

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
More than 50 years after the murder of iconic Chilean folk singer Victor Jara, the last man convicted of killing him has been tracked down and brought to justice. In 1973, a day after Pinochet's coup, Jara was seized, tortured, his hands broken to silence what was deemed music "more powerful than a thousand machine guns." Today, in a world tilting right, he remains an enduring symbol of resistance. Manifiesto: “A song has meaning/ When it beats in the veins/ Of a man who will die singing.”
On Sept. 11, 1973, troops under brutal, U.S.- backed General Augusto Pinochet bombed and stormed the presidential palace in Santiago to depose Salvador Allende, a Chilean physician who'd become the first democratically elected Marxist head of state in Latin America. Barricaded inside the palace, Allende gave a final speech defending Chilean democracy. "My words do not have bitterness but disappointment.," he said. "May they be a moral punishment for those who have betrayed their oath." He thanked the country's workers, farmers, miners, women, intellectuals, students for their heartfelt loyalty to "a man who was only an interpreter of great yearnings for justice." "I will always be next to you," he said. "My sacrifice will not be in vain. History is ours." Then he shot himself under the chin with an assault rifle.
A Marxist activist and singer hugely popular with Allende supporters, Jara had re-written the 1969 song Venceremos - composed by Sergio Ortega with original text by Claudio Iturra - as an anthem for Allende’s 1970 Popular Unity election campaign. Born to a poor farm family, Jara was mestizo, a mix of Indigenous Mapuche and Spanish heritage. He once said his first memory was hearing his mother sing folk songs as she worked in their garden or kitchen; after she died when he was 15, Jara went to seminary school but eventually decided against the priesthood. After military service, he studied theater and music at university, then turned to writing songs that merged tender folk music with political themes - rural working-class stories, brutal evictions of squatters: "We began to create a new kind of song. It was music that was born out of necessity."
In September 1973, widely recognizable, he was seized by soldiers the day after the coup and taken to Estadio Chile, a Santiago stadium now named for him, where about 5,000 people were being held. For four days, he was beaten, tortured, humiliated. An officer threw a cigarette on the ground and made him crawl for it; others played Russian Roulette with him; eventually, they broke both his hands before parading him through the stadium; later, through split lips, he sang a final Venceremos - "We Will Prevail." On his last day, said a fellow detainee, he found a pen and notebook and scribbled one more song, or harsh poem, Estadio Chile, later smuggled out. Two hours later, he was killed, his body dumped near a cemetery. His body had 44 bullet wounds 56 broken bones, including a shattered skull. He was 40 years old.
The Pinochet dictatorship went on to kill or disappear over 3,000 people, and detain and torture up to 40,000 during its brutal 17-year reign. It ended in 1990 through a constitutional process wherein voters rejected extending its rule and elected a civilian president. After years of legal efforts to hold Pinochet accountable, in 1998 a Spanish judge issued an international arrest warrant for his human rights abuses; he was detained in the U.K during a medical visit after the House of Lords ruled he did not have immunity, but Britain ultimately released him back to Chile in 2000 for health reasons. There, Chilean judges pushed their Supreme Court to strip him of immunity to face trial for murders and kidnappings tied to military death squads, but he died under house arrest of a heart attack in 2006, age 91, having never been formally tried or convicted for his crimes.
Victor Jara, one of the regime's most beloved and recognizable victims, swiftly became an enduring international symbol of resistance after the deadly, public silencing of his music. In 2003, Estadio Chile was renamed Estadio Víctor Jara; in 2009, Victor’s body was reburied in a public funeral attended by thousands of mourners; today, an annual 1,000 Guitars event held in his honor at that stadium also draws thousands. Still, the moral arc of the universe moved slowly. Over time, Chilean courts convicted hundreds of military officers and secret police for human rights abuses, but it was not until 2018 that eight retired officers were charged with Jara's murder, and that of Allende's director of prisons Littré Quiroga Carvajal. In August 2023, after five years of appeals and 50 years of evading justice, Chile's Supreme Court convicted them all in a unanimous decision.
The Court sentenced the eight, several in absentia, to 15 years and a day for the murders of both men, and 10 years and a day for their kidnappings, for a total of 25 years. A ninth was given eight years for concealing the crimes. The Court also dismissed all their appeals for annulment, and ordered the state to pay large reparations to the families of both men. Of those sentenced, 86-year-old Gen. Hernán Chacón killed himself moments after police arrived to arrest him at his home in a wealthy district of Santiago. Another, Pedro Barrientos, had fled Chile for the US in 1989; he was extradited back in 2023 after he was arrested in the US during a traffic stop. During his trial, one former soldier testified Barrientos liked to brandish his pistol in a crowd and declare, “I killed Víctor Jara with this!"
Five others have been in jail since then. Only one, Nelson Haase Mazzei, had remained missing since he failed to appear in court in 2018. A retired colonel, Haase Mazzei joined the Chilean army’s notorious Tejas Verde brigade in 1972 and was part of Pinochet’s brutal secret police; he worked closely with its head, Manuel Contreras, sentenced to over 500 years in jail for crimes against humanity before his 2015 death. Last weekend, in likely the final act of a too-long quest for justice, Chilean police announced they'd arrested Haase Mazzei, now 80, in rural Puyehue, south of Santiago. A judge ordered his immediate imprisonment to start his 25 year sentence; one article noted, "Impunity Takes Another Hit." Another said his defense lawyer has requested his transfer to Punta Peuco, a ritzy jail already housing many of the Pinochet era's murderers.
Through the Víctor Jara Foundation, started by Victor's widow Joan, a British dancer and activist who died in 2023 at 96, their daughter Amanda said she welcomes the news of Haase's arrest but, "Half a century after the murders, it is difficult to see this as justice." Still, Jara's songs live on from when Allende, after he won the presidency, spoke before a banner reading, "You can’t have a revolution without songs." "They were on the radio and television," said Joan in 1975. “The song movement was a tremendous weapon." Since then, music has continued fighting the fear authoritarianism depends on, transforming "political grievance into a shared language of survival" - Miriam Makeba, Mikis Theodorakis, Pussy Riot, America's Woody Guthrie to Dylan to Bad Bunny, who launched his 2026 tour in Chile with Jara's song, dedicated to Ho Chi Minh, The Right to Live in Peace.
In 2020, James Dean Bradfield, lead vocalist and guitarist for the Welsh alt-rock band Manic Street Preachers, released Even in Exile, a concept album dedicated to Jara's life and work, along with a three-part podcast. Bradfield discovered Jara as a teen, taken aback by a tenderness he didn't associate with "one of the only truly Marxist musicians. The truth...floats to you like a dream.” He learned more about Jara from poet Patrick Jones, whose brother is Bradfield’s bandmate; Jones had found two compilations of Jara songs in a thrift shop, became "obsessed" and wrote dozens of poems about Jara that, shared with Bradfield, became the album's songs. For Jones, the story of Jara's life and death is "a warning from history" that deeply . resonates with today's rise of the right: "Power is always afraid of those who stand up and say, 'There’s another way.'"
For the album, Bradfield wanted songs that span Jara's life, from his rural childhood to his final hours. He was moved by his singing of Venceremos near the end - "He died defiantly, but with grace" - yet felt, "If you just focus on his death, you ignore the journey." Above all, he wanted to highlight Jara's daunting courage and conviction throughout his life, a "naked truth" that rendered him what Phil Ochs called, when he met Jara in 1971, "the real thing." For Bradfield, it reminded him of the Preachers' 1998 song, If You Tolerate This Your Children Will Be Next. He also deliberately chose to include Jara's final Estadio Chile - "How hard it is to sing when I must sing of horror/ Horror which I am living, horror which I am dying” - which he calls "an anthem that became a prophecy." Of Jara's life and work, he hears "the echo time and time again. I wanted to show here’s an echo that doesn’t die."

- YouTube www.youtube.com
- YouTube www.youtube.com
Country music legend Willie Nelson on Tuesday spoke out against plans to build an artificial intelligence data center near his hometown of Abbott, Texas.
In a statement posted to social media, the 93-year-old Nelson said that his community, "like many others, needs to fight against data centers invading our land."
"The last thing we need," Nelson continued, "is a loud, water thieving, light polluting data center anywhere near our town (or any others for that matter). The strength of rural America has never come from industrial footprints. It comes from generations of people, open spaces, local businesses, and a connection to the land."
Nelson said that Americans deserve "thoughtful stewardship that doesn't steal farmland... and small family farmers' livelihoods," adding that data centers "only destroy the environment around them."
"Let's now allow our own demise," Nelson concluded, "or give up control over necessary resources in the US, and especially in Abbott."
Nelson's stand against data centers earned praise from Texas state Rep. Gina Hinojosa (D-49), who is running to unseat incumbent Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott.
"Now Willie Nelson has spoken: data centers are hurting Texas," wrote Hinojosa. "Greg Abbott has the sole power to fix TODAY what he broke. Abbott must sign an emergency order ending the taxpayer handouts he passed, and call a special session to end this data center madness."
Data centers have become political lightning rods in recent months, as residents across the country object to their massive resource consumption, which is leading to a major spike in utilities bills, as well as noise pollution.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) earlier this year introduced a bill that would impose a nationwide moratorium on AI data center construction “until strong national safeguards are in place to protect workers, consumers, and communities, defend privacy and civil rights, and ensure these technologies do not harm our environment.”
"Are you helping the president sell people advance access to market-moving information?"
That's the opening line of a Thursday letter that US House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) sent to Kevin McGurn, interim CEO of President Donald Trump's Trump Media & Technology Group (TMTG) Corp.
TMTG runs Trump's Truth Social platform and earlier this month announced plans to launch "Truth API" by August 1. API, or application programming interface, lets software applications talk to each other. Critics have warned that the new endeavor will give Wall Street firms faster access to posts by the president and other top accounts.
"Trump Media's target market for buyers of this service is 'high-frequency and algorithmic trading firms,' which would each pay a
handsome $100,000 monthly subscription fee," Raskin wrote. "Nearly half of each fee would go directly into the pocket of Donald Trump, who owns roughly 41% of the company's shares through a trust that he continues to control."
"Put another way, Trump Media will soon be selling early access to President Trump's so-called 'Truth' missives to the most sophisticated investment firms in the world," he stressed. "This insider-information scheme will enable Wall Street to profit from the president's frequent market-moving posts on major businesses and cash in on swings in stock prices caused by the president's buying and selling (or pumping and dumping, if you prefer) of publicly traded stocks to unwitting retail investors."
As Investopedia pointed out Thursday: "In recent months Trump has posted about new developments in the Iran War, which is particularly important for buyers and sellers of futures contracts who are trying to ascertain where oil prices are headed. Over the past year, he has also posted about tariff policy, government investments in publicly traded companies, and other corporate news developments."
Additionally, as Raskin highlighted, "Trump has promoted over 20 companies on his Truth Social account shortly after purchasing the companies’ stocks, including government contractors where the Trump administration exerted substantial ability to move markets in those companies' favor. Donald Trump Jr.'s investment firm, 1789 Capital, has posted a staggering 200% investment return since his father's return to the White House, with the president recently admitting that his oldest sons are coventurers in his corruption."
Once the new service is up and running, "whenever President Trump uses Truth Social to announce that a ceasefire is imminent, or prematurely leaks US jobs data, his customers will now be able to front-run the market using their privileged access to his social media posts, leaving retail investors, pension plans, and retirement accounts irreparably disadvantaged," he warned. "This is precisely the type of harm that federal securities laws are designed to prevent."
Concerns about TMTG's plans led Democratic Sens. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) and Adam Schiff (Calif.) to demand that US Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Paul Atkins launch an investigation. The senators wrote to the Trump-nominated SEC leader on Tuesday that the current administration "is the most corrupt in the nation's history," and the company's "new service threatens to undermine the integrity of capital markets."
In the meantime, Raskin—a constitutional scholar who managed Trump's historic second impeachment—is conducting his own probe of what he called a "reverse Robin Hood scheme," arguing that "this White House-Wall Street-Trump-Business feedback loop represents the depraved essence of insider trading." The congressman is demanding a lengthy list of records from the CEO of Trump's company by August 13.
"The president of the United States should be using the office to 'take care' that laws are enforced and to advance the public interest," he said, nodding to the US Constitution. "Instead, President Trump is, once again, using it to enrich in spectacular fashion himself, his family, and corporate cronies while also destroying the integrity of financial markets in the process."
After Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans advanced Todd Blanche's nomination to be US attorney general, attention shifted to a few GOP senators, including Maine's Susan Collins, who—as she faces a formidable Democratic challenger in November—said late Tuesday that she would vote against President Donald Trump's former personal lawyer leading the Department of Justice.
Collins has been in office for nearly three decades and often played the part of a "concerned moderate" while voting with her party when it needs her. Perhaps the most notable example was when the senator, who claims to support abortion rights, helped confirm US Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh—and then he helped overturn Roe v. Wade.
Now Collins—along with some other Republicans, such as Sens. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Bill Cassidy (La.), who lost his May primary to a Trump-backed candidate—must contend with a DOJ nominee who, in a recent phone call hosted by the White House Faith Office, said that "we have a lot of work to do" rolling back the Biden administration's progress on abortion rights, and "some of that is taking longer than we want."
Blanche, who is currently acting AG, assured those on the call—a recording of which was posted online by the religious group Intercessors for America, according to Politico—that the DOJ is "working hand in hand" with the White House, Department of Health and Human Services, and Food and Drug Administration to ensure that the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization ruling, which reversed Roe and let states enact total abortion bans, "becomes permanent in every single state," promising "victory."
Politico reported that when "asked to explain what Blanche meant by 'victory' and by making the high court decision 'permanent in every single state,' the Justice Department said his comments were made solely 'with respect to mail order abortion drugs' and did not elaborate further."
Collins, who is running against former Democratic state Senate President Troy Jackson, had not said how she planned to vote on Blanche before the panel weighed in on Tuesday; he advanced out of committee after striking a deal with a pair of GOP senators on blocking the so-called "Anti-Weaponization Fund" sought by Trump for his allies, including January 6, 2021 insurrectionists.
A spokesperson for the Maine Republican told the Bangor Daily News on Monday that she was waiting for the results of the panel's vote and "also holding off on a decision until confirming all the details of the agreement hammered out between Blanche and the two senators who were previously holding out, Sens. John Cornyn of Texas and Thom Tillis of North Carolina."
There are 53 Senate Republicans, and although Sen. Darline Graham (R-SC) has taken over for her late brother, former Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) remains hospitalized, meaning that with otherwise full attendance, losing three GOP votes could block Blanche's path to the permanent post.
In a lengthy statement on social media Tuesday evening, Collins said that "I have carefully reviewed Todd Blanche's qualifications," and "while I believe Mr. Blanche is a capable lawyer, the Department of Justice has become increasingly political."
"Mr. Blanche has taken several actions that have further eroded the department's independence, and that is the basis for my vote to oppose his confirmation," she continued, citing his approval of an immunity deal for the Trump family and the Anti-Weaponization Fund, his promise to "prohibit the mailing of abortion medication to women nationwide," attempted indictments of Democratic senators over their video encouraging resistance to unlawful military orders, and opposition to Blanche within the DOJ.
Brendan Duke, a former Biden administration economic adviser who's now senior director at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, responded, "Guess Senate republicans have the votes."
Collins said less than two months ago that "I do not regret" voting for Kavanaugh, despite the fallout that followed. At the time, she was running against Democrat Graham Platner, who had responded to the senator, "You should." Like the Supreme Court Justice, Platner was accused of sexual assault, which he denied; unlike Kavanaugh, Platner stepped aside. He was recently replaced on the ballot with Jackson, via a convention process.
Jackson, a 58-year-old logger by trade, "began his political career as an abortion opponent, having grown up in a Catholic family in the socially conservative St. John’s Valley area of Aroostook County," the Portland Press Herald noted last month. The Democrat has talked openly about his transformation on the issue, influenced by conversations with women, doctors, and rights advocates.
In a July opinion piece endorsing Jackson, Andrea Tirrell and Amanda Gavin, University of Maine PhD candidates who have volunteered at Bangor's Mabel Wadsworth Center, a reproductive healthcare nonprofit, wrote for the Press Herald opinion that "his seven-year streak (2018-2024) of 100% ratings from Planned Parenthood shows a track record we can trust."
Appearing on MS NOW's "Morning Joe" last week, Jackson touted that record and called out Collins for her contribution to the Roe reversal, as well as GOP attacks on healthcare access more broadly.
"When Susan Collins was helping overturn Roe v. Wade,” Jackson highlighted, "here in Maine... I co-sponsored one of the most progressive reproductive rights bills in the country—fought incredibly hard for it."
"I was wrong" to oppose abortion rights many years ago, he said. "But I'm very proud of my record over the past decade or more fighting for access across the state."
The director of Amnesty International Spain on Friday said both Spanish and Moroccan officials must "put their human rights obligations at the center of their response" to an influx of about 60,000 migrants over 24 hours into the self-governing Spanish city of Ceuta, an exclave in North Africa that borders Morocco.
As the vast majority of people had reportedly returned to Morocco after facing aggression from Spanish police and armed forces who had been deployed to the territory, where a humanitarian crisis quickly unfolded following the migrants' arrival, the director of the group, Esteban Beltrán, issued a reminder of international law pertaining to migration.
"The large number of people arriving in Ceuta and the circumstances of crossings must not distract from the fact that under international law, the principle of non-refoulement is absolute and collective expulsions are prohibited in all cases," said Beltrán.
At least 57 people were killed while trying to cross into Ceuta, The Associated Press reported, with some drowning and others killed in a stampede as many of the migrants tried to cross a barrier near a border checkpoint.
"Spanish authorities must also ensure that adequate healthcare and social care resources are deployed to respond to the needs of the people, including to cater for the needs of children and others at increased risk of human rights violations," Beltrán said.
On Friday, even after about 48,000 people were reported to have crossed back over the border, reports still indicated that thousands of migrants were sleeping on the streets of Ceuta, with many reporting they had crossed into the territory in search of work.
“You ask why everyone came—because there’s no work in Morocco,” Ajoub el-Arrot, a 24-year-old Moroccan migrant, told The New York Times.
Abdulah Buji, 21, told the Times that he would "have to work 12-hour shifts for a meager wage."
“But I haven’t found any opportunities here either, so I have to go back," said Buji.
Italian and French authorities said they would tighten controls at their borders with Spain in light of the surge.
The arrival of the migrants drew the attention of the far right in Europe and the US, where conservatives have been critical of Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez's migration policy.
Earlier this year, contrasting with President Donald Trump's aggressive and violent crackdown on immigrants and mass deportation campaign in the US, Sánchez moved to grant up to 500,000 undocumented immigrants legal status in the country, with those who had arrived before January 2026 and had authorization to work made eligible.
Conservative Spanish politician Isabel Díaz Ayuso said Sánchez had allowed Spain "to be invaded through Ceuta,” while the US State Department said the sudden influx of migrants was "the direct result of the Spanish government’s deliberate efforts to enable and facilitate mass illegal migration into Europe.”
Sánchez's government countered that the situation in Ceuta had "nothing to do with the regularization of migrants," and the prime minister said human traffickers had misinterpreted a recent Spanish Supreme Court ruling which said that people who arrive in the country by sea could not be summarily deported.
Claims that people could easily cross from Morocco into Ceuta "spread like wildfire over the past few hours through the networks of human trafficking organizations,” Sánchez said.
Another Spanish self-governing city on the North African coast, Melilla, also saw migrants attempting to cross from Morocco on Friday. Many Moroccans consider both Ceuta and Melilla to be occupied Moroccan territory.
While many of the migrants said they had been hoping to find work, they also told reporters that Moroccan authorities had urged the massive group to attempt to cross into Ceuta, according to the Times.
“They just kept saying, ‘Go that way, go that way,’” Youssef Alaoui, 26, said of Moroccan police officers near the border.
Some analysts suggested Morocco could be trying to pressure Spain out of strengthening ties with Algeria, a rival nation. The Spanish foreign minister made a recent trip to Algeria and spoke about importing more gas from the country, and Sánchez also recently visited.
“It is impossible for nearly 50,000 people to cross the border between Morocco and Spain in a single day without Morocco having a hand in it,” Lorenzo Gabrielli, a senior researcher at Pompeu Fabra University in Barcelona, told the Times.
Meanwhile, Portuguese author and former Secretary of State for European Affairs Bruno Maçães pointed to calls made by pro-Israel think tanks in April for Israel to "help Morocco take over Ceuta in order to punish Spain" for its pro-Palestinian, anti-Israeli positions.
"Spain's refusal to allow the United States access to its Rota and Morón military bases during the Iran campaign, its consistent failure to meet NATO defense spending targets, and Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez's confrontational posture toward the Trump administration have collectively generated something rare in North African affairs: a genuine crack in Spain's strategic armor over Ceuta and Melilla," wrote Amine Ayoub, a fellow at the Middle East Forum in April. "Into that crack, Morocco's most consequential new partner, Israel, is uniquely positioned to press."
Ayoub continued:
Israel can advance Morocco's cause through three distinct channels. First, through direct diplomatic signaling. Israeli acknowledgment that Spain's continued occupation of African territory undermines the post-colonial credibility that normalization frameworks require would reframe Ceuta and Melilla as a regional governance issue, not merely a bilateral spat. Second, through Washington corridors where Israel's influence is considerable, Israeli officials can amplify the case that Morocco's strategic contribution, anchoring the western Mediterranean, controlling the southern approach to the Strait of Gibraltar, and serving as America's longest-standing treaty partner, warrants concrete American support on its most persistent territorial demand. Third, Israel can expose Spain's glaring hypocrisy. Madrid has been among the loudest European voices condemning Israeli territorial policies and settlements. Spain recognized a Palestinian state in 2024 while simultaneously maintaining European enclaves on African soil that predate modern Israel by four centuries.
Danny Danon, Israel's ambassador to the United Nations, said Thursday that Spain "never misses an opportunity to lecture Israel."
"Maybe before it continues lecturing us," he said, "it’s time it explained to the world why it still maintains colonial enclaves in Africa."
Maçães said it was unclear whether Israel had pushed to "advance Morocco's cause," as Ayoub wrote, but he added, "whether or not the US and Israel were involved before the fact, they were deeply involved and intensely active after the fact, especially trying to use [the crisis in Ceuta] against the current Spanish government."
As the Israeli government faces increasing scrutiny for its enabling of settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank, the Israel Defense Forces has reportedly closed an investigation into one of the most brutal assaults documented in recent memory. Nobody has been charged.
Haaretz reported on Friday that the Military Advocate General’s Office has closed its investigation into an incident from October 12, 2023, in which about two dozen armed settlers attacked the village of Wadi as-Seeq, about 10 miles east of Ramallah, where most residents had been driven out by violence by a nearby Israeli outpost.
Three Palestinian men who'd remained in the village to help evacuate the local Bedouin community were detained by the gang of Israelis, who they said tortured them for hours, stripping them naked, beating them, urinating on them, burning them with cigarettes, and sexually abusing them.
Several Israeli peace activists also said they were attacked during the incident and corroborated much of the testimony of the Palestinian victims.
A photo of the three men stripped, bound, and blindfolded quickly made international headlines and drew condemnation from human rights organizations and even some pro-Israel groups like the US-based Israel Policy Forum, which called the reports "sickening and inexcusable."
The military prosecutor's office apparently found it very excusable. According to Haaretz:
The Military Advocate General's Office decided that the evidence collected did not establish the involvement of specific soldiers to the standard required for criminal prosecution.
The decision was made even though, following the initial publication, several soldiers who were present at the scene—including the unit's commander—were dismissed.
The soldiers were from the IDF Desert Frontier unit, a unit that recruits "hilltop youth," radical and often violent settler youths from illegal West Bank outposts. Some of the victims said that settlers also took part in the assault alongside the soldiers.
The dismissal of the case comes amid what the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data (ACLED) described as "an unprecedented surge in settler-related violence" this year, particularly this summer. June saw a record 460 settler-related attacks, and the trend has continued into July, with 360 documented incidents between July 1-24.
The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights warned on Wednesday that settler violence was at an "all-time high," noting that 18 Palestinians have been killed so far this year in incidents linked to settler attacks, more than the 17 who were killed all of last year.
The Israeli government, meanwhile, approved over $430 million to establish 34 new settlements in the West Bank earlier this year.
"The increase is part of a broader upward trend in settler violence that has been developing since 2023 but has accelerated significantly in 2026," said Nasser Khdour, Middle East Assistant Research Manager at ACLED. "Recorded incidents include attacks on Palestinians and their property, land seizures, looting activities, uprooting trees, grazing on Palestinian land, and clashes with Palestinians."
As The Times of Israel noted on Friday: "Israel has largely failed to crack down on such attacks, with arrests rare, indictments even rarer, and convictions almost unheard of. The current government has been accused of turning a blind eye to the phenomenon or even tacitly supporting it."
Members of the IDF have often been documented either directly participating in the violence or providing protection to settlers who are.
Earlier this month, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claimed during a CNN interview that his government was working hard to bring violent settlers to justice and conducting "real investigations."
But he also minimized the problem of settler violence that has become rampant, boiling it down to about “150 or so juvenile delinquents" causing mayhem while stating that they don't represent the broader settler community.
There have been no reported charges coming from this month's deadly attacks, which have resulted in the deaths of at least eight Palestinians and many more injuries, according to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.
A Guardian analysis on July 21 found that Israel has not once prosecuted any of its citizens for killing a Palestinian in the West Bank at any point this decade.
"Anti-abortion zealots like Todd Blanche would not stop until they could restrict our bodily autonomy to the furthest degree," said one critic.
Reproductive rights groups are sounding the alarm about a recent pledge made by acting US Attorney General Todd Blanche to make every state adhere to anti-abortion laws passed in red states.
In a phone call last week hosted by the White House Faith Office, Blanche told a religious group that he would work would work to ensure the US Supreme Court's Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision that overturned the constitutional right to an abortion “becomes permanent in every single state.”
During the call, Blanche hinted that the Trump administration would place restrictions on the ability to mail drugs such as mifepristone to states that have outlawed abortion.
"If states have said, ‘We are going to protect the unborn and we’re going to protect every life from the moment of conception,’ we’re putting practices and policies in place so that other states and other organizations can’t attack that,” Blanche said. "They can’t do things like they’re doing with mailing in mail-order drugs."
In an analysis published Wednesday, journalist Jessica Valenti argued that Blanche's pledge would not result in a nationwide ban on abortions, but rather "stopping the shipping of abortion medication under the auspices of adhering to Dobbs."
"If we lost telemedicine abortion, there would be devastating national consequences," Valenti emphasized. "You could even argue—and I have!—that banning the shipping of abortion pills amounts to a backdoor national ban."
In a Tuesday social media post, Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.) highlighted Blanche's call and warned that confirming him as AG permanently would be a green light to assault women's rights.
"Todd Blanche made clear in these secret calls with anti-choice activists that he wants to resurrect the Comstock Act—an antiquated anti-vice law from before women had the right to vote—to ban sending medication abortion in the mail," wrote Smith. "Republicans will likely do what they always do and confirm Blanche as attorney general despite all of this, and once again, women across America will pay the price."
Mini Timmaraju, president and CEO of Reproductive Freedom for All, accused Blanche of "making dangerous promises behind closed doors to weaponize the Justice Department to enact a national abortion ban."
"We must believe Blanche when he says he will come for our rights," Timmaraju added. "Republicans are using every lever of government to attack reproductive freedom, and voters will make their voices heard this November to take our Congress back from these extremists."
Nourbese Flint, president of All* Above All, called Blanche's promise "an open declaration of his intention to use the Justice Department to stop the delivery of abortion medication."
"The lie they told us in the aftermath of Dobbs was that it was about sending abortion law back to the states," Flint said, "but we have known all along that anti-abortion zealots like Todd Blanche would not stop until they could restrict our bodily autonomy to the furthest degree."
Rights groups warned that giving Secretary Pete Hegseth near-total control of what is released under the Freedom of Information Act "will naturally favor politicization and avoiding embarrassment over public transparency."
Press freedom organizations are urging Congress to reject a proposal that they warn could allow the Pentagon to withhold massive amounts of unclassified information from the public.
As part of its recent budget package, the Department of Defense submitted a proposal to Congress in late June that would create a new exception to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), allowing the defense secretary to bar certain "controlled unclassified information" (CUI) from public disclosure if the military determines that the national security risk outweighs the public interest.
CUI is a broad category of information that is not classified but that the government considers sensitive enough to be distributed only to specific people. But under current law, the government can only refuse to release information requested through FOIA if it meets certain exemptions, such as properly classified national security material, protected personal information, privileged internal communications, or records whose release could compromise law enforcement.
The new law would change this, allowing the defense secretary to declare almost any unclassified Pentagon record as both CUI and “national security information" to prevent it from being released. This could affect access to countless documents of significant public importance—from reports on investigations into military action, to internal records about the military's rules of engagement, to audit and oversight records.
"The CUI standard is already so broad that were it to be incorporated as a FOIA exemption for the Defense Department, massive amounts of important information would be yanked from the public," wrote Adam A. Marshall, the director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. "That would be disastrous, especially when the Defense Department is at the forefront of so many stories the public needs to know about, from the United States’ war with Iran to the targeted destruction of boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific."
Clayton Weimers, the executive director of Reporters Without Borders North America, argued that the proposed rule change was unnecessary.
"The Pentagon already has extensive authority to protect genuine national security secrets. What it is asking Congress for now is something entirely different: the power to hide unclassified information from the public," he said. "At a time when the Department of Defense controls nearly one trillion dollars in taxpayer funding and makes decisions that can shape war and peace, the public deserves more transparency, not more secrecy."
Under Secretary Pete Hegseth, the Pentagon has attempted to dramatically clamp down on the flow of public information. It has held far fewer press briefings than previous administrations, issued requirements that reporters pledge not to release "unauthorized" information, and booted credentialed press from Pentagon offices in favor of administration-friendly outlets and influencers.
Secrecy has grown amid President Donald Trump's war against Iran, with the Pentagon withholding information about hundreds of US military injuries from the public and altering publicly available death counts to exclude the names of four US personnel recently slain in the region.
Last week, a coalition of more than 40 press freedom, civil rights, and watchdog organizations, led by Reporters Without Borders, sent a letter to members of the House Oversight Committee, arguing that giving the defense secretary final say over what information is made public would be especially dangerous and "will naturally favor politicization and avoiding embarrassment over public transparency."
Under the Trump administration, the Pentagon has already been much less willing to comply with FOIA requests than under the Biden administration. Pentagon data show that it took more than 30% longer, on average, to respond to complex FOIA requests in 2025 than in 2024, and that it granted only 17% of FOIA requests in full.
"The Pentagon is already too secretive, and the last thing it needs is a rubber stamp to hide unclassified records under the guise of national security," said Lauren Harper, the Daniel Ellsberg chair on government secrecy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation. “We don’t need the Pentagon hiding more information from FOIA. We need it to actually respond to public records requests, we need it to stop harassing journalists for doing their job, and we need it to be transparent and accountable to the public, service members, and their families.”
Voters also rejected an amendment that would have gradually eliminated the state’s income tax in what one Democratic mayor said would benefit the wealthy "while raising costs on hardworking families."
The Democratic mayor of Kansas City, Missouri was among those celebrating what he called the "TOTAL repudiation by Missouri voter of a core agenda of state GOP leadership" on Tuesday night after the state voted by a 60-point margin against Amendment 4, a measure backed by the Republican governor which would have weakened voters' ability to pass citizen-sponsored ballot initiatives.
"We took over control of the state of Missouri tonight, repudiating absolutely atrocious ideas," Mayor Quinton Lucas said in a video message addressing voters as election results came in. "Against millions of dollars, lots of special interests, Missouri voters are trouncing Amendment 4, which was going to take away our initiative petition rights, eliminate our ability to make sure we can get things done."
The Republican supermajority in the state Legislature and Gov. Mike Kehoe supported Amendment 4, which was spurred by the passage of a ballot initiative in 2024 that had added the right to abortion care to the Missouri Constitution.
The addition of the amendment to the constitution would have required a majority vote in each of the state's eight congressional districts in order to pass any future citizen-sponsored amendments, instead of a simply majority of voters across the state.
With more than 95% of votes counted on Wednesday morning, 80.3% of voters had rejected Amendment 4, while 19.7% had supported it.
The amendment would have created the highest threshold in the country for passing ballot initiatives like others that Missourians have passed in recent years, including ones that have legalized marijuana, raised the minimum wage, and expanding Medicaid coverage.
Opponents warned that under Amendment 4, an initiative could fail to pass even with as many as 95% of voters across the state supporting it.
The St. Louis American reported that the election result could signal voters' coming rejection of Amendment 3 in November, which would ban abortion in Missouri in most cases.
The state GOP suffered a similar defeat for Amendment 5, which would have gradually eliminated the state's income tax and replaced it with expanded sales and use taxes. Opponents warned the new tax scheme would have cost working families and lower-income Missourians more, with the average resident paying $500 more in taxes annually, according to the nonpartisan Missouri Budget Project—as high-income residents would have been required to contribute less to public spending.
“Tonight’s rejection of Amendment 5 is not only an immense failure for statewide leadership, but also a sign to out-of-state billionaire special interests that Missourians and most Americans have no interest in voodoo tax schemes that would spare civic responsibility for a few elites while raising costs on hardworking families in our state and our country,” Lucas said Tuesday night.
Mark Jones of the Missouri National Education Association—part of a broad coalition that opposed the amendment—told the Missouri Independent that "fundamentally, Missourians rejected the idea that they should pay for tax breaks for billionaires and then not be able to change to correct the legislature, not only on this issue but forever."
The Independent reported that Missouri Promise political action committee (PAC), which did not report any contributions from individual donors, raised $17.2 million in favor of Amendment 5. Opponents of Amendment 5 were outspent 4-to-1 on broadcast ads.
Another PAC, Protect Election Integrity, raised $132,100 and spent $28,653 through July 23 in support of Amendment 4. Freedom Principle Missouri/Missouri First PAC, also reported spending $45,551 in support of the measure.
State House Minority Leader Ashley Aune (D-14) said Missouri voters had "made clear they won’t let Republicans rewrite the rules to protect their own power and line the pockets of the ultrawealthy."
Referring to the abortion rights amendment that will be up for a vote in the general election, Aune added, "In November, voters have the chance to send another powerful message to Jefferson City Republicans: If you mess with Missourians’ rights, you will pay the political price.”
Countries in Central America and southern Africa are expected to be hardest hit by El Niño this year, according to the United Nations World Food Program.
The United Nations World Food Program on Wednesday warned that close to 50 million more people across the world are facing the prospect of acute hunger due to the El Niño climate pattern that has emerged this summer.
By the end of the year, the WFP projects that 49 million more people could be unable to meet their daily food needs thanks to El Niño, which features warmer than average temperatures in the Pacific Ocean and can cause an increase in extreme weather.
Countries in Central America and southern Africa are expected to be hardest hit by El Niño this year. According to WFP's analysis, southern African nations are "particularly exposed because many households depend on rain-fed subsistence agriculture," while nations in Latin America and the Caribbean "could see one of the sharpest rises in food insecurity, with more than 16 million people affected."
"El Niño is a massive threat to the food security of millions who are already vulnerable," said Carl Skau, acting executive director of the WFP. "The sooner we help families to prepare for these climate shocks, the greater our ability to save lives and protect livelihoods."
WFP said it's boosting its hunger prevention efforts in eight countries that are particularly at risk, noting that it has already "triggered anticipatory action plans in South Sudan, Chad, Mauritania, Uganda, Guatemala, and El Salvador, providing more than $14 million in lifesaving responses to support half a million people."
Celeste Saulo, secretary-general of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), warned in June that El Niño "will exacerbate drought and heavy rainfall and increase the risk of heatwaves both on land and in the ocean."
While El Niño is a recurring phenomenon, a Wednesday report in The Guardian noted that "its impacts and strength are being strongly affected by the climate crisis," with meteorological experts saying it could lead to the hottest year on record in 2027.
"We all knew they were going to spend their money," said Abdul El-Sayed. "We didn't know that they were going to outspend us $11 to $1. And yet we're still standing."
Abdul El-Sayed was on track Wednesday to narrowly win the Democratic nomination for US Senate in Michigan, overcoming tens of millions of dollars in outside spending by AIPAC and other special interests that sought to smear the progressive epidemiologist and boost his opponent, US Rep. Haley Stevens.
NBC declared El-Sayed the winner, but The Associated Press said the race was too close to call with over 90% of ballots counted. As of early Wednesday morning, El-Sayed was leading Stevens by roughly 21,000 votes—or just over one percentage point.
In his election night speech, El-Sayed stopped short of declaring victory but celebrated the "movement that we were able to inspire."
"Across that movement that we built, there was an inspiration in the idea that we could take our government back. Government of the people, by the people, and for the people instead of government of the corporations, by the special interests, and for the billionaires," El-Sayed told supporters. "And because you had the audacity to believe in that, you know that the billionaires, the corporations, and the special interests, they weren't going to give up lightly. We all knew they were going to spend their money. We didn't know they were going to spend $70 million of their money. We didn't know that they were going to outspend us $11 to $1. And yet we're still standing."
An El-Sayed victory would be a brutal defeat for AIPAC, the pro-Israel lobbying organization that shelled out over $30 million to defeat him. AIPAC cash accounted for nearly half of all the outside spending in the race, which was the most expensive Democratic primary in US history.
"AIPAC spent over $30 million to stop Dr. Abdul El-Sayed in this race, and that record-high sum wasn’t enough because Democratic voters have had it with the fringe and extremist view that our tax dollars should pay for Israel’s bombs, wars, and genocidal ambitions," said Margaret DeReus, executive director of the IMEU Policy Project. "With Michigan now playing a decisive role in selecting the next Democratic president, potential 2028 contenders should take notes."
The winner of the Senate contest will face Republican Mike Rogers in November.
Progressives also appeared poised to win other closely watched races in Michigan. The Associated Press projected that grassroots organizer and climate activist William Lawrence has won the Democratic primary in Michigan's 7th Congressional District, while progressive state Rep. Donavan McKinney led establishment-backed US Rep. Shri Thanedar—who received AIPAC support—in the 13th District, with more than 70% of the vote counted.
"AIPAC fell on its face in Michigan," the progressive advocacy group RootsAction said in response to the primary results. "Voters showed that they want what progressives have been clamoring for, including Medicare for All, a stop to endless wars, and true economic security."
"Typical Susan Collins: Votes against Trump when her vote doesn't change the outcome but lock-in-step when it does."
After Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans advanced Todd Blanche's nomination to be US attorney general, attention shifted to a few GOP senators, including Maine's Susan Collins, who—as she faces a formidable Democratic challenger in November—said late Tuesday that she would vote against President Donald Trump's former personal lawyer leading the Department of Justice.
Collins has been in office for nearly three decades and often played the part of a "concerned moderate" while voting with her party when it needs her. Perhaps the most notable example was when the senator, who claims to support abortion rights, helped confirm US Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh—and then he helped overturn Roe v. Wade.
Now Collins—along with some other Republicans, such as Sens. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Bill Cassidy (La.), who lost his May primary to a Trump-backed candidate—must contend with a DOJ nominee who, in a recent phone call hosted by the White House Faith Office, said that "we have a lot of work to do" rolling back the Biden administration's progress on abortion rights, and "some of that is taking longer than we want."
Blanche, who is currently acting AG, assured those on the call—a recording of which was posted online by the religious group Intercessors for America, according to Politico—that the DOJ is "working hand in hand" with the White House, Department of Health and Human Services, and Food and Drug Administration to ensure that the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization ruling, which reversed Roe and let states enact total abortion bans, "becomes permanent in every single state," promising "victory."
Politico reported that when "asked to explain what Blanche meant by 'victory' and by making the high court decision 'permanent in every single state,' the Justice Department said his comments were made solely 'with respect to mail order abortion drugs' and did not elaborate further."
Collins, who is running against former Democratic state Senate President Troy Jackson, had not said how she planned to vote on Blanche before the panel weighed in on Tuesday; he advanced out of committee after striking a deal with a pair of GOP senators on blocking the so-called "Anti-Weaponization Fund" sought by Trump for his allies, including January 6, 2021 insurrectionists.
A spokesperson for the Maine Republican told the Bangor Daily News on Monday that she was waiting for the results of the panel's vote and "also holding off on a decision until confirming all the details of the agreement hammered out between Blanche and the two senators who were previously holding out, Sens. John Cornyn of Texas and Thom Tillis of North Carolina."
There are 53 Senate Republicans, and although Sen. Darline Graham (R-SC) has taken over for her late brother, former Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) remains hospitalized, meaning that with otherwise full attendance, losing three GOP votes could block Blanche's path to the permanent post.
In a lengthy statement on social media Tuesday evening, Collins said that "I have carefully reviewed Todd Blanche's qualifications," and "while I believe Mr. Blanche is a capable lawyer, the Department of Justice has become increasingly political."
"Mr. Blanche has taken several actions that have further eroded the department's independence, and that is the basis for my vote to oppose his confirmation," she continued, citing his approval of an immunity deal for the Trump family and the Anti-Weaponization Fund, his promise to "prohibit the mailing of abortion medication to women nationwide," attempted indictments of Democratic senators over their video encouraging resistance to unlawful military orders, and opposition to Blanche within the DOJ.
Brendan Duke, a former Biden administration economic adviser who's now senior director at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, responded, "Guess Senate republicans have the votes."
Collins said less than two months ago that "I do not regret" voting for Kavanaugh, despite the fallout that followed. At the time, she was running against Democrat Graham Platner, who had responded to the senator, "You should." Like the Supreme Court Justice, Platner was accused of sexual assault, which he denied; unlike Kavanaugh, Platner stepped aside. He was recently replaced on the ballot with Jackson, via a convention process.
Jackson, a 58-year-old logger by trade, "began his political career as an abortion opponent, having grown up in a Catholic family in the socially conservative St. John’s Valley area of Aroostook County," the Portland Press Herald noted last month. The Democrat has talked openly about his transformation on the issue, influenced by conversations with women, doctors, and rights advocates.
In a July opinion piece endorsing Jackson, Andrea Tirrell and Amanda Gavin, University of Maine PhD candidates who have volunteered at Bangor's Mabel Wadsworth Center, a reproductive healthcare nonprofit, wrote for the Press Herald opinion that "his seven-year streak (2018-2024) of 100% ratings from Planned Parenthood shows a track record we can trust."
Appearing on MS NOW's "Morning Joe" last week, Jackson touted that record and called out Collins for her contribution to the Roe reversal, as well as GOP attacks on healthcare access more broadly.
"When Susan Collins was helping overturn Roe v. Wade,” Jackson highlighted, "here in Maine... I co-sponsored one of the most progressive reproductive rights bills in the country—fought incredibly hard for it."
"I was wrong" to oppose abortion rights many years ago, he said. "But I'm very proud of my record over the past decade or more fighting for access across the state."
"Americans deserve a government that works for them, not one that’s for sale to hedge funds and Wall Street banks."
US Sen. Alex Padilla on Tuesday introduced legislation aimed at blocking President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance, and future occupants of their offices from profiting by selling early access to official or personal social media posts that could move financial markets, calling the practice a blatant abuse of public office for private gain.
Padilla's (D-Calif.) Stop Corrupt Trading Act would prohibit any sitting president or vice president—and any business in which they hold a substantial financial interest—from selling advance or exclusive access to presidential social media announcements. It would also establish civil penalties for the sale of nonpublic government information through such services.
“This is out in the open—Donald Trump is the most corrupt president in American history," Padilla said in a statement introducing the legislation. "Despite already being the richest president in history, President Trump’s number one priority in office is to make himself richer while everyday Americans struggle to make ends meet."
“Selling access to his market-moving social media posts is just one example of the brazen corruption we’ve seen coming out of the Oval Office—and I am fighting back to put a stop to it," he added. "Americans deserve a government that works for them, not one that’s for sale to hedge funds and Wall Street banks that can afford the subscription fee.”
Padilla's bill comes days after the Trump Media & Technology Group (TMTG) launched a premium service offering subscribers expedited access to the president's Truth Social posts, a move that ethics watchdogs and government accountability advocates have warned could provide wealthy investors with an unfair advantage if presidential statements affect stock prices, tariffs, or other market-sensitive policies.
US House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) responded to TMTG's move by announcing an investigation into what he called an "insider-information scheme."
"These markets risk creating perverse incentives, undermining public trust, and commodifying human suffering in ways that warrant careful scrutiny."
As wildfires ravaged large swaths of the Western US, a group of Democratic senators on Monday called on federal regulators to rein in prediction markets offering contracts tied to such disasters, warning that turning climate-fueled extreme weather into financial wagers creates "perverse incentives" that could motivate arson and other crimes.
In a letter to Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) Chair Michael Selig, Sens. Jeff Merkley (Ore.), Alex Padilla (Calif.), Jeanne Shaheen (NH), Adam Schiff (Calif.), Jacky Rosen (Nevada), Catherine Cortez Masto (Nevada), Martin Heinrich (NM), Ron Wyden (Ore.), and Amy Klobuchar (Minn.) wrote that "prediction markets have been enabled to expand rapidly, increasingly inviting speculation on war, political violence, disasters, and public emergencies that raise ethical and public policy concerns."
"These markets risk creating perverse incentives, undermining public trust, and commodifying human suffering in ways that warrant careful scrutiny," the lawmakers continued. "Recent public reports have highlighted how Polymarket—the largest prediction market platform in the world—accepted more than $1.2 million in bets surrounding the Palisades and Eaton fires in January 2025. These fires devastated the Los Angeles area, claiming the lives of 31 people and destroying more than 16,000 structures."
"Offering bets on destructive wildfires threatens to minimize communities’ suffering all so the rich and powerful can profit," the letter argues. "There’s also the heightened risk—according to state and local fire officials—that individuals could be tempted to commit arson in order to make sure their bets are successful."
"By offering contracts on fires, prediction market sites run the risk of encouraging people to influence fires that have already started, creating additional concerns around public safety and insider trading," the senators added.
The CFTC controversially considers Polymarket and Kalshi designated contract markets (DCMs)—over which the federal agency has control versus state gambling regimes—and is currently developing nationwide rules.
The letter's signers asked Selig:
"As the United States faces yet another record-breaking fire season this year, the [CFTC] cannot allow these prediction markets to offer unrestricted betting on wildfires," the senators stressed. "While these bets appear to be offered only on the offshore Polymarket site, it is only a matter of time before other US-based designated contract markets try to offer these. The CFTC must lead the charge to rein in these contracts in the US and offshore and put in place commonsense guardrails to prevent people from profiting as wildfires threaten communities."
In addition to wildfires, Polymarket users can place wagers related to earthquakes, hurricanes, and volcanic eruptions.
Polymarket responded to the senators' letter in a statement to Claims Journal saying, "When tragedy unfolds, people turn to the news for commentary and to Polymarket for information.”
"While we recognize the risks associated with these markets, removing them does not prevent a tragedy," the company added. "It only makes timely, market-based information less accessible to those seeking to understand what may happen next.”
The senators' letter came days after Democratic New York Attorney General Letitia James announced a lawsuit targeting Polymarket competitor Kalshi for operating as “an illegal gambling operation" in "flagrant disregard” for the Empire State’s “Constitution, penal laws, and other statutes.”
Last month, a coalition of consumer advocacy groups condemned the CFTC's attempt to allow platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket “a green light to bypass state gambling regimes.”
“Calling a sports wager an ‘event contract’ does not transform it into a legitimate tool for managing economic risk,” said Eric Naing, communications director for Demand Progress Education Fund, one of the groups decrying the regulator's approach to such companies.
A Greenpeace representative urged governments to recognize the "once-in-a-generation opportunity to make those most responsible for the climate, nature, and inequality crises we are facing pay their share.”
As world governments meet at the United Nations for another round of negotiations on a first-of-its-kind "Global Tax Treaty," economic justice campaigners are urging them to think big or risk leaving on the table trillions of dollars that could help alleviate global inequality and the climate crisis.
The fifth round of negotiations for the treaty began in New York on Monday, with countries ironing out its language line by line as they seek a global framework to more fairly tax the rich and multinational corporations and crack down on tax avoidance.
Jenny Ricks, the general secretary of the Fight Inequality Alliance—a global coalition of anti-inequality groups—said the framework, which was first conceived in 2022 at the urging of poorer nations in Africa, "aims to make global tax governance more inclusive, transparent, and equitable, shifting it away from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and giving the global majority a genuine say in rules that have long been set by wealthy states."
The first drafts of the proposed tax convention were released in late July in advance of this month's negotiations. Advocates at Greenpeace International, however, argue that they contain many gaps that fail to adequately tax fossil fuel companies driving the climate crisis or other multinational corporations and extremely wealthy individuals.
In a briefing document released to media organizations, Greenpeace argued that the text lacks clear language linking taxation to sustainable development, despite it being demanded by 24 countries, and that it lacks provisions requiring polluters to bear the public cost of environmental damage.
The group also criticized the weakening of an article covering taxes on high-net-worth individuals, the lack of a minimum tax on multinational profits, and the absence of specific rules for taxing extractive industries such as oil, gas, and mining.
The oil and gas industry, the group pointed out, is in the midst of a boom, with companies reporting record profits as President Donald Trump's war against Iran drives global oil prices higher.
"The money is right there," said Nina Stros, Greenpeace International's global senior policy expert. "It is about time governments recognized this once-in-a-generation opportunity to make those most responsible for the climate, nature, and inequality crises we are facing pay their share, and reclaim trillions of dollars to invest in our shared future.”
An open letter from Tax and Fiscal Justice Asia, a group of over 50 civil society organizations across 13 Asian countries, emphasized many of the same concerns that the conference could end up merely affirming broad principles without creating concrete rules.
They said representatives of Asian nations at the negotiating table needed to push for a shift in taxing power away from wealthy countries where corporate headquarters are located and toward poorer ones where much of the workforce and resources are concentrated. They also argued for a move away from regressive consumption taxes that disproportionately fall on lower-income people.
"The majority of states in Asia were among the 125 states that voted in November 2023 to adopt a resolution for a UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation (UNFCITC)," the letter said. "The vote has brought forth a historic opportunity to leave behind unjust systems and build a new global tax architecture."
"The National Guard are not pawns, and taxpayer dollars are not a piggy bank for Trump’s political stunts."
Information provided to Sen. Elizabeth Warren's office revealed that the deployment of the National Guard in Washington, DC is projected to cost taxpayers an extra $1.4 billion through the end of President Donald Trump's term.
As The Washington Post reported on Tuesday, Warren (D-Mass.) obtained the cost estimate for the National Guard deployment from Jules Hurst III, who is Trump’s nominee to become the comptroller for the US Department of Defense.
Hurst's estimate assumes there will be roughly 2,500 National Guard personnel deployed in the city through January 2029, when Trump is constitutionally mandated to leave office.
The estimate imagines a drawdown from the current 4,600 National Guard members deployed in the nation's capital, many of whom were sent to the city to oversee security at the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence.
In a social media post, Warren slammed the Trump administration for continuing to spend money on deploying the National Guard in the capital while ignoring the economic pain being felt across the country.
"While American families are getting flattened by skyrocketing costs, Donald Trump is spending $1.4 billion to keep troops on the streets in Washington for years on end," wrote Warren. "The National Guard are not pawns, and taxpayer dollars are not a piggy bank for Trump’s political stunts."
Rep. Shontel Brown (D-Ohio) also pointed to the opportunity cost of the service members' deployment.
"Trump says there's no money for healthcare or childcare," wrote Brown, "but he wants to spend billions to have the National Guard roaming around DC."
The Free DC campaign, which was founded last year to oppose the National Guard deployment in the city, warned that the continued presence of military forces was an ominous sign for Trump's future intentions.
"Trump is entrenching his power," the group wrote. "This is what that looks like in real time. It's tempting to call this money 'a waste,' but Trump has a clear reason he wants to spend this money on the National Guard's presence in DC. When January 6 comes around again, this time he'll have an army on call."
Unite for Veterans, an advocacy organization focused on defending the US Department of Veterans Affairs, also condemned Trump's use of the National Guard as a domestic law enforcement group.
"Spending $1.4 billion on a deployment that shouldn't be is not spending taxpayer money wisely or is it serving the military well," the group wrote. "The National Guard should not be policing the streets of America's cities. That is not their purpose. Let's send them home."