When Did Smoke of Satan Enter?

Rabbit hole of rabbit holes is the papacy of Francis and the state of the Church. It started when my wife sent this post about some seemingly targeted lightning strikes. “Press releases from Heaven” is a memorable phrase. 

The same author is convinced that Pope Francis is not the legit pope due to Benedict leaving another duress, an “impeded See”. I’m sketchy on the details and terminology but the gist seems to be that Benedict was playing 3d chess (far more believable in his case than The Donald’s). He makes that case here.

Somewhere along the rabbit trail I came across the famous “smoke of Satan” line by Pope Paul VI - which makes credible just about anything with regard to church irregularities, just the rich vein of government lies and censorship suddenly makes conspiracy theories well worth our attention. 

The smoke of Satan line was said on June 29th, 1972 but Malachi Martin places the smoke coming on June 29th, 1963. Which fits neatly into the general theory that 1963 was some sort of inflection point given the deaths of JFK, Tolkien and C.S. Lewis. It was also the year when sex was begun in Britain, according to Philip Larkin's best-known poem. Bob Dylan’s "Blowin' in the Wind” was popular and “The End of the World" by Skeeter Davis.

Liturgy is the linchpin of the spiritual world, and thus the world in general, we might wonder if anything smoky came in the immediate aftermath of that June 29th event? 

Well here we read that seminal books of essays were given imprimaturs before the huge game changing December release of Sacrosanctum Concilium.

Both Sunday Morning Crisis and The Revival of the Liturgy have imprimaturs dating from the summer of 1963, before the second session of Vatican II had even begun. So these essays interpreted Sacrosanctum Concilium before it was eventually promulgated on December 4, 1963, or even fully discussed at the Council. 

These imprimaturs came just post-smoke of Satan, in July and August.  I report, you decide. 

On Parents Who Did Everything Right

Interesting and frank homily from a local priest on the gospel of Zechariah and Elizabeth having their son John the Baptist despite their advanced age: 

“A question I get from parents a million times is, ‘but we did everything right - what happened?’ Or they frame it as, ‘our kids don’t go to Mass..what did we do wrong?” 

When they say they did everything right they add, ‘we sent them to Catholic schools and a Catholic college’ and I’m always tempted to say - but thank God have always resisted - ‘the answer is implicit in what you said...you sent them to Catholic schools’.  

The gospel says Zechariah and Elizabeth were righteous, that they did everything right and still he had no child. Ironically, Zechariah only did something wrong after he received the grace of a child, by his doubting of the angel. 

The core of our faith is ‘grace’, a blessing, an unmerited gift. Grace means that not everything we do, whether right or wrong, matters. God has His plans. It was only after Zechariah gave up his plan for his son and accepted God’s plan for John (by writing, ‘his name is John’ instead of after himself) that he got his speech back. 

Back in the day the church only had masses on Sunday. It was decided that we would add the Saturday vigil since many Catholics who worked on Sundays, like taxi drivers and restaurant workers, would be able to therefore attend mass. The expectation was that mass attendance would go up. But it was immediately shown that there was no increase whatsoever, that some people who previously went on Sundays just changed when they went to mass. The church did the right thing but it bore no fruit, and didn’t achieve the intended result. Zechariah was faithful for many decades but still received no child.  

St Paul wrote that he planted the seed, Apollos watered it, but God makes it grow.”

Rep. Mike Carey's Constitutional Bah Humbug

Donald Trump is a famously bad judge of character (Fauci, anyone?) and his endorsement of our local congressman was no exception. Mike Carey has moved easily from Ohio swamp creature to D.C. swamp creature with hardly a ripple. 

He promised he'd vote like Jim Jordan but has voted nothing like him on anything besides "naming a post office" votes. 

It all started with the curious case of his Ukraine funding fetish. This would not seem to be a natural fit for an outside, first term congressman. But he came to D.C. with his Raytheon-issued boots on. He came ready to fill the swamp.  

His latest outrage was to vote for the NDAA (national defense act). As he surely knows, warrantless queries, also known as “backdoor searches,” are inconsistent with a free society and violate our Fourth Amendment rights.  

On paper this would seem to be an easy vote since it's bipartisan. Every fair-minded American wants the FISA process limited since it can be used against Republicans, Democrats, and Independents. It's not an economic or social issue where there can be honest disagreement (if not much on the latter). 

By its own admission, the FBI and CIA are less fearful of foreign terrorists than Trump supporters so why should Carey be so protective of backdoor searches given that foreign terrorists are such a benign threat? 

Carey is in a "purple" district, which means presumably he has to take some tough votes. But NDAA, really? Are Democrats and Independents in his district dying to continue jack up the military industrial complex and continue the war on American citizens? 

Whatever blackmail the deep state has on Carey, it certainly appears to be working. 

Pope Pius on Christ & Politics

About a hundred years ago Pope Pius XI wrote of the feast of Christ the King and it feels as if it could’ve been written yesterday. A few excerpts: 

It would be a grave error to say that Christ has no authority whatever in civil affairs, since, by virtue of the absolute empire over all creatures committed to him by the Father, all things are in his power.  Nevertheless, during his life on earth he refrained from the exercise of such authority, and although he himself disdained to possess or to care for earthly goods, he did not, nor does he today, interfere with those who possess them.

If, therefore, the rulers of nations wish to preserve their authority, to promote and increase the prosperity of their countries, they will not neglect the public duty of reverence and obedience to the rule of Christ. What we said at the beginning of our pontificate concerning the decline of public authority, and the lack of respect for the same, is equally true at the present day. "With God and Jesus Christ," we said, "excluded from political life, with authority derived not from God but from man, the very basis of that authority has been taken away, because the chief reason of the distinction between ruler and subject has been eliminated. The result is that human society is tottering to its fall, because it has no longer a secure and solid foundation."

Our Lord's regal office invests the human authority of princes and rulers with a religious significance; it ennobles the citizen's duty of obedience. It is for this reason that St. Paul, while bidding wives revere Christ in their husbands, and slaves respect Christ in their masters, warns them to give obedience to them not as men, but as the vicegerents of Christ; for it is not by chance that men redeemed by Christ should serve their fellow-men. 

If princes and magistrates duly elected are filled with the persuasion that they rule, not by their own right, but by the mandate and in the place of the Divine King, they will exercise their authority piously and wisely, and they will make laws and administer them, having in view the common good and also the human dignity of their subjects. The result will be a stable peace and tranquillity, for there will be no longer any cause of discontent. Men will see in their king or in their rulers men like themselves, perhaps unworthy or open to criticism, but they will not on that account refuse obedience if they see reflected in them the authority of Christ God and Man. Peace and harmony, too, will result; for with the spread and the universal extent of the kingdom of Christ men will become more and more conscious of the link that binds them together, and thus many conflicts will be either prevented entirely or at least their bitterness will be diminished.

It is necessary that the kingship of our Savior should be as widely as possible recognized and understood, and to the end nothing would serve better than the institution of a special feast. For people are instructed in the truths of faith, and brought to appreciate the inner joys of religion far more effectually by the annual celebration of our sacred mysteries than by any official pronouncement of the teaching of the Church. Such pronouncements usually reach only a few and the more learned among the faithful; feasts reach them all; the former speak but once, the latter speak every year - in fact, forever. The church's teaching affects the mind primarily; her feasts affect both mind and heart, and have a salutary effect upon the whole of man's nature. Man is composed of body and soul, and he needs these external festivities so that the sacred rites, in all their beauty and variety, may stimulate him to drink more deeply of the fountain of God's teaching, that he may make it a part of himself, and use it with profit for his spiritual life.

History, in fact, tells us that in the course of ages these festivals have been instituted one after another according as the needs or the advantage of the people of Christ seemed to demand: as when they needed strength to face a common danger, when they were attacked by insidious heresies, when they needed to be urged to the pious consideration of some mystery of faith or of some divine blessing. Thus in the earliest days of the Christian era, when the people of Christ were suffering cruel persecution, the cult of the martyrs was begun in order, says St. Augustine, "that the feasts of the martyrs might incite men to martyrdom." The liturgical honors paid to confessors, virgins and widows produced wonderful results in an increased zest for virtue, necessary even in times of peace. But more fruitful still were the feasts instituted in honor of the Blessed Virgin. As a result of these men grew not only in their devotion to the Mother of God as an ever-present advocate, but also in their love of her as a mother bequeathed to them by their Redeemer.

When reverence and devotion to the Blessed Sacrament had grown cold, the feast of Corpus Christi was instituted, so that by means of solemn processions and prayer of eight days' duration, men might be brought once more to render public homage to Christ. So, too, the feast of the Sacred Heart of Jesus was instituted at a time when men were oppressed by the sad and gloomy severity of Jansenism, which had made their hearts grow cold, and shut them out from the love of God and the hope of salvation.

The feast of the Kingship of Christ, which in future will be yearly observed, may hasten the return of society to our loving Savior. It would be the duty of Catholics to do all they can to bring about this happy result. Many of these, however, have neither the station in society nor the authority which should belong to those who bear the torch of truth. This state of things may perhaps be attributed to a certain slowness and timidity in good people, who are reluctant to engage in conflict or oppose but a weak resistance; thus the enemies of the Church become bolder in their attacks. But if the faithful were generally to understand that it behooves them ever to fight courageously under the banner of Christ their King, then, fired with apostolic zeal, they would strive to win over to their Lord those hearts that are bitter and estranged from him, and would valiantly defend his rights.

While nations insult the beloved name of our Redeemer by suppressing all mention of it in their conferences and parliaments, we must all the more loudly proclaim his kingly dignity and power, all the more universally affirm his rights.

Numerical Significance in the Cancelling of Catholic Masses During Covid

I looked back at my journal during the covid period of ten weeks (ten Sundays) of no public masses. It was about 3/16 to 5/31, or 70 days. 

The suppression of public masses across the world seems an epochal event, something I can't imagine has ever happened in church history. 

So I checked out some of the biblical symbolism of 10 and 70. I found this on a non-Catholic site about the number 10: 

“As 10 represented God’s governmental rule, so does the number 10 represent the rule of mankind but also the Evil One behind man’s government (as we see in the 10 toes of Daniel 2 and in Revelation chapter’s 13 and 17 of the beast with the 10 horns). ...Throughout the Bible horns are representative of strength and great power.  In Revelation 2:10 Jesus tells the church as Smyrna, “The Devil will keep on throwing some of you into prison that you may be fully put to the test, and that you may have tribulation ten days.”

There were also ten plagues on the Egyptians, and exactly ten generations that lived up to the flood of Noah’s day when the flood of God’s judgment came. 

On 70, the Egyptians mourned the death of Joseph for 70 days and the years Israel was in exile in Babylon was 70 years. 

Book Review: Naomi Klein's Latest

The intriguing conceit of the book "Doppelgänger" is how the accident of their same first names, ethnic background, occupations and oppositional political positions led Klein to become obsessed with the “other” Naomi: Naomi Wolf. 

Reading Klein is like a voyeur reading a voyeur and it’s interesting to see the funhouse mirror world that Klein inhabits. But what makes it more interesting is she’s not blind to all of her side’s idiocies.  Her mix of credulity (when it comes to the government and Pharma during Covid) and sophisticated self-awareness makes for a compelling read, such as when she writes: “…when something becomes an issue in [conservative world] it automatically ceases to matter everywhere else. This has happened on so many issues that I sometimes feel as if we are tethered to each other as reverse marionettes…” 

Similarly she makes a cogent point about the dangers of what she calls “progressive-cloaked capitalism”, saying it leads to a “war on meaning”, and that what unites the far left and far right is hyper-individualism.

She sees Leftists who have gone to the dark side as unprincipled grifters, but it’s telling she never mentions someone like a Dr Peter Mccullough or a Glenn Greenwald. Klein prefers to “punch down”. 

It’s interesting to see how seriously she takes her legacy and brand and while she’s hardly alone in that it’s a cautionary tale. It's the story of modern journalism in which what elites think of you is far more important than the truth. She seems crushed by Philip Roth’s tarnished legacy, wondering what hope there is for her if his wealth and contrivances failed to protect him. Perhaps that’s the point and lesson: wealth and herculean efforts at self-salvation fail.

The Leftist tendency towards totalitarianism is reflected in her desire for a monopoly on language. She sees, apparently, no debasement in Leftist use of terms like “racist” or “white nationalist” (and, in fact, invokes them spuriously in the book) but also finds it painful when populists use the Left’s proprietary terms like “fake news” and “othering”. She “others” Bannon in this book while accusing him of appropriating the term. (Apparently only leftists are allowed to be among the “other”.)

Her religious bigotry or ignorance is noticeable also in saying that religious people think faith is a defense against disease when actually religious people believe there is an afterlife, which means they aren’t as deathly afraid of disease as she. 

All that said, she is a fine writer and a better one than her doppelgänger. She is wise in saying that the censorship of covid discussion gave fuel to conspiracy theorists and even faults herself for not questioning the narrative, due to not wanting to be conflated with conspiracy theorists. In other words, the truth is not something to be sought for its own sake but strategically deployed which leads to all sorts of negative second order effects.  

One suspects that without the angst over her reputation and legacy she would be freer to seek veracity in directions that do not align with the world’s opinion and may even occasionally align, heaven forfend, with her doppelgänger’s.

2018: The Year of the Red Pill

For me personally, I think 2018 was the pivotal “before/after” year politically and ecclesiastically.  Before 2018 things felt stable, more or less. Sure the pope had put out the controversial AMORIS LÆTITIA in 2016 and an argument could easily be made that that was the signal event, but at the time I thought perhaps it could be explained away or that it was a trial balloon of some sort.  I had no expectations of this being a positive papacy but my attitude was, “we had two decades of conservative popes, now we shall have a decade of liberal”. Fair is fair. 

On the political front, Trump had won in ’16 and was drawing a vitriol that was shocking if not unprecedented (see George W Bush).  You could say that in 2016 the “germs” of great destabilization had been planted (Francis’s ’16 synod and the FBI’s Russia probe of Trump which began in ’16). But it took 2-3 years for the fruits to be exposed and me to catch up with the reality. 

2018 was the crazy year in the Church. We learned of Cardinal McCarrick, who had helped write church policy in the U.S. on pedophilia while having a record of it himself.  It was a wake-up call that the corruption in the church was far greater than we knew. At the same time an innocent prelate trying to fix church finances, Cardinal Pell of Australia, was jailed on a made-up charge.  The combo was so unsettling. Pell would eventually be free’d after a couple years awaiting trials, but McCarrick’s allies continue in the church unaffected. 

Politically 2018 was a watershed year because of the Kavannaugh hearings. The level of bloodsport was off the charts and it didn’t feel like politics but something more demonic. 

Meanwhile, Robert Mueller was still dragging out his report. For three years they’d been investigating Trump on a hunch that he colluded with the Russia government to win the ’16 election and serve Russian interests.  Mueller was seen by some as a Boy Scout, a patriot, who would close the case within a month when he realized that there was no case. Instead he dragged it on till mid-2019 -- thus diverting, distracting, and dividing the American people.  After 2018 I could never see the Democrats, media, or FBI/DOJ the same way. 

So ’18 was the pivotal “before/after” year politically & ecclesiastically.  Before then there seemed a stability, a quality of “things are different but not radically so”. But the guilty McCarrick and innocent Pell red-pilled me. As did the Kavannaugh hearings in ’18 and Russia hoax.

2019 followed up with further confirmations of the destabilization.  You could say that 2018 was the intellectual awakening while 2019 was the more intangible, emotional kind. There was the weird Pope Francis Amazon synod with the Pachamama idol and the fire at Notre Dame in Paris which felt somehow prophetic.  The Mueller report landed with a dud (the equivalent of George Bush rolling into the Baghdad and finding no weapons of mass destruction in 2003), and then the sham House impeachment of Trump.  

So before covid, before the Antifa and BLM riots in ’20, before the stolen ’20 election, before the January 6th entrapment and subsequent hostage-taking by the government, we were already living in a world that felt very different from, say, the Bill Clinton years.

Putting the Local in WinRed Corruption

One of the last American journalists, James O'Keefe, put up this video with an interview with a woman who had no clue that she had donated something like $10,000 to the WinRed political PAC in small dollar donations over a short period of time.  Seems likely foreign money influencing our elections. 

I went to the FEC website, put in my zip code, and literally in two minutes found a guy with a "problematic" donation history. You have to laugh at how much a joke our country is at this point...

Tom Luongo on Trump's Iran Mistake

Tom Luongo: 

I can see the argument that Iran and Russia forced the US to choose between Ukraine and Israel, I can see that the US is forcing Russia to choose between Ukraine and Syria. 

Do I think trading Ukraine for Syria a good trade for Russia? Of course, in every way. Iran can defend Syria at this point; what is NATO going to do? 

When you play out the series of moves it doesn’t end well for the United States which is exactly the plan. Iran has to take the punch in the mouth, they have to sacrifice Hamas, the Palestinians. 

Even Trump is talking about going to war with Iran. The Republican caucus here in Florida is demanding DeSantis stop his presidential campaign. Why? Because Trump just came out in favor of going to war with Iran. Meaning, there’s been a deal made.  And he’ll do this. We have four years of evidence that Trump will do whatever the British want him to do even though it was the British (Steele dossier) that brought on Russia/Russia/Russia. He had four years of these neocons running operation after operation against him and then he comes out and says this, at this moment in time, when he’s got a 50-point lead and every other neocon is dropping out of the race? When everybody who is a Republican of any note wants war,  and Trump who owns the Republican base, could have shown leadership and said, ‘What happened in Israel was terrible.....” and stopped there. We don’t have to be the 800lb gorilla going all over the world beating everyone over the head. 

The Iranians invented chess and the Russians perfected it, the British invented statecraft and now we’re going to watch who perfected that. It’s really dumb, and yet it’s where we’re headed because everybody’s incentives line up for war. Today we are closer to an absolutely ugly long-form conflict than we have ever been. 

The Gospels Show that There's No Limiting Principle to Hate

In the gospels, a scourged and humiliated Jesus is presented by Pilate to the crowds. Pilate thought this would be enough for them, but there’s no limiting principle to hate. So why am I surprised to see that pictures of dead Israelis only create marches with Palestinian signs in American streets saying “finish the job”? 

Why am I surprised that at the end of Russia hoax, there were no apologies or sack cloth and ashes? Why am I surprised that after the Kavanaugh hearing and Kavanaugh being stalked by a gun with a gun, that it didn’t mortify the Democrats? Or why, after Steve Scalise was almost murdered by a Sanders support, that that wasn’t the “come to Jesus” moment? And why am I surprised that a justice system would put hundreds in prison for misdemeanor offenses would not result in the DoJ saying, “that is enough.” 

If the crowds didn’t think it was enough for Jesus to suffer a scourging that hastened his death, then they certainly won’t be moved by a Trump supporter who trespassed on Capitol grounds or a dead young Israeli woman. The gospels are ever timely. 

As John Zmirak recently wrote that our anger should be directed at spineless Republicans and not Democrats: 

"I’m not writing about this to pump up rage at Democrats. That’s like getting angry at alligators, for trying to bite off your legs. Gators gonna … gator. That party is no longer a mainstream, patriotic organization...Their party is no longer under human control, but is instead fully operated by principalities and powers, whose hunger for the blood of the unborn and the severed genitals of children will not be denied. The only response to 'political' programs that stink of brimstone is prayer and fasting. We don’t elect men to Congress and expect them to serve as exorcists."

If Lawmakers Could Have Sex with Ukraine They Would

Interesting commentary from Mark Wauck on the mysterious allure Ukraine has for a large segment of US lawmakers:

McCarthy made a variety of commitments in order to get the votes he needed to be elected Speaker. One of those commitments was that there would be no blanket Continuing Resolutions (CR)—spending bills would be voted on in separate categories. Typically a Speaker will not bring a bill up for a vote unless a majority of his party is on board with it. However, when it came time to send more money to Ukraine, McCarthy realized that he did not have a majority of Republicans on board. To get around his own party’s majority, he violated his commitment and bundled the Ukraine aid into a CR that was then passed with the help of Dems—over the heads of the majority of Republicans.

Gaetz pulled the plug on McCarthy because McCarthy had violated his pledge, but what precipitated it was the Ukraine issue. No doubt various members had various reasons for not wanting to pass the aid to Ukraine. Some, like Johnson, wanted provisions for tracing what happened to the money that was being shipped to Ukraine. That the Deep State could not tolerate. They demanded a blank check, in a manner of speaking.

Now Johnson—third in the presidential succession—will control the process. This not only complicates funding for the Neocon war on Russia, it also complicates any scheme to remove Biden before he can run again. Interesting times.

Tale of Two Views

I recently experienced an interesting convergence of readings from two very different sources: one an erudite atheistic political philosopher and the other a Pentecostal minister and Trump supporter. 

See the convergence, first from the political guru: 

Nowadays every dog in the street know that "wokeness" aka "political correct-ness" aka "progressivism" aka "social justice" is a religion. In 2008 it was an Archimedes-tier insight. That flash of genius was so bomb-intense it gave me, like, genius Tourette's, and I wanted to run naked out of the bathtub screaming Eureka.

I discovered, back in 2008, that the prewar mainline Protestant missionary-industrial complex in the process of morphing into the postwar secular aid-industrial complex. Having shown that our supposedly secular technocracy was in fact a theocracy—and not only that, a theocracy tied to what had been the most powerful English-speaking religious movement (growing out of English Calvinism) for 400 years—felt to me like a complete and sufficient disproof of the state.

After all, the fundamental principle of modern government is the separation of church and state. Nothing could be more important! And yet, simply by evolving away its belief in God— the way a cancer cell evolves away its MHC complex, which tags it for the immune system—this new religion has become basically as powerful as Islam in Iran. Certainly, if you replace all instances of "social justice" etc. with a reference to Allah, etc., you are looking at a pretty darned Muslim country.

Tracing it to the 16th century is easy. Across time, its devotees have been called Calvinists, Brownists, Independents, Dissenters, Puritans, Unitarians, and so on. It was the founding religion of Harvard. It remains the ruling religion of Harvard. Nothing ever happens, nothing ever changes.

The truth is that every stable government is a theocracy —a marriage of church and state. The problem with modern Puritanism is not that it is too integrated with the regime. It is not integrated enough. It is superior to the state; it should be subordinate.The "woke religion" holds unaccountable power over the regime-whereas it (and all other religions) should actually be subject to the secular authorities.

And then from evangelist Lance Wallnau in his book "Chaos Code", who uses the examples from the Old Testament where renewal (including the rebuilding of the Temple in Jerusalem) only come from the combined efforts of a statesman and a religious leader. With the Temple, there would’ve been no rebuilding without both the political statesman Cyrus and Nehemiah and Ezra. 

He brings up Pope John Paul II as an example of his changing Poland when combined with the help of Lech Wałęsa. 

The Deep State's Trump-Shaped Keyhole

Things were more boring, pre-Trump, for sure. Of course that hid a cancer that had grown inside the body politic but ignorance is bliss. It was nice being naive and thinking the Republican Party was a force for good. The temptation is to think that we could’ve limped along with Hillary or a Romney for awhile, but the other side of the coin is we had a cancer that would only grow bigger if left untreated. Trump is the chemotherapy and it’s a bitch in the short-term. It could kill the patient, or it might heal it, but either way there’s no going back at this point. 

Trump has such a unique collection of skills, and is so different, that one can’t help but feel he was sent by God to this nation at just such a time.  I remember asking in 2015 how it could be that Trump and Hillary were the two best choices we had. But Trump, amazingly, was the best choice only because of his flaws. Only he could act so blasé and immune to the danger that he faced from enemies within. Only he, with his long history of having been litigated against, could think that being prosecuted by some of the highest courts in the land was only “business as usual”.  Only he, who paid to have a porn star go away, could be “un-blackmailable” by the bureaucracy. It’s like he used the greatest power arrayed against him and turned it around as a weapon on his attacker. He almost turned J6 into a positive. 

In short, Trump has a political courage born of his narcissism that was the perfectly shaped key that unlocked the secrets of the state.

Trump’s rise reminds us that God still writes with history, and through flawed vessels.

The Demise of McCarthy

So the high political drama today was Kevin McCarthy losing his speakership; subsequently they decided to simply cancel Congress all week and into next week.

I’m worried about a potential delay in Ukraine funding. I think we should lock them all in a room like a papal conclave until blue and yellow smoke appears.


The wonder of it is that Gaetz telegraphed this six ways from Sunday starting back in January when they had the huge speaker fight. And yet there wasn't a sense of urgency on McCarthy’s part. They didn’t open congress on Monday until 6:30pm and renamed a couple post offices before concluding business. Similarly they took a six week summer break even knowing this September bill was coming due. 

To what can I attribute it to? I recall Bill O’Reilly saying the “swells” like George W Bush couldn’t imagine reversals since they’ve had so few. Seems like McCarthy’s failure to take Gaetz seriously might be along those lines?  Just figuring everything will work out even though you don’t have a plan. Or you’re betting the other guy will fold, and on the merits that usually works. Congress is pretty incompatible with a man of principle. 

I tend to agree with journalist Julie Kelly: “Just my opinion, but my sense is if McCarthy had not embraced Ukraine funding all year; formed a separate J6 committee or at least a highly functioning weaponization committee; and immediately moved to impeach Garland, or Wray, none of this happens.”

It’s sort of the toothless Republican brand that McCarthy has embodied well enough. Don’t rile up the Democrats, lose gracefully, and collect your insider trading profits. 

Ultimately Gaetz has a quintessential American aura about him of being either a great hero or a great villain. He's anything but mediocre. 

Speculation on Trans

One of the great mysteries of life is how the trans cult ignited and took off.  If we trace it back to “patient zero” we would go to Bruce Jenner. Did someone get to him and pay him off or did he come up with it on his own? 

Retracing his life we see him in quite a bit of trouble just before the big announcement in April of ’15 that he was “transitioning”. 

In December of ’14 he divorced Kim Kardashian. The gravy train seemed to be slowing.  Even more impactful was the February 2015 fatal multiple-vehicle collision in Malibu. Actress Kim Howe was killed when his SUV ran into Howe's car. Accounts of the sequence of collisions have varied, as have even the number of people injured.  Prosecutors declined to file criminal charges, but three civil lawsuits were filed against Jenner and later settled, with financial details not disclosed. 

So just two months after this horrific accident with the specter of a huge financial need coming, he goes on Barbara Walters.  Coincidence? I don’t doubt he already was into cross-dressing but did the deep state say to him, “we can make your financial and legal problems go away if you come out as a woman”?  It’s a stretch surely but it’s even harder to believe the trans cult happened organically.