Who's running the great, global, "vaccine" extravaganza

 "Who controls the past, controls the future. Who controls the present, controls the past."

Or: if WHO controls the past, WHO controls the future. And if WHO controls the present, WHO controls the past. So WHO's on first.

Say, have we considered that possibility that it is the mass "vaccination", with experimental genetic modification, which could break natural "herd immunity"?

The WHO Is Now Re-writing History - Says "Herd Immunity" Only Results from Mass Vaccination - Negates Natural Immunity

The institutional leftist chic elite ascendancy put on a show press conference

 I did watch some of "president" Biden's "press conference" last week. Not the whole thing, it was kind of excruciating. After some time for reflection on the experience, and a reminder or two, a metaphor occurred: For me, the experience has called to mind opera

They murdered an Uber Eats driver in D.C.

Do we need to bring back the Partnership For A Drug Free America ads, only for Democrat dope government?

You know,

This is your city....

This is your city on Democrat dope government policy, on top of drugs.

Warning! Murder on video (barely off camera, body visible) 

Do You Love Me?

Well that's funny. And, tragic. A childish waste of time and effort. And, a deeply meaningful statement on the human condition. I laughed. I cried.
Boston Dynamics: Do You Love Me?

But wait! There's more!
Citizen Kane: Opera

And, That's all, folks!
Forbidden Planet: Monsters From the Id

I think I qualify (by an objective standard, equally applied) for victim status!

If only an objective, equally applied standard could exist in the leftist mental map of the universe, and I were willing to bow to progressive Democrat tyranny, I could have a place in the line demanding reparations! And my injury is recent, and personal!

I left the progressive Democrat leftcoastian groupthink culture I was born and raised in 40 years ago, to register Republican and vote for Ronald Reagan, after I learned that essential parts of the "intellectual" foundation of the progressive Democrat belief system, for example, the "expectation" that everyone who was not an uneducated beer-swilling hick from the sticks, or otherwise "deplorable", was a progressive Democrat, were simply false.

As it happens, l had started, about 60 years ago, reading SF, mostly "hard SF" (but including a smattering of Bradbury and such), and pretty much no fiction but SF, much of it from the "golden age" (happily, as it turned out, for my ability to think independently despite having been born and raised in Leftcoastian groupthink culture). Also it happened that I was interested in technology, from low to high, and spent time learning how to work with that.

Imagine, if you will, how many times during the last 40 years I have been snootily "educated", by one of the "educated" who had discovered that I can't (in a progressive Democrat's eye) be one of the "educated" due to having an opinion which fails to conform to "educated" opinion.

Imagine, if you will, how many opportunities, in Silicon Valley, where I have lived and worked for 40 years, to apply my technical talents to building a better technical infrastructure, were never offered, because I was not properly "educated and therefore "not a good fit with the corporate culture" of "a very left-leaning place".

Apparently, I've reached the age, and level of, eh, education (in that school which groupthinking left-leaning chic elite "culture" prefers not to acknowledge), where it's fairly safe to assume that _every_ accusation coming at me from the left is projection, and every look down a scornful, left-leaning nose, directed at my lack of "education", and "success", in fact a recognition, in the attempt to deny, of an indictment of the ideology of the downward nose-looker which exists in the bare facts of my experience.

I estimate that "change" has not yet altered the world around me enough to fully resemble the Twilight Zone, but it might be enough to put me within the Outer Limits.

Boxer is a metaphor. Read the book. It's not long.

 When I decided, on election day, 2016, to alter, not my vote, but the commitment implied by it, from the strongest possible vote against a Hillary Presidency to an affirmative vote for a Trump Presidency, and a choice to stand with "the deplorables" rather than the deplorers, I estimated that my background (born, in Leftcoastia, and raised to be progressive Democrat, deploring "those people", but having walked away, in 1980) gave me an unusual (for a non-progressive Democrat) insight, from long familiarity with the ideological assumptions and daily practice of progressive Democratism, and good reason for confidence that the progressives meant, really meant, that it was their way or the highway- they would brook no moderation, and no persons willing to see both sides. So, I could, while knowing I had very good reason for confidence, understand that others wouldn't have such good reason to see (that the progressives were the pigs, and reaching the point of feeling entitled to decide, during a pig only meeting in the farmhouse, to send Boxer to the glue factory).

It's less understandable now, I think.

Animal Farm, by George Orwell

The lying left (now filling the entirety of the Democrat suit they wear) accuse themselves

The central idea of the Trump Presidency can be described simply: push back. Or, as Trump literally said: "I am a counter-puncher." I think that claim, now proven, during 4 years of his presidency, accurate, goes much deeper than critics imagine. Consider it in the light of what constitutes legitimate self defense, and legitimate defense against aggression under the laws of war. It's a matter of record that the New Left declared, about 50 years ago, their intent to achieve "the revolution" (another word for insurrection), primarily by means of a "long march through the institutions" instead of the bomb-throwing, fighting in the streets campaign they advocated, and some attempted, during the '60s, and even later. That doesn't mean they gave up organizing "protest", but that such "protest" was not intended to itself directly achieve "revolution", but to aid the "long march" in gaining positions of power within the institutions from which they could achieve "the revolution" (comparatively) "peacefully" (a "soft coup").

Everything the House managers are accusing Trump of, without compelling evidence, has been the central aim of leftism in the US, to be achieved, in their words, "by any means necessary", during the last 50 years. Evidently Trump is a threat to the plans of that Democrat-skin suited leftism, now installed within the institutions, but that's not in itself a threat to the Constitution, because neither the physical structures of the institutions, or the persons who inhabit them, are the Constitutional government unless they are actually submitting to the Constitution, and are not, themselves, engaged in various forms of insurrection.

Of course leftism lied about all this, but, in their lying, and especially their emotionally manipulating false accusation campaigns (Alinsky rule 13), they also reveal the truth.

When skin suit Democrats accuse Trump's counter-punches of being "a threat to Democracy", they accuse the punches leftism has thrown, during 50 years I can personally recall, the more, and raise the legitimate question of whether it is in fact they who are engaged in actual insurrection.

Reckless Rhetoric is a Reckless Standard for an Impeachment Trial