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.
This C.I.A. in the lobby of the agency's Original Headquarters Building. (Photo: C.I.A.)
Comments from Sen. Mark Warner responding to reports that Attorney General Bill Barr asked a number of world governments for help in refuting the investigation into Russian interference with the 2016 U.S. election were met with ridicule Friday as observers mocked the suggestion that the CIA would never do such a thing.
Warner, a Virginia Democrat, made the remarks to NBC in an interview over the latest revelations in the still-unfolding whistleblower scandal that has triggered an impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump. News that Barr reached out to intelligence agencies in Australia, Italy and the United Kingdom for help in probing the Russian investigation has added to the fire.
"Can you imagine if the CIA was asked to provide damaging evidence on a political opponent in Australia?" Warner said. "There would be outrage in our political establishment."
There's just one problem with Warner's example of the CIA becoming involved in Australian politics--as one Twitter user observed, the CIA "literally did that" in 1975, covertly taking down the pro-independence government of then-Prime Minister Gough Whitlam. Whitlam had proposed shutting down Pine Gap, the U.S. satellite intelligence gathering center in central Australia, and exposing U.S. intelligence operations in the country, a move that sent the CIA into panic mode.
In other words, as Grayzone journalist Anya Parampil tweeted, Warner's hypothetical was "almost as outrageous as the CIA carrying out a coup against Australia's democratically elected leftist leader who stood up to the agency, which it actually did."
As John Pilger recounted at The Guardian in 2014:
The Americans and British worked together. In 1975, Whitlam discovered that Britain's MI6 was operating against his government. "The Brits were actually decoding secret messages coming into my foreign affairs office," he said later. One of his ministers, Clyde Cameron, told me, "We knew MI6 was bugging cabinet meetings for the Americans." In the 1980s, senior CIA officers revealed that the "Whitlam problem" had been discussed "with urgency" by the CIA's director, William Colby, and the head of MI6, Sir Maurice Oldfield. A deputy director of the CIA said: "[governor-general of Australia, Sir John Kerr] did what he was told to do."
[...]
On 11 November--the day Whitlam was to inform parliament about the secret CIA presence in Australia--he was summoned by Kerr. Invoking archaic vice-regal "reserve powers," Kerr sacked the democratically elected prime minister. The "Whitlam problem" was solved, and Australian politics never recovered, nor the nation its true independence.
Australia, of course, is not the only country whose politics the U.S. has meddled in since the creation of the CIA in 1947. Among the other countries are China, East Germany, Iran, Costa Rica, Egypt, Indonesia, British Guiana, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Congo, France, Brazil, Dominican Republic, Cuba, Bolivia, Indonesia, Ghana, Chile, Greece, Rica, Bolivia, Angola, Zaire, Portugal, Jamaica, the Seychelles, Chad, Grenada, Suriname, Fiji, Nicaragua, Panama, Bulgaria, Albania, Yugoslavia, Ecuador, Afghanistan, Venezuela, Iraq, Haiti, Somalia, Libya, and Syria.
The above is an incomplete list.
Trump and Musk are on an unconstitutional rampage, aiming for virtually every corner of the federal government. These two right-wing billionaires are targeting nurses, scientists, teachers, daycare providers, judges, veterans, air traffic controllers, and nuclear safety inspectors. No one is safe. The food stamps program, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are next. It’s an unprecedented disaster and a five-alarm fire, but there will be a reckoning. The people did not vote for this. The American people do not want this dystopian hellscape that hides behind claims of “efficiency.” Still, in reality, it is all a giveaway to corporate interests and the libertarian dreams of far-right oligarchs like Musk. Common Dreams is playing a vital role by reporting day and night on this orgy of corruption and greed, as well as what everyday people can do to organize and fight back. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover issues the corporate media never will, but we can only continue with our readers’ support. |
Comments from Sen. Mark Warner responding to reports that Attorney General Bill Barr asked a number of world governments for help in refuting the investigation into Russian interference with the 2016 U.S. election were met with ridicule Friday as observers mocked the suggestion that the CIA would never do such a thing.
Warner, a Virginia Democrat, made the remarks to NBC in an interview over the latest revelations in the still-unfolding whistleblower scandal that has triggered an impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump. News that Barr reached out to intelligence agencies in Australia, Italy and the United Kingdom for help in probing the Russian investigation has added to the fire.
"Can you imagine if the CIA was asked to provide damaging evidence on a political opponent in Australia?" Warner said. "There would be outrage in our political establishment."
There's just one problem with Warner's example of the CIA becoming involved in Australian politics--as one Twitter user observed, the CIA "literally did that" in 1975, covertly taking down the pro-independence government of then-Prime Minister Gough Whitlam. Whitlam had proposed shutting down Pine Gap, the U.S. satellite intelligence gathering center in central Australia, and exposing U.S. intelligence operations in the country, a move that sent the CIA into panic mode.
In other words, as Grayzone journalist Anya Parampil tweeted, Warner's hypothetical was "almost as outrageous as the CIA carrying out a coup against Australia's democratically elected leftist leader who stood up to the agency, which it actually did."
As John Pilger recounted at The Guardian in 2014:
The Americans and British worked together. In 1975, Whitlam discovered that Britain's MI6 was operating against his government. "The Brits were actually decoding secret messages coming into my foreign affairs office," he said later. One of his ministers, Clyde Cameron, told me, "We knew MI6 was bugging cabinet meetings for the Americans." In the 1980s, senior CIA officers revealed that the "Whitlam problem" had been discussed "with urgency" by the CIA's director, William Colby, and the head of MI6, Sir Maurice Oldfield. A deputy director of the CIA said: "[governor-general of Australia, Sir John Kerr] did what he was told to do."
[...]
On 11 November--the day Whitlam was to inform parliament about the secret CIA presence in Australia--he was summoned by Kerr. Invoking archaic vice-regal "reserve powers," Kerr sacked the democratically elected prime minister. The "Whitlam problem" was solved, and Australian politics never recovered, nor the nation its true independence.
Australia, of course, is not the only country whose politics the U.S. has meddled in since the creation of the CIA in 1947. Among the other countries are China, East Germany, Iran, Costa Rica, Egypt, Indonesia, British Guiana, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Congo, France, Brazil, Dominican Republic, Cuba, Bolivia, Indonesia, Ghana, Chile, Greece, Rica, Bolivia, Angola, Zaire, Portugal, Jamaica, the Seychelles, Chad, Grenada, Suriname, Fiji, Nicaragua, Panama, Bulgaria, Albania, Yugoslavia, Ecuador, Afghanistan, Venezuela, Iraq, Haiti, Somalia, Libya, and Syria.
The above is an incomplete list.
Comments from Sen. Mark Warner responding to reports that Attorney General Bill Barr asked a number of world governments for help in refuting the investigation into Russian interference with the 2016 U.S. election were met with ridicule Friday as observers mocked the suggestion that the CIA would never do such a thing.
Warner, a Virginia Democrat, made the remarks to NBC in an interview over the latest revelations in the still-unfolding whistleblower scandal that has triggered an impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump. News that Barr reached out to intelligence agencies in Australia, Italy and the United Kingdom for help in probing the Russian investigation has added to the fire.
"Can you imagine if the CIA was asked to provide damaging evidence on a political opponent in Australia?" Warner said. "There would be outrage in our political establishment."
There's just one problem with Warner's example of the CIA becoming involved in Australian politics--as one Twitter user observed, the CIA "literally did that" in 1975, covertly taking down the pro-independence government of then-Prime Minister Gough Whitlam. Whitlam had proposed shutting down Pine Gap, the U.S. satellite intelligence gathering center in central Australia, and exposing U.S. intelligence operations in the country, a move that sent the CIA into panic mode.
In other words, as Grayzone journalist Anya Parampil tweeted, Warner's hypothetical was "almost as outrageous as the CIA carrying out a coup against Australia's democratically elected leftist leader who stood up to the agency, which it actually did."
As John Pilger recounted at The Guardian in 2014:
The Americans and British worked together. In 1975, Whitlam discovered that Britain's MI6 was operating against his government. "The Brits were actually decoding secret messages coming into my foreign affairs office," he said later. One of his ministers, Clyde Cameron, told me, "We knew MI6 was bugging cabinet meetings for the Americans." In the 1980s, senior CIA officers revealed that the "Whitlam problem" had been discussed "with urgency" by the CIA's director, William Colby, and the head of MI6, Sir Maurice Oldfield. A deputy director of the CIA said: "[governor-general of Australia, Sir John Kerr] did what he was told to do."
[...]
On 11 November--the day Whitlam was to inform parliament about the secret CIA presence in Australia--he was summoned by Kerr. Invoking archaic vice-regal "reserve powers," Kerr sacked the democratically elected prime minister. The "Whitlam problem" was solved, and Australian politics never recovered, nor the nation its true independence.
Australia, of course, is not the only country whose politics the U.S. has meddled in since the creation of the CIA in 1947. Among the other countries are China, East Germany, Iran, Costa Rica, Egypt, Indonesia, British Guiana, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Congo, France, Brazil, Dominican Republic, Cuba, Bolivia, Indonesia, Ghana, Chile, Greece, Rica, Bolivia, Angola, Zaire, Portugal, Jamaica, the Seychelles, Chad, Grenada, Suriname, Fiji, Nicaragua, Panama, Bulgaria, Albania, Yugoslavia, Ecuador, Afghanistan, Venezuela, Iraq, Haiti, Somalia, Libya, and Syria.
The above is an incomplete list.
If he prevails at the Supreme Court, U.S. President Donald Trump "could gain extraordinary powers to investigate and penalize private businesses and individuals, tilt elections," and more, one outlet noted.
The full D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday issued a divided ruling that reinstated two members of labor-focused independent agencies whom the Trump administration had sought to remove. The ruling is likely not the end of the legal saga and the case appears headed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The federal appeals court voted 7-4 to reverse an earlier decision by a three-member panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals that upheld the Trump administration's dismissal of National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) member Gwynne Wilcox and Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) member Cathy Harris.
Since Trump's return to the White House, Harris and Wilcox have been repeatedly removed and reinstated following contradictory rulings, according to The Guardian.
Monday's ruling was split along partisan lines, with the four dissenting judges all appointed to the court by Republican administrations, per The Guardian.
Wilcox was first appointed to the NLRB, which safeguards private sector workers' rights to organize, in 2021 by then-President Joe Biden and was re-confirmed for a five-year term by the Senate in 2023. Wilcox's removal meant the body did not have a quorum, because it needs three members to have a quorum. It once again has a quorum and can issue decisions.
As a member and former chair of the MSPB, Harris helped lead an agency that reviews federal employee firings, suspensions, and whistleblower claims.
According to the outlet Democracy Docket, the court ruled Monday that the administration's dismissal of Wilcox and Harris ran afoul of the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Humphrey's Executor v. U.S., a 1935 case that upheld removal restrictions for government officials on multimember adjudicatory boards.
"Trump's Department of Justice said it believes congressional limitations on the president's removal power are unconstitutional and that it will urge the Supreme Court to overturn Humphrey's Executor," Democracy Docket reported. "If the Supreme Court ultimately grants Trump the ability to fire members of independent bodies, he could gain extraordinary powers to investigate and penalize private businesses and individuals, tilt elections, and use monetary policy for political purposes."
"Trump and House Republicans are crashing the economy, raising your cost of living, and driving us toward a recession," said the chamber's top Democrat. "What happened to the so-called golden era of America?"
A week after Goldman Sachs raised the chance of a U.S. recession in the next 12 months from 20% to 35%, the Wall Street giant elevated it to 45% on Sunday, following President Donald Trump's worse-than-anticipated tariff announcement.
Goldman Sachs' note—tilted, Countdown to Recession—points to "a sharp tightening in financial conditions, foreign consumer boycotts, and a continued spike in policy uncertainty that is likely to depress capital spending by more than we had previously assumed."
The analysis is based on expectations that negotiations early this week will lead to "a large reduction in the tariffs" that Trump is set to impose on Wednesday. If that doesn't happen, Goldman's forecast is expected to change for the worse.
Since Trump's "Liberation Day" announcement last Wednesday, "at least seven top investment banks have raised their recession risk forecasts," Reuters noted Monday, "with JPMorgan putting the odds of a U.S. and global recession at 60%, on fears that the tariffs will not only ignite U.S. inflation but also spark retaliatory measures from other countries, as China has already announced."
China initially responded to Trump on Friday with 34% import duties on all American goods. The U.S. president hit back on Monday, further escalating his trade war with the Chinese government by threatening to impose an additional 50% tariff. Citing a White House official, CNBC pointed out that "U.S. tariffs on China will total 104% if Trump's latest threat takes effect."
Trump wrote in a Truth Social post: "Additionally, all talks with China concerning their requested meetings with us will be terminated! Negotiations with other countries, which have also requested meetings, will begin taking place immediately."
Stocks have plummeted over the past week, and were "swinging Monday following a manic morning where indexes plunged, soared, and then sank again as Wall Street tossed around a false rumor," The Associated Press reported.
"A White House account on X said a rumor circulating that Trump was considering a 90-day pause on his tariffs was 'fake news,'" the AP continued. "The intense and sudden moves show how hard financial markets are straining to see hopes that Trump may let up on his stiff tariffs, which economists see raising the risks of a global recession."
While progressive economists and working-class people have highlighted how Trump's "batshit crazy" tariffs are expected to impact everyday Americans—as the cost of the duties are passed on to consumers—many executives are also blasting the president's policy.
One respondent to a CNBC CEO Council survey called Trump's tariffs "disappointingly stupid and illogical," and said that "without faith that our government knows what it is doing, it is impossible for businesses to thrive."
According to CNBC, other CEO responses included:
Democrats in Congress also continued to call out the Republican president on Monday.
"Trump and House Republicans are crashing the economy, raising your cost of living, and driving us toward a recession,"
said the chamber's minority leader, Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.). "What happened to the so-called golden era of America?"
"South Sudan is about to blow up into potentially another country-wide civil war, putting civilians at risk. But yea let's force people to go back now," wrote one professor.
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Saturday announced that the United States is revoking visas for all South Sudanese passport holders, "effective immediately"—sparking criticism from several observers, including those who pointed out that the country could soon tip into another civil war.
Rubio announced on X that the move, which includes restricting any "further issuance" of visas, comes in response to the South Sudanese government's failure to return "its repatriated citizens in a timely manner."
"This is wrongheaded cruelty," wrote Rebecca Hamilton, a professor at American University Washington College of Law and executive editor at the digital law and policy journal Just Security, on X on Saturday. "The vast majority of South Sudanese in this country (or, frankly inside South Sudan, right now) have no say in what their government does. They are here working, studying, building skills essential for their nascent country."
Mike Brand, an adjunct professor at the University of Connecticut and Georgetown University who focuses on human rights and atrocities prevention, wrote on Saturday: "South Sudan is about to blow up into potentially another country-wide civil war, putting civilians at risk. But yea let's force people to go back now."
South Sudan is the world's youngest country, having only declared independence from Sudan in 2011 following two lengthy civil wars.
The young nation was once again plunged into civil war in 2013 due to violence between warring factions backing President Salva Kiir and his deputy, Riek Machar. A peace deal was brokered in 2018, though the country has still not held a long-delayed presidential election and Kiir remains in power today, according to Time.
Fears of full-on civil war returned when, last month, Machar was arrested and his allies in government were also detained. Machar's opposition political party declared the country's peace deal effectively over, per Time.
Shortly after Rubio's announcement on Saturday, Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau wrote on X that the government of South Sudan had refused to accept a South Sudanese national who was "certified by their own embassy in Washington" and then repatriated. "Our efforts to engage diplomatically with the South Sudanese government have been rebuffed," Landau wrote.
On Monday, the government of South Sudan released a statement saying that the deportee who was not permitted entry is a citizen of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, not South Sudan. The government also said it has maintained consistent communication and cooperation with the U.S. government regarding "immigration and deportation matters."
In the early 2000s, thousands of "lost boys" stemming from a civil war in Sudan that began in the 1980s and eventually led to South Sudan's independence were resettled in the United States.
John Skiles Skinner, a software engineer based in California, reacted to Rubio's announcement by writing on Bluesky: "I taught a U.S. citizenship class to South Sudanese refugees in Nebraska, 2006-2007. Fleeing civil war, they worked arduous jobs at a meat packing plant. Many had no literacy in any language. But they studied hard for a citizenship exam which many native-born Americans would not be able to pass."
In 2011, the Obama administration granted South Sudan nationals in the United States "temporary protected status" (TPS)—a designation that shields foreign-born people from deportation because they cannot return home safely due to war, natural disasters, or other "extraordinary" circumstances. The Biden administration extended it, but the designation is set to expire early next month.
As of September 2024, the U.S. provides TPS protections to 155 people from South Sudan.
In a Monday post for Just Security, Hamilton of American University and a co-author wrote that "while there has been no public determination by the secretary of homeland security regarding an extension of TPS for South Sudanese, Rubio's announcement presumably means [U.S. Department of Homeland Security] Secretary Kristi Noem is planning to terminate their TPS."
Observers online also highlighted that Duke University star basketball player Khaman Maluach, whose family left South Sudan for Uganda when he was a child, could be impacted by the State Department's ruling.