Mother Jones: Posts

Mother Jones

The Trump Family’s Crypto Venture Is Being Sued by Its Own Billionaire Backer

The Trump family’s cryptocurrency venture World Liberty Financial is being sued by one of its billionaire investors, who claimsthe company froze his token holdings.

In the lawsuit filed Tuesday, Justin Sun accused World Liberty Financial of “engaging in an illegal scheme to seize property.”

“They wrongfully froze all of my tokens, stripped me of my right to vote on governance proposals, and have threatened to permanently destroy my tokens,” Sun wrote in a statement on X on Tuesday night. While he said he remains an “ardent supporter” of Trump and his administration’s efforts to make crypto-friendly policies, Sun wrote that “certain individuals” associated with World Liberty were operating the venture “in a manner that goes against President Trump’s values.”

Sun backed the Trump family when they launched World Liberty Financial in 2024, investing $30 million. He spent another $45 million on 3 billion tokens just a few months later. According to Reuters, Sun owns about 4 billion tokens worth approximately $320 million.

World Liberty Financial’s co-founder, Zach Witkoff, wrote in a Wednesday post on X that Sun’s legal complaint “is a desperate attempt to deflect attention from Sun’s own misconduct.” Witkoff did not offer more details on what Sun did but said the investor’s actions required the company to “take action to protect itself and its users.”

As my colleagues Russ Choma, Dan Friedman, and Tim Murphy wrote in 2025:

Shortly after Trump took office, the Securities and Exchange Commission—which had accused Sun of fraud in a federal complaint—agreed to pause its lawsuit while the parties pursued a “potential resolution.” That was one of more than a dozen lawsuits and investigations targeting crypto firms that the SEC reportedly backed off from after Trump took office.

Sun eventually resolved the case with the SEC in a $10 million settlement last month.

The Trump family receives 75 percent of net proceeds from token sales. According to the Wall Street Journal, since the launch, they have received about $1 billion in proceeds as of December 2025.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Florida’s Notorious “Alligator Alcatraz” Can Remain Open, Court Rules

The infamous Florida immigrant detention center known as “Alligator Alcatraz” can remain open, an appeals court ruled Tuesday, overturning a lower judge’s decision to close the facility because it violated federal environmental laws.

The ruling is the latest development in the months-long legal battle against the center, which was constructed in the Everglades last summer by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis’ administration when the Department of Homeland Security needed more detention space to house immigrants pending their deportations.

The center has come under fire for both its living conditions and its impact on the surrounding area. As I reported in March, thousands of people have been detained there despite ongoing reports of mosquito infestations, flooding, poor medical care, lackluster food, and limited water access. Last month, two US senators said they launched an investigation into reported abuses, including the use of “the box,” in which detainees were allegedly shackled and held in small cages in direct sunlight for hours at a time. (A spokesperson for the Florida Division of Emergency Management, which runs Alligator Alcatraz, told me recently that the allegations were “false.”) In recent weeks, the center landed in the spotlight once again after attorneys representing immigrants held there told a judge that guards had assaulted and pepper sprayed detainees who protested after the phones were shut off, less than a week after a federal judge ordered legal access should be expanded at the facility.

Environmentalists have spent almost a year trying to shutter Alligator Alcatraz in an effort to protect the Everglades. The center was built on a little-used airfield next to the environmentally protected wetlands of Big Cypress National Preserve. “People get out, there’s not much waiting for them other than alligators and pythons,” Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier quipped in a video posted on social media late last June.

As I reported that month, environmental groups sued federal and state officials to halt the project. They argued that the construction hadproceeded without an environmental review or opportunity for public comment, in violation of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). They filed declarations in the case documenting how the camp could potentially impact the neighboring ecosystems and wildlife. Traffic to and from the detention site increases the likelihood of panthers being struck by vehicles, according to court filings, and light pollution could destroy the nighttime foraging abilities of bats in the area.

“Alligator Alcatraz will go down in history as a boondoggle to taxpayers and a flagrant assault on the Everglades.”

Florida and Trump officials argued that NEPA only applies to federal agencies, and that the facility was operated and funded by the state, which has spent at least $390 million to run it. But in August, a federal judge in Miami concluded that Alligator Alcatraz “exists for the sole purpose of detaining and deporting those subject to federal immigration enforcement” and ordered it to wind down operations within 60 days. The state of Florida appealed and the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit blocked the judge’s decision, allowing Alligator Alcatraz to continue to operate.

Alligator Alcatraz has disrupted the vulnerable ecosystems that surround it, Eve Samples, executive director of Friends of the Everglades, one of the plaintiffs in the environmental lawsuit, told me last month. The high intensity lighting, for example, has impacted about 2,000 acres of habitat for the Florida panther, an endangered species with a population of about 200. “The evidence of that harm is clear,” she said in a phone interview.

The three-judge panel heard oral arguments in the case on April 7 and released a 38-page ruling late Tuesday afternoon. In the 2-1 decision, judges concluded that the environmentalists failed to prove Alligator Alcatraz was under federal control. Florida also hasn’t received any federal funding (though it is in the process of requesting reimbursement). “Federal authority is, at most, indirect: it is involved in the construction only insofar as it sets the terms for which the facility may be used for detention of aliens, but Florida officials dedicated its land to that use,” wrote Chief Judge William Pryor, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, in the majority opinion.

Judge Nancy Abudu, a Biden appointee, wrote in her dissent that immigration is ultimately a federal obligation and the majority’s ruling is “just plain wrong.” “So long as Florida remains a willing participant in the federal government’s immigration detention scheme, it subjects itself to the federal government’s substantial control over the parties’ joint efforts,” she wrote.

The case was sent back to the district court. “This fight is far from over,” Samples, the Friends of the Everglades director, said in a statement Tuesday night. “Alligator Alcatraz will go down in history as a boondoggle to taxpayers and a flagrant assault on the Everglades, and we look forward to returning to the District Court to advance our case to shut it down.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Truth Social CEO Out After $1.1 Billion in Losses

Devin Nunes was not an obvious choice to run a fledgling social media network, but after $1.1 billion in losses, the former dairy farmer and congressman is out as the head of Truth Social.

Donald Trump Jr., a board member at Trump Media + Technology, the parent company of Truth Social, said on Tuesday night that Nunes would be replaced by another executive who formerly worked at Hulu. Nunes confirmed the move in a Truth Social post of his own.

The company, which is majority owned by Donald Trump, has seen its stock plummet 84 percent under Nunes’ leadership, from its debut price of $58 back in 2024. The current share price of around $9.80 is arguably still optimistic for a company that has lost $1.1 billion since it went public, and recorded just over $10.6 million in revenue in the same time.

Even as the company struggled, Nunes prospered. In 2024 alone, his pay outstripped any revenue the company has made over its lifetime—he drew a salary of $1 million, a bonus of $600,000 and was awarded stock worth another $46 million.

To be fair to Nunes, he was asked to oversee a company that despite having one of thet world’s most recognizable faces as its power user, had a remarkably scattershot approach to everything.

When Trump Media was first announced as a concept, the Trump family said it would include: Truth Social, streaming television services to rival Netflix and Amazon and web-hosting that would rival Amazon’s AWS business. And all of it would be devoted to fighting the “woke” media and corporate culture that Trump said had blacklisted him following Jan. 6. Truth Social would be a redoubt for freedom of speech, the streaming services would have wholesome non-“woke” content that America craved and the web-hosting would provide a home for any company that dared to challenge Amazon’s alleged anti-free speech motivations.

Of those grand dreams, under Nunes, Trump Media managed to launch Truth Social and a tepid streaming service, that runs for free and mostly provides content that is also free on YouTube. Truth Social may have as few as several hundred thousand daily active users, while Elon Musk’s X is estimated to have around 224 million. Those kind of numbers place it firmly in 24th place among social media companies, a few spots behind YouTube Kids.

That’s not how things were supposed to go. At its launch, a slide presentation distributed to investors and filed with the SEC suggested that by 2026, the company expected to have about $3.3 billion in revenue, 40 million users on Truth Social and another 81 million spread across the company’s other services.

Under Nunes, the company has, instead, struck out in seemingly random directions. It has, among other things, launched:

  • “Personal freedom” oriented ETFs.
  • A crypto “token”—a non-tradeable blockchain-based digital asset which, despite having no value, is slated to be given to shareholders and would grant them discounts on the company’s products.
  • A Bitcoin treasury: following in the footsteps of controversial Bitcoin evangelist Michael Saylor, Trump Media announced in 2025 that it would begin accumulating as many Bitcoins as possible, based on the theory that Bitcoin’s precipitous increase in value would also make the company more valuable.

The last initiative, which was announced in May of 2025, a few months before a massive decline in Bitcoin prices kicked in, is responsible for most of the $712 million in losses. The company had purchased roughly $2.5 billion in bitcoin, and the latest data suggests that after declines in the price of Bitcoin and sale of some of the company’s Bitcoins, the treasury is now worth just $753 million.

Trump Media’s boldest move under Nunes might have been the idea to pivot to nuclear power—specifically the largely experimental method of nuclear fusion. In nuclear fission, which is the method used for decades, atoms are split, but in fusion, pushing atoms together generates even greater energy—but the process has never been made commercially viable. In late 2025, Trump Media announced it would be merging with TAE Technologies, a longstanding player in the fusion field, which despite having previously secured funding, was still struggling to build an actual power plant.

The merger, which is supposed to be completed in June, would have made Nunes co-CEO of the social media, streaming, web-hosting, financial products, Bitcoin treasury and nuclear fusion company.

All that is a lot of responsibility for Nunes who began his career working on the family dairy farm in southern California in the early 1990s (he has a degree in agriculture). First elected to Congress in 2003 and served for 19 years, including several as the chairman of the House Intelligence committee, where he and one of his staffers—Kash Patel—became two of Trump’s loudest backers in accusing a “deep state” in the intelligence community of having targeted Trump.

Nunes had no specific experience running a technology company before taking over as CEO of Trump Media, but in 2019 he sued political strategist Liz Mair and two anonymous parody Twitter accounts, including @DevinCow, which purported to be one of the cows on his dairy farm, for defamation. Nunes asked for $250 million in damages, but the case was dismissed.

Nunes confirmed his departure from Trump Media but did not say what he would be doing next. He remains chairman of Trump’s Intelligence Advisory Board.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Tulsi Gabbard’s Dangerous War

A version of the below article first appeared in David Corn’s newsletter, Our Land_. The newsletter comes out twice a week (most of the time) and provides behind-the-scenes stories and articles about politics, media, and culture. Subscribing costs just $5 a month—but you can sign up for a free 30-day trial._

On Saturday, Donald Trump convened a meeting on the Iran war in the White House situation room. At the table, according to news reports, were Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, White House chief of staff Susie Wiles, envoy Steve Witkoff, Joint Chiefs Chairman Dan Caine, and CIA Director John Ratcliffe. Missing from this list: Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. This was another opportunity for administration officials to snicker that DNI stands for Do Not Invite.

You might wonder what’s the point of having a director of national intelligence who’s routinely not included in major deliberations about national security. Gabbard’s value for Trump is not in her oversight of the 18 agencies in the intelligence community, which is ostensibly her job. Nor in her intelligence experience, which is slight. It is in her willingness to serve Trump’s lust for vengeance against those he deems his political enemies. That includes her enthusiasm for politicizing and weaponizing intelligence to an extent never seen in US history.

Last summer, she did this by releasing highly classified intelligence documents that she claimed proved that President Barack Obama, his CIA chief John Brennan, and other Deep Staters had committed “treason”—a crime punishable by death. She accused them of falsifying intelligence to show that Russian leader Vladimir Putin had covertly intervened in the 2016 election in part to help Trump. The memos clearly did not show that. (Investigations by special counsel Robert Mueller, the Justice Department, and the bipartisan Senate intelligence committee have confirmed Putin attacked that election to boost Trump.)

Here was the top US intelligence official deploying unsubstantiated or phony Russian material—over the objections of CIA officials—to smear an American politician. It was disgraceful.

Gabbard’s stunt was a despicable act of immense gaslighting. And she and Trump each called for Obama, Brennan, and others to be prosecuted. Trump went so far as to post an AI-generated video of FBI agents violently handcuffing and arresting Obama and tossing him into a prison cell. In the video, Obama is on his knees before Trump. Never has intelligence been so abused by an administration for purely political purposes. Gabbard’s move led the Justice Department to mount a criminal investigation of Brennan and others that is ongoing.

At the time, Gabbard also declassified and made public a secret report that cited Russian intelligence material from 2016 that claimed Hillary Clinton suffered from “intensified psycho-emotional problems,” was on a daily regimen of “heavy tranquilizers,” and had schemed to set up the Trump-Russia scandal to distract from her email controversy. But US intelligence analysts and FBI agents had previously judged this Russian material to be unreliable and possibly disinformation. So here was the top US intelligence official deploying unsubstantiated or phony Russian material—over the objections of CIA officials who worried its disclosure could compromise sources and methods—to smear an American politician. It was disgraceful.

Trump loved it. Gabbard had been on the outs with the White House prior to this for several reasons, including her release of a video that implied she opposed military action against Iran. Now Trump proclaimed her a “star.”

Recently, Gabbard was again in the hot seat. In March, the day after her ally Joe Kent resigned as director of the National Counterterrorism Center over the Iran war, Gabbard testified before Congress on threats posed to the United States. Trump, according to Axios, was displeased that Gabbard at this hearing did not wholeheartedly endorse his war in Iran and personally scolded her. He was also apparently mad that she had protected Kent, who had publicly undercut his rationale for the war. (In his resignation letter, Kent said Iran posed no “imminent threat” to the United States.) Trump began asking his top advisers if he should give Gabbard the boot.

Gabbard showed that she had learned the lesson of how to survive in Trumpland: She released more intelligence documents to discredit a Trump foe.

MAGA activist Laura Loomer tweeted that “Tulsi was done” and that the White House was about to show her the door. But this didn’t happen. Roger Stone, the longtime Trump adviser who was found guilty of lying to Congress during the Trump-Russia scandal (and subsequently pardoned by Trump), took credit for interceding with Trump and rescuing Gabbard. Axios quoted “a source familiar with Trump’s thinking” saying, “Roger sealed the deal. He saved Tulsi.”

Whether Stone’s influence mattered or not, Gabbard last week showed that she had learned the lesson of how to survive in Trumpland: She released more intelligence documents to discredit a Trump foe and to reveal yet another purported Deep State conspiracy against the president.

This time, the target was the whistleblower who in 2019 filed a complaint with the intelligence community’s inspector general, Michael Atkinson, about the infamous phone call during which Trump pressured Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to launch investigations to dig up dirt on Joe Biden, who was then running for president, and to prove that Ukraine, not Russia, intervened in the 2016 election. The whistleblower maintained that Trump was “using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 US election.”

Just as Gabbard is trying to airbrush away Putin’s intervention in the 2016 election, she’s now attempting to delegitimize and erase that first impeachment.

When the acting DNI, John Maguire, declined to share this classified complaint with Congress, Atkinson informed Congress of its existence, triggering a brouhaha that soon led to Trump’s first impeachment.

Trump was not convicted by the Republican-controlled Senate, but he has always been steamed by the impeachment. Just as Gabbard is trying to airbrush away Putin’s intervention in the 2016 election, she’s now attempting to delegitimize and erase that first impeachment.

Last week, she released a handful of documents that she asserted exposed “a coordinated effort by elements within the Intelligence Community (IC), including a former Inspector General (IG), to manufacture a conspiracy that was used as the basis to impeach President Trump in 2019.” She insisted these records show that Atkinson “did not follow standard IG procedures and relied upon politicized, manufactured narratives” and that he took “actions to weaponize the Whistleblower process and exceed his statutory jurisdiction.”

Once more, she insisted that Trump was the victim of a nefarious cabal: _“_Deepstate actors within the Intelligence Community concocted a false narrative that was used by Congress to usurp the will of the American people and impeach the duly-elected President of the United States.”

Yet again, Gabbard is pulling a big con. The materials she released do not back up the charge that Atkinson mishandled this case, and they certainly don’t prove a narrative was manufactured. In fact, the whistleblower’s complaint was largely confirmed when the Trump White House, under pressure, released a summary of his call with Zelenskyy. And that summary played a more critical role in the impeachment proceedings than the whistleblower’s complaint. During the Trump-Ukraine controversy, Maguire testified that the whistleblower “did the right thing.” Maguire also testified that Atkinson’s handling of the whistleblower complaint was done “by the book” and consistent with the law.

Gabbard went further then pumping out more disinformation. She sent the Justice Department criminal referrals for Atkinson, who Trump fired in April 2020, and the whistleblower, who has never been officially identified. (Conservative media, Donald Trump Jr., and Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul revealed his name during the impeachment.)

A pro-Trump conservative activist who believes Gabbard should be ousted told me that it’s obvious Gabbard is gathering intelligence records she can strategically release when necessary to protect her position.

This is another dangerous action from Gabbard, who once again is abusing intelligence to gin up a criminal case to feed Trump’s revenge fantasy. There is no case here. There was no Deep State plot. This is all about payback—and Gabbard keeping her job.

A few days ago, a pro-Trump conservative activist who believes Gabbard should be ousted told me that it’s obvious Gabbard is gathering intelligence records she can strategically release when necessary to protect her position. This MAGA influencer called this conduct reprehensible, noting that if Gabbard has evidence of Deep State conspiracies, she ought to put it all out.

But none of the material Gabbard has released so far proves the conspiracy theories she’s peddling. As an apparatchik for Dear Leader, she’s misrepresenting once-classified material to set up show trials and demonstrating she will lie and cheat for Trump—and to stay employed. Such a disingenuous DNI is a threat to national security. Nothing she says—in private to the president or in public—can be trusted.

Gabbard’s most recent efforts to deceive the public have not received the media attention they deserve. They ought to be front-page news, for Gabbard also is leading the administration’s effort to find evidence of fraud in the 2020 election. Remember when she was photographed at the Atlanta site when FBI agents seized voting records and machines?

If Gabbard will manufacture false narratives and bogus evidence to support baseless criminal prosecutions of supposed Deep State conspirators and Trump critics, what might she do to cook up proof of Trump’s Big Lie about the 2020 elections or to concoct phony evidence of fraud in the coming midterm elections?

Gabbard is a careerist chameleon. In 2018, as I revealed last year, she spoke at the Bernie Sanders Institute and slammed Trump as a supporter of “genocidal war.” In 2019, when she was running for president as a progressive Democrat, she blasted Trump for being “on the brink of launching us into a very stupid and costly war with Iran.” Now she’s a Trump loyalist. She clearly will flip positions and jettison supposed principles to attain power. And she has demonstrated she’s willing to go far beyond that.

Gabbard may not be in the room when the big decisions about war are being made. But she’s prosecuting her own war on the truth to score retaliation for Trump. To date, her war has targeted a handful of people whom Trump craves to see crushed. But with her focus also on elections, it’s a war that could affect the future of American democracy.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Majority Backs Trump Impeachment—Even One in Five of His Own Voters

A majority of American adults say that the US House should vote to impeach President Trump—including one-in-five people who voted for him in 2024.

A new poll by Strength in Numbers, a data-based news website, and the market research platform Verasight found that 55 percent of respondents said they support the US House voting for impeachment. Out of the 1,514 Americans surveyed between April 10 and April 14, 37 percent said they opposed and eight percent reported they were unsure.

While this is just one poll in a collection of many, it is clear that Trump’s approval ratings are sinking. The New York Times’ daily average of dozens of polls has the president at a 38 percent approval rating. On January 27, 2025, the first average calculated following Inauguration Day, the Times recorded Trump’s approval rating at 52 percent.

The numbers are striking, but there are few avenues for popular sentiment to achieve tangible results in Washington. There have been numerous calls from lawmakers to impeach and convict Trump or invoke the 25th Amendment, especially following his threats of genocide against the people of Iran. But they appear unlikely to succeed given the Republican majorities in the US House and Senate, as well as large support from his cabinet.

However, as I wrote on Sunday about Trump’s approval rating falling to its lowest point of his second term, if Americans see the upcoming midterms as a referendum on the failures of the current administration, then it could swing elections across the country.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

New England Has Become a Mecca for Enormous Grid Storage Batteries

This story was originally published by Canary Media and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Enormous new batteries keep appearing on the grid, making it devilishly tricky to keep track of which is the biggest in a given region. That’s certainly the case in New England, where acute power needs and robust state climate goals are fueling a buildout of big batteries that keep breaking capacity records.

Canary Media recently covered the inauguration of the 175-megawatt Cross Town battery in Gorham, Maine, which was the largest in New England when it began operating in late November. But that trophy has already passed to a 250-megawatt facility in Medway, Massachusetts, southwest of Boston and about 10 miles from the Patriots’ Gillette Stadium.

The Medway battery came online fully on February 25, according to developer VC Renewables, a subsidiary of global energy trader Vitol. “To be fair, I don’t expect Medway to hold that title for very long, either,” said Tom Bitting, managing director at Advantage Capital, which supported the project with a $158 million tax equity deal. ​“There are other batteries being developed in New England that are bigger, but I think it is all just a sign that we need all of it, and there’s huge demand for it.”

“Store all that solar energy that we’re producing in the middle of the day and bring down the cost of operating the system for everyone.”

For instance, Jupiter Power, a heavyweight in Texas’ booming grid storage market, is developing the 700-megawatt/2.8-gigawatt-hour Trimount battery plant at a former oil-storage site in Everett, Massachusetts, just north of Boston. Jupiter aims to finish the project in 2028 or 2029. Trimount is slated to be among the largest stand-alone batteries in the whole country—Vistra’s battery in Moss Landing, California, set that record with 750 megawatts/​3 gigawatt-hours, before much of that capacity burned up in a disastrous fire.

The wave of battery megaprojects marks a new chapter for the region, which until recently was focused on building small-scale batteries. Massachusetts encouraged this by requiring energy storage alongside many distributed solar projects that received payments through the state’s main solar incentive; this rule led to a buildout of systems in the range of 1 to 5 megawatts.

Bigger batteries started taking off in the late 2010s out West: In California, Arizona, and Nevada, where developers can sign long-term contracts to deliver grid capacity; and in Texas, where they can bid into a uniquely competitive market.

The first three big batteries in New England—Plus Power’s Cranberry Point and Cross Town, as well as Medway, which was previously developed by Eolian—won seven-year contracts in 2021 to provide capacity for the New England grid, but the grid operator subsequently shortened that kind of contract to one year. After that change, developers have struggled with the lack of long-term capacity revenue; they can still charge up when prices are low and sell when they’re high, but that’s an unpredictable revenue stream that financiers might not want to underwrite.

Massachusetts has succeeded in building a robust fleet of small-scale solar—on recent sunny spring days, it has generated close to half the region’s demand. But leaders knew they needed batteries to keep cleaning up the grid in the hours when solar doesn’t produce. So they created a new policy driver for storage investment called the Clean Peak Standard, which officially took effect in 2020.

The rule orders utilities to serve a percentage of their peak-demand hours with clean electricity, and the target grows with each passing year. Companies that use batteries to save solar energy for the evening—when electricity consumption rises as people get home from work and school—earn credits that they can sell to utilities, providing some revenue certainty outside the wholesale market.

The administration of Gov. Maura Healey, a Democrat, views storage as a key lever to improve energy affordability, Undersecretary of Energy Michael Judge said, because it makes better use of existing grid infrastructure to meet peak demand.

Batteries can fit a lot of power into a relatively small footprint, without smokestacks or pollution.

“Store all that solar energy that we’re producing in the middle of the day and bring down the cost of operating the system for everyone,” he said. ​“You don’t have to run these peakers, and you get all the emissions benefits and integration of clean energy benefits, too.”

It took several years for the rule to actually spur batteries in the multihundred-megawatt range, but now that era has begun. Advantage Capital, for example, factored in revenues from the Clean Peak Standard when it analyzed and underwrote the investment in the Medway project, Bitting noted. A total of 725 megawatts of battery storage had qualified for the Clean Peak Standard as of early March, according to state data.

Stand-alone grid battery projects are also bolstered by a federal tax credit that can cut investment costs by 30 percent, an incentive that the Trump administration preserved in last summer’s budget law even as it slashed support for wind, solar, and electric vehicles.

Clean Peak cash alone doesn’t pay the bills; battery developers still need to make money in the marketplace. Though New England lacks long-term capacity contracts, storage companies in the region have at least two factors working in their favor: some of the nation’s highest electricity prices and growing demand for power.

“It’s very difficult to get additional generation online in an area with high population density, because regardless of what type of power generation you’re building, it requires a lot of space,” Bitting said. Batteries, though, can fit a lot of power into a relatively small footprint, without the smokestacks or pollution that make it hard to build new fossil-fueled plants in populous areas.

Batteries compete directly with gas power plants to serve the peak hours of demand, when prices are highest. That’s especially valuable in New England, where gas supplies are stretched thin between power generation and home heating on the coldest days of the year.

“When it’s cold, the households are going to continue to demand it,” Bitting said. ​“But if we can ease some of the peak on the utility side, that will provide a relief valve to supply.”

Jupiter Power’s colossal Trimount project will continue New England’s foray into large batteries, with the ability to discharge enough power for roughly 500,000 homes, per the developer. Trimount was the largest of four battery projects selected in December from Massachusetts’ statewide solicitation to bring on more Clean Peak power. Previously, battery owners could sell off their Clean Peak credits on a quarterly or annual basis. The new solicitation was designed to produce ​“cost-effective” long-term contracts for storage, giving developers more stable revenue to plan around. Furthermore, Healey doubled down on grid storage in a March 16 executive order that calls for another 5 gigawatts installed by 2035.

“That kind of policy signal, combined with the state’s grid reliability challenges and its decarbonization commitments, creates the conditions for investment at scale,” Hans Detweiler, senior director for development at Jupiter, said in an email.

Massachusetts officials also hope to speed development with new permitting rules, which run large battery applications through a state-level body instead of piecemeal local processes. Community members still get to weigh in, but the program has a clear 15-month timeline and allows just a single appeal to the state Supreme Court, to ensure a more timely resolution of conflicts in the permitting process.

The true test of all these policies will be whether the recent megabatteries kick off a trend, or remain bold outliers in the region’s energy system.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Justin Bieber’s Coachella Livestream Was Fine But Have You Seen These Birds

The most parasocial relationship I have is with a family of eagles that lives in Big Bear Valley, California. I watch them for hours every day through a camera mounted above their nest that is streamed live onto YouTube. There is a mother and a father who’ve been named Jackie and Shadow by the Friends of Big Bear Valley, the nonprofit that runs the webcam. They have two little chicks that, for now, are nameless. Eventually, the two chicks will have their names selected by a group of third graders in Big Bear.

I turn on the livestream when I start my work day, usually watching on my second monitor, but occasionally parking myself on the couch and opting for a more full-screen experience on the TV. I spend my day typing Slack messages, and Jackie and Shadow spend theirs hunting and feeding their babies and maintaining their nest and watching for threats.

When my husband calls on his way home from work to check in I tell him about these developments.

“How was your day?” he asks.

“It was good, but a little stressful because Jackie and Shadow had to leave the chicks to chase off some ravens that were getting too close to the nest.”

“Oh,” he says, “that is stressful,” kindly refraining from pointing out that this information tells him nothing about my day.

My day, usually, is good too, if not also a little stressful. I run the fact-checking department for Mother Jones. I read the news, and like my colleagues, I live in it. I read their reporting carefully, looking for any leaps in logic or possible factual discrepancies or potential legal issues. I believe strongly in what I do, what we do here at the Center for Investigative Reporting, and I like doing it too. Sometimes though, I am overwhelmed by the responsibility of being a journalist in today’s world, or by the news or by just being a person existing.

But I look up from a court document or new draft of a story or an email from a writer when I hear Jackie start to crow. My dog hates the sound, and she’ll pace the living room, looking for the source. Usually, Jackie is shrieking in delight as Shadow delivers a fish from the lake, and she will immediately jump up to feed her chicks. They are just about two weeks old now, but they are growing so fast. They have to, because they’ll fledge the nest in just about eight weeks.

It reminds me of when my husband returns home from work, sometimes with a little treat he’s picked up on the way: a piece of chocolate or a small bag of chips. I crow with delight too, though I have spent the entire day only feet from my kitchen and its full pantry, while Jackie has spent hers 145 feet in the air in a Jeffrey pine tree.

Everything about watching these birds delights me, and simultaneously makes me feel totally insignificant. I get cold and I turn on our heat. Jackie braves snowstorms, creating a canopy with her wings to keep the snow off her chicks. I send more Slacks. Jackie shows her babies how to fly.

Sometimes Jackie stares directly into the camera, and I imagine she’s looking right at me. She can see through the camera and into my living room, me in my enormous stained sweatshirts, my dirty dishes around me, staring at my laptop screen. I wonder how it makes her feel about her nest way up there. I wonder, if from her vantage point, we look as small as I feel.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

The Earth Is Worth Saving. Here’s How We Do It.

As NASA’s Artemis II journeyed into space earlier this month, one of the astronauts took a photo of Earth lit by the moon. Known as “Hello, World,” it’s the first published photograph of our planet taken by a human since 1972. “You could see the entire globe from pole to pole,” Commander Reid Wiseman, who took the photo, said when describing what Earth looked like from space. “It was the most spectacular moment, and it paused all four of us in our tracks.”

“Hello, World” and the Artemis mission have reinvigorated mankind’s awe of our planet. But for Earth to remain a habitable place for humans to flourish, it requires us to take care of it. On this special Earth Day episode of More To The Story, we’re featuring interviews with three influential environmental leaders: former Vice President and founder and chairman of the Climate Reality Project Al Gore; longtime activist Catherine Coleman Flowers; and journalist, author, and activist Bill McKibben.

All three acknowledge the challenges of fighting climate change to protect our planet, especially at a time when the Trump administration is rolling back federal environmental protections. But they’re surprisingly hopeful about our capacity to protect the Earth for future generations.

Find More To The Story on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, iHeartRadio, Pandora, or your favorite podcast app, and don’t forget to subscribe.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Virginia Dems Just Won a Major Battle in Trump’s Redistricting War

Last summer, when Donald Trump began pressuring GOP-controlled states to redraw their congressional maps mid-decade, Republicans had a lofty goal: pick up a dozen or more seats in an effort to fend off a coming blue wave and retain the House in the midterms.

Trump scored early wins in Texas, Missouri, and North Carolina. But the gerrymandering arms race he started hasn’t resulted in the lopsided victory the White House envisioned. The approval by voters in Virginia on Tuesday of a new congressional map that could net Democrats up to four new seats shows how Democrats have fought Trump to a surprising draw in the redistricting wars.

Right now, the parties are basically even in the states that have redrawn their maps since last summer. The new map in Virginia makes it even more likely that Republicans will lose the House in November, given Trump’s tanking approval numbers and the fact that Cook Political Report forecasts that Republicans have to win three-quarters of toss-up races to remain in control, calling Democrats “substantial favorites.”

This is not how Trump and his allies envisioned things going. After easily securing the new maps in Texas, Missouri, and North Carolina, Trump suffered a humiliating defeat when Indiana Republicans refused to redraw their districts. Other GOP-controlled legislatures, including Kansas and Nebraska, also balked. Ohio passed a compromise map that, while favoring Republicans, could have been much worse for Democrats. The courts in Utah struck down the state’s existing map, leading to a likely Democratic pickup. And Missouri voters could have a chance to block that state’s new gerrymander at the polls in November, all of which helps Democrats.

Democrats in California, meanwhile, pulled off an improbable ballot measure to offset the Texas gerrymander by redrawing the Golden State’s maps. Now, Virginia Democrats have followed suit, despite the fact that the process in Virginia was actually much trickier. Democrats had to retake control of the legislature and governorship last November in order to kickstart the redistricting process. Then they had to convince voters in a state that is much less blue than California to pass a constitutional amendment authorizing the very type of partisan gerrymandering that Virginia voters had sought to limit just six years earlier, when they passed a separate constitutional amendment giving a bipartisan commission the power to draw congressional maps. The takeaway is that voters dislike gerrymandering, but they now seem to hate Trump even more.

That said, the redistricting wars are far from over. Florida is planning to convene a special session next week to redraw its congressional map, which could net Republicans between two and five more seats. The Supreme Court could issue a decision any day now striking down the key remaining section of the Voting Rights Act, which could shift a handful of seats toward the GOP—though whether those maps would take effect before November’s elections depends partly on the timing of the decision. (It’s probably too late for most Southern states to draw new maps before the midterms.) And the Virginia Supreme Court could still strike down the new voter-approved map; the court allowed the referendum to proceed after Republicans challenged it but has yet to issue a final decision on the constitutionality of the redistricting effort.

Trump has threatened to “take over” the election system, and the mid-decade gerrymandering spree he started is part of a multi-faceted plan to interfere in the midterms. But while that has deeply destabilized American democracy, the president hasn’t succeeded in stopping Democrats from racking up a series of electoral victories over the past year. The passage of the redistricting referendum in Virginia is the latest sign of Democrats successfully fighting back.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Federal Judge Calls RFK Jr. an “Unsafe” Leader in Order Protecting Trans Youth Health Care

In a scathing ruling describing Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as an “unserious” and “unsafe” leader, a federal judge in Oregon issued an order that will protect doctors and hospitals, and the transgender kids they treat, from the federal crackdown on gender-affirming care.

On Saturday, US District Judge Mustafa T. Kasubhai ruled that Kennedy was acting illegally when he attempted last December to unilaterially cut off federal funding for healthcare providers treating kids with gender dysphoria. “Unserious leaders are unsafe,” Kasubhai wrote in his ruling, adding that Kennedy’s actions “caused chaos and terror for all those people and institutions of our great nation.”

The case began last December, when Kennedy issued a declaration falsely claiming that gender-affirming medical treatments for trans youth “fail to meet professional recognized standards of health care.” In reality, such treatments—including puberty blockers for kids entering adolescence and cross-sex hormones for older teens—are considered necessary for some patients under mainstream medical guidelines, and they’re supported by virtually the entire medical establishment. (And it’s worth noting that the treatments are actually quite rare, despite the amount of political attention paid to them.) Kennedy dubbed the treatments “sex-rejecting procedures” and claimed the right to pull all federal funding from any hospital, clinic, or doctor, found to be providing them. Soon, his department had referred over a dozen children’s hospitals for potential defunding, and hospitals hoping to avoid the federal crackdown began preemptively cutting off treatments for kids with gender dysphoria.

“I will go forward and issue a declaration and see if we can get away with it’ is not a principle of governance that adheres to the overarching commitment to a democratic republic.”

A coalition of 21 mostly Democratic-led states and Washington, DC, immedialy sued, arguing Kennedy had skipped the legally required procedures for such a drastic policy change. Last month, Kasubhai agreed that Kennedy had overstepped his authority and issued an order temporarily blocking the declaration. “The notion that ‘I will go forward and issue a declaration and see if we can get away with it’ is not a principle of governance that adheres to the overarching commitment to a democratic republic that requires the rule of law to be regarded and respected and honored as sacred,” the judge said at the time.

But Kasubhai’s first order wasn’t stopping the Trump administration. While the court case played out, HHS began going through the formal rule-making process, proposing a sweeping regulation that would strip federal Medicaid and Medicare funding from any hospital that provides trans youth health care, which I wrote about in depth last week. Such a regulation, if implemented, would force hospitals nationwide to cut off trans kids’ care or else face financial devastation. A former Trump policy aide has referred to the proposed rule as a “nuclear weapon.” A second proposed policy would ban federal insurance programs for kids in low-income families from covering the treatments.

Now, Kasubhai has thrown a new wrench in the administration’s plans. His ruling on Saturday makes permanent his prior order blocking Kennedy’s declaration. But the judge also went further, prohibiting HHS from enacting any similar policy “which supercedes or purports to supercede the professionally recognized standards of care” in the states that sued. “Despite repeatedly emphasizing their commitment and obligation to protect children, Defendants have sweepingly wielded the Kennedy Declaration to threaten children’s hospitals that provide life-saving care to children,” Kasubhai wrote.

Such a broad order was necessary, Kasubhai wrote, because the Trump administration has a track record of “evading or flouting” prior court orders.

The judge also took particular exception to an argument made by HHS that Kennedy’s declaration couldn’t be blocked because it was simply an example of the secretary exercising his right to free speech. The department’s arguments are based on “the bald-faced lie that the Kennedy Declaration amounts to nothing more than one man’s musings on gender-affirming care,” Kasubhai thundered. “Defendants cannot bully or gaslight this Court into ignoring the many procedural and legal flaws of the Kennedy Declaration by invoking one of the most sacred principles of our constitutional democracy—the freedom of speech—when that principle comes nowhere close to being implicated.”

Kasubhai’s order is sweeping enough that it likely blocks not just Kennedy’s declaration but also the soon-to-be-finalized Medicaid and Medicare regulations, according to Jennifer Levi, senior director of transgender and queer rights at GLAD Law. “This administration has tried to come back multiple times and do the same thing and then try to characterize it as something new,” she explains. “The court wanted to prevent that from happening.”

The Trump administration could appeal Kasubhai’s ruling. But now, if ittries to finalize its regulations in their current form, the states defending trans youth health care can go back to Kasubhai and argue that HHS is violating the injunction, Levi says. As a result, it seems likely that the regulations will be promptly blocked—if the Trump administration does decide to finalize them.

And that matters because hospitals across the country are watching this legislation closely to figure out if it’s financially and legally safe enough for them to offer trans youth health care. Could those hospitals who ended treatments restart them on the strength of Kasubhai’s new ruling? “I think they certainly could, and I think they should,” Levi tells me.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

And Then There Was Mills

At the start of last week, there were four members of Congress at risk of expulsion due to allegations of severe misconduct. Two of those members, Reps. Tony Gonzales (R-Texas) and Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), quickly resigned. On Tuesday afternoon, Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-Fla.) became the third member of Congress to resign in eight days. Now only one of the scandal-plagued members is still standing: Rep. Cory Mills (R-Fla.).

The allegations against Swalwell and Gonzales involved accusations of misconduct against women—including rape in Swalwell’s case. (The former California congressman has said that “allegations of sexual assault are flat false.”) Cherfilus-McCormick was indicted by a federal grand jury in November based on allegations that she and her brother stole government funding then used some of it to make illegal contributions to her campaign. A subcommittee of the House Ethics committee more recently found a pattern of “progressive and compounding corruption.” (The Florida Democrat resigned moments before the Ethics committee met to determine what, if any, punishment she should face.)

The accusations against Mills, who remains under investigation by the Ethics Committee, are shockingly wide-ranging. As I reported in a February profile, the Florida congressman has been accused of:

  • Severely exaggerating his military record by falsely claiming to have been an Army Ranger, an Army sniper, and a Special Forces qualified medic—none of which are supported by records released by the Army
  • Earning a Bronze Star through stolen valor and false claims about saving the lives of multiple former Army comrades in Iraq
  • Punching someone during a trip to Ireland while serving in Congress in 2023
  • Threatening to share sexually explicit content of an ex-girlfriend and, according to court testimony, saying he would kill her future partners

In October, a Florida judge placed a restraining order on Mills after concluding that he subjected his ex-girlfriend to “dating violence” via cyberstalking. Mills has defended himself by noting that he has never been criminally charged for that, or other, alleged misbehavior. That is true but highly misleading. Mills spent more than three hours in court as part of the restraining order case. He took the stand to defend himself but failed to convince a Florida judge to rule in his favor. (As part of his decision, the judge determined that Mills was not “truthful” about explicit material recorded during the relationship.)

Earlier last year, Mills was also implicated in an alleged assault involving a different girlfriend, although she later retracted the claim. According to bodycam footage and documents recently obtained by the Washington Post, police were on the verge of arresting Mills in relation to those allegations. The Post explained:

Before changing her account, the woman had shown [officer] Mazloom bruises on her arms and marks on her face, the body-camera footage shows. Tearful, she told the officer that Mills had harmed her during an argument and forcibly removed her from his Southwest Washington penthouse apartment, according to the footage.

Subsequent bodycam footage reviewed by the Post showed the alleged victim talking on the phone. She then told Mazloom, the DC police officer, that “he wants me to say” that the marks “were from our vacation and that I bruise easily.” According to the Post, Mazloom told fellow officers that he understood the alleged victim had been speaking to Mills.

Mills, an Army veteran who became an international arms dealer before running for Congress, has made enemies on both sides of the aisle in Washington. On Monday, Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.), who has been in a long-running feud with her Republican colleague, introduced a resolution to expel Mills from Congress. Mills is reportedly weighing introducing his own resolution to expel Mace. (His congressional office has not responded to multiple interview requests and requests for comment that I have sent between January and April.)

For now, Mills may remain safe from expulsion as the Ethics Committee investigation proceeds on an open-ended timeline. This fall, though, Mills is facing what is likely to be his first truly competitive reelection battle since he entered Congress in 2023. His likely Democratic opponent, Bale Dalton, is a former Navy helicopter pilot who served as the chief of staff for NASA.

In 2024, Mills won by 13 points in his Republican-leaning district. In a normal year with a normal Republican running for reelection, that would be an insurmountable challenge for Democrats. In 2026, as Democrats overperform in races across the country and Mills’ scandals become more widely known, none of the usual rules apply.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

The Working Families Party Is Riding The Anti-AI Wave

Voters are anxious about losing their jobs to artificial intelligence, and key players across the political spectrum have started to notice.

Now, the Working Families Party has rolled out a slate of policy proposals for the midterms, backed by more than two dozen Democratic candidates and representatives, that aims to address that anxiety. Their plan to counter AI-related job losses? Not a direct cash dividend, but a program seeking to place Americans in union jobs.

A recent Quinnipiac poll showed that over half of Americans believe AI does more harm than good in their day-to-day lives, and 70 percent think that broad AI adoption will decrease the overall number of available jobs.

With the midterms coming up, corporations and politicians are looking to address these fears. This month, OpenAI proposed creating a “public wealth fund” that would “provide every citizen with a stake in AI-driven economic growth.” Yesterday, New York Assemblyman Alex Bores proposed a taxation framework designed to redistribute wealth from major AI corporations to people whose jobs might be displaced by their products, calling it an “AI dividend.”

The Working Families Party, meanwhile, is proposing what looks like another Green New Deal-style jobs program to solve the same problem.

Julie Gonzales, who is running for U.S. Senate in Colorado, said the WFP’s union jobs would be in green infrastructure and healthcare, though the platform itself doesn’t specify how this jobs program would work. “Corporations and the do-nothing Dems they support have shipped jobs overseas, cut wages, and busted unions to boost their own profits,” Gonzales said.

A jobs guarantee hasn’t seen much success since the Works Progress Administration of the 1940s—despite broad popular support for such a policy. The new WFP platform, called the “Working Families Guarantee,” also includes guaranteed low-cost health and childcare. They plan to fund this program by (you guessed it) increasing taxes on the rich. “The working families guarantee is what working people deserve, and we are coming to collect,” said Maurice Mitchell, the group’s national political director. The politicians endorsing the Working Families Guarantee include Representative Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) and Rep. Delia C. Ramirez (D-IL). Several prominent candidates—among them Brad Lander in New York, Charles Booker in Kentucky, and Graham Platner in Maine—have also signed on.

The Working Families Guarantee platform is part of an ongoing struggle over the future of AI policy within the Democratic Party. The Searchlight Institute, a moderate think tank which pitches itself as the leader of a “realignment” within the party, has vocally opposed efforts to limit datacenter buildout. (Searchlight, however, is backed by Nvidia-linked donors.) Third Way, another centrist Democratic think tank, has taken similar positions.

The WFP, a relatively small left-wing party with big influence, wants to push moderate candidates further to the left. They’ve found a foothold among younger voters, who increasingly distrust both major parties. Ravi Mangla, National Press Secretary for the Working Families Party, told Mother Jones “people want leaders with backbone, yet groups like Third Way and the Searchlight Institute are telling Democrats to avoid taking positions on things like guaranteed health care and AI regulations.”

“That,” Mangla said, “is a losing position.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Why Kevin Warsh Won’t Grade Trump’s Economy

Donald Trump’s nominee for Federal Reserve chair promised to bring a new inflation framework and regime change to the central bank on Tuesday morning—all while maintaining that the president’s economy was doing just great.

One bizarre exchange between nominee Kevin Warsh and Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.) during the former’s confirmation hearing was telling:

“If Professor Warsh were to assign a letter grade to the American economy today for the average working family, what grade would you assign?” Warnock asked.

“In modern academic institutions they give everyone A’s,” Warsh joked to a handful of laughs in the crowd. “If I give a student anything but an A, I would have been summoned to the dean’s office.”

While Warnock’s question had a peculiar frame—Warsh became a lecturer at Stanford University after resigning from the Federal Reserve Board of Governors in 2011 over disagreements on how to improve the US economy—the Fed chair nominee avoided a factual response, lest it displease the president.

WARNOCK: What grade would you give the American economy?WARSH: Well, if i gave a student anything other than an A, the dean would summon me because I would've hurt his self-imageWARNOCK: Consumer confidence is at a record low. That's Americans' grade on the economy

Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) 2026-04-21T15:46:53.513Z

Warsh made a similar move when Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.) asked him about Trump’s remarks that “the roaring economy is roaring like never before” in his State of the Union address in February.

“The broad contours of the economy are improving,” Warsh responded. “I think it can improve more, and in the years ahead, I think the economy’s potential is strengthening.”

Warsh’s comment comes amid a massive affordability crisis with prices skyrocketing even further during the US-Israeli ongoing war in Iran and Trump’s tariffs—even if Wall Street appears to be happy.

It wasn’t just larger economic issues that Warsh avoided answering. Democratic senators, and even Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), questioned whether the nominee was as independent from political pressure as he asserts. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) criticized Warsh for flip-flopping on his position on interest rates, which notably aligned with Trump when he won the 2024 election. During the 2008 financial crisis, Warsh, who was a Federal Reserve board member at the time, argued against lowering interest rates to help American families and businesses borrow money. Instead, banks got bailouts during his term.

Warren said Trump passed on nominating Warsh for Fed chair over his stance on interest rates, “but as soon as Donald Trump became president a second time,” Warsh “began shouting from the rooftops about how the Fed should cut interest rates.”

Just a few hours before the Senate confirmation hearing on Tuesday, Trump appeared on CNBC’s Squawk Box and said he would be disappointed if Warsh did not cut interest rates immediately upon getting confirmed. Last week, when asked on Fox Business whether interest rates would still drop this year, Trump answered, “When Kevin gets in, I do.” And last December, Trump said that “anybody that disagrees with me will never be the Fed chairman.”

Warsh’s confirmation hearing comes as Trump strains to restore the economy and the public’s confidence before the midterm elections this November. The nomination is one desperate move in a desperate campaign by a desperate party.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Catholics Welcome Everyone, But Can They Handle Some of These New Converts?

Vice President JD Vance, a recent Catholic convert, has had a lot to say in recent weeks about his newfound religion – and it’s rubbing some cradle Catholics the wrong way.

Last week at a Turning Point event, Vance addressed remarks Pope Leo XIV made about the war in Iran.

“I think it’s very, very important for the pope to be careful when he talks about matters of theology,” he said.

This was after his boss, President Donald Trump, posted an AI-generated image of himself depicted as Jesus and called the pope weak on crime.

The pope has been vocal about his opposition to Trump’s handling of the war in Iran. After the president posted on social media that Iran could lose their entire civilization if they didn’t bend to his will, the pope told reporters: “Today, as we all know, there was this threat against the entire people of Iran, and this is truly unacceptable.”

The feud between the pope and the president has led to admonishments from nearly every bishop in the church, according to National Catholic Reporter columnist Michael Sean Winters. But some recent converts, like Vance, are speaking quite loudly and confidently while still learning the tenets of their faith. “I love converts, but you move into somebody’s house, you don’t start rearranging the furniture,” Winters said.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

There Are Eric Swalwells Across State Governments

Two lawmakers—Eric Swalwell and Tony Gonzales—resigned from office last week amid unrelated House Ethics Committee investigations over alleged sexual misconduct. And yesterday, the Committee stated that since 2017, they have initiated no less than 20 misconduct investigations against members of Congress, most of whom have not ended up resigning.

Sexual misconduct is pervasive in America’s statehouses, too, according to a new report by the National Women’s Defense League, a group focused on preventing sexual harassment in the workplace. The group started reporting on accusations against state lawmakers in 2023, tracking accusations going back to 2013.

NWDL has found credible sexual harassment allegations against 162 sitting state officials, in 424 incidents between 2013 and 2026. Six of those lawmakers were accused in 2025 — Ryan Armagost (R-Colo.); Ron Weinberg (R-Colo.); Jeremy Dean (D-Mo.); Dan McKeon (R-Neb.); Jeremy Olson (R-N.D.); and Solicitor General Judd Stone (R-Texas). Of those 162 lawmakers, 17 are still in office.

“The public record is only the tip of the iceberg,” said Sarah Higginbotham, NWDL co-director. Higginbotham noted that the report only includes public-facing accounts from people able to withstand the fear of retaliation from their bosses. “These numbers understate the harm.”

The problem is bipartisan: at the statehouse level, accusations against Republicans and Democrats happen at near-equal rates. The vast majority of victims are women, and 93 percent of accused officials over the past decade are men.

For Aftyn Behn (D-Tenn.), this isn’t surprising news. “Old-school sexism is absolutely back,” Behn said at a virtual press conference Tuesday morning, before offering a recent example. “Yesterday, a Republican female colleague of mine walked to the lectern on the Tennessee General Assembly House floor to present her bill. A member whistled at her. We all heard it, but nobody said a word, and we just moved on like nothing had happened.”

The problem may also be growing worse. In the years following the #MeToo movement, NWDL co-director Emma Davidson Tribbs said, the number of people reporting workplace sexual misconduct has decreased. “The recent dip in public reporting is a warning sign. It signals distrust in accountability systems,” she said. After Swalwell and Gonzales’ resignations, advocates hope they can push this issue back into the spotlight.

“This moment can, hopefully, give us momentum,” Republican Pennsylvania state representative Abby Major said at Tuesday’s press conference. This past year, five states enacted laws addressing sexual harassment in state legislatures—but most states still have relatively few protections in place. In practice, those protections might look like a confidential sexual misconduct reporting system, transparency around misconduct investigations, and other reforms. “We have to ensure that no one has to choose between their safety and their livelihood,” Major said.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

The Real Reason Tucker Carlson is Turning on Trump

Tucker Carlson would very much like you to forgive him for backing Donald Trump all these years.

“It’s not enough to say ‘I changed my mind’ or ‘this is bad, I’m out,'” Carlson said on his news podcast The Tucker Carlson Show on Monday. “I want to say I’m sorry for misleading people.”

Carlson said he will “be tormented for a long time” for promoting Trump in his campaign for presidency. The podcast episode featured his brother Buckley, who, according to the show’s notes, wrote speeches for Trump in 2015 and “can fully understand how painful the current betrayal is.”

Carlson, it must be noted, claimed his support for Trump “was not intentional.”

Tucker Carlson: I’ll be tormented for a long time by the fact that I played a role in getting Donald Trump elected. We’re implicated in this. I misled people.

Headquarters (@headquartersnews.bsky.social) 2026-04-21T13:12:44.447Z

But it certainly looks intentional. Carlson consistently misled over 3.5 million viewers on his Fox News show. During the lead-up to the 2020 election, Carlson boasted a nightly audience of over 5 million.

Carlson repeatedly spread Trump’s propaganda, including unsubstantiated claims of “meaningful voter fraud” in Georgia following the 2020 election. He also made racist and anti-immigrant remarks, including voicing support for the “great replacement” conspiracy theory, which promotes the fictional idea that nonwhite people are brought to the US to replace white voters and decimate the GOP fundraising base.

Carlson’s breaking point came when Trump invaded Iran and went on a genocidal online crash out by posting a series of religious posts on religious Truth Social posts earlier this month. Carlson said the whole ordeal made “a mockery of Christianity.”

Carlson has been sowing the seeds of redemption for weeks now. After Trump went on several verbal tirades against Pope Leo XIV, who himself criticized the US’ role in the Iran War, Carlson condemned Trump publicly saying on his April 15 show: “Could this be the antichrist? Well, who knows? At least that’s my conclusion.”

So here is my conclusion:Carlson is one of many conservative commentators who now want you to believe they were sold a fake bill of goods. From Marjorie Taylor Greene to Candace Owens, Alex Jones, and Megyn Kelly, right-wing commentators see Trump’s MAGA base defecting. Are these right-wing ideologues suddenly principled defenders of conservative values? Not a chance. They’re all just hucksters who sense a good business opportunity.

These fake outrage artists are even using Trump’s playbook to do it. Call it the latest iteration of the art of the deal.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

As Fuel Prices Soar, Climate Leaders Urge Democrats to Tie Clean Energy to Affordability

This story was originally published by the Guardian and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Democrats should get louder in championing clean energy’s affordability and resilience from global shocks, according to some of the party’s leading voices on the climate.

As the Iran war roils economies by raising the cost of oil and gas, countries are aiming to accelerate their shift to cleaner energy. But in the US, Donald Trump has sought to kill off any alternative to fossil fuels while opposing Democrats have been reluctant to tie the conflict to any action on the climate crisis.

The closure of the Strait of Hormuz, where one-fifth of the world’s oil and gas normally travels, in the wake of the US and Israel’s attack on Iran caused energy costs to spike around the world. In the US, gasoline has soared above $4.10 a gallon nationally, with Trump admitting the costs could even be “a little bit higher” by November.

During the first month of the Iran war, the world’s largest oil and gas companies made more than $30 billion every hour in unearned profit.

Democrats have pointed to this as further evidence of the US president’s broken promises to lower the cost of living for Americans. But there have been few calls for a pivotal switch away from the volatility of fossil fuels in favor of clean energy in response to the conflict, to the frustration of those who support action on the climate crisis.

“There’s a timely clash on climate and costs that Democrats can win, as long as we have the nerve to actually show up to the fight,” said Sheldon Whitehouse, a Democratic senator, who added “true energy independence will be achieved by powering our economy with renewable energy, the fuel sources for which are unlimited, free and independent of geopolitical events.”

“Democrats will continue to lose the righteous and winnable fight over the future of clean energy if we cede the battlefield to fossil fuel liars and our own party’s misguided climate-hushers,” Whitehouse said.

Climate “hushing,” in which politicians and businesses downplay or ignore the need to cut planet-heating emissions, has been prevalent in the US during Trump’s second term. A bruising 2024 election loss and ongoing inflation concerns—polls show gasoline costs are Americans’ top concern about the Iran war—have left Democrats wrestling with a critique of affordability rather than the imperiled livability of the planet, despite the clear link between the two.

The Iran war provides a “unique moment of opportunity” for Democrats to extol the advantages of lower-pollution options like electric cars but the focus should be on “reducing consumer costs, which should’ve been the message over climate protection all along,” according to Paul Bledsoe, a former climate adviser to Bill Clinton’s White House.

“I don’t think they’ve grasped the political opportunity yet,” Bledsoe said. “They have to stay really focused on how these next-generation technologies will provide a consumer benefit. When you pitch clean energy as cutting consumer costs first and improving the overall economy second, people are happy to cut emissions third.”

Translating this into a winning political message has been a struggle for Democrats who in Joe Biden’s administration passed sweeping climate legislation to spur new jobs in the clean energy sector, only for the bill to be gutted by Republicans now in control of Congress. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has proposed a partial resurrection of incentives for clean energy should his party regain power.

But Democrats must do better to pitch solar, wind, and battery technologies as a way to reduce US exposure to international fossil fuel costs dictated by global events, according to Ro Khanna, a leading Democratic member of Congress. “I really believe we missed a moment to do that with the Ukraine war,” he said. “We should have been linking the clean energy agenda to Americans’ economic security and our national security, and we should do that again.”

Longer term, Khanna added, the US needs to “wean ourselves off the petrostates. We need a moonshot for clean technology.”

Such a shift from fossil fuels, which scientists say is imperative if the world is to avert catastrophic climate impacts, has been stymied by Trump, who has implemented a “drill, baby drill” approach to oil and gas extraction and has taken extraordinary measures, even amid the Iran crisis, to halt domestic clean energy generation that he has called a “scam” and a “con job.”

“Wars don’t disrupt the supply of sunlight for solar power, and wind power does not depend on vulnerable shipping straits.”

The soaring price of oil may even be beneficial, Trump has suggested, because “when oil prices go up, we make a lot of money.” This money is mostly flowing to large fossil fuel corporations, with the world’s largest 100 oil and gas companies making more than $30 billion every hour in unearned profit during the first month of the war.

Trump’s approach differs starkly from that of other countries that have sought to rapidly reduce their exposure to a faraway conflict. Electric car sales have boomed in South Korea and Malaysia, while in Pakistan electric rickshaws have been selling out. “This is a wake-up call,” Indonesian president Prabowo Subianto said recently. “We will convert all motorcycles into electric motorcycles. All cars, all trucks, all tractors must [also] be electric.”

The European Union, too, plans to accelerate clean energy deployment to help alleviate electricity bills. “Every delayed investment in the energy transition risks greater cost for society at a later stage,” a draft European Commission proposal states. The plan comes ahead of a conference in Colombia this month where representatives from 85 countries will gather to craft a roadmap on how to move beyond the fossil fuel era.

The Iran war is a case study for the need to make this transition, according to the United Nations. “Clean energy is the antidote to fossil fuel cost chaos, because it is cheaper, safer, and faster to market,” said Simon Stiell, the UN’s climate chief. “Wars don’t disrupt the supply of sunlight for solar power, and wind power does not depend on vulnerable shipping straits.”

The mounting toll of the climate crisis, though, is the primary reason to ditch coal, oil and gas, advocates argue. Such impacts are increasingly apparent in the US, as well as the rest of the world, with the country enduring its hottest and driest start to a year in recorded history, with record-breaking March heat and punishing bouts of drought, heat and wildfire strafing much of the US west.

Despite the Trump administration’s dismissal of climate science, two-thirds of Americans are worried about global heating, polling has shown, with most people in the US underestimating how concerned others are about the topic as it has receded from coverage in many media outlets.

There has been “a surprising silence” from Democrats and climate activists on how clean energy is cheaper, inexhaustible and more locally controlled compared with fossil fuels, according to Anthony Leiserowitz, an academic at Yale University who studies public perceptions of the climate crisis. “And, oh by the way, it reduces the carbon pollution causing global warming,” he added.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

What We Lost When We Lost Self Magazine

Last week, the publishing conglomerate Condé Nast shuttered Self, a women’s health publication that in recent years had turned to publishing service journalism on chronic health conditions that was both practical and normalized living with chronic illness. Amid a trend of unrealistic articles on longevity and ambiguously defined, MAHA-coded writing on “wellness,” Self was a breath of fresh air.

“SELF has played an important role in shaping conversations around health and wellness,” Condé Nast CEO Roger Lynch said in a memo published last week. “However, as audience behaviors shift, we have not seen a path for SELF to continue in its current form as a digital publication.” Lynch’s memo said that health and wellness content would “be integrated into our other brands, including Allure and Glamour.” Self had already gone digital-only and ceased print publication in 2017.

I spoke to chronically ill women who had been dedicated readers of Self about what the magazine, and its closure, meant to them. Self may not have been a revenue driver for Condé, but its work was transformative for readers, quietly shifting away from the typical fare of women’s magazines in the 2000s and 2010s—like problematic weight-loss content—to a more progressive vision of women’s health and wellness.

Self‘s conversational style of writing about health topics made the publication more accessible, said Jaime Seltzer, scientific director of the myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome nonprofit MEAction, who was interviewed by then–editor-in-chief Rachel Miller for a 2022 article that Seltzer said sparked more awareness around ME/CFS and Long Covid and had a major impact on people who were trying to figure out what is happening to their health.

“The more people who know they have a disease, the more they can get the clinical care that they need,” Seltzer said. “A really good article like this is a great way to show a friend or a relative what you’re going through.”

Beth Morton, a migraine care advocate said she appreciated Self‘s non-stigmatizing articles on the condition by people who lived with migraines themselves. Self “still had an impact,” Morton said, lamenting the decision to shutter the magazine.

Myisha Malone-King, a chronic illness advocate living with Crohn’s disease, said Self made her feel seen and supported when she struggled with getting medical care for an ovarian cyst. “I felt extremely lonely when I was diagnosed,” Malone-King said, calling the publication’s folding “a huge blow.”

Condé Nast hasn’t announced what will happen to Self‘s digital presence and archives, and representatives for the company did not respond to a query about whether the site would stay online—or whether it would follow other folded media outlets, like the feminist publication Bitch Media, which also engaged frequently with chronic illness and disability, into digital oblivion (though some articles from Bitch are being republished in The Flytrap).

Vivian Delchamps Wolf, a disabled and chronically ill professor of English at Dominican University of California, told me how much she valued Self’s ability to capture the social dimensions of chronic illness, as with a piece by its former staff writer Katie Camero on how to navigate friendships with people who don’t seem to get what life with a chronic illness is like.

Reporting in that vein, Delchamps Wolf said, “clearly comes from an authentic space and refuses to present chronic illness as pitiful.”

“It’s so important that journalists address issues like medical racism and other systemic barriers that worsen people’s experiences of chronic illness,” Delchamps Wolf said. “In addition to talking about medical concerns, we have to acknowledge chronic illness as a politically, culturally, and socially marginalized category to bring about substantive change.”

Now, there’s one fewer publication where that can happen.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Trump’s Hormuz Blockade Is a Catch-22

“If it works, it’s not great for the US. And if it doesn’t work, it’s also not great for the US.”

That’s what Jeff Colgan, a political science professor and director of the Climate Solutions Lab at the Watson Institute for Public and International Affairs at Brown University, told me last week about the US naval blockade on Iranian ports.

The Trump administration’s stated intention was to stop Iran from profiting off the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. At the time, Iran’s government only allowed its own ships, and those of some of its allies, safe transit in the waterway. Iran was also reportedly charging tolls for at least some other ships to pass through the Strait of Hormuz, a key waterway in the Persian Gulf through which approximately 20 percent of global crude oil and natural gas flowed before the US and Israel launched strikes on Iran starting in February. Much of that oil went to Asian countries, with China, India, and Japan as the primary importers.

The US military implemented the blockade last Monday in response, saying last Tuesday that global sea trade with Iran had “completely halted.” But as Colgan says, “there’s this kind of Catch-22”: the more effective the US military blockade is, “the more it ripples out to global energy markets and affects everybody,” including voters “who are not going to be pleased with higher prices.”

Since I spoke with Colgan on Wednesday**,** oil prices have risen even further. Despite the ceasefire between the US and Iran established earlier this month, few ships have been able to cross the strait. As I recently reported, Iran reportedly shot at two Indian-flagged ships on Saturday and Trump said on Sunday that Marines stormed and seized an Iranian cargo ship trying to run its blockade “by blowing a hole in the engineroom.”

On Friday, Trump said that the naval blockade would “remain in full force” until Iran agreed to a deal, while Iran has vowed to not open the strait until the US withdraws its blockade, which it argues violates the ceasefire agreement.

In short, although the US and Iran now appear set to continue peace negotiations in Islamabad, don’t count on significant advances anytime soon.

Many reports on the fight for control of Hormuz hinge on national governments’ claims about poorly documented conflict at sea; tracking individual ships in the region is overwhelming, and verifying the bulk ofmilitary statements is nearly impossible.

That’s partly the usual “fog of war,” Colgan says, but it’s exacerbated by what he calls the Trump administration’s “casual relationship with truth.”

Oil markets, ship transits, and other bellwethers of the ceasefire are fluctuating wildly. As a way of tracking what’s going on, Colgan says those types of assessments are doubtful at best.

But one measurement that remains palpable for American consumers is the gas pump. According to Brown University’s Climate Solutions Lab, Americans have spent $23.4 billion more on gasoline and dieselsince the start of the war on February 28. That comes out to $178.43 per household in the US, as the national average price of gasoline has increased by more than a third to $4.04 per gallon and diesel prices have risen by just over 50 percent.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Corporations Are Getting Tariff Refunds. Americans? Not So Much.

The Trump administration has officially begun the process of repaying up to $175 billion in illegally collected tariffs, following a February Supreme Court ruling. It’s the biggest such repayment program in history, and over 330,000 businesses stand to benefit. But American consumers—that is, the people who ended up shouldering higher prices thanks to these fees—likely won’t see the cash anytime soon.

Justin Wolfers, a professor of economics at the University of Michigan, told Mother Jones the tariffs—a vast set of taxes Trump imposed on imports—“haven’t achieved what they were meant to achieve.”

“They were meant to onshore manufacturing—it’s continued to shrink. They were meant to lead to new factories being built—that hasn’t happened. They were meant to lead to an increase in government revenue—but the government’s about to write a whole bunch of checks. They were meant to lead to the US having leverage and signing new trade deals. We have effectively done none of that. So at a minimum, it achieved nothing positive.”

The refunds, then, might seem like a step towards minimizing the economic damage of “Liberation Day.” But Wolfers said that’s not how he’d put it in his Economics 101 class. “Often in economics, what we’ll do is we’ll try to subsidize something that we want more of, or we’ll tax something that we want less of”—a basic incentive structure. These tariff refunds don’t incentivize much, because “they’re purely tied to what you did in the past, which means [companies] have no incentive to do anything.”

“This is more like when your grandma sends money for your birthday,” he said. Smaller companies that folded entirely after the onset of Trump’s tariffs—think women selling handmade earrings on Etsy from their living rooms—won’t be refunded. Consumers, too, will likely miss out.

In February, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told reporters at the Economic Club of Dallas, “I’ve got a feeling the American people won’t see” the money. “My sense is this could be dragged out for weeks, months, years, so … we’ll see what happens there,” Bessent added.

“So, nothing here has helped American consumers,” Wolfers said. “If Costco raised the price of olive oil, I paid that higher price, and now I’m poorer. Costco, now, gets a refund. So what we did is, we took money out of the government coffers and gave it to Costco. Costco is not going to write me a check, it has no reason to. And now there’s less money in the government coffers, so eventually they’re going to tax me some more.” Theoretically, shoppers could benefit from lower prices after the tariffs—but the Budget Lab at Yale suggests that’s not the case, and that corporations haven’t stopped passing costs on to consumers.

One group of Costco-shoppers is attempting to sue the supermarket chain for collecting tariff prices from consumers, “while simultaneously seeking refunds of the same tariff payments from the federal government.” So, they’d be repaid by the government for costs that have already been passed on to shoppers.

“Costco stands to recover the same tariff payments twice” if the court doesn’t intervene, the customers wrote in their complaint. As of April 9th, over 56,000 importers had already completed the necessary steps to get an electronic refund—but they aren’t required to pass any of that money onto consumers.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

The Onion Says It Has Again Struck a Deal to Take Over Infowars

Infowars could finally have a new owner: Global Tetrahedron, the Chicago-based company that owns the satirical news outlet The Onion. The news was first reported by journalist and podcaster Pablo Torre, and also announced by Onion CEO Ben Collins, who wrote on Bluesky, “With the help of the Sandy Hook families, The Onion has reached a long-awaited deal to take over InfoWars.” Collins also said on Bluesky that Infowars’ new creative director will be comedian Tim Heidecker.

This is the Onion’s second attempt to acquire Infowars.

Collins also posted a link to a statement purportedly put out by Global Tetrahedron’s fake owner, Bryce P. Tetraeder. “Today I can finally say the sweetest nine or 10 words in the English language: Global Tetrahedron has completed its plan to control InfoWars,” the statement read. “With this new InfoWars, we will democratize psychological torture, welcoming brutal and sadistic ideas from everyone, even the very stupidest among us. It will be like the Manhattan Project, only instead of a bomb, we will be building a website.”

According to the New York Times, the Onion has reached a deal with the bankruptcy receiver overseeing Infowars, Gregory S. Milligan, to license the website from Milligan. Despite the Onion‘s description of the deal, its bid must still be approved by Judge Maya Guerra Gamble in a Texas district court.

This is the Onion’s second attempt to acquire Infowars. While Global Tetrahedron won a 2024 bankruptcy auction to buy the company while promising to turn the site into a parody of itself, a bankruptcy judge voided the results, saying that he wasn’t convinced the company’s bid had more value than one offered by allies of Jones. The announcement is the latest installment in an endless series of legal skirmishes that began in 2018, when the families of people killed during the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School sued Jones for defamation. Jones repeatedly claimed on-air that the shootings were a hoax; he lost all the lawsuits filed against him in Texas and Connecticut by default after failing to meaningfully participate in discovery.

If the past is any guide, Jones’ public response will likely involve a good deal of shouting and a vow to remain on-air, no matter what. During a live broadcast on Monday, after a viewer called to ask about the news, Jones said a “new thing” would soon be in place. Since 2024, Jones has been directing his viewers to buy supplements and donate money at a new site, the Alex Jones Store, which is currently hawking a “last-stand super sale” of Infowars products, billed as a “fundraiser” to keep the company alive. Jones has also said that if Infowars is shut down, he’ll immediately begin broadcasting from the Alex Jones Network, a website which currently broadcasts a mirror of Infowars content.

“Rumors of my death have been greatly exaggerated,” Jones added. “The media is going to run around and call this a victory. They already are. It’s all going to blow up in their face.”

_The Onion’_s CEO Ben Collins did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

This is a breaking news story and will be updated.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Palantir Wants To Bring Back the Draft

On Sunday afternoon, Palantir, the defense-tech company that sells software to clients like ICE, the US military, and the Israeli military,decided to give us all a piece of their mind. The company’s official X account published a list of excerpts from co-founder Alex Karp’s 2025 book The Technological Republic.

The book frames Silicon Valley’s move into military technology as the righteous repayment of a “moral debt” owed to the country that built the tech billionaire class. “The engineering elite of Silicon Valley has an affirmative obligation to participate in the defense of the nation.”

If you read past the post and dig into the book itself, you’ll find that this sentence continues: “the engineering elite must also, Karp said, participate in “the articulation of a national project—what is this country, what are our values, and for what do we stand.”

That is to say: Men like Karp should decide what this country is.

“If a US Marine asks for a better rifle, we should build it; and the same goes for software,” Palantir’s Bill-Ackman-esque digression continued. It asserts that the future of American military dominance will not depend on nuclear deterrence, but on AI weaponry — possibly like the Palantir AI product that is reportedly used to help generate ‘kill lists’ for the Israeli military in Gaza.

Then, after arguing for the primacy of its own products—called “spy tech” by Palantir’s critics—Karp suggests the remilitarization of the Axis Powers. “The postwar neutering of Germany and Japan must be undone,” Karp’s company account asserted. “The defanging of Germany was an overcorrection for which Europe is now paying a heavy price. A similar and highly theatrical commitment to Japanese pacifism will, if maintained, also threaten to shift the balance of power in Asia.”

That would make those countries massive defense markets, which means more money for Palantir. Right now, about half of their earnings come from their contracts with various governments. A further militarized Japan and Germany could see that share expand further.

The rest of the manifesto is also, essentially, a sales pitch for corporate capture: “hard power in this century will be built on software,” Palantir says, meaning that if America doesn’t buy that software, someone else will. The company has had a banner year profiting on Trump’s ICE crackdowns, and currently holds $970 million in US government contracts, but is eager for more.

As Palantir pitches an increasingly militarized United States, ideologically determined by Silicon-valley tastes—at one point in the post, they suggest bringing back the draft—they’re suggesting a country in which they get all the power.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Trump’s “Petro-Imperialism” Is Pushing the US and Iran to the Brink

Petro-imperialism is back in a big way.

On Monday, Iran’s military vowed to execute “necessary action” against US forces after it fired at and seized an Iranian-flagged ship the day before—destroying any hope for renewed peace negotiations in the near future.

While a spokesperson for Iran’s military called the US’ capture of the Iranian cargo ship trying to pass through a US blockade“blatant aggression,” they said the country’s first priority was to ensure the safety of crew members and their families on board. These developments are a drastic escalation of the fight for control over the Strait of Hormuz.

The Strait of Hormuz is a key waterway in the Persian Gulf through which approximately 20 percent of global crude oil and natural gas flowed—at least before the US and Israel launched strikes on Iran starting in February. Iran announced the re-opening of the strait after a 10-day truce between Israel and Lebanon. (Israel continued its indiscriminate bombing campaign against Lebanon even after the ceasefire agreement between the two countries).

But according to Al Jazeera, Iran reversed its decision on Saturday, stating that the strait will remain closed until the US withdraws its blockade on all ships entering and leaving Iranian ports. Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Iran’s parliamentary speaker, said in a television interview that the blockade, which began last Monday, was “a clumsy and ignorant decision” and violated their ceasefire agreement with the US.

Since then, Iran has reportedly fired at ships with Indian flags attempting to cross the strait and President Donald Trump has threatened to commit war crimes against Iran again by decimating civilian infrastructure—including power plants and bridges—if Iran didn’t agree to re-open the strait in a new deal to end the war. Iran is, of course, not cooperating as the US has persisted with their naval blockade on their shipping ports.

Thus, the two countries are at a stalemate. According to CNN, JD Vance is expected to travel to Pakistan on Tuesday to discuss next steps with Iran, but the vice president isn’t exactly a skilled negotiator.

As Jeff Colgan, a political science professor and Director of the Climate Solutions Lab the Watson Institute for Public and International Affairs at Brown University, told me last month, during which the US and Iran were largely in the same place regarding control of the strait, the Trump administration’s poor planning and foresight to the lasting impacts of their bombing campaign with Israel has brought us to this situation.

More than 3,000 people in Iran have been killed as of April 9 and Iran’s “backs are to the wall”—they have no other realistic option to defend themselves, especially as the US has intervened in Iran’s oil trade since the 1950s.

The Trump administration has returned to what Colgan calls “petro-imperalism,” interventionist policies that not only affect Iran but have also led to the recent attacks on Venezuela.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

The Iran War’s Wild Spike in Diesel Prices Is Eating Into Your Earnings

_This story was originally published b_y Grist and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

The first thing drivers probably check when they go to the gas station is the cost of gasoline—especially with prices surging. What they might not pay as much attention to is diesel. Perhaps they should. The price of that essential fuel has climbed even more quickly, and new data shows that it’s blowing nearly as big a hole in the American economy.

When bombing began in the Middle East, Iran quickly closed the Strait of Hormuz, through which about a fifth of the world’s oil passes. Prices immediately shot up—and, with the United States and Iran failing to negotiate a peace settlement over the weekend, the price of oil is once again rising.

By far the biggest beneficiary of soaring global fuel prices: Russia.

As of April 13, the war has saddled consumers with a staggering $19 billion in added fuel costs, according to researchers at Brown University who recently launched an online tool that tracks the impact of rising oil prices. Although the national conversation has focused on gasoline, diesel accounted for $9.4 billion, or almost half, of that increase. At about $71 per US household, that’s having a profound impact on everyone, even those who do not buy diesel.

“You’re probably feeling it in ways you don’t realize,” said Jeff Colgan, a political scientist at Brown who, along with his students, built the dashboard, which updates continuously. Some people purchase diesel for their passenger vehicles, but the fuel is also essential to commercial operations such as trucking, rail, agriculture, and construction. Virtually every good in the country passes through the diesel supply chain at some point, and higher costs are eventually passed to consumers.

”Diesel is the fuel that powers the economy much more than gasoline does,” said Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis for GasBuddy, an app that lets consumers track fuel prices. He explained that because each barrel of oil produces less diesel than gasoline, the impact has been disproportionately higher. According to the Brown University tracker, diesel prices have climbed 54 percent since the war began on February 28, compared to the 38 percent jump for gasoline.

Gas customers have been driving less as a result, but the industries that rely on diesel rarely have that option. “Gasoline demand is more elastic, meaning as prices go up, Americans can simply reduce consumption to some degree,” said De Haan. Diesel demand, on the other hand, doesn’t move as much.

The timing of the war with Iran is another factor contributing to the relative spike of diesel. The United States and Israel began bombing Iran on the heels of a long, cold winter in New England, where most of the country’s heating oil is consumed. Because heating oil and diesel have nearly identical molecular structures and energy content, there was already upward seasonal pressure on prices at the pump, which the war exacerbated. “Coming out of winter, heating oil consumption is elevated,” said De Haan. “That usually impacts diesel as well.”

Even after the Strait of Hormuz reopens, it will take months for the market to recalibrate.

While rising fuel prices have been bad news for the world’s consumers and economies, there have been some winners. “The really big beneficiaries are the oil producers around the world that haven’t been locked in behind the Strait of Hormuz,” Colgan said. “Russia is by far the biggest one of them, and the United States.”

Despite a two-week ceasefire intended to open the strait, only a handful of ships have transited the embattled waterway. When peace talks collapsed, President Donald Trump announced a blockade on Iranian ports. That campaign started Monday morning, once again driving oil prices higher. The commonly cited benchmark, Brent crude, reflects what traders expect a barrel will be worth in a month or two. But the spot price—or what it actually costs to buy a barrel now—has been trending higher than that, suggesting the crisis could be deeper than many realize.

“Physical prices and physical supplies would reflect a tighter market than I think the forward curve reflects,” said Mike Wirth, the chief executive of Chevron, at a conference last month.

Even when the strait opens and ships start moving again, it could take months to repair damaged oil infrastructure and for the market to recalibrate. It’s also unclear what new factors might be introduced by then. For example, Iran reportedly wants to charge million-dollar tanker fees that could be passed down to customers. But with winter ending and summer—when gasoline prices are highest—coming, De Haan expects the gap in price between the two fuels to shrink.

“From here on out,” he said, “you may see a little bit less of an increase in diesel as markets move up.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Trump’s Approval Rating Sinks to Lowest Point of His Second Term

President Donald Trump’s approval ratings have dropped to their lowest level since the start of his second term.

According to the NBC News Decision Desk Poll released on Sunday, only 37 percent of adults approve of Trump’s work as president. Meanwhile, 63 percent disapprove, including 50 percent who disapprove strongly. Some of that strong disapproval comes from Trump’s handling of skyrocketing costs for most households: Among the over 32,000 American adults that NBC News surveyed over two weeks in March and April, 52 percent said they “strongly disapprove” and 16 percent “somewhat disapprove” of Trump’s handling of inflation and the cost of living.

That’s a large disapproval jump compared to a few months ago. When NBC News asked the same inflation question to Americans last August, 45 percent noted they “strongly disapprove”—seven percentage points lower than this month’s results.

The NBC results also suggest that Trump is beginning to lose his voter base. The number of Republicans who approve of Trump’s performance on inflation sank by 10 percentage points (from 83 to 73 percent) since last summer. The poll also found that overall support for the president dropped by four percentage points (from 87 to 83 percent) among his Republican support in just two months.

Inflation has taken a toll across the country: 40 percent of the NBC poll respondents said their personal finances were worse today than a year ago. That’s the highest response to that question of any poll by the network during Trump’s second term.

The poll also found that approximately two-thirds of Americans disapprove of Trump’s war campaign in Iran. NBC News reported on Sunday that this percentage did not change significantly even after the US government announced a two-week ceasefire with Iran earlier in April. The agreement is set to expire this week.

Notably, the Decision Desk poll recorded improvements in Trump’s approval rating on immigration and border security at 44 percent, a four percentage point increase from the previous survey in late January and early February. This comes after Trump removed Border Patrol commander-at-large Greg Bovino in late January and DHS secretary Kristi Noem in March.

According to the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, a nonprofit and nonpartisan data research and distribution organization at Syracuse University, over 60,000 people are being detained by ICE as of April 4. About 70 percent of those detainees have no criminal convictions. Meanwhile, the number of immigrants who have died while in ICE custody has reached a record-high. Since last October, 29 people have died, according to NPR, exceeding the previous annual record.

With midterm elections coming up this fall, continuous drops in Trump’s approval ratings could impact key races across the country if Americans see them as a referendum on the failures of his administration.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Trump Threatens War Crimes in Iran Again

In a Truth Social tirade on Sunday morning, President Donald Trump claimed that Iran violated their ceasefire agreement with the US by firing shots at ships in the Strait of Hormuz and again threatened to commit war crimes by taking out the country’s energy infrastructure.

“Many of [the bullets] were aimed at a French Ship, and a Freighter from the United Kingdom,” Trump contended about Iran’s targeting of the ships, without evidence. “That wasn’t nice, was it?”

The US and Iran agreed to a two-week ceasefire in early April. The agreement is set to expire later this week, and the US continues to negotiate next steps around access to the Strait—the world’s most important oil transit corridor. “We’re offering a very fair and reasonable DEAL, and I hope they take it,” Trump wrote in the same social media post. “If they don’t, the United States is going to knock out every single Power Plant, and every single Bridge, in Iran. NO MORE MR. NICE GUY!”

International law experts consider strikes on infrastructure—even if they qualify as military targets—to be war crimes because they cause disproportionate harm to civilians.

Here we go again

MeidasTouch (@meidastouch.com) 2026-04-19T14:28:26.316Z

On Saturday, the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations organization, developed by Britain’s Royal Navy, reported two incidents of ships being hit in the Strait of Hormuz. Those ships, along with several others, turned back. The two vessels appear to both belong to India, according to India’s ministry of external affairs.

This reported attack took place the day after Iran re-established an effective closure of the strait on Saturday, overturning its announcement less than 24 hours before to “completely open” the shipping waterway during the Israel-Lebanon ceasefire.

According to Al Jazeera, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy explained on Saturday that the nation decided to close the strait until the US withdraws its blockade on all ships entering and leaving Iranian ports. Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Iran’s parliamentary speaker, said in a television interview that the blockade, which began last week, was “a clumsy and ignorant decision” and violated the ceasefire agreement.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps threatened that ships attempting to cross the strait during Iran’s closure would be considered in “cooperation with the enemy” and “any violating vessels would be targeted.” That same day, reports began to come out of the two ships hit in the strait.

Trump announced in the same Truth Social message that US officials will arrive in Pakistan on Monday to resume negotiations with Iran. According to the Associated Press, Iran did not immediately confirm whether they would send representatives to meet the US delegation. If JD Vance’s failed negotiations with Iran last week are anything to go by, it doesn’t seem like an agreement will happen anytime soon.

More than 3,000 people have been killed in Iran as of April 9 since US and Israeli strikes began at the end of February, according to Iran’s forensic chief. The US military has confirmed 13 combat-related deaths in the region.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Rich Nations’ Plastic Waste Is Burned for Fuel Abroad, Creating Grave Health Risks

This article was originally published as part of the Undark series “What I Left Out.” In this installment, journalist Beth Gardiner shares a story that didn’t make it into her recent book, Plastic Inc.: The Secret History and Shocking Future of Big Oil’s Biggest Bet. It is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Tropodo is a pretty village of narrow streets and brightly colored houses, set amid lush green fields in the eastern part of Java, Indonesia’s most populous island. Tall chimneys puffing streams of black smoke jut up behind many of its homes, but they’re only noticeable from a distance, so they hardly mar the town’s rustic feel.

cover of Beth Gardiner's book Plastics Inc

Penguin Random House

While most of my reporting has focused on where plastic comes from—the oil and petrochemical companies that are pushing ever more of it into our lives—I’ve come to Tropodo to see where some of the hundreds of millions of tons produced every year end up.

About 12 percent of plastic waste is burned globally, according to a landmark study based on data through 2015. Even when done in incinerators equipped with air scrubbers and filters, such burning is linked to higher rates of premature birth, congenital abnormalities including heart and neural tube defects, and may increase cancer risk for those living nearby, studies have found.

But when plastics—which a Nature study last year found can contain any of more than 16,000 different chemicals, a quarter of which may pose health concerns—are burned in low-tech furnaces lacking any pollution-reduction technology, the dangers are far greater.

That’s exactly what happens in Tropodo, a tofu production center where informal backyard factories use plastic as a fuel for making the soy-based staple.

A furnace with a pile of plastic bits going into the flames.

In Muhammed Gufron’s Tropodo, Indonesia, tofu factory, a plastic-fueled furnace heats water into steam that is used in the production process. Beth Gardiner/Undark

Muhammad Gufron, a solidly built man with a wispy moustache, is the owner of a local tofu factory. He greets me in front of a mint green house, and a moment later I’m following him down a long alleyway, past laundry hanging in the sun, into a building whose brick walls have big gaps that give it an open-air feel.

Gufron, who’s in a powder blue T-shirt, navy shorts, and sandals, starts the tour of his factory by pointing me toward several small rooms where shredded plastic, faded to near-colorlessness, is heaped against walls and stuffed into sacks. All around this region, I’ve seen waste sorters spreading plastic in the sun, to dry it for use as fuel. I hadn’t really understood the need for that, but as Gufron leads me toward his furnace, it begins to make more sense.

Intense heat is coming off the blaze inside the black metal cylinder, and when he stuffs a batch of scrap in with a wooden stick, it crackles audibly. The steam this fire helps generate is used in the production process.

After a few minutes in Gufron’s factory, I already feel a headache building behind my eyes, and as we move from the boiler room toward the tofu production area, the smoke is so thick I pull a mask out of my bag and put it on, despite the stifling heat.

There are about two dozen people working here, and with water sloshing around the concrete floor, many wear high rubber boots. Gufron shows me the machine that grinds soybeans into powder, then combines it with water to create a thick white sludge. Workers stir big vats of that mixture, and I watch as a man in a white tank top uses a metal pan to skim foam off the top, then dumps it onto the floor.

A worker moves large slabs of tofu in a large brick building. Others work behind him and large strainers drip on the left.

Gufron’s factory sits in a brick-walled building with an open-air feel. Workers grind soybeans into powder, combine it with water in large vats, and then scoop the resulting paste into wooden draining racks.Beth Gardiner/Undark

Eventually, the paste is scooped into wooden draining racks lined with thin mesh. They’re stacked in piles, and liquid drips from them, leaving something recognizable as tofu, which women slice into chunks with metal grids.

Gufron leads me back up the alley, and we take seats on dark wooden chairs in his living room, where the pungent smell of plastic smoke drifts in through open double doors along with the bright sunshine. Speaking Indonesian, he tells me through a translator that Tropodo has been a tofu hub since the 1960s, and the village’s producers now process more than 30 tons of soybeans a day. He’s in his 50s and has owned this business—it’s called DY, his daughters’ initials—since 2007. Most of his customers, he tells me, are in nearby Surabaya, Indonesia’s second-largest city, where he sells to markets as well as individuals.

His parents were tofu-makers too, and when he was a boy, their factory burned rice husks. But they began using plastic in the 1980s, so when he started his own company, he did too. He later switched to wood, but when his wood supplier closed, he went back to plastic. “It’s good, and cheap,” he tells me. All Tropodo’s tofu factories burn plastic, he says, and he doesn’t see any problem with it.

Much of the plastic Gufron and factory owners like him use is waste from overseas—packaging tossed away in places such as the United States, Europe, South Korea, Japan, and Australia. He buys it from local sorters who purchase it from paper recycling companies. Plastic scrap is often mixed in with the bundles of waste paper those companies import, and they must remove it before processing the paper. Indonesian regulations limit such contamination to 2 percent of any shipment, and while the industry insists violations are rare, Daru Setyorini, the environmentalist and researcher who has accompanied me to Tropodo, says that in reality, the amount of plastic can far exceed that limit.

“It’s good, and cheap,” Gufron tells me. All Tropodo’s tofu factories burn plastic, and he doesn’t see any problem with it.

Gufron steps out for a minute and returns with two big bags of fried tofu chunks, little red chilis mixed in. Setyorini appears to tuck in happily, but I’m wary, so I just have one, although the salty squares are tasty. My restraint may be silly, since I’ve already eaten plenty of local tofu.

Unsurprisingly, such burning introduces toxins into the food chain. Setyorini’s research and advocacy group, Ecoton, or Ecological Observation and Wetlands Conservation, has found microplastic fibers, filaments, and fragments in Tropodo tofu, although the group has not yet analyzed their chemical composition.

Along with several partner organizations, Ecoton has also tested eggs from chickens foraging in Tropodo’s plastic ash-strewn soil. Ash from plastic burning can contain dioxins and heavy metals, the Annals of Global Health reported in 2024. In Tropodo’s eggs, Ecoton and its collaborators found dangerous chemicals including PCBs—banned globally in the 2000s because they are believed to cause cancer and problems with the immune, nervous, reproductive, and endocrine systems—and per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, commonly known as PFAS or forever chemicals, which are linked to conditions including reduced fertility, high cholesterol, and cancer.

The researchers also found the second-highest dioxin level ever detected in an egg in Asia; the highest was in Vietnam, at a former US military base tainted by historic use of the defoliant Agent Orange, where a 10-year cleanup project began in 2019.

An adult eating an egg like the one found in Tropodo would exceed Europe’s acceptable maximum intake of chlorinated dioxins—chemicals linked to cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes, and hormonal changes—by 70 times, the groups reported. The eggs also contained short-chain chlorinated paraffins and polybrominated diphenyl ethers, which are both used as flame retardants in plastic and are linked to hormonal disruption, developmental and neurological damage, and cancer.

Chickens wander everywhere in Indonesian villages, and Tropodo is far from the only place where they peck through toxic ash. Many rural areas lack garbage collection, so households there often burn their waste. The faint whiff of that smoke hangs everywhere, and I often see hens munching their way through the blackened remains of such fires.

The threat goes far beyond Indonesia, of course, to everywhere plastic is burned out in the open. In Accra, Ghana, for example, researchers testing eggs near one of the world’s largest electronic waste scrapyards, where workers burn plastic culled from discarded devices, found chlorinated dioxin levels more than three times Tropodo’s very dangerous levels.

Burning plastic can also put a cocktail of dangerous chemicals into the air, including dioxins, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, chlorinated furans, and hydrogen cyanide. That may be why, when a team publishing in the journal Environment International tested the Ghanaian e-waste workers’ blood, they found dioxins there too.

In Tropodo, Ecoton measured levels of the tiny airborne particulates known as PM2.5—which are linked to a huge range of health problems including heart attacks, strokes, many kinds of cancer, diabetes, and dementia—at more than 1,000 micrograms per cubic meter. That’s nearly 20 times Indonesia’s legal limit, and 30 times the stricter American 24-hour standard. It’s a hint of why the Annals of Global Health review called open burning of plastic “an urgent global health issue.”

There are surely a host of dangerous pollutants in the plumes of black smoke billowing from ramshackle sheds that line the roads in Tamansari, about 385 miles west of Tropodo, outside the Indonesian capital, Jakarta.

The sheds house informal limestone kilns, and when I step out of a car in front of one, it takes me a few minutes to understand what’s happening. Men working in pairs haul loads of stone on white tarps they lift by hand or hang from poles slung over their shoulders. They dump the rock into a deep, brick-sided pit, or use a rope-and-pulley setup to lower it to a worker at the bottom.

There are several pits, and smoke pours out of the one furthest back from the road. Later, I would watch the video I made over and over, shocked anew each time by the thickness of the smoke, and how rapidly it rolls from the pit. The men in the foreground pay no attention to the foul plume as they hoist load after load of stone.

One of the workers, a man named Amin, whose T-shirt and long shorts are covered in dust, takes a break to speak to me. The limestone, he says in Indonesian, is quarried locally and fired here into lime, a powdery substance used to make cement.

A man in a soot-stain t-shirt, work gloves, shorts, and crocs stands in front of a pit. A large pile of white powder is behind him, as is a pit to hit left.

Amin has worked at the limestone kilns in Tamansari for 25 years, earning about $6 a day. The smoke sometimes makes it hard for him to breathe.Beth Gardiner/Undark

Humans have been baking limestone for millennia, both for construction materials and to reduce the acidity of agricultural fields. When Amin’s crew has filled a pit with rocks, it’s covered and then heated from below for two days and nights. Amin, who’s in his 50s (like many Indonesians, he has only one name), tells me he’s worked here for 25 years, although he’s only hired for short gigs, as part of a team of men, each of whom gets about $6 for 10 hours.

He’s seen colleagues suffer broken bones or become permanently disabled by falling stone. Even without injuries, “it’s a very hard job,” he says, “but I need it.” The smoke bothers him, sometimes making it hard to breathe, and it doesn’t help that similar kilns pollute the air near his home.

A study last year found plastics can contain any of more than 16,000 different chemicals, a quarter of which may pose health concerns.

As he goes back to work, I pick my way around the side of the kiln and down a steep hill littered with plastic debris, along with two young women from the Nexus3 Foundation, a Bali-based research and advocacy group. I see now how the stone is heated. Beneath each pit, a fire roars inside a big furnace, and at the hatch of the ones currently burning, a man tosses in plastic or shoves it with a long pole.

The plastic is piled all around, and includes diapers, stacked-up tires and pieces of brightly colored foam. Eventually, we drive a few minutes to another kiln, where a pit has just finished cooling, and the stone has turned white and crumbly, some already disintegrated into to powder. Men shovel it into baskets their colleagues haul up to ground level.

Kilns like these are informal businesses, unregistered and unregulated by government officials. But while the conditions in Tamansari were shocking, I was even more stunned to learn later that such small-scale operations are far from the only ones burning plastic to produce lime for cement.

In fact, what I saw by the side of an Indonesian road was one tiny piece of a major global push—by huge multinational companies and many governments—to fuel cement production with discarded plastic. Industry representatives portray it as a green win-win that gets rid of waste while shrinking the climate footprint of a process that would otherwise be powered by coal or petroleum coke.

In part because of that fossil fuel use, cement-making accounts for about 8 percent of all carbon dioxide emissions—as well as air pollution that often sickens those living near plants. So it’s certainly a sector crying out for a green overhaul. But with its toxic emissions, and a hefty climate hit to boot, plastic burning brings plenty of harms of its own.

A pile of tires sits on a pile of plastic next to a chimney.

Tires and plastic refuse, including diapers and scraps of foam, sit in piles around the limestone kilns, waiting to be loaded.Beth Gardiner/Undark

To be sure, industrial-scale kilns are subject to regulations on air quality, ash disposal, and worker safety, and are undoubtedly far better run than the informal ones I saw. But while advocates for plastic’s use as a fuel claim the kilns’ high temperatures burn off toxic gases, environmentalists note that cement-making is a notoriously dirty industry, where standards are lax, and often poorly enforced. Electrifying furnaces, ideally with renewable power, is a far better answer, they say.

Another worry is that the industry’s appetite for energy will help lock us into a future of ever-growing plastic production by creating a market for cheap trash.

Industry’s appetite for energy will help lock us into a future of ever-growing plastic production by creating a market for cheap trash.

Stuffing waste into cement kilns isn’t a new idea. American and European producers started doing it in the 1970s and ‘80s as a way to save money during a global energy crunch.

As the volume of plastic trash has skyrocketed in recent years, it’s accounted for a growing share of kilns’ consumption. It’s hard to know exactly how much plastic cement makers burn, since industry figures often group it under the broad heading of “alternative fuel,” a category that also includes discarded clothes, tires, wood, paper, and other garbage. A 2021 Reuters investigation reported “alternative fuel” accounted for about half the cement industry’s fuel use in Europe, and 15 percent in the United States.

One form that energy takes is “refuse-derived fuel,” or RDF, a mixture of packaging, other plastic waste, scrap wood, and paper that often ends up in cement kilns. More than $5.4 billion of RDF—upwards of 45 percent of which is consumed by the cement industry—is sold every year, and that market’s value is expected to double in a decade, one analysis estimated. “Governments are promoting actions to reduce the amount of materials being sent to landfills, and we are one solution,” the global sustainability director of a cement company told Grist.

The relentless push for new ways to make garbage go up in smoke is a natural outgrowth of industry’s long-standing effort to frame plastic pollution as nothing more than a waste management problem.

But that view only holds up if one disregards burning’s impact on the climate, air quality, soil, and human health—not to mention the harms wrought by unchecked production. Activists like to say incineration just moves the landfill from the ground to the sky. That sounds apt.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Podcasters, Presidents, and Psychedelics: How Joe Rogan Got Trump Into Ibogaine

President Trump signed an executive order on Saturday calling for the acceleration of research on certain psychedelic drugs as treatments for depression and other conditions. Podcaster Joe Rogan stood with him as he signed the order—and Trump indicated that Rogan was a major inspiration behind the push to fast-track legalizing ibogaine, which is used outside the United States to treat post-traumatic stress disorder.

Rogan has championed ibogaine for years. A year ago, on his podcast, he said “Ibogaine, in particular, has helped a lot of people. It gives you, like, a review of your life, apparently.” Two weeks ago, he interviewed the CEO of Americans for Ibogaine, who also stood by as Trump signed his order to ease access to the drug.

Rogan’s relationship with Trump has recently been strained, as the podcaster critiqued the president’s war on Iran. (Trump, in response, referred to Rogan as a “liberal,” a charge Rogan would likely deny.) But Rogan’s texts to Trump, he told reporters, were what brought this to fruition: “Sounds great, do you want FDA approval?” Rogan said Trump responded. “It was literally that quick.”

Rogan isn’t the only nationally prominent figure pushing psychedelics. The drugs’ path to legitimacy is fueled by early-stage investors hoping to stake their claim to a market many view as the next cannabis.

Billionaire tech investor Peter Thiel has spent the better part of the past decade investing heavily in psychedelic pharmaceutical companies. He’s a major backer of Compass Pathways, a British company seeking to commercialize psilocybin, the psychoactive ingredient in magic mushrooms, in particular for therapeutic use. He’s also invested in AtaiBeckley, a German company working on hallucinogens. On Thursday, the stocks of both companies spiked on news that Trump would likely be giving his stamp of approval to ibogaine this weekend.

Another financial beneficiary might be the state of Texas, which announced it would be conducting its own ibogaine clinical trials in late March, to the tune of $50 million. And then there’s the Mercer Family Foundation, a major conservative grantmaker that helped get Trump elected, which has donated over $1 million toward psychedelics-related treatment for PTSD in combat veterans.

At the White House Saturday, Trump didn’t talk much about the money behind all this. Instead, he asked if he could get some ibogaine.

“Can I have some, please?” he said. “I’ll do whatever it takes…I don’t have time to be depressed. If you stay busy enough, maybe that’s what works too, that’s what I do.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Homeland Security’s New Task Force Website Sanitizes Trump’s Deportation Agenda

The Department of Homeland Security just rolled out a new website for its city-occupying task forces that looks, more than anything, like a vibe-coded pitch deck. Launched on Friday, HSTF.gov was first announced on the FBI’s X account.

We don’t negotiate. We dismantle. The site’s slogan is displayed in the same sans-serif font stylings as direct-to-consumer deodorant companies and AI-powered lease abstraction platforms. The main page is largely consumed by a macho image, presumably AI-generated, of gas-masked officers with AR-15 style weapons advancing in formation through a cloud of tear gas.

Notably, it makes no mention of ICE, deportations, or even immigration. Instead, it frames the Homeland Security task forces as crusaders against foreign cartels, drug smuggling, and human trafficking. Yet the effort is inseparable from the multiagency task forces that have kidnapped and detained people across Minneapolis, Memphis, and Los Angeles. The connection isn’t evident if you look at HSTF.gov, but the FBI’s own website notes that DHS “formed Homeland Security Task Forces in response to Executive Order 14159.”

That’s an order signed by President Donald Trump shortly after he took office. It’s titled “Protecting the American People Against Invasion” and it explicitly describes a plan for deportation, incarceration, and removal of unprecedented numbers of immigrants.

The brand new website describes the Homeland Security Task Force as a “permanent, interagency law enforcement task force created by executive order to combat transnational criminal organizations—including cartels, trafficking networks, and foreign terrorist organizations—across all 52 U.S. states and territories.” But it omits a key line from the HSTF objectives cited in Trump’s executive order: to use “all available law enforcement tools to faithfully execute the immigration laws of the United States.”

The new website’s creators are familiar characters: The head of the National Design Studio, a year-old agency created by executive decree, is Joe Gebbia, a former DOGE man, current billionaire, and member of the Airbnb and Tesla boards. Then there’s Nate Brown, creative director, who used to work with Kanye West and has pivoted to government tasks. Edward Coristine, the 20-year-old perhaps best known by his DOGE-era nickname, “Big Balls,” says he’s the engineering lead on the project.

In an interview earlier this month with far-right influencer Nick Shirley, Coristine outlined his mission as a federal vibecoder. “We’re actually setting Americans up for growth moving forward, and to believe in the capitalist system and, like, see how it can actually work for them.” He’s been working 14-hour days, he added, and “AI is super important, I use it every day.”

Those hours of AI-assisted labor have delivered (among other things) a shiny new website hailing the 8,500 DHS “agents and analysts” coming to a city near you. Among the goals listed is “dismantling cross-border trafficking and smuggling networks” with a “priority focus” on those involving children—although, in practice, Homeland Security agents have spent months invading cities far from the border and locking children in detention centers.

A year ago, when the National Design Studio was first announced, Paula Scher of the graphic design firm Pentagram told Fast Company that the group’s remit—to make America’s websites beautiful again—didn’t land well, given its work on behalf of a government dedicated to deprivation. “You can’t talk about people losing their Medicare and have a slick website,” Scher said at the time. “It just doesn’t go.”

According to official National Design Studio materials, though, that’s the goal: “To update today’s government to be an Apple Store like experience: beautifully designed, great user experience, run on modern software.”

An Apple Store does not lock up and deport people, but maybe that’s beside the point.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

America’s Next Moon Mission Depends on Elon Musk, for Better or Worse

Elon Musk has long been in an on-again, off-again relationship with the moon. Though just last year he called it “a distraction”—saying his focus was shifting exclusively to Mars—he now seems to be rekindling things with our natural satellite. And regardless of his own feelings about the moon, NASA is paying him to get us there again.

The Artemis II mission, which returned just a week ago, set a new record for the farthest humans have ever traveled from Earth. But looping around the moon—as the four astronauts did during their nine days in space—is not the project’s paramount goal. By 2028, NASA plans for astronauts to touch down on the lunar surface, and while they’ve now demonstrated we can still shoot for the moon, landing there is another story.

No human has set foot on the moon since 1972, and the landing gear that facilitated the Apollo missions isn’t compatible with the modern rockets or NASA’s goal of longer-term exploration—humans have spent a total of just over three days ambling around the lunar surface. Since the inception of the Artemis project, NASA has contracted with SpaceX, currently Musk’s most profitable company, to design more expansive landing equipment.

NASA has always relied on partnerships with private companies, but the number of unique contractors has dropped by 38 percent between 2021 and 2024 as contracts with SpaceX ballooned. According to a Washington Post investigation, Musk’s company has received nearly $15 billion from the agency all told, with contract values doubling at the inception of Artemis.

“Musk can do basically whatever he wants with the rocket launches.”

“NASA helped build out SpaceX,” says Casey Drier, who leads the space policy team at the Planetary Society. In some ways, he sees this relationship as an exemplar of how NASA aims to interact with private companies; the partnership, he says, “has significantly lowered launch costs, increased reliability, and pursued real innovation in reusability.”

But SpaceX contracting also represents a worst-case scenario. A former NASA financial officer found that while the company had driven down the cost of launching things into space, it wasn’t passing those savings along to NASA. Even adjusting for inflation, SpaceX has been charging NASA more each year for the same services. And it can keep raising prices, because it has put competing ventures out of business. This one company “now facilitates US access to space,” Drier says.

The technologies that allowed SpaceX to leap ahead were developed using federal funds, yet Musk owns the rights to them. “Musk can do basically whatever he wants with the rocket launches to space, something previously only the domain of national superpowers,” Drier says. “The government, by policy, concentrated immense power in the hands of a single individual.”

The value of the Artemis contracts have grown over the last year as NASA, like other federal scientific agencies, finds itself in a tricky position. Because Congress rejected the president’s proposed budget cuts, NASA has the funding to carry out its missions—a $24.4 billion annual budget, plus a bump of nearly $10 billion over the next six years from the One Big Beautiful Bill. But their staff took a large hit at the hands of Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

The agency lost about 20 percent of its workforce, including many senior and specialized employees trained to support highly technical missions like getting back to the moon. This scenario “almost certainly will increase reliance on contractors,” Drier says—though DOGE ended many NASA contracts as well.

In the name of efficiency, the Trump administration also eliminated NASA’s entire Office of Technology, Policy, and Strategy, whose economists analyzed and managed NASA’s relationship with the space technology market. This included assessing contracts, which typically cost taxpayers more than in-house work—especially when there’s no competition.

This doesn’t leave NASA many places to turn when the company of a billionaire who famously overpromises doesn’t deliver. An analysis from the NASA Office of the Inspector General expressed concerns that SpaceX would not even be able to meet the already extended deadlines for the moon lander, especially as there is “little margin for error in completing the remaining work.”

To keep the Artemis III mission on track for mid-2027, NASA is “exploring options for accelerating lander development,” per the IG report. So far, this has meant soliciting proposals from the only two companies with the capacity to work on such gear. One is SpaceX. The other is Jeff Bezos’s rocket company, Blue Origin, which is already two years behind on its contracts for Artemis V.

Continue Reading…