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.
Our latest senseless illegal war against brown people, born of ever-shifting lies and fought by the sons of the blithe un-rich, is Trump's ultimate Wag-the-Dog distraction from his crimes, failures and pedophilia at home. Having oafishly declared the Iran regime “a vicious group of very hard, terrible people” - pot/kettle if you add "inept"- his "warriors" are now being told this is "part of God's divine plan," with The Rapture imminent (after killing more schoolgirls.) One sage: "It's a good thing Congress isn't alive to see this."
Leave it to "the world's most famous bone-spur patient," Board of Peace chair, recipient of a fake FIFA peace prize and pilfered real Peace Prize, cornered serial sexual predator facing exposure and pathological liar who vowed "no new wars" while attacking seven nations in a year to launch "the dumbest war in US history" - a tough competition - and the biggest US military operation in the Middle East since the 2003 invasion of Iraq, which Bush, Rumsfeld, Powell et al at least tried for months to justify with a pack of lies before making "the worst foreign policy decision in history." Trump: Hold my Coke. Experts have long warned that with his hubris, thin skin, historical ignorance and affinity for heedless demolition of buildings, customs, laws, credibility, he could wreak the most havoc in foreign affairs, where his power is most unbridled - especially now, as he grows increasingly desperate and dangerous.
Thus, having amassed a vast arsenal of US weaponry in the Persian Gulf, did he launch our current "national obscenity." Ever presidential, he did it in a sober, cogent speech at a White House lectern with all the gravity the occasion called for. Kidding: He did it in a histrionic 2:30 a.m post on his crappy platform from his golf bordello after a $1-million-a-plate fundraiser - cue cringe robotic dancing to God Bless the USA - and a bellicose, garbled speech, his face smeared in make-up beneath a tacky baseball cap?! Later, the White House released a photo of a hastily assembled War Room with black drapes around it and some guy peeking in - looking for the omelette bar? Observers: "Looks secure to me," "Looks like the Goodman wedding reception had to be moved," "These clowns seriously started WW lll from a blanket fort at a shitty golf club?!" and, "This is not how democracies go to war."
But we just did - with no (Constitutionally mandated) approval from Congress, no (historically obligatory) public debate, over the objections of his own intelligence agencies and against the wishes of 80% of Americans, including his own base. In a slurred, spurious, deeply Orwellian speech, he "upended half a century of US foreign policy" by proclaiming the $1-billion-a-day-but-who needs-groceries-or-health care Operation Epic Fury (presumably named by a 12-year-old minion), which he randomly called "the single greatest chance for the Iranian people to take back their Country." Citing zero evidence, he said many of Iran’s soldiers "no longer want to fight," are "looking for Immunity from us," and hope to "peacefully merge with Iranian Patriots (to) bring back the Country to Greatness" (like ravaged America) to "achieve our objective of PEACE THROUGHOUT THE MIDDLE EAST AND, INDEED, THE WORLD!” Because, bless his moronic heart, nobody ever thought of regime change before.
The world's worst negotiator moved to set the Middle East on fire after walking away from ongoing, reportedly promising talks in which Iran had already made concessions; given the regime's "stupefyingly overt corruption," they included bribes to a deeply unqualified Kushner and Witkoff. Trump's Very Serious, deep-dive analysis: "We were having negotiations with these lunatics, but it was my opinion they were going to attack first." So he did. The death toll in a swiftly spreading conflagration is now over 1,000, including at least six US service members. Gruesomely but not surprisingly, one of the first strikes hit the Shajareh Tayyebeh elementary school in southern Iran, killing an estimated 170 girls aged seven to 12. In a searing video of the carnage - woe to the murderers of little children - a distraught man stands amidst bloodied books, bodies, backpacks and shouts, "This was a school and they came to study."
Also killed the first day was Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and dozens of military commanders - so many, in a sign of Trump's famed proficiency, that he told news outlets he'd had a "beautiful plan" and several candidates for Iran’s new leadership but, oops, "They're all dead." There were other miscalculations. Despite his sanguine gibberish about PEACE, Tehran vowed to unleash "devastating blows" and the intact, powerful, heavily armed, fanatically loyal Revolutionary Guard, showing no interest in laying down their arms or ideology, warned of "a severe, decisive and regret-inducing punishment” of their killers. As in Iraq and everywhere else and one more time, a historian notes, regime change through bombing has never been successful: "Regimes are networks, (and) when an external power kills a leader, networks often consolidate, not fragment. Successors emerge, as do Martyr narratives."
As to the US, what has yet to emerge is a long-term plan, a lucid rationale for the mayhem. They throw spaghetti at the wall, offering wildly shifting goals, timelines, narratives, excuses of "imminent threat" so flimsy they'd be laughable if not lethal. They want to "destroy Iran’s missile capability," "annihilate their navy,” halt their regional hegemony, stop them from building nuclear weapons US intelligence insists are over 10 years away. Trump babbles: He wants "freedom for the people,” Iran "just wanted to practice evil," we have to "get rid of their whole group of killers and thugs," and they blocked his 2020 re-election. He really did "obliterate” their nuclear program in June but "we found they were in a totally different site - totally different, so it was just time.” One analyst: "The lack of any coherent message seems to suggest the lack of any coherent objective." Robert Reich: "He has no fucking clue what he’s doing."
Bizarrely, Trump's reportedly calling journalists to workshop objectives and timelines: 2 or 3 days, four to five weeks? More bizarrely - is it possible? - suddenly-anti-war MTG charges the regime, deep in "the same old bullshit," is even polling voters to ask how many casualties they'd accept: "How about ZERO you bunch of sick fucking liars." Meanwhile, MAGA struggles to define the debacle they've birthed. In a few head-spinning minutes, Mike Johnson claimed Iran "declared war on us," insisted "we're not at war," and clumsily pivoted to, "a very, umm, specific, clear mission, an operation." Enraged Dems were more forthright. Ruben Gallego: "Trump ran on exposing pedophiles and stopping wars, (and) is now protecting pedophiles and starting wars.” Chris Murphy on a vanity war "nobody in this country is asking for: "It won’t be the billionaire children of Trump and his buddies that die." Steve Schmidt, likewise bitter: They'll have "died to change the subject from child rape."
In greasy contrast, dry-drunk war-mongerer, preening macho cartoon, and "colossus of incompetence and extremism" Pete Kegsmith yammers about "our warriors fully unleashed to achieve our objectives, on our terms, with maximum authorities." Also "iron fist," "true force multiplier," "hitting them surgically, overwhelmingly" while seeking "off-ramps and escalations (to) execute what we need" with, "No apologies. No hesitation. Epic fury." What an epic asshole. He snarled at a presser with right-wing hacks: "Why would we tell you - you, the enemy, anybody - what we will or will not do?" He went full psychopath in another, braying of "death and destruction from the sky all day long" and "rules of engagement (that) are bold, precise, and designed to unleash American power. We are punching them while they are down." Also, "War is hell." Though Sherman added, "It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, for vengeance, for desolation."
A Christian nationalist, Crusades fan-boy and sexist xenophobe who attends Bible study and Pentagon prayer services, Hegseth is a vital force in an explosive push to enshrine brimstone-breathing - and unconstitutional - Christian fundamentalism in America's military. Thus is our new war of choice being feverishly sold, not as a ploy to distract from Epstein, ICE, inflation etc but as a Biblically-sanctioned holy crusade toward a devoutly-to-be-wished End Times. Or in the more skeptical words of The Fucking News, "Jesus Christ, They Drafted Jesus Christ To Fight Iran." Since the Iran attacks, reports Jonathan Larsen, the Military Religious Freedom Foundation has logged over 200 complaints from 50 bases of every military branch about commanders telling troops this is "all part of God’s divine plan," with Trump improbably "anointed" to bring the Rapture, Armageddon and the return of Christ to recreate a white, straight, Republican, gated-community America.
Larson reports one Christian NCO wrote on behalf of 15 troops of multiple faiths, all rejecting the call to embrace a nihilistic, Revelation-based worldview. "This is not what my faith is for," he wrote, "and this is not what my uniform is for." MRFF head Mikey Weinstein, an Air Force and Reagan White House veteran, said he's been "inundated" by calls with "one damn thing in freaking common" - complaints about "the unrestricted euphoria" of commanders urging troops to accept their fundamentalist theology. Declares Weinstein, "Any military (pushing) their blood-soaked, Christian nationalist wet dreams upon the flames of this latest non-Congressionally sanctioned attack against Iran should be swiftly, aggressively and visibly prosecuted." Adds Dean Blundell, raised Evangelical, on a "crusade of low-IQ warriors": "If history has taught us one goddamn thing, it’s that holy wars don’t end when the true believers say they will. They end when there’s nothing left to burn."
Alas, in the case of this ill-conceived holy war, true believers may be embarking not just with epic fury, an iron fist and a blanket fort but irreparably clogged toilets. Adding a surreal twist to an already dark tale of Christofascist empire-building, new reports describe toilet lines of up to 45 minutes for 4,500 sailors on the world's most advanced warship, the US Navy's $13-billion, nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford, now facing what are politely termed "significant sanitation challenges" as it idles in the Persian Gulf. The ship's vacuum-based sewage system has long been plagued by repeated failures and lack of maintenance, but the latest breakdown of many of its 650 toilets may be the final straw for sailors already weary from an extended, 8-month deployment; after Trump's illegal Venezuela assault/kidnapping, they were ordered to go straight to his illegal Iran air strikes/mass murder. Some have posted gross videos of flooding shit; reads one, "Join the Navy, they said."
Still, their Commander-In-Chief says everything's swell. "It's going to go pretty quickly," he announced of the widening chaos in the Middle East. "We're way ahead of schedule." Experts warn the Iran war, coupled with the shift of national security resources to immigration, raises the risk of terrorism; says veteran and Rep. Jason Crow, "It just shot through the roof. But Trump just bragged about the "exciting times," and asked how he'd rate the success of the war on a scale of one to ten, he said he'd give it "about a fifteen." As to the likely growing casualties from his "noble mission," he's shruggingly said, "That's the way it is." Talk about epic fury: See the response from Kendall Brown, whose husband is on the USS Gerald Ford. "If you voted for this, I fucking hate you," she says in a now-viral video. "If you still support this, you are a monster."
"America is strong because its leaders are strong. President Trump proves that every day," reads a DraftBarron website by South Park's Toby Morton. "Naturally, his son Barron is more than ready to defend the country his father so boldly commands. Service is honor. Strength is inherited. Dog Bless Barron." Arguing, "Leadership starts somewhere," it offers the loving testimonial from his dad, "People come up to me, with tears in their eyes, and they say, ‘Sir, you’re the strongest. Send Barron off to war.’" For now, Operation What Now lurches on. Trump reportedly bombed Iran because "he had a feeling, based on fact." Melania explained how to achieve "enduring peace." Oil prices quickly spiked, and millions were stranded after airports and sea lanes shut down. Because we are the most exceptional, can-do country on earth, the State Department's Office of Overseas Citizens Services hotline was there to help. Sort of. Dog bless America.
"Five things to remember about war: 1. Many things reported with confidence in the first hours and days will turn out not to be true 2. Whatever they say, the people who start wars are often thinking chiefly about domestic politics 3. The rationale given for a war will change over time. 4. Wars are unpredictable 5. Wars are easy to start and hard to stop." - Timothy Snyder
- YouTube www.youtube.com

A coalition of green groups filed a lawsuit Tuesday contesting the Trump administration's approval of what would be one of the world's largest liquefied natural gas facilities—permission granted despite the project's threats to frontline communities, the environment, and climate.
The National Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and Earthjustice are representing the Sierra Club, which is suing the US Department of Energy (DOE) for approving Venture Global’s application to export liquefied natural gas (LNG) from the Calcasieu Pass 2, or CP2, terminal, which is now under construction in Cameron Parish, Louisiana.
“We’re suing over DOE’s unlawful approval of this facility that will increase climate-warming pollution and do nothing to lower energy costs for Americans,” NRDC senior attorney Caroline Reiser said. “DOE is using an untested loophole to avoid considering the impacts of this project on Americans’ health and on the environment. The agency also failed to consider how LNG exports could increase US energy prices.”
As Earthjustice explained:
CP2’s pollution, traffic, sprawl, and visual impact would add to the harms the nine overburdened local Gulf Coast communities located near the facility already experience from nearby existing LNG terminals. These communities already bear the burden of other heavy industry and are on the frontlines of the bigger hurricanes and storms fueled by the worsening climate crisis. Approving CP2’s exports will add to environmental injustice, fuel additional climate change, and increase prices for domestic consumers.
CP2 is one of the key projects in what climate campaigners called a "staggering" LNG expansion under former President Joe Biden. In January 2024, his administration announced a temporary pause on DOE approvals of pending and future LNG export applications to nations with which the US did not have free trade agreements. A federal judge appointed by President Donald Trump later ruled the pause illegal.
The United States is the world’s leading natural gas producer and LNG exporter. While the fossil fuel industry often calls LNG a “bridge fuel”—a cleaner alternative to coal that will ease the transition to sustainable energy sources—critics have warned that the fossil gas actually hampers the transition to a green economy. LNG is mostly composed of methane, which has more than 80 times the planetary heating power of carbon dioxide during its first two decades in the atmosphere.
Trump's DOE—headed by former fracking CEO Chris Wright—granted preliminary approval to CP2 last March, with the final green light coming in October. If built as planned, it would export around 20 million metric tons per year of LNG.
"The estimated lifecycle greenhouse gas from this methane gas would be more than the annual emissions of 47 million gas-powered cars, or 54 coal-fired power plants," said NRDC.
CP2 construction has already harmed local communities in Cameron Parish—especially local fishers. Last summer, dredging despoiled hundreds of acres of marshland, burying crab traps and oyster beds, and killing wildlife including the crabs, fish, and shrimp upon which fishers depend for their livelihood.
“We’re routinely seeing less and less catch. LNG has polluted our waters and disrupted the wildlife," one local fisher and dock manager said last year. "The shrimp just do not want to come in because of the LNG projects.”
Concerns are mounting about the state of the US media landscape now that it looks increasingly likely that Paramount Skydance—a company controlled by the son of billionaire Larry Ellison, a donor to President Donald Trump—will succeed in its bid to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery.
One day after Netflix announced that it was dropping its previously accepted bid to buy Warner, many critics demanded that antitrust laws be invoked to block the Paramount-Warner merger from going through.
Alvaro Bedoya, former commissioner at the Federal Trade Commission, warned that the Ellison family could soon use their control over vast swaths of US media properties to engage in mass censorship, and he pointed to their decisions to cancel Stephen Colbert's program and to refuse to air an interview with Democratic US Senate candidate James Talarico.
"One family is about to control CBS, CNN, HBO, and TikTok," he wrote in a social media post. "They’ll buy [Warner Bros. Discovery] with $24 billion in money from the Saudis, Qatar, and Abu Dhabi. To win over Trump, they canceled Colbert... and blocked Talarico. Much more will follow. Block this rotten deal."
Craig Aaron, co-CEO of Free Press, said the proposed Paramount-Warner merger was "even worse" than the proposed Netflix-Warner merger.
"This deal endangers our democracy by giving a family of pliant billionaires even more control of vast swaths of our news coverage, TV stations, and movie studios," Aaron said. "Allowing more mergers in the already highly concentrated movie business will harm filmmakers and industry workers when Paramount delivers on its promise to make deep cuts to please its Wall Street backers."
Writing in the American Prospect, David Dayen described the Paramount-Warner merger as the "worst-case scenario" that has "echoes of media-political consolidation as we see in dictatorships the world over."
Dayen argued that state governments still had time to block the merger, but warned that they were in a race against time given that Paramount's consultants "are trying to speed run the deal in a matter of weeks."
"The states could challenge the merger even after the feds bless it," Dayen continued, "but by then, Paramount and Warner Bros. would have likely commingled their assets, engaged in layoffs, and made it very difficult to untangle the merger, particularly for judges who are inherently conservative on these matters."
Some Democratic lawmakers are warning that they aren't going to stop fighting the Paramount-Warner merger even if it goes through.
In an interview with Semafor, Sen. Ruben Gallego (R-Ariz.) predicted that the Ellisons would come to regret aggressively buying up US media properties.
"Once we take power, whoever the president is, we’re going to break up your companies," said Gallego. "So all the investment you did to create these mergers are going to be for naught. Your investors are going to be pissed at you, and you’re likely going to end up getting fired as the CEO because you wasted so much money and corrupted yourself in the process."
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) echoed Gallego's argument in a social media post.
"Paramount should enjoy its growing news monopoly while they have it," he wrote, "because when Democrats win back power we are going to break up these anti-democratic information conglomerates. All of them."
A pro-Palestine pastor has won the Democratic primary to fill the House seat in Texas that will be left behind by the pro-Israel Rep. Jasmine Crockett, who was a congregant at his church for years.
Frederick Haynes III, who has led the Friendship-West Baptist Church in Dallas for more than 40 years and was chosen by the late Rev. Jesse Jackson to lead his famed Rainbow PUSH coalition, won the primary for the seat now held by the two-term congresswoman with 72% of the vote.
Crockett announced in December that she would run for the US Senate rather than for reelection to her House seat.
Haynes—who campaigned on Medicare for All, abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and hiking the minimum wage—was endorsed by Crockett (D-Texas), who lost the bitterly contested Senate primary to state Rep. James Talarico (D-50) on Tuesday.
But where Crockett has faced heat from the Democratic base over her statements and votes in support of Israel amid its genocide in Gaza and her backing by pro-Israel megadonors, Haynes's credibility was bolstered by his willingness to call out Israel's human rights abuses against Palestinians when few other Democrats would.
On October 8, 2023, as Israel was just beginning what would become a two-year campaign to destroy Gaza in retaliation for Hamas' killing of around 1,200 Israelis the previous day, Haynes delivered a sermon questioning what was then a bipartisan consensus of unwavering military and diplomatic support for Israel.
“I recognize that we’ve got to be pro-Israel... or we get in trouble,” he said, echoing the views of a small number of progressive members of Congress at the time. “Well, I’m coming to get in trouble.”
Quoting former President Jimmy Carter, he said, "Israel is engaging in apartheid with Palestinians."
The Palestinians... don’t have the weaponry of Israel, the Palestinians don’t have the financial backing from the United States that Israel has. And so they throw their rocks and shoot their arrows, and Israel is able to bomb them and kill them. Watch in the news the disparity between Palestinians being killed and Israelis being killed. It is totally unfair. But this country is going to stand on the side of apartheid because that’s its track record.
It was a speech that would prove prescient, as Israel’s military campaign would result in the deaths of around 73,000 Palestinians in the coming years, according to official tallies from the Gaza Health Ministry, nearly 70% of whom were women and children, according to the United Nations Human Rights Office. Independent estimates suggest the actual death toll is much higher.
In that time, neither Democratic former President Joe Biden nor current Republican President Donald Trump cut off weapons sales despite a tremendous collapse of public support for Israel.
Haynes' run for Congress began mere months ago. After testifying against Republicans' efforts to racially gerrymander Texas in July, he waited right up until the federal filing deadline in December to announce a bid for Crockett's seat.
His campaign did not focus heavily on the Israel-Palestine conflict—instead emphasizing issues closer to home like the high cost of living, voting rights, and Trump's use of ICE to attack immigrant and minority communities.
But the virality of his past comments and his campaigning for the Biden administration to cut off weapons to Israel back in 2024 bolstered his image as a fighter for Palestinian rights, which earned him the endorsement of Justice Democrats and $72,000 in support from the American Priorities PAC, a newly formed group intended to support progressive candidates and counter the influence of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).
His victory on Tuesday comes as Palestinian rights have become vastly more salient among Democratic voters and the public at large. Less than a week ago, a Gallup poll showed that for the first time, a larger percentage of Americans sympathize with the Palestinians than the Israelis.
While support for Israel was also not at the forefront of the Senate primary, both Talarico and Crockett avoided joining the bulk of the party base in calling the US-backed Israeli assault on Gaza a "genocide." However, Talarico referred to the destruction of Gaza as a "moral and spiritual emergency" and condemned Israeli "war crimes."
Haynes's district is considered one of the safest in Texas for Democrats, and he is believed to be the overwhelming favorite to win the seat in November and head to Congress.
The group AIPAC Tracker, which monitors donations that politicians receive from the powerful group and the rest of the pro-Israel lobby, said that Haynes’ “big win” on Tuesday “proves that the AIPAC era is over.”
"Candidates like him all over the country," they said, "are speaking the truth rather than running away in fear."
Relatives of independent United Nations investigator Francesca Albanese this week sued US President Donald Trump and three of his senior Cabinet officials over sanctions imposed for her efforts to hold Israeli leaders and international corporations profiting from the Gaza genocide accountable.
Albanese, the UN special rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territories was sanctioned last July for what Secretary of State Marco Rubio called “her illegitimate and shameful efforts to prompt International Criminal Court (ICC) action against US and Israeli officials, companies, and executives.”
UN rules prohibit Albanese from suing under her own name, so her husband—World Bank official Massimiliano Cali—and their unnamed child filed a lawsuit in the US District Court for the District of Columbia on Wednesday.
“It is a shared interest for all who believe in international law, accountability, and the world governed by rules and not by force or by bullying,” Albanese, 48, said Thursday at a news conference hosted by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.
The lawsuit—which names Trump, Rubio, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, and Attorney General Pam Bondi as defendants—details how US sanctions have severely impacted the plaintiffs' lives, including loss of access to banking, the ability to travel to the United States, their home in Washington, DC, Cali's workplace, and professional ties to universities.
“Francesca’s expression of her views about the facts as she has found them in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and about the work of the ICC is core First Amendment activity,” the lawsuit states. “At its heart, this case concerns whether defendants can sanction a person—ruining their life and the lives of their loved ones, including their citizen daughter—because defendants disagree with their recommendations or fear their persuasiveness."
“Sanctions, used appropriately, are a powerful tool to disrupt and undermine the activities of terrorists, criminals, and authoritarian regimes,” the suit asserts. “Sanctions are abused, however, when they seek to silence disfavored points of view and to violate the constitutional rights of people the government does not like.”
Speaking to the New York Times Thursday, Albanese said that "I have experienced enormous hardship."
“There is a criminalization of my motherhood and the family bonds I have," she added, noting that her relatives fear committing a felony if they help a sanctioned person.
The State Department responded by calling the lawsuit “baseless lawfare” and claimed that the sanctions against Albanese are “legal and appropriate.”
“Francesca Albanese has openly supported antisemitism, terrorism, and has engaged in lawfare against our nation and our interests, including against major American companies vital to the world economy," the department added.
Albanese has never supported antisemitism or terrorism. Last year, she published a report, From Economy of Occupation to Economy of Genocide, in which she named and shamed dozens of international companies that are aiding and abetting Israel's genocide in Gaza.
Since her appointment nearly four years ago, Albanese has been a vocal advocate for Palestinian rights and a fierce critic of Israel's policies and practices, including invasion, occupation, colonization, apartheid, and ethnic cleansing.
Albanese accuses Israel of violating the Genocide Convention, as does South Africa, which is leading a case against Israel based on the landmark treaty—that Israel signed and ratified—at the International Court of Justice.
Last September, a panel of independent UN human rights experts—which did not include Albanese—found that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza, a conclusion shared by many scholars, jurists, world leaders, and rights groups.
More than 250,000 Palestinians, the vast majority of them civilians, have been killed or wounded in Gaza over the past 28 months, including thousands who are still missing. Two million people—the overwhelming majority of the strip's population—have been forcibly displaced, starved, or sickened. Gaza lies in utter ruins.
Albanese also supports prosecuting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant—who ordered the "complete siege" of Gaza that fueled a famine—for crimes against humanity and war crimes, as alleged in arrest warrants issued by the ICC in November 2024.
In an interview with the Associated Press shortly after she was sanctioned, Albanese said: “My daughter is American. I’ve been living in the US and I have some assets there. So of course, it’s going to harm me. What can I do? I did everything I did in good faith, and knowing that, my commitment to justice is more important than personal interests.”
While US complicity in Israel's genocidal assault on Gaza predates Trump's return to office, he has waged a broad attack on critics of his administration's foreign policy, including nearly unconditional support for Israel. Last year, he issued an executive order authorizing sanctions against anyone who helps the ICC investigate or prosecute Americans or US allies.
Albanese has been also targeted by several European nations. Earlier this month, the foreign ministers of Austria, the Czech Republic, France, and Germany have publicly called for Albanese’s resignation or termination after the pro-Israel group UN Watch—which is unaffiliated with the world body—circulated an deceptively edited video of her purportedly calling Israel “the common enemy of humanity."
“European governments accuse me—based on statements I never made—with a virulence and conviction that they have NEVER used against those who have slaughtered 20,000+ children," Albanese said in response.
As the US House prepared to vote Thursday on a war powers resolution aimed at ending President Donald Trump's assault on Iran and Democratic leaders whip votes in support of the measure, progressive organizers ramped up pressure on lawmakers to side with the vast majority of the party's voters and support the resolution—or face consequences in upcoming elections.
Usamah Andrabi, a spokesperson for Justice Democrats, told Axios Wednesday after Senate Republicans—and Democratic Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania—voted down a companion resolution, that "any Democrat that votes against war powers is supporting Trump's war on Iran and deserves to be primaried because all voters across the political spectrum are wholeheartedly against it."
A poll released by Reuters/Ipsos this week found that just 25% of voters support Trump's decision to join Israel in launching airstrikes across Iran, which have so far killed more than 1,000 Iranian civilians. At least six US service members have also died or been killed since the unprovoked assault began over the weekend.
Only 7% of Democratic voters support "Operation Epic Fury," as the administration is calling the attacks, while 74% oppose it. A small majority of Republicans, 55%, said they approved of the White House's war on Iran, which the administration has justified with conflicting reasons—none of them convincing experts who say the attacks are a clear violation of international law.
After warning that "the American people will remember who voted to keep our service members in danger by supporting this dangerous, unnecessary, unpopular war" following the Senate vote on Wednesday, the advocacy group Demand Progress urged Americans to call their representatives in Congress and demand they support the war powers resolution introduced in the House by Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.).
The measure is expected to fail due to the GOP majority; Republicans hold 218 seats in the House while Democrats control 214; Massie and one other Republican, Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio), have indicated support.
Groups are "organizing calls into their districts to make sure that every Democrat votes for" the bipartisan resolution, one House progressive told the outlet.
Organizers are directing particular ire at House Democrats who have a history of staunchly backing Israel and have unveiled a resolution that would allow Trump to continue striking Iran for 30 days.
That resolution was introduced by Reps. Josh Gottheimer (NJ), Jim Costa (Calif.), Henry Cuellar (Texas), Jared Golden (Maine), Greg Landsman (Ohio), and Jimmy Panetta (Calif.) and would authorize the attacks for roughly the same length of time the president has said he believes they'll last, although Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Wednesday that the war could take twice as long and that, ultimately, there would be no timeline placed on the war.
Cavan Kharrazian, a senior policy adviser for Demand Progress, told The Intercept Wednesday that for "any representative that is actually against the war," the resolution introduced by Khanna and Massie is "the vehicle they should be voting for now, and not attempting to give Trump a blank check for 30 days."
“We have already seen in the past four days the death and destruction and escalation with this war. I can’t even imagine what things look like in 30 days," said Kharrazian.
Golden is not seeking reelection this year; the other five co-sponsors of the alternative war powers resolution are up for reelection and facing primaries in the coming months.
Axios asked other lawmakers including Reps. Tom Suozzi (D-NY) and Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) how they plan to vote on Khanna and Massie's resolution, but did not receive clear answers, with Suozzi saying only that he was "going to do the right thing."
Moskowitz told The Hill that he has "decided" how he'll vote but is "not ready to say what my vote is."
Oliver Larkin, a democratic socialist running against Moskowitz in the primary, seized on the congressman's comment.
Britt Jacovich, a spokesperson for the grassroots advocacy group MoveOn, told Axios that the organization's members "have no plans to throw their support behind members of Congress who refused to do their job and stop Trump from expanding his war. All options are on the table to make sure that our members' voices are heard loud and clear."
MoveOn also said Wednesday that any lawmaker who supports a $50 billion supplemental funding package "should expect to hear from our members."
"MoveOn members consider a vote for the supplemental a vote in favor of Donald Trump's war," said the group.
In a private Democratic caucus meeting on Wednesday, Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY), the House Foreign Affairs Committee ranking member, and Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), made an "emphatic" case for Khanna and Massie's resolution, and House Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-Mass.) has been leading efforts to whip votes.
One anonymous progressive House Democrat told Axios that a vote against the resolution would be "politically perilous" for any Democrat.
Advocacy groups are "already preparing" to organize primary challenges against Democrats who break ranks or vote to allow Trump to attack Iran for a 30-day window, said the lawmaker.
"If the filing deadline has passed, they'll do it in '28," they told Axios. "It's basically inviting a primary challenge."
Paco Fabian, a spokesperson for Our Revolution, told Axios that "when elected officials... fail to stand with working people demanding peace and accountability, they risk losing the trust of the voters who put them in office."
"And when that trust is broken," he said, "voters often begin looking for leaders who will fight for them."
"This disgraceful vote does not change Congress' legal duty, and it certainly does not silence the millions of Americans who oppose another illegal war," said an ACLU director.
As US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth declared Thursday that "the amount of firepower over Iran and over Tehran is about to surge dramatically," four Democrats in the House of Representatives voted with nearly all Republicans to reject a bipartisan war powers resolution that would have halted President Donald Trump and Israel's assault on the Middle East country.
Democratic Reps. Henry Cuellar (Texas), Jared Golden (Maine), Greg Landsman (Ohio), and Juan Vargas (Calif.) stood with the GOP for the 212-219 vote against H.Con.Res.38, which was led by Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.). The only other Republican to support the resolution was Rep. Warren Davidson (Ohio)—though GOP Rep. Tony Gonzales (Texas), who is facing an unrelated scandal, did not participate.
Dylan Williams, vice president for government affairs at the think tank Center for International Policy, highlighted that given Massie and Davidson's votes, "if those four Democrats had stuck with their caucus and their voters, it would have passed."
"Everyone who opposed the resolution owns this war—along with the casualties, rising gas prices, and regional chaos that comes with it."
The House vote came just a day after Democratic US Sen. John Fetterman (Pa.) and all of the chamber's Republicans but Sen. Rand Paul (Ky.) rejected S.J.Res.104, a similar resolution sponsored by Paul and Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.). As with the Wednesday vote, a range of critics called out Congress for enabling Trump's illegal and already seemingly endless war.
"This is a shameful abdication of Congress' constitutional authority to take the country to war," said Defending Rights & Dissent, noting the rising death toll. "US and Israeli strikes have hit elementary schools, hospitals, and the capital city of Tehran, home to 10 million. Six US service members have died. Trump is carrying out yet another regime change war of choice, and the American people have been overwhelmingly clear that they don't support it."
"This was Congress' best chance to stop further killings, to stop an all-out regional war with no end in sight, and to uphold the constitutional principle that prevents presidents from going rogue," the group continued. "We are deeply disappointed in both chambers' failure to stand up to this dangerous insanity."
Christopher Anders, director of the ACLU's democracy and technology division, stressed in a statement that "this failed war powers vote is nothing short of cowardly, but Congress can't dodge the Constitution forever."
"By refusing to rein in President Trump's unauthorized war with Iran, Congress has allowed President Trump to make a mockery of the Constitution and is trying to duck responsibility for putting service members and civilians in great danger," Anders added. "But, this disgraceful vote does not change Congress' legal duty, and it certainly does not silence the millions of Americans who oppose another illegal war. We will hold President Trump accountable for this abuse of power."
In the lead-up to Thursday's vote, one unnamed "senior progressive House Democrat" told Axios that the groups including Justice Democrats, MoveOn, Progressive Change Campaign Committee, and Our Revolution "will primary anyone" who votes no.
After the vote, Justice Democrats shared the congressional office numbers of the four Democrats, and said to "call these spineless Dems who support Trump's new forever war with Iran and tell them to go to war themselves if they want it so bad."
Another progressive group, a youth-led climate organization Sunrise Movement, also took aim at the House Democrats who voted with the GOP, declaring on social media: "Absolutely ridiculous. Call them out. Vote them out."
Council on American-Islamic Relations government affairs director Robert S. McCaw commended all lawmakers "who voted to uphold Congress' constitutional duty and demand an end to unauthorized hostilities with Iran," particularly Massie and Davidson for their "courage to break with their party and stand on principle."
It is also "deeply disappointing" that some Democrats "joined Republicans to defeat this effort and enable an unconstitutional war," he said, warning that "their votes helped give the administration a green light to continue a dangerous escalation that threatens American lives and regional stability."
Earlier this week, Cuellar, Golden, and Landsman joined Democratic Reps. Jim Costa (Calif.), Josh Gottheimer (NJ), and Jimmy Panetta (Calif.) to introduce a competing war powers resolution that would let Trump wage war on Iran for a month. Noting that proposal, McCaw argued that "Americans did not elect Congress to issue a '30 days of carnage hall pass' for an unauthorized war. If a war is unconstitutional today, it should not be allowed to continue for another month."
“The Constitution is clear: Congress, not the president, has the authority to decide when this nation goes to war," he added. "The American people must continue pressing their elected representatives to reclaim that authority and stop another disastrous war in the Middle East before it spirals further out of control."
As of Thursday, the Iranian government put the death toll at 1,230, though US and Israeli attacks continue, and Hegseth said that "we have only just begun to fight and fight decisively... If you think you've seen something, just wait. The amount of combat power that's still flowing, that's still coming, that we'll be able to project over Iran is a multiples of what it currently is right now."
On top of the lives lost, recent reporting suggests that Trump's war on Iran could be costing US taxpayers $1 billion per day. Calling the House vote "profoundly disappointing," Demand Progress senior policy adviser Cavan Kharrazian said that "everyone who opposed the resolution owns this war—along with the casualties, rising gas prices, and regional chaos that comes with it."
"Congress needs to stop listening to warmongering elites," Kharrazian added, "and start listening to the American people who are sick and tired of being dragged into forever wars."
"Israel built AI targeting systems in Gaza—approved kills in 20 seconds, 10% error rate accepted," said one expert. "Now those same systems are running over Iran... and there’s an arms industry IPO-ing off the back of it."
After Israel's unprecedented use of artificial intelligence to select bombing targets in Gaza, experts are now sounding the alarm regarding what one analyst on Thursday called a lack of human supervision over Israeli AI targeting in Iran.
"Similarities between Israel's bombing of Gaza and Tehran are growing stronger," Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft executive vice president Trita Parsi said Thursday on X. "In both cases, it appears Israel is using AI without any human oversight."
"For instance, Israel has bombed a park in Tehran called 'Police Park,'" Parsi added. "It has nothing to do with the police. But it appears AI identified it as a target since Israel is bombing all government-related buildings. No one in Israel bothered to check and find out that it is just a park."
Borrowing from startup vernacular, tech journalist Jacob Ward calls Israel's use and export of AI technology in the post-Gaza era "lethal beta."
"Gaza was the prototype," Ward explained in a video posted this week on Bluesky. "Iran is the launch."
"[It's] a live-fire, live-ordnance lab experiment on people, killing people, that creates a pipeline of exportable products to the rest of the world, and it has become a big industry in Israel—and it's something that we in the United States have been dealing with and doing business with for some time as well."
Israel built AI targeting systems in Gaza — approved kills in 20 seconds, 10% error rate accepted. Now those same systems are running over Iran and being exported all over the world. I’m calling this “lethal beta,” and there’s an arms industry IPO-ing off the back of it. Full breakdown at
[image or embed]
— Jacob Ward (@byjacobward.bsky.social) March 3, 2026 at 4:45 PM
Previous investigations have detailed how the IDF uses Habsora, an Israeli AI system that can automatically select airstrike targets at an exponentially faster rate than ever before. One Israeli intelligence source asserted that the technology has transformed the IDF into a “mass assassination factory” in which the “emphasis is on quantity and not quality” of kills.
Mistakes were all but inevitable, but expert critics argue Israeli policy has made matters worse. In the tense hours following the Hamas-led attack of October 7, 2023, mid-ranking IDF officers were empowered to order attacks on not only senior Hamas commanders but any fighter in the resistance group, no matter how low-ranking.
According to a New York Times investigation, IDF officers were also permitted to risk up to 20 civilian lives in each airstrike, and up to 500 noncombatant lives per day. Even that limit was lifted after just a few days. Officers could order any number of strikes as they believed were legal, with no limits on civilian harm.
Senior IDF commanders sometimes approved strikes they knew could kill more than 100 civilians if the target was considered high-value. In one AI-aided airstrike targeting one senior Hamas commander, the IDF dropped multiple US-supplied 2,000-pound bombs, which can level an entire city block, on the Jabalia refugee camp in October 2023.
That bombing killed at least 126 people, 68 of them children, and wounded 280 others. Hamas said four Israeli and three international hostages were also killed in the attack.
The Washington Post reported Wednesday that the US military in Iran has "leveraged the most advanced artificial intelligence it’s ever used in warfare, a tool that could be difficult for the Pentagon to give up even as it severs ties with the company that created it."
According to the Post, Palantir's Maven Smart System—which contains Anthropic's Claude AI language model—reportedly helped US commanders select 1,000 Iranian targets during the war's first 24 hours alone.
Experts are urging a more cautious approach to military AI use. Paul Scharre, executive vice president at the Center for a New American Security, told the Post that “AI gets it wrong... We need humans to check the output of generative AI when the stakes are life and death.”
It is not publicly known whether AI was used in connection with any of the deadliest massacres of the current war on Iran, which has left more than 1,000 Iranians dead, including around 175 children and others who were killed by what first responders and victims' relatives said was a double-tap strike on a girls' school last Saturday in the southern city of Minab.
Last week, Trump ordered all federal agencies including the Department of Defense to stop using all Anthropic products in apparent retaliation for the San Francisco-based company's refusal to allow unrestricted government and military use of its technology over fears it could be used for mass surveillance of Americans and in automated weapons systems, also known as "killer robots."
Trump gave the Pentagon six months to phase out Anthropic products, allowing their continued use in the Iran war pending replacements.
Project Nimbus—a $1.2 billion cloud-computing and AI contract signed in 2021 between the Israeli government and Amazon Web Services and Google Cloud—provides cloud infrastructure, AI tools, and data storage for the IDF and other agencies. The deal prohibits Google or Amazon from refusing service to Israeli government, military, or intelligence agencies.
Academics and jurists are gathered this week in Geneva, Switzerland—with a second four-day round of talks starting August 31—for a United Nations-sponsored conference on lethal autonomous weapons systems.
Attendees are examining the risks posed by killer robots that can select and engage targets without meaningful human control. They are also studying the legal, military, and technological implications of autonomous weapons systems and working to build international consensus on regulation.
“The current failure to regulate AI warfare, or to pause its usage until there is some agreement on lawful usage, seems to suggest potential proliferation of AI warfare is imminent,” Craig Jones, a political geographer at Newcastle University in England who researches military targeting, told Nature's Nicola Jones on Thursday.
While some proponents of AI weapons systems have claimed their use will reduce civilian harm, Jones stressed that "there is no evidence that AI lowers civilian deaths or wrongful targeting decisions—and it may be that the opposite is true."
"This kind of quota system mirrors the kind of policies that white supremacist groups, including the Klan, pushed for 100 years ago."
Not a single refugee who isn't a white South African has been legally resettled in the United States since October, according to the State Department's most recent arrivals report.
The report, published last month, shows that from the start of October 2025 and the end of January 2026, just 1,651 people were admitted under the US Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP), which allows those fearing persecution based on race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or social group to apply for refuge in the United States.
Aside from just three, every single one of them was from South Africa.
Three Afghan refugees were also reported to have been settled in Colorado in November. But since then, their admission has been indefinitely suspended, and those who have entered may be at risk of deportation.
During that same period a year earlier—the final months of the Biden administration—a total of 37,596 refugees arrived in the US, with the greatest numbers coming from the Middle East, South Asia, and Africa.
The Trump administration dramatically curbed refugee admissions during its first year in power. On his first day back in office last January, President Donald Trump suspended USRAP processing, leaving around 600,000 people in the pipeline suddenly stranded, including roughly 10,000 who'd already booked flights.
Around 130,000 of those refugees had already been through the State Department's meticulous and taxing vetting process, and were instead "left to languish in refugee camps around the world after being given the promise of safety and a new life in America,” as a group of Democrats in Congress put it.
The next month, however, Trump carved out an exception to the suspension exclusively for white South Africans, who he has falsely claimed face a "genocide," and severe "discrimination" from land redistribution policies intended to correct extreme apartheid-era inequalities.
After previously discussing a cap of 40,000 refugee admissions for the fiscal year 2026---already a reduction by over two-thirds from the Biden administration---Trump announced on September 30 that he would lower admissions to just 7,500, a historic low.
He announced the change without consultation with Congress, which is required under the 1980 Refugee Act, leading Democrats to accuse him of acting in "open defiance of the law."
But in late February, Reuters reported on an internal State Department document showing that the administration was planning to welcome as many as 4,500 white South Africans to the US per month and detailed plans to install trailers on US Embassy property in the country to expedite more immigrant approvals.
All the while, refugees fleeing war, government oppression, and genocide in countries including Syria, Sudan, Ukraine, Afghanistan, and others have been locked out or face threats of arrest by the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) under a new policy requiring them to be reinspected to determine their ability for “assimilation.”
Many critics have pointed out the dramatic gulf in treatment between white immigrants from South Africa and members of other, largely nonwhite groups of immigrants, whom it has undertaken extreme measures to remove from the country with expediency.
Last month, a Rohingya refugee, who fled genocide in Myanmar and legally entered the US as a refugee, was found dead on the streets of Buffalo, New York, after being detained and then left outdoors in the freezing cold by immigration agents.
The policy was revealed as part of a case in which a federal judge halted a DHS effort to detain thousands of refugees in Minnesota who did not seek green cards after their first year of residency in the United States.
"While the Trump administration is trying to convert warehouses at home into massive prisons to jail and deport immigrants swept up in its racist crackdown, it is also working to build trailers in Pretoria so it can rapidly increase the number of white South Africans," wrote Ja'han Jones in an opinion piece for MS NOW.
Likening it to the 1924 Immigration Act, which created strict ethnic quotas for entry into the US, Jones said: "It’s the kind of immigration policy the Ku Klux Klan dreamed of. Literally. This kind of quota system mirrors the kind of policies that white supremacist groups, including the Klan, pushed for 100 years ago."