Wiki: When the film was released, The New York Times film critic, Bosley Crowther, while giving the film a mixed review, wrote well of the screenplay, “No use to speak of the action or the acting. It’s strictly routine. But the plot is deliberately sensational.”
(1222) Afternoon all. (1251)
15. House of the Sleepy
Point of this item with full pic is to illustrate that even with someone in parlmt, what guarantee anyone will be there to hear it, that it will get out to the people, that any change can eventuate. Lord Toby (speaking) runs Daily Sceptic and is visible on soc-med … how many of the normies would quote him?
14. Brave New World
13. Strange
12. An old account
11. The poisoning of our food
The 11th of the 11th, at 11 a.m.
Be upstanding please, ladies and gentlemen:
(0859)(0959, genuinely)
10. Moo corner
9. Example of, at a minimum, inaccurate write-up
… maybe even careless, maybe deliberately misleading, maybe innocent:
You’ll notice “translated from the French”, so maybe slack should be cut to a point … and yet there’s one crucial difference from what I posted some days ago, a tweet from LB saying that what she saw included cannibalism, whereas the French report says “possibly even involving” … quite a different account of the matter.
Plus she lost her congressional seat among the general slaughter. The other things with her are that infamous sex in the theatre with a demrat setting her up, affairs with three staffers and tatts all over her body. While those would not raise too many eyebrows with Bonny Blue watchers, they do with her cross around her neck and “Christian” stance … the optics ain’t great.
Then again, I’m not too great myself taking moral stances, given my track record, inc. recently. On a more positive note, Stephen Miller’s wife has divested herself of a goldmine in order that no enemy can use that against SM himself, given what he’s about to do.
8. Other Congressional and White House news
7. Just when you thought it was safe in Alabama
I’m thinking that what we have here, and which was pointed out by the two retired letter agency men (we posted it), was that while we’re all concentrating on the blue states and known cheating centers, where their defences are intricate and all but covered up … that it would avail investigators to concentrate more in red states where no one’s going to much notice a few snomalies, as long as the state still stays red.
Texas was a glaring example where the Bush state was so egregiously out of skew that it was almost like a globo-psycho/deathcult thumbing of the nose … there ain’t nuffink you nazis can do to stop us.
Bama is a bit more off the radar concerning the cheating but it still occurs (see the chart), e.g. in Baldwin county … as it did not flip the result, doesn’t mean it was not going on.
6. Ta muchly to IYE for this retrieval made possible
The Triangle (May 28, 2017)
A derogatory article on the issue of just what’s happening in the White House was posted on May 13th:
http://journal-neo.org/2017/05/13/the-donald-meets-sun-tzu-and-is-found-wanting/
The Deep State exists, no question, a secret state within the state, like some kind of freemasonic Ur-Lodge, unelected by the public, unanswerable to anyone but their secret internal Brotherhood, the Deep State. Donald Trump is not their enemy, or he would have been shot down well before the first Republican primary.
He is a creature of that Deep State. He keeps his word, but not to his voters; rather he keeps it, but to his Deep State controllers from Wall Street and the Big Oil and the Military Industrial Complex.
There is a different perspective below on the same question – the only way into power:
http://www.unz.com/article/political-sciences-theory-of-everything-on-the-2016-us-election/
“[T]he power elite can be best described as a “triangle of power,” linking the corporate, executive government, and military factions: “There is a political economy numerously linked with military order and decision. This triangle of power is now a structural fact, and it is the key to any understanding of the higher circles in America today.”
The 2016 US election, like all other US elections, featured a gallery of pre-selected candidates that represented the three factions and their interests within the power elite.
The 2016 US election, however, was vastly different from previous elections. As the election dragged on, the power elite became bitterly divided, with the majority supporting Hilary Clinton, the candidate pre-selected by the political and corporate factions, while the military faction rallied around their choice of Donald Trump.
Now this is the crux, as Hillary found out, even after the blatant rigging and dead voters, the way certain districts suddenly went her way in the popular vote – it was not enough because she did not carry the Electoral College – that’s where it all is.
The Donald was always going to do well in the popular, with massive rallies and so on but he was not going to be selected by one of these factions for that particular platform and power base and as the only way to power in the country is through one or more of those factions, as the Unz article says, then ipso facto, he had to have at least done a short term deal.
So, which devil did he have to appease? The military of course – Mattis, and corporate – Tillerson. The MIC.
As long as the Donald does their will, boosts defenc[s]e, drop a MOAB or two, then the machine is kept running for him and obstacles melt away.
If he starts taking the populism seriously, which he is inclined to do, making Bannon once again resurgent – then he is mad enough, in their eyes, to genuinely go down a populist path.
Why? Because the Donald does love the adoration, the rallies, the way he and he alone has MadeAGA. He’s made deals with the factions, realizing that technically, he was never going to get to power otherwise, thinking he could go his way once elected.
The temporary travel ban was a litmus test. Many pundits on our side were thinking it was so wrong – he had all the power he needed to implement it already and to hell with 9th Circuit but they wanted to let it run the whole distance for some reason which will eventually become apparent.
The agent the triangle appointed to curb him was Pence and closely connected to Pence – Ryan. Pence is being groomed to step into the shoes according to various pundits but I’m half and half on this. There is Pence’s overt Christianity and it is possible he really is. Thus the triangle uses religious arguments with him why to oppose this or that of the Donald’s ‘excesses’.
They’ve already had one attempt to oust Bannon from the west wing because Bannon represents our pressure group, the one the people think he was elected on – the Donald trusts Bannon the way a businessman trusts a person who rings true in his eyes. Bannon has zero power, except in the President’s ear. Pence has real power, backed by the MIC and finance.
Hence no moves on ‘lock her up’ Hillary, hence her impunity at Wellesley, hence the political impotence of the Donald as known by the inner players, inc. Clinton. She’s not going to prison. Whether she has the dirt on them or they have on him – things are not going to change, as Ryan assured Congressmen, as the health bill showed.
Why was Ryan not sacked for that? Because he’s above Trump, in the same way Osborne was above Cameron – both had deep hooks within the triangle. Cheney was theirs, Kissinger before him, Dulles, House – there’ve been a few.
They’ve obviously sorted out the balancing act for 2018 – if they feel they can keep the Donald bamboozled enough, thwarted enough, they might let the GOP take the mid-terms.
If they don’t feel they can, then the DNC will experience a resurgence – already reports are filtering through mentioning Sanders populism [Corbyn over here] making inroads on Trump territory – what that says for the deadheads even contemplating voting for that can wait for another post.
The Donald will have some victories – he has to so that his base does not dissolve as UKIP’s did. Perhaps Comey will be the sacrificial lamb, methinks Ryan is too big for that.
The mysterious silences and obtuseness of the Donald are explained by this scenario. Also how he goes to Twitter to rail against the courts. If he has the power, he need not do that – he can just exercise this power:
But he doesn’t. Sessions does not allow him, rather going after Assange – Sessions is part of it too. Who swore them in? Pence.
The Donald can make no real progress because he is waylaid by staff he cannot rely on – Bannon and other minor people are on his side. The main staff are playing for the triangle.
The one good bit of news is that the Donald, though old and understandably susceptible to a convenient heart attack, nonetheless is really a loose cannon and might do some damage on our behalf before he goes.
Think I agree with AKH about the production quality of this gumshoe series tradition in short form, over the others available, with maybe William Powell the standout exception.
Now, this is 2:23 … we then have 2:24 … then 2:25 is the key episode which to me was sad, especially with no further development of the idea. There’s one more in this UHC run … 2:29, regarded by some as one of the best. The atmosphere of those days was well captured by Peter Gunn.
(0608) Morning all. The theme today is:
An example, today at least, is to include only what is needed to identify, inc. counter-view if available, e.g. the BBC item. (0716)
5. Lawfare, Brit style?
Steve had commented:
At the same time:
4. Steve at 1541
The Uke and Iran headlines:
House and Senate:
Jim Johnson and Thune appointed.
3. That BBC defamation case
A few points, inc peripheral/procedural:
2. DAD at 1541
a) Norway’s Prime Minister has warned Britain against copying his country’s EU single market model, calling it an “obvious democratic deficit” that forces Norway to follow Brussels rules without voting rights.
b) UK. Social media ‘auditor’ says he was ‘nicked’ as warrant gives cops power to gather material ‘concerning HMOs or views towards immigration’. Brandon Breen – known online as ‘Struggle of the Streets’ – told nearly 50,000 Facebook followers Greater Manchester Police officers attended his home.
c) Spain. Recorded rapes almost double in Spain under Sánchez as killings rise by nearly a third. Attempted murders climbed 78 per cent between 2018 and 2025, official crime statistics showed.
d) UK. A remarkable and deeply moving photograph capturing the first two minutes of silence in London, 106 years ago on Tuesday 11th November 1919.
e) EU. The Real Reason Lagarde Is leaving the ECB.
1. Ancestry
They were obviously going to attack ancestry. I’d put three factors in this order of importance:
(1704) Evening all … that was some marathon today. Looked up Thune, no real news yet. 1920 seems an appropriate time to finish up this evening. Sleep well later. (1920)(2019)
20. Hmmmm, not sure this can be trusted
… we know his track record.
19. Moo corner
18. X a/c The House of Ayres … on Molly Kingsley
With Molly joining Restore Britain, I’ve spent some time looking beyond the noise and actually researching who she is, what she has done and who she has worked with.
First, something worth clearing up because anyone searching Companies House will notice it:
Molly is Michelle Kingsley.
Her official company records use Michelle Kingsley, while publicly and professionally she is known as Molly Kingsley. This isn’t something I’ve uncovered as some secret identity — she has previously been publicly described as Michelle (“Molly”) Kingsley.
Companies House currently lists Michelle Kingsley, born January 1979, as the active director of UsForThem Limited. Her earlier business records for Showroom Network Limited also appear under Michelle Kingsley.
So if you’re researching her and see “Michelle”, you’re looking at the same career history.
Now, who is she?
Molly trained as a lawyer.
She studied law at Oxford University and the London School of Economics, qualified as a solicitor in England and Wales and worked at major law firms including Slaughter and May and Weil, Gotshal & Manges.
She later moved into the technology/start-up world and co-founded Showroom, where one of her fellow founders was Chloe Ross.
Ross had previously worked in the Cabinet Office and in David Cameron’s Downing Street strategy operation.
That is a genuine professional connection worth recording — but a business relationship with somebody who previously worked in government isn’t evidence of government control.
Then came Covid.
In May 2020, Molly was one of the original founders of UsForThem, alongside Liz Cole and Christine Brett.
It began principally as a parents’ campaign arguing for schools to reopen and for children’s interests to be given greater weight in the pandemic response.
From there Molly became involved in campaigns around:
UsForThem also used legal and regulatory routes rather than simply campaigning on social media.
Molly eventually gave a formal witness statement on behalf of UsForThem to the UK Covid-19 Inquiry, setting out the organisation’s history, activities and criticisms of the pandemic response.
She has also co-authored books including:
The Children’s Inquiry with Liz Cole.
And The Accountability Deficit with her husband, Ben Kingsley.
Ben is another important part of the picture.
He is an experienced solicitor and former partner at Slaughter and May, specialising in areas including financial regulation.
He later became closely involved in UsForThem’s strategic legal work, with Molly and Ben working together on pandemic governance and proposed changes to international health regulations.
So UsForThem wasn’t simply Molly posting on social media.
There was campaigning, lawyers, parliamentary engagement, regulatory complaints and political communications involved.
Her wider circle is therefore worth understanding.
Ed Barker advised UsForThem on communications.
Barker had previously been a Conservative parliamentary candidate, worked on Boris Johnson’s Conservative leadership campaign, and also handled communications for the Conservative Covid Recovery Group.
UsForThem also worked with or engaged MPs.
Former Education Select Committee chair Robert Halfon publicly supported aspects of its work, while its later children’s-policy campaigning crossed party lines.
Molly has also worked in the wider free-speech / lockdown-accountability world alongside or around figures including:
Mike Fairclough
Toby Young
Allison Pearson
Francis Hoar
Laura Dodsworth
She became a founding writer at Free Speech Press, established by fellow campaigner Mike Fairclough.
That doesn’t mean everybody within that wider network shares every one of Molly’s views.
Connections are connections.
They should be recorded and examined — not automatically turned into conspiracies.
And now Molly has joined Restore Britain as Spokesperson for Accountability in Public Office.
So whether you agree with everything she has ever said or not, she hasn’t suddenly appeared from nowhere.
There is years of legal work, campaigning, parliamentary engagement and government scrutiny behind her.
NOW, BECAUSE A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE SHOUTING ABOUT ISRAEL…
I’ve looked at that as well.
The concrete connection I’ve established is this:
Molly signed the October Declaration.
It was launched following the 7 October 2023 Hamas attacks, condemning Hamas, calling for the hostages to be released and expressing solidarity with Israel and British Jews.
British Friends of Israel says the declaration subsequently attracted around 83,000 British citizens and residents.
Molly was one of those signatories.
What I haven’t found is evidence that Molly has been a director of British Friends of Israel.
Companies House lists its directors and Molly isn’t among them.
I’ve also searched for something deeper:
Israeli government employment.
Israeli government funding.
Lobbying payments.
A formal Israeli government position.
Payments from British Friends of Israel.
I’ve found no public evidence of those things so far.
Does that mean nobody should ask questions?
Of course not.
You can absolutely question who is around Molly.
You can question her associations.
You can ask whether signing that declaration reflects views you personally disagree with.
And if anyone has actual evidence of financial influence, lobbying, undisclosed interests or foreign influence, send it to me and I’ll investigate it.
That standard applies to Israel, America, China, Saudi Arabia, Ukraine or anybody else.
At present, based on all the searches I’ve made, what I can substantiate regarding Molly and British Friends of Israel is that she signed the October Declaration along with tens of thousands of other British citizens and residents.
If that alone is an issue for you, that’s your decision.
I’m adding this because some of the loudest voices on X are concentrating almost entirely on that point, while saying very little about who Molly actually is or the work she has spent years doing.
I’m not asking anybody to trust her blindly.
Quite the opposite.
Question everyone.
Check their history.
Map their connections.
Follow the money.
Look for influence.
But also follow the evidence wherever it actually leads.
17. There’s a longer version at NOWP too
16. Have a heart, Bill
The heart. Not what we are told it is.
Interesting stuff.
15. Brighton
14. Some sort of news at last
13. They all knew
12. Thought we’d be flooded with worthwhile news
… after I just got back … no such luck. Thune seems unopposed but not yet leader, and this was the other piece:
(1301) Last of the scheduled items, next will be last post, end of the afternoon. (1301)
If you out that with what Boebert and others saw and have said, I think we have the nauseating idea. You remember that Mexican model girl too? Disappeared straight after it?
The issue is not so much what they did … put it with Podesta’s drawings … but who did it? The above is no final proof, obviously … it’s certainly indicative though. And imho, not this name or that but rather a political class of “people”.
IYE theatre: “First Comes Courage” 1943 – WW2 Resistance Fight Movie:
Can you name these tools (preferably the trad name):
