Entirely Inedible: On Glitches and Losses and Lies
Apologies for re-visiting GOP lowlifes and their yammering Mad Emperor, but damn things are getting weird out there. Having ended his trial not with a bang but a craven whine - so much for "absolutely" testifying: "I tell the truth" - Trump gave a daft, dark speech at the NRA convention, calling Biden "a Manchurian candidate," vowing to roll back all gun control, pondering a third term and slamming the country as a “cesspool of ruin." Then a long glitch turned him bizarrely silent. It was blissful.
In brief: To the cretins of a sick, corrupt, fast-diminishing NRA gathered in Dallas to endorse him, the tinpot babbled and spewed his usual ugly gibberish. Biden is "a threat to democracy" who'd get the electric chair if a Republican, he's fighting "hateful communists and criminals," Alvin Bragg is "Soros-backed," not even Lincoln did more for "the black individual in this country than Donald J. Trump," he won 31 golf championships or 29, he's just like his friggin' "genius" uncle at MIT, he's "a better physical specimen" than Obama, he's started an imaginary "Gun Owners For Trump" to stop "the violent migrant crime wave (Biden) has unleashed on our country" though violent crime has fallen sharply, and gun owners, of which he's clearly not one, are "under seesh, we're under seesh but they didn't move us an inch" so on Day One "we'll roll back every gun control measure."
Then came what was widely billed a McConnell-like, 35-second "freeze" but in fact more resembled a system glitch - in his brain, his reading of the room or the teleprompter. He was in the middle of his 6th-grade report - "The Texas spirit of proud independence was forged by cowboys and cattle hands, ranchers and rangers...Many came here with nothing but the boots on their feet, the clothes on their back, the gun in their saddle. Together they helped make America into the single greatest nation in the history of the world" - when he fell silent. For a long time. So did the room. He shook his head, furrowed his brow, stared. An ad popped up for a gold IRA: "Text TRUMP." Finally, QAnon/Nazi music swelled and he came back to awful life: "But now, we are a nation in declined. We are a failing nation." Cue inflation, collapsing banks, drugs, crime, dirty airports, other "horror" by "these tyrants and villains."
When news came of his "Milli Vanilli-type" malfunction, he shrieked, "Donald Trump doesn’t freeze!" He cited a "record crowd of very enthusiastic patriots" and a standard pause before "the musical interlude" and besides Biden "freezes all the time," also he didn't fall when his podium once almost tipped over and he can drink a glass of water! Observers noted it was like "Amateur City for a live performance": At his rallies there's "cheering MAGA morons," this time "just the abyss" of a dark room and NRA stage, like a sit-com before they add the laugh track. His team miscalculated, the crowd missed their cue, he has a memorized shtick he's too dumb to tweak, and he couldn't understand why nobody was cheering. Besides, one summarized, "Never, ever trust anything when it comes to Trump. His very existence is a criminal fraud, foully perpetrated to the detriment of the universe."
Donald Trump Rejects Claims He 'Froze' During Rallywww.youtube.com
Meanwhile, the universe is diminished by each of his repulsive followers in the news. "Sam Alito is a fascist insurrectionist," notes Noah Berlatsky in a piece subtitled, "Stop with the appeasement, you quisling motherfuckers." "He displayed a symbol of support for fascist insurrection shortly after an attempted fascist insurrection. The obvious conclusion would be that (Alito) supports fascist insurrection. He told us who he is. We should believe him." Ditto Rudy Giuliani, now cringingly hawking coffee to pay his legal bills, and Greg Abbott, who with no legal or moral justification pardoned Daniel Perry, serving 25 years for murdering a BLM protester - a pardon, writes Will Bunch, proving the law only applies if an undemocratic few in power say it does, and "a gross injustice in a former Confederate state that (reeks) of the bad old days (when) white men lynched Emmett Till and laughed at justice."
Thus, the "inverted reality" embraced by VP-hopefuls dutifully echoing the Big Lie. "Once one of the two major governing parties no longer believes elections are binding," notes Rachel Maddow, "in many important ways, the democracy ship has sailed." Along with Christina 'Election Integrity' Bobb's creepy mugshot, we have Marco Rubio, the latest to fudge on accepting election results, arguing it's Democrats who questionGOP wins (and pay people $10 to vote). He also says Dems are the extremists on abortion and he supports protecting "all unborn human life," though when it comes to the lives of what he claims are up to 30 million migrants - "We don't even know who these people are" - the son of immigrants says, "This is not immigration...This is an invasion of the country." Add another sad bootlicker inexplicably in thrall to the guy who praises "the late, great Hannibal Lecter," though it turns out it's not reciprocal.
Dr. Hannibal Lecter DECLINES Trump's V.P. Offerwww.youtube.com
And that guy just keeps losing. New earnings filings show Trump Media & Technology Group, the parent company of Truth Social, reported a net loss of $327.6 million, with revenue of just $770,500, in its first fiscal quarter since debuting as a public company on the Nasdaq Stock Market. Also, his campaign to get back the job he so disastrously failed to do isn't doing well in the Saying the Quiet Part Aloud Dept. After eloquently suggesting he might limit access to contraception - "We're looking at that, and I'm going to have a policy on that very shortly...You will find it, I think, very smart" - he abruptly backtracked - "Things really do have a lot to do with the states, and some states are gonna have different policies" - almost like he has no idea what he's talking about. Same with a slipshod video he posted to celebrate his upcoming victory, that touted "A UNIFIED REICH," which quickly went missing.
And there's his trial, nearing its ignoble end. Despite 10 contempt findings, he isn't in jail, but not much else went well. His D-list, red-tie, Hell's Angels! posse - "circling (him) like the cold fragments of a destroyed planet" - was widely mocked, witnesses gave damning testimony, after insisting he'd testify he chickened out, and after claiming MAGA warriors would storm the barricades if he was prosecuted, nobody came. So he made them up: "Thousands of people were turned away, it is an armed camp to keep people away, it looks like Fort Knox." This is complete and utter bullshit," said one observer. Others: "There is virtually complete freedom of movement around the courthouse," "Nothing is happening," "There is a mouse pissing on a ball of cotton in China - that’s how quiet it is out here." Later, he bleated Judge Merchan should dismiss the case: "The right thing to do is to END THIS SCAM NOW AND FOREVERMORE." Yes. Please.
'Wake-Up Call for the World': Millions Impacted by Extreme Floods in Brazil
Experts emphasized the escalating risks of climate-related disasters and their disproportionate impacts on low-income people on Monday following flooding in Brazil that has killed at least 150 people and displaced more than 600,000.
The floods that hit over recent days and weeks have knocked out bridges and the main airport in Porto Alegre, a port city in southern Brazil. More than 460 of the 497 municipalities in the southern state of Rio Grande do Sol have been affected, with more than 2 million people impacted, according to provisional government data.
"The situation is catastrophic," said Rachel Soeiro, Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) medical coordinator in Brazil, who visited the area by helicopter. "We were able to view the towns from above and noticed that in some cases we couldn't even see the roofs of houses.”
More than two feet of rain has fallen so far this month, according Brazil's national weather service, inundating large areas.
"Whole towns and large, urban city centers are in some cases almost completely underwater," the BBCreported on Saturday.
We joined an emergency services helicopter rescuing people from Brazil's floods. The rescues themselves are fraught with risks. More than half a million people are displaced.
Watch on @BBCNews at 6 today (on at 1705) or catch up on the News at One.
Whole cities are destroyed👇 pic.twitter.com/hxZYSVDDmz
— Ione Wells (@ionewells) May 19, 2024
Experts connected the extreme rainfall to climate change, which increases the likelihood of such weather events. Incidents of extreme flooding have increased "sharply" across the planet in the last two decades, according to a study in Nature Water released last year.
"In many ways, this is not a disaster of Brazil’s making. The whole planet is experiencing increasingly rapid climate changes due largely to the greenhouse gases produced by a handful of wealthy nations," Cristiane Fontes (Krika), executive director of World Resources Institute (WRI) Brasil, wrote in a commentary earlier this month in which she called the situation a "wake-up call for the world."
In recent weeks, flooding has also hit China, the United Arab Emirates, and Australia, and WRI's staff in Kenya are dealing with dam breaches from heavy rains, Fontes noted.
A Brazilian expert indicated that the flooding, catastrophic as it has been, should not come as a surprise.
"People on the streets here in Brazil, they've attributed this change to global climate change driven by the increase of fossil fuels," Paulo Artaxo, a physics professor at the University of Sao Paulo, and a member of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), told the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. He explained that was in line with IPCC projections showing that southern Brazil would face more extreme rainfall due to tropical and polar currents.
In Brazil, as elsewhere, climate impacts are not evenly distributed. MSF relief efforts are focused on the most vulnerable, including Indigenous communities, one of which had been isolated by rising waters and without help for 10 days before being reached by the humanitarian group.
"Assisting those who are most vulnerable is one of our main concerns in such situations," Soeiro said. "These people were already facing difficult situations before the flooding. But their needs have risen further and access to them has become more difficult."
Some wealthy people in Porto Alegre have choices such as escaping to a second home, but in "rundown towns" on the city's periphery, low-income people have no such options, according to CNN.
Brazilian left-wing President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has pledged to provide relief money to families that lost their homes. Brazil is one of most unequal countries in the world, according to World Bank data.
FTC Chair Lina Khan Should Take Jim Cramer's 'Unhinged' Obsession as 'Badge of Honor'
The American Economic Liberties Project on Monday called outCNBC's Jim Cramer for at least dozens of "hostile" televised attacks on Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan and her "historic pro-working families record."
The left-leaning group has been compiling Cramer's "most egregious on-air outbursts" over Khan since early last year and its tracker now features more than 30 clips from "Mad Money" and "Squawk on the Street."
When President Joe Biden nominated Khan to lead the FTC in 2021, she was an associate professor of law at Columbia Law School who had previously worked for the Open Markets Institute, the office of former Commissioner Rohit Chopra, and the U.S. House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial, and Administrative Law.
As the clips collected by the project show, Cramer has described Khan as an "empty suit," "stupid," and a "total hack." The ex-hedge fund manager has also compared the agency leader's views to those of Vladimir Lenin, Karl Marx, and Don Quixote.
Cramer has called out specific FTC actions under Khan—repeatedly blasting a lawsuit against Amazon, a company founded by one of the richest persons on the planet—and broadly accused the "rogue" agency of "torturing all the companies that America likes."
When one of Cramer's colleagues pointed out last October that he has taken "every opportunity to just come back to Khan," he responded, "No, I've missed opportunities and I regret that."
The tracker page states that "if Cramer was accurately reporting what the FTC is doing, he would see that Chair Khan is pursuing a pro-business, pro-innovation, and pro-worker agenda. And he is capable of it: he did, for example, proclaim the FTC's case against Kroger-Albertsons to be strong."
Noting Cramer's praise for Jonathan Kanter, an assistant attorney general at the Department of Justice whom the host has called a "heavyweight" and "rigorous thinker," the page adds that "he is so blinded by his obsession of Chair Khan that he sometimes even rails against her for suits brought by the DOJ and forgets to give the Antitrust Division credit for its work."
American Economic Liberties Project spokesperson Jimmy Wyderko said in a statement Monday that "Jim Cramer's anger over the FTC's enforcement record has turned into a full-blown obsession, launching nearly weekly barbs at Chair Khan with the zeal of a carnival barker defending his turf."
"This has manifested on national cable news through a series of unhinged, incoherent, and often inaccurate rants from Jim Cramer attacking the FTC for standing up to big corporations and delivering kitchen table wins to working families," he continued.
"Given Jim Cramer's role as mouthpiece and cheerleader for monopolists across the economy, Chair Khan should consider his harassment a badge of honor," Wyderko added. "We hope to see Jim Cramer get over his fixation syndrome, which is evidently even starting to frustrate his colleagues, as soon as he is able."
House Progressives Blast Revival of 'Extreme' Border Bill by Senate Dems
Democratic leaders of two caucuses in the U.S. House of Representatives slammed the party's Senate leadership on Wednesday for trying again to pass a bipartisan border bill opposed by progressive lawmakers and migrant rights groups.
The joint statement from Congressional Hispanic Caucus Chair Nanette Barragán (D-Calif.) and Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.)—who's also ranking member of the House Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement Subcommittee—came as Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) prepared for a Thursday vote.
"We are disappointed that the Senate will once again vote on an already-failed border bill in a move that only splits the Democratic Caucus over extreme and unworkable enforcement-only policies," they said.
"This framework, which was constructed under Republican hostage-taking, does nothing to address the long-standing updates needed to modernize our outdated immigration system, create more legal pathways, and recognize the enormous contributions of immigrants to communities and our economy," the congresswomen continued.
"The Senate framework would also subject immigrants to impossible standards and unrealistic timelines in presenting their asylum claims, forcing many back to violence, dangerous conditions, or other harm."
The bipartisan Border Act negotiated by Sens. James Lankford (R-Okla.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), and Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.) previously failed to pass in February, after former Republican President Donald Trump—who's running against Democratic President Joe Biden—instructed the GOP to kill the bill. Lankford disagrees with the upcoming vote.
Speaking on the Senate floor Wednesday, Schumer took aim at Trump and H.R. 2, Republicans' Secure the Border Act, which he called "a very partisan bill." As for the bipartisan Border Act, he said that "we don't expect every Democrat or every Republican to support this bill. It wasn't designed that way... It was intended to be a compromise that could pass and become law."
Despite Schumer's remarks, the bill isn't expected to pass. As The New York Timesreported, "The measure is almost certain to be blocked again, but Democrats hope to use the failed vote to sharpen an election-year contrast with the GOP on a critical issue that polls show is a major potential liability for President Biden and their candidates."
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.), Whip Tom Emmer (R-Minn.), and Republican Conference Chair Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) on Monday accused Schumer of "trying give his vulnerable members cover by bringing a vote" and said that "should it reach the House, the bill would be dead on arrival."
"If Senate Democrats were actually serious about solving the problem and ending the border catastrophe, they would bring up H.R. 2 and pass it this week," the GOP House leaders added, advocating for "resuming construction of the border wall, ending the exploitation of parole, reinstating Remain in Mexico, and ending catch-and-release."
Meanwhile, Barragán and Jayapal slammed the bipartisan bill for incorporating GOP policies that critics call cruel and ineffective. They argued that "while the investments in asylum officers and immigration judges are welcome and needed, these alone cannot address the negative effects of a new Title 42-like expulsion authority that will close the border and turn away people seeking asylum without due process."
"Such a policy will be a boon to cartels who prey on migrants and would do nothing to address the root causes of migration—which will continue to send immigrants to the border," the congresswomen warned. "It is worth remembering that under Donald Trump, such a policy was not only declared unlawful by the courts, but it also led to increases—not decreases—in illegal border crossing."
They noted that "the Senate framework would also subject immigrants to impossible standards and unrealistic timelines in presenting their asylum claims, forcing many back to violence, dangerous conditions, or other harm. The bill also limits parole at land ports of entry, which will only make it more difficult to process people in a safe and orderly way."
"It is tempting to simply embrace the very policies we rejected under Donald Trump to counter the horrific xenophobic and racist attacks against immigrants coming from the right," Barragán and Jayapal said. "We urge our Senate Democratic colleagues to resist this urge and instead show a clear contrast between Republicans and Democrats."
"Abandon unworkable policy solutions offered by Republicans," they implored, "and instead work with our caucuses to craft a common-sense bipartisan bill that provides holistic solutions that address our economic, humanitarian, and security needs—not more of the same enforcement-only approach that has failed us for the last 30 years."
PFAS 'Ubiquitous' in Water, Atmosphere in Great Lakes Basin
A first-of-its-kind study published this week shows that levels of toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, are now so ubiquitous in the environment that they have begun building up in the Great Lakes Basin after entering it through rainwater and the air, contaminating 95% of the United States' fresh surface water supply.
Researchers at Indiana University, Bloomington and Environment and Climate Change Canada published the study Thursday, revealing that "background levels" of PFAS, also called "forever chemicals," are so high that atmospheric counts were consistent throughout the basin.
"The PFAS in rain could be carried from local sources, or have traveled long distances from other regions. Regardless, it is a major source of pollution that contributes to the lakes' levels," reported The Guardian on Saturday.
The levels of PFAS in precipitation did not correlate with whether or not an area in the Great Lakes Basin was heavily industrialized, lead author Chunjie Xia, a postdoctoral associate at Indiana University, told The Hill.
"The levels in precipitation don't depend on the population," said Xia. "They are similar in Chicago, which is heavily populated, and at Eagle Harbor, Michigan, where there's maybe 500 people living in a 25-kilometer radius."
"That tells us the levels are ubiquitous," he said. "This is the first time we've seen that. We've never seen that for other pollutants before."
Within the basin, however, levels of PFAS were higher near urban areas.
Twenty percent of the world's freshwater is held in the Great Lakes Basin, while 10% of the U.S. population and 35% of Canadians live in the region.
In 2023, Duke University and the Environmental Working Group analyzed fish samples collected from the Environmental Protection Agency's monitoring program for the Great Lakes, and found that eating just one locally caught freshwater fish could be the equivalent of drinking PFAS-contaminated water for a month.
Forever chemicals have earned their nickname because they do not naturally break down and can continuously remain in and move through the environment. PFAS are used by dozens of industries to make products heat-, water-, and stain-resistant.
European lawmakers have proposed a ban that could go into effect as early as 2026, but Reutersreported Wednesday that the law could include exemptions for certain industries.
Last month, the Biden administration finalized a rule setting limits on PFAS in drinking water.
"We need to take a broad approach to control sources that release PFAS into the atmosphere and into bodies of water," Marta Venier, a co-author of the new study, toldThe Guardian, "since they eventually all end up in the lakes."
Global Rights Groups Back ICC Arrest Warrants for Israel's Netanyahu and Gallant
Human rights defenders around the world on Tuesday welcomed the International Criminal Court's application for arrest warrants targeting Israeli and Hamas leaders for alleged crimes on and after October 7, with Amnesty International hailing the effort as "a crucial step toward justice."
ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan on Monday formally applied to a panel of judges on the 18-member Hague-based tribunal for permission to arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged "crimes of causing extermination, causing starvation as a method of war, including the denial of humanitarian relief supplies, [and] deliberately targeting civilians in conflict."
Khan is also seeking warrants for the arrest of Hamas leaders Yahya Sinwar, Ismail Haniyeh, and Mohammed Deif for alleged "extermination, murder, taking of hostages, rape, and sexual assault in detention."
Responding to the ICC request, Amnesty International secretary general Agnès Callamard said: "No one is above international law: no leaders of armed groups, no government officials—elected or not, no military officials. Regardless of the cause they are pursuing, no one is above the law."
"This move by the ICC prosecutor sends an important message to all parties to the conflict in Gaza and beyond that they will be held accountable for the devastation they have waged on the peoples of Gaza and Israel," Callamard added.
Balkees Jarrah, associate international justice director at Human Rights Watch, asserted that Khan's application "reaffirms the crucial role of the International Criminal Court."
"Victims of serious abuses in Israel and Palestine have faced a wall of impunity for decades," she continued. "This principled first step by the prosecutor opens the door to those responsible for the atrocities committed in recent months to answer for their actions at a fair trial."
"ICC member countries should stand ready to resolutely protect the ICC's independence as hostile pressure is likely to increase while the ICC judges consider Khan's request," Jarrah added.
The ICC has endured pressure from the United States—which gives Israel billions of dollars in military aid and diplomatic cover on the world stage—not to pursue charges against Israeli leaders. The Biden administration reportedly worked with the Israeli government to prevent arrest warrants, while some Republican U.S. senators have threatened to retaliate against ICC jurists. Under an existing U.S. law dubbed the Hague Invasion Act, the president may order action up to military intervention to free citizens of the United States or allied nations who are arrested and in ICC custody.
"The fact that the court is not caving to Israeli or massive U.S. pressure and intends to continue its investigation cannot be praised highly enough," said Andreas Schüller, director of the international crimes and accountability program at the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights.
"Just roughly one year ago, the court caused an uproar with its arrest warrant against [Russian President Vladimir] Putin for his responsibility for war crimes in Ukraine," Schüller noted. "By requesting arrest warrants against Israeli politicians and military officers, as well as leading representatives of Hamas, prosecutors in The Hague are making it clear that international criminal law is universal and that everyone who violates it must ultimately face accountability."
Israeli and Hamas leaders decried the ICC request, with Netanyahu calling it "absurd" and antisemitic and a Hamas spokesperson accusing the tribunal of equating "the victim with the executioner."
U.S. President Joe Biden condemned the court's "outrageous" move and reasserted that Israel's 228-day assault "is not genocide," even though it has killed, maimed, or left missing more than 126,000 Gazans, according to Palestinian and international officials.
"What is 'outrageous' is Israel's U.S.-enabled, decadeslong impunity for war crimes and crimes against humanity against Palestinians, which has emboldened it to carry out its wholesale assault against 2.2 million people in Gaza, while increasing attacks and landgrabs in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem," the Center for Constitutional Rights said Tuesday in a statement welcoming Khan's application.
The United Nations' International Court of Justice is currently weighing a case brought by South Africa and supported by more than 30 countries accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza. In March, the U.N. Human Rights Council published a draft report that found "reasonable grounds to believe" Israel is committing the crime of genocide.
Critics Call Blinken's Embrace of Ukrainian Attacks on Russia 'Deeply Ill-Advised'
"Russia has issued a credible threat to counter-escalate" in the event of the policy shift, noted one former Pentagon official. "Are we prepared for such escalation?"
Anti-war voices this week sounded the alarm over U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken's newfound embrace of letting Ukraine use weapons supplied by the United States to attack targets inside Russia—a policy critics say risks a catastrophic escalation between the world's two top nuclear powers.
So far, the Biden administration has strictly forbidden Ukrainian forces—who are defending their country from the invasion ordered by Russian President Vladimir Putin in February 2022—from attacking targets inside Russia with U.S.-supplied weapons. This is in keeping with President Joe Biden's stated objective of "trying to avoid World War III."
However, The New York Times' David Sanger reported Wednesday that "the consensus around that policy is fraying" amid "a vigorous debate inside the administration over relaxing the ban to allow the Ukrainians to hit missile and artillery launch sites just over the border in Russia."
Elbridge Colby, a former deputy assistant defense secretary during the Trump administration,
warned Wednesday on social media that "there is exceptional and ill-advised danger in this course," as "Russia has issued a credible threat to counter-escalate" in the event of the policy shift.
"Are we prepared for such escalation?" he asked.
Michael Young, a senior editor at the Carnegie Middle East Center,
said Wednesday that Blinken's "move toward persuading Biden to allow Ukraine to widen the war to Russian territory is just a crazy idea, and makes any eventual negotiation all but impossible."
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says forces and weapons amassed just across the Russian border have enabled Russia's recent territorial gains, including near Kharkiv, Ukraine's second-largest city, which has come under
heavy Russian bombardment in recent days.
After what Sanger called a "sobering" visit by Blinken to the Ukrainian capital Kyiv last week, the secretary of state has been pushing for a change in the Biden administration's stance. According to Sanger, "the consensus around that policy" of restraint is unraveling. It is not quite clear yet how many senior Biden administration officials support the move to greenlight Ukrainian attacks on Russia with U.S. arms, but one highly controversial undersecretary of state who recently resigned is a vocal proponent of the policy.
That would be Victoria Nuland, a neoconservative who is reviled by anti-imperialists around the world for her hawkish history that includes playing a key role in the plot to overthrow the pro-Moscow government of then-Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych during the Euromaidan uprising a decade ago.
"They need to be able to stop these Russian attacks that are coming from bases inside Russia," Nuland
toldABC News on Sunday. "Those bases ought to be fair game... I think it's time for that because Russia has obviously escalated this war."
NULAND CALLS FOR STRIKES ON RUSSIA pic.twitter.com/9WxCDZrM6b
— The_Real_Fly (@The_Real_Fly) May 19, 2024
The Biden administration is also weighing whether to train Ukrainian forces inside Ukraine, as opposed to in Germany under current policy—a move that could put U.S. and NATO troops in the line of fire.
Ukrainian officials welcomed Blinken's shift.
"Blinken's statement, which he repeated twice, that Ukraine is the one to choose its targets, created hope that the United States had changed its position: Ukraine should make its own decisions on the territories where it uses certain Western weapons, especially American ones," Nataliia Halibarenko, who heads Ukraine's mission to NATO, toldUkrinform on Thursday.
"The decision that we have the right to use American weapons beyond Ukraine must be made sooner or later," she added. "It is a pity that we are wasting time searching for a solution that should not cause doubts. But we will continue to promote it at all levels."
The U.S. would not be the first country to allow Ukraine to use weapons it supplies for attacks inside Russia. The United Kingdom has sent Ukraine Storm Shadow long-range air-launched cruise missiles, and British Foreign Secretary David Cameron says Ukraine "absolutely has the right to strike back at Russia."
The debate within the Biden administration over Ukraine's use of U.S.-supplied arms comes amid Russian military drills involving tactical nuclear weapons, which Russia's Defense Ministry earlier this month claimed were ordered in response to "provocative statements and threats of certain Western officials."
Senators Launch Probe of Trump's $1 Billion Offer to Big Oil
"Emboldened by impunity, Mr. Trump and Big Oil are flaunting their indifference to U.S. citizens' economic well-being for all to see, conferring on how to trade campaign cash for policy changes."
In the wake of Donald Trump attending a Big Oil-hosted fundraiser in Texas, two Democratic Senate chairs on Thursday initiated an investigation into the recent quid pro quo offer to fossil fuel industry executives by the presumptive Republican presidential nominee.
After The Washington Postreported that during an April event, Trump pledged to gut climate policies implemented under Democratic President Joe Biden if the fossil fuel industry raised $1 billion for his 2024 presidential campaign, House Committee on Oversight and Accountability Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) launched a probe last week, sending letters to the leaders of a trade group and companies whose executives appear to have attended that Mar-a-Lago gathering.
Senate Budget Committee Chair Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Senate Finance Committee Chair Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) followed suit on Thursday, sending letters to the American Petroleum Institute (API) and the same eight companies: Cheniere Energy, Chesapeake Energy, Chevron, Continental Resources, EQT Corporation, ExxonMobil, Occidental Petroleum, and Venture Global LNG.
"Such an obvious policies-for-money transaction reeks of cronyism and corruption," Whitehouse and Wyden wrote. "This solicitation, coupled with troubling reports that fossil fuel interests and other companies have been drafting language for use in executive orders favorable to their businesses during a possible second Trump administration, demand immediate additional inquiry."
"Such an obvious policies-for-money transaction reeks of cronyism and corruption."
"According to reports, Mr. Trump made specific policy commitments, including promises to auction off more oil and gas leases on federal lands and in federal waters, reverse pollution standards for new cars, and end drilling restrictions in the Alaskan Arctic," they detailed. "He also vowed to terminate the pause on new permits for liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports, allegedly pledging to do so 'on the first day.' Notably, Mr. Trump called the proposed arrangement a 'deal' for the executives given the tax and regulatory benefits that he would deliver for Big Oil companies and executives."
As Common Dreamsreported last week, one analysis found that if the industry executives took Trump up on his $1 billion offer—that has been undercovered by cable news—there would be a major return on investment for the companies, which would enjoy an estimated $110 billion from the tax breaks alone.
"Mr. Trump's blatant quid pro quo offer is particularly concerning in light of concurrent reporting by Politico that the oil and gas industry is drafting 'ready-to-sign' executive orders," Whitehouse and Wyden noted. "The fossil fuel industry's active attempts to write policy for its preferred presidential candidate are simply the latest installment in Big Oil's decadeslong pattern and practice of lobbying for anti-climate policies even while trying to greenwash its public image."
The pair of senators pointed to documents released last month by Raskin and Whitehouse's panels as part of a three-year probe that on Wednesday culminated in them urging U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland to investigate the fossil fuel industry for decades of spreading disinformation about their products and the climate emergency.
Speaking with The New Republic's Greg Sargent about Trump's reported comments to Big Oil executives, Whitehouse said last week that "this is practically an invitation to ask more questions," and a "natural extension of the investigation already underway."
As the senators highlighted Thursday: "Of particular relevance here, documents released in the joint investigation detail the industry's outsized influence on energy policy during Mr. Trump's first administration... In turn, the Trump administration appeared to rely on the oil and gas industry to support and defend its anti-climate energy agenda."
"Time and time again, both Mr. Trump and the U.S. oil and gas industry have proved they are willing to sell out Americans to pad their own pockets," they continued. "And now, emboldened by impunity, Mr. Trump and Big Oil are flaunting their indifference to U.S. citizens' economic well-being for all to see, conferring on how to trade campaign cash for policy changes. Such potential abuses must be scrutinized."
Whitehouse and Wyden are demanding answers and documents from API and the executives by June 6. Raskin, in his letters, called for responses and records by next Monday.
'For Gaza': Hundreds of Students Stage Walkout at Harvard Commencement Ceremony
The demonstration followed the “unduly harsh punishment” of 13 students barred from receiving their diplomas stemming from their support for Palestinian rights.
Update (2:20 PM ET):
Hundreds of graduates walked out in protest at Harvard University's commencement ceremony on Thursday in protest of the war in Gaza and the college's decision not to confer degrees on 13 pro-Palestine seniors.Harvard's controversial decision to block the 13 seniors from graduating strengthened the intensity of Thursday's demonstration, which was "far larger, louder, and more extensive than graduation protests at any other university in the region thus far this spring," according toThe Boston Globe.
BREAKING: Hundreds of Harvard students and faculty have walked out of commencement in support of Palestine and the 15 seniors having their degrees withheld for protesting a genocide. pic.twitter.com/D0lGKrmzvq
— Harvxrd Palestine Solidarity Committee (@HarvxrdPSC) May 23, 2024
Earlier:
Harvard University's board on Wednesday rejected a faculty vote to allow 13 seniors who had participated in a pro-Palestine encampment to graduate, provoking outrage from educators and students, some of whom protested outside the commencement ceremony Thursday morning.
The Wednesday announcement followed competing decisions by Harvard institutions in the days leading up to graduation. On May 18, the college's administrative board announced disciplinary actions against students—suspending five and placing more than 20 on probation—for their involvement in the on-campus encampment, which ended last week. This left the 13 seniors ineligible to graduate.
Professors in Harvard's Faculty of Arts and Sciences responded on Monday by voting to amend the list of students receiving degrees to include the 13 students—effectively rejecting the administrative board's decision. Harvard's main governing board, known as the Corporation, had to make the final decision, which they announced in a statement on Wednesday:
Because the [13] students included as the result of Monday's amendment are not in good standing, we cannot responsibly vote to award them degrees at this time. In coming to this determination, we note that the express provisions of the Harvard College Student Handbook state that students who are not in good standing are not eligible for degrees. We also considered the inequity of exempting a particular group of students who are not in good standing from established rules, while other seniors with similar status for matters unrelated to Monday's faculty amendment would be unable to graduate.
Both faculty and students condemned the decision, which The Harvard Crimson called an "unprecedented veto" of the faculty.
"I would expect a faculty rebellion, possibly a faculty rebellion against the entire governance structure, because there's already a fair amount of mistrust toward the Corporation to begin with," government professor Steven Levitsky told the Crimson.
The decision leaves uncertain the immediate future of the 13 students, two of whom have been awarded Rhodes Scholarships to study at Oxford University. "Despite fulfilling their degree requirements, these [13] students will not receive their diplomas, fellowships, and grad funding because of the Corporation's decision," Harvard Out of Occupied Palestine, a student group, wrote on social media. The faculty's vote was a "clear repudiation of the administrative board's unduly harsh punishment," the post said.
Pro-Palestine students also said that the Corporation's decision violated the terms of a deal they had reached with the administration. They ended the 20-day protest on Harvard Yard on May 14 after interim Harvard University President Alan Garber wrote an email promising to "encourage the administrative boards or other disciplinary bodies within the schools to address cases expeditiously under existing precedent and practice (including taking into account where relevant the voluntary decision to leave the encampment), for all students, including those students eligible thereafter to graduate so that they may do so."
Protestors set up outside of Harvard's graduation Thursday morning as the college's other seniors received their degrees.
Good morning from Harvard’s commencement. pic.twitter.com/dMMMZzmsk6
— Harvard Out of Occupied Palestine (@HarvardOOP) May 23, 2024
Protesters gather outside Harvard University commencement after some students denied degrees https://t.co/y5CyZ0LxWv
— WBZ | CBS News Boston (@wbz) May 23, 2024
The tumult at Harvard follows a spring of Gaza-related protests at campuses across the U.S., which have led to thousands of arrests as well as disciplinary action by universities, despite the lack of protestor violence. Many of these colleges still have graduation ceremonies in the coming weeks.