

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.

On Monday, the Independent Petroleum Association of America issued a new report arguing that fossil fuel divestment is costly for students, pensioners, and stakeholders.
The report was released days after hundreds of thousands of people mobilized for the Peoples Climate March, and a week before thousands around the world will take part in the Global Divestment Mobilization. This mobilization is taking place across 39 countries, including through five events across New York, and is intensifying the demand for divestment from the fossil fuel companies most responsible for causing climate change. As Donald Trump stacks his cabinet with fossil fuel billionaires including Exxon's own Rex Tillerson and industry puppet Scott Pruitt, communities are demonstrating resistance to the administration's rollbacks on hard-won protections for people and our planet.
In the last few years, multiple reports from financial and legal experts, such as Corporate Knights, the Center for International Environmental Law, Trillium Asset Management, and Mercer, reveal that major university endowments and pension funds, such as those of Harvard University and New York State, have or will incur billions in losses from continued investments in fossil fuels.
Amid a glut of supply, Exxon and many of its industry peers poured billions into the dangerous Alberta tar sands at the expense of the climate and their investors. Now oil majors, such as Exxon and Shell, are shedding fossil fuel assets, incurring billions in losses as the transition away from the carbon-intensive economy gets underway. ExxonMobil, whose executives have spent the last half a century sowing doubt about the company's own climate research, has claimed these divested reserves cannot be considered economical under the Securities and Exchange Commission's accounting rules. Investigations have revealed that Shell also knew about climate change in the early 1990s. The company's CEO recently noted that one of the industry's greatest obstacles today is waning public support. As coal companies declare bankruptcy and fossil fuel companies incur plummeting profits, low-income communities, communities of color, and workers bear the brunt of the industry's failure.
To date, over 700 institutions and more than 58,000 individuals representing over $5.4 trillion in assets have committed to some level of divestment. Just last week, Harvard University announced it is "pausing" its investments in fossil fuels, and the historic Riverside Church in New York announced it is fully divesting. Additional commitments include Amalgamated Bank, the University of California system, the Norwegian Sovereign Wealth Fund, 25 percent of all UK universities, and institutions across more than 77 countries.
QUOTE SHEET:
Mark Campanale Carbon Tracker Initiative Founder & Executive Director, said:
"There is clear evidence that past behaviour in markets won't be repeated in the future. There is a transition going on and at some point, falling demand for oil will lead to long periods of low oil prices, lowering return on capital, and making the whole sector uneconomic."
Katie McChesney, 350.org US Divestment Campaign Manager, said:
"This report shows the fossil fuel industry attempting to make its last stand, as it pours even further resources into promoting doubt and delay over action on climate change. Divestment doesn't increase risk, it lowers it by insulating an investment portfolio from the volatile and dangerous fossil fuel sector. Just days before the massive Peoples Climate March, Harvard announced it will pause its investments in fossil fuels. If institutions truly support the future they're preparing stakeholders for, they must heed the warnings of the thousands in next week's Global Divestment Mobilization, and cut ties with the coal, oil and gas companies perpetuating climate impacts."
Tom Sanzillo, Director of the Finance Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA.Org), said:
"For the last five years Exxon Mobil the oil industry's leader has lagged the Dow Jones Industrial Average dramatically. In its place other stocks like Apple and Microsoft have driven the returns of institutional investors large and small. The rest of the oil and gas industry have done worse. Professor Bessbinder's paper fails to mention this material fact and that the entire coal industry has collapsed financially and cost investors billions. As a former manager of a large public pension fund I would never hire an academic for investment advice or to advise me in fee negotiations. The Professor's paper lacks an understanding of the divestment question, knowledge of the internal workings of institutional investors and any appreciation of the interaction of market forces and public policy. "F" for missing the obvious, the fossil fuel industries are now less profitable than other stocks and face a negative financial outlook. Climate issues and structurally changing markets make past performance a very poor predictor of future profits."
Denise Patel, DivestInvest Network Coordinator said,
"The IPAA's assessment relies on alternative facts when the reality is that a transition away from fossil fuels is clearly underway. The scholarship on mounting financial risk for oil and gas companies continues to grow. Last week, Moody's cited lower demand for oil and gas over time, changing consumer preferences, and disruptive technological shocks as material risks to oil and gas companies. The report also shows that consequent price volatility and rising pressure on margins and cash flows will lead to stranded assets. The once reliable returns of fossil fuel investments will soon be the riskiest investments in endowment and pension fund portfolios as historical returns are not necessarily indicators of future performance. The implications of holding onto that level of climate risk for university endowments and pension funds are high, and responsible fiduciaries should divest to protect students and pensioners."
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 situation on the ground is catastrophic," said Francesca Albanese. "It’s really beyond what words can say."
The top United Nations expert on Palestine said Wednesday—the third anniversary of the Hamas-led attack on Israel—that Israel's US-backed genocidal annihilation of Gaza continues, with daily airstrikes adding to a toll of 250,000 Palestinians killed or wounded as Israeli forces seize most of the coastal strip and raze as much of it as they can.
In an interview with the Turkish news agency Anadolu, Francesca Albanese, the United Nations special rapporteur for the occupied Palestinian territories, said that "the situation on the ground is catastrophic."
"It's really beyond what words can say, and it gives the sense that the destruction of Gaza is not over," the 49-year-old Italian jurist continued. "Seventy percent of the strip is under the control of the [Israeli] army, which is leveling as much as it can. There is an environmental catastrophe, a humanitarian catastrophe."
Israel's assault on Gaza began in the immediate aftermath of the Hamas-led attack of October 7, 2023, in which more than 1,100 Israelis and others were killed—at least some by so-called “friendly fire” and under the fratricidal Hannibal Directive—and over 240 people were abducted.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other Israeli officials soon began calling for the genocidal destruction of Gaza and its 2.2 million people. Netanyahu declared it a "holy mission" for Israel to fulfill a divine command to the Israelites to exterminate every man, woman, child, and animal in Amalek, the fictional archenemy of the ancient Jews.
Over the past three years, Israeli forces have killed at least 74,237 Palestinians and wounded at least 175,206 others in Gaza, according to Gaza Health Ministry figures—which not only have been affirmed by senior Israeli military and intelligence officials, but are believed by the authors of multiple peer-reviewed scientific studies to be a significant undercount.
Tens of thousands of those injuries are classified as "life-altering," including thousands of amputations performed on adults and children, sometimes without anesthesia.
The Gaza Health Ministry says more than 10,000 of those killed were women, over 5,100 were elderly, and upward of 21,000 were children—figures supported by classified Israel Defense Forces intelligence data suggesting that 5 in 6 Palestinians killed by the IDF through the first 19 months of the onslaught were civilians.

Tens of thousands of children have also been left without one or both parents, with more than 2,700 families suffering so many deaths that they were erased from the civil registry in Gaza. The UN Children's Fund called the strip the "world's most dangerous place to be a child."
In the wake of the October 7 attack, the IDF dramatically loosened rules of engagement, effectively allowing an unlimited number of civilians to be killed when targeting a single Hamas member, no matter how low-ranking. The IDF’s use of massive ordnance, including US-supplied 1,000- and 2,000-pound “bunker buster” bombs, and the utilization of artificial intelligence to select targets, have resulted in staggering numbers of civilian deaths, including numerous instances of dozens or more people being massacred in single strikes.
At closer range, current and former IDF troops have accused their own of deliberately shooting Palestinian civilians, including children, sometimes out of sheer boredom. Palestinian medical professionals—who, like journalists and aid workers, have suffered hundreds of their ranks killed by Israeli bombs and bullets—have also described what they say is the deliberate shooting of Gazans, including children.
On October 8, 2023, then-Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant ordered the "complete siege" of Gaza, explaining that "we are fighting human animals, and we are acting accordingly." The siege, which is actually a tightening of a decadeslong blockade of Gaza, fueled famine and disease that killed many of the most vulnerable people in the strip. Nothing was spared, including hospitals and other medical facilities, whose staff members were sometimes abducted and tortured—allegedly to death in at least one case—by their Israeli captors.
Around 90% of Gaza's population—around 1.9 million people—has been forcibly displaced, most of them multiple times. With the vast bulk of Gaza's buildings damaged or destroyed, nearly two-thirds of Gazans continue to live in tents or makeshift shelters as the war's fourth winter, and with it the prospect of more infants and newborns dying of hypothermia, approaches.
Despite a purported year-old ceasefire, Israeli forces continue to kill, wound, and displace Palestinians in Gaza to this day. Gaza officials say that at least 1,460 people have been killed and more than 5,100 others have been wounded since the ceasefire took effect. Israel is still blocking or delaying desperately needed humanitarian aid from entering Gaza, although there have been some improvements in delivery during the ceasefire period.
Meanwhile, Israeli calls for more ethnic cleansing, occupation, and possibly even the Jewish recolonization of Gaza continue. And while President Donald Trump no longer openly discusses a US takeover and redevelopment of the Mediterranean strip into the "Riviera of the Middle East," his administration is still trying to determine Gaza's future through vehicles like his widely derided "Board of Peace."
In November 2024, the International Criminal Court in The Hague, Netherlands issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza, including murder and forced starvation. The ICC simultaneously ordered the arrest of three senior Hamas officials, but Israel has since assassinated them.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ), also in The Hague, is currently in the written stage of a genocide case against Israel brought by South Africa and formally supported by more than 15 nations. While a ruling in the case isn't expected until at least the end of the decade, a UN commission of inquiry, the International Association of Genocide Scholars, and other experts—including many Israeli and international Jewish academics, jurists, human rights campaigners, and others—have already concluded that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.
Yet genocide denial persists in Israel, the United States, and among supporters of Israel's destruction of Gaza around the world. And while numerous nations have severed diplomatic ties with Israel or imposed sanctions—sometimes both—the United States under both the Biden and Trump administrations has lavished the key Middle East ally with tens of billions of dollars in armed aid, as well as diplomatic cover including a string of vetoes of UN Security Council ceasefire resolutions.
Furthermore, the Trump administration has moved to punish members of the ICC, ICJ, and UN, including Albanese—who has been relentlessly critical of both Israel's genocide and Western complicity, especially by the United States.
On the other hand, increasing diplomatic recognition of Palestine by even Israel's allies and a worldwide wave of protests against the Gaza genocide—including numerous demonstrations organized and led by Jewish groups—has shown Palestinians that much of the world stands in solidarity with them.
"There are really these two forces... symbolically, fighting against each other," Albanese told Anadolu during Wednesday's interview. "Those who want to continue the genocide, the exploitation, and the erasure of Palestine, and those who want to stop it."
“No one outside the administration knows what a ‘Midterm Surprise’ means, but nothing this administration has done so far has come out of nowhere," one expert told Common Dreams.
With the 2026 midterm elections less than a month away, President Donald Trump keeps teasing that his administration has a "surprise" in store, a message that led many to fear a new attempt to subvert what are projected to be heavy losses by Republicans.
In a Truth Social post on Tuesday, bragging about his rally crowd sizes, Trump cryptically urged readers to "Watch for the ‘Midterm Surprise'!"
Hours later, during a rally in Maryland, he shouted out Russell Vought, the director of the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Vought, a key architect of Project 2025, has been instrumental in Trump's second-term restructuring of the federal government and in weaponizing federal funding to exert leverage over states.
"We have some big surprises coming up in another few weeks, right, Russ?" Trump said. "He's going to be one of the very important people in the history of our country, in my opinion. He's got some great things happening.”
In light of Trump's suggestions that he could "nationalize" elections or outright "cancel" them, send immigration agents to polling places, seize voting machines, or use federal agencies to seek out "ineligible" voters, his unexplained intonations about a coming "surprise" immediately became the subject of rampant speculation.
"The time to prepare for him to try to steal an election is now," wrote Fox News anchor Jessica Tarlov. Former US Attorney Joyce Vance wrote that it signaled “election interference is in the offing.” Conservative Trump critic Pedro Gonzalez warned that it could signal a "repeat of 2020," when Trump attempted to overturn his loss to former President Joe Biden by pushing false claims of widespread voter fraud.
"Nothing this administration has done so far has come out of nowhere."
Common Dreams spoke with several voting rights and election security experts about what sorts of "surprises" Trump may have in store and what powers he may actually attempt to wield. They made one thing abundantly clear: Whatever he tries to do—legal or otherwise—they're ready.
"No one outside the administration knows what a 'Midterm Surprise' means, but nothing this administration has done so far has come out of nowhere," said Cerin Lindgrensavage, who serves as counsel for Protect Democracy. "They have been signaling their plans for months."
Lindgrensavage told Common Dreams that "one clue" was the administration's use of federal payouts to voters—which some critics have characterized as "bribes"—including Trump's promise to send each American adult a $5,000 check if Republicans emerge victorious. Last week, Trump announced that around 20 million Medicare recipients would receive $90 checks from a fund meant to improve the program.
"We've been paying attention to the accelerating pace at which federal money is being shipped out the door and heralded in big announcements, in ways that look more like popularity plays than what Congress intended the use of those funds for," Lindgrensavage said.
Michael McNulty, the senior policy director at Issue One, agreed that while we "can't know exactly" what Trump has in mind, "we can look at the pattern," which his organization has described as the "election takeover playbook."
"It starts with tired, recycled false election fraud narratives such as claims of foreign interference, noncitizen voting, mail-in voting problems—despite himself voting by mail in previous elections—or ‘corrupt’ election officials, even when the evidence contradicts them," McNulty explained. "He then uses that to justify trying to take control of election processes, whether through an emergency declaration, demands for state voter data and election materials, or federal agents near polling places."
"It ends," he said, "with efforts to undermine certification if the results aren't what the administration wants."
OMB has no formal authority over elections. But McNulty stressed that Vought could still use his office's powers to exert "indirect" influence over the states that run them.
"Withholding funds, imposing grant conditions, and coordination with other agencies," he said, "could be used to pressure states and localities."

However, he said to "keep in mind those levers are limited by what Congress has authorized, and courts have repeatedly pushed back on funding conditions that go beyond the law."
McNulty told Common Dreams he is unaware of any specific effort directly tying OMB to election administration, but said there was a risk of possible coordination among OMB and the departments of Homeland Security and Justice "on voter data, security funding, and Election Day activity."
“We have strong protections in place, and we intend to use them."
Other experts suggested it was less useful to speculate on what Trump might do than to look at how he is already trying to exceed his legal authority.
Trump has repeatedly suggested that he should have had federal authorities seize voting machines in 2020. Democracy Docket reported on Tuesday that election denialist activists urged him to declare a "national emergency" to do just that while meeting with him in the White House recently.
Pamela Smith, the president and CEO of Verified Voting, said her organization was prepared in case Trump attempts to seize voting machines or other election materials.
“The states run elections, and the president has no authority to affect those processes, as courts have repeatedly shown," Smith told Common Dreams.
By preparing officials for what to do if chains of custody on ballots are broken, she said, "we are helping election offices prepare for any threats to ballots throughout the November 3 election and in the weeks that follow, so that every ballot can be tracked, secured, and accounted for."
John Cusick, assistant counsel for the NAACP Legal Defense Fund (LDF), told Common Dreams his group is preparing for threats ranging from federal interference in election administration to voter intimidation and mass voter challenges.
“We have strong protections in place, and we intend to use them,” Cusick said, pointing in particular to Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits voter intimidation.

He noted that LDF has already sued over the prospect of federal law enforcement at polling places.
“Let me be plain," he said, "a polling place is not a checkpoint.”
Cusick said LDF is also working with national, state, and local partners to identify problems ahead of election day and train volunteers to observe and report suppression efforts.
"We will protect this election," he said. "But it should not take such a herculean effort from the civil rights community to secure and protect voting rights. Congress must meet its constitutional responsibility to ensure every eligible voter can participate free from discrimination, no matter where they live."
He called on Congress to strengthen voting rights protections, establish national election administration standards, and provide more funding directly to local election officials.
Celina Stewart, the CEO of the League of Women Voters, told Common Dreams she would not speculate on what surprise attacks Trump may have in store or attempt to "assign meaning where no evidence exists."
"What we do know is that election administration in the United States is governed by law, distributed across states and local jurisdictions, and constrained by constitutional checks and balances," she said. "No president has unilateral authority to control election administration, determine election outcomes, or override the lawful counting and certification of ballots."
"Any attempt by any federal official to exceed constitutional or statutory authority would be subject to legal challenge and public scrutiny," she said. "Our focus is not on political rhetoric but on ensuring that voters can cast ballots freely, that election officials can do their jobs without interference, and that the 2026 elections are administered according to law."
"Let’s call this what it is: blatant corruption and an abuse of power.”
An analysis published on Wednesday by ABC News estimated that companies backed financially by Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump have so far scored more than $6 billion in contracts from the US Department of Defense.
As ABC documented, many of the investments into the defense firms come through 1789 Capital, a venture capital firm founded by pro-Trump donors in 2023 that brought Trump Jr. in as a partner in 2024.
The most recent example came earlier this week, when President Donald Trump announced a multibillion-dollar funding agreement with AI defense firm Anduril Industries, more than a year after 1789 Capital claimed a $2.5 billion stake in the company.
The ABC report also pointed to Florida-based drone parts manufacturer Unusual Machines securing a deal to supply motors for the US Army last year, mere months after the company named Trump Jr. as an adviser.
Drone company Powerus, which lists both Trump sons as investors, won a purchase order from the US Air Force earlier this year for an undisclosed amount.
Neither Unusual Machines nor Powerus had previously received government contracts prior to getting investments from the Trump brothers.
Vulcan Elements, a rare earths magnet startup that has received funding from 1789 Capital, last year received a $620 million loan from the Pentagon.
Foundation Future Industries, a robotics startup that named Eric Trump as its chief strategy adviser, was awarded a $24 million Pentagon contract in April. Shortly after the deal was announced, the Trump son boasted to Fox Business that it would help the US “win” the race with China to build battle-ready robots.
A spokesperson for the Trump brothers told ABC that they "are experienced business leaders who have built and invested in businesses across a wide range of industries for decades, long before their father first ran for public office."
"Their investment decisions are based solely on their independent business judgment and personal convictions," the spokesperson said, "and they do not seek to influence, direct, or participate in any government decision, procurement, award, regulatory action, or other governmental process. Attempts to portray their ordinary investment activities as improper are a deliberate distortion of the facts."
Critics of the Trump family, however, were quick to accuse the two Trump brothers of engaging in unprecedented corruption.
"Donald Trump and his sons have raked in BILLIONS while Americans struggle to make ends meet," wrote the social media account for Democrats in the US House of Representatives. "Let's call this what it is: blatant corruption and an abuse of power."
Phillips O’Brien, professor of strategic studies at the University of St. Andrews, said congressional Democrats should use the power of the purse to defund the Trump family's self-dealing.
"Corruption of this kind is why the Democrats need to freeze or cut back US defense spending if they take control of Congress," O’Brien wrote in a social media post. "If you actually care about US security, funding this is destructive."
Mark Jacob, former metro editor at the Chicago Tribune, wrote that Pentagon contracts for the Trump-linked firms were "not a coincidence" but "deep corruption that never would have been tolerated before a convicted felon took over the White House."
Sarah Longwell, a former Republican pollster who left the party over its embrace of Trump, said the deals show that "the president of the United States and his family are insanely, unprecedentedly corrupt."
"With each passing election since the Citizens United decision, billionaires have systematically bought up our democracy."
An analysis released Wednesday shows that 172 billionaire families in the United States have collectively spent more than $1.7 billion on the 2026 elections—a record-shattering sum for a midterm cycle.
The analysis by the Americans for Tax Fairness (ATF) Action Fund shows that the "vast bulk" of billionaire political spending this election cycle has flowed to super PACs, a product of the Supreme Court's notorious 2010 Citizens United ruling. Super PACs can raise and spend unlimited sums in support of favored candidates, giving billionaires a powerful vehicle to influence elections.
ATF Action Fund found that billionaire political spending has increased 53-fold since the Citizens United decision. This cycle, less than 20% of billionaire donations went to committees subject to contribution limits.
"With each passing election since the Citizens United decision, billionaires have systematically bought up our democracy," said Jodie Rubenstein, ATF Action Fund's executive director. "These billionaires are backing a crooked tax system that shifts wealth upward through massive tax giveaways to the wealthy and big business. We can’t let billionaire money erode our democracy while working families struggle to get by."
"Working- and middle-class Americans must fight back and make clear this November that our democracy is not for sale," Rubenstein added.
The top-spending billionaire families so far this cycle are those of Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz, cofounders of the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz. The two families have pumped a combined $149 million into the 2026 elections, with donations flowing to both Republicans and Democrats. Andreessen and Horowitz have given major donations to Leading the Future, a super PAC that opposes strict artificial intelligence regulations.
The families of investor George Soros, businessman Jeff Yass, and Tesla CEO Elon Musk are other leading spenders this cycle. The top 15 billionaire spenders have accounted for $962 million in combined 2026 election outlays, according to the new analysis.

GOP candidates have been the chief beneficiaries of billionaire election spending this cycle, ATF Action Fund found, with 113 billionaire families giving mostly to Republicans and 45 donating predominately to Democrats.
"A large group of billionaires is sending their checks to MAGA Inc., which has raised over $222 million from them since January 2025," the new analysis shows. "In fact $1 out of every $2 to Donald Trump’s MAGA Inc. super PAC comes directly from a billionaire on our list."
"Donald Trump promised to lower costs on day one. Instead, he has spent his presidency creating an affordability crisis, and now he's calling his self-made crisis a hoax."
With the US midterm elections just weeks away and control of Congress up for grabs, the top Democrat on the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee on Wednesday released a tool tracking inflation under Republican President Donald Trump.
"Donald Trump promised to lower costs on day one. Instead, he has spent his presidency creating an affordability crisis, and now he's calling his self-made crisis a hoax," said Ranking Member Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) in a statement. "The Trumpflation Tracker will show families across the country exactly how much of a price they are paying for Trump's and Republicans' failed economic agenda."
The tracker shows not only cumulative inflation since December 2024, the month before Trump returned to office—it's up 5.2%— but also limited job growth during his second term, the impact of his broken promise to cap credit card interest rates, falling wages since he launched an illegal war on Iran in February, mortgage rate increases, and rising household debt.

The tool also highlights the country's affordability crisis, detailing how costs have skyrocketed for childcare, electricity, gasoline, groceries, healthcare, and rent, with the average US household paying over $3,000 more.
As Trump rallies behind efforts to build more energy-sucking artificial intelligence data centers, Warren's tracker shows that residential electricity prices are up 12.7% during this term, with the average US household paying $222 more.
Last year, congressional Republicans passed and Trump signed a budget package that cut government healthcare programs and did not extend expiring Affordable Care Act subsidies. Now, per the new tool, healthcare costs are up 14.6%.
Prices for gas and diesel have skyrocketed since Trump and the Israeli military started bombing Iran, but the US president has dismissed concerns, claiming that paying $4 at the pump is "not very high" and is worthwhile to prevent the Middle Eastern nation from building a nuclear weapon—which the US intelligence community concluded, before the war, that Tehran wasn't trying to do.
Warren's tracker puts the gas surge at 43.7% since December 2024, with an average cost of over $750 per household. The senator plans to have the panel's economic experts update the figures on a monthly basis, as more data becomes available.
The Century Foundation's president, Julie Margetta Morgan, applauded the committee "for doing the math on this," writing on social media that "the Trump administration continues to claim that the economy is strong, but this tracker shows clearly just how much families are being squeezed."
"Americans should expect fair application of the rule of law to ensure even the most powerful and well-connected can be held accountable."
A report released by government watchdog Public Citizen Wednesday reveals how, under the Trump administration, a donation to or partnership with President Donald Trump "could make your legal matters disappear."
When Trump took office in January 2025, he inherited from the Biden administration hundreds of enforcement actions that were supposed to be carried out against law-breaking corporations.
But as Public Citizen research director Rick Claypool wrote in the report, titled "Trump’s Cascade of Canceled Corporate Enforcement Against Over 200 Corporations," the president and his top officials have rolled back 212 enforcement actions against 205 corporations since taking office—closing dozens of federal investigations, dismissing 67 lawsuits that federal agencies were actively litigating, and terminating numerous other consequences for wrongdoing.
Ninety of the companies that have avoided enforcement actions—44%—were ones with ties to Trump, including 53 that contributed to the president's inaugural committee, super political action committees (PACs) that supported him, or the demolition of the East Wing of the White House to make way for Trump's ballroom.
“Trump’s retreat from law enforcement against corporate crime is a signal to Big Business that if you’re big enough, rich enough, and connected enough with Trump’s inner circle, there are no consequences for breaking the law,” said Claypool. “The reckless experiments of AI corporations, the proliferation of scammy financial fraudsters, and the outbreaks of tainted food show that the message has clearly been received.”
Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, is one of the largest beneficiaries of Trump's retreat, following his pouring of $400 million into the president's campaign and those of other Republicans in 2024. He also gave $1 million to the president's inaugural fund and $5 million to the MAGA, Inc. super PAC.
Tesla has benefited from four canceled enforcement actions, with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration canceling three investigations and the Department of Labor canceling an inspection into contract compliance. Lawsuits that had been filed against SpaceX by the Department of Justice and the National Labor Relations Board were also closed, as was an Environmental Protection Agency investigation into data center pollution.
Musk himself also avoided a lawsuit over alleged misconduct when he purchased the social media platform X, when the Securities and Exchange Commission suit was dismissed.
Pfizer, which employed former Attorney General Pam Bondi before she joined the Trump administration—only to be fired earlier this year—also had three enforcement actions canceled. The pharmaceutical giant contributed $1 million to Trump's inaugural fund.
Wall Street giant Wells Fargo has also benefited from the cancellation of five enforcement actions, and Amazon, Bank of America, Meta, and Polymarket are among the corporations that have had at least two canceled.
The report explains how other corporations across the Big Tech, finance, and cryptocurrency sectors have seen investigations and lawsuits vanish after contributing to Trump's reelection efforts, including:
"Americans should expect fair application of the rule of law to ensure even the most powerful and well-connected can be held accountable," reads the report. "But with 44% (90 out of 205) of corporations with publicly known ties to the administration receiving the benefit of canceled enforcement, the pattern of favoritism toward corporate insiders is clear."
Claypool emphasized that by working unilaterally and wielding his executive power instead of collaborating with Congress, Trump has granted the "corporate wish" of canceled enforcement actions "with relative ease."
"Unlike passing friendly legislation, which requires coordination and cooperation with congressional majorities, or formal deregulation, which can require formal processes including outside input intended to ensure careful and deliberate decision making, agency leaders derelict in their duties claim canceling enforcement is a matter merely of prosecutorial discretion," reads the report.
The analysis details several executive actions and policies Trump has unilaterally adopted "to reduce enforcement against corporate crime and lawbreaking," including:
The administration has also been able to cancel enforcement in a "top-down" fashion through its "dismissal of DOJ independence" and the Supreme Court's ruling in Trump v. Slaughter, which permitted the White House to seize authority from regulators.
"The result," wrote Claypool, "is that power over federal agencies is more concentrated than ever with the president’s inner circle—and that courting favor with President Trump is a distinctly powerful lever for taking advantage of the enforcement retreat."
A new ad features Rogers saying, "You can’t have your privacy violated if you don’t know your privacy is violated," and bragging about his role in creating the PATRIOT Act.
As Flock cameras and the data firm Palantir dominate headlines, Michigan’s Democratic US Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed is spending the final weeks of the race hammering his Republican opponent, former Rep. Mike Rogers, for his role in expanding the surveillance state.
On Tuesday, El-Sayed's campaign unveiled a new campaign ad with the tagline "Mike Rogers is watching you."
The ad, first reported by WIRED, features clips of Rogers, who chaired the House Intelligence Committee from 2011-15, boasting of his role in passing the infamous PATRIOT Act, which dramatically expanded government spying powers in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, including the mass gathering of Americans' telephone records.
The video repeatedly shows a clip of Rogers from a 2013 intelligence committee hearing, where he downplayed explosive revelations about the National Security Agency's (NSA) warrantless spying powers.
"You can’t have your privacy violated if you don’t know your privacy is violated, right?" Rogers said.
Another clip shows Rogers, during a 2016 Heritage Foundation speech, saying, "We would love to get one-tenth of what Google has on you." The comment was made as Rogers lamented that aggressive intelligence gathering on US citizens had been curtailed somewhat in the wake of what he said was a "completely undeserv[ed]" backlash against intelligence agencies.
The new ad campaign comes amid broad public unease about government surveillance. A YouGov poll earlier this year found that 76% of Americans were concerned about technology's impact on state spying capabilities, while a separate survey from the Center for Democracy and Technology found 74% were concerned about the security of personal information held by government agencies.
The rapid adoption of Flock's artificial intelligence-powered license plate readers by police departments around the country has sparked bipartisan concern: 62% of voters say they are concerned by the use of Flock cameras, including majorities of Democrats, Republicans, and independents, according to a Navigator survey in September—many expressed fears that the technology was being used to collect information on innocent people without their consent.
A spokesperson for Rogers has said he “vehemently opposes unchecked use of Flock cameras to track law-abiding citizens” and emphasized that he departed from Congress before the company was founded in 2017.
Since he won the Democratic primary in August, El-Sayed has sought to lay voters' spying fears at the feet of Rogers, joking in August that the Republican had spent his career courting the "peeping Tom vote."
In addition to digital ads and billboards, El-Sayed's campaign also published a website titled "MikeIsWatching.com," which examines Rogers' record during his 14 years in Congress.
It notes Rogers' self-described role in helping to "author" the PATRIOT Act and its renewals, as well as his support for other legislation that expanded the government's reach into Americans' private lives:
In Ohio, former Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown has attacked Republican Sen. John Husted for promoting AI data centers, while Democratic Texas state Rep. James Talarico (D-50) has done the same to his opponent, Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton.
But others have leaned harder on the issue of mass surveillance. Also in Texas, Democratic state Rep. Gina Hinojosa (D-49) is trying to take down Republican Gov. Greg Abbott by hammering on a $28.5 million state contract with Flock, which now has over 13,000 cameras in the state, according to the group DeFlock.
"When it's over $6 per gallon for diesel... people are feeling the pinch."
Ken Paxton, the Republican Party's nominee for the US Senate in Texas, blamed President Donald Trump's illegal war with Iran for his political woes in a leaked recording published by Axios on Wednesday.
In the recording, which was made during a private meeting with donors and lobbyists last month, Paxton was asked by an attendee which issues were "dragging" his campaign.
"It's the war, it's gas prices, it's diesel," the Texas attorney general responded. "When it's over $6 per gallon for diesel... people are feeling the pinch."
Paxton added that concerns about affordability were "by far our biggest problem" and "why we're having a hard time with the numbers."
Later in the recording, an attendee pointed out to Paxton that he "can't stop the war," to which Paxton replied, "Right."
"So many factors in this federal race are uncontrollable," Paxton explained. "I don't make the decisions, and I don't... know what's behind some of the decisions."
If Paxton were elected to the US Senate, he could vote for a war powers resolution to compel Trump to end the war, which was launched in February without congressional authorization.
This is now the third leaked recording of Paxton to emerge in recent weeks. Paxton is facing Democratic nominee James Talarico in November.
In a recording leaked to Politico on Monday, Paxton lamented that he has lost control of his campaign's messaging, which he said was being dictated from Washington, DC.
The New York Times last month published a Paxton recording in which he admitted that Trump's big midterm convention held in Dallas hurt his campaign.
“The numbers—when we did that convention—it dropped our numbers,” Paxton said. “Everybody’s numbers dropped. Right now, yeah, not good.”
Veteran Democratic strategist David Axelrod predicted that Trump would not be pleased by Paxton once again placing blame on the president's decisions for his political misfortunes.
"Next to the war and the tariffs," Axelrod wrote in a Wednesday social media post, "anointing Ken Paxton as the GOP candidate for the US Senate in Texas may turn out to be [Trump's] worst political decision and the one he most regrets."
John Huffman, the former Republican mayor of Southlake, Texas, wrote that, while Trump may not want to hear it, Paxton's assessment of the political environment was correct.
"The war, gas prices, higher cost of living etc., are all making this cycle very difficult for Republicans," Huffman argued. "In a normal year, even a candidate as broken as Paxton could eke out a W in Texas."
"If not for the laws that protect the public’s right to know what their government is doing, the public likely would have never known about these concerning schemes."
Documents obtained and released on Wednesday by the advocacy group Democracy Forward show that the investigative arm of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement has gathered tens of millions of voter records ahead of the midterm elections as part of a purported effort to combat "voter fraud."
Democracy Forward, which obtained the ICE documents through the Freedom of Information Act, said records from the agency's Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) branch underscore how the Trump administration is "using the power of the government to try to silence eligible voters and prevent them from accessing the ballot."
The 166-page document that ICE turned over to Democracy Forward shows that HSI has considered sending undercover agents to investigate nonprofit organizations accused of illegally registering noncitizens to vote. President Donald Trump and his allies have repeatedly and baselessly claimed that noncitizen voting is a significant problem in the US.
HSI admits in one of the newly released documents that its "review" of more than 40 nonprofits in New Jersey uncovered "no derogatory information."
"The information revealed in the documents should concern all Americans and is further evidence of an alarming attempt by the executive branch to undermine our elections. It appears the president and his allies want to pick their voters, as opposed to the way things are supposed to function in a democracy where voters pick their leaders," said Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward. “If not for the laws that protect the public’s right to know what their government is doing, the public likely would have never known about these concerning schemes. We will continue to use all legal tools to expose threats to our elections and to challenge them swiftly.”
Democracy Forward noted that the records also show that HSI has "obtained 26,235 US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)-derived records, and 50.6 million voter roll records from the US Department of Justice, for investigating so-called voter fraud."
"Notably, ICE listed out priority states for each set of these records, including Texas, Pennsylvania, California, New Jersey, Minnesota, Michigan, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, and Ohio," the group said. "Alarmingly, certain state voter roll data may have been entered into Palantir’s ELITE app, which is used by ICE to identify, prioritize, and locate targets for deportation. HSI may also be investigating voting machines and seeking to prove voter fraud in 'counties with 2020 results.'"
ICE's efforts are part of what watchdogs and election experts have characterized as a sweeping, lawless attempt by the Trump administration to disrupt the 2026 midterms, which will determine control of the US Congress.
Hart Wood, senior oversight counsel at Democracy Forward, said the ICE documents provide "chilling new insights into the breadth and depth of the Trump-Vance administration’s efforts to pursue baseless claims of widespread election fraud and assert greater federal control over elections ahead of the 2026 midterms."
"These records also expose the influence of election denier Heather Honey at both [the Department of Homeland Security] and ICE—including her working in partnership with activists and feeding nearly 50 million records from ‘independent sources’ into DHS voter fraud data collection," said Wood. "They also show, for the first time, that HSI may be using undercover agents to investigate non-profits for purely political reasons.”
"Mainers can't afford to pay their bills with a press release or a strongly worded letter," said Jackson.
Democratic US Senate candidate Troy Jackson took his Republican opponent, incumbent Sen. Susan Collins, to task during a Tuesday debate for her role in Maine's worsening healthcare crisis, accusing her of paving the way for the disaster while attempting to take credit for an inadequate relief fund.
"Senator Collins is like an arsonist who helped set the fire, and then she wants credit for bringing a cup of water to put it out," Jackson said after Collins touted her role in securing a $50 billion fund for rural hospitals. The fund was part of a Republican budget package that includes the largest Medicaid cuts in the program's history—roughly $900 billion over the next decade.
Collins, who is running for a sixth term, voted against final passage of the Republican budget legislation, but she played a key role in advancing the bill through the Senate.
"She could have stopped it," Jackson, the former president of Maine's Senate, said of the budget law, which is fueling hospital staffing cutbacks and closures across the US, including in Maine. "What she brought back is a pittance to what we're losing in this state. I mean, we're watching our healthcare system crash right in front of us."
Watch:
Tuesday's debate came weeks ahead of the November general election, which polling indicates is a tight race. A survey conducted at the end of September by the Maine People’s Resource Center found Jackson leading Collins 49.3% to 46.5%—an advantage that was within the poll's margin of error.
During the debate, Jackson hammered Collins over her pro-Trump voting record and repeatedly accused her of playing up minuscule or largely symbolic opposition to the president's unpopular actions, including his tariffs on Canada and his illegal war on Iran.
After Collins noted that she "got concrete, pulp, and road salt removed from the tariff list," Jackson responded: "We can't eat road salt."
"Mainers can't afford to pay their bills with a press release or a strongly worded letter," said Jackson.
Jackson also highlighted recent ProPublica reporting that placed Collins at the center of a “sprawling pay-to-play operation” involving a Hawaii-based defense contractor accused of funneling donations to lawmakers in exchange for federal contracts.
"As late as 2024, the FBI was circling around Senator Collins," Jackson noted, citing the federal investigation that ProPublica revealed. "Then, whenever President Trump came back, his administration dismantled the investigation. Now, she votes with Donald Trump 96% of the time."
"I don't owe Trump. I don't owe the billionaires nothing. In fact, I've spent my life fighting back against billionaires," Jackson added. "But I do owe the people of Maine everything. I refuse corporate PAC money, I want to ban congressional stock trading. I fight for working Mainers every day. I'm not taking money from corporations like Susan Collins does."