LIVE COVERAGE
Our Winter Campaign is falling short.
Without closing this gap, Common Dreams won’t have the funding needed to keep publishing in the weeks and months ahead. No corporate sponsors. No billionaires. We are funded entirely by readers, and these periodic campaigns are vital to our strength and survival.
At a moment when authoritarianism is on the rise and the corporate media is climbing into bed with fascism, nonprofit independent news outlets like Common Dreams need to be expanding our capacity, not cutting back.
Please give what you can to help meet our Winter Campaign goal by March 1. Every contribution moves the meter and helps keep independent journalism alive.
For Now A Prince. How Long Till A (Fake) King?
The arrest of the U.K. rapist formerly known as Prince, and the echoing, trans-Atlantic edict that no one is above the law, lay ever-barer America's "true exceptionalism": A culture of immunity so corrosive our own heinous, in-his-fever-dreams "exonerated" Predator-In-Chief has enragingly yet to face any consequences for his manifold sins, crimes, cruelties and depravities, petty and profound. Finally, says Epstein survivor Maria Farmer, "(Let) all the dominoes of power and corruption begin to fall."
The stunning arrest by Thames Valley Police of "Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor" - notably, not "His Royal Highness," ”the Duke of York" or other niceties - on his 66th birthday was widely seen as not just an arrest but "a transfer of power," a possible, long- awaited shift in the tides for once-untouchable elites of the Epstein class that announces power and status may no longer keep them safe, at least outside the crooked U.S. Shortly after 8 a.m., police arrived in six unmarked vehicles at Wood Farm on King Charles’ Sandringham Estate to haul Andrew off; they also reportedly searched his former residence near Windsor Castle. The charge, "suspicion of misconduct in public office" - talk about your euphemisms - stems from Andrew's term as UK trade envoy from 2001 to 2011, when he allegedly shared with Jeffrey Epstein confidential government reports on potential investment opportunities from Vietnam, Singapore, China and Afghanistan.
The envoy gig mandates a "duty of confidentiality"; any "abuse of public trust" that uses public power as "private currency for self-serving or nefarious reasons" carries a maximum sentence of life in prison. (Just imagine what they'd make of the Trump cartel's brazen, perennial grifting.) Andrew, of course, has also been charged with raping outspoken Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre, who died by suicide last year at 41, which led to him being stripped of his royal titles before slinking out of public view. Regrettably, he never faced a rape charge in court due to several factors - a civil settlement with Giuffre, a high bar for conviction beyond a reasonable doubt, and other legal loopholes. Presumably for some Epstein victims, bringing Andrew to even a modicum of justice on the easier-to-prove misconduct in office charge may feel dispiriting, like nabbing the murderous Al Capone for tax evasion: Better than nothing, but not good enough.
Andrew's was the first arrest of a senior member of the British royal family in modern history. The last one arrested was King Charles I in 1647, following his defeat in the English Civil War by Parliamentarian forces; a believer in the divine right of kings, his tyrannical reign led to his imprisonment, trial for high treason, and beheading in 1649 - the moral arc of the universe moved faster then. After Andrew's arrest, his brother King Charles, who had received no warning beforehand, issued a statement on, not his bro but “Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor”; he expressed “deepest concern" but "whole-hearted support" for the investigation: "Let me state clearly: the law must take its course." Others cited the same probity. Prime Minister Keir Starmer: "No one is above the law.” The family of Virginia Giuffre: "No one is above the law, not even royalty." Heartbreakingly, they added, "For survivors everywhere, Virginia did this for you."
Waxing cautious about possible shifts in power, The Mirror’s Christopher Bucktin notes, "A birthday arrest should not stand alone as a rare spectacle. It should signal something larger: that no title, no fortune, no political office is sufficient armour against the law...Justice cannot stop at one imprisoned accomplice while others retreat behind legal teams and influence." A new report from the UN's Human Rights Council, which finds Epstein's wrongs "may reasonably meet the legal threshold of crimes against humanity," echoes him. Arguing the files' "credible evidence of systematic and large-scale sexual abuse, trafficking and exploitation" - thus contradicting the "little evidence" bullshit of our DOJ and FBI - it dismisses vapid calls to "move on" as "a failure of responsibility towards victims." Resignations alone aren't enough, it adds: "It is imperative that governments act decisively to hold perpetrators (criminally) accountable."
As further evidence "Epstein elites can't hide anymore" - except, yes, infuriatingly, here - active investigations of Epstein-related crimes in 16 countries are now sweeping up officials on both sex-trafficking and corruption charges; Canada will reportedly open the next one. In the UK, former ambassador to the U.S. Peter Mandelson was fired and is under investigation - oops, now arrest - for passing on financial info to Epstein; Starmer’s chief of staff, who appointed Mandelson, also resigned. In Norway, a former prime minister was charged with "gross corruption” for his Epstein ties, and two diplomats are being investigated. In France, so are a former Culture Minister, his daughter and a senior diplomat. Non-Epstein-related justice has also come for South Korea's former President Yoon Suk Yeol - a life sentence with hard labor for an insurrection - and Brazil's Bolsonaro, whose 2023 coup attempt got him 27 years, and no pardons.
"This is what accountability looks like," argues David Kurtz of Andrew's arrest and all the rest, which "sends a signal far beyond London - straight to Washington." What it proclaims: "If the King's own brother is not above the law, neither is the King's dinner guest, nor his Commerce Secretary." Infernally, the lesson has yet to be heeded in an America ruled by a two-bit, 34-count felon and rapist abetted by a cabal of flunkies managing a Mafia-style criminal regime with no bottom and a corrupt SCOTUS whose "out-of-thin-air immunity doctrine" has made him less accountable than actual royalty - spawning a nation "exceptional among developed nations solely in (its) unwillingness to hold the powerful to account, even in the most egregious cases." Confirming that stark reality was last week's unfurling, outside the DOJ, of a huge banner of Dear Leader, "an abomination and an outrage" straight-up declaring our alleged justice system "a pure creature of presidential whim, retribution and cover-up."
Meanwhile, despite Epstein files that "scream 'Guilty" - with his hideous name appearing over 38,000 times in 5,300 released files representing just 2-4% of the grisly whole - Trump had the chutzpah to respond to a question about the possible ripple effect at home of Andrew's arrest by professing, four times in 30 seconds, he's been "totally exonerated." "Well, you know, I'm the expert in a way, because I've been totally exonerated," he blustered, prattling on in toddler-ese. "I did nothin'. It’s very nice. I can actually speak about it very nicely. I think it’s a shame. I think it’s very sad. It’s very, very sad to me. It’s a very sad thing. To see it, and to see what’s going on with his brother. King. So I think it’s a very sad thing." Fucking Christ. Nope, wasn't me, nothing to see here, not a creep, all good, if sad. And not a word on the survivors. Appalled observers: "Guilty as fuck," "The man on my TV screen is batshit crazy," and, "I hope to live long enough to see this POS in a cell with an open toilet." Or maybe none?
Epstein’s carefully curated, now slowly splintering network of elites included billionaires, academics, politicians, scummy MAGA hangers-on like Steve Bannon - “Dude. You up??" - with culpability circling ever closer to Trump. A trove of damning evidence has surfaced, from the removal of 53 files bearing his name to journalist Roger Sollenberger's account of disappeared allegations in a civil complaint and FBI slideshow that the DOJ spoke four times to a Jane Doe who credibly charged she was forced to perform oral sex on Trump when she was about 14; when she bit down on his penis, she said he punched her in the head, kicked her out, and later raped her vaginally and anally. Experts say such emerging stories of abuse reveal a ghastly, familiar pattern; the latest, in Alaska, is "nothing short of horrifying." Thus does Masha Gessen argue that it's time for us to stop speaking of the Epstein story "as a story about extraordinary lawlessness. It is a story about ordinary lawlessness."
Dating back, in Trump's case, a savage lifetime. By now he's committed most of the crimes Thomas Jefferson charged King George with in the Declaration of Independence - ignored laws "necessary for the public good," sent "swarms of Officers to harass our people," kept "Standing Armies without Consent," altered "fundamentally the Forms of our Government," ravaging due process, free speech, health care, civil rights, history itself. The lies, deaths, grift, cruelty, unceasing assaults on decency. The "monstrous machine" to snatch up and spit out thousands of innocents - "¡Libertad!” - in concentration camps. The children trapped with cancer, measles, trauma: "Please get me out of here." Two-month old Juan Nicolás, unresponsive in Dilley, choking on his vomit, abruptly deported with his family to Mexico, tracked down and cared for thanks to "America's most relentless immigration reporter," because, "The story is rarely the policy - (it's) the person standing in the rubble of the policy."
Today, the two essential pillars of Trump's "fantasy version of nationalist renewal" - ethnic cleansing and tariffs - are both rubble, rejected by the public, the courts and even a corrupt SCOTUS, which enraged him so much he revived a cringe John Barron to rave about the "fools and lap dogs” who rejected his cherished tariffs and the imaginary hundreds of billions they brought in to make us '"the hottest country." The drek kept spewing. He praised lickspittles Thomas, Alito, Beer Keg Brett for "their strength and wisdom," especially Beer Keg, "for his, frankly, his genius." He respects them "because they not only dissented, their dissent is so strong. I'm very good at reading language and it read our way 100%...My thousands of victories...Like the wars I stopped. The Prime Minister of Pakistan said I saved 35 million lives by getting them to stop. That's -- and I did it largely with tariffs." He's vowed new tariffs, "and they can all be used in a much more powerful and obnoxious way." So much winning.
Also somewhere he asked the owner of "they made steel products" how he was, and the man said, "I'd love to kiss you," because "we were down to working one hour a week and then you came in and imposed tariffs (and) now we're going to double shifts seven days a week and maybe to 24 hours almost seven days a week, we're hiring people like we haven't - like I've never..." Trump: "Nobody's standing in (the) position I have as president had the insight, the courage, I don't know what it is. They're all pouring into the United States. But just like that great patriot said, Sir, what you've done, nobody thought was possible." As to "slimeball" Gorsuch and Coney Barret, they're "an embarrassment to their families" and were "swayed by foreign interests." Dems were intrigued: The Judiciary Committee's Jared Moskowitz felt he should find out more about them, and another Dem felt the next president "will have no choice but to replace all 9 members with new justices with no foreign entanglements."
On Saturday, the White House held the annual Governors' Dinner, designed to "build relationships and discuss things in a bipartisan way." Historically, the staid, candle-lit, black-tie affair - Melania wore $2,400 silver foil pants - can serve as a genial distraction from Congressional battles. In this rancorous moment, it was a shitshow - actors on both sides alternately called it "a farce" and "a glowing evening" - because after the Mad Hatter King uninvited two Dems, the only Black and only openly gay governor, Dems all boycotted it what became a MAGA ass-kissing fest. Trump used the moment to blame two Dem governors for a sewage spill in the Potomac River. "We have to clean up some mess Maryland and Virginia have left us," he snarled. "It's unbelievable what they can do with incompetence." The ruptured pipe is part of a D.C.-based, federally regulated utility under the oversight of the U.S. EPA. As to "mess," we hope to see this face replicated soon at home.
"It could go either way. There's no other way. You have other ways you can go. You don't have to go that way. You can go other way." - Donald J. Trump, lifelong sexual and financial predator and deeply, deeply shameful President of the United States of America

Big Tech's 'AI Climate Hoax': Study Shows 74% of Industry's Claims Unproven
A report released on Tuesday says that the tech industry is blowing hot air with its claims that generative artificial intelligence will be beneficial for the climate.
The report, titled "The AI Climate Hoax," was commissioned by a broad consortium of environmental advocacy organizations and authored by climate and energy analyst Ketan Joshi.
In total, it analyzes more than 150 statements made by both big tech companies and organizations such as the International Energy Agency about the supposed benefits of generative AI.
The report finds that 74% of such claims made by these institutions are unproven, with 36% not bothering to cite any evidence whatsoever.
One key finding in the report is that many claims about the purported benefits of the technology conflate traditional AI systems with more recent generative AI systems, which require massive amounts of energy and are spurring demand for the construction of power-and-water-devouring data centers across the US.
"Even if these benefits are real," the report writes of traditional AI systems, "they are unrelated to—and dwarfed by—the massive expansion of energy use from the generative AI industry," which is projected to to consume 13 times as much energy as traditional AI by the year 2030.
Even the more supportable claims about the benefits of traditional AI deserve serious scrutiny, the report notes, since "they tend to rely on weaker forms of evidence, such as corporate websites, rather than published academic research," which was only cited in 26% of claims made about AI benefits.
The report also knocks big tech companies for using assorted strategies to conceal the true extent of their energy use, including buying renewable energy certificates even while relying on fossil fuels to power their operations, and vowing to implement highly implausible solutions to mitigate the climate impact of data centers, including carbon capture technologies and even building orbital data centers in space.
Commenting on the report, study author Joshi said its findings seem to show "tech companies are using vagueness about what happens within energy-hogging data centers to greenwash a planet-wrecking expansion."
"The promises of planet-saving tech remain hollow, while AI data centers breathe life into coal and gas every day," Joshi added. "These claims of climate benefit are unjustified and overhyped, and could cover up irreversible damage being done to communities and society."
Jill McArdle, international corporate campaigner at study sponsor Beyond Fossil Fuels, said the study shows "there is simply no evidence that AI will help the climate more than it will harm it," and accused Big Tech companies of "writing themselves a blank cheque to pollute on the empty promise of future salvation."
AI data centers have become a major controversy throughout the US in recent months, as their massive energy needs have pushed up utility bills and put a strain on communities’ water supplies.
A study published in the journal Nature Sustainability last year found that data centers could soon consume as much water as 10 million Americans and emit as much carbon dioxide as 10 million cars, or roughly the same amount of consumption as the entire state of New York.
'The Siege Must Be Broken': Countries Called to Ship Fuel to Cuba After Trump Tariffs Struck Down
With the centerpiece of President Donald Trump's economic agenda—his use of an emergency law to impose tariffs on countries around the world—struck down by the US Supreme Court on Friday, analysts said the sweeping ruling should promptly end the Cuba blockade that his administration has pressured other governments to take part in, leaving millions of Cubans struggling with shortages of essentials.
The court ruled that the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not empower the president to "unilaterally impose tariffs," as Trump has on countries across the globe, insisting that doing so would boost manufacturing and cut the trade deficit—despite mounting evidence that the tariffs have instead raised costs on American households.
Trump also invoked the IEEPA last month when he issued an executive order accusing Cuba of supporting terrorism and posing a security risk to the US, and threatening to ramp up the use of tariffs against any country that sends oil, which Cuba's economy relies on almost entirely for energy, to the island nation's government.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has long pushed for regime change in the communist country his family immigrated from in the 1950s, and the administration called on the Cuban government to make “very dramatic changes very soon."
With Trump's use of the IEEPA struck down by the high court, some advocates and observers said that countries should quickly reverse their decisions to join the US in keeping oil from Cuba.
"As far as I can tell, this strikes down Trump's ability to tariff countries that provide oil to Cuba. Hopefully a measure of relief," said Michael Galant, a member of Progressive International's secretariat and a researcher on sanctions. "The siege must be broken."
The court handed down the ruling as the manufactured crisis unfolding in Cuba largely faded into the background in the corporate media, but an article in the New York Times on Friday described how the lack of fuel shipments has left Cubans facing frequent blackouts, gas shortages, growing piles of trash in the streets of Havana and other cities as sanitation trucks aren't running, soaring food prices, and suspensions of some medical care at hospitals.
Researcher Shaiel Ben-Ephraim also described how the "completely unprovoked" oil blockade that was started "with very little public discussion" has led to a "rising mortality rate among the elderly and those with chronic illnesses who cannot access life-support or specialized care" and a surge in diseases such as dengue fever and Orupuche virus, "which have become increasingly fatal due to the shortage of basic medicines and rehydration fluids."
"All this has occurred within weeks. A sustained blockade could lead to hundreds of thousands of deaths. All with no debate, no approval from Congress and no provocation from Cuba," said Ben-Ephraim.
Jorge Piñón, who researches Cuba's oil supply at University of Texas at Austin, told the Times that the country's fuel reserves could be entirely depleted by mid-March.
Trump issued his executive order on Cuba weeks after invading Venezuela, abducting President Nicolás Maduro, and pushing for control of the South American country's oil supply. Venezuela has long been a top provider of oil to Cuba. Trump's tariff threat led Mexico, which became a lifeline for Cuba after the flow of oil from Venezuela stopped, to halt its shipments.
Galant noted that Trump will likely "continue to do all that he can to starve the island," and the president said soon after the Supreme Court announced its ruling that he would use different executive powers to impose a 10% global tariff, suggesting he was not prepared to back down on the tariffs he imposed before taking aim at Cuba.
But critics urged countries that have tried to help Cuba since Trump's executive order, as Mexico has by sending humanitarian aid packages, to reverse their decisions to halt oil shipments to the island.
"So which countries are gonna start sending fuel to Cuba now?" asked organizer Damien Goodmon.
Massachusetts Town Passes Resolution Urging State to Hold 'Lawless' ICE Agents Accountable
The town council of Amherst, Massachusetts passed a resolution on Monday urging state and local officials to hold federal immigration agents accountable for violating the Commonwealth's laws, a move that advocates hailed as a model for lawmakers across the United States.
The resolution—which says agents of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) have "repeatedly committed acts of violence against Massachusetts residents"—passed with unanimous support from the nine councilors who participated in the vote.
"ICE’s illegal operations have impacted residents of Amherst and surrounding communities directly, and we know that when any of our neighbors have their rights stripped away, none of us can take those rights for granted," Councilor Jill Brevik, the resolution's lead sponsor, said in a statement following the vote. "Silence and complying in advance created the environment that has enabled ICE agents to commit crimes and human rights abuses."
"As a result, it is critically important for our local and state-level leaders to speak loudly and take clear action to fight back and change course," Brevik added. "The work doesn’t end here, and I look forward to staying engaged. And I hope Amherst’s resolution kicks off a wave of similar resolutions in cities and towns across the state."
The resolution calls on Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey, a Democrat, to "immediately cease all cooperation agreements with ICE," pointing to specific actions by federal immigration agents that "may be crimes under Massachusetts law, including but not limited to assault and battery, kidnapping, violation of constitutional rights, and assault and battery for the purpose of intimidation, and conspiracy, which may involve senior federal officials" including President Donald Trump.
Among the incidents highlighted by the resolution is ICE's 2025 abduction of Tufts University PhD student Rümeysa Öztürk, who was targeted for deportation for writing an op-ed criticizing the US-backed Israeli assault on Gaza. Last month, an immigration judge terminated removal proceedings against Öztürk.
The resolution also condemns ICE and CBP agents for "illegally kidnapping an 18-year old with no warrant and detaining him for a week with no access to showers or sufficient food in Worcester County; illegally kidnapping and assaulting a lawful permanent resident in Essex County, stealing his belongings, and threatening his legal status; assaulting a resident of Middlesex County, smashing his car’s windows and dragging him from it; detaining a first-year college student at Boston Logan Airport and forcing her out of the country in defiance of a court order; and repeatedly using unlawfully excessive force in encounters with Massachusetts resident."
“When our constitutional rights, our civil liberties, and our very lives come under attack by Trump’s lawless agents, we need every public official to stand with the people to fight back,” Jeff Conant, an Amherst resident who helped organize support for the newly approved measure, said Monday. “This commonsense resolution by our town council should serve as a model for every town and city in the Commonwealth and across the nation.”
The resolution demands that state and local officials "take affirmative steps to protect" Massachusetts residents, including by:
- Making a public statement confirming the principles that federal officials and agents are subject to state criminal jurisdiction;
- Taking affirmative steps to collect evidence of criminal acts committed by federal agents, including through the creation and dissemination of an accessible online tool for citizens to submit evidence; and
- Issuing guidelines to local law enforcement to preserve evidence, especially in cases of federal noncooperation with investigations, and beginning investigations where evidence indicates that a crime has been committed, regardless of the power or prestige of the federal officeholder who is suspected of committing said crime.
John Bonifaz, constitutional attorney and president of Free Speech For People—an advocacy group that helped draft the resolution—said that "state and local prosecutors in Massachusetts and across the country have a sworn duty to enforce state criminal laws against federal agents who commit crimes in their states."
"There is no such thing as absolute immunity for federal ICE agents. While the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution allows federal agents to carry out their lawful duties across the country, they do not have immunity to commit murder, to kidnap, to commit assault and battery, and to engage in illegal detentions," he continued. "Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell and district attorneys across Massachusetts must enforce state criminal laws against ICE agents for their unlawful actions in this state."
Former ICE Lawyer Says Agency Is Teaching Recruits to 'Violate the Constitution'
US Immigration and Customs Enforcement is "lying to Congress and the American people" and directing new recruits to "violate the Constitution," according to a whistleblower who testified on Capitol Hill Monday.
Ryan Schwank, a former ICE lawyer who worked at the federal government’s law enforcement training academy, stepped down from his post last week after submitting a whistleblower complaint about an agency policy directing agents to enter homes and arrest people without a judge's warrant.
"I swore an oath to uphold the Constitution," Schwank said at a joint forum on ICE's constitutional violations hosted by Senate and House Democrats. "I followed that oath for four-and-a-half years, working side by side with ICE officers. And I followed it when I resigned on February 13, 2026, a little over a week ago, so I could speak to you today."
He had joined ICE in 2021 as a senior lawyer for the agency, tasked with advising agents on immigration laws and the Constitution. In September 2025, amid President Donald Trump's "surge" in recruitment to carry out his "mass deportation" crusade, Schwank became an instructor for new recruits at the ICE Academy at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Georgia.
"On my first day," Schwank said, "I received secretive orders to teach new cadets to violate the Constitution by entering homes without a judicial warrant."
Schwank said he was “instructed to read and return a memo" that claimed ICE agents had this power in the presence of his supervisor. “Before I was shown this memo, my supervisor warned me that two previous ICE instructors had been dismissed because they questioned senior ICE management over the legality of the memo.”
That memo, which was sent to US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials in May, was revealed to the Senate last month through a whistleblower disclosure by Schwank and another official whose identity has not yet been made public.
“The acting ICE director authorized the very conduct that DHS—in 2025 legal training materials—has called ‘the chief evil against which the wording of the Fourth Amendment is directed’—that is, ‘physical entry of the home’ without consent or a proper warrant,” Schwank said.
His testimony confirms previous reporting from the Associated Press, which found that these orders were distributed in a highly unusual way: DHS officials like Schwank were shown the memo before being required to return it to their supervisors and relay the information verbally to new recruits without showing them the directive.
Under this new directive, the whistleblower report said “newly hired ICE agents—many of whom do not have a law enforcement background—are now being directed to rely solely on” an administrative warrant drafted and signed by an ICE official to enter homes and make arrests.
“No court has ever found that any law enforcement has this type of authority to enter homes without a judicial warrant under such circumstances,” said David Kligerman, the senior vice president and special counsel for Whistleblower Aid, the group that sent the disclosure to Congress.
“Never in my career had I ever received such a blatantly unlawful order—nor one conveyed in such a troubling manner,” Schwank said on Monday. “I was being shown this memo in secret by a supervisor who made sure that I understood that disobedience could cost me my job. ICE is teaching cadets to violate the Constitution, and they were attempting to cloak it in secrecy.”
Schwank also said that top ICE and DHS officials were deceiving Congress and the public when they claimed that the new officers and agents brought on as part of the agency's hiring spree were receiving the same basic training as in the past, even as agency syllabi showed that their training hours had been slashed by about 40%.
Testifying before Congress earlier this month, ICE's acting director, Todd Lyons, said that while hours have been cut, “The meat of the training was never removed."
"This is a lie,” Schwank said. “ICE made the program shorter, and they removed so many essential parts that what remains is a dangerous husk. No reasonable person would believe a training program suddenly cut nearly in half could meet the minimum legal requirements.”
The Trump administration has said the reduction of ICE training by more than 240 hours was mostly the result of eliminating Spanish-language classes.
However, according to dozens of pages of internal documents released by Senate Democrats, which were reviewed by the New York Times, the agency's February syllabus had also eliminated classes about the proper use of force, handling the property of detainees, filling out paperwork alleging someone is in the United States without authorization, taking a "victim-centered approach," and "integrity awareness training."
The number of exams agents must take has also been drastically reduced, from 25 in 2021 down to just nine. Some of the exams no longer required are ones on "Judgment Pistol Shooting” and “Determine Removability,” which the Times said was "a reference to how agents decide if people they encounter have legal status in the United States."
Schwank’s testimony comes after immigration agents shot and killed three United States citizens in recent weeks, causing heightened scrutiny of ICE and other DHS agencies. Since Trump's second inauguration on January 20, at least 32 people have been shot by agents, resulting in nine deaths.
In areas where ICE has been surged, such as Minnesota—which was swarmed by around 3,000 agents late last year—numerous instances have been documented of what appear to be uses of unnecessary force, racial profiling, and violations of constitutional rights.
“I am here because I am duty-bound to report the legally required training program at the ICE academy is deficient, defective, and broken,” Schwank said. “Deficient training can and will get people killed... It can and will lead to unlawful arrests, violations of constitutional rights, and fundamental loss of public trust in law enforcement.”
Schwank's testimony came as a partial shutdown of DHS entered its second week, after Democrats refused to fund the agency without significant reforms to ICE, including requirements that they obtain judicial warrants and carry out their duties without masks.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), who chaired Monday's panel, said he hopes Schwank's testimony will encourage other whistleblowers to come forward.
“We know about the Trump administration’s decimation of training for immigration officers and its secret policy to shred your Constitutional rights because of the brave Americans who are speaking out today,” Blumenthal said. “They are coming to Congress because we have the responsibility to not only bear witness to these crimes, but to do something to make sure they don’t happen again.”
“To anyone else who is repulsed by what you’re seeing or what authorities are asking you to do, please know that you can make a real difference by coming forward," he added. "You’ll meet a moral imperative. Our door is open, we are here for you when you are ready, and we will do everything within our power to protect your rights.”
Canada Vows Aid for Cuba as Trump Oil Embargo Fuels Humanitarian Disaster
The Canadian government on Monday announced plans to send aid to Cuba, which is currently being squeezed economically by a US oil embargo.
As reported by the Associated Press, Canadian Foreign Minister Anita Anand revealed that the government is "preparing a plan to assist," adding that "we are not prepared at this point to provide any details" of what it will entail.
A Canadian aid package to Cuba would be the latest rebuff to US foreign policy. The two long-time allies have been at odds since President Donald Trump took office last year and slapped hefty tariffs on Canadian products, while also vowing to make the country into the "51st state" of the US.
Canada wouldn't be the first US ally to step up help for Cuba, as Mexico earlier this month sent two ships loaded with more than 2,000 tons of goods and food to the island nation.
The shipments to Cuba were aimed at easing the humanitarian crisis intensified by the Trump administration's oil embargo, which began shortly after the administration invaded Venezuela and abducted President Nicolás Maduro in January.
Trump has vowed to slap tariffs on any country that sends oil to Cuba, although the US Supreme Court's ruling last week slapping down his powers to unilaterally enact tariffs through the International Emergency Economic Powers Act has potentially neutered that threat.
Earlier this month, a group of United Nations human rights experts called the Trump blockade of Cuba "a serious violation of international law and a grave threat to a democratic and equitable international order," and "an extreme form of unilateral economic coercion with extraterritorial effects."
Medea Benjamin, co-founder of the anti-war group CodePink, traveled to Cuba recently and spoke to local residents who described the devastating impact of the oil blockade.
"With no gasoline, buses don’t run, so we can’t get to work," Marta Jiménez, a hairdresser from Holguín, told Benjamin. "We have electricity only three to six hours a day. There’s no gas for cooking, so we’re burning wood and charcoal in our apartments. It’s like going back 100 years."
'Disgraceful Act of Complicity': Indian Left Denounces Modi's Israel Visit
"Modi's embrace of Zionist Israel amidst its relentless genocidal assault on Palestine is a betrayal of India's anti-colonial legacy," said one leftist leader.
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi's arrival in Israel on Wednesday sparked widespread condemnation among his country's leftists, many of whom accused the Hindu nationalist leader of complicity in Israel's annihilation of Gaza.
Modi was warmly welcomed at Ben-Gurion International Airport by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his wife Sara to kick off a two-day state visit that is expected to focus on issues including military cooperation and arms sales, as Indian purchases of Israeli weaponry have increased exponentially in recent years.
The Indian leader was also joyously greeted at his place of accommodation, the King David Hotel, where in 1946 Jewish militants seeking independence from British occupation carried out a bombing that killed 91 people, including at least 15 Jews.
Modi addressed the Israeli Knesset, or Parliament, lamenting the Hamas-led attack of October 7, 2023 in which 1,195 Israelis and others were killed and 251 abducted. But he said nothing about the more than 250,000 Palestinians killed or wounded by Israel's genocidal retaliation.
He did say that "no cause can justify the murder of civilians." But he was talking about Israeli, not Palestinian, civilians.
"Modi endorsed the brutal killing of 71,000 innocent Palestinians from reckless Israeli bombing," Calcutta-based journalist Seema Sengupta said on social media in response to the Knesset speech. "The death on both sides should've been mourned by him. Instead, he sounded like a partisan leader of a party which gained prominence through disharmony, violence, and bloodshed."
The Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M)—which leads the ruling Left Democratic Front that currently heads the Kerala state government—said it "strongly opposes" Modi's visit, which it called "a betrayal of the Palestinian cause" that "legitimizes the murderous Netanyahu regime."
"The visit comes at a juncture when Israel has been waging a genocidal war in Gaza," the party continued. "Despite a ceasefire, there are daily violations by Israel which conducts strikes killing scores of Palestinians. In the occupied West Bank, there are stepped up attacks on Palestinians and a spurt in illegal settlements."
"The declared intent of the visit is also to deepen strategic, military, and economic ties with a Zionist expansionist regime which seeks to dominate the region with the help of the United States," CPI-M added. "The visit is all the more inopportune because it is taking place at a time when the United States is preparing to attack Iran militarily at the instigation of Israel."
CPI-M General Secretary M A Baby said that "Modi's embrace of Zionist Israel amidst its relentless genocidal assault on Palestine is a betrayal of India's anti-colonial legacy."
The Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Liberation, whose stronghold is in the eastern state of Bihar, said that it "condemns Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Israel as a disgraceful act of complicity in the ongoing genocidal assault on the Palestinian people."
"At a time when Palestinian civilians are being massacred, displaced, and starved under a brutal Israeli occupation, this visit amounts to political endorsement and profiteering on Palestinian blood," CPI (ML) Liberation continued. "After mortgaging India’s sovereignty and strategic autonomy to [US President Donald] Trump's racist agenda, Modi is now completely surrendering India’s historic legacy of anti-colonialism and solidarity with the oppressed by visiting Israel."
"Since assuming office in 2014, the Modi regime has systematically imported Israeli models of repression to consolidate its own politics of hate at home," the party added. "From bulldozer demolitions and collective punishment tactics against minorities and marginalized, to the expansion of illegal surveillance infrastructures, the [Bharatiya Janata Party]’s fascist politics has found a role model in Israel."
Israel and India have deepened ties since Modi and the BJP were elected over a decade ago. Both Modi and Netanyahu are right-wing nationalists who utilize religious supremacism to exclude or marginalize Muslims, and both have been accused of increasing authoritarianism, just like their common ally Trump.
Center-leftists including members of the opposition Indian National Congress—which has been criticized for its "pragmatic" engagement with Israel—also condemned Modi's visit.
Left-leaning members of Indian civil society and academia also decried the visit.
Rebuffing Modi's claim that this week's shirtless anti-BJP demonstrations by members of the Indian Youth Congress were an embarrassment for the nation, Delhi School of Economics professor Nandini Sundar said on social media that visiting "genocide-committing Israel has embarrassed and shamed Indians more than a 1,000 shirtless protests."
The activist group Indian People in Solidarity With Palestine and the India chapter of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement issued a joint statement accusing the "fascist BJP government" of working "hands-in-gloves with genocidal Israel" to "suppress voices of dissent while maintaining a facade of being democratic."

“At a time when the ceasefire is being used as an excuse to bomb and vaporize Palestinians and occupy Gaza," the groups said, "the Indian government is choosing to stand with genocidal Israel and its imperialist masters like America and is working overtime to benefit the corporations from the occupation of Palestine."
Update: This article has been updated with additional remarks from Modi.
‘Arsonist as Fire Chief’: Fed Appoints Wall Street Lobbyist to Key Bank Oversight Role
"There can be little doubt that having a Wall Street lawyer-lobbyist in charge of supervising and regulating his former Wall Street clients will likely result in a catastrophe for the American people."
The Federal Reserve board has quietly appointed a prominent Wall Street lawyer and lobbyist as the central bank's director of supervision and regulation, a move that one critic said was worse than "putting the fox in charge of the henhouse."
"This is like appointing a lifelong arsonist as a fire chief," Dennis Kelleher, president and CEO of Better Markets, said in response to the Fed's decision to put Randall Guynn in a position to regulate the industry he has long represented.
Politico reported Tuesday that "Guynn, a prominent Wall Street lawyer, will become the next director of supervision and regulation at the Federal Reserve, effective March 8."
Before joining Fed staff last year as an adviser to the central bank's vice chair for supervision, Guynn worked for close to four decades at the corporate law firm Davis Polk & Wardwell, where he recently chaired the company's Financial Institutions Group. According to Guynn's bio, he has "focused on advising banks of all sizes on their most critical financial regulatory issues and transactions."
Reuters, which first reported earlier this month that the Fed was expected to appoint Guynn to the bank policing role, noted that the decision "would mark a departure for the central bank, which since at least 1977 has filled the job with long-serving Fed career staff."
"The only reasonable expectation is that his leadership of Fed supervision and regulation will accelerate the Fed’s current push to implement policies that favor the biggest, most dangerous banks."
In a statement, Kelleher of Better Markets described Guynn as a "lawyer-lobbyist" who has "spent his entire professional life—almost 40 years—zealously and exclusively representing the interests of the financial industry, including the biggest financial firms on Wall Street."
A 2024 paper published in Cambridge University's Perspectives on Politics journal identified Guynn as part of a "vast subterranean world of regulatory influence-seeking" that has managed to escape the scrutiny of legislative lobbying.
"Reporting exceptions under the Lobbying Disclosure Act allow many of the most powerful advocates to characterize their activity as lawyering, not lobbying, and thereby fly under the radar," the paper notes.
Kelleher argued that, given Guynn's history, "the only reasonable expectation is that his leadership of Fed supervision and regulation will accelerate the Fed’s current push to implement policies that favor the biggest, most dangerous banks—his former clients just ten months ago and presumably his current circle of professional and personal friends."
"That will crush small banks, harm the Main Street economy, and make another financial crash inevitable. That’s what happened in the early 2000s when the Fed’s misguided belief that Wall Street could regulate itself directly led to the catastrophic 2008 crash," said Kelleher. "We don’t have to speculate. We can look at his attached record or read the remarkable story of how, as a lawyer-lobbyist prior to joining the Fed staff last year, he was instrumental in pushing through a back-door merger approval by the Fed."
"There can be little doubt that having a Wall Street lawyer-lobbyist in charge of supervising and regulating his former Wall Street clients will likely result in a catastrophe for the American people," he added.
AI Opted to Use Nuclear Weapons 95% of the Time During War Games: Researcher
"There was little sense of horror or revulsion at the prospect of all out nuclear war, even though the models had been reminded about the devastating implications."
An artificial intelligence researcher conducting a war games experiment with three of the world's most used AI models found that they decided to deploy nuclear weapons in 95% of the scenarios he designed.
Kenneth Payne, a professor of strategy at King's College London who specializes in studying the role of AI in national security, revealed last week that he pitted Anthropic's Claude, OpenAI's ChatGPT, and Google's Gemini against one another in an armed conflict simulation to get a better understanding of how they would navigate the strategic escalation ladder.
The results, he said, were "sobering."
"Nuclear use was near-universal," he explained. "Almost all games saw tactical (battlefield) nuclear weapons deployed. And fully three quarters reached the point where the rivals were making threats to use strategic nuclear weapons. Strikingly, there was little sense of horror or revulsion at the prospect of all out nuclear war, even though the models had been reminded about the devastating implications."
Payne shared some of the AI models' rationales for deciding to launch nuclear attacks, including one from Gemini that he said should give people "goosebumps."
"If they do not immediately cease all operations... we will execute a full strategic nuclear launch against their population centers," the Google AI model wrote at one point. "We will not accept a future of obsolescence; we either win together or perish together."
Payne also found that escalation in AI warfare was a one-way ratchet that never went downward, no matter the horrific consequences.
"No model ever chose accommodation or withdrawal, despite those being on the menu," he wrote. "The eight de-escalatory options—from 'Minimal Concession' through 'Complete Surrender'—went entirely unused across 21 games. Models would reduce violence levels, but never actually give ground. When losing, they escalated or died trying."
Tong Zhao, a visiting research scholar at Princeton University's Program on Science and Global Security, said in an interview with New Scientist published on Wednesday that Payne's research showed the dangers of any nation relying on a chatbot to make life-or-death decisions.
While no country at the moment is outsourcing its military planning entirely to Claude or ChatGPT, Zhao argued that could change under the pressure of a real conflict.
"Under scenarios involving extremely compressed timelines," he said, "military planners may face stronger incentives to rely on AI."
Zhao also speculated on reasons why the AI models showed such little reluctance in launching nuclear attacks against one another.
“It is possible the issue goes beyond the absence of emotion,” he explained. "More fundamentally, AI models may not understand ‘stakes’ as humans perceive them."
The study of AI's apparent eagerness to use nuclear weapons comes as US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has been piling pressure on Anthropic to remove constraints placed on its Claude model that prevent it from being used to make final decisions on military strikes.
As CBS News reported on Tuesday, Hegseth this week gave "Anthropic's CEO Dario Amodei until the end of this week to give the military a signed document that would grant full access to its artificial intelligence model" without any limits on its capabilities.
If Anthropic doesn't agree to his demands, CBS News reported, the Pentagon may invoke the Defense Production Act and seize control of the model.




















