Member Login

You are not currently logged in.

» Register
» Lost your Password?
Article Archives



On Wednesday (4/17), the London Economist ran: America’s Trust In Its Institutions Has Collapsed.  This is extremely good news.  Now add this metric Gallup has to its April 17 report:


You know that line explaining how bankruptcy happens:

“You used to be rich, Bob. How did you go bankrupt?”  “Two ways,” Bob answered.  “Slowly at first, then all of a sudden.”

Gallup picked 2006 as the start date here, when the US was  at the top of the G7 in every category, when Bush II was still president, but any decline was very slow until 2009 when it started picking up speed – Obama’s first year.  Under Obama, the slide down – especially the key metric of confidence in the federal government – continued.

By 2020, Trump had brought confidence back up almost to pre-Obama levels.  Then, all of sudden it’s been falling off a cliff since FJB took over.  So now you can see why all this is such good news:  the blame for the current and sudden collapse of confidence falls squarely on the Dems and the electorate knows it.

Like an alcoholic who must fall to rock bottom before he realizes he has to quit, so now have many Latinos, Blacks, Independents, and non-woke Dems realize they can’t vote Dem this November.  The best news of all is that this results in such a wide voter disadvantage for the Dems it cannot be overcome by cheating.  You know the adage:  If the vote isn’t close, the enemy can’t cheat enough to win.




Except for this Rasmussen poll reported yesterday (4/18): Troubling Research Reveals How Many Americans Will Commit Vote Fraud. Most especially, note, the under-40 voters who’ve been educated to believe in relativist no-such-thing-as-right-and-wrong morality.

Add the vast hordes of illegal aliens imported into America to expressly and illegally vote Dem, and Dem vote fraud may very well overwhelm Trump/GOP votes.  However this is prevented, whatever it takes, it must be.




Speaking of relativist no-such-thing-as-right-and-wrong morality, as Professor of Evolutionary Behavior Gad Saad says, “’Truth is subjective’ is precisely the key tenet of postmodernism. This is why I refer to it as the granddaddy of all parasitic idea pathogens.”

Thus new NPR CEO Katherine Maher perfectly personifies the Left’s hatred of reality, facts, reasoning and logic, as all that counts for them are emotions, mindless thoughtless feelings, and the ability to manipulate them for power over others:


As the former CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation that operates all the Wiki sites like Wikipedia et al, she is responsible for converting Wikipedia into:




Thus Katherine Maher (no relation to Bill) epitomizes the fascist evil of Woketardism – and its mortal vulnerability:  the total inability to appeal to reality, facts, and anyone capable of thinking for themselves when buying groceries at their local market.

That’s because woketard personalities are dominated by hubris, making them unaware of how others believe, think and feel.  They are literally incapable of imagining how anyone could believe differently than them, honestly disagree with them.  That’s what makes them fascists, and why they are going to be thrown into the electorate ash can in November.

One thing you – and she – can count on is Trump zeroing-out all funding for NPR on January 20, 2025.




Another thing you can count on is the Dems pulling every dirty underhanded illegal trick they can imagine to stop Trump from being behind the Resolute Desk next January 20.  Exhibit A: NY Gives Trump the Anne Boleyn Treatment.

“Jury selection is completed  in the case of The People of the State of New York vs. Donald J. Trump, which alleges that the defendant lied to his own check register, and lied to the general ledger of his own company, when the invoice given to him by his lawyer was paid and recorded by someone else, and that the misstatement he made to himself in his own records was done ‘with the intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof’.


The case rides on the credibility of the witnesses: a porn star who denied any affair numerous times and a disbarred lawyer convicted of perjury.


The closest precedent is probably Anne Boleyn’s trial for adultery in 1536. It was about sex, the trial was in a hostile jurisdiction controlled by her accuser (King Henry VIII), and the whole point of the exercise was to lop off the head of someone who stood in the way of the regime’s continuity. But that’s what Democrats have lusted for since Donald Trump first arrived on the scene, isn’t it? They made no secret of it.”



As constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley writes:  The Trump Trial in Manhattan is an Indictment of the New York Legal System – not Trump.

Babylon Bee, however, has a different perspective, reporting: Hillary Clinton Condemns Trump For Paying Hush Money To Political Liabilities Instead Of Just Killing Them.




On Wednesday (4/17): Chuck Schumer and Senate Dems Save Mayorkas From Impeachment Threat.

“Wednesday’s decision marked the first time in 225 years since the Senate voted to immediately dismiss impeachment charges approved by the House vs. holding a floor trial or referring the matter to a special counsel for review.”


The Wall Street Journal ridiculed the Schumer Dems’ cowardice, “not even daring to have a token trial.”

Nothing could be clearer to voters that Dems are full advocates of an unending flood of illegal aliens to have them illegally vote Dem this November.  And be counted in states censuses for a mass increase in Dem congressional seats. The Dems are terrified about making this ever more gin-clear to voters with a Mayorkas trial.

Illegal immigration and its resultant nationwide crime wave are now the single most important issue for voters in poll after poll – along with Bidenomics inflation.  Voters also know voting GOP is the only way to stop it.  Another blindingly obvious sign that the Dems are committed to cheat their way to victory in 2024 as they did in 2020, as there is simply no other way to win.




On Wednesday (4/17), President Trump met for dinner with his friend, Andrzej Duda, the President of Poland at the Trump Tower in Manhattan.  One of the issues they discussed was aid to Ukraine, with both agreeing that NATO member countries should raise their commitment of military defense spending from 2% to 3% of GDP.


The next morning (4/18) , Reuters had this headline: Donald Trump Says Ukraine’s Survival Is Important To US.

“Donald Trump said on Thursday the survival of Ukraine is important to the United States, a shift in tone days before the Republican-led U.S. House of Representatives is due to vote on a $61 billion aid package…


In one of Trump’s first acknowledgements that Ukraine’s survival is an important U.S. security interest, he wrote on Truth Social:


‘Why can’t Europe equalize or match the money put in by the United States of America in order to help a Country in desperate need? As everyone agrees, Ukrainian Survival and Strength should be much more important to Europe than to us, but it is also important to us!’”


Tomorrow, Saturday (4/20), Speaker Mike Johnson will hold a vote for aid to Ukraine and Israel.  It will pass overwhelmingly, driving the Putinista House Conservatives straight up a tree in foaming rage.  Along with all their media cheerleaders like Tucker, ZeroHedge, and Breitbart.  It’ll be Schadenfreudelicious to watch.

Yesterday (4/18), Putinista Thomas Massie (R-KY) raged: ‘Unprecedented’: Speaker Mike Johnson Moves to Pass Rule for Ukraine Aid Using Democrats. What does he expect when Johnson has a virtual 1-seat majority?  A handful of goofball malcontents get to decide instead of a vast majority of both sides of the aisle?  Sorry, Tommy, go cry in your beer while the adults save a heroic nation from barbarian genocide.



We’ll close with this exceptional article in this week’s Economist: Russia Is Sure To Lose In Ukraine, Explains A Chinese Expert On Russia.

The author, Dr. Feng Yujun, is Professor and Vice Dean, Institute of International Studies, and Director at the Center for Russian and Central Asian Studies, Fudan University in Shanghai.  You might consider reading his full bio, exceptional for its scholarly depth and for the fact he is a major China-Russia expert recognized and respected by the Chinese Communist Party.

Dr. Yujun’s full article is here appended so you can read and reflect on it entire. Realize he speaks for the highest echelon of the CCP when he concludes: “China and Russia are very different countries. Russia is seeking to subvert the existing international and regional order by means of war, whereas China wants to resolve disputes peacefully.”

Adieu now from Albania where our Albania Wonderland adventure with your fellow TTPers begins tomorrow.  Mike Ryan will be helming the HFR next week.  See you Friday after next – enjoy Mike in the meantime!




Prof. Feng Yujun

The between Russia and Ukraine has been catastrophic for both countries. With neither side enjoying an overwhelming advantage and their political positions completely at odds, the fighting is unlikely to end soon. One thing is clear, though: the conflict is a post-cold-war watershed that will have a profound, lasting global impact.

Four main factors will influence the course of the war. The first is the level of resistance and national unity shown by Ukrainians, which has until now been extraordinary. The second is international support for Ukraine, which, though recently falling short of the country’s expectations, remains broad.

The third factor is the nature of modern warfare, a contest that turns on a combination of industrial might and command, control, communications and intelligence systems. One reason Russia has struggled in this war is that it is yet to recover from the dramatic deindustrialization it suffered after the disintegration of the Soviet Union.

The final factor is information. When it comes to decision-making, Vladimir Putin is trapped in an information cocoon, thanks to his having been in power so long. The Russian president and his national-security team lack access to accurate intelligence. The system they operate lacks an efficient mechanism for correcting errors. Their Ukrainian counterparts are more flexible and effective.

In combination, these four factors make Russia’s eventual defeat inevitable. In time it will be forced to withdraw from all occupied Ukrainian territories, including Crimea. Its nuclear capability is no guarantee of success. Didn’t a nuclear-armed America withdraw from Korea, Vietnam and Afghanistan?

Though the war has been hugely costly for Ukraine, the strength and unity of its resistance has shattered the myth that Russia is militarily invincible. Ukraine may yet rise from the ashes. When the war ends, it can look forward to the possibility of joining the European Union and NATO.

The war is a turning-point for Russia. It has consigned Mr. Putin’s regime to broad international isolation. He has also had to deal with difficult domestic political undercurrents, from the rebellion by the mercenaries of the Wagner Group and other pockets of the military—for instance in Belgorod—to ethnic tensions in several Russian regions and the recent terrorist attack in Moscow.

These show that political risk in Russia is very high. Mr. Putin may recently have been re-elected, but he faces all kinds of possible black-swan events.

Adding to the risks confronting Mr. Putin, the war has convinced more and more former Soviet republics that Russia’s imperial ambition threatens their independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Increasingly aware that a Russian victory is out of the question, these states are distancing themselves from Moscow in different ways, from forging economic-development policies that are less dependent on Russia to pursuing more balanced foreign policies. As a result, prospects for the Eurasian integration that Russia advocates have dimmed.

The war, meanwhile, has made Europe wake up to the enormous threat that Russia’s military aggression poses to the continent’s security and the international order, bringing post-cold-war EU-Russia detente to an end. Many European countries have given up their illusions about Mr. Putin’s Russia.

At the same time, the war has jolted NATO out of what Emmanuel Macron, the French president, called its “brain-dead” state. With most NATO countries increasing their military spending, the alliance’s forward military deployment in eastern Europe has been greatly shored up.

The addition of Sweden and Finland to NATO highlights Mr. Putin’s inability to use the war to prevent the alliance’s expansion.

The war will also help to reshape the UN Security Council. It has highlighted the body’s inability to effectively assume its responsibility of maintaining world peace and regional security owing to the abuse of veto power by some permanent members. This has riled the international community, increasing the chances that reform of the Security Council will speed up.

Germany, Japan, India and other countries are likely to become permanent members and the five current permanent members may lose their veto power. Without reform, the paralysis that has become the hallmark of the Security Council will lead the world to an even more dangerous place.

China’s relations with Russia are not fixed, and they have been affected by the events of the past two years. Russia’s foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, has just visited Beijing, where he and his Chinese counterpart once again emphasized the close ties between their countries.

But the trip appears to have been more diplomatic effort by Russia to show it is not alone than genuine love-in. Shrewd observers note that China’s stance towards Russia has reverted from the “no limits” stance of early 2022, before the war, to the traditional principles of “non-alignment, non-confrontation and non-targeting of third parties”.

Although China has not joined Western sanctions against Russia, it has not systematically violated them.

It is true that China imported more than 100m tons of Russian oil in 2023, but that is not a great deal more than it was buying annually before the war. If China stops importing Russian oil and instead buys from elsewhere, it will undoubtedly push up international oil prices, putting huge pressure on the world economy.

Since the war began China has conducted two rounds of diplomatic mediation. Success has proved elusive but no one should doubt China’s desire to end this cruel war through negotiations.

That wish shows that China and Russia are very different countries. Russia is seeking to subvert the existing international and regional order by means of war, whereas China wants to resolve disputes peacefully.

With Russia still attacking Ukrainian military positions, critical infrastructure and cities, and possibly willing to escalate further, the chances of a Korea-style armistice look remote. In the absence of a fundamental change in Russia’s political system and ideology, the conflict could become frozen.

That would only allow Russia to continue to launch new wars after a respite, putting the world in even greater danger.