SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
LIVE COVERAGE
Opinion
Climate
Economy
Politics
Rights & Justice
War & Peace
Further
Here We Remain: A World That Abides Slaughter
Atop all the others inflicted on us came last week's sickening spectacle of two vengeful, lying, broken old men - one a longtime killer of children, one a petty useful idiot abetting him - alternately celebrating and threatening genocide before "we the peoples of the United Nations." Born of :"the defiance of hope" to enable us to "live together in peace," the forum now hosts the perpetrators of unspeakable atrocities. Omar El Akkad: "One day everyone will have always been against this."
Even before war criminals spoke at the U.N., everyone was already against everything Trump's done, from his insane, drone-packed arch to the other $1.8 billion vanity projects to his latest tantrum over bad press. Despite multiple court rulings against it, the ensuing press ban is still partly, messily in place, with CNN, MS NOW and Politico facing dubious access, other major media finally finding their spine and solidarity, and the havoc offering us the droll sight of a needy guy who never met a camera he didn’t like in one farcical silent movie, a “shrinking figure gesticulating wildly into the wind.” The attention whore has tried to compensate with wildly weird and illegal PR stunts: Claiming an entire hemisphere, boasting, "Only Trump" and an ad pleading "Love Me" on the taxpayer dime in "an astonishing misuse of public resources more fitting for North Korea."
The final own goal of his attack on the press, teased by a frantic promo, was the launch of Trump TV: The Essentials Station, the White House YouTube channel recast as a 24/7 livestream of Trump's "greatest hits." Cue aJuly speech at Mt. Rushmore about "the communist menace," last year's speech at dinner with King Charles, a 2016 speech in Kentucky recalling the wet stairs he overcame. YouTube's real-time data let the "king of ratings" see it quickly crash and burn, from a paltry 8,000 viewers to half that to 1,000 to 704 as J.D. announced stripping health care from 760,000 people, way below the 2,000-plus watching birds snack on seeds and nuts. Many relished the flop - "Fascism is awesome!" - or suggested new slots: "Wake Up & Rage Tweet, Ketchup-Throwing, They’re Eating our Pets, The Great MAGA Crypto Scam, Wheel of Pardons" and, from 2:01 to 2:02 a.m., “Covfefe.”
Then came a clumsy, swooning welcome - "the deference was deafening" - for his strongman soulmate Chinese President Xi Jinping, the world's biggest jailer of journalists and never mind the "communist menace," with its empty pomp, cartoonish tour of a hole-in-the-ground ballroom and million-year helipad - "He has a great interest in granite" - and zero substance. The next day, with his approval rating "somewhere between Ebola and Ed Sheeran," he waddled into the 81st session of the UN General Assembly and threatened one of its130 participants with war crimes, musing, "Do I annihilate the Islamic Republic quickly and drive them into hell?" Iran's delegation swiftly walked out. Mehdi Hasan: "For shame. The president of the United States goes to the United Nations and threatens genocide against a member state in front of the world. This is where we’re at."
Slurring, stumbling, wandering at unhinged, racist length - details here - Trump boasted about murdering over 200 people “at war with civilization” in illegal boat strikes, claimed trans people are a national security risk, celebrated (and inflated) the theft of Venezuela’s oil, charged trans people are a national security risk, inanely declaimed “to the (raping and plundering) victor belong the spoils” - become, terrifyingly, "a demagogue who hijacked American democracy...devolving into a mad king before our eyes." The speech, a "sad and dangerous national embarrassment" with its "ridiculous braggadocio, narcissistic puffery, absurd demonstrable lies, open criminality and deranged, murderous threats" landed "with silence inside the hall and a pile of fact checks outside it, (the) death rattle of a rapist president and what’s left of America’s reputation on the world stage."
Then world leaders "went back to making plans that don't include the United States." Or, in the case of Denmark, trolling. Trump has created a fictional backstory for a "deal" on Greenland "long in the making - you could go back many, many decades, probably centuries" - that just repackages an existing 1951 deal; ahead of meeting held later at the U.N., officials played the Sondheim song Send In The Clowns. At this point, writes Paul Krugman, it's "Underwear on the Outside” time, a callback to Woody Allen's 1971 film Bananas about a third-world nation's absurd strongman. Coverage of the U.N. focused on Trump's rabid rejection of global cooperation or the fact almost everything he said was a lie. The bigger story: "The leader of what used to be the world’s most powerful nation, now collapsing before our eyes, has clearly, undeniably lost his mind."
Other speakers tried to steer the conversation back to reality. Secretary-General António Guterres stressed the primacy of international law, especially in Palestine, calling the birth of the U.N. "an act of defiance (by) people who refuse to surrender the future to fear...who know our futures are bound together." But with accountability: The U.N. deems Gaza "a collective crime," a "live-streamed atrocity...sustained by the complicity of influential third states"; their complicity must be confronted for the rule of law to survive. Holding photos of Iranian children killed in U. S. strikes, Iran's president Masoud Pezeshkian argued it is Trump who has defied international law, while Iran has remained committed to negotiations. “We have only defended ourselves. We are not terrorists." He also called for accountability on all sides, asking "why Israel kills, yet Iran is subject to sanction.”
Israel kills. And Benjamin Netanyahu offered a bellicose "potpourri of lies and incitement." In his "furious, ugly and disgraceful" diatribe, he called universal charges of genocide "the biggest lie of the century," summoning the chutzpah to call the carnage in Gaza "the opposite of genocide." Anyone who disagreed, he raved, was "a moral coward" - About half the Assembly, who walked out as Zionist allies chanted “Am Yisrael Chai," "the Nation of Israel lives"; Hundreds of protesters outside, with about 100 arrested; including Brooklyn Council Member Chi Ossé, who later posted a selfie in handcuffs with “Free Palestine. Netanyahu burn in hell"; and world leaders "spreading lies about my country and our brave soldiers," "tyrants (in) a global anti-Jewish conspiracy (to) erase us from the face of the Earth. Instead of collapsing, we delivered devastating blows to all of them with our great American friends."
There was much more. He brandished a pager in tribute to Israel's 2024 operation targeting Hezbollah in Lebanon that killed 12 and wounded over 3,000. He dismissed settler violence against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank as the work of "juvenile delinquents." He said bombing Iran was "’one of the easiest decisions I’ve ever had to make." Shameless, he claimed Israel still has "the most moral army in the world.” He denied a Haaretz report, confirmed by the New York Times, that Egypt's intel chief warned him in September 2023 Hamas was planning "a major attack," but he declined to pass the tip on to his intelligence agencies. He called the duly elected mayor of his host city, who deems him a war criminal and wants the ICC's arrest warrant issued, anti-Semitic," claiming "many Jews no longer feel safe in New York." He evidently doesn't; he flew into New Jersey.
He ended his speech with a Bible verse from Samuel that describes the genocide of the Amalek, enemies of Israel, after God orders King Saul, "‘Go and completely destroy those wicked people." Saul mostly does, but spares their king and “the best of the sheep and cattle. Then the prophet Samuel admonishes him: "(God) sent you on a mission, but you have rejected the word of the Lord, and the Lord has rejected you as king over Israel." Samuel's murderous gist: “Nezah Israel lo yeshaker,” or "the eternity of Israel will not falter.” Bibi's lesson: "We have no choice but genocide." And so they made it: Over 73,900 direct deaths, about half women and children. Over 175,000 wounded, often gravely. Roughly 641,000 ultimately dead, from destruction of the healthcare system, malnutrition, disease. The bodies of perhaps 10,000 more still remain under the rubble.
And the devastation goes on. Under Israel's blockade, there is widespread hunger, 90% of Gazans remain homeless, trauma and illness go untreated. More than 900 wheelchairs donated by two Australian non-profits for over 11,000 disabled children - Gaza has the most child amputees per capita in the world - are held hostage in Jordan warehouses by preposterous Israeli restrictions on anything that could "serve a military purpose." Other victims of insane "dual-use" rules: Portable toilets, sleeping bags, tarps. bandages, diapers, shampoo, tent poles. And presumably kites, after Bibi announced "targeted strikes”against the launch of any kites, balloons or drones, with the IDF ordered to "act forcefully" against perps. What else to expect from a place where a government official calls Palestinian children “explosives of the future." "What a childhood in Gaza teaches: Want less."
The cruelty, madness, loss continue to spark palpable rage. Actor Mandy Patinkin, a Jew aware of history, on the corrosive effect of "the revenge business": "How could it be done to you and your ancestors, and you turn around and do it to someone else?!” Omar El Akkad - born in Egypt, raised in Qatar and Canada, a US citizen - on "what it means to live under an ordering of the world that abides slaughter, and whether any ordering ever stood for anything at all." He wrote the book One Day Everyone Will Have Always Been Against This, though its full title is One day, when it’s safe, when there’s no personal downside to calling a thing what it is, when it’s too late to hold anyone accountable, everyone will always have been against this,” what one critic calls "a cathartic savaging" of empire, Western hypocrisy on Gaza, selective empathy in "the most privileged sliver of global society."
"When the unspeakable happens, the world should stop but it doesn't," he writes of the comfortable bubble of a white nationalist world run by broken men and their accomplices that blithely "shrugs at one kind of slaughter," having developed "a terrible immunity...When it mattered, who sided with justice and who sided with power?” The time to choose is now, he adds, and hindsight will not undo or excuse their crimes: "At the time they say, 'Yes, this is tragic, but necessary'...The alternative to the countless killed and maimed and orphaned... screaming from under the rubble (is) barbarism.” " There is no way to finish the sentence, 'It is unfortunate that tens of thousands of children are dead but...'" he movingly writes. "There is no such thing as someone else’s children."
The evening after Netanyahu assailed Zohran Mamdani as anti-Semitic - he dismissed the speech as "baseless lies meant to sanitize his genocide against Palestinians" - the good mayor was home at Gracie Mansion. He was hosting Palestinian families from Gaza who have lost family members there or have made their way to America as refugees to "honor their contributions to the city and acknowledge the losses they have endured." They ate a meal; a smiling Mamdani glided around the table, filling water glasses. And they planted an olive tree - for Palestinians, source of food, wood, fuel, symbol of peace, hope, resilience, a deep connection to their heritage and ancestral land. Palestinian poet Mahmoud Darwish: ‘"Here we remain, as long as thyme and olives remain." Zohran Mamdani: "May peace be our future."
A young boy in Gaza mourns his murdered mother Getty Image
Sep 28, 2026
SEE ALL
News
Working-Class Taxpayers Subsidize Billionaires' Climate-Killing Private Jets: Report
A handful of the world's wealthiest people are traveling aboard some of the planet's most polluting vehicles while receiving substantial public subsidies, according to a new report documenting how taxpayers and commercial airline passengers are funding billionaires' private jet lifestyles due to corporate lobbying, tax breaks, and other policies.
The Institute for Policy Studies' (IPS) "High Flyers 2026: The High Cost of Private Jet Excess," released on Friday, notes that only about 256,000 people around the world—roughly 0.003% of the global population—fly on private jets. Yet these ultrawealthy travelers account for a disproportionate share of aviation activity while paying a fraction of the taxes that fund air traffic infrastructure.
According to the report—which is co-authored by Chuck Collins, Omar Ocampo, Kalena Thomhave, and Emily Wagner—private jets and charter services account for roughly 16% of flight operations handled by the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), while noncommercial private jets account for about 7% of airspace activity.
NEW: Private jet travel — the most ecologically destructive form of transportation — is increasing among the wealthiest 0.003% of people. Taxpayers and commercial flyers are subsidizing it.It's time to tax this reckless consumption. REPORT:
[image or embed]
— Institute for Policy Studies (@ips-dc.org) September 18, 2026 at 6:05 AM
However, private jets contribute less than 0.6% of the taxes flowing into the Airport and Airway Trust Fund, which helps finance FAA operations.
"We all pay for the harms of private jet excess," the report states. "US taxpayers and commercial air travelers subsidize the luxury private jet transportation sector. Private jets fail to pay their fair share of their use of airspace and the costs of their carbon pollution, shifting the burden to everyone else."
The disparity is particularly stark when the climate consequences of private aviation are taken into account. IPS found that a passenger traveling by private jet is responsible for roughly 10 to 14 times the emissions of a passenger on a commercial airline and around 50 times those of a passenger traveling the same route by rail. On some low-carbon rail systems, the disparity can exceed 200-fold.
"Private jets are the super-polluters. On a warming planet, private jet operations are indefensible," the report's authors wrote. "Private jets account for a small sliver of aviation activity, but they are the most polluting form of transport and represent the fastest-growing segment of aviation emissions."
The report also found that at least half of private jet operations are for recreational, vacation, and personal luxury travel.
"The ultrarich and greedy corporations are private jet-setting at the expense of the rest of us," Collins told The Guardian on Friday. "The rest of us should not have to pay for the luxury excess of the private jet billionaire class."
The report comes amid increasing criticism of tax policies that have made private aircraft particularly lucrative investments for wealthy Americans. Last year, US President Donald Trump signed legislation permanently implementing 100% bonus depreciation for qualifying business assets, allowing full tax deductions for certain purchases—including private aircraft—in the year they are acquired.
In a May opinion piece published by Common Dreams, Collins and Wagner slammed what they described as "a massive tax break for billionaires and centimillionaires that use the most polluting form of transportation on the planet."
A corporation that buys a $50 million private jet could potentially deduct the entire purchase price from its taxes in the year of acquisition, meaning "ordinary taxpayers pick up the tab for the private jet industry and billionaire high flyers," according to Collins and Wagner.
The Trump administration has also recently declined to close another tax loophole benefiting wealthy private jet users. A proposal by Democratic senators would have changed the rules governing the so-called Standard Industry Fare Level method for calculating the taxable value of personal flights aboard corporate aircraft. The lawmakers argued that the system allows wealthy executives to substantially undervalue their personal use nof company jets.
"While working families struggle to afford groceries, housing, and gas," Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) said earlier this month, the Trump administration "focuses on tax breaks for billionaires—including tax breaks for private jets. What a disgrace."
The private jet industry has also benefited from efforts to shield aircraft owners from scrutiny. Earlier this year, House Republicans sought to restrict government use of flight tracking data that can help identify privately owned aircraft for taxation purposes.
“Oh look—Republicans helping private-jet billionaires avoid paying taxes," Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) quipped in June. "If only they worked that hard for consumers.”
IPS noted the private aviation industry's substantial political influence. The National Business Aviation Association spent approximately $2 million lobbying for the sector in 2025, including on policies concerning tax breaks and private flight secrecy.
The report's authors list policy changes they say would help "decarbonize private jet users' indefensible behavior."
"A luxury tax of 10% on used jets and 5% on new jets could have raised more than $3 billion in 2025, funds that could be invested in sustainable ground transportation," they asserted.
"Congress should strip a private jet tax avoidance provision from the pending air traffic safety legislation, the ALERT Act," the authors argued.
The report also calls for:
- Stopping another pending private jet tax break;
- Repealing accelerated bonus depreciation of private jet purchases and passing the End Subsidies for Private Jets Act;
- Increasing taxes on private jet fuel;
- Rolling back secrecy provisions; and
- Ending funding and construction of new private jet infrastructure.
“Since we first released our analysis on the costs of private jet travel to taxpayers and the planet in 2023, we’ve seen a shocking and irresponsible rise in the use of private jet travel,” Ocampo said in a statement.
“Unfortunately, the private jet lobby has worked hard to lower the tax obligations of the ultrawealthy," he added. "Meanwhile, the aviation industry pushes false solutions on the climate crisis. It’s time to stop making taxpayers subsidize luxury private jet travel and use our resources to green other industries.”
Sep 18, 2026
SEE ALL
News
How Greedy Corporations Are Weaponizing AI to 'Squeeze' Consumers and Working Class Families
A report released on Wednesday by Groundwork Collaborative and Reset Tech details how corporate America and assorted nefarious actors are using artificial intelligence to gouge US consumers.
The report begins by noting that while AI is "often promoted as a technology that will boost productivity, reduce costs, and improve efficiency," the reality so far is that it is "enabling new forms of fraud, expanding surveillance-based pricing, and increasing costs for essential services such as health insurance, transportation, and electricity."
As one example of how AI is hurting consumers, the report highlights AI's role in helping health insurers more rapidly deny claims, even as many physicians have expressed concerns about the technology's accuracy.
"AI adjudication tools like UnitedHealth’s nH Predict have been accused of often erroneously denying needed care, hoping that patients and providers don’t take the time to appeal," the report notes. "A recent lawsuit alleges that the 0.2% of patients who do appeal win about nine times out of ten, reversing the AI-powered tool’s denial."
On the other side of the coin, AI-powered medical scribes used by healthcare providers have been found to bill insurers for procedures more complex or expensive than the services that were actually delivered. The report points to a recent analysis conducted by PricewaterhouseCoopers, which found that AI-powered tools are now one of the top drivers of medical inflation in the US.
Groundwork Collaborative and Reset Tech also document how AI allows companies to implement surveillance pricing systems, which use customers' personal data to determine how much they should be charged for a given product or service to maximize the amount of revenue generated per sale.
According to the report, data brokers collect and analyze data taken from internet users and then sell their findings to corporations who can use that knowledge to create detailed profiles of individual consumers.
One area where this kind of pricing is increasingly being used is in the car insurance industry, which thanks to modern technology has vastly more information about drivers' habits than ever before.
"This information—known as telematics—includes speed, braking patterns, acceleration, and location tracking," the report explains. "Insurers analyze this information with AI to assess risk and set personalized premiums. While this may reward some safe drivers, it can also lead to higher premiums and be used to deny coverage entirely."
The report finds that airlines have also been using customers' information to create a dynamic pricing system that charges different fares based on "demand, search activity, booking patterns, and other consumer data."
Rishi Bharwani, US director of Reset Tech and co-author of the report, said that elected officials need to wake up to how cutting-edge technology is being used to gouge consumers with what he described as "a hidden tax on households."
"Families feel it every day, even if they can’t see it," Bharwani explained. "Lawmakers need to act now to stop greedy corporations from using AI to squeeze consumers."
Janelle Jones, senior fellow at Groundwork Collaborative and report co-author, noted that AI pricing is becoming more popular even as families across the US are struggling to afford basics such as food and energy.
"As working people face an affordability crisis, higher prices caused by AI are the last thing they need," Jones said. "It's another attack on household budgets that add up, and which working people certainly shouldn’t be on the hook for."
Sep 23, 2026
SEE ALL
News
AI Giants Probe 'Tens of Thousands' of Security Incidents—Some Involving Government Sites
Just days after a United Nations panel of experts warned that current artificial intelligence guardrails are "unraveling," Axios reported Saturday that security researchers, along with the firms Anthropic and OpenAI, "are investigating tens of thousands of incidents," including meddling with US government websites, amid growing calls for immediate action to rein in the technology.
Since OpenAI revealed in July that its models autonomously breached the systems of the open-source platform Hugging Face during internal testing, the firm—plus Anthropic, Google, and Meta—has disclosed some additional incidents.
"After the Hugging Face incident, we committed to conducting a much broader review of actions taken by our models during training and evaluation and to being transparent about our findings," OpenAI said on social media Friday. "Given the scale of the review required, and the need to assess each case, we expect this work will take months to complete."
Meanwhile, "Anthropic has commissioned a third-party safety organization to examine the behavior of its models," Axios detailed Saturday, noting that across both firms, "the sheer number of incidents, which occurred in recent months in internal testing and the real world, indicates that the problem is orders of magnitude more complex than what is publicly known."
"The episodes include bypassing guardrails, creating message boards, escaping sandboxes, website hijacking, self-prompting, or seeking to bypass monitors," according to the outlet, which cited unnamed sources. "Many have yet to become public as security researchers continue to investigate."
Among the incidents announced by OpenAI—which has paused training on its "most capable" models—are 53 cases in which images uploaded by ChatGPT users were leaked before "mitigations and safeguards" were implemented. Reuters noted Friday that the company "declined to say when the images were posted" and "if the images were AI-generated or identified real people."
Earlier this week, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese announced at the United Nations General Assembly in New York City that an OpenAI agent hacked into his country's national healthcare database, the first known case of AI hacking a government site.
"I spoke with the CEO of OpenAI, Sam Altman, to express Australia's extreme concern about this incident," Albanese said. "And I also expressed my disappointment that it took the company way too long to inform the government what had occurred."
Then, the research lab Transluce said Friday that its independent investigation found that apparent OpenAI agents unsuccessfully tried to hack the US Department of Education website. OpenAI confirmed that, as The New York Times put it, the company's "artificial intelligence went rogue and meddled with" not only that government site but also those of the US Department of Commerce and the Securities and Exchange Commission—though "none of the incidents were breaches."
The revelation fueled fresh demands for action in the United States—even calls to force members of the US House of Representatives to return to Washington, DC, where they are not expected until after the November midterm elections.
"Rogue agents are now trying to infiltrate our own government systems—this is cause for real concern," Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) said on social media. "Congress must come back to Washington and pass bills like my bipartisan Stop Rogue AI Act so we can protect American families and our national security."
It's not just Gottheimer and Rep. Mike Lawler's (R-NY) bill; Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas) have recently introduced the Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act. However, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Republican Big Tech-backed President Donald Trump have signaled an unwillingness to pursue regulations on AI.
Universal healthcare campaigner Melanie D'Arrigo said Saturday that "if you were caught hacking into government websites, you’d be sent to prison. When companies who are donors to Trump are caught hacking into government websites, they'll likely just get more tax breaks. This is what a tiered system of justice looks like."
After Axios revealed that tens of thousands of incidents are being probed, economist Dean Baker similarly said that "this is criminal activity and is being done for profit. If we had a real Justice Department, Altman and his cronies at OpenAI (or is 'OpenSI' now?) would be looking at serious time."
Congresswoman Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.) declared that "it is imperative that Speaker Johnson hold urgent and bipartisan hearings on advanced AI. The CEOs and engineers of these companies should be testifying in front of the American people. We can't wait until November to regulate this rogue industry."
Sep 27, 2026
SEE ALL
News
Marking One Year of NSPM-7, Rights Advocates Call On Congress to Rein In FBI's Spying Capabilities
On the first anniversary of President Donald Trump's signing of one critical national security memo, every member of Congress on Friday received a report on how his administration's "blatant use of the counterterrorism framework against left-wing domestic speech" has allowed the FBI to "spy on the First Amendment," attacking one of the bedrock principles of the US Constitution in order to crack down on "speech disfavored by Trump."
The 19-page report, titled "7Can the FBI Spy on the First Amendment?," was sent to every congressional office by the advocacy group Defending Rights and Dissent (DRAD), exactly a year after the president signed National Security Presidential Memorandum 7 (NSPM-7) in the wake of the assassination of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk.
Trump and other top White House officials immediately blamed the killing of 31-year-old Turning Point USA co-founder on the "radical left," and claimed left-wing extremists were behind "the terrorism that we’re seeing in our country today." Days earlier, the US Department of Justice had removed from its website a report showing that political violence perpetrated by far-right extremists in the US far outpaced that of people on the left.
The memo outlined how the Trump administration planned to crack down on left-wing groups by directing law enforcement agencies to treat political speech "as a precursor to terrorism," if it came from organizations that demonstrated particular viewpoints—including those critical of capitalism or the US government. Groups that displayed so-called "extremism on migration, race, and gender; and hostility towards those who hold traditional American views on family, religion, and morality" were also named as potential targets.
NSPM-7 called for the FBI's 200 Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTF)—comprised of about 4,000 agents across the country—to investigate groups suspected of left-wing extremism under the memo, with local police officers staffing many of the task forces.
"This extremely broad language leads to individual agents interpreting what these viewpoints mean to them when determining who to target. And thanks to the existence of FBI assessments, designed with the same preventive purpose that NSPM-7 echoes, Task Force officers can investigate groups or individuals without a factual basis to suspect them of criminal wrongdoing or consider them a national security threat," wrote Chip Gibbons, policy director at DRAD. "At the assessment level, the FBI can even have an informant infiltrate their group. Informants often act as agent provocateurs in sting operations, in which the informant proposes and recruits individuals to participate in a fictitious terror plot concocted by the FBI."
Under pressure from Trump, Homeland Security Adviser Stephen Miller, and other officials to deliver prosecutions of suspected left-wing extremists, wrote Gibbons, "the agents' loose guidelines, politicized guidance, and track record of the FBI creates a recipe for disaster."
"Trump and Miller have made clear they plan to exploit the broad counterterrorism authorities of the executive branch to unleash this machinery of repression upon their domestic political opponents. Unless Congress acts now, they will get away with it."
A year after NSPM-7 was signed, the memo has already underpinned a crackdown on groups and individuals who oppose Trump's deeply unpopular deployment of federal immigration agents to carry out his violent mass deportation policy and other aspects of his far-right agenda.
US Attorney Daniel Rosen cited the memo in June when he announced the indictment of 15 organizers who led protests against US Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Minnesota, and those indictments came out of a sprawling investigation into local labor and rights groups that was opened after federal agents fatally shot anti-ICE protester Alex Pretti in Minneapolis in January. Top administration officials also accused Pretti, soon after he had been killed, of being a "domestic terrorist."
In July, Miller said NSPM-7 would allow the administration to "disrupt, identify, defund, de-bank, arrest, prosecute these political terrorists that are operating within our country," as Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that four left-wing groups had been designated as "foreign terrorist organizations."
And in March, the memo underpinned the conviction of eight people accused of domestic terrorism for wearing all black to a protest at Prairieland Detention Facility in Alvarado, Texas, where one demonstrator shot and wounded a police officer. The protesters were later sentenced to 30-100 years in prison.
“This wouldn’t be a terrorism case if it weren’t for that memo,” a defense lawyer told one news outlet after the conviction.
Gibbons emphasized on Friday that carrying out NSPM-7's directives "requires no new laws, no new agencies, because well before Trump ever returned to power, the FBI and its enablers have amassed for itself the power to spy on pure political speech."
As hundreds of thousands of Americans expressed opposition to President George W. Bush's impending invasion of Iraq in 2003, notes the report, "the FBI issued two controversial intelligence bulletins, one on 'Tactics Used During Protests and Demonstrations,' and one on 'Potential for Criminal Activity at Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) Annual Meeting.'"
"The latter bulletin was prepared in advance of mass protests against the Iraq War," reads the report. "It went so far as to list 'tactics by which protestors draw attention,' which included 'marches, banners, and forms of passive resistance such as sit-in.' It urged law enforcement to 'be alert to these possible indicators of protest activity and report any potentially illegal acts to the nearest FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force.'"
The inspector general of the Department of Justice at the time raised alarm about the bulletins' potential violation of the First Amendment, but the head of the DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC), Jack Goldsmith, dismissed the concern.
"The OLC opinion made clear that the executive branch believes it is not unconstitutional for the FBI to monitor protected speech so long as it claimed it was looking for potential unlawful activity, such as terrorist threats or 'civil disorder,'" writes Gibbons.
The FBI's international terrorism program has also pursued "homegrown violent terrorists," and the agency sought to prove in the 1960s and '70s that anti-war protests were "the product of Soviet foreign"—providing the National Security Agency with the names of US citizens to be added to a watchlist.
"While the stakes were high before, the actions of the Trump administration, especially those of Stephen Miller, have made it clear they aim to use the counterterrorism bureaucracy to destroy their domestic political opponents," reads the DRAD report.
Gibbons called on Congress to take several key actions to rein in the FBI as it seeks to carry out the directive outlined in NSPM-7, including:
- Creating a statutory charter for the FBI that outlines what it can investigate and why;
- Imposing on the FBI a definition of "terrorism" that puts the focus on criminal violence against people instead of political ideology;
- Eliminating the FBI's assessments of individuals based on their political speech and putting the agency "out of the business of suspicionless investigations"; and
- Requiring a warrant for foreign intelligence searches and queries under §702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
"With NSPM-7, Trump and Miller have made clear they plan to exploit the broad counterterrorism authorities of the executive branch to unleash this machinery of repression upon their domestic political opponents," said Gibbons. "Unless Congress acts now, they will get away with it."
Sep 25, 2026
SEE ALL
News
As Trump Threatens to 'Annihilate' Iran, Most Senate Republicans Still Refuse to Demand End to Illegal War
Even as some swing-state Republican US Senate candidates are suddenly calling for an end to President Donald Trump's unpopular and illegal war with Iran, the vast majority of elected GOP senators are voting to keep the conflict going.
A war powers resolution that would have compelled Trump to end the war he started more than six months ago was narrowly defeated in the US Senate on Thursday.
Just four Republicans—Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), and Thom Tillis (R-NC)—voted in favor of the resolution, which failed by a vote of 49-50. Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) was the lone Democrat to vote against the resolution.
The Iran War, which Trump launched in February without congressional authorization, has led to a massive spike in energy prices, including record-high prices for diesel fuel.
As reported by NPR, Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD), who voted against Thursday's resolution, nonetheless acknowledged the economic toll the war is taking on Americans while speaking with reporters earlier this week.
"Everybody wants to see wars come to a conclusion," said the South Dakota Republican. "We are hopeful that the administration's efforts will lead to getting... the shipping lanes open and taking some of the pressure off of the American peoples' pocketbooks via a lower price at the pump for gasoline."
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), who led the war powers resolution in the US House of Representatives, decried the Senate's failure to pass it as "a slap in the face to the millions of American people who want this war to end."
"The Senate had the opportunity to send a clear message to this administration that they would not stand for another day of his war of choice," said Jayapal. "Instead, a majority of Senate Republicans acted as a cult party and stood by Trump’s unpopular and devastating war."
The Washington Democrat vowed that the House "will continue to pass these resolutions and demand an end to the war."
Cavan Kharrazian, senior policy adviser for Demand Progress, had a more optimistic take on the resolution's failure, arguing that the close vote count "shows that the tide continues to turn against this illegal war."
Kharrazian also noted that "Congress has already passed a legally binding war powers resolution directing him to remove US forces from the fighting," but the president "ignored it and kept waging a war that was illegal from day one."
During an unhinged speech before the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday, Trump threatened to "annihilate" Iran by driving the country "into hell with no chance of survival and no hope of future greatness or generations."
Sep 24, 2026
SEE ALL
LATEST NEWS
'Consumers Will Pay the Price': Fury as Trump Pushes Through Rule Change to Make Vehicles Less Efficient, More Polluting
"Oil companies will get a windfall from gutting the fuel economy standards, but the rest of us are going to be handing over more of our hard-earned paychecks to fill up the tank," said one environmental lawyer.
Sep 28, 2026
Scientists and environmental advocates are warning that the Trump administration's rollback of fuel economy standards for cars and trucks will not only lead to more pollution but also hurt cash-strapped consumers already reeling from gas price spikes.
The administration announced on Monday that it was weakening the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, which require automakers to increase the fuel efficiency of their vehicles each year.
Biden administration rules required a 2% annual increase in fuel-efficiency standards, with the goal of bringing most vehicles to an average of 50.4 miles per gallon by 2031. Under President Donald Trump, the annual target has been reduced to just a 1% improvement each year, meaning five years from now the average car would be required to get just under 34.9 mpg.
The Department of Transportation, which finalized the rule, has argued that efficiency standards put an unnecessary burden on carmakers and has projected that lowering them will “reduce the average cost of a new vehicle by $1,300 for American families" and "save the American people $138 billion over the next five years."
Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy described the Biden-era increase as one that "forced automakers to produce more expensive electric vehicles that American families didn’t want."
But Dave Cooke, senior vehicles analyst for the Union of Concerned Scientists’ (UCS) Clean Transportation Program, argues that rather than being a benefit to consumers, “the federal government’s decision to gut fuel economy standards is a handout to automakers and oil companies that will strap American consumers already struggling with an affordability crisis.”
His group has estimated that since CAFE standards were first introduced in 2010, they have saved auto owners about $321 billion at the gas pump. And over just the past seven months, during which Trump's war with Iran has caused gas prices to soar around the country, UCS estimates that consumers have saved $32 billion.
"Any small reduction in upfront vehicle costs will be outweighed by higher fuel expenses," Cooke said.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) itself estimated in an impact analysis for the rule days ago that, as a result of the rule change, Americans will consume roughly 122 billion more gallons of gas than they would under the 2024 standards, resulting in average lifetime fuel costs of more than $1,600 more per vehicle—more than the administration estimates consumers will save by buying cheaper cars.
Transportation already accounted for about 17% of average US household spending in 2024, the latest year for which the Bureau of Labor Statistics has published data. Meanwhile, as the war with Iran has driven up costs, oil companies are reporting record profits. The top eight brought in nearly $93 billion in earnings in the second quarter of this year alone, according to an analysis by The Guardian.
"Oil companies will get a windfall from gutting the fuel economy standards, but the rest of us are going to be handing over more of our hard-earned paychecks to fill up the tank," said Atid Kimelman, an attorney at the NRDC.
Americans won't just spend more money; they'll also produce way more planet-heating greenhouse gases. The standards being rolled back were projected by NHTSA to prevent about 659 million metric tons of carbon dioxide, 825,000 metric tons of methane, and roughly 24,000 metric tons of nitrous oxide emissions through 2050.
The Center for Biological Diversity pointed out that the US is already the world's largest oil guzzler, accounting for 20% of global use, and that transportation is the No. 1 consumer of that oil.
"This move spells short- and long-term disaster for people’s health, the planet, and even US automakers who’ll sit on the sidelines while clean cars advance around the world," said Dan Becker, the director of the group's Safe Climate Transport Campaign. "This standard was the biggest single step any nation has taken to save gas, money at the pump, and auto pollution.”
Matthew Davis, vice president of federal policy for the League of Conservation Voters, emphasized that fuel efficiency standards are popular with the American public. A nationwide survey last month by the Global Strategy Group found that 73% of voters nationwide said they'd support "reestablishing fuel efficiency standards for cars and trucks."
"It is no secret that Trump promised handouts to Big Oil in exchange for campaign spending," Davis said, "and he is delivering for those billionaire CEOs and polluters while he hurts working families, American manufacturing competitiveness, public health, and the environment at every turn.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Preservation Group 'Gobsmacked' as Trump Admin Dismisses Public Concern Over Triumphal Arch
By abruptly closing public consultation on the massive project, the administration “decided the public’s role is meaningless, unimportant, and of no value whatsoever," said critics.
Sep 28, 2026
A historical preservation group said it was "gobsmacked" on Monday after the Trump administration said it was closing down its consultation with experts about President Donald Trump's plan for a triumphal arch in Washington, DC, because addressing their concerns and those from the general public would require them to deviate from the president's vision for the project.
On Thursday, Travis Voyles, the Trump-appointed vice chairman of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), sent a letter informing civil society and historic preservation groups that it was ending the federal review of how the 250-foot-tall arch would harm nearby historical sites.
That review is required under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, which mandates that federal agencies, including the National Park Service (NPS), consider how a project will affect historic properties and seek ways to "avoid, minimize, or mitigate” the harms of a planned project.
The federal regulations governing the Section 106 process explicitly state that "the views of the public are essential to informed federal decisionmaking,” and require agencies to “seek and consider” those views.
The administration, via the NPS, has acknowledged that the Triumphal Arch would have "adverse effects" on historical sites, disrupting views of Arlington National Cemetery, the Lincoln Memorial, and dozens of others. Meanwhile, the proposal has received over 107,000 public comments, most of which are negative, according to a sample from the DC Preservation Office.
But rather than taking the public concern as a reason to reevaluate or scale back the project, Voyles explained that the ACHP was choosing to end public consultation altogether because taking it into account would require changing the “fundamental nature” of the project in a way that the administration would never accept.
"It is clear that the proposed undertaking and its potential effects on historic properties have raised significant public interest, and the NPS stated in its September 22, 2026 correspondence that it believes additional consultation on the existing proposal is unlikely to result in agreement... to resolve adverse effects," he wrote.
"Further, the NPS stated that implementation of alternatives to avoid or minimize the adverse effects would alter the fundamental nature of the proposed undertaking and fail to achieve its goals," he continued, explaining that "in recognition of the public’s significant concerns," they were "hereby terminating" consultation.
Voyles said the ACHP would create its own recommendations and deliver them by October 7 to Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, whose office is overseeing the project. Burgum is legally required to consider and formally respond to those recommendations, but unlike a legally binding memorandum of agreement, he does not have to follow them.
The ACHP has set a deadline for public comments for Tuesday night at 11:59 pm and said it planned another meeting with consulting parties.
One of the outside groups involved in the consultation process was The Cultural Landscape Foundation (TCLF), a national historic-landscape preservation nonprofit, whose founder and CEO, Charles Birnbaum, worked at the NPS for 15 years and was the principal author of the federal guidelines for cultural landscapes.
Section 106 requires consultation to begin “at the early stages of project planning.” But TCLF says the review began only after the Commission of Fine Arts had approved the arch’s design.
Meanwhile, the TCLF has said that it and other relevant preservation groups were invited to only a single meeting on September 9, just weeks before public consultation was terminated. They said this indicated that any real alternative proposals had essentially been taken off the table.
On Monday, Scott MacFarlane of MeidasTouch News published a letter from the TCLF savaging the administration's "extraordinary" reasoning for canceling the public consultation.
"Mr. Voyles has written a singularly audacious letter," it said. "Rather than address the 'public's significant concerns regarding the adverse effects' on one of the nation's most revered and symbolically important cultural landscapes through an authentic public engagement process that doesn't foreclose avoidance as a precondition, the administration, through its proxy, the ACHP, has decided the public's role is meaningless, unimportant, and of no value whatsoever."
The question of historical preservation is one of numerous legal issues facing Trump's effort to build the arch, which is estimated to cost at least $100 million, though the administration has not published an official price tag.
Although it will be partially funded by taxpayers, Congress has not yet authorized the project, leading to a federal lawsuit seeking to block construction.
Outcry over the public funding for the project led Trump last week to propose using the monument as a "military complex" that would house drones, ammunition, and snipers. He has similarly attempted to justify his taxpayer-funded White House ballroom project by giving it a dual national security purpose.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Not Just Another Tech Company': Unions, Rights Groups Across EU Demand Governments Ditch Palantir
"A company whose technologies are implicated in serious human rights abuses should not be allowed to become an integral part of Europe’s public infrastructure."
Sep 28, 2026
A large coalition of labor unions and rights groups across Europe on Sunday demanded governments end their relationships with US tech company Palantir, which they described as a threat to democracy and civil liberties.
A joint statement from over 120 groups—including Corporate Europe Observatory, Global Justice Now, and the European Federation of Public Service Unions (EPSU)—says Palantir's actions should "disqualify it from involvement in the operations and functioning of democratic governments."
Among other things, the statement cites Palantir's technical support for "predictive policing" in US cities, its supply of data mining tools to US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and its work with the Israeli military, whose brutal years-long assault on Gaza has killed at least 74,000 Palestinians.
The statement also highlights the danger of governments relying on "a class of tech billionaires" to deliver public safety services, which they argue could lead to corporate capture of sovereign nations.
The groups are demanding that European governments cancel all current contracts with Palantir while permanently barring the firm from receiving future public contracts.
Scholars of authoritarianism earlier this year expressed alarm after Palantir posted a 22-point manifesto that they said espouses a “technofascist” doctrine.
Among other things, the manifesto hails the creation of artificial intelligence-powered weapons as tools to enforce American “hard power” around the world; declares that “national service should be a universal duty,” while suggesting the US should “seriously consider moving away from an all-volunteer force”; and denounces the embrace of “a vacant and hollow pluralism” on the grounds that some cultures “remain dysfunctional and regressive.”
Tim Bierley, campaign manager at Global Justice Now, said that Palantir's leadership has shown "apparent disdain... for democracy," but has still "been allowed to embed dubious technologies across our public services, giving it access to sensitive data and creating worrying new technical dependencies."
"The UK must work with other countries to end dependence on companies involved in human rights abuses," Bierley added, "and end the outsourcing of the public sphere to a dangerous class of big tech oligarchs."
Olivier Hoedeman, research and campaign coordinator at Corporate Europe Observatory, warned that "Palantir is not just another tech company selling governments a piece of software," but is rather being woven "into the machinery of the state, creating deep dependencies while giving a private company a far too powerful role in how governments process sensitive information and make decisions."
"This is a recipe for corporate capture of public infrastructure and decision-making," Hoedeman emphasized. "A company whose technologies are implicated in serious human rights abuses should not be allowed to become an integral part of Europe’s public infrastructure."
Jan Willem Goudriaan, general secretary of EPSU, singled out Palantir's tax avoidance schemes as a reason for European nations to scrap all ties with the company.
"Europe must stop rewarding public contracts to corporations that do not share public service values," said Goudriaan. "The European Parliament must fix this. It is unacceptable to keep feeding corporations with public money while they minimize their tax bills in the middle of a public services emergency. Every euro shifted offshore means fewer nurses, teachers or firefighters."
Keep ReadingShow Less
If Democrats Win Control of Congress in the Midterms, Will They Impeach Trump a Third Time?
"It's about setting a standard, and the Democrats can impeach, to uphold constitutional values, and at the same time, have a first-hundred-day agenda that deals with the cost of living," said Rep. Ro Khanna.
Sep 27, 2026
With the US midterm elections less than six weeks away and Republicans' congressional majorities at risk, both GOP leaders and Democrats are discussing the possibility that a Democratic-controlled Congress could impeach President Donald Trump a historic third time.
"They say they’re not going to, but we know they will—they'll do a third impeachment of President Trump," House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) said of Democrats during a Sunday radio interview. "But that's just part of it. They're going to investigate the first family, they're going to investigate Cabinet secretaries."
In fact, Democratic leaders are not denying another potential impeachment effort targeting someone who has been condemned by a range of critics as "the most openly corrupt president in American history."
During an interview with The Associated Press published on Saturday, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), who could become speaker if Democrats reclaim the lower chamber, signaled that impeachment is on the table—and not just for Trump.
"We haven't ruled anything out... and we haven't ruled anything in," he said. "If folks have been stealing from the American people, shortchanging the American people, or screwing over the American people... we are going to hold the crooks accountable."
Jeffries and other Democrats "are preparing a vast oversight agenda" that is "as robust as it is daunting, spanning several House committees," the AP reported. "With majority power comes bigger budgets and staff, and the ability to investigate, subpoena, and potentially course-correct what the Democrats say are widespread corruption and abuses of power."
Annual financial disclosures released this summer show that Trump pocketed at least $2.2 billion—over half of it from his family’s cryptocurrency grift—during his first year back in office, and his stock trades since then have continued to generate alarm.
Trump's deployment of federal immigration agents to various US communities to abuse the rights of US citizens and immigrants alike as well as his illegal war on Iran—with its the resulting affordability crisis—have also fueled calls for impeachment.
Responding to suggestions from some that another impeachment wouldn't be a good use of Democrats' time, Congressman Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), a potential 2028 presidential candidate, said during a Sunday appearance on NBC News' "Meet the Press" that "it's not about Donald Trump," who will be a lame duck and "increasingly irrelevant."
"The point is to stand up for the Constitution," Khanna explained. "Impeachment says that you can't get into an illegal war in Iran without constitutional approval. Impeachment says that you can't just start firing federal employees... in defiance of what Congress says. Impeachment says you can't do deals with foreign governments to allegedly enrich your own family."
"It's about setting a standard, and the Democrats can impeach, to uphold constitutional values, and at the same time, have a first-hundred-day agenda that deals with the cost of living," he added, pointing to issues such as free childcare, raising the minimum wage, and taxing billionaires. "We can do both."
Democrats have unveiled various articles of impeachment against Trump since his return to the White House last year. On Thursday, Congressman Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), who is retiring after this term, introduced 26 more, including for alleged abuses of power, violations of his oath of office, and corrupt use of the pardon authority.
"Trump is clearly the most impeachable president our country has ever endured," said Cohen, a member of the House Judiciary Committee. "His continued presence in office is a danger to our democracy. That the sycophantic Republican majority in Congress is derelict in its duty does not mean that I must abandon my responsibilities."
Cohen stressed that "I took an independent oath to support and defend the Constitution. That commitment compels me to introduce this resolution today. When historians write about this period, and our constituents ask who stood up to President Trump's lawlessness, this resolution is the answer."
The House initially impeached Trump for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress in December 2019. After his supporters stormed the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, he became the first president to be impeached twice. However, the Senate acquitted him in both cases.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Battle Over Illegal E1 Settlement in Occupied West Bank Escalates a Month Before Israeli Election
Critics around the world continue to call the proposed settlement "a plan to progress the forced displacement and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians."
Sep 27, 2026
Israel's far-right finance minister and other settlers living in the illegally occupied West Bank fumed on Sunday after their country's attorney general pushed a key deadline for the widely condemned E1 project until after the Israeli Knesset election.
Although the International Court of Justice, plus governments and human rights groups around the world, have concluded that all Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory violate international law, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government has charged ahead with expansion plans, granting final approval for the building of 3,401 housing units in the E1 area last year.
Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich had celebrated that decision, declaring that the project "buries the idea of a Palestinian state," as it would split the West Bank in two by connecting Jerusalem and the settlement Ma'ale Adumim. While signing a related agreement a year ago, Netanyahu similarly said that "there will be no Palestinian state."
Despite an ongoing legal challenge to the E1 plan from Bedouin Palestinians who live in the area and Israeli peace groups, Israel's Ministry of Construction and Housing last month issued a tender to build seven residential compounds with 1,234 units, giving contractors until October 19—a week before the October 27 election—to submit bids.
"This is a last-minute maneuver that is part of the scorched-earth policy the government is pursuing at the end of its term to secure long years of conflict and bloodshed for Israel," the Israeli watchdog Peace Now said at the time. "The government is trying to sign contracts with contractors before the elections so that it will be much harder for the next government to cancel the construction."
The office of Israeli Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara this week ordered a monthlong postponement of the deadline for bids, "so that it will fall after Election Day, thereby reducing the concern that the tender could be used for prohibited election propaganda."
Smotrich on Sunday accused her of "trying to stop the construction in E1" and "interfering in the election campaign" to help Gadi Eisenkot, the Yashar party leader who could lead a coalition government that ousts Likud's Netanyahu, depending on the results.
The finance minister called on Supreme Court Justice Noam Sohlberg, who chairs the Central Elections Committee (CEC), to intervene to "ensure that the attorney general and her people do not turn into active players in the election campaign in an attempt to back up the left, prevent the right from forming a government, and to enable the establishment of a Palestinian state that would endanger the existence of the state of Israel."
Ma'ale Adumim also challenged the attorney general's move on Sunday, with a petition to the High Court of Justice. Mayor Guy Yifrach said that "if the claim is that continuing the tender is political, I say exactly the opposite: Stopping it now is an intervention with political implications."
"The E1 plan is already facing heavy international pressure, and developers and contractors need certainty," Yifrach added. "Is it not enough that outside Israel they are trying to deter them from the project, now we are adding uncertainty from within our home as well?"
Earlier this month, the United Kingdom, France, and Canada jointly announced bans on imports from illegal Israeli settlements, and partnered with nine other nations—Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Ireland, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, and Sweden—for a statement that describes the situation in the West Bank as "rapidly deteriorating amid unprecedented levels of settler violence and settlement expansion, including the unacceptable decision to publish tenders for the E1 settlement project."
Then, 19 US Senate Democrats on Wednesday introduced a bill to sanction people or companies that facilitate the construction for Israeli settlers in the E1 area, with Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), one of the lead co-sponsors, condemning the project as "a move towards de facto annexation of the West Bank."
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), another lead sponsor and longtime supporter of Israel, said on social media Friday that "the Netanyahu campaign to extinguish the possibility of a future Palestinian state by building Israeli settlements in the E1 area of the West Bank must end. I'm leading a new effort to sanction those involved in its development and preserve a future pathway for peace."
In addition to pushing for the expansion of settlements in the West Bank, since the Hamas-led October 7, 2023 attack on Israel, Netanyahu has overseen a genocidal war against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. Despite a ceasefire agreement reached nearly a year ago, Israeli attacks continue, and the official death toll keeps rising, topping 74,000 on Sunday.
The bleak milestone came two days after The New York Times corroborated Haaretz’s recent reporting that in September 2023, United Arab Emirates President Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan warned Netanyahu about now-deceased Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar's plans "for a major event" targeting Israel. The Israeli leader has denied those reports, and even threatened to sue Haaretz.
However, in a signal that Netanyahu and his allies are worried about the upcoming election, the CEC this week voted to disqualify all Arab-majority political parties from the election, while declining to take similar action against Smotrich's Religious Zionism, far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir's Otzma Yehudit, and Zehut, founded by Moshe Feiglin, a former Likud member. The Supreme Court is set to review the disqualifications this week.
Meanwhile, Eisenkot suggested this weekend that the barred parties would not be part of any government he leads. As Haaretz summarized, he said that "all coalition partners would have to recognize Israel as a Jewish and democratic state, uphold the values of the Declaration of Independence, support mandatory military service, and recognize Hamas as a terrorist organization that must be destroyed."
Yoav Segalovich from the United Arab List's Knesset slate responded that anyone seeking to lead the country must "show leadership and not fold in the face of the Likud's scare campaign," adding: "Israel needs deep change and genuine partnership, through courageous leadership. Eisenkot will not have a government without the United Arab List."
Keep ReadingShow Less
AI Giants Probe 'Tens of Thousands' of Security Incidents—Some Involving Government Sites
"Insane that we allow this," one journalist said of the rapidly advancing technology. "Sleepwalking into disaster or worse."
Sep 27, 2026
Just days after a United Nations panel of experts warned that current artificial intelligence guardrails are "unraveling," Axios reported Saturday that security researchers, along with the firms Anthropic and OpenAI, "are investigating tens of thousands of incidents," including meddling with US government websites, amid growing calls for immediate action to rein in the technology.
Since OpenAI revealed in July that its models autonomously breached the systems of the open-source platform Hugging Face during internal testing, the firm—plus Anthropic, Google, and Meta—has disclosed some additional incidents.
"After the Hugging Face incident, we committed to conducting a much broader review of actions taken by our models during training and evaluation and to being transparent about our findings," OpenAI said on social media Friday. "Given the scale of the review required, and the need to assess each case, we expect this work will take months to complete."
Meanwhile, "Anthropic has commissioned a third-party safety organization to examine the behavior of its models," Axios detailed Saturday, noting that across both firms, "the sheer number of incidents, which occurred in recent months in internal testing and the real world, indicates that the problem is orders of magnitude more complex than what is publicly known."
"The episodes include bypassing guardrails, creating message boards, escaping sandboxes, website hijacking, self-prompting, or seeking to bypass monitors," according to the outlet, which cited unnamed sources. "Many have yet to become public as security researchers continue to investigate."
Among the incidents announced by OpenAI—which has paused training on its "most capable" models—are 53 cases in which images uploaded by ChatGPT users were leaked before "mitigations and safeguards" were implemented. Reuters noted Friday that the company "declined to say when the images were posted" and "if the images were AI-generated or identified real people."
Earlier this week, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese announced at the United Nations General Assembly in New York City that an OpenAI agent hacked into his country's national healthcare database, the first known case of AI hacking a government site.
"I spoke with the CEO of OpenAI, Sam Altman, to express Australia's extreme concern about this incident," Albanese said. "And I also expressed my disappointment that it took the company way too long to inform the government what had occurred."
Then, the research lab Transluce said Friday that its independent investigation found that apparent OpenAI agents unsuccessfully tried to hack the US Department of Education website. OpenAI confirmed that, as The New York Times put it, the company's "artificial intelligence went rogue and meddled with" not only that government site but also those of the US Department of Commerce and the Securities and Exchange Commission—though "none of the incidents were breaches."
The revelation fueled fresh demands for action in the United States—even calls to force members of the US House of Representatives to return to Washington, DC, where they are not expected until after the November midterm elections.
"Rogue agents are now trying to infiltrate our own government systems—this is cause for real concern," Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) said on social media. "Congress must come back to Washington and pass bills like my bipartisan Stop Rogue AI Act so we can protect American families and our national security."
It's not just Gottheimer and Rep. Mike Lawler's (R-NY) bill; Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas) have recently introduced the Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act. However, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Republican Big Tech-backed President Donald Trump have signaled an unwillingness to pursue regulations on AI.
Universal healthcare campaigner Melanie D'Arrigo said Saturday that "if you were caught hacking into government websites, you’d be sent to prison. When companies who are donors to Trump are caught hacking into government websites, they'll likely just get more tax breaks. This is what a tiered system of justice looks like."
After Axios revealed that tens of thousands of incidents are being probed, economist Dean Baker similarly said that "this is criminal activity and is being done for profit. If we had a real Justice Department, Altman and his cronies at OpenAI (or is 'OpenSI' now?) would be looking at serious time."
Congresswoman Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.) declared that "it is imperative that Speaker Johnson hold urgent and bipartisan hearings on advanced AI. The CEOs and engineers of these companies should be testifying in front of the American people. We can't wait until November to regulate this rogue industry."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Only 'Negotiated Solution' Can Get US Out of 'Deadlock,' Iranian Diplomat Says After Trump Rejects Deal
"They want to make a deal where they open the strait immediately because they're losing so badly," the US president claimed. "We're winning tremendously."
Sep 27, 2026
As US President Donald Trump publicly rejected Iran's proposal for a ceasefire and reopening the Strait of Hormuz this weekend, the Iranian foreign minister reiterated that "there is no alternative to a negotiated solution."
"There's always hope for diplomacy," though the Trump-led United States has been an untrustworthy negotiator, Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi said during a Sunday appearance on NBC News' "Meet the Press."
"We are fully prepared for the war to be resumed... We stand firm in the face of any new aggression, even [if] it comes to a doomsday war,” the foreign minister added. "At the same time, we stand ready for diplomacy. It is up to President Trump to choose."
Iran's latest offer was "essentially the same bargain" as the June deal, "but with a very different sequence," Sina Toossi, a senior fellow at the US-based Center for International Policy, explained to CNN. Under the Iranian proposal, he said, "the US takes concrete steps first, and only then does Iran ease its pressure over Hormuz."
Araghchi and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian had pushed for the proposal this week while visiting the United Nations General Assembly in New York City—where Pezeshkian said in his UNGA speech that "we have been the victims of terrorism" and highlighted the civilians killed since the United States and Israel began bombing Iran at the end of February.
Trump—who launched the illegal war despite his own intelligence agencies concluding that Iran wasn't pursuing a nuclear weapon—used his UNGA address to threaten to "annihilate" Iran. Then, The Wall Street Journal reported late Friday that he "has rejected Iran's proposal for a seven-day ceasefire and has told aides he expects to resume bombing Iran after the November midterms."
The US president on Saturday confirmed to journalists that "I'm rejecting their deal," adding: "They want to make a deal where they open the strait immediately because they're losing so badly... We're winning tremendously. We have total control of the Hormuz Strait... They want to make a deal, and I think that's fine; I like making a deal, too. But that deal would not be acceptable."
Despite Trump's rejection, "US official claimed 'positive and constructive' discussions are still ongoing between the US and Iran through the mediators, including on nuclear issues," Axios reported Saturday. Aided by Qatar, Trump envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner "held a new round of indirect negotiations" with the Iranian foreign minister on the sidelines of the UNGA.
In a lengthy Persian statement shared on Telegram this weekend, Araghchi said that "we have seen the first reaction from the US president, but nothing has been conveyed to us from the mediators yet. Of course, the US president has also said many contradictory things, which unfortunately we hear a lot from him. We are waiting for the definitive opinions to be conveyed to us by the mediators, and we will make a decision based on that."
"In any case, our conditions are clear; any progress toward the opening of the Strait of Hormuz is contingent upon the fulfillment of these conditions, and we will not shrink from them," he continued. "Only a negotiated solution can get them out of this deadlock."
Such a solution must be "based on honor and justice that secures the rights of the Iranian people and fulfills their legitimate demands," he argued. The diplomat added that "the people of Iran have demonstrated their strength across military, diplomatic, and economic spheres, as well as in confronting sanctions."
Reporting on Araghchi's remarks, Reuters noted:
The commander-in-chief of Iran's army, Amir Hatam, said the war was at a critical and decisive stage, adding that Tehran would not accept a situation in which it was unable to trade while foreign powers used the region's strategic waterways.
"If Iran cannot trade, if Iran cannot live, no one will be able to trade or live," he said, in comments reported by state media.
It's not just the Iranians pushing for an end to the Iran War; the US public is also frustrated by its economic impacts, with prices soaring, particularly for diesel and gasoline. With the midterm elections less than six weeks away, and the president's Republican Party trying to at least hold on to its narrow majorities in Congress, Trump's approval rating has hit a record low.
After the president rejected Iran's proposal on Saturday, National Iranian American Council (NIAC) Action policy director Ryan Costello responded by calling out his various moves regarding Iran, including exiting former President Barack Obama's nuclear deal with the country during the first Trump administration.
"Art of the deal," Costello wrote on social media. "Attack Obama for negotiating a successful deal. Tear up the deal, say you'll get a better one. Start a war instead, blowing up the economy. Strike a deal to end the war, stick to it for a fortnight. Refuse to go back to the deal heading into the midterms."
NIAC Action filed a federal lawsuit on Thursday, arguing that Trump's war on Iran, which lacks congressional authorization, is unconstitutional. The group's president, Jamal Abdi, declared that "no president should have the power to take this country into an indefinite war by himself."
"Congress never authorized this war," he stressed. "Yet Iranian families are being bombed, American service members have been killed, and communities on both sides are being forced to bear the consequences. This lawsuit asks a fundamental question: Can one person decide, on his own, to keep an entire nation at war?"
Keep ReadingShow Less
Austin City Council Candidate Misael Ramos Arrested After Protest Against ICE Shooting
"We must end the terror in our communities created by the fascist administration in Washington and here in Texas—I will never stop standing up and speaking out for our community."
Sep 26, 2026
Misael Ramos, a democratic socialist running for City Council in Austin, was arrested by Texas troopers on Saturday morning for protesting US Immigration and Customs Enforcement after an ICE agent shot Wilber Rafael Garcés Pérez in the state's capital.
"At approximately 8:50 am this morning, two neighbors witnessed several state troopers, including many in unmarked vehicles, approach Misael while he was walking his dog and proceed to detain him," his campaign said on social media. "They never showed him a warrant for his arrest, but proceeded to arrest him anyway."
The Travis County Sheriff's Office website shows that the 40-year-old candidate for District 1 was booked at the county jail shortly after that and charged with a Class B misdemeanor for "riot participation." His campaign said the charge appears to be "related to his participation in the protest last Sunday at the site of Wilber's shooting by ICE."
The Austin American-Statesman reported that the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) could not be reached for comment.
"That these officers felt emboldened to do this to me, as a candidate on the ballot, speaks volumes to the level of impunity they feel to do this to our neighbors, who are living in fear of these kinds of abductions every day," Ramos said in a statement from jail. "We must end the terror in our communities created by the fascist administration in Washington and here in Texas—I will never stop standing up and speaking out for our community."
ABC affiliate KVUE reported that "at least four people were arrested by DPS and the Austin Police Department during Sunday's demonstration, including for charges of rioting, obstructing a highway, resisting arrest, and assault on a peace officer. Ramos' campaign said additional arrests have been made on DPS warrants throughout the week."
Ramos' campaign held a Saturday afternoon press conference outside the jail with representatives from various organizations, including the Austin chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA)—which has endorsed him—as well as the Austin Lawyers Guild and Texas State Employees Union.
"People have a constitutional right to gather, speak, protest, and criticize the government," George Lobb, an attorney and spokesperson for the Austin Lawyers Guild, said in a statement ahead of that event. "Arresting someone does not establish that they committed a crime, and pretrial conditions must comply with the Constitution."
Ramos was released from jail during the press conference, eliciting cheers from the crowd gathered outside. He made his way to the podium, hugging audience members, and began by thanking everyone who "spoke up" and "spoke out" on Saturday, including a neighbor who recorded his arrest and notified people he asked her to contact.
"This should not be happening on our streets," but "this is why I fight," the candidate declared, reiterating that he was approached while walking his dog—which one officer threatened to shoot—and never shown a warrant. "Thank you again, and let's keep fighting."
The crowd broke out into chants of "this is what solidarity looks like," and "Fuck ICE, ICE OUT."
Protests have been held in Texas since an ICE agent shot Garcés Pérez during a traffic stop last Sunday while he was making DoorDash deliveries. A federal judge has temporarily barred the President Donald Trump's administration from deporting the 28-year-old Venezuelan, who remains in ICE custody, despite having a bullet lodged in his back, near his spine.
Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas), whose district includes Austin, visited Garcés Pérez at a detention center in Pearsall on Wednesday. Afterward, according to The New York Times, the congressman told reporters that a doctor has advised the immigrant to have surgery to remove the bullet.
"If Wilber and his wife decide that he needs to go through his surgery, then ICE needs to expedite his care," said Casar. "I am making it very clear to every part of the federal government that ICE needs to take the medical care of Wilber Garcés extremely seriously."
Since returning to office last year, Trump has deployed ICE in cities across the United States as part of his mass detention and deportation campaign. Members of the agency and Customs and Border Protection have shot immigrants and US citizens alike—some fatally—and violated the rights of numerous others. Additionally, over 50 people have died in ICE custody.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump 'Gleefully Eviscerating' Efforts to Help Families With 'Illegal' Pocket Rescission
"Donald Trump knows he can’t get these cuts through Congress, so he is illegally making them through the back door," said the House Budget Committee's top Democrat.
Sep 26, 2026
Elected Democrats—and even the Senate's top Republican appropriator—blasted President Donald Trump late Friday for rescinding nearly $1 billion in congressionally approved spending that the White House deemed "wasteful and harmful" through a legally contested process.
In a statement announcing what was targeted, the administration celebrated funding cuts for what it called "pro-illegal immigration programs," a "nefarious" Department of Justice subagency, a program that "propagates America Last climate alarmism," an office that promotes diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI)—or "discrimination, and radical woke ideologies"—and more.
House Budget Committee Ranking Member Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.) responded in a statement that "Donald Trump knows he can't get these cuts through Congress, so he is illegally making them through the back door."
"Trump's actions are a blatant attack on Congress' constitutional power of the purse," he added. "It is exactly why we need to pass my Congressional Power of the Purse Act and stop any president from illegally overriding Congress."
The Associated Press reported that "under federal law, Congress has 45 days to review the president's proposed spending cuts before they take effect. But Trump made that all but impossible by announcing them with just five days left in the federal fiscal year and the House out of session through the November election."
Senate Budget Committee Ranking Member Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) stressed on social media that "a pocket rescission is an illegal line-item veto. It is the president saying that he and he alone will convert a bipartisan spending bill (that has been signed into law) into a partisan spending bill. He is canceling the lines of spending he doesn't like."
"This violates the core separation of powers embedded in our Constitution in which it is the Congress, not the president, who decides what programs are designed and at what level they are funded," he continued. "Republican colleagues said they would never let this happen. Well, here it is. They should ask themselves: 'How would I like to have a Democratic president canceling out the Republican flavored programs he or she doesn't like in a bipartisan spending bill that has been signed into law?' If they have any integrity or any spine, they will join us in ending this practice."
Noting that the cuts will impact everything from critical health research, to combating the international illicit narcotics trade, Senate Appropriations Committee Vice Chair Patty Murray (D-Wash.) declared: "This is theft from the American people, plain and simple. These are funds Congress has delivered on a bipartisan basis and should be helping people—not cut off by a president more focused on building a ballroom than investing in families."
She specifically called out Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Russell Vought—a co-author of Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation-led blueprint for a right-wing overhaul of the federal government, who was recently condemned as an "unelected shadow president" by the House Democrat who introduced impeachment articles against him. According to Murray, "Every Republican who voted for these bills should be furious because Vought is saying their votes don't count."
Murray also pointed out that during negotiations for the recently enacted stopgap spending legislation, "Democrats fought to include language to prevent the Trump administration from once again usurping Congress' power—but for the second time in a year, Republicans refused to take common sense action and prevent this from happening."
"While Trump spends tax dollars on ads promoting himself, Congress needs to reassert its powers to help people, and it's past time Republicans join us in that fight," she argued. "Russ Vought's message to Congress is that your votes don't count, and your laws are optional. It is now time for my Republican colleagues who said they would never let this happen to stand up and join us to stop this, and remind this administration this is not how this works."
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) emphasized the impact of the administration's move, saying that "Trump is gleefully eviscerating programs and protections that help hardworking American families live a safe and healthy life, all while he continues to punish them with skyrocketing gas and grocery prices."
"With this rescissions package, the Trump administration is illegally stripping nearly $1 billion in critical funding that supports kids, K-12 students, small businesses, and health and clean air research," he highlighted. "Americans are crying out for relief."
"Instead of ending his Iran War and tariff chaos that are driving up costs, Trump is rolling out the red carpet for our adversaries while stealing funds meant to help American families," he added. "Senate Democrats will challenge Trump's illegal cuts at every turn and continue the fight to help American families, lower healthcare costs and secure our communities."
The administration's rescission announcement came less than six weeks away from the midterm elections. Democrats aim to win majorities, while Trump's Republican Party is fighting to keep control of both chambers of Congress. One of the nationally watched races is that of Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine).
As some congressional Republicans cheered the Friday action, Collins put out a statement denouncing it. She said that "without warning or consultation, Congress just received an $810 million package of pocket rescissions from the administration," which she called OBM's most recent attempt "to undermine Congress' constitutional power of the purse."
"This move shows that OMB intentionally withheld these funds for months to execute this unlawful cancellation of appropriations that were approved on a bipartisan basis and signed into law," Collins continued. "Not only is the delay itself an impoundment that was not reported to Congress, but also it is a usurpation of Congress' appropriations powers. OMB is an agency of the executive branch. It does not get to decide which programs are worth funding."
"The independent Government Accountability Office has concluded that pocket rescissions are unlawful and not permitted by the Impoundment Control Act," she added. "Any effort to rescind appropriated funds without congressional approval is a clear violation of the law. I will work with my colleagues to address these illegal actions."
While some Democrats had called for their Republican colleagues to make such promises, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) fired back at Collins on social media, writing that "Senate Republicans had chance after chance to stop Trump's illegal seizure of taxpayer money. Time after time, they pledged allegiance to Trump instead of to citizens. And he'll keep rolling them if the Senate doesn't change hands."
So did Troy Jackson, the former Democratic Maine Senate president running to unseat Collins. He said that "Susan Collins voted for Trump's pick to lead the OMB. Now she’s surprised he's doing exactly what he promised to do? She's the appropriations chair who voted with Trump 96% of the time. Expressing concern isn't enough. Mainers see through the bullshit."
Keep ReadingShow Less
In Win for Missouri Voters, Supreme Court Smacks Down GOP's Rigged Map a Third Time
"We have said from the beginning, people, not politicians will be the final deciders on this DC power grab," said one campaigner. "We are moving forward to vote NO on Proposition A."
Sep 25, 2026
Although the US Supreme Court's right-wing supermajority on Friday greenlit President Donald Trump's voter purge database, it also helped deliver yet another blow to Missouri Republicans' push for a rigged congressional map.
"In 2022, the Missouri Legislature enacted a redistricting map for elections to the US House of Representatives. In 2025, the Missouri Legislature enacted a new map," says the high court's unsigned ruling. Like Republican legislators in other states, Missouri's lawmakers pursued the new districts in response to public pressure from the president.
"But under the Missouri Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court of Missouri, a new law such as the 2025 map does not take effect unless and until approved by voters in a referendum in the next election—at least where, as here, the number of voter signatures on the petition suffices to trigger a referendum," Friday's opinion explains.
Thus, on September 3, the document notes, "the Missouri Supreme Court ruled that the 2025 redistricting map 'is not the law and has never been the law' in Missouri—and will not take effect unless and until approved by Missouri voters by referendum in the 2026 election."
However, Missouri Republicans fought back. The following week, Justice Brett Kavanaugh—a Trump appointee and member of the court's right-wing supermajority—delivered the first blow to the 2025 map. Just days later, the full court agreed, again tossing the redrawn districts.
The high court reiterated its position for a third time on Friday, with no noted dissents: "In short, as a matter of state law, the 2022 map—not the 2025 map—must be used in the 2026 congressional election."
The justices also gave clear directions to the US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri and the Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit, stating that they "should not enjoin or otherwise prohibit the use of the 2022 map," and "should not order or otherwise require Missouri to use the 2025 map" in the November midterm elections.
Trump's Republican Party is trying to cling to control of both chambers of Congress in the face of the president's unpopular and illegal war on Iran, which has exacerbated the country's affordability crisis.
With early voting underway and Election Day less than six weeks away, the high court highlighted that "at this late date, ordering reversion to the 2025 map in the midst of an ongoing election would usher in electoral chaos."
Gov. Mike Kehoe—who last year called the special session to redraw the map and then signed House Bill 1—said that Friday's decision was "disappointing," but "nevertheless, Missouri will follow the court's order."
Meanwhile, Marina Jenkins, executive director of the National Redistricting Foundation, declared that "this victory is the final nail in the coffin of Missouri’s egregious mid-decade gerrymander for the 2026 midterms."
"Make no mistake: In the 2026 midterms, Missourians will not only vote on the Show Me State's 2022 congressional map, a map that keeps Kansas City together, but they will also have the opportunity to veto Republicans' egregious mid-decade gerrymander at the ballot box."
People Not Politicians Missouri, a campaign that has challenged the GOP map since it was passed a year ago and sought the latest intervention from the nation's top court, also welcomed its Friday decision.
"We are done with corrupt politicians trying to force their map into effect outside the process outlined in the Missouri Constitution," said the group's executive director, Richard von Glahn. "We have said from the beginning, people, not politicians will be the final deciders on this DC power grab. We are moving forward to vote NO on Proposition A."
Proposition A is the congressional map referendum. If enough voters oppose it, they can kill "the gerrymander that won't die," a map that targets the state's 5th Congressional District, currently held by Democratic US Rep. Emanuel Cleaver.
As The Associated Press reported Friday: "Cleaver was unopposed in the Democratic primary. Republican state Sen. Rick Brattin won a six-way Republican primary under the revised districts. They remain the candidates for the general election, even though the district boundaries have reverted to their prior lines."
Journalist Jamie Dupree called the Friday ruling a "loss for the GOP," adding that "the Missouri map will be 5R-2D instead of 6-1."
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
Progressive Newswire
Fuel-Economy Standards Axed by Trump Administration
Sep 28 2026 · 12:35pm EDT
Trump Administration Guts Mile-Per-Gallon Auto Rule
Sep 28 2026 · 12:28pm EDT
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy