Big Tech companies helped censor Americans during COVID. Now many of the same interests pillaging rural America for surveillance data centers want to suppress debate over their next great project. This time, they are not merely trying to censor speech. They are helping create the pretext to criminalize it.

Federal and state law enforcement should have their hands full with real threats: jihadist networks, political assassinations, attacks against ICE, and the growing culture of left-wing violence that led to Charlie Kirk’s murder. Yet last week, Wired obtained documents showing a coordinated effort among the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis, and roughly 80 regional fusion centers to monitor supposed anti-tech and anti-data-center violence.

It is disgraceful to watch law enforcement silence Americans on behalf of Big Tech.

More than 1,000 pages of internal DHS, FBI, and fusion-center reports describe “anti-technology extremism” as an emerging domestic threat based largely on a handful of unverified threats against politicians. No one should excuse genuine threats or violence. But the idea that data-center opponents have created a domestic threat requiring this level of federal coordination is absurd. It is gaslighting dressed up as intelligence work.

This is the same logic behind the Trump administration’s decision to station marshals with surveyors for data-center transmission lines in Carroll County, Maryland. The point was not to respond to credible threats. The point was to frame opposition — especially in one of Maryland’s most conservative counties — as dangerous before the debate even began.

Which brings us to Dixon, Illinois.

Last week, resident Harley Delander organized a Facebook protest outside the home of former state Rep. Tom Demmer (R), who is now promoting a 387-acre data-center site through the Lee County Industrial Development Association. People can debate the prudence of protesting at an official’s residence, though such protests have become common in local disputes. But police produced no credible evidence that Delander or his friends planned violence.

Delander was arrested outside his home 12 hours later and charged with two felonies: intimidation and stalking. Police said his communications “knowingly and willfully” caused fear for Demmer and his family’s safety. Delander recorded the arrest.

This reflects a growing trend: criminalizing sharp public debate based on how a public official claims to feel rather than what a citizen actually did.

A Massachusetts resident was sentenced to prison and spent a full year behind bars before trial for writing angry emails to a local Michigan politician. The emails were ugly — the sort of language elected officials receive every day — but they contained no personal threats or even veiled threats. He was extradited to Oakland County, Michigan, in December 2023 and charged under Michigan’s law against intimidating public officials, which hinges on whether the “victim” felt “terrorized, frightened, intimidated, threatened, harassed, or molested.”

Arvitalya/Getty Images

We have reached the point where heated political debate — a tradition as old as Adams and Jefferson — can become grounds for abridging the First Amendment. What a way to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence!

The crackdown is not limited to nasty emails or home protests. Across the country, law-abiding rural residents, many of them seniors, are getting roughed up or arrested for speaking too long or objecting too loudly at data-center hearings.

On February 17, Oklahoma farmer Darren Blanchard exceeded his three-minute speaking limit by a few seconds at a Claremore City Council town hall on “Project Mustang,” a proposed AI data center backed by Beale Infrastructure. Once his time expired, he stopped speaking and walked to the rostrum to give the city manager a written copy of his remarks. For that, police handcuffed and removed him, transported him to Rogers County Jail, and booked him on criminal trespassing charges.

In April, Imperial County, California, resident Ismael Arvizu was arrested and charged with trespassing, disturbing the peace, resisting arrest, and threatening a public official. Did he attack an official? No. After speaking during his allotted time at an Imperial County Board of Supervisors meeting, Arvizu applauded when another resident threatened to start a recall petition against the supervisors. The Los Angeles Times reported that an officer led him out and arrested him, and prosecutors charged him with threatening a public official.

In Midland, Texas, video shows a resident calmly calling for a point of order under meeting rules at a data-center meeting. He was immediately grabbed and removed from the room. He does not appear to have been arrested or charged, but the point remains: Police increasingly seem prepared to remove data-center opponents before their speech, outbursts, or objections would traditionally qualify as disrupting a meeting.

Dylan Hollingsworth/Bloomberg/Getty Images

This is happening in deep-red counties across America. It is disgraceful to watch law enforcement silence Americans on behalf of Big Tech.

Recently, the Intercept obtained a law-enforcement bulletin from a fusion center housed within the Philadelphia Police Department showing that federal authorities were monitoring anti-data-center social media posts for “domestic violent extremists.” The bulletin warned that “domestic violent extremists” were “likely interested in targeting artificial intelligence data centers,” posing physical and cyber threats to infrastructure in the Philadelphia region. Then it conceded that authorities lacked “specific information on plans to target AI data centers in the Philadelphia area.”

That is the whole game. Invent a vague threat, inflate it into a domestic extremism category, and use it to justify surveillance, intimidation, and arrests. Then pretend ordinary citizens are dangerous because they object to surrendering their land, power, and communities to Big Tech.

The irony is hard to miss. Governments at every level are deploying censorship, surveillance, and criminal enforcement to service an agenda built on surveillance, data extraction, and control.

Talk about paying for the rope to hang ourselves!

Artificial Intelligence Is Rewarding High School Grads For Being Dishonest Frauds

With widespread AI use, what distinguishes top graduates from their lower-ranked classmates is often just their greater willingness to cheat and lie about their work.

When the government takes everything without proving anything

Imagine you founded a company with a stop-smoking product that actually works — no nicotine, better than anything on the market. You are the largest investor. You take no salary. You build it into something real, serving 756,000 customers. You are doing exactly what America is supposed to reward.

Then one night, without warning, without a trial, without any finding of wrongdoing, the federal government comes. The government freezes every account you own or are even associated with — personal and business accounts, life insurance, and retirement savings. A court-appointed receiver sells your office furniture. They tell you that you no longer have Fourth Amendment rights. They come for the wedding ring on your wife's finger.

This attack sounds like some hypothetical scenario. It is my story.

I am writing this so that every American understands just what weaponization by the government really means.

The Federal Trade Commission came for me in 2018 using Section 13(b) of the FTC Act — a provision Congress created for injunctions only, not for seizing assets or freezing accounts. The receiver the agency installed consumed nearly $4 million of my money in fees before anyone proved the FTC did not have legal rights to my assets.

When I went to court and asked for access to my own frozen money just to pay lawyers and keep my home, the government's response was: You can go live under the freeway for all we care.

While this was happening, inspired by President Trump's Made in America initiative, I built VPL Medical — the world's first made-in-USA three-ply surgical face mask manufacturing operation, based in California, where I was born and raised.

This was before COVID. When the pandemic hit, VPL Medical was ready. The Department of Health and Human Services awarded us a $14,500,000 contract to deliver 20,000,000 American-made masks to the Strategic National Stockpile. The factory was going to employ 400 Americans. The country didn't want masks from China, and we were ready to deliver.

Then the FTC came for VPL Medical, too. The factory went dark for three months while Americans died and hospitals begged for PPE. The FTC's offer to reopen: Pay the receiver $25,000 per week to run my own company under a law that didn't authorize the demand. I refused. The receiver's first act was to cancel the HHS contract. Twenty million American-made masks and 400 American jobs gone.

In April 2021, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously in AMG Capital Management v. FTC that the commission had no authority to seek monetary relief. Nine justices. Zero dissents. My civil FTC case collapsed. The district court returned my company to me. Zero dollars — after four years of destruction, a factory closed during a pandemic, a $14.5 million federal contract canceled, and nearly $4 million consumed by a fraudulent receiver.

There is no mechanism to get that back. You win. And you are still destroyed.

My family and I moved to Ireland to take a break. We were through the nightmare and wanted to recover. Or so we thought.

Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

When I flew home to see my dying father, I was arrested at Los Angeles International Airport. The Biden DOJ had indicted me for the same conduct the FTC had litigated for four years and won nothing from — conduct the prior Trump administration's DOJ had already reviewed and declined to charge.

The Trump administration's own 2018 “No Piling On” directive explicitly prohibits this practice. The alleged consumer harm: approximately $154, across 756,000 customers who all received their product or a refund. My criminal defense costs: in the millions and climbing.

What is happening in my case now has no precedent in American federal prosecution. The supervising AUSA withdrew in April 2025. No replacement has appeared in 14 months. There is no confirmed U.S. attorney supervising the case. The DOJ unit employing the trial attorney was abolished in September 2025. Thirty-one demands for that authorization have gone unanswered. The prosecution continues anyway.

Six fully briefed motions to dismiss — covering fraud on the court, due process, double jeopardy, evidence suppression, and the “No Piling On” violation — have all been denied by District Court Judge Jesus Bernal, an Obama appointee.

Every player in this case, with the exception of myself, is a Biden or Obama appointee. This is what Biden-Obama weaponization looks like — a rogue agency, an unauthorized prosecution, and politically appointed judges, all targeting an American entrepreneur who built American manufacturing and supported President Trump.

I have filed a restitution claim with the DOJ Anti-Weaponization Fund. I am not asking for sympathy. I am asking for what the rule of law promises: that the government must prove its case before it destroys you. Right now, for me, that promise has not been kept. I am writing this so that every American understands just what weaponization by the government really means.

Editor’s note: This article was originally published by RealClearPolicy and made available via RealClearWire.

The great motor oil shortage of 2026 is another fake, media-driven panic — and drivers are paying the price

America is running out of motor oil!

At least, that’s the latest media-driven crisis making the rounds — and making consumers nervous. Shelves stripped bare by panic buying, retailers quietly raising prices, and everyone blaming “supply chains.”

Older vehicles were often far more forgiving. Many could run multiple oil viscosities without major drama.

Sound familiar?

It should. Welcome to the reboot of 2020’s “great toilet paper shortage.” This time, the same playbook is being used with synthetic motor oil.

Spoiler alert: There is no nationwide motor oil collapse.

Slick trick

Your car is not about to become undrivable because America suddenly “ran out” of lubricants. Most drivers will probably notice little more than higher prices and fewer discount sales.

Yes, there is a legitimate supply issue involving some specialty synthetic base oils used in certain ultra-low-viscosity lubricants. Shipping disruptions, refinery problems, and instability in parts of the Middle East and Asia have tightened supply for these specialized lubricants.

The American Petroleum Institute even activated emergency provisional licensing flexibility for some lubricant formulations because certain approved ingredients became harder to source. That’s not something done casually.

But these high-end Group III base oils — thinner oils designed primarily to help automakers meet fuel economy and emissions targets — are only used in specific synthetic formulations like 0W-8, 0W-16, and certain OEM-specific blends required in some newer vehicles.

So if your car has a new Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, Ford, or GM engine designed around low-viscosity lubricants, you could face higher prices, fewer choices, or occasional temporary shortages of specific formulations.

That’s a very different story from, “America is running out of oil.”

CBS Photo Archive/Getty Images

Primed for panic

Even if your car is affected, the impact will likely show up as higher maintenance costs, reduced sales promotions, and occasional difficulty finding certain premium synthetic blends. That’s annoying, especially when vehicle ownership costs are already skyrocketing from inflation, insurance increases, expensive repairs, and high interest rates. But it’s hardly an automotive apocalypse.

But the media narrative is turning a narrow industrial issue into another broad consumer panic, and once again, fear is becoming profitable.

Most conventional motor oils are still widely available. Most drivers using common viscosities like 5W-30 or 10W-30 are not likely to face major supply issues. You can still walk into most parts stores, retailers, and service centers and find plenty of oil on the shelf.

But that nuance doesn’t generate clicks.

Instead, social media influencers and breathless news coverage are lumping everything together under the terrifying word “shortage” because panic spreads faster than facts. Suddenly consumers start hearing rumors that oil changes may become impossible, stores will run dry, and everyone needs to buy cases of oil immediately before it disappears forever.

That panic buying itself becomes the problem.

Memory wipe

The toilet paper fiasco proved how quickly consumer psychology can create artificial shortages. There was never a true nationwide inability to manufacture toilet paper. The system broke because consumers started hoarding far more than they normally purchased, overwhelming distribution and retail inventory systems that were never designed for panic-level buying behavior.

Now we’re watching the same pattern develop in automotive service.

Some repair shops and distributors are already stockpiling certain synthetic products because they expect higher prices and tighter inventories. Consumers are hearing “shortage” and buying extra oil they otherwise would not have purchased. Retailers are responding by raising prices early, sometimes well ahead of any actual supply impact.

Which raises the question: At what point does anticipation become opportunistic pricing?

Thin is in

The bigger question, however, is why we’re in this situation at all. The answer points to increasing government pressure on the auto industry.

Modern engines have become increasingly dependent on hyper-specific lubricants largely because automakers were chasing federal fuel economy targets. Thinner oils reduce internal drag slightly, helping manufacturers squeeze out small efficiency gains that look good on government testing charts.

But that engineering strategy also created greater dependence on specialized synthetic supply chains.

Older vehicles were often far more forgiving. Many could run multiple oil viscosities without major drama. Today’s engines are increasingly calibrated around exact formulations, exact additives, and exact viscosity requirements. That means even a relatively small disruption in specialized synthetic oil supply suddenly becomes a much bigger issue for dealerships and owners of newer vehicles.

If you own an older truck running conventional 5W-30, you’re probably in much better shape than someone driving a brand-new vehicle requiring a very specific OEM-approved 0W-8 synthetic blend.

If your vehicle requires a highly specialized synthetic oil, keeping enough for your next oil change is reasonable. Buying a lifetime supply because somebody on TikTok said that “the shelves are going empty” is exactly the kind of irrational behavior that creates unnecessary shortages in the first place.

The bigger concern should actually be how quickly we’re manipulated into panic consumption cycles every time there’s even a modest supply disruption.

We’ve seen this movie before.

And unless consumers stop reacting emotionally every time a scary headline appears, we’ll probably see it again with the next product too.

Two Lives Upended By Vindictive Prosecutors Underscore The Need For Anti-Weaponization Fund

Jim Troupis and Dr. Ron Elfenbein, dragged through hell by abusive prosecutors, underscore the need for the DOJ's Anti-Weaponization Fund.

Covid Dissenter Alex Berenson’s Free Speech Victory Might Be The First Of Many

Berenson told The Federalist, 'the government’s admission is a crucial step forward in our case.'

The AI boom is turning public meetings into crime scenes

Artificial Intelligence Is Rewarding High School Grads For Being Dishonest Frauds

When the government takes everything without proving anything

The great motor oil shortage of 2026 is another fake, media-driven panic — and drivers are paying the price

Slick trick

Primed for panic

Memory wipe

Thin is in

Two Lives Upended By Vindictive Prosecutors Underscore The Need For Anti-Weaponization Fund

Why Thomas Massie Lost

Covid Dissenter Alex Berenson’s Free Speech Victory Might Be The First Of Many

Far-Left Academics Wrote Scientific Advisory Guide Used To Influence Judges

Join the revival: Blaze Media's Sunday church series launches this weekend

Trans-identifying Democrat accused of threatening to kill Trump

Cancel Culture Is Just Maoism With Less Killing

‘We Will Remember What They Try To Cancel:’ New Database Quantifies Campus Cancel Culture

Foo Fighters to reopen Madison Square Garden, but only vaccinated can attend concert – fans are furious: 'I'll never buy another ticket'

Angry demonstrators swarm, scream at NYC diners: 'We don't want your fing taqueria, owned by fing white men!'

Slick trick

Primed for panic

Memory wipe

Thin is in

We’ll keep you informed with top stories for conservatives who want to become informed decision makers.