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.

AI Chatbots Rely On Sources With Clear Biases

AI chatbots like ChatGPT and Grok can be a big help in writing essays, conducting research, and exploring complex issues. But these tools bring risks, especially when they filter facts through a political lens. And the Trump administration is now stepping into the debate. “We believe AI systems should operate free of ideological bias and avoid pushing socially engineered agendas,” said David Sacks, the administration’s AI and crypto czar, in a statement today. “We’ve introduced several proposals to ensure AI stays truth-seeking and trustworthy.”

Over the weekend, I saw this bias unfold in real time.

On Friday, a user on Elon Musk’s platform X asked Grok whether more guns make Americans safer. Grok responded flatly: “No, evidence shows more guns correlate with higher firearm homicides and violent crime rates.” The chatbot dismissed self-defense and deterrence, referring to my research –specifically my “more guns, less crime” theory – as something cited by “right-wing advocates.” Grok supported its claims by referencing Scientific American magazine and a RAND Corporation review, saying these sources show guns don’t reduce crime and instead increase violence.

Those answers are misleading and wrong.

The Scientific American article had extensive biases. Grok ignored my published rebuttal in Scientific American. In it, I noted that over two-thirds of peer-reviewed studies show that concealed carry laws do reduce crime. Melinda Wenner Moyer, a journalist affiliated with Michael Bloomberg’s The Trace, a well-known gun control advocacy outlet, wrote the article. I had provided Moyer with those studies while she prepared her piece, but she ignored them. She failed to acknowledge any of my post-1998 work and misrepresented the findings of the National Research Council’s major report on the topic.

Grok gave tremendous weight to RAND’s literature survey, claiming that RAND had surveyed 100+ studies. Eventually, Grok conceded that the number of papers studying right-to-carry laws was actually 25, showing a range of mixed results. I pointed out that the California-based think tank was highly selective in the sources it included, ignoring dozens more papers showing that these laws lowered violent crime rates and surveys of academics who have published peer-reviewed empirical research.

Even then, Grok largely ignored my responses and focused on two papers claiming that right-to-carry laws increased violent crime. The first failed to control for any variables – such as changes in policing, poverty, or economic conditions – that affect crime trends after adopting right-to-carry laws. When I pointed that out, Grok mentioned another study that demonstrated a statistical technique that could account for such factors, but that study didn’t look at right-to-carry laws. Only after a prolonged exchange did Grok acknowledge the error.

Keep reading

Russiagate Explained: The Sins Of The 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment

A key part of the House Permanent Selection Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) review is about then-CIA director John Brennan’s reliance on an obscure fragment to determine in the 2017 ICA that Putin “aspired to help Trump’s chances of victory when possible.”

The fragment, which is in bold below, comes from a raw human source intelligence report, or HUMINT in intelligence-speak.

“Putin had made this decision [to leak DNC emails) after he had come to believe t h a t the Democratic nominee had better odds of winning the U.S. presidential election, and that [candidate Trump], whose victory Putin was counting on, most likely would not be able to pull off a convincing victory.”

You might think that means Putin wanted Trump to win. That’s one interpretation.

But there were five different interpretations among the five people who wrote the ICA.

A senior CIA operations officers remarked: “We don’t know what was meant by that,” and “five people read it five ways,” the HPSCI reports says.

Usually that’s no problem, because as the Intelligence Community Directive standards (ICD 203) make clear, alternative interpretations should be included. Incredibly, the ICA failed to do that even though there was great disagreement on the fragment’s meaning.

The significance of this fragment to the ICA case that Putin “aspired” for candidate Trump to win cannot be overstated. The major “high confidence” judgment of the ICA rests on one opinion about a text fragment with uncertain meaning, that may be a garble, and for which it is not clear how it was obtained. This text-which would not have been published without DCIA’s orders to do so—is cited using only one interpretation of its meaning and without considering alternative interpretations.

The HPSCI gives some examples of alternative interpretations for “whose victory Putin was counting on.” Since the information was acquired in July 2016, it could have meant Putin “expected” a Trump victory at the upcoming Republican National Convention. The HPSCI notes that the convention’s outcome “was still uncertain to do active efforts to deny Trump a majority of convention delegates. This was a headline issue for the US political media at the time, though many pundits nonetheless expected — or ‘counted on’ — a Trump victory.”

Keep reading

Largest U.S. Power Grid Issues “Max Generation Alert”

America’s largest power grid has issued a ‘Maximum Generation Alert‘ and ‘Load Management Alert‘ for Thursday, the third this summer, as extreme heat pushes power demand to the brink, with air conditioners running at full blast across its 13-state eastern U.S. service area. 

“The alert is also targeted at transmission/generation owners, who then determine if any maintenance or testing on equipment can be deferred or canceled,” PJM said, adding, “By deferring maintenance, the units stay online and continue to produce energy that is needed.”

PJM posted on X that electricity usage is expected to reach 151,485 megawatts by 5 p.m. today (Eastern Time). The good news is that the grid has about 161,643 megawatts of spare capacity available. This spare capacity will act as a buffer to prevent rolling blackouts during peak evening usage. 

The unfolding story in the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast regions is an alarming one for power grids.

Years of Democratic leadership at every level of government have pushed climate crisis propaganda that forced premature decarbonization of power grids by retiring stable fossil fuel power generation, swapping it for unstable solar and wind. Yet, there wasn’t a perfect one-to-one swap, and this has led to a mix-and-match in base load power capacity versus demand – now colliding with a rapid boom in data center construction across the region, especially the power-hungry CIA data centers in Loudoun County, Virginia. 

Keep reading

Amazon Ring Cashes In On Techno-Authoritarianism And Mass Surveillance

Ring founder Jamie Siminoff is back at the helm of the surveillance doorbell company, and with him is the surveillance-first-privacy-last approach that made Ring one of the most maligned tech devices. Not only is the company reintroducing new versions of old features which would allow police to request footage directly from Ring users, it is also introducing a new feature that would allow police to request live-stream access to people’s home security devices.

This is a bad, bad step for Ring and the broader public.

Ring is rolling back many of the reforms it’s made in the last few years by easing police access to footage from millions of homes in the United States. This is a grave threat to civil liberties in the United States. After all, police have used Ring footage to spy on protestors, and obtained footage without a warrant or consent of the user. It is easy to imagine that law enforcement officials will use their renewed access to Ring information to find people who have had abortions or track down people for immigration enforcement.

Siminoff has announced in a memo seen by Business Insider that the company will now be reimagined from the ground up to be “AI first”—whatever that means for a home security camera that lets you see who is ringing your doorbell. We fear that this may signal the introduction of video analytics or face recognition to an already problematic surveillance device.

It was also reported that employees at Ring will have to show proof that they use AI in order to get promoted.

Not to be undone with new bad features, they are also planning on rolling back some of the necessary reforms Ring has made: namely partnering with Axon to build a new tool that would allow police to request Ring footage directly from users, and also allow users to consent to letting police livestream directly from their device.

After years of serving as the eyes and ears of police, the company was compelled by public pressure to make a number of necessary changes. They introduced end-to-end encryption, they ended their formal partnerships with police which were an ethical minefield, and they ended their tool that facilitated police requests for footage directly to customers. Now they are pivoting back to being a tool of mass surveillance.

Keep reading

Obama’s Disgraced CIA Director John Brennan Lashes Out — Accuses Tulsi Gabbard of “Intentionally Lying” After She Exposes His Fraudulent Intel Reports

Obama’s scandal-plagued CIA Director John Brennan has lashed out at Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, accusing her of “intentionally lying” after she publicly exposed him for publishing fraudulent intelligence reports.

The report—declassified by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard—alleges that Brennan, together with Obama-era officials like James Clapper and James Comey, directed the creation of a misleading Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) claiming “Putin aspired to help President‑elect Trump’s election chances”

In October 2020, then-DNI John Ratcliffe declassified Brennan’s handwritten notes from a July 2016 briefing he gave to President Obama and other senior officials, along with a related CIA memo sent to the FBI.

These documents originated from U.S. intelligence monitoring Russian activities and were declassified amid congressional oversight into the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane investigation.

Recent declassifications in July 2025, under DNI Tulsi Gabbard, include a HPSCI oversight report and DNI press releases (e.g., PR-15-25 and PR-18-25) on Obama-era actions. These build on prior materials, focusing on the ICA’s creation.

  • HPSCI Report Findings on Brennan:
    • Brennan ordered the ICA’s publication despite veteran CIA officers’ warnings it was “substandard” and relied on dubious sources, including the Steele dossier. He overruled objections, reportedly saying of the dossier, “Yes, but doesn’t it ring true?”
    • The ICA claimed Putin “aspired to help” Trump’s election by discrediting Clinton, but excluded intelligence contradicting this (e.g., reports Putin was neutral or prepared for a Clinton win). Only a “scant, unclear, and unverifiable fragment” supported the claim.
    • Brennan directed inclusion of “substandard reporting” on December 9, 2016, after an Obama Oval Office meeting, ignoring standards because it was a presidential directive.
    • The report accuses Brennan of misleading lawmakers by denying dossier use in the ICA, though it was referenced in the text and annex.
  • DNI PR-18-25 Revelations:
    • Brennan and IC leaders “mischaracterized intelligence” to create a “contrived false narrative” of Putin’s Trump preference, suppressing contradictory info that made the claim “implausible—if not ridiculous.”
    • Brennan overruled officers who noted “we don’t have direct information that Putin wanted to get Trump elected.”
    • In a December 2016 memo, Brennan stated: “There is strong consensus among us on the scope, nature, and intent of Russian interference in our presidential election.”
    • The ICA was unusually directed by senior officials like Brennan, using just five analysts and one principal drafter.
  • DNI PR-15-25 Revelations:
    • Brennan attended a December 9, 2016, White House meeting where Obama directed creation of the ICA to detail Russian “tools” influencing the election. No direct quotes from Brennan, but it implies his involvement in what the release calls a “treasonous conspiracy” to undermine Trump.

The irony is rich. Here is John Brennan—architect of the Russia Collusion Hoax, signer of the infamous Hunter Biden laptop disinformation letter, and key player in weaponizing U.S. intelligence against political opponents—lecturing anyone about ethics and honesty.

Keep reading

Second Court Ignores Landmark SCOTUS Ruling, Issues Nationwide Injunction

In a 6-3 ruling late last month, Justice Amy Coney Barrett minced no words when it came to so-called “universal injunctions,” lower-court rulings that extended far beyond that court’s jurisdiction.

“It is unnecessary to consider whether Congress has constrained the Judiciary; what matters is how the Judiciary may constrain the Executive,” Barrett wrote in the decision.

“That goes for judges, too,” Barrett added. “When a court concludes that the Executive Branch has acted unlawfully, the answer is not for the court to exceed its power, too.”

That decision, by the way, did not decide the merits of the case in which the universal injunction was issued: President Donald Trump’s administration has argued that the 14th Amendment does not grant birthright citizenship because those born to citizens of other countries within U.S. borders are not among “persons born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”

The meaning of this language, and whether children of foreign nationals are “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States will eventually be decided one way or another before the high court. But the ruling itself was clear: Before that, nationwide universal injunctions were the judiciary acting in a way that exceeded its power.

So, for the second time since the decision, the judiciary has exceeded its power, because what the heck?

In a 2-1 decision handed down late Wednesday by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, judges ruled that the plaintiffs — attorneys general from four Democratic-led states, Arizona, Illinois, Oregon, and Washington — could receive a nationwide injunction because that was the only way to obtain requisite relief, according to The Hill.

“States’ residents may give birth in a non-party state, and individuals subject to the Executive Order from non-party states will inevitably move to the States,” U.S. Circuit Judge Ronald Gould wrote in the opinion of the court.

Both Gould and Judge Michael Hawkins, who voted to issue the universal injunctions, were Bill Clinton appointees.

Keep reading

Will ‘Greater Syria’ and ‘Greater Israel’ Collide or Co-exist under the Al Qaeda Regime?

With the fall of Syria came the reshaping of the Resistance Axis, weakened by the loss of the central hub linking the regional state and non-state actors, and providing the land bridge that connected Iran to Palestine. Syria was historically instrumental in the manufacture and development of the weapons being used by the Palestinian and Lebanese Resistance factions against Israel.

This is an update on the current state of affairs in the region, focusing on Lebanon and Syria since the ‘ceasefire’ between the US, Israel, and Iran. It is a ceasefire designed to enable Israel to replenish air defence interceptor supplies and to prepare for the next stage of the long war against Iran. As with the ceasefire between Iran and Hezbollah that came into effect on 27 November 2024, we saw a US/Israel pivot to Syria and the fall of the Syrian Government within ten days, leading to an Al Qaeda Junta controlling Syria and acting as a de facto Zionist alliance proxy in the region.

Lebanon

Trump’s inexperienced, economic hit-man, and envoy to the Middle East (West Asia) is Thomas Barrack. In recent weeks, Barrack has been pushing the Lebanese Government for the full disarmament of Hezbollah, contrary to UN resolution 1701, which specifies the withdrawal of Hezbollah to the north of the Litani River. Both the US and Trump’s advisors know that this is an unrealistic demand, as Hezbollah will never agree to disarm while Israel is on their borders and occupying land in southern Lebanon.

Barrack is demanding that the disarmament comes into effect within four months, which is also unrealistic. In the 1980s, after the Lebanese Civil War, the Zionist-aligned Lebanese Forces were disarmed, which at the time represented less than 10% of Hezbollah’s capabilities. This process took two or three years.

Proposing the disarmament of Hezbollah is a similar tactic to demanding Iran abandons its nuclear energy development or its defensive missile program. The Zionist bloc know it will not be adopted. For Israel, the goal is to weaken the Resistance in Lebanon and Iraq in the interim period before a resurgence of aggression against Iran. The preferred option in Lebanon is to manufacture a civil war which will occupy Hezbollah internally, reducing their ability to react to Israeli aggression, in theory. However, this is a miscalculation on the part of the Zionist bloc.

Barrack is insistent upon the Hezbollah disarmament, but he is not applying the same pressure on Israel to withdraw from southern Lebanon, or to stop its daily bombing raids and drone assassinations across Lebanon.

Hezbollah has demonstrated its ability to withstand and prevent any serious ground invasion by the Zionist forces, while the Lebanese Army (LAF) has been unable to prevent further Zionist incursions since the ceasefire. This is largely because the US, the chief sponsor of the LAF, has ensured that the LAF are not equipped with air defence capabilities or the ground superiority necessary to be able to defend the country against the asymmetric force of the US-empowered Zionist military. They are restricted to ‘reporting’ the daily Zionist violations and regular assassinations of Lebanese civilians on the basis that they are ‘Hezbollah’.

Keep reading

EPA confirms existence of GEOENGINEERING programs, validating long-held public concerns

  • The U.S. EPA officially confirmed the existence of government-backed geoengineering programs, reversing years of denial. Administrator Lee Zeldin announced a transparency initiative detailing solar radiation modification (SRM) and its risks.
  • SRM involves injecting reflective particles (e.g., sulfur dioxide) to cool the planet, but the EPA warns it may harm the ozone layer, disrupt weather, damage crops and cause acid rain. Neurological risks, like Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s, are also linked to nano-aluminum particles from atmospheric spraying.
  • The EPA admitted tracking private actors engaged in geoengineering, suggesting undisclosed corporate or international programs. Weather modification techniques like cloud seeding (using silver iodide) were also confirmed.
  • The disclosure sparked debate, with some lawmakers pushing for bans while critics dismissed extreme weather links. Skeptics argue the move distracts from broader climate policy failures, blurring lines between fact and conspiracy theories.
  • The admission raises concerns about undisclosed programs and long-term consequences. While the EPA denies large-scale SRM operations, public distrust persists, leaving citizens to navigate potential health and environmental risks. The era of denial has ended, but the full impact remains uncertain.

In a dramatic shift, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has officially acknowledged the existence of government-backed geoengineering programs – a revelation that confirms what skeptics and concerned citizens have alleged for decades.

On Thursday, July 16, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced the agency’s new transparency initiative. The agency published detailed resources on geoengineering and contrails while admitting the potential dangers of such programs. The EPA’s admission marks a stunning reversal from years of official denial and ridicule directed at those who questioned the unnatural patterns in the skies above them.

For years, Americans who pointed to persistent white trails crisscrossing the atmosphere were dismissed as conspiracy theorists. Now, the EPA has conceded that geoengineering – specifically solar radiation modification (SRM) – is not only real, but poses serious environmental and health risks.

Keep reading

President Trump Plans to Open 401(k)s to Bitcoin, Crypto, Gold, and Private Equity: FT

Financial Times reported today that President Trump is preparing to sign an executive order that would allow 401(k) retirement plans to invest in alternative assets such as gold, private equity, and cryptocurrencies like bitcoin.

“Donald Trump is preparing to open the $9tn US retirement market to cryptocurrency investments, gold, and private equity in a move that would spur a radical shift in the way Americans’ savings are managed,” reported the Financial Times.

According to Financial Times, the order is expected this week and will direct federal regulators to remove barriers preventing 401(k) plans from including these non-traditional investments in managed funds. This includes digital assets, metals, private loans, infrastructure deals, and corporate buyout funds.

Keep reading

CNN Analyst Doubles Down on Stupid, Suggesting Trump Admin ‘Helping Russia’ by Sharing New Details on Collusion Hoax

Now that Tulsi Gabbard is sharing shocking new details on the Russia collusion hoax that implicate former President Obama, some people on the left are having a hard time facing the facts.

Enter CNN national security analyst Beth Sanner, who insisted this week that there is nothing to this, and that the Trump administration is actually helping Russia by advancing the story.

So in her mind, Trump is STILL working for Russia, in a way. There is no fixing these people.

The New York Post reports:

CNN analyst accuses Trump admin of aiding Russia by releasing ‘cherry-picked’ intel on Trump-Russia collusion investigation

CNN National Security Analyst Beth Sanner accused the Trump administration of aiding Russia after the Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, declassified a report prepared by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence back in 2020 on Wednesday.

Sanner slammed the administration on Wednesday for releasing the report, which she claimed included “cherry-picked examples” that ran contrary to the intelligence community’s assessment at the time that Russian President Vladimir Putin meddled in the 2016 election in hopes of helping President Donald Trump win.

“What I don’t appreciate is that these are cherry-picked examples that they are quibbling, angels dancing on the head of a pin when we have volumes of reporting,” she asserted.

“You’re always going to find one report that’s different, OK, whatever.”

Keep reading