Spring Sale: Get 1 Year, Save 58%

Michelle Obama & Breonna Taylor portraitist on Black artists: “We’ve been here all along”

Why does the current wave of Black American artists feel like such a new thing? Because it is. Curators are rapidly placing Black art in museums, collectors are learning and understanding what Black artists are trying to say, and fellowships for Black artists are increasing. Finally, the rest of the world is starting to recognize our talents.

The reason it has taken so long is because Black people came into this country as property­­ in 1619­­. And even though I’m sure plenty of those captured Africans were talented artists, there was no way for their work to be acknowledged, let alone highlighted or celebrated. This is the origin of our artistic legacy in America until the Civil War. That was only 156 years ago, meaning that Black people are a century behind in terms of learning, studying and participating in the culture of sharing, showcasing, and making a living through art­. Still, as resilient as we are, we somehow found a way to put the biggest exhibitions and make it into the biggest galleries, which is captured in the new HBO Max documentary, “Black Art: In The Absence of Light,” directed by Sam Pollard.

The film is based on the late artist and curator David Driskell’s exhibition, “Two Centuries of Black American Art,” and we get to see Driskell’s journey in creating the historic exhibition and the direct beneficiaries of his efforts, today’s contemporary Black artists, including Kerry James Marshall, Kara Walker, Kehinde Wiley and Amy Sherald, whom I recently got a chance to talk with on an episode of “Salon Talks.” 

Sherald is portraitist and realist who captures African Americans in everyday settings. She received national acclaim for her portrait of Michelle Obama, which now sits in the Smithsonian’s National Portrait Gallery, and recently for her portrait of Breonna Taylor on the cover of Vanity Fair. 

You can watch my “Salon Talks” episode with Amy Sherald here, or read a Q&A of our conversation below to hear more about her take on making art history today — from her unique painting style, to collaborating with Breonna Taylor’s mom for her most emotional piece, to pushing to get more Black art in museums and more Black curators in the room.

The following conversation has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

How have you been surviving COVID-19?

I spent the majority of it, in the beginning, in Atlanta with my family. I got back up here in June. I’ve just been here working. No new friends, no company, not doing anything, really. Walking the dog, and trying to stay safe.

You paint other people for a living and it usually means meeting them out in the world. Has it been difficult making those adjustments as an artist?

It has. I was having that conversation with my friend and painter, Jordan Casteel, because we both have health issues that we have to be really careful about. We’re making jokes about painting self-portraits. For me, I actually turned to Instagram because it’s really easy to find people on Instagram. Hashtags have become very useful. For my show that’s opening up in LA, on March 20th, the models that I used, two of them, I found on Instagram. I have a painting that’s about surfing. I went to the #blacksurfers, and it took me down the rabbit hole, and then, I found two people.

How do you choose models? What makes a person a subject, and another person maybe not so much of a subject?

It’s something that is very much a spiritual process for me. I guess, since you asked me this now, and I’m thinking about it, I think the best way to describe it is that they all have that Chadwick [Boseman] energy, you know what I mean? He’s a special dude. He felt like the moment, but then he felt like all the Black history, all at one time. That’s just what it is. And I know it instantaneously. It has something to do with what they look like, but it’s not beauty, necessarily. It’s just a look, something that’s interesting in their face. Sometimes they have on an outfit that I just think is absolutely perfect.

I met people in Patterson Park, in Baltimore. Baltimore is just such a great city to find people in. It’s still my place to find a model because it’s such a rich history there, and a rich culture. It’s a Black city, so it’s just great.

It’s home. I love it. I’ll always love it. I’ve learned so much from this HBO film you’re a part of, “Black Art in The Absence of Light.” There’s so much history to unpack. Can you give our viewers a brief synopsis of what the project is trying to accomplish?

I think it was really trying to, and is successful in illustrating, that we’ve been here all along, that Black artists have been here all along, that curators have been curating, and it didn’t matter, but they still did it. They did it in the dark, and it didn’t matter, because it’s a part of our history, that is just coming to light.

Art history is a very long history, to a degree. People were drawing when they were cavemen, so we think about art history starting there and carrying that all the way up, and then understanding that, not receiving validation from the art market, until the 1900s? It’s just insane. We carry an important story in myself, as an American painter, and as a Black female painter, and as a female painter, figuratively speaking, that history just isn’t there.

For me, as an American painter, I realized that these images that I make are filling up gaps with photography. Because that was the only time that we’ve really had the opportunity to become authors of our own narrative, when the camera was invented. We could pose ourselves, and we could represent ourselves, and we could show up in these images the way that we wanted to be seen, versus the propaganda, that was being published through imagery. A lot of artists that were making work in the ’60s and the ’70s are receiving their due now, and they’re in their 60s and 70s. And I think it’s really important to honor them. David Driskell, what he did was create this movement that helped push us forward, in a way that may not have happened, had he not had the insight, and the impetus to do that.

You yourself are making history as an artist. Does it feel like that when you’re just in a studio working? Is it something that’s heavy on top of your shoulders? Or are you just free, and just working, and just breathing?

I’m free and I’m working, and I’m breathing. But it is funny, because when you think about this conversation, you being the writer that you are, this is like a historical conversation. But it’s an honor to know that the work that you’re making is creating an historical legacy. My work is being taught in schools now. I get tagged in a lot of things on Instagram. White kids in Portland are making portraits in my style, of themselves, or of Michelle Obama. It’s just amazing. I didn’t have that, growing up, and you probably didn’t, either. The fact that they’re working from Black imagery at such a young age it’s life-changing for them. I have to hope it would lead to a better future for all of us.

I never met a professional artist or painter, or a writer, even, when I was growing up. So many professions that we come across in our social circles, just never, ever made it on my block. Where do you think your journey fits in, in context of the history of Black art, as portrayed in this film?

I think that the ideas that pushed me forward in my studio practice are having opportunity to make images that represent us in ways that we need to see ourselves. I make the work that I want to see in the world. I want to walk into a museum and see a beautiful painting of a Black person, that’s just being Black. When I say that, that’s just being a human being hanging out in this space, no contention, not in a teaching moment, not in resistance, just in a moment of leisure. I think for me, especially, over the past decade, I feel like we deserve these moments, where we can reflect upon ourselves. That’s what I really want people to see, when they walk into a space, and look at a portrait, is that they’re seeing beauty reflected back at them.

When I think about my place in art history, and I consider myself an American Realist because I paint these everyday moments, like Andrew Wyeth, or the artists who I grew up admiring, like Bo Bartlett, he painted families and living rooms. These are images we just didn’t see, unless you were looking at your own family photographs. I think it’s really important that these kinds of images become a part of, and fill up that space within the American art canon, just the simplicity of who we really are. I think my work really speaks to our interior space, and not that public identity that constantly remains in a space of activation, because we’re always pushing forward for civil rights, and for justice, in so many different ways all the time. It’s just the opportunity to take a deep breath. I think these paintings offer that space within our own narrative.

The beauty too is that you are young and alive, and so many artists didn’t get their flowers until they were dead for 30 years. You get a chance to live in this world now and be an inspiration now. That is extremely powerful.

It’s amazing. I wake up with that every single day. It doesn’t happen to everybody. And I just feel very happy.

You are at the forefront of Black artists who are being called on today to tell stories that depict our place in modern history. You see that with your Breonna Taylor painting this summer on the cover of Vanity Fair that memorialized her in a way that America had not been introduced to her. Could you speak to that?

Having the opportunity to create that portrait was something that I never thought I’d be able to do. You hear her story on the news and I just never imagined that I would become a part of her life in such a huge way, that I would be working with her mother, to create something that could represent her legacy.

It was very emotional and some moments of levity. When I was trying to figure out what I wanted Breonna to wear, I didn’t have a lot to work from. I remember I texted her mother some pictures of dresses. And she said, “I don’t think Breonna would like any of these dresses.” I’m like, “Oh, no.” Long story short, she loved the painting, she loved the outfit. She thought that her representation was true to who she was. I think that it’s really important that there is something that quantifies this moment, especially with violence against women. Breonna was and is the perfect subject for that. I think her story has inspired so many. And she belongs in American history, Black history and art history.

Absolutely, and it’s such a beautiful piece. When I look at a lot of your work, I think about how as a Black creative person we’re always viewed through this political lens. I could write an essay about playing basketball and how I don’t trust people with small heads, and people are going to be like, “He made such a political statement.” And I’m not even being political! I really just want to talk about basketball. Do you feel your work is political? Or do people push you into that space?

I think so. One thing that I was very aware of when I started to paint was you really couldn’t tell who was making the work, whether it was a Black woman, a white man, you couldn’t tell. When I see through that, I didn’t want the conversation and the discourse to be marginalized just around identity, because of who we are. We’re a kaleidoscopic people. We have so many ways of being in this world, and of being Black. I really wanted it to be about who we were on the inside. I did have a fear of it.

When I speak about a public identity, anything that has to do with Black skin is automatically political. So the work, being in a museum, on a museum wall after all these centuries of it not happening, is a political statement in itself. But there’s other things underneath the surface, and on the surface, and around all of that, that are far more important than just this one narrative — it’s about the way that we see ourselves, and the way that people see us. These figures in a museum express to the viewer that “This is what you should value.” Because museums and institutions show us what’s valuable, and what we should value.

Seeing Black figures, especially in museum spaces, allows the opportunity to communicate that, in a way, and hopefully transform people and the way that that they see us. It takes me back to a story, that was published about a group of young Black scholars that were on a field trip, I believe, to the Boston Museum of Fine Art. And they were made to feel like they didn’t belong there. And I always imagined that, “What if my work had been in that space, like one of my big paintings?” When I think about these big paintings that I make, I’m really thinking about them confronting people in the museum. What if one of those pieces was there? Then they would have felt they had ownership in this space, and maybe those people wouldn’t have looked at them like they didn’t belong there.

I think it’s extremely important. But then there’s also a part of me who wants to get to that place, where we have the choice. Like, if I’m going to a television show, they’re going to put “activist” as my lower third, but I don’t even identify as an activist. Yes, I help people. Yes, I show love. Yes, I participate in all of these things. But maybe I just want to pull up as a public intellectual. Maybe I just want to pull up as a teacher. Maybe we’re a hundred years of history away from that.

I feel the same way. I’ve been called an activist before. I’m not exactly comfortable with that label either.

Do you think it’s getting easier for Black artists?

I don’t know. In some ways, yes, and in some ways, no. I oftentimes question people’s intentions when it comes to acquiring Black art now, and hoping that they’re buying for the right reasons, and not because we’re being seen as a trend right now. I think we make really great work, and I think we’re really making work that really speaks to the moment. We’re making what people need to see right now in our work, so we’re really rising quickly, and gaining a lot of attention, but I want to make sure that we’re still in the conversation 10, 15, 20 years from now.

This is bigger than just a moment. This is the culmination of a lot of hard work for all of us, and debt from master’s degrees, and really putting forth an effort to make something that’s empirical happen. The rush to find Black artists . . .  I feel there’s some galleries that don’t even know where to start. They’re calling every Black curator. Poor Thelma Golden is probably receiving all the phone calls, “What should we do? How can we diversify?” You have to do the homework. Don’t just ask me who you need to show. You should be doing the homework. And I think time will tell with it. This is a conversation that’s running through my head for the past five years, and six years, and just watching, tapping, and being in the moment, and not quite being able to see it, because you are in the moment. I think it’s one of those things that we’ll look back at, and have a greater understanding of. But I know that, my contemporaries, that we deserve to be here.

Absolutely.

And it’s not because we’re Black. It’s because we’re smart and we make some amazing work.

If you could just get all of the institutions, and the critics and the curators in a room, who have an interest in doing that work, what would you say to them?

This is a two-part answer. I was on the board for the Baltimore Museum for a couple of years, and I think that Christopher Bedford’s approach was a really smart approach. He took the time to look at what was in that collection, so that they could begin to acquire the work of women artists, and Black artists. But he also thought about the audience. When you start to appreciate art, or poetry or writing, or anything, you need an introduction to it, in a sense. Christopher’s idea was to exhibit figurative art for one or two years, and then, slowly move that into abstraction, and different things that are highly conceptual, that your average viewer, when they come to a museum, they feel alienated by it because they don’t understand it. So I think, one, it’s educating the viewer.

And then two, it’s like, make your walls look the city that that museum and ask them what they want. I think it’s really about listening, at this point, and not just being reactionary and doing. And I thought that the way that he proceeded with that was really brilliant.

Let’s talk about the next steps, for Black artists, and Black art collectors. In the film, it mentions how Alicia Keys and Swizz Beatz, and Beyoncé and Jay-Z have these great Black art collections. As a Black person who wants to be a collector, what types of things should we be doing?

I have so much respect for Alicia, for Swizz, for Jay-Z, Beyoncé, because people look at what they do. It’s a big deal for them to introduce that to all the millions of followers that they have, to introduce any kind of art, Basquiat, whatever it is. What I always tell people when they say they want to start collecting is, to visit different graduate programs. Artists come out of these Master’s programs. You’re able to have conversations with real artists, and you can purchase from these young artists, and they may acquire some of their pieces early on.

I have a lot of people that bought my work early on when it was $3,000. It’s gotten a return on their investment that they probably never expected. I respect and like that. They believed in me, and loved the work enough to buy it, not because they thought they were going to get a return on their investment because they really appreciated what I was doing, and what my vision was. But I think that’s a really good way to get into collecting, to start that way, because it can be intimidating.

Once you reach a certain level, as a Black collector, I think a lot of times you get turned away, unless you have that resume that’s like, “I’m on the board for this museum, and I already have these pieces from this artist.” And if you’re not able to spit those things out, then it’s almost like, you don’t qualify. I speak to my gallery all the time about making sure that we prioritize Black collectors because it’s really important who’s sitting at that table. We have to do that by making sure that they’re part of the full conversation, and the only way that that can happen is if we speak up, as Black artists and galleries, and some of them are institutions in themselves.

Speaking of gatherings, you have a new show in LA. Could you tell us a little bit about that?

I am opening a show. It’s a five-painting show. It’s the smallest show I’ve done, but it’s three of the largest paintings I’ve ever done, so I’m really excited about it. I named it The Great American Fact. I came across the readings of Anna Julia Cooper, she was a Black female educator from the 1800s. That title really resonated with me because I feel like it just speaks to this moment of, “We’re here, and we’ve been here, and you can’t do anything about it.” So I’m just really excited. It’s my first LA show, and I’m excited to get out there, and hopefully, people in LA will start wearing their masks.

“Black Art: In the Absence of Light” is currently streaming on HBO Max.

Meghan McCain gets schooled by White House press secretary Jen Psaki on “The View”

White House press secretary Jen Psaki joined ABC’s “The View” on Thursday for a virtual round table discussion. When co-host Meghan McCain broached the topic of immigration, accusing Biden’s administration of hypocrisy, Psaki politely set her straight. 

According to McCain, both Joe Biden and Kamala Harris aggressively spoke out against “kids in cages” while campaigning for the White House and are now hypocritically doing much of the same by opening a new Health and Human Services facility. Psaki begged to differ.

“I feel like this is the same thing and that you’re still detaining kids at the border and it’s not meaningfully different from what President Trump was doing,” said McCain. 

“Well, absolutely not the same thing, Meghan,” Psaki shot back. “We are not ripping children from the arms of their parents. That is horrible and immoral and something we saw in the last administration.”

The Biden administration was forced to reopen a HHS facility because many children were still separated from their guardians. NBC News reported that when Trump left office, there were 611 children in captivity whose parents were yet to be found. On Wednesday, that number was down to 506 children. Although there are many reunions still to come, the 105 child difference is notable. 

Psaki defended the new facilities by saying they are the necessary next step in helping reunite children with their families while keeping them safe from COVID-19 and well taken care of overall. 

“What we’re seeing is, kids are fleeing prosecution,” said Psaki. “They’re fleeing really difficult circumstances in their home country and they’re coming to the border and we have to figure out how to treat them humanely and keep them safe. And in the time of covid, that means we needed to open an additional facility so that we could have educational services, so we could have legal services, so we could have medical and health services, and have those kids there treated humanely until we can find proper homes, family placements for these kids.”

“I just wanted to know are you or are you not detaining children separately and in a different facility?” asked McCain, echoing the combative tone of former Trump adviser Stephen Miller on Fox News Wednesday. 

Psaki explained that the new facility was “revamped” in order to ensure optimum safety and well being for the remaining children. “We can’t send them directly to families that haven’t been vetted,” she said. “We’ve seen issues with that in the past. We can’t have them all in the former HHS facility because of COVID, and we need to make sure there are safety protocols so they’re not in beds next to each other.”

McCain called the new facility a “potato, patahto” hypocrisy, claiming that Rep. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y, is also adamantly against the facilities. Psaki explained that kids are no longer being separated from their families, reassuring her that was only happening during the Trump administration.   

“Our objective is to get these kids into safe homes with their families as quickly as possible,” said Psaki. “And we are absolutely not doing what the former president did, and what frankly the current president and the current vice president objected to, which is ripping kids from the arms of their parents. That is not the policy of this administration and not something we would do.” 

In Jewish horror film “The Vigil,” a mythological demon manifests the trauma of antisemitism

Jewish-themed horror movies are not unknown, but they are relatively rare. Certainly they are less common than those which rely on Catholic mythology or other forms of Christian folklore. One has to wonder if this is because filmmakers fear audiences are anti-Semitic: Jews in entertainment have long felt pressured to change their names so they sound less “ethnic” and, therefore, it stands to reason that producers may believe people won’t like genre pictures that focus on Jewish culture. (The same principle would not apply to dramas about issues like the Holocaust, which are intended for an “artsy” crowd, but rather for those intended to be mass entertainment.)

I don’t know this for sure, but it is a niggling suspicion I’ve harbored for some time. Fortunately, the rich ore of Jewish mythology has not gone completely neglected among horror filmmakers, which is a good thing because frankly there are a lot of terrifying entities in Judaic folklore. In recent films you have had malevolent ghosts called dybbuks, as seen in the David S. Goyer/Michael Bay film “The Unborn” (2009) and Ole Bornedal/Sam Raimi film “The Possession” (2012), and monsters made of mud or clay that come to life known as golems, most prominently featured in the Israeli movie “The Golem” (2018).

Now we have a mazzik, the supernatural baddie featured in “The Vigil.” Written and directed by Keith Thomas in his directorial debut, “The Vigil” focuses on an invisible demon that Jewish mythology teaches will torment people in big ways and small during their day-to-day lives. It also incorporates a second feature of Jewish culture: The practice of shemira, or a religious ritual of making sure that someone watches the body of a recently deceased person from their time of death until they are buried.

Using these two elements, “The Vigil” is a straightforward tale: A lapsed Hasidic Jew named Yakov Ronen (Dave Davis) is asked by his friend Reb Shulem (Menashe Lustig) to be shomer (someone who performs shemira) over the body of a Holocaust survivor who died in Brooklyn’s Hasidic Borough Park neighborhood, even though he is warned away by the deceased’s widow Mrs. Litvak (Lynn Cohen). Before long, a mazzik begins to psychologically and physically torment him, actions that take up the bulk of the film’s running time.

As a horror movie “The Vigil” falls qualitatively below a masterpiece like “Midsommar” but better than dreck like the “Pet Sematary” remake. There are a lot of nice touches here that make it intrinsically interesting. One is that the characters often speak in Yiddish, a language that was nearly extinguished during the Holocaust but is spoken in an increasing number of Hasidic Jewish communities. Another is the matter-of-fact way in which Jewish culture is explained to the audience; when Yakov says he is going to sit shomer, for instance, this is viewed simply as an ordinary reality rather than trumped up to be something ominous, demystifying it in a satisfying way. Thomas also wisely decides to rely on building tension and suspense for his scares rather than piling on the gore, which works well with this kind of psychological material. 

That last point — that “The Vigil” aims to be psychological horror — deserves more unpacking because it is perhaps the most intriguing part of the film. In “The Vigil,” the mazzik is an allegory for the trauma that Jews can bear after being victimized by anti-Semitism. This includes the horrors witnessed by acts of brutality and bullying, of course, but it is not limited to them. When facing discrimination, people often expose the weaknesses in their own characters — their willingness to do wrong to others, or their cowardice — and feel plagued with shame and guilt afterward. These emotions can literally torment their victims for years after the traumatic episodes have occurred and that is where “The Vigil” is particularly clever: In Thomas’ story, the mazzik feeds off of that psychic pain to select its victims. It is an adroit way of allowing the supernatural theme to become a character study without seeming forced or heavy-handed.

“The Vigil” is not without its flaws, however. There are too many jump scares, and because the audience can see them coming from a mile away, they feel like padding rather than earned moments of fright. While Cohen does a great job as the creepy-but-sympathetic Mrs. Litvak, her character falls into another horror cliché: The side character who knows that the main character (or characters) is about to face a terrible evil, but only speaks in mysterious riddles rather than being direct. (I’m not saying I’d automatically believe someone if they told me that performing shomer for a specific body would mean that the demon that tortured him for 50 years would go after me, but the information would at least give me pause.) Then there is the problem with the film’s climax. Though emotionally satisfying, it feels a bit rushed, and is one of those occasions where a denouement works on paper but the execution falls a little bit flat. It could have been fleshed out a bit more.

These aren’t minor quibbles, but they also aren’t reasons to stay away from “The Vigil.” It is smart enough, scary enough and unique enough to be worth a watch both for horror fans and for people who want to see more Jewish culture represented on the screen. Thomas is obviously a talented director and, for an initial outing, this is a good start. Hopefully it will perform well enough to convince other horror filmmakers that Jewish mythology, like that of Catholics and other religious groups, can be used to make compelling cinema.

“The Vigil” is available in select theaters, digital platforms, and VOD on Friday, Feb. 26.

DeSantis touts lack of vaccine plan as study finds more than 95,000 Floridians may die without one

At a news conference on Wednesday, Florida’s Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis defended Florida’s failure to publish an official vaccine distribution plan, making it the only state with such an oversight according to an analysis by the Kaiser Family Foundation

“If you notice, a lot of [states] adopted plans, and then they’ve already had to change the plans,” DeSantis said. “We haven’t done that.”

He echoed that defense on Thursday: “I would point out, people say, ‘Oh, well these other states have all these plans of when they’re going to do it.’ A lot of those plans haven’t worked out,” the governor said. “I mean, they’ve had to change their criteria from the beginning. They had plans in December, had to shift, most of them have shifted to doing what Florida is doing and so we’re gonna continue with seniors first.”

While Florida is one of only two states to have first prioritized all persons over the age of 65, regardless of health or occupational concerns, it has not yet announced when other demographic groups will become eligible for a vaccine. Although the state is currently approaching two million seniors vaccinated, its plan has left out healthcare workers and younger residents with underlying medical conditions who may be more vulnerable.   

DeSantis initially suggested that workers in education and law enforcement would be the next to receive a vaccine dose. “We’ll start with probably 50 and up,” he hinted on Tuesday. But during Wednesday’s presser, DeSantis withheld any official plans for the vaccine rollout, emphasizing the need for an open-ended approach. The same day, data science firm Cogitativo released a report that found Florida’s lack of a future distribution plan might leave the Sunshine State vulnerable to “complete chaos.”

Even using the CDC’s Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), which measures the relative vulnerability between populations in order to assess which ones should be prioritized for vaccines, Cogitativo argues, Florida will suffer excess deaths as a result of COVID because the SVI “does not account for social determinants of health such as air quality or access to fresh food,” as the report notes. “To simulate vaccine allocation, we assumed an initial distribution of 100 million doses for the entire US with two doses per person for a total of 50 million possibly vaccinated persons.”

According to Cogitativo’s projections, Florida’s current distribution trajectory would leave 48% of Florida counties in a vaccine deficit, with the top five counties being Palm Beach, Broward, Orange, Hillsborough, Miami-Dade. Florida would have a “combined shortage” of 694,990 vaccine doses. Cogitativo’s study found that if Florida implemented a plan with “clinical data provides a clear view of the prevalence of health conditions — such as obesity, diabetes and hypertension — that are major risk factors for negative outcomes with the virus” it could save nearly 100,000 lives and avoid 840,760 hospitalizations. 

How to make a Gold Rush, a bourbon cocktail that’s reminiscent of the classics

The Mandela Effect is an unsettling collective phenomenon: A number of people certain they remember a thing or an event differently than how it actually happened. (Think: believing with absolute conviction in a childhood spent reading about the adventures of the Berenstein — rather than the Berenstain — Bears.) Are these false memories, or evidence of permeable parallel universes? Little cognitive earthquakes such as these can shake our belief in objective reality.

But sometimes, we mistake recognition of likeness for recall of existence. Something reminds us so strongly of a thing that has always been around that we believe it must be of a certain vintage. (Not retro, to be clear, which suggests a self-consciousness about presentation; a replica, cheap or not.) Reminiscent, perhaps, comes closest to describing it.

Where a Mandela Effect is destabilizing, this kind of memory-that-isn’t is more grounding once it’s understood: This newer thing isn’t old, but it feels like it could be. I find this understanding particularly useful to draw upon in times when change is called for. An incremental change — a new technique or approach, for instance — that is reminiscent of prior successes has the potential to dramatically alter your reality for the better while still offering the stability of the familiar.

RELATED: How to make a Sazerac, a New Orleans cocktail with a sweet and spicy bite

Maybe you’re ready to make changes, but a major overhaul feels daunting, and you’re not sure where to start. Look to the Gold Rush for inspiration. 

The first time I sipped a Gold Rush, I assumed I had ordered a classic cocktail. The name certainly evokes a bygone era, equal parts rugged and glamorous, right? The ingredients are simple building blocks; nothing fancy on their own but together they make an indulgent, soothing, familiar drink. At home, flipping through vintage cocktail recipes, I came up empty-handed. That’s because the Gold Rush is a thoroughly 21st century creation, invented in the early Aughts by T.J. Siegal at New York’s Milk & Honey, and from there, its popularity spread. 

I don’t think there’s a Mandela Effect at play here, though I assume I’m not alone in believing this drink had been in the world for longer than it has. It’s simply reminiscent of the classics, in the best way. The Gold Rush is like a whiskey sour, but its sweetness is more sophisticated; it’s like a Bee’s Knee, with cozy bourbon instead of bracing gin. Thanks to its basic, foolproof recipe, it invites play. Try bourbons of different strength and mash bill to see which you prefer. Use a local artisanal honey or the squeezey plastic bear. Small innovations, as this cocktail proves, can yield meaningful results. 

Ingredients:

Serving size: one beverage

  • 2 oz. bourbon (I like Old Forester in this drink.) 
  • 1 oz. honey syrup (Add 1/2 cup boiling water to 1/2 cup of honey, shake until dissolved, cool.)
  • 3/4 oz. fresh lemon juice
  • One large ice cube or sphere 
  • Ice for shaking

Gear:

You don’t need any specialty equipment to mix a simple cocktail. Improvise with what you have. But here’s what I keep at hand:

Instructions:

Shake the bourbon, lemon juice and honey syrup with ice until chilled. Strain into rocks glass over large ice cube and serve. 

Variations:

Honey and lemon pair delightfully with Calvados, if you want to swap out the bourbon for a French apple brandy. Or make your spirit gin for a Bee’s Knee (serve in a cocktail glass). You can use the honey syrup in any number of cocktails to deepen the flavor — try it in a classic daiquiri, too.

More Oracle Pour:

Salon Food writes about stuff we think you’ll like. Salon has affiliate partnerships, so we may get a share of the revenue from your purchase.

“Crisis” boasts big names – Gary Oldman, Evangeline Lilly, even Armie Hammer! – and fails them all

“Crisis” is a woefully bad, inspired-by-true-events drama about the opioid epidemic.   

Nicholas Jarecki (“Arbitrage“) who wrote, directed, produced, and also appears in a supporting role, does none of these things well. Especially all of them.

His film follows three storylines — each involving an ethical conflict — but viewers will laugh inappropriately, hurt themselves suspending disbelief, and see every plot twist coming. It is hard to imagine a more unexciting crime film, or a drama so determinedly unsubtle. Arguably, the sole moment of originality has a character put a magazine into a gun the wrong way at first and then, realizing their mistake, fixes it.

“Crisis” may have worked if it had been reformatted as a miniseries, like the original 1989 BBC version of “Traffik” (remade as a feature film by Steven Soderbergh). But instead Jarecki shoehorns too much — and little of it good — into three plotlines that stretch across 118 interminable minutes. 

Jake Kelly (Armie Hammer) is a federal agent who is trying to entrap Mother (Guy Nadon) who runs an opioid pill mill and drug trafficking operation between the U.S. and Canada. He is also trying to snare a pair of Armenian power gangsters he has been working with while undercover. His commitment to this risky mission may stem from the sad fact that his sister Emmie (Lily-Rose Depp) is an addict. 

Jake’s story dovetails with Claire Reimann (Evangeline Lilly), an addict in recovery whose world spirals out of control when her teenage son David (Billy Bryk) dies of an overdose. Or does he? The cops fail to notice the bruise on his skull or the fact that his lungs are clear. Claire takes it upon herself to investigate how David was involved in a drug smuggling operation. But as mad as she is — and she is mad as hell — Claire does not even take the police to task for their sloppy forensics. 

The third story, which is tangentially related, concerns Dr. Tyrone Brower (Gary Oldman, who executive produced), a tenured university professor whose lab results indicate that a new (fictional) opioid product called Klaralon, meant to reduce dependence actually results in death. (Cages of stiff lab mice prove this). As the product is about to go on the market, Brower risks losing funding and jeopardizing the university’s reputation by blowing the whistle.

Each story, which features personal and political issues, is important, but none of them are well told. Jarecki clumsily lumbers from one meh scene to the next, never generating anything other than tedium. Jake glowers in his meetings with Mother when a list of informants that might botch his plan, is introduced. Episodes of Claire packing heat and tracking down the chain of individuals who set up her dead son strain credibility. And Brower’s meeting with FDA agent Ben Walker (Kid Cudi) take place on a park bench in broad daylight. “Crisis” always goes for the cliché. 

The characters face moral issues but fail to express the difficulty of their predicaments. Jake’s frustration having to track down Emmie after she releases herself from rehab seem to be more about her interrupting his mission than actual concerns about her addiction. Likewise, Claire’s revenge scheme may be completely facile, but worse is the Big Dramatic Moment where Claire opens a bottle of painkillers and . . . decides not to take them. 

But the film’s worst offender is the Brower plotline, which involves him being involved in a sexual harassment claim, and tangling with his Dean (Greg Kinnear, sleazy yet again) about money and ethics, while also trying to assure his much younger pregnant wife Madira (Indira Varma) that everything is going to be OK. This storyline has Brower standing up for the Capital-T Truth(!), and its preachiness is both painful and unmoving. 

“Crisis” is rarely convincing, which is one of its many problems. The film is glossy where it should be gritty. Scenes in drug dens look set-decorated, not authentic. The film’s cynical tone is hollow, and meaningless. An anti-drug PSA is more persuasive. Jake, Claire, and Brower are all meant to be heroes fighting against the evil opioid crisis, but it is difficult to invest in the three single-minded characters. They are noble robots, not complex or flawed human beings. 

The ensemble cast cannot elevate the subpar material. Armie Hammer — in what may be one of his last screen roles if his career implodes — basically scowls through the entire film. Jarecki must have encouraged his intensity-on-overdrive acting, because it is all he does. He is as stiff as the aforementioned dead lab mice. Evangeline Lilly is simply miscast. Her speech in a Narcotics Anonymous meeting is as risible as her confrontation with a supermarket checkout clerk regarding her missing son’s whereabouts. She never earns the empathy her character should engender. When Claire holds that handful of opioids, one might want her to ingest them rather than throw them out. 

Gary Oldman tries to inject Brower with some brio, but he cannot save this turkey. When Brower rejects an offer by Big Pharma, personified by Bill Simmons (Luke Evans in oily mode) and Meg Holmes (Veronica Ferres), viewers are expected to cheer, not yawn. The enervating film makes it hard to muster up the energy to do either. Moreover, one can’t help but admire the irony of the Oscar-winner — who brilliantly played Sid Vicious decades ago — making an anti-drug film. Was “Crisis” some form of penance? 

Jarecki’s film is a complete misfire from start to finish. It is meant to be hard-hitting, but it is completely soft-headed.

“Crisis” opens in select theaters Feb. 26 and is available on digital and on demand March 5.

It’s time to get back to normal? Not according to science.

A popular Facebook and blog post by conservative radio host Buck Sexton claims scientific research indicates life should return to normal now despite the persistence of the COVID-19 pandemic.

“Here’s what the science tells anyone who is being honest about it: open the schools, stop wearing masks outside, and everyone at low risk should start living normal lives. Not next fall, or next year — now,” reads the blog post, posted to Facebook on Feb. 8.

The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about PolitiFact’s partnership with Facebook.)

KHN-PolitiFact messaged Sexton via his Facebook page to ask if he could provide evidence to back up the statement but got no response.

So we reviewed the scientific evidence and talked to public health experts about Sexton’s post. Overall, they disagreed, noting the ways in which it runs counter to current public health strategies.

Let’s take it point by point.

Opening the schools”

In March, when government and public health leaders realized the novel coronavirus was spreading throughout the U.S., many public institutions — including schools — were ordered to shut down to prevent further spread. Many students finished the 2020 spring semester remotely. Some jurisdictions did choose to reopen schools in fall 2020 and spring 2021, though others have remained remote.

Throughout the pandemic, researchers have studied whether in-person learning at schools contributes significantly to the spread of covid. The findings have shown that if K-12 schools adhere to mitigation measures — masking, physical distancing and frequent hand-washing — are adhered to, then there is a relatively low risk of transmission.

And getting kids back into the classroom is a high priority for the Biden administration.

n a Feb. 3 White House press briefing, Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said data suggests “schools can safely reopen.” The CDC on Feb. 12 released guidance on how schools should approach reopening. It recommends the standard risk-mitigation measures, as well as universal masking, contact tracing, creating student learning cohorts or pods, conducting testing and monitoring community transmission of the virus.

Susan Hassig, associate professor of epidemiology at Tulane University, said science shows that schools can open safely if “mitigation measures are implemented and maintained in the school space.”

Here’s some of the latest research that tracks with these positions:

  • Only seven covid cases out of 191 were traced to in-school spread in 17 rural K-12 Wisconsin schools that had high mask-wearing compliance and were monitored over the 2020 fall semester.
  • Mississippi researchers found most covid cases in children and teenagers were associated with gatherings outside of households and a lack of consistent mask use in schools, but not associated with merely attending school or child care.
  • Thirty-two cases were associated with attending school out of 100,000 students and staff members in 11 North Carolina schools, where students were required to wear masks, practice physical distancing and wash hands frequently.

Of course, there are some limitations to these studies, which often rely on contact tracing, a process that can’t always pinpoint where cases originate. Some of the studies also rely on self-reporting of mask-wearing by individuals, which could be inaccurate.

Additionally, Hassig pointed out that not all school districts have the resources, such as physical space, personnel or high-quality masks, to open safely.

Sexton’s assertion that schools can reopen leaves out a key piece of information: that safe reopening is highly dependent upon use of mitigation measures that have been shown to tamp down on virus spread.

“Stop wearing masks outside”

Because the coronavirus that causes covid is relatively new, the research on outdoor mask use is limited. But so far science has shown that masks prevent virus transmission.

The CDC study published Feb. 10 reported that a medical procedure mask (commonly known as a surgical mask) blocked 56.1% of simulated cough particles. A cloth mask blocked 51.4% of cough particles. And the effectiveness went up to 85.4% if a cloth mask was worn over a surgical mask.

Another experiment from the study showed that a person in a mask emits fewer aerosol particles that can be passed on to an unmasked person. And if both are masked, then aerosol exposure to both is reduced by more than 95%. A multitude of reports also show more generally that mask-wearing is effective at reducing the risk of spreading or catching other respiratory diseases.

Sexton’s post, however, advised that people should stop wearing masks outside. To be sure, public health experts agree the risk of transmitting covid is lower outdoors than indoors. But the experts also said that doesn’t mean people should stop wearing masks.

“The wind might help you a bit outside, but you are still at risk of breathing in this virus from people around you,” said Dr. Rachel Vreeman, director of the Arnhold Institute for Global Health at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai.

Being outside is “not a guarantee of safety,” reiterated Stephen Morse, an epidemiology professor at Columbia University Medical Center. “Especially when those people without masks are close together.”

The CDC addressed the issue of whether masks are needed outside in the agency’s mask guidelines: “Masks may not be necessary when you are outside by yourself away from others, or with other people who live in your household. However, some areas may have mask mandates while out in public, so please check for the rules in your local area.”

Overall, the prevailing scientific opinion is that, while it may be OK to go maskless outside if you are physically distant from others, mask-wearing is still recommended if you are around others.

“Everyone at low risk should start living normal lives”

All the public health experts we consulted agreed this part of the claim is absolutely false. It flies in the face of what scientists recommend should be done to get through the pandemic.

While it’s unclear what exactly the post means by “low-risk” people, let’s assume it’s referring to younger people or those without health conditions that make them more vulnerable to covid. And that “living normal lives” refers to no longer wearing masks, physical distancing or washing hands with increased frequency.

News reports and scientific evidence show that bars, parties and other large gatherings can quickly become spreader events. Moreover, even young people and those without preexisting health conditions have gotten severely ill with covid or died of it.

Even if a low-risk person doesn’t get severely sick, they could still infect others in higher-risk groups.

The sentiment of this post is similar to calls early in the pandemic to let life return to normal in an attempt to achieve herd immunity. But, on the way to achieving that goal, many would die, said Josh Michaud, associate director for global health policy at KFF.

“Everyone going back to ‘normal’ right now, especially in the presence of more transmissible and more deadly variants, would be a recipe for further public health disasters on top of what we’ve already experienced,” he added.

Already almost half a million Americans have died of covid.

The push to “return to normal” is precisely what let the new variants form and multiply, said Vreeman. “If we can ramp up getting people vaccinated and keep wearing masks in the meantime, only then will we have a chance at getting back to ‘normal.'”

Indeed, because of the new variants circulating in the U.S., Walensky and Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, have urged Americans not to relax their efforts to control the virus’s spread.

Our ruling

A blog post by conservative talk show host Buck Sexton claims scientific evidence shows that right now we should “open the schools, stop wearing masks outside, and everyone at low risk should start living normal lives.”

Scientific research shows that in order for schools to reopen safely, risk mitigation measures must be put in place, such as requiring masks, rigorous hand-washing and limiting the number of students in classrooms. These changes, though, would not represent a return to normal, but a new normal for students and teachers.

The remainder of Sexton’s statement strays further from current science. Research indicates that you’re safer outdoors than indoors, but public health experts still recommend wearing masks in public, even outside. Science does not support the idea that the time is right for some people to resume life as normal. That would allow the virus to continue to spread and have a large human cost in hospitalizations and deaths, said the experts.

Sexton’s post is inaccurate. We rate it False.

Source List:

ABC News, “‘Wrecked Our Lives’: Families of 3 Young Adults Who Died From COVID-19 Share Heartbreaking Stories,” Nov. 19, 2020

American Academy of Pediatrics News, Study: In-School Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 Rare in Schools Implementing Safety Measures, Jan. 8, 2021

Buck Sexton website, “Get Ready to Fight ‘Forever Covid,'” Feb. 8, 2021

BMJ Global Health, Reduction of Secondary Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in Households by Face Mask Use, Disinfection and Social Distancing: A Cohort Study in Beijing, China, 2020

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Operational Strategy for K-12 Schools through Phased Mitigation, Feb. 12, 2021

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Guidance for Wearing Masks, updated Feb. 11, 2021

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Maximizing Fit for Cloth and Medical Procedure Masks to Improve Performance and Reduce SARS-CoV-2 Transmission and Exposure, 2021, Feb. 10, 2021

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, SARS-CoV-2 Transmission Associated With High School Wrestling Tournaments — Florida, December 2020-January 2021, Jan. 29, 2021

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, COVID-19 Cases and Transmission in 17 K-12 Schools — Wood County, Wisconsin, August 31-November 29, 2020, Jan. 29, 2021

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Trends in Outbreak-Associated Cases of COVID-19 — Wisconsin, March-November 2020, Jan. 29, 2021

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Factors Associated With Positive SARS-CoV-2 Test Results in Outpatient Health Facilities and Emergency Departments Among Children and Adolescents Aged <18 Years — Mississippi, September-November 2020, Dec. 18, 2020

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Scientific Brief: Community Use of Cloth Masks to Control the Spread of SARS-CoV-2, Nov. 20, 2020

Chalkbeat, “Do Schools Spread COVID? It May Depend on How Bad Things Already Are Around Them,” Jan. 4, 2021

The Conversation, “Being Outdoors Doesn’t Mean You’re Safe From COVID-19 — A White House Event Showed What Not to Do,” Oct. 8, 2020

Email interview with Susan Hassig, associate professor of epidemiology at Tulane University, Feb. 10, 2021

Email interview with Josh Michaud, associate director for global health policy at Kaiser Family Foundation, Feb. 10, 2021

Email interview with Dr. Rachel Vreeman, director of the Arnhold Institute for Global Health, Feb. 10, 2021

Email interview with Stephen Morse, professor of epidemiology at Columbia University Medical Center, Feb. 10, 2021

Johns Hopkins University Medical Center, Coronavirus and COVID-19: Younger Adults Are at Risk, Too, updated Dec. 2, 2020

Kaiser Health News/PolitiFact, “Social Media Image About Mask Efficacy Right in Sentiment, but Percentages Are ‘Bonkers,'” July 6, 2020

medRxiv, Closed Environments Facilitate Secondary Transmission of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), April 16, 2020

Pediatrics, Incidence and Secondary Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 Infections in Schools, January 2021

PNAS, An Evidence Review of Face Masks Against COVID-19, Jan. 26, 2021

The New York Times, “How Safe Are Outdoor Gatherings?” July 3, 2020

The Washington Post, “CDC Finds Scant Spread of Coronavirus in Schools With Precautions in Place,” Jan. 26, 2021

The White House, Press Briefing by White House COVID-19 Response Team and Public Health Officials, Feb. 3, 2021

Kaiser Health News (KHN) is a national health policy news service. It is an editorially independent program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation which is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.

This story was produced in partnership with PolitiFact.

“Classic Andrew Cuomo”: Bill de Blasio piles on following latest allegations against NY governor

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio recently made clear he’s not all surprised that Gov. Andrew Cuomo is publicly lashing out at—and reportedly threatening to “destroy”—state Assemblyman Ron Kim, one of the few Democratic lawmakers who has been willing to criticize the powerful governor over his disastrous handling of nursing homes during the coronavirus pandemic.

“It’s a sad thing to say… but that’s classic Andrew Cuomo,” de Blasio said in an appearance on MSNBC last week. “A lot of people in New York state have received those phone calls. The bullying is nothing new. I believe Ron Kim, and it’s very very sad. No public servant, not person who’s telling the truth should be treated that way.”

“The threats, the belittling, the demand that someone change their statement right that moment—many, many times I’ve heard that, and I know a lot of other people in this state have heard that,” de Blasio continued.

Watch:

The mayor’s comments came after Cuomo held a press conference last week during which he accused Kim, a Queens representative, of running an unethical and potentially illegal “pay to pay” scheme involving local nail salon owners.

In a statement following Cuomo’s public attack, Kim said the governor is attempting to “smear” him to “distract us from his fatally incompetent management.”

“But these facts are not going away because they are the facts—unacceptable facts that hold him accountable,” Kim added.

The origin of the intensifying public spat between Cuomo and Kim dates back to March of last year, when the New York state health department issued an advisory requiring nursing homes to accept still-recovering Covid-19 patients, despite the risk that they could spread the virus to other vulnerable people in the facilities. While Cuomo effectively rescinded the directive in May amid widespread backlash, critics said the order had deadly consequences for nursing home residents, as Common Dreams reported at the time.

In July, Kim demanded the creation of an independent, bipartisan panel to investigate the Cuomo administration’s handling of nursing homes during the coronavirus crisis. The assemblyman also called on the governor to be fully transparent about the coronavirus death toll at New York’s nursing homes, which he and other lawmakers believed was being significantly undercounted by the state government.

That suspicion was vindicated last week when Melissa DeRosa, a top Cuomo aide, admitted that the state government intentionally withheld information on the nursing home death count—which is now estimated to be around 15,000—out of fear that the staggering figure would be “used against us” by the Trump Justice Department. Earlier state reports of the death toll didn’t include the thousands of nursing home residents who ultimately died at hospitals.

Cuomo rejected allegations of a cover-up, saying after DeRosa’s comments were reported that there was simply “a delay in providing the press and the public all that additional information.”

“Everyone was busy,” the governor said. “We’re in the midst of managing a pandemic.”

Federal prosecutors with the U.S. attorney’s office for the Eastern District of New York are now investigating the Cuomo administration’s handling of Covid-19 at nursing homes, the Wall Street Journal reported.

In response to DeRosa’s admission, Kim told the New York Post last week that it the Cuomo government appeared to be “trying to dodge having any incriminating evidence that might put the administration or the [Health Department] in further trouble with the Department of Justice.”

Kim told the New York Times that hours after his comments to the Post went to press, he received an angry late-night call from Cuomo, who proceeded to yell at Kim for 10 minutes and demand that he walk back his remarks.

“He goes off about how I hadn’t seen his wrath and anger, that he would destroy me and he would go out tomorrow and start telling how bad of a person I am and I would be finished and how he had bit his tongue about me for months,” Kim said. “This was all yelling. It wasn’t a pleasant tone.”

Refusing to back down in the face of Cuomo’s threats, Kim used his statement Wednesday to slam Cuomo for slipping “legal immunity into our state budget bill for hospital executives and for-profit nursing homes at the request of powerful lobbyists like the Greater New York Hospital Association (GNYHA)—a group that donated $1.25 million towards his campaign.”

As The Daily Poster‘s David Sirota pointed out, “GNYHA said it ‘drafted’ the provision, which did not merely shield frontline healthcare workers from lawsuits, but also extended such liability protection to top corporate officials who make staffing and safety decisions.”

“Critics argued that shielding hospital and nursing home executives from the threat of lawsuits would remove a deterrent to cost-cutting, profit-maximizing decisions that endanger lives,” Sirota wrote. “They were ignored.”

Kim went on to note that Cuomo’s administration “was grossly under-reporting nursing home deaths by as much as 50 percent and withholding information about the situation to federal and state officials—a move that benefited the same healthcare donors helping his campaign over the years.”

“As legislators we have a duty to uncover the truth behind the nursing home deaths and the governor’s explanations do not add up,” Kim said. “While he claims he was taking time to answer the Justice Department, we saw him gallivant around on a book tour and victory lap across prime time cable shows. Again, all while his top aide deliberately hid the information in fear of political and legal consequences.”

 

Trump’s failed coup continues: CPAC set to be a celebration of the Capitol insurrection

The Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) kicks off on Thursday, seven weeks and one day after Donald Trump sent a murderous mob to rampage through the Capitol in a final, violence-soaked bid to overturn the presidential election. The annual confab — which has become the central event of the year for Republican politics — not only has no distance from the events of Jan. 6, it is basically shaping up to be a celebration of both the man and the movement that inspired a fascist insurrection. 

It’s not just that Trump is going to be the headline speaker on Sunday, allowing the same man whose mob tried to kill members of Congress and his own vice president to soak in conservative adulation. It’s also that the speaker’s list is heavily populated by other major right-wing figures — including Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri and Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas — who spent the past few months stoking the Big Lie that led to the insurrection. 

Just as critically, the themes of the conference — that Joe Biden “stole” the election and that conservatives are somehow being “canceled” by shadowy liberal forces that secretly control everything — align with the same themes that drove the insurrection and Trump’s defenses of his behavior.

“The conference, organized and sponsored by the American Conservative Union, will even keep alive Trump’s false claims of election fraud with several panels on the topic with names like ‘Other Culprits: Why Judges & Media Refused to Look at the Evidence,’ ‘The Left Pulled the Strings, Covered It Up, and Even Admits It’ and ‘Failed States (PA, GA, NV, oh my!),'” NPR reports. “One panel will discuss whether tech companies are ‘colluding to deprive us of our humanity.’ One speech will explore what to do when a social media network ‘de-platforms’ a conservative by deleting his account,” David Weigel of the Washington Post reports. Even the theme of the conference is “America Uncancelled.” 


Want more Amanda Marcotte on politics? Subscribe to her newsletter Standing Room Only.


Unsurprisingly, these two major themes — fake “concerns” about election “fraud” and conservatives feeling entitled to platforms provided by private companies — dovetail with the twin obsessions of Trump, who believes that he is owed both the White House and a Twitter account to spread lies and encourage violence. 

Matt Schlapp, the chairman of the American Conservative Union who hosts CPAC, has been playing rhetorical games with the press, coming just short of saying the election was stolen and the insurrection was justified by citing the “beliefs” of Republican voters to justify spreading the very lies that led to the violent insurrection. 

“Right now, half the country” is angry about “the media coverage of the election,” Schlapp told Weigel, saying CPAC will “cover the facts that most people in the media canceled.”

By “facts,” of course, he means the lies that Trump hyped and continues to hype which the media “canceled” on the grounds that they are not true. CPAC’s lineup shows how central the whining about “cancel culture” is to justify the insurrection. It’s difficult to defend lying to the public to stoke a violent insurrection on its own terms. So conservatives are using bank shot arguments to defend the violence and lies by saying any effort to counteract them — such as taking down Trump’s Twitter account because he keeps inciting violence — is somehow an assault on “free speech.” 

This is also the circular logic being embraced across the GOP, starting with Hawley’s claim that he was justified in challenging Pennsylvania’s election results because “many citizens in Missouri have deep concerns about election integrity.” Trump and his allies tell lies about the election, Republican voters believe those lies, and Republican leaders use that belief as evidence that the lies need more hyping in order to “represent” views that were instilled by the first round of lies. 

But the widespread nature of the belief that Biden “stole” the election doesn’t make it true, nor does it mean that the mainstream media is obligated to present it as “fact” to avoid accusations of “cancel culture.” This is all a tapdance to rationalize what is really going on, which is that CPAC is being used to normalize, justify, and mainstream Trump’s insurrection within the larger Republican Party. 

That the conservative movement and therefore the Republican party would eventually rally to Trump’s side and embrace a defensive stance towards his insurrection was likely inevitable. Initially, a number of GOP congressional members were rattled by having a howling mob banging through the Capitol, demanding their heads. But the gravitational pull of excusing any and everything Trump does, no matter how illegal or evil, has too much power. The writing was also on the wall once Fox News started to lean heavily towards insurrectionist defense. As Media Matters has documented, Tucker Carlson in particular has been aggressive about defending the honor of the people who responded to Trump’s incitement by violently shutting down the electoral college certification (though eventually Congress reconvened and finished). Carlson has also repeatedly conflated the insurrectionists with Trump voters in general, encouraging his viewers to believe that being a Republican means being on the side of those who tried to overthrow the government. 


Want more Amanda Marcotte on politics? Subscribe to her newsletter Standing Room Only.


The results of the propaganda campaign have been heartening for the anti-democratic right.

While most Americans correctly believe that Trump incited the insurrection, the majority of Republican voters — 75% of them, according to a recent poll — continue to support him and want him to play a prominent role in the party going forward. “Republicans are backing Trump not in spite of the insurrection but because of it,” David Graham of The Atlantic writes, noting that the reason they voted for him in the first place is because “they saw him as someone who would actually fight for their vision of American culture, doing whatever it took to win.”

“Trump’s frantic attempt to overturn the election didn’t work, but it was just the sort of furious effort his supporters wanted,” he adds. 

CPAC will be awash in rhetorical games meant to put a palatable spin on this pro-insurrectionist sentiment. Fascists will be painted as victims of “cancel culture.” Efforts to throw out millions of legal votes will be framed as “concerns” about “fraud.” Trump will be given all the time he wants for a self-pitying stemwinder about how he’s the real victim here —  not the Americans he attempted to disenfranchise, nor the Capitol police who died or were injured as a result of his lies, nor the congressional staff traumatized by his mob. And the Republican Party will continue its march away from democracy and towards blatant authoritarianism. 

Confirmed: Trump’s tax returns are now in the hands of Manhattan’s top prosecutor

Former President Trump’s tax returns have been handed over to Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance, Jr. following the Supreme Court’s ruling on Monday that Trump’s legal team could not quash Vance’s subpoena.  

A spokesperson for Vance confirmed to CNBC on Thursday that Trump’s longtime accounting firm, Mazars, has complied with the request, giving Vance access to what sources told CNN are “millions of pages of documents” containing Trump’s financial statements, agreements, tax preparations, and more.

On Monday, Trump’s lawyers called Vance’s probe “a fishing expedition” and accused it of having partisan motives after the Supreme Court ruled that it would not shield the former president from such a criminal probe.

Early reports speculated that Vance might be looking into the alleged hush-money payments made by the former President to women with whom he had alleged extramarital affairs. Recent filings, however, show that Vance might be investigating concerns related to bank and insurance fraud. The documents are expected to contain the true valuations of Trump’s assets, information that many have said Trump falsified in the past. People familiar with the investigation told CNN that Vance’s team intends to review the documents thoroughly before calling any witness to a grand jury to testify against Trump. 

Trump’s non-compliance has brought the case to the Supreme Court twice. Both times, the Court ruled in Vance’s favor.

In the first case, which occurred in July of last year, Chief Justice John Roberts made a point to explain why Trump did not qualify for the legal immunity his team demanded. “In our judicial system, ‘the public has a right to every man’s evidence,'” Roberts opined, “Since the earliest days of the Republic, ‘every man’ has included the President of the United States.”

Trump’s legal team continued to fight the ruling in lower courts on the grounds that Vance’s subpoena was overbroad and issued in bad faith. However, lower courts threw out those claims. When Trump’s lawyers brought the case back to the Supreme Court, the Court stated in a one-line order that it would involve itself again.

Although Vance now has full access to Trump’s tax returns, grand jury secrecy laws prevent the documents from being made public unless Vance were to indict Trump on criminal charges. According to CNN, Vance has also subpoenaed Deutsche Bank, one of Trump’s most loyal creditors, for documents relating to the loans it provided to the President for the past several decades. Multiple sources familiar with the investigation also said that Vance subpoenaed Aon, Trump’s insurance broker, Ladder Capital, which loaned Trump some $100 million, and the Trump Organization, which paid consulting fees to the former President’s daughter, Ivanka Trump.

“Unimaginably cruel”: Greene hangs anti-trans sign outside office of Rep. with transgender daughter

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., drew immediate backlash after escalating a fight over a bill that would extend civil rights protections for the LGBTQ community by taunting a Democrat who has a transgender child with an anti-trans sign outside her office.

Freshman Rep. Marie Newman, D-Ill., said in an emotional speech on the House floor Tuesday that she had a very personal reason to co-sponsor the Equality Act, which would ban discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

“I rise today on behalf of the millions of Americans who continue to be denied housing, education, public services and much, much more because they identify as members of the LGBTQ community,”  said Newman, who last year defeated conservative Democrat Dan Lipinski, D-Ill., an opponent of the Equality Act. “Americans like my own daughter, who years ago bravely came out to her parents as transgender. I knew from that day on, my daughter would be living in a nation where [in] most of its states, she could be discriminated against, merely because of who she is.”

Newman later put up a transgender pride flag outside her door, which is across from Green’s, after Greene tried to block a vote on the bill.

“Our neighbor, @RepMTG, tried to block the Equality Act because she believes prohibiting discrimination against trans Americans is ‘disgusting, immoral, and evil,'” Newman tweeted. “Thought we’d put up our Transgender flag so she can look at it every time she opens her door.”

Greene, a QAnon booster who earlier this month lost her committee assignments after pushing conspiracy theories and calling for Democrats to be executed, quickly escalated the dispute by putting up a sign attacking transgender identity to taunt Newman outside of her own office.

“Thought we’d put up ours so she can look at it every time she opens her door,” Greene tweeted with a video of her putting up a sign saying “There are TWO genders: MALE & FEMALE” and “Trust the Science!”

Greene later posted a transphobic attack aimed at Newman’s daughter, writing, “your biological son does NOT belong in my daughters’ bathrooms, locker rooms, and sports teams.”

Science shows that gender is far less binary than Greene, who espoused conspiracy theories about Jewish space lasers, would have people believe. Her stunt quickly drew bipartisan condemnation.

“Your sign is incorrect because it’s not what the science says,” tweeted Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif., quoting a column in Scientific American that said, “the science is clear and conclusive: sex is not binary, transgender people are real.”

“Sickening, pathetic, unimaginably cruel,” Rep. Sean Casten, D-Ill., tweeted in response to Greene. “This hate is exactly why [the Equality Act] is necessary and what we must protect [Newman’s] daughter and all our LGBTQ+ loved ones against.”

“This is sad and I’m sorry this happened.  Rep. Newmans daughter is transgender, and this video and tweet represents the hate and fame driven politics of self-promotion at all evil costs,” tweeted anti-Trump Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill. “This garbage must end.”

The Daily Beast’s Scott Bixby noted that Kinzinger’s tweet came after he voted in support of Greene’s motion to block the vote, “a motion she explicitly proposed to attack trans people.”

Kinzinger voted in favor of Greene’s motion to adjourn for the day instead of voting for the bill, which she said would allow her colleagues to “rethink destroying #WomensRights and #WomensSports and #ReligiousFreedom.”

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., responded, “you could just vote ‘no’ instead of trying to get out of work early.”

“You should probably stop using those hashtags because women’s rights include trans women,” Ocasio-Cortez added.

Despite objections from Greene, the Equality Act is expected to pass the House, as it did in 2019. Despite Democrats winning control of the Senate, they would still need support from multiple Republicans to avoid a filibuster after it was rejected by Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., last time around.

Greene, meanwhile, faces renewed scrutiny in connection to the deadly January 6 Capitol riot after CNN reported that Anthony Aguero, who bragged about invading the Capitol, “worked closely” with Greene for years and described the freshman congresswoman as “one of my closest friends.”

Supreme Court cheered for stopping Trump’s “shameful” effort to block release of his tax returns

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday delivered another blow to Donald Trump’s efforts to block the enforcement of a subpoena for his accounting firm to turn over eight years of the ex-president’s tax returns and other financial documents to a grand jury convened by Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance Jr. while Trump was still in office.

Vance welcomed the high court’s unsigned, one-sentence order in a short statement: “The work continues.”

Ryan Thomas, a spokesperson for the progressive advocacy group Stand Up America, also celebrated the decision, saying that “Trump’s shameful effort to block his financial records from investigators is yet another reminder of the lengths he’s gone to to avoid accountability.”

“This decisive defeat once again shows that no one—including Donald Trump—is above the law,” added Thomas. “Trump must be held accountable by state and federal prosecutors for his criminal conduct.”

While Vance’s probe involves hush-money payments to women who said they had affairs with Trump, recent court filings suggest the investigation could also include tax and insurance fraud as well as falsifying business records.

As NBC News explained Monday:

Now that the Supreme Court has cleared the way for Vance to enforce the subpoena, the president has exhausted his legal options to block it. The full tax return documents, or portions of them, would become public only if Vance brings criminal charges at some future date and seeks to introduce them as evidence.

Vance in 2019 issued a subpoena to Trump’s accounting firm, Mazars USA, for his tax returns from 2011 to 2018. Federal lawmakers also sought the then-president’s tax returns—which he refused to make public before or during his four-year term, bucking a precedent followed by several of his predecessors.

Last July, the Supreme Court ruled that Vance could enforce the subpoena but blocked Congress from obtaining the financial records. In both 7-2 decisions, Trump appointees Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh joined the majority while Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented. Those rulings preceded the September death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Trump’s appointment of Justice Amy Coney Barrett, confirmed by a GOP-controlled Senate in October.

After the justices rejected claims by Trump’s attorneys that he was immune from state investigations while serving as president, his legal team tried to argue that the subpoena was issued “in bad faith” and amounted to political “harassment”—a position rejected by a U.S. district judge in August, a federal appeals panel in October, and now the nation’s highest court.

The appeals panel’s decision came shortly after the New York Times began publishing a damning series of reports based on over two decades of Trump’s tax documents obtained by the newspaper. The twice-impeached former president currently faces not only Vance’s investigation but also probes by the New York attorney general’s office into his business empire and a Georgia prosecutor regarding election interference.

Ohio GOP lawmaker praises Amish community for not wearing masks: “They’ve culled the herd”

In a debate held by the Ohio House of Representatives on Wednesday, Republican state Rep. Diane Grendell made her case for a hands-off pandemic response by praising the Amish’s lax attitude toward the virus, arguing that they’ve simply let the virus infect them and “culled the herd.”

“They don’t wear masks,” Grendell said of the Amish in her state. “They refuse to because they believe in god.”

Grendell did mention that seven members of Ohio’s Amish community passed away after becoming infected. “Many of them were older,” she explained, “and they had their problems.”

“But now they don’t have it anymore,” she exclaimed. “They’ve culled the herd, so to speak.”

Ohio Capitol Journal reporter Tyler Buchanan noted on Twitter that Grendell’s remarks came as part of a debate to allow the state legislature to overrule public health orders from medical experts:

According to a CDC study published in November of last year, COVID-19 spread rapidly through Ohio’s Amish community due to the frequency of large social gatherings, as well as a hesitancy within the community to follow public health guidelines. What followed, per the CDC’s report, was a 77% rate of positivity. 

Despite limited resources, strengthening collaboration between and across health departments and communities might help overcome cultural barriers,” the study concluded.

In September, Grendell, a staunch critic of COVID-19 restrictions, proposed a bill to cancel Ohio’s state of emergency. Grendell suggested at the time that the death rate of the seasonal flu was “far higher, far higher” than that of COVID-19’s but “we don’t make people take masks for the flu.”

The Ohio Department of Health reported that COVID’s fatality rate hovered at 3-4%, at the time, while the seasonal flu’s was around 0.1%. Shortly after Grendell’s proposal, Ohio’s case count shot up tenfold.

DeSantis advances questionable link between lockdowns and despair

The result of lockdowns “has been the destruction of millions of lives across America as well as increased deaths from suicide, substance abuse and despair without any corresponding benefit in covid mortality.”

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, Feb. 2, 2020

For months, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has boasted about his state’s “open for business” strategy in dealing with covid-19 and how it’s working better than so-called lockdown states.

Unlike in some other states, all Florida public schools are open for in-person learning, restaurants and bars have few restrictions, and the state has barred local governments from penalizing individuals for not wearing a mask in public.

In a recent rant against social network companies such as Facebook and Twitter, DeSantis suggested that states that had instituted heavy restrictions on residents experienced severe repercussions for residents without reducing the number of covid deaths.

“Lockdowns at the time of the pandemic were favored by the, quote, ‘narrative’ and so, in the name of, quote, ‘science,’ articles and posts warning against lockdowns were taken down and censored,” said DeSantis. “The result has been the destruction of millions of lives across America, as well as increased deaths from suicide, substance abuse and despair, without any corresponding benefit in covid mortality.”

We wondered whether that was true. Have state restrictions done such significant harm without providing any boost in the fight against covid deaths? So we dug in.

Locking In on Lockdowns

To reduce the spread of the coronavirus, states have enacted — and then sometimes relaxed or lifted — various restrictions, including mask mandates, limits on restaurant capacity, stay-at-home orders and bans on large gatherings.

DeSantis, a Republican, has bristled at such statewide orders, even resisting pleas from local officials in Florida and criticizing other jurisdictions for implementing them. He has consistently questioned their effectiveness. Late last year, for instance, he claimed that states with lockdowns had covid transmission rates twice as high as Florida’s. We rated that Half True.

We asked DeSantis’ office for any evidence supporting his more recent claim. The response reveals a mixed bag of information.

Check the Data: Did Florida’s Path Lead to Less ‘Despair’?

To support the governor’s claim that other states have seen higher numbers of deaths from suicide, substance abuse and despair than Florida has during the pandemic, DeSantis’ office sent information from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention showing “all cause” mortality rates increased slower in Florida in 2020 — coinciding with the pandemic’s first months through June 3 — over 2019 rates than in California and New York — two states that have opted for more regulations on public gatherings and mask-wearing. DeSantis’ analysis showed Florida’s rate rose 15% compared with 16% in California and 29% in New York.

But the “all causes” category goes far beyond deaths associated with suicide and drug abuse. It includes deaths from cancer, heart disease, lung disease and dementia, for example.

DeSantis’ office did not provide any data showing how rates of suicide and drug abuse in Florida compared with those in so-called lockdown states. It sent us a Miami Herald article that said in Florida, according to preliminary medical examiners’ statistics, 2,975 people died by suicide in 2020, down 13% from the previous year. But the article did not have nationwide data or figures from California or New York.

Concerning overdose deaths, DeSantis’ office did not provide specific information. However, health experts said the pandemic likely did increase opioid overdoses. But the latest, provisional CDC data on drug overdose deaths shows Florida’s numbers rising faster than the national average.

Comparing the 12-month period ending in June 2020 to the prior 12 months, the period for which data is available, Florida had a 34% increase in the rate of overdose deaths compared with a 20% national average among states. California had a 23% increase and New York had an 18% increase.

Meanwhile, federal suicide data reflecting the months in which the pandemic has transpired will not likely be available until 2022. Experts say that anecdotal evidence suggests a possible uptick in suicide rates during the pandemic. In addition, an online tool offered by the nonprofit Mental Health America to help screen for mental health issues showed a slight increase last year in people having suicidal thoughts.

Nonetheless, Paul Gionfriddo, the group’s CEO, said he knows of no studies showing that so-called lockdown states have higher rates of suicide than those with fewer restrictions.

Gionfriddo said DeSantis may think he is mitigating the harmful effects of loneliness by not limiting public gatherings. But loneliness is not the only reason people cite in considering suicide, he said. Grief, financial insecurity and other factors also play a role, he said.

John Auerbach, president and CEO of Trust for America’s Health, a nonprofit think tank, said it’s difficult to pinpoint the psychological impact of restrictions to reduce infection because rules vary by state and within states, and such regulations have been imposed and lifted at different times.

Auerbach said he knows of no evidence that links states’ covid restrictions to suicides or drug overdose deaths.

“There are many contributing factors to suicide and drug overdoses,” he said. The pandemic itself is having the biggest effect on heightening people’s risk of dying from suicide and drug abuse — not the states’ different approaches to prevent the transmission of infection, he added.

“It is the underlying pandemic that is at the root of increased risks,” Auerbach said.

Factoring In Covid Mortality Rates

DeSantis also argued that statewide restrictions did not bring any corresponding benefit in limiting covid mortality.

We asked his office for evidence. They again pointed to the CDC increase in “all cause” mortality data that showed California’s rate was slightly higher than Florida’s. But those statistics cover all causes of death, and people are still dying of diseases and conditions besides covid.

We then consulted three epidemiologists to get their take. They all said the governor was playing loose with the facts. They stressed varying factors that affect states’ mortality rates — from the weather to socioeconomic indicators to access to health services.

The epidemiologists pointed to the latest CDC data, which indicated that Florida’s covid mortality rate is higher than California’s and seemed to undercut DeSantis’ position that lockdowns have only hurt states.

As of Feb. 22, Florida ranked 28th in covid death rates while California ranked 33rd, according to the latest CDC data, as compiled by Statista.

“That would bolster the argument that restrictions are one factor involved in lowering death rates,” said Nicole Gatto, an associate professor of public health at Claremont Graduate University in California.

Numerous others also have an effect, Gatto said, so it is impossible to compare states using current data based on their strategies.

“I do think it is an oversimplification to make the assertion that the governor did without further study of the numerous variables involved, characteristics of the population, timing of interventions and the limitations of the data,” she said.

Our Ruling

DeSantis said lockdown states have seen “increased deaths from suicide, substance abuse and despair without any corresponding benefit in covid mortality.”

The pandemic certainly has caused anxiety and distress across the country, and state and local restrictions designed to tamp down on the coronavirus’s spread have also affected people’s financial and emotional well-being. But currently, no clear data supports DeSantis’ strongly worded claim. Researchers agreed that more research is necessary before such broad conclusions could be drawn. In addition, experts said that covid death rates vary by state and numerous factors beyond state strategies to combat the virus affect this metric.

We rate the statement Mostly False.

This story was produced in partnership with PolitiFact. It can be republished for free.

Biden to name new USPS board members as Postmaster General DeJoy taunts critics: “Get used to me”

Testifying before the House Oversight and Reform Committee on Wednesday, Postmaster General Louis DeJoy sparred with Democratic lawmakers who pressed him on the Postal Service’s continued delays in mail delivery. “Get used to me,” the Trump-appointed Dejoy told members of Congress, expressing his intentions to stay in his role for “a long time” despite the Postal Service’s history of dysfunction under his leadership. Shortly thereafter, the White House announced President Joe Biden’s picks to fill the three vacancies on the U.S. Postal Service’s board of governors, which oversees DeJoy.  

According to NBC News, Biden’s picks include a former deputy postmaster general and the former general counsel for American Postal Workers Union. NBC News also reports that the current board is made up of six white men with “limited experience with the Postal Service.” Biden’s picks include two men of color and a woman. 

In his testimony, the Postmaster General apologized for the delays, specifically citing their severity over the holidays. “We must acknowledge that during this peak season, we fell far short of meeting our service targets,” DeJoy admitted. “Too many Americans were left waiting for weeks for important deliveries of mail and packages. This is unacceptable and I apologize to those customers who felt the impact of our delays.”

DeJoy’s apology comes after the Trump-appointee took a series of “cost-cutting” measures over the summer of last year, such as removing mail sorting machines, in an ostensible effort to buoy the financial health of the Post Service –– an institution which lost over $9 billion last year and holds some $80 billion in unfunded liabilities. DeJoy planned to implement another wave of cost-cutting initiatives after the summer but decided to hold off until after November in order to allay fears that doing so would hamper the integrity of the election system. 

While DeJoy promised to unveil a new and improved strategic plan for the Postal Service, several Democratic lawmakers remained skeptical because of the damage he’s already personally inflicted. In one instance, Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., challenged DeJoy after he admitted the limitations of ground mail. “It sounds like your solution to the problems you’ve identified is just surrender,” Raskin said. “You’re basically saying, ‘Because the mail has been late under your leadership, we’re just going to change the standards and build it into the system that it will be late.'”

DeJoy rebutted that the Postal Service had operational problems long before he took over. “You can sit here and think I’m bringing all this damage to the Postal Service,” he said, “but the place was operationally faulty because of lack of investment and lack of ability to move forward, which is what we’re trying to do.”

As Sen. Gary Peters, D-Mich., told NPR before the hearing, however, “The standard for the Postal Service has been: the mail gets delivered on time 96% of the time. But what we’re seeing nationally is roughly 80%, and in some areas considerably less than that. In Detroit, for example, it’s roughly 74%. So that’s still an unacceptable standard.”

Following the meeting, President Biden announced the names of three people to fill the existing vacancies in the Postal Service’s Board of Governors: Ron Stroman, Anton Hajjar and Amber McReynolds. Last moth, Congressional Democrats called for DeJoy’s ouster. With Biden’s new additions, the Board of Governors might have the majority needed strip DeJoy of his title.

How to keep your pantry free of creepy-crawly pests

Welcome to Storage Wars, a new series about the best ways to store, well, everything. From how to keep produce orderly in the fridge (or not), to ways to get your oddball nooks and crannies shipshape, and, yes, how to organize all those unwieldy containers once and for all — we’ve got you covered.

* * *

Allow me to paint you an upsetting word picture: I woke up one morning last spring to find that a mouse had entered the kitchen (bad) and managed to chew through a heavy-duty Ziploc bag, a large-sized Bee’s Wrap, and parchment paper (worse) to gnaw at a loaf of sourdough bread that took me three days to make (the horror!). Reader, when I tell you I screamed.

While this scene could be rewritten into my “Why I’m Leaving New York” essay, it instead has become the grounds for my — now even more militant than ever — approach to kitchen pest control. And also another item in the “pro” column for why I absolutely need to adopt a cat. I’ve actually always been extremely cautious about pests in the kitchen: It simply comes with the territory when you’re living with a poorly constructed rental kitchen in a prewar building, and work with food to boot. But even if critters aren’t a part of your daily life, you never know what’s lurking out of sight.

Pest control in the kitchen, particularly in the pantry, may take a bit of reorganization. Or, depending on your current setup, a lot of reshuffling. Is it necessary nonetheless? Without a doubt. If you’ve ever opened up a bag of flour to find it crawling with bugs or dealt with a similar mouse situation (I’m so sorry), you’ll heed this warning.

Check food for pests first

As soon as you bring home ingredients, particularly bags of flour or boxes of dry goods that are easy to sneak into, open them and peek inside to make sure the only stuff in there is what you bought — no uninvited guests. (It’s probably not going into your pantry, but make sure your produce is bug-free as well before storing all your fruit and veg). PS: Since you’re starting this process, I’d recommend you check open bags already in your pantry for any intruders, as well as seal up any holes in your physical pantry before moving on to the next step.

Transfer dry goods to airtight containers

Once you’ve opened bags or boxes, you’ve essentially unlocked the door to any critters looking for a cozy home. Transfer dry goods to a fleet of sturdy airtight containers — organized and pest-free, what could be better.

Store fresh produce you don’t want to refrigerate under a cloche  

I know nothing’s cuter than a bowl of fresh fruit on the table (and the easiest way to ruin a perfect tomato is to put it in the fridge), so I have a solution. Though they may seem like a decor trend you don’t want to spend money on, a cloche is actually an ideal pest deterrent when you want to keep produce out at room temperature without attracting critters. Cake rarely lasts long enough in my kitchen to warrant the use of a cake standbut I’ve taken to using the one I have (which has a lid) to store my tomatoes and peaches — which, let’s be honest, when in their prime are just as precious as a chocolate-frosted genoise.

Store other prepared or snack foods in lidded containers or bowls 

You could store freshly baked cookies under a cloche, but I prefer to keep those (as well as other prepared foods that should stay at room temperature) in containers or bowls. If you’d prefer more air circulation, opt for a bread box. This is also where I store potatoes and onions. (All other produce is bought in small quantities and goes in the fridge, which is cool and dark enough for a couple days’ stay.)

Already dealing with critters? Try these:

Set up a fruit-fly catcher (And other traps) 

Let’s focus on the rest of the kitchen — because the pantry isn’t the only place you might find pests. If you’re having issues with fruit flies, set up a bowl with apple cider vinegar and a bit of dish soap in the areas of the kitchen where you’re seeing bugs (see this post for the specifics). For ants, some suggest a mix of borax, sugar, and water (see this article for details) — though I tend to use those little traps you can buy at the hardware store. For mice, I avoid using sticky or snappy traps (I’ve tried “humane” ones that give you the option to release the critters, but I think the mice in my building are too smart for them); ultimately I’ve found nothing keeps mice away like not having food out in the open, nor stored in any packaging thin enough to chew through. Also, it’s clear that cats do genuinely help keep mice and other bugs at bay. (If my partner is reading this: We should really get a cat.)

Call in a professional 

If you’re at your wit’s end and nothing seems to keep the pests at bay, I’d highly recommend calling in an exterminator to take a look. Hey, it’s cheaper than moving.

How George Harrison’s lifelong quest for spiritual enlightenment shaped his music and life

Today, we celebrate what would have been George Harrison’s 78th birthday. When it comes to such milestones, the mind easily wanders in the direction of other, less sanguine anniversaries. Incredibly, it has already been more than four decades, for instance, since December 8, 1980, the last day that all four Beatles walked the earth. And when it comes to George in particular, nearly two decades have elapsed since his untimely death in November 2001 at age 58.

In sharp contrast with Lennon’s shocking murder in 1980, Harrison’s passing could be considered less wrenching. In the late 1990s, he had undergone radiotherapy during a bout with throat cancer. While he had seemed to have beaten the disease at the time, reports began to circulate in the summer of 2001 that his recent medical condition was not merely serious, but dire, as a struggle with lung cancer had spread to his brain.

In short, the prevailing conditions allowed us to mourn Harrison’s loss in a much different fashion than Lennon’s, which had been sudden and devastating. In the years since Harrison’s death, attention has been showered on the musician’s lifelong journey towards spiritual enlightenment. It was a progress that had begun even before young George had fallen hopelessly in love with music.


Love the Beatles? Subscribe to Ken’s podcast “Everything Fab Four.”


As Harrison later recalled during the Beatles’ “Anthology” project, his earliest memories were about spiritual matters. Even as a preteen, he had developed a fascination with the strange intermingling of commerce and religion—and, ultimately, vice—that he observed in the neighborhood around his family’s Liverpool home. Growing up in the city’s Speke district, George remembered that “priests used to come round to all the houses in the neighborhood collecting money.” What really troubled young George was that his father’s hard-earned money went towards the construction of yet another cathedral (“The Beatles Anthology,” p. 26).

“Before that,” George reflected, “there was a temporary church in a big wooden hut. It had the stations of the cross around it, and that’s my earliest remembrance of wondering, ‘What is all this about?’ Okay, I could see Christ dragging his cross down the street with everybody spitting on him, and I got the gist of that; but it didn’t seem to make any sense. I felt then that there was some hypocrisy going on, even though I was only about 11-years-old” (“The Beatles Anthology,” p. 26).

Even at that tender age, George recognized that “it seemed to be the same on every housing estate in English cities: on one corner they’d have a church and on the other corner a pub. Everybody’s out there getting pissed and then just goes in the church, says three ‘Hail Marys’ and one ‘Our Father’ and sticks a fiver in the plate. It felt so alien to me. Not the stained-glass window or the pictures of Christ; I liked that a lot, and the smell of the incense and the candles. I just didn’t like the bullshit. After Communion, I was supposed to have Confirmation, but I thought, ‘I’m not going to bother with that, I’ll just confirm it later myself'” (“The Beatles Anthology,” p. 26).

And for nearly the balance of the rest of his life, George did exactly that. Indeed, his spiritual quest would become a key factor in the Beatles’ creative inspiration and musical direction. As with so many of his later moments of intellectual recognition, George didn’t look back after his epiphany regarding the hypocritical relationship that existed between churchgoing and drinking. “From then on,” he recalled, “I avoided the church, but every Thursday a kid would come round to herald the arrival of the priest. They’d go round all the streets, knock on the door and shout, ‘The priest’s coming!’ And we’d all go, ‘Oh, shit,’ and run like hell up the stairs and hide. My mother would have to open the door, and he’d say, ‘Ah, hello, Mrs. Harrison, it’s nice to see you again, so it is. Eh, be Jesus.’ She’d stuff two half-crowns in his sweaty little hand and off he’d go to build another church or pub” (“The Beatles Anthology,” p. 26).

It was in 1965, while working on the set of the Beatles’ “Help!” feature film, that Harrison first came into the orbit of the sitar. After listening to the work of Ravi Shankar, the renowned Bengali-Indian virtuoso, George was hooked: “I had bought a very cheap sitar in a shop called India Craft in London, and it fitted on to the song [‘Norwegian Wood’] and it gave it that little extra thing. Even though the sound of the sitar was bad, they were still quite happy with it. At the same time as I played the sitar, very badly, on the Beatles’ record, I began to hear Ravi Shankar’s name. The third time, I thought, ‘This is an odd coincidence.’ I went out and bought some of Ravi’s records, put them on, listened to them and it hit a certain spot in me that I can’t explain, but it seemed familiar to me. The only way that I can describe it was my intellect didn’t know what was going on and yet this other part of me identified with it. It just called on me'” (Keith Badman, “The Beatles Off the Record,” p. 190).

For George, meeting Shankar would ignite one of the most important associations of his lifetime. In many ways, Shankar acted as the Beatle’s “spirit guide,” in the words of Graeme Thomson. George’s budding interest in Eastern music and religion occasioned a reconsideration of spirituality and religion. By 1966, George had found himself in the throes of “confirming things for himself” as he had predicted all those years ago: “Nobody I know in the Christian religions seems to have a deep enough understanding of the science of God to be able to translate it into human terms. Church leaders are purveying a kind of nonsense because they don’t really understand it themselves. So they blind you with ignorance, like a government does, as if the power of the Church has become reason enough for you not to question anything it says. It’s like, ‘You don’t know anything about Christ and God because we’re the ones who own the franchise'” (Thomson, “George Harrison,” p. 11).

Through Shankar, George began to steep himself in the literature of Eastern religion and philosophy. These readings had, in short, changed his way of seeing the world and notions of spiritual transcendence. “I had read enough from the Vivekenandas and Yoganandas,” George later recalled, “to comprehend how to see God: by using the Yogic system of transcending through the relative states of consciousness (waking, sleeping, dreaming) to get to the most subtle level of pure consciousness. It is in that level that the individual experiences pure awareness, pure consciousness, the source of all being. Everything in creation is the effect of that pure state of being, the transcendent or the God. God is the cause. And the effect is all three worlds: the causal, the astral and the physical. I believe absolutely in the power of prayer, but it’s like love: people say ‘I love you,’ but it’s a question of ‘how deep is your love?'” (“The Beatles Anthology,” p. 263).

Harrison’s spirituality proved to be all-consuming. When he died in Los Angeles in 2001, his wife Olivia and son Dhani were at this bedside, as were Shankar and his wife Sukanya and daughter Anoushka. They were joined by Hare Krishna devotees Shyamsundar Das and Mukunda Goswami, who chanted from verses of the Bhagavad Gita. In a final statement, Harrison entreated citizens of the world to begin their search for enlightenment, saying that “everything else can wait, but the search for God cannot wait, and love one another.” In keeping with the Hindu tradition, Harrison’s ashes were later scattered in India along the Ganges and Yamuna rivers.

For Harrison, a boyhood sense of religious skepticism would translate into the search of a lifetime for spiritual enlightenment. And in the end, he left the world with vast reservoirs of love—both in his music and his steadfast devotion to finding pure consciousness and religious transcendence.

Did MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” just take a shot at “The View” host Meghan McCain?

MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough took what may have been a veiled shot at “The View” co-host Meghan McCain for bashing Dr. Anthony Fauci.

The conservative McCain has been drawing heat all week on social media for saying President Joe Biden should replace Fauci with someone who “understands science,” saying the infectious disease expert’s advice on masks had been “inconsistent and confusing,” and it sounded as if the “Morning Joe” host joined the chorus of critics.

“The amount of tape that is out there on the lies, the missteps, the sheer idiocy, the false claims, the sunny predictions, bleach recommendations. hydroxychloroquine, it goes on and on forever,” Scarborough said.

“It is fascinating there are still Republicans trying to attack Dr. Fauci and twist his words out of their proper context — even some I will say now, quote, mainstream Republican commentators who may have even been a little more careful in the past,” he added, apparently referring to the widely criticized McCain. “They’re trying to go after a guy who actually was the voice of reason through this entire process.”

Donald Trump’s children “should be worried” about Manhattan DA’s investigation, John Dean says

Former White House Counsel John Dean told CNN’s Don Lemon Wednesday that Donald Trump’s adult children should probably “be worried” about the cases being investigated by district attorneys.

Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., was grilled by prosecutors this month about questionable spending in the inaugural committee. Jr. is also part of a New York probe into the Trump Organization’s finances. He and Trump Organization’s CFO, Allen Weisselberg are said to be at the center of the prosecutors’ investigation.

“I think they should be worried,” Dean said flatly. “They got a pass of sorts last time they were in front of [DA Cy] Vance. One of Trump’s long-time lawyers went in, negotiated a deal and got them a pass and later gave a large contribution to Vance. Actually, a couple of large contributions. That came back to haunt Vance. So, I don’t think he looks very favorably on the Trump family anymore, and he wants to clean up his reputation. So, he’s probably being very aggressive about them and pursuing any potential criminality.”

At issue is more than Trump’s tax returns, Dean explained.

“There’s almost a terabyte of data,” he said of the Trump financial documents. “That’s massive. That’s thousands upon thousands of documents. And this is going to show how they prepared the tax returns over the last eight years that they’re looking at. The memos back and forth. Records of phone calls where the accountants were being instructed. So, if there’s malfeasance, non-feasance or misfeasance in there it’s very likely to be in that terabyte. So, that’s a mighty pile of information they have to go through, too.”

Dean explained that he has read that Don Jr.’s involvement in the Trump family corporations was limited, because “his father didn’t have the greatest faith in his skills and abilities and he was often kept out of things.” That could ultimately help Jr. from being pinned down in the Trump Organization case, however, he and Eric Trump have also been the ones in charge of the company in their father’s absence.

“For example, the payments to Michael Cohen, the hush payments, he might have been directly involved in those,” Dean continued. “So who knows where all this is going to go? The conspiracy law in New York is very broad, as most states have, and they’ve been operating clearly in secret for a long time. And that’s what Mr. Vance is looking at. So, I think he’s got jeopardy.”

You can watch the discussion below via YouTube:

Ted Cruz has raided campaign funds for travel “security” (but apparently not in Cancún)

When Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, bailed out for the balmy climes of Cancún while the worst winter storm in recent memory stranded millions of his constituents without power, he hired a security guard to watch his home and care for his poodle, Snowflake. But the way the senator chose to pay for that help may attract the attention of the Federal Election Commission, which has not sanctioned the use of campaign funds for personal security.

Cruz appears to have tapped into both campaign funds and his taxpayer-backed Senate allowance for security expenses, some of them related to travel. The FEC bars candidates and elected officials from using political contributions for their own personal use, and Cruz may have violated this rule if he used donations to pay for a security guard for his Houston home or at other times outside his capacities as a candidate or officeholder. It would also appear to be a violation of the personal use prohibition if Cruz dipped into his campaign account to pay the guard to do household chores, such as caring for Snowflake. Last year, former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo triggered an internal investigation for a similar alleged misuse of taxpayer funds, such as paying an aide to walk his dog.

Salon reported earlier this month that in the wake of the Capitol insurrection, the two Republican national congressional committees filed a joint advisory ruling request asking the FEC to allow lawmakers to fund personal protection details with campaign donations, but the issue is unsettled. While candidates can and do expense electronic security systems for their homes, the FEC has not ruled on whether the exemption extends to bodyguards.

A handful of candidates, including Cruz, appear to have gone ahead without FEC guidance. In October 2020, the senator’s campaign organization, Ted Cruz for Senate, started paying the Houston security firm Atlas Glinn Inc. for “personnel service/equipment,” according to FEC filings. The Atlas Glinn website features a photo of Cruz accompanied by what appears to be a security team. In the three months from October to December, the campaign paid the firm a total of $46,000, according to federal records.

In addition to home security, Cruz’s campaign also spent more than $15,000 in the last four months on what it characterizes in filings as “security equipment installation”: $11,000 to Houston-based Automation Media Professionals, and $4,000 to Solar X Window Film Systems, also in Houston, for “tear and penetration-resistant” protective window film designed to hold “glass fragments together in the event of an accident, break-in or violent storm.” Cruz and his family live in Houston, which also hosts his southeast Texas office.

The vast majority of these payments came after the 2020 general election, which Cruz predicted could be a “bloodbath” for Republicans. The Harvard Law graduate was among the first and most ardent peddlers of former President Trump’s baseless claims of election fraud, a leading voice in a broader narrative that led directly to the Jan. 6 assault on the Capitol by a mob of Trump supporters. Cruz was inside the Senate chamber when that attack began, objecting to Electoral College votes, and used the event to raise campaign funds.

In justifying the emergency nature of the FEC request last month, attorneys for the National Republican Senatorial Committee and National Republican Congressional Committee cited the alarming spike in security threats connected to the Jan. 6 riots.

“In light of current events involving concrete threats of physical violence against Members and their families, Members have been compelled to consider further security measures for themselves and their families,” the committees wrote. “As has been well-documented in the media, Members and their families continue to endure threats and security breaches, which are being timely reported to appropriate law enforcement officials.”

Cruz has also paid his former bodyguard out of his campaign and Senate accounts. FEC filings show that in 2019, Ted Cruz for Senate issued a $5,000 payment to Air France for “security expenses,” and paid more than $3,000 to Matthew “Grant” Murray, apparently for providing security for Cruz while he was traveling.

Murray currently works for Cruz’s Senate office: His LinkedIn profile says he is a “Special Operations Advisor to the U.S. Senate,” and before that he served as regional deputy director for southeast Texas, a job he took in November 2016 after briefly heading up security for Cruz’s ill-fated 2016 presidential campaign. Before that, Murray was director of operations for 360 Group International Inc, a personal security firm that describes itself as providing executive protection, security consulting and threat assessment services to VIPs, companies and government agencies.

Since 2016, Murray has made six figures a year as a full-time Senate employee, according to LegiStorm data, and in 2018 he appears to have made $50,000 on the payroll for Cruz’s re-election campaign. The Cruz campaign has also paid Murray more than $10,000 for travel and per diem expenses, according to campaign records.

In 2018 Murray accompanied Cruz in his official Senate capacity on a federally funded trip to Israel, and in 2019 the campaign paid a security bill to the full-time Senate aide ahead of an Indo-Pacific tour that Cruz appears to have taken in his government capacity.

Filings also indicate that the campaign reimbursed Murray for “materials” related to a 2019 trip orchestrated by a travel agency called Culture Trip GMBH. According to its LinkedIn page, Culture Trip is “Germany’s leading, luxury travel planner” and offers “access to the inaccessible: private homes and collections, exclusive wine tastings & culinary events with master sommeliers and star chefs, curator walks through extraordinary museum treasures and the most fabulous team of expert/guides available.” The company says that it specializes in custom small-group tours throughout Germany, and offers “hand-selected” drivers and guides as well as “Shore Excursions.”

Salon could not find reports that Cruz traveled to Germany in 2019, in any capacity, but his campaign had logged that $5,000 payment to Air France for “security expenses” just a few months prior. If Cruz did indeed indulge in a luxury getaway — for which recent events suggest he has a taste — it’s not clear that Germany impressed him: A few months later he crossed the aisle in an attempt to block the construction of a pipeline that would reroute Russian gas under the Baltic Sea to a German port, threatening further sanctions against Russia if the countries went ahead with the project, although it was backed by German Chancellor Angela Merkel, an important U.S. ally. Nearly a year earlier, in January 2018, Cruz had rejected bipartisan calls for stricter sanctions on Russia in a resolution that failed in the Senate by three votes.

This week, Cruz urged the Biden administration to cut support for the Russian gas pipeline, saying that it could have “serious consequences for the national security of America and the energy security of our European allies.”

It does not appear that Cruz enlisted a personal detail on his recent but brief holiday in Cancún. The Houston Police Department provided personnel assistance and “monitored his movements” after Cruz’s staff requested a law enforcement “assistance upon arrival” at the airport, The New York Times reported. Video captured Houston officers accompanying the senator when he returned the next morning, when Cruz issued a statement saying he had taken the trip under disaster conditions because he wanted “to be a good dad.”

“With school canceled for the week, our girls asked to take a trip with friends. Wanting to be a good dad, I flew down with them last night and am flying back this afternoon,” the statement said. “My staff and I are in constant communication with state and local leaders to get to the bottom of what happened in Texas. We want our power back, our water on, and our homes warm. My team and I will continue using all our resources to keep Texans informed and safe.”

The Cruz campaign did not immediately reply to Salon’s request for comment.

How to make oatmeal perfectly every time

Ready to learn how to make oatmeal once and for all? Before you get cooking, there’s a lot to know about this simple pantry staple. There’s a world of cooking variations to familiarize yourself with depending on how the raw grain was milled, which makes a difference in the preparation of your perfect bowl.

Like most grains, oats are best enjoyed in either a crunchy or a softened state. Dehydrated, toasted oats become granola. Oatmeal, on the other hand, is defined by the fullness of its hydration. In terms of cookery, oatmeal just might be the world’s most forgiving dish. The recipe can be reduced to a simple equation. Oats + liquid + time = oatmeal. You can mess it up, but it’s not easy, especially if you understand the ratio of oats to liquid. Oats can absorb a lot of water, so you need substantially less oats than water by volume: 1/2 cup of oats is a reasonable place to start for a single portion.

Let’s explore three popular kinds of oatmeal — rolled oats, steel-cut oats, and instant oatmeal — and go over how to cook each one.

Rolled Oats

Rolled oats, also called flaked or old-fashioned oats, are quite literally rolled. Actually, they’re steamrolled. Picture one of the machines road crews use to level asphalt, except there are two of them (one on top of the other) with steamed oat groats in between. When the rollers turn, the grain is flattened — almost like rolling dough through a pasta machine. Because the grains have been steamed and smashed, they’re already par-cooked. Rolled oats can get you to a bowl of oatmeal in 10 minutes or less, with a soft, gooey texture that retains a slight chew. They’re also ideal for baked oatmeal and oatmeal muffins.

Cook on the stove (boil then simmer for about 10 minutes, stirring occasionally) or in the microwave (uncovered on high for about 2 minutes, stirring halfway through) with a 1:2 oatmeal to liquid ratio. Use water or milk for sweet oatmeal, and water, milk, or stock for savory. If you find the consistency too thin, keep simmering and the oatmeal will thicken.

Steel-Cut Oats

Steel-cut oats, also known as Irish oatmeal, are chopped rather than rolled. To give it some context: If oats were vegetables, steel-cut oats would be large dice. Millers use steel blades to break the groats into three or four pieces each. Because steel-cut oats haven’t been steamed and smashed, and because they’re thicker, they take longer to cook than rolled oats, and have a chewier texture.

Stove-top is the recommended method for steel-cut oats. Bring a 1:3 (or even 1:4) ratio of oatmeal to liquid to a boil in a pot, reduce to a simmer, and cook for 20 to 25 minutes, stirring every few minutes to prevent the oats from sticking to the bottom of the pot. Irish oatmeal can take up to 30 minutes to cook, depending on the heat level. If undercooked, the grains will be excessively al dente. This is easily corrected (provided you aren’t already late for work). Just let them ride a little longer, adding water as necessary if the consistency becomes too thick before the oats are fully cooked.

If you burn your oatmeal, you’ll unfortunately have to start over. Even if you try to separate the burned portion, the acrid flavor will have already infused the rest of the pot.

Instant Oats

Instant oats are rolled oats that are thinner and broken into smaller pieces, and they cook the fastest of all three styles. You can more or less just add boiling water to instant oats or microwave them in a 1:2 ratio of oats to water for a minute, and have yourself a bowl of oatmeal right then and there. Instant oats also produce oatmeal with the smoothest, most homogeneous texture, which may or may not be a textural drawback depending on your inclinations.

Overnight Oats

Oats are so absorbent that heat isn’t even necessary to make oatmeal; it simply helps oats absorb liquid more quickly (and it warms your belly on a cold morning). You’re probably hip to overnight oats, which utilize time to the fullest to produce creamy oatmeal without the aid of your stove or microwave.

Oatmeal Toppings

Now, let’s talk flavor. The fun of oatmeal is that it’s a blank canvas, eager to accept the endless flow of your creative ideas. Before you get too fancy, though, don’t forget the salt. A little pinch of salt goes a long way toward bringing out the natural flavor of the grain. If you skip the salt, you’re shortchanging your oats.

Oatmeal tastes great with just about anything. Standard breakfast flavor profiles are built from fruit, nuts, and seeds; dairy products like milk, butter, and yogurt; sweeteners like honey, maple syrup, and brown sugar; and spices like cinnamon or nutmeg. You can also get more adventurous with ingredients like chocolate, coconut milk, avocado, nut butters, pumpkin, cardamom, or star anise. You can even make savory oatmeal with ingredients like chicken broth, cheese, a fried or poached egg, sausage, chives, shallot, mushrooms, saffron, or turmeric.

Personally, I’m currently on a chocolate overnight oats kick, and banana bread oatmeal is one of my favorite ways to use overripe bananas. In the end, the best approach to oatmeal is to always keep oats stocked in the pantry, along with a few ingredients from the list above. That way, when your belly rumbles on a chilly morning, you’ll be prepared to deliver the perfect bowl of oatmeal.

Related reading:

Trump’s “sabotage” plan: Watchdog groups want to know who was “burrowed” into career jobs

Government watchdog groups are calling on congressional committees to release the names of Trump political appointees who have “burrowed” into career civil service positions over concerns they may attempt to “sabotage” the Biden administration.

Former President Donald Trump signed an executive order in October that stripped career civil servants of employment protections and opened the door for political appointees to “burrow” into career positions inside the government. The move came as Trump Cabinet members like Education Secretary Betsy DeVos urged staffers to “be the resistance” to the incoming Democratic administration. President Joe Biden rescinded the order in his first days in office, but it remains unclear how many such appointees may have burrowed into career positions inside their departments.  

Trump installed at least 26 political appointees in career civil service jobs in the first 10 months of 2020, according to data provided by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to Congress, but most conversions likely happened in the final months of Trump’s presidency and those reports have not yet been turned over to Congress. The Washington Post reported last month that the White House was reviewing 425 officials that might move to career positions, but the Trump administration likely ran out of time to install all of them before Biden took office.

In a letter obtained exclusively by Salon, multiple watchdog groups called on key congressional committees — which receive reports detailing the conversion of political appointees to civil servant positions from the OPM — to release the names of any such appointees.

“Some of the Trump administration’s political appointees may be lingering within agencies, seeking conversions to career civil service positions, a process commonly referred to as ‘burrowing,'” the watchdog groups said in a letter to Sen. Gary Peters, D-Mich., head of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., who chairs the House Oversight and Reform Committee.

The letter was signed by government watchdog groups Accountable.US, American Oversight, Public Citizen, Campaign for Accountability, Government Information Watch and the Government Accountability Project. Accountable.US has also filed 60 public records requests to various government agencies, seeking the release of reports regarding political appointees who have been transferred to permanent career positions.

“In his final days as president, Donald Trump refused to work with the incoming administration to deal with historic crises he only made worse, and instead made it easier to pack the government with his crony political appointees,” Kyle Herrig, president of Accountable.US, said in a statement to Salon. “If any former Trump political operative is now working to sabotage and obstruct action against the pandemic and recession, the public deserves to know their names.”

The Trump administration had previously pushed for Congress to change civil service laws over concerns that Obama administration holdovers might “try to set up … roadblocks” for the new administration. Just four years later, “many of his political appointees are attempting to retain power through the same process Trump preciously repudiated,” the watchdog groups said in the letter.

Though Biden ultimately rescinded Trump’s order, the letter continued, “the will of the American people is now at risk of being undermined by a potentially historic number of holdovers from the previous administration.”

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., along with multiple advocacy groups, has already called for the Biden administration to oust Mark Brown, who was appointed by DeVos to head the Education Department’s Office of Federal Student Aid through 2022, over concerns that he could undermine new changes sought by Democrats. Biden can easily remove Brown, but career civil service jobs “come with job protections that will make it difficult for Biden to fire them,” Politico noted in a report detailing the “‘deep state’ of loyalists Trump is leaving behind for Biden.”

“We’ve identified some people already, but we don’t know how many there are in total, or where exactly they’re placed,” a source close to Biden told Politico during the presidential transition.

Biden and his team have already removed top officials at the National Labor Relations Board, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and the U.S. Agency for Global Media, and has also purged hundreds of Pentagon advisory board members to root out Trump loyalists. But “burrowing” officials are often classified as “Schedule F” employees, who do not receive the same protections as traditional civil service employees, but are protected against removal over their political affiliation.

One such official is Michael Ellis, a former top aide to Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., who served as a top legal adviser at the National Security Council before moving to a career position as top legal counsel to the National Security Agency despite reportedly lacking the necessary qualifications. Ellis was placed on paid leave within hours of taking over the new job after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., sent a letter to the Pentagon calling the “eleventh-hour” appointment “highly suspect.”

Others were moved to senior roles as assistant U.S. attorneys, general counsels, intelligence officials and immigration judges, The Washington Post reported last month.

Jordan Von Bokern, a former clerk to Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett who served as a counsel at the Justice Department, got a pay raise of more than $15,000 when he became a career trial attorney at the DOJ’s civil division.

Prekak Shah, a member of the Federalist Society who worked for Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, before joining the Justice Department, was appointed to a career position as an assistant U.S. attorney in Texas.

Michael Brown, a former coal executive who worked on former HUD Secretary Ben Carson’s 2016 presidential campaign and later as a lawyer for the Energy Department, recently moved to a permanent position representing the Energy Department in Saudi Arabia. Kyle Nicholas, another adviser at the department, landed a similar job in Brussels.

Many of these hires quickly raised eyebrows. In one case, Christopher Prandoni, a young aide to former Interior Secretary David Bernhardt, was named as a judge in the Interior Department’s Office of Hearings and Appeals, even though he was only three years out of law school.

“The job that Prandoni was given was a gift,” Brett Hartl of the Center for Biological Diversity told ProPublica last year. “He never in a thousand years would have gotten this job if he hadn’t worked directly with David Bernhardt for months at a time implementing the Trump agenda.”

Tracy Short, a former legal adviser at Immigration and Customs Enforcement, landed a $185,368-per-year position as the top immigration judge at the Justice Department.

“He just doesn’t have the courtroom experience to be a chief judge,” Denise Slavin, the longtime former president of the National Association of Immigration Judges, told ProPublica.

Brandon Middleton, a former aide to Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, was first hired at the Justice Department’s environmental division after Sessions became attorney general, and later got a $172,508-per-year job as chief counsel for an Energy Department office that oversees toxic waste cleanup.

“He has the kind of background that makes me concerned that he might use his new career position for ideological purposes,” Nick Schwellenbach of the Project on Government Oversight told Politico last month.

It might be difficult to fire some of these officials, but the Biden administration could reassign them.

“Our options to respond to burrowing are really limited, which is why they do it,” a Democratic aide working on the issue told Politico. “It’s like whack-a-mole. Once you have found them, you can’t fire them. Your recourse is to transfer them to somewhere they don’t want to be, isolate them, and make working conditions bad to the extent you can, without crossing lines put in place to protect the civil service.”

What planet is NATO living on? Because it’s no longer useful on this one

The February meeting of NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) defense ministers, the first since President Biden took office, revealed an antiquated, 75-year-old alliance that, despite its military failures in Afghanistan and Libya, is now turning its military madness toward two more formidable, nuclear-armed enemies: Russia and China. 

This theme was emphasized by U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin in a Washington Post op-ed in advance of the NATO meeting, insisting that “aggressive and coercive behaviors from emboldened strategic competitors such as China and Russia reinforce our belief in collective security.” 

Using Russia and China to justify more Western military buildup is a key element in the alliance’s new “Strategic Concept,” called “NATO 2030: United For a New Era,” which is intended to define its role in the world for the next 10 years.

NATO was founded in 1949 by the United States and 11 other Western nations to confront the Soviet Union and the rise of communism in Europe. Since the end of the Cold War, it has grown to 30 countries, expanding to incorporate most of Eastern Europe, and it now has a long and persistent history of illegal war-making, bombing civilians and other war crimes. 

In 1999, NATO launched a war without UN approval to separate Kosovo from Serbia. Its illegal airstrikes during the Kosovo war killed hundreds of civilians, and its close ally, Kosovo President Hashim Thaci, is now on trial for war crimes committed under cover of the NATO bombing campaign. 

Far from the North Atlantic, NATO has fought alongside the United States in Afghanistan since 2001, and attacked Libya in 2011, leaving behind a failed state and triggering a massive refugee crisis.

The first phase of NATO’s new Strategic Concept review is called the NATO 2030 Reflection Group report. That sounds encouraging, since NATO obviously and urgently needs to reflect on its bloody history. Why does an organization nominally dedicated to deterring war and preserving peace keep starting wars, killing thousands of people and leaving countries around the world mired in violence, chaos and poverty?

Unfortunately, this kind of introspection is not what NATO means by “reflection.” The Reflection Group instead applauds NATO as “history’s most successful military alliance,” and seems to have taken a leaf from the Obama playbook by only “looking forward,” as it charges into a new decade of military confrontation with its blinders firmly in place. 

NATO’s role in the “new” Cold War is really a reversion to its old role in the original Cold War. This is instructive, as it unearths the ugly reasons why the United States decided to create NATO in the first place, and exposes them for a new generation of Americans and Europeans to examine in the context of today’s world.

Any U.S. war with the Soviet Union or Russia was always going to put Europeans directly on the front lines as both combatants and mass-casualty victims. The primary function of NATO is to ensure that the people of Europe continue to play these assigned roles in America’s war plans. 

As Michael Klare explains in a NATO Watch report on NATO 2030, every step the U.S. is taking with NATO is “intended to integrate it into U.S. plans to fight and defeat China and Russia in all-out warfare.”

The U.S. Army’s plan for an invasion of Russia, which is euphemistically called “The U.S. Army in Multi-Domain Operations,” begins with missile and artillery bombardments of Russian command centers and defensive forces, followed by an invasion by armored forces to occupy key areas and sites until Russia surrenders. 

Unsurprisingly, Russia’s defense strategy in the face of such an existential threat would not be to surrender, but to retaliate against the United States and its allies with nuclear weapons.

U.S. war plans for an assault on China are similar, involving missiles fired from ships and bases in the Pacific. China has not been as public about its defense plans, but if its existence and independence were threatened, it too would probably use nuclear weapons, as indeed the United States would if the positions were reversed. But they’re not — since no other country has the offensive war machine it would need to invade the United States.

Michael Klare concludes that NATO 2030 “commits all alliance members to a costly, all-consuming military competition with Russia and China that will expose them to an ever-increasing risk of nuclear war.”

So how do the European people feel about their role in America’s war plans? The European Council on Foreign Relations recently conducted an in-depth poll of 15,000 people in 10 NATO countries and Sweden, and published the results in a report titled “The Crisis of American Power: How Europeans See Biden’s America.” 

The report reveals that a large majority of Europeans want no part in a U.S. war with Russia or China and want to remain neutral. Only 22% would support taking the U.S. side in a war with China, 23% in a war with Russia. So European public opinion is squarely at odds with NATO’s role in America’s war plans.

On trans-Atlantic relations in general, majorities in most European countries see the U.S. political system as broken and their own countries’ politics as in healthier shape. Fifty-nine percent of Europeans believe that China will be more powerful than the United States within a decade, and most see Germany as a more important partner and international leader than the U.S. 

Only 17% of Europeans want closer economic ties with the U.S., while even fewer, 10% of French and Germans, think their countries need America’s help with their national defense. 

Biden’s election has not changed Europeans’ views very much from a previous survey in 2019, because they see Trumpism as a symptom of deeply rooted and long-standing problems in American society. As the writers conclude, “A majority of Europeans doubt that Biden can put Humpty Dumpty back together again.”

There is also pushback among Europeans to NATO’s demand that members should spend 2 percent of their gross domestic products on defense, an arbitrary goal that only 10 of the 30 members have met. Ironically, some states will reach the NATO target without raising their military spending because COVID has shrunk their GDPs, but NATO members struggling economically are unlikely to prioritize military spending.

The schism between NATO’s hostility and Europe’s economic interests runs deeper than just military spending. While the United States and NATO see Russia and China primarily as threats, European businesses view them as key partners. In 2020, China supplanted the U.S. as the EU’s No. 1 trading partner and at the close of 2020 the EU concluded a comprehensive investment agreement with China, despite U.S. concerns.

European countries also have their own economic relations with Russia. Germany remains committed to the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, a 746-mile natural gas artery that runs from northern Russia to Germany, even as the Biden administration calls it a “bad deal” and claims it will make Europe vulnerable to Russian “treachery.”

NATO seems oblivious to the changing dynamics of today’s world, as if it were living on a different planet. Its one-sided Reflection Group report cites Russia’s violation of international law in Crimea as a principal cause of deteriorating relations with the West, and insists that Russia must “return to full compliance with international law.” But it ignores the U.S. and NATO’s far more numerous violations of international law and leading role in the tensions fueling the renewed Cold War: 

  • Illegal invasions of Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq; 
  • The broken agreement over NATO expansion into Eastern Europe; 
  • U.S. withdrawals from important arms control treaties;
  • More than 300,000 bombs and missiles dropped on other countries by the U.S. and its allies since 2001; 
  • U.S. proxy wars in Libya and Syria, which plunged both countries into chaos, revived Al Qaeda and spawned the Islamic State; 
  • U.S. management of the 2014 coup in Ukraine, which led to economic collapse, Russian annexation of Crimea and civil war in Eastern Ukraine; 
  • The stark reality of the U.S. record as a serial aggressor whose offensive war machine dwarfs Russia’s defense spending by 11 to 1 and China’s by 2.8 to 1, even without counting other NATO countries’ military spending.

NATO’s failure to seriously examine its own role in what it euphemistically calls “uncertain times” should be more alarming to Americans and Europeans than its one-sided criticisms of Russia and China, whose contributions to the uncertainty of our times pale by comparison. 

The short-sighted preservation and expansion of NATO for a whole generation after the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War has tragically set the stage for the renewal of those hostilities — or has perhaps made their revival inevitable.    

NATO’s Reflection Group justifies and promotes the U.S. and NATO’s renewed cold war by filling its report with dangerously one-sided threat analysis. A more honest and balanced review of the dangers facing the world and NATO’s role in them would lead to a much simpler plan for NATO’s future: It should be dissolved and dismantled as quickly as possible.  

“Ginny & Georgia” isn’t “Gilmore Girls” redux – it’s darker, riskier and far more fun

Stars Hollow, like the family relationship around which it revolves, is a TV fantasy built on a foundation of spun sugar. This is precisely what the loyal “Gilmore Girls” audience loved about this little American paradise and adored about Lorelai Gilmore and her daughter Rory. More than merely a mother and daughter who deeply loved one another, they were also best friends.

Watch a few minutes of “Ginny and Georgia” and one can assume Ginny Miller (Antonia Gentry) takes issue with that portrayal of the mother-daughter bond despite the best efforts of her mother Georgia (Brianna Howey).

We meet them at the moment that Georgia’s husband dies suddenly. Shortly after the funeral she uproots Ginny and her half-brother Austin (Diesel La Torraca) from Houston, Texas and moves them abruptly to Wellsbury, Massachusetts, a wealthy enclave nestled around a postcard-perfect main drag. Ginny accurately describes it as looking “like Paul Revere boned a pumpkin spice latte.” But we recognize it as a stand-in for someplace else.

Series creator Sarah Lampert plainly created Ginny and Georgia (Brianna Howey) as a film negative’s version of Rory and Lorelei, inserting darkness in her characters where “Gilmore” embraced light. She even namechecks that other show in the opening episode she wrote. People who click in and expect a hit of that old Gilmore froth may be disappointed though because “Ginny & Georgia” is not that show.

It lacks the former’s gymnastic dialogue and unapologetic sweetness. Aside from Ginny’s defensive pride in her high academic achievements the writers don’t bend over backwards to make intellectual viewers feel better about watching a coming-of-age drama.

None of this is an argument against “Ginny & Georgia.” I’m simply explaining what one shouldn’t expect from a show that blends teen angst, adult mystery, and soap opera twists into 10 episodes while also leaning into harsher realities rarely if ever confronted in Stars Hollow.

The only things Lorelai and Georgia have in common is that each is lovable, easy to root for and fiercely loyal to her daughter. But where Lorelai is pure sunshine, Georgia’s glow is purely cosmetic. Ginny loves her mom, and she also knows she’s dishonest, curiously quiet about her past, and probably dangerous. Georgia makes promises she can’t keep such as assuring her kids that she’ll refrain from dating anyone to focus on them. But once she gets an eyeful of Wellsbury’s mayor Paul Randolph (Scott Porter from “Friday Night Lights”) that assurance flies out the window.

Wellsbury is the kind of town built for people who look like Georgia, which makes it ripe for conquest. For Ginny, whose father is Black, it is less welcoming. Still, the chameleonic Georgia sees the place for what it is and does what she has to do, changing her appearance to fit in with its class-conscious denizens.

When she and the kids first arrive in town, Georgia is wearing denim cut-off shorts. Not long after she gets Ginny and Austin situated at their schools, Georgia hits the boutiques and finagles herself a wardrobe and a blowout suitable for blending in with all the right people.

At the same time Ginny is confronted by an English teacher who assumes she isn’t cut out for his advanced placement class based on taking one look at her – and he’s not judging her fashion choices. Efficiently cutting the man to the quick in front of her class gains her a friend in Maxine (Sara Waisglass), who also happens to live across the street from her. She also attracts the attention of popular nice guy Hunter (Mason Temple) and Maxine’s troubled-but-hot twin brother Marcus (Felix Mallard). There are worse fates for a teenage girl than to have two of the best-looking guys in school contending for her affections. And yet, Ginny also has to navigate peers wanting to touch her hair, calling her “exotic,” and asking which of her parents is Black.

“Ginny and Georgia” could have left out these small aggressions instead of quite accurately inserting them into its narrative stream and had a by-the-numbers appealing Netflix teen show to work with.

There are plenty of other reasons for Ginny to feel like an outsider, including the classics: she’s the new kid in a small town where everybody knows everyone else. She’s the child of a single mother with a luscious Southern drawl built to provoke snobbery, particularly in tony New England.

The fact that the writers make the effort to confront the casual racial politics of places like Wellsbury should earn it a bit more respect than it may be getting. And it handles this covertly, for the most part. That clothes shopping spree in which Georgia indulges? Entirely accomplished with a string of small cons. Whereas later, when Ginny succumbs to peer pressure and tries to fit in by joining them in shoplifting, she’s the only one to gets caught because she’s the only one the boutique owner searches.

Playing with class conflict in a show like this is easy. Leaning into other essential American ugliness while permeating the plot’s intrigue with black humor and snark is a more challenging knit.

This show blends all of these emotional colors nicely while also ensuring that neither Ginny nor Georgia or anyone else comes off as one-dimensional. Not even Wellsbury’s resident queen bee Cynthia (Sabrina Grdevich) is entirely detestable; she may be used to getting her way, but she’s also being surreptitiously undermined by Georgia, who is all honey, smiles and ambition.

As messy and terrifying as Georgia can be, she’s also an entertaining maneater and thrilling to watch. She’s a predator, but less a wolf than coyote, a creature whose prey drive is coded for survival as opposed to dominance. Her personality also wins her a true friend in Max and Marcus’s mother Ellen (Jennifer Robertson), who may be Wellsbury’s only truly easygoing, accepting person. (Not for nothing, she’s also married to a deaf man, and in all of the scenes the family shares the actors all use sign language as they’re saying their lines.)

Of course, all of Georgia’s existing problems compound as she begins setting others into motion, further alienating her already suffering children in the process.

Gentry’s sensitive performance shoulders the weight of “Ginny & Georgia,” and she wears her character’s excitement, hope and pain with a heartbreaking lightness. When we experience the world through Ginny’s eyes it’s as intoxicating and seductive as her mother wants to it be, but as she warns us in her moody voiceover narration to entirely buy her mother’s act is foolish.

Ginny has her secrets too. She’s also is the daughter of a shady woman who lies, steals and cheats to get what she wants, perhaps not expressly to get ahead but definitely to stay a few strides in front of something she’s running from. Howey never allows us to completely hate Georgia, though, even when we watch her make choices to get by in the here and now that may make life more difficult for them down road.

Nevertheless, as part of a family of series that includes and is defined by “Gilmore” on one end of the scale and the stylized nightmare that is “Euphoria” on the other, a show like “Ginny & Georgia” plays like a product of Netflix’s algorithm – a little Stars Hollow and a few parts “13 Reasons Why” with a touch of “White Oleander” to add some spice. But that only proves that it knows its audience and trusts in its awareness of the world we live in now, a place where Stars Hollow feels more unrealistic than ever. Wellsbury is fictional too, but we know its places and its people. That may be why we can relate more to the Millers with all their unenviable flaws and the melodrama mother and daughter create around them.

Sane people wouldn’t dream of wanting to live through (or relive) Ginny’s aches or contend with the menace Georgia attracts through her actions. But damn if they aren’t a good time to view from a safe distance.

“Ginny & Georgia” is now streaming on Netflix.