Opinion
Climate
Economy
Politics
Rights & Justice
War & Peace
Trump and young beauty pageant contestants in Hawaii
Further

For Now A Prince. How Long Till A (Fake) King?

The arrest of the U.K. rapist formerly known as Prince, and the echoing, trans-Atlantic edict that no one is above the law, lay ever-barer America's "true exceptionalism": A culture of immunity so corrosive our own heinous, in-his-fever-dreams "exonerated" Predator-In-Chief has enragingly yet to face any consequences for his manifold sins, crimes, cruelties and depravities, petty and profound. Finally, says Epstein survivor Maria Farmer, "(Let) all the dominoes of power and corruption begin to fall."

The stunning arrest by Thames Valley Police of "Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor" - notably, not "His Royal Highness," ”the Duke of York" or other niceties - on his 66th birthday was widely seen as not just an arrest but "a transfer of power," a possible, long- awaited shift in the tides for once-untouchable elites of the Epstein class that announces power and status may no longer keep them safe, at least outside the crooked U.S. Shortly after 8 a.m., police arrived in six unmarked vehicles at Wood Farm on King Charles’ Sandringham Estate to haul Andrew off; they also reportedly searched his former residence near Windsor Castle. The charge, "suspicion of misconduct in public office" - talk about your euphemisms - stems from Andrew's term as UK trade envoy from 2001 to 2011, when he allegedly shared with Jeffrey Epstein confidential government reports on potential investment opportunities from Vietnam, Singapore, China and Afghanistan.

The envoy gig mandates a "duty of confidentiality"; any "abuse of public trust" that uses public power as "private currency for self-serving or nefarious reasons" carries a maximum sentence of life in prison. (Just imagine what they'd make of the Trump cartel's brazen, perennial grifting.) Andrew, of course, has also been charged with raping outspoken Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre, who died by suicide last year at 41, which led to him being stripped of his royal titles before slinking out of public view. Regrettably, he never faced a rape charge in court due to several factors - a civil settlement with Giuffre, a high bar for conviction beyond a reasonable doubt, and other legal loopholes. Presumably for some Epstein victims, bringing Andrew to even a modicum of justice on the easier-to-prove misconduct in office charge may feel dispiriting, like nabbing the murderous Al Capone for tax evasion: Better than nothing, but not good enough.

Andrew's was the first arrest of a senior member of the British royal family in modern history. The last one arrested was King Charles I in 1647, following his defeat in the English Civil War by Parliamentarian forces; a believer in the divine right of kings, his tyrannical reign led to his imprisonment, trial for high treason, and beheading in 1649 - the moral arc of the universe moved faster then. After Andrew's arrest, his brother King Charles, who had received no warning beforehand, issued a statement on, not his bro but “Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor”; he expressed “deepest concern" but "whole-hearted support" for the investigation: "Let me state clearly: the law must take its course." Others cited the same probity. Prime Minister Keir Starmer: "No one is above the law.” The family of Virginia Giuffre: "No one is above the law, not even royalty." Heartbreakingly, they added, "For survivors everywhere, Virginia did this for you."

Waxing cautious about possible shifts in power, The Mirror’s Christopher Bucktin notes, "A birthday arrest should not stand alone as a rare spectacle. It should signal something larger: that no title, no fortune, no political office is sufficient armour against the law...Justice cannot stop at one imprisoned accomplice while others retreat behind legal teams and influence." A new report from the UN's Human Rights Council, which finds Epstein's wrongs "may reasonably meet the legal threshold of crimes against humanity," echoes him. Arguing the files' "credible evidence of systematic and large-scale sexual abuse, trafficking and exploitation" - thus contradicting the "little evidence" bullshit of our DOJ and FBI - it dismisses vapid calls to "move on" as "a failure of responsibility towards victims." Resignations alone aren't enough, it adds: "It is imperative that governments act decisively to hold perpetrators (criminally) accountable."

As further evidence "Epstein elites can't hide anymore" - except, yes, infuriatingly, here - active investigations of Epstein-related crimes in 16 countries are now sweeping up officials on both sex-trafficking and corruption charges; Canada will reportedly open the next one. In the UK, former ambassador to the U.S. Peter Mandelson was fired and is under investigation - oops, now arrest - for passing on financial info to Epstein; Starmer’s chief of staff, who appointed Mandelson, also resigned. In Norway, a former prime minister was charged with "gross corruption” for his Epstein ties, and two diplomats are being investigated. In France, so are a former Culture Minister, his daughter and a senior diplomat. Non-Epstein-related justice has also come for South Korea's former President Yoon Suk Yeol - a life sentence with hard labor for an insurrection - and Brazil's Bolsonaro, whose 2023 coup attempt got him 27 years, and no pardons.

"This is what accountability looks like," argues David Kurtz of Andrew's arrest and all the rest, which "sends a signal far beyond London - straight to Washington." What it proclaims: "If the King's own brother is not above the law, neither is the King's dinner guest, nor his Commerce Secretary." Infernally, the lesson has yet to be heeded in an America ruled by a two-bit, 34-count felon and rapist abetted by a cabal of flunkies managing a Mafia-style criminal regime with no bottom and a corrupt SCOTUS whose "out-of-thin-air immunity doctrine" has made him less accountable than actual royalty - spawning a nation "exceptional among developed nations solely in (its) unwillingness to hold the powerful to account, even in the most egregious cases." Confirming that stark reality was last week's unfurling, outside the DOJ, of a huge banner of Dear Leader, "an abomination and an outrage" straight-up declaring our alleged justice system "a pure creature of presidential whim, retribution and cover-up."

Meanwhile, despite Epstein files that "scream 'Guilty" - with his hideous name appearing over 38,000 times in 5,300 released files representing just 2-4% of the grisly whole - Trump had the chutzpah to respond to a question about the possible ripple effect at home of Andrew's arrest by professing, four times in 30 seconds, he's been "totally exonerated." "Well, you know, I'm the expert in a way, because I've been totally exonerated," he blustered, prattling on in toddler-ese. "I did nothin'. It’s very nice. I can actually speak about it very nicely. I think it’s a shame. I think it’s very sad. It’s very, very sad to me. It’s a very sad thing. To see it, and to see what’s going on with his brother. King. So I think it’s a very sad thing." Fucking Christ. Nope, wasn't me, nothing to see here, not a creep, all good, if sad. And not a word on the survivors. Appalled observers: "Guilty as fuck," "The man on my TV screen is batshit crazy," and, "I hope to live long enough to see this POS in a cell with an open toilet." Or maybe none?

Epstein’s carefully curated, now slowly splintering network of elites included billionaires, academics, politicians, scummy MAGA hangers-on like Steve Bannon - “Dude. You up??" - with culpability circling ever closer to Trump. A trove of damning evidence has surfaced, from the removal of 53 files bearing his name to journalist Roger Sollenberger's account of disappeared allegations in a civil complaint and FBI slideshow that the DOJ spoke four times to a Jane Doe who credibly charged she was forced to perform oral sex on Trump when she was about 14; when she bit down on his penis, she said he punched her in the head, kicked her out, and later raped her vaginally and anally. Experts say such emerging stories of abuse reveal a ghastly, familiar pattern; the latest, in Alaska, is "nothing short of horrifying." Thus does Masha Gessen argue that it's time for us to stop speaking of the Epstein story "as a story about extraordinary lawlessness. It is a story about ordinary lawlessness."

Dating back, in Trump's case, a savage lifetime. By now he's committed most of the crimes Thomas Jefferson charged King George with in the Declaration of Independence - ignored laws "necessary for the public good," sent "swarms of Officers to harass our people," kept "Standing Armies without Consent," altered "fundamentally the Forms of our Government," ravaging due process, free speech, health care, civil rights, history itself. The lies, deaths, grift, cruelty, unceasing assaults on decency. The "monstrous machine" to snatch up and spit out thousands of innocents - "¡Libertad!” - in concentration camps. The children trapped with cancer, measles, trauma: "Please get me out of here." Two-month old Juan Nicolás, unresponsive in Dilley, choking on his vomit, abruptly deported with his family to Mexico, tracked down and cared for thanks to "America's most relentless immigration reporter," because, "The story is rarely the policy - (it's) the person standing in the rubble of the policy."

Today, the two essential pillars of Trump's "fantasy version of nationalist renewal" - ethnic cleansing and tariffs - are both rubble, rejected by the public, the courts and even a corrupt SCOTUS, which enraged him so much he revived a cringe John Barron to rave about the "fools and lap dogs” who rejected his cherished tariffs and the imaginary hundreds of billions they brought in to make us '"the hottest country." The drek kept spewing. He praised lickspittles Thomas, Alito, Beer Keg Brett for "their strength and wisdom," especially Beer Keg, "for his, frankly, his genius." He respects them "because they not only dissented, their dissent is so strong. I'm very good at reading language and it read our way 100%...My thousands of victories...Like the wars I stopped. The Prime Minister of Pakistan said I saved 35 million lives by getting them to stop. That's -- and I did it largely with tariffs." He's vowed new tariffs, "and they can all be used in a much more powerful and obnoxious way." So much winning.

Also somewhere he asked the owner of "they made steel products" how he was, and the man said, "I'd love to kiss you," because "we were down to working one hour a week and then you came in and imposed tariffs (and) now we're going to double shifts seven days a week and maybe to 24 hours almost seven days a week, we're hiring people like we haven't - like I've never..." Trump: "Nobody's standing in (the) position I have as president had the insight, the courage, I don't know what it is. They're all pouring into the United States. But just like that great patriot said, Sir, what you've done, nobody thought was possible." As to "slimeball" Gorsuch and Coney Barret, they're "an embarrassment to their families" and were "swayed by foreign interests." Dems were intrigued: The Judiciary Committee's Jared Moskowitz felt he should find out more about them, and another Dem felt the next president "will have no choice but to replace all 9 members with new justices with no foreign entanglements."

On Saturday, the White House held the annual Governors' Dinner, designed to "build relationships and discuss things in a bipartisan way." Historically, the staid, candle-lit, black-tie affair - Melania wore $2,400 silver foil pants - can serve as a genial distraction from Congressional battles. In this rancorous moment, it was a shitshow - actors on both sides alternately called it "a farce" and "a glowing evening" - because after the Mad Hatter King uninvited two Dems, the only Black and only openly gay governor, Dems all boycotted it what became a MAGA ass-kissing fest. Trump used the moment to blame two Dem governors for a sewage spill in the Potomac River. "We have to clean up some mess Maryland and Virginia have left us," he snarled. "It's unbelievable what they can do with incompetence." The ruptured pipe is part of a D.C.-based, federally regulated utility under the oversight of the U.S. EPA. As to "mess," we hope to see this face replicated soon at home.

"It could go either way. There's no other way. You have other ways you can go. You don't have to go that way. You can go other way." - Donald J. Trump, lifelong sexual and financial predator and deeply, deeply shameful President of the United States of America

The former Prince Andrew leaving the police station after his arrest The former Prince Andrew leaving the police station after his arrestPhoto by Phil Noble/Reuters, a portrait of power crumbling in real time that went viral on BlueSky

SEE ALL
Texas Governor Abbott And Google Make Economic Development Announcement In Midlothian
News

Big Tech's 'AI Climate Hoax': Study Shows 74% of Industry's Claims Unproven

A report released on Tuesday says that the tech industry is blowing hot air with its claims that generative artificial intelligence will be beneficial for the climate.

The report, titled "The AI Climate Hoax," was commissioned by a broad consortium of environmental advocacy organizations and authored by climate and energy analyst Ketan Joshi.

In total, it analyzes more than 150 statements made by both big tech companies and organizations such as the International Energy Agency about the supposed benefits of generative AI.

The report finds that 74% of such claims made by these institutions are unproven, with 36% not bothering to cite any evidence whatsoever.

One key finding in the report is that many claims about the purported benefits of the technology conflate traditional AI systems with more recent generative AI systems, which require massive amounts of energy and are spurring demand for the construction of power-and-water-devouring data centers across the US.

"Even if these benefits are real," the report writes of traditional AI systems, "they are unrelated to—and dwarfed by—the massive expansion of energy use from the generative AI industry," which is projected to to consume 13 times as much energy as traditional AI by the year 2030.

Even the more supportable claims about the benefits of traditional AI deserve serious scrutiny, the report notes, since "they tend to rely on weaker forms of evidence, such as corporate websites, rather than published academic research," which was only cited in 26% of claims made about AI benefits.

The report also knocks big tech companies for using assorted strategies to conceal the true extent of their energy use, including buying renewable energy certificates even while relying on fossil fuels to power their operations, and vowing to implement highly implausible solutions to mitigate the climate impact of data centers, including carbon capture technologies and even building orbital data centers in space.

Commenting on the report, study author Joshi said its findings seem to show "tech companies are using vagueness about what happens within energy-hogging data centers to greenwash a planet-wrecking expansion."

"The promises of planet-saving tech remain hollow, while AI data centers breathe life into coal and gas every day," Joshi added. "These claims of climate benefit are unjustified and overhyped, and could cover up irreversible damage being done to communities and society."

Jill McArdle, international corporate campaigner at study sponsor Beyond Fossil Fuels, said the study shows "there is simply no evidence that AI will help the climate more than it will harm it," and accused Big Tech companies of "writing themselves a blank cheque to pollute on the empty promise of future salvation."

AI data centers have become a major controversy throughout the US in recent months, as their massive energy needs have pushed up utility bills and put a strain on communities’ water supplies.

A study published in the journal Nature Sustainability last year found that data centers could soon consume as much water as 10 million Americans and emit as much carbon dioxide as 10 million cars, or roughly the same amount of consumption as the entire state of New York.

SEE ALL
Rally To Oppose House Republicans' Tax Proposal Ahead Of Final House Vote
News

In Fox News Op-Ed, Warren Blasts Trump for Breaking Promise on Credit Card Rates

Sen. Elizabeth Warren on Monday slammed President Donald Trump for breaking his promise to cap credit card interest rates.

In an op-ed published by Fox News, Warren noted that Trump last month gave the major US credit card companies a deadline of January 20 to set their interest rates at a maximum of 10% over the next year, or face some form of consequences.

However, that deadline has long since passed and Trump still hasn't done anything to punish the credit card firms for keeping their interest rates high.

What's more, Warren wrote, Trump and his administration have continued gutting the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), which could be used to launch an investigation into credit card billing practices.

"While Trump claims he wants a credit card interest rate cap," Warren argued, "his own regulators are helping out those very same Wall Street banks that are ripping off Americans and blocking states from protecting their citizens from sky-high loans."

The Massachusetts senator also slammed major financial institutions for claiming that capping credit card interest rates would lead to economic disaster.

"Give me a break," she said. "These are the most profitable financial institutions in the history of the world. There is no reason for them to demand 25% or 30% interest rates when smaller banks and credit unions are offering much lower credit card interest rates and are still making solid profits."

Warren revealed that she had a conversation recently with White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles in which she made a case that it would be politically beneficial to pursue legislation on the issue, but so far the senator has not heard back about any follow-up plans.

"After six weeks, there’s no deal to help the American people," explained Warren. "We don’t need more speeches. We need an agreement on legislation and a commitment from the president to actually fight for it."

Trump's inaction on credit card interest rates came under fire last month from Mike Pierce, executive director of advocacy organization Protect Borrowers, who said that the president would need to lean harder on his congressional allies to make his promises a reality.

"Banks are charging the highest rates ever recorded—raking in windfall profits because both American life and Americans’ debts are more expensive," Pierce said. "If the president is serious about helping families, he needs his Republican allies in Congress to make this a top priority and stand up to the executives and lobbyists trying to protect banks’ bottom lines."

Matthew Stoller, senior researcher at the American Economic Liberties Project, was not surprised that Trump failed to live up to his credit card interest rate pledge.

"Shocker," he wrote in a social media post. "Trump was lying about his 10% credit card interest rate cap."

SEE ALL
Attorney General Bondi, FBI Director Patel, And U.S. Attorney Pirro Make Announcement At The Justice Department
News

'Huge Win': Judge Bars Trump DOJ From Searching Devices of Washington Post Journalist

A federal judge ruled Tuesday that the US Justice Department cannot search the devices it seized from Hannah Natanson, a Washington Post journalist whose home was raided by the FBI earlier this year as part of an investigation into a government contractor.

William Porter, magistrate judge of the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia's Arlington Division, wrote in his 22-page decision that the Trump administration's "failure to identify and analyze" the Privacy Protection Act (PPA) in its application for a search warrant in the case "has seriously undermined the court’s confidence in the government’s disclosures in this proceeding."

The PPA shields journalists from being forced to turn over work materials to law enforcement. During the raid on Natanson's home, FBI agents reportedly seized a phone, two laptops, a recorder, and other devices.

"Many government lawyers had multiple opportunities to identify the PPA as controlling authority and to include an analysis of it in the warrant application," Porter wrote. "None of them did."

Porter added that he hopes "this search was conducted—as the government contends—to gather evidence of a crime in a single case, not to collect information about confidential sources from a reporter who has published articles critical of the administration."

Runa Sandvik, founder of a startup that works to protect journalists' digital security, called the ruling a "huge win for Hannah Natanson and the Washington Post."

The Post noted in its reporting on the decision that federal prosecutors "acknowledged that only a small portion of the information on the devices seized from Natanson would be relevant to the case against" Aurelio Perez-Lugones, a government contractor who was indicted last month on charges of illegally obtaining and sharing classified materials.

Federal prosecutors "asked Porter to allow a government filter team to search through the devices for relevant information," and the team "would then hand over the responsive information to prosecutors," the Post reported.

Porter rejected that proposal in his ruling, citing "documented reporting on government leak investigations and the government’s well-chronicled efforts to stop them."

"Allowing the government’s filter team to search a reporter’s work product—most of which consists of unrelated information from confidential sources—is the equivalent of leaving the government’s fox in charge of the Washington Post’s henhouse,” Porter wrote. “The concern that a filter team may err by neglect, by malice, or by honest difference of opinion is heightened where its institutional interests are so directly at odds with the press freedom values at stake.”

Press freedom organizations have condemned the Trump administration's raid on Natanson's home and seizure of her work devices as an alarming escalation in a broader assault on journalism.

Earlier this month, the Freedom of the Press Foundation filed a complaint against Gordon Kromberg, the federal prosecutor who signed the search warrant application targeting Natanson.

“Kromberg and the government omitted a federal law that should have prohibited the raid of Hannah Natanson’s home when applying for a search warrant," Seth Stern, chief of advocacy for FPF, said in a statement, referring to the Privacy Protection Act. "That choice now threatens to expose Natanson’s sources and cripple her ability to report, while also sending a warning shot to journalists and whistleblowers nationwide."

“Disciplinary bodies cannot look the other way and ignore misconduct that threatens the First Amendment, particularly from an administration with a long history of misleading judges and everyone else," Stern added. "When prosecutors abuse their power to facilitate efforts to silence reporting and intimidate news sources, disciplinary authorities must hold them accountable and impose real consequences.”

SEE ALL
Benjamin and Sara Netanyahu greet Narendra Modi upon his arrival in Israel
News

'Disgraceful Act of Complicity': Indian Left Denounces Modi's Israel Visit

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi's arrival in Israel on Wednesday sparked widespread condemnation among his country's leftists, many of whom accused the Hindu nationalist leader of complicity in Israel's annihilation of Gaza.

Modi was warmly welcomed at Ben-Gurion International Airport by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his wife Sara to kick off a two-day state visit that is expected to focus on issues including military cooperation and arms sales, as Indian purchases of Israeli weaponry have increased exponentially in recent years.

The Indian leader was also joyously greeted at his place of accommodation, the King David Hotel, where in 1946 Jewish militants seeking independence from British occupation carried out a bombing that killed 91 people, including at least 15 Jews.

Modi addressed the Israeli Knesset, or Parliament, lamenting the Hamas-led attack of October 7, 2023 in which 1,195 Israelis and others were killed and 251 abducted. But he said nothing about the more than 250,000 Palestinians killed or wounded by Israel's genocidal retaliation.

He did say that "no cause can justify the murder of civilians." But he was talking about Israeli, not Palestinian, civilians.

"Modi endorsed the brutal killing of 71,000 innocent Palestinians from reckless Israeli bombing," Calcutta-based journalist Seema Sengupta said on social media in response to the Knesset speech. "The death on both sides should've been mourned by him. Instead, he sounded like a partisan leader of a party which gained prominence through disharmony, violence, and bloodshed."

The Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M)—which leads the ruling Left Democratic Front that currently heads the Kerala state government—said it "strongly opposes" Modi's visit, which it called "a betrayal of the Palestinian cause" that "legitimizes the murderous Netanyahu regime."

"The visit comes at a juncture when Israel has been waging a genocidal war in Gaza," the party continued. "Despite a ceasefire, there are daily violations by Israel which conducts strikes killing scores of Palestinians. In the occupied West Bank, there are stepped up attacks on Palestinians and a spurt in illegal settlements."

"The declared intent of the visit is also to deepen strategic, military, and economic ties with a Zionist expansionist regime which seeks to dominate the region with the help of the United States," CPI-M added. "The visit is all the more inopportune because it is taking place at a time when the United States is preparing to attack Iran militarily at the instigation of Israel."

CPI-M General Secretary M A Baby said that "Modi's embrace of Zionist Israel amidst its relentless genocidal assault on Palestine is a betrayal of India's anti-colonial legacy."

The Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Liberation, whose stronghold is in the eastern state of Bihar, said that it "condemns Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Israel as a disgraceful act of complicity in the ongoing genocidal assault on the Palestinian people."

"At a time when Palestinian civilians are being massacred, displaced, and starved under a brutal Israeli occupation, this visit amounts to political endorsement and profiteering on Palestinian blood," CPI (ML) Liberation continued. "After mortgaging India’s sovereignty and strategic autonomy to [US President Donald] Trump's racist agenda, Modi is now completely surrendering India’s historic legacy of anti-colonialism and solidarity with the oppressed by visiting Israel."

"Since assuming office in 2014, the Modi regime has systematically imported Israeli models of repression to consolidate its own politics of hate at home," the party added. "From bulldozer demolitions and collective punishment tactics against minorities and marginalized, to the expansion of illegal surveillance infrastructures, the [Bharatiya Janata Party]’s fascist politics has found a role model in Israel."

Israel and India have deepened ties since Modi and the BJP were elected over a decade ago. Both Modi and Netanyahu are right-wing nationalists who utilize religious supremacism to exclude or marginalize Muslims, and both have been accused of increasing authoritarianism, just like their common ally Trump.

Center-leftists including members of the opposition Indian National Congress—which has been criticized for its "pragmatic" engagement with Israel—also condemned Modi's visit.

Left-leaning members of Indian civil society and academia also decried the visit.

Rebuffing Modi's claim that this week's shirtless anti-BJP demonstrations by members of the Indian Youth Congress were an embarrassment for the nation, Delhi School of Economics professor Nandini Sundar said on social media that visiting "genocide-committing Israel has embarrassed and shamed Indians more than a 1,000 shirtless protests."

The activist group Indian People in Solidarity With Palestine and the India chapter of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement issued a joint statement accusing the "fascist BJP government" of working "hands-in-gloves with genocidal Israel" to "suppress voices of dissent while maintaining a facade of being democratic."

Members of Indian People in Solidarity With Palestine and the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement demonstrate against Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi's visit to India. (Photo by Indian People in Solidarity With Palestine)

“At a time when the ceasefire is being used as an excuse to bomb and vaporize Palestinians and occupy Gaza," the groups said, "the Indian government is choosing to stand with genocidal Israel and its imperialist masters like America and is working overtime to benefit the corporations from the occupation of Palestine."

Update: This article has been updated with additional remarks from Modi.

SEE ALL
Democratic Leaders Jeffries and Schumer
News

Top Dems Reportedly Working to Sabotage Bill to Stop Trump War With Iran

Top Democrats are reportedly working behind the scenes to stop a vote that would force them to go on the record about whether they support a Trump administration attack on Iran.

As the president amasses an armada in the Middle East in apparent preparation for an unauthorized military action, Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) planned to force a vote this week on their war powers resolution, which would require congressional authorization for any attack.

The congressmen have emphasized that time is of the essence, as Trump has signaled that a strike may come any day, and Iran has indicated it may retaliate with devastating force.

A war with Iran is overwhelmingly unpopular with the American public: According to a YouGov poll published Tuesday, just 27% said they'd support military force while 49% oppose it. Democrats are even more united, with 76% saying they'd oppose a war and just 9% support.

And yet, as independent journalist Aída Chávez reported in her newsletter Capital & Empire, Democrats on the House Foreign Affairs Committee have tried to "dampen momentum and prevent the Iran war powers vote from advancing."

Multiple sources have told her that "a top Democratic HFAC staffer... deliberately inflated projections of opposition to the bipartisan measure—warning of 20 to 40 Democratic defections" in a bid to indicate the resolution would fail overwhelmingly.

She said a senior Democratic congressional staffer told her it’s “pretty clear” Democratic leadership is working to "delay or potentially sideline" the vote on the war powers resolution. “If you’ve been around the Hill, this is a familiar playbook," the staffer said.

“Leadership rarely comes out and says they oppose these votes outright, because they know the underlying issue is popular with the base,” said the staffer, who works on foreign policy. “Instead, you see process concerns, timing objections, and caucus-unity arguments used to slow things down or keep members off the record. We’ve seen the same approach on past war powers votes and foreign policy amendments that clash with the national security elite consensus.”

Democratic leaders have largely tempered their criticisms of Trump's buildup for what would be potentially the most consequential military action taken by the US in decades.

Schumer, one of the top recipients of funding from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and other pro-Israel donors, has limited his criticisms of Trump's war posturing to questions of procedure rather than policy.

Asked earlier this week about potential US strikes on Iran, Schumer lamented that discussion was being held in "closed-door briefings," saying that "the administration has to make its case to the American people as something as important as this."

Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), who sits on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, issued a similar statement that did not object to war in principle but rather the fact that Trump's reasons for making war were unclear.

"The president and his administration have not tried to explain whether their goal is to destroy Iran's nuclear program, protect Iranian protestors, pursue regime change, or simply distract from hisfailure to deliver on his promises at home," Coons said in a statement posted to social media. "Congress and the American people need answers about what our objectives are in Iran."

President Donald Trump is reportedly weighing a massive military operation that could entail assassinating Iran's leaders. Meanwhile, Iran has said in the event of a massive attack, it would consider US military bases to be “legitimate targets,” meaning US servicemembers could be at risk.

As Drop Site News reported late last week, based on conversations with an unnamed aide to Schumer back in June—weeks before Trump attacked three nuclear sites in Iran—a number of important Senate Democrats believed that if Trump wants to start a war with Iran, they shouldn't stand in his way.

Not only did these Democrats believe that "Iran ultimately needed to be dealt with militarily," but they "also understood that going to war again in the Middle East would be a political catastrophe."

"That’s precisely why they wanted Trump to be the one to do it," the report continued. "The hope was that Iran would take a blow and so would Trump—a win-win for Democrats."

Other Capitol Hill sources told Chávez that, in the House, Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) and other leaders have not been whipping support for the Khanna-Massie resolution, while few members have openly endorsed it, even as no other war powers resolutions are up for a vote.

Two leading pro-Israel Democrats, Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) and Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), came out against the war powers resolution on Friday, with Moskowitz deriding it as the "Ayatollah Protection Act."

In a statement, they claimed that Iran was "still pursuing a nuclear weapon," even though US intelligence agencies and the United Nations' International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) have assessed the opposite.

Iran's leaders have expressed a willingness to reach an agreement with the United States that limits their ability to develop a nuclear weapon while allowing them to pursue peaceful nuclear technology in line with the terms of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

The IAEA assessed that at the time Trump pulled the US out of a previous nuclear agreement in 2018, Iran was complying with its terms. Since the deal's collapse, it has begun to scale up uranium enrichment, according to a report by the agency last year.

During an interview on the podcast Breaking Points on Tuesday, Khanna said that the Democrats who have sought to kill his bill were being guided by "powerful interests that are itching to have regime change in Iran."

"This has been a long-term goal of AIPAC and other groups," Khanna said. "So when you stand up and say, 'I'm going to introduce legislation to uphold the Constitution and not get us into another war,' you make enemies."

He said pro-war Democrats were going along with Trump's push for the same reason they've resisted releasing the Democratic National Committee's report assessing that former Vice President Kamala Harris' position on Israel cost her votes in the 2024 election, and have balked at saying Israel is committing a "genocide" in Gaza.

"It's not that they may disagree with it," Khanna said. "It's just that they don't want billionaires and powerful people to be targeting them."

Khanna said he plans to meet with other House Democrats on Wednesday to rally the votes for his resolution. He says he believes he'll have enough support to force a vote on the resolution by next week, but that "it's taking work."

"There are a lot of people in Congress," he said, "who just would prefer that these issues go away."

SEE ALL