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
Leader of Nation’s Largest Progressive Organizing Group Calls for Democrats to Obstruct Proceedings for Trump’s Unqualified and Dangerous Cabinet Picks Amid Musk’s Corporate Coup
This week, the U.S. Senate is expected to take further steps to advance the nominations of several key cabinet picks by Donald Trump, including Kash Patel for FBI Director, Linda McMahon for Secretary of Education, and Lori Chavez-DeRemer for Secretary of Labor.
Like many of Trump’s previous nominees, this group reflects his strategy of appointing political loyalists willing to execute his extreme agenda at any cost. McMahon, co-founder of World Wrestling Entertainment, has already shown her readiness to support Trump’s goal of dismantling the very agency she seeks to lead. Patel, a 2020 election denier accused of delaying the National Guard’s deployment during the January 6th Capitol attack, is one of Trump’s most dangerous and sycophantic picks, poised to radically reshape the FBI. Meanwhile, Chavez-DeRemer, once seen as a moderate pro-labor voice, has already reversed her support for the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act in an attempt to win over hardline Republican senators.
As Trump’s allies in Congress move swiftly to install his cabinet picks, the world’s wealthiest man, Elon Musk, is tightening his grip on the federal government. In one of the most blatant power grabs in U.S. history, Musk has taken control of federal agencies and gained access to Americans' private financial and social data under the guise of the so-called 'Department of Government Efficiency' (DOGE)—an entity created by executive order with no oversight, accountability, or legal authority. DOGE continues to wreak havoc on the federal government, pushing unconstitutional efforts to dismantle agencies, seize classified information, and purge thousands of nonpartisan career civil servants.
Joseph Geevarghese, Executive Director of Our Revolution—the nation’s largest grassroots progressive political organizing group—is available to comment on this week’s confirmation proceedings and the broader threats posed by Elon Musk’s unchecked power. Specifically, Geevarghese can address:
- Grassroots leaders’ calls for Senate Democrats to place a blanket hold on all Trump nominees, utilizing every procedural tool at their disposal
- The glaring lack of qualifications among many of Trump’s cabinet picks, particularly the grave risks of advancing Kash Patel to lead the FBI
- Elon Musk’s ongoing corporate coup and the failure of Democratic leadership to rise to the occasion and operate as an effective opposition party
Our Revolution will reclaim democracy for the working people of our country by harnessing the transformative energy of the "political revolution." Through supporting a new generation of progressive leaders, empowering millions to fight for progressive change and elevating the political consciousness, Our Revolution will transform American politics to make our political and economic systems once again responsive to the needs of working families. Our Revolution has three intertwined goals: to revitalize American democracy, empower progressive leaders and elevate the political consciousness.
LATEST NEWS
Leaders Across EU Deliver Unified Message to the US: 'No War on Venezuela'
"We condemn in the strongest terms the military escalation against Venezuela," said progressive leaders from countries including the United Kingdom, Spain, and Greece.
Nov 21, 2025
With thousands of US troops patrolling the Caribbean, at least eight warships deployed in the region, and the BBC reporting that it tracked four US military planes that flew near Venezuela Thursday night, lawmakers and other leaders from across Europe on Friday issued a unified demand for the Trump administration to deescalate the tensions it has ratcheted up in recent weeks.
The administration's "show of force has already proved lethal," said the leaders, with more than 80 people—including fishermen and an out-of-work bus driver—having been killed in the US military's strikes on more than 20 boats, which the administration has insisted were trafficking drugs to the US. The White House has publicized no evidence of the claims.
President Donald Trump has not taken further military action against Venezuela since he was presented with "options" for potential strikes last week by officials including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, nor has he followed through with threats he's made against Mexico and Colombia.
But the European leaders—including British Members of Parliament Zarah Sultana and Jeremy Corbyn, former Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis, and Spanish Member of European Parliament Irene Montero Gil—noted that Trump "severed diplomatic channels with Caracas and approved covert [Central Intelligence Agency] operations in Venezuela" as the military buildup continues in the region.
The Trump administration has insisted it is engaged in a legal "armed conflict" with drug cartels in Venezuela, which it has accused of trafficking fentanyl to the US—though experts say drug boats originating in Venezuela are "are mainly moving cocaine from South America to Europe," and analysis by both the United Nations and US intelligence agencies have shown the South American country plays virtually no role in the production or transit of fentanyl.
The US Congress has not authorized any military action against drug cartels or Venezuela's government, and lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have attempted to pass war powers resolutions blocking the US from striking more boats or targets on land in Venezuela, only to have the resolutions voted down.
In his second term, Trump has sought to tie Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro to drug cartels—despite a declassified US intelligence memo showing officials rejected the claim—and designated Cartel de los Soles a foreign terrorist organization last week, giving the White House what Hegseth called "new options" to go after the group.
But the escalation that Trump claims is the latest battle in the "War on Drugs" comes two years after he explicitly announced his desire to take control of Venezuela's oil, and following years of condemnation of Maduro's socialist government from Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
The European leaders said the administration's narrative about the threat Venezuela poses to the US and the escalation is simply the "latest attempt to threaten and undermine the sovereignty of Latin America and the Caribbean nations."
"Declassified documents have confirmed the CIA’s hand in overthrowing democratically elected governments in Latin America, such as Salvador Allende’s Chile in 1973, João Goulart’s Brazil in 1964, and Jacobo Árbenz’s Guatemala in 1954. The human cost of these regime change operations was catastrophic, and their political legacy endures," reads the letter, which was organized by Progressive International.
A military intervention by the US in Venezuela "would mark the first interstate war by the United States in South America," the leaders said, yet "the pretext for intervention is as tired as it is familiar."
"Under the banner of combating the 'narco-terrorists,' Trump celebrates lethal strikes against peaceful fishermen arbitrarily labeled as carrying drugs," the leaders said.
As in the past, they added, moving the War on Drugs to Venezuela would deliver "not security but a torrent of bloodshed, dispossession, and destabilization."
"Therefore, we condemn in the strongest terms the military escalation against Venezuela," they said. "Our demand is clear and our resolve is firm: No war on Venezuela."
As Peoples Dispatch reported Thursday, many European leaders have "subordinated" themselves to Trump and have avoided speaking out against the US escalation with Venezuela, but left-wing political parties have led the way in denouncing the US deployment of soldiers and warships to the region.
The Workers' Party of Belgium said recently that the world is "witnessing an unprecedented military escalation in 20 years, a multifaceted aggression that threatens not only Venezuela, but any project of sovereignty and social justice in Latin America."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Fury as 'Shamefully Weak' COP30 Draft Drops All Mention of Fossil Fuels
"We can’t have a deal that fails to deliver what science and the law require on finance, fossil fuels, or forests and call that progress."
Nov 21, 2025
Climate advocates voiced alarm and outrage Friday after every mention of fossil fuels was dropped from the latest draft text to emerge from the COP30 summit, high-stakes talks that have been swarmed by a record number of oil and gas lobbyists seeking to derail any progress toward a clean energy transition.
Dozens of nations—including Spain, Vanuatu, the Marshall Islands, Chile, and Germany—are demanding that any final agreement include "a roadmap for implementing a just, orderly, and equitable transition away from fossil fuels" to fulfill world leaders' previous commitment at COP28.
But a draft document released by COP30 host Brazil on Friday, formally the last day of talks, omits any such roadmap and does not even contain the term "fossil fuels."
Monique Barbut, France's environment minister, said Friday that "at this point, even if we don't have the roadmap, but at least a mention of the fossil fuels, I think we would accept it."
"But as it stands now, we have nothing left," Barbut added.
While draft texts are not necessarily a definitive measure of the state of negotiations, the omission was seen as further evidence that United Nations climate talks have been captured by petrostates such as Saudi Arabia and fossil fuel industry influence-peddlers. At COP30, fossil fuel lobbyists outnumber the delegations of every country except Brazil.
The Donald Trump-led United States, the world's largest oil producer, did not send an official delegation to the summit.
"This is outrageous," Bronwen Tucker, public finance lead at Oil Change International, said in response to the new draft text. "The presidency has presented a shamefully weak text that fails to mention fossil fuels, fails to deliver accountability towards rich countries’ finance obligations, and only makes vague promises on adaptation."
"A large group of countries have been vocal in their support for a roadmap to transition away from fossil fuels, but rich parties are still refusing to deliver the debt-free public finance on fair terms that is key to make it happen," Tucker added. "Until they stop blocking efforts to address the systemic barriers developing countries face to phasing out fossil fuels, any roadmap will be a dead-end."
"We’re walking a fine line here between survival and climate catastrophe."
The updated text was released as negotiators raced to strike a consensus deal in the final hours of the summit, which appears likely to head into overtime. Talks were delayed for hours on Thursday after a fire broke out at the summit, an incident that activists viewed as a "potent metaphor" for world leaders' failure to combat the climate crisis as it wreaks havoc across the globe.
"We’re walking a fine line here between survival and climate catastrophe, and in these final hours I am hoping we can take something back to our communities that indicates that the world considers our homes worth fighting for,” said Fenton Lutunatabua, Pacific team lead at the climate group 350.
Nikki Reisch, director of the Climate and Energy Program at the Center for International Environmental Law, said Friday that the toothless draft text lays bare the need to overhaul the COP process and mitigate the influence of the fossil fuel industry—the primary driver of the climate emergency.
"The world is being sold a bill of lies here at this 'COP of truth,'" said Reisch. "We can’t have a deal that fails to deliver what science and the law require on finance, fossil fuels, or forests and call that progress. The weakness of the text underscores why the climate talks are sorely in need of reform to allow a majority vote when a handful of countries block consensus."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Just Corrupt': Lindsey Graham Blocks Repeal of Senate GOP Payout Provision
"American taxpayers should not be forced to pay the bill for partisan payouts, least of all for Senate Republicans who were implicated in the insurrection that nearly toppled our democracy," said one House Democrat.
Nov 21, 2025
US Sen. Lindsey Graham on Thursday blocked an effort to repeal a provision allowing senators to reap potentially millions of dollars in taxpayer money by suing the Justice Department.
Shortly after the House voted 426-0 to repeal the provision, which Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) slipped into a government funding package that lawmakers approved earlier this month, Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-NM) requested unanimous consent for the Senate to follow suit.
Graham (R-SC), who recently described Medicaid funding as a "money laundering scheme," objected to Heinrich's request, blocking the bill's passage. The South Carolina senator has been vocal in his defense of the payout provision even as GOP lawmakers in the House have condemned it as abhorrent.
The provision empowers senators to sue the federal government for damages of at least $500,000 if investigators obtained their phone records or other data without notifying the targeted lawmakers. The language applies retroactively, making eligible Graham and other Republicans whose records the Justice Department obtained as part of its investigation into President Donald Trump's lawless attempt to subvert the results of the 2020 election.
Graham has openly vowed to take advantage of the provision, saying in an interview earlier this week that he intends to "sue the hell out of" the Justice Department for "tens of millions of dollars."
Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) said in response that Graham "may be upset, but he's not entitled to millions of taxpayer dollars."
"Republican senators' secret provision making themselves eligible multimillion-dollar payouts is just corrupt," said Beyer.
So far, despite mounting criticism from members of his own party, Thune appears bent on upholding the provision. The Republican senators positioned to benefit from the measure are Marsha Blackburn and Bill Hagerty of Tennessee, Josh Hawley of Missouri, Dan Sullivan of Alaska, Tommy Tuberville of Alabama, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, and Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming.
Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, said following the House repeal vote that "American taxpayers should not be forced to pay the bill for partisan payouts, least of all for Senate Republicans who were implicated in the insurrection that nearly toppled our democracy."
"Majority Leader Thune must bring this measure to a vote at once," said DeLauro. "The American people deserve to know on the record who supports taxpaye-funded payouts for Republican senators, and who does not. If they really do support this cash grab, they should own it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular