Friday, May 08, 2026

Leaked CIA Analysis Shows Trump and Hegseth ‘Lied Through Their Teeth’ About Iran War, Says Murphy

White House officials “just straight up fabricated shit,” said the Democratic senator from Connecticut.



US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth testifies before the House Armed Services Committee on April 29, 2026 in Washington, DC.
(Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

Jessica Corbett
May 07, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

Just hours before the Trump administration conducted what it claimed were “self-defense strikes” against “Iranian military facilities,” The Washington Post reported Thursday that the Central Intelligence Agency concluded that “Iran can survive the US naval blockade for at least three to four months before facing more severe economic hardship.”

Citing four unnamed officials familiar with the analysis, the newspaper highlighted that “the CIA analysis might even be underestimating Iran’s economic resilience if Tehran is able to smuggle oil via overland routes.”

Militarily, “Iran retains about 75% of its prewar inventories of mobile launchers and about 70% of its prewar stockpiles of missiles,” the Post added. “There is evidence that the regime has been able to recover and reopen almost all of its underground storage facilities, repair some damaged missiles, and even assemble some new missiles that were nearly complete when the war began.”



Drop Site News’ Murtaza Hussain responded that if this assessment along with a previous one from the Center for Strategic and International Studies about “remaining US munitions and interceptor capacity are even approximately correct, it goes a long way to explaining why Trump seems so eager to end the war whereas the Iranians have either dug in or escalated their negotiating positions. The missile math of continuing the conflict would be much more favorable to the Iranians, especially if the war continued for a significant time.”

“Prior to the war, interceptor capacity compared to the size of the Iranian missile stockpile seemed like the most rationally incontrovertible reason to avoid fighting such a conflict, even for people who found it politically desirable,” he added. “This also might explain why the US and Israel pivoted towards the end to threatening countervalue strikes against civilian targets if attempts to destroy the underground missile cities by air were ineffective.”

The Post’s reporting came one month into a fragile ceasefire and starkly contrasts the recent framing of conditions in Iran from President Donald Trump and others in his administration, including Defense Secretary Pete Hesgeth.

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) responded to the Post’s reporting by quoting Hegseth, who said in March that “never before has a modern, capable military, which Iran used to have, been so quickly destroyed and made combat ineffective.”

Murphy declared: “They lied through their teeth. Just straight up fabricated shit.”



Still, White House spokesperson Anna Kelly stuck to the administration’s framing in a Thursday statement to the Post.

“During Operation Epic Fury, Iran was crushed militarily,” Kelly said. “Now, they are being strangled economically by Operation Economic Fury and losing $500 million per day thanks to the United States military’s successful blockade of Iranian ports. The Iranian regime knows full well their current reality is not sustainable, and President Trump holds all the cards as negotiators work to make a deal.”

Meanwhile, some experts were unsurprised that the CIA privately delivered a “sober” assessment contradicting the administration’s public commentary on the conflict—which it now claims is no longer an active “war,” seemingly to dodge a key congressional deadline.

“Nice to know that a confidential CIA analysis is confirming what close observers of the Iranian economy have been saying publicly for weeks! Intelligent policymakers rely on intelligence. But Trump jeopardized diplomacy by instigating a blockade that was never going to work,” said Esfandyar Batmanghelidj, an adjunct professor at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies in Europe and founder of the think tank Bourse & Bazaar Foundation.

Sharing the reporting on social media, Jennifer Kavanagh, a senior fellow and director of military analysis at the think tank Defense Priorities, wrote: “As I argued a week into the U.S. blockade, Iran can hold out for months without economic collapse. The costs for the US and the world are increasingly unsustainable, however.”

Earlier this week, Stephen Semler, a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy, estimated that the US government spent $71.8 billion on the Iran War during its first 60 days, an average of $1.2 billion daily. The International Monetary Fund warned last month that the conflict could cause a global recession.

Last Friday, Trump responded to the War Powers Act’s 60-day deadline by claiming to Congress that his war—which already violated US and international law—had been “terminated.” The White House said at the time that no fire had been exchanged since April 7, when a ceasefire deal was reached just hours after the president issued a genocidal threat against the Iranian people.

However, on Thursday evening, United States Central Command announced that Iran “launched multiple missiles, drones, and small boats” at American warships. CENTCOM added that it “eliminated inbound threats and targeted Iranian military facilities responsible for attacking US forces, including missile and drone launch sites; command and control locations; and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance nodes.”


Trump’s Iran War Will Cost US Families $1,753 Extra at the Pump This Year: Analysis

“Instead of swindling taxpayers to pay for his gilded ballroom and finding new ways to give CEO billionaires tax breaks, Trump should focus on ending his war on Iran,” said Sen. Ed Markey.




Gas prices at more than $6 a gallon are displayed at a Mobil station on May 4, 2026 in Los Angeles, California.
(Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

Brad Reed
May 07, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

An updated analysis released Thursday finds that President Donald Trump’s illegal war with Iran will cost Americans significant money at the gas pump this year.

The report, released by the office of Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), projects that if gas prices remain at their current level of over $4.50 per gallon, it will cost a US drivers an extra $73.06 per month—or $876 per year—to fill up their cars compared to what they were paying before Trump attacked Iran in late February.

For a family with two cars, this would mean forking over an extra $1,753 for gas this year.


The analysis also notes this projection is “likely an underestimate” since “many analysts predict gasoline prices will rise higher without a permanent end to the war.”

The report highlights how Trump’s Iran war is likely to bolster Big Oil’s profits, which had been steadily declining since 2022, when they exploded in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Climate and renewable energy organizations have repeatedly called on the US Congress to pass a windfall tax on Big Oil profits for the duration of the war, which they said could be used to provide relief to consumers and invest in clean energy infrastructure.

In a statement accompanying the report, Markey blasted Trump for both the Iran war and his broader economic mismanagement.

“American small businesses and families cannot afford Trump’s crushing bump at the pump—all thanks to the President’s illegal war on Iran,” said Markey, the top Democrat on the Senate Small Business Committee. “Americans have to figure out how to make ends meet while Trump slashes affordable healthcare, dismantles clean energy networks, and doubles down on his tariff taxes.”

“Instead of swindling taxpayers to pay for his gilded ballroom and finding new ways to give CEO billionaires tax breaks,” Markey added, “Trump should focus on ending his war on Iran and ending the pain on Main Street.”

Expert Puts True Cost of Trump’s Iran War at $72 Billion—Nearly 3 Times Higher Than Pentagon Said


“The $25 billion war cost given by Pentagon Secretary Hegseth and acting Comptroller Hurst before Congress was a lie. It was a denial of the Iran war’s spiraling costs.”



Acting Pentagon Comptroller Jules Hurst and Pentagon Secretary Pete Hegseth testify during a Senate hearing on April 30, 2026.
(Photo by Graeme Sloan/Getty Images)

Jake Johnson
May 06, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

The Pentagon’s official estimate of the direct financial cost of the US war on Iran is a nearly threefold undercount of the actual price tag of the war, according to an expert analysis published Wednesday.

Stephen Semler, a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy, produced the new cost estimate for the Popular Information newsletter. Accounting for armament use, troop deployments, and other factors, Semler estimated that the US government spent $71.8 billion on the Iran war over the course of 60 days—an average of $1.2 billion per day.



“Like the estimates from Pentagon leadership and unnamed officials, this figure refers only to direct war costs—near-term expenses for military operations, munitions, and the like—and not indirect costs, which include broader economic impacts, interest on the national debt, and longer-term expenses like veterans’ care,” explained Semler, who argued that the Pentagon’s $25 billion cost estimate suffers from “incomplete accounting of damaged or destroyed military assets, the exclusion of costs outside the department (including billions of dollars in State Department-funded military aid to Israel), and a flawed method for tracking munition expenditures.”




Semler, who detailed his methodology in a separate post, accused top Pentagon officials of attempting to deliberately mislead lawmakers and the American public about the true cost of the war, which is historically unpopular.

“The $25 billion war cost given by Pentagon Secretary [Pete] Hegseth and acting Comptroller [Jules] Hurst before Congress was a lie,” Semler wrote Wednesday. “It was a denial of the Iran war’s spiraling costs, one of several foreseen consequences of the Trump administration’s decision to go to war. The closing of the Strait of Hormuz is another predictable consequence.”

Semler’s analysis was released days after unnamed Trump administration officials told CBS News that they believe the actual US cost of the Iran war is roughly double the estimate offered under oath by Pentagon leaders.

“US officials familiar with internal assessments suggested the war’s price tag is closer to $50 billion so far,” CBS News reported. “Much of the gap is accounted for by munitions that have been used and need to be replaced. For instance, the Pentagon has lost 24 MQ-9 Reaper drones—sophisticated unmanned aircraft that can cost $30 million or more apiece—underscoring how quickly the financial toll has mounted. Taken together, the higher estimate reflects not only the tempo of operations but also the often unseen costs of attrition, as material lost in the field reshapes the ledger.”

Ongoing efforts to calculate the costs of US-Israeli war—which has killed thousands, displaced millions, sent global energy markets into chaos, and sparked fears of a worldwide food crisis—come as Trump continues to threaten Iran with an even more aggressive bombing campaign, which would send the conflict’s price tag soaring further.

In a Truth Social post early Wednesday, Trump said that if Iran doesn’t agree to US terms to end the war, “the bombing starts, and it will be, sadly, at a much higher level and intensity than it was before.”
Trump Rebuked for Bypassing Congress With $8.6 Billion Weapons Sale to Israel and Gulf Allies


“The vaults are open and the arms trade is thriving before the war and after it,” said one Nobel Peace Prize laureate.



Common Dreams Staff
May 03, 2026

As the US voting public continues to express its discontent over the disastrous war of choice against Iran that US President Donald Trump launched just over two months ago, fresh criticism followed after weekend reporting revealed the administration skirted congressional review to approve an $8.6 billion weapons deal with the United Arab Emirates and other allies in the Middle East.

Announced Friday night quietly by the US State Department, as the New York Times reports, the “sales would entail the transfer of rockets to Israel, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates and air-defense equipment to Qatar and Kuwait.”



According to the Times:
Under the terms of the deal with Qatar, the Gulf country would pay more than $4 billion for American-made Patriot missile interceptors — global stockpiles of which have dwindled during the war with Iran.

Israel, the Emirates and Qatar would receive an Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System, which fires laser-guided rockets. Kuwait also purchased an advanced aerial defense system for about $2.5 billion.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio expedited the deals under an emergency provision allowing the “immediate sale” of the weapons, the State Department said, bypassing standard congressional review and prompting criticism from Democratic lawmakers. This is the third time the second Trump administration has invoked an emergency authorization during the Iran war to bypass Congress on arms sales.

“No comment,” said Mohamed ElBaradei, a Nobel Peace Prize winner and the former head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), in an eye-rolling response to the news on social media.

After a commenter suggested that “America opened the door to war for [the countries taking part in the sale] so they would open their treasuries and the Israeli-American arms trade would boom after a slump,” ElBaradei seemed to agree.

“The vaults are open, and the arms trade is thriving before the war and after it,” he said.

Kenneth Roth, former executive director of Human Rights Watch and now a visiting professor at Princeton University, said: “Trump is bypassing Congress to fast-track arms sales to the United Arab Emirates, apparently without receiving any promise that the UAE would stop arming the genocidal Rapid Support Forces (RSF) in Sudan.”

The RSF has been accused of atrocities in the ongoing Sudanese civil war, and the backing it has received from the US, with the UAE as its closely allied proxy, has been the source of outrage and criticism.
Trump Agriculture Chief Claims ‘Golden Age’ Is Coming. US Farmers Say They’re ‘Barely, Barely Getting By’

“These rising costs are hitting us at the wrong time here,” said one farmer of the high prices of diesel and fertilizer.


Farmer Alan Montag loads soybeans into his planter on May 6, 2026 near West Bend, Iowa.
(Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

Brad Reed
May 07, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

US Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins on Thursday claimed American farmers are heading toward a “golden age,” even as President Donald Trump’s policies are increasingly driving them into financial distress.

During an appearance on Fox Business, Rollins discussed Trump’s upcoming meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping to talk trade between the two countries.

“For our farmers and our ranchers, for farm security, for food security, making sure our farmers can prosper as they move into what will hopefully be a golden age under this president, these trade deals are very important,” Rollins said. “But the president also understands that the over-reliance on a country like China has massive implications from a national security standpoint.”



American farmers took a big financial hit in 2025 after China cut off purchases of US soybeans in retaliation for Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs.

The problems facing US farmers have gotten even worse since Trump illegally launched a war with Iran in late February, as the prices of fertilizer and diesel soared after Iran shut down the Strait of Hormuz.

According to a Monday report from Wisconsin Public Radio, there is little immediate relief coming for US farmers even if Trump ends his war with Iran and the Strait of Hormuz immediately reopens.

Shawn Arita, associate director of the Agricultural Risk Policy Center, told WPR that price projections show fertilizer prices will likely remain high throughout the rest of the year.

In fact, even if the strait were to reopen soon, the center projects that fertilizer prices will remain 13% higher than they were before the war started through all of next year and into 2028.

“We have seen that even in the most optimistic scenario,” Arita explained, “we’re going to see elevated prices on the nitrogen as well as phosphate side that continues on through the fall and moving into 2027.”

Bill Knudson, agriculture economist at Michigan State University, told WPR that it will also take time to get shipping back to normal should the strait reopen soon because there are still an estimated 2,000 vessels stranded there that will take time to clear out.

“You’re not going to see a return to normal for several months, even if the Strait of Hormuz was opened relatively quickly,” Knudson explained, “because you’ve got to get all those ships out of there.”

The Guardian on Thursday published interviews with US farmers who explained how the combined hit of the president’s trade wars and the Iran war have hurt them financially.

New York-based farmer Blake Gendebien told The Guardian that “these rising costs are hitting us at the wrong time here,” as the price of offroad diesel has nearly doubled since last April.

“It’s a massive cost for farmers that are already barely, barely getting by,” Gendebien explained.

North Carolina-based cotton farmer Julius Tillery told The Guardian that he’s had to overhaul his planting process this year to minimize his use of diesel fuel.

“I’m very careful on my planting dates,” said Tillery, who also revealed he’s been eating more ramen noodles to save money. “I can’t afford to plant crops in bad climates, so the production window becomes smaller.”
‘4.3 Million Off SNAP and Counting!’ Trump Official Celebrates Mass Loss of Food Aid

“Kicking 4.3 million Americans off of SNAP is not a flex, it’s a failure,” said Democratic Rep. Shontel Brown.



US Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins testifies during a Senate Appropriations Subcommittee hearing on April 22, 2026 in Washington, DC.
(Photo by Heather Diehl/Getty Images)


Brad Reed
May 04, 2026

US Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins on Saturday openly celebrated millions of people losing their food assistance, which experts say is a direct result of the Republicans’ 2025 budget law that slashed funding to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program by $186 billion over a decade.

In a social media post pointing to preliminary data from her department, Rollins boasted that there were now “4.3 million off SNAP and counting!”



“Under President Trump, Americans are getting back to work!” Rollins added. “Healthy employment numbers mean less reliance on government programs. Leaving benefits for those who truly need them. America is back in business!”

In reality, the unemployment rate is currently higher than when President Donald Trump took office in February 2025 and there has been almost no growth in net employment since the president announced his “Liberation Day” tariffs just over a year ago.

The Associated Press on Monday published a fact check of Rollins’ claims about SNAP, finding that Republicans’ cuts to the program were far more likely responsible for the historic drops in enrollment than any purported improvement in the economy.

Caitlin Caspi, an associate professor at the University of Connecticut who studies food insecurity, told the AP that current job creation numbers are nowhere near strong enough to explain the massive number of Americans losing access to SNAP.

“We’re not seeing a linear kind of drop-off,” Caspi said. “We are not seeing, if you look at the unemployment rates, things that might be an indicator that a strong economy was driving this change. We don’t see, for example, a pattern of decline in unemployment that would match the pattern of decline in SNAP participation.”

Caspi’s analysis was echoed by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP), which last week published an analysis finding that “economic conditions haven’t been improving as the number of people receiving SNAP has plummeted in recent months, representing the sharpest decline in decades.”

Instead, CBPP pointed the finger squarely at the GOP’s budget law as the biggest culprit behind the decline.

“The deep cuts to federal funding for SNAP are shifting significant new costs to states,” wrote CBPP, noting that the GOP law “also dramatically expands SNAP’s already harsh and ineffective provision taking away people’s benefits for not meeting the work requirement.”

Rollins’ claims about SNAP enrollment were also criticized by Rep. Shontel Brown (D-Ohio), who expressed disgust that the administration is bragging about kicking people off food assistance during a time when the price of groceries has continued to rise thanks in part to Trump’s own policies.

“Better economy where?” Brown wrote on social media in response to Rollins. “You mean the one where Americans paid $300 more on their groceries to compensate for Trump’s tariffs? Kicking 4.3 million Americans off of SNAP is not a flex, it’s a failure. That’s why I’ve authored legislation to reverse the Trump SNAP cuts.”
900 Health Facilities Shutting Down or at Risk of Collapse as Trump-GOP Cuts ‘Ripple Across the Country’

GOP STATES HIT HARDEST

“Providers are stretched thin, doing everything they can as resources disappear and the system buckles under the pressure of Republicans cutting more than $1 trillion from healthcare.”


A man has his blood pressure checked at a Remote Area Medical (RAM) mobile dental and medical clinic at Terre Haute South High School on August 02, 2025 in Terre Haute, Indiana.
(Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

Jake Johnson
May 05, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

An advocacy group tracking the impacts of the unprecedented Medicaid cuts that congressional Republicans and President Donald Trump enacted last year said Monday that at least 900 hospitals, nursing homes, and other healthcare facilities are now shutting down or at risk of closure—a disaster for low-income Americans who lack easy access to care.

Protect Our Care’s Hospital Crisis Watch project has identified healthcare centers that have closed or are at risk of closing, cutting services, and shutting down wards as they grapple with the impacts of the GOP’s 2025 budget law, which included over $1 trillion in total healthcare cuts over the next decade. More than $900 billion of the cuts will come from Medicaid, which pays hospitals and other providers for services delivered to low-income patients.

“Hospital Crisis Watch has now reached 900 pins, 900 communities where access to care is evaporating as Republicans’ healthcare cuts ripple across the country,” said Brad Woodhouse, president of Protect Our Care. “Providers are stretched thin, doing everything they can as resources disappear and the system buckles under the pressure of Republicans cutting more than $1 trillion from health care to fund tax breaks for billionaires and big corporations.”

“Families are driving further for care, parents are scrambling to find services for their kids, and seniors are being left without the support they need,” Woodhouse continued. “Care is getting harder to access, in too many places, disappearing entirely, and communities are left to deal with the consequences.”




The impacts of the Trump-GOP Medicaid cuts have been felt in both urban and rural areas, despite Republicans’ inclusion of a $50 billion Rural Health Transformation Fund that supporters touted as a way to bolster at-risk healthcare facilities. Critics of the fund have warned from the start that it would not be nearly enough to offset the devastation caused by massive Medicaid cuts.
(The Trump-GOP law includes an estimated $137 billion in cuts to Medicaid in rural areas.)

“In Nebraska and other states, rural hospitals are facing across-the-board cuts—and the rural health fund Congress created to offset the impact of Medicaid cuts on rural healthcare is falling short,” Adam Searing, an associate professor at the Georgetown University McCourt School of Public Policy’s Center for Children and Families, wrote in a blog post last week.

“What is quickly becoming clear, even at this early stage, is that as a result of the cuts enacted by Congress, healthcare is going to become much harder to access for many people,” wrote Searing. “Rural areas and small towns across the country will be particularly affected.”

The latest assessments of surging healthcare facility cuts and closures across the US came as Nebraska became the first state to implement the punitive work requirements that the 2025 Republican law imposes on some Medicaid recipients. Early estimates indicate that more than 20,000 Nebraskans could lose Medicaid coverage due to the stringent work requirements and the procedural hurdles the new mandates entail.

States must implement the new work requirements by the start of 2027.

“Everyone who is eligible for Medicaid will be at risk of having their health coverage taken away—whether or not the work requirement applies to them, and whether or not they prove their compliance or exemption status if it does—because the administrative burden of implementing the work requirement strains a state’s entire Medicaid system,” Farah Erzouki, a senior policy analyst at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, warned last week.

“Without sufficient time and guidance,” Erzouki added, “states will be unable to implement these requirements without harming many more eligible people and millions will lose coverage.”
‘Outrageous’: GOP Budget Includes $1 Billion in Taxpayer Funds for Trump Ballroom

“Using taxpayer dollars to toady to a wannabe-dictator is both pandering and pathetic,” said one critic.



US President Donald Trump holds a rendering of the White House South Terrace balustrade view as he speaks to reporters aboard Air Force One on March 29, 2026.

(Photo by Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images)

Brad Reed
May 05, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

Even though President Donald Trump has long insisted that his proposed White House luxury ballroom would be funded by private donations, congressional Republicans unveiled legislation on Monday that would put US taxpayers on the hook for the project.

As reported by Punchbowl News, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) released a proposal for a budget reconciliation package that includes $30 billion more in funds for US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), $3.4 billion for Customs and Border Protection, and $2.5 billion for the Department of Homeland Security.


Tucked into the proposal is $1 billion for what is described as an “East Wing modernization project, including above-ground and below-ground security features.”

Given that Trump is planning to build his ballroom on the area of the White House’s East Wing that he demolished last year, this means that $1 billion in taxpayer money would be going to the president’s vanity project.

Democratic officials immediately pounced on news that their Republican counterparts are planning to funnel $1 billion to the ballroom project, noting that the budget plan comes as Americans are struggling with the surging costs of energy and food.

“Zero dollars to lower costs,” wrote Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.), ranking member of the House Budget Committee. “Zero dollars to protect your healthcare. A massive check for an out-of-control ICE, and $1 billion for Trump’s ballroom. This Republican budget bill is a disaster.”

Rep. Sean Casten (D-Ill.) responded to the GOP ballroom plan by declaring, “Oh hell no.”

“Spiking prices, SCOTUS attacking democracy, collapsing faith in the US government,” Casten added, “and the GOP is prioritizing sending more money to murderous ICE agents and Trump’s ballroom vanity project. This is offensive.”

Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.) contrasted the GOP finding money to fund the ballroom with its unwillingness to extend enhanced subsidies for Americans who buy health insurance through exchanges established by the Affordable Care Act.

“Add the ballroom to the laundry list of things Trump said someone else would pay for,” Ansari wrote. “Ultimately, of course, it’s always the American people footing the bill for his outrageous pet projects. A $1BN price tag while he rips away your healthcare. Sickening.”

Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) welcomed the chance to have his Republican colleagues go on the record in favor of funding the ballroom.

“Just flagging that now everyone gets an up or down vote on the ballroom!” he wrote.

Elected Democrats weren’t the only ones to hammer the GOP for the proposal to fund Trump’s ballroom.

Lisa Gilbert, co-president of Public Citizen, called the GOP plan a “corrupt absurdity” that would make taxpayers shell out $1 billion for the president’s “grandiose, bombastic, vanity project.”

“Using taxpayer dollars to toady to a wannabe-dictator is both pandering and pathetic,” added Gilbert, who decried the plans for increased ICE funding as “abhorrent.”

Kristen Crowell, executive director of Families Over Billionaires, denounced the ballroom funding plan as “a glaring symbol of misplaced priorities and grift,” while also calling attention to other harmful aspects of the GOP’s budget proposal.

“At a time when families are struggling to afford housing, child care, and other basic necessities,” Crowell said, “the White House and Republicans in Congress are proposing to pour tens of billions of dollars into an already bloated and unaccountable deportation machine—while also carving out funding for the president’s own luxury projects.”
Chart Shows How Trump 2.0 Is ‘Most Brazenly Self-Enriching’ Administration in US History

Buying Trump’s meme coin is like investing in “a pet rock, except you don’t even get a rock” out of the deal, said economist Steve Rattner.


A Donald Trump coin is pictured alongside Bitcoin and various other cryptocurrencies in this photo illustration in Brussels, Belgium, on August 5, 2025.

(Photo by Jonathan Raa/NurPhoto via Getty Images)


Brad Reed
May 01, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

Since returning to office a little more than a year ago, President Donald Trump has nearly tripled his net worth, driven in large part by investments in his family’s cryptocurrency ventures.

Appearing on MS NOW on Friday morning, economist Steve Rattner broke down how Trump’s net worth has exploded from $2.34 billion in 2024 to an estimated $6.5 billion in 2026.

“So where did the money come from? He had $4 billion, he and his family, of profits,” Rattner said. “$3 billion of it came from crypto, and I will tell you, there are so many transactions here, so many structures, that made my head hurt trying to understand it.”


In addition to the crypto ventures, Rattner pointed to Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner raising money from investors in the Middle East through his investment firm Affinity Partners; increased revenue that came from raising admission fees to his Mar-a-Lago resort; and money he’d obtained from lawsuits against assorted media companies.

Rattner then explained the finances of the Trump meme coin, which he described as investing in “a pet rock, except you don’t even get a rock” out of the deal.

“He sold them initially at $7, it went up to $45, not surprisingly it crashed,” Rattner said.

However, Rattner said that early investors in the cryptocurrency, whom he described as “whale wallets,” managed to profit handsomely from the venture by buying up large numbers of Trump coins and then selling them to retail investors, who were left holding the bag when the coin’s value fell precipitously shortly after its launch.

“Let me just emphasize, it’s not like [the retail investors] got anything,” he added. “All they got, in effect, was like a little note, a little email or something, saying, ‘Congratulations, you own 10 Trump meme coins.’ But there’s nothing they can do with it. They were buying nothing, they were buying air.”



The economist did note that Trump made $600 million in trading fees that investors paid to carry out transactions of the coin.

After his appearance on MS NOW, Rattner posted a photo on social media of a graph he made to document the rise in Trump’s wealth over the last two years.


“[Trump’s] administration,” Rattner commented, “is the most brazenly self-enriching in American history.”



Trump Admin Shutters DHS Watchdog Amid Rampant and Growing Detainee Abuse

Last year was the deadliest in ICE detention in about two decades, with more than 30 deaths reported in custody. So far this year, at least 18 more detainees had reportedly died in ICE custody.



In an aerial view from a helicopter, detainees are seen at Krome Detention Center run by United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement on July 4, 2025 in Miami.

(Photo by Alon Skuy/Getty Images)

Brett Wilkins
May 04, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

The US Department of Homeland Security is officially closing its watchdog for immigrant detention abuse, even as reports of excessive force, deadly neglect, and other maltreatment by agency personnel soar under the Trump administration.

Citing an internal email, Huffpost’s Dave Jamieson reported Monday that DHS is shutting down its Office of the Immigration Detention Ombudsman (OIDO), which was established by an act of Congress and signed into law by President Donald Trump in 2020 as part the massive federal spending package known as the Consolidated Appropriations Act.

Jamieson added that the communication said that OIDO “is in the process of removing all its public signage and ending its inspection,” and that the agency’s website was down.

The email attributed OIDO’s closure to a lack of federal funding in the Homeland Security appropriations package that ended the recent 76-day shutdown affecting the agency.

Largely pushed through by congressional Democrats, OIDO was designed to be independent from both US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and US Customs and Border Protection. The office was given the power to receive detainee complaints, investigate alleged abuse or misconduct, inspect detention facilities, and report systemic problems to DHS leaders and Congress.

OIDO emerged amid widespread abuse of detained migrants during the first Trump administration, including deaths in custody, family separation, overcrowding, and other mistreatment.

Since returning to office for a second term, Trump has overseen the dismantling of the agency, arguing that it hinders immigration enforcement. The administration’s effort to dilute OIDO’s power have triggered legal action arguing that, since it was created by Congress, the agency cannot be abolished without congressional consent.

DHS detainees—especially those ICE lockups—report abuses including inadequate or delayed medical care; physical attacks and excessive force; sexual abuse and harassment; solitary confinement misuse; overcrowded and unsanitary conditions; intimidation and retaliation following complaints; abuse of pregnant women and children; denial of access to lawyers; denial of family contact; and denial of food, water, hygiene, or medication.

Last year was the deadliest in ICE detention in about two decades, with more than 30 deaths reported in custody. So far this year, at least 18 more detainees had reportedly died in ICE custody.



OIDO isn’t the only DHS watchdog under attack by the Trump administration. The Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL) and Office of Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman have also been targeted.

One former CRCL employee who was placed on administrative leave due to funding cuts said in a recent court filing that the agency is unable to conduct “meaningful investigations” into alleged civil rights and civil liberties violations committed by its personnel. As an example, they noted the accusations of excessive force by the ICE agent who fatally shot Minneapolis resident Renee Good last year.

“In my experience, investigations into systemic issues like these required significant staff resources, which CRCL no longer has to devote to these important issues of civil rights and civil liberties,” the official told Federal News Network earlier this year. “Nor does CRCL have the resources to conduct multidisciplinary onsite investigations at detention facilities, the need for which is greater than it has ever been as both the number of detention facilities and number of people detained has skyrocketed.”




Report Details How Post-9/11 Legal Policies Laid Groundwork for Trump ‘Terrorizing Migrants’

A legal expert explores how the administration is “weaponizing the law... to effectuate a widespread harassment and mass deportation campaign that is more akin to ethnic cleansing than routine immigration enforcement.”


US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents detain a man outside of his home in Saint Paul, Minnesota on January 27, 2026.
(Photo by Madison Thorn/Anadolu via Getty Images)

Jessica Corbett
May 05, 2026
COMMON DREAMS


President Donald Trump’s taxpayer-funded mass deportation campaign has tormented communities across the country with militarized federal agents, killed immigrants and US citizens alike, abused demonstrators and detainees of all ages, and sparked fears of an expansive effort to strip citizenship from Americans.

The “Terrorizing Migrants” report released Tuesday by the Costs of War Project at Brown University’s Watson School of International and Public Affairs details how Trump’s xenophobic campaign reflects “specific law and policy options created and strengthened among all three branches of the US government, on a bipartisan basis, since 9/11.”

“These law and policy options place heightened unchecked discretionary authority within the administration, and are particularly ripe for abuse against noncitizen persons of color by immigration authorities, law enforcement agents, and other executive branch officials,” wrote Widener University Delaware Law School assistant professor Elizabeth Beavers, author of the report.

The publication focuses on five key post-9/11 precedents borrowed from the “War on Terror,” though it acknowledges that “the Trump administration is relying on laws and policies far beyond those described in this paper to effectuate its broader anti-immigrant agenda, and justifying much of it in national security language.”

The first of the five precedents is “conflation of immigration enforcement and counterterrorism.” The report recalls that after the 2001 terrorist attacks, the Federal Bureau of Investigation “orchestrated a mass investigation” that “exclusively targeted Arab, Muslim, and South Asian immigrants in a dragnet roundup, subjecting them to secretive detention at locations inside the US,” and holding many of them “for weeks or even months without any charges at all.”

Beavers also pointed to the George W. Bush administration’s launch of the National Security Entry and Exit Registration System, as well as the creation of the US Department of Homeland Security and the placement of Immigration and Customs Enforcement within DHS. ICE and Customs and Border Protection agents have been key to Trump’s campaign.

The Muslim ban from Trump’s first term “built upon the structures that came before it, but greatly expanded legal presumptions that people of particular races, religions, and nationalities carry inherent danger,” Beavers wrote. His second term policies have “extended this precedent to its logical conclusion by framing migration itself as terrorism. And nearly 25 years after its post-9/11 creation, ICE has been unleashed and empowered to roam American streets, snatching and disappearing people they perceive as unlawfully present, often based solely on race, and often without verifying their immigration status.”

The second precedent Beavers explored is “expanded and politicized ‘terrorist’ designation lists.” She noted Trump’s invasion of Venezuela and abduction of its president, Nicolás Maduro, as well as his boat-bombing spree allegedly targeting drug traffickers in international waters.

The expert also dove into “deporting people as ‘terrorists’ without proving actual violent conduct,” flagging Trump’s “reverse migration” pledge after an Afghan man allegedly shot two National Guard members in Washington, DC, along with the administration’s decision to “hold and review” asylum applications for people from “high-risk” countries.

That review, she warned, “could result in mass removal from the country of ‘terrorist’ noncitizens who involuntarily paid money to cartels at some point in their lives, whose family remittances have crossed hands with cartel-controlled actors, who have family members or other connections to a designated cartel but no involvement themselves, or who have unwillingly been pressed into service of a cartel at some point.”



The fourth precedent examined in the analysis is “indefinite detention, torture, and rendition of noncitizens.” Beavers began the section with the detention camp at US Naval Station Guantánamo Bay in Cuba, which she called “perhaps one of the most notorious features of the US government’s post-9/11 ‘War on Terror.’”

“It is both a place where every post-9/11 president has detained Muslim men in connection with the post-9/11 counterterrorism wars, but it is also a place where unauthorized migrants are sometimes held,” she wrote. “More than 700 migrants have been sent to and from Guantánamo in President Trump’s second term, detained there by ICE with support from the military.”

The expert also highlighted Trump’s deportation of hundreds of men to El Salvador’s infamous Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT)—based on often dubious claims that they belonged to the gang Tren de Aragua, which the president designated as a terrorist organization—as well as the “practice of disappearing people into secretive immigration detention” within the United States, and reports indicating that “abusive treatment in those facilities may amount to unlawful torture.”

The final precedent Beavers explored is the “anti-democratic concentration of executive national security powers.” She wrote that “the second Trump administration has made prompt use of this latitude” from federal courts since 9/11.

“This has included: manipulating the ‘terrorist’ designation lists in novel ways to include drug cartels without needing court approval, which has expanded the scope of people who can be deported as ‘terrorists’; claiming a maximalist version of its immigration powers, daring courts to intervene; invoking the state secrets privilege to avoid accountability in cases challenging its deportation orders; and indefinitely detaining and torturing migrants,” Beavers continued. “They have taken each of these actions without fear they will be meaningfully held accountable in court.”

Based on her review, the professor concluded that “indisputably, administration officials are weaponizing the law in new and particularly indefensible ways to effectuate a widespread harassment and mass deportation campaign that is more akin to ethnic cleansing than routine immigration enforcement.”

“Neither Congress nor the courts have meaningfully checked presidents or held them accountable for their expansive and spurious claims of war authorities, national security powers, and counterterrorism mechanisms to justify harmful and discriminatory practices against noncitizens and especially against people of color,” she stressed. “In these and many other ways, US policymakers on a bipartisan basis built and sharpened the legal weapons that President Trump is now utilizing against immigrants.”



‘The Creep State Is Watching’: Guerilla Art Project Takes on Big Tech’s Power Grab​

“These people and these companies need to continue to be exposed for all of the harm that they’re causing and the real power that they have over our government and those governed,” one organizer said.


Posters of Elon Musk and Bill Gates are seen in Seattle.
(Photo via Creep State)

Olivia Rosane
May 05, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

On their way to attend the Met Gala on Monday night, guests might have spotted a different image of Amazon founder Jeff Bezos than the one he tried to project by chairing the annual fundraiser: a poster featuring his bulbous head, looming over them out of the darkness, attached to a muscular spider-shaped body. Above it, a mysterious message: “The Creep State is watching.”

What does it mean?

The Creep State is an anonymous guerilla art and protest project that debuted in Austin, Texas during South by Southwest earlier this year. It is designed to draw people’s attention to the threat posed by Big Tech billionaires and their increasing influence over both the US government and the daily lives of everyone who interacts with their products.

“These individuals are a danger to all of us,” a DC-based organizer said.

What Is the Creep State?


The Creep State image of Jeff Bezos is shown. (Photo via Creep State)

The idea for the Creep State came from the desire to raise awareness about certain Silicon Valley oligarchs and their anti-democratic actions and aspirations. Participants in the project who spoke to Common Dreams asked to remain anonymous in keeping with the guerilla-style tactics of their effort.

“There’s what is really a very small group of men who control these algorithms, who control the software, the hardware, and.. they are trying to initially infiltrate our government and eventually replace our government,” a Seattle-based organizer explained. “They’ve all been pretty clear about, you know, some version of, you know, a company town run by a CEO king.”

The project’s designers wanted to convey that “these specific individuals have very nefarious and creepy goals, and they are personally creeps,”—hence, the “creep state” framing.

“Whatever you do, see, hear, touch, say, feel, believe, dream, the Creep State is watching.”

Currently, the project consists of a physical and digital element.


Volunteers wheatpaste posters of seven Silicon Valley kingpins—Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, Sam Altman, Peter Thiel, Bill Gates, and Marc Andreessen, drawn in cartoon style as B-movie monsters—in major US cities. To date, the images have been displayed in Austin, Seattle, DC, Palo Alto, the area around the Met Gala in New York, and Los Angeles, with more to come.

The posters include a QR code that leads to a website, including a video highlighting how these moguls’ companies and products are already monitoring people’s daily activities, from surveillance pricing to sleep tracking.

“Whatever you do, see, hear, touch, say, feel, believe, dream, the Creep State is watching,” the video declares, before concluding: “We’re fighting back.”


“These people and these companies need to continue to be exposed for all of the harm that they’re causing and the real power that they have over our government and those governed,” the DC-based organizer said.

‘People Versus the Machines

The Creep State image of Sam Altman is shown. (Photo via Creep State)

While there have been many different campaigns and critiques calling out Big Tech and the rise of AI in recent years, the creators of the Creep State took an artistic approach partly to grab people’s attention, to make something that “quite literally visually shocked people out of the normal way that they think about and talk about these guys,” as the Seattle-based organizer put it.

They added that they wanted a viewer’s first response upon seeing the art to be, “Woah!”

So far, it seems to be working.

When the art went up in Seattle ahead of the No Kings protest on March 28, “people walking by stopped and took pictures and were like, ‘Whoa, what is this about? Oh my God, is that Jeff Bezos? Whoa, is that Bill Gates?’” the Seattle organizer said.

A member of the team who put the posters up in DC on April 18 similarly recalled: “We had a young woman come up to us and ask us about the Creep State and said she was glad we were exposing these guys. She said she was from [Prince George’s] County in Maryland and was part of the movement to stop data centers there.”

“Fundamentally the question that we face is will we allow one or a few of these corporations to literally remake our society?”

The project’s designers see themselves as operating within a tradition of guerilla art against the powerful from Banksy, Favianna Rodriguez, and Shepard Fairey’s OBEY posters to student protests against Slobodan MiloÅ¡ević in Serbia in the 1990s and the FeesMustFall campaign in South Africa in the 2010s. However, the project—which made a point of working with actual human creators, including a screenwriter, comic book artist, and graphic designer—takes on extra resonance in an age in which AI slop clogs up social media feeds and threatens to put creative workers out of a job.

“This is very much a people versus the machines kind of thing,” the Seattle-based organizer said. “Are we going to be a society where human creativity and human inspiration and human thinking are valued, or are we going to be a world where.. we’re all plugged into a screen?”

Bipartisan Appeal

The Creep State image of Peter Thiel is shown. (Photo via Creep State)

As the project uses an artistic approach to hook people who might otherwise ignore its messaging, it also crafts that messaging in an attempt to appeal to people who might not always agree politically.

The name “Creep State” was chosen in part for its similarity to “deep state,” which is often used on the political right to describe hidden actors undemocratically controlling the federal government. Some of the headlines highlighted in the introductory video were also selected to appeal to right-leaning viewers. (“Prayer apps: is AI playing God?” one reads.)

“Our assessment here is that we may have, and we very much do have, some very deep disagreements in a variety of ways with the right wing. But there is a very real grassroots right-wing opposition to the Silicon Valley takeover of our economy and our democracy. And we want to make sure that this is a campaign that different types of folks can see themselves reflected in,” the Seattle-based organizer said.

“Once they’re burrowed in, it’s going to be very difficult to root them out.”

Indeed, the rise of AI and the hyperscale data centers it relies on seems to have, at least so far, bypassed the usual culture war divides. As communities across the country have mobilized against the data center buildout, “you’ve got DSA people linking arms with, you know, like ultra-MAGA folks,” the Seattle organizer added.

The numbers reflect this, with around 50% of both Republicans and Democrats now saying they are more concerned than excited about AI and 55% of the politicians opposing data centers, which are often located in red states, being Republicans.

The embrace of AI and its Silicon Valley pushers may be one wedge between President Donald Trump and some of his supporters, as 75% of 2024 Trump voters think that AI should be regulated while the president himself has thrown his weight behind a plan to prohibit states from regulating AI at all.

Indeed, even as the Creep State’s developers reach out to Trump voters, they are clear that the Trump administration itself has escalated the Big Tech takeover of the US government, upping the urgency of their project.

Even before Trump was elected a second time around, Silicon Valley enabled his rise. Bezos sunk The Washington Post’s endorsement of his rival Kamala Harris, while Musk donated more than a quarter billion to back Trump’s campaign. His Vice President JD Vance is a protege of Thiel, who has backed Trump since 2016.

Trump has repaid these Big Tech executives handsomely with access, money, and his deregulatory push. The DC-based organizer said they were partly inspired to get involved with the Creep State project after witnessing the havoc wreaked by Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, which cut funding for essential grants and may lead to the deaths of over 14 million through the shuttering of the US Agency for International Development. At the same time, tech billionaires have increased their profits by contracting with the government, enabling deportations via Immigration and Customs Enforcement and both surveillance and targeting via the Pentagon.

Yet the Seattle-based organizer said that some Trump supporters “are beginning to realize… that these guys don’t care about Trump. Trump is a vehicle for them. And, you know, once they’re burrowed in, it’s going to be very difficult to root them out.”

‘We’re Fighting Back’

The Creep State image of Mark Zuckerberg is shown. (Photo via Creep State)

Ultimately the goal of the Creep State project is to plug everyone who sees and responds to the art—whatever their politics—into the growing movement to push back against the Big Tech power grab.

“The more we can expose these actors, it can inspire people to… organize against them, demand… oversight and regulations over AI and the influence that these individuals have on their politics,” the DC-based organizer said.

People who scan the QR code can be funneled into future wheatpasting sessions (which are all volunteer efforts) or local fights related to tech policy. One hope the organizers have is that communities across the country who are fighting data center construction or Flock camera expansion could order posters from the site that would have their QR codes adjusted to direct viewers to the local struggle.

“If we can plug people into some of those fights with organizations and for them to get more deeply involved, we’d love to do that,” the DC organizer said.

The Seattle organizer concluded, “Fundamentally the question that we face is will we allow one or a few of these corporations to literally remake our society?”

They continued: “We’re all living through this polycrisis. The climate is collapsing, the economy is in tatters, we’re at war abroad. There’s something new and crazy every day, and it’s hard to break through to people. So the hope is that this art specifically, in this way of highlighting both the like political creepiness and the personal creepiness of these guys, can maybe shock some people who otherwise are just trying to get through their day into, ‘I need to do something.’”


A Four-Word Response for Those Upset With Jeff Bezos for Any Number of Reasons: ‘Tax the Damn Rich’

Sen. Bernie Sanders noted that the billionaire spent $10 million on the Met Gala, $120 million on a penthouse, and $500 million on a yacht while “planning to throw 600,000 Amazon workers out on the streets and replace them with robots.”


Protesters gather blocks away from where the Met Gala is being held in Manhattan on May 4, 2026 in New York City.

(Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

Brad Reed
May 05, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

Amazon founder Jeff Bezos in recent weeks has come under fire for a wide variety of reasons, including his involvement with the 2026 Met Gala and his plans to build a robot workforce.

A Monday report from The Hollywood Reporter noted that Bezos, despite being a lead sponsor of this year’s Met Gala, did not make an appearance at the event’s red carpet as he had in past years.



Bezos’ sponsorship of the Gala has been hit with heavy criticism in recent weeks, as many activists slammed the New York Metropolitan Museum of Art for taking the tech mogul’s money despite his company’s labor practices and reported involvement in helping US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations.

According to The Hollywood Reporter, other critics “accused the billionaire of buying influence with the major event and speculation swirled that some stars may boycott the event due to his involvement.”

In addition to not appearing at the Met Gala red carpet, Bezos is reportedly trying to lower his profile by selling his $500 million luxury yacht.

The New York Post reported on Monday that Bezos has decided that the 417-foot vessel has become “too recognizable,” and is also a headache to maintain, costing an estimated $30 million per year to operate.


‘Worst Conceivable Representative’: Inequality Opponents Condemn Bezos Sponsorship of Met Gala

“It’s a thin line between celebrating glamor and artwashing extreme wealth,” said the Tax Justice Network.



A person puts up “Boycott the Bezos Met Gala” posters in New York City on April 15, 2026.
(Photo by Angela Weiss/AFP via Getty Images)

Julia Conley
May 04, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

As celebrities prepared to attend the 2026 Met Gala at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York on Monday, a coalition of nearly three dozen civil society groups warned that with Amazon founder Jeff Bezos—currently the fourth-richest person on Earth—chairing the annual fundraiser, the gala risks “artwashing the harms of extreme wealth.”

Groups including Greenpeace International, Patriotic Millionaires, and War on Want signed a letter organized by the Tax the Superrich Alliance, calling on the museum and Vogue magazine, which hosts the event, not to honor Bezos and warning that the billionaire is using the two cultural institutions as tools “to launder his public image.”

The Metropolitan Museum of Art has a celebrated collection of art spanning centuries, many of it made “in defiance of power—work that exposed injustice, gave voice to the silenced, and held the powerful to account,” reads the letter.

But the tech mogul chosen to chair the gala “has made his loyalties clear” since President Donald Trump first took office in 2017 and during the Republican’s second term, said the groups, pointing to Bezos’ purchase of The Washington Post, the mass firing of hundreds of the newspaper’s reporters this year, and his remaking of the publication’s opinion section into one focusing on “free markets.”

He “gutted” the Post “while reportedly pouring $75 million into a film promoting Melania Trump,” reads the letter, referring to the Amazon-produced documentary film Melania.

“A 2% wealth tax on just three necklaces previously worn by celebrities to the Met Gala’s red carpet could fully fund New York City’s home energy assistance program, helping 1 million households heat and cool their homes.”

“He is not just a bystander to Trump’s administration,” wrote the organizations. “He is one of its enablers. This is not philanthropy. This effectively is influence bought and paid for by Bezos’ pocket change—and the Met Gala is his latest purchase.”

The groups added that in addition to aligning himself with the White House through his ownership of the Post, Bezos and Amazon—a government contractor where he is still the largest individual shareholder—is working with Trump to “make possible a concentration of power that not only threatens lives in the US but across the world as well.”

“While so many of these policies aren’t new, they have been exacerbated under Trump and with the help of people like Bezos—from families torn apart by ICE [US Immigration and Customs Enforcement] raids reportedly enabled by Amazon’s own technology, to a White House emboldened to threaten and carry out military action against sovereign nations without consequence—including to ‘destroy a whole civilization’ in Iran—with no accountability,” reads the letter.

The Tax Justice Network, one of the signatories, emphasized that just a fraction of the money that goes to the $100,000-per ticket Met Gala could alleviate the economic inequality that’s grown worse under the Trump administration.

“A 2% wealth tax on just three necklaces previously worn by celebrities to the Met Gala’s red carpet could fully fund New York City’s home energy assistance program, helping 1 million households heat and cool their homes,” said the Tax Justice Network, citing its analysis released Monday.

Bezos is among the billionaires who have contributed donations to Trump’s pet projects—a luxury ballroom and a 250-foot-tall arch in Washington, DC—while the president has tried to cut the home energy assistance program, said the group.

“There’s a thin line between celebrating glamorous fashion and artwashing extreme wealth, and that line gets bulldozed when your poster boy is an ICE-profiteering billionaire bankrolling Trump’s vanity projects and a top spender on anti-worker lobbying,” said Alex Cobham, chief executive at the Tax Justice Network.

In the first two hours of the Met Gala, Cobham added, “Bezos’s wealth will grow by the equivalent of 130,000 hours of a teacher’s labor... This extreme distortion throws economies out of whack. Our economies are supposed to let people earn the wealth they need to lead secure and comfortable lives, but most countries’ tax rules make it easier for the superrich to collect wealth than for the rest of us to earn it.”



“In Bezos’ case, it’s easy to see how that undertaxed collected wealth goes towards lobbying further against workers’ rights and pay, while his company Amazon remains one of the biggest recipients of US subsidies,” said Cobham.

According to the Tax Justice Network’s analysis, Bezos accumulated $3.8 million every house from 2023-25, when his total wealth grew by more than $100 billion.

“If Bezos were to continue to accumulate wealth at this rate,” said the group, “he would accumulate $7.6 million in the first two hours of the Met Gala event, which is the equivalent of 110 NYC Public Schools teachers’ starting salaries”—$68,902.

Those organizing the gala can and must “stop celebrating those destroying our countries and humanity itself,” reads the letter sent by the Tax the Superrich Alliance, by not honoring Bezos and backing the fair taxation of the wealthiest households and corporations.

“End the oligarchy,” reads the letter. “Tax the super rich. Now.”

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, a proponent of taxing the rich to pay for crucial public programs and services, planned to skip the Met Gala in a break with tradition. Last month Mamdani announced plans for a tax on second homes valued at $5 million or more in New York City.

Celebrities who are reportedly planning to skip the event include Palestinian-American model Bella Hadid, who has spoken out against ICE and in favor of Palestinian rights, and actress Zendaya.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Tuesday argued that Bezos’ lavish spending and his plan to build an army of robots to replace human workers was symbolic of American capitalism in 2026.

“The reality of American life today,” Sanders wrote in a social media post. “Jeff Bezos, worth $290 billion, spent: $10 million on the Met Gala, $120 million on a penthouse, $500 million on a yacht. Meanwhile, he’s planning to throw 600,000 Amazon workers out on the streets and replace them with robots. Unacceptable.”

Warren Gunnels, Sanders’ staff director, similarly made the case that Bezos’ spending spree was yet another argument for raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans.

“Jeff Bezos, who paid $10 million for the Met Gala,” Gunnels wrote, “got $62 billion richer since [President Donald] Trump was elected and spent $500 million on a yacht to sail to his $55 million wedding in Venice to give his wife a $5 million ring because his tax rate is less than 1%. Four words: Tax the damn rich.”

Labor unions, which have long clashed with Bezos over Amazon’s aggressive union-busting tactics, held their own rival “Ball Without Billionaires” on Monday evening to protest the Bezos-funded Met Gala.

As reported by Democracy Now!, the gala featured “Amazon, Whole Foods, Washington Post, Starbucks, and Uber workers” who “walked the runway in looks by immigrant designers.”

April Verrett, president of the Service Employees International Union, said the Ball Without Billionaires was “not just about fashion” but “about power” and “telling the truth that people who sew and care and drive and cook and clean and secure and those that create are the ones who make everything possible.”

Workers at the New York Metropolitan Museum of Art, who earlier this year voted to unionize, registered their own disapproval of this year’s Met Gala, posting a message on Instagram informing followers that “91% of hourly Met staff in our unit earn less than a living wage.”

‘Worst Conceivable Representative’: Inequality Opponents Condemn Bezos Sponsorship of Met Gala

“It’s a thin line between celebrating glamor and artwashing extreme wealth,” said the Tax Justice Network.