SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER

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

* indicates required
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Opinion
Climate
Economy
Politics
Rights & Justice
War & Peace
Maria Corina Machado gestures during a January protest in Caracas,
Further

A Beacon Of Hope and Woke Bullshit

Citing the value of “keep(ing) the flame of democracy burning," the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado for her “tireless work promoting democratic rights for (her) people." Machado called the award an “immense recognition of the struggle of all Venezuelans." With their usual grace, MAGA-ites blasted the choice of "some lady in Venezuela" and not a mad king terrorizing brown people, siccing troops on his citizens, and murdering fishermen. America: Fuck that guy.

Machado is a key but divisive figure in Venezuela: She's been called "the smiling face of Washington’s regime-change machine" and CAIR has blasted her for supporting Israel's right-wing Likud Party and anti-Muslim fascists. She's also faced years of political persecution under Maduro’s regime while building a powerful grassroots democracy movement from a once-fragmented opposition. A 58-year-old industrial engineer, she was blocked by the courts from running against Maduro in 2024; facing death threats and bogus charges, she has been living in hiding since then.

The Nobel Committee praised Machado as "a brave and committed champion of peace" struggling "to achieve a just and peaceful transition from dictatorship to democracy.” They also called her a symbol of civilian courage and "a beacon of hope for Latin America." Possibly sending a message to those of us facing growing autocracy, they affirmed the value of “keep(ing) the flame of democracy burning during a growing darkness" and said she "has shown that the tools of democracy are also the tools of peace.”

International leaders praised Machado's "tireless struggle for freedom and democracy (that) has touched hearts and inspired millions"; the EU Commission's Ursula von der Leyen called the award a tribute to her courage and “every voice that refuses to be silenced.” She joins the ranks of other distinguished women honored in recent years for championing human rights, including Iran's Narges Mohammadi, Myanmar's Daw Aung San Suu Ky - both still imprisoned - Tawakkol Karman of Yemen and Liberia’s Ellen Johnson Sirleaf and Leymah Gbowee, joint recipients in 2011.

Announcing this year's award, the Nobel Committee seemed to especially take note of and aim at the looming threat posed by Trump. "When authoritarians seize power, it is crucial to recognize courageous defenders of freedom who rise and resist," they wrote. "Democracy depends on people who refuse to stay silent, who dare to step forward despite grave risk, and who remind us that freedom must never be taken for granted, but must always be defended - with words, with courage, and with determination." (And, sometimes, blow-up animals costumes."

Told the news before the announcement in an emotional, early morning call from Kristian Berg Harpviken, Director of the Norwegian Nobel Institute, Machado sounded shocked and tearful. "Oh my God, Oh my God," she repeatedly exclaimed. "I have no words." She quickly added, "I hope you understand this is a movement, this is an achievement of a whole society. I am just, you know, one person. I certainly do not deserve this." Harpviken graciously assured her that both she and the movement did deserve the honor.

In grotesque contrast were the denizens and Narcissist-In-Chief of MAGA land, outraged the prize was not awarded to a racist, lying, vindictive despot who's busy threatening political opponents, ordering violent roundups of immigrants, deploying his military against cities whose leaders disagree with him, cracking down on dissent and undertaking extrajudicial killings of fishermen in the Caribbean who may not have done anything wrong while boasting about "ending" several imaginary wars and whining that not winning the award would be "a big insult to our country."

Somehow, shamefully, some mainstream media took seriously Trump's longtime, petulant claim to deserve what many consider the world's most prestigious prize - for many, proof of how low American media have fallen during the reign of a guy who still boasts about his "perfect score" on a basic cognitive test that requires naming a camel and lion, who is arguably more likely to win a Heisman Trophy or Miss Teen U.S.A., and who now joins the estimable ranks of Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Mao Tse-Tung, Pol Pot, Saddam Hussein, Putinm, and "all the Kims" to rightly fail to win a Nobel.

With discomfiting, possibly strategic generosity, Machado later dedicated her prize not only to "the suffering people of Venezuela," but to Trump for "his decisive support of our cause." Trump giddily twisted that mention into claims he'd “been helping her along the way,” she accepted the prize "in his honor," and he was "happy because I saved millions of lives." Still, MAGA officials and fans were pissed, and a White House statement charged the Committee "proved they place politics over peace" by rejecting Trump, who "has the heart of a humanitarian."

Supporters called the decision "unbelievable," "a disgrace," "an utter joke," "woke bullshit." "They hand it to someone nobody's (aka I've) ever heard of," said one. "The prize is garbage now, a Crackerjacks prize." Right-wing activist Laura Loomer called the choice "an absolute joke." "Everyone knows President Trump deserves the Nobel Peace Prize," she said. "More affirmative action nonsense." From The MAGA Voice: "Some random person that nobody knows... TRUMP COULD HAVE CURED CANCER" (if he hadn't halted cancer research.)

"Dear Snobs, Accredited Clowns and TDS-driven socialists of the European elite," wrote one Sebastian Adlercreutz, whose bio reads, "No woke lefties...Jesus is my Lord." "You have yet again managed to turn the Nobel Peace Price into a worthless trinket." Several GOP Reps raged online: One argued, "The Nobel Peace Prize does not deserve Trump," one proposed Congress give Dear Leader their own Nobel Peace Prize - it's unclear how that might work - and one thought they should create their own Trump Peace and Prosperity Award as a sort of participation trophy.

"TOTAL FIX," fumed a Truth Social post evidently from Trump. "Norway - a tiny country with expensive fjords and weak politicians - has the nerve to lecture AMERICA...Their leader (is) a LIBERAL lightweight and globalist puppet, a clowen in Oslo's palace, and his Nobel cronies are a disgrace." Announcing 100% tariffs on Norwegian goods, it charged "they RIGGEDED the nobel to embarass ME" and declared, "We will FIGHT. We will EXPOSE them. Norwegian Marxists will not humiliated AMERICA and get away with it!" Eventually, it turned out the post was a parody. We think.

SEE ALL
Lancet Study Warns Cancer Deaths Could Surge Nearly 75% by 2050
News

Lancet Study Warns Cancer Deaths Could Surge Nearly 75% by 2050

An ominous new study in the Lancet medical journal projects that deaths from cancer will surge over the next two-and-a-half decades, with lower-income countries set to be the hardest hit.

The study, which was released on Wednesday, estimates that there will be 18.6 million cancer deaths and 30.5 million cancer cases in 2030. The estimated number of cancer deaths would represent a nearly 75% increase from the estimated 10.4 million cancer deaths in 2023.

The study explains that the forecasted death increases "are greater in low-income and middle-income countries" than in wealthy nations, and that most of the projected increases are likely to come from an older population, not a rise in the lethality of cancer overall.

All the same, the study warns that the total increase in cancer cases and deaths will put a strain on global health systems.

"Effectively and sustainably addressing cancer burden globally will require comprehensive national and international efforts that consider health systems and context in the development and implementation of cancer-control strategies across the continuum of prevention, diagnosis, and treatment," the study says.

Meghnath Dhimal, chief research officer at the Nepal Health Research Council, who worked on the study, told Euronews that the projections showed "an impending disaster" for low-income nations. Dhimal also said that these nations needed to do more to improve their citizens' access to cancer screenings and treatments to prevent their systems from potentially being overwhelmed.

"There are cost-effective interventions for cancer in countries at all stages of development," he said.

Dr. Theo Vos, a researcher at the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation who helped author the study, told Euronews that the incidence of cancer could be significantly reduced by lowering tobacco use, unsafe sex, obesity, and high blood sugar, among other factors.

"There are tremendous opportunities for countries to target these risk factors, potentially preventing cases of cancer and saving lives," Vos explained.

SEE ALL
President Trump Signs Executive Order In White House's Roosevelt Room
News

Trump Admin Weighs Privatizing Student Loans, Fulfilling Another Project 2025 Objective

The Trump administration is reportedly weighing the privatization of federal student loans, fulfilling yet another Project 2025 agenda item.

Politico reported on Tuesday:

Trump administration officials are exploring options to sell off parts of the federal government's $1.6 trillion student loan portfolio to the private market, according to three people familiar with the matter.

The discussions have taken place among senior Education Department and Treasury Department officials and have focused on selling high-performing portions of the government's massive portfolio of student debt, which is owed by about 45 million Americans.

Since retaking office, Trump has already enacted numerous changes to student loan policy that have squeezed borrowers, including resuming wage garnishments for millions of borrowers with overdue debt payments after a five-year reprieve.

Meanwhile, he has slashed programs that helped those in debt pay their loans. These include the Biden-era Saving on a Valuable Education (SAVE) Plan, which provided payment assistance to over 8 million student debtors based on income level. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) set the SAVE program to formally shut down in July 2028, giving borrowers until then to find a new payment plan.

With little notice, the administration also paused forgiveness from the Income-Based Repayment (IBR) system, which was established in 2007 and enabled 2 million more borrowers to pay rates pegged to their income, with the promise of forgiveness after 20 to 25 years.

The OBBBA included a total $300 billion worth of cuts to higher education programs, primarily through federal student loans.

As Persis Yu, the deputy executive director and managing counsel at the advocacy group Protect Borrowers, explained, this included "the elimination of certain loans for graduate students, new annual and lifetime limits on federal loans for parents, cuts to Pell Grant eligibility, and new, stingier repayment options that will spike monthly costs and push borrowers further into debt."

The idea of bringing in private consultants to determine the value of the government's debt holdings and selling some student loan debt to private investors was floated during the first Trump term, but never came to fruition. However, this idea was fleshed out more thoroughly in the Heritage Foundation's Project 2025 playbook, which states that "student loans and grants should ultimately be restored to the private sector."

While details of how exactly the administration may plan to sell off this debt are scarce, critics have warned that privatization will put even more borrowers in precarious situations.

"Private student loans generally have more onerous repayment terms than federal loans, lacking options such as Income-Driven Repayment and often limiting and imposing fees for the use of forbearances," Yu said. "Private loans also lack vital cancellation protections found in federal student loans, such as disability and death discharges, or Public Service Loan Forgiveness."

"Private loans will not merely replace federal student loans," she continued. "Instead, they will limit access for students from the most underrepresented communities, raise borrowing costs, and eliminate vital protections that current federal borrowers rely on."

Private loans are also more rife with abuse. According to the Century Foundation, while private loans account for just 8% of all student loan debt, they have accounted for more than 40% of student loan-related complaints to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. One third of those complaints come from borrowers who say they are unable to afford their monthly loan payments.

At the same time, even while the Trump administration claims privatizing debt would save money for taxpayers, Preston Cooper, a senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, told Politico that savings would likely be minimal because investors would be unlikely to pay more for the loans than they are worth.

"The only way for [Trump's plan] to make economic sense is to structure the deal in a way that really short-changes borrowers," said Eileen Connor, executive director of the Project on Predatory Student Lending.

Yu says that the goal of privatization rests on a faulty premise: "The argument that free markets will control the cost and improve the quality of higher education underestimates the harm that can be caused by setting private lenders loose on students and fundamentally misunderstands the relationship between these market participants. In a debt-financed higher education system, students are not the consumer; they are the commodity."

Sara Partridge, associate director for Higher Education Policy for the Center for American Progress, said, "Once again, this Administration seeks to line the pockets of private companies at student borrowers’ expense while moving away from a system that provides consumer protections under the law."

SEE ALL
President Trump Speaks On Recent Supreme Court Rulings At The White House
News

'What Tyranny Looks Like': Democracy Defenders Slam Trump DOJ's Indictment of NY AG James

Critics sounded the alarm Thursday after the US Department of Justice indicted Democratic New York Attorney General Letitia James—who successfully prosecuted President Donald Trump for financial crimes—for alleged bank fraud in what democracy defenders called the president's latest weaponization of the DOJ against a political foe.

Days after another prosecutor in Virginia resisted intense pressure from Trump and Attorney General Pam Bondi and declined to pursue charges against James, US Attorney of the Eastern District of Virginia Lindsey Halligan—a former personal attorney for Trump whom the president appointed to her lifetime seat despite having never prosecuted a case—indicted James for allegedly defrauding a bank and making false statements to a financial institution.

"This is nothing more than a continuation of the president’s desperate weaponization of our justice system," James said in response to the news. "I am not fearful—I am fearless. We will fight these baseless charges aggressively, and my office will continue to fiercely protect New Yorkers and their rights."

This is nothing more than a continuation of the president’s desperate weaponization of our justice system.I am not fearful — I am fearless. We will fight these baseless charges aggressively, and my office will continue to fiercely protect New Yorkers and their rights..

[image or embed]
— New York Attorney General Letitia James (@newyorkstateag.bsky.social) October 9, 2025 at 2:36 PM

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said in response to the indictment: "This is what tyranny looks like. President Trump is using the Justice Department as his personal attack dog, targeting Attorney General Tish James for the ‘crime’ of prosecuting him for fraud—and winning."

“One US attorney already refused this case," Schumer added. "So, Trump handpicked an unqualified hack that would go after another political enemy. This isn't justice. It's revenge. And it should horrify every American who believes no one is above the law.”

Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) said on social media that the Trump administration is targeting James "for one reason: She had the courage to hold Donald Trump accountable."

"This is political weaponization of our courts, plain and simple—and proof that when you stand up to corruption, they come for you," she added. "I stand with Attorney General Letitia James. This attack won’t silence the truth."

Trump Wants the Nobel Peace Prize for War, Insurrection, and Indicting Letitia James with @mehdirhasan.bsky.social A desperate Trump is attempting to distract from the Epstein Files by indicting Letitia James and declaring war on American critics.thelefthook.substack.com/p/trump-want...

[image or embed]
— Wajahat Ali (@wajali.bsky.social) October 9, 2025 at 2:23 PM

Politico reported that James' case has been assigned to Judge Jamar Walker, an appointee of former President Joe Biden.

Halligan recently filed criminal charges against former FBI Director James Comey—who oversaw investigations into Russian interference in the 2016 election and potential ties to Trump's campaign—for allegedly making a false statement to Congress and obstruction of a congressional proceeding.

Critics accuse Trump of signaling to Bondi his wish for her to go after some of his political enemies, who in addition to James and Comey include Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who led the first House impeachment trial of the president. Following Comey's indictment, Trump vowed that "there'll be others."

Trump forced out Erik Siebert, Halligan’s predecessor, amid his refusal to indict Comey or file charges against James, who in 2022 filed a civil lawsuit against the then-former president, his two eldest sons, and the Trump Organization for business fraud. Trump and his organization were found liable for fraud and ordered to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in penalties, although an appeals court later overturned the fine while upholding the fraud findings.

Last month, the DOJ subpoenaed James as part of a probe into whether she violated Trump’s civil rights by suing him, his sons, and his business.

In addition to Democratic lawmakers, pro-democracy campaigners also slammed Thursday's indictment, with Stand Up America executive director Christina Harvey contending that "this is revenge and another dangerous abuse of power."

"Just days after prosecuting James Comey, Trump’s Justice Department pursued charges against New York Attorney General Letitia James in a thinly veiled act of retaliation for defeating Trump in court," Harvey added. “Americans do not want our president using taxpayer-funded prosecutors and law enforcement to exact revenge. If prosecutors can't even do their jobs without facing prosecution themselves, none of us are safe from Trump's overreach.”

Lisa Gilbert, co-president of the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, said in a statement:

Yet again, the vengeful Donald Trump has demanded the perversion of justice, this time with the vindictive charges against New York Attorney General Letitia James. Yet again, career prosecutors have recommended against bringing criminal charges. Yet again, only an interim US attorney who previously served as Trump’s personal lawyer was willing to seek the indictment.

Attorney General James will defend herself from these unjust charges and continue to do her job. But this prosecution is directed not only against Letitia James, but all Americans. No one should fear criminal prosecution because they stand up to Donald Trump.

“The government should be for the people," Gilbert added. "It should serve justice and law and regular Americans. It should not be distorted to serve the vindictive revenge effort of a single man. Even if that man is the president and the president thinks he is a king.”

SEE ALL
Explosion At Tennessee Explosives Manufacturer Leaves Multiple People Dead
News

19 Workers Missing and Feared Dead After Massive Blast Rocks Tennessee Bomb Factory

This is a developing story... Please check back for possible updates.

Nineteen people are missing and feared dead after a massive blast tore through a military explosives manufacturing plant in rural Tennessee on Friday morning.

Humphreys County Sheriff Chris Davis told reporters that a "very devastating blast" rocked the Accurate Energetic Systems (AES) facility in Bucksnort, about 60 miles southwest of Nashville, at approximately 7:45 am local time. Davis said the explosion—which rattled homes miles away—destroyed an entire building, and that multiple people died in the blast.

“I thought the house had collapsed with me inside of it,” local resident Gentry Stover told The Associated Press. “I live very close to Accurate and I realized about 30 seconds after I woke up that it had to have been that.”

Hickman County advanced emergency medical technician David Stewart told the AP that emergency responders could not yet go into the building due to continuing secondary explosions.

One AES worker told The Tennessean that the blast occurred in the melt pour building, which the employee said usually has less than 30 people inside during work hours.

As the newspaper reported:

The daily process of making bombs involves melting the explosives in large kettles, transferring the melted material into cannisters, packing the cannisters into boxes, stacking the boxes on palettes, and loading the palettes into trucks, the employee said.

AES makes mines for the US Army and demolition charges for the Air Force. In addition to the Department of Defense, AES clients have included the Department of Homeland Security, Department of Justice, and NASA.

This isn't the first disaster to occur at an AES facility. In 2014, an explosion at the company's McEwen, Tennessee munitions factory killed one person and injured three others, and in 2020, a fire broke out at the Bucksnort plant.

SEE ALL
Congressional Lawmakers Continue Work On Funding Bill After Government Shuts Down
News

Fetterman Joins GOP to Kill War Powers Resolution Against Trump's Extrajudicial Venezuela Bombings

With Democratic Sen. John Fetterman joining Republicans in opposing a measure to rein in President Donald Trump's ability to unilaterally bomb ships in the Caribbean Sea, the US Senate narrowly failed to advance a war powers resolution Wednesday.

Since the beginning of September, Trump has conducted four strikes on vessels off the coast of Venezuela which the administration has alleged, with little evidence, are carrying "narco-terrorists" spiriting illegal drugs to the United States.

Trump has also deployed thousands of sailors and marines to the Venezuelan coast and is reportedly considering strikes on the Venezuelan mainland, which has stoked fears within the country and across Latin America of another regime-change war.

In a quote to Responsible Statecraft, John Ramming Chappell, an advocacy and legal fellow at the Center for Civilians in Conflict, said that even if the ships attacked by Trump do contain drug-runners, the strikes carried out by Trump have been "summary executions and extrajudicial killings" that are "manifestly illegal under both US and international law."

But by a 51-48 vote, largely along party lines, the Senate opted not to discharge a resolution introduced by Sens. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Tim Kaine (D-Va.) from the Foreign Relations Committee that would have halted Trump's ability to carry out more strikes without congressional approval.

"The president has used our military to strike unknown targets on at least four occasions, and he is promising more," Schiff said in his speech introducing the resolution on the Senate floor. "With at least 21 people dead, and more killing on the way, with the president telling us that strikes on land-based targets may be next, we ask you to join us and reassert Congress' vital control over the war power."

Kaine added: "Americans want fewer wars—not more—and our Constitution clearly grants Congress alone the power to declare one. Yet President Trump has repeatedly launched illegal military strikes in the Caribbean and has refused to provide Congress with basic information about who was killed, why the strikes were necessary, and why a standard interdiction operation wasn't conducted."

Two Republican senators, Rand Paul (Ky.) and Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), joined Democrats in voting to advance the resolution.

Paul, a libertarian who is typically more skeptical of foreign interventions than others in the GOP, has been an outspoken critic of Trump's assertion of unchecked authority to bomb ships and the lack of evidence provided.

He previously sparred with Vice President JD Vance online after Vance said, "I don't give a shit" that striking unarmed civilians without due process is a "war crime" under international law.

On the Senate floor, Paul said: "Perhaps those in charge of deciding whom to kill might let us know their names, present proof of their guilt, show evidence of their crimes... Is it too much to ask to know the names of those we kill before we kill them?"

Paul previously said in an interview with Bloomberg: "I think it might lead to regime change. And some of the more skeptical among us think that maybe this is a provocation to lead to real regime change, a provocation to get the Venezuelans to react so we can then insert the military."

Murkowski added: "We all want to get rid of the drugs in this country, absolutely. But the approach that the administration is taking is new, some would say novel, and I think we have a role here."

Even with two Republican defectors, it was not enough for the resolution to advance, especially with an assist from Fetterman (Pa.), the Democratic Party's leading war hawk, who joined Republicans in voting the motion down.

It's the second time in a matter of months that he's voted against imposing a congressional check on Trump's ability to carry out acts of war. In June, he was also the lone Democrat to vote against a Senate resolution to require congressional approval for future strikes against Iran, even as the president made regime change threats.

Nick Field, a correspondent for the Pennsylvania Capital-Star, noted that "voting against a war powers resolution seeking to curb Trump's executive powers" was "not how John Fetterman campaigned in 2022, 2018, or 2016," when he acted as a strident opponent of everything Trump stood for.

Fetterman has not publicly commented on his decision to vote against the resolution. His office did not respond to a request for comment from Common Dreams.

Despite the vote's failure, Schiff said it likely will not be the last attempt to limit Trump's war-making authority. Similar resolutions were introduced late last month in the House of Representatives by Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and Jason Crow (D-Col.).

"Sadly, as these strikes get worse, support will only grow for another War Powers Resolution to stop them," Schiff said. "Let's hope by then we are not in a full-fledged war."

SEE ALL