LIVE COVERAGE
Our Fall Campaign is falling short.
These periodic campaigns are vital to our strength and survival. If you believe that independent journalism can help change the world, then we need you in this urgent moment.
Monsters 'R Us
Most of Planet Earth now knows cruelty is the point of Trump 2. But if anyone implausibly needs more evidence, meet Rev. Edward Nalwamba, a 79-year-old, pro-democracy Ugandan priest who spent over a year in ICE detention. When he went in, he was fit; at his long-delayed release last week, fellow detainees had to carry him to a car because officials wouldn't let him take his wheelchair that far. To ICE, he charged, "You are an animal...They forget they are dealing with human beings."
In the last 18 months, the Trump regime has deported nearly a million people, and killed at least 60, including two U.S citizens in cold blood and broad daylight. The family of one, Renee Good, has filed two federal civil lawsuits over her Jan. 7 murder, alleging wrongful death, "negligent infliction of emotional distress," conspiracy to conceal evidence, and coordinated campaigns of "aggression and abduction" against ethnic communities and "intimidation and violence" against their allies. And of course it has detained, terrorized, traumatized or shattered the lives of untold thousands, the vast majority with no criminal history.
One was the good Rev. Nalwamba, who arrived in the U.S. in 2002 for a religious conference. Having publicly condemned human rights abuses by the Ugandan government, and subsequently heard from colleagues that government agents were pursuing him, he decided to stay in Colorado and apply for asylum. In 2010, after his application was denied, he began living peaceably in Lakewood under a 15-year ICE supervision order, reporting to immigration officials as required, working as a health aide for people with developmental disabilities, and serving as a pastor at nearby Resurrection Anglican Fellowship until he retired two years ago.
In September 2025 he was arrested by ICE; they charged he was under a removal order dating back to 2010, and that he'd failed to "cooperate with efforts to obtain travel documents" before a deadline, aka to help with his own deportation in a timely manner. He was taken to the GEO Group's private ICE detention facility in Aurora, where for over a year DHS repeatedly vowed to deport him and then didn't. On Oct. 20, after his lawyers filed a second habeas corpus petition, Judge Cyrus Chung ruled feds had exceeded a “presumptively reasonable” six months of holding time with "no concrete plan” to return him to Uganda, and ordered his release.
When he was detained, Nalwamba was a fit 77-year-old who regularly walked, exercised and played ping pong. Inside, his health quickly deteriorated. He caught pneumonia which persisted for weeks, lost over 30 pounds and the ability to walk, developed a stubborn cough, chest pain, scratchy throat, headache and fatigue that were never treated - and besides, "You don’t want to go to the hospital - they shackle you like a bull.” "He walked in. He can't walk now," noted Colorado Sen. John Hickenlooper. "They want the misery of one person to be known by others. It's a low-rent form of terrorism to make people so scared they'll self-deport."
Along with the barbaric cruelty, observers also blasted the "staggering hypocrisy" of a regime that simultaneously charged Biden et al "targeted" Christians yet in their voter intimidation efforts sent ICE into churches, interrogated church staff, and detained and abused a church elder. Last week, because they hadn't alienated Christians enough by picking a fight with the Pope, they also turned a supposed prayer gathering of Catholic bishops into a sleazy photo op, prompting two angry Archbishops to apologize, charge they'd been "manipulated," and clarify this was "in no way an endorsement of the president, his policies, or his party."
In the final, petty degradation meted out to Rev. Nalwamba, detention officials told his attorneys they would ensure his safe passage on release with a wheelchair and escort, and then reneged on it all. The wheelchair couldn't go out to the gate, they insisted, nor could vehicles approach it. Hickenlooper: "There is no excuse for this cruelty. None.” In the end - no surprise here - it was two young mensches also being released who hooked their arms together - one lawyer: "It was heartbreaking and it was infuriating" - carried the reverend to his waiting car, and went on their way: "They didn't even give me a chance to say thank you.".
After his release, a buoyant Nalwamba said he’s “in another world." He talked to his children, he's well fed, he’s staying with a family who lent him an electric scooter to get around. The next day, he visited a health clinic to get a chest X-ray, blood work, TB testing. He looks forward to physical therapy and reconnecting with his church community: "I am a happy man." Except for the monsters, still here. DHS said they were "forced" by "an activist judge" to release "an illegal alien" who "chose to overstay his welcome in violation of our nation's laws." Most vitally, "He remains in the country illegally," under a removal order, without legal status.
So much, or not yet for Obama's Michigan citing of "a decency we should expect from our public officials." Attorneys plan to reopen Nalwamba's asylum case; conditions in Uganda have seriously deteriorated with widespread crime, unrest and targeting of political opponents and a U.S. "Do not travel" advisory in effect. At the same time, says attorney Joy Athanasiou, she has never seen "this inhumanity and cruelty" over 20 years of working with detained clients. Before, there were under 1,000 habeas corpus petitions a year; now there are about 90,000, a demand "100 times greater than what we can provide.”
Nalwamba says his thoughts remain with those innocents still inside a callous, corrosive environment worse than any maximum security prison. He loves the America he has lived in for almost 26 years, he says, and has always thought African and other countries should aspire to be like the U.S. But no more, he adds, not without drastic change. Those other countries, he argues, treat their livestock better than he was treated. "It's as if they've gotten used to treating people that way, like they're taking care of goats or cows,” he said. “I have never imagined human beings treated like I saw in this place."

'Absolutely Maddening': UK Approves Jackdaw Gas Drilling in North Sea
With drilling in the Jackdaw gas field in the North Sea set to go forward following the United Kingdom's approval, announced on Wednesday, climate groups and progressive lawmakers demanded to know how Prime Minister Andy Burnham could declare the decision a "pragmatic" one, considering the meager job growth and energy savings and massive climate damage expected from the project.
“Is the prime minister living in a parallel universe?" asked Danny Gross, climate campaigner for Friends of the Earth (FOE). "One where we haven’t just endured our hottest summer on record, with droughts, wildfires and, in all likelihood, the most heat-related deaths on record?"
The approval of the oil and gas extraction from Jackdaw by Adura, a joint venture between Shell and Equinor, was announced as the United Nations warned that continued fossil fuel drilling has put the possibility of avoiding a global temperature rise that breaches the 1.5°C threshold out of reach, and emphasized that countries must take action to mitigate the damage and ensure the breach is temporary.
The UN said greenhouse gas emissions must be slashed by nearly one-fifth in the next four years to avoid the worst impacts of the climate crisis.
"Against this backdrop, there’s nothing that justifies giving the go-ahead to a colossal new fossil fuel project in North Sea. The disconnect is absolutely maddening," said Gross.
The Jackdaw approval was announced as the government said inflation had jumped to its highest level in almost a year, with US President Donald Trump's war on Iran and Russia's invasion of Ukraine driving up energy prices worldwide.
But an analysis by the UK climate action group Uplift, which compiled data from the public record, found that the Jackdaw project would provide enough gas to displace just 2% of the UK's current imports.
"This will not lower international gas prices paid by UK consumers," said Greenpeace, which also emphasized that Adura has admitted in an environmental statement that the project is projected to create just 27 full-time jobs—making little difference to the area surrounding Aberdeen, Scotland, the center of the UK oil industry where local officials have reported losses of 1,000 oil and gas jobs per month.
Zack Polanski, the leader of Britain's Green Party, said the projected impact of the Jackdaw project couldn't compare "to all the benefits of investing in renewables and insulating our homes."
CBI Economics found earlier this year that the UK's green economy employs more than 1 million people and is worth £100 billion ($133 billion) per year, with workers in the sector paid more than the national average.
“Jackdaw won’t make a jot of difference to our energy bills, but it will fuel the climate chaos already unfurling in front of us. The route to lower bills and true energy security lies in the UK’s vast capacity for cheap, homegrown renewable power and street-by-street home insulation programs," said Gross. “This decision makes Shell and its shareholders richer at the expense of ordinary people’s lives—a move that sees the prime minister turning his back on the very people he claims to be on the side of."
Richard Burgon, a member of Parliament who represents Burnham's Labour Party, called the approval "absolutely terrible" and urged the government not to "repeat the same mistake" with Rosebank oil field in the North Sea, which the prime minister said he would make a decision about at a later date.
Fossil fuel development in both the Jackdaw and Rosebank fields was blocked by a moratorium in 2024, imposed by the Labour government of former Prime Minister Keir Starmer. Drilling has previously been approved in 2022 and 2023 by the Conservative government. Supporters of oil and gas extraction in the North Sea have argued that since the fields were approved for exploration under the Conservatives, allowing drilling now does not violate the moratorium.
The climate impacts of the two projects are projected to cost each UK household £3,000 ($4,017) annually, according to Greenpeace, and gas production from Jackdaw is estimated to be equivalent to about 40 million barrels of oil, Adura has said.
"Using government calculations for climate harm, burning Jackdaw’s gas will cause an estimated £16.1 billion [$21.5 billion] in global damage and over 8,000 heat-related deaths," said Greenpeace.
This past summer, extreme heat across Europe helped ignite wildfires and was blamed for tens of thousands of excess deaths on the continent. The breakdown of a glacier in Nepal and Tibet also caused a flooding disaster that killed more than 1,000 people.
“It is a shame that one of the first big decisions for the new energy secretary, Miatta Fahnbulleh, has been to approve more fossil fuel drilling," said Rosemary Harris, North Sea senior campaigner for Oil Change International. "At a time where the impacts of climate breakdown are so clearly felt, from the loss of livelihoods, homes, and lives in the UK over the summer, to the devastating floods in Nepal, our government should look to the future, not cling to the past."
The approval also came weeks before Burnham is set to represent the UK at the UN Climate Change Conference (COP31) in Antalya, Türkiye.
While drilling in the Jackdaw field will "make no real difference to our energy bills or security," said Bob Ward, policy and communications director at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics and Political Science, "it will signal to other fossil fuel producers that they too should carry on with business as usual, less than a month before the COP31 United Nations climate change summit.”
Harris said that following the approval, "all eyes are now on Rosebank, and the hope that Andy Burnham and his energy secretary have the courage and vision to push back against the industry and plot a path to an energy transition that provides more security, lower bills, and a safe climate."
Largest US Corporations Paid Lowest-Ever Tax Rate in 2025 Thanks to Trump and GOP: Study
Some of the biggest US corporations paid an effective federal income tax rate of just 10.4% last year as Republican legislation passed by President Donald Trump disproportionately benefited businesses and the superrich while eviscerating key social programs, a study published Thursday revealed.
The 706 corporations examined by the Washington, DC-based Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) reported a combined $1.88 trillion in US profits in 2025, yet paid less than half the statutory federal corporate income tax rate of 21%. Of those companies, the study found that 114 paid no federal income taxes at all.
Those 706 companies collectively paid current federal corporate income taxes equal to just 10.4% of that $1.88 trillion, "the lowest effective rate that ITEP has uncovered in over 40 years of analyzing corporate income taxes," according to the analysis.
The study attributes this to two major tax laws enacted under Trump: The 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act—derided at the time as the "GOP Tax Scam"—slashed the statutory corporate income tax rate from 35% to 21%, while the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act passed by the Republican-controlled Congress and signed by the president last year expanded and made permanent the 2017 cuts.
NEW: U.S. corporations are paying the lowest tax rate seen in decades.706 major corporations collectively paid a federal income tax rate of just 10.4%, less than half the statutory rate.114 corporations paid zero.itep.org/corporate-ta...
[image or embed]
— ITEP (@itep.org) October 22, 2026 at 8:30 AM
"These findings show just how dramatically the corporate tax system has been tilted in favor of the nation’s wealthiest and most powerful companies,” ITEP senior fellow Matt Gardner, who co-authored the report, said in a statement.
“At a time when lawmakers claim the country cannot afford investments in families and communities, some of the most profitable corporations in American history are paying little or nothing in federal income taxes," he added. "This is not an accident. It is the predictable outcome of deliberate policy choices that have steadily eroded the corporate tax base."
Among the report's key findings:
- The 114 companies that paid no current federal income tax last year include Tesla, Walt Disney, CVS, Citigroup, United Airlines, and DoorDash;
- 258 corporations paid effective tax rates below 7%, or less than one-third of the statutory rate;
- Those 258 companies reported $683 billion in US profits but paid an effective federal income tax rate of just 1.7%;
- The 706 corporations studied received $198 billion in federal tax subsidies by paying less than the statutory 21% rate;
- They also benefited from an additional $263 billion in tax savings attributable to the 2017 reduction of the statutory rate from 35% to 21%; and
- Just 25 corporations accounted for more than half of the 2025 tax subsidies, with Alphabet ($18.9 billion), Microsoft ($18.7 billion), Amazon ($17.4 billion), and Meta ($13.9 billion) among the largest beneficiaries.
“Congress has repeatedly chosen to expand tax breaks for corporations that are already extraordinarily profitable,” said Steve Wamhoff, ITEP's federal policy director and co-author of the report. “Rather than continuing to subsidize corporate investments and reward aggressive tax avoidance, lawmakers should close these loopholes and ensure that large corporations pay a meaningful share of their profits in taxes.”
‘Rats Run Away’: Facing Criminal Probe, Flávio Bolsonaro Flees Brazil to US After Loss to Lula
Just one day after vowing he would remain in Brazil to disprove allegations of money laundering, corruption, and other crimes, far-right Brazilian Sen. Flávio Bolsonaro followed in his disgraced father's footsteps by fleeing to the United States after losing a presidential election.
Bolsonaro, his wife Fernanda Bolsonaro, and their two daughters, ages 14 and 12, left Brazil for an unknown location in the United States, according to initial reporting by Isadora Teixeira at the Brasília-based news site Metrópoles, which was subsequently confirmed by other Brazilian and international media.
The Argentinian site Infobae reported that Bolsonaro and his family may have crossed into Argentina—which is run by his ally, far-right President Javier Milei—and then traveled to the US in a private jet. It is not known where the family went in the US.
Bolsonaro's brother, Eduardo Bolsonaro, lives in Texas while facing criminal punishment in Brazil after trying to use the Trump administration to pressure Brazilian authorities over the prosecution of his father, former President Jair Bolsonaro, who last year was convicted of conspiring to violently remain in power following leftist President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva's 2022 election win.
Flávio Bolsonaro, a 45-year-old senator representing Rio de Janeiro, was defeated by Lula in Sunday's second-round election, but refused to accept the results and groundlessly demanded an annulment. The following day, Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes ordered the seizure of Bolsonaro's passport. He was supposed to have turned in the document Tuesday, but he didn't.
US President Donald Trump also cast doubt on the election's outcome, saying the contest appeared to be "rigged."
Jair Bolsonaro also fled to the United States while refusing to acknowledge his own 2022 defeat, which occurred during the administration of former President Joe Biden.
Like Trump, Bolsonaro incited a violent insurrection in his nation's capital following his loss.
Unlike Trump, Bolsonaro was held accountable for his crimes, and, in addition to a 27-year prison sentence—now being served under house arrest—is banned from running for any political office for the rest of the decade.
Now, with Trump back in the White House and Secretary of State Marco Rubio in charge at Foggy Bottom, Bolsonaro and his relatives are set to be issued US visas, a senior State Department official told The Associated Press.
The younger Bolsonaro's flight—which may have been aided by his obtaining an Italian passport in 2023—contradicts his pledge on Monday, when he said, "I have never thought about leaving the country" and "I will hand over my passports and defend myself against this travesty."
He was referring to de Morães' order to surrender his passport amid accusations of corruption, money laundering, tax evasion, and foreign currency violations.
Bolsonaro is also the subject of an inquiry pertaining to the millions of dollars he raised from a disgraced banker implicated in a massive corrupt plot to finance a biopic of Jair Bolsonaro.
The senator has not been charged and denies any wrongdoing.
Bolsonaro's flight stands in stark contrast to Lula, who spent 580 days in prison after being convicted in corruption cases stemming from the sprawling Operation Car Wash investigation.
In 2021, Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court annulled Lula’s convictions on procedural grounds, ruling that the court in Curitiba lacked jurisdiction over the cases and separately finding that former judge Sergio Moro had acted with bias in one of them. The decisions restored Lula’s political rights and eligibility to run for office, paving the way for his 2022 presidential victory over Bolsonaro.
Lula responded to the senator's departure by saying, "Unfortunately, the Bolsonaro family is like that."
"Brazil is his second homeland," the president continued, accusing Bolsonaro of "bootlicking in the United States."
Secretary-General of the Brazilian Presidency Guilherme Castro Boulos ripped Bolsonaro, saying: "Leaders face things head-on! Rats run away!”
"It is a shameful thing, which should make Brazilian society as a whole reflect, especially those who supported and voted for Flávio Bolsonaro," Boulos asserted. "He slapped his supporters in the face and left them on the side of the road."
"Almost 60 million Brazilians trusted him as political leadership to run the country, and 24 hours later, he flees," he continued. "And it's no use coming up with this talk of persecution, of dictatorship. He ran away because he must."
"This reveals the DNA of Bolsonarism," Boulos added. "Bolsonarism is made of cowardice."
Erika Hilton, a member of the Chamber of Deputies—the lower house of Brazil's Legislature—representing São Paulo for the Socialism and Liberty Party, weighed in on social media, calling Bolsonaro "a traitor to the homeland."
In the United States, Congressman Joaquin Castro (D-Texas) said on X that "losing an election is not grounds for asylum."
"Yet the Trump administration is giving Flávio Bolsonaro safe haven in the United States," he continued. "The Trump administration owes Congress answers on its role helping Bolsonaro flee Brazil in contravention of Brazilian law."
Mark Weisbrot, co-director of the Center for Economic Policy and Research (CEPR), told Common Dreams:
Trump is now the most corrupt president in US history, raking in billions from his presidency. It's no surprise when the most powerful corrupt authoritarian government in the hemisphere uses international law designed to protect the persecuted to shield another corrupt authoritarian government from criminal prosecution. Perhaps this is what is meant by the Trump-led 'Shield of the Americas.'
Francesca Emanuele, senior international policy associate at CEPR, noted that "the United States has long served as a destination for numerous right-wing Latin American political figures who fled their home countries while facing corruption allegations, criminal investigations, or accusations of grave human rights violations, including crimes against humanity."
"The list is extensive," she added, "ranging from former presidents such as Panama’s Ricardo Martinelli and Bolivia’s Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada to dictators such as Nicaragua’s Anastasio Somoza."
Emanuele also contrasted the actions of the Bolsonaros and Lula, arguing that the latter's decision to remain in Brazil "reflected a commitment to the Brazilian people and a determination to defend his rights through the country’s own institutions, even when those institutions failed to uphold them."
"Rather than leaving Brazil," she told Common Dreams, "Lula stayed, fought to clear his name, and continued his political struggle alongside the people he sought to represent."
Trump DOJ Charges Ex-FBI Chief James Comey a Third Time
President Donald Trump's administration has charged former Federal Bureau of Investigation Director James Comey a third time, according to documents unsealed on Monday—the same day a US judge ruled that the administration unlawfully fired Comey's prosecutor daughter, who worked on the sex crimes case against the president's dead ex-friend Jeffrey Epstein.
Comey, a former Republican fired during Trump's first term, and various critics have condemned all of the cases against him and others who publicly call out the administration as weaponization of the US Department of Justice (DOJ) against the president's political enemies. The latest case relates to a New York Times article from over a decade ago, when he was still FBI chief.
The case, in which he's accused of unlawfully disclosing classified information, "has played out under seal since October 5. Comey's defense attorneys filed a motion 10 days ago to dismiss the charges against him. He has not been indicted in the case," NBC News reported. "The charges that were filed are a criminal information—essentially a charge filed by prosecutors—and not a grand jury indictment."
Elie Honig, a former federal prosecutor and CNN's senior legal analyst, was among the experts who highlighted that "this is a bizarre, and likely improper, use of a criminal 'information' to end-run the statute of limitations."
"Typically an information must be agreed to by a defendant—and Comey did not consent here," Honig explained. "It therefore likely cannot extend the statute of limitations, which would have expired on October 5, 2026."
The DOJ Rapid Response account on X said that "the department filed a waiverless criminal information to toll the statute of limitations as it relates to allegations concerning former FBI Director Comey. Filing a criminal information to toll the statute of limitations is a widely recognized practice in federal court and has been approved by multiple circuit courts of appeals. This is an ongoing criminal investigation, and we will not comment further."
Comey's attorney, Pat Fitzgerald, said that he "steadfastly maintains his innocence" and noted some details from all cases: "In September 2025, the Department of Justice used a person who was not actually a United States attorney to seek an indictment that was not actually shown to the grand jury. And it charged Mr. Comey with crimes that he did not commit. That case was promptly and properly dismissed. In April 2026, the Department of Justice filed charges in the Eastern District of North Carolina concerning Mr. Comey's posting of a photograph of seashells spelling '8647.' We will not comment beyond our filings in that case."
"This most recent case involves an October 5, 2016 New York Times article that two different teams of prosecutors investigated during the first Trump administration," Fitzgerald continued. "Both times the government determined that no charges should be brought against anyone. Now, 10 years after the article was published, the government filed an 'information' against Mr. Comey that was not approved by a judge nor issued by a grand jury. It purports to charge Mr. Comey with crimes that he did not commit. We are gratified that United States District Judge Trevor McFadden has ordered this matter unsealed. Mr. Comey will fight these charges vigorously and in the open."
Comey also directly declared his innocence and vowed to fight back in a video he posted on Substack, saying that "it would almost be funny if it weren't such an appalling abuse of the Department of Justice—one that we cannot become numb to."
Yet another case in DC by James Comey
Read on SubstackThe documents were unsealed shortly after US District Judge Jesse M. Furman—appointed to the Southern District of New York by former President Barack Obama—sided with Maurene Comey, concluding that the DOJ "violated the separation of powers, federal administrative law and Ms. Comey’s due process rights when it fired her in July 2025," as the Times detailed Monday.
A spokesperson for the DOJ—which is now led by Attorney General Todd Blanche, who previously served as the president's personal lawyer—said that "the department disagrees with this decision and will appeal in due course."
Sharing news of that ruling on X, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) predicted, "This will drive 'Ranting Man' Trump even crazier!!"
Israeli Occupation Forces Ramp Up Ethnic Cleansing in West Bank After Palestinian Resistance Attack
Israeli forces on Friday began demolishing homes and businesses and forcibly evacuating residents near Hebron in the illegally occupied West Bank following a Palestinian resistance attack that killed two Israeli soldiers.
"First, we will destroy this place and completely transform it, but we will do something that has never been done before," Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said at the scene of the shooting attack that took place earlier Friday near Hebron Junction. "We will evacuate the residents, go from house to house, remove weapons from there as well, and deal with and destroy all terrorist infrastructure."
"We will consider expanding this model to other cities as well," Netanyahu added.
The prime minister also ordered the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) to “immediately impose a lockdown on Hebron and prepare for a full lockdown" of the entire West Bank, while vowing to launch the largest military operation in the occupied territory since it was conquered during the 1967 Six-Day War and subsequently ethnically cleansed of more than 100,000 Palestinians.
Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz also vowed that neighborhoods associated with the attackers would be "evacuated"—a word that critics call a euphemism for ethnic cleansing—"just like in Gaza; just like in Lebanon."
Far-right Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich echoed those calls.
"There is no other option but a comprehensive military campaign in Judea and Samaria to dismantle the Palestinian Authority, collect weapons, and eliminate terrorists," he said, referring to Israel's name for the West Bank.
"Exactly like in Gaza and Lebanon," Smotrich added.
Israeli forces have killed or wounded more than 250,000 people in Gaza since the Hamas-led attack of October 2023, while forcibly displacing around 1.9 million residents and destroying or damaging more than 80% of the strip's structures. In Lebanon, nearly 40,000 people have been killed or injured by Israeli attacks over the same period, during which there were two waves of mass displacement in which more than a million people were forced from their homes each time. Dozens of Lebanese villages have been flattened.
Demolition and displacement were the order of the day in the West Bank Friday as Israeli bulldozers began demolishing homes after Netanyahu's announcement, even as local residents said their properties had no connection to the attack on the slain IDF troops.
The Times of Israel reported that soldiers ordered Palestinians in the Farsh al-Hawa area to evacuate ahead of demolitions, with footage showing residents being pushed out as their belongings were loaded onto trucks.
“We are already here with the equipment on the ground, sending an unequivocal message to our enemies: If you mess with us, we will exact a very, very painful price from you,” Smotrich said in Farsh al-Hawa.
Israel’s High Court intervened and issued a temporary order to halt demolitions after Arab-Israeli human rights lawyer Mohammed Dahleh filed an urgent petition on behalf of two factory owners who claimed the destruction violated Israeli law as well as international prohibitions on collective punishment.
“What we saw today was an attempt to copy the illegal practices used in Gaza, in the heart of the West Bank,” Dahleh told The Guardian. “They want to wipe out entire areas exactly as they did in Gaza and the refugee camps in the West Bank.”
Another Israeli human rights attorney, Michael Sfard, called Smotrich's video announcement a "direct admission" of collective punishment.
The demolitions and forced evacuations are unfolding amid a wider Israeli campaign of home destruction, settler pogroms and other deadly violence, and displacement that Palestinian rights advocates and United Nations officials have called ethnic cleansing.
Palestinian olive harvesters, as well as international solidarity activists accompanying them, journalists covering settler attacks, and even international diplomats have come under attack by IDF-backed settler terrorists. The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) said earlier this week that between September 1 and October 12, Israeli settlers carried out 199 attacks connected to the harvest, killing one Palestinian, injuring 124, and damaging more than 2,500 trees and saplings.
According to OCHA, over 1,130 Palestinians—at least 250 of them children—have been killed by Israeli soldiers and settlers in the West Bank since October 2023.
Friday's developments came four days ahead of Israel's elections, in which the ruling far-right coalition is trying to boost support among voters, including settler colonists pushing the government to annex the West Bank.
Netanyahu has vowed to annex all settler colonies. Smotrich has presented a plan to annex approximately 82% of the West Bank, excluding six major Palestinian cities. Ben-Gvir wants to annex the entire West Bank.
Israel's actions on Friday drew widespread condemnation.
“Israeli leaders are publicly announcing plans for collective punishment and acts that could constitute war crimes,” the Israeli human rights group B'Tselem said, while imploring “governments and international institutions to act now, using all means available under international law, to prevent the forcible displacement of Palestinian civilians, collective punishment, and extensive unlawful destruction in Hebron.”
Siding With DNC a Week Before Midterms, Judge Blocks Trump's Taxpayer-Funded 'Propaganda Campaign'
The administration had allocated $20 million in public funds to pay for ads celebrating Trump weeks before the midterms.
Less than a week before Election Day, another federal judge on Wednesday blocked the Trump administration from using taxpayer funds to run ads promoting the president.
US district judge Loren AliKhan froze the White House Office of Management and Budget’s $20 million allocation to run the ads, saying the administration likely “used public dollars to unlawfully finance a national media campaign in the final weeks before the November 2026 elections.”
The ruling follows a lawsuit filed earlier this month by the Democratic National Committee (DNC), which accused President Donald Trump of using funds to “finance a national propaganda campaign.”
The ads, which stated that they were “paid for by the US government,” attacked Trump’s enemies as “Marxists,” celebrated his military operations in Iran and Venezuela, and promoted his personal declaration that his presidency marked the beginning of a “golden age of America.” Another ad that was reportedly prepared but never aired declared that “God made Trump.”
Following public outcry over the ads, Trump promised that future ads would be paid for with money he raised for his super political action committee MAGA Inc.
“That promise went unfulfilled,” wrote AliKhan, an appointee of former President Joe Biden. “The ads continued to air with the ‘Paid for by the US government’ disclosure for at least another week.”
The US Department of Justice has also acknowledged that the ads continued to run hundreds of times after a court order issued on October 11 requiring them to be canceled.
Federal law prohibits using federal appropriations for “publicity or propaganda purposes within the United States not heretofore authorized by Congress.”
The DNC argued that the administration's use of public funds illegally “deprives the DNC of a fair electoral process by adding public funds to the resources available to support Republican candidates.”
AliKhan agreed that there was "little doubt that defendants’ unlawful use of public funds makes it more difficult for the DNC to achieve its mission of ‘electing Democratic candidates in federal, state, and local elections across the country.’”
“The court just delivered a victory for the rule of law and for American taxpayers," DNC chair Ken Martin said following the ruling on Wednesday. "Trump and his administration can no longer misuse Americans’ hard-earned dollars to run political ads while working families can’t even afford to pay for their gas and groceries."
Martin added that “Trump’s illegal and desperate attempt to save his cratering approval ratings ahead of the midterm elections only underscores how out of touch he is with the American people, who will hold him and Republicans accountable for their destructive agenda at the ballot box next week.”
Ahead of Anthropic IPO, Warren Warns AI Giant Could Leave 'Americans Holding the Bag'
"Anthropic is saying that AI models could pose catastrophic or existential risks to humanity. At the same time, Anthropic is planning the largest IPO in history."
As the artificial intelligence company Anthropic moves toward a historic initial public offering, the top Democrat on the US Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee sounded the alarm about both public safety and financial concerns in a Tuesday letter to CEO Dario Amodei.
"I write with concern following your company's disclosure that Anthropic's advanced AI models could 'pose catastrophic or existential risks to humanity' at the same time that it seeks to register as a public company and sell shares in November," said Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.).
"Anthropic disclosed extensive public safety and financial risks to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) as part of its registration process for an initial public offering (IPO)," she noted. "An IPO would provide Anthropic with broader access to the largest capital markets in the world, allowing it to raise more funding from a larger pool of investors to fuel its rapid growth."
"It will also mean that millions of Americans with retirement accounts invested in index funds will quickly become Anthropic shareholders," stressed the former Harvard University bankruptcy professor. "Public pensions are already heavily exposed to Anthropic and have expressed their concerns about Anthropic's societal risks ahead of its IPO."
According to the SEC paperwork, Anthropic plans to list on the Nasdaq under ticker symbol "ANT." Reports have suggested the company—known for its Claude models—could be valued at between $1.5 trillion and $2 trillion. As NPR noted: "That would put it in league with Elon Musk's rocketry and AI company SpaceX, which was valued at around $1.8 trillion when it listed in June."
Warren pointed out to Amodei that "this massive influx of public capital is likely to catapult the development and deployment of your technology during a time of intense public debate and concern about the risks of your frontier intelligence models."
The senator argued that "the risks presented by this technology demand greater scrutiny before they become intertwined with the public capital markets, which could further escalate both public safety and systemic financial risks."
The "growing public safety concerns" section of Warren's letter cites details from the Form S-1 that Anthropic submitted to the SEC, as well as the CEO's public statements "calling for the need to slow down the development of frontier AI models."
"You warned that 'we still only understand a tiny fraction of what goes on inside these models' and highlighted the 'risk of losing control of AI systems, misuse of AI for cyberattacks and bioterrorism, and serious economic disruption,'" she reminded Amodei. "You further warned that a 'race to the bottom, spurred by commercial incentives, can make these risks more acute.'"
"It is also difficult to trust existing safety tests and evaluations of model test environments in the wake of recent incidents in which models built by frontier AI companies, including Anthropic, have broken through security controls and hacked external systems autonomously," the senator emphasized.
Such incidents have intensified AI experts' warnings and spurred calls for government action, leading to a range of legislative proposals, including in the US Congress—the future control of which will be decided in next week's midterm elections.
Warren highlighted that "in addition to the potentially catastrophic safety risks posed by Anthropic's technology, the company's launch into the public markets could inject extreme volatility and risk into the financial system, which threatens to undermine Americans' economic security."
"Anthropic is projected to be the largest IPO in history," she wrote. "Given its unprecedented size, swings in Anthropic's share price have the potential to roil the broader markets on day one, particularly for companies in the technology sector, and even more acutely for megacap companies with direct financial entanglement with Anthropic."
"Beyond the threats to the financial system that Anthropic's IPO may pose, the company's registration statement disclosures include astronomical projections supported by aggressive assumptions that require further review and due diligence," she added, digging into the company's disclosures.
Warren also sent Amodei a detailed list of questions she wants answered by November 3—before the company goes public.
Are Israeli Opposition Parties 'Brave Enough' to Join Forces and End 'Blood-Soaked' Netanyahu Government?
"We have no future here if we don’t stop being afraid," said Yair Golan, the leader of the left-wing Democrats party. "We must no longer accept Netanyahu’s racist division between Jewish votes and Arab votes."
Israel’s opposition parties appeared to have secured enough Knesset seats in Tuesday’s elections to oust Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from power and end a four-year reign marked by genocidal war in Gaza and escalating terror and dispossession against Palestinians in the West Bank.
But will they?
With about 86% of ballots counted as of Wednesday morning, Netanyahu's far-right religious bloc is projected to have lost about 11 seats, putting them at 53, eight shy of an outright majority.
The Jewish opposition bloc, led by Yashar party leader Gadi Eisenkot, is projected to win 48 seats, putting it in a position to take control. But it would likely have to cooperate with the parties representing Israel’s Arab minority, which together won a record 19 seats on Tuesday thanks to unprecedented turnout among Arab voters who braved racist incitement from the Netanyahu camp and widespread suppression tactics at the ballot box.

Ameer Fakhoury, an analyst at Israel’s Van Leer Jerusalem Institute think tank, described the mobilization of Palestinian citizens in the elections as a “truly historic development.”
"They went to the polls in extraordinary numbers to confront a political leadership responsible for what they regard as the gravest crimes against their people: devastation in Gaza, ethnic cleansing in the West Bank, and years of persecution and intimidation at home," he told Middle East Eye.
"History has placed Palestinian citizens of Israel in an extraordinary position. Having mobilized first and foremost to protect their own people, they may now also help rescue Jewish Israelis from their country's destructive trajectory," he said.
"Bibi or Tibi"
With a limited window for the parties to negotiate a new government before another election is triggered, the Arab parties now hold leverage to press their demands.
Mansour Abbas, the leader of the smaller of the two Arab factions, Ra’am, signaled his willingness to compromise on Tuesday evening as the results emerged, saying his priority was to “bring down Benjamin Netanyahu, [Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich], and [National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir] in this election.”
Ra’am has featured in further-right governments before, previously helping to cobble together the majority that briefly allowed former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett—also part of the Eisenkot coalition—to form one in 2021. But with the current parliamentary math, Abbas’ seven seats alone would not be enough to form a majority.
The larger Arab coalition, the left-wing Joint List, has also offered to back Eisenkot’s government. Its parliamentary leader, Ahmad Tibi, has been vocal about his demands for concessions, including commitments to fight crime in Arab communities, end the demolition of unauthorized homes often built due to permit discrimination, halt racist incitement against Arab citizens, and offer a potential “political horizon” for Palestinian self-determination.
He said the choice was between "either Bibi or Tibi."
Eisenkot has likewise described “Netanyahu’s retirement from political life” as a central goal. But in an effort to court Jewish Netanyahu voters hostile to Arabs and hold together his own bloc, he ruled out working with Arab parties unless they recognize Israel as a Jewish state, accept conscription of Palestinian citizens of Israel into the Israeli military, and denounce Hamas as a terrorist organization.
Amjad Shbita, the general secretary of Hadash, the socialist party that is the biggest faction in the Joint List, has expressed hostility to the idea that Eisenkot would get to dictate terms.
“Laying down conditions won’t work with the Joint List,” Shbita said. “We will negotiate as equals because we need each other.”
Tibi said the opposition could form a coalition “if it wants to, if it is brave enough to.”
Making things more complex is pressure from within Eisenkot's bloc. Bennett and former Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman have rejected forming a government dependent on Arab parties’ support or abstention.
Liberman has urged members of Netanyahu’s Likud party to defect and join the opposition to form a “true” right-wing government. One potential opening would be to peel away Likud hawks opposed to Netanyahu’s concessions to ultra-Orthodox parties, most notably draft exemptions for yeshiva students.“Anyone who tries to erase the voices of Arab citizens is surrendering to Netanyahu and giving up on Israel."
On the other side of the opposition, Yair Golan, the leader of the left-wing Democrats party, has urged Eisenkot to cooperate with the Arab parties and form a coalition that would decisively push Netanyahu out of power.
“Netanyahu lost. I know how to count to 120. Sixty-five is more than 55. That’s how Israeli democracy works. Period,” Golan wrote Wednesday on social media. “The reality must teach us one resounding lesson: We have no future here if we don’t stop being afraid. And if we don’t stop with the racism. We must no longer accept Netanyahu’s racist division between Jewish votes and Arab votes.”
"Anyone who tries to erase the voices of Arab citizens is surrendering to Netanyahu and giving up on Israel," he said.
Another possibility on the table is a “national unity government” that would involve a power-sharing agreement between the Netanyahu and Eisenkot factions, likely boxing out the Arabs entirely.
Eitan Tzelgov, an expert on Israeli populism and democratic backsliding at the UK's University of East Anglia, presented the choice for Eisenkot's bloc as a binary one: "govern with the Arab parties, or with Netanyahu."
"Israel is a tribal society, with cohesive right-wing tribes and a shrinking liberal tribe that will need to make a decision," he said in an email to Common Dreams. "Over the years, Netanyahu and the far right have built an ideological firewall around the Arab parties by presenting any Jewish-Arab collaboration as support for terrorism."
"The leaders of the change bloc, representing Israel’s liberal camp, now must decide if they are willing to break it," he continued. "That is the only way to bring about a U-turn from the current government’s policies in Gaza and the West Bank."
He was not optimistic about their stomach for it: “A more likely outcome at the moment,” he said, “is a split within the change bloc and collaboration of some of its components with Netanyahu, a result [US President Donald Trump] reportedly supports.”
Joint List Chair Yousef Jabareen put the stakes in plain terms: “Anyone who wants to offer a substantive and genuine alternative to Netanyahu’s blood-soaked government will have to talk to us,” he said. “It’s either the continuation of racism, the continuation of exclusion, and the continuation of supremacy, or a genuine Jewish-Arab partnership.”
Led by Elon Musk, 515 Superrich People Have Donated $4.2 Billion to Super PACs for 2026 Elections
"Until something is done, like overturning the Citizens United US Supreme Court decision, the wealthy’s stranglehold on our political system will continue to tighten."
The "almost cartoon-villain level of political spending" by SpaceX CEO and former Trump administration adviser Elon Musk has reached a fever pitch ahead of the midterm elections, with the right-wing billionaire's donations of $445 million to super political action committees accounting for 10% of the $4.2 billion the PACs have brought in.
As an analysis released Tuesday by the government watchdog Public Citizen found, Musk has led the way in contributing huge sums to super PACs. The PACs can raise unlimited amounts of money on behalf of candidates and causes and have increasingly influenced elections following the 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court ruling, which said the government cannot restrict political spending by corporations.
But excluding Musk, just 514 donors have contributed about $3.8 billion to super PACs this election cycle, as Republicans attempt to hold onto control of the US Senate and House of Representatives despite President Donald Trump's plummeting approval rating and his record of raising the prices of gas and other essentials with his illegal war on Iran and his tariff policy.
Altogether, the donations from the 515 contributors account for 73% of all super PAC funding from individuals, corporations, and nonprofits this election cycle, according to Public Citizen.
"The figures add to a growing body of evidence that unlimited political spending has concentrated influence over elections among a tiny number of wealthy individuals and corporations," said the organization, noting that Musk's contributions come two years after he poured nearly $300 million into the 2024 elections, boosting Trump and other Republicans and spending close to $120 million more than the next closest donor.
The report follows an earlier Public Citizen analysis that found more than 100 super PACs that have raised at least $1 million received the majority of the funding from just a single donor, collectively gathering more than $1 billion to boost the candidates of their choice.
The Senate Leadership Fund has the most donors contributing at least $1 million each, with 61 people contributing $496 million.
“When 500 donors account for more than 70% of super PAC contributions, we should be asking whose voices our political system is prioritizing.”
MAGA Inc., the super PAC affiliated with Trump, has taken $405 million from 102 contributors ahead of the crucial midterms, while the Senate Majority PAC has received $244 million from 44 people or groups.
Fifty-three donors have sent $231 million to the Congressional Leadership Fund, while 31 donors have contributed $183 million to the House Majority PAC.
“Super PACs have helped create a political system where a small number of wealthy interests can spend unlimited amounts to influence elections and shape the choices voters face,” said Lisa Gilbert, co-president of Public Citizen. “When 500 donors account for more than 70% of super PAC contributions, we should be asking whose voices our political system is prioritizing.”
After Musk, GOP megadonors Richard and Elizabeth Uihlein have been the second-largest contributors to super PACs this year. The Uihleins own the packing company Uline, and have pushed for years for government deregulation and against labor unions.
Other top contributors include multiple dark money groups, right-wing megadonor Jeffrey Yass—a longtime funder of anti-LGBTQ+, anti-choice, and anti-public school campaigns—and venture capitalist Marc Andreessen, who said earlier this year that he would prefer to use artificial intelligence in his business rather than hire human workers.
As The Washington Sun reported Tuesday, dark money groups, which don't have to reveal the source of their contributions, have poured more than $392 million into the four congressional leadership PACs this year.
The Public Citizen report stresses that the hundreds of top donors to super PACs this year gave amounts of money that "most Americans could not fathom donating to a political cause."
More than 85% of the money raised by super PACs ahead of the midterms came from donors who gave at least $20,000—"nearly a quarter of the median household income," said Public Citizen.
"Until something is done, like overturning the Citizens United US Supreme Court decision," said the group, "the wealthy’s stranglehold on our political system will continue to tighten."
Official Price Tag of Iran War Jumps to $47 Billion as Trump Says It Will End 'Whenever I Want It To'
The president's comments and the official cost estimate came amid reports that the US military is preparing for a new onslaught against Iran after the midterm elections.
US President Donald Trump told a crowd of his supporters on Tuesday that his illegal war of choice in Iran will end "whenever I want it to" as the conflict's official price tag reportedly jumped to $47 billion—a figure that independent analysts believe to be a dramatic underestimate.
"It can be over whenever I want it to be over," Trump said of the historically unpopular war during a rally in Texas, a week before the midterm elections. "But we have to have it end properly, with... a total statement [that] they will never have a nuclear weapon." (Iran has already said repeatedly that it would never develop nuclear weapons, including in the opening pages of the Obama-era agreement that Trump shredded during his first White House term.)
Trump's remarks came as The Hill reported that the federal government's official estimate of the Iran war's cost has jumped $3 billion since last month, rising to $47 billion.
"The biggest chunk of the cost is munition replacement at $29 billion," The Hill reported, citing a US Central Command estimate that the outlet obtained on Tuesday. "Nearly $12 billion is obligated for incremental costs of military action and another $6.1 billion to replace equipment losses, according to the estimate. Air Force’s support for deployed personnel, airlift, base, communication support, and transportation in theater costs $7.6 billion. The estimate does not include the cost to damaged US military bases in the Middle East."
When such damage—which has been far more extensive than the Pentagon has acknowledged publicly—and other factors are included, the price tag balloons. Stephen Semler, a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy, estimated in July that the US spent more than $103 billion in the first four months of the war, which has killed thousands of people and sent gas prices soaring.
In the US, consumers have spent an extra $146 billion on gasoline and diesel since the war's beginning in February, according to a running tracker maintained by the Watson School of International and Public Affairs at Brown University.
Trump said Tuesday that the unauthorized war's end would come "very quick," despite evidence that his administration is preparing for yet another round of heavy bombings in Iran after the midterm elections.
"The US has told several Gulf Arab countries to be prepared for a short, intense military campaign after the US midterm elections," The Wall Street Journal reported late Tuesday, citing unnamed people briefed on the conversations. "The communications through diplomatic and military channels are among a growing number of indications that the US and Israel are readying to launch a new round of heavy combat operations against Iran, risking a major escalation in hopes of degrading Tehran’s strength and pushing it toward negotiations."
"US forces in the region have been restocking their munitions, and bomber aircraft and jet fighters are preparing for strikes," the Journal added. "An additional aircraft carrier strike group and Marine expeditionary unit are also poised to join an armada of roughly 20 other warships operating in the Middle East next month, although some ships could rotate out."
‘Rats Run Away’: Facing Criminal Probe, Flávio Bolsonaro Flees Brazil to US After Loss to Lula
"This reveals the DNA of Bolsonarism," said one critic. "Bolsonarism is made of cowardice."
Just one day after vowing he would remain in Brazil to disprove allegations of money laundering, corruption, and other crimes, far-right Brazilian Sen. Flávio Bolsonaro followed in his disgraced father's footsteps by fleeing to the United States after losing a presidential election.
Bolsonaro, his wife Fernanda Bolsonaro, and their two daughters, ages 14 and 12, left Brazil for an unknown location in the United States, according to initial reporting by Isadora Teixeira at the Brasília-based news site Metrópoles, which was subsequently confirmed by other Brazilian and international media.
The Argentinian site Infobae reported that Bolsonaro and his family may have crossed into Argentina—which is run by his ally, far-right President Javier Milei—and then traveled to the US in a private jet. It is not known where the family went in the US.
Bolsonaro's brother, Eduardo Bolsonaro, lives in Texas while facing criminal punishment in Brazil after trying to use the Trump administration to pressure Brazilian authorities over the prosecution of his father, former President Jair Bolsonaro, who last year was convicted of conspiring to violently remain in power following leftist President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva's 2022 election win.
Flávio Bolsonaro, a 45-year-old senator representing Rio de Janeiro, was defeated by Lula in Sunday's second-round election, but refused to accept the results and groundlessly demanded an annulment. The following day, Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes ordered the seizure of Bolsonaro's passport. He was supposed to have turned in the document Tuesday, but he didn't.
US President Donald Trump also cast doubt on the election's outcome, saying the contest appeared to be "rigged."
Jair Bolsonaro also fled to the United States while refusing to acknowledge his own 2022 defeat, which occurred during the administration of former President Joe Biden.
Like Trump, Bolsonaro incited a violent insurrection in his nation's capital following his loss.
Unlike Trump, Bolsonaro was held accountable for his crimes, and, in addition to a 27-year prison sentence—now being served under house arrest—is banned from running for any political office for the rest of the decade.
Now, with Trump back in the White House and Secretary of State Marco Rubio in charge at Foggy Bottom, Bolsonaro and his relatives are set to be issued US visas, a senior State Department official told The Associated Press.
The younger Bolsonaro's flight—which may have been aided by his obtaining an Italian passport in 2023—contradicts his pledge on Monday, when he said, "I have never thought about leaving the country" and "I will hand over my passports and defend myself against this travesty."
He was referring to de Morães' order to surrender his passport amid accusations of corruption, money laundering, tax evasion, and foreign currency violations.
Bolsonaro is also the subject of an inquiry pertaining to the millions of dollars he raised from a disgraced banker implicated in a massive corrupt plot to finance a biopic of Jair Bolsonaro.
The senator has not been charged and denies any wrongdoing.
Bolsonaro's flight stands in stark contrast to Lula, who spent 580 days in prison after being convicted in corruption cases stemming from the sprawling Operation Car Wash investigation.
In 2021, Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court annulled Lula’s convictions on procedural grounds, ruling that the court in Curitiba lacked jurisdiction over the cases and separately finding that former judge Sergio Moro had acted with bias in one of them. The decisions restored Lula’s political rights and eligibility to run for office, paving the way for his 2022 presidential victory over Bolsonaro.
Lula responded to the senator's departure by saying, "Unfortunately, the Bolsonaro family is like that."
"Brazil is his second homeland," the president continued, accusing Bolsonaro of "bootlicking in the United States."
Secretary-General of the Brazilian Presidency Guilherme Castro Boulos ripped Bolsonaro, saying: "Leaders face things head-on! Rats run away!”
"It is a shameful thing, which should make Brazilian society as a whole reflect, especially those who supported and voted for Flávio Bolsonaro," Boulos asserted. "He slapped his supporters in the face and left them on the side of the road."
"Almost 60 million Brazilians trusted him as political leadership to run the country, and 24 hours later, he flees," he continued. "And it's no use coming up with this talk of persecution, of dictatorship. He ran away because he must."
"This reveals the DNA of Bolsonarism," Boulos added. "Bolsonarism is made of cowardice."
Erika Hilton, a member of the Chamber of Deputies—the lower house of Brazil's Legislature—representing São Paulo for the Socialism and Liberty Party, weighed in on social media, calling Bolsonaro "a traitor to the homeland."
In the United States, Congressman Joaquin Castro (D-Texas) said on X that "losing an election is not grounds for asylum."
"Yet the Trump administration is giving Flávio Bolsonaro safe haven in the United States," he continued. "The Trump administration owes Congress answers on its role helping Bolsonaro flee Brazil in contravention of Brazilian law."
Mark Weisbrot, co-director of the Center for Economic Policy and Research (CEPR), told Common Dreams:
Trump is now the most corrupt president in US history, raking in billions from his presidency. It's no surprise when the most powerful corrupt authoritarian government in the hemisphere uses international law designed to protect the persecuted to shield another corrupt authoritarian government from criminal prosecution. Perhaps this is what is meant by the Trump-led 'Shield of the Americas.'
Francesca Emanuele, senior international policy associate at CEPR, noted that "the United States has long served as a destination for numerous right-wing Latin American political figures who fled their home countries while facing corruption allegations, criminal investigations, or accusations of grave human rights violations, including crimes against humanity."
"The list is extensive," she added, "ranging from former presidents such as Panama’s Ricardo Martinelli and Bolivia’s Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada to dictators such as Nicaragua’s Anastasio Somoza."
Emanuele also contrasted the actions of the Bolsonaros and Lula, arguing that the latter's decision to remain in Brazil "reflected a commitment to the Brazilian people and a determination to defend his rights through the country’s own institutions, even when those institutions failed to uphold them."
"Rather than leaving Brazil," she told Common Dreams, "Lula stayed, fought to clear his name, and continued his political struggle alongside the people he sought to represent."
'We Want Our Son's Killers Brought to Justice,' Says Mother of Alex Pretti Months After CBP Slaying
The father of the late nurse, killed during a Trump administration crackdown on immigrants in Minnesota, urged leaders at the US Department of Justice to "do your job and stop shielding Alex's killers."
"I'm Michael Pretti, Alex's father. Our son Alex was shot and killed by the government—federal immigration agents—on January 24, 2026."
After thanking those gathered, that's how Michael Pretti began his remarks at a Tuesday press conference in Minneapolis, just over nine months after US Border Patrol agent Jesus Ochoa and Customs and Border Protection officer Raymundo Gutierrez fatally shot the 37-year-old intensive care nurse in the Minnesota city during President Donald Trump's "Operation Metro Surge."
Michael Pretti recalled his son's upbringing in the Midwest, and conversations about "cars, hiking, biking, or anything that came to our mind." His wife, Susan Pretti, who also spoke at the press conference, called their first-born child "exceptionally kind and caring," adding that he "did not tolerate bullies," "loved working with the veterans" he served as a nurse, and "had a deep sense of justice."
"We are not political activists," Susan Pretti stressed. Her husband pointed out that their son was observing the immigration crackdown: "He was peaceful... He was not protesting."
Federal immigration agents "executed" Alex Pretti, his father said. The family learned about his death from the media, and "that video haunts our family... I think it haunts many Americans."
After the agents "murdered our son," Susan Pretti said, "the federal government went on TV and lied about Alex. They tried to slander his memory to cover up their crime."
Members of the Trump administration have repeatedly tried to smear Pretti and others killed during the president's mass detention and deportation initiatives as "domestic terrorists" endangering agents on the ground, even as video footage has contradicted their claims.
Michael Pretti highlighted that "no one from the federal government has called us since" his son's killing. He also said that "even in our grief, we understand that investigations need to be done carefully and thoroughly. We know that the wheels of justice move slowly—but even then, there is cooperation and communication."
Instead of justice, the Pretti family has been subjected to "cruelty," he argued. "Do your job and stop shielding Alex's killers," he urged Dan Rosen, who serves as the US attorney for the District of Minnesota, and US Attorney General Todd Blanche, who leads the Department of Justice.
The parents, who live in Colorado, are "begging for the Department of Justice to do what is right," according to Susan Pretti. "We want to clear our son's name. We want the world to understand who Alex really was. We want our son's killers brought to justice once and for all."
In March, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty, and state Bureau of Criminal Apprehension Superintendent Drew Evans sued the Trump administration over its refusal to cooperate with state investigators probing federal immigration agents' killings of Pretti and Renee Good, both US citizens, as well as their shooting of Julio Cesar Sosa-Celis, a Venezuelan who was wounded but survived.
"The Trump administration has suggested that state prosecutors don't have jurisdiction to investigate federal officers, while Minnesota officials have said they don’t trust the federal government to investigate itself," The Associated Press noted Tuesday. "The state is still seeking the cellphones of the officers involved... and recordings of key interviews."
As The New York Times reported:
Steven L. Schleicher, a lawyer representing Mr. Pretti's parents, said the Justice Department's refusal to share basic information with the family amounted to a violation of the federal Crime Victims' Rights Act. He expressed similar sentiments in a letter he sent to Attorney General Todd Blanche in July.
Hoang Bui, a spokesman for the US attorney's office in Minnesota, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
While the Prettis haven't yet sued over their son's homicide, their press conference comes after families of other victims launched cases in recent weeks. On October 1, Good's relatives filed a pair of lawsuits against the federal government and immigration officials over her killing and an alleged conspiracy to interfere with civil rights in Minnesota's Twin Cities.
US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent Jonathan Ross fatally shot Good—the 37-year-old writer, poet, and mother—in her vehicle while she and her partner were observing ICE operations on January 7 in Minneapolis.
"What happened to her on January 7th and what has happened to far too many people in the last year is not what America is about," said her brother, Brent Ganger. "We can and must do better, and the Constitution must be the roadmap back to decency and the rule of law."
A week after those suits were filed, groups representing the family of Silverio Villegas González filed a legal claim against the Trump administration over an immigration agent's "execution-style killing" of the 38-year-old Mexican man in Illinois on September 12, 2025.
"We are united by the same pain that every family who has been impacted by this inhumane immigration system faces," his relatives said. "A year has not erased or diminished the ache we feel in his absence. Our family demands justice for Silverio, and we hope that those responsible for his death are held accountable."
House Dems Press Trump USDA Over Aid Cuts as Seniors 'Struggle to Put Food on the Table'
"No senior should have to choose between putting food on the table, paying rent, or affording lifesaving medication."
A group of almost 20 Democratic lawmakers on Tuesday pressed US Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins to explain the adverse effects of President Donald Trump's so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act on older Americans, including the administration's plan to eliminate a program serving nearly 700,000 low-income seniors and expanded food stamp work requirements.
"At a time when Americans continue to face elevated grocery costs, Washington Republicans enacted the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), which the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates will reduce federal [Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program] spending by approximately $187 billion through 2034," 18 House Democrats led by Rep. Analilia Mejia (D-NJ) wrote in a letter to Rollins.
"The law expanded SNAP’s three-month time limit and associated work requirements to certain adults ages 55 through 64, restricted states’ ability to obtain geographic waivers from those requirements, and made additional changes to state cost-sharing requirements expected to reduce SNAP participation and benefits," the letter continues.
"These cuts come as the same law provides substantial tax benefits that will help disproportionately benefit the rich, with CBO finding that the law will decrease resources available to households towards the bottom of the income distribution while increasing resources for households toward the top," the lawmakers noted.
The letter decries Trump's stated goal of eliminating the Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSFP), which the lawmakers described as "the most extensive hunger-relief federal program for seniors and services to nearly 700,000 low-income seniors across the nation."
"The administration justified the elimination of this crucial program by focusing 'on supporting seniors through the SNAP program' as they passed a law to make SNAP more inaccessible for seniors," the letter laments. "Congress has been responsible for keeping the CSFP fully funded and maintained while the administration continues to threaten this critical federal food assistance program."
"Even so, as Americans—particularly seniors—struggle to put food on the table, you have failed to meet the urgency of this affordability crisis, even as the department you lead reports that food prices have climbed another 3% in the past year," the Democrats added.
The letter requests state-by-state figures showing how many adults ages 55 to 64 have lost or suffered reductions in SNAP benefits because of expanded work requirements, as well as how many have received exemptions. The lawmakers are also seeking data regarding the health and financial consequences of eliminating the CSFP and how the administration would ensure seniors retain access to nutritious food. The legislators requested a written response from Rollins' office by November 6.
"You have failed to meet the urgency of this affordability crisis."
According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP), approximately 5.5 million people, including roughly 2 million children, have lost SNAP assistance since Trump signed the OBBBA in July 2025. This, despite more than 47 million Americans—including 1 in 5 children—living in food-insecure households.
Seniors are experiencing their own unique set of hardships, given that many of them have limited resources.
"Many seniors rely heavily on fixed or limited incomes from Social Security, retirement savings, and pensions, leaving them particularly vulnerable as the cost of living continues to rise," the letter states, adding that "rather than protect older and low-income Americans from rising costs, you and the Trump administration continue to pursue policies that threaten to make it harder for them to afford basic necessities."
Sanders: Billionaires Fighting Prop 40 Would 'Rather Poor Kids With Cancer Die Than Pay a Little More in Taxes'
The senator noted that "billionaires in California are spending $333 million to wage a war" on the proposed one-time tax.
As one Golden State tech billionaire suggested he wouldn't move away even if voters passed the California Billionaire Tax Act that he opposes, progressive US Sen. Bernie Sanders on Tuesday took aim at the wealthy taxpayers working to defeat Proposition 40.
"Billionaires in California are spending $333 million to wage a war," Sanders (I-Vt.) wrote on social media. "Against what? Homelessness? No. Cancer? No. Child poverty? No. They're waging war against a 5% billionaire wealth tax. They'd rather poor kids with cancer die than pay a little more in taxes. That is obscene."
Sanders, a former Democratic presidential candidate who has campaigned in California for the ballot measure that would impose a one-time 5% tax on the state's billionaires to offset healthcare funding cuts, was citing contributions to Building a Better California, a group created in January.
"Eighty or so donors have provided more than $333 million to Building a Better California, state records show, making it among the best-funded political efforts in California history," The New York Times reported Tuesday. "The donor list is a who's who of tech celebrities: the Google co-founder Sergey Brin; the former Google chief executive Eric Schmidt; the Stripe chief executive Patrick Collison; the legendary investor John Doerr."
Abby Lunardini, a spokesperson for the group, told the Times that "our supporters have created companies, entirely new industries, and hundreds of thousands of jobs here in California, and they want our state to remain the place where the future is built and where people can still afford to live, dream big, and succeed."
Lunardini claimed the wealth tax would "permanently damage the state's budget, tax base, and economy," though dozens of multimillionaire Californians have signed an open letter supporting the one-time wealth tax, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg—one of the richest men in the world—is preparing to potentially pay it, and Anduril co-founder Palmer Luckey said Monday that he won't leave the state.
TechCrunch reported on his latest comments, in which Luckey—whose defense company won key US military contracts after he was announced as one of the leaders of a new Pentagon project on the "future of warfare"—made clear that he opposes Prop 40:
"I think that this tax act, if you can call it a tax, is going to cause a lot of problems. It’s causing a lot of people to run who I don’t want to be running. It’s going to cause companies that I work with to leave the state, which is a problem for me. As of right now, though, I’m not running. I am staying. I think California is something special. I want to fight for California," Luckey said during an invite-only press conference on Monday.
He added that he's felt pressure from other billionaires to declare his intention to leave.
"This has been a point of friction between me and some of my other billionaire friends," he said. "They've said things like: 'Palmer, you have to have solidarity for us. You can't enable these really bad policies. If you stay and if you don't leave, it's going to show them that there's no consequences.' I empathize with that argument, but it's not one that I'm going to participate in right now because I still believe that we can fix things."
Luckey has publicly sparred with US Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.)—who, like Sanders, supports Prop 40. Leading political opponents in the state include term-limited Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, who's expected to run for president in 2028, and former US Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, a Democrat running to replace the governor.
Estimates vary on how much the tax—which would apply to any billionaire residing in the state as of January 1, 2026—could cost the richest Californians, if approved by voters in next week's midterm elections.
Forbes pointed to one of them on Tuesday: "$104 billion. That's how much economists Jasper Boll, Emmanuel Saez, and Gabriel Zucman estimate California's billionaires would owe if Proposition 40 is enacted, according to an analysis by the National Bureau of Economic Research. Saez and Zucman helped draft the tax proposal."
Ramesh Ponnuru, National Review editor and a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, noted in a Tuesday column at The Washington Post—owned by Jeff Bezos, another one of the world's richest men—that "a new study by Benjamin Jaros and Joshua Rauh, two economists affiliated with the Hoover Institution, challenges that projection."
After trying to "account for the uncertainty over whether taxes can be collected from other billionaires, such as the ones who have left since the beginning of the year and may thus have a legal case for escaping the tax," Ponnuru summarized, those economists estimated Prop 40 would generate around $30 billion. The columnist also acknowledged that Zucman "has issued a barrage of attacks on that paper."
Specifically, Zucman called it "spectacularly misleading" and explained "its crucial flaw," which is that "they assume that billionaires will leave permanently, frightened by the prospects of an annual wealth tax."
"Let's be clear: This is a highly inappropriate way to model the effect of Prop 40 on taxpayer behavior. For one, it's a basic violation of rational expectations, a cornerstone of modern economics," Zucman said.
In Jaros and Rauh's world, "the billionaires act irrationally: They respond to a policy that does not exist and will never exist," he added. "Economics students around the world are taught this is not an appropriate way to model behavior—but apparently in this context (fighting Prop 40) it's OK."
Netanyahu Accused of 'Incitement' as Arab Israelis Face Intimidation and Surveillance at Polls
The prime minister's coalition has sent around 2,000 activists, some of them armed, to surveil voters in what they called “Arab population centers.”
The leader of one of Israel's main Arab parties accused Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of "incitement" against Arab voters, whom civil rights groups warn are facing deliberate obstruction and intimidation at the polls on Tuesday.
“Benjamin Netanyahu is lying and inciting against Ra’am, using it as a scare tactic to mobilize right-wing voters and drive them to the polls,” the party’s leader, Mansour Abbas, said in a video message Tuesday.
Abbas was responding to a video posted by Netanyahu warning supporters of his Likud party that Arab voters in the south were “racing to the ballots.” He also accused Ra’am of “trying to steal the election from us,” citing the arrest the previous night of three people on suspicion of attempting to bribe voters to cast ballots for the party. Though Netanyahu has claimed that the three were “senior Ra’am” figures, he has not provided evidence of this.
Gadi Eisenkot, the leader of the Jewish-led Change coalition seeking to oust Netanyahu, has sworn off an alliance with Arab parties. However, Ra’am is hoping for an opposition victory narrow enough that the inclusion of Arab parties will be essential to form a governing coalition in the Knesset.
Tuesday’s election is the first since Netanyahu launched Israel’s genocidal assault on Gaza and comes amid unprecedented state-backed terrorism by Israeli settlers against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank. Accusing the other side of being too soft on Palestinians has been a central campaign tactic for both Netanyahu and his opponents.
Reuters reported on Tuesday that cars flying Likud banners were seen driving through Jerusalem playing the Islamic call to prayer and warning that "Arabs are voting" and that the prime minister had shared videos of long lines at Arab polling places to frighten his supporters.
"If you want this country to be Jewish and Zionist, you must go out and vote," National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, the leader of the far-right Jewish Power party, told voters for the Likud coalition. "Don’t let them win.”
The Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) warned Tuesday of potential deliberate efforts by Israeli authorities to slow down Arab voters. In a letter demanding urgent action from the chairman of the Central Elections Committee, Judge Noam Sohlberg, the group said that in Arab communities, “the voting process is proceeding slowly, without explanation, and voters are being forced to wait for extended periods.”
ACRI reported that police and National Guard troops kept about 200 voters waiting outside a high school in the Bedouin town of Segev Shalom in southern Israel, citing overcrowding, even though relatively few voters were actually inside. Voters there had waited up to five hours before casting ballots.
The group said it received reports of long queues in other Arab communities, including Rahat, Tel Sheva, Laqiya, Umm Batin, Tira, and Tamra.
"There are numerous reports of severe slowdowns at many polling stations," Yeela Raanan, a member of a team monitoring election integrity in Bedouin communities, told Haaretz.
In many Bedouin communities, Raanan said, "people report waiting for hours, and polling station staff are taking a very long time to verify each voter's identity."
Police have been dispatched to many Arab polling places, where they've reportedly been checking voters' identification, a duty that, under the law, belongs to election officials, Haaretz reported.
Adalah, the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel, said that at some locations, Palestinian voters were slowed down by election officials who asked them irrelevant questions, blocked doors, and suspended voting.
The group reported that at one polling station in Kafr Qara in central Israel, only one person had voted during the first three hours after polls opened.
At several other polling places in ethnically diverse and Arab cities—including in Haifa, Nazareth, I’billin, Eilabun, Shefa-Amr, and Nof HaGalil—Arab voters arrived to find that ballots printed in Arabic were not available. Adalah sent a letter to the head of Israel’s Central Elections Committee demanding that these polling centers immediately be supplied with Arabic-language ballots.
There are also reports of direct intimidation. Likud and its coalition partner, the far-right Religious Zionism party, led by Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, announced plans to send about 2,000 activists to what they called “Arab population centers” to observe elections, claiming without evidence that Arabs were committing fraud on a massive scale.
Israel's Supreme Court on Sunday night rejected a petition to ban firearms at polling places on Election Day. Adalah warned that the decision "allows those taking part in Netanyahu and Smotrich's provocation to show up at polling stations in Arab communities like armed militias."
The Mossawa Center, which advocates for Arab citizens’ rights in Israel, urged election officials to intervene Tuesday, saying Israeli settlers had arrived at polling stations to obstruct voting and that it had documented confrontations in Tayibe, Majd al-Krum, Shefa-Amr, Haifa, and I’billin, according to The New Arab.
The outlet separately reported that residents in Majd al-Krum stopped a right-wing activist from forcing his way into a polling station after provoking voters.
"Settlers at polling stations in Arab communities are deliberately obstructing and slowing down the voting process," said Ahmad Tibi, a Palestinian member of the Knesset. "A sick woman fainted while waiting. I'll put it this way: It won't help you. People will stay there until they cast their votes."
Haaretz reported Tuesday that Likud also paid unofficial teams “millions of shekels” to record Arab voters to help push the conspiracy theory that the election was rigged if Netanyahu’s coalition falls short.
Despite the obstacles, Arab turnout is reportedly significantly higher than during Israel's last elections in 2022, according to estimates by the coalition of left-wing Arab parties, known as the Joint List.
Joint List Chairman Yousef Jabareen predicted ahead of Tuesday’s vote that intimidation would be widespread. He said it would be answered with turnout from voters eager to oust Netanyahu.
"They will get our answer at the ballot box," he said, "when we, with our own hands, send them home.”























