SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
");background-position:center;background-size:19px 19px;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-color:#222;padding:0;width:var(--form-elem-height);height:var(--form-elem-height);font-size:0;}:is(.js-newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter_bar.newsletter-wrapper) .widget__body:has(.response:not(:empty)) :is(.widget__headline, .widget__subheadline, #mc_embed_signup .mc-field-group, #mc_embed_signup input[type="submit"]){display:none;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) #mce-responses:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-row:1 / -1;grid-column:1 / -1;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget__body > .snark-line:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-column:1 / -1;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) :is(.newsletter-campaign:has(.response:not(:empty)), .newsletter-and-social:has(.response:not(:empty))){width:100%;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col{display:flex;flex-wrap:wrap;justify-content:center;align-items:center;gap:8px 20px;margin:0 auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .text-element{display:flex;color:var(--shares-color);margin:0 !important;font-weight:400 !important;font-size:16px !important;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .whitebar_social{display:flex;gap:12px;width:auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col a{margin:0;background-color:#0000;padding:0;width:32px;height:32px;}.newsletter-wrapper .social_icon:after{display:none;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget article:before, .newsletter-wrapper .widget article:after{display:none;}#sFollow_Block_0_0_2_0_0_0_1{margin:0;}.tabs__tab-content .row:not(:empty){margin-bottom:0;}@media (min-width: 1024px){#sHome_0_0_4_0_0_16_1_0_1{padding-left:30px;}}.donation_banner{position:relative;background:#000;}.donation_banner .posts-custom *, .donation_banner .posts-custom :after, .donation_banner .posts-custom :before{margin:0;}.donation_banner .posts-custom .widget{position:absolute;inset:0;}.donation_banner__wrapper{position:relative;z-index:2;pointer-events:none;}.donation_banner .donate_btn{position:relative;z-index:2;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_9_0_0_3_1_0{color:#fff;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_9_0_0_3_1_1{font-weight:normal;}.newswire_five_post .all-related-sections [href="https://www.commondreams.org/newswire"]{display:none;}.sticky-sidebar{margin:auto;}@media (min-width: 980px){.main:has(.sticky-sidebar){overflow:visible;}}@media (min-width: 980px){.row:has(.sticky-sidebar){display:flex;overflow:visible;}}@media (min-width: 980px){.sticky-sidebar{position:-webkit-sticky;position:sticky;top:100px;transition:top .3s ease-in-out, position .3s ease-in-out;}}.custom-field-newsletter-visible-on-sticky-position, .custom-field-newsletter-visible-on-sidebar-position, .custom-field-newsletter-visible-on-fixed-position{display:none;}.cta-close:before, .cta-close:after{width:50%;height:2px;content:"";position:absolute;inset:50% auto auto 50%;border-radius:2px;background-color:#fff;}.cta-close:before{transform:translate(-50%)rotate(45deg);}.cta-close:after{transform:translate(-50%)rotate(-45deg);}.sticky_newsletter_wrapper{width:100%;}.black_newsletter.is_sticky_on{transition:all .3s ease-out;}.black_newsletter.is_sticky_on.cta-hide{transform:translateY(100%);}.black_newsletter .newsletter_bar{height:auto;padding:24px 16px;}.black_newsletter .newsletter_bar.newsletter-wrapper{margin:0;background:none !important;}@media only screen and (min-width: 768px){.black_newsletter .newsletter_bar{padding:20px 16px;justify-content:space-between;}}@media only screen and (min-width: 1320px){.black_newsletter .newsletter_bar.newsletter-wrapper{margin:0 -16px;}}.footer-campaign .posts-custom .widget, .footer-campaign .posts-custom .posts-wrapper:after, .footer-campaign .row:not(:empty), .footer-campaign .row.px10, .footer-campaign .row.px10 > .col, .footer-campaign .sm-mb-1 > *, .footer-campaign .sm-mb-1:not(:empty):after{margin:0;padding:0;}.footer-campaign .sm-mb-1:not(:empty):after{display:none;}.footer-campaign{padding:0;}.footer-campaign .widget:hover .widget__headline .widget__headline-text{color:#fff;}@media only screen and (min-width: 768px){.footer-campaign .sm-mt-1:not(:empty):after{content:"";grid-column:4;grid-row:1 / span 2;}}@media only screen and (min-width: 768px){.footer-campaign .sm-mt-1:not(:empty):before{grid-column:1;grid-row:1 / span 2;}}.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper.sidebar{background:linear-gradient(91deg, #005dc7 28%, #1d63b2 65%, #0353ae 85%);}.black_newsletter{background:linear-gradient(91deg, #005dc7 28%, #1d63b2 65%, #0353ae 85%);}.black_newsletter .newsletter_bar.newsletter-wrapper{background:none;}
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.
In a dystopian appearance before the House Homeland Security Committee, robotic sycophant and Cosplay Barbie Kristi Noem dodged, lied and gaslighted her way through questions from angry lawmakers about illegally disappearing migrants, defying court orders, arresting mayors, deporting children with cancer, declining a basic proof of life request or even acknowledging a massive photo of fake tattoos put before her because, "The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears."'
The absurdist, infuriating spectacle played out as Kilmar Abrego Garcia, along with many other Venezuelans, marked three months in El Salvador's hellhole of a prison, and as a spiteful regime that "knows no shame and has no bottom" released a Shepard-Fairey-like poster of the now-iconic Kilmar - "We call this one not a Maryland Dad" - with a giant "MS-13" replacing Obama's "Hope," evidently because, "'We accidentally sent a Maryland dad to a foreign torture prison and can’t be bothered to get him back' doesn’t poll well outside the extreme MAGA fringe." It was amidst their smears and turpitude that Homeland Security's deeply complicit ICE Barbie faced off against Dems repulsed by her so-called leadership - endless photo-ops in tactical gear and "cosplaying as every Fox News fever dream," flagrant sidestepping of court orders, a sickening, staged, well-coiffed performance, complete with $50,000 Rolex, before the silent, shackled prisoners in El Salvador's CECOT.
All of this represents "a sad day for DHS." said Bennie Thompson, Democrats' ranking member, though he added he was glad she took time off from her photo-ops and costumes - cowgirl, firefighter, "Every day is Halloween!" - to testify. Then he lit into her. "Even when, Madame Secretary, my Republican colleagues and I had strong disagreements, we still did our duty keep America safe," he said. "But that's not the case any longer. On your watch, the department is breaking the law, it's hurting people, and it's making America less safe. The Trump administration is outright lying to the courts and the American people." Promptly confirming his charges, Noem, "this vile, contemptuous, plastic creature" and "dead-eyed puppy murderer," then offered up enough twisted opinions - yes everyone ICE arrested has received due process, yes suspending habeas corpus is probably warranted - to explain the popularity of a South Dakota bumper sticker, "Kristi Noem Is A Monster."
She defended the arrest of Newark Mayor Ras Baraka at a New Jersey ICE facility, where he joined three Dem lawmakers seeking to exercise Congressional oversight, claiming he tried to "storm" the site in “a political stunt that put the safety of law-enforcement officers, agents, staff, and detainees at risk," despite video showing burly ICE agents shoving the visitors. "They were cooperating with criminals to create criminal acts," she raved on Fox News. "This was committing felonies. This was attacking people who stand up for the rule of law." Baraka's response: "Bullshit." Noem also defended/lied about deporting a four-year-old U.S. citizen with Stage 4 cancer to Honduras with her mom, falsely claiming the mother had consented to the action. Rep. Seth Magaziner: "You have been sloppy. Your department has been sloppy. And instead of focusing on real criminals, you have allowed innocent children to be deported while you fly around the country playing dress-up for the cameras."
Noem went still lower in response to Rep. Robert Garcia's questions about Andry Hernández Romero, an openly gay make-up artist shipped to El Salvador and held incommunicado though he'd come to this country legally seeking asylum, passed a credible fear interview, and committed no crime; a journalist identified him crying “I’m innocent” and “I’m gay” as CECOT guards shaved his head. Grabbed for his tattoos - of his parents' names and crowns for a hometown festival - Romero worked at the Miss Venezuela pageant, his lawyer said: "His social media is full of beauty queens." "We are paying to lock this young gentleman up forever," said Garcia, who pleaded with Noem to do "a proof of life check on Andry just to see if he is alive." Nope, said Noem, not my problem. Also, "ask El Salvador," "how things should be implemented," "utilizing the tools Congress has given us," "jurisdiction." Garcia angrily persisted, citing "humanity," clearly in vain. Noem refused, blankly, stonily repeating ask Bukele. Comment: "The souls of these people took flight."
Perhaps the day's most chilling, surreal, propaganda-at-its-finest, sociopathic-flunky-of-the-regime-will-not-defy-great-talking-yam moment came when Rep. Eric Swalwell challenged the deportation of Kilmar Abrego Garcia by producing a large poster board of the Trump-touted, atrociously photo-shopped image of MS-13 tattoos on his knuckles and asked Noem to look at it, and say if she thought it was "doctored or not doctored." Famously, the image was first presented by Trump, who in a cringey interview with ABC News’ Terry Moran insisted the tattoos were real even though experts said and any imbecile except this one could see they were fake. Trump, exulted: "He has MS-13 on his knuckles, tattooed!" Moran, embarrassed: "That was photo-shopped." Trump, whining: "You're not being very nice...Why don't you just say, 'Yes he does.'" (He then also undid all his previous arguments by alternately saying he didn't have the power to return Abrego Garcia and "we have lawyers that don’t want to do this.”)
Because Noem is not an imbecile so much as a sick evil fuck, her stonewalling was more impressive. Ignoring Swalwell's request and unhelpful facts - Abrego Garcia had a protection order preventing his removal, regime lawyers admit he was deported through "administrative error," SCOTUS ruled 9-0 the regime must facilitate his return, evidence of him being a gang member is non-existent no matter how loudly Stephen Goebbels Miller rants he had “extensively documented membership" and was a “clear and present danger (to) the American people" - Noem simply, repeatedly refused to look at the photo. Instead, she reverted - "If you look round the back you'll find a ring pull and a bit of string" - to the robotic babbling of talking points: Abrego Garcia "is an El Salvador resident who has been treated appropriately,” "the mission of Homeland Security is to secure our nation," etc, thereby inadvertently proving, "The people claiming to protect our nation from terrorists are in fact terrorists themselves."
Swalwell stubbornly persisted: “It's a simple yes or no question. The letters M-S and the numbers 13 - are those doctored or not?” At one point he asked an aide to move the image and wield it in Noem's face before asking again; she yammered on in a Botoxed monotone, immersed in a political theater piece for a demented audience of one. Swalwell dismissed it. "Madame Secretary, I have a 7-year-old, a six-year-old, and a three-year-old," he said wearily. "I have a built-in bullshit detector." He went back to asking one of the country's chief law enforcement officials of a photo that's "been hanging out here for four weeks": Doctored or not? Finally, she landed on her last, improbable dodge: "I have no knowledge of that photo you're pointing to," thus rendering her the only person in America who hadn't yet seen it. "I'm a former prosecutor. I have put people away for life sentences," said a furious Swalwell. "What makes me different from you (is) I did it with the weight of the law behind me.”
In contrast, amidst her motorized monologue, Noem slipped and revealed her own lawlessness by declaring - under oath, in defiance of SCOTUS and other court orders, "We will not be bringing (Abrego Garcia) back." "Pretty sure the credibility thing is off the table," was one comment. "Time for contempt or perjury charges." In normal times, yes. Instead, Noem, like her venal boss, may be getting a plane. In a last-minute budget change, the Coast Guard has requested a new $50 million Gulfstream jet to replace her old one. Yammered the acting Coast Guard Chief, “Meeting the needs of (our) men and women doing frontline operations is (a) top operational priority of the Secretary.” Presumably, with make-up studio and yuge closet for all the Barbie outfits. And - "You get a car, and you get a car! - she might get a reality TV show where immigrants compete for a chance to earn citizenship. Per the pitch, “We’ll join in the laughter, tears, frustration, and joy (as) we are reminded how amazing it is to be American.” Indeed.
Louisiana advocates and their allies are not giving up in their fight to stop the liquefied natural gas buildout that threatens the health and well-being of Gulf Coast communities—not to mention the stability of the global climate—even as the Trump administration doubles down on its commitment to expanding LNG infrastructure.
In a briefing on Tuesday, community members, local advocates, and international campaigners shared how they would continue to push back against Venture Global, an LNG company that has amassed a record of ecosystem destruction and air pollution violations at its currently operating Calcasieu Pass export terminal in Cameron Parish, Louisiana. Despite this, the Trump administration's Department of Energy granted conditional approval for the company’s nearby Calcasieu Pass 2 (CP2), undoing the pause that the outgoing Biden administration had placed on it and other LNG approvals as it considered the public interest ramifications of LNG exports.
Yet Gulf Coast campaigners, who are used to dealing with a lax regulatory environment at the state level, were not defeated.
"Anybody who reports here in Louisiana regularly understands that we've never been protected by our regulatory environment. Never," Anne Rolfes, who directs the Louisiana Bucket Brigade, told reporters. "And so we always have had to take matters into our own hands, and we have protected ourselves against enormous companies."
One key strategy that the Louisiana Bucket Brigade and others have used to get around the regulatory rubber stamping of bad actors is to raise public awareness of how the companies turning coastal Louisiana into a sacrifice zone really operate.
Case in point is Venture Global. Rolfe and John Allaire—a 40-year veteran of the oil and gas industry who lives next door to the Calcasieu Pass terminal—laid out its short but extensive record of environmental violations and unethical business practices.
Even before the original Calcasieu Pass began exporting, in January 2022, it had to clear a space for tankers to access the facility.
"It's understood that this is a volatile fuel to lock into, that you don't want to rely on a fuel that Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump control."
"They pumped hundreds of thousands of cubic yards of black viscous sludge from their marine berth out into the front of the Gulf of Mexico," Allaire said. "And that was the first indication of what was to come with Venture Global."
Since it began operating, the company has added air, noise, and light pollution to the water pollution that has devastated local fisheries.
Allaire has taken hundreds of videos and photos of flaring incidents.
"The light pollution is unbelievable," he said. "At night, I can literally read a book when the flares are going, and I'm over a mile away from their flare stacks."
Allaire's observations are backed up by the official record. In June 2023, the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality sent Venture Global a compliance order detailing over 2,000 air permit violations from its first 10 months of operation, Allaire said. The company has yet to resolve the complaint, and the state sent them a warning letter in March covering their 2024 and 2025 rule-breaking.
The company also has a history of failing to report its flares and other excess emissions to the Department of Environmental Quality as required by the Clean Air Act.
If they reported and then investigated their violations, "that would enable them to really understand what's happening at their facility so that they could prevent future problems," Rolfe said. "They absolutely aren't doing that."
In March, the Louisiana Bucket Brigade and the Habitat Recovery Project notified Venture Global of intent to sue the company over Clean Air Act violations at its Calcasieu Pass facility.
But the environmental groups aren't the only ones suing Venture Global. The company stretched its commissioning phase—during which it is considered still in the process of establishing itself and can sell its products to the highest bidder rather than honoring its contracts—for three years and three months, beginning normal operations just this April.
"This is absolutely off from the industry norm," Rolfe said.
Now, other major fossil fuel companies, including Shell and BP, are pursuing arbitration claims against Venture Global for breach of contract. Investors have joined a class-action lawsuit against it, saying it violated federal securities law by misrepresenting its prospects.
Yet Venture Global has huge ambitions for the region. In addition to Calcasieu Pass and CP2, it wants to build three other export terminals in coastal Louisiana and more than triple its capacity from 30 million tons per annum (MTPA) of liquid gas—already over a quarter of the 88 MTPA exported by the U.S. exports in 2024—to 104 MTPA.
"As a review, they're flouting the Clean Air Act. They've manipulated the commissioning phase. They're being sued by everybody they've done business with. Is this a company that our country and our state should put such faith in?" Rolfe asked.
She answered her own question: "Of course, our answer is no."
Another strategy the Louisiana Bucket Brigade and their allies seek to employ is to delay Venture Global's ambitions long enough for the economic reality of the LNG boom to catch up with it.
In addition to the approval of CP2, Australian company Woodside announced on Monday that it had approved a Louisiana LNG project worth $17.5 billion. Yet the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis concluded in April that the massive growth in LNG capacity would exceed dwindling demand within two years.
"It's understood that this is a volatile fuel to lock into, that you don't want to rely on a fuel that Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump control. So people are trying to get off of gas," Rolfe said.
"The economics are going to catch up with them. I just want it to be before they destroy the coast of Louisiana."
This means that LNG companies like Woodside and Venture Global are behaving "like a kid in a candy store," Rolfe continued. "That kid, unchecked, will eat so much, they'll throw up. I think the same is true with this industry. Unchecked, it will do itself harm."
The key is therefore to stall the buildout long enough that many projects become infeasible. This tactic has worked for frontline communities during the first Trump administration, Rolfe said. Through a combination of public pressure, records requests, and legal action, community advocates were able to delay the construction of a plastic plant proposed by the Chinese company Wanhua Chemical U.S. Operation, LLC, which would have released the World War 1-era nerve gas phosgene into the already pollution-burdened St. James Parish.
The economic outlook for the plant had always been "dubious" Rolfe said, and eventually the company gave up on trying to build it.
"They could have gotten approval and gotten on their way within a month. But our suit and then our constant presence and making them table things and so forth, drew it out and let the economics catch up with them," Rolfe said.
Rolfe added that the gas industry has similarly gotten ahead of itself.
"They're greedy, right? They want to grab all the candy they can, and the economics are going to catch up with them. I just want it to be before they destroy the coast of Louisiana."
Another strategy to slow down the building of new LNG facilities like CP2 is to target the one thing, in addition to permits and funds, that they can't move forward without: insurance.
Insurance is one sector in which the economic impact of the climate crisis is already being felt, as Ethan Nuss, senior energy finance campaigner at Rainforest Action Network, explained.
For example, major insurer Chubb earns $1.5 billion a year in premiums from the fossil fuel industry, which was already canceled out early this year with the $1.5 billion in pre-tax losses they took from the Los Angeles wildfires. On a local level, some insurers have pulled out of Louisiana all together to avoid insuring against climate-fueled extreme weather events.
"Once they are really educated about the permit violations and the legal risks and the true risk landscape that they're facing by taking on this client, many of them are very concerned."
"This is not a time to build something like CP2 that would deepen the climate crisis," Nuss said.
Because insurers are on the books for both fossil fuel projects and the damage for climate disasters, and because many of them have climate and human rights policies, they are vulnerable to growing pressure from the climate movement to drop the oil and gas clients costing them so much money.
RAN in February published the names of the major insurers for Venture Global's Calcasieu Pass, which it obtained via a Freedom of Information Act request. These included Chubb subsidiary ACE American Insurance Company, AIG subsidiary National Union Fire Insurance Co., Allianz, Swiss Re, AXA, and Tokio Marine subsidiary Houston Casualty Company.
"That has kicked off a global effort to reach out to those insurers and begin to educate them about what is happening in Southwest Louisiana, the impacts from Calcasieu Pass, and what associated risks they're facing," Nuss said.
As a result of these efforts, Swiss Re has agreed to meet with the fishing community of Southwest Louisiana, to talk about the "devastating impacts on their livelihoods" from Calcasieu Pass' operations.
"Often with these global financial institutions, they aren't fully aware of what's really happening on the ground. That client is maybe just another line on the spreadsheet. But once they really start hearing the stories, once they are really educated about the permit violations and the legal risks and the true risk landscape that they're facing by taking on this client, many of them are very concerned," Nuss said.
Nuss hopes that, once fully informed, insurers would decide any project of Venture Global's is a "very risky business that they don't want to be involved in."
Alex Jacquez from the progressive think tank Groundwork Collaborative issued a stark warning to the U.S. public on Wednesday in response to a statement from the Federal Reserve committee that sets interest rates.
The new statement from the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) "provides further evidence that a perfect storm for a recession is brewing" under U.S. President Donald Trump, said Jacquez, Groundwork's chief of policy and advocacy. "Barely 100 days into Trump's second term, working families are already being crushed by sticky inflation and slowing growth."
"A Trump-engineered recession will devastate working families, but the president refuses to stand down on his failed trade war, no matter the cost," added Jacquez, who previously advised former President Barack Obama and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).
The FOMC said Wednesday that "the risks of higher unemployment and higher inflation have risen," and opted to keep the federal funds rate at 4.25-4.5%. The committee has maintained the rate for the past three meetings, following a series of cuts last year.
Trump on Sunday pushed for a rate cut, and though he has backed off a threat to try to oust Fed Chair Jerome Powell, the president "could reconsider if the economy stumbles in the coming months," The Associated Pressreported Wednesday.
According to the AP:
Asked at the press conference whether Trump's calls for lower rates [have] any influence on the Fed, Powell said, "[It] doesn’t affect doing our job at all. We're always going to consider only the economic data, the outlook, the balance of risks, and that's it."
If the Fed were to cut rates, it could lower other borrowing costs, such as for mortgages, auto loans, and credit cards, though that is not guaranteed.
Addressing Trump's evolving tariff policy, Powell said Wednesday that "if the large increases in tariffs that have been announced are sustained, they're likely to generate a rise in inflation, a slowdown in economic growth, and a rise in unemployment."
Sharing a video of his remarks on social media, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) stressed that Trump's tariffs mean higher prices.
In a Wednesday blog post, former Labor Secretary Robert Reich wrote: "Recall that last November, the single biggest reason voters gave in exit polls for choosing Trump was that he'd bring prices down... Although Trump has scaled back some tariffs and paused others as he seeks trade deals with foreign nations, his tariffs are already eating into household budgets."
Reich highlighted comments about price hikes from companies whose products include everything from baby supplies and laundry detergent to paper towels and tools. He also emphasized that "tariffs will particularly hurt small businesses."
"This bodes ill for American workers, since 80% of U.S. employment comes from small businesses with fewer than 500 workers. The likely result: higher unemployment," he explained, projecting price hikes and job losses this month. "But here's the question: Will consumers and workers realize Trump is the cause? And if they do, will they remember this by the November 2026 midterm elections?"
Amid the news that billionaire tech mogul Elon Musk secured a new deal with Saudia Arabia for his satellite internet service just as U.S. President Donald Trump was visiting the Middle Eastern country, Democratic senators are intensifying their demand for an investigation into how Musk has directly benefited from the president's policies and actions since taking office.
Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), and Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) wrote to top Trump administration officials demanding a probe into what they called "a textbook case of corruption."
Musk, a "special government employee" who has led Trump's efforts to slash public spending via the Department of Government Efficiency, said at an investment forum in Riyadh Tuesday that Starlink, the satellite service owned by his aerospace company, SpaceX, had gotten approval to operate in Saudi Arabia.
The service has struggled to gain traction in international markets, relying on permits from foreign governments—but its trajectory has changed since Trump took office.
"Starlink has seen a rush of new countries permitting the company to enter their markets," wrote the senators. "Soon after President Trump announced tariffs, Lesotho 'awarded Musk's firm the nation's first-ever satellite internet service license,' and 'is far from the only country that has decided to assist Musk's firm while trying to fend off U.S. tariffs.'"
India, Vietnam, and Bangladesh have also agreed to work with Musk's company in recent weeks as Trump was threatening to impose tariffs.
On Thursday, ProPublicadetailed some of the discussions the administration has had with foreign governments in recent weeks, about trade as well as foreign aid, with an apparent goal: "Get business for Elon Musk."
In Gambia, where Musk had tried for months to secure approval for Starlink, U.S. Ambassador Sharon Cromer—an appointee of former President Joe Biden—met with the country's top communications official, Lamin Jabbi, in February.
"We ask that the DOJ and the White House investigate whether any officials have pursued a quid pro quo exchange of Starlink access for tariff favors in violation of federal ethics law."
"The administration had already begun freezing foreign aid projects, and early in the meeting, Cromer... said something that rattled Gambian officials in the room," reported ProPublica. "She listed the ways that the U.S. was supporting the country, according to two people present and contemporaneous notes, noting that key initiatives—like one that funds a $25 million project to improve the electrical system—were currently under review."
Hassan Jallow, a top deputy to Jabbi, told ProPublica that the clear implication in Cromer's comments "was that they were connected."
Similar discussions have taken place between U.S. officials and the government of Cameroon—where leaders were told they could prove their "commitment to Trump's agenda by letting Starlink expand its presence there" and warned of the potential "impact of U.S. aid cuts and deportations."
In Lesotho, Starlink finalized a deal with officials after Trump imposed 50% tariffs on the landlocked country.
Kenneth Fairfax, who served as U.S. ambassador to Kazakhstan, told ProPublica the conversations pushing countries to approve deals with Musk "could lead to the impression that the U.S. is engaging in a form of crony capitalism."
The Saudi deal announced Tuesday was finalized just as Trump secured a $600 billion investment deal with the country and agreed to sell the government a $142 billion arms package.
As Common Dreamsreported last week, internal government messages have shown how U.S. embassies and the State Department have mentioned Starlink by name in numerous communications with foreign governments about satellite companies.
"Secretary of State Marco Rubio has increasingly instructed officials to push for regulatory approvals for Musk's satellite firm at a moment when the White House is calling for wide-ranging talks on trade," The Washington Post reported.
Warren, Warner, and Shaheen wrote that the Public Integrity Section at the Department of Justice (DOJ) "is responsible for investigating
potentially criminal conflicts of interest like this," and called on Attorney General Pam Bondi to initiate a probe.
"The White House's Designated Agency Ethics Official can similarly investigate potential ethics violations by White House officials," they wrote. "We ask that the DOJ and the White House investigate whether any officials have pursued a quid pro quo exchange of Starlink access for tariff favors in violation of federal ethics law."
The lawmakers also called on the State Department inspector general to investigate whether department officials "may be subverting the public's interests in favor of Mr. Musk's personal financial interests as they negotiate new tariff agreements—and whether they have been directed by Mr. Musk or President Trump to do so."
Bowing to industry pressure, the Environmental Protection Agency is planning to roll back limits on so-called "forever chemicals" in drinking water—a move that critics said belies President Donald Trump's dubious pledge to "ensure that America has among the very cleanest air and cleanest water on the planet."
In a misleading announcement, the EPA said Wednesday that it will "keep maximum contaminant levels" (MCLs) for two per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)—PFOA and PFOS—as part of an effort to "provide regulatory flexibility and holistically address these contaminants in drinking water."
However, the EPA plans to scrap MCLs for four other forever chemicals: PFNA, PFHxS, GenX, and PFBS.
"These four chemicals are the ones currently in use because industry developed them to replace PFOA and PFOS, so they are the chemicals most likely to increase contamination in the future," explained former senior EPA water official Betsy Southerland in a statement issued by the Environmental Protection Network on Wednesday.
"It is incredibly inefficient to regulate them years after the treatment has been installed only for PFOA and PFOS," Southerland added. "[EPA Administrator Lee] Zeldin's announcement on PFAS drinking water standards ensures that America's children will be drinking PFAS for another decade while he slows drinking water and wastewater PFAS treatment for years."
The EPA also pushed back the deadline for compliance with a Biden administration rule finalized last year aimed at ensuring polluters pay forever chemical cleanup costs, from 2029 to 2031. Earlier this week, the EPA said it is delaying a key PFAS reporting rule by one year.
"This is a betrayal of public health at the highest level," Environmental Working Group president Ken Cook said in response to Wednesday's announcement. "You can't make America healthy while allowing toxic chemicals to flow freely from our taps. The EPA is caving to chemical industry lobbyists and pressure by the water utilities, and in doing so, it's sentencing millions of Americans to drink contaminated water for years to come."
"The cost of PFAS pollution will fall on ordinary people, who will pay in the form of polluted water and more sickness, more suffering, and more deaths from PFAS-related diseases," Cook added.
"Zeldin's announcement on PFAS drinking water standards ensures that America's children will be drinking PFAS for another decade."
Approximately half of the U.S. population is drinking PFAS-contaminated water, "including as many as 105 million whose water violates the new standards," according to the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), which added that "the EPA has known for decades that PFAS endangers human health, including kidney and testicular cancer, liver damage, and harm to the nervous and reproductive systems."
Forever chemicals—so called because some of them take up to 1,000 years to break down in the environment—have myriad uses, from nonstick cookware to waterproof clothing to firefighting foam. Increasing use of forever chemicals has resulted in the detection of PFAS in the blood of nearly every person in the United States and around the world.
"The PFAS contamination crisis is much larger than just two chemicals, and there is increasing evidence that other PFAS chemicals that pollute water harm health," Cook said. "Eliminating all PFAS chemicals from drinking water is an urgent public health priority."
"If this administration is serious about making America healthier, it needs to prove it by stopping PFAS from contaminating our drinking water," he added.
NRDC senior strategic director of health Erik Olson said Wednesday that "with a stroke of the pen, the EPA is making a mockery of the Trump administration's promise to deliver clean water for Americans."
"With this action, the EPA is making clear that it's willing to ignore Americans who just want to turn on their kitchen taps and have clean, safe water," Olson asserted. "The EPA's plan to retain but delay standards for two legacy forever chemicals may offer modest consolation to some, but throwing out protections against four others will be devastating."
"The law is very clear that the EPA can't repeal or weaken the drinking water standard. This action is not only harmful, it's illegal," Olson stressed. The Safe Drinking Water Act contains an "anti-backsliding" provision prohibiting the EPA from repealing or weakening the standard.
"With a stroke of the pen, the EPA is making a mockery of the Trump administration's promise to deliver clean water for Americans."
Kelly Moser, senior attorney and leader of the Water Program at the Southern Environmental Law Center—which successfully sued the industrial chemicals giant Chemours to stop PFAS contamination in North Carolina—said Wednesday that "when this administration talks about deregulation, this is what they mean—allowing toxic chemicals in drinking water at the request of polluters."
"This action also undercuts Administrator Zeldin's acknowledgment of the severe health harms of PFAS; what people need are protections from pollution, not press releases feigning concern," Moser added.
Food & Water Watch water program director Mary Grant said Wednesday that "today's decision is a shameful and dangerous capitulation to industry pressure that will allow continued contamination of our drinking water with toxic PFAS."
"Once again, the Trump administration has demonstrated that its priority is bending to corporate interests, not protecting the safety and well-being of everyday people," Grant continued. "Nothing is safe from Trump's greed-driven agenda—not even our drinking water."
"This will cost lives," she warned.
Dozens of former United Kingdom Special Forces troops or those who served with them have broken their silence to describe alleged war crimes they witnessed—including the execution of children—during the U.S.-led wars on Afghanistan and Iraq.
BBC's "Panorama"—which has repeatedly aired episodes focused on war crimes committed by British soldiers during the so-called War on Terror—on Monday featured testimonies from 30 former U.K. Special Forces (UKSF) members, including Special Air Service (SAS), Special Boat Service (SBS), and supporting troops who served in Afghanistan and Iraq.
"They handcuffed a young boy and shot him," recalled one SAS veteran who fought in Afghanistan. "He was clearly a child, not even close to fighting age."
"It's not justified, killing people in their sleep."
Another veteran who served with the SAS said that killing was "intoxicating" for some soldiers and became "an addictive thing to do," adding that there were "lots of psychotic murderers" among the ranks.
"On some operations, the troop would go into guesthouse-type buildings and kill everyone there," he said. "They'd go in and shoot everyone sleeping there, on entry. It's not justified, killing people in their sleep."
One SBS veteran described executions of wounded people who posed no threat, including one man who was being treated by a medic when "one of our blokes came up to him."
"There was a bang. He'd been shot in the head at point-blank range," the veteran recalled, describing the killing and other like it as "completely unnecessary."
"These are not mercy killings," he said. "It's murder."
Another veteran recounted a fellow SAS commando who kept track of the dozens of Afghans he'd killed during his six-month deployment.
"It seemed like he was trying to get a kill on every operation, every night someone got killed," the former soldier said, adding that his colleague was "notorious in the squadron; he genuinely seemed like a psychopath."
The soldier allegedly slit the throat of an injured Afghan man after telling an officer not to shoot him again, "because he wanted to go and finish the wounded guy off with his knife."
Another veteran said "everyone knew" what was happening and that to avoid scrutiny for executions, British troops would plant "drop weapons" on victims' bodies to make it appear as if they were militants. U.S. troops—who widely engaged in this war crime—called it "dead-checking."
One veteran said that "there was implicit approval for what was happening" from commanders.
"We understood how to write up serious incident reviews so they wouldn't trigger a referral to the military police," he explained. "If it looked like a shooting could represent a breach of the rules of conflict, you'd get a phone call from the legal adviser or one of the staff officers in HQ. They'd pick you up on it and help you to clarify the language. 'Do you remember someone making a sudden move?' 'Oh yeah, I do now.' That sort of thing. It was built into the way we operated."
"Panorama" also confirmed for the first time that former Conservative U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron, who was in office from 2010-16, was repeatedly warned that British troops were committing war crimes.
Gen. Douglas Lute, a former U.S. ambassador to NATO, told "Panorama" that then-Afghan President Hamid Karzai—who repeatedly condemned American war crimes in his country—was "so consistent with his complaints about night raids, civilian casualties, and detentions that there was no senior Western diplomat or military leader who would have missed the fact that this was a major irritant for him."
In 2020, the International Criminal Court determined that British troops committed war crimes in Iraq but declined to prosecute any alleged perpetrators.
Documented war crimes committed by U.S. troops, mercenaries, and other private contractors in nations including Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Libya, and Syria during the ongoing War on Terror include but are not limited to murder of civilians and detainees, extraordinary rendition, torture, rape, and jailing and sexual abuse of women and girls held as bargaining chips.
Whistleblowers who exposed these and other illegalities—including WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, former NSA operative Edward Snowden, former Army analyst Chelsea Manning, former CIA intelligence officer John Kiriakou, and others—were almost always the only ones ever punished in connection with the crimes they exposed.
Other coalition troops—including Afghans, Iraqis, Australians, Germans, Poles, and Canadians—have allegedly committed atrocities during the War on Terror, as have Taliban, al-Qaeda, Islamic State, and other militants.
According to the Costs of War Project at Brown University's Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs, "at least 940,000 people have died due to direct war violence, including civilians, armed forces on all sides, contractors, journalists, and humanitarian workers" in U.S.-led wars since 9/11. This figure includes at least 408,000 civilians.
Rep. Al Green of Texas accused Trump of "flouting of federal court orders, flouting the separation of powers, undermining the independence of the federal judiciary, and flouting the constitutional mandate of due process."
After Democratic Michigan Rep. Shri Thanedar earlier this week opted not to move forward with an effort to force the U.S. House of Representatives to vote on impeaching U.S. President Donald Trump, another lawmaker on Thursday filed a single article of impeachment against Trump, calling him a threat to democracy.
In a Thursday statement, Rep. Al Green of Texas, a Democrat, said that he "announced on the floor of the House of Representatives that I have filed H.Res.415 to impeach President Donald John Trump for condoning the flouting of federal court orders, flouting the separation of powers, undermining the independence of the federal judiciary, and flouting the constitutional mandate of due process."
In a letter, Green elaborated that he felt compelled to move forward with the impeachment push because he cannot "in good conscience... wait until the next election to deal with authoritarian President Donald John Trump's pre-election threat to American democracy that has become a post-election assault on our government."
Green's article of impeachment alleges that Trump is "devolving democracy within the United States into authoritarianism with himself (Donald John Trump) as an authoritarian president."
His resolution states that through Trump's conduct and his "violation" of the presidential oath of office, in which the president swears to "faithfully execute the office of president of the United States" and to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States" in accordance with Article II, Section I of the U.S. Constitution, he has "engaged in high crimes and misdemeanors."
In his letter, Green said that he would "call for a vote to impeach authoritarian President Donald John Trump at a time to be determined."
This year, Green has repeatedly expressed his intention to file articles of impeachment against Trump.
Green was censured earlier this year after disrupting Trump's joint address to Congress, heckling the president and telling him he had "no mandate to cut Medicaid."
Thanedar, who last month filed seven articles of impeachment against Trump, backed off from forcing a vote after Democrats privately worried that it would distract from efforts to highlight potential cuts to Medicaid and other programs as part of the Republican megabill currently making it ways through Congress, according to Politico. Publicly, Thenader said he was holding off after speaking with colleagues and that he intends to add to the impeachment articles.
The group Free Speech for People, which is mounting a campaign to drum up support for impeaching Trump again, boosted both Thanedar and Green's impeachment pushes on social media.
Trump was impeached twice by the House of Representatives during his first term, but in both cases he was acquitted by the Senate. Both chambers of Congress are now controlled by Trump's Republican Party.
In response to Green's resolution, the White House assistant press secretary told the Houston Chronicle, in part, on Friday: "Every action taken by President Trump and his administration is fully lawful and firmly rooted in the will of the American people. President Trump is doing exactly what he promised: securing our border, bringing in trillions of dollars in investment to America, and restoring common sense leadership."
"The dismantling of USAID and cuts to humanitarian aid has been devastating and unacceptable," said one international aid group.
More than a million people in some of the world's most impoverished countries could be fed for three months and hundreds of thousands of children's lives could be saved if $98 million in ready-made meals and other rations were able to leave four warehouses run by the U.S. foreign aid agency dismantled by the Trump administration.
But instead, there is no end in sight to the food languishing in the facilities—or to the starvation of millions of people in Gaza, Sudan, South Sudan, and other parts of the Global South facing high levels of hunger and malnutrition.
Some of the 66,000 tonnes of food, including grains, high-energy biscuits, and vegetable oil, are slated to expire as soon as July, when they will likely be turned into animal feed, incinerated, or otherwise destroyed, Reuters reported Thursday.
The warehouses are located in Houston, South Africa, Djibouti, and Dubai, and are run by the U.S. Agency for International Development's (USAID) Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance. Many of the staff who help run the warehouses are scheduled to be fired on July 1 in the first of two rounds of cuts that will effect nearly all of USAID.
Contracts with suppliers, shipping companies, and contractors have been canceled since USAID was taken over by the Trump administration's so-called Department of Government Efficiency, with the White House saying the agency—with a relatively small budget of just $40 billion—was responsible for "significant waste."
Since DOGE, run by tech billionaire Elon Musk, targeted USAID in one of its first full-scale attacks on a federal entity, the agency is being run by Secretary of State Marco Rubio. The State Department's Office of Foreign Assistance has not yet approved a proposal to give the stranded food stocks to aid organizations for distribution, two former USAID staffers told Reuters.
That office is being led by Jeremy Lewin, a 28-year-old former DOGE employee who is overseeing the complete decommissioning of USAID, which has provided humanitarian assistance in conflict zones and the Global South for more than six decades.
Max Hoffman, a foreign policy adviser to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), said the massive waste of life-saving food rations was the result of President Donald Trump and Musk deploying "some idiot 20 year old staggering around USAID turning things off without the faintest idea of the consequences."
Some of the rations were intended for Gaza, where half a million Palestinians are currently facing starvation and the rest of the population of 2.3 million people are suffering from acute levels of food insecurity due to Israel's total blockade on humanitarian aid which was reimposed in March after a brief cease-fire. Thousands of children have been hospitalized with acute malnutrition since the beginning of the year, but Israel's U.S.-backed assault on Gaza has left health providers with extremely limited means to treat them.
The entire population of Gaza could be fed for a month and a half with the food rations that are on the verge of rotting in the four warehouses, Reuters reported.
Nearly 500 tonnes of high-energy biscuits in Dubai are among the stocks that will expire in July, a former USAID official told the outlet. They could feed at least 27,000 acutely malnourished children for a month.
The food aid was also scheduled to go to Sudan, where famine has been confirmed in at least 10 areas as the country faces the third year of a civil war.
Action Against Hunger is one of many aid groups that have had to scale back operations after losing significant funding due to U.S. cuts; the group said last month that its suspension of work in the Democratic Republic of Congo had already directly led to the deaths of at least six children.
In addition to USAID's warehouses full of soon-to-be-expired food, the U.S.-based company Edesia, which makes the peanut-based Plumpy'Nut, told Reuters that USAID's cuts to transportation contracts had forced the company to open an additional warehouse. A $13 million stockpile of 5,000 tonnes of Plumpy'Nut, which is used to prevent severe malnutrition in children, is in the warehouse now—but could be used to feed more than 484,000 children.
"The dismantling of USAID and cuts to humanitarian aid has been devastating and unacceptable," said Oxfam America.
"Our society could decide that police and fire departments will not respond to calls made by individuals who worked less than 80 hours in the prior month, but most would find this repugnant," wrote Matt Bruenig of the People's Policy Project.
Days after Trump Cabinet officials championed work requirements in the pages of The New York Times, a progressive policy expert wrote in that same newspaper on Friday that such mandates—particularly for Medicaid recipients—are "cruel and pointless," potentially stripping critical benefits from millions of people through no fault of their own.
The GOP proposal, which advanced out of the House Energy and Commerce Committee earlier this week, would require many Medicaid recipients to prove that they worked or did some related activity for at least 80 hours per month. Republicans are also seeking to dramatically expand work requirements for recipients of federal nutrition assistance.
Matt Bruenig, founder of the People's Policy Project, a left-wing think tank, argued in his Times op-ed that "imposing work requirements on Medicaid is a fundamentally misguided policy," particularly given that "it is employers, not workers, who make hiring, firing, and scheduling decisions."
"Last year, over 20 million workers were laid off or fired at some point from their jobs," Bruenig observed. "Many of those workers ended up losing not just all of their income but also their employer-sponsored health care. Medicaid is supposed to provide a backstop for these workers, but if we tie eligibility to work, they will find themselves locked out of the healthcare system because of decisions their employers made, often for reasons beyond their control."
To underscore the absurdity of forcing vulnerable people to document adequate work hours in order to receive public benefits, Bruenig wrote that "our society could decide that police and fire departments will not respond to calls made by individuals who worked less than 80 hours in the prior month, but most would find this repugnant and contrary to the purpose of these services."
"Refusing medical care to people in their time of need based on how much they happened to work the month before is a cruel and pointless policy," he added.
"For those fundamentally opposed to Medicaid and the welfare state more generally, the fact that these new requirements would create administrative barriers that disenroll eligible recipients may be seen as a feature, not a bug."
Like other policy experts and healthcare advocates, Bruenig argued that Medicaid work requirements are a solution in search of a problem.
According to Bruenig's calculations, just 5% of Medicaid recipients are able-bodied adults without dependents who work fewer than 80 hours per month—a figure that undercuts the Republican narrative of a crisis-level refusal to work among single, adult Medicaid enrollees with no children.
Bruenig also notes the immense administrative burden that work requirements inevitably bring. "Requiring proof of monthly work hours will cause some people to lose coverage simply because they struggle to keep up with the paperwork, not just because they’re unemployed," he warned, echoing concerns expressed by other analysts.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that the GOP's proposed Medicaid work requirements would imperil benefits for more than 14 million people.
"For those fundamentally opposed to Medicaid and the welfare state more generally, the fact that these new requirements would create administrative barriers that disenroll eligible recipients may be seen as a feature, not a bug," Bruenig wrote. "I suspect that for many of the Republican policymakers who endorsed work requirements, the goal of such a policy isn't genuinely to increase employment or remove support from only those who refuse to work. Rather, it is to redirect resources from lower-income Americans toward those at the top. And for that purpose, it is indeed well designed."
Opponents of Medicaid work requirements typically point to Arkansas and Georgia as evidence that the mandates do little to boost employment while depriving many of health coverage.
The Washington Postreported Friday that in Georgia, "just12,000 of the nearly 250,000 newly eligible Georgians ultimately received Medicaid" under the state's Pathways to Coverage program, which requires enrollees to submit monthly paperwork demonstrating that they worked, volunteered, or participated in job training for at least 80 hours.
"Somewho do work had a tough time proving it to state officials—or their work, such as caring for ailing relatives, didn't qualify," the Post noted. "Georgia's experiences portend what's to come if work requirements are imposed nationally."
The work requirements that Republicans are pushing would produce roughly $300 billion in federal Medicaid spending cuts over the next decade—reductions that would be achieved by either removing people from the program or preventing people from enrolling.
U.S. Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) said Friday that he helped sink a vote to advance the GOP reconciliation package out of the House Budget Committee on Friday partly because the proposed Medicaid work requirements would begin in 2029, rather than immediately.