

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.
The atrocities and the fury mount. Astoundingly, after a murderous thug shot a mother of three in the face in broad daylight - "He didn't kill her because he was scared, he killed her because she wasn't" - state terror has ramped up with more lies, goons, attacks on "gangs of wine moms," brutish agitprop literally echoing the Nazis'. So when mini-Bovino went to take a leak at a store, the people's wrath, a bittersweet splendor, erupted. Their/our edict: "Get the fuck out."
For now, Trump's America keeps getting scarier and uglier. He's threatened to (illegally) withdraw the US from the world’s most vital climate treaty and 65 other agencies doing useful work. He's trashing a once-thriving economy because he doesn't know how it works, scapegoating longtime Fed chair Jerome Powell, who's (startlingly fighting back, flipping off autoworkers, admiring non-existent ballrooms. After (illegally) killing over 100 Venezuelans and abducting their president - Chris Hedges: "Empires, when they are dying, worship the idol of war" - he called oil executives to a dementia-ridden meeting where in a reality check one brave skeptic argued Venezuela is historically "uninvestable." He ordered invasion plans for Greenland - wait what - that joint chiefs are resisting as "crazy and illegal": “It’s like dealing with a five-year-old.” And in a supreme irony overload, he's menacing U.S. protesters while warning Iran's killers of protesters they'll "pay a big price" and urging Iran's people to "take over your institutions." We can't even.
Meanwhile, in Minnesota, he's sending yet more thugs, persisting in calling Renée Good "a professional agitator" - Professional Agitators 'R Us! - and warning a besieged, traumatized community, "THE DAY OF RECKONING & RETRIBUTION IS COMING!" Up is down and MAGA minions dutifully follow suit. Tom Homan: "We've got to stop the hateful rhetoric. Saying this officer is a murderer is dangerous. It’s ridiculous. It’s just gonna infuriate people more." Newsmax and GOP Rep. Pete Sessions agree: Dems have to quiet their "rhetoric," cease "honking of horns," and stop "putting an iPhone on your face." "STOP THE MADNESS," shrieks David Marcus on Fox, blasting "organized gangs of wine moms" across the country - Wine Moms 'R Us! - using Antifa tactics to "harass and impede" ICE: "It's not civil disobedience. It isn’t even protest. It’s just crime." Here, Renée Good was "a trained member" of groups "executing missions that put law enforcement and the public in harm’s way," probably all part of "criminal conspiracies."
To support the insane narrative that the brazen murder of a mother of three in her car in public constitutes "an attack on our brave law enforcement," DHS released crude, "pathological," Goebbels-worthy propaganda that repeats the first day's lies and includes footage of when Good "weaponized her vehicle” by “speeding across the road" while failing to mention it was when "she had just been shot in the fucking face and her dead foot hit the pedal." No wonder the mindless carnage goes on. A thug leers to a cuffed protester she should've "learned her lesson," she asks what lesson, he snarls, "Why we killed that fucking bitch." And gangs of goons rampage door-to-door, barging into households of kids with guns and tasers ready. One brave, calm woman records it all, demands a warrant, barks get your hands off me, mocks how big and bad they are flashing a light in her face and sneers that, on the street, "You're all some pussies without that shit on your chest...Your mamas raised a bitch if you can wear that outfit proudly."
Last week both Illinois and Minnesota, and each state's targeted cities, filed federal lawsuits to end their invasions by thousands of armed, masked, violent goons racially harassing, terrorizing and assaulting their communities. The courts may yet halt the deadly mayhem; the regime sure as shit won't. In the wake of the DOJ's predictable, outlandish announcement they won't investigate Good's murder, multiple attorneys in the civil rights division - for decades "America’s last line of accountability when federal agents kill" - have resigned, the latest in a flood of departures totaling over 250, a 70% reduction. In their stead, the FBI seized control of the "investigation" after blocking local law enforcement's access to evidence. Kash's Keystone Cops are now looking into, not Jonathan Ross, but Good and her "possible connections to activist groups" - also, because there truly is no low, her widow's. "This isn’t a cover-up," said one former DOJ attorney. "It’s the end of civil rights enforcement as we've known it."
Experts say the escalating malfeasance and accompanying thuggery are the logical culmination of a longtime "culture of violence" within border control agencies. Ryan Goodman of Just Security describes a scathing 2013 report, commissioned but then buried, that specifically cites agents' proclivity for standing in front of blocked vehicles as a pretext to open fire on drivers attempting to flee a tense encounter. Thank God we don't see that anymore. Nor do we have to see Stephen Miller's nightmare vision of Dems in power making "every city into Mogadishu or Kabul or Port-au-Prince," complete with roaming convoys of masked, armed, hefty hoodlums snatching people off the streets, dragging them out of their cars, beating them up, kneeling on their necks (illegal under post-George-Floyd Minnesota law), and brutalizing them for unknown offenses until they go limp, fate unknown, like in this video by Ford Fischer last week. For MAGA, ICE proudly represents "the fearsome power of the American state." But don't call them fascists.
It was sick Greg Bovino's knee on that neck. Then he went on Sean Hannity's show to praise Jonathan Ross for shooting Renée Good three times in the face - "Hats off to that ICE agent" - because "a 4,000-pound missile is not something anyone wants to face." Hannity readily agreed it was "not even a close call...There is no ambiguity for anyone with eyes to see that (Good) had been taunting officers," which is not true, also definitely a death penalty offense. Later, Bovino claimed that 90% of the public "are happy to see us." Last week, a YouGov poll disagreed, finding a majority of Americans disapproved of the murderous job ICE is doing, and almost half support abolishing it entirely. That may be why, when Bovino went to take a piss last week at a Target in St. Paul, accompanied by a phalanx of surly stormtroopers with itchy trigger fingers and nervous cameras held aloft, they were met by pure, gut-level fury, and a crowd of we the people with no fucks left to give. More video from Ford Fischer of News2Share.
A handy transcript: "You’re a fucking bum. you’re a bitch. and if your wife’s got a problem, fuck her, too. you guys are all bitches. you can’t do shit to me. you can’t do a thing. get the fuck out of here. get the fuck out. nobody wants you here. right. get the fuck out. walk the fuck, you stupid bitches. get the fuck out of here. coward. you’re a fucking coward, bitch. you’re a fucking bitch. fuck you. hold on, babe, I’m on the phone with these bitch-ass niggas. get the fuck out of here. get the fuck out of here, you stupid bitches. you’re a fucking coward piece of shit. fuck you. and if you didn’t have a gun or a vest, I would beat the shit out of you. take that fucking badge off, and that fucking gun, and see what happens to you. you shut the fuck up, you’re not fucking tough. you’re a bitch and get the fuck out, you fucking pussy. you fucking bitch-ass white boys. I’ll fucking spit on you. fucking get out of here. get the fuck out. shut the fuck up. get the fuck out of here. get the fuck out of here. get the fuck out. nobody wants you here."
Among Minnesota's ICE victims was a Marine veteran who said she was following agents "at a safe distance" when they rammed the car, broke the window, dragged her out by the neck, slammed her face into the ground, tightly cuffed her and snarled, per their memo, "This is why we killed that lesbian bitch." Shaken, she told a reporter, "I took an oath, and they're spitting on it. They're Nazis. They're Gestapo. This isn't Germany." Not yet. But close, says James Fell's Sweary History: "Those who cannot remember the past need a history teacher who says 'fuck' a lot." When ICE Barbie, "this puppy-killing, plasticized bag of fascism" called Good a domestic terrorist, he notes, her podium read, "One of Ours, All of Yours" - the phrase Nazis used when the Resistance killed "murderous motherfucker" Reinhard Heydrich, and Nazis retaliated by killing thousands of Czechs and most of the village of Lidice, where they (wrongly) thought the assassins came from. Kill one of ours, we murder all of yours: "This is what DHS is threatening should people dare to resist the American Gestapo."
Dark echoes keep coming. In more Goebbels-worthy agit-prop, the Dept. of Labor just posted a bizarre musical photo montage captioned, "One Homeland. One People. One Heritage," which even X's AI chatbot Grok noted is just like the Nazi slogan, "Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Führer" - One People, One Realm, One Leader. Huh, said many: "Sounds familiar," "Sounds better in the original German," "I didn't have DOL dropping race-baiting propaganda with moody techno music on my 2026 Bingo card," "I remember this one from history books," "Can't wait for the sequel! Labor Creates Liberty!" and, "That 1930s retro energy really matches the new vibe." The video added, "Remember who you are, American." Rob Kelner responded, "I remember who I am. I am the grandchild of immigrants, in a nation that welcomed all four of my grandparents, dirt poor...fleeing tyranny." We have fallen so far, and lost so much. But some truths remain: "There is no world in which these are the good guys. None."
"Get it all on record now. Get the films. Get the witnesses. Because somewhere down the road of history, some bastard will get up and say that this never happened." - Dwight D. Eisenhower, Commander of the Allied Forces, on atrocities committed by the German Nazis.

The massive energy needs of artificial intelligence data centers became a major political controversy in 2025, and new reporting suggests that it will grow even further in 2026.
CNBC reported on Thursday that data center projects have become political lightning rods among politicians ranging from Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on the left to Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on the right.
However, objections to data centers aren't just coming from politicians but from ordinary citizens who are worried about the impact such projects will have on their local environment and their utility bills.
CNBC noted that data centers' energy needs are so great that PJM Interconnection, the largest US grid operator that serves over 65 million people across 13 states, projects that it will be a full six gigawatts short of its reliability requirements in 2027.
Joe Bowring, president of independent market monitor Monitoring Analytics, told CNBC that he's never seen the grid under such projected strain.
"It’s at a crisis stage right now," Bowring said. "PJM has never been this short."
Rob Gramlich, president of power consulting firm Grid Strategies, told CNBC that he expects the debate over data centers to become even more intense this year once Americans start getting socked with even higher utility bills.
"I don't think we’ve seen the end of the political repercussions,” Gramlich said. “And with a lot more elections in 2026 than 2025, we’ll see a lot of implications. Every politician is going to be saying that they have the answer to affordability and their opponents’ policies would raise rates."
Concerns about data centers' impact on electric grids are rising in both red and blue states.
The Austin American-Statesman reported on Thursday that a new analysis written by the office of Austin City Manager TC Broadnax found that data centers have the potential to overwhelm the city's system given they are projected to need more power than can possibly be delivered with current infrastructure.
"The speed in which AI is trying to be deployed creates tremendous strain on the already tight resources in both design and construction," says the analysis, which noted that some proposed data centers are seeking more than five gigawatts, which is more than the peak load for the entire city.
In New York, local station News 10 reported last year that the New York Independent System Operator is estimating that the state's grid could be 1.6 gigawatts short of reliability requirements by 2030 thanks in large part to data centers.
Anger over proposed data centers has even spread to President Donald Trump's primary residential home of Palm Beach County, Florida, where local residents successfully postponed the construction of a proposed 200-acre data center complex.
According to public news station WLRN, locals opposed to the project cited "expected noise from cooling towers, servers, and diesel generators, along with heavy water use, pollution concerns, and higher utility costs" when petitioning Palm Beach County commissioners to scrap the proposal.
Corey Kanterman, a local opponent of the proposed data center, told WLRN that his goal is to shut the project down entirely.
"No good comes of having an AI data center near you," Kanterman said. "Put them in the location of least impact to the environment and people. This location is not it."
Jensen Huang, CEO of the tech behemoth Nvidia and the eighth-richest man in the world, said Tuesday that he is "perfectly fine" with a grassroots push in California to impose a one-time wealth tax on the state's billionaire residents.
In an interview with Bloomberg, Huang said that "we chose to live in Silicon Valley, and whatever taxes, I guess, they would like to apply, so be it"—a nonchalant response that diverges from the hysteria expressed by other members of his class in response to the proposed ballot initiative.
"It never crossed my mind once," Huang said of the tax proposal.
If the proposed 5% levy on billionaire wealth makes it onto the November ballot and California voters approve it, Huang would face an estimated $8 billion tax bill—a tiny slice of his $165 billion net worth. Those subject to the tax would have the option of paying the full amount owed all at once or over a period of five years.
"'Who cares' is absolutely the appropriate reaction," said Matt Bruenig, founder of the People's Policy Project, a left-wing think tank. "It means nothing to him. David Sacks types look like the biggest babies in the world."
Bruenig was referring to the White House cryptocurrency czar who left California for Texas at the end of 2025 in an apparent effort to avoid the possible billionaire tax, which would apply to anyone living in California as of January 1, 2026.
“As a response to socialism, Miami will replace NYC as the finance capital and Austin will replace SF as the tech capital,” Sacks declared in a social media post last week.
"Frontline caregivers are glad to hear that, much like the overwhelming majority of billionaires, Mr. Huang will not be uprooting his life or business to make an ideological point over a 1% per year fix to a problem that Congress created."
The proposed one-time tax on California's roughly 200 billionaires would raise an estimated $100 billion in revenue, funds that would be set aside for the state's healthcare system, food assistance, and education.
Organizers are pursuing the tax in direct response to unprecedented Medicaid cuts enacted by US President Donald Trump and the Republican-controlled Congress over the summer.
Suzanne Jimenez, chief of staff of Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West and the lead sponsor of the ballot initiative, welcomed Huang's response to the proposed tax in a statement late Tuesday.
"We agree with Jensen Huang that California has a tremendous talent pool of workers uniquely qualified to continue moving many industries forward, including within the tech sector and beyond," said Jimenez. "This initiative will ensure the $100 billion healthcare funding crisis created by [the Trump-GOP legislation] in July is fixed, so that all of those workers can access emergency rooms and vital healthcare in California."
"Frontline caregivers are glad to hear that, much like the overwhelming majority of billionaires, Mr. Huang will not be uprooting his life or business to make an ideological point over a 1% per year fix to a problem that Congress created last July—and that California will unite to solve this November," Jimenez added.
The leadership of the nearly 100-member Congressional Progressive Caucus said Tuesday that it will "oppose all funding" for US immigration enforcement in any upcoming government appropriations bills without substantial reforms, a position laid out as federal agents unleashed by President Donald Trump continued to terrorize communities across the country.
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), deputy chair of the CPC, said during a press conference alongside other caucus members that "demanding accountability is not radical." Omar represents the district where 37-year-old Renee Good was shot and killed by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent Jonathan Ross last week.
"Calling for systematic reforms is not extreme," Omar continued. "This is the bare minimum required to restore safety and justice back to our communities."
Omar, a frequent target of Trump's bigotry, said the CPC's official position is to "oppose all funding for immigration enforcement in any appropriation bills until meaningful reforms are enacted to end militarized policing practices."
"We cannot and we should not continue to fund agencies that operate with impunity, that escalate violence, and that undermine the very freedoms this country claims to uphold," the congresswoman said. "ICE has no place in terrorizing Minneapolis or any American community."
The CPC's press conference marked an intensification of a fight over Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding that erupted in the wake of Good's killing in Minneapolis last week. ICE, which is part of DHS, currently has a larger budget than that of a dozen national militaries, thanks to a massive infusion of funding approved by congressional Republicans and Donald Trump last summer.
NBC News reported Tuesday that "Democratic opposition has already frozen a DHS measure that was slated to be added to an appropriations package getting a Senate vote this week."
"Congress may have to fall back on a stopgap bill to prevent a funding lapse for DHS," the outlet added. "That’s where things get trickier for Democrats. If House Republicans pass a continuing resolution on their own, which would keep DHS running on autopilot, Senate Democrats would again have to choose between accepting it and forcing a partial shutdown."
Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), the top Democratic appropriator in the House, said Tuesday that she does "not support increasing funding for ICE" and is "looking at policy riders in the homeland security funding bill to rein in ICE."
"ICE is terrorizing our communities, and I have called on masked, armed ICE agents to leave our towns," DeLauro added.
An Economist/YouGov poll released this week found that, for the first time, more Americans support abolishing ICE entirely (46%) than oppose it (43%). Democratic support for abolishing ICE is currently at 77%, according to the survey.
In an appearance on MS NOW, Omar said that "we want this terror to stop."
"People are angry. People are frustrated. They're confused. They don't understand why this chaos is necessary," said Omar. "And they certainly do not want this level of militarized ICE and border agents just roaming the streets, harassing and terrorizing their neighbors."
Since President Donald Trump returned to power and unleashed Immigration and Customs Enforcement on US cities, members of the National Coalition Against Censorship have periodically reminded Americans that "yes, you have the right to film ICE." The NCAC did so again on Tuesday, as videos emerge of agents telling observers to stop recording.
"We join together as nonprofit civil rights and free expression advocates to condemn the Trump administration's statements that it is illegal to record videos of ICE agents. These claims are incorrect as a matter of law, directly contrary to our First Amendment values, and deeply troubling for democratic governance," NCAC said in a statement.
"The ability to hold the government accountable is at the very core of our democracy. To preserve that ability, the First Amendment unequivocally protects the right to observe, monitor, and take pictures and video of government officials conducting their duties in public. This explicitly includes law enforcement officers engaged in their public duties," the coalition continued, citing decisions from all federal appellate courts that have addressed the issue.
In a Wednesday appearance on KQED's podcast Close All Tabs, CJ Ciaramella, a criminal justice reporter at Reason, similarly highlighted that while the US Supreme Court "actually hasn't put out a ruling saying there's an unambiguous First Amendment right to film the police," the circuit courts "that have considered the issue have pretty much said there is a First Amendment right to record the police and observe the police, and they've all decided that pretty unambiguously."
"And this ranges from, you know, the 9th Circuit, which is traditionally a pretty liberal leaning court, to the 5th Circuit, which has a reputation as a more conservative circuit court," Ciaramella explained. "The 5th Circuit looked at it and said, you know, based on the First Amendment tradition, the Supreme Court precedents, this seems pretty unambiguous to us."
"So it's not a completely like black and white issue, but it's also not... a thorny or divisive First Amendment question. Every court that's looked at it has said, yeah, based on our long First Amendment traditions. And in America, you have a right to record the police," he added. "Now, Minnesota is in one of the circuits that hasn't yet ruled on this."
The NCAC statement comes amid a flurry of videos of violent and otherwise problematic ICE actions, especially in Minneapolis, where Trump has sent thousands of troops and ICE officer Johnathan Ross fatally shot Renee Nicole Good in the head last week. Ross was recording on his phone, and amid mounting calls for his arrest and prosecution, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has put out a "propaganda" video defending the actions of ICE agents.
Journalists and other critics of Good's killing have debunked DHS claims in part by pointing to bystanders' footage from the scene.
While the NCAC statement doesn't point to any specific incidents with agents, it does sound the alarm about Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem's suggestion last July that videotaping ICE operations is "violence" and anyone "doxing" agents will be prosecuted.
After playing a clip of Noem's remarks on Close All Tabs, host Morgan Sung said: "Notice the use of the word doxing here. That's the act of posting private information about someone to target and harass them, usually like their home address or personal phone number. The Trump administration has equated identifying and publicly naming ICE agents to doxing."
NCAC argued that "statements such as Secretary Noem's misinform the public about their First Amendment rights and chill constitutionally protected speech. As a policy matter, threats to punish those who monitor law enforcement increase the likelihood that people will be intimidated out of exercising their constitutional rights and lead to precisely the outcome such oversight is intended to prevent—law enforcement agents who act with impunity as transparency is demonized by political leaders."
Like ICE, agents with Customs and Border Protection, another DHS agency, have been sent to various cities and recorded behaving violently in recent months, often while donning masks. After Ross killed Good, Border Patrol Commander Greg Bovino—who is currently in Minnesota—sent a "legal refresher" to agents in the field stating that taking photos and recordings is protected activity under the First Amendment.
The coalition said that "regardless of one's views on immigration policy, the increased budget and enforcement operations of ICE were a core campaign issue in the presidential election, and are a widespread topic of conversation and concern."
"Recordings of law enforcement directly inform the public, shape policy discussions, and even serve as the catalyst for large-scale political movements across the political spectrum. They have helped to expose horrific and illegal acts by the government," NCAC pointed out. "At the same time, they also protect law enforcement officers. If an officer is acting within the bounds of the law, a recording will help prove as much."
"We stand behind the public's well-established right to record public officials, law enforcement, and ICE agents engaged in their public duties. We jointly condemn this administration's refusal to recognize the First Amendment right to record officers in public. And we call on this administration to recognize that constitutional rights are a feature, not a bug, of democratic governance," the coalition concluded. "For our constitutional rights to be real, our public officials must uphold them—as they have sworn to do."
The groups that signed on to the statement are the ACLU, Center for Democracy & Technology, Center for Protest Law & Litigation at the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund, Defending Rights & Dissent, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Freedom of the Press Foundation, Government Information Watch, Knight First Amendment Institute, National Coalition Against Censorship, People for the American Way, Public Citizen, Tully Center for Free Speech, and Woodhull Freedom Foundation.
Joining them as individuals are writer and historian Pat McNees, and three experts from Yale Law School: David A. Schulz, Stacy Livingston, and Tobin Raju.
A survey released Wednesday shows that just 4% of US voters think it would be a "good idea" for President Donald Trump to seize Greenland by military force, data that came ahead of a closely watched White House meeting between Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and the foreign ministers of Greenland and Denmark.
More broadly, according to the new Reuters/Ipsos poll, only 17% of Americans approve of Trump's push for the US to acquire Greenland by any means.
The White House has said it is considering a "range of options" to seize Denmark, from buying the mineral-rich island to acquiring it through military force. Just one in 10 Republican voters and virtually no Democrats said they believe it's a good idea for the Trump administration to forcibly take Greenland, which is currently an autonomous territory of Denmark.
Greenland residents have overwhelmingly voiced opposition to US control.
In an early morning Truth Social post ahead of Wednesday's White House meeting, Trump declared that the US "needs Greenland for the purpose of National Security"—a view that military experts have rejected.
"It is vital for the Golden Dome that we are building," Trump added, referring to his proposed missile defense boondoggle. "NATO should be leading the way for us to get it. IF WE DON’T, RUSSIA OR CHINA WILL, AND THAT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!"
Trump's latest Greenland rant came a day after the territory's prime minister, Jens-Frederik Nielsen, said during a press conference that "we are now facing a geopolitical crisis, and if we have to choose between the United States and Denmark here and now, we choose Denmark."
"One thing must be clear to everyone,” said Nielsen. “Greenland does not want to be owned by the United States. Greenland does not want to be governed by the United States. Greenland does not want to be part of the United States.”
Wednesday's White House meeting was scheduled at the request of Danish and Greenlandic officials, who said they are seeking to head off a potential disaster spurred by Trump's increasingly belligerent rhetoric.
In the face of Trump's threats, Denmark has reportedly begun mobilizing military equipment and advanced troops to Greenland.
"Our reason for seeking the meeting we have now been given was to move this whole discussion into a meeting room where we can look each other in the eye and talk about these things," Lars Løkke Rasmussen, Denmark's foreign minister, said Tuesday.
"Pretty much all federal scientists working on climate in the US have had to self-censor," said one scientist. "Thankfully much of the underlying science is still occurring, even if they cannot talk about it."
National Aeronautics and Space Administration Administrator Bill Nelson declared a year ago that "once again, the temperature record has been shattered—2024 was the hottest year since recordkeeping began in 1880," and NASA's statement noted climate change and its consequences, from sweltering heat to devastating wildfires. This week, under a president who has called the fossil fuel-driven crisis "the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world," there was no such language from the US agency.
NASA did release a statement about its latest findings on Wednesday. The agency said that, like other experts around the world, its scientists found that "Earth's global surface temperature in 2025 was slightly warmer than 2023—but within the margin of error the two years are effectively tied," and "the hottest year on record remains 2024."
Specifically, 2025 saw average temperatures 2.14°F or 1.19°C above the 1951-80 average, the statement said, also detailing NASA's data sources. However, in line with what President Donald Trump's second administration has done across the federal government, the release does not mention human-caused climate change.
Here's the data:
[image or embed]
— Michael E. Mann (@michaelemann.bsky.social) January 14, 2026 at 8:22 PM
The omission quickly caught the attention of journalists and scientists, including Agence France-Presse's Issam Ahmed, who began a Wednesday report on the topic with, "Don't say the c-word" and spoke with various experts:
"The US government is now, like Russia and Saudi Arabia, a petrostate under Trump and Republican rule, and the actions of all of its agencies and departments can be understood in terms of the agenda of the polluters that are running the show," University of Pennsylvania climatologist Michael Mann told AFP. "It is therefore entirely unsurprising that NASA administrators are attempting to bury findings of its own agency that conflict with its climate denial agenda."
Zeke Hausfather, a research scientist at Berkeley Earth, added, "I'm just happy they were allowed to put out a press release."
"Pretty much all federal scientists working on climate in the US have had to self-censor and leave out reference to human influences on climate change, unfortunately," he told AFP. "Thankfully much of the underlying science is still occurring, even if they cannot talk about it."
Mike Scott of Carbon Copy Communications, told Euronews Green on Thursday that NASA's new statement is "consistent" with the administration's other "anti-climate actions."
In September, the US Department of Energy—led by climate liar and former fracking CEO Chris Wright—added "climate change" to its "list of words to avoid" at the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Other banned terms include carbon/CO2 "footprint," clean, decarbonization, "dirty" energy, emissions, energy transition, green, sustainability/sustainable, and tax breaks/tax credits/subsidies.
Last month, the Trump administration removed all references to human-caused climate change from Environmental Protection Agency webpages, as well as data showing global warming over recent decades and the resulting risks. Daniel Swain, a climate scientist at the University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources, called it "one of the more dramatic scrubbings we've seen so far in the climate space."
And we have a NASA press release at least! www.nasa.gov/news-release...
[image or embed]
— Alexandra Witze (@alexwitze.bsky.social) January 14, 2026 at 9:28 AM
Since returning to office nearly a year ago with support from Big Oil's money, Trump has also declared a "national energy emergency" to help deliver on his campaign pledge to "drill, baby, drill," rolled back various climate policies implemented under his Democratic predecessor, ditched the Paris climate agreement again along with dozens of other international treaties and organizations, refused to attend an annual United Nations summit, and more.
"This increasingly authoritarian regime has operated with impunity to tear up climate and clean energy policies, lie about the scientific realities of climate change and the facts on renewable energy, and ram through measures to boost fossil fuels and the profits of polluters," Rachel Cleetus, policy director with the Climate and Energy program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, wrote Thursday.
"They have attacked the federal scientific enterprise built up over decades through taxpayer investments, fired or forced out agency experts, and cut funding for critical science. And a compliant Congress has enabled this destructive agenda, including by rubber-stamping some of the president's illegal actions and by failing to exercise its constitutional powers to check his tyrannical power grabs," she continued.
"This year has also brought extraordinary efforts to expose and fight back against the worst excesses of this unhinged administration," she noted, pointing to lawsuits, organizing, and wins in states. "And as we face down another tough year under the anti-science, authoritarian Trump administration, we're fired up to keep up the fight for science and for our democracy. We hope you'll join us—because despite it all, that future is ours to build."
The finance industry is relying on climate models that understate the speed of climate change and likely economic impact. New report warns that climate-driven inflation, financial shocks, and insurance withdrawals could happen sooner than anticipated. 🧪greenfuturessolutions.com/news/parasol...
[image or embed]
— Scientists for Global Responsibility (@responsiblesci.bsky.social) January 14, 2026 at 4:38 AM
Like Cleetus, Scott of Carbon Copy Communications expects Trump and his allies to continue waging its war on science.
"It's not clear what climate institutions are left for Trump to try and dismantle, but there is little doubt that if he finds them, he will go after them," he warned. "The climate denial is really worrying and out of line with almost every other country in the world, including most of the world's largest oil producers. Failing to acknowledge the impacts of climate change will leave the US less able to deal with those impacts—which will continue to happen whatever Trump thinks."
"The US stance is bad for science, it's bad for the US economy and its citizens, and it's bad for the climate," Scott added. "It's also unsustainable. Climate change will not stop because the US administration doesn't believe in it. The American response to climate-related disasters will be worse if it doesn't understand why extreme weather events and other climate impacts are happening."
"Primary every Democrat who wants to fund and still support ICE," said journalist Mehdi Hasan.
Americans across the country are protesting federal agents' violent crackdown on immigrant communities and on dissent, support for doing away with US Immigration and Customs Enforcement entirely is at an all-time high in the wake of an officer's killing of a legal observer, and the outrage is intensifying just as the Democratic Party has negotiating power ahead of a January 30 deadline for funding the government.
A number of Democrats, however, are hesitant to leverage their position in the appropriations fight to rein in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the agencies it controls, including ICE and Customs and Border Protection (CBP), which oversees Border Patrol.
That reluctance, said journalist Mehdi Hasan of Zeteo, should result in primary challenges for "every Democrat who wants to fund and still support ICE."
As Common Dreams reported Wednesday, the Congressional Progressive Caucus, which includes nearly 100 Democratic members of the US House of Representatives, said clearly that it would "oppose all funding" for federal immigration enforcement agencies in the upcoming appropriations bills unless, as Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) said, "meaningful reforms are enacted to end militarized policing practices.”
The House and Senate are currently negotiating a dozen spending bills to keep the government running past the January 30 deadline, and each bill must garner at least 60 votes to pass in the Senate.
A DHS funding bill was already excluded from a spending package earlier this week amid outcry over the killing of Renee Good by an ICE agent in Minneapolis and the agency's violent treatment of demonstrators, bystanders, and even residents who are not involved in protests against President Donald Trump's mass deportation campaign.
But at the Bulwark, Joe Perticone reported Tuesday that a number of Democrats in the Senate expressed doubt that they would treat ICE funding in appropriations bills as a red line to force the administration to drastically change its approach to immigration enforcement.
“I certainly don’t want see funding increases,” Sen. Andy Kim (D-NJ) told the Bulwark. “We’re going through these negotiations right now. I don’t want see that funding... I don’t ever make predictions about where my vote’s coming down on, but what I will say is that I’m certainly gonna fight to stop it.”
Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) told the Bulwark that she would not want to increase ICE's budget, which includes $75 billion it was given in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) last year, but said Republicans were "taking the lead on these [appropriation bills]."
“Is this what they want to rubber-stamp for residential neighborhoods across this country?" she asked. "Thousands of masked, armed agents coming into their communities?”
But while criticizing the agency's practices, she told the Bulwark that discussions about reforming ICE's enforcement should be separate from the appropriations debate.
“That’s obviously—I don’t wanna get in the weeds—that’s obviously an authorizing committee issue,” she said. “When we’re talking about appropriations, I call on my Republicans... Do they wanna rubber-stamp this or what?”
Organizer and attorney Aaron Regunberg compared the comments—which echoed earlier remarks from House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY)—to saying: "We are the resistance. We are also negotiating furiously to figure out how to fully fund the Gestapo."
Sens. Jacky Rosen and Catherine Cortez Masto, both Democrats from Nevada, announced their own proposal on Thursday to redirect some of the OBBBA funding to local law enforcement agencies—many of which work with ICE.
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), the ranking member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, did not make any specific policy commitments regarding what changes ICE and DHS would need to make to ensure funding for immigration enforcement continues, but has suggested that Border Patrol agents should return to the border instead of being unleashed in communities with ICE, agents should be banned from wearing masks and required to wear identification, and federal officers must obtain warrants for immigration arrests.
“You should demand that we make sure that this appropriations process is used to make ICE comply with the law,” Murphy told Time magazine. “And I see a lot of signs out there—not one additional dime for ICE in this budget.”
Murphy also told NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday that Republicans must decide if they are "willing to shut down the government simply to endorse the most lawless Department of Homeland Security in the history of the country."
Last fall, the federal government saw its longest shutdown in US history, with funding lapsing for 43 days after Democrats refused to approve a spending package that would have allowed Affordable Care Act subsidies to expire and threatened healthcare for millions. Ultimately, some Democrats caved, and the subsidies lapsed.
Journalist Aaron Rupar said that ahead of the January 30 deadline, "Senate Democrats absolutely have to shut the government down to stop this ICE insanity in the Twin Cities."
"This is not sustainable and cannot be normalized," said Rupar. "Any Democratic vote to provide money to the thugs who are brutalizing this community is a grave betrayal to the people here. Accountability can't wait."
"The continuing effort led by Washington Republicans to unfairly rig the midterm elections with an unprecedented series of mid-decade gerrymanders must be met head-on," said a former US attorney general.
Democratic officials and voters battling President Donald Trump's attempt to bully Republican state lawmakers to rig congressional maps for the GOP ahead of the November midterm elections recorded two key wins on Wednesday.
In California, two members of a three-judge panel upheld Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom's new map, which was approved by the state's voters late last year and then challenged by the California Republican Party and the US Department of Justice.
Meanwhile, in Virginia, the Democratic majority in the state's House of Delegates advanced a proposed constitutional amendment that would let lawmakers to redraw the congressional map in the middle of the decade—an authority that would expire in 2030.
As the Virginia Mercury detailed:
Democrats argue the amendment is necessary to counter aggressive Republican gerrymanders elsewhere that could tilt control of Congress, while Republicans call it a blatant power grab that undermines Virginia voters' 2020 decision to create an independent redistricting commission.
"This amendment creates essentially a narrow, temporary exception," said Del. Rodney Willett (D-58), the measure's sponsor. He emphasized repeatedly that the proposal does not automatically redraw any lines and does not eliminate the Virginia Redistricting Commission.
"We are not expanding the authority to change the state district lines," Willett said. "We're just talking about congressional lines. And more importantly, it does not change any of the lines as they exist today—this just creates the process to consider doing that."
The proposal now heads to the Virginia Senate, where Democrats also have a majority. If it advances, as expected, then the measure would be voted on by state residents in April.
According to the Hill, "Democratic leaders in Old Dominion are eying either a 10-1 or 9-2 map in a state where Democrats currently have a 6-5 edge in the congressional delegation."
Former US Attorney General Eric Holder, now chair of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, said in a Wednesday statement that "the continuing effort led by Washington Republicans to unfairly rig the midterm elections with an unprecedented series of mid-decade gerrymanders must be met head-on."
"The threat created by the Trump administration to our democracy is grave. Protecting our system requires taking extraordinary and responsive action, like the proposed referendum in Virginia," he continued. "The decision by Virginia lawmakers to pursue a process that allows voters to weigh in stands in stark contrast to the illegitimate power grab engineered by Republicans in Texas and anti-democracy efforts now underway by politicians in Florida."
In addition to Texas and Florida, Missouri and North Carolina's GOP legislators have pursued new maps for their states ahead of the midterms—under pressure from the president—while some Indiana Republicans joined with Democrats to block an effort there.
Newsom, one of several Democrats expected to run for president in 2028, led the fight for Proposition 50, which voters approved in November. So far, California is the only Democrat-led state to fight back by trying to draw Republican districts out of existence.
In the court battle over the California map, Judges Josephine Staton and Wesley Hsu—appointees of former Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden, respectively—allowed the new districts to stand, while a Trump appointee, Judge Kenneth Lee, dissented.
Welcoming Wednesday's court ruling, Newsom said that "Republicans' weak attempt to silence voters failed. California voters overwhelmingly supported Prop 50—to respond to Trump's rigging in Texas—and that is exactly what this court concluded."
Although the case could move to the US Supreme Court—which has a right-wing supermajority that includes three Trump appointees—the justices in December gave Texas Republicans a green light to use their recently redrawn map.
As the New York Times reported: "The Supreme Court previously determined that courts could not rule on claims of partisan gerrymandering. So Republicans who oppose the California maps face the same challenge as Democrats who opposed the maps in Texas: to prove that race, not partisanship, was the predominant factor in crafting the new district lines."
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee intervened in the lawsuit, represented by Elias Law Group. Firm partner Abha Khanna called Wednesday's decision "a vindication of California voters and a decisive rebuke of the Republican Party's attempt to use the courts to overturn an election."
"The court correctly recognized that Proposition 50 was an unambiguously partisan response to Texas' unprecedented mid-decade redistricting," Khanna added. "The accusations of racial gerrymandering, especially coming from Republicans and Trump's Department of Justice, were nothing more than a cynical attempt to prevent California voters from having their voice heard in response to Texas."