SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
July, 08 2020, 12:00am EDT
Contact:
Carli Kientzle at press@freedomfromfacebook.com
WASHINGTON
The following is a statement from David Segal and Sarah Miller, co-chairs of Freedom From Facebook & Google in response to Facebook's audit on Civil Rights, Hate Speech and Voter Suppression:
Facebook's own audit shows what everyone already knew to be true, their business model relies on racism and hate to increase traffic and targeted ad profits and the platform 'privileges' some voices over others, allowing the powerful to willfully break the rules.
To underline these findings the audit also concluded that Facebook allowed Trump to share racist, xenophobic, and false posts even though they explicitly violated even the current set of weak rules.
It really can't get any clearer that Zuckerberg and Facebook will never change their business model voluntarily, and the propagation of racism and hate speech, election meddling, and overall poisoning of discourse will never cease until they're broken up and targeted advertising is banned.
It is incumbent on Congress, the FTC, the DOJ, and State Attorneys General to act. Every week that Facebook is allowed to continue poisoning our discourse and democracy is exponentially more dangerous as the 2020 election rapidly approaches.
Freedom From Facebook, a diverse group of organizations sharing deep concerns about Facebook's extraordinary power over our lives and democracy, is calling on the Federal Trade Commission to use its broad authority to break up Facebook's monopoly and re-establish competition in the social networking space by spinning off WhatsApp, Instagram, and Messenger into independent businesses. Freedom From Facebook also calls on the FTC to develop interoperability standards, so users will have the freedom to communicate between competing social networks, as well as implement strong privacy rules to give users more control over the collection and utilization of personal information. Learn more at
LATEST NEWS
'Another Giveaway to Wall Street': Advocates Sound Alarm on GOP Bank Deregulation Bill
The Republican legislative package "would leave the financial system dramatically weaker and make future bank failures and publicly financed bailouts more likely," warned one advocacy group.
Jul 21, 2026
A broad coalition of advocacy organizations and labor unions warned Tuesday that Republican legislation currently moving through the US House of Representatives would deregulate Wall Street giants and increase the risk of another financial disaster under the guise of aiding community banks.
"This dangerous bank deregulation package would undermine core safeguards and supervision, push risk into the shadows, and make the next publicly financed bailout more likely," an alliance of 28 advocacy groups wrote in a letter to members of Congress. "Further deregulation is especially alarming at a time when financial regulatory agencies are under political attack, pursuing industry-friendly agendas, and starved of resources, and when there is effectively no oversight of financial markets."
Proponents of the GOP's Main Street Capital Access Act (HR 6955), which is backed by major bank lobbying organizations and some Democratic lawmakers, characterize the bill as an effort to bolster small financial institutions by reducing their regulatory burdens. Oscar Valdés Viera, senior policy analyst for private equity and capital markets at Americans for Financial Reform, said that's a ruse.
"Instead of providing meaningful relief from sky high credit card interest rates and late fees, this bill just lets big banks off the hook by weakening oversight, enacting carve-outs and exemptions from banking laws, and creating a pathway for banks to block commonsense regulatory safeguards that could reduce the likelihood and severity of financial crises," said Valdés Viera. "HR 6955 would automatically raise major regulatory thresholds, weaken bank examiners tools, create new avenues to contest supervisory and enforcement decisions, reduce meaningful competition review for many bank mergers, and expand merchant banking arrangements that blur the line between banking and commerce."
"The House majority is pushing a package of risky bank deregulation that is just another giveaway to Wall Street banks when the Congress should be laser focused on the affordability crisis," Valdés Viera said.
The advocacy coalition's letter urging lawmakers to block the legislative package—which could receive a vote in the House as early as Tuesday afternoon—points specifically to Sections 201-204 of the measure. The language in those sections, the coalition warned, "would raise statutory thresholds, extend 'tailoring' well beyond genuinely small and simple banks, and hard-wire automatic future threshold increases."
"As a result, fewer institutions, activities, and risks would remain within baseline guardrails even as the financial system grows more complex and interconnected," the coalition wrote. "The combined effect would be higher leverage and risk-taking, thinner cushions against losses, and weaker prudential standards. It would return the financial system to a pre-2008 pattern in which risk migrates out of view, problems build for years at midsize and large institutions, and the public is left holding the bag when those institutions fail."
The Main Street Capital Access Act, sponsored by Rep. French Hill (R-Ark.)—a major beneficiary of finance industry campaign cash—cleared the House Rules Committee on Monday. Punchbowl reported that Rep. Bill Foster (D-Ill.), the ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee's subcommittee on financial institutions, is urging his Democratic colleagues to support the legislation, despite opposition from the top Democrat on the committee, Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.).
"HR 6955 is Wall Street deregulation hiding as a community bank bill," Waters said in her testimony before the House Rules Committee on Monday. "This bill lets even more of these large banks escape critical safeguards risking more failures. In fact, the sponsors of this bill were so zealous to raise thresholds, they increased one threshold that will aid bad actors who commit fraud against a bank."
"Instead of letting Wall Street put Americans and our economy at risk again," said Waters, "we should be working together to address the affordability crisis caused by Trump’s failed economic policies and endless war with Iran."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Consumer Groups Warn Trump Picks for Product Safety Agency Could Enable His Corruption
The president's attempt to control the commission "is particularly troublesome" given the financial stakes that he, his family, and his supporters have in products the agency regulates, said dozens of groups.
Jul 21, 2026
Nearly a month after the US Supreme Court overturned almost a century of precedent to give President Donald Trump king-like power to purge independent agencies, consumer groups on Tuesday sounded the alarm over his nominees to the Consumer Product Safety Commission.
Before the high court's recent ruling, Trump last year fired the three Democratic commissioners appointed by his predecessor—hamstringing the CPSC, which needs at least three members to conduct official business, but currently only has acting Chair Peter Feldman.
Trump nominated Karen Sessions as a commissioner in February and Brien Lorenze, the agency's executive director, in early June. Later last month, the GOP-controlled Senate began considering the nominees, but has not yet confirmed them.
In a Tuesday letter to Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.)—respectively, the chair and ranking member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation—dozens of consumer groups detailed their concerns.
Led by the Consumer Federation of America and National Consumers League, the coalition urged the senators "to protect the independence and nonpartisanship" of "the nation's chief household product safety regulator," stressing that "hazards have no partisan leanings, and neither should the commission tasked with addressing them."
The letter highlights that the agency, created by Congress over five decades ago, cannot have more than three commissioners affiliated with the same political party, and the law bars all of them "from owning stock or bonds of substantial value in a company that sells or manufactures consumer products, or from being in 'any other manner pecuniarily interested in such a person.'"
"Historically, the agency's independence has buffered the commissioners from political pressure from the White House and large donors. This has ensured that the agency has acted with transparency and a diversity of views, which has benefited the American people," the groups wrote. "Further, the presence of minority commissioners provided a layer of oversight and accountability on CPSC actions."
"With this independent and nonpartisan structure, the CPSC has had a lifesaving effect," the coalition emphasized, pointing to drops in residential fires, child poisonings, bicycle and pool injuries, and deaths from cribs, garage door incidents, and refrigerator entrapments.
The organizations stressed their concern that Trump ousted "the three Democratic, Senate-confirmed CPSC commissioners" without cause, and then "nominated two individuals of his own political party, threatening to further undermine the independence and nonpartisanship of the CPSC."
"Silencing the voices of subject matter experts with whom the president politically disagrees or who may not serve his financial interests can have a chilling effect on the CPSC's functions," they argued. "The president's assertion of control over CPSC commissioners has eliminated the transparency provided by minority commissioners and the independence of those who remain."
"This is particularly troublesome given the conflict of interest created by the president's financial stake and those of his family and supporters in consumer products the CPSC is entrusted to regulate," the groups noted.
Specifically, as the letter lays out:
President Trump financially benefits from the distribution of a vast array of consumer products, including Trump Watches, Trump Sneakers, and "45" Guitars. The president also has substantial financial interests in major manufacturers, retailers, and online marketplaces, including Whirlpool Corp., Newell Rubbermaid, Macy’s Retail Holdings, and Amazon.com Inc. The Trump Organization, helmed by Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, sells a wide variety of consumer products, including toys and children’s products; apparel, footwear, and accessories; sporting goods; pet products; and household goods such as drinkware, kitchenware, linens, candles, and home décor. First Lady Melania Trump, through MelaniaTrump.com, is associated with the sales of jewelry and Christmas ornaments. Lara Trump and Kai Trump sell apparel through their respective online stores. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon maintains a significant financial stake in TKO Group Holdings, which has lucrative licensing deals for World Wrestling Entertainment toys, apparel, and accessories. Mike Lindell, a prominent supporter of the president, is the founder of MyPillow, which sells bedding and apparel. Former special government employee Elon Musk profits from sales of Tesla’s Powerwall systems and the Tesla Cyberquad for children. Political ally and Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) CEO Dana White profits from UFC’s sale of apparel, combat-sport equipment, and collectibles.
"These extensive financial and familial interests heighten concerns that the president could use his authority to influence CPSC enforcement decisions in ways that protect his and his associates' interests, as the administration has done in matters before other federal agencies," the letter warns, citing various actions involving the US Department of Justice and Securities and Exchange Commission.
In addition to those actions—from the attempt to create an "Anti-Weaponization Fund" to pay off Trump allies, to dropping investigations into his backers—the president has blatantly cashed in on his return to the White House, pocketing at least $2.2 billion, according to recently released annual financial disclosures.
"We are concerned that without balanced representation at the CPSC, this small agency with a big mission will be unable to independently carry out its congressionally mandated duties and provide the public with the transparency it deserves," the coalition told Cruz and Cantwell. "The CPSC is no place for political favoritism. We therefore urge you to oppose reporting favorably the nominations of Brien Lorenze and Karen Sessions to serve as CPSC commissioners."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Top Finance Committee Democrat Rips Trump's New Canada Tariffs as 'Yet Another Shakedown'
Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman described Trump's latest tariffs as "unutterably idiotic."
Jul 21, 2026
Critics are piling on President Donald Trump for once again picking a fight with the United States' top trading partner by moving to slap 50% tariffs on certain imported Canadian goods.
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, said on Tuesday that Trump's latest broadside against Canada was "yet another shakedown that will raise the cost of living for Americans, their families, and small businesses across the country."
Wyden also said that Trump has "abused every trade authority at his disposal" and vowed to soon release a bill "to rein him in and put Congress back in the driver's seat" in crafting US trade policy.
Wyden wasn't the only Democrat to take a shot at Trump over his new economic attack on Canada.
Rep. Mike Levin (D-Calif.) called Trump's new tariffs "really dumb" given that they violate a trade deal that Trump himself negotiated with Canada and Mexico during his first term.
"You cannot negotiate a trade agreement, sign it, celebrate it, then blow it up and expect anyone to trust the next deal," said Levin. "And who actually pays? American importers and American families. Tariffs are a tax on us."
Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.) predicted that US consumers would once again pay the price for the president's trade war.
"We're the ones who will eat the cost," wrote Huffman. "That's what happened with Trump's last tariff spree and it will happen again. Trump's failed foreign and economic policies are making life worse for hardworking people."
Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman on Tuesday published an analysis trying to make sense of the justifications for Trump's latest trade war with Canada, but he came up mostly empty.
"The White House fact sheet claims that the new tariffs are a response to Canadian policies that discriminate against US products," explained Krugman, "notably the moves by most Canadian provinces... to stop importation of US alcoholic beverages. But these policies were themselves a response to the tariffs on Canadian goods Trump had previously imposed."
Krugman then noted that Trump shifted his justification for the tariffs, saying they were designed to punish Canada after smoke generated by wildfires in Ontario billowed into the US last week.
However, Krugman found this explanation even more absurd.
"Blaming Canada for not controlling fires that are, in reality, largely a consequence of global warming," Krugman remarked, "is unutterably idiotic."
Krugman concluded his analysis by arguing that "whatever the real motivation for these new tariffs, they are almost surely illegal," noting that they run afoul of Trump's own North American trade deal.
Trump on Tuesday indicated that the tariffs on Canada were not actually a response to the wildfires, though he said his administration was looking at separate measures to punish the Canadian government for purportedly doing a poor job of managing its forests.
Q: Are the Canada tariffs in response to the wildfires?
Trump: No, We're looking at that separately. They need us to survive. Without us, there's no way they can survive pic.twitter.com/ycllBXmPTd
— Acyn (@Acyn) July 21, 2026
Several studies have found that Trump's tariffs, which he kicked off in April 2025, have cost US businesses and consumers hundreds of billions of dollars, as importers pass most of the increased costs imposed by the tariffs to consumers in the form of higher prices.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Electricity Costs Up 18% as Trump's Self-Imposed Deadline to Cut Household Bills in Half Passes
"Time’s up, and so is your bill."
Jul 21, 2026
President Donald Trump's trade war, demand for the rapid expansion of energy-sucking artificial intelligence data centers, and cancellation of renewable energy projects have all gotten in the way of his ability to deliver on his promise to slash household electricity costs, according to US Energy Information Administration data released as the president's self-imposed deadline for cutting rates by 50% came and went this week.
The latest data from the EIA shows residential rates as recent as this past April, and finds that households paid an average of 18.83 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh) that month compared with 17.55 cents in April 2025.
Since January 2025, when Trump entered office for his second term, prices have gone up by more than 18%, according to the EIA.
The data comes as the president reached the 18-month mark of his second administration—the deadline he gave himself to cut electricity rates in half.
"Under my leadership, the United States will commit to the ambitious goal of slashing energy and electricity prices by half at least,” Trump said at a campaign rally in North Carolina in August 2024. “We intend to slash prices by half within 12 months—at a maximum 18 months.”
"Every single thing that I promised, I produced," he added.
As Democratic research group American Bridge 21st Century said Tuesday, "Time's up, and so is your bill."
The 7.3% increase in the average electricity bill over the past 12 months alone shows costs soaring at roughly double the rate of inflation, reported 24/7 Wall Street.
The largest grid operator in the country, PJM Interconnection, reported a capacity price of $16.4 billion for power delivery in the 2028-29 period, according to the outlet. Reason also reported that data centers' electricity use added $6 billion to PJM's capacity auction, which utilities pay to guarantee future power supplies, with the costs flowing to ratepayers.
In the second quarter of 2026, utilities filed $9.2 billion in requests for rate hikes, up 26% from the same period in 2025, according to 24/7 Wall Street.
The EIA projected in May that residential electricity prices would rise by about 5% this year, with costs soaring the most in East Coast states.
Trump's deadline for slashing prices—a promise he made as families were also struggling with rising grocery and housing prices—came as The Century Foundation (TCF) released a report titled "Power Failure: Rising Energy Debt Is Climbing into the Middle Class."
According to the report, energy bills have increased three times faster than the inflation rate since Trump took office for the second time, with the national average utility bill reaching $280 in early 2026—a 12% increase since the end of 2024.
The average household in 18 states is now paying more than $280 per month for utilities, and average costs have gone up by more than 20% in 10 states since Trump began his second term.
In March 2026, the national average overdue utility balance for a household was $817, said TCF.
"The Trump administration’s policies are actively contributing to and worsening the energy cost crisis," reads TCF's report. "The effects of the Iran war will only further increase household utility costs, while runaway data center expansions account for 63 percent of electricity generation capacity costs in the nation’s largest power market. Meanwhile, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act repealed clean-energy tax credits that would have lowered household electricity bills and aid programs to help low-income families afford their energy bills."
Without citing evidence, Trump's energy secretary, Chris Wright, claimed last week that AI data centers "are the greatest tool we have right now to stop the rise of electricity prices," but numerous analyses have tied the rapid growth of the sector—pushed by the White House—to higher household costs, as a typical "hyperscale" data center can use as much as 100 megawatts, the same amount of electricity as 100,000 households.
Trump has also made components of energy infrastructure more expensive, while the think tank Energy Innovation found in a recent analysis that the president's cancellation of solar and other renewable energy projects could leave households paying an additional $460 per year in energy costs by 2035.
"The bottom line is what the data shows," wrote Joel South at 24/7 Wall Street. "The specific promise, cheaper power by mid-2026, was not met."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Raskin Launches Investigation Into Evidence Epstein Was 'Foreign Agent' Working to Influence Trump Policies
"Numerous recently released documents now show he acted aggressively on behalf of multiple foreign governments... in order to influence policies of the first Trump administration."
Jul 21, 2026
The top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Jamie Raskin, launched an investigation Monday into whether the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein worked on behalf of foreign governments to influence President Donald Trump during his first term.
In a letter addressed to acting Attorney General Todd Blanche; Trump’s nominee to be director of national intelligence, Jay Clayton; and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Raskin (D-Md.) said that files provided to the Judiciary Committee show “substantial evidence” that Epstein acted to advance the interests of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, advised the Russian government on its dealings with Trump, and worked as a consultant to former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak.
“Jeffrey Epstein never registered as a foreign agent," Raskin said. "Yet numerous recently released documents now show he acted aggressively on behalf of multiple foreign governments, including several with interests adverse to the United States, in order to influence policies of the first Trump administration."
Epstein, a convicted sex criminal who was found dead in his jail cell in 2019 after being charged with trafficking minors, has long been surrounded by questions about his relationships to foreign governments. But this is the first time an inquiry from the US Congress has expressly focused on them.
Raskin called attention to a trip taken by Epstein to Riyadh in November 2016, the week of Trump's first election, during which he met with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) before sending one of his representatives an email offering to become the "financial confidant" to members of the Saudi government. "I am happy to represent [Kingdom of Saudi Arabia] interests. period," he said.
Epstein also apparently offered to represent Saudi Arabia's sovereign wealth fund in the US and serve as an adviser to a development project overseen by MBS. The crown prince's response to the proposal has not been provided to the committee, according to Raskin.
Several emails to friends and confidantes indicate that around the same time, Epstein was regularly boasting of his visits to Trump Tower and meetings with "Trump people" during the presidential transition, which he said presented "lots of opportunity."
Other correspondence seems to indicate that Epstein coached the emir of Kuwait on how to deal with Trump. In May 2017, prior to a summit of Gulf states in Riyadh, Epstein wrote to an unnamed political figure that he had “much to do around the Trump trip.”
The figure responded that he wanted “tips on how we should communicate with Trump,” specifically on the Saudi-led war against Yemen; Kuwait had played host to three months of UN-led negotiations related to the conflict the year before.
It is unclear from the records which US officials, if any, Epstein intended to engage on Kuwait's behalf.
Raskin also highlighted what is perhaps Epstein's most well-documented foreign government contact, Ehud Barak, who served as Israel's prime minister from 1999 to 2001 and later its minister of defense.
According to a trove of leaked emails published by Drop Site News last year, Epstein worked to create a backchannel between Barak and the Russian government and helped him to pursue a meeting with President Vladimir Putin in 2013 as he pushed for Russia to abandon its support for then-Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, which was a major national security priority of Israel.
Epstein also provided information about US officials to Barak as he tried to push the Obama administration to take a harder stance toward Iran and Syria.
It is one of many instances in which Epstein and Barak worked to advance Israeli interests across the world, including brokering security and surveillance agreements with the governments of Mongolia and Côte d'Ivoire and helping to build the relationship between Israel and the United Arab Emirates.
Other emails reveal Epstein advising high-ranking Russian officials on how to deal with Trump as they sought to avoid sanctions placed by the US over its interference in the 2016 election and its aggression toward Ukraine.
Raskin said that Epstein seemed to be consciously acting as a foreign agent despite never registering as one under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). The congressman pointed to exchanges in which Epstein appeared to advise Trump's former chief strategist Steve Bannon on how to avoid FARA reporting requirements.
Raskin argued that Epstein's deep well of knowledge about Trump and his apparent access to members of his circle "posed a major national security liability." Epstein often bragged that he had leverage over the president and said he was "the one able to take [Trump] down."
The congressman argued for transparency in light of the administration’s efforts to delay the release of the files and withhold information despite congressional requirements.
Beyond potentially embarrassing revelations about Trump, he said the repeated use of the White House Situation Room to discuss the Epstein scandal indicated that it posed possible national security concerns that have not been disclosed to the public.
Raskin called on the Department of Justice and State Department to release all files referencing Epstein and other foreign nations and information that may point to his efforts to avoid FARA requirements.
Keep ReadingShow Less
‘Frankly Sickening’: Reports Highlight Brutal Impact of Trump-GOP Cuts to Food Aid
"States are absolutely contemplating a world in which SNAP isn’t available."
Jul 21, 2026
Several reports published this week highlight the brutal impact cuts made to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program in Republicans' 2025 budget law are having on Americans' access to food.
A lengthy Tuesday report in The New York Times zeroed in on the bill's impact in Arizona, where roughly 440,000 people have been dropped from the program even though many of them are still eligible to receive assistance.
The GOP-passed One Big Beautiful Bill Act established severe penalties for states that have high error rates when awarding SNAP benefits, and Arizona has responded by vastly increasing the paperwork applicants must file to qualify for the program in order to avoid making mistakes that could result in the loss of federal funding.
According to the Times, this has created "bureaucratic chaos" that has caused many otherwise eligible people to lose aid.
"It can take months to reach besieged caseworkers, and offices have gone as far as asking people with panhandling income for verification from strangers dropping cash in their jar," reported the Times. "Arizonans losing SNAP say they are skipping meals, quarreling over food, and missing rent payments to restock pantry shelves."
One former SNAP beneficiary featured in the Times story was Dee McDonald, a 65-year-old cancer survivor who reported skipping meals to ensure that the three grandsons she's raising have enough to eat.
According to the Times, McDonald has been scrambling from one local food pantry to another to ensure there is enough food in the house for the whole family, a process she told the paper has left her "exhausted."
“I go to sleep thinking about what are we going to have,” McDonald said.
Michael Wisehart, director of the Arizona Department of Economic Security, told the Times that it's "frankly sickening to me the number of individuals" who are suffering due to the bureaucratic hurdles the state is enacting.
However, Wisehart said that if Arizona doesn't add these bureaucratic layers, it could risk seeing its SNAP program completely destroyed.
“It’s an existential threat,” he explained. “States are absolutely contemplating a world in which SNAP isn’t available."
Another state facing this dilemma is Arkansas, which the local news station KATV reported on Monday is scrambling to lower its SNAP error rate that, under new rules, could cost the state $55 million per year.
Keesa Smith-Brantley, executive director of Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families and former deputy director of the Arkansas Department of Human Services, told KATV that the financial penalties imposed on the state could create a downward spiral in which state officials have fewer resources to effectively lower the SNAP error rate.
"It is very concerning that we may not have a SNAP program in years to come if the state can't come up with the funding," said Smith-Brantley.
A Tuesday report in Axios examined how the GOP's SNAP cuts have impacted Virginia, where 100,000 fewer residents are now enrolled in the program compared to a year ago.
Aaron McClung, chief development officer at Feed More, an umbrella organization for food banks in the central part of the state, told Axios that visits to food pantries have increased by more than 20% since the passage of the GOP budget law last year.
While food banks have tried to fill the gap, McClung said, they are no substitute for SNAP, which he described as "the nation's most effective, dignified, and scalable tool for reducing food insecurity."
Jacqueline Mott, Virginia state manager for the Save the Children Action Network, expressed a similar sentiment, telling Axios that "charitable food assistance was never designed to replace SNAP."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Rights Group Demands US Investigation Into Reported Bombing of Ecuadorian Fishing Boat
“The families of the eight individuals whose whereabouts are unknown fear that this is a case of enforced disappearance at the hands of the United States," said an advocate at Amnesty International.
Jul 21, 2026
Amnesty International is calling for a full investigation by the US government into the alleged bombing of an Ecuadorian fishing boat, the Fiorella, last January, as the family members of eight disappeared fishermen have spent months demanding answers about what happened to their loved ones in the midst of the Trump administration's boat bombing campaign in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean.
In "Operation Southern Spear," which the Trump administration has said is aimed at stopping drug trafficking from Latin America and in which at least 221 people have been killed in more than 60 bombings, US Southern Command has frequently announced strikes in the region since they began in September.
In the case of the Fiorella, the US military did not issue an announcement of a bombing after the boat "went up in smoke" on January 20, after which eight fishermen who were on board went missing in the midst of Operation Southern Spear.
Amnesty noted on Monday that in the case of two other Ecuadorian fishing vessels, Negra Francisca Duarte II and Don Maca, which were reportedly struck by drones in March and whose surviving crew members said they were captured and tortured by US forces, US Southern Command also did not publicly acknowledge the strikes, "despite reports from survivors stating that both vessels were allegedly sunk by unmanned aerial vehicles bearing markings attributed to the United States."
"If it were confirmed that the United States was responsible for the strike on the Fiorella, as well as for the strikes against the Negra Francisca Duarte II and the Don Maca, the total number of extrajudicial executions, enforced disappearances and other serious human rights violations associated with these operations could be much higher than previously estimated," said Amnesty.
The group's Evidence Lab used a vessel monitoring system to reconstruct the route covered by the Fiorella, finding the boat set sail from Jaramijó with 10 crew members on January 15.
The boat lost its internet connection shortly after setting out and went in and out of international waters, also sailing in the Galapagos Exclusive Economic Zone, between January 15-19.
"During the first days of the trip, no major incidents were reported," said Amnesty. "However, from the fourth day onwards, the Fiorella was allegedly subjected to sustained monitoring by aircraft, patrol boats and drones bearing United States markings. Juan Carlos Valencia, the fishing boat’s captain, sent daily satellite messages to his family expressing his growing concern about the surveillance."
On the morning of January 20, the boat sent two skiffs out with baited hooks, and at around 1:00 pm the two crew members on one of the boats saw "a large column of smoke in the distance in the direction of the Fiorella." The two crew members on the skiff were rescued by another fishing boat two days later, but "nothing more has been heard of the Fiorella or the second skiff since," said Amnesty.
Three months after the Fiorella disappeared following the apparent attack, the local organization Standing Committee for the Defense of Human Rights reported that the 36 crew members who had been aboard the Negra Francisca Duarte II and the Don Maca had been detained by US personnel after their boats were struck by drones, before being eventually returned to Ecuador.
Amnesty International, which met with the families of the disappeared crew members from the Fiorella, said the relatives suspect their loved ones may also have been captured and transferred to another country by the US.
“The families of the eight individuals whose whereabouts are unknown fear that this is a case of enforced disappearance at the hands of the United States," said Ana Piquer, Americas director at Amnesty International. "The US and Ecuadorian authorities must confirm or deny whether state agents from either country were involved, take all necessary steps to ascertain the fate and whereabouts of the victims, and provide reliable evidence showing what happened to them."
Family members reported that Ecuadorian officials have alluded to allegations that their loved ones were involved in drug trafficking and were therefore attacked by the US as part of Operation Southern Spear.
“The commander said to us: ‘You know what they went to do, so why are you looking for them?’" the daughter of one missing fisherman told Amnesty. "This made me really angry, and I said to him: ‘I’m here to look for my dad, all they did was go fishing. You should show some compassion and tell us the truth.’ The next day we went again [to the port authority] and they simply closed the door on us.”
The Ecuadorian Public Prosecutor's office has not submitted a formal request to the US for information to complete an investigation into the Fiorella's disappearance, said Amnesty.
“It’s as if the ship simply vanished and no one cares how it happened or what became of the people on board. Perhaps it just flew away? More than six months on from the disappearance, the Ecuadorian authorities must provide a clear account of what actions they have taken to establish the facts, what they know, what they do not know, and how they intend to address the legitimate demands of the families of those disappeared. The criminal investigation into these events must continue until those potentially responsible are identified and brought to justice,” said Piquer.
She added that "the Department of Justice and the investigative authorities of the US armed forces must investigate and establish possible criminal responsibility not only in relation to the Fiorella, but also for all other strikes on vessels on the high seas."
"Similarly, the US Congress must drive a parliamentary inquiry into this serious incident, with hearings and reports designed to establish the facts and determine the possible involvement of public agencies or private entities under its authority," she said. "In addition, all states must suspend international cooperation on intelligence and military equipment that could be used in such illegal operations."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'We Must Cut Off Funding': House Dem Readies Legal Action and New Bill to Halt Trump's Iran War
Rep. John Larson said members of Congress must "take every available legal action to end it before more Americans are killed."
Jul 21, 2026
Democratic Rep. John Larson said late Monday that he is preparing legal action against the Trump administration and a new bill to cut off funding for the US war on Iran, which was launched without congressional authorization nearly five months ago and has intensified in recent days following the collapse of a ceasefire deal.
Larson (D-Conn.) said he would file a lawsuit "challenging the administration’s continued prosecution of the war without congressional approval," pointing to President Donald Trump's cynical attempt to evade limits imposed by the War Powers Act of 1973.
"The administration’s claim that recent developments constitute a new conflict and restart what they consider to be a 60-day deadline under the War Powers Resolution is nothing more than a legally baseless attempt to evade Congress and circumvent the Constitution," Larson's office said in a press release.
The Connecticut Democrat, who has called for Trump's impeachment over the illegal war, said he would also introduce legislation aimed at prohibiting any additional federal funding for unauthorized attacks on Iran as the White House and congressional Republicans seek tens of billions more for the war—and as the Trump administration reportedly plans to widen its assault, potentially involving ground troops.
“While Speaker Mike Johnson and House Republicans continue to do Trump’s bidding instead of defending Congress' constitutional authority, more American servicemembers are paying the price with their lives," Larson said in a statement. "Congress cannot continue to sit on its hands. We must cut off funding for this illegal war and take every available legal action to end it before more Americans are killed."
Last month, the House and Senate—both controlled by Republicans—passed a resolution calling on Trump to remove US forces from conflict with Iran, but the measure lacked the force of law. The president has since reimposed a naval blockade on Iran and resumed a massive bombing campaign that, since its inception in late February, has killed thousands, wreaked havoc on the global economy, and driven up costs for Americans.
With Trump ignoring congressional war powers efforts, Democrats and advocacy organizations committed to stopping the war on Iran have shifted their focus to blocking military funding to exert pressure on Republicans and the Trump administration. Last week, Senate Democrats blocked the annual National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) over the Iran war.
The House is expected to vote on its version of the NDAA as soon as Wednesday. Republicans on the House Rules Committee rejected a proposed Democratic amendment last week that would have barred future Pentagon funds from being used for the war on Iran.
"NOBODY in Congress that passed the historic Iran War Powers Resolution should vote to give ONE CENT to Trump and Hegseth's Pentagon without a signed Iran peace deal," the advocacy group Just Foreign Policy wrote in a social media post late Monday.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump 'Raising Prices on Americans Again' With 50% Tariff on Canadian Imports
"Americans have to pay high prices because Trump doesn’t understand how wind works," quipped one critic.
Jul 20, 2026
US President Donald Trump on Monday invoked an arcane legal provision to impose 50% tariffs on most imported goods from Canada, a move that critics said will hit US consumers already reeling from an unabated cost-of-living crisis and further strain relations with the nation's second-largest trade partner.
Trump invoked Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930, an unprecedented move the White House said is aimed at "offsetting the burden and disadvantage on US commerce from Canada’s discriminatory treatment of US commerce" and "leveling the playing field for crucial American exports—cars, alcohol, and dairy."
The new tariffs exempt energy products, potash, fish, and critical minerals.
“While the administration continues to secure fair and reciprocal trade deals with our trading partners, Canada, unlike other partners and allies, continues to retaliate against the United States for its efforts to rebalance trade and protect US industry in national security-sensitive sectors,” US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said in a statement.
“Specifically, Canada has taken US alcohol products off Canadian shelves, given better market access to dairy products from the European Union, and has put a cap on US vehicle exports to Canada from companies reshoring to the United States," Greer added. "Today, President Trump took decisive action to hold Canada accountable for its retaliation and discrimination, delivering on his promise to correct trade imbalances and ensure fairness for American workers, farmers, and businesses.”
While the administration's official communications cite economic reasons for the new tariffs, Trump in recent days has repeatedly cited the Canadian wildfires as justification for the move.
“I told them. I mean, you got to stop these fires from coming in, and you know poisoning our air," Trump said of Canada on Sunday evening. "Our air has been poisoned. Maybe they should pay us some damages or something, or we should do some tariffs."
The president's linkage of the wildfires and tariffs drew widespread ridicule, with Democratic New York Gov. Kathy Hochul posting on X, "Only Donald Trump could see wildfire smoke and decide the answer is more tariffs."
Pod Save America co-host Dan Pfeiffer said on social media, "Americans have to pay high prices because Trump doesn’t understand how wind works."
According to We Pay the Tariffs, a small business coalition, Trump’s capricious tariffs have cost American businesses and consumers upward of $317 billion since March 2025.
That month, Trump imposed 25% tariffs on many Canadian goods and 10% on Canadian energy products. The administration later modified or paused some of those tariffs.
Ottawa has criticized the tariffs and rejected the US justification that Canada is unfairly restricting American products.
"I’ll never stop fighting to protect Ontario," Doug Ford, the province's right-wing premier, said in response to Trump's move. "If these tariffs proceed, Canada should respond tariff for tariff, dollar for dollar."
Some Democratic US lawmakers blasted the new tariffs.
"Trump is raising prices on Americans, again, by jacking up tariffs by 50% on Canadian goods bought by Americans," Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) said on social media. "Democrats will flip the House. And on day one of next term, Democrats will introduce legislation to repeal Trump’s disastrous tariffs. And we will pass it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Mamdani Cites ICC Warrant, Trump Says 'Netanyahu Will Not Be Arrested' in NYC
New York City's mayor reiterated Monday that his administration will "follow all applicable local laws" as he considers legal options to take against the fugitive Israeli prime minister.
Jul 20, 2026
US President Donald Trump declared Monday that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—who is wanted by the International Criminal Court for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes in Gaza—will be safe from arrest in the United States after New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani said he was exploring whether he could apprehend the fugitive during his planned visit to the United Nations in September.
"Netanyahu will not be arrested, in any way, shape, or form, while in the United States of America," Trump said on his Truth Social network.
"He is fighting against the Islamic Republic of Iran, which recently killed 52,000 innocent protestors, and has spent the last 47 years killing American Soldiers, and others," the president continued, citing a protest death claim made by opponents of the Iranian government, which said that 3,117 people were killed.
"The only ones that should be arrested," Trump added, "are the people that led Iran into this unprecedented SPIRAL OF DEATH AND DESTRUCTION, something that should have been dealt with years ago, by previous Presidents!"
The US and Israel are currently waging an illegal war of choice against Iran.
Trump's post followed weekend remarks by Mamdani, who told The New York Times that Netanyahu "belongs in The Hague," the Dutch city that's home to both the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the International Court of Justice, where a genocide case against Israel filed by South Africa in 2023 is pending.
“He’s a war criminal who has been charged by the International Criminal Court,” the mayor said. “I will follow the laws that we have here in New York City because I believe that there is an importance in following the law as a leader who presides over our city.”
"Whatever the law allows me to do in New York City, that’s what we will do, but we won’t be writing our own laws to that end," he added.
Mamdani was asked about his remarks during a Monday press conference.
"We're speaking about someone who's the subject of an International Criminal Court arrest warrant," he said of Netanyahu. "And he's the subject of this arrest warrant for alleged crimes against humanity, for war crimes, and he's the architect of the genocide against Palestinians in Gaza as Israel's prime minister. These are not facts of my personal assessment; they are facts of public record."
"And I believe that when someone is charged with an International Criminal Court warrant, it's something that should be taken seriously, whether it's Benjamin Netanyahu or it's [Russian President] Vladimir Putin, or whomever else," Mamdani added. "What I've also made clear is that my administration will follow all applicable local laws. That is our commitment."
🚨Mamdani on why he ordered review re: Netanyahu arrest:
“He's the architect of the genocide of Palestinians in Gaza as Israel's prime minister...
“If someone is charged with a warrant for by the International Criminal Court for these kinds of crimes, that's something I… https://t.co/6OfJPRJQ4u pic.twitter.com/Wee0mbID9S
— Jacob N. Kornbluh (@jacobkornbluh) July 20, 2026
Although neither the US nor Israel is an ICC member, Palestine is a state party to the Rome Statute, the treaty governing the tribunal, Articles 12 and 13 of the document say that individuals from nonsignatory nations can be held liable for crimes committed in the territory of a member state.
Article 27 of the Rome Statute also says that serving as a head of state or government, or as any elected official, "shall in no case exempt a person from criminal responsibility" before the court.
However, Article 98 of the treaty may limit governments' obligation to execute an ICC arrest warrant in certain circumstances involving officials of nonparty states.
Netanyanu and Yoav Gallant, his former defense minister, are accused of murder and forced starvation in Gaza following the October 7, 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel, the deadliest in that country's history.
Israeli forces have killed more than 73,000 Palestinians, over 21,500 of them children, in Gaza since October 2023, while wounding over 173,500 others, according to Palestinian officials. More than 2 million other Gazans have been forcibly displaced—often multiple times—starved, or sickened by the US-backed war, which UN and other experts say is a genocide.
While numerous Global South nations—particularly members of the Hague Group—and US allies including Belgium, Canada, Ireland, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, and Spain have publicly said they would enforce the warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant, other nations including France and Hungary have said they would not try to arrest the Israelis if they entered their territory.
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular