5
#000000
#FFFFFF
LIVE COVERAGE
Opinion
Climate
Economy
Politics
Rights & Justice
War & Peace
Further
Michigan/America Is Not For Sale
Wowza, rare glimmer of good news. We take a moment to honor the stunning Michigan victory of Abdul El-Sayed, who was outspent 12-1 by his opponent's millions from establishment Dems, Zionist PACS and corporations and still managed to win even though he is a progressive Muslim who calls genocide genocide and wants Medicare for all in a Trump state that isn't communist New York. Ha. What millions in dark money buys you these days: "Sweet fuck all, as it turns out."
El-Sayed's inspiring win came against a candidate, Haley Stevens, who was bankrolled by over $60 million from party leaders and outside money from a murky nesting doll of super-PACS and shell corporations but whose campaign still had the audacity to bill her as “the grassroots choice of Michigan working families.” Total spending on the race in a key swing state was about $80 million, most from fat cats, making it "the fattest cat in the history of primaries." El-Sayed reportedly got about $4.6 million in outside money; Stevens and Netanyahu got about $60 million, the plurality of it from AIPAC's United Democracy Project (sic) super PAC - the most they've dumped into a single race, making it what observers call AIPAC's biggest defeat. From I Fucking Love Australia: AIPAC shoved 30 million dollars up Michigan's arse, and Michigan shat it straight back out."
Born in Detroit in 1984, Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed was raised by his father Mohamed, an Egyptian immigrant, and his stepmother Jackie, whose Michigan roots go back to the 1800s. After graduating from the University of Michigan Phi Beta Kappa, he earned an MD from Columbia and a doctorate in public health from Oxford as a Rhodes Scholar, worked as an epidemiologist and became the youngest health official in a major American city when he was appointed Director of Detroit's Health Department, gutted rwhen it was privatized during the city’s bankruptcy, at age 30. Rebuilding it, he went after corporate polluters, stripped lead out of schools, starting offering free glasses to kids in need, expanded Narcan access, and spearheaded a program cancelling up to $700 million in medical debt for 300,000 state residents.
Faced with that resume, AIPAC spent their millions on an ad blitz that managed not to mention any of his policies, or even Israel, though he won the first-ever political endorsement from Jewish Voice For Peace. Instead, they focused on the issues that really matter: They attacked El-Sayed for criticizing the Obamas, allegedly helping Trump win, and sitting for an interview with a streamer they don’t like, Hasan Piker. If he wins the general election against the GOP's carpetbagging empty suit Mike Rogers, he'd become the first Muslim in the Senate. His longtime message to Dems: Stop compromising, ban ICE, end sending arms to Israel, Medicare for All, no more forever wars, get dark money out of politics. On election night, at a podium reading, "MIchigan Is Not For Sale," he celebrated "the movement we were able to inspire," and "the idea that we could take our government back."
El-Sayed's victory, while slimmer than predicted, was seen as pivotal; noted Bernie Sanders, "This is an election between Abdul and the billionaire class.” And the candidate the establishment called "unelectable" won with the endorsement of the United Auto Workers, "the beating heart of Michigan labor." His win was the biggest but not the only news out of Michigan: Sunrise Movement co-founder and data center opponent William Lawrence also took the primary for Michigan’s 7th Congressional district. They join progressive wins elsewhere: Zohran Mamdani in New York. Katie Wilson in Seattle. Three Mamdani-backed candidates in New York primaries, two against longtime incumbents. Melat Kiros in Colorado. Troy Jackson in Maine. It's still a long tough road ahead. But take heart from spineless ghoul Mike Johnson: “The insurgent left is on the rise."
Aug 06, 2026
SEE ALL
News
Back a Windfall Profits Tax, Say Campaigners, After Trump Admits Oil Giants 'Making Too Much Money'
After President Donald Trump echoed climate campaigners' longtime condemnation of fossil fuel giants' massive profits—uttering "the only thing" the climate-denying president "has said about energy policy since taking office that makes any sense," according to one advocate, organizers on Tuesday urged him to put his money where his mouth is by backing a windfall profits tax for companies like Chevron and Exxon Mobil.
In the Oval Office on Monday, Trump called on those corporations and others to slash prices and give some of their record-breaking profits—specifically those made since the president joined Israel in waging an unprovoked war against Iran on Feb. 28—"back to the public.”
"They're making too much money, based on a shortage," said Trump, while noting that he is a "big free enterprise guy."
"I don't like it... Chevron, too much money. Exxon Mobil, too much money," he said. "When you look at one company, they made 12 times what they made the year before? Give some of that back to the public, and they'd better cut the retail price."
“Too much money.”
“Chevron too much money.”
“Exxon Mobil too much money.”
President Donald Trump attacked oil majors ExxonMobil and Chevron for earning windfall profits from energy shortages created by the U.S.-Iran war, demanding that both companies cut prices and return… pic.twitter.com/I3CfmmQlqv
— Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) August 3, 2026
With oil and consumer gas prices skyrocketing since Trump and Israel started the war, resulting in Iran's retaliatory measure of effectively closing the Strait of Hormuz, which a fifth of the world's oil supply ordinarily travels through, Exxon reported that its second-quarter profits more than doubled compared with last year. The company took in $14.5 billion, while Chevron reported profits of $12 billion compared with $2.5 billion in 2025—nearly a 400% increase.
BP also reported profits that were $2.35 billion higher than last year.
An analysis by the Guardian published Tuesday showed that eight of the world's largest oil companies made nearly $93 billion in profits in the three months following the invasion.
Chevron just announced its highest quarterly earnings ever. Shell clocked its second-highest quarterly profits. ExxonMobil doubled its earnings.Combined, the three companies raked in, on average, some $404 million in profits every day for the last three months.
[image or embed]
— Make Polluters Pay (@polluterspay.bsky.social) August 3, 2026 at 12:16 PM
The climate action group 350.org noted that the record profits of oil and gas giants come as "communities across the world endure record-breaking heatwaves, wildfires, and rising living costs"—and as governments from around the world prepare to resume negotiations on a United Nations Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation, where a "mandatory surtax on highly polluting industries is gaining support as part of that process."
Two Democratic lawmakers in the US, Rep. Ro Khanna of California and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, introduced the Big Oil Windfall Profits Tax Act in March.
“From Bordeaux to Phoenix to Mumbai, families are living through the cost of climate delay, while the companies most responsible bank blockbuster bonanzas," said Anna Jellema, executive director of 350.org. "That is not a coincidence; it is a business model. Governments meeting in New York this month have a genuine opportunity to change it. Calls are growing across the political spectrum for a proper global profits tax, so the industry that helped cause these disasters pays towards the recovery, the solutions and the protection people need. It’s simple fairness: Those who caused the damage and profited from it should pay to fix it.”
Candice Fortin, US campaign manager for 350.org, emphasized that the latest comments from Trump, whose Interior Department just moved to weaken restrictions on Arctic drilling, must be taken with a grain of salt.
In the same Oval Office statement on Monday, said Fortin, "Trump criticized countries championing wind energy and supported more oil extraction in the North Sea."
"We don't just need to tax fossil fuels' windfall profits now, to be then forget about later," said Fortin. "We need to end our dependence on oil, gas, and coal—and we need a permanent mechanism to make the fossil fuel industry pay its fair share and redirect those revenues towards protecting people and communities from the climate and cost-of-living crises."
"If this is a genuine change of heart from a president whose budget bill included $18 billion in taxpayer handouts to Big Oil, we welcome it," added Fortin. "But talk is cheap, here's the real test: Will Trump throw his weight behind the Big Oil Windfall Profits Tax bill, which his party has been stonewalling in Congress since March?"
Aug 04, 2026
SEE ALL
News
Majority of Workers Say AI Will Make Jobs Harder and Only Benefit Those at the Top
Regardless of tech executives' promises that artificial intelligence will make people's workdays more efficient, more productive, and even happier, a new survey out Monday found that employees "are bracing for the impacts of AI rather than embracing them."
That was the interpretation of Elizabeth Pancotti, the vice president of policy, advocacy, and research at the progressive think tank Groundwork Collaborative, after the group joined research firm Ipsos in releasing the first results of a yearlong study of worker attitudes on AI.
Workers, said Pancotti, "expect the tech to deepen existing inequality in the workplace."
Just one-third of US workers expect the technology, whose expansion President Donald Trump has aggressively pushed, to improve their jobs, according to the poll.
The rest of the respondents rejected the idea that AI would automate tedious tasks at work and provide support, allowing them to complete more challenging responsibilities faster. Instead, two-thirds of workers said they expect their lives at work to get harder as AI eliminates jobs—theirs or their coworkers—and increases pressure at the workplace.
"This sentiment is consistent across race, gender, education, and income lines," reported Ipsos, while people with a college degree were more likely to believe that AI could improve their jobs. Only 1 in 5 people with a high school education or less said they expected their jobs to be improved by the technology.
Black workers (12%) were more likely than white respondents (4%) to feel that AI could eventually replace their jobs.
“Workers know bosses who say AI will make their jobs easier and allow them to be more productive are pulling a fast one."
More than a quarter of employed people said AI is already having a negative impact on their work, while 41% of unemployed people said the same.
As Jessica Grose wrote in The New York Times last month, AI has made it easy for companies to rapidly post job listings and give "the impression a business is thriving," without following up with many applicants, leaving job seekers in "purgatory."
More than half of the workers surveyed by Groundwork and Ipsos said they believe the widespread use of AI in workplaces will "only or mostly benefit business owners and executives."
"The benefits of AI in the workplace are not being split evenly," said Pancotti. "The workers who expect to reap the rewards of adoption are already high earners in white-collar jobs.”
Just 6% of respondents said workers will benefit, and about 14% said the technology will ultimately not benefit anyone.
About 40% of people making $100,000 per year or more expected their jobs to get better and easier due to AI—more than twice the percentage of people who make under $50,000.
“This is really just yet another class divide for the American public,” Alex Jacquez, senior vice president of policy, advocacy, and research at Groundwork Collaborative, told Semafor.
The poll comes as communities across the country have mobilized to stop AI data centers from being built, arguing that the facilities' massive water and electricity consumption, as well as the evidence that they could ultimately lead to job losses while creating little-to-no permanent work, makes them undesirable additions to their cities and towns.
“Workers know bosses who say AI will make their jobs easier and allow them to be more productive are pulling a fast one," said Pancotti. "Across the board, workers report AI putting more pressure on productivity rather than supporting workers as many AI proponents claim."
Aug 03, 2026
SEE ALL
News
Senate Confirms 'Personal Servant to Donald Trump' Blanche as AG in Late-Night Vote
Early Saturday, outgoing Sen. Bill Cassidy cast the deciding vote to confirm Todd Blanche as US Attorney General shortly after outlining a litany of reservations about the nominee.
Around 4:30 am ET, the US Senate voted 50-49 to confirm Blanche, President Donald Trump's former personal attorney and acting attorney general since April, as the nation's chief law enforcement officer. It did so despite widespread concerns, including among some Republicans, that he would use the office primarily to carry out the president's whims.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), one of two Republicans who voted against Blanche, outlined her concerns in a social media post Friday ahead of the vote, saying Trump had "accelerated" the "politicization—even weaponization" of the US Department of Justice (DOJ) and that Blanche had played a part.
"I take issue with the handling of the release of the Epstein files; the sweeping immunity protections granted to the president, his family, and their businesses; the statements that have been made to anti-abortion groups; and the repeated targeting of individuals ranging from former administration staff to sitting US senators," Murkowski said.
Murkowski also expressed doubt about Blanche's promise to eliminate the department's so-called $1.8 billion "weaponization fund" for Trump's supporters and allies—including January 6 Capitol insurrectionists. Referring to it as a "slush fund," she said confirming Blanche would cost the Senate any "leverage" to prevent it from being revived.
In a speech Friday ahead of the vote, Cassidy (R-La.)—who lost his Senate primary in May after being attacked by Trump as "disloyal"—raised similar concerns about Blanche, but ultimately said they did not prevent him from supporting the nominee.
"Mr. Blanche showed poor judgment in approving the anti-weaponization slush fund and exempting the president from [Internal Revenue Service] audits," Cassidy said on the Senate floor. "Mr. Blanche said these were mistakes and has made efforts to kill the slush fund."
To secure his confirmation, Blanche struck a deal with Republican holdouts, including Sens. Thom Tillis (NC) and John Cornyn (Texas), earlier last week and issued an order to eliminate the $1.8 billion fund, but did not agree to end the exemption from tax audits of Trump's past activity.
Cassidy also said he was concerned about "DOJ bringing suits against political enemies," but argued that Trump's "unrelenting" targeting of his foes meant any attorney general he appointed would face the same pressure.
To address the allegation that Blanche would act as a "yes-man" for Trump, Cassidy quoted William Barr, who served as attorney general during Trump's first term: "Because of his previous client-attorney relationship with President Trump, Mr. Blanche would be precisely the person to push back on President Trump."
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said on CNN Friday night that the Republicans who were voting to confirm Blanche despite their reservations "know better" than to trust him and would ultimately "regret" the decision.
"He advanced... this $1.8 billion slush fund. That's a terrible idea. And frankly, that my colleagues and friends, John Cornyn and Bill Cassidy, accept this paper-thin excuse of a signed deal by Todd Blanche doesn't pass the smell test because, frankly, President Trump is the one who continues to berate and push for that weaponization fund," he said. "I have no confidence that Todd Blanche won't just turn around and give it to him once confirmed."
Asked about Cassidy's reasoning that Blanche, as Trump's former attorney, would be more willing and able to constrain the president, Coons said, "I don't buy that at all."
"What I've seen from Todd Blanche in the role of [acting] attorney general and in his confirmation hearing was that he still thinks of himself as President Trump's personal lawyer, not the person who is trying to protect the Department of Justice and the Constitution from presidential overreach," Coons said.
Ultimately, just two Republicans joined every Democrat to vote against confirming Blanche—Murkowski and Sen. Susan Collins, who faces a difficult reelection battle against Democratic nominee Troy Jackson in Maine. Cassidy, Tillis, and Cornyn all voted yes.
Former Ambassador Norm Eisen, the co-founder and board member of Democracy Defenders Action, said that Blanche's confirmation was "a dark day for the rule of law."
"Senate Republicans sounded the alarm, rightfully so, calling out the ‘fund that would pay people who beat police officers,’ and exposing a nominee who has never stopped serving the personal and political interests of Donald Trump. Yet, at the precipice, they lost their nerve and the majority voted for him anyway."
Praveen Fernandes, vice president of the Constitutional Accountability Center, said that approving the slush fund was "one of the most brazen attempts to circumvent the law and benefit Trump and his cronies."
She added that every senator who voted for Blanche "cast a vote in support of the Blanche-led Department of Justice’s continued failure to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act and its unconscionable treatment of Epstein survivors, its efforts to wipe clean the records of those who participated in January 6th violence against lawmakers and law enforcement officers, its record of weaponized prosecutions, and its brazen rejection of the notion of prosecutorial independence from White House pressure."
Lisa Gilbert, co-president of the watchdog group Public Citizen, said that "Moving forward, our country has to contend with an attorney general who sees himself as a personal servant to Donald Trump instead of a public servant to the American people."
"If he is tasked with leading Trump’s revenge agenda against his political enemies and critics, as he likely will be," she said, "we have every reason to believe he will execute this mission with eagerness and fealty."
Aug 08, 2026
SEE ALL
News
Ansari Calls for Miller to Be ‘Investigated and Prosecuted’ for Illegal Push to End Birthright Citizenship
Stephen Miller, President Donald Trump's deputy White House chief of staff and the architect of much of his anti-immigration agenda over the past decade, has been fixated for years on ending birthright citizenship in the US—and one Democratic congresswoman said Thursday that his latest attempt should be the last straw.
"Stephen Miller architected the entirety of Trump’s racist and fascist mass deportation agenda, and he’s the one pushing relentlessly to end birthright citizenship—which is illegal," said Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.) after Trump and Miller announced two new executive orders related to the issue. "He needs to be investigated and prosecuted for the crimes he’s actively committing."
Weeks after the US Supreme Court—where three of the justices who make up the right-wing majority were appointed by Trump—ruled that the president's previous effort to end birthright citizenship for undocumented immigrants was unconstitutional, Trump signaled a new tactic focusing on terminating the right for the children of specific groups of people.
The first order would end automatic citizenship for children born to parents who work for foreign governments at embassies or organizations in the US, parents who "engaged in fraudulent activity to obtain citizenship," and parents who are part of designated terrorist groups or an "alien enemy."
Stephen Miller: The president is using his authority as commander in chief, to sign first an executive order using the new rule in the Supreme Court issued to expand the definitions of people who are ineligible for birthright citizenship
That includes, for example, alien enemies… pic.twitter.com/TtpWe0QYe1
— Acyn (@Acyn) August 6, 2026
The restriction would also pertain to babies who are "born in a territory or territorial waters of the United States where citizenship is not conferred by federal statute"—but eliminating birthright citizenship for children born in US territories would require congressional action, according to The New York Times.
The second order aims to crack down on what Trump called "birth tourism," with more restrictions on visitors to the US who give birth while in the country and try to obtain visas.
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, said the new executive action, like the order Trump signed to end birthright citizenship shortly after he took office last year, "seemingly violates the Constitution."
In the Oval Office at the White House late Thursday, the president cited no evidence as he claimed foreigners have obtained citizenship for their children, who numbered in the dozens.
“You have one man came in with a family... said he had 56 children," said Trump. "Another one came in. They said they had 98 children. This was not what it was for. This was meant for the babies of slaves. It was, it was right after one week or two weeks after the Civil War ended.”
Miller also emphasized that the 14th Amendment, which guarantees birthright citizenship, due process, and equal protection under the law, was meant to confer citizenship only to the children of people who had been enslaved before the Civil War ended.
But the origin of the law did not stop the Supreme Court from ruling in June that birthright citizenship is the law of the land under the US Constitution.
The president claimed "hundreds of thousands" of people in the US have benefited from birthright citizenship due to tourists giving birth in the country and the other scenarios described in the executive orders, but a study by Pennsylvania State University recently found that fewer than 0.3% of babies born in the US are born to tourists in any year.
Miller spoke during the Oval Office event, speaking out against people who "come here pretending to be a tourist... but the real reason they're here is to have a child."
Lying on a visa application in order to give birth in the US has long been illegal, Reichlin-Melnick pointed out.
Miller claimed that Section 215A of the Immigration and Nationality Act gives Trump the authority to enact the new restrictions on birthright citizenship, but even a Department of Homeland Security official who spoke anonymously to the Times said no new enforcement would come out of the birth tourism order.
The deputy chief of staff, who has also taken a leading role in orchestrating Trump's mass deportation campaign, claimed that the birth tourism order was "especially historic."
The word "historic," said writer Mike Young, was "doing a lot of work."
"You can crack down on visa fraud. You cannot have Stephen Miller stand beside the Resolute Desk and turn the 14th Amendment into a hotel checkout policy," said Young. "Birthright citizenship is not a loophole. It is the Constitution."
Immigration attorney Cyrus Mehta noted that even so-called "birth tourism" was covered in the Supreme Court's recent ruling, with Justice Samuel Alito noting that fact in his dissent.
"I expect a court to hold that most of Trump's new executive order is blatantly unconstitutional," said Mehta. "Trump is a small and petty man with a venal mind, and will be historically remembered as such down the ages, along with his henchman and collaborator Stephen Miller, who love to attack newborn children!"
Aug 07, 2026
SEE ALL
News
'Bay of Pigs Reloaded': New CIA Task Force to Further Destabilize Cuba Revealed
After months of President Donald Trump threatening a US takeover of Cuba and ramping up a decadeslong economic assault of the island, The New York Times revealed Wednesday that the Central Intelligence Agency created a related task force, "setting in motion plans for a more concerted campaign to pressure the Cuban government to make the economic, political, and leadership changes."
"In 1960, the CIA established an earlier Cuba task force, whose members oversaw the failed, agency-backed invasion of Cuba the next year known as the Bay of Pigs," the newspaper noted. "The people briefed on the new task force said its mandate is more limited: to create fissures among the Cuban political elite, in hope of pressuring the Cubans to replace perceived anti-American hard-liners with more practical leaders more amenable to Mr. Trump's demands."
Despite the anonymous sources' claims about the differences from over a half-century ago, Eva Golinger, an American lawyer who wrote multiple books about former Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez, simply responded, "Bay of Pigs reloaded."
The Times article—on which the CIA declined to comment—came a day after Politico reported that "the US has increased its intelligence assets in Cuba in recent months as it pushes the country's communist regime to reform or fall from power, according to two people familiar with the Trump administration's plans for the island."
The agency also declined to comment on Politico's piece, which pointed out that "US military operations are often preceded by increased American intelligence activity. CIA efforts to track the whereabouts of Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro reportedly played a critical role this January in the successful US operation to capture him."
Sharing Politico's coverage on social media, Andrés Pertierra, a Cuba historian at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, said that it is "hard to say at this point to what degree this is theater aimed at rattling the cage in Havana or performing strength to Miami, on the one hand, or some kind of prelude to an actual escalation, on the other, given recent months of warnings of escalation that went nowhere."
Enrique "Ric" Prado, a Cuban exile who served in various posts at the CIA, "is convinced that Washington is preparing a definitive blow against the island regime," El País reported early Wednesday. He predicted, "Cuba is the next apple to fall from the tree."
This week's reporting followed the July release of a "McCarthyite" US Department of State document that was widely decried as an "attack on Americans' constitutional rights to free speech and assembly," as well as an attempt to justify an invasion of Cuba, where the Trump administration has fueled a humanitarian crisis.
"For nearly seven decades, the Cuban regime has waged a sustained campaign of subversion against the United States," the department's report begins, "that has infiltrated the highest reaches of the US government, recruited and cultivated generations of American activists, backed an unprecedented wave of left-wing terrorism on American soil, and carried out one of the most durable and damaging foreign intelligence penetrations in American history."
Promoting the publication on social media, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio—the son of Cuban immigrants and a longtime advocate of regime change on the island—claimed his department was "exposing the full history of Cuban espionage and subversion in our country."
During a Sunday interview with Fox News host Lara Trump, the president’s daughter-in-law, Rubio repeated claims from the report and called the island nation, about 90 miles south of Florida and home to roughly 10 million people, "an influence and espionage superpower." His comments drew criticism from Democrats in Congress, the Cuban foreign minister, and other experts.
Aug 05, 2026
SEE ALL
LATEST NEWS
Scale of Trump's Raid on National Parks Funds for White House 'Vanity Projects' Revealed
"The National Park Service is being used as a piggy bank," said one critic.
Aug 10, 2026
Internal documents from the US National Park Service reportedly show that massive sums of money have been diverted to fund assorted projects commissioned by President Donald Trump.
According to a Sunday report from journalist Scott MacFarlane, NPS records show that $323 million has been rerouted to fund projects on the White House grounds this year alone, representing an increase of nearly 5,000% from the amount spend on such projects in 2024.
Additionally, the documents show NPS allotted nearly $100 million for projects on the Washington National Mall, a tenfold increase on the amount spent two years ago.
At the same time, the records show "multimillion-dollar reductions" in funding for several famous national parks, including Yellowstone, Yosemite, and Grand Canyon.
In fact, the total spending for projects at the White House and National Mall is larger than the combined spending at nine of the largest US national parks, MacFarlane found.
One anonymous federal employee who spoke with MacFarlane said that the spending shifts documented in internal records are "part of a pattern of the National Park Service being forced to prioritize Trump’s vanity projects over our own needs."
Tim Whitehouse, executive director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, similarly argued that "the National Park Service is being used as a piggy bank for Trump’s vanity projects," which he said was "costing the American people."
Some Democratic critics of Trump pounced on the report, which they said was the latest example of the president corruptly wasting taxpayer dollars.
"Let’s ask the American people," wrote Democrats on the US House Ways and Means Committee in a social media post, "would you rather have your nearest national park preserved and protected or another monument to Trump?"
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), whose state has been hit by devastating wildfires this summer, accused the president of "raiding wildfire prevention funding to pay for his vanity projects."
Fred Wellman, a Democratic candidate for the US House of Representatives in Missouri, said that "Trump and his complicit Republican Congress have been robbing us to gild statues and build his private home without any oversight or approval."
"This is theft on a grand scale," Wellman added, "and all of us are paying for it."
Keep Reading
Show Less
Amazon Says New Texas Data Center Won't Raise Utility Bills—But It Will Supercharge Pollution
"Instead of building a modern, clean energy source to power its increased AI-driven electricity demand, Amazon chose to invest in a massive natural gas power plant to fuel its giant Texas data center."
Aug 10, 2026
Amazon is boasting that the new data center it plans to build in Pecos County, Texas will be self-sustaining in its use of electricity, as the company has acquired permits to build a 7.65 gigawatt gas plant to power the massive facility, ensuring it won't raise electricity prices for households in the area.
But the savings on utility bills will likely come at a cost for the US at large and the planet, as well as locals in West Texas.
According to reporting from Cleanview Newsletter on Friday, the site acquired by Amazon, GW Ranch, has a permit from the state allowing the construction of a gas power plant that could emit 33 million tons of carbon pollution, which would make it by far the largest single source of pollution in the US.
The James H. Miller Jr. Power Plant, which burns coal in Quinton, Alabama, is currently the biggest emitter of carbon dioxide, sending about 16 million tons of pollution into the atmosphere each year.
Power plants generally emit less than the maximum amount of carbon permitted, but the unprecedented limit for the new plant, which is being developed for Amazon by Pacifico Energy and will have 35 natural gas turbines, means it is likely that the company's project will far exceed the pollution caused by the plant in Alabama.
The permits viewed by Cleanview, which tracks data centers and sustainable energy development, show that the power plant would be disconnected from the state's electricity grid, at least at first, and an Amazon spokesperson said the company "believes in paying the full costs of powering our operations" and would not "raise electricity costs for Texas families."
The on-site power generation will be "designed to transition to grid-connected service as interconnection timelines allow," the spokesperson added—suggesting the data center could ultimately raise household electricity costs as well as supercharging carbon pollution in the area.
The company further tried to allay fears of the impact of the new data center and its dedicated power plant by saying it plans to use brackish water that isn't safe for irrigation or consumption at GW Ranch; along with data centers' impact on utility costs, communities have protested against the facilities across the country due to their massive water consumption.
But the advocacy group Climate Action Campaign said Sunday that in its rush to join the nationwide artificial intelligence data center buildout as President Donald Trump has demanded, Amazon "chose dirty power over clean."
"Instead of building a modern, clean energy source to power its increased AI-driven electricity demand, Amazon chose to invest in a massive natural gas power plant to fuel its giant Texas data center," said Margie Alt, the group's director. "During this excessively hot and dry summer, riddled with forest fires and unbearable air pollution, a move like this is truly unacceptable."
With Amazon pledging to eliminate its pollution-causing emissions by 2040, the company's decision to join Meta, Microsoft, and Google in investing in its own power plant to build a data center was an example of "yet another major corporation dodging accountability," said Alt.
"This isn’t innovation," she said. "Despite its massive resources, Amazon is shirking its own responsibility and the industry’s promises of computing progress without the economic or health burdens to local communities. The result of that broken promise is that communities will pay the consequences with their health and their wallets."
According to Cleanview, Pacifico Energy has plans to eventually build up to 750 megawatts of solar generation and 1.8 gigawatts for battery storage capacity at GW Ranch.
As it potentially doubles the amount of planet-heating carbon emissions that are currently sent into the atmosphere by the James H. Miller Jr. Power Plant, the plant at the GW Ranch site could heighten the risk of developing heart disease, asthma, chronic respiratory illnesses, and other health problems for people living and working in the area.
"Progress shouldn’t come at the expense of the rest of us just to power billionaires’ ambitions," said Alt. "Shame on you, Amazon!”
The project, Kathryn Guerra, a campaign director at the watchdog group Public Citizen, told The New York Times, will "absolutely have a huge impact on the environment, and on public health."
The project was made public weeks after Trump insisted that "smart" communities want data centers to be built in their vicinity—but numerous polls have shown the facilities, which offer few long-term jobs as they raise costs for families, are sparking outcry from across the political spectrum.
About 70% of respondents to a Gallup poll in March said they would oppose the construction of a data center in their area. About half of those who expressed opposition said they were mostly concerned with the environmental impact associated with data centers, or the potential for resources to be gobbled up by the facilities.
Keep Reading
Show Less
David Hearn's Lawyers Seek Documents to Show Misconduct by Trump DOJ in Reflecting Pool Case
"The government is continuing to attack an innocent man."
Aug 10, 2026
A federal judge last week dismissed felony charges against former US Olympic athlete David Hearn, who was arrested in July for allegedly vandalizing the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool. But Hearn's lawyers are signaling that the case is far from over.
In an interview with The New Republic published Monday, attorney Norm Eisen said that he and other members of Hearn's legal team are demanding transcripts to show "whether prosecutors were candid with the grand jury" when seeking the indictment of their client.
The US Department of Justice (DOJ) late last month moved to drop charges against the 67-year-old Hearn after it determined that "hasty and botched work," which had been commissioned by President Donald Trump, was responsible for the damage to the pool.
Eisen said he wanted to know what prosecutors knew about the pool's condition before they decided to indict his client, arguing that "the notion that they did not know that there was a botched, rushed renovation... does not hold water."
In addition to seeking grand jury transcripts, Hearn's attorneys are also pressing to have his case dismissed with prejudice, which would bar the DOJ from reviving it at a future date.
Hearn's lawyers aren't the only ones demanding answers in the Reflecting Pool case, as Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), ranking member on the US House Judiciary Committee, also plans to demand documents related to the decision to prosecute the former Olympian.
In a statement given to The New Republic, Raskin said he and other Democrats on the committee "will investigate who lied, who buried the evidence, and who decided to threaten an American citizen with prison simply to protect Trump’s wounded feelings and continuing corruption."
Trump, who has repeatedly made baseless claims about vandals destroying the pool, is still demanding that Hearn face prosecution even though the DOJ has determined it lacks evidence to make any charges stick.
In a Sunday Truth Social post, the president insisted that "a highly credible witness" saw Hearn "in broad daylight vandalize the Reflecting Pool by ‘violently’ ripping and tugging at the Pool’s somewhat delicate coating."
This prompted Hearn's attorneys to fire back in a statement posted on social media.
"The government is continuing to attack an innocent man," the attorneys said. "Our first filing in the case on July 10 included photographic evidence from before Mr. Hearn touched the Reflecting Pool proving that he caused no damage. Our other filings provided even more proof."
"We are reviewing all legal remedies, including for this continued harassment," the attorneys added. "It is outrageous."
Keep Reading
Show Less
'Racist and Bigoted': Trump Rebuked for Grotesque Attack on Abdul El-Sayed and Wife
President's smear of Michigan Democrat described as "not just an attack on American Muslims, but on the idea of America itself."
Aug 10, 2026
President Donald Trump, a notorious racist and serial liar, is being denounced once again for his hateful contributions to public discourse and American politics for an Islamophobic social media post over the weekend targeting Dr. Abdul El-Sayed, the Democratic nominee for US Senate in Michigan, and his wife, Dr. Sarah Jukaku—both of whom are practicing Muslims.
On Saturday evening, Trump posted side-by-side images with he and his wife, Melania Trump, wearing formal dinner attire, on the left and El-Sayed and his wife, who wears a Islamic hijab, both dressed casually in what appears to be a diner, on the right.
The heading above the photo posted by Trump declared, "Two VERY DIFFERENT Americas."
The overtly anti-Muslim message, now pervasive within the Republican Party, stirred immediate anger and harsh rebuke.
"America does not belong to any one race or religion, and President Trump does not get to decide who counts as an American," said Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).
"An American man of Egyptian descent is just as American as an American man of German descent, and an American woman wearing a hijab is just as American an American woman without one," Awad continued. "President Trump's racist and bigoted social media post was not just an attack on American Muslims, but on the idea of America itself."
As Zeteo's Mehdi Hasan wrote on Friday, El-Sayed's recent victory in the Michigan primary last week has unleashed a fresh wave of GOP-led attacks on Muslims, a strategy that is well-worn, that is only likely to intensify.
"We are about to witness an explosion of Islamophobia in America of the kind we have not seen for decades," warned Hasan. "Expect them to throw the whole bigoted kitchen sink at El-Sayed. This will be the anti-Zohran Mamdani campaign on anti-Muslim steroids."
Asked about Trump's racist attack by CNN on Sunday, El-Sayed turned the Islamophobic smear into an opportunity to explain what does distinguish people like the president and the First Lady from the kind of lawmaker the Michigan Democrat said he wants to be and the kind of relationship he and his wife have.
“Yeah, he’s right,” El-Sayed told CNN, when asked about the post on Sunday.
“One in which your overlords are two people who don’t like each other, but join in the interest of making billions of dollars off of you—or two people who genuinely love each other, enjoyed some pancakes together, want to come together to build the kind of America where they can raise a family and know that that family is going to have the good things.”
“Yes, you’ve got two different visions of America,” said El-Sayed. “Donald Trump’s vision is the one you’re living in right now. Can you afford your gas? Can you afford your groceries? Do you believe, when you look in your children's eyes, that they're going to have a better future than you did?”
Democratic Michigan Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed responds to President Trump posting a picture of his wife. pic.twitter.com/j8lGGwPET8
— State of the Union (@CNNSOTU) August 9, 2026
"Sarah and I are running," he continued, "because when we look our daughters in the eye, we want them to believe that they are every bit as able to have a better future than the one they could have had under the Trump administration—that they can live together with their sisters and brothers in America in a way that they lock arms to build the good things that they deserve together. Where they'll know they have the good healthcare that they need and good jobs, and know that there are kids who live 15 minutes away whose lives are very, very different from theirs because we've been okay for far too long with a level of inequality in this country."
For his daughters, El-Sayed added, "I want them to live in a country where they breath clean air and drink clean water. And actually, Sarah and I like each other. I don't know about about the First Lady and the president, but from what I've heard it's a bit of a rocky road."
CAIR's Awad called on Trump to "immediately remove this hateful post and to uphold his responsibility to represent all Americans, regardless of race, religion, or background." He also said that all members of Congress must "reject ongoing efforts to fuel anti-Muslim hatred and division" that has become so commonplace in recent decades, only intensifying under Trump's leadership.
Keep Reading
Show Less
'It’s Not Radical to Believe You Should Have Healthcare': El-Sayed Hits Back at Trump, GOP Attacks
"Donald Trump's vision is the one you're living in right now," said the Democratic US Senate nominee. "Can you afford your gas? Can you afford your groceries?"
Aug 10, 2026
Fresh off his victory in the Democratic primary race for US Senate in Michigan, progressive epidemiologist Abdul El-Sayed used television appearances on Sunday to respond to increasingly hysterical attacks by Republicans and President Donald Trump while offering a positive vision for the future, underscoring his support for Medicare for All and a humane foreign policy that doesn't fund genocide.
"It’s not radical to believe that people should be able to afford their groceries," El-Sayed, who is set to face Republican Mike Rogers in November, told NBC's Kristen Welker in response to the Senate GOP's first attack ad of the general election. "It’s not radical to believe that you should have healthcare in this country. It’s not radical to believe that you don’t think the president should be able to deny elections or make $2.2 billion off of his role in office. It’s not radical to believe that all of us should be able to breathe clean air and drink clean water. Those are the things that I’ve been fighting for."
Trump and congressional Republicans wasted no time launching unhinged and bigoted attacks on El-Sayed following his primary victory last week. In a Truth Social post on Saturday, Trump posted an image showing a photo of himself and First Lady Melania Trump alongside a photo of El-Sayed and his wife, psychiatrist Sarah Jukaku. The caption of the photo blared, "Two VERY DIFFERENT America's [sic]."
Asked by CNN's Jake Tapper to respond to the post, El-Sayed said Sunday that the caption is "right."
"One [America] in which your overlords are two people who don't like each other, but joint in the interest of making billions of dollars off of you, or two people who genuinely love each other, enjoyed some pancakes together, want to come together to build the kind of America where they can raise a family and know that that family is going to have the good things," said the Michigan Democrat.
"So, yes, you got two different visions of America. Donald Trump's vision is the one you're living in right now," he continued. "Can you afford your gas? Can you afford your groceries? Do you believe, when you look your kids in the eye, that they're going to have a better future than you did?"
Democratic Michigan Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed responds to President Trump posting a picture of his wife. pic.twitter.com/j8lGGwPET8
— State of the Union (@CNNSOTU) August 9, 2026
El-Sayed overcame more than $30 million in spending by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)—and over $60 million in total outside spending—to defeat Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.) in last week's primary contest. Throughout his primary campaign, El-Sayed criticized AIPAC as a destructive force in US politics and spoke out in support of ending American military aid to Israel—a stance that Trump and Republicans have sought to equate to antisemitism.
"He doesn’t love Israel. He doesn’t love Jewish people," Trump said of El-Sayed last week. "He hates them. He hates them with a passion that burns in his heart."
During his CNN appearance on Sunday, El-Sayed hit back at the president's smear, saying, "I love and revere Judaism and the Jewish people."
"They are not the same as AIPAC in Israel," he said. "I want our tax dollars spent to provide good schools, to pay for healthcare, to rebuild our roads here in Michigan, rather than it being sent abroad to subsidize foreign militaries. That’s not just Israel, by the way. That is also Egypt and Saudi Arabia and Jordan and Pakistan."
"So I believe in international law," El-Sayed continued. "I believe in equal rights to peace, dignity, and self-determination for all people. I believe in a process that allows a free Palestinian people and free Jewish Israeli people to come together around what they believe the ultimate peace should look like."
Keep Reading
Show Less
As Trump Shows 'Desperation,' Iran Says Strait of Hormuz Will Not Open 'Until America Corrects Its Behavior'
As it becomes clear that there is "no escalatory military path out of this war," Iran is demanding an even steeper toll for Trump to pull out.
Aug 09, 2026
President Donald Trump is now quietly conceding that he's willing to walk away from his Iran war without meeting all of his demands if they agree to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. But Iran won't let him back out of the quagmire without a steep price.
Iran is in the process of negotiating a limited reopening of the critical waterway with Oman. But Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr, the secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, said on Saturday that "until America corrects its behavior, the Strait of Hormuz will not open.”
He outlined a list of demands on Saturday, even harsher than those Trump walked away from when he abandoned the "memorandum of understanding" negotiated in June.
Zolghadr said the US must permanently end its war and naval blockade against Iran, and withdraw military forces from the region. He also said the US must fully compensate Iran for damages from the war, lift sanctions, and unfreeze assets abroad.
This demand for an end to US "aggression" applies not just to Iran, but to its allies in the region: Zolghadr also demanded an end to Israel's attacks on Palestinians and a withdrawal of Israeli forces from southern Lebanon, as well as an end to US and Israeli attacks against the Houthis in Yemen.
The Trump administration, which is not known to be in direct talks with Iran, has not yet responded to the demands. Trump told Axios on Sunday that "We are low-keying it" and "only semi-negotiating with Iran," claiming that it was "in very bad shape" economically.
It's clear, however, that the Iranians believe they have enough of an upper hand to make Trump grovel, especially as news emerges that the US has burned through nearly all its available stocks of long-range precision weapons, making the war increasingly costly, though the administration has denied this.
Domestic concerns are also weighing on Trump. Over the past month, as the war heated up again, average gas prices in the US have shot back up above $4 a gallon, a major liability for Republicans heading into a midterm election cycle in which many voters say the cost of living is a top concern.
Approval of Trump among Americans has fallen to a new all-time low of 34% according to a YouGov poll late last month. And just 28% of Americans say they approve of his handling of the war, according to an Associated Press/NORC poll.
As the Wall Street Journal reported, Trump has privately signaled a willingness to declare victory if Iran opens the strait, even without getting any sort of nuclear agreement, which was purportedly the reason he launched the war in the first place.
Kenneth Roth, the former executive director of Human Rights Watch, said Trump was "showing his desperation for a deal before it is completed, so Iran predictably demand[ed] major new concessions," adding that it was a "masterclass in how not to negotiate."
"As time passes, Tehran appears increasingly confident that the pressure is shifting onto Washington," said the Israeli national security analyst Danny Citrinowicz. "Iranian leaders seem to believe that the United States is now more eager than Iran to bring the confrontation in the Strait of Hormuz to an end, and, crucially, that Washington has few attractive military options for changing that equation."
Trita Parsi, the executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, told CNN, "At this point, it is absolutely clear that there is no escalatory military path out of this war."
"It's been tried in several different variations, and it has not ended up particularly well," Parsi said. "In fact, the US's position has been weakened, in my view, by additional military action. And as a result, I think there needs to be a full dedication to the diplomatic pathway."
He added that for the Iranians, "the promise and the credibility of sanctions relief will carry far more weight than threats of further bombings."
Keep Reading
Show Less
Ex-Trump Lawyer Says 'We're Screwed' if Trump Pressures New AG Blanche to Subvert Elections
"There's no circumstance under which we shouldn't expect Blanche to seize ballots and seize voting machines and try to interfere in the process of the upcoming election."
Aug 09, 2026
One of the many questions swirling around new US Attorney General Todd Blanche is whether he'd go along with President Donald Trump's efforts to subvert the result of another election.
In 2020, when Trump attempted to overturn his loss to former President Joe Biden, his attempts to claim the result was marred by systemic fraud were met with resistance from then-Attorney General William Barr.
But under Blanche, who served for two years as Trump's personal defense attorney, things may be very different.
That's according to another of Trump's former lawyers, Ty Cobb, who served as White House special counsel for nearly a year during Trump's first term, as he came under investigation by then-special counsel Robert Mueller over his campaign's alleged coordination with the Russian government.
Cobb, who has been an outspoken critic of both Trump and his appointment of Blanche, appeared for an interview released Saturday on Zeteo's "Mehdi Unfiltered." Host Mehdi Hasan asked Cobb, "Come 2028, does American democracy survive Donald Trump?"
"I’m not sure they survive it in 2026,” Cobb responded.
Meet the Former Trump White House Lawyer Who Says Our Democracy Could Be ‘Screwed’ in 2026 by Mehdi Hasan
Ty Cobb, who represented the Trump White House during the Mueller investigation, questions whether democracy will survive the midterms and accuses Trump of 'unprecedented' corruption.
Read on SubstackNoting Barr's resistance to Trump in 2020, Hasan asked: "If the midterms don’t go Trump’s way this fall, is there any world in which Todd Blanche stands up to Trump if he’s asked to find some fake evidence of voter fraud, or are we screwed now?”
“We’re screwed,” Cobb said bluntly.
“Great,” Hasan said. “That’s what I suspected.”
Trump has, on multiple occasions, floated the idea of canceling the midterm elections outright and has enacted measures aimed at blocking mail-in voting and seizing voter information from states. He has also said he wants Republicans to "nationalize" elections in Democratic-leaning locales.
Cobb noted that Blanche "has already echoed [former Trump chief strategist] Steve Bannon's view that [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] should be on the street during the election," adding, "I think we'll almost certainly see that."
Hasan pointed out that the administration has routinely ignored court orders, especially with regard to its immigration enforcement. Cobb predicted that "the level of noncompliance" so far "is nothing compared to what we're about to see."
He said that if Democrats take the US House of Representatives and begin pursuing investigations, he suspects there will be "a number of contemptuous acts" by the administration. "We can count on the Justice Department to pursue zero of those referrals."
"That's assuming that the midterms actually produce a Democratic Congress," he continued, noting that even if one were elected legitimately, "whether they get seated or not by [Republican House Speaker] Little Mikey Johnson and his service to the president, that remains to be seen."
Cobb said that's in addition to other "dangers" around the election, including the presence of ICE agents. "Blanche has suggested that people should be happy to see ICE at the polls."
Where Barr refused Trump's requests to do so in 2020, Cobb said, "There's no circumstance under which we shouldn't expect Blanche to seize ballots and seize voting machines and try to interfere in the process of the upcoming election."
"I think that the president has made it very clear that he doesn't want immigrants or people of color to have the ability to go to the polls," Cobb said. "He's going to do everything he can in blue states and elsewhere to try to prevent this election from going smoothly."
Keep Reading
Show Less
Israel Revokes Entry Permits For Jewish Americans Who Protected Palestinians From Settler Violence
"Israeli-occupied territory is not a 'safe place' for all Jews," said one Jewish American activist.
Aug 08, 2026
The Israeli government is closing its doors to some Jewish Americans. Their crime? Volunteering to protect Palestinians in the occupied West Bank from violence by illegal settlers.
The Forward reported on Friday that at least seven young American Jews have had their electronic travel authorization (ETA) revoked over their involvement with activist groups involved with "protective presence." This practice involves unarmed nonviolent activists, often Israelis or other Jewish volunteers from abroad, accompanying Palestinians at risk of being attacked by Israeli settlers.
None of the seven Americans who spoke with The Forward had been arrested or charged with crimes.
One activist from New York, Sam Sherman, said he and some other volunteers received emails informing them that their status had been revoked while they were in the West Bank with a program known as Hineinu, started by the Center for Jewish Nonviolence in 2021.
The program places Jewish volunteers within Palestinian communities for around three months, where they participate in protective presence, accompany Palestinians at risk of attack, and document human rights abuses with the hope of deterring them.
Sherman said that while he was volunteering in Masafer Yatta in the Southern West Bank, he was harassed by a group of soldiers, police, and armed settlers who photographed his passports.
“We were just there hanging out with people, essentially,” he said. “But we were treated as if it was almost criminal for us to be there.”
Other activists explained that once Sherman left, he likely would not be allowed to return unless he immigrated there permanently.
"If I’m the wrong kind of Jew for Israel,” he said, “Sure. Great.”
Increasingly, the Israeli government seems to believe that people like Sherman are the wrong kinds of Jews for Israel.
In April 2024, Israel's far-right national security minister created a police task force aimed at handling foreign and Israeli left-wing activists. He has taken credit for having dozens of activists deported from the country.
As +972 Magazine reported back in October 2024, the task force was set up after the Biden administration began imposing sanctions on violent Israeli settlers and settler organizations.
Activists detained and deported by the task force have described being threatened, intimidated, and falsely accused of crimes like terrorism during interrogations by soldiers.
According to the Center for Jewish Nonviolence, dozens of its foreign volunteers in Hineinu and other protective-presence initiatives have had their entry permits revoked over the past two years.
News of Israel's efforts to keep out Jewish American activists comes amid an extraordinary surge of settler violence in the West Bank that the United Nations recently said had reached an “all-time high."
As of Late July, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs reported that 18 Palestinians have been killed this year in incidents involving settler attacks, already surpassing the total killed all of last year. About 900 Palestinians have been injured this year in settler attacks, representing more than half of all the Palestinian injuries documented in the West Bank this year.
Cameron Kasky, a Jewish American activist who was recently detained by armed settlers in the West Bank while visiting with US Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), said Israel's treatment of Jews who show solidarity with Palestinians calls into question its purported commitment to Jewish safety.
"Israeli-occupied territory is not a 'safe place' for all Jews," Kasky said. "Jewish American, Israeli, and European activists are frequently brutalized by Jewish settlers and soldiers."
Keep Reading
Show Less
'Has Trump’s Invasion of Greenland Already Begun?': Experts Fearful as MAGA-Linked Oil Company Prepares Unauthorized Drilling
"Let nobody think Trump has given up on taking Greenland," warned one professor of European politics.
Aug 08, 2026
After appearing to back off earlier this year, President Donald Trump this week renewed his threats to seize Greenland. A Saturday report that a Texas oil company with ties to Trump had begun preparing to drill in the Arctic territory without permission has raised fresh concerns that his push for control of the island may already be moving beyond rhetoric.
As The Guardian reported, Greenland’s government issued a “strong warning” last week after learning that a Texas oil company called Greenland Energy had begun making unauthorized preparations for oil extraction in Jameson Land, a remote area of eastern Greenland, including bringing drilling materials ashore.
The company, founded last year, has claimed that Jameson Land may contain $1 trillion worth of crude oil and announced plans to drill two wells there—a project that requires approval from Greenland’s government.
The company also has ties to several Trump allies and associates. According to The Guardian:
Greenland Energy has retained Phil McGraw, better known as Dr. Phil, a prominent right-wing former chatshow host who served on Trump’s religious freedom commission, to make a documentary series that will “capture the mission of these modern-day wildcatters.”
It has also appointed as a director a US Navy veteran who is working on Golden Dome, the missile defense plan for which Trump says controlling Greenland is “vital.”
Larry Swets, Greenland Energy’s chair and a big shareholder, appears to enjoy access to Trump’s circle. He has said the oil project is “not related to American annexation.”
A Greenland Energy representative falsely claimed in June that the company had permission to place equipment on Jameson Land, before later saying there had been confusion.
But the following month, residents saw a barge arrive with drilling equipment. A Danish outlet confirmed that the delivery was intended for Greenland Energy.
Following the delivery, Greenland’s government said on July 30 that the company "did not have the necessary approvals from the mineral resources authority" and would receive a warning that "all future logistical matters must be advised and approved by the mineral resources authority—before they are carried out."
Two days later, Trump posted an ominious digitally altered image to Truth Social depicting himself as a giant looming over a Greenlandic town, captioned "Hello, Greenland!"
A day earlier, Trump had appeared on the right-wing network Real America’s Voice, where host Steve Gruber reminded him that he had predicted Greenland would be under US control by the time he leaves office in 2029.
“You’ll be right," Trump replied. "Greenland is important. Not from their standpoint, from our standpoint. You should make that bet.”
Before this week’s comments, Trump had spoken far less publicly about Greenland since January, when he threatened to use military force to take over the island if Denmark did not cede it. To pressure NATO allies, Trump threatened steep tariffs on several European countries, but backed off after Europe pledged retaliatory tariffs, causing panic in the financial markets.
"Let nobody think Trump has given up on taking Greenland," said John O’Brennan, professor of European politics at Maynooth University in Ireland. He added that Greenland Energy’s unauthorized activity "is the latest act of lawlessness his acolytes are engaged in."
Kenneth Roth, the former executive director of Human Rights Watch, responded to the story by asking, "Has Trump’s invasion of Greenland already begun?"
Historian Ruth Ben-Ghiat suggested it was possible. "Invasions," she said, "often start with 'technical' projects that justify the presence of operatives and 'technical experts' who are also doing recon and advance prep."
The Greenlandic government ultimately said it “would not be proportionate” to order Greenland Energy to remove the drilling equipment, a decision that The Guardian said underscored the difficult position facing its officials.
"They could grant permission for oil drilling, even though the planned wells appear to fall within a conservation area protected by the Ramsar convention on wetlands," the report explained. "Or they could refuse and, some worry, give Trump a pretext to advance his imperialist agenda."
Although the project has not been approved, a Greenland Energy representative said a vessel carrying additional drilling equipment would depart Canada in September, with drilling set to begin in October.
Jessica Berlin, a senior fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis, warned that allowing the equipment to remain would signal weakness that Trump could exploit.
"Don’t even think about allowing this," she wrote in a post directed to the Greenlandic and Danish governments. "If you give them an inch, they’ll take 100 miles. Kick them out now or accept that you just opened the floodgates."
"Like Putin, you can’t negotiate with Trump," she added. "Showing weakness will just guarantee the next outrage."
As part of the Kingdom of Denmark, Greenland is covered by NATO’s Article 5 collective-defense clause, which obligates member nations to defend one another from armed attack. But NATO has no precedent for how Article 5 would apply if one member—the US—attacked another.
O'Brennan warned, "Europe—you are about to be seriously tested."
Keep Reading
Show Less
Senate Confirms 'Personal Servant to Donald Trump' Blanche as AG in Late-Night Vote
"If he is tasked with leading Trump’s revenge agenda against his political enemies and critics, we have every reason to believe he will execute this mission with eagerness and fealty."
Aug 08, 2026
Early Saturday, outgoing Sen. Bill Cassidy cast the deciding vote to confirm Todd Blanche as US Attorney General shortly after outlining a litany of reservations about the nominee.
Around 4:30 am ET, the US Senate voted 50-49 to confirm Blanche, President Donald Trump's former personal attorney and acting attorney general since April, as the nation's chief law enforcement officer. It did so despite widespread concerns, including among some Republicans, that he would use the office primarily to carry out the president's whims.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), one of two Republicans who voted against Blanche, outlined her concerns in a social media post Friday ahead of the vote, saying Trump had "accelerated" the "politicization—even weaponization" of the US Department of Justice (DOJ) and that Blanche had played a part.
"I take issue with the handling of the release of the Epstein files; the sweeping immunity protections granted to the president, his family, and their businesses; the statements that have been made to anti-abortion groups; and the repeated targeting of individuals ranging from former administration staff to sitting US senators," Murkowski said.
Murkowski also expressed doubt about Blanche's promise to eliminate the department's so-called $1.8 billion "weaponization fund" for Trump's supporters and allies—including January 6 Capitol insurrectionists. Referring to it as a "slush fund," she said confirming Blanche would cost the Senate any "leverage" to prevent it from being revived.
In a speech Friday ahead of the vote, Cassidy (R-La.)—who lost his Senate primary in May after being attacked by Trump as "disloyal"—raised similar concerns about Blanche, but ultimately said they did not prevent him from supporting the nominee.
"Mr. Blanche showed poor judgment in approving the anti-weaponization slush fund and exempting the president from [Internal Revenue Service] audits," Cassidy said on the Senate floor. "Mr. Blanche said these were mistakes and has made efforts to kill the slush fund."
To secure his confirmation, Blanche struck a deal with Republican holdouts, including Sens. Thom Tillis (NC) and John Cornyn (Texas), earlier last week and issued an order to eliminate the $1.8 billion fund, but did not agree to end the exemption from tax audits of Trump's past activity.
Cassidy also said he was concerned about "DOJ bringing suits against political enemies," but argued that Trump's "unrelenting" targeting of his foes meant any attorney general he appointed would face the same pressure.
To address the allegation that Blanche would act as a "yes-man" for Trump, Cassidy quoted William Barr, who served as attorney general during Trump's first term: "Because of his previous client-attorney relationship with President Trump, Mr. Blanche would be precisely the person to push back on President Trump."
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said on CNN Friday night that the Republicans who were voting to confirm Blanche despite their reservations "know better" than to trust him and would ultimately "regret" the decision.
"He advanced... this $1.8 billion slush fund. That's a terrible idea. And frankly, that my colleagues and friends, John Cornyn and Bill Cassidy, accept this paper-thin excuse of a signed deal by Todd Blanche doesn't pass the smell test because, frankly, President Trump is the one who continues to berate and push for that weaponization fund," he said. "I have no confidence that Todd Blanche won't just turn around and give it to him once confirmed."
Asked about Cassidy's reasoning that Blanche, as Trump's former attorney, would be more willing and able to constrain the president, Coons said, "I don't buy that at all."
"What I've seen from Todd Blanche in the role of [acting] attorney general and in his confirmation hearing was that he still thinks of himself as President Trump's personal lawyer, not the person who is trying to protect the Department of Justice and the Constitution from presidential overreach," Coons said.
Ultimately, just two Republicans joined every Democrat to vote against confirming Blanche—Murkowski and Sen. Susan Collins, who faces a difficult reelection battle against Democratic nominee Troy Jackson in Maine. Cassidy, Tillis, and Cornyn all voted yes.
Former Ambassador Norm Eisen, the co-founder and board member of Democracy Defenders Action, said that Blanche's confirmation was "a dark day for the rule of law."
"Senate Republicans sounded the alarm, rightfully so, calling out the ‘fund that would pay people who beat police officers,’ and exposing a nominee who has never stopped serving the personal and political interests of Donald Trump. Yet, at the precipice, they lost their nerve and the majority voted for him anyway."
Praveen Fernandes, vice president of the Constitutional Accountability Center, said that approving the slush fund was "one of the most brazen attempts to circumvent the law and benefit Trump and his cronies."
She added that every senator who voted for Blanche "cast a vote in support of the Blanche-led Department of Justice’s continued failure to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act and its unconscionable treatment of Epstein survivors, its efforts to wipe clean the records of those who participated in January 6th violence against lawmakers and law enforcement officers, its record of weaponized prosecutions, and its brazen rejection of the notion of prosecutorial independence from White House pressure."
Lisa Gilbert, co-president of the watchdog group Public Citizen, said that "Moving forward, our country has to contend with an attorney general who sees himself as a personal servant to Donald Trump instead of a public servant to the American people."
"If he is tasked with leading Trump’s revenge agenda against his political enemies and critics, as he likely will be," she said, "we have every reason to believe he will execute this mission with eagerness and fealty."
Keep Reading
Show Less
See More
Most Popular
Progressive Newswire
As El Niño and heatwaves dry up fields, governments must act fast
Aug 10 2026 · 08:30am EDT
Blanche Is (Still) Unfit to Be Named Attorney General
Aug 07 2026 · 01:26pm EDT
Food & Water Watch Applauds Failure of Bad Senate Farm Bill
Aug 06 2026 · 03:07pm EDT
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy