by Stephen Prager | Feb 27, 2026 | AI, Article, big tech, Politics and Movements: US, Reprint
This story originally appeared in Common Dreams on Feb. 25, 2026. It is shared here under a Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) license.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has threatened to punish the artificial intelligence company Anthropic if it doesn’t let the Pentagon use its technology however it wants—apparently even to create autonomous killer drones or conduct surveillance of Americans.
Anthropic’s powerful AI model, Claude, is currently the only one permitted to handle classified military data, and the company was awarded a $200 million contract last year to develop AI capabilities for the Department of Defense to use alongside other AI firms.
However, the company’s usage policy prohibits its use for mass surveillance and for the development of autonomous weapons—such as drones that attack targets without a human operator.
These limitations have infuriated the Defense Department leadership. On Tuesday, Hegseth called Anthropic’s CEO, Dario Amodei, to a meeting at the Pentagon, where he demanded “unfettered” access to Claude without any guardrails.
This goal was outlined last month in the department’s “AI Strategy” memo, which called for the US to adopt an “AI-first warfighting force” and for companies to allow their technology to be deployed for “any lawful use,” free from ethical safeguards.
According to a senior defense official who spoke to Axios, Hegseth issued an ultimatum to Amodei on Tuesday: If he does not grant the Pentagon unrestricted use of Anthropic’s technology by 5:01 pm on Friday, the department would take measures to coerce the company.
It would either declare Anthropic a “supply chain risk,” effectively blacklisting it for military use and ending its contract, or it would invoke the Defense Production Act, which would force the company to tailor the product to the military’s needs.
While it would not be an
by Taya Graham and Stephen Janis | Feb 27, 2026 | Economy, Epstein, immigration, Inequality Watch, Politics and Movements: US, Trump, video
Trump’s State of the Union address delivered grandstanding and grievance politics, but few concrete solutions for Americans facing healthcare crises, economic instability, and ever-widening inequality. While mainstream media commentators fixated on the spectacle, Epstein survivors in attendance were essentially ignored, and key claims on immigration and economic policy went largely unexamined.
Credits:
Written by: Stephen Janis
Produced by: Taya Graham, Stephen Janis
Studio / Post-Production: Cameron Granadino
Transcript
The following is a rushed transcript and may contain errors. A proofread version will be made available as soon as possible.
Taya Graham:
Okay. You might have watched President Donald Trump’s state of the Union and found it difficult to reconcile with what’s actually happening in your life. He said we were in a new golden age, but it doesn’t feel like it for most of us. He said the economy is the strongest ever, but perhaps your actual experience doesn’t jive with that assessment. Well, you’re not wrong and we’re going to prove it. Myself, along with my reporting partner, Stephen Janis, are going to break down what Trump’s speech was missing, mainly the perspective of the people actually living with the consequences of his policies. So we’re going to give you the people’s state of the union breakdown and you won’t want to miss it.
Hello, my name is Taya Graham and welcome to The Inequality Watch, the show where we break down the historic wealth imbalance that defines this country and hold the people who are making it worse accountable. Today we’re going to talk about the state of the union or perhaps more accurately, the state of the oligarchy address, which President Trump gave on Tuesday. Like
by Jake Johnson | Feb 27, 2026 | Article, cuba, Politics and Movements: International, Politics and Movements: US, Reprint
This story originally appeared in Common Dreams on Feb. 26, 2026. It is shared here under a Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) license.
The Cuban government said Wednesday that the men on a Florida-registered boat who opened fire on Cuban soldiers in the island’s territorial waters were bent on carrying out “an infiltration for terrorist purposes.”
In a statement following news that Cuban forces had killed four people on the boat, the besieged Caribbean nation’s Interior Ministry said the vessel was carrying 10 men, all “Cuban nationals residing in the United States.”
The ministry said it seized assault rifles, explosives, body armor, and other items from the boat and identified seven of its passengers, six of whom were detained. Four men on the boat—which, according to reports, was last purchased in 2022—were killed in the gunfight with Cuban soldiers, who had reportedly “approached the vessel for identification.”
Cuban authorities also said another individual, Duniel Hernández Santos, was arrested “within national territory.” The Interior Ministry said Santos “had allegedly been sent from the United States to facilitate the landing and reception of the armed group and has confessed to his role.”
“The investigation remains ongoing until all facts have been fully established,” the ministry said.
Participants in Foiled Armed Infiltration in Villa Clara IdentifiedAs part of the ongoing investigation into the armed attack against a patrol vessel of the Border Guard Troops of the Ministry of the Interior, in the northeastern area of the El Pino channel, at Cayo Falcones,… pic.twitter.com/s9IFmUkqvk— Cuban Embassy in US (@EmbaCubaUS) February 26, 2026
The deadly incident came as Cuba continued to reel from the Trump administration’s recent intensification of decades-long economic warfare against the island. The administration is “actively seeking regime change in Cuba,” according to Wall
by Marc Steiner | Feb 27, 2026 | Iran, Israel, Middle East, Podcast, Politics and Movements: International, Politics and Movements: US, The Marc Steiner Show, Trump
Urged on by Israel and neocon war hawks, President Trump has brought the US to the verge of a war with Iran, amassing more American military forces in the Middle East since the 2003 invasion of Iraq. In this episode of The Marc Steiner Show, Marc speaks with Trita Parsi, co-founder and executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, about the disastrous ramifications such a war would have—and what options still remain to avoid it.
Guests:
Trita Parsi is an Iranian-born Swedish writer and policy analyst and the co-founder and executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. He is an award-winning author and the 2010 recipient of the Grawemeyer Award for Ideas Improving World Order. He is an expert on US-Iranian relations, Iranian foreign policy, and the geopolitics of the Middle East. He has authored four books on US foreign policy in the Middle East, with a particular focus on Iran and Israel.
Additional links/info:
Trita Parsi, Common Dreams, “How does this end? Even a ‘small’ US strike on Iran by Trump would be disastrous”
Maximillian Alvarez, TRNN, “Jeremy Scahill: Prospects for avoiding US-Iran war ‘remain fragile’”
Credits:
Producer: Rosette Sewali
Studio Production: David Hebden
Audio Post-Production: Stephen Frank
Transcript
The following is a rushed transcript and may contain errors. A proofread version will be made available as soon as possible.
Marc Steiner:
Welcome to the Marc Steiner Show here on The Real News. I’m Marc Steiner. It’s great to have you all with us. We are on the verge of a war with Iran, a war that could unleash a conflict that can lead to a wider war in the region and have devastating effects on
by Adam Johnson | Feb 25, 2026 | Article, Democrats, Iran, Opinion, Politics and Movements: International, Politics and Movements: US, Trump
Just as they did with the Venezuelan attack in early January, the ongoing starvation of Cuba, and the bombing of Iran last summer, Democratic leadership in Congress is once again throwing its de facto support behind Trump’s militarism with conspicuous silence and limp process criticisms, suppressing genuine pushback and working to prop up every premise of his bellicosity. As Democrats shrug in the face of a build up to war with Iran, it’s clear once again that, when it comes to matters of bombing, sanctions, genocide, and wars of aggression, the US functionally has no opposition party.Despite it being over a week since Trump began his massive military buildup targeting Iran, neither Chuck Schumer or Hakeem Jeffries has released a single press release or social media post about Iran or the threats Trump is leveling against it. And when they do discuss it, always after being forced to by reporters, they hand-wring in vague terms or make process criticisms about Trump not “making his case to the American people” or some other such shallow critique. Schumer, in particular, refuses to criticize a war on Iran in principle, only complaining about Trump filling out the right paperwork:
.@SenSchumer on potential Iran strikes, ahead of Congressional closed-door briefing: “The administration has to make its case to the American people as something as important as this.” pic.twitter.com/1qNKFCnyob— CSPAN (@cspan) February 24, 2026
Despite the fact that only 14% of Democrats support an attack on Iran and 75% explicitly oppose it, this anti-war sentiment is nowhere to be found in Democratic leadership who refuse to support, and are likely suppressing, a war powers resolution proposed by
by Brett Wilkins | Feb 25, 2026 | Article, Epstein, Politics and Movements: US, Reprint, Trump
This story originally appeared in Common Dreams on Feb. 24, 2026. It is shared here under a Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) license.
The top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee announced Tuesday that an investigation will be opened into the US Department of Justice’s withholding of Epstein files related to an alleged sexual assault on a 13-year-old girl committed by President Donald Trump decades ago.
“For the last few weeks, Oversight Democrats have been investigating the FBI’s handling of allegations from 2019 of sexual assault on a minor made against President Donald Trump by a survivor,” Oversight Committee Ranking Member Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) said in a statement.
“Yesterday, I reviewed unredacted evidence logs at the Department of Justice. Oversight Democrats can confirm that the DOJ appears to have illegally withheld FBI interviews with this survivor who accused President Trump of heinous crimes,” he continued. “Oversight Democrats will open a parallel investigation into this.”
“Under the Oversight Committee’s subpoena and the Epstein Files Transparency Act, these records must immediately be shared with Congress and the American public,” Garcia added. “Covering up direct evidence of a potential assault by the president of the United States is the most serious possible crime in this White House cover-up.”
Oversight Dems have access to a list of documents, including interviews detailing serious allegations against President Trump, that are missing from the DOJ’s so-called “unredacted” files.Where are the missing files? What do they say? This all points to yet another cover up.— Rep. Robert Garcia (@robertgarcia.house.gov) 2026-02-24T22:21:35.629Z
The Trump administration is accused of continuously flouting the Epstein Files Transparency Act—which mandated that all materials related to convicted child sex criminal and longtime former Trump friend Jeffrey Epstein be released by December 19. But critically, the law gives Attorney General Pam Bondi wide discretion to redact
