Após semanas de tensão entre Brasil e Estados Unidos, o presidente Lula conversou por telefone com Donald Trump na última sexta-feira, 21 de agosto. A ligação, que durou mais de uma hora e meia, teve dentro dos principais temas as atuais medidas envolvendo a segurança pública e economia, e também as acusações contra autoridades brasileiras. Segundo nota do Governo Federal, a conversa foi para retomada de um novo canal de diálogo e de negociações entre os países.

Em entrevista ao Pauta Pública, gravada no mesmo dia da ligação, Celso Amorim, chefe da Assessoria Especial do Presidente da República, reforçou que a conversa teve um tom positivo, que não se limitou aos temas bilaterais, mas reforçaram o compromisso de cooperação sem a necessidade de interferências dos EUA nas questões nacionais. “O presidente Lula e o presidente Trump fizeram a nuvem, agora as equipes técnicas têm que fazer chover”, afirma Amorim.

Na entrevista com Andrea Dip, ele analisa o resultado da conversa, comenta as medidas adotadas pelo governo norte-americano e os desafios das negociações comerciais. Ele também fala sobre as pressões geopolíticas sobre o Brasil e a necessidade de fortalecer a defesa e a independência do país na área industrial e militar. “Diante desse mundo, é como uma apólice de seguro. É evidente que você prefere que não aconteça nada, mas você tem que estar preparado se acontecer.”

Leia os principais pontos da conversa e ouça o podcast completo abaixo.

Quais foram os principais temas tratados no telefonema entre Lula e Trump? Qual era o clima e qual seu balanço sobre essa conversa?

O balanço da conversa é o mais positivo possível. Eu acho que os dois presidentes tiveram uma conversa muito respeitosa, com muita empatia. O presidente Lula não se limitou a temas bilaterais, ele falou de temas globais, e o presidente Trump se estendeu em colocar a posição dele, mostrar qual é a visão dele de mediação e o papel que os Estados Unidos têm realizado, o que pode ser feito. O presidente Lula enfatizou a importância do Conselho de Segurança, um lugar onde as grandes potências que podem decidir têm que conversar.

Em geral, dentro do clima desse espírito brasileiro de que, quando possível, sempre coopera para a paz, mas tendo clareza de que os cinco membros permanentes do Conselho de Segurança da ONU [China, Estados Unidos, França, Reino Unido e Rússia] têm uma responsabilidade primária nisso. E, obviamente, os Estados Unidos, como ainda é a maior potência do mundo, têm uma responsabilidade especial.[…] Na parte bilateral, os temas que foram tratados são os que estão na nota oficial, não houve nenhum tema diferente.

Os dois temas principais foram o comércio e a cooperação no combate ao crime organizado, que as equipes se reúnam, voltem a se reunir e trabalhar. O presidente Lula descreveu um pouco o que nós temos feito aqui. E, digamos, foi crítico da medida americana comercial, claramente, que os motivos não correspondiam à realidade.

O presidente Trump não contestou, não posso dizer também se concordou, mas ele concordou com a importância de voltar a conversar e preparar as equipes para isso. Então, o clima foi muito bom. Eu acho que o que se espera de uma conversa entre chefes de Estado é isso, é criar o clima e depois as equipes têm que encontrar a solução. Às vezes, as equipes são mais difíceis do que os governantes, mas isso é um problema para mais tarde.

O senhor avalia as ações tomadas pelo governo Trump, em relação ao Brasil, como ilegais ou inconstitucionais?

Constitucionais segundo a Constituição dos Estados Unidos eu não posso julgar. A Suprema Corte americana já fez isso no passado em relação à primeira onda de tarifaço. Enfim, eu sempre me lembro do primeiro encontro – não o primeiríssimo, porque o primeiro foi antes da posse – mas o primeiro encontro do presidente Lula com o presidente Bush na Casa Branca, no Salão Oval, quando o presidente Lula entrou, o presidente Bush disse assim, “olha, nós temos diferenças, nós vamos tratar daquilo que nos aproxima.”

Enfim, eu achei que o clima foi um pouco também esse, sem necessariamente falar em diferença, mas que é muito respeitoso da parte do presidente Trump. As colocações que nós fizemos, muito interessado em discutir e apresentar a posição norte-americana sobre temas globais. Eu acho muito respeito por um estadista, que o presidente Lula é, não é qualquer pessoa que liga para o presidente dos Estados Unidos. Eu tenho muita vivência nisso, quem liga para o presidente dos Estados Unidos e fala sobre a guerra no Irã, por exemplo, e ele se dá ao trabalho de explicar as posições dos Estados Unidos? Agora, eu tinha um chefe, que era ministro do exterior muitos anos atrás, ele dizia que “a gente faz a nuvem, agora a gente não pode fazer chover.” Então, o presidente Lula e o presidente Trump fizeram a nuvem, agora as equipes técnicas têm que fazer chover.

Vários analistas veem um aumento constante das pressões dos Estados Unidos sobre o Brasil por acesso a recursos nos próximos anos e para conter a influência da China, independente de ser um governo republicano ou democrata. Alguns até pensam na possibilidade de uma escalada militar envolvendo o Brasil pela sua importância geopolítica na nova economia. Como fugir dessa encruzilhada?

O Brasil, como um país grande que é, tem que tratar da sua defesa. Nós temos que trabalhar nessa conversa. Nós conversamos com todos e torcemos, e se pudermos vamos colaborar para que eles tenham uma relação pacífica entre si. Isso não é bom só para o Brasil, isso é bom para o mundo. Diante desse mundo, é como uma apólice de seguro. É evidente que você prefere que não aconteça nada, mas você tem que estar preparado se acontecer. Eu fui ministro da Defesa, como você sabe, e naquela época fizemos investimentos importantes, entre eles o Gripen [aeronave supersônica], mas a Comissão da Verdade foi o tema dominante. Então, as atenções se voltavam mais para isso, mas eu acho que nós temos que dar uma grande importância à defesa nacional.

Isso pode envolver cooperação com outros países, mas tem que envolver também um grau forte de independência na área industrial ou militar. Isso eu acho que é fundamental. Não é para atacar ninguém, não, mas é que se alguém quiser nos atacar, tem que pensar duas vezes. A questão é a seguinte: não é que você vai ganhar uma guerra contra o país A ou contra o país B, que tem bomba atômica, etc. É que você tem que ser capaz de causar um dano que seja suficiente para ele pensar duas vezes antes de te atacar. Senão, você fica dominado a priori.

El presidente de Estados Unidos, Donald Trump, anunció el viernes la firma de un acuerdo con el Gobierno interino de Venezuela que calificó como “el mayor acuerdo petrolero de la…

Acting President Delcy Rodríguez's government in a statement said the deal involves the development of 17 fields with a proven potential of 65 billion barrels.

Acting President Delcy Rodríguez's government in a statement said the deal involves the development of 17 fields with a proven potential of 65 billion barrels.

Proposed investment could bring billions in private capital and expand Venezuela’s struggling oil production.

The post U.S. seeks greater role in Venezuela’s oil industry appeared first on BOL News.

President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva launched his campaign for a fourth and final term before thousands of supporters in São Bernardo do Campo, promising to keep fighting poverty and investing in Brazil’s future. His challenger: Senator Flavio Bolsonaro, running in place of his father, former far-right President Jair Bolsonaro, who is under house arrest after being convicted of attempting a coup. US President Donald Trump has backed the Bolsonaros with tariffs, visa revocations, and open pressure — what experts call a new era of US dominance over Latin America.

Michael Fox reports from São Paulo, with voices from Lula’s campaign launch, evangelical Bolsonaro supporters on the streets of São Paulo, and foreign relations professor Igor Fuser.

Credits:

• Filmed and edited by Michael Fox 

Transcript

The campaigns are underway ahead of Brazil’s October elections

And U.S. President Donald Trump is doing his best to sway the vote…

“Lula, Lula!”

Thousands of supporters of leftist president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva attended his campaign launch in mid August.

Karen Silva

“We came to support Lula, especially in his last election. And we believe that we are going to win. This is a fact.”

They filled May 1st Stadium in Sao Bernardo do Campo….

A place, where Lula led an iconic metal workers strike and rally in 1979.

They say Lula has changed their lives. 

Raimunda Silva Santos

“Yeah, he changed my life. He changed the life of my whole family.”

During his years in office, he promoted education, health and social programs. He helped to lift millions from poverty. They have not forgotten.

Raimunda Silva Santos

“Wow, this is the greatest joy of my life. I’m 76 years old. I’m so happy. Lula is coming to stay. He’s an incredible person. He’s helped a lot of people there in the northeast. We owe a lot to Lula.”

They want him back for a fourth and final term.

Valmir Lima, Movement of People Affected by Dams

“Lula will win with the strength of social movements, of the movements of people affected by dams, all the social movements that are helping on his campaign. And all of civil society.”

Applause

Lula has promised to continue to fight poverty, promote industry, create jobs and invest in Brazil’s future.

Lula

“What kind of a future do you want for the Brazilian people if you don’t invest in education? What future do you want for the Brazilian people if you don’t invest in health? What future do you want if you don’t invest in jobs?” 

Lula

“We need to win these elections. To elect our people to congress so we can do everything we need to do for this country.”

Lula’s challenger is the son of the former far-right president Jair Bolsonaro. 

His name is Flavio Bolsonaro. He’s a Senator and he launched his campaign in his hometown of Rio de Janeiro.

Flavio Bolsonaro 

“Come with me and rescue our nation. Brazil above all. God above everyone. Brazil above all. God above everyone!”

Flavio is in the race, because his father is under house arrest. 

Former president Jair Bolsonaro was first barred from running for spreading lies about the country’s electoral system. Last year, he was convicted of attempting to carry out a coup to return to power.

His son, Flavio, has attacked the left, and promised to fight crime and insecurity, cut bureaucracy, promote private business and privatizations, and develop close ties with the United States

He spoke at the US Conservative Political Action Conference in March.

Flavio 

“Let me look you in the eyes and tell you,“we will win.”

Much of his discourse, and that of his supporters, is wrapped in a religious language of good versus evil.

“You are the son of hope. You are the first born. You received the legacy of representing your father. And now, for everything that is more sacred on the face of the earth, honor your father. Honor his days on earth.”

That goes over well with his evangelical supporters, an important base for Bolsonaro and far-right politicians in Brazil.

Glayson Araujo is a youth pastor at an evangelical church in a working class neighborhood of São Paulo. He joined others on the streets in mid August to promote Bolsonaro and other far-right candidates running for local office.

Glayson Araujo

“I believe that Flavio Bolsonaro is the only viable candidate, who can beat Lula and the Workers Party.”

Glayson Araujo

“I am a Christian here, I behave as a Christian, but I am also a political activist. Here on the streets to defend my beliefs.”

Flavio Bolsonaro also has powerful support in high places.

In particular… from Donald Trump.

The U.S. president is a longtime ally of his father, Jair Bolsonaro. 

Last year, Trump imposed 50% tariffs on Brazil, in part, because of the country’s trial against the former president. In May, Trump met with Flavio Bolsonaro at the White House. In June, he reposted an article over Truth Social that said Brazil was his next big challenge. He recently imposed new tariffs on the country and revoked the U.S. visa of the Brazilian ambassador.

Igor Fuser is a professor of foreign relations at Brazil’s ABC Federal University.

Igor Fuser

“This is not just about the United States trying to remove the government of a left-wing party, the workers Party or a left-wing leader, which is Lula. It’s about subjecting Brazil to the policies of the United States. And Brazil, being the largest country in Latin America, is precisely the biggest obstacle to the American project of global dominance of the Western Hemisphere.”

Over the last year, Trump has pushed the United States into a new era of dominance over Latin America the likes of which the region has not seen in decades.

Boat strikes in the Caribbean. The U.S. invasion of Venezuela and the kidnapping of president Nicolas Maduro. The oil blockade on Cuba.

And Trump throwing his weight around… and meddling in elections across Latin America.

It is all justified by a renewed Monroe Doctrine…

Pete Hegseth

”President Trump has established the Trump corollary of the Monroe Doctrine, the Donroe Doctrine. And the War Department is implementing it as fast as we can.”

Brazil is the latest battleground.

Igor Fuser

“So, it is clear that the United States is doing everything, and will do everything possible to prevent the re-election of Lula in the next elections.”

Fuser says that if Flavio Bolsonaro wins, he will bow to Trump and the United States.

Igor Fuser

“Brazil will become a country under the tutelage of the United States, a colony, or almost a colony, of the United States, as it already happens with Argentina, Colombia, Venezuela, and many others. And if Lula is victorious in these elections, we will live a very intense period of confrontation between the two countries.”

Fuser says the U.S. stated dominance over Latin America imposed by Trump is analogous to the control of the Soviet Union over the Eastern Bloc countries during the Cold War, under a Russian foreign policy imposed by Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev in 1968.

Igor Fuser 

“So, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland, Bulgaria, all those countries were formally independent countries, with their own government, their own laws, their representation in the United Nations, but these countries were not autonomous, they did not have sovereignty. Any movement that they made that clashed with the interests of the Soviet Union was repressed. Some of them were invaded, etc. So, we are living in Latin America a Brezhnev Doctrine, capitalist, imperialist, dictated by Donald Trump.”

Lula has accused Trump of trying to influence Brazil’s October election. Lula’s allies are taking action ahead of the vote…. to stand up to Trump and to push for Lula’s reelection. Brazil has denied visas to U.S. State Department officials who they feared wanted to travel to Brazil to cast doubt about the country’s electoral system. People are hitting the streets to campaign for Lula, who has long stood against U.S. intervention in Latin America. Over the next two months, Brazil will be a key battleground for Latin American sovereignty against Trump’s attack on the region. 

For The Real News, I’m Michael Fox. Sao Paulo, Brazil.

💾

The order directs U.S. federal agencies to use the new name as Canada rejects the change.

The post Trump signs order renaming Lake Ontario as ‘Lake America’ appeared first on BOL News.

Politicians from Canada’s two biggest political parties vowed on Monday to hit back hard against US President Donald Trump’s trade war against their country.

Trade negotiations between the two countries collapsed last week after Trump reportedly sought to restrict Canada from striking trade deals with other nations, while also pressuring the country to scrap requirements aimed at preserving the use of the French language.

Speaking to reporters on Monday, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney warned that Trump’s aggression would come back to hurt US workers.

“It’s not a surprise that the US would take some form of reprisal to our response to their unjustified tariffs,” said Carney, a member of the center-left Liberal Party. “But what message does that send to the workers in Michigan and Ohio and Kentucky and Alabama who rely on Canadian demand? We’re their largest customer for automobiles, more than the European Union, Japan, Korea.”

Mark Carney: "It's not a surprise that the US would take some form of reprisal to our response to their unjustified tariffs, which was on top of other unjustified tariffs. But what message does that send to the workers in Michigan and Ohio and Kentucky and Alabama who rely on… pic.twitter.com/2o5rbEmQAo

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) August 24, 2026

Carney also said there was an “attitude at the negotiating table” from US officials that “Canada is a subsidiary of the United States,” which is “not something we’re going to accept.”

Ontario Premier Doug Ford, a member of the rival center-right Progressive Conservative Party, delivered a more strident rebuke to Trump, vowing that Canada’s response would deliver a hit to the president’s voters.

“The red states, we’re going to hit hard,” said Ford.

The Ontario premier then outlined all the ways his country can make life more painful for US consumers so long as Trump keeps trying to undermine Canadian sovereignty.

“If it gets really, really bad, I say everything’s on the table,” Ford said. “We need everyone to be on Team Canada and throw everything and the kitchen sink at them, no matter if it’s electricity, if it’s fuel, again, if it’s potash, if it’s uranium. We need to have everything on the table… we can put massive pain on the US. President Trump underestimates us. And that’s the biggest mistake.”

Ontario Premier Doug Ford: "We need to throw everything and the kitchen sink that them — electricity, fuel, potash, uranium … we can put massive pain on the US. President Trump underestimates us. And that's a mistake." pic.twitter.com/IRIidj0iYS

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) August 24, 2026

Trump lashed out at both Carney and Ford in a Monday morning Truth Social post.

“The USA will always be far bigger, richer, and stronger than Canada,” Trump wrote. “Without the United States, Canada couldn’t survive—it’s where they get all of their money and, because of their current bad leadership, primarily Governor Carney, and his Flunky, Ford, they will not be allowed to keep taking advantage of the United States—their key to survival.”

I found it easy to resist the early dispatches from “UFC Freedom 250,” the Ultimate Fighting Championship event held in June on the White House South Lawn. But Jon Ronson is the sort of writer I can’t help following into battle. Fresh off a new book about masculinity, Ronson brings a delightfully skewed perspective to the fights and the days that surrounded them. The result is a portrait of a planned media spectacle that can’t quite make sense of itself. The best battle here may be Ronson’s tussle with his own photographer, 79-year-old Bruce Gilden, who is a bit of a hugger.

“I’m pretty certain you hugged Stephen Miller first,” I say. “I don’t see Stephen Miller as initiating a hug.”

“You may be right,” he says. “I don’t remember. Look, I do things maybe other people aren’t comfortable doing, but I felt comfortable and I trust my instincts.”

He acknowledges that “nobody is immune to misreading a situation” and that because of him we were all forced back indoors, but he blames Miller’s entourage for not checking with their boss on whether he minded being hugged.

L’architettura geopolitica globale sta subendo una trasformazione in cui le alleanze tradizionali lasciano il posto a intese transazionali e strategie di sopravvivenza. Analizzando le dinamiche tra Washington, Mosca, Pyongyang, Seul ...

Leggi tutto

The US military has resumed its campaign of bombing alleged drug-trafficking vessels after a two-month pause in a campaign that many legal experts and human rights groups believe constitutes a murder spree.

In a Monday social media post, US Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) said it carried out a “lethal kinetic strike on a low-profile vessel operating along established narco-trafficking routes” in the Pacific Ocean on Sunday. Two people were killed as a result of the attack, SOUTHCOM claimed.

In announcing the strike, SOUTHCOM Commander Gen. Francis Donovan said the attack was part of a campaign of “imposing total systemic friction on narco-terrorists—disrupting their operations, dismantling their leadership, and eliminating cartel terror across the region.”

Donovan’s boasts about the effectiveness of the boat strikes in combating the drug trade come less than a month after a leaked a Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) analysis revealed that the boat-bombing campaign has not “reduced the amount of cocaine entering” the country, as drug cartels have found alternate methods for shipping their product into the US.

With the latest two casualties, the boat bombing campaign launched nearly a year ago by President Donald Trump’s administration has now claimed the lives of at least 223 people.

Adam Isaacson, director of the Defense Oversight program at the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA), criticized the administration for resuming its boat bombings despite “overwhelming evidence that they are murder; that many, likely most, of the dead are either super-low-level or uninvolved with drugs; and that cocaine supply is unaffected.”

Brian Finucane, senior adviser to the US Program at the International Crisis Group, delivered a similarly scathing assessment, commenting that “the Trump administration’s lawless killing spree at sea resumes.”

Nicholas Grossman, professor of international relations at the University of Illinois, described the boat strike campaign as “murderous” and “illegal,” adding that its victims are “not terrorists” and “may not even be drug traffickers.”

Investigative journalist Camila Lourdes Galarza observed that “there’s still no proof any of the victims” of the boat strikes were involved in the drug trade.

Lourdes Galarza sarcastically added that if the victims had been drug traffickers, “the US would probably give them a deal” like the one given to Juan Orlando Hernández, the former president of Honduras who was pardoned by Trump last year despite being previously convicted on narcotics trafficking charges.

Da ich letzte Woche bereits beim Homeofffice von NuoViso über all die Themen gesprochen habe, die wir normalerweise bei Tacheles sprechen, haben wir Tacheles letzte Woche ausnahmsweise ausfallen lassen. Aber heute gibt es wieder eine aktuelle Folge von „Tacheles mit Röper und Stein“. Nächste Woche fällt Tacheles übrigens wieder aus, weil NuoViso sein jährliches Sommerfest […]

The Teen Pregnancy Prevention program, first authorized through bipartisan legislation in 2009, has been credited with helping to dramatically reduce the number of American teenagers who have experienced unwanted pregnancies in the past decade and a half, dropping by more than 65% over 16 years, according to one congressional report.

Despite the best efforts of President Donald Trump and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a federal judge’s ruling on Wednesday sent the message that the push to reduce teen pregnancy in the US will continue, with the administration’s limits on the program’s federal grants paused.

Judge Christopher Cooper of the US District Court for the District of Columbia granted a preliminary injunction in the case of Hennepin County, Minnesota v. US Department of Health and Human Services, in which officials joined King County in Washington state, Planned Parenthood of the Heartland, and the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS) in challenging HHS’s changes to the program’s grant policy. The plaintiffs were represented by Public Citizen and Democracy Forward.

The changes, said Cooper, were “likely arbitrary and capricious.”

LAWSUIT WIN: The court blocked the Trump admin’s attempt to turn the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program into an abstinence-only program.

The court said the plan would seem to defy social reality, common sense, & scientific evidence alike.

A win for young Americans' wellbeing.

— Public Citizen (@Public_Citizen) August 19, 2026

The new policy, announced in June, canceled 53 of 66 active grants that had gone to public universities, health departments, and nonprofits for programming related to sex education, including information that was given to teens on contraception and communication with sexual partners.

In Trump’s 2027 budget, the grants are described as promoting “radical leftist ideology,” and officials claim there is no evidence that teen pregnancy prevention programs that go beyond educating young people about abstinence have “contributed to the historic decline in teen pregnancy, which is now at an all-time low.”

Under new guidance issued in June, Teen Pregnancy Prevention (TPP) program grantees are required to focus lessons on abstinence, deemphasize contraception, and teach teens about fertility and “body literacy.”

“HHS is perfectly entitled to formulate its own views about how to stem teen pregnancy—or even whether it is worth preventing at all—and to pursue policy initiatives consistent with its viewpoint. But it is not at liberty, under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), to impose conditions on grant recipients that Congress did not intend or that are unreasonable or unexplained. The preliminary record suggests that HHS has done just that,” wrote Cooper in the ruling.

“Through the TPP, Congress sought to fund a range of evidence-based teen pregnancy prevention strategies, not just abstinence. According to unrebutted record evidence, programs that teach abstinence to the exclusion of all other approaches are ineffective in delaying sexual initiation and reducing adolescent pregnancy, at least as a general matter,” Cooper continued.

The judge took aim at the administration’s promotion of “body literacy,” which he called “a nebulous concept that appears to elevate fertility and marital procreation over well-tested forms of contraception and pregnancy prevention.”

Cooper also suggested that HHS had not bothered to find genuine evidence of its claims about “body literacy,” instead “remarkably” referencing “public health studies that appear either not to exist or not to support the propositions for which they are cited—a hallmark of AI-generated citations.”

The judge stopped short of reinstating the dozens of grants, amounting to about $67 million, that have been terminated, saying it was unclear whether he had the authority to do so.

The plaintiffs and other advocates of comprehensive sex education have called for a permanent injunction; Cooper called on both parties in the case to propose a schedule for next steps by September 1.

Callie Simon, executive director of SIECUS, said the group was “encouraged that the court has halted implementation of the new harmful policy” but emphasized that “the impacts of terminating existing grants remain.”

“Today’s decision sends a clear message that the Trump-Vance administration cannot replace the proven, bipartisan Teen Pregnancy Prevention program with an ideologically driven alternative that harms young people,” said Simon. “Communities across the country are still without the evidence-based programs they relied on, and we will continue fighting to ensure young people have access to the sex education they deserve.”

Sandra J. Valenciano, director and health officer for public health in Seattle and King counties, said local communities were facing a measurable loss due to HHS’ stripping of TPP grants

“This federal action threatened our ability to complete a study on a new science-based, community-informed sex education curriculum specifically for young men and boys,” said Valenciano. “This ruling gives us hope that we may still be able to get to the finish line with this study and ultimately empower more young people to build healthy families if, when, and how they choose.”

Ruth Richardson, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood North Central States, said the ruling “reaffirms the value of trusted, evidence-based education programs that help youth make informed choices and plan for their futures.”

“Attacks on the Teen Pregnancy Prevention program not only put young people at risk, they also risk increasing costs for taxpayers,” said Richardson. “No one benefits from these politically motivated attacks. It’s time for them to end.”

In July 2025, a protester shot a cop outside an ICE detention facility in North Texas. The federal government alleged the incident was the result of an “antifa” terrorist plot involving a network of friends and acquaintances united in leftist beliefs. The case that ensued was chilling:

It didn’t matter that little evidence of a premeditated attack on law enforcement ever emerged. It didn’t matter that every defendant, except the actual shooter, was exonerated of the original attempted murder charges. It didn’t even matter that prosecutors struggled to show the defendants belonged to an “antifa cell.” In the end, they convinced the jury that Batten and most of her co-defendants were guilty of rioting, conspiracy, using explosives, and supporting terrorists.

In a Fort Worth courtroom in June, a right-wing judge sentenced Batten to 50 years behind bars—a stark warning to others who might challenge the president’s agenda. 

di Patrizio Ricci | vietatoparlare.it Il rifiuto della Corea del Sud di partecipare al fronte d’attacco ed economico orchestrato da Washington contro l’Iran ha provocato la reazione immediata di Donald ...

Leggi tutto

Il segretario al Tesoro Scott Bessent annuncia sanzioni “senza precedenti” contro la Repubblica Islamica. L’amministrazione americana punta a chiudere i porti iraniani e a mettere in ginocchio il sistema finanziario ...

Leggi tutto

As Mainers continue to target Sen. Susan Collins’ office with protests following a recent killing by an immigration agent, new reporting shows how some of the $70 billion she and her GOP colleagues gave to President Donald Trump’s immigration agencies is being spent.

According to the Associated Press on Tuesday:

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers may soon be outfitted with gloves that can deliver painful electric shocks intended to gain compliance from combative individuals.

ICE plans to spend up to $20 million to purchase thousands of “conductive distraction and de-escalation devices” for officers and agents by March, according to a notice published Monday by the Department of Homeland Security.

The devices are known as the GLOVE, which stands for Generated Low Output Voltage Emitter, and are manufactured by Compliant Technologies LLC of Lexington, Kentucky. They have been used in recent years by some jails and police departments.

As the company’s website explains, “the discomfort associated with the stimulation is usually effective in bringing individuals into compliance in less than three seconds and leaves no burns, marks, or scars.” It describes them as a “humane, low-optics, de-escalation solution for many situations facing our men and women in uniform.”

As if ICE wasn’t sadistic enough, the agency plans to spend up to $20 million to give officers gloves that can deliver painful electric shockshttps://t.co/y5yMRYecLr

— Thomas Kennedy (@tomaskenn) August 12, 2026

John Peters, president of the Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths, told the AP that the sensation is “immediate and sharp,” comparing it to a “bee sting.”

While he said it could be an effective tool to prevent “resistance,” he warned that it should not be used as a form of punishment against those merely exhibiting “verbal defiance or belligerence” or on high-risk populations such as children, pregnant women, or elderly or disabled people.

But given the recent record of rampant civil rights abuses, extrajudicial killings, excessive use of force, and efforts to lie about misconduct, civil rights advocates are warning that these gloves are being placed into, or onto, the exact wrong hands.

“ICE spent the last year showing this country that they are willing to disregard the law and are too quick to use force, with devastating and at times fatal consequences for citizens and noncitizens alike,” Jenn Rolnick Borchetta, deputy director on policing at the American Civil Liberties Union, told Common Dreams. “Now they might be equipped with a device that allows them to deliver an electric shock with their hands by pushing a small button, in a move that might be imperceptible to those watching.”

Kica Matos, president of the National Immigration Law Center, concurred, telling Common Dreams that ICE is a “rogue agency with an $80 billion slush fund that allows them to concoct and fund new ways to visit cruelty upon our communities.”

“Arming poorly trained agents with electric shock gloves to inflict pain on our neighbors is disgusting and barbaric,” Matos added. “Congress must end the blank check to ICE, and ICE must get out of our communities.”

The shock gloves are just one way that immigration agencies are spending the $70 billion in additional funding they were given back in June, when Republicans in the Senate voted 52-47 to authorize the funding despite rampant lawlessness. Only one Republican, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), voted against supercharging the funding.

In a July 16 letter to Democratic Gov. Janet Mills, Collins defended her vote for the increased ICE funding by pointing to “reforms” passed in April as part of the Department of Homeland Security’s broader appropriations bill, which included $20 million for body cameras and $2 million for “de-escalation” training.

Collins’ office did not immediately respond when asked by Common Dreams whether she believes electric shock gloves were a good form of “de-escalation.”

A five-term senator in the midst of a fierce reelection bid against Democrat Troy Jackson has taken fierce criticism for her vote to support ICE on the campaign trail, which has only grown in intensity since July’s fatal shooting of 25-year-old Johan Sebastián Durán Guerrero in Biddeford.

It was one of two fatal shootings of men without criminal records over the course of a week. ICE later acknowledged that the victims were not the target of their operations.

When asked after the shooting, Collins declined to say that she regretted her vote for increased ICE funding.

Protesters who gathered outside Collins’ Biddeford office on Tuesday said she should.

“$70 billion to fund the terror that left my family and community in fear,” Fernanda McLaughlin, a Maine resident and community organizer, said over the loudspeaker, according to NBC News Center Maine. “You know what that money can be really used for? To feed Mainers. To fund our schools. To fund our health system.”

“There were no guardrails included, and she still voted yes on it,” McLaughlin said. “Simple guardrails that exist in nearly every other law enforcement agency across our nation.”