Blog

Aargh! Letters of marque would unleash Blackbeard on the cartels

Just saying the words, “Letters of Marque” is to conjure the myth and romance of the pirate: Namely, that species of corsair also known as Blackbeard or Long John Silver, stalking the fabled Spanish Main, memorialized in glorious Technicolor by Robert Newton, hallooing the unwary with “Aye, me hearties!”

Perhaps it is no surprise that the legendary patois has been resurrected today in Congress. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) has introduced the Cartel Marque and Reprisal Reauthorization Act on the Senate floor, thundering that it “will revive this historic practice to defend our shores and seize cartel assets.” If enacted into law, Congress, in accordance with Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, would license private American citizens “to employ all reasonably necessary means to seize outside the geographic boundaries of the United States and its territories the person and property of any cartel or conspirator of a cartel or cartel-linked organization.”

Although still enshrined in Constitutional canon, the fact that American citizens can be empowered to make war in a wholly private capacity skirts centuries-long understanding over “the laws of war.” At best, a letter of marque is to be issued only in the circumstance of a legally issued state declaration of war. Hence, a licensed corsair or privateer is akin to a sheriff’s deputy, who even as a private armed person is sworn to abide by the order and laws of the state.

History, however, does not support this best case. The plain truth — again, over centuries — tells the story of private naval enterprise practically unfettered. These are no Old West deputies under direct command of a U.S. Marshal. These are licensed raiders, serving autonomously, as flag-waving freebooters.

A letter of marque, the King’s signature notwithstanding, is simply licensed predation at sea — and this is under the most favorable aegis, when said letter is actually granted to a private person when the nation is at war. Yet most often, for the last 700 years, a letter of marque is really no more or less legal piracy.

But why would states want to create such a legal justification for attacking rivals and competitors, pesky inconvenient minor states, or in this case, drug traffickers?

Keep reading

DHS Says REAL ID, Which DHS Certifies, Is Too Unreliable To Confirm U.S. Citizenship

Only the government could spend 20 years creating a national ID that no one wanted and that apparently doesn’t even work as a national ID.

But that’s what the federal government has accomplished with the REAL ID, which the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) now considers unreliable, even though getting one requires providing proof of citizenship or lawful status in the country.

In a December 11 court filing, Philip Lavoie, the acting assistant special agent in charge of DHS’ Mobile, Alabama, office, stated that, “REAL ID can be unreliable to confirm U.S. citizenship.”

Lavoie’s declaration was in response to a federal civil rights lawsuit filed in October by the Institute for Justice, a public-interest law firm, on behalf of Leo Garcia Venegas, an Alabama construction worker. Venegas was detained twice in May and June during immigration raids on private construction sites, despite being a U.S. citizen. In both instances, Venegas’ lawsuit says, masked federal immigration officers entered the private sites without a warrant and began detaining workers based solely on their apparent ethnicity.

And in both instances officers allegedly retrieved Venegas’ Alabama-issued REAL ID from his pocket but claimed it could be fake. Venegas was kept handcuffed and detained for an hour the first time and “between 20 and 30 minutes” the second time before officers ran his information and released him.

Lavoie’s declaration says that the agents “needed to further verify his U.S. citizenship because each state has its own REAL ID compliance laws, which may provide for the issuance of a REAL ID to an alien and therefore based on HSI Special Agent training and experience, REAL ID can be unreliable to confirm U.S. citizenship.”

It’s the punch line to a bad joke with a 20-year windup. When Congress passed the REAL ID Act in 2005. It was sold as a post-9/11 security measure to create uniform standards for state IDs, including clearly listing citizenship or lawful immigration status. State IDs that conformed to the requirements would be marked with a star. Contrary to the cheeky first sentence of this story, DHS insists that REAL ID is not a national ID system, and that it doesn’t involve a centralized national database. (Civil liberties groups say it amounts to a de facto national ID system anyway.) 

The rub was that REAL IDs would be required for entry to federal property, including, most significantly for the average American, airport security checkpoints. But the law was widely unpopular. There was such low compliance from states that enforcement was delayed seven times over the years, until finally beginning this May.

The project should have been scrapped years ago. America somehow survived two decades of terrorism-free air travel without REAL IDs. As Reason‘s Scott Shackford wrote in 2021, “The government is demanding that Americans give up more of their privacy to the feds, subject themselves to additional inane bureaucracy, and carry around proof that we’re citizens to be able to fly, even though none of that makes us more secure.”

And now we discover that DHS doesn’t even consider the thing proof of citizenship.

In a court filing in response to DHS, the Institute for Justice noted how incredible this position is. “REAL IDs require proof of citizenship or lawful status,” the Institute for Justice wrote. “DHS is the very agency responsible for certifying that REAL IDs, including Alabama’s STAR IDs, satisfy this requirement.”

The law firm argues that DHS’ policy of allowing officers to disregard proof of lawful presence likely violates the Fourth Amendment and DHS’ own regulations.

When asked to comment on Lavoie’s declaration, a DHS spokesperson said in a statement to Reason: “The INA requires aliens and non-citizens in the US to carry immigration documents. Real IDs are not immigration documents—they make identification harder to forge, thwarting criminals and terrorists.”

But of course, Venegas is a U.S. citizen, so he is not required to carry non-existent immigration documents.

DHS’ statement to Reason when Venegas’ lawsuit was first filed insisted that, “What makes someone a target for immigration enforcement is if they are illegally in the U.S.—NOT their skin color, race, or ethnicity.”

The agency never responded to a follow-up question asking why, then, Venegas was targeted.

Keep reading

The DOJ is flaunting the law on the Epstein Files. Why isn’t Pam Bondi in handcuffs?

Congress’s newly minted Epstein Files Transparency Act—a bipartisan law co‑authored by Representatives Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna—was supposed to leave no room for discretion. It required Attorney General Pam Bondi, who serves President Donald Trump, to release all unclassified Justice Department records related to Jeffrey Epstein within thirty days. Trump signed the bill, but his Justice Department blew the deadline and produced only a small fraction of the documents, many of which were blacked out. The co‑authors have responded by drafting impeachment articles and exploring inherent contempt. Their outrage raises a broader question: why can the executive branch ignore the law with impunity, and why does this seem to happen over and over again?

The impetus for the transparency law lies in the horrific pattern of abuse that Epstein orchestrated for decades and the government’s failure to stop it. Even after survivor Maria Farmer told the FBI in September 1996 that Epstein was involved in child sex abuse, officials did nothing. The latest document release confirms that the bureau was tipped off a decade before his first arrest. Many of the new documents show that Epstein’s scheme went far beyond one man; the files include photographs of former presidents, rock stars, and royalty, and testimony from victims as young as fourteen. Campaigners say the heavy redactions and missing files—at least sixteen documents disappeared from the Justice Department website, including a photo of Donald Trump—betray the law’s intent. The omissions have fueled suspicions that the department is selectively protecting powerful clients rather than victims.

A law that leaves little wiggle room

In addition to the redactions, entire files vanished after the department’s release. Al Jazeera reported that at least sixteen documents disappeared from the Justice Department website soon after they were posted, including a photograph of Trump. Survivors expressed frustration: Maria Farmer said she feels redeemed by the disclosure yet weeps for victims the FBI failed to protect, and critics argue the department is still shielding influential individuals. The missing files underscore that Bondi’s partial compliance is not just tardy but potentially dishonest; the law obligates her to release names of government officials and corporate entities tied to Epstein, and removing those names is itself a violation.

The statute instructs the attorney general to release all unclassified Justice Department records about Epstein within thirty days. This covers everything from flight logs, travel records, names of individuals and corporate entities linked to his trafficking network, to internal communications about prosecutorial decisions and any destruction of evidence. It prohibits withholding information to avoid embarrassment, and allows redactions only to protect victims’ privacy, to exclude child sexual abuse imagery, or to safeguard truly classified national security information. Even then, the attorney general must declassify as much as possible and justify each redaction to Congress. These provisions make the statute stricter than a typical subpoena and leave little room for discretion.

Keep reading

Bloody Diamonds: How Your Engagement Ring Helps Fund a Genocide in Gaza

Did your engagement ring help fund a genocide in Gaza? Quite possibly. Despite possessing no mines of their own, Israel is a major player in the world’s diamond business, buying up minerals across Africa and selling them to the West, netting billions in the process. Diamonds are Israel’s most important export, and directly bankroll the country’s ongoing genocide against the people of Gaza. MintPress explores the dark world of Israeli blood diamonds.

A Gigantic Industry

Any visitor walking through Tel Aviv’s exclusive Ramat Gan district will be struck by its wealth. Skyscrapers are everywhere, and expensive jewelry stores lines the streets. Ramat Gan is the center of the world’s diamond industry, with more than 15,000 people employed by the Israel Diamond Exchange in the business of cutting, polishing, importing, exporting, and marketing the stones.

Israel’s largest export is not tech industry or its food. Diamonds alone account for over 15% of all the country’s exports, with other jewelry also contributing significantly to its economy. Between 2018 and 2023, Israel exported over $60 billion dollars worth of precious stones.

Their number one customer is the United States. Historically, Israel has accounted for between one third and one half of all the diamonds sold across America, a growing market already worth $20 billion per year.

Genocide Stones

Unlike gold, diamonds are rarely hallmarked, meaning that few American brides know that their engagement and wedding rings were crafted and polished in Israel. Even fewer are aware that their purchase directly funds the slaughter in Gaza and Israel’s ongoing seizure of land in the West Bank, Lebanon, and Syria.

“Overall, the Israeli diamond industry contributes about $1 billion annually to the Israeli military and security industries … every time somebody buys a diamond that was exported from Israel, some of that money ends up in the Israeli military,” Israeli economist, Shir Hever, testified at the Russell Tribunal on Palestine in 2010.

Perhaps the key figure in the Israeli diamond industry is business magnate, Beny Steinmetz. Considered by many to be Israel’s richest man, the 69-year-old founder of Steinmetz Diamond Group first entered the industry in 1988, purchasing a production factory in Apartheid South Africa.

Through his charitable foundation, Steinmetz has poured money into the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF), including “adopting” a unit of the Givati Brigade, buying equipment for them. During Operation Cast Lead in 2009, the brigade carried out a massacre, forcing dozens of Palestinian civilians into a house in Gaza, bombed the house, and prevented ambulances from approaching. Rescue workers who eventually found their bodies also reported seeing the words “The only good Arab is a dead Arab” daubed in Hebrew on the remains of the building.

More recently, the Givati Brigade has been filmed setting fire to Palestinian food supplies, and a Gaza sewage plant, as well as demolishing more homes.

Since October 7, 2023, Israel has destroyed 92% of the schools and residential buildings of Gaza, shot around 300 journalists, and killed at least 20,000 children. UNICEF estimates that 3,000 to 4,000 children in Gaza have lost one or more limbs. In addition to its violence in Palestine, Israel has invaded and occupied Lebanon and Syria, and bombed Iran, Tunisia, Yemen, and Qatar.

The US Pays in Dollars, Africa Pays in Blood

Israel’s appetite for diamonds is directly fueling civil war and bloodshed across Africa, where it supplies military hardware with governments, warlords, and local armed groups in exchange for access to the continent’s mineral wealth. Israel-based International Diamond Industries (IDI), for example, secured a monopoly on diamond production in the Democratic Republic of the Congo in a deal that, according to a United Nations panel, included covert weapons transfers and the training of Congolese security forces by IDF commanders. The deal was fantastically lucrative for IDI, who paid only $20 million for a monopoly generating $600 million per year.

Meanwhile, in 2002 in war-ravaged Sierra Leone, for just $1.2 million in cash, Steinmetz himself managed to acquire half of the Koidu Ltd., a company that accounted for 90% of the country’s diamonds. In 2011, Koidu produced a reported $200 million worth of diamonds.

Why authorities would agree to such ludicrously low purchase prices might be explained by a 2021 ruling by a Swiss court, that found Steinmetz guilty of paying $8.5 million in bribes to the wife of the president of Guinea. These bribes, the court ruled, secured him the rights to lucrative iron ore concessions in the country’s Simandou region. Steinmetz was sentenced to five years in prison. The Israeli billionaire is currently facing similarly grave corruption charges in Romania.

The diamond rush in D.R. Congo, Sierra Leone and other African nations has resulted in civil war, human trafficking, forced child labor, and other serious human rights violations by groups intent on securing a slice of the diamond industry for themselves. But they are relatively small players in comparison to the Israelis.

Keep reading

PA Police Commissioner Appointed by Democrat Governor Jumps to FBI Despite the Final Butler Report Still Locked Away

The Western District of Pennsylvania’s U.S. Attorney’s Office celebrated what it called a victory for transparency when state prosecutors secured court approval to release a set of grand-jury-subpoenaed records to Congress. The order was made public during the busy holiday season allowing the Department of Justice to share pre-existing business records from the investigation of accused shooter Thomas  Matthew  Crooks in connection with the July  13, 2024  assassination attempt on then former President Donald J. Trump in Butler, PA.

During the Congressional hearings about the assassination attempt Patrick Yoes, national president of the Fraternal Order of Police, captured the mood starkly saying “There were critical failures of security at the event in Butler. It is important that we learn from these failures to better provide safety.” Federal attorneys now frame this document release as proof that law enforcement is being transparent.  Really?

Despite this ruling, at the same time, the Pennsylvania State Police (PSP) continue to withhold its report on the Butler investigation, quietly leaning on provisions of Pennsylvania’s Right-to-Know Law, especially Section 708(b)(16), which classifies “criminal investigative records” as exempt from public release. That legal shield allows the state to bury internal memos, communications, and even full reports without ever disclosing investigative results.  Meanwhile, nothing has been publicly released to date that proves accused shooter, Thomas  Matthew  Crooks, actually fired the shots at the rally.

The story of the Butler assassination attempt continually returns to one image: an elevated roof, with a clear line of sight, left effectively unguarded. Press accounts of official findings describe “stunning security failures” and “the unguarded roof, easily within shooting distance of the rally” where the gunman positioned himself, failures that congressional and independent reviews admit never should have happened. And, most importantly, no ballistic report has ever been made public.

The roof of the AGR Building, and everything that went wrong beneath it, sits squarely with the responsibility of Commissioner  Christopher  L. Paris, the PSP chief during the Butler attempted assassination.  Appointed by Governor Josh Shapiro in 2023, Paris testified before Congress about “stunning” lapses.  In news, again during the busy holiday season, Paris announced he would retire on  January 2, 2026, to take a position with the Federal Bureau of  Investigation (FBI). The Paris transition to the FBI, with Pennsylvania’s official Butler report still locked away, leaves questions regarding transparency, accountability and motive.

For Ablechild, as a national nonprofit fighting to expose behavioral-health industry links to violence, this is proof that “transparency” is selective. When violent bloodshed occurs, a school shooting, an assassination, a sudden act of mass violence, behavioral health usually is behind it, and the key records always stay sealed.

Ablechild argues that the public deserves answers about the family of accused shooter  Thomas  Matthew  Crooks, whose parents are both licensed behavioral-health professionals in Pennsylvania.  It is impossible to understand the Butler violence without examining that connection. Crooks’ parents should have no problem providing all medical, mental-health, and school records. Asking whether their work within the behavioral-health system influenced how warning signs were handled or ignored is common sense.  Material facts, such as whether Crooks had a treatment or medication history, any contact with state-funded behavioral-health programs, or was involved in any experimental clinical drug or device trials?  All of this critical data remains hidden under seal.

Ablechild calls this secrecy a public betrayal. The Department of Justice can proudly release selected documents to Congress, but the FBI and PSP keep their most revealing material out of public reach. Even basic questions are still unanswered, such as who authorized the body to remain on the AGR roof overnight while the medical examiner was ordered to return the following morning to identify the alleged shooter.

Keep reading

University Writing Center Rejected Proper English, Calling It “Linguistic White Supremacy”

There was a time when being a white supremacist meant something (for starters, that you were one in a million). Today, though, it appears that anyone can be a white supremacist. Why, all journalist Larry Elder had to do to become “the black face of white supremacy” was seek California’s governorship. And now all you need to do to become the linguistic face of white supremacy is uphold Standard American English (SAE).

That is, according to certain “intellectuals” — such as those at the Metropolitan State University of Denver’s (MSUD’s) Writing Center.

Yes, that’s right. Don’t dare tell students not to speak like a cross between Snoop Dogg and the rapist in the film Deliverance. Otherwise, you could be guilty of “anti-black linguistic racism.”

No, “Woke” Is Not Dead

Reporting on the story Monday, National Review (NR) wrote that MSUD’s writing center urged educators to dispense with SAE

in since-deleted materials published under its “Anti-Racist Practices for Your Classroom” guidance on the university’s website.

The writing center even rejected that SAE exists at all, and “fully support[s] students in using their English (whatever that may be) in communicating their thoughts and ideas,” according to a page that has since been removed from its website.

The center’s reasons for rejecting SAE include the assumption that there is a “correct” way to write, the implication that there is a “standard” when the United States does not have a regulating body, that SAE “is a social construct that privileges white communities and maintains social and racial hierarchies,” and that SAE privileges white society over other ethnicities.

Having gotten blowback, however, the university is now doing damage control. As NR also informs:

MSU Denver told National Review it is aware of the content and that it does not reflect the official policy of the university.

“The University has removed that content and is working with the Writing Center to review it to ensure alignment with the institution’s mission, values and academic best practices,” an MSU Denver spokesperson told NR. “MSU Denver remains committed to rigorous academic standards and preparing all students for success in life and careers.”

So that should be it for the story, right? Not exactly.

Keep reading

NYC poised to force landlords to sell private property to non-profits to ensure ‘affordable housing’

The New York City Council has passed what has been called the Community Opportunity to Purchase Act (COPA) that will force private building owners to offer up their property to nonprofits and government entities before they make any private sale, effectively causing massive delays in property sales and other regulatory hurdles in the Big Apple’s housing industry.

In the scenario that it is passed, NYC will have the largest COPA program in the country. The act forces landlords to offer their property to the city as well as nonprofits before the building can be sold on the public market. The lawmaker who sponsored the law, Council Member Sandy Nurse, claims that it will be a win for New Yorkers.

“Corporate interests and big real estate tried their hardest to block the Community Opportunity to Purchase Act with a misinformation and fear-mongering campaign, and they failed,” Nurse said about the law’s passage, per Pix 11. “Today marks the beginning of a new social housing era in New York City… COPA levels the playing field and makes it possible to preserve and create thousands of permanently affordable homes across our city.”

The act dictates that landlords must first tip off the government entities and nonprofits that qualify, and “may not take any action that will result in the sale of such covered property to a person other than” those entities. Then the owner must sit on that property for 25 days as it is up for sale to the nonprofits, which can submit a statement of interest.

If the statement of interest is submitted to the property owner, the nonprofit entity then has 80 days to submit a first offer. Only after rejecting any offer from the nonprofit during those 80 days would the owner then be able to list the property for public sale.

That, however, is not the end of the red tape. If there is an offer from the private market submitted after a building owner refused an offer from a nonprofit, the owner must then inform the nonprofit so that the nonprofit can offer a matching price on identical terms of the private offer and has 15 days to do so.

Keep reading

DOJ Grants Antitrust Immunity To Nuclear Fuel Companies

The Department of Justice (DOJ) Antitrust Division recently authorized antitrust immunity to companies involved in the domestic nuclear fuel chain. 

Stemming from the set of nuclear industry Executive Orders (EOs) issued earlier this year on May 23rd, the Department of Energy (DoE) established the Nuclear Fuel Chain Defense Production Act (DPA) Consortium back in August to meet some of the goals directed by the EOs. The consortium has since been working “to develop plans of action to ensure that the nuclear fuel supply chain capacity for mining and milling, conversion, enrichment, deconversion, fabrication, recycling and reprocessing is available to enable the continued reliable operation of the nation’s reactors.”

After some initial hype following the consortium’s establishment, rumors kicked back up about the potential for the government building a Strategic Uranium Reserve (SUR). However, most of the interest in the consortium’s activities/goals fell off after the government shutdown delayed the first meetings of the new group.

Fast forward to last week when the DOJ completed the required justification for the US government to enter into agreements with companies involved in the nuclear fuel chain that would have otherwise been illegal under antitrust laws. The DOJ presented their findings on December 19th, stating “the purposes … of the DPA may not reasonably be achieved through a voluntary agreement having less anticompetitive effects or without any voluntary agreement. Given this finding, the proposed Voluntary Agreement may become effective”.

Keep reading

False refugee study used by Dems to justify open borders — and massive spending

Even as massive fraud schemes are uncovered in Minnesota, orchestrated primarily by Somali refugees, Democrats are circling the wagons.

Refugees and asylum seekers provide a substantial net benefit to the United States, they claim, generating more wealth than they take from the government.

But that talking point is based on a federal study that was rejected in 2017 by the first Trump administration as methodologically unsound and preposterous in its conclusions. The study was resurrected and expanded by the Biden administration in 2024.

Today, 73% of Somali households have at least one member enrolled in Medicaid, and 89% of Somali families with children participate in at least one welfare program.

These realities stand in stark contrast to the glowing conclusions of the Biden report, which claims refugees and asylees add a net $8.25 billion annually to federal coffers.

Keep reading

State Dept Revamps U.N. Funding: ‘More Lives Saved for Fewer Taxpayers Dollars’

The State Department and the United Nations jointly announced on Monday that they have agreed to a new framework for processing American funding for the global body, streamlining funds directly to countries in need and potentially saving billions in needless bureaucracy.

Given expected savings for American taxpayers of “nearly $1.9 billion dollars” compared to the way the United States sent money to the U.N. in the past, the State Department announced an extra $2 billion funding commitment to be offered directly to countries in need that the administration of President Donald Trump trusts to spend appropriately.

The move follows a prodigious effort by Secretary of State Marco Rubio to repair the federal government’s broken humanitarian aid system, including the shutdown of most programs under the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). The Trump administration has also withdrawn America from some of the United Nations’ most corrupt and dysfunctional bodies, such as the World Health Organization (W.H.O.), UNESCO, and the Human Rights Council. The administration has also distanced the United States from the U.N. Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) operating in Gaza, whose members were implicated in the October 7, 2023 invasion of Israel by the jihadist terror organization Hamas.

Despite these moves, the United States remains the largest funder of the U.N. generally and the host country for its main headquarters. In a statement on Monday, the State Department emphasized that America will retain its position as a humanitarian works leader and be better able to serve the needy through the new funding mechanism agreed to in the memorandum of understanding signed with the U.N. on Monday.

The agreement, the State Department explained, “establishes a new paradigm whereby the United States will replace the current unaccountable morass of projectized grants with a set of consolidated and flexible pooled fund vehicles at the country or crisis level.” This paradigm allows for money to be disbursed through “comprehensive country-level policy agreements,” cutting out expenditures related to the involvement of U.N. bureaucrats. It also allows the State Department to better “ensure alignment with American interests and priorities” for the spending involved, according to the statement.

“This means more lives saved for fewer taxpayer dollars,” the department asserted.

“Because of significantly enhanced efficiency and hyper-prioritization on life-saving impacts, this new model is also expected to save U.S. taxpayers nearly $1.9 billion dollars,” the State Department explained. As a result, the United States can pledge “an initial $2 billion anchor commitment to fund life-saving assistance activities in dozens of countries.”

“The U.N.’s web of overlapping humanitarian mandates have long suffered from ideological creep, maddening duplication and bureaucratic inefficiencies, and poor coordination,” the State Department condemned in its release.

Keep reading