Arlington Heights Elderly Leftist Couple Pleads Guilty to Defacing GOP Headquarters with Swastikas and Feces on Charlie Kirk Poster — No Hate Crime Charges, Just $100 Fine

An elderly leftist couple in Arlington Heights, Illinois, charged with vandalizing the Republicans of Wheeling Township headquarters in January pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges on Thursday.

Brock McNerney, a 72-year-old retired financial planner, and Moisette McNerney, a 69-year-old retired special education teacher, admitted to criminal damage to property and criminal defacement of property charges as part of a plea agreement.

The Gateway Pundit previously reported that on the night of January 25, 2026, surveillance video captured the pair drawing multiple swastikas and profanities in permanent marker across the windows of the ROWT office at 909 E. Rand Road.

They specifically targeted a portrait of slain conservative activist Charlie Kirk, born in Arlington Heights and a former volunteer at the local GOP office as a Wheeling High School student, defacing his image. The couple also tossed bags of feces and poured an unknown liquid near the front door.

This was no isolated act of random mischief. It came after earlier vandalism in December 2025 that included threatening and offensive messages scrawled into the brick outside the office, specifically and gleefully referencing Charlie Kirk’s wounds.

The January attack occurred right before the March primary. ROWT members installed cameras after the prior incident.

Despite the use of Nazi symbols against a political organization and the apparent effort to frighten Republican volunteers, the McNerneys were charged only with misdemeanors, not hate crimes.

Keep reading

Czech data shows that those who got the Moderna vaccine died more

For the first time, I show the directly standardized survival curves for each 5 year age group in the Czech Republic using the publicly released record-level data.

This data consistently shows the people who got the Moderna vaccine were much more likely to die than those of the same age who got the Pfizer shot. The relative risk (RR) was >1.5 for those under age 60 which is a huge difference.

The comorbidity distribution for both groups of a given age range was very similar (SMD=.05)

This isn’t because Pfizer is more protective of a COVID death because the differences were not specific to COVID periods (and were too large to be explained by effectiveness differences).

There are two remaining explanations:

  1. The Moderna vaccine was more deadly
  2. There was a systematic distribution of vaccines in Czech Republic that no matter what age you were, if you were more likely to die, you were given the Moderna shots.

Explanation is 2 is much less likely because there was no systematic bias in vaccine distribution by brand, and even if there were, the fact that the DCCI distributions were similar and that the younger you were, the more pronounced the effect, would be unusual since 45 year old people are not concentrated in elderly homes and hospital beds.

So the most likely explanation is Moderna was more deadly.

Keep reading

The AI Race With China Is a Lie Told by Big Tech to Justify the Data Center Invasion

As Big Tech races to build water-guzzling, energy-hungry data centers for its artificial intelligence, talk of an “AI race” between the United States and China has permeated public discourse. Pundits, politicians, and the media have all joined tech corporations in selling this narrative. And it’s giving license to Big Tech and their political handmaidens to ruin our communities, exploit our every action (both online and via AI-powered surveillance), and steal the wealth of human knowledge for private gain.

But the idea of an AI race between China and the US isn’t grounded in reality. The researchers, companies, and governments behind Chinese and US AI development are pursuing completely different goals.

The discourse in the US assumes that achieving artificial general intelligence (AGI)—computers that mimic human consciousness—would be so momentous and earth-shattering that clearly this must be the goal of anyone pursuing AI development. But that’s not the main goal of Chinese AI development. And a competition in which the competitors are running toward different finish lines isn’t a race.

If we allow the myth of an AI race with China to give Big Tech free rein, we face a more polluted, less equal world.

A Race Doesn’t Have Two Different Finish Lines

While the US is focused on artificial general intelligence (AGI) powered by Large Language Models (LLMs), Chinese developers are focused on AI embedded in products. It’s ChatGPT versus robots.

Yes, China is developing LLMs, although largely in an open-source way as opposed to the for-profit competition in the US. Recent news stories report that China is “catching” the US in LLM development. Indeed, the latest Chinese model outperforms leading US models. But this isn’t evidence of an LLM-AGI race. Instead, it shows that without making AGI its main focus, China is capable of developing its own models almost as quickly as US companies.

More to the point, LLM development in China is incidental to the country’s real goal for AI. Its focus remains on products embedded with AI and robots. Or, as AI policy researcher Liang Zheng says, in China, “The first priority is to use it to benefit ordinary people” (debatable, but indicates the kind of AI they are pursuing).

In the US, the first priority is to exploit people so that the tech oligarchs can profit. It’s chatbots all the way down.

This isn’t to argue that China is doing it “right” and the US is doing it “wrong.” Either approach will lead to a future in which citizens become increasingly disempowered. In which work becomes more scarce and less lucrative for most people. And in which a handful of billionaires grow wealthier and more powerful.

But the arguments being hauled out to support the destructive growth of hyperscale data centers are based on a fallacy. There is no need to “beat China.” China and the US are racing on separate tracks, in different races, with different finish lines.

These two separate approaches also explain the mind-boggling scale of the data center invasion we currently face. The massive hyperscale data centers—recent proposals would demand up to 5 gigawatts, enough electricity to power roughly 3.75 million US households—are only “required” because the US is racing toward AGI. Meanwhile, the embodied AI dominating in China does not require the same amount of computational power.

The truth is, we don’t need hyperscale data centers to “beat China.” We aren’t racing China. We’re killing ourselves so Silicon Valley can race itself.

Keep reading

What in the Actual? Mamdani Doxxes NYC’s Wealthy by Publishing Their Names and Addresses

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani (D) just made it a whole lot easier for anyone to look up the names and home addresses of wealthy New Yorkers who own second properties in the city.

How? By publishing a searchable database of properties that could fall under the new pied-à-terre tax, complete with the owners’ full names and addresses.

The list covers unoccupied, non-primary residences worth more than $1 million across the five boroughs.

The New York Post reports that the move by the administration is “effectively doxxing thousands of wealthy New Yorkers.”

I’m almost certain that those individuals are thrilled to have their potentially empty homes’ addresses advertised to unhinged “tax the rich” leftists.

For property owners who already felt targeted by the city’s new tax push, having their personal information posted online is only pouring fuel on the fire, which is the intent, really. Mamdani is literally trying to drive wealthy individuals out of the city that serves as the economic engine of the nation.

It fits a clear pattern of taunting. RedState’s Nick Arama detailed how Mamdani recently mocked second-home owners online by gloating that notification letters for the new pied-à-terre tax were already in the mail and that “you’ve got mail.”

Arama accurately described the derisive message as “gross,” which might as well be an evergreen description going forward for Mamdani’s economically illiterate reign.

Keep reading

Natalee Holloway Murderer’s Deadly Twist: Trump’s DOJ Releases Docs on FBI Decisions That May Have Cost a Life Under Eric Holder

Documents obtained by journalist and Newsmax host Greta Van Susteren reportedly show that the Obama administration had an opportunity to arrest convicted murderer Joran van der Sloot during a sting operation, only days before he committed a second murder.

The award-winning journalist intends to publish FBI documents she obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request, as well as with the help of former Attorney General Pam Bondi, that show the FBI “bungled” the sting and then “kept it quiet” from the public.

Susteren also intends to release video footage of the sting itself.

She made the announcement on Facebook.

Released to her courtesy of President Donald Trump’s Department of Justice, the new documents and video reportedly show that the Obama FBI “bungled” a sting operation by failing to arrest Van der Sloot in 2010 for the murder of Natalee Holloway.

Twenty days before Van der Sloot murdered Stephany Flores Ramírez on May 30, 2010, an intermediary working for the FBI paid van der Sloot an initial $25,000 out of $250,000 ($10,000 in cash, $15,000 wired) in exchange for information about Holloway’s remains, according to NPR. The information turned out to be false.

Keep reading

Trump Responds to Netanyahu Opposing Sale of F-35 Jets to Turkey: “Nobody Tells Me What We Should Be Selling or Not”

President Trump on Monday responded to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for criticizing his plan to sell F-35 fighter jets to Turkey, saying, “Nobody tells me what we should be selling or not.”

Netanyahu is scheduled to meet with Trump on Tuesday at the White House during a visit to the United States, where he will also attend the wake for late Senator Lindsey Graham. Trump told reporters that he and Netanyahu are “pretty close” to the same page. “We have a little difference, but pretty close,” Trump said.

But he made it clear that they’re not on the same page regarding Turkey.

Earlier this month, Netanyahu appeared on CNN with Dana Bash hours after Trump said he would sell F-35s to Turkey during the NATO Summit in Ankara, overturning a ban from his first term.

“He’s not exactly a model ally of the United States,” Netanyahu said, asserting that the move “doesn’t make Turkey a friendly state to the United States.”

“It would destroy the power balance in the Middle East,” he continued. “This is not a force for peace and stability… When you give them that power, you’re going to see aggression in its wake.”

Keep reading

China: Six-Year-Old Girl Subjected to Brain Gene-Editing Therapy Dies After Being Injected with Viruses

Neuroscientist Qiu Zilong of Shanghai Jiao Tong University is under investigation following the death of a six-year-old girl who was receiving gene-editing therapy during a human trial under his supervision. 

The child was administered an experimental treatment that involved injecting “trillions of viruses carrying the recipe for the base editor into her spinal fluid,” according to a report in Science magazine. 

Science told the heartbreaking story of how the girl bounced into Xinhua Hospital in Shanghai in March 2025, wearing “a pink jacket and blue pants decorated with cartoon bears.” She treated her visit to the hospital as if it were a vacation and her parents were confident she would receive the best of care at the hospital’s acclaimed pediatrics ward.

The child was suffering from a genetic mutation that was interfering with her cognitive development. The experimental cure involved using a gene editor — similar to the fabled CRISPR, but more advanced — to rewrite the mutated gene in her nervous system. The little girl became the first human being to undergo gene-editing therapy for her brain, an experimental procedure that cost over $860,000.

The details of what happened next have been kept secret until now by the arrogant Chinese Communist tyranny, which is very eager to displace the United States as the world’s leading biotech power. 

According to research by Science and Retraction Watch, a watchdog group that follows up on failed experiments and retracted scientific research, the hospital used a fast-track bureaucratic procedure that bypassed national regulations and Qiu and his team severely undersold the risks of the procedure to the girl’s parents. When the truth was finally revealed, international experts said the negative reactions observed during animal testing should have prevented the experimental treatment from advancing to human trials.

The process of gene editing involves using tailored viruses to deliver the altered genetic material to a patient’s cells — and the little girl had a fatal immune reaction to the bewildering cocktail of viruses injected into her spinal column. She died seven days after entering the hospital.

A hideous cover-up ensued, erasing all mention of the little girl and her fate from experimental literature. Most shockingly, Qiu and his team published an article about the animal studies in their gene-editing trial at Nature this year, but without telling the full story of the human child who died from the treatment or the enormous financial contributions her family made to the research.

Science noted that the hospital paid only a “modest fine to a local health authority” after the death of the child and Qiu was not publicly sanctioned until now. The girl’s parents said they came forward due to their anger at the lack of accountability although they still felt it was necessary to use pseudonyms.

“Learning the reality of these missing safeguards has fundamentally changed how we now view the entire project. We did not realize how unusual and dangerous many of the arrangements were,” said the girl’s father, a software engineer who asked to be called “Jason” in the story.

Dr. Qiu was another in a series of Chinese scientists who came to the United States for an education, then returned to Communist China in 2009, “as China was ramping up its efforts to lure its scientists back home.” 

Qiu was, somewhat ironically, an outspoken critic of “rogue geneticist” He Jiankui’s experiments using CRISPR to create genetically engineered human babies, but he still felt there was great potential in using gene editing techniques to address neurological disorders. His papers and video presentations caught the attention of “Jason” and his wife, who emailed the doctor in 2023 to say they were “willing and able to bear the costs” of getting his experimental treatment for their child. He responded to their inquiry in thirteen minutes flat.

Over the course of the next two years, Jason said he came under increasing pressure to pump money into the research, sometimes in dubious ways, such as paying members of his research team directly and informally.

The cost of the treatment increased dramatically and Jason was told that if he stopped providing the funds, everything he had already paid would be for nothing. Chinese law forbids charging patients or their families for unproven therapies, but this prohibition was circumvented by treating the huge sums provided by Jason’s family as “contributions” to advanced medical research.

Jason and his wife recorded all of their conversation with Qiu and other researchers, so they had a mountain of evidence to bring to the table when they decided to go public.

The general consensus from Science and its researchers is that serious medical work was conducted. The research was not a scam operation and Qiu does not appear to have taken any great portion of the money for himself, although he accepted some lavish gifts from the family. The researchers appeared to be reckless, disregarding evidence that their experimental treatment was dangerous and failing to take some precautions that might have been helpful, such as using more powerful preparatory drugs to suppress the little girl’s immune system.

Science and Retraction Watch referred to the case of “Baby KJ,” a Philadelphia boy named KJ Muldoon with a rare life-threatening metabolic condition that was saved by the world’s first personalized gene-editing treatment in 2025. Baby KJ’s landmark treatment and recovery were the kind of success Jason wanted for his child which Qiu evidently thought he could provide.

Jason referred to his child as “Mei,” a Chinese word that means “beauty.” The last week of her life was a terrible ordeal as her immune system fought to the death against the gene-editing viruses and lost. She began running a fever that Dr. Qiu confidently, and incorrectly, predicted would pass. Her kidneys failed, so she could not have any fluids. Qiu seemed baffled by her deteriorating condition.

In the aftermath of Mei’s death, her parents asked Qiu not to publish the paper he had been excitedly preparing for Nature, but he did it anyway — after removing the genetic data collected from Mei and her family and deleting a message of thanks to them.

Some of the international scientists who were excited by Qiu’s paper were later angry to discover he had already administered the experimental treatment to a young human patient who did not survive. Nature’s editors were annoyed to learn Qiu had not told them the full story before publication.

Qiu’s company had an insurance policy for the medical trial, but Mei’s parents received no settlement. Her shattered parents blamed themselves for not asking enough questions and apparently could not bear to speak with the friends who helped pay for Mei’s treatment.

The South China Morning Post (SCMP) reported on Sunday that Shanghai Jia Tong University has “established a special group to investigate” Qiu’s clinical study and the paper he published at Nature.

“The medicine school has always valued research integrity and standards, and resolutely opposes medical research that violates research ethics and regulations,” the university said.

Keep reading

The Left Is Using Kids As A Trojan Horse For Total Online Surveillance

It is the oldest trick in the authoritarian playbook. Anytime a Democrat politician looks into a television camera and declares a new policy is “for the kids,” history tells us it is time to do three things: grab your Bill of Rights, lock your wallet, and check your firearms.

The political left has mastered the art of semantic camouflage. Because leftists’ true intentions – total state control and the systematic dismantling of individual liberty – are entirely unpalatable to the average citizen, they must cloak their radical agendas in the warm blanket of public safety.

We are seeing this exact misdirection play out today across two seemingly different battlefronts: the push for Universal Background Checks (UBCs) on firearms, and the sudden, “bipartisan” stampede to pass online child safety legislation. Under the microscope, however, they share the exact same DNA. They were never about protecting children. They are about building lists to target political opponents. Period.

Currently making waves in Congress are the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) in the Senate and the Kids Internet and Digital Safety Act (KIDS) in the House. On paper, the marketing pitch is flawless. Proponents claim these bills will shield innocent children from online predators, groomers, and illicit adult content.

At face value, it sounds reasonable. Who could possibly oppose protecting children?

The answer lies in the structural mechanics of the legislation. Just as gun control advocates use “safety” to pierce the veil of constitutional privacy, digital regulators are using children as human shields to bypass the First Amendment.

To understand the trap being set online, one must first look at the ongoing battle over Universal Background Checks. Under current federal law, licensed firearm dealers must maintain physical ATF Form 4473. Crucially, under the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act (FOPA) and the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) regulations, the federal government is strictly prohibited from centralizing these forms into a master database. If a firearm is used in a crime, investigators must work backward – from manufacturer to dealer to buyer. It is a localized, investigative process that protects law-abiding gun owners from mass government discovery.

Enter the left’s obsession with Universal Background Checks for private transfers. Proponents claim this keeps weapons out of the hands of criminals – ignoring the obvious reality that criminals, by definition, do not obtain weapons through legal channels.

The real objective is structural. A Universal Background Check law is completely unenforceable unless the state knows who owns every firearm in the country beforehand. The law has no teeth without a mandatory, centralized gun registry. It is the ultimate camel’s nose under the liberty tent.

This brings us back to the digital arena. Changing the law would mean de facto digital ID for every American. The database concept that makes UBCs so dangerous is the exact same mechanism driving KOSA and KIDS.

To enforce age restrictions online and block youth from specific platforms, websites cannot simply rely on the honor system. Platforms must mandate strict age verification. To prove your age, you must verify your legal identity. Proponents make it sound like it’s just the kids who must register.

However, they conveniently fail to mention the rest of the action. In order to prove they are not children, adults will be forced to upload government-issued identification simply to access standard political commentary, religious forums, or independent news sites. Platforms will choose the path of least resistance, implementing blanket identity checks to avoid massive federal fines. The immediate casualty of this regime will be political anonymity.

The author has personally witnessed this phenomenon, having friends in the UK with whom we’ve corresponded for many years. They have become extremely guarded in answering certain political-type questions in the past couple of years, basically avoiding commenting. And we all read now about British subjects being arrested for making comments in public or posting online viewpoints that oppose official positions.

Independent outlets like American Thinker rely heavily on robust, pseudonymous comment sections. Thousands of everyday Americans utilize digital pen names to engage in fierce partisan debates. They do not do this out of cowardice; they do it to protect their careers, their livelihoods, and their families from targeted harassment campaigns by the radical Left. KOSA and KIDS would mean the end of the dissident commenter.

If KOSA and KIDS become law, the era of the pseudonymous internet is dead. Email providers, forums, and social platforms will require positive legal identification just to open an account.

When you strip away the emotional appeals, the underlying architecture becomes clear:

  • Step 1: Force the population into centralized databases (whether via gun registries or digital IDs) under the guise of public safety.
  • Step 2: Eliminate the anonymity that allows for free, uninhibited political dissent.
  • Step 3: Weaponize those databases when political fortunes shift.

If progressive Marxists secure unchecked power over the administrative state and the judiciary, they will no longer need to hunt for dissidents. The compliance architecture currently being built in Washington will hand them a pre-verified list of their political opponents on a silver platter. And since they would have already emptied all the prisons, they’d have plenty of beds to hold us all.

Keep reading

GrapheneOS Wipe at Airport Leads to Federal Charge in Atlanta

The Justice Department is asking a federal court in Atlanta to treat a man’s erasure of his own phone as destruction of property, in the first known US prosecution built on a phone’s duress password.

Samuel Tunick faces one count under Title 18, Section 2232(a), a statute covering the destruction of property to stop the government from taking it. Prosecutors say he handed Customs and Border Protection officers a passcode that deleted the contents of his Google Pixel instead of unlocking it. His lawyers appeared before the court for the first time on Monday, arguing that officers ran a custodial interrogation without Miranda warnings, denied him a lawyer, and searched him unlawfully. They want everything obtained from the encounter suppressed.

CBP pulled Tunick into secondary inspection at Hartsfield-Jackson on January 24, 2025, as he returned from the Dominican Republic. An FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force officer and an FBI special agent had coordinated with CBP in advance to question and search him on arrival. The account comes from the defense filing, which draws on the government’s own reports. Officers from CBP’s Tactical Terrorism Response Team opened by telling him they were “looking for people who are pedophiles.”

Officers never read Tunick his Miranda rights. He said early in the interview that he did not want to keep talking without a lawyer, then asked to call one repeatedly. Questioning continued. One officer told him his refusal to talk gave them authority to go through his phone. When he asked again about his attorney, an officer told him customs and immigration work was a different matter, “and we have search authority, we don’t need a warrant.”

Tunick eventually provided a password for his phone and his e-reader. The screen “went blank, flashed several times and the phone appeared to restart,” according to the government’s report. Officers seized the devices anyway and told him they would be returned after thirty days. A third officer took him to another room for a pat-down that was not recorded. A DHS agent then told him he was free to leave once the other agents were finished with him.

The government’s reports contain no indication that anyone suspected Tunick of carrying illegal images, his lawyers wrote. The reports record an interest in his association with Defend the Atlanta Forest, the movement opposing the clearing of the South River Forest for the Atlanta Public Safety Training Center. Opponents call the 85-acre, $115 million police facility Cop City. Federal documents label the movement an “Anti-Government, Anti-Authority Violent Extremist Group.” Tunick has not been charged with any offense connected to it.

Eleventh Circuit precedent favors the government. Its 2018 ruling in United States v. Touset permits forensic searches of electronic devices at the border with no warrant, no probable cause, and no individualized suspicion. Tunick’s lawyers cite decisions from the First, Fourth, and Ninth Circuits going the other way, including a Fourth Circuit holding that warrantless border searches of devices cannot be used to hunt for evidence of domestic crime. They also argue that surrendering a passcode is testimonial, relying on a 2012 Eleventh Circuit decision that decrypting and producing the contents of a hard drive triggers Fifth Amendment protection.

Courts allow suspicionless border searches to keep contraband out of the country. The accusation here is that data left a phone rather than entered the United States, and digital files move across borders over the internet anyway. A ruling on the motion is not expected before the end of October.

GrapheneOS, the hardened Android build that replaces the stock software on Pixel devices, lets an owner set a second PIN or password that irreversibly wipes the device and any installed eSIMs when entered at a credential prompt. No confirmation dialog appears, and nothing distinguishes it from a normal unlock.

Bill Budington, senior staff technologist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and Runa Sandvik, founder of the security firm Granitt, both said they had seen no comparable prosecution. Sandvik said she had discussed the scenario with activists and journalists for years and advised travelers to leave sensitive data off devices they carry across borders rather than count on wiping it. Christophe Boutry told the Guardian the prosecution “sends the message that [GrapheneOS] is criminal by default.”

Matthew Dodge, an assistant federal public defender on Tunick’s legal team, said the statute is rarely seen in an indictment. Tunick was arrested about ten months after the airport stop. His crowdfunding page says he was pulled over for a purported tail light fault and cuffed by FBI and DHS officers when he stepped out of the car. He has pleaded not guilty. The single-count indictment  accuses him of acting to delete the digital contents of a Google Pixel to impair the government’s lawful authority to take it, in violation of Title 18 of what the document calls the “Untied States Code.”

Keep reading

Deep State In “Fight To The Death” To Defend Voter Fraud

Journalist Alex Newman is an expert on the so-called Deep State.  He is the author of the longtime popular book “Deep State” and, most recently, “Deep State 2.0.” 

The Deep State is not a conspiracy theory.  It is a conspiracy fact. 

This year, the Deep State will be going to war with the Trump Administration to hold onto the voter fraud that has won them elections for many years.  Without voter fraud, Deep State Democrats lose and lose big in the midterms.  They are fighting every way they can to keep the cheating going.  

The Trump Administration is threatening fines and jail time if the Dems in Blue States “Refuse to Cooperate to Secure Elections.”  It is so bad that Harvard PhD and political expert Dr. Jerome Corsi says President Trump must “Stop Voter Fraud or Lose the Republic.”  The fight is going to get much more intense and violent before the midterm elections in November. 

Keep reading