5
#000000
#FFFFFF
LIVE COVERAGE
Opinion
Climate
Economy
Politics
Rights & Justice
War & Peace
Further
Utter Desecration: Walking Wrecking Balls, All Of 'Em
In a perfect, ghastly metaphor for the state of our "democracy," J.D. and Drunken Pete just oversaw an "artillery fiasco" at a Marine Corps celebration when a live shell detonated over a highway and hit their motorcade - Lesson #1: "Morons Are Governing America" - and Trump began his demolition of the East Wing of The People's House "for a fucking ballroom," though he claimed construction "wouldn't interfere" with it. Lesson #2: They "lie like they breathe," bulldoze history and wreak havoc as they go.
On the same day as No Kings but definitely not in an effort to distract anyone even though the actual date they're marking isn't until November 10, repulsive bros J.D. Vance and manly "We Are The War Department" Pete Hegseth went to California for the 250th anniversary of the Marine Corps at Camp Pendleton to watch a training exercise that included firing live 155mm M777 shells out of howitzers from the ocean over Interstate I-5, an action Gavin Newsom decried as "an absurd show of force" that threatened public safety. Just in case, being a grown-up, Newsom shut down 17 miles of the highway. Vance, in turn, ridiculed his move as "consistent with a track record of failure," sneering the governor "wants people to think this exercise is dangerous" when of course it's "an established safe practice" and anyway he's a big boy.
So then what happened? Well, what happens "when the commander-in-chief is an idiot and the head of the Pentagon is a blackout drunk": After Marines fired several live rounds over the highway, one of the shells prematurely exploded - officers "saw the artillery round fail to clear the highway and explode near the southbound lanes" - raining burning shrapnel onto a California Highway Patrol car and motorcycle that were part of Vance's security detail in what Highway Patrol called "an unusual and concerning situation" that surely nobody could have predicted except maybe Gavin Newsom, who rightly raged, "Next time, the Vice President and the White House shouldn’t be so reckless (with) their vanity projects (and) put lives at risk to put on a show. If you want to honor our troops, open the government and pay them."
Vance, who's hated wherever he goes - his summer vacation in the English countryside was met by residents holding a "Dance Against Vance Not Welcome" party complete with Go Away banner, insults, memes, and a staff mutiny at a pub where he wanted to eat - told reporters he had "a great visit" with the Marines. His team declined to comment on his "artillery fiasco," but others had thoughts. They suggested he'd probably say "it was just kid pieces of shrapnel doing normal kid pieces of shrapnel stuff," or locker room shrapnel, or antifa, thus representing the most destruction seen on No Kings Day. Also, "Nothing says 'Warrior Ethos' like firing live ammunition across a busy Southern California freeway on a Saturday afternoon," "MAGA stands for Morons Are Governing America," and, "This is a whole new level of dipshitery."
Then, on Monday, came Trump's backhoes and destruction crews methodically ripping through the historic, stately, 1902 East Wing of the White House to build a garish $250 million, "beautiful, beautiful ballroom like I have at Mar-a-Lago" - "the remodel no one asked for" - despite his earlier adamant claim the project "wouldn’t interfere” with the former structure: "It’ll be near it but not touching it (and) pay total respect to the existing building, which I’m the biggest fan of...It’s my favorite place. I love it." Announcing the boondoggle in July, he said it would be 90,000 square feet and seat up to 650 people - now grown to 999 people - making it by far the largest room in the White House. It will ostensibly be funded by "many generous patriots" who also happen to be billionaires seeking deregulation and access to his gilded power.
Trump claims America's masses have long been yearning for a glitzy ballroom - it took so long because "there’s never been a president that was good at ballrooms" - and he is "honored to finally get this much-needed project underway," especially now during a government shutdown, when wealth and income inequality is at a record highs, SNAP benefits are being slashed, millions of people are struggling to buy groceries, health care and Medicaid are threatened, special ed and veterans' services are in jeopardy, farmers and small businesses are suffering, federal workers are either losing their jobs or not getting paid, he is sending billions to Argentina for no discernible reason and he is giddily spending millions on golf and new jets and fake gold feckin' everywhere while demanding his let-them-eat-cake cult members keep tightening their frayed belts.
Architects have also noted the fortuitous timing: The White House is a public property run by the National Park Service, but the project is evidently exempt from review by multiple planning and preservation bodies Trump has dismissed, rendered toothless or effectively disappeared in the shutdown. "This is by design," said one. “The object of power is power." On Monday, many Americans watched in horror as an iconic White House built by slaves - where pearls were once clutched when Nancy Reagan ordered new china, Jimmy Carter put in solar panels, Obama romped with his dog - was blithely razed, stripped, pillaged in what Joe Walsh called "an utter desecration of the Peoples’ House." He added he'd gladly invite Americans, some weekend, "to bring their own sledgehammers & crowbars to help tear that abomination down."
The Bulwark's Mona Charen has called Trump "a walking wrecking ball of law, tradition, civility, manners, and morals." His tacky paved Rose Garden, fake-gold-drenched Oval Office and now ballroom reflect "a low and shameful time" at the end of which his total transforming of the graceful into the tasteless "will be both awful and fitting." Now, the metaphorical has become literal. "This is Trump's America," said one dismayed patriot, watching the dusty devastation. "And that was our history." Many sounded physically sickened by the grisly manifestation "of the entire Trump administration": "It is not his fucking house," "Holy mother of God, this is horrifying," "Jesus fucking Christ, somebody stop him," "That was our democracy." "Breaking News: Antifa destroys the White House," said one. "Correction: It was Trump."
Oct 21, 2025
SEE ALL
News
'The Well-Oiled Plan': Short Film Targets Fossil Fuel Industry's PR Tricks
With less than a month until the next United Nations climate summit, filmmakers and campaigners on Tuesday released an animation that calls out the fossil fuel industry's use of Big Tobacco's public relations tactics in under three minutes.
The Well-Oiled Plan was created by Daniel Bird and Adam Levy at Wit & Wisdom, in association with the Global Climate and Health Alliance (GCHA), a consortium of over 200 health professional and civil society groups. It "comprises scenes spun off from My Pet Footprint," a comedy feature film about climate grief that Wit & Wisdom is developing with Greenpeace.
"My Pet Footprint plays with the idea that consciences are removable," Bird, the director, said in a statement. "Decades ago, the fossil fuel industry decided business as usual was worth any price, and it takes an incredible deficit of conscience to be able to do that when that price is the demise of civilization and possibly even life in general."
With the new short, he said, "we took a direct route from smoking as an evil perpetuated on individuals, and the nascent public relations industry around that, to smoking as an industrial process imposed upon the global population. The only difference now is that the PR machine has become all the more sophisticated, and, dare we say it, successful."
The short film—starring comedians Cody Dahler and Michael Spicer, and actors Jaylah Moore-Ross and Sinead Phelps—comes as Big Oil has faced mounting scrutiny for its decades of burying, denying, and downplaying the impacts of its products. Since the #ExxonKnew exposés a decade ago, more journalism, scholarly research, lawsuits against the fossil fuel industry, and congressional reports and hearings have further revealed major polluters' climate disinformation efforts.
In 2020, Fossil Free Media launched Clean Creatives, a project targeting public relations and advertising agencies that serve Big Oil. Since then, 2,700 creatives and 1,500 agencies have signed the campaign's pledge to decline future contracts with the industry. Despite that progress, polluters continue to dump money into PR and ads from firms that will work for them.
" Fossil fuels are making people sick—and the companies behind them are spending millions on advertising and PR to cover it up," said Shweta Narayan, campaign lead at GCHA—which last month released a report detailing "the health toll of fossil fuels" for at every stage of the production cycle and across the human lifespan.
"The PR and communications industry must commit to fossil-free contracts," she argued. "Firms cannot claim to advance sustainability while helping fossil fuel companies greenwash their image or delay climate policy. We call on agencies to adopt fossil-free policies, disclose all fossil fuel clients, and ensure their work does not obstruct the transition to clean, healthy energy systems."
"We call on agencies to adopt fossil-free policies, disclose all fossil fuel clients, and ensure their work does not obstruct the transition to clean, healthy energy systems."
Narayan noted that "the same PR firms spreading fossil fuel disinformation are also working with health organizations—a clear conflict of interest for health. Through the Break the Fossil Influence—Fossil-Free Health Communications commitment, health organizations are leading by example, by cutting ties with those agencies."
Clean Creatives executive director Duncan Meisel stressed that "health organizations should not be hiring agencies with fossil fuel clients."
"The fossil fuel industry is one of the leading causes of long-term illness and premature death worldwide, and agencies that help sell coal, oil, or gas products have a conflict of interest when it comes to organizations and companies that promote public health," he continued. "At the same time, the public health sector has enormous leverage to use their procurement policies to accelerate the marketing industry's exit from fossil fuels."
Hundreds of organizations including GCHA are also calling on Brazil, host of the upcoming UN Climate Change Conference (COP30), to "make clear that unchecked corporate influence is not compatible with climate leadership."
GCHA executive director Jeni Miller on Tuesday urged the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) "to draw a red line" and declare that "no PR or advertising firms that continue to work for fossil fuel companies should be allowed to shape the story of the COP or the climate crisis."
"For all future COPs, governments and the UNFCCC must adopt clear conflict-of-interest rules and ethical procurement standards for all communications, PR, and event contractors—just as the World Health Organization does under its tobacco control framework," she said. "Just as the health community once stood up to Big Tobacco and its advertising, now it's time to stand up to Big Oil."
Oct 14, 2025
SEE ALL
News
US Consumers Paying the Most for Tariffs: Wall Street Giant’s Report Exposes Trump Lies
New research from investment bank Goldman Sachs affirms, as progressive advocates and economists warned, that US consumers are bearing the brunt of President Donald Trump's trade wars.
As reported by Bloomberg on Monday, economists at Goldman released an analysis this week estimating that US consumers are shouldering up to 55% of the costs stemming from Trump's tariffs, even though the president has repeatedly made false claims that the tariffs on imports exclusively tax foreigners.
Goldman's research also found that US businesses will pay 22% of the cost of the tariffs, while foreign exporters will pay just 18% of the cost. Additionally, Goldman economists estimate that Trump's tariffs "have raised core personal consumption expenditure prices by 0.44% so far this year, and will push up the closely watched inflation reading to 3% by December," according to Bloomberg.
Despite all evidence that US consumers are shouldering the costs of the tariffs, the Trump administration has continued to insist that they are exclusively being paid by foreign countries.
During a segment on NBC's "Meet the Press" last month, host Kristen Welker cited an earlier Goldman estimate that 86% of the president's tariffs were being paid by US businesses and consumers, and then asked US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent if he accepted that the tariffs were taxes on Americans.
"No, I don't," Bessent replied.
“Goldman Sachs says 86% of the tariffs have been paid by American businesses & consumers. Do you acknowledge that these tariffs are a tax on Americans?” - NBC
“No I don't.” - Scott Bessent
pic.twitter.com/6wtAznhpCc
— Spencer Hakimian (@SpencerHakimian) September 7, 2025
As Common Dreams reported in August, executives such as Walmart CEO Doug McMillon have explicitly told shareholders that while they are able to absorb the cost of tariffs, Trump's policy would still "result in higher prices" for customers.
Goldman's report comes as Trump is piling up even more tariffs on imported goods that will ultimately be paid by US consumers as companies raise prices.
According to The New York Times, tariffs on a wide range of products including lumber, furniture, and kitchen cabinets went into effect on Tuesday, and the Trump administration has also "started imposing fees on Chinese-owned ships docking in American ports."
The administration has claimed that the tariffs on lumber are necessary for national security purposes, although some experts are scoffing at this rationale.
Scott Lincicome, vice president of general economics at libertarian think tank the Cato Institute, told the Times that the administration's justification for the lumber tariffs are "absurd."
"If war broke out tomorrow, there would be zero concern about American ‘dependence’ on foreign lumber or furniture, and domestic sources would be quickly and easily acquired," he said.
Oct 14, 2025
SEE ALL
News
Noem Gets Two Luxury Private Jets as Trump-GOP Shutdown Threatens Food Aid for Millions
The US Coast Guard has purchased two luxury private jets for Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem at a total cost of more than $170 million in taxpayer money as the federal government remains shut down, imperiling food aid and other assistance for tens of millions of Americans.
The decision to buy two Gulfstream G700 jets for Noem—a central figure in President Donald Trump's lawless mass deportation campaign—drew swift criticism from Democratic lawmakers, who said the purchase underscores the administration's corruption and contempt for those struggling amid a government shutdown with no end in sight.
Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), the top Democrat on the House Committee on Homeland Security, called the spending "wholly inappropriate," "blatantly immoral," and "probably illegal" in a statement issued Sunday.
"While the nation suffers under this corrupt and extreme administration, Secretary Noem is fleecing the American taxpayers to live in luxury," said Thompson. "Not only does she now have multiple fancy jets to use, she lives rent-free on Coast Guard property."
In a letter to the Department of Homeland Security—which oversees the US Coast Guard (USCG)—Reps. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) and Lauren Underwood (D-Ill.) pointed to Noem's policy of personally reviewing and deciding whether to approve any contract exceeding $100,000 in value, an indication that the secretary signed off on the new procurement of private jets from Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation.
The purchase, wrote DeLauro and Underwood, "reflects a continuing trend of self-aggrandizement" during Noem's tenure as head of DHS. The two Democrats demanded answers from the agency about the contract, including the names of those who reviewed it and the funding source.
"In addition to raising serious questions about your ability to effectively lead an agency whose procurement strategies appear to vary on a whim, the procurement of new luxury jets for your use suggests that the USCG has been directed to prioritize your own comfort above the USCG's operational needs, even during a government shutdown," DeLauro and Underwood wrote. "We are deeply concerned about your judgment, leadership priorities, and responsibility as a steward of taxpayer dollars."
News of the Coast Guard's private jet purchase, which DHS claimed was a "matter of safety," comes as the Trump administration continues to exploit the government shutdown to inflict partisan funding cuts and accelerate its assault on the federal workforce.
Recipients of federal nutrition assistance are among those set to face significant harm if the shutdown persists.
According to the Trump administration's own estimates, more than 40 million Americans could soon see disruptions or cuts to their Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits if the government remains shut down into November. The US Department of Agriculture reportedly warned state agencies earlier this month that under such a scenario, the federal government would have "insufficient funds" to fully pay out benefits.
The average monthly SNAP payment is $177 per person, according to the USDA.
"Can't pay federal workers. Can't reopen the government. But sure, let's buy Kristi Noem TWO private jets," Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.) wrote in a social media post on Sunday. "Republicans have lost absolutely all touch with reality."
Oct 20, 2025
SEE ALL
News
Body Cam Footage Shows Alleged ICE Officer Pulled Over for Drunk Driving Racially Profiling Arresting Officer
Newly released body camera footage shows a Florida man claiming to be a federal immigration enforcement official racially profiling a police officer who pulled him over on the highway for drunk driving.
The footage, which was published on Thursday by YouTube account "The CrimePiece," shows the arrest of 42-year-old Miami resident Scott Thomas Deiseroth, who was pulled over by officers from the Monroe County Sheriff's Office on August 13.
The footage begins with the officer who pulled Deiseroth over asking him for his identification and asking him if he knew his current location.
Deiseroth reacted belligerently to the officer's questions and told him that he was a federal agent who worked for the Department of Homeland Security. As reported by local news station CBS 12, the Monroe County Sheriff's Office website at one point listed his occupation as an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer.
Deiseroth also told the officer that he was simply trying to get home and informed him that he had his two young sons with him riding in the backseat.
The officer then asked Deiseroth to step out of his car, to which Deiseroth replied, "Are you fucking serious right now?"
After exiting the vehicle, Deiseroth continued to exhibit hostility to the officer's questions, and he repeatedly demanded to know, "Are we really doing this right now?"
The officer then asked him how much he'd had to drink, and Deiseroth replied that he'd had four drinks, without specifying the nature of those drinks.
"Are you guys really trying to fuck me right now?" Deiseroth asked.
The officer informed Deiseroth that he could smell alcohol on him and he wanted to ensure that he was capable of safely driving his vehicle home.
The officer proceeded to administer field sobriety tests. During the tests, another officer came over to ensure that Deiseroth did not stumble while trying to walk a straight line along the side of a busy highway.
Deiseroth then questioned why the second officer, who was Black, was there, and the officer informed him that it was to prevent him from getting hit by oncoming traffic.
Deiseroth responded by repeatedly asking the officer, "Are you Haitian?"
Deiseroth was then informed by the officer administering the sobriety test that "it doesn't matter" where the other officer was from or his heritage.
"Yes it does," Deiseroth replied.
After failing the sobriety tests, Deiseroth was placed in handcuffs and informed that he was being placed under arrest. He then pleaded with the officers to not take him to prison and asked what they were going to do with his two children.
Later, after Deiseroth had been placed in the back of a police car, the officers informed him that his sons' mother—with whom Deiseroth had said earlier he was going through a divorce—would pick up the two children at the police station.
He repeatedly demanded that he be allowed to see his children before being taken to the police station, but the officers did not grant his request.
"Let me see my kids!" he demanded at one point.
"Brother, I really do not want them to see you in the way you're in right now," the officer replied.
Records at the Monroe County Sheriff's Office show that Deiseroth was subsequently charged with one misdemeanor count of driving under the influence and two felony counts of reckless child endangerment.
A request to the Florida State Attorney's Office in Monroe County to confirm Deiseroth's employment status at the time of the arrest was not returned by press time. The criminal case is pending.
Oct 17, 2025
SEE ALL
News
US Military Holding Survivors of Latest Trump Extrajudicial Boat Bombing: Reports
This is a developing story… Please check back for updates…
Multiple media outlets reported Friday that the US military is holding two survivors of President Donald Trump's sixth known strike on a boat in the Caribbean—bombings he claims are targeting drug smugglers and which critics argue are blatantly illegal.
Reuters was the first to report the news of survivors detained after a Thursday strike, citing several unnamed sources. According to the outlet, "Five sources familiar with the matter said the US military staged a helicopter rescue to pick up the survivors of the attack and bring them back to the US warship."
The Associated Press confirmed the development, citing two unnamed sources who said there were survivors brought to a Navy ship. The outlet added that "the survivors of this strike now face an unclear future and legal landscape, including questions about whether they are now considered to be prisoners of war or defendants in a criminal case."
The Intercept also spoke with two government sources who said that survivors are being held on a warship. Brian Finucane, a former State Department lawyer who is a specialist in counterterrorism issues and the laws of war, told the outlet, "Given that there is no armed conflict, there is no basis to hold these survivors as law of war detainees."
"The Trump administration is already using a make-believe armed conflict to kill people," Finucane added. "Will it also use this make-believe armed conflict to detain people as well?"
Trump told reporters at the White House on Friday that the US attacked "a drug-carrying submarine," and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who was beside him, said that more details would be forthcoming.
The reporting comes amid broader alarm about the Trump administration's push for regime change in Venezuela. However, human rights advocates, Democrats in Congress, legal scholars, and other critics have condemned all of Trump's boat bombings—which have killed at least 27 people—as murders.
This is the first reported case of survivors. Former Human Rights Watch executive director Kenneth Roth said Friday, "For the first time, some people survive a Trump-ordered strike on a boat in the Caribbean, meaning there are witnesses to what he tries to pass off as acts of war but are really murders which the International Criminal Court may be able to prosecute."
Oct 17, 2025
SEE ALL
LATEST NEWS
'A Betrayal': Ranchers Slam Trump Plan to Buy Beef From Argentina With US Tax Dollars
"After crashing the soybean market and gifting Argentina our largest export buyer, he's now poised to do the same to the cattle market," said an Illinois cattle producer.
Oct 20, 2025
US ranchers and industry groups are responding critically to President Donald Trump's proposal that the United States "would buy some beef from Argentina," in a bid to "bring our beef prices down," while pursuing an up to $40 billion bailout for the South American country.
Trump made the suggestion to reporters on Air Force One Sunday, according to the Associated Press. A few days earlier, he'd said that a deal to cut the price of beef was "gonna be coming down pretty soon." The AP noted various reasons for "stubbornly high" US prices, including drought and reduced imports from Mexico.
"President Trump's plan to buy beef from Argentina is a betrayal of the American rancher," Christian Lovell, an Illinois cattle producer and senior director of programs at the organization Farm Action, said in a Monday statement. "Those of us who raise cattle have finally started to see what profit looks like after facing years of high input costs and market manipulation by the meatpacking monopoly."
"After crashing the soybean market and gifting Argentina our largest export buyer, he's now poised to do the same to the cattle market," he continued, referring to one of the impacts of Trump's tariff war. "Importing Argentinian beef would send US cattle prices plummeting—and with the meatpacking industry as consolidated as it is, consumers may not see lower beef prices either. Washington should be focused on fixing our broken cattle market, not rewarding foreign competitors."
"Trump has done more in the past month to help Argentina than he has to help the American people."
"With these actions, President Trump risks acting more like the president of Argentina than president of the United States," Lovell declared. The US leader is a key ally of the nation's actual president, Javier Milei, whose austerity agenda has created the need for a massive bailout from Washington, DC.
Farm Action's proposed fix for the US is to tackle the "structurally flawed system" with three steps: "Reinstate Mandatory Country of Origin Labeling (MCOOL) for beef and pork, restore competitive markets by enforcing antitrust laws, and rebuild the US cow herd to achieve national self-reliance in beef production."
The group was far from alone in criticizing Trump's weekend remarks and offering alternative solutions to reduce US prices.
"We appreciate President Trump's interest in addressing the US beef market, which has been producing all-time record-high consumer beef prices," said Bill Bullard, CEO of R-CALF USA, the nation's largest cattle association, in a statement. "We urge the president to address the fundamental problems in the beef market, not just its symptom."
"The symptom is that the US has shrunk its beef cow herd to such a low level that it can no longer produce enough beef to satisfy domestic demand," he continued. "But the fundamental problem is that decades of failed trade policies have allowed cheap, undifferentiated imports to displace the domestic cow herd, driving hundreds of thousands of cattle farmers and ranchers and millions of domestic beef cows out of the domestic beef supply chain."
"In addition, the nation's beef packers and beef retailers have been allowed to concentrate to monopolistic levels, enabling them to interfere with competitive market forces," he asserted. "Attempting to lower domestic beef prices simply by inviting even more imports will both exacerbate and accelerate the ongoing dismantling of the domestic beef supply chain."
Instead of promoting US beef production, Trump now wants to establish a preferred position for Argentine beef in the US. Why, exactly? Is this what America First means?
[image or embed]
— Scott Horton (@robertscotthorton.bsky.social) October 20, 2025 at 2:23 PM
National Cattlemen's Beef Association CEO Colin Woodall said that "NCBA's family farmers and ranchers have numerous concerns with importing more Argentinian beef to lower prices for consumers. This plan only creates chaos at a critical time of the year for American cattle producers, while doing nothing to lower grocery store prices."
"Additionally, Argentina has a deeply unbalanced trade relationship with the US," Woodall noted. "In the past five years Argentina has sold more than $801 million of beef into the US market. By comparison, the US has sold just over $7 million worth of American beef to Argentina. Argentina also has a history of foot-and-mouth disease, which, if brought to the United States, could decimate our domestic livestock production."
Justin Tupper, president of the US Cattlemen's Association, highlighted the rising costs that ranchers are enduring.
"The cost of producing beef today is accurately represented in the consumer markets where it is sold," he said. "Ranchers are facing historic highs for feed, fuel, labor, and land—and those costs have risen far faster than beef prices on grocery shelves."
"When policymakers hint at intervention or suggest quick fixes, they can shake the market's foundation and directly impact the livelihoods of ranchers who depend on stable, transparent pricing," Tupper warned in the wake of the president's recent remarks. "Sudden price moves make it harder for independent producers to plan, invest, and keep their operations running."
"Efforts to support consumers must consider the economic realities on the ground and ensure the voices of independent ranchers lead the discussion," he added. "Market-driven prices—not mandates or panic interventions—have delivered value for generations. Let's focus on transparency, market integrity, and maintaining the conditions for sustainable rural economies."
Trump's signal that the US may buy more beef from Argentina comes as poll after poll shows that Americans—whose federal minimum wage hasn't increased in over 15 years—are stressed about the climbing costs of groceries. In addition to beef, shoppers are facing higher prices for staples such as coffee and eggs.
The Democratic National Committee also called out Trump's proposal on Monday, with Kendall Witmer, the DNC's rapid response director, charging that "Trump has done more in the past month to help Argentina than he has to help the American people, who are struggling to afford everything from rent to groceries."
"Because of Trump, farmers are on the brink of bankruptcy, and the government has been shut down for almost a month," Witmer added. "You would think that the so-called 'America First' president would be focused on reopening the government and saving millions of Americans from skyrocketing healthcare premiums—but Trump is showing his true colors. He only cares about helping himself and his friends, even at the expense of the American people. Let's be clear: MAGA now stands for Make Argentina Great Again."
Keep Reading
Show Less
'Historic Mistake': Brazil Opens Up Amazon to New Oil Drilling Ahead of Global Climate Summit
"For us all to have a future, the oil industry can have no future," said one campaigner.
Oct 20, 2025
As climate leaders and policymakers arrive in Belém, Brazil next month, for the global climate summit that officials have pledged will stand apart from previous conferences due to its emphasis on "implementation," the country's government-run Petrobras firm will be drilling for oil just over 200 miles away in the Amazon, after the company was granted a license Monday.
Petrobras said it plans to begin drilling immediately in a project that will last about five months at the mouth of the Amazon River—the Foz de Amazonas region.
Despite President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva's reputation as an international climate leader, he has claimed that oil revenue will help fund Brazil's transition to renewable energy, but Ilan Zugman, Latin America and Caribbean director at the grassroots climate action group 350.org, said Monday that in granting the license, the Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Natural Resources (IBAMA) was "doubling down on a model that has already failed."
Petrobras is planning to drill an oil well at an offshore site, Block 59, that is 310 miles from the mouth of the Amazon.
IBAMA previously denied Petrobras the license, saying the company had not provided adequate plans for how it would protect wildlife in the case of an oil spill.
"The history of oil in Brazil shows this clearly: huge profits for a few, and inequality, destruction, and violence for local populations."
In September, the agency approved a pre-operational environmental assessment and said a new "fauna simulation" would take place after the license was issued, allowed Petrobras to prove after obtaining permission for drilling that it would protect wildlife.
The Amazon region is home to about 10% of the planet's wildlife, and climate advocates have raised alarm that the river's currents would swiftly bring the damage from an oil spill straight to the habitats of many animals and plants.
Brazilian NGO the Climate Observatory said the approval of the license "sabotages" the 30th United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP30), which World Meteorological Organization Secretary-General Celeste Sauro said recently "aspires to be a turning point, a moment when the world shifts from ambition to implementation."
Last year was the first year to exceed 1.5°C above average preindustrial temperatures, and the previous 10 years have been the warmest on record. Scientists and the International Energy Agency have warned that no new oil or other fossil fuel projects have a place on a pathway to reaching net-zero global carbon emissions by 2050.
“The decision is disastrous from an environmental, climate, and sociobiodiversity perspective," said the Climate Observatory.
The group told The Guardian that civil society organizations would be taking the Brazilian government to court over the license, saying its approval was rife with "illegalities and technical flaws."
Despite IBAMA's approval, an opinion signed by 29 staff members at the agency in February said they recommended denying the license due to the risk of “massive biodiversity loss in a highly sensitive marine ecosystem."
Zugman called the decision a "historic mistake."
"The history of oil in Brazil shows this clearly: huge profits for a few, and inequality, destruction, and violence for local populations," said Zugman. "Brazil must take real climate leadership and break the cycle of extraction that has led us to the current climate crisis. We urgently need a just energy transition plan, based on renewables, that respects Indigenous, quilombola, and riverside peoples and guarantees them a leading role in decisions about climate and energy—including at COP30."
Earlier this year, Indigenous leaders representing dozens of Amazon ethnicities and tribes signed a declaration demanding that officials at COP30 "nullify oil blocks that have not had the consent of Indigenous people," "halt investment in new oil infrastructure," and create phase-out plans for oil and gas operations.
Nick Young, co-head of story and communications at Greenpeace International, called IBAMA's decision "disastrous."
"A spill here would be catastrophic and uniquely hard to contain in the Amazon plume," said Young. "And in addition to the risk of oil spills, the science clearly shows that we cannot afford to burn even existing oil reserves, let alone new ones."
"For us all to have a future, the oil industry can have no future," he added. "It makes zero sense to allow them to find new oil to throw on the fire."
Keep Reading
Show Less
Nearly Half of Dems in Competitive Primary Districts Say They 'Could Never' Support a Candidate Backed by AIPAC
"The political rules of the last almost half-century are changing before our eyes," said Jewish Currents editor Peter Beinart.
Oct 20, 2025
As voters sour on Israel after over two years of genocide in Gaza, an internal poll suggests that backing from the pro-Israel lobby may be a liability for Democrats seeking to win their primaries.
The Democratic polling firm Upswing Strategies canvassed 850 Democratic voters in congressional districts across Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, and Pennsylvania. The survey asked voters for some of the most competitive Democratic primaries in the 2026 election cycle a number of questions about their sympathies in the Israel-Palestine conflict.
It also zeroed in on their feelings about pro-Israel lobbying groups, including the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), which supported 152 Democrats who received more than $28 million in total during the 2024 election and had a role in toppling several House progressives, including then-Reps. Cori Bush (D-Mo.) and Jamaal Bowman (D-NY).
The poll found that nearly half of voters in these competitive districts (48%) agreed with the statement that they "could never support" a candidate for Congress that was funded by AIPAC or the pro-Israel lobby more generally. Over a quarter of voters, 28%, said they strongly felt they could never support a candidate backed by AIPAC.
Just 40% said they "could see" themselves supporting a candidate backed by AIPAC, "especially if I agreed with them on most other issues," but just 10% expressed that belief strongly, while the other 30% said they only agreed with it somewhat.
The poll was posted to social media by Matthew Eadie, a reporter for the Illinois news outlet Evanston Now, on Saturday. He said that since it was conducted in early September, its results have been "circulating among Democrats in over a half-dozen competitive primaries in mostly Illinois."
With Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin's seat coming open in 2026, several current Illinois congresspeople have signaled their intent to run, leaving their own House seats up for grabs. Among them are some AIPAC favorites, including Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.), who received over $63,000 from pro-Israel groups during the 2023-24 election cycle and nearly $269,000 since his first campaign in 2016; and Rep. Robin Kelly (D-Ill.), who received over $17,000 last cycle and nearly $109,000 since her first campaign in 2012.
Pro-Israel groups will also likely seek to hold off yet another primary challenge to Rep. Danny Davis (D-Ill.) from the progressive community organizer Kina Collins, who has run against him during the last three cycles. During the 2024 election, an AIPAC affiliate, the United Democracy Project, spent approximately half a million dollars running ads attacking Collins, who had described Israel's actions against Palestinians, including its blockade of food and water supplies, as "war crimes."
Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.), a progressive who has referred to Israel's actions as a "genocide" and sponsored a bill to halt military aid to the nation, was targeted with more than $157,000 worth of digital ads and mailers in 2022 by the AIPAC ally Democratic Majority for Israel. However, in 2024, while blitzing other races, the groups held off on targeting Ramirez, whose support was deemed to be too strong.
Other districts in the survey included that of Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), who has weathered multiple challenges from AIPAC, which likewise held off in 2024 due to her popularity.
On the flip side, it also included the district of one of Israel's strongest soldiers, the self-described "centrist" Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Pa.), whom AIPAC and other pro-Israel groups armed with more than $5.4 million in 2024 to take down the progressive Jewish incumbent Rep. Andy Levin, whom AIPAC's former president called "the most corrosive member of Congress to the US-Israel relationship.”
While the poll's results were not broken down by congressional district, they do show that in a political era defined by the Gaza genocide, the Israel lobby's influence within the party may be on the wane. Last week, Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.), a centrist challenger to the progressive Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), seemed to exemplify this when he pledged to return the money he'd received from AIPAC, saying, “I’m a friend of Israel, but not of its current government, and AIPAC’s mission is to back that government."
This wane is partially due to the collapse of support for Israel among Democrats over the past two years. Affirming what past polls have shown, the Upswing poll found that Democratic voters overwhelmingly have a wildly positive view of not only Palestine, but international organizations that have shown support to Palestinians like the United Nations and Doctors Without Borders, while having overwhelmingly negative views of Israel and especially its prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.
And while it was less salient to voters than holding President Donald Trump accountable and lowering the cost of living, 53% of voters in the poll said "putting pressure on the Israeli government to end the humanitarian crisis in Gaza" was a 10 out of 10 issue on the scale of importance for Democrats to focus on, while 72% said it was at least an 8 out of 10.
Peter Beinart, the editor-at-large of the progressive magazine Jewish Currents, said, "It's astonishing how quickly the politics are moving."
Democratic politicians, he continued, now "don't fear AIPAC. They fear being associated with AIPAC. The political rules of the last almost half-century are changing before our eyes."
Keep Reading
Show Less
Most Popular
Progressive Newswire
Health Care Costs are a Priority — Trump and Republicans Aren’t Delivering
Oct 20 2025 · 12:23pm EDT
Advocacy Orgs Launch Ad Campaign to Defend Healthcare in Face of Shutdown
Oct 15 2025 · 09:54am EDT
Millions Of U.S. Children Could Go Hungry Next Week If Trump’s Shutdown Persists
Oct 09 2025 · 03:10pm EDT