JFK’s Radical Grandson Accuses Vice President J.D. Vance of ‘Killing the Pope’ in Unhinged Online Rant

Jack Schlossberg—grandson of former President John F. Kennedy—lashed out on social media Monday morning, accusing Vice President J.D. Vance of “killing the pope” just hours after the Vatican announced the death of Pope Francis.

The accusation comes after Pope Francis’s passing, ending his 12-year tenure as head of the Roman Catholic Church.

Vance, a Catholic convert since 2019, had a brief private meeting with the pontiff at Casa Santa Marta on Easter Sunday.

The meeting lasted about 15–17 minutes, during which they exchanged Easter greetings.

According to reports, Francis gifted Vance chocolate Easter eggs for his children, a Vatican tie, and rosaries. Vance noted the Pope’s frail health but expressed appreciation for the audience.

The meeting followed an initial rebuff on April 19, when Vance met with Vatican officials instead of Francis, which some interpreted as a snub due to their disagreements, especially on immigration.

Hours after that historic meeting, the world learned that Pope Francis had passed away at the age of 88.

Keep reading

BlueAnon: Democrats in Full Panic Mode Over Absurd Conspiracy That Trump Will Declare Martial Law on April 20

The Left is melting down once again—and this time, it’s over a tinfoil-hat-level conspiracy theory that President Donald Trump is preparing to declare martial law on April 20.

The same people who spent years mocking “QAnon” are now pushing a full-blown BlueAnon fantasy of their own.

The source of this hysteria? None other than James Carville, the aging Democratic strategist who’s apparently desperate to stay relevant.

On a recent episode of Politics War Room, Carville was asked whether Trump was trying to provoke enough unrest to declare martial law and suspend the 2026 elections.

“You’re so correct to be concerned about this… It’s getting worse by the day. It is not going to stop getting worse. And I would be, we ought to be, on high, high alert.”

The left’s panic stems from a deliberate misreading of Trump’s January 20 executive order, which declared a national emergency at the southern border and directed the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security to submit a report by April 20.

The report will assess the border crisis—created by years of Democrat open-border policies—and recommend whether to invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807 for enforcement. Nowhere does it mention “martial law,” but that hasn’t stopped the BlueAnon crowd from spinning dystopian fantasies.

Keep reading

Canada: Mark Carney Vows Internet Speech Crackdown if Elected, Citing Online “Pollution” of Misogyny, Conspiracies

It was supposed to be a routine campaign pit stop, the kind of low-stakes political affair where candidates smile like used car salesmen and dish out platitudes thicker than Ontario maple syrup. Instead, Mark Carney found himself dodging verbal bricks in a Hamilton hall, facing hecklers who lobbed Jeffrey Epstein references like Molotovs. No rebuttal, no denial. Just a pivot worthy of an Olympic gymnast, straight to the perils of digital discourse.

“There are many serious issues that we’re dealing with,” he said, ignoring the criticism that had just lobbed his way. “One of them is the sea of misogyny, antisemitism, hatred, and conspiracy theories — this sort of pollution online that washes over our virtual borders from the United States.”

Ah yes, the dreaded digital tide. Forget inflation or the fact that owning a home now requires a GoFundMe. According to Carney, the real catastrophe is memes from Buffalo.

Keep reading

The JFK files and the curious case of Israeli exceptionalism

With the recent release of the JFK files, Twitter—sorry, X—is ablaze with amateur detectives sifting through the document dump with more fervour than an especially high Shaggy devouring Scooby Snacks. The question on everyone’s lips: whodunnit? The answer remains elusive, given the lack of a definitive smoking gun, but what is clear is that the lone gunman theory is dubious at best. What is clear is that Kennedy had managed to upset a lot of important people, and the list of suspects remains extensive.

What’s curious, though, is the feeling of uneasiness, a sense of hesitation when considering Israel’s possible involvement in the ‘63 assassination. Discussions about the Mob, the CIA (arguably the same entity in post-war America), the military, and the Fed all feel acceptable within the Overton Window, yet raising the question of Israeli connections feels problematic and that it must be treated with exceptional delicacy. Why does any criticism of Israel provoke an instinctive sense of foreboding, as if any questioning could incite the next Holocaust, invite accusations of antisemitism, and lead to cancellation or social exile, akin to getting a swastika tattooed on one’s forehead? The answer is simple: we have been indoctrinated and propagandised by a Zionist movement determined to pursue its goals without scrutiny, protest, or backlash.

This influence permeates all tiers of society. The CIA, for example, specifically demanded that all mentions of Israeli intelligence be redacted from the JFK files. Thankfully, they weren’t. The documents indicate that Israel, like the other key players, had the means, motive, and possibly the opportunity. This bizarre exceptionalism extends beyond public discourse into the very corridors of power. Trump is now pressuring universities with threats of defunding, arguing that it is antisemitic to protest against genocide. The paradox is staggering: recognising the Holocaust as one of history’s greatest atrocities somehow inhibits criticism of an ongoing holocaust against a minority group, ironically within the nation-state of Israel. The bullied have become the bully. Even asserting that Palestinians are human beings deserving of self-determination is almost as dangerous as being displaced to a refugee camp in the West Bank. Imagine if Putin had deliberately targeted refugee camps, hospitals, and women and children. The media would double down on the Hitler comparisons, yet when Netanyahu does it, we get justifications, sanitised language, and deflection tactics designed to desensitise us to human suffering—so long as the victims are Muslim and not Jewish. Without eyewitness videos capturing the daily brutality in Gaza, the mainstream media would still have us believe that the IDF is the “most moral army in the world”. October 7th, of course, is the official start of history, with Hamas launching an entirely unprovoked and exceptionally evil attack that now somehow justifies the ongoing mass slaughter of hundreds of thousands of innocents, mostly children.

Israeli exceptionalism is even evident in the way definitions are constructed. The Stockholm Declaration of 2000 by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), adopted by numerous governments, originally referenced only Jewish victims, omitting other groups targeted by the Nazis. Only recently were the Roma added as a secondary consideration, yet most people still equate the Holocaust solely with the murder of six million Jews, forgetting the communists, Slavs, intelligentsia, disabled people, and others who perished. It is also evident in political rhetoric: politicians can discuss Islamic extremism and Asian grooming gangs without fear of career-ending repercussions from Muslim lobby groups. But criticising Zionist influence in domestic politics? That is antisemitic. Al Jazeera produced an in-depth documentary exposing the role of Israeli lobbying in UK politics, demonstrating how a coalition of bad-faith actors—including figures from the UK military, intelligence services, and the Labour Party itself—helped neutralise the “Corbyn threat” due to his pro-Palestinian stance. Luckily, the British public, of course, opted for Boris Johnson instead, another pyrrhic victory in the ongoing destruction of the country to “Build Back Better’. That wasn’t sarcasm. Confessions of an Economic Hitman outlines what would have come next if Corbyn hadn’t been stopped by the PR wing of the establishment, aka the media—something confirmed by leaked emails between then-CIA Director Mike Pompeo and top UK army generals. No one critical of Israel, capitalism, or the poverty gap will ever be allowed to hold real power. That’s not how pseudo-democracy works. The system’s genius lies in making people believe they have agency while using every cog in the machine to propagandise them into voting against their own interests, vilifying any true opposition, and infiltrating grassroots movements to sabotage them from within. Thatcher being Blair’s hero was no coincidence. Nor was it a coincidence that NHS privatisation began under a Labour government.

Keep reading

Mike Waltz Wonders If It Was a Conspiracy. We’re Wondering About a Few OTHER Things.

Have the Democrats declared that this is “bigger than Watergate!” yet? Because — checks watch — it’s definitely gonna happen. I’ve lost track of all the GOP scandals that were “bigger than Watergate!” but it’s still the left’s go-to epithet. If they haven’t used the phrase yet, I’ll bet you a Diet Coke they’ll use it by noon tomorrow.

By now, you’ve heard the news: In a weird, inexplicable SNAFU, journalist Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic was inadvertently included in a Signal conversation with high-level White House officials, where he eavesdropped on their planning for the (successful) attack on the Houthis. Although it sounds implausible, this Signal conversation has been authenticated by administration officials.

Goldberg contends that Michael Waltz — the U.S. national security advisor — invited him to connect on Signal and join the conversation. And for a short while, that was the dominant theory throughout DC: Waltz was careless, invited the wrong guy, and nobody realized the mistake until Goldberg left the chat.

But what if something else was going on?

Mike Waltz was on Fox News on Tuesday evening, talking about the incident with Laura Ingraham. 

Keep reading

Democrat hints at Trump’s REAL reason for Canada annexation… and it’s the most bizarre conspiracy theory yet

Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin has a bizarre new conspiracy theory about why President Donald Trump wants to make Canada the 51st state and it involves Elon Musk.

Raskin, a constitutional law professor, argued that if Trump brings Panama, Greenland and Canada into the United States it would require a new constitution – and that would allow Musk to run for president.

‘They want to bring in Panama. They want to bring in Greenland. They want to bring in Canada, where Elon Musk is a citizen after he left his apartheid South Africa,’ Raskin said.

‘Why? Because they believe that this new consortium will require a new constitution that would allow Elon Musk to run for president.’  

Musk was born in South Africa in 1971. His mother is Canadian, which allowed him to obtain Canadian citizenship in 1989. 

He moved to the United States in 1992 to attend the University of Pennsylvania. He initially entered the country on an Exchange Visitor Visa before transitioning to a work visa. He became a U.S. citizen in 2002. 

The Constitution requires natural-born citizenship for presidential candidates. 

But it can be amended as Raskin argues it would have to be in order for the United States to take possession of Panama, Canada and Greenland – which Trump has repeatedly said he wants to do.  

Keep reading

Self-Deported Rosie O’Donnell Suggests Trump’s Victory Was Fraudulent — Demands Investigation of This Supposed ‘Anomaly’

The recently self-deported actress and comedian Rosie O’Donnell is taking her conspiracy theories to Ireland.

In an interview with Irish television channel RTE 1, O’Donnell was asked by the host about whether she respected the decision of the American people.

“A lot of people did vote for him,” the host said. “Do you accept their right to do that and their opinion of him?”

O’Donnell responded:

Well, I respect their right to do that.

I question why the first time in American history a president has won every swing state, and is also best friends and his largest donor was a man who owns and runs the Internet.

So I would hope that that would be investigated, and that we would see whether or not it was an anomaly or something else that happened on election night in America when Kamala Harris was filling up stadiums with people who supported her, and Donald Trump was not able to do that.

So it’s curious to me, and as an American and a believer in democracy, I would hope that we would be able to look at all of the reasons why this happened.

Keep reading

Rosie O’Donnell floats bizarre conspiracy theory about Elon Musk after fleeing US after election

Rosie O’Donnell has suggested the 2024 presidential election may have been stolen during her first Irish television interview since leaving the United States for Ireland.

The famously outspoken comedian and former talk show host spoke with Patrick Kielty on Friday’s The Late Late Show on the Irish channel RTE One in which she implicated tech billionaire Elon Musk without naming him directly.

‘I question why for the first time in American history, a president has won every swing state and his largest donor was a man who owns and runs the internet,’ O’Donnell said.  

‘I would hope that would be investigated,’ she added. ‘Whether or not it was an anomaly… or something else that happened on election night in America.’

O’Donnell told Kielty how she found Trump’s win strange because then-Vice President Kamala Harris was ‘filling up stadiums with people who supported her and Donald Trump was not able to do that.’ 

Now self-exiled in Ireland, O’Donnell explained how she fled the US following what she calls a ‘terrifying’ sequence of political events. 

‘The president of the United States has it out for me,’ she said, referring to Donald Trump, with whom she’s had a public feud spanning decades. 

She explained how her critique of Trump’s bankruptcies and sexual assault allegations on TV show The View had made her a long-term target.

Keep reading

WAYNE ROOT: Back in 2015, I Wrote, “Is Supreme Court Justice John Roberts Being Blackmailed?” This Question is as Valid Today as a Decade Ago.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Way back in 2015, I asked in one of my nationally-syndicated columns, if Chief Justice of the Supreme Court John Roberts was being blackmailed?

I laid out the case. It seemed obvious to me that he was either being blackmailed, or bribed, or he was a fraud from day one- a Deep State, liberal plant disguised as a “conservative” put in place to vote the wrong way on key issues.

Because Justice Roberts always votes against us, against the obvious conservative decision, for most, if not all, of the important, life-or-death decisions that change this country’s direction.

Look at the record.

Roberts voted to protect and save the Obamacare disaster and scam- TWICE. That destroyed the entire healthcare system of the United States.

Roberts voted against asking about citizenship in the census; he voted against Texas being allowed to secure its own border with razor wire; he voted against Texas having standing to challenge the 2020 election; he just voted against the Trump administration’s attempt to withhold pay from USAID contractors- which of course, protects the Deep State’s fraud, waste, looting and abuse of taxpayers.

And now just a day ago, Roberts publicly rebuked and rejected President Trump’s desire to see an out-of-control federal judge impeached for trying to stop the deportation of illegal alien gangbangers who have committed the worst crimes in our country.

Roberts tried to intimidate Trump and fool the nation. The Supreme Court has nothing to do with the impeachment of a judge. Only Congress can decide that.

Again, I ask, “Who’s side is Roberts on?” Because he sure isn’t on the side of conservative patriots.

Again, I ask, “Is Justice John Roberts being blackmailed?”

Here is my column from 2015. Compare it to what’s happening today. Nothing has changed in a decade.

Keep reading

Dr. Leana Wen Admits Some COVID ‘Conspiracy Theories’ Were Actually True

Dr. Leana Wen, a former CNN medical analyst who famously stated that “the unvaccinated should not be allowed to leave their homes,” is now admitting that Covid dissenters should have been allowed to ask questions.

Wen, in a recent video, addresses the fact that many people had questions, particularly about the Covid vaccine, but were afraid to ask those questions because they might be told that their concerns were simply conspiracy theories.

In that video, Wen admits that concerns that were raised about the vaccine’s impact on women’s menstrual cycles are supported by studies that “have shown that there may be some changes to the menstrual period in the short term.”

Wen also conceded that questions about natural immunity from infection were summarily dismissed during the first two years of the pandemic because medical officials didn’t want people to be exposed through what she termed “chicken pox parties” where people could be infected all at once.

According to Wen, medical experts now admit that a person who has been infected with Covid does enjoy short term immunity benefits, saying, “It’s also true that … you do get some degree of pretty good immunity after having infection.”

Wen says Covid dissenters should have been able to ask questions and that she would have answered them.

The turnaround is a sharp contrast to Wen’s harsh earlier stances taken during her regular appearances on CNN as a medical analyst, her opinion pieces for the Washington Post and her time as a guest contributor for NPR, PBS, BBC, and MSNBC.

Keep reading