5
#000000
#FFFFFF
LIVE COVERAGE
Opinion
Climate
Economy
Politics
Rights & Justice
War & Peace
Further
Well Done, America
Well that was a night. The glad spectacle of a newly sentient America tottering back to its capacious ideals was dubbed Orange Crush, Bluenami, a political earthquake, a wily tweak to Hegseth's coveted public execution and "one of the great acts of defiance in American history." It was both landslide too big to rig or stop and "extinction-level" rout. Above all, it was a thunderous rejection of fear, greed, lies, cruelty, war-mongering, authoritarianism. Tell your kids, urged Abdul El-Sayed, "The bad guys lost."
Who knew, pundits marveled: Turns out if you keep lying, stealing, abusing children, terrorizing, kidnapping, assaulting neighbors, shooting people in the street, making it impossible to get food, gas, health care or education while gloating about it and lining your fat pockets, everyone hates you. So it was that a "Trump Reckoning" and GOP "Armageddon" beyond even their worst doomsday scenarios arrived wherein Democrats swept "nearly every race that matters” as Americans en masse embraced all the shithole, lunatic, transgender, anti-Semitic, dog-eating, Medicare-wanting Muslim Brotherhood communists they'd been so helpfully warned about, alas, in vain.
This, of course, despite MAGA's best/worst efforts to re-draw districts, shutter polling places, strong-arm election officials, browbeat brown and black voters, pre-litigate election results they couldn't buy, and launch 1,000 DOJ "polling monitors" into all 50 states in hopes of targeting vulnerable minority districts. And yet, noted Garrett Graff, nothing untoward happened. Instead, voters "gave America another chance." Millions stood up, showed up, voted early, refused to bend the knee or be silenced. Graff said a friend wrote from deep-red Mississippi, where Democrat Scott Colom still had a stunning, razor-thin lead. "My flabbers are gasted,” she wrote. “Be on the lookout for pigs in the sky."
"So much history was made last night," Graff added, much of it shaped by both the 250 years and then Trump's dark reign of white supremacist politics. The startling result: The most diverse set of newly elected lawmakers the country has ever seen, with one historian writing Dems are winning races "they haven’t won since they were the white supremacist party.” An Atlanta Journal-Constitution story begins, "In 1860, an enslaved man named Sheppard Peek was listed among the possessions of William Peek, a white man in Crawfordville"; Sheppard's value was placed at $1,400. In Georgia on Tuesday, his great-great-granddaughter, Keisha Lance Bottoms, was elected the first Black female governor in the country.
Bottoms is just one of many historic firsts. Xavier Becerra, the son of Mexican immigrants, became California's first elected Latino governor. Deb Haaland became New Mexico’s first Native governor. Wisconsin and Nevada elected their first Black governors. There are three other first women governors. New Hampshire's Chris Pappas will become the first out gay man in the Senate. A trans woman won a House seat in...Alabama. Colorado elected its first Gen Z woman; she will be one of a record 100 women to serve simultaneously in the House. Democrats gained full control of a record six state governments, Southern voters swung 20 points to Dems, Jon Ossoff was easily re-elected on a platform, essentially, of "I don't like Nazis." Virginia ended Jim Crow after 124 years, and enshrined abortion in its constitution. Nancy LaCore, a former Navy admiral fired by Hegseth, flipped Nancy Mace's seat in South Carolina. The GOP lost all four of its gerrymandered districts in Florida. Egyptian-born Adam Hamaway, 57, will be the first Muslim elected to the House from New Jersey. A Rutgers-educated doctor, he served 8 years as a combat surgeon in the US Army before starting private practice in Princeton; he also volunteered in Gaza, Syria, Lebanon, Sudan, Jordan.
Beating back a grotesquely Islamophobic campaign, Michigan's Dr. Abdul El-Sayed will become the first Muslim in the Senate.In his victory speech, he thanked "everyone who sent a dollar, made a call, posted a story and most importantly gave us your stake in democracy. You took a chance on the unlikeliest of candidates." Summoning "all the kids who watched and the parents who struggled to explain why the president openly mocked someone for their name or how they pray, let them (know) the bad guys lost...We deserve an America big enough for all our kids - let's go build it." He also cited the "delicious irony" that JD, whose "view of America is small, like him," is constitutionally obligated to swear him in come January.
In another sweet spot and longtime pipe dream, Talarico took back Texas from the scandal-smeared Paxton in "not just a tsunami, but a bloodbath." Adding to the schadenfreude was the upset win by Gina Hinojosa, the state's first Latina governor-elect, over monstrous Greg Abbott. In a stunning twist, Dems also won every statewide office down to railroad commissioner, along with four Supreme Court seats; the wins prompted an explosion of noisy joy in Austin that "sounded like an Eastern European city that just overthrew a dictator.” The cherry on top: Texas' new Dem Attorney General, who campaigned on investigating Elon Musk after he moved his business there to escape California woke, can now prosecute him for state level crimes without any DOJ interference.
Musk, who spent half a billion dollars nationwide and lost every race he tried to buy, is among MAGA fat cats, tech bros and grifters who'll likely be targeted by California's (easily reelected) Robert Garcia, set to chair the House Oversight Committee. His blunt message: "Lawyer up." Many others also feel "the only way we want Dems to reach across the aisle is with a subpoena." With an "accountability bill" ready, Dean Blundell argues, "A LOT of people need to go to jail" - Hegseth, the Trump family crypto empire, the DOJ hacks who covered up Epstein crimes, the Rapist-In-Chief, the sadists of ICE once it's been "torn down to the studs." Scores of voters also demanded justice for their victims Renee Good, Alex Pretti and Lorenzo Salgado Araujo by putting "I Voted" stickers on their memorials: "They were on the ballot."
Over at the presumably ketchup-encrusted White House, Trump remains in his own daft fantasy world, the "lamest of lame ducks." He burbles he "looks forward to working with" the trans jihadists he says are destroying America, but he'll veto everything. He's awash in his "magnificent" ballroom. He insists if he was on the ballot "we'd have won IN A LANDSLIDE," but of course he was and CNN's John King is happy to name all the places he told voters to pretend he was: "They did. They'd had enough." Even his cultists - and ex-cultists - blame him: "The reason isn't them, it's you. You fucked us. We chose Hitler with Down Syndrome, and we lost." Online, meanwhile, the White House posted a desperate "PSA: Trump Is Still Your President." Like we could forget.
Still, the seismic shift tentatively feels like a new dawn, a path toward redemption, a sliver of hope, the long-ago thing with feathers we can barely remember. Candidates, volunteers, organizers, lawyers stepped up, and vast numbers of Americans showed up to support them. The mood was buoyant. Some said they wished Mitch McConnell was alive to see the Senate results. The Borowitz Report said Mike Johnson begged God to "rapture him up" immediately; tearfully, he said that as a loyal Republican he couldn't bear to be in a "minority" because he hates 'em all. Another report said a bitter Elon Musk put Ken Paxton on eBay; no buyers yet. Also, tragically, two sources say cracks and peeling have again emerged in the Reflecting Pool, but MAGA is on it. Said an Interior spokesperson, "The Reflecting Pool has never looked this beautiful, and it's all thanks to President Donald J. Trump."
Update: Can you say learned nothing, knows nothing, never will, truly astoundingly losing it? On Thursday, our lame-duck loser displayed his stellar grasp on political priorities - what election? - by signing an entirely meaningless order proclaiming nobody can de-Cheesecake Factory his tacky abomination of a golden whorehouse of an Oval Office, 'cause then he'd be some pissed and don't forget we won World War One. Beyond the surreal looking-glass,
- YouTube www.youtube.com
- YouTube www.youtube.com
Nov 05, 2026
SEE ALL
News
Ahead of Next Climate Summit, COP30 Host Brazil Unveils 'Critical Handbook for Ending the Fossil Fuel Era'
With the next United Nations Climate Change Conference less than a week away, greenhouse gas levels soaring, and a temporary overshoot of the Paris Agreement's 1.5°C goal now inevitable, Brazil, the host of last year's COP30, on Tuesday published a pair of roadmaps for transitioning away from planet-heating fossil fuels and tackling deforestation.
"We don't need more negotiations. What we need is for governments to start taking action," André Aranha Corrêa do Lago, the Brazilian diplomat who served as the president of COP30, told Reuters. "We need to completely change the way governments deal with climate change. To implement this, we need finance, infrastructure, and transportation ministers at the table."
In his foreword for the transition report, Corrêa do Lago explained that at the closing plenary in Belém last November, "and in the context of the COP being held in the Amazon, I committed to developing... roadmaps for implementing two outcomes of the First Global Stocktake, agreed by consensus at COP28 just two years earlier: (i) transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems in a just, orderly, and equitable manner; and (ii) enhancing efforts toward halting and reversing deforestation and forest degradation by 2030. With their publication, that commitment is fulfilled."
"Both transitions depend on finance," he stressed. "The two roadmaps are therefore presented alongside a third document, 'Implementing the Baku to Belém Roadmap to 1.3T,' which sets out how financing to developing countries for climate action can be scaled up from all public and private sources to at least US$1.3 trillion per year by 2035. Read together, the three documents describe what has to change and propose ways forward so that change can be financed and sustained."
After ending with what critics called "an empty deal," COP30 was condemned as a "catastrophic failure to take concrete action to implement a funded and fair fossil fuel phaseout," and there was some criticism of the new roadmaps for also not going far enough.
Greenpeace Brazil executive director Carolina Pasquali said in a statement that "this is a major effort by the COP30 presidency and a crucial step towards ensuring the COP28 decision to transition away from fossil fuels is fully implemented. As our climate races towards a 1.5°C overshoot, the roadmap encourages important measures but stops short of setting clear fossil fuel phaseout targets or calling for an immediate halt to the expansion of fossil fuels."
However, Pasquali praised the forests roadmap—launched in the aftermath of Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva's reelection victory over far-right candidate Flávio Bolsonaro—which she said "represents a major effort from the COP30 presidency and was launched with the credibility of a Brazilian government that has achieved the lowest deforestation rate in its history. The presidency has helped bring together, through multiple contributions and dialogues, a wide range of existing initiatives and views."
It remains slightly mad that governments have agreed to phase out fossil fuels from energy systems, but can't agree to even the principle that having a plan for doing so would be a good idea. www.businessgreen.com/news-analysi...
[image or embed]
— James Murray (@james-bg.bsky.social) November 3, 2026 at 11:34 AM
Despite some shortcomings, other climate campaigners welcomed the roadmaps—released as activists and world leaders alike prepare for COP31, which is scheduled to kick off Monday in Antalya, Türkiye.
"Brazil has offered a valuable blueprint for the global transition away from fossil fuels," said Oil Change International global policy lead Romain Ioualalen in a statement. "It recognizes there is no one-size-fits-all pathway, that all countries need to plan their transition now, and that equity and finance are critical to achieving fossil-free prosperity in many countries."
Like Corrêa do Lago, he emphasized that "now that we have a global roadmap, we need to see action. If all this process leads to is another series of dialogues, it will be a massive missed opportunity in an already closing window. Countries need to develop their own domestic roadmaps that plan their economic diversification away from fossil fuels using the guidance and tools provided by Brazil’s report."
"We also need to see the global Mutirão for the transition away from fossil fuels deliver key decisions that allow countries with strong economic and energy constraints to unlock their transition. The Second Global Stocktake in 2028 will be a critical opportunity to make that happen," Ioualalen continued.
"Delivering on this global roadmap for countries with deep financial constraints hinges on finance. But it does outline some finance tools that have a track record of failing, like debt swaps and derisking methods," he noted. "Enough public finance can be delivered to fund a fair fossil fuel phaseout as rich countries can unlock trillions every year through taxing polluters and extreme wealth, ending fossil fuel subsidies, and reforming unfair financial rules."
Ioualalen added that "one area of real concern is the suggestion that global action on reducing fossil fuel supply could wait until the 2030s. That would be a grave mistake, and a guarantee to further lock in fossil fuels and for a chaotic transition. Existing fossil fuel extraction projects already commit the world to emissions nearly seven times the remaining 1.5°C carbon budget. There is no time to pass the baton between supply and demand. Both need to be addressed now, through a fair, funded, and fast transition."
“The roadmaps are valuable but fall short of clearly indicating the pace of change needed by including no timeline or key benchmarks” ~Joeri Rogelj, professor of climate science and policy at Imperial College London.
[image or embed]
— Suzanne York (@suzanneyork.bsky.social) November 3, 2026 at 12:06 PM
Fanny Petitbon, a policy analyst at the international movement 350.org, similarly said that "this roadmap is a critical handbook for ending the fossil fuel era, which leaves governments with no excuse not to act. It offers every country a menu of policies to build its own plan to move away from coal, oil, and gas, whether it's a major producer, a big consumer, or an economy that depends on imports."
"Electrification is absolutely central to this transition, but it will only deliver if it is powered by renewable energy, matched by investment in modern grids, and brings clean, affordable energy to everyone," she highlighted. "We cannot swap one energy system for another while leaving the same communities behind."
Petitbon argued that "the roadmap must not end up as just another report gathering dust on a shelf. France, the Netherlands, and Germany have already published national roadmaps, but they fall short of the ambition the climate crisis demands and of their responsibility in it. Pacific Island states plan to deliver a regional strategy to break free from fossil fuels. So the question for all major emitters is simple: When will you submit your roadmap?"
"Rich nations must also mobilize public finance to support developing countries with their transition and ensure that the fossil fuel industry cannot continue to profit from a crisis that is costing people their livelihoods, health, and homes," she asserted. "COP31 must be the moment when governments take this work forward, with clear commitments, timelines, and the resources to deliver a fair and orderly exit from coal, oil, and gas."
"The COP30 presidency has set out clear next steps, and future COPs must keep this issue at the top of the agenda every year so the momentum is never lost," she added. "2028 will be the moment of truth. As the world will take stock of how far it has come in delivering the Paris Agreement, it will become clear who has honored the promise made in Dubai to transition away from fossil fuels, and who has walked away from it."
Nov 03, 2026
SEE ALL
News
Not Just Food and Fuel—Inflation Numbers Show 'Worrying Trends' as Midterms Loom
Less than a week before the US midterm elections in which voters may end Republican control of Congress, the Bureau of Economic Analysis on Thursday released inflation data highlighting the nation's persistent affordability crisis under GOP leaders, including President Donald Trump.
In September, the Personal Consumption Expenditures index rose 3.6% from a year ago, up from 3.4% in August, according to the BEA. Core PCE strips out food and energy prices, the latter of which has soared as Trump has waged an illegal war on Iran. That increased 3.1%, up from 3% the previous month.
The "bottom line," said Navy Federal Credit Union chief economist Heather Long, is that "inflation is back near a three-year high."
"It's largely due to war in Iran, but there's legitimate concern that inflation is spreading beyond energy," the economist explained. Referencing the "core" figure, she noted some "worrying trends."
Long pointed to a "big rise in goods prices" that "is largely driven by Trump's tariffs (big move up since 2025) and now war."
The expert also noted that "service sector inflation is picking up again."
She further observed that "rent prices are no longer improving" and housing inflation is "moving sideways."
The inflation update comes just days after the University of Michigan's Surveys of Consumers announced last week that its Consumer Sentiment Index dropped to 48 this month, nearing the record low of 44.8 from this past May, and Trump celebrated fossil fuel industry profits from his war during a weekend campaign rally in Georgia.
Trump told the crowd he was advised against highlighting how the industry—which helped him get elected two years ago and in which he is significantly invested—is "making hundreds of billions of dollars," given that "people are paying a little higher" for gasoline and diesel.
"I can just see the fake headlines," he said. "President Trump is talking about all the money they're making while people are suffering at the pump. That will be the headline. But I said, I don't give a damn, I'm going to say it: We're making a freaking fortune."
As of Thursday, the national average for a gallon of gasoline was $4.23 and $6.33 for diesel. The Climate Solutions Lab at Brown University estimates US residents have paid at least $81.1 billion more for gas and $65.9 billion for diesel, or a total of $147 billion. That's over $619 per household, for just gas.
Some estimates are even higher. A Monday report from Democrats on the congressional Joint Economic Committee states that US households "have now spent an additional $101 billion on gasoline since the start of the Iran War, or an average of $856 in gas costs per family."
Meanwhile, oil giants Shell and TotalEnergies announced their sizable third-quarter profits on Thursday, and companies such as BP, Chevron, and ExxonMobil are expected to follow suit on Friday.
"Inflation remains high, working families are paying $4.23 at the pump, and meager pay raises aren’t keeping up with rising prices," Alex Jacquez, a former Obama administration official who is now senior vice president of policy, advocacy, and research at Groundwork Collaborative, said in a statement.
"Instead of focusing on delivering lower prices, Trump is touting Big Oil's Iran War windfall," Jacquez stressed. "Skyrocketing prices and economic growth largely driven by AI spending do not add up to an economy that works for working families."
Democrats in Congress have seized on cost-of-living concerns ahead of the midterms, including Sen. Ed Markey, who is up for reelection in Massachusetts. He said Thursday that "inflation is up. Margins are tighter."
"Prices are skyrocketing—and small business owners are on the frontlines of Trump's war on Main Street," Markey added. "Small businesses and workers should not have to bear the costs of Trump's reckless economic policies."
This article has been updated to credit the Climate Solutions Lab at Brown University for its fuel cost tracker.
Oct 29, 2026
SEE ALL
News
Jeffries Refuses to Say If He’ll Support Holding Up Funding Bill to Stop Iran War
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries declined to say on Monday whether he'd support holding up a spending bill next month in an effort to force President Donald Trump to end his war in Iran before Democrats retake Congress in January.
"We're going to end the war in Iran one way or the other," Jeffries (D-NY) said during a news conference Monday, but added that the appropriations process was "in the hands of" Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) and Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), the top Democrats on their chambers' respective appropriations committees.
Since Republicans’ resounding defeat in last Tuesday’s midterms, Trump has fluctuated wildly between declarations that the Iran War may soon end and bellicose threats to “destroy the rest” of the country. Some Democrats have taken this as a sign that urgent action is needed even before their new majorities take office in January.
Their most immediate point of leverage is the next government funding bill, which needs to be enacted by December 11 in order to avert a government shutdown.
With Trump ignoring the war powers resolution passed by Congress earlier this year, some Democrats have said they will withhold their votes unless the next bill contains clear language prohibiting federal funds from being used to continue waging the unauthorized war.
A Reuters/Ipsos post-election survey published Monday showed that 71% of all adults supported legislation to end the war, including 51% of Republicans.
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), who has suggested launching a leadership challenge against Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, said Tuesday morning that Democrats must use their leverage to end the war as soon as possible.
"The American people have spoken loudly and clearly: We need to end the war in Iran now," Van Hollen said in a video posted to social media. "We're now 255 days into that war, a war that Donald Trump said would be over in a matter of weeks."
"What's the fastest way to end this war? Well, to stop funding it, to stop giving it the fuel it needs to keep going," he continued, pointing to the December 11 deadline for a new spending bill.
"If President Trump wants to tell the country that he'll shut down the entire government, all federal agencies, in order to keep his illegal war going, that's his decision," Van Hollen said. "But the American people have rendered their decision. Let's end this war and end it now: not a penny more."
Schumer, whom several incoming members of the Senate Democratic caucus have pledged to vote against as majority leader, has not publicly stated a position on whether he'd support using the December 11 deadline to force concessions from Trump. Last week, he told Politico he was working with Murray to “get something done” on government funding before December 11, but did not say whether he would demand a cutoff of war funding.
In a joint statement Monday, following a Democratic leadership meeting, Schumer and Jeffries pledged to “stop the reckless war of choice in Iran," but did not indicate what action they planned to take. They added that "a new day is coming on January 3."
Jeffries said last week that his goal was “to reach a spending agreement that meets the needs of the American people and prioritizes their economic well-being, health, and safety.”
Drop Site News co-founder Ryan Grim suggested that Van Hollen’s demand for Democrats to hold up the December spending bill may put more pressure on Schumer to endorse a similar strategy. Jeffries, on the other hand, has not had his leadership role challenged, and several progressive members of Congress have said they’ll back him as speaker despite their policy disagreements.
Grim said Jeffries’ response showed he was “feeling absolutely no pressure to end this war, clearly very confident he’ll become speaker regardless.”
Since Trump launched the war in February, critics have argued that Jeffries' response was lackluster. As independent journalist Adam Johnson recounted, Jeffries focused largely on procedural objections to the war while reinforcing many of the Trump administration's justifications for it, including saying that Iran needed to be "aggressively confronted."
While Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) were pushing for a war powers resolution as Trump built an “armada” in the Middle East weeks before the start of “Operation Epic Fury,” Jeffries did not force a vote on it to occur until several days after the bombing began.
Johnson argued that Jeffries has been "at best sleepy, useless, and indifferent" in response to the war.
The anti-war group Just Foreign Policy, one of the groups that pressured Democrats to ultimately invoke the War Powers Resolution against Trump, said that cutting off funding was one of the only guaranteed ways to bring the war to an end.
The group noted that Congress' July 1973 decision to cut off funding played a decisive role in forcing President Richard Nixon to end direct combat operations elsewhere in Southeast Asia amid the US withdrawal from Vietnam.
It noted that the US bombing of Cambodia ceased the day that the funding prohibition took effect. After the House voted to restrict funding, then-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger declared, "That finishes us."
"The ONLY way to truly rein in war criminals like [Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth] and Kissinger is for Congress to be willing to force the White House to risk a government shutdown if it wants to continue the war," Just Foreign Policy said. "Time to shut the funding down like Congress did for Vietnam. Force Republicans to fund it themselves if they refuse."
Nov 10, 2026
SEE ALL
News
Setting 'Powerful Example' for Other States, Newsom Works to Clear Country's Largest Death Row
Opponents of capital punishment applauded on Thursday after Gov. Gavin Newsom moved to commute all of California's death sentences, sparing up to 548 lives as the term-limited Democrat prepares to leave office with eyes on the White House.
The New York Times had reported last month that Newsom was mulling the move, which he addressed in a Thursday letter initially obtained by The Sacramento Bee: "After nearly 30 years in public office, I have come to understand the limits of what government can justly accomplish. I take this action because I firmly believe that state-sanctioned killing is incompatible with California's values, undermines the foundations of our legal system, and diminishes each of us."
The Bee explained that "Newsom can commute single-felony sentences, but must receive the California Supreme Court’s approval to commute sentences for people with multiple convictions. Four of the seven justices must approve those requests, though there is no time limit for them to do so. If they do not approve before Newsom leaves office on January 3, 2027, the requests lapse and do not roll over to the next governor, according to attorney Natasha Minsker, an anti-death penalty advocate."
However, Democratic Gov.-elect Xavier Becerra has pledged to maintain the death penalty moratorium that Newsom issued in 2019, and could keep pushing to make all 548 sentences life without parole if the state's high court doesn't initially sign off. In his letter, Newsom cited his decades of publicly opposing state-sanctioned killings and his executive order seven years ago, which "formalized the de facto moratorium on executions in place since 2006, the last year California executed anyone."
"The people sentenced to death in California caused indescribable suffering to victims, their families, communities, and our state as a whole," but "I have concluded the state cannot morally kill them," Newsom wrote. "Because the death penalty is inherently incompatible with our legal system's commitment to justice, I have determined that this clemency decision, while difficult in many respects, will ultimately affirm the strength and integrity of our state and its justice system."
The outgoing governor called the decision "among the most difficult" of his career, but also "a righteous action." He said it follows "the moral leadership of past presidents, including our Founding Fathers, and governors across America," and is informed by what he has heard from "crime victims and survivors, public safety experts, and religious, civil rights, and other community leaders."
Coalitions of civil rights groups, business executives, faith leaders, victims' family members, former corrections professionals, and ex-prosecutors have recently urged Newsom to take this action before leaving office. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, he is now among a dozen state and federal leaders who have made sweeping clemency grants to death row inmates since capital punishment was reinstated in the United States in 1976.
It is arguably the most significant of those actions because of its scope. California has the largest death row in not only the United States, but the Western Hemisphere, according to the governor's letter. The Times reported that "Newsom's action cancels approximately one-fourth of all death sentences nationwide."
The national ACLU and its three affiliates in the state were among the groups pressuring the governor to act. The organization's executive director, Anthony Romero, declared Thursday that Newsom "made history" and "honored his commitment to end a system that conflicts with human dignity, fairness, and the values enshrined in our Constitution."
"These commutations reflect what justice demands: an end to a racist, error-prone, and inhumane punishment that has burdened California for far too long," Romero continued. "By taking this step, Gov. Newsom has affirmed that the death penalty has no place in California, and he showed real courage by confronting racialized injustice head-on."
US Campaign to End the Death Penalty's executive director, Laura Porter, also offered praise: "We are grateful that Gov. Newsom, like other Republican and Democratic leaders across the country, has decided to grant clemency to individuals on death row. The historic number of commuted sentences would set a new record and offer an acknowledgment that the death penalty process is flawed."
Bryan Stevenson, Equal Justice Initiative's founder and executive director and the author of the award-winning memoir Just Mercy, similarly welcomed the development, saying: "The death penalty is a flawed, expensive, and error-filled practice that fails us all. I commend Gov. Newsom for this historic act and hope that other state elected officials follow his lead... Now more than ever, Americans need leaders who act on our beliefs, protect the vulnerable, and stand up for human rights and human dignity."
As the Times noted:
Death penalty opponents have planned a national ad campaign praising him for the move. The minute-long commercial casts the governor’s decision as an act of courage and leadership inspired by the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Dolores Huerta, and Robert F. Kennedy. It will air on dozens of news and political shows nationwide, said Dan Newman, a Democratic strategist who advises both Mr. Newsom and the anti-death penalty groups sponsoring the ad.
Mr. Newman said that the governor had been motivated by personal conviction. But the ad could also help Mr. Newsom in a 2028 presidential campaign.
Among the Californians cheering Newsom's move is Jeanne Woodford, who presided over four executions as warden of San Quentin State Prison, signed a recent letter to Newsom, and shared that "as someone who has carried out executions in California, I am haunted by the fear that we will execute an innocent person."
"Innocent people have been sentenced to death in California," she stressed. "Since 1973, more than 200 individuals nationwide, including eight in California, have been freed from death row after they were found to have been innocent. Gov. Newsom will ensure that California will never execute an innocent person."
Newsom's move may save some innocent prisoners, but it is also set to spare some notorious ones. The Times pointed out that the state's death row includes "Richard Allen Davis, who murdered Polly Klaas, a 12-year-old, after kidnapping her from her home in 1993," as well as "Cary Stayner, who killed four women near Yosemite in 1999, and the 1980s serial killer Charles Ng."
Relatives of the 12-year-old are divided: Her father, Marc Klaas, has criticized Newsom for the 2019 moratorium, but her stepsister, Jess Nichol, recently met with the governor and encouraged his action. She said in a statement that "I won't pretend I've always opposed the death penalty. I used to think the man who killed my sister deserved execution. But over time I've realized that whether he's executed has absolutely nothing to do with my recovery or with real public safety."
"The system tells survivors that execution matters to our healing," Nichol added. "It doesn't. It's a distraction from what we actually need."
While President Donald Trump—whose Republican Party just lost its majorities in Congress—is infamously pro-death penalty, fresh calls for ending capital punishment nationwide have mounted since late September, when Christa Pike survived two injections of pentobarbital from a doctor involved with an earlier botched execution at the maximum security prison in Tennessee.
"There hasn't been a moment since that night when I haven't been in pain," Pike said last week. "My body hurts. My arms hurt. My hands hurt. My throat hurts. I still struggle to speak. And the pain isn't just physical. There is pain in my mind and in my soul. I had not contemplated life beyond that night, and I'm deeply hurt by the incompetence that has put so many people in this terrible position. I continue to think about my victim's family and the terrible pain and loss they have endured. I am recovering, and I know that I am getting stronger. But healing is not the same as being okay."
Nov 05, 2026
SEE ALL
News
'Power of the Purse': Schumer Indicates Democrats Will Defund Trump's Illegal Iran War
Democratic Senate Leader Chuck Schumer on Wednesday indicated that his party will defund President Donald Trump's illegal war with Iran when it takes over as the majority next year.
While speaking with reporters, Schumer (D-NY) was asked how Democrats planned to end the war, which Trump launched without congressional authorization in February.
"We are going to end the war," said Schumer. "We already have some Republicans who have joined us in ending the war. And the Founding Fathers had the power of the purse as one of the ways of deterring a president who does war without the consent of the American people."
Q: How are Democrats going to end the war?SCHUMER: The Founding Fathers had the power of the purse as one of the ways of deterring a president who does war without the consent of the American people https://t.co/UZdb601W7h
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) November 4, 2026
Democrats on Tuesday secured majorities in the US House of Representatives and the Senate, and Democrats will have at least 54 members in the congressional upper chamber.
Earlier this year, four Republicans in the Senate—Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Bill Cassidy (R-La.), and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)—voted with the vast majority of Democrats to pass a war powers resolution aimed at compelling Trump to end the Iran War.
Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) was the lone Democrat to oppose the measure.
While Cassidy and Collins will leave office at the end of this year, a full majority in both chambers of Congress will enable Democrats to go beyond passing war powers resolutions and cut off funding for the US Department of Defense until Trump agrees to wind down the conflict.
Schumer's remarks on defunding the war came shortly after Vice President JD Vance posted a message on social media acknowledging that voter dissatisfaction with the war, and the subsequent rise in energy prices caused by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, were the major reasons for Republicans' defeat.
"The reason we lost is the war," Vance wrote. "The president himself said so last night. If you'd like to argue it was worth it, that losing the Senate for the next six years was worth it, then do so. Argue it was a worthwhile cost to pay. Agree or disagree, that's at least honest. But everyone knows why we lost."
Vance's statement also earned the endorsement of Donald Trump Jr., who may or may not have understood that it was an implicit criticism of his father's decision-making.
"Every word of this," the president's eldest son—who, along with Vance, may run for the White House in 2028—wrote in response to the vice president.
Nov 04, 2026
SEE ALL
LATEST NEWS
'Your Victory Is Fleeting': After California Measure Falls Short, Sanders Threatens Billionaires With Federal Wealth Tax
"With the blue wave nationally, the billionaire tax is going to be front and center in the new Congress," said economist Gabriel Zucman, who led the charge for California's failed proposal.
Nov 10, 2026
California's wealth tax proposal has fallen just short after the state's richest residents spent hundreds of millions of dollars to mobilize voters against it. But Sen. Bernie Sanders is warning them not to get too comfortable.
Sanders (I-Vt.) argued that Proposition 40, which would have used revenue from a one-time 5% tax on billionaire residents to fund the state’s healthcare system, performed quite well given the resources that powerful tech barons like Google co-founder Sergey Brin and its former CEO Eric Schmidt deployed to fight it.
"Oligarchs spent $425 million against California's billionaire wealth tax—outraising supporters 250 to 1 on ads," Sanders wrote on social media. "The result: They got a 'whopping' 52% [of the vote]."
"I've got bad news for these oligarchs," Sanders continued. "Your victory is fleeting. We will pass a federal billionaire wealth tax and end your greed."
Many of the wealthiest Americans pay lower effective tax rates than ordinary workers because much of their wealth is held in stocks, whose gains are generally untaxed until sold—and can be taxed at lower rates than wages when realized.
Polls show that overwhelming majorities of Americans support a federal tax on the wealth of the superrich—including most Republicans.
One February poll by the University of Maryland's Program for Public Consultation found that 80% of Americans, including 72% of Republicans and 88% of Democrats, supported the idea of a federal tax of 2% on fortunes over $50 million and a 3% tax on those over $1 billion.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who has called for a wealth tax for years and made it central to her 2020 presidential bid, has argued that "the best way to do a wealth tax is to do a national wealth tax."
In January, she told The New Republic that a federal proposal would avoid some of the pitfalls the rich used to fearmonger about California’s proposal, such as the possibility of simply fleeing across state lines to avoid paying it.
Escaping a national tax, she said, would mean having to “give up your US citizenship, and forfeit your passport.”
French economist Gabriel Zucman, who helped lead the push for California’s ballot measure, said he was “not surprised” by its defeat.
"The money spent by the billionaires was critical," he told NPR. "Anyone who lives in California has been carpet-bombed by a deluge of ads. One can easily see how this could be pivotal in such a closely contested ballot."
But he said that last week's midterm elections, which saw Democrats swept into power on a wave of anti-billionaire anger, showed that the fight over a wealth tax was not something that could easily be ignored.
"With the blue wave nationally, the billionaire tax is going to be front and center in the new Congress," Zucman said. "Many of the newly elected Democratic senators have been campaigning on curbing the power and influence of billionaires. One can reasonably expect to see significant progress in the next two years."
Sanders, who introduced a 5% annual wealth tax on those worth $1 billion or more with Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) in March, renewed his call to pass the bill after the elections.
Another proposal, which would impose an annual 2% tax on net worth above $50 million, increasing to 3% on wealth above $1 billion, has gained the support of 63 Democrats, including Warren, Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY).
Van Hollen, who has suggested he may challenge Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) to become Senate majority leader when Democrats retake the chamber, told Politico last week that he thinks there’s “growing support” in the Democratic caucus for a tax on the ultrarich.
“People are recognizing that we have a tax system that allows individuals to accumulate huge amounts of wealth," he said.
“It is essential that we show the American people where we stand,” Van Hollen added. “If [President Donald Trump] vetoes it, it will just show people that he’s on the side of billionaires.”
Keep Reading
Show Less
For Backstabbing El-Sayed, Progressives in Michigan Demand ‘Capricious’ Haley Stevens Be Expelled From Democratic Party
"As a constituent of Haley Stevens, I am appalled that she’s left residents of the 11th Congressional District high and dry."
Nov 10, 2026
Progressives are demanding that Rep. Haley Stevens be expelled from the Democratic Party over the Michigan Democrat's last-minute decision to rescind her endorsement of Sen.-elect Abdul El-Sayed.
Just two days before the 2026 midterm elections, Stevens announced that she was supporting Republican Mike Rogers in the US Senate race in Michigan, despite pledging to back El-Sayed after he defeated her in the state's Democratic primary months earlier.
Stevens' surprise endorsement of Rogers led to a mass staff exodus, including her longtime chief of staff. Politico reported that Stevens had been spotted in the Republicans' cloakroom in the US House of Representatives on Monday, and her office door was locked throughout the day.
Levi Teitel, communications director of Progress Michigan, said Stevens' actions merited her being forced out of the Democratic Party.
"As a constituent of Haley Stevens, I am appalled that she’s left residents of the 11th Congressional District high and dry," said Teitel. "Her capriciousness is what’s led to this: flipping to Rogers just two days before polls opened on Election Day without thinking through how she would be able to represent her constituents in her last few weeks in office."
Stevens is still representing her district until January 3, 2027, when Rep.-elect Jeremy Moss (D-Mich.) is slated to take over.
Regardless, Teitel said Stevens' actions are "nothing short of a dereliction of duty," adding that House Democrats "have a responsibility to hold Rep. Stevens accountable and expel her from the caucus."
Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who is also leaving Congress next year after a 40-year career, cautioned her party against expelling Stevens while speaking with reporters on Tuesday.
"We have about... two more weeks of being in the Congress," said Pelosi, "so I don’t think we should start making judgments about anybody in the caucus at this point."
Nancy Pelosi on Kicking Haley Stevens Out of the Caucus:We have a few more weeks of being in Congress, so I don’t think we should start making judgments about anybody in the caucus at this point.I was disappointed. I conveyed that to her. I want to be helpful to her in terms of how she deals with this, but I’m not supporting kicking her out.Let’s focus on the very positive
— Acyn (@Acyn) November 10, 2026
The California Democrat added that she was "disappointed" in Stevens for endorsing Rogers, but emphasized that she's "not supporting kicking her out of the caucus."
Critics of Pelosi, however, found her position unconvincing and a testament to the failure of Establishment wing of the party that has long been hostile to progressives and accommodating to figures like Stevens.
“Pelosi refusing to kick Haley Stevens out of the caucus because ‘there’s only a few weeks left’ is everything people hate about DC,” said journalist Saad Abedine, in response to the former speaker’s remarks. “Zero accountability, total protection for insiders, and a smile telling us to ‘focus on the positive.’ Utterly absurd.”
Keep Reading
Show Less
Trump Nominates Palantir Executive to Head Cybersecurity Agency
If the Republican-controlled Senate is unable to confirm Michael LoSapio before the end of the current legislative session, Democrats could scrutinize his ties to the surveillance giant after they take the majority.
Nov 10, 2026
An executive with the company that's come under fire for its participation in President Donald Trump's mass deportation agenda and his illegal war on Iran may serve as the latest link between the Silicon Valley firm and the White House.
As NextGov/FCW reported Monday night, the White House has nominated Michael LoSapio, the chief information security officer for software giant Palantir Technologies, to lead the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), which operates under the Department of Homeland Security.
CISA oversees cybersecurity protections for agency networks, water systems, power grids, telecommunications networks, and other infrastructure. It has been without a permanent director for nearly two years and has faced wide-scale layoffs and resignations under the Trump administration.
Meanwhile, three major cybersecurity breaches at the FBI, the Pentagon, and DHS have been reported in the past three months.
The company LoSapio has worked for since 2017 has become increasingly intertwined with the Trump administration since the president took office in 2025.
As Common Dreams reported late last month, Palantir has provided "mission-critical software infrastructure" for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services—specifically for the development of an artificial intelligence pilot program that's been linked to healthcare delays for seniors.
The company, co-founded by right-wing Republican megadonor Peter Thiel, has also allowed its Enhanced Leads Identification and Targeting for Enforcement system to identify people for US Immigration and Customs Enforcement to target for Trump's violent mass deportation campaign, in which tens of thousands of people have been sent to "third countries" that they have no connection to and where they may be at risk of persecution.
Palantir has also received hundreds of millions of dollars in federal contracts as it has developed a "mega-database" full of Americans' private taxpayer information.
As NextGov reported, Trump could be forced to renominate LoSapio after the new legislative session begins on January 3, if Congress is unable to confirm the nominee before the end of the current session, during which lawmakers will be busy debating a continuation of government funding and defense spending.
In that case, the new Democratic majority in the US Senate could potentially scrutinize LoSapio's history with the company that lawmakers, including Se. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), have pushed to investigate.
"Sen. Wyden has a number of questions about Palantir's work to facilitate the Trump-Vance abuse of government data that he intends to ask again as chairman of the Finance Committee," an aide for Wyden told NPR this week. "If Palantir is not responsive next year, compulsory processes will be on the table."
Keep Reading
Show Less
California's Prop 40 Falls Short, But Wealth Tax Fight Shows 'Billionaires Are Frightened by Voters'
"We may have lost this battle, but we have no doubt we’ll win the war to rein in extreme wealth—both here and around the world," said Patriotic Millionaires.
Nov 10, 2026
Bombarded by hundreds of millions of dollars worth of often misleading ads funded by tech titans and other monied interests, California voters narrowly rejected Proposition 40, a one-time 5% tax on the state’s billionaires, but proponents of the measure to fund vital social programs said they'll try again in 2028.
Prop 40 was defeated 52.8% to 47.2%, according to The Associated Press. Also known as the California Billionaire Tax, the ballot measure was sponsored by Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West (SEIU-UHW) and would have imposed a 5% tax on the wealth of California residents and trusts worth more than $1 billion.
Proponents argued the tax would have generated tens of billions of dollars to help fund healthcare, food assistance, and public education programs facing funding pressures, including from cuts resulting from President Donald Trump’s attacks on Medicaid, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, and other lifelines.
We’re disappointed to see Prop 40 lost in California.But all hope is not lost. We may have lost this battle, but we have no doubt we’ll win the war to rein in extreme wealth—both here and around the world.Read our full statement here: patrioticmillionaires.org/press/patrio...
[image or embed]
— Patriotic Millionaires (@patrioticmillionaires.org) November 10, 2026 at 9:56 AM
The "No on 40" campaign—including efforts supporting Propositions 41 and 42, a pair of anti-Prop 40 poison pills—was bankrolled by some of Silicon Valley's wealthiest figures, led by Google co-founder Sergey Brin, who contributed upward of $100 million to a committee he established to defeat the measure.
Overall, billionaire opponents contributed approximately $378.4 million, compared with just $33.5 million raised by Prop 40 supporters, according to CalMatters.
“That is incredibly corrosive and corrupting to our democracy and our political system, and that’s been dominating the discussion here in California,” SEIU-UHW president Dan Regan told CalMatters.
Morris Pearl, a former managing director at the investment firm BlackRock who now chairs the advocacy group Patriotic Millionaires, said he's "sad that the ballot measure ultimately fell short, but the attention about what happened in California has sparked not only a national and international conversation around inequality, but also about how billionaires are frightened by voters who very clearly want to shake up the economic status quo."
Initial polling showed 55% of California voters supporting Prop 40 shortly after its introduction last year, and the measure soon won the backing of prominent national figures such as Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Congressman Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), and former US Labor Secretary Robert Reich.
But Prop 40 was opposed by California's Democratic establishment, with Gov. Gavin Newsom, Gov.-elect Xavier Becerra, and the mayors of most major cities coming out against the measure. So did the state NAACP, California Teachers Association, Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, and other left-leaning groups.
The editors of the Los Angeles Times, San Francisco Chronicle, San Diego Union-Tribune, Orange County Register, San Jose Mercury News, and virtually every major newspaper in the state—the Sacramento Bee being the most notable exception—also urged voters to reject Prop 40.
The "No on 40" campaign's ads relied heavily on misleading scare tactics that portrayed the one-time tax on approximately 200 people as a threat to ordinary Californians. In one particularly deceptive AI-generated ad, bureaucrats terrorize suburban families, steal a bike and a scooter from children, and even try to take a baby's stroller, warning that every Californian would have to disclose their assets or face a 40% penalty.
"Make no mistake—what happened on November 3 was a referendum on the economy, which is why billionaires poured so much money into defeating Proposition 40 and retaining their grasp on their political and economic power," Pearl said. "It will take continued work with leaders from all political parties to fully tackle and address the problem that is extreme wealth concentration."
Economic justice campaigners are already looking forward to trying to pass a billionaire tax in 2028.
“That’s not a hypothetical," said Regan. "That’s our plan."
San Francisco organizer Nadia Rahman said: "And more broadly, we need to tax billionaires throughout the country. We should all demand the new 2027 Congress do so with the mandate the voters gave them last week."
"Contact your congressional representatives," she added, "and tell them to tax the rich."
Keep Reading
Show Less
‘Big Jump in Grocery Prices’ Highlights How Trump’s Iran War Kept Hammering Consumers in October
"The average real wage—what your paycheck buys—is falling," said one economist.
Nov 10, 2026
The impact of President Donald Trump's illegal war with Iran continued to hit US consumers hard in October, with the price of groceries experiencing a particularly notable spike.
The latest Consumer Price Index (CPI) report from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) released on Tuesday shows that overall prices increased by 0.4% in October, higher than economists' expectations of a 0.3% increase.
Core inflation, which excludes food and energy prices, showed a monthly increase of 0.3%, which was also higher than economists' expectations of a 0.2% increase.
The CPI report doesn't include estimates of yearly price increases, as the BLS last October didn't collect any price data during a government shutdown.
Heather Long, chief economist at Navy Federal Credit Union, estimated in a social media post that the data released by BLS "implies about a ~4% inflation rate for the past year."
Long highlighted a "a big jump in grocery prices" in the report, while also noting that "eating out, electricity, transportation (especially airfares), rent, and medical services (especially hospitals)" all saw "sizable monthly price increases." Analysts have noted that Trump’s Iran war is increasing costs across the economy, including food prices, by jacking up fuel and fertilizer expenses.
Ben Zipperer, an economist at the Economic Policy Institute, posted a chart showing that real wage growth has been in decline in the seven months since Trump launched his illegal war without congressional authorization in February.
Zipperer also mused that the decline in workers' earning power may have "something to do with the recent election results," in which Democrats ousted Trump's Republicans as the majority party in both the US House of Representatives and the US Senate starting in January.
Maybe something to do with the recent election results:
[image or embed]
— Ben Zipperer (@benzipperer.org) November 10, 2026 at 9:56 AM
University of Michigan economist Justin Wolfers observed that real wage growth is now flat throughout Trump's second term, with prices really picking up steam at the start of the Iran War.
"The average real wage—what your paycheck buys—is falling," Wolfers wrote. "That's the sense in which it might feel like you're falling behind. It's not meant to work this way."
The latest inflation report was so ugly that even National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett, who has been widely criticized for spinning bad data into an implausibly sunny narrative, couldn't paint a rosy picture during a Tuesday interview with Fox Business.
"It's a disappointing report," Hassett acknowledged. "Energy prices in the CPI are up 20% year-over-year, and gasoline prices are up 37% year-over-year... right now, the trickle down from the higher energy prices is definitely very palpable in the data."
🤯 even Hassett can't spin hotter than expected inflation data: "It's a disappointing report ... things have accelerated over the last three months ... the trickle down from higher energy prices is definitely very palpable in the data" https://t.co/yiIylq1mT5
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) November 10, 2026
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), who is facing calls to step aside as Senate Democratic leader before his party takes over as the majority next year, said the latest CPI report showed "why Americans chose Democrats to be in charge."
"From his costly tariffs to his reckless war, Trump has only made inflation worse," said Schumer. "And he openly admits he doesn’t care. Our Senate Democratic majority will work relentlessly to bring down costs for all Americans."
Keep Reading
Show Less
Jeffries Refuses to Say If He’ll Support Holding Up Funding Bill to Stop Iran War
Sen. Chris Van Hollen, who may mount a leadership challenge against Sen. Chuck Schumer, called on Congress to “end this war now” by blocking the bill next month.
Nov 10, 2026
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries declined to say on Monday whether he'd support holding up a spending bill next month in an effort to force President Donald Trump to end his war in Iran before Democrats retake Congress in January.
"We're going to end the war in Iran one way or the other," Jeffries (D-NY) said during a news conference Monday, but added that the appropriations process was "in the hands of" Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) and Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), the top Democrats on their chambers' respective appropriations committees.
Since Republicans’ resounding defeat in last Tuesday’s midterms, Trump has fluctuated wildly between declarations that the Iran War may soon end and bellicose threats to “destroy the rest” of the country. Some Democrats have taken this as a sign that urgent action is needed even before their new majorities take office in January.
Their most immediate point of leverage is the next government funding bill, which needs to be enacted by December 11 in order to avert a government shutdown.
With Trump ignoring the war powers resolution passed by Congress earlier this year, some Democrats have said they will withhold their votes unless the next bill contains clear language prohibiting federal funds from being used to continue waging the unauthorized war.
A Reuters/Ipsos post-election survey published Monday showed that 71% of all adults supported legislation to end the war, including 51% of Republicans.
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), who has suggested launching a leadership challenge against Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, said Tuesday morning that Democrats must use their leverage to end the war as soon as possible.
"The American people have spoken loudly and clearly: We need to end the war in Iran now," Van Hollen said in a video posted to social media. "We're now 255 days into that war, a war that Donald Trump said would be over in a matter of weeks."
"What's the fastest way to end this war? Well, to stop funding it, to stop giving it the fuel it needs to keep going," he continued, pointing to the December 11 deadline for a new spending bill.
"If President Trump wants to tell the country that he'll shut down the entire government, all federal agencies, in order to keep his illegal war going, that's his decision," Van Hollen said. "But the American people have rendered their decision. Let's end this war and end it now: not a penny more."
Schumer, whom several incoming members of the Senate Democratic caucus have pledged to vote against as majority leader, has not publicly stated a position on whether he'd support using the December 11 deadline to force concessions from Trump. Last week, he told Politico he was working with Murray to “get something done” on government funding before December 11, but did not say whether he would demand a cutoff of war funding.
In a joint statement Monday, following a Democratic leadership meeting, Schumer and Jeffries pledged to “stop the reckless war of choice in Iran," but did not indicate what action they planned to take. They added that "a new day is coming on January 3."
Jeffries said last week that his goal was “to reach a spending agreement that meets the needs of the American people and prioritizes their economic well-being, health, and safety.”
Drop Site News co-founder Ryan Grim suggested that Van Hollen’s demand for Democrats to hold up the December spending bill may put more pressure on Schumer to endorse a similar strategy. Jeffries, on the other hand, has not had his leadership role challenged, and several progressive members of Congress have said they’ll back him as speaker despite their policy disagreements.
Grim said Jeffries’ response showed he was “feeling absolutely no pressure to end this war, clearly very confident he’ll become speaker regardless.”
Since Trump launched the war in February, critics have argued that Jeffries' response was lackluster. As independent journalist Adam Johnson recounted, Jeffries focused largely on procedural objections to the war while reinforcing many of the Trump administration's justifications for it, including saying that Iran needed to be "aggressively confronted."
While Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) were pushing for a war powers resolution as Trump built an “armada” in the Middle East weeks before the start of “Operation Epic Fury,” Jeffries did not force a vote on it to occur until several days after the bombing began.
Johnson argued that Jeffries has been "at best sleepy, useless, and indifferent" in response to the war.
The anti-war group Just Foreign Policy, one of the groups that pressured Democrats to ultimately invoke the War Powers Resolution against Trump, said that cutting off funding was one of the only guaranteed ways to bring the war to an end.
The group noted that Congress' July 1973 decision to cut off funding played a decisive role in forcing President Richard Nixon to end direct combat operations elsewhere in Southeast Asia amid the US withdrawal from Vietnam.
It noted that the US bombing of Cambodia ceased the day that the funding prohibition took effect. After the House voted to restrict funding, then-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger declared, "That finishes us."
"The ONLY way to truly rein in war criminals like [Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth] and Kissinger is for Congress to be willing to force the White House to risk a government shutdown if it wants to continue the war," Just Foreign Policy said. "Time to shut the funding down like Congress did for Vietnam. Force Republicans to fund it themselves if they refuse."
Keep Reading
Show Less
‘I Would Do It Again’: Facing Impeachment Vote, Hegseth Celebrates Alleged War Crimes
"No... secretary of defense has ever been impeached for carrying out lawful military operations," said Hegseth, who is facing impeachment for allegedly carrying out unlawful military operations.
Nov 10, 2026
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Tuesday defended his record, including an unconstitutional war on Iran and a murderous boat-bombing campaign in international waters, during a defiant press conference held one day before an expected impeachment vote in the US House of Representatives.
Hours after Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) advanced articles of impeachment against Hegseth that accuse him of waging an illegal war and committing war crimes, the former Fox News host accused his critics of waging a partisan "show trial" with no historical precedent.
"In the 250 years of our American republic," Hegseth said, "no secretary of war or secretary of defense has ever been impeached for carrying out lawful military operations—and in our case, successful ones at that."
my "no treason" T-shirt has people asking a lot of questions already answered by my shirt https://t.co/Z0qSUb5ACN
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) November 10, 2026
Hegseth is not facing impeachment for carrying out lawful military operations, but for carrying out unlawful military operations.
Among other things, the impeachment articles filed against him allege he systematically dismantled rules of engagement intended to minimize civilian casualties, while also carrying out an unlawful campaign of extrajudicial killings by bombing suspected drug trafficking vessels in international waters.
Hegseth expressed no regret for any of these operations, including the deadly US attack on the Shajareh Tayyebeh Elementary School in the city of Minab, Iran, which killed more than 150 people, including more than 100 children.
"I stand behind every one of these operations," Hegseth said. "I was proud to execute them, and I would do it again tomorrow."
Hegseth linked the current impeachment effort against him to the past two impeachments of his boss, President Donald Trump.
"We've seen this show before: They impeached President Trump over a perfect phone call," said Hegseth, in reference to Trump's efforts in 2019 to shake down the Ukrainian government to open a criminal investigation into political rivals. "They impeached him again in his final week in office. Both times, they failed."
Hegseth denounces "show trials" and says, "we've seen this show before. They impeached President Trump over a perfect phone call." https://t.co/htAsMLolsJ
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) November 10, 2026
Trump's second impeachment came after he tried to unlawfully stay in power after losing the 2020 election to former President Joe Biden, an effort that culminated in a deadly riot carried out by the president's supporters at the US Capitol that sent lawmakers fleeing for their lives.
Later in the press conference, Hegseth predicted that US servicemembers who carried out his orders would also face legal consequences, claiming that Democrats plan to "put the secretary on trial today, and the men and women who carried out those orders tomorrow."
"If they want to come for the warriors," Hegseth added, "they're going to have to come through me."
Hegseth: "Put the secretary on trial today, and the men and women who carried out those orders tomorrow. If they want to come for the warriors, they're going to have to come through me." https://t.co/XplGs8CTQq
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) November 10, 2026
Hegseth's performance earned a rave review from Trump in a Thursday social media post.
"Pete Hegseth gets an 'A' PLUS, PLUS, PLUS for his defense against a disgruntled, angry, defeated, former Congressman, Thomas Massie, a TOTAL LOSER!" the president wrote.
Jan-Albert Hootsen, Mexico representative for the Committee to Protect Journalists' Americas program, said that the charges against Hegseth outlined in Massie's impeachment articles are extremely serious and likely warrant prosecution.
"Pete Hegseth ordered the extrajudicial execution of over 100 Latin Americans," said Hootsen. "No trial, no evidence. Instead of even a weak attempt to justify the killings, he gloated. Merely firing him is not accountability—it should be the beginning of criminal investigations."
The House is scheduled to take up a procedural vote on the impeachment articles on Tuesday. If a majority votes to advance it, a full debate and final vote on impeaching Hegseth will likely occur on Wednesday.
Keep Reading
Show Less
600,000-Member Machinists Union Calls on Schumer To Allow ‘A New Generation To Lead’ Democrats
"Our country is at a critical crossroads and a moment of extraordinary opportunity. This week’s elections sent a clear message: Working people are demanding change," said the IAM Union international president.
Nov 10, 2026
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer's bid to continue leading the Democratic Party when it takes control of the US Senate in January continued to falter Monday night as a key machinists' union asked the New York senator to step aside and allow "a new generation to lead Senate Democrats."
In a letter, Brian Bryant, international president of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM Union) thanked Schumer for "many years of leadership, friendship, and unwavering commitment to working people" before telling him that "after thoughtful discussions," the IAM Union Executive Council had opted not to support Schumer's push to remain as the Senate leader.
"With the utmost respect and appreciation for your service, we respectfully urge you not to seek another term as Senate
Democratic leader," Bryant wrote. "We also encourage all returning and newly elected Democratic senators to join together through a fair and open process to select a consensus leader who can unite the party, build on your legacy and carry forward a bold vision for working people."
The letter came hours after Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) told reporters that he was considering a challenge to Schumer, after initially saying he was not interested in running for the Senate majority leader post following the party's electoral sweep last week.
Candidates who won Senate seats include several outspoken proponents of Medicare for All, such as Sens.-elect Abdul El-Sayed (D-Mich.), Troy Jackson (D-Maine), and Peggy Flanagan (D-Minn.), and others who centered in their campaigns the need to decisively take on billionaires and worsening economic inequality.
A decision by Schumer to step aside in favor of "new leadership," said Bryant, would allow the party to "turn this moment into lasting progress."
He wrote that the party must push to pass the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act, restore collective bargaining rights to all federal workers, reinstate Affordable Care Act and give "every American the healthcare they need, and pass "meaningful rail safety legislation."
"Our country is at a critical crossroads and a moment of extraordinary opportunity. This week’s elections sent a clear message: Working people are demanding change," said Bryant. "The IAM Union’s Workers vs. Billionaires movement reflects a growing desire for an economy and political system that puts working families ahead of wealthy special interests. We have a tremendous opportunity to build on this momentum, but doing so will require fresh ideas, new energy, and a new generation of leadership."
Bryant's message made clear that "it's time" for Schumer to step aside, said author and commentator Don Winslow.
"The Democratic Party will make a catastrophic mistake if they lock out all of these voters for a man who has been in political office for 51 years," said Winslow.
The letter came after Schumer's support among senior Democrats appeared to crack on Monday, with Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) telling reporters, “We need a conversation about leadership going forward because we need new energy and ideas."
But later that evening, the senator said that he expected Schumer to become Senate majority leader and plans to back him.
Van Hollen, who has reportedly received a steady stream of phone calls since last week from voters calling on him to take the helm of the party in the Senate, reiterated Monday evening that he believes there should be "a full caucus discussion" about the path forward.
"I am in listening mode," he said of the possibility that he could challenge Schumer. "There are clearly lots of people around the country and a number of our members, quite a few of our members, who want to have this discussion... I haven't closed the door."
He also told Semafor: “I am listening to the thousands of people who have been calling for change, but especially listening to our members, but in particular to new members who have just come off the campaign trail. So what I've said from the very beginning is, we shouldn't have a coronation.”
Van Hollen also met Monday with Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), who has not endorsed Schumer.
On Monday afternoon, Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), who is also facing calls from newly elected progressive lawmakers to step aside in his push to become House speaker, released a statement saying that "Democrats are united and ready to lead."
But several representatives-elect, including Melat Kiros (D-Colo.) and Adam Hamawy (D-NJ) suggested that even if Jeffries secures the top post in the House, he will have to contend with many new members of Congress who will be pushing for far-reaching action.
"It's about the agenda, an agenda that actually reflects the priorities of the American people," said Kiros. "We might have different ideas about how to accomplish certain things but we all agree that we have to reduce costs for working families, we all agree that we have to root out corruption in government, we all agree that our foreign policy has to reflect our values. And in order for us to be able to do that we need an agenda that's bold enough to meet that vision. And so what we're demanding is an agenda, it's not about the individual."
"We, as progressives, want to build," she added. "We want to accomplish things, we want to work together with this caucus to actually get work done, and we haven't had that conversation yet."
Keep Reading
Show Less
US Citizen Shot by ICE in California Sues Trump Administration for $25 Million
Carlos Jimenez claims the FBI drove him from the hospital to the scene for an interrogation, "while the bullet and fragments remained lodged in his body," even as he "kept bleeding and vomiting in the agents' van."
Nov 09, 2026
Carlos Jimenez, a US citizen and father of three who still has bullet fragments lodged near his lung after being shot by a US Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer in California last year, is suing the Trump administration, San Bernardino County, and various agents for over $25 million in damages.
Jimenez, who is from Ontario, east of Los Angeles, filed his complaint against the United States, the county, ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations officer Eusebio Ortiz, two US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers, a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) special agent, and 20 unnamed defendants on Friday.
While Jimenez was driving to work on the morning of October 30, 2025, he approached agents conducting an immigration operation to let them know they were near a bus stop for schoolchildren. Ortiz ultimately shot him, but it was Jimenez, not the officer, who then faced charges that have since been dropped.
As with some other people ICE or CBP agents have shot—sometimes fatally—the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which oversees both agencies, has claimed Jimenez "attempted to run officers over" federal agents "by reversing directly at them without stopping," but his lawyers have disputed that account.
After the shooting, at a local hospital, FBI agents "interfered with his medical care," according to a complaint. They allegedly prevented Jimenez from talking to healthcare providers, removed him from the hospital bed, and "handcuffed him with a leather waist restraint."
As the FBI drove Jimenez back to the scene for an interrogation, "while the bullet and fragments remained lodged in his body," he "kept bleeding and vomiting in the agents' van," and they told him not to "ruin their vehicle," the filing claims. He was taken to West Valley Detention Center, where he was also denied adequate medical care.
A few weeks later, a grand jury indicted Jimenez, whom federal prosecutors charged with assaulting a federal officer using a deadly or dangerous weapon, but "the criminal case later became the subject of a dispute over evidence," Newsweek reported Monday.
As the outlet detailed:
On May 5, US District Judge Kenly Kiya Kato ordered the government to turn over communications and operational records sought by the defense; this included responsive communications on government-issued and personal phones. The order also required a declaration under penalty of perjury from Ortiz if no responsive messages from him existed.
Jimenez entered into a diversion agreement shortly afterward. After he completed its conditions, Kato dismissed the indictment with prejudice on November 2, meaning the charge cannot be refiled. The dismissal order did not make a finding that federal officers used excessive force or otherwise acted unlawfully.
The Guardian highlighted that in addition to calling the criminal charges against Jimenez "fabricated," the complaint "alleges that the FBI falsely claimed that two neighbors witnessed the incident and told an agent that Jimenez's vehicle had enough room to pull forward without reversing. When Jimenez’s legal team interviewed those witnesses, both denied making those statements and said they were unaware there had been a shooting until they saw news reports."
While the FBI declined to comment and DHS referred questions to the US Department of Justice, Ciaran McEvoy, a spokesperson for the DOJ in Los Angeles, said in an email to the newspaper that Jimenez "could have exercised his right to take the case to trial, but he instead requested that our office agree to resolve the case through a diversion agreement."
Jimenez is among at least 32 people fired upon by federal immigration agents as part of Republican President Donald Trump's mass detention and deportation campaign. Others include Renee Good and Alex Pretti, US citizens killed early this year in Minneapolis, Minnesota, and Silverio Villegas González, a Mexican man fatally shot last year near Chicago, Illinois.
At the beginning of October, Good's family filed a pair of lawsuits against the federal government and immigration officials over her death and an alleged conspiracy to interfere with civil rights in Minnesota's Twin Cities. A week later, Villegas González's relatives filed a legal claim against the administration over his "execution-style killing." Pretti's family hasn't yet sued, but his parents demanded justice at a press conference late last month.
Keep Reading
Show Less
'Beaten and Disinterested' Trump Makes 'Flaccid' Claim That Midterms Were Rigged
"Trump can’t admit his policies fucked the midterms," said one critic. "Nothing is ever his fault. So now the accusation is that red states cheated against themselves."
Nov 09, 2026
As Republicans reel from last week's "blue tsunami" midterm wipeout, President Donald Trump—who previously congratulated Democrats on their historic takeback of both houses of Congress—on Monday reverted to the kind of election denial that sparked the 2021 Capitol insurrection, making a baseless claim of voting machine fraud.
“Does anybody really believe that this ‘Election’ was honest,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform. “How could the Polls be so wrong??? Some early voting ‘dumps’ were so large that it was impossible to win, no matter how many people went to vote. It’s all about the machines, which are far more important than the voter!”
The polls, which widely forecast Democrats reclaiming one or both chambers of Congress, were largely accurate. And despite a handful of localized issues with voting machines, there is no evidence of any widespread problems.
I was just thinking how weird it was that Trump didn’t call the midterms rigged.Well…
[image or embed]
— Matt Novak (@paleofuture.bsky.social) November 9, 2026 at 7:16 AM
On Election Night, Trump said during a phone call to Fox News: "Congratulations to the Democrats. I think the Democrats did a good job. I really do. I think they did a good job. They fought hard. They were, you know, they've been fighting for a long time. They've been fighting me for a long time. This fight's been going on for ages."
However, as unfounded claims of fraud proliferated on social media—and amid posts promoting a January 3 "Million Crusader Cross March" on the Capitol headlined by racist provocateur Jake Lang—the president changed his tune.
"Trump now claims the midterms were rigged," noted the political action group Blue Georgia. "It was just a matter of time."
Conspiracy theory journalist Mike Rothschild said on Bluesky: "After a week of meekly accepting the midterm results, Trump has veered into 'the machines are rigged' denial." But this is a pale shadow of 2020 denialism. He sounds beaten and disinterested."
Former Chicago Tribune metro editor Mark Jacobs also took to Bluesky, touting his prediction that the president would cry fraud and writing, "I knew Trump could never resist the impulse to declare that the election was rigged if he lost."
"The View" co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin said on X, "Lather, rinse, repeat."
Former Obama and Biden administration appointee Andrew Weinstein said: "Losing isn't proof of fraud. It's proof you lost."
Tangle News founder Isaac Saul also took to X, opining that Trump's denial "feels pretty flaccid."
"Nobody *actually* thinks these results are nefarious, and it seems like there's a lot of impatience on the right with anyone suggesting these losses were due to fraud and not policy," he added. "Even Trump seems to be offering this as an afterthought."
That right-wing impatience was evident in just two words from commentator Megyn Kelly, who posted, "Just stop."
Keep Reading
Show Less
See More
Most Popular
Progressive Newswire
Civil Society Groups to House: Support Every Article of Impeachment for Hegseth
Nov 10 2026 · 05:03pm EDT
Statement on Google AI in School Allegedly Helping Teen Girl Plan Suicide
Nov 05 2026 · 04:09pm EDT
ACLU Applauds Gov. Gavin Newsom’s Historic Commutation of All Death Sentences in California
Nov 05 2026 · 03:11pm EDT
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy