Spring Offer: Get 1 Year, Save 58%

Bird flu is spreading. Are supermarket eggs and milk safe?

In early December, Sonoma County, California, declared an agricultural disaster when two poultry farms had to kill their entire flocks to try to stop “highly pathogenic avian influenza” — or bird flu — from spreading. This particular strain of bird flu, H5N1, had first been reported in the United States in early 2022 when escalating avian horror stories began popping up in headlines: Two zoos reported bird flu among their flocks, prompting zoos across the country to pull their birds off-display; three bald eagles were infected in Georgia and died; hundreds of infected birds were found dead at a lake in the Chicago suburbs

Tens of millions of turkey and chickens at commercial farms have since been killed to try to suppress the outbreak. 

During a time of already sustained inflation, as avian influenza cases rose, so did the cost of eggs. As reported by the University of Arkansas System Division of Agriculture, bird flu was blamed for higher egg prices in 2023, which peaked at $4.82 per dozen in January (last month, they hovered around $2.99 per dozen, for reference). 

Then, late Thursday, the Food and Drug Administration announced that one in five commercial milk samples tested in a nationwide survey contained particles of the H5N1 virus, a discovery that has led some experts to voice concern that “the virus is more widespread among dairies than we had previously thought,” as reported by Reuters

But how concerned should home cooks be about the impact of bird flu on the safety of their egg and dairy products? Let’s dive into what we know. 

What is bird flu? 

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), avian influenza, or bird flu, is a virus naturally spread among wild aquatic birds worldwide. The disease was first identified in Italy in the late 19th century and was initially referred to as “fowl plague,” as it was confused with a form of fowl cholera. The term “bird flu” gained more popularity through the 20th and 21st century, following outbreaks of highly pathogenic strains such as H5N1 and H7N9 (and the first  International Symposium on Avian Influenza held in Paris, France, in 1981). 

The CDC maintains that bird flu viruses do not normally infect humans, however, in a current situation summary, the organization says that, “sporadic human infections with bird flu viruses have occurred.” Such is the case with the current strain, H5N1. 

On April 1, a Texas dairy farm worker who had been exposed to cattle tested positive for H5N1 bird flu. According to a release from the CDC, “the patient reported eye redness — consistent with conjunctivitis — as their only symptom, and is recovering.”

We need your help to stay independent

“The patient was told to isolate and is being treated with an antiviral drug for flu,” they write. “This infection does not change the H5N1 bird flu human health risk assessment for the U.S. general public, which CDC considers to be low.” 

This is the second human in the United States to have reported being infected under the current wave of the disease; the first was a 2022 case in Colorado involving a “person who had direct exposure to poultry and was involved in the culling (depopulating) of  poultry with presumptive H5N1 bird flu.” 

While the transmission of bird flu to other mammals is rare, it is possible. Currently, nine states — North Carolina, Ohio, Michigan, Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, Kansas, South Dakota and Idaho — have reported outbreaks of bird flu among cattle, with an estimated 34 herds being impacted as of Friday. There are several ways the cows could have become infected, including coming into direct contact with infected birds, living in a contaminated environment, or consuming feed containing contaminated poultry by-products or droppings. 

Are supermarket eggs and milk safe to consume? 

On Tuesday, the Food and Drug Administration said that samples of pasteurized milk had tested positive for remnants of the bird flu. At the time, they stressed that the materials were inactivated and that they “do not represent actual virus that may be a risk to consumers.”

According to Dr. Scott Roberts, a Yale New Haven Hospital Infectious Disease specialist and assistant professor in infectious diseases at Yale School of Medicine, there’s little risk of transmission in supermarket eggs and milk because one needs to have direct contact with the infected animal. 

“But more than that, the pasteurization process would kill any viable virus in there,” Roberts said

The FDA issued a statement communicating a similar message on Friday after the agency had received additional results from “an initial limited set of geographically targeted samples as part of its national commercial milk sampling study underway in coordination with USDA.” 

“The FDA continues to analyze this information; however, preliminary results of egg inoculation tests on quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR)-positive retail milk samples show that pasteurization is effective in inactivating HPAI [avian influenza],” they wrote. “This additional testing did not detect any live, infectious virus. These results reaffirm our assessment that the commercial milk supply is safe.” 

As a result, experts recommend avoiding unpasteurized or raw milk and egg products. 

What’s next? 

Until now, farmers only had to test their dairy cows for bird flu voluntarily or if their herd showed symptoms of infection, but the USDA announced last week that every lactating cow must now be tested and post a negative result before moving to a new state. This will help officials track the disease and understand how it is spreading, according to Michael Watson, an administrator with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.

“We believe we can do tens of thousands of tests a day,” Watson told the Associated Press

Then, according to the FDA’s Friday statement, the agency will continue further assessing retail samples from its study of 297 samples of retail dairy products from 38 states. 

“All samples with a PCR positive result are going through egg inoculation tests, a gold-standard for determining if infectious virus is present,” they wrote. “These important efforts are ongoing, and we are committed to sharing additional testing results as soon as possible. Subsequent results will help us to further review our assessment that pasteurization is effective against this virus and the commercial milk supply is safe.”

RFK Jr. repeats debunked vaccine claims in interview with Bill Maher

Presidential hopeful Robert F. Kennedy Jr. made an appearance on “Real Time with Bill Maher” on Friday, pushing back on claims that he is “anti-vaccine.”  

Maher began the segment by pressing Kennedy on running mate Nicole Shanahan, who spoke out against the Moderna vaccine.

“She’s not gonna . . . I think those vaccines need to . . . We need to have, again, true double blind placebo control trials,” Kennedy struggled to explain. 

Notably, the results of a phase III double-blind clinical trial of the Moderna vaccine were published in 2021.

Kennedy went on to discuss vaccine skepticism in the American public, possibly fueled by claims he made, saying, “There’s 25% of Americans who believe that they know somebody who was killed by a COVID vaccine.”

It’s true that a 2023 poll concluded that 34% of Americans believe COVID vaccines have contributed to deaths. Although, beyond their initial FDA clearance, multiple studies have shown that COVID vaccines are safe.

Kennedy then spouted a debunked claim that those who took the Pfizer vaccine in a clinical trial saw a 23% increase in death rate.

Maher, who said he himself was an early skeptic, touted the effectiveness of the vaccine in response to Kennedy’s and, eventually, the two came to an agreement, with Maher arguing for “mak[ing] it a case by case basis.”

The pair’s shared agita with vaccine mandates is in contrast with scientists, who hold that a large threshold of populations must be vaccinated for them to be maximally effective.  

“I’m not anti-vaccine,” Kennedy said. “I’m called that because it’s a way of silencing me.”

Kennedy’s long history of vaccine skepticism was reported on in a 2005 article originally published by Salon, in which he argued that a link between compounds in vaccines and autism existed. The article was retracted after evidence suggesting critical errors and potential fraud in the cited studies emerged.

Watch RFK Jr. on "Real Time" here:

Lawyer suggests Trump had Daniels’ phone number due to “The Apprentice” casting

In court on Friday, Donald Trump’s attorney, Susan Necheles, suggested that he had Stormy Daniels’ number because she was nearly cast in "The Celebrity Apprentice."  

The trial, in which Trump is charged with 34 counts of falsification in connection with hush money payments made to his alleged affair partner, saw more testimony, including from former Trump assistant Rhona Graff.

Questioning Graff, Necheles brought up Daniels and Karen McDougal, for whom Graff created contact pages within the Trump Organization’s computer system. Necheles began to argue that Trump only had Daniels' phone number as a result of a casting effort on his TV show.

“He thought that she would be an interesting addition to 'The Apprentice?'" Necheles asked, according to NBC News.

"That was the office chatter, yes," Graff replied. When asked whether she had ever seen Daniels, Graff said she vaguely remembered her in the lobby of Trump Tower. Graff also testified that she was aware that Daniels was a porn actress.  

Daniels was reportedly not in the running to appear on "The Celebrity Apprentice" until 2007, a year after her alleged affair with Trump. She never appeared on the program.

Necheles seeks to build a case that there was no wrong-doing in the former President’s payments to Daniels, while placating her client who maintains that he had no affair with Daniels.

Arguments in the trial will resume Monday, following this week’s testimony from David Pecker, former National Enquirer publisher, Graff, and banker Gary Farro.

It’s all the media’s fault

Well, we finally know who to blame.

President Joe Biden unexpectedly (for the White House press pool, at least) showed up on the Howard Stern Sirius XM radio show Friday. It was a mutual love fest that surprisingly provided some insight — but you had to be a subscriber to listen.

Stern, who dressed up in a suit a little too small for his expanding girth (according to him) fawned over Biden for a bit before asking him a few noteworthy questions. Biden confirmed he’d be willing to debate Donald Trump. That was the big news. But at one point the president turned the tables and asked Stern in essence, why does the media suck today?

Stern blamed social media and Biden said he “hasn’t figured it out yet,” but that the “free press isn’t speaking up as much as it used to.” 

“Everyone is scared,” Stern argued. Biden agreed.

Excuse me?

As Samuel L. Jackson said in “Pulp Fiction”: “Allow me to retort.”

Yes, the press sucks. If you need to understand how badly we blow, I point you to David Pecker and his testimony in Manhattan this week during the first of potentially four Donald Trump felony trials. Pecker, the former publisher of The National Enquirer, is/was an independent journalist (or the colorectal cancerous example thereof) who is a slave to the money. His brand of toiletry involves writing stories for the absolutely lowest common denominator of homo sapiens.

As H.L. Mencken once noted, homo sapiens are hopeless. “Go back through the history of the past thousand years and you will find that nine-tenths of the popular idols of the world – have been hawkers of palpable nonsense.” That’s why most stories in The National Enquirer were about things like giving birth to Big Foot’s baby, engaging in a threesome with space aliens and why Donald Trump is a great guy. Naturally, Trump loved Pecker. Read that any way you want.

And while everyone this week is taking a deep dive on what the Trump trial means for the future of the presidency and politics, few reporters are examining what it shows about the bigger picture of the press: It’s all about the Benjamins.

Fewer and fewer companies own more and more of the media outlets, independence is waning and as a result, the news business is just a cash grab built around knee-jerk reactions and preconceived notions. David Pecker’s stewardship of The National Enquirer exposes the worst problems in today’s press. He is the bottom of the barrel and some politicians absolutely love it. 

Trump took advantage of him while calling us all “Fake News.” It’s a cry that has stuck because the American public knows there’s something wrong with us – they just don’t know what it is. And that cry was taken up by Biden on Stern’s show.

“I haven’t figured it out yet.” Uh-huh. I think he has.

 

In short, the press is the big problem everyone says it is. And while everyone feigns ignorance about the cause of our demise, there are those who should know better – and that includes the president of the United States.

David Pecker courted Donald Trump because Trump had something Pecker wanted: influence, money and an audience. Trump courted Pecker because he wanted cover and Pecker’s easily influenced and entertained audience. Biden courted Stern because he wanted Stern's audience and Stern courted Biden because he wanted what Pecker wanted.

Who got screwed? In Trump’s case, it’s anyone who came into contact with him – including Pecker and scores of others who worked with Trump during the last five decades and had to kiss the acidic ring of fire held by Trump. By extension, we’ve all suffered, especially those who love him the most. However, as Mencken pointed out, they’re too stupid to realize that.

We need your help to stay independent

In Biden’s case on the Stern show, it’s anyone who didn’t listen to Stern on subscription satellite radio. The size of his audience is debatable – but it is believed to consist of 35-44-year-old upscale listeners who make more than $100K a year.  I guess they remain attracted to Stern because of his “Fartman” bit or the fact that he once had a female guest ride a Sybian for masturbatory pleasure on his show. Hey, that’s a good demographic, and there are other reasons Biden went on Stern’s show. One of those reasons is to stick it to Donald Trump. But, again, unless you subscribe to Stern, you didn’t get to hear it.

Trump used to be a frequent guest on Stern’s show – but the two had a falling out over Trump’s politics after he became president, and last fall, Trump blasted Stern in a post  on Truth Social, calling Stern a “broken weirdo, unattractive both inside and out, trying like hell to be relevant!”

That came after Stern criticized Trump and the MAGA party for the revocation of Roe V. Wade and assorted other questionable policies supported by the former president. No doubt, Biden loved going on the show to get in a few digs. Who could blame him? Still, having the president sit down in primetime with Dan Rather would be more appealing.  

So, to continue to retort to Stern and the President, what gives anyone the idea that we are scared? There are plenty of us unafraid of either Trump or Biden, or any other president. On the contrary, I think both Trump and Biden are afraid to sit down with members of the press who aren’t afraid of them.

Trump would never sit down and do a one-on-one with a member of the press pool who publicly challenged him. How many times did I, Jim Acosta, April Ryan, Jeff Mason, or anyone else who pushed back against Trump sit down across from him and have the opportunity to extensively question him? 

Zero times. 

And how often has Biden done the same? He hasn’t even shown up in the Brady briefing room once and has had fewer encounters with the press than Trump. It’s a bit disingenuous for this president to say he hasn’t figured it out yet. I think he has. The key is to stay away from people who might ask you questions you don’t want to answer – or more importantly questions your inner circle don’t want you to answer. It’s far easier to go on a national show with an audience that suits your demographic needs – even if the host of the show is not known for interviewing presidents; or particularly because he isn’t known for that. 

When I told a Biden staffer I should have more access to the president because he always answers my questions when I’m in front of him I was told “that’s precisely why they don’t want you in front of him.”

That being said, while you can fault politicians for the de-construction and consolidation in our industry – points I’ve often covered in depth – and even wrote a book about (“Free the Press” of which I also gave a copy to Biden), it is unfair to totally blame the politicians for the day-to-day stupidity they’ve helped make possible.

Media managers could demand better. They do not. They populate the press corps with young, inexpensive, ignorant and arrogant reporters because it serves their bottom line better. The reporters, enamored and, to Stern’s point, fearful, don’t aspire to anything greater than access. They think they’re important just because they’re in the room, yet they are often more politically naïve than Howard Stern. As we gather for the “Nerd Prom” the White House Correspondents’ Dinner in D.C. this evening, what exactly are we celebrating? Our mediocrity?


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


Briefings are jokes, with reporters asking questions the average American often laughs at with aplomb. We are everything everyone says we are – venal, shallow, incredibly ignorant, self-effacing, smug, arrogant and often wrong.

But every politician knows why. It’s not a mystery. We have the politicians to blame for it. Our media managers make money off of it and reporters are too stupid to see they have the power to make effective and important changes in the delivery of news because we are in the same room with the decisionmakers. 

Just once, why doesn’t the entire press corps simply ask the same question in the Brady briefing room: When can we see the president show up to take some questions? In the last few months I, and only a handful of others have asked this – though most want to see it. They are afraid to ask it, fearful of having their access diminished and never understanding of the fact that the politicians need us.

The best presidential press secretary I ever encountered was Mike McCurry, who once told me that the Clinton administration learned as much from us as we learned from them during briefings and press conferences. “Sometimes it even led to policy changes,” he said candidly.

Today, as H.L. Mencken once noted, the press has become filled with ignorance and cowardice. The presidency suffers because the administration doesn’t interact enough to learn from us, and their limited interactions are with virtual neophytes.

If Biden really is still searching for an answer to the press problem, and gets a second term, I encourage him to sit down with me and I can give it to him chapter and verse. And, if he’s really courageous, he could take some questions from me for a half hour or so. 

If he’s got the stones to do it. 

“Beginning of the end”: Law professor says first hush-money witness set up case to “bury Trump”

Ex-American Media Inc. David Pecker spent the week divulging the intricacies of the catch-and-kill deals he made on behalf of Donald Trump and their relationship while on the stand in the former president's New York hush-money trial — and his testimony, legal experts say, could spell the "beginning of the end for Trump" in the case. 

Pecker, who was on the stand for four days this week, described in detail his work with Trump and his former lawyer and "fixer" Michael Cohen to "catch and kill" negative stories about the former president, while publishing negative stories about Trump's political rivals.  

The former National Enquirer publisher said AMI paid Playboy model and actress Karen McDougal, whose allegations are not a part of the current case against the former president, $150,000 to keep her quiet about her alleged affair with Trump. His later decision not to purchase the story of an alleged sexual encounter with Stormy Daniels, the adult film actress whose hush-money payment is at the center of the Manhattan district attorney's case, led Cohen to ultimately foot the $130,000 bill, Pecker said, according to CNN

Pecker's testimony was "really critical" to the "important foundation" the prosecution is trying to establish with the jury as it presents its case, David Schultz, a Hamline University professor of political science and legal studies, told Salon. 

"The foundation is to establish the fact that Trump and the National Enquirer were regularly — to use the phrase here — catching and killing stories, stories, for our purposes here, that could potentially impact somebody's career or more importantly a political career," Schultz explained. "And what I think is trying to be established here is the foundation for the predicate crime."

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who brought the case, has charged Trump with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to cover up hush-money payments to Daniels made to keep her from going public with their alleged affair ahead of the 2016 presidential election. In order to elevate what would normally be misdemeanor charges to felonies, prosecutors would need to prove the falsification predicated an underlying crime, Schultz said.

Prosecutors have argued that the cover up served to influence the 2016 presidential election, and Bragg put forth a few legal theories for what the underlying crime could be in a November court filing, according to Lawfare: violations of federal campaign finance law under the Federal Election Campaign Act, violations of New York election law section 17-152, and violations of federal, local and state tax law. 

While the prosecution hasn't yet finished articulating those theories, it's currently carrying out what is almost "a mini trial" to convince the jury that Trump's alleged scheming with Cohen and Pecker "wasn't just because Trump was personally embarrassed" or sought to conceal the alleged extramarital affairs from his wife but instead because Trump wanted to protect his presidential campaign, Schultz explained. Prosecutors, then, could establish the predicate crime by showing the payments were therefore made to hide the information and influence the strength of the campaign. 

From there, Schultz continued, the prosecutors could make the case about the structure of the payment records amounting to a form of fraud under New York state law and the records concealing a crime elevating the counts to felonies. 

We need your help to stay independent

But the district attorney's failure to clearly outline in the indictment the specific elements of the underlying crime Trump is charged with and the way he is alleged to satisfy those elements could also come back to bite the prosecution by way of Pecker's testimony, Syracuse University College of Law professor Gregory Germain told Salon, likening the lack of specificity to "getting pulled over and given a ticket for violating the traffic code." 

"You have a right to know what you did — you were speeding, or ran a red light. We don't let the prosecutors say that you violated the traffic law and make you guess what you have to show to defend yourself," he explained, noting that the district attorney can state multiple crimes and would only need to prove one but didn't so in the charging document. 

Though Pecker appeared "truthful and credible" on the stand, his testimony "has very little" to do with the charges in the indictment because Trump is not being charged with "conspiring with Pecker to commit an election crime," he argued. Because the former AMI exec only referred Daniels' story to Cohen and wasn't involved in Daniels' payment or its documentation, Trump could "argue on appeal that the Court should not have admitted evidence of the unrelated Pecker crimes" should he be convicted, he explained.

"The judge allowed Pecker and [will allow] MacDougal to testify, even though the potential crimes they were involved with had nothing to do with the charges in the indictment," Germain said. "The Court of Appeals just overturned Harvey Weinstein's conviction because the trial court allowed the admission of evidence of prior acts that had nothing to do with the charges, and I think the DA's attempt to introduce evidence from Karen MacDougal that will be prejudicial to Trump but has really nothing to do with the document charges in the indictment will create additional problems for the DA on appeal if he is successful in obtaining a conviction."


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


"The DA has to prove that the reason for Trump's characterization of the Cohen payments as attorney fees was to commit a fraud and independent crime," he added. "That should have been the focus of the DA's case, instead of ancillary wrongdoing that has not been charged.  We haven't seen any real evidence yet relating to the charges."

Schultz argued, however, that the prosecution is setting up "a pattern for the predicate offense" that establishes Daniels' payoff is part of a "broader process" that was regularly carried out to hide embarrassing information, and "the fact that Trump knew that process, through Mr. Pecker being his friend."

To that end, "Pecker was the perfect lead off for the prosecution," argued Bennett Gershman, a former New York prosecutor and current Pace University law professor, emphasizing that Pecker made it "crystal clear" the case is about a plot to "illegally influence the 2016 election." From Pecker's testimony, the jury could "reasonably connect" him and Trump as the "sleazy publisher and a sleazy politician" duo and "clearly find" that the catch-and-kill effort was for the election. 

Pecker also testified Thursday that, at least during the 2016 presidential campaign, he understood Trump's concerns undergirding the hush-money scheme to revolve around "the impact it would have upon the election."

"The prosecution [has] now set up the case effectively and every subsequent witness will connect the dots, reinforce the sleazy plot, and likely bury Trump," Gershman said, arguing that Pecker's testimony will bring about "the beginning of the end for Trump, at least [in] this case."

Trump’s criminal trials are accelerating the countdown clock on America’s news media

The American news media is facing an extreme challenge as it prepares to celebrate itself tonight at the White House Correspondents' dinner. During normal times covering a presidential election is hard work. But the Age of Trump and the larger democracy crisis have made reporting and commenting about the news and current events even more difficult. How has the American mainstream news media as an institution met the challenge?

On one day the elite agenda-setting news media such as the New York Times and the Washington Post will publish excellent investigative reporting on subjects such as Donald Trump and his regime’s crimes, Jan. 6, and the authoritarian playbook of Project 2025 and Agenda 47. But as has been widely documented, in the interest of “balance” and “fairness” and a “diversity of opinion," those same elite media outlets will the next day feature op-eds and other commentary from Trumpists and MAGA people and others who oppose multiracial pluralistic democracy – the effect of which is to mainstream and normalize their anti-democratic beliefs. As journalist Nina Bernstein told Dan Froomkin in a 2021 interview, “Many reporters across the traditional news media are struggling against institutional tics and timidities that make ‘balance’ a false idol.” The consequence: “The inadvertent normalization of existential threats to democracy and public health by one party and its right-wing media echo chamber.

To that point, NBC News recently hired former Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel, a Trumpist and Big Lie advocate, as a political analyst. After public outrage — and a revolt by several of MSNBC’s most prominent TV personalities — the offer of employment was eventually rescinded.

There is a focus on President Biden’s occasional lapses in memory – which mental health and other experts have concluded are normal for a man of his age. However, Donald Trump’s worsening and much more severe challenges in memory, speech, cognition, and behavior which may be indicative of an actual brain disease are often downplayed or ignored. Alternately, the mainstream news media tries to create a false equivalency between President Biden and Donald Trump’s challenges with memory and speech when they are in fact very different.

We need your help to stay independent

Slate magazine’s Alicia Montgomery recently reflected on her time working at NPR and how its leadership dismissed the mounting evidence that Donald Trump could win in 2016 and enforced a policy of normalizing his candidacy:

For most of 2016, many NPR journalists warned newsroom leadership that we weren’t taking Trump and the possibility of his winning seriously enough. But top editors dismissed the chance of a Trump win repeatedly, declaring that Americans would be revolted by this or that outrageous thing he’d said or done. I remember one editorial meeting where a white newsroom leader said that Trump’s strong poll numbers wouldn’t survive his being exposed as a racist. When a journalist of color asked whether his numbers could be rising because of his racism, the comment was met with silence. In another meeting, I and a couple of other editorial leaders were encouraged to make sure that any coverage of a Trump lie was matched with a story about a lie from Hillary Clinton. Another colleague asked what to do if one candidate just lied more than the other. Another silent response.

Public opinion polls and other research show that the American people have low levels of trust in the news media. This is in part a function of how malign actors such as Donald Trump and others on the right have for decades used disinformation and other propaganda tools to systematically undermine faith in the news media and other democratic institutions as part of their authoritarian campaign to create an alternate reality where the truth and the facts no longer exist.

But there is another compelling explanation for these declining levels of trust: The mainstream news media as an institution has been criminally late in consistently sounding the alarm about Donald Trump and the existential dangers that he and the MAGA movement represent to the country.

On this, philosopher Jason Stanley, author of "How Fascism Works," told me in conversation here at Salon:

It's surreal. No amount of reality will change them. I'm shocked, by the way the media is reacting to every new claim that Trump is a fascist as if this were news. Those like me, you, and a select group of others have been saying for years that Trump was a potential fascist dictator and there is a movement behind him. They dismissed us and laughed at us. Now instead of turning to those of us who were accurate and sounding the alarm years ago, the media is turning to people, supposed experts, who only now are realizing that we're facing a fascist, social and political movement. Such people should not be the ones turned to by the news media to be talking about the near-term future of Trump and this fascist movement and the danger. Why? They have quite clearly demonstrated total unreliability. For example, a person who is so late to this danger and reality can go back instantly to normalization. Who knows what someone who was so blatantly wrong for so long about social reality will believe or say? The current commentators were so far behind the fact that Trump is a fascist that they will not be able to properly comprehend such tricks. Most importantly, in 2023, they are just starting to think about fascism….

If you know how to read Trump correctly then you understand his intentions and plans. If you are just now realizing that Trump is a fascist, you're going to be looking for signs to assuage yourself that you are just being hysterical, because you spent so many years calling those of us who have been correctly describing reality, hysterical. The people who the media are turning to now as alarm sounders are not equipped to understand what is really happening.

Can the American mainstream news media fix itself?

Charles Sykes offers the following suggestions in his new essay at the Atlantic:

Are we going to get it right this time? Have the media learned their lessons, and are journalists ready for the vertiginous slog of the 2024 campaign?

My answer: only if we realize how profoundly the rules of the game have changed….

So what’s to be done? I don’t have any easy answers, because I don’t think they exist. Getting it right this time does not mean that journalists need to pull their punches in covering Biden or become slavish defenders of his administration’s policies. In fact, that would only make matters worse. But perhaps we could start with some modest proposals.

First, we should redefine newsworthy. Klaas argues that journalists need to emphasize the magnitude rather than simply the novelty of political events. Trump’s ongoing attacks on democracy may not be new, but they define the stakes of 2024. So although live coverage of Trump rallies without any accompanying analysis remains a spectacularly bad idea, it’s important to neither ignore nor mute the dark message that Trump delivers at every event.

The media challenge will be to emphasize the abnormality of Donald Trump without succumbing to a reactionary ideological tribalism, which would simply drive audiences further into their silos. Put another way: Media outlets will need all the credibility they can muster when they try to sound the alarm that none of this is normal. And it is far more important to get it right than to get it fast, because every lapse will be weaponized.

The commitment to “fairness” should not, however, mean creating false equivalencies or fake balance. (An exaggerated report about Biden’s memory lapses, for example, should not be a bigger story than Trump’s invitation to Vladimir Putin to invade European countries.)

Sykes concludes with a much-needed corrective about the dangers of political coverage as theater criticism:

In the age of Trump, it is also important that members of the media not be distracted by theatrics generally. (This includes Trump’s trial drama, the party conventions, and even—as David Frum points out in The Atlantic—the debates.) Relatedly, the stakes are simply too high to wallow in vibes, memes, or an obsessive focus on within-the-margin-of-error polls. Democracy can indeed be crushed by authoritarianism. But it can also be suffocated by the sort of trivia that often dominates social media.

And, finally, the Prime Directive of 2024: Never, ever become numbed by the endless drumbeat of outrages.


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


Mark Jacob, former metro editor at the Chicago Tribune, has also been trying to hold the mainstream American news media to a higher standard in the Age of Trump. In a particularly sharp essay at his newsletter Stop the Presses, which merits being quoted at length, Jacob takes on the dictates of “neutrality” and “objectivity.”

Journalists aren’t bystanders in a democracy.

Democracy relies on them to take action – to fact-check political lies, expose wrongdoing, explain the issues, and warn the public about the consequences of their votes.

Our political system cannot survive without an informed citizenry that’s equipped with shared, verified facts. That means journalists are not passive members of the audience – they’re supporting actors in the drama.

I’m not saying they should be kingmakers, deciding which candidates they like and distorting the news to fit their personal opinions. But they must not shy away from exposing politicians who use lies and hate to threaten democracy. That’s not the media being unfair – that’s the media doing their duty.

Whether journalists realize it or not, they operate from a set of values – ideally, values shaped by deep concern for what’s important to the public. Yes, I said “a set of values.” Because no one in the news media is truly objective, and when they try too hard to appear to be, it sometimes compels them to do the wrong thing….

You see, the real problem in American journalism isn’t that some outlets have values; it’s that some outlets spread disinformation. The main reason Fox News is bad for democracy is not because it’s right-wing – it’s because Fox lies to support criminals.

In my four-decade career as a daily newspaper editor, I assigned reporters to cover plenty of stories, and I wasn’t objective. I chose stories I thought would benefit our audience and our community. I was undoubtedly wrong sometimes. But it’s impossible to be unbiased. The very act of assigning a story is a value judgment. Every story is shaped by multitudes of biases, from who gets quoted to how they’re described to what gets edited out. Pretending otherwise is, as McGowan put it, a fallacy.

Here Jacob aims a powerful light at the failings of the New York Times:

The publisher of the New York Times, A.G. Sulzberger, spoke recently to the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, making the case for objectivity, or as he called it, “independent journalism.” He described it as “an insistence on reflecting the world as it is, not as you wish it to be.”

But the Times seems to wish it was 1983 and Tip O’Neill was cutting a bipartisan deal with Ronald Reagan. It has utterly failed to face up to the unprecedented danger of MAGA fascism. Either that or the Times thinks objectivity means not caring whether democracy survives. (I raised that issue in a recent newsletter.)

My friend Bryan Smith has a nickname for the New York Times — the Great Dumbfounded Paper, reflecting the news outlet’s tendency to protect its self-styled objectivity by pretending it doesn’t know why bad things happen. The Times prefers to blame “politics” instead of the people who are actually at fault. That supposedly makes the Times appear “fair.”

One of the most disturbing parts of Sulzberger’s speech was his dismissal of the idea of being on “the right side of history.”

“Simply put, journalists don’t serve the public by trying to predict history’s judgments or to steer society to them,” he said. “Our job as journalists is firmly rooted in the present: to arm society with the information and context it needs to thoughtfully grapple with issues of the day.”

While the New York Times often comes across as arrogant, that statement suggests the paper has a poor sense of its own power and potential. We’re facing an election that could plunge this country into a dictatorship and the folks at the Times aren’t worried about how history will view their role?

How terribly objective of them.

The institutional failings of the American news media in the Age of Trump are not spontaneous: they are the result of years and decades of poor decision-making, as well as market and political forces that are largely outside of the control of the rank-and-file reporters and journalists and other people who comprise “the media.” This means that fixing these deep problems will most certainly not happen over the next few months. But in the short term there is a better way forward — if the American news media chooses it. The countdown clock on the American news media in the Age of Trump and ascendant fascism has not expired but we are very close to that moment. Time is not a luxury that the American news media – or the American people and their democracy and society – has in abundance.

Can nasal Neosporin fight COVID? Surprising new research suggests it works

Four years ago, when COVID-19 first began to spread globally, it didn't just damage our physical health, but also the health of our information ecosystem. Ever since, the internet has been rife with health misinformation on ways to treat or protect oneself against the coronavirus. First, internet healers falsely suggested that gargling salt water and vinegar could prevent a coronavirus infection. Then, despite multiple studies debunking the effectiveness of ivermectin, an anti-parasitic drug used in horses (and less commonly in humans), Joe Rogan fans continued to cling onto it as a potential treatment.

Health misinformation is a symptom of a lack of certainty. When there is no guaranteed preventative measure or treatment, people are bound to find solutions on their own. Thanks to cognitive biases like confirmation bias, they might even appear to work. But what if a way to reduce exposure to COVID-19, and treat it, was hiding in our medicine cabinets all along — and it wasn’t pseudoscience? 

A new study published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences suggests that neomycin, an ingredient in the first aid ointment Neosporin, may prevent or treat a range of respiratory viral infections such as COVID-19 and influenza when applied to the nose. 

In the study, researchers found that mice who had neomycin in their nostrils exhibited strong antiviral activity against both SARS-CoV- 2 and a highly virulent strain of influenza A virus. It also mitigated contact transmission of SARS-CoV- 2 between hamsters. 

"When we compared the gene expression in the nose, Neosporin stimulated genes whereas those people who had Vaseline did not."

“We decided to see if neomycin applied into the nose can protect animals from infection with COVID as well as the flu,” Dr. Akiko Iwasaki, the lead author of the study and a professor of immunobiology at the Yale University School of Medicine, told Salon in a phone interview. “And what we found is that treatment with neomycin significantly prevented infection and also reduced disease burden in animals.”

Iwasaki described the work as “encouraging” because it shows that neomycin can trigger an antiviral response in animals by creating a localized immune response. “That’s resulting in this protection that we see,” Iwasaki said. 


Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon's weekly newsletter Lab Notes.


The results are encouraging for mice and hamsters. But what about humans? The researchers proceeded to recruit healthy volunteers and asked them to apply Neosporin with a cotton swab to their nose, twice a day. The placebo for some was vaseline. The researchers measured their antiviral response and found similar results.

“When we compared the gene expression in the nose, Neosporin stimulated genes whereas those people who had Vaseline did not,” Iwasaki said.  “So this suggests that we might be able to use Neosporin or neomycin in humans to induce this antiviral state that we also saw in animals.”

Does that mean we should all be applying Neosporin to our noses in high-risk situations? Not exactly, but it probably wouldn’t hurt either — as long as someone isn’t allergic to the cream, which is a combination of the antibiotics bacitracin, neomycin and polymyxin B. Notably, details around the dosage remain unclear. 

“We know from the dose response that we did in animals that we probably need to give humans more Neosporin, or neomycin,” she said. “Because Neosporin has very little neomycin compared to what we were able to achieve in the animal model.”

"This could be a potential broad spectrum antiviral treatment and prophylaxis."

Iwasaki added they know that Neosporin can produce a similar effect in humans as it did in animals, but whether or not it can reduce transmission has yet to be determined. 

“For that, we need different kinds of study and a much larger study to determine that,” she said. 

Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center and infectious disease doctor who wasn’t involved in the study, told Salon via email that the research could have broader implications that extend beyond COVID-19. 

“This could be a potential broad spectrum antiviral treatment and prophylaxis,”Adalja said. “The molecules in the topical antibiotic cream induce certain antiviral compounds to be made by cells where the ointment has been applied; these antiviral compounds produce non-specific immunity that impacts various viruses.”

Iwasaki cautioned against the idea that people swabbing their noses with Neosporin will be a cure-all in the future. Instead, she said she sees this as another possible layer of protection

We need your help to stay independent

“We know how important it is to layer protection against infections,” Iwasaki said. “Vaccines and masks and other measures are very important, but this type of strategy where we can trigger the host to produce antiviral factors may be another layer that we can add on to the existing ones.”

The more layers a person has, Iwasaki said, the less likely a person is to get infected. 

“And that's really important for preventing diseases like long COVID,” Iwasaki said, referring to a condition in which COVID symptoms last for months or even years. “So I think it's definitely worth kind of moving forward with an approach like this.”

An approach that was right under our noses all this time.

The climate crisis is a sexual health and reproductive rights emergency

In the wake of Earth Day, West Africa is facing a historic and deadly heatwave, last month was the tenth hottest month in a row in the U.S., and Americans and people across the globe are already bracing for what scientists are predicting will be yet another record-breaking summer with more extreme heat and weather events in store.

Those of us paying attention know it to be true: the climate crisis is here. Climate change is perhaps the defining crisis of our time and our rapidly changing climate will undoubtedly affect every aspect of human life – including people’s sexual and reproductive health.

Women and girls disproportionately bear the brunt of climate-related events and environmental stress – women comprise 20 million of the 26 million people estimated to have been displaced already by climate change. As the climate crisis ravages our world, many have ignored the detrimental impact it has on women’s lives, their access to health care and their agency to create the families and futures of their choosing. But we can no longer ignore this reality. 

Our global community is experiencing a swift rise in disastrous weather events from droughts and flooding to extreme heat and freak storms. As I wrote when Hurricane Harvey struck Texas several years ago, during these ever-more-frequent emergencies, sexual and reproductive health services are often “invisible” when compared with food and emergency medicine in humanitarian relief efforts and crisis settings. But reproductive health services such as contraception and abortion are also critical and time-sensitive.

We simply cannot talk about the dangers and harms of climate change without including the impact on reproductive health. It’s past time to recognize that climate justice is a reproductive justice issue

Sexual and reproductive health services are often “invisible” when compared with food and emergency medicine in humanitarian relief efforts and crisis settings.

Let’s take one example: access to clean water. In Kenya, and in many places across the globe, access to clean water is increasingly in jeopardy due to ongoing cycles of drought and flooding brought on by climate change. Without access to clean water, women cannot safely give birth. They cannot receive basic reproductive care. Health care providers in Kenya have reported turning away women seeking reliable long-term contraception like implants and IUDs, as well as women actively in labor, because they cannot sanitize the health facility.

Additionally, sea level rise in Bangladesh has turned many freshwater sources into salt water, forcing women in these communities to bathe, drink and fish in non-fresh water, which has been linked to hypertension, preeclampsia and a rise in miscarriage and dangerous gynecological infections.


Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon's weekly newsletter Lab Notes.


As these droughts, floods and other climate emergencies force people from their homes and create climate refugees, we know women face elevated risk of gender-based violence, forced prostitution, forced marriage and unwanted pregnancy. Women are not only more likely than men to be displaced by climate change, they are disproportionately negatively impacted by displacement.

Furthermore, what is deeply troubling is in the wake of climate emergencies, even humanitarian aid is rife with a minefield of harms for women and girls. In Mozambique, women report being exploited by government officials in charge of food aid distribution after climate disasters, offering them extra food in exchange for sexual favors. In times of emergency, the last worry on a mother’s mind should be wondering if she or her children will be safe from sexual violence if they seek shelter in government-provided housing.

So many women in the world are enduring these horrors as a result of the climate crisis. It is heartbreaking, terrifying and unacceptable.

Yet, research from Ipas, the non-profit reproductive justice organization where I am president, indicates that women in Bangladesh have faced increased sexual harassment and assault in community cyclone centers. Researchers on my team have also spoken with countless women and girls who are afraid to use the bathroom in humanitarian aid-provided shelters because the facilities are shared by men and often lack door locks and lighting, causing them to painfully hold their urine for fear of being sexually assaulted.

So many women in the world are enduring these horrors as a result of the climate crisis. It is heartbreaking, terrifying and unacceptable – we cannot allow them to go unaddressed or become worse.

We are already feeling the fallout of the climate crisis – it's no longer a question of whether or not it exists, but rather how will we deal with the already catastrophic transformation of our world that climate change will create. As we puzzle through that enormous problem, we must prioritize women and girls’ sexual and reproductive health.

We need your help to stay independent

So what does that look like? At minimum, it means integrating abortion access and sexual and reproductive health and rights into climate justice efforts at the local, regional and global levels, including in the wake of disasters. It means prioritizing the views of women in climate solutions.   And it means empowering women in community decision-making.

But we must think more boldly. Climate change calls on us to radically re-imagine health service delivery. Brick and mortar clinics will not serve us if they are washed away or are without electricity and staff. This is a call for public health professionals to move beyond “resilience” to re-imagination. We must radically re-imagine the health system, and we are very far behind in doing so. In the meantime, people suffer.

While our scientists, researchers, policymakers and experts work to mitigate climate change, we must ensure we are guided by a commitment to creating a world in which women and girls have bodily autonomy, are resilient in the face of climate change, and have the power to determine their own futures.

“Sexual violence is such a thief”: Ashley Judd speaks out against overturn of Weinstein conviction

Actress Ashley Judd spoke out against a New York court’s decision to overturn Harvey Weinstein’s 2020 rape conviction, saying that “male sexual violence is such a thief." 

Judd, the first of numerous women to come forward with sexual harassment allegations against Weinstein, reacted to the top New York court’s decision to overturn the Hollywood producer’s conviction in an interview on CBS Mornings.

“We have institutional betrayal, which is a real thing," Judd said. The court’s 4-3 decision came down to testimony from a number of Weinstein’s alleged victims who were not included in the charges, which the ruling called “irrelevant, prejudicial, and untested.”

Judd appeared alongside reporter Jodi Kantor, who reported on a series of allegations that would become part of the #MeToo movement. 

“To bolster their case, prosecutors brought in additional witnesses, women who had experienced terrible things at the hands of Weinstein," Kantor noted, adding that the controversial prosecution strategy formed the baseline of Weinstein’s appeal.

Though Manhattan prosecutors plan to re-try Weinstein, Judd is weary of putting victims through the same pain once again.

"Courtrooms are not healing spaces," Judd told CBS Mornings. "They are traumatizing spaces and victims should not have to perform their trauma in order to find peace.”

Tarana Burke, founder of the #MeToo movement, also spoke out against the court’s decision in a Thursday press conference, but emphasized that women shouldn’t take the ruling as a “blow to the movement.”

“We ride the wave when we have big moments and when we have low moments, we get low and we get dirty and we do what we have to do,” Burke said. “The outcome of this case doesn’t change that.”

Rose McGowan, another victim of Weinstein’s repeated sexual abuse of women in Hollywood, went to Instagram to share a message of support to women, captioning a video message, “they will never overturn who we are.”

“To everyone out there fighting the good fight… you matter, I’m with you,” the "Jawbreaker" actress said.

Secret Service prepped for possible Trump imprisonment for gag order violations

The Secret Service quietly planned for Donald Trump’s potential imprisonment after his repeated gag order violations prompted a contempt hearing.

In meetings, discussions focused on the possibility of a short jail sentence for being held in contempt by Judge Juan Merchan, though officials were uncertain as to whether he would place Trump in a courthouse holding cell, according to ABC News, adding that staff has not yet begun discussions on its response to a conviction and prison sentence in his hush-money case.

"For all settings around the world, we study locations and develop comprehensive and layered protective models that incorporate state of the art technology, protective intelligence and advanced security tactics to safeguard our protectees,” the Secret Service said in a statement to ABC News. “Beyond that, we do not comment on specific protective operations." 

Trump attended a Tuesday hearing on his repeated violations of a gag order, which legal experts say meet the bar for contempt of court. Judge Merchan ultimately reserved judgment on gag order violations, many of which stem from Trump’s Truth Social posts in which he has made repeated attacks on witnesses in the case, prosecutors say.

Witnesses began their testimony this week, including former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker who outlined a “catch and kill” scheme that he and Trump allegedly engaged in to bury sex scandals during his 2016 campaign.

 

Mars probe spots “spider” shapes in Martian Inca City

The European Space Agency reported a surprising finding in a region of Mars known as Inca City, in which dark shapes resembling spiders were discovered by the agency's Mars Express orbiting satellite. The strange arachnid shapes are actually geologic features formed by channels of carbon dioxide gas that originate as the weather warms in Mars' Southern Hemisphere for that planet's spring. This causes them to create black branches measuring from 0.03 to 0.6 miles across (45 meters to 1 kilometer) and dot an area near Mars' South Pole known as either Inca City or Angustus Labyrinthus. Layers upon layers of carbon dioxide ice melt in the process, with the lowest layers turning to gas (or sublimating), picking up dark dust and then exploding out of the overlying layers.

"This new view of Inca City and its hidden arachnid residents was captured by Mars Express’s High Resolution Stereo Camera," the ESA reported. Their spacecraft grabbed images of "everything from wind-sculpted ridges and grooves to sinkholes on the flanks of colossal volcanoes to impact craters, tectonic faults, river channels and ancient lava pools."

While fans of aliens and bugs (and David Bowie) are likely disappointed at the lack of literal Martian spiders, the presence of carbon dioxide suggests lifeforms may still indeed exist on the Red Planet. Carbon is regarded as an essential element in creating life because it is abundant in nature and polymerizes (forms large, complex molecules) easily with other ubiquitous elements like hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen. Last year a Mars rover discovered organic compounds, or substances that have been polymerized with carbon.

Trump uses “happy birthday” wish to Melania to complain about his “rigged” trial

Donald Trump took a birthday wish to his wife as an opportunity to complain about his criminal trial.

“I want to start by wishing my wife Melania a very happy birthday,” Trump told reporters inside the courthouse, dedicating mere seconds to her before shifting the focus back to himself. “It would be very nice to be with her, but I’m in a courthouse for a rigged trial.”

Melania Trump, whose absence at her husband’s criminal trial has drawn media attention, turned 54 on Friday. The pair married in 2005, just a year before Trump began his alleged affair with porn actress Stormy Daniels.

In court yesterday, former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker discussed his role in killing stories on Trump’s association with Daniels, telling prosecutors that Trump was worried that the stories would make it back to Melania. 

Though she is reportedly taking a step back from a public role in the third Trump campaign, Melania is keeping busy by following in her bible-peddling husband’s entrepreneurial footsteps, selling a $245 necklace to “honor all mothers.”

“We’re doing very well in this rigged trial, and everybody knows it. Yesterday was a big day, but I do have to start by wishing Melania happy birthday,” he said, doubling down in an email to supporters hours later.

This isn’t the first time that Trump has complained that his presence in court stands in the way of his family affairs. He previously falsely complained that judge Juan Merchan was keeping him from attending his son Barron Trump’s graduation.

Trump slips into a “bona fide nap” once again during trial

Donald Trump once again struggled to stay awake during testimony in his first criminal trial.

As lawyers for “Drowsy Don” cross-examined former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker Friday morning, those present at the Manhattan courthouse documented Trump’s nap time. 

Just minutes into the day’s proceedings, former Deputy Assistant Attorney General Harry Litman described the former President as “heavy-lidded,” noting that he “seem[ed] to be dozing off for brief periods.” Trump’s drowsiness during the hush money trial has become a well-documented pattern as New York prosecutors make their case.

Per Litman, Trump slipped into a “bona fide nap,” and was “asleep for several minutes.” Perhaps it was his attorneys’ “pretty dull” arguments, which were reportedly “hardly rapt” to the jury, that exhausted the 77-year-old.

The aging Trump would be the second-oldest President in the office’s history if his bid for a second term is successful, behind his opponent. Trump has knocked 81-year-old President Biden for his age on the campaign trail, reprising the nickname “Sleepy Joe” in a February Truth Social post.

Speculations on whether Biden would agree to a debate given his age came to an end Friday. In an appearance on “The Howard Stern Show,” Biden kicked the ball into Trump’s corner, committing to a debate. “I’m happy to debate him,” Biden told Stern.

“National Enquirer gold”: Trump’s alleged tryst would have sold lots of papers, David Pecker says

David Pecker, former publisher of the National Enquirer, admitted Friday that he would have loved to publish the story of Karen McDougal, a former Playboy model who claims she had an affair with Donald Trump, but that he declined to do so in order to help the former president's 2016 campaign.

The admission came as prosecutor Joshua Steinglass asked Pecker to clearly outline whether or not he had previously conducted a similar arrangement to the one he had with Trump, wherein he would publish stories based on whether or not they would help one particular politician.

Pecker, previously the CEO of American Media Inc., under which the National Enquirer operated, denied ever doing this before. 

"Prior to the August 2015 meeting at Trump Tower, did AMI ever agree to publish stories attacking Mr. Trump’s political opponents?" Steinglass asked. "No," Pecker said.

Through the arrangement with Trump, Pecker understood his job as using his company's network of sources to keep an eye out for "any information that would be coming out on Mr. Trump or the campaign, related to specific women who would be selling their stories," he said. 

When these stories would come up, Pecker testified that he would speak to Trump’s fixer, Michael Cohen, and tell him which stories were up for sale, as well as how urgent it was that they bought them before someone else got to them. 

Cohen would then either buy them or try and make them disappear, Pecker said.

Steinglass questioned Pecker on the McDougal story, in particular.

“Had you published a story about a Playboy model having a year-old sexual affair while he was married with a presidential candidate, would that have sold magazines, you think?" Steinglass asked.

Pecker said it would have been, agreeing with the prosecutor's description of the tale as “National Enquirer gold."

Prosecutors argue that Pecker's arrangement with Trump reached at that August 2015 meeting, constituted illegal contributions to Trump's campaign. In McDougal's case, Pecker paid her $150,000 for the rights to her story.

"At the time you entered into that agreement, you had zero intention of publishing that story?" Steinglass asked. "Yes," Pecker said.

Kristi Noem killed her pet dog, “Cricket,” after the animal misbehaved on a hunting trip, she says

South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, a Republican seen as a potential running mate for Donald Trump, tells a story in her new book about shooting and killing her young dog and a goat, The Guardian reported.

In the book, Noem explains in excruciating detail how she gunned down a 14-month-old wirehair pointer named "Cricket." What crimes earned this dog the death penalty? Noem reported that the puppy was disobedient and out “having the time of her life” during a pheasant hunting trip and that the animal later attacked and killed a neighbor's chickens.

The ill-fated Cricket proved not to be a bad hunter, after all, but was guilty of killing the wrong kind of bird. According to Noem, since a shock collar didn't instill the desired discipline, the only reasonable thing to do was to kill the excitable and “untrainable” pup.

Noem, who became governor in 2019, likened murdering her canine to having the ability and willingness in politics to do anything “difficult, messy, and ugly.” It’s not the only animal she chose to sacrifice that day, she wrote: "​​I realized another unpleasant job needed to be done.”

The “job” in question was killing a “nasty and mean” male family goat. What outrageous crimes did the goat, whom she described as “disgusting, musky, rancid,” commit other than needing a bath? The uncastrated, unnamed farm animal, “loved to chase” Noem’s children, knocking them down and ruining their clothes.

After killing the goat, who proved to put up a bit more of a fight than the defenseless dog, Noem wrote that the school bus arrived to drop off her kids. Her daughter Kennedy looked confused, according to Noem, asking: “Hey, where’s Cricket?”

“I guess if I were a better politician I wouldn’t tell the story here,” Noem wrote.

A history of the Statue of Liberty getting destroyed or distorted in movie posters

The marketing campaign for "Civil War" began with one image. Shortly before the film’s trailer premiered, A24 debuted a single poster announcing the production’s imminent arrival. This teaser features none of the movie's notable actors. It also doesn't offer specific glimpses into the plot. Instead, the "Civil War" poster features two snipers poised at opposite ends of the Statue of Liberty's torch. Sandbags dot the exterior of this torch. Everything on this poster exemplifies that this locale is now a go-to spot for soldiers rather than a tourist attraction. It's a striking image suggesting that no parts of America are off-limits in this national conflict. Everything can become a battleground.

Don’t you want to know what could lead to the chaos that resulted in the State of Liberty’s destruction?

This inaugural piece of "Civil War" marketing continues a long-running promotional trend for movie posters in distorting the Statue of Liberty. Over the years, decimating this iconic American landmark has become a go-to design motif for ominous movies involving cataclysmic circumstances. In the fictional universe of "Civil War," the titular conflict is something unprecedented. While the previous American Civil War had been split across two factions, the one in this film has divided the country into four different sectors, and this time they're duking it out with each other in large-scale battles with refined military firepower. Alex Garland's dystopian hit is all about thrusting both its characters and the audience into a seemingly impossible American nightmare. The "Civil War" poster hinging on the distortion of the Statue of Liberty, though, is far less idiosyncratic.

Hollywood loves to destroy national monuments for the sake of eye-catching spectacle. Just look at 1950s creature features. These titles informed by the horrors of the Atomic Age featured recognizable American landmarks going up in smoke. A big octopus takes down the Golden Gate Bridge in 1955's "It Came from Beneath the Sea." A year later in "Earth vs. the Flying Saucers," the titular otherworldly invaders attack recognizable locales like the White House. These instances of spectacle tend to play on fears as relevant in 2024 as they were in 1954. Landmarks like the Golden Gate Bridge and the White House have always been around. They’re seemingly eternal fixtures that only exist in America. If they can get wiped out, nobody or nowhere is safe.

That anxiety underpins the film industry’s love for blowing up and damaging big American landmarks. It also defines the trend of movie posters depicting the Statue of Liberty in disarray. One notable early example of this phenomenon is a pair of posters for 1981's sci-fi actioner "Escape from New York." Set in the distant future of 1997, "Escape from New York" takes place in a world where the America/Russia conflict has resulted in Manhattan becoming a massive unruly prison. When the President (Donald Pleasence) is taken hostage in this hideous domain, there's only one solution. To fight fearless criminals, you need one of your own. The unpredictable ex-Special Forces agent and federal prisoner Snake Plissken (Kurt Russell) is sent in to retrieve the President despite being the last guy anyone would think of as hero.

All of that mythology and story could be potentially difficult to communicate to moviegoers in a single image. Thus, the "Escape from New York" marketers leaned on skewing the Statue of Liberty to convey the movie's distinctive tone. One of these posters features a pair of handcuffs dangling from the arm of Lady Liberty. The other more famous poster shows the decapitated head of the statue looming in the background of a trio of humans (including Plissken) fleeing the city. Alternate posters for the film continued that theme.

Immediately, "Escape from New York's" posters suggest just how dire the world of this movie truly is. These striking visuals establish an ominous vibe that grabs your eye. However, they're also not throwing everything and the kitchen sink on the poster. Enough is left to the imagination to compel people to buy a ticket. Don’t you want to know what could lead to the chaos that resulted in the State of Liberty’s destruction?

In hindsight, these posters also suggest the cheeky anti-authority vibes of the film. "Escape from New York" is about rescuing the POTUS from the clutches of evil foes. However, neither protagonist Snake Plissken nor the movie has much respect for the President or any authority figures. Having the Statue of Liberty in shambles on the "New York" posters quietly revealed the feature's non-hagiographic approach to America. Nothing is sacred here. Not its leaders nor its monuments urging other countries to “give me your tired, your poor.”

A renaissance for disaster movies in the 1990s gave renewed urgency to posters depicting the Statue of Liberty or any American monument in tatters, with advancements in visual effects now making that possible. That included the White House getting blown up by alien invaders in "Independence Day" or Paris, France going up in smoke thanks to fragments of a massive asteroid in "Armageddon." The former movie even dedicated most of the back of its VHS case to an image of the State of Liberty in ruins. "Escape from New York's" poster lingered on the decapitated Statue of Liberty head to suggest a subversive ominous atmosphere. Now posters in that vein were decimating landmarks in the name of a blockbuster arms race. You couldn’t just promise spectacle to the viewer. You had to promise bigger spectacle than the last disaster movie. 

We need your help to stay independent

This reasoning for this marketing fixation on the damaged Statue of Liberty endured into the 21st century. However, this is when it got amplified by unspeakably devastating real-world circumstances. The horrors of 9/11 made the destruction of seemingly indestructible New York City landmarks a very tangible prospect. Initially, Hollywood responded to this new status quo by removing reminders of 9/11 from their motion pictures. A "Spider-Man" teaser hinging on the Twin Towers was pulled from theaters. Fellow Sony/Columbia summer 2002 blockbuster "Men in Black II" reshot an entire climax that initially took place in this now-decimated location. However, eventually, Hollywood marketers returned to their old tricks. Not even a modern-day equivalent to Pearl Harbor could stop major studios from returning to the Statue of Liberty in ruins. In fact, posters for disaster movies like "The Day After Tomorrow" lingered on this monument's destruction. Now the promised ruin of the Statue of Liberty didn't signal a dystopian future; it grounded even the corniest disaster movies in something resembling reality. 

Here, viewers see the aftermath of the Statue of Liberty getting its head torn off.

This was especially true with Matt Reeves' 2008 monster flick "Cloverfield." That movie's entire marketing campaign oriented around the Statue of Liberty's decimation by the beastie Clover. With the entire movie captured via found-footage, "Cloverfield" especially evoked the terror of experiencing a 9/11-adjacent event in real time. There is no explanation for what’s going on. Tidy exposition to clarify the horrors is absent. All that’s clear is massive landmarks are perishing and that you need to run. This realistic tone rooted in ambiguity and the destruction of New York City infiltrates "Cloverfield’s" poster.

Here, viewers see the aftermath of the Statue of Liberty getting its head torn off. It's a striking and haunting image instilling a pit in your stomach on how ordinary people can navigate such grand chaos. This also makes the "Cloverfield" poster a visual inverse of the "Escape from New York" poster. How fitting since that earlier piece of marketing actually inspired this "Cloverfield" image in the first place! 

The ubiquity of these posters has continued into the post-2010 world. Subsequent Roland Emmerich movie "Independence Day: Resurgence" followed the practice. One of the many posters for this blockbuster features the Statue’s torch crumbling thanks to a lowering alien spacecraft. Meanwhile, even prestige TV got in on the act. "The Man in the High Castle's" debut poster, for example, features the Statue of Liberty performing the Sieg Heil salute. This creepy alteration instantly explains how this show occupies an alternate history in which the Nazis won World War II.

The enduring ubiquity of these kinds of posters isn’t just because of distinctly American post-9/11 anxieties. Global moviegoers also factor into these posters being so prominent decades after "Escape from New York’s" poster dropped. Mainstream big-budget movies and TV shows are often designed to be digestible to any viewer on the planet. Part of that is setting them in locations anyone can recognize, such as Los Angeles and New York City. There’s a similar rampant cognizance of big American landmarks.

However, the Statue of Liberty is particularly special in this regard. On paper, it’s supposed to symbolize the best attributes of America. A gift from the French, the sculpture holds a tablet inscribed with the date July 4, 1776 in Roman numerals, representing independence. A broken chain and shackle represents freedom from slavery. The lines, "Give me your tired, your poor/ Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free," are inscribed on a plaque in the statue's museum. Here is a gigantic monument to the idea that anyone can come into this land of opportunity and find possibilities denied to them in their homeland.

That’s the kind of visual that promises something provocative and possibly in touch with the complexities of America as a country.

Of course, the reality of America is much more complex. It’s not a haven paradise, but, like many other superpower countries, susceptible to corruption, systemic rot and enacting colonial horrors on Indigenous people. The dissonance between the State of Liberty’s intent and the realities of America has always fascinated artists. A couple of the most striking shots of the original two "Godfather" movies, for instance, juxtaposes the brutalities of America in the foreground while the Statue of Liberty stands tall in the distant background. In these images, the realities and dreams of America inhabit the same frame. 

Posters distorting the Statue of Liberty are a continuation of this tradition while also trodding on visuals that everyone around the world are conscious of. What better way to convey the ominous ambiance of your production than an image like the Statue of Liberty emitting a slithery tongue? A promo for "The Strain's" third season takes it one step further:

That’s the kind of visual that promises something provocative and possibly in touch with the complexities of America as a country. Sure, such image build on a landmark that can be identified anywhere and everywhere. But they also speak to larger anxieties propelling the American public in different eras. 


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


The Atomic Horror of the 1950s, the Cold War of the '80s, post-9/11 anxiety in the 2000s, the countless issues plagung America today . . . all of these woes have made Americans feel anxious about the very continued existence of this country. Movie marketing showing the Statue of Liberty getting distorted, including that "Civil War" poster, don’t just build on these fears. They also entice potential moviegoers with the promise of exploring those overwhelming anxieties in the relatively safe confines of a closed-off movie theater. Here, all the mayhem and political turmoil is confined to the silver screen. 

Georgia Democrats condemn “dangerous escalation” after police detain Emory University protesters

During a pro-Palestine protest at Emory University, two professors were detained and 28 protesters were arrested, including 20 Emory community members, CNN reported Thursday

Those detained by Georgia state police included economics professor Caroline Fohlin and the chair of the school's philosophy department, Noëlle McAfee.

During her interaction with police, filmed by CNN, Fohlin could be heard expressing concern about violent arrests and the use of force by police against individuals she identified as students. Troopers used Tasers and fired pepper balls at protesters “to control" what law enforcement described as an "unruly crowd."

Georgia’s attorney general, Chris Carr, a Republican, defended efforts to clear campuses of protesters. He wrote on X that he “proudly" supported actions taken by universities that would “protect the health and safety of Georgia's students.”

“Nobody has the legal right to shut down our schools by camping out and making antisemitic threats,” he said.

But Democratic Georgia state lawmakers are condemning the “excessive force used by Georgia State Patrol” seen at Emory. The use of "extreme anti-riot tactics" is not safe and “is a dangerous escalation to protests which were by all accounts peaceful and nonviolent,” read a statement signed by 11 Democrats and posted on X by Georgia state Rep. Ruwa Romman, a Palestinian-American.

The Democratic Georgia state lawmakers argued that some Georgia leaders have created an environment where “state police feel free or perhaps are directed — to respond to normal peaceful protests with violence.”

Some protesters have responded to the use of police force by fighting back. A video captured by WSB-TV shows some protesters at Emory pushing into a line of police officers with large posters. The officers, whose backs are against the doors of a school building, succumbed to pushing back.

The ACLU of Georgia expressed concern over law enforcement’s response to the protests.

“The freedom to protest without retribution is essential to our democracy. Atlanta has historically been a place where citizens could freely exercise their rights to protest, but we have unfortunately seen a series of unconstitutional crackdowns on speech and protest across Georgia in recent years,” it said in a statement. “Colleges and universities should be places where viewpoints, expression, debate, and free speech are encouraged, not suppressed.”

Jack Smith may have a “trick up his sleeve” to avoid delay of Trump’s election interference trial

While the U.S. Supreme Court seems unlikely to accept Donald Trump’s claims of absolute immunity, many expect the justices to effectively delay special counsel Jack Smith's election interference case against the former president. But former federal prosecutor Barbara McQuade said Smith may still have "one trick up his sleeve" to bring the case to trial before the November election.

At oral arguments this week, Trump's legal team argued that the former president cannot be held criminally liable for what they described as "official acts" taken while president. Though even some conservative justices seemed skeptical, many legal experts predicted the court would throw the question back to lower courts of what actually makes an action "official," pushing back the start of any trial.

McQuade told MSNBC that several justices appear to think “perhaps there is some presidential immunity for some official acts, but that the acts alleged in this indictment are not those acts.” She pointed to Chief Justice John Roberts as one member of the court who appears to favor a delay, requiring a lower court to decide whether Trump was carrying out official business when he tried to overturn the 2020 election — and where to draw the line between private acts and a president's duties.

“The example Chief Justice Roberts used was bribery," McQuade noted. "It might be an 'official act' to appoint an ambassador, but if you do that in exchange for money, a bribe, that could still be a crime."

But McQuade argued there's a way for Smith to avoid a costly delay as those questions are addressed.

"At the end of the day, it seems necessary to probably sort out what is and is not an 'official act' here," she said. "But Jack Smith still has one trick up his sleeve, I think, which is to pare down the indictment and use only the things that are clearly private acts here."

Private acts could include things Trump clearly did as a "candidate" trying to overturn the election, such as consulting with private attorneys on a scheme to promote fake electors. Trump's attempt to get his vice president, Mike Pence, to block the counting of electors could be construed as an action he took as president.

A Nick and Aaron Carter docuseries is coming

Investigation Discovery is set to release a new, four-part docuseries that will delve into the controversies surrounding Backstreet Boys member Nick Carter and his late brother Aaron Carter. "Fallen Idols: Nick and Aaron Cater" will debut over two days on May 27 and 28 at 9 p.m. ET. It comes on the heels of the network's wildly successful "Quiet on Set: The Dark Side of Kids TV," which premiered in March.

The docuseries will investigate allegations of sexual assault against Carter (claims he has vehemently denied) made by three women, Aaron Carter's mental health and substance abuse issues, and the strained relationship between the two brothers that stemmed from Aaron's support of Nick's accusers.

Interviewees will include Melissa Schumann — former member of the early aughts girl group, "Dream" — Ashley Repp and Shannon "Shay" Ruth, all of whom have alleged that Nick Carter sexually assaulted them, per Variety. Also featured in "Fallen Idols" will be an unnamed "member of the Carter family," Nick Carter’s ex-girlfriend Kaya Jones, and Aaron Carter’s former fiancé Melanie Martin.

“Nick looks like a perfect, pretty Ken doll. But I know how evil he can be,” Jones says in the docuseries' trailer. “The truth is all gonna come out.”

“To be honest, I’m scared of him,” Schuman says separately.

Billy Idol’s “Rebel Yell” continues to reverberate 40 years later in remastered, deluxe edition

In the early 1980s, Billy Idol exploded onto the American music scene with “Dancing with Myself,” the neo-punk anthem that he originally recorded with Generation X. He had recently left England for New York City, having heard the siren call of MTV. As he recently reflected on the "Everything Fab Four" podcast, the flamboyant Idol and upstart MTV were made for each other, which he proved in unforgettable style with the video hit “White Wedding” on his self-titled debut LP.

But Idol’s incredible coming-out party as a hitmaker was a mere prelude to 1983’s "Rebel Yell," an album that sounds as fresh and arresting as it did more than 40 years ago. In a newly remastered, deluxe edition, "Rebel Yell" underscores Idol’s vaunted place as one of his era’s most dazzling performers, as well as the searing, hard-rocking voice at the center of an increasingly plasticene, synth-driven musical epoch. In short, Idol was the rock ‘n’ roller at the center of the maelstrom.

With Steve Stevens turning in one raucous guitar lick after another, "Rebel Yell" is a veritable feast for the ears. When he originally assembled his backing band at Electric Lady Studios in New York City, Idol knew that something special was in the offing. Enjoying heavy rotation on MTV on the wings of “Dancing with Myself” and “White Wedding,” his audience hungered for more. With the hard-rocking “Rebel Yell” leading the way, the album delivered one hit song after another, including several of Idol’s signature compositions.

In addition to the title number, the album sizzles with hit songs like “Eyes without a Face” and “Flesh for Fantasy.” In the former composition, Idol turns in an early rap performance, while “Flesh for Fantasy” offers one of his most sensual musical turns. Both songs were ably supported by music videos, which cemented Idol’s place at the heart of the music-video zeitgeist. 

The deluxe edition of "Rebel Yell" features a host of bonus tracks, including “Best Way Out of Here” and “Love Don’t Live Here Anymore.” But the real gems are the demo and early session take for “Flesh for Fantasy,” which began as a searing, up-tempo number only to settle into the slower, more pronounced version that later took the music world by storm. Audiophiles will revel in the array of supplementary materials provided by this lavish collection, while new fans will delight in the high-octane sound of Idol at the top of his game.

“Real embarrassment”: Trump lawyer apologizes after judge called him out for “misleading” jury

It was a pretty good day for Donald Trump and his defense team. David Pecker, the former National Enquirer publisher, was seen by jurors as being a little fuzzy on the details of a key moment: an August 2015 meeting where prosecutors say he, Michael Cohen and the former president conspired to break campaign finance laws by cementing an agreement to "catch-and-kill" potentially damning stories about the Republican candidate.

During cross examination, Trump attorney Emil Bove pressed the witness on why he was now testifying that Hope Hicks  then-director of the Trump campaign's communications team  was "in and out" of that Trump Tower meeting when he had previously told federal investigators that she was not there. Bove then handed Pecker a document that the attorney said would refresh his memory.

But that document appears to have been more of a prop than a piece of evidence. After jurors left the room Thursday, and following objections from the prosecution, Judge Juan Merchan accused Bove of leaving the jury with a false impression.

"If there wasn't anything in that document, it's misleading," Merchan said, as HuffPost reported. "I'm going to ask you to be very careful with that."

When Bove sought to defend himself, Merchan cut him off. "Mr. Bove, are you missing my point?"

Norm Eisen, an attorney and CNN legal analyst, said that moment undid whatever good may have been accomplished Thursday from the defense's perspective.

"The defense, Mr. Bove, Trump's lawyer, really got off to a strong start with their cross-examination," Eisen said. "But then, they made a mistake."

We need your help to stay independent

Instead of demonstrating that Pecker, 72, is unreliable, Bove undermined his own credibility before the jury by introducing a document that did not contain the information that the defense counsel claimed. "It seemed to be an 'a-ha' movement," Eisen commented. But, now, "All that good is going to be undone because the judge is going to tell the jury that it was not fair."

Former federal prosecutor Harry Litman agreed that it was a bad moment for the defense, coming after Merchan earlier in the week told one of Trump's other attorneys, Todd Blanche, that he was "losing all credibility" with the court. That rebuke came during a hearing on whether Trump should be held in contempt for violating a gag order, with Blanche faulted for failing to present any case law to support his claim that attacks on witnesses were protected forms of speech.

"Not as bad as 'you're losing all credibility,' but not great," Litman commented on social media. "Bove will start tomorrow [with] a real embarrassment before [the] jury, as judge tells them Bove basically misled them in characterizing [the] document he was supposedly using to 'refresh [Pecker's] recollection.' A bad way to start the day and… undoes the solid if not very damaging work he did."

The next morning, with jurors once again in the room, Trump's defense attorney was indeed forced to begin by saying "sorry" for the document "confusion" and the suggestion that Pecker flatly told investigators that Hicks was not at the 2015 meeting, CNN reported.

"I wanted to apologize and move on from that," Bove said Friday.

Trump’s sordid hush-money defense: Tales from his sleazy past could hurt him doubly

Donald Trump held a little rally at a construction site in New York before his trial commenced on Thursday morning. He glad-handed the workers and passed out pamphlets that claimed he would end Biden's electric vehicle mandate. They all seemed to like him but, of course, they would, as Fox News reported that the attendees were solicited and vetted by the Trump campaign. In fact one of the "workers" interviewed at the event was a former staffer of disgraced GOP congressman George Santos:

In other words, it was just another example of Trump fake news, which has been revealed in his Manhattan hush-money trial as a specialty of his going back decades. 

Trump was very upset that he had to attend Thursday's trial proceeding since his Supreme Court immunity case was being argued before the Supreme Court at the same time and he had wanted to attend. Unfortunately, he's a criminal defendant and doesn't get the privilege of making his schedule of court appearances around the country as he's used to doing. Instead, he had to face more testimony from his old friend, the former publisher of the National Enquirer, David Pecker, who took the stand for the second day. 

When asked about Pecker at his little astroturfed rally, Trump simply said, “David’s been very nice, he’s a nice guy," which is bizarre considering what Pecker is saying about Trump on the witness stand. It's always been curious as to why he's never had a bad word to say about Pecker when he always maliciously insults anyone he thinks has done him harm. But something Pecker testified to later in the day may just explain Trump's unusual silence.

Trump's squalid character seems to be a selling point. 

Apparently, once the campaign commenced, Trump had requested that Michael Cohen, his longtime fixer and liaison on the hush-money deals, retrieve boxes of information that Pecker had gathered about Trump over the years. Pecker told Cohen that he'd had an executive go through them and that there was nothing to be concerned about but that he wouldn't turn them over or let Cohen go through them. Knowing how Trump thinks — and assuming everyone else thinks the same way — he no doubt believes that it wouldn't be wise to antagonize this man with whom he once conspired to destroy people's reputations. Who knows what could be in those boxes? 

Over two days of Pecker's testimony, the prosecution has laid out the details of what they say was a conspiracy to "promote or prevent" the election of any person under state law. (Trump is actually charged with falsifying his business records to cover up the violation of that law, which is what makes his conduct a felony.) It's hard to argue that it isn't exactly what they were engaged in doing. Pecker admitted it repeatedly and Michael Cohen previously pleaded guilty to the same thing and will presumably testify to that effect when he's called in this trial. They were paying people off who were trying to come forward with negative information about Trump and then Trump and his company tried to hide the paper trail. 

We need your help to stay independent

In his second day of testimony, Pecker told a number of anecdotes that implicate Trump in the scheme before, during and after — even during the transition and beyond — often quizzing Pecker about the status of the Karen McDougal matter. When the Wall St. Journal reported on Trump's alleged affair with the former Playboy playmate, Pecker said Trump was livid and called him up to ask, "How did this happen? I thought this was under control. Either you or one of your people leaked this story!” He also recalled that Trump later arranged a special "thank you" dinner at the White House, to which Pecker brought a number of National Enquirer employees. At one point he and Trump were walking alone together and Trump asked him, "How's Karen doing?" and Pecker replied, "She's doing well, she's quiet." 

Pecker also testified that he spoke with former White House Communications Director Hope Hicks and press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders about keeping McDougal quiet during Trump's presidency which is a little bit startling especially since he says they both agreed it would be a good idea. Hicks' testimony is going to be interesting

As for Stormy Daniels, Trump was clearly directing the plot once Pecker declined to pay the money, largely because Trump didn't pay him back for the previous hush money agreements and because he knew from previous experience that there was exposure to campaign finance violations. Nonetheless, he was involved and was surprised to learn that Cohen had to make the payoff himself and was having trouble getting reimbursed as well. Trump was obviously trying to avoid having to pay because he's a notorious deadbeat but he was also obviously trying to avoid having a paper trail. And that certainly wasn't because he was trying to protect Melania


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


The cross-examination began at the end of the day and the defense got Pecker to admit that he'd engaged in such sordid schemes before, managing to get Arnold Schwarzenneger, Rahm Emmanuel and Mark Wahlberg's names into the record in the process. Perhaps they're laying the groundwork for some kind of selective prosecution argument but it's unclear why any of this is relevant to the matter at hand except as a further illustration of just how depraved David Pecker's organization really was. When Trump's attorney elicited the comment that Donald Trump was Pecker's mentor and that he still considers him a good friend, it was very hard to see how that benefits his client. I'd imagine the members of the jury were all anxious to get home and take a shower after hearing about the gross conduct of all of these people, including the former president. 

This sleazy tale of the arrangement Trump made with Pecker and his relationship with this extortionist gossip monger alone should be enough to sink Trump's chances of ever being elected again to the presidency. But since he was elected the first time after having been shown on tape bragging about assaulting women it's been amply demonstrated that a lot of people like that about him. Trump's squalid character seems to be a selling point. 

Throughout his life, he's been getting away with corrupt, unethical behavior and skirting legal accountability and he probably thinks he'll slither out of this one too. The prosecution still has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump falsified his records to cover up this conspiracy and all we have so far is Pecker's testimony along with some incriminating texts and documents. There's a lot more to come. 

Trump reportedly spent much of the day listening to the testimony with his eyes closed, not reacting to what he heard. But he did seem a little bit rattled when he emerged, calling the day's event "breathtaking" and for some unknown reason telling the gathered press that the Charlottesville Nazi protest was "a little peanut." He should probably get some rest.

Genetics studies have a diversity problem that researchers struggle to fix

CHARLESTON, S.C. — When he recently walked into the dental clinic at the Medical University of South Carolina donning a bright-blue pullover with “In Our DNA SC” embroidered prominently on the front, Lee Moultrie said, two Black women stopped him to ask questions.

“It’s a walking billboard,” said Moultrie, a health care advocate who serves on the community advisory board for In Our DNA SC, a study underway at the university that aims to enroll 100,000 South Carolinians — including a representative percentage of Black people — in genetics research. The goal is to better understand how genes affect health risks such as cancer and heart disease.

Moultrie, who is Black and has participated in the research project himself, used the opportunity at the dental clinic to encourage the women to sign up and contribute their DNA. He keeps brochures about the study in his car and at the barbershop he visits weekly for this reason. It’s one way he wants to help solve a problem that has plagued the field of genetics research for decades: The data is based mostly on DNA from white people.

Project leaders in Charleston told KFF Health News in 2022 that they hoped to enroll participants who reflect the demographic diversity of South Carolina, where just under 27% of residents identify as Black or African American. To date, though, they’ve failed to hit that mark. Only about 12% of the project’s participants who provided sociodemographic data identify as Black, while an additional 5% have identified as belonging to another racial minority group.

“We’d like to be a lot more diverse,” acknowledged Daniel Judge, principal investigator for the study and a cardiovascular genetics specialist at the Medical University of South Carolina.

"We need to be even more creative in how we obtain people to help contribute to studies,” she said."

Lack of diversity in genetics research has real health care implications. Since the completion more than 20 years ago of the Human Genome Project, which mapped most human genes for the first time, close to 90% of genomics studies have been conducted using DNA from participants of European descent, research shows. And while human beings of all races and ancestries are more than 99% genetically identical, even small differences in genes can spell big differences in health outcomes.

“Precision medicine” is a term used to describe how genetics can improve the way diseases are diagnosed and treated by considering a person’s DNA, environment, and lifestyle. But if this emerging field of health care is based on research involving mostly white people, “it could lead to mistakes, unknowingly,” said Misa Graff, an associate professor in epidemiology at the University of North Carolina and a genetics researcher.

In fact, that’s already happening. In 2016, for example, research found that some Black patients had been misdiagnosed with a potentially fatal heart condition because they’d tested positive for a genetic variant thought to be harmful. That variant is much more common among Black Americans than white Americans, the research found, and is considered likely harmless among Black people. Misclassifications can be avoided if “even modest numbers of people from diverse populations are included in sequence databases,” the authors wrote.

The genetics research project in Charleston requires participants to complete an online consent form and submit a saliva sample, either in person at a designated lab or collection event or by mail. They are not paid to participate, but they do receive a report outlining their DNA results. Those who test positive for a genetic marker linked to cancer or high cholesterol are offered a virtual appointment with a genetics counselor free of charge.

Some research projects require more time from their volunteers, which can skew the pool of participants, Graff said, because not everyone has the luxury of free time. “We need to be even more creative in how we obtain people to help contribute to studies,” she said.

Moultrie said he recently asked project leaders to reach out to African American media outlets throughout the Palmetto State to explain how the genetics research project works and to encourage Black people to participate. He also suggested that when researchers talk to Black community leaders, such as church pastors, they ought to persuade those leaders to enroll in the study instead of simply passing the message along to their congregations.

“We have new ideas. We have ways we can do this,” Moultrie said. “We’ll get there.”

Other ongoing efforts are already improving diversity in genetics research. At the National Institutes of Health, a program called “All of Us” aims to analyze the DNA of more than 1 million people across the country to build a diverse health database. So far, that program has enrolled more than 790,000 participants. Of these, more than 560,000 have provided DNA samples and about 45% identify as being part of a racial or ethnic minority group.

“Diversity is so important,” said Karriem Watson, chief engagement officer for the All of Us research program. “When you think about groups that carry the greatest burden of disease, we know that those groups are often from minoritized populations.”

Diverse participation in All of Us hasn’t come about by accident. NIH researchers strategically partnered with community health centers, faith-based groups, and Black fraternities and sororities to recruit people who have been historically underrepresented in biomedical research.

In South Carolina, for example, the NIH works with Cooperative Health, a network of federally qualified health centers near the state capital that serve many patients who are uninsured and Black, to recruit patients for All of Us. Eric Schlueter, chief medical officer of Cooperative Health, said the partnership works because their patients trust them.

“We have a strong history of being integrated into the community. Many of our employees grew up and still live in the same communities that we serve,” Schlueter said. “That is what is part of our secret sauce.”

So far, Cooperative Health has enrolled almost 3,000 people in the research program, about 70% of whom are Black.

“Our patients are just like other patients,” Schlueter said. “They want to be able to provide an opportunity for their children and their children’s children to have better health, and they realize this is an opportunity to do that.”

Theoretically, researchers at the NIH and the Medical University of South Carolina may be trying to recruit some of the same people for their separate genetics studies, although nothing would prevent a patient from participating in both efforts.

The researchers in Charleston acknowledge they still have work to do. To date, In Our DNA SC has recruited about half of the 100,000 people it hopes for, and of those, about three-quarters have submitted DNA samples.

Caitlin Allen, a program investigator and a public health researcher at the medical university, acknowledged that some of the program’s tactics haven’t succeeded in recruiting many Black participants.

For example, some patients scheduled to see providers at the Medical University of South Carolina receive an electronic message through their patient portal before an appointment, which includes information about participating in the research project. But studies show that racial and ethnic minorities are less likely to engage with their electronic health records than white patients, Allen said.

“We see low uptake” with that strategy, she said, because many of the people researchers are trying to engage likely aren’t receiving the message.

The study involves four research coordinators trained to take DNA samples, but there’s a limit to how many people they can talk to face-to-face. “We’re not necessarily able to go into every single room,” Allen said.

That said, in-person community events seem to work well for enrolling diverse participants. In March, In Our DNA SC research coordinators collected more than 30 DNA samples at a bicentennial event in Orangeburg, South Carolina, where more than 60% of residents identify as Black. Between the first and second year of the research project, Allen said, In Our DNA SC doubled the number of these community events that research coordinators attended.

“I would love to see it ramp up even more,” she said.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

Subscribe to KFF Health News' free Morning Briefing.

Trump’s isolation deepens after his coup crew is hit with Arizona criminal indictments

Because Donald Trump himself wasn't indicted, there was a surprisingly muted response to the announcement, late on Wednesday, that Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes had indicted a school bus full of Republican activists and operatives on felony charges related to Trump's efforts to steal the 2020 election. There's a real "Trump himself or it doesn't count" bar regarding interest levels in coup-related cases. The previous indictment for the same scheme in Georgia did include the former president, leading to his infamous mug shot from the Fulton County Jail. Plus, Trump himself is on trial in New York on charges of cheating in the 2016 election, leading to a stream of images of him looking bedraggled as he goes in and out of court. Hearing that Rudy Giuliani is getting arrested again just can't compete. 

These charges further erode his already-collapsing support system.

But it's time to take a longer look at these Arizona charges because they will have a major impact on Trump personally, even if he is not indicted (yet) for his role. These charges further erode his already-collapsing support system. Trump goes to court most days without family or friends, just his lawyers and security, people who are paid to be there. Despite his endless pleading, he can't get his followers to show up to demonstrate outside the courthouse. The people who were willing to commit crimes to keep him in office in 2020 now have to face the real possibility that sticking by Trump's side raises their chances of going to prison. Even those foolish enough to take that risk, I suspect, are going to be too busy trying to fend off criminal charges from the last attempted coup to have much time to help Trump with planning the next one. 

As I wrote earlier this week, Trump was only able to pull off the Jan. 6 coup attempt because he had scores of people handling the logistical work for him. Lawyers like Giuliani, John Eastman and Kenneth Chesebro hatched the plan to create slates of fake electors, with an eye towards pressuring Vice President Mike Pence and members of Congress into accepting them instead of the real electors chosen by voters. Trump's co-conspirators set up an actual "war room" at Willard Hotel, where the people behind the legal scheme regularly communicated with propagandists like Steve Bannon, whose role was to get ordinary MAGA folks to show up at the Capitol on Jan. 6 to heed Trump's call to "fight like hell." Groups like the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers, who were in near-daily contact with Trump ally Roger Stone, took on the planning when it came to leading the charge to the Capitol. Trump's chief of staff, Mark Meadows, took on the role of traffic cop, managing many of the various conspirators as they worked their own angles. 


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


Now many, if not most, of these people are alienated from Trump to some degree, in no small part because of all the legal jeopardy their schemes have put them in. Experts have noted that Chesebro is not listed in the Arizona indictments, suggesting that he's cooperating with the prosecution, as he is in Michigan. But even some of the usual names that crop up in the various legal maneuvers post-Jan. 6 belong to people who just don't seem that involved with Trump anymore. 

Even those foolish enough to take that risk, I suspect, are going to be too busy trying to fend off criminal charges from the last attempted coup to have much time to help Trump with planning the next one. 

Not everyone involved in the coup conspiracy has scootched away from Trump. Boris Epshteyn, a longtime Trump stooge, traveled with him Thursday to court in Manhattan, although he didn't go into the building. Epshsteyn was among the 18 people indicted in Arizona on Wednesday. Notably, this is the first time Epshteyn has been in legal trouble — for his role in the coup, at least. He's been arrested twice before, once for bar-fighting in 2014 and again for groping women in a bar in 2021. The latter is a well-known way to impress Trump. Sure enough, shortly thereafter, Epshteyn's star began to rise in Trump world, even though the charges were later reduced to disorderly conduct. But Epshteyn is learning the lesson that eventually comes for most Trump cronies: Stick with Trump and, sooner or later, you'll either be under arrest or striking a cooperation deal with the prosecution.

Only Giuliani seems totally incapable of learning. He took a moment out of his busy legal calendar to release a statement complaining, "It’s not a coincidence that this is happening as we approach the summer before the election." He repeated Trump's election lies and even name-checked Trump, claiming he's "the biggest threat to their grasp on power." But it speaks volumes about how far Giuliani has fallen that he has to beg for Trump's attention like this. Hey, maybe if Trump keeps losing people, he'll cave and give ol' Rudy a ring. 

Most former Trump cronies seem to get it, though. Certainly, National Enquirer publisher David Pecker is living through that morality tale. During his lengthy court testimony against Trump in the Manhattan case, Pecker walked through many stories in which he was used and abused by Trump. Pecker's actions in 2015 and 2016 to help Trump at the Enquirer put him in serious legal jeopardy, but throughout his testimony, he described how Trump repaid him: By screwing him over at every turn. Pecker described paying hush money to women on Trump's behalf, only to have Trump renege on the deal to pay him back. When reporters at the Wall Street Journal uncovered the hush money conspiracy, the leak apparently didn't come from Pecker, but that didn't stop Trump calling up to scream at him over it. When Pecker expressed anxiety about committing possible crimes, Trump had his fixer, Michael Cohen, call and threaten him. 

Hopefully, people who may consider joining up with one of Trump's future criminal conspiracies are paying attention to all this and realizing it's not worth it. The fates of people who agreed to be fake electors should give would-be conspirators pause. Many of the people recruited by Giuliani, Chesebro and company never even met Trump before they agreed to commit crimes for him. As both the House committee investigating Jan. 6 and the indictment by special prosecutor Jack Smith detail, a number of the fake electors raised concerns that they could be arrested for their part in the scheme. Giuliani reassured them, falsely, that they were safe from prosecution. Now people who stepped into that role in at least three states — Michigan, Arizona and Georgia — are facing serious legal consequences for doing so. 

Are Republicans finally starting to learn that Trump will never return the loyalty he's shown? His loneliness at trial is a promising hint that they may, finally, be starting to get it. Sure, Republican politicians like Speaker of the House Mike Johnson of Louisiana still know they have to make a big public display of kissing Trump's ring. (Notably, Johnson did so and then turned around and passed the Ukraine aid bill Trump wanted him to kill.) But even the biggest Trump bootlickers in Congress just keep not showing up in New York, though his miserable expressions suggest he could use a little cheering up these days. Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., knows the trial is right in her backyard, but somehow couldn't take a day off from demagoguing about Ivy League universities to hold Trump's hand for a day. Maybe she's worried about the smell? It is hard to wash it out of those ugly blazers she loves wearing. Or maybe, like an increasing number of Republicans, Stefanik is finally starting to get it: Getting close to Trump and his various criminal schemes, even just to sit through a trial, is dangerous business. It's best to leave him to hang out and dry.