Rothbard Was Right: Libertarians Must Never Warm to the Warfare State

 Murray Rothbard argued that libertarians should not support a warfare state, as it conflicts with the principles of a free-market system. His views from 1977 remain relevant today, especially regarding the inconsistency within self-identified libertarians who support interventionist foreign policies while simultaneously advocating for libertarian economic principles.

1. Debate on Interventionism:

• Rothbard critiqued articles in Reason Magazine supporting interventionism, questioning why libertarians would even debate such a position.

• He highlighted that debates about abolishing certain government regulations and practices are seldom featured, which shows a bias in what is considered open for discussion.

2. Current Libertarian Stance:

• Today, many libertarians still endorse interventionism, with figures like Javier Milei promoting policies that contradict libertarian ideals.

• Rothbard’s argument is that the push for a global empire through war and foreign interventions contradicts the principles of laissez-faire economics.

3. Economic Impact of War:

• Maintaining military operations and global presence is costly and requires taxes and inflation, which libertarians generally oppose.

• To fund a warfare state without income tax or Federal Reserve support would necessitate raising tariffs and implementing harsh taxation, which contradicts a libertarian vision of minimal government.

4. Consequences of Warfare on Society:

• Rothbard references Randolph Bourne’s assertion that "war is the health of the state," suggesting wars enable governments to expand their power over citizens.

• Warring states often infringe on citizens' rights, employing oppressive tactics that can return home, thereby undermining the freedoms libertarians value.

5. Ethical Considerations:

• The actions of the U. S. government, including numerous crimes committed during interventions, are ethically problematic and questionable from a libertarian standpoint.

• Despite advocating for intervention, some libertarians overlook the moral implications of demanding that the U. S. take up international roles with resources taken from American taxpayers.

Rothbard’s insights from decades ago still resonate today, emphasizing that libertarians cannot support the warfare state while adhering to principles of freedom and free markets. The financial and moral burdens of an imperialistic foreign policy fundamentally clash with the core tenets of libertarianism. To truly maintain a libertarian society, both domestic and foreign policies must align with non-interventionist ideals, as the pursuit of a global empire threatens the very foundations of liberty that libertarians advocate for. 

https://mises.org/mises-wire/rothbard-was-right-libertarians-must-never-warm-warfare-state

John Thune Is Holding Back Vital Info on the Russiagate Hoax

 The issues surrounding the Senate's response to the U. S. Justice Department's request for information related to the investigation of alleged Russian collusion. Specifically, it examines Senate leader John Thune's actions regarding this sensitive issue.

• Earlier in the year, the U. S. Justice Department asked two Senate committees to provide records of communication with former CIA Director John Brennan regarding the Russia collusion investigation.

• The deadline for compliance was February 23, but by April, the Senate, led by Thune, had still not complied with this request.

• The investigation aims to uncover whether Obama and Biden administration officials misused law enforcement and intelligence agencies against President Trump and his supporters.

• Senate Republicans are encouraged to introduce a resolution and hold a vote to facilitate the transmission of the requested evidence, but no action has been taken.

• Thune's team is attempting to negotiate with Democrats to avoid a contentious floor vote, which could delay other legislative business.

• As this process unfolds, the acting Attorney General is intensifying efforts in related investigations regarding alleged weaponization of government resources.

The article criticizes Thune’s leadership and suggests internal Republican corruption may be a factor in the delays surrounding the investigation into the Russia collusion claims. 

https://www.independentsentinel.com/john-thune-is-holding-back-vital-info-on-the-russiagate-hoax/

DoJ Charges the Southern Poverty Law Center of Wire & Bank Fraud

 The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has been indicted by the Justice Department on charges related to wire and bank fraud. The case involves allegations that the SPLC funneled over three million dollars to extremist groups such as white supremacists while misleading donors and banks.

• The SPLC is facing 11 counts of wire and bank fraud, according to the federal grand jury in Alabama.

• The Justice Department claims the organization paid members of extremist groups to aid in its investigations, which they did not disclose to their funding sources.

• SPLC has denied the allegations, with its CEO stating they are under investigation due to the practices of using paid informants to gather intelligence on violent groups.

• The indictment's announcement included statements from acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, who accused the SPLC of contributing to the extremism it claims to oppose.

• Critics argue the SPLC is politically biased, suggesting that its "hate map" misrepresents certain groups, lumping together genuine extremists with mainstream conservative organizations while neglecting extremism on the left.

• Historically, the SPLC has gained significant financial support and power, leading to its controversial status as a major activist nonprofit.

The recent charges against the SPLC highlight significant controversies regarding its funding practices and portrayal of extremist groups. The SPLC's position in the charitable sector remains contentious, with discussions surrounding its political motivations and accountability continuing in the public discourse. 

https://www.independentsentinel.com/doj-charges-the-southern-poverty-law-center-of-wire-bank-fraud/

Virginia voters approve Democrats’ redistricting plan amid nationwide battle over gerrymandering

Virginia voters have approved a significant amendment that permits mid-decade redistricting. This decision primarily benefits the Democratic Party, allowing them to redraw congressional maps to gain more seats in the House of Representatives during the upcoming midterm elections.

1. Approval of Redistricting Amendment:

• Virginians voted to amend the state constitution, giving the General Assembly the authority to adopt new congressional maps temporarily.

• The vote results showed 51.5% in favor of the amendment and 48.6% against it.

2. Democratic Advantages:

• The proposed redistricting plan by Democrats aims to shift the current congressional delegation from a 6-5 Democratic-Republican split to a 10-1 advantage.

• Democrats argue this move is necessary to counteract Republican-led redistricting efforts in other states.

3. Context of Nationwide Gerrymandering Debate:

• The vote reflects a larger national debate on gerrymandering, with many voters concerned about fair representation.

• Criticism exists around the legality and ethics of redistricting, with Republicans challenging the amendment and seeking intervention from the Virginia Supreme Court.

4. Voter Turnout and Responses:

• Approximately 41.1% of registered voters participated in the special election, with significant turnout in areas supporting the amendment and lower turnout in predominantly Republican areas.

• Democratic officials, including Governor Abigail Spanberger, celebrated the approval, while Republicans expressed concerns about its implications for fair representation.

• Some voters expressed the wish for a bipartisan approach to redistricting rather than what they perceive as a partisan power grab.

5. Potential Judicial Review:

• The Virginia Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments regarding the legality of the redistricting maps proposed by the Democrats.

• The court's decision could greatly impact the balance of power in Congress through the 2030 elections.

6. Historical Context:

• Just six years prior, Virginia voters had passed an amendment restricting gerrymandering, emphasizing the evolving and contentious nature of political representation in the state.

7. Political Reactions:

• Figures like former President Barack Obama commended the victory for its representation of democratic principles, suggesting ongoing redistricting conflicts in states like Florida.

Virginia's approval of the redistricting plan is a pivotal moment in a larger battle over political representation and the fairness of electoral processes. The decision reflects party dynamics, legal scrutiny, and the ongoing debate over gerrymandering as states seek to influence congressional power balance ahead of the midterm elections. The measures will remain effective until 2030 unless overturned by the Virginia Supreme Court. The mixed responses from voters indicate a divide on the necessity and fairness of the redistricting initiative amidst national debates on democracy and representation. 

https://wtop.com/virginia-election/2026/04/ballots-tallied-as-virginia-takes-center-stage-in-nationwide-redistricting-battle/ 

Iran's military 'takes ayatollah hostage' with bombshell claim coup launched

 A power struggle is reportedly unfolding within Iran's leadership, suggesting that there may be a coup underway against the new supreme leader. This situation is further complicated by the ongoing conflict between the United States and Iran.

• Military Power Struggle: Reports, especially from Fox News' Jesse Watters, indicate a potential coup involving Iran's military against Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei. Watters states that there is confusion about who is truly in control of the country.

• US-Iran Relations: Negotiations between the US and Iran, which included a delegation led by Vice President JD Vance, were set to take place in Islamabad, Pakistan. However, the Iranian delegation did not depart, casting doubts on the talks.

• Current Conflict: Tensions escalated following US-Israeli strikes on Iranian sites beginning February 28. Iran made retaliatory strikes across the Middle East and has closed off the crucial Strait of Hormuz, impacting global oil trade.

• US Response: The US has placed a blockade on Iranian ports, targeting the economic pressure to prompt negotiations. President Trump announced an extension of a ceasefire while keeping military options open if discussions do not progress.

• Crisis Likelihood: Watters expressed that the military's actions may lead to a scenario where the Ayatollah is merely a figurehead, controlled by military leaders. He labeled the situation as a "soft military coup," indicating significant shifts in power dynamics within Iran.

The situation in Iran is increasingly volatile, with potential implications for ongoing US-Iran negotiations and regional stability. The power struggle may lead to further escalation, complicating efforts to reach a long-term peace agreement. As events unfold, the world watches closely, considering the effects of these developments on international relations and security. 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/2196851/irans-military-takes-ayatollah-hostage

DOJ charges Southern Poverty Law Center with fraud for paying white supremacist groups $3M to ‘stoke racial hatred’

 The U. S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has indicted the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) for allegedly making fraudulent payments to white supremacist groups over a span of several years. This indictment raises serious concerns about the SPLC's financial practices and raises questions about its role in combating hate groups.

• Indictment Details: A grand jury has brought 11 counts against the SPLC, stating that the organization made fraudulent payments totaling at least $3 million to members of extremist groups, including the Ku Klux Klan and neo-Nazi organizations.

• Specifics of Payments: Payments included about $270,000 to a leader involved in the 2017 Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville. Payments were also made to individuals associated with other hate groups, such as Aryan Nations and the Nationalist Socialist Party of America.

• Use of Confidential Informants: The SPLC has a history of using informants to gather intelligence on extremist groups. However, the indictment claims that the SPLC did not disclose to law enforcement that it was paying these individuals. Some informants were reportedly being paid while being publicly listed as members of hate groups by the SPLC.

• Allegations of Fraud: Prosecutors allege the SPLC engaged in a decade-long scheme to defraud its donor network by misrepresenting how donations were used. The organization allegedly created fake companies to conceal the payments and misled its donor base about its activities.

• Comments from Officials: Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and FBI Director Kash Patel emphasized that the SPLC's actions were contrary to its mission of fighting racial hatred and claimed the organization was actually fueling the extremism it claimed to oppose. Blanche stated that the investigation was not politically motivated and had begun before the current administration.

• Consequences of the Indictment: The charges could lead to the forfeiture of any illicit funds obtained by the SPLC if they are found guilty. The allegations have sparked a debate about the effectiveness and integrity of nonprofit organizations that track hate groups.

The indictment of the SPLC highlights significant issues regarding financial transparency and ethical practices within organizations that are dedicated to combating hate and extremism. As the legal process unfolds, it remains to be seen how this will impact public perception of such organizations. 

https://nypost.com/2026/04/21/us-news/doj-charges-southern-poverty-law-center-with-fraud-for-paying-white-supremacist-groups-3m-to-stoke-racial-hatred/

House Ethics Committee Releases Public List of Investigative Matters Involving Sexual Misconduct by Members of Congress Amid Swalwell Scandal

The House Ethics Committee has publicly acknowledged its work reviewing allegations of sexual misconduct involving members of Congress over the past decade. This comes in light of a recent scandal involving Congressman Eric Swalwell.

1. The Committee reported that it has investigated 20 instances of sexual misconduct by Congress members since 2017.

2. Their statement emphasized a vigorous approach to handling misconduct allegations, noting incidents involving both Congress members and their senior staff.

3. The House Ethics Committee underscored that behavior not meeting legal definitions of harassment or assault may still violate the Code of Official Conduct for House members, which has higher standards.

4. Eric Swalwell, a Democrat, has resigned from Congress and withdrawn from the California governor's race due to multiple allegations of sexual assault, including a serious claim of drugging and rape made by Lonna Drewes.

5. The Justice Department is currently investigating Swalwell.

6. Another Republican, Tony Gonzales, also resigned amid controversy following the suicide of a staffer linked to his extramarital affair.

The release of the Ethics Committee's findings highlights ongoing issues of sexual misconduct within Congress. The investigations aim to ensure accountability among members and maintain a standard of conduct expected in the House. 

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2026/04/house-ethics-committee-releases-public-list-investigative-matters/