Showing posts sorted by date for query COTTON. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query COTTON. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Sunday, July 05, 2026

Op-Ed

Trump’s UFC Cage Fight Is an Apt Metaphor for a Nation Built on Colonial Violence

The White House’s Freedom 250 spectacle grotesquely exposed the settler-colonial legacy of 1776.

July 2, 2026

Fireworks go off during "UFC Freedom 250" mixed martial arts event on the South Lawn of the White House on June 15, 2026, in Washington, D.C.Saul Loeb - Pool / Getty Images


“On July 4th, 1776 … the United States became the greatest force for freedom, justice, equality, and prosperity in the history of the world,” President Donald Trump declared in a promotional video for the Freedom 250 campaign, the administration’s flagship initiative commemorating the U.S.’s semiquincentennial. Among the centerpiece events planned for the nation’s 250th birthday celebration was an Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) cage fight on the grounds of the White House.

The June 14 event, which occurred on Trump’s birthday and Flag Day, delivered exactly what he promised: a pageant of power, violence, and nationalism staged at the seat of U.S. power. Thousands gathered around an octagonal cage erected on the White House grounds; cabinet secretaries mingled with senators, tech billionaires with celebrity athletes, media personalities with corporate sponsors, all beneath military flyovers and pyrotechnic displays. Under the lights, fighters bloodied one another as the crowd roared its approval.

Liberals found the event crass. Sen. Patty Murray called it “out of touch.” New York Times opinion columnist Michelle Goldberg wrote, “On the 250th anniversary of our country’s founding, America’s increasingly senescent president turned the White House lawn into a tacky, bloody gladiatorial arena.” Meanwhile, CNN quoted one historian who asked, “What does a UFC fight have to do with America’s greatness?”

The historian’s question assumes that the values represented by the spectacle — domination, hierarchy, and the glorification of power — are fundamentally at odds with the ideals of the founding of the United States. But what if the contradiction lies not between the cage match and the American Revolution, but between the history that people in the U.S. are taught and the history that actually unfolded? To answer that question, it helps to begin with an observation from Martinican poet and anti-colonial theorist Aimé Césaire: “No one colonizes innocently.”

By fusing combat, militarism, celebrity culture, and nationalism into a single public performance, the White House cage match endeavored to cast repression, xenophobia, and extreme inequality not as threats to freedom but as expressions of national strength.

Americans are taught that their nation was born in the cradle of liberty. But Césaire’s insight requires us to confront a more disquieting truth: The U.S. republic emerged from another womb altogether — the smoke of burning villages, the holds of slave ships, and the ambitions of a colonial elite willing to unleash unspeakable violence in pursuit of wealth and power. Indeed, what better way to party like it’s 1776 than with a spectacle of combat staged at the center of U.S. empire?

The cage fight, surrounded by representatives of every branch of the armed forces, was part of Trump’s effort to cultivate a cult of personality. Writing under Nazi rule, cultural theorist Walter Benjamin described fascism as the “aestheticization of politics” — the transformation of political life into spectacle in order to generate emotional attachment to authority. By fusing combat, militarism, celebrity culture, and nationalism into a single public performance, the White House cage match endeavored to cast repression, xenophobia, and extreme inequality not as threats to freedom but as expressions of national strength.

As the United States approaches its 250th anniversary, the country faces rising authoritarianism, ongoing state violence against Black communities, a worsening affordability crisis, widening wars, climate catastrophe, attacks on immigrants and LGBTQ+ people, and an escalating siege on critical education. We can no longer afford to leave the meaning of 1776 to Donald Trump, establishment Democratic Party politicians, billionaire-funded media outlets, or the sanitized narratives found in many textbooks. Only by confronting the republic’s colonial foundations — and recovering the traditions of freedom forged by those who resisted them — can we pursue a different future.


National Innocence or Colonial Brutality?


Trump’s over-the-top jingoism obscures a deeper truth: The refusal to reckon with the United States as a settler-colonial project is a bipartisan affliction. As President Barack Obama declared: “The patriots of 1776 did not fight to replace the tyranny of a king with the privileges of a few or the rule of a mob. They gave to us a republic, a government of, and by, and for the people, entrusting each generation to keep safe our founding creed.” President Joe Biden similarly argued, “Deep in the heart of America burns a flame lit almost 250 years ago — of liberty, freedom, and equality.” Trump did not invent the founding fairytale of innocence; he inherited and radicalized this bedtime story that has from the beginning called the United States the “fairest of them all” to obscure its colonial origins.

The U.S. republic emerged from the smoke of burning villages, the holds of slave ships, and the ambitions of a colonial elite willing to unleash unspeakable violence in pursuit of wealth and power.

It’s clear Trump has exploited the bipartisan faith in American exceptionalism to suppress dissent and concentrate executive power. Yet his authoritarianism is less an aberration than the latest expression of a recurring pattern. From slavery and Indigenous dispossession to Jim Crow, Japanese American incarceration during World War II, McCarthyism, COINTELPRO, and NSPM-7 today, authoritarianism has repeatedly resurfaced. Its roots lie in the colonial foundations of the republic, where conquest, racial hierarchy, and state violence became enduring instruments of governance. The 20th century’s most infamous authoritarian movements did not emerge from nowhere. They drew upon centuries of colonial practice. For example, Adolf Hitler openly admired the United States’ genocide of Indigenous peoples. In a 1928 speech, he praised white American settlers for having “gunned down” millions of Indigenous people until only a “few hundred thousand” remained. As James Q. Whitman, author Hitler’s American Model, notes, “Beyond its laws, the Nazis also admired America’s conquest of the West.” Nazi leaders viewed the United States’ seizure of Indigenous lands and westward expansion as precedents for their own project of Lebensraum (“living space”) — the conquest and ethnic cleansing of Eastern Europe.

The Nazi fascination with the U.S. frontier was rooted in a historical reality that many accounts of 1776 still minimize. As historian Nick Estes, a citizen of the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe, writes, the Haudenosaunee remember George Washington as the “town destroyer” for ordering the destruction of dozens of Haudenosaunee towns during the Revolutionary War. “In a very real sense,” Estes concludes, “the founding of the United States was a declaration of war against Indigenous peoples.” One of the principal grievances driving many advocates of independence was the British Crown’s attempt to restrict westward expansion after the Seven Years’ War. The Declaration of Independence itself denounced Indigenous peoples as “merciless Indian Savages,” revealing that Native nations were viewed as obstacles to colonial expansion rather than sovereign peoples. Independence swept aside those restraints and accelerated a centuries-long project of dispossession, forced removal, and genocide.

For anti-colonial thinkers such as Aimé Césaire, W. E. B. Du Bois, and Walter Rodney, fascism was not a departure from colonialism but one of its logical destinations. As historian Robin D. G. Kelley argues in his introduction to Césaire’s Discourse on Colonialism, one of the book’s most important contributions was its effort to “locate the origins of fascism within colonialism itself.” Kelley and the anti-colonialists he draws on have shown that white supremacy, dispossession, dehumanization, and state violence did not begin with fascism. Those methods had long been refined through colonial conquest, empire, and racial domination before they were turned inward against Europe itself.


Only by confronting the republic’s colonial foundations — and recovering the traditions of freedom forged by those who resisted them — can we pursue a different future.

Most people in the U.S. have been taught to view 1776 as the starting point for understanding the origins of freedom. But the choices confronting enslaved people during the American Revolution reveal the limits of the “patriot” vision. In 1772, Lord Mansfield ruled in favor of James Somerset, an enslaved African who resisted being returned from England to slavery in Jamaica, alarming colonial slaveholders who feared Britain might eventually restrict slavery. Those fears intensified in 1775 when Lord Dunmore, Virginia’s royal governor, offered freedom to enslaved people owned by rebel colonists if they escaped and joined the British side. Thousands fled to British lines. So threatening was the prospect of enslaved people claiming freedom that the Declaration of Independence condemned George III for having “excited domestic insurrections amongst us” — a phrase widely understood as a reference to Dunmore’s proclamation. For many colonial elites, one of the gravest dangers posed by British rule was that it might undermine slavery itself.

The American Revolution looked very different from the tobacco and cotton fields than it did from the plantation house or Independence Hall. Take the question Frederick Douglass asked in his famous speech, “What to the Slave Is the Fourth of July?” and consider his conclusion:

This Fourth of July is yours, not mine. You may rejoice, I must mourn. To drag a man in fetters into the grand illuminated temple of liberty, and call upon him to join you in joyous anthems, [is] inhuman mockery and sacrilegious irony.

More than a century later, the Black revolutionary and anti-colonial thinker Malcolm X advanced a similar critique, urging Black people to reject the assumption that their freedom originated with the American founding:

We are Africans, and we happen to be in America. We are not Americans. We are a people who formerly were Africans who were kidnapped and brought to America. Our forefathers weren’t the Pilgrims. We didn’t land on Plymouth Rock; the rock landed on us. We were brought here against our will … We were not brought here to enjoy the constitutional gifts that they speak so beautifully about today.

Malcolm X’s challenge forces us to confront the reality that the American Revolution was shaped by conquest, slavery, and elite rule. Once we abandon the assumption that 1776 represents the highest expression of freedom, another revolution comes into view — one that pushed the ideals of liberty and equality far beyond anything the U.S. founders were willing to imagine.


Fear of a Black Republic


To understand the limits of the American Revolution, we need only compare it to the Haitian Revolution, which erupted shortly thereafter in the same Atlantic world. The Haitian Revolution breached the walls U.S. and European empires had erected around the idea that freedom was the sole property of white people, and rescued the idea of emancipation as the natural human condition.

Beginning in 1791, enslaved people in the French colony of Saint-Domingue revolted against one of the most brutal slave systems in the world. Under the leadership of figures such as Toussaint Louverture and Jean-Jacques Dessalines, they defeated French, Spanish, and British armies and, in 1804, established Haiti — the first Black republic and the only nation ever created through a successful slave revolution.


At a moment when the United States restricted citizenship and political power along racial lines, Haiti offered a strikingly different vision — one in which solidarity with the struggle against slavery and colonialism mattered more than ancestry or skin color.

The contrast with the United States is striking. Haiti’s 1805 Constitution declared that “Slavery is forever abolished” and that “all acception of color” was “necessarily to cease,” while the U.S. Constitution protected slavery and racism through the Three-Fifths Clause and the Fugitive Slave Clause. Haiti’s commitment to freedom was not limited to people of African descent. After independence, Haitian leaders granted citizenship and full rights to many Polish soldiers who had defected from Napoleon’s army and joined the revolutionary cause. At a moment when the United States restricted citizenship and political power along racial lines, Haiti offered a strikingly different vision — one in which solidarity with the struggle against slavery and colonialism mattered more than ancestry or skin color.

Yet Haitian revolutionaries also understood that freedom’s greatest enemies often masqueraded as its guileless defenders.

Toussaint Louverture, the brilliant Haitian general who led the revolution, understood that systems of domination rarely announce themselves as such and prefer to hide behind a mask of innocence. Writing in 1799, Louverture warned of “the unity that exists between the proprietors of St.-Domingue who are in France, those in the United States, and those who serve under the English banner.” These slaveholding interests from powerful nations, he argued, were united behind an “unequivocal and carefully constructed” plan for “the restoration of slavery.” Yet they did not openly proclaim themselves enemies of freedom. Instead, he observed, they sought to “envelop themselves in the mantle of liberty in order to strike it more deadly blows.”

As historian Leslie M. Alexander explains in her book, Fear of a Black Republic, Haitian independence “transformed global conceptions of freedom and challenged existing assumptions about who possessed human rights and who did not.” The revolution exposed the lie that slavery was natural or permanent and proved that enslaved people could overthrow their oppressors and govern themselves.

The panic was immediate among enslavers and the leaders of the new United States. As historian Brian Jones notes in his book, Black History Is For Everyone, over a nearly two-year period from 1791 to 1793, U.S. officials sent approximately $726,000 to Saint-Domingue to support enslavers attempting to crush the uprising.

As the uprising spread across Saint-Domingue in 1791, President George Washington declared, “Lamentable! To see such a spirit of revolt among the Blacks.” Alexander Hamilton described the Haitian Revolution as a “calamitous event.” In 1793, Thomas Jefferson — the author of the July 4, 1776, Declaration of Independence — feared that the Haitian Revolution threatened the entire slave system of the Americas, worrying that “all the West India Islands will remain in the hands of the people of colour” and that slaveholders south of the Potomac might one day have to “wade through” similarly “bloody scenes.” Fearing that the rebellion would inspire enslaved people in the United States, Jefferson warned that unless slaveholders and the U.S. government acted quickly to contain its influence, they would bring ruin upon themselves: “If something is not done, and done soon, we shall be the murderers of our own children.”

By 1802, Jefferson expressed the great fears of freedom-loving enslavers everywhere when he said that Haiti had already “given considerable impulse to the minds of the slaves” and that “a great disposition to insurgency has manifested itself among them.”

The hostility was not merely rhetorical. After becoming president, Jefferson imposed an economically devastating embargo on Haiti, and the United States refused to formally recognize Haitian independence until 1862. Haiti’s greatest crime, in the eyes of enslavers, was that it cracked open history and revealed another future waiting inside — a future in which Black people not only won their freedom but established their own sovereign nation.

This history undermines one of the most common defenses of the founders: that they were merely people of their time. The Haitian Revolution demonstrates that the brutality of slavery was not beyond the moral imagination of the 18th century. Enslaved people, abolitionists, Maroons, and Indigenous resisters understood it well. Haiti proved that a republic could be built on abolition rather than slavery. The question was never whether a broader vision of freedom was possible, but whether those who benefited from oppression would surrender power.

The fact of the Haitian Revolution also demolishes the claim that the United States led the world toward abolition. As PragerU — the far right propaganda organization that produces videos for children — asserts, “America was one of the first places on earth to outlaw slavery.” Or as one of their flagrantly inaccurate videos proclaimed, “White people were the first to formally put an end to slavery … white men led the world in putting an end to the abhorrent practice.”


If the next 250 years are to bring us closer to freedom than the last, we must reject the colonial lie that the founding of the United States marked the fulfillment of freedom.

The truth is the United States maintained slavery longer than every independent nation in the Americas except Brazil and Paraguay (with the Spanish colonies of Cuba and Puerto Rico abolishing slavery later as well). Black Haitians abolished slavery in 1804 — long before Britain, France, or the United States — and helped spread emancipation throughout the Americas, including through its support for Simón Bolívar’s anti-colonial struggles. It took the bloodiest war in U.S. history to finally destroy the institution of slavery in 1865 because so much of the nation’s political and economic system was built upon it.

The history of emancipation in the Americas reveals that the most expansive visions of freedom emerged not from white men with silver shoe buckles and powdered wigs, but from barefoot Black revolutionaries with natural curls and the scars from leg irons. At stake in our interpretation of the American Revolution is more than the reputation of the founders; it is the kind of society we believe is possible and the future we are struggling to create.

The Fight for the Next 250


If the next 250 years are to bring us closer to freedom than the last, we must reject the colonial lie that the founding of the United States marked the fulfillment of freedom. Yet rejecting that lie does not mean denying its significance.

The American Revolution did help demonstrate that kings could be overthrown and challenged hereditary rule. Its language of liberty was seized upon by women, laborers, abolitionists, and democratic radicals who insisted that freedom meant far more than independence from Britain. Take formerly enslaved Boston abolitionist Prince Hall, who seized upon the American Revolution’s own language to demand the abolition of slavery. In a 1777 petition to the Massachusetts legislature, Hall and seven other free Black men insisted that enslaved people possessed “a natural and unalienable right to that freedom” bestowed “equally on all mankind.” Thomas Paine was another such radical. His bestselling pamphlet Common Sense helped ignite the American Revolution, while his 1775 essay “African Slavery in America” denounced slavery as “an outrage against humanity” and called for its abolition. As Hall and Paine demonstrate, the American Revolution raised expectations for freedom that many of its most powerful leaders worked just as fiercely to keep from becoming universal.

To decolonize our understanding of 1776, however, is not simply to recover missing voices to the story of the American Revolution. It is to recognize that the most expansive traditions of freedom were not the product of a colonial elite, but instead lived in Indigenous resistance to conquest, in slave rebellions, in the Haitian Revolution, in abolitionism, in Reconstruction, and in the many social movements for collective liberation.

It is no accident that these traditions are being targeted today. Voting rights are under attack. State violence continues to be inflicted on Black communities. The United States continues to occupy Native land and refuses to honor treaties it signed with Indigenous nations. Educational gag orders and book bans seek to prevent people from learning about racism, colonialism, and inequality. As the United States celebrates its 250th birthday, it also celebrates an economic order that has produced both 44 million people living in poverty and, however briefly, the world’s first trillionaire, Elon Musk — whose fortune has been propelled in part by his investments in SpaceX, a company dedicated to colonizing Mars.


Once we understand that some of the deepest roots of authoritarianism lie within the colonial foundations of the republic itself, we can better grasp the scale of the transformation necessary to achieve genuine freedom.

Perhaps the deepest legacy of colonialism is not only the conquest of land, but also the conquest of political imagination itself. Two hundred and fifty years after 1776, we are still taught that the highest expression of freedom is expansion — ever more power, ever more wealth, ever more conquest. The colonial imagination of the U.S. elite can conceive of colonies on Mars more readily than justice on Earth. We are asked to believe that colonizing another planet is a realistic and noble ambition while guaranteeing housing, health care, education, and dignity for every person is dismissed as utopian fantasy.

More than 70 years ago, Aimé Césaire warned that “a civilization that chooses to close its eyes to its most crucial problems is a stricken civilization.” His warning remains our own. Once we understand that some of the deepest roots of authoritarianism lie within the colonial foundations of the republic itself, we can better grasp the scale of the transformation necessary to achieve genuine freedom. Decolonizing 1776 therefore requires more than rethinking the past; it requires reclaiming our capacity to imagine a different future that can guide the struggle for the next 250 years.

As Louverture declared during the Haitian Revolution: “I want Liberty and Equality to reign … I work to bring them into existence. Unite yourselves to us, brothers, and fight with us for the same cause.”

This article is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), and you are free to share and republish under the terms of the license.


Jesse Hagopian

Jesse Hagopian is a Seattle educator, the director of the Zinn Education Project’s Teaching for Black Lives Campaign, an editor for Rethinking Schools, and the author of the book, Teach Truth: The Struggle for Antiracist Education. You can follow him at IAmAnEducator.com, Instagram, Bluesky or Substack.


Op-Ed

Abortion Is as American as Apple Pie

Abortion has been legal in some or all parts of the country for more than 180 years of US history.

July 3, 2026

Abortion rights demonstrators gather in front of the U.S. Supreme Court on Independence Day in Washington, D.C., on July 4, 2022.STEFANI REYNOLDS / AFP via Getty Images


Truthout is a vital news source and a living history of political struggle. If you think our work is valuable, support us with a donation of any size.

It has been 250 years since the U.S. declared independence at one of the most tenuous moments in our history. We now stand at another tenuous moment. With an autocrat firmly in the White House, a sycophantic legislative branch, and a judiciary dominated by far right conservatives, it feels hard to celebrate the United States and its “democracy,” which hangs by a thin thread.

In the run-up to this anniversary, patriotic reflections have abounded, whitewashing U.S. history and seeking to erase its more sinister chapters. This pageantry has also erased any mention of a positive practice that has run throughout American history — the practice of safe abortion.

That’s right, abortion has been a part of American life since the very beginning. Despite attempts by far right extremists to eradicate it out of existence and erase its history in U.S. colonial and republican history, safe abortion has been a consistent throughline over the past 250 years and beyond.

Abortion access has been decimated in recent years. Before the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, Republican-dominated state legislatures successfully forced the closure of more than 160 abortion clinics from 2012 to 2019 alone. States like Alabama and Texas passed draconian early abortion bans, designed to force the Supreme Court to test and potentially end the constitutional right to an abortion. Finally, in June 2022, after Donald Trump successfully appointed three far right justices during his first term, Roe v. Wade fell in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.

Writing for the majority in the Dobbs ruling, Justice Samuel Alito argued that abortion is “entirely unknown in American law,” and the right to a legal abortion is “not deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and tradition.” In this interpretation, Alito, as he so often finds himself, is flat-out wrong.


Battle Over Medication Abortion Threatens to Revert US Back to 19th Century
SCOTUS has temporarily paused a Fifth Circuit Court ruling that echoed the Comstock Act of 1873, an anti-obscenity law. By Emma Cieslik , Truthout May 19, 2026


Abortion, a matter of individual liberty and personhood, isn’t just foundational based on the U.S. Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, which established the right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” It was also common, legal, and acceptable across communities and states throughout the colonial era and the first half-century of the U.S. republic.


Benjamin Franklin, the man who graces our $100 bill, didn’t just endorse safe abortion — he helped teach people how to do it themselves.

Colonial American life included abortion. It was so common and acceptable that the venerated Benjamin Franklin intentionally added information on how to perform an at-home abortion to a reference book he published, The American Instructor, reprinting within it recipes for herbal abortifacients and contraceptives from a 1734 medical handbook entitled Every Man His Own Doctor: The Poor Planter’s Physician. Benjamin Franklin, the man who graces our $100 bill, didn’t just endorse safe abortion — he helped teach people how to do it themselves.

In the late 18th century and early 19th century, abortion was legal and acceptable to the point of quickening, or when the pregnant person can feel the fetus move. This occurs during the second trimester of pregnancy, typically from 16-20 weeks into a pregnancy. With little in the way of scientific methods for determining how long a pregnancy was, quickening was the most common and often the only surefire way to determine whether a person was pregnant. And because abortions were largely performed by midwives or Indigenous healers — trusted, community-based experts and providers of care — abortion was typically kept in the realm of women’s work. This also helped enslaved women inhibit pregnancy and have abortions through their private use of cotton; enslavers knew little to nothing about the herbal remedies for unwanted pregnancy that were known among African and Indigenous healers. Enslaved women would chew cotton root and bark to resist childbearing following sexual assault by their enslavers. Abortion was a key means of asserting the little independence that enslaved women could claim.

The nation’s first abortion ban was not enacted until 1821, nearly a half-century after the U.S. declared independence, when Connecticut passed a law that banned the use of “poison” to cause a miscarriage. This could have been targeted at midwives and Indigenous healers who had, for centuries, used natural herbs to induce abortions. Regardless of its target, it marked the first time in U.S. history that abortion, in any way, had been criminalized.

Abortion bans began to spread not because of hostility to the procedure, but hostility to those who provided them. Midwives and Indigenous healers were the trusted experts, and as physicians began to establish themselves as the sole health care authorities, abortion came under scrutiny. With the establishment of the American Medical Association in 1847, physicians began a coordinated campaign to smear midwives and criminalize abortion, a procedure they were unable to perform. It took time, but by 1910, abortion was banned nationwide.


For as long as this country has been here, and even before its founding, people on this land have been providing and having safe abortions. That is a history worth celebrating.

However, that means that for more than 130 years after the nation’s founding, abortion was legal in some parts of the country. That’s more than half of our entire history. Add to that the years that abortion was protected nationwide by Roe v. Wade, from 1973 to 2022, and abortion has been legal in some or all parts of the country for more than 180 years of U.S. history. And yet Justice Alito and far right ideologues have erased this overwhelming part of the country’s history from our story.

It is essential that people in the U.S. embrace the real history and legacy of abortion, one that is foundational to realizing the much-lauded ideals of liberty and independence. If this milestone feels difficult to celebrate, remember this: For as long as this country has been here, and even before its founding, people on this land have been providing and having safe abortions. That is a history worth celebrating.


This article is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), and you are free to share and republish under the terms of the license.



Lauren Rankin

Lauren Rankin is the author of Bodies on the Line: At the Front Lines of the Fight to Protect Abortion in America, about the legacy of everyday volunteers on the fight for abortion right. Her writing has been featured at the Washington Post, The Cut, Fast Company, Slate, Teen Vogue, TIME, and many more. She spent six years as a clinic escort in New Jersey and is on the board of A is For, a reproductive rights advocacy nonprofit.




Saturday, July 04, 2026

'Simply staggering': Eyes widen as Jack Smith blows the whistle on 'American Gestapo'


Bennito L. Kelty
July 2, 2026 
RAW STORY


Former Special Counsel Jack Smith testifies before the House Judiciary Committee about his criminal investigation of U.S. President Donald Trump, on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. on Jan. 22, 2026. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

Former special counsel Jack Smith stunned online viewers by revealing how he prepared for prosecution by the Trump administration.

During an appearance on MS NOW, Smith spoke about hiring lawyers when he left his job as a federal prosecutor because he led two criminal investigations into Donald Trump, including for his efforts to overturn the 2020 election and the discovery of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago.

"I resigned as special counsel. I know I need to get a lawyer because the president has said he wants to jail me for doing my job," Jack Smith explained. "And so I retain lawyers, as soon as that becomes public, the president and the Justice Department target that law firm."

Online, viewers reacted to Smith's account of how his fears about the Trump administration came true. Veteran political scientist Norman Ornstein responded by describing the administration as "American Gestapo" in a post on X.

"The retribution is simply staggering," wrote civil rights lawyer Leslie Proll.

"We are in such high cotton here," reacted columnist Sophia A. Nelson. "And nobody in power who can stop him or his minions gives a d—."

"What a refreshing example of an honest, moral and non political American hero," architect and political activist Mike Kihn wrote about Jack Smith. "He will not give in to Trump's attempt to intimidate because, like a legal first responder, he will run to danger, personal or otherwise, not away from it."

"Now listen to the women who testified under oath that Trump r— them," posted journalist Robert Young Pelton. "Or listen to the testimony of those who spoke out from inside the Trump administration, like Miles Taylor."




Thursday, July 02, 2026

'Like a kid in a candy story': Trump appoints polarizing UFO scientist to top committee


Dr. Avi Loeb (Wiki Commons)
June 30, 2026 
ALTERNET


On Tuesday President Donald Trump appointed a famous and controversial Harvard theoretical physicist, cosmologist and astronomer to lead a group of scientists to investigate UFOs and whether they pose a national security threat.


Dr. Avi Loeb, who led Harvard’s astronomy department until 2020 and is widely respected for his research into black holes, was publicly tapped by the Trump administration on Tuesday, according to a report by the Associated Press. In 2022, Dr. Ethan Siegel, an astrophysicist and science writer who frequently criticized Loeb’s work, told this journalist for Salon that Loeb’s research into a mysterious space object that crashed into the ocean, ‘Oumuamua, was a “travesty.” By contrast, Loeb is very popular among the lay UFO fan community, and more than three dozen scientists co-authored a 2023 paper with him in the scientific publication Journal of Astronomical Instrumentation advocating his recommended methods for learning more about UFOs (unidentified flying objects) and UAPS (unidentified anomalous phenomena).

Speaking to AlterNet about his recent appointment, Loeb broke down how he learned about his appointment and what he believes it could mean for American politics.


“I was contacted by the office of the Director of National Intelligence and was asked to lead a council that will advise that office, the ODNI, the White House, the FBI, and the intelligence community, and of course the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office in the Pentagon, providing scientific advice to figure out the nature of unidentified anomalous phenomena, UAP,” Loeb told AlterNet. “And it looks like, if they were sure that they're dealing with human-made objects, they would have a classified memo exchange within the Pentagon or the intelligence agencies. But the fact that they're reaching out to the scientific community for help implies that they cannot really tell that some of these things are definitely human-made. And obviously, if they're human-made, there would be concern for national security, given that these objects are found near strategic assets.”

Because the Trump administration reached out to Loeb, he believes this means that “they really need advice.” He continued by explaining how he will apply the scientific method to his directives.


“First we have to review any information that they can share with us, with the council,” Loeb told AlterNet. “So I first assembled a team of 15 scientists who are exceptional, who have expertise in the physics of oceanography, statistics, and psychology, because these objects are interacting with humans. And we need all these aspects to understand the reported events. And we already submitted, since I assembled this team — and it's really an exceptional team, people who have a fresh mind with respect to the phenomena, I deliberately did not select people with an agenda or baggage regarding their views on the subject, because we need to provide scientific advice — and we already submitted a request for more than 50 items of information on specific incidents, and perhaps materials that the US government might have, and we should see what we hear in response.”

Because Loeb and his scientific team will only analyze unclassified information, they will be able to share their findings with the public, guaranteeing transparency about a subject that is often contentious. Coincidentally, he noted that he recently examined materials released on June 12th of this year, the same day as the Steven Spielberg movie “Disclosure Day,” which explicitly discusses how humanity could be brought together by the revelation that extraterrestrial life exists.

While Loeb admitted that he is not a fan of science fiction “because very often it violates the laws of physics,” he admitted that he feels the sense of wonder and hope captured by Spielberg’s motion picture.


“I feel like a kid in a candy store, in a way, as long as we receive sufficient information that is substantive — because the quality of our deliberations, our analysis, will reflect the quality of the data that we receive,” Loeb told AlterNet. “Science is guided by data. So what I say is, let's keep our eyes on the orbs, not on social media. It's not a matter of opinions — we just need the data, the evidence, just like a detective. So it's a great privilege for me to be involved in figuring things out.”

He added, “Of course, if we find a non-human-made technological object, the implications would be huge for our future. Because, first, we might learn about new science, new technologies. Second, it might imply that we're not at the top of the food chain, cosmologically speaking.

And my hope is that it'll be just like a knock on the door — when all family members in the house hear a knock on the door by a neighbor, all the loud arguments quiet down. So it'll change our priorities from conflicts, which you find every day in the news, to cooperation and response to this neighbor that we just found. It's sort of akin to finding a sibling in our family of intelligent civilizations. And for those people who have religious beliefs, they should not necessarily assume that God is a parent who can attend to only one child.”


Also like “Disclosure Day,” Loeb believes that the discovery of alien organisms could help humanity overcome the differences that sharply divide us. When asked about whether he has yet met President Trump (he said has not), he pivoted to that subject.

“The interesting aspect of this is that both Republican and Democrat members of the House and the Senate are working together on this subject of disclosure, and everyone is excited,” Loeb told AlterNet while laughing. “It's a reminder that science is better than politics. What do I mean by science is better than politics? It brings people together rather than separating them. So in an age where you have a lot of polarization as a result of social media, as a result of political upheaval and so forth, it's really refreshing to find a subject where everyone comes together.”

He then observed, “I was in the US Senate on Thursday for the UAP Disclosure Forum, and there were members of Congress there — you could see half of them were Republicans, half were Democrats, and they were all rooting for it. I find that very refreshing. And I think that is a reflection of what will happen if we do find that we are being visited, because then the mindset will change. People will stop arguing with each other on relatively mundane matters when they realize something cosmologically important — that we are not alone. And it'll change everything.”

Responding to a question from AlterNet about Loeb’s appointment, Siegel reiterated the disdain for Loeb he first expressed to this journalist four years ago.


“This is extremely typical and to be expected of the Trump Administration,” Siegel told AlterNet. “Legitimate science conducted by those who value truth, facts, and the common good of humanity has repeatedly been rejected by this Presidential Administration in favor of sensationalism, grift, and self-enrichment. On those metrics, there is no better qualified astronomer in the country than Avi Loeb, who will no doubt find himself surrounded by like-minded individuals like Dr. Oz, Lee Zeldin, and RFK Jr. in the quest to destroy what remains of the American scientific enterprise entirely, and to replace it with Lysenko-esque policies that will lead to both long-term and short-term harm to all.”

Unlike Siegel, Dr. Franck Marchis — the CEO of and an astronomer at the SETI Institute (Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence) — had a mixture of praise and criticism for Loeb.

“I also think Avi too often starts with the exciting explanation before the data are strong enough to support it,” Marchis told AlterNet. “That is not how science works. Science is not about making a bold assumption first and then looking for evidence to confirm it. Science is about collecting calibrated data, sharing it, letting other teams verify it, and being ready to change your mind.”

He added, “I also disagree with the idea that scientists are somehow hiding the truth. Most scientists, including my colleagues at the SETI Institute, I know are open, curious, imaginative, and very happy to be surprised. We just know that extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence. Check our recent discussion with Jill Tarter [a fellow SETI astronomer] for instance. This is exactly why we are building SkyMapper and SkySphere. The goal is to observe the sky all the time, from many places, with instruments that can produce time-stamped and verifiable data.”


















Religious groups are more prepared for aliens than you think


(RNS) — Rep. Tim Burchett of Tennessee told RNS that he sees evidence of UFOs in the Bible.
Actors Emily Blunt and Josh O'Connor in "Disclosure Day."  (Photo by Niko Tavernise / Universal Pictures and Amblin Entertainment)

(RNS) — Roughly a third of the way into Steven Spielberg’s new blockbuster film “Disclosure Day,” which focuses on the theoretical release of evidence documenting the existence of alien life, a conversation between the two main characters takes a sudden turn toward the spiritual.

One of the characters, who is Catholic, begins fretting over what the release of such information would mean for religious people, worrying many will “stop believing in God.” People who believe in “superior beings,” she says, will balk at news of “actual” superior beings — namely, technologically advanced aliens.

“People can’t handle both,” she concludes.

Her implicit question is left hanging, like a flying saucer hovering over the horizon, for most of the film: If intelligent life were to be discovered beyond Earth, would it shatter religious traditions?

But for all the profound implications of intelligent extraterrestrial life, experts say the possibility is far less bracing for many religious practitioners across the globe. In fact, scholars argue many major faith groups have not only been thinking about the prospect of aliens for some time, some have even outlined extensive theological answers to the question of extraterrestrial life — or even fully embraced the idea.

“That question is packed with drama, but it doesn’t correspond to the lived realities of people,” said Diana Pasulka, a religious studies professor at University of North Carolina Wilmington and author of the book “American Cosmic: UFOs, Religion, Technology.”

Diana Pasulka on a podcast in 2025. (Video screen grab)

Pasulka, who has also published a book focused on Catholic theology and history, noted that despite the framing of Spielberg’s film, Catholics in particular have long been interested in extraterrestrial life. The idea was already showing up in the 15th century, when a German Catholic cardinal insisted on the prospect of life on other stars. What’s more, she noted that multiple heads of the Vatican observatory have openly discussed the prospect of intelligent life elsewhere in the universe, with one saying he would baptize an alien “if she asks.”

When it comes to Catholics, she argued, aliens are simply “not a problem for them.”

Paul Gutjahr, a professor at Indiana University Bloomington and author of the forthcoming book “Faith in Space: American Religious Belief in Extraterrestrial Life,” said the situation is similar for other religious traditions. He noted that in the early 1700s, prominent Puritan clergyman Cotton Mather — a major figure in Colonial-era Massachusetts — was already opining about life on other worlds: Mather, Gutjahr explained, believed that God was “so capacious, so big” that life elsewhere was seemingly inevitable.

“It’s a sign of his greatness, his omnipotence, his ubiquity,” Gutjahr said. “There has to be life on all these stars.”

There was also a surge of discourse about aliens in the 20th century, particularly during the space race. In the 1960s, at least one rabbi wrote and extensive academic article on the topic, pointing to Jewish texts some argue have long pointed to the existence of other worlds.



Pasulka said religion also often comes up when she interviews people who claim to have seen Unidentified Flying Objects, or UFOs, also known as or UAPs.

“I’ve met Orthodox Jewish people who had those experiences, and they’re fascinated by the public conversation, but it doesn’t shake their faith,” she said.

(Image by Albert Antony/Unsplash/Creative Commons)

Pasulka added that many religious people interpret the prospect of aliens through their own religious beliefs. She said that includes Muslims she has met who say they have encountered UFOs, some of whom have described their experiences by referencing jinn — supernatural beings in Islam and some other religious traditions.

Others have claimed that UFOs may be evidence of demons or “preternatural” beings such as angels, Pasulka said. It’s a belief that has garnered attention in recent months, with Vice President JD Vance referencing the idea in a March interview. But it has also proven controversial: on June 3, Catholic authorities announced the removal of an exorcist from his post in the Archdiocese of Washington, with church leaders justifying the move by citing the monsignor’s claim that UFOs are demons. Cardinal Robert McElroy, who oversees the archdiocese, said such statements “gravely undermine” church teachings.

“That belief has been around since the early twentieth century,” Pasulka said, referring to the association of UFOs with demons.

But while the spectrum of views about religion and aliens is wide, belief in their existence is fairly common among religious Americans. A 2021 Pew Research poll found that while religious people in the U.S. are less likely than others to believe intelligent aliens exist on other planets, most Protestants and Catholics still said their best guess is that intelligent life is out there. Among the groups polled, the only outlier was white evangelicals, with only around 40% assuming intelligent life exists.

And even then, there are prominent exceptions. In Congress, among the more vocal believers in aliens and UFOs is Rep. Tim Burchett of Tennessee, who is an evangelical Christian. Speaking to Religion News Service in December 2024, he said he saw evidence of UFOs in a passage from the biblical book of Ezekiel that describes a “wheel within a wheel.”

Military pilots have encountered unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP). (Image courtesy DOD/U.S. Navy)

“He saw the wheel, and the wheel at that time was the most technologically advanced mechanized item that they had,” Burchett said, referring to the prophet Ezekiel. “He described basically what I would say (is) a traditional flying saucer.”



Debate over aliens can be especially intense within Christianity, as one of the big questions surrounding the prospect of intelligent life on other planets is what that revelation means for Jesus Christ. Christians typically see Jesus as having died for the forgiveness of human sins, which raises a question: If aliens are real, did Jesus die for their sins too? Or do aliens have their own alien version of Jesus who dies for their sins?

By at least the 1880s, some Christian groups already had their answers. Gutjahr noted that Ellen G. White, the co-founder of the Seventh-day Adventist tradition, wrote extensively about alien life at the time, including the question of what it means for salvation.

“One of her takes was the Earth is the only fallen planet,” said Gutjahr, referring to the Christian concept of humanity being sinful. “There is life elsewhere, but none of it fell — only Earth, so Earth was the only planet Jesus needed to die on to redeem humanity.”

According to White, Gutjahr said, the result is that life elsewhere in the universe observes Earth as a sort of “giant amphitheater” to witness “God’s saving action.”

Paul Gutjahr. (Photo courtesy of Indiana University)

He added: “We become like a visual aid to the entire universe that you know about God’s mercy.”

For his part, when Burchett was asked whether extraterrestrials would have their own alien versions of Jesus who died for their sins, he didn’t hesitate.

“The Bible’s pretty clear about there being one (Jesus),” he said. “Jesus died for them just like everybody else.”

As for Spielberg’s film, it ultimately showcases a more multifaceted vision for what the existence of aliens would mean for religion than its early lines would suggest. Gutjahr found that unsurprising: He recalled that when he first started his book on religion and aliens, he expected documented moments of religious discourse regarding the prospect of aliens to be few and far between.

But as he began researching, he said, he was suddenly overwhelmed by the sheer volume of examples.

“It turns out that the whole freaking world has thought about life on other planets,” Gutjahr said, laughing.