The same developer that wants to build out the Fillmore Safeway property into apartments now has the same idea for the Ocean Beach Safeway on LaPlaya Street, though in this case, that Safeway would reopen once construction was finished.
Today’s Chronicle reports that the developer Align has submitted plans to tear down the Ocean Beach Safeway and replace it with housing, but then place a larger Safeway on the ground-floor once the structure is rebuilt. What is now the one-story Safeway would become two eight-story buildings with 526 housing units, covering the whole 3.3-acre property on LaPlaya between between Fulton and Cabrillo streets that is currently also a large parking lot. The new buildings would be 85 feet tall, and parking would be moved underground.
Again, the Safeway would close for some extended period of time, but reopen as an even larger Safeway once construction was complete.
The Chronicle’s report merely says that the developer Align has “pitched a plan” to the SF Planning Department, and they add there is “no timeline for the planned closure, or the completion of the project.” This whole process of planning, approvals, and construction will likely take years, though the Chronicle says it would be built using “by-right” entitlement, which involves automatic approval of many City Hall bureaucratic processes that can often be quite lengthy.
The grocer Safeway also commented to the Chronicle on their report.
“Safeway looks forward to continuing to serve this community for generations to come,” a spokesperson told the Chronicle, saying there was no “specific temporary closure date” for the Ocean Beach Safeway store, though the company insisted it would provide “clear and timely updates as those details are available.”
There is also the matter of Daniel Lurie’s proposed “family zoning” upzoning plan that would raise height limits in the Outer Sunset. But this project does not need Lurie’s new upzoned height limits. The project already qualifies for state height and density bonuses that will let it go even higher than Lurie’s proposed new 65 feet limit for the Outer Sunset, because it meets affordable housing inclusion requirements.
But this revelation, which comes after Align indicated they had more development plans around the city to announce, could be part of a larger strategy by Align to partner with Safeway on the redevelopment of its dated and underdeveloped urban properties. Which leads us to wonder if the Castro Safeway — long rumored as a potential development site where a store could return in a similar ground-floor configuration — could be next on the developer’s list.
This is, we should note, still just conjecture, but Safeway has been undertaking this strategy broadly across the country, selling its assets for redevelopment as mixed-use with housing, as with this large property in Atlanta.
Workers at Starbucks are raising their voices—and we must answer the call. These baristas and café associates, individuals who greet us every morning with a friendly smile and a warm drink, are demanding something fundamental: safe, dignified, and just working conditions. Supporting them is not just about cheerleading for labor—it’s about fighting for the heart of what fair work means in America.
First, better working conditions are essential because they reflect the respect owed to anyone who earns their living through honest labor. When a Starbucks worker asks for manageable schedules, sufficient break times, adequate staffing, or protection from harassment and illness, they’re asking for the basic dignity every worker deserves. When employees are overworked, under‐staffed, or fearful of speaking up, the cost isn’t only theirs—it falls on the quality of service, on communities, on our shared economy.
Second, workers at large national chains like Starbucks are front‐line examples of how corporate power can erode worker rights unless we stand up. If a major brand doesn’t ensure fair conditions, smaller employers may feel free not to either. The fight at Starbucks thus becomes a bellwether. Supporting these workers sends a message: we will hold major corporations accountable for the labor behind their billions in revenue.
Third, this struggle is deeply connected to broader democratic values: power, equity, collective voice. When workers organize, when they stand together, they reclaim their agency. This counters the growing imbalance between wealth and labor in our society. As we’ve said before when talking about mobilizing in civic space: power to the people means workers too. When baristas, shift leads, and café associates demand fairness, they raise the ceiling of possibility for us all.
Finally, there’s an urgent moral call. We live in a world where the gap between those who set policy and those who serve continues to widen. Choosing to support the Starbucks workers is choosing to stand with people—not profits. This is about solidarity, not charity; about rights, not favors.
Take action now. Together we will stand for workers’ dignity, for justice, for a future where Power to the People includes every worker, in every city, in every store.
Starbucks Workers United is escalating the pressure by going on strike and they have 3 critical ways you can support workers:
Delete the Starbucks app from your phone
Do not make purchases at Starbucks for the duration of the strike
Click here to send a message to Starbucks CEO Brian Niccol and let him know you stand with the workers and won’t cross the picket line.
Thank you for being interested in helping San Franciscans. Many individuals are struggling with food insecurity that goes beyond Thanksgiving. As shifts fill up, please look at other days or help by making a monetary donation.CityTeam San Francisco – Bring store-bought warm dishes (serving 6-10 people) on Thanksgiving Eve and Day to help prepare and distribute meals to neighbors in need. More info
Little Brothers: Friends of the Elderly – Deliver Thanksgiving meals and make in-person visits to bring joy to older adults. Read more and RSVP
Project Open Hand – Assist in assembling medically-tailored meals and packaging groceries for sick and elderly neighbors during Thanksgiving week at 730 Polk St. RSVP to volunteer
Salvation Army – Deliver Thanksgiving meals to 4,000 homebound seniors and disabled individuals, with shifts from 6am-12:15pm at 155 Clara Street. RSVP required
San Francisco Glide – Help prepare and serve nearly 2,500 Thanksgiving meals, with various shifts available at 330 Ellis St. Sign up
SF-Marin Food Bank – Volunteer in the warehouse or community to help distribute over 1 million meals weekly. Learn more
Members of UPTE and campus students appeared at the strike to show their support for AFSCME. Noah Mendieta | Staff
More than 40,000 University of California service and patient care workers are striking Monday and Tuesday across UC campuses, citing the “university’s failure to settle contracts” that address cost of living crises.
The employees, represented by the American Federation of State, Council and Municipal Employees Local 3299, or AFSCME 3299, have been operating without a contract for more than a year. Ongoing deliberations between AFSCME and the UC concern livable wages, health care and job security.
AFSCME members lined the entrance to UC Berkeley’s campus on Bancroft Way and Telegraph Avenue.
“The ideal contract is a livable wage for the members … We can’t afford to even live where we work,” said Kathreen Bedford, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory employee and AFSCME executive board member. “I commute an hour and a half just to come to work. Born and raised right here in the Bay Area, and I can’t afford to live. (I commute) from Stockton, 80 miles one way, 160 a day.”
Bedford, who’s been working for the UC system for more than 20 years, raised concerns about the living conditions of other AFSCME members, some of whom are unhoused or living out of cars.
The UC system’s last, best and final offer from April this year suggested a 5% wage increase for next year, a 4% increase for the following year and a 3% increase for the three years after that. Additionally, over the summer the UC system implemented a 5% increase in wage and issued up to $1,500 in health care credits per year for AFSCME workers.
According to Nico Quidang, surgical technician, workers recently had to change health insurance plans, which doubled prices for some. Quidang moved to California from Hawaii seeking higher wages, but found that the local cost of living means she does not make more money.
On Nov. 6, AFSCME originally declared plans for more than 80,000 workers across three unions to strike. Following tentative agreements made between the UC system and the University Professional and Technical Employees CWA Local 9119, or UPTE-CWA 9119, and the California Nurses Association the workers represented by the latter two unions will no longer strike. The California Nurses Association was originally set to strike in sympathy with UPTE and AFSCME.
Members of UPTE made appearances at the strike to support AFSCME on the picket line.
“The more people you have on the picket line, the stronger your strike is, and the more UC pays attention,” said Tina Kremzner-Hsing, a campus alum and UPTE member who is a museum scientist at the UC Berkeley Magnes Collection of Jewish Art and Life. “I just feel really strongly about standing in solidarity … we don’t want to leave AFSCME behind.”
Two student workers at Crossroads dining hall, who requested anonymity for concern of retribution, joined the strike in solidarity, despite not being represented by AFSCME.
“One of the most meaningful conversations to me was with one of the older Cantonese workers at Crossroads. I remember after a particularly tough shift, she just kind of paused and looked at me and said, ‘I’ve been in this country for almost 40 years. I’m supposed to be rich by now, and I’m still poor,’” one of the students said.“A lot of career workers don’t get paid enough to even see their kids.”
According to UC Office of the President spokesperson Heather Hansen, there has not been any “substantive counterproposals” since April 2025.
Dining commons will continue to operate while campus restaurants will be closed during the strike, according to an email from UC Berkeley Dining sent to campus residents.
Epstein operated for decades because prosecutors, police, and federal agencies looked away. Survivors were ignored. Justice was denied. Congress must release the full files now. We are starting to see some Epstein files released but let’s be clear we need Congress to mandate a full disclosure of all the Epstein files. Can you join us to advocate for protecting children and not predators:
Click here to Tell Congress: Release the Epstein Files Now
Phone Script to Call Your House MemberHi, my name is [YOUR NAME], and I’m a constituent from [CITY/ZIP].I’m calling to urge the Representative to support full transparency and vote YES on releasing the complete Jeffrey Epstein files. Survivors and the public deserve the truth. For decades, Epstein’s network of abuse was protected by secrecy, lenient deals, and systemic failures in law enforcement. The only way to restore trust is through full disclosure—without redactions, delays, or political interference.This is not a partisan issue. It’s a matter of justice, accountability, and protecting children from predators. I’m asking the Representative to stand with survivors, not with anyone trying to hide the truth.Can you please share where the Representative stands on this vote?Thank you for your time.
Click here to support our efforts by subscribing, upgrading, or gifting a subscription
Just five days after his pick for D4 supervisor resigned, Mayor Daniel Lurie will appear before the Board of Supes Tuesday/18 for Question Time—and none of the eligible board members has put forward a question.
That means the mayor can choose to address the board for five minutes—or, with a supermajority vote, the board can change the rules and allow an unscripted question.
Lurie is reaching out to Sunset and Richmond residents, who are at best dubious about his plan. Photo by Ebbe Roe Yovino Smith
So there’s no requirement at this point that the mayor discuss his bungled appointment of Beya Alcarez or say anything about what he plans to do to make sure his next choice has a longer tenure. But it would be odd, to say the least, if he simply ignored the issue.
Then on Thursday/20, Lurie will visit D1 to talk about his Rich Family Zoning Plan, which has not been well received on the West Side of town. In previous West Side meetings, Lurie has told constituents that his plan may not be perfect, but it’s way better than what the state will impose if San Francisco doesn’t adopt it.
What he hasn’t mentioned is that the reason the state is forcing cities to allow the demolition of existing housing, the construction of much denser housing, and the displacement of small businesses—with no money for or guarantee of any reasonable affordability—is the work of state Sen. Scott Wiener. Wiener is now running for Congress, and West Side voters will be critical in that campaign.
The message that Lurie has not delivered: “I hate this as much as you do, but Scott Wiener is forcing us to do it.”
But there will be plenty of time for residents of D1 to raise the issue.
The town hall meeting starts at 6:30pm at the Internet Archive, 300 Funston. Former Sup. Sandra Lee Fewer will moderate.
Sponsored link
Help us save local journalism!
Every tax-deductible donation helps us grow to cover the issues that mean the most to our community. Become a 48 Hills Hero and support the only daily progressive news source in the Bay Area.
Meanwhile, the zoning plan, with all the recent amendments, will be back at the Land Use and Transportation Committee meeting Monday/17. The city’s economist has made clear that the supposed goal of the plan—increasing affordable housing by allowing the private market to build more—won’t work.
Neighborhoods United San Francisco is asking the committee to take five steps:
Adopt the amendments introduced by Supervisors Connie Chan and Chyanne Chen.
Place a pause on the process given the extraordinary and unsettled circumstances in District 4.
Recommend a “Committee of the Whole” session before forwarding this legislation to the full Board of Supervisors.
Request an extension from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to allow for full review, transparency, and participation.
Require HCD leadership to attend Land Use and Transportation hearings, the Committee of the Whole, and full Board meetings to provide clear, direct answers on state compliance criteria and housing capacity calculations.
The last suggestion is intriguing. From the start of this process, Lurie and his allies, along with some planning staffers, have said that the state won’t certify any housing plan that doesn’t include most of his proposals. Sup. Myrna Melgar has suggested that rent-controlled buildings of more than three units be exempt from demolition, because any tighter threshold (preserving all rent-controlled housing, for example) wouldn’t pass HCD muster.
But nobody from the state has ever come to a board meeting to explain what the rules are, and what would qualify. (If I were the chair of the Land Use and Transportation Committee, I would also ask Wiener to appear to answer questions).
The mayor may (again) take his time finding another D4 supe, so one of the districts that will be most impacted by this legislation may not be represented when the plan moves to the full board.
That meeting starts at 1:30pm.
48 Hills welcomes comments in the form of letters to the editor, which you can submit here. We also invite you to join the conversation on our Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.
Tim Redmond has been a political and investigative reporter in San Francisco for more than 30 years. He spent much of that time as executive editor of the Bay Guardian. He is the founder of 48hills.
Bill Christeson holds a sign calling for the release of the Jeffrey Epstein files, November 12, 2025, outside the U.S. Capitol. Credit: Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call via AP Images
Well, now we have it. On Wednesday, Democrats on the House Oversight Committee released another batch of documents related to notorious pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. Among them were several emails about Donald Trump. One was from Epstein to his accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell back in 2011. He wrote: “i want you to realize that that dog that hasn’t barked is trump.. [victim] spent hours at my house with him ,, he has never once been mentioned. police chief. etc. im 75 % there[.]” (Excuse the spelling and grammar errors, that’s all Jeffrey.)
By now, we’re all familiar with what “spent hours” meant in the context of rich, powerful men and Epstein’s victims—particularly given the reference to ‘barking,’ which has to mean going to prosecutors or the media.
Epstein also wrote to the author Michael Wolff in 2019: “[victim] mara lago … trump said he asked me to resign, never a member ever. of course he knew about the girls as he asked ghislaine to stop[.]” This appears to be a reference to Maxwell picking up victims at Mar-a-Lago—raising the question of whether Trump was mad at Epstein’s abuses, or for “taking our people,” as he said in July.
This certainly puts some more intrigue on the seating yesterday of Rep. Adelita Grijalva (D-AZ), the 218th vote on the discharge petition in the House to release the Epstein files, as well as the Trump administration’s increasingly desperate campaign to stop that vote.
But I have just one question: Was President Biden’s pick to run federal law enforcement, former Attorney General Merrick Garland, kicked in the head by a particularly irritable mule right before assuming office in 2021, and did he thereby spend the next four years wandering around the Justice Department bumping into things and saying, “It feels like I am forgetting something. Where am I?” Because otherwise his term in office is looking like the greatest law enforcement failure in American history, and Biden’s decision to nominate Garland the most catastrophic personnel decision by any Democratic president since James Buchanan.
As we at the Prospect have covered for years now, this is only the latest in about 10,000 stories implicating Trump in Epstein’s abuses. Let’s review some highlights again!
2002: Trump tells New York magazine: “I’ve known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy … He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.”
2003: As part of an incredibly revolting book celebrating Epstein’s 50th birthday, Trump sends a birthday note with a hand-drawn note of a pubescent, nude female form, and a poem reading in part: “Donald: Enigmas never age, have you noticed that? … A pal is a wonderful thing. Happy Birthday—and may every day be another wonderful secret.”
2008: Epstein is finally investigated for sexual abuse of minors. Then-U.S. attorney Alex Acosta grants Epstein one of the most bizarre sweetheart deals in American legal history, in which Epstein not only secretly pled to a much lesser charge of soliciting an underage prostitute, but also got all his unnamed accomplices immunized forever.
2011: Epstein sends the above email.
2016: Epstein claims in another email that he is hanging out in Trump Tower a week after the election.
2017: Trump nominates Acosta, who has no relevant experience, to run the Department of Labor, which he does until 2019.
2019: Epstein is finally indicted for sexual abuse. A few months later, he apparently commits suicide under the most suspicious circumstances imaginable.
2022: Maxwell is convicted of conspiring with Epstein to abuse children, and sentenced to 20 years in prison.
2025: Trump, back in office, fires the prosecutor who successfully prosecuted Epstein. His lawyers have a meeting with Maxwell. She subsequently says that Trump definitely didn’t do anything wrong, and then she is transferred to apparently the cushiest prison cell in the Western Hemisphere, according to a recent whistleblower report, which includes a service puppy.
That is leaving much out, including Epstein saying on tape that Trump was “my closest friend for 10 years.” I’d argue that this recent email is the most directly damning single piece of evidence, but in context the weight of it all is overwhelming. Any fool can figure out what was going on here.
So why are we only hearing about these emails now? They came from Epstein’s personal email account. Are we really to think that the Biden-era Justice Department could not find or get access to this, when the Trump-era DOJ clearly did? It was a regular Gmail account, for crying out loud, and Epstein, being dead, could not fight them in court. The Epstein estate happily honored the request this year for the birthday book. Google would have tripped over themselves obeying a legitimate order, which could have been obtained easily, to turn over the records of the most notorious pedophile in the world.
Indeed, the incriminating email is actually seen as part of a reply from Maxwell, and the “Gmax” address was known from previous court proceedings. It simply beggars belief.
Given Garland’s other behavior—like the fact that he dragged his feet for months on prosecuting Trump directly for January 6th, and as a recent book by Carol Leonnig and Aaron C. Davis reported, halted the investigation for weeks to avoid influencing the 2022 midterms, even though Trump was not on the ballot—I think it is at least plausible that Garland knew about these emails, and refused to leak them or (better yet) have Trump prosecuted just like Maxwell, because he was obsessed with performing political neutrality. By this view, it is unsporting not to give your high-profile political opponents every possible benefit of the legal doubt, to the point where they get away with grotesque violations of legal procedure, and skate on many crimes.
Let’s not let the rest of the Democratic apparatus off the hook. These emails were released by House Oversight Committee Democrats. That committee existed from 2019 to 2022, when Democrats held the House majority. Yet there was no effort to subpoena this material.
Meanwhile, Donald Trump ran for president three times, and we have photographic, audio, and video evidence of his relationship with Epstein. Outside of maybe a couple of billboards with unknown funders in the South during the 2024 primaries, the Epstein issue never came up in a paid ad from Democrats in any of those campaigns. In fact, the candidate who ran on the Epstein files in 2024 was Trump! “When they go low, we go high” is a syndrome that Democrats are afflicted with, but letting your opponent off the hook from a scandal that would have toppled virtually anyone in the world who had this kind of evidence against them is mind-blowing.
An important task for the leader of any republic is to prevent rebellions or insurrections. That’s why the Constitution formally enables the suspension of habeas corpus in such circumstances. Biden had a relatively easy task compared to Abraham Lincoln. All Biden had to do was enforce the law against a man who broke it in the most blatant fashion imaginable; or failing that, ruin him politically by any means to hand. Even if these emails could not have been published through the normal process, which they almost certainly could have been—thousands of other Epstein emails were unsealed in early 2024—Biden and/or Garland should have just leaked them. Preventing a fascist from becoming president is more important than stuffy adherence to the letter of Department of Justice internal rules.
The fact that there is written evidence indicating that Donald Trump either knew about or was somehow involved in Jeffrey Epstein’s pedophile ring, and the Biden administration failed to either find or publicize it, might just doom the American republic.
First, I want to thank you for reading the Prospect. At the end of the day, you’re helping build a more just and fair world by taking the time to read independent and fearless journalism. We hope that when you read our work it isn’t just idle entertainment or cynical ragebait, but something that informs and inspires you. If you agree with that, and I hope you do, we’re asking that you take the next step and consider supporting our work. We don’t have corporate sponsors or billionaire backers – we have you, our readers. A significant portion of the money it takes to send reporters into the field to write the hard-hitting stories you expect from the Prospect comes from readers just like you. Can you chip in today? Your support funds deeply reported investigations into power, how it works, and what it means for you.
Ryan Cooper is the Prospect’s managing editor, and author of How Are You Going to Pay for That?: Smart Answers to the Dumbest Question in Politics. He was previously a national correspondent for The… More by Ryan Cooper
Presidend Donald Trump’s administration followed its research funding freeze with a list of demands to UCLA in exchange for the return of its federal funding.Hayes Gaboury | File
A federal judge has ordered the federal government to end their coercive tactics against the UC in the latest installment of a coalition of UC employees and students’ lawsuit against President Donald Trump’s administration.
In her ruling, U.S. District Judge Rita F. Lin ordered the federal government to cease threats of withholding federal funding, as well as to “address Plaintiffs’ irreparable harm and to restore the status quo.”
The decision comes after a Nov. 6 hearing in which Lin said she found the plaintiffs had submitted “overwhelming evidence” that the federal government had “publicly launched a campaign to purge woke and left viewpoints” from the university by freezing nearly $600 million in federal research grants from UCLA over alleged antisemitism, among other issues.
The administration followed the freeze with a list of demands to UCLA in exchange for the return of its federal funding. These demands include placing restrictions on student protests, discouraging admission of “anti-Western” international students, ending “unlawful DEI goals” in admissions, banning gender-affirming care for minors and banning transgender women from women’s sports.
“This looks to me like a classic First Amendment injury, and it is exactly what the administration has said that it’s trying to achieve,” Lin said.
The plaintiffs launched the lawsuit against the Trump administration in September, alleging that the administration’s demands constitute political censorship and retaliation against the university. The lawsuit claims the federal government has violated the First, Fifth and Tenth amendments, Title VI and Title IX, and the Administrative Procedures Act.
On Oct. 9, more than 60 staff members of the American Association of University Professors, or AAUP — one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit — submitted sworn declarations to the federal court in which the staff members describe specific incidents including self-censorship and concerns about potential political retaliation.
On Oct. 10, the coalition filed a motion for preliminary injunction that called for the court to “stop the Trump-Vance administration’s unlawful policy while the case continues,” according to a press release.
During the Nov. 6 hearing, U.S. Department of Justice lawyer Abhishek Kambli said, “It’s questionable whether the third party censorship doctrine is even viable because the easiest path to complete relief for the plaintiff would be to sue the university directly.”
However, Lin pushed back against this argument. “How does that respond to the present harms that are already occurring, the self censorship that is already occurring?” she asked.
Connie Chan, a lawyer for AAUP, said the defendants had presented “zero evidence” that the university was taking actions independent of the pressure from the federal government to “extinguish” leftist ideology on campus.
“It is the fact that the University of California is allowing faculty and students to engage in this type of protected First Amendment speech that has made University of California the target of the federal government’s coercion campaign,” Chan said.
A chance to help former Indivisible organizer Aftyn Behn flip a House seat by calling voters in TennesseeThursday: “What’s the Plan?” with Leah + Ezra (3pm ET) An interactive Q&A with our co-founders — and special guest Aftyn Behn this week!On the Horizon November 25 – December 4November 25: “All in for Aftyn” Virtual Phonebank
Stay tuned for more events in next Monday’s newsletter…
Don’t shop these stores next weekend
All year long, we’ve watched business leaders meekly cave to the Trump regime — rolling back diversity programs, collaborating with ICE, funding Trump’s reign of terror, and more. Leaders of major corporations like Target, Amazon, and Home Depot are enabling an authoritarian takeover and actively participating in Trump’s attacks on the very communities they serve.
This Thanksgiving through Cyber Monday, we’re saying “We Ain’t Buying It” and asking Americans to hit pause on buying from corporations that enable Trump’s fascist agenda.
By refusing to shop at Target, Home Depot, or Amazon during the busiest shopping weekend of the year, we’ll underline the scale of our movement and remind corporate decision-makers that there’s more to lose from complicity than from noncooperation.
When you volunteer for Saikat, it’s on us to give you a great experience and a genuine chance to make a difference. We don’t want to waste a second of your time. That’s why we’re always optimizing. And I’m excited to report that this Saturday we talked with 300% more... Continue reading →
San Francisco – Communities Not Cages: National Day of Action to Stop ICE Warehouse Detention Solidarity Event · Volunteer organized Time Saturday, April 25 12 – 2pm PDT Location In front of San Francisco Tesla, corner of Van Ness and O’Farrell St. 999 Van Ness Ave San Francisco, CA 94109 Map About... Continue reading →
Trump Regime Takedown: Every Saturday Saturday, March 7, 2026 12:00 PM 2:00 PM Tesla San Francisco999 Van Ness AvenueSan Francisco, CA, 94109United States (map) Google Calendar ICS Keep democracy alive every Saturday by showing up, taking a stand, and sticking together for the long haul. Standing together is better than standing alone. Let’s get together... Continue reading →
This Sunday’s Town Hall: Announcing This Week’s Progressive Town Hall: Every Sunday at 4pm ET/1pm PT RSVP HERE Join PDA activists online from across the country to discuss the importance of progressives reclaiming the American story from the MAGA right, an issue of heightened importance as we’re now within one... Continue reading →
We protest Heritage Foundation EVERY MONDAY (Join us!!!!) By admin | September 2, 2025 | Uncategorized Cliff Cash Comedy Premiered Jul 26, 2025 Every Monday at The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Ave. Washington D.C. 4pm protest 6pm pizza Every Friday at Fox News D.C. 400 N. Capitol St. Washington D.C. 4pm protest 6pm pizza We are... Continue reading →
Milk Club Trans Caucus Meeting Date: Tuesday, April 28 Time: 5-7 PM Location and Zoom Link: Meeting info available to members of the Milk Club Trans Caucus. Please reach out to trans@milkclub.org if you would like to join the Milk Club Trans Caucus.
One Million Rising: Strategic Non-Cooperation to Fight Authoritarianism Virtual Event · Hosted by No Kings Time Wednesdays 8 – 9:30pm EDT Location Virtual event Join from anywhere About this event Across the country, authoritarian forces are getting bolder and more dangerous. Trump and his allies are not hiding their agenda: mass deportations,... Continue reading →
by 
