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
For Immediate Release
January, 08 2020, 11:00pm EDT
Contact:
Alec Connon, (206) 258-9176
Elana Sulakshana, (703) 589-0040
Activists to Shut Down Chase Branches Across Seattle With Song
Demonstration in solidarity with the Wet’suwet’en Nation’s struggle for sovereignty.
Seattle, WA
350 Seattle is organizing a protest on Friday, January 10 at Chase branches across Seattle and the Consulate General of Canada, in solidarity with the Wet'suwet'en Nation. This week marks a critical juncture in the Wet'suwet'en struggle against Coastal GasLink, the multibillion-dollar fossil fuel corporation trying to ram a massive fracked gas pipeline through unceded Wet'suwet'en territory without consent.
On New Year's Eve, the British Columbia Supreme Court granted an injunction against members of the Wet'suwet'en nation who have been stewarding and protecting their traditional territories, located 18 hours north of Seattle in northern British Columbia. Following the court ruling, Wet'suwet'en Hereditary Chiefs, representing the five clans of the Wet'suwet'en Nation, served an eviction notice to Coastal GasLink and ordered the fossil fuel corporation off of their lands immediately.
"Coastal GasLink has violated the Wet'suwet'en law of trespass, and has bulldozed through our territories, destroyed our archaeological sites, and occupied our land with industrial man-camps," wrote members of the Wet'suwet'en in a press release.
The Wet'suwet'en struggle has been in the spotlight this past month, following an explosive Guardian investigation revealing that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police were making preparations to to shoot Wet'suwet'en land defenders that stood in the way of Coastal GasLink one year ago.
In response to the imminent threat of yet another militarized raid, the Wet'suwent'en Nation have called for people across the globe to stand with them and organize actions in their communities this week. Heeding the call, 350 Seattle will be disrupting business at several branches of one Coastal GasLink's largest funders: JPMorgan Chase, as well as at the Consulate General of Canada on Friday.
WHAT: Let Justice Echo at Chase: Wet'suwet'en Solidarity Action
WHEN: Friday, Jan 10th, 10am - 1pm
WHERE: The action will begin at the Statue of Lenin in Fremont at 10am
MEDIA AVAILABILITY: Protesters will be available for interviews before and after the event.
PHOTOS: Contact Alec (alec@350seattle.org) for high-resolution photos after the event.
This protest is occurring on the same day as a coalition of over nearly two dozen national organizations--including the Sierra Club, 350.org, Rainforest Action Network, The YEARS Project, and Union of Concerned Scientists--is launching a major new campaign, Stop the Money Pipeline, targeting the financial sector's funding of climate chaos.
350 is building a future that's just, prosperous, equitable and safe from the effects of the climate crisis. We're an international movement of ordinary people working to end the age of fossil fuels and build a world of community-led renewable energy for all.
LATEST NEWS
'Vought Should Resign,' CFPB Workers Say of 'Pledge' to Be Nice to Wall Street Fraudsters
"What's next, 'Russell Vought Tells CFPB Examiners to Serve Tea to Their Wall Street Masters in Tiny French Maid Aprons'?"
Nov 25, 2025
“Why is Russell Vought showing the world his weird, creepy pledge of allegiance to big corporations? Have some dignity, Russell."
That's what Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Union member Alexis Goldstein said on Monday about the CFPB acting director's new "humility pledge" that examiners with the agency's Supervision Division will be forced to read to financial institutions before conducting reviews next year.
Several other CFPB Union members joined Goldstein in blasting Vought's pledge, including treasurer Gabe Hopkins, who said that "whoever wrote this has never even spoken to an examiner before, only been wined and dined by industry lobbyists."
The lengthy pledge states in part that the CFPB's "goal is to work collaboratively with the entities to review entities' processes
for compliance and/or remedy existing problems," and the agency "is doing so by encouraging self-reporting and resolving issues in Supervision, where feasible, instead of via Enforcement."
CFPB Union president Cat Farman inquired: "Is this fan fiction I'm reading? What's next, 'Russell Vought Tells CFPB Examiners to Serve Tea to Their Wall Street Masters in Tiny French Maid Aprons'?"
"Instead of traumatizing CFPB workers with his roleplay fantasies," Farman argued, "Vought should resign so we can finally do our jobs protecting Americans from Wall Street fraud again."
CFPB Workers don’t consent to Vought’s creepy “Humility Pledge” fantasy. nteu335.org/2025/11/24/c...
[image or embed]
— CFPB Union (@nteu335.bsky.social) November 24, 2025 at 11:17 AM
Vought—also the Senate-confirmed director of the Office of Management and Budget, a role he previously held during President Donald Trump's first term—has unsuccessfully tried to shutter the CFPB completely this year.
As the New York Times reported Monday:
The new pledge is, for now, mostly symbolic. Mr. Vought halted nearly all work at the bureau shortly after his arrival in February, and bank examinations have not resumed. The agency's hundreds of examiners have been told to spend their time closing out all open matters; they are currently barred from initiating new ones.
And Mr. Vought has refused to request money for the consumer bureau from the Federal Reserve, which funds its operations. The bureau warned in court filings that it would run out of operating cash early next year.
In a Friday statement announcing the pledge, the Vought-led agency claimed that under the Biden administration, the Supervision Division "was the weaponized arm of the CFPB."
The agency added that "where these exams were previously done with unnecessary personnel, outrageous travel expenses, and with the thuggery pervasive in prior leadership, they will now be done respectfully, promptly, professionally, and under budget."
Given that Vought "stopped all supervision exams in 2025, refuses to fund CFPB, and says he's shutting us down by 2026," CFPB Union member Doug Wilson asked: "So how will we supervise banks in 2026 if CFPB is closed? How can bank exams be 'under budget' if there is no budget?"
Ripping Vought's pledge and press release as "incredibly disrespectful to Supervision's dedicated workers," fellow CFPB Union member Tyler Creighton said that the pair of documents also "misunderstands or misconstrues Supervision's prior work."
"Supervision's workers have always conducted examinations professionally, efficiently, conscientiously, and with a focus on remedying consumer harm," Creighton said. "We will continue to do so as soon as Donald Trump and Vought end their 10-month suspension of examinations and let us get back to work for the American people."
Another CFPB Union member, Steve Wheeler, highlighted that "they're trying to make it sound like it’s groundbreaking to send notifications of exams ahead of time and keep data pulls relevant to the examined area, when those are things we already do."
Originally proposed by now-Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), the CFPB was created in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis via the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, signed in 2010 by then-President Barack Obama.
Warren joined the CFPB Union members in calling out the new pledge, declaring that "Donald Trump is Wall Street first."
Union member Ravisha "Avi" Kumar pointed out that "under previous administrations, CFPB examiners protected consumers from banks, like Wells Fargo, that incentivized their employees to cut corners and overlook consumer harm. CFPB forced the banks to return that stolen money to consumers."
"Ironically, under this administration, Vought says he will incentivize examiners to rush jobs (cut corners) and stick to the surface (overlook consumer harm)," Kumar added. "How is that still consumer financial protection?"
The pledge announcement came a day after CFPB officials told staff that much of the agency workforce will be furloughed at the end of the year and that remaining consumer litigation will be sent to the US Department of Justice (DOJ).
"This is Russ Vought's latest illegal power grab in his ongoing plan to shut down the CFPB and protect CEOs instead of consumers," said Farman. "CFPB attorneys are afraid DOJ will dismiss these cases."
"Vought's already helped Wall Street swindle $18 billion from Americans this year," the union leader continued. "If Vought is going to keep refusing to fund CFPB in order to illegally dismantle the agency, while he wastes over $5 million of CFPB's dwindling budget on personal bodyguards, then it's time for Congress to impeach and remove Russell Vought from power."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Sanders, Warren Help Form Senate Democratic ‘Fight Club’ Challenging Schumer’s Leadership
"So glad there are some Senate Dems willing to fight back," said one progressive strategist.
Nov 25, 2025
Angered by the Democratic leadership's fecklessness and lack of a bold vision for the future, a group of senators including Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts has formed an alliance to push back on Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and the party's campaign arm ahead of next year's critical midterm elections.
The existence of the group, known as the "Fight Club," was first revealed Monday by the New York Times, which reported that the senators are pressing the Democratic Party to "embrace candidates willing to challenge entrenched corporate interests, fiercely oppose the Trump administration, and defy their own party’s orthodoxy."
Sens. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, Tina Smith of Minnesota, and Chris Murphy of Connecticut are also members of the alliance, and other senators—including Ed Markey of Massachusetts and Jeff Merkley of Oregon—have taken part in group actions, according to the Times.
"The coalition of at least half a dozen senators... is unhappy with how Mr. Schumer and his fellow senator from New York, Kirsten Gillibrand, the head of Senate Democrats’ campaign arm, have chosen, recruited and, they argue, favored candidates aligned with the establishment," the newspaper reported. "The party’s campaign arm, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, has not made any formal endorsements in contested primaries. However, the senators are convinced that it is quietly signaling support for and pushing donors toward specific Senate candidates: Representative Angie Craig in Minnesota, Representative Haley Stevens in Michigan, and Gov. Janet Mills in Maine."
Members of the "Fight Club" have endorsed Minnesota Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan's bid for US Senate. In addition to Flanagan, Sanders has backed Abdul El-Sayed's US Senate run in Michigan and Graham Platner's campaign to unseat Republican Sen. Susan Collins in Maine.
Platner's top opponent in the primary race, Maine Gov. Janet Mills, was "aggressively recruited" by Schumer.
News of the "Fight Club" alliance comes after a small group of centrist Democrats, with Schumer's tacit blessing, capitulated to President Donald Trump and Republicans earlier this month by agreeing to end the government shutdown without an extension of Affordable Care Act subsidies, even as health insurance premiums skyrocket nationwide.
The cave sparked widespread fury, much of it directed at Schumer. Indivisible, a progressive advocacy group that typically aligns with Democrats, has said it will not support any Senate Democratic primary candidate who does not call on Schumer to step down as minority leader.
"We must turn the page on this era of cowardice," Indivisible said following Senate Democrats' capitulation. "We must nominate and elect Democratic candidates who have an actual backbone. And we must ensure that the kind of failed leadership we see from Senator Schumer does not doom a future Democratic majority."
Thus far, no sitting member of the Senate Democratic caucus has demanded Schumer's resignation. But the emergence of the "Fight Club" is the latest evidence that the Democratic leader's support is beginning to crumble.
"Absolutely love to see this," progressive strategist Robert Cruickshank wrote on social media in response to the Times reporting. "So glad there are some Senate Dems willing to fight back."
Keep ReadingShow Less
US Troops Near Venezuela Reportedly Denied Holiday Leave as Fears Grow of Unpopular and Lengthy Trump War
Meanwhile, newly released documents suggest the administration is gearing up to have troops in the region until the end of Trump's term.
Nov 25, 2025
Following reports that the Trump administration is eyeing a "deadly new phase" of military actions against Venezuela, including land strikes, a new report suggests that the US troops stationed near the South American nation are being denied holiday leave in anticipation of immediate action.
On Monday, NewsNation White House Correspondent Kellie Meyer reported via social media that the United States Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) is "restricting/limiting leave over the Thanksgiving and Christmas holidays in preparation for possible land strikes in the next 10 days to two weeks."
SOUTHCOM has denied the claim, with a spokesperson saying: "Our service members and civilian employees are always afforded the opportunity to take leave throughout the year, and that includes holiday periods."
As of yet, reports only suggest that the US may be planning imminent airstrikes against Venezuela. But as documents reported Tuesday by The Intercept revealed, the US is planning to maintain "a massive military presence in the Caribbean almost to the end of President Donald Trump’s term in office—suggesting the recent influx of American troops to the region won’t end anytime soon."
According to the report: "One spreadsheet outlining supplies for 'Puerto Rico Troops' notes tens of thousands of pounds of baked goods are scheduled for delivery from November 15 of this year to November 11, 2028. Foodstuff set to feed the troops include individually wrapped honey buns, vanilla cupcakes, sweet rolls, hamburger rolls, and flour tortillas." The food is slated to be delivered to every branch of the military, including the Coast Guard, Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps.
“The procurement’s length of time and the level of effort seemed to point to these operations continuing at the current level for several years,” said Mark Cancian, an analyst with the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “That’s significant because it means that the Navy will maintain a large presence in the Caribbean that is far larger than what it has been in recent years. It further implies that the Navy will be involved in these counter-drug operations.”
The Pentagon currently has more than 15,000 troops stationed in the region, the most since 1989, when the US launched a land invasion of Panama to topple the drug-running dictator Manuel Noriega, whom it had previously supported.
The reports came shortly after the US State Department designated the so-called "Cartel de los Soles," which the US accuses Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro of leading, as a "terrorist organization." This is despite the fact that it is not actually an organized cartel at all, but a media shorthand developed to refer to the alleged connections that high-level Venezuelan officials have to the drug trade.
“It is not a group,” Adam Isaacson, director for defense oversight at the Washington Office on Latin America organization, told the Associated Press Tuesday. “It’s not like a group that people would ever identify themselves as members. They don’t have regular meetings. They don’t have a hierarchy.”
Colombian journalist Juan Esteban Silva explains that the terrorist designation, despite its factual flimsiness, "gives the US authority to conduct covert operations, bring terrorism and drug charges, issue international arrest warrants, freeze assets, and block transactions. It also enables extraterritorial prosecution, travel restrictions, broader law enforcement and military cooperation, and asset seizures."
Maduro's government called the designation an "infamous, vile lie to justify an illegitimate and illegal intervention against Venezuela under the classic US format of regime change."
It comes after Reuters reported Sunday that “covert operations" in Venezuela "would likely be the first part of the new action against Maduro" and that the US was “prepared to use every element of American power” to achieve its goals in the region.
While stopping drug trafficking was the initial justification for the administration’s push for regime change, White House messaging has shifted in recent days, with officials telling Fox News that it "goes beyond the Maduro regime" and is also about "getting Russia, China, and Iran out of the Western hemisphere."
On Monday, US Rep. María Salazar (R-Fla.) gave a more candid explanation for the potentially imminent military action and the need for regime change on Fox Business.
Maduro, she said, "is understanding that we're about to go in." She went on: "Venezuela, for the American oil companies, will be a field day, because it will be more than a trillion dollars in economic activity. American companies can go in and fix all the oil rigs and everything that has to do with the Venezuelan petroleum companies."
Prior to returning to office, Trump said at a rally in 2023 that he regretted not invading Venezuela during his first term: "We would have taken [Venezuela] over; we would have gotten to all that oil; it would have been right next door.”
Though the White House appears increasingly committed to military action against Venezuela, it is overwhelmingly unpopular among Americans.
A CBS News/YouGov survey published on Sunday found that 70% of Americans—including 91% of Democrats and 42% of Republicans—are against the “US taking military action in Venezuela,” and a majority don’t believe a direct attack on Venezuela would even achieve the Trump administration’s stated goal of reducing the flow of drugs to the United States.
The same poll found that just 13% of Americans consider Venezuela to be a "major threat" to "US security," while 48% consider it a "minor threat," and 39% consider it to be "not a threat."
Alfons López Tena, a former member of the Catalan parliament and an analyst on public and international affairs, expressed shock at the Trump administration's brazenness despite the total lack of public consent for war.
"The US doesn’t feel at all like a country marching into war, 70% oppose military action in Venezuela," he said. "The government's cursory explanations show they are so heedless of public opinion that they don't even feel the need to mount a proper propaganda campaign."
Nathan J. Robinson, the editor-in-chief of the left-wing magazine Current Affairs, meanwhile, said he's not surprised.
"It's no mystery to a leftist when the US government's foreign policy is out of step with popular opinion," he said, "because we understand foreign policy is shaped by narrow elite interests."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular