

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.
A few seconds ago, Dems held massive protests, swept an election, and claimed the inarguable moral high ground in a cruel shutdown America had pinned on the GOP. Then the "surrender caucus" caved to a demented moron who knows nothing, lies about everything, insults veterans, bans fatsos, pukes fake gold, can't find his office, insists he's not a rapist, argues let them eat nothing while partying (again) with fat cats. And now, Epstein's back to take him down. Good call, Dems.
It was, shall we say, disheartening when Democrats in a devoutly-to-be-wished ascendancy voted against the will of a majority of their own party, "spit in America's face," and again surrendered to a brazenly inept GOP that refused to do their job by taking a "taxpayer-funded, seven-week vacation" and a regime that shamelessly fought all the way to the Supreme Court for the right to not feed 42 million hungry Americans in a moral and political fiasco dubbed "an intergalactic freak show." When 8 centrist Democrats folded just days after a watershed election that saw every demographic group they need to regain power swing sharply to the left, the response from a dismayed populace was almost universally somewhere between, "Ugh. Just ugh" and "FUCK."
Having backed the already underwater Trump into a corner where he was advocating for starving Americans - Marie Antoinette was often evoked - the move was blasted as a "cataclysmic failure," "horrific mistake," "moral failure," "world-class collapse," "betrayal" and, from Bernie Sanders, "a very bad night." "When they go low, we cave," was one refrain. Also, "How about we shut down the government for this very popular issue that over three-quarters of Americans support, with a very specific goal and then, hear me out, we hold out for like a month and a half and then...ONLY THEN, fold and don't get the one thing we said we wanted?" Calls for the ejection of wussy Chuck Schumer were so prevalent they sprung up among even fed up moderate Dems like Mark Kelly.
What they got in return for their perfidy was...little enough they managed to make the cretinous Trump almost look like a stable genius. The key demand for an extension of Obamacare subsidies was left hanging in a vague deal wherein treacherous House Republicans may or may not bring it up for a vote in December; many cited Unholy Mike likewise last year "promising" to restore $1.1B in funding to DC in exchange for funding the government but then somehow not getting to it. Food stamps will continue to be funded through September, but most government spending will again expire on January 30, when we'll be back where we started. In the interim, House Dems may proffer their own bill to extend ACA subsidies by three years, but a venal GOP will (duh) kill it.
Meanwhile, our Narcissist-in-Chief remains focused on a revenge and redemption tour because governance = boring. As Americans struggled, he bragged about cuts to "Democrat programs," toyed with ballrooms and bathrooms, blamed besieged air-traffic controllers not evil Musk for air travel woes - "I am NOT HAPPY WITH YOU" - issued a symbolic, wildly broad pardon to over 70 criminal accomplices who helped try to overturn an election in case they wanna help him crime again, and got Ghislaine Maxwell a puppy. He also asked SCOTUS to throw out his much adjudicated, E. Jean Carroll rape and defamation verdict, calling it another "hoax (of) implausible, unsubstantiated assertions” - not his type - because "The American People...demand an immediate end to all of the Witch Hunts." Actually, not.
And abroad, in the name of "protecting the (Nazi) homeland," Pete Hegseth has killed 76 people in clearly illegal "kinetic strikes" on Venezuelan "narco-terrorists," likely hapless fishermen, based on zero evidence; to further inflame things, he also brought in the world's largest warship. In response, Maduro called for massive deployment of ground, aerial, naval and missile forces on "full operational readiness" against a greedy dimwit on record for wanting to take "all that oil." Said dimwit has also threatened to "go into Nigeria" with "guns-a-blazing" to protect the fictional "large number of Christians" being killed there. Again, no evidence; again, Nigeria says, not. One possible saving grace: It's improbable Trump could find NIgeria - on a map, in his fever dreams - given he's evidently now struggling just to find his office.

So it was that, last week, White House observers noticed a new sign - actually sheets of computer paper taped to the walls - announcing "The Oval Office." Or, per one report, "The White House Dementia Care Unit helpfully labels the Oval Office with giant, comforting, gold letters" - an act born, many speculated, after "who knows what Trump-kept-trying-to-go-into-the-broom-closet moments." The dumbfounding tackiness of the display, which didn't even manage to center the "the" - never mind what it suggested about the cognitive condition of the supposed most powerful elected official in the world, its presumed target - horrified many. "Please tell me this is not real," pleaded one viewer. Also, "Next, it'll be a picture," "This sign looks like shit," and, in a multi-layered gem, "This is not a good sign."
The fact of the sign was one thing. The slovenly visual - "dementia patient navigation signage disguised as nouveau-riche trash chic" - was another: "The1980s called and want their font back" captured the snark toward a script variously compared to a garage sale, a funeral home, an omelette bar, a whorehouse, an Olive Garden, a La Quinta lobby, the Newlywed Game, Daytona Beach circa 1981, and "invites to a shower for a baby named Lakynn." Some posited Barron designed and printed it because "he's good with computer," and, "It's computer everywhere these days." Gavin Newsom countered, "Live, Laugh, Lose." Or "Live, Laugh, Oval Office. I came up with the name Oval Office. It doesn’t have to be an oval. It can be any shape. Square. Rectangle. Doesn’t even have to be an office. It can be your den."
Alas, the sign is accompanied by the same ghastly, tacky, polyurethane, $58.07 Home Depot gimcracks that defile the Oval Office, along with the sparely elegant walkway now become a glitzy, game-show Presidential Walk of Fame. It seems the awful glare may finally prove too much even for Laura Ingraham, who in a new interview with the king seems a tad skeptical about the flood of bullshit she's long accepted. Peering at the newest gold vomit above a door, she asks, "So, this is not Home Depot? "Naah," he blusters, real gold, blah blah. (This is Home Depot). She seems likewise, oddly unconvinced about other bonkers claims, like HBCUs would "all be out of business" if fewer Chinese students go to American schools, and his 50-year mortgage is great (if you wanna pay double for your home.)
Ingraham grows downright quizzical - wait, has he lost Ingraham? - on the subject of affordability. When Trump brags about "the greatest economy we've ever had," she wonders then why are people saying they're anxious about high prices? Big bluff and bluster. "More than anything else it's a con job by the Democrats," he says. "Are you ready? Costs are way down." Also $2 gas, drill baby drill, we're going wild. She, downright doubtful: "So you're saying voters are mis-perceiving how they feel?" For all the bombast, the underwater loser sounds like one. Perhaps sensing their slow, pitiable fall, the White House social media team has begun releasing random, hallucinatory montages of some of the "greatest hits" of "one glorious (insane) nation under God." Just wowza.
Despite the frantic cheerleading, reality in all its cognitive dissonance keeps intruding. Last week, in one of its most freakish moments, Trump's cluelessness and sick indifference came into ugly, eerie focus when he stood gazing blankly into space, his back to the room, as an Oval Office guest collapsed and a scrum of people rushed to render aid. As Dr. Oz announced a possible deal to lower the price of weight-loss drugs - never mind why are fat drugs the only drug to see price cuts - one man passed out and slowly sank to the floor. As Oz and several others went to help, the People's President turned away - not my narcissistic table - to demonstrate "the unsubtle art of not giving a fuck," also, "how to spot a sociopath," "more mannequin than man," and, "truly, a dick." I really don't care, do you?
The same day, his State Department issued new rules about who can/cannot come to our pristine shores. Officials will be charged with rejecting any applicants with an array of conditions - obesity, depression, cancer, cardiovascular - especially if they lack the resources to pay for their health care, which we sure won't, never mind the $100,000 H-1B visa. So: Only the skinny, healthy, rich and racist - like white Afrikaners - need apply. No huddled masses. Def no dementia-ridden fatsos "crumbling in real time," like, you know. People had questions: Will that be all obese people, or just poor ones? Has he looked in a mirror? Also, their social media must show they support white Christian nationalism, Charlie Kirk, and eugenics. His ignoble work done, Trump then left to party, again.
In his second big Hell-A-Lago extravaganza in a week - during the shutdown, as his USDA returned to court to whine they shouldn't have to feed hungry kids, after his tone-deaf Great Gatsby party whose irony he missed sparked widespread fury - Trump again lifted a fat teeny middle finger to America and welcomed another toxic swarm of rich old white guys and makeup-slathered, pouty-lipped women, this time to gorge on beef filet even he concedes nobody else can afford, truffle dauphinoise, pan-seared scallops and a trio of desserts including "Trump chocolate cake." In the shape of turds? Also there: A vast seafood spread, a CPAC ice sculpture, an opera performance, and sorta synchronized swimmers performing to a tinny God Bless the USA. Where is David Lynch when we need him?
Amidst the fuck-you opulence, he still babbled, deflected, raved. He spewed out a preposterous scheme for people to buy "THEIR OWN, MUCH BETTER, HEALTH CARE" that mainstream media dutifully reported as something other than ignorant rants - Trump "has floated a proposal" - based, per Klugman, on “whatever the fuck he thinks he knows about healthcare," which is clearly nothing. "Everybody is gonna be happy," he bleated. "They're going to feel like entrepreneurs." He mused, "Nobody knows what magnets are." In one especially deranged stab at distraction, he dug back into birther crap about Obama, who "betrayed a country he wasn't born in." Jittery, hollow, spiteful, he threw spaghetti at the wall, hoping something would stick as his approval plunged to 33%, glossy swimmers or no.
Then he went to an NFL game - Commanders vs. Detroit Lions - where 67,000 D.C.-area denizens twice booed him so bigly, loudly, relentlessly, all in with jeers, thumbs down, middle fingers up, the noise happily drowning him out, that even cocooned high up in his luxury suite with Mike and Pete (also booed) beside him he seemed to notice, and wilt. D.C lost badly, he left early and sulkily, The Borowitz Report said he tried/failed to get ICE to arrest all 67,000 booing fans, who were probs paid by Soros and/or Venezuelan drug dealers. At Arlington Cemetery for Veterans' Day, still unable to sing God Bless America, a furious veteran declared it "an affront to me and every other veteran past, present and future to have this bloated POS (who) doesn't give a flying fuck about the Military at this hallowed ground."
Wednesday, Jeffrey Epstein returned to haunt him, as we knew one day he would, when Dems released three damning emails. Epstein said "of course (Trump) knew about the girls." He said Trump was "the dog that hasn’t barked" though a victim had just "spent hours at my house with him." And Rep. Adelita Grijalva was finally sworn in to force release of the files. Swiftly, prayerful, maybe AI Press Barbie leapt to the podium to "defy the laws of moral physics." It's all "a hoax, a "fake narrative," a "bad-faith effort to distract from (Trump's) historic accomplishments," she said. It proves "absolutely nothing" even as righteous, transparent Republicans re-open the government pernicious Dems shut down. Also, "there are no coincidences (in) DC," and it's all Biden's fault. Cave, idiocy, lunacy, evil: This timeline is killing us.

The fossil fuel industry is "racing toward climate breakdown with its foot on the accelerator," said one official at the German environmental rights group Urgewald on Tuesday as the group released its Global Oil and Gas Exit List.
The report shows that as world leaders prepare to meet in Brazil for the annual United Nations climate summit, any discussion they have there regarding a green transition is being undercut by massive expansion in oil and gas extraction and production, including in the fracking and liquefied natural gas (LNG) industries.
Four years after the International Energy Agency (IEA) stated that no new oil and gas fields have a place on a pathway to limiting planetary heating to 1.5°C—marking global energy experts' public endorsement of warnings that had come from climate scientists for years prior—96% of fossil fuel firms are exploring and developing new oil and gas resources, said Urgewald.
Short-term expansion is up 33% since 2021, when the IEA issued its warning, with fossil fuel giants planning to bring 256 billion barrels of oil and gas equivalent (bboe) into production in the coming years.
Five companies account for about one-third of global short-term expansion: QatarEnergy (26.2 bboe), Saudi Aramco (18.0 bboe), ADNOC in the United Arab Emirates (13.8 bboe), Russian state-owned entity Gazprom (13.4 bboe) and US firm ExxonMobil (9.7 bboe).
Nils Bartsch, head of oil and gas research at Urgewald, said the largest fossil fuel companies in the world "are treating the Paris Agreement like a polite suggestion, not a survival plan."
The analysis comes a decade after 195 countries signed the legally binding Paris Agreement, committing to develop and implement national climate action plans to draw down fossil fuel emissions.
"With 256 billion barrels of new projects on the table, this is not a transition—it is defiance," said Bartsch.
The Paris Agreement also included a demand for wealthy countries to contribute funds to help the Global South mitigate and adapt to the climate emergency, and annual UN conferences have addressed climate finance, but the industry is still spending about 75 times more on oil and gas exploration than governments have pledged to the UN Loss and Damage Fund, according to the report.
On average, companies listed in the Global Oil and Gas Exit List (GOGEL) spent an average of $60.3 billion over the last three years on oil and gas expansion.
“Brazil is showing an alarming level of climate hypocrisy—presenting itself as a climate leader at COP30 while allowing oil and gas expansion right at the summit’s doorstep, threatening one of our most fragile ecosystems."
The US has pledged just 17.5 million to the Loss and Damage Fund, while two of its biggest fossil fuel companies, Chevron and ExxonMobil, have spent $1.3 billion and $1.1 billion on oil and gas exploration, respectively, in the last three years.
"While the Loss and Damage Fund sits almost empty, oil and gas companies are investing more than $60 billion each year into new exploration, exacerbating the problem the fund is meant to alleviate. This is financial and moral negligence. Regulators and supervisory authorities need to start treating this as a risk, not a footnote," said Fiona Hauke, oil and gas researcher and financial regulation expert at Urgewald.
The report was released a week before world leaders are scheduled to meet in Belém, Brazil for the 2025 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP30), even as state-owned fossil fuel company Petrobras begins drilling in Foz do Amazonas Basin in the fragile, biodiverse Amazon rainforest.
Petrobras was named in GOGEL as the 15th largest fossil fuel exporter worldwide, currently spending $1.1 billion annually searching for new reserves, as Brazil prepares to host a meeting that is meant to focus on implementing emissions reduction plans.
“Brazil is showing an alarming level of climate hypocrisy—presenting itself as a climate leader at COP30 while allowing oil and gas expansion right at the summit’s doorstep, threatening one of our most fragile ecosystems,” said Nicole Oliveira, executive director of the Arayara International Institute in Brazil.
GOGEL also pointed to oil and gas expansion in the US under the Trump administration, with the US overtaking China as the number-one developer of gas-fired power even as a recent UN and World Bank report found that nine out of 10 renewable energy projects are cheaper than even the lowest-cost fossil fuel alternatives.
The US is home to the largest LNG export developer worldwide, Venture Global, as companies are planning an export capacity of around 847 million tons per year—a 171% increase from current operational capacity.
Urgewald noted that even TotalEnergies CEO Patrick Pouyanné recently acknowledged that the LNG sector is "building too much."
"Analysts warn that if current plans proceed, the world could face an oversupplied gas market within five years, with far more capacity than global demand can absorb," reads GOGEL. "Yet despite industry leaders acknowledging the risk, investment continues."
"US fracking companies are producing far more gas than they can sell domestically," adds the report, noting that the country is turning to Mexico as an export platform. "Now faced with a flood of excess gas, companies are racing to build new LNG facilities to liquefy their surplus and push it onto countries around the globe."
Pablo Montaño, director of Conexiones Climáticas, Mexico, said new LNG projects "are not for the benefit of Mexicans."
"They will import fracked gas from the US, liquefy it in Mexico and send it straight to Asia. Gas liquefaction is an incredibly dirty business," he said.
Despite clear warnings from energy and climate experts, said Cathy Collentine, Beyond Dirty Fuels campaign director at the Sierra Club in the US, "fossil fuel expansion continues to put communities and the climate at risk."
"Under the Trump administration," she said, "we are seeing a disregard for both to do the bidding of Big Oil and Gas."
Tech giant OpenAI generated significant backlash this week after one of its top executives floated potential loan guarantees from the US government to help fund its massive infrastructure buildout.
In a Wednesday interview with The Wall Street Journal, OpenAI chief financial officer Sarah Friar suggested that the federal government could get involved in infrastructure development for artificial intelligence by offering a "guarantee," which she said could "drop the cost of the financing" and increase the amount of debt her firm could take on.
When asked if she was specifically talking about a "federal backstop for chip investment," she replied, "Exactly."
Hours after the interview, Friar walked back her remarks and insisted that "OpenAI is not seeking a government backstop for our infrastructure commitments," while adding that she was "making the point that American strength in technology will come from building real industrial capacity, which requires the private sector and government playing their part."
Despite Friar's walk-back, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman said during a podcast interview with economist Tyler Cowen that released on Thursday that he believed the government ultimately could be a backstop to the artificial intelligence industry.
"When something gets sufficiently huge... the federal government is kind of the insurer of last resort, as we've seen in various financial crises," he said. "Given the magnitude of what I expect AI's economic impact to look like, I do think the government ends up as the insurer of last resort."
Friar and Altman's remarks about government backstops for OpenAI loans drew the immediate ire of Robert Weissman, co-president of consumer advocacy organization Public Citizen, who expressed concerns that the tech industry may have already opened up talks about loan guarantees with President Donald Trump's administration.
"Given the Trump regime’s eagerness to shower taxpayer subsidies and benefits on favored corporations, it is entirely possible that OpenAI and the White House are concocting a scheme to siphon taxpayer money into OpenAI’s coffers, perhaps with some tribute paid to Trump and his family." Weissman said. "Perhaps not so coincidentally, OpenAI President Greg Brockman was among the attendees at a dinner for donors to Trump’s White House ballroom, though neither he nor OpenAI have been reported to be actual donors."
JB Branch, Public Citizen’s Big Tech accountability advocate, said even suggesting government backstops for OpenAI showed that the company and its executives were "completely out of touch with reality," and he argued it was no coincidence that Friar floated the possibility of federal loan guarantees at a time when many analysts have been questioning whether the AI industry is an unsustainable financial bubble.
"The truth is simple: the AI bubble is swelling, and OpenAI knows it," he said. "Big Tech is building a mountain of speculative infrastructure without real-world demands or proven productivity-enhancing use cases to justify it. Now it wants the US government to prop up the bubble before it bursts. This is an escape plan for an industry that has overpromised and underdelivered."
An MIT Media Lab report found in September that while AI use has doubled in workplaces since 2023, 95% of organizations that have invested in the technology have seen "no measurable return on their investment."
Concerns about an AI bubble intensified earlier this week when investor Michael Burry, who famously made a fortune by short-selling the US housing market ahead of the 2008 financial crisis, revealed that his firm was making bets against Nvidia and Palantir, two of the biggest players in the AI industry.
This has led to some AI industry players to complain that markets and governments are undervaluing their products.
During her Wednesday WSJ interview, for instance, Friar complained that "I don’t think there’s enough exuberance about AI, when I think about the actual practical implications and what it can do for individual."
Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang, meanwhile, told the Financial Times that China was going to beat the US in the race to develop high-powered artificial intelligence because the Chinese government offers more energy subsidies to AI and doesn't put as much regulation on AI development.
Huang also complained that "we need more optimism" about the AI industry in the US.
Investment researcher Ross Hendricks, however, dismissed Huang's warning about China winning the AI battle, and he accused the Nvidia CEO of seeking special government favors.
"This is nothing more than Jensen Huang foaming the runway for a federal AI bailout in coordination with OpenAI's latest plea in the WSJ," he commented in a post on X. "These grifters simply can't be happy making billions from one of the greatest investment manias of all time. They'll do everything possible to loot taxpayers to prevent it from popping."
House Judiciary Committee ranking member Jamie Raskin is calling out Republicans in the US Senate for slipping into their government funding bill a provision that would let eight GOP senators personally each rake in an extra $1 million in taxpayer money.
As reported by The Hill, the provision allows Republican senators whose data was obtained without their knowledge during former special counsel Jack Smith's investigation to sue the FBI.
"The provision, which is retroactive to 2022, only applies to members of the Senate and would allow them to sue for $500,000 if data was sought without their being notified, as well as once it was obtained," noted The Hill.
Raskin (D-Md.) responded by blasting the "million-dollar jackpot provision" in the Senate bill as "one of the most blatantly corrupt provisions for political self-dealing and the plunder of public resources ever proposed."
Raskin also contrasted Republican senators giving themselves the ability to score a quick $1 million with the economic uncertainty and anxiety facing the American people.
"If it were to pass, this astounding provision would give eight Republican senators a personal payday of at least one million dollars each paid for directly by US taxpayers," he said. "This jackpot is being set up at the same time Republicans throw millions of Americans off Medicaid and deny millions more a tax credit that helps make premiums for health insurance more affordable."
Raskin also shot down claims by the senators that law enforcement officials had violated their rights to privacy during Smith's probe, which sought Republican senators' phone records as part of his investigation into President Donald Trump's efforts to illegally remain in power after losing the 2020 presidential election.
"To be clear, there was no ‘phone tap’ or eavesdropping on the content of their conversations," he said. "The call records subpoenaed were the kind of information you see on a phone bill—a list of calls made and received."
Raskin wasn't the only House Democrat to blast the provision slipped into the funding bill. During a contentious House Rules Committee meeting on Tuesday, Rep. Joe Neguse (R-Colo.) called the provision "deeply insidious" and pushed an amendment to strip it from the legislation ahead of a vote in the House later this week.
"I think it is outrageous for these Republican senators to effectively guarantee themselves million-dollar paydays!" he said. "A retroactive provision in this bill that very clearly applies to them. The removal of all relevant immunity defenses on the part of the United States government. This is insanity to allow this provision to go forward, and I would hope that my Republican colleagues would join us in supporting the removal of this provision."
Neguse: I think it is outrageous for these Republican senators to effectively guarantee themselves million-dollar paydays, a provision in this bill that very clearly applies to them. The removal of all relevant immunity defenses on the part of the United States government. This… pic.twitter.com/ukmEnybcd7
— Acyn (@Acyn) November 12, 2025
Democrats weren't the only congresspeople who criticized the provision, as Reps. Austin Scott (R-Ga.) and Chip Roy (R-Texas) also said that it should be removed, although they both expressed concern that doing so would prolong the government shutdown.
"I personally agree this should removed," Scott said, according to HuffPost reporter Igor Bobic. "The problem is if we remove it, it has to go back to the Senate. I’ve struggled with what to do."
A leading Muslim civil rights group in the US applauded Monday as the Trump administration's agreement to release British pro-Palestinian commentator Sami Hamdi acknowledged that he is not "a danger to the community or to national security," after he was held in Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention for more than two weeks.
Hamdi's family and the California chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which has been representing the journalist, expressed relief at the news that he had accepted an offer to leave the US voluntarily.
Hamdi was detained at San Francisco International Airport on October 26, mid-way through a US speaking tour during which he spoke about Palestinian rights and Israel's US-backed war in Gaza, which has killed more than 68,000 Palestinians.
The journalist, who is Muslim and of Tunisian and Algerian descent, had just spoken at an event in Sacramento, where he called on US leaders to take an "America First" rather than "Israel First" approach to its policy in the Middle East.
As Prem Thakker reported at Zeteo News, two "unelected, far-right, Islamophobic figures," Laura Loomer and Amy Mekelburg, took credit for "investigating" Hamdi. Mekelburg published a report that called on the US to deport Hamdi and prohibit him from entering the country, claiming he was “training US Muslims in digital agitation, electoral sabotage, and political warfare in alignment with Muslim Brotherhood doctrine.”
Loomer, a far-right conspiracy theorist, has become known during President Donald Trump's second term as someone with a considerable influence over the White House. Two days after Mekelburg's report was published, the US State Department revoked Hamdi's visa, and a day later ICE arrested him.
"His forthcoming release is welcome, but it does not erase the message this sends to every activist and journalist watching—and every authoritarian dictatorship worldwide who can now claim they are following America’s example.”
The Trump administration said at the time that it had "no obligation to host foreigners who support terrorism and actively undermine the safety of Americans," and appeared to reference comments Hamdi made after the October 7, 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel. The Department of Homeland Security shared a video clip released by the pro-Israel group Memri, which showed Hamdi saying Palestinians should “celebrate their victory."
As The Guardian reported, Hamdi later clarified those remarks, saying, "We don’t celebrate blood lust, we don’t celebrate death and we don’t celebrate war... What Muslims are celebrating is not war, they’re celebrating the revival of a cause—a just cause—that everybody thought was dead, this is an important distinction."
Hamdi's wife, Soumaya Hamdi, told The Guardian after his arrest that the Memri video had been “edited in a way to frame Sami in a horrible light and produced by an organization that is very well known to be anti-Muslim, anti-Arab, Islamophobic, and out there to target people who are speaking up against the genocide against Palestinians."
CAIR-CA emphasized Monday that in Hamdi's immigration charging documents, the US government alleged only a visa overstay "and never identified any criminal conduct or security grounds."
“It is this simple: Sami never should have spent a single night in an ICE cell. His only real ‘offense’ was speaking clearly about Israel’s genocidal war crimes against Palestinians," said Hussam Ayloush, CEO of CAIR-CA.
“Sami’s case shows how quickly our government officials are willing to sacrifice our First Amendment and free press when a journalist uses his platform to dare put America first before Israel," said Ayloush. "His forthcoming release is welcome, but it does not erase the message this sends to every activist and journalist watching—and every authoritarian dictatorship worldwide who can now claim they are following America’s example.”
President Donald Trump's policy of bombing purported drug-trafficking boats in the Caribbean, which multiple legal experts have decried as an illegal act extrajudicial murder, is now meeting resistance from a top US ally.
CNN reported on Tuesday that the UK has now stopped sharing intelligence related to suspected drug-trafficking vessels with the US because the country does not want to be complicit in strikes that it believes violate international law.
CNN's sources say that the UK stopped giving the US information about boats in the region roughly a month ago, shortly after Trump began authorizing drone strikes against them in a campaign that so far has killed at least 76 people.
"Before the US military began blowing up boats in September, countering illicit drug trafficking was handled by law enforcement and the US Coast Guard, [and] cartel members and drug smugglers were treated as criminals with due process rights," explained CNN.
Last month, after his administration had already launched several strikes, Trump declared drug cartels enemy combatants and claimed he has the right to launch military strikes against suspected drug-trafficking boats.
Appearing on CNN on Tuesday to discuss the story, reporter Natasha Bertrand described the decision to stop sharing intelligence as "a really significant rupture" between the US and its closest ally.
"We're told that the UK is deeply uncomfortable with [the boat strikes], and they believe that it is pretty blatantly illegal," Bertrand explained. "It really underscores the continued questions surrounding the legality of this US military campaign."
🚨HOLY SHIT: The UK - our closest ally since WWI - just cut off ALL intelligence sharing with the U.S. about Caribbean drug trafficking boats, calling the strikes illegal.
Britain doesn’t trust us anymore. Trump has torched a century of friendship while he sucks up to dictators. pic.twitter.com/E0Was3WrrY
— CALL TO ACTIVISM (@CalltoActivism) November 11, 2025
The US military began its boat attacks in the Caribbean in September, and has since expanded them to purported drug boats operating in the Pacific Ocean.
Reporting last month from the Wall Street Journal indicated that the administration was also preparing to attack a variety of targets inside Venezuela, whose government Trump has baselessly accused of running drug cartels. Potential targets include “ports and airports controlled by the military that are allegedly used to traffic drugs, including naval facilities and airstrips.”
The Washington Post reported on Tuesday that the USS Gerald R. Ford aircraft carrier has now arrived off the coast of Latin America, in a move that the paper notes "has fueled speculation the Trump administration intends to dramatically escalate its deadly counternarcotics campaign there, possibly through direct attacks on Venezuela."
Reports from the US government and the United Nations have not identified Venezuela as a significant source of drugs that enter the United States, and the country plays virtually no role in the trafficking of fentanyl, the primary cause of drug overdoses in the US.
The administration's military aggression in Latin America has also sparked a fierce backlash in the region, where dozens of political leaders last month condemned the boat attacks, while also warning that they could just be the start of a regime change war reminiscent of Cold War-era US-backed coups like ones that occurred in Chile, Brazil, and other nations.
One critic said such a move—which would require an admission of guilt—risks giving a "green light" to corruption.
Israeli President Isaac Herzog said Wednesday that he had received a request from US President Donald Trump to pardon Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is currently on trial in Israel for alleged bribery, fraud, and breach of trust.
“I hereby call on you to fully pardon Benjamin Netanyahu, who has been a formidable and decisive War Time Prime Minister, and is now leading Israel into a time of peace," Trump wrote in a letter to Herzog.
While Trump said that he "absolutely respect[s] the independence of the Israeli Justice System,” he denounced the case against Netanyahu as “political, unjustified prosecution.”
"It is time to let Bibi unite Israel by pardoning him, and ending that lawfare once and for all," Trump added, using Netanyahu's nickname.
U.S. President Donald Trump, also a criminal, has formally requested Israeli President Isaac Herzog to grant a pardon to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
[image or embed]
— Josep Goded (New Main Account) (@josepgoded2.bsky.social) November 12, 2025 at 2:54 AM
Herzog's office responded to Trump's letter with the following statement:
The president holds great respect for President Trump and repeatedly expresses his appreciation for Trump’s unwavering support of Israel and his tremendous contribution to the return of the hostages, the reshaping of the Middle East and Gaza, and the safeguarding of Israel’s security. Without detracting from the above, as the president has made clear on multiple occasions, anyone seeking a pardon must submit a formal request in accordance with the established procedures.
Opposition leader Yair Lapid noted in a social media post that "Israeli law stipulates that the first condition for receiving a pardon is an admission of guilt and an expression of remorse for those actions."
Amir Fuchs, a senior researcher at the Jerusalem-based think tank Israel Democracy Institute, told the Washington Post that “pardon is a word for forgiveness, a pardon without some kind of admission of guilt is very unusual and even illegal."
Fuchs added that any pardon based on Trump's request could be viewed as giving a "green light" to corruption and "undermining the rule of law."
Many social media users responded to Trump's letter with the same four words—"birds of a feather"—noting that the Republican president was convicted of 34 felony charges related to the falsification of business records regarding hush money payments to cover up sex scandals during the 2016 presidential election.
In addition to his domestic trial, Netanyahu is also a fugitive from the International Criminal Court in The Hague, where he and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant are wanted for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in connection with the Gaza genocide.
Herzog also faces criminal complaints filed in Switzerland alleging incitement to genocide over remarks including a suggestion that Palestinian civilians in Gaza were legitimate targets for Israeli strikes because "it is an entire nation out there that is responsible" for the Hamas-led October 7, 2023 attack.
Like former President Joe Biden before him, Trump has supported Israel with billions of dollars worth of US armed aid and diplomatic cover including vetoes of United Nations Security Council ceasefire resolutions.
In the first prosecution of a sitting Israeli prime minister, Netanyahu was indicted in 2019 for allegedly giving or offering lucrative official favors to media tycoons in exchange for positive news coverage or gifts valued at hundreds of thousands of dollars. The prime minister—who has also been accused of drawing out Israel's assault on Gaza to delay his case—denies any wrongdoing and, like Trump, has called his prosecution a "witch hunt."
"If the goal is relief for Americans, just get rid of the tariffs," explained one economist.
As poll numbers on his handling of the US economy have continued to sink in recent weeks, President Donald Trump has floated sending Americans a $2,000 check that he has claimed will be funded with revenue collected from his tariffs on imported products.
However, economist Dean Baker of the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) on Tuesday crunched some numbers and found that Trump's proposed tariff "dividend" simply doesn't add up.
In particular, Baker found that the revenue being generated by the tariffs is less than half of the total cost of sending nearly every US citizen a $2,000 check.
"At $2,000 a piece it would come to $600 billion, more than twice what Trump is collecting from us with his import taxes," Baker explained. "Since he's already $330 billion short, how can Trump think he has money to pay down the national debt?"
Baker declared Trump's tariff math "crazy," and then speculated that the president sincerely believes the false claims he's been making about securing $18 trillion in investments from foreign countries. What's more, Baker said that it appears that no one on the president's economic policy team wants to tell him that this belief is purely delusional.
"People like Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent or National Economic Adviser Kevin Hassett may not be brilliant intellects, but they know that Trump does not have trillions of dollars from foreign countries to play with, and that we are still running deficits that would ordinarily be considered very large," he said. "But they are too scared of Donald Trump to explain this to him."
Erica York, vice president of federal tax policy at the Tax Foundation, said in an interview with CNN published on Tuesday that Trump could also reignite inflation by sending out $2,000 checks to everyone, as this would likely increase demand for goods and services without a corresponding increase in supply.
"All of this is exactly the wrong recipe if you want to get inflation under control and make things feel more affordable," she said.
York also said in a separate interview with the Associated Press that it makes little sense to cut Americans a check when one of the main reasons they're paying more for so many products has been the president's tariffs.
"If the goal is relief for Americans, just get rid of the tariffs," she said.
Michael Pearce, deputy chief US economist at Oxford Economics, echoed York's concern about the dividend checks worsening inflation, and he told CNN that the risk with Trump's plan is "if you add a stimulus check on top of a tax cut refund, you're going to overheat the economy."
University of Michigan economist Justin Wolfers was even more blunt in his take on Trump's tariff dividend idea, which he labeled, "insane, unfair, pointless and dumb."
"If tariffs are making Americans poorer," Wolfers told CNN, "the simplest and fairest way to stop that is not to tariff."
"It seems to me like we are looking at a labor market with near-zero labor force growth and near-zero real wage growth," wrote economist Dean Baker. "This means that real labor income in the economy is essentially flat."
Even without the benefit of recent federal jobs data, which the Trump administration has withheld amid the government shutdown, a prominent US economist argued Wednesday that it's clear the labor market under Donald Trump's leadership is increasingly grim.
Citing private figures that have been used to fill the void left by two consecutive missed jobs reports from the federal government, Dean Baker of the Center for Economic and Policy Research argued that "we can infer" weak job growth in September and suggested Trump or his aides "likely reviewed the September data and made a decision not to release it."
More broadly, Baker wrote, the payroll firm ADP "shows average private sector job growth of just 10,000 a month for the three months from July to October. Since this excludes the government sector, which likely shed jobs over this period due to federal layoffs (even pre-shutdown), the ADP data imply essentially zero job growth over this period."
"The other part of the story is that wage growth also seems to have slowed especially for workers at the bottom end of the wage distribution," Baker added. "It looks to me like we are looking at a labor market with near-zero labor force growth and near-zero real wage growth. This means that real labor income in the economy is essentially flat."
"That is not a pretty picture from the standpoint of the bulk of the population, and it does not describe a very stable path of economic growth," he continued. "When the AI bubble bursts, things might get really ugly really fast."
Baker's assessment came as CNN reported that President Donald Trump considered "traveling the country to give economy-focused speeches" as consumer sentiment craters, tariffs drive up prices, millions face skyrocketing health insurance premiums, and people across the country reel from the administration's assault on safety net programs.
Publicly, Trump has dismissed the notion that people are struggling economically under his administration, calling polling to that effect "fake."
"The economy's the strongest it's ever been," Trump falsely declared during a recent Fox News interview.
On Tuesday, the White House was widely mocked for citing extremely limited data from the food delivery company DoorDash to proclaim that Trump's agenda is "delivering real results for American families."
They’ve laid off so many people that the government is now getting its economic data from DoorDash.
[image or embed]
— Dare Obasanjo (@carnage4life.bsky.social) Nov 11, 2025 at 8:09 PM
Economist Paul Krugman wrote in a blog post on Wednesday that Trump is beginning to face "backlash against his attempts to gaslight the public about the true state of the economy," pointing to "the blowout Democratic victories in last week’s elections" as just part of that backlash.
"Once again, these attempts aren’t about putting a positive spin on the data. They’re just flat-out lies," Krugman wrote. "And Democrats should hammer those lies as proof not just that Trump is utterly dishonest, but that he’s completely out of touch with the reality of American life."