SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER

Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

* indicates required
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Opinion
Climate
Economy
Politics
Rights & Justice
War & Peace
Forbearance, thy name is: Fauci at latest Senate hearing
Further

Desperately Seeking Scapegoats

Killing The Messenger Dept: Somehow going still lower, Republicans - aka "you absolute fucking pieces of shit" - just hauled Dr. Anthony Fauci into a Senate hearing to charge the guy who saved three million lives with "sabotaging" a dog heartworm pill, wanting to be a megalomanic "sun god," destroying "Americans' trust in their government" and probs being "responsible for this entire pandemic." In response, Fauci, "the man they cannot forgive for being right," declined to answer any of their "questions."

Wednesday's Stalinist circus shitshow trial from a GOP so desperately bogged down they've resorted to, "Ok, but remember the pandemic?" - and forget the Epstein files - offered dismal proof they're still mindlessly bowdlerizing science and using Fauci - a Cornell-trained, 85-year-old immunologist and infectious disease specialist who spent over 50 years in public service - as its main punching bag. Fauci, who evil bridge troll Steve Bannon once said should be beheaded, served almost 40 years as head of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (Niaid) under 7 presidents. Reagan hired him, George H. W. Bush cited him when asked to name someone he admired, George W. gave him a Presidential Medal of Freedom and asked him to design a wildly successful AIDS relief PEPFAR that saved 25 million lives, most poor people in Africa.

In the 1980s, HIV/AIDS was one of multiple public health crises largely afflicting marginalized populations, along with Ebola and a first coronavirus, that Fauci confronted with grace and courage. "AIDS arrived attached to a despised population," notes one observer. "Fauci did not look away." He redirected research toward what was then deemed a plague "when it was neither safe nor popular," and when furious, screaming, ill AIDS activists stormed his office, he invited them in, listened to them, decided they were at least partly right and expedited clinical trials so patients could get quicker access to experimental drugs. Fierce AIDS activist Larry Kramer, who once called Fauci "an incompetent murderer," years later called him "the only true and great hero" among government officials of the time.

This week's hearing, called and convened under subpoena by rabid gadfly and Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, was billed as an investigation into the origins of COVID, a legit scientific question that to some extent remains unresolved. For years, MAGA has chosen to blame an accidental "lab leak" from China's Wuhan Institute of Virology, and Paul has devoted much of his otherwise less-than-memorable political career to arguing, according to that theory, that Dr. Fauci “could be responsible for this entire pandemic” - because NIH once provided the Institute with a sub-grant. Most virologists and other health experts say it was more likely caused by the occasional "spillover event" of a virus jumping from an infected animal to a human, arguing the “preponderance” of evidence points to that natural origin.

Public health officials have stepped up to protest the government's “vilification and harassment" of American scientists,” and a group of 155 scientists wrote an open letter dismissing bizarre MAGA charges against Fauci - he covered up the origins of his own research, bribed or others to join him, holds patents on vaccines, is working with bad actors to suppress the awful truth - as "baseless...No credible evidence has been produced to support these absurd charges." Still, Paul's office spent last weekend dumping over 1,100 pages of Fauci’s private “diary” online; after blowback, they took them down, made redactions and reposted them. Inadvertently or no, they left in Fauci's various descriptions of Trump as “rambling,” “crazy,” “bumbling,” “incompetent,” “an idiot” and “truly an obnoxious adolescent.”

In a somber preamble, Fauci noted over the decades he has testified before Congress, willingly and under oath, hundreds of times. But because he "has spent years playing Twister with these sinuous assholes (and) he knows it doesn’t matter what the spinner says," he went on, "Though it pains me to do so because of the respect I have for the legislative branch of government," following counsel's advice he would invoke the Fifth and "refrain from answering your questions." He also blasted Paul's "unhinged obsession" with him. Then, dozens of times over the infuriating hours, he intoned, "I respectfully decline to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.“ Later, an expert noted his carefully neutral body language during the ordeal: "He is refusing to participate in the confrontation beyond what is legally required.”

Paul - the only senator to vote against $8.3 billion in emergency spending during COVID, and the first senator to get it - grew agitated by Fauci's calm stream of refusals. He threatened him with "repercussions" and with a charge of contempt. Heatedly refusing to allow any of Fauci's attorneys to join him - "The attorneys were not recognized," he snarled - at one point he called on security to escort out of the hearing room one lawyer after he attempted to speak with Fauci. "This is the way Anthony Fauci wants to be remembered - for a lawyer not recognizing the rules," he said. "Security, please remove him from the room.” The attorney gently patted Fauci on the shoulder and turned to leave on his own; a guard sheepishly trailed after him. In the audience, Laura Ingraham and other MAGA-ites applauded, because they have no shame and never will.

Rand and other Republicans tried to claim Fauci had no right to take the Fifth because Biden issued him a preemptive pardon that eliminated that privilege, an ongoing debate in some legal circles. What is not debated though Repubs tried to argue otherwise: Invoking the Fifth Amendment is not a confession of guilt, but a foundational right against self-incrimination as long as there exists a valid threat of prosecution. Most pointedly, the Fifth does not represent guilt but "the ordinary caution" of any citizen who is dragged before a hostile panel by a vindictive chairman vowing for years to put him behind bars, and who "understands this hearing was "never a search for information but a search for a crime - of having stood in public and told a frightened country the truth, while a president lied to it."

Public health experts now say roughly 40% of America's million-plus COVID deaths, representing hundreds of thousands of lives, could have been prevented under more effective federal policies. But because they were caused by an idiotic malignant narcissist tragically unable to admit he's ever fucked up - or to allow anyone around him to admit it - the lies keep spewing. Last year the White House published a paper on the lab-leak theory as a rationale to defund the NIH, justify cutting over a billion dollars in state and local health funding, and gut cancer and Alzheimers research; now, citing that lame lie and dreaded diversity, they're trying to put the entire $1 trillion federal grant apparatus under the control of political appointees. This week, in honor of Paul's hearing, Trump wrote Dr. Fauci’s ideas were "CRAZY."

On Wednesday, MAGA dutifully jumped in. Cowardly slimebag Josh Hawley, who fist-pumped then ran away from the mob who smeared shit on the Capitol walls, said Fauci had no right to invoke the Fifth, "This is about contempt for this body and the American people," and, yuge pot/kettle, the good doctor was a lying megalomaniac who "wanted to be the sun god." Bernie Moreno demanded Fauci apologize for his crimes and sneered, "Who the fuck did you think you were?" Roger Marshall, an alleged doctor, said vaccine lies "made Americans not trust their government," though unvaxxed MAGA died at twice the rate of Dems. Ron Johnson called a vaccine that saved millions of lives "an experimental gene therapy, and accused Fauci of lying in his own diary, eliciting the day's only smile from him.

Later, a frustrated Paul told reporters he would hold Fauci in contempt, though it's not up to him. Besides, notes Tom Wellborn, the spectacle wasn't really about answers to questions; it was about a mob of willfully ignorant quacks and losers finding an imaginary villain. "Fauci was the man on the screen," he writes. "He absorbed the rage that had nowhere else to go." Above all, Fauci was hated, not for lying, but for "telling the truth to people who did not want to hear it." He "stood between the American public and a president who wanted the problem to vanish before an election," who suggested insane things - Ivermectin, disinfectant, lights - as Fauci carefully contradicted him, "trying to keep his job long enough to keep being useful."

Fauci wasn't a saint, Wellborn writes, and he wasn't right about everything. But he was "right about the things that mattered most" - it was airborne, masks and distance helped. He "told the truth as the science understood it at the time, and when the science changed, as science does, he changed the guidance, and his enemies have spent years calling those updates lies." Meanwhile, "he saved lives, and they were on the other side." Most vital: To remember "that in the summer of 2026, a man who had given his entire adult life to keeping other people alive was hauled before a hostile Senate by a colleague nursing a personal vendetta... and which of the two men in that room had spent his life saving strangers, and which spent his trying to jail the person who did."

"As some day it may happen/that a victim must be found" - Gilbert and Sullivan's I've Got A Little List

SEE ALL
Russ Vought speaks while Donald Trump looks on
News

‘Stunning Admission’: Trump Admin Targeted Democrats by Canceling Clean Energy Grants

President Donald Trump's administration has admitted in court that it chose to cancel certain grants for clean energy projects because they were set to benefit Democratic-voting states.

The New York Times reported on Friday that attorneys representing the US Department of Energy (DOE) acknowledged in court documents filed earlier this month that decisions about canceling grants were based "solely on the political identity of the grant recipient’s state, i.e., whether the recipient’s location and/or place of performance was in a Blue State or a non-Blue State."

The Times described this as a "stunning admission" that "offered an unvarnished glimpse into the way President Trump has weaponized the provision of federal education, energy, health, housing, and infrastructure aid in his second term."

According to the Times, the DOE last year recommended canceling more than 600 grants awarded for energy projects under former President Joe Biden's administration.

However, the White House Office of Management and Budget only made 284 of the recommended cuts while leaving the rest of the grants in place.

After a group of California researchers challenged the terminated grants in a lawsuit, the DOE acknowledged that "with one exception, the 284 terminated grants had a recipient location and/or at least one place of performance in a state that awarded its electoral votes to Kamala Harris in the 2024 election and has two Democratic-caucusing senators."

The DOE also admitted that there was no "programmatic, statutory, cost-reduction, or performance-based factor" to justify the cuts.

In a social media post, New York Times reporter Tony Romm noted that the DOE made these admissions "as part of a process meant to avoid discovery" and "perhaps spare it from sharing more damaging records" in its possession.

The Times report drew a sharp reaction from Trump administration critics.

"This is corruption," said Rep. Laura Friedman (D-Calif.). "It’s how this administration has acted since day one: punishing states, businesses, and ordinary Americans who push back on Trump. It’s a major betrayal of our nation that will lead to higher energy prices and should be condemned by people of all political parties. It’s un-American and despicable."

Sen. Andy Kim (D-NJ) accused the administration of "the weaponization of government" with its selective grant cancellations.

"This administration shows us time and time again they only care about one person," Kim added, "and that person only cares about himself."

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) argued that the filings prove "what we have long known, that their grant cancellations were not based on 'waste' or sound policy but vindictiveness."

"It is despicable," Durbin emphasized, "that the administration is taking away funding from states that did not vote for Trump."

Jennifer Victory, political scientist at George Mason University, described the administration's scheme as "violations of the rule of law that would be sufficient for impeachment in any other American presidency but aren't in this one because pathological partisan loyalty has rotted the constitutional order."

Sam Stein, managing editor at The Bulwark, said that the DOE's admission about targeting Democratic states was "something we all knew and saw at the time and yet still breathtaking to read... in print."

SEE ALL
Trump's Iran War Hits US Farmers With $1.4 Billion More in Diesel Fuel Costs: Report
News

Trump's Iran War Hits US Farmers With $1.4 Billion More in Diesel Fuel Costs: Report

President Donald Trump's illegal war with Iran is putting significant financial stress on US farmers, according to a report issued on Thursday by Democrats on the Joint Economic Committee.

The report finds that US farmers spent $1.4 billion more on diesel fuel this year when planing corn, soybeans, wheat, cotton, and rice than they did a year ago, representing a 63% yearly increase.

The six states to get hit with the biggest yearly percentage increases in diesel costs all voted for Trump in three consecutive presidential elections: Florida (90.6% yearly increase in diesel costs), Alabama (86.2%), Oklahoma (85.9%), West Virginia (85.8%), Kansas (83.8%), and Indiana (79.5%).

Diesel prices in 2026 hit their peak right in the middle of planting season, and the report estimates that "the average farmer spent $1,500 more to refil their farm's onsite fuel tank... compared to the same high point during the 2025 planting season."

The report notes that it doesn't capture the full extent of economic damage caused the president's unlawful assault on Iran, as its analysis "doesn’t take into account other war-related increases such as the increased costs of running diesel generators that power some greenhouses or the increases at the pump that farmers and truckers face when they drive products to market."

The report adds that the economic pain being felt by farmers thanks to Trump's war will soon hit US grocery shoppers.

"Trump’s decision to go to war with Iran drove up the cost of diesel fuel just as farmers were set to start their spring planting," the report says. "This comes after Trump’s tariffs have already significantly increased costs for farmers and made it more difficult for them to plan for the future. These increased costs... are likely to further contribute to rising grocery costs."

According to data published by the US Energy Information Administration, diesel prices peaked in May this year when they averaged $5.60 per gallon.

While prices initially fell after Trump announced a ceasefire agreement with Iran in June, the war's resumption this month has sent them jumping upward again.

Data published by the American Automobile Association on Thursday showed that the average price of diesel in the US is now back up to $5.20 per gallon, an increase of $0.20 from one week ago.

Despite the economic turmoil caused by his illegal war of choice, Trump has shown little sign of backing off. In an interview with Axios published Thursday, the president said that he was “close” to making a decision on whether to authorize what he described as a “massive attack” on Iran that he vowed would be “bigger than ever before.”

SEE ALL
Democratic Leaders Rally Voters In Michigan For Senate Candidate Abdul El-Sayed
News

Dem Establishment Intensifies Attacks on El-Sayed as New Poll Shows Him Leading by Double Digits

With a number of recent polls finding former public health official Abdul El-Sayed with a strong lead against Rep. Haley Stevens in the Michigan US Senate race, establishment Democrats are resorting this week to attacks that some critics said amounted to racism.

The latest survey, out Thursday from the highly respected, non-partisan Emerson College Polling along with WLNS/WOODTV, found El-Sayed with 54% support, while Stevens had 39%.

Six percent of respondents said they were undecided about the primary election, in which Michigan voters will go to the polls on August 4, and 2% said they backed state Sen. Mallory McMorrow (D-8), who suspended her campaign earlier this summer.

El-Sayed had the support of voters under 50 by 42 percentage points, as well as voters age 50-60 by 12 points.

The poll came on the heels of another survey by Tavern Research, which found El-Sayed—who has built his campaign around the pledge, "Money out of politics, money in your pocket, and Medicare for All"—leading Stevens by 11 points.

Outside groups' spending on behalf of Stevens, including roughly $60 million in funding from a super political action committee affiliated with the increasingly unpopular American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), has become a major topic of discussion in the race, with El-Sayed arguing that his opponent's reliance on such outsized spending is proof that she is far less "electable" than her supporters in the Democratic establishment have argued.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said Wednesday that billionaires are clearly "panicked" by the possibility of a Democratic Senate candidate whose victory would "make it clearer than ever that the American people are sick and tired of the same-old, same-old establishment politics and policies."

Even with money pouring into Michigan to back Stevens, who has praised US Immigration and Customs Enforcement and said she would not support any conditions on military aid to Israel—further distancing herself from Democratic voters' views—the congresswoman's supporters have resorted to attacks on El-Sayed, with Rep. Hillary Scholten (D-Mich.) recently making numerous media appearances to portray him—without evidence—as "sexist" and "un-American."

Scholten told Semafor Thursday that El-Sayed "has allowed distinctly anti-American sentiment to enter our public dialogue"—an apparent reference to his earlier campaigning with commentator Hasan Piker, an outspoken critic of Israel who once said the US "deserved" the September 11 attacks, a remark he later clarified and apologized for.

Georgia state Rep. Ruwa Romman (D-97) said Scholten's vague comment ignored El-Sayed's own clear statements about his love for and belief in the potential of the United States.

"She’s just racist," Romman said of the remark. "All people have to do is listen to Abdul speak for barely a few minutes, and they’ll hear a deep love for our country."

The United Democracy Project, the super PAC tied to AIPAC, has also attacked El-Sayed for his association with Piker and baselessly claimed in one commercial that the candidate “expressed sympathy for a terrorist." Scholten's comment also echoed the campaign of Republican candidate Mike Rogers, a former US House member who said in a call with supporters, “I don’t think he likes America, candidly.”

AIPAC-funded ads have also claimed El-Sayed's rhetoric is "uniquely sexist."

The commentary from both Democrats and Republicans are "reproducing tropes that have just been around for centuries" about Muslims, Nancy Khalil, an anthropologist at University of Michigan, told The Intercept this week, referring to stereotypes painting Arab and Muslim men as "controlling of women."

“We’re seeing it come from within his own party," said Khalil.

Dr. Adam Hamawy, a surgeon who won the Democratic primary race in New Jersey’s 12th Congressional District in June after also campaigning on Medicare for All and other popular progressive policies, told The Intercept that he faced similar attacks.

"They’re questioning his loyalty, they are not talking about issues,” Hamawy said. “And that was the same thing here as well: They didn’t attack me on issues, they attacked me for who I was.”

While making negative claims about El-Sayed's character, some in the Democratic establishment have refused to say they would vote for the Medicare for All advocate in the general election if he wins the primary. Scholten refused to commit to backing him in an interview with CNN last week, while Michael LaRosa, the former press secretary for First Lady Jill Biden during the Biden administration, said Wednesday that he would "do everything I can to make sure he loses" the general election, due to comments El-Sayed made about supporting primary challenges of Democrats including Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.).

Sanders said Wednesday on CNN that he was committed to supporting whichever candidate wins the primary, in the interest of securing a Democratic Senate seat in the crucial election.

SEE ALL
Planned Parenthood In Wisconsin To Pause Abortions In Order To Not Lose Funding Under Trump's Tax And Spending Bill
News

Planned Parenthood Sues Trump Admin Over Title X Funding for 'Vital Care'

Planned Parenthood Federation of America on Wednesday sued over the Trump administration's attempt to abuse a federal program "for an overtly political and ideological agenda that is at odds with Title X's statutory purpose of funding comprehensive family planning care for those who cannot afford it."

"Title X of the Public Health Service Act is the only domestic federal program devoted solely to family planning for uninsured, underinsured, and low-income people," notes the complaint, filed in federal court in Washington, DC by lawyers at PPFA, Democracy Forward, and Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr.

After the US Department of Health and Human Services' Office of Population Affairs in April announced changes to how it chooses Title X grantees for the 2027-32 cycle, the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association and the Family Health Council of Central Pennsylvania sued last month, backed by the ACLU.

The office then updated the policy earlier this month. However, as Wednesday's complaint explains, the updated version still says that "in evaluating and awarding Title X grants," the office "will consider the extent to which applicants 'advance' and 'align with' a series of political priorities."

PPFA's attorneys argued that the administration's approach is unlawful and puts the group's members "at a competitive disadvantage," which could ultimately impact people seeking care, from contraception to testing for sexually transmitted infections (STIs).

Democracy Forward president and CEO Skye Perryman—whose organization has repeatedly sued over Trump policies—said in a statement that "people should be able to receive the healthcare that is right for them, their lives, and their values, and that requires support for providing critically needed family planning services for people who cannot afford it."

Accusing the administration of "once again putting politics over people," she said that "the unlawful, ideologically driven changes to Title X threaten devastating consequences for lower income Americans nationwide who rely on the program for essential healthcare, including birth control, cancer screenings, and STI testing."

"Title X was created so a person's income would never determine whether they could access the medically appropriate family planning care that is right for them," Perryman emphasized. "We will aggressively pursue legal action on behalf of our clients until the administration stops undermining that promise and follows the law."

Highlighting the potential impact of the administration's policy for people throughout the United States, PPFA pointed out that from October 2024 through September 2025, its health centers provided over 1.3 million Title X visits across 33 states.

"Planned Parenthood health centers have provided affordable sexual and reproductive healthcare, including birth control, STI testing and treatment, cancer screenings, and wellness exams to millions of people through Title X," said PPFA president and CEO Alexis McGill Johnson. "We are suing the Trump administration because, yet again, it is trying to make it harder for people to get the vital care they need at Planned Parenthood."

The new lawsuit comes after Planned Parenthood and other reproductive health clinics regained access to Medicaid funding earlier this month, following the expiration of a provision in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which President Donald Trump signed last July.

The passage of that provision was a victory for forced pregnancy advocates, who have long targeted Planned Parenthood for providing abortion care. An analysis from the organization found that the "defunding" effort led to the closure of nearly 30 health centers, all of which were located in "contraceptive deserts" and two-thirds of which were in areas defined as rural, medically underserved, or experiencing health professional shortages.

The group also called the Medicaid provision a "backdoor abortion ban," noting that 64% of Planned Parenthood health center closures were in states where such care is legal, and the shuttered facilities had previously served over 10,000 abortion patients annually.

"By deliberately targeting Planned Parenthood, President Trump and his allies in Congress worsened a public health crisis, making it harder for people to get the essential and lifesaving care they needed at their trusted provider," McGill Johnson said in early July.

"Still, anti-abortion lawmakers are trying to make 'defund' permanent because Planned Parenthood health centers provide abortion care where it's legal," she stressed. "They are willing to sacrifice the lives and health of people across the country if it gets them closer to their goal of banning abortion everywhere and shutting down Planned Parenthood."

"We're in a fight for survival—not just for Planned Parenthood health centers, but for everyone to get high-quality, affordable healthcare from their trusted provider," she added. "And know this: Planned Parenthood will never stop fighting to ensure everyone can get the care they need."

SEE ALL
Trump-Netanyahu meeting in Washington DC
News

By 22-Point Margin, Americans Think Netanyahu Should Be Arrested on US Soil

As with his proposals for government-run grocery stores and a tax on the second homes owned by rich New Yorkers, New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani's recent call for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, an accused war criminal, to be arrested on US soil sparked outrage among Trump administration officials and others on the right.

And just like his other proposals, despite the claims that the mayor's comments displayed "extreme views" and were dangerous and divisive, Mamdani's demand that the US execute the International Criminal Court's (ICC) arrest warrant for Netanyahu is broadly supported by the public.

A poll taken by The Economist/YouGov between July 25-27 found that 49% of Americans believe the US should arrest Netanyahu, who arrived in Washington, DC on Monday to meet with President Donald Trump and attend the late Sen. Lindsey Graham's (R-SC) funeral.

Just 27% of respondents said the US should not execute the warrant, while 23% were unsure, according to the poll released Tuesday.

Nearly a quarter of people who voted for Trump in 2024 agreed with Mamdani, as well as 21% of people who identified themselves as supporters of Trump's MAGA political movement. The view was also held by 68% of Democrats and 55% of Independents, as well as 24% of Republican voters.

Forty-seven percent of respondents also said they believed Netanyahu was guilty of war crimes.

With Americans increasingly disapproving of Israel and the powerful pro-Israel lobby, sympathizing with Palestinians, and now backing the arrest of Netanyahu by an "overwhelming margin," said the Institute for Middle East Understanding, Trump is nevertheless "welcoming him back into the White House to lobby for more impunity, more war, and more of our tax dollars going to Israel."

Columbia University professor Anthony Zenkus wrote that while nearly half of Americans believe the US should execute the ICC warrant, "we've got prominent Democrats and Republicans and their online supporters calling Mamdani a terrorist for wanting to do that very thing."

Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) and Trump's ambassador to the United Nations, Mike Waltz, are among those who have condemned Mamdani's demand for Netanyahu's arrest. Waltz said the US would not execute the warrant because the country, like Israel, is not party to the Rome Statute, which established the ICC, and does not recognize the court's authority. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has threatened to "dismantle" the court.

On Tuesday, Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) denounced the White House for hosting the Israeli prime minister while Israel is "wrongfully detaining an American citizen," 20-year-old student Sama Safi, who was detained in the West Bank on June 2.

"As I speak, we've not been able to get justice for American citizens killed by violent Israeli settlers or by the IDF," Van Hollen continued, referring to the Israel Defense Forces. "As I speak, Palestinians in the West Bank are under violent assault by Israeli terrorists who are terrorizing Palestinian villages, lighting mosques on fire, torching cars, pushing Palestinians off their lands, killing innocent Palestinians."

"When Donald Trump meets with Bibi Netanyahu, things don't go well for the United States of America," said the senator, noting that five months after Israel convinced the administration to launch an "illegal war against Iran," American soldiers are being killed and injured in the region.

"On top of all that," said Van Hollen, "Prime Minister Netanyahu has a warrant out for his arrest for committing war crimes. He should be nowhere close to the Oval Office of the president of the United States."

SEE ALL