So, just before Christmas, Government what it called a "response" to this New York Times account of cronyism in pandemic spending.

We at @GoodLawProject have a paralegal attending the case management hearing in the Tavistock's appeal in the Bell case on behalf of our trans defence fund. Occasional updates from them as the hearing progresses...

The 'stay' - effectively a suspension of the legal effect of the first instance decision - will continue. That has been agreed between the parties.

Judge doesn't want oral submissions from any of the would-be intervenors at the case management hearing. (I wouldn't read anything in to that.)

Tavistock supports the intervention by @stonewalluk, @BrookCharity, @TheEndoSociety and @Genderintell, is neutral on those from @libertyhq and @TheBMA and opposes those from Transgender Trend and Dr Bell and a 'parents' group'.

Counsel for Bell opposes - I hope I have that right - the joint intervention.

The High Court gave us 'permission' to bring some of our judicial review arguments in relation to the Government's odd PPE contracts. We are today asking again for permission to bring the others. You can read our (remarkable) Skeleton and Statement here.

We chose these three contracts (Clandeboye/Ayanda/Pestfix) in June/July when we had much less understanding than we do now about what was going on. Once you appreciate that fact, what we have already uncovered (before disclosure) about those three is all the more remarkable.

Let me just focus on one aspect of those contracts: the quality of the product supplied by those companies (respectively, a confectionery wholesaler, a 'family office', and a pest control specialist).

And, rather than me editorialising, let me quote the words of those companies themselves, or Government, or Government agencies.

This is what Government says about what we bought from Clandeboye (we spent a total of £108m on gowns).

But how can they not be cleared for use as gowns? And yet be "authorised for distribution... as part of the PPE ensemble"? It doesn't sound like what we got was gowns.

From time to time, indeed quite a lot, I receive letters from Pestfix's lawyers who boast of acting for the world's leading tech companies (and a pest control specialist with last reported net assets of £18k but now engorged with profits from £350m of PPE contracts).

Sometimes I have to send those letters off to lawyers acting for @GoodLawProject who charge quite a lot of money (we might now be well into five figures) to advise me on the various ways to tell Pestfix's lawyers to sling their hook.

What I find especially crappy about this is that Pestfix doesn't like its actions being in the public domain. Their letters are marked "private and confidential" to try and stop me telling you they are using profits from public contracts to muzzle my work.

And if I do tell you, they complain to the court that it is my actions that lead to public opprobrium being heaped upon them. For my part, I tend to think it is mostly their actions.

Anyway. I mention this by way of precusor to observing that the NAO has quietly made some changes to their report about, inter alia, the £350m in PPE contracts won by a small pest control specialist in Littlehampton that got into the VIP channel for reasons no one can explain.

Thread:
I'm thinking about Tim Keller's influence.

There is the curious fact that Keller is well-regarded among the culture elite (or at least has not suffered the sort of vilification one might expect given his influence). How can we explain this?

Looking at Prodigal God and other writings, you see that his approach to urban ministry is deeply political in a way that appeals to Democrat-heavy cities. It involves two moves:

1) equalizing sins: elevating the sin of hypocrisy, "moralism," and "religion" (the sins of "conservatives") and equating these with the sins tolerated among liberal (e.g., homosexuality)
&
2) emphasizing "self-righteousness" as a sort of chief sin (the sin of "red states").

Keller effectively downplays the sins that liberals tolerate while elevating the sins of their political enemies, the red state conservatives.

But the greatest appeal to liberals is that critiquing the "self-righteous" vilifies political action, particularly the action of social conservatives (e.g., anti-gay marriage). And the equalization of sins eases concerns over changes in social policy (e.g., gay marriage).

1) Where we are: This is much, much bigger than a fraudulent election (it was) or rampant gubment tyrannical China Virus abuse (it is).

2) What we are facing has been building for a good 30 years.

3) I date it back to the GOP failure to defeat Clinton in the gubment shutdown.

4) If you went to public school, that would be the 1995 budget battle.

5) The brand new GOP Congress, with plenty of public support, failed to rein in a Clinton bloated budget.

6) It wasn't the numbers. Compared to today's deficits & debts, this was pocket change. Rather, this was the first time since the Cold War, which was a legit excuse for constant deficit spending, that Congress failed to do its MAIN constitutional duty--oversee spending.

7) No, this isn't a thread about deficits or debt. At present, I don't think those pose the biggest challenge to us, or even probably one of the top five.

8) Rather, this is about a deadly disease that hit DC & the patient refused to take any medicine for it.

9) The disease was the failure to address the major problems of the day, whether it was deficits, Islamic terrorism, the banking crisis, or trade.

10) Vote fraud & this frankenstein of an election is only the latest SYMPTOM of this much larger disease.

In 2009, I studied the history of the FBI/CIA and also the Hitler regime (research for a book). I expected it to be a dull errand, not a horrific realization that the evil methods of operation of US agencies were often indistinguishable in their actions from the N regime. AND...

2) I found no evidence whatsoever that these abhorrent programs had stopped. Quite the opposite... I kept waiting for the books to get to the part where the programs ended, were properly disclosed/exposed, all went to prison, victims were compensated, and these agencies prevented

3) from ever conducting unethical operations against their own citizens and others ever again... But... no. That part of the books wasn't written. We can only conclude then, that the operations are still ongoing. Even programs that were supposedly forced to end have many signs

4) of simply changing the name of the program/operation and shifting things around to look like something else... nope, just a continuation of the same unlawful evil thing as before. Except, year after year, the tech capabilities rose, and the level of wickedness had to also rise

5) As society became progressive, there wasn't much left that society universally labels a "compromising position": activities rejected as unacceptable, unforgivable, unpardonable & if caught- jailed or fired. Blackmail doesn't work if all human activity is accepted and defended

This NYT interview with Dr. Fauci blows the biggest hole possible in @Ken_Rosenthal's reporting from 10 days ago.

In his article, @Ken_Rosenthal wrote, "The union, by scheduling its own discussion with the same officials for a later date, avoided hearing what the government representatives suggested to MLB, according to sources: a one-month delay, with the idea of getting players..." 2/

"in time to start the season."

Within a day or two the Union had its own meeting with government officials. That was already reported, although perhaps not as widely as the original pieces claiming the Union didn't want to talk to government officials. In a previous thread 3/

I explained that the Union did not want to be on the same call with management because it would lead to the parties posturing on the call, rather than having an honest discussion with the experts, including Fauci. The Union never avoided the discussion, it just wanted 4/

a separate discussion, not a negotiation in front of COVID experts.

But, this interview undermines the original reporting further.

Fauci told the NYT:

The only thing I said was that, from a public health standpoint, it looks like the cases — if you look at the plotting of 5/