6-13-25 DailyBriefs.info          mp3 of brief  podcast  

Here is a comprehensive response to your query, drawing on the provided sources:

I. California Dreamin' By James Howard Kunstler

1. The "Party of Chaos" is described as inherently driven to sow chaos, and the operation to instigate riots over the removal of illegal immigrants has been "well-planned in advance". Chief lawfare artists Norm Eisen and Mary McCord have "engineered the legal strategy to oppose enforcement of US immigration law," aiming to "clog the courts with lawsuits to prevent it".

2. The Democratic Party allegedly "hustled XX-millions of border-jumpers into the country" to "flood the swing election precincts with enough new voters to keep the Party of Chaos in power permanently". Now that the illegals are here, "the party will do anything it can to foil their removal".

3. The ultimate goal of this operation is to "goad President Trump into declaring some kind of national emergency to put down the violence," with the objective of then pointing at him and hollering, "Behold the fascist tyrant!". However, the Democrats are "mistaken in thinking they can replay the George Floyd hustle," as "more than 70-percent of the American public is not-insane" and "are not fooled by the term 'undocumented'".

4. Former Homeland Security chief Alejandro Mayorkas is blamed for what was a "patently treasonous act" of allowing millions of illegal immigrants to "stroll freely across the border," with "massive assistance from NGOs". Before being sworn in, Mr. Mayorkas was a board member of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS), an organization actively assisting this wave of illegal immigrants, which has purportedly been "enlisted to serve the Democratic Party’s program for flooding the voter rolls".

5. Violent mobs in Los Angeles are expected to fill the streets, "waving Mexican and Palestinian flags burn cars, fling missiles and fireworks at police, and interfere with the deportation process of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency". These actions are described as "coming close to presenting themselves as a foreign enemy army and, as such, would invite a response from the defending US military".

6. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass "skates at the edge of sedition as she orders her city’s law officers to 'not cooperate' with federal authorities who seek to find-and-deport illegal immigrants". In her youth, Ms. Bass "joined the Cuba-sponsored Venceremos Brigade" and "traveled to Cuba eight times in the 1970s for training in regime change operations".

7. California Governor Gavin Newsom is seen as "recklessly grandstanding, looking for a kayfabe fight with Donald Trump as he primps for his party’s 2028 nomination". The author questions whether "documented citizens" of California "have noticed how Governor Newsom managed to wreck the state during his terms-in-office".

8. Street fighting is presented as a "capital amusement" for "sore-beset Gen Z, stuck with unpayable college loans, faced with a daunting job market, reduced to living in Mom’s basement, addled with sexual bamboozlement, and jacked-up on prescription drugs and other mind-altering substances". This feeds a "lack of purpose and meaning," leading to "mass delusion, mob violence, and social upheaval," but also offers "an opportunity to get outside in nice weather and consort with your peers".

9. The current violence is attributed to "profound boundary problems," which the Democratic Party has "exploited very deliberately". The party is accused of having "erased the moral boundaries between decent behavior and crime, just as it tried to erase the boundary between the United States and Mexico".

II. Can Trump and Musk Make Up? By Ron Paul, MD

1. The recent "dramatic blowout" between President Trump and Elon Musk was "shocking yet predictable," with media reports indicating a "cold war had been brewing between Musk’s people and Trump’s appointees". Musk's support for Trump "made him a lightning rod for Trump-haters and he saw his personal wealth take a hit for his troubles".

2. Musk’s "Department of Government Efficiency project was truly revolutionary," enabling Americans to "see up close and in real time just how government operates". This project revealed that federal spending, in the "billions and trillions of dollars," not only failed its stated goals but "actually harmed the United States".

3. Targeting USAID through DOGE revealed that "90 percent of the 'independent' media in Ukraine was US government controlled". Furthermore, it was found that "Foreign 'journalists' paid by the US government are going to publish what the US government wants to be published".

4. The overarching message from these revelations was that "The United States is being undermined by a government that demands the right to intervene in every aspect of our lives – and of the lives of everyone on the planet," which is deemed "not sustainable". The "Trump/Musk split was seemingly finalized" by Trump’s "Big Beautiful Bill," a "massive funding bill" that "blew up the national debt with more spending".

5. Elon Musk publicly expressed his frustration on X, calling the Congressional spending bill "a disgusting abomination" and "massive, outrageous, pork-filled". This post, seen by over a hundred million people, escalated the break "seemingly beyond the point of no return".

6. Musk was "no-doubt frustrated that despite all of the work he and his team did to uncover government waste, he hit a brick wall in a Washington that recoils from any attempt to shrink its size and level of interference in our lives". The article expresses hope that after the "smoke has cleared," Trump and Musk can "agree on" a return to the principles of DOGE and the idea that current levels of spending and debt are unsustainable.

III. Donald Trump Decouples the United States From the European Union By Thierry Meyssan

1. The article suggests that the "fall of the 'American Empire' will not resemble that of the USSR," as Washington's Western European allies "intend to perpetuate it, with or without their leader". President Donald Trump is depicted as decoupling the United States from both NATO and the European Union, no longer wishing his country "to have anything to do with the 'American Empire' and its hired guns".

2. Trump initially appeared to give "carte blanche" to EU leaders and the UK, allowing them to believe they could "fight Russia in Ukraine alone" and "ensure the continent’s security". However, the United States has since "suspended its coordination with the EU," meaning future EU "sanctions" packages will be decided alone and are "already doomed to failure" without US backing.

3. The US has observed the Council of Europe's preparation of an "international criminal tribunal to judge Russian crimes in Ukraine," but they "are keeping aloof from it" because, in their eyes, "this jurisdiction makes no sense". The UK and EU are now faced with the reality that they "lack the military means to back up their policies" and have distanced themselves from the United States by failing to take them seriously.

4. The UK and EU's only remaining "weapon" is to confiscate frozen Russian assets for Ukraine's rebuilding, but this would "violate property rights" and is "only possible in times of war against an enemy". Confiscating these assets would "amount to declaring war on an enemy several times more powerful than the UK and the EU combined" and would "scare all its partners on the planet".

5. Trump's prior demand for allies to commit 5% of their GDP to military spending, an "impossible to achieve" figure, made the "United States’ withdrawal from NATO’s integrated command... predictable". He has also repeatedly asserted that "the European Union was created to harm the United States," viewing it as the "civilian component of the 'American Empire'".

6. At the Munich Security Conference on February 14, Vice President JD Vance "warned the UK and the EU" that the most concerning threat to Europe is "from within—Europe’s retreat from some of its most fundamental values". Donald Trump is not actively attacking Western Europeans but is "simply letting them drift in pursuit of a pipe dream".

7. The dissolution of NATO and the EU is considered a "step forward" by some, but for British subjects and European citizens, it is "a catastrophe". The article predicts that in "the coming months, we will witness the reconciliation of the United States and Russia," which will require Westerners to "replace their elites and rethink their societies," for which they are "completely unprepared".

8. President Trump's goal is to bring his country back to its fundamentals with "Make America Great Again!". However, his European allies "intend to prolong this Empire," with the EU administration hoping Trump will be "assassinated soon or lose the midterm elections and be forced to fall into line".

IV. He Who Wrestles With God in Public: Jordan Peterson Versus Himself By Scott Ventureyra

1. Jordan Peterson’s recent appearance on Jubilee’s YouTube debate was not merely a cultural war skirmish but revealed "the ongoing drama of a man caught between archetype and Incarnation, between myth and metaphysical truth". The event "laid bare the limits of symbolic Christianity" and posed the question: "Can a man live as though Christianity were true without ever affirming that it is?".

2. Peterson consistently "stops short of theological affirmation," grounding his concept of the sacred in "evolutionary utility and symbolic resonance not in divine revelation". The author argues that the true question is not whether God is a necessary archetype but "whether He has spoken and has revealed Himself in human history, most decisively in Jesus Christ".

3. In a prior article, the author noted a "deep tension in his thought" where Peterson, despite affirming moral objectivity and rejecting relativism, did so "inconsistently, lacking a clear referential grounding—that is, God". It was concluded that Peterson's "philosophical vision was not equipped to defend Christian theism," even though he "rescued many from nihilism".

4. The Jubilee debate format was "far more adversarial and emotionally charged" than previous discussions. A pivotal moment occurred when an atheist challenged Peterson with, "You’re not a Christian," which "reverberated across social media, spawning headlines and memes," exposing what many saw as Peterson’s "bluff".

5. Some Christian thinkers, like Trent Dougherty and William Lane Craig, offered charitable interpretations of Peterson's approach, with Craig suggesting his evasiveness might be "strategic" or due to him being a "baby Christian". However, the author argues that such interpretations "only serve to illuminate the core dilemma: the uneasy coexistence of archetype and the Incarnation, where symbolic truths... become theologically hollow when severed from the concrete reality of divine revelation".

6. Peterson's theological evasiveness is characterized by a shift to "symbolic language" when asked about belief in God or Christ, defining "God" as "the highest value" and "Belief" as "what we live out". This is seen as "conceptual sleight of hand than serious theology" and his pragmatism "collapses under the weight of Paul’s warning: if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile (1 Corinthians 15:17)".

7. Peterson's assertion that "God is conscience," purportedly supported by Cardinal Newman, is deemed a "clear misreading". Newman, in fact, "saw conscience as the echo of God’s voice—not its source, and certainly not God," leading the author to state, "Peterson psychologizes what Newman theologizes".

V. How Marxists Erase Human Will and Agency By Wanjiru Njoya

1. Many individuals "fail to recognize Marxist theories when they encounter them" because the language of Marxism is "increasingly disguised in moralistic slogans such as 'social justice' and 'inclusiveness'". The most "pernicious influence of Marxist doctrine into the social justice discourse" is its role "in erasing human will and agency".

2. Marxists contend that "human action is inevitably determined, not by individual will or choice, but by one’s economic and social circumstances". In contrast, Ludwig von Mises asserts that human beings possess the "will and power to make choices and take purposeful action," defining action as "human will put into operation and transformed into an agency".

3. According to Marxists, there are "certain predetermined actions that will inevitably be adopted by people who are classified as 'exploited' and other actions will always be adopted by their 'exploiters'". This means that "man does not adjust his actions based on his personal preferences or his own agency but merely follows the collective dictates of his group".

4. Progressives, even those who claim to reject Marxist ideology, hold the expectation that "people’s opinions are determined by their class consciousness or race consciousness," viewing their own worldview as merely "obvious". For example, the Southern Poverty Law Center finds it "incomprehensible" that a black man might not share their worldview, expecting "exploited people will be in constant struggle against their exploiters".

5. Mises rejects the Marxist assertion that "a man’s thinking is determined by his class affiliation," which posits that "Every social class has a logic of its own". Modern critical race theories, which developed from the Frankfurt School, "extend this notion of class affiliation to racial affiliation," suggesting that "one’s thought inevitably reflects his race".

6. Mises differentiates purposeful human action from "animal reaction," explicitly rejecting the "method of instinct-psychology" which argues that human action is solely the "satisfaction of an instinctive urge". He posits that "what distinguishes man from beasts is precisely that he adjusts his behavior deliberately" and "can master his impulses and desires".

VI. Leftists Devastate Los Angeles With Fiery Riots Against Trump Immigration Policy By Matt Lamb Lifesite News

1. "Violent and fiery riots unfolded throughout the weekend in Los Angeles as left-wing activists set cars on fire and caused significant damage as they protested Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids". In response to this violence, "President Donald Trump deployed the National Guard to quell the violence".

2. Democrats, including New Jersey Democratic Senator Cory Booker and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, were "quick to rush to call the violent and 'fiery' protests 'peaceful,'" similar to their response to the 2020 George Floyd riots. They were "quick to blame President Donald Trump for sending in troops" and for "sowing chaos and confusion by arresting people who are showing up for their immigration hearings".

3. Video evidence shows "left-wing activists committing widespread violence," including burning the American flag and shouting "vulgar chants at Trump," yet it "remains unclear how Trump himself is at fault". The rioting began when "law enforcement aimed to serve warrants on illegal immigrants," leading to crowds attempting to block agents and officers using "flash bangs into the street to disperse people".

4. President Trump, in contrast, "has continued to call for peace and law and order," stating on Truth Social, "We will always do what is needed to keep our Citizens SAFE, so we can, together, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!". Mark Hemingway is quoted suggesting that "Dem politicians in LA publicly encouraging riots helps explain why they’re also incapable of issuing building permits for the fires months ago".

VII. The Camp of the Saints By Paul Craig Roberts

1. The author expresses bewilderment at rioters burning cars, noting that "Insurance seldom covers such events" and that "Violent protests harm innocents". There is also confusion as to why the National Guard is deployed when they "are not permitted to use their weapons," suggesting that in America, "the defense of property and livelihood plays second fiddle to the lives of criminals".

2. It is asserted that "Hispanics have taken back California," to the point that "We might as well cede the state back to Mexico". California is further characterized as "a main source of Woke, left-wing, anti-white influence," and the Democrat governor of California states that the "immigrant-invaders are 'his people, his community'".

3. The argument is put forth that "immigrant-invaders who have been permitted to live in the US for a number of years now have roots in America and squatters’ rights to citizenship," drawing a parallel to the legal concept of "adverse possession". The author states that "The non-enforcement of borders creates squatters’ rights," and that courts would likely "include citizenship as a right of adverse possession".

4. Without a border, a country is "just an open area to which anyone can come," and "Other states and cities under Democrat control want citizenship given to whoever walks across the non-existing border". If deportation attempts persist, the opposition "can spread and become more violent," with "White Democrats" potentially joining "simply because they oppose Trump".

5. A "more promising approach" would be to "encourage the enculturation of immigrant-invaders, transforming them into Americans with American mores, behavior, and language," while supporting Christianity and suppressing the "entire race thing" and "multiculturalism". However, this would necessitate closing the border and halting or slowing legal immigration, and it may be "late in the game for this to succeed" as "left-wing intellectuals want America’s destruction".

6. The problem of illegal immigration has worsened since President Reagan amnestied millions due to agribusiness needs for labor, without addressing the border. The absence of a border causes a nation to "dissolve into a Tower of Babel," a fate increasingly befalling Western countries as the US transforms with growing populations of Hispanics, Asians, and Arabs, and a decaying "language and religious base".

7. The author notes the observation that "so many white Americans are in the streets claiming California for immigrant-invaders" in news photos and videos. The article concludes that "America is already lost," and "Deportation of millions of illegals is impossible," predicting that "America’s illegals will end up with amnesty" and the border will be reopened once "the Establishment gets rid of Trump".

VIII. The Deep State Revelations By Madge Waggy

1. The "deep state" is defined as "a hybrid entity of public and private institutions ruling the country" that operates "concealed behind the one that is visible" and beyond democratic accountability. Individuals like Dominic Cummings, former chief advisor to UK PM Boris Johnson, have a habit of "revealing things we’re not supposed to know about how government operates," exposing "the motives and acts of what many these days call the deep state".

2. Cummings revealed that unelected officials, such as a private secretary in the PM’s office, can be "ten times more powerful and important than the [foreign] secretary of state," indicating that the "whole system has become fake" and "the cabinet is just like a staged theatre". These revelations prompt questions about "whom do the bureaucrats serve? And how do we challenge the power of those who really exercise it if they are not the politicians we elect to represent us?".

3. Cummings also confessed that "people like Bill Gates and that kind of network" of globalist oligarchs were dictating the UK government’s Covid emergency response, showing that "the general public’s perception of government is 'all nonsense'". The legacy media, including the BBC and Sky News, reportedly failed to investigate these revelations and instead worked to convince the public that politicians were making the decisions.

4. Former UK Prime Minister Liz Truss confirmed that upon entering Number 10, she found she was "not holding the levers," which were instead "held by the Bank of England, the Office of Budget Responsibility [OBS]". The OBR, a public-private partnership described as an "independent" fiscal policy watchdog, has an advisory panel including representatives from major financial firms like Vanguard, JP Morgan, and Goldman Sachs, who are "steering UK government fiscal policy—irrespective of which party is elected into office".

5. These admissions from Cummings and Truss "confirm something many of us already know: Government policy does not reflect the will of the people". The article suggests that the public believes in "fake government" because "the entire legacy media has been perpetuating that illusion for decades, if not centuries," conditioning people not to question the system.

6. The "deep state network" funds both the corporate legacy media, which directly propagandizes for the state, and the "Mainstream Alternative Media (MAM)," which "acknowledges concepts such as the uniparty and the deep state". The MAM's role is "more subtle," aiming to "steer the conversation toward advocating some sort of party political solution—usually in the form of one political saviour or another" and to "reinterpret the previously suppressed information to suggest solutions or narratives that are amenable to the oligarchs".

7. An example given is American MAM reporters acknowledging "global governance overreach" but then advocating for "gov-corp Technates" promoted by billionaires like Peter Thiel, a "Bilderberg steering committee oligarch and prominent supporter of the Trump administration". This implies that by voting for Trump, "freedom-minded Republican voters have ended up with... perhaps the most authoritarian form of globalist oligarch control imaginable".

8. The "deep state" facilitates meetings between globalist oligarchs, such as Bill Gates, and bureaucrats to implement their collective agenda as policy. Politicians like Mark Carney, the "newly appointed—not elected—Prime Minister of Canada," are described as "among the most closely connected" to the globalist inner circle, with Carney himself stating this connection is his "core strength".

9. Political scientist Francis Fukuyama, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and National Endowment for Democracy (NED), published "In Defense of the Deep State," acknowledging some historical aspects of the deep state as agencies that "manipulated the political system". However, he is accused of using a "straw man argument" by redefining the deep state as merely "the 'administrative state'" that "needs to be defended and not vilified".

10. Political science, through theories like "Economic-Elite Domination," has empirically demonstrated the existence of the deep state "as it is commonly perceived," where government policies are created for the interests of economically significant institutions or individuals. This contradicts Fukuyama's premise and the New York Times' portrayal of the deep state as "awesome" civil servants.

IX. The Last Days of Gaza By Chris Hedges

1. Gaza is characterized as being in its "final blood-soaked chapter of the genocide," with two million people living in "rubble or in the open air" and "Dozens are killed and wounded daily from Israeli shells, missiles, drones, bombs and bullets". The population lacks "clean water, medicine and food," having reached a "point of collapse" and feeling "Sick. Injured. Terrified. Humiliated. Abandoned. Destitute. Starving. Hopeless".

2. Israel and its "cynically named Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF)" are accused of "weaponizing starvation" by "enticing Palestinians to southern Gaza the way the Nazis enticed starving Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto to board trains to the death camps". The true goal is not to feed Palestinians, but to "cram Palestinians into heavily guarded compounds and deport them".

3. A "final humanitarian explosion" is anticipated in Gaza's "human slaughterhouse," evident in surging crowds fighting for food parcels, leading to "Israeli and U.S. private contractors shooting dead at least 130 and wounding over seven hundred others in the first eight days of aid distribution". Benjamin Netanyahu is accused of "arming ISIS-linked gangs in Gaza that loot food supplies," and Israel is blamed for orchestrating the "implosion of civil society" by eliminating UNRWA employees, doctors, journalists, and police through "targeted assassinations".

4. The author suspects Israel will "facilitate a breach in the fence along the Egyptian border," leading to "Desperate Palestinians will stampede into the Egyptian Sinai". The author asserts that "We — full participants in this genocide — will have achieved our demented goal of emptying Gaza and expanding Greater Israel".

5. The unfolding events are described as bringing "down the curtain on the live-streamed genocide," which "mocked the ubiquitous university programs of Holocaust studies" designed to "deify Israel as an eternal victim licensed to carry out mass slaughter". The mantra of "never again" is deemed "a joke," and the understanding of culpability for failing to halt genocide "does not apply to us," as "Genocide is public policy. Endorsed and sustained by our two ruling parties".

6. The genocide's aim is to "render us speechless," "paralyze us," and traumatize, fostering a sense of helplessness where "Nothing we do, it seems, can halt the killing". The author explicitly states an inability to look at the images of suffering, including "rows of little shrouded bodies," "decapitated men and women," and "Families burned alive in their tents".

7. The author predicts that "This genocide will haunt us. It will echo down history with the force of a tsunami. It will divide us forever. There is no going back". It is expected that once it is over, "all those who supported it, all those who ignored it, all those who did nothing, will rewrite history, including their personal history," reminiscent of post-WWII Germany where few admitted to being Nazis.

8. The source emphasizes that fear of being labeled a "terrorist sympathizer" or ostracized prevents people from "mak[ing] a fuss" about actions like drones vaporizing nameless souls. The author states unequivocally that one "cannot decimate a people, carry out saturation bombing over 20 months to obliterate their homes, villages and cities, massacre tens of thousands of innocent people, set up a siege to ensure mass starvation, drive them from land where they have lived for centuries and not expect blowback".

9. The killing of "two Israeli diplomats in Washington" and the "attack against supporters of Israel at a protest in Boulder, Colorado," are cited as "only the start" of the response to "the reign of state terror". The author questions how Palestinians are expected to react differently than a Sobibor death camp uprising participant who attacked a guard, especially when "Europe and the United States, who hold themselves up as the vanguards of civilization, backed a genocide that butchered their parents, their children, their communities".

10. The unequivocal message delivered to Palestinians and the Global South by this genocide is: "You do not matter. Humanitarian law does not apply to you. We do not care about your suffering, the murder of your children. You are vermin. You are worthless. You deserve to be killed, starved and dispossessed. You should be erased from the face of the earth". Omar El Akkad is quoted describing atrocities, including "setting fire to a library" and "blow[ing] up a mosque," done "To preserve the values of the civilized world".

11. Many individuals, including those known to the author, will "never speak to again" because they "will not risk alienating their colleagues, being smeared as an antisemite, jeopardizing their status, being reprimanded or losing their jobs". These individuals "do not risk death, the way Palestinians do," but rather "risk tarnishing the pathetic monuments of status and wealth they spent their lives constructing".

12. One commenter expresses hope for "an armed and bloody civil war in America where Black and Caucasian Americans start killing Jews, Koreans, and Chinese," to give Americans "a test of what their government has been doing for decades around the world". Another commenter declares, "There were no 'death camps'," stating instead that "The Germans interned alien enemy Jews for the protection of their Homeland".

13. A commenter questions Chris Hedges' failure to mention Jews, asserting that "Zionist Jews are the root cause" of the disaster and that the "USGov has been completely bribed and blackmailed by Jews and Israelis". This commenter also argues that Chris Hedges, being a "Christian minister," is "cucked to Jews" because "his whole faith revolves around Jews," making it "impossible to take on Jews".

14. Multiple commenters argue that "Judiasm and Christianity are JOINED AT THE HIP SEAMLESSLY," meaning that "The only way you can destroy Jews and Judiasm is to destroy Christianity". They assert that a "Christian cannot divest himself of the influence of the Jew without throwing out the dogma of the Bible," and that Christians are "hopelessly enslaved to Jews" and "will always accept Jewish crimes".

15. One commenter states that "War Crimes have no statute of limitations" and that "little people such as a Pentagon shipping clerk" and "big people such as Ron Lauder or Jason Greebblatt are all at risk of being tried for war crimes". Another comment implies that the Jewish owner of a Premier League club, Daniel Levy, fired the successful Greek coach Ange Postecoglou because "The Jew cannot abide the successful Greek".

16. A commenter expresses puzzlement as to why "the surrounding Arab nations (Lebanon/Jordan/Egypt/Syria) show no interest in helping their fellow Arabs or Muslims supposedly being killed in Gaza," and are not "offering them refuge or organizing a liberation army to invade Israel". Conversely, another commenter cites Palestinian views alleging that Hamas leaders live safely abroad and have chosen to "sacrifice tens of thousands of Palestinians to please its patrons in Qatar and Iran," effectively "trading" Gaza for their own "relevance in Tehran" and "applause in Doha".

X. The Spectacle of a Police State: This Is Martial Law Without a Formal Declaration of War By John & Nisha Whitehead The Rutherford Institute

1. In "Trump’s America," the standard for martial law is no longer constitutional but "personal," evidenced by Trump's reply to a reporter, "The bar is what I think it is". The article contends that Donald Trump operates as an "operative for the Deep State," which is defined as "the entrenched network of unelected bureaucrats, intelligence agencies, military contractors, surveillance firms, and corporate lobbyists that operate beyond the reach of democratic accountability".

2. The Deep State is described as "a government within a government—an intelligence-industrial complex that persists regardless of who sits in the Oval Office and whose true allegiance lies not with the Constitution but with power, profit, and control". Trump is portrayed as a "showman willing to turn its agenda into a public performance of raw power—militarized, theatrical, and loyal not to the Constitution, but to dominance".

3. The deployment of "hundreds of Marines" and federalization of "thousands of National Guard troops" in California, with military displays, is presented as the latest "performance". This "costly, violent, taxpayer-funded military display" is intended to "intimidate, distract and discourage us from pulling back the curtain on the reality of the self-serving corruption, grift, graft, overreach and abuse that have become synonymous with his Administration".

4. The situation in California is labeled a "manufactured crisis fomented by the Deep State," and Trump's calls to "BRING IN THE TROOPS!!!" and desire to have them "everywhere" are considered alarming. This is characterized as "martial law without a formal declaration of war," a "heavy-handed, chest-thumping, politicized, militarized response to what is clearly a matter for local government" that disregards the Constitution.

5. Deploying the military to handle domestic matters that civilian police should manage, particularly against the objections of local and state leaders, is seen as "cross[ing] the line into authoritarianism" and a "constitutional crisis in motion". This marks the first time in over fifty years that a president has "forcibly deployed the National Guard against a state governor’s wishes," with California Gov. Gavin Newsom reportedly threatened with arrest by Trump.

6. Trump's governance is defined by "force (military deployment), fear (ICE raids, militarized policing), and spectacle (the parade)," which collectively form "the spectacle of a police state" and "the language of force and authoritarian control". The Founders' warnings against "standing armies on American soil" are recalled, as the military might be used "not to defend the people, but to control them," making the Republic "tremble" when the military marches domestically.

7. Fear is identified as the Deep State’s primary tool, used not just to control people but to "condition them to surrender voluntarily". The deployment of the National Guard in this manner is deemed a "strategic act of fear-based governance designed to instill terror, particularly among vulnerable communities, and ensure compliance".

8. Under Trump, "the lines between a civilian democracy and a military regime continue to blur," transforming American streets into "war zones" where "peaceful protests are met with riot gear, armored vehicles, and surveillance drones". This transformation is viewed as strategic, with the government perceiving the public "not as constituents to be served but as potential combatants to be surveilled, managed, and subdued," and dissent being treated as "insurrection".

9. The current civil unrest is described as part of a "broader setup: an excuse to use civil unrest as a pretext for militarized overreach". The strategy involves bringing in militarized police to escalate tensions and turn peaceful protests into riots, thereby "reframe[ing] protest as provocation and dissent as disorder".

10. The right to criticize government and speak out against wrongdoing is called the "quintessential freedom," yet the government has become "increasingly intolerant of speech that challenges its power". A pattern is observed where "Civil discontent leads to civil unrest, which leads to protests and counterprotests. Tensions rise, violence escalates, and federal armies move in," while "the government’s abuses continue unabated".

11. This entire pattern is attributed to an "elaborate setup by the architects of the Deep State," who "want us divided. They want us to turn on one another. They want us powerless in the face of their artillery and armed forces. They want us silent, servile and compliant". The authors warn that this rapid slide towards an authoritarian society means "we are all about to become enemies of the state".

12. California is being "staged as the test site for the coming crackdown," where the Trump administration "provokes unrest through inhumane policies—in this case, mass ICE raids—then paints the resulting protests as violent threats to national security". This creates a "cynical and calculated loop: create the crisis, then respond with force," which "transforms protest into pretext, dissent into justification for domination".

13. Trump’s tactics are said to have "disturbing echoes of history," including Nixon’s deployment of the National Guard at Kent State and crackdowns on civil rights, Occupy Wall Street, and Black Lives Matter protests, all "under the guise of order". His use of the military against civilians is argued to violate the "spirit—if not the letter—of the Posse Comitatus Act" and raises "severe constitutional questions about the infringement of First Amendment rights to protest and Fourth Amendment protections against warrantless search and seizure".

14. Modern tools of repression, such as "AI-driven surveillance, predictive policing software, biometric databases, and fusion centers," have made "mass control seamless and silent," allowing the state to "predict and preempt" dissent. The military parade planned for Washington, D.C., is not seen as a celebration of service but a "declaration of supremacy" and a reminder to the populace "who holds the power and who wields the guns," akin to authoritarian regimes like North Korea and Mussolini’s Italy.

15. The article asserts that the underlying issue is not immigration, security, or protest, but "Power. Raw, unchecked, theatrical power". It concludes that if "the language of fear, the spectacle of dominance, and the machinery of militarized governance" become normalized, "then we are no longer citizens of a republic—we are subjects of a police state".

XI. The Truth About Salt By A Midwestern Doctor

1. The author highlights a significant frustration with the medical system: "the war against salt," which began in 1977 when a Senate Committee published dietary guidelines for reduced sodium despite "the existing evidence not supporting this". This policy, like others, "has developed an nearly unstoppable inertia of its own".

2. Many people, especially those in the medical field, assert that "salt is bad" and that "one of the most common pieces of health advice given both inside and outside of medicine is to eat less salt". The two main arguments for this belief are that salt raises blood pressure and that excessive sodium causes exacerbations in heart failure patients by accumulating fluid.

3. The logic behind the arguments against salt is considered "less solid than it appears," and the author suggests that many medical practices are driven by what is "most profitable" rather than "most helpful". A foundational principle of successful businesses in medicine is recurring revenue, leading to the goal of having "as many patients as possible be on lifelong prescriptions".

4. The "blood pressure market" has been "cement[ed] by making everyone terrified of salt," a tactic compared to making people fear the sun to benefit the skin cancer treatment market. The link between blood pressure and salt consumption is described as "actual quite tenuous," with drastic salt reduction typically resulting in "less than a 1% reduction in blood pressure".

5. Doctors routinely give hospitalized patients large amounts of IV 0.9% sodium chloride, sometimes "ten times the daily recommended sodium chloride we are supposed to consume—yet their blood pressure often barely rises". The author notes that only "some people and certain ethnicities are salt sensitive and will experience greater increases in blood pressure consuming salt (but this does not apply to the majority of the population)".

6. Aggressively pushing patients to "eliminate all (or almost all) salt from their life" is considered "dangerous" because a study of 181 countries found that "countries with lower salt consumption have shorter life expectancies". Furthermore, "Low sodium levels (hyponatremia) are strongly correlated with a risk of dying (e.g., the salt consumption target we are recommended to follow increases one’s risk of dying by 25%)".

7. Reduced salt consumption "increases one’s risk of hyponatremia," with one study showing it made hypertensive patients "9.9 times more likely to develop hyponatremia". Many blood pressure and psychiatric medications are also noted to put individuals at risk for "dangerously low sodium levels".

8. "Low dietary sodium intake causes a 34% increase in cardiovascular disease and death". Rapidly lowering blood sodium levels can reduce cardiac output and blood pressure "in a manner resembling traumatic shock," and low salt consumption has been "repeatedly linked to tachycardia (and atrial fibrillation)".

9. "Chronic sodium depletion has been linked to fatigue and insomnia," and many have reported discovering that "low salt consumption was the cause of their fatigue and lightheadedness". Postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), a condition linked to chronic fatigue syndrome, is "often treated with increased dietary sodium".

XII. Trap Door Spider By Eric Peters

1. The author describes observing "armed government worker[s]" (police) who "hide by the side of an old building" or use camouflaged vehicles, akin to a "trap door spider that hides in a little burrow so its prey cannot see it, waiting for the prey to get close". This tactic leads the author to question whether the goal is truly to reduce "speeding" or to "extract money".

2. If the objective were genuinely to suppress speeding, it would be "more sense to hide in plain sight" because the "obvious presence of speed limit enforcers" would deter "speeders". Instead, the author contends that "the government wants people to 'speed' so as to have the excuse to extract money from as many of them as possible".

3. In the past, "police" (a term the author applies to a more deserving time) drove "clearly marked, clearly visible police cars" with large lettering and obvious emergency lights, serving as a deterrent. Today, however, vehicles driven by "armed government worker[s]" are "painted in the manner of warships, to be harder to identify accurately," with shaded lettering and hidden lights, making them "very hard to see until it is too late".

4. The author states that "There is... only one explanation that makes sense for this. It is that the whole affair is about money – not 'safety'". This extracted "revenue" then "ends up paying the enforcer to enforce," and the process is "intellectually laundered" by being made "procedural" through forms and checks.

5. Despite these actions being done "In the name of keeping us safe," the author notes that "none of us do feel safe whenever we notice the presence of an armed government worker". The author concludes that people who are not criminals fear and loathe the police because "they are not criminals. And they are not police".

XIII. White or Western Specialness Forfeited by Blind Unconditional Obedience to Zion, or Now, the Myth of White Uniqueness in the West Gone Cuck By Jung-Freud

1. The article posits that "White or Western Specialness" has been "Forfeited by Blind Unconditional Obedience to Zion". The idea that "the West needs white people to uphold Western Values has been blown to smithereens by white submission to Judeo-Semitic Despotism".

2. The author challenges the notion that whites are uniquely advanced in appreciating values like "freedom, personal conscience, and individual thought," noting that despite such claims, the "values and virtues extolled in admiration and defense of the West... are hardly discernible among whites" today. Even white self-loathing is seen as a way of claiming advanced ethics.

3. The article suggests that "most white people, even ‘liberals’ and ‘progressives’, at least FEEL" that whites developed "far ahead of all the other peoples to better appreciate the values of freedom, personal conscience, and individual thought". Black Lives Matter (BLM) is viewed as subconsciously predicated on the assumption that "white conscience/compassion is essential because nonwhites, especially blacks, simply cannot do things on their own".

4. The "Jewish-controlled media" is accused of deliberately "fixat[ing] on the relatively rare cases of white-on-black violence... while mostly ignoring black-on-black and black-on-nonblack violence," leading to the impression that "white policemen constitute the main source of violent deaths in the black community". "Negrolatry" is described as "essentially a white thing," requiring "the fawning, gushing, and even delirious immersion of whites in stuff like Black Girl Magic".

5. So-called white "liberals" and "progressives" are depicted as priding themselves on being "radical" or "ahead of the curve," but are ultimately "abject tools of power, a bunch of commissars with the mentality of the East German Stasi". Their ideology is seen as defunct, replaced by the "idolatry of certain groups, namely Jews, blacks, and homosexuals".

6. The Democratic Party is described as the "quasi-official oligarchic party funded by super-rich Zionists and served by institutions run by Jewish supremacists and their cuck goy dogs". The Republican Party, instead of opposing this, allegedly "hopes to win over those very oligarchs by demonstrating an even greater servility to Zion".

7. "Holocaustianity" is presented as having "supplanted Christianity as the holiest of the holy," and "'antisemitism' constituting the absolute worst ‘sin’," fundamentally transforming Americanism and Western values. Whites, "in their doglike servitude to Jews and in total absence of agency & conscience," have effectively "outsourced Western values to the ‘browns’ who’ve shown the spirit of freedom, justice, courage, dignity, and human rights in calling out the evils of Jewish Supremacism".

8. The author claims that "white Americans... are now hardly better than the rest of the world, or even worse," citing how "so many whites collectively lost their minds over issue after issue, sheepishly or rabidly conforming to whatever craze, panic, or hysteria handed down from above" in 2020. White conservatives and liberals, particularly, have shown the "least amount of sense, decency, principles, and values" in the face of the "Gaza Horror".

9. The "Extreme Center" of both Democratic and Republican parties is stated to support "extreme ultra-tribal Jewish supremacist globalism" dominating the US, and it is within this center that the "biggest warmongers are found". In contrast, figures deemed "fringe" or "extreme," such as Ron Paul, advocated for a "more modest role for the US in the world".

10. White elites in the Democratic Party are criticized for their silence on the horrors in Gaza and Zionist destabilization, while whites in the GOP are portrayed as "castrated, wussy, servile, venal, and murderous (if only to appease Jewish Power)". The primary animating spirit among Republicans is "Jew Envy," seeing Jews as the "golden goose, the super-elites, superior whites, and the rightful master race".

11. The "Jewish Narrative" of "antisemitism" as "irrational" hatred from the "Christian (and then ‘racist’) White West" culminating in the Holocaust, is accused of burdening whites with the "greatest ‘sin’". This narrative was allegedly used to "scapegoat the white race" and form a "Jewish-Diversity alliance" for Democratic politics, where Jews blame whites for antisemitism and nonwhites blame whites for racism.

12. White Conservatives, out of fear of being labeled "antisemite" or "racist," reportedly "prevented them from calling out the actual political mechanism behind this anti-white defamation and crusade". Their primary hope was to "win over the Jews" by demonstrating "UNCONDITIONALLY supportive of whatever Israel does, even if it is genocide, support for ISIS & Al Qaeda terrorists, and more unjust wars based on Zionist lies".

13. The article questions where "Western values of liberty, independence, and morality" are found in these attitudes, suggesting that "some of the key essence of Western Values have been best expressed by nonwhites since Oct 7". These "brown" voices are described as having shown "courage," "stood on principles," and "named the great evil of our age, Zionism which is now genocidal Jewish supremacism".

14. Jewish Power is accused of leveraging its "Holocaust victim status to psycho-politically blackmail the West into supporting every Zionist abuse and browbeat into silence anyone who notices Jewish Power and its perversities". Jews, once associated with free speech, are now seen as the "main force for censorship".

15. The author criticizes college presidents, particularly "Jewish ones," who pontificated about McCarthyism but were "silent or utterly ineffectual against government demands that speech and expression be curtailed on campuses lest they offend the tender sensitivities of Jewish supremacist Zionist students". Colleges are accused of not resisting the "witch-hunt against college administrators in the aftermath of the Gaza Uprising" or condemning black rage, nor censoring speech that offended white or Christian students.

16. The "politicizing of EVERYTHING" is attributed to "modern Jewish-led academia," citing examples like Archie's comics being politicized with "globo-homo message" and TV ads promoting "race-mixing" and "anti-white-male messaging". The article concludes by lamenting that whites have "pathetically and pitifully submitted" to Jewish power like "servile dogs," while "brown people with the power of courage and conscience are" now "more representative of the Western spirit & values".

XIV. ☕️ REGRETFULLY ☙ Wednesday, June 11, 2025 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠 By Jeff Childers

1. The media is accused of "journalistic malpractice" for widely covering a new "octo-valent jab" that supposedly "works on viruses they haven't discovered yet," based on preliminary mouse studies. This is contrasted with the media's tendency to neglect "massive adverse events registries" and "declining (or negative) efficacy research" related to vaccines.

2. The author labels the media's behavior as "hype the hypothetical," where "Pre-clinical vaccines make page one" but "massive adverse events registries appear on page… none". If a study "flatters Big Pharma while whispering sweet nothings about safety, it’s splashy headline material," but if it questions "the holy jabs, it’s 'misinformation,' 'just a mouse model,' or 'anecdotal,' and it promptly gets memory-holed".

3. Positive science news today is suggested to be "most likely just a strategically timed PR push for a grant cycle, IPO, or political narrative," especially after HHS Secretary Kennedy called major journals "sock puppets" for Big Pharma. Kennedy's plan to publish all NIH study findings online is viewed as "long-overdue reform" threatening the "prestige journals’ cozy cartel," despite critics' condemnations.

4. The media is criticized for reporting on a "Victorian 'bleeding disease'" (typhoid) by blaming "travellers returning to the UK" while "Buried several paragraphs down" was the truth that the treatment-resistant strain is a "direct result of decades of antibiotic abuse and a strange new population-level immune dysfunction". This is seen as "deliberate misdirection" to avoid admitting "institutional responsibility" for "pharma-overload and immune-wrecking policies".

5. The article states that "the covid jabs —administered in successive rounds to a whopping 90% of British— caused immune dysregulation in a significant subset of recipients," including "persistent elevation of IgG4 antibodies, the subclass that tells the immune system to stand down". Despite this, the media avoids "any speculation about what else... might have caused 700 British victims to succumb to this latest outbreak," instead blaming "their own carelessness".

6. President Trump achieved "wins" in trade and tariffs, with the Court of Appeals upholding his "tariff dashboard". Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick announced an "agreement in principle" on a major trade deal with a Chinese trade negotiator, which Trump is expected to approve soon.

7. Trump's "first major trade deal is on the brink of completion— mere months into his presidency," with an announcement from Trump including a "Harvard student visa ban". The article also notes a "rapprochement" between Trump and Elon Musk, as both posted late-night/early-morning messages.

8. A self-directed autonomous drone "just won a flying competition against experienced human operators — for the first time," with the author expressing personal acceptance due to past drone crashes.

9. A judge rejected California Governor Newsom's emergency request to limit Trump's LA troop deployment, meaning "federal troops stay put" for now. The New York Times "timidly included" a story on Democrats entering "risky political terrain" with the immigration protests, with "party leaders" worrying that "the President is setting a dangerous political trap with provocations too outrageous to ignore".

10. The New York Times reported that "scenes of unrest" from the LA riots "have left Democratic leaders worried the confrontation elevates a losing issue for the party," and that the Los Angeles mayor announced a curfew. A tweet from John Fetterman (D-Pa.) was reposted, which seemingly downplayed the violence as "just people having fun watching cars burn".

11. Democrats are advised to "figure out not only what they’re against, but what they’re for," with one Democratic leader suggesting pivoting to "Republican cutbacks on health-care programs" in response to the unrest. Breitbart News opined that continued protests could lead Republicans to "actually win the midterms even if they cut Medicaid," a "dreadful possibility" for the Times.

12. Russia Today (RT) published a controversial story, confirmed by AP and Reuters, claiming "Ukraine’s shame: Why Kiev refuses to take back its dead and wounded," specifically 6,000 frozen Ukrainian soldiers from Russia. This refusal is linked to a Ukrainian law entitling each soldier's family to 15 million hryvnias (approx. $360,000), meaning the shipment would obligate Ukraine to pay over $2 billion, about "10% of Ukraine’s entire 2025 defense budget".

13. Kiev's stated excuse for not accepting the bodies, that it hasn't "confirmed the identities of the soldiers" and fears being "tricked," is deemed "laughably absurd". The author questions why Ukraine wouldn't accept the bodies and verify identities later, as "That’s how every other nation on Earth handles the fog of war".

14. The 6,000 dead soldiers from "one operation" (Kursk salient) contradict Zelensky's claim of only 43,000 KIA since the war's start, exposing "More Ukrainian lies". Kiev's "ugly foot-dragging on taking back its own war dead could conceivably cost it the war" by undermining military morale among soldiers who may feel their government minimizes casualties or stalls benefits.

15. This situation is presented as a "propaganda jackpot" for Russia, allowing them to claim, "We’re returning the dead with dignity. Ukraine doesn’t even want them back". Western taxpayers funding Ukraine are prompted to "wonder why billions are being sent to a regime that refuses to bury its own dead," as even a "brief delay constitutes a moral failure that crosses civilizational boundaries".