Author: HP McLovincraft

Seeker of rabbit holes. Pessimist. Libertine. Contrarian. Your huckleberry. Possibly true tales of sanity-blasting horror also known as abject reality. Prepare yourself. Veteran of a thousand psychic wars. I have seen the fnords. Deplatformed on Tumblr and Twitter.

Elon Musk Shares that AOC is an Actress – How Many Other Politicians Are Actors As Well?

Elon Musk Shares that AOC is an Actress – How Many Other Politicians Are Actors As Well?

Elon Musk shared a post this morning that tells how AOC won a contest for Congress, and her brother put her name in.

Elon Musk just posted “AOC is an actor”

He’s 100% correct, and here’s the proof. AOC was chosen to be in Congress by a Democrat casting call. She’s a political actor that was picked out of 10,000 applicants

AOC’s brother submitted her application and she was chosen by the Executive Director of Justice Democrats Out Of 10,000 Candidates

It’s all on camera. There is even footage of AOC and Alexandra Rojas both confirming this on camera

“Alexandria Ocasio Cortez is not really the congresswoman of New York’s 14th congressional district. She is essentially an actress. She’s merely playing the part of a New York congresswoman. I know this sounds crazy, but bear with me. In 2017, a group called the Justice Democrats held auditions for potential congressional candidates that they would run on their platform for various congressional seats throughout the country. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez’s brother Gabriel submitted her for the role”

– In 2017 Justice Democrats, a progressive PAC founded by former Bernie Sanders staffers and allies put out a public call for congressional candidates
– They received over 10,000 nominations
– AOC’s younger brother, Gabriel Ocasio-Cortez, submitted her name. AOC was working as a bartender

Justice Democrats vetted nominees and chose AOC. They then trained her and installed her as their candidate

Keep reading

Study Finds Sunscreen Use Linked to Higher Risk of Multiple Skin Cancers

A UK Biobank study involving over 470,000 people found that individuals who reported using sunscreen more frequently had substantially higher risk of multiple skin cancers — even after researchers accounted for major confounding factors like age, sex, skin type, tanning ability, sunburn history, sunlamp use, and time spent outdoors.

The findings are worrisome:

• MELANOMA: +292% higher risk (RR = 3.92)

• BASAL CELL CARCINOMA: +140% higher risk (RR = 2.40)

• SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA: +126% higher risk (RR = 2.26)

The researchers categorized sun protection habits from “never/rarely” to “always” and found the strongest associations among the most frequent sunscreen users.

In other words: the more sunscreen use reported, the higher the observed skin cancer risk.

This was an observational study, meaning it cannot prove sunscreen directly caused cancer. However, the study was also not a simplistic comparison of random sunscreen users versus non-users. Researchers statistically accounted for many of the biggest known skin cancer risk factors — including skin color, hair color, tanning ability, childhood sunburns, tanning bed exposure, outdoor time, age, and sex.

Even after all of that, the association remained.

Many chemical sunscreens contain hormone disruptors that are rapidly absorbed into the bloodstream, including compounds like oxybenzone, octocrylene, and homosalate.

Some formulations have also been found contaminated with benzene, a known human carcinogen.

And then there is the vitamin D issue. Sunlight is how the human body produces vitamin D, a hormone precursor involved in immune regulation, cellular repair, inflammation control, and cancer defense. People who never receive sunlight exposure without sunscreen are likely to become vitamin D deficient.

That does not mean people should recklessly burn in the sun. Sunburns are clearly harmful. Aim for sensible sunlight exposure — spending enough time in the sun reap the benefits without reaching the point of burning. If you’ll be out in the sun for hours on end during mid summer, consider opting for zinc-based (mineral) sunscreens rather than heavily absorbed chemical formulations.

The takeaway is not to fear sunlight, but to respect it.

Keep reading

Justice Sotomayor Discloses $4,333 in Concert Tickets from Bad Bunny’s Record Label in Latest Supreme Court Financial Report

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor disclosed receiving $4,333 worth of concert tickets from Rimas Entertainment, the Puerto Rican record label that represents superstar Bad Bunny, as part of the latest round of Supreme Court financial disclosure reports.

The tickets were for Sotomayor and an unspecified number of guests during a private trip she took to Puerto Rico in August.

Sotomayor, the first justice of Puerto Rican descent, noted in her filing that the gift came from the label while she was traveling privately, though she did not specify which concert she attended.

At the time, Bad Bunny was in the middle of a major residency that included more than 30 sold-out shows in San Juan.

These 2025 financial disclosures, which cover outside income, gifts, and other interests for eight of the nine justices, are required annually under federal ethics rules.

Justice Samuel Alito was granted a 90-day extension and has not yet filed.

While Sotomayor’s concert tickets stand out as the most eye-catching gift in the current reports, the filings also show substantial outside earnings for several other justices, primarily from book deals and teaching positions.

Keep reading

Are Taxpayers Helping to Finance America’s Data Center Boom?

“Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else” ~ Frédéric Bastiat

A strikingly large number of massive data centers are being built across the United States. It is currently estimated that there are more than 4,000 data centers in the U.S., and more are on the way.

The federal government as well as local and state governments are providing financial incentives for these investments. Such incentives occur in an environment that lacks transparency and proper disclosure. As an extension of this opaqueness, the benefits to justify these subsidies also remain unclear. Many would argue that promises of job creation have been grossly overstated (and the data centers’ potential role in creating a digital control grid kept secret), while energy and resource concerns—as well as the potential costs of site cleanup if and when the facilities close down or fail—have been minimized. This, in addition to the secrecy surrounding the planning and financing of the data center industry, indicates that the negative impact to local residents and the American taxpayers may be substantial.

The following report examines this matter and is organized into two main sections. The first covers the federal layer of financial influence helping to advance the data center boom—the One Big Beautiful Bill. The second section focuses on the generous state and local government tax incentives, which are costing state governments billions in revenue losses. The conclusion elaborates on an opportunity to join the effort in seeking clarity on America’s data center industry, with additional resources provided in the links below.

Keep reading

While Kaitlan Collins Claims Democratic Socialists Aren’t Communists, Clip Resurfaces of DSA National Leader Saying the Quiet Part Out Loud: “Our Goal is Communism”

As the fake news media and the Democratic Party try to claim that its far-left Democratic Socialist wing does not represent communism, a clip has resurfaced showing a top Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) leader openly admitting “Our goal is Communism”

As The Gateway Pundit reported, CNN’s Kaitlan Collins went on air on Friday and blasted Trump for saying that the Democratic Socialists are “the most serious threat to our country since its existence.” She described his comments as “border apocalyptic,” while insisting that the Democratic Socialists of America are not actually Communists.

“While Democrats themselves have been wrestling with what Tuesday night means for the direction of their party, socialism, much less democratic socialism, is not Communism,” Collins said.

However, a clip has resurfaced, showing DSA National Leader David Jenkins debunking her claims by literally admitting that the goal of the DSA is “Communism.”

A compilation of Jenkins’s previous remarks shows him saying on a Zoom call, “Our goal is liberation. Our goal is Communism.” It is unclear when the clip was recorded.

The video goes on to feature Jenkins’s greatest hits, including calling to defund the police at a New York City budget hearing, admitting that he aligns with Marxism, admitting he was present at the January 6 protests as a “counterprotester,” and spewing violent rhetoric.

Keep reading

Officials urge WHO to declare climate change a global health emergency

Climate change should now be treated as a global health emergency comparable to Ebola and mpox, European ministers and health officials have told the WHO. 

The Pan-European Commission on Climate and Health, an independent group of experts convened by former Icelandic Prime Minister Katrín Jakobsdóttir and WHO Europe chief Hans Kluge, urged governments to speed the shift to clean renewables to help avert millions of deaths in a new report.

The group said the WHO should declare the climate crisis a “public health emergency of international concern” (PHEIC), a high-level alert most recently activated for the Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo, as well as for mpox.

The experts said the move was critical since even temperate European countries are warming rapidly, driven largely by fossil fuel combustion. According to the report, fossil fuel subsidies in 12 European countries amounted to more than 10% of their public health budgets.

Kluge, who supported the call, said that “climate change is a security threat, a health emergency and an economic time bomb, all rolled into one.” 

He previously told Euractiv that climate change will have to become a much bigger priority for the European region, explaining that “for the first time in history, Iceland has mosquitoes.”

The experts pointed to several health concerns linked to climate change in the report: extreme heat, vector-borne diseases such as dengue and chikungunya, air pollution-related deaths, and water contamination from flooding. 

The experts’ prognosis was not entirely grim, however, adding that there’s still a window of time to act.

For healthcare systems, they suggested setting up greener procurement standards to reduce the sector’s carbon footprint, creating more resilient systems to shocks like floods, as well as training staff around climate awareness.  

EU governments, on top of phasing out fossil fuel use, should invest in public transit, create more low-emission zones, and switch away from resource-heavy red meat consumption, they added. 

The bloc’s recent progress has fallen short of both UN climate targets and its own ambitions. Most countries are still far from reaching tougher pollution targets by 2030 under the bloc’s revised air quality rules.

The European Environment Agency (EEA) estimates that air pollution is behind around 350,000 deaths in Europe every year.

EU officials are currently in Geneva for the WHO’s annual assembly, where the commission launched its report. 

Keep reading

Justice Clarence Thomas Dissents: Birthright Citizenship Claim Is Based on Feudalism

Justice Clarence Thomas says the Supreme Court’s 5-4 court decision today establishing birthright citizenship as a constitutional right is a modern political project built on a feudal principle rejected by the American Revolution that devalues U.S. citizenship.

Thomas wrote:

The Court says that the Citizenship Clause incorporated the English feudal principle that subjects owed lifetime servitude to the King who owned the soil on which they were born, but Americans — unsurprisingly — rejected this feudal principle.

…

Today’s opinion devalues [U.S.] citizenship. I respectfully dissent.

His dissent is long:

The Court today takes the extraordinary step of holding facially unconstitutional the President’s Order excluding from citizenship the children of foreign temporary visitors and illegal aliens. In doing so, the Court adds to the sad history of the Fourteenth Amendment, which was designed and understood to secure equal rights for the freed blacks but has instead been repurposed for political projects that the Reconstruction Congress [after the civil war] did not support. [Emphasis added.]

Thomas’s dissent, which was co-signed by Justice Neil Gorsuch, explained his view:

The Citizenship Clause was consistently interpreted not to apply to the children of foreign temporary visitors, who were by definition not domiciled in the United States. Regardless of administration or party, the Federal Government for decades after ratification regularly denied claims to citizenship by children who were born in the United States but not domiciled here. When a child was “born” in the United States to parents “domiciled” abroad, he was “not, therefore, under the statute and the Constitution a citizen of the United States by birth”…  Scholars agreed: A child “born within the territory of the United States, of alien parents” was not a citizen unless his parents were “permanently domiciled within the United States”… This Court agreed: The Citizenship Clause “exclude[d] from its operation children of… citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States”… And, Congress agreed: The Citizenship Clause did not extend to a child born here but “subject to any foreign power”… As Justice Harlan would write in his [Supreme Court] dissent in Plessy v. Ferguson… the Citizenship Clause “gave citizenship to all born or naturalized in the United States and residing here”…

The [Supreme] Court offers a different account. American citizenship, the Court says, was based on a medieval English “feudal” principle, according to which each person “owed personal service to the lord of the soil” as his “master” — a perpetual servitude that was “born with the child and only ended in the grave”… Americans, the Court says, adopted this feudal principle as a rule of American citizenship “with little fanfare”… Then, according to the Court, the Reconstruction Congress codified that feudal principle with the words “not subject to any foreign power” in the Civil Rights Act and “subject to the jurisdiction thereof ” in the Citizenship Clause. Then, the Court says, the Clause’s meaning was definitively settled by dicta in United States v. Wong Kim Ark…

With due respect, the Court’s account is not historically accurate. The Court says that the Citizenship Clause incorporated the English feudal principle that subjects owed lifetime servitude to the King who owned the soil on which they were born, but Americans — unsurprisingly — rejected this feudal principle. The Court’s theory of American citizenship is based on the opinion of a New York assistant vice chancellor in an inheritance dispute called Lynch v. Clarke, … But, the assistant vice chancellor’s reasoning, whatever it was worth, was not even followed in New York by the time of the Citizenship Clause. Finally, the Court reasons that dicta in Wong Kim Ark settled the meaning of the Clause. But, Wong Kim Ark itself emphasized that its holding was limited to persons domiciled in the United States. And, scholars and government officials continued to agree after Wong Kim Ark that the Citizenship Clause did not extend to the children of foreign temporary visitors. The rule remained what it always was: A child born on American soil of “a stranger or traveler passing through the country, or temporarily residing here,” was “not a citizen.”

President Barack Obama’s nominee, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, responded with a sneer that Thomas is a racist who supports the court’s 1857 Dredd Scott decision endorsing slavery which helped trigger the Civil War:

Of course, the ultimate irony is that for all the talk about the detestable Dred Scott decision, the Government and the principal dissent propose a return to its core tenet. Their bottom line is that, for certain people, being born on American soil will not suffice to confer citizenship. It is that odious conclusion that the Citizenship Clause plainly rejects, as the Court explains.

Thomas ended his dissent with a reference to the court’s 1896 Plessy v Ferguson decision that overturned racial segregation and the obsolete, pre-Civil War Dredd Scott case:

I am not sure that today’s opinion will stand the test of time. The Citizenship Clause “added greatly to the dignity and glory of American citizenship.” Plessy, 163 U. S., at 555 (Harlan, J., dissenting). Today’s opinion devalues that citizenship. I respectfully dissent.

The court’s decision leaves American citizens with no avenue to guard their citizenship except a formal constitutional amendment enacted via a two-thirds majority of the federal Congress or of the states.

Keep reading

Despite Media Claims, USAID Cuts DID NOT Kill 14 Million People

Critics of the U.S., along with mainstream media and Democratic lawmakers, have claimed that Elon Musk’s cuts to USAID have killed 14 million people. This claim fails on multiple levels. Musk did not cut USAID. As head of DOGE, he held no formal legal authority to cancel contracts or eliminate programs, and the formal cancellations were executed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

The death toll figures circulating in the press are not confirmed counts but forward projections spanning up to five years, derived from economic models that assume no alternative funding was found, no internal reallocation of funds occurred, and no recipient government, third-country government, or global aid organization stepped in to fill gaps, assumptions the evidence does not support. An examination of the countries most dependent on USAID funding finds no verified excess mortality data for 2025 or 2026 attributable to the cuts; what exists are modeled estimates, not death registries.

The White House stated in court that Musk was a senior presidential adviser with no formal decision-making authority. The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals confirmed that DOGE played a role in the dismantling of USAID. However, the court found that the cuts were approved by government officials. It also ruled that Musk’s social media statement claiming he had “fed USAID into the wood chipper” did not legally constitute evidence that he made those decisions.

Keep reading

Rosie O’Donnell Slammed for Posing in Front of Private Jet After Blasting Wealthy People as ‘Embarrassing’

Millionaire left-wing comedian Rosie O’Donnell is being slammed on social media for posing with fellow comedian Kathy Griffin in front of a private jet after recently attacking wealthy people as “embarrassing” and asking, “How much [money] can you have?”

“The resistance has landed,” Griffin wrote in a Friday Instagram caption, sharing a photo of herself with O’Donnell in front of a jet. “Are you guys gonna watch the week that @Rosie guest hosts for @jimmykimmellive??? It will be a must watch week.”

Amusingly, O’Donnell is apparently back in the U.S. — again — after fleeing the country for Ireland early last year and previously vowing not to return while President Donald Trump is in office.

Viewers quickly took to social media to share their reactions to O’Donnell standing before the private jet.

“Whatever democrats accuse you of doing, THEY ARE DOING,” one X user proclaimed.

“Rules for thee not for me!” another wrote.

“They are both embarrassing enough no matter what they’re standing in front of!” a third exclaimed.

“Envy is a terrible thing, usually displayed extensively by champagne socialists,” another X user remarked.

“These celebrities are hypocrites… and the general public doesn’t care what they have to say anyways,” another commented.

Keep reading

San Francisco Archdiocese Agrees To $395 Million Abuse Settlement

The Archdiocese of San Francisco has agreed to pay $395 million to settle more than 500 lawsuits alleging child sexual abuse by church officials, in what the plaintiffs’ lawyers described as the largest per-survivor settlement.

The plaintiffs’ attorneys said on June 29 that San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone will have to write an apology letter to each survivor as part of the settlement.

The settlement also requires the archdiocese to implement a series of child protection and transparency reforms.

The settlement comes three years after the archdiocese filed for bankruptcy and will cover approximately 530 survivors of child sexual abuse.

It is the latest agreement over clergy sexual abuse claims. In 2024, the Archdiocese of Los Angeles agreed to a record $880 million settlement.

This settlement follows years of back-and-forth mediation between the Archdiocese and the Survivors’ Creditors Committee.

The law firm representing the survivors said the $395 million “stands as the largest per survivor settlement in any clerical bankruptcy.”

“As a part of the settlement, the Archdiocese is turning over (assigning) its rights under the insurance policies for the survivors to recover additional damages against all the insurance companies who refused to abide by their contractual responsibilities to the Archdiocese and the survivors,” it said.

“I’ve been working with survivors for decades, and I’ve never heard of anything quite as significant, as rigorous, as robust as what is being required of the Archdiocese of San Francisco,” said Jeff Anderson, an attorney representing dozens of child sexual abuse victims.

The proposed 14-point settlement plan calls for appointing an independent child protection consultant with full access to archdiocesan records, publishing findings and a more complete list of credibly accused offenders, creating a survivor-sensitive public archive, and strengthening protections for whistleblowers and reporters.

It also calls for banning mandatory nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) in abuse settlements and prohibiting private digital communications between adults and children.

Margie O’Driscoll sued the archdiocese, alleging she was sexually abused almost 50 years ago by a priest while she was a student at Marin Catholic High School in Kentfield, a community north of the Golden Gate Bridge.

“I, like every survivor, have carried this pain and shame along like a ball and chain for a very, very long time,” O’Driscoll said during a news conference.

“Ashamed and confused about what happened, scorned by the archdiocese, and sometimes not even believed by family and friends, and I think today shame is gonna change sides.”

“We believe this proposal provides a path toward fair compensation for survivors who have borne the weight of this abuse for a lifetime,” Rev. Salvatore J. Cordileone, archbishop of San Francisco, said in a June 29 statement.

The Archdiocese of San Francisco, led by Cordileone, serves more than 400,000 Catholics in San Francisco, San Mateo, and Marin Counties.

“The entire Catholic family is called to unite and share in the work of making amends through this proposed settlement. We have a moral obligation to bring some level of healing and reconciliation to those who deserve our unwavering respect, attention, and prayers,” he said.

“With stringent preventative measures and trainings now in place for decades, the hope is that this proposal will allow us collectively to move forward by continuing the important ministries to the faithful and community members that rely on our services and charity.

“While the vast majority of sexual abuse allegations associated with this bankruptcy were from many decades ago, we accept full responsibility for what happened, and I sincerely apologize to all those who have been harmed.”

Keep reading