LIVE COVERAGE
Oh Canada: We Will Neither Cower Nor Bend
More insane idiocy from the petty huckster clown king whose idea of governance is threatening lawsuits, trade wars, buildings that won't put his name on them; bungling war and peace; flaunting Nazi loyalty queries and sadistic images of black men in chains; and distracting from it all with the dumbass geographic circlejerk of inventing “LAKe AMeRiCA.” The Internet was born for this: Cue Donald Ducks, the Straits of Our Moose, Lake Dead Pedo Bestie, Lake Superior President Obama, and Lake Stupid Fucking Moron.
Last week, after God killed the wrong 80-year-old in the 784th year of a presidency that feels like "being in middle school when there's a substitute teacher and a student has a medical emergency," yet more banal slop issued from a needy racist sociopath so stupid he once seemingly conflated the Very Hard words "transistor" and "transgender" to claim Biden's CHIPS Act offered billions to domestic tech companies but "if you weren't transgender, (you) didn't qualify." Jesus. No wonder, à propos of nothing, the widely deemed "worst president in U.S. history" took time out from his busy mob boss schedule to declare himself the bestest - take that Honest Abe - after his faithful Human Printer dug up a similar 1948 Life Magazine chart, which is "exactly the kind of thing a healthy, high-functioning person shares."
Other things he did, abetted by a confederacy of dunces, stooges, techno-fascists, warmongers, crypto dorks, "unfuckable hate nerds" and "an actual Jewish Nazi": Having hit the six-month mark of his Iran debacle, he giddily proclaimed, "Mission Accomplished!" despite a. the only thing achieved is handing a newly empowered Iran control of the Strait of Hormuz as U.S. gas prices skyrocket and the economy implodes, b. he evidently missed the part where George W's 2003 banner aboard an aircraft carrier became a queasy punchline, c. he did so amidst reports his and Kegsbreath's said debacle has pushed the US military into a "beyond critical" shortage of money and missile interceptors in the case of an enemy attack, forcing them to shift funds around "in imaginative ways" - because everything he touches dies and we probably will too.
A fragile child, he demands fealty to even his ceaseless clusterfucks. Thus the latest inane authoritarian hokum from a Department of Homeland (sic) Security that alas hasn’t lost any of its fascist fervor since the brutal puppy-killing days of ICE Barbie. Its new, dystopian, “genuinely deranged” missive: A glowering image of Dear Dumb Leader with the dark challenge, “Did you remain loyal?”, which chillingly fails to consider just what atrocities they’re demanding allegiance to. The answer came in a post that swiftly followed: Sadistic footage of shackled Haitian immigrants, targeted after losing Temporary Protected Status for no reason but mindless, racist cruelty, being shuffled onto planes in pouring rain to the sneering tune of a Creole song about returning home - complete with fawning close-ups of the chains on their feet. Well done, sick fucks.
Meanwhile, the trail of destruction goes on apace. In D.C., after the East Wing and reflecting pool - we like the meme of him studying it with, "All I see is scum" and a lackey saying, "Well, it is a reflecting pool, sir" - we've reached the mobsters' "offer-they- can't-refuse" phase on the besieged Kennedy Center. Having repeatedly lost in court, the regime now threatens to demolish the not-long-ago-flourishing Center unless a tantrum-throwing 10-year-old gets his name "prominently added" to its exterior with "appropriate respect" of his efforts to "save” it from a fictional "death spiral" that's rendered it "dilapidated, outdated, decrepit and embarrassing to the Nation’s Capital," which is some pot/kettle. If they can't plaster his ghastly name over it - inscription, plaza et al - they'll replace it with "an outdoor amphitheater," aka a lawn.
They're also pushing to sell off part of Yosemite National Park, like everything else, to the highest bidder, though the seller is such an imbecile he still cringingly says "Yo, Semites!" He's such a petty dolt he's also skipping this year's 9/11 remembrance at Ground Zero because he wasn't allowed to give a Nazi speech there, opting to give it at the Pentagon before rushing off to the Irish Open at his crappy golf course, 'cause priorities. Having trashed jobs, health insurance, food aid, the environment and most of our global alliances, he blew up trade talks with Canada, calling its endlessly nice residents "nasty people," and holding a clownish Oval Office event to sign an idiotic executive order renaming Lake Ontario to “LAKe AMeRiCA,” which he's "been thinking about for a long time" with what's left of his tiny brain. (Here he is on trade: The stupid, it burns.)
"All it takes is a good pen and some intelligence,” he said, only batting one for two in a pretend-name-changing event labeled, "Making the Great Lakes Even Greater.” Then - what a feckin’ playacting infant - he drew a line through the doomed lake and intoned, “We have notified various people who needed to be notified...This is official.” He said he’d instructed craven lickspittle and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum to "take all appropriate actions." Burgum slavishly wrote, “We’re on it, Mr. President!”, thus becoming the only person on Planet Earth to take this puerile claptrap seriously, evidently unaware an executive order is not a law and every ship entering the Great Lakes has to go through Canada's Welland Canal, including $26 billion in U.S. trade, and it would be a shame if Canada up and supersized their tolls, and thank you for your attention to this matter.
Uncle Bernie and most of America promptly responded they'd rather have affordable health care, thanks, also housing, food, education and cancer research. Nova Scotia's Conservative premier Tim Houston, "not exactly a firebrand," opined, “We’re into some real foolishness now. It’s Lake Ontario, buddy." Canada's newly combative Prime Minister Mark Carney, out of fucks to give, noted that long before Europeans came the lake was named by Native Americans using the Huron word "Ontari’io," for, "The lake is beautiful, the lake is big." "The name is more than 400 years old," he said. "Canadians know that naming reality means calling it Lake Ontario - then, now and always." The Canadian Resistance Army, who earlier defended penguins, also chimed in, declaring, "We're going to trade war/Beavers and moose won't take it any more."
Above all, it was agreed, “LAKe AMeRiCA" is what God invented the Internet for. The names spooled out in a gleeful torrent.
Lake Release the Epstein Files. Lake Gulf of Mexico. Lake Are We Doing This Again. Lake Micropenis. Lake Natalie. Lake Huron Thin Ice with Melania. Lake Universal Healthcare. Lake Eerily Overweight Pres Dick J. McRectum. Lake Felon. Lake Not Eerie. Lake Oh Canada. Lake Small Dick Energy. Many chose Lake Obama. Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers created the politically incorrect Lake Retard: "See, I can sign napkins that say things too." One decided to "just keep calling it Lake Epstein, like the Founders wanted." Mapquest, unlike cowering Google, not only declined to change the lake's name but invited viewers to "spread some geographic joy" and "name it whatever you want." One result: Lake Who Uses Mapquest Anymore.
Many noted the traditional Great Lakes litany of "H.O.M.E.S" had entirely logically become "S.H.A.M.E." People renamed their toilet bowl to Lake Trump. The White House to Home of Diaper Butt. Mar-a-Lago to Poopy Pants Palace. The United States of America to the Epstein States of Pedophiles, or just South Canada. President Trump to President Dickhead. California to Amerifornia. Strait of Hormuz to Strait of Our Moose. People mocked his thieving choice of one of the smallest and dirtiest Great Lakes. They noted, "Nobody in Ontario gives a single solitary fuck what Assclown McCrappy-Pants says about anything." They griped the name change "really screws with the lyrics of Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald."
"What are they trying to distract us from this time?" they asked. Response: "The previous distraction." Some coddled the needy child-king: "Good for you, li'l fella." Some railed: "Jesus Christ, can somebody just get him a coloring book already?" Some were still baffled by how low we've gone: "Wait, this is real?" Some refused to go there: "Nope." Some summoned the great Talking Heads: "As things fell apart/Nobody paid much attention." And some fought back against the incessant bullying. After the Center for American Progress released a report finding billions spent on ICE thugs and National Guard swarms had no real effect on reducing violent crime, Trump threatened a $5 billion lawsuit if they didn't retract it. The center stood firm against "a transparent attempt to silence us." "We will neither cower nor bend in the face of it," they said. And, still and all, we will snark away.
Update: Talk about "Do not obey in advance": After defying the petty madness, usage of Mapquest has surged to about 50 times its usual rate, leapfrogging past Google and Apple Maps to become the most-downloaded mapping app, and the fourth most popular of all apps excluding games in the US. Along with their "spread some geographic joy" invite, they posted a mocking, all-caps retort: "OUR MAPS ARE BIG AND BEAUTIFUL. PEOPLE COME UP TO US AND SAY WE'LL GET THEM PLACES. AND WE DO!!" Lol.
Canada vs. the Epstein Statesof AmericaImage from Bluesky
‘Unconscionable, Immoral, and Illegal’: Lawsuit Targets Trump Approval of Cancer-Causing Forever Chemical
Environmental groups have sued the Trump administration, alleging the Environmental Protection Agency approved a potentially cancer-causing "forever chemical" for use as an herbicide without fully assessing the risk.
The petition was filed Friday in the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit by the Center for Food Safety, the Center for Biological Diversity, and Pesticide Action & Agroecology Network North America, who asked the court to throw out the EPA's June 30 approval of trifludimoxazin and six products containing it for use on a wide range of crops including corn, wheat, soybeans, and apples.
Trifludimoxazin is part of the family of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, synthetic chemicals with strong carbon-fluorine bonds that can take years to fully break down, earning them the nickname "forever chemicals."
The trifludimoxazin was initially approved in 2021 during the Biden administration. But the company agreed to stop selling the product the following year after environmental groups sued, citing its potential to cause cancer and harm to threatened and endangered fish. But the Trump EPA last year proposed registering it again for widespread use and issued a final approval in June.
The groups argue that the EPA approved the use of trifludimoxazin without accounting for evidence that the pesticide could cause cancer and harm wildlife and ecosystems.
The EPA itself has acknowledged that the chemical could harm many endangered and threatened species, including posing chronic risks to bees and other invertebrates. Meanwhile, rodent studies have found that at high doses, the chemical can cause thyroid tumors and adverse effects on the liver and reproductive systems.
The chemical, which blocks an enzyme in plants needed for growth, has been described as 10 times as potent as dicamba, another weedkiller used on soybeans and cotton, whose products have caused millions of acres of unintended crop damage since its approval in 2017.
But though the EPA's own guidance states that carcinogenic effects in animals could point to human risk, the agency stated that its final risk assessment found “no human health risks of concern."
The plaintiffs argue that the EPA did not take all the proper steps to reach this conclusion, having failed to quantify the chemical's danger, especially when combined with exposure to other approved chemicals.
“Trifludimoxazin is a likely human carcinogen that belongs to a family of weedkillers that also causes reproductive harm, birth defects, and neurological deficits in animal studies,” said Bill Freese, science director at the Center for Food Safety. “As if the health threats weren’t enough, this incredibly potent herbicide can drift to stunt crops and wild plants hundreds of yards from a sprayed field, while runoff threatens wetland plants. Potent biocides like this have no business on the American landscape.”
The lawsuit also notes that two of the approved trifludimoxazin products combine it with another toxic herbicide called saflufenacil, meaning that farmworkers who apply the chemicals could be exposed to the effects of both at once. The plaintiffs said the EPA did not evaluate the risk that would be posed to farmworkers who are exposed to these chemicals.
“While everyone’s distracted by the Trump administration’s erratic actions on the world stage, it keeps approving dangerous forever pesticides right here on our own soil,” said Nathan Donley, environmental health science director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “It’s unconscionable, immoral, and illegal. Our kids and grandkids deserve better than to be saddled with pollution that never goes away.”
Watchdog Denounces 'Staggering and Disgusting' Hypocrisy of AI Industry Giants
Government watchdog Public Citizen on Thursday hit back at the artificial intelligence industry for warning about the dire threats posed by its own technology after it spent years trying to block any government regulations that could have curtailed dangerous AI behavior that experts and progressive lawmakers have warned about for years.
In an open letter sent on Thursday, dozens of tech companies—including OpenAI, Anthropic, Amazon Web Services, and Microsoft—claimed that there is a "limited window" to defend against AI-executed cyberattacks, which they said "will become far more widespread and sophisticated as models around the world become increasingly capable."
If nothing is done, the companies said, then crucial facilities "from hospitals to water treatment plants to the infrastructure that powers the internet" will be at risk.
The companies said that thwarting such AI cyberattacks would require a "global response" where governments will need to "fund cyber defense" and "give hospitals, water utilities, and local governments access to capable defensive AI, authorized testing, and hands-on support through trusted security providers and partners."
JB Branch, director of federal AI governance and technology policy at Public Citizen, urged lawmakers to be deeply skeptical of Big Tech’s messaging on the issue and the industry's proposed plan of action, which he said would further enrich Silicon Valley without providing any safeguards for the public when it comes to AI development.
"Big Tech does not get to unleash powerful AI systems, fight tooth and nail against meaningful regulation," said Branch, "and then cry for help when the dangers they helped create come knocking."
Branch noted that the tech industry has insisted for years that there should be no government intervention into developing technology, supposedly because it would put the US at risk of "losing" the AI race to China.
Now, Branch said, they are running to the government and demanding fast action to help solve a problem they created.
"That hypocrisy is equal parts staggering and disgusting," Branch said. "If the threat is serious enough to demand urgent action from the government, then it is serious enough to demand binding rules, independent oversight, and accountability from the companies creating it."
The AI firms' open letter comes as the tech industry appears acutely concerned about public backlash to its products. The Wall Street Journal reported on Friday that Big Tech firms who gave heavily to President Donald Trump have been scrambling to donate to Democratic candidates ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.
In particular, according to the reporting, many tech companies who donated to Trump's ballroom and other vanity projects fear that a Democratic majority will start subpoenaing them for records that could lead to criminal investigations.
Cooper Teboe, a Silicon Valley donor adviser and Democratic strategist, has told Trump-funding tech companies that they will pay a big price unless they repair their relationships with Democrats whom they've alienated by going all-in on MAGA.
"You’re going to be totally fucked next year or you’re going to figure it out this year and you’re going to make amends," Teboe said, "and amends are going to be much more costly than they were previously."
As Branch put it, "Big Tech knows it has lost public support on AI, and the PR machine is now working overtime."
Despite industry efforts to control narratives and members of Congress, he said, the American people "aren’t going to forget the harms these companies unleashed, the regulations they fought, or their promises that AI could replace their jobs."
"Silicon Valley is the problem threatening our ways of life," Branch concluded. "It’s hard to take them seriously when they invented the problem in the first place.”
Jewish Artists Condemn Corporate 'Smear Campaign' Against Mark Ruffalo for Israel Criticism
A group of over 170 Jewish figures, including many who work in the entertainment industry, have come to the defense of actor Mark Ruffalo as he faces antisemitism accusations from executives at Paramount for criticizing the Israeli government and its ties to powerful corporations.
In a letter released Tuesday, prominent Jewish figures—including filmmaker Joel Coen, director and author Miranda July, actress Debra Winger, actress and director Ilana Glazer, actress and comedian Hannah Einbinder, and playwright Tony Kushner—accused Paramount of waging a "smear campaign" to shield corporate interests from legitimate criticism.
"Enough with the false and dangerous weaponization of charges of antisemitism," the letter states, "against those who are brave enough to point out the obvious: that the assault on the Palestinian people and the assault on our liberties at home are deeply interconnected, and there is nothing antisemitic about recognizing that fact."
Ruffalo was accused of being an antisemite after he cited the work of Oracle founder Larry Ellison, father of Paramount CEO David Ellison, in helping the Israeli military carry out a years-long assault on Gaza that has left an estimated 73,500 Palestinians dead.
The actor specifically said that Oracle was powering "an apartheid system of oppression" in the Middle East, which he warned could be exported everywhere if "merged into one of the largest media conglomerates in the world," a reference to the proposed $110 billion megamerger between Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery.
However, the Jewish figures' letter points out that there is nothing at all antisemitic about expressing concerns about corporate megamergers that could fuse the power of mass media with the power of a technology giant.
In particular, the letter says that the Paramount-Warner Bros. merger is part of "a larger project of tech-driven domination, a project Larry Ellison and his partners have never been shy about trumpeting—and one they themselves have explicitly linked to their support for the ongoing depredations being visited on the people of Palestine and their silencing of critics of those horrors."
The letter also slams Ellison for trying to create an "Orwellian world" as he "consolidates control over what we watch and how we watch it, knowing that as we watch he and his corrupt cohort will always be watching us."
"The time is over for spurious charges of antisemitism to be trotted out, this time in the defense of war, oligarchy, and [artificial intellignece] domination," the letter concludes. "That tired playbook has run its course. We stand proudly with Mark Ruffalo, and with all decent people who are bravely rising and speaking truth to power."
Dems Call for Cancellation of $17 Million Contract to Equip ICE Agents With Electric Shock Gloves
A group of House Democrats on Monday demanded the immediate cancellation of a nearly $17 million federal contract to provide electric shock gloves to Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, who have been unleashed on American cities under the second Trump administration and enabled to commit horrific—and, in some cases, deadly—abuses against undocumented immigrants and American citizens.
The Democratic lawmakers, led by Rep. Delia Ramirez of Illinois, expressed "profound alarm" over the contract in a new letter to Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Markwayne Mullin, whose agency oversees ICE. The letter's 50 signatories wrote that the devices, known as Generated Low Output Voltage Emitters (GLOVE), are "designed to inflict severe pain without leaving physical evidence or visible optics," making them "a uniquely dangerous tool for unaccountable abuse."
"We demand the immediate cancellation of this contract and a total ban on the deployment of these abusive devices across all immigration enforcement and detention operations," the lawmakers continued. "The rollout of these weapons to thousands of field agents across ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations and Homeland Security Investigations contributes to a DHS environment already under widespread scrutiny for state-sanctioned abuse, torture, and arbitrary cruelty."
The Democrats sent their letter days after ICE granted a $16.7 million no-bid contract to the Kentucky-based firm Compliant Technologies for 6,000 pairs of electric shock gloves, ignoring the protests of lawmakers and human rights groups.
The ACLU, Physicians for Human Rights, and the Center for Victims of Torture (CVT) are among the advocacy organizations that have decried ICE plans to equip its agents with the gloves. CVT has described the devices as "inherently abusive equipment that facilitates torture."
In their Monday letter, the group of House Democrats warned that the "dangers of these 'less-lethal' weapons are not theoretical," pointing to the case of a 43-year-old man in Kentucky who died after corrections officers shocked him dozens of times with electric gloves.
More than 50 people have died in ICE custody during President Donald Trump's second term.
"This administration continues to outfit ICE and [Customs and Border Protection] with the tools of an occupying paramilitary force—despite widespread human rights violations carried out by its agents during immigration enforcement actions," the lawmakers wrote. "Introducing low-visibility electric shock weapons into our immigration enforcement system is an unacceptable escalation that prioritizes physical intimidation and unaccountable force over human safety and administrative accountability.
On top of calling for cancellation of the contract, the House Democrats demanded information on any threat assessments ICE conducted before awarding the contract, whether the agency has trained its officers with electric shock gloves, and whether DHS intends to implement any productions to "prevent officers from using them for punitive measures, retaliation, or against non-threatening individuals."
"We reiterate our demand that you immediately halt the acquisition and deployment of electric shock gloves, cancel the contract, and refocus the Department’s resources on accountability and humanitarian standards rather than expanding a paramilitary apparatus," the lawmakers wrote.
Iran Says Trump's New Attacks Show Americans 'Stuck in the Massive Error They’ve Made'
As US President Donald Trump returns to bombing Iranian territory, Esmaeil Baghaei Hamaneh, the spokesperson for Iran's Foreign Ministry, said at a press conference on Tuesday that it's only a sign of the quagmire he's found himself in, and emphasized that the only way out will be negotiation rather than force.
"It has become clear they are now stuck in the massive error they’ve made, and it’s their usual habit to raise excessive demands," Baghaei said, noting that mediation efforts by Pakistan were continuing even as the Trump administration claims that Iran is refusing "meaningful negotiations."
When Trump launched the war in February, he predicted that Iran would be brought to its knees in a matter of weeks. Six months later, there is no sign that an end to the conflict is in sight as Trump rejects a return to the negotiating table.
Baghaei said it's clear that the US was once again falling into "a state of miscalculation." Iran, he said, had been adhering to the Memorandum of Understanding reached in June, while the US refused to abide by its terms of ending its economic blockade, unfreezing assets, and ending threats of aggression, as well as ending attacks by US ally Israel in Lebanon.
Baghaei said Iran was willing to reach another agreement to end the war. The problem, he said, was that Trump had shown himself unwilling to follow any deal that included concessions to Iran and was demanding its full capitulation.
"We cannot accept any orders being dictated upon us," Baghaei said. "If they continue with this philosophy, they will not get any different result.”
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian echoed Baghaei's position on Tuesday, saying that Iran would “immediately reciprocate” if Washington honored its commitments under the June interim agreement.
Failing to break Iran with military might, Trump tried to switch last month to a strategy of "economic warfare," imposing "the toughest sanctions in history" and pressuring other nations around the world to do the same in an effort to isolate Iran and fully topple its government.
Baghaei acknowledged that US sanctions were having a devastating effect on the people of Iran. According to Reuters, Iran's foreign trade is down by 35%, and inflation reached 66% in July, cranking up the pain felt by the civilian population.
But efforts to create the "greatest coordinated economic isolation in the history of the world," as Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent described it, have faced resistance, with Iran's major trading partners such as China and Pakistan refusing to cut ties.
"Six months of US bombing and naval blockade have produced no US victory, so the plan now is to starve Iran into capitulation," wrote Columbia University professor Jeffrey Sachs and UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network adviser Sybil Fares on Monday for Al Jazeera. "The new approach is illegal, cruel, and will fail for several reasons."
"To begin with, there is the historical record. Economic sanctions do not bring down governments determined to survive them. Yes, sanctions can impoverish populations, empower the security services that control smuggling, and hand the targeted nation a rallying point built on US malice," Sachs and Fares wrote.
They added that at a time when Iran's restrictions on travel through the Strait of Hormuz have spiked oil prices and sent shocks through the global economy, there is little incentive for the world to cut off Iran's oil exports as well.
"The US proposes to deepen a stagflationary shock already being borne by Europe, Japan, and its other allies, and orders those countries to enforce sanctions that will throttle their economies," they wrote.
And due to Trump's erratic policy, disregard for the United Nations Charter in launching a war of aggression, and the demonstration that his assurances are "unreliable," Sachs and Fares noted that countries are increasingly reaching agreements that rely less on US military guarantees and dollar-based trade.
"Pride goeth before the fall, and no government today is more arrogant than the US under Trump and his enforcer, Bessent," they wrote. "Governments around the world will not follow the US blindly into disaster."
Jayapal and Wyden Demand Probe of 'Unlimited Surveillance' and Subpoena Abuses by Trump Agencies
Agencies have used their subpoena power "to surveil, intimidate, and suppress the free speech of ordinary citizens and even the free press," said the Democrats.
Under the Trump administration, said Rep. Pramila Jayapal and Sen. Ron Wyden this week, federal agencies' use of subpoena power to surveil Americans has become "institutionalized" in what the two Democrats called "brazen abuses of authority."
Jayapal (Wash.) and Wyden (Ore.) wrote to US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts and the acting comptroller general of the Government Accountability Office (GAO), Orice Brown, regarding what they called federal agencies’ decades-long practice of attempting "to coerce indefinite silence from private companies that receive subpoenas for customer information."
While federal agencies have the congressionally vested authority to serve companies and service providers with administrative subpoeanas when they are seeking information about the provider's customer or client, the recipient generally maintains the "First Amendment right to notify their customers of the demand, allowing the actual targets of the subpoenas the opportunity to assert their own legal rights or challenge the demand in court," wrote Jayapal and Wyden.
If secrecy is required in a specific case, the agency can apply to a court for a time-limited nondisclosure order, but in the vast majority of cases, the lawmakers said in a statement, "the agencies may not gag recipients of subpoenas."
That appears to have changed under the Trump administration.
Wyden and Jayapal pointed to one incident from July 8, 2025, when Harvard University received three immigration subpoeanas from US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) regarding international students, which contained "boilerplate requests for silence."'
"The absurdity of this secrecy demand was demonstrated the very next day, when the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a press release celebrating the very enforcement action it had just directed Harvard to keep secret," wrote the lawmakers.
Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), which operates under ICE, has summons authority only for records relating to customs issues such as illegal imports or unpaid customs dues.
However, HSI has used its subpoena power "to surveil, intimidate, and suppress the free speech of ordinary citizens and even the free press"—in one case trying to reveal the identity of an anonymous Instagram user who had criticized and publicized ICE operations, according to the lawmakers.
Earlier this week, The Guardian reported that HSI had used the subpoenas to secretly obtain six months' worth of phone records for Georgia Fort, a Minneapolis-based journalist who, along with former CNN anchor Don Lemon, was arrested in January for covering an anti-ICE protest at a church.
While the secrecy demands that come with subpoenas "carry no force of law," said the lawmakers, "their coercive effect is extremely successful. This leaves customers entirely in the dark about government incursions into their personal data."
Jayapal and Wyden noted that federal agencies were demanding secrecy from subpoenaed companies and third parties for decades before President Donald Trump took office.
For over four decades, they said, the Department of Justice (DOJ) "has treated extra-legal gag requests as standard operating procedure,
regularly instructing the recipients of grand jury subpoenas not to disclose the government's demands."
"Given the severe, asymmetric power dynamics between federal law enforcement and civilian businesses—particularly when the subpoena recipient is a business operating within a highly regulated industry—many corporate legal departments will naturally read an official prosecutorial 'request' for silence as an implied command, choosing compliance over risking scrutiny from federal regulators," wrote Wyden and Jayapal. "This coercive silence is particularly insidious because it targets corporate policies intended to protect consumers. For nearly every American industry, including telecommunications, technology, and healthcare, Congress has neither required nor prohibited notice of subpoenas. Absent a court order or statute saying otherwise, notice to customers is a protected exercise of free speech that furthers government transparency and customer privacy."
The lawmakers called on the GAO to conduct a comprehensive audit of the DOJ and DHS as well as the agencies they oversee regarding their use of gag requests in subpoenas.
Such an audit would "help ensure that agencies do not abuse their subpoena authorities at the expense of privacy and free speech rights," said Jayapal and Wyden.
Trump Commerce Secretary Once Said Data Centers ‘Suck Water,’ Now Scoffs That Such Concerns Are Just ‘Propaganda’
"Data centers don't use water," laughed Howard Lutnick during an interview. In fact, across seven states, they rely on about 3.4 trillion gallons of it per year.
President Donald Trump's commerce secretary, Howard Lutnick, told a brazen lie on Wednesday while trying to defend the administration's support for rapid data center expansion amid growing public backlash from voters concerned about their extreme electricity and water use.
Asked on CNBC's "SquawkBox" about how politicians in both parties were responding to voter outrage, Lutnick laughed the concerns off.
"One of my favorite things is when people talk about data centers using water," Lutnick chuckled. "The number one product in America that uses water is cattle."
"I mean, data centers don't use water," Lutnick continued. "This is propaganda by our adversaries to try to slow us down."
Lutnick is correct that beef cattle production—which uses about 6 trillion gallons per year, according to the US Department of Agriculture—involves much greater amounts of water consumption than data centers.
But the contention that data centers "don't use water" is egregiously false. A report out Tuesday from the Pacific Institute, a nonprofit water policy research organization, found that data centers in the US directly use anywhere from 270 to 3.9 million gallons of water per day.
About 74% of that water, which is withdrawn from local sources near the data center, is consumed rather than returned to the same watershed, the report found.
The Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory estimated that in 2023, US data centers directly consumed about 17 billion gallons of water. Since then, data center capacity in the US has more than doubled, according to the commercial real estate firm CBRE.
Water directly consumed by data centers also only represents a fraction of their overall demand. Most of the water being used is not directly pumped into the centers to cool servers, but is used for the power generation that supplies the centers.
A report out last month from the corporate sustainability organization Ceres found that across the seven US states that host about half of all US data centers—Virginia, Texas, California, Illinois, Georgia, Ohio, and Arizona—the facilities depend on 3.4 trillion gallons of freshwater for electricity generation per year.
Lutnick's comparison of national water use between data centers and cattle farming also overlooks that the effects are often concentrated heavily in the areas where data centers are located.
In Newton County, Georgia, for instance, families told The New York Times that shortly after Meta broke ground on a $750 million data center project in 2018, their taps began to run dry, and water rates soared. According to Meta's environmental data, the center withdrew about 146 megaliters, or 38.6 million gallons, of water in 2024.
In Fayette County, Georgia, residents complained of low water pressure only to find that a QTS data center had covertly used about 29 million gallons of water without paying for it, far exceeding the amount agreed upon during the planning process. The company was ultimately required to pay back nearly $150,000.
In New Carlisle, Indiana, about a dozen residents reported that their wells had gone dry during the construction of Amazon Web Services' massive data center campus. One resident told the Indy Star that she'd gone 18 months without running water and had to bathe using bottled water from the store.
Lutnick's claim doesn't just contradict the facts, but his own statements from just over a year ago on Fox News, as MeidasTouch senior digital editor Acyn Torabi noted.
Attempting to promote data centers as a vehicle for job growth, the secretary emphasized that "these AI things suck water" and that they will "need a plumber."
The Trump administration has made the rapid expansion of data centers central to its "AI Action Plan." But Trump and his team have struggled to sell the vision to voters, including in their own party.
A national survey by the Annenberg Public Policy Center last month found that 61% of voters oppose the construction of new data centers in their area. That included 69% of Democrats, but also 54% of Republicans, and 53% of independents.
Critics described Lutnick's dismissive remarks about voters' concerns as a sign of how out of touch the administration was with the public on this issue and how much their data center PR push is failing.
Rep. Seth Magaziner (D-RI) said it showed that "our government is being run by morons."
'At a Breaking Point': Survey Shows Teachers Working Second Jobs, Spending Hundreds on Supplies
"They are battling education funding cuts, out-of-control Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, limitations on what they can say, much less teach, and an affordability crisis," said one union leader.
As the academic year kicks off, survey results released Wednesday by the second-largest teachers union in the United States show how educators are struggling because of underinvestment in schools and high prices under a Republican-controlled White House and Congress.
In the lead-up to classes resuming, Grow Progress last month surveyed 2,112 American Federation of Teachers (AFT) members who teach kindergarten through 12th grade about spending, stress, President Donald Trump's policies, and more.
The pollsters found that a majority of respondents anticipate spending at least $100 to $600 on supplies for their classrooms without being reimbursed. Over a quarter said that school funding issues shift costs to teachers, and supply prices keep rising.
While 61% said they are buying basic supplies, that's not all that teachers are shopping for this year. Nearly a third are spending on food, hygiene, and student care items, and around a quarter are purchasing specialized tools and accessibility supports as well as items for classroom setup, organization, and decor. Roughly a fifth are buying books and rewards for students.
Half of the teachers surveyed said they anticipate needing to buy food for their students at some point during this school year.
Over three-quarters of them reported seeing negative impacts of the Trump administration's policies in their schools and communities, with 61% selecting "very negative." They pointed to funding cuts and privatization of schooling, immigration enforcement that "traumatizes students and families," rising costs, vulnerable students losing support and protection, political pressure that restricts teaching and inclusion, and issues with bigotry and hostility.
Gasoline prices have stayed at record highs lately thanks to Trump's illegal war on Iran, which has responded by restricting traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, a key trade route. Just 15% of teachers said their commute will cost about the same this year, compared with 36% who expect it to be "a little more" and 47% worried it will be "much more."
A plurality—48%—blamed Trump and Republicans specifically for "the rising costs of groceries, gas, and other goods," while 28% pointed to government policies and leadership, 18% said tariffs and global instability, and 11% cited corporate greed and profiteering.
Prices for everything are climbing while the national debt races past $40 trillion. The bottom line? The current economy is not working for hardworking Americans. www.nytimes.com/2026/08/29/u...
[image or embed]
— AFT (@aft.org) September 2, 2026 at 9:45 AM
Asked to rank their stress level on a 1-10 scale, with 10 being extremely stressed, 62% selected somewhere in the 7-10 range.
Almost a third of teachers said they were somewhat or very likely to leave the profession in the next year. While over half of all respondents said they can't afford to lose their salary, pension, and benefits, and a quarter pointed to their love for teaching and students, nearly a fifth said the stress and workload make the job unsustainable.
"Teachers are at a breaking point," said AFT president Randi Weingarten said in a statement. "Many work more than one job to make ends meet, and they still dig into their pockets each year for basic classroom supplies, from books to art materials and even food for their students."
"They are battling education funding cuts, out-of-control Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, limitations on what they can say, much less teach, and an affordability crisis that's making it even harder for working families to get by, let alone get ahead," she emphasized. "No wonder they're stressed and talking about leaving the profession. All of this is taking its toll."
The survey results followed a report released late last month by the Center for Economic and Policy Research and the Economic Policy Institute that suggests leaving the field could lead to a pay boost. Sylvia Allegretto, a senior economist at CEPR and research associate at EPI, found that "in 2025, the teacher pay penalty stood at an estimated 25.2%—meaning teachers earned about a quarter less than comparable college graduates in other professions."
"Inflation-adjusted weekly wages for public school teachers fell 6.2% over the last three decades, while wages for other college graduates rose 28.8% over the same period," according to the report. "Teachers typically receive better benefits packages than other professionals, but after accounting for the difference in benefits, teachers' total compensation penalty was 14.5% in 2025."
Allegretto said in a statement that "the decades-long teacher pay penalty has taken a heavy toll on public education. Yet, policymakers have failed to make the needed investments to reverse course. That failure is especially troubling in a country as wealthy as the United States, with more than enough resources for its public schools to be the envy of the world."
It's not just teachers who are contending with soaring costs as school resumes; parents and students are also facing high prices for academic supplies and other essentials, including food, fuel, healthcare, and housing, due to the Iran War, Trump's tariffs, and GOP cuts to key programs.
With the midterm elections just two months away, Senate Democrats on Wednesday released a roundup of recent reporting on how families are struggling with back-to-school season, and said that "as Trump continues to claim affordability is a 'hoax' and a 'con job,' Americans are feeling the strain of Trump's policies on their pocketbooks."
"Headlines from across the country this summer lay bare Trump's cost-of-living crisis as families get ready to send their kids back to school," Senate Democrats stressed. "Parents are worried about the cost of school supplies and their kids' lunches, gas prices are at an all-time high for August, and families' vacations had to be cut short as rising inflation and the cost of airfare hit wallets."
"Trump's attempts to pass the buck belie Americans' reality: His illegal war in Iran, his tariffs, and the rest of Republicans' failed economic policies have made life unaffordable for families nationwide," they added. "Because of President Trump and Republicans' broken promises, working families across the country are now paying more but getting less—and they're fed up."
Voters in Missouri City Overwhelmingly Vote to Recall Councilman Who Approved Data Center
"It’s so sad what’s happened in our city, to see people being robbed of what they thought they had," said one data center opponent.
Residents in Independence, Missouri on Tuesday voted overwhelmingly to recall a city councilman—apparently over his vote to approve tax incentives for an artificial intelligence data center in the community.
In total, 68% of voters in the city's District 1 voted to recall Councilman John Perkins, with just 32% voting to let him stay in office.
According to KMBC News 9, Perkins had originally been elected to serve through June 2028, but he will now be forced to step down as soon as the results of the Tuesday election are certified.
The election marked the first time in Independence's history that a councilperson has been successfully recalled.
In an interview with Spectrum News Kansas City, Perkins expressed no regrets about his decision to approve the data center even though it led to him getting soundly rejected by voters.
"I still have a 40-hour-a-week job, I cut meat for Price Chopper," Perkins explained. "I've laid some really good foundation, so it was time to pass the baton."
The recall election of an Independence councilman is official: John Perkins of the city's first district is out. 68% of voters recalled Perkins. This ends a five-month long effort to remove him from office after he passed tax abatements for an AI data center. pic.twitter.com/fpeEd6fAhj
— Spectrum News Kansas City (@SpectrumNewsKC) September 2, 2026
Perkins was targeted by the recall campaign after he was one of five council members who voted to approve a $150 billion Nebius AI data center that is projected to take up 2.25 million square feet of land in the city.
Two other council members, Bridget McCandless and Jared Fears, were also voted out of office in April after voting in favor of tax incentives for the project.
Independence resident Elisa Breitenbach, an opponent of the planned data center, grew emotional during an interview with Fox 4 Kansas City when explaining her support for the recall campaign.
"It’s so sad what’s happened in our city," said Breitenbach, "to see people being robbed of what they thought they had."
Perkins' recall is just the latest sign of a nationwide backlash against AI data centers, which have been criticized for being major sources of pollution and for raising local utility bills by consuming so much power.
A poll conducted by Embold Research and published by Heatmap Pro last month showed that 75% of Americans now oppose building AI data centers in their area, including 61% registering strong opposition.
Data centers do have an ally in President Donald Trump, however, as he warned Americans this week that their communities will "end up being backwards and poor" if they reject the power-hungry AI facilities.
But McKenna Cobb, a resident who led the recall effort, said people in Independence had spoken loud and clear about their views on the data center—and were ignored by Perkins and other council members.
"There are hours of public testimony," she told KMBC News, "and they still voted in favor of billions of dollars in tax incentives."
US Condemned for 'War Crimes' After Bombing of Wedding Party in Iran
The spokesperson for Iran's foreign ministry said the attack, which killed at least five people, including two children, was "part of America’s desperate struggle to conceal its failure."
At least five people are dead, and 68 more are reportedly injured after the US bombed a wedding party in Southern Iran on Tuesday, an act that Iranian officials called a "war crime."
The Iranian embassy posted a video from a hospital showing several people, including what appears to be a young child, being treated for severe wounds from the attack, which occurred at a private home in the city of Kuhestak, Hormozgan province.
At least two children—4-year-old Amir-Ali Karimi and 16-year-old Mohammad Mollahi—were killed, according to Iranian officials.
"Bombing wedding parties used to be a trademark of the US, while Trump was known for targeting schools and hospitals," the social media account for Iran's embassy in Austria said Wednesday morning. "Now, however, Trump’s obsession with war crimes has gone to another level."
The bombing of the wedding party was part of a barrage of strikes launched by US Central Command (CENTCOM) on Tuesday across Iran, which it said targeted Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) sites in response to Iranian attacks on ships and US personnel near the Strait of Hormuz.
CENTCOM spokesperson Capt. Tim Hawkins told the Associated Press that the command was aware of reported civilian casualties, but noted that the reports “originated from Iranian state media.” He said, "The US military never targets civilians, unlike the IRGC." He did not specify what military purpose the attack on the wedding ceremony served.
The Iranian Red Crescent, which released a video showing the destroyed house, called for the International Criminal Court (ICC) to investigate the attack.
"Given the reported civilian character of the location as the venue of a family wedding ceremony, as well as the presence of civilians at the site, the incident raises serious concerns under international humanitarian law and warrants an independent, impartial, thorough, and effective investigation,” the Red Crescent said in a letter to the ICC's Office of the Prosecutor.
It added that if investigators determine there was no lawful military objective for the strike or that civilian harm was knowingly excessive, the attack could amount to a war crime by the individuals involved.
Yemen’s National Human Rights Commission likewise condemned the attack as "a full-fledged war crime and a blatant violation of international humanitarian law and the four Geneva Conventions," which forbid the targeting of civilians and safe residential areas.
Iranian media reported that the US had also hit several other civilian sites along the southern coast on Tuesday, including a civilian airport. In total, at least 18 people were killed on Tuesday, according to the state broadcaster IRIB.
Tuesday's attacks came after Trump issued more threats of civilizational destruction against Iran.
"If the failed Nation of Iran retaliates for this very justified attack, they will be hit again at a much harder and higher level, but it will not be the biggest attack of them all, that is waiting in the wings and, when it is over, there will be very little left of the Islamic Republic of Iran!” he posted Tuesday on Truth Social.
Later on Tuesday night, he emphasized that if Iran retaliated, "they'll be no longer." He dismissed the idea of returning to negotiations with Iran, stating that "an agreement with them isn’t worth the paper it’s written on." Iran has said it wants to reopen talks with Trump if he agrees to abide by the terms of the memorandum of understanding he agreed to in June.
After attempting and largely failing to implement a global strategy of coordinated economic isolation, Trump returned to bombing Iran for the first time in a month this weekend.
Trita Parsi, the executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, remarked that the US had bombed the wedding "roughly ten days after the Trump administration claimed its new sanctions on Iran would make military action unnecessary."
Iran appears to have been undeterred by Trump's threats, with Esmaeil Baghaei, the spokesperson for Iran's Foreign Ministry, vowing that Tehran would "respond to these savage crimes with firmness."
He called the attacks part of a "catalog of atrocities" against Iran, including the US bombing of an elementary school that killed 150 people, mostly children, during the war's opening salvo on February 28.
The IRGC claimed on Wednesday that in retaliation for the wedding bombing, its forces launched strikes that killed US personnel and destroyed drones and military facilities at the Ali Al Salem Air Base in Kuwait. Iran also said it launched ballistic missiles at US bases in Bahrain, Jordan, and Iraq.
As of Wednesday morning, the US has not commented on the claim that US personnel were killed. Kuwait reported intercepting the drones and missiles but did not report any casualties, according to Al Jazeera.
Baghaei said the attack on the wedding ceremony was a "war crime" that was part of an "unlawful war of choice" and that the wedding party was "brutally bombed as part of America’s desperate struggle to conceal its failure."
He separately condemned nations that have remained silent in the face of other US attacks against Iranian civilians. The US-based Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA) reports that more than 1,700 civilians were killed during the war's initial stage, between the end of February and mid-April, at least 1,700 Iranian civilians were killed in US and Israeli attacks.
"More dangerous than the bomb itself is the normalization of bombing," Baghaei said. "And more dangerous than silence is the conversion of silence into legitimacy.”
'So Afraid of Working-Class People': Delia Ramirez Rips Supporters of 'Stupid' Anti-Socialism Resolution
"They're afraid to get honest about who they really work for here. Spoiler alert: It's not working people."
Rep. Delia Ramirez on Tuesday hit back at colleagues in the US House of Representatives who voted for a resolution condemning socialism "in all its forms."
During a speech on the House floor, Ramirez (D-Ill.) slammed the anti-socialism resolution, which passed with the support of eight Democrats joining all Republicans, as a meaningless distraction.
"Today my colleagues thought it was a good use of people's time... to come after a working people's platform and the people working to make that platform a reality," Ramirez said. "You know why? Because they're afraid to get honest about who they really work for here. Spoiler alert: It's not working people."
Whether it’s “socialism”, a Twitch streamer, working-class candidates, or immigrants, my colleagues always have a boogeyman to condemn… Why? They're afraid to be honest about who they really work for and spoiler alert: it's not working people.
I call on my colleagues to put… pic.twitter.com/r4k4KWZg2S
— Congresswoman Delia C. Ramirez (@repdeliaramirez) September 1, 2026
The Illinois Democrat rattled off a list of Republican policies that benefit big corporations and the wealthy at the expense of working people, including cuts to Medicaid and support for President Donald Trump's illegal war with Iran.
Ramirez then accused Republicans of pushing the resolution "because you're so afraid of working-class people coming into the next Congress" after the 2026 midterm elections.
"So let me be clear," she concluded. "Not only do I call on my colleagues to vote against this stupid resolution... but also to put this much energy into creating a world, a system that actually works for working people."
Ramirez was far from the only Democrat to rip the anti-socialism resolution.
Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) likewise condemned the "stupid resolution," which he said "ignores Americans who are more concerned about the cost of living than obsessing about socialism."
Rep. Valerie Foushee (D-NC) suggested that a better use of Congress' time would be to "condemn the 34-count felon in the White House, not a bunch of people who just want universal healthcare."
Darializa Avila Chevalier, the Democratic nominee for the US House seat in New York's 13th congressional district, slammed the eight Democrats who voted with Republicans to pass the resolution.
"Democrats love talking about a 'big tent,' but then they vote in line with Republicans hell-bent on destroying our democracy," she wrote. "This resolution was aimed squarely at democratic socialists like me."
'Testament to the Power of the Progressive Movement': Ed Markey Beats Seth Moulton in Landslide
One Markey supporter called his victory "a rejection of the idea that generational change has to come at the expense of bold, progressive leadership."
Progressive US Sen. Ed Markey, a champion of Medicare for All and the Green New Deal, decisively fended off a Democratic primary challenge from his right on Tuesday, defeating Rep. Seth Moulton by nearly 30 percentage points in a contest that focused heavily on the incumbent senator's age.
Markey, 80, and his supporters—including prominent young Democrats such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY)—rejected the notion that "generational change" necessarily means electing the youngest candidate in the race. Markey said in his victory speech Tuesday night that "generational change isn’t about compromising to do the small things better—it’s about fighting to do the big things best."
“Tonight is a testament to the power of the progressive movement,” Markey added. “It is a progressive movement fueled by young people, demanding more from their leaders, and it’s your voices that are the ones we need to hear right now.”
Moulton, a 47-year-old member of the conservative New Democrat Coalition, attempted to capture momentum that has propelled other younger candidates to victory over entrenched incumbents by making Markey's age and lengthy tenure in Congress—rather than his policy agenda—a central focus of Tuesday's contest. In a recent interview with MS NOW, Moulton removed ideology and policy from the equation completely, lumping Markey in with Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and late Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) as well as elderly Democrats such as former President Joe Biden.
The Democratic representative, who opposes Medicare for All and attacked Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) from the right during his ill-fated 2020 presidential bid, also falsely claimed in a campaign ad that he and Markey "want the same things."
Moulton's age-centric message failed, according to Markey's backers, because voters in Massachusetts and elsewhere are hungry for progressive politics, not just younger politicians.
"We don’t want younger politicians with older politics,” Tyler Hack, the 21-year-old executive director of the Christopher Street Project, a trans rights group, said at a rally for Markey over the weekend.
Joseph Geevarghese, executive director of Our Revolution, said in a statement that "tonight's victory isn't just a win for Ed Markey or for our progressive movement. It's a rejection of the idea that generational change has to come at the expense of bold, progressive leadership."
"Massachusetts voters understood the difference between changing the age of our leaders and changing the politics of our country," said Geevarghese. "Ed Markey has never settled for the moderate Democratic establishment or accepted the status quo simply because Washington said change was impossible. From staking his political capital on the Green New Deal, to fighting for Medicare for All, abolishing ICE, and taking on corporations and billionaires rigging our economy, Ed has consistently been willing to go where the Democratic Party needs to go—often before the rest of Washington gets there."
"That's the lesson from Massachusetts tonight," he added. "The future doesn't belong to the youngest politician in the room. It belongs to the people with the courage to fight for it."
Markey, who is heavily favored to win the general election in November, has said a new six-year Senate term would be his last.
JD Vance Says If His Work With Trump 'Leads to the End Times' That Is 'OK'
"Show this clip to anyone who says Iran is run by religious lunatics," responded one podcaster.
Shortly before US President Donald Trump on Tuesday spurred fresh fears that he'll use nuclear weapons in his illegal war on Iran, Vice President JD Vance told a Christian podcaster that he's fine with the administration's work leading to the end times.
"Do I think that we're in the end times? I don't know," Vance told 22-year-old podcaster Bryce Crawford nearly an hour into a lengthy video interview released Monday. While admitting his fascination with the theories, the VP said that "I think that it's probably bad for me, spiritually, to focus too much on it."
As The New Republic's Ellie Quinlan Houghtaling explained: "The Christian end times refer to the religion's interpretations of the final days of humanity. That's detailed in the Bible as a period involving widespread turmoil and deception (such as wars, earthquakes, and a false prophet), a seven-year stretch of unprecedented hardship known as the Great Tribulation that will end in Armageddon, the emergence of the Antichrist and a cadre of their followers who reject Christ's teachings, and a final judgment by God."
As Vance sat beside a propped-up edition of his new book on his religious journey, including his conversion to Catholicism, he said that "I think that there are... things about the world that make me feel like not shocked if the Antichrist was walking among us, but again, I try not to focus too much on it."
"One of the things that I think that Catholics are very focused on, that I think is very good for me, is this idea that... we don't know when God is coming, but we're commanded to try to, as much as possible, try to make the world the kind of world that God wants it to be," the vice president continued.
"While I wouldn't be shocked if we are living in the end times," he added, "what I'm trying to focus on is doing as much of God's work as possible right now, and if that leads to the end times, OK, and if that leads to, you know, us building a better world that thrives and survives for a very long time after I'm gone, that's great, too."
Those remarks—from a man expected to compete with figures such as Donald Trump Jr. and Secretary of State Marco Rubio for the GOP's 2028 presidential nomination, if the president doesn't try for an unconstitutional third term—were met with alarm.
Critics wrote that "this should concern us all" and wondered: "WTF does that mean? Is he OK with using nuclear weapons?"
Sharing a clip of Vance's comments on social media, Iranian-American writer Alex Shams noted that "these guys are trying to convince you Iran is ruled by a crazed messianic theocracy."
Podcaster and writer Katie Halper said, "Show this clip to anyone who says Iran is run by religious lunatics."
As Vance's video interview began circulating on Monday, over six months into the Iran War, a reporter in the Oval Office asked Trump if he's ruled out using a nuclear weapon against the Mideast country.
While suggesting he has ruled out nuclear war, Trump also said: "What a stupid question that is, actually. Here they are, they're totally defeated militarily, so now I defeat them, and now I should use a nuclear weapon on top of them?"
Just a day later, Trump triggered speculation that he'll pursue a nuclear attack. On Tuesday, while bombing alleged Iranian military targets, he wrote on his Truth Social platform, "If the failed Nation of Iran retaliates for this very justified attack, they will be hit again at a much harder and higher level, but it will not be the biggest attack of them all, that is waiting in the wings and, when it is over, there will be very little left of the Islamic Republic of Iran!"
'Declare a Worldwide Climate Emergency': Death Toll in Nepal-Tibet Floods Tops 1,000
"The glacial collapse and deluge," one scientist said, "was the structural failure of a mountain itself, nature's latest commentary on the deadly consequences of human-caused planetary warming."
With more than 1,000 people dead as of Tuesday and rescue teams still searching for the thousands missing after a glacial collapse in the Himalayas that created a flooding crisis in Nepal and Tibet last week, campaigners, politicians, and scientists reiterated the need for global climate action.
China confirmed at least 16 people are dead and 546 are missing in Tibet, including 261 foreign nationals, while Nepal reported 1,003 deaths and 3,916 more unaccounted for, including 583 foreigners, according to The Associated Press. Among those missing in Nepal are about 900 workers from a dozen hydropower projects, 500 of whom are believed to be trapped in tunnels.
Thousands have been rescued since last Wednesday, and as the AP noted, "authorities in Nepal have been burying bodies in temporary graves until they can be identified. They are preserving DNA samples, photographing distinguishing facial features, and recording other identifying details. Each body is assigned a reference number to help families identify and claim the remains later."
Nepali Prime Minister Balendra Shah has emphasized in recent days that "the flood in the Bhote Koshi River in Rasuwa was not an ordinary flood," and "it is now time for us to strongly raise with the international community the issue of the disasters we are experiencing as a result of climate change."
In a Monday interview with The New York Times, Maheshwar Dhakal from Nepal's Ministry of Agriculture, Forest, and Environment also linked the disaster to human-caused climate change and said that "those who have contributed the least are suffering the most."
Dhakal estimated the recovery cost at $5 billion, and shared his government's letter to the United Nations' fund for such disasters, which says in part that "early action in Nepal would send a signal that the fund is capable of responding with humanity, speed, flexibility, and solidarity when climate-vulnerable countries face losses and damages beyond their capacity to address alone."
Declare a world-wide #climate emergency www.nytimes.com/live/2026/08... #nepal #floods #flooding
[image or embed]
— Nikolas Kozloff (@nikolaskozloff.bsky.social) August 27, 2026 at 4:29 PM
Stefan Rahmstorf, a scientist at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany, highlighted on social media Tuesday that experts have long warned about the kinds of disasters seen in the Himalayas over the past week.
"Why are climate scientists not surprised about mountains being destabilized by glacier melt and permafrost thaw?" he asked. "Because they have long predicted that as a result of global heating."
Bill McGuire, professor emeritus of geophysical and climate hazards at University College London, wrote in a Tuesday column for The Guardian that "the increasingly temperamental behavior of the Earth beneath our feet teaches us that global heating is all-pervasive. It will intrude into every aspect of our lives and livelihoods, and leave no part of the planet untouched. As the world processes the horror of the events in Nepal and Tibet, it is a lesson that we ignore at our peril."
Also writing for the British newspaper on Tuesday, Michael Mann, a renowned climate scientist at the University of Pennsylvania, similarly stressed that "the glacial collapse and deluge in Nepal and Tibet was not a freak weather event; it was the structural failure of a mountain itself, nature's latest commentary on the deadly consequences of human-caused planetary warming. And it was the exclamation point on a summer of extremes, illustrating with a sole unnatural disaster the apocalyptic future that lies in store if we fail to take dramatic climate action."
Mann pointed to the lack of such action in the United States—the world's largest historical climate polluter—where President Donald Trump openly courted Big Oil on the campaign trail and has served the climate-wrecking fossil fuel industry's interests since returning to the White House last year, from declaring a national energy emergency and ditching the Paris Agreement, again, to waging a war on renewable power projects.
"Trump and enabling congressional Republicans continue to double down on policies favoring fossil fuel extraction and dependence at the very time we need to be moving even more quickly away from fossil fuels toward clean energy," Mann wrote. "These extreme events underscore the urgency of taking action now, and—while there are many things we can do—one of the greatest opportunities Americans will have to affect climate policy is the upcoming midterm election. You can make support for urgent and dramatic climate action a litmus test issue as you go to the voting booth."
Highlighting that dozens of Americans are among those still missing in Asia, the US-based watchdog group Public Citizen argued on social media Tuesday that "this isn't just a climate change catastrophe. It's a crime. For decades, Big Oil knew fossil fuels would lead to disasters like this. Big Oil must be held accountable."
In 2024, the group published a legal memo detailing how local or state prosecutors in the United States could bring criminal charges against Big Oil for deaths from extreme heat made more likely by the fossil fuel-driven climate emergency. With rapidly advancing attribution science, the approach could also be applied to other disasters linked to the human-caused crisis.
Greenpeace International also demanded accountability for the industry on Tuesday, saying that "it makes us SICK to think of people losing their homes, their livelihoods, and the people they love to fires, floods, and storms, while fossil fuel companies make billions. A FRACTION of those obscene profits could help communities rebuild. MAKE POLLUTERS PAY."
"Make oil, coal, and gas corporations pay their fair share for the damage they cause," the advocacy group added. "Introduce new taxes or fines on them to help communities at home and around the world rebuild from climate disasters and invest in climate solutions."
Federal Panel Halts What Would Be First Data Center on Public Lands
"The Trump administration is pulling out all the stops to let tech companies build massive data centers on our public lands. This tremendous victory proves communities have the power to fight back and win.”
Environmental groups are celebrating on Tuesday after a federal panel halted construction of what would be the first artificial intelligence data center to be built on US public lands.
The Interior Board of Land Appeals, an appellate body within the US Department of the Interior, put a temporary stay on the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) approval of the proposed 80-acre Townsite Data Center near Boulder City, Nevada, which environmental groups warned would jack up electricity demand and water usage and threaten local species.
The board sided with the Sierra Club, the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), and the local government of Boulder City, which argued that the BLM had not conducted the legally required review of the plan's environmental impacts.
The BLM had approved the site based on a review of a proposed solar power plant, but had not reevaluated the impacts of a data center.
The board said that the environmental groups were "likely to prevail" in their case that the BLM had acted illegally "because the two projects are not ‘substantially the same.’” It also ruled that continuing the project without a proper review was likely to cause "irreparable harm" to the landscape—including soil disruption, habitat loss for species like the Mojave desert tortoise, and construction activities that pollute the air.
The temporary stay blocks the data center project from continuing while the board considers the environmental groups' appeal.
While it was not a final ruling on whether the project will be built at all, Patrick Donnelly, Great Basin director at the CBD, said the group was "thrilled that this data center has been stopped dead in its tracks."
Townsite has been described as a test case as BLM considers approving other data center proposals on federal lands, including in Nevada, where 80% of the land is federally managed.
Building data centers on federal lands is a major priority of the Trump administration's "AI Action Plan," which was published by the White House in 2025 and directs US agencies to identify public lands “well-situated for large-scale data centers."
Under the plan, the US Department of Energy announced in July 2025 that it had identified at least four other sites around the country for potential development, including the Idaho National Laboratory, the Oak Ridge Reservation in Tennessee, the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant in Kentucky, and the Savannah River Site in South Carolina.
Donnelly said Tuesday's ruling had shown BLM would not be able to approve these and other sites without conducting the appropriate environmental reviews.
"The Trump administration is pulling out all the stops to let tech companies build massive data centers on our public lands," he said. "This tremendous victory proves communities have the power to fight back and win.”
Boulder City is one of many locales around the country where plans for large data centers have received public backlash. For months, the project faced protests at City Hall from residents who raised concerns about energy and water use, light pollution, and impacts on the local desert habitat.
Public anger ultimately led the Boulder City Planning Commission to turn against the project, voting in May against adding data centers to the city's land management process. To bypass the city, BLM approved the same project on adjacent federal lands. Boulder City responded by joining environmental groups' appeal against the project.
“The BLM essentially, sweepingly, approved a new land use without following processes in federal law, which include a meaningful engagement process with the city," City Attorney Brittany Walker told the Nevada Current in July, after the City Council unanimously voted to appeal.
Olivia Tanager, director of the Sierra Club Toiyabe chapter, called Tuesday's ruling "a victory for democracy, public participation, and the principle that our public lands should serve the public."
"The people of Boulder City have made clear that they do not want a data center on public lands, and this ruling gives their voices the weight they deserve," she said. "Data centers do not belong on public lands, and we will continue to fight unfettered data center development.”
Townsite is just one of several data center proposals being considered on federal lands in Nevada. In June, BLM officials told local leaders that it had received four applications for data centers on public lands around Silver Springs, a small community east of Reno in Lyon County, which has eight facilities planned in total, according to the US Data Center Map.
The sudden explosion of data center planning in the area has led many residents to push for a moratorium on new data center approvals.
Brynn deLorimier, a Boulder City resident who joined the appeal, said she hopes her city's victory will help to protect neighboring communities from unaccountable data center growth.
“We love our community and our desert, and we’re so grateful to our friends and neighbors for working hard to protect both,” she said. “We’re also grateful to the Interior Board of Land Appeals for recognizing that this case matters far beyond Boulder City and could set an important precedent for public lands in Nevada and across the country.”