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.
A few seconds ago, Dems held massive protests, swept an election, and claimed the inarguable moral high ground in a cruel shutdown America had pinned on the GOP. Then the "surrender caucus" caved to a demented moron who knows nothing, lies about everything, insults veterans, bans fatsos, pukes fake gold, can't find his office, insists he's not a rapist, argues let them eat nothing while partying (again) with fat cats. And now, Epstein's back to take him down. Good call, Dems.
It was, shall we say, disheartening when Democrats in a devoutly-to-be-wished ascendancy voted against the will of a majority of their own party, "spit in America's face," and again surrendered to a brazenly inept GOP that refused to do their job by taking a "taxpayer-funded, seven-week vacation" and a regime that shamelessly fought all the way to the Supreme Court for the right to not feed 42 million hungry Americans in a moral and political fiasco dubbed "an intergalactic freak show." When 8 centrist Democrats folded just days after a watershed election that saw every demographic group they need to regain power swing sharply to the left, the response from a dismayed populace was almost universally somewhere between, "Ugh. Just ugh" and "FUCK."
Having backed the already underwater Trump into a corner where he was advocating for starving Americans - Marie Antoinette was often evoked - the move was blasted as a "cataclysmic failure," "horrific mistake," "moral failure," "world-class collapse," "betrayal" and, from Bernie Sanders, "a very bad night." "When they go low, we cave," was one refrain. Also, "How about we shut down the government for this very popular issue that over three-quarters of Americans support, with a very specific goal and then, hear me out, we hold out for like a month and a half and then...ONLY THEN, fold and don't get the one thing we said we wanted?" Calls for the ejection of wussy Chuck Schumer were so prevalent they sprung up among even fed up moderate Dems like Mark Kelly.
What they got in return for their perfidy was...little enough they managed to make the cretinous Trump almost look like a stable genius. The key demand for an extension of Obamacare subsidies was left hanging in a vague deal wherein treacherous House Republicans may or may not bring it up for a vote in December; many cited Unholy Mike likewise last year "promising" to restore $1.1B in funding to DC in exchange for funding the government but then somehow not getting to it. Food stamps will continue to be funded through September, but most government spending will again expire on January 30, when we'll be back where we started. In the interim, House Dems may proffer their own bill to extend ACA subsidies by three years, but a venal GOP will (duh) kill it.
Meanwhile, our Narcissist-in-Chief remains focused on a revenge and redemption tour because governance = boring. As Americans struggled, he bragged about cuts to "Democrat programs," toyed with ballrooms and bathrooms, blamed besieged air-traffic controllers not evil Musk for air travel woes - "I am NOT HAPPY WITH YOU" - issued a symbolic, wildly broad pardon to over 70 criminal accomplices who helped try to overturn an election in case they wanna help him crime again, and got Ghislaine Maxwell a puppy. He also asked SCOTUS to throw out his much adjudicated, E. Jean Carroll rape and defamation verdict, calling it another "hoax (of) implausible, unsubstantiated assertions” - not his type - because "The American People...demand an immediate end to all of the Witch Hunts." Actually, not.
And abroad, in the name of "protecting the (Nazi) homeland," Pete Hegseth has killed 76 people in clearly illegal "kinetic strikes" on Venezuelan "narco-terrorists," likely hapless fishermen, based on zero evidence; to further inflame things, he also brought in the world's largest warship. In response, Maduro called for massive deployment of ground, aerial, naval and missile forces on "full operational readiness" against a greedy dimwit on record for wanting to take "all that oil." Said dimwit has also threatened to "go into Nigeria" with "guns-a-blazing" to protect the fictional "large number of Christians" being killed there. Again, no evidence; again, Nigeria says, not. One possible saving grace: It's improbable Trump could find NIgeria - on a map, in his fever dreams - given he's evidently now struggling just to find his office.

So it was that, last week, White House observers noticed a new sign - actually sheets of computer paper taped to the walls - announcing "The Oval Office." Or, per one report, "The White House Dementia Care Unit helpfully labels the Oval Office with giant, comforting, gold letters" - an act born, many speculated, after "who knows what Trump-kept-trying-to-go-into-the-broom-closet moments." The dumbfounding tackiness of the display, which didn't even manage to center the "the" - never mind what it suggested about the cognitive condition of the supposed most powerful elected official in the world, its presumed target - horrified many. "Please tell me this is not real," pleaded one viewer. Also, "Next, it'll be a picture," "This sign looks like shit," and, in a multi-layered gem, "This is not a good sign."
The fact of the sign was one thing. The slovenly visual - "dementia patient navigation signage disguised as nouveau-riche trash chic" - was another: "The1980s called and want their font back" captured the snark toward a script variously compared to a garage sale, a funeral home, an omelette bar, a whorehouse, an Olive Garden, a La Quinta lobby, the Newlywed Game, Daytona Beach circa 1981, and "invites to a shower for a baby named Lakynn." Some posited Barron designed and printed it because "he's good with computer," and, "It's computer everywhere these days." Gavin Newsom countered, "Live, Laugh, Lose." Or "Live, Laugh, Oval Office. I came up with the name Oval Office. It doesn’t have to be an oval. It can be any shape. Square. Rectangle. Doesn’t even have to be an office. It can be your den."
Alas, the sign is accompanied by the same ghastly, tacky, polyurethane, $58.07 Home Depot gimcracks that defile the Oval Office, along with the sparely elegant walkway now become a glitzy, game-show Presidential Walk of Fame. It seems the awful glare may finally prove too much even for Laura Ingraham, who in a new interview with the king seems a tad skeptical about the flood of bullshit she's long accepted. Peering at the newest gold vomit above a door, she asks, "So, this is not Home Depot? "Naah," he blusters, real gold, blah blah. (This is Home Depot). She seems likewise, oddly unconvinced about other bonkers claims, like HBCUs would "all be out of business" if fewer Chinese students go to American schools, and his 50-year mortgage is great (if you wanna pay double for your home.)
Ingraham grows downright quizzical - wait, has he lost Ingraham? - on the subject of affordability. When Trump brags about "the greatest economy we've ever had," she wonders then why are people saying they're anxious about high prices? Big bluff and bluster. "More than anything else it's a con job by the Democrats," he says. "Are you ready? Costs are way down." Also $2 gas, drill baby drill, we're going wild. She, downright doubtful: "So you're saying voters are mis-perceiving how they feel?" For all the bombast, the underwater loser sounds like one. Perhaps sensing their slow, pitiable fall, the White House social media team has begun releasing random, hallucinatory montages of some of the "greatest hits" of "one glorious (insane) nation under God." Just wowza.
Despite the frantic cheerleading, reality in all its cognitive dissonance keeps intruding. Last week, in one of its most freakish moments, Trump's cluelessness and sick indifference came into ugly, eerie focus when he stood gazing blankly into space, his back to the room, as an Oval Office guest collapsed and a scrum of people rushed to render aid. As Dr. Oz announced a possible deal to lower the price of weight-loss drugs - never mind why are fat drugs the only drug to see price cuts - one man passed out and slowly sank to the floor. As Oz and several others went to help, the People's President turned away - not my narcissistic table - to demonstrate "the unsubtle art of not giving a fuck," also, "how to spot a sociopath," "more mannequin than man," and, "truly, a dick." I really don't care, do you?
The same day, his State Department issued new rules about who can/cannot come to our pristine shores. Officials will be charged with rejecting any applicants with an array of conditions - obesity, depression, cancer, cardiovascular - especially if they lack the resources to pay for their health care, which we sure won't, never mind the $100,000 H-1B visa. So: Only the skinny, healthy, rich and racist - like white Afrikaners - need apply. No huddled masses. Def no dementia-ridden fatsos "crumbling in real time," like, you know. People had questions: Will that be all obese people, or just poor ones? Has he looked in a mirror? Also, their social media must show they support white Christian nationalism, Charlie Kirk, and eugenics. His ignoble work done, Trump then left to party, again.
In his second big Hell-A-Lago extravaganza in a week - during the shutdown, as his USDA returned to court to whine they shouldn't have to feed hungry kids, after his tone-deaf Great Gatsby party whose irony he missed sparked widespread fury - Trump again lifted a fat teeny middle finger to America and welcomed another toxic swarm of rich old white guys and makeup-slathered, pouty-lipped women, this time to gorge on beef filet even he concedes nobody else can afford, truffle dauphinoise, pan-seared scallops and a trio of desserts including "Trump chocolate cake." In the shape of turds? Also there: A vast seafood spread, a CPAC ice sculpture, an opera performance, and sorta synchronized swimmers performing to a tinny God Bless the USA. Where is David Lynch when we need him?
Amidst the fuck-you opulence, he still babbled, deflected, raved. He spewed out a preposterous scheme for people to buy "THEIR OWN, MUCH BETTER, HEALTH CARE" that mainstream media dutifully reported as something other than ignorant rants - Trump "has floated a proposal" - based, per Klugman, on “whatever the fuck he thinks he knows about healthcare," which is clearly nothing. "Everybody is gonna be happy," he bleated. "They're going to feel like entrepreneurs." He mused, "Nobody knows what magnets are." In one especially deranged stab at distraction, he dug back into birther crap about Obama, who "betrayed a country he wasn't born in." Jittery, hollow, spiteful, he threw spaghetti at the wall, hoping something would stick as his approval plunged to 33%, glossy swimmers or no.
Then he went to an NFL game - Commanders vs. Detroit Lions - where 67,000 D.C.-area denizens twice booed him so bigly, loudly, relentlessly, all in with jeers, thumbs down, middle fingers up, the noise happily drowning him out, that even cocooned high up in his luxury suite with Mike and Pete (also booed) beside him he seemed to notice, and wilt. D.C lost badly, he left early and sulkily, The Borowitz Report said he tried/failed to get ICE to arrest all 67,000 booing fans, who were probs paid by Soros and/or Venezuelan drug dealers. At Arlington Cemetery for Veterans' Day, still unable to sing God Bless America, a furious veteran declared it "an affront to me and every other veteran past, present and future to have this bloated POS (who) doesn't give a flying fuck about the Military at this hallowed ground."
Wednesday, Jeffrey Epstein returned to haunt him, as we knew one day he would, when Dems released three damning emails. Epstein said "of course (Trump) knew about the girls." He said Trump was "the dog that hasn’t barked" though a victim had just "spent hours at my house with him." And Rep. Adelita Grijalva was finally sworn in to force release of the files. Swiftly, prayerful, maybe AI Press Barbie leapt to the podium to "defy the laws of moral physics." It's all "a hoax, a "fake narrative," a "bad-faith effort to distract from (Trump's) historic accomplishments," she said. It proves "absolutely nothing" even as righteous, transparent Republicans re-open the government pernicious Dems shut down. Also, "there are no coincidences (in) DC," and it's all Biden's fault. Cave, idiocy, lunacy, evil: This timeline is killing us.

The fossil fuel industry is "racing toward climate breakdown with its foot on the accelerator," said one official at the German environmental rights group Urgewald on Tuesday as the group released its Global Oil and Gas Exit List.
The report shows that as world leaders prepare to meet in Brazil for the annual United Nations climate summit, any discussion they have there regarding a green transition is being undercut by massive expansion in oil and gas extraction and production, including in the fracking and liquefied natural gas (LNG) industries.
Four years after the International Energy Agency (IEA) stated that no new oil and gas fields have a place on a pathway to limiting planetary heating to 1.5°C—marking global energy experts' public endorsement of warnings that had come from climate scientists for years prior—96% of fossil fuel firms are exploring and developing new oil and gas resources, said Urgewald.
Short-term expansion is up 33% since 2021, when the IEA issued its warning, with fossil fuel giants planning to bring 256 billion barrels of oil and gas equivalent (bboe) into production in the coming years.
Five companies account for about one-third of global short-term expansion: QatarEnergy (26.2 bboe), Saudi Aramco (18.0 bboe), ADNOC in the United Arab Emirates (13.8 bboe), Russian state-owned entity Gazprom (13.4 bboe) and US firm ExxonMobil (9.7 bboe).
Nils Bartsch, head of oil and gas research at Urgewald, said the largest fossil fuel companies in the world "are treating the Paris Agreement like a polite suggestion, not a survival plan."
The analysis comes a decade after 195 countries signed the legally binding Paris Agreement, committing to develop and implement national climate action plans to draw down fossil fuel emissions.
"With 256 billion barrels of new projects on the table, this is not a transition—it is defiance," said Bartsch.
The Paris Agreement also included a demand for wealthy countries to contribute funds to help the Global South mitigate and adapt to the climate emergency, and annual UN conferences have addressed climate finance, but the industry is still spending about 75 times more on oil and gas exploration than governments have pledged to the UN Loss and Damage Fund, according to the report.
On average, companies listed in the Global Oil and Gas Exit List (GOGEL) spent an average of $60.3 billion over the last three years on oil and gas expansion.
“Brazil is showing an alarming level of climate hypocrisy—presenting itself as a climate leader at COP30 while allowing oil and gas expansion right at the summit’s doorstep, threatening one of our most fragile ecosystems."
The US has pledged just 17.5 million to the Loss and Damage Fund, while two of its biggest fossil fuel companies, Chevron and ExxonMobil, have spent $1.3 billion and $1.1 billion on oil and gas exploration, respectively, in the last three years.
"While the Loss and Damage Fund sits almost empty, oil and gas companies are investing more than $60 billion each year into new exploration, exacerbating the problem the fund is meant to alleviate. This is financial and moral negligence. Regulators and supervisory authorities need to start treating this as a risk, not a footnote," said Fiona Hauke, oil and gas researcher and financial regulation expert at Urgewald.
The report was released a week before world leaders are scheduled to meet in Belém, Brazil for the 2025 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP30), even as state-owned fossil fuel company Petrobras begins drilling in Foz do Amazonas Basin in the fragile, biodiverse Amazon rainforest.
Petrobras was named in GOGEL as the 15th largest fossil fuel exporter worldwide, currently spending $1.1 billion annually searching for new reserves, as Brazil prepares to host a meeting that is meant to focus on implementing emissions reduction plans.
“Brazil is showing an alarming level of climate hypocrisy—presenting itself as a climate leader at COP30 while allowing oil and gas expansion right at the summit’s doorstep, threatening one of our most fragile ecosystems,” said Nicole Oliveira, executive director of the Arayara International Institute in Brazil.
GOGEL also pointed to oil and gas expansion in the US under the Trump administration, with the US overtaking China as the number-one developer of gas-fired power even as a recent UN and World Bank report found that nine out of 10 renewable energy projects are cheaper than even the lowest-cost fossil fuel alternatives.
The US is home to the largest LNG export developer worldwide, Venture Global, as companies are planning an export capacity of around 847 million tons per year—a 171% increase from current operational capacity.
Urgewald noted that even TotalEnergies CEO Patrick Pouyanné recently acknowledged that the LNG sector is "building too much."
"Analysts warn that if current plans proceed, the world could face an oversupplied gas market within five years, with far more capacity than global demand can absorb," reads GOGEL. "Yet despite industry leaders acknowledging the risk, investment continues."
"US fracking companies are producing far more gas than they can sell domestically," adds the report, noting that the country is turning to Mexico as an export platform. "Now faced with a flood of excess gas, companies are racing to build new LNG facilities to liquefy their surplus and push it onto countries around the globe."
Pablo Montaño, director of Conexiones Climáticas, Mexico, said new LNG projects "are not for the benefit of Mexicans."
"They will import fracked gas from the US, liquefy it in Mexico and send it straight to Asia. Gas liquefaction is an incredibly dirty business," he said.
Despite clear warnings from energy and climate experts, said Cathy Collentine, Beyond Dirty Fuels campaign director at the Sierra Club in the US, "fossil fuel expansion continues to put communities and the climate at risk."
"Under the Trump administration," she said, "we are seeing a disregard for both to do the bidding of Big Oil and Gas."
In the wake of a top-to-bottom shellacking of Republicans across the country in Tuesday's elections, President Donald Trump is making a concerted effort to co-opt the "affordability"-focused messaging that catapulted the once-obscure democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani to become New York City's next mayor.
MSNBC columnist Steve Benen notes that before Election Day, Trump had never once uttered the word "affordability" in his more than a decade using Twitter/X. But since Tuesday, it's been all he can talk about.
After Democrats romped in virtually every important race from Virginia to California to New Jersey, the president explained that it was because "they have this new word called affordability" and Republicans "don't talk about it enough."
He followed it by claiming that “2025 Thanksgiving dinner under Trump is 25% lower than 2024 Thanksgiving dinner under [former President Joe] Biden, according to Walmart. My cost are lower than the Democrats on everything, especially oil and gas! So the Democrats ‘affordability’ issue is DEAD! STOP LYING!!!”
He later claimed, completely falsely, that America was nearing "almost $2 for gasoline," and that Republicans "are the ones who've done a great job on affordability... they said we lost an election on affordability. It’s a con job."
Focusing aggressively on the cost of living and blaming his opponents for it being out of control has worked for Trump in the past. Polls from his 2024 reelection showed that inflation and the cost of living were the leading issues under Biden that drove voters away from Democrats and into Trump's camp.
But Mamdani will enter office with the status of an outsider and a slew of untested policy proposals meant to concretely address New York's untenable cost of living, like a freeze on rent hikes, free public transit, and the opening of public grocery stores.
Trump, on the other hand, is nearly a year into his second presidential term, during which he has often downplayed voters' concerns about rising costs, even telling them they'd need to endure "some pain" in order to reap the benefits of his agenda.
Under his watch, and often directly due to his own policy decisions, the crisis of affordability that drove him to the White House has only accelerated, with 2.9% yearly inflation in August, the last month for which there is data due to the government shutdown.
His claims about both grocery and energy prices are both untrue. Energy prices have actually increased by 10% since Trump took office, and the average regular gas price was not nearing $2 per gallon, as Trump claimed, but more than $3 as of Monday.
While high energy costs can be attributed to external factors like increased power demand from artificial intelligence data centers and energy bottlenecks resulting from the war in Ukraine, the New York Times editorial board noted last month that "Trump energy policies are not helping—and will soon make matters worse."
The foremost culprit is his slashing of hundreds of billions of dollars worth of tax credits and investments into renewable energy sources like wind and solar, as well as electric vehicles. As the board explained:
Energy prices are likely to rise the most in states that have not prioritized clean energy, including Kentucky, Missouri, and Oklahoma, experts say. The repeal of the tax credits alone may push electricity prices almost 10% higher than they would be otherwise by 2029, according to National Economic Research Associates, a consulting firm. Gas prices will also increase over the next decade, according to Rhodium Group, a think tank, as consumers who would otherwise have driven electric cars continue using vehicles that burn fossil fuels.
Grocery prices have also spiked by 2.7% since last year, increasing each month except one since he took office. Some of the products that have seen the most dramatic increases are those impacted by Trump's aggressive tariff regime, both because they are frequently imported like coffee or bananas, or commonly exported like beef, and subject to the retaliatory tariffs of countries against which Trump has waged his trade war.
His "mass deportation" agenda, meanwhile, has gutted the nation's agricultural labor force, which is 80% foreign-born, causing supply shortages and, as a result, higher prices for domestic goods.
On the other major plank of Mamdani's affordability agenda, the uncontrolled cost of housing has also been supercharged by Trump's policies. His tariffs have caused the cost of building materials to spike, slowing the rate of housing construction.
And as a record high 22 million renters are considered cost-burdened, meaning they spend over 30% of their income on housing, Trump's 2026 fiscal year budget proposed to slash rental assistance by nearly 43%. In September, ProPublica also obtained two plans from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) expected to place burdensome new work requirements and time limits on those living in public housing, which could jeopardize assistance for 4 million people.
While Trump has made a sharp pivot toward "affordability" rhetoric, his actions amid the ongoing government shutdown, which has become the longest in US history, have belied that commitment.
Though Trump acknowledged that Tuesday's Election Night drubbing suggested Republicans were "losing" the shutdown, Republicans have insisted they won't come to the table to negotiate to extend the Affordable Care Act tax credits that caused the impasse in the first place.
As a result, Americans are already beginning to see their health insurance premiums skyrocket as the enrollment period for next year begins. And if the GOP refuses to extend the credits, over 22 million Americans are expected to see their premiums more than double on average in 2026, according to KFF.
And contrary to fighting the rising prices of food, the Trump administration has used the shutdown to choke off food assistance to 42 million Americans eligible for the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP) in defiance of orders from two federal judges.
Under a proposed plan to only partially fund the program, the average SNAP recipient would have their benefits cut by 61%, while millions will lose their benefits for November entirely, according to an analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
According to The Economist, Trump's approval rating has tanked to just 39%, while disapproval is at 58%. It's an all-time low over both his terms as president. By far the sharpest decrease in his approval rating has come on prices and inflation. Where he enjoyed a net +5 rating on the issue at the start of his term, it had utterly collapsed to -33 as of November 2.
"Trump could theoretically fix his political problems if he readjusts his policy framework and focuses on affordability, corporate power, and working with Democrats instead of the establishment GOP," said economic journalist Matt Stoller in a post on social media. "But there's zero chance he does that. He can't. He's George W. Trump."
House Judiciary Committee ranking member Jamie Raskin is calling out Republicans in the US Senate for slipping into their government funding bill a provision that would let eight GOP senators personally each rake in an extra $1 million in taxpayer money.
As reported by The Hill, the provision allows Republican senators whose data was obtained without their knowledge during former special counsel Jack Smith's investigation to sue the FBI.
"The provision, which is retroactive to 2022, only applies to members of the Senate and would allow them to sue for $500,000 if data was sought without their being notified, as well as once it was obtained," noted The Hill.
Raskin (D-Md.) responded by blasting the "million-dollar jackpot provision" in the Senate bill as "one of the most blatantly corrupt provisions for political self-dealing and the plunder of public resources ever proposed."
Raskin also contrasted Republican senators giving themselves the ability to score a quick $1 million with the economic uncertainty and anxiety facing the American people.
"If it were to pass, this astounding provision would give eight Republican senators a personal payday of at least one million dollars each paid for directly by US taxpayers," he said. "This jackpot is being set up at the same time Republicans throw millions of Americans off Medicaid and deny millions more a tax credit that helps make premiums for health insurance more affordable."
Raskin also shot down claims by the senators that law enforcement officials had violated their rights to privacy during Smith's probe, which sought Republican senators' phone records as part of his investigation into President Donald Trump's efforts to illegally remain in power after losing the 2020 presidential election.
"To be clear, there was no ‘phone tap’ or eavesdropping on the content of their conversations," he said. "The call records subpoenaed were the kind of information you see on a phone bill—a list of calls made and received."
Raskin wasn't the only House Democrat to blast the provision slipped into the funding bill. During a contentious House Rules Committee meeting on Tuesday, Rep. Joe Neguse (R-Colo.) called the provision "deeply insidious" and pushed an amendment to strip it from the legislation ahead of a vote in the House later this week.
"I think it is outrageous for these Republican senators to effectively guarantee themselves million-dollar paydays!" he said. "A retroactive provision in this bill that very clearly applies to them. The removal of all relevant immunity defenses on the part of the United States government. This is insanity to allow this provision to go forward, and I would hope that my Republican colleagues would join us in supporting the removal of this provision."
Neguse: I think it is outrageous for these Republican senators to effectively guarantee themselves million-dollar paydays, a provision in this bill that very clearly applies to them. The removal of all relevant immunity defenses on the part of the United States government. This… pic.twitter.com/ukmEnybcd7
— Acyn (@Acyn) November 12, 2025
Democrats weren't the only congresspeople who criticized the provision, as Reps. Austin Scott (R-Ga.) and Chip Roy (R-Texas) also said that it should be removed, although they both expressed concern that doing so would prolong the government shutdown.
"I personally agree this should removed," Scott said, according to HuffPost reporter Igor Bobic. "The problem is if we remove it, it has to go back to the Senate. I’ve struggled with what to do."
In one of vanishingly few US Supreme Court rulings protecting equal rights, the majority-conservative court on Monday rejected efforts to overturn the decade-old precedent of marriage equality.
Without issuing a comment, the court denied an appeal from Kim Davis, the former Kentucky county clerk who was ordered to pay $360,000 in compensation after she refused to issue a marriage license to a same-sex couple in defiance of the precedent set by the 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision.
Amid a flurry of rulings that have rolled back sexual and reproductive freedom in other realms—including for the LGBTQ+ community—the court's refusal to hear Davis' appeal was considered a small but still invigorating victory.
“The bar is in hell,” wrote Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz on social media. “But this is a win for decency and compassion.”
The ruling came as a relief to advocates for equal rights, who long feared that marriage equality might soon become the next target as the conservative movement grows increasingly hostile to the LGBTQ+ community.
In 2022, as the court's right-wing majority overturned the right to an abortion in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization case, the archconservative Justice Clarence Thomas signaled in a concurring opinion that it should be the start of efforts to fully revise the court's recognition of "substantive due process," that is, the recognition of rights not explicitly granted by the US Constitution.
He questioned not just the right of same-sex couples to marry, but the court’s entire recognition of the right to privacy established by the 1965 Griswold v. Connecticut ruling, which has been the basis for rulings against bans on homosexual relationships and the right to contraception.
Thomas was one of the four conservative justices who dissented from the majority's ruling in Obergefell. Two others—Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito—also still serve on the court. The other three conservative justices who have been appointed since, all by President Donald Trump during his first term—Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett—have remained relatively coy on how they’d rule if marriage equality were to come back up, though they have sided with conservatives in cases that pitted religious liberty against discrimination protections for LGBTQ+ people.
In 2023, the six conservatives ruled that a Christian web designer was allowed to decline services to same-sex weddings, overturning a Colorado law that banned discrimination against gay people. Notably, the designer who brought the case had not actually been asked to design a website for any gay couple, but the court's right-wing majority accepted her case regardless.
This apparent zealousness to intervene in favor of discrimination appeared to be a red flag, but as Harvard University law professor Noah Feldman wrote for Bloomberg, Monday's ruling "is best read as a signal that the conservative majority has little interest in revisiting gay marriage," even as "the conservative constitutional revolution at the Supreme Court remains underway."
He notes that just four justices are required for a case to be heard by the court. And while it has aggressively rolled back the rights of transgender people, ended affirmative action, and recognized unprecedented executive authority for President Donald Trump, when it comes to same-sex marriage, "their silence is noteworthy."
Public support for marriage equality has grown considerably in the decade since Obergefell. In July 2015, a month after the court legalized same-sex marriage nationwide, 58% of Americans said in a Gallup poll that they agreed that same- sex couples should have the same rights as opposite-sex pairs. That number ballooned to a high of 71% in 2023, and even as attacks on LGBTQ+ people have ratcheted up intensely within the conservative movement, support for marriage equality remains stubbornly steady—68% of Americans still say gay marriages should be valid.
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, who represented two of the plaintiffs in the 2015 case, said that while she welcomes the court's decision Monday not to erode the hard-won rights of gay people further, advocates should not become complacent.
"I am relieved for today’s decision reaffirming same-sex couples’ continued right to dignity and protection under the law, but we cannot take those protections for granted," Nessel said in a news release. “Members of this Supreme Court have already told us they are willing to overturn Obergefell. It’s only a matter of time before they do.”
Her state of Michigan is one of more than two dozen in which same-sex marriage would become illegal or face restrictions if Obergefell is overturned. She said that Monday's decision "allows us a reprieve, an opportunity to bring our state Constitution into alignment with the protections our residents are entitled to and have enjoyed for more than a decade. Now is the time to act."
President Donald Trump's policy of bombing purported drug-trafficking boats in the Caribbean, which multiple legal experts have decried as an illegal act extrajudicial murder, is now meeting resistance from a top US ally.
CNN reported on Tuesday that the UK has now stopped sharing intelligence related to suspected drug-trafficking vessels with the US because the country does not want to be complicit in strikes that it believes violate international law.
CNN's sources say that the UK stopped giving the US information about boats in the region roughly a month ago, shortly after Trump began authorizing drone strikes against them in a campaign that so far has killed at least 76 people.
"Before the US military began blowing up boats in September, countering illicit drug trafficking was handled by law enforcement and the US Coast Guard, [and] cartel members and drug smugglers were treated as criminals with due process rights," explained CNN.
Last month, after his administration had already launched several strikes, Trump declared drug cartels enemy combatants and claimed he has the right to launch military strikes against suspected drug-trafficking boats.
Appearing on CNN on Tuesday to discuss the story, reporter Natasha Bertrand described the decision to stop sharing intelligence as "a really significant rupture" between the US and its closest ally.
"We're told that the UK is deeply uncomfortable with [the boat strikes], and they believe that it is pretty blatantly illegal," Bertrand explained. "It really underscores the continued questions surrounding the legality of this US military campaign."
🚨HOLY SHIT: The UK - our closest ally since WWI - just cut off ALL intelligence sharing with the U.S. about Caribbean drug trafficking boats, calling the strikes illegal.
Britain doesn’t trust us anymore. Trump has torched a century of friendship while he sucks up to dictators. pic.twitter.com/E0Was3WrrY
— CALL TO ACTIVISM (@CalltoActivism) November 11, 2025
The US military began its boat attacks in the Caribbean in September, and has since expanded them to purported drug boats operating in the Pacific Ocean.
Reporting last month from the Wall Street Journal indicated that the administration was also preparing to attack a variety of targets inside Venezuela, whose government Trump has baselessly accused of running drug cartels. Potential targets include “ports and airports controlled by the military that are allegedly used to traffic drugs, including naval facilities and airstrips.”
The Washington Post reported on Tuesday that the USS Gerald R. Ford aircraft carrier has now arrived off the coast of Latin America, in a move that the paper notes "has fueled speculation the Trump administration intends to dramatically escalate its deadly counternarcotics campaign there, possibly through direct attacks on Venezuela."
Reports from the US government and the United Nations have not identified Venezuela as a significant source of drugs that enter the United States, and the country plays virtually no role in the trafficking of fentanyl, the primary cause of drug overdoses in the US.
The administration's military aggression in Latin America has also sparked a fierce backlash in the region, where dozens of political leaders last month condemned the boat attacks, while also warning that they could just be the start of a regime change war reminiscent of Cold War-era US-backed coups like ones that occurred in Chile, Brazil, and other nations.
"It looked like Mossad was working for Epstein instead of Epstein working for Mossad,” said Drop Site News reporter Murtaza Hussain.
As the US House of Representatives appears poised to vote for a resolution demanding the release of files relating to the late sex criminal and financier Jeffrey Epstein, a new series of investigations is digging into an area of the disgraced financier's life that has largely evaded scrutiny: his extensive ties with Israeli intelligence.
Epstein's relationship with the Israeli government has long been the subject of speculation and conspiracy theorizing. But the extent of the connections has long been difficult to prove. That is, until October 2024, when the Palestinian group Handala released a tranche of more than 100,000 hacked emails from former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, who led the country from 1999 to 2001.
The emails span the years 2013-16, beginning just before Barak concluded his nearly six-year tenure as Israel's minister of defense. Barak is known to have been one of Epstein's closest associates, with the Wall Street Journal reporting that he visited the financier's estates in Florida and New York more than 30 times between 2013 and 2017, years after Epstein had been convicted for soliciting a minor for prostitution.
Virginia Giuffre, one of Epstein's most prominent victims, who died earlier this year, alleged in her posthumous memoir that a figure, described only as "the Prime Minister," but widely believed to be Barak, violently raped her on Epstein's private Caribbean island when she was 18. In past court filings, Giuffre accused Barak of sexually assaulting her. Barak has categorically denied those allegations and said he was unaware of Epstein's activities with minors during the time of their friendship.
Emails between Barak and Epstein have served as the basis for the ongoing investigative series published since late September by the independent outlet Drop Site News, which used them to unearth Epstein's extensive role in brokering intelligence deals between Israel and other nations.
The emails reveal that between 2013 and 2016, the pair had "intimate, oftentimes daily correspondence," during which they discussed "political and business strategy as Epstein coordinated meetings for Barak with other members of his elite circles."
The investigation comes as President Donald Trump's extensive ties to Epstein face renewed scrutiny in Congress. On Wednesday, just a day after Drop Site published the fourth part of its series, Democrats on the House Oversight Committee released a new trove of documents from Epstein's private estate.
Among them were emails sent in 2011 from Epstein to his partner and co-conspirator Ghislane Maxwell, in which he said the then private-citizen Trump “spent hours at my house” with one of his sex trafficking victims, referring to Trump as a “dog that hasn’t barked.”
Murtaza Hussain, one of the Drop Site reporters who has dug into Epstein's Israel connections, told Democracy Now! on Wednesday that the focus on Trump, while important, has diverted attention from other key tendrils of Epstein's influence.
"There's been a lot of justifiable focus on Epstein's very grave crimes and facilitation of the crimes of others related to sex trafficking and sex abuse," Hussain said. "But one critical aspect of the story that has not been covered is Epstein's own relations to foreign governments, the US government, and particularly foreign intelligence agencies."
The first report shows that Epstein was instrumental in helping Barak develop a formal security agreement between Israel and Mongolia, recruiting powerful friends like Larry Summers, who served as an economist to former Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, to serve on a Presidential Advisory Board for the Central Asian nation's economy.
Epstein helped to facilitate an agreement for Mongolia to purchase Israeli military equipment and surveillance technology from companies with which the men had financial ties.
Another report shows how Epstein helped Israel to establish a covert backchannel with the Russian government at the height of the Syrian Civil War, during which they attempted to persuade the Kremlin to oust Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, a major national security priority for Israel, which had become substantially involved in the conflict.
This process was coordinated with Israeli intelligence and resulted in Barak securing a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. In one message, Barak explicitly thanked Epstein for "setting the whole thing together."
Epstein also worked alongside Barak to sell Israeli surveillance tech, which had previously been used extensively in occupied Palestine, to the West African nation of Côte d’Ivoire.
In 2014, the pair architected a deal by which the nation's government, led by President Alassane Ouattara, purchased technology used to listen in on phone calls and radio transmissions and monitor points of interest like cybercafes.
In the decade since, the report says, "Ouattara has tightened his grip on power, banning public demonstrations and arresting peaceful protestors," while "his Israeli-backed police state has squashed civic organizations and silenced critics."
On Tuesday, just before the House Oversight Committee dropped its latest batch of documents, the series' latest report revealed that an Israeli spy, Yoni Koren, stayed at Epstein's New York apartment for weeks at a time on three separate occasions between 2013 and 2015. Koren served as an intermediary between the American and Israeli governments, helping Barak organize meetings with top intelligence officials, including former CIA Director Leon Panetta.
Drop Site's reporting has fueled speculation of the longstanding theory that Epstein may have worked as an agent of Mossad, Israel's central intelligence agency. Hussain said that the evidence points to the idea that Epstein was not a formal Mossad agent, but was working as an asset to advance its most hawkish foreign policy goals.
He marveled at the fact that throughout each of these stories, “it’s not Epstein chasing Barak—it’s Barak chasing Epstein," and that at times, "it looked like Mossad was working for Epstein instead of Epstein working for Mossad.”
In a foreword to their latest report, Hussain and co-author Ryan Grim expressed bewilderment at the lack of media attention paid to the publicly available files revealing Epstein's role as a semi-official node in Israel's intelligence apparatus.
While Epstein's relationship with Trump has routinely been front-page news for many outlets, the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Wall Street Journal have not published a story focused on Epstein's role in Israeli intelligence.
"We’re left wondering why the rest of the media, which has demonstrated no lack of excitement when it comes to the saga of Jeffrey Epstein, has all of a sudden lost its reporting capacity, in the face of reams of publicly available newsworthy documents," the reporters asked. "A question for editors reading this newsletter: What are you doing?"
In the interview, Hussain said he and Grim "are going to continue drilling down on this and not shying away from the political implications of his activities."
“We are talking about a coordinated effort of eight senators, with the knowledge of Leader Schumer, voting to break with the entire Democratic Party," said the New York Democrat.
As the US House of Representatives prepared for a vote to reopen the federal government, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Wednesday called out members of her own Democratic Party in the Senate, including Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, who capitulated to Republicans in the shutdown fight, for which they received "nothing" in return.
Shortly before the government shut down over Republicans' refusal to address a looming healthcare crisis, Axios reported that the New York congresswoman was preparing to run for president or Senate in 2028. In the lead-up to Wednesday's vote, she was asked at least twice on camera about how Schumer, also a New Yorker, handled the shutdown.
"I think it's important that we understand that this is not just about Sen. Schumer, but that this is about the Democratic Party," she told CNN's Manu Raju. "Sen. Schumer—there's no one vote that ended this shutdown. We are talking about a coordinated effort of eight senators, with the knowledge of Leader Schumer, voting to break with the entire Democratic Party in exchange for nothing."
New — Asked AOC about Chuck Schumer’s handling of shutdown. (He voted NO on bill)
“We are talking about a coordinated effort of eight senators with the knowledge of Leader Schumer, voting to break with the entire Democratic Party in exchange for nothing,” she told me pic.twitter.com/fzDkMGMfzy
— Manu Raju (@mkraju) November 12, 2025
Democratic Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada, Dick Durbin of Illinois, John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire, Tim Kaine of Virginia, Jacky Rosen of Nevada, and Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, along with Independent Sen. Angus King of Maine, who caucuses with Democrats, joined Republicans for both the procedural and final votes.
Unlike the upper chamber, Republicans have enough members in the House to advance legislation without Democratic support. The GOP's continuing resolution neither reverses Medicaid cuts from the budget package that President Donald Trump signed in July nor extends expiring tax credits for people who buy health insurance on the Affordable Care Act exchanges.
"And now people's healthcare costs are going to be skyrocketing, and we want to make sure that we have a path to ending this moment, and finding relief for them right now," Ocasio-Cortez told CNN. "But I think that when we talk about this debate about the Democratic Party, that it is indeed about the party writ large, and our ability to fight or not."
While no senators in the caucus have demanded that Schumer step aside yet, The Hill on Wednesday compiled comments from the growing list of House Democrats who have called for new leadership: Reps. Glenn Ivey (Md.), Ro Khanna (Calif.), Mike Levin (Calif.), Seth Moulton (Mass.), Ayanna Pressley (Mass.), Mark Pocan (Wis.), Delia Ramirez (Ill.), Shri Thanedar (Mich.), and Rashida Tlaib (Mich.).
In a video circulated by C-SPAN on Wednesday, a reporter directly asked Ocasio-Cortez whether Schumer should stay in his leadership role. The progressive congresswoman's response was similar to her remarks to CNN.
Q: "Should Schumer stay as minority leader?"
.@RepAOC @AOC: "This problem is bigger than one person. It actually is bigger than the minority leader in the Senate...A leader is a reflection of the party and Senate Democrats have selected their leadership to represent them." pic.twitter.com/5cPi5GQzov
— CSPAN (@cspan) November 12, 2025
"I think what is so important for folks to understand is that this problem is bigger than one person, and it actually is bigger than the minority leader in the Senate," Ocasio-Cortez said. "You had eight Senate Democrats who coordinated... their own votes on this."
She also noted that two are retiring—Durbin and Shaheen—and the rest aren't up for reelection next year, thanks to the Senate's revolving cycles. Cortez Masto, Hassan, and Fetterman have until 2028, while Kaine, King, and Rosen have until 2030. She suggested that those who run for another term are hoping that "people are going to forget this moment."
"I think what's important is that we understand that... a leader is a reflection of the party. And Senate Democrats have selected their leadership to represent them," Ocasio-Cortez said. "And so, the question needs to be bigger than just one person. We have several Senate primaries this cycle."
"I know I'm being asked about New York. That is years from now. I have to remind my own constituents," she continued, directing attention to the 2026 races. "We actually do have Senate elections this year, and my hope is that people across this country actually participate in their primary elections in selecting their leadership."
One critic said such a move—which would require an admission of guilt—risks giving a "green light" to corruption.
Israeli President Isaac Herzog said Wednesday that he had received a request from US President Donald Trump to pardon Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is currently on trial in Israel for alleged bribery, fraud, and breach of trust.
“I hereby call on you to fully pardon Benjamin Netanyahu, who has been a formidable and decisive War Time Prime Minister, and is now leading Israel into a time of peace," Trump wrote in a letter to Herzog.
While Trump said that he "absolutely respect[s] the independence of the Israeli Justice System,” he denounced the case against Netanyahu as “political, unjustified prosecution.”
"It is time to let Bibi unite Israel by pardoning him, and ending that lawfare once and for all," Trump added, using Netanyahu's nickname.
U.S. President Donald Trump, also a criminal, has formally requested Israeli President Isaac Herzog to grant a pardon to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
[image or embed]
— Josep Goded (New Main Account) (@josepgoded2.bsky.social) November 12, 2025 at 2:54 AM
Herzog's office responded to Trump's letter with the following statement:
The president holds great respect for President Trump and repeatedly expresses his appreciation for Trump’s unwavering support of Israel and his tremendous contribution to the return of the hostages, the reshaping of the Middle East and Gaza, and the safeguarding of Israel’s security. Without detracting from the above, as the president has made clear on multiple occasions, anyone seeking a pardon must submit a formal request in accordance with the established procedures.
Opposition leader Yair Lapid noted in a social media post that "Israeli law stipulates that the first condition for receiving a pardon is an admission of guilt and an expression of remorse for those actions."
Amir Fuchs, a senior researcher at the Jerusalem-based think tank Israel Democracy Institute, told the Washington Post that “pardon is a word for forgiveness, a pardon without some kind of admission of guilt is very unusual and even illegal."
Fuchs added that any pardon based on Trump's request could be viewed as giving a "green light" to corruption and "undermining the rule of law."
Many social media users responded to Trump's letter with the same four words—"birds of a feather"—noting that the Republican president was convicted of 34 felony charges related to the falsification of business records regarding hush money payments to cover up sex scandals during the 2016 presidential election.
In addition to his domestic trial, Netanyahu is also a fugitive from the International Criminal Court in The Hague, where he and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant are wanted for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in connection with the Gaza genocide.
Herzog also faces criminal complaints filed in Switzerland alleging incitement to genocide over remarks including a suggestion that Palestinian civilians in Gaza were legitimate targets for Israeli strikes because "it is an entire nation out there that is responsible" for the Hamas-led October 7, 2023 attack.
Like former President Joe Biden before him, Trump has supported Israel with billions of dollars worth of US armed aid and diplomatic cover including vetoes of United Nations Security Council ceasefire resolutions.
In the first prosecution of a sitting Israeli prime minister, Netanyahu was indicted in 2019 for allegedly giving or offering lucrative official favors to media tycoons in exchange for positive news coverage or gifts valued at hundreds of thousands of dollars. The prime minister—who has also been accused of drawing out Israel's assault on Gaza to delay his case—denies any wrongdoing and, like Trump, has called his prosecution a "witch hunt."