We are all by now familiar with cancel culture's version of a pile-on, whereby the selected victim is subjected to a constant barrage of vitriol from all directions. Sometimes the target is complicit, sometimes not. Grovelling apologies, of which they have been many, are rarely effective. Most times, in any normal world, there would be nothing to apologize for but, as we know, normal disappeared over the horizon getting on for four years ago. One of the most recent victim was not entirely blameless, but the intensity of the take-down was something to behold. When one considers the alleged offence, the overreaction by almost every party involved is epic, as is the hypocrisy on the part of the prime accusers.
Luis Rubiales was the president of the Royal Spanish Football Federation (RFEF). He had been in post since May 2018 and, prior to that, he served as the president of the Association of Spanish Footballers for seven years, starting at the age of 32. His tenure was not without the odd speed-bump, with accusations of financial impropriety being aired, and he certainly seems to have made his fair share of enemies. It's difficult to know whether he was ruffling feathers because he was doing his job or otherwise. At any rate, it seems that he was not under investigation.
The manager of the women's national team was Jorge Vilda, in position since 2015. He had replaced a gentleman named Ignacio Querada, who had been in post since 1988. The team hadn't done well, despite the abundance of talent, and the players felt that the RFEF was somewhat indifferent to them. They demanded the manager's replacement in 2011 and in 2015; multiple players refused to continue in the national squads unless changes were made. It was alleged that Querada had been responsible for a “culture of rampant fear, bigotry, sexism and homophobia”.(1) It seems that the manager wasn't a fan of homosexuality, which may not have made him the ideal candidate to manage a women's sports team.
It's not possible for this writer to parse the evidence one way or the other. Spain may be a more traditional society than some in the West and a movement called fourth wave feminism has made a substantial impact of late. It may be that some of the advances that feminists have made in other countries, particularly in the Anglosphere and in Scandinavia (whether for better or for worse), have yet to be fully realized in Spain. Fast moving societal change may, therefore, also have impacted the dressing room.
In any event, come 2022, the senior players were once again of the opinion that a fresh start was needed; they didn't like the training or the tactics and they thought that the manager was too authoritarian. In September, fifteen of them emailed the RFEF, stating that they did not want to be called up to the national team. Other players publicly supported them. Rubiales supported the manager and the manager took the rebels at their word and didn't select them for the friendlies in October. The team, nonetheless, did well.
Once again, it's difficult to be definitive about the rights and wrongs of the dispute, but it's fair to observe that the players do seem to have developed a habit of withdrawing their labor if they don't get their way, a tactic that will lose shock value over time. It certainly didn't have the desired effect on this occasion; Las 15 largely stayed away, although three of them accepted selection for the 2023 World Cup and were successfully re-integrated.
I can see that the wider commentariat, dominated as it is by the wokesters, might have had a degree of ambivalence when Spain started winning their group games, without the dissident dozen but still with the manager. The complaint had been that they had under-performed and that this was due to poor management (rather than their own shortcomings) and yet now they were winning.
As an aside, the only facet of the saga that remained largely unexplored by all concerned was the culpability (or otherwise) of the players themselves for their previously underwhelming results. My impression is that the reasons for this omission are twofold. Firstly, the RFEF had been cast as the pantomime villain and nothing was to be allowed to raise any doubts as to that premise and, secondly, while Spain has very talented footballers, there has historically been a fractious relationship between players at the two biggest clubs (Real Madrid and Barcelona). There is a suspicion that this animus may have impaired the national team's performances.
The likes of the BBC busied themselves peddling the 'despite all the discord, the ladies are pulling together' line, without apportioning any of the credit to the manager, who had managed to fashion a winning run while missing an entire team. It would seem that when the team loses, it's the manager's fault and when it wins, it's all down to the players. And they kept winning, playing expressive, exciting football, eventually beating England in the final to become World Cup Winners for the first time. And that's when the wheels fell off, once again.
As the players were receiving their medals Rubiales, in his excitement (and he was excited)
Figure 1
Figure 2
briefly kissed one of the players (Jenni Hermosa) on the lips.
Figure 3
which doesn't look great. However, treating that image alone as representative of the unvarnished truth would be a mistake, when one factors in this image taken moments later
Figure 4
and realizes that Figure 1 was taken last; the Spanish players in the background don't look to be overly traumatized. The entire interaction between Rubiales and Hermosa lasted 11 seconds, including a slap on the back as Hermosa walked away. Nonetheless, in the present day – and, more particularly, in the present day in Spain – Rubiales would have been better advised to contain his excitement; but perhaps that's just how he is.
The outrage machine took a short while to crank into life. In the immediate aftermath, the player herself and her teammates were not yet aware of their allotted roles and so behaved relatively normally. Hermosa was laughing and joking at memes of the kiss on the team coach after the game. Once again, trauma would appear to be absent.
Figure 5
It took Hermosa three days to make a complaint, so she seems to have some honor, at least. But by then, Rubiales had already been thrown under the bus by all and sundry. However, on the day in question, the kiss was not an issue. The BBC, not an outlet to knowingly let an opportunity for wokeism to be celebrated pass it by, doesn't even mention it in after match report which reflects on Spain's campaign. The players seemed appreciative of the manager, too.
Figure 6
The storm broke the next day, with the Spanish media (not Hermosa or the players) leading the way, although Hermosa had by then decided that she didn't like the kiss after all (although she was laughing as she said it) and had posted that sentiment online, but a later statement issued on her behalf – on the day of the final - defended Rubiales' actions.
"It was a totally spontaneous mutual gesture because of the immense joy that winning a World Cup brings. The president and I have a great relationship, his behaviour with all of us has been outstanding and it was a natural gesture of affection and gratitude. A gesture of friendship and gratitude cannot be gone over so much, we have won a World Cup and we are not going to deviate from what is important."(2)
Which is a gracious and clear-headed take on the entire affair and, importantly, contains the word 'mutual'. Rubiales apologized anyway and that should probably have been that. But it wasn't. Whoever it was that told the press to go all in on Rubiales is not within my knowledge, but whoever (or whatever) it was, possesses plenty of clout.
The hysteria was rapidly turned up to eleven and the world and his wife felt that they had the right to weigh in. The tumult was undoubtedly increased by Rubiales' refusal to resign, even in the face of the Prime Minister and his deputy tag-teaming a response that said the apology was insufficient and that Rubiales should step down.(3) He still refused.
The mob, however, was just warming up; as we have seen elsewhere, intransigence in a victim induces mass hysteria. Along with the Spanish players' now obligatory renewed refusal to play – this time 81 of them, including the entire World Cup squad - Spain's female Minster for Equality called the kiss a “form of sexual violence”,(4) FIFA (football's world governing body) launched disciplinary proceedings and suspended Rubiales, the entire women's coaching team (except the manager, Vilda) also quit and prosecutors opened a sexual assault investigation and also issued an entirely pointless restraining order banning him from going within 200 meters of Hermosa.(5)(6) The RFEF, which had backed Rubiales initially – even threatening legal action against Hermosa – eventually found the heat in the kitchen too hot and also demanded his resignation.(7)
Rubiales stuck to his guns for some time, which he was clearly perfectly entitled to do. He withstood the daily hate for longer than most, to the outrage of his accusers. As the days turned into weeks, some became untethered from reality. But they got their man, in the end. First to go was Vilda, who hadn't kissed anyone and had just won the World Cup despite the best efforts of some of his players. The interim president of the RFEF couldn't even provide a reason, but he was obviously intent on ensuring that his neck was not the next to be under the guillotine.
One might have thought that, given Rubiales' allegedly horrific actions, that he'd be the one to be sacked, rather than the manager but, for some reason, the RFEF seemed to stay its hand. Five days after the Vilda sacking, Rubiales bit the bullet and finally resigned, thus ending three weeks of utter carnage. Or perhaps not. The new manager, a woman, has just called up 15 of the players who are boycotting the national team, which has upset them further. Hermosa, however, wasn't one of them.
The newly incorporated Las 15 MkII expressed their regret that they had again been “put in a position we never wanted to be in” and reiterated their desire to spend more time with their families or whatever. I fear that they are fast wearing out their welcome with sensible people, although the feminist faction are no doubt in for the long haul. The players want changes so that they feel they're in a “safe place”; they stress that they believe that they are “professional” and that what fills them with most pride is “wearing the shirt of our team”.(8) Their demands include a complete overhaul of the RFEF, a new organisation solely for women's football and another round of sackings.
However, eventually a calm of sorts has broken out. The players returned to the fold – mostly, initially at least, because they feared the legal and financial consequences of failing to do so – and the authorities did a good enough job of abasing themselves, although it wouldn't be surprising if further heads rolled in the near future.(9)
One might conclude that players who have effectively blackballed the national team twice in eighteen months are unwise to claim that are professional or that the shirt is so important to them. One might also think that it's their job to play and other people's job to manage and that perhaps they should stay in their own lane a little more frequently. The “safe space” reference places them firmly at the neurotic end of the scale, given the uses to which that phrase has been put by Leftist undergrads and others. They are also no doubt aware that the federation could have its licence suspended under Spain's Sports Act. But, as is the case with all members of the progressive alliance, they doubled down repeatedly. Ultimately, they gave the impression that they recognize no authority other than their own.
And so, the power struggle will lumber on. I suspect that whoever is behind the campaign, which may turn out to be some mainstream feminists, would rather break everything than compromise, if at all possible. The entire affair, what is being laughably referred to as Spain's #MeToo moment, is clearly a proxy for the wider societal feminist 'struggle'. Rubiales unwisely provided the opposition with ammunition and paid the price; Vilda, although framed as the villain of the piece initially, became collateral damage in the end.
Once again, it's worth observing that politics is downstream from personality and a number of modern movements (including fourth wave feminism, climate change, the trans agenda and many others) are peopled by neurotic monomaniacs and their enablers. The Rubiales affair could and should have been a minor blip on the public consciousness. Certainly, that's the way the two protagonists viewed it until Hermosa was got at. Very few of the characters involved how come out of it with any credit; most have revealed themselves to be weak, selfish and sometimes vindictive.
In addition, when a lie is used to promote a cause, one might think it sensible to have another look at the cause itself. It may be that the kiss came at just the right moment for Spanish feminism but, to the outsider, the whole affair smacked of opportunism. The continuum of protests and refusals to play extended far back into the past; perhaps Rubiales' over-exuberance encapsulated the 'struggle' in a way that is only apparent to Spanish women, although they too were only up in arms once the media lit the blue touch paper, rather than on the day itself.
For me, the most translatable feature is that the truth becomes unimportant once a narrative has taken hold. Hermosa's lengthy statement in support of Rubiales was memory holed instantly. Somebody, somewhere took the decision that this incident was going to be hysterically blown out of all proportion, in familiar fashion, and everybody else fell into line. Nobody, but nobody, whether in person or in print had the courage to stand against the tsunami of BS. The feminist cause (in this case) was far more important than Rubiales and Vilda – and the truth – and nobody will now revise their take.
Rubiales and Vilda only lost their jobs; others in the recent past have lost considerably more – Derek Chauvin, for one. You will probably recall that he was the cop kneeling on George Floyd's neck for nine minutes while he died of asphyxiation. He was also held to be the man responsible for the $2 billion worth of property damage during the 'mostly peaceful' Summer of Love in 2020. Except, Chauvin probably wasn't kneeling on Floyd's neck and Floyd didn't die of asphyxiation, but neither of those facts made an iota of difference at trial or in the media. Nor will they. And for the same reason as Kissgate; Floyd's death could be made to fit the 'systemic racism' trope with ease and, once that had been done, nobody was doing to risk being accused of racism themselves and excommunicated from polite society. For that reason (and others, as we shall see), Chauvin was never going to get a fair trial.
Floyd's encounter with the police was the result of an attempt to pass a counterfeit note, a $20 bill. He had also ingested fentanyl on an industrial scale – three times the lethal dose.(10) He was complaining of the symptoms of fentanyl poisoning (difficulty breathing) for twenty minutes before anyone knelt on him. The only reason that he was being restrained on the ground was because he had resisted being placed in a police car, which had been the option of choice for the officers. The officers were, in fact, waiting for an ambulance.
Floyd had heart problems, too; one of his arteries was 75% blocked.(11) Additionally, the autopsy evidence pointed to the overdose as the cause of death and there was little medical evidence of asphyxiation.(12) His lungs were two to three times the normal size and filled with fluid; such a condition (pulmonary edema) is symptomatic of an opioid overdose.(13) Without asphyxiation as a definitive cause of death, one might suppose that murder would be a little difficult to prove, especially as the defense presented evidence (from three different time stamps) that Chauvin's knee was across Floyd's shoulder, not his neck and that the video shot by bystanders was undermined by a phenomenon known as 'camera perspective bias'.(14)
In addition, there is clear evidence of a paramedic checking Floyd's carotid pulse while Chauvin was still kneeling on him, an action that would have been impossible if the officer was kneeling on Floyd's neck.(15) The technique was one that could be found in the police training manual. For a murder charge to stick, there would be a need to prove that the murderer actually caused the death. Even the state's autopsy couldn't prove that.
“A merely incidental form of violence followed by a death does not cut it. Floyd did not die of trauma, asphyxiation, or anything else that happened during the arrest. He ingested large quantities of drugs and had an overdose; the state’s autopsy says so. The video evidence also shows this, once you are aware of what to look for.”(16)
Evidentially, then, not exactly a slam dunk. In fact, a prosecution may not have been attempted under other circumstances or, if it had, it might have concerned itself solely with some sort of negligent manslaughter charge. But, the circumstances that surrounded the case were what made a guilty verdict inevitable.
Chauvin was tried in April 2021, just under a year after Floyd's death. The narrative had been fully embedded by then, by activists, by the media, by government itself. The social justice warriors breaching lock-downs so that they could burn things down and beat anyone that tried to prevent them from doing so were tolerated and even encouraged. Democrats donated to the Minnesota Freedom Fund, an organisation supported by the current VP, Kamala Harris,(17) which stumped up the bail money for any thug incompetent enough to get arrested by police, who had mostly be ordered to stand down and let the rioters get on with it. Of the pitifully few that were arrested, at least 90% of them never made it to court.(18)
The message was loud and clear; Chauvin had murdered St George and looting and rioting were legitimate if the cause was 'social justice'. In the run up to the trial itself, the political class, the activists and the press presented a united front. A BLM official warned that “all hell is going to break loose” unless Chauvin was found guilty.(19) Rep Omar, Rep Walters and Biden himself did their best to influence the jury by saying that the evidence was overwhelming, when it was nothing of the sort.(20)(21) Waters, a notorious race baiter, poured fuel on the flames:
“I hope we get a verdict that says guilty, guilty, guilty. And if we don’t, we cannot go away. We’ve got to stay on the street. We get more active, we’ve got to get more confrontational. We’ve got to make sure that they know that we mean business.”(22)
The local paper, the Minnesota Star-Tribune, released biographical data on all twelve jurors, plus the two alternates, giving those with the motivation the opportunity to potentially identify the individuals.(23) That there would be an orgy of renewed violence on the streets if the 'right' verdict wasn't rendered was obvious to all; the jury, no doubt, included. Which was problematic, to say the least, because there was no conceivable way that the prosecution had proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt. Chauvin was, nonetheless, found guilty on all charges.
The spectacle was (sadly) inevitable. It would have taken several jurors of extraordinary fortitude to have withstood the pressure to convict (not least from their families and friends, in all probability) and they would only have had the belief that they had done their duty to comfort them in the aftermath, which would likely have proved insufficient to offset the opprobrium that might have lasted a lifetime.
“By the time they made it home, their names and addresses would have been leaked by BLM, Antifa, or Maxine Waters. An outraged President Biden would have made it clear they were all evil people, racists, and “white supremacists.” LeBron James would have tweeted out their photos. Angry, violent mobs would have surrounded their homes....At a best-case scenario, none of these jurors would ever work again. No company could afford to keep them employed. Their children’s lives at school would be ruined. They’d need police cars stationed outside their homes, day and night. They’d never be safe again.”(24)
In any event, the feds had two back-up plans if the verdict went against them. In typical American fashion, they wanted at least two bites at the cherry and were also trying Chauvin for violating Floyd's civil rights. Given the fact that he had already been found guilty of murder by the time this case reached a conclusion, it was inevitable that he would be further convicted – which he duly was, receiving another sentence, this time for 20 years 5 months.(25) They would also have arrested him once again (whilst he was still in the courthouse after acquittal).
In short, Chauvin was toast every which way to Sunday. The regime had decided what his fate would be, evidence be damned. The police brutality/institutional racism narrative had to be maintained and allowing any deviation would have been unconscionable. Additionally, a not guilty verdict would have retrospectively soiled the justification for the previous year's rioting and so, once again, an individual's fate was sacrificed in the service of an orthodoxy. This time, in contrast to the Rubiales affair, we can be completely sure that the mantra is myth.
There is, after all, no evidence that police target the black community and plenty of evidence that blacks target each other.
“At least 16 U.S. cities witnessed record-high homicide rates in 2021, while New York, Chicago and Los Angeles saw notable homicide spikes... In Chicago, which tallied the most homicides since 1996, 648 of the city’s 797 homicide victims were Black. In Baton Rouge, Louisiana, 105 of the city’s 133 homicides were Black males. In Columbus, Ohio, 135 of the city’s 204 homicides were of Black males. In Louisville, Kentucky, 133 of the city’s 197 homicide victims were Black males.”(26)
And if one examines the 2021 data of the 65 most violent cities in America, blacks were responsible for the predominance of murder in all but one.(27) Moreover, only eleven unarmed black men were killed by police over the same period,(28) not that being unarmed necessarily makes someone a non-lethal threat if they weigh 300 pounds and wish to relieve you of your gun, as Michael Brown did.(29) By way of context, 37 police officers were killed in the first five months of that year, many (presumably) by black offenders.(30) If blacks are responsible for eight times the murders (per capita) than any other racial group – which they are – claiming racist police and the justice system are the problem is somewhat problematic.(31)
Legal scholars, seemingly operating in a parallel universe where justice is still served, assert that Chauvin should receive a retrial due to the many abuses of discretion practiced by the court, plus the blatant political interference and the small matter of a BLM activist as a juror (a fact that said juror managed to conceal until post trial).(32) It would be astonishing if he did. He's already been denied that outcome by the original court and by the appellate court also and the case is now making its way to SCOTUS, who will once again find themselves in the crosshairs of the Biden regime,(33) which is itching for an excuse to neuter it or turn it blue by packing it.(34) While the court is nominally conservative by a margin of 6-3, the Chief Justice (in particular) and two others have regularly shown themselves to be vulnerable to outside pressure.
Both Kissgate and the Floyd case (plus the current imbroglio involving Russell Brand) share similarities beyond the obvious – they are institutional hit jobs on individuals who have been targeted because of ideology. The script dictates that the toxic patriarchy is a ubiquitous presence, as is the bias and brutality of the police towards the black population. Brand is being taken out because he is an effective dissident and there is a systematic campaign ongoing whose object is to silence that category of person.
(Brand has been accused of historic sexual assaults and rape by four women who a) are still anonymous b) had made no allegations to the police and c) the allegations came about as the result of a four year campaign instigated by The Sunday Times and Channel 4 who interviewed
“...hundreds of people in a systematic search for ammunition to use against him. All positive testimony has been disregarded and the most lurid and damaging claims have been emphasized.”(35)
Brand denies the claims, but that hasn't prevented his agents dropping him,(36) his shows being cancelled,(37) any online archive footage being removed,(38) YouTube demonetizing his channel (39) and the UK government going after Rumble for refusing to do likewise.(40) The allegations may prove to have some substance – who knows at this stage? But the presumption of innocence is no longer available if one is an enemy of the regime, which wishes to send a message pour encourager les autres.)
There is one other recent case of note, yet another willfully botched court case; the motivation, but not the outcome, may be different. The media and the justice system insist that Lucy Letby, a former neonatal nurse in the UK, is a serial killer with the blood of seven babies on her hands and the perpetrator of an additional six attempted murders. However, given that the case is entirely circumstantial, there is another possible explanation:
“The more we populate the bigger picture on what was happening at the Countess of Chester Hospital at the time, and the subsequent decision to completely demolish the unit and rebuild from scratch, the more it is looking like a well orchestrated coverup of a combination of: (i) ineffectual and poorly supervised clinical interventionalism (negligent iatrogenesis); (ii) poor maintenance leading to hospital borne pathogenicity (nosocomial infection); (iii) insufficient nursing resources (practice outside guidelines); and (iv) negligent, toxic and deceitful management.”(41)
The neonatal unit was Level II for approximately three years, 2014-2016, meaning that it cared for very premature babies. Letby worked on the ward from 2012. Between mid 2015 and mid 2016, fifteen infants died and around the same number also had major collapses but survived, many more than before or afterwards, although the unit had lost its Level II status by late 2016.
Figure 7
The consultants' concern at this catastrophic falling away of performance led to internal investigations and then a review by the Royal College of Pediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH) which found that the unit itself was unsuitable for its task due to staffing and safety issues.(42) Letby had been moved to a desk job by mid 2016, as doubts about her competence had arisen, but the report makes no mention of any member of staff. Letby filed a grievance against the consultants, which was upheld. The latter were unhappy and involved the police, although exactly why they did so is unclear. There had been no suspicion of wrongdoing thusfar.
Postmortems on six of the seven babies Letby has been convicted of killing found that they had died of natural causes.(43) It wasn't until a professional expert witness was employed that there was any suggestion of foul play. This retired pediatrician identified 8 murders and seven attempted murders, having examined 30 cases. The other deaths during this period were put down to “the usual problems why small babies die: haemorrhage, infection, congenital problems.”(44) Letby's MO was allegedly of the scatter-gun variety; air embolisms, interference with feeding tubes, excessive feeding, insulin poisoning and assault, to be precise.
There are some obvious problems with the prosecutions case, which ought to have given pause. Notwithstanding the deaths for which Letby was charged, there is still a cluster of other deaths (deemed to be from natural causes) which occurred simultaneously.
“That means that we are asked to believe that Letby’s murders coincided, quite by chance, with a spike of other excess deaths, all of them unsurprising. I’d accept this if Letby was a strychnine poisoner, if seven babies died from strychnine and seven died owing to a concurrent viral outbreak. It’d be shocking, but clear. But these were highly-vulnerable babies, mostly premature and with other health issues. Do the suspicious and non-suspicious excesses really divide so precisely?”(45)
Then there is the fact that, even if the air embolism diagnosis is correct – and the original postmortems made no mention of it – that finding would not, in itself, show intent. There are infant diseases (such as bacterial peritonitis) that can introduce micro-bubbles into the vascular system and air can also be introduced accidentally or negligently with surgical procedures or during the insertion of tubes.(46) Letby's complicity in any insulin overdoses is similarly incomplete, given the numerous doses delivered by a number of different nurses.
Much was made of her own personal notes, also – but these are also perfectly capable of being read in other ways. The whiff of prosecutorial confirmation bias is pungent. It is also somewhat strange that a person who had worked on the unit for years, who was of previous good character with no behavioral issues would, in the space of a single week in 2015, kill two babies and attempt to kill another.(47) Especially when evidence showed that mid 2015 was the time at which a larger number of babies with serious issues were starting to be accepted.
Letby's defense at trial showed there were errors in the standard of care for nearly all the babies being cared for at the unit. There were also some serious issues with hygiene. Many of the babies developed sepsis and there is a wealth of literature detailing how many hospital born pathogens (common to wastewater) can be the source of such an infection.(48) The fact that the unit was contaminated by leaking wastewater from old pipework (continually being repaired by a plumber) is unlikely to be a coincidence.(49) Conditions were bad enough that a decision to demolish the unit, conveniently destroying the evidence in the process, was subsequently taken.
Again, as with Chauvin, it is inconceivable that there is no reasonable doubt. There will, in all probability, be an attempted appeal, but the fact that Letby was found guilty to begin with is disturbing. The judicial system has a natural tendency to avoid throwing mud; judges may very well be reluctant to overturn the decisions of another of their kind. Moreover, if Letby didn't do what has been ascribed to her, culpability for a large number of deaths lies elsewhere, most likely with the hospital trust itself; it's a racing certainty that paying out huge sums of compensation to the babies' parents does not feature in their business plan.
The gap between reality and media reporting in these instances is alarming. If Chauvin or Letby were to be acquitted by an appellate court, public outrage would likely be intense, largely because they were fed a line to begin with. This factor, in turn, makes the chances of true justice being done even less of a possibility, which is why when January 6th defendants are sentenced to eighteen years or more, there is little to no outrage.(50) The 'insurrection' narrative dictates that dissident commentary is muted. Karl Rittenhouse is the only victim to cheat the machine so far, but even he isn't home free.(51)(52)
In short, we live in a time where the truth is increasingly inconsequential to those who rule over us. Their sacred cows and their own well-being are, instead, all that matters. Anything that furthers the agenda is permissible and anyone who gets in the way is a legitimate target. I strongly suspect that this pathology will reach its apogee with Trump. If, for some reason, they can't get him removed from the Republican ticket for 2024 or jailed, they will put him in the ground instead. RFK Jnr is probably equally vulnerable if it seems that he will run as a third party candidate, which is why the regime refuses to provide him with Secret Service protection.(53) Tucker Carlson has also refused to go gentle into that good night. My guess would be that solutions to all these problems will need to be found by late 2024, so expect much more of the same disregard for reality and blatant obfuscation in the weeks and months ahead.
Citations
(1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disputes_involving_the_Spain_women%27s_national_football_team
(3) https://www.spiked-online.com/2023/08/29/we-need-to-calm-down-about-the-world-cup-kiss/
(5) https://www.spiked-online.com/2023/08/29/we-need-to-calm-down-about-the-world-cup-kiss/
(6) https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/66628521
(7) https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/66818080
(8) https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/66818080
(9) https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/66863081
(10) https://www.newsweek.com/george-floyd-autopsy-report-cause-death-1579393
(11) https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/04/speaking-of-derek-chauvin.php
(12) https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/pulmonary-edema/symptoms-causes/syc-20377009
(13) https://amgreatness.com/2021/04/04/a-narrative-collapse-in-chauvin-trial/
(16) https://amgreatness.com/2021/04/04/a-narrative-collapse-in-chauvin-trial/
(17) https://alphanews.org/kamala-harris-fund/
(19)
https://twitter.com/warriorwoman91/status/1379061061286944773
(21)
(22) https://edition.cnn.com/2021/04/19/politics/maxine-waters-derek-chauvin-blm/index.html
(24) https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/04/wayne-root-stop-lying-derek-chauvin-trial/
(26) https://www.foxnews.com/us/homicide-victims-cities-black-data
(27) https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1656924186177306625.html
(29) https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2023/05/the_lefts_systematic_slandering_of_the_police.html
(30) Ditto
(31) https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/06/the_myth_of_systemic_racism.html
(33) https://www.zerohedge.com/political/cop-who-kneeled-george-floyd-appeals-us-supreme-court
(34) https://americanmind.org/memo/the-court-packing-coup/
(35) https://im1776.com/2023/09/20/russell-brand/
(41)
(43) https://dailysceptic.org/2023/09/11/lucy-letby-must-be-allowed-an-appeal/?highlight=lucy
(44)
(45) https://dailysceptic.org/2023/09/11/lucy-letby-must-be-allowed-an-appeal/?highlight=lucy
(46) Ditto
(47) https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/23756916.lucy-letby-killer-nurse-campaign-free/
(48)
(49)
(50) https://www.newsweek.com/full-list-capitol-rioters-jailed-sentences-january-6-1826075
(51) https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/08/kyle-rittenhouse-sued-again-estate-unstable-child-molester/
(52) https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/02/father-anthony-huber-sues- kyle-rittenhouse-police-wrongful-death-son-shot-kenosha-blm-riots/
https://dailysceptic.org/2023/09/18/the-fall-of-russell-brand-is-no-victory-for-women/
https://dailysceptic.org/2023/09/11/lucy-letby-must-be-allowed-an-appeal/?highlight=lucy
Figure 1 https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/66645961
Figure 2 https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/66721003
Figure 6 https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/66563205
Figure 7 https://dailysceptic.org/2023/09/11/lucy-letby-must-be-allowed-an-appeal/?highlight=lucy