Opinion
Climate
Economy
Politics
Rights & Justice
War & Peace
Trump posted AI image of him and Washington in his ballroom
Further

Be Quiet, Be Quiet: We Are All On the Decoy Plane Now

Not to alarm, but everything in America - our economy, military, education, environment, health, moral fiber - is being decimated by a petty, fragile, flailing child in a fact-free bubble who just turned our foreign policy over to North Korea because its dictator "has always been nice to me." Otherwise, he's grifting, lying, babbling, losing wars, slathering gold, raving about his vanity projects - "If you're grass, you're very happy" - and going on AI slop sprees with George Washington, spinning in his grave.

This week, the war in Iran sank deeper into the quagmire it was always doomed to be when the 60-day negotiating period expired with little public comment. Trump shrugged off the lack of new talks because "the situation is so good," then threatened the "MOST CRUSHING ECONOMIC OPERATION EVER TAKEN" against Iran, which said it's working with Oman to monitor shipping through Hormuz Strait, which prompted Trump to threaten to "bomb the shit out of Oman," even though it's supposedly mediating on Iran. Having announced that after "we finish defeating Iran" he wanted to declare the Strait "a territory of the U.S," Trump went online and did just that with his magic Sharpie; Iran, in turn, vowed to "correct the delusions of this delusional individual," and who could blame them. Whiplash City.

At home, alas, America will likely continue getting dumber thanks to the moronic regime deleting or altering nearly 400 federal datasets - tracking police misconduct, violence against children, pollution - to wipe out facts they don't like. Of online data released last week from over 60 agencies - environment, education, labor, law enforcement - by far the largest slice is health information, much on substance abuse, mental health, infectious disease, queer and trans people in keeping with the surreal executive order “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government." Entirely logically, experts decry the destruction - Facts: who needs 'em? - arguing once these cretins crawl back to their caves "we are not going to have the information we need...We’re erasing our institutional memory for public health.”

Speaking of: Just in time for fall, we have "Bobby Jr's Back to School Special: Free Measles!" The folks who won't give out free lunch are instead giving us over a quarter of a million kids entering kindergarten susceptible to measles, which has hit a 36-year high along with an all-time high of vaccine exemptions after rules were loosened - a vax rate so low health experts say it cannot provide herd protection. Just to keep us on our toes, polio, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis and chickenpox vax rates are also down, good news for a regime whose only strong point is spreading preventable disease. Dems wrote a letter urging Trump to halt substituting “anti-vaccine ideology for decades of scientific evidence”; good luck to them and us on what besieged health officials deem ongoing "chaos and confusion in vaccination recommendation systems."

Meanwhile, as Americans struggle to afford food, gas, health care - 8 million have lost coverage - the mad king is insisting his "REAL Polling Numbers (are) the best they have ever been" - ie: low 20s for Independents, 13% for Black voters, down 27 points for his Latino voters as Dems flip 30 state seats, including where Mar-a-Lago is - and covering everything in gold. Like, everything. One sage: "His super power is the ability to ruin shit you didn’t even know existed." He's spent up to $900 million on vanity pr0jects and $200 million to turn the White House into a brothel-like, gimcrack-packed "Middle Eastern bazaar crossed with an opulent Cracker Barrel" - complete with gold Trump coin glued to the Oval Office door - in a lavish, tacky, Let-Them-Eat-Gold-or-at-least-Home-Depot-plastic-appliques shopping junket with (obviously) our money.

He's ordered a "golden fleet" of 15 new "Trump-class" nuclear-powered warships estimated to cost about $275 billion, though he's said he'd rather get 25 ships for $455 billion. He announced the White House was buying 250 giant new Cadillac Escalade SUVs - retail price $90,000 each, over $300,000 for armored version - because, "That’s how we look sharp in those cavalcades." Last month, he spent over $5 million to gaudily gild two 19-foot, 80,000-pound equestrian statues, Arts of War and Arts of Peace, in 23.75-karat gold leaf (though they're bronze and should have been polished), rendering them like "very, very gold" oversized children's trophies next to the austere Lincoln Memorial. "We made them the way they were plus," he moronically bragged, "and everyone’s so proud." We wonder: Is "everyone" in the room with us?

As the national debt just hit $40 trillion for the first time - it took nearly 200 years for it to reach $1 trillion in 1981- Trump remains fixated on his feckin' $600 million ballroom - oops, sorry: "military complex" - that no one asked for. After a court blocked construction, he called the National Trust for Historic Preservation, who successfully brought the suit to stop it, “TREASONISTS” who are threatening national security and exposing "top secret military features.” More weirdly, the guy supposedly worried about "national security" just imploded seven decades of careful diplomacy with South Korea - and a 1950s mutual defense treaty the State Department calls "the linchpin for security and stability in the Indo-Pacific” - to punish a longtime democratic ally for declining to join his Iran debacle and instead appease a nuclear-armed dictator.

His abrupt move Sunday night to “substantially reduce” joint exercises with South Korea, hours before 18,000 South Korean troops and thousands of Americans were set to kick off their annual Ulchi Freedom Shield drills, was widely panned as "an unforced error" and "another inane, haphazard decision (by) a chaotic administration" - one made, as usual, not jointly with Congress but unilaterally, on social media, based on wildly false, revisionist history. His "reasons": The drills are "costly" (see statues, ballroom, mountain of gold crap), they send a signal that's "inappropriate and hostile" toward a regime that's "unthreatening," and “Kim Jong Un has always treated me with great respect...I understand him, and he understands me." In other words, he is Sally Fields at the 1985 Oscars: "You like me!"

Never mind his "unthreatening" North Korea has weapons that reach the US; they're shipping weapons to Putin's forces in Ukraine; and Thursday they shrugged off Trump's paltry olive branch by launching a barrage of missiles, dismissing the "recent measure (of) so-called good faith," and denying Trump's claim his bestie had reached out. Sen. Tim Kaine: "North Korea tests ballistic missiles and Trump decides the problem is with...our ally, South Korea." These are also the guys who killed Otto Warmbler, a 21-year-old U.S. student on a 2016 tour charged with a "hostile act against the state" after allegedly stealing a hotel poster. He was put away after a show trial; when the U.S. got him released 17 months later, he came home blind, deaf, vegetative, howling, with catastrophic brain damage and signs of torture. He died six days later. But sure, Trump and Kim Jong Un "get along GREAT!"

Along with America’s rebuff of ally South Korea, the Pentagon just chose to relieve the beleaguered USS Lincoln with the USS Washington, the Navy’s only aircraft carrier in the Asia Pacific. The move leaves no U.S. presence there for the first time since 1944, “vaporizing” U.S. influence in the region and marking “the end of an era” - maybe just as well, given the Navy’s belated admission that last month U.S. destroyer USS Benfold lost power and ran adrift in the South China Sea for four days with no food, water, AC or toilets. Heckuva job, Pete. No wonder the rude mad king lost it Monday when CNN reporter Kristen Holmes did her job and challenged him on the wisdom of said “policies.” "What I'm doing is making things safer," he snarled. Admirably, she persisted. "Quiet! You're very disrespectful, you're a loud boisterous person," he snapped. "Be quiet. Be quiet. Be quiet."

The rancor didn't end there. Holmes also dared to ask about a now-viral speech by Sen. Jon Ossoff, who noted the "crook president" doesn't want "to do the job." Instead, "he wants to build his ballroom and travel with Natalie on their apparently defenseless flying palace gifted by the emir of Qatar" - a brief, incendiary reference to "weird stalker-slash-diaper-nurse" Natalie Harp, who Trump calls "sweetie." Trump brushed off Holmes' question with the always bizarre tactic of a grotesquerie tossing puerile insults at better-looking people: Ossoff is "a Pee-wee Herman look-alike." Still, the fragment of discomfiting reality - Ossoff: “Apparently, in the White House, the truth hurts” - in a 30-minute speech sparked a telling torrent of fury from MAGA cultists unaccustomed to hearing it. As a result - and 'cause they're dumb - the meltdown was laughable.

The White House declared Ossoff “the biggest cuck loser in politics,” a “feminine theater kid,” a “lightweight.” They also went for Holmes, “a disgraceful, humiliating embarrassment." “These scumbags are the lowest of the low,” they said. “Someday, your children will come across your disgusting and inhumane question. They will be sickened and embarrassed.” (Cue lowest of the low.) Many others chimed in. Ossoff is “a mean-spirited jerk who traffics in slander,” “Who does this and holds their head high? This guy should be ashamed.” Hilariously, some ran with the news the quiet, studious Ossoff, known “for keeping his head down and doing the work,” spent $2,887 on make-up and prep for TV appearances. Laura Ingraham: "Beneath that pancake bronzer and rouge, we have an ambitious man, (the) most dangerous type of politician." America: "Fox ridiculing men who wear makeup is really something to behold."

Amidst the eruptions, Trump took to Truth Social, his tawdry security blanket, in a weekend spree of over 40 posts in six hours, most of it AI slopaganda. No more hiding in catering trucks: Here he is triumphant, a svelte Elvis - "President Trump ages in reverse!” - building a “WALL OF STEEL" around Iran's ports in a made-for-TV movie war where, in Nazi typeface, “We are going to win.” Also beware Elizabeth "Pocohontas" Warren, Abdul El-Sayed, and women in hijab who "are coming for your home and your belongings!" Enamored of George Washington, he saves him at Mt. Rushmore, splits a portrait with him, rides beside him on horseback (the bad guy on a black horse) and, before two huge American flags with the wrong number of stripes, consults him - shrunk shorter than Trump 'cause petty is as petty does - on his feckin' ballroom: "Thank you, George, for some of your brilliant ideas." Consensus: "Psychotic stuff."

Dean Blundell cites the screaming dissonance of Trump’s infatuation with a leader of grace and integrity who over time “refused a crown, a palace, a third term, power itself” as he “diligently sought the public welfare.” In He’s No Washington, Blundell helpfully offers “the most humiliating side-by-side in American history.” With no fancy education, Washington had and read one key book of philosophy: A 1702 translation of Seneca’s Morals. Its chapter headings became the moral axioms Washington followed through "a lifetime of deliberate self-discipline," starting at 14 when he copied “110 Rules of Civility” into a notebook "and spent the next 50 years living them." A man who could "command a room by saying less" but naturally "most tremendous in his wrath,“ Washington's composure was "a construction project...He was a volcano that decided, every single day, not to erupt."

Blundell describes ”the moral weight of a man who asked nothing for himself.” When he took office, the Senate debated for weeks what to call him - “His Highness the President of the United States," "His High Mightiness“ - but he chose the unfussy ”Mr. President." Same with his residence; the original plan was a European-style palace four times bigger. He twice gave up power at the height of his own, for which King George called him "the greatest man in the world.” His favorite piece of writing was a play about the Roman Stoic senator Cato, who chose death over submission to Julius Caesar’s tyranny. With his army barefoot and freezing at Valley Forge, he had Cato performed for them "to remember what they were freezing for." In his farewell address, he warned of demagogues who would "ride public rage to power." He understood that in America, "the office was supposed to be bigger than the man. Power was never the prize. Character was the prize." Blundell: "Compare and weep."

Wednesday, the “visibly incoherent” current president, laser-focused on our most vital issues, led the press on a giddy tour of the work he’s ordered on the White House grounds in a scene like “a lost episode of the 1980s Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous.” He bragged about the driveway’s “flawless granite,” autographed the ornate helipad “he insists he needs” - “It’s very strong stone, it will never break, it will never do— it’s rated million-year plus” - claimed the "military complex will have a drone-proof uh roof, and you’re gonna have on top of the roof, many drones,” and for perhaps the 10th time intoned “grass has a life like humans”: "We put brand new earth on top, so if you’re grass, you’re very happy.” America: "Hey Ma, Grandpa is in the front yard again yelling at people," "What an incredible babbling idiot," "A million years - that's how long his presidency has felt," and, "Fix the country you broke, asshole." Trump moved on to his new flagpoles. "This is a great pole," he said. "I'm very good at flagpoles."

- YouTube www.youtube.com

SEE ALL
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito testifies before Congress
News

'Shamelessly Corrupt': Recusal From Climate Cases Demanded After Alito's Fossil Fuel Profits Exposed

Calls for US Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito to recuse himself from a major climate case mounted Tuesday after an analysis found that he made as much as $2.9 from oil and gas stocks from roughly the time he joined the nation's highest court in 2005 through 2024.

The analysis by judicial watchdog Court Accountability, reviewed exclusively by The Guardian, found that Alito earned between around $390,000 and $2.9 million from fossil fuel interests during his tenure as a justice.

"Between 2005 and 2024, Alito’s assets—not including his personal residence or other personal property not required to be reported on his financial disclosure—grew from a nominal value of $1.1 million to a value somewhere between $3.4 million and $8.4 million," the analysis states.

"Importantly, much of the Alitos’ oil- and gas-related wealth in this estimate comes from a single asset: a Grady County, Oklahoma property in which Martha-Ann Alito holds a 'mineral interest,'" the publication notes, referring to the right-wing justice's wife. It adds that "divergent values" on his financial disclosures apparently "indicate that Alito has significantly understated the value of the Grady County property."

These revelations come just weeks before the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear Suncor Energy (USA) Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County, a potentially consequential case over whether federal law bars state and local governments from holding fossil fuel companies accountable for climate-related harms.

Progressive watchdogs say Alito's participation presents an obvious appearance of conflict—even though the justice does not currently own shares of either ExxonMobil or Suncor, the companies directly involved in the case. His disclosures show realized gains of between $105,004 and $216,000 from shares of ExxonMobil he owned and sold, and no previous ownership of Suncor shares. The records also show Alito has invested in around a dozen fossil fuel industry companies during his Supreme Court tenure.

“His impartiality may be reasonably questioned in terms of his affinity towards the industry that has helped build his nest egg,” Lisa Graves, co-founder of the judicial ethics watchdog Court Accountability, told The Guardian's Dharna Noor.

“A reasonable person would think if you’re invested in the industry that could benefit from the outcome of a lawsuit, then you could personally stand to benefit from the outcome, even if you don’t hold the stock in the specific company that happens to be the named plaintiff," Graves added.

“His impartiality may be reasonably questioned in terms of his affinity towards the industry that has helped build his nest egg."

Alito has repeatedly ruled in favor of the fossil fuel companies. He also recused himself in this year's Chevron USA v. Plaquemines Parish due to his stock in ConocoPhillips, one of whose subsidiaries is involved in the case.

Court Accountability and other groups recently called on the US Senate to investigate "Alito’s inconsistent history of recusals from cases from which he should be compelled to recuse under long-standing federal law, given his substantial holdings in individual oil and gas companies and other personal ties."

"His irregular recusal practice in oil and gas industry-related cases is undermining public confidence in the impartiality of the court," the groups warned in a May letter to Senate leaders. "They could not occur were he compelled to adhere to enforceable ethics standards against adjudicating cases where he has financial interests or the appearance of a conflict of interest where his impartiality might reasonably be questioned."

Alito has also come under fire for his relationship with Leonard Leo, a key architect of the conservative judicial movement who helped arrange a 2008 Alaska fishing trip for Alito involving billionaire donor Paul Singer, who later had business before the court. Alito did not disclose the private jet travel.

In 2023, the Supreme Court unveiled a code of conduct that was derided by the watchdog group Revolving Door Project (RDP) as a "toothless PR stunt."

“This unenforceable public relations document serves absolutely no purpose other than to permit the media to revert to pretending that our unaccountable and unethical Supreme Court retains legitimacy,” RDP founder and executive director Jeff Hauser said at the time.

SEE ALL
Republican Tax Bill Protest in Los Angeles
News

As Americans Struggled to Buy Basics, These 6 Companies Got $83 Billion in Tax Breaks Last Year

As with the GOP's 2017 tax legislation, experts warned that big businesses and ultrarich individuals would benefit from President Donald Trump signing the One Big Beautiful Bill Act last year, while everyday Americans would suffer, and a Monday analysis identifies some of the companies now paying billions of dollars less in taxes.

The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) "has tracked $204 billion in federal tax breaks disclosed by publicly traded US companies so far for 2025," the report says. "But those benefits were not spread evenly across the corporate sector: Six companies alone accounted for $83 billion of them."

The publication points out that "the stunning size of the federal income tax breaks corporations claimed this year dwarfs past corporate tax breaks, themselves sizeable. Microsoft received $18.7 billion in federal income tax breaks, a record high for single-year federal tax breaks for one publicly traded company. Alphabet claimed a staggering $18.4 billion, and Amazon walked away with $17.4 billion in tax breaks. Meta received $13.7 billion, JPMorgan Chase received $8.3 billion, and Nvidia received $6.8 billion."

To put that $83 billion into context, the report highlights that it "represents nearly 18%, or almost $1 out of ever $5, of total federal corporation tax collections according to the Congressional Budget Office." It also "exceeds the entire annual discretionary budget of the US Department of Education," which Trump is notably aiming to eliminate as part of a broader mission to gut the federal government in his second term.

"This is an extraordinary concentration of tax benefits among some of the biggest and most profitable companies in the world," report co-author and ITEP senior fellow Matthew Gardner said in a statement. "When six companies can collect tax breaks equal to nearly one-fifth of what the federal government raises from the corporate income tax altogether, policymakers should be asking whether these provisions are serving the public interest or simply rewarding companies that are already enormously profitable and politically influential."

Gardner and his co-author, ITEP intern Sarah Buttikofer, emphasized that the top four firms featured in their analysis are tech giants: "Microsoft, Alphabet, Amazon, and Meta collectively received $68 billion in federal income tax breaks—which represents roughly 33% of the overall total."

"These figures show what Americans intuitively know: Corporate profits and economic power are increasingly concentrated among a relatively small number of extremely large companies," the pair wrote. "The presence of half a dozen tech CEOs at Donald Trump's January 2025 inauguration was a stark reminder that the economic leverage these companies are gaining is being translated into political power as well. That makes the tax treatment of these companies especially important."

Amazon founder Jeff Bezos and Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg were among the Big Tech executives with prime seating at the inauguration. There was also the world's richest man, Elon Musk, who went on to help Trump rip apart the federal workforce as the de facto leader of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency.

To put these enormous tax breaks in context, the largest single-year tax break we've documented for any corporation before 2025 was J.P. Morgan’s $5.2 billion haul in 2024.itep.org/six-companie...

[image or embed]
— ITEP (@itep.org) August 14, 2026 at 12:18 PM

Musk leads various businesses, including Tesla, which was among 88 companies that paid no federal income tax last year, despite making almost $5.7 billion, according to an April analysis from ITEP. The others range from airlines and banks to energy, entertainment, and tech companies, such as Citigroup, Edison International, Palantir, United, and Walt Disney.

Meanwhile, near the end of last year, as Trump dismissed affordability concerns, an Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll found that only 31% of voters approved of Trump's handling of the economy, the survey's lowest figure for his two terms.

Then, a January analysis by Democrats on the Joint Economic Committee revealed that the average American family paid $1,625 in higher costs last year as his policies drove up prices.

That was followed by a February warning from the Economic Policy Institute that Trump's economic agenda "will make ordinary families reliably poorer in the future." EPI's chief economist, Josh Bivens, pointed to the president's anti-labor policies, cuts to federal spending and jobs, mass deportation efforts, and tariffs—as well as the OBBBA, which gave tax breaks to the rich while stripping healthcare and food assistance from Americans in need.

With the US now enduring the consequences of Trump's war of choice on Iran, inflation remains high. Americans are struggling with the cost of gasoline, groceries, healthcare, housing, and more. After the latest figures were released last week, Alex Jacquez, a former Obama administration official who is now senior vice president of policy and advocacy at Groundwork Collaborative, said that "prices started climbing again in July, and Trump's catastrophic mismanagement of our economy means more spikes in the months ahead."

SEE ALL
Candidate Aisha Wahab Gathers With Supporters On Night Of Special Election To Replace Eric Swalwell
News

California Voters Prefer 'Progressives' and 'Democratic Socialists' to 'Mainstream Democrats': Poll

A new poll in California may offer a window into the national struggle to define the Democratic Party. In a state that’s often thought of as the capital of blue America, voters are now more likely to say they’re turned off by candidates who align themselves with the Democratic Party.

But that’s not because they’re moving right. The survey, published Wednesday by the Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies, found that voters are “more inclined” to vote for a candidate who identifies as a “progressive” or a “democratic socialist,” compared with those who call themselves “mainstream Democrats.”

Identifying as any sort of Republican, "MAGA" or otherwise, made voters say they were overwhelmingly "less inclined" to give their support.

(Poll by the Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies)

That California voters lean left of the country at large is hardly shocking news, but the poll does provide yet another striking data point in the broader trend of Democratic voters revolting against the establishment of their own party, which has culminated in a surge of left victories nationwide.

Among self-identified Democratic voters in the state, just 48% said they would be "more inclined" to vote for someone who self-identifies with the mainstream of the party, compared with 58% who said they were inclined to vote for a "democratic socialist" and 60% who said they were inclined to vote for a "progressive."

What precisely these terms mean is not defined by the pollster, and in mainstream discourse, "progressives" like Michigan's Democratic Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed and "democratic socialists" like New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani are often spoken of in the same breath, largely because their platforms overlap significantly and both defeated better-funded Democratic opponents with greater institutional backing.

Whatever term is used to describe such candidates, pundits in establishment-friendly media have struggled to make sense of their recent wins.

But Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)—a long-time critic of corporate influence over the US political system who ran for president in 2016 and 2020 and is arguably more responsible than any other single figure for kicking off this shift in the Democratic electorate—wrote in an op-ed for The Guardian on Wednesday that the reason behind it “is not complicated.”

"We now have more income and wealth inequality than at any time in American history. The top 1% now own more wealth than the bottom 93%, and one man, Elon Musk, owns more wealth than the bottom 50% of US households," he wrote. "Not surprisingly, working families are tired of status quo politics and the same old, same old establishment policies that have failed them for years. They want change, real change—and are supporting progressive candidates who are fighting for that change."

That is why, he argues, candidates who have run on campaign finance reform, establishing a single-payer healthcare system, stronger union protections, higher taxes on the rich, and an end to aggressive foreign interventions in countries like Iran and military support for Israel are seeing success.

In November, progressives like El-Sayed, as well as Minnesota Senate candidate Peggy Flanagan, Florida Senate candidate Angie Nixon, Michigan House candidate William Lawrence, Pennsylvania House candidate Bob Brooks, and others, will try to prove that their politics can win in competitive races against Republicans. So will Randy Villegas, who is aiming to unseat Republican Rep. David Valadao in California's 22nd district.

But California's "jungle primary" system, which lets the top two candidates across all parties face off in the general election, will continue for the next several months to be a front in the Democratic Party's internal war.

One closely watched race is in California’s 14th District, near Oakland, where a special election for the seat vacated by the disgraced former Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell has come down to the wire between the progressive state Sen. Aisha Wahab (D-10) and the centrist-leaning transportation official Melissa Hernandez (D).

The two are starkly divided on Israel; while Wahab has called its actions in Gaza" genocide" and called for an end to weapons aid, Hernandez has been noncommittal.

Wahab has also taken stronger stances against corporate abuses and US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and called for significant police reforms, while Hernandez has run on public safety and business-friendly policies.

After steamrolling her opponents in the June primary, with a 25-point lead over Hernandez, Wahab was hit with a $6.3 million spending blitz from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) in the months leading up to this past Tuesday's general election. As of Thursday, the race is too close to call, with Wahab ahead by just over 1,300 votes as 62% of ballots have been counted.

Whoever wins this race will hold the seat for the remainder of Swalwell's term. But the two will face each other again in November with new district lines approved by voters last year as part of a Democratic redistricting effort.

In the 7th district, Sacramento City Council member Mai Vang (D), who was endorsed by the Democratic Socialists of America, unexpectedly finished with more votes in the June primary than 11-term Democratic Rep. Doris Matsui.

The 40-year-old Vang outflanked Matsui, who is more than twice her age, on the left by aggressively championing the abolition of ICE, Medicare for All, and a wealth tax proposal by Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.). The two will face off again one-on-one in November's runoff.

The mayor's race in Los Angeles, between incumbent Karen Bass and democratic socialist City Council member Nithya Raman, will be another test for the left.

Bass, a former member of Congress, has strong institutional support from the Democratic Party, including endorsements from former Vice President Kamala Harris and California Gov. Gavin Newsom.

Raman is challenging her less on ideological grounds and more on the question of competent governance, seeking to overhaul the city's homelessness bureaucracy and construct more affordable housing. She has also pushed back against Bass' call to hire more police officers and advocated instead for investing in more unarmed civilian first responders.

SEE ALL
'Should Never Have Been an Option': Palestine Action Activists Won’t Be Sentenced as Terrorists
News

'Should Never Have Been an Option': Palestine Action Activists Won’t Be Sentenced as Terrorists

Five Palestine Action activists who were convicted in June of vandalizing a Barclays bank in the UK will not be sentenced as terrorists.

As reported by Al Jazeera on Friday, Judge Robert Altham determined that the five defendants—Brendon O’Hagan, 28; Amanda Kelly, 31; Hmeera Atiqnisar, 31; Mohammed Malik, 28; and Alma Yaniv, 70—did not commit crimes that rose to the level of terrorism.

Instead, the judge said, they will be sentenced in September for criminal damage to the bank, which will carry significantly shorter prison sentences compared to a terrorism sentencing.

According to The Guardian, attorneys representing the defendants argued that their clients' Palestine Action membership should not influence a decision to sentence them on terrorism because the group wasn't proscribed as a terrorist organization until long after the vandalism took place.

The five activists were found guilty two months ago of causing damage exceeding £200,000 to the Barclays bank in Burnley, Lancashire in August 2024. Palestine Action activists across the UK targeted Barclays branches due to its investments in Elbit Systems, and Israeli defense technology firm.

The activists issued a joint statement after the ruling saying they were "extremely relieved" by the outcome, while emphasizing that a terrorism sentence should never have been under consideration.

"This should never have been an option,” they said. "We were on trial for charges of criminal damage, for damaging some windows and spraying red paint on a Barclays branch. At no point during the trial were we, or the jury, informed that, if convicted, we could face being sentenced as terrorists."

Supporters of the activists erupted in cheers outside the court after hearing the news. Dove Malik, mother of defendant Mohammed Malik, expressed relief in an interview with Al Jazeera.

"It’s a victory for us," said Malik, "it’s a victory for Palestine, it’s a victory for protesting."

SEE ALL
Flooding hits displaced Palestiniansâ tents after heavy rain in Gaza
News

94% of Palestinians in Gaza Need Shelter, Basic Aid to 'Live Safely and With Dignity'

It's been 10 months since a ceasefire agreement was reached between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, but in addition to continued attacks on the exclave—in which more than 1,250 Palestinians have been killed since last October—households across Gaza are being endangered on a constant basis by "a shelter crisis which runs far deeper than just physical damage" to residential buildings, as the Norwegian Refugee Council said Thursday.

Ninety-four percent of the population—about 1.98 million people—are in need of shelter-related aid in order to "live safely and with dignity," said the group, "including fuel, energy, and essential household items."

The NRC and the International Organization for Migration lead the Palestine Shelter Cluster, which coordinates humanitarian aid focused on addressing shelter needs in Gaza and the West Bank. The organization's new report, "Exposed on All Sides," describes how funding shortfalls as well as Israel's continued restrictions on shelter materials have left the vast majority of Palestinians in Gaza exposed to "serious health and safety risks."

The Shelter Cluster assessed nearly 2,000 household interviews conducted between June 14-28 in accessible areas in northern Gaza, Gaza City, Deir al-Balah, and Khan Younis.

It categorized the households' severity of needs on a scale of 1-5, with conditions assessed as minimal, stressed, crisis, critical, or catastrophic. More than 4 in 5 households were facing critical or catastrophic conditions, with the families struggling the most described as living in conditions "so poor they were considered a risk to life." Just 12% of households were assessed as being in the least severe categories.

With Israel's bombardment of Gaza damaging or destroying approximately 92% of residential buildings, nearly two-thirds of families interviewed by the Shelter Cluster were living in tents or other makeshift shelters that were meant to be temporary.

"Ten months after the October 2025 ceasefire, most families have lived more than a year in shelters that were never designed for long-term accommodation."

More than half of those households had been living in the same tent for over a year, and more than half of the makeshift housing was in poor or very poor condition. More than 100,000 households are living in shelters with "major deterioration to flooring, walls, and frames," said NRC.

With fuel both unaffordable and difficult to obtain, daily tasks were challenging for the families assessed by the Shelter Cluster. Eighty-four percent of households said their solutions for heating their homes were mostly or entirely ineffective. Nearly 50% of households said they had been burning plastic, tires, garbage, or cardboard in order to prepare food.

"Their use for meal preparation presents serious health risks from toxic smoke and food contamination," reads the report.

Jehan Salim, national coordinator for the Shelter Cluster, emphasized that "a shelter is not adequate simply because it has four walls or a roof."

"Families need to be able to sleep, cook, wash, and keep their children safe inside it," said Salim. "Ten months after the October 2025 ceasefire, most families have lived more than a year in shelters that were never designed for long-term accommodation. The materials needed to repair homes, restore basic services, and provide improved shelters are still not entering Gaza at anything close to the scale required.”

Only 1 in 10 households received shelter materials or basic household assistance in the month prior to the survey, and the Shelter Cluster's partners in Gaza reported "very limited in-country stocks of tents, blankets, or mattresses" in June.

"The entry of shelter materials and equipment also remains constrained by strict and frequently changing entry restrictions. Long advance-notification requirements, repackaging rules, repeated submission processes, and unpredictable approvals can delay or prevent supplies from reaching Gaza, keeping available stocks low and limiting the quality and scale of the response," reads the report.

Israel's "dual-use" restrictions—which claim that everyday items for basic household needs could also be used for violent purposes by Hamas—have contributed to the chronically low supply of "fuel, solar energy equipment, construction and repair materials, heavy machinery, and debris-clearance equipment," said the Shelter Cluster.

"People remain in appalling conditions because Israeli restrictions are preventing even the most basic housing materials from entering Gaza," said Jan Egeland, secretary general of the NRC. "Without a rapid procurement of and access for materials, the coming winter will be catastrophic. Israel must lift its restrictions and allow for predictable entry of shelter materials."

The European Union, United Nations, and World Bank's Gaza Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment (RDNA) report earlier this year found that $26.3 billion was required in the first 18 months following the ceasefire deal to restore essential services, rebuild infrastructure, and support Gaza’s economic recovery. An estimated $71 billion will be needed over the next decade.

In May, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs reported that its 2026 flash appeal for $4 billion was only 12% funded.

"Funding levels must be increased," said Egeland, "so that Palestinians families can get out of decaying temporary shelters and into something that provides more protection from the elements."

SEE ALL