

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


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

Ahead of a Congressional hearing held by House Science Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX), members of Congress, law experts, and environmental groups gathered at the Capitol to highlight all that Exxon knew and buried about climate change, and to pushback on the Chairman's overreaching subpoenas.
The event featured prominent members of Congress including Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA), Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Rep. Katherine Clark (D-MA) and Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT), who have been leading the charge against Exxon to hold the fossil fuel company for its role in orchestrating a decades-long campaign of deception and misinformation about climate change.
At the event, Sharon Eubanks, the former Department of Justice lawyer who led the historical suit against Big Tobacco, echoed the call for a federal investigation into Exxon. Representing the climate movement, May Boeve, 350.org Executive Director, and Jesse Bragg, Corporate Accountability International Media Director, spoke to financial ties between Big Oil and the Science Committee, as well as climate impacts that likely could have been curbed if Exxon had told the truth when its scientists warned executives about climate change.
Rep. Smith's hearing is set to feature professors of law who are expected to exclusively focus on affirming the Committee's authority to subpoena environmental groups and the attorneys general of New York and Massachusetts. At least two of Rep. Smith's witnesses, Ronald Rotunda and Elizabeth Price Foley, have significant ties to fossil fuel industry-funded groups such as the Heartland Institute and the Koch-funded Cato Institute, both which have funding ties to "dark money" financial channels Donors Trust and Donors Capital.
Since 1998, Rep. Smith has received a total of $675,597 from the fossil fuel industry, including $24,770 over the course of his career which came directly from ExxonMobil -- making oil and gas his most generous industry contributor throughout his career.
This event took place the day after thousands across the country, with a large rally in Washington, DC, rallied in solidarity with the Standing Rock Sioux and Indigenous Peoples who are protecting people and planet from the Dakota Access Pipeline.
Just this week, NASA confirmed that August 2016 was the hottest month in history, marking it the sixteenth hottest consecutive month on record.
QUOTE SHEET:
May Boeve, 350.org Executive Director said, "This hearing may as well be sponsored by ExxonMobil. Over his career, Rep. Smith has received nearly $700,000 in campaign contributions from the fossil fuel industry -- no surprise he's willing to trample our First Amendment rights in his mad dash to their defense. The bottom line is that this hearing is nothing but Smith's attempt to distract us from the real issue: Exxon knew the truth about climate change, and Exxon lied."
Representative Ted Lieu (D-CA) said, "Climate change is the biggest long-term threat to life as we know it. Global warming endangers the health of our families and creates national security risks. The historic flooding in Louisiana is just the latest example of extreme weather events that will only get more frequent and more destructive due to climate change. ExxonMobil knew for decades that its product was causing climate change. But instead of investigating ExxonMobil's decades-long deception on climate change, Republicans in charge of the House Science Committee are attacking attorneys general and nonprofits who are trying to protect the public by holding ExxonMobil accountable for their fraud and deceit. The American people - who are facing the toll of climate change every single day - deserve leaders in Congress who believe in science. We deserve leaders who will protect the people, rather than ExxonMobil."
Representative Katherine Clark (D-MA) said, "I usually am proud to sit on the Science Committee. Sadly, today, the Republican majority spends most of its time undermining scientific consensus on issues like global climate change and stripping down the very institutions that fuel innovation and scientific advancement. The Committee's overreaching subpoenas demonstrate the majority's reckless disregard of the Congress' constitutional and jurisdictional limits. Law abiding attorneys general, who are doing their jobs and serving the public and investigating potential violations of state law, should not be bullied into becoming pawns in the Republican's ongoing ideological assaults on science and fact. I urge the Committee and its leadership to remember what its job is, who it works for, and let's get back to work for the people."
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) said, "The really big question, and the one that needs answering here, is how far is the hand of the fossil fuel industry into the glove of this Committee? Because if in fact the true actor here is the fossil fuel industry, and if this committee is being nothing more than its agent, than that raises some very important questions about the subject of an investigation having a congressional tool to obstruct that investigation."
Tamar Lawrence-Samuel, Corporate Accountability International said, "This hearing, orchestrated on behalf of ExxonMobil, is a perversion of this important congressional procedure, and a complete distraction. The only thing this hearing will prove is that Rep. Smith is capable of cherry-picking a panel of witnesses that validate his views. Mr. Smith and his denialist colleagues on the House Science Committee are once again using our government to carry out the head-in-sand agenda of their Big Oil campaign funders and it needs to stop. It's time for Rep. Smith to end this charade and let AGs do what they were elected to do."
350 is building a future that's just, prosperous, equitable and safe from the effects of the climate crisis. We're an international movement of ordinary people working to end the age of fossil fuels and build a world of community-led renewable energy for all.
The Trump administration's boat strikes have now killed at least 168 people, according to NPR.
The United States military has killed five more people suspected of drug smuggling in the latest boat bombing operation that many international law experts consider to be acts of murder.
In a Sunday social media post, US Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) announced it had "conducted two lethal kinetic strikes on two vessels" that it had deemed to be run by "designated terrorist organizations." As with the dozens of other boat bombings the Trump administration has conducted since last September, the military did not provide evidence that the vessels were involved in drug trafficking.
"Intelligence confirmed the vessels were transiting along known narco-trafficking routes in the Eastern Pacific and were engaged in narco-trafficking operations," SOUTHCOM said. "Two male narco-terrorists were killed, and one narco-terrorist survived the first strike. Three male narco-terrorists were killed during the second strike."
SOUTHCOM said that it had alerted the US Coast Guard to conduct a search and rescue operation of the lone survivor of the two strikes, although it provided no further details of his well-being.
According to NPR, the US has now killed at least 168 people with its strikes on suspected drug boats, which began in September and have since continued despite being denounced by human rights organizations such as Human Rights and Amnesty International.
Brian Finucane, senior adviser with the US Program at the International Crisis Group, took note of the latest boat strike by remarking, "The lawless killing spree at sea continues."
A coalition of rights organizations led by the ACLU last year sued the Trump administration to demand it release documents that provide legal justification for its boat-bombing campaign.
The groups said that the Trump administration’s rationales for the strikes deserve special scrutiny because their justification hinges on claims that the US is in an “armed conflict” with international drug cartels akin to past conflicts between the US government and terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda.
The groups argued there is simply no way that drug cartels can be classified under the same umbrella as terrorist organizations, given that the law regarding war with nonstate actors says that any organizations considered to be in armed conflict with the US must be an “organized armed group” that is structured like a conventional military and engaged in “protracted armed violence” with the US government.
Before President Donald Trump's Pentagon began conducting the lethal boat strikes last year, drug trafficking in international waters was treated as a criminal offense, with law enforcement agencies and the US Coast Guard intercepting boats suspected of carrying drugs and arresting suspects.
Trump's bombings of boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific have been called "extrajudicial killings" by advocacy groups including Amnesty International.
"He’s a clear and present danger to America and the world," wrote one critic. "We’ve got to do whatever we legally can to remove him from office."
US President Donald Trump's flurry of increasingly deranged late-night social media posts over the weekend—combined with his continued violent belligerence overseas—prompted fresh calls on Monday for congressional Democrats to immediately force an impeachment vote.
Rep. John Larson (D-Conn.) introduced 13 articles of impeachment against Trump last week, accusing the president of usurping congressional war powers by waging unauthorized assaults on Iran and other nations, illegally deploying National Guard troops in US cities, unlawfully detaining and deporting citizens and immigrants on the basis of their political views, lawlessly dismantling worker- and consumer-protection agencies, and other offenses.
In a statement on Monday, constitutional attorney John Bonifaz applauded Larson for introducing the impeachment articles but said that "we need the congressman to now take the next step and force an immediate floor vote on these articles at this critical hour for our nation."
"And, Democratic leaders in the Congress should stop standing in the way of such a vote," said Bonifaz, co-founder and president of Free Speech for People (FSFP). The group's petition urging the US House to impeach Trump a third time has received more than a million signatures, but the Democratic leadership has so far shown no willingness to push ahead with another impeachment process—which would require some Republican support to be successful.
"Momentum is on the side of action," FSFP said Monday, warning that "further delay only emboldens the president."
Bruce Fein, a constitutional scholar who served in the Reagan Justice Department, said Monday that the "impeachment of President Donald Trump is urgent."
"How can any decent person indulge Mr. Trump’s Hitler-like declaration that ‘a whole civilization will die tonight’ with our tax dollars-paid weapons?" asked Fein, referring to the US president's genocidal threat against Iran last week.
By one count, more than 85 Democrats in the Republican-controlled US House have called for Trump's removal via the impeachment process or the 25th Amendment in recent days. Last week, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) said he would introduce legislation to establish a commission tasked with removing the president if he is deemed unfit to serve.
“This is plainly out of the realm of normal politics," said Raskin, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, urging the White House physician to immediately evaluate Trump's cognitive fitness. "When the president of the United States threatens to extinguish a civilization on social media, rants about combat missions with children at the Easter Egg Roll, and drops profane tirades on Easter morning, we have indisputably entered the realm of profound medical difficulty and concern."
Growing calls for Trump's impeachment and removal came after the president launched into an unhinged social media tirade late Sunday, hours after high-level talks with Iran ended without an agreement to halt the war that the US president and his Israeli counterpart started in late February.
Trump is having a mental health episode right now. He’s been posting on social media all night. He posted at:
9:49pm (Ai Jesus photo)
9:50pm (Trump tower on moon)
10:10pm (dumb meme)
10:32pm (news clip)
10:53pm (news clip)
12:43am (announcing Hormuz blockade)
2:35am (article…
— Harry Sisson (@harryjsisson) April 13, 2026
Trump said Sunday that he would impose a naval blockade on the Strait of Hormuz—an illegal act of war—and is reportedly considering a resumption of aerial strikes on Iran.
After the talks concluded, Trump posted a lengthy attack on Pope Leo XIV, a vocal critic of the war on Iran. The president then posted an artificial intelligence-generated image depicting himself as a Jesus-like figure.
"Beyond mentally unstable," Rep. Yassamin Ansar (D-Ariz.) wrote in response to Trump's post.
Robert Reich, the former US labor secretary, wrote in a blog post on Monday that "the president of the United States is stark-raving mad."
"He’s a clear and present danger to America and the world. The American public is beginning to see it," Reich continued. "We’ve got to do whatever we legally can to remove him from office. The 25th Amendment would be useful if Trump’s Cabinet and key advisers had any integrity, but they don’t. They’re ambitious, unprincipled traitors. Which leaves impeachment."
"The message of the Gospel is very clear: ‘Blessed are the peacemakers.'"
Pope Leo XIV on Monday said he would not back off his criticism of President Donald Trump's war of choice in Iran after the president targeted him with an unhinged late-night social media rant.
In a Sunday Truth Social post, Trump accused Pope Leo of being "WEAK on Crime, and terrible for Foreign Policy," even though dealing with crime and running US foreign policy are not part of the pope's job description.
"Leo should get his act together as Pope, use Common Sense, stop catering to the Radical Left, and focus on being a Great Pope, not a Politician," Trump wrote at the conclusion of his long tirade. "It’s hurting him very badly and, more importantly, it’s hurting the Catholic Church!"
A short time later, Trump posted an artificial intelligence-generated image that depicted him as a Christ-like figure.

Pope Leo in recent weeks has been openly critical of the US war in Iran, taking particular issue with US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth claiming that the conflict was being waged in the name of Jesus Christ.
“This is our God: Jesus, King of Peace, who rejects war, whom no one can use to justify war,” the pope said during a Palm Sunday sermon last month. “He does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war, but rejects them.”
According to a Monday report from the Associated Press, the pope remained defiant in the face of criticism from the president.
"The message of the Gospel is very clear: ‘Blessed are the peacemakers,'" he said. "I will not shy away from announcing the message of the Gospel and inviting all people to look for ways of building bridges of peace and reconciliation, and looking for ways to avoid war any time that’s possible."
Leo added that he is "not afraid of the Trump administration or of speaking out loudly about the message of the Gospel," and insisted that "I will continue to speak out strongly against war, seeking to promote peace, promoting dialogue and multilateralism among states to find solutions to problems."
Trump's attack on the pope drew a rebuke from Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), who said it was reflective of a presidency circling the drain.
" Donald Trump is flailing," Kelly wrote in a social media post. "His war in Iran has led to the death and injury of American servicemembers and the death of Iranian children. He will attack anyone or anything to try to protect himself, even the Church that millions of Americans find faith and comfort in every day."
Rep. Pramila Jayapal suggested that Trump's anti-pope rant was more evidence that he is mentally unwell and should be removed from office.
"The deranged and disgusting post from Trump attacking Pope Leo should certainly help him appeal to the more than 50 million Americans who identify as Catholics," she wrote. "Perhaps this will convince JD Vance to invoke the 25th Amendment to remove Trump from office?"
Archbishop Paul Coakley, president of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, said he was "disheartened" that Trump "chose to write such disparaging words about the Holy Father."
"Pope Leo is not his rival; nor is the pope a politician," Coakley added. "He is the vicar of Christ who speaks from the truth of the Gospel and for the care of souls."
The Rev. James Martin said he doubted Pope Leo "will lose any sleep over" Trump's rant, but added "the rest of us should" because "it is unhinged, uncharitable, and unchristian."