Saturday, November 22, 2025

Researchers stunned by wolf’s use of crab traps to feed


By AFP
November 20, 2025


The wolf dragged a green crab trap from the water to the shore to eat its bait in the Heiltsuk Indigenous territory of Canada - Copyright AFP/File TOM BRENNER

When a wild wolf encounters a potential meal, its instinct is usually to pounce — but researchers in western Canada have recorded at least one wolf taking a strikingly different approach.

The behavior captured on video in a remote part of British Columbia province shows a wolf completing multiple steps to retrieve a crab trap from deep water, sophisticated behavior researchers say marks “the first known potential tool use in wild wolves.”

“I couldn’t believe my eyes when we opened up that camera,” said Kyle Artelle, an environmental biologist at the State University of New York.

The discovery, detailed in the journal Ecology and Evolution, came partly by accident.

For several years, crab traps have been submerged in deep water in the area as part of a program to eradicate European green crabs, an invasive species.

Researchers, working in collaboration with the Heiltsuk First Nation, observed that the traps had mysteriously been dragged ashore and the bait removed.

Because the traps had been set in deep water and never exposed during low tide, they assumed a marine predator was involved.

They set up cameras in May 2024 and quickly solved the mystery.

A female wolf was recorded swimming out and dragging the buoy attached to a trap to shore.

She then pulled in the line attached to the trap. With the trap on shore, she chewed through its netting to access the bait.

It was a “carefully choreographed sequence,” the researchers said — not a wild predator aggressively pursuing food.

Artelle said it was “incredible behavior.”

“This wolf showed up and she just saw a float and she knew the float was attached to a trap. She knew how to pull the trap up. She knew if she pulled the trap onto the beach, she could get food… Really intelligent, really incredible, sophisticated behavior.”

The researchers, who included University of Victoria geography professor Paul Paquet, conceded they do not know how pervasive such levels of sophistication are among wild wolves.

They noted the wolf may have figured out how to get the trap on shore through trial-and-error, stressing that wolves in the remote area are less exposed to danger — including from humans — and therefore may have more time to experiment.



Scramble for Sudan’s resources fuels brutal civil war


By AFP
November 20, 2025


The Ariab company gold mine in the Sudanese desert, 800 kilometres northeast of the capital Khartoum, on October 3, 2011 - Copyright AFP Kazuhiro NOGI


Guillaume Lavallee and Celia Lebur

Behind the civil war tearing Sudan apart for more than two years lie the country’s natural riches, with foreign powers vying for control of its gold, fertile farmland and coastline.

Raging since April 2023, the conflict between the regular army and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) has escalated in recent weeks with the RSF’s capture of the major city of El-Fasher in Darfur at the end of October.

The army has been backed by Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran and Turkey, while the RSF relies on the patronage of the United Arab Emirates (UAE), according to regional experts.

Officially, all parties deny providing direct support to either side in a conflict which has killed tens of thousands of people, displaced nearly 12 million more and triggered one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises.

– Farmland, trade corridor –


The swathes of fertile farmland in Sudan, Africa’s third-largest country and a potential agricultural breadbasket, have whetted the appetite of the desert Gulf countries across the Red Sea.

Before the war, the UAE poured vast funds into Sudan, with Emirati businesses controlling tens of thousands of hectares of land and agricultural products making up a significant portion of Sudan’s pre-war exports to the country.

Prior to the 2019 coup that ousted President Omar el-Bashir, the Saudis and Qataris had also negotiated sometimes massive investments in agriculture in Sudan.

At the same time, “with Sudan’s coastline along the Red Sea, linking the Mediterranean to the Indian Ocean, there’s the prospect of influencing global maritime traffic, security and trade through (its) ports and naval bases,” said Atlantic Council researcher Alia Brahimi.

The Gulf states are far from the only powers with an interest in the strategic corridor, through which around 10 to 12 percent of goods shipped worldwide flows.

Besides the UAE, Russia and Turkey have also attempted to either secure port concessions or obtain a naval base in Sudan — though those negotiations have either failed or been put on ice.

– UAE and friends –


Soon after the conflict broke out, the army-backed government broke off relations with the UAE, accusing the Emiratis of siding with the RSF.

The army insists that the UAE has sent weapons to the paramilitaries and hired mercenaries sent via Chad, Libya, Kenya or Somalia to fight alongside them — claims denied by Abu Dhabi.

In May, Amnesty International published an investigation into photos of bomb debris it said showed the UAE had supplied RSF with Chinese weapons.

From the war’s outbreak, Amdjarass airport in eastern Chad has played a key role in keeping the RSF well-stocked, acting as a hub for cargo planes from the UAE flying over the border to the paramilitaries’ fiefdom in the Darfur region, according to UN reports.

More recently, separatist-controlled eastern Libya has supplanted Chad as the main Emirati supply route towards Sudan, said Emadeddin Badi, a researcher at the Global Initiative Against Transnational Organized Crime.

The region’s leader is Libyan military commander Khalifa Haftar, whose administration in Benghazi rivals the UN-recognised government in the north and has enjoyed UAE patronage since 2014.

Since June, “you have… well north of 200 military cargo flights that landed in eastern Libya between Benghazi and Kufra directly and presumably delivered weapons to the RSF,” said Badi.

A report by US-based watchdog The Sentry found that Haftar has “been a key fuel supplier to the RSF” throughout the war, because of his “deep loyalty to the Emirati government”. Those continuous supplies had allowed the RSF to move and conduct operations in Darfur, it said.

– Thirst for gold –


After the 2011 independence of South Sudan, home to pre-breakaway Sudan’s largest oil fields, gold became central to Sudan’s exports.

According to the central bank, Sudan produced just over 80 tonnes of gold per year before the war’s outbreak, exporting $2.85 billion worth of the precious metal in 2021.

But official gold production plummeted after the fighting broke out, with underground mining and trafficking networks taking over, according to a recent Chatham House study.

“Economic competition between the (Sudanese army) and the RSF in gold mining and trade was also a leading driver of the current war,” the research institute said.

Whether it comes from the regular Sudan army via Egypt or from the RSF via Chad, South Sudan or Libya and other African countries, much of the gold will then end up in Dubai.

According to the Swiss NGO Swissaid, which accuses the UAE of being “a global hub for gold of dubious origin”, the Gulf state imported 70 percent more gold from Sudan in 2024 — on top of the many tonnes purchased from neighbouring countries.

“Not only does gold bankroll fighter loyalty, the smuggling of missiles or the purchase of drones, it gives multiple stakeholders a clear economic interest in the continuation of the conflict,” said Brahimi, the Atlantic Council researcher.

– Drone aid –


Along with Iran, Turkey has supplied the Sudanese army with long-range drones, which “made a big difference” in the recapture of the capital Khartoum from the RSF in March, according to Badi.

But those drones, intended to either spy on or bomb the targets, have become less effective in recent months as the RSF beefed up its air defences, which is “part of the reason why they lost El-Fasher as well”, he added.

In turn, the army-backed government has accused the UAE of sending drones, notably Chinese-made ones, to the RSF.

On top of this, “the RSF has from the start of the conflict, recruited a contingent of foreign mercenaries,” said Thierry Vircoulon, an associate researcher at the French Institute of International Relations.

Russians, Syrians, Colombians and people from the Sahel countries are among the guns for hire on the RSF’s payroll, Vircoulon added.

burs-gl-cl/sbk/pma/db/kjm

GOP Blocks Bill to Ban Arms Sales to UAE Until It Stops Arming Sudan Genocidaires


Darfur’s governor said this week that 27,000 people were killed in the days following RSF’s el-Fasher siege last month.

November 21, 2025

Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) arrives for a closed briefing for members of the Senate Armed Services Committee at the U.S. Capitol on July 29, 2025 in Washington, D.C.. The subject of the briefing was U.S. strikes on Iran conducted on June 22, 2025.
Win McNamee / Getty Images

On Thursday, Senate Republican Joni Ernst (Iowa) blocked an attempt to pass a bill aimed at using U.S.’s leverage to bring an end to the genocide in Sudan by suspending arms shipments to the United Arab Emirates.

Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Maryland) called for unanimous consent on his bill, the Stand Up for Sudan Act, to bar the U.S. from selling or issuing a license for weapons until the White House certifies that the UAE is “not providing materiel support to the Rapid Support Forces in Sudan.”

The move comes three weeks after the Rapid Support Forces, known as the RSF, took over the Sudanese military’s last major outpost in North Darfur, the capital city of el-Fasher. The paramilitary group swept through the city searching for civilians to kill, conducting field executions and invading a hospital, killing everyone inside.

UN officials estimate that 2,000 people were killed, though other estimates have been far higher, with Darfur’s governor Minni Arko Minnawi saying that 27,000 people were killed in three days following the siege. Pools of blood and piles of bodies were so vast that they could be seen from space, researchers found. RSF forces then moved to dig mass graves to dump the bodies in, Yale University experts said, based on satellite imagery.

“They turned the city into a killing field, going house to house rounding up people to torture and murder because of their ethnicity,” said Van Hollen in remarks on the Senate floor.



US Urged to End Arms Sales to UAE as It Backs Genocidal Paramilitary in Sudan
The US has provided the UAE with billions of dollars’ worth of weapons, even as it’s funneled weapons into Sudan. By Sharon Zhang , Truthout October 30, 2025


“This could have been prevented. We had warning, and we could have done more to stop it — and we can still do more now to stop the ongoing genocide,” the senator went on. “We have not effectively used our leverage and influence to end the war. Because throughout this conflict, we, the United States, have continued to send weapons to the United Arab Emirates, the UAE, who we know are arming the murderous RSF.”

Ernst objected to the bill. In remarks, Ernst suggested that the potential threat from Iran that would spawn out of suspending weapons to the UAE was more pressing than the ongoing genocide in Sudan.

“Applying a blanket ban on the export of U.S. defense articles to the UAE leaves our partners in the region unequipped to deter any act of aggression and sends a message of weakness to our adversaries, like Iran and its terrorist proxies,” Enrst said, calling instead for diplomatic solutions for “stabilizing Sudan.”

Stories out of Sudan have been horrific. Survivors of the el-Fasher takeover say that they are being hunted down by the RSF after fleeing the city — with tens of thousands fleeing, but only a small fraction of them making it to the next town over, humanitarian officials have reported.

UN Emergency Relief Coordinator Tom Fletcher said this week that Sudan is “now the epicenter of human suffering in the world,” and an “absolute horror show” as a result of the siege.

Van Hollen condemned Ernst’s move as “shameful.” “If the UAE is telling us the truth when they say that they’re not sending any of their weapons to the RSF to help fuel the genocide in Sudan, why do my colleagues protest so loudly against this measure?” he asked, pointing out that arms transfers wouldn’t be affected if the UAE were not actually backing the RSF.

“I’m very disappointed that our colleagues cannot join together in a bipartisan manner to just use a little bit of American influence to try to stop a genocide in Darfur,” he said.

Ernst’s objection comes despite widespread consensus that the RSF is committing genocide in Sudan. The State Department, under the Biden administration, declared a genocide in January. The Biden administration also confirmed that the UAE is supplying weapons to the RSF, a finding that has been supported by numerous reports and evidence from weapons found within the country.

The Trump administration has also called for withholding arms in attempts to cut off the RSF.

“Something needs to be done to cut off the weapons and the support that the RSF is getting as they continue with their advances,” said Secretary of State Marco Rubio last week, per Reuters.

Rubio suggested that this would include the UAE. “We know who the parties are that are involved … that’s why they’re part of the Quad, along with other countries involved,” he said, likely referring to the U.S., Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE.

President Donald Trump has also signaled interest in ending the slaughter.

“Tremendous atrocities are taking place in Sudan. It has become the most violent place on Earth and, likewise, the single biggest Humanitarian Crisis,” Trump said in a post on Truth Social on Wednesday, after his meeting with Saudi Arabia Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. “We will work with Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and other Middle Eastern partners to get these atrocities to end, while at the same time stabilizing Sudan.”

Trump ignores the fact that his administration has put millions of peoples’ lives at risk with his dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which last year provided 44 percent of Sudan’s humanitarian aid budget.

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.
World’s biggest nuclear plant edges closer to restart


By AFP
November 21, 2025


Local Japanese authorities have approved the restart of the world's biggest nuclear power facility, the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Nuclear Power Plant, for the first time since the 2011 Fukushima disaster - Copyright JIJI Press/AFP STR

Japanese local authorities approved the restart of the world’s biggest nuclear plant on Friday for the first time since the 2011 Fukushima disaster.

Hideyo Hanazumi, governor of Niigata province where the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant is located, told a news conference he “would approve” the resumption, which will need final permission by Japan’s nuclear regulator.

The plant was taken offline when Japan pulled the plug on nuclear power after a colossal earthquake and tsunami sent three reactors at the Fukushima atomic plant into meltdown in 2011.

However, the resource-poor nation now wants to revive atomic energy to reduce its heavy dependence on fossil fuels, achieve carbon neutrality by 2050 and meet growing energy needs from artificial intelligence.

Fourteen reactors, mostly in western and southern regions, have resumed operation since the post-Fukushima shutdown after strict safety standards were imposed.

The 400-hectare (1,000-acre) Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant on the Sea of Japan coast facing the Korean peninsula would be the first restart for Fukushima operator Tepco since the disaster.

The huge facility in central Japan has been fitted out with a 15-metre (50-foot) wall in case of tsunamis, new power backup systems on higher ground and other measures.

Before the 2011 quake and tsunami, which killed around 18,000 people, nuclear power generated about a third of Japan’s electricity, with fossil fuels contributing most of the rest.

Power company Kansai Electric said in July it was taking an initial step towards building the nation’s first new nuclear reactor since the Fukushima disaster.

Japan is the world’s fifth-largest single-country emitter of carbon dioxide, after China, the United States, India and Russia, and is heavily dependent on imported fossil fuels.

Nearly 70 percent of Japan’s power needs in 2023 were met by power plants burning coal, gas and oil — a figure Tokyo wants to slash to 30-40 percent over the next 15 years.

Almost all these fossil fuels must be imported, at a cost of around $500 million per day.

Japan passed a law in June allowing nuclear reactors to operate beyond 60 years to compensate for stoppages caused by “unforeseeable circumstances”.

It aims to make renewables its top power source by 2040.

Under the plan, nuclear power will account for around 20 percent of Japan’s energy supply by 2040 — up from 5.6 percent in 2022.
Spain court orders Meta to compensate media for ‘unfair competition’


By AFP
November 20, 2025


Facebook owner Meta is cutting 600 jobs in artificial intelligence - Copyright AFP/File Benjamin LEGENDRE

Daniel SILVA

A Spanish court on Thursday ordered Facebook owner Meta to pay local media outlets 479 million euros ($552 million) in compensation for “unfair competition” in breach of EU data protection rules.

The potentially landmark decision was centred on European Union law which obliges companies to obtain users’ consent to create lucrative personalised advertising from their data.

Spain’s main AMI media association filed a lawsuit in 2023 against the US tech giant, which also owns Instagram and WhatsApp, accusing it of creating “unfair competition” by “systematically” breaking the law between May 2018 and July 2023.

A Madrid commercial court, which heard the case last month, ruled in favour of AMI, saying Meta had gained a “significant competitive advantage” in its digital advertising sales by violating the data protection rules.

The “enormous amount of data that Meta possesses” and processes means there must be “rigorous checks”, and “competition law plays a fundamental role”, the court explained in its ruling.

AMI said in a statement that the decision “marks a turning point in the defence of professional journalism, competitive balance in the digital advertising market and fundamental rights in a democratic society”.



Meta ‘systematically’ broke advertising rules, a Spanish court found 
– Copyright AFP/File Frederic J. BROWN

“Meta competed unfairly for years, violating the privacy of millions of users and seriously harming media that did follow the law. It is a victory for democracy, accurate information and fair competition,” said AMI director general Irene Lanzaco.

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) welcomed a decision that “opens the way for an efficient offensive against the unfair competition of platforms in Europe with regards to news media”.

“The economic collapse of the media, exacerbated by the non-regulation of platforms, constitutes one of the main threats to the right to reliable information and press freedom,” said Vincent Berthier, head of the tech desk at RSF.

Spain’s far-left deputy prime minister Yolanda Diaz also hailed the ruling, saying “the big US tech companies are not above our sovereignty”.

“We have to continue making progress on a European technological model that boosts our economy and guarantees labour rights,” she wrote on social media platform Bluesky.

– Meta to appeal –

Meta said it would appeal what it called “a baseless claim that lacks any evidence of alleged harm and wilfully ignores how the online advertising industry works”.

“Meta complies with all applicable laws, and has provided clear choices, transparent information and given users a range of tools to control their experience on our services,” a company spokesperson said in a statement.

Meta representatives told the trial that user data mattered less than algorithms to generate personalised advertising.

AMI had been seeking 551 million euros in compensation. The compensation and a further 60 million euros in interest are to be paid out to 87 media outlets.

Media groups represented by AMI include Prisa, owner of Spain’s top-selling daily El Pais; Vocento, which publishes the conservative newspaper ABC; and Unidad Editorial, whose titles include daily El Mundo and sports newspaper Marca.

Spanish radio and television stations have launched a separate lawsuit against Meta for the same reasons, seeking 160 million euros in damages.

Socialist Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez on Wednesday said Spain would investigate Meta for allegedly violating millions of users’ privacy, summoning the company to answer before parliament.
‘This is nuts!’: Internet explodes over Marjorie Taylor Greene's sudden resignation


Erik De La Garza
November 21, 2025
RAW STORY


Marjorie Taylor Greene. (Photo credit: Gage Skidmore)


The internet erupted Friday after Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene announced she will resign from Congress effective Jan. 5 following escalating tensions with President Donald Trump and increasingly frequent breaks from the Republican Party.

The resignation followed weeks of public infighting with the MAGA leader and a sudden attempt by Greene to revamp her public image and apologize for past remarks. Online, the announcement was widely described as both shocking and bizarre – and in many corners, a cause for celebration.

“Good riddance and goodbye,” MAGA influencer Laura Loomer wrote in one of a series of seething social media posts targeting the Georgia Republican. “I hate when women pretend like they are done so you will chase them and beg them to stay. It’s such female behavior. MTG wants Trump to chase her. When someone leaves, open the door for them and then change the locks so they can’t return. Goodbye!”

Loomer later called Greene “a terrible person," told her followers that she gets “a lot of joy in watching my enemies fall," and predicted Greene would run for president in 2028.

RealClearNews White House reporter Philip Melanchthon Wegmann, wrote: “Trump runs his most loyal ally, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, out of office the same day he bears hugs a democratic socialist, Mayor-elect Zoran Mamdani.”

Independent journalist Aaron Rupar piled on: “Trump feuding with Marjorie Taylor Greene but being in love with Zohran Mamdani was not on my November 2025 bingo card.”

Writer Charlotte Clymer voiced confusion felt across the political spectrum: “I don't pretend to know exactly what's going on with Marjorie Taylor Greene's resignation, but I sure…know we're not getting the full story. None of this makes sense.” In a follow-up post, she called the move “bizarre” and part of “one of the weirdest days of this era.”

Clymer also noted a detail others flagged: Greene’s resignation date may be timed to qualify her for a congressional pension.

“A House Member has to win three consecutive terms and serve at least five years,” the veteran and progressive activist added. “January 3rd marks her fifth year in Congress. She can't start collecting until she's 62, but that does qualify her for a pension. From what I can tell, that's about $15k annually in today's dollars.”

Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta (D-PA) joked: “Trump glazed Mamdani so hard Marjorie Taylor Greene resigned from Congress.” While former federal prosecutor Ron Filipkowski wrote: “So the new version of MAGA is that Marjorie Taylor Greene is a traitor, Rand Paul is a RINO, and Zohran Mamdani is great. Got it.”

Writer and social media commentator Brian Krassenstein perhaps summed it up best with his X post: “This is nuts!”


GOP's sinister flirtation points to something very dark for America

Robert Reich
November 21, 2025
RAW STORY


Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon 
REUTERS/Ken Cedeno

Today I want to talk to you about a difficult subject. Let me start with the Trump regime’s ongoing accusations of antisemitism to extort billions of dollars from American universities — while simultaneously disregarding antisemitism within its own ranks.


Exhibit A is Harmeet Dhillon, now Trump’s assistant attorney general for civil rights. For the last 10 months, Dhillon has condemned prestigious universities for allowing what she deems “antisemitic” protests — and withheld research funding unless they agree to explicit measures supposedly to prevent antisemitism.

I was a Dartmouth trustee in the 1980s when its president, James O. Freedman, who was Jewish, endured the antisemitic barbs of an ascendant right-wing student group that included Dhillon, along with Laura Ingraham and Dinesh D’Souza.

In 1988, as editor of The Dartmouth Review, Dhillon published a column depicting Freedman as Adolf Hitler under the headline “Ein Reich, Ein Volk, Ein Freedmann” — a play on a Nazi slogan, “One Empire, One People, One Leader,” but substituting and misspelling Freedman’s name for “Fuhrer.”

Using the analogy of Nazi Germany and the Holocaust, the column satirically described how “Der Freedmann” and his associates rid the campus of conservatives. The column referred to the “‘Final Solution’ of the Conservative Problem” and to “survivors” of the Dartmouth “holocaust” and described Dartmouth conservatives being “deported in cattle cars in the night.”


A drawing on the cover of the following issue also depicted Freedman, who had been critical of The Review, as Hitler.


I saw up close how much Dhillon’s publication hurt Freedman. As a Jew, he not only felt personally attacked but also worried about the effects of Dhillon’s publication on Jewish students at Dartmouth.

The student newspaper The Dartmouth took The Review to task, claiming that it “is anti-semitic; its impact rings through this community today and will remain long after its publishers have completed their stints in Hanover.”

Several faculty members wrote to outside advisers of The Review, asking them to reconsider allowing their names to be associated with the publication. The regional office of the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith, in Boston, condemned it.


It is possible, of course, that Dhillon’s undergraduate escapade into antisemitism caused her such remorse that she subsequently experienced a conversion of sorts and became committed to ridding universities of similar acts of bigotry.

But nothing in her history after Dartmouth or her official biography suggests such a conversion.

The most probable explanation for her turnaround is simple ambition. Dhillon grabbed the opportunity to become assistant attorney general in charge of civil rights and agreed to use the charge of antisemitism as a weapon to carry out the Trump regime’s war on prestigious universities — not because they’re hotbeds of antisemitism, but because the authoritarian right considers them hotbeds of leftist ideology.


As JD Vance said in a 2021 speech titled ‘The Universities are the Enemy,’ “we have to honestly and aggressively attack the universities in this country.”

But the problem of antisemitism within the ranks of Trump Republicans runs much deeper than Dhillon.

Exhibit B is Kevin Roberts — president of the Heritage Foundation, creator of Trump’s Project 2025, and one of Trump’s most loyal supporters.


Roberts recently came to the defense of Tucker Carlson after Carlson’s friendly interview with Nick Fuentes, an ardent fan of Adolf Hitler, in which Carlson declined to challenge Fuentes’s bigoted beliefs or his remark about problems with “organized Jewry in America.”

Here’s what Roberts said:
“Tucker Carlson … always will be a close friend of the Heritage Foundation. The venomous coalition attacking him are sowing division. Conservatives should feel no obligation to reflexively support any foreign government, no matter how loud the pressure becomes from the globalist class or from their mouthpieces in Washington.”


To whom was Roberts referring when he spoke of “the venomous coalition” and “the globalist class”? These words are closely associated with antisemitism and are similar to those Fuentes has used.


Roberts went on to say:
“The Heritage Foundation didn’t become the intellectual backbone of the conservative movement by canceling our own people or policing the consciences of Christians, and we won’t start doing that now. My loyalty as a Christian and as an American is to Christ first and to America.”


But aren’t Jews as loyal to America as Christians? Again, Roberts seemed to be toying with an antisemitic trope, implicitly questioning the loyalty of American Jews to America.

When asked about the controversy, Trump refrained from criticizing Fuentes (with whom he has dined at Mar-a-Lago) and praised Carlson for having “said good things about me over the years” — adding “you can’t tell him who to interview” and “if he wants to interview Nick Fuentes — I don’t know much about him — but if he wants to do it, get the word out. People have to decide.”

Fuentes liked Trump’s response, posting “Thank you Mr. President!” on social media.

Fuentes’s influence is surely one test of whether Trump conservatives are willing to accommodate bigots in their coalition.

But the problem of antisemitism in the ranks of Trump Republicans runs deeper than one antisemitic crackpot. Indeed, it runs deeper than the apparent hypocrisies of Kevin Roberts or Harmeet Dhillon.

It touches on a central question that everyone inside the regime and all who support it must grapple with: When does Trump authoritarianism bleed into fascism — along with the antisemitism that has historically fueled it?


Robert Reich was a professor of public policy at Berkeley and former secretary of labor. His writings can be found at https://robertreich.substack.com/.

Robert Reich's new memoir, Coming Up Short, can be found wherever you buy books. You can also support local bookstores nationally by ordering the book at bookshop.org.



Op-Ed

Trump’s BBC Lawsuit Seeks to Bully International Newsrooms Into Servility

MAGA’s vision of journalism isn’t even remotely compatible with democracy.

November 18, 2025

The BBC headquarters as seen in central London, UK, on November 10, 2025.
Vuk Valcic / SOPA Images / LightRocket via Getty Images

This past week, Donald Trump went global with his wrecking ball to the concept of a free press. For years, he has used lawsuits to intimidate major newspapers and broadcasters, in the process getting major outlets such as CBS and ABC to repeatedly bend the knee. Under his watch, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has reportedly pushed broadcasters to fire personalities, such as Jimmy Kimmel and Stephen Colbert, whom he disapproves of and has threatened to withhold broadcast licenses and to stymie lucrative mergers should those broadcasters not fall into line. He has, numerous times, attempted to sue The New York Times for libel — his ambitions falling short not for lack of trying, but because the libel laws in the U.S., giving the benefit of the doubt to news organizations in their coverage of public figures, make it extremely difficult for a public figure to successfully claim damages. Good faith errors do not, generally, result in a libel verdict against a news organization.

Now, however, Trump believes that he has been handed a gift horse by the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) which recently admitted to using a spliced video of Trump’s infamous January 6, 2021 speech urging his supporters to march to the U.S. Capitol. That video was included in a documentary produced by an independent production company but aired by the broadcaster a week before the 2024 election. The footage was edited in a way that made it look and sound as if Trump had explicitly ordered those marchers to conduct their assault, rather than simply riling up the mob to such a fever pitch that, once they had made the trek down Pennsylvania Avenue, they then took matters into their own hands: looting the Capitol building while engaging in a bloody struggle to find and punish members of Congress and Vice President Mike Pence in an attempt to steal the 2020 election.

Given how inflammatory Trump’s actual speech and actions on that day were — and, as the Congressional hearings into the January 6 mob and numerous investigations have shown, given Trump’s fixation on overturning the results of that election and preventing the peaceful transfer of power — it seems rather strange that the documentary makers felt the need to go the extra mile to make Trump’s words sound even worse than they were. But they did, splicing together a 12-second clip from separate sections of the speech, that made its way into the one-hour documentary, and the BBC is now dealing with the fallout.

A wide-ranging internal BBC inquiry, which had been launched months before issues surfaced around the video, after allegations by journalists with ties to the Conservative Party that the organization was politically biased, identified problems with the footage. It also came out swinging from the right against some of the institution’s coverage of transgender issues and of Israel’s brutal assault on Gaza.

Some of the conclusions from that inquiry were then leaked to the right-wing Telegraph newspaper in the U.K., which has long viewed the public broadcaster as ineffably liberal. Instead of trying to deal with the allegations head on, the BBC then made the inexplicable, ham-handed decision of refusing to comment on leaked materials. And, after more than a week of growing discontent within the organization, Director General Tim Davie — the top dog of the entire BBC — and Deborah Turness, the head of the news division, abruptly resigned.

Related Story

Trump Threatens Comcast After Seth Meyers Makes Jokes About Him
The president-elect claims to support free speech but frequently refers to the media as “enemies” of the US. By Chris Walker , Truthout  January 15, 2025


Rather than accepting an apology from the BBC, and a promise not to rebroadcast the documentary, Trump appears determined to use the organization’s disarray to his own maximum financial and political advantage. After Davie and Turness resigned, he posted on social media that they were gone “because they were caught ‘doctoring’ my very good (PERFECT!) speech of January 6th.” That Trumpian interpretation is, to say the least, a vast distortion of the historical record regarding the content and quality of the heinous speech that preceded the mob’s assault on the Capitol building later in the day.

Regardless, Trump’s lawyers have threatened a $1 billion lawsuit, which, if the BBC ever had to pay up, would largely crush the world’s oldest news broadcasting organization. On November 14, Trump upped the ante even more, saying he would likely be suing for somewhere in the range of $5 billion. This year, the BBC’s revenue from all sources — including the money raised by the license fee charged to all television owners in the United Kingdom — is estimated to be just under £6 billion (about $8 billion). Trump is, in other words, floating a settlement equal to well over half of the entire annual revenue stream for the corporation. That isn’t a routine lawsuit; it’s the actions of a conqueror demanding a bone-crushing tribute.

If there is a silver lining to this ugliness, it is that the president is, apparently, planning to sue in his home state of Florida, which, like other states in the U.S. as well as the federal system — despite conservatives’ best efforts in recent years to undermine the first amendment protections codified in the famous New York Times vs. Sullivan ruling — still has defamation laws in place that tend toward protecting the media from frivolous lawsuits by public personalities and heavily protect the media’s right to free speech and controversial opinion. In Britain, where the libel laws make it far easier to succeed against news organizations, but where damages awarded tend to be orders of magnitude smaller than those handed out by U.S. juries, a statute of limitations would have required him to file the case against the BBC by the end of 2024. Since he didn’t do so, he is almost certainly going to have to file in the U.S. instead.

The BBC has expressed confidence that it would win such a court case — since the documentary wasn’t aired in the U.S.; since, given Trump’s election win, the film did not appear to do him material harm; and because the spliced quotes were, they argue, intended to provide highlights from a longer speech rather than to intentionally mislead the audience.

Unlike major U.S. broadcasters that have offered up large cash settlements to make their lawsuits disappear, the corporation has made no moves to financially placate Trump. Given the differences in how public broadcasters are funded compared to the near-bottomless wallets of large private media conglomerates, the broadcaster likely has no choice here; caving financially would throw the BBC into a death spiral. And that, ultimately, may be Trump’s real goal here. MAGA doesn’t want a free, critical press; rather, it craves supine coverage that neither criticizes nor investigates its leaders’ actions, and a largely neutralized first amendment that would offer only scant protection against libel suits. That vision of journalism isn’t even remotely compatible with democracy, and that is what will be on the line if and when Trump’s ghastly lawsuit is litigated in Florida’s courts.

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.


Sasha Abramsky

Sasha Abramsky is a freelance journalist and a part-time lecturer at the University of California at Davis. Abramsky’s latest book, American Carnage: How Trump, Musk, and DOGE Butchered the US Government, is available for pre-order now and will be released in January. His work has appeared in numerous publications, including The Nation, The Atlantic Monthly, New York Magazine, The Village Voice and Rolling Stone. He also writes a weekly political column. Originally from England, with a bachelor’s in politics, philosophy and economics from Oxford University and a master’s degree from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism, he now lives in Sacramento, California.
Thailand’s last hunter-gatherers seek land rights

ByAFP
November 21, 2025


The Maniq in Thailand are demanding ownership rights to land they say has effectively been theirs for generations - Copyright Courtesy of Luke Duggleby/AFP Luke Duggleby


Nathaphob Sungkate

Deep in a Thai forest a young man sprints through the undergrowth, blowpipe in hand, before pumping a poisoned dart at a monkey.

The group closes in, shouting out to each other, and the animal falls to the ground.

The kill was in keeping with centuries of tradition for the Maniq, one of Thailand’s smallest ethnic minorities, who were the country’s last hunter-gatherers.

But the lures of a settled home, among them education and healthcare, mean their way of life is changing.

The Maniq are now demanding ownership rights to land they say has effectively been theirs for generations, but is today protected by Thai law.

As the youngest of the Maniq hunters, still learning the ways of the jungle, Dan Rakpabon, 18, carried the kill back to the thap –- seven leaf-covered bamboo shelters in a clearing in Pa Bon.

Singeing the animal over a fire to burn off the fur, he carefully butchered it and divided the meat among the community, with the largest families receiving the biggest shares.

“I feel happy every time we hunt. This is our food,” he said.

But wildlife is protected in Thailand’s conservation zones, making the kill illegal.

It is a predicament faced by many Indigenous people globally, under pressure to abandon traditional lifestyles and fighting for rights to land they have long called home.

In many cases, they are effectively the victims of environmental conservation efforts, despite studies showing the low-intensity forest use associated with Indigenous peoples often protects biodiversity.

It is a point some officials in Thailand recognise.

“We are not concerned about the Maniq’s traditional way of life,” said Chutiphong Phonwat, head of the Khao Banthat Wildlife Sanctuary.

“They do not destroy the forest.”



– ‘I can write my name’ –



For centuries the Maniq, part of the wider Negrito ethnic lineage, lived as hunter-gatherers, roaming the rainforests of the Malay Peninsula, moving with the seasons in search of food.

Just 415 Maniq remain, according to the Indigenous Peoples’ Foundation for Education and Environment, scattered across southern Thailand’s Banthat mountains.

Most have abandoned the nomad lifestyle of their ancestors and settled on the edges of forests, drawn by access to education for their children and healthcare, as in Pa Bon, in Phattalung province.

The change comes with challenges: living in the modern world requires cash, so men work on rubber plantations for $3-8 a day, while women make pandanus leaf bags to sell.

Some have smartphones and the community’s children live in a village 10 kilometres (six miles) away during the week for school.

“One day, my child came to me and said, ‘Today I can write my name.’ Just hearing that made me proud,” said mother Jeab Rakpabon, who weaves for a living.

Hunting has become an occasional activity rather than a source of daily sustenance.

“I grew up following my father into the forest to hunt and forage,” said Tom Rakpabon, leader of the 40-strong community — all of whom were given the same surname by officials when they obtained identity cards.

“Now we have to buy rice, meat and vegetables from the market,” he added.

Caught between their old traditions and modern lives, the Maniq and their supporters want ownership rights in perpetuity over protected forest to provide them with settled livelihoods.

“We want proper houses, land to grow our own vegetables,” said Jeab adding that, “leaf shelters like this are only temporary”.



– Title deed –



The forest is now classified as a conservation zone where Thai law bars private landownership and puts strict limits on resource use.

“Not only the Maniq people, but everyone must obey the law equally,” said Chalerm Phummai, director of Thailand’s Wildlife Conservation Office.

Under Thai regulations, established Indigenous communities on protected land can request 20-year usage permits — and several have been issued.

But critics say the process reduces Indigenous groups to temporary occupants of their ancestral forests.

One Maniq community have lived for more than 30 years in Plai Khlong Tong in Trang province, establishing their own rubber plantations and permanent but sparsely-furnished wooden and concrete houses among the forest’s towering resin trees.

But it is not easy.

“It’s frustrating to live like this,” said Thawatchai Paksi, whose mother’s marriage to a Thai rubber-grower was the catalyst for the transition. “We need permission for almost everything — even cutting down a tree or building a house.”

Living without title deeds leaves the community in a precarious position, explained local leader Sakda Paksi.

“If the Maniq had land, we could stand on our own feet.”



– Hard lessons –



The situation has created real hardship for some.

Some Maniq in Satun province have been reduced to begging because they cannot find work.

“If nobody gives us food, it’s difficult,” said their leader Jin Sri Thung Wa.

The group travels several kilometres from their forest shelter to beg on a roadside.

“There’s nothing left in the forest here, and no work we can do,” she said.

The Maniq also face discrimination.

Kritsada Inchalerm, a Thai who stopped to give them food and money, said they reminded him of a film, Sagai United –- a title that incorporated a Malay word for slave used as a derogatory term for the minority.

“The Maniq are not savages,” said Tao Khai, leader of another community. “We are people who live in the forest.”

The owners of a resort and rubber plantation allow his group to live on their property, but they have no fields to cultivate and survive on daily wage work in the area, supplemented by hunting.

Every morning a plantation staffer drives Duan Srimanang, 13, and dozens of other children from several local Maniq communities to school.

She has been put into second grade according to her abilities and learns alongside seven-year-olds, but can now write her name and is learning to read.

“When I grow up, I want to have a job and earn money so I can take care of my mother and make her comfortable and happy,” she said.



– Land security –



A new Thai law in September introduced “protected ethnic areas” for Indigenous groups, with a more flexible regulatory regime.

“The Maniq will not be granted land ownership, but they will receive rights to use the land in accordance with their traditional way of life,” said anthropologist Apinan Thammasena.

“Land security does not necessarily have to come in the form of ownership. It can come in the form of guaranteed, permanent rights to use the land,” he added.

But MP Laofang Bundidterdsakul, who helped draft the bill and is from the Hmong hill tribe, said existing environmental rules were left in place, potentially undermining the new measure’s impact.

“Land rights remain largely unchanged,” he said. “For example, land matters remain under the same forestry law. Road construction, access to electricity and water still require permission from the Forestry Department.”

At the rubber plantation, where Duan and her friends did their homework under the glow of headtorches, Tao Khai returned home from a hunt.

“This land was given to us only temporarily,” he said. “The Maniq want a home where we can live forever.”

This story is a collaboration between AFP and HaRDstories, with support from the Pulitzer Center.
CDC Rewrites Vaccine-Autism Page, Echoing Kennedy’s Anti-Science Views

"Today is a tragic day for public health," one health expert said in response to the changes.



November 21, 2025


The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has altered its webpage on vaccine safety and autism to reflect the false anti-vaccine talking points peddled by Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

The new language contradicts decades of evidence-based research that has found zero link between childhood vaccinations and autism.

The original version of the page had included a “key points” header stating that, “Studies have shown that there is no link between receiving vaccines and developing autism spectrum disorder (ASD),” and that, “No links have been found between any vaccine ingredients and ASD.”

The claim ‘vaccines do not cause autism’ is not an evidence-based claim because studies have not ruled out the possibility that infant vaccines cause autism.

Related Story

I Am One of 20 Million in US With Long COVID. RFK Pulled the Rug From Under Us.
RFK Jr. has shut down the Office of Long COVID Research and Practice, gutted funding, and derailed trials and studies. By Jesse Hagopian , Truthout October 20, 2025


The site also claims that “studies supporting a link have been ignored by health authorities.”

Notably, the site keeps a section from the old version in place, including a header that reads, “Vaccines do not cause autism.” However, an asterisk placed next to that text indicates that their reason for keeping the header is to placate the concerns of Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy (Louisiana), a lawmaker with a medical degree who was the deciding vote during Kennedy’s confirmation hearings. Cassidy had expressed qualms about supporting the HHS nominee, but Kennedy assured him during that time that he would not change vaccine policy.

“The header ‘Vaccines do not cause autism’ has not been removed due to an agreement with the chair of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee that it would remain on the CDC website,” the new version of the site states.

Cassidy issued a short response to the website change. Coupling his message with false anti-abortion language, the senator stated yesterday that he was “concerned” that “energy is going into promoting disproven claims about vaccines.”

Kennedy has held anti-vaccination views for many years, and his peddling of falsehoods regarding public health is widely documented.

Since beginning his tenure as head of HHS, Kennedy has indicated little understanding of how infectious diseases actually work, and how vaccines play a role in preventing their spread. For example, in February, at the start of a measles endemic in the U.S., Kennedy claimed that outbreaks of the disease happen “every year,” a statement that ignores how, just two decades ago, measles was considered effectively eradicated in the U.S. (a distinction it is now very close to losing).

Kennedy also falsely — and dangerously — claimed that measles vaccines are less effective than direct exposure to the virus when it comes to developing immunity. As of this week, more than 1,750 cases of measles have been reported in the U.S., within 45 separate outbreaks. That’s a sharp increase from the year before, when only 285 measles cases were identified in just 16 outbreaks.

Kennedy has taken other anti-vax positions at the CDC. This past summer, he dismissed the entire Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), a panel that advises health agencies on matters relating to vaccines. Kennedy then filled those vacancies with individuals with anti-vax views.

Several health experts denounced the CDC for the changes to its website.

One critic, Alison Singer, president and co-founder of the Autism Science Foundation, noted that the new language on the site flouts the principles of the scientific method.

“You can’t do a scientific study to show that something does not cause something else,” Singer said. “All we can do in the scientific community is point to the preponderance of the evidence, the number of studies, the fact that the studies are so conclusive.”

The Infectious Diseases Society of America also condemned the changes, writing:

This change is deeply troubling because it is false and lacks transparency. There is no scientific rationale for CDC to change its long-standing assertion that there is no link between vaccines and autism. This change is not driven by science but by politics and will only serve to increase mistrust in science and medicine.

“Extensive and rigorous studies consistently show that vaccines are safe and effective at protecting against serious illness. Vaccination is essential to protect individuals and communities from preventable diseases, making it a fundamental element of public health,” American Medical Association trustee Sandra Adamson Fryhofer said. “The AMA is deeply concerned that perpetuating misleading claims on vaccines will lead to further confusion, distrust, and ultimately, dangerous consequences for individuals and public health.”

Michael T. Osterholm, director of the University of Minnesota’s Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy, similarly panned the CDC’s decision to peddle falsehoods on vaccines.

“Today is a tragic day for public health,” Osterholm said. “Ideology has replaced science as the means for addressing life-saving research and best practices that save lives.”




US health agency edits website to reflect anti-vax views


Amid the site rewrite, one header remained: “Vaccines do not cause Autism.”


By AFP
November 20, 2025


Image: — © AFP/File Frederic J. BROWN


Charlotte Causit with Maggy Donaldson in New York

The US health agency has updated its official website to reflect the vaccine skepticism of a senior Trump official, a move that medical and public health experts widely condemned.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) late Wednesday revised its site with language that undermines its previous, scientifically grounded position that immunizations do not cause the developmental disability autism.

Years of research demonstrate that there is no causal link between vaccinations and autism or other neurodevelopmental disorders.

But Robert F. Kennedy Jr, the nation’s health chief, has long voiced anti-vaccine rhetoric and inaccurate claims connecting the two.

The CDC webpage on vaccines and autism had previously stated that studies show “no link between receiving vaccines and developing autism spectrum disorder,” citing a body of high-quality research including a 2013 study from the agency itself.

That text reflects medical and scientific consensus, including guidance from the World Health Organization.

But the changes rebuke it. The website now asserts that “the claim ‘vaccines do not cause autism’ is not an evidence-based claim because studies have not ruled out the possibility that infant vaccines cause autism.”

The revised language accuses health authorities of having “ignored” research supporting a link and said the US health department “has launched a comprehensive assessment of the causes of autism.”

A purported connection between the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine and autism stems from a flawed study published in 1998, which was retracted for including falsified data. Its results have not been replicated and are refuted by subsequent research.

Amid the site rewrite, one header remained: “Vaccines do not cause Autism.”




US Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has been a vocal anti-vaccine advocate for years – Copyright AFP/File TOM BRENNER

A footnote explains that the line wasn’t cut due to an agreement Kennedy had made with the Republican Bill Cassidy, a medical doctor and senator from the southern state of Louisiana who chairs the Senate committee focused on health.

Cassidy on Thursday insisted on vaccine safety and efficacy in a post on X. He did not name Kennedy, but said “any statement to the contrary is wrong, irresponsible, and actively makes Americans sicker.”

“What parents need to hear right now is vaccines for measles, polio, hepatitis B and other childhood diseases are safe and effective and will not cause autism,” he said.

– ‘Do not trust this agency’ –

The CDC website edits were met with anger and fear by career scientists and other public health figures who have spent years combatting such false information, including from within the agency.

“Staff are very worried and upset about everything happening surrounding vaccines,” a CDC union member, who asked not to be named for fear of retribution, told AFP.

Helen Tager-Flusberg, director of Boston University’s Center for Autism Research Excellence, called the changes “terribly disturbing.”

“I feel like we are going back to the Dark Ages. I feel like we are undermining science by tying it to people’s political agendas,” the psychologist told AFP.

“We’re going to see a significant increase in these childhood diseases.”

Demetre Daskalakis — the former director of the agency’s arm focused on immunization and respiratory diseases, who resigned earlier this year in protest — was unequivocal: “DO NOT TRUST THIS AGENCY.”

And Susan Kressly, president of American Academy of Pediatrics, said “we call on the CDC to stop wasting government resources to amplify false claims that sow doubt in one of the best tools we have to keep children healthy and thriving: routine immunizations.”

Pointing to “40 high-quality studies,” she said that “the conclusion is clear and unambiguous: There’s no link between vaccines and autism.”

The anti-vaccine advocacy group Children’s Health Defense meanwhile praised the revisions. The organization’s CEO Mary Holland said “thank you, Bobby” on X.

Kennedy is the founder and former chairman of the nonprofit.


Fake AI Trump audio clip on ‘Epstein files’ gains traction

By AFP
November 21, 2025


Trump-Epstein disinformation is roiling social media - Copyright AFP/File Jim WATSON


Anuj CHOPRA

Left-leaning social media users have amplified an AI-generated audio clip purporting to show President Donald Trump screaming at US officials to block the release of documents related to disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, researchers said Friday.

In recent weeks, renewed public furor over the so-called Epstein files has consumed US politics, spurring a showdown between lawmakers and Trump, a former friend of the late convicted sex offender.

“Not releasing the Epstein files,” a Trump-like synthetic voice said in a widely circulated clip that social media posts falsely claimed showed the president berating his cabinet.

“If I go down, I will bring all of you down with me.”

The clip was amplified by posts on platforms such as Instagram and TikTok, many of which garnered millions of views and thousands of comments.

Disinformation watchdog NewsGuard said the audio was “an AI-generated fake.”

The clip — apparently first posted by a liberal TikTok user — came from a video showing signs it was generated with Sora, OpenAI’s text-to-video model, NewsGuard said.

The clip was then shared in multiple other videos that lacked Sora’s watermarks, thereby “obscuring its AI origins,” the watchdog said.

Liberal social media users have also wrongly quoted White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt as saying that recently released Epstein emails do not refer to the president.

“It is not President Trump who is in the Epstein emails. It is another person with the same name,” read a post on X that credited the remark to Leavitt and amassed more than four million views.

The false claim also gained traction on Instagram.

Responding on one such post on X insisting that Leavitt had made the remark, a White House account on the platform said: “No … she didn’t. You are a weapons grade moron.”

The left-wing warping of reality underscores how disinformation is peddled across both sides of the political aisle in a hyperpolarized country. The falsehoods stir information chaos on increasingly unmoderated social media sites that has made it harder for ordinary users to decipher fact from fiction.

Trump has insisted he has “nothing to do” with his one-time close friend Epstein.

The Republican president signed into law on Wednesday a bill requiring his administration to release government documents on Epstein.

Trump had for months resisted the release of the files but stunned Washington this week after reversing course and ensuring that the legislation sailed through Congress.

Insiders warn that even with the president’s signature, his administration could lean on redactions, procedural delays or lingering federal investigations to keep explosive details out of the public eye.

Epstein, a wealthy financier, moved in elite circles for years, cultivating close ties with business tycoons, politicians, academics and celebrities to whom he was accused of trafficking girls and young women for sex.

Epstein’s 2019 arrest over a trafficking charge fueled a storm of outrage and pressure for a full accounting of his network and finances.

burs-ac/sla

Trump's Epstein fiasco makes sense if you remember this insanity at the heart of MAGA

John Stoehr
November 21, 2025
ALTERNET

 
   Supporters of Donald Trump raise MAGA hats. REUTERS/Brian Snyder

In July, I said the president triggered a crisis of faith in MAGA. It had been revealed that the US Department of Justice would not release files concerning the late financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. With that decision, Donald Trump made his most zealous followers choose between him and their imaginary enemies. Since they were never going to stop believing in evil super-Jews conspiring against “real Americans,” he forced them to rethink their trust in him

On Monday, we saw concrete consequences of that crisis.

Trump spent last week pressuring two key House Republicans, Nancy Mace and Lauren Boebert, to vote against a measure leading to the release of the Epstein files. He summoned them to the Situation Room, along with the US attorney general and FBI director. (This was after Speaker Mike Johnson adjourned the House for nearly two months during the shutdown and refused to swear in Arizona’s Adelita Grijalva. She had vowed to be the 218th vote on the Epstein discharge petition.)

Then Friday, Trump attacked the Republican who is probably the most MAGA of all MAGA, Georgia Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene. He said he was taking back “his support and endorsement.” He called her a “lunatic.” He offered “complete and unyielding support” for anyone who would primary her. In another post, he called Greene a “RINO,” who had “betrayed the entire Republican Party when she turned Left.”

Greene did not back down from calling for the release of the Epstein files.

“It really makes you wonder what is in those files and who and what country is putting so much pressure on him,” she said. “I forgive him and I will pray for him to return to his original MAGA promises.”

Then Trump retreated. Early Monday, he said, “House Republicans should vote to release the Epstein files. We have nothing to hide.”

If that’s true, he could order the Justice Department to release the files.

Some are saying Greene is coming to her senses. Others are saying there’s a place for her among the Democrats.

Let’s not get ahead of ourselves.

Greene isn’t standing up to Trump. She’s exploiting the crisis of faith that he has created. She’s taking command of the story that brought him to power. She doesn’t care about sex-crime victims. She cares about her position in the GOP after Trump is gone. I think she’s been quietly sussing out possibilities for a while. Monday’s head-on collision with Trump was the quiet part getting loud.

None of this week’s news makes sense if you forget about QAnon.


In that conspiracy theory, Epstein is part of a shadowy group of Jewish super-elites who control the government, corporations and the media. It is so powerful it can commit any crime — including the most heinous, pedophilia and cannibalism — and get away with it, all while conspiring with allies, foreign and domestic, to destroy America.

In that story, Trump is the hero, “the chosen one” who is supposed to save America from enemies so evil that he must do whatever it takes to defeat them, even if that means committing massive crimes himself. Thanks to that story, Trump could broadcast during his campaign all the crimes he was going to commit once reelected (ie, vengeance), and it didn’t matter to the most conspiracy-addled faction of the GOP.

Anything was acceptable as long as Trump defeated the Great Evil.

On the release of the Epstein files, this supposed pedo-cabal (“Democratic politicians, Hollywood actors, high-ranking government officials, business tycoons and medical experts,” per Wikipedia) was supposed to face immediate justice: mass arrests and summary executions.

They called it “The Storm.”


But last spring, US Attorney General Pam Bondi determined that the president’s name appeared too many times in the government’s case against Jeffrey Epstein to risk releasing the files. (Bloomberg reported in August that 1,000 FBI agents reviewed 100,000 documents in order to redact his name. Bondi made her determination after that.)

Trump agreed with Bondi, and once he did, he took his most zealous followers for granted. He failed to consider what he was asking them to do: choose between believing in him, and the heroic role he played in the cosmic story about the fate of America, and believing in the existence of deadly threats to America by imaginary Jewish enemies.

Put another way, he forced them to choose between him and their anti-semitism and they were never going to let go of antisemitism. (QAnon is a 21st-century update of very, very old hatred of Jews.)

In doing so, Trump introduced doubts that have deepened with every revelation about his ties to Epstein. Instead of being the exception to every rule, he seems to be the rule itself. Instead of being the solution to the problem, he seems to be part of it — or worse. Before long, it could be understood that he exploited those who truly fear a phony pedo-cabal to hide his own involvement in a real pedo-cabal.

As long as Trump was a victim — as long as he represented the heroic victimhood of “the nation” — he could be forgiven for anything, even crimes that ultimately hurt his followers. Without the authority that comes with being the exception to the rule, however, efforts to blame his enemies are falling on deaf ears. He has repeatedly tried accusing the Democrats of making up the “Epstein hoax,” as he did with the “Russia hoax,” yet followers don’t look to him. They look to Republicans like Greene who still seem loyal to the One True Faith.

So not only has Trump undermined MAGA's trust in him. He made room for rivals who have been seeking moments of weakness to exploit. Greene presented herself as a true believer who is saddened by the former hero’s fall from grace: “I forgive him and I will pray for him to return to his original MAGA promises.” But she also dared him to reclaim what she had taken: “It really makes you wonder what is in those files and who and what country is putting pressure on him.”

It wouldn’t take much for a figure like Greene to expand the conspiracy theory about a pedo-cabal to include a Russian dictator who is blackmailing the president into covering up a pedo-cabal.

Trump seems to know it. That’s why he balked.

His base is fractured. His rivals are emboldened. His opponents are united. The result was Wednesday's House vote in which members voted 427-1 to force the Justice Department to release the Epstein files.

How this ends is anyone’s guess. But if this ends badly, it will be due to Trump’s hubris — in taking for granted the conspiracy theory that brought him back to power.