Dan O’Donnell explains.

Of all the hysterical leftist reactions to Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter on Monday, MSNBC host Ari Melber’s was easily the most revealing.

“If you own all of Twitter or Facebook or what have you, you don’t have to explain yourself,” he gravely intoned during his show Monday evening. “You don’t even have to be transparent. You could secretly ban one party’s candidate or all of its candidates, all of its nominees, or you could just secretly turn down the reach of their stuff and turn up the reach of something else, and the rest of us might not even find out about it ‘til after the election.”

You don’t say. This was in fact the way the left used social media to win the 2020 presidential election. They even admitted it openly in a stunning yet largely forgotten February 2021 article in Time magazine entitled “The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign that Saved the 2020 Election.”

“For more than a year, a loosely organized coalition of operatives scrambled to shore up America’s institutions as they came under simultaneous attack from a remorseless pandemic and an autocratically inclined President,” wrote reporter Molly Ball. “Their work touched every aspect of the election.” Read the rest of this entry »

Robert Arvey finds the establishment’s standard of proof this year impossible to meet.

One of my idle hobbies is writing science fiction stories. The first one will be published after I die, at which point I will become rich and famous.

None of them, however, is as strange as the bizarre world in which we now find ourselves. It is as if criminals had broken into your house, while you were home, in broad daylight, and begun loading up your valuable belongings in a rented truck parked in your driveway. You immediately pick up the phone and dial 911.

“911. What is your emergency?”

“I’m being robbed.”

“Really?”

“Yes!”

“Do you have any evidence of that?”

“Yes! I’m looking right at the robbers.”

“Okay. But do you have any video?”

“As a matter of fact, my security cameras are running right now.”

“Good. Put your phone next to the video and let me see.”

“Okay. Here’s the video, and here is live feed of the robbers, directly from my phone.”

“I see. But there are other possible explanations for what is going on.”

“What other possible explanation could there be? You can actually see them robbing my house.”

“Has any court ruled that they are doing that?”

“Court? What the hell are you talking about? You can see them with your own eyes.”

“Let me talk to them.”

“Talk to them? Are you crazy?”

Just then, one of the robbers hears what you said and takes the phone from your hand. “Hello,” he says. Then, “No, we’re not robbing this guy’s house. He’s just a sore loser.” He gives you back the phone.

“This is 911 again. He denies that he is robbing your house.”

“But you can plainly see him.”

“Sir, there are laws against robbing houses. And you have no evidence of widespread house-robbing.”

The police finally show up, and you say, “These guys are robbing my house.”

“Can you prove that?”

“Prove it? Has everyone gone crazy?”

RTWT

I find whatever this really, really bright guy has to say worth reading, though laborious. His erudite and witty references are downright dazzling, but he hits the reader with so many of them that one feels like one has encountered the intellectual equivalent of a golf ball-sized hailstorm. It gets tiring.

He himself clearly tires of particular points he’s making. There will be a number of paragraphs filled with intellectual acrobatics, delivering rapier-sharp insights and simply showing off. His denunciation of “conservacon” losers amounts to a strong argument. But he never really seems to get around to identifying his preferred alternative. Armed revolution? A new Caesar crossing the Rubicon to end the farce that the Republic has become and to start the Empire?

The Moldbugian Revolution seems destined inevitably to bog down, unable to make progress through his prolix prose. He needs an editor in the worst way.

For those of my own readers lacking the stamina, allow me to summarize:

The Moldbug has no sympathy for us losers. Might makes right, and the democrats demonstrated their virtu, their deserving to win, by using force to steal the election.

Yes, Virginia, the election was stolen. America has a loosey-goosey, complicated, and wide-open electoral system that readily lends itself to fraud. Other countries are considerably more careful.

This election is sending some messages. The messages are: The most powerful branch of the US Government is the unelected Fourth Estate. The NYT was right: The winner of US Presidential Elections is declared by the news media. The media is far more powerful than the Supreme Court. People who voted Republican don’t matter.

Conservatives operate on the basis of an agenda dedicated to good faith operation and preservation of our institutions. Therefore, they will never win. Trump also could not possibly win.

Curtis Yarvin clearly is endorsing some form of undefined revolutionary change.

Read it for yourselves.

Vae victis

The world works this way. It has to work this way. It should work this way. We do have a few things to say—but first, you have to deal. Read the rest of this entry »

Study Finds Connection Between Getting Your Way And Calling For Unity https://t.co/aISRFJMyTW

— The Babylon Bee (@TheBabylonBee) December 4, 2020

Glenn Greenwald, now exiled to Substack (and behind a Paywall), is pretty disgusted at how various arms of the establishment and the Deep State cooperated to keep voters in the dark.

All of these vital facts and questions about Hunter’s activities in China were largely suppressed from the voting population by the bulk of the U.S. media, working in tandem with Silicon Valley (which simply prevented the story from being discussed and shared on its key platforms), and the intelligence community. How was this accomplished? Largely through outright propaganda, a blatant two-pronged lie: that these materials should be ignored because they constitute “Russian disinformation.”

There has never been any evidence that Russia played any role whatsoever in these materials (The New York Times acknowledged that “no concrete evidence has emerged that the laptop contains Russian disinformation” and the paper said even the FBI has “acknowledged that it had not found any Russian disinformation on the laptop”). This newly disclosed criminal probe obviously constitutes very strong evidence of their authenticity, as was the confirmation at the time from several participants in the emails that they were genuine. Critically, not even the Bidens denied the materials from the laptop were authentic, as The Times noted last night in its story about the criminal investigation into Hunter: “The Biden team has rejected some of the claims made in the NY Post articles, but has not disputed the authenticity of the [laptop] files upon which they were based.”

Even the letter used by these media outlets to peddle the “Russian disinformation” lie — from known liars: former CIA and other intelligence community leaders, who claimed that the Hunter laptop story “has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information” — admitted that “we do not have evidence of Russian involvement.”

In sum, we have the extraordinary historic disgrace of media outlets collaborating with the intelligence community in the weeks before a presidential election to manufacture and peddle a propagandistic lie to justify censorship of highly relevant materials about the presidential front-runner and his family’s efforts to profit off his name — namely, that the documents were not authentic but rather “Russian disinformation.” …

Leading up to the 2020 election, much of the U.S. media and Silicon Valley giants decided that ensuring Trump’s defeat was such an overarching goal, a moral imperative, that anything and everything was justified to achieve it — including uniting with the professional liars of the CIA to disseminate blatant falsehoods about the Hunter Biden materials in order to discredit them, lead the public to believe they should be ignored, and justify their own burying and censoring of these materials.

Michael Walsh lists the many reasons that it’s impossible to believe that Biden legitimately won.

Let’s start with this inconvenient and overriding truth about the 2020 election: there is no such thing as a Joe Biden fan. Nobody actually likes Joe Biden, nobody admires him, nobody looks up to him. He’s no one’s idea of role model or an aspiration.

Throughout his nearly 50-year career as a Washington hack politician—a nobody from a state that most Americans can’t find on a map, a lifelong, superannuated swamp dweller who has enriched himself and his family through “public service” and contributed nothing to the commonweal—Biden, 78, has “run” for president on a couple of occasions, only to discover that nobody cared.

His lies about his academic record—he didn’t win a full scholarship to Syracuse law school and didn’t graduate in the top half of his class—were easily exposed, and his speechifying pilferage from other politicians, such as both Jack and Bobby Kennedy and Britain’s Neil Kinnock, made him a laughingstock, even among reporters otherwise favorably disposed toward his brand of big-government Democrat politics.

And yet here he is, the self-proclaimed “president-elect” of the United States, a doddering senescent braggart, serial liar, plagiarist, and handsy hair-sniffer, who is even now assembling a fantasy cabinet chosen strictly along the progressive lines of race, sex, and class. If the count is to be believed, Biden somehow received more votes for president (80 million) than anyone in history, even more than the media-canonized Barack Hussein Obama, whose yes-man and water boy Biden was for eight years.

Nobody attended his few rallies. His notable absence from the hustings gave a new meaning to a “front porch” campaign for the highest office in the land, this one conducted furtively from his Delaware basement. He was often masked—his obeisance to the Dreaded Covid—and almost always accompanied protectively by his wife, “Dr.” Jill Biden, a former teacher at the open-admissions Delaware Technical and Community College, who holds a doctorate in the least demanding academic “discipline” there is, education.

His running mate, Kamala Harris is, if anything, even less popular than Biden. As I wrote in April of 2017, just as America was beginning to get a good look at her: “Imagine a combination of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, and you’ve got Kamala Harris, the current seat-warming senator from California who, like Obama, is using the World’s Greatest Deliberative Body as a resume-puncher before swiftly moving on to bigger things: the 2020 Democrat presidential nomination… She combines Obama’s race with Hillary’s sex, and as identity politics goes these days, that’s going to be tough to beat.”

RTWT