

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.

Dan Beeton, 202-293-5380 x104
Drop Site News and The Intercept Brasil report that they have reviewed more than 1,500 leaked text messages that appear to be between Ecuadorian attorney general Diana Salazar, hailed by the US government as an anti-corruption champion, and former member of Ecuador’s National Assembly Ronny Aleaga. The messages contain numerous bombshell allegations, including claims apparently made by Salazar that slain 2023 presidential candidate Fernando Villavicencio had been a US government informant. They and other recently leaked messages also suggest that Salazar has used her position to politically target members of the Ecuadorian left, and appears to have sometimes done so with support from officials in the US embassy in Quito.
“These messages appear to further confirm that ‘lawfare’ ― politicizing judicial systems to target opponents ― has been conducted in a blatant and aggressive manner in Ecuador that calls to mind the same sort of judicial persecution that had put Brazil’s now-president Lula da Silva in jail. This kept Lula ― who left office as one of the most popular presidents in the world and was widely expected to win reelection ― off the ballot in Brazil’s 2018 elections, before he was subsequently exonerated,” CEPR Director of International Policy Alex Main said.
The messages mostly span March 2023 to March of this year, and were exchanged on an anonymous, private messaging platform called “Confide.” Aleaga, who leaked the messages to the US and Brazilian outlets, stated that he recorded and saved the messages (using a second mobile phone), and had them reviewed and certified by a digital forensics company. Drop Site News and The Intercept Brasil say they have reviewed the forensic report.
The messages appear to show Salazar divulging her own exceedingly unlawful behavior. In a clear case of politicization of justice, “Seño,” who Aleaga says is Salazar, admits to having delayed a corruption investigation against former president Guillermo Lasso and his brother-in-law and close business associate, Danilo Carrera, because they thought the investigation would help the left-of-center Movement of the Citizens’ Revolution, of former president Rafael Correa, in the 2023 snap elections.
“Seño” also made several claims regarding US involvement and political intervention in Ecuador. They boasted of their close relationship and collaboration with the US embassy and revealed that the embassy was worried that the “correistas” (supporters of former president Correa) might win in the 2023 elections, strongly implying that her actions were part of a broader strategy to stop the Left from winning in Ecuador. “They [the US] want RC’s head,” “Seño” told Aleaga.
Following the Ecuadorian government’s invitation to the FBI to investigate the assassination of Villavicencio in August 2023, “Seño” claimed that Villavicencio had been a US government informant. “Seño” also claimed that several of the suspects in his murder, who were killed while in Ecuadorian government custody, were to have been sent to New York had they not been murdered. Verónica Sarauz, the slain candidate’s widow, recently appeared to confirm this, saying she had knowledge that the suspects were to be taken out of the country.
Other messages appear to show Salazar complaining that the FBI, who had been given access to Villavicencio’s phone, had transferred the phone’s contents to her office in a data dump, but that she suspected the FBI had erased information, which she considered to be “procedural fraud.”
In their exchanges, “Seño” unlawfully shares highly sensitive and confidential information about ongoing criminal investigations in Ecuador. The messages also suggest that Salazar used her privileged access to sensitive information, and the power of her office, to intimidate political actors or to warn them to flee imminent arrest or prosecution. In the case of Aleaga — with whom she had a “‘secretive’ relationship,” according to Drop Site News and The Intercept Brasil — the messages reveal that she warned him that his arrest was imminent, and told him to flee the country to avoid it.
In their investigation, Drop Site News and The Intercept Brasil describe the messages as part of a pattern of Salazar’s abuse of her authority. As such, they examine another scandal that recently emerged concerning the testimony of a former Ecuadorian judge, Wilman Terán, whom Salazar ordered be arrested in December in what appeared to be a politically motivated prosecutorial decision. In recent months, Terán has claimed that Salazar intimidated him into ruling against Correa’s 2020 appeal. In a highly politicized and expeditious court case, Correa — who has lived in Belgium since 2017 — was found guilty of exerting “psychic influence” on his collaborators to accept bribes. Terán also accused Salazar of hiding evidence from him. As in the case of Lula in 2018, this sentence prevented Correa from being a candidate in 2021.
Terán also submitted his exchanges with Salazar for forensic examination, the results of which have been made public. In these messages, the attorney general displayed similar behavior as in the communications with Aleaga, sharing confidential information and warning of imminent prosecution. In a recent and blatant display of overreach that underscores her immense power, Salazar ordered raids on the offices and homes of two National Court of Justice judges for favoring Terán. These judges had ruled that Terán should be transferred to a different prison and be given greater access to his legal team after enduring “cruel, inhumane, and degrading treatment.”
These shocking revelations about Salazar’s unlawful conduct, politicization of justice, and numerous ethical violations, echo similar exposés, reported in 2019 by The Intercept Brasil, on the highly politicized trial against former president Lula. These disclosures led the Brazilian Supreme Court to rule that Judge Sergio Moro had been biased in his treatment of Lula. Subsequent investigative reports published by Brazilian investigative outlet Agência Pública revealed that US Department of Justice and FBI officials were deeply involved in the Lava Jato judicial operation that culminated in Lula’s jailing. US Members of Congress have twice requested that the US Attorney General share further information regarding the US role in Lava Jato, but have yet to receive a substantive response.
New Revelations Raise Serious Questions about Ongoing US Support for Salazar
These latest revelations raise serious questions about the United States’ potential involvement in politicized judicial processes in Ecuador and its ongoing support for Attorney General Diana Salazar, who is widely regarded as a US government protégé. In 2021, the State Department granted Salazar its annual anti-corruption award, lauding “her courageous actions” and praising her as “a role model to judges, lawyers, and prosecutors throughout South America.” In 2024, Salazar was one of the winners of the US government-funded Wilson Center’s Award for Public Service “for her commitment to justice in Latin America.” The same year, Samantha Power, the US Agency for International Development administrator, eulogized Diana Salazar in TIME, lavishing praise on the Ecuadorian attorney general, who is “now spearheading the effort to prevent violent and well-connected drug traffickers from ruining her beloved country,” and “has earned the respect and support of a population desperate for calm and safety.”
During her time in office, Salazar has frequently received US authorities, such as General Laura Richardson, the commander of the US Southern Command, and special advisor to President Biden Christopher Dodd, who reportedly told Salazar “you are not alone in this fight.” While in Washington, Salazar visited Attorney General Merrick Garland, who expressed support for the “continued cooperation and partnership with @FiscaliaEcuador in combating transnational organized crime and corruption.”
In Ecuador, Salazar has enjoyed the unflinching support of the US embassy, with regular public meetings and photo opportunities granting her significant political cover. When Salazar faced accusations of having plagiarized large chunks of her graduation thesis, US Ambassador Fitzpatrick responded to the accusations by posing, along with other diplomats, for a photo op alongside Salazar, and stating, “We reiterate our rejection of any violence or threat against the institutions and their representatives, and our attachment to respect for state institutions and the rule of law.”
This conspicuous endorsement from successive US administrations and the US foreign policy establishment has given Salazar an aura of untouchability. But in recent months, there has been mounting criticism against Salazar for the politicization of her office. As a result, Salazar now faces impeachment proceedings in the National Assembly, where she stands accused of delaying prosecution in several high-profile criminal investigations, including the “León de Troya,” “Encuentro,” and “INA Papers” cases, which concern accusations of corruption against former presidents Lenín Moreno and Guillermo Lasso, and, in Lasso’s case, accusations of covering up his brother-in-law’s links with narcotics trafficking.
“Salazar faces impeachment proceedings and multiple accusations of ethics violations, but this latest news makes it clear that she is a political actor, and may have broken the law in order to achieve political aims,” Main said. “The time has come for Washington’s unwavering support for Salazar to cease, and for this political persecution in Ecuador to come to an end.”
The Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) was established in 1999 to promote democratic debate on the most important economic and social issues that affect people's lives. In order for citizens to effectively exercise their voices in a democracy, they should be informed about the problems and choices that they face. CEPR is committed to presenting issues in an accurate and understandable manner, so that the public is better prepared to choose among the various policy options.
(202) 293-5380Earlier this month, the Trump administration bypassed Congress to sell Israel more than 20,000 bombs, costing over $650 million.
Sen. Bernie Sanders has introduced joint resolutions of disapproval for US arms sales to Israel following its escalation of attacks against Iran, Lebanon, and Palestine in recent days.
The resolutions Sanders presented on Thursday (I-Vt.) are cosponsored by Sens. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), and Peter Welch (D-Vt.) and target a total of $658 million worth of weapons sales to Israel.
“Given the horrific destruction that Israel’s extremist government has wrought on Gaza, Iran, and Lebanon, the last thing in the world that American taxpayers need to do right now is to provide 22,000 new bombs to the Netanyahu government,” Sanders said. “No more weapons to support an illegal war.”
The weapons Sanders hopes to block were approved under emergency authority by the Trump administration earlier this month, allowing it to bypass congressional review.
According to Reuters, the package contained more than 12,000 thousand-pound bombs requested by Israel, which human rights groups say Israel has often used in densely populated areas, leading to large numbers of civilian casualties.
"Trump not only disregarded congressional authority to declare this war, he’s now bypassing Congress by invoking an emergency authority to supply additional bombs to this war, a crisis of his own making," Van Hollen said.
More than 3,000 people have been killed in US-Israeli attacks on Iran since February 28, according to a Wednesday report from the US-based Human Rights Activist News Agency, a humanitarian monitor for Iran.
More than 1,300 of those killed have been classified as civilians, including more than 200 children. Meanwhile, more than 3 million Iranians have been displaced from their homes, according to the United Nations Refugee Agency.
In Lebanon, where Israel has launched a ground invasion, the death count is at nearly 1,000 according to the nation's health ministry, following attacks on densely populated areas in recent days. Forced evacuation orders from Israel have led more than a million people to flee from their homes.
Government-backed Israeli settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank has also intensified since the outbreak of the war, according to Human Rights Watch. Since the beginning of March, there have been reports of settlers—sometimes in uniform—invading Palestinian communities, firing live ammunition, setting homes and cars on fire, and attacking families in their homes.
Sanders' resolutions of disapproval will be introduced under the Arms Export Control Act, which allows Congress to vote on halting proposed weapons transfers after being notified by the executive branch.
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee, controlled by Republicans, will have five days to consider the proposal. After that, Sanders and his cosponsors will have the opportunity to force a simple-majority floor vote to discharge it.
To actually block weapons sales, the resolution would need to pass both the House and the Senate, which is highly unlikely. Even if this happened, Trump could still veto it, which could only be overridden by a two-thirds vote in both houses.
While the vote itself is almost sure to fail, it has the opportunity to force members of Congress—particularly other Democrats—to go on the record about their support for Israel's actions in the Middle East, which many have continued to fund even while rhetorically opposing them.
“President Trump’s war of choice in Iran has been a catastrophe—jeopardizing our national security and the lives of our troops, killing and wounding thousands of innocent civilians, and causing havoc in the global economy," Welch said. “I support these joint resolutions to make sure that we do not send another 20,000 bombs to Israel that will result in further destruction in Iran and Lebanon. We must end this war, and we must not send these bombs.”
Hegseth also scolded the US media for reporting negative news about the war and insisted that it wasn't a "quagmire."
President Donald Trump's unprovoked and unconstitutional war against Iran has led to energy prices surging across the globe while unleashing political instability across the Middle East.
However, US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said on Thursday that the world needs to show Trump more gratitude for everything he's done.
Speaking at a press conference, Hegseth lambasted US allies who so far have not joined Trump's Iran war, which he launched early on a Saturday morning without any approval from the US Congress.
"The world, the Middle East, our ungrateful allies in Europe, even segments of our own press, should be saying one thing to President Trump: 'Thank you,'" Hegseth said. "Thank you for the courage to stop this terror state from holding the world hostage with missiles while building, or attempting to build, a nuclear bomb. Thank you for doing the work of the free world."
Hegseth: "Our ungrateful allies in Europe, even segments of our own press, should be saying one thing to President Trump -- 'Thank you. Thank you for the courage to stop this terror stage from holding the world hostage while building or attempting to build a nuclear bomb.'" pic.twitter.com/EpuPOUDd6I
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) March 19, 2026
US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard testified under oath before the Senate Select Intelligence Committee on Wednesday that Iran's nuclear weapons program had been "obliterated" by US-led airstrikes that were launched last year, and that there "has been no effort since then to try to rebuild their enrichment capability" since then.
Former National Counterterrorism Center Director Joe Kent also said Iran had posed "no imminent threat" when he announced his resignation this week.
Despite those acknowledgments by high-level officials, elsewhere in the press conference, Hegseth attacked the US media for reporting negative news about the Iran war.
"The media here—not all of it, but much of it—wants you to think, just 19 days into this conflict, that we're somehow spinning toward an endless abyss or a forever war or a quagmire," claimed the one-time Fox News host. "Nothing could be further from the truth."
Hegseth: The media wants you to think that we're somehow spinning toward an endless abyss or a forever war or a quagmire. Nothing could be further from the truth. Hear it from me.
One of hundreds of thousands who fought in Iraq and Afghanistan, who watched previous foolish… pic.twitter.com/qI3RpGzmy3
— Acyn (@Acyn) March 19, 2026
Hegseth then informed viewers that as "one of hundreds of thousands who fought in Iraq and Afghanistan, who watched previous foolish politicians like [Presidents George W.] Bush, [Barack] Obama, and [Joe] Biden squander American credibility," he could credibly claim that "this is not those wars" because "President Trump knows better."
Hegseth also defended the Pentagon's request for $200 billion in funding for the war, telling reporters, "IT takes money to kill bad guys."
The Iran Health Ministry has estimated more than 1,200 Iranians have been killed in Israeli and US strikes since the war began in late February.
A recent analysis of opinion polls conducted by data analyst G. Elliott Morris found that the Iran war is the most unpopular military conflict launched by the US over the span of at least three decades.
“The big takeaway from these numbers is that the new war in Iran is very unpopular,” Morris explained. “Not merely negative-number-so-what unpopular, but worst-ever-support-for-war-when-it-started unpopular. With just 38% of Americans in favor, support for bombing Iran is lower than retrospective support for the war in Iraq was in 2014.”
"The so-called 'balanced budget amendment' is the Republicans’ latest backdoor attempt at gutting Americans’ hard-earned benefits," said one Democratic lawmaker.
Nearly every member of the House Republican caucus voted Wednesday in favor of a proposed constitutional amendment that experts say would result in massive cuts to Social Security, Medicare, nutrition assistance, and other key federal programs.
The proposed amendment, led by Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), would effectively prohibit the federal government from deficit spending, with an exception for declared wars. The final House vote on the amendment was 211-207, well short of the two-thirds support required for passage of a constitutional amendment.
Every Republican who took part in Wednesday's vote backed the proposed amendment. Just one Democrat—Rep. Henry Cuellar of Texas—joined the GOP in voting yes.
The vote came as congressional Republicans, and a handful of Democrats, continued to reject efforts to halt a war that is costing US taxpayers roughly $1 billion a day—a price tag that some in the GOP have openly embraced.
The vote also came less than a year after congressional Republicans and President Donald Trump approved a sprawling reconciliation package that delivered another round of tax cuts primarily to the richest Americans and large corporations, while enacting unprecedented cuts to Medicaid and federal nutrition assistance.
Nonpartisan analysts have estimated that the GOP budget law would add more than $4 trillion to the national debt over the next decade.
“American families don’t need a lecture on fiscal responsibility from the same politicians who just added $4 trillion to the debt with their so-called ‘Big Beautiful Bill’—one of the most expensive pieces of legislation in American history,” said Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.), the top Democrat on the House Budget Committee. “When it comes to cutting taxes for billionaires, they have never had a problem blowing up the deficit. This amendment is nothing more than a show to cover up their hypocrisy on the debt.”
Rep. John Larson (D-Conn.) said following Wednesday's vote that "the so-called 'balanced budget amendment' is the Republicans’ latest backdoor attempt at gutting Americans’ hard-earned benefits."
"It would force drastic cuts to Medicare, Social Security, food assistance, veterans’ benefits, and other programs American families depend on," said Larson. "My Republican colleagues can say this amendment is about fiscal responsibility all they want, but the reality is that the budget they passed last year ballooned our deficit by $4 trillion to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy and give ICE a slush fund larger than most nations' militaries."
"Not only would it effectively bar tax increases, but it would allow unlimited tax cuts, thus forcing huge, unacceptable program cuts. It should be roundly rejected."
Ahead of the amendment vote, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) warned that the amendment's passage and ratification by US states would "immediately devastate programs that are appropriated annually, such as housing assistance, education, and scientific and medical research."
"And eventually it would require cutting programs such as Social Security, Medicare, and food assistance," the think tank added. "Claims that these programs would ultimately be protected ring hollow, given their share of the budget. If policymakers decide to shield those programs from cuts, the amendment would require lawmakers to devastate the rest of the federal budget—including Medicaid, food assistance, housing assistance, education, scientific and medical research, farm aid, national parks, transportation, airport security, mine safety—since revenue increases would be so hard to achieve."
Under the proposed amendment, two-thirds support in each chamber of Congress would be required to approve any new tax or increase in the tax rate, hamstringing lawmakers' ability to raise revenue.
"Ultimately, meeting longstanding and broadly popular commitments to seniors’ retirement and healthcare, and managing the future risks associated with higher debt, will require substantially more revenue," said CBPP's Brendan Duke. "This constitutional amendment moves in the opposite direction. Not only would it effectively bar tax increases, but it would allow unlimited tax cuts, thus forcing huge, unacceptable program cuts. It should be roundly rejected."