SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER

Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

* indicates required
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Opinion
Climate
Economy
Politics
Rights & Justice
War & Peace
Gold Trump statue grounded in Ohio
Further

Fuck This Guy: The Hunted Becomes the Beached

Not Our President's Day, thank God, has passed. Along with mattress sales, it was marked by many middle fingers in the air, a typically grotesque message from a tainted White House, and news that a massive, ill-fated, gold-leaf statue of the worst president in history, hilariously dubbed "Don Colossus," remains stranded on its back in an Ohio warehouse as its creator and a bunch of crooked crypto bros - surprise! no surprise! - back-stab and bicker about money. May he rot there, please.

The general sentiment around our latest National Holiday was best summed up by one post: "Happy Presidents Day. Except the current one. Fuck that guy." He didn't win any points by marking the day spewing the usual hateful vulgarity "in the creepiest way possible," declaring in a vengeful post, "They came after the wrong man. I was the hunted. Now I'm the hunter." He is also, of course, "one sick dude," old, dazed and confused with unprecedented low approval ratings, maybe because all he does is lie, bully, bribe, be bribed and in his gluttonous delusion insist, “We have the greatest economy actually ever in history” as he rips us off for billions by selling his name for hopeful airports and don't forget their trashy "clothing, handbags, luggage, jewelry, watches, and tie clips." Democracy dies in tie clips.

Now, in one final, loutish indignity, he - or at least a gaudy doppelgänger - is being held hostage in Zanesville OH for a $92,000 payment, having been both delayed and downgraded from a planned prime spot at his inauguration to his Doral golf course - specifically, the tenth hole. The statue saga began when sculptor Alan Cottrill, who's made about 400 figures on commission, including bronzes of 16 past presidents and a Thomas Edison now in the Capitol, got a call from an unknown Las Vegas sculptor asking if he'd like to make a statue commemorating Trump's brave ear being allegedly grazed in Butler, Pennsylvania - an "iconic" 2024 moment a consortium of 16 cryptocurrency enthusiasts deemed "a turning point in world history," also a cool chance to "show our appreciation of his embrace of crypto." LOL.

The original plan was to unveil a bronze, 15-foot, 2,400-pound Don Colossus, installed on a 6,000-pound concrete base, at Trump’s inauguration, positing it to loom over the National Mall. The roughly month-long timeline was tight - Cottrill had to work "crazy fast" - and he was to be paid $300,000. There were tough moments. When he replicated Trump's "turkey neck," the crypto boys were "aghast" and requested "a more flattering, less realistic look." The hardest part was the hair: "Holy shmoly! You can't sculpt and cast something that is....wispy." Still, he toiled away at it, and met the deadline. The night before one of the crypto clutch called: Temps had plunged, the Secret Service had moved Inauguration Day inside where a two-story rapist might pose a danger, and the new plan was to install Don later at his Doral resort.

The statue malingered in a warehouse in DC, then in another in Pittsburgh. Cottrill got paid over time, but "every payment arrived weeks late." In November, he approached his patrons with a shiny new idea: The bronze was burnished to look gold, but what if they coated it in Trump's beloved gold leaf? The proposal was "like a glass of water to a person dying of thirst - Immediately everybody jumped on board." But finding someone to work on a giant Trump statue proved tough; several declined the job "because of the subject matter" before someone agreed to slather it in a layer of 23.75-carat gold leaf. A photo was sent to the felon, who loved it - "Wow, it's so bright and beautiful" - a plan was formed to install the pedestal at "a juicy spot" near three palm trees at the 10th hole, and the crypto investors began "actively looking” for a launch date.

But Cottrill suddenly charged the crypto guys - who include Dustin Stockton, a GOP strategist investigated by federal agents for the "We Build The Wall" fraud Steve Bannon did time for - with copyright infringement, arguing they'd gone behind his back for months to promote their $PATRIOT cryptocurrency while marketing the statue: "That was their play all along." Instantly, the deal got bogged down in the volatile world of crypto, a meme coin only worth what current speculation makes of it; things got really messy when the gluttonous Trump, smelling money, launched his own $TRUMP coin days before his inauguration, hammering the $PATRIOT value before itself predictably tanking to over 95% below its peak. Still, and despite charges of massive conflict of interest, Trump has reportedly raked in $1.4 billion from this crap.

Meanwhile, Don Colossus is being held hostage in "financial purgatory" by Cottrill, who claims the crypto guys are both ripping him off and refusing to fork up their final payment. "They keep saying, 'Oh don’t worry Alan, we’ll pay you, we’ll pay you,' but actually they've been illegally infringing on the copyright of my original art right up to the present day." They're also continuing a bizarre social media campaign, posting images of the pedestal - all they have - with promos for their meme coin. "The dream is alive and well," they proclaim. "What the president has in store for the $PATRIOT community and his inner circle for this unveiling will surely be spectacular!" They say they hope to offer Trump one of Cottrill's earlier miniature versions, coated in the same gold finish; they'd love to have it placed in the Oval Bordello, along with all its trashy drek.

The crypto cartel argue they'll pay their final installment before Don "leaves for Doral," and Cottrill is "trying to squeeze us for it." But Cottrill says he already went to Doral a few weeks ago to install the base; he brought along a 12-inch version to scope out the site - "It was the only thing I could fit in my hand luggage" - and a landscape architect dug up and re-positioned the palm trees just so. "The gold leaf in the Florida sun - it’s going to be brilliant," he pledges. "But what they owe me is $91,200, and it's not leaving until they pay me." For all the aggravation, Cottrill says he's enjoyed working on the project. But it's taken up a lot of space in his studio for a long time, and now, "I'd like to get it the hell out of here." Many, many Americans can relate.

SEE ALL
Trump Works To Revive US Coal Industry With Pentagon Contracts And Less Regulation
News

Senate Dems Launch Investigation Into Trump EPA Policy to 'Disregard' Health Impacts of Pollution

A group of 31 Democratic senators has launched an investigation into a new Trump administration policy that they say allows the Environmental Protection Agency to "disregard" the health impacts of air pollution when passing regulations.

Plans for the policy were first reported on last month by the New York Times, which revealed that the EPA was planning to stop tallying the financial value of health benefits caused by limiting fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and ozone when regulating polluting industries and instead focus exclusively on the costs these regulations pose to industry.

On December 11, the Times reported that the policy change was being justified based on the claim that the exact benefits of curbing these emissions were “uncertain."

"Historically, the EPA’s analytical practices often provided the public with false precision and confidence regarding the monetized impacts of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and ozone," said an email written by an EPA supervisor to his employees on December 11. “To rectify this error, the EPA is no longer monetizing benefits from PM2.5 and ozone.”

The group of senators, led by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), rebuked this idea in a letter sent Thursday to EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin.

"EPA’s new policy is irrational. Even where health benefits are 'uncertain,' what is certain is that they are not zero," they said. "It will lead to perverse outcomes in which EPA will reject actions that would impose relatively minor costs on polluting industries while resulting in massive benefits to public health—including in saved lives."

"It is contrary to Congress’s intent and directive as spelled out in the Clean Air Act. It is legally flawed," they continued. "The only beneficiaries will be polluting industries, many of which are among President [Donald] Trump’s largest donors."

Research published in 2023 in the journal Science found that between 1999 and 2020, PM2.5 pollution from coal-fired power plants killed roughly 460,000 people in the United States, making it more than twice as deadly as other kinds of fine particulate emissions.

While this is a staggering loss of life, the senators pointed out that the EPA has also been able to put a dollar value on the loss by noting quantifiable results of increased illness and death—heightened healthcare costs, missed school days, and lost labor productivity, among others.

Pointing to EPA estimates from 2024, they said that by disregarding human health effects, the agency risks costing Americans “between $22 and $46 billion in avoided morbidities and premature deaths in the year 2032."

Comparatively, they said, “the total compliance cost to industry, meanwhile, [would] be $590 million—between one and two one-hundredths of the estimated health benefit value."

They said the plan ran counter to the Clean Air Act's directive to “protect and enhance the quality of the Nation’s air resources so as to promote the public health and welfare,” and to statements made by Zeldin during his confirmation hearing, where he said "the end state of all the conversations that we might have, any regulations that might get passed, any laws that might get passed by Congress” is to “have the cleanest, healthiest air, [and] drinking water.”

The senators requested all documents related to the decision, including any information about cost-benefit modeling and communications with industry representatives.

"That EPA may no longer monetize health benefits when setting new clean air standards does not mean that those health benefits don’t exist," the senators said. "It just means that [EPA] will ignore them and reject safer standards, in favor of protecting corporate interests."

SEE ALL
People line up at a job fair
News

Data Reveals Trump Economy Added Hundreds of Thousands Fewer Jobs in 2025 Than Previously Reported

Revised federal data released Wednesday shows that the US economy under the stewardship of President Donald Trump added hundreds of thousands fewer jobs in 2025 than previously reported, further undercutting the president's claim to have ushered in the "greatest" economy in history.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics said Wednesday that US employers added just 181,000 jobs last year, an average of roughly 15,000 per month. That's roughly 69% fewer than the previous estimate of 584,000 jobs created in 2025.

Groundwork Collaborative, a progressive advocacy group, said the updated figures paint "a grim picture" of the job market under Trump, who has repeatedly promised—and taken credit for bringing about—an economic boom.

“Today’s numbers show that the economy spent 2025 treading water while costs surged and families fell further behind," said Alex Jacquez, chief of policy and advocacy at Groundwork. "Job growth was dramatically weaker than advertised and concentrated nearly entirely in healthcare, leaving the rest of the labor market to stall. Opportunities are drying up outside a handful of sectors, and more and more workers are settling for part-time hours or have stopped looking for work entirely. 2025 was a lost year for American workers."

Daniel Zhao, chief economist at the employment site Glassdoor, told the New York Times in response to the revised numbers that "we’ve been hearing from workers that the job market is not working for them for some time."

“The anecdotes are starting to align with the data," Zhao added.

A separate analysis released Wednesday by Democrats on the Joint Economic Committee (JEC) found that the US lost 108,000 manufacturing jobs during the first year of Trump's second term in the White House, despite the president's pledge to revive American industry through his tariff regime.

“While President Trump promised us a manufacturing boom, the reality of his first year has been a bust,” said Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-NH), the JEC's ranking member. “It is critical for both our national security and our economic future that we grow our manufacturing sector. The president has instead spent his first year burdening manufacturers with reckless tariffs, and this loss of jobs is the result."

SEE ALL
Mark Zuckerberg
News

Meta Drops $65 Million on Super PACs to Back Pro-AI Candidates Against Big Tech Critics

Meta, the parent company of social media giants Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, is spending big bucks to ensure that government regulations don't interfere with its ambitions in artificial intelligence.

The New York Times reported on Wednesday that Meta is planning to spend $65 million on this year's midterm elections, with one super political action committee (PAC) dedicated to electing AI-friendly Democrats, and another dedicated to electing AI-friendly Republicans.

The pro-Democratic super PAC, called Making Our Tomorrow, will work to influence congressional races in Illinois, while the pro-GOP PAC, called Forge the Future Project, will be focusing on congressional races in Texas.

The Times noted that Meta has in the past been "cautious about campaign engagements, making small donations out of a corporate political action committee and contributing to presidential inaugurations," but it has decided to ramp up its spending to defend its AI business from governmental interference.

Meta's spending splurge to elect pro-AI candidates is just one of many efforts by the AI industry to ensure a friendly regulatory environment.

CNN reported last week that Leading the Future—a super PAC backed by venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, Palantir co-founder Joe Lonsdale, and other AI heavyweights—is pledging to spend at least $100 million to influence the 2026 midterm election.

The goal of the PAC will be to elect lawmakers who will pass legislation to set a single set of AI regulations that will take effect throughout the US, overriding any restrictions placed on the technology by state governments.

The PACs' big spending comes as a nationwide backlash to Big Tech has been forming across the US, as many communities are fighting against the construction of energy-devouring AI data centers that are raising electricity prices and have been accused of degrading the quality of local water supplies.

Reed Showalter, a Democratic US House of Representatives candidate running in Illinois' 7th Congressional District, said the report of Meta's big spending showed the importance of ensuring that voters elect leaders who will hold the major tech companies accountable.

"We deserve representatives who are going to take an honest look at AI and regulate it accordingly," he wrote in a social media post. "We can't afford more corrupt politicians bought by Big Tech."

Democratic New York congressional candidate Alex Bores, who is running on a platform of regulating AI, said during an interview with CNN on Wednesday that the tech companies' actions show they are "terrified" of being held accountable by elected officials.

He also noted that being attacked by the Leading the Future super PAC has ironically helped his candidacy.

"The fact that they're being so aggressive with it, I think, has been redounding to my benefit," he told host Dana Bash. "I've had a lot of constituents who have reached out and said, 'I hadn't even heard of you until all these text messages [from the AI super PAC]."


Watchdog social media account @OilPACTracker predicted that Meta's major political spending could turn into a liability if voters are made aware of its machinations.

"We would make sure the electorate knows about it," the watchdog wrote. "Big Tech money is toxic."

SEE ALL
Khanna Demands Action After UN Panel Says Epstein Files Point to 'Crimes Against Humanity'
News

Khanna Demands Action After UN Panel Says Epstein Files Point to 'Crimes Against Humanity'

Rep. Ro Khanna on Wednesday demanded action from both the Trump administration and US Congress after the United Nations Human Rights Council said it found evidence of a potential "global criminal enterprise" in the US government's files related to the investigation of late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

In a video posted on social media, Khanna (D-Calif.) issued a series of demands in the wake of the UN council's Tuesday declaration that the actions of Epstein and his associates "may reasonably meet the legal threshold of crimes against humanity."

First, Khanna said that the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) must assemble a special prosecution committee to build criminal cases against Epstein associates who are alleged to have participated in the trafficking of underage girls.

He then demanded that House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) set up a congressional select committee to have hearings where "every person who went" to Epstein's private island in the Caribbean where he trafficked girls is forced to testify.

Finally, Khanna said that the DOJ must release the remaining Epstein files that are still under wraps, without any redactions for names of the "predators" within.

Experts on the UN Human Rights Council said that the evidence contained in the Epstein files is "suggestive of the existence of a global criminal enterprise" that has "shocked the conscience of humanity and raised terrifying implications of the level of impunity for such crimes."

The experts added that "so grave is the scale, nature, systematic character, and transnational reach of these atrocities against women and girls, that a number of them may reasonably meet the legal threshold of crimes against humanity."

Khanna and Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) last year authored the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which mandated that the DOJ publish all materials related to the FBI's investigation into Epstein and his associates, with redactions made only to protect the identities of the victims.

Despite this law, the DOJ proceeded to release files that revealed victims' identities, while also blacking out names of alleged abusers.

SEE ALL
Three members of the Zakoul family killed in an attack on Jabalia Camp
News

Lancet Study Shows 75,000+ 'Killed Violently' in First 16 Months of Israel's Genocide—Far More Than Reported

A peer-reviewed study published Wednesday in The Lancet Global Health estimates that more than 75,000 people in Gaza were killed during the first 16 months of Israel's genocidal assault—a figure that far exceeds the death toll reported at the time by the strip's health authorities.

The study's authors found that there were 75,200 "violent deaths" in Gaza between October 7, 2023 and January 5, 2025, with women, children, and elderly Palestinians making up around 56% of the toll. The researchers estimated an additional 16,300 nonviolent deaths—from disease, accidents, or other causes not directly related to Israel's military onslaught—during that period.

The Lancet study's estimated Gaza death toll through early January 2025 is at least 25,000 deaths higher than the figure reported at the time by Gaza's Ministry of Health (MoH).

Gaza health officials put the current death toll from Israel's assault at more than 72,000—a figure that Israeli authorities only recently acknowledged is accurate after more than two years of denial.

"The combined evidence suggests that, as of January 5, 2025, 3-4% of the population of the Gaza Strip had been killed violently and there have been a substantial number of nonviolent deaths caused indirectly by the conflict," the Lancet study states. "Our findings contradict claims that the MoH has inflated the death toll from the war in the Gaza Strip. Instead, the MoH appears to provide conservative, reliable figures while working under extraordinary constraints."

The study's lead author is Michael Spagat, a professor of economics at Royal Holloway, University of London and a board member of Action on Armed Violence. The London-based watchdog organization noted in its coverage of the study that "Spagat is internationally recognized for his work on war mortality estimation, including studies of Kosovo, Iraq, and other conflict zones."

The new study, described as "the first independent population survey of mortality in the Gaza Strip," is the latest peer-reviewed research showing that the officially reported death tolls from the Israeli military's invasion and destruction of the territory are likely significant undercounts.

A study published in The Lancet in January 2025 indicated that the death toll reported by Gaza health officials over roughly the first year and a half of Israel's assault was likely a 41% undercount.

"It will be a long time before we get to a full accounting of all the people killed in Gaza, if we ever get there," Spagat told The Guardian on Thursday.

SEE ALL