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
Blanche Is (Still) Unfit to Be Named Attorney General
Today, Senator Bill Cassidy, announced that he will vote to confirm Todd Blanche as Attorney General.
Lisa Gilbert, co-president of Public Citizen, issued the following statement in response:
“This is an appalling outcome for the rule of law. Todd Blanche is Donald Trump’s lawyer. He is committed to lawfare and Donald Trump’s political vendettas, not rule of law defense and the American people. He should not become our permanent attorney general. We are disgusted by those who are allowing his confirmation to continue.”
Public Citizen is a nonprofit consumer advocacy organization that champions the public interest in the halls of power. We defend democracy, resist corporate power and work to ensure that government works for the people - not for big corporations. Founded in 1971, we now have 500,000 members and supporters throughout the country.
(202) 588-1000LATEST NEWS
Renewables Surge Despite Trump Cuts, With Solar as Top May Power Source in 2 States
"Wind plus solar is on a tear right now," said one expert.
Aug 07, 2026
Despite the Trump administration's staunch support for the climate-wrecking fossil fuel industry and equally aggressive attacks on renewable energy, the US is generating more power from the sun and wind than ever, according to the latest figures on the matter.
Updated state-level data confirmed this week that solar generation eclipsed every other source of electricity in Utah for the first time in its history, with photovoltaic panels producing nearly 1 terawatt-hour in May. That's enough to power roughly 90,000 homes for an entire year, according to the US Department of Energy.
That amount represented nearly one-third of all electricity generated in Utah that month, according to data from the global energy think tank Ember. Natural gas generated 32% of Utah's electricity in May, while coal produced 28%, and wind 2%.
“The trend of more and more solar in Utah is wonderful news for air quality, it’s wonderful news for the climate, and it’s wonderful news for jobs and the economy,” Dan Schroeder, a physics professor at Weber State University in Ogden, told Grist in an article published on Thursday.
Meanwhile, California achieved an even more significant milestone. Solar was already the largest source of electricity generation in the Golden State. In May, solar produced 51% of California's electricity, the first time a renewable energy source generated more than half of a state's power for an entire month. Solar also outproduced natural gas in every month of 2026 through May, the last month confirmed.
Also in May, solar supplied more of the nation's electricity than coal for the first time, and solar and wind combined generated the majority of electricity in seven states and more than 30% of power in 20 states.
Good morning with good news: Solar & wind generated more than 50% of electricity in 7 US states & more than 30% in 20 states in May 2026! Top 10 S&W states:IA 67%SD 64%NM 63%CA 58.9%KS 58.3%MA 56.9%CO 51.8%VT 49%OK 48.6%ME 45.7%S&W generated 24.2% of US power in May.#energysky
[image or embed]
— John Hanger (@jrfhanger.bsky.social) August 7, 2026 at 4:42 AM
“We’re going to see milestones like this increasingly happen,” Logan Mitchell, a climate scientist and energy analyst with Utah Clean Energy, told Grist.
According to the US Energy Information Administration, approximately 51% of new utility-scale electricity generation in the United States is projected to come from the sun this year, as the nation is expected to add another 43.4 gigawatts of solar, compared to 6.3 gigawatts of natural gas generation and no new coal.
More broadly, the US produced nearly three times as much solar, wind, and geothermal power in 2025 than it did in 2016, with renewables accounting for more than 20% of the nation's power production, as shown by the recently launched State of Renewable Energy online dashboard published by Environment America Research & Policy Center and Frontier Group.
Renewables accounted for 21.4% of national retail electricity sales in 2025, up from just 8% in 2016. South Dakota led the nation by generating the equivalent of 95% of its retail electricity from wind, solar, or geothermal.
“In 2026, America is getting more power from the sun and wind than ever,” Wendy Wendlandt, president and chairwoman of Environment America Research & Policy Center, said in May. “Renewable energy is reliable, resilient, and shows up for free every day. When we replace polluting energy sources with solar and wind, it delivers a cleaner, healthier future for all Americans.”
The surge in renewables comes amid efforts by the administration of President Donald Trump—who ran on a "drill, baby, drill" energy platform during a 2024 presidential campaign generously supported by the fossil fuel industry—to boost oil, gas, and coal and roll back clean power initiatives.
At times, the Trump administration's animus toward renewables has been downright inane, like when Interior Secretary Doug Burgum—a billionaire who has personally profited from an oil lease on family land—infamously trashed solar by saying that "when the sun goes down, you have a catastrophic failure called sunset and there’s no solar energy produced," prompting some observers to question whether he's aware of batteries or how they work.
The One Big Beautiful Bill Act signed into law by Trump last year includes billions of dollars in handouts for the fossil fuel industry, boosts drilling on millions of acres of public lands, mandates oil and gas lease sales, and imposes new fees on renewable development. A report published last month by BlueGreen Alliance revealed that "23 manufacturing, clean energy, and industrial projects are already facing cancellations and delays representing at least $82.8 billion in capital investment, which could cost 111,765 jobs."
Last month, Common Dreams reported that Trump's rollback of clean energy policies will cost American consumers $650 billion in additional energy bills by 2040, based on figures from the San Francisco-based energy and climate policy think tank Energy Innovations.
Trump has also twice withdrawn the US from the Paris Agreement, rolled back Environmental Protection Agency rules, signed pro-fossil fuel executive orders—including one declaring what critics say is a "phony" energy emergency—resumed and accelerated approvals for new natural gas export terminals following a moratorium enacted during the Biden administration, and paid billions of taxpayer dollars to kill clean energy projects around the world.
The “energy emergency” has been invoked to fast-track fossil fuel permits, including for extraction projects on public lands. This, despite overwhelming evidence that burning fossil fuels is the leading driver of the climate emergency.
Still, clean energy advocates are buoyed by recent reports of rising renewables.
"Wind plus solar is on a tear right now," said Mitchell. "We may have achieved liftoff."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Each President Is a Temporary Tenant': DC Appeals Court Orders Halt to Trump Ballroom Construction
"The president has no... constitutionally assigned authority over that property."
Aug 07, 2026
A federal court on Friday ruled that President Donald Trump must halt most construction of his $400 million White House ballroom project, siding with a lower court that said it must be authorized by Congress.
“Each president is a temporary tenant, not the owner, of the White House and its executive residence,” wrote judges Patricia Millett and Bradley Garcia in a 2-1 decision for the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. "The president has no—and claims no—constitutionally assigned authority over that property."
Friday’s ruling only affects the above-ground portions of the project. The construction of a fortified underground bunker and other “national security facilities” beneath the site is allowed to continue.
Trump has already demolished the East Wing of the White House to make room for the project, which he has said will be entirely privately funded, mostly by corporate donors, many of whom had business before the executive branch. However, reporting from The Washington Post in June revealed that he had secretly planned to dip into $300 million worth of taxpayer dollars for the project.
At Trump's urging, Republicans have attempted to add $1 billion in taxpayer money to the federal budget to pay for the project's security features, but the proposal to pass it through budget reconciliation without approval from Democrats was rejected by the Senate parliamentarian.
The court's majority said it’s ruling “has nothing at all to do with whether the proposed ballroom is desirable, or not, as a matter of policy… What it does mean is that the defendants may not do so during the district court’s expeditious litigation without securing Congress’s authorization, as the Constitution and laws require.”
Brent Leggs, the CEO of the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which sued to block the ballroom’s construction in December, said Friday was “a great day for our country and for the American people’s right to voice their opinions about the historic places they cherish, including the White House.”
"The White House, a global landmark that symbolizes American identity and the ideals of democracy, belongs to the American people," he said.
Trump reacted with predictable fury on Truth Social.
"We will be immediately appealing to the United States Supreme Court," he wrote. "The Military and Secret Service are viewing this horrendous, politically motivated, and unlawful ruling as a National Security threat to our Nation in that the entire Complex is being built for the protection of our Country and, additionally, all future Presidents."
The ruling is the second blow to one of Trump’s vanity projects this week. A report by the National Park Service recently found that his planned “Arc de Trump” near the National Mall could compromise the historical significance and "integrity" of dozens of other historic landmarks.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Cassidy's Yes on Blanche Again Shows Collins Only Votes Against Trump 'When Her Vote Doesn't Matter'
"The moment Collins announced she was a no on Blanche, you knew they had the votes," said MS NOW host Chris Hayes.
Aug 07, 2026
Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana announced Friday that he would vote yes on Todd Blanche's nomination for US attorney general, rendering vulnerable Sen. Susan Collins' opposition to President Donald Trump's former personal attorney effectively meaningless.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) on Friday morning came out in opposition to Blanche's confirmation—but Cassidy hours later announced that he would vote in vote in favor of the former personal attorney to President Donald Trump.
In a speech announcing the decision, Cassidy acknowledged that Blanche—who as deputy attorney general arranged for convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell to be transferred to a minimum-security jail and who orchestrated the widely criticized $1.8 billion slush fund for Trump allies—is "not perfect."
I will support Todd Blanche for U.S. Attorney General. pic.twitter.com/PKWr3atuvA
— U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, M.D. (@SenBillCassidy) August 7, 2026
"But the choice is not between perfection and Mr. Blanche," Cassidy continued. "It is between Mr. Blanche and another acting attorney general who may not run the department effectively under President Trump, and who indeed may not be as good as Mr. Blanche."
The Louisiana Republican added that he expected to "be criticized for this vote," before adding, "What's new?"
The sequence of Collins (R-Maine) and Murkowski announcing their opposition to Blanche, only for Cassidy to clinch his confirmation shortly after, made MS NOW host Chris Hayes suspicious that the fix was in from the start.
"The moment Collins announced she was a no on Blanche," Hayes wrote, "you KNEW they had the votes."
The social media account of Susan Collins Watch, a website that has tracked the Maine Republican's voting patterns for decades, made a similar observation.
"Of the thousands of GOP nominees Susan Collins has voted on over a 29-year career, NOT ONCE has she cast a tie-breaking vote against the GOP," they wrote. "But she's cast dozens of tie-breaking votes for GOP nominees, bills, etc. Are we supposed to believe this is some quirky statistical anomaly?"
Sam Stein, reporter for The Bulwark, argued Cassidy's yes vote on Blanche "doesn't help Collins" politically, as she "will continue to be tagged with only voting against Trump when her vote doesn't matter."
Collins in 2018 was the decisive vote in favor of confirming US Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. During her speech announcing her vote for Kavanaugh, she insisted that he would uphold the precedent set by Roe v. Wade establishing the constitutional right to an abortion.
Four years later, however, Kavanaugh joined the Supreme Court majority in overturning Roe.
Former Maine state Senate President Troy Jackson, who is running against Collins as the Democratic Party's nominee for the US Senate, has highlighted the vote to confirm Kavanaugh as a major reason why she must be unseated.
“When Susan Collins was helping overturn Roe v. Wade,” Jackson said in a recent interview, “here in Maine... I co-sponsored one of the most progressive reproductive rights bills in the country—fought incredibly hard for it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Ansari Calls for Miller to Be ‘Investigated and Prosecuted’ for Illegal Push to End Birthright Citizenship
"You can crack down on visa fraud," said one observer. "You cannot have Stephen Miller stand beside the Resolute Desk and turn the 14th Amendment into a hotel checkout policy."
Aug 07, 2026
Stephen Miller, President Donald Trump's deputy White House chief of staff and the architect of much of his anti-immigration agenda over the past decade, has been fixated for years on ending birthright citizenship in the US—and one Democratic congresswoman said Thursday that his latest attempt should be the last straw.
"Stephen Miller architected the entirety of Trump’s racist and fascist mass deportation agenda, and he’s the one pushing relentlessly to end birthright citizenship—which is illegal," said Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.) after Trump and Miller announced two new executive orders related to the issue. "He needs to be investigated and prosecuted for the crimes he’s actively committing."
Weeks after the US Supreme Court—where three of the justices who make up the right-wing majority were appointed by Trump—ruled that the president's previous effort to end birthright citizenship for undocumented immigrants was unconstitutional, Trump signaled a new tactic focusing on terminating the right for the children of specific groups of people.
The first order would end automatic citizenship for children born to parents who work for foreign governments at embassies or organizations in the US, parents who "engaged in fraudulent activity to obtain citizenship," and parents who are part of designated terrorist groups or an "alien enemy."
Stephen Miller: The president is using his authority as commander in chief, to sign first an executive order using the new rule in the Supreme Court issued to expand the definitions of people who are ineligible for birthright citizenship
That includes, for example, alien enemies… pic.twitter.com/TtpWe0QYe1
— Acyn (@Acyn) August 6, 2026
The restriction would also pertain to babies who are "born in a territory or territorial waters of the United States where citizenship is not conferred by federal statute"—but eliminating birthright citizenship for children born in US territories would require congressional action, according to The New York Times.
The second order aims to crack down on what Trump called "birth tourism," with more restrictions on visitors to the US who give birth while in the country and try to obtain visas.
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, said the new executive action, like the order Trump signed to end birthright citizenship shortly after he took office last year, "seemingly violates the Constitution."
In the Oval Office at the White House late Thursday, the president cited no evidence as he claimed foreigners have obtained citizenship for their children, who numbered in the dozens.
“You have one man came in with a family... said he had 56 children," said Trump. "Another one came in. They said they had 98 children. This was not what it was for. This was meant for the babies of slaves. It was, it was right after one week or two weeks after the Civil War ended.”
Miller also emphasized that the 14th Amendment, which guarantees birthright citizenship, due process, and equal protection under the law, was meant to confer citizenship only to the children of people who had been enslaved before the Civil War ended.
But the origin of the law did not stop the Supreme Court from ruling in June that birthright citizenship is the law of the land under the US Constitution.
The president claimed "hundreds of thousands" of people in the US have benefited from birthright citizenship due to tourists giving birth in the country and the other scenarios described in the executive orders, but a study by Pennsylvania State University recently found that fewer than 0.3% of babies born in the US are born to tourists in any year.
Miller spoke during the Oval Office event, speaking out against people who "come here pretending to be a tourist... but the real reason they're here is to have a child."
Lying on a visa application in order to give birth in the US has long been illegal, Reichlin-Melnick pointed out.
Miller claimed that Section 215A of the Immigration and Nationality Act gives Trump the authority to enact the new restrictions on birthright citizenship, but even a Department of Homeland Security official who spoke anonymously to the Times said no new enforcement would come out of the birth tourism order.
The deputy chief of staff, who has also taken a leading role in orchestrating Trump's mass deportation campaign, claimed that the birth tourism order was "especially historic."
The word "historic," said writer Mike Young, was "doing a lot of work."
"You can crack down on visa fraud. You cannot have Stephen Miller stand beside the Resolute Desk and turn the 14th Amendment into a hotel checkout policy," said Young. "Birthright citizenship is not a loophole. It is the Constitution."
Immigration attorney Cyrus Mehta noted that even so-called "birth tourism" was covered in the Supreme Court's recent ruling, with Justice Samuel Alito noting that fact in his dissent.
"I expect a court to hold that most of Trump's new executive order is blatantly unconstitutional," said Mehta. "Trump is a small and petty man with a venal mind, and will be historically remembered as such down the ages, along with his henchman and collaborator Stephen Miller, who love to attack newborn children!"
Keep ReadingShow Less
'As Toxic as AIPAC': Casar Urges Dems to Reject AI Industry Money and Protect Workers
"We need to clearly be 100% on the side of workers who are vulnerable, kids who are vulnerable, everyday people who are vulnerable to mass surveillance."
Aug 07, 2026
Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar this week urged fellow Democrats to reject campaign support from artificial intelligence industry lobbyists and unveiled a bill intended to help protect workers from AI-related mass unemployment.
The Texas congressman took aim at Leading the Future (LTF), a pro-industry super political action committee (PAC), and "AI billionaires that are lobbying for no regulation," during a Thursday interview with MS NOW. He argued that "we need to clearly be 100% on the side of workers who are vulnerable, kids who are vulnerable, everyday people who are vulnerable to mass surveillance."
Casar drew a comparison to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, whose super PAC is spending millions against Democratic candidates critical of the Israeli government and its forces' genocidal violence in the Gaza Strip. He predicted that LTF and the "big anti-AI regulation donors" would soon be "as toxic as AIPAC is today."
According to AI Money Watch, a project launched in June by the progressive advocacy group Demand Progress, "LTF entered 2026 with $70 million cash on hand and operates through affiliated super PACs (Think Big PAC in New York, American Mission PAC in Texas) and a dark-money 501(c)(4) arm called Build American AI."
AI Money Watch found that the two candidates with the most LTF money spent on them so far during this cycle are both former congressional Democrats from Illinois. The group poured over $1 million into supporting Jesse Jackson Jr., who lost the primary for the 2nd District, and AIPAC-backed Melissa Bean, who beat a progressive in the state's 8th District.
LTF also spent over $1 million each on Ben McAdams, a former Democratic congressman running in Utah's 1st District, and Congressman Ritchie Torres (D-NY), who is formally endorsed by the group. Rounding out the top 5 is James Kingston, a Georgia Republican who won the 1st District primary, with over $960,000 spent on him.
Casar told MS NOW that rejecting such support could help his party earn the trust of voters: "If Democrats clearly stand with the 75% plus of Americans that want sensible AI regulations to prevent mass unemployment, mass surveillance, or mass national security risks, I think we should win over the voters... Even if it means we don't win over all the money."
Gallup found last September that 80% of US adults believe the government should prioritize "maintaining rules for AI safety and data security, even if it means developing AI capabilities at a slower rate." In March, 76% of respondents to a Americans for Responsible Innovation poll said that they had concerns about AI tools enabling unprecedented government surveillance of citizens.
A June poll conducted by Justice Research Group for Working Families Power found that 85% of working-class voters support large-scale retraining and apprenticeship programs for workers whose jobs are changed by artificial intelligence, 73% worry that AI will lead to job losses, and 62% fear the rapidly developing technology would personally affect them or people close to them.
Casar partnered with Reps. Valerie Foushee (D-NC) and Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.) on Thursday to introduce the AI Tax and Work Protection Act, a bill that would tax industry giants to fund a Work Protection Administration charged with creating jobs to offset layoffs.
"This bill says: We will not let AI billionaires get rich by putting you out of work," said Casar. "Right now, the path we are on is clear: AI will turn a couple of billionaires into trillionaires but leave millions without work. That is unacceptable. And right now, the federal government is doing nothing to protect workers from the threat of AI mass unemployment. Our bill would protect American workers by making big AI companies pay their fair share."
The bill is backed by various policy experts and advocacy organizations, including the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees; Groundwork Action; and Demand Progress Action—whose executive director, Sean Vitka, applauded Casar's "continued leadership on artificial intelligence."
"Serious, resilient proposals to address the unfolding impacts of this rapidly advancing technology are far too hard to find in Congress," said Vitka. "Some policymakers don't take AI seriously enough, and some don't understand it at all. With this legislation, Rep. Casar is instead demonstrating the kind of policymaking vision needed to meet the moments ahead."
Related legislation recently introduced by progressives in Congress includes the American AI Sovereign Wealth Fund Act proposed in June by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), which would give the public "a direct ownership stake" in the largest artificial intelligence companies in the country, and the landmark data center moratorium bill unveiled in March by Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY).
In a sign of how the public is feeling about "AI taking our jobs," data centers driving up utility bills, and "surveillance tech tracking our every move," a coalition of groups is planning a week of action from August 9-16 "to demand that our elected officials stand with the people—not Big Tech billionaires."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Author of DNC Autopsy Found Gaza Policy Hurt Harris in 2024—But Never Submitted Finding to Party Leadership
"This is all strange in ways that either suggest dishonesty or stupidity," said one critic.
Aug 07, 2026
When the Democratic National Committee at long last released its "autopsy" report on former Vice President Kamala Harris' loss in the 2024 election in May, one of the most puzzling aspects was the lack of any conclusions related to her and former President Joe Biden's support for Israel's genocide in Gaza.
Holly Otterbein of Axios reported on Thursday that the document's author, Paul Rivera, did indeed look into the issue of Gaza and found it had a role in Harris’ loss. But he did not submit the findings to the DNC for inclusion in the report. Axios did not include an explanation for that decision.
Rivera confirmed Axios’ reporting from back in February that the conclusions had been shared with the Institute for Middle East Understanding (IMEU) Policy Project, a pro-Palestinian think tank, which told the DNC that Harris’ failure to break from Biden’s policy on Israel's US-backed assault on Gaza proved a liability with progressive voters, especially in Michigan.
This news led to speculation that DNC chair Ken Martin, who had resisted calls to release the autopsy in full, was doing so to avoid publicizing findings that portrayed Israel as an albatross around the party's neck.
Rivera alleged earlier this week that Martin and top DNC brass withheld other portions of his report from public view, including a chapter criticizing the party's overreliance on “self-enriching” consultants and party operatives out of touch with voters. Rivera claims to have handed Martin a three-ring binder containing the report, but Martin denies that this occurred.
Rivera, who was fired from his advisory role at the DNC following widespread public backlash to the release of the autopsy, has since published his own 564-page report on the 2024 election, which includes several pages examining the role of Gaza.
As of Election Day 2024, more than 43,000 Palestinians had been killed, including at least 13,300 identified children, according to figures from the Gaza Ministry of Health, and protests had swept the nation demanding that Biden cut off military aid to Israel.
While Rivera's report does not conclude that Gaza alone cost Harris the election, it found that it had a clear role in alienating voters who would have otherwise supported Harris.
It found that in Michigan, one of the key swing states that handed victory to Trump, the losses in heavily Arab and Middle Eastern communities like West Bloomfield, Sterling Heights, Dearborn, Dearborn Heights, and Hamtramck, were significant.
In these communities, Harris received 30,850 fewer votes in 2024 than Biden did in 2020, while Trump gained 14,874, a swing accounting for nearly 20% of the 234,291-vote shift that handed President Donald Trump the state.
Rivera noted that the Uncommitted Movement, which garnered more than 700,000 votes nationally in the 2024 primary, originated in Dearborn, where Harris lost nearly a third of the support Biden had received in 2020. In nearby Hamtramck, her support tanked by 39% from Biden's in 2020.
Notably, many of these voters did not flock to Trump, but to Green Party candidate Jill Stein, who received more than 12,000 votes across Dearborn, Dearborn Heights, and Hamtramck.
"The political analysis is simple," Rivera wrote. "The electoral results and voting shifts in Michigan and elsewhere demonstrate the impact the crisis had on the Harris campaign."
He concluded that the issue could not simply be boiled down to "messaging" but to concrete policy.
“For many voters whose family members were displaced, subject to violence, or killed, the inability of the administration to effectively intervene was unacceptable,” he wrote. “In 2024, absent a real end to military action and restoration of civilian control in Gaza, many voters in Michigan and elsewhere would not be satisfied.”
Asked by Common Dreams to elaborate on why he did not provide these findings to the DNC, Rivera did not immediately respond to a request sent through his website’s press contact.
Zeeshan Aleem, a political columnist at MSNOW was puzzled by the decision by Rivera not to provide the Gaza findings to the DNC.
"This is all strange in ways that either suggest dishonesty or stupidity," he said. "The author of the DNC report said he did conclude that Gaza hurt Kamala, but didn’t include that finding in the report he submitted to the DNC. Why?"
The opacity and conflicting narratives surrounding the autopsy's release continue to befuddle critics and onlookers.
Dave Weigel, a political reporter at Semafor, described the idea that Gaza cost Harris votes as "a water-is-wet finding guarded like the Ark of the Covenant."
"Martin could have just admitted that, yes, this issue that got Harris protested everywhere and helped Trump win Michigan hurt the campaign," he said. "Instead, it became a secret that Holly pried loose and generated an extra year of negative stories."
The exclusion of Gaza from the official report released in May became ammunition for some commentators seeking to downplay the idea that Democrats' support for Israel is an electoral liability or to accuse the IMEU Policy Project of spinning a false narrative.
Responding to the release of Rivera's report, media critic Adam Johnson mocked those who framed it as a "conspiracy theory."
"What’s so important to understand is that anyone denying Gaza harmed Harris’ chances is a rank propagandist. Nobody believes this in good faith," he said. "Obviously it did. We can debate the degree of harm it had, but clearly it was significant and had many downstream deflating effects."
Keep ReadingShow Less
‘Like the Gestapo’: Trump-Voting Businessman Horrified After ICE Arrest of His Fiancée
"The most horrible things shouldn’t have to happen to you in order to oppose them," said one critic.
Aug 07, 2026
A Trump voter is in shock after the president's ongoing effort to conduct the largest mass deportation campaign in US history impacted him personally.
In an interview with CBS News published Thursday, Texas businessman John Gannon expressed regret for supporting President Donald Trump in the 2024 election after federal immigration officials last month detained his fiancé, a Venezuelan immigrant named Yasmin Suarez Reyes.
Gannon said that he expected that Trump's mass deportation campaign would only go after criminals who are unlawfully in the US, but instead found "they are picking up law-abiding citizens" and "destroying families, jobs."
Texas businessman John Gannon says he feels "totally betrayed" after his Venezuelan fiancée, Yasmin Suarez Reyes, was detained by ICE at Houston's international airport.
A lifelong Republican who says he voted for President Trump, Gannon told CBS News' @camiloreports he now… pic.twitter.com/7dDvGH1TrM
— CBS News (@CBSNews) August 6, 2026
Gannon, the owner of over 1,000 billboards in the US and of a hotel and restaurant in Mexico, explained that Suarez Reyes was detained in July by multiple US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents after passing through security at the George Bush Intercontinental Airport in Houston.
According to Gannon, the ICE officers "swarmed" Suarez Reyes and "wrestled her off into a car" without providing an explanation.
"This is like the Gestapo," Gannon said.
Anne Kennedy, an attorney representing Suarez Reyes, told CBS that her client entered the US legally and had a pending asylum case and had been able to get a work permit and a Texas driver's license before she was detained. Kennedy also noted that Suarez Reyes had no criminal record.
"For almost two weeks now, she has been in a physical jail cell," said Kennedy, "when she has done nothing more than follow the laws of the United States and do what our immigration laws allow her to do."
When asked by CBS what message he had for Trump, Gannon encouraged the president to "go after the criminals" but "leave the mom and pops and the kids alone."
"Man, he's destroying families," Gannon added.
Some critics expressed little empathy for Gannon's situation, however, given Trump's decades of racist attacks on immigrants.
"You voted for Trump to do this to other people," commented journalist Molly Knight. "You’re mad because he’s not doing this to 'the right people,' as defined by you."
Election forecaster Rachel Bitecofer was similarly unsympathetic, and sarcastically summed up Gannon's position as, "I only wanted other people's relatives deported!"
Gun safety activist Shannon Watts questioned why Gannon needed to be personally impacted by Trump's policies to turn against them.
"The most horrible things shouldn’t have to happen to you in order to oppose them," Watts wrote.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'How Cruel': Child Advocates Rip Trump's Plan to Gut Head Start
"This proposed rule would fundamentally alter Head Start and break the promise that America has made good on for decades to offer the children born furthest from opportunity with the best our country has to offer in early childhood education.
Aug 07, 2026
Advocates for early education and vulnerable children are denouncing a new rule issued Thursday by the administration of President Donald Trump that would severely weaken the Head Start program relied on by families and communities nationwide.
"At a time when the US faces the highest rate of child poverty of any major country, how does Mr. Trump respond?" asked Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), in response to the rule. "Instead of expanding access to early childhood education, he is moving to dismantle Head Start and the standards that keep its 700,000 kids safe. How cruel."
Head Start—created as a federal program in 1965 and "designed to prepare America’s most vulnerable young children to succeed in school and in life beyond school"—has been an ongoing target of the Trump administration, which has moved to eviscerate the program's funding and voiced support for scrapping it completely.
Speaking with NPR, journalist Coral Davenport, who reports for the New York Times, explained that early childhood educators fear the changes being proposed represent the most sweeping changes—more like "erasure" than "reforms"—to the program since its founding:
The Trump administration is proposing a major overhaul of Head Start, with new guidelines that could fundamentally change how the program is run nationwide.
Launched in 1965 as part of President Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty, Head Start serves 700,000 children ages three to… pic.twitter.com/YsDgM4OzX7
— PBS News (@NewsHour) August 6, 2026
The Children's Defense Fund (CDF) warns that the new rule, published in the federal register by the US Department of Health and Human Services, represents a new attack on Head Start that would "dismantle the program from the inside out."
The rule, according to the CDF, will result in the "stripping away of most of the quality standards that define what children and families actually receive" when they are part of the program, "including the requirements that ensure children are safe and supported, that hold programs accountable to the families they serve, and that guarantee the comprehensive services children need to arrive at kindergarten ready to learn."
In a letter stating their opposition to the attack, CDF—joined by EdTrust, Legal Defense Fund, NAACP, National Center for Learning Disabilities, National Urban League, The Arc, and UnidosUS—warned that Head Start "will exist in name only, offering unequal services based on where the child lives," if the rule is finalized.
According to the coalition:
The proposal strips away most of the quality standards that define what services children and families actually receive, including the requirements that ensure children are safe and supported, that hold programs accountable to the families they serve, and that guarantee the comprehensive services children need to arrive at kindergarten ready to learn. We urge the administration to withdraw it.
Over the past year, the administration has delayed funding that programs depend on to keep their doors open, cut the federal staff who support them, and proposed eliminating Head Start entirely. Each of these moves has created uncertainty for the providers who run these programs and the families who count on them. We oppose this latest attack on Head Start, which will harm the children and families the program was built to serve.
The signers of the letter called on the administration to rescind its proposal and said Congress must "stand behind Head Start and reject these changes so that we maintain the promise of Head Start for future generations."
Democratic lawmakers in the US House and Senate joined Sanders in slamming the move.
"Trump is trying to destroy Head Start—and he's hoping you won't notice," said Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.). "He's gutting basic standards and protections for over 700,000 kids, after he already tried and failed to defund the program altogether. We need to speak up and SAVE Head Start."
Trump is trying to destroy Head Start—and he's hoping you won't notice.
He's gutting basic standards & protections for over 700,000 kids, after he already tried and failed to defund the program altogether.
We need to speak up and SAVE Head Start. pic.twitter.com/zDgGqFxVaC
— Senator Patty Murray (@PattyMurray) August 6, 2026
"Head Start is not just preschool," said Rep. Mike Levin (D-Calif.) in a social media post. "For hundreds of thousands of children from low-income families, it is where they learn to read, receive basic health screenings, get support for disabilities, and begin kindergarten with a real chance to succeed."
The regulations that govern Head Start, which Trump's HHS now wants to eliminate, said Levin, "are the difference between children getting the care and support they need or being left to fall through the cracks. Why on earth would anyone want to take that away from them?"
As Murray noted, "this rule is not final," meaning there remain avenues to defeat it.
When a previous Trump memo detailing the desire to eliminate Head Start leaked, said Murray, "we got loud and he backed off. We can protect Head Start again, but it's going to take all of us speaking up and taking a stand for our kids."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Trump Is Tanking the US Economy': Dismal Report Shows 23,000 Jobs Lost, Slowing Wage Growth
"However the White House tries to spin these numbers, their talking points ring hollow for people who are actually experiencing Trump’s weak economy."
Aug 07, 2026
Federal data released Friday shows the US economy shed 23,000 jobs last month, but one analyst said that figure was "only the beginning of the bad news" for the country's job market under the leadership of President Donald Trump.
"This is a bleak jobs report," said Heather Long, the chief economist at Navy Federal Credit Union, noting that the unemployment rate fell slightly in July—but primarily because more people left the labor force—and year-over-year hourly wage growth slowed to 3.2%, not keeping up with inflation.
Breyon Williams, the Groundwork Collaborative's top economist, said in response to the new Labor Department numbers that "regardless of having a job or not, everyone is paying high prices from Trump’s chaotic tariffs and war with Iran."
"Today’s report shows a patchwork economy that is fraying at the seams," said Williams. "Trump’s economic mismanagement has injected so much uncertainty into the economy that employers are not confident enough to add more people, but also have not initiated massive layoffs, creating a frozen job market where those with jobs are afraid to leave them and those without are stuck on the sidelines."
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) wrote on social media that "Trump is tanking the US economy."
In addition to the loss of 23,000 jobs last month—far worse than forecasters' expectation of an increase of 80,000 jobs—the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) revised job growth downward for both May and June. BLS said job growth in May was actually 20,000 (down from the earlier estimate of 57,000), and job growth in June was 63,000 (down from 129,000). The healthcare sector has accounted for a disproportionate share of US employment growth this year.
"This economy is running on fumes," said Angela Hanks, a former Labor Department official who now works as chief of policy programs at The Century Foundation. "However the White House tries to spin these numbers, their talking points ring hollow for people who are actually experiencing Trump’s weak economy."
White House spin efforts began almost immediately after the release of the new figures.
Kevin Hassett, director of the National Economic Council, claimed during a Fox Business appearance that the dismal job numbers were a testament to the success of Trump's mass deportation campaign, even though the largest job losses in July occurred in state and local government.
"Because we have a tight border and because we've been deporting folks who aren't citizens, then that puts downward pressure on what the sort of breakeven job number is," said Hassett.
Speaking to reporters outside the White House, Hassett also blamed the "end of the World Cup," which "meant that a lot of hospitality workers were then laid off."
Kevin Hassett thinks Americans are very very stupid. This spin is ridiculous, transparent BS. pic.twitter.com/h0qX7c8fbI
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) August 7, 2026
"Is this the ‘Golden Age’ that Donald Trump and JD Vance keep talking about?" asked Kendall Witmer, the Democratic National Committee's rapid response director, following publication of the BLS report. "Trump’s disastrous economic agenda has caused irreparable damage to the job market, as layoffs mount and it’s nearly impossible to find a job."
"Working families are already drowning under the weight of skyrocketing costs on everyday goods like groceries, gas, and healthcare, and their paychecks aren’t keeping up," said Witmer. "Americans are barely keeping their heads above water—and Trump can’t even be bothered to care."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Stand for Something!' All Eyes on Cassidy After Murkowski Says She's a No on Blanche
"This vote offers one last shot to use his power to do what he knows is right."
Aug 07, 2026
Attention turned to Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy on Friday after his colleague, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, announced her opposition to confirming President Donald Trump's former personal lawyer Todd Blanche as US attorney general, leaving the GOP without any additional votes to spare.
With Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) expected to be absent and Sens. Murkowski and Susan Collins (R-Maine) planning to vote no, Cassidy (La.)—who lost reelection in May to a Trump-backed challenger—is seen as the last-remaining obstacle to confirming Blanche. The Trump lackey is currently leading the Justice Department in an acting capacity.
Murkowski said in a statement that she decided to oppose Blanche's confirmation because of the Justice Department's "handling of the release of the Epstein files; the sweeping immunity protections granted to the President, his family, and their businesses; the statements that have been made to anti-abortion groups; and the repeated targeting of individuals ranging from former administration staff to sitting US senators."
“I am also keenly aware that the Department’s nearly $2-billion dollar slush fund—which likely would have rewarded January 6 protesters—is only off the table because this nomination is pending and the Senate has leverage. Once we vote, that will end, and there is no telling what the future holds," the Republican senator added. “The country needs an attorney general who will check the worst impulses of this administration. I hope Mr. Blanche is able to achieve that, if confirmed, but I simply do not have confidence that will be the case.”
Cassidy met with Blanche earlier this week but has not indicated publicly how he intends to vote. Republicans were hoping to confirm Blanche before senators leave for August recess on Friday.
In an interview earlier this week, Cassidy said that he has to be convinced that Blanche "is an attorney general who just happens to have once been President Trump’s personal attorney, as opposed to President Trump’s personal attorney who is now the attorney general."
"I think there’s a big difference between the two," the Louisiana senator.
Cassidy has repeatedly drawn Trump's ire since voting to convict him in 2021 for inciting the January 6 insurrection. Earlier this year, Cassidy reportedly got into a shouting match with Trump over the Iran war after the Republican senator voted to advance a war powers resolution that sought to bring the illegal conflict to an end.
But in some cases, Cassidy has aided the administration. In February, for instance, the Louisiana Republican cast the deciding vote to confirm Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as head of the Health and Human Services Department. Cassidy, a physician, has since criticized Kennedy's leadership of the health department.
Sarah Longwell, a former Republican and publisher of The Bulwark, wrote Friday that "considering his disastrous decision to confirm RFK and Trump’s attacks against him in the primary, this vote offers one last shot [for Cassidy] to use his power to do what he knows is right."
"For God’s sake man, stand for something!" Longwell added.
If Cassidy announces his opposition, it's possible that Republicans will try to summon McConnell to cast the deciding vote on Blanche.
McConnell was hospitalized in June after a fall, according to his office. On Thursday, McConnell said he was discharged and planned to continue his recovery at home.
McConnell's primary residence is in Washington, DC.
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular