It will never end

You do realize that, don’t you? The “COVID” restrictions have no expiration date. They will continue forever, unless they are stopped by force majeure.

People look at me like I’m crazy when I say the lockdowns will never end, but consider that in the US, we are now on day 301 of what was sold to us as a 15-day campaign to slow the pathogen’s spread. Dr. Doom assures us that “we can start essentially approaching some form of normality” this fall, which I would note starts on September 22 this year, or another 254 days from now.

In other words, extraordinary “public health” measures that were supposed to last 15 days have already been extended to 555 days, a timeline predicated on the success of a mass vaccination program that is already faltering as large swaths of the healthcare profession decide they’d rather take their chances with the virus than with a novel mRNA vaccine that was essentially designed on a computer in a matter of hours. We also have no idea how long immunity lasts after getting vaccinated, whether the vaccines even stop transmission of the virus, etc., so it is not hard to imagine this timeline being stretched further into the future. As the CDC website notes:

There is not enough information currently available to say if or when CDC will stop recommending that people wear masks and avoid close contact with others to help prevent the spread of the virus that causes COVID-19. Experts need to understand more about the protection that COVID-19 vaccines provide before making that decision.

To the people who think I’m nuts, my response is to ask what their major malfunction is that prevents them from seeing the simple facts that are hitting them in the face, day after day. Americans accepted lockdowns in mid-March because they were told it would be over in a handful of weeks. Ten months later, restrictions are still in place: mask mandates; offices closed; sporting events canceled; indoor dining banned in places like New York City and California; capacity restrictions in churches; mandatory self-quarantines for people who cross state lines… the list goes on and on and on, a sinister catalog of rules, regulations, cancelations and disruptions that have transformed our lives to the point where it is hard to even remember what things were like before the madness began. Many of the restrictions, like California’s “Stay Home Order,” have no end date; they are literally in place “until further notice“! Not for 90 days; not for 180 days; indefinitely. WHAT WILL IT TAKE FOR SOME OF YOU TO GET THE MEMO? YOU ARE EXPLICITLY BEING TOLD BY THE RELEVANT AUTHORITIES THAT THE MEASURES MAY NEVER END.

On April 4, 2020, I predicted that the lockdowns were here to stay:

Coronavirus appears to be forcing some US troops out of Iraq, a sign that America’s “forever war” in that country may be winding down after just 17 years of destructive and pointless conflict. Ironically, though, SARS 2.0 has inspired the launch of a new type of forever war: the indefinite suspension of society and commerce in the name of defeating a microbe. Call it the forever lockdown. […]

“There is no quick fix” is the message that is increasingly coming from our elites. They are preparing us for a long, miserable and ruinous battle against the microbe, one which our economy, society, and political order are not likely to survive. The forever wars weakened and demoralized America. The forever lockdown, if actualized, will finish us off. Buckle up!

I take no joy in reporting that this prediction is looking pretty accurate just about now. But let me amend it slightly. If the coronavirus does indeed “go away,” either in reality or because the media loses interest in it, then another crisis will quickly be found to replace it as the pretext for continued (albeit modified) restrictions. This could take the form of a new virus, or another fake emergency such as “systemic racism” or “climate change,” which cries out for radical action. If you think I’m exaggerating or losing it, again, I would just ask what is wrong with YOU that you seem unable to process the messages that are being screamed at you nonstop by the people in positions of institutional power.

In November, the American Medical Association declared that “Racism is a threat to public health.” In June, an open letter claiming that “White supremacy is a lethal public health issue that predates and contributes to COVID-19” was signed by a large number of medical doctors and epidemiologists. The letter called for allowing BLM protests while maintaining lockdowns and prohibiting anti-lockdown protests. As for climate change, it has not escaped our rulers’ notice that the lockdowns have slashed carbon dioxide emissions by an estimated 7 percent year-on-year in 2020, or the equivalent of taking 500 million cars off the planet’s roads. It’s perhaps odd that this story has not received more coverage, given the massive ramp-up of climate hysteria in 2019 (again, these things are hard to remember). In any case, don’t be surprised if our rulers announce their intention to “lock in” these emissions reductions. New Zealand has already declared a “climate change emergency,” and the US appears poised to do the same under Fake President Biden:

“Folks, we’re in a crisis,” Biden said at an event in Wilmington, Delaware. “We literally have no time to waste … Just like we need to be a unified nation to respond to COVID-19, we need a unified national response to climate change.”

And last month, a collection of 538 environmental groups urged Biden to declare a national climate emergency. It’s easy to imagine his puppet-masters, drunk with power after taking over the entire federal government on January 20, pushing through such a measure. The restrictions associated with it could end up looking a lot like the COVID response: travel restrictions, limits on consumption, shuttering of commercial buildings, bans on energy-intensive activities such as food service, etc. As the London-based think tank ODI, wasting no time, put it back in early March:

The level and speed of action taken to try and halt the spread of COVID-19 has given us the chance to witness and live in real-time some of the actions that are urgently needed to reduce our carbon emissions. For some, these restrictions might represent a dystopian vision of the future, for others, a real opportunity to tackle the climate emergency. […]

People expect the restrictions on their lifestyles in response to COVID-19 to be short term. But how might governments sustain public support for such restrictions in the long term? Let’s start by being honest.

The recent unpleasantness in the US Capitol gives rise to another possibility, that a bogus “national security threat” will replace or supplement the public health emergency as a means of controlling the population in granular detail. We can see this in the propaganda campaign to designate the incident as “domestic terrorism” and the push for a new domestic terrorism bill that will be used to restrict the activities of Trump supporters. The tech giants that control the flow of information for 3 billion people also appear more than willing to deplatform everyone associated with the MAGA movement, including the sitting POTUS himself.

The conjunction of these government and private-sector actions means that Trump supporters will not only have their freedom of speech curtailed, but also their ability to find jobs, promote their businesses, attend gatherings/rallies, travel, etc. In this context it’s interesting to note that the largest flight attendant union is calling for everybody who participated in the Capitol riots (not those charged with crimes, but those who are identified as having participated) to be blacklisted from flying. Remarkably, the statement adds: “Acts against our democracy, our government, and the freedom we claim as Americans must disqualify these individuals from the freedom of flight.”

This arbitrary, subjectively defined and elastic standard will be used to strip 74 million Americans of their freedoms and civil rights, to isolate them and disconnect them from modern society, for the sake of “national security.” One way or another, the lockdowns will never end.

The big steal

At this point, I think it is very obvious that the 2020 presidential election was stolen. The evidence of fraud and irregularities is massive, overwhelming and damning. The violations of laws and procedures alleged by Team Trump and substantiated by an ever-accreting mass of evidence are more than sufficient to change the outcome of the election, and until a full audit is conducted in each of the contested states of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, there are no grounds for certification of the results. That last point is crucial. Trump does not, in fact, have to prove that any fraud occurred. He merely has to prove that the elections in these states were held in an illegal and unconstitutional manner, which they clearly were, to deny Biden his pseudo-victory.

The Democrats and the media, of course, are not interested in hearing the evidence. Neither are the courts, law enforcement or most of the Republican establishment, for that matter. Almost all of the available remedies to address this historic theft have been closed off to the president and his 74 million supporters. The attorney general (a month ago) stated in an interview that the DOJ had not yet seen fraud on a scale that could have changed the outcome of the election. The courts have rejected lawsuit after lawsuit by Team Trump, mostly on procedural grounds. On the basis of these dimly registered facts, Democrats conclude that there was no fraud. “Where is the evidence?” they ask. “I haven’t seen any evidence.” When the evidence is presented to them, they either ignore it or dismiss it as baseless right-wing conspiracy theorizing, citing the vociferous reassurances of the authorities that the election was free and fair—indeed, that it was “the most secure in American history.” But it does not follow from those reassurances that the evidence is false. Indeed, the prima facie evidence of fraud is so powerful and immediately obvious to any thinking person that another possibility suggests itself: that those aforementioned institutional actors are sweeping the fraud under the rug because they are corrupt and dishonest.

The problem is, most Democrats rule out the possibility that such widespread corruption and dishonesty can exist in our institutions, much as they rule out the possibility that our new permanent global lockdown regime is a totalitarian power-grab, so they reflexively dismiss any evidence that suggests otherwise as fake or baseless. If 2020 taught us anything, it is that there is nothing that can’t be rationalized away. The evidence simply does not matter to those with ideological blinders bolted to their heads. I have no doubt that even a “smoking gun” would fail to change their minds. If an authentic video emerged of, say, Stacey Abrams sneaking into Atlanta’s State Farm Arena in the dead of night with a huge sack marked FAKE BALLOTS slung over her shoulder, the Democrats would say it wasn’t enough votes to change the outcome.

This blog post is not written for those people. Their minds and hearts are closed, perhaps for good. We can always hope that they will have an awakening, but it’s not realistic to expect that a supporter of naked tyranny in the form of ongoing lockdowns would give a quantum of a damn about something as minor as election fraud.

For everyone else—for the roughly half of the electorate, including many Democrats, who know the election was in some manner stolen—and for people who may be on the fence about the issue, I here provide a handy compilation of the key documents laying out the evidence of the steal. The evidence comes in many forms, as Peter Navarro explains in his report, ranging from bizarre statistical anomalies to sworn affidavits testifying to all manner of illegal behavior. If even a fraction of this evidence checks out, every American should be outraged and no American should support the election or installation of a president on such dubious grounds.

Here it is, then—the evidence:

  • President Donald Trump’s speech on election fraud (external link | video | PDF download)
  • The Immaculate Deception: Peter Navarro’s report on election irregularities (external linkPDF download)
  • Texas v. Pennsylvania: Lawsuit filed with the US Supreme Court by Texas and supported by 18 other states (external link | PDF download)
  • Here is the Evidence: Website compiling the anomalies and legal issues (external link)
  • “Yes, It Was a Stolen Election”: Article by John Perazzo at FrontPage Magazine (external link | PDF download)
  • “Reasons why the 2020 presidential election is deeply puzzling”: Article by Patrick Basham at Spectator USA (external link)

The beatings will continue until morale improves

China port source BBC

From Axios, we learn that the Sino-American trade relationship will remain… strained… for a while:

President Trump has no intention of easing his tariffs on China, according to three sources with knowledge of his private conversations. Instead, these sources say he wants Chinese leaders to feel more pain from his tariffs — which he believes need more time to fully kick in.

What we’re hearing: “He wants them to suffer more” from tariffs on $200 billion of Chinese goods, said a source with direct knowledge of Trump’s thinking, and the president believes the longer his tariffs last, the more leverage he’ll have. […]

Behind the scenes: Trump has privately boasted that his China tariffs have driven down the country’s stock market. Experts say the trade war has hurt market sentiment, but the stock market has never been a reliable barometer of Chinese economic strength.

As 罗臻 points out:

A-shares are not a good measure of Chinese economic sentiment, it’s housing. In order to crack the housing market, however, Trump would need to inflict more pain for longer, to the point where China can’t contain the fallout and home prices start sinking 1 or 2 percent per month.

Trump is pursuing the right strategy for his intentions, even if he isn’t watching the right signals. Or maybe the stock market comments are for public (and China’s) consumption.

The Navarro effect

There’s no such thing as a free lunch — anymore:

President Donald Trump announced that the US would pull out of an obscure 144-year-old postal treaty, in what looks to be his latest direct shot at China.

The Trump administration announced Wednesday that the US would leave the the Universal Postal Union treaty, an agreement from 1874 that helps to standardize postal rules among the international community.

The interesting aspect of the UPU decision is a more recent addition to the agreement. The UPU, which is now under the United Nations’ purview, sets rates that national postal services pay to ship goods internationally. Under a deal reached in 1969, developing countries can ship smaller items at lower rates than developed nations like the US. The provision is designed to help facilitate exports from smaller countries to give a boost to growing economies.

But the provision also allows Chinese producers to ship items to the US at significantly low rates even compared to some US domestic shipping rates. The Trump administration says many companies even offer free shipping to the US from China because of these lower rates — and as a result, roughly 60% of inbound shipping to the US comes from China.

Trump’s trade adviser Peter Navarro appears to be the instigator of this move.