

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.
In the hopeful, chaotic aftermath of the biggest blue wave in 50 years, the inept “cartoon ghoul of a man” who fomented the carnage and his foul minions - Miller, Hegseth, Unholy Mike, the wrong Dana White - are scrambling like “pigs in the mire” to grasp some thorny new realities. To wit: Accountability is neither revenge nor crime, their once-vaunted “leader” is a dead clown walking, and hundreds of flipped state and federal seats mean their sleazy party is over.
This week we got the first giddy sightings of new Congressional Democrats, who auspiciously look much like diverse America, arriving at the Capitol for orientation. Fresh from their historic wins - flipping 549 legislative seats, ending 13 GOP supermajorities, creating at least six new Democratic trifectas, taking control of the House and Senate - they will now govern three quarters of Americans even as the Republican Party, per one online wiseacre, devolves into the Donner Party. Amidst the lame finger-pointing and precipitous shattering of GOP control, Mike Johnson blindly insisted “voters made the wrong choice" and smarmy Josh Hawley called for Christians to meet the “shocking and historic” election with a (notably modest) hour-long fast on Dec. 15 at the Capitol. Cheap thoughts and prayers: Go for it.
Because nobody ever claimed those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it, MAGA world has simply tripled down on their unequivocally rejected folly. First, led by a fragile narcissist snugly embedded in his alternate reality, flaccid calls of a rigged election slowly emerged. "Here we go," noted weary America. “Lather, rinse, repeat." "Does anybody really believe this "Election" was honest?" Trump whined, devising some "creative math" to falsely argue, "The Alaska Race is OVER. Dan Sullivan WON, BY A LOT!" MAGA idiots chimed in. Pillow Guy's "cybersecurity team" vowed to reveal vague "matching algorithmic patterns across multiple states," Alex Jones weirdly declared Trump "the ultimate Democrat sleeper cell," one Christo-fascist announced a Jan. 3 "Million Crusader March - Bring your cross!" SAD. Even evil Megyn Kelly was fed up: "Just stop."
But cults, by definition, don't. Instead, hell-bent on more losing, Trump gave voters a teeny stubby middle finger and chose to boost some of his most abject zealots, all tied to hated and calamitous policies: Stephen Miller, aka Pee Wee German, a literal Nazi with "blood on his hands" whose despised deportation machine moved Hispanics to help turn Texas blue; Pete Kegsbreath, a widely loathed, utterly inept asshole and war criminal whose bungled Iran war has made life unaffordable for vast swathes of America; and Gym Jordan, a buffoonish loyalist and former assistant wrestling coach known for long ignoring an infamous sexual abuse scandal with thousands of victims - there's even a movie - that creepily echoes the regime's ongoing cover-up of Epstein's boundless, Trump-adjacent atrocities. Heckuva job, Donnie et al.
Above all, like cornered animals clinging to the heroic memory of Nixon's refusal to accept any responsibility for his crimes - “When the president does it, it's not illegal” - the MAGA reponse to its glaring failures and looming accountability for them is to cry mean wolf and argue enforcing the law and embracing the constitutional task of Congressional oversight is, in fact, a crime, even months before the fact. Trump's already shrieking Dem "SLEAZEBAGS should go to jail for what they are doing," ie their job, which as an uber grifter he can only weirdly see as "extortion." "They are threatening a lot of people because they happen to be Republicans," he wailed, a scaredy-cat Mob bully pathetically melting down into his usual feeble projection. "There are no impeachable acts committed, or even thought of, by the victims of this illegal process."
His toadies have predictably mobilized to back him up - first, with bonkers threats. White House Counsel Will Scharf sent a mob-like, "legally repulsive" letter to incoming Oversight Chair Robert Garcia warning that Democrats undertaking their constitutionally mandated Congressional oversight "may cross the line into blatant criminality," resulting in, umm, imprisonment. Citing no criminal statute 'cause it doesn't exist, he snarled, "We are monitoring the abusive and capricious threats (to) harass and aggrandize, rather than to advance any legitimate legislative end,” a rebuke one lawyer called "a total bluff” given Dems have that "for miles." Other experts mocked "a ham-fisted stab at intimidation" that "will be Exhibit 1" in a self-own giving Dems "ammo to go straight to subpoenas." Said one, “Get D-team lawyers, win D-team prizes.”
Attorney General (sic) Todd Blanche, who as America's top law enforcement official "clearly doesn’t have the slightest clue what the rule of law is," went on both CNN and Fox to also suggest Dems were committing crimes; when asked what those might be, viewers noted he looked worried - or "scargry," a blend of scared and angry - before he pivoted to, "I'm not interested in explaining." He babbled about Dems' "extremely troubling rhetoric, no basis, no facts, just everyone running around...You have to draw the line, we have to wake up in this country, that's not governing, that's a disappointment." And yes of course it's his job to represent Goebbels and "everyone else...Every A.G. in history actively defends executive members of an administration." In other words, "Trump's former personal lawyer is still Trump's personal lawyer."
Despite MAGA’s bravado - and cleaning house of flunkies who may have receipts - they continue to be “led” by a fumbling clown - caravans, "Afghanistan jungles," "perceived loss," "chartered the human ginome" - who lately ends speeches with, “By the way, I was not on the ballot.” On 60 Minutes, even right-wing Ross Douthat nailed him for his poors-are-dumb retort to $3 billion in grift and corruption: “I have a son who watches over money...Every president has a problem (going) back to George Washington.” And there was his inane Press Secretary choice of “the Great Dana White, a violent Fighter and Warrior” who'd maybe bring some UFC fighters “though not from our Country, to defend us against the Lunatic Left.” He said he was “just kidding” after people realized he had the wrong Dana White, who alas is Black - other suggested Whites: Vanna, Betty, Walter - but he dragged his White to a bizarre presser anyway.
Amidst the tomfoolery, pundits point out the mid-term avalanche was the biggest rejection of any party since Watergate; its 13% net gain was the largest margin of victory since 1926, a "once-in-a century margin." "Everything is coming," says one. "It's going to be an entirely new day." Thanks to another GOP own goal, Dems will hit the ground running: They've been building investigative staffs from a large pool of former career prosecutors purged by Trump who know where the bodies are: "You cannot shred institutional memory - they just changed employers." Dems are working to reverse disastrous cuts in Medicaid, SNAP, other benefits. They're probing Susie Wiles' work with Kremlin-connected lobbyists and Marco Rubio's $1.2 million spent on military flights to Florida to watch his son (occasionally) play college football on our dime.
A judge made a D.C. golf course lawsuit the Caddyshack-like "surprise contender" for a belated legal showdown over feds' defiance of court orders, with a special master appointed to investigate "ethical violations” in the case. In Mississippi, Scott Colom just ousted Cindy Hyde-Smith to become the state's first Black U.S. senator since 1874, flipping the Dems' eighth Senate seat. Thomas Massie's resolute move to impeach "dangerously incompetent" Pete Hegseth for war crimes failed despite Hegseth's low-rent, lie-filled, "just following orders" hissy fit presser: "When he’s attacked, he hides behind the troops.” He squeaked through this time - "Tick tock get ready" - but John Oliver spoke for many when he urged, "Remove this fucking asshole." And Massie just got enough signatures to finally force a House vote to release millions of Epstein files. Garcia: “Our work is just getting started.”
Meanwhile, the guy whose lamentable victory Trump celebrated as "the EXONERATION of a Great American Patriot" again proved what a "warrior ethos jerk" he remains - on Veterans' Day yet - at an event at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, the country's most sacred war memorial. Because "everything is a show or photo op" to the empty buffoon with the make-up studio, Hegseth and his clueless coterie stood on the steps of the memorial for a "truly abhorrent" picture ; as they turned away, one of them loudly laughed, prompting a guard to furiously bark at them, as mandated, “ALL VISITORS WILL MAINTAIN AN ATMOSPHERE OF SILENCE AND RESPECT AT ALL TIMES." Online, a gazillion horrified people called Pete an oblivious asshat; many recalled visiting the site as middle-school kids who even then knew better, so what's his fucking problem.
At Arlington Trump was likewise insufferable. He compared his illegal 48-hour kidnapping stunt in Venezuela to America's endless, obscene tragedies in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, hideously argued "we got very little from any of those wars,” and gloated, "We’re taking out billions and billions of dollars of oil...To the victor belong the spoils." What a grotesquerie. Now the knives are out for him. For Veterans' Day, the Secret Handshake erected a new Bone Spurs tribute on the National Mall. Dubbed "The Foot Soldier," it features a golden Trump sitting on a pedestal rubbing a sore foot. Two plaques bear quotes. One from a 2013 photo in his Military Academy uniform: "I can be very military.” The other: "We honor the sacrifice (of) a soldier in spirit who marched to the front lines of dodging the draft, armed with a perfect diagnosis of bone spurs.”
With Democrats already infighting as the lame duck waddles amidst his crimes, lies, hate and question he'll never answer, The Bulwark entreats us to remember "There are no deals to be had." Our sole mission: "Destroy all monsters." In Unpopular Front, John Ganz proffers a similar but darker ultimatum: Eternal torment. He recalls 60 Minutes' Douthat asking Trump, "Do you think you're going to heaven?" Reply: "I hope so." Citing Christian forgiveness of your enemies, he asks if the smallest man on Earth can do that. Nope, he says: "I hate my enemies and I always will." In Dante's Inferno, Ganz notes, Dante and Virgil stop to talk to souls "stuck like animated friezes, repeating their state of sinfulness, the perpetual fate of the Wrathful...already pigs in the mire in this life." Thus is Trump's hatred "the entire substance of his being, the product of his disordered love for himself," and "relinquishing it would be an intolerable loss of self." So, inevitably, will he be "solidified into eternal bronzer."
"He was an arrogant person in the world/No goodness adorns his memory."
“How does it feel being a loser, Mr President?”- Sky News reporter, Dominic Waghorn👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏Give this man his Pulitzer Prize.
[image or embed]
— KittyKatGirl😻🙏💞🐞 (@mary1kathy.bsky.social) November 8, 2026 at 2:18 PM
A tribal leader from Brazil stressed on Monday, the opening day of the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Türkiye, that protecting Indigenous lands is a critical part of tackling the climate emergency, remarks that came as Brazil's government advances a plan to demarcate dozens of Indigenous territories amid surging violence against native people.
Joziléia Kaingang, co-founder and executive director of the National Network of Indigenous Women Warriors of Ancestral Wisdom (ANMIGA), told attendees of a session in COP31's Brazil Pavilion in Antalya that there are no real climate solutions without Indigenous participation.
"This means a very simple thing for us Indigenous peoples, something that our grandmothers have been saying for a long time and have known for a long time. Protecting Indigenous territory is indeed a climate policy," said Kaingang, who is a member of the Kaingang people of southern Brazil. "It is not charity, it is not compensation, it is a solution."
Kaingang hailed progress under the government of Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who was reelected last month with the support of 608 of the country's 658 Indigenous polling places. Lula's overwhelming support from Indigenous Brazilians is in no small part due to his government's substantial—yet tenuous—progress against illegal mining, logging, and other invasions of tribal lands.
Lula's policies marked a sharp reversal from former far-right President Jair Bolsonaro's deliberate dismantling of Indigenous territorial protections and other actions that lived up to his self-bestowed "Captain Chainsaw" moniker.
"The state withdrew invaders from our lands," Kaingang said. "The forest breathes again from the action of the last government of President Lula, and will continue to do so in this presidency in the next four years."
Kaingang continued:
In the Yanomami territory... 98% of illegal mining fell. This is important for all of us. Indigenous lands and local communities keep about a third of the carbon that humanity cannot lose.
And we want to say that we, Indigenous peoples, are here to celebrate the Brazilian government. We want to advance the roadmap to stop and reverse deforestation and forest degradation by 2030. But it is necessary that the roadmap brings the perspective of Indigenous peoples, of traditional communities, of our knowledge.
"Let's reaffirm that without demarcation, there is no climate solution," Kaingang added. "So let's keep demarcating the Indigenous territories so that we are the solution."
Brazil's government is preparing to approve dozens of additional Indigenous land demarcations before the end of 2026, Indigenous Peoples Minister Eloy Terena, who is a member of the Terena people, told Brasil de Fato on Sunday, as native communities face continuing deadly violence, land invasions, and encroachment by agribusiness interests.
During Lula’s third term, Brazil's government has recognized 20 Indigenous lands, declared 21 others, and established 31 reserves, according to the minister.
However, recent Indigenous land demarcation protests across Brazil have decried the government's failure to move faster in recognizing and protecting Indigenous territories amid ongoing violence.
Terena linked recent attacks against Guarani Kaiowá communities in Mato Grosso do Sul—including reported murders, vehicle attacks, and threats to poison drinking water—to the government's failure to secure their ancestral territories. He said that more than 150 technical working groups are advancing demarcation procedures, but warned that executive action alone cannot overcome entrenched political and judicial resistance, which is sustained by pressure from agribusiness and other destructive interests.
The minister added that the government seeks "to strengthen Indigenous organizations, the Indigenous movement, and communities. Because we understand that if eventually the democratic winds turn, we need to have a very committed society and very well-structured social movements."
Forbes reporter Dan Alexander on Sunday thoroughly debunked claims made by President Donald Trump that his net worth grew by $3 billion since his return to office solely due to gains in the stock market.
During an interview with CBS News' "60 Minutes," Trump was asked by Ross Douthat about a Forbes estimate showing that Trump's net worth had grown from $3.9 billion in 2024 to $7 billion in 2026.
"Your net worth went up by $3 billion..." Douthat began.
"So did everyone's!" Trump replied.
Ross Douthat asks the President how his net worth rose by nearly $3 billion, according to a Forbes estimate, since he returned to office. Watch the interview Sunday at 7 p.m. ET/PT on 60 Minutes.
[image or embed]
— 60 Minutes (@60minutes.bsky.social) November 8, 2026 at 10:37 AM
"My net worth did not go up by $3 billion," Douthat shot back.
"Well, you should have had stock," Trump said.
Trump then claimed that he didn't pay too much attention to his net worth and said, "I guess it's gone up" over the last two years.
Alexander responded to Trump's claims in a social media post, giving detailed breakdown of how Trump's net worth grew by $3 billion, and emphasizing that "the president's answer here is nonsense."
Alexander began the story in 2024, when Trump grew his net worth by $1.8 billion while running for president when the Trump Media and Technology Group became a publicly traded company after a merger with Digital World Acquisition Corp.
The Forbes reporter emphasized that this was just the start of Trump's political profiteering, which he would really kick into high gear in the latter half of 2024.
"Just before the election, Trump kicked off a venture named World Liberty Financial, selling a crypto token and offering vague promises of a 'financial revolution,'" Alexander explained. "For Trump, the proposition was clearer: a 52.5% cut of every dollar investors put in after the initial $30 million."
Twenty days after Trump's triumph in the election, Chinese billionaire Justin Sun invested $30 million into World Liberty Financial, which ensured that the Trump family "would collect," wrote Alexander.
"The crypto community went wild, and money started pouring in, especially as the inauguration approached," Alexander continued. "One day before Trump took office, Sun announced another $45 million investment."
During this period, Trump also launched his official meme coin, which quickly shot up in value before crashing back down, leaving most of its investors billions of dollars underwater.
Alexander noted that foreign investments into World Liberty Financial continued pouring in after the election, especially from firms located in the United Arab Emirates.
The Wall Street Journal would later report that many of these investments were made by associates of an Abu Dhabi royal family member who "secretly signed a deal with the Trump family to purchase a 49% stake in their fledgling cryptocurrency venture for" $500 million.
"All this dealmaking leads to staggering amounts of cash by the end of 2025," Alexander explained, with World Liberty Financial and the Trump meme coin producing "$1,425,000,000 of liquidity... in one year."
In addition to crypto schemes, Trump also vastly expanded his overseas licensing empire, which in 2025 generated 10 times more income than it did just two years prior, Alexander wrote.
Summing up his findings, Alexander wrote that Trump over the last two years had made $1 billion off World Liberty Financial dealings, $1 billion from the sale of crypto tokens, $400 million in branding ventures, and $500 million after an appeals court wiped out a fine he had been ordered to pay as part of a civil financial fraud case.
This means that Trump's vast enrichment over the last two years has come from his own personal business dealings, not just gains in the stock market.
"In fact, almost none of Trump's $3 billion in gains from the fall of 2024 to the fall of 2025 came from stock," wrote Alexander. "In the fall of 2024, we estimated that the president's liquid assets totaled about $415 million. After analyzing his financial disclosure, we pegged about 10% of that in stock."
In the first two years of his second term in the White House, "success" according to President Donald Trump has looked like hundreds of thousands of people being detained by federal immigration agents, and families struggling with soaring costs at the grocery store and gas pump as a result of his "incredible" tariffs and so-called "victory" in the deeply unpopular Iran War.
But at the What's Next summit hosted in Denver by Majority Democrats on Thursday, Sen.-elect James Talarico (D-Texas), whose election win last week stunned Republicans, called on the Democratic Party to ensure the president achieves a new kind of success in his final years in office, as he contends for the first time with a US Senate and House that are both controlled by the Democrats.
The party has an opportunity, said Talarico, to "make the final two years of his presidency the most productive of any presidency in American history"—but only if he agrees to sign the kinds of legislation that American voters signaled they're demanding when they went to the polls last week, handing Democrats at least 55 US Senate seats and 255 US House seats and rejecting the president's MAGA agenda.
Talarico called on Democrats to emulate the far-reaching domestic policy agenda of former President Lyndon Baines Johnson, who signed the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act, created the Medicare and Medicaid programs, and spearheaded early education and legal services programs for low-income families, among other far-reaching initiatives as part of his Great Society agenda.
"We are in striking distance of a supermajority," said Talarico, "and a supermajority requires a super agenda. We must deliver immediate, bold relief during this affordability crisis. We must unrig this economic system that only benefits the top 1%."
Talarico: The American people cannot wait two years for change, so we must work with President Trump. If President Trump wants the same plaques and portraits as LBJ, we can help make that a reality. We should make the final two years of his presidency the most productive of any American presidency
— Acyn (@Acyn) November 12, 2026
Talarico called on Democrats in Congress to pass legislation to ban gerrymandering, "invest in our teachers and our students and build an American public education system that is the envy of the world," regulate artificial intelligence, end "forever wars that are driving up prices," and "champion a new, values-based foreign policy." Without naming the broadly popular Medicare for All proposal that has been introduced in the House and Senate numerous times, he called for Democrats to "pass universal healthcare so no one in this country goes bankrupt just because they get sick."
"Some of these reforms may not pass until 2029," said the senator-elect, who emphasized during his campaign that Americans across racial, partisan, and gender divides must join together to fight the influence of powerful billionaire megadonors. "But the American people cannot wait two years for change. So we must work with President Trump."
"If President Trump wants the same plaques and portraits and busts as LBJ, we can help make that a reality," Talarico continued, alluding to Trump's push to build monuments to himself. "This moment is so much bigger and so much more important than the red team or the blue team."
David Sirota of Lever News applauded Talarico's call, suggesting, as Sen.-elect Abdul El-Sayed (D-Mich.) has, that Democrats could pass a Medicare for All bill called "Trumpcare" and trade the president's affection for seeing his own name emblazoned on policy initiatives for a new healthcare system that could save more than 100,000 lives and $1 trillion annually.
Sirota compared a far-reaching Democratic agenda to the legislation passed by Congress during Republican President Richard Nixon's five-and-a-half years in office.
Working with Democrats in both chambers of Congress, Nixon signed the National Environmental Policy Act, the Clean Air Act, the Endangered Species Act, key workplace safety and anti-discrimination protections, and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, among other major legislation.
Talarico's comments echoed those of Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who appeared undaunted by Trump's threat to veto legislation passed by Democrats.
“If Donald Trump wants to be Mr. Veto, let’s test that out,” the senator said. “The new Democratic majority in Congress should pass bills to make life more affordable and our government less corrupt.”
Carlos Jimenez, a US citizen and father of three who still has bullet fragments lodged near his lung after being shot by a US Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer in California last year, is suing the Trump administration, San Bernardino County, and various agents for over $25 million in damages.
Jimenez, who is from Ontario, east of Los Angeles, filed his complaint against the United States, the county, ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations officer Eusebio Ortiz, two US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers, a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) special agent, and 20 unnamed defendants on Friday.
While Jimenez was driving to work on the morning of October 30, 2025, he approached agents conducting an immigration operation to let them know they were near a bus stop for schoolchildren. Ortiz ultimately shot him, but it was Jimenez, not the officer, who then faced charges that have since been dropped.
As with some other people ICE or CBP agents have shot—sometimes fatally—the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which oversees both agencies, has claimed Jimenez "attempted to run officers over" federal agents "by reversing directly at them without stopping," but his lawyers have disputed that account.
After the shooting, at a local hospital, FBI agents "interfered with his medical care," according to a complaint. They allegedly prevented Jimenez from talking to healthcare providers, removed him from the hospital bed, and "handcuffed him with a leather waist restraint."
As the FBI drove Jimenez back to the scene for an interrogation, "while the bullet and fragments remained lodged in his body," he "kept bleeding and vomiting in the agents' van," and they told him not to "ruin their vehicle," the filing claims. He was taken to West Valley Detention Center, where he was also denied adequate medical care.
A few weeks later, a grand jury indicted Jimenez, whom federal prosecutors charged with assaulting a federal officer using a deadly or dangerous weapon, but "the criminal case later became the subject of a dispute over evidence," Newsweek reported Monday.
As the outlet detailed:
On May 5, US District Judge Kenly Kiya Kato ordered the government to turn over communications and operational records sought by the defense; this included responsive communications on government-issued and personal phones. The order also required a declaration under penalty of perjury from Ortiz if no responsive messages from him existed.
Jimenez entered into a diversion agreement shortly afterward. After he completed its conditions, Kato dismissed the indictment with prejudice on November 2, meaning the charge cannot be refiled. The dismissal order did not make a finding that federal officers used excessive force or otherwise acted unlawfully.
The Guardian highlighted that in addition to calling the criminal charges against Jimenez "fabricated," the complaint "alleges that the FBI falsely claimed that two neighbors witnessed the incident and told an agent that Jimenez's vehicle had enough room to pull forward without reversing. When Jimenez’s legal team interviewed those witnesses, both denied making those statements and said they were unaware there had been a shooting until they saw news reports."
While the FBI declined to comment and DHS referred questions to the US Department of Justice, Ciaran McEvoy, a spokesperson for the DOJ in Los Angeles, said in an email to the newspaper that Jimenez "could have exercised his right to take the case to trial, but he instead requested that our office agree to resolve the case through a diversion agreement."
Jimenez is among at least 32 people fired upon by federal immigration agents as part of Republican President Donald Trump's mass detention and deportation campaign. Others include Renee Good and Alex Pretti, US citizens killed early this year in Minneapolis, Minnesota, and Silverio Villegas González, a Mexican man fatally shot last year near Chicago, Illinois.
At the beginning of October, Good's family filed a pair of lawsuits against the federal government and immigration officials over her death and an alleged conspiracy to interfere with civil rights in Minnesota's Twin Cities. A week later, Villegas González's relatives filed a legal claim against the administration over his "execution-style killing." Pretti's family hasn't yet sued, but his parents demanded justice at a press conference late last month.
As leading Democrats express hesitation about using an upcoming fight over government funding to cut off money for President Donald Trump's illegal Iran war, Sen. Chris Van Hollen and Rep. Ro Khanna are pushing their party to act boldly against a conflict that spurred massive backlash against the GOP at the ballot box last week.
The Washington Sun reported Wednesday that Van Hollen (D-Md.) and Khanna's (D-Calif.) call for Democrats to withhold their support for any government funding package unless it excludes money for the Iran war is "hitting resistance from senior members of the party." The outlet cited several top Democrats, including Rep. Adam Smith of Washington, Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware, Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia, and other lawmakers who have voiced skepticism about potentially sparking a government shutdown over war funding just weeks after the midterms.
But Van Hollen, who is considering a run for Senate majority leader in the upcoming Congress, has countered that any blame for a shutdown would fall on Trump and his Republican Party.
"If the president wants to tell the country that he’s prepared to shut down the United States government in order to conduct an illegal and senseless war in Iran, that will be his choice," said Van Hollen.
Matt Duss, executive vice president of the Center for International Policy and a former adviser to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), echoed Van Hollen, writing to Democrats: "You wouldn’t be shutting down the government. You’d be offering a bill that funds the government but prohibits any funds for the war."
"If Republicans oppose that," Duss added, "they would be choosing to continue the war and shut down the government."
Trump launched the war on Iran without congressional authorization in late February and has funded the conflict with existing Pentagon appropriations. The Pentagon has put the Iran war's price tag at $47 billion—an estimate that outside experts say is a dramatic undercount.
The White House has called on Congress to approve a supplemental funding package that includes tens of billions of dollars for the war, which Trump administration officials previously said would be over in a matter of weeks.
Van Hollen told The Washington Sun last week that he is "not planning to vote for anything that provides any funding to fuel the war in Iran."
“I think this is a really important moment for Democratic leadership,” said Van Hollen. “Are the Democrats, including the Democratic leadership, going to listen to the verdict of the American people and vote to end this war?”
Erik Sperling, executive director of the advocacy group Just Foreign Policy, said Wednesday that "if every Democrat was talking like Chris Van Hollen, we'd be just weeks away from ending this war."
"Instead, too many AIPAC-backed Dems are acting powerless to stop one of the most unpopular wars and lame-duck presidents in history," Sperling added.
Current government funding is set to expire on December 11.
Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), who is vying to become House speaker in the upcoming Congress, would not commit to supporting efforts to cut off Iran war money in the upcoming government funding package and said the details are in the hands of Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), the top Democratic appropriators.
DeLauro said in a statement to Politico last week that "Democrats will absolutely not fund Trump’s war of choice with Iran that has increased costs on American families and made us less safe." But The Washington Sun reported on Wednesday that neither DeLauro nor Murray "would commit to demanding Iran war restrictions as a condition of supporting a December funding extension, with Murray saying Democrats are examining their options."
Sen. Patty Murray, ranking member on the Senate Appropriations Committee, tells me Democrats will “explore every option” to end the Iran war, but wouldn’t commit to opposing Schumer should he refuse to block any government funding bill with dollars for it. Murray has the power to stop war funding in the CR.
— Julian Andreone (@JulianAndreone) November 10, 2026
In a social media post earlier this week, Khanna—a possible 2028 presidential candidate—argued that the midterm results were "a cry for help by Americans who are in pain." A tracker maintained by Brown University's Watson School of International and Public Affairs estimates that the Iran war has cost US consumers over $157 billion in extra gasoline and diesel costs.
"Democrats must stop the war in Iran to bring down the cost of gas, food, and diesel," Khanna wrote. "We can do this by insisting on no funding for Iran combat activities in the continuing resolution."
This election was a cry for help by Americans who are in pain.This November, Democrats must stop the war in Iran to bring down the cost of gas, food, and diesel. We can do this by insisting on no funding for Iran combat activities in the continuing resolution. https://t.co/o7IrzGJlcY
— Ro Khanna (@RoKhanna) November 9, 2026
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) has joined Van Hollen and Khanna in demanding specific provisions in any government funding bill to ensure that no more money goes toward continuing the Iran war.
“I think we should come up with a funding bill that does things like replenishes munitions... all the stuff that we need to do as a nation, but say, ‘The war is illegal, until you get [congressional] authorization,'" Kaine told Jewish Insider earlier this week. "I think we should put in a provision that says, ‘No funding for a war in Iran unless you get an authorization from Congress.'"
The Mossad director's trip comes amid efforts by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to persuade the US president to abandon diplomacy and resume military strikes on Iran.
The head of Israel's foreign intelligence agency was in Washington, DC on Friday, reportedly trying to persuade the Trump administration to renew the illegal US-Israeli war of choice against Iran.
Mossad Director Roman Gofman was scheduled to meet with CIA Director John Ratcliffe in the nation's capital before traveling to Miami for talks with White House Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, according to reporting from Axios' Barak Ravid.
Other sources, including The Jerusalem Post, confirmed that Gofman was in Washington to discuss the Iran War.
Gofman's trip comes amid an increasingly public campaign by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to persuade US President Donald Trump to abandon diplomacy and return to military strikes on Iran.
According to Axios, Trump has so far resisted Netanyahu's demands, instead favoring continued economic pressure and a naval blockade while leaving open the possibility of a negotiated agreement.
"I could end it immediately," Trump said Thursday of the 258-day war—a claim he has made dozens of times in one form or another. "At the request of the nations that I'm looking to protect, we are doing it a little bit longer... a little bit more civilly."
The president claimed that leaders of countries including Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain said they preferred that the US maintain the current approach rather than resume fighting.
Netanyahu had reportedly been lobbying Trump to resume strikes immediately after the US midterm elections, in which the Iran War played a major role in Republicans' losing control of Congress, according to exit polls.
Israel's domestic political turmoil may also be playing a part in Netanyahu's machinations. His Likud-led far-right bloc lost its parliamentary majority in last month's election, and opposition leader Gadi Eisenkot has a mandate to try to form a new government.
Some Israeli opposition figures fear Netanyahu could initiate another attack on Iran—or provoke an Iranian response—in an effort to sabotage Eisenkot's efforts and cling to power. Eisenkot, who met with Netanyahu for two hours Thursday, said Friday that he had warned the outgoing prime minister against taking advantage of the political transition to pursue military objectives.
Trump's own rhetoric has become increasingly bellicose. On Thursday, he said that he had "no hesitation" about using military force against Iran and that renewed strikes were possible "right now" if he decided to give the order.
In a separate Truth Social post, he declared: "We don't need a deal with Iran. Those days have long since passed."
Thousands of Iranians—including more than 3,500 civilians, at least 380 of them children—have been killed and tens of thousands more wounded by US and Israeli attacks since February 28, according to Iranian and international officials. More than 20 US troops and dozens of people in Gulf Arab states have been killed in Iranian counterattacks.
"All departing traffic should remain ground stopped until further notice," said the Federal Aviation Administration.
This is a developing story. Please check back for possible updates.
All US flights were ordered not to take off Friday afternoon as the Federal Aviation Administration ordered a "national ground stop."
"Due to extraordinary circumstances and for reasons of safety," said an alert from the FAA, "by order of the Federal Aviation Administration all airports are ground stopped. All departing traffic should remain ground stopped until further notice."
Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said the ground stop was due to "a communication issue impacting all Air Route Traffic Control Centers.”
A major outage appeared to be affecting the FAA's air traffic control system, The New York Times reported.
“FAA technicians are investigating the issue,” Duffy said. “We will provide immediate updates as we have them."
The FAA issued an unprecedented nationwide ground stop order and closed the nation's airspace after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. An outage in the FAA's system that alerts pilots of safety issues had an outage on January 11, 2023, which also required a ground stop.
According to the flight tracking app Flighty, there were more than 30,000 departures and arrivals scheduled for the remainder of the day when the ground stop was ordered.
The Times reported that the FAA has recently incorporated an artificial intelligence model into its system, but it was not clear late Friday whether that contributed to the outage. The tool, Strategic Management of Airspace, Routes, and Trajectories (SMART), was made by an AI company called Air Space Intelligence, which won an $875 million contract to develop the program. The tool is aimed at avoiding flight delays.
"We have an opportunity to restore faith in our democracy—not by preaching about its virtues, but delivering," said US Sen. Chris Van Hollen.
Sen. Chris Van Hollen got an enthusiastic reception on Friday at the “What’s Next” summit hosted by the group Majority Democrats in Denver, when the Maryland Democrat brought up his bid to challenge Sen. Chuck Schumer as leader of the caucus.
Van Hollen, who just hours earlier announced his intention to run for Senate majority leader in the next US Congress, was greeted with big applause as he took to the stage at the convention, with some in the audience shouting, "Leader!"
Chris Van Hollen gets thunderous applause and "leader" shouts at What's Next. https://t.co/T7g4DE48tm
— CENTRIFUGE (@ClippingMods) November 13, 2026
During his address, Van Hollen said that his goal as leader would be to restore American voters' faith in democracy, as polls for years have shown steep declines in trust across US institutions.
"For many Americans, our institutions sound like the thing that is standing in the way of getting that better life," Van Hollen said, according to Semafor reporter Dave Weigel. "We have an opportunity to restore faith in our democracy—not by preaching about its virtues, but delivering."
The Maryland Democrat then echoed remarks made over the last week by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), as well as Sens.-elect Abdul El-Sayed (D-Mich.) and James Talarico (D-Texas), about passing popular legislation and daring President Donald Trump to block it.
"What if we actually had votes on the Senate floor about things the American people really cared about?" Van Hollen asked. "If Trump wants to veto it and... show that he stands with his billionaire buddies, let him do that."
While Van Hollen was well received at the conference, Democratic Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), who aims to become the House speaker, was repeatedly heckled and booed during his discussion with Democratic strategist Jessica Tarlov.
One demonstrator, who was escorted out of the auditorium, yelled that Jeffries was a "traitor" for "shaking hands with the Trump family," presumably a reference to the New York Democrat's meeting with Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, earlier this year.
yikes -- Jeffries's talk in Denver is being disrupted by a string of protesters, one of whom screams obscenities at him https://t.co/zyiYkgdSIj
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) November 13, 2026
Progressive organizers over the last week have been calling for Jeffries to step aside as leader, although no other House Democrat has officially announced their candidacy for the speakership.
A Change.org petition posted earlier this week to draft Rep. Ayana Pressley (D-Mass.) for the speakership has gained nearly 99,000 signatures as of this writing.
The New York Times reported on Friday that Jeffries is "pressing to wrap up his nomination to be speaker next week quickly and overwhelmingly, leaving potential detractors little room to maneuver around him even as some of them complain about an undemocratic process."
"The Pentagon has been playing games with US casualty stats for months," said investigative journalist Nick Turse. "Someone is dead. Then they're not. 15 people are wounded. Then they disappear."
The Intercept, an investigative news outlet, is suing the US Department of Defense in an effort to compel it to disclose the “true” number of casualties from the Iran War.
Since President Donald Trump launched the war in February, investigative journalist Nick Turse has reported extensively on what one US defense official quoted in his reports has described as a “casualty cover-up.” He has documented several deaths and hundreds of injuries not included in official tallies and tracked unexplained changes that obscure the full toll of the conflict.
"The Pentagon has been playing games with US casualty stats for months," Turse explained in July. "Someone is dead. Then they're not. 15 people are wounded. Then they disappear."
The lawsuit follows the Pentagon’s failure to substantively respond to five requests by The Intercept under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) for records documenting US casualties, briefings provided to Defense Department personnel including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, internal communications, directives governing how casualties were counted, and the war’s financial costs.
The Pentagon acknowledged receiving the requests but missed the legal deadline to fulfill them.
In a complaint filed Friday in federal court in the Southern District of New York, The Intercept accused the Pentagon of violating its duties “to conduct a reasonable search for responsive records” and “to take reasonable steps to release all nonexempt information.”
“For months, The Intercept has been working to determine the true number of US military personnel who have been killed or injured in the Iran War. And for months, the Department of Defense has failed to give a clear answer,” said Ben Muessig, the outlet’s editor-in-chief. “The public deserves clarity and transparency from its government.”
The Intercept's lawsuit comes amid what Turse has described as "the most aggressive assault on press freedom in memory," under Hegseth, who has tried to outlaw journalists from seeking information not officially "authorized" for release—an effort blocked by a federal judge in March—and sought sweeping authority to withhold unclassified records requested under FOIA.
In August, a US Central Command (CENTCOM) public affairs official threatened to put Turse on a “list of people to disregard” after he repeatedly sought answers about Iranian attacks, conflicting casualty figures, and medical evacuations. CENTCOM subsequently denied maintaining a blacklist.
The Intercept is being represented by the nonprofit legal group Democracy Forward, which is also representing the outlet in a similar lawsuit filed in June seeking to compel the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to release documents related to a secretive database of activists who have protested and recorded Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents.
“The American people deserve the truth from their government, especially about the true human cost of the military conflict with Iran,” said Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward. “We are honored to work with The Intercept once again to hold our government accountable, and to fight for a democracy where a free press can report on important issues without interference or being unlawfully prevented from accessing public information.”
As of its latest update on November 9, the Pentagon’s Defense Casualty Analysis System shows that 23 US service members have died and 867 have been wounded in action since the attacks against Iran began on February 28.
But The Intercept says the tallies still contain discrepancies that “have yet to be corrected or explained” and, in October, launched a letter-writing campaign calling for Congress to investigate them.
"More than 200 sailors treated for lacerations or smoke inhalation have never been listed in official statistics. In April, the official number of wounded-in-action troops declined by 15 without explanation. An Army death listed in late May was removed from the record in early June. Ten wounded troops added to the official record in July disappeared a few days later," read the more than 68,000 letters sent to members of Congress.
The Intercept has also asked for answers about why the Pentagon waited more than six months to include Maj. Sorffly Davius, a signals and communications officer with the New York Army National Guard, who died on March 6 while on duty at Camp Buehring, Kuwait, in its official death tally. The Intercept wrote 10 articles about Davius’ death before the Pentagon added it to the count.
"Despite repeated questions for months, the Pentagon has not explained these and other disparities," the letters said. "It’s time for Congress to demand answers about the Pentagon’s long-delayed classification of the death of Maj. Davius and find out the truth about hundreds of other casualties missing from the official record."
“New Yorkers’ personal data should never be used as a weapon against their own pocketbooks,” said Mayor Zohran Mamdani.
The New York City Council on Thursday approved landmark legislation banning businesses from using consumers’ personal data and algorithms to charge different people different prices for the same goods and services, an increasingly common—and controversial—corporate practice known as surveillance pricing.
In a 44-5 vote, city lawmakers passed Introduction 891-A, sponsored by Council Speaker Julie Menin, which prohibits businesses from using personal data—including browsing histories, shopping habits, demographics, location information, and other identifying characteristics—to determine individualized prices for consumers.
The legislation gives the city's Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (DCWP) authority to investigate complaints and impose civil penalties of up to $1,000 for each violation. Qualifying small businesses would have an opportunity to correct their violations before facing penalties.
“The City Council is putting consumers first by ending the deceptive and insidious practice of surveillance pricing,” said Menin, a Democrat. “When corporations use algorithms and personal data to charge different people different prices for the same products, it’s unethical and worsens our affordability crisis."
"We take consumer protection extremely seriously, and we will continue fighting to lower prices and stop predatory corporate tactics," she added.
New York City Mayor Zohran Mamadani, also a Democrat, supports the measure, and called surveillance pricing a way for corporations to "squeeze working people."
“New Yorkers’ personal data should never be used as a weapon against their own pocketbooks,” he said. “Our administration will continue working with the Council to protect workers, tenants, and consumers, and put an end to the scam economy.”
Mamdani has 30 days to sign the bill. If he does not, it automatically becomes law unless he vetoes it, a highly unlikely move that city council members could override with a two-thirds majority.
As the City Council explained:
Surveillance pricing is invisible to consumers, making it difficult to identify, but reports suggest the practice is occurring in a variety of industries. One investigation found that a major grocery delivery platform was engaging in algorithmic pricing experiments that resulted in individualized price differences as high as 23%. Another investigation found that the price of a television at one retailer increased from $499.99 to $599.99 when the consumer pulled into the store’s parking lot. A behavioral economist who worked for a major ride-share company revealed that the application increases prices when a consumer’s phone battery is low because they might not otherwise be able to get home if they do not accept the high offer. The Council aims to end these predatory practices and protect New York consumers with this landmark ban.
"Fair pricing visible for all to see. Today, New York City has upheld this basic principle, passing the country’s strongest municipal protections against surveillance pricing," DCWP Commissioner Samuel A. A. Levine said in a statement.
"At a moment when working families are struggling with the cost of living," he continued, "New Yorkers should not have to contend with an ever more fickle economy, in which the price of groceries, household goods, and everyday essentials depends on how much an algorithm thinks it can squeeze from their wallets."
"Surveillance pricing weaponizes our personal data against us—tracking our behavior, characteristics, location, schedules, and purchasing history to predict the most we are willing to pay, then charging accordingly," Levine said. "It’s wrong, it’s loathed by consumers, and now it’s illegal."
"In New York City, algorithms do not have the final say," he added. "People do."
New York City follows Seattle—which in September became the first US city to ban surveillance pricing—as well the states of Connecticut, Maryland, and New Jersey in outlawing the practice.
When I sponsored legislation making Seattle the first city in the country to ban surveillance pricing, I knew we wouldn’t be the last. Now, we’re taking on unfair pricing coast to coast. Congrats, New York.Portland City Council, your move.
— AMR - Alexis Mercedes Rinck (@alexis4seattle.bsky.social) November 12, 2026 at 9:23 PM
Consumer advocates hailed Thursday's vote, with Consumer Reports senior policy analyst Grace Gedye saying that “living in New York is already expensive enough. The last thing New Yorkers need is algorithms quietly hiking prices on everyday essentials."
"Nobody should pay more just because a data broker is tracking what they search for, what they hover over, or where they live,” she added. “The price you see shouldn’t be different based on who you are."
Lindsay Owens, the president and CEO of the economic justice group Groundwork Collaborative, asserted that “New Yorkers didn’t sign up to be spied on and have their own data turned against them just to pad corporations’ pockets."
"Today, the New York City Council has drawn a clear line in the sand that New Yorkers deserve a fair price, not one set by an algorithm designed to extract every last penny they’re willing to pay," she continued.
"But while the Council has moved to protect shoppers in the city, families across the Empire State, from Westchester to Buffalo to Albany, are still waiting on Governor [Kathy] Hochul to do the same," Owens added. "All New Yorkers deserve a fair price, no matter their ZIP code. Gov. Hochul can’t wait another day to sign the One Fair Price Act.”
“Living in New York is already expensive enough. The last thing New Yorkers need is algorithms quietly hiking prices on everyday essentials."
New York state lawmakers passed that bill in June. Championed by Democratic New York Attorney General Letitia James, the legislation would prohibit companies from using consumers' personal data—including browsing histories, income, and other identifying information—to set individualized prices for goods and services. It also prohibits collecting, retaining, selling, or sharing personal data to facilitate surveillance pricing.
Not everyone welcomed New York City's surveillance pricing ban. Uber spokesperson Josh Gold argued that "this law will make it harder for small restaurants with limited marketing budgets to reach customers, putting them at a disadvantage against national chains."
The surveillance pricing victory comes amid a broader campaign to restrict corporate snooping on New Yorkers, including the increasingly widespread use of facial recognition and other biometric identification technologies in retail businesses.
A separate City Council measure sponsored by Brooklyn Councilmember Shahana Hanif, a Democrat, would prohibit businesses and other public accommodations from using biometric recognition technology to identify or verify customers. It would also require notification and written consent for biometric data collection and establish protections governing the handling of that information.
The legislation would restrict Madison Square Garden’s controversial use of facial recognition technology. MSG owner James Dolan has notoriously used facial recognition to blacklist people he dislikes, including hundreds of attorneys whose law firms have sued his companies; in one particularly publicized case, a mother was denied entry to Radio City Music Hall while accompanying her daughter’s Girl Scout troop because she worked for a firm litigating against MSG.
Hanif has warned that biometric surveillance poses particular dangers to immigrant communities, whose identifying information could potentially reach federal immigration authorities amid the Trump administration's deadly crackdown.
"This bill protects everybody," Hanif said when introducing her bill, "but we know who experiences disproportionate surveillance, and our immigrant community is among them."
Sen. Elizabeth Warren warned that President Donald Trump "wants to rip food assistance away from 6 million more who are already struggling to get by because of his sky-high gas prices and chaotic tariffs."
US Sen. Elizabeth Warren said Thursday that Congress must act to stop a new Trump administration assault on federal nutrition assistance that would strip aid from over 6 million people, compounding the hunger disaster created by the Republican budget law enacted last year.
"This is beyond cruel," Warren (D-Mass.) wrote in a social media post, referring to a rule proposed by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) that would curtail a policy known as broad-based categorical eligibility. The USDA's own analysis estimates that its proposal, published in the Federal Register earlier this week, would take Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits from roughly 6.3 million people in 2029, the first year the rule would take full effect.
Warren noted that 5.5 million people have already lost federal nutrition aid since enactment of the 2025 Trump-GOP budget law, which instituted the largest SNAP cuts in the program's history.
"Now, he wants to rip food assistance away from 6 million more who are already struggling to get by because of his sky-high gas prices and chaotic tariffs," the senator wrote. "Congress needs to stop this."
After a rule is published in the Federal Register, Congress has 60 legislative days to introduce a Congressional Review Act resolution to overturn it. Democrats will take control of the House and Senate on January 3, 2027.
The new USDA rule takes aim at broad-based categorical eligibility, which lets states automatically deem recipients of other federal benefits eligible for SNAP—reducing administrative burdens for state officials and program enrollees. Under the Trump administration's rule, which is open for public comment until December 10, households with gross incomes above 130% of the federal poverty line would lose SNAP benefits, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
Experts have noted that the Trump administration's attack on broad-based categorical eligibility would, if finalized, have far-reaching impacts, including reduced access to free school meals.
In a statement on Friday, the Children's Defense Fund urged the Trump administration to "reverse course" on its proposal, warning it would harm kids across the US.
"Many public schools use SNAP to automatically enroll children in free meal programs, meaning any child who loses SNAP access could also lose automatic eligibility for free school meals, exacerbating food insecurity in school districts across the country," the group said.
“We must unrig this economic system that only benefits the top 1%,” said the senator-elect. “The American people cannot wait two years for change.”
In the first two years of his second term in the White House, "success" according to President Donald Trump has looked like hundreds of thousands of people being detained by federal immigration agents, and families struggling with soaring costs at the grocery store and gas pump as a result of his "incredible" tariffs and so-called "victory" in the deeply unpopular Iran War.
But at the What's Next summit hosted in Denver by Majority Democrats on Thursday, Sen.-elect James Talarico (D-Texas), whose election win last week stunned Republicans, called on the Democratic Party to ensure the president achieves a new kind of success in his final years in office, as he contends for the first time with a US Senate and House that are both controlled by the Democrats.
The party has an opportunity, said Talarico, to "make the final two years of his presidency the most productive of any presidency in American history"—but only if he agrees to sign the kinds of legislation that American voters signaled they're demanding when they went to the polls last week, handing Democrats at least 55 US Senate seats and 255 US House seats and rejecting the president's MAGA agenda.
Talarico called on Democrats to emulate the far-reaching domestic policy agenda of former President Lyndon Baines Johnson, who signed the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act, created the Medicare and Medicaid programs, and spearheaded early education and legal services programs for low-income families, among other far-reaching initiatives as part of his Great Society agenda.
"We are in striking distance of a supermajority," said Talarico, "and a supermajority requires a super agenda. We must deliver immediate, bold relief during this affordability crisis. We must unrig this economic system that only benefits the top 1%."
Talarico: The American people cannot wait two years for change, so we must work with President Trump. If President Trump wants the same plaques and portraits as LBJ, we can help make that a reality. We should make the final two years of his presidency the most productive of any American presidency
— Acyn (@Acyn) November 12, 2026
Talarico called on Democrats in Congress to pass legislation to ban gerrymandering, "invest in our teachers and our students and build an American public education system that is the envy of the world," regulate artificial intelligence, end "forever wars that are driving up prices," and "champion a new, values-based foreign policy." Without naming the broadly popular Medicare for All proposal that has been introduced in the House and Senate numerous times, he called for Democrats to "pass universal healthcare so no one in this country goes bankrupt just because they get sick."
"Some of these reforms may not pass until 2029," said the senator-elect, who emphasized during his campaign that Americans across racial, partisan, and gender divides must join together to fight the influence of powerful billionaire megadonors. "But the American people cannot wait two years for change. So we must work with President Trump."
"If President Trump wants the same plaques and portraits and busts as LBJ, we can help make that a reality," Talarico continued, alluding to Trump's push to build monuments to himself. "This moment is so much bigger and so much more important than the red team or the blue team."
David Sirota of Lever News applauded Talarico's call, suggesting, as Sen.-elect Abdul El-Sayed (D-Mich.) has, that Democrats could pass a Medicare for All bill called "Trumpcare" and trade the president's affection for seeing his own name emblazoned on policy initiatives for a new healthcare system that could save more than 100,000 lives and $1 trillion annually.
Sirota compared a far-reaching Democratic agenda to the legislation passed by Congress during Republican President Richard Nixon's five-and-a-half years in office.
Working with Democrats in both chambers of Congress, Nixon signed the National Environmental Policy Act, the Clean Air Act, the Endangered Species Act, key workplace safety and anti-discrimination protections, and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, among other major legislation.
Talarico's comments echoed those of Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who appeared undaunted by Trump's threat to veto legislation passed by Democrats.
“If Donald Trump wants to be Mr. Veto, let’s test that out,” the senator said. “The new Democratic majority in Congress should pass bills to make life more affordable and our government less corrupt.”
The Senate minority leader addressed reporters amid a push for progressives in the House to nominate Rep. Ayanna Pressley as an alternative to Jeffries at next week’s Democratic caucus meeting.
Democratic Rep. Hakeem Jeffries sidestepped a reporter’s questions about a controversial proposal to more closely integrate the US and Israeli militaries on Thursday, underscoring some critics’ argument that he’s unfit to serve as House speaker when Democrats retake the chamber in January.
Democrats in the US Congress are facing growing calls to strip out provisions in the 2027 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that would significantly expand cooperation between the US and Israeli defense industries, making it easier for the two countries to jointly develop weapons, share military technology, and incorporate Israeli tech into US military systems.
One poll from August by Data for Progress showed that 61% of likely voters opposed the measure, known as the "United States-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative," including 78% of Democrats—a reflection of the public's growing desire for the US to cut ties with Israel following over three years of genocidal attacks on Gaza, expansionist conquest in the West Bank and Lebanon, and military aggression against Iran.
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), who is challenging Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) to lead the Democrats’ Senate majority, said earlier this week that Democrats should oppose the military integration provisions. He and his colleagues warned that these provisions would give Israel even greater leverage over US policy and threaten national security by granting Israel access to sensitive information about US military technology beyond what is shared even with NATO allies.
The NDAA is expected to come up for a vote next month. But it will need Democratic support to pass the Senate, where 60 votes are required to break the filibuster. It may also face obstacles in the House, where Republicans hold a narrow 218-214 majority. Some in the GOP, like Reps. Thomas Massie (Ky.), Lauren Boebert (Colo.), and Anna Paulina Luna (Fla.), have already signaled opposition to the measure, meaning that a united Democratic caucus could kill it.
Asked by The Hill's Laura Kelly at a news conference on Thursday whether he agreed with Van Hollen's call to remove the provisions from the NDAA, Jeffries never answered her question directly:
I haven't had a conversation with Sen. Van Hollen, but what I have said is that things have to dramatically change over in the Middle East.
We need dramatic change in the West Bank, which is why I strongly support the West Bank Violence Protection Act. We need dramatic change in Gaza, and we need dramatic change with respect to the memorandum of understanding as it winds down, all of which I've previously said publicly.
And we'll work as a caucus to make sure that we can bring about the just and lasting peace that Israelis and Palestinians deserve over in the Middle East.
The status quo is unacceptable, and we need dramatic change. And that looks like, as far as I'm concerned, making sure you have a safe and secure Israel, living side by side as a Jewish and democratic state with an independent Palestinian state that provides dignity and self-determination for the Palestinian people.
Jeffries, who has received more than $1 million in campaign donations facilitated by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) since 2022, is already facing criticism over his refusal earlier this week to commit to using next month's government funding bill to force President Donald Trump to end his war in Iran and for failing to ensure the whole Democratic caucus was present for a key vote to advance the impeachment of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.
Trita Parsi, the executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, said that with his noncommittal answer on US-Israeli military integration, Jeffries had “in less than 90 seconds” made it “crystal clear why he should not become the next speaker of the House.”
"Asked whether he supports removing provisions that deepen US defense cooperation and intelligence sharing with Israel from the National Defense Authorization Act—an obvious yes!—he refuses to address the question and instead gives a 1990s answer about a mythological two-state solution," Parsi wrote on social media.
In the Senate, momentum is building behind Van Hollen’s effort to oust Schumer as leader. On Wednesday, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said that Schumer, another staunch ally of Israel, was “way out of touch with where the American people are at.”
Several incoming Democratic senators, including Abdul El-Sayed (Mich.), Peggy Flanagan (Minn.), Troy Jackson (Maine), Adam Hamilton (Kan.), and Juliana Stratton (Ill.), have said they support Van Hollen or won't back Schumer, while others, including Democratic Sens.-elect Annie Andrews (SC) and Chris Pappas (NH), as well as the centrist Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), have suggested they wanted new leadership.
However, despite growing calls from the Democratic base for new leadership in the House as well, no Democrat has formally stepped up yet to challenge Jeffries’ claim to the speaker’s gavel.
Some newly elected Democrats—like Reps.-elect Melat Kiros (Colo.), Don Leonard (Ohio), and Claire Valdez (NY)—have suggested they would prefer a different leader, but House progressive leaders have so far put the kibosh on an insurgency, with Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY), Pramila Jayapal (Wash.), and Greg Casar (Texas) standing by Jeffries, at least as long as he's the only choice.
Time is running out for progressives to rally behind an alternative to Jeffries. The Democratic caucus will begin its internal leadership elections on November 18 and choose its nominee for speaker. The entire House will vote to elect a speaker when the new Congress convenes on January 3, 2027.
Some grassroots organizers have pushed for progressive Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) to challenge Jeffries, with one petition to draft her garnering over 90,000 signatures.
She has circulated her own petition pushing for a bolder agenda for Democrats to pursue in the next Congress, including passage of Medicare for All, national abortion protections, restrictions on data centers, and the abolition of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
In a speech on the House floor Thursday, she declared that “incrementalism is a recipe for failure” and that Democrats “cannot let money and the special interests dictate our fight.”
No one in the House Democratic caucus has publicly declared support for Pressley. But there is reportedly some movement behind the scenes ahead of Wednesday’s caucus meeting, where a nominee for party leader will be chosen.
One lawmaker, granted anonymity by Drop Site News congressional reporter Julian Andreone, said, "I am hearing that many progressives will be writing Ayanna’s name in.”
“You can’t put out a fire while handing the matches to the arsonists. And you certainly can’t expect the arsonists to write the evacuation plan.”
A coalition of environmental organizations is warning that the COP31 climate summit in Antalya, Türkiye is in danger of being co-opted by big polluters.
An analysis released on Friday by the Kick Big Polluters Out (KBPO) coalition finds that more than 100 polluting corporations and trade associations—including from fossil fuel, Big Tech, and industrial agriculture—have sent delegations to COP31.
Among the largest delegations, the report says, are International Emissions Trading Association (IETA), which sent 29 delegates; BNP Paribas, which sent 22; HSBC, which sent 19; and Amazon, which sent 12.
The analysis also shows that banks "collectively representing more than $2.2 trillion in fossil fuel financing from 2021-2025" have a presence at COP31.
The KBPO report notes that these industries and associations "have demonstrated track records of being notably misaligned with or obstructing climate policy... indicating they can be a threat to the strong climate action COP31 must urgently deliver."
These polluters' delegations are so big that they vastly outnumber delegations sent by many nations that are most endangered by the climate emergency, including Niger, the Philippines, and Nepal.
Maikel Peuki, director of the Papua chapter of the Indonesian Forum for Living Environment (WALHI) and a KBPO partner, said allowing big polluters to have a seat at the COP31 table would have dire consequences for his country's environment.
“In Papua our forests and coastal areas are being targeted for fossil fuel and food estate projects and carbon-offsetting schemes by major corporate emitters,” said Maikel Peuki. “This is not a genuine solution to the climate crisis. Those who cause pollution should be the ones to pay for the damage they have created.”
Peuki's remarks were echoed by Lien Vandamme, senior campaigner for the Center for International Environmental Law's Climate and energy program.
"You can’t put out a fire while handing the matches to the arsonists," said Vandamme. "And you certainly can’t expect the arsonists to write the evacuation plan. It’s therefore no surprise that the UN climate talks continue to fail in delivering the climate action that is needed. It’s time to show Big Polluters the door and fundamentally change the rules that keep rolling out the red carpet for them."
Prakash Dalal, director of Friends of the Earth Nepal, accused big polluters of causing "loss of livelihood, emotional damage, trauma, and survival challenges" for people in his country, adding that "we cannot tolerate the disproportionate space given to them compared to civil society and our country delegations."
"We need to kick these big polluters out!" Dalal emphasizes. "This should be a moral and legal obligation for the COP."
The presence of polluters also drew the ire of climate activist Greta Thunberg, according to a Thursday report in Latin Times.
While protesting outside COP31, Thunberg decried the negotiations for being "filled with lobbyists" who are "paid by the very destructive industries" profiting from continued fossil fuel dependence.
Thunberg also accused governments attending COP31 of using the event to "whitewash themselves" without taking real action.
"Should a handful of billionaires and a corrupt president have the power to sell out the rest of us so they can get even richer, or do the American people get a say in their own future?"
A broad coalition of advocacy organizations on Friday urged Democratic lawmakers to aggressively wield their investigative powers in the new Congress to scrutinize US President Donald Trump and his administration's relationship with Jensen Huang, the scandal-engulfed former chief executive of the AI chip giant Nvidia.
"While CEO Jensen Huang has resigned, that should not mean that he escapes scrutiny of Nvidia's actions," Guardrails Action, Indivisible, the American Federation of Teachers, and seven other groups wrote in a letter to Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY). "Beyond the obvious and pressing concerns regarding legislation on chip exports is a question at the very core of our democracy: Should a handful of billionaires and a corrupt president have the power to sell out the rest of us so they can get even richer, or do the American people get a say in their own future?"
The letter came a day after Huang stepped down as head of Nvidia following revelations of two extramarital affairs—one with a subordinate and another with a woman flagged by US intelligence agencies for potential ties to the Chinese government.
Over the past two years, Huang has developed a close relationship with Trump, and the CEO's professional demise has heightened scrutiny of White House policy decisions that have benefited the company—including licenses to export AI chips to China.
"Nvidia, the second-largest corporation in the world, gave $25 million to Trump’s ballroom," the advocacy coalition noted on Friday. "Its former CEO, Jensen Huang, traveled with Trump on Air Force One to China, and attended Trump’s state dinner with Chinese President Xi Jinping. At the same time, according to recent bombshell reporting, Huang was having an affair with a suspected Chinese spy, who led Megaspeed, a company under investigation for allegedly smuggling restricted Nvidia chips into China."
"Rather than take action, President Trump ignored the warnings; a Commerce Department investigation was even halted after direct intervention by Nvidia’s general counsel," the groups observed.
The coalition specifically called on Democrats in both the House and Senate to commit to three actions:
"The concentration of power and wealth from AI, and the risks that come with it, are historic," the groups wrote. "Countering that power is the most important fight of our lifetime. The American people put their trust in Democrats to put them first; now let’s prove they were right."
As Common Dreams reported on Thursday, a pair of high-ranking congressional Democrats have already launched an investigation into what they characterized as a "scheme" by the Trump administration to "mask an unconstitutional export tax as a national security tariff action—benefiting both Nvidia and the Chinese government."
The Democrats, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.), announced their investigation in a letter to Lutnick, a billionaire businessman whose department is under fire for lax oversight of Nvidia chip exports. Wyden and Neal noted in their letter that Lutnick's Commerce Department "has approved sales to Chinese companies with government and military ties—including Chinese 'cutout' companies with no physical presence at their listed addresses."
CNN reported Friday that some of Trump's advisers "have begun discussing" whether Lutnick should be fired. In an interview on Friday morning, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent blamed Lutnick for what he described as "leakage" of Nvidia's advanced AI chips to China.
According to Axios, Lutnick "has repeatedly stood in the way" of efforts to crack down on companies "suspected of diverting Nvidia's advanced AI chips to China."
"Howard Lutnick should resign or be fired," US Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) wrote on Thursday.