5
#000000
#FFFFFF
LIVE COVERAGE
Opinion
Climate
Economy
Politics
Rights & Justice
War & Peace
Further
Gobsmacking Fabulists 'R Us
For the anniversary of the Jan. 6 riot that almost toppled democracy (more quickly than now), the hacks and crackpots in power have concocted a deranged revisionist history of such "evil," "pathological," "Stalin-level propaganda" it's somehow dragged us even further through the looking glass. In its telling, "orderly patriots" marched to the Capitol, Democrats who "masterfully reversed reality" "staged the real rebellion," and Trump "triumphed over tyranny." Up is down. What the fuck. Orwell lives.
A few days ago, Robert Reich described the Jan. 6 insurrection as "the most shameful day in American history." He later wisely upped the ante to draw a direct line from that crime to all the rest, including his capture of Maduro, arguing they're all based on the same disturbing premise: "The hubris of omnipotence." Many have made the same connection, calling Jan. 6 a stark "fork in the road" whose moral implications - supremacy of political loyalty over the rule of law - poisoned all that followed. It became "the moment we lost the plot," "a riot that never ended," not "the final, violent death spasms of the cult of Trump" as many thought but "the dawn of Trump’s total liberation." Today, amidst all the gaslighting, denial, lies, the ongoing, well-fed hubris, we pay the price.
A few weeks ago, former special counsel Jack Smith appeared before the House Judiciary Committee, testifying that his team had "proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 election and to prevent the lawful transfer of power." We all know Trump should be behind bars. Tragically, he isn't, because he inexplicably weaseled his way into getting elected, a complicit, lawless SCOTUS gave him an unconscionable lifeline, Merrick Garland was a dud, Biden got old, and Smith was forced to drop the case. Since then, Trump has blasted ahead with his revenge tour, his toadies have gutted the DOJ, the far-right, fueled by Charlie Kirk's death, has soared, and truth has lost at every mournful turn.
And so to Trump's "day of love” as framed by a demented J6 website, widely deemed "disgusting lies," "an absolute disgrace," and "a despicable, shameful distortion of reality by a lawless, rogue White House." With a stark black and white banner portraying a supposed gallery of villains composed of - surprise! - Democrats, along with traitorous Cheney and Kinzinger, it opens with the florid claim, "President Trump took decisive action to pardon January 6 defendants who were unfairly targeted, overcharged, and used as political examples... They were punished to cover incompetence." It boasts Trump, on his first day in office, pardoned nearly 1,600 "patriotic Americans...treated as insurrectionists by a weaponized Biden DOJ" for "exercising their First Amendment rights."
Blasting Nancy Pelosi for creating "a scripted TV spectacle to fabricate an 'insurrection' narrative and pin blame on President Trump" and flaunting contextless quotes - "We have totally failed" - it claims Pelosi "repeatedly" acknowledged responsibility for “catastrophic security failures" after refusing Trump's gracious offer of 10,000 National Guard troops for protection (not, all of it). Thus did wily Dems reverse reality: "In truth it was the Democrats who staged the real insurrection by certifying a fraud-ridden election, ignoring widespread irregularities, and weaponizing federal agencies to hunt down dissenters. This gaslighting narrative allowed them to persecute innocent Americans, silence opposition, and distract from their own role in undermining democracy.”
Then, a timeline of fictional events: Trump "invites patriotic Americans" to DC for "a peaceful and historic protest against certifying the stolen 2020 election." He "speaks to hundreds of thousands of supporters." The crowd "responds with massive enthusiasm." The march "is orderly and spirited." Capitol Police "fire tear gas, flash bangs, and rubber munitions, deliberately escalating tensions." The "stolen election is certified" despite "hidden suitcases of ballots," also "exploding water pipes"? Trump is "silenced," "weaponized prosecutions," "FBI entrapment," "fabricated indictments," "rigged show trials," "Trump prevails despite relentless Deep State efforts to imprison, bankrupt, and assassinate him," and of course "God’s unmistakable grace." Whew.
The triumphant finale: Trump "corrected a historic wrong - freeing Americans who were unjustly punished in one of the darkest wrongs in modern American history" - reportedly, when faced with the task, saying fuck it and giving all 1,600, even the most vile, a free ride 'cause he was too lazy to go through each case. He pardoned "patriotic citizens viciously overcharged, denied due process and held as political hostages by a vengeful regime." Those victims of "merciless persecution (for) the simple act of peacefully walking through the Capitol" were "finally freed from years of cruel imprisonment" as he "ended the nightmare of weaponized justice and delivered long-overdue vindication to those betrayed by those leaders sworn to protect them."
Speaking of: Since then, Republicans have spinelessly toed the line. To date, unholy Mike Johnson's even refused to install a legally mandated plaque at the US Capitol honoring the brave and still damaged souls in law enforcement who tried to stop the mayhem; challenged, he argues the plaque is "not implementable" as written, and that alternatives offered by Democrats "do not comply with the statute." On Tuesday's anniversary, dozens of Dem lawmakers held a forum to recount their experiences of the traumatic event and honor those who fought to protect them and uphold the law; they gathered in the basement where many had hidden that day after the Speaker's office declined their requests for a hearing room or larger auditorium upstairs.
History repeats itself, first as tragedy, then as farce. Also on Tuesday, a twisted, ragtag "family reunion" of several dozen rioters came to D.C. to march again, ostensibly to commemorate Ashli Babbitt, who was killed as she tried to breach the Capitol; the administration paid $5 million to settle a wrongful death lawsuit with her family. The pardoned rioters, many of whom are similarly seeking millions in damages, marched draped in MAGA gear. "This is about redemption," said one. "This is the life force of MAGA." Some tangled with a handful of counter-protesters - "Eat Shit Donald Trump" - and a small fight began when one thug tried to seize the bullhorn from a protester’s hands. She was handcuffed by the police. Color us shocked.
Since Trump's sweeping pardons, even of the worst of the worst, at least 33 rioters have been re-arrested for other crimes. The charges include plotting the murder of FBI agents who investigated Jan. 6 cases, and violent assault - punched a woman in the throat, stomped on a man’s chest at a bar. Three have been arrested for rape, and six have been charged with child-sex crimes, including child rape and child pornography, because only the best. After a five-year manhunt, the DOJ also just indicted the guy accused of planting pipe bombs outside DNC and RNC headquarters the night before Jan. 6, 2021; he's detained pending trial, but oops - it turns out the stable genius may have already pardoned him.
Others pop up in a sordid "Where Are They Now" round-up. Former Proud Boys leader and self-proclaimed “Western chauvinist" Enrique Tarrio, who formed a militia-like Ministry of Self-Defense unit,” got a 22-year-sentence, with terrorism charges included, before being pardoned. He joined Tuesday's march; before that, he was last seen getting charged with another assault, but feds declined to prosecute him. Jan. 6 shaman Jacob Chansley last made the news when he filed an unhinged $40 trillion lawsuit against Trump, declaring himself "the first legal President of the New Constitutional Republic of the United States." In that capacity, he ordered the printing of a $40 trillion coin, and gave himself $1 trillion "for my years worth of pain and suffering."
Of other Jan. 6 heroes, one was arrested on a felony charge after his off-leash dogs viciously attacked multiple people, sending four to the hospital. One was arrested for driving a van loaded with weapons near Barack Obama's home; he also livestreamed threats against Jamie Raskin, threatened to blow up a federal building, and was convicted on a weapons and hoax bomb threat charge. One was arrested for making a “terroristic threat" against Rep. Hakeem Jeffries. One, Jared Wise - "Kill ‘em! Kill ‘em!” - works at the DOJ under Ed Martin, who represented Jan. 6 defendants. And one, the Instigator-In-Chief, just overthrew the president of Venezuela in violation of the U.N. Charter and international law, among many other crimes. He has yet to serve any time; somehow, horrifyingly, he is still babbling in public.
Despite the attempts at revisionist history, "Americans remember that day for a simple reason – we watched it happen." - Gregory Rosen, former DOJ prosecutor of Jan. 6 defendants.
Jan 07, 2026
SEE ALL
News
'A Wake-Up Call': Scientists Find 2025 Among Hottest Years on Record
Climate change driven by human burning of fossil fuels helped make 2025 one of the hottest years ever recorded, a scientific report published Monday affirmed, prompting renewed calls for urgent action to combat the worsening planetary emergency.
Researchers at World Weather Attribution (WWA) found that "although 2025 was slightly cooler than 2024 globally, it was still far hotter than almost any other year on record," with only two other recent years recording a higher average worldwide temperature.
For the first time, the three-year running average will end the year above the 1.5°C warming goal, relative to preindustrial levels, established a decade ago under the landmark Paris climate agreement.
"Global temperatures remained very high and significant harm from human-induced climate change is very real," the report continues. "It is not a future threat, but a present-day reality."
"Across the 22 extreme events we analyzed in depth, heatwaves, floods, storms, droughts, and wildfires claimed lives, destroyed communities, and wiped out crops," the researchers wrote. "Together, these events paint a stark picture of the escalating risks we face in a warming world."
The WWA researchers' findings tracked with the findings of United Nations experts and others that 2025 would be the third-hottest year on record.
According to the WWA study:
This year highlighted again, in stark terms, how unfairly the consequences of human-induced climate change are distributed, consistently hitting those who are already marginalized within their societies the hardest. But the inequity goes deeper: The scientific evidence base itself is uneven. Many of our studies in 2025 focused on heavy rainfall events in the Global South, and time and again we found that gaps in observational data and the reliance on climate models developed primarily for the Global North prevented us from drawing confident conclusions. This unequal foundation in climate science mirrors the broader injustices of the climate crisis.
The events of 2025 make it clear that while we urgently need to transition away from fossil fuels, we also must invest in adaptation measures. Many deaths and other impacts could be prevented with timely action. But events like Hurricane Melissa highlight the limits of preparedness and adaptation: When an intense storm strikes small islands such as Jamaica and other Caribbean nations, even relatively high levels of preparedness cannot prevent extreme losses and damage. This underscores that adaptation alone is not enough; rapid emission reductions remain essential to avoid the worst impacts of climate change.
“If we don’t stop burning fossil fuels very, very, quickly, very soon, it will be very hard to keep that goal” of 1.5°C, WWA co-founder Friederike Otto—who is also an Imperial College London climate scientist—told the Associated Press. “The science is increasingly clear.”
The WWA study's publication comes a month after this year's United Nations Climate Change Conference—or COP30—ended in Brazil with little meaningful progress toward a transition from fossil fuels.
Responding to the new study, Climate Action Campaign director Margie Alt said in a statement that "2025 was full of stark reminders of the urgent need to cut climate pollution, invest in clean energy, and tackle the climate crisis now."
"Today’s report is a wake-up call," Alt continued. "Unfortunately, [US President Donald] Trump and Republicans controlling Congress spent the past year making climate denial official US policy and undermining progress to stave off the worst of the climate crisis. Their reckless polluters-first agenda rolled back critical climate protections and attacked and undermined the very agencies responsible for helping Americans prepare for and recover from increasingly dangerous disasters."
"Across the country, people are standing up and demanding their leaders do better to protect our families from climate change and extreme weather," Alt added. "It's time those in power started listening.”
Dec 30, 2025
SEE ALL
News
Tax the Rich, Say Mamdani, Sanders, and NYC Inauguration Crowd
"Tax the rich. Tax the rich. Tax the rich."
The chants broke out at City Hall in New York on Thursday as US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) addressed the crowd before swearing in Mayor Zohran Mamdani, a democratic socialist who campaigned on a platform that prioritized NYC's working class.
"Demanding that the wealthy and large corporations start paying their fair share of taxes is not radical. It is exactly the right thing to do," declared Sanders—who endorsed Mamdani even before his June primary victory over former Democratic New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and "the billionaire-backed status quo."
The 34-year-old mayor on Thursday described Brooklyn-born Sanders—50 years his senior—as "the man whose leadership I seek most to emulate, who I am so grateful to be sworn in by today."
During the afternoon inauguration ceremony—which followed an early morning swearing-in at the abandoned subway station beneath City Hall—Mamdani also called for taxing the rich as he reiterated the agenda that secured him over 1.1 million votes in November.
"Beginning today, we will govern expansively and audaciously. We may not always succeed, but never will we be accused of lacking the courage to try," he said. "To those who insist that the era of big government is over, hear me when I say this: No longer will City Hall hesitate to use its power to improve New Yorkers' lives."
"Here, where the language of the New Deal was born, we will return the vast resources of this city to the workers who call it home," Mamdani vowed. "Not only will we make it possible for every New Yorker to afford a life they love once again, we will overcome the isolation that too many feel, and connect the people of this city to one another."
The mayor said that "the cost of childcare will no longer discourage young adults from starting a family, because we will deliver universal childcare for the many by taxing the wealthiest few. Those in rent-stabilized homes will no longer dread the latest rent hike, because we will freeze the rent."
"Getting on a bus without worrying about a fare hike or whether you'll be late to your destination will no longer be deemed a small miracle, because we will make buses fast and free," he continued. "These policies are not simply about the costs we make free, but the lives we fill with freedom. For too long in our city, freedom has belonged only to those who can afford to buy it. Our City Hall will change that."
The ceremony also featured remarks from another early Mamdani supporter, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), as well as the swearing-in of Jumaane Williams for a third term as New York City's public advocate and Mark Levine, the new comptroller.
"New York, we have chosen courage over fear," said Ocasio-Cortez, whose district spans the Bronx and Queens. "We have chosen prosperity for the many over spoils for the few. And when the entrenched ways would rather have us dig in our feet and seek refuge in the past, we have chosen instead to turn towards making a new future for all of us."
AOC: New York City has chosen the ambitious pursuit of universal childcare, affordable rents and housing and clean and dignified public transit for all. We have chosen that over the distractions of bigotry and the barbarism of extreme income inequality
[image or embed]
— Acyn (@acyn.bsky.social) January 1, 2026 at 1:47 PM
As NYC kicked off the new year with progressive city leadership, 2025 findings from the Bloomberg Billionaire Index sparked fresh wealth tax demands. According to the tracker, the world's 500 richest people added a record $2.2 trillion to their collective fortunes last year. About a quarter of that went to just eight Big Tech billionaires: Jeff Bezos, Sergey Brin, Michael Dell, Larry Ellison, Jensen Huang, Elon Musk, Larry Page, and Mark Zuckerberg.
In New York, Mamdani has proposed raising the state corporate tax rate from 8.85% to 11.5% and hiking taxes for individuals who make more than $1 million a year. Achieving those goals would require cooperation from state legislators.
Mamdani acknowledged Thursday that for much of history, the response from City Hall to the question of who New York belongs to has been, "It belongs only to the wealthy and well-connected, those who never strain to capture the attention of those in power."
In the years ahead, he pledged, "City Hall will deliver an agenda of safety, affordability, and abundance, where government looks and lives like the people it represents, never flinches in the fight against corporate greed, and refuses to cower before challenges that others have deemed too complicated."
"Together, we will tell a new story of our city," the mayor said. "This will not be a tale of one city, governed only by the 1%. Nor will it be a tale of two cities, the rich versus the poor. It will be a tale of 8.5 million cities, each of them a New Yorker with hopes and fears, each a universe, each of them woven together."
Jan 01, 2026
SEE ALL
News
‘Breathtaking Cruelty’: Trump Cuts Billions in Federal Childcare Funds for Democrat-Led States
The Trump administration is portraying its decision to slash $10 billion in funding to five Democrat-led states as a response to a scandal in Minnesota, where dozens of people have been convicted of stealing public money through the state's social services system—but advocates and Democratic lawmakers on Tuesday condemned what they called an act of "political retribution" that will punish working families who have nothing to do with the recent fraud cases.
"Rather than an isolated decision, this is part of a clear and dangerous pattern," said Kristen Crowell, executive director of the advocacy group Fair Share America.
Crowell pointed to Medicaid and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program cuts in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act that was passed by Republicans last year, and said that along with the cuts announced Monday, "these policies amount to a coordinated attack on working families."
The US Health and Human Services Department (HHS) said the cuts would impact New York, California, Colorado, Minnesota, and Illinois.
About $7 billion in funding for the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program will be impacted, reducing cash assistance that is provided to low-income families with children. The five states will also collectively lose nearly $2.4 billion in assistance for working parents through the Child Care and Development Fund and $870 million for social services grants.
The funding freeze follows the administration's suspension of $185 million in annual aid to childcare centers in Minnesota and a pause it announced on childcare funding for all states until officials could prove verification data about how the money was being spent—a response to what Deputy HHS Secretary Jim O'Neill called "blatant fraud that appears to be rampant in Minnesota and across the country."
A spokesperson for HHS, Andrew Nixon, told CNN Tuesday that the new funding cuts for the five states were moving forward because "for too long, Democrat-led states and governors have been complicit in allowing massive amounts of fraud to occur under their watch. Under the Trump administration, we are ensuring that federal taxpayer dollars are being used for legitimate purposes. We will ensure these states are following the law and protecting hard-earned taxpayer money.”
The administration did not point to any evidence that the five states have used taxpayer money fraudulently in their social services programs.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) accused President Donald Trump of "playing politics with our children's lives," while Rep. Brittany Pettersen (D-Colo.) posited that Colorado was being targeted once again in retaliation for the state's prosecution of a former county clerk over her involvement in efforts to overturn the 2020 election results.
In addition to responding to Minnesota's fraud scandal by cutting funding for millions of families in four other states, Trump has cited the controversy as a reason to further ramp up immigration enforcement as he's placed blame on Minnesota's entire Somali community of about 80,000 people for the fraud. Members of the Somali diaspora have been charged with defrauding the state government.
Trump said Sunday that "every one of them should be forced to leave this country," referring to all Somalis, and is deploying thousands of federal agents to Minnesota to intensify anti-immigration operations there.
In the case of the childcare funding cuts, the administration's decision will mean "higher costs, fewer slots, and more families forced into impossible choices between caring for their children and keeping a job," said Crowell.
"Beyond the immediate human harm, this agenda undermines foundational elements of our economy: the care infrastructure that makes work possible and the purchasing power of the working class," she added. "When parents can’t afford childcare, when families lose health coverage, when hunger rises, our workforce shrinks, productivity falls, families are forced to go without. This is not fiscal responsibility—it’s economic sabotage, paid for by America’s kids.”
On social media, one commentator pointed to the right-wing policy blueprint Project 2025 as evidence that the administration ultimately aims to gut the childcare industry altogether—ending federal funding for large-scale childcare programs and supporting parents "directly" instead so they can stay home with their children.
"It’s not about fraud. It’s about defunding childcare," they wrote. "While not offering a real financial alternative. While cutting programs like Head Start. While rolling back access to birth control and abortion. That’s not support. That’s coercion."
Jan 06, 2026
SEE ALL
News
'DOJ Cannot Be Trusted,' Say Khanna and Massie, Seeking Special Master for Epstein Files
The congressmen behind the Epstein Files Transparency Act on Thursday asked a federal judge to appoint a "special master and/or independent monitor" to ensure that the Trump administration actually releases the documents from the trafficking case against deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, as required by the new law.
Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) led the monthslong congressional effort to pass the legislation, which Trump—a former friend of Epstein who's repeatedly mentioned in the files—signed in November. Since then, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) has published some heavily redacted materials but blown the December 19 deadline to release everything.
"We have offered for six months to meet with the Justice Department to help them get the right documents out, and we're now going to be intervening with the Southern District of New York (SDNY) to ask those judges to appoint a special master and ensure that all the documents are released," Khanna told NPR last week.
Khanna and Massie did so with a Thursday letter to Judge Paul Engelmayer, writing to the appointee of former President Barack Obama that "we have urgent and grave concerns about DOJ's failure to comply with the act as well as the department's violations of this court's order."
As MS NOW—which initially reported on the letter—explained, "Engelmayer oversees the case involving Ghislaine Maxwell, and last month, the Justice Department obtained Engelmayer's permission to release grand jury materials and other evidence provided to Maxwell in discovery that were redacted or sealed per a court order."
On December 24, the DOJ announced that it had received over a million more documents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation and SDNY "to review them for release, in compliance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act, existing statutes, and judicial orders." The department added then that "due to the mass volume of material, this process may take a few more weeks."
Khanna and Massie noted in their letter that the DOJ's most recent court filing on Monday states the department has only produced "approximately 12,285 documents (compromising approximately 125,575 pages)" and there is still "more than 2 million documents potentially responsive to the act in various phases of review."
As the lawmakers pointed out: "Other reports suggest that the DOJ may be reviewing more than 5 million pages. Because these figures are self-reported and internally inconsistent with prior representations, there is reasonable suspicion that the DOJ has overstated the scope of responsive materials, thereby portraying compliance as unmanageable and effectively delaying disclosure."
According to their letter:
The conduct by the DOJ is not only a flagrant violation of the mandatory disclosure obligations under the Epstein Files Transparency Act, but as this court has recognized in its previous rulings, the behavior by the DOJ has caused serious trauma to survivors.
In addition, the DOJ has not complied with Section 3 of the act, which requires the attorney general, within 15 days of the deadline for release, to submit a report to the House and Senate Judiciary committees identifying the categories of records released and withheld and summarizing all redactions and their legal bases. To date, no such report has been provided. Without it, there is no authoritative accounting of what records exist, what has been withheld, or why, making effective oversight and judicial review far more difficult.
Put simply, the DOJ cannot be trusted with making mandatory disclosures under the act.
Khanna and Massie added that "while we believe that criminal violations have taken place and must be addressed, the most urgent need now is for the DOJ to produce all the documents and electronically stored information required by the act."
The pair has threatened to bring inherent contempt proceedings against US Attorney General Pam Bondi. Asked about that on Tuesday, Massie told MS NOW that they were assessing the situation and still hoped for DOJ compliance.
"Hopefully, we don't have to do it," the congressman said. "But when we feel like we need to do it, we'll do it."
Jan 08, 2026
SEE ALL
News
GOP Senators Break Ranks With Trump to Help Advance Venezuela War Powers Resolution
Amid President Donald Trump's admission that his intervention in Venezuela could last years, US senators voted Thursday to advance legislation aimed at blocking the president's use of military forces against the oil-rich South American nation.
Senators voted 52-47 to advance a war powers resolution introduced last month by Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) "to block the use of the US armed forces to engage in hostilities within or against Venezuela unless authorized by Congress" as required by the 1973 War Powers Act.
The Senate will now continue debating the measure, which, if passed by both the upper chamber and the House of Representatives, would be subject to a likely veto by Trump—who has sunk two previous war powers resolutions unrelated to Venezuela.
In addition to Paul, four other GOP senators voted to advance the resolution: Susan Collins of Maine, Josh Hawley of Missouri, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, and Todd Young of Indiana. While lawmakers often assent during the procedural phase, only to cast ballots against legislation during final votes, at least one of the GOP senators signaled they will vote the same as they did Thursday.
"While I support the operation to seize [Venezuelan President] Nicolás Maduro, which was extraordinary in its precision and complexity, I do not support committing additional US forces or entering into any long-term military involvement in Venezuela or Greenland without specific congressional authorization," Collins said in a statement, referring to Trump's threats to acquire the Danish territory by force if he deems it necessary. Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) this week introduced a bill that would ban the president from any such action.
"I believe invoking the War Powers Act at this moment is necessary, given the president’s comments about the possibility of ‘boots on the ground’ and a sustained engagement ‘running’ Venezuela, with which I do not agree," added Collins, who is facing a serious challenge for her Senate seat from candidates including former Maine Gov. Janet Mills and progressive Graham Platner, both Democrats who oppose US military action in Venezuela.
At the time of bipartisan war powers resolution's introduction last month, Trump had not yet attacked Venezuelan territory, although he had threatened to do so, deployed warships and thousands of US troops to the region, authorized covert CIA action to topple Maduro, and ordered the bombing of boats the administration claimed—without evidence—were smuggling drugs in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean.
However, Trump dramatically escalated US intervention in Venezuela, first with a December drone strike on a port facility and then by bombing and invading the country and abducting Maduro and his wife.
Asked during a Wednesday interview with the New York Times whether the US intervention in Venezuela would last a year, or longer, Trump replied, "I would say much longer," explaining that "we will rebuild" the country "in a very profitable way," including by "taking oil" from it.
The specter of yet another US "forever war" like the ongoing open-ended War on Terror that's left nearly 1 million people dead in at least seven countries since 2001 has prompted the introduction of several congressional war powers resolutions. So far, none have passed.
“If there was ever a moment for the Senate to find its voice, it is now," Schumer said on the Senate floor ahead of Thursday's vote. "Today, the Senate must assert the authority given to it on matters of war and peace. We must send Donald Trump a clear message on behalf of the American people: No more endless wars. Donald Trump’s ready for an endless war in Venezuela, and lord knows where else. The American people are not.”
Kaine made it clear during his pre-vote Senate floor remarks that the resolution does not challenge the "execution of a valid arrest warrant against Nicolás Maduro," which—despite experts concurring that the invasion and abduction were illegal—he called "good for America and good for Venezuela."
However, Kaine said, given that Trump's intervention "will go on for a long period of time," US troops "should not be used for hostilities in Venezuela without a vote of Congress as the Constitution requires.”
“No one has ever regretted a vote that just says, Mr. President, before you send our sons and daughters to war, come to Congress," he added.
However, such votes have very rarely succeeded in stopping any president from proceeding with military action.
In 2019 during Trump's first term, the House and Senate both passed a war powers resolution introduced by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) to cut off US military support for the Saudi-led coalition’s atrocity-laden war on Yemen. Trump vetoed the measure, and senators lacked the two-thirds majority needed to override his move.
The following year, both houses of Congress passed another war powers resolution—this one introduced in the Senate by Kaine—to terminate military action against Iran. But Trump again vetoed the legislation, and the Senate could not muster the two-thirds majority required for an override. After returning to office last year, Trump ordered sweeping attacks on Iran—and is threatening to do so again.
While Trump took to his Truth Social network to blast the five Republican senators who voted to advance the war powers resolution on Thursday and Vice President JD Vance called the War Powers Act "fundamentally a fake and unconstitutional law," progressive and anti-war advocacy groups hailed the advancement.
"With this historic, bipartisan vote to prevent further war in Venezuela, Congress has begun the long-overdue work of reasserting its constitutional role in decisions of war and peace," Demand Progress senior policy adviser Cavan Kharrazian said in a statement.
"We commend the leadership of Sens. Kaine and Paul in forcing this vote, and we thank Sens. Collins, Young, Hawley, and Murkowski for their principled votes," Kharrazian continued. "Senators should move quickly to adopt the resolution to prevent further unauthorized military escalation and the House should follow suit."
"Congress should also make clear, using the full force of the law, that no president has the authority to unilaterally launch hostilities anywhere in the world," he added, "whether in Venezuela or against other countries the administration has openly threatened, including Cuba, Greenland, Colombia, and Iran.”
"The dam has broken." Afghanistan War Veteran Max Rose applauds the Senate’s bipartisan vote advancing the War Powers Resolution. He calls it a stunning rebuke of Trump’s unilateral wars, reminding the President that the military belongs to America, not him.
[image or embed]
— VoteVets (@votevets.org) January 8, 2026 at 9:05 AM
Jose Vasquez, executive director of Common Defense and an Army veteran, said, "The vote is a victory for the Constitution, the stability of the region, and for the veterans and military families who organized, spoke out, and refused to accept another reckless slide toward forever war."
"By drawing this vote, Congress sends an essential message that accountability still matters and that no one person or presidential administration can send Americans to war," he added. "Veterans will remain organized and vigilant, but today shows what is possible when Congress listens to the will of the people and leans toward peace rather than war."
Jan 08, 2026
SEE ALL
LATEST NEWS
'Sound the Alarm': Lawmakers Vote to Subpoena Journalist Who Named Delta Force Commander
One expert asserted that the House vote to subpoena Seth Harp "is clearly designed to chill and intimidate" journalists from reporting on government policies and practices.
Jan 09, 2026
Free press defenders voiced alarm and outrage following Wednesday's vote by a congressional committee to subpoena a journalist wrongly accused of "leaking classified intel" and "doxing" a US special forces commander involved in President Donald Trump's invasion of Venezuela and abduction of the South American nation's president and his wife.
Seth Harp is an investigative journalist, New York Times bestselling author, and Iraq war veteran whose work focuses on links between the US military and organized crime. On January 4—the day after the US bombed and invaded Venezuela and kidnapped Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores—Harp posted on X the name and photo of a commander in Delta Force, which played a key role in the attack.
Experts noted that Harp did not break any laws, with Freedom of the Press Foundation chief of advocacy Seth Stern pointing out that "reporters have a constitutional right to publish even classified leaks as long as they don’t commit crimes to obtain them."
“Harp merely published information that was publicly available about someone at the center of the world’s biggest news story," he added.
However, the House Oversight Committee on Wednesday approved in a voice vote a motion introduced the previous day by Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) to subpoena Harper. Democrats on the committee backed the measure after Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) added an amendment to also subpoena co-executors of Jeffrey Epstein's estate, according to the Washington Post.
Responding to the committee vote, Harp told the Post:
The idea of a reporter "leaking classified intel" is a contradiction in terms. The First Amendment and ironclad Supreme Court precedent permit journalists to publish classified documents. We don’t work for the government and it’s our job to expose secrets, not protect them for the convenience of high-ranking officials. It’s not “doxing" to point out which high-ranking military officials are involved in breaking news events. That’s information that the public has a right to know.
Harp also took to social media to underscore that he's not the only journalist being targeted with dubious "doxing" claims.
The House lawmakers' vote drew widespread condemnation from press freedom advocates.
“Luna’s subpoena of investigative reporter Seth Harp is clearly designed to chill and intimidate a journalist doing some of the most significant investigative reporting on US special forces," Defending Rights & Dissent policy director Chip Gibbons said in a statement.
"Harp did not share classified information about the US regime change operation in Venezuela. And even if he had, his actions would firmly be protected by the First Amendment," Gibbons added. "This is a dangerous assault on the press freedom, as well as the US people’s right to know. It is shameful it passed the committee.”
PEN America Journalism and Disinformation program director Tim Richardson said Thursday that “any attempt to haul an investigative reporter before Congress for doing their job reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the role of a free press."
"Seth Harp is an independent journalist, not a government official, and therefore cannot be accused of ‘leaking’ classified information in the way those entrusted with such material can," Richardson added. "The information at issue was publicly available, not secret or unlawfully obtained."
In a bid to protect reporters and their sources, House lawmakers in 2024 unanimously passed the PRESS Act, legislation prohibiting the federal government from compelling journalists and telecommunications companies to disclose certain information, with exceptions for imminent violence or terrorism. However, under pressure from Trump, the Senate declined to vote on the proposal.
"The bill died after Trump ordered the Senate to kill it on Truth Social," said Stern. "Apparently, so did the principles of Reps. Luna, Garcia, and their colleagues.”
Keep Reading
Show Less
'Don't Hide': Minnesota Officials Demand Access to Probe of ICE Killing
"If you feel that the ICE agent operated within the law, then let there be an investigation so that that can be revealed," said Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison.
Jan 09, 2026
Top Minnesota officials are demanding that the Trump administration stop their efforts to "hide" evidence in the probe of an immigration agent's killing of 37-year-old mother Renee Nicole Good in Minneapolis earlier this week, which has been met with outrage in the community and demonstrations across the country.
After initially saying that it was cooperating with local law enforcement to investigate the killing, the FBI said Thursday that it assumed sole responsibility for the probe, which the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA) said left them without access to evidence needed to carry out a full investigation.
At a press conference on Friday, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, who demanded after the shooting that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) "get the fuck out of Minneapolis," said that the Trump administration and Attorney General Pam Bondi's Department of Justice were seeking to commandeer the investigation because they "have already come to a conclusion" that the ICE officer who shot Good, identified Thursday as Johnathan Ross, should not face criminal charges.
The federal government has claimed that Ross acted in self-defense, shooting Good as she attempted to ram him with her car. But video evidence contradicts this version of events, showing her attempting to avoid hitting the agent, and that he fired the fatal shots into her window from the car's side.
Members of the administration have justified Good's killing repeatedly with attacks on her character. Within hours of the shooting, President Donald Trump referred to Good, without a shred of evidence, as a "professional agitator" who "violently, willfully, and viciously ran over” Ross. The video shows that Ross actually walked away from the incident unscathed.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem later described Good as a "domestic terrorist," while Vice President JD Vance degraded her as a "far-left... lunatic."
"From the very beginning, they're calling the victim a domestic terrorist. They're calling the actions of the agent involved some form of defensive posture," Frey said. "We know that they've already determined much of the investigation."
"If you've got nothing to hide from, then don't hide from it," he added. "Include local experts in the process. We've got nothing to hide from here. All we want in Minneapolis is justice and the truth."
Jason Chavez, a member of the Minneapolis City Council representing the area where Good was shot, noted that contrary to the administration's claim that Good attempted to run over agents, she could be heard shouting "I'm pulling out" before her car was surrounded.
"The video that we have all seen... does not match the false narrative from the federal government," said Chavez, who described Good as "a mother, a wife, and a beloved community member, not a domestic terrorist."
Noem has asserted that Minnesota officials "don't have any jurisdiction in this investigation," while Vance has dubiously claimed that federal agents have "absolute immunity" from prosecution.
Minnesota's Democratic attorney general, Keith Ellison, however, argued on Friday that, given the nature of the incident, the state should be in charge of the investigation.
"This is clearly a homicide. And because of that, the states, traditionally, historically, have had priority and jurisdiction over these kinds of matters," Ellison said in an interview with Democracy Now! "It’s certainly the right thing for local authorities, state authorities, to be intimately involved in conducting this investigation."
"My thought is: What are you hiding?" he continued. "I mean, if you feel that the ICE agent operated within the law, then let there be an investigation so that that can be revealed."
Legal experts have said that Minnesota can investigate and prosecute Ross. Bryna Godar, a staff attorney at the State Democracy Research Initiative, wrote in a piece for Slate on Wednesday:
Contrary to recent assertions from some federal officials, states can prosecute federal officers for violating state criminal laws, and there is precedent for that.
Although federal officers do have immunity in some circumstances, that protection applies only if their actions were authorized under federal law and “necessary and proper” in fulfilling federal duties. When federal officers violate federal law or act unreasonably when carrying out their duties, they can face state charges.
States have a long history of prosecuting federal officials for allegedly using excessive force on the job. And when federal courts agree that the force may not have been legally justified, they have allowed the state prosecution to proceed.
Good was shot shortly after the Trump administration deployed around 2,000 federal agents to Minneapolis. On the day of the shooting, agents were also filmed pepper-spraying students during a raid at a Minneapolis high school, leading it and other schools in the area to cancel classes for the remainder of the week.
"We need a couple things here," said Democratic Gov. Tim Walz. "We need Minnesota to carry out this investigation, to make sure that the professionals at the BCA and that local law enforcement, who’s in charge of law enforcement, make sure we do the investigation, and then to pull back this unnecessary surge."
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), who has been floated as a possible successor after Walz announced earlier this week that he would not seek a third term as governor, joined Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.) to send a letter to Bondi, calling on her to cooperate with state authorities.
The US senators said the administration’s decision to freeze out state law enforcement "raises serious questions about its objectivity, particularly after administration officials have made statements that conflict with the video and other evidence that has already become public."
Keep Reading
Show Less
‘To Be Clear,’ Contrary to Vance’s Claims, ICE Agents Do Not Have ‘Absolute Immunity,’ Say Legal Experts
"Just so you all understand what our vice tyrant is saying here this means ICE is allowed to shoot and kill Americans with ZERO consequences," said one advocate.
Jan 09, 2026
When Vice President JD Vance told reporters at a press briefing Thursday that Jonathan Ross, the federal immigration agent who was filmed fatally shooting Renee Good in Minneapolis, has "absolute immunity," he was not referring to any recognized statute in United States law, according to legal experts.
Instead, said Human Rights Campaign press secretary Brandon Wolf, "masked federal agents who can gun people down with 'absolute immunity' is called fascism."
Vance addressed reporters at the White House the day after Good was fatally shot at close range while serving as a legal observer of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) surge of federal agents in Minneapolis, where the Trump administration is targeting members of the Somali community in particular.
Widely available footage taken by onlookers shows ICE agents including Ross approaching the car and, according to at least one witness, giving her conflicting instructions, with one ordering her to leave the area and another telling her to get out of the car. The wheel of Good's car was seen turning as she began to drive away, just before Ross fired his weapon at least three times.
President Donald Trump, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, and Vance immediately blamed Good for her death, saying she had committed an act of domestic terrorism and had tried to run Ross over with her car.
Vance doubled down on Thursday when a reporter asked him why state officials in Minnesota were being cut off from investigating Good's death—a fact that has left the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, which had been planning to launch a probe, with few tools to bring a case to prosecutors.
The vice president said Minnesota prosecutors should instead investigate people who "are using their vehicles and other means" to interfere with ICE's operations before claiming that Ross is protected from being held accountable for his actions.
"That guy's protected by absolute immunity," said Vance. "He was doing his job. The idea that [Minnesota Gov.] Tim Walz and a bunch of radicals in Minneapolis are going to go after him and make this guy's life miserable because he was doing the job that he was asked to do is preposterous."
Vance: He is protected by absolute immunity. He was doing his job. The idea that Tim Walz and a bunch of radicals are going to go after him and make his life miserable because he was doing the job that he was asked to do is preposterous. pic.twitter.com/AfwpFvhLsC
— Acyn (@Acyn) January 8, 2026
Robert Bennett, a veteran lawyer in Minneapolis, told Mother Jones that he has worked on hundreds of cases regarding federal law enforcement misconduct.
"I’ve deposed thousands of police officers,” he said. “ICE agents do not have absolute immunity.”
He continued:
There’s plenty of case law that allows for the prosecution of federal law enforcement agencies, including ICE. And it’s clear under the law that a federal officer who shoots somebody in Minnesota and kills them is subject to a Minnesota investigation and Minnesota law.
Mary Moriarty, the Hennepin County attorney, whose jurisdiction includes Minneapolis, appeared incredulous Friday when asked about Vance's claim.
"I can't speak to why the Trump administration is doing what it's doing or says what it says," she told a reporter before adding unequivocally, "the ICE officer does not have complete immunity here."
Q: Is this ICE officer immune to charges?
HENNEPIN COUNTY ATTORNEY MORIARTY: I can't speak to why the Trump administration says what it says. I can say the ICE officer does not have complete immunity here. pic.twitter.com/N2ThNOun6w
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) January 9, 2026
Constitutional law expert Michael J.Z. Mannheimer of Northern Kentucky University told CNN that more than a century of legal precedent has shown that state prosecutors can file charges against federal officials for actions they take while completing their official duties.
“The idea that a federal agent has absolute immunity for crimes they commit on the job is absolutely ridiculous,” Mannheimer said.
Should the state take up the case, Ross could attempt to raise an immunity argument if he were able to move the case to a federal court, where a judge would then conduct a two-part analysis—determining whether Ross was acting in his official capacity and whether his action was "reasonable" considering all the facts on the ground, gathered from video evidence and eyewitness testimony.
While holding Ross accountable may be an uphill battle, former federal prosecutor Timothy Sini told CNN, "officers are not entitled to absolute immunity as a matter of law," contrary to Vance's claim.
Gun control advocate David Hogg called the vice president's comments "insanely dangerous."
"Just so you all understand what our vice tyrant is saying here this means ICE is allowed to shoot and kill Americans with ZERO consequences," said Hogg. "It’s important to note that absolute immunity is something that basically no cop gets. It goes even beyond qualified immunity."
Police officers are typically shielded from liability for civil damages by qualified immunity, provided they can prove their actions did not violate "clearly established" constitutional rights. "Absolute immunity" is typically applied to judges, prosecutors, and legislators who are acting within their official duties.
On Friday, US Reps. Dan Goldman (D-NY) and Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) announced they would introduce a bill aimed at stripping ICE officers of qualified immunity.
Goldman noted that under current law, it would be difficult to prosecute an ICE agent because the legal standard "allows for the officer’s own view to carry a lot of weight.”
"So what this bill does is only for civil enforcement officers—not criminal enforcement officers who are dealing with real bad guys, not moms driving cars—it would say that it’s an objective test,” he said on a podcast by the New Republic. “And if you are acting completely outside of your duties and responsibilities, you don’t have immunity from a civil lawsuit, and you don’t have a defense from a criminal charge.”
Goldman added that the bill would make clear that ICE agents' "only authority is to investigate and civilly arrest immigrants for immigration violations."
“And so they should have never been in the situation they were in, where they were trying to take a woman out of a car," he said. "That was not part of what they should be doing. They could ask her to move if they needed to. It doesn’t look like from the video that she was doing anything that was obstructing them.”
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, who has expressed outrage over Good's killing and demanded that ICE leave the city immediately, called Vance's claims about absolute immunity "pretty bizarre" and "extremely concerning" in comments to reporters on Friday, and called on the press to "get to a point where we're not trusting everything that [administration officials] are saying."
"That's not true in any law school in America, whether it's Yale or Villanova or anywhere else," said Frey. "That's not true. If you break the law, if you do things that are outside the outside the area of what your job responsibilities require, and this clearly seems to be at the very least, at the very least, this is gray... This is a problem and it should be investigated."
Frey: I think he also asserted that because you work at the federal government that you somehow have absolute immunity from committing crimes. That's not true in any law school in America, whether it's Yale or Villanova or anywhere else. That's not true pic.twitter.com/kqEwYdeVMI
— Acyn (@Acyn) January 9, 2026
Vance's comments, said political scientist Norman Ornstein, made clear that "we are in a police state."
"The notion expressed by Trump, Vance and Noem that there is absolute immunity for a cold blooded murder if it’s carried out by one of their agents is the final straw," he said. "If we do not turn this around, we are done for as a free society and a decent country."
Keep Reading
Show Less
Most Popular
Progressive Newswire
Social Security Needs Full Staffing — Not a Scheme Destined to Fail
Jan 09 2026 · 02:13pm EDT
Trump’s Losing Streak Continues as Jobs Report Shows Weak 2025 Labor Market
Jan 09 2026 · 09:42am EDT