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
Musk's Takeover Is a Huge Step Backward for Twitter
According to press reports on Monday, Twitter's board of directors unanimously accepted the terms of Elon Musk's $44-billion bid to buy out the company's shareholders and take the platform private.
WASHINGTON
According to press reports on Monday, Twitter's board of directors unanimously accepted the terms of Elon Musk's $44-billion bid to buy out the company's shareholders and take the platform private.
Prior to finalizing his offer, Musk had tweeted and discussed his plans to "transform" the social network and make "significant improvements" to the ways it manages content. A self-described free-speech absolutist, Musk has a troubling history of using the social-media network to intimidate and disparage others, including journalists, elected officials, owners of competing businesses and anyone else who might challenge his views.
Last week, Free Press and its allies in the Change the Terms coalition launched the "Fix the Feed" campaign. The initiative plans to convene high-level meetings with executives at Meta, TikTok, Twitter and YouTube, urging them to adopt core recommendations to curb the amplification of hateful, violent, misleading and false content across their platforms. Change the Terms is calling on the networks to immediately make these essential changes in all languages and enforce them in the runup to the 2022 midterms and beyond.
Free Press Co-CEO Jessica J. Gonzalez said:
"Musk hasn't just purchased another expensive play toy, but a global online community that includes about 330 million regular users. With control of such a massive platform comes great responsibility -- and Musk hasn't shown he has the capacity to be accountable to this diverse online community.
"For one, he hasn't demonstrated that he's able or interested in protecting other Twitter users or respecting their free-speech rights. Rather, he's used the platform to attack people, often launching childish broadsides against anyone he doesn't like or agree with. And he's regularly rallied a Twitter mob of loyal fans to follow his lead with more vicious threats and bullying.
"For years, Free Press and the Change the Terms coalition have pressured Twitter to be more accountable about its moderation methods. This work includes fixing Twitter algorithms and other systems that promote the most misleading and hateful content, protecting its users equally regardless of where they live and what language they speak, and being more transparent about the social network's amplification and moderation practices.
"Protecting everyone's ability to participate and speak on online platforms requires careful moderation. Musk taking the company private will likely threaten this notion and make the platform even more toxic to its users and the public.
"With or without Musk at the helm, Twitter must take a series of actions outlined by the Fix the Feed campaign to correct known failures at the company and do right by Twitter users. The platform must continue efforts to stop amplifying bigotry and conspiracy theories that pollute public discourse, threaten the health and safety of users and undermine democracy.
"The success of any mass-market network requires making sure that users feel safe on the platform and don't feel threatened by others. The leader of any social-media platform must take action against things like glorification and incitement of violence; the spread of disinformation, sexual harassment and abuse; and other hateful activities. These protections are essential for all platform users and not just a few prominent and powerful influencers like Musk.
"This deal has to be about more than making shareholders happy. It should be about protecting civil and human rights, public health and safety and our democracy. We will fight to ensure that Musk prioritizes these vital principles."
Free Press was created to give people a voice in the crucial decisions that shape our media. We believe that positive social change, racial justice and meaningful engagement in public life require equitable access to technology, diverse and independent ownership of media platforms, and journalism that holds leaders accountable and tells people what's actually happening in their communities.
(202) 265-1490LATEST NEWS
Alarm Grows Over Vought Plan to Give Trump Cronies Control of Federal Grant Money
"The test will be a simple one: Are you sufficiently loyal to the president? If the answer is no, it will result in the denial of lifesaving disaster relief, funding for research into cures, the closure of Head Start offices, and more."
Jun 13, 2026
A Trump White House plan to give political appointees more power over federal grant money has sparked alarm among scientists, public health organizations, environmental groups, and others who fear that the proposal amounts to an attempt to subordinate critical funds to the whims of the president and his far-right allies.
More than 300 organizations signed a joint letter on Friday calling on White House budget director Russell Vought, the proposed rule's architect, to extend the public comment period that's set to end on July 13, warning that the "scope and impact of [the Office of Management and Budget's] rule is vast."
"The rule will impact the entirety of government grant-making across the United States," the groups warned. "OMB itself says the revisions suggested would relate to over $179 billion of funds to small entities."
Politico, which exclusively obtained the letter, noted that the "proposed rule has already garnered over 15,000 public comments, with many expressing alarm that the changes could undermine research across fields."
Under Vought's rule, federal agencies would be required to perform "pre-issuance reviews" of federal grants—funds appropriated by Congress—to ensure their distribution is consistent with "applicable law, federal agency priorities, and the national interest."
The rule lays out a number of standards that political appointees at federal agencies must screen for when deciding whether an organization can receive federal grant dollars. For instance, the rule would prohibit the distribution of federal grants to organizations that "promote anti-American values" or support "ideologies that deny the biological reality of sex or the sex binary in humans."
The New York Times reported that the consequences of Vought's rule "could fall hardest on health and science, a field in which [President Donald Trump] has pursued some of the steepest cuts in his second term."
"In exchange for federal assistance, researchers would face limits on the subjects that they can explore, the foreign labs with which they may collaborate and even the conferences at which they can appear," the Times noted. "Dr. Georges C. Benjamin, the chief executive of the American Public Health Association, a professional organization and advocacy group, said the policy could 'devastate innovation, science, and research' in the United States."
"This is an executive power grab that would hand presidential political appointees unchecked control over more than a trillion dollars that Congress appropriated in the interests of all Americans."
Earlier this month, Lawyers for Good Government and the Environmental Protection Network said that "if finalized, the rule would put senior political appointees in charge of approving and canceling individual grants, while stripping recipients of due process rights" while attaching "ideological conditions to nearly every federal dollar, raising First Amendment and equal-protection concerns."
The two organizations published a fact sheet warning that the proposed rule has the potential to halt billions of dollars in funding that communities across the US depend on for "health, public education, scientific research, public safety, and economic development projects."
“This is an executive power grab that would hand presidential political appointees unchecked control over more than a trillion dollars that Congress appropriated in the interests of all Americans,” said Jillian Blanchard, senior vice president for climate change and environmental justice at Lawyers for Good Government. “Conditioning funding for critical programs on ideology and viewpoint discrimination, while erasing basic due-process protections, violates freedoms of speech, equal protection, and eviscerates Congress’ power of the purse.”
Democratic lawmakers have also sounded the alarm about Vought's proposal. Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, said Thursday that she has given her Republican colleagues two opportunities to denounce Vought's rule—and they declined both times.
"Vought continues to attempt to steal from communities across the country. Now, he is trying to set a new political test on grants for a wide swath of the federal government," said DeLauro. "The test will be a simple one: Are you sufficiently loyal to the president? If the answer is no, it will result in the denial of lifesaving disaster relief, funding for research into cures, the closure of Head Start offices, and more. If you are not loyal enough, if you speak out against this administration, the president and his cronies will take away resources Congress provided."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Democratic Lawmakers Condemn Trump Effort to 'Tip the Scales' in Colombia Election
"The future of Colombia must be decided by the Colombian people—not American politicians with their own agenda."
Jun 13, 2026
A group of Democratic members of the US Congress on Friday condemned President Donald Trump and Republican lawmakers' attempts to influence the results of Colombia's upcoming presidential runoff, calling it an "insult" to the Colombian people's sovereignty.
"We see actions by US President Donald Trump and other members of Congress to endorse, advocate for, or otherwise tip the scales to a particular candidate as detrimental to the democratic rights of the Colombian people," said the lawmakers, led by Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.). "The future of Colombia must be decided by the Colombian people—not American politicians with their own agenda."
The statement came days after Trump publicly injected himself into Colombia's presidential contest by endorsing far-right candidate Abelardo De La Espriella, a 47-year-old defense lawyer who has pledged to "disembowel the left."
“The results of this Election are very important to the future of Colombia and its relationship to the United States,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post earlier this month. “Because of his tremendous accomplishments in life, and his political support for me, personally, it is my Honor to give Abelardo my Complete and Total Endorsement.”
The US president said that if De la Espriella wins, he "will have the total support and strength of the United States behind him."
The Center for Economic and Policy Research noted that "the implicit threat in Trump’s endorsement of De la Espriella is that Colombians will be punished—through reduced aid, tariffs, sanctions, etc.—if they vote for a political leader not backed by the United States."
Two Republican lawmakers, Rep. María Salazar of Florida and Sen. Bernie Moreno of Ohio, have also endorsed De la Espriella. The New York Times reported that "before Mr. Trump posted his full-throated endorsement of Mr. De La Espriella, Mr. Moreno held a call with reporters in which he said US officials had 'vetted' Mr. De La Espriella and found him to be 'impeccable.'"
De la Espriella will face leftist Sen. Iván Cepeda, an ally of incumbent President Gustavo Petro, in the June 21 presidential runoff.
Petro has criticized his US counterpart for meddling in Colombia's presidential race, urging Trump in a recent social media post to "not intervene in the campaign and allow the people of Colombia to decide freely."
"Whoever wins will maintain the friendship of more than two centuries between Colombia and the US," Petro added.
Earlier this week, Petro planned to meet with New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani during the Colombian leader's trip to the US, but "the Trump administration effectively nixed it in a behind-the-scenes effort," The Washington Post reported.
"The Colombian government quietly called off the event following a meeting between US and Colombian officials in Bogotá in which State Department officials made clear that this week’s engagement was unacceptable, a move Colombian officials interpreted as a threat to arrest Petro on site if he proceeded," the newspaper revealed. "A State Department official told The Washington Post that the visit would violate visa restrictions the US imposed against Petro following his comments last year criticizing US support of Israel’s war in Gaza and imploring US soldiers to disobey presidential orders to kill."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'More Lawless, Performative Killing': Trump Says US Strike Executes Alleged Leader of Venezuelan Gang
"Outside of armed conflict, premeditated killing is referred to as murder," said one expert.
Jun 13, 2026
US President Donald Trump and Pentagon Secretary Pete Hegseth announced in social media posts late Friday that American forces, in coordination with Venezuelan authorities, killed the alleged leader of the Tren de Aragua gang in a strike on a compound inside Venezuelan territory.
"At my direction, the United States Southern Command delivered a swift and lethal kinetic strike to successfully execute Niño Guerrero, the infamous leader of Tren de Aragua," the president wrote on his Truth Social platform, posting what appears to be footage of the strike. Hegseth later specified that the attack took place inside Venezuela earlier this week and that Héctor Rusthenford Guerrero Flores—known as Niño Guerrero—was "confirmed killed."
The strike that purportedly killed Guerrero, whom the US Justice Department charged last year with multiple crimes including "facilitating acts of terrorism," came in the context of the Trump administration's broader, deadly military campaign in South America and off its coast. Dozens of US bombings of boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific Ocean since last September have killed more than 200 people—including possible victims of human trafficking—with the stated goal of stemming the flow of drugs to the US (an objective that experts say has not been achieved).
Leading human rights organizations have characterized the boat bombings as "murder."
Brian Finucane, senior adviser to the US Program at the International Crisis Group, called the strike that allegedly killed Guerrero Flores "more lawless, performative killing by the Trump administration."
"Outside of armed conflict, premeditated killing is referred to as murder," Finucane wrote on social media. "There is no indication this strike occurred in an armed conflict. Including because, as best we can tell, TdA doesn't constitute an 'organized armed group.'"
The government of Venezuela, whose president was kidnapped by US forces earlier this year, issued a statement confirming its involvement in the strike this week.
“During the operation, clashes occurred with members of criminal groups, resulting in the death of Héctor Rusthenford Guerrero Flores, alias ‘Niño Guerrero,’ the leader of one of these criminal organizations,” the statement reads.
It was not immediately clear if others were killed in the military attack.
"We extend our gratitude to the Venezuelan security forces for their support to the successful joint operation against a Tren de Aragua compound that resulted in the death of the narco-terrorist organization’s leader," said Gen. Francis Donovan, the head of the US Southern Command.
The Associated Press noted that "Trump and administration officials have consistently blamed Tren de Aragua for being at the root of the violence and illicit drug dealing that plague some US cities."
"The president spent months repeating the claim—contradicted by a declassified U.S. intelligence assessment—that Tren de Aragua had operated under Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro’s control," the AP added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular