Trump family could pocket billions from IRS suit: analyst

Ewan Gleadow
April 26, 2026
RAW STORY

President Donald Trump will funnel a potential IRS payout into a family shell company, a political analyst has claimed.

Trump and his sons are negotiating with the Internal Revenue Service to settle a $10 billion lawsuit without trial. Trump filed the lawsuit after taking office, claiming an IRS contractor leaked his tax information. The motion for settlement extension was filed with IRS consent, requesting time for parties to engage in discussions and avoid protracted litigation.

Trump acknowledged in January that he is essentially negotiating with himself, stating he could make the settlement "a substantial amount" before directing funds to charities.

Heather Delaney Reese believes that, should Trump's lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service be a success, the payout will not be headed to charity.

Reese wrote, "Trump and his lawyers are currently in settlement talks with the Department of Justice over this lawsuit. The same DOJ that he controls. If those talks result in a payout, it would be Trump’s own administration writing Trump and his family a check from the United States Treasury. That would be taxpayer money being spent.


"And if he does donate the winnings to charity, as he suggested on Air Force One, do not hold your breath waiting to find out which one. This is a family with a history of creating entities that look like charities on paper.

"The Trump Foundation was shut down under court supervision after the New York Attorney General found that Trump had repeatedly used its funds for his own personal, business, and political interests.

"He was ordered to pay $2 million in damages. He made 19 admissions of illegal activity. His three adult children were required to undergo mandatory charity law training as part of the settlement. So when he says the money could go to charity, it might not mean what we imagine that to mean."

Reese went on to suggest that the lawsuit could be set to collapse by May after a federal judge asked a pointed question about the point of the suit.

"But on Friday, a federal judge named Kathleen Williams, an Obama appointee sitting in Miami, looked at the case and asked a question that cut through what this lawsuit really was about: money," Reese wrote. "She pointed out that Trump is the sitting president who directly oversees both the IRS and the Treasury Department.

"His named adversaries in this lawsuit are agencies whose decisions are subject to his direction. She questioned whether the parties are even 'sufficiently adverse to each other' for the lawsuit to be constitutional under Article III, which requires an actual controversy between genuinely opposing parties."

‘These People Are Shameless’: RFK Jr.’s Son Launches Healthcare Investment Fund

“The festering swamp of corruption and self-dealing surrounding the Trump White House just got even deeper.”


Robert F. Kennedy Jr., with his son Finn behind him, spoke during a rally in Aurora, Colorado on May 19, 2024.
(Photo by Helen H. Richardson/MediaNews Group/The Denver Post via Getty Images)

Jake Johnson
Apr 25, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

US Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s son, Finn Kennedy, is reportedly seeking to raise $100 million for a new healthcare industry investment fund that will seek to capitalize on “policy initiatives in government”—including RFK Jr.'s so-called Make America Healthy Again agenda.

The Financial Times reported Friday that Finn Kennedy’s fund, Victura Ventures, has already secured roughly $70 million in commitments. The fund is “targeting early-stage growth companies involved in healthcare AI, consumer health, and other health technologies,” FT reported, citing an offering document.

“Kennedy’s foray into healthcare investing marks the latest example of the cozy relationship between the Trump administration and close associates who have sought to capitalize on it,” the newspaper added. “Sons of President Donald Trump and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick have invested in cryptocurrency businesses as Trump has promoted alternative currencies. Donald Trump Jr. has joined the board of 1789 Capital, a fund founded by pro-Trump donors in 2023. At least four of 1789’s portfolio companies have won contracts from the Trump administration. 1789 has also invested in big government contractors, such as Anduril and Elon Musk’s SpaceX.”

Additionally, as Common Dreams reported on Thursday, Eric Trump appeared on Fox Business to brag about a $24 million Pentagon contract secured by Foundation Future Industries, where the president’s son serves as chief strategy adviser.

“These people are shameless,” journalist Doug Henwood wrote in response to the reporting on Finn Kennedy’s new fund.

The advocacy group Protect Our Care said the FT reporting and a Friday story in The New York Times—which detailed how a top Kennedy aide “was advising on changes to the American health system while running a rapidly growing wellness company poised to benefit from Trump administration health policies”—show that “the festering swamp of corruption and self-dealing surrounding the Trump White House just got even deeper.”

According to the Times, Kennedy aide Calley Means “held between $25 million and $50 million in stock in the company, Truemed, through November, as he continued to serve as its president.”

“For months, Mr. Means has ignored questions from Democrats in Congress about his finances, including the extent of his stake in Truemed, and how they related to federal policy,” the Times added.

Kayla Hancock, the director of Protect Our Care’s Public Health Project, said in a statement Friday that “it’s perhaps easy for RFK Jr. to look at Donald Trump and Commerce Secretary Lutnick blatantly abuse the power of the White House to enrich themselves, family members, and big donors, and say, ‘Why not me?’”

“Kennedy claims he’s following ethics rules, but why did he keep the barn door open for his son and close associates to profit off his policy decisions?” asked Hancock. “It follows a corrupt pattern of Trump administration officials exploiting loopholes to steer money into their family and friends’ pockets at the same time they rip away healthcare from millions of Americans and push policies that hike costs on everything from insurance premiums, gas, to groceries.”

‘Unprecedented Kleptocracy’: Sanders Slams Trump Family’s Presidential Profiteering

“The Trump family has made $4 billion off the presidency,” the senator said.


US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) speaks during a Fighting Oligarchy Tour rally at the UIC Forum in Chicago on August 24, 2025.
(Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

Brett Wilkins
Apr 24, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

Amid renewed scrutiny of self-dealing by President Donald Trump and his relatives ahead of this weekend’s Mar-a-Lago gala for top investors in the $TRUMP meme coin—whose value has plummeted more than 90% from its high—Sen. Bernie Sanders on Thursday took aim at the First Family’s corruption.

“The Trump family has made $4 billion off the presidency,” Sanders (I-Vt.) said on X following reporting by New Yorker staff writer David Kirkpatrick and others detailing how Trump and relatives have profited from his position during his second term.

Sanders listed sources of Trump family presidential profiteering, including more than $3 billion from cryptocurrencies like $TRUMP and $MELANIA—the latter whose value has plunged by over 99%—Persian Gulf deals worth over $425 million, $150 million in the form of a luxury jumbo jet gifted by Qatar, and various business ventures and deals the senator slammed as part of an “unprecedented kleptocracy.”

In addition to the two meme coins, many of those crypto gains are linked to ventures including American Bitcoin and World Liberty Financial—which has raised eyebrows for being co-founded by Trump’s sons, with disclosures showing 75% of its token sales going to a Trump-linked entity.

Democrats on the US House Oversight Committee have published their own running tally showing nearly $2.5 billion in “Trump family digital grift profits”—including more than $634 million from foreign sources—and $6 billion in “Trump family digital grift wealth.”

“While Americans struggle to buy groceries and pay rent, Donald Trump is making his family richer through digital grift schemes—collecting profits through digital wallets and granting pardons to the highest bidders,” the House Oversight Democrats said.

Sanders isn’t the only US lawmaker to denounce what Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) last year called Trump’s “superhighway of crypto corruption.”

Also last year, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, released a report detailing how “Trump and his family have transformed the presidency into a personal money-making operation, adding billions of dollars to his net worth through cryptocurrency schemes entangled with foreign governments, corporate allies, and criminal actors.”

“President Trump and his family kept lining their pockets while he and his allies in Congress closed down the federal government—refusing to extend tax credits to make healthcare affordable for American families, putting continued food benefits for women and children in doubt, and placing active-duty military personnel in danger of missing their next paycheck,” House Judiciary Democrats said.

Trump is the only president to ever be convicted of felony crimes. In 2024, while he was running for a second term, a New York jury found him guilty of 34 felony charges related to the falsification of business records regarding hush money payments to cover up sex scandals during the 2016 presidential election.

Last year, a New York appeals court tossed a $355 million civil fraud judgment—which increased to more than half a billion dollars with interest—against Trump and his two eldest sons in a separate case in which the trio exaggerated the wealth of their business organization. The ruling upheld the fraud finding and banned Trump and his sons from leading businesses in the state for 2-3 years.

‘The Corruption Is in Plain Sight’: Protesters Decry Ellison-Trump Dinner as Megamerger Looms

“Tonight’s dinner appears to be nothing more than a transparent bid to flatter the Trump administration into rubber-stamping David Ellison’s proposed Paramount-Warner Bros. merger.”


David Ellison, the CEO of Paramount Skydance, walks through Statuary Hall to the State of the Union address on February 24, 2026, in Washington, DC.
(Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

Jake Johnson
Apr 24, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

A coalition of free speech organizations, progressive lawmakers, and antitrust advocates gathered outside the US Institute of Peace in Washington, DC on Thursday to protest a private dinner hosted inside the building by Paramount Skydance CEO David Ellison, who is seeking regulatory approval from the Trump administration for a megamerger of his company and Warner Bros. Discovery.

The invite-only dinner was billed as an “intimate gathering in celebration of the First Amendment honoring the Trump White House”—which has waged war on press freedom—“and CBS White House correspondents.” Norm Eisen, co-founder of Democracy Defenders Action, said during Thursday’s protest that the dinner “resembles the First Amendment in the same way that a book burning is a celebration of the written word.” President Donald Trump attended the dinner, which critics dubbed the “Paramount Corruption Gala.”

Organizers of Thursday’s demonstration warned that the proposed merger of Paramount and Warner Bros., the parent company of CNN, would be catastrophic for media and free expression. If the merger is approved, David Ellison—the son of Trump megadonor Larry Ellison—would control CBS, CNN, HBO, and other major media properties.

“Tonight’s dinner appears to be nothing more than a transparent bid to flatter the Trump administration into rubber-stamping David Ellison’s proposed Paramount-Warner Bros. merger, which would be a disaster for American news media and media consumers,” said Robert Weissman, co-president of the watchdog group Public Citizen. “This proposed acquisition perfectly illustrates the domino effect of corporate and wealth concentration: David Ellison is only positioned to propose this merger because his father, Larry Ellison, the co-founder of Oracle, has become richer than any person should be allowed to be.”

Craig Aaron, co-CEO of the advocacy group Free Press, said that “no company should have this much media power, but especially not this company.”

“We’re here tonight to defend free speech. We’re here tonight to defend press freedom,” said Aaron. “We’re here to stop government censorship. We’re here to stop corruption and stop the Ellisons from trashing even more of our media.”

Aaron called on those gathered to say it “loud so that state attorneys general” across the country can hear the message clearly.

“Stop the merger!” they shouted. “Stop the merger!”

Watch the full protest:




The dinner was held hours after Warner Bros. shareholders approved the proposed merger with Paramount, a company that just last summer received approval from the Trump administration to merge with Skydance—a decision that was widely viewed as corrupt. The proposed merger of Paramount Skydance and Warner Bros. has drawn vocal opposition from Hollywood actors, directors, and producers, who released an open letter earlier this month warning that the combination would “threaten the sustainability of the entire creative community.”

Two members of Congress, Reps. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) and Becca Balint (D-Vt.), spoke at Thursday’s protest, decrying what they called Ellison and Trump’s “corrupt merger scheme.”

“We’re here to say, ‘Hell no,’” said Raskin, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee. The Maryland lawmaker called Ellison’s private event “a lavish oligarch’s dinner for Donald Trump.”

Balint told protesters that as she spoke, Ellison was probably “raising a glass to his friend, his supporter, his patron, Donald Trump.”

“That’s what they’re celebrating: power and corruption,” said Balint. “And in this instance, the corruption is in plain sight.”

‘Absurd Corruption’: Disgust as Eric Trump Brags About Scoring $24 Million Pentagon Deal

“The US government is now one of, if not the most, corrupt governments on earth,” said one critic.


Eric Trump, son of US President Donald Trump, attends a ceremony at Mar-a-Lago on January 16, 2026 in Palm Beach, Florida.
(Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

Brad Reed
Apr 23, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

Critics reacted with disgust after Eric Trump went on Fox Business on Thursday morning to boast about Foundation Future Industries, a company where he serves as chief strategy adviser, scoring a multimillion-dollar deal from the US Department of Defense.

For the segment, Fox Business’ Maria Bartiromo invited on both Eric Trump and Sankaet Pathak, co-founder and CEO of Foundation Future, a robotics firm that earlier this year won a $24 million Pentagon contract that will see its robots deployed in Ukraine, where they will be used to inspect and transport weapons.

Bartiromo asked the second-eldest son of President Donald Trump how he got involved with Foundation Future, and “what attracted” him to the enterprise.

Trump responded that he decided to get involved with robotics to help America “win” the race with China to build battle-ready robots, in the same way he purportedly helped the US “win” by being an early investor in cryptocurrency.

“We better be winning this race in the United States of America,” he declared. “We’re the greatest economy in the world... When you go up and you interact with these robots, and they fist bump you and they high five you, they follow your commands. You bring in AI economy, it’s going to change industry, it’s going to change military application, it’s going to change hospitality. The uses are unlimited.”



Eric Trump and his brother, Donald Trump Jr., for months have been investing in companies with the goal of scoring lucrative Pentagon deals.

The Wall Street Journal reported in March that the Trump brothers invested in a Florida-based drone company called Powerus that “is vying to meet fresh demand from the Pentagon” for drones that started when the Trump administration banned foreign-made drones and drone components from the US in December.

And in 2025, at least two companies backed by Trump Jr. received contracts collectively worth hundreds of millions of dollars from the DOD.

Given this history, critics were quick to hurl accusations of corruption at the Trumps for using their father’s presidency to personally enrich themselves.

“The president’s son, who was never involved in this industry before his father became president, should not be getting contracts from the Pentagon,” declared Ron Filipkowski, editor-in-chief of MeidasTouch. “This is absurd corruption that Republicans in Congress will say nothing about and do no oversight.”

Phillips O’Brien, professor of strategic studies at the University of St. Andrews, said the fact that the president’s son is openly boasting about getting multimillion-dollar deals from his father’s DOD shows “the US government is now one of, if not the most, corrupt governments on earth.”

University of Michigan political scientist Donald Moynihan compared the Trump brothers to Uday and Qusay Hussein, the late sons of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, and argued that much of Trump’s second administration appears to be running the US government like it’s a family business.

“An underestimated rationale for Trump’s massive ramp-ups in immigration/military spending,” he wrote, “is to create a public slush fund for friends, families, donors.”

National security attorney Bradley Moss, in a nod to possible future congressional investigations of the Trump family’s corruption, advised Eric Trump to “preserve your records.”

Maine (D) Gov. Mills Ripped for Veto of Landmark AI Data Center Moratorium

One critic said Mills “demonstrated a shocking disconnect with the people of Maine, their elected legislators, and a large and growing national movement against the reckless explosion of this highly problematic industry.”


Gov. Janet Mills (D-Maine) attends a meeting of governors at the White House on February 21, 2025, in Washington, DC.
(Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

Stephen Prager
Apr 24, 2026
COMMON DREAMS


Maine’s Democratic Gov. Janet Mills is facing criticism from lawmakers and environmental groups after vetoing a bill that would have enacted the nation’s first statewide moratorium on artificial intelligence data centers.

The bill, LD 307, which passed both chambers of Maine’s Legislature with bipartisan support earlier this month, would have stopped state and local governments from issuing permits for data centers with electric loads of 20 megawatts or more until November 2027, giving the state time to study their effects.



Maine Gov. Mills Urged to Sign ‘Nation-Leading’ AI Data Center Moratorium



Small Wisconsin City Overwhelmingly Passes First-of-Its-Kind Measure Restricting AI Data Centers

Mills opted to veto the bill after lawmakers voted down an amendment that would have carved out an exception for a proposed data center project in the town of Jay.

“A moratorium is appropriate given the impacts of massive data centers in other states on the environment and on electricity rates,” Mills wrote to the Legislature on Friday. “But the final version of this bill fails to allow for a specific project in the Town of Jay that enjoys strong local support from its host community and region.”

While there has not been much organized opposition to the Jay project, proposals in other towns, like Lewiston and Wiscasset, have been met with furious resistance from locals who fear sharp rises in utility costs.

The moratorium’s sponsor, Rep. Melanie Sachs (D-48), said that by vetoing the bill, Mills was “resisting the will of a majority of Maine people.”

“While a veto might protect the proposed data center project in Jay, it poses significant potential consequences for all ratepayers, our electric grid, our environment, and our shared energy future,” she told the Portland Press Herald. “This decision is simply wrong.”

Maureen Drouin, the executive director for Maine Conservation Voters, said that Mills had “sided with large-scale data center developers over safeguards for Maine people and the environment, leaving communities at risk to higher energy prices and more pollution.”

“Across the country, the development of large-scale data centers has far outpaced the ability of policy and lawmakers to properly regulate them and establish sensible protections,” she continued. “Maine had a chance to push pause and establish the right regulatory framework to protect its people, their wallets, and the environment from polluting, resource-hungry data centers.”

Mitch Jones, the managing director of litigation for Food & Water Watch, which has backed proposals in several other states—including New York, Pennsylvania, California, and Michigan—agreed that Mills’ veto “demonstrated a shocking disconnect with the people of Maine, their elected legislators, and a large and growing national movement against the reckless explosion of this highly problematic industry.”

“Mainers and people across the country are becoming increasingly fed up with the skyrocketing electricity rates, false jobs promises, and harmful industrialization of small-town communities that hyperscale data centers bring wherever they land,” he said.

Mills’ veto comes as she is running for the Democratic nomination to challenge Republican US Sen. Susan Collins for her seat in November. The establishment-backed governor is facing increasingly long odds amid the insurgent progressive candidacy of the former Marine-turned-oyster farmer Graham Platner, who leads by wide margins in recent polls.

A leaked Zoom meeting last month showed that Mills was lambasted by voters over her decisions to veto other popular bills that would have strengthened gun control laws, protected tribal sovereignty, allowed farmworkers to unionize, and lowered prescription drug prices.

“It is no wonder that Janet Mills’s political career seems to be limping to a feeble conclusion,” Jones said following her veto of the data center bill Friday. “The Maine Legislature must now do what Mills won’t: stand up for the best interests of Mainers and their communities, and override this foolish veto immediately.”

PEN America Sounds Alarm Over Pentagon’s Firing of Stars and Stripes Ombudsman

“Even as the nation is at war, Pentagon leadership is silencing independent voices that uphold credible reporting, part of a broader pattern of restricting press access to evade scrutiny.”


Pentagon Secretary Pete Hegseth speaks during a press briefing on April 24, 2026 in Arlington, Virginia.
(Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

Jake Johnson
Apr 24, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

PEN America, one of the nation’s leading free expression groups, voiced alarm Friday at the Pentagon’s firing of the ombudsman for the military newspaper Stars and Stripes, warning the move marks yet another blow to US press freedoms amid the Trump administration’s war of choice in Iran and other lawless actions across the globe.

“Even as the nation is at war, Pentagon leadership is silencing independent voices that uphold credible reporting, part of a broader pattern of restricting press access to evade scrutiny,” Tim Richardson, PEN America’s journalism and disinformation program director, said in a statement. “Congress must defend the statutory independence of Stars and Stripes so that service members can continue to rely on it for independent reporting.”

Jacqueline Smith, who was tasked with upholding the Stars and Stripes’ editorial independence from the Pentagon—which partially funds the newspaper—publicly announced her firing on Thursday in a defiant editorial, writing: “Apparently the Pentagon... doesn’t want you to hear from me anymore about threats to the editorial independence of Stars and Stripes.”

Smith, who has served in the congressionally mandated ombudsman role since December 2023, wrote in Stars and Stripes that while she was not given a reason for her firing, “no one should be surprised” by the decision.

“For nearly a year, Pentagon leadership has placed more and more restrictions on the mainstream media. The New York Times sued and when the Defense/War Department lost in court, instead of following the judge’s ruling Secretary [Pete] Hegseth and company pivoted, finding another way to restrict journalists. The judge rejected that attempt, too,” Smith wrote. “The laser beam turned to Stars and Stripes on Jan. 15 when Sean Parnell posted on X four paragraphs announcing a ‘refocus’ of the newspaper. Parnell is Assistant to the Secretary of Defense/War (Public Affairs); my firing notice came from his office.”

“Since his ‘refocus’ post, I’ve been outspoken in my columns, media interviews, talks with national free press groups and communications with Congress about the Pentagon’s moves to take control of Stripes’ content,” Smith added. “This newspaper has a long history of commitment to the military community and to journalistic values. Please don’t let it be controlled by Pentagon brass.”

“My responsibility to Stripes and the First Amendment was paramount.”

In January, the Pentagon announced plans to overhaul Stars and Stripes with the stated goal of moving its content “away from woke distractions that syphon morale”—without offering any examples of such content.

Weeks later, the Pentagon issued a memo declaring that the newspaper was “prohibited” from using “news stories, features, syndicated columns, comic strips and editorial cartoons from commercial news media.” The directive barred the paper from reprinting material from The Associated Press and Reuters.

Smith criticized the Pentagon directive as another blatant and “unacceptable” attempt to infringe on the newspaper’s editorial independence.

“What is happening with Stripes is within the broader context of the Pentagon attempting to restrict the mainstream media,” she wrote in an April column. “At first it was by closing off areas of the complex where journalists previously had been able to go unescorted, then it followed last fall with the demand for the press to sign an agreement essentially saying it would not use any information not authorized by the department. That’s when more than two dozen journalists from mainstream media turned in their press badges and walked out. They still cover the news.”

In a message to Stars and Stripes staff following her firing, Smith said she “knew it was risky to speak out.”

“But my responsibility to Stripes and the First Amendment was paramount,” she added.

OPINION

Inside the 160-year military tradition under attack from Trump's Pentagon

U.S. President Donald Trump and members of his administration attend a cabinet meeting at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., January 29, 2026. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein

D. Earl Stephens 

April 26, 2026

ALTERNET

Editor's Note: AlterNet Editor and Publisher Roxanne Cooper also worked at Stars & Stripes from 2000-2003.

While America is bogged down in this senseless war in Iran, Donald Trump and his reprehensible Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth are once again attacking the welfare and morale of our troops.

For the past few months, this destructive duo have been taking aim at the iconic Stars and Stripes newspaper and its congressionally mandated editorial independence, by quite literally trying to kill the messenger.

It is unseemly, unnecessary and has been answered by journalists like myself and recently the newspaper’s ombudsman, Jacqueline Smith, who was fired earlier this week for her stellar efforts defending the daily paper that has been covering and defending our troops since the Civil War.

I want to commend Smith for her good, important work, and command of her subject matter. She follows a rich tradition of notable ombudsmen at the paper through the years who have been charged with protecting the readers and ensuring the editorial staff delivers a comprehensive news and sports report to the troops free from command interference.

Any journalist worth his or her salt understands that Stars and Stripes might be the most important newspaper in the United States, and is certainly its most unique.

As I have explained before, Stars and Stripes is mandated by Congress to be an editorially independent newspaper that reports on and for the troops and their families overseas. It has endured through parts of three centuries, and through countless wars and administrations.

As I said in that piece:

Stripes has never been the military’s newspaper. It is the military’s hometown newspaper that reports on the military for the military, and is supplemented with the same stateside news they would expect from any other editorially independent newspaper.
The paper is a non-appropriated fund entity and receives approximately a third of its operating budget from the Pentagon with the rest coming from other sources such as advertising, single-copy sales, and online subscriptions.
Stripes reporters are with the troops during war and peace, and experts on their subject matter. There are countless examples over the years of the paper reporting on important issues that have resulted in positive change for its readers.

Most important: Stripes delivers news they can trust and free from interference from paranoid, self-serving, unscrupulous pirates like Hegseth and his small-minded, insecure toadies in the Pentagon.

People like Hegseth are exactly why this paper’s editorial independence is protected.


Many of you will know I was the managing editor of the newspaper between 1998 to 2009. You will know this because I am so proud of my editorial service to the newspaper that I use it in my tagline after every column I write. I worked at many other newspapers in many other capacities, but my time at Stars and Stripes was by far the highlight.

It was beyond my imagination as a sailor who read the paper in the 1970s, that I would go onto work at the iconic place 20 years later. These are things a troublemaking kid growing up in New Jersey never dreamed of.

Now Stars and Stripes is facing its most brutal attack in its long history from a group of known liars, who have always been terrified by the truth. Trump and Hegseth lie as they speak, so of course they feel a newspaper that prints the truth must be stopped.

It is not the first time this newspaper has been attacked by self-serving, ignorant politicians, or even Trump himself, who made an ill-advised run at shutting the paper down during his first disastrous term.

The paper has always enjoyed bipartisan congressional favor as a necessary resource for the troops and their families, who are painfully learning how little Trump thinks of them.

It’s time for Congress — Republicans and Democrats — to stand up for our troops by protecting this important paper that advocates for them.

I’ll never forget sitting down with the leaders of a visiting public affairs contingent from Macedonia (now North Macedonia) at Stars and Stripes’ then overseas headquarters in Darmstadt, Germany, in 2005.

When I was finished with a windy explanation of the paper’s mission, the leader of the delegation was clearly blown away. “I can’t believe something like this can work,” he said. “We would never be allowed to do this in my country.”

I smiled at him and said three words: “Only in America.”

Just not Trump’s perverted notion of America apparently …

D. Earl Stephens is a United States Navy Veteran and finished up a 30-year career in journalism as the Managing Editor of Stars and Stripes. You can find all his work here, and follow him on Bluesky here.

Hegseth Calls Iran War ‘Gift to the World’ Despite Economic Calamity, Food Shortages

Hegseth once again chided US allies for not getting involved in the war, which has created severe shortage of jet fuel and forced European airlines to enact mass flight cancelations.


US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth speaks during a press briefing at the Pentagon in Washington, DC, on April 24, 2026.
(Photo by Annabelle Gordon / AFP via Getty Images)

Brad Reed
Apr 24, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Friday once again suggested the international community should show gratitude for President Donald Trump’s illegal war with Iran, which has led to a global oil supply shock and created the potential for food shortages in the coming months.

Speaking with reporters at the Pentagon, Hegseth defended the president’s decision to launch a war of choice with Iran that so far has cost US taxpayers an estimated $60 billion.

“It’s a bold and dangerous mission,” said Hegseth. “A gift to the world. Historic. Courtesy of a bold and historic president.”



Hegseth also chided US allies for not getting involved in the war, which Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu launched in late February without any consultation or coordination with Europe.

“America and the free world deserve allies who are capable, who are loyal, and who understand being an ally is not a one-way street,” he said. “We are not counting on Europe, but they need the Strait of Hormuz much more than we do, and might want to start doing less talking and having less fancy conferences in Europe, and get in a boat. This is much more their fight than ours.”

In reality, there is little reason for the world to feel gratitude to the US and Israel for the war.

As reported by Barron’s on Friday, the war has created a global shortage of jet fuel that has led to airlines canceling flights, with Europe being particularly hard hit.

German airline Lufthansa, for instance, has announced it’s cutting 20,000 flights through October, and even US airlines such as Delta have been announcing cuts to save money thanks to the increase in jet fuel prices.

South China Morning Post reported on Wednesday that Asian nations are bracing for food shortages, as the Iran War has led to a shortage of fertilizer for crops during the planting season throughout much of the world.

In addition to citing the effects of the Iran War on global food supplies, the South China Morning Post pointed to scientists’ warnings of a “super El Niño” that could lead to lower than average rainfall.

“It is very concerning because this year is supposed to be a super El Niño, and you are getting into the planting season,” Gnanasekar Thiagarajan, founder of India-based financial research and advisory firm Commtrendz Research, told South China Morning Post. “This is going to be widespread across South and Southeast Asia. There will be dryness everywhere.”

Jorge Moreira da Silva, executive director of the United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS), warned on Tuesday that there is a real risk of a global food crisis if the Strait of Hormuz remains closed to shipments of fertilizer.

“The planting season has already started, and in most countries in Africa it will end in May,” the UN official explained. “So, if we don’t get some solution immediately, the crisis will be very significant and severe, particularly for the poorest countries and for the poorest citizens.”

TMZ Confronts Hegseth Over Whether He’s on a ‘Power Trip’ When Ordering ‘Extreme Level of Violence’

“I’ve never seen the corporate media hacks even dream of having the courage to ask something like this,” said one journalist.


US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth takes questions during a press briefing at the Pentagon on April 24, 2026 in Arlington, Virginia.
(Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

Julia Conley
Apr 24, 2026
COMMON DREAM

At the latest press briefing at the Pentagon on Friday, in addition to issuing his latest threat to journalists who publish classified information obtained from sources, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth peppered his comments with the violent rhetoric that’s become commonplace in his public remarks.

The US military will “shoot and kill” if Iranian boats are found trying to disrupt passage through the Strait of Hormuz, which remains closed following the extension of a ceasefire this week, said Hegseth.

He added, “We will shoot to destroy, no hesitation, just like the drug boats in the Caribbean”—a reference to strikes that have killed at least 180 people the US has accused of trafficking drugs, in an operation that has been widely condemned as one of extrajudicial killings or murder.

“The War Department stands ready for what comes next, locked and loaded,” said the secretary, who has also denigrated what he refers to as “stupid” rules of engagement meant to protect civilians. “We’ll use up to and including lethal force if necessary.”

Amid Hegseth’s escalating efforts to control the media’s coverage of his department, including the Pentagon’s firing on Thursday of the ombudsman of the military newspaper Stars and Stripes and his demand that journalists agree to a policy prohibiting coverage that the department has not approved, an outlet that’s new to Capitol Hill made its way into the press briefing room Friday—and asked the top military official a question that hadn’t previously come up about the deadly attacks he’s ordered in recent months.

“I’ve heard you talk a lot about bombing people and places,” said Jacob Wasserman of the celebrity news outlet TMZ, which has recently expanded its political coverage by opening an office in the nation’s capital. “And when you give these orders to carry out this extreme level of violence, what’s going through your mind and your body? Do you have, like, an adrenaline rush? Are you scared? Do you feel like you’re on a power trip?”

Hegseth appeared perplexed before smirking and dismissing the query as “a very TMZ question.” He quickly denied that a “power trip” plays into his decisions to strike targets in places including Iran, where at least 3,375 people have been killed in US-Israeli strikes, including at least 200 children; the Caribbean Ocean and Pacific Ocean, where the boat bombing campaign is continuing; and Ecuador, where US troops launched a joint campaign with the nation’s military last month, targeting suspected drug traffickers on land.

He said his “only thought process is to ensure that our war fighters have everything they need to be successful, defeat and destroy the enemy,” before adding some more of the violent rhetoric Wasserman had alluded to about bringing “maximum violence to the enemy.”

Some scoffed at Wasserman’s question, but others, including Drop Site News journalist Julian Andreone, applauded the reporter for publicly suggesting and confronting Hegseth about the possibility that he enjoys ordering US troops to kill people in foreign countries, including many civilians, in operations that legal experts say violate international law.

“I’ve never seen the corporate media hacks even dream of having the courage to ask something like this, yet they continue to shove the fancy name of their organization in everybody’s faces while looking down their noses at TMZ,” said Andreone.

Wasserman’s colleague, Charlie Cotton, followed up with a question about whether Hegseth, who has claimed the Department of Defense has been renamed the Department of War—although congressional approval would be needed for such a change—would consider again rechristening the agency as the Department of Peace, “since that’s what we’re all after.”

The question prompted Hegseth, moments after demanding “maximum violence,” to remark that “the one institution that should win the Nobel Peace Prize every single year is the United States military, because we are the guarantor of the safety and security, not just of our country, but of a lot of people in this world.”



TMZ’s first appearance in the briefing room and its arrival in Washington, DC come at a time when the corporate media’s coverage of the Iran war and other military operations has been compared to the drumbeating tone in the national press ahead of the George W. Bush administration’s invasion of Iraq in 2003, and as some have called for more adversarial coverage of the White House and the political establishment.

The outlet, which is more accustomed to publishing celebrity gossip, spent recent weeks publishing photos of federal lawmakers vacationing during the partial government shutdown, with TMZ founder Harvey Levin interviewing one Transportation Security Administration worker who had been reporting to work for weeks without pay on the company’s weekday show, “TMZ Live.”

Levin urged viewers to who saw members of Congress on vacation during the shutdown to “take a picture and send it to us at TMZ. We will post that picture on our website, on our social media, and we will put it on our television shows. We want to show what they are doing at your expense.”



Levin told The Hollywood Reporter earlier this month that TMZ’s presence in Washington will “sometimes be fun, sometimes intensely serious.”

The headline the outlet chose for its brief write-up of Wasserman’s question to Hegseth on Friday was, “TMZ DC to Pete Hegseth: Do You Get Off on Dropping Bombs???”

Journalist Krystal Ball of the online news show “Breaking Points” said that if Wasserman’s question to Hegseth was a “'TMZ question,’ I’m excited to see more of what TMZ will bring to the table.”

Trump’s DoorDash Grandma ‘No Tax on Tips’ Stunt Was Beyond Tacky

The staged photo op was actually a good reminder of the gap between the White House’s rhetoric and reality.


US President Donald Trump tips Sharon Simmons after receiving a DoorDash delivery of McDonald’s during an event outside the Oval Office of the White House on April 13, 2026 in Washington, DC.
(Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

Peter Hart
Apr 26, 2026

Center for Economic and Policy Research

There is little doubt that most of the benefits of President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act flow to the wealthy. But the White House has put considerable effort into promoting the idea that the law benefits working class people too, in particular those who earn tips.

To drive that point home, they staged an April 13 photo op with a DoorDash delivery to the White House. But the stunt was actually a good reminder of the gap between the White House’s rhetoric and reality.



First, it helps to understand that the “no tax on tips” policy applies to very few workers; less than 3% of workers are tipped. And its effects are even narrower than that. The policy is actually a deduction (topping out at $25,000) that can be claimed by tipped workers to lower their taxable income. But many tipped workers—about 1 in 3, or possibly close to 40%—do not earn enough to file taxes, so this deduction does them no good.

Now on to the White House event. When DoorDash driver Sharon Simmons “delivered” his McDonald’s order, President Trump commented that she “picked up an extra $11,000” because of the new policy. As Paul Waldman (and others) noted, this was mathematically dubious, given the $25,000 cap on the deduction. Indeed, Simmons would later explain that she earned $11,000 in tips, not that she saved that amount of money on her taxes. How much she saved on her taxes is unclear; by one high-end estimate, if she were paying a 24% tax rate she would have saved just $2,640.

If the goal of these kinds of policies are to provide some relief for workers—especially those earning a low wage—there are plenty of other options that would apply more broadly. Raising the minimum wage, for example, or eliminating the subminimum “tipped” wage would put more money in more workers’ pockets.

Speaking just after the White House photo op—and at a different “no tax on tips” event—Trump said the photo op was “a little tacky.” Given that Simmons is making DoorDash deliveries to pay for her husband’s cancer treatments, and the fact that his signature tax cut bill slashes food assistance and will cause millions to lose their health insurance coverage, “tacky” is an understatement.

Consumers Looking to Avoid Trump Have One Fewer Option in REI

REI’s leadership has endorsed leaders who gutted public lands, greenwashed their use of AI, deployed a union-busting law firm, and rigged their governance structure to shut out different perspectives.


REI’s flagship New York store stands in Lower Manhattan on January 25, 2022 in New York City.
(Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

Jules Geritz
Apr 26, 2026

Common Dreams

In the Trump 2.0 era, many Americans have begun to engage in a new “conscious consumerism”—avoiding the companies that have bent the knee to the president. Data firm Numerator found that 38% of US consumers have participated in some form of a boycott over the last year, and 48% said they would stop buying from a company that had differing political views. Some may have felt that outdoor retailer REI would be an ideal place to shop during this time, a home for like-minded, outdoorsy people who care about the environment.

As an REI worker, I’m still expected to evangelize about REI‘s mission—the outdoors, sustainability, and community. But ever since we started unionizing at REI in 2022, it’s now become a facade. REI‘s leadership has endorsed leaders who gutted public lands, greenwashed their use of AI, deployed a union-busting law firm, and rigged their governance structure to shut out different perspectives. REI, a favorite of outdoor-loving liberals, has gone Trump.

The first public sign came when REI endorsed the Trump administration directly. The executives of the “co-op,” without any direct feedback from the members whose values and opinions they claim to base their decisions on, signed a letter of support for then-nominee for Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum, who ended up being confirmed in a vote of 79-18. In the year since his confirmation, Burgum has spent much of his time opening federal lands up to oil and gas drilling and trying to make the “Gulf of America” name stick. While REI’s new CEO has issued an apology since, the damage is already being done.

But throughout our union effort, from organizing to now bargaining, we’ve seen up close how the co-op has aligned itself with President Donald Trump. REI has met our unionization campaign by hiring a law firm with deep ties to pro-business, anti-worker cases, Morgan Lewis. This firm has been contracted to bust unions in everything from Amazon to professional baseball.

As REI has continued to stonewall us at the bargaining table, it’s opened itself up to a new opportunity for “conscious consumerism.” We have authorized a boycott should the company fail to agree on a contract with its 11 unionized stores.

Its reputation has earned the respect of the Trump administration, as the president installed Crystal Carey, a former partner at Morgan Lewis, as the general counsel for the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). In that role, Carey is responsible for setting the agenda for the NLRB as it weighs decisions on union elections, unfair labor practices, and more—including major cases regarding our union campaign. Morgan Lewis also handled the president’s taxes for many years. That’s who REI chose to hire—one of Trump’s favorite law firms.

Perhaps the most damning example of how REI is taking a page from the Trump playbook is how they’ve changed their governance structure. As a co-op, REI members elect the board of directors each year, seemingly a symbol of democratic governance and participation. Any co-op member can vote, and any member can run.

Last year, we decided to nominate two members to the board, Tefere Gebre and Shemona Moreno, longtime labor advocates, outdoor enthusiasts, and progressive leaders. Both were ideal candidates for REI’s board, but instead, their candidacies were rejected outright in favor of a slate of candidates handpicked by REI executives.

In response, we urged co-op members to vote down this slate. They responded overwhelmingly in support—members defeated the slate of candidates, and the board was left with multiple vacancies in response. An expression of will like this—again, from the very members whose values the co-op’s executives claim impact their decisions—should have prompted REI to look inward and reflect.

Instead, REI took the Trump route. REI didn’t like the results, so they changed the rules. They moved up the board election to December, after holding it in April and May for years. This came in the middle of negotiations, which prevented us from speaking out against this anti-democratic move. Holding the election over the holidays meant participation would be low, and members couldn’t hear another perspective on any of the co-op’s preferred candidates. It’s a microcosm for how Trump is trying to change the rules of our democracy with the SAVE America Act and gerrymandering.

Of course, REI isn’t alone in cowering to the president. Another major retailer, Target, has also kept its head down during the second Trump administration. The company pulled back its Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion initiatives and remained silent as Immigration and Customs Enforcement ran amok in the company’s home state of Minnesota. And Target has paid the price as it has faced boycotts from customers and protests outside its stores.

While many corporations have bowed their heads to the president, it wasn’t always this way. During the first Trump administration, we even had companies like Microsoft, Google, and Facebook speaking out against Trump’s immigration policies.

As REI has continued to stonewall us at the bargaining table, it’s opened itself up to a new opportunity for “conscious consumerism.” We have authorized a boycott should the company fail to agree on a contract with its 11 unionized stores. We do not take this decision lightly, but we know that REI members and customers have our backs in the fight for a fair contract and in the fight against Trump.


Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.


Jules Geritz
Jules Geritz is a senior sales specialist at REI’s store in Berkeley, Califoria; a 13-year REI employee; and a member of the REI Union’s national bargaining committee.
Full Bio >

Groups Issue World Cup Travel Advisory Over ‘Deeply Troubling Human Rights Landscape’ in US

The coalition cited the Trump administration’s “racist immigration policies, mass detention and deportation, and attacks on freedom of expression and peaceful protest.”

 
US President Donald Trump receives the inaugural FIFA Peace Prize from FIFA President Gianni Infantino on December 5, 2025 in Washington, DC.
(Photo by Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images)

Brett Wilkins
Apr 23, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

A coalition of more than 120 US-based civil society groups on Thursday issued a travel advisory ahead of the upcoming FIFA Men’s World Cup over what the ACLU called the “deteriorating human rights situation” in the United States amid the Trump administration’s deadly anti-immigrant crackdown, suppression of free speech, and more.

Citing the “absence of meaningful action and concrete guarantees from FIFA”—world soccer’s governing body—“host cities, or the US government,” the coalition published a warning urging “fans, players, journalists, and other visitors traveling to and within the United States” for the tournament to “have an emergency contingency plan.”

The US, Canada, and Mexico are jointly hosting the tournament, which is set to kick off with group stage matches in Mexico City and Guadalajara on June 11 and Los Angeles and Toronto the following day.

“World Cup games will be played in 11 different cities across the United States, which, like many localities, have already been the target of the Trump administration’s violent and abusive immigration crackdown,” the coalition wrote.

“While the Trump administration’s rising authoritarianism and increasing violence pose serious risks to all,” the advisory continues, “those from immigrant communities, racial and ethnic minority groups, and LGBTQ+ individuals have been and continue to be disproportionately targeted and affected by the administration’s policies and, as such, are most vulnerable to serious harm.”

According to the groups, those harms potentially include:

Arbitrary denial of entry and risk of arrest, detention, and/or deportation of non-US nationals—even those with prior authorization from the US government;

Expanded restrictions and limitations on travel and entry into the United States, given the Trump administration’s ban or severe restriction on entry of people from 19 Global South nations;

Invasive social media screening and searches of electronic devices as part of admission to the United States;

Violent and unconstitutional immigration enforcement, including racial profiling and other discrimination by law enforcement;

Suppression of speech and protest and increased surveillance; and
Serious risk of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, and in some cases, death, while in immigration detention facilities or custody.

The coalition—which includes groups like the ACLU, Amnesty International USA, Center for Constitutional Rights, Committee to Protect Journalists, Haitian Bridge Alliance, Human Rights First, Legal Defense Fund, Mijente Support Committee, NAACP, National Lawyers Guild, and Southern Poverty Law Center—is urging prospective World Cup attendees to take steps to protect themselves. These include knowing their rights, securing their electronic devices, and informing trusted people about travel plans.

Visitors are also advised to download Human Rights First’s ReadyNow! mobile app “to notify trusted contacts in case of possible detention.”

Journalists covering the tournament are urged to “consult resources from the Committee to Protect Journalists or Reporters Without Borders for information on how to keep themselves safe while entering the US and while reporting inside the country.”

Daniel Noroña, Americas advocacy director at Amnesty International USA, said in a statement Thursday that “fans, journalists, and others traveling to the United States for the 2026 FIFA World Cup risk encountering a deeply troubling human rights landscape, shaped by the Trump administration’s racist immigration policies, mass detention and deportation, and attacks on freedom of expression and peaceful protest.”

ACLU human rights program director Jamil Dakwar said that “FIFA has been paying lip service to human rights while cozying up with the Trump administration, putting millions of people at risk of being harmed and their basic rights violated.”

“The Trump administration’s abusive actions continue to threaten our communities, tourists, and fans alike—and it’s past time that FIFA use its leverage to push for meaningful policy changes and binding assurances that will make people feel safe to travel and enjoy the games,” Dakwar added.

FIFA faced worldwide ridicule for awarding President Donald Trump its first-ever Peace Prize last December amid his administration’s illegal high-seas boat-bombing spree, and just ahead of his bombing of Nigeria, kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, launch of the US-Israeli war of choice against Iran, and threats to attack several other countries.

Despite US bombing that’s killed thousands of its people—including hundreds of children—and FIFA’s refusal to relocate its matches outside the United States, Iran, which easily qualified, is planning to take part in the tournament.

On Thursday, Iran’s embassy in Italy decried what it called a “morally bankrupt” effort by US Special Envoy for Global Partnerships Paolo Zampolli to ban it from the tournament and replace its bracket slot with Italy, which is reeling from missing its third consecutive World Cup final.

‘Leaving the US Behind,’ 50+ Nations Gather in Colombia to ‘Phase Out Fossil Fuels’

“Word on the street is NO fossil fuel lobbyists at the Santa Marta, Colombia ‘Transition Away’ conference,” said one climate journalist.


Colombian Environmental Minister Irene Vélez Torres speaks during the First Conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels, in Santa Marta, Colombia on April 24, 2026.
(Photo by Colombian Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development/X)

Brett Wilkins
Apr 24, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

Representatives of more than 50 countries on Friday kicked off the First Conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels in Colombia, a hopeful summit that comes amid a worsening global climate crisis and fossil fuel-producing nations’ efforts to block a clean energy transition.

Organizers of the conference—which is taking place in the Caribbean city of Santa Marta and is co-hosted by the Netherlands—said participants aim to “initiate a concrete process through which a coalition of committed countries, subnational governments, and relevant stakeholders can identify and advance enabling pathways to implement a progressive transition away from fossil fuels, creating sustainable societies and economies.”


‘No Oil, No War’: Trump’s Attack on Iran Condemned Ahead of Global Climate Summit

“This process will be informed by the experience and perspectives of national and subnational governments, academia, Indigenous peoples, peoples of African descent, peasants, civil society, workers, the private sector, and other key actors at different stages of the transition,” the organizers added.



The conference comes amid widespread disappointment and frustration over what climate defenders called a “shamefully weak” draft text—called the Multirão Decision—produced at last November’s United Nations Climate Change Conference, or COP30, in Brazil. The final document removed all mentions of fossil fuels amid pressure from oil and gas-producing nations like the United States, Russia, and Saudi Arabia, and the presence of a record number of industry lobbyists.

“When multilateral processes move slowly, concrete alliances of the willing can take us a long way,” German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said this week at the 17th Petersberg Climate Dialogue in Hesse state, where high-level representatives from around 40 countries discussed “concrete steps towards overcoming the climate crisis.”

The Santa Marta conference, which will run through April 29, will focus on three main areas:Overcoming economic dependence on fossil fuels;
Transforming energy supply and demand; and Advancing international cooperation and climate diplomacy.

Major fossil fuel producers including Angola, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, Nigeria, Norway, and the United Kingdom are among the 54 nations represented in Santa Marta.

Notably absent from the conference are some of the world’s biggest greenhouse gas polluters, including the United States, China, Russia, India, and Japan. Their absence is fine with Colombian Environmental Minister Irene Vélez Torres, who told The Guardian that “this is not the space for them.”

“We are not going to have boycotters or climate denialists at the table,” Vélez said.

Also missing by design are the legions of lobbyists who increasingly swarm COP conferences.

Former Peruvian Environment Minister Manuel Pulgar-Vidal, who heads the World Wildlife Fund’s global climate division, said in a statement that “changing the world’s dependence on fossil fuels isn’t a slow problem with a slow solution: We need a rapid, global shift to renewable power, smarter grids, and efficiency, so emissions fall fast and stay down.”

“And we need a ‘coalition of the willing’ to show us the way,” he added. “Santa Marta is an inflection point and an opportunity that we should not miss.”

The absence of the United States surprised no one, given the Trump administration and Republicans’ promotion of oil, gas, and coal. Big Oil invested $445 million during the 2024 election cycle in efforts to elect Trump and other Republicans and promote fossil fuel-friendly policies.

Trump, who ran on a “drill, baby, drill” energy policy, has signed a series of executive orders aimed at boosting fossil fuel production, including by declaring a fake “energy emergency” in a push to fast-track permit approvals. He also tapped former fossil fuel executives to head the Department of Energy and Interior Department, which have pursued a policy of opening up more public lands and waters for fossil fuel development.

At the same time, the Trump administration dropped out of the Paris climate agreement for the second time and moved to roll back the modest climate progress achieved under former President Joe Biden.

Melinda Lewis—who directs the Global Trade Watch program at the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen—is attending the Santa Marta conference, where she is working to dismantle the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) system. The enforced mechanism empowers multinational corporations to sue governments before panels of corporate attorneys and has been denounced by opponents—especially those in the Global South—as a novel form of colonialism.

“While it is tragic that the United States government is failing to meet this critical moment for climate action, we are encouraged that the rest of the world has recognized that it’s high time to take bold action to remove the arcane ISDS extra-legal instrument buried in trade and investment treaties that has been used as a cudgel by fossil fuel and extractive industries to stymie government actions that might reduce their profits,” Lewis said on Friday.

As Canadian researcher Joseph Bouchard recently wrote in a Common Dreams opinion piece, “Colombia is especially exposed” to ISDS harm, as “the country has 129 oil and gas projects covered by ISDS provisions, leaving it vulnerable to a wave of potential claims as it pursues its energy transition.”


Lewis noted that Colombia’s government, led by leftist President Gustavo Petro, “recently announced its intention to renounce its treaties that include ISDS as part of the full package of needed action to usher in a clean energy transition.”



Indigenous leaders said more must be done to ensure a just transition.

“We are very concerned. We talk about a just transition, but in practice it is not true,” Oswaldo Muca, General Coordinator of the Organization of Indigenous Peoples of the Colombian Amazon, told Inter Press Service. “Mining continues. Extraction continues. Deforestation continues. The territories and Indigenous peoples continue suffering this problem, and it is becoming more serious every day.”

Muca added that benefits from resource extraction “do not reach Indigenous territories, but they destroy the territory and leave the damage.”

On Friday, more than 250 legal experts from around the world asserted that “phasing out fossil fuels is not a political choice—it is a legal obligation.”

The jurists noted in an open letter that “the International Court of Justice (ICJ) unanimously confirmed that every state must use all means at its disposal to prevent significant harm to the climate system, including by avoiding the principal activities driving it: fossil fuel production and use.”

The letter’s signers include former Irish President Mary Robinson and Julian Aguon, an Indigenous human rights lawyer from Guam who played a key role in winning the ICJ climate case.

“The phaseout of fossil fuels is not just scientifically necessary to prevent catastrophic and irreversible harm to the climate system, all peoples, and ecosystems; it is legally required,” they wrote. “It is also socially, economically, and environmentally beneficial for present and future generations.”

Ultimately, countries participating in the Santa Marta conference will draw their own individual roadmaps with the help of scientists and other experts.

“If we think about it,” said Vélez, “the conference is that turning point where, collectively, we decide to be on the right side of history.”