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.
Hillary Clinton at a campaign rally at Hillside High School in Durham, North Carolina earlier this month. (Photo: Nathania Johnson/flickr/cc)
The media tells us that Hillary has a lock on the nomination. That news should make her supporters extremely nervous, and not because the prognosticators have been wrong so many times already. All Democrats should worry because her major policy and character flaws could leave us with a Republican president this fall. Here's why.
The media tells us that Hillary has a lock on the nomination. That news should make her supporters extremely nervous, and not because the prognosticators have been wrong so many times already. All Democrats should worry because her major policy and character flaws could leave us with a Republican president this fall. Here's why.
1. The Senator from Wall Street: This is not 1972 when the country was so deeply divided over the Vietnam War. That upheaval wrecked the Democratic Party and led to the Nixon landslide over George McGovern. Now the country is united against Wall Street. Hillary will have a great deal of difficulty triangulating her way to safety. She will never be able to explain away why she received over $11 million in corporate speaking fees, much of it from Wall Street, and why she still is accepting millions from Wall Street for her campaign.
The defensive lines she is using are weak -- Obama did it too. I have a proven record against Wall Street. I can't be bought. My proposals are even tougher than my opponent's.
Do you really think that will sell in the fall?
2. Free Trade Cheerleader: The neo-liberal consensus on corporate-managed trade has collapsed. The American people know they've been had. They see that average worker and thousands of communities have been screwed by trade agreements which put Americans in direct competition with low wage workers around the world. Hillary, during her husbands administration, pressed hard for NAFTA. And until very recently, she was proud of her work to develop the TPP -- "the gold standard" of all trade agreements she said -- until Bernie forced her to retreat. She has no credible defense.
3. Global Warrior: The American people are also turning away from regime change. Hillary's record is consistently hawkish. She voted for the Iraq War. She pushed for the takedown of Kaddafi and Assad. Now she wants a dangerous no-fly zone in Syria and she encourages the use of special OPS troops all over the world. The Libya and Middle East are her quagmire.
4. Enthusiasm Gap: While a Trump or a Cruz will draw many to the polls just to defeat them, there is no substitute for positive enthusiasm. We should be worried about the fact that Hillary is having difficulty breaking into double digits with young voters. That's where the real energy is this year. Maybe she can make up for this with older voters, especially women. But it's a gamble -- a big one. Those Sanders kids may stay home. And guilt-tripping them into voting is not likely to work.
5. Trust: Hillary does not generate trust. Nearly 55% of voters think it's a quality she lacks. Sure, it's a wash if Trump is the nominee, given his high unfavorables. But what if it's a Cruz-Kasich ticket or Ryan? Hillary will be hobbled. And it's not just a bum rap. She has shift-shaped too many times, on too many issues. Yes, you can always explain away any one instance or another, by saying how she has changed, learned or made a mistake. But doing so only reinforces the image that she's not being straight -- that she'll say whatever needs to be said to get elected.
6. "I" not "We": Hillary seems to say "I" more than any other candidate. The election is so clearly about her -- her record, her skills, her experience, her ability to get things done. I've been in the situation room. I've had to make the tough choices. I will work hard for you. "I" is her sense of public service. She wants to do for others, she says again and again. In normal times that might be enough, assuming it was believable. But these are not normal times. There are movements afoot. Bernie has made "we" the mantra of his political revolution. Trump talks about his movement. Cruz talks about the conservative movement. But voters want to be included, to be part of something important. Hillary doesn't have a feel for how to rally people to a cause. That's not her. She's an insider, a player, a person who commands $225,000 speaking fees. And that spells "I".
7. Working Class Blues: A lot has changed in the public's perception of Hillary since 2008 when she ran against Obama. Then, she captured the lion's share of the white working class vote. Much, but not all, had to do with race. It also had to do with the perception that she and Bill were public servants, not rich people. I feel your pain. Today, Hillary casts a different image. She and Bill are very, very rich. They hang out with other very rich people. Together, the Clintons have made over $130,000,000 during the last 8 years. They threw a multi-million dollar wedding for their daughter. That life style creates a growing chasm that separates them from the average working family.
Trump is much richer but doesn't talk that way. In comparison, Hillary sounds more like Jeb Bush -- the policy nerd. Not a good year for that.
8. Unmotivated African-American voters: Hillary is beating Bernie because of her lopsided support among black voters. Clearly the Clinton machine's many years of engagement with the black political and social infrastructures has made a difference. But will that translate into a massive turnout in November without Obama on the ticket? It's possible that her support for Wall Street and trade bills will temper the turnout among some black working class voters. And she doesn't seem to have any proposals that will generate real enthusiasm. Just saying "breaking all barriers" is not enough. Are we counting on Obama doing it for her?
9. The Typical Politician: Hillary sounds incredibly scripted -- like every line was carefully tested in a focus group. It's not just that she says them again and again. By this point, every candidate is a broken record. It's that she seems less than sincere. It's hard to fathom what she really believes. But that is not her biggest problem. Her real political character comes out when she goes on the attack. For example, her claim that Bernie didn't support the auto bailout was a monumental distortion, if not an outright fabrication. The fact that she doubled down and repeated accusations showed a political character that is not about trust. It's the opposite, in fact. It showed that we could trust her to lie, when necessary, to get what she wants -- what she feels is her due.
10. Weaker Polling: Hillary supporters should be worried that Bernie polls better against the Republicans. Yes, there are many ways to explain that away too. The argument most repeated is that the Republicans haven't done a number on him yet. Wait until they red-bait him....
But Hillary's poll numbers show weakness right now. Yes, she beats the Republicans in most polls. But why is Bernie doing better? Think about that for a bit. He's a self-declared socialist in the most capitalist country in the world and he's doing better than Hillary Rodham Clinton, a capitalist to the core? How can that be?
The answer is simple. Bernie is everything Hillary is not. He's a straight shooter, who is willing to fight Wall Street and to stop fighting useless wars. He offers bold proposals that would really make a tangible difference in people's lives, like free higher education. And he doesn't need to test his lines in a focus group. As a result, he has the enthusiastic support of young people of all hues. He's also a big hit with independents. Everyone knows he's completely committed to fighting runaway inequality. And this year, that's what voters really want.
What they don't want is what we're hearing from so many Hillary supporters -- defensiveness, complex explanations about why her positions have changed, why she's being treated unfairly, why her more centrists positions are really more progressive, why she's really telling the truth even when she isn't. It's spin after spin after spin. It doesn't sit well with voters.
Plain and simple, Hillary is a much bigger risk this fall than Bernie. It's not too late to do something about it.
Donald Trump’s attacks on democracy, justice, and a free press are escalating — putting everything we stand for at risk. We believe a better world is possible, but we can’t get there without your support. Common Dreams stands apart. We answer only to you — our readers, activists, and changemakers — not to billionaires or corporations. Our independence allows us to cover the vital stories that others won’t, spotlighting movements for peace, equality, and human rights. Right now, our work faces unprecedented challenges. Misinformation is spreading, journalists are under attack, and financial pressures are mounting. As a reader-supported, nonprofit newsroom, your support is crucial to keep this journalism alive. Whatever you can give — $10, $25, or $100 — helps us stay strong and responsive when the world needs us most. Together, we’ll continue to build the independent, courageous journalism our movement relies on. Thank you for being part of this community. |
Les Leopold is the executive director of the Labor Institute and author of the new book, “Wall Street’s War on Workers: How Mass Layoffs and Greed Are Destroying the Working Class and What to Do About It." (2024). Read more of his work on his substack here.
The media tells us that Hillary has a lock on the nomination. That news should make her supporters extremely nervous, and not because the prognosticators have been wrong so many times already. All Democrats should worry because her major policy and character flaws could leave us with a Republican president this fall. Here's why.
1. The Senator from Wall Street: This is not 1972 when the country was so deeply divided over the Vietnam War. That upheaval wrecked the Democratic Party and led to the Nixon landslide over George McGovern. Now the country is united against Wall Street. Hillary will have a great deal of difficulty triangulating her way to safety. She will never be able to explain away why she received over $11 million in corporate speaking fees, much of it from Wall Street, and why she still is accepting millions from Wall Street for her campaign.
The defensive lines she is using are weak -- Obama did it too. I have a proven record against Wall Street. I can't be bought. My proposals are even tougher than my opponent's.
Do you really think that will sell in the fall?
2. Free Trade Cheerleader: The neo-liberal consensus on corporate-managed trade has collapsed. The American people know they've been had. They see that average worker and thousands of communities have been screwed by trade agreements which put Americans in direct competition with low wage workers around the world. Hillary, during her husbands administration, pressed hard for NAFTA. And until very recently, she was proud of her work to develop the TPP -- "the gold standard" of all trade agreements she said -- until Bernie forced her to retreat. She has no credible defense.
3. Global Warrior: The American people are also turning away from regime change. Hillary's record is consistently hawkish. She voted for the Iraq War. She pushed for the takedown of Kaddafi and Assad. Now she wants a dangerous no-fly zone in Syria and she encourages the use of special OPS troops all over the world. The Libya and Middle East are her quagmire.
4. Enthusiasm Gap: While a Trump or a Cruz will draw many to the polls just to defeat them, there is no substitute for positive enthusiasm. We should be worried about the fact that Hillary is having difficulty breaking into double digits with young voters. That's where the real energy is this year. Maybe she can make up for this with older voters, especially women. But it's a gamble -- a big one. Those Sanders kids may stay home. And guilt-tripping them into voting is not likely to work.
5. Trust: Hillary does not generate trust. Nearly 55% of voters think it's a quality she lacks. Sure, it's a wash if Trump is the nominee, given his high unfavorables. But what if it's a Cruz-Kasich ticket or Ryan? Hillary will be hobbled. And it's not just a bum rap. She has shift-shaped too many times, on too many issues. Yes, you can always explain away any one instance or another, by saying how she has changed, learned or made a mistake. But doing so only reinforces the image that she's not being straight -- that she'll say whatever needs to be said to get elected.
6. "I" not "We": Hillary seems to say "I" more than any other candidate. The election is so clearly about her -- her record, her skills, her experience, her ability to get things done. I've been in the situation room. I've had to make the tough choices. I will work hard for you. "I" is her sense of public service. She wants to do for others, she says again and again. In normal times that might be enough, assuming it was believable. But these are not normal times. There are movements afoot. Bernie has made "we" the mantra of his political revolution. Trump talks about his movement. Cruz talks about the conservative movement. But voters want to be included, to be part of something important. Hillary doesn't have a feel for how to rally people to a cause. That's not her. She's an insider, a player, a person who commands $225,000 speaking fees. And that spells "I".
7. Working Class Blues: A lot has changed in the public's perception of Hillary since 2008 when she ran against Obama. Then, she captured the lion's share of the white working class vote. Much, but not all, had to do with race. It also had to do with the perception that she and Bill were public servants, not rich people. I feel your pain. Today, Hillary casts a different image. She and Bill are very, very rich. They hang out with other very rich people. Together, the Clintons have made over $130,000,000 during the last 8 years. They threw a multi-million dollar wedding for their daughter. That life style creates a growing chasm that separates them from the average working family.
Trump is much richer but doesn't talk that way. In comparison, Hillary sounds more like Jeb Bush -- the policy nerd. Not a good year for that.
8. Unmotivated African-American voters: Hillary is beating Bernie because of her lopsided support among black voters. Clearly the Clinton machine's many years of engagement with the black political and social infrastructures has made a difference. But will that translate into a massive turnout in November without Obama on the ticket? It's possible that her support for Wall Street and trade bills will temper the turnout among some black working class voters. And she doesn't seem to have any proposals that will generate real enthusiasm. Just saying "breaking all barriers" is not enough. Are we counting on Obama doing it for her?
9. The Typical Politician: Hillary sounds incredibly scripted -- like every line was carefully tested in a focus group. It's not just that she says them again and again. By this point, every candidate is a broken record. It's that she seems less than sincere. It's hard to fathom what she really believes. But that is not her biggest problem. Her real political character comes out when she goes on the attack. For example, her claim that Bernie didn't support the auto bailout was a monumental distortion, if not an outright fabrication. The fact that she doubled down and repeated accusations showed a political character that is not about trust. It's the opposite, in fact. It showed that we could trust her to lie, when necessary, to get what she wants -- what she feels is her due.
10. Weaker Polling: Hillary supporters should be worried that Bernie polls better against the Republicans. Yes, there are many ways to explain that away too. The argument most repeated is that the Republicans haven't done a number on him yet. Wait until they red-bait him....
But Hillary's poll numbers show weakness right now. Yes, she beats the Republicans in most polls. But why is Bernie doing better? Think about that for a bit. He's a self-declared socialist in the most capitalist country in the world and he's doing better than Hillary Rodham Clinton, a capitalist to the core? How can that be?
The answer is simple. Bernie is everything Hillary is not. He's a straight shooter, who is willing to fight Wall Street and to stop fighting useless wars. He offers bold proposals that would really make a tangible difference in people's lives, like free higher education. And he doesn't need to test his lines in a focus group. As a result, he has the enthusiastic support of young people of all hues. He's also a big hit with independents. Everyone knows he's completely committed to fighting runaway inequality. And this year, that's what voters really want.
What they don't want is what we're hearing from so many Hillary supporters -- defensiveness, complex explanations about why her positions have changed, why she's being treated unfairly, why her more centrists positions are really more progressive, why she's really telling the truth even when she isn't. It's spin after spin after spin. It doesn't sit well with voters.
Plain and simple, Hillary is a much bigger risk this fall than Bernie. It's not too late to do something about it.
Les Leopold is the executive director of the Labor Institute and author of the new book, “Wall Street’s War on Workers: How Mass Layoffs and Greed Are Destroying the Working Class and What to Do About It." (2024). Read more of his work on his substack here.
The media tells us that Hillary has a lock on the nomination. That news should make her supporters extremely nervous, and not because the prognosticators have been wrong so many times already. All Democrats should worry because her major policy and character flaws could leave us with a Republican president this fall. Here's why.
1. The Senator from Wall Street: This is not 1972 when the country was so deeply divided over the Vietnam War. That upheaval wrecked the Democratic Party and led to the Nixon landslide over George McGovern. Now the country is united against Wall Street. Hillary will have a great deal of difficulty triangulating her way to safety. She will never be able to explain away why she received over $11 million in corporate speaking fees, much of it from Wall Street, and why she still is accepting millions from Wall Street for her campaign.
The defensive lines she is using are weak -- Obama did it too. I have a proven record against Wall Street. I can't be bought. My proposals are even tougher than my opponent's.
Do you really think that will sell in the fall?
2. Free Trade Cheerleader: The neo-liberal consensus on corporate-managed trade has collapsed. The American people know they've been had. They see that average worker and thousands of communities have been screwed by trade agreements which put Americans in direct competition with low wage workers around the world. Hillary, during her husbands administration, pressed hard for NAFTA. And until very recently, she was proud of her work to develop the TPP -- "the gold standard" of all trade agreements she said -- until Bernie forced her to retreat. She has no credible defense.
3. Global Warrior: The American people are also turning away from regime change. Hillary's record is consistently hawkish. She voted for the Iraq War. She pushed for the takedown of Kaddafi and Assad. Now she wants a dangerous no-fly zone in Syria and she encourages the use of special OPS troops all over the world. The Libya and Middle East are her quagmire.
4. Enthusiasm Gap: While a Trump or a Cruz will draw many to the polls just to defeat them, there is no substitute for positive enthusiasm. We should be worried about the fact that Hillary is having difficulty breaking into double digits with young voters. That's where the real energy is this year. Maybe she can make up for this with older voters, especially women. But it's a gamble -- a big one. Those Sanders kids may stay home. And guilt-tripping them into voting is not likely to work.
5. Trust: Hillary does not generate trust. Nearly 55% of voters think it's a quality she lacks. Sure, it's a wash if Trump is the nominee, given his high unfavorables. But what if it's a Cruz-Kasich ticket or Ryan? Hillary will be hobbled. And it's not just a bum rap. She has shift-shaped too many times, on too many issues. Yes, you can always explain away any one instance or another, by saying how she has changed, learned or made a mistake. But doing so only reinforces the image that she's not being straight -- that she'll say whatever needs to be said to get elected.
6. "I" not "We": Hillary seems to say "I" more than any other candidate. The election is so clearly about her -- her record, her skills, her experience, her ability to get things done. I've been in the situation room. I've had to make the tough choices. I will work hard for you. "I" is her sense of public service. She wants to do for others, she says again and again. In normal times that might be enough, assuming it was believable. But these are not normal times. There are movements afoot. Bernie has made "we" the mantra of his political revolution. Trump talks about his movement. Cruz talks about the conservative movement. But voters want to be included, to be part of something important. Hillary doesn't have a feel for how to rally people to a cause. That's not her. She's an insider, a player, a person who commands $225,000 speaking fees. And that spells "I".
7. Working Class Blues: A lot has changed in the public's perception of Hillary since 2008 when she ran against Obama. Then, she captured the lion's share of the white working class vote. Much, but not all, had to do with race. It also had to do with the perception that she and Bill were public servants, not rich people. I feel your pain. Today, Hillary casts a different image. She and Bill are very, very rich. They hang out with other very rich people. Together, the Clintons have made over $130,000,000 during the last 8 years. They threw a multi-million dollar wedding for their daughter. That life style creates a growing chasm that separates them from the average working family.
Trump is much richer but doesn't talk that way. In comparison, Hillary sounds more like Jeb Bush -- the policy nerd. Not a good year for that.
8. Unmotivated African-American voters: Hillary is beating Bernie because of her lopsided support among black voters. Clearly the Clinton machine's many years of engagement with the black political and social infrastructures has made a difference. But will that translate into a massive turnout in November without Obama on the ticket? It's possible that her support for Wall Street and trade bills will temper the turnout among some black working class voters. And she doesn't seem to have any proposals that will generate real enthusiasm. Just saying "breaking all barriers" is not enough. Are we counting on Obama doing it for her?
9. The Typical Politician: Hillary sounds incredibly scripted -- like every line was carefully tested in a focus group. It's not just that she says them again and again. By this point, every candidate is a broken record. It's that she seems less than sincere. It's hard to fathom what she really believes. But that is not her biggest problem. Her real political character comes out when she goes on the attack. For example, her claim that Bernie didn't support the auto bailout was a monumental distortion, if not an outright fabrication. The fact that she doubled down and repeated accusations showed a political character that is not about trust. It's the opposite, in fact. It showed that we could trust her to lie, when necessary, to get what she wants -- what she feels is her due.
10. Weaker Polling: Hillary supporters should be worried that Bernie polls better against the Republicans. Yes, there are many ways to explain that away too. The argument most repeated is that the Republicans haven't done a number on him yet. Wait until they red-bait him....
But Hillary's poll numbers show weakness right now. Yes, she beats the Republicans in most polls. But why is Bernie doing better? Think about that for a bit. He's a self-declared socialist in the most capitalist country in the world and he's doing better than Hillary Rodham Clinton, a capitalist to the core? How can that be?
The answer is simple. Bernie is everything Hillary is not. He's a straight shooter, who is willing to fight Wall Street and to stop fighting useless wars. He offers bold proposals that would really make a tangible difference in people's lives, like free higher education. And he doesn't need to test his lines in a focus group. As a result, he has the enthusiastic support of young people of all hues. He's also a big hit with independents. Everyone knows he's completely committed to fighting runaway inequality. And this year, that's what voters really want.
What they don't want is what we're hearing from so many Hillary supporters -- defensiveness, complex explanations about why her positions have changed, why she's being treated unfairly, why her more centrists positions are really more progressive, why she's really telling the truth even when she isn't. It's spin after spin after spin. It doesn't sit well with voters.
Plain and simple, Hillary is a much bigger risk this fall than Bernie. It's not too late to do something about it.
"Call it what it is: a pay cut and a betrayal of the working people," said One Fair Wage.
With backing from the restaurant lobby, the Washington, D.C. city council voted Monday to gut plans to raise wages for tipped workers, which had already been approved by the public.
It's the second time the council has overturned a wage increase for tipped workers that the public voted for, having already done so once in 2018.
Under federal law, tipped workers are allowed to be paid a much lower minimum wage—just $2.13 per hour compared with $7.25 for nontipped workers. Tipped workers are, consequentially, more likely to live in poverty.
This is the case in Washington, D.C., where, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics analyzed by the Economic Policy Institute, 7.7% of tipped workers live in poverty compared to 2.6% of nontipped workers.
In 2022, D.C. voters overwhelmingly voted to address this problem, supporting Initiative 82, which would have gradually raised the minimum wage for tipped workers—just over $5.35 an hour at the time—to match what other workers receive by 2027.
In 2022, D.C.'s standard minimum wage—which increases each year pegged to inflation—was $16.10. As of 2025, it has increased to $17.95.
As the initiative to raise the tipped minimum wage began, restaurant industry lobbying groups like the Restaurant Association of Metropolitan Washington (RAMW) fought tooth-and-nail to roll it back.
In Jacobin, Raeghn Draper wrote that this group, and others like it around the country, "claim to speak on behalf of restaurant workers, but they are not worker organizations."
Instead, Draper wrote, "They are extensions of the National Restaurant Association (NRA), an industry group historically aligned with large corporate chains like McDonald's, Taco Bell, and Olive Garden—none exactly known for their commitment to workers' rights or well-being."
These groups waged an aggressive disinformation campaign, claiming that by phasing out the subminimum wage, restaurants, crushed by their increasing operating costs, would be forced to close en masse.
The RAMW even touted a survey of its own member restaurants purporting to show that 44% of full-service casual restaurants would have no choice but to close their doors by the end of 2025 due to the policy.
As Draper points out, citing data from an independent investigation by D.C.'s Office of the Budget Director, "the number of D.C. restaurant closures in 2024 did rise slightly compared to the previous year, but restaurant openings also increased, outpacing closures by a margin of two to one."
A study by the EPI likewise found that—despite industry claims that the higher wage requirements were forcing restaurants to lay off their employees—D.C. was seeing more employment growth than other towns in the region without requirements to raise wages.
But media outlets uncritically reported the restaurant industry's narrative about mass closures, and their attempts to "manufacture a crisis," as Draper says, paid off.
While making public appearances with restaurant industry lobbyists, Democratic Mayor Muriel Bowser signed legislation halting the wage increases in June—freezing the tipped minimum wage at $10 an hour. She pushed for a full repeal, which would have knocked the tipped wage back down to $8 an hour. But the city council voted it down.
On Monday, despite fierce protests from workers and unions, the city council voted 7-5 to freeze the tipped wage at $10 until July 2026, when it will increase by a measly five cents. They also voted to dramatically slow the tipped wage increases to just 5% each year until 2034, when it will be capped at 75% of the standard minimum wage.
Members of the council, as well as many media outlets, including Axios and The Washington Post, described the decision as a "compromise" between employers and workers. RAMW, which lamented that it was "not a full repeal," has portrayed it that way, though it nevertheless described it as a "win for the industry."
Fair wage activists, however, described it not as a compromise, but an assault on a hard-won democratic victory.
"In what world is this a compromise?" asked One Fair Wage, one of the groups that campaigned for the initiative. "Call it what it is: a pay cut and a betrayal of the working people."
"D.C. Council just voted to overturn the will of the people and freeze wages for tipped workers," said the Fair Budget Coalition in a post on X following the vote. "As rents and other costs rise, it is a CHOICE to maintain a subminimum wage for struggling D.C. residents."
According to EPI, a person living in Washington, D.C. needs to earn just under $31 an hour to afford the cost of living. The average wage paid to tipped workers like bartenders, waiters, and waitresses falls several dollars short of this.
"The voters told us what they wanted when they voted overwhelmingly for I-82—twice—and this is not it," said Brianne Nadeau, one of the council members who voted against reversing the wage hikes. "Restaurant workers and the organizations that represent them have been fighting this battle for wage protections for years, and they shouldn't have to keep fighting it. And this council should not keep on telling the voters they don't know what's best for themselves."
"The council chose corporate lobbyists over tipped workers," said One Fair Wage. To the council members who voted for it, they said: "We see you. We won't forget."
Even right-wing Brazilian politicians are condemning Trump's actions as "an unacceptable attempt at foreign interference."
U.S. President Donald Trump is facing international condemnation for his decision to level sanctions against Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes in a bid to punish him for overseeing the criminal trial of former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, a longtime Trump ally.
The Guardian reported on Wednesday that Brazilian political leaders are not backing down in the face of Trump's economic warfare, which includes not only sanctions against Moraes but also 50% tariffs on several key Brazilian exports to the United States, including coffee and beef.
Chamber of Deputies member José Guimarães, a member of the left-wing Partido dos Trabalhadores, described Trump's actions as "a direct attack on Brazilian democracy and sovereignty" and vowed that "we will not accept foreign interference in... our justice system."
Left-wing politicians weren't the only ones to criticize the sanctions and tariffs, as right-wing Partido Novo founder João Amoêdo condemned them as "an unacceptable attempt at foreign interference in the Brazilian justice system." Eduardo Leite, the conservative governor of the state of Rio Grande do Sul, said he refused to accept "another country trying to interfere in our institutions" as Trump has done.
In justifying the sanctions and tariffs, the Trump White House said they were a measure to combat what it described as "the government of Brazil's politically motivated persecution, intimidation, harassment, censorship, and prosecution of former Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro and thousands of his supporters."
Bolsonaro is currently on trial for undertaking an alleged coup plot to prevent the country's current president, Luiz Inacio Lula Da Silva, from taking power after his victory in Brazil's 2022 presidential election.
Eduardo Bolsonaro, the son of the former president, openly celebrated Trump's punitive measures against Brazil this week, which earned him a stiff rebuke from the editorial board of Folha de São Paulo, one of Brazil's largest daily newspapers. In their piece, the Folha editors labeled Eduardo Bolsonaro an "enemy of Brazil" and said he was behaving like "a buffoon at the feet of a foreign throne" with his open lobbying of the Trump administration to punish his own country.
Elsewhere in the world, the U.K.-based magazine The Economist leveled Trump for his Brazil sanctions, which it described as an "unprecedented" assault on the country's sovereignty. The magazine also outlined the considerable evidence that the former Brazilian president took part in a coup plot, including a plan written out by Bolsonaro deputy chief of staff Mario Fernandes to assassinate or kidnap Lula and Moraes before the end of Bolsonaro's lone presidential term.
U.S. government reform advocacy group Public Citizen was also quick to condemn Trump's actions, which it described as a "shameless power grab."
"Trump's order sets a horrifying precedent that literally any domestic judicial action or democratically enacted policy set by another country could somehow justify a U.S. national emergency and bestow the president with powers far beyond what the Constitution provides," said Melinda St. Louis, global trade watch director at Public Citizen.
St. Louis also predicted that the tariffs on Brazil would soon be tossed out by courts given their capricious justifications, although she said the reputation of the U.S. would suffer "lasting damage."
"Follow the money," one critic wrote in response to the Justice Department's decision to drop an antitrust case against American Express Global Business Travel.
The U.S. Justice Department this week dropped an antitrust case against a company represented by the lobbying firm that employed Pam Bondi before her confirmation as attorney general earlier this year.
American Express Global Business Travel (Amex GBT) has paid the lobbying giant Ballard Partners hundreds of thousands of dollars this year to pressure Bondi's Justice Department on "antitrust issues," according to federal disclosures.
The DOJ's decision to drop the antitrust lawsuit, which was initially filed during the final days of the Biden administration, allows Amex GBT's acquisition of rival CWT Holdings to move forward despite concerns that the merger would harm competition in the travel management sector. Amex GBT said it was "pleased" the DOJ dropped the case ahead of trial, which was set to begin in September.
Lee Hepner, senior legal counsel for the anti-monopoly American Economic Liberties Project, called the Justice Department's move "so so so corrupt" and urged observers to "follow the money."
Amex GBT paid Ballard Partners $50,000 in the first quarter of 2025 and $150,000 in the second quarter to lobby the Justice Department. Jon Golinger, democracy advocate with Public Citizen, said last week that "the American people deserve to know whether Attorney General Bondi has been involved with her former firm's lobbying and if the red carpet is being rolled out for these clients by the Department of Justice because of her former role at Ballard."
"If Bondi has been involved with the Ballard firm's lobbying, she has likely violated the ethics pledge," Golinger added. "The American people deserve an attorney general who always puts their needs above the special interest agendas of former business associates."
Scrutiny of the Justice Department's decision to drop the Amex GBT case comes amid allegations of corruption surrounding the DOJ's merger settlement with Hewlett Packard Enterprise and Juniper Networks last month. It also comes days after the Justice Department fired two of its top antitrust officials.
The American Prospect's David Dayen noted Tuesday that the Justice Department's voluntary dismissal of the Amex GBT lawsuit means the case—unlike the Hewlett Packard Enterprise and Juniper settlement—doesn't have to face a Tunney Act review.
In a statement to the Prospect, a Justice Department spokesperson denied that Bondi had any involvement in the antitrust division's decision to drop the Amex GBT case.
"The smell of corruption has gotten bad enough that they're trying to shape the information environment," Dayen wrote in response to the DOJ statement.