

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.

Sanjali De Silva, sdesilva@ucsusa.org, 303-396-7325
The County of Multnomah—encompassing Portland and parts of Vancouver metro areas—today filed a new lawsuit aiming to hold Big Oil accountable for public nuisance and damages related to the climate change crisis, as well as consumer fraud and deception.
County Commissioners, led by County Chair Jessica Vega Pederson, passed the resolution Thursday afternoon to sue oil and gas companies, energy companies, industry trade associations, and a consulting firm on behalf of their constituents, the residents of Multnomah County. The County is seeking remedies for damages related to the 2021 heat dome event, that has been directly linked to climate change through a growing body of attribution science.
The entities named in the suit include Chevron, ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, the American Petroleum Institute (API), Peabody Energy, and Koch Industries. The case is also the first time the consulting firm McKinsey and Company and the trade association Western States Petroleum Association have been named as defendants.
Oregon is facing increased costs from climate related impacts including worsened air quality, increased heat related deaths and increased risk of wildfires. In a recent report, the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) found that the world’s 88 largest fossil fuel companies—including ExxonMobil, BP, Chevron, and Shell—and cement manufacturers are responsible for over a third of area burned by wildfires across Western North America in the last 40 years. The historic heat dome named in the complaint also led to at least 69 heat deaths in the Portland area and record‑setting maximum temperatures of 116 degrees. The county estimates that costs from human-caused climate change will soon reach $27 billion annually in Oregon.
With today’s announcement, Multnomah County joins more than 40 cities, counties, and states across the U.S. and its territories that are suing major fossil fuel companies over devastating climate impacts and deliberate campaigns to spread disinformation about climate science and the harmful effects of their products.
Below is a statement by Delta Merner, lead scientist at the Science Hub for Climate Litigation at UCS:
“Multnomah County residents are on the frontlines of devastating climate change impacts. Extreme heat and wildfires are taking a massive toll on the health, well-being, and livelihoods of community members and leaving scars that will last for generations. A growing body of attribution science is paving the way for real accountability, showing over and over that the fossil fuel industry bears a great deal of responsibility for the damage done. As the first constitutional climate lawsuit trial draws to a close in Montana, plaintiffs, advocates, and scientists are hopeful that our justice system will work effectively, informed by robust scientific evidence.
“Across the country and the world, climate litigation is helping communities resist the fossil fuel industry’s attempts to further extend a dangerous, unjust and destructive fossil fuel-dependent energy system and economy. While nothing can truly compensate for the lives lost, the homes destroyed, or the irreplaceable natural landscapes forever altered, legal avenues provide a glimmer of hope for justice. Climate litigation is a necessary mechanism to hold these corporations accountable for their callous disregard for the well-being of communities and the planet.”
Additional Resources and Analyses:
The Union of Concerned Scientists is the leading science-based nonprofit working for a healthy environment and a safer world. UCS combines independent scientific research and citizen action to develop innovative, practical solutions and to secure responsible changes in government policy, corporate practices, and consumer choices.
"You cannot buy this administration's favor. For the right price, you can only borrow it. And the price always goes up."
Anna Gomez, the lone Democrat on the Federal Communications Commission, delivered a scathing attack on her own agency in a letter sent on Monday to Walt Disney Company CEO Josh D'Amaro.
At the start of her letter, Gomez told D'Amaro that his company "has once again been made a target by this FCC," as part of "a sustained, coordinated campaign of censorship and control, carried out through the weaponization of the FCC’s authority as a federal regulator."
Gomez said that while Disney, the parent company of television network ABC, is not the first media firm targeted by the administration's censorship campaign, its case is "the most documented," and thus "worth laying... out plainly."
The FCC commissioner said that the campaign against Disney started shortly after it agreed to pay $15 million to settle a lawsuit brought by President Donald Trump, which signaled to the president and allies that "pressure works," while also telling other major media companies that "capitulation was an option."
And instead of getting the Trump administration to back off, Gomez explained, Disney's decision to cave only emboldened it to crack down further.
"You cannot buy this administration's favor," she wrote. "For the right price, you can only borrow it. And the price always goes up."
Since the settlement, Gomez continued, the administration has opened up investigations into Disney's diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies, pressured the company to pull late-night talk show host Jimmy Kimmel off the air, and opened up an investigation into the daytime talk show "The View" after it hosted Democratic US Senate candidate James Talarico of Texas.
On top of all that, Gomez said, the FCC has demanded that eight ABC-owned local TV stations file early for renewal of their broadcast licenses, which she described as "the most egregious assault on the First Amendment" the agency has taken so far.
Gomez concluded her "blistering" letter by urging Disney to fight against administration efforts to censor it, and she said that both the law and the American public would be behind the company if it decides to take a stand.
"Your journalists do work that matters to millions of Americans across the country, and the viewers who rose up to defend Jimmy Kimmel are the same viewers who will stand up again if this FCC follows through with its threat," she wrote. "I am encouraged to see that Disney is choosing courage over capitulation. The fight ahead may not be easy, but the law, the facts, and the public are on your side. This is a fight worth having, and one that I am confident you will win."
Disney last week came out swinging against the Trump FCC over the agency's investigation into "The View," accusing the administration of trying to "upend decades of settled law and practice and chill critical protected speech, both with respect to ‘The View’ and more broadly.”
"Trump's true priority, ahead of absolutely everything else, is to go down in history in big letters," said one journalist. "Remaking everything, no matter in which direction or with what consequences."
President Donald Trump said on Monday that he is considering trying to annex Venezuela and make it a US state in an imperialist effort to seize more of its oil wealth.
It's one of nearly half a dozen nations or territories Trump has threatened to use US military might to illegally conquer and add to the US during his term, including Greenland, Canada, Cuba, and Panama.
According to Fox News correspondent John Roberts, Trump said in a phone call that he was “seriously considering making Venezuela the 51st US state,” citing the Latin American nation's possession of tens of trillions of dollars worth of oil.
“They were miserable. Now they’re happy. It’s being well run,” Trump recently told Full Measure's Sharyl Attkisson. “The oil that’s coming out is enormous, the biggest in many years. And the Big Oil companies are going in with the biggest, most beautiful rigs you’ve ever seen.”
One poll from the Venezuelan firm Meganálisis in March found that while the public was initially happy to be rid of their autocratic president, Nicolás Maduro—who was abducted by US forces in January—the majority now feel that Trump's action had little to do with democracy or the well-being of the Venezuelan people and more to do with handing control of the country's nationalized oil reserves to American companies, which Trump stated as his primary objective after ousting Maduro.
Trump left Maduro's vice president, Delcy Rodríguez, in place as Venezuela's interim leader with the promise that she'd act as a pliant collaborator with the US, whom she allowed to declare control over Venezuela's oil resources "indefinitely" amid market transitions.
The environmental activist group Global Witness has estimated that over the next 10 years, as much as $150 billion in oil revenue that was expected to go to the Venezuelan treasury, which could have funded projects to develop the impoverished country, instead may flow into the coffers of foreign companies.
Trump has spoken about the idea of Venezuela becoming the 51st state before, including after the country defeated Italy in the World Baseball Classic in March, when he posted on Truth Social: “STATEHOOD, #51, ANYONE?”
Last month, during a discussion about his desire to "take" Iran's oil, Trump described his takeover of Venezuela as something akin to the resource-hungry imperial conquests of centuries past.
"I'm a businessman first," he told reporters during a press briefing. "We've taken hundreds of millions of barrels [of oil], hundreds of millions... and paid for that war many, many times over. You know the old days, 'to the winner belong the spoils.' And I said, 'Why don't we use that?' We haven't had that in this country probably in 100 years." He then went on to lament the US-led efforts to "rebuild" Germany after World War II.
While the US has lifted personal sanctions on Rodríguez and some sanctions on the Venezuelan oil and banking sectors, most of the sanctions that have contributed to the country's economic collapse remain in place. "Full unrestricted access to global capital markets has not been restored," explained Roger D. Harris from the Task Force on the Americas and the US Peace Council in Common Dreams last week.
Actually adding Venezuela as a US state would require approval from both Congress and Venezuela itself—and Trump does not appear to have the latter.
Issuing a rare rebuke of the US on Monday, Rodríguez responded that becoming the 51st state "would never have been considered" by Venezuela.
"If there is one thing we Venezuelan men and women have, it is that we love our independence process, we love our heroes and heroines of independence," the interim leader said.
Though wars of conquest are expressly forbidden under international law, it's not clear what leverage Rodríguez would have to resist if Trump attempted to make good on his goal of expanding US territory.
Argemino Barro, a Spanish political journalist and author, said the possibility that he's serious can't be dismissed.
"Yes, of course, we can dismiss it as provocation or delusion, say that it's impracticable for XYZ reasons, etc. But this kind of comment is a window into the mindset of a man who fabricates his own reality, and not only that, but imposes it on others," Barro said. "Trump wants to build the world's largest triumphal arch right in the middle of Washington, overshadowing the Lincoln Memorial; he wants his face on coins and passports; his name appears on institutions, one airport. Annexing Venezuela, in his mind, fits 100%."
"I think Trump's true priority, ahead of absolutely everything else, is to go down in history in big letters. To enter the league of Alexander the Great, Jesus Christ, and Genghis Khan," he added. "Remaking everything, no matter in which direction or with what consequences."
"It is unthinkable and irresponsible to release technologies capable of destabilizing critical systems and then worry about the fallout afterward," said one expert.
Watchdog group Public Citizen is raising alarms after tech giant Google on Monday revealed that a group of criminal hackers used artificial intelligence to detect a previously unidentified software vulnerability.
As reported by The New York Times, Google said that it had "high confidence" that the hackers used AI to discover and exploit the vulnerability.
While Google said that the attack had been thwarted, the Times noted that the company "did not say precisely when the thwarted attack happened, whom it was targeting, or which AI platform the hackers used."
While the discovery of so-called "zero-day vulnerabilities" were once a rare occurrence, the proliferation of AI models has made them much easier for hackers to detect. In fact, AI software vendor Anthropic earlier this year said that it had developed a model that was so good at exploiting these vulnerabilities that it would not be releasing it publicly.
John Hultquist, chief analyst at Google Threat Intelligence Group, said in an interview with Cyberscoop that this kind of AI-assisted attack "is probably the tip of the iceberg and it’s certainly not going to be the last" to occur.
“The game’s already begun and we expect the capability trajectory is pretty sharp,” Hultquist explained. “We do expect that this will be a much bigger problem, that there will be more devastating zero-day attacks done over this, especially as capabilities grow.”
JB Branch, AI governance and technology policy counsel at Public Citizen, said the attempted AI exploit once against showed how reckless Big Tech has been in aggressively pushing this technology out the door.
"Cybersecurity experts are sounding the alarm, yet AI companies continue racing to release increasingly powerful models with little regard for the societal consequences," Branch said. "It is unthinkable and irresponsible to release technologies capable of destabilizing critical systems and then worry about the fallout afterward."
Branch also said it was well past time for Congress to step in and slap strict guardrails on the development of AI.
"We need enforceable AI regulations that require rigorous safety testing, independent review, and meaningful oversight before these systems ever reach the public," he said. "Regulators cannot remain in a perpetual game of catch-up while Big Tech gambles with the safety and stability of modern society."
While calls for more AI regulation have grown in recent months, Silicon Valley elites are planning to spend massive sums of money in this year's midterm elections to prevent candidates who support AI regulation from winning public office.
Leading the Future—a super political action committee (PAC) backed by venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, Palantir co-founder Joe Lonsdale, and other AI heavyweights—is spending at least $100 million to elect lawmakers who aim to pass legislation that would set a single set of AI regulations across the US, overriding any restrictions placed on the technology by state governments.