President-elect Donald Trump says that, on the same day that he is inaugurated for his 2.0 presidency, he will pardon people who stormed the Capitol on January 6, 2021. “It’s going to start in the first hour,” he told Time magazine when they interviewed him for their cover story after naming him man of the year, “Maybe the first nine minutes.”

On the campaign trail, Trump described the January 6 rioters as “political prisoners,” conveniently forgetting the fact that those progressing through the criminal justice system were charged by grand juries and convicted by either juries or federal judges. He calls them “great patriots,” even opening his first campaign rally in Waco, Texas, with “Justice for All,” a song recorded over the phone by imprisoned insurrectionists, set to the tune of the “Star Spangled Banner.”

Pardoning them would be, as Brennan Center President Michael Waldman has said, a misuse of the president’s clemency power. And indeed, two-thirds of Americans oppose it, according to a recent Washington Post poll.

Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution gives broad power to presidents to “grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States,” excepting only “Cases of Impeachment.” The power to both pardon crimes and commute sentences is unrestricted in any other way, except, perhaps, by the still-untested-in-the-courts limitation that a president may not pardon himself.

In other words, Trump can pardon the January 6 defendants. He would not violate the law or exceed the power extended to him by the Constitution if he did so. But while it would not technically be an abuse of his power to do so, it would be an appalling, unprecedented violation of the trust the American people place in their leaders.

In mid-December, President Biden pardoned 39 individuals convicted of nonviolent crimes and commuted the sentences of some 1,500 additional people who had qualified for early release from prison during the Covid-19 pandemic and succeeded in reentering their communities. He reflected on the exercise of the pardon power when he took that action, saying, “I have the great privilege of extending mercy to people who have demonstrated remorse and rehabilitation, restoring opportunity for Americans to participate in daily life and contribute to their communities.” The group includes “parents, veterans, health care professionals, teachers, advocates, and engaged members of their communities.”

By contrast, according to reporting compiled by NBC’s Ryan Reilly, the January 6 defendants were captured on video brandishing and using firearms, stun guns, flagpoles, fire extinguishers, bike racks, batons, a metal whip, office furniture, pepper spray, bear spray, a tomahawk ax, a hatchet, a hockey stick, knuckle gloves, a baseball bat, a massive Trump billboard, Trump flags, a pitchfork, pieces of lumber, crutches, and even an explosive device during the attack on the Capitol. More than 140 police officers were injured and members of Congress fled the building in fear for their lives. (Biden’s commutation of sentences for 37 people on death row should not be conflated with Trump’s proposed action. Commutation means they will serve the rest of their lives in prison instead of being executed, a far cry from the immediate release Trump has discussed for January 6 defendants.)

It’s even worse if Trump intends to pardon members of the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys organizations convicted of seditious conspiracy, something that he has not ruled out. Judge Amit Mehta, who sentenced the Oath Keepers’ leader, Yale Law School graduate Stewart Rhodes, to 18-years in prison for seditious conspiracy said, “The notion that Stewart Rhodes could be absolved is frightening — and ought to be frightening to anyone who cares about democracy.”

If Trump pardons January 6 rioters, he would be using the pardon power to erase an attack on Constitution and country. The purpose of that attack was his personal benefit — if it had succeeded, it could have permitted him to stay in power after losing the election, contrary to every principle of American democracy. An exercise of the pardon power along those lines would have no resemblance to what the Founding Fathers intended. The pardon power, which was only included after extensive debate, was based on the English “prerogative of mercy” that resided in kings and queens to undo punishment that was deemed too harsh. It was not about rewarding political loyalists.

Pardoning people convicted of plotting to interfere with the lawful and peaceful transfer of power following the 2020 presidential election isn’t a righteous grant of mercy. Few of these defendants have shown remorse and some have shown outright defiance, like Ryan Grillo, who said, “Trump’s gonna pardon me anyways” after Judge Royce Lamberth sentenced him in December. The January 6 offenders Trump has committed to pardoning aren’t people who committed nonviolent crimes in their late teens and early twenties and, having served significant portions of their sentence, are now prepared to return to their communities as rehabilitated individuals deserving of a second chance. If anything, the January 6 defendants’ return would give a boost to the white supremacist and domestic terror groups many of them participated in before they overran the Capitol, and it would severely dampen the deterrent effect of our laws against future aggression.

It has been the practice in most recent administrations to use the Office of the Pardon Attorney in the Department of Justice to review requests for pardons and commutations before they are handed up to the White House counsel and the president for a decision. That process includes an extensive evaluation of each individual applicant’s request, including consultation with prosecutors, lawyers, judges, victims, probation officers, prison staff and others to determine whether the requested clemency would serve the interests of justice without endangering the community. Pardons have often been used in the interests of equal justice when people are serving lengthy sentences that would no longer be handed down or in cases of extraordinary rehabilitation when people have demonstrated a commitment to the future of their communities. None of those considerations will be in play if Trump pardons January 6 offenders.

The key to Trump’s pardons is that they are not about people and their communities. They are about personal loyalty to him. Trump summoned these individuals to the Capitol to support him and now he will pardon them to complete that transaction. Trump will use the pardon power to make it clear that violence and violation of the law can be forgiven in service to himself.

Pardoning the rioters is a grotesque misuse of the pardon power because, cloaked in the appearance of lawful authority, it would put the presidential seal on crimes that go to the heart of an attack on our democracy, an effort to undo the will of the voters and seat a man who lost an election as the country’s leader. By advertising his willingness to pardon the people who supported him rather than the Constitution, Trump is sending a message to the people he is counting on to support him this go-round: If they protect him, he will take care of them. It’s a message fit for a would-be authoritarian.

The clean energy transition is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to build momentum for environmental justice.

As the transition accelerates, we face a choice: Will it reproduce the harms of the past fossil fuel-based energy system, or will it create a fairer, more just future where more people can access and benefit from accessible and affordable clean energy? For far too long, historically marginalized communities have been excluded from decisions about the challenges they face, and energy infrastructure is no exception.

Community Benefits Agreements (CBAs) are a tool for ensuring frontline communities receive real, tangible benefits from renewable energy projects.

States that embrace policies like CBAs are showing what’s possible: a future where energy solutions uplift communities rather than burden them.

CBAs are legally binding agreements between developers and communities that outline commitments such as local job creation, workforce training, or investments in public infrastructure. In states that are leading the way, CBAs ensure that energy projects provide clean power and bring economic and social benefits to the communities most impacted. From Michigan to California, states are showing what’s possible:

• In Michigan, developers pay host communities $2,000 per megawatt of energy capacity.
• In California, enforceable agreements with grassroots organizations ensure benefits flow directly to local people.
• In Maine, wind projects deliver long-term financial contributions to communities hosting the turbines.

These policies are not just about energy infrastructure; they represent a shift in power, creating systemic change for equity, accountability, and justice, giving those communities most affected by energy development a voice along with a share of benefits. These state successes show what's possible, but to scale these benefits nationwide, we need stronger federal and state policies working in tandem—like the Justice40 Initiative.

The federal Justice40 Initiative aims to allocate 40% of federal climate and energy investment benefits to communities that have long been overburdened by pollution and underinvestment. State policies require CBAs to build on this foundation, ensuring that energy projects are designed with and for communities that have historically been excluded from decision-making.

By centering racial justice in the clean energy transition, CBAs can:

• Deliver good-paying local jobs.
• Fund schools, public health, and infrastructure.
• Empower communities to shape the projects in their backyards.

Yet CBAs are only as strong as the policies that back them. Some developers will inevitably try to exploit loopholes, sidestep accountability, or push vague agreements that deliver little. In California, legally enforceable agreements with grassroots organizations ensure that the benefits of renewable energy projects flow directly to the local communities hosting them. To advance energy justice, CBAs must be enforceable (legally binding), transparent, and community-driven, and not just another box for developers to check.

We are at a turning point. State governments have a chance to lead by mandating strong, enforceable CBAs and ensuring communities are part of the decision-making process. This isn’t just about clean energy—it’s about repairing harm, investing in people, and building a just energy future.

The clean energy transition can be more than reducing emissions—it can be a powerful pathway to justice, equity, and community empowerment. States that embrace policies like CBAs are showing what’s possible: a future where energy solutions uplift communities rather than burden them.

By centering racial justice in the clean energy transition, CBAs can deliver tangible benefits that create lasting change:

• Good-paying local jobs that boost economic opportunity.
• Funding for schools, public health, and infrastructure to address long-standing inequities.
• Empowered communities that have a say in shaping projects in their own backyards.

CBAs ensure that historically excluded communities move from being merely hosts of energy infrastructure to being active partners and beneficiaries of the clean energy revolution.

To Joe Biden: You have just decided that grizzly bears can remain on the endangered species list. Yet, week after week, you have watched Netanyahu target with U.S. F-16s innocent defenseless Palestinian families, killing 50-100 a day, and blocking humanitarian aid trucks with food, medicine and water for the dying and sick people in this…

Like many Americans, TMI Show co-hosts Ted Rall and Manila Chan have deep ties to Los Angeles. Manila grew up in metro LA and still considers herself a Californian. Ted was a talk show host at KFI AM 640 Los Angeles and the staff cartoonist at the Los Angeles Times. Join Manila and Ted as they discuss the long-term repercussions of the wildfires that continue to scorch the nation’s biggest city.

As the drought continues and the climate continues to change in a place that never had many water resources to begin with, can we adapt, or is it time to consider forcible population shifts away from California? Should the federal government assist Californians who lose multi-million dollar homes but can’t get insurance? How do we define a tipping point after which a place is no longer suitable for human habitation?

We are joined by Dr. Reese Halter, a conservation biologist and the author, most recently, of the book “Generation Z Emergency.”

The post TMI Show Ep 54: “City of Angels or Hell on Earth?” first appeared on Ted Rall's Rallblog.

The post TMI Show Ep 54: “City of Angels or Hell on Earth?” appeared first on Ted Rall's Rallblog.

Jimmy Carter was my last president. I believe that is true for progressive civic groups, too. He actively opened up the federal government to engagement and participation from long politically excluded American activists. When he was campaigning in 1976, he would say that he wanted to be more of a consumer advocate than I am, that he would take seriously…

In addition to seeking to expand Social Security, those fighting for greater economic security must always continue to play defense. There have always been those who want to end Social Security. Republican President Dwight Eisenhower once described them as “a tiny splinter group” that seeks “to abolish Social Security.” He explained, “Their number is negligible and they are stupid.” Unfortunately, that tiny group now controls the Republican party.

Most of the time, they hide their true feelings, knowing how popular and important Social Security is, even with the Republican base. Sometimes, though, the veil drops and their true feelings are revealed. That happened most recently last month when Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) decided to share his true feelings about Social Security in a lengthy Twitter thread. Elon Musk, the soon-to-be shadow President of the United States, amplified the thread, calling it “interesting.”

That “interesting” thread was simply a rehash of lies first uttered by Alf Landon, the 1936 Republican nominee for President, who lost in a landslide. These lies are not just falsehoods but zombie lies, which are used to try to undermine support for Social Security, over and over again.

Every time, Americans have recognized that they were being told lies, and the opponents of Social Security failed. We must be vigilant and make sure that these current efforts fail, too.

Enemies of Social Security willfully refuse to see it as what it actually is: insurance against the loss of wages due to retirement, disability, or death of a family breadwinner.

Let’s review just a few of those zombie lies told by Alf Landon in 1936, Senator Lee last month, and numerous other opponents in the decades in between. They mischaracterize Social Security as individual savings and then claim people would be better off saving on their own. Indeed, they claim, in the words of Lee, that “the government routinely raids” our money. Some even slander our Social Security system by calling it a criminal Ponzi scheme.

These enemies of Social Security willfully refuse to see it as what it actually is: insurance against the loss of wages due to retirement, disability, or death of a family breadwinner. They ignore that Social Security is most working families’ only disability insurance, largest life insurance policy, and most secure, effective and efficient retirement income.

While you can outlive savings, you can never outlive Social Security. The liars refuse to acknowledge that Social Security is strikingly superior to its private sector counterparts—more efficient, secure, universal, and fair. Its one shortcoming is that benefits are too low.

President Franklin Roosevelt responded to Alf Landon’s lies eloquently, in words that are as true today as when he spoke them:

Never before in all our history have [the wealthy] been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me—and I welcome their hatred…[They] are not happy. Some of them are desperate. […]

They tell the worker his wage will be reduced by a contribution to some vague form of old-age insurance. They carefully conceal from him the fact that for every dollar of premium he pays for that insurance, the employer pays another dollar. That omission is deceit…

They do not tell him that the insurance policy that is bought for him is far more favorable to him than any policy that any private insurance company could afford to issue. That omission is deceit…

But they are guilty of more than deceit. When they imply that the reserves thus created against both these policies will be stolen by some future Congress, diverted to some wholly foreign purpose, they attack the integrity and honor of American Government itself. Those who suggest that, are already aliens to the spirit of American democracy.

Everyone should save, if they possibly can. Everyone should also have adequate insurance. Savings are necessary for short-term emergencies and expenses; insurance, for large losses that are predictable for groups, but not individuals.

The liars refuse to acknowledge that Social Security is strikingly superior to its private sector counterparts—more efficient, secure, universal, and fair. Its one shortcoming is that benefits are too low.

To manage the risk of the financial loss associated with the loss of a home as the result of fire, homeowners purchase fire insurance; they do not simply save for the contingency. Similarly, car owners have car insurance, not car-accident savings accounts. And to manage the risk of lost income as the result of disability, death, old age, or unemployment, everyone who works for wages needs wage insurance in the form of Social Security and unemployment insurance.

In addition to the disinformation and the lies, Alf Landon, Mike Lee, and many other Social Security opponents claim that Social Security, in the words of Mike Lee, “is government dependency at its worst.” In truth, rather than undermining freedom, Social Security unlocks the freedom to change jobs, change careers, and change life circumstances while providing some measure of peace of mind that your earned Social Security benefits are there if misfortune strikes in the form of disability or death leaving dependents. They are also there if you have good fortune in the form of a very long life.

Perhaps Republican President Eisenhower said it best:

Retirement systems, by which individuals contribute to their own security…have become an essential part of our economic and social life. These systems are but a reflection of the American heritage of sturdy self-reliance which has made our country strong and kept it free; the self-reliance without which we would have had no Pilgrim Fathers, no hardship-defying pioneers, and no eagerness today to push to ever widening horizons in every aspect of our national life. The Social Security program furnishes, on a national scale, the opportunity for our citizens, through that same self-reliance, to build the foundation for their security.

Senator Lee’s zombie lies about Social Security may be appealing to Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, who will do whatever he can to avoid paying his fair share. But these lies will never convince the American people to abandon their overwhelming support for our Social Security system.

Lies about Social Security may be appealing to Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, who will do whatever he can to avoid paying his fair share. But these lies will never convince the American people to abandon their overwhelming support for our Social Security system.

Those lies have failed to change the narrative for 90 years, and they’re not going to work now.

It’s no surprise that Musk wants to undermine support for Social Security and is eager to amplify Mike Lee’s lies to do so. Musk’s so-called “Department of Government Efficiency” is designed to target our earned benefits, with Republicans already admitting that “there will be some cuts” to Social Security and Medicare.

We must not let that happen.

The key to peace in the Middle East is the security of all states and peoples in the region. The arrival of a new presidency in the United States brings the opportunity for a comprehensive peace deal.

The security of all states and peoples would mean the disarming of the militant non-state forces. It would mean the normalization of diplomatic relations among all nations in the region. It would mean that the people of Palestine have their own sovereign state alongside Israel. It would mean the protection of the territorial integrity and stability of neighboring countries Lebanon and Syria. It would mean the commitment of all countries to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the region. And it would mean that all economic sanctions would be lifted as part of the normalization of diplomatic relations, and as a great stimulus to economic development.

Many millions of people are simply terrified, believing that the other side is an implacable foe out to kill them. False narratives of hatred feed these fears.

Such a comprehensive deal would be in the national security interest of every nation. It would enable all parties to achieve their legitimate aims. Importantly, it would also be line with international law, therefore supported by the United Nations and all its member states.

The sheer majority of people in the Middle East, and in the world, yearn for peace. Yet a violent extremist minority, in Israel and the Arab world, opposes peace. Mercenary armies fight for the spoils of war, and some arms-makers stoke the conflicts. Some opponents of peace dream of restoring ancient empires in flagrant violation of today’s realities.

Many millions of people are simply terrified, believing that the other side is an implacable foe out to kill them. False narratives of hatred feed these fears. To those in great fear, let us recall the wisdom of President John F. Kennedy, who declared sixty years ago:

Indeed, across the gulfs and barriers that now divide us, we must remember that there are no permanent enemies. Hostility today is a fact, but it is not a ruling law. The supreme reality of our time is our indivisibility as children of God and our common vulnerability on this planet.

Kennedy’s confidence in peace enabled the U.S. and the Soviet Union to sign and implement the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. Today, the “art of the deal” could avert a world war.

The Middle East is known as the cradle of civilization because of its vast and unique history and its gifts to world civilization. The three monotheistic faiths are all born in this region; and they all preach and yearn for peace. With the Middle East today at real risk of nuclear conflagration, the moment has arrived for a comprehensive peace deal. The world’s political leaders and religious leaders have peace within their reach.

A comprehensive peace deal in 2025 should include seven measures:

1. An immediate UN-mandated ceasefire across all fronts of the conflict, including Israel, Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, Iraq, and Iran, and the immediate release of hostages and prisoners of war across all entities;
   
2. The admission of a sovereign State of Palestine as 194th UN Member State on the June 4, 1967 borders with its capital in East Jerusalem; the withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in 1967, with the simultaneous introduction of UN-mandated international forces and security guarantees to protect all populations;
   
3. The protection of the territorial integrity and stability of Lebanon and Syria, and the full demilitarization of all non-state forces, and withdrawal of all foreign armies from the respective countries;
   
4. The adoption of an updated Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran, and the end of all economic and other sanctions on Iran;
   
5. The termination, including defunding and disarmament of belligerent non-state entities, of all claims or states of belligerency, and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area, (without excluding the possibility of subsequent territorial adjustments, security arrangements, and cooperative forms of governance agreed by the sovereign parties);
   
6. The establishment of regional peace and normalization of diplomatic relations by all Arab and Islamic states with Israel;
   
7. The establishment of an Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East Sustainable Development Fund to support the reconstruction, economic recovery and sustainable development of the region.

Let us imagine the happiness and prosperity that will reverberate across this ancient, proud, and magnificent region, if the leaders and peoples rise to the challenge of peace.

Sybil Fares, Senior Advisor on the Middle East for UNSDSN, assisted centrally on this article.

I’ve guided trips to Alaska’s North Slope and Brooks Range Mountains for 31 years, and I always start out with the same speech: “You are headed to some real wild country.” Alaska’s Arctic is home to some of our most iconic landscapes. This is probably the wildest place left in the United States and some of the most remote country in North America. What you see there—and what you won’t see–are things you’ll never forget.

I had guided rafting trips for a number of years across the western U.S., but I was unprepared for the sheer scale of this country. At all points of the compass, nothing but tundra for days and a river filled with exotically beautiful aufeis–layer upon frozen layer of ice. I’ve seen caribou, wolves, bears–a muskox nearly trampled my tent. I’ve had the good fortune to return to this landscape every year and it still is as wild and free from development as ever–for now. But with the return of Donald Trump to the White House, that could soon change.

To stem the tide of species loss and to give our environment a fighting chance, we need to protect more lands and waters by the end of the decade than we did in the last century.

The Arctic as we currently know it is thanks to Jimmy Carter, who passed away last week at the age of 100. Carter signed the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act created 16 wildlife refuges, 13 national parks, two national monuments, two national forests, two conservation areas, and 26 wild and scenic rivers, and designated 57 million acres of wilderness. Ironically, Carter’s funeral will happen the same day the Biden administration holds its final lease sale in the Arctic Refuge—the smallest version they could legally offer. It’s a fitting move from an administration that, unlike Carter, had a complicated approach to the Arctic.

The Western Arctic was the setting for one of President Biden’s worst climate decisions—the March 2023 approval of the Willow project. Instead of preserving these landscapes from extraction, the president seemed to extend a new and dark era for the Arctic that began with Trump’s approval of oil drilling in the Arctic Refuge in 2017.

But a lot can change in a few months, and the Biden administration seemingly shifted strategies in the Western Arctic from extraction to preservation. Beginning last summer, the White House advanced a slate of new protections to safeguard millions of acres of public lands from oil and gas drilling. This summer was my 31st leading people into the Brooks Range mountains and the tundra beyond to the north in those little planes, and as we flew over wild Alaskan landscapes, we saw no signs of human development—in part due to Biden’s actions. But oil and gas companies will soon have a new ally to turn to.

With Trump’s return to the Oval Office, those same companies will get another chance to turn this pristine wilderness into the country’s largest gas station. On the campaign trail, Trump made it clear he would “drill, baby, drill” and give those Big Oil CEOs free rein to drill wherever and whenever they could. Opening up the Arctic Refuge to drilling was one of the first actions the Republican trifecta took in 2017, and extending that law is one of their top priorities this time around. For Arctic communities, wildlife, and ecosystems, it’s the biggest threat in a generation.

We’re currently witnessing an extinction crisis driven by habitat destruction, and the key driver of habitat destruction is development. At the same time, the effects of the climate crisis are being exacerbated by development that destabilizes ecosystems and natural carbon absorption. To stem the tide of species loss and to give our environment a fighting chance, we need to protect more lands and waters by the end of the decade than we did in the last century. The Arctic survived four years of Trump, but it’s up to us to ensure it survives another four.

“I left you for God, Daddy.”

Let those words resonate across the planet. The speaker is Yahya Al-Batran, a Palestinian man – a dad – imagining the words his newborn son would have said. The boy, Jumaa, froze to death in the family’s tent. The infant had a twin brother who was also lying still in their bed one morning recently. The parents rushed the boys to a functioning hospital, where Jumaa’s brother, at the time NBC’s story came out last week, was still fighting for his life.

Jumaa was one of half a dozen Palestinian babies (so far) who have frozen to death in their family’s tents since the onset of winter – just one more fragment of hell the Palestinians are enduring as Israel’s US-complicit genocide continues . . . one death at a time.

Every week, every day, I have less of a sense of how to write about this or, indeed, how to think about it as I absorb the news of the day. Yes, there are wars and hellish suffering across the whole planet – there always have been – but in this current moment I feel less able to shrug and move on with my own life. I feel connected to it: a participant, you might say, simply as a citizen of the genocide’s largest enabler, as strike after strike after strike kills more Palestinians.

In a recent Common Dreams column, Abby Zimet writes: “America’s newest $8 billion contribution to an increasingly normalized genocide and its bloody, barbarous, macabre delusions will ensure more of the same. As Gazans plead for mercy and reason from an uncaring world, they in truth know and say they have ‘nothing but God.’”

An increasingly normalized genocide . . .

I think that’s what’s shredding my soul about this: the lack of any sort of mainstream awareness beyond the need for endless militarism – beyond the world’s brutally divided nature. Us vs. them is apparently the limit of our understanding, with no awareness of the effect that ongoing war against “them,” and the ensuing planetary dividedness, is having on our shared human home, not to mention our future.

Yes, there are wars and hellish suffering across the whole planet – there always have been – but in this current moment I feel less able to shrug and move on with my own life.

A recent New York Times mini-analysis of America’s current mass murder situation – particularly the horrific motor-vehicle murders in New Orleans on New Years Day – definitely seemed, as I read it, like the normalization of genocide, in its implication that only our enemies are bad. Watch out, the story warned us: Terrorism is back!

“The killing of 14 people on New Year’s Day in New Orleans was the latest sign of a resurgence in radical Islamist terrorism,” the Times story informs us. “Some of the attacks — like the one last week — seem to have been merely inspired by ISIS, the network of groups that are offshoots of Al Qaeda. In other cases, ISIS groups played an active role in the planning.”

The alleged killer, who drove his rented truck into a crowd of people in the French Quarter, had an ISIS flag in the truck. The Times then proceeds to catalog sixteen instances of violence over the last five years, in countries all over the world, that were either “inspired by” or directly plotted and carried out by ISIS.

And who the hell is ISIS, anyway? The story notes that the organization came into being during the US war in Iraq, but fails to mention . . . uh, the half a million or so Iraqis who died as a result of our bloody invasion. All that matters, apparently, is the emergence of the terrorist organization, not the US shock-and-awe bombings and brutal dismantling of Iraq’s national infrastructure. You know, the terrorists just popped up and started doing bad things. If this isn’t the normalization of genocide, it’s something worse: the utter denial of genocide.

A few paragraphs later, the Times story moves to Afghanistan, noting that President Biden’s withdrawal from the country in 2021 “reduced the pressure on an ISIS chapter there known as ISIS-K, and it has since expanded beyond Afghanistan. ISIS-K was behind the Iran bombing, the Moscow concert attack and the Taylor Swift plot.”

So, shame on Genocide Joe! His pullout allowed ISIS to expand. For some reason the story fails to note that, prior to its withdrawal, that US military presence in Afghanistan resulted in over 175,000 Afghani deaths.

We live in a disconnected planet at war with itself – and in possession of the means to kill itself.

As Brown University’s Costs of War project notes: “In Afghanistan, even after the withdrawal of U.S. troops in 2021, people continue to die due to the war-induced breakdown of the economy, public health, security, and infrastructure. The majority of the population faces impoverishment and food insecurity. The CIA armed Afghan militia groups to fight Islamist militants and these militias are responsible for serious human rights abuses, including extrajudicial killings of civilians. Unexploded ordnance from this war and landmines from previous wars continue to kill, injure, and maim civilians. Fields, roads, and school buildings are contaminated by ordnance, which often harms children as they go about chores like gathering wood.”

Attention, New York Times: Terrorism doesn’t exist all by itself. While actions thought to be terrorist in nature can indeed be horrific, they cannot begin to compare to the horrors that result from heavily armed state terrorism – in particular, the terrorism committed by the “good states,” i.e., the United States and its allies. We live in a disconnected planet at war with itself – and in possession of the means to kill itself.

A year ago, on, good God, the 25th twenty-fifth anniversary of the Columbine shootings, I wrote: “What is power? Is it simply and sheerly us vs. them, good vs. evil? Every war on Planet Earth is sold with this advertising slogan. Perhaps this is why I find myself thinking about the Columbine shootings — and all the mass shootings since then. Define an enemy, then kill it. This is what we learn in history class — but would-be mass shooters, caged in their own isolation, cross a line. They take this lesson personally.”

All of which is to say that war begets violence of all sorts and at every level of devastation. “I left you for God, Daddy.” Perhaps these will be our last words as we exit the planet we have chosen to destroy.

Snce 2020, plans to build militarized police training facilities, also known as cop cities, have erupted across the country in an effort to maintain the status quo and quell political dissent from abolitionist and progressive organizers. As of July 2024, there are 80 projects either already being built or in the process of negotiating contracts to begin construction. Ten states have plans for multiple police compounds. The creation of these training facilities marks a new chapter of policing in the U.S.

Disability justice and disabled community organizers must be at the forefront of the nationwide movement to stop cop cities because this movement is a disability justice issue.

The movement to #StopCopCity emerged in the wake of nationwide uprisings in response to police killings of Black people, sparking critical conversations around the role of policing, the limits of police reform, community safety, and alternatives to the criminal legal system. Along with other organizations, I organized on the ground in Atlanta, where multiple police agencies used militarized tactics against community members. This occurred even as we mourned the loss of Rayshard Brooks, a member of our community who was killed by the Atlanta Police Department. All of this unfolded as we grappled with the profound impacts of a global pandemic—a mass-disabling event affecting countless lives.

We must listen to and follow the leadership of disabled people, especially those who are formerly or currently incarcerated.

Our collective grief transformed into action, fueling demands to end state-sanctioned violence and redirect investment into our communities. Our displays of solidarity angered and alarmed corporations, as well as local and national political establishments. In collaboration with major media outlets, those in power obscured the focus, reframing the narrative around rising crime rates and once again positioning police as the solution to our social, political, and economic challenges.

As a response to our organizing efforts, the city of Atlanta decided to build a $90 million complex equipped with military-grade facilities and a mock city for urban police training. If completed, this would be the country’s largest police training facility. Other municipalities have followed Atlanta’s misleadership. Cop city proposals have surfaced in Baltimore, Maryland; San Pablo, California; Fitchburg, Massachusetts; and Nashville, Tennessee all in response to demonstrations that took place in 2020. Meanwhile, other facilities have completed construction and are currently in operation like the cop cities in Semmes, Alabama; Fort Lauderdale, Florida; Decatur and Chicago, Illinois; and Madisonville, Kentucky.

In a society that prioritizes profits over people, disabled people are frequently marginalized and disposed of. Incarceration and police violence underscore the ways capitalism fails its most vulnerable. Disabled people are often excluded from discussions about the criminal legal system, resulting in limited and ineffective strategies for addressing the root causes of incarceration (e.g., poverty, racism, and capitalism).

The overrepresentation of people with disabilities in prisons and jails illustrates how victims of capitalism are locked up and harmed. Approximately 66% of incarcerated individuals in the U.S. report having a disability, while half of all people killed by police are disabled, with disabled Black Americans disproportionately affected. Even people without a disability who are locked up develop some sort of disability over the course of their imprisonment because the prison system is disabling.

Each year, an estimated 350 people with mental health diagnoses are killed by law enforcement, and individuals with psychiatric disabilities are 16 times more likely to be killed during police encounters. People like Anthony Hill, Sandra Bland, Eric Garner, Deborah Danner, Alfred Olango, Daniel Prude, Magdiel Sanchez, Freddie Gray, and countless others were all disabled people who were murdered by police.

These risks are even greater for people of color, women, trans folks, and LGBTQIA+ people. An alarming statistic reveals that by age 28, half of all disabled Black Americans have experienced arrest, underscoring the urgent need to address police violence and brutality as an intersectional issue that includes disability justice. These statistics will continue to rise as more Cop Cities are built, which will place BIPOC disabled individuals in closer proximity to police and increase their risk of harm.

The estimated budgets for these police training facilities are staggering; meanwhile police funding already consumes the majority of municipal budgets at the expense of essential social services. As police budgets grow, funding for education, direct services, infrastructure, and healthcare falls, leaving many—especially disabled individuals—without access to the resources they need. For example, Baltimore’s training facility is projected to cost $330 million; San Pablo, California estimates a $44 million facility, and Richmond, Kentucky, has a $28 million project budget.

Investing more in police departments does not create safer communities. Increased training does not address the root causes of violence. The safest communities are those that are well-resourced and have minimal police presence. Our communities deserve better.

The changing landscape of policing in the U.S. is increasingly characterized by international police exchange programs (also known as Deadly Exchange programs), which expose officers to new surveillance methods, military tactics, and forms of political repression from countries with notorious human rights abuses.

The Georgia International Law Enforcement Exchange (GILEE) program in Atlanta sends U.S. officers to train with the Israeli Occupation Forces (IOF), who are responsible for the ongoing genocide of Palestinians. The IOF conducts urban warfare training in a mock city called "Little Gaza," a replica of the Gaza Strip designed to simulate combat scenarios. These practices serve as the blueprint for cop cities across the U.S.

In Baltimore, an Amnesty International report found that the Baltimore Police Department’s participation in deadly exchange programs with Israel contributed to “widespread constitutional violations, discriminatory enforcement, and a culture of retaliation.” However, more police departments are participating in deadly exchange programs. Police officials from states including Florida, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Arizona, Connecticut, Massachusetts, North Carolina, Washington, and D.C. have also trained with Israeli paramilitary forces.

Israel, a nation responsible for the killing and disabling of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, serves as the model for these military complexes. These tactics will disproportionately impact marginalized communities domestically and amplify surveillance and repression in already vulnerable areas. Disability Justice involves liberating Palestinians from the disabling effects of genocide.

Climate change is deeply connected to the issues of cop cities and disability justice. Projects like those in Atlanta and Nashville involve clearing large areas of urban forest, causing severe environmental harm. For example, Atlanta’s urban forest, which protects communities from flash flooding, has already been compromised, leading to increased flooding across the city. Such environmental degradation worsens health conditions for disabled people, leaving them to face the consequences with little support, as we saw during disasters like Hurricane Helene. This situation will only deteriorate further.

What is to be done?

The phrase “death by a thousand cuts” reminds us that there is no single solution to combat social injustice in this country. Addressing these challenges requires a diversity of tactics and a shared commitment to building a better world. Everyone has a role to play in movement work—whether it’s cooking for comrades, taking meeting notes, providing childcare so others can participate, or conducting research on targets. Every action, big or small, adds up, creating momentum when combined with the efforts of others. There is a place for you; come find it.

We must listen to and follow the leadership of disabled people, especially those who are formerly or currently incarcerated. Those directly impacted by oppressive systems possess invaluable knowledge of how these systems function and must be at the forefront of our movements. Yes, that means building relationships with people currently incarcerated.

It’s equally critical to learn from past campaigns, both their victories and setbacks. For example, the 2017 #NoCopAcademy campaign in Chicago, which sought to stop the construction of a police training facility, illustrates how grassroots organizing can achieve tangible wins. While the facility was ultimately built, organizers succeeded in cutting $21 million from school policing budgets, a significant step toward redistributing resources.

A new world is emerging, whether we are ready for it or not. It’s up to all of us to prepare and take action to shape what comes next. Liberation is possible, but we need you to make it a reality.

TikTok and knockoff reels on platforms like Facebook inexplicably highlight these giant subtitles of people talking. Remember when subtitles were for translations of foreign languages?

The post Peak Stupidity first appeared on Ted Rall's Rallblog.

The post Peak Stupidity appeared first on Ted Rall's Rallblog.

What’s happening right now in Los Angeles is almost too painful to write about. I’ve spent much of the day writing and calling back and forth with friends and colleagues. All report: horror. And since it’s playing out against the most familiar backdrop on earth, the scene of more movies and tv shows than any place on our planet, I think it will be as iconic as Pompeii in our collective imagination. If, you know, people in Pompeii had had smartphones.

So let me pull back a minute and tell a broader story. Though I’ve spent most of my life in the mountains of the East, my early boyhood was in California—my earliest recollections are of our house in Altadena, the neighborhood currently being consumed by the Eaton fire. And the sharpest memories of those are of climbing the fire road to the observatory at Mt. Wilson, which you could see from our backyard. I guess those must have been the first hikes in a lifetime of hikes, the first time to see the world spread out below.

I didn’t know it at the time—I was five—but the telescopes at the observatory at the top of the road were the place where humankind first really saw the universe spread out above. Edwin Hubble, using the 100-inch Hooker telescope, then the largest in the world, made a series of pivotal discoveries in the 1920s. First he showed that the Andromeda nebula was outside our galaxy, taking the universe past the Milky Way. And then, a few years later with Milton Humason, he demonstrated that those distant galaxies were receding from ours—that the universe was expanding. This was the crucial groundwork for the Big Bang theory.

The last time I was up there, you could press a button on a display and the reassuring voice of Hugh Downs would explain that “Hubble’s discoveries were the last great step in the Copernican revolution of thought concerning man’s place in the cosmos. Hubble showed that our galaxy is not the center of the universe. There is no center.”

These discoveries were of a piece with the other great revelations of the 20th century—things like the invention of the solar cell at Bell Labs in 1954, or Jim Hansen’s pathbreaking climate science at NASA’s labs in the 1980s. They were the product of the human instinct for observation, nurtured in America’s unprecedented complex of university, government, and commercial labs. Scripps Oceanographic, MIT, Caltech, JPL, on and on. These were the kind of institutions that took us to the moon, and that indeed just last month shot a spacecraft closer to the sun than ever before.

And it’s this kind of science that lets us understand what’s happening in LA today; the descendants of Hubble and Hansen have continued the kind of painstaking research that make clear the result when a climate-induced drought (it’s only rained 0.16 inches in LA since May) and climate-induced heatwaves (the LA basin had some of its hottest stretches ever this past summer) and perhaps the climate-induced increase in the intensity of Santa Ana winds combine to created a firestorm unlike any other. It’s both simple and complicated: here’s a remarkable paper from Nature explaining how the melt of Arctic sea ice, by affecting the jetstream, is making West Coast fires worse.

In some ways, all this human intelligence is still being put to good use. Sammy Roth has written powerful recent accounts of Los Angeles’s push to build solar farms on all its margins, en route to becoming one of the world’s most renewably powered cities.

But in other ways that legacy of highly developed human intelligence is starting to disappear. It’s not just the polio vaccine (RFK Jr. told reporters yesterday, by the way, that he was “very worried” about his LA mansion). It’s the web of climate science targeted by Project 2025, which envisions an end to federal support even for the web of thermometers that measures our descent into something like hell. That’s because they understand (correctly) that this science is “one of the main drivers of the climate change alarm industry.” As Marc Morano, perhaps the country’s most inedfatigable climate denier, put it on Fox yesterday when asked about climate researchers

You have to cut the funding. You have to cut the program. You have to fire the employees, or at the very least, since it is hard to fire people, reassign them.

And yesterday the incoming president published a particularly memorable rant on his Truth Social platform

Governor Gavin Newscum refused to sign the water restoration declaration put before him that would have allowed millions of gallons of water, from excess rain and snow melt from the North, to flow daily into many parts of California, including the areas that are currently burning in a virtually apocalyptic way. He wanted to protect an essentially worthless fish called a smelt, by giving it less water (it didn’t work!), but didn’t care about the people of California. Now the ultimate price is being paid. I will demand that this incompetent governor allow beautiful, clean, fresh water to FLOW INTO CALIFORNIA! He is the blame for this. On top of it all, no water for fire hydrants, not firefighting planes. A true disaster!

That this is all nonsense should by now be taken for granted. His reference is to some effort half a decade ago to allot yet more water to California’s big corporate farms; there is no river of water that the governor could somehow have diverted to Los Angeles to fight the fires. (And if you look at the videos it’s painfully absurd to imagine that a phalanx of firemen with hoses were going to beat down this maelstrom). Elsewhere on social media MAGA aficonados (and U.S. Senators) have taken turns blaming DEI initiatives, the war in Ukraine, and so on.

The great casualties in California today are people and animals and buildings—homes, synagogues, schools, libraries. The great casualty in the month’s ahead may be the insurance system of the world’s fifth biggest economy, which is going to buckle under the strain of these losses. But the steady loss of intelligence in our nation and our world worries me the most. Even as the stakes grow higher, we’re losing our hard-won ability to understand the world around us.

One of the mysteries of Hubble’s universe is why we haven’t found other intelligent species. One explanation is that most civilizations do themselves in before they can reach out into space.

Conflicts across the world’s regions experienced a further surge in 2024, according to data provided by Armed Conflict Locations & Event Data (ACLED)—an independent, international non-profit organization that collects data on real time on locations, actors, fatalities, and types of all reported political violence and protest events around the world. While Ukraine and Gaza are considered the two major global hotspots of conflict, violence increased by 25 percent in 2024 compared to 2023 and conflict levels have experienced a two-fold increase over the past five years, according to ACLED. The intensity and human toll of armed conflicts are also on the rise as more civilians are exposed to violence and the number of actors involved in violence is proliferating.

What is also noteworthy about the data on violence collected by ACLED is that neither democracy nor more development appears to constrain violence. In fact, the data collected by ACLED shows that countries with elections in 2024 experienced much higher rates of violence than countries without elections.

As militarism and warmongering are pushed to new heights, the rhetoric of peace also goes into full swing.

Speaking of electoral democracies, warmongering talk is also sharply on the increase in developed nations, courtesy of major leaders of the western world, and comes with a rising militarism. Mark Rutte, NATO’s recently appointed secretary-general, warned last month that “danger is moving toward us at full speech” and that the west must face the fact that “what is happening in Ukraine could happen here too.” He urged NATO to “shift to a wartime mindset” and implored the citizens of NATO countries to tell their banks and funds that “it is simply unacceptable that they refuse to invest in the defense industry.” UK’s prime minister Keir Starmer has zealously endorsed the widening of NATO’s war against Russia and recently gave Ukraine permission to use Storm Shadow cruise missiles inside Russia. And Joe Biden delivered a warmongering rant at his final address to the United Nations (UN) General Assembly on September 24, 2024, urging an expansion of alliances against Russia and China and threatening Iran.

Warmongering is a constant element in the never ending obsession of U.S. presidents since the end of the Second World War to pursue a policy of what Andrew Bacevich described a few years ago as “militarized hegemony until the end of time.” Indeed, since the breakout of the Ukraine conflict, Washington has been more than eager to wage a proxy war against Russia while the U.S.-led western military bloc (NATO) has increased its military presence in the eastern part of the Alliance, seeks to expand its southern flank to Africa and looks toward the Indo-Pacific as part of its global approach to security. Meanwhile, all major western states have been behind Israel in its destruction of Gaza, offering the Jewish state an extraordinary level of support (weapons, cash and political support) as it carries out war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Of course, as militarism and warmongering are pushed to new heights, the rhetoric of peace also goes into full swing. Western hypocrisy knows no bounds. Biden spoke of the need for a peaceful world in his final address to the UN although he has done everything in his power to prolong the war in Ukraine and ensure Gaza’s destruction. His administration has vowed to fight Russia to the last Ukrainian and has fueled Israel’s war in Gaza, making the U.S. complicit in war crimes in Gaza.

Geopolitical forecasts for 2025 are grim.

The Biden administration did very little to prevent Russia from invading Ukraine as it totally ignored the question of Ukraine’s membership into NATO and has denied massacres, genocide and ethnic cleansing taking place in Gaza by the Israel Defense Fores (IDF). In fact, Biden himself called the International Criminal Court’s decision to issue an arrest warrant for the Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu “outrageous.” The icing on the cake was when Biden’s Secretary of State, Anthony Blinken, who will go down as the worse Secretary of State since World War II, had the audacity to write in a recent essay in Foreign Affairs that the United States is a country that, unlike Russia and China, seeks a “world where international law, including the core principles of the UN Charter, is upheld, and universal human rights are respected.”

Unsurprisingly, geopolitical forecasts for 2025 are grim. ACLED projects an annual increase of 20 percent in levels of violence in 2025. And then there is Trump’s return to the White House which surely adds another layer of unpredictability to an already volatile and highly dangerous world.

Imperialism is still about world hegemony and a struggle for the control of strategic resources.

Trump’s second administration seems set on advancing a new version of Manifest Destiny with threats of retaking the Panama Canal, which the U.S. ceded to Panama in 1999, forcibly buying Greenland, which is controlled by Denmark, and calling Canada “the 51st State,” a remark he repeated shortly after Justin Trudeau’s resignation.

Imperialism seems to be Trump’s new theme, but his overall vision of power is reminiscent of U.S. imperialist attitudes of the 19th century. He seems to believe that territorial expansion of the boundaries of the United States would make the country safer, stronger, and more prosperous. Of course, this could all just be a symptom of Trump’s arrogance and ignorance, but there can be no denying that imperialism is embedded in U.S. political culture. The U.S. has been preparing for a future global conflict for quite some time now, first with Russia and then with China.

Imperialism seems to be Trump’s new theme, but his overall vision of power is reminiscent of U.S. imperialist attitudes of the 19th century.

The U.S. set the theater for a conflict with Russia by orchestrating the 2014 coup in Ukraine, treating the country in turn as a NATO ally in all but name and subsequently engaging in military provocations with the hope of inducing Russia to embark on a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, which finally occurred on February 24, 2022. And it has been following the same scenario in the Asia-Pacific region by making Taiwan and the South China Sea the fuse for conflict.

The truth is that U.S. imperialism never died. And how could it when the U.S. still maintains around 750 military bases in at least 80 countries and territories (U.S. bases represent over 90 percent of the world’s foreign bases) and spends more on defense than the next nine countries combined, which include major powers such as China, Russia, India, Germany, France, and the United Kingdom? There are more active-duty U.S. Air Force personnel in Britain than in 40 U.S. states.

Of course, imperialism has taken new forms in the 21st century and the dynamics of exploitation have changed. But imperialism is still about world hegemony and a struggle for the control of strategic resources. Military and economic/natural resource interests are interrelated, and the major capitalist states are all caught in an inescapable struggle for survival, power, and prestige. In its turn, the U.S. continues to exercise imperial power by using all its available tools and weapons to make the world conform to its own whims and wants as it tries to shore up its declining economic dominance. But with Trump’s return to the White House, and armed as he appears to be with a new version of Manifest Destiny, U.S. imperialism may become more aggressive and even more dangerous to world peace. If that turns out to be the case, the world is headed for an even more violent future.

It has been over 450 days since Israel began its genocide and military invasion of Gaza and then Lebanon, Iran, and Syria. With the election of Donald Trump as the next U.S. president, the American government will continue and increase support for Israel’s all out war against Palestinian people.

For the past year, students have rallied and protested to demand divestment from Israel and its apartheid regime. Heated protests have erupted across the country, including in San Francisco where students planned walk outs and took over quads with encampments and teach-ins.

Alongside these students, parents from Southwest Asia and North Africa (SWANA) communities went up against San Francisco’s school board to insist that their children cannot be censored for supporting Palestinian people. Many of these parents are Arab Resource and Organizing Center (AROC) members, so I joined a meeting between these parents and the superintendent. When the superintendent would not bring up pressing issues around how students were being impacted by the ongoing genocide, parents disrupted the meeting and demanded their kids’ rights to speak up.

Through organizing, we build trust and are able to inoculate the harmful disinformation coming from white Christian nationalists and other right-wing forces.

However, not too long ago, I saw these same parents swayed by white Christian nationalists who were mobilizing Arab and Muslim parents around transphobia and homophobia. By circulating hateful rhetoric and drumming up fears about the “influence” of LGBTQ+ acceptance, white Christian nationalists convinced Arab and Muslim parents to pull their children out of public schools in the Bay Area. This is a trend we have seen across the country as Christian nationalist groups like Moms for Liberty recruit conservative Asian faith-based groups to rally against curricula portraying LGBTQ+ families and themes.

What happened? How did these parents go from being swayed by one fascist force to vehemently countering another fascist force? What can we learn as organizers from this moment?

The fight for a free Palestine is deeply ingrained into the many other fights against rising facism in the United States and abroad. We must understand that to end the Israeli occupation of Palestine, we must also develop a longer-term strategy that contends with the growing power of far-right forces here in the U.S. We cannot do one without the other.

What does this take? First, we must be clear about who we’re up against and what strategies they are using. After 75 years of occupation and a year of military invasion, Zionism has made clear their strategy: complete annihilation of Palestine and its people. To do this, the Zionist system requires the support of other right-wing forces for monetary, political, and narrative power.

One formidable partnership is between white Christian nationalists and Zionists. Nationally, the largest Zionist organization in the United States is Christians United for Israel, which funnels millions of dollars into the Israel lobby every year. Project 2025, the 900-plus-page policy document spearheaded by the far-right Heritage Foundation, lays out far-right forces’ plan to transform the United States into a Christian nationalist theocracy that would sustain Israel’s military expansion. Locally, in San Francisco, when AROC campaigned with parents and students for the addition of Eid as holidays on the school calendar, Christian nationalists and Zionists allied to threaten the school board and halt the decision.

This issue of transphobia is a longer-term struggle that we will continue to face. We have not resolved it with our members, and there is no success story. However, we are helping our members to understand the contradictions of right-wing forces in order to move our communities on various contentious issues.

For years, Christian nationalists have made inroads into organizing Muslim and Arab parents in the Bay Area by manufacturing fear and outrage around queer and trans “influences” in schools. In the past year, as AROC has mobilized thousands of people to call for a permanent cease-fire and an arms embargo on Israel, we have also been engaging in deep political education and long conversations with our communities to point out the connections between various right-wing, fascist forces.

This past year has politicized many to call for Palestinian liberation. It has especially mobilized the SWANA families in AROC’s membership, many of whom have direct connections to the region that Israel is devastating. This past year has reemphasized that we need to deeply invest in grassroots organizing and basebuilding. This allows organizers and working-class people to work together to protect our communities from right-wing disinformation and come up with real solutions that can transform lives.

When the attacks on Gaza began last October, AROC was able to provide the space and container for our parents, youth, and activists to identify key issues and leverage our power locally. We got the cities of San Francisco and Oakland to adopt resolutions for an immediate and sustained cease-fire. Through those processes, we saw our community really engage with democratic processes and understand the power of civic engagement. Through organizing, we build trust and are able to inoculate the harmful disinformation coming from white Christian nationalists and other right-wing forces. This is key to winning our communities away from right-wing influences and building a stronger anti-fascist movement.

Grassroots organizing is how we build the power of our movement! Power means we can shift conditions in society and in our own lives. Power means we can end the Israeli occupation of Palestine and block the rise of far-right fascism.

LIVE at 10 am Eastern time today and STREAMING whenever:

Never embarrassed to be seen blowing with the political winds, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg spent the last four years leading Silicon Valley’s censorship-industrial complex. Facebook openly admitted throttling all political content on the grounds that users didn’t like it. It hired an advisory panel with clear ideological blind spots. Most notoriously, Facebook turned to outsourced fact checkers who decide whether or not posts get blocked and users get banned even though they rarely had any expertise in the controversies they were asked to weigh in on, and made frequent mistakes. Now, at least, Zuckerberg says the fact checkers are no more.

Co-hosts Ted Rall and Manila Chan are joined by guest Peter Coffin to ask: is Facebook really entering the Free Speech Zone? If so, how long will it last in the second age of Trump?

The post TMI Show Ep 53: “Facebook: Now with 40% Less Censorship” first appeared on Ted Rall's Rallblog.

The post TMI Show Ep 53: “Facebook: Now with 40% Less Censorship” appeared first on Ted Rall's Rallblog.

In June 2021, just months into the Biden era, Zephyr Teachout argued that Lina Khan’s appointment to the Federal Trade Commission “may be the best thing Joe Biden has done” in office. With a firm reputation as a leader in the anti-monopoly movement, her nomination to the FTC was a clear victory for progressives in an administration otherwise primarily staffed by moderates.

Three years on, it’s clear that this optimistic outlook about a Khan-run FTC has been vindicated. In her position, Khan’s FTC has scored historic victories for consumers and workers—even as she’s faced powerful industry opposition and obstruction from right-wing judges.

Understanding the significance of Khan’s tenure means understanding how antitrust enforcement has been sabotaged in recent decades by right-wing ideologues. The federal government adopted antitrust laws beginning in 1890, which would become a crucial tool for reining in corporate abuses for decades to come. But beginning in the 1970s, federal courts would embrace a right-wing reimagining of antitrust law under the guise of promoting “consumer welfare.” Unsurprisingly, this hands-off approach helped create an economy defined by extreme corporate concentration, leading to fewer and worse choices for American consumers.

While the leadership of both agencies are set to change under President-elect Donald Trump, the new merger guidelines mean that Khan’s pro-competition vision will help shape FTC decision-making well past her tenure.

While still in law school, Khan rose to prominence in 2017 for her critique of laissez-faire antitrust enforcement. Given her reputation, observers were quick to speculate on how she’d be able to put her principles to action at the FTC. For one, the commission in recent decades has built a track record of being deferential to the very monopolies it’s tasked to regulate. Additionally, the commission has long suffered from inadequate funding, which has hindered its capacity to police monopolies. But despite these institutional constraints, Khan’s FTC has secured major wins for American consumers, all while facing down hostile corporate actors and their allies in the judiciary.

Monopolistic behavior in the food industry over the past few decades has robbed consumers of choice while increasing grocery costs. Two years ago, grocery giants Kroger and Albertsons announced a massive merger deal that quickly raised alarms among consumer advocates. While such a merger may have gone through unscathed a decade or so prior, the Khan-led FTC filed suit to block the deal. Last month, the FTC won one of its biggest victories in recent years by blocking the merger in court. This victory, along with the FTC’s successful effort to block Tapestry’s acquisition of Capri, shows that Khan’s view of antitrust is increasingly finding support in court.

Sharing jurisdiction on antitrust matters with the Department of Justice (DOJ) Antitrust Division, the two agencies successfully modernized merger guidelines to help identify illegal mergers in their tracks. Observers have credited both the FTC and DOJ Antitrust Division’s aggressive enforcement efforts with a recent decline in merger efforts. And while the leadership of both agencies are set to change under President-elect Donald Trump, the new merger guidelines mean that Khan’s pro-competition vision will help shape FTC decision-making well past her tenure.

These developments, of course, only scrape the surface of the FTC’s accomplishments under Khan. The commission notably blocked an effort by Nvidia to acquire Arm, which was set to be the biggest merger deal in semiconductor industry history. The ultimate failure of Amazon to acquire iRobot, which caused concern among various international antitrust regulators, has been at least partially credited to the FTC’s scrutiny. Among the most meaningful impact of renewed FTC antitrust scrutiny may be felt on private equity firms, a welcome development given said firms’ harms to competition and American society at large.

The Khan-led FTC’s ability to build bipartisan support for efforts such as recent rulemaking on junk fees, as well as on merger guidelines, should be seen as a model for Democratic governance. Moreover, the Khan-led FTC should be applauded for using long-neglected tools at the commission’s disposal, such as its ability to police price discrimination as interlocking directorates.

With Khan set to be succeeded by Andrew Ferguson, Trump’s pick to lead the FTC, it's likely that the FTC will soon shift its approach on antitrust and consumer protection. Nevertheless, it’s clear that Khan will leave behind a legacy that will influence antitrust enforcement for decades to come. And in doing so, Khan will also leave behind a track record that shows what successful progressive governance looks like.

Ever since my first foray into climate activism in 2019, I have dreaded the year 2025. In my mind, it’s always been the Big Deadline.

The 2015 Paris agreement concluded that greenhouse gas emissions must peak before 2025 if we have any chance of limiting global warming to 1.5°C.

And yet, now that we’re standing at the precipice of this once-far off deadline, we are still so far from the meaningful climate action necessary to fend off unstoppable climate catastrophe. Indeed, we’ve just worsened our chances at a survivable future.

We need to build a strong left to fight fascism during Trump’s presidency and to build a just green future in its aftermath.

The U.S. became the largest oil producer in 2018 and continues to expand domestic fossil fuel production. American citizens just elected a fascist president who has promised to gut the EPA and establish U.S. “energy dominance,” but the Democrat who supposedly could have saved us from Donald Trump refused to ban fracking and praised U.S. oil production.

Technically, I should be panicking. I certainly was when my college graduation last May was preceded by some headlines announcing the 1.5°C limit had already been reached. But now, as a climate activist in New York City, I find myself surprisingly calm.

This calm isn’t simply due to local climate wins, though I have celebrated those. Gov. Kathy Hochul just signed the Climate Change Superfund Act into law, which will require fossil fuel companies to pay billions into a fund to help New Yorkers recover from climate disasters. In other words, New York will force polluters to pay to clean up their own messes. This is a huge step in holding fossil fuel companies accountable.

Yet my optimism arises out of a different trend in the climate movement: Climate activists are (finally) showing up for other movements.

Historically, the climate movement has attempted to isolate itself from other political and social issues, arguing that climate policy is “just science.” This majority-white movement has failed to see that fossil fuel emissions are part of a larger history of the Global North colonizing and exploiting both people and the planet for decades. The climate crisis is a symptom of a broader exploitative system. To change that system, we need a united left that will fight for all people—not just those who identify as environmentalists.

In 2020, climate activists were rightfully berated for not showing up enough for the Black Lives Matter movement. Thankfully, I think many climate activists heard that message because today, they have come out in droves for Palestine.

Many of the college students who organized campus encampments last spring to urge their school administrators to divest from Israel and the U.S. imperial war machine were students who had previously organized for climate justice. I witnessed this firsthand at the Claremont Colleges when I was a senior: The student organizations demanding fossil fuel divestment fell to the wayside as the crisis in Gaza intensified. Globally, many climate organizations chose to speak out and take direct action to call for a cease-fire in Gaza.

But none of these climate activists had stopped caring about the climate. In fact, they often pointed out that Israel’s actions were not just genocide, but ecocide as well. The onslaught of bombs dropped on Gaza will contaminate the soil and groundwater in the region for decades. And the destruction has produced at least 54.5 million tons of carbon dioxide, equal to the annual emissions of 16 coal-fired power plants.

Climate activists cannot claim to fight for a just future and stay silent about genocide. “If we, as climate activists, aren’t able to see and speak up against the current marginalization and oppression and killing of people today, then I don’t think we should be able to call ourselves climate justice [activists],” climate champion Greta Thunberg told Al Jazeera in early December 2024.

As Trump prepares to enter the White House, we will undoubtedly see more people oppressed and killed. Among the many groups who are vulnerable under his administration are undocumented immigrants, whom Trump has vowed to round up and deport.

Migrant justice has long been intertwined with climate justice. As climate change makes many areas around the world uninhabitable, climate refugees have no choice but to leave their home.

In response to Trump’s election, climate organizers Jeff Ordower and Ahmed Gaya called on their fellow activists to bring their experiences of shutting down pipelines and coal plants to fight the incarceration and deportation we can expect under Trump. Climate activists should answer this call: The struggles for migrant justice and climate justice are intertwined, and we must meet the needs of the current moment.

“[Climate is] not more urgent than kids being ripped away from their families and dying in the desert—anyone who tries to win that argument is monstrous themselves. We either merge, join forces, or we lose,” writer and activist Naomi Klein said in 2019.

With Trump as president, things will undoubtedly get worse before they get better. We need to build a strong left to fight fascism during Trump’s presidency and to build a just green future in its aftermath. To do so, climate activists must put their words into action when they say they fight for every living being.

Shahd Rajab, a Palestinian artist from Gaza, is like any 21-year-old university student. She enjoys lattes, reads in the library, and loves to draw in her free time. Unlike students in the United States, however, Shahd has lived under the Israeli occupation of Gaza.

Now during Israel’s most brutal war against Gaza, Shahd has produced more than 80 drawings, using her art as a means of expression and resistance as she and her family endure Israel’s impacts, not only a long war but also a genocidal war.

For Shahd, war, injustice, and loss are things the young Palestinian has experienced all her life before Israel’s war on Gaza began in October of 2023.

“Tragic Childhood” by Shahd Rajab, 2024

I met Shahd through a mutual friend, Albert Campos, a Cuban-American local artist who also finds the means of resistance through art. Albert was looking for art of a young Palestinian in Gaza, then found Shahid’s work in early June of this year and began messaging Shahd on Instagram in hopes of collaborating with the artist. Dr. Manal Hamzeh, a professor at the Borderlands and Ethnic Studies Department at New Mexico State University (NMSU), encouraged Albert to collaborate with Shahd. Later she acted as a translator and facilitator to Albert’s conversation with Shahd over WhatsApp and Zoom. We began looking at Shahd’s social media to get to know the artist before communicating directly with her over WhatsApp text. The outcome of this first round of communication resulted in the selection of one of Shahd’s drawings, “Our Right to Education was Stolen, Destroyed Too (Scholasticide),” to be the cover of the December 28, 2024 issue of the Journal of Ethnic Studies Pedagogies.

On the International Day of Solidarity to Palestinians, gathered at the table of NMSU Students for Justice for Palestine in Corbett, the three of us—Dr. Hamzeh, Albert, and I—expanded the collaboration with Shahd and decided to tell her story in a feature article.

Though Shahd is learning English, we decided to present a set of questions translated into Arabic. We also preferred to have Shahd fully and freely respond to the questions in her mother language, Arabic. Dr. Hamzeh was the conduit to this process. The following are pieces of her engagement with our questions that introduce who she is, what her art is about, and what she has been experiencing the past year, since the start of Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, its 458 days and still counting.

When asked what she wanted Americans to know about the Palestinian people and their struggle, Shahd emphasized the importance of speaking out against the Israeli occupation and the U.S. funding of this genocidal war against Palestinians, even if you are not Palestinian.

“I was five years old in the 2008 war, nine years old in the 2012 war, and 11 in the 2014 war. I remember the first time my family ran from death, and in the 2014 war when we were temporarily displaced from our home. At times when the bombardment was bad, realizing the gravity of the situation and the risk of getting killed, my family would sleep in one room, so we would die together.”

These harsh conditions Palestinians in Gaza have endured have not deterred young people like Shahd, who was in her second year of college when the most recent war began in 2023, hoping to earn a bachelor's degree by the end of her studies. When this current war started, Shahd was studying at the University College for Applied Sciences in Gaza, specializing in IT. The last time a war affected her studies she was a senior in high school.

“The last and most important year of my studies, I was studying for my high school metrication exam while hearing Israeli fighter planes flying overhead and missiles exploding nearby. Despite the war, I ended the year with a 3.9 GPA,” said Shahd about her senior year of high school.

Shahd had the typical routine of a university student: She would wake up early, get coffee with her friends before morning classes, and spend her free time in the library drawing in her sketchbook. She was active on campus, attending conferences, seminars, student group meetings, and socializing with her friends. When the university student was not busy with the hustle of her college routine, she would find time to go to a cafe to have a drink and draw, or she would find time at home to work on her art. Before the current war on Gaza, Shahd drew on paper and learned digital art on her laptop or tablet.

That changed on October 9, 2023, when Shahd and her family were displaced again, this time permanently from their home in Shuja’iyya, Gaza City, under threat of death due to Israeli bombardment of residential areas. This war was not just different because of the unbridled brutality from Israeli forces. This time Shahd was separated from her father.

“As a child, I remember moments of hiding behind my father when I heard the bombs and the missiles,” said Shahd.

Shahd’s father traveled to the occupied West Bank for medical treatment three days before the war. According to the article “Cruelty against Gaza Patients Enabled by U.S. and E.U.” published by Electronic Intifada in 2022 by Maureen Clare Murphy, Palestinians have struggled to receive adequate treatment in Gaza with a total land, air, and sea blockade that has been implemented since 2007. The healthcare system in Gaza is deprived of proper advancements to deal with certain procedures. Israel has typically denied Palestinians medical transfers into advanced hospitals in Israel or nearby countries, like Jordan or Egypt. Instead, and if they get permits from Israel, most Palestinians in need of specialized medical care may be allowed to travel to the West Bank for treatment. Shahd and the rest of her family had to evacuate Gaza City, where their house is, in the center of the strip, where they were under direct risk of bombing and ethnic cleansing, at the beginning of the current war, to an area in the southern part of the strip. The Israeli military did not allow them to return to their home in Gaza City, like all displaced Palestinians from the North of Gaza, or leave Gaza to join her father in the West Bank.

“I Want My Bed” by Shahd Rajab, 2024

“This war has displaced us over 20 times; we have ended up living in a small tent; we have run from one place to another, escaping death. I only carry on me important items such as my ID card, my phone, and a single pair of pajamas. We are enduring a difficult life.”

Amid the current Israeli genocidal war on Gaza, Shahd finds strength in her art, using it not just as a form of self-expression but as a form of resistance for herself and her people.

“Art allows me to express myself and assert our just cause as Palestinians; art allows me to expose the violence of the Israeli occupation and the killing that I witness every day. I do not write my feelings, but I can draw them. When I complete a drawing, I sleep better. Through my art, I feel some joy amid the atrocities, loss, and the killing we live with.”

“Israel is actively erasing our existence as people, our memories, our schools, universities, our knowledge of the land, and our art.”

Shahd began drawing when she was seven years old. She remembers drawing cartoon characters she liked to watch as a child and how creative her father was when she was younger. Sitting together, Shahd would watch her father draw different animals with only a pen.

“I used to take my drawings to school to show my friends and teachers. The principal of the school used to love to see my drawings. Everyone, including my family, encouraged me to draw.”

Before the current war, Shahd’s favorite thing to draw was eyes. Now she draws powerful images showing the brutality of the Israeli occupation. The Israeli war on Gaza and blockade have driven up prices and dwindled supplies. After heavy bombardment, Shahd has been left with nothing but colored pencils to capture the injustice she has endured not just in the past year, but throughout her entire life. It took her months to find those colored pencils, which were very expensive. Shahd also creates images that make political commentary and reflect Palestinians’ many ways of resistance.

Despite more than 400 days of the current genocidal war on Gaza, Shahd and her people, the Palestinians, endure as they have since 1948, and insist on their right to return to their homes and land. Shahd now lives in a tent on the beach during the winter season in Gaza. She hopes, after the war, to return to her home, though she knows it is not intact, and find the drawings her mother has kept over the years still in the box among the rubble. When asked what she wanted Americans to know about the Palestinian people and their struggle, Shahd emphasized the importance of speaking out against the Israeli occupation and the U.S. funding of this genocidal war against Palestinians, even if you are not Palestinian.

Photo courtesy of Shahd Rajab

“Israel is actively erasing our existence as people, our memories, our schools, universities, our knowledge of the land, and our art. They try to steal our Palestinian heritage, they appropriated it and claim it is theirs. There will be a day when Palestine is liberated, and when we achieve our liberation, I will draw myself in the courtyard of the holy site, Al Aqsa Mosque, in Jerusalem.”

Shahd has a GoFundMe. Readers can donate to help Shahd and her family preserve the harsh life until the war is over and reunite with her father. Readers can also donate to the Palestine Red Crescent Society and UNRWA.

Acknowledgment: Dr. Manal Hamzeh translated all of Shahd’s responses to our questions, facilitated communication with her, and guided us throughout.

Americans have always had a love-hate relationship with food. We eat too much of it, and not the best kind; as high as 75% of Americans are considered obese. Yet our popular culture lionizes models and actors so painfully thin many of them suffer from anorexia. The latest attempt by the body-positivity movement to fight fat-shaming comes in the form of online “fat-fluencers,” one of whom has been hired by San Francisco as its weight stigma czar. Meanwhile, HHS nominee RFK Jr. is going after Big Food on the grounds that they’re inhibiting his drive to Make America Healthy Again.

Co-hosts Ted Rall and Manila Chan investigate these latest developments in our national Food Fight.

The post TMI Show Ep 52: “Food Fight! RFK’s MAHA vs. Fat-Fluencers” first appeared on Ted Rall's Rallblog.

The post TMI Show Ep 52: “Food Fight! RFK’s MAHA vs. Fat-Fluencers” appeared first on Ted Rall's Rallblog.

Donald Trump’s victory is causing James Carville, the outspoken raging Cajun who was Bill Clinton’s campaign manager in 1992, to call for the Democratic Party to go all in on a populist agenda. He wrote recently in the New York Times,

“Go big, go populist, stick to economic progress, and force them [Republicans] to oppose what they cannot be for. In unison.”

Is Carville really agreeing with the Center for Working Class Politics, which in October published the results of their YouGov survey, “Populism Wins Pennsylvania?” That report found that:

“… working-class Pennsylvanians responded most favorably to populist messages and messages that emphasized progressive economic policies. What’s more, we found little evidence that focusing on economic populism risks decreasing voter enthusiasm among core Democratic constituencies outside the working class.”

Ezra Klein, another Democratic Party influencer, picked up on that survey just before the election in November, but then dismissed it as an outlier: “Surveys like that should be treated with some skepticism”, he wrote. “The Harris team is running plenty of its own polls and focus groups and message tests.”

But the results of elections matter, and there is now a chorus of Democratic Party nouveau populists, including Rahm Emanuel, Bill Clinton’s close advisor, who went on to earn tens of millions on Wall Street.

It’s time to take a deep breath and recall how these recently minted populists helped to create the very conditions that crushed the working class. As former Senator Sherrod Brown discovered in Ohio, to this day, workers still blame the Democrats for NAFTA, the 1994 trade deal that Clinton, Carville, and Emanuel pushed that ended up costing millions of U.S. jobs.

It’s time to take a deep breath and recall how these recently minted populists helped to create the very conditions that crushed the working class.

Emanual seems these days to have become a closet Sanders supporter, claiming that Obama was way too soft on the bankers who crashed the economy in 2008:

Not only was no one held accountable, but the same bankers who engineered the crisis were aggrieved at the suggestion of diminished bonuses and government intervention. It was a mistake not to apply Old Testament justice to the bankers during the Obama administration, as some called for at the time.

Some did, at the time, but Emanuel did not. Buy hey, people do change, don’t they? Why shouldn’t we believe that the old Democrats can become real populists?

Let’s start with an understanding of how that Harris polling could have been so wrong. Why did their results cause them to shy away from the kind of strong populism that the Center for Working Class Politics found attracted the most working-class support in Pennsylvania? A state Harris had to win.

I don’t know the Harris pollsters personally, but I do know how the Center for Working Class Politics operates. They are meticulous. They know that their polls will be ripped apart by establishment academics and party gatekeepers, so they can’t make mistakes. They can’t let their own personal beliefs tilt the survey towards what they’d like to believe is true. Their goal is to ask the questions others aren’t asking, to better reflect the opinions of people of all types about working class values and beliefs.

Not so with the pollsters who cashed in on the Harris campaign. They know what their client wants to hear (and is capable of hearing). And it’s not that a strong anti-Wall Street message sells, and therefore that she should mercilessly attack what Sanders calls “the billionaire class.” After all, Harris made a public point of holding a Wall Street fundraiser in the middle of her campaign, and her staff made clear that Wall Street helped to shape her agenda. Her brother-in-law, Tony West, was special adviser to her election campaign, and has deep ties to Wall Street through Uber and Pepsico.

It’s not that Democratic Party pollsters cooked the books. They just knew to ask questions that hovered within the corporate Democratic comfort zone. They didn’t ask the strongest populist questions because they didn’t think those results would be welcomed within the campaign.

I once saw this process in action. I was watching a focus group through a one-way mirror. The topic was healthcare in the leadup to Obamacare, but it was stunning to see how the discussion was shaped by the types of questions the facilitators asked. They limited them to various types of health insurance and avoided more radical reforms of the healthcare system.

At one point a younger Black man expressed his frustration: “Why all this talk about insurance? I’m interested in health care and getting access to it.” He was thanked for his comment and then ignored, while I yelled at the mirror, “Talk about Medicare for All!” It didn’t happen because the group paying for the focus group, as well as the pollster, didn’t think Medicare for All was feasible, and therefore refused to discuss it.

Today, the Democratic elites not only run away from Medicare for All, but they refuse to acknowledge their financial ties to Wall Street. They are more than comfortable, however, accepting large consulting and speaking fees from what should be the targets of their populism. This goes back to Bill and Hillary Clintons’ tone-deaf acceptance of $153 million in speaking fees, including 39 speeches from the very banks that crashed the economy in 2008. During Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign she collected $1.8 million for eight speeches to Wall Street banks.

For the Democrats to become a populist party, an entirely new wave of working-class candidates must come to the fore. And for that to happened, we need a working-class movement that forms outside of the two parties and demands economic justice for all...

It's not hard to understand. The Wall Street barons who pay the speaking fees are the same kind of people who went to Yale with Hillary and Bill. They’re all from the same newly minted class of highly successful strivers. If there were any working-class roots in their backgrounds, they withered long ago. Nearly all Democratic Party elites are swathed within this moneyed class. During their leadership of the Vietnam War in the 1960s, author David Halberstam called them “the best and the brightest.” Now they are just the richest. In this milieu, light years away from the working class, getting $225,000 per speech seems like a trifle.

But let’s try to be fair. Can’t the party change its stripes now that Democratic influencers are talking populism in the wake of Trump’s victory?

Unfortunately, I don’t think their talk is credible. It’s doubtful that Carville, Klein, and Emanuel are capable of offering a sustained anti-Wall Street message. They are different from Bernie Sanders, and not just because of their word choices. It’s about their entire careers, the things that made them who they are, their entire way of being. Sanders has been an overt social democrat all his adult life. It’s obvious that he means what he says. He says it over and over again. He really couldn’t care less what Wall Street thinks about him.

As for the nouveau populists, I’m waiting for Carville to say, “Look I was dead wrong when I helped Bill Clinton undermine unions through NAFTA.” Or for Emanuel to confess that “I was wrong to take millions in Wall Street fees while workers were losing their jobs through mergers, leveraged buyouts, and stock buybacks.” Or for Ezra Klein to admit in print that the Center for Worker Class Politics, “were right about populism. The Harris pollsters were wrong, and I was at fault for dismissing their solid work.”

Or maybe the Democrats could finally show some outrage about Wall Street-induced mass layoffs that are destroying the livelihoods of working people. (For more information, please see Wall Street’s War on Workers.)

For the Democrats to become a populist party, an entirely new wave of working-class candidates must come to the fore. And for that to happened, we need a working-class movement that forms outside of the two parties and demands economic justice for all, as the original American populists, the Peoples Party, did in the 1880s. Today, that might look like a sustained, organized version of Occupy Wall Street, which fights against mass layoffs caused by Wall Street’s greed and for a $20 federal minimum wage.

Meanwhile, get ready for more faux populism from Democratic Party elites while Wall Street feasts on the riches Trump showers upon them.