I was blissfully unaware of Bari Weiss until I stumbled on comedian Jimmy Dore dissecting her appearance with Joe Rogan (Jimmy Dore ROASTS NYT journo Bari Weiss). Of course, Rogan dissects her himself, revealing a crazed, uninformed neocon version of the old Saturday Night Live character Mary Katherine Gallagher. If you’ve got 20 minutes to laugh at the low bar now set for mainstream journalists, check it out.

Yes, our FBI heros raided Felicity Huffman’s house with drawn weapons. And though William H. Macy, Huffman’s husband, was present at the meeting with Singer and both parents agreed to pay Singer’s fee, Macy wasn’t arrested. Now kingpin Singer is a confidential witness against his own marks. Great job, Feds.

Felix, you are absolutely right. Neither US nor UK nor any EU entities are sovereign States, they are all Jews’ colonies – and all their sanctions against Russia are the Jews’ sanctions.

Putin was successfully injected with the kosher anaesthetic the Talmudic leeches use to tranquilize their victims, before they bleed them dry.

Had he posed a threat to those bloodsuckers in the Middle East, Russia would have enjoyed the status of the most favoured nation with all those kosher banana republics of the ‘free world’ that spurn her – and you would have never heard of any Skripals, either.

The Jews always grow big and all-powerful amidst treason, corruption and cowardice.

It occurred to me that it would be interesting to look at the first public edition (1975) of the CIA World Factbook to see what it has to say about Russian demographics and about the population of Moscow. While there is no reason to put absolute faith in it, it shouldn’t be too incredibly inaccurate since it was written to be useful as a reference for US government officials. Also, it could be interesting to contrast what is stated there with popular propoganda. I haven’t yet found the first edition online, though.

A Muscovite friend claims me that all condoms available today in Russia come from the same British company, and that rumours that their is a conspiracy to make import defective condoms in order to increase the number of pregnancies. One of the more amusing conspiracy theories that I have heard.

About abortion as birth control in Russia. I’ve visited a gynaecology ward in a Russian hospital, and found that almost all in-patients are old women with ovarian cancer or young women getting an abortion. N=1, but it seemed to me quite striking.

For what it’s worth, my opinion of the US government is плохо both before and after Trump, but I’m open to a Bayesian update. So far, I basically agree with Fred Reed on Trump, though I don’t feel so strongly on the issue of Mexico and instead feel rather strongly about the issue of Russia.

If Trump triggers the Germans enough that they move out of the Atlanticist basement and let a flat of their own, then that will be one of the unintended goods to come from Trump. If Germany starts acting in its own economic self-interest and does business with China and Russia, then the US will simply become increasingly irrelevant.

The Russian government seems to be particularly competent in foreign policy, so I expect that while they will try to improve relations with the US, this will certainly not be at the expense of relations with China. Russia has much more to gain from good relations with China than with the US, both in terms of trade and stability, and certainly the long-term prospects of business with China are far more promising. I think somebody in Washington must understand this, and I suspect the current anti-Russian hysteria is really about an attack on Russia as the most important link between China and Western Europe.

Apparently the difference between the author and the gabachos here is that the author has a sense of humour. If you want to say nasty things about Mexicans, at least try to be funny about it.

The woman has her head screwed on straight. She manages to stay on message, despite the interviewer’s many attempts to deflect and derail. Let us hope that there will be found ten righteous persons in Congress.

I’m too lazy to sign up so that I can read the original from the Economist. Does anyone know what kind of data and criteria are used? Some of the characterizations are simply incredible.

I look forward to the review of Davydov’s book, though I shan’t have time to read the book itself. But I enjoy Lieven’s (much shorter) book on Nicholas II. The parts about economic development were the most interesting to me. I think both Witte and Stolypin get a chapter each.

I think Obama's "policy" in Libya, as in regard to the Middle East generally, is mostly based on optics. I don't think he's actually that interested in shaping the future of the region one way or the other. (His grand ambitions are in the domestic sphere.) However, he saw an unpopular regime appearing to be on the verge of toppling, and, given the willingness of other countries to take action, Obama thought (guessed) it would be better, on balance, for him to be seen on the side of the topplers than on the side of the toppl-ees (or, for that matter, the side of humble restraint). He probably also sensed it would enhance his domestic political prospects to fight and win a war, since the Bushes had each reaped short-term popularity windfalls in this fashion.

IOW, to the extent Obama thought about this decision, his thoughts were focused on what would make him look the best both in the U.S. and around the world.

The statement: “I was expecting it. That is, that the more intelligent, who scored high on a vocabulary test, would drink more than the dumb, who scored low” is not supported by the data.

At best they are more likely to drink, the amount (more) is not polled.

I am sure the trailer-park residents would agree with you.