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

The US and UK militaries “owe” at least $111 billion in reparations to communities most harmed by their planet-heating pollution, a first-of-its-kind study calculates.

The research employs a “social cost of carbon” framework—a way to estimate the cost, in dollars, of the climate damage done by each additional ton of carbon in the atmosphere.

“The environmental costs of maintaining the global military reach of the US and UK armed forces are astonishing,” said Patrick Bigger, research director of the Climate and Community Project and co-author of the report.

According to the report, which was published by the UK-based think tank Common Wealth and the US-based Climate and Community Project, the two militaries have generated at least 474 million tons of carbon dioxide equivalent since the 2015 United Nations Paris climate agreement. That’s more than the total greenhouse gas emissions produced in the UK last year.

In 2010, Barack Obama signed the Plain Writing Act into law, requiring that federal government documents use clear, straightforward language. Despite its passage more than a decade ago, though, getting plain-language information about government policy—ranging from the federal to local level—isn’t always easy. 

Plain-language documents serve a dual purpose: they can make information more accessible to people with disabilities that affect cognition and memory, but also address the fact that legislation is already complicated for most people to read—a case in point of how accessibility practices benefit even those without a particular disability.

New Disabled South, a disability justice nonprofit founded in 2022, is trying to make more information available to disabled people on legislation that affects them, launching its Plain Language Policy Dashboard in November to cover 14 Southern states. As of now, the bills it explains fall into six categories: accessibility, civil rights, criminalization, poverty and care, democracy, and education. 

Dom Kelly, New Disabled South’s CEO, told me that he hopes the dashboard—which uses AI to translate texts into plain language, which is then checked for accuracy and additional analysis is added—can also help “combat myths and disinformation” that spread on social media, like whether a mental health–related bill could actually lead to more institutionalization. 

I spoke to Kelly and e.k. hoffman, associate director of the nonprofit’s advocacy arm, about the policy dashboard and the importance of accessibility in politics.

Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia will not run for reelection next year. 

The conservative Democrat called the choice—which he shared the news of in a video he posted to X—”one of the toughest decisions of my life.” Instead of running for Senate, Manchin said he would be “traveling the country and speaking out to see if there is an interest in creating a movement to mobilize the middle and bring Americans together.” 

If you think that sounds insufficiently vague…I agree. Which is why I reached out to Manchin’s press team in a bid to get some clarity. And specifically, to ask: Is he running for president?

No word yet. (Though, I’m not quite holding my breath: after my colleague David Corn reported a Manchin scoop back in 2021—that he was considering leaving the Democratic party and formulating an exit plan if the Build Back Better plan wasn’t dramatically cut down to his liking—the senator denigrated the Mother Jones story as “bullshit.” We stand by the story.)

In the meantime, NBC News reports that a person “with direct knowledge” of the politician’s future plans said “nothing is off the table” and “no specific decisions have been made other than a commitment to find a way to change the country’s political dialogue.”

GOP presidential candidates are threatening to deport international students who they accuse of sympathizing with anti-Israel terrorists. “If you are here on a student visa as a foreign national, and you’re making common cause with Hamas, I’m canceling your visa and I’m sending you home, no questions asked,” vowed Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis during Wednesday night’s debate.

“To every student who has come to our country on a visa to a college campus, your visa is a privilege, not a right,” South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott said during the same event. “To all the students on visas who are encouraging Jewish genocide, I would deport you.”

Those comments were just the latest salvo in the escalating Republican campaign against immigrants who the right accuses of siding with Hamas, the group that perpetrated the October 7 mass murder in Israel. It’s a trend that is setting off alarm bells for civil liberties advocates, who warn that these proposals risk conflating support for Palestinian rights or criticism of the Israeli government with an endorsement of terrorism. Moreover, they argue, threats of deportation could have a severely chilling effect on free speech and the right to protest.

“It’s a really dangerous rhetoric,” says Azadeh Shahshahani, the legal and advocacy director of Project South, an organization that focuses on racial justice and immigrants’ rights. “This seems to be just another measure that is targeting a particular group of people, in this case immigrants, and using vulnerability in terms of immigration status to try to force people to stay quiet.”

The Republican demands have already gone far beyond typical campaign-trail bluster. In a letter to Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) urged the Biden administration to “immediately deport any foreign national—including and especially any alien on a student visa—that has expressed support for Hamas and its murderous attacks on Israel.” A week after the October 7 attack, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-Texas) introduced a resolution calling on President Biden to “revoke visas and initiate deportation proceedings for any foreign national who has endorsed or espoused the terrorist activities of Hamas” or other anti-Israel terrorist organizations. 

Rep. Mike Johnson, the newly elected Republican House speaker, used to conduct a seminar in churches premised on the idea that the United States is a “Christian nation.” This ministry, as he has referred to it, is yet more evidence that Johnson is committed to a hardcore Christian fundamentalism that shapes his views of politics and government.

The seminar, titled “Answers for Our Times: Government, Culture, and Christianity,” was organized by Onward Christian Education Services, Inc., a company owned by his wife, Kelly Johnson, a Christian counselor and anti-abortion activist who calls herself a “leader in the pro-family movement.” The website for her counseling service—which was taken down shortly after Johnson became speaker—described the seminar, which featured both her and Johnson, as exploring several questions, such as, “What is happening in America and how do we fix it?” The list includes this query: “Can our heritage as a Christian nation be preserved?” There were different versions of the seminar running from two-hour-long lectures to retreats lasting two days. 

Mike and Kelly Johnson, each a fundamentalist Christian and culture war battler who advocates adhering to what they call a “Biblical worldview,” launched this initiative in 2019. After one such presentation on February 24, 2019, at the First Baptist Church in Bossier City, Louisiana, where they are members—an event that also featured Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council—a local television news show reported that the seminar’s goal was to “keep God in Government.” Johnson posted the article on his congressional website. 

According to a Louisiana Baptist newsletter, the Johnsons intended to first pitch their seminars to Baptist churches in the Pelican State before expanding to other states. The publication reported that the couple’s goal was “to equip churches to take a stand against the cultural attacks now being directed at people of faith, the traditional family and basic freedoms embedded in the U.S. Constitution.” It noted that Johnson said he was compelled to create this new ministry while serving in the US House because he was concerned “that too many believers today feel ill-informed to provide substantive answers to fake arguments.” It quoted Johnson: “Our nation is entering one of the most challenging seasons in its history and there is an urgent need for God’s people to be armed and ready with the Truth.” He was referring to what fundamentalists call “Biblical truth.”

A promotion blurb for the seminar described it this way: “As polls show that Christianity is in rapid decline in America, and the culture is growing more secularized and more coarsened, many believers feel ill-informed and ill-prepared to do anything to reverse these trends. Scripture is clear that we have an obligation to provide substantive answers… But HOW?”

For the briefest of moments, it must have felt like the good old days for the former president’s eldest daughter.

But fresh from her star turn at Kim Kardashian’s celebrity-studded 43rd birthday party in Beverly Hills, Ivanka Trump will be back in the public eye very soon, in far less glamorous climes: The witness stand of a downtown Manhattan courtroom.

Seemingly desperate to distance herself from her dad, the eldest Trump daughter will nonetheless be forced to testify in his $250 million New York civil fraud case on November 3, after Judge Arthur Engoron on Friday rejected Ivanka’s bid to avoid testifying in open court, according to the Associated Press. Ivanka Trump’s lawyers had stated that she hasn’t been part of the Trump Organization since 2017 and currently resides in Florida, arguing that the New York court shouldn’t have jurisdiction over her.

Ivanka, along with Eric and Don Jr., will now be compelled to take the stand ahead of the main defendant himself, Donald Trump. The former president will appear on November 6, in the blockbuster trial that threatens to unravel his sprawling business empire.

Ivanka has wanted to move on from all this drama, explicitly announcing she won’t be joining her father’s 2024 campaign. In the “billionaire bunker,” she now calls home—a 300-acre gated community on an island near Miami called Indian Creek Village—Ivanka’s friends have reportedly been supportive of her bid to write a new chapter. According to the New York Times, “Ms. Trump now generally minds her own business and people close to her think it is time she is allowed to move on with her new life.”

The Maine mass-shooter obtained several weapons legally, including some in the days immediately before the attack, according to the New York Times, citing local officials.

Robert Card, who shot and killed 18 people in Lewiston, Maine, during a rampage on Wednesday, bought guns in July, just before being hospitalized and ordered to undergo a psychiatric evaluation, according to CNN.

New York State Police told the broadcaster that police were called to Camp Smith in July, where Card was serving in the National Guard, because he was acting “belligerent” and was potentially “intoxicated.” An unnamed federal law enforcement source told CNN that Card informed Army personnel he was “hearing voices” and having thoughts about “hurting other soldiers.” 

Just ten days earlier, Card had purchased a high-powered Ruger SFAR rifle. Maine, where Card purchased the gun, does not require background checks on all gun sales. Twenty states currently enforce universal background checks on firearms purchases. 

Studies suggest that, by themselves, universal background checks may have some effect on reducing gun violence and homicide; many academics believe that they can be very effective when combined with other gun control measures, including gun licensing laws. Maine also does not have permit laws for carrying guns, except in certain places like state and national parks. 

Scores of protestors gathered in New York on Friday night in support of a ceasefire following Israel’s expansion of its ongoing siege of Gaza. Soon after, tens of thousands joined large-scale marches through the streets of London on Saturday morning, demanding an end to the widening bombardment.

Friday night’s protests in New York took place in Manhattan’s Grand Central Station and was organized by Jewish Voices for Peace, which bills itself as “the largest progressive Jewish anti-Zionist organization in the world.” The group staged a similar protest on Capitol Hill earlier this month. On Friday, protestors took over the main atrium of the train station for a sit in, and chanted “cease fire now” and “let Gaza live,” many wearing black shirts that said “not in our name” and “ceasefire now.” Two protestors stood on a ledge with a sign that read “Never again for anyone.” 

Jews have taken over New York's Grand Central Station to demand #CeasefireNOW and rights for #Palestinians. Thanks @JvpAction @jvplive @jvpliveNY!! pic.twitter.com/vce42tiOvn

According to the New York Times, as many as 1,000 people attended the Grand Central Station protest. The Times reported that police had initially tried to block entrances to keep protestors from streaming in, but were unable to do so. Organizers told the media that roughly 300 protesters were arrested as a part of the protest. 

Online, activists and celebrities like filmmaker Michael Moore voiced support for the protests.

Maine Rep. Jared Golden, a Democrat who last year voted against a federal assault weapons ban, apologized on Thursday for his previous opposition and pledged to reverse course following the mass shootings in Lewiston that killed 18 people and left 13 injured. 

“The time has now come for me to take responsibility for this failure, which is why I now call on the United States Congress to ban assault rifles, like the one used by this sick perpetrator of this mass killing in my hometown,” Golden said at a press conference. “For the good of my community, I will work with any colleague to get this done in the time that I have left in Congress.” 

Golden—who was elected to office in 2018, won reelection last year and is up for re-election in 2024—was one of five Democrats who voted against a federal assault weapons ban last July. The bill eventually passed the House but has yet to come up for a vote in the Senate. In his apology on Thursday, Golden said he had opposed the ban out of a desire to protect his family and “because of a false confidence that our community was above this.” 

“To the people of Lewiston, my constituents throughout the second district, to the families who lost loved ones, and to those who have been harmed, I ask for forgiveness and support as I seek to put an end to these terrible shootings,”  Golden said. 

Contrition is rare among gun-supporting lawmakers, who have often stopped short of taking meaningful legislative action after mass shootings and become known instead to offer “thoughts and prayers”—or alternative theories about what actually makes such events so lethal. My colleague Mark Follman noted one example following the horrific mass shooting in Uvalde, Texas last year, in which the shooter used an AR-15:  

George Santos has pleaded not guilty for the second time this year. Santos’ plea on Friday morning at the Eastern District of New York’s Long Island courthouse comes after prosecutors unveiled a superseding indictment earlier this month that charges the freshman Republican congressman with helping to orchestrate a fake donor scheme first exposed by Mother Jones in February, fabricating a $500,000 loan to his campaign, and making unauthorized transactions with donors’ credit cards.

Santos is now facing 23 counts of criminal charges.

Federal prosecutors had requested that District Court Judge Joanna Seybert, a Bill Clinton appointee, hold Santos’ trial in May or June of next year. Seybert said that was not possible given the cases already on her docket, and set September 9 as the trial date. The trial is expected to last two to three weeks.

It is unclear whether Santos will be a member of Congress in September. Fellow New York Republicans are moving forward with a motion to expel Santos from the House as part of an effort to distance themselves from him as they run for reelection in swing districts.

Santos did not make a statement or take questions from reporters as he exited the courthouse. On his way out, he was heckled by a small group of protesters. One held a sign that read “Devolder, Defrauds, Devoters,” a reference to Santos’ second last name.

A federal judge on Thursday ruled that voting maps created by Georgia Republicans violated the Voting Rights Act by racially discriminating against Black voters. In his 516-page ruling, US District Court Judge Steve Jones ordered lawmakers to redraw the state’s congressional and legislative districts, as well as create an additional Black-majority congressional district by December 8. The new maps could have major implications for the 2024 elections. 

Since September, voting rights advocates have been engrossed in a legal battle with legislators, arguing that the 2021 passage of new voting maps diluted the power of Black voters. As my colleague Ari Berman wrote when the new maps were drawn:

The congressional lines adopted by Georgia Republicans entrench white power by diluting the votes of fast-growing communities of color—a defining feature of GOP gerrymandering across the South this year. Georgia gained 1 million new residents over the last decade—all from communities of color—and is now a majority-minority state, but the congressional map increases representation for white Republicans and decreases representation for voters of color in spite of these demographic changes.

Now, along with redrawing current maps, Jones ordered lawmakers to create a new Black-majority congressional district, two more state Senate districts, and five additional state House districts, CNN reports. Republican Gov. Brian Kemp responded to Thursday’s order by scheduling a special session for November 29. But he did not rule out the possibility of appealing the court’s decision, according to the Associated Press. The Supreme Court’s ruling in the Georgia case is the most recent in a wave of decisions upholding the Voting Rights Act, including in Alabama and Florida, where judges ordered states to redraw maps found to be racially gerrymandered.

This week’s release of Police State was especially well-timed. The new pseudo-documentary film by conspiracy theorist and far-right influencer Dinesh D’Souza opened in theaters this week just as Jenna Ellis, one of Donald Trump’s election lawyers, pleaded guilty to a felony charge for her role in Trump’s efforts to overturn the election in Georgia. She is the fourth of his lawyers in the case to do so, a trend that for a certain audience, is evidence that the police state D’Souza’s film warns of is already here.

With a screening planned at Trump’s Florida resort Mar-a-Lago next month, Police State is an extended riff on the mantra Trump has adopted since being indicted for an extensive variety of crimes: If it can happen to me, it can happen to you.

Telling this horror story are right-wing luminaries such as former Secret Service agent Dan Bongino, former Trump administration official Kash Patel, and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), who explain how ordinary people could, at any time, be just like the “nonviolent protesters” who sacked the US Capitol, and have jack-booted FBI thugs kick down their door, ransack their homes, scare their children, and haul them away to jail. Once there, they’ll be forced to plead guilty to crimes they didn’t commit simply for being conservatives exercising their free speech rights.

The work of far-right fringe characters who populate Rumble and Truth Social, Police State may nonetheless help shape the GOP narrative that will dominate the 2024 presidential election next year. “If politics is downstream from culture, what is more upstream from politics than going to AMC to see a movie?” says Danielle Tomson, paraphrasing the late conservative journalist Andrew Breitbart. A researcher working on a book about conservative influencers, Tomson sees the film as a preemptive strike on an inevitable Trump conviction ahead of his presidential campaign. “They think like Hollywood screenwriters,” she notes.

Unless you lurk inside a particular right-wing media bubble, you may have forgotten all about D’Souza, a wunderkind of the second Reagan administration whose star has fallen considerably since then. You certainly wouldn’t have heard about his newest movie in the mainstream press. Police State was publicized almost entirely through D’Souza’s extensive social media channels, where he has millions of followers. The film premiered in dozens of traditional AMC movie theaters across the country this week as if it were as mainstream as the Exorcist remake. But D’Souza paid to rent out the theaters, before moving his film to online streaming on October 27. I was curious to see how many conservatives would actually get off the couch to see a film by a B-list influencer with the delivery of a bank teller. So, on Monday night, I plodded across the Beltway to an AMC multiplex in Alexandria, Virginia, to catch the first showing.

Newly minted Speaker of the House Mike Johnson thinks it’s too easy to get divorced, and he’d like to change that. 

“In my generation, all we’ve ever known is the no-fault scheme, and any deviation from that seems like a radical move,” Johnson said more than two decades ago. No-fault divorce, the “scheme” Johnson has long admonished, allows one party to unilaterally file to end a marriage—without having to prove things like adultery, imprisonment, or domestic abuse. These laws, mostly passed in the 1960s and 70s, were monumental in furthering women’s financial, social, and professional independence, as well as their safety. 

Johnson, though, believes that such laws are partly to blame for our “completely amoral society” that causes a young person to go “into their schoolhouse and open fire on their classmates.”

And Johnson isn’t alone in his ire. Lately there’s been a push by conservatives to end no-fault divorce—in podcast studios and in the halls of government. Right-wing activist and influencer Steven Crowder, Daily Wire and PragerU host Michael Knowles, and conservative podcaster Tim Pool, among others, have all decried the nationwide standard as being too lax, granting women divorces on a whim. The official GOP party platforms in Texas and Nebraska call for ending no-fault divorce. And in Louisiana, Johnson’s home state, the Republican party is considering the elimination of no-fault divorce.

Johnson’s opposition to no-fault divorce dates back decades. In 1997, Louisiana became the first state in the country to pass a “covenant marriage” law, offering newlyweds a religion-based contract that makes it significantly harder to get divorced. The law was backed by the Louisiana Family Forum, “a voice for traditional families,” where Johnson had been a volunteer. (The organization has received money from powerful groups like the Family Research Council and Alliance Defending Freedom; Johnson has been an attorney and spokesperson for the latter.) Two years later, Johnson and his new wife, Kelly, opted for a covenant marriage. They were some of the few who did. Between 2000 and 2010, about 1 percent of Louisiana couples opted for a covenant marriage.

As hundreds of thousands of Gazans have fled their homes in response to Israel’s warnings of a massive ground invasion, the United Nations is warning of an escalating humanitarian crisis.

Many are struggling to find shelter and food; Gaza has no electricity and is running out of clean drinking water. “It has become a matter of life and death,” said Phillippe Lazzarini, Commissioner-General of the UN Relief and Works Agency, the agency that provides support and humanitarian assistance to Palestinians, in a statement Saturday. “It is a must: Fuel needs to be delivered now into Gaza to make water available for two million people.” 

On Saturday, Francesca Albanese, a UN expert on Palestinian human rights, warned, “In the name of self-defense, Israel is seeking to justify what would amount to ethnic cleansing.”

Nearly half of Gaza’s population has been displaced over the week following a massive attack on Israel by Hamas, the group that controls Gaza, last Saturday. The sequestered region has not received humanitarian aid since a complete blockade began on Friday. More than 1,300 Israelis and 1,900 Palestinians are estimated to have died in a war that erupted after the surprise attack a week ago. With the ground invasion set to begin soon, residents are fleeing but have few places to go. 

Meanwhile, a number of American lawmakers and other officials have attempted to demonstrate their support for Israel. Last week, President Joe Biden said, “So, in this moment, we must be crystal clear: We stand with Israel. We stand with Israel. And we will make sure Israel has what it needs to take care of its citizens, defend itself, and respond to this attack.”

On Friday, a Trump-appointed federal judge struck down an electoral map in Galveston, Texas, saying it violates the Voting Rights Act and amounts to “egregious” discrimination against Black and Latino voters.

“This is not a typical redistricting case,” wrote Judge Jeffrey Brown in a 157-page ruling. “What happened here was stark and jarring…the enacted plan denies Black and Latino voters an equal opportunity to participate in the political process and to elect a candidate of their choice.”

The trial, which began in August, focused on how Galveston’s Republican commissioners redrew voting maps in 2021, breaking up the only precinct where Black and Latino voters made up the majority of the electorate. Their map would have effectively erased representation of people of color at the highest levels of local government in a county that is 45 percent non-white.

As my colleague Ari Berman wrote in 2021, the redistricting in Galveston “brought to mind the disenfranchisement of Black voters in the Jim Crow South,” with implications that extended beyond this single district. 

What’s happening in Galveston isn’t an aberration, but part of a troubling trend that is playing out throughout Texas—and across the South—in which Republicans at all levels of state government are going to increasingly extreme lengths to preserve white GOP power by diluting the votes of communities of color in new maps drawn for the US House, state legislative seats, and local offices like county commission and city council districts.

This story was originally published by Canada’s National Observer and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

A little over three years ago, a menacing fog crept into the valley surrounding the small village of Satartia, Missisippi, causing a mass poisoning. Within minutes of breathing the air, residents choked and dropped to the ground. Nearly 50 people were hospitalized.

First responders didn’t know the calamity was caused by a carbon dioxide pipeline failing, but clues were there as they struggled to get to the scene. Gas-powered vehicles couldn’t move, and some people lay in the streets struggling to breathe. Jack Willingham, the emergency director for the town’s county, told NPR, “It looked like you were going through the zombie apocalypse.” And he told HuffPost that despite the disaster, the village was in fact lucky because if the wind had blown differently or the incident had happened when people were sleeping, there would have been deaths.

The havoc that day was caused by a rupture in a carbon dioxide pipeline that shot a massive white cloud of concentrated CO2 into the air in a dangerous rolling fog. Because CO2 displaces oxygen and oxygen is needed for gas-powered cars to work, vehicles wouldn’t run. Because CO2 is heavier than air, the thick fog didn’t dissipate but settled on the ground where its lethal potential was narrowly avoided.

A Texas high school that suspended a Black student for more than a month over the length of his dreadlocks is removing the student and transferring him to an alternative disciplinary program. Starting yesterday, Darryl George, an 18-year-old junior at Barbers Hill High School in Mont Belvieu, east of Houston, will report to EPIC until November 29.

“Your child has engaged in chronic or repeated disciplinary infractions that violate the district’s previously communicated standards of student conduct,” school officials wrote to George’s family in a letter obtained by the New York Times.

Barbers Hill High School’s decision to send George to the alternative program extends a pattern of disciplinary actions taken against Black students over their hairstyles. As my colleague nia t. evans and I wrote in a piece just last week, George’s suspension on August 31 came just one day before Texas’s CROWN Act, a law that prohibits race-based hair discrimination, was slated to go into effect. In 2020, the school came under fire for similarly suspending another Black student, DeAndre Arnold, over his dreadlocks, ordering him to cut them to attend graduation. 

“The racism is being shown,” said Candice Matthews, a civil rights advocate and spokesperson to the George family, after Barber Hills High School told George he was being transferred. Following his suspension in August, George’s parents filed a lawsuit against Texas Gov. Greg Abbott for failure to enforce the CROWN Act. But the issue reflects a far wider and systemic racism:

The episodes at Barbers Hills High reflect a longstanding issue in the United States, particularly in schools where dress codes can discriminate against students. You saw it in the video of a New Jersey high school wrestler forced to cut his locs after a referee claimed that keeping them would forfeit the match. When a North Carolina charter school demanded that a young Indigenous boy cut his hair before returning to class after spring break. Such incidents, widely condemned as racist, have sparked laws similar to the CROWN Act around the country. Despite these protections, school administrators still enforce policies that target non-white students. 

The Justice Department on Thursday issued a new indictment against Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez and his wife, this time accusing the couple of acting as foreign agents for Egypt.

The court filing adds detail to the astonishing allegations already lodged against the senior New Jersey senator. Those include charges that he and his wife Nadine accepted gold bars, cash, a Mercedes, exercise machines, an air purifier, and other gifts worth hundred of thousands of dollars. In exchange, Menendez allegedly helped an Egyptian-American businessman maintain a monopoly on halal certification for US meat sent to Egypt; interfered with multiple criminal investigations; and used his post as the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to make sure US arms sales to Egypt went through. The DOJ has also alleged that Menendez secretly provided the Egyptian government with sensitive details on American employees working at the US embassy in Cairo.

The new charge that Menendez conspired to act as foreign agent is not a surprise. Prosecutors said in their initial September 22 indictment of Menendez that he had used his power to advance Egyptian interests in exchange for bribes. But the new indictment adds pressure on Senate Democrats—and Republicans—as they grapple with how to deal with their embattled colleague. Menendez has so far refused to resign from the Senate and still sits on the Foreign Relations Committee, despite stepping down as its chairman. Charges that Menendez used his office and position on the panel to secretly act as an Egyptian agent make his continued service all the more embarrassing for Democrats, complicating their hopes to highlight the indictments and alleged corruption of former President Donald Trump in 2024.

A committee spokesperson declined to comment. A spokesperson for Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), who has not publicly urged Menendez to resign, did not respond to questions Thursday.

In the superseding indictment filed Thursday, prosecutors describe a May 21, 2019, dinner meeting at a Washington, DC, steakhouse involving the senator and his now-wife, the Egyptian-American businessman, and an unnamed Egyptian government official. During that meal, Nadine Menendez allegedly asked the men: “What else can the love of my life do for you?”

A former Deutsche Bank executive testified this week that the German financial behemoth only agreed to make massive loans to Donald Trump because of Trump’s vast personal fortune. The problem? The bank apparently thought, based at least partly on financial statements provided by Trump, that he was far wealthier than he really was.

The Deutsche Bank exec, Nicholas Haigh, was testifying in Manhattan as part of New York Attorney General Letitia James’ $250 million civil fraud lawsuit against Trump. Going over internal documents in court with Haigh, James’ attorneys showed that the bankers didn’t really believe all of Trump’s claims about his wealth. They estimated that Trump was significantly less wealthy than he claimed, but they were still convinced that he had more money than he really did.

James contends that Trump didn’t have anywhere near enough wealth to qualify for the loans he received, and she alleges that the financial statements he gave to Deutsche and other institutions were fraudulent because he vastly over-valued his real estate properties. New York judge Arthur Engoron, who is overseeing the case, has already ruled that he agrees—the ongoing trial involves a handful of lesser allegations over the paperwork and will also determine how much of a fine Trump should have to pay.

Trump and his legal team have largely declined to try to argue the facts of the case. The former president’s comments on the ongoing proceedings have mostly been limited to angry outbursts accusing James of pursuing a political or racist agenda. (James is Black.) Wednesday’s testimony highlighted just how hard it is for Trump to deny the allegations. As James’ attorneys repeatedly showed in court, not only did Trump sign his name to documents listing incorrect values for his properties, the banks largely believed what he told them and made their decisions based on his claims.

According to the documents and Haigh’s testimony, at least one of the transactions required that Trump maintain a net worth of at least $2.5 billion to avoid defaulting on the loan. At the time, Trump claimed his net worth was well over $4 billion. But James’ office contends that it was actually only about $1.6 billion.

Virginia Democrats are calling on the Justice Department to investigate the state’s elections department after the administration announced last week that it had mistakenly removed eligible voters from voter rolls after incorrectly listing them as convicted felons.

The announcement, which came with early voting already underway for a pivotal state election, said that it had identified at least 270 errors. But Democrats are warning that the total could be far more after Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s (R-Va.) administration removed more than 10,000 voters last year in a purge effort.

We're just weeks away from an election and we're just now finding out that potentially thousands of eligible Virginia voters were purged from the voter rolls.

I'm urging the Justice Department to investigate these alarming reports. https://t.co/IZ6l7pDawE

— Tim Kaine (@timkaine) October 11, 2023