THE NEWS

President Donald Trump on Monday met with Ryder Williams, whose rescue of a 10-year-old from violent waves last month in Santa Cruz, California, garnered national attention.
The post Trump Meets with Lifeguard Who Saved Boy in Viral Rescue: ‘A Real Hero’ appeared first on Breitbart.

Angel Reese was served a heaping helping of humble pie on Sunday as she missed not one but two point-blank layups in the closing seconds of regulation in Atlanta’s eventual overtime loss to Caitlin Clark and the Indiana Fever.
The post Enes Kanter Told Angel Reese He Will Humble Her This Way Once He Enters the WNBA appeared first on Breitbart.

Iran’s Foreign Ministry on Monday dismissed “fabricated” reports in American media of secret “backchannel” negotiations between the U.S. government and Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).
The post Iran Denies Report of ‘Backchannel’ Negotiations with U.S. appeared first on Breitbart.

New actions targeting Lyme disease, alpha-gal syndrome, and other tick-borne illnesses are coming from HHS, Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced Monday, joined by actor Dennis Quaid.
The post RFK Jr., Dennis Quaid Announce New HHS Push on Lyme, Tick-Borne Disease: ‘Faster Diagnoses,’ ‘Real Answers’ appeared first on Breitbart.

Police Attacked During Massive “Teen Brawl” At Wisconsin State Fair

The establishment media commonly uses strategic phrases to hide or omit the truth behind certain uncomfortable situations.  Since the BLM era, journalists cannot simply describe a violent mob as a “black mob”, even if that description is generally true.  Today, one must say the words “teen brawl” in order to avoid any implications of race. 

It’s a very similar tactic to those used by the media in the UK whenever a migrant (or child of migrants) commits a brutal crime – Simply call the suspect a “London Man” or a “Liverpool Man” or a “Glasgow Man” and hope no one asks questions.

In the US, whenever the media uses the words “teen brawl”, it’s easy to conclude who was involved.  The fatigue is real.

Over the weekend the Wisconsin State Fair in West Allis (a suburb of Milwaukee) experienced yet another of these seemingly spontaneous outbreaks of chaos when a horde of “teens” flooded into the event and began randomly attacking anyone nearby.  It should be noted that even the witnesses are reticent to admit who the culprits were, choosing their words carefully. 

Witness accounts report that law enforcement officers on scene were also targeted, with multiple police suffering injuries.  Dispatch audio indicates chaotic moments near the rides. “They need some help at Spin City. Send anybody extra you have,” one police officer could be heard saying. 

🚨#BREAKING: Absolute CHAOS broke out at the Wisconsin State Fair as “teens” began BEATING ANYONE IN SIGHT.
MULTIPLE police officers were badly beaten, as families with kids were seen RUNNING FOR THEIR LIVES as teens began brawling.
WE DON’T HAVE TO LIVE LIKE THIS!!! pic.twitter.com/gBbE73ph3f
— Matt Van Swol (@mattvanswol) August 17, 2026

Last day of the Wisconsin State Fair.
They went on a rampage. Anyone they could get their hands on. Shots were allegedly fired.
They’re calling it Killwaukee now.
We can’t keep living like this, something has to change. pic.twitter.com/AJ7Xi3BPiZ
— Kim “Katie” USA (@KimKatieUSA) August 17, 2026
Local news reports show police attempting to break up the fights, but the assailants swarm into the fairground crowds to avoid arrest.  Roving mob fights involving black “youths” are common at state fairs across the region every year.  The Minnesota State Fair reported similar incidents last year and rumors suggest a “bigger brawl” is likely this year.

It’s not just Wisconsin.
This was the Minnesota State Fair last year—and the year before there was a shooting in the midway.
Every year it gets more and more violent. I wonder why🤔#fight#statefair https://t.co/ktUFWO8377 pic.twitter.com/7Um9Tc6oYy
— AmyLouWho (@perseverare1776) August 17, 2026
Why start brutal fights at the state fair?  Maybe because the whole point is to ruin everyone else’s day.  Maybe the point is simply to create chaos and bask in the violence and misery.  What is clear is that events that used to be safe for families are being turned into open melees just so urban demographics can revel in their own lack of impulse control.

Tyler Durden
Mon, 08/17/2026 – 21:20

An alleged Hamas member, who was recently flown in from Gaza, who had no ID was allowed to vote in the Minnesota primary last week! – via Muckraker.org
Josh Rubin of Muckraker.com went undercover as “Muhammad” an various Minneapolis polling stations and confirmed that foreign terror organization members can vote if they are “vouched” for.
“We put Minnesota’s voter “vouching” system to an extreme test by asking if it was okay to vouch for alleged Hamas militants who had recently come to America from the Gaza Strip,” Muckraker said.
The Minnesota poll workers confirmed to Muckraker that members of Hamas, a designated terrorist organization, can vote if vouched for.
WATCH:

BREAKING: Hidden camera captures Minnesota poll workers confirming alleged foreign terror organization members can vote if vouched for.
We put Minnesota’s voter “vouching” system to an extreme test by asking if it was okay to vouch for alleged Hamas militants who had recently… pic.twitter.com/ZuOoKZTnal
— Muckraker (@realmuckraker) August 17, 2026

Muckraker’s undercover video comes after James O’Keefe dressed as a Muslim and exposed the ‘vouching’ system in Minneapolis.
Minnesota’s Democrat Secretary of State threatened James O’Keefe and Cam Higby after they went undercover in Muslim garb to expose the state’s insane ‘voter vouching’ system.
Muckraker proves even Hamas members without ID’s can vote in Minnesota.
“Under Minnesota’s Statutes § 201.061, a registered voter can sign an affidavit affirming that they know another individual resides in the same precinct, allowing that person to register at the polls without presenting standard proof of residence. One registered voter can vouch for up to eight people,” O’Keefe said.
“We wanted to find out what this actually looks like inside a polling place and how far election workers would let us take it,” he said.
O’Keefe was dressed in a ‘thobe’ and Cam Higby wore a black burka as they entered polling stations across Minneapolis.

CAUGHT INSIDE MINNEAPOLIS POLLING BOOTHS: Minnesota Poll Workers Tell O’Keefe, Dressed in Muslim Garb, & @camhigby, in a Burka, That They Can Vouch for Eight Unregistered Voters Without ID, Allowing Them to Vote in Minnesota Primary Election
Election worker says, “You’re the… pic.twitter.com/bUPVxym08G
— James O’Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) August 13, 2026

The post EPIC MUCKRAKER UNDERCOVER VIDEO: Minnesota Election Officials Allow Hamas Members to Vote in Primary Election with ‘Vouching’ System – Without IDs appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Deep Capture: The Administrative State’s Intellectual Origins

Authored by Sofia Karstens via Brownstone Institute,

Woodrow Wilson holds a distinction no other American president has: he earned a Ph.D., completing his doctorate in political science and history at Johns Hopkins University in 1886. That same year, he wrote an essay called “The Study of Administration,” later published in the inaugural volume of Political Science Quarterly. Historians widely credit this essay as the founding document of public administration as a formal academic field, and Wilson himself as the father of that discipline.

Wilson’s central argument was that government should be split into two separate domains: politics, where elected officials set broad goals and policy direction, and administration, a technical, expert-driven sphere that should be run with “large powers and unhampered discretion” and insulated from day-to-day political interference.

Wilson suggested that government ought to be removed from the political process…in other words: “Democracy is too important to be left to voters.” He explicitly encouraged American reformers to study European administrative models – including Prussia’s – for lessons in efficiency, arguing that the US had fallen behind other nations in developing a science of government administration.

Later scholars have debated how far Wilson actually intended this separation to go, and some interpret his argument as calling for administrators to be almost entirely removed from political accountability. His essay laid the intellectual groundwork for what would become the modern professional civil service – insulated from patronage and run by career administrators rather than political appointees or elected officials.

The Frankfurt School’s American Exile

Nearly 50 years later, a very different intellectual tradition found refuge in the same city that Wilson’s ideas would eventually help administer. Max Horkheimer became director of the Institute for Social Research in Frankfurt, Germany in 1930, leading a group of thinkers who developed what became known as Critical Theory. Its core members included Theodor Adorno, Herbert Marcuse, Erich Fromm, and Leo Lowenthal. Critical Theory is a philosophical framework that analyzes power structures and social inequalities.

Developed by the Frankfurt School in the 1930s and 1940s, it shifted Marxism from a strict economic focus to a critique of culture, media, and modern society. Critical Theory was a different way of looking at philosophy; where philosophy was a search for truth – trying to explain phenomena and things that were not easily proven by science (ethics for example) – Critical Theory shifted to look at philosophy specifically through the lens of Marxism. It became no longer a search for truth but a means of propagandizing, which some would argue was a betrayal of philosophy.

When the Nazis seized power in 1933, Horkheimer was forced to relocate the group first to Geneva and then to New York, where it formed a loose affiliation with Columbia University in 1934-35. Horkheimer’s actual scholarly project – laid out in works like Dialectic of Enlightenment and Eclipse of Reason – described how instrumental reason, mass culture, and authoritarianism are able to take hold in modern societies.

It was also between 1933 and 1937 that several regulatory agencies were established that would come to form the backbone of the modern Administrative State.

Port Huron and the Old/New Left Split

By the early 1960s, the American left was largely defined by an older tradition: labor unions, industrial organizing, and class-based politics rooted in the fights of the 1930s and ’40s. In June 1962, a group of Socialist Organization representatives, student activists, organized labor unions, civil rights leaders, and foreign observers gathered in Port Huron, Michigan, and produced a document that would come to mark a generational break from that tradition.

Students for a Democratic Society had grown out of the Student League for Industrial Democracy, the youth wing of an older Socialist educational group called the League for Industrial Democracy, which itself traced back to the Intercollegiate Socialist Society founded in 1905. In early 1960, that student branch renamed itself Students for a Democratic Society.

The manifesto produced at Port Huron was drafted primarily by Tom Hayden, a University of Michigan student and former editor of the Michigan Daily, working from ideas that blended the sociology of Columbia’s C. Wright Mills and Walter Reuther with the direct-action tactics of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee. The week-long meeting brought together groups who wrote, debated, and voted on a 60-page document. Notably, it took place at a United Auto Workers retreat, with the UAW under Reuther’s leadership covering a range of the convention’s costs. Inside circles among Reuther’s contemporaries referred to it as “The Long Journey.”

The statement opened with a line that became its signature: “We are people of this generation, bred in at least modest comfort, housed now in universities, looking uncomfortably to the world we inherit.” Its authors argued that two forces had shaken them out of complacency – the civil rights struggle against racial bigotry in the South, and the threat of nuclear war under the Cold War’s shadow.

Where the Old Left had organized around labor and class struggle, Port Huron’s New Left shifted the terrain. It called for a “participatory democracy” in which ordinary people – not just union leaders or party bosses – would have a direct hand in the decisions shaping their lives, workplaces, schools, and government. It criticized both American Cold War policy and Soviet communism, explicitly opposing the Soviet system’s suppression of organized dissent. And because the statement judged the civil rights, peace, and student movements too poor and marginalized to drive change on their own, and organized labor too quiet, it looked instead to universities – which it saw as institutions open to people of nearly any viewpoint who could be recruited as “useful innocents” (often mistranslated as “useful idiots”) to carry the water – as the engine of a new movement. Media, unions, high schools, and elementary schools were to follow.

The Port Huron Statement went on to shape the framing of Great Society-era politics, the anti-Vietnam War movement, and the broader counterculture that carried into the early 1970s. Historians and participants alike have described it as the founding document of the New Left and a turning point.

The Modern Left’s Long March

The strategic logic for how a university-centered movement might expand its influence beyond campus came from Germany. West German student movement leader Rudi Dutschke, nicknamed “Red Rudi,” coined the phrase “der Lange Marsch Durch die Institutionen” (the long march through the institutions), borrowing the “long march” imagery from Mao’s Chinese Communist Red Army march of 1934-35. The idea was that instead of pursuing a frontal revolutionary confrontation with the state, radicals should embed themselves inside existing institutions and overtake them from within over time. The name (and indeed his nickname) was a deliberate echo of the Chinese Communist Party.

Herbert Marcuse (The Frankfurt School) explicitly endorsed the approach of pursuing radical change not through revolution but by working patiently inside the institutions of government and civil society until they were captured and transformed from within. Writing to Dutschke in 1971 he intoned: “Your notion of the ‘long march through the institutions’ is the only effective way” forward for the movement. Marcuse became an enthusiastic backer of the strategy, and summarized Dutschke’s strategy in his 1972 book Counterrevolution and Revolt as “working against the established institutions while working within them.”

He described infiltrating while learning their actual skills and functions rather than simply obstructing them; by “not simply ‘boring from within’ but by ‘doing the job’…learning how to program and read computers, how to teach at all levels of education, how to use the mass media, how to organize production, how to recognize and eschew planned obsolescence.

Writing nearly three decades later, cultural critic Roger Kimball invoked this same Marcusean formulation to explain how the radicalism of the 1960s ultimately achieved its aims not through revolution but through patient institutional capture – “by insinuation and infiltration rather than by confrontation” (The Long March: How the Cultural Revolution of the 1960s Changed America). The result, as later commentators (The Successful Long March Through the Institutions, The American Vision) have characterized it, was a transformation accomplished without open conflict: “Not a shot was fired. No one was forced into concentration camps. Millions of parents willingly sent their children into public schools and universities systems…” that had, by then, been reshaped from within. Effectively replacing “bloody revolutions from without” with institutional capture from within.

Dutschke’s thinking is often linked to the earlier work of Antonio Gramsci, the imprisoned Italian Marxist theorist who argued that revolution in developed Western societies wouldn’t come from a single decisive uprising but from a slow “war of position” – a patient campaign to win cultural and institutional influence over time. While there’s no direct evidence Dutschke had read Gramsci when he coined the term, notably, his diaries and biography reference other influences, including Georg Lukacs, Che Guevara, and Mao Zedong.

Khrushchev famously said “We will bury you,” which he later clarified to mean that communism would trounce capitalism. The Long March Through the Institutions is reminiscent of the Marxist/Communist concept of the “Vanguard State” as the “bridge” between a Capitalist state and a Socialist/Communist state.

Marcus Raskin and the Institute for Policy Studies

One American figure who embodied this institution-building, infiltrating strategy was Marcus Raskin. Born in Milwaukee in 1934 to Russian immigrant parents, Raskin studied at the University of Chicago, where he earned his law degree in 1957. During his time at Chicago, Raskin studied under Rexford Tugwell, who was a Columbia economist and a key member of Franklin Roosevelt’s “Brain Trust.”

It was Tugwell who had suggested that it would be necessary to collect money (from the American people) to begin the process of creating an Administrative State.

In 1933, President Franklin Roosevelt issued Executive Order 6102, requiring most Americans to surrender their gold coins, bullion, and certificates to the Federal Reserve in exchange for paper dollars, citing that private gold hoarding was worsening the Depression. The following year, the Gold Reserve Act of 1934 revalued gold from $20.67 to $35 an ounce – a roughly 69 percent devaluation of the dollar against gold – which meant the government profited handsomely on the gold it had just collected at the lower price. Tugwell was among the New Deal’s most influential architects of expanded federal planning, helping design agencies like the Agricultural Adjustment Administration and the Resettlement Administration. The devaluation, paired with an expanded money supply, gave Washington greater fiscal room to fund Administrative State projects.

After Chicago under Tugwell, Raskin went on to work as legislative counsel for several Congressmen in the late 1950s, then joined the Kennedy administration’s National Security Council in 1961 as an aide to McGeorge Bundy. He resigned in 1962, citing his opposition to the Cuban Missile Crisis response. In 1963, alongside fellow Kennedy-administration alumnus Richard Barnet, Raskin co-founded the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) in Washington, D.C. – widely described as the first independent progressive think tank, built explicitly on the idea that the systemic change they wanted couldn’t be achieved from inside government, and would instead have to come through social movements and infiltrating institutions.

IPS was closely tied to the New Left from the start. Historian Brian Mueller has written that IPS “epitomized the ideals of the New Left, especially those found in the 1962 Port Huron Statement” and, in fact, a 1962 prospectus Raskin wrote for IPS contained ideas strikingly similar to Port Huron’s. Fellow IPS founder Arthur Waskow joined SDS in 1963, and both men wrote for the New Left magazine Ramparts.

IPS drew sustained scrutiny throughout the Cold War for its foreign-policy positions. The House Committee on Internal Security and later conservative critics documented Raskin and Barnet’s contacts with North Vietnamese communist officials during the Vietnam War, Raskin’s board membership at Ramparts (which the same committee called “pro-Hanoi, pro-Castro”) and, later, in the 1980s, IPS-organized conferences with Soviet officials that a bipartisan group of roughly 80 members of Congress warned could be used for Soviet intelligence purposes.

Carter, Ink, and the Reshaping of Federal Administration

The administrative machinery Wilson had theorized decades earlier took its modern shape under President Carter. By 1977, Carter had concluded that the federal civil service system needed its first comprehensive overhaul since the Pendleton Act of 1883. The opportunity came in the aftermath of Watergate and amid broader public distrust of government institutions. In March 1978, he sent Congress his reform proposal; after 13 days of hearings and testimony from more than 200 witnesses, Congress passed the Civil Service Reform Act, and Carter signed it into law that October – just over seven months after it was introduced.

The Act abolished the US Civil Service Commission and split its functions among three new agencies: the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), which handles federal personnel policy; the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), which adjudicates federal employee appeals; and the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA), which oversees federal labor-management relations.

The reform’s chief architect and implementer was Dwight Ink, a career federal executive who had served in every presidential administration since Eisenhower. Ink had already built a formidable reputation of cutting through red tape and quickly executing major government overhauls, earning him the nickname “Mr. Implementation.” Ink himself later wrote that he couldn’t recall any other government-wide management reform as broad as the 1978 act being enacted so quickly. The transformation was praised by Marcus Raskin’s intellectual incubator, IPS, which has documented ties to the American Communist Party and drove DNC capture between 1972 and 1978.

That same year, Carter signed a second landmark law. The Inspector General Act of 1978 established 12 statutory offices of Inspector General across major federal departments and agencies, giving each the authority to audit internal agency documents, investigate fraud, and report findings both to their agency heads and directly to Congress every six months. By 1988 additional IGs had been added for smaller independent agencies, and there are now 73 statutory Inspectors General across the federal government. By systematically replacing public servants with IGs and positions functioning as commissars who decide investigative targets, including the US elections commission, the landscape for a coup became fertile.

Marching Along

CIGIE, created in 2008, was established by the Inspector General Reform Act by merging two earlier coordinating bodies: the President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency (PCIE) and the Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency (ECIE). Those two predecessor councils themselves went back to 1992, created by executive order under President George H.W. Bush. Between the original 1978 IG Act and the 2008 creation of the unified CIGIE structure are three decades of Long March institutional groundwork.

CIGIE functions as a coordinating and standard-setting body for the IG community – running training, setting audit and investigation standards, and housing an Integrity Committee that investigates allegations against IGs themselves. Its voting members include not just the Inspectors General of individual agencies, but also representatives from the CIA, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the FBI, the Office of Government Ethics, and the Office of Special Counsel – a genuinely broad cross-section of oversight and intelligence-adjacent offices sitting on one council, which could be described as a “control layer.”

The IG Act has continued to evolve since 1978: notably, the 2022 Securing Inspector General Independence Act added new protections against politically motivated IG removals, requiring the President to give Congress 30 days’ notice and a substantive, case-specific rationale before removing an Inspector General.

CIGIE today represents a sui generis entity where one office effectively oversees software integrity across 3,143 counties. This structure echos Woodrow Wilson’s administrative state-framed government as “too important to be left to the voters,” relying on a political-technocratic elite and completes the Marxist Commissar model.

The GAP

In 1977 the Institute for Policy Studies formed the Government Accountability Program (GAP). On its surface it looked like a place for whistleblowers to find shelter, especially after the Pentagon Papers, and indeed many whistleblowers from the intelligence community and national defense program gravitated there. Critics suggest, however, that it was actually used as a honeypot to entice, contain, and control the whistleblowers, even as it collaborated and often even worked directly with the US Office of Special Counsel (OSC).

The Office of the Whistleblower Ombudsman was created in January 2019, as part of the House rules package adopted at the start of the 116th Congress (when Democrats took control of the House). It established, within the House of Representatives, a mandate to develop practices for House offices receiving confidential information from whistleblowers about government wrongdoing – including setting up reporting systems, maintaining confidentiality, and training staff.

It sat without a director for about a year. Then in February 2020, shortly after the conclusion of Trump’s first impeachment trial (which had been sparked by a whistleblower complaint), Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced that she had appointed Shanna Devine as the inaugural director of the office. Devine had previously worked at GAP.

Critics questioned whether someone from an advocacy group could serve a “nonpartisan” role, citing concerns that the position could function as a filter protecting officials from exposure, and worrying whether this infrastructure meant this office could effectively legally spy on everyone – including Congress.

GAP also had a prominent role in advocating for the office’s creation. Samantha Feinstein, GAP’s senior legal and international analyst, testified before Congress to request the creation of the Ombudsman Office, which meant GAP was influencing policy from the outside as well.

The Modern Left’s Electoral Rise

Decades after Port Huron, the left flank that it and IPS helped seed has grown into an electoral force. The Democratic Socialists of America was formed in 1982 through the merger of two left-wing organizations: the Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee, founded in 1973 by socialist Michael Harrington, and the New American Movement. For decades it remained small and aging – its median member age was 68 in 2013.

That changed after 2016. Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign highlighted disaffection with mainstream Democratic politics and helped consolidate a younger left wing, and DSA’s median member age dropped to 33 by 2017. One commentator described the shift as transforming the group from a “musty debate club for retired social democrats into an electoral powerhouse of young, ecumenical radicals.”

Electoral wins followed quickly. In 2017, fifteen DSA members won local and state offices, including Lee Carter’s election to the Virginia House of Delegates. The breakthrough came in 2018, when DSA member Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez defeated incumbent Congressman Joe Crowley in a primary upset in New York’s 14th District, becoming a national figure. She and Rashida Tlaib became the first two DSA members elected to Congress that year.

The organization’s footprint in elected office has continued to grow, with Ashik Siddique, a research analyst at one IPS program (National Priorities Project) who is also separately, and much more significantly, the current national co-chair of the DSA. That means that a sitting IPS staffer simultaneously holds DSA’s top elected position.

Notable DSA-linked officials now include Ocasio-Cortez, Tlaib, and New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, elected in 2025. By 2025, more than 250 DSA members held elected office across 40 states, with 90% of them elected after 2019. As of mid-2026, DSA has grown to more than 120,000 members and now plays an influential role within the Democratic Party, and the group and its local chapters have endorsed 150 candidates this year, claiming 38 wins so far.

The group draws sharp fire from opponents. President Trump has characterized Mamdani and other DSA-backed candidates as “communist,” exposing their links to adversaries like the CCP – though DSA describes itself as aiming for “democratic socialism.”

Expert Colonel Tim Shindelar describes The New Left’s methodical inching into the Modern Left as “The Final Mile.” The Old Left (Marxism, 1908-1962; 54 years) was about class struggle and establishment of unions. The New Left (Social Justice, 1962-1982; 20 years), focused on issues like abortion, capital punishment, civil rights, environmentalism, feminism, gay rights and gender roles, and immigration. The Modern Left (Final Mile, 1982-present; 44 years) has evolved into policies like the Green New Deal, making higher education free, social ownership of the American economy (placing governors on true free market capitalism), national defense reduction, a Democratic Party shift into the progressive far left, along with pro-Palestinian and anti-Zionist causes.

The Media and The Last Mile

This shift to administrative power effectively renders elected officials powerless. Just because someone is elected to office doesn’t mean they have any real power; the administrative state will allow elected officials (even executive ones) to ride in the back but they cannot drive the car.

Which means that voters are at the kids table, because it doesn’t matter who the elected official is if the power lies with the Administrative State…thus embodying and defining Wilson’s vision of keeping politics out of government because democracy is too important to be left to voters. The politics in which we all engage is merely a rubber match, and is unconnected to the outcome; the real match is occurring in a different stadium entirely.

Much of this neutralization and marginalization of the actual people (voters), while maintaining the illusion that it is neither by validating the scrimmage to its participants, traces to mid-20th-century globalist planning (1952-1956), building on Wassily Leontief’s 1953 work aimed at phasing American labor to China while addressing excess human labor and galvanizing wealth concentration among a technocratic elite. Individual self-interest via game theory was expected to align populations toward what we now describe as the Singularity, but Marx’s framework did not anticipate AI collapsing labor demand to zero – accelerating the need for focused population control programs. But there would be no buy-in unless a different diorama was presented.

The 1928 book Propaganda was written by the nephew of Sigmund Freud, Edward Bernays (1891-1995). Bernays was the son of Freud’s sister and also related through his mother, who was Freud’s sister. His father was also the brother of Freud’s wife Martha.

Bernays is often called the “father of public relations” and Propaganda argued that manipulating public opinion is a necessary part of a functioning democracy. It drew heavily on his uncle’s psychoanalytic theories to explain how to influence mass behavior through unconscious desires rather than rational argument.

George Orwell didn’t invent the world of 1984 out of thin air – he drew it directly from Stalinist Russia, where erasing and reshaping history was institutionalized state policy. Not long after Stalin consolidated control, images of Leon Trotsky, the driving force behind the 1905 and 1917 revolutions, started vanishing from public life. In their place came grand, fictionalized depictions of Stalin standing shoulder to shoulder with Lenin as co-architects of the Bolshevik uprising, while Trotsky, despite having founded the Red Army himself, was written out entirely. These doctored scenes became fixtures of Soviet propaganda, plastered across office walls, towering billboards, museum halls, and postage stamps.

The effect on public memory was profound. Younger citizens absorbed the fabrication as historical fact, while older ones who had lived through the actual events found their genuine recollections gradually blurring with the state’s preferred narrative – a strange kind of political false memory syndrome. People who reconciled what they actually remembered with that which the government insisted they believe developed what Orwell described as “doublethink.” Those who refused – old revolutionaries who knew firsthand – were branded traitors, class enemies, or fascist sympathizers; they faced arrest, torture, forced public confessions, and execution.

With total command over media and law enforcement, it is possible to rewrite the collective memory of an entire population if you have one generation in which to accomplish it. With fully infiltrated and captured institutions it is possible to take control over an entire country without firing a shot if you have two. We are in the final mile, and the ghost in the machine has a government ID.

Sofia Karstens is an activist in California who worked closely with publisher Tony Lyons and Robert F. Kennedy Jr on several projects, including Kennedy’s best-selling book: The Real Anthony Fauci. She collaborates with several organizations in the legal, legislative, medical science, and literary spaces and she is co-founder of Free Now Foundation, a non-profit preserving medical freedom and children’s health.

Tyler Durden
Mon, 08/17/2026 – 20:55

The mysterious wounds found on one of the world’s oldest orcas have triggered an investigation in Spain and raised questions about whether someone took aim at the famed killer whale amid years of tense encounters between orcas and boats.Toñi, the oldest known Iberian orca, surfaced in the Strait of Gibraltar with multiple fresh marks across her dorsal fin and back that conservationists believe were caused by shotgun pellets. The injuries were not visible in photographs taken just weeks earlier.The orca, known as Toñi, was spotted this week with marks Spanish officials described as compatible with possible pellet shots, according to Spain’s Ministry for the Ecological Transition and the Demographic Challenge (MITECO).CALIFORNIA TEEN FACES PRISON AFTER VIRAL VIDEO SHOWS HIM SQUARING UP, REPEATEDLY KICKING SEA LION IN THE FACEThe ministry said it learned of Toñi’s injuries on Aug. 11, after receiving information from marine conservation group WeWhale, which operates in the area with government authorization.Officials opened preliminary investigative proceedings the next day to determine what happened and potentially identify those responsible.While Spanish authorities have stopped short of concluding that Toñi was shot, conservation groups WeWhale and Iberian Orca Guardians said their teams believe the appearance, number and distribution of the wounds point to a shotgun discharge.The groups said the injuries appeared suddenly. They had photographed and observed Toñi only weeks earlier, when the wounds were not present.WeWhale said its team counted roughly 10 apparent pellet impacts on the left side of her dorsal fin. At least two or three projectiles appear to have passed straight through the fin, while others may still be lodged inside, according to the group.EL-SAYED IN THE HOT SEAT AFTER ‘SICKENING’ ANIMAL CONTROL RECORD GOES VIRAL ON SOCIAL MEDIAAt an estimated 60 years old, Toñi could face added risks from the injuries. WeWhale said the fin has a rich blood supply and helps the animal regulate its body temperature, meaning the wounds could lead to tissue damage, swelling or infection. If pellets remain lodged inside, the group warned that an infection could, in the worst case, become life-threatening.For now, however, there are encouraging signs. WeWhale said Toñi appears to be swimming and hunting normally, and its team will continue watching her closely.”We know Toñi. We were with her a few weeks ago and these wounds were not there,” Janek Andre, founder and president of WeWhale and the Iberian Orca Guardians Foundation, said in a statement.Andre said the groups are now seeing “multiple impact wounds” across the animal’s dorsal fin and back that they believe are consistent with a shotgun blast.DEADLIEST ANIMAL IN EVERY US STATE REVEALED, FROM MOOSE AND BEARS TO DOGS”If someone has deliberately fired a shotgun at her, this is not only an act of extreme cruelty against an individual animal,” Andre said. “It is an attack on one of the last remaining members of a critically endangered population.”Toñi, also known as “La Abuela,” or “the grandmother,” is the oldest known member of the Iberian orca population, according to the conservation groups. Her population in the Strait of Gibraltar and Gulf of Cádiz is classified as vulnerable under Spain’s Catalog of Endangered Species.The stakes for anyone found responsible could be steep. Spanish law prohibits killing, capturing, pursuing or disturbing protected species, and violations of regulations protecting the orcas can carry penalties of up to 2 million euros, equivalent to about $2.3 million, along with potential criminal liability, according to MITECO.The ministry’s General Directorate of Biodiversity, Forests and Desertification is investigating the incident.The investigation comes amid years of documented interactions between Iberian orcas and boats off the Iberian Peninsula.Since 2020, orcas in the region have repeatedly interacted with vessels in Atlantic waters, prompting Spanish authorities to issue guidance aimed at protecting boaters, vessels and the animals. Officials advise sailors not to use deterrent measures that could kill, injure or disturb the cetaceans.WeWhale said the apparent shooting should not be viewed as an acceptable response to those encounters.”There has been enormous public discussion about Iberian orcas and their interactions with vessels,” Andre said. “Whatever someone’s opinion about those interactions may be, shooting at these animals can never be an acceptable response.”The conservation groups said they are preserving their original photographs and observational records and will continue monitoring Toñi’s physical condition and behavior as the government investigation moves forward.Authorities have not announced a suspect or identified anyone who may be responsible for the injuries.

ESPN host and political commentator Stephen A. Smith targeted the National Association of Black Journalists (NABJ) for what he called a “personal hit job” against him in a lengthy rant during his show on Monday.Smith’s comments came after the NABJ gave him a “Thumbs Down” award at the group’s Saturday night gala in Atlanta over what it characterized as his repeated disparagement of prominent Black women.The sports host felt personally offended by the decision, calling out the moment as a spectacular lack of journalism from a journalism organization.STEPHEN A SMITH ADMITS BYRON DONALDS COULD MAKE HIM A REPUBLICAN, CALLS HIM ‘THE REAL DEAL’”The reality is that it was a personal hit job,” Smith said. “We can sit up there and lollygag around and act like we don’t know any better. It was a personal hit job. Which, by the way, usually doesn’t phase me. I know you think something phases me, just because you see me commenting on it. No, I’m in this business. I have a platform. I can comment about anything I want to, and I will continue to do so.””That’s not what this is,” he added. “This is different. This is a journalism organization that didn’t engage in journalism when it came to critiquing me. Disparaging Black women is a very incendiary thing to say. If you felt that adamant about it, [NABJ] President [Errin] Haines, how come I never got a call?”Smith speculated that the award was focused on his past criticism of high-profile Black female political figures like Texas Democratic Rep. Jasmine Crockett. He also revealed that he reached out to Haines regarding the organization’s allegations to potentially discuss their differences, a conversation that ultimately went nowhere.STEPHEN A SMITH REVEALS DEVASTATING MOMENT HIS FATHER SAID HE WOULD NEVER ‘BE ANYTHING'”Do you know what she said to me, ladies and gentlemen? She’d rather have a private off-the-air conversation first,” he said. “Oh, really? So you can go on a public platform, denigrate me, make these accusations against me without calling. But when I challenge you to come on here face to face and have a conversation with me, now we want a private conversation before. Nah, I will never speak to her because the deed is done.” However, Smith clarified that he still plans to support NABJ, remarking that he owes his career to an “NABJ job fair” over 30 years ago.”This is not about the NABJ. This is not an indictment against them. It certainly isn’t an indictment against the sports task force filled with a bunch of my brothers that I will always be there for,” he said. “And it certainly isn’t something that should be held against aspiring journalists and those already in the business who aspire to rise higher. I’m always here. But those few board members who made this decision, it was wrong. It was grossly unfair. And more importantly, it was self-defeating.”An editor for the conservative watchdog, the Media Research Center, told Fox News Digital Sunday that the award reflected what he viewed as a broader disconnect between journalism organizations and the public.”This charade is further proof these so-called journalist trade groups are an absolute scam. They exist to keep Woke 1 alive, and illuminate the reality elitist journalists are wildly disconnected from the rest of the country,” NewsBusters Managing Editor Curtis Houck said.”Stephen A. Smith was exactly right to eviscerate them. Smith is known as someone who can be a bloviator, but he also calls out all sides if he feels they did something wrong. It’s a lesson those in the NABJ should take a page from instead of masquerading as clownish activists,” he added.Fox News Digital reached out to NABJ for comment but did not immediately receive a response.STEPHEN A SMITH ONLY SPEAKS UP ABOUT IMPORTANT SOCIETAL ISSUES ONLY WHEN IT’S POLITICALLY ACCEPTABLEA video of the NABJ presentation was shared by Washington Association of Black Journalists President Phil Lewis on X Sunday.”Smith has established a recurring public pattern of disparaging commentary directed at prominent Black women across politics, sports, and media,” the award presentation said.”Such commentary reinforces harmful narratives, undermines the fair and respectful representation of Black women in public discourse, and stands in direct conflict with NABJ’s longstanding commitment to accurate, responsible, and inclusive portrayals of Black communities,” it continued.

Chris Cuomo apparently isn’t enjoying life on the receiving end.
Carolla revealed on his podcast that Cuomo texted him upset after Carolla retweeted one of Cuomo’s classic COVID-era “bad looks.” The former CNN primetime host, who spent 2020 and 2021 lecturing Americans, shaming dissenters, and pushing the official narrative, apparently doesn’t enjoy having his own words thrown back in his face five years later.
Carolla’s response was pure fire.
According to Carolla, Cuomo texted something along the lines of “What’s up, bro? Like, what are you doing?” after the retweet. Carolla told him the obvious: he was simply sharing what Cuomo himself had said.
Then Carolla unloaded:

“I got a text from Chris Cuomo the other day ’cause I retweeted one of his bad looks. This is great. And he’s like, “What’s up, bro? Like, what are you doing?”
And I’m like, “I’m just retweeting what you said. Like, listen, everybody, you said a lot of stupid shit during COVID, and I got a lot of shit foisted on me thanks to people like you saying a lot of stupid shit, and so did Aaron Rodgers. So now it’s five years later.”
I know a lot of people don’t like the fact that it’s being relitigated. Perhaps you should have shut the fuck up back then. You can give your opinion. Stop attacking people. You attacked people, and now people are rubbing it back in your face.
Okay, that’s how the world works.”

WATCH:

Adam Carolla says Chris Cuomo texted him UPSET that he retweeted one of Cuomo’s “bad looks” from COVID.
Carolla’s message to Cuomo is brutal:
CAROLLA: “You said a lot of STUPID SH*T during COVID, and I got a lot of sh*t foisted on me thanks to people LIKE YOU saying a lot of… pic.twitter.com/w73rj3P1J0
— The Vigilant Fox (@VigilantFox) August 17, 2026

The clip Carolla had shared was a 2020 Cuomo Prime Time segment in which the CNN host went after Dr. Scott Atlas and “the Trumpers” for daring to question the Fauci orthodoxy on masks, social distancing, and isolating the elderly. Cuomo was in full scold mode, warning that Thanksgiving could be people’s “last” if they didn’t fall in line.
Carolla simply captioned it “This aged nicely.”
WATCH:

This aged nicely pic.twitter.com/OjLlwRd135
— Adam Carolla (@adamcarolla) July 29, 2026

The post Adam Carolla Brutally Destroys Chris Cuomo After Cuomo Texts Him Upset Over Retweet of His Own COVID “Bad Looks” — “Perhaps You Should Have Shut the F*ck Up Back Then” appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.