

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


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

Arielle Swernoff, arielle@stopthemoneypipeline.com
Resolutions a “litmus test” for investors
This coming Tuesday, April 25, shareholders at Citi, Wells Fargo, and Bank of America, the second, third, and fourth largest global funders of fossil fuels, respectively, will vote on climate and Indigenous rights resolutions at their annual shareholder meetings. These three banks have provided over $789 billion in financing to fossil fuel companies since 2016.
Shareholders at Citi, Wells Fargo, and Bank of America will be voting on four resolutions related to climate and Indigenous rights. Those resolutions include:
· Fossil Fuel Phase Out: Calls on banks to adopt a time-bound phase-out of financing for projects and companies engaged in fossil fuel expansion. Filed at Citigroup, Bank of America, and Wells Fargo. A version of this resolution was filed last year at the same companies, and received 12.8% support at Citi and 11% support at Bank of America and Wells Fargo.
· Indigenous Rights Report: Filed at Citigroup, this resolution urges the company to issue a report on the efficacy of their current practices in ensuring their financing respects internationally-recognized standards for respecting Indigenous rights. A version of this resolution was filed last year at Citi and Wells Fargo, where it received 34% and 26%, respectively.
· Absolute Emissions Targets: Filed by New York City and New York State at Bank of America, these resolutions call on the banks to set absolute emission reduction targets. Banks currently use Intensity-based targets, which allow them to increase the amount of greenhouse gas emissions financed so long as the emissions per dollar or per unit goes down; absolute targets require companies to decrease emissions funded overall.
· 2030 Transition Plan: Filed at Bank of America and Wells Fargo, these resolutions urge the respective banks to publish a comprehensive plan detailing how they will meet their 2030 climate targets.
Significance of the Results
Shareholder voting is not like a Presidential election; the outcomes and impacts of the vote carry different weight. In the US the results of shareholder votes are non-binding. Resolutions that receive more than 50% of the vote are not automatically adopted, nor are those which fail to receive a majority vote considered a failure. Votes represent capital and power. Votes in support of climate resolutions at Citi, Bank of America and Wells Fargo last year, which received 11-13% support, represent tens of billions of dollars in shareholder equity.
It’s also worth noting that the largest bank shareholders are other Wall Street institutions and other banks. For example, asset managers Vanguard, Blackrock, and State Street, and banks JP Morgan Chase and Morgan Stanley, hold over 24% of shares at Citi. If these companies are trying to block accountability by shareholders at their own annual general meetings, they are hardly going to support similar resolutions at Citi’s.
Grassroots Action
On April 5, Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) – now the world’s #1 fossil fuel financing bank of 2022 – harassed and segregated Black and Indigenous land defenders at its AGM in Saskatoon, and dodged accountability for its financing of toxic fossil fuel projects including the Coastal GasLink fracked gas pipeline through unceded Wet’suwet’en Hereditary territory without consent from the rightful titleholders.
Citi, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and Goldman Sachs are expected to face intense grassroots protest over their fossil fuel financing and violations of Indigenous rights in the lead up to the AGMs. Groups in New York City, Charlotte, San Francisco and Dallas have announced their intention to shut down the headquarters of the three banks leading up to the AGM.
“Hiding behind “green” lingo and playing at hapless, innocent lender of billions to the fossil fuel industry is the kind of BS that got us to full-on climate crisis. Our actions have consequences. Funding the destruction of what remains is unconscionable. Indigenous peoples are on frontlines all over the earth, bringing the voice of nature to those who have forgotten and threatening big oil profit margins.” said Tara Houska, Giniw Collective. “Respect Indigenous rights, respect our only home. For our children and yours.”
“It’s despicable, in this time of extreme flooding, droughts, and fires, that the likes of Citibank continue to be the top financiers of fossil fuels in the world,” said Amy Gray, Senior Climate Finance Strategist with Stand.earth, and coordinator of the Climate Safe Pensions Network. “They clearly don’t care about communities, particularly Black and Indigenous communities facing the brunt of climate chaos. While bank executives greenwash and lie about supporting coal, oil and gas companies transitioning, big oil is raking in record profits and increasing pollution. It's time for shareholders, especially public pension funds, to wield voting power for Indigenous sovereignty and climate action."
"There is no more time for banks to delay addressing the urgent demands of frontline communities and climate science,” said Ernesto Archila, Strategy and Engagement Manager at the Rainforest Action Network. “This year's crop of resolutions demonstrate that a critical mass of investors are demanding clear limits and reporting on fossil fuel financing and indigenous rights. These responsible investors are not fooled by the continuous greenwashing and evasion we have seen from the banks, to the tune of $5.5 trillion in financing for fossil fuels since the Paris Agreement was signed."
“As communities of color are literally fighting for our lives on the frontlines of the climate crisis, U.S banks continue funding the fossil fuel industry. These banks target communities, like mine, treating us as collateral damage to corporate profiteering. By funding the fossil fuel industry these banks are also funding environmental racism and climate chaos. Our communities don’t have clean air or drinkable water. Our children have asthma and eczema. Our elders are dying of cancer and other health issues caused by methane and other pollutants being emitted. Enough is enough.” Said Roishetta Ozane, founder, director and CEO of The Vessel Project of Louisiana and Gulf Fossil Finance Coordinator for Texas Campaign for the Environment.
“Wall Street banks continue to sacrifice Black and Indigenous communities for profit. At some point the people who lead these banks will have to decide what is more important: their children’s future & the future of our planet, or another dollar in their pocket. History will judge us all by the actions we take today,” said Michael Esealuka, organizer with Healthy Gulf and True Transition
“Indigenous communities have bore the brunt of energy colonization. From the exploitation of traditional homelands, forced removal, pollution, the exploitation of resources, forced labor and the crisis of missing and murdered Indigenous peoples, financial are not only complicit in these human and environmental rights abuses, but are directly financing it,” said Matt Remle (Lakota), co-founder of Mazaska Talks. “Financial institutions can, and must, do better.”
“Banks’ financing decisions have a significant outcome on whether the world will meet its climate goals. It is imperative for banks to adopt science-based policies that translate to real-world emissions reductions. They cannot hide behind accounting tricks to shield themselves and their shareholders from climate-related financial risks,” said Jessye Waxman, Senior Campaign Representative at the Sierra Club. “Prudent investors recognize the threats climate change poses to our economy and to their investments, and will support these resolutions that help shield banks from future risk.”
“As shareholders consider resolutions on climate and Indigenous rights, we’re organizing grassroots protests at Citi, Bank of America, and Wells Fargo in order to give them a glimpse into the destruction people are experiencing because of climate chaos,” said Alice Hu, Lead Climate Campaigner at New York Communities for Change. “Banks like Citi like to say verbally that they are funding the energy transition, but in reality it’s business as usual: pumping money into the fossil fuels driving worsening extreme weather, droughts, and food shortages that hit working class communities of color like ours the worst.”
The Stop the Money Pipeline coalition is over 160 organizations strong holding the financial backers of climate chaos accountable.
"I will give," said the Republican mega-donor with a smile.
Billionaire Miram Adelson on Tuesday night suggested the legal obstacles for President Donald Trump to serve an additional term in office after 2028 are not insurmountable as the far-right Republican megadonor vowed another $250 million to bolster a run that experts say would be unlawful and unconstitutional on its face.
Adelson, a hardline Zionist who, along with her now deceased husband, Sheldon Adelson, has given hundreds of millions to US lawmakers who back a strong relationship between the US and Israeli governments, was sharing the podium with Trump during a Hanukkah candlelighting event at the White House when she made the remarks.
With a reference to Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, Adelson said they had discussed "the legal thing of four more years"—something Trump has repeatedly gestured toward and many of his backers have called for—and told Trump, “So, we can do it, think about it.”
A chant in the crowd then broke out for "For four more years!" as Adelson whispered something in Trump's ear.
“She said, ‘Think about it, I’ll give you another $250 million,’” Trump then said into the microphone. "I will give," Adelson said with a smile.
Watch the exchange:
Adelson: I met Alan Dershowitz.. he said.. four more years. We can do it. Think about it.
Crowd: *chants four more years*
Trump: She said think about it, I’ll give you another 250 million pic.twitter.com/eOc7Zazyns
— Acyn (@Acyn) December 17, 2025
For Trump's 2024 presidential campaign alone, Adelson gave at least $100 million to support the Republican candidate with Super PAC she established, according to federal filings.
In his remarks on Tuesday, Trump credited Adelson with providing him $250 million overall—"directly and indirectly"—during his 2024 bid.
"When someone can you $250 million, I think that we should give her the opportunity to say hello," Trump said, when introducing her. "And Miriam, make it quick, because $250 million is not what it used to be."
"This is the Iraq War 2.0 with a South American flavor to it," warned one Democratic senator.
US President Donald Trump late Tuesday declared a blockade on "all sanctioned oil tankers" approaching and leaving Venezuela, a major escalation in what's widely seen as an accelerating march to war with the South American country.
The "total and complete blockade," Trump wrote on his social media platform, will only be lifted when Venezuela returns to the US "all of the Oil, Land, and other Assets that they previously stole from us."
"Venezuela is completely surrounded by the largest Armada ever assembled in the History of South America," Trump wrote, referring to the massive US military buildup in the Caribbean. "It will only get bigger, and the shock to them will be like nothing they have ever seen before."
The government of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, which has mobilized its military in response to the US president's warmongering, denounced Trump's comments as a "grotesque threat" aimed at "stealing the riches that belong to our homeland."
The US-based anti-war group CodePink said in a statement that "Trump’s assertion that Venezuela must 'return' oil, land, and other assets to the United States exposes the true objective" of his military campaign.
"Venezuela did not steal anything from the United States. What Trump describes as 'theft' is Venezuela’s lawful assertion of sovereignty over its own natural resources and its refusal to allow US corporations to control its economy," said CodePink. "A blockade, a terrorist designation, and a military buildup are steps toward war. Congress must act immediately to stop this escalation, and the international community must reject this lawless threat."
The announced naval blockade—an act of aggression under international law—came a week after the Trump administration seized an oil tanker off the coast of Venezuela and made clear that it intends to intercept more.
US Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Texas), one of the leaders of a war powers resolution aimed at preventing the Trump administration from launching a war on Venezuela without congressional approval, said Tuesday that "a naval blockade is unquestionably an act of war."
"A war that the Congress never authorized and the American people do not want," Castro added, noting that a vote on his resolution is set for Thursday. "Every member of the House of Representatives will have the opportunity to decide if they support sending Americans into yet another regime change war."
"This is absolutely an effort to get us involved in a war in Venezuela."
Human rights organizations have accused the Republican-controlled Congress of abdicating its responsibilities as the Trump administration takes belligerent and illegal actions in international waters and against Venezuela directly, claiming without evidence to be combating drug trafficking.
Last month, Senate Republicans—some of whom are publicly clamoring for the US military to overthrow Maduro's government—voted down a Venezuela war powers resolution. Two GOP senators, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, joined Democrats in supporting the resolution.
Dylan Williams, vice president for government affairs at the Center for International Policy, wrote Tuesday that "the White House minimized Republican 'yes' votes by promising that Trump would seek Congress’ authorization before initiating hostilities against Venezuela itself."
"Trump today broke that promise to his own party’s lawmakers by ordering a partial blockade on Venezuelan ships," wrote Williams. "A blockade, including a partial one, definitively constitutes an act of war. Trump is starting a war against Venezuela without congressional authorization."
Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) warned in a television appearance late Monday that members of the Trump administration are "going to do everything they can to get us into this war."
"This is the Iraq War 2.0 with a South American flavor to it," he added. "This is absolutely an effort to get us involved in a war in Venezuela."
"Obviously, they have issues with what is in that video, and that’s why they don’t want everybody to see it," Sen. Mark Kelly said of administration officials after the meeting.
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Tuesday that the Pentagon will not release unedited video footage of a September airstrike that killed two men who survived an initial strike on a boat allegedly carrying drugs in the Caribbean Sea, a move that followed a briefing with congressional lawmakers described by one Democrat as an "exercise in futility" and by another as "a joke."
Hegseth said that members of the House and Senate Armed Services committees would be given a chance to view video of the September 2 "double-tap" strike, which experts said was illegal like all the other boat bombings. The secretary did not say whether all congressional lawmakers would be provided access to the footage.
“Of course we’re not going to release a top secret, full, unedited video of that to the general public,” Hegseth told reporters following a closed-door briefing during which he and Secretary of State Marco Rubio fielded questions from lawmakers.
As with a similar briefing earlier this month, Tuesday's meeting left some Democrat attendees with more questions than answers.
“The administration came to this briefing empty-handed,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) told reporters. “If they can’t be transparent on this, how can you trust their transparency on all the other issues swirling about in the Caribbean?”
That includes preparations for a possible attack on oil-rich Venezuela, which include the deployment of US warships and thousands of troops to the region and the authorization of covert action aimed at toppling the government of longtime Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.
Tuesday's briefing came as House lawmakers prepare to vote this week on a pair of war powers resolutions aimed at preventing President Donald Trump from waging war on Venezuela. A similar bipartisan resolution recently failed in the Senate.
Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY), the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and co-author of one of the new war powers resolution, said in a statement: “Today’s briefing from Secretaries Rubio and Hegseth was an exercise in futility. It did nothing to address the serious legal, strategic, and moral concerns surrounding the administration’s unprecedented use of US military force in the Caribbean and Pacific."
"As of today, the administration has already carried out 25 such strikes over three months, extrajudicially killing 95 people," Meeks noted. "That this briefing to members of Congress only occurred more than three months since the strikes began—despite numerous requests for classified and public briefings—further proves these operations are unable to withstand scrutiny and lack a defensible legal rationale."
Briefing attendee Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.)—who is in the administration's crosshairs for reminding US troops that military rules and international law require them to disobey illegal orders—said of Trump officials, "Obviously, they have issues with what is in that video, and that’s why they don’t want everybody to see it."
Defending Hegseth's decision to not make the boat strike video public, Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) argued that “there’s a lot of members that’s gonna walk out there and that’s gonna leak classified information and there’s gonna be certain ones that you hold accountable."
Mullin singled out Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), who, along with the Somalian American community at large, has been the target of mounting Islamophobic and racist abuse by Trump and his supporters.
“Not everybody can go through the same background checks that need to be cleared on this,” he said. “Do you think Omar needs all this information? I will say no.”
Rejecting GOP arguments against releasing the video, Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said after attending Tuesday's briefing: “I found the legal explanations and the strategic explanations incoherent, but I think the American people should see this video. And all members of Congress should have that opportunity. I certainly want it for myself.”