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.

USAID Liberal Corruption and Circular Funding: How Taxpayer Dollars Were Used Against U.S. Policies and Interests

President Trump was criticized for cutting USAID funding shortly after taking office in his second term. He argued that USAID was plagued by waste, fraud, and corruption, with taxpayer money funding projects such as DEI workplace training in Serbia and transgender theater productions in Ireland.

The White House released a documented list of expenditures that included hundreds of thousands of dollars to a nonprofit linked to designated terrorist organizations after an OIG investigation had been launched, millions to EcoHealth Alliance, which was involved in research related to the Wuhan lab, and funding that resulted in hundreds of thousands of meals being distributed to al Qaeda-affiliated fighters in Syria.

Beyond waste and fraud, USAID funds also flowed to organizations that were at odds with U.S. interests, including groups that funded protests against U.S. policies within the United States and undermined US policy abroad.

George Soros, one of the largest donors to the Democratic Party and left-wing causes in the United States, became a central figure in the USAID corruption debate. Open Society Foundations has stated that claims it receives USAID funds or directs USAID spending are “manifestly false.” However, the organization’s own records and federal grant data indicate a financial relationship with USAID.

The Soros Foundations’ 2001 annual report listed USAID as a “donor partner,” while congressional testimony by Tyler O’Neil, citing USASpending.gov records, documented USAID grants to the Alliance for Open Society International, a legal arm of the Open Society Foundations. The grants were identified by federal grant numbers AID122A000200042, SLMAQM11GR635, and SLMAQM11GR0635. The arrangement creates a circular flow of taxpayer money, with federal funds flowing to Soros-linked organizations that then support left-wing activism, protests, and Democrat-aligned groups.

In addition to funding Soros-linked organizations directly, USAID awarded more than $27 million to the Tides Center, an organization that has received tens of millions of dollars from Soros’s Open Society Foundations.

The Tides Center functions as a donor-advised fund that masks the identity of original donors. Its grants do not disclose which donor directed the funds, and the IRS does not require donor disclosure. Tides founder Drummond Pike stated, “Anonymity is very important to most of the people we work with.” In 2023, the Tides network took in nearly $800 million, with major donors including Soros, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, and the Ford Foundation.

Keep reading

The Burden Of History: Justice Jackson’s Curious Call To Overturn Critical 2nd Amendment Precedent

Since her confirmation in 2022, Justice Kentaji Brown Jackson has established a legacy that is fast becoming one of the most radical in the Court’s history. Her sole dissents have drawn sharp criticism from both her conservative and liberal colleagues. However, for critics of some of these decisions, Justice Jackson continues to publish opinions that are not just, as she describes it, cathartic but chilling. Worse yet, the latest judicial jump scare was shared by her colleague, Justice Sonya Sotomayor, in her concurring opinion in United States v. Hemani..

At issue in the case was an effort to prosecute Ali Hemani for recreational use of marijuana, a prosecution that threatened up to 15 years and to strip him of his gun rights under  18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3)

Writing for the majority, Justice Neil Gorsuch ruled that the provision was not “consistent with the Second Amendment.” Gorsuch noted that Hemani was not alleged to be a drug addict or to have used his guns in a menacing manner.

Gorsuch wrote that the “historical laws on which it relies targeted different kinds of people, did so for different reasons, and operated in different ways.”

However, Jackson used the concurrence to argue for overturning NYSRPA v. Bruen, a case critical to laying the foundation for interpreting the Second Amendment based on historical precedent. Jackson lashed out at the”‘history and tradition’ metric” and called for the Court to “revisit” the case.

Declaring Bruen “unworkable,” Jackson called for the restoration of the “means-end scrutiny – the approach courts applied before we adopted Bruen’s ‘history and tradition’ metric – offers a more rational way of assessing the constitutionality of firearm regulations.”

The reason for undoing Bruen? According to Jackson, “it imposes on judges the unfamiliar and difficult tasks of sifting through centuries-old evidence in order to answer ‘contested historical questions,’ and ‘applying those answers to resolve contemporary problems.'”

Justice Jackson added that “Given those challenges, it is unsurprising that Bruen’s test is vulnerable to inconsistent and arbitrary application, as judges draw different conclusions from the same historical evidence and reach divergent assessments of the same laws.”

The burden of actually seeking to understand the intended meaning of a constitutional provision is certainly greater than the more free-style approach of Jackson who focused on how to “resolve contemporary problems” under a living Constitution. However, to suggest that her outcome-determinative approach is less inconsistent and arbitrary is only true when you control the Court with justices who have like-minded “solutions” for contemporary problems.

That is precisely what many Democrats have in mind as they openly pledge to pack the Court with an insistent liberal majority if they can retake power. Moreover, Jackson is often cited as the model of the left, a justice who is unburdened by the language and history of constitutional provisions.

Just last week, liberal Wisconsin State Supreme Court justices heralded Jackson’s approach in arguing for the restoration of race-based gerrymandering. The state jurists lamented not being able to interpret the Constitution to address the “harms this country has caused to those who are marginalized, disempowered, or disenfranchised,” including the “preference for White Americans and to burden Black Americans and those of other disadvantaged races or backgrounds.”

These federal and state Supreme Court opinions are a glimpse into what awaits the country if Democratic leaders carry out their threat to take over the Supreme Court by adding four liberal justices in the image of Justice Jackson.

Keep reading

FCC Probe into ‘The View’ Heats Up: Media Research Center Submits 2,473 Separate Pieces of Evidence Documenting ‘Pervasive Bias’

In January, The Gateway Pundit reported that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) announced a crackdown on partisan talk shows in both daytime and late-night in an effort to provide equal treatment for political candidates.

FCC Chairman Brendan Carr said at the time, “For years, legacy TV networks assumed that their late night & daytime talk shows qualify as “bona fide news” programs – even when motivated by purely partisan political purposes.”

In February, the FCC is launched an investigation into ABC’s “The View” following an appearance by Texas Democratic Senate candidate James Talarico, the first political candidate to appear on the program following the announcement in January.

At the time, Talarico was facing other candidates, including Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX), in the Democrat primary. Republicans Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), state Attorney General Ken Paxton, and Rep. Wesley Hunt (R-TX) faced off in the GOP primary.

Yet, as Fox News reported at the time, ABC’s parent company, Disney, never made an equal-time filing to the FCC regarding Talarico’s recent appearance, which would implicitly indicate to the FCC that Disney believes “The View” is bona fide news and would be exempt from the policy.

The equal opportunity requirement applies to all legally filed candidates on a ballot regardless of political party, meaning all eligible Democratic primary candidates would require equal time. Notably, Talarico received roughly nine minutes of airtime in one segment while his top primary rival, Texas Rep. Jasmine Crockett, had roughly 17 minutes of airtime across three segments during her appearance on “The View” last month.

The source noted that not only would ABC require equal airtime for Republican candidates on the ballot like incumbent Republican Texas Sen. John Cornyn and his primary rivals. It would also apply to Ahmad Hassan, the little-known candidate running against Talarico and Crockett in the Democratic primary.

In a letter to FCC division chief Maria Mullarkey, Media Research Center (MRC) President David Bozell wrote, “For nearly four decades, the Media Research Center (MRC) has been an unrelenting media watchdog and a counterforce to activism in America’s newsrooms, broadcast networks, and Big Tech platforms. As such, the MRC is uniquely qualified to respond to the Commission’s request for comment on Disney/ABC’s petition to declare that the daytime television program The View qualifies as a bona fide news interview program.”

Keep reading

MP Materials’ Lawsuit Against USA Rare Earth Highlights Battle For America’s Future In Minerals

USA Rare Earth has dismissed a lawsuit filed by MP Materials, calling the claims “completely without merit” and arguing the case is an attempt to slow its growth. The company said it will deny all allegations that it improperly obtained confidential information from a former MP employee, according to Bloomberg.

The dispute underscores intensifying competition in the U.S. rare-earth sector, where both companies are racing to build domestic mining, processing, and magnet-production capabilities. USA Rare Earth said MP is trying to impede its progress as it develops the Round Top deposit in Texas and a magnet facility in Oklahoma.

Bloomberg writes that MP sued last month, alleging a coordinated effort by USA Rare Earth to recruit MP employees and misuse proprietary information. The lawsuit also questioned the viability of USA Rare Earth’s projects. MP declined to comment on the latest filing.

Keep reading

“I Think Kamala Won” – Election Deniers Rosie O’Donnell and Jim Acosta Push Conspiracy Theory That Trump Stole the 2024 Election and is Rigging Midterms

Rosie O’Donnell and former CNN White House reporter Jim Acosta put their Trump Derangement Syndrome on full display this week, teaming up to push what has been referred to as “election denialism” and a “threat to democracy.”

During an interview on Acosta’s show, Rosie declared that Trump stole the election from Kamala Harris. Though Acosta was skeptical about the theory, he endorsed the idea that the midterms will be stolen or outright canceled by Trump.

“So most people are very, very, very shocked, scared, and absolutely astonished that he is the President of the United States, and I think I am too. I mean, part of the reason that I left is I never in a million years thought we would put a convicted felon who tried to start an insurrection back in office,” O’Donnell said. Very ironic considering Trump saying the election was stolen is what these people considered insurrection.

“How did that happen? I don’t think it happened. I think Kamala won. I do,” she continued, as Acosta called her idea “interesting.”

O’Donnell went on with her crazed theory, suggesting that Elon Musk was the golden ticket and that, perhaps, the tech billionaire had something to do with rigging the votes.

“And I think that we’re going to find all this out. It’s going to come out, and it’s, I’m not the first person to say this, there are all these researchers who are saying it. I read it online again today. And you know, the Elon Musk, of it all,” she said, asking Acosta, “What did he do for Donald that was able to give him back all that he gave him back? What did he do, you think, for the Donald in that election?”

But Acosta wasn’t willing to admit that it’s possible to cheat in elections. After all, that would make him a hypocrite after denying that the 2020 election was stolen from Trump.

“It’s hard to believe, I mean, especially now, that he, that he, that he won. I mean, it’s, it is hard to believe that. I mean, I, I tend to, you know, maybe it’s because I’m old-fashioned, you know, and patriotic, and grew up in this country, you know, watching, you know, Tom Hanks and Saving Private Ryan, I would never think that something like that can happen. So I tend to trust it,” he stammered. “But I do worry he’s going to try to steal the next one.”

Rosie took the conspiracy theory even further, claiming that Trump isn’t going to steal the election, but cancel it, calling him a “Fascist.”

“Well, I don’t think he’s going to try to steal it. I think he’s going to come up with some big tragedy. We’re going to have an event here in the United States in some capacity, maybe another assassination attempt, and he’s going to declare that the elections are off,” she said. “That’s what I think is going to happen because that’s in the Fascist playbook.”

Acosta was audibly agreeing with her, saying “yes” as she spewed her insane theories.

Keep reading

Invasion of the Killer Data Centers

Who controls what data?

Wikipedia tells us that a data center is “a facility used to house computer systems and associated components, such as telecommunications and storage systems. Data centers are critical infrastructure for the storage and processing of information, and they support the global financial system….and artificial intelligence.”

Data centers are being constructed now on a scale never seen before. These big, beautiful data centers have been described as “foundational to how modern society functions.” And, like so many other nefarious things, they are said to be vital to national security. This would be the same society that is so concerned about national security they left the southern border completely open for decades, and are now hot and heavy to merge our military together with that of another nation. In January, 2025, our beloved former President Biden signed an executive order on Advancing United States Leadership in Artificial Intelligence Infrastructure, with a decided emphasis on AI’s central role in shaping the economy and our national defense. This order triggered the development of “domestic AI infrastructure,” visibly represented by large-scale data centers. We have to “ensure U.S. economic competitiveness,” after all. It’s not like building factories and reviving domestic industry would do that.

So who is paying for all these data centers? That’s a bit unclear, as you might expect. We do know that Google invested $40 billion just in Texas for AI and new data centers. One report said Microsoft was planning to spend $80 billion on the same thing in 2025. Something called Digital Realty operates more than 300 data centers worldwide. All we know is that it’s a “real estate investment trust.” A company owned by a Dubai billionaire friend of Donald Trump is kicking in $20 billion. The U.S. worked out some kind of “investment agreement” with Saudi Arabia that amounts to $600 billion. Taxpayers are kept in the dark about lucrative data center subsidies, and one source claims we are paying about $1 million for every data center job created. In Israel, Larry Ellison’s Oracle is building a new data center that takes up nine stories. Underground. For “security” reasons. “Experts” warn that “anti-Israel protesters” are among those objecting to all these new data centers.

As always, the Zionist connection is prominent. In a remarkably revealing recent speech, “AI researcher” Dr. Maya Ackerman told the American Jewish Committee, “instead of trying to control the whole world, and trying to somehow manage what’s happening in this big blob of Wikipedia and social media, we can go directly to the companies with clear technical and advocacy solutions. For the first time, there is a path to correcting the digital world.” I’m certainly no “AI researcher,” but I think the lovely Zionist is confessing to an Israeli desire to control the world here. Just imagine if an Iranian “AI researcher” said this. Or a Russian. Bari Weiss would be up in arms. Jerry Seinfeld might cheer a little less loudly at the next Knicks game. Clearly, there is a powerful consortium pushing for these data centers, and an expansion of AI. In my state of Virginia, over 600 new data centers have been, or are being built. Democrat Gov. Abigail Spanberger is ecstatic about that. But so are Trumpenstein and his cult.

I worked in Information Systems for nearly thirty years, in three different data centers. So my knowledge of data centers is limited to what they historically were. Companies, or government agencies, would utilize a data center to store the data specific to their company or agency. So these sudden super data centers baffle me. One in Utah is said to be envisioned as twice the size of Manhattan. What? How many servers would that require? And what data in Utah is being stored? No particular company built it. No special government agency did. So what is its purpose? What is the purpose of the over 600 data centers springing up in Virginia? Was that much of the state really offline, to require 600 new data centers? Shouldn’t someone be asking these questions? What else could they be used for, other than nefarious AI monitoring? If they’re not for surveillance, explain what they are for. Whose data are they storing, and why is there so much of it? Where was all this data before?

Keep reading

Crypto’s next billion-dollar hacker may move at superhuman speed

Anthropic’s new Claude Fable 5 puts powerful cyber tools behind safety filters. DeFi, already hit by more than $840 million in hacks this year, is one of the industries with the most to lose if the filters fail.

The newest AI model from Anthropic, which gives users access to stronger, faster reasoning and coding capabilities, lands in a crypto market beset by security problems and could well exacerbate them.

The company released Claude Fable 5 on Tuesday, the first public model in the Mythos class and, Anthropic says, its most powerful yet. So powerful, in fact, the company released two versions: one for widespread use and the other for more restricted distribution.

The public version sports stronger reasoning and coding ability while blocking the most dangerous uses. A less-hamstrung counterpart, Claude Mythos 5, is available only to vetted users in cybersecurity and critical infrastructure.

Experts say Mythos can find and chain zero-day vulnerabilities, or previously unknown software flaws, and help turn a bug into a working attack. Anthropic says the software tries to intercept possible attack vectors by detecting high-risk requests. Once identified, they are routed to a weaker model, Claude Opus 4.8.

The company says this specific fallback triggers in fewer than 5% of sessions. It also said in a blog post that specialized cybersecurity teams and more than 1,000 hours of external bug-bounty work found no universal way of breaking the system.

Still, Anthropic recognizes that the system is unlikely to be foolproof and says it expects determined, well-funded attackers to keep trying because the capability is valuable.

“The uplift from Mythos-level capabilities is valuable to many adversaries—for instance, those who could financially gain from cyberattacks—and we therefore expect them to be motivated to try to circumvent our safety measures,” the firm said in the post.

Keep reading

ICE Says 51 People Died in Custody Under Trump. Experts Say That’s an Undercount.

amuka Artmeladze, a 43-year-old Georgian national, was found dead on June 4, 2026, in federal immigration custody. Though his name did not appear in Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE’s) online death records by the time this article was published, Artmeladze was reported as the 50th person to die in ICE custody since President Donald Trump returned to office. One of two recent deaths at a notorious immigration prison in Louisiana, Artmeladze’s death is one of the latest signs that the president’s mass deportation campaign has predictably created a human rights crisis inside a sprawling system of immigration jails and camps.

At least 51 people have died while in ICE custody since Trump began his second term, federal records show. At least 19 deaths occurred between January 1 and June 4, 2026, an average of about one death every eight days over the first six months of this year.

Additionally, at least two disabled people died this year from exposure shortly after being released by immigration officials in freezing winter weather, including a 31-year-old Haitian woman who died after being left at a Pittsburgh bus stop for 30 hours in early March. While medical examiners determined both deaths to be homicides, ICE does not include them in its official tally, and experts say the 51 deaths reported since January 2025 could be an undercount.

For months, protesters, federal inspectors, and Democrats in Congress have sounded the alarm about the dangerous conditions of confinement faced by more than 68,000 adults and children swept up in Trump’s crackdown. While ICE claims to provide proper care for detainees, oversight data shows a clear pattern of abuse, medical neglect, and preventable deaths inside its jails and camps. Critics say the unprecedented number of deaths is the predictable result of Trump administration policy, including fighting in court to incarcerate immigrants for as long as possible while aggressively expanding privately run jails and prison camps.

“Using the windfall in funding from Congressional Republicans, they are inflicting as much pain as possible no matter the cost,” said Vanessa Cárdenas, executive director of the immigrant rights group America’s Voice, in a statement on June 22.

Keep reading

The KIDS Act: A Bipartisan Mass Surveillance Megabill

Just weeks after Americans criticized the United Kingdom for imposing intrusive and heavy-handed social media rules, Congress is now advancing legislation that raises strikingly similar concerns about government overreach, privacy erosion, and the expansion of online surveillance.

A bipartisan agreement on children’s online safety legislation unveiled by House Energy and Commerce Committee leaders would impose new obligations on social media platforms, while creating powerful incentives for companies to end online anonymity.

The proposal is part of the Kids Internet and Digital Safety Act (KIDS Act), an omnibus package that bundles together multiple bills, including the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), the SCREEN Act, the SAFE BOTs Act, COPPA 2.0, the SPY Kids Act, and more, as well as data broker provisions and research and education initiatives.

We obtained a copy of the bill for you here.

Committee Chairman Brett Guthrie and ranking Democrat Frank Pallone announced Monday that they had reached agreement on the legislation, which would require social media companies to provide additional safeguards and parental tools for minors. The lawmakers said it would “hold Big Tech accountable.”

“We worked across the aisle for many months and have now found common ground on policies to significantly improve the digital environment for kids,” Guthrie and Pallone said in a joint statement.

As always, under that framing lies a familiar and deeply controversial approach: imposing broad obligations on platforms that hinge on whether companies know a user is a minor, without clearly defining how that knowledge is supposed to be obtained.

Congress has tried for years to set national rules for social media and youth safety. Those efforts have repeatedly stalled, in part because of unresolved tensions between child protection goals and fundamental privacy rights. In the absence of federal action, states have moved ahead with their own laws, often pushing even more aggressive requirements.

One of the main disputes appears to have been resolved in favor of House Republicans. According to a committee spokesperson, the agreement does not include a “duty of care” provision, a requirement backed by many child-safety advocates and several Senate lawmakers.

The bill text states that nothing in it may be construed to “impose a duty of care on a provider of a covered platform.”

Keep reading

FDA Altered Autopsy Results of Children Who Died After COVID Vaccines

Scientists at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) revised the autopsy results of children who died after receiving the COVID-19 vaccine, reducing the number of children the agency classified as having likely died as a result of their vaccination, according to documents released last week by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.).

The documents show that in November 2025, the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) identified 10 child deaths related to the COVID-19 shots. But in December 2025, it reduced the number to seven and downgraded the probability that those deaths were connected to the children’s vaccination.

The Daily Caller, which first reported, quoted two former FDA officials and a forensic pathologist who performed two of the children’s autopsies. One of the FDA officials told the outlet the emails reveal “a coverup” by the FDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Johnson included the documents in a letter sent last week to U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., CDC Acting Director Jay Bhattacharya and FDA Acting Commissioner Kyle Diamantas.

Even the reduced number of deaths was enough to trigger concern among some FDA scientists about the safety of the COVID-19 shots, Johnson’s letter stated.

“Although what drove the decision to change these three cases remains to be seen, what is clear is that these officials appear to have determined that the seven cases warranted warning about the risks,” Johnson wrote. These risks “should have raised serious concerns at HHS and CDC about the mRNA COVID-19 Injections.”

Even after the downgrade, the FDA’s Division of Pharmacovigilance recommended revising the label of the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines to include a warning about the risk of “myocarditis with fatal outcomes.”

The change was never made, for reasons that are not clear.

Myocarditis is widely associated with the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and, with reports of deaths connected to the vaccines, particularly among teenage and young adult males.

Keep reading