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.

Ted Bundy named as killer of teen girl who left a Halloween party and never returned after DNA breakthrough

Notorious serial killer Ted Bundy has been identified as the murderer of a teenage girl who vanished on Halloween night more than half a century ago.

Laura Ann Aime, 17, was last seen alive at a party in Utah County on October 31, 1974, when she told friends she was heading out to buy cigarettes. She never returned.

Around a month later on November 27, 1974, her naked body was found in an embankment up in the mountains near American Fork Canyon Road. The teen had been raped and strangled.

For decades, her murder has been linked to Bundy, with the serial killer giving a deathbed confession to killing Aime and at least 29 other victims before he was sent to the electric chair in January 1989.

But, her case remained unsolved for the next 37 years, with investigators needing more evidence to close the investigation once and for all.

That evidence finally arrived in the way of a breakthrough in DNA evidence last month.

In a press conference on Wednesday, Utah County Sheriff Mike Smith announced that advanced DNA testing of bodily fluids found on the victim had proven Bundy to be the killer once and for all.  

‘Although Bundy did claim that he committed the murder of Laura, the confession he gave was deemed to be not enough evidence to close the case and rule out any other party having had committed this crime, as had been speculated at the time,’ Smith said.

Keep reading

Energy bills set to spike for Washington state residents — while Microsoft gets rate cut: report

Electric bills are set to jump more than 16% for 1.25 million Washington state residents — even as Microsoft gets a rate cut under a special deal, according to a report.

Puget Sound Energy, a utility company that is owned by a consortium of Canadian and Dutch pension funds, is seeking state government approval for rate hikes of 16.75% next year, 3.76% in 2028, and 8.81% in 2029.

The request, which is subject to approval by Washington’s state regulators at Utilities and Transportation Commission, also includes a proposed rate cut for Microsoft, according to the local news site Zoned Out PNW.

If PSE gets its way, the Redmond, Wash.-based software giant, which as of Wednesday boasted a market capitalization of $2.76 trillion, will see its rates slashed by 12.49% next year; 2.04% in 2028; and 3.06% in 2029.

The UTC board is chaired by Brian Rybarik, who held various roles at Microsoft before he was appointed to his current position by Gov. Bob Ferguson, a Dem.

Microsoft reportedly qualifies for the rate cuts because the tech giant falls under the category of a “special contracts” customer.

Keep reading

Missouri Senate Passes Bill To Ban Intoxicating Hemp THC Products

After nine hours of debate over competing proposals to ban intoxicating hemp products, the Missouri Senate finally approved a House bill Tuesday night that would align state law with a federal ban set to take effect in November.

It also includes provisions to protect marijuana consumer privacy and cannabis workers’ right to organize.

It now heads back to the House, which can either ask for a conference to work out differences with the Senate or send it to the governor.

The bill, sponsored by Republican state Rep. Dave Hinman of O’Fallon, would prohibit hemp products from containing more than 0.4 milligrams of THC per container, which is among the limits included in a provision in the federal spending bill Congress approved last year.

Even if Congress reverses course and decides to allow the sale of these products, Hinman’s bill would only permit them to be sold in Missouri’s licensed marijuana dispensaries. And if Congress chooses to delay the ban for a couple years, Missouri would still ban all products, except for intoxicating beverages.

“I had just a good opportunity over in the Senate to work with several of the senators to get some of the things that they wanted to get on there that I think actually benefit the bill,” Hinman told The Independent Wednesday morning. “So I’m very happy with the things that were done last night and look forward to bringing that to the House tomorrow.”

Resistance to the bill came from Republican senators who expressed concern that the hemp industry members weren’t included in the final negotiations that took place for more than 12 hours Tuesday.

And Democratic state Sen. Karla May of St. Louis argued Missouri would be taking a more restrictive approach than the federal government because the proposals would deem the intoxicating hemp products as “marijuana.”

“They claim they’re mirroring the federal regulation,” May said during the debate Tuesday. “There’s some things in there that’s going far beyond the federal regulation, such as…hemp-derived cannabinoids will be put under the marijuana umbrella and have to be sold in dispensaries.”

May successfully led a nearly seven-hour filibuster on the first bill brought for discussion, sponsored by Republican state Sen. David Gregory, which would have made the ban effective as soon as the governor signed it.

“We spent pretty much from 11 a.m. until really 9 p.m. trying to figure out where we wanted to go, trying different things,” Hinman said, regarding Gregory’s bill. “We couldn’t get everyone really to agree, and so the senator [Gregory] suggested, ‘Let’s just go back to Hinman’s bill and go with that.’”

In an unusual move, the senators decided to reconvene the Senate Fiscal Oversight Committee at about 10 p.m. The same committee had decided not to vote on Hinman’s bill earlier that day, saying Hinman needed to reach a resolution with the hemp industry.

There was no public notice of the fiscal oversight committee’s evening meeting, which ended when senators voted to move the bill forward and allowed the full Senate to take it up for debate.

An amendment was approved to keep dispensaries from collecting marijuana consumers’ information unless they “opted in,” Hinman said, and another ensured all cannabis workers can unionize and shouldn’t be considered “agricultural workers” who aren’t protected under federal law. A group of workers in St. Louis have been battling this point since 2023.

Keep reading

School librarians told to remove art books with ‘historic paintings of nudes’ in latest censorship row

School librarians are being told to remove art books with ‘historic paintings of nudes’ in the latest censorship controversy revealed today.

The ‘insane’ trend was revealed by a delegate at the annual conference of the National Education Union (NEU), saying she had heard ‘many accounts’ of art books being cut.

It comes after a school librarian at Lowry Academy in Salford, Greater Manchester, revealed last week she had been forced to remove books deemed ‘inappropriate’ by management.

Bosses used artificial intelligence to earmark almost 200 books for removal, including George Orwell’s 1984 and Stephenie Meyer’s Twilight.

The school later admitted it had removed ‘a small number of books’ but said it had put most of them back, into ‘age-appropriate categories’.

The Lowry Academy case prompted the NEU to pass an urgent motion yesterday to ‘fight censorship and defend librarians’.

The union said that although the woman in the original controversy is not part of the union, it wanted to protect its own librarian members from suffering a similar fate.

Proposing the motion, Kristabelle Williams, a member from Lewisham, said: ‘We cannot ignore the issues that this case has brought up.

‘We can take action as a union now to try to make sure it doesn’t happen again.’

She said the support of the union would give librarians the ‘confidence to not self-censor and resist the chilling effect that this case will cultivate’.

She added members fear there is now an ‘increased risk of external complaints’ and ‘hate campaigns’ about books in their libraries.

Also speaking during the debate was Laura Butterworth, a member from Tameside Greater Manchester, which is near Lowry Academy.

Keep reading

Woke San Francisco nonprofit boss charged with fraud made local library buy 1,500 copies of HER children’s book, netting her $100,000

A former California civil rights leader is accused of pocketing $100,000 by directing a library to buy thousands of her children’s books, amid allegations she siphoned funds meant for the black community. 

Sheryl Davis, former director of San Francisco’s Human Rights Commission, was arrested Monday on allegations of a ‘pervasive pattern of self-dealing,’ with prosecutors accusing her of misappropriating thousands of dollars in taxpayer funds. 

She allegedly used her partner’s nonprofit as a ‘slush fund’ for lavish personal spending, including travel, VIP party tickets and even her son’s tuition at UCLA. 

On Tuesday, an affidavit revealed that thousands of dollars were personally used toward promoting her children’s book through questionable deals and high-profile, celebrity-studded events, according to The New York Post.

The once-respected activist allegedly arranged the sale of 1,500 copies of ‘Free to Sing’ to the San Francisco Public Library, her book about a young black girl’s passion for singing despite criticism.

Davis raked in $100,000 in 2024 from book sales through her publisher, Book Baby, under the deal, according to an economic disclosure filing.

From 2021 to 2024, the nonprofit spent upwards of $30,000 on hotels and singer Goapele’s performances at two events, including $5,000 for a 2023 book launch party for Davis. 

The city’s Human Rights Commission (HRC) also spent at least $6,000 on the firm Varner PR, along with other expenses, to further promote sales. 

Keep reading

Judge Rejects Anti-Marijuana Groups’ Motion To Block CBD And THC Medicare Coverage Plan, Setting Hearing For 4/20

A federal judge has denied a request from a coalition of anti-marijuana organizations that sought to immediately block the Trump administration’s initiative to cover hemp-derived CBD and THC products through Medicare from launching on Wednesday.

The groups’ overall lawsuit challenging the policy is still under consideration, however, with a hearing on their separate motion for a preliminary injunction scheduled for April 20, which coincidentally is known as the unofficial cannabis cultural holiday 4/20.

Judge Trevor N. McFadden on Tuesday rejected the request from Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM) and nine other drug prevention groups to issue a temporary restraining order to halt the federal cannabis initiative, which is being facilitated by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), from taking effect.

McFadden, in his one-page order, quoted case law holding that a temporary restraining order is an “extraordinary and drastic remedy” that can only be granted if a party makes a “clear showing that four factors, taken together, warrant relief: likely success on the merits, likely irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, a balance of the equities in its favor, and accord with the public interest.”

“Having considered the arguments in Plaintiffs’ motion and at a motions hearing, the Court finds that Plaintiffs have not met this high standard,” the judge wrote. “The motion for a temporary restraining order is thus denied. The Court will consider Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction and motion to stay upon the completion of briefing.”

Defendants in the lawsuit—CMS Administrator Mehmet Oz and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.—now have until April 9 to file briefs responding to the prohibitionist groups’ motion for a preliminary injunction. The plaintiffs then have a reply brief due on April 13, a week ahead of the 4/20 hearing on the matter.

The lawsuit comes as CMS is set to start covering CBD and THC products under select federal health insurance programs as a Substance Access Beneficiary Engagement Incentive (BEI) beginning on Wednesday.

Under the BEI, patients enrolled in specific federal health insurance programs could have up to $500 worth of hemp-derived products covered each year. The CBD-focused plan will also allow a certain amount of THC in products, but the agency said that the rules are subject to change if federal hemp policy changes, as is currently expected under a law set to take effect later this year.

Keep reading

“No One Knows What Will Happen Now”: Justice Jackson Warns Against Unbridled Free Speech

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson is again warning of a growing threat to the nation. In her lone dissent in Chiles v. Salazar, Jackson observed that “to be completely frank, no one knows what will happen now.” The ominous tone stemmed from the fact that free speech had prevailed over state-imposed orthodoxy in a Colorado case.

Eight justices, including her two liberal colleagues, ruled that Colorado could not prevent licensed counselors from “any practice or treatment” that “attempts or purports to change” a minor’s sexual orientation or gender identity.

The win for free speech was catastrophic for Jackson and many on the left. Allowing counselors to discuss the causes and basis for sexual orientation changes, Jackson maintained, would “open a can of worms.” It would be far better for the majority to simply silence such dissenting voices in the name of science.

The dissent in Chiles is only the latest example of the chilling jurisprudence of Justice Jackson, including a pronounced dismissal of free speech values. Consider the holding of her colleagues that Jackson finds so horrific.

Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that the First Amendment “reflects … a judgment that every American possesses an inalienable right to think and speak freely, and a faith in the free marketplace of ideas as the best means for discovering truth … any law that suppresses speech based on viewpoint represents an ‘egregious’ assault on both of those commitments.”

What a nightmare.

Instead, Jackson would have declared the ban on anything deemed “conversion therapy” to be “conduct,” not speech.

It is that easy.

You simply impose an orthodoxy and then treat any dissenters as being regulated for their conduct, not their viewpoints.

Justice Elena Kagan could not withhold her frustration with her colleague, noting that “[b]ecause the State has suppressed one side of a debate, while aiding the other, the constitutional issue is straightforward.” She added that Jackson’s view “rests on reimagining—and in that way collapsing—the well-settled distinction between viewpoint-based and other content-based speech restrictions.”

Other countries have embraced Jackson’s permissive approach to speech curtailment.

Keep reading

You Are Paying for Retirees’ Lavish Lifestyles

As he celebrated the 50th anniversary of Social Security, then–Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill (D–Mass.) hailed the program’s epic accomplishments.

In the days before Social Security was born, O’Neill said, “Life for the elderly is filled with uncertainty, dependency, and horror. When you get old, you are without income, without hope.” The federal government’s payments to retirees, he continued, meant that Americans no longer had to live in “fear and dependency” in old age.

It was a tidy summary of the conventional wisdom surrounding America’s old-age entitlement state—which includes not just Social Security, but also Medicare and many other taxpayer-funded efforts to subsidize the supposedly nasty, brutish, and not-so-short lives of the over-65 crowd.

It is a narrative that deserves to be shoved off a cliff.

Today’s retirees, most of them from the baby boomer generation, are the wealthiest cohort of Americans. The median household headed by someone over age 65 is far wealthier than the average household headed by someone in their late 30s.

Despite that, roughly 22 cents of every dollar the federal government spent last year was funneled to retirees via Social Security. Medicare spending accounted for another 14 percent. Many of those dollars were extracted from younger, poorer Americans. (The rest were borrowed and added to the national debt.)

A retired couple today might possess a robust retirement account and own a million-dollar home, but the government still acts as if they live in the poverty-stricken hellscape that O’Neill described. And as the old have gotten wealthier, the taxpayer-funded benefits have only gotten more lavish.

Social Security provides inflation-proof monthly payments, keeping retirees ahead of the curve even as working-age Americans struggle to make ends meet. In many places, seniors are gifted special exemptions from taxes on homes and vehicles that aren’t available to younger Americans. Medicare, created to address seniors’ medical needs, now offers such taxpayer-funded perks as discounted golf course fees, ski resort lift tickets, even pet supplies and pickleball equipment.

In short: Today’s old-age entitlement system is not a last-resort guardrail against poverty and desolation. It is a sprawling, expensive lifestyle-subsidy program that steals from the poor to give to the rich—while also worsening the housing crisis and pushing the country toward a dangerous fiscal cliff.

Keep reading

Children’s Health Defense Wins Settlement in Landmark Censorship Case

Children’s Health Defense (CHD) and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) finalized a settlement in CHD’s landmark class action censorship lawsuit against key Biden administration officials accused of colluding with tech companies to censor social media content.

In a press release, the DOJ cited President Donald Trump’s Jan. 20, 2025, Executive Order “acknowledging that ‘the previous administration trampled free speech rights by censoring Americans’ speech on online platforms, often by exerting substantial coercive pressure on third parties, such as social media companies, to moderate, deplatform, or otherwise suppress speech that the Federal Government did not approve.’ 90 Fed. Reg. 8243 (Jan. 28, 2025).”

CHD, along with its then-Chairman Robert F. Kennedy Jr., sued the Biden administration in March 2023.

The lawsuit, Kennedy v. Biden, became CHD v. Trump after Trump became president of the U.S., and Kennedy, who first left CHD to run his own presidential campaign, was later named secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services under the Trump administration.

The class action lawsuit against then-President Joe Biden, Dr. Anthony Fauci and other top administration officials and federal agencies alleged they “waged a systematic, concerted campaign” to compel the nation’s three largest social media companies to censor constitutionally protected speech.

Jed Rubenfeld, attorney for CHD, called the settlement a “tremendous win” against government censorship.

“We brought this case years ago to challenge the Biden administration’s assault on free speech,” Rubenfeld said. “Today, the government, under a new administration, acknowledged that assault. And via a previously issued Executive Order, the president prohibited government officials from pressuring social media companies in the future to trample on Americans’ First Amendment rights.”

As part of the settlement with CHD, the government agreed to pay attorneys’ fees.

The DOJ also settled a similar lawsuit, Missouri v. Biden, and issued a consent decree in the case.

Keep reading

Trump Administration To ‘Re-Evaluate’ NATO Membership After Europe Declines To Assist War In Gulf

 President Donald Trump has signaled a major potential shift in U.S. foreign policy, stating he is strongly considering withdrawing the United States from NATO after alliance members declined to support American military operations against Iran, including efforts to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

In an exclusive interview with The Telegraph published Wednesday, Trump described NATO as a “paper tiger” and said a U.S. exit from the 77-year-old defensive alliance is now “beyond reconsideration.”

“I was never swayed by NATO. I always knew they were a paper tiger, and Putin knows that too, by the way,” Trump told the British newspaper.

The comments come as the U.S.-led military campaign against Iran, which began on February 28, continues. Trump had pressed NATO allies to contribute naval forces to secure the Strait of Hormuz — a critical chokepoint carrying roughly 20% of global oil and gas supplies — but most declined to participate in what they viewed as an offensive operation rather than a defensive one under NATO’s Article 5 mutual defense clause.

Trump framed the lack of support as a key test of alliance reliability. In recent speeches, he warned that failure to back the U.S. would not be forgotten, adding: “If the ‘big one’ ever happened, I guarantee you they wouldn’t be there.” He also expressed doubt about future U.S. commitments, saying, “We are always going to be there — at least we were; I don’t know anymore, to be honest with you.”

Keep reading