The Fall Campaign fundraising drive has been launched, with the goal of raising $100,000 by midnight on October 31. The campaign seeks donations to support the nonprofit, independent journalism of Common Dreams.
Lindsey Halligan, the US attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, has recently drawn attention after sending unsolicited text messages containing sensitive details about a high-profile case. Halligan was appointed by President Donald Trump to prosecute political opponents and faced scrutiny when she reached out to Anna Bower, a senior editor at Lawfare, regarding a case involving New York Attorney General Letitia James.
Bower published the full text message exchange on Monday night, which pertained to the prosecution of James, who was charged with mortgage fraud earlier this month. The case against James has been criticized as politically motivated, given that she previously brought a case against Trump for financial crimes in 2022.
Halligan was appointed by Trump to replace her predecessor, Erik Siebert, who was forced out for declining to prosecute former FBI Director James Comey on what he considered weak charges. Halligan, a former insurance lawyer with no prior criminal prosecution experience, had previously worked as a personal attorney for Trump.
The messages began on October 11, shortly after the indictment against James was filed. The Department of Justice accused James of misrepresenting her use of a rental property in Norfolk, Virginia, to secure a better mortgage rate in 2020. According to the indictment, she claimed the property was for personal use as a “second home” but actually rented it to a family of three.
Bower expressed skepticism about the case’s merits, noting that the mortgage agreement allowed for renting the property after a year. She also highlighted reporting from the New York Times, which revealed that the home had been occupied by James’ grand-niece without rent since 2020.
In response to the report, Bower posted on X that the information provided was exculpatory, as the indictment accused James of seeking a “second home” mortgage when she intended to use it as an “investment” home. This post caught Halligan’s attention, leading to a private conversation between the two.
Halligan initially sent a message to Bower, stating that the information being reported was false. Bower, assuming the exchange might be a hoax, questioned whether Halligan was genuine. After confirming the identity of the sender, Bower asked for clarification on what was inaccurate.
Halligan responded by suggesting Bower was jumping to conclusions and offered to clarify if she had questions. However, when Bower asked for specific inaccuracies, Halligan declined to provide details, citing grand jury secrecy. The conversation escalated into a personal attack, with Halligan accusing Bower of bias and suggesting she would be discredited when evidence emerged.
Over subsequent days, Bower continued reaching out to Halligan, only to face more insults and eventual silence. When Bower contacted the DOJ for comment, a spokesperson stated that Halligan was attempting to direct Bower to facts rather than gossip. They warned that threatening to leak the conversation could result in future communication barriers.
Following the release of the texts, legal analysts and media professionals have raised concerns about Halligan’s credibility as a prosecutor. Her previous actions, including presenting inconsistent documents during the Comey case, have drawn criticism. Legal scholars have described her charging documents as lacking factual material, and her conduct during court proceedings has been scrutinized.
The situation has sparked discussions about the implications of Halligan’s behavior, with some suggesting that her use of Signal could potentially violate federal law requiring prosecutors to preserve evidence favorable to the accused.
Meanwhile, news outlets covering the US Department of Defense have until 5:00 pm Tuesday to sign an agreement issued by the Pentagon last month. The agreement bars journalists from reporting any unapproved information, but several major organizations have refused to sign, arguing that the policy threatens First Amendment rights.
Outlets such as the New York Times, Washington Post, Atlantic, NPR, and Breaking Defense have stated they will not agree to the terms, emphasizing their commitment to reporting on national security issues. The Pentagon has warned that non-signatories will have 24 hours to surrender their press credentials, but many organizations have indicated they will continue reporting without them.
Richard Stevenson, Washington Bureau chief for the Times, called the policy a threat to ordinary news gathering protected by the First Amendment. He emphasized the public’s right to know how the government and military operate, given the annual taxpayer funding of nearly $1 trillion for the DOD.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s response to these statements has been minimal, with only a “hand waving” emoji shared in reaction to the Times’ statement. Similar responses were received by other outlets, highlighting the administration’s resistance to critical reporting.
Right-wing outlets like The Washington Times and Newsmax have also rejected the new policy, calling it unnecessary and onerous. They have pledged to work with other media outlets to resolve the situation.
The new policy follows the removal of four news outlets from their long-held workspaces in the Pentagon, replaced by right-wing networks that have agreed to the restrictions. Journalists have also faced increased access limitations within the building, marking a significant departure from established norms.
The Pentagon Press Association (PPA) has criticized the policy, warning that it conveys an unprecedented message of intimidation to DOD personnel. The PPA emphasized that the press corps plays a vital role in informing the public about military operations and the well-being of service members.
As a fragile ceasefire in the Gaza Strip begins, press freedom advocates and critics of Israel’s actions have called for international media access to the region. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) urged media outlets to demand direct, unsupervised access to Gaza following the release of hostages and the return of imprisoned Palestinians.
CAIR highlighted the importance of covering the stories of Palestinian civilians and hostages, stressing the need for balanced reporting that reflects the full scope of the conflict. The group also emphasized the necessity of accessing Gaza to witness the consequences of the ongoing violence.
Despite efforts to secure a Nobel Peace Prize, US President Donald Trump announced the first phase of his proposed plan for Gaza. However, reports indicate that the true toll of the Israeli assault remains significantly underreported.
Over 200 journalists have been killed in Gaza, with many more remaining in danger. Organizations such as Reporters Without Borders have called for justice and accountability, urging the International Criminal Court to act on complaints filed since October 2023.
The Foreign Press Association in Jerusalem has also called for immediate access to Gaza, emphasizing the urgent need for international media to report on the realities of the war. They have urged Israel to lift restrictions on press freedom and allow free and independent access to the territory.
Arabic 
English