

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.

Tomomi Shibata, tomomi@priceofoil.org (JST)
Nicole Rodel, nicole@priceofoil.org (CET)
Valentina Stackl, valentina@priceofoil.org (ET)
Today, G7 Leaders in Hiroshima concluded that there is “an important role” for “increased deliveries of LNG” and that “publicly supported gas investments can be appropriate”, jeopardizing the 1.5ºC warming limit and directly contradicting last year’s G7 commitment to end international public finance for fossil fuels by the end of 2022.
The G7 endorsement of increased gas finance comes despite strong opposition. Leading up to the Summit, activists organized over 50 actions in 22 countries to urge Japan and fellow G7 countries to end their support for fossil fuels and to stop driving the expansion of gas and other fossil-based technologies such as ammonia co-firing in coal-fired power plants. They say the science is clear: ending investments in fossil fuels and phasing them out is necessary to avoid climate breakdown and meet parallel energy security and affordability goals.
In their Leaders’ Communique, the G7 claim that “they are steadfast in their commitment to … keeping a limit of 1.5ºC global temperature rise within reach”. A true commitment to 1.5°C, however, requires the G7 to explicitly exclude continued investments in new upstream gas projects and Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) infrastructure. Today’s G7 endorsement of increased gas investments came after a push from Japan and Germany, with Japan using its G7 Presidency to also promote other fossil fuel-based technologies such as hydrogen, ammonia and CCS.
The G7 play a central role in enabling the global buildout of LNG infrastructure. An Oil Change International briefing shows that 61% of LNG export terminal capacity built in the last decade had international public finance from the G7. A large portion of the G7’s fossil fuel finance went to support gas projects (42%), of which 75% went to support LNG projects, with Japan and the United States providing the majority of LNG finance.
According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), maintaining a 50% chance to limit global warming to 1.5°C requires an immediate end to investments not just in new coal, oil, and gas production, but also in LNG infrastructure. Such investments also come with serious stranded assets risks as gas demand, including for LNG, is forecasted to drop. These findings remain unchanged in the context of the war in Ukraine and its impact on global energy markets.
Reducing soaring energy costs and improving energy security requires phasing out fossil fuel reliance and shifting to clean energy, according to the IEA. Renewable energy technologies are more affordable, and can be scaled up more rapidly. They also help avoid fiscal instability linked to volatile fossil fuel prices and stranded asset risks as global gas demand drops. Today, the G7 failed to reap these benefits of an accelerated shift to clean energy.
Leaving the door open for new gas and LNG infrastructure is also in direct contradiction to last year’s G7 commitment to end international public finance for fossil fuels by the end of 2022 “except in limited circumstances … consistent with a 1.5°C warming limit…”. Today, G7 Leaders claim that they have fulfilled this commitment. However, data shows this is untrue, as Japan and Italy have continued to approve new international support to fossil fuel projects in 2023 that are not aligned with 1.5°C.
This year, Italy has already approved international public financing for the Santos Basin oil and gas production project in Brazil. The Japanese Export Credit Agency, JBIC, has provided USD 393 million for a gas-fired power plant (Syr Darya II Shirin combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT)) in Uzbekistan. During a recent visit to Mozambique, as part of Japan’s efforts to “deepen its involvement with the global south”, Prime Minister Kishida committed to help Mozambique revive its LNG project and support Japanese private investment in gas. The United States Export Import Bank (U.S. EXIM) voted to provide almost USD 100 million in export support to expand the controversial PT Kilang Pertamina Balikpapan Petroleum Refinery in Indonesia.
Had the G7 upheld their climate and fossil finance commitments, the group of nations could have collectively shifted over USD 24.3 billion per year out of fossil fuels and into clean energy and increased G7 clean energy finance to USD 34 billion annually, a sum nearly substantial enough to close the energy access finance gap. This would have catalyzed an even larger shift in public and private finance and further investments are needed for the G7 to deliver their fair share of climate, loss and damage and just energy transition finance support to the Global South.
Today, the G7 missed an opportunity to set the stage for success at key upcoming global climate events, including the UN Climate Action Summit in September and COP28 in December. World leaders must urgently change course to not forfeit the chance to limit global warming to 1.5°C while building a more energy secure and affordable future.
In response, experts at Oil Change International and partner organizations issued the following statements:
“This year’s G7 is revealing Japan’s failure of climate leadership at a global level. At a time when we rapidly need to phase out fossil fuels, this year’s G7 host has pushed for the expansion of gas and LNG and technologies that would prolong the use of coal. Activists mobilized 50 actions across 22 countries this week to demand that Japan end its fossil fuel finance and stop driving the expansion of gas and other fossil-based technologies. Japan will continue to face intense international scrutiny until it stops fueling the climate crisis,” said Susanne Wong, Asia Program Manager at Oil Change International.
“A month ago G7 ministers successfully pushed back against a Japan-led push for gas investments and fossil fuels. But Germany joining Japan in promoting gas investments means we now have a disastrous G7 Summit outcome. The repeated call for public gas investments directly contradicts the G7 Leaders’ claim that they have fulfilled their commitment to end public finance for fossil fuels by the end of last year. It also jeopardizes 1.5ºC and energy security goals. The G7 today missed an important opportunity to get on track for 1.5°C to set the stage for a successful G20 and COP28 — rather they have moved in the opposite direction. They need to urgently reroute to protect people and the planet,” said Laurie van der Burg, Global Public Finance Co-Manager at Oil Change International.
“Japan has used the G7 presidency to derail the global energy transition. Japan has been driving the push to increase gas investments and has been promoting its so-called ‘Green Transformation’ strategy. This greenwashing scheme includes fossil hydrogen, ammonia, CCS, and nuclear, technologies which will delay the urgently needed just energy transition. Japan and G7 governments must accelerate fossil fuel phase-out, not prolong the life of fossil fuel infrastructure. Japan must commit to a full fossil fuel phase-out and stop blocking efforts to phase out coal and fossil fuels at the G7,” said Ayumi Fukakusa, Deputy Executive Director at Friends of the Earth Japan.
“Last year, Germany led G7 discussions that secured a ground-breaking commitment to end international public finance for fossil fuels by the end of 2022. However, the G7’s continued approval for public investment in the gas sector, led by Germany and Japan, is in direct breach of that commitment and severely undermines progress made on this agenda. The immediate energy crisis has passed and G7 leaders have failed to act in accordance with clear market signals and climate science that new investments in fossil fuels are no longer needed. What is needed is a prioritisation of public investment in clean energy, that will help prevent fiscal instability and reduce stranded asset risks, especially as global gas demand will continue to drop. This is critical not only to meet climate targets but also to bring down energy costs and managing energy security,” said Louise Burrows, Energy Finance Lead at E3G.
“The endorsement of increased LNG deliveries and investment in gas in the G7 communique is no mere backsliding — it is a death sentence being dealt by the G7 to the 1.5°C limit and, in consequence, to the climate survival of vulnerable peoples in the Philippines, Southeast Asia, and across the world. Unless they genuinely put forward the phase out of all fossil fuels, Japan and all G7 nations spout nothing but lies when they say they have aligned to 1.5°C. They cannot claim to be promoting development while subjecting our people to decades more of pollution and soaring energy prices. We reject this notion of a development powered by fossil fuels. In the aftermath of the G7 Summit and lead up to this year’s COP, Japan and G7 leaders should already be warned that civic movements will not tire in pushing back against fossil fuels and false solutions and in demanding a renewable energy transition,” said Gerry Arances, Executive Director at Center for Energy, Ecology, and Development (Philippines).
“Where there was an opportunity to accelerate a renewable energy transition that would bring about energy security, accessibility, and keep us on track to meet climate targets, the G7 have chosen to remain on a fossil-fuelled collision course. Despite a week of sustained global calls from civil society, G7 leaders have let down their constituents on the frontlines. The final G7 communiqué does not heed the bold calls needed for our times and fails to include concrete plans to end the fossil fuel era. Instead of taking decisive action to tackle cost of living, energy, and climate crises, the text plays around the edges,” said May Boeve, Executive Director at 350.org.
“The G7 leaders’ communiqué shows a serious disconnect with science, as it enables new investment in fossil gas infrastructure, despite the very clear messages from both the International Energy Agency and Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which show that a future below 1.5 degrees can’t include more fossil fuels. Most likely, the German chancellor Olaf Scholz has been a driving force behind the weak language on gas, which is a serious blow to Germany’s international credibility on climate,” said Petter Lydén, Head of International Climate Policy at Germanwatch.
“The G7, among the richest nations in the world, have once again proved to be poor leaders on climate with their statement from the Hiroshima Summit. Emphasising the need to keep global warming below 1.5ºC while at the same time committing to continue to invest in gas and LNG shows a bizarre political disconnect from science and a complete disregard for the severity of the climate emergency. This continued hypocrisy from historical polluters as climate impacts continue to increase sets a low bar and jeopardises global efforts to fight the climate crisis. The G7 countries must come to COP28 with a clear focus on doing their fair share on phasing out fossil fuels and delivering climate finance,” said Harjeet Singh, Head of Global Political Strategy at Climate Action Network.
“The G7 energy outcome correctly diagnoses a short-term need for energy security, then promotes a dangerous and inappropriate lock-in of fossil gas that would do nothing to address this need. Energy security can only be achieved by rapidly and equitably phasing out fossil fuels and transitioning to renewable energy, not locking in deadly fossil fuels and lining the pockets of oil and gas executives. This betrayal continues a disturbing turn by President Biden and Chancellor Scholz from rhetorically committing to climate leadership to openly boosting fossil fuel expansion. History will not look kindly on world leaders who accelerate the pace of fossil fuel buildout in the face of worsening climate crisis,” said Collin Rees, United States Program Manager at Oil Change International.
Oil Change International is a research, communications, and advocacy organization focused on exposing the true costs of fossil fuels and facilitating the ongoing transition to clean energy.
(202) 518-9029"Protesters... are furious, and tensions are exploding," said one independent journalist. "This is escalation, not policing."
Amidst peaceful demonstrations and shows of empathy and solidarity in Minneapolis and other US cities following the killing of Renee Nicole Good by a federal agent last week, videos appearing online over the weekend also show increasing levels of outrage directed at immigration officers who community members say they no longer want to see terrorizing their streets.
While Trump has reportedly ordered more officers to Minneapolis in the wake of Good's killing—even as local and state officials have called for the end of operations in order to tamp down tensions in the city—the clips circulating online reveal mounting frustration by neighbors no longer willing to tolerate the situation.
On Sunday, journalist and documentarian Ford Fischer posted video from Minneapolis he described as ICE agents being "followed by dozens of activists on foot and in vehicles" in the city.
While agents are seen holding bear spray and warning people to stay back, the procession of civilians following them heckled the officers and made it clear they are not wanted in the city.
"You are murderers!" yells one man at the officers. Several others can be heard screaming, "Go home!" and "Fuck you!"
Just now: ICE followed by dozens of activists on foot and in vehicles in Minneapolis. pic.twitter.com/vFXmZIr0TA
— Ford Fischer (@FordFischer) January 11, 2026
In another video, posted by FreedomNews.TV, federal agents are seen pulling two people from a vehicle on a residential street and placing them under arrest before being confronted by neighbors and onlookers telling them to "Get out of our fucking state!"; "Get the fuck out!"; and "Get a real job!"
🚨 HOLY SMOKES: New video shows ICE agents smashing the window of a protester’s vehicle and forcibly pulling him out in Minneapolis and he was immediately detained.
Protesters in the area are furious, and tensions are exploding.
This is escalation, not policing. pic.twitter.com/CfHMQyPOOg
— Brian Allen (@allenanalysis) January 11, 2026
"Protesters in the area are furious, and tensions are exploding," said independent journalist Brian Allen in response to the video. "This is escalation, not policing."
The latest scenes appear to indicate growing anger by the public towards President Donald Trump's authoritarian deployment of federal agents to cities nationwide over the last year. With Good's killing, the growing tensions are palpable.
While many state and local lawmakers and other officials calling for calm and peaceful protest in response, many—including Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) also believe that Trump and members of his administration are intentionally trying to provoke the civilian population in order to justify an ever harsher repressive response.
In comments on Saturday, as Common Dreams reported, Omar warned that the ultimate goal is "to agitate people enough where they are able to invoke the Insurrection Act to declare martial law."
While the individual episodes documented above reveal the very real anger that many are feeling as masked federal agents target people in their communities, the overall protests against the policies that led to Good's killing—which took place in hundreds of cities over the weekend—have been resoundingly peaceful.
🚨 JUST IN: Families, including parents with children, are present at PEACEFUL protests in Minneapolis, underscoring that these are community demonstrations, NOT riots.
If federal agents escalate force against crowds that include families, that will be a choice by the state, not… pic.twitter.com/SKoHKleGFb
— Brian Allen (@allenanalysis) January 11, 2026
"A peaceful night in Minneapolis," the city posted to its social media accounts following Saturday night's demonstrations. "As more demonstrations are planned today, we appreciate and thank the community for using its collective voice in harmony and love."
"Cuba is a free, independent, and sovereign nation. Nobody dictates what we do," said Cuba's President Miguel Diaz-Canel in response to the latest threat from the authoritarian US president.
President Donald Trump was ripped by humanitarians and anti-war voices on Sunday after he again threatened Cuba by saying the US military would be used to prevent oil and other resources from reaching the country, threats that come just over a week after the American president ordered the unlawful attack on Venezuela and the kidnapping of President Nicolas Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores.
In a social media post Sunday morning, Trump declared:
Cuba lived, for many years, on large amounts of OIL and MONEY from Venezuela. In return, Cuba provided “Security Services” for the last two Venezuelan dictators, BUT NOT ANYMORE! Most of those Cubans are DEAD from last weeks U.S.A. attack, and Venezuela doesn’t need protection anymore from the thugs and extortionists who held them hostage for so many years. Venezuela now has the United States of America, the most powerful military in the World (by far!), to protect them, and protect them we will. THERE WILL BE NO MORE OIL OR MONEY GOING TO CUBA - ZERO! I strongly suggest they make a deal, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE. Thank you for your attention to this matter. President DJT
Cuba's President Miguel Diaz-Canel rejected Trump's latest comments and threat of military force, saying the island nation was ready to defend itself.
"Cuba is a free, independent, and sovereign nation. Nobody dictates what we do," Diaz-Canel said in a social media post. "Cuba does not attack; it has been attacked by the US for 66 years, and it does not threaten; it prepares, ready to defend the homeland to the last drop of blood."
Progressive critics of the US president were also quick to hit back. Medea Benjamin, co-founder of the anti-war group CodePink, said the "true extortionist" in this situation is Trump himself, as she detailed the mutual benefit of the relationship between the Venezuelan and Cuban governments over recent decades:
Trump says Cuba is “extorting” Venezuela.
Yet, it was Cuba that sent 250,000 health workers to Venezuela, lowered infant mortality, restored eyesight, and trained local doctors.
The true extortionist is Trump. pic.twitter.com/79b9IafeSH
— Medea Benjamin (@medeabenjamin) January 11, 2026
"What is extortion?" Benjamin asks. "It's what Donald Trump is doing: taking over those oil tankers, confiscating 30-50 million tons of oil—that is extortion. And saying to Venezuela, 'We're going to run your country." Donald Trump is the greatest extortionist our country has seen."
Reuters reports Sunday, citing shipping data, that Venezuela has been Cuba's "biggest oil supplier, but no cargoes have departed from Venezuelan ports to the Caribbean country since the capture of Maduro.
Speaking with CBS News on Sunday, Rep. María Elvira Salazar (R-Fla.) said that Trump's threats to strangle the people of Cuba by enforcing a resource blockade were "like magical" in her ears and those of her right-wing constituents who live in Miami's large community of Cuban exiles.
Welcoming Trump's efforts to bully Cuba into submission, Salazar claimed that Cuba's government is "hanging by a threat" she said, before correcting herself, "a thread, I should say."
Oddly—but notably—Salazar continued her remarks by saying it was Cuba that has been an "immense" threat to the United States, as she described it as a nation "with no water; they have no electricity; they have no food—nothing. So if you think Maduro is weak, Cuba is even weaker. And now they do not have one drop of oil coming from Venezuela."
President Trump announced on TruthSocial that “there will be no more oil or money going to Cuba,” Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar (R-FL) responded saying “those words are like magical.”
“Cuba is really a center of power for our enemies,” Salazar told @margbrennan. “Now, I think… pic.twitter.com/CSZNRI30lZ
— Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) January 11, 2026
But progressive voices opposed to Trump's authoritarian violations of international law, his bullying of allies and enemies alike with claims that the US can do whatever it likes in the name of national security and claims of national interest, are warning that the threats against Cuba and other nations represent a chilling development that must be met with international opposition and condemnation.
"The US blockade of Cuba is the longest-standing act of collective punishment in the world," said David Adler, co-general coordinator of Progressive International, pointing to Trump's remarks. "It is condemned by the entire international community every year at the UN. And now, the US president is doubling down on this cruel and illegal punishment. Enough."
"This is an emergency," Progressive International explained in a dispatch last week, warning about Trump's overt hostility toward Cuba, Colombia, Mexico, and other nations in the wake of the US attack on Venezuela and the kidnapping of Maduro and Flores.
"The United States is rapidly escalating its assault on the Americas—and the principle of self-determination at large," warned the international advocacy group. "Under the banner of the Monroe Doctrine, Donald Trump and his cronies are leading a campaign of imperial aggression that stretches from Caracas to Havana, Mexico City to Bogotá."
According to the dispatch:
What we are witnessing today is class struggle played out through imperial violence. The United States stands as the political and military instrument of capital: Big Oil bankrolling politics; arms manufacturers profiting from destruction; and financial power thriving on plunder and permanent war. These sections of capital pay for the policies they desire and are richly rewarded. The share prices of US oil majors soared around 10% following Maduro’s kidnapping, representing a return of around $100 billion on an investment of $450 million in the last US elections.
The government serves its donors, so aggression can proceed without consent. Public opinion has repeatedly shown opposition to U.S. military action in Venezuela — a gap between elite appetite and popular will bridged by force, not democracy.
Venezuela — like many nations before it — represents a different possibility: that the popular classes might govern themselves, control their resources, and chart a future beyond imperial command. And that possibility represents an existential threat to empire.
The group said Sunday's latest threat by Trump against Cuba—openly saying that the US military might will be used to prevent life-sustaining resources from reaching the island nation—should be seen for what it is: a coercive "threat to strangle Cuba of critical energy and resources" at the end of a barrel of a gun.
"Through manipulation, coercion, and now direct military action," the group warns, the US government under Trump "has made absolutely clear its intention to dominate Latin America."
"It should be terrifying to every American how Noem lies," said one critic. "She doesn't sweat or move uncomfortably. She just doesn't care. This is what Trump has created. An environment where you only get in trouble if you don't lie."
Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem sat for a live interview with CNN's Jake Tapper on Sunday morning about the killing of Renee Nicole Good by a federal immigration agent last week and lied straight through her teeth to the American public about what happened.
Since Good was shot and killed by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent Jonathan Ross on Wednesday, members of the Trump administration have consistently tried to portray the shooting as justified despite indisputable video evidence contradicting their false claims and narratives.
Noem, who released her first statement on the shooting within three hours of Good's killing, has joined Vice President JD Vance as the leading liars and propagandists—with plenty of help from people like Tricia McLaughlin, Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs at the US Department of Homeland Security, and Border Czar Tom Homan—within the Trump administration.
In her exchange with Tapper, who confronted Noem over the blatant chasm between her claims about what happened—she called Good a "domestic terrorist" who "attacked" federal agents—and what anyone with two good eyes who watches the variety of videos made public of the shooting can plainly see for themselves.
Tapper: Why did you not wait for an investigation before making your comments?
Noem: Well, everything that I've said has been proven to be factual, and the truth.
Tapper: With all due respect the first thing you said was not what happened.
Noem: It absolutely is pic.twitter.com/0yGeWSr9aa
— Acyn (@Acyn) January 11, 2026
Various angles of the video, including audio from Good's final moments, have shown that she was not "yelling" at officers or "attacking" them in any way. Video shows several vehicles driving around her car in the minutes prior to the shooting. Good has a visible smile on her face when she says, directly to Ross as he circles her car, "That's fine, dude. I'm not mad at you." Detailed analyses of the footage shows Ross could just as easily have stepped aside—without drawing and firing his weapon—in order to dodge the moving car, which he did—even with firing the fatal shots—without injury or harm to others.
Asked by Tapper why she did not wait for the full facts before speaking out publicly to demonize Good and defend the officer, Noem falsely claimed that "everything that I've said has been proven to be factual, and the truth."
That's a lie.
"With all due respect," Tapper responded, "the first thing you said was not what happened."
"It is absolutely what happened," Noem said, lying once again about her initial comments and their relationship to what factually transpired.
"It should be terrifying to every American how Noem lies," said James Abrenio, a criminal defense attorney, in a social media post on Sunday. "She doesn't sweat or move uncomfortably. She just doesn't care. This is what Trump has created. An environment where you only get in trouble if you don't lie. Even about an officer shooting a woman in the face on video."
Noem, in the interview, goes on to claim that Good's behavior fits the textbook definition of "domestic terrorism," despite scores of law enforcement and civil liberties experts who have reviewed the video saying that Ross' behavior betrayed basic police training about how to deal with a routine traffic stop or de-escalate a situation involving a motor vehicle in a roadway.
When Tapper tries to pin Noem down, asking her to explain what she thinks Good was trying to do when she moved her car, the secretary deflects by saying the real "question" should be why are people—in this case a broadcast journalist—"arguing with the president who is trying to keep people safe?"
Noem's overt gaslighting—telling the public something objectively contrary to available facts—has become part and parcel of the Trump administration's Orwellian approach in the president's second term.
"Kristi Noem is a stone-cold liar who has zero credibility," said Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), the minority leader in the House, on Friday in reaction to her earlier comments about the case. "There is nothing to suggest the shooting of an unarmed woman in Minneapolis was justified. This heinous killing must be criminally investigated to the full extent of the law."
On Friday, The Guardian documented a litany of false claims made Noem, Trump, McLaughlin, and others, comparing them against what is factually known based on video evidence and eye-witness accounts:
The claim
“ … rioters began blocking ICE officers and one of these violent rioters weaponized her vehicle, attempting to run over our law enforcement officers in an attempt to kill them – an act of domestic terrorism” – post on X by the Department of Homeland Security.
The reality
There is simply no evidence that Good was “a violent rioter” or “domestic terrorist”. No riot was taking place before her encounter with the ICE agents, and the department could not yet have been certain of her identity at 12.43pm, the time the message was posted. There is no evidence that Good – a poet and mother – was a terrorist.
The claim
“ … the woman driving the car was very disorderly, obstructing and resisting, who then violently, willfully, and viciously ran over the ICE Officer” – post on Truth Social by Donald Trump.
The reality
Video of the incident shows that Good was not “disorderly”, and had reversed her car and allowed at least one ICE vehicle to pass before other agents confronted her. A separate video clearly shows that the officer who fired the fatal shots walked up to the front of Good’s car, which was turning away from him as it began to move forward, and he remained on his feet as the vehicle passed him.
The claim
“An ICE officer, fearing for his life, the lives of his fellow law enforcement and the safety of the public, fired defensive shots … The ICE officers who were hurt are expected to make full recoveries” – Tricia McLaughlin, homeland security assistant secretary, in a post on X.
The reality
The officer who killed Good was not in the pathway of her car when he began firing, analysis of the video shows. Two other officers were beside the car, and no members of the public were seen to be in harm’s way. There is no evidence that any ICE officer was injured.
According to The Atlantic's Adam Serwer, such "blatant lies" by the administration in the wake of Good's killing serve various purposes:
They perpetuate the false narrative that federal agents are in constant peril and therefore justified in using lethal force at the slightest hint of danger. They assure federal agents that they can harm or even kill American citizens with impunity, and warn those who might be moved to protest Trump’s immigration policies of the same thing. Perhaps most grim, they communicate to the public that if you happen to be killed by a federal agent, your government will bear false witness to the world that you were a terrorist.
Following the DHS secretary's latest comments on Sunday, Democratic Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, also speaking on Tapper's show, said Noem "needs to resign or be impeached."