5
#000000
#FFFFFF
LIVE COVERAGE
Opinion
Climate
Economy
Politics
Rights & Justice
War & Peace
Further
Two Different America's (Sic)
Hoo boy. With the approach of what bleakly promises to be "the super-Islamophobic midterms," the Bigot-In-Chief is letting his racist freak flag fly by attacking Dr. Abdul El-Sayed, whose smarts, strength, hotness, accomplished wife and Michigan win clearly terrify him. Cue charges of "communist," "man of hate," and, probs soon, AI slop featuring suicide vests. Meanwhile, El-Sayed, a far sharper tool in the shed, has embraced the charge they represent "(two) America’s": The ads write themselves.
Planet MAGA, of course, is already so delusional Trump just boasted of his "Great Poll Numbers," which now sit at rock-bottom lows of 38% to 33%. For a bunch of hacks led by a fragile narcissist who's never seen a scapegoat he didn't relish, the fantastical goes hand-in-stubby-hand with the fear-mongering: vandals in the Reflecting Pool, domestic terrorists at No Kings, migrant caravans, lunatic Bolsheviks, weird names or just brown-or-black skinned success, more terrifying to many of these losers than any threat of extremism. Enter, in peril, the high-achieving epidemiologist, health official, author and "Muslim boogeyman" El-Sayed. “Expect them to throw the whole bigoted kitchen sink at El-Sayed," says Mehdi Hasan. "This will be the anti-Zohran Mamdani campaign on anti-Muslim steroids."
Unsurprisingly, it began in earnest the minute the good doctor won Michigan's against-the-odds primary against establishment Dem Haley Stevens. He'll face off against GOP Rep. and racist ijiot Mike Rogers, who of course has rushed to call the U.S.-born-and-bred El-Sayed "anti-American" and - pulling the same juvenile "Barack Hussein Obama" crap to undermine his legitimacy - to use his full, scary, def-not-in-Kansas-anymore name Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed. But Abdulrahman, who doesn't suffer fools gladly, has brutally pushed back. "With a name like mine, I never thought running for office would be possible," he said at a campaign event. But if "Mike" wants to focus on his 11-letter (a lot!) first name, he just wanted to remind him, "If you don’t know how to say it, keep the name out of your damn mouth.”
In moronic lockstep, MAGA's bigots, brown shirts and zealots have followed suit with "cartoonishly Islamophobic attacks." They use his full name and say he's a "socialist," which they can't define but anyway he isn't. Anti-trans goon Nancy Mace charges, “Every single Muslim holding public office (is) a Trojan Horse and a threat to national security and our republic," and woe is us when "our granddaughters are wearing burkas to school." Vapid scumbag JD calls him a "crazy" guy who doesn't want Trump's rip-off, oligarch-run "prosperous economy" and flings "personal insults" at Vance's family, though hours later Trump attacked El-Sayed's wife, who is U.S.-born and thus not an alleged Einstein Visa immigrant third wife who somehow after 30 years here can still barely speak English. Maybe it was an Epstein Visa?
As usual, Trump has eagerly led the racist, vulgar charge. Along with a communist man of hate, he's also called El-Sayed a "jihadist" from a rigged, "strictly Third World" state who's "full of shit." It turns out El-Sayed is also "the absolute best at casually burning Trump to the fucking ground": Asked about the barb, El-Sayed snapped back, “At least I don’t let mine go in the middle of the Oval Office." And as with another smart, quick, non-white guy who's way above his pay grade and lives rent-free in his wee puerile mind, he likes to sneeringly recite, often stumbling, the full, scary name of a guy who this time actually would be the first Muslim U.S. senator. Presumably, the ketchup really hit the White House walls last weekend when El-Sayed said he'd had "a really good conversation" with Obama about "what we need to do to win."
Above all, the bigot for all seasons pivots to the trope of anyone Arabic - El-Sayed's parents immigrated from Egypt - being anti-Semitic. "He doesn't love Jewish people," babbles Trump. "He hates them with a passion that burns in his heart." In fact, El-Sayed has plainly, repeatedly said he opposes not Jews but Israel's genocidal policies, AIPAC and the dark U.S. money that abets both: "I believe in equal rights to peace, dignity and self-determination for all people." That call for equality under the law has nothing to do with anti-Semitism, notes Peter Beinart; cognizant of history. he also warns that a political party or ideology willing to be "nakedly bigoted" toward any group of people, in this case Muslims, in order to maintain power would, if the politics were to shift, "do the same thing to Jews in a heartbeat."
Obviously, such subtlety is beyond the dim-witted likes of Trump and his MAGA zombies, who alone could look at Dr. El-Sayed and his (one) wife Dr. Sarah Jukaku, a psychiatrist whose parents emigrated here from India, and see a threat. Both are U.S.-born-and- raised doctors with undergrad degrees from University of Michigan, where they met, and advanced degrees from Columbia and Oxford. In his book Healing Politics, El-Sayed offers a rigorous framework for understanding systemic medical and political failure, and building conditions for lasting healing. He also calls Jukaku his “rock" and praises the "quiet confidence" that led her to work with people confronting pain. "I struggled to learn who I was,” he wrote of their earlier selves. “Sarah did not. She danced with her emotions. I wrestled with mine." The couple has two daughters.
No wonder, then, a needy, hollow rapist, con-man, bully and aspiring tinpot dictator, routinely raking in billions while kids go hungry and stuffed into a cheap tux for his fellow billionaire felons, posted a photo of himself with his tacky, mail-order, call-girl wife in a tight dress with "redacted Epstein files written all over it" - both smirking, "We're richer and be better than you and just ignore our vile name appearing in those pedo files thousands of times" - alongside the other couple, warmly smiling after a pancake breakfast in a diner, El Sayed in a t-shirt, Jukaku in a hijab so she must be a terrorist (though Trump, suspect, is wearing a cat.) The caption for the side-by-side pics, which only the spectacularly tone-deaf Trump could remotely imagine as a mic-drop: "Two VERY DIFFERENT America’s (sic).” Umm. Sure.
Kudos to El-Sayed, prince among men, who didn't even stoop to pick the low-hanging fruit of Trump's "grammatical shitbaggery" - one comment: "What a maroon" - emblematic of a proudly semi-literate GOP somehow come to power in our debased America without understanding how apostrophes work. Instead, El-Sayed went for the meat of the matter. "Yeah, he's right," he told CNN. Swiftly, he embraced the campaign-ready concept of two Americas: "Trump's vision, the one you're living in right now (in) which your overlords are two people who don’t like each other, but join in the interest of making billions of dollars off of you...Or two people who genuinely love each other, enjoyed some pancakes together, and want to come together to build the kind of America where they can raise a family and know that family is going to have the good things."
Those "good things" - health care, good jobs, clean air and water, a relatively level playing field to replace gross inequality, a country where people can live peaceably together "with their sisters and brothers" - are what he and his wife want for their kids, and he wisely gauges most of the rest of us do too. And no, he says, rebutting GOP charges, it's not "radical" to believe people should be able to afford groceries, have health care, partake in free elections. Also, he and his wife actually "like each other," he adds; as to the couple in the "very different" America, "From what I've heard, it's a bit of a rocky road." As mid-terms loom. “They are going to try to paint me as a certain thing, (but) America is a lot bigger than (these) very small people make it out to be," he says. "They all think we won't step up and fight...We fight for each other."
@abdulelsayed They all think we won't step up and fight... They think they're the biggest, baddest bully on the playground... That they're going to show up and we're going to run away...
Aug 10, 2026
SEE ALL
News
'It Is a Warning': Super El Niño Pushed Ocean Temps to Hottest on Record for July
Last month's average global ocean surface temperature was the hottest ever recorded in the month of July, fueled in part by uniquely intense, fossil fuel-driven El Niño conditions that have wreaked deadly havoc around the world this summer.
The European Union's Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S) said Monday that last month—which ranked as the second warmest July on record—"saw exceptionally high temperatures for the month across a large portion of the tropical Pacific, an area where El Niño conditions are present and forecast to further strengthen in the coming months." Average global sea surface temperatures (SSTs) were 20.96°C last month, surpassing the July 2023 record of 20.89°C.
"Around Europe, SSTs reached record highs for July along the Atlantic coast and western Mediterranean, associated with widespread strong or severe marine heatwave conditions," C3S said.
Brian O'Donnell, director of the Campaign for Nature, said the latest Copernicus data "is more than another climate milestone; it is a warning that the natural systems we depend on are being pushed closer to their limits."
"Governments have become very good at documenting these records. Now they need to become much better at safeguarding the forests, wetlands, and oceans that help regulate the climate and protect communities from the impacts of warming world," said O'Donnell. "With land and ocean temperatures across Europe breaching records, governments should be investing far more and delivering on their global commitment to protect at least 30% of land and ocean by 2030."
The new analysis was released as western Europe and other regions faced deadly heat, wildfires, drought, and other extreme weather as the international community, including the US and other leading polluters, fails to rein in fossil fuel use—and as oil and gas giants reap record profits.
“Our leaders’ response has to be swifter and stronger than El Niño," Anne Jellema, executive director of the environmental group 350.org, said Monday. "We already know that global heating is supercharging extreme weather damage, and the public wants polluters to pay for it. With Big Oil’s earnings skyrocketing while a global food crisis looms, now is the time to act. The only way to stave off a humanitarian disaster is to make those causing it pay upfront—before even more damage is done.”
Scientists have characterized this year's El Niño, which officially began on June 11, as historically strong and dangerous, earning it the informal "Super El Niño" label.
The Washington Post reported Monday that the 2026 El Niño is "on track to become the strongest ever recorded, with cascading effects on global climate peaking late this year and into next."
"El Niño’s effects have already been felt around the planet," the Post observed. "The higher frequency of heat domes worldwide, the nonstop temperature records in Peru and deadly storms in Chile can all be linked to this pattern. As can the destructive typhoons in the western Pacific Ocean and the relative calm of the Atlantic hurricane season so far."
United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres warned in remarks to reporters last month that El Niño is no longer just "on our doorstep."
"It is inside the house—and turning up the heat," said Guterres. "We have already endured a summer of extremes—record-shattering heat domes, apocalyptic wildfires raging in Spain, France, and far beyond. Thousands of lives lost in the scorching conditions.”
“But according to the latest science," he added, "this is only a warm-up act."
Aug 10, 2026
SEE ALL
News
Trump's TSA Sued Over 'Insane Proposal' to Privatize Airport Screening
The nation's largest public employees union filed a lawsuit Wednesday against the Trump administration accusing it of trying to conceal a scheme aimed at privatizing the federally controlled airport screening process.
In its complaint, the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) asked a federal court to force the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to comply with its Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for TSA Gold+, which the union described as a "secretive push to expand the privatization of airport security screening functions."
The union originally filed its FOIA request in May, but has since received none of the records requested, although the TSA last month did acknowledge the program's existence and said that there are plans to launch it at three airports next year.
AFGE's complaint alleges that the program "would jeopardize the employment conditions of tens of thousands of TSA employees and the safety of the traveling public," while noting that the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) last year tried to "eliminate the collective bargaining rights of approximately 47,000 employees" before being enjoined by a court order.
AFGE also pointed to a proposal contained in the Heritage Foundation's notorious Project 2025 blueprint to "privatize the screening function" at US airports.
The union said it was demanding more information from the TSA because "of its interest in the TSA GoldPlus program, the lack of public information about the program, and the potential threat to its membership."
Everett Kelley, national president of AFGE, said that the administration appeared to be headed back toward the kind of system used before the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in which airports relied on private contractors with less stringent standards for screening passengers.
"TSA has been keeping everyone in the dark about its privatization plans–TSA employees, members of Congress, airport authorities, and the flying public,” said Kelley. "Changes of this magnitude must not be made in the dark."
Sara Nelson, international president of the Association of Flight Attendants, said in an interview with The American Prospect published Monday that "nobody should be surprised" by the administration's efforts given how they were foreshadowed by Project 2025.
"This is about dismantling government everywhere, dismantling worker rights everywhere," said Nelson, who described the privatization initiative as "an insane proposal" by the Trump administration.
Chris Finlay, a TSA worker in Tampa and president of AFGE local 556, told The Guardian in an interview published Wednesday that having for-profit firms in charge of security would inevitably lead to a decay in safety standards.
"As a business, their primary goal is to be profitable," said Finlay, "and staffing is the most expensive part of that contract, so if they can reduce how much they have to pay staff, they’re going to... They’re selling the safety of the traveling public for corporate greed. That’s what is happening."
Aug 06, 2026
SEE ALL
News
Can Flanagan in Minnesota and Wisconsin's Hong Continue Progressive Wave in Midwest?
As the Democratic establishment and the corporate media continue to grapple with the results of last week's Senate primary in Michigan, which Abdul El-Sayed won after campaigning on Medicare for All, ending corporations' grip on elections, and investing in the social safety net instead of foreign wars, two more high-profile Midwestern races on Tuesday may provide more answers about the direction in which the Democratic base hopes to push the party.
In Minnesota, progressive Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan is facing US Rep. Angie Craig in the Democratic Senate primary, while in neighboring Wisconsin, democratic socialist state Rep. Francesca Hong's (D-76) closest opponent is Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley.
As in Michigan, where Democratic operatives have insisted that Rep. Haley Stevens would have been a better bet to win against Republican candidate Mike Rogers, supporters of Craig claim the congresswoman is more "electable" than Flanagan, who supports Medicare for All, an end to "offensive weapons sales to Israel," and publicly financed universal pre-kindergarten.
“Electability is probably the No. 1 factor,” Joe Radinovich, a Democratic strategist who views Craig as the better candidate to face a Republican in the November midterms, told The New York Times.
But a number of Craig's positions and ties suggest her backers may be working with a flawed understanding of what makes a candidate appealing to voters in 2026, with nearly half of Democratic voters in swing districts last year telling Upswing Strategies that they would avoid supporting a candidate who was funded by the pro-Israel lobby, 78% of Democrats saying in a poll in December that they supported Medicare for All, and half of Americans telling YouGov last month that they believed US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) should be abolished.
Craig has received major support from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) in the past, but says she asked the powerful pro-Israel group not to donate to her this year as Americans sour on US military support for Israel, which, with the backing of the Biden and Trump administrations, has slaughtered more than 73,000 Palestinians in Gaza since October 2023. AIPAC has continued hosting fundraisers to boost Craig's campaign indirectly.
Craig has refused to call Israel's attacks on Gaza a genocide, while Flanagan has joined top human rights organizations and Holocaust experts in doing so, saying that “American taxpayer dollars should not be used to fuel the horrific violence and suffering that’s being experienced there."
The congresswoman is also out of step with the majority of Democrats on healthcare, pushing for legislation that would "build on" the Affordable Care Act instead of establishing a national healthcare plan, and on immigration policy. She was the only Democrat in Minnesota to support the Laken Riley Act, which gave ICE broader power to detain immigrants. Although Craig initially defended her vote, she expressed regret in March, after two Minnesota residents were killed by federal immigration agents who were part of President Donald Trump's crackdown in the state.
Flanagan has not joined the specific call to abolish ICE, but told The New York Times: “Whatever word you want to use, it can’t exist like this anymore. We have to rip ICE apart and start over.”
Outside groups, including super political action committees (PACs) representing cryptocurrency interests, have poured roughly $20 million into the effort to elect Craig, a co-sponsor of the CLARITY Act. The bill would split regulation of digital assets between the Securities and Exchange Commission and the industry-friendly Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
Flanagan on Monday said she was not intimidated by the special interests that, as she said "think they can buy this Senate seat."
The lieutenant governor has been endorsed by Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and Tina Smith (D-Minn.), among others, as well as a number of labor unions, the anti-corruption group End Citizens United, and the advocacy group Indivisible.
Some recent polls have shown Craig with a small lead, while some internal surveys by Flanagan's campaign have shown the lieutenant governor several points ahead of her opponent.
Sanders predicted "a tight race" on Sunday in an interview with Margaret Brennan of CBS News' "Face the Nation."
"I hope very much that Peggy wins," said the senator. "I think what we’re seeing in Minnesota, Margaret, in Michigan, and all across this country, is that people understand that we’re living with an economy that is rigged. You have working families, 60% of our people, living paycheck to paycheck. People can’t afford groceries, housing, healthcare, basic necessities of life."
In Wisconsin, Sanders, Warren, and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) are among the high-profile progressives who have declined to wade into the race and endorse Hong, who has consistently led by double digits in polls since February.
The gubernatorial candidate has distanced herself recently from what she called "bad takes"—a call in 2020 to "cancel Thanksgiving" and support for abolishing law enforcement.
“I will not abolish the police," said Hong in a debate in July. “I want to focus on stopping violent crime and giving law enforcement the resources and the training that they need but ensure that we are also holding accountable law enforcement that does not follow the law."
But Hong has won the support of Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), with Omar calling her a "true champion for working families" and highlighting her support for broadly popular proposals like universal childcare, Medicare for All, and guaranteed paid leave.
Opponents of Hong are striving to attach the word "communism" to her political priorities—a clear sign, said Gustavo Gordillo of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) chapter in New York City recently, that "democratic socialism is not the scary word it used to be" for voters.
When asked by Fox News on Tuesday about alleged "fears that democratic socialism could turn into communism," Hong dismissed the idea, echoing Ocasio-Cortez's recent comment that "we can't even raise the minimum wage" in Congress.
"This is a state where we still have a $2.33 tipped minimum wage and $7.25 minimum wage," said Hong. "I think it's gonna be hard to turn that into socialism soon, but what we can do with this campaign is make sure we fight for policies that put working-class people first."
She added that she rejects claims that she is too "extreme" to win the general election in November due to her support for policies like taxing the rich and abolishing ICE, countering that Republican primary front-runner Rep. Tom Tiffany has displayed extremism by denying the 2020 election results and voting to keep files regarding convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, a former associate of Trump, hidden from the public.
"What's extreme is that Congressman Tiffany, a longtime DC congressman, has voted against the interests of Wisconsinites over and over again," said Hong.
Q: Were you prepared for the pushback you received, especially from Republicans, framing you as far too extreme for Wisconsin?
FRANCESCA HONG: What's extreme is Rep. Tiffany has voted against the interests of Wisconsinites over and over again. What's extreme is that he's an… pic.twitter.com/QW0M5AVIVc
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) August 11, 2026
The Intercept noted that despite the recent hand-wringing in the corporate media over Hong's past comments on Thanksgiving—complete with a Times article that asked whether voters can forgive her—"the Times’ on-the-ground reporting managed to dig up precisely one Wisconsinite who would not."
"Even allowing for the fact that the attacks on Hong follow a well-established right-wing tradition—let us never forget those who laid down their lives in the War on Christmas—why has such a ridiculous controversy come to dominate efforts to quash her campaign?" asked Intercept reporter Sean Bell.
"The answer is simple: Nothing else has worked, and that failure indicates a worrying pattern for the Democratic establishment terrified of an insurgent left," Bell continued. "As the numerous recent victories for DSA-backed or progressive Democratic candidates have demonstrated, attacking the left on policy is not the winning strategy it once was. Many voters no longer recoil at the mere mention of universal healthcare, rent controls, or the dreaded 'socialism.'"
Joseph Geevarghese, executive director of Our Revolution, which has endorsed both Hong and Flanagan, issued a reminder on Tuesday: "Here’s how electability actually works: The most electable candidate is the one who gets the most votes. This narrative was always manufactured by people afraid of Francesca—and afraid of what happens when working people actually win. Her supposedly ‘radical’ agenda is healthcare, affordable childcare, and making billionaires pay their fair share."
"That’s not unelectable," he said. "That’s what working people are asking for.”
Aug 11, 2026
SEE ALL
News
'Trump Is Scared': DOJ Executive Privilege Memo Decried as Effort to 'Shield' Inner Circle
Just days after Senate Republicans confirmed US Attorney General Todd Blanche, the Department of Justice this week issued a legal opinion on executive privilege that was swiftly condemned as an attempt to unfairly protect some of President Donald Trump's top advisers from any accountability.
Historically, the president has been allowed to assert executive privilege over communications with executive branch staff, protecting them from disclosure.
However, the DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) said in a Monday memo that "presidential communications with private advisers can fall within the scope of executive privilege so long as they relate to official presidential decisionmaking, involve or reflect communications with the president or his direct advisers, and are confidential."
The memo is signed by Assistant Attorney General T. Elliot Gaiser. HuffPost reported that a DOJ official "argued its veracity by comparing it to a similar one made by President George W. Bush's attorney general in 2007."
"While the issue has not been litigated frequently, the opinion reaffirms the long-standing position of the office going back at least as far as Paul Clement in 2007 and arguably as far back as 1972," the unnamed official said.
Jonathan Shaub, a University of Kentucky School of Law professor who served in the Obama administration’s OLC, told CNN: "I would say it's not inconsistent with past positions... But it's never been stated publicly."
Shaub also told Axios that "it really could be a pretty significant weapon" for the second Trump administration "to deflect a lot of that congressional investigation of private parties."
Republicans are at risk of losing control of both chambers of Congress in the November midterm elections, and if they do, Democratic majorities could move to impeach Trump a historic third time—for everything from the Trump family's profiteering off of the presidency to his illegal war on Iran.
The Not Above the Law coalition's co-chairs—Brett Edkins of Stand Up America, Praveen Fernandes of the Constitutional Accountability Center, Lisa Gilbert of Public Citizen, and Kelsey Herbert of MoveOn—said Tuesday that "Todd Blanche's Justice Department is doing what it always does: attempting to shield Donald Trump and the people around him before anyone can hold them accountable."
"This opinion is about protecting Trump and his allies from any real accountability, no matter where the questions come from—Congress, the courts, or investigators of any kind," they argued. "Every senator who voted to confirm Blanche knew exactly what kind of Justice Department they were signing off on. They own it now."
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY)—who may not have enough support to lead Democrats even if they reclaim the upper chamber in November—was similarly critical, concluding: "Donald Trump is scared. He knows accountability is coming."
"He’s using his newly installed attorney general/personal lawyer, Todd Blanche, to cover up his communications with private advisers and special interest cronies," Schumer said on Facebook. "These are the actions of someone with something to hide. And it shows he is petrified of the questions a Democratic Congress will demand answers to. We will not let Trump escape the accountability he deserves."
Aug 11, 2026
SEE ALL
News
'Assault on the Rule of Law': US Groups Sue Trump Administration Over ICC Sanctions
A quartet of US human rights groups filed a federal lawsuit on Tuesday challenging the Trump administration’s sanctions targeting members of the International Criminal Court for their roles in seeking to hold Israeli leaders accountable for alleged crimes against humanity in Gaza.
The American Friends Service Committee (AFSC), the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), Human Rights Watch (HRW), and the Open Society Institute (OSI) filed suit in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York challenging the Trump administration’s sanctions against ICC prosecutors and judges, a United Nations human rights expert, and three Palestinian human rights groups.
The groups argue that US President Donald Trump's February 2025 executive order that imposed sanctions on the ICC are a “blatantly illegal attack on international justice and should be struck down."
James Goldston, executive director of the Open Society Justice Initiative, called the sanctions "a slap in the face to victims and survivors of grave crimes everywhere who depend on the ICC as a court of last resort.”
Trump's sanctions follow the ICC's November 2024 issuance of arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant, his former defense minister, for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes in Gaza, including murder and forced starvation. The tribunal simultaneously issued warrants for the arrest of three Hamas leaders for the same categories of crimes allegedly committed on and after the October 7, 2023 attack on Israel. However, Israel extrajudicially assassinated all three of the men.
The groups' complaint argues that the Trump administration has effectively transformed human rights advocacy into a potential criminal offense. Organizations can face severe civil and criminal penalties for providing what the government may determine are “services” to sanctioned individuals or groups.
That threat, they contend, has already had tangible consequences. The plaintiffs say the sanctions have disrupted their ability to represent victims of war crimes, submit evidence and legal arguments to the ICC, and collaborate with sanctioned Palestinian organizations on research, litigation, advocacy, and humanitarian work.
Targeted groups and individuals have experienced "frozen or closed bank accounts, rejection of financial transactions, denial of access to digital services, and travel bans," CCR notes. "US organizations, including the plaintiffs, can face punishment of up to 20 years of imprisonment and exorbitant fines for providing services to sanctioned persons or entities."
CCR called the sanctions "one of many" actions taken by the Trump administration "against free speech, protest, and advocacy in support of the human rights of Palestinians."
“For many years, I have represented victims in pressing for justice for crimes committed by the powerful, and finally saw much-needed, even if overdue, investigations opened at the ICC," said CCR senior staff attorney Katherine Gallagher. "In response, the Trump administration took the extraordinary step to not only deny Palestinians and victims of US torture equal access to justice, but to criminalize and punish them, their lawyers and advocates, and their partners."
Israeli officials and their supporters argue that the ICC and the International Court of Justice—where Israel is facing a genocide case filed by South Africa and formally supported by nearly 20 nations—have unfairly singled out Israel. However, the ICC has launched 18 investigations involving conflicts in countries including Afghanistan, the Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Libya, the Philippines, Sudan (Darfur), and Ukraine.
Trump’s order asserts that ICC efforts involving US or allied nationals constitute a threat to American national security. But the new complaint argues that there is no genuine “national emergency” that can lawfully justify invoking the International Emergency Economic Powers Act against the court’s routine judicial work.
"The US government’s efforts to dismantle the ICC and punish people seeking justice for grave human rights violations harm far more than the individuals and groups facing sanctions," AFSC general secretary Joyce Ajlouny said in a statement Tuesday. “It is an affront to all victims and survivors of war crimes and genocide."
Ajlouny asserted that the Trump administration "seeks to intimidate human rights defenders and deter people of conscience from advocating for the rights and dignity of others."
"We are joining this lawsuit because we refuse to stay silent when the pursuit of justice is criminalized," she added.
Tuesday's complaint is the latest in a string of lawsuits challenging Trump's sanctions.
Francesca Albanese, the UN special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, earlier this year sued Trump and three of his senior Cabinet officials over sanctions imposed on her and her family. Although a federal district judge temporarily blocked the move on First Amendment grounds, an appeals court quickly reinstated the sanctions via an administrative stay.
In April 2025, two human rights advocates sued over sanctions against then-ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan, arguing that the restrictions violated their First Amendment rights. A federal judge subsequently found the advocates were likely to succeed on their constitutional claims and issued a preliminary injunction protecting their communications with the court.
In June, three sanctioned ICC judges—Judges Kimberly Prost of Canada, Solomy Bossa of Uganda, and Reine Alapini-Gansou of Benin—filed suit against the Trump administration, arguing that the president's order directly violated the Administrative Procedure Act, which prohibits the government from making arbitrary and capricious policy changes.
Last month, Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN) and the Taxpayer Alliance Against Genocide also sued Trump and senior administration officials over the ICC sanctions.
“The Trump administration is using the blunt instrument of economic sanctions not only to punish human rights defenders but to police the political expression of millions of Americans,” DAWN executive director Omar Shakir said at the time. “The government is violating the constitutional rights of American citizens in order to shield officials of a foreign government who have committed a genocide.”
Aug 11, 2026
SEE ALL
LATEST NEWS
'Lawlessness': Trump Agency Instructs Prediction Market Giant Kalshi to Defy Federal Court Order
One critic said the Commodity Futures Trading Commission's "cheerleading for prediction markets truly knows no bounds."
Aug 13, 2026
Consumer advocacy groups are accusing the Trump administration of engaging in "lawlessness on behalf of well-connected gambling interests" after the Commodity Futures Trading Commission instructed the prediction market giant Kalshi to continue operating in New York, in defiance of a federal court order.
In a Tuesday statement, the CFTC said it "exercised its emergency authority" and "ordered" Kalshi to "continue to operate in accordance with the Commodity Exchange Act’s Core Principles." The statement came weeks after a federal judge denied Kalshi's bid to prevent New York from enforcing its gambling laws against the platform, which allows users to "trade on the outcome of real-world events." The CFTC's action also came after New York sued Kalshi for allegedly "running an illegal gambling operation."
Benjamin Schiffrin, director of securities policy for the advocacy group Better Markets, said in a statement that it appears the CFTC "believes that the law does not apply to it."
"Now that New York has sued Kalshi to prevent it from circumventing state gambling laws, the CFTC has directed Kalshi to continue to operate even if a court enjoins it from doing so," said Schiffrin. "This is not the first time the CFTC has directed Kalshi to violate a court order. It did so after a Michigan state court ordered Kalshi to void, cancel, and refund some bets. The CFTC is now directing Kalshi to violate the orders of a federal court. Its cheerleading for prediction markets truly knows no bounds."
New York's lawsuit, filed late last month, seeks a court order stopping Kalshi from "operating as an unlicensed gambling business and requiring the company to pay fines, forfeit all illegal gains, and pay restitution to users."
The CFTC, headed by Trump-appointed Chairman Michael Selig, has launched a sweeping effort to prevent states from regulating prediction markets, arguing the federal agency has sole regulatory authority over the platforms. States have pushed back, accusing the CFTC of exceeding its powers.
In a statement on Wednesday, Public Citizen's Tyson Slocum called the CFTC's intervention on behalf of Kalshi in New York "a massive overreach."
“After the federal court rejected gambling platform Kalshi’s request to continue offering gambling products to New Yorkers while the state challenged their legality, the CFTC has swooped in, declaring a phony emergency, and issued an order allowing Kalshi to defy federal courts and a US state," said Slocum. "The Commodity Exchange Act should not permit such gambling platforms, and until there is reasonable and lawful regulation at the federal level, states should be the ones—not the CFTC—making the decisions on how to regulate gambling.”
Keep Reading
Show Less
Tennessee Planning Lethal Injection Despite ‘Barbaric’ Botched Execution of Another Inmate in May
"All the lawyers want to know is, will there be a qualified physician on staff?" said one advocate. "The state of Tennessee has refused to answer this question."
Aug 12, 2026
A lawyer for Anthony Darrell Hines, a man who was convicted of the 1985 murder of Catherine Jean Jackson Jenkins in Kingston Springs, Tennessee, said the state's Republican governor will force a "grotesque spectacle" to move forward on Thursday by refusing to stop Hines' planned execution despite a botched lethal injection involving another death row inmate in May.
The lawyer, Kit Thomas, noted that Hines, 66, has experienced muscular atrophy after several recent strokes, has been in a wheelchair or confined to his bed for eight months, and has stiffness in his arm that forces his hand to remain clenched in a fist—medical issues that could make it challenging for physicians and staffers to establish an IV line to administer lethal drugs.
Hines' medical condition particularly raises alarm considering the Tennessee Department of Correction's attempt to execute Tony Carruthers earlier this year in an ordeal that continued for an hour and 15 minutes before a warden intervened.
An IV team and a physician, later publicly identified as Dr. Mark Fowler, attempted to locate veins in Carruthers' arms, legs, feet, shoulder, hands, and finally his neck, causing what one witness called a "bloody mess" as the inmate remained strapped to a gurney, groaning in pain.
An attorney for Carruthers described the scene as "outright barbaric."
Thomas has asked the US Supreme Court to intervene to stop Hines' lethal injection.
Gov. Bill Lee granted a one-year reprieve to Carruthers, and Fowler was deposed by attorneys—a process during which he admitted he had not placed an IV line since 2013.
Thomas said the Department of Correction had violated its own protocol by appointing an unqualified doctor to carry out Carruthers' execution, and Hines' legal team expressed concern that the state has not disclosed whether Fowler will be involved in the inmate's planned lethal injection.
Last week, the Tennessee Supreme Court rejected Hines' request to force the state to confirm whether Fowler will be administering the drugs.
"It’s particularly horrifying to think of them lifting a partially paralyzed man from his hospital bed, which he’s lived in for the last eight months, then strapping him to a gurney, while executioners attempt to establish IV access," Thomas said.
The advocacy group Death Penalty Action delivered a petition to Lee's office last week calling on him to halt Hines' execution.
Hines' legal team has also expressed concern about the leadership of Frank Strada, who oversees executions for the Department of Correction and was previously deputy director of the Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation, and Reentry.
During his tenure in Arizona, the three executions that took place were "marked by prolonged and problematic attempts to establish IV access."
Thomas has also called on the state to confirm that officials have done quality control testing on the drugs scheduled to be used Thursday and ensured they were properly stored and handled. Nine Republican state senators, all of whom support capital punishment, wrote to Lee in June, urging an independent review of Carruthers' botched execution and "independent testing" of the lethal drugs the state plans to use before it attempts another execution.
"All the lawyers want to know is, will there be a qualified physician on staff? That's a very reasonable request for them to make," Robin Maher, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, told Fox 17 in Nashville. "The state of Tennessee has refused to answer this question, and the Tennessee courts have not forced them to answer. So everyone is in the dark and concerns are mounting."
Keep Reading
Show Less
Mysterious Attacks on Ecuadorian Fishers Raise Fears of Expanded US Boat Bombings
“It would be one thing if the US didn’t have an overt maritime strike campaign, but they do, and they’re posting snuff films of boats going up in flames regularly,” said one expert.
Aug 12, 2026
An investigation published Wednesday by The New York Times has raised fresh questions about who attacked three Ecuadorian fishing vessels in the Pacific Ocean earlier this year—but for fishers and their families in the South American nation, the mystery is hardly new.
According to the Times, Ecuadorian fishers aboard the Fiorella, Negra Francisca Duarte II, and Don Maca were separately attacked by what witnesses called unidentified "gringos" using drones. Survivors said they "came under attack by English-speaking assailants wearing matching uniforms with American flag patches, but without any clear insignia to link them to an official government force."
International rights groups have called for an investigation after the Fiorella and its crew of eight disappeared in January amid Operation Southern Spear, President Donald Trump's largely ineffective campaign of extrajudicial strikes on boats that the US administration claims, without evidence, were smuggling drugs.
By the Pentagon's own admission, more than 220 people have been killed in at least 66 such strikes since last September. The US military says no civilians were killed in the strikes, a claim that anonymous government officials called "a fucking joke" and "a total whitewash."
This is a very worrying story. Ecuadorian fishermen are being attacked and killed, and the perpetrators seem to be either the U.S. military engaged in clandestine operations or an American mercenary company working for Bukele or another Central American country.
[image or embed]
— Aaron Reichlin-Melnick (@reichlinmelnick.bsky.social) August 12, 2026 at 7:12 AM
Government officials in countries including Colombia and Venezuela, as well as victims' relatives, have contradicted the US claim. The families of two Trinidadian men killed in one strike earlier this year filed wrongful death lawsuits against the United States. Relatives of a Colombian slain in another US strike also filed a complaint at the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.
Some of the Ecuadorian fishers featured in the new Times piece say they were seized and interrogated by the attackers before being handed over to the Salvadoran navy, which conducts long-range maritime patrols and counternarcotics operations in the Eastern Pacific and occasionally intercepts vessels.
The new Times report says that a maritime patrol aircraft based at a military facility in El Salvador repeatedly flew toward and tracked the Ecuadorian fishing boats in the days before they were attacked or disappeared. An analysis of flight data found that the aircraft's course appeared to follow the vessels over several days.
Yet the aircraft was not listed among Pentagon operational aircraft. According to the Times, it was registered to a private company whose address was a UPS store mailbox in Virginia, deepening the mystery over who was operating it—and for whom.
“It would be one thing if the US didn’t have an overt maritime strike campaign, but they do, and they’re posting snuff films of boats going up in flames regularly," Brian Finucane, a former State Department lawyer who specializes in the laws of war, told the Times.
"And that’s what makes this even more squirrelly," added Finucane, now a senior adviser in the US Program at the International Crisis Group. “Who are these people that are operating, and under what authority? And they are using a UPS store as their company address? Come on.”
The Pentagon has denied involvement, claiming that US Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) did not know about the attacks or have a role in them. But the new findings raise the possibility that the attacks could have involved a private military contractor or another force operating in coordination with Washington's expanding anti-drug campaign.
“Who are these people that are operating, and under what authority? And they are using a UPS store as their company address?"
In addition to the boat bombing campaign—which the Pentagon has replaced with the newly created Joint Task Force Western Hemisphere—SOUTHCOM has launched Operation Total Extermination, a joint counternarcotics operation with Ecuadorian forces involving the deployment of US ground troops into the Andean nation.
In one operation in the campaign, Ecuadorian soldiers raided and destroyed a dairy farm in San Martín, Sucumbíos, on March 3. Ecuador claimed the site was a traffickers’ camp, but investigations by The New York Times and, later, Human Rights Watch found substantial evidence that it was a working cattle and dairy farm with no credible evidence of a criminal connection. HRW said four workers at the farm were detained and tortured by Ecuadorian forces, and that the broader operation was carried out with US assistance.
The Times investigation published Wednesday followed months of reporting by Ecuadorian and international media and human rights groups, including HRW, on the three fishing vessels and their crews.
In April, Primicias reported growing fear among fishermen in Manabí, Ecuador's major fishing province, where crews said they had been intercepted and attacked at sea. Fishers from the Don Maca and Negra Francisca Duarte II separately described being surrounded by drones and subsequently detained by what they believed were US personnel.
Don Maca's crew told El Universo that drones bombed their boat without warning on March 26. Fishers aboard said they escaped in small boats, approached a foreign vessel for help, and were instead handcuffed and hooded before eventually being transferred to Salvadoran authorities.
El Universo also separately reported a strikingly similar account from the crew of the Negra Francisca Duarte II. Captain Hernán Flores said a drone struck the boat on March 17, setting it ablaze and forcing all 16 fishermen into the water. When they approached a nearby blue vessel seeking assistance, Flores said, armed foreign personnel pointed weapons at them, bound them, and covered their heads.
In the case of the Fiorella, Primicias and El Universo reported that two fishers who had separated from the boat in a smaller vessel saw a drone circling above shortly before they spotted smoke on the horizon. Fiorella and those aboard it have never been found.
Keep Reading
Show Less
Lawsuit Filed Against 'Blatantly Corrupt' Trump Scheme to Charge for Early Access to Market-Moving Social Posts
"Nothing could be more antithetical to the free, independent press than the president charging for early access to his public announcements."
Aug 12, 2026
A lawsuit filed on Wednesday is challenging the legality of Truth API, a recently unveiled initiative to allow Wall Street firms to pay up to $100,000 per month in exchange for early access to potentially market-moving social media posts from President Donald Trump.
The complaint, filed by the Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF) and The Intercept, alleges Truth API violates the US Constitution's First Amendment by granting insiders special access to the president's announcements.
The scheme also violates the Constitution's Fifth Amendment by "charging unreasonable sums that cannot be justified to offset the cost" of receiving the benefit of information from the president, the complaint states.
The lawsuit describes Truth API as "profoundly corrupt," given that "the president stands to gain financially by giving 'market-moving' government information to those who are willing and able to pay his personal company."
In establishing the plaintiffs' standing, the complaint argues that The Intercept is being put at a competitive disadvantage by the scheme, given that the news outlet is "both unable and unwilling to subscribe" to it, even though it risks "losing out on timely news to competing organizations."
Ben Muessig, editor-in-chief of The Intercept, accused the president of "trying to enrich himself by privatizing government information that he has no right to sell," while vowing that "we won't let that stand."
David Bralow, chief legal officer for The Intercept, said that "nothing could be more antithetical to the free, independent press than the president charging for early access to his public announcements," emphasizing that "public information belongs to the public."
Seth Stern, chief of advocacy at FPF, said Truth API "is so blatantly corrupt and unconstitutional that it would have been hard to even fathom just a few years ago."
"Trump’s crooked scheme is particularly outrageous," Stern added, "because, as documented by our Trump Anti-Press Social Media Tracker, he frequently uses his Truth Social account to berate journalists and even to announce his plans to sue them and criminally investigate them. Then, he makes them wait in line behind paying customers to find out about it unless they’re willing to subsidize the platform he uses to attack them."
The Intercept and the FPF are being represented in the case by attorneys from Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), the Yale Law School Media Freedom and Information Access Clinic, the Public Integrity Project, and Altshuler Berzon LLP.
Nikhel Sus, chief counsel at CREW, said his organization was "proud to represent our clients in their effort to end this corrupt and unconstitutional scheme" because "all Americans are entitled to timely access to their president’s public statements, not just those willing to pay the president’s company $100,000 a month."
Truth API has also drawn the attention of Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), ranking member of the US House Judiciary Committee, who announced a probe into the initiative last month, describing it as an "insider-information scheme" that "will enable Wall Street to profit from the president’s frequent market-moving posts on major businesses."
Keep Reading
Show Less
Thomson Reuters Slammed for Deal That Gives ICE Access to Private Profiles of Tens of Millions of Americans
"Big Tech and Big Data companies like Thomson Reuters need to decide whether profiting from government surveillance is compatible with the values they claim to hold," said one tech watchdog.
Aug 12, 2026
More than two dozen watchdog organizations are calling on Congress to investigate reports that the data broker Thomson Reuters is making its investigative database available to US Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which they warn will make Americans vulnerable to Fourth Amendment violations.
Last month, documents unearthed by 404 Media revealed:
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) plans to pay data broker giant Thomson Reuters $125 million for access to its databases of personal data—which includes peoples’ names, addresses, Social Security numbers, ethnicity, social media posts, and geolocation information—to help Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) investigate what it describes as “voters fraud” and immigration fraud.
On Tuesday, a coalition of advocacy groups, including Public Citizen, ACLU, the Center for Democracy and Technology, Common Cause, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, and the Electronic Privacy Information Center, sent a letter to members of the Senate Judiciary and Homeland Security committees warning about the deal.
"The reporting highlights a problem that has continued to grow in recent years: Federal agencies are purchasing access to commercially aggregated personal information that they could not otherwise obtain without judicial oversight," the letter says. "This growing practice threatens to erode the protections guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment and underscores the urgent need for Congress to close the data broker loophole."
Thomson Reuters is primarily known for its leading international news agency, but it is also a major data broker that sells access to its dozens of databases to businesses and governments.
ICE has been buying data from Thomson Reuters since 2008. But the Trump administration hopes to dramatically expand the scale of this data collection by accessing the company's CLEAR database, which compiles vast amounts of information, including addresses, phone records, utility information, vehicle registrations, license plate records, social media activity, geolocation data, and other information.
While much of this data could be acquired through other means, the watchdog groups explained that "aggregating them into searchable investigative dossiers dramatically expands government surveillance capabilities, which further run the risk of being supercharged by the rapid growth and use of artificial intelligence by the federal government."
A DHS procurement document reviewed by 404 stated that Thomson Reuters "is the only contractor able to provide ICE with a continuous monitoring and alert service for millions of individuals and entities of interest; this is essential for national security purposes.”
Thomson Reuters has denied that selling CLEAR access presents a constitutional risk, stating earlier this year that "CLEAR does not contain the types of information that law enforcement traditionally need a warrant to obtain, and CLEAR does not include information about an individual’s citizenship or immigration status."
The letter from advocacy groups also notes that the use of this technology in voter fraud investigations, in addition to immigration and national security, "demonstrates the broad range of government functions now supported by commercially acquired surveillance tools."
The documents do not make clear how ICE plans to use the data from Thomson Reuters in a voter fraud investigation.
Trump has directed the federal government to use DHS citizenship and immigration records to identify suspected noncitizen voters and commanded states—in an order that has been blocked by a federal judge—to turn over information about their voters.
While the administration says the goal is to root out noncitizen voters, voting rights advocates have warned that many eligible voters are also at risk of being wrongly purged.
As 404 pointed out, news of the agreement with Thomson Reuters came "after President [Donald] Trump held a conspiracy-laden and unhinged press conference about election security" in July, "setting the stage for potentially undermining the legitimacy of the upcoming midterm elections."
The letter urges Congress to hold oversight hearings examining federal agencies' acquisition and use of commercially available information from data brokers, require transparency about what data agencies are purchasing and how it's being used, and examine whether existing law surrounding data purchasing adequately protects constitutional rights.
It also calls on the government to pass the Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act, a bipartisan piece of legislation that would close the data broker loophole by preventing the government from buying data from private companies that it would ordinarily need a judicial warrant to obtain directly from an individual or company.
"Americans should not lose their Fourth Amendment rights simply because the government is willing to purchase its way around our rights," said JB Branch, the director of federal AI governance and technology policy at Public Citizen. "Big Tech and Big Data companies like Thomson Reuters need to decide whether profiting from government surveillance is compatible with the values they claim to hold.”
Keep Reading
Show Less
After Narrow Defeat, Hong 'Fully' Backs Crowley for Wisconsin Governor
Francesca Hong said she looks forward to working with David Crowley to defeat Republican Rep. Tom Tiffany in November.
Aug 12, 2026
Francesca Hong on Wednesday unequivocally endorsed David Crowley in Wisconsin's gubernatorial contest following her razor-close loss in the Democratic primary, a show of unity in the face of the Republican Party's extremist nominee, Trump-endorsed US Rep. Tom Tiffany.
"Congratulations to David Crowley and his team," said Hong, a grassroots candidate who lost by less than one percentage point despite a massive fundraising disadvantage. "I fully support him and look forward to working with him to defeat Congressman Tiffany in November."
Hong said she is "overwhelmingly proud" of her campaign and emphasized that her run "was not about getting one person into office."
"It is about building a movement for permanent affordability and a government that puts working people first," said Hong. "Our movement is strong, and the work isn't done."
The last 11 months have been one of the greatest joys of my life. Traveling the state, meeting people in churches and dive bars and bike races and dance parties and in their homes, and hearing about what matters most to them informed every decision we made on the trail. It will… pic.twitter.com/Navh81hgvP
— Francesca Hong For Governor (@FrancescaHongWI) August 12, 2026
Crowley, the Milwaukee County executive who suspended his campaign in early July only to reenter the primary less than a month ago with the support of outgoing Democratic Gov. Tony Evers, echoed Hong's call for party unity to defeat the GOP in November.
“Every one of us has something much bigger to unite around,” Crowley said at a press conference on Wednesday. “And that is keeping MAGA extremism from bringing the chaos we see in Washington into our neighborhoods right here in the state of Wisconsin. From the very first day I announced this campaign, I said the real threat wasn’t any of my primary opponents. The real opponent has always been Tom Tiffany. That remains true today.”
Of the more than 311,000 Wisconsinites who voted for Hong on Tuesday, Crowley said, "I look forward to earning their support."
“We may not agree on every policy," said Crowley. "We may not use the same labels, but we all want safe communities, strong schools, affordable health care, good-paying jobs, and a brighter future for all of our children."
Keep Reading
Show Less
Expert Explains the Real Danger Behind Trump's Midterm ‘National Emergency’ Threat
Trump is "trying to scare people into thinking he has more power than he has," said UCLA law professor Rick Hasen.
Aug 12, 2026
President Donald Trump raised eyebrows on Tuesday when he didn't rule out declaring a "national security emergency for elections" ahead of the 2026 midterms that would let him restrict the use of mail-in ballots and require voters to provide proof of citizenship.
Rick Hasen, a law professor at UCLA and an expert in election law, told The New Republic in an interview published Wednesday that simply declaring a national emergency related to election security wouldn't override states' voting laws.
"The United States Constitution does not give the president power over elections," Hasen explained. "We have a decentralized election system. Most of our election rules come from states, from state legislatures passing statutes."
Even though Trump cannot legally seize control of the country's elections systems, Hasen said, his "national emergency" declaration could be used as a tool to discredit Democratic victories in the midterms and also to more generally intimidate Democratic voters.
"He’s trying to scare people into thinking he has more power than he has," Hasen said. "That itself makes him powerful, because people are deterred by him. And maybe it deters people from showing up to vote in elections... We should not be complacent at all, even if Trump doesn’t have the power to actually do some of the stuff he’s threatened."
Hasen also speculated that Trump's executive order instructing the United States Postal Service to not deliver mail-in ballots to states that have not shared their voter data with the White House was also part of an intimidation operation.
"So everybody’s confidence in the elections goes down," Hasen said. "And it’s like, 'Why mail back my ballot if the post office isn’t going to deliver it? Why show up at the polling place if there’s going to be armed security there?' All of these things are, I think, scare tactics. And we shouldn’t give Trump the power—we shouldn’t give Trump room in our heads to panic over whether or not we're going to have free and fair elections."
In an analysis published Wednesday, progressive commentator Thom Hartmann described Trump as a "cornered rat" who will attempt any trick to maintain Republican majorities in Congress.
"It's going to be up to us and the individual states to make sure our voices are heard and our votes are properly counted," Hartmann wrote. "We should be thinking of this as an election continuity exercise that may not be necessary but, like wearing a seatbelt, could be essential if Trump tries to repeat 2020 in some way."
Hartmann also listed a number of recommendations for Democrats to combat Trump's election subversion attempts, including educating voters on the constitutional limits of the president's powers, being prepared to arrest any federal immigration enforcement officers who appear at polling locations, and encouraging early voting.
"For over a decade now, close races immediately produce Republican claims of fraud," Hartmann added. "Lawyers, election officials, and communications systems must be fully prepared to deal with lies and propaganda long before November."
Keep Reading
Show Less
'Shamelessly Corrupt': Recusal From Climate Cases Demanded After Alito's Fossil Fuel Profits Exposed
“A reasonable person would think if you’re invested in the industry that could benefit from the outcome of a lawsuit, then you could personally stand to benefit from the outcome," said one critic.
Aug 12, 2026
Calls for US Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito to recuse himself from a major climate case mounted Tuesday after an analysis found that he made as much as $2.9 from oil and gas stocks from roughly the time he joined the nation's highest court in 2005 through 2024.
The analysis by judicial watchdog Court Accountability, reviewed exclusively by The Guardian, found that Alito earned between around $390,000 and $2.9 million from fossil fuel interests during his tenure as a justice.
"Between 2005 and 2024, Alito’s assets—not including his personal residence or other personal property not required to be reported on his financial disclosure—grew from a nominal value of $1.1 million to a value somewhere between $3.4 million and $8.4 million," the analysis states.
"Importantly, much of the Alitos’ oil- and gas-related wealth in this estimate comes from a single asset: a Grady County, Oklahoma property in which Martha-Ann Alito holds a 'mineral interest,'" the publication notes, referring to the right-wing justice's wife. It adds that "divergent values" on his financial disclosures apparently "indicate that Alito has significantly understated the value of the Grady County property."
These revelations come just weeks before the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear Suncor Energy (USA) Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County, a potentially consequential case over whether federal law bars state and local governments from holding fossil fuel companies accountable for climate-related harms.
Progressive watchdogs say Alito's participation presents an obvious appearance of conflict—even though the justice does not currently own shares of either ExxonMobil or Suncor, the companies directly involved in the case. His disclosures show realized gains of between $105,004 and $216,000 from shares of ExxonMobil he owned and sold, and no previous ownership of Suncor shares. The records also show Alito has invested in around a dozen fossil fuel industry companies during his Supreme Court tenure.
“His impartiality may be reasonably questioned in terms of his affinity towards the industry that has helped build his nest egg,” Lisa Graves, co-founder of the judicial ethics watchdog Court Accountability, told The Guardian's Dharna Noor.
“A reasonable person would think if you’re invested in the industry that could benefit from the outcome of a lawsuit, then you could personally stand to benefit from the outcome, even if you don’t hold the stock in the specific company that happens to be the named plaintiff," Graves added.
“His impartiality may be reasonably questioned in terms of his affinity towards the industry that has helped build his nest egg."
Alito has repeatedly ruled in favor of the fossil fuel companies. He also recused himself in this year's Chevron USA v. Plaquemines Parish due to his stock in ConocoPhillips, one of whose subsidiaries is involved in the case.
Court Accountability and other groups recently called on the US Senate to investigate "Alito’s inconsistent history of recusals from cases from which he should be compelled to recuse under long-standing federal law, given his substantial holdings in individual oil and gas companies and other personal ties."
"His irregular recusal practice in oil and gas industry-related cases is undermining public confidence in the impartiality of the court," the groups warned in a May letter to Senate leaders. "They could not occur were he compelled to adhere to enforceable ethics standards against adjudicating cases where he has financial interests or the appearance of a conflict of interest where his impartiality might reasonably be questioned."
Alito has also come under fire for his relationship with Leonard Leo, a key architect of the conservative judicial movement who helped arrange a 2008 Alaska fishing trip for Alito involving billionaire donor Paul Singer, who later had business before the court. Alito did not disclose the private jet travel.
In 2023, the Supreme Court unveiled a code of conduct that was derided by the watchdog group Revolving Door Project (RDP) as a "toothless PR stunt."
“This unenforceable public relations document serves absolutely no purpose other than to permit the media to revert to pretending that our unaccountable and unethical Supreme Court retains legitimacy,” RDP founder and executive director Jeff Hauser said at the time.
Keep Reading
Show Less
New Inflation Numbers Prove 'Catastrophic Mismanagement of Our Economy' by Trump
"Today's report is yet another reminder that Trump's promise to lower costs on 'Day One' was a lie," said the House Budget Committee's top Democrat.
Aug 12, 2026
As Americans continue to struggle with the cost of gasoline, groceries, healthcare, housing, and more under President Donald Trump, congressional Democrats and economists on Wednesday used his own government's latest inflation figures to call out the Republican's handling of the US economy.
The US Bureau of Labor Statistics announced that the consumer price index—a measure of goods and services bought by households—increased 0.1% on a seasonally adjusted basis in July after falling 0.4% in June. The annual inflation rate was 3.4% before seasonal adjustment.
The brief reprieve for American consumers in June was tied to Trump's illegal Iran War cooling off a bit, so the new numbers were expected, given the ramped-up hostilities that followed and persist. The conflict and its various consequences are expected to hurt Republicans in the November elections.
"Prices started climbing again in July, and Trump's catastrophic mismanagement of our economy means more spikes in the months ahead," warned Alex Jacquez, a former Obama administration official who is now senior vice president of policy and advocacy at Groundwork Collaborative, in a statement.
"The president said it himself: He is only 'semi-negotiating' an end to the war, all while slapping new tariffs on 99% of our imported goods," noted Jacquez. "Trump is not serious about bringing much-needed relief to working families who are weary of higher prices at the pump and on the shelves, and who are pessimistic about an economy that is bleeding jobs."
US Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said Wednesday that "as inflation continues to spiral out of control and gas prices remain well above $4, this is how Donald Trump is spending your taxpayer dollars. $900 million for a gilded ballroom at the White House. $0 to lower your costs. The Trump White House in a nutshell."
House Budget Committee Ranking Member Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.) recalled when Trump was asked in May how much "Americans' financial situations" were on his mind as he tried to negotiate an end to the Iran War, and the president replied, "Not even a little bit," then returned to his misleading talking points on nuclear weapons.
"Month after month, Donald Trump continues to prove that he doesn't 'think about Americans' financial situation,'" Boyle said. "Over the last year and a half, Trump and Republicans in Washington have ripped healthcare away from millions of Americans, forced families to pay expensive tariff taxes, and started a disastrous war with Iran."
"Today's report is yet another reminder that Trump's promise to lower costs on 'Day One' was a lie," the congressman added. "American families deserve better."
House Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-Mass.) declared on social media Wednesday, "Donald Trump's economy is a disaster."
"His war is spiking gas costs. Wages are down. Inflation is up," she said, looking to the midterms. "In November, Democrats will take back the House and fight for an affordable America."
Keep Reading
Show Less
ICE Funding Approved by Susan Collins and Trump GOP to Deliver Electric Shock Gloves to Agents Nationwide
"Congress must end the blank check to ICE," said the president of one immigrant rights group.
Aug 12, 2026
As Mainers continue to target Sen. Susan Collins' office with protests following a recent killing by an immigration agent, new reporting shows how some of the $70 billion she and her GOP colleagues gave to President Donald Trump's immigration agencies is being spent.
According to the Associated Press on Tuesday:
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers may soon be outfitted with gloves that can deliver painful electric shocks intended to gain compliance from combative individuals.
ICE plans to spend up to $20 million to purchase thousands of “conductive distraction and de-escalation devices” for officers and agents by March, according to a notice published Monday by the Department of Homeland Security.
The devices are known as the GLOVE, which stands for Generated Low Output Voltage Emitter, and are manufactured by Compliant Technologies LLC of Lexington, Kentucky. They have been used in recent years by some jails and police departments.
As the company's website explains, "the discomfort associated with the stimulation is usually effective in bringing individuals into compliance in less than three seconds and leaves no burns, marks, or scars." It describes them as a "humane, low-optics, de-escalation solution for many situations facing our men and women in uniform."
John Peters, president of the Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths, told the AP that the sensation is "immediate and sharp," comparing it to a "bee sting."
While he said it could be an effective tool to prevent "resistance," he warned that it should not be used as a form of punishment against those merely exhibiting “verbal defiance or belligerence” or on high-risk populations such as children, pregnant women, or elderly or disabled people.
But given the recent record of rampant civil rights abuses, extrajudicial killings, excessive use of force, and efforts to lie about misconduct, civil rights advocates are warning that these gloves are being placed into, or onto, the exact wrong hands.
"ICE spent the last year showing this country that they are willing to disregard the law and are too quick to use force, with devastating and at times fatal consequences for citizens and noncitizens alike," Jenn Rolnick Borchetta, deputy director on policing at the American Civil Liberties Union, told Common Dreams. "Now they might be equipped with a device that allows them to deliver an electric shock with their hands by pushing a small button, in a move that might be imperceptible to those watching."
Kica Matos, president of the National Immigration Law Center, concurred, telling Common Dreams that ICE is a "rogue agency with an $80 billion slush fund that allows them to concoct and fund new ways to visit cruelty upon our communities."
"Arming poorly trained agents with electric shock gloves to inflict pain on our neighbors is disgusting and barbaric," Matos added. "Congress must end the blank check to ICE, and ICE must get out of our communities.”
The shock gloves are just one way that immigration agencies are spending the $70 billion in additional funding they were given back in June, when Republicans in the Senate voted 52-47 to authorize the funding despite rampant lawlessness. Only one Republican, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), voted against supercharging the funding.
In a July 16 letter to Democratic Gov. Janet Mills, Collins defended her vote for the increased ICE funding by pointing to "reforms" passed in April as part of the Department of Homeland Security's broader appropriations bill, which included $20 million for body cameras and $2 million for "de-escalation" training.
Collins' office did not immediately respond when asked by Common Dreams whether she believes electric shock gloves were a good form of "de-escalation."
A five-term senator in the midst of a fierce reelection bid against Democrat Troy Jackson has taken fierce criticism for her vote to support ICE on the campaign trail, which has only grown in intensity since July's fatal shooting of 25-year-old Johan Sebastián Durán Guerrero in Biddeford.
It was one of two fatal shootings of men without criminal records over the course of a week. ICE later acknowledged that the victims were not the target of their operations.
When asked after the shooting, Collins declined to say that she regretted her vote for increased ICE funding.
Protesters who gathered outside Collins' Biddeford office on Tuesday said she should.
"$70 billion to fund the terror that left my family and community in fear,” Fernanda McLaughlin, a Maine resident and community organizer, said over the loudspeaker, according to NBC News Center Maine. "You know what that money can be really used for? To feed Mainers. To fund our schools. To fund our health system."
"There were no guardrails included, and she still voted yes on it," McLaughlin said. "Simple guardrails that exist in nearly every other law enforcement agency across our nation."
Keep Reading
Show Less
See More
Most Popular
Progressive Newswire
Governments must tax Big Oil's profits as UN tax treaty talks advance
Aug 13 2026 · 08:11am EDT
As El Niño and heatwaves dry up fields, governments must act fast
Aug 10 2026 · 08:30am EDT
Blanche Is (Still) Unfit to Be Named Attorney General
Aug 07 2026 · 01:26pm EDT
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy