

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.
Hope glimmers. After an election that saw "democrats in array" rising up to thunderously repudiate anything connected with a doddering tyrant - "Apparently Americans liked the East Wing more than anyone thought" - the final small sweet revenge was a jury acquitting D.C.'s valiant Sandwich Guy for the crime of making it pellucidly clear, with mustard, he doesn't want stormtroopers in his town. One sage: "The only way this week could've been better for America was if Dick Cheney died again."
On Tuesday, voters came out in sometimes record numbers - New York saw its highest turnout in over 50 years - to reject MAGA cruelty, inequity and greed, and win "just everything." New Jersey and Virginia saw double-digit wins for women governors - a veteran and former CIA officer - reflecting a failure of anti-trans bigotry and resurgence of Democrats' big tent. There were comparable wins from Connecticut and Pennsylvania to Mississippi and Georgia. Maine overwhelmingly rejected an effort to restrict mail-in voting, Colorado willingly raised taxes on the rich to fund school lunches, California's re-districting Prop. 50 passed by an almost 2 to 1 margin; Newsom showed how to fight Trump - "After poking the bear, this bear roared” - and urged other states to also "meet this moment head-on."
Most thrillingly, New York's Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani evinced "the way to win is to include everyone. All everyone," and he did in an off-off year yet. One analyst: "Republicans raved every Democrat was Zohran Mamdani, and Americans said, 'Sign me up.'" In Mamdani's electrifying speech - Eugene Debs! - to an exultant crowd, he rebuffed a politics that has "bowed at the altar of caution (and) paid a mighty price...Too many working people cannot recognize themselves in our party." "We chose hope together," he said. "We won because we insisted that no longer would politics be something that is done to us. Now, it is something that we do...New York will (be) a city built by immigrants, powered by immigrants and, as of tonight, led by an immigrant." To Trump: "To get to any of us, you will have to get through all of us."
He and his vassals will also have to exit the alternative reality bubble - and immense cognitive dissonance - revealed this week in Miami, where Trump spoke at an opulent America Business Forum to billionaires from Saudi Arabia to Silicon Valley. As Republicans lost every election in sight, the government shutdown became the longest in history, and 42 million people, including 3 million in Florida, faced hunger, the assembled tycoons paid $2,000 - but got a $50 gift card for food - to hear a vengeful old man babble, ramble, boast, confuse "Communist" South Africa with South America, and nonetheless gloat about the "economic miracle" he'd delivered to usher in a reeling America's "golden age." Like the tawdry Great Gatsby party he held, "They just can’t seem to stop doing things shockingly out of touch."
Meanwhile, per the advice of his ghoulish mentor Roy Cohn, Trump is using the courts as a "personal cudgel" against his perceived enemies. Along with terrorizing blue cities, prosecutors have gone after over 20 anti-ICE protesters, often with "impeding" charges. In Chicago, prosecutors charged primary candidate Kat Abughazaleh with "conspiracy" after roughing her up at a protest. In L.A., a goon shot Carlos Jimenez, absurdly claiming self-defense, after he tried to warn marauding troops that kids were coming out of a school. In Chicago, head Nazi Greg Bovino, who's told ICE thugs to arrest anyone who makes "hyperbolic" comments, charged a protester with giving him a groin injury purportedly requiring a two-week leave to recover; prosecutors just dropped the case after video, shockingly, showed they lied.
And so it goes. Mostly, the fascists, being inept, lose. (GOP) Judge Karin Immergut just permanently blocked Trump from inflicting "all necessary troops" on "war-ravaged" Portland OR after finding "no credible evidence" there was need for them and insisting "the facts - not the President’s political whims - guide how the law is applied." Ouch. Still, the most failures have been earned by laughably unqualified US Attorney Jeanine “Boxwine” Pirro, who keeps trying and failing to get grand juries - seven at this point - to indict the proverbial ham sandwich. Her latest and most public effort to "turn a gag-gift-worthy moment into a federal criminal offense" was the case of folk hero, Air Force veteran and former DOJ attorney Sean Dunn, 37, who "brought a sandwich to a fascism fight" - specifically, a salami sub - and won.
In the infamous case of "the hoagie heard around the world," Dunn, in a pink shirt and holding a just-bought, now-historic sub, confronted troops skulking on a downtown DC corner, reportedly about to raid a gay club there. He yelled they were fascists who should get out of his town; then he got in the face of 23-year-veteran Border Patrol agent Gregory Lairmore, yelled some more, hurled his sub at Lairmore's bullet-proof-vested chest, and took off running. Thugs gave chase, caught and handcuffed him, and released him without charges. But for the "retaliatory animus" of the thin-skinned toddler in power, it would've ended there. Instead, video of the encounter went viral, the toddler got pissed, and a SWAT team went to Dunn's apartment, complete with pulpy heavy-metal video of the action, to arrest him.
Insisting on the preposterous narrative Dunn was pretty much the Zodiac killer and not a guy who threw some bread, Pirro theatrically announced felony assault charges against him: "This guy thought it was funny. Well, he doesn’t think it’s funny today." An equally off-the-wall Pam Bondi chimed in, raving about "assault on a law enforcement officer" and claiming Dunn was "an example of the Deep State" (who worked at the DOJ). Pirro tried to get a grand jury to indict him; they (hilariously) declined, but she finally got a misdemeanor charge to stick. And so to the federal jury trial starting Tuesday - in rare poetic justice, the day after National Sandwich Day - to protect our brave troops from food fights and send the dubious message to a restive populace: "Mess with this government, and it will mess with you."
Presiding over what he called "the simplest case in the world" was US District Judge Carl Nichols. And it should have been, especially since the perp, at the scene of the crime, had already confessed, boldly proclaiming, "I did it. I threw a sandwich." Still, it took two days and much bickering as the jury of 12 of Sandwich Guy's peers struggled to remain straight-faced during what one observer called "a strange sort of performance art," both amusing and menacing. The opening statements clearly laid out both sides' differences. Defense: "He did it. He threw the sandwich." Also, so what: See First Amendment." The government: "No matter who you are, you can’t just go around throwing stuff at people if you’re mad.” Also poor traumatized Officer Lairmore, who was just protecting the public, from sandwiches.
There was squabbling over words in a charge that cites "forcibly opposing, impeding or interfering" with federal agents on duty. What's "forcibly"? Defense: A sandwich doesn't constitute force any more than "an eight-year-old throwing a stuffed animal in the middle of a temper tantrum." Prosecution, leaning hard into bellicose language: "Here we have the defendant throwing - it’s a sandwich, but throwing it hard...at point-blank range...He takes the sandwich, he cocks it back." There's the "impact" through the vest. Also, it's not just a sandwich; there was "screaming," "cussing," "attempting to instigate." (The judge reminds the jury speech isn't assault). And, like an IED in Fallujah, prosecutors note the victim's harrowing testimony the sandwich "kind of exploded. I could smell the onions and mustard." The horror! The horror!
Meanwhile, Sandwich Guy sits in the cafeteria on lunch break, eating soup. A friend's GoFundMe for him - "Help support the Sandwich Guy" - notes his ten years of service in Afghanistan, the Forest Service, the DOJ: "He is proud of his career serving the people of the United States." Back in the courtroom, defense attorney Sabrina Shroff shreds Lairmore's claim the sandwich "exploded" with video showing said sandwich still wrapped on the sidewalk. "Do you recognize that sandwich?" she asks. Lairmore waffles. Shroff: "You don’t see there’s mustard on it?” Lairmore wilts. No. “You can’t tell there’s ketchup on it?” No. "Mayonnaise? Lettuce? Tomato? No. "In fact, the sandwich hasn’t exploded at all has it?" Lairmore, helpfully, "It looks like a little bit is coming out towards the bottom."
Shroff also cited two "gag gifts" Lairmore said, sheepishly smiling, he got from co-workers: A plush sandwich he put on his shelf at work and a cartoon patch of Dunn throwing the sandwich, with the words “Felony Footlong,” he put on his lunchbox. So much for trauma, she suggested. Her closing argument was fiery. "This case, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, is about a sandwich," she declared. "A sandwich that, according to agent Lairmore, somehow both exploded on his chest in a spray of onions and mustard, but also landed intact on the ground still in its Subway wrapping." Most vitally, she argued, a sandwich cannot be a weapon worthy of federal charges, especially facing off against a bulletproof vest. Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael DiLorenzo glumly dissented: "We’re not just talking about a sandwich."
Social media lapped up the coverage. They “relished” the testimony, they argued it “didn’t pass mustard,” they called Lairmore’s claim “baloney.” They summoned “12 Hungry Men.” Asked, “Do you see the sandwich seated in the courtroom today?” Argued, “If the sub doesn’t fit, you must acquit.” Snarled, “Say hello to my foot-long friend.” Asked, “Show us on this doll where the sandwich touched you.” Mused, ”Not all gyros wear capes." Insisted, ”I did not have a relationship with that sandwich.“ Proclaimed, "Liberte! Egalite! Panini!" When the verdict came Thursday - with every juror voting for acquittal - they celebrated Sandwich Guy ”beat the wrap,“ "justice, like a good sandwich, was served,“ and, like them, an anti-fascist jury looked at the video, decided what mattered, and essentially said ”what sandwich?“
Outside the courthouse after the verdict, Shroff thanked jurors for their "affirmation" that dissent is "not just tolerated." "It is legal," she declared, "and it is welcome." Sandwich Guy also thanked the jurors, as well as "family and friends and strangers for all of their support, whether it was emotional or spiritual or artistic or financial." "I am so happy that justice prevails in spite of everything," he said. "That night I believed that I was protecting the rights of immigrants...Let us not forget that the great seal of the United States says ‘E pluribus unum.’ That means ‘from many, one.’ Every life matters no matter where you came from. No matter how you got here, no matter how you identify, you have the right to live a life that is free." A nation salutes you. Warren Zevon would have too: "Enjoy every sandwich."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."
US President Donald Trump is set to dine with finance industry titans at the White House on Wednesday as his administration continues to withhold nutrition assistance from millions of Americans, forcing them to rely on overwhelmed food banks and the generosity of their communities to stave off hunger.
Reuters reported that the private dinner is expected to include "several top business executives, including the chief executives of Nasdaq and JPMorgan Chase." BlackRock's Larry Fink and Goldman Sachs chief executive David Solomon were among those invited.
"The gathering underscores Trump's effort to deepen ties with corporate leaders as his administration rolls out new initiatives aimed at strengthening US capital markets and rebuilding critical domestic supply chains seen as vital to national security," Reuters reported.
News of the dinner came as the US Supreme Court on Tuesday extended an order allowing the Trump administration to continue withholding billions of dollars in Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits as a legal fight plays out in a lower court and the government remains shut down.
Throughout the shutdown, which is expected to end this week after a group of Senate Democrats capitulated to the GOP, the administration has fought tooth and nail to avoid fully paying out SNAP funds, resulting in the first benefit lapse in the program's history. Over the weekend, Trump's Agriculture Department threatened to penalize any states that did not "undo" full November SNAP payments amid the court fight, prompting sharp pushback from Democratic governors.
"The president should not be directing states to take food out of the mouths of the hungry," said Maine Gov. Janet Mills. "His actions are hurting our most vulnerable people, while the president hosts lavish parties in Florida and builds a $350 million ball room at the White House."
Late last week, as HuffPost reported, Trump hosted a party at his Mar-a-Lago resort where guests dined on "filet, scallops, and a dessert on the same day that the Supreme Court ruled the SNAP food program that 1 in 8 Americans rely on would not be fully funded amid the shutdown."
"Just hours before millions of Americans lost federal food aid earlier this month, Trump hosted a lavish “Great Gatsby” themed party at his Mar-a-Lago resort," the outlet noted. "The theme of the night was 'A Little Party Never Killed Anyone.'"
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."
The fired members of the Federal Housing Finance Agency's internal watchdog were looking into complaints that Director Bill Pulte and his team improperly pulled records of Democratic officials.
Watchdogs at the government-sponsored home loan company popularly known as Fannie Mae were fired as they investigated whether a close ally of President Donald Trump improperly accessed mortgage files of Democratic officials targeted for political retribution by the president, the Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday.
People familiar with the matter told the Journal that the fired ethics team members were looking into complaints that Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) Director Bill Pulte and his team improperly directed staff to access mortgage records of New York Attorney General Letitia James and other Democratic officials.
The anonymous officials said that ethics team leader Suzanne Libby and her staffers were fired shortly after Fannie Mae management ordered them to stop investigating a company executive close to Pulte, effectively clearing out the company's internal watchdogs.
This, days after Reuters reported that Joe Allen, the FHFA's acting inspector-general, was being removed from his position. Three unnamed sources told Reuters that Allen's removal came as he was preparing to notify congressional lawmakers that the FHFA was not cooperating with his office.
Pulte has donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to a pro-Trump super political action committee and has been described as the president's "attack dog" after his team pulled property records of Democrats including James, Sen. Adam Schiff of California, and Federal Reserve Gov. Lisa Cook.
James successfully sued Trump and his business organization for fraud. Schiff was the lead manager in the first of the president's two House impeachments.
Interim US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia Lindsey Halligan—who was hand-picked by Trump—indicted James after her predecessor, Erik Seibert, refused to do so, citing a lack of evidence. On Tuesday, the Campaign for Accountability, a watchdog group, filed a complaint with the bar associations of Florida and Virginia accusing Halligan of possible ethics violations in connection with the charges against James and former FBI Director James Comey, who oversaw a probe into alleged pro-Trump interference in the 2016 presidential election by Russia.
Pulte said last month that he fired dozens of Fannie Mae staffers as part of the Trump administration's attack on diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. On Monday, the company fired at least 200 additional employees, according to the Washington Post.
As the Post noted:
Pulte’s actions and unpredictable policymaking style have also sown uncertainty and undermined confidence in him from those across the housing finance industry at a crucial moment. The Trump administration is looking to take Fannie and Freddie [Mac]—under government control since the 2008 housing crisis—public through what it says would be the largest public offering in history. Pulling that off would require a full-throated endorsement from major banks, investors, lenders, and the financial markets. But multiple industry figures and housing finance experts say Pulte’s time in office, and the recent firings of top Fannie officials, is eroding their faith in the firms’ futures.
If Pulte or others are found to have improperly accessed mortgage records, they could possibly face charges under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, which prohibits intentionally accessing electronic files without authorization or exceeding authorized access, especially for protected computers including those handling financial data at Fannie Mae.
News of the ethics team firings came as Fannie Mae is under scrutiny for announcing its lifting of the 620 minimum credit score requirement for borrowers seeking loans that will be sold to the company, and as Trump and Pulte float the possibility of 50-year residential mortgages. Critics point to the 2008-09 financial crash—caused largely by a real estate bubble fueled by risky lending practices—and the possibility of lifelong indebtedness resulting from such lengthy loans as cause for alarm.
Pulte is an heir to the fortune amassed by his grandfather, Pulte Homes founder William J. Pulte. The company, now known as PulteGroup, is currently the nation's third-largest homebuilder.
“The next time you go to a restaurant and then uncontrollably vomit and diarrhea in your pants, you should send a note of thanks to the Republican and Democratic senators,” said David Sirota, founder of The Lever.
While the Republican and Democratic senators who passed this week’s emergency funding bill to reopen the government took heat for their failure to provide a solution to rising health insurance premiums, they also slipped other provisions under the radar that will likely harm Americans’ health.
As The Lever reported Tuesday, senators inserted language into the bill that would gut food safety regulations that prevent illness and death, as well as regulations on ultraprocessed foods.
The changes come “amid a lobbying blitz and a flood of campaign cash” from the food and restaurant industries which have spent more than $13 million lobbying the White House, Congress, and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) this year.
Amid a surge of product recalls for bacteria like Listeria, Salmonella, and E. coli, the number of dangerous cases of foodborne illness doubled last year, according to the Public Interest Network. These illnesses annually result in around 53,000 hospitalizations and 900 deaths, according to a report from the Government Accountability Office.
Nevertheless, The Lever reports that the “new funding bill blocks federal rules designed to trace sources of outbreaks, and to prevent contamination of produce.” One provision bans the use of funds to administer or enforce the FDA’s "Requirements for Additional Traceability Records for Certain Foods," published in November 2022.
That traceability rule, The Lever notes, is “aimed to establish new record-keeping standards for companies to track their food products across the supply chain. Those records could help regulators identify the point of origin in the event of a major disease outbreak or food contamination event. The rule applied to produce, seafood, and certain dairy products, such as cheese, and exempted small businesses from the rule.”
The rule was initially proposed by the Trump administration during the Covid-19 pandemic, and enacted in 2023 by the Biden administration over aggressive opposition from industry groups. But after Trump’s return to office this year, they began a multimillion-dollar effort to lobby Congress to repeal the measure.
The National Restaurant Association spent nearly $2.5 million to lobby lawmakers to eliminate the rule, while the International Foodservice Distributors Association spent more than $600,000. In August, the Trump FDA proposed a rule to delay the traceability standards until 2028.
As The Lever explains: “The line inserted on page 154 of the new funding package contains identical language as the federal rule and would enshrine it into law.”
Two groups that have lobbied aggressively for deregulation of food tracking, the National Restaurant Association and the National Grocers Association, donated more than $750,000 to both parties’ congressional candidates and more than $145,000 to the two parties’ congressional election committees in the last election.
And they gave a combined $17,000 to three of the seven Democrats who joined Republicans in backing the bill—Sens. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.).
“The next time you go to a restaurant and then uncontrollably vomit and diarrhea in your pants, you should send a note of thanks to the Republican and Democratic senators who helped their campaign donors slip this language into their legislation to reopen the government,” wrote The Lever’s founder, David Sirota, on social media.
The traceability rule is one of several regulations the bill, which is expected to come up for a vote in the House on Wednesday, would gut. It also requires that none of the bill’s funds go toward enforcing a 2015 FDA rule requiring stricter inspections of wine grapes, hops, almonds, and certain other crops.
It also axes funds for the FDA to establish new regulations to limit the public’s high intake of sodium, which is commonly found in highly processed foods. The effort to gut these regulations notably flies in the face of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s so-called “Make America Healthy” initiative.
Kennedy’s “MAHA” report, released in May, explicitly called for guidelines “that emphasize unprocessed foods while strictly limiting high-fat, high-sugar, and high-sodium processed items.”
“The most MAGA thing ever is embracing the so-called MAHA movement and then quietly gutting food safety regulations and research into ultra-processed foods,” said Neal Kwatra, the founder of the New York-based progressive group Metropolitan Public Strategies. “Just previously unseen levels of gaslighting on politics vs. actual policy.”
But Democrats allowed the measure to pass, too. For this, Melanie D’Arrigo, the executive director of the Campaign for New York Health, blamed the overwhelming power of corporate money.
“As long as corporations and billionaires are legally allowed to pay off politicians, we will never have a government that works for us,” she said.