Two months after making a $14.3B investment in Scale AI, Meta is relying heavily on its competitors to train next generation AI models.

Minneapolis trans sh**ter reportedly REGRETTED transitioning

China is America’s greatest adversary. Not merely an economic rival or a diplomatic competitor, but an existential threat to everything the United States claims to stand for. Beijing dreams of an America in retreat, a world where democratic values collapse and the Middle Kingdom reclaims the throne of global dominance. Their strategy isn’t nuclear war. It’s far more insidious: buying America one acre at a time. The land acquisition pattern is unmistakable and deliberate. In New Hampshire alone, Chinese companies have made several major purchases in the last decade. Nongfu Spring, owned by China’s richest man, bought a warehouse and land near Nashua’s water system for $67 million — four times its assessed value. Chinese investor Sui Liu purchased the former Daniel Webster College campus that sits just 6 miles from BAE Systems Electronic Systems, a defense contractor supporting Air Force and Space Force programs. These aren’t random real estate investments — they’re strategic positioning near military installations and defense contractors. The mathematics are revealing. When foreign companies systematically overpay by 300-400 percent for properties adjacent to sensitive military sites, that’s not market dynamics. That’s reconnaissance disguised as commerce. The New Boston Space Force Station sits within striking distance of multiple Chinese-owned properties. The pattern repeats across critical infrastructure: airports, water systems, defense facilities. Americans celebrate this as economic development. State officials actively courted Nongfu Spring as part of an economic development initiative, competing against Maryland to land the deal. The promise of 200 jobs apparently justified selling strategically vital land to a company controlled by an individual who couldn’t have become China’s wealthiest citizen without complete alignment with Communist Party priorities. And land purchases are only the surface layer. Beneath them lies something even more dangerous: political infiltration. While Chinese companies buy land near military bases, Chinese operatives are simultaneously manipulating American elections with breathtaking audacity. More than 50 organizations with ties to Beijing have mobilized members to fundraise and endorse political candidates over the past five years. Many nonprofit charities, legally prohibited from electioneering, openly violate federal tax law with impunity, as American authorities look the other way. (RELATED: House GOP Releases Report Highlighting Grave CCP Spy Threat) Chinese consulate officials are literally leading American citizens in loyalty ceremonies. As the New York Times recently reported, videos show festive gatherings where diplomats guide hometown association leaders through pledges to “love the motherland,” support reunification with Taiwan, and contribute to the “great rejuvenation” of China. These are not harmless cultural celebrations. They are loyalty tests carried out on American soil, under the cover of tax-exempt organizations. (RELATED: How China Is Quietly Outsmarting the West) The electoral manipulation works with surgical precision. When State Senator Iwen Chu attended a reception for Taiwan’s president, Chinese diplomats summoned hometown association members to the consulate for interrogation about her political positions. Association leaders who had previously supported her flipped their endorsements. She lost her reelection, costing Democrats their supermajority. When Yan Xiong, a Tiananmen Square veteran, dared run for Congress, a Chinese intelligence agent hired a private investigator to dig up compromising material, discussing hiring prostitutes and suggesting “Violence would be fine, too.” Simultaneously, the Chinese Consulate directed hometown association leaders to oppose his campaign. He was systematically sabotaged by the very government he had once challenged. The pattern repeats with mechanical efficiency. Susan Zhuang won her New York City Council seat after Chinese-American organizations circulated damaging photos of her opponent at a Hong Kong democracy rally, branding her as supporting “violent Hong Kong independence.” Once elected, Zhuang distributed over $300,000 in city funds to the same Chinese nonprofits that had supported her campaign. The mythology of the melting pot, free markets, and cultural diversity has made Americans incapable of recognizing obvious threats. This represents systematic foreign interference in American democracy. Tax-exempt organizations openly violating federal law. Foreign intelligence agents targeting American candidates. Consulate officials coordinating domestic political campaigns. Yet American officials treat this as normal community organizing rather than what it obviously is: a hostile takeover. So why, one might ask, is this madness allowed to persist? American psychology has created a fatal blind spot. The mythology of the melting pot, free markets, and cultural diversity has made Americans incapable of recognizing obvious threats when they arrive wrapped in the rhetoric of investment and community engagement. When hostile foreign powers exploit American openness, millions of Americans call it tolerance. (RELATED: China’s War Is Here — Most Americans Are Blind to It) Republican Congress hopeful Lily Tang Williams, who escaped communist China in the 1980s, understands the strategy. Beijing, she told Newsweek, “doesn’t want to get into hard war, they don’t want to fire on shot,” which explains why “they are using these so-called acceptable international expansion strategies to get the world on their side.” China plays chess while Americans play checkers, thinking in decades while Americans think in quarterly earnings reports. The solution requires immediate action on multiple fronts. First, emergency legislation must ban all land purchases by Chinese entities within 25 miles of military installations, defense contractors, or critical infrastructure. No exceptions, no grandfather clauses. National security trumps economic development. Second, the IRS must immediately revoke tax-exempt status for every organization that has violated federal election law. If they want to engage in politics, they can pay taxes like everyone else. Third, the Justice Department must aggressively prosecute foreign agents operating on American soil. Election interference is a federal crime, regardless of the perpetrator’s diplomatic cover. Fourth, state and local officials who accepted money from Chinese-linked organizations must return every dollar. Public corruption is public corruption, even when disguised as campaign contributions. Finally, Americans must abandon their dangerous naivety about adversarial intentions. When China’s richest man buys land next to military bases, that’s intelligence gathering. When foreign consulates orchestrate domestic political campaigns, that’s election interference. Time is running out. Every day of delay allows China to dig in deeper. They succeed because they play the long game, setting traps that may not snap shut for decades. The question is whether America will act before the jaws close, or keep pretending there’s no danger until the trap springs and there’s no way out. READ MORE from John Mac Ghlionn: A New Psychosis Consuming America Facing up to Black Crime in America OnlyFans and the Economics of Empty Conversions

Eighty years ago, on August 30, 1945, Gen. Douglas MacArthur landed unarmed at Atsugi airfield in preparation for the surrender ceremony, which was set to take place on the battleship Missouri on September 2.  “Of all the amazing deeds in the war, I regard General MacArthur’s personal landing at Atsugi as the greatest of the lot,” said Winston Churchill. Was this merely hyperbole on Churchill’s part? After all, Churchill had witnessed the bravery of British pilots during the Battle of Britain. He knew about the courage of the men who stormed the beaches at Normandy and the islands of the Pacific War. He understood the bravery of British seamen. Bravery was a daily occurrence for Allied armies, navies, and air forces throughout the war. How does a landing by one man at a Japanese airfield after Japanese leaders accepted the surrender terms of the Potsdam Declaration stack up against the deeds of valor in battle after battle of that terrible war? (RELATED: Harry Truman at Potsdam — As Naïve As FDR) Churchill, to be sure, can be considered something of an expert on bravery and courage. He read about it in the pages of history. He wrote about it in books about the Duke of Marlborough, the history of the English-speaking peoples, and the fighting in both World Wars. He exhibited bravery and courage himself in Southwest Asia, the Sudan, South Africa, and on the Western Front in the First World War. His assessment of MacArthur’s bravery at Atsugi, therefore, cannot be dismissed out of hand. To understand just how brave and courageous MacArthur’s actions at Atsugi were, it is necessary to explain the context of the landing. Only about three weeks earlier, the United States had dropped two atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Japanese soldiers and citizens had been preparing for the U.S. and Allied invasion of Honshu and Kyushu, where Japan’s leaders anticipated suffering more than 10 million casualties. Thousands of Kamikaze strikes were being readied. More than 60 Japanese cities had already been pounded and incinerated by American bombers. And even after the atomic bombings, many of Japan’s soldiers wanted to fight on to an even more bitter end. (RELATED: Tokyo, Hiroshima, Nagasaki and the Man Who Ended the War) It was only two weeks earlier, on August 14, that Japan had formally accepted the terms of the Potsdam Declaration. Segments of Japan’s army opposed the surrender. When Emperor Hirohito recorded a surrender speech to be broadcast on August 15, the recordings (there were two) were hidden to avoid their seizure by disgruntled army officers who unsuccessfully tried to prevent the recordings from being aired. It was an attempted coup d’état and included the murder of a lieutenant general of the Imperial Guards Division, and the planned arrest and possible assassination of the emperor. Historian Richard Frank, in his book Downfall: The End of the Imperial Japanese Empire, noted that a brief insurrection among naval and naval air troops broke out at Atsugi within two weeks of MacArthur’s arrival. Japanese forces continued to fight in Manchuria and China, including an intense battle near Mutanchiang against Soviet forces that lasted until August 22. And Atsugi airfield was home to some of Japan’s Kamikaze pilots. In short, Japan’s military spirit had not been completely eradicated. Instead, as historian Seymour Morris Jr. noted, “[t]he country was swarming with disgruntled militarists and terrorists for whom killing was an act of honor.” He was, therefore, the perfect target for those in Japan who wanted the war to continue. MacArthur was the most famous Allied commander of the Pacific War. He had kept his promise to return to retake the Philippines after Japan’s victory there. He had led American forces to victories in New Guinea. He was to command the armies that would have invaded the main Japanese islands had the war continued. He was, therefore, the perfect target for those in Japan who wanted the war to continue. His assassination would perhaps undo Japan’s surrender. MacArthur’s top aides warned him of the risk he was taking by landing at Atsugi. Gen. Richard Sutherland said, “My God, General, the emperor is worshipped as a real god, yet they still tried to assassinate him. What kind of a target does that make you?” The journalist John Gunther wrote that “Professors who studied Japan all their lives, military experts who knew every nook and cranny of the Japanese character, thought that MacArthur was taking a frightful risk.” During the plane ride to Atsugi, MacArthur told his aides to remove their pistols. “If they intend to kill us,” he said, “sidearms will be useless. And nothing will impress them like a show of absolute fearlessness.” Throughout his distinguished military career, MacArthur had repeatedly demonstrated absolute fearlessness — in Mexico, on the Western Front in the First World War, where he earned seven Silver Stars among other military decorations, and in the Southwest Pacific campaign of World War II, where he repeatedly and bravely exposed himself to enemy fire. The courage and bravery he showed on August 30, 1945, after landing unarmed and greatly outnumbered at Atsugi, was simply part of his character. As Seymour Morris noted, “All his life he had taken risks on the battlefield and never got hit. … Only an incurable romantic would do what MacArthur was doing, descending unarmed onto a kamikaze airfield like a swashbuckling Errol Flynn.” Just after 2:00 pm, MacArthur’s plane — the Bataan — set down on the airfield. MacArthur lit his corncob pipe, walked down the stairway, and was greeted by Gen. Robert Eichelberger. MacArthur exuded supreme confidence and calmness despite the risks, just as he had done throughout his sterling military career. He came through that perilous landing unharmed and went on to govern Japan brilliantly for the next five years. Perhaps Churchill was right. READ MORE from Francis P. Sempa: August 23, 1939: Another Date That Should Live in Infamy The Organizer of Victory: Frank S. Meyer Watch How the Deep State Took Down Richard Nixon

American Eagle’s fall fashion campaign starring NFL tight end Travis Kelce was going to make a splash — but the timing, optics, and celebrity chessboard behind it offer a far more complex picture than your average product rollout. The campaign’s official debut came one day after Kelce and Taylor Swift, his now-fiancée, confirmed their engagement on Tuesday via social media. Reportedly, the proposal happened two weeks prior to their Instagram post, shortly after Swift’s twelfth album announcement on Kelce’s podcast. That timeline matters. It allowed the American Eagle X Travis Kelce collaboration — complete with his “Tru Kolors” collection — to live close enough to the engagement frenzy and the positive publicity surrounding Kelce’s personal brand so that it would partially eclipse the partnership. This was critical considering the recent media circus surrounding Sydney Sweeney’s involvement with American Eagle. (RELATED: Why Is Every Brand Suddenly Acting Like a Taylor Swift Superfan?) Travis Kelce partners with American Eagle for new collection. pic.twitter.com/JbazHXqDAC — Pop Crave (@PopCrave) August 27, 2025 Although Kelce’s American Eagle ads dropped Wednesday, he said the partnership was in the pipeline for one year. Neither Kelce nor American Eagle could have predicted the political attention coming from Sweeney’s ad, which predated Kelce’s campaign release by mere weeks. Earlier this month, conservative media figures and online influencers pounced on Sweeney’s American Eagle ad — an intentionally cheeky series of clips involving a “jeans” vs. “genes” pun and a not-so-subtle focus on her breasts. The spot was arguably more about Sweeney’s conventionally attractive image and pop culture appeal than any ideological message. But that didn’t stop some corners of TikTok from painting the actress as a pro-eugenics symbol over a pun that was clearly marketing wordplay. (RELATED: Sydney Sweeney Ad Means America Is Hot Again) None of the “eugenics” or “Nazi” accusations had any substantial basis or credibility, but that didn’t stop outlets like Fox News from picking up the story and feeding the fire. Hours of coverage were dedicated to dissecting the campaign, and suddenly, your favorite Republican commentators were walking ads for American Eagle. The story would have dissipated if not for the amplification of the insane ramblings of a few anti-Sweeney radicals, but the right has learned to take control of the narrative. Although no prominent Democrats broke through the noise with an official anti-Sweeney stance, much like how the Democrats also did not publicly support the “woke” Cracker Barrel rebrand, loud minorities still wrote anti-Sweeney think pieces and aggrieved short-form videos — so that was enough fuel. (RELATED: At the Bottom of the Left’s Barrel) As a result, what should’ve been a clever, slightly suggestive campaign became a flashpoint in the culture wars. Suddenly, American Eagle — a mass-market fashion brand aimed at teens and young adults — was in danger of being pegged as making some kind of ideological statement simply for working with Sydney Sweeney. (RELATED: Sydney Sweeney and the Babe Factor) Then Travis Kelce showed up. A Super Bowl champion, an effortlessly charismatic public figure, and now engaged to the biggest pop star on the planet, Kelce brought something crucial to American Eagle at a time when it needed it most: balance. Kelce’s entrance into the brand’s campaign … wasn’t just a happy accident for American Eagle — it was recalibrated gold. It’s important to point out that both Swift and Kelce are known to lean left politically. Swift has publicly endorsed Democrat candidates in the past, and Kelce famously appeared in a Pfizer ad promoting the COVID vaccine, warranting boos from some right-wing football fans. So, Kelce’s entrance into the brand’s campaign, which appears to have been photographed before the Sweeney discourse even emerged, wasn’t just a happy accident for American Eagle — it was recalibrated gold. (RELATED: Travis Kelce Is the Blueprint Democrats Have Been Missing) In effect, Kelce’s presence in the campaign (without making any overt political statements) repositions American Eagle in a more neutral, commercially safer zone. It counters the conservative backlash without alienating right-leaning consumers. That’s an impressive feat in an era where brands frequently fold at the slightest sign of controversy. After the controversy surrounding Sydney Sweeney’s American Eagle ad, the brand is launching a new campaign featuring Travis Kelce, Taylor Swift’s fiancé. Will people cancel him for collaborating with an alleged “Nazi, supremacist, and racist” brand? pic.twitter.com/4yVKAQkSdZ — Sydney Sweeney Daily (@sweeneydailyx) August 27, 2025 Whether intentional or not, the juxtaposition of Kelce and Sweeney does something critical: it blurs ideological lines. In a time where brands live or die by how well they navigate cultural landmines, ambiguity holds real currency. The fall fashion campaign feels broad, accessible, and most importantly, uncommitted — exactly what you want if you’re selling jeans and other clothing items to Gen Z and Millennials across the political spectrum. And let’s not forget about the shadow of Swift. She doesn’t appear in the photoshoot, of course, but her influence looms large. Given the hyper-curated nature of her image and careful protection of her relationship from public influence, it’s impossible to believe this campaign dropped without at least a whisper of awareness on her part. If you’re the world’s most scrutinized couple, you inherently know what a campaign like American Eagle can do to public perception — especially right after a wedding announcement, podcast appearance, and the general uptick of celebrity fascination. (RELATED: Taylor Swift a Self-Made Billionaire?) Kelce’s involvement signals that he’s not concerned with conservative association or backlash, and that makes the statement even more potent. Unlike some progressive celebrities who would pull out of the brand deal the moment somebody whispers “Republican,” Kelce didn’t flinch. He and Swift have enough clout to have pulled the plug on the partnership, but they let it go public. Both of them have more than enough money, so the motivation for this must not be financial. That makes Kelce (and by extension, wife-to-be Taylor Swift) look grounded, unbothered, and apolitical — even though we know better. That intentional ambiguity pays off. For Swifties, it’s another hand-heart moment. For the Democrats who cared, it could turn down the heat against American Eagle. For critics on the right? It’s confusing enough to make them hesitate. And confusion is currency, especially when political commentators are trying to box companies and celebrities into ideological corners. Whether American Eagle intended this outcome or not, the following campaign does little to clarify how the clothing company feels politically. Kelce’s involvement, arriving just after the engagement announcement and continuing explosion of attention surrounding the Sydney Sweeney ads, shifts the conversation without resolving it. Cultural debates swirl, but the brand remains silent, forcing observers to draw their own conclusions. And maybe that’s exactly how it should be — businesses selling clothes, not opinions. READ MORE from Julianna Frieman: Vanity Fair Staff Draws the Line at Melania Trump Cover Gen Z’s Nostalgia Isn’t Regression — It’s Resistance Cracker Barrel’s New Logo Sparks Outrage — But Is It Really About ‘Woke’ Politics? Julianna Frieman is a writer based in North Carolina. She received her bachelor’s degree in political science from the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. She is pursuing her master’s degree in Communications (Digital Strategy) at the University of Florida. Her work has been published by the Daily Caller, The American Spectator, and The Federalist. Follow her on X at @juliannafrieman.

by Oliver JJ Lane, Breitbart: The rights involved with the national government housing asylum seekers trumps the rights of local residents represented by their district council, government lawyers told a court on Thursday as they sought to have an injunction against a migrant hotel overturned. The British government is fighting a rearguard action against a […]

by Mike LaChance, The Gateway Pundit: A dark money group on the left is paying progressive influencers up to $8,000 a month to push Democrat policy ideas. Must be nice. This is so typical. For all of the Democrats’ talk of getting ‘big money’ out of politics, they are the worst culprits of using big […]

I’ll never shop without it again. READ MORE...