Welcome, fellow Conspirators!
Hearty thanks to all the great Conspirators for Freedom who joined us tonight as we dug into big breaking stories, from Zionist war criminals visiting the US, to French piracy of Russian Oil, to the US-Iran-Mid-East crisis and nukes, based on excellent reporting we got to discuss. - Join us, m-f 6 pm on Rumble, or on X, and get the audio pod, free, via Spotify and here at Substack! Here are some of the major issues we explored tonight!
Subscribe now
Share
WARBREAKING - Hegseth Declares Pentagon Press Office “Classified Territory”The Pentagon, under Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, has designated its own press office as a classified space. This bans journalists from entering unescorted and requires controlled access (escorts from public affairs staff), effectively treating the area with security clearance-level restrictions to protect sensitive information handled by speechwriters and officials.
There have been court orders directly addressing (and blocking) this kind of Pentagon press restriction under Hegseth. In October, 2025, Hegseth’s Pentagon rolled out new press credentialing rules that required journalists to pledge not to “solicit” or report on unclassified/unauthorized information (or risk losing access), while treating independent reporting as a potential security risk. Most major outlets refused and walked out. The New York Times sued the Defense Department and Hegseth in December, arguing the rules violated the First Amendment (free speech/press) and Fifth Amendment (due process).
On March 20, 2026, U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman ruled key parts of the policy unconstitutional, blocked enforcement, and ordered the Pentagon to reinstate credentials for NYT reporters (and said the ruling applied broadly). He found it was viewpoint discrimination aimed at punishing reporters who seek information beyond official statements.
The Pentagon responded with revised “interim” rules (requiring escorts for reporters inside the building, closing the traditional media corridor, and moving press workspaces to an annex outside). The NYT immediately accused the department of defying the order. On April 9, 2026, Judge Friedman ruled again that the Pentagon was violating his earlier order and continuing to obstruct reporter access. The department has appealed and received some temporary relief (e.g., an appeals panel in late April 2026 allowed escorts while litigation continues), but the core restrictions keep getting struck down or challenged. The latest development (as of today) is that the Pentagon has now classified its own press office as a secure/classified area because speechwriters and officials there handle sensitive material. This blocks unescorted journalists from direct access to spokespeople — effectively imposing a security-clearance-style restriction on routine press interactions. This is exactly the kind of workaround the courts have already criticized as evading the March/April rulings.
IRANIt looks like the Iranian government has had enough of the fake US “negotiations”.
Ben-Gvir wants the “suburbs” of Lebanon “flattened” (more on this in the section on Lebanon, below)
Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) yesterday launched a retaliatory strike with ballistic missiles and/or drones targeting a U.S. air base in Kuwait — specifically Ali Al Salem Air Base.
Iran stated this was in direct response to recent U.S. strikes on Iranian sites (including radar/drone facilities at places like Goruk, Qeshm, and earlier actions around Sirik Island/Bandar Abbas/Hormuz).
Kuwait’s air defenses intercepted the majority of the incoming projectiles; there were reports of minor debris-related injuries to U.S. personnel but no major damage or casualties reported at the base.
Kuwaiti “officials” immediately condemned the attack as a violation of its sovereignty, but they have no problem w the US launching from Kuwait attacks on the sovereign nation of Iran. Curious hypocrisy, there…
This Kuwait-based strike is exactly what the Iranian Foreign Ministry was citing today as the “example” of their immediate response to any perceived U.S. ceasefire violation. Of course, Iran struck US bases in Qatar (Al Udeid) in March, so the Iranians repeatedly have pointed out the US presence on the soil of these nations, and they would be wise to stop facilitating the US aggression…
FM Aragchi just released this statement, in case people in the US still accepted the repeated nonsense from the US that Lebanon somehow doesn’t exist and Israel can act with impunity.
And Iran continues to stress that Israeli attacks on Lebanon must stop, emphasizing that the new attacks on Beirut are going to trigger united fighting from Iran and Yemeni forces…
This, this appears to be the latest - As of 4:40 PM eastern US time, Israel is carrying out further strikes against Lebanon and…
This, from Netanyahu
Jeffrey Sachs offers key thoughts on the overall situation
Subscribe now
Share
US ECONOMY - IRAN - FUEL
Oil prices are skyrocketing.
ISRAEL-GAZA-LEBANON-WEST BANK-SYRIAStrange, that Israel is tied to all of those PLUS IRAN. That’s gotta be mere coincidence, surely. Here is some of the deceptive nonsense that Trump posted earlier today, likely to manipulate oil markets. It makes no reference to ground troops in southern Lebanon or to air-based attacks on Beirut. Duh.
As we know, Israeli forces have not stopped their immoral ground invasion in southern Lebanon, moving north of the Litani River (including new positional advances and captures) and conducted airstrikes, drone activity, and other airborne arms in that area since Saturday. LINK
Share Gardner Goldsmith
The Israeli Offense Force took illegal control of the Beaufort Ridge outpost (a strategic Crusader-era castle site) and the Wadi al-Saluki area north of the river—the deepest land theft into Lebanon in 26 years. As of June 1, IDF forces were actively operating north of the river. Reports from May 31–June 1 confirm ongoing Israeli airstrikes pounding targets in the region amid the expanded ground ops. The Israelis over the weekend killed dozens of civilians, targeting schools and medical workers, dropping white phosphorus, and making a continuing mockery of the term “ceasefire”. Here is Daniel Davis on it, with an excellent reference to the map of Lebanon.
BUUUT, thank goodness! The EU just issued a smokescreen “statement” telling Israeli forces to lay off Lebanon. This comes at a time when Israel is finishing its latest phase of immoral expansion, moving up to and beyond the Litani River, and taking nearly 3,000 lives. Oddly, the EU was silent the whole time. Oh, and, by the way, 17 EU member states actively allow and encourage arms makers to sell to Israel, and that his not stopping. How strange… One wonders how much stock of these arms makers the mucky-mucks in each EU nation, or reps from those nations who are in the EU body, own.
Let’s lay out some of the current corporate-state-Israeli ties these Euro governments have. A large majority continued to do so in 2024 (the most recent year with detailed EU-wide data). The EU approved roughly €820 million in arms export licenses to Israel despite the Gaza conflict, with 17 member states issuing permits. These are typically commercial sales (not free government aid), subject to national export controls and EU Common Position rules. Top approvers (2024 data):
France (~€362–368 million) — largest EU exporter that year.
Germany (~€164–169 million) — historically the second-largest overall supplier to Israel after the U.S. (including air defense and submarine tech); some temporary pauses occurred in 2024–2025 but resumed post-ceasefire.
Greece (~€114–115 million).
Romania (~€103 million).
Czech Republic (~€35 million).
Finland (~€17 million).
Smaller approvals came from Hungary (~€5–6 million), Latvia, Croatia, and minimal amounts (€1 million or less) from Austria, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Estonia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and Poland. Some countries (e.g., Italy, Spain, parts of Belgium, Netherlands) announced restrictions, suspensions, or case-by-case reviews for new exports (especially post-ICJ rulings or for Gaza-specific use), but pre-existing contracts, components, or non-lethal items often continued. Data for 2025–2026 is less granular but shows the pattern largely persisted for many states
Take a look at this. As a former writer for MRCTV, which watches media bias, this kind of thing stands out to me. How about you?
Oh, and look!
BTW, Smotrich has an international warrant out for his arrest for War Crimes - per the ICJ. LINK
The Zionist mentality
And what day would be complete without the poison of Mark Levin?
RUSSIA-UKRAINE — THE EUROPEANSYep. The French are pirating. Headline “Kremlin slams France over ‘borderline piracy’ — RT Russia & Former Soviet Union” LINK
**POPE LEO ISSUES MASSIVE ENCYCLICAL ON AI - A SPECIAL REPORTPope Leo XIV on May 15 issued a lengthy and very interesting encyclical on AI, but it only was made public on May 25. Called “Magnifica Humanitas: On Safeguarding the Human Person in the Time of Artificial Intelligence”, you can read the full English text here: https://www.vatican.va/content/leo-xiv/en/encyclicals/documents/20260515-magnifica-humanitas.html.
From a libertarian, free-market, Natural Rights, perspective, Pope Leo XIV’s first encyclical offers a thoughtful but ultimately flawed intervention into the AI debate. AI simply is a tool—like the lever, the steam engine, or the personal computer—and tools endure precisely because they reduce human toil. Markets test and retain them only when they deliver net value to people. The encyclical rightly senses AI’s promise, yet strays by treating labor displacement as a moral crisis requiring top-down solidarity and regulation rather than the creative destruction that has always propelled human progress. Where it aligns with libertarian concerns—especially on consent, data exploitation, and state overreach—it does so inconsistently, subordinating individual rights and voluntary exchange to a collectivist “common good.”
Libertarians long have celebrated technological progress. In fact, the term “progress” is, and always is, subjectively defined, based on each of us being free to determine our wants, needs, expectations, satisfaction, and opportunity costs (trade-offs). When aggregated, human behavior operating in free market competition generally adopts tools and rewards their creators/dealers because the tools liberate time and energy. A lever multiplies force so one person moves what ten could not; AI multiplies cognition so one mind accomplishes what armies of clerks once did. As long as consumers willingly pay for these gains—cheaper goods, faster services, novel products—AI stays in use. The resulting reduction in necessary toil sees labor needs on a time/jewel/per-person level drop, which not tragedy but triumph.
Freed labor resources then can flow, via market signals, into higher-value projects: new inventions, art, caregiving, entrepreneurship. It simply makes sense. MOst of us, one can guess, don’t want to toil HARDER for our wants, but to toil less, and have time and resources freed to do more, improve in new realms.
And history confirms this. The Industrial Revolution did not leave masses idle; it created unimaginable wealth and leisure while shifting workers into roles unimaginable to their grandparents. Markets, not papal edicts, performed this reallocation through voluntary contracts and price signals.
Pope Leo’s encyclical acknowledges AI’s productivity potential (Chapter 3) in
paragraph 152:
“It is certainly desirable for technology to relieve humans of arduous, repetitive or dangerous tasks and to provide intelligent support for human activity.”
But Leo, overall, frames job displacement in neo-Marxist terminology, as “anthropological regression” demanding statist retraining mandates and implying the need for tax-funded social protections (par. 150–156). His embrace of the widespread, multi-generational, error of fearing technological progress as a “stealer of jobs”, even as he benefits from the productivity gains that tech progress (of any peacefully adopted form) provide, is a repeat of the anti-industrial concerns of the 19th Century. This might best be seen in three of his most pointed paragraphs, found in the section he has termed, “The Dignity of Work at a Time of Digital Transition”:
Paragraph 154:
“A society that guarantees employment to only a small fraction of the population, despite having a high level of technical development, risks exposing many to forced inactivity, a lack of responsibility and the absence of daily tasks and stimuli, resulting in human and cultural impoverishment. This creates a paradox of material progress and anthropological regression that undermines the foundations of a just and stable social peace. […] the Church’s Social Doctrine insists that access to work for all must be a high priority for public policies and economic processes, serving as a criterion for evaluating the human quality of any development model.”
Paragraph 155:
“Today, however, these instruments are no longer sufficient by themselves in the face of the transformations driven by AI […] New collaborative efforts are needed among political leaders, labor organizations, the business world and the scientific community in order to develop rapidly adequate shared regulations and protections, including at the international level.”
Paragraph 156:
“One viable path is, first of all, to establish social criteria for innovation. Here, every introduction of automation and AI should be accompanied by verifiable measures to protect the employment, retraining and participation of workers. […] Second, we need proactive policies that make continuous training and professional transitions accessible to all, ensuring that the cost of adaptation does not fall solely on individuals.”
This inverts reality. Unemployment from AI that respects property rights is like unemployment through the use of any other labor-saving tool. It is based on increasing productivity, allowing us to get more output for less input. It is transitional, not terminal; the market’s “invisible hand” reallocates labor more efficiently than any central planner because it is the reflection of our own free wills, our preferences, as transmitted through market price signals and responsive resource allocation. Insisting otherwise echoes the Luddite fallacy the Catholic Church itself once navigated during earlier industrial upheavals.
To put it in a way I might relate to higher-level students in a lecture hall: Leo, himself, uses tools such as a keyboard, electronics, even the alphabet and language, to allow his ideas to propagate in a more efficient way than, say, speaking aloud to a large crowd, then repeating the speech, or speaking to “verbal curriers” who might memorize his words, then travel far and wide to communicate through spoken word, over many months. These tools allow Leo to publish infinite copies of what might have taken scribes years to copy and circulate.
Leo now can communicate to millions in milliseconds, thanks to multiple layers of developed and adopted tools. Each of those tools displaced the “verbal curriers” and scribes, but, just as a lever freed up multiple people when the tool allowed one person to do the physical work of more than one, so, too, have all of the writing/publishing tools Leo employed to publish his thoughts.
The real trouble with AI is not that it replaces toil—the lever did that centuries ago—but that it risks violating property rights and enabling coercion. Training models on copyrighted material or personal data without genuine consent constitutes theft of ideas. Creators and individuals own their intellectual output and release it on their own terms; aggregating it without permission or compensation is plunder, no different from pirating a novel or hacking a diary.
The Pope’s encyclical gestures toward this concern when he insists data “is the product of many contributors and should not be treated as something to be sold off or entrusted to a select few” and must be managed “as a common or shared good, in a spirit of participation” (par. 108). Here the Pope approaches agreement: unauthorized extraction disrespects dignity and consent. Yet he strays by dissolving private ownership into collective claims rather than enforcing strict property rights and voluntary licensing—the Natural Rights solution.
Clear title, enforceable contracts, private adjudication markets, insurance, and opt-in data markets would solve exploitation without bureaucratic oversight.
Even more dangerous is government weaponization of AI. The encyclical warns powerfully against AI-fueled surveillance, profiling, and manipulation:
“When every action… leaves a trace, a new form of power emerges, namely the power to profile, predict and influence behavior” (par. 171).
Leo condemns algorithmic control that fosters self-censorship and exclusion. This echoes libertarian alarms about the surveillance state. AI in the hands of governments can violate the Bill of Rights—warrantless data sweeps contradicting the Fourth Amendment, predictive policing that chills speech, or social-credit systems that punish dissent. The document also decries military AI: autonomous weapons lower moral thresholds, depersonalize killing, and accelerate conflict by turning enemies into statistics (par. 183, 197–200). It calls for human control and ethical restraints. On these points the Pope stands closer to libertarians than many realize—state monopoly on force must never be augmented by unaccountable algorithmic power. Yet he ultimately prescribes more regulation, international oversight, and “active political involvement” (par. 107) rather than the radical limits on government that alone can prevent abuse. Subsidiarity is invoked (Chapter 2), but it is quickly harnessed to demand transparency mandates, equitable-access rules, and global cooperation—tools that expand rather than constrain state power.
The encyclical’s deepest divergence lies in its economic anthropology. It subordinates private initiative and profit to the “common good,” solidarity, and universal destination of goods (par. 60–61, 67). Markets are not trusted to orient AI toward human flourishing; instead, technocratic paradigms and profit motives are portrayed as threats requiring guardrails. Libertarians counter that the common good emerges precisely from individuals pursuing their own ends through voluntary exchange. Profit is the signal that value is being created. When AI companies deliver tools that reduce toil and expand choices, they serve the common good far more effectively than any Vatican-orchestrated discernment process.
In sum, Leo’s “Magnifica Humanitas” (approximately 42,000 words) rightly elevates human dignity and flags genuine perils—consent violations and state surveillance—that libertarians have warned about for years. Yet it strays by pathologizing the very market dynamism that turns AI from curiosity into widespread liberator, preferring regulation and solidarity over property rights and limited government. The encyclical fears a future of concentrated power; the libertarian answer is not more power in different hands but strict constitutional limits, ironclad property law, and the unfettered market that has always turned tools into servants of human liberty. AI will reduce toil and spawn new frontiers—if we let freedom, not fear, guide its deployment.
The gents from Author Update have some interesting thoughts on the Encyclical.
Share
Subscribe now
NDAA SECTION 224Ro Khanna is teaming up with Thomas Massie to try to strip this US-Israeli military-industrial merger from the NDAA. This set of combinations not only will spur direct US DoD investment in Israeli companies and prompt backdoor deals with a lot of M-I cronies, it will plunk down US-Israeli connected projects in numerous states, creating perpetual-motion machines of pork and graft that will be very difficult to end, because local and state politicians will serve up the same tired song of “these bring jobs to our area and people.” LINK
Here are phone numbers you can use to express your thoughts in DC
Subscribe now
US EXTRAJUDICIAL MURDER, PIRACY, IN CARIBBEAN, EASTERN PACIFIC
Antiwar has the story. Trump’s mass murder in the regions now is over 200 victims. Headline “Trump’s Boat Strikes Kill More Than 200 People, Fail To Curb the Flow of Cocaine to the US - News From Antiwar.com” LINK
That’s it for now, all! Many thanks for supporting freedom, and for sharing the links! And remember, you can back us here by becoming a paid subscriber if you would like, and feel free to watch Liberty Conspiracy LIVE on Gardner’s X @gardgoldsmith and on Rumble! Spread the word! Thanks, again! Please feel free to SHARE the links, and join us every M-F at 6 PM on Rumble, and my X @gardgoldsmith — and you also can donate to help the Liberty Conspiracy, itself! Just visit PayPal to help out! You also can mail GG at:
Gardner Goldsmith
PO Box 581
Amherst, NH, 03031 :)
Leave a comment
Subscribe now
Share
Share Gardner Goldsmith