❌

Normal view

Received — 27 October 2026 ⏭ The Real News Network

Rachel Maddow’s conspicuous refusal to cover Israelgate

27 October 2026 at 19:50
Screenshot from "'Follow the money': Maddow’s INSTANT REACTION to U.S. striking Iran," Feb 28, 2026/MSNOW YouTube

If there’s one story MSNOW’s Rachel Maddow is known for, it’s her tenacious, years-long focus on a broad theory that Trump is a compromised agent of Russian intelligence installed by Russia via a shady patchwork of direct funding, loose connections, opaque meetings, election interference, Facebook ads, innuendo, and genuinely strange behaviors. From 2016 to 2025, Maddow mentioned Russia 6,126 times on her primetime program The Rachel Maddow Show. 

This analysis isn’t a commentary on the validity of the “Russiagate” story, as such. I think it was inflated, and served the ends of some of the worst elements in the US security state, but there was certainly an element of truth to it. (Trump is brazenly venal, and would presumably take bribes from anyone). At the same time, the conspiracy mongering veered into Loose Change territory and was, ultimately, contradicted by Trump’s own policies which—while rhetorically critical of Ukraine—have largely continued to arm and support the country in its four-year-and-a-half war against Russia’s aggression. 

The state of Israel is running what could very well be construed as GOTV commercials for the Republican Party during an election season.

What’s noteworthy is less that Maddow has covered Trump’s connections with Russia, and the associated seemingly weekly breathless developments. It’s that, over the past two years in particular, she has very conspicuously avoided a major story about another country influencing domestic politics in service of Trump and a pernicious reactionary agenda: that of Israel’s influence over the president, and its broader attempts to influence politics in the US. A report in Zeteo last week details how Israel is directly funding ads in swing states that not only advertise Israel’s alleged security benefits to the US, but show images of Trump’s 250 year celebration, the White House, and Trump’s ambassador to Israel, painting them in a heroic light. In other words: the state of Israel is running what could very well be construed as GOTV commercials for the Republican Party during an election season.   

This is, of course, just the tip of the iceberg. A Quincy Institute report in June calculated $1 billion in influence operations since 2023 directly backed by the state of Israel targeting the American public via lobbyists, TV ads, media campaigns, AI output-altering fake websites, propaganda delegations, building “business ties” with Silicon Valley, and a host of other, more opaque efforts. Israel’s attempt to influence US politics has exploded in recent years, and this is just what is disclosed: 

And all of this is one top of the decades-long multibillion dollar informal network of pro-Israel propaganda groups like the Anti Defemation League (ADL), the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), and Christians United for Israel (CUFI), organizations largely funded by American donors with ideological commitments to Israel, though not directly by the state of Israel. These groups frequently align messaging with and coordinate with the Israeli government, but there was always a thin veneer of plausible deniability. These latest efforts are not even bothering to maintain this veneer: Israel is, increasingly, directly funding influence operations—many of which have explicit ties to the Trump White House. Indeed, Trump has taken the unusual step of openly endorsing Netanyahu in his upcoming election, and several of Trump’s advisors, including his own son-in-law, are heavily invested in Israeli companies. His former campaign manager Brad Parscale literally runs one of the aforementioned Israeli influence operations. Put another way: Trump’s “ties” to Israel and the influence the state of Israel has over Trump is far better documented, much clearer, and much more consequential than any ties he has or ever had to Russia. 

Yet Maddow only covers one of these angles. 

Maddow rarely talks about Israel in general—much less its influence over Trump. And, on the rare occasion she does, it’s safely within the confines of “Netanyahu Bad/Israel Good” or “Netanyahu wants Trump to win the election” safe pseudo-criticism. As Mondoweiss’ Michael Arria noted in 2021, even before Oct. 7, 2023, Maddow understood how avoiding the topic would benefit her burgeoning career, mentioning Israel only six times from 2011 to 2021 in over 2,000 shows. As I document in my book on liberal media’s role in helping destory Gaza, How To Sell a Genocide, Maddow largely avoided the subject in the first year of the Gaza genocide, and didn’t mention it at all for seven of the first twelve weeks of the Gaza assault, despite over 3,000 Palestinians being killed a week by American bombs. And when she did bring up Gaza, unlike her broad, deep, and sympathetic portrayal of Russia’s war crimes in Ukraine, Maddow’s coverage was superficial and hurried. The one major exception among MSNBC primetime stars who did have the courage to center Palestine as something more than a box to check, Joy Ann Reid, was subsequently fired for what she says was her coverage of the genocide. 

Trump’s “ties” to Israel and the influence the state of Israel has over Trump is far better documented, much clearer, and much more consequential than any ties he has or ever had to Russia.

The most Orwellian moment of Maddow’s conspicuous silence on Israel was when she did a long, detailed segment on foreign powers’ influence on Trump’s attack on Iran on the first day of the bombing, entitled “Follow the money.” To kick off the segment, Maddow bizarrely handwaved away Israel’s involvement, telling her viewers, “There’s a lot of attention on Israel, and indeed Israel and the United States have worked together in the bombing campaign… but it is the Gulf Arab states that are arrayed against Iran.” She then proceeded to pin the nefarious influence entirely on “Gulf Arab states, countries like Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates in Qatar.” This isn’t to say these countries don’t unduly influence the Trump clan—this is well documented—but their influence is relatively small compared to that of Israel and the Trump family connection with Israel and pro-Israel donors and it’s not particularly close.  

Maddow’s defenders could argue that the major difference is that Israel is an “ally” of the US, whereas Russia isn’t. But, despite the fact that the majority of Americans do not agree with this sentiment in the normative sense, the “Gulf Arab states” Maddow accuses of corrupting Trump are also US allies, so this is obviously not the reason. The real reason is that she knows discussing the elephant in the room of Israeli influence over both Trump and US body politic more broadly would pretty much spell the end of her career, as it did with Reid and, to a lesser degree, other MSNBC/MSNOW personalities that were demoted or pushed out after October 7 for having the temerity to veer off the safe script of pseudo-criticisms of Israel. As I also document in my book, the first, last, and only time MSNBC/MSNOW’s parent corporation (then Comcast) directly intervened in MSNBC/MSNOW’s coverage was to dress down network executives for letting anchors Ayman Mohyeldin and Ali Velshi attempt to contextualize the October 7 on the day of the attack. Saying anything meaningfully critical of Israel would also compromise Maddow’s access to high status arch-zionists like Hillary Clinton, with whom Maddow is doing an event in two weeks at the pro-Israel Streicker Center. Whatever the reason, the liberal media personality who built her large, intense media following sowing paranoid visions of dark, reactionary foreign influence operations is clearly determined to not mention the most brazen, obvious, and deleterious one.

💾

Israel has spent $1 billion to influence US politics and is directly paying for ads promoting MAGA. Why isn't MSNOW's “foreign influence” sleuth covering it?

Once upon a time in Miami: The heartland of Latin American counter-revolution

27 October 2026 at 16:34
Thousands of Cuban-American nationals demonstrate in front of the Consulate General of Colombia in Miami, FL, 09 March 1994 to protest Colombia's planned trade of petroleum products to Cuba for sugar. Photo by DOUG COLLIER/AFP via Getty Images

In this episode of Rattling the Bars, Mansa Musa speaks with Dr. Kimberly Dawn Miller, Co-Coordinator of the Haiti/Americas Team for the Black Alliance for Peace. They examine geopolitical relations and the unfiltered history of U.S. imperialism in the Caribbean—including economic warfare against Cuba, the state of Florida’s recent arrest warrant for former Cuban leader Raúl Castro, Trump and JD Vance’s racist criminalization of Haitians, and over a century of capitalist resource extraction and regime change in Haiti.

The Black Alliance for Peace in Miami, organizing alongside the Miami Coalition, seeks to end the blockade against Cuba. October 24–31 marks the Cuba Week of Action against the U.S. chokehold on Cuba, leading up to the International and National Day of Action on October 28. This aligns with the United Nations’ annual vote, where the international community will once again vote on the U.S. embargo on Cuba. 

Credits:

  • Production/Post-production: Cameron Granadino
Transcript

The following is a rushed transcript and may contain errors. It will be updated.

Mansa Musa:

Welcome to Rattling the Bars. I’m your host, Mansa Musa. At Rattling the Bars, we examine the prison industrial complex, both domestically and internationally. Miami floor sits at the direct intersection of US imperialism across the Caribbean and Latin America. Joining me today is Dr. Kim Miller, an organizer in Miami fighting to end sanctions and the embargo on Cuba opposing termination of TPS for Haiti and building solidarity with nations targeted for their socialist or abolitionist revolutions. Welcome, Kim.

Dr. Kimberly Dawn Miller:

Thank you. I’m really excited to be here for this conversation.

Mansa Musa:

All right, so first introduce yourself to our audience and tell them about your work with Black Alliance for Peace in Miami.

Dr. Kimberly Dawn Miller:

Yeah, so my name is Kimberly Dawn Miller. I have a PhD in global studies with a concentration in environmental sociology. So I research particularly the Eastern Caribbean looking at the contradictions of the post-colonial state, neoliberal development regimes, as well as the politics of post-disaster recovery. So I kind of use a lot of my organizing to also inform my research. And right now I am the Miami point person for the Black Alliance for Peace Miami cluster, as well as the co-coordinator for the Black Alliance for Peace, Haiti Americas team. So Cuba, Haiti, Venezuela, and the Caribbean at large are very central to our anti-imperialist organizing and situating and centering Haiti in particular as a note of Black liberation and why we fight so hard for their sovereignty.

Mansa Musa:

Kim, you focus heavily on Cuba. Can you discuss the organizing you are doing locally in Miami and internationally against the direct tack on the achievement of the Cuban Revolution?

Dr. Kimberly Dawn Miller:

Miami, Florida is basically the heartland of Latin American counterrevolution, and it is a central city that has a lot of reactionary diaspora politics from Latin America, and particularly the Cuban exile community, the Venezuelan exile community, supporting some of the more far right policies, including the economic and oil blockade occurring on Cuba. So

Mansa Musa:

It’s

Dr. Kimberly Dawn Miller:

Been important though that we resist this notion of creating a monolith regarding the politics of Miami at the same time. So the Black Alliance for Peace in Miami, we work with the Miami Coalition to end the blockade on Cuba, which is a coalition of many different organizations as well as trying to fight in a decades long organization, trying to fight along with the national network on Cuba. And starting tomorrow, October 24th is the Cuba Week of Action against the US genocide on Cuba. And it’s through the 31st of October. And we’re really trying to mobilize for International and National Day of Action for Cuba on the 28th, which coincides with the UN’s annual vote where majority of the world’s countries will be able to vote on the embargo on Cuba. And we basically

Mansa Musa:

Want

Dr. Kimberly Dawn Miller:

To show that in Miami, Florida as well, the heartland of, like I said, Latin American counterrevolution, that not

Mansa Musa:

All

Dr. Kimberly Dawn Miller:

Voices in Miami support what this government is doing, specifically heightening sanctions as well as blocking solidarity, international solidarity with the Cuban people, as well as their access to even third party, like I said, financing. So we’re really just trying to show the economic strangulation that’s occurring and standing in solidarity with Cuba, the Cuban revolution, as well as those that are resisting.

Mansa Musa:

Okay. So let’s unpack the issues that’s taking place in Cuba as it relates to the international community. And you can address this from your experience and what you know to be a fact, you have on the so-called left in the United States anarchist with people that have a particular political ideology and they’re critiquing Cuba in the sense of saying that the centralization of the government is problematic and that if they didn’t have a centralized government, then it would be more likely they wouldn’t be suffering from the imperialist on slaughter. Talk about what’s your experience and what do you say about that?

Dr. Kimberly Dawn Miller:

Right. Well, I think there lies at a fundamental disagreement on maybe the nature of the state when it comes to how maybe a Marxist Leninist would view state power versus an anarchist. So one thing I’ve been trying to reference a lot of times is Lenin’s state and revolution where he clearly identifies that the state does not hover above class interests, class power. And if you see the state as instrumental to class antagonism and class power, then what does it mean when you have a state like Cuba that had a socialist revolution and that did expropriate from the bourgeoisie and actually identify class power within institutions? And I think when you look at the state not as a monolithic or a flattened character, but actually looking at the state in terms of its global configuration within, like I said, the capitalist world order, it becomes very clear that Cuba, the Cuban state is not inherently the same as the US state.

There are several colonial states, there are imperialized states, there are states in the imperial core. And then we have to recognize these differences to coming from a conclusion on the nature of the state, people’s power within its dynamic within the state, as well as the function of that state. And I do think when you have anti-imperialist states, it’s fundamentally different and they’re targeted because of they represent a more autonomous or sovereign form of development. And it’s hard to move toward no state, if you will, when you have the imperialist attack. So you just need levels of defense. Iran is another example. You need a state to defend against imperialist onslaught. And I do think that maybe putting the cart before the horse, it’s important to understand those differences. And in addition to that, I wanted to add that the dynamic between, for instance, grassroots popular power and communes is not necessarily antagonistic to the socialist state itself.

And I think that that’s important to demystifying the idea that there’s either just an authoritarian socialist state versus popular power beneath. And I think that just in my experience with Venezuela, even though we know there’s been a lot of restructuring to the Venezuelan state since January 3rd, I did see a popular consultation on International Working Women’s Day within the communes. And I did see that how they were trying to actually build their communal capacity, which Hugo Chavez said is the base for transforming the bourgeois state as well as capitalist social relations. So I do think that you can have a dialectical and sometimes, yes, antagonistic relationship between communes and the state, but I do think it’s important to understand that it’s not necessarily opposed and that they work within the Bolivarian process to get financing for infrastructure in their own productive capacity. So that’s one thing I wanted to add there as well as you can even see a country like China that has rural village cooperatives and land ownership.

And what does that mean for the actual community that it’s still a centralized party state, but they still have a communicative and a participatory democracy within that. Right.

Mansa Musa:

Okay. And I think that’s a very astute observation because I think that, and I’ve been a lot of these spaces, when people make an analysis, they have a tendency to the foundation be based on misinformation to begin with and they build out on that. They build out on, like you say, it’s a difference between the United States and the state that Lenin talked about with state revolution. Let’s shift our gears and talk about Haiti. Switching, we see a different history, not a socialist revolution, but an abolition one in Haiti, establishing the first Black Republic through slaves revoked, historically targeted by the United States imperialists. Haiti recently became the focal point of a campaign by Donald Trump and JD Vance. Given that Florida holds the largest Haitian population in the US, what are the local international dynamics that exist within that? It’s almost as if Tucson let overture ghost haunts anybody that got a view of history that’s imperialist.

The involvement by the United States and continues to destabilize it is criminal in and of itself. Talk about the Haitian aspect of your analysis.

Dr. Kimberly Dawn Miller:

Yeah, I mean that’s an excellent overview. I think it speaks to the idea of Black ungovernability and the idea that since 1804 when Thomas Jefferson snubbed Dasaline, it was always the idea that Haiti was going to be excluded. Haiti was seen as a model of Black liberation of formerly or enslaved people freeing themselves, creating its first independent state in Latin America. And what does that symbolize to enslaved Africans in the United States? It was the idea that Black sovereignty is a threat to the powers that be essentially. And these are the class contradictions that Dasaline was trying to actually resolve through a kind of form of early socialist egalitarian or agrarian reform that actually did occur when he was assassinated. But just thinking about the long history of foreign interventions in Haiti, like I said, they weren’t really given access to international credit through non-diplomatic recognition.

And then when France did recognize Haiti, they had to pay an indemnity. So the idea that it’s creating successive notions of debt that Haitians never want to take on, but the idea of, oh, well to recognize you, you have to pay for your freedom. And then we did in particular, in Miami, we actually did a teaching looking at the 1915 US occupation where the US rewrote the Haitian constitution to allow foreign ownership of land that was banned in Haiti, as well as making sure that it opened up to US capital to exploit rural workers to basically extract from the country. So the US has always had a very, and of course through Bank of New York, which is now Citibank, extracting, like I said, it’s gold, it’s resources. And I think that that’s an example even to this day since the current gang suppression force occupation after the multiple occupations from the UN, after the US, France and Canada back to coup in 2004 against Aristide.

I mean, you just see this constant history of intervention and occupation. And I do think, like you said, it’s to keep them destabilized because a functioning Haiti, a sovereign Haiti, that is, I believe, a model of what Black sovereignty could and should mean.

Mansa Musa:

So what are y’all doing to organize and change this narrative in terms of how Haiti is being looked at? Because that goes a long ways in terms of not so much as imperialist. Imperialis is going to lie. I think Gold would say when you’re dealing with propaganda, find a narrative, repeat it over and over and over again till people come to believe it. So we know that’s going to come from them, but talk about how y’all organize to get people to see the need to be involved in what’s going on in Haiti and aid and assist the Haitian people in their liberation.

Dr. Kimberly Dawn Miller:

Well, in the Black Alliance for Peace and the Haiti Americas team, we always say that Haiti’s crisis is one of imperialism. It’s not of the Haitian people where we work and move against narratives that dehumanize the Haitian public, that pathologize them. And I think it’s important, once you understand that the crisis is imperialism, you see it as an externally driven crisis. We know, for instance, that all the arms that the gangs are using, the paramilitary groups are using in Haiti come from Miami. They’re trafficked from Miami to the Dominican Republic into Haiti. So there’s an arms embargo on Haiti, and yet these weapons are flooding the country. And what does that mean around the source of the problem? Haiti is a weapons manufacturer, so the guns are getting there somewhere from the United States. That’s one way. We also look at the culpability of, unfortunately, a lot of Latin American governments.

El Salvador right now is actually trying to basically start war with Haiti by saying, “Oh, we have our four servicemen that were kidnapped and now we’re going to go in.” And it’s like, “Well, why are there Salvadorian troops in Haiti?” It speaks to this idea that there’s this global kind of almost subjugation of the Haitian people because this is the international community that is sanctioning Chad or Kenya going in and representing on behalf of the United States. It’s proposed military solution for Haiti, but it’s never looking at the political situation, never looking at the core group, the countries of US, Canada, France, believe Germany, also Brazil. We don’t know that. Brazil also has a long history of pressing Haiti. So I think it’s important that we look at all these factors and that we understand that the gangs are getting support by the oligarchs. And what does that mean?

And what is the relationship between the elites in Haiti, the violence happening against the mostly working class Haitians, and how do we address the root of the problem instead of, like I said, stigmatizing the Haitian people, as well as attacking them through TPS, which is basically saying that the US helped create these conditions and now we’re going to send them back to that. People aren’t temporary. Haitians aren’t temporary. And it’s unfortunate that the mass deportation of this regime is trying to keep Haitians, and like I said, exploit their labor when it’s convenient, but also keep them in a state of precarity. And like you said, Miami has a huge Haitian population, I think the second highest in the country, and they’re in particular fields like hospitality industry, construction, home healthcare, and they’re being devastated right now. The communities are definitely fearful, but we want to push back against the narrative.

We want to put an anti-imperialist analysis into our understanding of the Haitian immigrant and migrant presence as well.

Mansa Musa:

Yeah, just the effect of imperialist. This is not people just not wanting to live a quality life. We remember Baby Doc, Papa Doc, and Tanta Liku. We remember when they was ravishing the country, being a full stool for imperialists, taking all the minerals and the natural resources out of Haiti and putting a little money in their pocket in comparison. So we are well aware, and that’s a good viewpoint as you especially, Dr. Kim, because we got to push back. I think that when they say their response to the oppression is the reason why they oppressed, you oppressed because you saying, “Get your foot off my neck.” But talk about how the United States and imperialists in particular, and this is a shift in terms of not so much the Trump administration, but the general attitude of imperialists and capitalists and fascists around the world, how they deal with Maduro and the fact that they talking about kidnapping Raul, but they threatening any country that stand up and try to identify with any type of sovereignty.

Dr. Kimberly Dawn Miller:

Absolutely. Well, I think for us, we understand that the illegal kidnapping of a head of state when it came to Maduro and his wife, Cylia Flores, and bringing them to Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, what does this say when the US gets to espouse and impose extraterritorial coercion against a sovereign country? And we know historically when the US would indict, for instance, Noriega from Panama, indicting for drug trafficking, even though he was the CIA guy until our grace. Well, he didn’t play ball geopolitically, and then suddenly he needs to be removed. We know again with the kidnapping of Aristide in 2004 and dropping him off in the

Mansa Musa:

Central

Dr. Kimberly Dawn Miller:

African Republic, this is not new what the US is doing. I think what makes this

Mansa Musa:

Particularly horrific

Dr. Kimberly Dawn Miller:

Is just knowing it’s the combination of the

Mansa Musa:

War

Dr. Kimberly Dawn Miller:

On drugs with the war on terror. So you have this narco terror label. We know that the US has sadly bombed 240 Caribbean and Latin American men on both extrajudicially for being narco terrorists. And you’re seeing, like I said, the collusion of, I do think these two kind of law enforcement mechanisms that is aligned with imperialist interests. So I think that’s one thing that we look at when advocating for Arizona peace and basically saying that the US and looking at the heart of US militarization in the region, this is not new, Venezuela wasn’t the first. And with, like you said, these indictments on Raul Castro, the indictments on the Cuban president, Diaz Canal. I mean, particularly in Florida, it was Florida that just put out a arrest warrant, which the state of Florida cannot actually arrest Raul on a sovereign country. But this idea of this performance, we were even tough on the communists.

I mean, it plays into a lot of red meat to their base, but it’s also just incredibly

Mansa Musa:

Illegal

Dr. Kimberly Dawn Miller:

And a part of how the US has operated, sadly, in this re-intensification of the Monroe doctrine that we’re seeing.

Mansa Musa:

We do remember this, and you can weigh in on this if you want to. We do remember this, the Iran Contra where they were selling guns for cocaine and the cocaine flooded the United States. And when it flooded the United States, you had the crime bill, and the crime bill was designed to make crack cocaine worse than powder cocaine, but any kind of cocaine was coming through the country through the military and the United States government with the goal of destabilizing Nicaragua and killing all American citizens. If you got a viewpoint on that, you can weigh in now.

Dr. Kimberly Dawn Miller:

Yeah, absolutely. I think it’s interesting, 60 Minutes before 60 Minutes became terrible. When they used to do journalism, they actually had a report after the invasion of Panama, and it basically said that looking at the post Noriega political climate, it’s been skyrocketing drug addiction of crack cocaine. Largely Afro-Panamanians would be addicted now to crack after the invasion. After the US invaded, then you see a rise of crack cocaine flooding the country. So it’s this weird kind of contradiction that they’re invading to stop the idea that drug trafficking is the reason that they’re going in, and then yet it’s gotten far worse. And I think that’s a similar idea when it comes to how the CIA moved through the concerts in Nicaragua to make sure that where that drugs are being funneled would be poor Black and brown communities and we’re the ones that suffer. So that’s why Black Alliance for Peace says no compromise, no retreat, which is the ways in which the war on African people here is connected to the global war on African people abroad.

And I think that’s just one excellent example.

Mansa Musa:

And as we wrap up, talk about the 60th anniversary of the Black Panther Party was this month, and the Black Panther Party, all organizations during that time that came up had an international platform. Aside of Shakur, Cuba gave a side of Shakur sanctuary. Huey was exile, gave him sanctuary. Al Jeria, we had a embassy in Algeria, Pete O’Neill and Shiloh O’Neill is in Tanzania. But talk about why it’s so

Dr. Kimberly Dawn Miller:

Important

Mansa Musa:

That our movement have an international perspective about our struggle.

Dr. Kimberly Dawn Miller:

Yeah. So thinking specifically when you have these kind of more narrow nationalist xenophobic movements coming up that try to say Black Americans, Black America, we’re not African. And thinking about the history of Black radical struggle, it was always internationalist. It was always about connecting the fight against imperialism and how that shapes the militarization of our own communities here, whether it was the 1033 program, weapons from wars being kind of funneled into local police departments that have a disproportionate effect on, like I said, Black people or the idea that the IDF will train local police departments here in the surveillance tech that both these states as they subjugate Palestinians. So that’s just another way that Black people here and Palestinians are connected. I think we have to look at things broader because understanding how we, I know some people like the domestic colony theory, that if we are an internal colony, then what does that look like?

What does that mean when our communities are occupied by police or even the shooting of Cullen Wiley in Mississippi being justified by their attorney general? I think you’re seeing that these struggles are connected, and I think that it’s really important that we don’t see ourselves as isolated, but that we have people we can tap into. And in my trip to Caracas in Venezuela, it was so surprising seeing so many Venezuelans that look just like me, Black people. And I was like, oh my gosh, because I don’t see as many Venezuelans that are Black, but there are, and how these struggles are shaped and Black internationalism is very important to fighting our own battle here, I believe.

Mansa Musa:

And you had a last word, Dr. Kim. What do you want to tell our audience and how can we get in touch with you or how can they become more involved in Black Alliance for Peace or understanding what’s going on with Cuba and y’all organization, y’all advocacy around Cuba and the diaspora?

Dr. Kimberly Dawn Miller:

Yeah. Well, so blackalianceforpeace.com/haiti, you can learn all of our resources on Haiti. Very important. We’re also on Instagram, Black Alliance for Peace, Twitter, Black Alliance for Peace, or Blacks for Peace on Twitter and Facebook. So we’re really trying to pick up our social media. And I also just want to point out that it’s the week of action for defense of Black migrants, and that’s just something that we’re working with. I mean, the Miami cluster is working with Baji, which is the Black Alliance for Just Immigration. And we’re just really trying to, like I said, spread our message on the war on African people here, being connected to the war on Africans abroad and driving out the heart of US militarization so that we can have a true zone of peace. And yeah, you can tap into our US NATO axis of domination out of our Americas network.

There’s a lot, but thank you so much.

💾

https://youtu.be/fb80DqejYqs In this episode of Rattling the Bars, Mansa Musa speaks with Dr. Kimberly Dawn Miller, Co-Coordinator of the Haiti/Americas Team for the Black Alliance for Peace. They examine geopolitical relations and the unfiltered history of U.S. imperialism in the Caribbean—includin

Data center near Yellowstone River would cause “irreparable harm,” Native activist says

27 October 2026 at 14:21
Paradise Valley, located between Livingston, Mont, and Yellowstone National Park, is known for the Yellowstone River and Absaroka Mountain Range, Monday, Sept. 11, 2023. Photo by Adrian Sanchez-Gonzalez for The Post

This article was originally published by Truthout on Oct. 26, 2026. It is shared here under a  Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) license.

The Northern Cheyenne Tribal Council voted unanimously this October to ban data centers on tribal land in Montana. The ban follows a decision in August by the Fort Peck Tribes to bar officials from projects involving data center developers.

But Montana’s Tribes are now split. Next door to the Northern Cheyenne, the Apsáalooke, or Crow Tribe, has not taken an official position and remains open to hearing proposals from companies, according to Shane Doyle, an Apsáalooke tribal member and The Nature Conservancy’s Indigenous right relations director. Doyle grew up on the Crow Reservation and has consistently advocated for reciprocity with the land, rendering him a voice in the dissent, whether he intends to be or not.

The stakes are highest in Crow country. In the small city of Hardin, at the Crow Indian Reservation’s northern edge, a former cryptocurrency mine is being actively converted into an AI data center. About 14 miles northwest of the reservation, Texas-based Quantica Infrastructure plans to build its Big Sky campus on nearly eight square miles of ranchland near the town of Broadview, north of Billings, Montana’s most populous city. As it’s currently planned, the data center would rank among the largest data centers in the world. The Yellowstone River Valley is “the heart of the Crow Nation,” Doyle said.

Krystal Two Bulls, who is Oglala Lakota and Northern Cheyenne, has been tracking these data centers closely. As the executive director of Honor the Earth, a nonprofit tracking data centers on or near reservation lands, she takes an extensive view of history and geography when it comes to tribal land and AI developments.

“Broadview is still a traditional territory of the Northern Cheyenne and also the Crow,” she told Truthout. “It may not technically be on the reservation, but it definitely is still going to have an impact on the land and the people around it.”

The divide over data centers comes as developers eye Montana for its land, water, and power, and as Tribes test how far their sovereignty can actually reach. Bans like the Northern Cheyenne’s are enforceable on tribal land, said Matthew Fletcher, a University of Michigan Law professor and member of the Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians. But tribal bans on off-reservation data centers that affect reservation waters are “unlikely to be enforceable,” Fletcher said, unless a tribe can show a very significant threat to its waters, enterprises, or citizens’ health.

Quantica has asked Northwestern Energy for more than 7,000 megawatts. The utility currently serves about 750 average megawatts, said Anne Hedges, executive director of the Montana Environmental Information Center. “We’ve never imagined something this massive,” she told Truthout. The company’s plan includes about 1,700 megawatts of gas generation, which alone would be more than the gas generated by all Montana’s existing gas plants combined.

The gas would affect more than just the rural Broadview community. A retired Billings pulmonologist modeled the air-quality impact of 1,700 megawatts using EPA tools, Hedges said, and found fine-particulate pollution spreading to communities east of the site, including the Crow, Northern Cheyenne, and Fort Peck reservations. “It’d be a disaster,” she said.

The Northern Cheyenne resolution, which passed by a vote of 8-0, covers all land on the reservation, says Melissa Lonebear, a Northern Cheyenne citizen and tribal council member. It quashes any extant or future data center discussions on their territory. (None are currently active.) “We have fought historically to preserve our land,” says Lonebear. “We have fought against coal development, coal bed methane, all these things.”

The Northern Cheyenne own nearly all of the land within their reservation, which makes the Tribe a target for developers looking for large, contiguous sites, Lonebear said. She added that the governor had remarked in a closed meeting with tribal leaders that big corporations were looking for land. “I almost felt like we would be targeted,” she said.

Fort Peck’s ban bars the tribal government, individuals, and entities from discussing proposals to build data centers on the tribe’s reservation. The tribe passed the ban after three companies approached the tribe about data center projects on tribal land, Tribal Chairman Floyd Azure told Montana Free Press. Azure had asked standard questions about the benefits to his community, and after learning about the required natural resources, he strongly rejected theirs and any future proposals. Azure did not respond to Truthout’s request for comment.

Tribal water rights in the state define what is available for development projects like data centers. Fort Peck and the Northern Cheyenne coordinate with state environmental agencies, such as Montana’s Department of Natural Resources and Conservation (DNRC), to enforce these rights. “Physical and legal water availability analysis are part of the water rights permitting process, as is an assessment of adverse effect to other water right,” Patricia Spencer, a DNRC spokesperson, told Truthout.

Water rights are set out in an agreement between a tribe and a state, and sometimes the federal government. Such an agreement limits the amount of water available to the tribe within the state’s overall supply, which is sourced from groundwater and rivers near and far. “The proposed datacenter in Hardin is located in a basin closed by the compact, and DNRC cannot process or grant an application for an appropriation of water within the Bighorn River Basin,” Spencer said in an email. “At this time, DNRC has not received any water rights applications or change applications tied to that facility.”

The Crow’s calculation also includes revenue, according to Lonebear. The Absaloka coal mine, which was long the Tribe’s marquee employer and profit source, shipped its last rail car of coal in 2024, the Billings Gazette reported. In August, a Senate committee advanced the Crow Revenue Act, a bill with full-throated support from Crow reservation chairman Frank White Clay that would give the Crow ownership of their coal, previously paternally managed by the Hope Family Trust. In exchange, the Hope family is offering federal coal reserves in Bill Mountains, which they’re anticipated to lease to Signal Peak Energy, whose customers are in Japan and South Korea. The Crow also plan to participate in the mining directly in the future.

The Absaloka coal mine reduced capacity and then halted production in April 2024 after losing its main client, Xcel Energy’s Sherburne County Generating Station (Sherco Plant), in Minnesota, which pivoted to cheaper, cleaner alternatives like natural gas. It’s a loss that left the Crow without a clear surrogate source of revenue.

“The Crow Tribe has decided to develop their coal… and so the rest of the world should not be in our way for that,” Conrad Stewart, energy director of the Crow Tribe, told Inside Climate News.

We’re trying to always make sure that we protect our water, keep it clean, make sure there’s enough for the fish and for people to drink and use in the community … So I think a data center would conflict with that.

Water is on everyone’s mind. “We’re trying to always make sure that we protect our water, keep it clean, make sure there’s enough for the fish and for people to drink and use in the community,” says Doyle. “So I think a data center would conflict with that, with all our values.”

Asked whether the Crow will follow suit on the ban, Two Bulls said she was “hopeful,” but added that she doesn’t think the Crow will “entertain a ban or even a moratorium,” citing her understanding that tribal leadership sees data centers as a way to replace declining coal revenue.

The Crow chairman and executive officers all declined requests for comment.

Water may be a forefront issue, but that may not be the same for tribal consultation. Without a federal permit, federal land, or federal money, the federal consultation duties don’t apply: Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, NEPA review, and the federal government’s consultation obligations to Tribes.

The Montana Department of Environmental Quality has a public comment period that closes October 29 on Quantica’s water well. The company hasn’t yet applied for a water right, according to the DNRC, and that application will come with its own public notice.

Asked whether Montana’s Department of Natural Resources and Conservation must notify or consult the Crow Tribe, DNRC spokesperson Patricia Spencer pointed to the general public notice process. “Public notice, including an opportunity for the public to comment and make objections, is a part of the water rights permitting process,” Spencer told Truthout. “The Crow Tribe–Montana Water Rights Compact would not have any bearing on an application near Broadview.”

Meanwhile, the Montana Public Service Commission is developing a large-load tariff for data centers. The state legislature is scheduled to convene in January 2027, with what Hedges describes as dozens of data center bills. No Native legislators sit on the energy committee drafting them, and at the same time she called the American Indian Caucus “a force to be reckoned with.”

“We do not anticipate the construction and operation of our Big Sky Campus will impact tribal lands or water rights,” a Big Sky Digital Infrastructure spokesperson told Truthout over email.

“If we put a project like this in around Yellowstone County, in that river valley, it’s gonna be an environmental impact similar to a coal mine, or something that’s gonna cause irreparable harm to the area. I think that’s why there’s so much opposition to it right now,” Doyle said.

❌