
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.

Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
In the hopeful, chaotic aftermath of the biggest blue wave in 50 years, the inept “cartoon ghoul of a man” who fomented the carnage and his foul minions - Miller, Hegseth, Unholy Mike, the wrong Dana White - are scrambling like “pigs in the mire” to grasp some thorny new realities. To wit: Accountability is neither revenge nor crime, their once-vaunted “leader” is a dead clown walking, and hundreds of flipped state and federal seats mean their sleazy party is over.
This week we got the first giddy sightings of new Congressional Democrats, who auspiciously look much like diverse America, arriving at the Capitol for orientation. Fresh from their historic wins - flipping 549 legislative seats, ending 13 GOP supermajorities, creating at least six new Democratic trifectas, taking control of the House and Senate - they will now govern three quarters of Americans even as the Republican Party, per one online wiseacre, devolves into the Donner Party. Amidst the lame finger-pointing and precipitous shattering of GOP control, Mike Johnson blindly insisted “voters made the wrong choice" and smarmy Josh Hawley called for Christians to meet the “shocking and historic” election with a (notably modest) hour-long fast on Dec. 15 at the Capitol. Cheap thoughts and prayers: Go for it.
Because nobody ever claimed those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it, MAGA world has simply tripled down on their unequivocally rejected folly. First, led by a fragile narcissist snugly embedded in his alternate reality, flaccid calls of a rigged election slowly emerged. "Here we go," noted weary America. “Lather, rinse, repeat." "Does anybody really believe this "Election" was honest?" Trump whined, devising some "creative math" to falsely argue, "The Alaska Race is OVER. Dan Sullivan WON, BY A LOT!" MAGA idiots chimed in. Pillow Guy's "cybersecurity team" vowed to reveal vague "matching algorithmic patterns across multiple states," Alex Jones weirdly declared Trump "the ultimate Democrat sleeper cell," one Christo-fascist announced a Jan. 3 "Million Crusader March - Bring your cross!" SAD. Even evil Megyn Kelly was fed up: "Just stop."
But cults, by definition, don't. Instead, hell-bent on more losing, Trump gave voters a teeny stubby middle finger and chose to boost some of his most abject zealots, all tied to hated and calamitous policies: Stephen Miller, aka Pee Wee German, a literal Nazi with "blood on his hands" whose despised deportation machine moved Hispanics to help turn Texas blue; Pete Kegsbreath, a widely loathed, utterly inept asshole and war criminal whose bungled Iran war has made life unaffordable for vast swathes of America; and Gym Jordan, a buffoonish loyalist and former assistant wrestling coach known for long ignoring an infamous sexual abuse scandal with thousands of victims - there's even a movie - that creepily echoes the regime's ongoing cover-up of Epstein's boundless, Trump-adjacent atrocities. Heckuva job, Donnie et al.
Above all, like cornered animals clinging to the heroic memory of Nixon's refusal to accept any responsibility for his crimes - “When the president does it, it's not illegal” - the MAGA reponse to its glaring failures and looming accountability for them is to cry mean wolf and argue enforcing the law and embracing the constitutional task of Congressional oversight is, in fact, a crime, even months before the fact. Trump's already shrieking Dem "SLEAZEBAGS should go to jail for what they are doing," ie their job, which as an uber grifter he can only weirdly see as "extortion." "They are threatening a lot of people because they happen to be Republicans," he wailed, a scaredy-cat Mob bully pathetically melting down into his usual feeble projection. "There are no impeachable acts committed, or even thought of, by the victims of this illegal process."
His toadies have predictably mobilized to back him up - first, with bonkers threats. White House Counsel Will Scharf sent a mob-like, "legally repulsive" letter to incoming Oversight Chair Robert Garcia warning that Democrats undertaking their constitutionally mandated Congressional oversight "may cross the line into blatant criminality," resulting in, umm, imprisonment. Citing no criminal statute 'cause it doesn't exist, he snarled, "We are monitoring the abusive and capricious threats (to) harass and aggrandize, rather than to advance any legitimate legislative end,” a rebuke one lawyer called "a total bluff” given Dems have that "for miles." Other experts mocked "a ham-fisted stab at intimidation" that "will be Exhibit 1" in a self-own giving Dems "ammo to go straight to subpoenas." Said one, “Get D-team lawyers, win D-team prizes.”
Attorney General (sic) Todd Blanche, who as America's top law enforcement official "clearly doesn’t have the slightest clue what the rule of law is," went on both CNN and Fox to also suggest Dems were committing crimes; when asked what those might be, viewers noted he looked worried - or "scargry," a blend of scared and angry - before he pivoted to, "I'm not interested in explaining." He babbled about Dems' "extremely troubling rhetoric, no basis, no facts, just everyone running around...You have to draw the line, we have to wake up in this country, that's not governing, that's a disappointment." And yes of course it's his job to represent Goebbels and "everyone else...Every A.G. in history actively defends executive members of an administration." In other words, "Trump's former personal lawyer is still Trump's personal lawyer."
Despite MAGA’s bravado - and cleaning house of flunkies who may have receipts - they continue to be “led” by a fumbling clown - caravans, "Afghanistan jungles," "perceived loss," "chartered the human ginome" - who lately ends speeches with, “By the way, I was not on the ballot.” On 60 Minutes, even right-wing Ross Douthat nailed him for his poors-are-dumb retort to $3 billion in grift and corruption: “I have a son who watches over money...Every president has a problem (going) back to George Washington.” And there was his inane Press Secretary choice of “the Great Dana White, a violent Fighter and Warrior” who'd maybe bring some UFC fighters “though not from our Country, to defend us against the Lunatic Left.” He said he was “just kidding” after people realized he had the wrong Dana White, who alas is Black - other suggested Whites: Vanna, Betty, Walter - but he dragged his White to a bizarre presser anyway.
Amidst the tomfoolery, pundits point out the mid-term avalanche was the biggest rejection of any party since Watergate; its 13% net gain was the largest margin of victory since 1926, a "once-in-a century margin." "Everything is coming," says one. "It's going to be an entirely new day." Thanks to another GOP own goal, Dems will hit the ground running: They've been building investigative staffs from a large pool of former career prosecutors purged by Trump who know where the bodies are: "You cannot shred institutional memory - they just changed employers." Dems are working to reverse disastrous cuts in Medicaid, SNAP, other benefits. They're probing Susie Wiles' work with Kremlin-connected lobbyists and Marco Rubio's $1.2 million spent on military flights to Florida to watch his son (occasionally) play college football on our dime.
A judge made a D.C. golf course lawsuit the Caddyshack-like "surprise contender" for a belated legal showdown over feds' defiance of court orders, with a special master appointed to investigate "ethical violations” in the case. In Mississippi, Scott Colom just ousted Cindy Hyde-Smith to become the state's first Black U.S. senator since 1874, flipping the Dems' eighth Senate seat. Thomas Massie's resolute move to impeach "dangerously incompetent" Pete Hegseth for war crimes failed despite Hegseth's low-rent, lie-filled, "just following orders" hissy fit presser: "When he’s attacked, he hides behind the troops.” He squeaked through this time - "Tick tock get ready" - but John Oliver spoke for many when he urged, "Remove this fucking asshole." And Massie just got enough signatures to finally force a House vote to release millions of Epstein files. Garcia: “Our work is just getting started.”
Meanwhile, the guy whose lamentable victory Trump celebrated as "the EXONERATION of a Great American Patriot" again proved what a "warrior ethos jerk" he remains - on Veterans' Day yet - at an event at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, the country's most sacred war memorial. Because "everything is a show or photo op" to the empty buffoon with the make-up studio, Hegseth and his clueless coterie stood on the steps of the memorial for a "truly abhorrent" picture ; as they turned away, one of them loudly laughed, prompting a guard to furiously bark at them, as mandated, “ALL VISITORS WILL MAINTAIN AN ATMOSPHERE OF SILENCE AND RESPECT AT ALL TIMES." Online, a gazillion horrified people called Pete an oblivious asshat; many recalled visiting the site as middle-school kids who even then knew better, so what's his fucking problem.
At Arlington Trump was likewise insufferable. He compared his illegal 48-hour kidnapping stunt in Venezuela to America's endless, obscene tragedies in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, hideously argued "we got very little from any of those wars,” and gloated, "We’re taking out billions and billions of dollars of oil...To the victor belong the spoils." What a grotesquerie. Now the knives are out for him. For Veterans' Day, the Secret Handshake erected a new Bone Spurs tribute on the National Mall. Dubbed "The Foot Soldier," it features a golden Trump sitting on a pedestal rubbing a sore foot. Two plaques bear quotes. One from a 2013 photo in his Military Academy uniform: "I can be very military.” The other: "We honor the sacrifice (of) a soldier in spirit who marched to the front lines of dodging the draft, armed with a perfect diagnosis of bone spurs.”
With Democrats already infighting as the lame duck waddles amidst his crimes, lies, hate and question he'll never answer, The Bulwark entreats us to remember "There are no deals to be had." Our sole mission: "Destroy all monsters." In Unpopular Front, John Ganz proffers a similar but darker ultimatum: Eternal torment. He recalls 60 Minutes' Douthat asking Trump, "Do you think you're going to heaven?" Reply: "I hope so." Citing Christian forgiveness of your enemies, he asks if the smallest man on Earth can do that. Nope, he says: "I hate my enemies and I always will." In Dante's Inferno, Ganz notes, Dante and Virgil stop to talk to souls "stuck like animated friezes, repeating their state of sinfulness, the perpetual fate of the Wrathful...already pigs in the mire in this life." Thus is Trump's hatred "the entire substance of his being, the product of his disordered love for himself," and "relinquishing it would be an intolerable loss of self." So, inevitably, will he be "solidified into eternal bronzer."
"He was an arrogant person in the world/No goodness adorns his memory."
“How does it feel being a loser, Mr President?”- Sky News reporter, Dominic Waghorn👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏Give this man his Pulitzer Prize.
[image or embed]
— KittyKatGirl😻🙏💞🐞 (@mary1kathy.bsky.social) November 8, 2026 at 2:18 PM
A tribal leader from Brazil stressed on Monday, the opening day of the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Türkiye, that protecting Indigenous lands is a critical part of tackling the climate emergency, remarks that came as Brazil's government advances a plan to demarcate dozens of Indigenous territories amid surging violence against native people.
Joziléia Kaingang, co-founder and executive director of the National Network of Indigenous Women Warriors of Ancestral Wisdom (ANMIGA), told attendees of a session in COP31's Brazil Pavilion in Antalya that there are no real climate solutions without Indigenous participation.
"This means a very simple thing for us Indigenous peoples, something that our grandmothers have been saying for a long time and have known for a long time. Protecting Indigenous territory is indeed a climate policy," said Kaingang, who is a member of the Kaingang people of southern Brazil. "It is not charity, it is not compensation, it is a solution."
Kaingang hailed progress under the government of Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who was reelected last month with the support of 608 of the country's 658 Indigenous polling places. Lula's overwhelming support from Indigenous Brazilians is in no small part due to his government's substantial—yet tenuous—progress against illegal mining, logging, and other invasions of tribal lands.
Lula's policies marked a sharp reversal from former far-right President Jair Bolsonaro's deliberate dismantling of Indigenous territorial protections and other actions that lived up to his self-bestowed "Captain Chainsaw" moniker.
"The state withdrew invaders from our lands," Kaingang said. "The forest breathes again from the action of the last government of President Lula, and will continue to do so in this presidency in the next four years."
Kaingang continued:
In the Yanomami territory... 98% of illegal mining fell. This is important for all of us. Indigenous lands and local communities keep about a third of the carbon that humanity cannot lose.
And we want to say that we, Indigenous peoples, are here to celebrate the Brazilian government. We want to advance the roadmap to stop and reverse deforestation and forest degradation by 2030. But it is necessary that the roadmap brings the perspective of Indigenous peoples, of traditional communities, of our knowledge.
"Let's reaffirm that without demarcation, there is no climate solution," Kaingang added. "So let's keep demarcating the Indigenous territories so that we are the solution."
Brazil's government is preparing to approve dozens of additional Indigenous land demarcations before the end of 2026, Indigenous Peoples Minister Eloy Terena, who is a member of the Terena people, told Brasil de Fato on Sunday, as native communities face continuing deadly violence, land invasions, and encroachment by agribusiness interests.
During Lula’s third term, Brazil's government has recognized 20 Indigenous lands, declared 21 others, and established 31 reserves, according to the minister.
However, recent Indigenous land demarcation protests across Brazil have decried the government's failure to move faster in recognizing and protecting Indigenous territories amid ongoing violence.
Terena linked recent attacks against Guarani Kaiowá communities in Mato Grosso do Sul—including reported murders, vehicle attacks, and threats to poison drinking water—to the government's failure to secure their ancestral territories. He said that more than 150 technical working groups are advancing demarcation procedures, but warned that executive action alone cannot overcome entrenched political and judicial resistance, which is sustained by pressure from agribusiness and other destructive interests.
The minister added that the government seeks "to strengthen Indigenous organizations, the Indigenous movement, and communities. Because we understand that if eventually the democratic winds turn, we need to have a very committed society and very well-structured social movements."
Hundreds of thousands of workers across France held demonstrations to protest the high cost of living and the French government's proposed budget that includes a number of austerity measures.
As reported by Euronews, the government of French President Emmanuel Macron is attempting to pass a budget that has been decried by major trade unions for "targeting the most vulnerable and those who are ill, freezing social benefits, and undermining the protective role of the social security system."
Sophie Binet, head of the General Confederation of Labor, acknowledged the need to curb the country's budget deficit, but told Euronews that "we need to reintroduce taxes on the wealthiest individuals and the largest companies," which "will enable us to fund our public services."
The French Interior Ministry estimated that 600,000 people attended Thursday's demonstrations, which took place across 180 different locations, according to Bloomberg.
The Ministry of Public Action and Accounts estimated that nearly 10% of French public servants were on strike Thursday, including almost 16% of all teachers, according to The New York Times.
The nationwide protests began in September when students blockaded their schools to protest staffing shortages, dilapidated buildings, and a widely criticized university application system.
They have since spread to encompass a wide range of grievances in the country, including the cost of living and the high cost of fuel sparked by US President Donald Trump's illegal war with Iran.
While earlier demonstrations had been marked by violent unrest, Thursday's protests were overwhelmingly peaceful, and included a festive performance from the Orchestre du Nouveau Monde in Paris.
« J'ai deux passions ! »Ambiance festive pour le concert géant de l'orchestre du Nouveau Monde sur la Place de la République à Paris.#grevegenerale #5Novembre #greve5novembre https://t.co/A5KhOjGxmN
— Luc Auffret (@LucAuffret) November 5, 2026
In an interview with the Times, 27-year-old Antonia Barot said that she attended the Thursday protests because of the government's "disregard for young people's and workers' living conditions," adding that "we need to realize how powerful we are."
Florence Eliakine, 61, told the Times the protests should "make it clear to our government, which pursues right-wing policies, that there is a social and ecological crisis that must be taken into account."
Gaëlle Martinez, national secretary of the trade union Solidaires, told France 24 that the motive behind the demonstrations was a simple one.
"People just want to live, not survive," Martinez explained.
She also said that the government needed to draft "a new budget" that would "tax the biggest companies, the richest companies where the profits are made," while eliminating proposed cuts to vital programs.
Democratic Rep. Hakeem Jeffries sidestepped a reporter’s questions about a controversial proposal to more closely integrate the US and Israeli militaries on Thursday, underscoring some critics’ argument that he’s unfit to serve as House speaker when Democrats retake the chamber in January.
Democrats in the US Congress are facing growing calls to strip out provisions in the 2027 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that would significantly expand cooperation between the US and Israeli defense industries, making it easier for the two countries to jointly develop weapons, share military technology, and incorporate Israeli tech into US military systems.
One poll from August by Data for Progress showed that 61% of likely voters opposed the measure, known as the "United States-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative," including 78% of Democrats—a reflection of the public's growing desire for the US to cut ties with Israel following over three years of genocidal attacks on Gaza, expansionist conquest in the West Bank and Lebanon, and military aggression against Iran.
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), who is challenging Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) to lead the Democrats’ Senate majority, said earlier this week that Democrats should oppose the military integration provisions. He and his colleagues warned that these provisions would give Israel even greater leverage over US policy and threaten national security by granting Israel access to sensitive information about US military technology beyond what is shared even with NATO allies.
The NDAA is expected to come up for a vote next month. But it will need Democratic support to pass the Senate, where 60 votes are required to break the filibuster. It may also face obstacles in the House, where Republicans hold a narrow 218-214 majority. Some in the GOP, like Reps. Thomas Massie (Ky.), Lauren Boebert (Colo.), and Anna Paulina Luna (Fla.), have already signaled opposition to the measure, meaning that a united Democratic caucus could kill it.
Asked by The Hill's Laura Kelly at a news conference on Thursday whether he agreed with Van Hollen's call to remove the provisions from the NDAA, Jeffries never answered her question directly:
I haven't had a conversation with Sen. Van Hollen, but what I have said is that things have to dramatically change over in the Middle East.
We need dramatic change in the West Bank, which is why I strongly support the West Bank Violence Protection Act. We need dramatic change in Gaza, and we need dramatic change with respect to the memorandum of understanding as it winds down, all of which I've previously said publicly.
And we'll work as a caucus to make sure that we can bring about the just and lasting peace that Israelis and Palestinians deserve over in the Middle East.
The status quo is unacceptable, and we need dramatic change. And that looks like, as far as I'm concerned, making sure you have a safe and secure Israel, living side by side as a Jewish and democratic state with an independent Palestinian state that provides dignity and self-determination for the Palestinian people.
Jeffries, who has received more than $1 million in campaign donations facilitated by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) since 2022, is already facing criticism over his refusal earlier this week to commit to using next month's government funding bill to force President Donald Trump to end his war in Iran and for failing to ensure the whole Democratic caucus was present for a key vote to advance the impeachment of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.
Trita Parsi, the executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, said that with his noncommittal answer on US-Israeli military integration, Jeffries had “in less than 90 seconds” made it “crystal clear why he should not become the next speaker of the House.”
"Asked whether he supports removing provisions that deepen US defense cooperation and intelligence sharing with Israel from the National Defense Authorization Act—an obvious yes!—he refuses to address the question and instead gives a 1990s answer about a mythological two-state solution," Parsi wrote on social media.
In the Senate, momentum is building behind Van Hollen’s effort to oust Schumer as leader. On Wednesday, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said that Schumer, another staunch ally of Israel, was “way out of touch with where the American people are at.”
Several incoming Democratic senators, including Abdul El-Sayed (Mich.), Peggy Flanagan (Minn.), Troy Jackson (Maine), Adam Hamilton (Kan.), and Juliana Stratton (Ill.), have said they support Van Hollen or won't back Schumer, while others, including Democratic Sens.-elect Annie Andrews (SC) and Chris Pappas (NH), as well as the centrist Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), have suggested they wanted new leadership.
However, despite growing calls from the Democratic base for new leadership in the House as well, no Democrat has formally stepped up yet to challenge Jeffries’ claim to the speaker’s gavel.
Some newly elected Democrats—like Reps.-elect Melat Kiros (Colo.), Don Leonard (Ohio), and Claire Valdez (NY)—have suggested they would prefer a different leader, but House progressive leaders have so far put the kibosh on an insurgency, with Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY), Pramila Jayapal (Wash.), and Greg Casar (Texas) standing by Jeffries, at least as long as he's the only choice.
Time is running out for progressives to rally behind an alternative to Jeffries. The Democratic caucus will begin its internal leadership elections on November 18 and choose its nominee for speaker. The entire House will vote to elect a speaker when the new Congress convenes on January 3, 2027.
Some grassroots organizers have pushed for progressive Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) to challenge Jeffries, with one petition to draft her garnering over 90,000 signatures.
She has circulated her own petition pushing for a bolder agenda for Democrats to pursue in the next Congress, including passage of Medicare for All, national abortion protections, restrictions on data centers, and the abolition of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
In a speech on the House floor Thursday, she declared that “incrementalism is a recipe for failure” and that Democrats “cannot let money and the special interests dictate our fight.”
No one in the House Democratic caucus has publicly declared support for Pressley. But there is reportedly some movement behind the scenes ahead of Wednesday’s caucus meeting, where a nominee for party leader will be chosen.
One lawmaker, granted anonymity by Drop Site News congressional reporter Julian Andreone, said, "I am hearing that many progressives will be writing Ayanna’s name in.”
Carlos Jimenez, a US citizen and father of three who still has bullet fragments lodged near his lung after being shot by a US Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer in California last year, is suing the Trump administration, San Bernardino County, and various agents for over $25 million in damages.
Jimenez, who is from Ontario, east of Los Angeles, filed his complaint against the United States, the county, ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations officer Eusebio Ortiz, two US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers, a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) special agent, and 20 unnamed defendants on Friday.
While Jimenez was driving to work on the morning of October 30, 2025, he approached agents conducting an immigration operation to let them know they were near a bus stop for schoolchildren. Ortiz ultimately shot him, but it was Jimenez, not the officer, who then faced charges that have since been dropped.
As with some other people ICE or CBP agents have shot—sometimes fatally—the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which oversees both agencies, has claimed Jimenez "attempted to run officers over" federal agents "by reversing directly at them without stopping," but his lawyers have disputed that account.
After the shooting, at a local hospital, FBI agents "interfered with his medical care," according to a complaint. They allegedly prevented Jimenez from talking to healthcare providers, removed him from the hospital bed, and "handcuffed him with a leather waist restraint."
As the FBI drove Jimenez back to the scene for an interrogation, "while the bullet and fragments remained lodged in his body," he "kept bleeding and vomiting in the agents' van," and they told him not to "ruin their vehicle," the filing claims. He was taken to West Valley Detention Center, where he was also denied adequate medical care.
A few weeks later, a grand jury indicted Jimenez, whom federal prosecutors charged with assaulting a federal officer using a deadly or dangerous weapon, but "the criminal case later became the subject of a dispute over evidence," Newsweek reported Monday.
As the outlet detailed:
On May 5, US District Judge Kenly Kiya Kato ordered the government to turn over communications and operational records sought by the defense; this included responsive communications on government-issued and personal phones. The order also required a declaration under penalty of perjury from Ortiz if no responsive messages from him existed.
Jimenez entered into a diversion agreement shortly afterward. After he completed its conditions, Kato dismissed the indictment with prejudice on November 2, meaning the charge cannot be refiled. The dismissal order did not make a finding that federal officers used excessive force or otherwise acted unlawfully.
The Guardian highlighted that in addition to calling the criminal charges against Jimenez "fabricated," the complaint "alleges that the FBI falsely claimed that two neighbors witnessed the incident and told an agent that Jimenez's vehicle had enough room to pull forward without reversing. When Jimenez’s legal team interviewed those witnesses, both denied making those statements and said they were unaware there had been a shooting until they saw news reports."
While the FBI declined to comment and DHS referred questions to the US Department of Justice, Ciaran McEvoy, a spokesperson for the DOJ in Los Angeles, said in an email to the newspaper that Jimenez "could have exercised his right to take the case to trial, but he instead requested that our office agree to resolve the case through a diversion agreement."
Jimenez is among at least 32 people fired upon by federal immigration agents as part of Republican President Donald Trump's mass detention and deportation campaign. Others include Renee Good and Alex Pretti, US citizens killed early this year in Minneapolis, Minnesota, and Silverio Villegas González, a Mexican man fatally shot last year near Chicago, Illinois.
At the beginning of October, Good's family filed a pair of lawsuits against the federal government and immigration officials over her death and an alleged conspiracy to interfere with civil rights in Minnesota's Twin Cities. A week later, Villegas González's relatives filed a legal claim against the administration over his "execution-style killing." Pretti's family hasn't yet sued, but his parents demanded justice at a press conference late last month.
A leading United Nations human rights expert said nations must prepare to send ships to break Israel’s “siege” of Gaza as it continues to block humanitarian aid—including tents, shelter materials, and repair supplies—from entering the territory as its population is inundated by deadly floods.
"Israel must immediately open all Gaza crossings and let humanitarian aid in, starting with new tents and modular housing, clean water, nutrient-rich food, medicines," Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories, wrote on social media Tuesday. "If... Israel still refuses, any principled leader would send humanitarian vessels to break the siege."
Most buildings in Gaza have been damaged or destroyed by Israel's genocidal three-year military assault. About 1.4 million people now live in makeshift shelters, including flimsy tents.
According to Gaza's Government Media Office, about 70,000 tents were flooded when heavy rains struck the territory over the weekend, leaving tens of thousands of displaced people without shelter, defenseless against the elements. At least four children and two women have died as a result of the flooding.
As The Guardian reported Wednesday, the storms have also damaged sanitation infrastructure, causing sewage to flow into families' tents. About 940,000 people in Gaza live in makeshift tent areas at risk of flooding.
“All our clothes were soaked. My kids are all sick, and I can’t afford to buy them more clothes,” said Raed Jamal, a displaced Palestinian. “Watching them suffering in the cold is heartbreaking.”
According to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), more than 150,000 tents are awaiting Israeli authorization to enter Gaza, even as humanitarian organizations warn that Israel's restrictions on shelter supplies are exacerbating the deadly flooding emergency.
On Monday, the International Rescue Committee said aid groups had only about 2,800 tents available, compared with roughly 121,000 that are needed. Meanwhile, no emergency shelter kits were available.
"People are exhausted and have spent days trying to secure tarpaulins and scoop water from the floor of tents," said Beckie Ryan, the humanitarian group CARE Palestine's interim country director. "For these families, most of whom have been displaced repeatedly, a flooded tent means losing their last protection against the elements as winter approaches. It also means the loss of essential belongings, including clothing, bedding, medication, documentation, and personal items."
"Israeli authorities must facilitate full, rapid, safe, and unhindered humanitarian access," she said. "This includes opening all crossings for humanitarian aid and facilitating the entry of shelter and construction materials and machinery."
Israel's restrictions on shelter materials are part of broader limits on humanitarian aid entering Gaza, with only one crossing for humanitarian cargo currently operational. Relief organizations say the closures have created bottlenecks that have delayed deliveries of food, medicine, and desperately needed shelter materials.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has denied responsibility for the conditions, blaming the militant group Hamas for allegedly diverting humanitarian aid for military use, a claim for which he provided no supporting evidence, according to The Associated Press.
His response came after some unusually pointed criticism from the US-led Gaza Board of Peace, which said Israel's restrictions had “exacerbated the consequences of a foreseeable humanitarian challenge.”
The crisis has also drawn pledges of action from foreign officials. Ed Miliband, the UK foreign secretary, said on Monday that the "humanitarian situation in Gaza is getting worse," adding that the British government would "not stand by" and "not rest until we bring an end to the intolerable suffering."
Albanese made her call for humanitarian vessels in direct response to Miliband's remarks, challenging world leaders to do more than condemn the worsening crisis.
Several governments have previously supported civilian efforts to break Israel's blockade—including Spain and Italy, which sent naval vessels to assist the activist-led Global Sumud Flotilla, which was intercepted by Israel last year. But no government has publicly committed to sending its own ships to force humanitarian aid through Israel's blockade.
Albanese and five other UN human rights experts made a similar appeal in May, saying that “states should take necessary action to prevent genocide and to support all efforts to deliver aid to the Palestinian population.”
Richard Burgon, a Labour member of the British Parliament, introduced a motion on Tuesday calling for his government to take more concrete action to compel Israel to allow in aid, which he said has received over 50 signatures.
He said, “Governments around the world should respond to the horrific scenes from flood-hit Gaza with a clear and coordinated message to Israel: We will impose sanctions on everyone responsible for blocking humanitarian aid from getting in.”
"We have an opportunity to restore faith in our democracy—not by preaching about its virtues, but delivering," said US Sen. Chris Van Hollen.
Sen. Chris Van Hollen got an enthusiastic reception on Friday at the “What’s Next” summit hosted by the group Majority Democrats in Denver, when the Maryland Democrat brought up his bid to challenge Sen. Chuck Schumer as leader of the caucus.
Van Hollen, who just hours earlier announced his intention to run for Senate majority leader in the next US Congress, was greeted with big applause as he took to the stage at the convention, with some in the audience shouting, "Leader!"
Chris Van Hollen gets thunderous applause and "leader" shouts at What's Next. https://t.co/T7g4DE48tm
— CENTRIFUGE (@ClippingMods) November 13, 2026
During his address, Van Hollen said that his goal as leader would be to restore American voters' faith in democracy, as polls for years have shown steep declines in trust across US institutions.
"For many Americans, our institutions sound like the thing that is standing in the way of getting that better life," Van Hollen said, according to Semafor reporter Dave Weigel. "We have an opportunity to restore faith in our democracy—not by preaching about its virtues, but delivering."
The Maryland Democrat then echoed remarks made over the last week by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), as well as Sens.-elect Abdul El-Sayed (D-Mich.) and James Talarico (D-Texas), about passing popular legislation and daring President Donald Trump to block it.
"What if we actually had votes on the Senate floor about things the American people really cared about?" Van Hollen asked. "If Trump wants to veto it and... show that he stands with his billionaire buddies, let him do that."
While Van Hollen was well received at the conference, Democratic Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), who aims to become the House speaker, was repeatedly heckled and booed during his discussion with Democratic strategist Jessica Tarlov.
One demonstrator, who was escorted out of the auditorium, yelled that Jeffries was a "traitor" for "shaking hands with the Trump family," presumably a reference to the New York Democrat's meeting with Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, earlier this year.
yikes -- Jeffries's talk in Denver is being disrupted by a string of protesters, one of whom screams obscenities at him https://t.co/zyiYkgdSIj
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) November 13, 2026
Progressive organizers over the last week have been calling for Jeffries to step aside as leader, although no other House Democrat has officially announced their candidacy for the speakership.
A Change.org petition posted earlier this week to draft Rep. Ayana Pressley (D-Mass.) for the speakership has gained nearly 99,000 signatures as of this writing.
The New York Times reported on Friday that Jeffries is "pressing to wrap up his nomination to be speaker next week quickly and overwhelmingly, leaving potential detractors little room to maneuver around him even as some of them complain about an undemocratic process."
“New Yorkers’ personal data should never be used as a weapon against their own pocketbooks,” said Mayor Zohran Mamdani.
The New York City Council on Thursday approved landmark legislation banning businesses from using consumers’ personal data and algorithms to charge different people different prices for the same goods and services, an increasingly common—and controversial—corporate practice known as surveillance pricing.
In a 44-5 vote, city lawmakers passed Introduction 891-A, sponsored by Council Speaker Julie Menin, which prohibits businesses from using personal data—including browsing histories, shopping habits, demographics, location information, and other identifying characteristics—to determine individualized prices for consumers.
The legislation gives the city's Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (DCWP) authority to investigate complaints and impose civil penalties of up to $1,000 for each violation. Qualifying small businesses would have an opportunity to correct their violations before facing penalties.
“The City Council is putting consumers first by ending the deceptive and insidious practice of surveillance pricing,” said Menin, a Democrat. “When corporations use algorithms and personal data to charge different people different prices for the same products, it’s unethical and worsens our affordability crisis."
"We take consumer protection extremely seriously, and we will continue fighting to lower prices and stop predatory corporate tactics," she added.
New York City Mayor Zohran Mamadani, also a Democrat, supports the measure, and called surveillance pricing a way for corporations to "squeeze working people."
“New Yorkers’ personal data should never be used as a weapon against their own pocketbooks,” he said. “Our administration will continue working with the Council to protect workers, tenants, and consumers, and put an end to the scam economy.”
Mamdani has 30 days to sign the bill. If he does not, it automatically becomes law unless he vetoes it, a highly unlikely move that city council members could override with a two-thirds majority.
As the City Council explained:
Surveillance pricing is invisible to consumers, making it difficult to identify, but reports suggest the practice is occurring in a variety of industries. One investigation found that a major grocery delivery platform was engaging in algorithmic pricing experiments that resulted in individualized price differences as high as 23%. Another investigation found that the price of a television at one retailer increased from $499.99 to $599.99 when the consumer pulled into the store’s parking lot. A behavioral economist who worked for a major ride-share company revealed that the application increases prices when a consumer’s phone battery is low because they might not otherwise be able to get home if they do not accept the high offer. The Council aims to end these predatory practices and protect New York consumers with this landmark ban.
"Fair pricing visible for all to see. Today, New York City has upheld this basic principle, passing the country’s strongest municipal protections against surveillance pricing," DCWP Commissioner Samuel A. A. Levine said in a statement.
"At a moment when working families are struggling with the cost of living," he continued, "New Yorkers should not have to contend with an ever more fickle economy, in which the price of groceries, household goods, and everyday essentials depends on how much an algorithm thinks it can squeeze from their wallets."
"Surveillance pricing weaponizes our personal data against us—tracking our behavior, characteristics, location, schedules, and purchasing history to predict the most we are willing to pay, then charging accordingly," Levine said. "It’s wrong, it’s loathed by consumers, and now it’s illegal."
"In New York City, algorithms do not have the final say," he added. "People do."
New York City follows Seattle—which in September became the first US city to ban surveillance pricing—as well the states of Connecticut, Maryland, and New Jersey in outlawing the practice.
When I sponsored legislation making Seattle the first city in the country to ban surveillance pricing, I knew we wouldn’t be the last. Now, we’re taking on unfair pricing coast to coast. Congrats, New York.Portland City Council, your move.
— AMR - Alexis Mercedes Rinck (@alexis4seattle.bsky.social) November 12, 2026 at 9:23 PM
Consumer advocates hailed Thursday's vote, with Consumer Reports senior policy analyst Grace Gedye saying that “living in New York is already expensive enough. The last thing New Yorkers need is algorithms quietly hiking prices on everyday essentials."
"Nobody should pay more just because a data broker is tracking what they search for, what they hover over, or where they live,” she added. “The price you see shouldn’t be different based on who you are."
Lindsay Owens, the president and CEO of the economic justice group Groundwork Collaborative, asserted that “New Yorkers didn’t sign up to be spied on and have their own data turned against them just to pad corporations’ pockets."
"Today, the New York City Council has drawn a clear line in the sand that New Yorkers deserve a fair price, not one set by an algorithm designed to extract every last penny they’re willing to pay," she continued.
"But while the Council has moved to protect shoppers in the city, families across the Empire State, from Westchester to Buffalo to Albany, are still waiting on Governor [Kathy] Hochul to do the same," Owens added. "All New Yorkers deserve a fair price, no matter their ZIP code. Gov. Hochul can’t wait another day to sign the One Fair Price Act.”
“Living in New York is already expensive enough. The last thing New Yorkers need is algorithms quietly hiking prices on everyday essentials."
New York state lawmakers passed that bill in June. Championed by Democratic New York Attorney General Letitia James, the legislation would prohibit companies from using consumers' personal data—including browsing histories, income, and other identifying information—to set individualized prices for goods and services. It also prohibits collecting, retaining, selling, or sharing personal data to facilitate surveillance pricing.
Not everyone welcomed New York City's surveillance pricing ban. Uber spokesperson Josh Gold argued that "this law will make it harder for small restaurants with limited marketing budgets to reach customers, putting them at a disadvantage against national chains."
The surveillance pricing victory comes amid a broader campaign to restrict corporate snooping on New Yorkers, including the increasingly widespread use of facial recognition and other biometric identification technologies in retail businesses.
A separate City Council measure sponsored by Brooklyn Councilmember Shahana Hanif, a Democrat, would prohibit businesses and other public accommodations from using biometric recognition technology to identify or verify customers. It would also require notification and written consent for biometric data collection and establish protections governing the handling of that information.
The legislation would restrict Madison Square Garden’s controversial use of facial recognition technology. MSG owner James Dolan has notoriously used facial recognition to blacklist people he dislikes, including hundreds of attorneys whose law firms have sued his companies; in one particularly publicized case, a mother was denied entry to Radio City Music Hall while accompanying her daughter’s Girl Scout troop because she worked for a firm litigating against MSG.
Hanif has warned that biometric surveillance poses particular dangers to immigrant communities, whose identifying information could potentially reach federal immigration authorities amid the Trump administration's deadly crackdown.
"This bill protects everybody," Hanif said when introducing her bill, "but we know who experiences disproportionate surveillance, and our immigrant community is among them."
Sen. Elizabeth Warren warned that President Donald Trump "wants to rip food assistance away from 6 million more who are already struggling to get by because of his sky-high gas prices and chaotic tariffs."
US Sen. Elizabeth Warren said Thursday that Congress must act to stop a new Trump administration assault on federal nutrition assistance that would strip aid from over 6 million people, compounding the hunger disaster created by the Republican budget law enacted last year.
"This is beyond cruel," Warren (D-Mass.) wrote in a social media post, referring to a rule proposed by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) that would curtail a policy known as broad-based categorical eligibility. The USDA's own analysis estimates that its proposal, published in the Federal Register earlier this week, would take Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits from roughly 6.3 million people in 2029, the first year the rule would take full effect.
Warren noted that 5.5 million people have already lost federal nutrition aid since enactment of the 2025 Trump-GOP budget law, which instituted the largest SNAP cuts in the program's history.
"Now, he wants to rip food assistance away from 6 million more who are already struggling to get by because of his sky-high gas prices and chaotic tariffs," the senator wrote. "Congress needs to stop this."
After a rule is published in the Federal Register, Congress has 60 legislative days to introduce a Congressional Review Act resolution to overturn it. Democrats will take control of the House and Senate on January 3, 2027.
The new USDA rule takes aim at broad-based categorical eligibility, which lets states automatically deem recipients of other federal benefits eligible for SNAP—reducing administrative burdens for state officials and program enrollees. Under the Trump administration's rule, which is open for public comment until December 10, households with gross incomes above 130% of the federal poverty line would lose SNAP benefits, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
Experts have noted that the Trump administration's attack on broad-based categorical eligibility would, if finalized, have far-reaching impacts, including reduced access to free school meals.
In a statement on Friday, the Children's Defense Fund urged the Trump administration to "reverse course" on its proposal, warning it would harm kids across the US.
"Many public schools use SNAP to automatically enroll children in free meal programs, meaning any child who loses SNAP access could also lose automatic eligibility for free school meals, exacerbating food insecurity in school districts across the country," the group said.
“We must unrig this economic system that only benefits the top 1%,” said the senator-elect. “The American people cannot wait two years for change.”
In the first two years of his second term in the White House, "success" according to President Donald Trump has looked like hundreds of thousands of people being detained by federal immigration agents, and families struggling with soaring costs at the grocery store and gas pump as a result of his "incredible" tariffs and so-called "victory" in the deeply unpopular Iran War.
But at the What's Next summit hosted in Denver by Majority Democrats on Thursday, Sen.-elect James Talarico (D-Texas), whose election win last week stunned Republicans, called on the Democratic Party to ensure the president achieves a new kind of success in his final years in office, as he contends for the first time with a US Senate and House that are both controlled by the Democrats.
The party has an opportunity, said Talarico, to "make the final two years of his presidency the most productive of any presidency in American history"—but only if he agrees to sign the kinds of legislation that American voters signaled they're demanding when they went to the polls last week, handing Democrats at least 55 US Senate seats and 255 US House seats and rejecting the president's MAGA agenda.
Talarico called on Democrats to emulate the far-reaching domestic policy agenda of former President Lyndon Baines Johnson, who signed the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act, created the Medicare and Medicaid programs, and spearheaded early education and legal services programs for low-income families, among other far-reaching initiatives as part of his Great Society agenda.
"We are in striking distance of a supermajority," said Talarico, "and a supermajority requires a super agenda. We must deliver immediate, bold relief during this affordability crisis. We must unrig this economic system that only benefits the top 1%."
Talarico: The American people cannot wait two years for change, so we must work with President Trump. If President Trump wants the same plaques and portraits as LBJ, we can help make that a reality. We should make the final two years of his presidency the most productive of any American presidency
— Acyn (@Acyn) November 12, 2026
Talarico called on Democrats in Congress to pass legislation to ban gerrymandering, "invest in our teachers and our students and build an American public education system that is the envy of the world," regulate artificial intelligence, end "forever wars that are driving up prices," and "champion a new, values-based foreign policy." Without naming the broadly popular Medicare for All proposal that has been introduced in the House and Senate numerous times, he called for Democrats to "pass universal healthcare so no one in this country goes bankrupt just because they get sick."
"Some of these reforms may not pass until 2029," said the senator-elect, who emphasized during his campaign that Americans across racial, partisan, and gender divides must join together to fight the influence of powerful billionaire megadonors. "But the American people cannot wait two years for change. So we must work with President Trump."
"If President Trump wants the same plaques and portraits and busts as LBJ, we can help make that a reality," Talarico continued, alluding to Trump's push to build monuments to himself. "This moment is so much bigger and so much more important than the red team or the blue team."
David Sirota of Lever News applauded Talarico's call, suggesting, as Sen.-elect Abdul El-Sayed (D-Mich.) has, that Democrats could pass a Medicare for All bill called "Trumpcare" and trade the president's affection for seeing his own name emblazoned on policy initiatives for a new healthcare system that could save more than 100,000 lives and $1 trillion annually.
Sirota compared a far-reaching Democratic agenda to the legislation passed by Congress during Republican President Richard Nixon's five-and-a-half years in office.
Working with Democrats in both chambers of Congress, Nixon signed the National Environmental Policy Act, the Clean Air Act, the Endangered Species Act, key workplace safety and anti-discrimination protections, and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, among other major legislation.
Talarico's comments echoed those of Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who appeared undaunted by Trump's threat to veto legislation passed by Democrats.
“If Donald Trump wants to be Mr. Veto, let’s test that out,” the senator said. “The new Democratic majority in Congress should pass bills to make life more affordable and our government less corrupt.”
The Senate minority leader addressed reporters amid a push for progressives in the House to nominate Rep. Ayanna Pressley as an alternative to Jeffries at next week’s Democratic caucus meeting.
Democratic Rep. Hakeem Jeffries sidestepped a reporter’s questions about a controversial proposal to more closely integrate the US and Israeli militaries on Thursday, underscoring some critics’ argument that he’s unfit to serve as House speaker when Democrats retake the chamber in January.
Democrats in the US Congress are facing growing calls to strip out provisions in the 2027 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that would significantly expand cooperation between the US and Israeli defense industries, making it easier for the two countries to jointly develop weapons, share military technology, and incorporate Israeli tech into US military systems.
One poll from August by Data for Progress showed that 61% of likely voters opposed the measure, known as the "United States-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative," including 78% of Democrats—a reflection of the public's growing desire for the US to cut ties with Israel following over three years of genocidal attacks on Gaza, expansionist conquest in the West Bank and Lebanon, and military aggression against Iran.
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), who is challenging Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) to lead the Democrats’ Senate majority, said earlier this week that Democrats should oppose the military integration provisions. He and his colleagues warned that these provisions would give Israel even greater leverage over US policy and threaten national security by granting Israel access to sensitive information about US military technology beyond what is shared even with NATO allies.
The NDAA is expected to come up for a vote next month. But it will need Democratic support to pass the Senate, where 60 votes are required to break the filibuster. It may also face obstacles in the House, where Republicans hold a narrow 218-214 majority. Some in the GOP, like Reps. Thomas Massie (Ky.), Lauren Boebert (Colo.), and Anna Paulina Luna (Fla.), have already signaled opposition to the measure, meaning that a united Democratic caucus could kill it.
Asked by The Hill's Laura Kelly at a news conference on Thursday whether he agreed with Van Hollen's call to remove the provisions from the NDAA, Jeffries never answered her question directly:
I haven't had a conversation with Sen. Van Hollen, but what I have said is that things have to dramatically change over in the Middle East.
We need dramatic change in the West Bank, which is why I strongly support the West Bank Violence Protection Act. We need dramatic change in Gaza, and we need dramatic change with respect to the memorandum of understanding as it winds down, all of which I've previously said publicly.
And we'll work as a caucus to make sure that we can bring about the just and lasting peace that Israelis and Palestinians deserve over in the Middle East.
The status quo is unacceptable, and we need dramatic change. And that looks like, as far as I'm concerned, making sure you have a safe and secure Israel, living side by side as a Jewish and democratic state with an independent Palestinian state that provides dignity and self-determination for the Palestinian people.
Jeffries, who has received more than $1 million in campaign donations facilitated by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) since 2022, is already facing criticism over his refusal earlier this week to commit to using next month's government funding bill to force President Donald Trump to end his war in Iran and for failing to ensure the whole Democratic caucus was present for a key vote to advance the impeachment of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.
Trita Parsi, the executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, said that with his noncommittal answer on US-Israeli military integration, Jeffries had “in less than 90 seconds” made it “crystal clear why he should not become the next speaker of the House.”
"Asked whether he supports removing provisions that deepen US defense cooperation and intelligence sharing with Israel from the National Defense Authorization Act—an obvious yes!—he refuses to address the question and instead gives a 1990s answer about a mythological two-state solution," Parsi wrote on social media.
In the Senate, momentum is building behind Van Hollen’s effort to oust Schumer as leader. On Wednesday, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said that Schumer, another staunch ally of Israel, was “way out of touch with where the American people are at.”
Several incoming Democratic senators, including Abdul El-Sayed (Mich.), Peggy Flanagan (Minn.), Troy Jackson (Maine), Adam Hamilton (Kan.), and Juliana Stratton (Ill.), have said they support Van Hollen or won't back Schumer, while others, including Democratic Sens.-elect Annie Andrews (SC) and Chris Pappas (NH), as well as the centrist Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), have suggested they wanted new leadership.
However, despite growing calls from the Democratic base for new leadership in the House as well, no Democrat has formally stepped up yet to challenge Jeffries’ claim to the speaker’s gavel.
Some newly elected Democrats—like Reps.-elect Melat Kiros (Colo.), Don Leonard (Ohio), and Claire Valdez (NY)—have suggested they would prefer a different leader, but House progressive leaders have so far put the kibosh on an insurgency, with Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY), Pramila Jayapal (Wash.), and Greg Casar (Texas) standing by Jeffries, at least as long as he's the only choice.
Time is running out for progressives to rally behind an alternative to Jeffries. The Democratic caucus will begin its internal leadership elections on November 18 and choose its nominee for speaker. The entire House will vote to elect a speaker when the new Congress convenes on January 3, 2027.
Some grassroots organizers have pushed for progressive Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) to challenge Jeffries, with one petition to draft her garnering over 90,000 signatures.
She has circulated her own petition pushing for a bolder agenda for Democrats to pursue in the next Congress, including passage of Medicare for All, national abortion protections, restrictions on data centers, and the abolition of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
In a speech on the House floor Thursday, she declared that “incrementalism is a recipe for failure” and that Democrats “cannot let money and the special interests dictate our fight.”
No one in the House Democratic caucus has publicly declared support for Pressley. But there is reportedly some movement behind the scenes ahead of Wednesday’s caucus meeting, where a nominee for party leader will be chosen.
One lawmaker, granted anonymity by Drop Site News congressional reporter Julian Andreone, said, "I am hearing that many progressives will be writing Ayanna’s name in.”
“You can’t put out a fire while handing the matches to the arsonists. And you certainly can’t expect the arsonists to write the evacuation plan.”
A coalition of environmental organizations is warning that the COP31 climate summit in Antalya, Türkiye is in danger of being co-opted by big polluters.
An analysis released on Friday by the Kick Big Polluters Out (KBPO) coalition finds that more than 100 polluting corporations and trade associations—including from fossil fuel, Big Tech, and industrial agriculture—have sent delegations to COP31.
Among the largest delegations, the report says, are International Emissions Trading Association (IETA), which sent 29 delegates; BNP Paribas, which sent 22; HSBC, which sent 19; and Amazon, which sent 12.
The analysis also shows that banks "collectively representing more than $2.2 trillion in fossil fuel financing from 2021-2025" have a presence at COP31.
The KBPO report notes that these industries and associations "have demonstrated track records of being notably misaligned with or obstructing climate policy... indicating they can be a threat to the strong climate action COP31 must urgently deliver."
These polluters' delegations are so big that they vastly outnumber delegations sent by many nations that are most endangered by the climate emergency, including Niger, the Philippines, and Nepal.
Maikel Peuki, director of the Papua chapter of the Indonesian Forum for Living Environment (WALHI) and a KBPO partner, said allowing big polluters to have a seat at the COP31 table would have dire consequences for his country's environment.
“In Papua our forests and coastal areas are being targeted for fossil fuel and food estate projects and carbon-offsetting schemes by major corporate emitters,” said Maikel Peuki. “This is not a genuine solution to the climate crisis. Those who cause pollution should be the ones to pay for the damage they have created.”
Peuki's remarks were echoed by Lien Vandamme, senior campaigner for the Center for International Environmental Law's Climate and energy program.
"You can’t put out a fire while handing the matches to the arsonists," said Vandamme. "And you certainly can’t expect the arsonists to write the evacuation plan. It’s therefore no surprise that the UN climate talks continue to fail in delivering the climate action that is needed. It’s time to show Big Polluters the door and fundamentally change the rules that keep rolling out the red carpet for them."
Prakash Dalal, director of Friends of the Earth Nepal, accused big polluters of causing "loss of livelihood, emotional damage, trauma, and survival challenges" for people in his country, adding that "we cannot tolerate the disproportionate space given to them compared to civil society and our country delegations."
"We need to kick these big polluters out!" Dalal emphasizes. "This should be a moral and legal obligation for the COP."
The presence of polluters also drew the ire of climate activist Greta Thunberg, according to a Thursday report in Latin Times.
While protesting outside COP31, Thunberg decried the negotiations for being "filled with lobbyists" who are "paid by the very destructive industries" profiting from continued fossil fuel dependence.
Thunberg also accused governments attending COP31 of using the event to "whitewash themselves" without taking real action.
"Should a handful of billionaires and a corrupt president have the power to sell out the rest of us so they can get even richer, or do the American people get a say in their own future?"
A broad coalition of advocacy organizations on Friday urged Democratic lawmakers to aggressively wield their investigative powers in the new Congress to scrutinize US President Donald Trump and his administration's relationship with Jensen Huang, the scandal-engulfed former chief executive of the AI chip giant Nvidia.
"While CEO Jensen Huang has resigned, that should not mean that he escapes scrutiny of Nvidia's actions," Guardrails Action, Indivisible, the American Federation of Teachers, and seven other groups wrote in a letter to Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY). "Beyond the obvious and pressing concerns regarding legislation on chip exports is a question at the very core of our democracy: Should a handful of billionaires and a corrupt president have the power to sell out the rest of us so they can get even richer, or do the American people get a say in their own future?"
The letter came a day after Huang stepped down as head of Nvidia following revelations of two extramarital affairs—one with a subordinate and another with a woman flagged by US intelligence agencies for potential ties to the Chinese government.
Over the past two years, Huang has developed a close relationship with Trump, and the CEO's professional demise has heightened scrutiny of White House policy decisions that have benefited the company—including licenses to export AI chips to China.
"Nvidia, the second-largest corporation in the world, gave $25 million to Trump’s ballroom," the advocacy coalition noted on Friday. "Its former CEO, Jensen Huang, traveled with Trump on Air Force One to China, and attended Trump’s state dinner with Chinese President Xi Jinping. At the same time, according to recent bombshell reporting, Huang was having an affair with a suspected Chinese spy, who led Megaspeed, a company under investigation for allegedly smuggling restricted Nvidia chips into China."
"Rather than take action, President Trump ignored the warnings; a Commerce Department investigation was even halted after direct intervention by Nvidia’s general counsel," the groups observed.
The coalition specifically called on Democrats in both the House and Senate to commit to three actions:
"The concentration of power and wealth from AI, and the risks that come with it, are historic," the groups wrote. "Countering that power is the most important fight of our lifetime. The American people put their trust in Democrats to put them first; now let’s prove they were right."
As Common Dreams reported on Thursday, a pair of high-ranking congressional Democrats have already launched an investigation into what they characterized as a "scheme" by the Trump administration to "mask an unconstitutional export tax as a national security tariff action—benefiting both Nvidia and the Chinese government."
The Democrats, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.), announced their investigation in a letter to Lutnick, a billionaire businessman whose department is under fire for lax oversight of Nvidia chip exports. Wyden and Neal noted in their letter that Lutnick's Commerce Department "has approved sales to Chinese companies with government and military ties—including Chinese 'cutout' companies with no physical presence at their listed addresses."
CNN reported Friday that some of Trump's advisers "have begun discussing" whether Lutnick should be fired. In an interview on Friday morning, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent blamed Lutnick for what he described as "leakage" of Nvidia's advanced AI chips to China.
According to Axios, Lutnick "has repeatedly stood in the way" of efforts to crack down on companies "suspected of diverting Nvidia's advanced AI chips to China."
"Howard Lutnick should resign or be fired," US Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) wrote on Thursday.
"Senator Van Hollen understands this is a fight of workers vs. billionaires and has the courage to deliver the change voters demanded," said the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers.
A machinists union with around 600,000 members issued a statement on Thursday endorsing US Sen. Chris Van Hollen's bid for Senate majority leader in the new Congress, calling the Maryland Democrat "a proven champion of working people who will fight to unrig an economy stacked against working families."
"The IAM Union proudly supports Senator Chris Van Hollen for Senate Majority Leader," said Brian Bryant, president of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. "Senator Van Hollen understands this is a fight of workers vs. billionaires and has the courage to deliver the change voters demanded. Workers did their part on election night. Now it’s Senate Democrats’ turn. Senator Van Hollen is the right choice.”
IAM's statement came shortly after Van Hollen, an outspoken supporter of labor unions, announced that he would challenge Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) for the majority leader post.
"In this election, Americans called on us to unrig an economy rigged against working people and fueled by political corruption," Van Hollen wrote on social media late Thursday. "To deliver, we need new leadership. This isn't about any one person—it’s about answering that call. That's why I’m running for Senate majority leader."
The Maryland senator acknowledged he would be the "underdog" in the contest but disputed Schumer's claim to have already locked down enough support to win. Senate Democrats are expected to vote for majority leader by secret ballot in early December.
Van Hollen told MS NOW on Thursday that he has the support of "more than 10" of 55 Democratic senators and senators-elect so far, including Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Sen.-elect Abdul El-Sayed (D-Mich.).
"Now people will have to make a decision, one way or the other," said Van Hollen, "and they have to decide whether they want to vote for change or whether they want to vote for the status quo."
The progressive advocacy group RootsAction, which says it has more than a million supporters online, announced Friday that it plans to "build on the campaign that we launched early this week, when activists responded to our mass emails by telling their Democratic senators to urge Van Hollen to run for the top Senate post."
"Now that he has done so, the imperative task is for Democrats nationwide to make sure that their voices are heard and heeded within the Capitol bubble," the group said in a statement. "At this historic moment, that bubble must be burst so that grassroots Democrats finally have the bold leadership in the Senate that they deserve. Political business as usual is absolutely unacceptable, and that means Schumer is unacceptable as the Senate Democratic leader."
"The ‘blue tsunami’ could easily become the blue mirage in the wrong hands," warned Sunrise Movement. "And Schumer’s hands are too full of billionaire money to hold young people’s future."
Thursday's announcement that Sen. Chris Van Hollen will challenge Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer to lead the upper house of Congress when Democrats retake control in January was met with cautious optimism from progressives, who underscored the mandate for change delivered by voters in last week's Democratic midterm blowout.
"Yes, I am planning to run for the Senate majority leader," Van Hollen (D-Md.) told Jen Psaki on MS NOW Thursday night. "This is not about any one individual but it is about answering the call of the American people."
"We saw a huge outburst of democracy on Election Day; red states, blue states, purple states," the senator continued. "And it wasn't only a rejection of [President] Donald Trump and his corruption, and his wars, and his cruelty. It was also about a call... to take on a broken economic system that's rigged in favor of the very wealthy against working people, and it's fueled by a corrupt political system."
"The call was to reject the status quo, and to reject business as usual," Van Hollen added. "And to do that, I think we need new leadership."
Sen.-elect Abdul El-Sayed (D-Mich.) was among the first to hail Van Hollen's announcement, writing on social media that he called on the senator "to lead our caucus as a candidate back in April because he leads with courage and experience."
"We need both right now," El-Sayed added. "Which is why I’m proud to stand with him in his bid to lead our Senate majority."
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) soon followed, noting that "the American people voted for change. They want a Democratic Party that will stand up to powerful special interests, take on the billionaire class, and fight for working families."
"That is why I am supporting Senator Chris Van Hollen to lead Senate Democrats," he added.
The secret-ballot vote to choose the next majority leader is expected to take place in early December and would mark the first contested Democratic leadership contest in decades.
Author Courtney Millan said on Bluesky that she is calling her "centrist-ass senators and asking them to back Chris Van Hollen."
Journalist Matt Novak said, "Hell yes, let's go."
BREAKING: Chris Van Hollen officially announces run for senate majority leader against Chuck Schumer! Call the U.S. Capitol Switchboard at:(202) 224-3121to tell your senators: Vote Chris, NOT CHUCK.
[image or embed]
— 50501: The People’s Movement ❌👑 (@50501movement.bsky.social) November 12, 2026 at 6:07 PM
The activist group RootsAction said it "will build on the campaign that we launched early this week, when activists responded to our mass emails by telling their Democratic senators to urge Van Hollen to run for the top Senate post."
"Now that he has done so, the imperative task is for Democrats nationwide to make sure that their voices are heard and heeded within the Capitol bubble," the group continued. "At this historic moment, that bubble must be burst so that grassroots Democrats finally have the bold leadership in the Senate that they deserve."
"Political business as usual is absolutely unacceptable, and that means Schumer is unacceptable as the Senate Democratic leader," it added.
The youth-led Sunrise Movement for climate action said on Bluesky that "Young people voted for change on election night. Chuck Schumer can’t give us that, but Chris Van Hollen might."
"The truth is, the ‘blue tsunami’ could easily become the blue mirage in the wrong hands," Sunrise continued. "And Schumer’s hands are too full of billionaire money to hold young people’s future."
"Young people are looking for a fair shot at life, and they haven’t yet been given one," the group added. "While the climate crisis barrels toward us at full speed, politicians like Schumer, who has been in office since 1974, have received plenty of chances."
"Chris Van Hollen has spent the last two years fighting to release his constituents out of [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] custody, spoken out against [the American Israel Public Affairs Committee's] corrupting influence, and tried to build the future young people deserve," Sunrise noted.
"But Senate Democrats won't elect him just because young people want change," the group cautioned. "We’ll have to show up at their offices like young people did today at Schumer’s Senate office."
More than 50 Sunrise activists were arrested during Thursday's sit-in at Schumer's Washington, DC office.
Schumer, meanwhile, responded to the news by posting on X:
I welcome any discussion about the future of our caucus and the important work ahead. I’m proud of what we’ve accomplished together—55 seats and counting is an amazing result—and I have the votes to continue serving as Democratic Leader. I look forward to leading our new Democratic majority and delivering for the American people.
Van Hollen drew plaudits from human rights defenders, who noted his opposition to US wars and support for Israel and for authoritarian regimes around the world. The senator has criticized Israel for what a UN commission of inquiry and many other experts have called its genocide in Gaza and what the International Court of Justice has found to be an illegal occupation and apartheid in the West Bank.
Americans, Van Hollen wrote earlier this year in one of his many calls to end US armed aid to Israel, “do not want to be complicit in ethnic cleansing in the West Bank, or what human rights organizations and scholars have determined to be genocide in Gaza.”
“A historic number of voters sent a clear message to Congress this election that they want mass economic relief and financial breathing room,” said one campaigner.
More than 200,000 student borrowers and their allies, as well as a coalition of advocacy groups, demanded Thursday that Democratic congressional leaders seize the moment of their soon-to-be majorities in both houses of Congress to win a student loan repayment pause.
A petition circulated by the Student Debt Crisis Center (SDCC) demanding President Donald Trump act to pause all federal student loan repayments and interest had collected 209,359 signatures as of Thursday afternoon.
The petition accuses the Department of Education under Education Secretary Linda McMahon—who has said she shares Trump's goal of abolishing the DOE—of having "failed Americans" by moving the student loan portfolio to the US Treasury Department, creating lengthy delays in and "egregious account errors" in application processing, not granting loan forgiveness to qualified borrowers, making repayment less affordable, announcing the end of the Saving on a Valuable Education plan, and restarting interest accrual on SAVE plans. Dozens of Democratic lawmakers last week pressed McMahon to answer for these failures.
"Amid an affordability crisis and the current state of affairs, student loan payments should be the last thing on anyone’s mind," the petition states. "Student loan payments are an unacceptable source of additional stress for Americans who are already stretched thin."
Our payment pause petition surpassed 200,000 signatures, but we aren't stopping there. Read the full press release here: www.studentdebtcrisis.org/post/student...Add your name to the petition: actionnetwork.org/petitions/pa...
[image or embed]
— Student Debt Crisis Center (@debtcrisisorg.bsky.social) November 12, 2026 at 8:10 AM
"We called for a payment pause in 2025, which the Department of Education chose to ignore, but we are resuming our call for a pause right now," the document adds. "Given the growing economic anxiety and hardship facing Americans, an immediate payment pause is not just necessary; it is imperative."
SDCC said in a statement announcing the petition:
Following the midterms, affordability is top of mind for millions of Americans. With a new Congress opening the door for real change, beginning with a payment pause would give student loan borrowers necessary relief while the 120th Congress legislates and conducts oversight. Lawmakers are already demanding answers from the Department of Education on their extensive failures managing the federal student loan system. Now, borrowers are holding those in charge accountable.
“The results of the midterm election are undeniable—Americans need relief from the burden of unaffordable living, and they need it now," said SDCC founder and president Natalia Abrams.
"Implementing an immediate pause on student loan payments and interest wouldn’t just be an effective way of providing relief, it would also free up room in the paychecks of over 43 million borrowers to pay bills, care for their families, and revitalize their local economies," Abrams added. "It’s a no-brainer."
The Federal Reserve Bank of New York reported Tuesday that outstanding student loan debt reached approximately $1.66 trillion in the third quarter of 2026, making it the second-largest category of household debt after mortgages.
Meanwhile, Federal Student Aid, a DOE agency, highlighted earlier this year that more than 42 million people hold federal student loans, with the federally managed portfolio alone exceeding $1.64 trillion.
On Wednesday, around 20 advocacy groups wrote to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, both New York Democrats, urging them to pressure Trump to sign legislation pausing student loan repayments after Democrats take back control of Congress in January.
We joined nearly 20 orgs in a letter to Senator Schumer and Rep. Jeffries urging them to win a pause on student loan payments in this next Congress.From widespread administrative errors to high monthly payments, Dems must step up for student debtors.www.forbes.com/sites/adammi...
[image or embed]
— Debt Collective 🟥 (@debtcollective.bsky.social) November 12, 2026 at 9:30 AM
"The student debt system is on the brink of breakdown, and today it functions worse than it did before the COVID-era payment pause," the groups contended in their letter, referring to the suspension of repayments during the first Trump administration that continued during former President Joe Biden's tenure before ending in 2023.
"We do not make this request lightly," the letter continues. "It is grounded in a documented and worsening pattern of administrative failure that is causing real, immediate, and irreparable harm to millions of borrowers."
"The chaos and disarray in the current system are not the fault of borrowers, and borrowers should not bear the consequences," the signers asserted. "A pause is the only responsible course until the department can guarantee that the system works as the law requires."
Groups signing the letter include the American Association of University Professors, Debt Collective, Democratic Socialists of America, Sunrise Movement, SDCC, and the University of California Student Association.
“A historic number of voters sent a clear message to Congress this election that they want mass economic relief and financial breathing room,” Debt Collective co-founder Astra Taylor said on Bluesky. “Trump paused student loans once. Democrats should push him to get it done again.”
Corporate Democrats could also prove to be an obstacle to debt relief. Both Schumer and Jeffries backed legislation that effectively prohibited the Biden administration from extending the pandemic-era payment pause.
Schumer had previously been among the most prominent congressional advocates for student debt relief, repeatedly urging Biden to extend the payment moratorium and cancel as much as $50,000 in debt per borrower.
During Trump's second term, his administration has moved aggressively to resume collections. In April 2025, the DOE announced that it would restart collections on defaulted federal student loans the following month, and that it would seize federal tax refunds and other payments through the Treasury Offset Program.
The department also announced plans to garnish borrowers' wages. In July 2025, it notified borrowers that interest would resume accruing on loans enrolled in Biden's SAVE repayment plan, which had been blocked by a federal court injunction. The administration subsequently announced plans to eliminate SAVE. However, the Trump administration has also twice delayed involuntary collections, including the planned wage garnishments, amid public outcry.
As of September, more than 9.3 million student loan borrowers were in default, owing approximately $234 billion.