Original article by republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).
President Donald Trump takes questions at his Mar-a-Lago estate on December 22, 2025 in Palm Beach, Florida. (Photo by Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images)
“The right-wing bullshit machine is operating at full steam and across all cylinders today,” said one critic.
President Donald Trump on Wednesday posted an account of the deadly shooting in Minneapolis by a federal immigration officer that was completely at odds with all evidence seen so far.
In a post on Truth Social, the president claimed that the woman killed in her car by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer “violently, willfully, and viciously ran over” him, forcing him to fire his weapon at her in self-defense.
Trump further claimed that it “is hard to believe” that the ICE officer “is alive” after being supposedly run over.
Eyewitness videos taken at the scene of the incident, however, do not show the officer getting run over at all. In fact, the officer can be seen walking around after discharging his weapon, with no signs of any injury.
In fact, the video Trump posted on his Truth Social that he claims shows the officer being run over does not at all show the officer being run over, but rather stepping safely out of the way as the car starts moving forward.
The New Republic‘s Greg Sargent carefully examined the video posted by Trump and concluded that it “demonstrates nothing close to what” the president claimed it showed.
“This is a sick, malicious lie from Trump,” Sargent commented.
Reporter Sam Stein of the Bulwark also provided a swift debunking of Trump’s claims.
“Hard to believe the ICE officer is still alive, writes the president,” Stein wrote on X, “of an ICE officer who was not hit at all and was well enough to go run down the street to check on the woman he had killed.”
John Hopkins University economist Filipe Campante was struck by just how little effort the president feels he needs to exert to make his lies convincing.
“That he chooses the ‘me or your lying eyes?’ approach, in the full knowledge that there are multiple videos out there, is a striking commentary on the nature of propaganda in the modern information environment,” Campante wrote on Bluesky. “Censorship is no longer viable, so the approach is to use your own content provision to drown out any negative facts/evidence.”
Tour guide and author Ben Edwards marveled at the president’s ability to make completely fact-free assertions.
“The country is slowly starting to come apart,” Edwards observed. “Trump lives in an alternate reality. He cannot speak a word of truth.”
Disinformation researcher Kate Starbird warned that Trump’s low-effort propaganda was still likely to prove effective with his followers.
“The right-wing bullshit machine is operating at full steam and across all cylinders today,” Starbird wrote, “strategically framing the horrific ICE killing of a Minnesota woman to defend/bolster their political aims. For example, Trump’s message… will shape how his supporters (willfully mis)interpret the video evidence.”
Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.Donald Fuhrump says that Amerikkka doesn’t bother with crimes or charges anymore, not being 100% Amerikkkan and opposing his real estate intentions is enough.Orcas discuss how Trump was re-elected and him being an obviously insane, xenophobic Fascist.
Conservative influencer Robby Starbuck’s hiring at Meta was apparently part of a legal settlement. Credit: CNBC
Right-wing influencer Robby Starbuck has a new job advising on political bias in Meta’s AI tools. His record on climate is concerning, say advocates.
A conservative political activist recently appointed to be Meta’s new artificial intelligence anti-bias advisor is a well-known climate change denier, DeSmog has learned.
Robby Starbuck — best known for opposing corporate diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, particularly among brands popular with conservatives — has a track record of denying the science of climate change. These views could seriously compromise the climate content accessed by Instagram and Facebook users, climate advocates warn.
In August 2024, Starbuck told CNN that “corporate policies to slow down the effects of human-caused climate change do nothing positive for society,” that “the climate has always changed” and that “human beings have very little control over it.”
In his new advisory role, Starbuck will be responsible for removing alleged political bias from Meta’s artificial intelligence tools. This may result in a surge of climate change denialism and climate science disinformation on Meta’s social media platforms, like Facebook and Instagram, say climate advocates.
Starbuck’s appointment appears to be at odds with Meta’s stated goals of reaching “net zero emissions across our value chain in 2030” by way of a “science-aligned emissions reduction target in line with the Paris Climate agreement.”
But his appointment comes at a time when major tech companies like Meta and Google are walking back their sustainability initiatives, a process likely motivated by a broad conservative-led anti-ESG political campaign, according to a 2024 Harvard Business Review analysis.
“Putting Starbuck in charge of Meta’s AI policies is the latest reason to believe that Facebook and Instagram are billboards for disinformation,” said Phil Newell, communications co-chair of Climate Action Against Disinformation (CAAD), a global coalition of over 50 climate and anti-disinformation organizations.
Why Meta appointed Starbuck
Starbuck — who produced music videos prior to becoming a conservative activist and MAGA influencer — has no scientific background or experience in climate science.
Yet that hasn’t stopped him from promoting a conspiracy that record 2024 floods in Dubai were the result of “weather modification,” or that the U.S. should “LEAVE and DEFUND the UN!” in response to its positions on climate change.
It is the general consensus of the scientific community and most of the world’s governments that climate change is real and caused by human activity.
He was apparently appointed to the role as part of a legal settlement. The conservative influencer had sued Meta after the company’s AI chatbot incorrectly linked Starbuck to the January 6th insurrection.
Starbuck’s appointment appears to contrast with Meta’s previous climate statements, including a July 2023 document entitled “Our Path to Net Zero” which stated that “operating sustainably and addressing climate change through bold, meaningful action are paramount to our mission.”
Yet in recent years Meta and other tech companies have appeared to walk back such commitments as they build data centers that have largely been powered by fossil fuels.
They’ve also cultivated closer relationships with Trump. Amazon, Apple, Meta, and Microsoft all made $1 million donations to Trump’s second inauguration fund.
Meta’s ties to Trump
Newell argues that Meta’s retreat on climate action coincides with new leadership that takes the crisis less seriously. He pointed to the 2025 appointment of chief global affairs officer Joel Kaplan, who is credited with developing Meta’s Washington lobbying effort, as well as bringing CEO Mark Zuckerberg into Donald Trump’s orbit.
About a week after Kaplan’s appointment, Meta announced that it would eliminate fact checkers from moderating content on its platforms. Zuckerberg said that the company would henceforth rely on users to counter climate change denialism and misinformation.
Newell told DeSmog that the prevalence of right-wing propaganda and disinformation on platforms such as Facebook is profitable, and likely why such content isn’t being banned.
Meta’s hiring of Starbuck comes as the Trump administration is leading a coordinated attack on mainstream climate science. In July, the Department of Energy released a report on climate change that actual climate scientists condemned as “biased, full of errors, and not fit to inform policymaking.” The report — authored by five well-known climate science deniers — aimed to undermine the scientific consensus that human activity underlies climate change.
According to CNN, Starbuck may be involved in efforts to reduce or eliminate “AI hallucinations” – false or nonsensical information provided in response to queries. As such, an exceptionally high-profile conservative activist will have a say in one of the world’s most widely used AI systems.
Even prior to hiring Starbuck, Meta’s AI has already been criticized for leaning heavily on carbon capture as a potential climate change solution, despite the considerable expert analysis that has largely concluded the technology is an ineffective smokescreen to permit continued fossil fuel production.
AI climate denial
Researchers with CAAD have identified bigger, more systemic climate problems with AI.
CAAD estimates that even if tech companies improved AI data centers’ energy efficiency by 10 percent, but also doubled the number of data centers, it would increase carbon dioxide emissions by 80 percent.
“There’s definitely a significant harm happening that’s already greater than the promises of pro-AI boosters,” said Newell.
Starbuck’s appointment — only the most recent example of the right-wing’s takeover of Big Tech — signals that the problem will likely get worse, especially if Meta’s AI is programmed to consider actual climate science politically or ideologically biased, he argued.
DeSmog reached out to Meta and Starbuck for comment, but did not receive a reply.
dizzy: I suggest that AI should be regarded as certainly not impartial and instead anti-Democratic and supportive of Fascism. For example Musk’s chatbot Grok is censored after confirming that Israel and the United States is committing genocide in Gaza and Google’s AI getting censored so that it fails to confirm that Trump is demented. It follows that AI should be opposed since it’s supportive of Fascism and anti-Democratic.
Greenpeace activists display a billboard during a protest outside Shell headquarters on July 27, 2023 in London. (Photo: Handout/Chris J. Ratcliffe for Greenpeace via Getty Images)Experienced climbers scale a rock face near the historic Dumbarton castle in Glasgow, releasing a banner that reads “Climate on a Cliff Edge.” One activist, dressed as a globe, symbolically looms near the edge, while another plays the bagpipes on the shores below. | Photo courtesy of Extinction Rebellion and Mark RichardsElon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.
US Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin speaks at EPA Headquarters on February 18, 2025, in Washington, DC. (Photo by Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images)
Repealing the endangerment finding, they wrote, “is contrary to science and the public interest.”
More than 1,000 scientists and other experts on Tuesday sent a letter to US Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin explaining why they “strenuously object” to his effort to repeal the EPA’s 2009 “endangerment finding,” which has enabled federal climate regulations over the past 15 years.
Amid mounting fears that he would take such action, Zeldin in late July unveiled the rule to rescind the landmark legal opinion that greenhouse gases endanger public health and the welfare of the American people—part of Republican President Donald Trump’s broader pro-polluter agenda.
“As climate scientists, public health experts, and economists, we can attest to the indisputable scientific evidence of human-caused climate change, its harmful impacts on people’s health and well-being, and the devastating costs it is imposing on communities across the nation and around the world,” states the new letter, organized by the Union of Concerned Scientists. “This explicit attempt to undermine or weaken these findings, as well as the critical regulations linked to them, is contrary to science and the public interest.”
“We also strongly oppose the EPA’s reckless dismissal of established climate science as part of its proposal to repeal the endangerment finding, including the agency’s heavy reliance on an unscientific study commissioned by the Department of Energy. This report is rife with inaccuracies, deliberately cherry-picks and mischaracterizes data, and has not undergone a rigorous scientific review process,” the letter continues, echoing an expert review of the government report from earlier this month.
🚨NEW: Scientists from nearly every state, DC, and Puerto Rico are calling out Trump's Environmental Protection Agency for failing to fulfill their core duties: protect the environment and public health.
Citing major US and global analyses, along with thousands of independent, peer-reviewed scientific studies, the letter stresses that “the scientific evidence on human-caused climate change and its consequences was unequivocal in 2009 and, since that time, has become even more dire and compelling.”
It says that “based on the best available science,” scientists know:
Climate change poses severe harms to human health and well-being;
Climate change is clearly increasing the likelihood of extreme events; and
The economic toll of climate change is rising.
Harms to human health and well-being include higher rates of heat-related deaths, increased spread of some infectious diseases, and decreased food and water safety due to climate-fueled extreme weather events, the letter says. It also highlights that, according to data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), “billion-dollar disasters in the United States are on the rise, driven by a combination of climate factors and increased development in disaster-prone areas.”
Despite such findings, the Trump administration is making various moves to boost the planet-wrecking fossil fuel industry and the president withdrew the United States from the Paris Agreement—again—when he returned to office in January. Parties to the 2015 climate agreement aim to limit global temperature rise this century to 1.5°C above preindustrial levels.
🌎🧪Over 1,000+ scientists joined together to defend the EPA's Endangerment Finding, and you have SIX DAYS to make your voice heard too.
“The world stands on the cusp of breaching the 1.5°C (2.7°F) mark on a long-term basis, the global average temperature increase above preindustrial levels that scientists have long warned about,” the experts noted Tuesday. “Communities across the nation are already dealing with devastating and costly climate impacts, that are set to worsen as global warming accelerates. Humanity’s window to act to stave off some of the worst impacts of climate change is fast closing; any further delay is harmful and costly.”
“We urge you to stop dismantling critical climate regulations and evading EPA’s responsibility by pushing disinformation about climate science and impacts,” they concluded. “Instead, we call on you to act with urgency to help address this pressing challenge by limiting heat-trapping emissions. People across the nation are relying on the EPA to fulfill its mission to protect public health and the environment.”
Donald Trump urges you to be a Climate Science denier like him. He says that he makes millions and millions for destroying the planet, Burn, Baby, Burn and Flood, Baby, Flood.Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.Orcas discuss Donald Trump and the killer apes’ concept of democracy. Front Orca warns that Trump is crashing his country’s economy and that everything he does he does for the fantastically wealthy.
It was this big! Stephen Miller speaks at a Donald Trump campaign rally in Novi, Michigan on October 26, 2024. (Photo by Drew Angerer/AFP via Getty Images)
“We must end any form of political violence—and reject those who try to exploit it,” one Democratic congresswoman asserted.
Senior Trump administration officials on Monday made fresh threats to crack down on a nonexistent left-wing “domestic terror movement” following last week’s assassination of Charlie Kirk—a move that critics called an attempt to exploit the far-right firebrand’s murder to advance an authoritarian agenda targeting nonviolent opposition.
Even as investigators work to determine the motive of Kirk’s killer, members of Trump’s inner circle and supporters have amplified an unfounded narrative of a coordinated leftist movement targeting conservatives.
On Monday, two senior administration officials, who spoke anonymously to describe the internal planning, said that Cabinet secretaries and federal department heads were working to identify organizations that funded or supported violence against conservatives. The goal, they said, was to categorize left-wing activity that led to violence as domestic terrorism, an escalation that critics said could lay the groundwork for crushing anti-conservative dissent more broadly.
Appearing on the latest episode of “The Charlie Kirk Show” podcast—which was guest hosted by US Vice President JD Vance—White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller said that “we are going to use every resource we have at the Department of Justice, Homeland Security, and throughout this government to identify, disrupt, dismantle, and destroy these networks and make America safe again for the American people.”
“It will happen, and we will do it in Charlie’s name,” Miller vowed.
Vance said during the podcast that he wanted to explore “all of the ways that we’re trying to figure out how to prevent this festering violence that you see on the far left from becoming even more and more mainstream.”
“You have the crazies on the far left who are saying, ‘Oh, Stephen Miller and JD Vance, they’re going to go after constitutionally protected speech,‘” the vice president said. “We’re going to go after the network that foments, facilitates, and engages in violence.”
Vance, who like Trump and numerous supporters claim to champion free speech, also took aim at “people who are celebrating” Kirk’s killing.
If we want to stop political violence like what happened to Charlie Kirk, we have to be honest about the people who are celebrating it and the people who are financing it.
Another unnamed administration official told the Times Monday that government agencies would be investigating people, including those accused of vandalizing Tesla electric vehicles and dealerships and allegedly assaulting federal immigration agents, in an effort to implicate US leftists in political violence.
Vance and Miller’s threats ignored right-wing violence—which statistically outpaces left-wing attacks—including the recent assassinations of Democratic Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband Mark Hortman, who were murdered in June by a right-wing masked gunman disguised as a police officer.
Investigative reporter Jason Paladino reported last week that the US Department of Justice apparently removed an academic study previously published on the National Institute for Justice’s online library showing that “since 1990, far-right extremists have committed far more ideologically motivated homicides than far-left or radical Islamist extremists, including 227 events that took more than 520 lives” versus “42 ideologically motivated attacks that took 78 lives” committed by “far-left extremists.”
“Militant, nationalistic, white supremacist violent extremism has increased in the United States. In fact, the number of far-right attacks continues to outpace all other types of terrorism and domestic violent extremism.”The Trump DOJ scrubbed this study from their website.
Responding to Miller’s remarks, New Republic staff writer Greg Sargent noted on social media that “Stephen Miller was directly involved in one of the largest acts of organized domestic political violence the United States has seen in modern times, the January 6 [2021] insurrection.”
Congresswoman Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) weighed in Monday on Miller’s attempt to exploit Kirk’s murder, writing on the social media site Bluesky that “it’s never acceptable to kill someone for their political beliefs. But the Trump [administration] exploiting the shooting of Charlie Kirk to follow their authoritarian instincts and crack down on the left is incredibly disturbing.”
“We must end any form of political violence—and reject those who try to exploit it,” she added.
Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom noted Monday on social media that Miller “has already publicly labeled the Democratic Party as a terrorist organization.”
“This isn’t about crime and safety,” Newsom added. “It’s about dismantling our democratic institutions. We cannot allow acts of political violence to be weaponized and used to threaten tens of millions of Americans.”
The progressive Working Families Party (WFP) said Monday on social media that “JD Vance and Stephen Miller want to use the horrifying murder of Charlie Kirk to target and dismantle pro-democracy groups.”
“Their comments call to mind some of the darkest periods in US history,” WFP continued. “They’re dividing people based on what box we ticked on our voter registration.”
Vance and Miller “want to stoke fear and resentment to justify their un-American crackdowns on free speech, mass abductions of working people, and military takeovers of our cities,” WFP added. “This isn’t going to fly. We’ve survived crises like this before as a country, and we can choose to live in a place where our political freedoms are protected, where we settle disagreements with words not weapons, and where no one has to fear losing a loved one to gun violence.”
Donald Fuhrump says that Amerikkka doesn’t bother with crimes or charges anymore, not being 100% Amerikkkan and opposing his real estate intentions is enough.Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.Orcas discuss how Trump was re-elected and him being an insane, xenophobic Fascist.
US President Donald Trump, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. Photos via Presidential Press
The war drums beating in Washington are not just a threat to a distant nation; they are a symptom of a political system that thrives on the distraction of war abroad to cover its internal crises.
The sun glints off the gray hull of the USS Iwo Jima, a massive amphibious assault ship cutting through the Caribbean Sea. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, a key architect of the Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” policies, stands on deck before a group of sailors and marines. His voice, amplified by the ship’s public address system, is a low, serious rumble that carries across the choppy waters. “What you’re doing right now is NOT training,” he says, in a scene reminiscent of George W. Bush’s staged landing to declare victory in Iraq. “This is a REAL-WORLD EXERCISE on behalf of the vital national interests of the United States of America, to end the POISONING of the American people.” His words hang heavy in the air, a dramatic prelude to what some suspect is an impending invasion of Venezuela.
The history of the Caribbean is a bloody one, stained by the imperial ambitions of European powers and the United States. The region now sits on the verge of another bloody chapter. As the great writer and historian Juan Bosch once observed, this region of Latin America is a battleground where empires have fought to seize the rich lands of its peoples and to claim what other empires had already conquered.
Today, the Caribbean is again being transformed into a stage for imperial aggression.
In a dangerous and dramatic escalation, the government of the United States, through its aptly renamed Department of War, has amassed a formidable naval force and deployed advanced fighter jets to the waters off Venezuela. This military buildup, consisting of at least eight warships, 4,000 sailors and marines along with P-8 spy planes and at least one nuclear submarine, is a clear threat to Venezuelan sovereignty and a blatant crime against international law. Washington is hiding behind a well-worn, cynical pretext: the “war on drugs”.
A sordid history of manufactured pretexts
The latest act of lawlessness came on September 2, when US forces in the Caribbean allegedly interdicted a “drug trafficking” vessel. Instead of following international protocols, the US Coast Guard and DEA agents opened fire, destroying the boat and killing all 11 people on board. This extrajudicial execution at sea is a clear violation of international law, which mandates that law enforcement actions must prioritize arrest and the preservation of life. The use of lethal force is only permitted as a last resort in cases of immediate self-defense. Though the US is not a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the US military’s legal advisors have previously said that the US should “act in a manner consistent with its provisions”. To destroy a vessel and summarily execute its occupants without due process is not law enforcement; it is a state-sanctioned massacre, a crime that echoes other massacres in American military missions abroad. Recently, Professor Michael Becker of Trinity College in Dublin told the BBC that the US action “stretches the meaning of the term beyond its breaking point”.
This act of violence is not an anomaly but part of a deliberate pattern of provocation. The US Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) has significantly bolstered its presence with additional destroyers and littoral combat ships. Meanwhile, the US Air Force has sent F-35 fighter jets, aircraft designed for air dominance and striking high-value targets – not for intercepting drug runners – to its base in Puerto Rico, an island under US colonial domination. This military posture has nothing to do with curbing narcotics flow and everything to do with encircling and intimidating a nation that has defiantly resisted Washington’s hegemony for over two decades.
The historical context is inescapable. The United States has a long and sordid history of fabricating justifications for military action to achieve its political ends. The sinking of the USS Maine, the Gulf of Tonkin incident, and the non-existent “Weapons of Mass Destruction” used to justify the invasion of Iraq are all well-worn chapters in the same playbook. The current administration, with its bellicose rhetoric, is drafting a new one. Key architect of Trump-era maximum pressure policies, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, has consistently agitated for regime change, framing the Venezuelan government as a “narco-state”.
Exposing the “narco-state” smokescreen
The “narco-state” narrative collapses under the weight of its own fiction. According to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and the US State Department’s own annual reports, the vast majority of cocaine leaving South America originates from and passes through US-allied nations like Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru. Venezuela is not a significant producer of cocaine. The narrative is a convenient smokescreen, a lie sold to the public to manufacture consent for aggression. The hypocrisy is further exposed by Rubio’s recent tour of Ecuador, a nation with extremely high levels of collaboration with US anti-drug agencies. Despite this collaboration, Ecuador has been plunged into a devastating crisis of drug trafficking and gang violence, proving that US intervention solves nothing and only fuels instability.
The true goal of this military buildup is clearly the overthrow of Venezuela’s government and the seizure of its vast oil reserves. The threats emanating from Washington are not veiled. They range from scenarios of massive bombing campaigns to the outright kidnapping or assassination of President Maduro. Donald Trump’s past musings about a “military option” for Venezuela are now being operationalized.
The Venezuelan people prepare for resistance
In the face of this existential threat, the Venezuelan people are preparing to defend their homeland. President Maduro has called for a “people in arms”, and an estimated 8 million Venezuelans have joined citizen militias. Across the country, young people, students, workers, and retirees are training in basic combat, emergency response, and civil defense. Their resolve is a powerful testament to the spirit of resistance.
“We are not an army for aggression, but an army for peace, for the defense of our sacred land,” said Maria Delgado*, a 20-year-old university student and new militia member in Caracas. “They think that because we are young or because we are not professional soldiers, we will be afraid. They are wrong. We know what is at stake: our sovereignty, our future, and the project of justice that our parents built.”
President Maduro has framed this mobilization in stark terms: “Venezuela is facing its greatest threat in 100 years. Having defeated all forms of hybrid warfare, they [United States] have opted for the worst mistake.”
The war drums beating in Washington are not just a threat to a distant nation; they are a symptom of a political system that thrives on the distraction of war abroad to cover its internal crises. The billions spent on deploying F-35s and destroyers to the Caribbean are billions stolen from the right to healthcare, education, and housing of ordinary Americans at home.
*Name changed
Manolo De Los Santos is Executive Director of The People’s Forum and a researcher at Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research. His writing appears regularly in Monthly Review, Peoples Dispatch, CounterPunch, La Jornada, and other progressive media. He coedited, most recently, Viviremos: Venezuela vs. Hybrid War (LeftWord, 2020), Comrade of the Revolution: Selected Speeches of Fidel Castro (LeftWord, 2021), and Our Own Path to Socialism: Selected Speeches of Hugo Chávez (LeftWord, 2023).
