[American Greatness] As Rudyard Kipling popularized in his 1886 Departmental Ditties, little tin gods are figures whose records cannot carry the legends built around them but who are shielded by the institutions that built them. The Democrat Party, its allied media, and the transnational class that gathers in Davos and Brussels have perfected the production of little tin gods to serve their political ends. Five cases on two continents show the pattern: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Anthony Fauci, Volodymyr Zelensky, and Emmanuel Macron. Their records differ; the template does not.
ANTHONY FAUCI: THE HIGH PRIEST OF "THE SCIENCE"
For two years, the press presented Fauci as the embodiment of science itself, and he obliged by telling an interviewer in 2021 that attacks on him were attacks on science. The legend required forgetting his first epidemic.
In a JAMA commentary in May 1983, Fauci raised the possibility that routine household contact could spread AIDS, and the wire services carried the warning nationwide. The infant cases behind it turned out to be mother-to-child transmission, and Fauci reversed himself within weeks without acknowledging his role in the scare. The fear of casual contact fueled stigma against homosexual men for years. Overstate the risk, centralize control, brand skeptics as dangerous, and adjust quietly when the data turn. The COVID playbook was written in 1983.
During COVID, the script ran again, on masks, surface transmission, school closures, and natural immunity. The House Select Subcommittee’s 520-page final report in December 2024 concluded that a lab-related incident involving gain-of-function research was the most likely origin of the virus and that the "Proximal Origin" paper, used to dismiss the lab-leak hypothesis as a conspiracy theory, had been prompted by Fauci. The NIH grant pipeline he oversaw ran through EcoHealth Alliance to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. In January 2025, HHS debarred EcoHealth and its president, Peter Daszak, for five years for failing to report risky experiments and violating grant terms.
Accountability for Fauci himself never arrived. He was the highest-paid federal government employee, earning $480,000 in 2022, more than the president. His household net worth rose from $7.6 million in 2019 to $12.6 million by the end of 2021, helped by nearly $1 million in prizes, including a $901,400 award honoring him for "speaking truth to power" during the Trump years. Then, on 20 January 2025, hours before leaving office, Joe Biden granted him a preemptive pardon. A man confident of his innocence would want his day in court. The protected get pardons instead. And the legacy media have protected him to the present day.
Nor was salary the whole story. Records pried loose from NIH only through a federal lawsuit show Fauci received 23 royalty payments from third parties licensing NIH inventions between 2010 and 2014, with the amounts and the payers redacted by his own agency. In 2025, he conceded that royalties on his experimental AIDS drug, interleukin-2, posed a conflict of interest since his institute was spending $36 million testing it on patients who were not told on their consent forms. He said he gave the money to charity; the public has never been allowed to check.
Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited by Gleb Zabelin
[Regnum] Relatives of those repressed can obtain almost all the surviving information about the fates of their loved ones, although some archival materials remain classified. Valery Fadeyev, Chairman of the Presidential Council for Civil Society and Human Rights (HRC), told a Regnum correspondent this on October 30 at the Moscow Wall of Grief.
Here, in the square at the intersection of Sadovaya-Spasskaya and Sakharov Avenue, a flower-laying ceremony was held on the Day of Remembrance for the Victims of Political Repression.
State Duma deputy Boris Chernyshov, head of the State Duma Committee on the Development of Civil Society, Public and Religious Associations, also participated in the event.
Flowers were already lying at the foot of the Wall of Grief before Valery Fadeyev approached the memorial. People of different generations had gathered there: the elderly, including relatives of those repressed, and young people gathered in small groups.
WHAT HAS BEEN PRESERVED IN THE ARCHIVES
A Regnum correspondent asked Valery Fadeev about the challenges faced by families of the repressed searching for documents about their loved ones, and how accessible archives are.
"As far as I understand, relatives of those repressed can obtain almost all the information about what happened to their ancestors," the Chairman of the Human Rights Council noted, and then explained why he was talking about almost all the information, not all of it.
"Some information is classified, for example, about the 'troikas.' You know, there was a concept called 'troikas.' Instead of holding a trial, they would convict the accused within a day, and the next day they would execute them. This information is classified."
The head of the Human Rights Council linked the restrictions, among other things, to ethical issues: "Some activists demanded that this data be made public. There are ethical considerations here, too. Is it right to disclose this information? Some of it is related to confidentiality."
It was also impossible to preserve all the information about the fates of those executed. "Not all of them have [information]. In some places, the archives have simply been lost. This is a problem," the head of the Human Rights Council noted.
Chairman of the Human Rights Council Valery Fadeyev and State Duma deputy Boris Chernyshov at the memorial to the victims of political repression.
And yet, according to Fadeev, during their search for information, relatives do not encounter any deliberate resistance: “It is impossible to say that someone is hindering relatives.”
According to the Law on the Rehabilitation of Victims of Political Repression, adopted on October 18, 1991, family members of victims may review the criminal and administrative case files of their relatives and receive copies of the documents—with the consent of the rehabilitated person or after his death.
If the archives contain information about the time and cause of death, and the place of burial, this information must also be provided upon request.
However, access to some documents may be restricted. In March 2025, Rosarkhiv approved a procedure classifying certain archival materials as classified information with restricted distribution.
"DON'T ERASE FROM MEMORY"
The Wall of Grief, where the conversation took place, was erected nine years ago. The memorial, designed by sculptor Georgy Frangulyan, was unveiled on October 30, 2017. The state funded the construction, but private donations also played a significant role. Fadeyev recalled this, explaining why he considers the monument a people's monument:
"This memorial was built at the initiative of civil society. This issue was raised at the Human Rights Council about fifteen years ago. This memorial was built, in part, with public funds, as a fundraising campaign was launched for its construction."
Donations varied, from small amounts to substantial sums. "The maximum contribution was five million rubles, but there were also contributions of five hundred rubles and even one hundred rubles. Thousands of people donated for this monument. It's a people's monument," said Valery Fadeyev.
"It's not bad, but good, that the state is participating in this. In doing so, the state is showing that it has no intention of erasing these tragic pages from history," the HRC chairman added.
But the work isn't limited to erecting monuments. Shortly before October 30, Fadeyev said, a working group on perpetuating the memory of victims of political repression met. Among the issues discussed was a methodological seminar for regional public activists and museum directors, who could share experiences. No dates have yet been announced.
"Most of what was planned ten to fifteen years ago has already been accomplished, including this memorial. However, we will continue working on it for some time," Fadeyev noted.
The work of perpetuating the memory of the victims of repression is not limited to the creation of memorials.
The Human Rights Council continues to interact with regional museums and public organizations, helping to preserve historical evidence and discussing further work in this area.
At the state level, the foundation for this work is the Concept of State Policy for the Perpetuation of the Memory of Victims of Repression, adopted in 2015. This basic document, among other things, calls for improving legislation on the rehabilitation of victims of repression and the creation of new memorial projects.
Preserving documents is one aspect of his work. Teaching history is another. Fadeyev was asked whether enough space is devoted to the topic of repression in school textbooks.
"This topic is certainly covered in school textbooks. Nothing prevents history teachers from expanding on this topic if they wish. I don't see any problem," the head of the Human Rights Council emphasized. However, he believes the issue extends beyond just one topic: "Many of our schoolchildren know little about the Great Patriotic War. This, I believe, is a question of the overall quality of education."
WHY DOES THE WEST NEED THE SOLOVETSKY STONE?
The conversation at the Wall of Grief wasn't limited to history and archival matters. Journalists raised the issue of current controversies surrounding monuments. One of them concerns the Solovetsky Stone, which was erected on Lubyanka Square in 1990.
In December 2024, Fadeyev proposed moving the monument to the Wall of Grief: in his opinion, some of the protests at the monument had become politically charged. The Chairman of the Human Rights Council maintained his position, but urged caution: "There's no need to rush into making any kind of urgent decision."
Valery Fadeyev specifically addressed the participation of Western diplomats in commemorative events at the Solovetsky Stone. According to the head of the Human Rights Council, representatives of states supplying arms to Ukraine are exploiting the memory of the victims of Soviet repression for contemporary political purposes.
"Yesterday, diplomats from countries that are effectively at war with us came again. Western countries that supply weapons, intelligence, and so on. Why are they even coming there? You see, this is also politicking," Fadeyev said.
[PJ] Imagine visiting a democratic country where young people dressed in military clothes, carrying machine guns, and eager to defend their country are ubiquitous. There are also children everywhere, as it is the country with the highest birth rate in the developed world. The cities are vibrant, and everyone you meet tells you what a wonderful place it is to live.
Former Australian deputy prime minister John Anderson shared these impressions on his recent trip to Israel. He explained that his reason for the visit was that he despises racism, especially the oldest and most pernicious hatred, antisemitism. He also said that his history degree gave him enough knowledge to know that when you see a rise in antisemitism, worse trouble is always brewing.
Anderson interviewed Israeli national security expert Dan Schueftan in Tel Aviv to discuss the future of Israel and the West. Schueftan, whom Anderson praised for having a track record of calling things right since the Yom Kippur War in 1973, said that the essential question facing us today is, "Can civilized people defend themselves against barbarians even when the barbarians are defended by stupid people in the mainstream of Western civilization?"
Schueftan noted that the number of Israelis who prepare to qualify for a combat unit has more than doubled in the last three years. Anderson contrasted that with the situation in most Western countries, particularly America. He said:
#1
*The former Warsaw Pact countries will probably be fine.
*The Scandinavian and Baltic countries (and Italy) seem to be waking up to the threat and taking action that may work.
*The remaining European countries and the US are in trouble. The far left is using the legal system against us.
Deal with the rioters harshly
*Charge the rank & file (aka useful idiots) that haven't committed a violent felony or misdemeanor: They get a plea deal of 2000 hours of community service and probation or reduced sentences if they provide information that leads to the arrest and conviction of anybody listed below,
* Charge the ones that committed a violent felony or misdemeanor crime with the maximum sentence
*Charge the leadership and financial supporters with sedition and maximum sentences.
Sadly, I don't see any of those three things happening.
#3
*Charge the rank & file (aka useful idiots) that haven't committed a violent felony or misdemeanor:
To join the mob is to accept the possibility of becoming violent. It’s only happenstance that those particular people did not happen to be caught engaging in kinetic action.
Because he thinks for himself and he left them. Thinking for yourself is fine, praiseworthy even, so long as you come to the same conclusions as everyone else.
[Victor Davis Hanson] As the midterms approach, the Left has gone nearly berserk in its hatred of trillionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk. Yet its escalating venom would have been almost inconceivable before 2022, when Musk publicly declared that he would be voting Republican.
Before Musk’s recent political reversal (he voted for both Hillary Clinton in 2016 and Joe Biden in 2020), he was beloved by the Left as the first successful upstart challenger to the century-long dominance of the Big Three fossil-fuel automakers. Liberals once loved his revolutionary, electrically powered TeslaKarps and drove them proudly as a green virtue signal.
Not now. Far-left podcaster Jennifer Welch has run out of Nazi epithets for Musk. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez—ironically, given her own limited talents—trashed Musk as "probably one of the most unintelligent billionaires I have ever met or seen or witnessed."
Fellow multibillionaire Bill Gates smeared Musk for supposedly "killing the world’s poorest children" by promoting cuts to U.S. foreign aid programs.
Just this week, former Clinton labor secretary Robert Reich even demanded that Musk’s SpaceX and Starlink be nationalized and run by the government—a move more associated with Cuba or the old Soviet Union than with the United States of America.
Such unhinged venom can contribute to violence. In early 2025, leftists launched more than 80 attacks against Tesla cars and dealerships—and sometimes even individual Tesla drivers. Similar cases of vandalism and arson have continued into 2026.
So why did the Left go from hailing Musk as the next Thomas Edison to treating him as public enemy No. 1 and targeting him with death threats?
The Left once loved all the tech and Wall Street billionaires who ensured that Democrats always had more money than Republicans.
Billionaire George Soros and his various foundations have channeled well over half a billion dollars to left-wing candidates and causes in just the last six years alone. Billionaires like Reid Hoffman, Tom Steyer, and the now-imprisoned Sam Bankman-Fried gave hundreds of millions to the Democratic Party and its candidates.
But Elon Musk now embodies everything the enraged Left hates.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
