Hey! Good Evening!

This evening's music features Memphis musician and leader of the Memphis Jug Band, Will "Son Brimmer" Shade. Enjoy!

"When they say [Donald Trump] is not "presidential": I asked myself what does it mean to be "presidential"? You wear a suit; you talk to the American people like you possess the character and the dignity of one who seeks the highest office in the land, and behind the door you're the worst criminal on the planet, plotting the overthrow of nations and governments, and regime change, and sending drones to kill people you don't like? That's presidential."

-- Louis Farrakhan

News and Opinion

They Kidnapped Maduro Because The World Is Ruled By Unaccountable Tyrants

Well, Trump finally did it. US special forces attacked Venezuela and abducted President Maduro from Caracas, reportedly killing at least 40 people in the process.

And now that it’s all over, the White House is getting a lot more honest about the real motives behind its actions. After all those months of babbling about fentanyl and “narcoterrorism” and freedom and democracy, the Trump administration has come right out and admitted that its regime change interventionism in Venezuela has always been a good old-fashioned oil grab.

“We’re gonna take back the oil that frankly we should have taken back a long time ago,” Trump told the press following Maduro’s abduction, saying “We’re going to be taking out a tremendous amount of wealth out of the ground, and that wealth is going to the people of Venezuela, and people from outside of Venezuela that used to be in Venezuela, and it goes also to the United States of America in the form of reimbursement for the damages caused us by that country.”

“We’re going to have our very large United States oil companies, the biggest anywhere in the world, go in, spend billions of dollars, fix the badly broken infrastructure, the oil infrastructure, and start making money for the country, and we are ready to stage a second and much larger attack if we need to do so,” Trump said.

“We have tremendous energy in that country. It’s very important that we protect it. We need that for ourselves, we need that for the world,” the president added.

After bombing Venezuela and abducting President Nicolás Maduro, Donald Trump said the US government is "going to run the country" until there is a "transition" to pro-US leadership.

He boasted that "very large" US corporations will exploit its oil.

This is blatant colonialism. pic.twitter.com/Cy44HmRdpG

— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) January 3, 2026

Trump made it explicitly clear that this is going to be some sort of long-term US occupation project, contradicting early claims of his supporters who had defended the president’s actions in Venezuela as a brief in-and-out, one-and-done special ops intervention.

“We’re going to run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition,” Trump said. “So we don’t want to be involved with having somebody else get in. And we have the same situation that we had for the last long period of years. So we are going to run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition.”

“We’re not afraid of boots on the ground,” the president said. “And we have to have, we had boots on the ground last night at a very high level. Actually, we’re not afraid of it, we’re we don’t mind saying it, but we’re going to make sure that that country is run properly. We’re not doing this in vain.”

You would think after all these incredibly honest admissions that this was a regime change operation aimed at controlling the resources of the nation with the largest proven oil reserves on the planet, people would get real and accept that they were lied to about the Trump administration’s real reasons for targeting Venezuela. But I am still getting Trump supporters prattling on about drugs and terrorism and democracy in my social media replies defending my criticisms of his monstrous act of war.

"This incredible thing last night... We have to do it again [in other countries]. We can do it again, too. Nobody can stop us." pic.twitter.com/clzQORVv1s

— TrumpFile.org (@TrumpFile) January 3, 2026

I had one Trump supporter try to tell me the president’s admissions that it was all about the oil don’t necessarily prove it wasn’t also about fighting drug trafficking, arguing that it could possibly have been motivated by both. Which to me kinda sounds like a grandmother acknowledging that yes, she had been victimized by an email scam, but that doesn’t necessarily mean the nice man who scammed her wasn’t also a Nigerian prince.

Trump supporters would make excuses for literally anything he did. Literally anything. I am not using hyperbole for effect. There is literally nothing he could do that they wouldn’t twist themselves into cognitive pretzels trying to justify.

Trump is spelling out the truth of what he is and what the US empire is, and anyone with open eyes can see it plain as day.

For those whose eyes are open or are beginning to open, I hope you continue learning the same lessons with Venezuela that you learned with Gaza. The US empire always lies, the mass media always facilitate its lies, and the global south continues to be ransacked by the murderous abusers who run things.

No no, don't try to wash your hands now. You own this. You cheered this on and told your fans to support US regime change interventionism in Venezuela, now you get to forever be the evil neocon pundit who supported your generation's oil war. You own all the consequences of this. https://t.co/SNuPtLuFJk

— Caitlin Johnstone (@caitoz) January 3, 2026

While I was decrying Trump’s Venezuela assault some empire simp mockingly told me, “It must be sad for you to lose a tyrant.”

I told him no, it’s sad for me that we live in a lawless world that is ruled by tyrants.

It’s sad for me that we are ruled by chaotic despots who can invade a sovereign nation and abduct its leader and suffer no consequences.

It’s sad for me that the people with their hands on the steering wheel of the fate of our species are a bunch of sociopathic thugs who can smash and rob any country they please with total impunity.

It’s sad for me that our planet’s population is subject to the whims of a globe-spanning empire which topples governments, wages wars, sponsors genocides, targets civilians with starvation sanctions, backs proxy conflicts, drops bombs, brainwashes entire nations with propaganda, uses its military and economic might to bully and cajole states into bowing to its dictates, and sows suffering, destruction and death around the world every moment of every day.

It’s sad for me that these are the people who are making the decisions which will determine humanity’s path into the future. The future of our society. The future of our planet’s resources. The future of our technological innovation. The future of our ecosystem. The future of our militaries. The future of our nuclear weapons.

That is what is sad for me. I have no special emotional attachment to Maduro as an individual, but I do have a strong emotional attachment to the possibility of a healthy world emerging in the future.

And as things stand right now it’s looking pretty dark.

I find that sad.

Jeffrey Sachs Blasts US Power Grab Over Venezuela, Maduro Capture at Historic UN Meeting

Donald Trump warns of ‘big price to pay’ if Caracas fails to toe line

The prospect of the United States seizing direct control of Venezuela appeared to recede on Sunday after the shocking seizure of President Nicolás Maduro – but US officials said Washington was keeping a 15,000-strong force in the Caribbean and might make a fresh military intervention if Venezuela’s interim president, Delcy Rodríguez, did not accommodate their demands. While Rodríguez kept up a defiant tone in public, the substance of conversations she had had in private with US officials was not clear.

In the aftermath of Maduro’s abduction on Saturday, Donald Trump said the US would “run” the South American country of 30 million people. On Sunday he warned Rodríguez to heed US wishes. “If she doesn’t do what’s right, she is going to pay a very big price, probably bigger than Maduro,” he told the Atlantic.

Rodríguez, 56, had on Saturday pledged fealty to Maduro and condemned his capture as an “atrocity” but the New York Times reported that Trump officials several weeks ago identified the technocrat as a potential successor and business partner partly on the basis of her relationship with Wall Street and oil companies. The US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, spoke to Rodríguez, who told him “‘we’ll do whatever you need’”, Trump told reporters. “She, I think, was quite gracious, but she really doesn’t have a choice.”

In the capital, Caracas, senior government and military figures demanded the return of Maduro but pledged support for Rodríguez as a stand-in leader and called for a return to normality. ...

Trump said the US may intervene in other countries. “We do need Greenland, absolutely.” Katie Miller, the wife of Trump’s deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, posted a social media picture of Greenland painted in the colours of the US flag, and the word “soon”, prompting a protest from Greenland’s prime minister.

To Oppose U.S. Aggression, Latin America Must Unite w/ José Luis Granados Ceja

‘They lied to our face’: Democrats decry Trump’s military raid on Venezuela

Democratic leaders responded with fury on Sunday to Donald Trump’s military intervention in Venezuela, slamming it as an illegal act carried out in the absence of required congressional approval that would lead to disaster for the American people. Top Democrats took to the Sunday TV political talk shows to express their dismay at the lack of any prior notification of lawmakers about the audacious military raid 24 hours earlier.

They portrayed the action to unseat the Venezuelan president, Nicolás Maduro, as unlawful under the US constitution and ill-advised in terms of the US standing in the world, where numerous authorities, including the secretary general of the United Nations, have accused the US of breaching the UN’s founding charter.

“They literally lied to our face,” said Chris Murphy, a US senator from Connecticut, on Sunday, referring to a briefing on Venezuela that the US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, gave to his chamber last month. “The message they sent was that this wasn’t about regime change … They said this is just a counter-narcotics operation.” In an appearance on CNN’s State of the Union, Murphy called the action in Venezuela in the early hours of Saturday “wildly illegal”, adding: “There is no way to trust this administration.”

Under the US constitution, only Congress has the power to declare war. The 1973 War Powers Resolution requires presidents to seek approval from Congress for military engagements. Yet in the case of Saturday’s dawn bombardment on Venezuela and military landing to snatch Maduro, not even the “gang of eight”, the top congressional leaders of both main parties who are traditionally consulted on national security issues, were notified about the operation.

“Still haven’t got a phone call,” said Jim Himes, the top Democrat on the House intelligence committee. He told CNN: “I’m a member of the gang of eight, and I have yet to get a phone call from anyone from the administration.” ... Himes lambasted the military operation, which he dubbed an “imperial adventure”, as “another example of absolute lawlessness on the part of this administration”. He accused Trump of “paving the way for disaster” and “not giving a hoot about the US congress”.

Law Prof. David Cole on the Illegality of U.S. Attack on Venezuela

Narco Rubio deploys rhetorical tricks to get by the hapless George Snuffleupagus. He uses the word "leverage" to obfuscate that he is employing threats of the use of force against a sovereign nation. As the UN charter states:

"All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations."

As a treaty that the US is a signatory to and properly ratified, the Constitution says that it is the highest law of the land.

Top Republicans backpedal from Trump claim that US will run Venezuela

Marco Rubio, the US secretary of state, and prominent Republicans swiftly backpedaled from Donald Trump’s assertion that the US will run Venezuela in transition after US forces snatched the president, Nicolás Maduro, and brought him to the US to face federal criminal charges.

Rubio appeared on numerous US politics shows on Sunday morning to defend the US operation in the early hours of Saturday to capture Maduro and his wife despite critics calling the operation illegal on multiple levels and the White House failing to demonstrate how it would run the South American nation. The secretary of state was challenged repeatedly in a number of appearances to confirm whether the US would run Venezuela.

Rubio said on ABC that the US had “leverage” over the country and that: “We expect that it’s going to lead to results here. We’re hope so … hopeful that it does. Positive results. For the people of Venezuela, but ultimately, most importantly, for us, in the national interests of the United States.” He added that the US would “set the conditions” so that Venezuela is no longer a “narco-trafficking paradise” aligned with US adversaries including Iran and militant proxies such as Hezbollah.

ABC anchor George Stephanopoulos asked a follow-up question. “What is the legal authority for the United States to be running Venezuela?” Rubio responded: “I explained to you what our goals are and how we’re going to use the leverage to make it happen.”

Senator Tom Cotton, a Republican from Arkansas and the chairman of the Senate intelligence committee, also rowed back on Trump’s assertions, saying there were “still a lot of questions to be answered” about what happens next in Venezuela. When asked who was running Venezuela right now he responded: “Who is not running Venezuela is Maduro.”

Col. Larry Wilkerson: America’s Biggest Foreign Policy Mistake Just Blew Up in Venezuela

Trump says US military operation in Colombia 'sounds good to me'

According to an audio recording of Trump talking to media aboard Air Force One on Sunday, when a reporter asks if that means there will be a US operation in Colombia, the president says: “It sounds good to me.”

Petro’s criticism of the US campaign against Venezuela, and its targeting of small boats in the Caribbean and Pacific, has infuriated Trump, who on Saturday said the Colombian leader should “watch his ass”.

Anya Parampil: Could the Venezuela Case Expose a CIA Narco-State?

If this action were constitutionally sound, the Attorney General wouldn’t be tweeting that they’ve arrested the President of a sovereign country and his wife for possessing guns in violation of a 1934 U.S. firearm law.

— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) January 3, 2026

“Lawlessness”: Russia Accuses US of Neo-Colonialism in Venezuela at Blistering UN Session

Trump’s focus on Venezuelan oil reinforces claim action was never about ‘war on drugs’

Hailing the US military operation to seize Nicolás Maduro as spectacular, extraordinary and “an assault not seen since World War II”, Donald Trump surprised many by making Venezuela’s oil the central focus of his hour-long press conference on Saturday. The US president made little mention of the “war on drugs” that for months had been his main justification for the military buildup and the strikes on boats that have killed 116 people, instead referring to oil more than a dozen times, even when questions made no reference to it. ...

As he did weeks earlier when announcing a “total blockade” of sanctioned oil tankers, Trump said Venezuela, which holds the world’s largest reserves, had “stolen” oil from the US and that it would now be taken back. “We built Venezuela’s oil industry with American talent, drive and skill, and the socialist regime stole it from us during those previous administrations. And they stole it through force. This constituted one of the largest thefts of American property in the history of our country,” Trump said, echoing almost word for word a post on X by his homeland security adviser, Stephen Miller, in mid-December.

Analysts can trace the origins of Trump’s claim – decisions by previous Venezuelan governments to nationalise production – but they argue that the US has no legal claim to Venezuela’s oil. José Ignacio Hernández, a legal scholar and researcher of Venezuela’s oil industry who works with the consultancy Aurora Macro Strategies, said: “Even if a past government illegitimately expropriated the oil assets of US companies without fair compensation, Venezuela did not steal any oil from the US.”

Other analysts note that US companies never owned the oil or the land in Venezuela. They held exploration concessions, which confer temporary operating rights, not permanent ownership. Under international law and the UN principle of permanent sovereignty over natural resources established in 1962, sovereign states have the inherent right to control and dispose of resources within their territory. ...

US companies such as Exxon and Mobil, which merged in 1999, and Gulf Oil, now part of Chevron, suffered losses estimated at $5bn but were compensated to the tune of about $1bn each. ... Despite Trump’s claims of oil “theft”, Chevron still holds about 25% of operations in Venezuela. PDVSA controls roughly 50%, with about 10% in joint ventures led by China, another 10% by Russia and 5% by European companies.

John Helmer: Simultaneous Strikes in Russia and Caracas—This Was No Coincidence

‘Naked imperialism’: how Trump intervention in Venezuela is a return to form for the US

The US bombardment of Venezuela and the capture of its president, Nicolás Maduro, follow a long history of interventions in South and Central America and the Caribbean over the past two centuries. But they also mark an unprecedented moment as the first direct US military attack on a South American country. At a press conference after Maduro’s capture, Donald Trump said that “American dominance in the western hemisphere will never be questioned again”.

But since the mid-19th century, the US has intervened in its continental neighbours not only through economic pressure but also militarily, with a long list of invasions, occupations and, in the case most closely resembling the current situation, the capture of Panama’s dictator Manuel Noriega in 1989. Covert actions helped topple democratically elected governments and usher in military dictatorships in countries such as Brazil, Chile and Argentina, but overt US military operations have historically been confined to closer neighbours in Central America and the Caribbean.

The first direct US military attack on a South American country “signals a major shift in foreign and defence policy – one that is made explicit in the new national security strategy published by the Trump administration a few weeks ago”, said Maurício Santoro, a professor of international relations at the State University of Rio de Janeiro.

While Saturday’s action was “in line” with many past operations, it is “shocking because nothing like this has happened since 1989”, said Alan McPherson, a history professor at Temple University and author of A Short History of US Interventions in Latin America and the Caribbean. “One might have thought that this era of naked imperialism – of the US getting the political outcomes it wants in Latin America through sheer military force – would be over in the 21st century, but clearly it is not,” he added.

US Begins Disastrous Petrodollar Plan But Dooms US Bonds As Global Ramifications Build

After Venezuela Assault, Trump and Rubio Warn Cuba, Mexico, and Colombia Could Be Next

US President Donald Trump and top administration officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, characterized Saturday’s assault on Venezuela and abduction of the country’s president as a warning shot in the direction of Cuba, Mexico, Colombia, and other Latin American nations.

During a Saturday press conference, Trump openly invoked the Monroe Doctrine—an assertion of US dominance of the Western Hemisphere—and said his campaign of aggression against Venezuela represented the “Donroe Doctrine” in action.

In his unwieldy remarks, Trump called out Colombian President Gustavo Petro by name, accusing him without evidence of “making cocaine and sending it to the United States.”

“So he does have to watch his ass,” the US president said of Petro, who condemned the Trump administration’s Saturday attack on Venezuela as “aggression against the sovereignty of Venezuela and Latin America.”

Petro responded defiantly to the possibility of the US targeting him, writing on social media that he is “not worried at all.”

In a Fox News appearance earlier Saturday, Trump also took aim at the United States’ southern neighbor, declaring ominously that “something’s going to have to be done with Mexico,” which also denounced the attack on Venezuela and abduction of President Nicolás Maduro.

“She is very frightened of the cartels,” Trump said of Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum. “So we have to do something.”

Rubio, for his part, focused on Cuba—a country whose government he has long sought to topple.

“If I lived in Havana and I was in the government, I’d be concerned, at least a little bit,” Rubio, who was born in Miami to Cuban immigrant parents, said during Saturday’s press conference.

That the Trump administration wasted no time threatening other nations as it pledged to control Venezuela indefinitely sparked grave warnings, with the leadership of Progressive International cautioning that “this armed attack on Venezuela is not an isolated event.”

“It is the next step in the United States’ campaign of regime change that stretches from Caracas to Havana—and an attack on the very principle of sovereign equality and the prospects for the Zone of Peace once established by the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States,” the coalition said in a statement. “This renewed declaration of impunity from Washington is a threat to all nations around the world.”

“Trump has clearly articulated the imperial logic of this intervention—to seize control over Venezuela’s natural resources and reassert US domination over the hemisphere,” said Progressive International. “The ‘Trump corollary’ to the Monroe Doctrine—applied in recent hours with violent force over the skies of Caracas—is the single greatest threat to peace and prosperity that the Americas confront today.”

US ‘has no right’ to take over Greenland, Danish PM says after renewed Trump threats

Denmark’s prime minister has urged Donald Trump to stop threatening to take over Greenland after the president said the US “absolutely” needs the territory. Mette Frederiksen said on Sunday: “It makes absolutely no sense to talk about the US needing to take over Greenland. The US has no right to annex any of the three countries in the Danish kingdom.”

The US bombardment of Venezuela and the capture of its president, Nicolás Maduro, has renewed fears of an American takeover of Greenland, as members of Trump’s Maga movement gleefully set their sights on the Danish territory after the attack in South America.

Speaking aboard Air Force One on Sunday hours after Frederiksen’s remarks, Trump doubled down on his claim that Greenland should become part of the United States. “We need Greenland from the standpoint of national security, and Denmark is not going to be able to do it,” Trump told reporters said when asked about the issue.

SOON pic.twitter.com/XU6VmZxph3

— Katie Miller (@KatieMiller) January 3, 2026

Hours after the US military operation in Venezuela, the rightwing podcaster Katie Miller – the wife of Stephen Miller, Donald Trump’s powerful deputy chief of staff for policy – posted on X a map of Greenland draped in the stars and stripes with the caption: “SOON.” Miller’s threat to annex the mineral-rich territory, which is part of the Nato alliance, drew outrage from Denmark and Greenland.

Greenland’s prime minister, Jens-Frederik Nielsen, called the post “disrespectful”. “Relations between nations and peoples are built on mutual respect and international law – not on symbolic gestures that disregard our status and our rights,” he wrote on X.

Larry Johnson: Mossad Cooperation Alleged in Venezuela

UN Human Rights Chief Rips Israeli Legislation to Execute Palestinians

The United Nations high commissioner for human rights on Friday forcefully denounced proposed Israeli legislation that would effectively “impose mandatory death sentences exclusively on Palestinians under certain circumstances, both in the occupied Palestinian territory and in Israel.”

The statement from the UN leader, Volker Türk, came after Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, advanced three bills in November—votes that drew widespread condemnation, including from Amnesty International, the Palestine Liberation Organization, and Hamas, which Israel considers a terrorist organization. The proposals would have to pass two more readings to take effect.

The bill pushed by the Otzma Yehudit or Jewish Power party would require courts to impose the

death penalty on “a person who caused the death of an Israeli citizen deliberately or through indifference, from a motive of racism or hostility against a population, and with the aim of harming the state of Israel and the national revival of the Jewish people in its land.”

As Türk noted: “When it comes to the death penalty, the United Nations is very clear, and opposes it under all circumstances... It is profoundly difficult to reconcile such punishment with human dignity and raises the unacceptable risk of executing innocent people.”

“Such proposals are inconsistent with Israel’s obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,” he explained. “In particular, the introduction of mandatory death sentences, which leave no discretion to the courts, and violate the right to life.”

“The proposal also raises other human rights concerns, including on the basis that it is discriminatory given it will exclusively apply to Palestinians,” the high commissioner continued.

He also highlighted that Palestinians are already often convicted after unfair Israeli trials, and denying any Palestinian from the West Bank or Gaza Strip a fair trial as outlined in the Fourth Geneva Convention is a war crime.

Türk’s comments come after Amnesty’s senior director for research, advocacy, policy, and campaigns, Erika Guevara Rosas, argued last year that “the international community must exert maximum pressure on the Israeli government to immediately scrap this bill and dismantle all laws and practices that contribute to the system of apartheid against Palestinians.”

Epstein disclosures raise key question: why wasn’t he stopped earlier?

Over the course of two decades, Jeffrey Epstein repeatedly appeared on law enforcement’s radar for sexual misconduct involving teen girls and young women. And over this same period of time, Epstein avoided serious and meaningful punishment for his crimes.

The US justice department’s recent disclosure of long-secret investigative files related to Epstein has once again raised the question of why he wasn’t interdicted sooner, despite numerous reports of misconduct. The issue has been the subject of many conspiracy theories, often focusing on the idea that Epstein – who lived at the center of a network of powerful people – enjoyed some form of protection.

Some never-before-seen documents recently released under the Epstein Files Transparency Act, as well as previously public filings tucked deep into prior civil litigation included in these disclosures, spell out numerous missed opportunities to stop Epstein before his 2019 arrest and subsequent suicide in prison. ...

Epstein did not face serious charges until 2019, months after a Miami Herald investigation prompted controversy about his plum plea deal. Epstein killed himself in jail weeks after his July 2019 arrest and Maxwell was arrested the next year and convicted of luring teen girls into his abusive world. Advocates for Epstein’s victims have repeatedly condemned local and federal law enforcement for failing to take victims’ claims seriously – enabling his abuse to continue years after initial reports.

‘Just an unbelievable amount of pollution’: how big a threat is AI to the climate?

During a golden sunset in Memphis in May, Sharon Wilson pointed a thermal imaging camera at Elon Musk’s flagship datacentre to reveal a planetary threat her eyes could not. Free from pollution controls, the gas-fired turbines that power the world’s biggest AI supercomputer were pumping invisible fumes into the Tennessee sky. “It was jaw-dropping,” said Wilson, a former oil and gas worker from Texas who has documented methane releases for more than a decade and estimates xAI’s Colossus datacentre was spewing more of the planet-heating gas than a large power plant. “Just an unbelievable amount of pollution.”

That same week, the facility’s core product was running riot on news feeds. Musk’s maverick chatbot, Grok, repeated a conspiracy theory that “white genocide” was taking place in South Africa when asked about topics as unrelated as baseball and scaffolding. The posts were quickly deleted but Grok has gone on to praise Hitler, push far-right ideologies and make false claims.

“It’s a horrible, horrible waste,” said Wilson, the director of campaign group Oilfield Witness, pointing to Grok-generated images of Nazi Mickey Mouse as an example of what fossil gas was being burned to produce. “What useful purpose does this serve?” Wilson is not alone in asking this question. Scientists are watching the AI boom with unease as it pollutes the natural world with carbon and the digital world with dangers ranging from dodgy health myths to deepfake pornography targeting children.

Some experts fear datacentres may derail the shift to a clean economy, adding an unnecessary hurdle to the quixotic task of keeping the planet from heating 1.5C (2.7F). Others are sanguine about the energy costs, arguing they pale in comparison not just to polluting industries, but also to the technology’s power to reshape society. ... Datacentres consume just 1% of the world’s electricity but may soon demand much more. Their share of US electricity is projected to more than double to 8.6% by 2035, according to BloombergNEF, while the IEA projects datacentres will account for at least 20% of the rich world’s growth in electricity demand to the end of the decade.

But for the near future, fossil fuels are set to dominate supply. China’s datacentres are clustered in its coal-heavy east. In the US, where natural gas is expected to generate most of the electricity in datacentres over the next decade, the Trump administration used them to justify burning more coal. “Beautiful, clean coal will be essential to … winning the AI race,” energy secretary Chris Wright said in September when announcing a $625m (£467m) investment package.

‘The perfect storm’: Trump has left the US less prepared for natural disasters, experts say

Donald Trump has presided over a dangerous erosion in US capacity to prepare for and respond to natural disasters, according to emergency management experts. The first year of his second term was marked by crackdowns on climate science that produced world-class weather forecasts and the gutting of frontline federal agencies - policies that have left the country, already struggling to keep pace with severe storms, even more at risk.

Deep budget cuts and massive firing sprees shrank emergency response agencies, including the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema), the agency tasked with coordinating national disaster responses, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Noaa), considered a global crown jewel for climate science.

After Trump took office in January, his administration also worked quickly and diligently to claw back funding for climate-resilience initiatives, cancel research contracts and pull down data relied on by industry and the public alike. The worst effects, experts say, may not reveal themselves until catastrophe strikes. But in a year marked by three category 5 hurricanes, record summer humidity and heat, and deadly fires and floods, the cracks have already begun to show.

Fema, bereft of strong leadership and sinking under low morale and large gaps in its workforce, went into hurricane season without a plan in place. Gutted weather-balloon networks in Alaska failed to adequately warn residents in advance of what would become one of the most destructive storms in state history. It took administration officials more than 72 hours to authorise the deployment of federal search-and-rescue teams after the Guadalupe river in Texas surged into a summer camp and through nearby communities in July, a flood that left more than 135 people dead. Even as Trump sought to slash federal funding, the cost of disasters continued to climb.

In the first half of 2025 alone, damage from weather and climate disasters across the nation totaled more than $101bn, according to Dr Adam Smith, who tracked the data for Noaa until the federal database that cataloged these costs was discontinued in May. “That cost is by far the most costly first half of any year on record dating back to 1980,” he said. Smith now works as the senior climate impacts scientist for the non-profit Climate Central, where he is continuing to build the database. “We are in the perfect storm,” said Monica Medina, who served as the principal deputy administrator of Noaa during the Obama administration. Ever-escalating threats are being met with a crumbling safety net, she added, as mismanagement and cuts in funding corrode an emergency response system already close to the brink.

Also of Interest

Here are some articles of interest, some which defied fair-use abstraction.

Trump’s Act of War

Trump’s Teatro Yanqui del Absurdo

US Attack on Venezuela Killed at Least 80, Including Military Personnel and Civilians

Trump Threatens Venezuela’s Acting President With Fate Worse Than Maduro’s

What’s The U.S. Follow Up Action After Taking Maduro Out?

Maduro indictment attempts to link Venezuelan leader to Tren de Aragua

Trump’s intervention in Venezuela – cartoon

Israeli forces kill Palestinian child as Gaza humanitarian crisis deepens

The CIA Is Manipulating Trump Against Putin

How Mexico More Than Tripled Its Minimum Wage in Eight Years Without Triggering the Economic Disaster Many Had Predicted

“We're returning to a pre-1945 world” Yanis Varoufakis & Gillian Tett on "fractious" global politics

Maduro's first court appearance

GRAND THEFT VENEZUELA | Trump snares Maduro | His ‘perp walk’ | Iran in the sights | Greenland now?

A Little Night Music

Will Shade - I'll Get A Break

Will Shade - Dirty Dozens

Charlie Burse & Will Shade - Kansas City Blues

Furry Lewis & Will Shade - Muscle Shoal Blues

Will Shade - Better Leave That Stuff Alone

Will Shade - I Can't Stand It

Will Shade & Minnie Wallace - Field Mouse Stomp

Catherine Porter And Will Shade - Won't You Ride With Me Tonight

Memphis Jug Band - Going Back To Memphis

Memphis Jug Band - Gator Wobble