Spring Offer: Get 1 Year, Save 58%

NASA is officially headed to Saturn moon as it greenlights $3.35 billion space rotocraft mission

It's scientifically ambitious. It's aeronautically daring. And it's unflinchingly expensive. It's NASA's newly approved mission to Saturn's moon, Titan, where the agency will deploy the robotic quadcopter called Dragonfly — successor to the legendary Ingenuity of Mars-mission fame. Approved just last week for a July 2028 launch after doubling its budget to $3.35 billion, the Dragonfly mission is now formally on the books as the agency gears up to make its bold stride across the solar system

“Dragonfly is a spectacular science mission with broad community interest, and we are excited to take the next steps on this mission," said NASA administrator Nicky Fox, of the agency's Science Mission Directorate, in a recent statement. "Exploring Titan will push the boundaries of what we can do with rotorcraft outside of Earth.”

NASA chose the Dragonfly mission almost five years ago and a large chunk of its new $3.35 billion budget reflects the agency's determination to shepherd the ambitious project through the immense fiscal upheaval caused by COVID-19 and more recent budget battles between Congress and the White House.

“With the Dragonfly mission, NASA will once again do what no one else can do,” NASA administrator Jim Bridenstine said. “Visiting this mysterious ocean world could revolutionize what we know about life in the universe. This cutting-edge mission would have been unthinkable even just a few years ago, but we’re now ready for Dragonfly’s amazing flight.” 

Despite its charmingly bug-sized name, Dragonfly is a beast of a machine unlike any NASA's ever designed, and will be able to carry a surface-exploring vehicle about the size of a bigger Mars rover through the moon's treacherous freezing temperature, braving minus 290º Fahrenheit. 

NASA will have the benefit of 13 years of data it collected by the Cassini spacecraft and the European Space Agency's Huygens probe, the latter of which gave the world its first pictures of Titan. As reported by Ars Technica on Tuesday, Dragonfly's mission will take it to more than 30 locations on Titan over it's three-year mission window, flying tens of kilometers per month to study its organic-rich composition. 

 

We need to reframe how we think about juvenile sex offenders

Adult sex offenders are criminals who need to be brought to justice to maintain public safety. But we need to be careful about extending that same principle to children who hurt other kids. Most youth who exhibit problematic sexual behavior don't need punishment. They need help.

It's time for the public and our legal system to catch up with the growing literature on the causes of such behavior and how to stop it, rather than throwing the book at these kids and writing them off for good. In doing so, we can break cycles of trauma, reduce homelessness and incarceration and prevent the sexual abuse of children.

At first, parents may not know how to distinguish truly problematic sexual behavior in children and teens from behavior that is normal and developmentally appropriate.

Exploratory behavior out of mutual curiosity among children around the same age is fairly typical. Two six-year-olds playing "doctor" together is not, per se, cause for alarm. If it becomes planned, persistent, coerced, aggressive or happens between children of disparate ages or developmental levels, however, that's different. A 12-year-old "playing doctor" with a 4-year-old requires intervention.

If a child's actions are cause for concern, parents may not know what to do. They may wonder if their child has been a victim of sexual abuse or if there's something they have been missing for years. They may question whether their child is dangerous or beyond help.

We should treat youth with these behaviors with the same nuance, care and attention we use to address mental health struggles in kids.

But the reality is that problematic sexual behavior as a kid isn't predictive of adult sex offenses — in fact, 97% of children charged with sexual offenses never offend again. And while some children who engage in problematic behavior have experienced abuse themselves, many have not.

We should treat youth with these behaviors with the same nuance, care and attention we use to address mental health struggles in kids.

Youth have the best outcomes with evidence-based models, like cognitive behavioral therapy designed for problematic sexual behavior (PSB-CBT), that also engage parents or other caregivers and take past trauma into account. Treatment focuses on helping children build healthy communication and social skills, coping mechanisms and strategies for emotional regulation and impulse control.


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


Clinical research bears out the benefits of this approach. One study of youth ages 10 to 14 found that early intervention coupled with PSB-CBT therapy eliminated problematic sexual conduct 98% of the time. Another study of 5- to 12-year-old children with sexual behavioral problems found that just 2% of children who underwent cognitive behavioral therapy committed future offenses, compared to 11% of children who underwent group play therapy.

Therapy doesn't need to be a long-term, intensive endeavor. Most children stop exhibiting problematic sexual behaviors after three to eight months of outpatient treatment.

When we fail to recognize that most of these youth can go on to live lives both fulfilling and safe for others, we increase the chances that our criminal justice system will stigmatize them for good. Over 200,000 Americans are on sex offender registries for an offense they committed as a child — some as young as eight years old.

Research shows that placing children on such registries does not prevent or reduce sexual violence. But it's disastrous for their mental health and future prospects. Over 44% of registered youth go on to experience homelessness, according to a 2013 Human Rights Watch report. Nearly 85% experience serious mental health issues or thoughts of suicide. The social ostracism can be so severe that over half report vigilante-style harassment or physical violence directed at them.

We need your help to stay independent

Additionally, low-income youth, LGBTQ youth, and youth of color are disproportionately placed on these registries — in California, over 76% of youth on sex offender registries are kids of color.

Of course, there are instances in which kids and teens commit horrible crimes that demand court involvement. But these cases should be treated as the exceptions they are, not the rule.

If your child exhibits problematic sexual behavior or is a victim of such behavior, there are resources available to get help. Children's Advocacy Centers, a national network of care centers that support families impacted by child abuse, can help your family assess the situation and devise a plan to move forward.

Youth engaging in problematic sexual behaviors are not a lost cause. By quickly intervening and getting them treatment, we can help all kids thrive.

See a statue of Queen Elizabeth and her corgis unveiled for what would have been her 98th birthday

When some think of the late Queen Elizabeth, her waddling corgis come to mind.

In remembrance of what would have been the queen's 98th birthday, a small English town has immortalized the former head of the church and her close confidants — her corgis. The statue was unveiled to the public on April 21 in Oakham, England. Built by London-based sculptor Hywel Pratley, it depicts a bronze replica of the queen in her regalia and her beloved dogs at the statue's base.

According to an Instagram post from the Rutland County Council, hundreds of people celebrated the unveiling and the former reigning monarch who passed away at 96 in 2022. After a 70-year run, the queen was also Britain's longest-reigning monarch. The county council said the statue is the "first permanent memorial" of the queen. 

https://www.instagram.com/p/C6B8fc0sdCb/?utm_source=ig_embed&ig_rid=31b8e198-00bb-4dbe-a17c-afbf28098506&img_index=1

Dr. Sarah Furness, the Lord-Lieutenant of Rutland, commissioned the statue's erection after the queen's death. The county council shared that local and public businesses donated to crowdfunding and construction of the queen's statue. Local children also designed the imagery of the corgi dogs. 

During the ceremony, Furness said in a speech, “What most of us remember about Queen Elizabeth is her warmth. By showing Queen Elizabeth’s love of dogs, we show her humanity," The New York Times reported.

“Clearly contempt”: Expert warns Trump lawyers could face “sanctions” over gag order violations

Donald Trump's social media posts landed him in hot water in his New York hush-money trial  — and his lawyers' Tuesday arguments explaining his motives for them didn't help.

New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan held a hearing Tuesday morning on whether to hold Trump in contempt of court for violating his gag order in making posts criticizing potential witnesses and commenting on prospective jurors. Prosecutors argued that the former president's online assailing of anticipated witnesses Michael Cohen and adult film actress Stormy Daniels, whose hush-money payment ahead of the 2016 election lies at the center of the Manhattan district attorney's case, are "willful beyond a reasonable doubt" and "pose a very real threat" to the proceedings. 

Among other arguments, defense attorney Todd Blanche countered that such posts were "political," protected speech and Trump's responses to attacks from the witnesses — claims the judge grew more frustrated with as Blanche pushed them.

Merchan repeatedly pressed Blanche to provide specific examples of those alleged attacks from witnesses and admonished the defense's floundering in arguing that reposting others' attacks don't violate the gag order. 

"I hate to keep coming back to this, but you're not offering me anything to support your argument," Merchan said, adding moments later: "You're losing all credibility with the court."

Judging by reports of Merchan's reactions to the defense's arguments, "It really sounds like the judge is keeping Trump's feet to the fire," Loyola Law School professor Laurie Levenson told Salon, noting that she never believed the "just reposting" argument to be a "good one."

"As it turns out, it's not a good argument for a couple of reasons: One, they're not just reposts. [Trump is] actually changing the quotes or adding his own gloss to it, and the second thing is they seem to be directly against what the judge at least intended in his gag order," she added.

Prosecutors on Tuesday zeroed in on a post Trump made last week, attributing a claim that "undercover liberal activists" are "lying" to the judge "to get on the Trump jury" to Fox News host Jesse Watters. While Watters, according to Assistant District Attorney Christopher Conroy, had said on his show that the purported activists had been lying to the judge, Trump's post added that they were doing so to be seated on his jury, NBC News reported

Merchan did not respond well to the revelation. "Your client manipulated what was said and put it in quotes," he told Blanche, who went on to concede that the post wasn't a repost but insisted that it's not clear whether it violated the gag order.

But not only did Trump's apparent manipulation of the post demonstrate an intent to use to for his "own purpose," Levenson said, "it also shows some real hands-on conduct by Trump."

The former president "really wants to use this trial for political purposes and for political gain," added David Schultz, a professor of political science and legal studies at Hamline University. What Tuesday's hearing makes clear is that "Trump is really chafing" as his approach to litigation and campaigning clashes with the expectations of the court, he speculated.

"His history has always been you've got to attack people, you've got to attack opponents and so forth, and, increasingly, what I think he's feeling here is the fact that, in a judicial proceeding, court's don't put up with that kind of stuff," Schultz told Salon, noting the "strain" on the court as it tries to treat Trump like "every other defendant" while offering him "far more slack than probably anybody" in a similar situation.

"Under normal circumstances, you would not see these kind of attacks going on against the court, and you wouldn't see somebody violating when you have" a gag order, he noted.

We need your help to stay independent

Trump's gag order is more narrow in scope than barring him from speaking publicly about any witness or juror for any reason, a nuance Merchan acknowledged Tuesday morning, according to NBC News. Instead, the order prohibits him from making statements about witnesses as far as it pertains to their "potential participation in the investigation or in this criminal proceeding" and about a juror or prospective juror "in this criminal proceeding."

Prosecutors told the judge Tuesday that the former president has continued to violate it as recently as Monday when he called Cohen a liar in remarks at the courthouse. They asked the judge to order Trump to take down the 10 inflammatory posts, sanction him $1,000 per violation and remind him of the possibility of jail time for contempt, of which New York authorizes up to 30 days. 

"We are not yet seeking an incarceratory penalty," but the "defendant seems to be angling for that," Conroy said Tuesday morning, per NBC News.

Merchan did not rule Tuesday morning on whether to hold Trump in contempt of court for the alleged violations or indicate when he may do so.

That decision, Levenson said, is "really smart" because his taking time to rule shows he "wants to be very careful" in his orders and "wants to have a ruling that he knows when reviewed by an appellate court will hold up,"

But given that Trump's behavior is "clearly contempt," Schultz said, the question now becomes what sanctions he may face. Though he doesn't suspect Merchan would jail the former president for contempt, the judge could order Trump to "give up his cell phone" and "stay out of his social media" accounts, while issuing a "pretty hefty fine." 


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


Trump's attorneys could also face sanctions over his conduct because it is their responsibility to "manage" their clients and a failure to do so affects their ability to present their case, Schultz, who also specializes in legal ethics, explained. 

Though the judge on Tuesday may be "still hoping" the case can proceed "as normal" and allow the Trump defense team "one more chance" to rein their client in, Schultz speculated that Merchan is also giving the defense an "implicit warning" that they could face sanctions either from his court, a New York disciplinary body or "ultimately" in the form of future discretionary rulings against their interests based on denying them the benefit of the doubt. The latter outcome, he said, could also result from the credibility the judge told Blanche the defense lost.   

"If they can't bring him in line, is the judge going to basically say, 'You're, in effect, encouraging your client to show disrespect to the court and the judicial process, and if so, you're failing to act as an officer of the court and we're going to sanction you?" Schultz said. 

While how exactly the judge will rule is unknown — as its "quite possible" he'll determine some of the posts prosecutors flagged as violating the gag order and others as not — Levenson said his messaging to Trump at the hearing was "pretty clear."

"I think the point of this hearing was [for] the court to convey, 'Stop it. Just stop it," and for the court to reassert control over what's happening in this case," she said.

"It's really about the integrity — and I'll emphasize that," Levenson added. "It's the integrity of the process. This is not an ego trip by the judge. This is a judge working really hard to keep a challenging trial on the tracks."

“Unlocked: A Jail Experiment”: 7 things we learned from Netflix’s free-roaming detainees experiment

Sherriff Eric Higgins' proposal seemed almost too radical to believe.

Allow 46 incarcerated men, many of whom were serving time for capital charges, to roam free in their unit with open cell doors for weeks at a time with minimal supervision from deputies. And yet, the sheriff, who helmed the social experiment turned unscripted Netflix series conducted at Pulaski County Regional Detention Facility in Little Rock, Arkansas, felt it could be exactly what detainees needed. 

"We thought, ‘What can we do to create some ownership for those detainees in that unit?’” Higgins told Netflix’s Tudum of the eight-part docuseries, "Unlocked: A Jail Experiment," which premiered on April 10.

 “How do we make the facility safer, and what can we do to still hold them accountable but empower them at the same time?”

In endeavoring to create an environment with less direct supervision, Higgins wanted to both humanize incarcerated people and give the men in the facility's H-unit the autonomy to foster an environment grounded in community. Doing so, he hoped, would not only spur accountability and a sense of collectiveness but also lower the detention center's recidivism rates — the tendency of an incarcerated person to re-offend, often after being released — and discourage detainees from committing future crimes. 

“In this country, we have a certain perception of someone who goes to jail — the assumption being that they’re guilty,” Higgins told the outlet. “But they deserve dignity. These individuals, they’re fathers, they’re uncles, they’re sons. People care about them . . . they’re not just a number. I believe that if you treat people right, and you hold them accountable . . . I think they take that with them when they walk out of this facility. I think we have proven that people will rise to the expectation.”

Here are key moments from the experiment: 

01
How the experiment was conducted
During "Unlocked," inmates were not entirely out of the supervision of deputies and other staff at the detention facility. As Higgins wrote in an ordinance shared by KATV, a deputy was always posted approximately six to eight feet near two secured doors outside H-unit, while an officer constantly monitored CCTV cameras. Staff also installed monitors prior to the deputies' removal to ensure close supervision and safety precautions. “Pulaski County Regional Detention Center is a direct supervision facility, which means the deputies are inside the unit with detainees,” Higgins clarified to Tudum.
 
“Our re-entry unit is for detainees who want help with their addiction or other issues they’re dealing with,” Higgins added. “There’s an interview process — it’s an open-barrack unit, and it’s the safest in our facility. The behavior is better, it was safer, and the facility was cleaner, because they took ownership. Looking at this experiment, we wondered if that was something we could implement; if we could take a typical unit and modify behavior based on a system of responsibility and benefits.”
 
Higgins also stated that detainees were briefed in advance on what the experiment would entail so that they could have the choice to opt out. “We didn't automatically open the doors,” Higgins told Tudum. Ahead of filming, the sheriff said, “We talked to them about the possibilities, and about behavior. We gave them a list of responsibilities and [made] personnel available to them to ask more detailed questions."
 
Lucky 8, the production company involved in "Unlocked" also explained to members of H-unit that they would be recorded as part of the docuseries, making it clear that they could withdraw from the experiment if they wanted to.  “We checked to see if they wanted to be there,” Higgins said. “At any given time, a person could leave [the experimental unit].”
02
From the onset, there was a stark generational divide between detainees
As one captain says in a meeting ahead of the formal unlocking, "Somebody is [going to] take control."
 
While effectively all of the members of H-unit are thrilled by the sheriff's announcement of plans to initiate the experiment, conflict inevitably arises once it begins. In particular, the sharp generational divide among the participants is consistently exacerbated by the new rules, giving way to sparring among the groups as well as the emergence of pod bosses. 
 
When older inmates — notably a man named Randy and another known as Squirrel — attempt to establish a pecking order for who should be in charge and how the unit should conduct themselves, they are met with frustration and resentment by some of the younger inmates. 
 
While the first week or so of the experiment proceeds relatively smoothly,  juvenile detainees inevitably begin to test the limits of their new freedom. Feeling disrespected, Randy elects to step down from his self-appointed post as leader, which leads to subsequent dissolution of order.
03
Someone is removed from the experiment for creating a weapon under duress
Though Sheriff Higgins laid out the ground rules for H-unit ahead of "Unlocked's" commencement, one inmate ultimately violates the system by creating a highly contraband shank, a makeshift knife commonly found in prisons and jails. 
 
David Miller is deeply unliked by many across the pod for constantly stoking quarrels with his behavior and for being somewhat of an outsider, as described by other interviewees. One "Unlocked" participant even refers to him as an "alien from a different planet." After a series of confrontations with other inmates, Miller's final straw comes when a group of youngsters toss ice water onto his bed while he's sleeping. In response, he begins to whittle a shank, presumably to retaliate against his antagonizers. He is caught doing so on camera and is promptly removed from the unit by deputies. 
04
H-unit is punished with a 24-hour lockdown for bad behavior
Things come to a head about halfway through the experiment after a subset of the detainees begin to engage in illegal practices. In addition to contraband (various pills and drugs) that some have covertly sequestered in their cells, they begin to brew hooch, an illicit alcoholic drink ubiquitous to jails and prisons that is typically made in plastic bags from a concoction of bread crusts, fermented fruit and sugary substances.
 
Separate from that, inmate John McCallister (better known as Eastside) enlists a group of H-unit members to partake in a wick-making session, in which the group constructs candle wicks out of toilet paper that is then used to light and smoke "coffee sticks" — paper towels soaked in coffee and rolled like blunts — and actual raw cannabis that some of them have smuggled in. After stealing a battery from a clock to serve as a lighter, numerous inmates begin to smoke inside cells, eventually triggering the fire alarm.
 
Their group's antics are found out, which leads Sheriff Higgins to subject the entire unit to a daylong lockdown in response. Knowing that they will be reluctant to snitch on one another, Higgins also has the group partake in an anonymous vote to share which members of the unit they each feel have compromised the integrity of the experiment through disorderly conduct.
 
However, Eastside ultimately takes ownership of spearheading the wick-making and is permitted to stay in the unit with certain restrictions (no phone calls, no commissary, and no access to kiosks.)
05
A detainee returns to the program after a stint in solitary confinement
Raymond "AJ" Lovett, previously removed from H-unit for confiding to a mental health representative at Pulaski that he has been struggling with thoughts of suicide, comes back to join the men for the final week of the program. AJ, who faced capital charges of aggravated assault and murder, is temporarily placed in "the hole" so that he can be more closely monitored in case he becomes a risk to himself. Several other inmates, moved by his situation, show him support with a send-off dinner of commissary items ahead of his time in solitary.
 
"It felt like I was returning home after being gone for a long time," AJ tells producers upon his re-entrance into H-unit.
06
The group holds a casino tournament, which leads to violence
Tensions begin to rise after a new group of detainees rotates into H-unit, and ultimately culminate when the group holds a mock casino tournament. Five hours into the tournament, things are especially heated between Weekley — an older, new arrival — and CJ, an established H-unit member who suspects him of cheating at cards and taking money from other detainees. 
 
CJ and a small group of other inmates create a plan to get Weekley alone in a cell, which leads to an intense physical altercation. The Sheriff removes certain people from the unit after the fight breaks out but still permits the group to have unlocked doors for another 24. The caveat? They must convince him that they can change their ways by the following day.
 
 
 
07
Sherriff Higgins permits the doors to stay unlocked
The unit comes together as a collective in front of the sheriff to share personal anecdotes and proposals for systemic change, echoing a widely felt sentiment for solidarity as they make a case for why the doors should remain open. After a day of deliberation, Higgins tells the detainees that he has chosen to keep H-unit unlocked.
 
"There's so much more that we want to do," Higgins says to the group. "But that's gonna depend on you."
 
Speaking to producers, Higgins says, "Every step is a chance. You know, it takes time, and what I heard from them is trust. Getting up to the point where they trust each other, where they trust us and what we're doing. And I believe that the light bulb has come on."

"Unlocked" is streaming on Netflix.

 

Trump discussed hush payment to Playboy model Karen McDougal with David Pecker, jurors hear

David Pecker, former publisher of the National Enquirer, testified Tuesday that he paid Karen McDougal — a former Playboy model who alleges she had an affair with Trump — for the rights to her story and spoke with former President Donald Trump about the risks of it coming out.

Speaking at Trump's criminal trial in Manhattan, Pecker testified he learned of the McDougal allegation in 2016 and that the then told Trump fixer Michael Cohen about it. Later, Pecker said, he received a phone call from Trump himself, asking what Pecker thought he should do.

At that point, Pecker said he informed Trump that McDougal had an offer to perform on ABC’s “Dancing with the Stars" and that he thought the Republican candidate should pay her off. Trump was hesitant at first, said Pecker, who recalled the former president saying: "Anytime you do something like this, it always comes out." It was only when Pecker kept insisting that Trump decided to clue in his personal fixer, Michael Cohen, promising Pecker that he’d call again in a few days, the publisher testified.

Pecker and Cohen would soon begin communicating regularly, with Pecker saying Cohen told him to start using to use an encrypted messaging app, Signal, instead of speaking on a landline.

Despite his involvement in the story, Pecker claimed he is still in the dark about whether or not the affair with McDougal actually happened. “I still to this day don’t know whether that’s true or not," he said.

 

“I train like an athlete”: Celine Dion reveals how she manages stiff person’s syndrome

Celine Dion is opening up about her journey with stiff person's disease.

In a recent interview with Vogue France, the five-time Grammy winner gave an update about her health and said she was “well, but it’s a lot of work,” adding: “I’m taking it one day at a time.” Dion was diagnosed with Moersch-Woltman syndrome, more commonly known as stiff-person syndrome, in May last year. The diagnosis led the 55-year-old singer to focus on her health, ultimately canceling her upcoming tour dates and halting live performances as the disorder affected her ability to walk and sing.

Since her diagnosis, Dion said she spends five days a week on “athletic, physical and vocal therapy.”

She continued, “I work on my toes, my knees, my calves, my fingers, my singing, my voice . . . I have to learn to live with it now and stop questioning myself. At the beginning I would ask myself: ‘Why me? How did this happen? What have I done? Is this my fault?’”

But Dion revealed that her perspective has since then shifted: "The way I see it, I have two choices. Either I train like an athlete and work super hard, or I switch off and it’s over, I stay at home, listen to my songs, stand in front of my mirror and sing to myself. I’ve chosen to work with all my body and soul, from head to toe, with a medical team. I want to be the best I can be. My goal is to see the Eiffel Tower again.”

David Pecker says he published attacks on Ted Cruz at the request of Trump’s personal fixer

Former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker testified Tuesday that Michael Cohen helped direct tabloid attacks on Trump’s Republican adversaries in the 2016 presidential race.

Testifying at Trump's Manhattan criminal trial, Pecker said that the former president's ex-fixer would call him and direct him to focus negative coverage on whichever Trump rival had been most successful on the debate stage, The New York Times reported.

“He would send me information about Ted Cruz or about Ben Carson or Marco Rubio, and that was the basis of our story, and then we would embellish it a little,” Pecker said.

In court, according to the Times, Trump “leaned in toward the monitor” and “squinted” to look at headlines from The Enquirer that benefited him, such as, "Bungling surgeon Ben Carson left sponge in patient's brain!" and "Ted Cruz sex scandal — 5 secret mistresses."

In particular, Trump pounced on the negative coverage of Ted Cruz, his chief rival toward the end of the 2016 primaries, including the false theory that Cruz’s father had helped John F. Kennedy’s assassin.

Pecker testified that Dylan Howard, former editor-in-chief at the Enquirer, worked with the tabloid's research department to Frankenstein the article. "We mashed the photos and the different picture with Lee Harvey Oswald … we mashed the two together," Pecker said. "That's how that story was prepared — created, I would say."

Pecker said that his tabloid would also praise Trump as part of an effort to assist his campaign. The magazine published headlines such as, "Donald Trump: 'Healthiest individual ever elected!'"

Republicans seize on student protests, demand Biden squash pro-Palestine speech with National Guard

Republican lawmakers are seeking to exploit turmoil on college campuses for political gain, some now demanding that President Joe Biden deploy soldiers to break up pro-Palestine protests.

The student protest at Columbia began April 17 with an on-campus encampment, organizers associated with Columbia University Apartheid Divest accusing the university of investing in companies that do business that "profit from Israeli apartheid," as ABC News reported. Dr. Minouche Shafik, president of Columbia University, last week called in the NYPD to clear out the students, a decision made after she was grilled by Republicans earlier this month on the school's response to alleged antisemitism on campus.

Although police made roughly a hundred arrests, an NYPD official later described the protest as "peaceful." Students at other schools, including Yale University and New York University, have since begun protests in solidarity. At the same time, Jewish groups have been pressing the university to take more steps to protect Jewish students against antisemitism. 

At a congressional hearing earlier this month, Dr. Shafik faced criticism from Republicans who maintained that she wasn't doing enough to combat antisemitism on campus. That criticism was followed by last week's crackdown, with Columbia's Special Committee on Campus Safety citing some protesters' "threatening rhetoric and intimidation."

Now 10 Republican members of Congress have written a letter to Dr. Shafik telling her to resign. In the letter, sent Monday, they claim that she has “failed” in her obligations as the president and that the happenings on campus were a “direct” result of her ineptitude. 

Calling the protest an “unsanctioned mob of students and agitators,” the representatives, including New York Rep. Elise Stefanik, wrote that Shafik should "step down immediately so that someone will take action against this mob."

Other Republicans are demanding that the federal government step in.

“If [Mayor] Eric Adams won’t send the NYPD and [Gov.] Kathy Hochul won’t send the National Guard, Joe Biden has a duty to take charge and break up these mobs," Sen. Tom Cotton said in a post on X.

Four years ago, Cotton wrote an Op-Ed in The New York Times calling for the mobilization of the National Guard to combat Black Lives Matter protests. And just a week ago, Cotton implored his X followers to attack pro-Palestine protesters who blocked traffic.

His call for a federal crackdown on protests was echoed this week by fellow Republican Sen. Josh Hawley. "It’s time for Biden to call out the National Guard at our universities to protect Jewish Americans," Hawley wrote on X.

In the meantime, cooler heads are trying to de-escalate, with Columbia announcing Monday night that is moving to allow remote through the end of the semester, April 29.

Kroger, Albertsons announce plans to sell hundreds more stores to gain merger approval

Kroger was dealt a big blow in February when, 16 months after the company first announced plans to acquire its competitor Albertsons, the Federal Trade Commission and eight states sued to block the $25 billion merger between two of the country’s largest supermarket chains. 

The FTC asserted that the deal would eliminate the "fierce competition between Kroger and Albertsons,” which consumer groups worried would lead to higher grocery prices and union job losses during a time of sustained food inflation. “In some regions, such as in Denver, the combined Kroger/Albertsons would be the only employer of union grocery labor. Union grocery workers’ ability to leverage the threat of a boycott or strike to negotiate better CBA terms would also be weakened,” the FTC said in a press release

At the time, Kroger responded by saying that the “only winners if this merger is blocked will be larger, non-unionized retailers who will continue to fight union growth,” a message Albertsons leadership underscored. 

“If the Federal Trade Commission is successful in blocking this merger, it would be hurting customers and helping strengthen larger, multi-channel retailers such as Amazon, Walmart and Costco — the very companies the FTC claims to be reining in — by allowing them to continue increasing their growing dominance of the grocery industry,” a spokesperson from the company said in an emailed statement. 

At the time, according to Reuters, Kroger had proposed to divest 413 stores and eight distribution centers to C&S Wholesale Grocers, with the acknowledgement they might need to shed an additional 237 stores to gain regulatory approval. However, the FTC deemed that proposal inadequate. 

Now, the supermarket chain — which owns brands like Ralphs, Mariano’s, Harris Teeter and King Soopers — has announced a plan to unload even more stores in an effort to push the merger over the finish line. 

On Monday, Kroger and Albertsons jointly announced that they would divest an additional 166 locations, meaning the companies would sell a total of 579 stores to C&S, as well as giving it access to Albertsons Signature and O Organics private label brands. Under the new agreement, C&S will pay Kroger about $2.9 billion in cash for the stores, up from the previous payout of $1.9 billion, Reuters reported. 

“We have reached an agreement with C&S for an updated divestiture package that maintains Kroger’s commitments to customers, associates and communities, addresses concerns raised by regulators, and will further ensure that C&S can successfully operate the divested stores as they are operated today,” Kroger chairman and CEO Rodney McMullen said in a statement to Retail Insight Network

He continued: “Importantly, the updated divestiture plan continues to ensure no stores will close as a result of the merger and that all frontline associates will remain employed, all existing collective bargaining agreements will continue, and associates will continue to receive industry-leading healthcare and pension benefits alongside bargained-for wages.  Our proposed merger with Albertsons will bring lower prices and more choices to more customers and secure the long-term future of [unionized] grocery jobs.” 

We need your help to stay independent

However, some industry members and union leaders are already voicing concerns over Kroger’s updated plan. For instance, a coalition of representatives from UFCW Locals 5, 7, 324, 400, 770, 1564 and 3000 — which represent over 10,000 Kroger and Albertsons workers across the country — issued a statement Monday afternoon regarding the potential downsides of the sale of more stores. 

“This bigger proposed divestiture simply increases the challenge C&S, a New Hampshire-based wholesaler, would have trying to operate a hodgepodge chain of retail stores,” the union representatives wrote. “They have no experience operating retail stores in these states, would still lack the IT, customer loyalty and manufacturing capabilities needed, and would most likely end up monetizing the real estate under many of these stores.” 

The Federal Trade Commission’s lawsuit aimed at blocking the merger between Kroger and Albertsons is set for a hearing in August and — while, as Supermarket News reported, the FTC has been historically reticent to accept divestiture packages as an antitrust remedy — the commission’s former chairperson warns the organization will really have to establish what constitutes competition in today’s changing supermarket landscape. 

Maureen Ohlhausen, who headed the FTC from 2012 to 2018 and now is a partner at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, said in a webinar on Thursday that the definition of the grocery market has expanded to include digital retail and massive competitors like Walmart and Amazon. 

“This relevant market really hasn’t been tested in some time,” she said, adding that the market has seen massive growth in “online shopping, online acquisitions, and some of the new formats coming in and really taking on what we might have previously considered just being served by the traditional grocery market.”

“As I said, the market really has changed,” Ohlhausen said.

 

In defense of a flawed “Sex and the City” – by a progressive Gen Zer

"Sex and the City" will never die. In 1998, it made juggernauts out of stars Sarah Jessica Parker, Kim Cattrall, Cynthia Nixon and Kristin Davis. The female pleasure-centered show broke boundaries as it showcased four white women in their 30s reveling in their privileged lives, which focused on shopping, lunching together and having casual sex with men.

In the series, Carrie Bradshaw (Parker) is the hopeless romantic who runs a sex column titled "Sex and the City," Samantha Jones (Cattrall) is the sex-positive public relations agent, Miranda Hobbes (Nixon) is the ambitious corporate lawyer gunning for partner and Charlotte York (Davis) is the traditional aspiring homemaker who doubles as an art dealer.

Instead of trying to fix or reimagine what's cringe and awful about the show's characters and writing, we are missing the show's value in women's media.

On the surface, the main characters are nothing like me. Inherently, my personal experiences as a working-class daughter of African immigrants who lives in Brooklyn, shouldn’t relate to the stories of Carrie, Samantha, Miranda and Charlotte – but they do.

The HBO classic has been available to stream on Max but recently found its way to Netflix, which has led to the show finding a new audience in Gen Z, who are rediscovering the 26-year-old show. 

In a viral piece in the Independent, 22-year-old journalist Brittany Miller admitted that upon her first watch of some of the show’s episodes, she was not a fan. Miller said her issues with the show aren't contingent on its how it's aged, but rather that it's "unbearably cringey" and centers on characters who are "awful people – and awful friends."

As a 24-year-old writer living in NYC, I cannot speak for the totality of Zoomers. However, I can say in defense of "Sex and the City" that instead of trying to fix or reimagine what's cringe and awful about the show's characters and writing, we are missing the show's value in women's media.

Most of this criticism begins and ends with Carrie. She is your textbook unlikeable protagonist: a self-absorbed main character who serves as a mirror to our own worst impulses. Some of her most selfish tendencies are ones we see in real life. Have you ever wrapped your self-worth in romantic relationships that bring you nearly zero validation? If not, you definitely have a friend who has. Her longtime love interest Mr. Big (Chris Noth) treats her with as much self-respect as she has for herself. In the middle of Season 2, she finds out he is going to Paris and hasn't told her. Later, she wears a beret and brings McDonald's to show him she wants to move to Paris for him. He tells her "I don't want you to uproot your life and expect anything." She yells at him but mostly at herself while throwing her Filet-o-Fish, "I'm such an idiot!"

In Season 3, she meets her next boyfriend, the furniture designer Aidan Shaw (John Corbett). It doesn't take long before she cheats on Aidan with Big while Big is married to a younger, more socially acceptable woman Natasha (Bridget Moynahan). Just as it started, the affair ends disastrously with Aidan heartbroken and Natasha with a literal broken nose. Early in the show's run, Carrie's reckless relationship decisions may have felt isolated to only harming herself. But as the show progresses, it smartly depicts her choices as hurtful to people she cares about too — a human realization that we are all subject to learning as we get older.

We need your help to stay independent

I'm not here to excuse any of Carrie's bad behavior, but rather, as writer Kyndall Cunningham argues in a piece for Vox, "Does it matter if Carrie Bradshaw is the worst?" The hate she may receive may be fair but it's overstated. Carrie came before characters like Tony Soprano, Walter White, Dexter Morgan and Don Draper. We certainly don't fault them for their bad decision-making skills — we exalt them.

If we are to compare any of the "Sex and the City" characters to men, Samantha emulates the type of feminism that blossomed in the '90s and '00s. With the scales between men and women tipping towards equality, author Ariel Levy explains in "Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture" that in a hyper-sexual post-'90s America, many women performed their sexuality boldly, brashly for male pleasure. They did this as a way to gain status from the dominant group and overcome oppression by acting like male chauvinists.

There are parts of this that are true for Samantha. The fan favorite is the most sexually liberated on the show. But she is also emotionally unavailable to most of her love interests. She is an interesting foil to Carrie and Charlotte, the show's traditional romantics. She does that by unapologetically expressing and flaunting her sexual fluidity and openness. Sometimes her unapologetic nature is violently problematic as she picks a fight with Black transgender sex workers who work outside her apartment building. But her character arc shines in the last season of the show. Her vulnerability peeks through her facade as she loses her hair during her chemotherapy treatments. Her healthy, long-term relationship with Smith (Jason Lewis) illustrates the character's growth when she cries to him about her hair, and he shaves his head to match hers.

As a product of its time, "Sex and the City" exists to reflect our worst and best selves – and we need to acknowledge both sides.

For Charlotte, love and relationships drive her motivations. She looks for love and commitment in almost every relationship. She was a WASPy tradwife before that term was coined on social media. Christian influencers like Estee WilliamsCynthia LoewenNatalie Bennett and Mrs. Midwest, come to mind. Even though this imagery may be harmful to portray to its audience, for how much it plays into patriarchal expectations, ultimately, she pays the price for her staunchly traditional ways. Her dedication to securing a husband and having children before society declares her a spinster leaves her in a passionless, sexless marriage with the uber-perfect Trey (Kyle MacLachlan). Ultimately, she gets divorced because of their incompatibility. She meets her soulmate in a dopey, divorce attorney, named Harry (Evan Handler), and he's imperfectly imperfect for her.

We need your help to stay independent

Unlike Charlotte, Miranda's ambition and hard-line realism are another tool to keep viewers' feet planted on the ground. But mostly, Miranda is career-focused and self-reliant, the most modern working woman out of the bunch. However, as dedicated as she is to her work, she struggles to find real romantic connections because of her rigid standards. That is until she meets the unlikely working-class bartender Steve (David Eigenberg). The on-again-off-again relationship opens up Miranda's one-track mind. Love makes her slightly more vulnerable but it also gives her the chance to be a mother. When she has her son, Brady, Miranda learns the importance of community and leaves her hyper-independence at the door.

As the show nears its end, writer Charlie Squire illustrates in the blog Evilfemale that "the main characters are punished for their shortcomings." Each character is reprimanded for their awfulness, making sure that even if they aren't perfect, politically correct women — they are real. As a product of its time, "Sex and the City" exists to reflect our worst and best selves – and we need to acknowledge both sides. In a world where right-wing politicians are actively scrubbing America's stains of slavery from our memories in schools, whitewashing our troubled histories is detrimental and regressive. It takes well-intentioned efforts to be better, and looking back is a large part of that.

So it is limiting to write off "Sex and the City" as a problematic relic we should leave behind. When in reality, we should learn from its faults and triumphs. If rewriting history has taught us anything in our ever-polarizing political and social spheres, the criticism about "Sex and the City" would not have resulted in the inauthentic changes in its spinoff “And Just Like That.” Instead, "Sex and the City" would be a piece of history we cherish for its importance so we can do better.

“Are those dogs happy?”: “Dogland” author tracks the answer from couch naps to kennel clubs

If you've ever spent any amount of time watching a dog show — Westminster Kennel Club or otherwise — you may have found yourself wondering, as the dogs competed in their individual rounds, led by their handlers . . . what's in it for them? 

Author Tommy Tomlinson focuses a whole book, "Dogland: Passion, Glory, and Lots of Slobber at the Westminster Dog Show," on examining that question. He was inspired to do so after seeing such an event on TV one day, thinking, "Are those dogs happy?" 

"One of the reasons why people love dogs so much is that dogs know how to make us happy,” Tomlinson says. Casting a wide net to determine if, and how, we're able to return the favor, he spent an expanse of time shadowing a champion Samoyed named Striker and his handler Laura King at "the fancy," as Westminster is called by pros, as they went after one grand finale title prior to retirement, Best in Show. And during his time spent in the field, Tomlinson learned that although King and other professionals like her do view dogs as tools of the trade, there's love there as well. Witnessed in a tearful goodbye detailed in the book where King, after three years spent with Striker, sends him off to return to normal pet life with his owner after all his hard work as the goodest of good boys was done.

"Dogs figure out in a situation what they need to be happy and do their best to make that work."

As funny as it is poignant and, in many sections, educational, "Dogland" centers on Striker's last hurrah as a show dog, but also mixes in a heartbreaking tale of the author's own dog. These are interspersed with Pee Break sections offering an assortment of historical, breed specific and pop culture canine stories to paint a picture of the ways humans have literally and figuratively loved dogs to death since their earliest beginnings as wolves, coaxed out of the trees to sit with us by the fire, trusting in the promise of a warm meal and a soft hand. 

Speaking to Salon over Zoom, he also acknowledges that, for all its fancy seriousness, the dog show subculture can also be hilarious — introducing me to my new favorite professional title bestowed upon dog show assistants: Bucket Bitch.

The following transcript has been edited for length and clarity.

A friend of mine who lives in upstate New York keeps acquiring Belgian Malinois that she trains for editorial shoots and agility competitions. "Dogland" touches upon a question that often comes to mind when I think of these dogs, which is, wouldn’t they rather be home watching TV? If given the option, do you think Striker, the main dog in your book, would opt for a couch potato life if the option had presented itself early?

That’s sort of the thing that brought the book to life, for me. I was watching one of those dog shows one night and started wondering, "Are those dogs happy?" And then I started thinking about regular dogs. Like regular pets. Are they happy? And the book is about me sort of working through that question of what it means and, ultimately, what does happiness mean. I think we have an advantage over dogs and other animals in that, as far as we know, we can see alternate worlds that they can’t. Like if we’re in some dead-end job, or we’re in prison or something like that, we know that there are other people out there living better lives than us.

I’m not sure dogs know that. Maybe some dog who’s chained to a tree looks across the street and sees some happy dog running around and is wistful somehow. But I don’t know that dogs' brains or emotions really work that way. But, obviously, as with everything with dogs, we tend to anthropomorphize them and think that what we might think or feel in that situation, they might feel or think in that situation. What I know for sure or what I feel like I know for sure is that dogs figure out in a situation what they need to be happy and do their best to make that work. And so, yeah, I think your friend’s dogs are probably happy if they tend to be happy-natured dogs to begin with. They may just not know there may be a different life for them out there. 

Dogs are very funny, and your book is very funny, but dog shows seem like they call for a sort of seriousness that I would think also needs to be bred or trained for. When moments of chaos occur – like where you detail an Alaskan malamute named Tyce who had an existential crisis of howling that you describe as being like if Mickey Mouse took off his head at Disney World and the guy inside started talking – what sort of ripple effect does that cause in the room?

One thing that was amazing to me was to see how well-trained these dogs are to not respond to chaos. So in that moment, when this dog started howling, I think the other dogs may have glanced over to see what was going on and to see if it was something they should be alarmed about. But by and large, the show just kept going, and the dogs just kept doing whatever they did. And I was at several smaller shows that are more chaotic where dogs are being walked by each other all the time. And just on a rare occasion two dogs would stop to sniff each other’s butts or maybe growl a little bit at each other, and there was a little kerfuffle, they’d be separated, and everybody would move on. And the other dogs would just act like nothing had happened. Whereas if that happened out in the street, every dog three blocks away would be wanting to know what was going on. So I think part of the training of those dogs is to drown out the noise and to be in the moment, which is actually a pretty good lesson for us in some ways because we’re all very distractible. And I was amazed at the discipline those dogs had not to be distracted in the moment. The other part of that is, these handlers are very experienced in how to center their dog’s attention. Often with treats. But as we saw with Tyce, sometimes that doesn’t work, and dogs revert to their essential dogness.


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


I think there’s always a curiosity as to whether or not the handlers drug their dogs. It seems like it would be easy to just put a pill into a treat and then you don’t really have to worry about them acting up. But then that would, of course, take away from their ability to perform, but is that something that they watch for in competitions like this?

"For a retired show dog, there's no reunion tour. Show dogs aren't The Eagles."

That’s a good question. They’re not drug tested, as far as I know. My understanding of this is that dogs do get some medications, but generally for medical issues like sore hips or if they need certain vitamin supplements or something like that. If there is widespread dog drugging, I certainly didn’t find that or hear about it, and I asked some questions along those lines. So I don’t think that’s true. These dogs are products of generation after generation of breeding and then, even when they’re born as purebreds, all this filtering goes on to separate basically the very best dogs from the ones who aren’t quite good enough. And I think part of that filtering is to filter for temperament. And so, it’s not like you just pull a dog in from off the street asking him to be in a dog show. There’s a lot of both genetic nature and nurture that goes in to making sure these dogs are even tempered.

I didn’t realize that there were so many different kinds of bitches, and Bucket Bitch has been repeating in my head since reading it. Did you have a "Dogland" sensitivity reader make the suggestion to include a chapter explaining the use of these "bitch" terms? 

The sensitivity reader was me. Within the first 30 minutes of walking into my first dog show, I heard someone over the PA system say, "Will all the German Shepherd bitches report to Gate 4," or whatever. And I was like "What?" I mean, I knew in this world that female dogs are called bitches, and it’s kind of normal. I just didn’t expect it to be bandied about like it was. And there’s absolutely no shame or hesitation. They don’t think twice about it. It’s just the way that their world talks about it. And obviously they know that outside the fancy, this word has a whole different meaning. But it originated with the dog world. And so they kind of cling to it like, "This is ours. This word belongs to us. It has a specific meaning. It does not have a negative connotation in our world. We’re gonna use it." And so, once I saw and realized pretty quickly that I was gonna have to use the word bitch a lot to be true to this world, I thought I’d need to have something up front to let people know that this is how dog people talk. They’re not cursing in that sense. They’re not downgrading women. This is just the language they use. And so as I was structuring the book, that was one of the first things I put in because I thought we needed to have that up front.

It made me laugh, but it was also useful. I’ve never been to a dog show, but I’d imagine the tone factors in too. Because they’re not like, “Bitch!” 

Right. Right. They never do that. There are occasionally like little moments where they sort of acknowledge the kind of ironic or dual meaning. The American Kennel Club Museum, they had a quilt exhibit one time that was called “Bitches in Stitches.” And, you know, they knew what they were doing when they said that. So there is the occasional nod to the outside world on that. But, in general, it’s just everyday language to them. 

In 2012, when I worked at VICE, a writer attended the Westminster Dog Show on acid and wrote about the experience. Spending time there, did you get the sense that they screen for those kinds of things now?

I remember that. And even before that, Conan O'Brien had Triumph the Insult Comic Dog who went to Westminster and got thrown out. And he went back the next year and got thrown out again. Every year, somebody writes a sort of satirical piece about Westminster. It’s ripe for it. I mean, these are dogs that are outside of the natural way we think about dogs. Some people take this stuff way too seriously and kind of prance around the ring. There are aspects of beauty pageants in there. There’s like the super serious handlers and judges wearing tuxedos. And there’s this sort of overly formal way of doing it. It’s ripe for parody and satire, which is why the movie "Best in Show" did so well. It saw the humor and the way to poke fun at those things. Certainly, I went going in knowing that some of this would be ripe to poke fun at for me too. And I did, in several places.

But I also wanted to respect, in some ways, the people who took it seriously. And, at the very least, understand why they cared. I think part of the satirical aspect of anything like this, when you wander into a little subculture and make fun of it, is you can’t understand why somebody would care about this sort of thing. One of the things I love most as a writer is diving into one of these subcultures and trying to take it seriously. And trying to see why otherwise normal people are so obsessed and devoted and care so much about this one thing that, from the outside, looks odd and strange and silly. And so, I think that in the fancy, there’s some people who get that it’s looked at with a satirical eye from the outside, and they understand that. And there are other people who just have no sense of humor about it at all. And, of course, those are the ones that are the funniest. So I try to walk that line of, certainly, poking fun at and having a good laugh at the things I thought were especially funny about dog shows. But, also, trying to understand on an emotional level why people care about them so much.

I mentioned before that this book is very funny. But midway through, there’s a sentence that made my eyes tear up where you write, “In many ways, we have loved dogs to death.” In competitions like Westminster, there’s a lot of pride and general sportsmanship, but was there love there as well? I feel bad just making my American Bully walk to the post office down a busy street. 

The short answer is yes. The longer answer is, it depends on the moment. A lot of this dog show stuff is a job. The handlers have a job. And they’re often at big shows, like Laura King the handler I focus the book on. They’re working with like 15 dogs at the same time. So there’s a lot of transactional stuff they do with their dogs. 

Being familiar with the Westminster Dog Show the same way as most others, in that I know it exists, it didn’t immediately occur to me that the dogs’ handlers are often not their owners, and that they sometimes have as many as four owners in total. This, more than everything that goes into competing itself, paints a picture for me of the dogs being property and not pets.  

Sort of at the top level, the dogs are usually owned by somebody else. And then those owners pay the handlers to go on what they call campaigns. But even at Westminster, there are dogs there that they call "owner handler." But to the scenario you're talking about, it's complicated and something I sort of had a hard time understanding too, and still not sure if I have a full grasp of. The reason there are often several owners is that it's a way to share expenses. It's very expensive to put these dogs into campaigns and hire handlers that put them on the road and that sort of thing. So often when people breed purebreds, they go in together. But it does lead to that idea of dogs as property. There are a couple of things that people said to me that made sense in that regard. Striker's co-owners compared sending him off to sending a kid to college. Another thing is, dog shows are not a big profit venture. One handler told me that they consider it like owning a beautiful piece of art. It's something that nobody else has. It's unique. Something that you want to show other people. Maybe partly for ego. But also partly to just share something beautiful with the world.

You know the expression: “We don’t deserve dogs”? Do you think we deserve dogs?

"We domesticated each other."

We deserve them in this sense; we created them. Dogs are a human invention. I would argue, they're maybe the greatest human invention. Early man, somewhere between 15,000 and 30,000 years ago, we took the wolves that had come close enough to make them pets and we bred them and re-bred them and re-re-bred them. All the dogs that exist in the world today are the product of wolves, and they would not exist if humans had not manipulated their genes to make them exist. To the larger, more emotional point, I think there are definitely some people who do not deserve dogs. There are a lot of people who mistreat dogs and take dogs for granted. A lot of people think of dogs as disposable items. But other people find the best parts of themselves through dogs. Because even when they feel misanthropic toward other people, somehow a dog will bring something out of them that puts something in their heart that makes them realize the world isn't all that bad.

Any updates from post-retirement Striker?

I hear from his owners every once and awhile. He lives in Toronto now. He seems to be living an awesome life. He's a pet, you know. He lays around on the couch. He goes out for walks. They have another dog, a Siberian Husky named Awesome, who's sort of his partner. And apparently, Striker's sort of the trailing dog in this relationship. So Awesome does stuff, and Striker sort of follows her around. For a retired show dog, there's no reunion tour. Show dogs aren't The Eagles. When he's done, he's done. Does he have some sense of the life he led and that it was meaningful to other people? Who knows? I think we'd like to think that's true. I do think, if we all suddenly had the ability to talk to him, he'd probably say he's had a pretty great life.    

If you had to sum up all the knowledge you gleaned about dogs while researching and writing this book, what would your main takeaway be?

I think the main thing that I would take away is that dogs help us survive in the same way that we help them survive. We domesticated each other. Dogs started out as basically power tools. We bred them to do hard physical labor for us. And because of their ability to do that, it enabled humans to sort of stay in one place, not be so nomadic, to build farms and homesteads. Dogs are a crucial step in early man becoming what we think of as human. And along the way, we have adapted them to our changing needs. And as that's happened, they have sort of adapted us. Dogs, mostly now, do white collar jobs. They're companions. They're friends. They're sort of unofficial therapists and counselors. And they have helped us cope with the changing emotional landscape. The idea that most of us now do most of our work in our head, and that's a crazy place to be sometimes. They have been, in some ways, a sherpa for us, to guide us through the evolution of humanity. It's a major co-existence.

"Dogland" is out now via Simon & Schuster and, while you're at it, pick up Tomlinson's first book, "The Elephant in the Room."

Good for your health and the environment: Why we should be eating oily fish

A range of economic, nutritional, religious and ideological factors influence our diets. The key, however, lies in finding a balance that cares for both our health and that of the planet.

The traditional Mediterranean and Atlantic diets are two options that meet these requirements. Fish plays an important role in both, providing flavor as well as nutritional value.

Globally, annual per capita fish consumption has almost doubled over the last 50 years, from 10.75kg in 1970 to 20.03kg in 2021. It has grown exponentially in China, where the average person ate 4.58kg in 1970, and 39.87kg in 2021, and has also grown significantly in the EU, where annual consumption has increased by 40%, from 16.58kg to 23.44kg in the same period.

Oily fish is defined as fish with a proportion of fat higher than 5-6% of their muscle mass: sardines, longfin tuna, mackerel and horse mackerel are some the most well known examples.

Oily fish has been part of many countries' cultural heritage throughout history. In Spain, for example, sardines are integral to the San Juan festivities in June, while the coastal fishing season for longfin tuna is also traditionally followed due to the seasonal migration of fish in search of nutrient-rich waters and suitable temperatures for breeding and feeding.

 

Oily fish as part of a healthy diet

On a nutritional level, oily fish stands out thanks to three important components:

  • Polyunsaturated omega-3 fatty acids, which can help to protect against cardiovascular disease and other illnesses.

  • Peptides – protein molecules made up of two or more amino acids – which have various health benefits such as preventing or treating conditions like high blood pressure, diabetes and obesity.

  • High vitamin content (notably vitamins A, D and E) and other micronutrients such as magnesium, selenium and iodine.

The benefits of this combination of nutrients have been demonstrated by the GALIAT (Galician Atlantic Diet) project, led by the Santiago de Compostela University Hospital. The project consists of a series of clinical trials to determine the effects of the traditional Atlantic diet on the general population. The results show a reduction in metabolic syndrome – a group of conditions that increase the risk of heart disease and diabetes.

 

Sustainable fishing practices

The fishing season for sardines, mackerel and horse mackerel runs, with varying intensity, from May to October. Plankton – which these fish eat – is more plentiful at this time of year, giving the fish a higher fat content and a better flavour.

The most common method used to catch oily fish is known as "seine" fishing, one of the most environmentally friendly fishing techniques in use today:

  • It produces little to no bycatch (the unwanted part of the catch that is not kept and is thrown back into the sea). Because this technique involves surrounding a shoal of fish with a net in order to catch them, it carefully targets the desired catch, meaning it does not trap or harm other species, thus helping to protect biodiversity.

  • Taking every stage of production into account, its overall carbon footprint is one of the lowest among all sources of dietary protein. Horse mackerel fishing, for example, produces an average footprint equivalent to 550g of CO2 per 100g of protein, while sardines produce 646g of CO2 per 100g protein. This puts oily fish on a par with dairy products, vegetables and legumes, and lower than most fruits and meat.

 

Oily fish and traditional cooking

Fish consumption is part and parcel of the evolution of Homo sapiens. For hundreds of thousands of years our species has incorporated it as a staple food, and its preparation has been perfected throughout history.

Oily fish lends itself to a multitude of uses in the kitchen, from simple grilling or griddling to more elaborate dishes like tataki or papillote. One advantage of oily fish is that it is easy to clean and bone, meaning it can be included in children's diets.

Given such a wide range of uses, along with its nutritional benefits and low environmental impact, this type of fish should be making regular appearances on our plates.

Gumersindo Feijoo Costa, Catedrático de Ingeniería Química. Centro Singular CRETUS, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

70% of world’s workers at elevated health risks due to climate change, UN report finds

More than two out of three workers on Earth are going to experience climate change-related health risks in the near future, according to a recent report from the United Nations. The UN's International Labour Organization (ILO) found that many of the environmental conditions caused by global warming are already negatively impacting workers and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. The report listed dangerous environmental conditions such as extreme heat, extreme weather events, air pollution and UV radiation from the Sun.

Presently there are roughly 18,970 people who are die every year on the job because of excessive heat, more than 860,000 people who die from exposure to air pollution and nearly 19,000 people who die from non-melanoma skin cancer from exposure to solar radiation. The authors even found that more than 26.2 million people suffer from chronic kidney disease because of workplace heat stress. They conclude that the world's countries will need to revise their labor protection laws to protect the working class.

"As climate change hazards evolve and intensify, it will be necessary to re-evaluate existing legislation or create new regulations and guidance," the authors write. "Some worker populations may be especially vulnerable to the effects of climate change and could therefore need extra protections."

In an official statement accompanying the report, contributor Manal Azzi said that the ILO's conclusions are consistent with its broader mission of upholding human rights. "Working in safe and healthy environments is recognized as one of the ILO’s fundamental principles and rights at work," Azzi said. "We must deliver on that commitment in relation to climate change, just as in every other aspect of work.” 

Taylor Swift, grief therapist? How my late husband’s Swiftie legacy brings our family comfort

When my husband was alive, he listened to Taylor Swift with our daughters. They were discovering her together around the 2016 election, and I preferred Katy Perry’s fuller vocals and willingness to take a political stance. Taylor seemed only to sing about boys.

Ian, who was more of a music connoisseur than I, informed me that he’d listened to Taylor’s entire catalog driving our oldest to school each day, and not only did she have more songs, she largely wrote them herself and played guitar. Our 9-year-old feminist’s favorite song was “We Are Never Ever Ever Getting Back Together.”

I was skeptical but in spite of myself, I kept skipping to “Stay Stay Stay,” right after “Never Ever Ever” on "Red," because it reminded me of Ian and our relationship — despite the muddling hardships of middle-aged marriage, we always chose to stay. It tickled me that 22-year-old Taylor had written, “Before you, I'd only dated self-indulgent takers.” How many narcissists could she have dated in her short lifetime?

When Taylor came to nearby Philadelphia in 2018 and Ian wanted to buy our daughters premium seats, I balked. Why ruin all future concerts for a 10- and 7-year-old? I figured they should sit in the wet grass in general admission like we had for our first shows.

We compromised on second best. The girls were ecstatic in their own ways: our younger one dancing in the aisles, while our oldest stayed seated and sang quietly along, intently studying Taylor and how everything worked together on stage.

I was struck by how well Taylor understood her audience and how well she tailored — pun intended — her performance to the young girls filling the stands. While some artists might be disappointed to have a following of preteens, Taylor seemed to relish it.

As it turned out, it was our last normal Friday as a family of four. We returned home to Baltimore, where the following week, Ian was diagnosed with stage 4 colon cancer.

While he was in treatment, he worked on introducing the girls to a deeper well of music—Neil Young, Yo La Tengo, Belle and Sebastian, Willie Nelson—but their favorite was “Woman” by Ke$ha, with the hard-to-forget lyric, “I’m a motherf**king woman.”

When he died 10 months later, “I’m a motherfu**ing woman” stuck. I played Ke$ha’s "Rainbow" album over and over on a road trip to Massachusetts and Maine that summer, eventually adding in P!nk and Adele, although we all agreed that Adele made us melancholy. I wanted the girls to have strong female role models.

After getting my heart bruised by a friend I had hoped would be more, I discovered that "Red" was my favorite Taylor album.

Missing the chatter and clatter of the office during the pandemic nearly a year after that, I told Alexa to “play Taylor Swift’s latest album” — I didn’t even know it was called "Lover" — as background music.

I tried my former go-to artists, but it was too easy to get overly introspective sitting alone in my room while I tried to work. Taylor’s upbeat-sounding songs, which didn’t demand too much from me, turned out to be the perfect pandemic soundtrack.

I loved the playful optimism of “Lover” and “Paper Rings.” And when I really listened to the lyrics to “Soon You’ll Get Better” — about Taylor’s mom’s struggle with cancer — I was stopped in my tracks. So many lines in that song hit home, but “I'll paint the kitchen neon, I'll brighten up the sky/I know I'll never get it, there's not a day that I won't try” captured the utter helplessness of being a caregiver.

That summer, “Miss Americana” came out on Netflix, and though my 13-year-old thought she had outgrown her, we all emerged from the documentary impressed with Taylor’s newfound feminism, perception — and depth. I liked what she had to say about her struggles with body image and how she navigated finally opening up about her politics.

After getting my heart bruised by a friend I had hoped would be more, I discovered that "Red" was my favorite Taylor album. Not just “Stay Stay Stay” but especially “Treacherous,” which reminded me of how scary — and risky — falling in love again can feel.

It turns out that Taylor gets her heart broken a lot. And even at 22, she possessed a sageness about relationships.

In Susan Cain’s "Bittersweet," she talks about what draws us to sad music over happy music.

“People whose favorite songs are happy listen to them about 175 times on average,” she reports. “But those who favor ‘bittersweet’ songs listen to them almost 800 times, according to a study by University of Michigan professors Fred Conrad and Jason Corey, and they report a ‘deeper connection’ to the music than those whose favorites made them happy.”

“They tell researchers that they associate sad songs with profound beauty, deep connection, transcendence, nostalgia and common humanity — the so-called sublime emotions,” Cain writes.

Similarly, I associated Taylor’s music with my lost friendship and my missing husband and my newly wild hormones.

When I felt like I was coming out of my skin as the never-ending pandemic raged on in the winter of 2021, I took long, freezing nightly walks with my reluctant Shih Tzu and listened to the whole "Red" album in order. I did the same thing as I started writing down my experience with cancer and grief for an hour each night. During the day I told Alexa to “shuffle songs by Taylor Swift,” switching over to "Red" at 5 p.m. to write.

At the same time, I was going through a “red” phase of my own, trying to brighten up my widowhood with first a cheerful red coat, and as the seasons progressed, red strappy sandals and three red bathing suits — culminating in a sporty red car.

My daughters watched this transformation with fascination, not having the words for “midlife crisis.”

"Red (Taylor’s Version)" came out two years after Ian’s death, and my daughters and I cheered.

When she released "Fearless (Taylor’s Version)," my 25-year-old co-worker and I bonded, not just over our love for Taylor’s music but also her project to rerecord all her old songs so that she would own them outright. We loved the example she was setting for young artists, particularly women.

"Red (Taylor’s Version)" came out two years after Ian’s death, and my daughters and I cheered. My 14-year-old, who once considered herself too cool to watch Taylor’s documentary, asked me to go on long drives. We drove north on I-83 in Maryland toward the Pennsylvania border and dissected every song.

So when presale tickets for Taylor’s Eras tour came out on what would have been Ian’s 51st birthday, it seemed fated that we would get a code. Except fate, as my daughters and I know — I might say as we know all too well — doesn’t work like that. I put a plea on Facebook and after hours of effort, a friend found us just two tickets to the Philadelphia show, where we’d first seen Taylor with Ian.

As the date grew closer (it would be in May, just days before the fourth anniversary of Ian’s death) I purchased three tickets from a third-party reseller so we could all go. To appease my guilt at spending this much money on concert tickets — an amount that would make Ian blush, despite his desire to get them front-row seats the first time around — I decided to pay the original two forward. I gave them to a friend, and when she got sick and couldn’t go, she passed them on to two thrilled teenage girls.

On that perfect-weather night in May, we danced and swayed with the nearly all-female audience as Taylor gracefully — and when she couldn’t pull off graceful, then humorously self-deprecatingly — moved through her eras. That July would mark four years since we’d seen her as a family of four, and I wondered at how much we had all changed.

My oldest, the introspective one who’d stayed in her seat for the first concert, never left her feet. At almost 16, she was just beginning to emerge from a long depression that started when her dad was diagnosed with cancer, compounded by the pandemic and her ADHD, which made getting caught up difficult. My younger daughter, the extrovert in a family of introverts, planned her outfit with care, choosing to rep the "1989" era. She wore a white mini skirt, a sparkly white boa, and a powder blue halter top with matching cowboy boots. At nearly 13, she was the one who occasionally sat down with me to rest her feet.

I tried unsuccessfully to hold back tears as Taylor entered the stage at exactly 8 p.m. to wild cheers from the audience, my own children and to my surprise, myself. I marveled at this near-sacred space Taylor represented for her fans and our family, and at how far we’d come since the early days of Ian’s death — when my daughters could hardly stand to be in the same room together and I would sometimes shout at them until my throat was hoarse. When my older girl disappeared into her room for long hours and my younger one slept with me every night, worried about letting me out her sight. Here we were, arms linked, experiencing this hallowed moment together.

"The Tortured Poets Department" dropped this Friday, and we spent the weekend listening, looking for clues about Taylor’s life, and ultimately our own. Though it’s an album devoted to the grief of busted romance, we see ourselves in it too. In the “manuscript” of Taylor’s life, she — like us — has learned to “do it with a broken heart.” And, she seems to be saying, it hasn’t been all bad.

As my now teenage daughters and I move into our own unknown and increasingly separate eras, we’ve reached a place not unlike “Florida!!!”: “Well, me and my ghosts, wе had a hell of a time/ Yes, I'm haunted, but I'm feeling just fine.” We know there will be inevitable heartbreak and grief along the way — but also touchdowns and comebacks and even the “alchemy” of new love. Throughout Taylor’s eras and our own, there is room for it all: joy, adventure, pain, wanting, rebirth. The best is yet to be written.

Butchered a social media recipe? You are not alone

I failed at trying to bake or cook over a dozen recipes I found on Instagram, so don't feel bad when you do the same. 

In the 1993 classic film, “Philadelphia”, Tom Hanks asks Denzel Washington, “What do you call a thousand lawyers chained together at the bottom of the ocean?”

“A good start.”

I love that joke, not just because lawyers work my nerves, but you can also swap it out with other professions like politicians, city workers, police officers and definitely, definitely, Instagram cooks. 

Don't get me wrong, there are some excellent social media cooks and I have learned from so many people. The collective has taught me about mocktails, different granola blends and all kinds of cool hacks.

But too many times, the ingredients that these digital pedestrians recommend are too expensive, the videos are too short for you to see the process and oftentimes, they just don't work. On the first, third and 30th time, their little tricks and hacks like the vegan Snickers bar or healthy lemon tarts that come out tasting like the sole of a triple E wide New Balance walking sneaker never work.

My latest and biggest failure was homemade Fruit Roll ups. 

"I should let you know that I love fruit roll ups. I'm choosing fruit roll ups over a steak dinner at a ten-star restaurant if such a thing existed. I’m choosing Fruit Roll Ups over a free vacation to Hawaii, over World Peace and even over a meeting with Jesus Christ."

For context, I should let you know that I love Fruit Roll Ups. I'm choosing Fruit Roll Ups over a steak dinner at a ten-star restaurant, if such a thing existed. I’m choosing Fruit Roll Ups over a free vacation to Hawaii, over world pae and even over a meeting with Jesus Christ. Okay, so maybe I don't love them that much, but you get what I'm saying.

As a child, when I opened a new box, I would immediately hide them so that the other kids in my house or at my grandma's house would not eat them all. To prove how much I loved them, I should tell you that they always wrapped around and got stuck in between and angered my big, crooked teeth. I had been instructed by so many people in my family, my parents, the dentist who we almost never saw and older kids with sore mouths riddled with cavities, to stay away from the sticky sheets of sweetness as nothing good comes from Fruit Roll Ups. 

My simple response to all of this was, “More for me!” 

This toxic relationship between me and the sticky candy would go on for years, until we had to break up. And yes, there is a sad story. I feel like there always is a sad story, and if I could skip this sad story, I would spare you, but then you would not understand the breakup. 

We need your help to stay independent

As stated a few paragraphs up, I didn't go to the dentist much. I go three times a year now, but in my early 20s, I had a friend whose mom was hospitalized and died. And I don't want to go into all the details of the sicknesses she suffered from; however, the doctor had told him that many of her issues would have been resolved if she had simply visited a dentist once a year. Not even the two times they recommend, but once, and she would have been okay. She was terrified of the dentist as many of us are, so terrified that she allowed that fear to cause issues that many of us could not imagine.

I was shocked at the horrible outcome, but no, it didn't make me run to the dentist in that very moment. I did give up on the candy I knew I could live without and the number one culprit that I always found scraping off of my teeth was those damn Fruit Roll Ups.

So, imagine my surprise, when I was scrolling on Instagram and saw a guy saying that you can make natural Fruit Roll Ups from blending strawberries with lemon juice and then baking for a few hours. 

"I've also given myself some grace because this happens. It doesn't only happen to me, but to a lot of other people I know that are trying to be inspired in the kitchen, to find shortcuts, to have an elevated dining experience that they can control themselves."

The first error in his video is that he doesn't mention you have to boil those blended strawberries for about 10 minutes before you place them in the oven. But I will give him a pass on that because he does add that step to the instructions in the caption. My problem is that I blended, juiced, boiled and baked and the only thing I kept coming up with was inedible pieces of tart syrup. And no, I'm not claiming to be a master chef — maybe I was rushing the first time and maybe I wasn't focused enough the second time, but by the sixth time, and about six cups of wasted strawberries and three wasted lemons, I was ready to block that guy (but I didn't, because he has no idea who I am anyway).

I've also given myself some grace because this happens. It doesn't only happen to me, but to a lot of other people I know that are trying to be inspired in the kitchen, to find shortcuts, to have an elevated dining experience that they can control themselves. 


Want more great food writing and recipes? Subscribe to Salon Food's newsletter, The Bite.


In this process, we all have to remember that the Tik Tok and Instagram cooks are extremely good at making content, so creative that they even made it onto your page. You don't necessarily have to be good at relationships or therapy to give online dating advice, you don't have to understand fashion to be an online stylist, so why can't you be a cook?

Remember that their goal is to monetize off of likes and shares, rather than make sure you get a product that is delicious as it is beautiful as it is easy to make. Imagine them as being car salesman, a used car salesman on a lot full of sparkling clean Mercedes that have no engines. To all of you, to all of us, I encourage you to not give up after being duped by some pseudo self-made digital cook with a large following. 

Upon further investigation, I found out that if I simply went through the comments of the video, I would have seen the many holes in his recipe and even could have been directed to a page where someone actually pulled the trick off. Alas, I have no more interest in healthy Fruit Roll ups anymore as my desire has moved on. 

But if you would like to follow some of these social media cooks, judge them by their comments. After all, I'm not saying that all of these cooks are bad, just that some of them are pathological liars and should be wiped from the Internet. Their comments normally tell the truth. 

“You’re losing all credibility”: Judge shuts down Trump lawyer at brutal contempt hearing

Donald Trump's continued posting of attacks on witnesses in his criminal trial is one piece of evidence that suggests he's "angling" for jail time, prosecutors said Tuesday at a contempt hearing in Manhattan where the former president's attorney was told that he was losing all credibility with the court after trying to defend his client's actions.

Trump has repeatedly argued that he should not be subject to a gag order barring him from attacking witnesses and others, including Judge Juan Merchan and his family. He has also at times acted like that gag order doesn't exist, appearing to cross the line in several recent posts on Truth Social in which he attacked Michael Cohen, Stormy Daniels and even prospective jurors.

At Tuesday's hearing, defense attorney Todd Blanche — a day after delivering an opening statement that legal experts panned as harming his client's interests — argued that such posts were "political" in nature and thus protected speech. He also maintained that Trump sharing an attack on jurors from Fox News personality Jesse Watters did not necessarily constitute violate such prohibitions, coming as it did in the form of a quote.

But that quote was modified, prosecutor Christopher Conroy said Tuesday. On his show, Watters had said that "undercover liberal activists" were "lying" to Judge Merchan; 40 minutes later, on Truth Social, Trump quoted that line and added to it, writing that the supposed activists were lying "to get on the Trump jury," as MSNBC's Katie Phang reported.

“What happened here was exactly what this order was meant to prevent, and the defendant doesn’t care,” Conroy said.

The revelation that Trump fabricated part of Watters' quote did not go over well with Merchan. "Your client manipulated what was said and put it in quotes," the judge noted, according to The New York Times. When Blanche later insisted that Trump and his legal team "are trying to comply" with the court's gag order, Merchan couldn't take it anymore, losing patience with the claim that reposting others' attacks, even modified ones, doesn't violate that order.

"I hate to keep coming back to this, but you're not offering me anything to support your argument," Merchan said, adding moments later: "You're losing all credibility with the court."

Merchan did not rule Tuesday morning on what if any punishment Trump should receive if he's found to have violated the gag order, although a ruling could come later in the day. Prosecutors want Trump to be forced to delete posts and pay a $1,000 fine for each violation. They are not seeking jail time, with Conroy suggesting Tuesday that Trump might well be "angling" for such an outcome, presumably to bolster his claims of martyrdom.

 

 

This “Top Chef” go-to ingredient should be one of your pantry staples

In this week's "Top Chef" episode, multiple cheftestants incorporated miso into their dishes, both sweet and savory.

Over the years — dating all the way back to Katie Lee's hosting tenure — miso has been a star ingredient on the culinary competition reality show. At the same time, though, beyond the ubiquitous miso soup at many a sushi restaurant, the staple remains decidedly unapproachable for many home cooks. That shouldn't be the case.

I assure you, miso is so much more than just a soup base.

Throughout the Salon recipe archive, there is a host of recipes involving miso, from a vegetable marinade to seasoned bacon, from a cookie to a vegan protein. Miso adds a depth of flavor, a richness, a funky bite, a salty note and a hard-to-pinpoint umami sensation. It's one of my favorite ingredients  and maybe, after reading this, it can be come one of yours.

When I was a Milk Bar stan, I was obsessed with the idea of the miso butterscotch chai, which still reigns supreme as one of the most strikingly flavorful food concoctions ever devised. Over in Bon Appetit, Katie Okamoto says "miso contains multitudes." A 1998 Saveur article dubs it "magical miso." Clearly, it's something held in very high regard. 

Jolinda Hackett at The Spruce Eats defines miso as "a fermented pasta that adds a salty umami flavor to many Japanese dishes." also noting that there are actually over 1,000 types of miso  primarily broken down by color, usually ranging from white or light (with a yellow-ish tinge) to a heavier, darker miso that is stronger and darker in color. 

Zoe Denenberg writes in Epicurious that miso consists of soybeans, salt and koji before being aged "for months or even years." Koji, as Deneberg puts it, is an "ancient fungus" that serves as a starter for fermentation purposes. It is often extracted from a grain before being mixed with soybean and salt.


Want more great food writing and recipes? Subscribe to Salon Food's newsletter, The Bite.


I generally use shiro miso  or white miso  when I'm stirring it into cookie batters, glazes, soup bases, mayonnaise, vinaigrettes, desserts or sauces. Shiro miso and aka (or red) miso are the most commonly found in stores. 

There is basically no limit to how you can use miso. Stir into a savory or sweet bread dough. Whisk it into a creamy pasta sauce. Brush it on protein before grilling. Make the wildest pudding you've ever tasted. Incorporate it into a pizza topping. Pair it with raw vegetables for dipping. If you're looking to deepen your flavor profiles and be a bit more adventurous, then miso is your best friend. 

I will also generally note — please don’t salt as you would normally when using miso. It is quite a bomb of salt and umami in one bite, but it can take any dish into a staggeringly salty category very quickly. Use with discretion! (Speaking of, how funny was that oddly lingering shot on the Morton kosher salt after Dan placed it on the table in the Quick Fire?)

We need your help to stay independent

"Top Chef" takeaways, Episode 5

  • So interesting to learn a bit about the legacy of Carson Gulley and his sauces! I wasn’t familiar with him and will now do much research.
  • The “Laura is a villain” edit seems overwrought to me? To barely show us this cheftestant at all —sans that one weird moment in which she didn't acknowledge her part in Dan falling in the spilled cream — and then shift to an oddly negative focus felt odd. At the same time, though, I'm terrible at numbers and dissociate whenever money is discussed at length, but it was quite evident even to me that she badly bungled her team's budget (and that's putting it lightly). $1000 for five people to cook for forty people is pretty absurd, to be fair, especially with the food prices are right now. From a production standpoint, though, it feels kind of arbitrary and silly to assign such a low number to possibly rile up drama, but in actuality, simply produce subpar food.
  • It was very interesting to see — for the very first time — a direct impact of the new rule. We saw our this week's Quick Fire winner go home in the elimination challenge, one in which he normally would've been immune.

“Are you trying to make this OJ?”: Jon Stewart warns media’s Trump trial coverage could backfire

Comedian Jon Stewart on Monday launched into a fiery rant aimed at the media coverage of former President Donald Trump's hush money trial in the latest episode of "The Daily Show."

Stewart spent a portion of Monday's segment lambasting media outlets for their coverage of Trump's criminal trial unfolding in Manhattan, in which prosecutors have alleged that he falsified business records to cover up a $130,000 payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels shortly before the 2016 election.

“This trial will obviously be a test of the fairness of the American legal system, but it’s also a test of the media’s ability to cover Donald Trump in a responsible way. A task they have acknowledged they’ve performed poorly in the past,” Stewart said before showing a montage of clips from notable outlets like CNN and MSNBC acknowledging that they need to give less obsessive attention to the former president's every antic. 

“So brave. Well done,” Stewart said sardonically. “I think, for this trial, we will see the seeds of that introspection bear fruit. Or, we will learn that learning curves are for pussies." He then immediately entered another clip of top networks referring to the case as "the trial of the century" and making claims that the "legal walls are starting to close in" on Trump. 

“Perhaps, if we limit the coverage to the issues at hand, and try not to create an all-encompassing spectacle of the most banal of details, perhaps that would help?” Stewart asked.

The late-night host then played repeated footage of the former president's motorcade ferrying to and from the courthouse each day. “Seriously, are we going to follow this guy to court every f***ing day? Are you trying to make this OJ? It’s not a chase. He’s commuting,” Stewart said.

We need your help to stay independent

Stewart then honed in on a moment wherein CNN's Jake Tapper attempted to analyze a courtroom sketch of Trump, saying, "Why are you showing it to us? It’s a sketch. Why would anyone analyze a sketch? It’d be like looking at The Last Supper and going, ‘Why do you think Jesus looks so sad here?'” This jab was coupled with other clips Stewart pulled where journalists present at the trial reported on Trump's every physical movement.

"The Daily Show" host concluded by arguing that incessant media reporting on the trial will ultimately detract from its more important revelations and takeaways. 

“At some point in this trial, something important and revelatory is going to happen. But none of us are going to notice because the hour spent on his speculative, facial tics,” Stewart said. “If the media tries to make us feel like the most mundane bulls**t is Earth shattering, we won’t believe you when it’s really interesting. It’s your classic boy-who-cried-Wolf Blitzer.”


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


“We got a long ways to go here," he continued. "It’s the first day of the first of [Trump’s] 438 trials to come. Pace yourselves. And if [the media is] bored, you can always start planning how you’re going to be covering his next trial and the sober mea culpas you’ll deliver during his next term as president.” 

"The Daily Show" airs Monday through Thursday at 11 p.m. on Comedy Central and streams on Paramount+

California’s newest Costco will be one of the biggest in the world

If you are one of the many who deem yourself a Costco superfan, a trip to California may soon be in order to peruse the aisles of what will be one of the country's largest locations. After lots of legal back-and-forth, a location in northwest Fresno will be replaced by a "massive 219,000-square-foot warehouse," according to Amanda Bartlett at SF Gate

Currently, the largest Costco store as of now is in Salt Lake City and sits at 250,000 square feet. This California location was originally planned to top 240,000 square feet, but those plans have changed in response to community concerns about increased traffic and how the expanded store footprint would impact the surrounding area. Additionally, there were concerns about construction and noise. 

Costco has compromised, noting they'd pave a portion of the surrounding road with rubber asphalt to "mitigate noise issues" and also met with local school officials to ensure they were "comfortable with the proximity" of the store, according to Bartlett. Costco also agreed to pay for road improvements as well as crosswalks. 

Costco has compromised, noting that they'd "pave the portion of Riverside Drive . . . with rubber asphalt to mitigate noise issues" and also meet with local school officials to make sure they're "comfortable with the proximity" of the store, as per Bartlett. Costco also agreed to additional changes, like paying for road improvements as well as crosswalks.

"The new store is expected to produce nearly $13 million in tax revenue, $3 million of which will stay in Fresno County, in addition to creating 37 new full-time jobs," wrote Bartlett. The store could be opened by the end of 2025.

Trump valet Walt Nauta was promised a presidential pardon if he lied to the FBI, witness claims

Unsealed court filings in the federal classified documents investigation show that former President Donald Trump’s valet and personal aide Walter Nauta was promised he’d be pardoned for lying to the FBI if Trump won the 2024 election.

Included in the filings, released Monday, are redacted interview notes with an FBI witness, identified only as “Person 16." The witness, who was interviewed in November 2022, is described as someone who worked in the Trump White House, CNN reported

“NAUTA was also told that even if he gets charged with lying to the FBI, FPOTUS will pardon him in 2024,” reads the summary.

In June 2023, Nauta was charged with lying to the FBI and obstructing the investigation by special counsel Jack Smith. Trump himself was also charged with obstruction, along with mishandling classified national defense information. Both Nauta and Trump have pleaded not guilty. 

The FBI interview summary does not detail how the witness, who refused to be recorded, came to know about the alleged offer to pardon Nauta. It indicates that the witness hasn’t spoken to Nauta since Trump was elected in 2016. 

But, following the end of Trump’s term in 2020, the witness visited the former president’s Mar-a-Lago numerous times, according to the summary. During one such visit, in November 2021, the witness purportedly advised Trump to give up “whatever” he had back to the National Archives. 

“Don’t give them a noble reason to indict you, because they will,” the witness said to Trump, according to their account.

In August 2022, the FBI executed a search warrant at Mar-a-Lago to recover classified material in August 2022.

 

Trader Joe’s announces another recall, this time for packaged herbs

If you've recently purchased any herbs from Trader Joe's, you might want to take a look in your refrigerator. 

The grocer has announced a recall on packaged herbs due to a "multi-state salmonella outbreak," according to Elizabeth Chuck with NBC News. Infinite Herbs organic basil, which was sold in clamshell containers from February to April, has been recalled. The product was sold in 29 states plus Washington, D.C., said Chuck, who also writes that "there have been 12 reports in seven states of people being infected with salmonella," including one hospitalization.

“I am heartbroken at the thought that any item we sold may have caused illness or discomfort," Infinite Herbs' CEO and President Grego Berliavsky said in a statement. "We simply will not rest until we can once again be confident in the safety of this product.” 

Berliavsky recommends that anyone who freezes their herbs should double check their freezer to ensure they have no frozen basil on hand. He also remarked that the basil had been "sourced from a single farm, which is no longer in production." Trader Joe's advises consumers to either throw out the basil or return it for a refund.

In addition to many recalls over the past year or so, Trader Joe's also recently recalled cashews in March due to potential salmonella concerns.

 

“Really poor way to start”: Experts knock Trump lawyer’s “weird” opening statement after objections

Trump attorney Todd Blanche did several thing he wasn’t supposed to on Monday – and he probably did it on purpose.

On the first day of actual arguments in Donald Trump’s criminal trial, the former president’s defense counsel tried to plant some objectionable seeds in the minds of jurors. In his opening statement, Blanche portrayed adult film star Stormy Daniels as a liar who sought to “extort” his client and Michael Cohen, Trump’s former personal attorney, as a dishonest rogue who took it upon himself to commit crimes that just so happened to benefit the Republican candidate.

More than a half-dozen times, Blanche said things that sparked objections from prosecutors – objections that were sustained by Judge Juan Merchan, including the claim that there’s nothing illegal about buying someone’s silence (it depends, for example, on whether someone seeks to evade campaign finance laws while doing so). Twice during opening Blanche’s remarks, Merchan called lawyers from both sides to approach the bench for a sidebar in response to something the defense counsel had said.

“It was weird,” MSNBC legal analyst Lisa Rubin commented, “not just because there was one objection, but because of how many there were relative to the brevity of Todd Blanche’s opening statement.”

It was also a tactic. The line about nondisclosure agreements being legal – and another defense that Trump merely followed bad legal advice – had already been ruled inadmissible prior to the trial beginning; Blanche said it anyway. That led to multiple interruptions, Rubin noted, but at the same time, “he still planted the seeds of doubt in the jurors’ mind.”

Writing for CNN, Norm Eisen, former counsel for the House Judiciary Committee, wrote that Monday’s spectacle was, to him, highly unusual: “There were repeated objections that were upheld – probably the highest rate of upheld objections to an opening that I have seen in my 30-plus years of practicing law.”

“He knew that these were objectionable things he was saying,” Catherine A. Christian, a former prosecutor with the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office, told MSNBC. “They were objected to, but you can’t unring the bell,” she noted – meaning that you can’t make jurors forget what they heard, “and prosecutors can’t appeal an acquittal.”

But that strategy could backfire, too. Katie Phang, another legal analyst with MSNBC, argued that all the objections to Blanche’s opening statement could hurt his credibility with jurors. “When Blanche went beyond what he was allowed to do, not only did the objections get sustained… it interrupted flow,” Phang observed. “And that sends a message to the jury that Blanche is doing something wrong.”

We need your help to stay independent

It’s not a given that Blanche “doing something wrong” would harm Trump’s chances before a jury; those judging the state’s case against the former president could well conclude that Blanche is merely being a pugnacious defender of his client’s interests. But Neil Katyal, a former acting U.S. Solicitor General, argued that if jurors pay attention to Blanche’s legal arguments, rather than his objectionable attacks on witness credibility, they would spot a number of fallacies.

For one, Katyal said Monday night, the idea that Michael Cohen would have decided to pay off Daniels – and take out a home equity loan – of his own volition, without consulting Trump, is “thoroughly implausible.” And if the money Trump paid Cohen was truly for “legal expenses,” not to evade campaign finance laws and buy an accuser’s silence, then jurors will soon discover that there’s little to support the defense’s theory.

“That is going to be a problem,” Katyal said. “As an attorney, the last thing you want to do is over-promise in your opening statement and tell the jury the evidence is going to show something and it doesn’t actually turn out to show it. That’s when you blow your credibility.” After all, what witness would agree to testify under oath that “these payments were for legitimate legal expenses,” Katyal asked.

“It’s just unthinkable,” he said – and an auspicious way to begin one’s defense of a man facing 34 felony counts. “A really poor way to start,” Katyal said, “which is why Trump has always been scared of not just the other trials, but this trial in particular.”

The government is hiding something about the “Havana syndrome”

You can’t expect transparency from our government.

This is especially true when it comes to the so-called Havana syndrome – a generic term used to describe a variety of symptoms that have plagued diplomats and embassy workers since it first came to light in Havana, Cuba nearly a decade ago.

The symptoms have since been seen across the globe, including in Northern Virginia. The U.S. government has told us on a variety of occasions that there is nothing nefarious going on. But as reported exclusively here in Salon a year ago, and more recently on CBS’s “60 Minutes,” there is reason to believe the series of health concerns the government labels “Anomalous Health Incidents” or AHI’s, is manmade and possibly of Russian origin. 

Last year Mark Zaid, one of the premiere attorneys handling Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests in the country, filed a FOIA on behalf of a federal government whistleblower and myself to get more information regarding the Havana syndrome. Zaid and the whistleblower believe the government knows and is covering up the cause. It is unlikely, however, according to reliable sources that the U.S. government is responsible for causing Havana syndrome. 

Secretary of State Antony Blinken previously defended the government workers who came forward to report their symptoms. “Their pain is real,” he said. “I have no higher priority than the health and safety of each of you.”

Congress responded last week to the latest “60 Minutes” report and has asked President Biden for more information about the cause. This week a judge heard testimony from Zaid about the latest FOIA request, and even the judge showed concern about the government’s lack of cooperation.

We need your help to stay independent

“There’s not a lot of transparency,” United States District Judge Amit Mehta said during the hearing. The Obama-appointed judge presided over the 2023 Google antitrust trial, and handed out an 18-year sentence to the leader of the Oath Keepers, Stewart Rhodes for his involvement in the Jan. 6 insurrection – calling Rhodes’ actions a “peril to our democracy.”

This lack of clarity only leads to a proliferation of a wide variety of conspiracy theories, most of them crazier than the truth, and includes accusations of everything from our government experimenting on its citizens to space aliens doing the same.

The government was supposed to provide expedited service to our request for information, but so far has told us little more than there may be as many as 391 pages of information. We still do not know, months later, what that information actually is. Judge Mehta said in the hearing that while providing information was supposed to be expedited, it “wasn’t reflected in the facts.”

This lawsuit continues ongoing efforts to bring needed transparency surrounding the U.S. government’s knowledge of Anomalous Health Incidents (“AHI”) impacting federal employees and their family members. “The American public deserves to have a straight answer from the U.S. Government regarding AHIs and the impact that has been and is continuing to be felt by U.S. Government personnel, both overseas and domestically,” Zaid explained. 

As Zaid said on the “Just Ask the Question” podcast this week, the roots of the “Havana syndrome” could be traced back to the “Moscow Signal,” an event that occurred during the Cold War.  It was a reported microwave transmission varying between 2.5 and 4 gigahertz directed at the Embassy of the United States, Moscow from 1953 to 1976, resulting in an international incident. 

It is believed the microwave signal was used to turn on “The thing,” which was a gift from Russia to the U.S. – a large seal – that hid a listening device.

Since then, the question has become whether or not the technology has advanced and been weaponized, with suspicions of handheld devices used to induce the symptoms called The Havana syndrome.

While that sounds like a wild conspiracy theory, it’s not nearly as wild as the conspiracy theorists who believe the U.S. government is using its citizens as Guinea Pigs. “I do not believe that the U.S government is torturing or using these devices on its own citizens,” Zaid explained on the podcast. It is the introduction of the extreme conspiracy theorists who are also contributing to the misinformation that has led many reporters to ignore the problem.


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


There have been many theories about the cause behind the Havana syndrome, and as Salon exclusively reported last year, the wide range of symptoms could be traced to a variety of energy weapons. At the time, the government, however was still denying that possibility, instead telling us that there was no reason to believe AHIs were caused by human activity.  The issue first came to light in 2016 after diplomats from Canada and the U.S. stationed in Cuba reported a variety of symptoms, ranging in severity from and pain and ringing in the ears to cognitive dysfunction. One national security source, speaking on background, said, "This most definitely occurred before 2016. We just don't know for how long, who was involved or why.

The problem has led to potentially long-term health problems – and a question of government liability for those health consequences. “This is real. There is a problem and the government hasn’t been honest with us,” Zaid said.

This lack of clarity only leads to a proliferation of a wide variety of conspiracy theories, most of them crazier than the truth, and includes accusations of everything from our government experimenting on its citizens to space aliens doing the same.

Speaking on background, a Department of Defense official I spoke to Saturday said there is “hypothetically a huge problem here. If our enemies have created a handheld microwave or radio device that can cause these symptoms, who would want to work overseas? Worse, it appears that if this is manmade, then it happened here in the United States – and that would be an act of war.”

The same source also said the government either has or is developing ways to detect energy weapons, “if they exist.”

While the source would not say whether or not he believed the source of the Havana syndrome is manmade, he did say, “If it is, then it is a frightening weapon. The untraceable ability to harm, permanently disable or even kill someone from a distance is a serious, very serious matter.”

That seems like something out of a lunatic conspiracy, but as several FOIA requests and lawsuits have shown, and as the “60 Minutes” piece explained, this is one issue the U.S. government is taking seriously – even as it stymies the public in trying to find the answers.