distinguished themselves from other Republicans by offering early and vocal support for Rittenhouse.

It’s easy to see why, since the Rittenhouse trial seemed tailor-made to illustrate the premises of their brand of populist nationalism. A young, working-class, white Trump supporter, Rittenhouse was subjected to a public smear campaign in which President Biden himself impugned him as a white supremacist in a campaign video. Meanwhile, the state prosecution deflected attention away from the evidence supporting Rittenhouse’s self-defence claims and onto his motives by suggesting that he had come to Kenosha looking for trouble — despite the fact that Rittenhouse could be seen on video, shortly before the shooting, offering medical aid to Black Lives Matter protesters.

As the prosecution bumbled its way through the trial and got publicly scolded by the judge, it only further proved the point of those who see an American regime spanning the upper layers of government, media, and business that is not only illegitimate but incompetent, run by emissaries of a “clown world,” as a popular phrase on the Right has it.

“Think about what this says about our disgusting elite leadership in this country,” Vance said in a video message recorded days before the Rittenhouse verdict. “If we don’t defend this young boy who defended his community when no one else was, it may very well be your baby boy that they come for.” The day Rittenhouse’s acquittal was announced, Masters tweeted: “This case reminded us that our justice system, like every other institution our ancestors built, is under siege, and that the besiegers are very close to victory.”

The rallying cry of the “Rittenhouse Republicans,” which at times approaches the rhetoric of revolution, is that the ruling class has become parasitic on the lives of ordinary Americans. “We despise our government & corporations benefiting from the security & labor of our working class solely for the benefit of elites who have no loyalty to our nation, rather they despise us & are using the wealth they generate to fund our decline,” Kent recently tweeted. Both Masters and Kent say they think Trump was the rightful winner of the 2020 election.

Aside from the specifics and symbolism of the Rittenhouse case, publicly supporting him makes sense in terms of the demographic changes in the makeup of the major political parties. While Wall Street business executives and upper middle class professionals now overwhelmingly back the Democrats, the Republicans have, by default as much as by choice, increasingly courted the working class. Over the past decade, the party’s biggest gains have been among white voters without a college degree, and in the 2020 election, it made some inroads with voters of all races without a college degree. (read more)