SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
With no grown-ups in sight, a feckless war lurches and whipsaws on, run by a regime full of clowns, drunks, losers, grifters, all steadfastly defying the will of the people. Trump rants, Hegseth lies, Rubio punts, and shameless, "bad paranoid mess" Ka$h Patel, who actually likes to spell his name that way, is gifting bottles of personally branded bourbon - "KASH PATEL, FBI Director," boasting "strong notes of insecurity" - on all sides. Nothing to see here.
The dizzying pivots on Iran go on, with Dear Leader "paralyzed" by what he started and can't for the life of him figure out how to end. The military blockade of Iran's ports is "the greatest military maneuver in history"; also, if Iran doesn't give in to his demands, they will be "blown off the face of the earth." The "already legendary Epic Fury" is almost over, and the Hormuz Strait will be "OPEN TO ALL" if Iran just agrees to the 14-point US plan they dismiss as "a wish-list." One day, Project Freedom is "a gift to the world" that will get all 2,000 stranded ships through the Strait; the next day, with two ships through and Navy commanders resisting, he pulls the plug in the name of an almost-here "complete and final agreement" that doesn't exist. It turns out he veered away because the Saudis, angry and mistrustful, wouldn't let him use their bases or air space; NATO countries are also increasingly.barring the US from their bases. Iran's chief negotiator: "Operation Trust Me Bro failed.”
There’s more bad if unsurprising news: Pete and Donnie "lied through their teeth" about how the war's gone: Iranian airstrikes did far more damage to US military sites - hitting or destroying at least 228 hangars, barracks, fuel depots, aircraft, key radar, defense, communication systems - than they've acknowledged, and Iran's military might is far from "obliterated." The lies flew through, in part, because they “requested” that several large satellite imagery providers withhold images of the war to tightly control a bogus “winning” narrative. The result, critics say: “Not since Vietnam has there been a more systematic effort by an administration to lie about the costs, consequences, and results of a war.” Meanwhile, NATO is increasingly moving on without the US - who can blame them - and even Australia is pissed at the economic chaos: “Interest Rates Rise Because Some (Emotionally-Stunted) Fuckwit in America Wasn’t Hugged Enough As A Child."
Amidst the carnage, a “once-in-a-lifetime stupid“ Trump posts bonkers AI memes - Biden as ”COWARD," Obama as ”TRAITOR" - and proof the Iran war is shorter than Afghanistan: "Wow! Study this chart!“ His clowns flail. Todd Blanche wants SCOTUS to let the DOJ trash E. Jean Carroll's $83.3 million win. Howard Lutnick told the House his relationship with Epstein was "inexplicable.” Hegseth still inexplicably pursues Mark Kelly for obeying the law though multiple judges tell him to stop; Pete also posted a cringe video of "performative dipshittery wrapped in fictional jingoism," insisting a proposed $1.5 trillion military budget is “putting the American taxpayer first.” Also: "Arsenal for freedom" WTF? GOP tax cuts for the rich and slashing of Obamacare tax credits will see millions lose health care and food stamps, which they call cutting fraud: "Let them eat ballrooms." ICE promises, "Mass deportations are coming." America wants none of this shit.
They also likely don't want much of what Trump's FBI - which boasts, "Law and order is back," complete with vows to hunt down "bad guys" at the World Cup - is selling. Especially given its alleged director, fresh off drunken drunken revels celebrating with his hockey "friends" in Milan and reportedly, perennially panicking about being fired after a series of scandals, is now facing yet more bad press thanks toThe Atlantic's Sarah Fitzpatrick, who's been lauded as "a fearless badass" for staying on his sketchy trail. Her first story, on April 17, cited two dozen FBI sources "alarmed" by Patel's erratic behavior, "conspicuous inebriation and unexplained absences" after nights of boozing. Patel responded with a sputtering, typo-riddled, $250-million lawsuit charging Fitzpatrick and The Atlantic with an elaborate, organized-crime-like conspiracy. The FBI also reportedly launched a criminal leak investigation, usually reserved for "insider threats" involving classified documents, into who told Fitzpatrick what.
This week, Fitzpatrick followed up with another boozy story: Patel travels with a stash of personalized, bespoke, presumably taxpayer-funded Ka$h Patel bourbon he regularly hands out wherever he goes, including on official FBI business. The bottles bear the label, “KASH PATEL FBI DIRECTOR” with the rendering of an FBI shield; around it, text reads, with his preferred spelling, Director Ka$h Patel. An eagle holds the shield in its talons; sometimes the 750-milliliter bottles bear Patel’s signature. They also bear the imprint of Kentucky distillery Woodford Reserve, who have helped out MAGA before. In 2025, they gifted bottles to attendees of the 2025 inauguration luncheon, part of the swag arranged by Mitch McConnell's team. They also created a commemorative "Trump Presidential Woodford Reserve Whiskey, part of their Spirited Gifts line. It's unclear to what extent they've been impacted by or spared from Trump's infamous tariffs.
Patel is already known to have "a great affection" for swag: "He is known as being very merch forward." The Ka$h-branded crap on his website - “Choose Freedom. Shop Based" - has included t-shirts, beanies, faux-camo Fight with Kash hoodies, Fight With Kash Punisher scarf, “Justice for All” #J6PC tees to support Jan, 6 rioters, “government gangsters” playing cards, tacky juvenile "Steel Wall Art," and his children's book The Plot Against the King, about a heroic wizard, Kash the Distinguished Discoverer, who helps "King Donald" uncover conspiracies and crush his enemies. Profits supposedly go to a non-profit Kash Patel Foundation that “supports whistleblowers, education, defamation cases, etc." Patel was also already a bourbon fan during Trump's first term; he reportedly kept a barrel of bourbon at the National Security Council which was regularly brought out to celebrate successes.
In her account, Fitzpatrick lists places and occasions, including FBI events, where Patel has given out bottles of his bourbon. She reports that, when a bottle went missing during a March FBI "training seminar" with Ultimate Fighting Championship athletes in Quantico, Virginia, the incident caused Patel to "lose his mind"; he was so angry he threatened to make his staff take polygraph tests and face prosecution if they were found to have been involved. The FBI did not deny Patel gives out the whiskey; they defended the gifts as "routine" within the FBI, where Bureau officials "exchange commemorative items in formal gift settings consistent with ethics rules." A spokesperson "declined to clarify which ethical rules he is following, or which past directors also did it. When Fitzpatrick asked a former longtime senior official if he'd ever seen personally branded booze gifted, "He burst out laughing."
Several current and former FBI leaders said the action was "unheard-of," noting, "The FBI has traditionally had a zero-tolerance approach to unauthorized use of alcohol on the job or its misuse off duty.” Said one, "Handing out bottles of liquor at our premier law-enforcement agency - it makes me frightened for the country." Others called it "weird," "uncomfortable," "a "shitshow," "a misunderstanding of the Bureau's culture of quiet professionalism," “demoralizing because it suggests one set of standards for the director and another for the rest of the Bureau." Then again, said one, "If you make allegations against Patel, you're screwed." "The Kash Patel bourbon has strong notes of insecurity, narcissism, incompetence and alcohol-fueled national security risk,” wrote Dem lawmakers online. "Pairs well with taxpayer-funded getaways and the occasional SWAT-assisted wake-up call.”
"I knew one day I'd have to watch powerful men burn the world down. I just didn't expect them to be such losers." - Rebecca Shaw in The Guardian

Environmental activists are hopeful after a six-day climate summit in Colombia resulted in a coalition of more than 50 countries agreeing to start developing plans to move away from planet-heating fossil fuels. But they say action must now follow talk.
In marked contrast to the annual United Nations climate summits, which have been routinely overrun by oil and gas industry lobbyists and concluded with agreements that largely ignore the imperative to divest from fossil fuels, Shiva Gounden, the head of Greenpeace's delegation this week in Santa Marta, said the conference that concluded Wednesday "was a breath of fresh air, a real sign that the wind is finally shifting."
The 59 nations that attended the First Conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels did not ultimately end with a binding agreement to transition away from fossil fuels within a specific timeframe, which activists say is urgently necessary as global heating rapidly approaches 1.5°C above preindustrial levels.
Many of the world's biggest polluters—including the United States, China, and India, as well as petrostates like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates—were also absent.
However, the summit did end with attendees, nearly half of whom are fossil fuel producers and who represent more than half of global gross domestic product, agreeing to form tangible "frameworks" for how they plan to transition away from a fossil-fueled model of capitalism that Colombian President Gustavo Petro decried as "suicidal."
Perhaps the single biggest breakthrough at the conference was France's unveiling of a national roadmap to phase out fossil fuels in the coming decades. It became the first developed nation to lay out such a plan, with the goals of removing coal from its national grid by 2027, phasing out oil by 2045, and fossil gas by 2050.
The French climate envoy, Benoit Faraco, described it not only as an obligation but an opportunity: “This process has made us realise we want to be an electro-superpower,” he said, according to The Guardian. “We want to be the electricity Saudi Arabia of Europe, selling green electrons to the UK, Ireland, Germany, and other countries.”
Many attendees also agreed that any collective movement away from fossil fuels would require addressing the debt crisis in the Global South, which many countries—especially those in Africa, where national debts have doubled in the past five years—have found themselves cranking up fossil fuel production to cope with.
While the conference concluded without any binding plan for debt forgiveness, which many delegates from developing countries had proposed, the participants agreed that poorer countries would need support to move out of debt and finance a green transition.
"Fossil fuel dependency deepens economic instability, fuels conflict, and traps countries in cycles of debt," said Bronwen Tucker, public finance lead for Oil Change International. "As long as Global South countries remain locked in this system, while Global North governments write the financial rules, public resources will continue to flow away from people and toward the systems driving crisis."
Laura Caicedo, the campaigns coordinator at Greenpeace Colombia, described the conference as "an important space to put the just energy transition on the agenda ahead of the Climate COP," which will take place in Turkey this coming November.
"There is willingness and a sense of fresh momentum that is worth celebrating," she said. "But this is only the beginning: more time is needed for this process to mature into a true platform for dialogue that can inform decision-making in this and other cooperation spaces on key energy issues."
The next conference on Transitioning Away From Fossil Fuels is set to occur early next year in Tuvalu, a low-lying Pacific island nation that is at risk of becoming uninhabitable within decades due to sea-level rise.
While climate activists were heartened by the progress made in Santa Marta, Gounden said countries need to come to Tuvalu with concrete plans.
“When we get to Tuvalu, the conversation has to change," she said. "We can’t just bring more ambition; we have to bring proof of implementation."
This week's conference took place against the backdrop of the US and Israel's war in Iran, where US President Donald Trump has suggested a key goal is to "take the oil" controlled by Iran. The obstruction of oil shipments has become a critical piece of strategic and economic leverage and simultaneously inflicted chaos upon the global economy, disrupting humanitarian aid for some of the world's poorest and most vulnerable people.
"Amid a tense geopolitical context and worsening climate extremes," said Rodrigo Estrada, Greenpeace International's senior climate adviser, "Santa Marta helped spark a feeling of renewed energy, but delegates must now follow through to deliver action, not just words."
While the war has sent energy companies' profits soaring, the climate advocacy group 350.org estimated this week that the continued blockade of the Strait of Hormuz could cost households and businesses an additional $600 billion to $1 trillion.
"It’s never been clearer that fossil fuel phase-out is imperative for stability and peace," Tucker said. "Every step away from fossil fuels weakens the outsized power and wealth that allows the US to wage illegal wars in the name of energy dominance."
At the next conference, she added, "The richest polluting countries must show they are serious. Canada, Norway, the UK, and the EU must make real plans to accelerate their fossil fuel phaseout at home and come to the table with real economic collaboration."
Mariana Paoli, the climate policy lead for Oxfam, said the lack of action by rich countries was "disappointing" and needed to change.
"Wealthy governments have still not stepped up to provide sufficient climate financing for poorer countries, which face the brunt of the impacts of the climate crisis," she said. "Rich countries hold the historical responsibility for the climate crisis, therefore they must not only move first and faster but also provide finance at scale for others to follow them."
"A just transition," she said, "must make rich polluters pay for the crisis they have caused."
As Americans on Wednesday continued to face the economic fallout of President Donald Trump's war on Iran, a gallon of gasoline cost $4.536, the average transaction price for a new vehicle was $49,275, and a pair of progressive groups published a report detailing "how surging auto loan debt is hurting households."
"The costs of purchasing and financing a car have been going up for years," noted Protect Borrowers senior fellow Tara Mikkilineni, who co-authored the report, "When The Wheels Come Off," with other experts from her organization and The Century Foundation.
"Unfortunately, the Trump administration's reckless actions on the economy and the expensive fallout from the war in Iran has made it harder for working families to purchase a car and has left millions more feeling major pocket pain at the pump," Mikkilineni said. "For millions of working families, a car is not a luxury, it is an essential economic lifeline. Working families deserve relief and they deserve to have a government that is watching out for them, not allowing lenders and auto dealers to rake in record profits at their expense."
Mikkilineni's team found that "in recent years, aggregate total auto debt has reached $1.68 trillion, a 37% jump since early 2018, and now comprises the largest volume of outstanding loan debt ever recorded. At the end of 2025, nearly 86 million Americans—roughly 28% of consumers—have outstanding auto loan or lease debt. Residents in states where driving is most necessary, such as Texas, Alaska, Louisiana, and Florida, are struggling with the highest levels of auto debt."
"Borrowers carrying auto loans see significantly higher and faster credit card balance growth—regardless of income level—suggesting that auto debt cascades into broader financial pressure," according to the report. Specifically, "between early 2018 and late 2025, credit card balances for middle-income borrowers with auto debt surged by 31%, while those without auto loans saw a notably lower growth of 17%. Borrowers with extended-length auto loans are carrying monthly balances on their credit cards that are 190% of (that is, nearly twice) their monthly income."
"At the end of 2025, the average origination balance for an auto loan reached $33,519, an amount $10,000 higher than the average in 2018, due to massive increases in the price of even the most basic cars and a shortage of 'affordable' car models," the publication explains. "Borrowers are also facing higher interest rates. Today, the average annual percentage rate (APR) for auto loans is nearly 10%, up from 7.5% in 2018."
Financially vulnerable borrowers are being hit particularly hard by current conditions. The researchers found that for those with the most limited access to credit, "the average APR is up to 18.7%, which means a six-year loan on a $30,000 car will cost $20,000 in interest alone. Furthermore, Black, Hispanic, and American Indian and Alaska Native borrowers face higher interest rates than their white and Asian counterparts."
NEW from @cnbc.com: Auto debt is crushing families. Our new report with @borrowerjustice.bsky.social shows that 86 million Americans owe a staggering $1.68 trillion in auto loan debt, with auto debt now reaching the highest level ever recorded. www.cnbc.com/2026/05/06/c...
[image or embed]
— The Century Foundation (@tcfdotorg.bsky.social) May 6, 2026 at 10:24 AM
Affordable vehicles are also harder to find these days. Sean Tucker, a managing editor at Kelley Blue Book, told CNBC that "in 2017, [automakers] built 36 models priced at $25,000 or under... Today? Four."
Tucker said that a "record" share of new cars—over 43%—are now bought by households with incomes of at least $150,000. According to him, "Automakers are serving that market."
Angela Hanks, another report co-author and chief of policy programs at The Century Foundation, stressed that "for the overwhelming majority of working families, a car is a necessity—yet purchasing a car has become a financial trap, eating up more of people's paychecks than ever before."
With so many US communities lacking quality public transit, some US families in need of a vehicle turn to loans with longer terms. The report points out that "for these borrowers, even after taking on these riskier products with additional lifetime costs, auto loan payments are still nearly 20% of their monthly income, meaning nearly $1 out of every $5 they earn will go toward car payments over the seven years of their loan."
Hanks highlighted that "while families drown" from costly, extended-term loans, "the Trump administration is refunding big businesses for the tariffs that consumers paid, with interest."
The Trump administration last month launched a portal designed to facilitate refunds for around $166 billion in tariffs that the US Supreme Court struck down as unconstitutional, but only businesses that directly paid the import taxes are eligible, even though companies largely passed on the cost hikes to consumers.
Meanwhile, the president responded to the high court's decision by imposing temporary import taxes, and his administration is pursuing "plan B," holding hearings required to impose tariffs under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, a different legal authority than the one Trump used last year.
The new report concludes by calling on US policymakers to act: "Amidst the growing affordability crisis, Americans deserve urgent action to bring down costs and rein in profiteering from the dealers and lenders who have been allowed to get away with nickel-and-diming working families for far too long."
Two Democratic US Senate candidates in closely watched primary races found themselves in rare agreement with a powerful pro-Israel lobby group on Tuesday evening after it warned the two progressives posed "a direct threat to the US-Israel relationship."
"I’m Abdul El-Sayed and I endorse this message," said the physician and public health advocate running in a three-way race in Michigan, where he recently emphasized at a rally that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)—the group that issued the warning to voters—has endangered Jewish Americans by promoting the idea that criticizing the Israeli government is antisemitic.
In Maine, combat veteran and oyster farmer Graham Platner, the presumed winner of the June 9 primary following Gov. Janet Mills' decision to suspend her campaign, said he was also "proud to appear" in AIPAC's fundraising email, "and many AIPAC fundraising emails to come."
In its email to supporters, AIPAC said El-Sayed and Platner are the chosen candidates of a "coordinated, well-funded effort to punish anyone who stands with Israel"—one that's being "driven by the far-left fringe of American politics."
The group added that the movement is being "pushed" by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)—one of the nation's most prominent Jewish political leaders and consistently ranked as the most popular member of the US Senate—and "amplified by voices like Hasan Piker," a Twitch streamer and commentator who has campaigned with El-Sayed.
Piker's involvement in El-Sayed's campaign sparked a weekslong controversy, with the other two Michigan Democrats in the race, AIPAC-backed Rep. Haley Stevens and state Sen. Mallory McMorrow, accusing El-Sayed of associating with someone who's promoted antisemitism and comparing Piker to white nationalist influencer Nick Fuentes. Both El-Sayed and Piker have condemned antisemitism, expressed vehement support for Palestinian rights, and denounced Israel's US-backed attacks on the occupied Palestinian territories.
In its email, AIPAC doubled down on its claims that El-Sayed and Platner are part of an extremist movement that occupies the fringes of American public life, warning that they've embraced "extreme rhetoric, pushed false accusations of genocide, and openly support cutting off aid" to Israel.
But numerous polls in recent months have suggested that Israel's actions since it began attacking Gaza in October 2023 with US military funding—killing more than 72,000 Palestinians, creating the largest child amputee population in the world, and imposing an intentional starvation policy—have resulted in plummeting approval ratings for the country and its right-wing government, without any help from Sanders, Platner, El-Sayed, or Piker.
Months into Israel's war on Gaza, cracks in Israel's popularity among US voters were already beginning to show. In May 2024, a poll by Data for Progress found that 56% of Democratic voters believed Israel was committing genocide in Gaza, and 54% said they supported suspending all US arms sales to Israel until it stopped blocking humanitarian aid.
Public disapproval has only grown more pronounced since then. A Gallup poll showed in February that for the first time, a larger share of Americans sympathized with the Palestinians than with Israel in the Middle East conflict. In March, a survey by Hart Research Associates and Public Opinion Strategies found that just 32% of US voters viewed Israel positively, down from 47% in 2023.
Just before the US helped broker a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas last October—a deal Israel has repeatedly violated, killing hundreds of Palestinians since it was reached—a Washington Post poll found that 61% of Jewish Americans believed Israel had committed war crimes in Gaza and 40% said Israel was guilty of genocide.
At a rally held by Platner and Sanders in September, the political newcomer garnered loud applause when he called for an end to US funding for the Israeli military.
On Tuesday, despite the mounting evidence to the contrary, AIPAC replied to El-Sayed's "endorsement" of its attack by insisting that many voters want to vote for a candidate "who backs a partnership that delivers for Michigan—more jobs, a stronger auto industry, thriving agriculture, and better healthcare."
The Medicare for All advocate retorted that he plans to be "a senator who keeps Michigan tax dollars in Michigan to fund schools, healthcare, and roads... in Michigan."
Recent polls have shown a close race in the state. The most recent survey by the Glengariff Group found Stevens ahead of El-Sayed by just two points, with McMorrow behind six points. A poll by Emerson College, also taken in mid-April, found El-Sayed and McMorrow tied with 24% of the vote, despite the attacks on El-Sayed over his campaigning with Piker.
The Michigan primary is scheduled for August 4.
The US Department of Homeland Security is officially closing its watchdog for immigrant detention abuse, even as reports of excessive force, deadly neglect, and other maltreatment by agency personnel soar under the Trump administration.
Citing an internal email, Huffpost's Dave Jamieson reported Monday that DHS is shutting down its Office of the Immigration Detention Ombudsman (OIDO), which was established by an act of Congress and signed into law by President Donald Trump in 2020 as part the massive federal spending package known as the Consolidated Appropriations Act.
Jamieson added that the communication said that OIDO "is in the process of removing all its public signage and ending its inspection," and that the agency's website was down.
The email attributed OIDO's closure to a lack of federal funding in the Homeland Security appropriations package that ended the recent 76-day shutdown affecting the agency.
Largely pushed through by congressional Democrats, OIDO was designed to be independent from both US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and US Customs and Border Protection. The office was given the power to receive detainee complaints, investigate alleged abuse or misconduct, inspect detention facilities, and report systemic problems to DHS leaders and Congress.
OIDO emerged amid widespread abuse of detained migrants during the first Trump administration, including deaths in custody, family separation, overcrowding, and other mistreatment.
Since returning to office for a second term, Trump has overseen the dismantling of the agency, arguing that it hinders immigration enforcement. The administration's effort to dilute OIDO's power have triggered legal action arguing that, since it was created by Congress, the agency cannot be abolished without congressional consent.
DHS detainees—especially those ICE lockups—report abuses including inadequate or delayed medical care; physical attacks and excessive force; sexual abuse and harassment; solitary confinement misuse; overcrowded and unsanitary conditions; intimidation and retaliation following complaints; abuse of pregnant women and children; denial of access to lawyers; denial of family contact; and denial of food, water, hygiene, or medication.
Last year was the deadliest in ICE detention in about two decades, with more than 30 deaths reported in custody. So far this year, at least 18 more detainees had reportedly died in ICE custody.
18 people have died in ICE detention this year—and the administration is illegally "closing" OIDO, the office that is supposed to monitor detention conditions and help detained people needing medical care or suffering abuse.Its portal, myoido.dhs.gov, is offline.
[image or embed]
— Adam Isacson (@adamisacson.com) May 4, 2026 at 3:19 PM
OIDO isn't the only DHS watchdog under attack by the Trump administration. The Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL) and Office of Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman have also been targeted.
One former CRCL employee who was placed on administrative leave due to funding cuts said in a recent court filing that the agency is unable to conduct “meaningful investigations” into alleged civil rights and civil liberties violations committed by its personnel. As an example, they noted the accusations of excessive force by the ICE agent who fatally shot Minneapolis resident Renee Good last year.
“In my experience, investigations into systemic issues like these required significant staff resources, which CRCL no longer has to devote to these important issues of civil rights and civil liberties,” the official told Federal News Network earlier this year. “Nor does CRCL have the resources to conduct multidisciplinary onsite investigations at detention facilities, the need for which is greater than it has ever been as both the number of detention facilities and number of people detained has skyrocketed."
The Israeli military on Wednesday bombed the suburbs of the Lebanese capital for the first time since a ceasefire agreement was announced in mid-April by US President Donald Trump, whose administration reportedly coordinated with Israel on the latest strike.
"This is a ceasefire in name only," US Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.) wrote in response to the bombing, which Israel said killed a top Hezbollah commander. "Israel needs to adhere to the ceasefire and work in good faith toward a permanent end to the larger war with Iran and Lebanon."
According to the United Nations, at least 380 people have been killed by Israeli strikes on Lebanon since the ceasefire agreement took effect. Trump announced a three-week extension of the ceasefire deal on April 23.
The target of Wednesday's strike on Beirut's southern suburbs "appeared to be a 10-story building in the Haret Hreik neighborhood next to a school," The Washington Post reported, citing satellite imagery and open-source material. "Photos of the aftermath showed half the building leveled and excavator machines digging beneath the rubble."
The Israeli military also bombed the southern Lebanese town of Zelaya on Wednesday, killing at least four people, including two women and an elderly man, Lebanon's Ministry of Health said.
Early Thursday, the Israeli military issued new displacement orders for southern Lebanon, instructing the residents of Deir al-Zahrani, Bafroa, and Habush to leave their homes.
The Wednesday attack on Beirut's suburbs, according to an unnamed Israeli official cited by the country's broadcasting authority, was "carried out in coordination with the US."
"This would be a clear violation of the War Powers Act 8(c)—further strengthening the case for Congress to urgently pass Rep. Rashida Tlaib's (D-Mich.) Lebanon War Powers Resolution," said Erik Sperling, executive director of the US-based advocacy group Just Foreign Policy.
Tlaib unveiled her legislation in late March, demanding the "removal of all US Armed Forces’ participation in unauthorized hostilities in Lebanon, including involvement in targeting assistance and intelligence sharing for the Israeli airstrikes and ground invasion."
"We must act now to stop this campaign of ethnic cleansing," Tlaib said at the time.
US Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.), who co-led the Lebanon resolution with Tlaib, said Wednesday that "the unaccountable, unlawful, inhumane campaign of death and displacement continues."
"The Israeli government continues to drop US-made bombs in Lebanon. More than 2,600 people have died, and over 8,350 people are injured," said Ramirez. "Congress can and must put an end to the violence in the region. We must Block the Bombs and pass the Lebanon War Power Resolution."
"Local hospitals and emergency rooms could shut their doors forever because billionaires insist on paying less than the rest of us," said Emmanuel Saez, the French economist who designed California's wealth tax proposal.
The architect of California's wealth tax proposal called out The Washington Post and its multibillionaire owner, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, on Thursday for peddling what he said is "misinformation" to readers.
Emmanuel Saez, a French economist and professor at the University of California, Berkeley, who was tapped by California's largest union to design the tax proposal, singled out an opinion piece by the Washington Post editorial board from earlier this week that argues the proposal would backfire and cost California billions of dollars in tax revenue each year.
Saez said the article contains glaring falsehoods and omits key information about the proposal, which aims to create a one-time tax of 5% on the total assets of California's roughly 200 billionaire residents in order to recoup about $100 billion in revenue for healthcare, food assistance, and education stripped from the state by last year's Republican federal budget legislation, which will hand $1 trillion in tax breaks to the wealthiest 1% of Americans over the next 10 years.
The piece, published on Monday with the headline "California already losing with billionaire tax referendum," argues that even if California voters don't ultimately approve the measure, "the specter of such a wealth tax has already cost the state more in lost future revenue from income taxes than it would raise" due to an exodus of wealthy people from the state—an oft-used but weakly substantiated talking point by opponents of the measure.
The Post cited a paper by Jared Walczak, a visiting fellow at the California Tax Foundation, which it said demonstrates that billionaire flight "will cost California’s state government somewhere between $3.5 billion and $4.5 billion every year in other tax collections, and up to $19 billion in lost [gross domestic product]."
But Saez argued that his study makes a "basic mistake" by "modeling a mobility response of billionaires to a permanent annual and recurrent 5% wealth tax." In reality, though, the tax would be imposed only once and would apply to any billionaires who resided in the state after January 1, 2026, which has already passed, so it no longer creates an incentive to move.
Saez argued that in any case, "Walczak’s estimation of the California income tax paid by billionaires who have threatened to leave is also wildly exaggerated."
Walczak's figure for lost tax revenue, he said, hinges on the idea that the three richest men who've threatened to leave the state, Google co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page, and Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, pay $1.7 billion in California income taxes each year.
"If only they paid so much!" Saez quipped.
"In reality, using Securities and Exchange Commission data on stock sales, stock donations, dividends, and executive compensation, we can directly estimate that they paid only [$269 million] in California income tax in 2025, 6.3 times less than Walczak’s assumption," he said, citing a paper he co-wrote in March responding to a similar argument by a conservative think tank.
He cited tax data showing that the tech tycoons—who own a combined $810 billion according to Forbes—only collectively paid about [$22 million] per year on average between 2019-25, with Brin and Page paying no taxes on their wealth from stock in Google's parent company Alphabet during three of those years because they didn't sell stock, get dividends, or receive executive compensation. This is despite 90% of their wealth coming from those holdings.
"The one-time wealth tax finally makes them contribute in proportion to their enormous wealth gains," Saez said.
The Post also claimed that the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) United Healthcare Workers West, the union leading the charge in support of the referendum, is "pretend[ing] that the tax is needed to save California’s health system from 'collapse'" and is instead dishonestly using that framing to covertly pursue the "redistribution of wealth."
But Saez said that the federal cuts of roughly $20 billion annually are already having devastating effects on Californians that could be alleviated with more tax revenue.
As a result of the cuts, "more than 400 California hospitals have already laid off more than 3,400 healthcare workers as of mid-March, with a second wave of layoffs expected as funding cuts tied to recent federal policy changes are phased in over the next several years," he said. "Statewide, projections show the cuts could result in the loss of up to 145,000 healthcare jobs, impacting hospitals, clinics, and home care providers alike."
Eighty-three more hospitals in California may be at risk of closing due to the federal funding cuts, according to a recent nationwide analysis by Public Citizen. But Saez said the billionaire's tax would go a long way toward closing the gap.
"Right now, California’s billionaires pay much lower tax rates than what working families pay out of every paycheck," Saez said.
Despite claims otherwise by the Post editorial board—which last month ran another piece arguing that due to progressive taxation, "the rich already pay more than their fair share"—according to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, at all levels of government from 2018-20, billionaires paid just 24% of their total income in taxes, while the US-wide average was 30%. This disparity arises largely due to loopholes that allow the rich to avoid taxes on business and investment gains that are not sold.
"Local hospitals and emergency rooms could shut their doors forever because billionaires insist on paying less than the rest of us," Saez said.
Debru Carthan, the executive vice president of SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West, said it was not surprising that the Post "completely ignores that the billionaire tax would keep hospitals from closing and healthcare costs from skyrocketing for millions of Californians" because it is "a crisis that comes as a direct result of the tax breaks handed out to Jeff Bezos and his buddies."
Since the return of Donald Trump to the presidency, the Amazon founder has taken a much heavier hand over the content of his flagship paper, including its opinion section, which he last year mandated to exclusively publish pieces on economics that promote “personal liberties and free markets," leading to the resignation of opinion editor David Shipley.
But Saez marveled at how blatant Bezos' thumb on the scale has appeared in his paper's coverage of California's billionaire wealth tax and similar proposals, which it has denounced on several other occasions.
“Are readers meant to take this seriously?" Saez asked. "‘Board of billionaire-owned paper comes out against tax on billionaires’? Everyone knows this board makes political decisions at the behest of Jeff Bezos, but this one is the most transparent of them all."
"Saying so privately to some big donors is very different than publicly calling for transparency from the DNC, which is badly needed," said Norman Solomon of RootsAction, which has led calls for the release.
Even former Vice President Kamala Harris reportedly "has no problem with a public airing" of the Democratic National Committee's internal "autopsy" report on her 2024 loss to Republican President Donald Trump—which the DNC has continued to conceal, despite mounting demands for transparency.
Harris' position was reported Thursday by NBC News, which noted that "while she indicated to donors that she had no issue with releasing it, Harris has not discussed the postmortem with DNC Chairman Ken Martin and did not know about his decision to keep it under wraps until it happened."
NBC cited "a person who has heard the conversations," one of multiple sources journalists Jonathan Allen and Natasha Korecki spoke with for their broader report exploring "turmoil over the Democratic Party’s future" and Harris' consideration of a 2028 run.
For months, Martin has resisted pressure to release the autopsy—which, as Axios revealed in February, found that the Biden administration's support for Israel's genocidal assault on Palestinians in the Gaza Strip contributed to Harris' defeat.
Citing a "person close to Harris," NBC also reported Thursday that the former VP "is signaling privately that she has more to say about the Middle East now that she is freed from the Biden White House policy," and "she is likely to do so after the midterm elections," either "from the perspective of a party elder or from the perspective of a candidate seeking votes."
While touring the country for the book she wrote after her loss, Harris has publicly acknowledged that she is weighing another White House run. Though the 2028 election is two and a half years away, she has led early polling. However, the party's potential primary field is incredibly crowded, featuring dozens of current or former governors and members of Congress.
Potential contenders include governors from the Trump 2.0 era—such as Gavin Newsom of California, JB Pritzker of Illinois, Andy Beshear of Kentucky, and Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan—as well as leading progressive voices in Congress, such as Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY).
Norman Solomon, national director of RootsAction, which has spearheaded calls for publishing the full postmortem, wrote in a recent opinion piece for Common Dreams that "Martin's concealment of the autopsy report puts a thumb on the scale for one candidate: Kamala Harris."
Solomon highlighted the DNC's reported conclusion about the role of the Gaza genocide in the election result, and suggested that "renewed attention to the Harris 2024 finances would also be unwelcome."
In response to Harris' reported remarks to donors, Solomon said Thursday that "more than four months have passed since Martin announced he was reneging on his promise to release the autopsy.
"But Harris still hasn't made any public statement that she believes it should be released," he added. "Saying so privately to some big donors is very different than publicly calling for transparency from the DNC, which is badly needed."
"Although the FCC has the authority to ensure broadcasters operate in the public interest, it cannot serve as President Trump’s roving censor."
A group of Senate Democrats on Thursday told Federal Communications Chairman Brendan Carr to back off his threats to strip Disney-owned TV network ABC of its broadcast licenses.
In a letter addressed to Carr, the Democrats took Carr to task for ordering Disney to file early license renewals for eight ABC stations shortly after President Donald Trump demanded that the network fire late-night host Jimmy Kimmel.
Kimmel earned Trump's ire when he jokingly likened first lady Melania Trump to an "expectant widow" days before a gunman stormed into the White House Correspondents' Dinner in an alleged attempt to assassinate the president.
The senators called Carr's order an "extraordinary abuse of power" and "the latest and most extreme step in your use of the FCC’s licensing authority as a cudgel against broadcasters whose editorial choices displease the president."
The Democrats charged that the order "appears to penalize Disney for refusing to capitulate to Trump’s demands to fire Kimmel and to send a message to other broadcasters: Modify your speech to favor Trump or face the FCC’s wrath," while noting that the order was the first time in over 50 years that the commission had called on a broadcaster to apply for early renewal.
The day before the order to Disney, the FCC sent a similar order to a small station license holder called Bridge News.
Carr's order to Disney was also part of a broad pattern of Trump administration assaults on the free press, including calls to fire Kimmel last year after the comedian said Trump and his political allies were trying “to score political points" after the assassination of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk.
"Although the FCC has the authority to ensure broadcasters operate in the public interest," they wrote, "it cannot serve as President Trump’s roving censor, threatening to revoke licenses against broadcasters whose editorial content—including a comedian’s jokes—displeases the president."
The Democrats concluded their letter by asking Carr to provide information about the timing and process by which the FCC decided to send Disney its early renewal order, including whether any FCC staff had communicated with the White House about the order before it was issued.
The letter was signed by Sens. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Maria Cantwell (D-NM), Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Elizabethe Warren (D-Mass.).