Wednesday, December 10, 2025

SAMA HOOLE: Every food you eat is either inflammatory or anti-inflammatory. Ruminant meat is the only food that contains zero inflammatory compounds . . .

Every food you eat is either inflammatory or anti-inflammatory.

Ruminant meat is the only food that:
--Contains zero inflammatory compounds (no lectins, oxalates, phytates, or seed oils)

--Provides complete bioavailable nutrition in one source

--Digests without fermentation (no gas, bloating, or gut irritation)
--Stabilises blood sugar perfectly 
--Never triggers immune response

Compare to literally anything else:

Plants: Packed with defense chemicals designed to harm you. Require detoxification. Incomplete nutrition. Gut inflammation guaranteed. Chicken/pork: Higher in inflammatory PUFA. Monogastric animals store whatever garbage they ate in their fat. Fish: Increasingly contaminated with microplastics and heavy metals.

Ruminants biohydrogenate polyunsaturated fats into stable saturated fat. They're walking purification systems that convert grass into the most bioavailable nutrition on Earth.

You can base your entire diet on beef and thrive indefinitely.

Try that with literally any other single food. You'll be deficient, inflamed, or dead within months.

This isn't opinion. This is 2.5 million years of human evolution screaming the answer at you.

ALERT: San Francisco residents have been forced to spend $820K of their own money on private armed guards because the city won’t fix open-air drug markets and 700K lbs of trash littering their neighborhoods.

Easy solution.  People doing drugs suffer from a general despair.  Fix despair by giving them work.  Oh, wait, jobs go to illegals, I totally forgot.  There is no mention of work in this video.  It's all about managed care.  

ANDREW BRANCA: They don't kill you because you're a Nazi. They call you a Nazi so they can kill you.

And then the outcome will be just what we see happening in South Africa today.  Now the black majority in charge is aggressively murdering the white South Africans, seizing the farms, seizing their property, driving them out of the country until the white South Africans are desperately, and with some help from Trump, trying to migrate to America.  White South Africans, of course, like Elon Musk, are first world peoples, right.  They came from Europe, First-World Europe.  I'm more than happy to have them in America.  But what's happening in South Africa is what will happen in Europe, is what will happen in America if we don't check this mass migration of the third world into our cultures. We will be where the South Africans are today hunted down for our skin color, because they hate us.  They don't really hate racism.  They just hate white people, and I understand why. Maybe I would feel the same way, I don't know.  But I'm the target of that hate, my children are, their children are, and I'm not going to go down without a fight.

And this is something I've seen Elon post before as well,

They don't kill you because you're a Nazi.  They call you a Nazi so they can kill you.

They dehumanize you, so they're comfortable killing you and publicly urging others to kill you.  That's how the process works 

ANDREW BRANCA: Libertarianism is a luxury belief of a high IQ culture that's protected against low- IQ, third world invasion.

Reading a subscriber's comment: 

The old Libertarian coalition required free flow of people regardless of whether we could go there or what their merit.  But even now they're not willing to compromise even though they can get welfare.  Libertarians insist we must remove the welfare not add border controls. 

Listen, Libertarianism it's one of those political perspectives that you have as a kid, right.  There was a point in my life, I think I was in my first year of college.  I actually sent money to the Libertarian Party.  I was a card carrying Libertarian.  But Libertarianism is a luxury belief of a high IQ culture that's protected against low- IQ, third world invasion.  So Libertarianism works if you're Ayn Rand living in America, if you're Robert Heinlein living in America, your high IQ.  Everyone you interact with is high IQ.  You have no real exposure to low IQ people, certainly they're not in charge of anything.  So they're not a constraint to anything you want to do.  And if you have this imaginary world where everybody was an IQ of 100 or better, Libertarianism might work.  But that's not the world we live in.  That's the white population of the world, which is now, you know, down to 8%.  Most of the world is not that.  Most of the world is mentally retarded and libertarianism doesn't work with mentally retarded people.  That's why Libertarianism can't work. Right there, it's the IQ map again.  The IQ map it's always the same map, and it answers all the questions.

— C3 (@C_3C_3): Clinton appointed Judge Breyer tries blocking President Trump from deploying the National Guard to California. Again. Judicial Coup continues.

ANDREW BRANCA: Because the majority of the voting public in America is women. And this kind of emotional laden propaganda not only appeals to women, but women are themselves by Nature amenable to resources being taken from White men and distributed to those who need it so it'll be fair.

All that happens is that Africa goes from a starving population of 200 million to a starving population of 800 million to a starving population of a billion and now they're a starving population of 1.3 billion, and the answer, according to the Left, is take even more money from white men in America and give it to Africa. This is a black hole of consumption, and all we're doing is creating more starving Africans.  It strikes me as a bad plan, but I'm supposed to feel guilty about it.  And here is the thing: this line of propaganda will work.  It can work.  Do you know why?  Because the majority of the voting public in America is women.  And this kind of emotional laden propaganda not only appeals to women, but women are themselves by Nature amenable to resources being taken from White men and distributed to those who need it so it'll be fair.  Like Timmy brought in a bag of candy to kindergarten.  He better have brought enough for everybody.  Got to be fair.

Sex and Culture, Joseph Daniel Unwin, 1934.

HUD SECRETARY, SCOTT TURNER: But when you have over 12 million people coming over our borders unchecked, unvetted, this is straining our housing market from a supply standpoint, from an affordability standpoint.

But when you have over 12 million people coming over our borders unchecked, unvetted, this is straining our housing market from a supply standpoint, from an affordability standpoint.  HUD just put out a report and found that between 2021 and 2024 the foreign-born population in our country in just three short years is 6 million people, which is the most in that period of time of American history.  So we cannot forgo the thought that because of illegal immigration, because of people coming into our country, prices have risen, supply has been squeezed, but we're working very hard at HUD along with the president and the leaders in the administration to bring down the cost and raise the supply.  And we're doing it through inter-agencies but we need the FED to cut rates.  We need to continue to deport illegals that are taking houses from the American people.  So we are very intentional and focused about it at HUD and across the Administration.  

HUD Secretary, Scott Turner.

Fentanyl Kills 100,000+ Year

Kristofer Ferreyra, 23 months.

Joel Romero, 15 yrs, Miami, FL.

Alyssa Kittendorff, 17 yrs, Downey, CA.

Kermani Gray, 13 yrs. 

Cali Anne Sylvis, 21 yrs, 2002-2023, Weatherford, Parker County, Texas.

Raymone Aragon, 22 yrs.

Brooklyn Jade Bowers, 19 yrs., 2003-2022, Cedar Rapids, Iowa.

Ella Sweeney, 20 yrs.

Miah VanHouten, 16 yrs. 

Jaci Hinsey, 15 yrs. 

Tyler Williams, 13 yrs.

Shaun Hunter, 16 yrs.

VALERIE ANNE SMITH: Today, research shows babies cry for connection, comfort & regulation, that is crucial to their development, trust, & so much more

For 1,000s of years, babies slept with their mothers. They were never left alone. They were held, rocked & fed when hungry.

Did you know the 'cry-it-out' method didn’t even exist before the early 1900s? Until two men came along...Psychologist John Watson & Dr. Luther Holt pushed the idea that babies should be left to cry. Before that, families co-slept, rocked, or responded to babies’ needs without the concept of strict training. These doctors believed responding too much to infants would 'spoil' them, an idea that shaped decades of parenting advice. They said babies should be trained, isolated & controlled. That babies had to fit the assembly line & office schedules of their parents. Dr Watson had 4 children, 3 attempted suicide & 1 succeeded [. . .]. His remaining 3 children blamed him for their psychological pain & damage. Watson died alone, isolated & estranged from his family...the same painful way in which he brainwashed millions of parents to treat their babies. Dr Watson's granddaughter is quoted as stating, "my grandfather's ideas were a legacy of psychological damage." These methods became parenting norms...not because they were right, but because they worked for the system. A system that demanded efficiency. Not connection. You're not being manipulated by your baby by attending their needs. You're resisting rules built for factories, not families. Your instincts aren't outdated. They're what kept our species alive & emotionally healthy. Without abandonment issues & the ability to have emotional connection with others. Today, research shows babies cry for connection, comfort & regulation, that is crucial to their development, trust, & so much more.

SAMA HOOLE: Chicken was lean, stringy, required long cooking, not particularly desirable. It was acceptable protein when the egg production ended. Nothing more.

Chickens were domesticated 8,000 years ago in Southeast Asia. For 7,900 years, humans kept chickens for one reason: eggs. Chicken meat was eaten only when the hen stopped laying. Usually after 3-5 years. The bird had earned its retirement in the cooking pot. Chicken was lean, stringy, required long cooking, not particularly desirable. It was acceptable protein when the egg production ended. Nothing more. 1950s: The low-fat era begins. Saturated fat becomes the enemy. Beef and pork are suddenly "dangerous." Chicken becomes "healthy lean protein." 1960s: Factory farming begins breeding chickens specifically for meat. The Cornish Cross is developed - grows from chick to slaughter weight in 6 weeks instead of 16 weeks. These birds are bred for: - Massive breast meat (consumers want lean protein) - Rapid growth (more production cycles per year) - Docile temperament (easier factory farming) They're so far removed from ancestral chickens that they can barely walk under their own weight. Their skeletons can't support the meat mass. Many develop heart failure before reaching slaughter age from the metabolic strain. 1980s: "Chicken breast and rice" becomes the default fitness meal. Bodybuilders everywhere trim the fat, eat the lean muscle, call it optimal. Your great-grandparents would have fed that part to the dog. The fattiest parts - the thighs, the skin, the liver - those were the valuable bits. The breast was just convenient bulk. We've spent 60 years promoting the least nutritious part of the chicken as a health food while demonising the parts humans actually valued for millennia. Chicken wasn't a health food until we decided fat was poison.

Before that, it was just the consolation prize when your laying hen retired. 

SAMA HOOLE: The deer belonged to the king. The barley belonged to the king. The peasant belonged to the king. And the king ate venison while the peasant ate gruel. This wasn't about protecting animals. It was about controlling protein access.

1066, England. William the Conquering just taken the throne.

Within months, he issues the Forest Laws. Hunting deer is now forbidden to anyone below noble rank. The punishment isn't a fine. It's death. Not execution by sword, which would be quick. Execution by hanging, slow strangulation, body displayed in the village square as a warning. Sometimes they'd blind you first and let you starve instead. The cruelty was the point. These weren't conservation laws. The deer population was massive. Herds roamed freely across thousands of acres of "royal forest" that just happened to include the land peasants had been hunting on for generations. The real reason becomes clear when you look at what replaced venison in the peasant diet. Bread. Lots of bread. Grain-based gruel. Pottage made from whatever vegetables they could grow. The lords continued eating venison. Multiple deer per week. Whole roasted boars. Fatty game birds. Their tables groaned with meat at every meal. The peasants ate grain and were told it was God's will that only nobility could hunt. The Church backed this up with sermons about knowing your place in the divine order. A peasant family could watch deer walk through their barley field, destroying their crop, and be executed for killing the deer to feed their starving children. The deer belonged to the king. The barley belonged to the king. The peasant belonged to the king. And the king ate venison while the peasant ate gruel. This wasn't about protecting animals. It was about controlling protein access. A population fed on grain is weaker, more compliant, easier to manage. A population eating meat is stronger, more energetic, more likely to cause problems for the ruling class. The Forest Laws stayed in effect for 800 years. Eight centuries of restricting meat to the elites while forcing the masses onto grain. And during those eight centuries, the peasant class got shorter, weaker, more disease-prone with each generation. The nobility, eating their venison and boar, stayed tall and strong. You can see it in the armor. Noble armor from the 1400s fits a 5'10" man. Peasant remains from the same period average 5'3". Same genetics. Different diets. The nobility ate what humans evolved eating. The peasants ate what they were allowed to eat. The elites have always known: Control the meat supply, control the population.

Tuesday, December 9, 2025

J. MICHAEL WALLER: Muslim Brotherhood or Hamas they can't fight their wars back home because they're hopelessly outnumbered, so they have to fight them here because the United States exercises so much strength and power abroad so they can subvert the United States from within on a short-term political basis

Host is Lee Smith.

3:30.  Why is the Muslim Brotherhood a threat to American National Security? 

3:36.  It's a profound threat to our national security not so much because it has elements of terrorist networks within it and it supports terrorism.  But an even deeper threat is it's colonizing us.  It's waging a civilizational jihad against us to build population centers, to silence critics, to make themselves indispensable parts of political coalition and to take political power.  So they're looking at playing a very long game in our country, and it's not to come here to become Americans and to assimilate.  It's to impose what they feel like they're morally bound to do, and that is to impose Islamic law over the US Constitution.

4:22.  I knew that a lot of this was happening in Europe.  I mean we see the effects of it throughout the streets of London, Paris, certainly Brussels, but I didn't know it had gotten that bad already in the United States.

4:35.  It's getting there. Europe is already 20 years ahead of us, a generation or two ahead of us.  And it has been going on really since the early mass movements, like the Communist movements, the, you know, the anarchist movements.  They sort of spawn in Europe and then they come over here.  But they're very well embedded in many communities where you can see in places like Minneapolis, or now you've seen in the election of this Mayor [Mamdani] of New York.  They have colonies down in Texas, really in pockets all around the country, large and small, and they're in some of the . . . most of the immigrants are harmless, but if they go to a mosque, that's a Muslim Brotherhood mosque. They're going to get gradually radicalized very softly, almost imperceptibly, not to come out and endorse terrorism or push people out into the streets to support Hamas which some of them do.  But the really long-term civilizational Jihad mosques, run by the Muslim Brotherhood, will just sort of gradually assimilate people, raise their children this way by going to their religious schools, and create a civilization within a civilization that will never assimilate with us.

5:54.  Why do they care about us?  I mean one of the great Muslim Brotherhood ideologues and this was the organization that was founded in Egypt but the Egyptian ideologue site could tub famously came to the United States I can remember.  It was the 40s or the 1950s but he was grossed out just looking at a community church dance and these were you know we're very modest people in a modest dance but he took it as a sign of corruption and rot and lust and all these different things. So why wouldn't they just avoid America why did they feel that it's their need now to take over America?

6:32.  Well, that's the place for everybody to come.  If America is the real threat whether it's American culture, as Sayyid Qutb said, or whether it's American support for Israel or American support for other countries that are Muslim majority countries they're just not Muslim Brotherhood countries. We're the greatest power to support everything they hate.  So they have to colonize us.  

6:59.  So the purpose is really to get here and to undermine us and to I mean how do you they expect a transform the entire country or do they expect a transform the country?  Or do they just want to take pieces of the political pie to be able to shape our politics or do they really expect that there are going to be women walking through the streets of American cities wearing hijabs wearing the head covering because Muslim Brotherhood imams demand it?

7:24.  Well it's all of these things and it's many reasons also so you have you have Muslim Brotherhood people like they're fighting their wars back home like the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood or Hamas they can't fight their wars back home because they're hopelessly outnumbered, so they have to fight them here because the United States exercises so much strength and power abroad so they can subvert the United States from within on a short-term political basis to affect the outcomes of wars or the changing of Borders or the migrations of population they'll do it here to pressure presidents to pressure judges to pressure lawmakers to pressure journalists and then to raise new generations of Americans and other foreigners to see the world through their eyes so that's one great important reason for them for they're fighting their Wars back home but they're also fighting as a sort of in a missionary like way to convert people to Islam under Muslim Brotherhood guidelines because they view it as a supernatural mission.  

8:35.  You mean that this is what the religion demands that they go out and convert that they prosthletize and convert and make the world safer for Islam?  

What you were talking about before that they fight us because they're outnumbered and outgunned at home this was kind of Osama bin Laden's Theory right fighting the far enemy because the near enemy for instance Egypt or Saudi Arabia was too difficult and of course Al Qaeda comes out of Muslim Brotherhood ideology doesn't it as this larger thing we know is political Islam was Bin Laden shaped by the Muslim Brotherhood?

9:21.  Yes he was shaped by their theoretical teachings in addition to Saudi wahhabism which is not Muslim Brotherhood but they all have the same end state and this is what matters.  Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood and Isis and the Shiites and Iran all have the same end state which is to make all the world ruled under Islam all of humanity and to kill all the enemies that they can't control, to kill or enslave the enemies that they can't convert so it's a question of how do they get to that point that's where the difference is.

9:58.  What are the different I mean you know you're talking about Europe I mean one of the fascinating things about I think even London and Paris are different right because I think they had different concepts Concepts about how to deal with political Islam my understanding is that the Brits pretty much let it happen they let all and all these fanatical Imams and the idea was well as long as you don't put Terror attacks against us it's okay and I think the French at first were sort of like that and then the French said well wait now they are starting to plot attacks against us we have to round them up and be pretty tough what's the American idea about Muslim Brotherhood influence on our Shores or do we have a coherent plan right now to confront this not only to confront it but hopefully to defeat it and to end it once and for all?

10:45.  We don't have a plan we've been faced with before since 9/11 with this threat with this problem that people didn't want to talk about because they were afraid of being called racist or bigots or whatever other labels were being thrown at them even after 9/11 when we needed the American Muslim Community to help us fight Al Qaeda the Muslim Brotherhood came in not to to be a difficult challenge to us but to "help our authorities."  So they came in by offering translation services by offering their expertise and how to advise the FBI and the CIA the military on how to think about Islam how to understand the communities that either the bureau here at home or the CIA in the military abroad were going to operate in. And you can think, "Well that's all really well and that's really helpful," but really they were teaching our military security and intelligence people how to think about Islam through the Muslim Brotherhood's view of the world.  

11:51.  Yeah it's pretty amazing I mean you see the different the different ways the brother hood is described fighting for social justice is primarily started as an aid organization when nothing of the sort.  I mean it started in Egypt in 1928 and the whole purpose was to be fighting the British occupiers at the time.  And they started turning and fighting the Jews in Israel look, is the 

12:19.  and that's a key right there, Lee.  They were fighting the British first.  They didn't . . . Muslim Brotherhood didn't care about the Jews they cared about secular Muslims.  They cared about different non-Arab Muslims getting . . . pushing them out.  And they cared about the British occupier, so the Israel and the Jews didn't come until later.  This is a big misconception now that somehow if we didn't support Israel we wouldn't have a Muslim Brotherhood problem.

12:45.  Yeah that's a very interesting point because that's how people sort of rationalize Hamas as well they say oh it's about the occupation Israel doing this and doing that.  But if you go back through the history of their Brotherhood you find well I mean how would you I mean certainly we call it an extremist organization but it's also exclusivist if not eliminationist, right anyone who doesn't follow who doesn't follow this are their enemies I want to ask something about the talking about what happened after 9/11.  There's a lot of people I think are still in some shock about the recent election to the mayor of New York Zora Mamdani and a lot of people are saying well the guy is not really in islamist as it turns out he's a crazy socialist like a lot of kids you see in school but then we understand that he's been this is not the case right his parents got money from the Qataris which is kind of home base, Global home base for the Brotherhood and then of course the different organizations he was a a member of like students for justice in Palestine and the whole chant of globalizing the Intifada.  So should people be worried about Mamdani as a Muslim Brotherhood activist, as the Mayor of New York?

14:02.  Sure.  That's why he was deployed he had a whole image making campaign and champions throughout New York and really throughout the country and the world to promote him not because he was such a great capable Visionary guy but because he represented a much larger movement so when he was elected you had both the Muslim Brotherhood celebrating his election but you also have the Democratic socialists of America celebrating his election saying that this is the greatest single revolutionary victory in a century that's their shorthand for the greatest victory since the Bolshevik Revolution they see now one of America's greatest cities under control of the red-green axis.

14:49.  What does this tell us about our ability to our own resistance our own antibodies against this because you know again you're talking about 9/11 and I was visiting New York recently my hometown and I was reminded not only of the First World Trade Center bombing in 1993 but also 1994 there was a crazed islamist a guy from Lebanon got up on the FDR Drive or actually on the access point of the Brooklyn Bridge and he shot at a bus full of Chabad kids and one of them was killed and that driveway is named after him so this has been going on even before 9/11 so again what does it tell us about Americans ability to not only understand what's happening but to fight it? 

15:37.   We willfully don't understand as a country.  We like to think the best of people.  There's a tendency for many Americans to feel guilty, you know, about being an Anglo-Saxon; you know, having Anglo-Saxon roots in our country somehow that's wrong, somehow it's oppressive, and somehow we have to compensate.  And one of the ways of compensation is to accept as many people from around the world as possible and then not demanding they assimilate, and, in fact, accommodating all of their demands.  And then you have others who simply want to be left alone, or they even want to speak out but they're so harassed when they speak out that they just shut up, and . . . that's probably a majority of the country.  They know something is wrong but . . . they can't say anything, and then you have others who find themselves their lives professionally ruined.  You saw this after 9/11 when the Bush Administration took rapid action to go after it Al Qaeda and reached out to the American Muslim Community.  But what?  There is no community in America Islam.  There weren't many Shiite Muslims here and those who were here were refugees from the Ayatollahs for the most part. The Sunni Islam isn't a vertically structured entity. So it does not have a "community," because it's all horizontal.  It's all, it's more like more Grassroots ish not top down but what is top down claiming to represent everybody the Muslim Brotherhood

"Just Cause" allows the city and state to modify the lease.

Accessory Dwelling Units.  

"Just Cause" allows the city and state to modify the lease.   

"Just Cause" eviction policies require landlords to provide valid reasons for terminating a lease, enhancing tenant stability and preventing arbitrary evictions. These laws can vary by city and state, allowing local jurisdictions to implement their own specific regulations.

Just Cause Evictions.

PAGE 7 OF TINA PETERS PARDON LETTER TO TRUMP: "In the new unit, she was attacked by other prisoners 3 times in different locations where guards had to pull inmates off of her"

Here's a copy of the full letter and request for Tina Peters pardon to President Trump., dated December 7, 2025.


This  9News report suggests that the reason the state is holding onto Peters is that she's got damning information on Democrat polling practices and how fraud is built into their game.  

Flynn has said Peters, 70, should be moved into federal custody because she could be a witness into an investigation of the 2020 election.

DENVER(AP) — A federal magistrate judge on Monday rejected a bid by a former Colorado county clerk to be released from prison while she appeals her state conviction for orchestrating a data breach scheme driven by false claims about voting machine fraud in the 2020 presidential race.  9News.

Peters argued that the magistrate judge should free her because she said the state judge who sentenced her to 9 years behind bars violated her First Amendment rights. Peters claimed he punished her for making allegations about election fraud, but prosecutors argued that the U.S. Supreme Court has allowed judges to consider people’s speech during sentencings if they deem it relevant.  

During Peters’ October 2024 sentencing, Judge Matthew Barrett called the defendant a “charlatan” and said she posed a danger to the community for spreading lies about voting and undermining the democratic process.

Peters was unapologetic and insisted that everything she did was geared toward trying to unroot what she believed was fraud. She claimed her actions were done for the greater good.

Her lawyers argued that Barrett was wrong to call Peters' statements “lies” and said there was no evidence her speech posed a danger.

President Donald Trump and other supporters, including retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, the national security adviser during Trump’s first term, have called for Peters to be released. In August, Trump warned he would “take harsh measures” if Peters wasn’t freed, saying she was old and very sick.  

The administration sent a letter to the Colorado prison system in mid-November asking that Peters be transferred to federal custody. One her lawyers said he believed the request was made so Peters could more easily be involved in the investigation into the election.

There is no evidence of any widespread cheating in Colorado elections, which have been staunchly defended by county clerks throughout the state, most of whom are Republican. Peters was prosecuted by an elected Republican district attorney, and the three supervisors in her conservative-leaning county also supported the case and defended the integrity of the state’s elections.

The U.S. Justice Department got involved in Peters’ federal case in March, saying “reasonable concerns” had been raised about her prosecution. It also said the DOJ was reviewing whether the prosecution was “oriented more toward inflicting political pain than toward pursuing actual justice or legitimate governmental objectives,” a line from an executive order entitled “Ending the Weaponization of The Federal Government” that Trump signed shortly after his inauguration.

The state objected to the federal government inserting itself, saying the statement the department filed in the case appeared to be a “naked, political attempt” to intimidate the court or Peters’ prosecutors. It unsuccessfully asked for the court to reject it.

Peters’ lawyers pointed to three cases in which federal judges ordered people convicted of state crimes to be released from prison while they appealed, including one involving free speech. In that 1977 case, a judge freed the late Native American activist Russell Means after he was placed back behind bars because he remained active in the American Indian Movement while free on bond from state custody. The state court had largely barred him from participating in the group. The federal judge ruled that was an unconstitutional limit on his First Amendment rights of speech and association.

TRUMP DID WHAAAAAAAAAT!

SCORECARDS HELP

WIDE AWAKE MEDIA: In 1994, Japan ceased all mandatory vaccines for children under 24 months old. Can you guess what happened next?

BREAKING - This woman received 100k likes for explaining exactly how the mainstream media lies and slanders ICE.

SAMA HOOLE: You're not "detoxing" with juice cleanses. Your liver detoxes. It's been doing it since birth. It doesn't need £89 of blended vegetables.