SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Our latest senseless illegal war against brown people, born of ever-shifting lies and fought by the sons of the blithe un-rich, is Trump's ultimate Wag-the-Dog distraction from his crimes, failures and pedophilia at home. Having oafishly declared the Iran regime “a vicious group of very hard, terrible people” - pot/kettle if you add "inept"- his "warriors" are now being told this is "part of God's divine plan," with The Rapture imminent (after killing more schoolgirls.) One sage: "It's a good thing Congress isn't alive to see this."
Leave it to "the world's most famous bone-spur patient," Board of Peace chair, recipient of a fake FIFA peace prize and pilfered real Peace Prize, cornered serial sexual predator facing exposure and pathological liar who vowed "no new wars" while attacking seven nations in a year to launch "the dumbest war in US history" - a tough competition - and the biggest US military operation in the Middle East since the 2003 invasion of Iraq, which Bush, Rumsfeld, Powell et al at least tried for months to justify with a pack of lies before making "the worst foreign policy decision in history." Trump: Hold my Coke. Experts have long warned that with his hubris, thin skin, historical ignorance and affinity for heedless demolition of buildings, customs, laws, credibility, he could wreak the most havoc in foreign affairs, where his power is most unbridled - especially now, as he grows increasingly desperate and dangerous.
Thus, having amassed a vast arsenal of US weaponry in the Persian Gulf, did he launch our current "national obscenity." Ever presidential, he did it in a sober, cogent speech at a White House lectern with all the gravity the occasion called for. Kidding: He did it in a histrionic 2:30 a.m post on his crappy platform from his golf bordello after a $1-million-a-plate fundraiser - cue cringe robotic dancing to God Bless the USA - and a bellicose, garbled speech, his face smeared in make-up beneath a tacky baseball cap?! Later, the White House released a photo of a hastily assembled War Room with black drapes around it and some guy peeking in - looking for the omelette bar? Observers: "Looks secure to me," "Looks like the Goodman wedding reception had to be moved," "These clowns seriously started WW lll from a blanket fort at a shitty golf club?!" and, "This is not how democracies go to war."
But we just did - with no (Constitutionally mandated) approval from Congress, no (historically obligatory) public debate, over the objections of his own intelligence agencies and against the wishes of 80% of Americans, including his own base. In a slurred, spurious, deeply Orwellian speech, he "upended half a century of US foreign policy" by proclaiming the $1-billion-a-day-but-who needs-groceries-or-health care Operation Epic Fury (presumably named by a 12-year-old minion), which he randomly called "the single greatest chance for the Iranian people to take back their Country." Citing zero evidence, he said many of Iran’s soldiers "no longer want to fight," are "looking for Immunity from us," and hope to "peacefully merge with Iranian Patriots (to) bring back the Country to Greatness" (like ravaged America) to "achieve our objective of PEACE THROUGHOUT THE MIDDLE EAST AND, INDEED, THE WORLD!” Because, bless his moronic heart, nobody ever thought of regime change before.
The world's worst negotiator moved to set the Middle East on fire after walking away from ongoing, reportedly promising talks in which Iran had already made concessions; given the regime's "stupefyingly overt corruption," they included bribes to a deeply unqualified Kushner and Witkoff. Trump's Very Serious, deep-dive analysis: "We were having negotiations with these lunatics, but it was my opinion they were going to attack first." So he did. The death toll in a swiftly spreading conflagration is now over 1,000, including at least six US service members. Gruesomely but not surprisingly, one of the first strikes hit the Shajareh Tayyebeh elementary school in southern Iran, killing an estimated 170 girls aged seven to 12. In a searing video of the carnage - woe to the murderers of little children - a distraught man stands amidst bloodied books, bodies, backpacks and shouts, "This was a school and they came to study."
Also killed the first day was Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and dozens of military commanders - so many, in a sign of Trump's famed proficiency, that he told news outlets he'd had a "beautiful plan" and several candidates for Iran’s new leadership but, oops, "They're all dead." There were other miscalculations. Despite his sanguine gibberish about PEACE, Tehran vowed to unleash "devastating blows" and the intact, powerful, heavily armed, fanatically loyal Revolutionary Guard, showing no interest in laying down their arms or ideology, warned of "a severe, decisive and regret-inducing punishment” of their killers. As in Iraq and everywhere else and one more time, a historian notes, regime change through bombing has never been successful: "Regimes are networks, (and) when an external power kills a leader, networks often consolidate, not fragment. Successors emerge, as do Martyr narratives."
As to the US, what has yet to emerge is a long-term plan, a lucid rationale for the mayhem. They throw spaghetti at the wall, offering wildly shifting goals, timelines, narratives, excuses of "imminent threat" so flimsy they'd be laughable if not lethal. They want to "destroy Iran’s missile capability," "annihilate their navy,” halt their regional hegemony, stop them from building nuclear weapons US intelligence insists are over 10 years away. Trump babbles: He wants "freedom for the people,” Iran "just wanted to practice evil," we have to "get rid of their whole group of killers and thugs," and they blocked his 2020 re-election. He really did "obliterate” their nuclear program in June but "we found they were in a totally different site - totally different, so it was just time.” One analyst: "The lack of any coherent message seems to suggest the lack of any coherent objective." Robert Reich: "He has no fucking clue what he’s doing."
Bizarrely, Trump's reportedly calling journalists to workshop objectives and timelines: 2 or 3 days, four to five weeks? More bizarrely - is it possible? - suddenly-anti-war MTG charges the regime, deep in "the same old bullshit," is even polling voters to ask how many casualties they'd accept: "How about ZERO you bunch of sick fucking liars." Meanwhile, MAGA struggles to define the debacle they've birthed. In a few head-spinning minutes, Mike Johnson claimed Iran "declared war on us," insisted "we're not at war," and clumsily pivoted to, "a very, umm, specific, clear mission, an operation." Enraged Dems were more forthright. Ruben Gallego: "Trump ran on exposing pedophiles and stopping wars, (and) is now protecting pedophiles and starting wars.” Chris Murphy on a vanity war "nobody in this country is asking for: "It won’t be the billionaire children of Trump and his buddies that die." Steve Schmidt, likewise bitter: They'll have "died to change the subject from child rape."
In greasy contrast, dry-drunk war-mongerer, preening macho cartoon, and "colossus of incompetence and extremism" Pete Kegsmith yammers about "our warriors fully unleashed to achieve our objectives, on our terms, with maximum authorities." Also "iron fist," "true force multiplier," "hitting them surgically, overwhelmingly" while seeking "off-ramps and escalations (to) execute what we need" with, "No apologies. No hesitation. Epic fury." What an epic asshole. He snarled at a presser with right-wing hacks: "Why would we tell you - you, the enemy, anybody - what we will or will not do?" He went full psychopath in another, braying of "death and destruction from the sky all day long" and "rules of engagement (that) are bold, precise, and designed to unleash American power. We are punching them while they are down." Also, "War is hell." Though Sherman added, "It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, for vengeance, for desolation."
A Christian nationalist, Crusades fan-boy and sexist xenophobe who attends Bible study and Pentagon prayer services, Hegseth is a vital force in an explosive push to enshrine brimstone-breathing - and unconstitutional - Christian fundamentalism in America's military. Thus is our new war of choice being feverishly sold, not as a ploy to distract from Epstein, ICE, inflation etc but as a Biblically-sanctioned holy crusade toward a devoutly-to-be-wished End Times. Or in the more skeptical words of The Fucking News, "Jesus Christ, They Drafted Jesus Christ To Fight Iran." Since the Iran attacks, reports Jonathan Larsen, the Military Religious Freedom Foundation has logged over 200 complaints from 50 bases of every military branch about commanders telling troops this is "all part of God’s divine plan," with Trump improbably "anointed" to bring the Rapture, Armageddon and the return of Christ to recreate a white, straight, Republican, gated-community America.
Larson reports one Christian NCO wrote on behalf of 15 troops of multiple faiths, all rejecting the call to embrace a nihilistic, Revelation-based worldview. "This is not what my faith is for," he wrote, "and this is not what my uniform is for." MRFF head Mikey Weinstein, an Air Force and Reagan White House veteran, said he's been "inundated" by calls with "one damn thing in freaking common" - complaints about "the unrestricted euphoria" of commanders urging troops to accept their fundamentalist theology. Declares Weinstein, "Any military (pushing) their blood-soaked, Christian nationalist wet dreams upon the flames of this latest non-Congressionally sanctioned attack against Iran should be swiftly, aggressively and visibly prosecuted." Adds Dean Blundell, raised Evangelical, on a "crusade of low-IQ warriors": "If history has taught us one goddamn thing, it’s that holy wars don’t end when the true believers say they will. They end when there’s nothing left to burn."
Alas, in the case of this ill-conceived holy war, true believers may be embarking not just with epic fury, an iron fist and a blanket fort but irreparably clogged toilets. Adding a surreal twist to an already dark tale of Christofascist empire-building, new reports describe toilet lines of up to 45 minutes for 4,500 sailors on the world's most advanced warship, the US Navy's $13-billion, nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford, now facing what are politely termed "significant sanitation challenges" as it idles in the Persian Gulf. The ship's vacuum-based sewage system has long been plagued by repeated failures and lack of maintenance, but the latest breakdown of many of its 650 toilets may be the final straw for sailors already weary from an extended, 8-month deployment; after Trump's illegal Venezuela assault/kidnapping, they were ordered to go straight to his illegal Iran air strikes/mass murder. Some have posted gross videos of flooding shit; reads one, "Join the Navy, they said."
Still, their Commander-In-Chief says everything's swell. "It's going to go pretty quickly," he announced of the widening chaos in the Middle East. "We're way ahead of schedule." Experts warn the Iran war, coupled with the shift of national security resources to immigration, raises the risk of terrorism; says veteran and Rep. Jason Crow, "It just shot through the roof. But Trump just bragged about the "exciting times," and asked how he'd rate the success of the war on a scale of one to ten, he said he'd give it "about a fifteen." As to the likely growing casualties from his "noble mission," he's shruggingly said, "That's the way it is." Talk about epic fury: See the response from Kendall Brown, whose husband is on the USS Gerald Ford. "If you voted for this, I fucking hate you," she says in a now-viral video. "If you still support this, you are a monster."
"America is strong because its leaders are strong. President Trump proves that every day," reads a DraftBarron website by South Park's Toby Morton. "Naturally, his son Barron is more than ready to defend the country his father so boldly commands. Service is honor. Strength is inherited. Dog Bless Barron." Arguing, "Leadership starts somewhere," it offers the loving testimonial from his dad, "People come up to me, with tears in their eyes, and they say, ‘Sir, you’re the strongest. Send Barron off to war.’" For now, Operation What Now lurches on. Trump reportedly bombed Iran because "he had a feeling, based on fact." Melania explained how to achieve "enduring peace." Oil prices quickly spiked, and millions were stranded after airports and sea lanes shut down. Because we are the most exceptional, can-do country on earth, the State Department's Office of Overseas Citizens Services hotline was there to help. Sort of. Dog bless America.
"Five things to remember about war: 1. Many things reported with confidence in the first hours and days will turn out not to be true 2. Whatever they say, the people who start wars are often thinking chiefly about domestic politics 3. The rationale given for a war will change over time. 4. Wars are unpredictable 5. Wars are easy to start and hard to stop." - Timothy Snyder
- YouTube www.youtube.com

As the Trump administration broadens its efforts to criminalize dissent, a nonviolent climate advocacy group says the FBI is targeting it with a terrorism investigation.
Using a dubious legal designation of "domestic terrorism," the US Department of Justice (DOJ) has ramped up its efforts to surveil those it considers to be domestic enemies—including members of left-wing groups with no history of violence.
The New York City chapter of the group Extinction Rebellion said one of its former members came into the crosshairs earlier this month.
In a statement on Wednesday, the group said that a former member was visited by two special agents, one of whom was from the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Forces, at their residence 200 miles outside New York City.
They said the agents asked about their involvement with Extinction Rebellion. The member declined to respond, referring the questions to their attorney.
The former member, who has chosen to remain anonymous, told the Intercept that they hadn't been involved with the group in two years and hadn't participated in any actions they thought would warrant FBI involvement.
“I believe this to be a significant escalation of the criminal legal system against Extinction Rebellion and find it very troubling,” Ron Kuby, an attorney for Extinction Rebellion, said. “This is usually the way we find out an actual investigation is underway and is often followed by other visits and other actions.”
He said he found it strange that Extinction Rebellion would become the target of a terrorism investigation. Members of the group take part in acts of what they call "nonviolent civil disobedience" such as blocking roads, sit-ins at public buildings, and occasional vandalism.
The group has sought to use these tactics to draw attention to leaders' inaction in fighting the climate crisis. Increasingly, they have launched protests against the Trump administration's policies more broadly, including its deployment of federal immigration agents in cities across the country.
While its actions can be disruptive, Extinction Rebellion has always been nonviolent, Kuby said, and its tactics are at worst misdemeanor offenses, which typically wouldn't interest federal law enforcement.
"[Extinction Rebellion NYC] is a nonviolent, decentralized group of artists, small business owners, parents, retired teachers, and everyday New Yorkers. We are not terrorists!" said a statement from Extinction Rebellion Global posted to social media on Tuesday. "We use artistic nonviolent organized protests, community outreach, and strategic advocacy to empower everyday citizens and drive meaningful environmental change."
"This is an escalation against the climate movement as a whole, and the next phase of this administration's crackdown on dissent that many of us have been expecting," the group continued.
The New York City chapter of Extinction Rebellion is not the first to receive FBI visits during the second Trump administration.
Last year, six members of its sister group in Boston said the feds came to their doors, all on the same day in March, and questioned them without providing any business cards or explanation for their visit.
According to WBUR reporting at the time, none of the activists questioned had a history of participating in violent protests or of facing felony charges in federal or Massachusetts courts.
Jeff Feuer, a lawyer in Cambridge who has represented climate activists for more than three decades, told the outlet, “Until this year, I have never heard about the FBI or any other federal law enforcement officer visiting or questioning any of the hundreds of climate activists that I have personally represented."
After months of denial, US Attorney General Pam Bondi acknowledged during a contentious House Judiciary Committee hearing earlier this month that the department does, in fact, have a list of "domestic terrorist organizations" being compiled under President Donald Trump’s National Security Presidential Memorandum 7, which was described as a national directive to use the Joint Terrorism Task Forces to focus on “leftist” political violence in America.
That memo, commonly referred to as NSPM-7, was first obtained by independent journalist Ken Klippenstein in September. It laid out a national strategy to “disrupt” individuals or groups that "foment political violence" before it takes place.
NSPM-7 described many vaguely defined political viewpoints as potential "indicators" that one is a possible domestic terorrist, including: "anti-Americanism," "anti-capitalism," and "Anti-Christianity"; "extremism" on "migration," "race," and "gender"; and "hostility to those who hold traditional views" on "family," "religion," and "morality."
In another memo that leaked in December, Bondi—who just months before pledged under oath there would “never be an enemies list” compiled by the DOJ—directed the department to compile a list of potential “domestic terrorism” organizations that espouse “extreme viewpoints on immigration, radical gender ideology, and anti-American sentiment.”
It directs federal law enforcement agencies to refer "suspected" domestic terrorism cases to the Joint Terrorism Task Forces, which will then undertake an “exhaustive investigation contemplated by NSPM-7” that will incorporate “a focused strategy to root out all culpable participants—including organizers and funders—in all domestic terrorism activities.”
During the hearing, Bondi refused to say which groups and entities were on the list of so-called "domestic terrorists," though she acknowledged it existed, saying, "I know antifa is part of that."
Trump designated "antifa," referring to a loose confederation of antifascist groups, as a "domestic terrorist organization" in October, even though there is no formal "domestic terrorism" statute in US law.
It is unclear whether a formal federal investigation into Extinction Rebellion is underway or if it is part of NSPM-7.
An internal document shared with the Guardian in November revealed that the FBI had launched “criminal and domestic terrorism investigations” into “threats against immigration enforcement activity” in at least 23 regions across the US—including New York. It acknowledged that some of the investigations were related to the "countering domestic terrorism" memo.
"'Domestic terrorism' may not yet be a criminal charge, but the Trump administration is gearing up to create it," Extinction Rebellion NYC said on Wednesday. "NSPM-7... will be the broadest criminalization of free speech since McCarthyism or the height of the Civil Rights Movement. And while this fossil-fueled administration has already failed in some attempts to silence critics, we understand the broader context within which our specific activities sit."
President Donald Trump will soon be hosting a ritzy fundraiser even as many Americans say they're still struggling to afford weekly groceries.
As flagged by New York Times reporter Teddy Schleifer, Trump on Friday is scheduled to have a fundraising dinner at his Mar-a-Lago resort where attendees must pay $1 million each for the price of entry.
According to a Times report published last year on the planned fundraiser, the money raised from the dinner "will flow to a super PAC devoted to Mr. Trump, MAGA Inc., which has vacuumed up hundreds of millions of dollars since he was reelected last year."
The Times noted that it's unclear what Trump plans to do with the vast sums he's raising since he is constitutionally ineligible to serve another term, although that hasn't stopped him from saying he wants to run again in 2028.
The fundraiser is occurring as a new report from the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) is projecting that US consumers will get little relief from food prices in 2026.
According to the USDA Economic Research Service forecast for February 2026, "prices for all food are predicted to increase 3.1%" this year, "with a prediction interval of 0.7 to 5.7%."
The USDA also projects that seven categories of food are project to see their prices increase faster this year than their 20-year historical average rate of growth: "Beef and veal, other meats, fish and seafood, processed fruits and vegetables, sugar and sweets, cereal and bakery products, and nonalcoholic beverages."
Leor Tal, campaign director at Unrig Our Economy, said on Friday that Republican policies including Trump's tariffs and cuts made to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) are exacerbating the affordability crisis for US families.
"Families are already struggling to put food on the table and, instead of relief, they’re getting hit with even higher costs because congressional Republicans continue to prioritize billionaires over working Americans," said Tal. "Thanks to Republican-backed tariffs and devastating SNAP cuts, working Americans are not only facing higher food prices but millions of people are also losing the assistance they rely on to put food on the table."
An Associated Press poll released last year found that 53% of Americans believe the cost of groceries is a “major source of stress,” which is higher than the percentage of Americans who say the same thing about the cost of housing, healthcare, and childcare.
Anxiety about grocery prices is particularly strong among Americans earning $30,000 or less per year, as nearly two-thirds of them described paying for groceries as a “major source of stress.”
James Talarico's victory in the Democratic US Senate primary in Texas on Tuesday shows why it would be a mistake to think Latino voters who jumped ship to support President Donald Trump in 2024 are a lost cause, according to Democratic strategist Chuck Rocha.
Rocha, who worked on Sen. Bernie Sanders' (I-Vt.) 2020 presidential campaign and who is a senior adviser for Talarico's campaign, told the Wall Street Journal that the Democratic Senate hopeful won over Latino support in Texas by focusing on a populist economic message first and foremost, such as when he accused US billionaires of "stealing from the American people, stealing the wealth that we created."
"Latinos are an aspirational people, and they want to aspire," said Rocha. "And they are also religious people, and they're... for economic populism."
The Journal noted that Talarico easily bested his rival for the nomination, US Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas), by roughly 27 percentage points in Texas counties whose populations are 60% or more Latino, including counties in the southern part of the state that were longtime Democratic strongholds that swung to Trump in 2024.
The lesson of the election for Democrats, Rocha told the Journal, is "don’t write off Latinos that voted for Donald Trump."
In a video posted on social media Wednesday, Rocha elaborated on how Talarico and his campaign secured the nomination, calling the Texas Democrat "a special candidate" who "ran the right kind of race at the right time."
The facts about how @TeamTalaricoHQ won last night pic.twitter.com/1IUd9VpPUh
— Chuck Rocha (@ChuckRocha) March 4, 2026
Beyond that, Rocha said, Talarico and his staff were simply relentless campaigners willing to seek votes wherever they could find them.
"He won because he showed up in communities," Rocha said. "He ran advertising in those communities. He had an amazing field team of 28,000 volunteers, over 600 community events in just eight weeks. They sent over 4 million peer-to-peer texts."
Rocha said that it was too soon to say whether Talarico's message meant that Latino voters were returning to Democrats more broadly, but added, "They will move back for James Talarico if you show up and give them a hopeful message."
Rocha's enthusiasm for Talarico was echoed by Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas), chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
"James Talarico is the future of the Democratic Party," Casar declared in a social media post. "He unites working people of all kinds to take on the billionaires who are making life unaffordable. He’s going to show Texas Republicans how powerful working people are when we stand together. On to victory in November."
Mark McKinnon, a one-time Texas political operative who has worked for both Republicans and Democrats, said in an interview with Politico that Talarico's victory would be an unwelcome development for the Texas GOP, which will have to work harder to defeat him than other prospective Democratic nominees.
"A perfect storm is lining up for Texas Democrats," McKinnon said. "They have a nominee who can appeal to moderates and soft Republicans. Talarico could be Moses who leads the Lone Star Democrats out of the desert they’ve been in for 35 years."
Just four major data broker breaches in recent years have cost US consumers over $20 billion, according to a Thursday report from a key leader in Congress that argues "additional action is needed to protect Americans from scams."
Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-NH), ranking member of the congressional Joint Economic Committee (JEC), launched a sweeping investigation into financial scams last July. As part of it, she's examined data brokers, which collect and sell individuals' personal information. These companies often operate with limited transparency, her report explains, making it "more difficult for individuals to secure their information online and, ultimately, protect themselves from the growing threat of scams."
"Data brokers, for example, can enable scams by making consumers' personal information available to bad actors, who can then use details like Social Security numbers, home addresses, or banking information to develop customized and convincing scams," the report explains. "In some cases, data brokers have allegedly sold this information directly to scammers; in others, cyber hacks of data brokers have exposed individuals' data to uncontrolled circulation online."
Last August, after Wired reported that some data brokers took steps to hide their opt-out pages, Hassan issued investigative requests to Comscore, Findem, IQVIA Digital, Telesign, and 6Sense Insights. The report states that all of the companies but Findem responded with "actions to make their opt-out options more accessible to consumers and other parties," which "included removing 'no index' code that had blocked opt-out pages from search engine results, adding opt-out links in more prominent locations, and publishing blog content explaining how people can exercise their privacy rights."
"Notably," the report continues, "Findem did not respond to the ranking member's requests or written outreach from committee staff and has not removed the 'no index' code from its opt-out page—raising serious concerns about its responsiveness to opt-out requests and commitment to data privacy."
While recognizing the other companies for their positive responses, Hassan's report also stresses that more must be done. For instance, she requested information about efforts "to audit or assess the visibility of opt-out options or the success rates of opt-out requests," and "only 6sense stated that it contracts with third-party auditors to conduct both of these assessments."
Highlighting the need for further action, Hassan's staff estimated that identity theft stemming from four large data broker breaches—Equifax in 2017, impacting 147 million US residents; Exactis in 2018, impacting 230 million; National Public in 2023, impacting 270 million; and TransUnion in 2025, impacting 4.4 million—cost American consumers $20.9 billion.
"As international criminal syndicates increasingly use scams to target Americans, data brokers shouldn't make it harder for people to protect themselves," Hassan said in a statement. "This report shows the scope of the threat that people face from data broker breaches and underscores the importance of protecting Americans' private data."
She added that "it is encouraging that after we launched our investigation, many companies took steps to improve opt-out options for Americans, which in turn can help more consumers keep their information out of the wrong hands."
As a related webpage from the Electronic Privacy Information Center details: "There is no federal law in the United States that adequately regulates the data broker industry. As a result, private companies invade our private lives, spy on our families, and gather our most intimate facts, on a mass scale, for profit. EPIC supports state and federal legislative efforts that set limits on data brokers’ collection, use, retention, and disclosure of personal data."
In recent years, members of Congress have introduced various legislative proposals aimed at reining in data brokers—including in the Security and Freedom Enhancement (SAFE) Act, introduced on Monday. The bipartisan bill would, among other things, close the so-called "data broker loophole" that, as Sens. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah) put it, "intelligence and law enforcement agencies use to buy their way around the Fourth Amendment" to the US Constitution.
There are some limits that have passed, including in Protecting Americans’ Data from Foreign Adversaries Act of 2024. Earlier this month, the Federal Trade Commission sent letters reminding 13 companies of their obligations to comply with the PADFAA, which "prohibits data brokers from selling, licensing, renting, trading, transferring, releasing, disclosing, providing access to, or otherwise making available personally identifiable sensitive data of a United States individual to any foreign adversary country or any entity that is controlled by a foreign adversary."
However, as Lartease Tiffith, an expert at American and George Mason universities, laid out in an article for Just Security last November, while Congress enacted the PADFAA "with the right goal," the law, as written, "could penalize legitimate US companies for routine global operations while failing to deliver the targeted national security tool Congress intended."
US investigators reportedly believe that American forces were behind the bombing of an Iranian girls' school that killed more than 160 people—mostly young children—during the initial wave of attacks launched Saturday by President Donald Trump in coordination with the Israeli military.
Citing two unnamed officials, Reuters reported Thursday that US military investigators have found it is "likely" that American forces were responsible for the deadly strike on the school in the southern Iranian town of Minab, though the investigation has not yet been completed. Schools are protected under international law, and targeting them is a war crime.
"Reuters was unable to determine more details about the investigation, including what evidence contributed to the tentative assessment, what type of munition was used, who was responsible, or why the U.S. might have struck the school," the outlet noted. "The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive military matters, did not rule out the possibility that new evidence could emerge that absolves the U.S. of responsibility and points to another responsible party in the incident."
"If a US role were to be confirmed," Reuters added, "the strike would rank among the worst cases of civilian casualties in decades of US conflicts in the Middle East."
HuffPost's Akbar Shahid Ahmed echoed Reuters' reporting, writing that Pentagon officials "told Congress in multiple briefings this week that they believed the US was most likely responsible (though probe ongoing)."
The reporting came on the heels of a New York Times analysis that concluded the US was "most likely to have carried out the strike," given that American forces were simultaneously bombarding an adjacent Iranian naval base. The Times also rejected the claim that an Iranian missile hit the elementary school.
"The strikes were first reported on social media shortly after 11:30 am local time," the Times reported. "An analysis of those posts—as well as bystander photos and videos captured within an hour of the strikes—helps corroborate that the school was hit at the same time as the naval base. One video, pinpointed by geolocation experts, showed several large plumes of smoke billowing from the area of the base and the school."
Beth Van Schaack, a former State Department official who currently teaches at Stanford University’s Center for Human Rights and International Justice, told the Times that "given the US' intelligence capabilities, they should have known that a school was in the vicinity."
Trump administration officials have said very little about the Iranian school strike in their triumphant rhetoric about the war, which Pentagon Secretary Pete Hegseth hailed as the "most lethal, most complex, and most precise aerial operation in history." Hegseth has also openly dismissed what he's called "stupid rules of engagement," rejecting constraints on US forces that are designed to prevent the killing of civilians.
Asked about the school strike during a March 4 press conference, Hegseth responded: "All I know—all I can say is that we're investigating that. We, of course, never target civilian targets, but we're taking a look and investigating that."
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio referred reporters to the Pentagon when asked about the attack, but added that "the United States would not target, deliberately target, a school," in purported contrast to the Iranian government, which Rubio claimed is "deliberately targeting civilians" because "they are a terroristic regime."
Two first responders to the scene of the attack, as well as a parent of one of the killed children, told Middle East Eye earlier this week that the school was hit by two strikes, a possible "double-tap" attack. An Al Jazeera investigation concluded the attack on the school was likely deliberate.
Jeremy Konyndyk, president of Refugees International, called the school attack "a horrific US war crime, up there with My Lai," referring to US soldiers' massacre of Vietnamese civilians in 1968. The US military initially covered up the massacre.
"In a sane world, Hegseth would resign, Congress would hold immediate hearings and establish an investigation, and the US would come clean," Konyndyk wrote on social media. "None of that is likely, so international mechanisms should kick in, including the [International Criminal Court]. And Hegseth should probably talk to a lawyer."
On Thursday, as US and Israeli officials vowed to ramp up their assault on Iran, two boys' schools southwest of Tehran were reportedly bombed.
"The targeting of civilians, educational facilities, and medical institutions constitutes a grave violation of international humanitarian law and human rights law," a group of United Nations experts said earlier this week.
"Nothing short of a halt to the data center rollout will suffice... to ensure that people and the environment are fully protected."
Several Big Tech CEOs met with President Donald Trump on Wednesday and pledged to fund their own energy infrastructure needed to power their artificial intelligence data centers that have caused US utility bills to spike over the last year.
That same day, Food and Water Watch slammed the pledge as "wholly inadequate" and released what it described as a "first-of-its-kind report" outlining the massive environmental and human costs imposed by the AI data center explosion.
Among other things, the report states that data centers' vast energy needs are throwing a "lifeline to the fossil fuel industry," while undermining the many gains made from the revolution in clean power technology.
"AI expansion is largely fueled by dirty energy sources," the report notes. "In the US, over 40% of energy for data centers comes from natural gas, 24% from solar and wind combined, 20% from nuclear, and 15% from coal."
The report also pours cold water on Trump's plan to have Big Tech build its own energy infrastructure to power its data centers.
"Power plants can’t come online fast enough to fuel this growth," the report explains. "Data centers in New York state are seeking more than 9,000 megawatts (MW) of new demand—about 1.5 times the power consumption of every household in the state in 2024. Georgia Power predicts that energy sales will almost double by the early 2030s, largely driven by data centers. This steep demand increase can raise residential electricity costs—regardless of whether the new data centers pull from the grid or not."
Electricity isn't the only resource consumed in vast quantities by AI data centers, and the report also shines a light on the enormous amounts of water required to keep the facilities from overheating.
"The amount of water consumed by data centers more than tripled from 2014 to 2023," the report explains. "By 2028, US data centers could use as many as 720 billion gallons of water each year just to cool AI servers. This is equal to over 1 million Olympic-size swimming pools—or enough water to meet the indoor needs of 18.5 million American households."
Food and Water Watch says that the report's findings point to only one solution: A moratorium on AI data center construction along the lines of what US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) proposed last year.
"The well-documented harms of AI data centers cannot be resolved with piecemeal regulations or vague promises from AI enthusiasts of a utopian future," the report concludes. "Nothing short of a halt to the data center rollout will suffice until a comprehensive regulatory framework is developed to ensure that people and the environment are fully protected."
Meghan Pazik, senior policy advocate with Public Citizen’s Climate Program, also criticized Trump's AI data center pledge on Thursday and argued that the president's plan "isn’t doing anything binding to cut energy bills."
"Data centers increase residential energy bills by upwards of 250% and many communities are left in the dark on these projects from the start," said Pazik. "Asking corporations to sign meaningless ‘agreements’ fits Trump’s tired pattern of seeking fake concessions from corporations that translate to zero action or relief."
Trump's AI data center pledge comes at a time when US voters are facing increasing economic pressure across multiple fronts. In addition to data centers' impacts on utility bills, Americans are also facing increased costs from Trump's global tariffs on imported products and a spike in gas prices caused by the president's war against Iran.
While Trump has claimed to be prioritizing cutting costs with the data center pledge, he was dismissive of Americans’ concerns about paying more for gas this week, telling Reuters in an interview that “if [gas prices] rise, they rise.”
"ICE abductions of noncitizen journalists take the reporters best equipped to cover immigration enforcement off the beat."
Press freedom groups on Friday were calling for the immediate release of Estefany Rodríguez, a journalist with Nashville Noticias and Univision 42 Nashville, after she was detained by federal immigration agents while traveling in her marked press vehicle.
The Freedom of the Press Foundation said it was not yet clear whether Rodríguez was detained "in retaliation for her reporting" on US Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) mass detention and deportation operation under President Donald Trump.
"But we certainly wouldn't be surprised," said the group in a statement on social media. "ICE abductions of noncitizen journalists take the reporters best equipped to cover immigration enforcement off the beat."
Rodríguez was with her husband, a US citizen, on Wednesday when she was arrested outside a gym. She was in a car marked with the Nashville Noticias logo when several other vehicles surrounded her, the outlet said in a statement Friday.
"Several men got out and demanded that our colleague be taken into custody for reasons that the legal team will specify at a later date," said Nashville Noticias. "Estefany Rodríguez was taken to a detention center."
Pablo Manríquez of Migrant Insider reported Friday that Rodríguez had been taken to the Central Louisiana ICE Processing Center, "a facility infamous for solitary confinement and sexual abuse by guards against detainees."
Nashville Banner reported that Rodríguez arrived in the US in 2021 on a tourist visa and then applied for political asylum. Her lawyer, Joel Coxander, told the outlet that Rodríguez had reported on armed groups in her native Colombia and had received threats for doing so, leading her to file at least one police report before coming to the US. After getting married, the Columbia Journalism Review (CJR) reported, Rodríguez "filed for permission to adjust her status to that of a lawful permanent resident."
She had never had an interaction with ICE until January 8, Nashville Banner reported, when she received a G-56 "call-in" letter asking her to come in to a local ICE office for "processing and additional information" on January 26.
Coxander told Nashville Banner that the letter advised Rodríguez to come to a meeting to "help ensure the best outcome for your case." She was also told she would receive a Notice to Appear (NTA) at the meeting, an official document initiating an immigration court case.
The local office was closed on January 26 due to inclement weather, and a makeup appointment was scheduled for February 25.
Media and an associate of Coxander's went to the ICE office two days before the rescheduled appointment to confirm whether Rodríguez had to go to the meeting and ask if the NTA could simply be sent to her attorneys. They were told no appointment was in the system for Rodríguez and a third appointment was scheduled for March 17.
Nine days later, Rodríguez was arrested, with ICE agents presenting the NTA rather than a warrant after they surrounded her car.
An ICE officer at the local office told Coxander's associate after Rodríguez was detained that she had been arrested because she was considered a "flight risk" because she had "missed" two meetings.
“She’s being told, ‘We’re holding it against you that you didn’t do this thing we told you you didn’t have to do,” Coxander told Nashville Banner. “They’re saying, ‘Hey, you didn’t show up to this invitation letter, so you’re a full flight risk.’”
Rodríguez has covered ICE's operations in Nashville. CJR reported that on Tuesday, the day before she was arrested, Rodríguez "reported from the parking lot of a residential complex where three ICE agents detained a man believed to be of Venezuelan origin."
Her arrest comes weeks after federal agents arrested journalists Don Lemon and Georgia Fort, accusing the two US citizens of conspiring with organizers to disrupt a church service at a protest they were covering. Last June, an Emmy-winning reporter named Mario Guevara was arrested and held for more than 100 days before being deported. His deportation "is believed to be the first case of a journalist being removed from the US in retaliation for their work," wrote CJR's Carolina Abbott Galvão.
The Tennessee Immigrant and Refugee Rights Coalition said Rodríguez is a "beloved community member and trusted journalist in the community."
"It’s not lost on us that as a reporter, Estefany honestly and courageously told real stories about the harms caused by ICE and the people they targeted and detained," said the group.
Media Action Plan, a Canada-based press freedom group, said Rodríguez's arrest "is another attack on the free press."
Rodríguez's husband set up a GoFundMe for the family, which also includes a young daughter. The fundraiser had raised nearly $9,000 as of Friday afternoon.
“Not merely negative-number-so-what unpopular, but worst-ever-support-for-war-when-it-started unpopular.”
President Donald Trump's unprovoked and unconstitutional war against Iran is historically unpopular among US voters.
In an analysis published Friday, polling expert G. Elliott Morris calculated an average of eight high-quality polls conducted over the last week about the war and found just 38% of Americans approve of the military strikes against Iran, while 49% are opposed.
Morris noted that there is simply no precedent for a US war being this unpopular from the very outset.
"The big takeaway from these numbers is that the new war in Iran is very unpopular," he wrote. "Not merely negative-number-so-what unpopular, but worst-ever-support-for-war-when-it-started unpopular. With just 38% of Americans in favor, support for bombing Iran is lower than retrospective support for the war in Iraq was in 2014."
Morris then offered some comparisons to past US military conflicts to show that the lack of support for Trump's Iran war is simply in uncharted territory.
"No president in modern polling history has launched a major military operation with the public already against him," he wrote. "After the September 11 attacks, a November 2001 Gallup poll found 90% of Americans approved of military action in Afghanistan, with just 5% opposed. The Gulf War in 1991 hit 79-80% approval. Gallup measured 76% support for the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 (Pew had it at 71%)."
Even comparatively unpopular operations, such as Trump's strikes against Syria in 2017 or former President Barack Obama's 2011 military operation in Libya, still had net-positive approvals at the times they occurred.
Morris added that Trump should be concerned about this because historically "wars only get less popular" over time as "casualties mount and costs become clear."
CBS News polling director Anthony Salvanto on Tuesday also highlighted this phenomenon when analyzing a poll on the Iran war commissioned by his network that showed US voters' support for the conflict dropped precipitously the longer they believed it would last.
"If you think it's going to be a long conflict, months, even years... the numbers tilt toward disapproval overall," he said.
The longer Americans believe the conflict in Iran will last, the more they disapprove, a new CBS News poll finds. Half the country believes it'll be months, or even years before it's over. CBS News' @SalvantoCBS breaks down the new findings. https://t.co/KyjZB3PriP pic.twitter.com/N4yXnlKgLS
— CBS News (@CBSNews) March 3, 2026
Trump so far has not offered any kind of timeline for his war against Iran, and Politico reported on Wednesday that the US military is preparing for the conflict to last until at least September.
Trump on Friday insisted he would not end the conflict with Iran until its government offered its "unconditional surrender."