SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER

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

* indicates required
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Opinion
Climate
Economy
Politics
Rights & Justice
War & Peace
Gold Trump statue grounded in Ohio
Further

Fuck This Guy: The Hunted Becomes the Beached

Not Our President's Day, thank God, has passed. Along with mattress sales, it was marked by many middle fingers in the air, a typically grotesque message from a tainted White House, and news that a massive, ill-fated, gold-leaf statue of the worst president in history, hilariously dubbed "Don Colossus," remains stranded on its back in an Ohio warehouse as its creator and a bunch of crooked crypto bros - surprise! no surprise! - back-stab and bicker about money. May he rot there, please.

The general sentiment around our latest National Holiday was best summed up by one post: "Happy Presidents Day. Except the current one. Fuck that guy." He didn't win any points by marking the day spewing the usual hateful vulgarity "in the creepiest way possible," declaring in a vengeful post, "They came after the wrong man. I was the hunted. Now I'm the hunter." He is also, of course, "one sick dude," old, dazed and confused with unprecedented low approval ratings, maybe because all he does is lie, bully, bribe, be bribed and in his gluttonous delusion insist, “We have the greatest economy actually ever in history” as he rips us off for billions by selling his name for hopeful airports and don't forget their trashy "clothing, handbags, luggage, jewelry, watches, and tie clips." Democracy dies in tie clips.

Now, in one final, loutish indignity, he - or at least a gaudy doppelgänger - is being held hostage in Zanesville OH for a $92,000 payment, having been both delayed and downgraded from a planned prime spot at his inauguration to his Doral golf course - specifically, the tenth hole. The statue saga began when sculptor Alan Cottrill, who's made about 400 figures on commission, including bronzes of 16 past presidents and a Thomas Edison now in the Capitol, got a call from an unknown Las Vegas sculptor asking if he'd like to make a statue commemorating Trump's brave ear being allegedly grazed in Butler, Pennsylvania - an "iconic" 2024 moment a consortium of 16 cryptocurrency enthusiasts deemed "a turning point in world history," also a cool chance to "show our appreciation of his embrace of crypto." LOL.

The original plan was to unveil a bronze, 15-foot, 2,400-pound Don Colossus, installed on a 6,000-pound concrete base, at Trump’s inauguration, positing it to loom over the National Mall. The roughly month-long timeline was tight - Cottrill had to work "crazy fast" - and he was to be paid $300,000. There were tough moments. When he replicated Trump's "turkey neck," the crypto boys were "aghast" and requested "a more flattering, less realistic look." The hardest part was the hair: "Holy shmoly! You can't sculpt and cast something that is....wispy." Still, he toiled away at it, and met the deadline. The night before one of the crypto clutch called: Temps had plunged, the Secret Service had moved Inauguration Day inside where a two-story rapist might pose a danger, and the new plan was to install Don later at his Doral resort.

The statue malingered in a warehouse in DC, then in another in Pittsburgh. Cottrill got paid over time, but "every payment arrived weeks late." In November, he approached his patrons with a shiny new idea: The bronze was burnished to look gold, but what if they coated it in Trump's beloved gold leaf? The proposal was "like a glass of water to a person dying of thirst - Immediately everybody jumped on board." But finding someone to work on a giant Trump statue proved tough; several declined the job "because of the subject matter" before someone agreed to slather it in a layer of 23.75-carat gold leaf. A photo was sent to the felon, who loved it - "Wow, it's so bright and beautiful" - a plan was formed to install the pedestal at "a juicy spot" near three palm trees at the 10th hole, and the crypto investors began "actively looking” for a launch date.

But Cottrill suddenly charged the crypto guys - who include Dustin Stockton, a GOP strategist investigated by federal agents for the "We Build The Wall" fraud Steve Bannon did time for - with copyright infringement, arguing they'd gone behind his back for months to promote their $PATRIOT cryptocurrency while marketing the statue: "That was their play all along." Instantly, the deal got bogged down in the volatile world of crypto, a meme coin only worth what current speculation makes of it; things got really messy when the gluttonous Trump, smelling money, launched his own $TRUMP coin days before his inauguration, hammering the $PATRIOT value before itself predictably tanking to over 95% below its peak. Still, and despite charges of massive conflict of interest, Trump has reportedly raked in $1.4 billion from this crap.

Meanwhile, Don Colossus is being held hostage in "financial purgatory" by Cottrill, who claims the crypto guys are both ripping him off and refusing to fork up their final payment. "They keep saying, 'Oh don’t worry Alan, we’ll pay you, we’ll pay you,' but actually they've been illegally infringing on the copyright of my original art right up to the present day." They're also continuing a bizarre social media campaign, posting images of the pedestal - all they have - with promos for their meme coin. "The dream is alive and well," they proclaim. "What the president has in store for the $PATRIOT community and his inner circle for this unveiling will surely be spectacular!" They say they hope to offer Trump one of Cottrill's earlier miniature versions, coated in the same gold finish; they'd love to have it placed in the Oval Bordello, along with all its trashy drek.

The crypto cartel argue they'll pay their final installment before Don "leaves for Doral," and Cottrill is "trying to squeeze us for it." But Cottrill says he went to Doral a few weeks ago to install the base and scope out the site; he brought along a 12-inch version - "It was the only thing I could fit in my hand luggage" - and a landscape architect already dug up and re-positioned the three palm trees just so. "The gold leaf in the Florida sun - it’s going to be brilliant," he pledges. "But what they owe me is $91,200, and it's not leaving until they pay me." For all the aggravation, Cottrill says he's enjoyed working on the project. But it's taken up a lot of space in his studio for a long time, and now, "I'd like to get it the hell out of here." Many, many Americans can relate.

SEE ALL
Factory at sunset in Cleveland, Ohio
News

Warnings of 'Permanent' Damage to People and Planet as Trump EPA Set to Repeal Key Climate Rule

In what experts warn would be the most sweeping rollback of US climate policy ever, the Trump administration is expected this week to repeal the Environmental Protection Agency's "endangerment finding," the Obama-era rule empowering climate regulation over the past 15 years.

The endangerment finding determined that six greenhouse gases—carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride—caused by burning fossil fuels are a single air pollutant that threatens public health and welfare, rather than treating each gas individually, for regulatory purposes.

The 2009 finding has served as the legal foundation for EPA climate rules, including limits on power plant emissions and automobile fuel economy standards under the Clean Air Act.

The new rule would end the regulatory requirement to measure and report vehicle emissions, certify the results, and comply with limits. It would also repeal compliance programs and credit provisions.

“This amounts to the largest act of deregulation in the history of the United States,” EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said in a Monday interview with the Wall Street Journal.

However, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) warned Tuesday on the upper chamber floor that "this week, the Trump administration is set to take one of its most nakedly corrupt steps since Donald Trump returned to office, and that’s saying a lot: a wholesale reversal of essentially all greenhouse gas regulations."

"Trump is making a radical move that will send shockwaves across the economy—uncertainty for manufacturers, states, regulators everywhere. And it flies in the face, of course, of basic science," Schumer said. "Let's be very clear what this announcement represents: It is a corrupt giveaway to Big Oil, plain and simple."

"Big Oil has worked tirelessly for decades to undermine rules that protect against emissions, and now that they have their guy in the White House, they are taking their biggest swing yet," the senator added. "Remember, in the spring of 2024, Donald Trump invited top oil executives to Mar-a-Lago and told them, if you raise me a billion dollars to get me elected, I will cut regulations so you can make more money. That devil’s bargain is now coming true."

Trump is trying to repeal the "endangerment finding" -- the scientific investigation that led EPA to conclude that climate change is dangerous to humans.It's scientifically unjustifiable of course, but they're going to have to justify it to a court. That should be fun to watch.

[image or embed]
— David Roberts (@volts.wtf) February 10, 2026 at 9:22 AM

Big Oil spent over $445 million to elect Trump and other Republican candidates during the 2024 election cycle.

Gretchen Goldman, president and CEO at the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), a nonprofit advocacy group, said in a statement Tuesday that “Zeldin took a chainsaw to the endangerment finding, undoing this long-standing, science-based finding on bogus grounds at the expense of our health.”

“Ramming through this unlawful, destructive action at the behest of polluters is an obvious example of what happens when a corrupt administration and fossil fuel interests are allowed to run amok,” Goldman added.

More than 1,000 scientists and other experts have implored EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin to not repeal the endangerment finding. In a statement last year, the Environmental Protection Network warned that repealing the finding would result in “tens of thousands of additional premature deaths due to pollution exposure” over the next several decades and spark “accelerated climate destabilization with greater risks of heatwaves, floods, droughts, and disease spread.”

While Trump administration officials told the Journal that the new rules would not apply to regulation of emissions from power plants and oil and gas facilities, some said that repealing the endangerment finding could set the stage for additional rollbacks favoring such polluters.

UCS noted Tuesday that the Trump administration “relied heavily on shoddy science in a report developed by a ‘Climate Working Group,’ composed of five skeptics well outside the scientific mainstream in its proposal to repeal the endangerment finding."

“The report, which was commissioned by the Department of Energy (DOE), has been thoroughly discredited by the scientific community, which found that the report ‘misrepresents the state of climate science by cherry-picking evidence, exaggerating uncertainties, and ignoring decades of peer-reviewed research,’” UCS continued.

On January 30, Judge William Young of the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts, an appointee of former President Ronald Reagan, ruled that the DOE violated the law when Energy Secretary Chris Wright—the former CEO of a fracking company who denies there is a climate emergency—handpicked the five researchers for the dubious report.

Republicans have been working toward killing the endangerment finding for years. Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation-led blueprint for a right-wing overhaul of the federal government, explicitly mentions the rule as ripe for repeal. Project 2025’s policy lead, Russell Vought, now directs Trump’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

OMB Acting Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs Jeffrey Clark—a purveyor of the “Big Lie” that Democrats stole the 2020 election—has also been working hard at dismantling federal climate regulations, which he once likened to a “Leninistic” plot to control the US economy.

“Instead of rising to the challenge with necessary policies to protect people’s well-being, the Trump administration has shamefully abandoned EPA’s mission and caved to the whims of deep-pocketed special interests,” Goldman said. “Sacrificing people’s health, safety, and futures for polluters’ profits is unconscionable. We all deserve better and this attack against the public interest and the best available science will be challenged.”

Climate scientist Michael Mann called the campaign to repeal the endangerment finding “a reminder that, while some of the damage that Trump [and the] GOP are doing might seem temporary, the damage they’re doing to the planet is permanent.”

Or, as Cardiff University ecologist Aaron Thierry put it, “You can repeal an endangerment finding. You can’t repeal the endangerment.”

SEE ALL
214 House Republicans Just Tried to Give 'Mad King' Trump Even More Tariff Powers
News

214 House Republicans Just Tried to Give 'Mad King' Trump Even More Tariff Powers

Republicans in the US House on Tuesday tried—and narrowly failed—to advance a measure containing language that would have temporarily blocked votes on resolutions disapproving of President Donald Trump’s tariffs.

Democrats voted unanimously to defeat the measure, and were joined by just three House Republicans—Don Bacon of Nebraska, Thomas Massie of Kentucky, and Kevin Kiley of California—in a final vote of 214 in favor to 217 opposed.

As reported by MS NOW, House Republicans tucked language preventing challenges to Trump's tariff policies into a rule setting up floor consideration for legislation related to US energy security.

While a similar provision was passed in the House in September before expiring at the end of January, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) was unable to cobble together votes to get it passed this time.

Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) celebrated what he described as a "heartening" victory, while expressing concern that the vast majority of Republicans were comfortable letting the president take their constitutionally mandated power over taxation.

"Most Republicans again tried to surrender Congress’ power as a coequal branch of government to check a president who is behaving like a mad king," Beyer wrote in a social media post. "The trade powers Trump is illegally usurping are expressly granted to Congress under the Constitution."

Matt Fuller, director of congressional reporting at MS NOW, similarly argued that "it's a lot more notable to me that 214 House Republicans voted to hand Donald Trump unchecked authority to levy tariffs until August than it is that three House Republicans said 'no.'"

While Tuesday's vote suggests a narrowly divided House, Punchbowl News co-founder Jake Sherman argued that it actually represented a "watershed moment" that could open the door to several defeats for the Trump administration on the House floor in the coming days, as Democrats prepare to hammer the GOP with tariff disapproval resolutions.

"Now Democrats have the opportunity to force unlimited votes on the president's global tariffs, putting Republicans on the spot all the time," Sherman explained in a Wednesday social media post. "If Dems handle this well, this is going to get bad for rank and file House Republicans. And it will piss off Trump."

Sherman's assessment of the situation was echoed by the Wednesday edition of Politico Playbook, which noted that Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY) is already teeing up a resolution to overturn Trump's tariffs against Canada that is set for a vote on Wednesday afternoon.

"Given the current mood in the House—every single Dem showed up to vote last night, while plenty of Republicans are uncomfortable with tariffs—Johnson looks all but certain to lose," Politico declared.

Matt Maasdam, a Democratic US House candidate running in Michigan's 7th Congressional District, started putting pressure on incumbent Rep. Tom Barrett (R-Mich.) the morning after the Michigan Republican voted to protect Trump from tariff resolutions.

"Tom Barrett has voted over and over to protect the Trump tariffs that make costs go up," wrote Maasdam on social media. "The tariffs on Canada hit Michigan hard. Auto parts for a car made here cross the border multiple times—in a trade war, it’s our workers and businesses who get hurt."

SEE ALL
62nd Munich Security Conference
News

As Dem Voters Seek a 'Fight' With the Superrich, AOC is Now Their Favorite Candidate: Poll

Democratic voters overwhelmingly want a leader who will fight the superrich and corporate America, and they believe Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is the person to do it, according to a poll released this week.

While Democrats are often portrayed as squabbling and directionless, the poll conducted last month by the New Republic with Embold Research demonstrated a remarkable unity among the more than 2,400 Democratic voters it surveyed.

This was true with respect to policy: More than 9 in 10 want to raise taxes on corporations and on the wealthiest Americans, while more than three-quarters want to break up tech monopolies and believe the government should conduct stronger oversight of business.

But it was also reflected in sentiments that a more confrontational governing philosophy should prevail and general agreement that the party in its current form is not doing enough to take on its enemies.

Three-quarters said they wanted Democrats to "be more aggressive in calling out Republicans," while nearly 7 in 10 said it was appropriate to describe their party as "weak."

This appears to have translated to support for a more muscular view of government. Where the label once helped to sink Sen. Bernie Sanders' (I-Vt.) two runs for president, nearly three-quarters of Democrats now say they are either unconcerned with the label of "socialist" or view it as an asset.

Meanwhile, 46% said they want to see a "progressive" at the top of the Democratic ticket in 2028, higher than the number who said they wanted a "liberal" or a "moderate."

It's an environment that appears to be fertile ground for Ocasio-Cortez, who pitched her vision for a "working-class-centered politics" at this week's Munich summit in what many suspected was a soft-launch of her presidential candidacy in 2028.

With 85% favorability, Bronx congresswoman had the highest approval rating of any Democratic figure in the country among the voters surveyed.

It's a higher mark than either of the figures who head-to-head polls have shown to be presumptive favorites for the nomination: Former Vice President Kamala Harris and California Gov. Gavin Newsom.

Early polls show AOC lagging considerably behind these top two. However, there are signs in the New Republic's poll that may give her supporters cause for hope.

While Harris is also well-liked, 66% of Democrats surveyed said they believe she's "had her shot" at the presidency and should not run again after losing to President Donald Trump in 2024.

Newsom does not have a similar electoral history holding him back and is riding high from the passage of Proposition 50, which will allow Democrats to add potentially five more US House seats this November.

But his policy approach may prove an ill fit at a time when Democrats overwhelmingly say their party is "too timid" about taxing the rich and corporations and taking on tech oligarchs.

As labor unions in California have pushed for a popular proposal to introduce a billionaire's tax, Newsom has made himself the chiseled face of the resistance to this idea, joining with right-wing Silicon Valley barons in an aggressive campaign to kill it.

While polls can tell us little two years out about what voters will do in 2028, New Republic editorial director Emily Cooke said her magazine's survey shows an unmistakable pattern.

"It’s impossible to come away from these results without concluding that economic populism is a winning message for loyal Democrats," she wrote. "This was true across those who identify as liberals, moderates, or progressives: An unmistakable majority wants a party that will fight harder against the corporations and rich people they see as responsible for keeping them down."

SEE ALL
North Carolina Holds Midterm Primary Elections
News

North Carolina Students Walk Over a Mile to Vote After GOP Shut Down Campus Polling Places

As early voting began for the state primaries, North Carolina college students found themselves walking more than a mile to cast their ballots after the Republican-controlled State Board of Elections closed polling places on their campuses.

The board, which shifted to a 3-2 GOP majority, voted last month to close a polling site at Western Carolina University and to reject the creation of polling sites at two other colleges—the University of North Carolina at Greensboro (UNC Greensboro), and the North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University (NC A&T), the largest historically Black college in the nation. Each of these schools had polling places available on campus during the 2024 election.

The decision, which came just weeks before early voting was scheduled to begin, left many of the 40,000 students who attend these schools more than a mile away from the nearest polling place.

It was the latest of many efforts by North Carolina Republicans to restrict voting ahead of the 2026 midterms: They also cut polling place hours in dozens of counties and eliminated early voting on Sundays in some, which dealt a blow to "Souls to the Polls" efforts led by Black churches.

A lawsuit filed late last month by a group of students at the three schools said, “as a result, students who do not have access to private transportation must now walk that distance—which includes walking along a highway that lacks any pedestrian infrastructure—to exercise their right to vote.

The students argued that this violates their access to the ballot and to same-day registration, which is only available during the early voting period.

Last week, a federal judge rejected their demand to open the three polling centers. Jay Pavey, a Republican member of the Jackson County elections board, who voted to close the WCU polling site, dismissed fears that it would limit voting.

“If you really want to vote, you'll find a way to go one mile,” Pavey said.

Despite the hurdles, hundreds of students in the critical battleground state remained determined to cast a ballot as early voting opened.

On Friday, a video posted by the Smoky Mountain News showed dozens of students marching in a line from WCU "to their new polling place," at the Jackson County Recreation Center, "1.7 miles down a busy highway with no sidewalks."

The university and on-campus groups also organized shuttles to and from the polling place.

A similar scene was documented at NC A&T, where about 60 students marched to their nearest polling place at a courthouse more than 1.3 miles away.

The students described their march as a protest against the state's decision, which they viewed as an attempt to limit their power at the ballot box.

The campus is no stranger to standing up against injustice. February 1 marked the 66th anniversary of when four Black NC A&T students launched one of the most pivotal protests of the civil rights movement, sitting down at a segregated Woolworth's lunch counter in downtown Greensboro—an act that sparked a wave of nonviolent civil disobedience across the South.


"Aggies do what is necessary for our rights, for our survival, and for our people,” Jae'lah Monet, one of the student organizers of the march, told Spectrum News 1.

Monet said she and other students will do what is necessary to get students to the polls safely and to demonstrate to the state board the importance of having a polling place on campus. She said several similar events will take place throughout the early voting period.

"We will be there all day, and we will all get a chance to vote," Monet said.

SEE ALL
US Rep. Nydia Velázquez (D-NY) speaks during a press conference
News

After Another Boat Bombing, House Progressives Demand End to 'Donroe Doctrine'

With the death toll from President Donald Trump's boat bombings of alleged drug traffickers now at 130 after a Monday strike, a pair of progressive congresswomen on Tuesday called for ending the Monroe Doctrine and establishing a "New Good Neighbor" policy toward Latin America and the Caribbean.

In 1823, then-President James Monroe "declared the Western Hemisphere off limits to powerful countries in Europe," NPR noted last month. "Fast forward, and President Trump is reviving the Monroe Doctrine to justify intervening in places like Venezuela, and threatening further action in other parts of Latin America and Greenland."

Trump's version of the policy has been dubbed the "Donroe Doctrine." After US forces boarded the Aquila II, a Venezuela-linked oil tanker, in the Indian Ocean, David Adler, co-general coordinator of Progressive International, said Monday that "the Donroe Doctrine is not simply a vision for the hemisphere. It is a doctrine of global domination."

In response to the president's recent actions—from his boat bombings and pardon of convicted drug trafficker and former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández, to his oil blockade of Venezuela and raid that overthrew the South American country's president, Nicolás Maduro—US Reps. Nydia Velázquez (D-NY) and Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) introduced the New Good Neighbor Act.

"This administration's aggressive stance toward Latin America makes this resolution critical," said Velázquez in a statement. "Their 'Donroe Doctrine' is simply a more grotesque version of the interventionist policies that have failed us for two centuries."

"The United States and Latin America face shared challenges in drug trafficking, migration, and climate change," she continued. "We can only solve these through real partnership, not coercion. We need to finally leave the Monroe Doctrine behind and pursue a foreign policy grounded in mutual respect and shared prosperity."

Ramirez similarly said that "for more than 200 years, the United States has used the Monroe Doctrine to justify a paternalistic, damaging approach to relations with Latin America and the Caribbean. As a result, the legacy of our nation's foreign policy in those regions is political instability, deep poverty, extreme migration, and colonialism. It is well past time we change our approach."

"We must recognize our interconnectedness and admit that the Monroe Doctrine undermines the partnership needed to confront the complex challenges of this century," she argued. "We must become better neighbors. That is why I am proud to join Congresswoman Nydia Velázquez to develop an approach to foreign policy that advances our collective interests and builds a stronger coalition throughout the Americas and the rest of the world."

The original Good Neighbor Policy was adopted by former President Franklin D. Roosevelt in the 1930s, in an attempt at reverse US imperialism in Latin America. The aim was to curb military interventions, center respect for national sovereignty, and prioritize diplomacy and trade.

As the sponsors' offices summarized, the new resolution calls for:

  • The Department of State to formally confirm that the Monroe Doctrine is no longer a part of United States policy toward Latin America and the Caribbean;
  • The federal government to develop a "New Good Neighbor" policy in place of the Monroe Doctrine;
  • Developing a new approach to promoting economic development;
  • The termination of all unilateral economic sanctions imposed through executive orders, and working with Congress to terminate all unilateral sanctions, such as the Cuba embargo, mandated by law;
  • New legislation to trigger the suspension of assistance to a government whenever there is an extraconstitutional transfer of power;
  • Prompt declassification of all United States government archives that relate to past coups d’état, dictatorships, and periods in the history of Latin American and Caribbean countries characterized by a high rate of human rights crimes perpetrated by security forces;
  • Collaboration with Latin American and Caribbean governments on a far-reaching reform to the Organization of American States; and
  • Supporting democratic reforms to the International Monetary Fund, World Bank, Inter-American Development Bank, and other international financial institutions.

The measure isn't likely to advance in a Republican-controlled Congress that has failed to pass various war powers resolutions that would rein in Trump's boat strikes and aggression toward Venezuela, but it offers Democrats an opportunity to make their foreign policy positions clear going into the midterms—in which Velázquez, who is 72, has decided not to seek reelection.

So far, it is backed by Democratic Reps. Greg Casar (Texas), Yvette Clarke (NY), Jesús "Chuy" García (Ill.), Sylvia García (Texas), Adelita Grijalva (Ariz.), Eleanor Holmes Norton (DC), Jonathan Jackson (Ill.), Pramila Jayapal (Wash.), Hank Johnson (Ga.), Summer Lee (Pa.), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Ilhan Omar (Minn.), Mark Pocan (Wis.), Jan Schakowsky (Ill.), Lateefah Simon (Calif.), and Rashida Tlaib (Mich.). Like Velázquez, Chuy García and Schakowsky are also retiring after this term.

Leaders from organizations including the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR), the United Methodist Church's board, and We Are CASA also backed the bill and commended the sponsors for, as Cavan Kharrazian of Demand Progress, put it "advancing a new framework for US engagement in the region grounded in mutual respect, sovereignty, and cooperation rather than coercion or threats."

Alex Main, CEPR's director of international policy, stressed that "Trump is waging a new offensive against Latin America and the Caribbean—conducting illegal and unprovoked military attacks and extrajudicial killings and brazenly intervening in other countries' domestic affairs in an undisguised effort to exert control over the region's resources and politics."

"But while Trump’s actions are especially egregious, they are just the latest chapter of a centuries-old story of US military political and economic interference that has subverted democracy and fueled instability and human rights crimes across the hemisphere," Main continued. "It is in the interest of the US to reject this doctrine of unilateral domination and chart a new course for US-Latin American relations—to treat our Latin American siblings as vecinos, not vassals."

Sharing yet another brief black-and-white video on social media, US Southern Command on Monday announced a "lethal kinetic strike on a vessel" allegedly "transiting along known narco-trafficking routes in the Eastern Pacific." SOUTHCOM added that "two narco-terrorists were killed and one survived the strike," which prompted a search for the survivor.

Legal experts and various members of Congress have described the killings as murder on the high seas. Reiterating that position in response to the latest bombing disclosure, Amnesty International USA urged Americans to pressure lawmakers to act.

"US military helpfully publishes evidence of its mass murder of civilians at sea," said Ben Saul, a professor at Australia's University of Sydney and the United Nations special rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism. "Over to you, US Department of Justice, to do your job and bring murder suspects to justice."

SEE ALL