Category Archives: Liberal Press

The EU is sleepwalking into anarchy

Sept. 26, 2022 – By Thomas Faze

Source: The EU is sleepwalking into anarchy – UnHerd

All eyes may be on the Italian election results this morning, but Europe’s got much bigger problems on its hands than the prospect of a Right-wing government. Winter is coming, and the catastrophic consequences of Europe’s self-imposed energy crisis are already being felt across the continent.

As politicians continue to devise unrealistic plans for energy rationing, the reality is that soaring energy prices and falling demand have already caused dozens of plants across a diverse range of energy-intensive industries — glass, steel, aluminium, zinc, fertilisers, chemicals — to cut back production or shut down, causing thousands of workers to be laid off. Even the pro-war New York Times was recently forced to acknowledge the “crippling” impact that Brussels’s sanctions are having on industry and the working class in Europe. “High energy prices are lashing European industry, forcing factories to cut production quickly and put tens of thousands of employees on furlough,” it reported.

Zinc, aluminium and silicon production cuts (amounting to a staggering 50% of output) have already left consumers in the Europe’s steel, auto and construction industries facing severe shortages, which are being offset by shipments from China and elsewhere. Meanwhile, steel plants in Spain, Italy, France, Germany and other countries — more than two dozen in total — are beginning to slow down or entirely stop their output.

The fertiliser industry, which is heavily dependent on gas as a key feedstock as well as a source of power, is in even bigger trouble. More than two-thirds of production — around 30 plants — has already been halted. The German chemicals powerhouse BASF has temporarily shut down 80 plants worldwide and is slowing production at another 100 as it plans further output cuts depending on what happens to gas prices. To make things worse, EU sanctions have also limited imports of Russian fertilisers.

Dwindling supplies of fertilisers are also having a dramatic knock-on effect on European farmers, which are being forced to scale back their use of the key nutrient. This means higher prices for less output, and the consequences are bound to be felt well beyond Europe’s borders, potentially triggering a global food shortage.

But the shortage of fertiliser isn’t the only problem facing European farmers. Across northern and western Europe, vegetable producers are contemplating halting their activities because of the crippling energy costs — in some cases ten times higher than those of 2021 — required to heat greenhouse through the winter and keep harvests refrigerated, on top of rising transport and packaging costs. Greenhouse industry group Glastuinbouw Nederland says up to 40% of its 3,000 members are in financial distress. This further threatens food supplies — and will certainly lead to even higher food prices which, coupled with soaring energy bills, is likely to drive millions of European into poverty. In other words, the European energy and cost-of-living crisis is on course to descend into an outright humanitarian crisis.

In the UK, 45 million people are forecast to face fuel poverty by January 2023; as a result, “millions of children’s development will be blighted” with lung damage, toxic stress and deepening educational inequalities, as children struggle to keep up with school work in freezing homes. Lives will be lost, experts warn. Meanwhile, in Germany’s Rheingau-Taunus district, the authorities have carried out a simulation of what such a blackout would mean for them, and the results are shocking: more than 400 people would die in the first 96 hours. And this in a district of just 190,000 inhabitants.

Now, these numbers may well be overestimates, but the local government can’t afford to ignore them. Indeed, Gerd Landsberg, general manager of the German Association of Towns and Municipalities, has urged residents to stockpile water and food for 14 days. Landsberg says that Germany is “in no way” prepared for such a scenario.

What’s important to understand is that this is not some temporary crisis where all we need to do is grit our teeth through the winter, after which things will return to normal. The reality, as the chief executive of Shell recently made clear, is that if European governments insist on decoupling Europe from Russian supplies, the continent will face gas shortages “likely to last several winters”. It’s a bitter truth, but there’s simply no short-term alternative to Russia’s gas. Indeed, the European Commission forecasts gas and electricity prices to “remain high and volatile until at least 2023”.

To put it simply, if it stays on its current course, Europe is looking at years of economic contraction, inflation, deindustrialisation, declining living standards, mass impoverishment, and shortages — and this without taking into account the terrifying prospect of an outright military confrontation with Russia. How can anyone think Europe can survive this without plunging into anarchy?

The folly of the situation becomes even more apparent when we consider that, in its attempt to reduce its dependence on Russian gas, the EU is increasing its reliance on supplies from countries like China and India — which, it would appear, are simply reselling to Europe gas that comes from… Russia (at a higher price, of course). If people’s lives weren’t on the line, this whole thing would seem like a sick joke.

Europe has lost the energy war

By Thomas Fazi

It’s truly a sign of the feebleness of Europe’s politicians that despite the fast-approaching cliff, no one can bring themselves to state the obvious: that the sanctions need to end. There’s simply no moral justification for destroying the livelihoods of millions of Europeans simply to school Putin, even if the sanctions were helping to achieve that aim, which they clearly aren’t.

And so, rather depressingly, the only voice of reason appears to be that of Hungary’s prime minister, Victor Orbán. For weeks he and other members of his government have been warning about the economic calamity facing Europe. “The attempts to weaken Russia have not succeeded,” he said recently. “By contrast, it is Europe that could be brought to its knees by brutal inflation and energy shortages resulting from sanctions”. This is a statement of fact, not an opinion. But nobody seems to want to listen.

In response, the technocrats in Brussels are proving to be just as senseless as national leaders. Not only is the EU’s gung-ho approach to Russia one of the main causes of the present crisis, but its leadership continues to pour petrol on the fire. Just this month, Josep Borrell, the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, said that “the strategy against Russia is working and must continue” — and promised new sanctions.

Even worse, the EU isn’t even doing anything to help cushion the effects of the crisis it helped create. After dropping the ridiculous proposal of capping only the price of Russian gas — which would have led to the latter’s immediate cut-off — Brussels is now mulling a cap on all gas imports, which even the German Minister of State for Europe has warned could lead to severe shortages.

The proposal also fails to take into account a basic fact: it’s not energy exporters that are ramping up the price of gas; the latter today is linked to the price at which gas is traded on virtual trading markets such as the TTF in Amsterdam, where speculators have been rallying up prices for months, making huge profits. Moreover, in today’s liberalised market, which is based on so-called marginal-cost pricing, the final price of power is set by the most expensive fuel needed to meet all demands — in this case gas. This means that as gas prices soar, so does electricity, even if cheaper, clean sources contribute to the total mix.

So, if the EU were serious about tackling about energy prices, it would decouple the price of gas from speculative trading markets and overhaul the marginal-cost pricing system. But that would go against the European technocrats’ fundamental ideology: the idea that prices should be set by markets. Indeed, the EU was among the most ardent supporters, against Putin’s advice, of the shift from long-term, fixed price gas deals to a system where the price is set by virtual trading markets.

Civil disobedience is coming

Given the unlikelihood of radical reform, what will Brussels do next? In all likelihood, it will settle for half-baked solutions — such as a cap on the excess revenues made by non-gas power plants and a windfall tax on surplus profits — as well as for what it does best: austerity. Meanwhile, the ECB, instead of announcing a new round of bond purchases to provide governments with the cash they need to cushion citizens and companies from soaring gas and energy prices, has started to taper its quantitative easing programmes and hiked interest rates, causing the spread between 10-year government bonds issued by Italy and Germany to widen to their highest levels since the pandemic began. This could easily precipitate a new debt crisis, which is the last thing Europe needs.

Without central bank support, governments in the EU have essentially been left to fend for themselves. Once again we are reminded of what it means for euro countries to have given up the power to issue their own money; it’s no coincidence that the UK alone has allocated more than 50% of what has been set aside by the EU as a whole.

This is already leading to beggar-thy-neighbour policies: those countries, such as Germany, that can rely on financial markets to raise the cash they need to help citizens and businesses, and nationalise or bail out ailing energy utilities, will inevitably outcompete weaker countries that are already facing stress on bond markets, such as Italy. In fact, this is already starting to happen, as more and more countries engage in what can only be described as energy protectionism.

In theory, Europe’s gas security is governed by a regulation adopted in 2017, which makes solidarity among European countries mandatory. But EU countries don’t always observe those rules when confronted with a supply crisis. So, for example, the Italian newspaper la Repubblica recently reported that Italy had received written notification from France’s state-controlled utility EDF regarding a potential two-year halt on power exports as part of France’s energy-saving plans. A spokesperson for Italy’s Ministry of Ecological Transition later confirmed the newspaper report, although it was denied by EDF. Similarly, Croatia and Hungary have both announced that plans to implement measures to limit exports of natural gas to neighbouring countries. While Norway, which has supplanted Russia as the EU’s largest source of gas, making gigantic profits on the back of higher gas prices, has thus refused to back a price cap on its gas exports.

Yet while moaning about such “lack of solidarity” between European states is easy, it is also naïve. This, after all, is simply how capitalism works. For all the talk of “global capitalism”, individual nations — or better, their respective capitalist elites — are still engaged in competition with each other. While the ruling classes of individual countries are more than happy to collaborate to pursue the interests of capital-in-general at the expense of workers — just look at the European Union — their competing interests inevitably re-emerge in times of crisis.

The EU, in fact, far from encouraging solidarity among countries, actually makes inter-capitalist competition even more fierce, by depriving countries of the basic economic tools that are required to deal with external shocks. It doesn’t matter if the continent is experiencing a financial crash, a global pandemic or an energy shortage. In Europe, beggar-thy-neighbour policies aren’t an exception to the rule — they are the rule.


Double standards: The Atlantic Tells the Story of a Doctor Whose Cancer Got Worse After Vaccination, but No Legacy Media Outlet Will Cover the Aftermath of a Boy Who Had Myocarditis

Source: Double standards: The Atlantic Tells the Story of a Doctor Whose Cancer Got Worse After Vaccination, but No Legacy Media Outlet Will Cover the Aftermath of a Boy Who Had Myocarditis

Why are we treating possible adverse events more seriously than a proven one?

Sep 25, 2022

This week the Atlantic published a long essay about a doctor: Michel Goldman, who has lymphoma, and who noticed that his cancer seemed to worsen after COVID19 mRNA boosting. Was the vaccine responsible?

Let me be clear: Is it possible his cancer got worse because of the booster? Absolutely, it is possible. Is it possible the cancer would have gotten worse without the booster? Absolutely, that often happens with lymphoma. Many patients experience what feels like a change in tempo, and it is hard to know what, if anything, precipitated it.

Imagine you put a gun to my head, and ask me to make the call. Is it related or unrelated? But you are a kind, and say you will give me 1 month, and allow me to use any data sources. I would do something very simple. I would go to a large electronic medical record with images. I would pick an incurable lymphoma where there is often repeat imagining— such as follicular lymphoma. I would extract images from patients (let us say 500). Some patients would have gotten boosters and others not— and it will not be random— this is a limitation. But, I can’t make excuses, I have a gun to my head.

I would use the raw images to calculate the g- or growth rate coefficient before COVID vaccination, and the g or growth rate after COVID vaccination (using established methods, see Fojo, et al.).

As a falsification test— (Learn about that here)— I would use the patients’ birthday to define a g before a birthday and a g after a birth day.

Here is the hypothesis: if the vaccine accelerates growth, the growth rate will change after boosting, but— let us be clear— it would not change at time of patient’s birthday. That’s the purpose of the falsification test— to serve as a negative control. You could also use a random day of the year for your falsification test. And you need a group of people to get a sense of the distribution.

With access to a nice dataset and omnibus IRB, a project like this could be done in 3 weeks. If I was allowed to involve Logan Powell— a Texas medical student who has done ~20 papers with me— we would be done in 2 weeks, because that kid doesn’t sleep. And, honestly, with Logan’s help (again, dude doesn’t sleep), I can think of 5 different studies to run to complement this analysis.

Do you know what I wouldn’t do? I wouldn’t extensively pour over the story of the individual Michel Goldman— because nothing can be found in one anecdote to help me. The yield will be low. And do you know what I really would not do: I wouldn’t broadcast this story in the Atlantic before I had strong evidence the link might be real!

Meanwhile, there is a proven safety signal I don’t hear much about in the legacy media. Myocarditis for boys after mRNA vaccination. It occurs as often as 1 in 3,000 after primary vaccination and 1 in 10,000 after boosting. It has very rarely but really resulted in young people ending up on Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation. It could be lowered (surely) if we banned Moderna in men <40, (possibly) if we lowered doses, (likely) if we spaced doses apart, and (surely) if we minimized doses in young men who already had COVID19. And yet, we have done nearly none of these things! The CDC only spread doses after a year of inaction, and we haven’t taken natural immunity seriously.

Vaccination means trying to maximize efficacy and minimize harm, but when it comes to young men, we haven’t taken the harm seriously and haven’t tried to minimize it. Yet, I don’t read this in the pages of the Atlantic. I just read about a famous old doctor who thinks the vaccine made his cancer grow faster. What is going on?

The entire episode led me to several conclusions:

  1. If he wasn’t a rich doctor; this would not be in the news. How sad is it that the experience of everyday Americans is not considered acceptable for news coverage. Many people have felt a range of medical issues were triggered or worsened by vaccination, but the media steadfastly refuses to cover those stories. Yet, in this case, they make an exemption because the individual is famous. I find this problematic. I prefer to not cover any anecdote, but this idea that if it happens to an electrician- it is anti-vax, but if it happens to a doctor- it is news— that’s problematic.
  2. Cancer accelerating after vaccination is not yet established as linked to COVID19 vaccination, but 2 things are fully established. Blood clots and runaway platelet activation after J&J vaccination is fully proven to be linked to the shot. And myocarditis, particularly in young men, has been linked to mRNA vaccines. And yet: I have never seen coverage of the human cost of either of these in any major news outlet!
  3. The news media could easily cover a poor young man who was forced to be boosted by his college or university, and experienced myocarditis. This occurs at the rate of 1 in 10k. One news story like this would be powerful— and strongly discourage these mid level managers from mandating novel medical products. And yet the media is silent on these stories. Why does the doctor get special treatment for a side effect that has not yet been vetted?
  4. What about this story of a 14 year old boy? Why is this (or a similar story) not in the Atlantic? Instead a doctor gets his unproven anecdote widely broadcast? 


  5. What about the young woman who had clot and brain damage from J&J? What about her family? Why no coverage of that? The news could also note that some (dim) scientists on Twitter compared runaway platelet activation after J&J to a blood clot in the leg after oral contraceptives. This was a deceptive and ignorant comparison that furthered preventable harm. Why does the media not cover this story? Why only a possible side effect— unproven— in a famous scientist?
  6. Consider the risk gradient here. Young people have far less to gain from each additional dose of vaccine, and even rare risks become salient. Older people who suffer from cancers that often lead to (or therapies lead to) b-cell inhibition face much higher risks of COVID19. Why are we covering an anecdote that might lead a higher risk population to forgo vaccination vs. lead colleges to consider that a lower risk population ought not be compelled? The whole thing is backwards.
  7. The White House is doing massive damage to our institutions— particularly the FDA— as they push a new booster based solely on mouse data. Their unethical pressure led Gruber and Krause to resign. They could have compelled Pfizer to run RCTs, but chose not to. The legacy media is largely complicit with this, writing many articles defending this choice, but it is entirely unprecedented. And yet, instead, they are happy to cover a putative side effect that might not even be related?
  8. I have no doubt there may be adverse events attributable to vaccines that are not yet established, but we don’t need to profile the people who have these (not yet), we need careful epidemiological studies. I agree the CDC’s passive collection is suboptimal, and I also no longer trust them, as I believe they have been captured by political winds, but the solution is better systems and independence, rather than covering anecdotes in the media.
  9. The Atlantic coverage is balanced and fair, but that’s not the point. The mere act of covering the anecdote to millions of readers, elevates it to something intensely plausible or true. No matter how much confidence you place in it, the truth is mycocarditis is more plausible and more true and should be preferentially covered. And yet there is no story of a boy who lost a football scholarship because he can’t play. Or a kid still ravaged with late gad enhancement after surviving mycocarditis. This discrepancy is fundamentally unfair.

The media coverage of vaccines and side effects is awful. They lack a philosophical framework and are unmoored. This article nicely shows how that is the case. Whether they choose to improve is beyond me. They have too much allegiance to the Biden administration, and have failed American boys as a result.

Like CommentComment ShareShare

If you liked this post from Sensible Medicine, why not share it?


C&C. Proud of President Biden. So Lucky to have MSM.

Discount to your heart’s content. I think Mr. Childers is right on the money. The President, the Democrat Party, the MSM and most “swamp Republicans” are responsible for every ounce of good will, friendship and integrity that America loses each day. At best its crickets from these people: “Send me money!!” I’ll take the likes of Jim Jordan, and Gov. Desantis any day.

Source: Coffee & Covid ☙ Friday, August 26, 2022 ☙ MYSTERY BABYLON


🔥 It’s affidavit day! Yesterday, side-swapper and former Epstein lawyer Bruce Reinhart, Magistrate over the Biden Raid case, ordered the FBI to disclose its heavily-redacted search warrant affidavit by sometime today, conveniently heading into the weekend news cycle. The redacted affidavit was already prepared and the Magistrate has already reviewed it. So the order looks to me like puffing; he’s ordering them to redact and disclose an already-redacted affidavit.

Anyway, here’s what the Magistrate’s order said about the redactions:

Based on my independent review of the Affidavit, I further find that the government has met its burden of showing that the proposed redactions are narrowly tailored to serve the Government’s legitimate interest in the integrity of the ongoing investigation and are the least onerous alternative to sealing the entire Affidavit.

Narrowly-tailored! Remember that phrase for when we see the document. It’s heartwarming that the FBI got all their redactions EXACTLY RIGHT on the very first try. Great job! It’s a crime-fighting miracle. Absent from this latest order was any of the high-flying language from the last order about the unprecedented nature of the investigation, the public’s interest, and so on. This order was all business.

So we’ll see whether whatever is actually disclosed today moves the needle at all. I have no predictions, none; we’re in all-new territory, and Kamala spilled her blackberry wine cooler all over the map again.

💉 CNN picked up the Fetterman stroke-speech story yesterday — after C&C covered it — and the clip below includes some helpful examples of Fetterman’s obvious post-stroke cognitive struggles:

You win some, you lose some. At least he won’t have any serious side effects from COVID.

🔥 The UK Telegraph ran a story yesterday that will gratify many of you headlined, “Rishi Sunak Is Just the Start. The Great Lockdown Scandal Is About to Unravel.” The sub-head explains, “The pseudo-scientific sheen is finally being stripped off the decision to shut down Britain.”

Rishi Sunak was Britain’s Chancellor of the Exchequer during the pandemic, and recently ran to replace Boris Johnson. His campaign stalling, he is now talking to journalists about the climate of fear and total control inside the British government during the early pandemic when lockdowns were originally being cooked up.

Sunak says that virtually all decision-making was handed over to a small group of cherry-picked lockdown scientists, and everyone was expected to go along or face political destruction. In other words, the lockdown instructions were coming from the top. The article describes it like this:

Questioning lockdown, even in ministerial meetings, was seen as an attack on the Prime Minister’s authority. To ask even basic questions – about how many extra cancer deaths there might be, for example – was to risk being portrayed as one the crackpots, the “Cov-idiots”, people who wanted to “let the virus rip”. Hysteria had taken hold in the heart of Whitehall.

The paywalled article is a very interesting read for folks who hope that accountability will someday catch up with current events. Here are my favorite two paragraphs:

The disclosures should start a great unravelling of the lockdown myth, its pseudo-scientific sheen stripped away and the shocking political malfeasance left to stand exposed. Were Sage minutes manipulated, with dissent airbrushed out? If Sage “scenarios” were cooked up on fundamentally wrong assumptions we need to know, because that will mean lockdowns were imposed or extended upon a false premise. A premise that could have been exposed as false, had there been basic transparency or proper scrutiny.
This isn’t just about a virus. An autocratic streak took hold of the Government and overpowered a weak Prime Minister – and did so because our democratic safeguards failed. It should have been impossible for policies of such huge consequence to be passed without the most rigorous scrutiny. So many lives were at risk that every single lockdown assumption should have been pulled apart to see if it was correct. It should have been impossible for government to suspend such scrutiny for more than a few weeks.

This is a good start, and it’s encouraging to see it in corporate media. But a huge question remains: Who was directing this from the top? WHO or WHAT was able to coerce nearly every government on Earth into going along with the lockdown program, no matter the cost, all within a few days of each other?

Obviously, we can only speculate. For my Revelation watchers, these verses seem like a hint:

“Then the angel carried me away in the Spirit into a wilderness. There I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast that was covered with blasphemous names and had seven heads and ten horns. The woman was dressed in purple and scarlet, and was glittering with gold, precious stones and pearls. She held a golden cup in her hand, filled with abominable things and the filth of her adulteries. The name written on her forehead was a mystery:




Revelation 17:3-5.

I don’t know. I’m a lawyer, not a theologian. But to me, it seems like a pretty good description of the mysterious whoever or whatever orchestrated the global pandemic response.¹

🔥 Joe Biden has now gone 40 out of 56 days without taking a single question from the media, and he has not sat for an on-camera interview since February 10th.

🚀 Remember when Biden jetted over to Israel and Saudi Arabia, fist-bumping everybody, all notwithstanding having sworn during the campaign to make the Saudis into a “pariah nation” for assassinating a woke international journalist and probably spy of some kind? But it was all okay, no problem bwana, because Joe’s high-minded trip was well-intentioned, for the express purpose of brokering Middle East peace, and it was definitely NOT to beg the Saudis for oil. (How dare you.)

Well, it turns out Joe’s interest in Middle East peace comes and goes. You have to catch him on a good day.

The Times of Israel ran an embarrassing story Wednesday with the oblique headline, “US Said to Rebuff Request for Lapid-Biden Call, Gantz-Austin Meet Amid Iran Push.”

Haha, I don’t wonder the Times of Israel soft-pedaled the headline. What really happened was, Israel’s Prime Minister Yair Lapid urgently called Biden to talk to about the Iranian nuclear situation, saying it was an emergency. Then — get this — he was icily told “Biden is on vacation, dummy. He’ll call you back when he’s in the office.”

I am not making that up or exaggerating in any way, I swear. Here’s how the Times of Israel described what happened, in its own words:

> [T]he White House recently rejected an Israeli request for an emergency phone call between Prime Minister Yair Lapid and US President Joe Biden… the president’s office claimed Biden was unavailable for a conversation with the premier because he was on vacation. However, the sources emphasized that the talk would be arranged eventually.

“CLAIMED Biden was unavailable,” haha. Good one.

Now remember, Israel is the U.S.’s MOST important Middle-East ally. Allegedly. And Israel is armed to the wisdom teeth with nukes. And it has sworn to start a preemptive nuclear war if necessary to prevent Iran from getting its own nuclear weapons. And Joe was JUST THERE a month ago to “broker peace” in the region. So that’s a lot of reasons to take the call right there.

Now add the fact that Joe is on his FOURTH WEEK of being out of action, two weeks of double-covid quarantine, followed by two weeks of vacation to recover from his harrowing brush with death. I mean, at HIS AGE, Joe practically has to brush the Wings of Death out of his mouth every time he takes a nibble from his Rocky Road triple scoop. They’re basically sharing a bathroom at this point.

The U.S. is about to close a deal with Iran, which has demanded even more money, the legitimization of its terrorist front group, higher allowed levels of nuclear enrichment, less oversight, the instructor’s manual to some class called “How to Build a Nuclear Bomb,” free passes for Disney cruises, and six truckloads of all-green M&Ms with Khamenei’s face printed on the sides. For its part, the U.S. has demanded that the Iranians sign the deal, any deal, it doesn’t matter, just sign the damned thing.

You wouldn’t know anything about this appalling spectacle by reading U.S. corporate media, it’s embargoed. I had to use Israeli sources and translate the whole thing from Hebrew:

Haha, just kidding. The Times of Israel has an English language version. But I’m NOT kidding that U.S. media is pretending like the story doesn’t exist, like a bunch of teenagers carefully stepping over a puppy accident to grab a power-bar from the kitchen and muttering, “what? I didn’t see it.”

The Hebrew state is conflicted about what to do about the pending Iran deal. The Jerusalem Post illustrated the difficulty in an article Wednesday headlined, “Lapid Close to Criticizing Biden on Iran as Netanyahu Looms Large.” The sub-head asked the pressing question, “Should Israel ‘play nice’ with the White House or be aggressive when it comes down to Iran nuclear talks?”

The article reports that Prime Minister Lapid is not super copacetic with the proposed M&M deal with Iran, but neither does he want to get sideways with Biden. He delicately told reporters, “In our eyes, [the Iran deal] does not meet the standards set by President Biden himself: preventing Iran from becoming a nuclear state.”


🚀 I need to brief you in on the Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Plant situation, because it’s big and murky and mostly embargoed. I’ll start with a Hill article yesterday headlined, “Biden, Zelensky Discuss Concerns Over Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Plant.”

Haha, Israel, vacationing Biden doesn’t have time to talk about YOUR nuclear problems with Iran, but he does have all the time in the world to chat with the dancing comedian about HIS little nuclear power plant issue.


A White House call summary explained, “The two leaders also called for Russia to return full control of the Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant to Ukraine and for International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) access to the plant.”

Like THAT is going to happen.

So what is it? Zaporizhzhya is the largest nuclear power plant in Europe. Russia has safely and quietly controlled the plant since early in the war. But lately the Ukrainians have been lobbing mortars at the plant, for weeks now, which is making a lot of people very nervous about a potential ‘accident’ that could be literally one million times worse than Three Mile Island multiplied by Chernobyl.

Currently, Ukraine enjoys the protection of a fully-powered-up criticism shield, which destroys all Western media that touches it. So, OF COURSE the Zaporizhzhya threat is ALL Russia’s fault — not the bat-guano insane Ukrainians firing explosive rounds at a NUCLEAR POWER PLANT. Are you confused? It’s Russia’s fault because Putin started the war in the first place. See how easy that was?

Ironically, the Ukrainians have justified the shelling by accusing the Russians of storing ammunition and military supplies inside the reactor grounds. I say ‘ironically’ because Ukraine has itself been credibly accused of placing ammo and supplies in civilian locations like schools, shopping malls, apartment buildings, and churches.

But I don’t know if they’re truly comparable. It seems like a nuclear reactor is a strategic, non-civilian site, and if you captured it, you’d probably want some military hardware there, because capturing a target is only half the equation. You also have to KEEP the target. You don’t want nuclear power plants falling into the wrong hands.

But I’m just a lawyer, not a woke, unattractive cross-dressing general. So what do I know about military strategy?

🔥 Yesterday, citing obvious safety concerns, the Russians disconnected the Zaporizhzhya plant from the European power grid for the first time in history. Since it is almost impossible to find any credible reporting about the situation in Western corporate media, I am forced to rely on local independent reports on Twitter, which suggest the power outage continues this morning:

The ability to turn the power on and off is an ace card for the Russians. From the beginning of the war, I wondered about why the Russians were not taking out all Ukraine’s power. It would be child’s play. But it has become clear over time that the Russians are being extremely careful to avoid damaging civilians and civilian infrastructure as much as possible.

Leaving the power off for too long will create a humanitarian disaster, which the Russians seem to be trying to avoid. But strategically turning it on and off at critical moments, like maybe whenever U.S. congresspeople come for photo ops and to deliver or pick stuff up, could be a very useful weapon in the overall war effort.

This may just be another one of those myriad of stories that mysteriously fades away again after the outrage machine billows smoke and pivots loudly toward a different target. But I thought you should hear about it.

🔥 In the bottom story of the day, the crack squad of highly motivated personnel down at the Texas Child Protective Services’ office are getting, um, creative about ways to help orphaned kids. Fox 26 Houston ran a story last week headlined, “CPS Employee Caught on Camera Telling 14-Year-Old Girl to Become a Prostitute.”

It seems like that’s exactly what happened. CPS has already fired the worker and is trying to move all the involved kids around, leaving some parents complaining they are being punished for blowing the whistle. CPS has not denied any of the allegations. What happened was, a 14-year-old runaway living in a state-supplied motel, waiting for a foster placement, went in to the Houston CPS office to complain about being hungry. Because she’d received sketchy advice before, the teen used her cell phone to record the CPS worker’s advice.

In the video, the CPS worker can clearly be heard telling the girl she could make up to $1,500 a day as a prostitute, so that she can get some food. It’s a pretty wild story, but at least Child Pimping Services, I mean PROTECTIVE Services, did the right thing and buried the story beneath a thousand banker’s boxes of red tape.

Who cares how many times it’s happened before, whether there are other caseworkers involved, or whether there even might be an organized sex trafficking ring operating out of that office?

Don’t be nitpicky.

🔥 Finally, to warm your hearts, Governor DeSantis — who has been on a ROLL for two years now — took a hostile election question from reporters yesterday, jammed it into a political hand grenade, and tossed it right back at them:


I hope ya’ll have a fantastic Friday, and I’ll meet you back here tomorrow for the weekend roundup.


C&C is moving the needle and changing minds. If you can, I could use your help getting the truth out and spreading optimism and hope:

Twitter: @jchilders98
Truth Social: @jchilders98
C&C Swag!
Emailed Daily Newsletter:



Revelation Chapter 17 continues by describing the beast’s heads and horns as representing the kings of the earth. So, the beast represents world government, the horns and heads represent the leaders of earth governments, and the Prostitute is sitting on the beast, controlling it. Get it?

Like CommentComment ShareShare

You’re a free subscriber to ☕️ Coffee & Covid 2022 🦠. For the full experience, become a paid subscriber.