Spring Offer: Get 1 Year, Save 58%

Taylor Swift donates $100k to family of woman killed at Chiefs parade

Singer Taylor Swift had donated $100,000 to the family of Lisa Lopez-Galvan, who was killed Wednesday after a mass shooting erupted near the end of a rally for the Kansas City Chiefs. Swift on Friday made two separate donations of $50,000 each to the GoFundMe established for Lopez-Galvan's family, which had reached more than $250,000 as of Friday afternoon. “Sending my deepest sympathies and condolences in the wake of your devastating loss. With love, Taylor Swift,” the singer wrote along with the donation. Swift is currently dating Travis Kelce, a tight end for the Chiefs. 

Lopez-Galvan, a radio DJ, was celebrating the Chiefs' Super Bowl win with her husband, daughter and son when she was fatally shot. The mass shooting, which injured another 22 people — including Lopez-Galvan's adult son — may have stemmed from a dispute, per the AP. Beto Lopez, Lopez-Galvan's brother, told CNN's Anderson Cooper that his sister was “a very loving, caring and devoted mother.

“We have tragic situations like this one that occur unfortunately way too often, and a lot of time individuals get lost as just statistics or numbers,” Lopez added. “She did a lot for this community and the Kansas City area, raising money for a lot of charitable events and organizations, and it’s something we’ll be very proud of forever.” Following the incident, Kelce took to X/Twitter to speak out. “I am heartbroken over the tragedy that took place today,” the NFL player wrote. “My heart is with all who came out to celebrate with us and have been affected. KC, you mean the world to me." 

“Egg Rolls and Sweet Tea”: How food can serve as a catalyst for diversity

The title of Natalie Keng’s new cookbook, “Egg Rolls and Sweet Tea: Asia Inspired, Southern Style” is a nod to how her parents’ immigration from Taiwan to Georgia set the stage for her culinary upbringing. “Not only are they two of my favorite foods,” she said. “In many ways, they reflect who I am.” 

Keng enjoyed a distinctly southern childhood — spent “suckling nectar out of honeysuckles, going to country fairs and fishing off the dock of Lake Altoona” — that was flavored with dishes from her parents’ home country, sparking a lifelong interest in global cuisine. As a kid, she worked in several of her parents’ retail stores at the local mall, including one that sold (you guessed it) egg rolls and sweet tea. 

“This oddball pairing went ‘viral’ and folks lined up for what at first had seemed more like cultural confusion than culinary fusion,” Keng said. 

"If you stop and think about the foods we enjoy as Americans, it's easy to see the kaleidoscope of intersections and overlaps that makes us the envy of the world,” she continued. “Right in my hometown of Atlanta, Georgia, I can enjoy dishes that span the globe while embracing my love of the great American South." 

Natalie KengNatalie Keng (Photo by Chris Lawery)

However, illuminating unique points of intersection in singular ways isn’t just a narrative thread through Keng’s book (though look to her her “Signature Purple ‘Snushi’ Rolls,” which contain pork rinds, Cheetos and avocado, as a prime example of that). It was a key element of her work in the corporate world where she utilized food as a way to encourage real conversations about corporate culture— something that can perhaps serve as a template for others who want to have more real conversations around both the boardroom and dining table. 

Before starting her own business and becoming an author, Keng was a strategic multicultural marketing executive and diversity-inclusion advisor at a Fortune 100 company. She says that she discovered "the power of food and culture" while working in the financial services sector of this corporation, where she was charged with "promoting gender equity in a male-dominated industry." 

We need your help to stay independent

“At first, I found it hard to get anyone to engage in these kinds of discussions in the boardroom,” she said. “But as soon as I started inviting colleagues to potlucks, insights about how diversifying a sales team should be just as important as diversifying an investment portfolio flowed right out into the social conversation.” 

This led to an idea: What if instead of relying on the same stale corporate bonding activities to inspire new conversations, food became the talking point? Keng got people out of the office and started hosting dumpling-making events, tours of farmers markets and restaurant visits. This offered attendees a chance to find unexpected points of commonality. 

Egg Rolls & Sweet Tea coverEgg Rolls & Sweet Tea cover (Photo by Deborah Whitlaw Llewellyn/Gibbs Smith)

That is one of the reasons why, in the introduction to “Egg Rolls and Sweet Tea,” Keng poses the question: "Can food be the catalyst for accepting diversity?” In Keng’s mind, the answer is an unequivocal yes, given that she thinks of it as “arguably the world's best icebreaker.”


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


Sometimes, all it takes is a single ingredient to find common ground. For instance, rice. 

"Rice has played such a historically significant agricultural and economic role across the world, especially in Asia and in the American South,” Keng said. “[It] can be simple and amazingly complex across the rice varieties, nutrients, growing and cooking methods.” 

Dad's Sweet TeaDad's Sweet Tea (Photo by Deborah Whitlaw Llewellyn/Gibbs Smith)

From her book, she points to the  Rainbow Black Rice Salad — which she calls “a potluck favorite for its amazing colors and texture variety” — as well as the Base Camp White Rice with Quinoa (with a pat of butter and a fried egg), which is “comforting, simple and satisfying.” 

“This cookbook is an amalgamation of my childhood growing up in the Deep South and my experiences as I came to discover my passion for exploring the parallels and intersections of race, class and gender through the prism of Asian and Southern family and food traditions,” she continued. As Keng puts it, she comes from "a lineage of ceiling breakers."

And while the book is deeply personal to Keng’s lived experience — and is packed with family photos and delightful anecdotes about both her work and personal life — it contains a universal message. 

 "Every dish tells a story, whether it’s barbecue or banh mi. When we learn to love the food, we are more open to the people,” she said. “When we are more open to people, we have a chance to find common interests — whether same age kids or even if it’s a debate about the definition of a Dumpling or the best style BBQ — it opens possibilities — for friendship, relationship and trust, curiosity at some level. When we have connection, everything flows from there." 

“Manipulation of fear”: New analysis blows hole in “good guy with a gun” myth

Fueled by right-wing politicians and the powerful gun lobby, nearly three-quarters of firearm owners in the United States believe the enduring myth that a gun at the ready will keep them safer—but a new analysis offers the latest hard evidence that guns simply make life more dangerous and deadly for everyone.

The Center for American Progress (CAP) joined gun violence research group GVPedia to release an issue brief debunking the falsehoods pushed by the National Rifle Association (NRA) and other pro-gun groups, which, looking to "counter the horrors of everyday gun violence in America… masterfully constructed a narrative based on the myth of a 'good guy with a gun' using their weapon defensively to stop an armed assailant before harm can be done."

Listening to former NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre and the right-wing lawmakers who count on the gun lobby's endorsements, one could hardly be blamed for conjuring an image of a "good guy with a gun" who frequently stops a violent attack from happening—but the analysis shows how faulty research in the 1990s underpinned such claims.

Surveys at the time, including a widely-cited study by Gary Kleck and Matt Gertz, estimated that between 760,000 and 2.5 million defensive gun uses (DGU) occurred annually.

But the Harvard Injury Control Research Center found two years later that fewer than 550,000 burglaries occurred in gun owners' homes annually, while Kleck and Gertz had estimated that "guns were used for self-defense during burglaries approximately 845,000 times."

"Burglary victims would have needed to use their gun defensively in more than 100% of cases, which is, of course, impossible," the issue brief reads.

Until the myth of the "good guy with the gun" is defeated, said Devin Hughes, founder and president of GVPedia, "Americans will continue buying firearms in the mistaken belief that those guns will make them safer, and gun violence will continue unabated."

"Accurate information is critically important in fighting America’s epidemic of gun violence. Just as important, however, is countering inaccurate information," Hughes added.

CAP also analyzed data on DGU from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which estimated just 70,000 such instances per year.

The group found that nine times as many people report being victimized by a person with a gun than being protected by a firearm. Respondents to two Harvard surveys taken in 1996 and 1999 were three times as likely to report being threatened or victimized with a gun than having used one to protect themselves.

In addition to putting a household at higher risk of an accidental gun injury or death, gun ownership also is not "the safest means of self-protection," CAP found.

NCVS data from 2007-11 showed that of the 14,145 crime incidents in which a victim was present, less than 1% involved DGU.

Eleven percent of victims who did not use a gun defensively reported being injured during the altercation; almost the same amount, 10.9%, reported injuries in cases of the victim using a gun.

More than 38% of victims who used a gun defensively reported property loss, while less than 35% who defended themselves with a different weapon reported that property was stolen during the incident.

"The idea that one is not safe unless they are carrying a gun is perhaps the most personal and insidious myth constructed by the gun lobby," said CAP. "What does improve safety is stronger gun laws, improved clearance rates, and investments in community violence intervention programming."

The brief noted that people who intend to use their guns defensively are more likely to keep them "unlocked, readily accessible, and loaded, substantially increasing the risk of unauthorized access by a minor"—suggesting that a parent with a gun for self-protective purposes is unlikely to successfully use it for self-defense, and is actively endangering family members by having the gun.

"Similar to adult cohabitants, children living in a home with a firearm are at a greater risk for unintentional injury and death, homicide, and suicide," said CAP. "Moreover, their unauthorized access to household firearms can put those outside the home at risk, with more than 74% of firearms used in school shooting incidents obtained from the student's home or from the home of a relative or family friend."

Citing a number of examples of people in states with so-called "Stand Your Ground" laws, which say that gun owners have a right to use their firearms if they believe they are being threatened, CAP and GVPedia showed how, contrary to the narrative about the "good guy with a gun," most DGU cases "are harmful to society" and involve innocent people being killed due to the presence of a firearm.

"Emboldened by a 'shoot first, ask questions later' culture, too many armed individuals have used deadly force as a first response, rather than a last resort," said CAP. "More concerning, gun homicides in which white shooters invoked SYG after killing Black victims were determined justifiable by the legal system five times more often than when the situation was reversed, indicating serious racial disparities in the defensive use of firearm."

The group's research showed how the gun industry and its backers have used "the manipulation of fear, perversion of self-defense, and falsified statistics" to weaken "the public's ability to properly inform themselves of the risks associated with gun ownership," said Allison Jordan, research associate for gun violence prevention at CAP.

"In untangling the myth of defensive gun use, one thing is abundantly clear," said Jordan. "If safety is the goal, guns are not the answer."

“Completely discredited”: Expert says informant’s indictment “eviscerates” GOP impeachment case

An FBI informant was charged Thursday with making up a bribery scheme involving President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden at the heart of the Republicans’ impeachment efforts.

Alexander Smirnov in 2020 falsely reported to the FBI that executives at the Ukrainian energy firm Bursima paid Hunter and Joe Biden $5 million each in 2015 or 2016 in order to “protect” them from “all kinds of problems,” according to The Associated Press.

Prosecutors say Smirnov only had routine business dealings with the company in 2017 and made the allegation after he “expressed bias” against then-candidate Joe Biden. He was charged with making a false statement and creating a false and fictitious record.

Smirnov’s claims have been central to the House GOP impeachment inquiry into Biden. An attorney for Hunter Biden, who is expected to be deposed by the House this month, told the AP the indictment shows the GOP investigation is “based on dishonest, uncredible allegations and witnesses.”

Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, called on Republicans to “end their doomed impeachment inquiry,” arguing it has “always been a tissue of lies built on conspiracy theories.”

“When did James Comer know this was false and how long did he conceal that from the American people?” Rep. Jared Moskowitz, D-Fla., questioned on CNN.

CNN legal analyst Elliot Williams said the indictment “eviscerates” the GOP’s impeachment effort.

“Any evidence linking current President Biden to wrongdoing was pretty thin to begin with. But if people had it and could come forward with it and substantiate it, by all means, bring it. That’s how law enforcement works,” he said.

“Now, I’m genuinely curious sort of as a citizen, as much as a former Hill staffer and prosecutor, what the folks on the Hill do with it now, because literally your star witness – his testimony has been completely discredited by law enforcement,” he added.

Former Russia ambassador says “Putin killed Navalny” after opposition leader reportedly dies in jail

Jailed Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny, who received international attention after being poisoned in 2020, was reported dead Friday by Russia's Federal Penitentiary Service, according to CNN. Navalny, one of the most outspoken critics of Russian President Vladimir Putin, was 47. The anti-Kremlin activist "felt unwell after a walk" and "almost immediately" fell unconscious, the prison service said Friday, adding that it was investigating Navalny's "sudden death."

Dmitry Peskov, a Kremlin spokesman, told reporters Putin had been made aware of the report and that doctors must determine Navalny's cause of death.

A spokesperson for Navalny, Kira Yarmysh, said on X that his lawyer is traveling to Kharp where Navalny was held and vowed to report any information they obtain.

 

“I want them to know that they will be punished for what they have done with our country, with my family, and with my husband,” she said, adding that she did not have confirmation of Navalny's death.

News of his death comes less than a month before a presidential election expected to grant Putin another six years of power and has sparked a swath of criticism against the Kremlin leader who has quashed opposition in the nation.

Navalny's activism involved exposing corruption, orchestrating massive anti-Kremlin protests and campaigning against the ruling United Russia party, according to CNN. Upon returning to Russia in 2021 following his poisoning with Novichok, a Soviet-era nerve agent, he was arrested on charges he regarded as politically motivated. He was sentenced to a 19-year prison term in August after being found guilty of building an extremist community among other crimes. He had already been serving an 11-and-a-half-year sentence in a maximum security facility on other charges he denied. 

"Putin killed Navalny. Let's be crystal clear about that," Michael McFaul, a former United States Ambassador to Russia and friend of Navalny, told MSNBC Friday, adding: "Putin killed Navalny because Navalny was the one opposition leader in Russia that Putin feared the most. This is a really tragic day for me, and it should be a tragic day for anybody who cares about democracy."

Israel will participate in Eurovision Song Contest 2024 following worldwide calls for a ban

The European Broadcasting Union (EBU) announced Thursday that Israel can compete in this year’s Eurovision song contest, despite worldwide calls urging the union to exclude Israel from this year’s showcase over the Gaza conflict. 

“The Eurovision song contest is a non-political music event and a competition between public service broadcasters who are members of the EBU. It is not a contest between governments,” the EBU director general, Noel Curran, said in a statement, per Guardian.

“Our governing bodies . . . did review the participants list for the 2024 contest and agreed that the Israeli public broadcaster Kan met all the competition rules for this year and can participate, as it has for the past 50 years.”

Israel is slated to take part in the second semi-final on May 9. This will be the nation’s 46th competition since its first entry in 1973.

In anticipation of the EBU’s decision, 400 Hollywood celebrities and industry executives penned an open letter supporting Israel’s inclusion. Signatories include actors Emmy Rossum, Helen Mirren, Mayim Bialik, Ginnifer Goodwin and Liev Schreiber, among hundreds of others. Industry figures include Saban CEO Haim Saban, Recording Academy CEO Harvey Mason Jr, Mattel CEO Ynon Kreiz and WME partner David Levy. Record executive Scooter Braun, KISS frontman Gene Simmons and Culture Club lead singer Boy George also offered their signatures.

According to Variety, the letter, organized by the non-profit organization Creative Community For Peace, states: “We believe that unifying events such as singing competitions are crucial to help bridge our cultural divides and unite people of all backgrounds through their shared love of music.

“Those who are calling for Israel’s exclusion are subverting the spirit of the Contest and turning it from a celebration of unity into a tool of politics.”

Earlier this month, more than 400 Danish artists signed a petition condemning Israel’s participation in Eurovision 2024, stating, “When Israel’s failure to comply with international law and order has no consequences, war crimes, occupation, and blockade are normalized.

“We believe that the EBU and all member states contribute to this normalization by allowing Israel to participate in this year’s Eurovision,” the petition continued. “We cannot be passive and watch as a country that commits gross war crimes against an imprisoned people is invited to a joint celebration of music, diversity, and cohesion.”

Slovenian members of the European Parliament (MEPs), Matjaž Nemec and Irena Joveva, also stood up against Israel's participation. Same with protestors in Norway, who called on the Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation (NRK) to boycott the event. NRK, in a statement, said they “cannot call for a cultural boycott.”

“It's not part of our broadcasting remit, it would be totally impossible for us," the company added.


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


In January, more than 1,400 members of the Finnish music community called for a ban due to Israel’s “war crimes” in the midst of a months-long attack against Palestine. Their efforts came after a group of Icelandic musicians demanded last year that Iceland boycott Eurovision if Israel took part.

“Music is a place for unity not division,” Scooter Braun said in a statement. “It is a language that should always bring us together. Artists should never be discriminated against for who they are, who they love, or where they’re born. These boycott efforts do nothing but distract from the uplifting and unifying power of music — something we need now more than ever.”

In contrast, this is what happened in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. On Feb. 24, 2022, the EBU said including a Russian entry in that year’s contest “would bring the competition into disrepute.”

The decision was “based on the rules of the event and the values of the EBU,” it said at the time.

In light of the EBU’s most recent decision, Curran told The Guardian that it was not the EBU’s place to make comparisons between wars.

Following the Oct. 7 attacks — which has killed more than 28,000 Palestinians — Israeli forces have raided Gaza’s local hospitals. By the end of November, 30 of Gaza’s 36 hospitals were hit by Israeli rockets, Al Jazeera reported. Currently, only six of Gaza’s hospitals remain functional.

“Spectacle”: Legal experts say messy hearing shows Fani Willis scandal is a “big nothingburger”

Thursday’s evidentiary hearing on the misconduct claim against Fulton County, Ga., District Attorney Fani Willis yielded a lot of drama but little evidence of wrongdoing, legal experts say.

Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee held a hearing after Ashleigh Merchant, an attorney for Trump co-defendant Mike Roman, alleged an improper relationship between Willis and top prosecutor Nathan Wade and claimed that Wade used his earnings from the case to fund trips for the pair.

The hearing began with a bombshell claim from Robin Yeartie, a former friend of Willis, who claimed that the pair’s relationship began in 2019, well before they claimed the relationship began in 2022. The prosecutors pushed back that Yeartie was a disgruntled former employee with an ax to grind against Willis.

McAfee ordered Wade to testify after the allegation and Willis, who had resisted a subpoena to testify at the hearing, later entered and agreed to testify. The prosecutors, who said they broke up in the summer of 2023, pushed back on the allegations and accused the TrumpWorld lawyers peppering them with questions of lying about the relationship.

The couple also pushed back on allegations of financial misconduct. Wade testified that Willis reimbursed him for the trips with cash for “safety reasons.” Willis testified that she also keeps six months of cash at home on her father’s advice.

The hearing is set to resume for a second day on Friday but legal experts say there is little from the dramatic hearing that warrants Willis’ removal.

“I simply don’t see any new evidence that requires disqualification. It’s a credibility pissing match so far. Ugly. Dramatic. But the needle hasn’t moved,” tweeted Georgia State University Law Prof. Anthony Michael Kreis.

“As an excavation of a now-defunct relationship, it was Bravo-worthy (and frankly, sad). But as an evidentiary hearing, it wasn’t the win the defense promised, especially under the governing legal standard,” agreed MSNBC legal analyst Lisa Rubin.

“Unless something new and dramatic happens tomorrow, I'd say there's almost no chance Willis gets disqualified,” predicted Randal Eliason, a professor at the George Washington University School of Law.

Attorney Ted Boutros called the allegations against Willis “the weakest, most convoluted, ludicrous, legally baseless ‘conflict of interest’ argument imaginable.” 

“The judge should have rejected it as a matter of law,” he wrote.

Former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance told MSNBC that the hearing featured “a lot of spectacle but not very much substance.”

We need your help to stay independent

"Ultimately, at the end of the day yesterday, it was just a big nothingburger," she said. "There was nothing to show that Fani Willis and Nathan Wade had the financial conflict of interest that Georgia law recognizes, something akin to a prosecutor who only gets paid if they win a case. That's the classic case in Georgia law where there is a conflict that results in disqualification. That wasn't there yesterday in the courtroom."

Former prosecutor Karen Friedman Agnifilo told CNN that the TrumpWorld lawyers arguing the case failed to probe the pair’s financial relationship.

“This just devolved into a salacious, private, deeply personal attack on Fani Willis that just really seemed irrelevant to such an extent it was I thought that was a real sideshow and not a lot came out that would actually disqualify where they could have asked a lot of those questions to establish that relationship,” she said.

Republicans’ impeachment farce implodes with indictment of star Biden “informant”

The Biden impeachment inquiry seems to attract witnesses who turn out to be con artists and criminals for some reason. The Republican inquisitors get a tip that somebody's got the goods on "the Biden family" and they fan out to the right-wing media to hail the news that they've finally nabbed the Big Guy. Then the truth inevitably comes out that they were played for fools.

The alleged crime at the center of the impeachment probe is still that ridiculous claim that then vice president Joe Biden was working on behalf of his son's business, Burisma, in Ukraine when he pushed the government to fire a prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, whom they claim was investigating the company. The problem is that Shokin wasn't investigating the company at all and was actually ousted because he failed to investigate corrupt politicians. (No wonder all these Republicans find him to be such a sympathetic figure.) In fact, the whole international community was agitating to have him fired because he was corrupt and the Ukrainian parliament finally did it.

When the Republicans took over the House in 2023, they went full steam ahead with their investigation of those same moldy facts, following the orders of their leader Donald Trump who has demanded that they impeach Joe Biden at least once as payback for Trump's first impeachment which, not coincidentally, was also centered around Ukraine. (He also wants both of his impeachments "expunged" like they are a juvie record or something but it looks like that will have to wait until he's restored to the White House.)

Republicans had been hinting around that they'd found a smoking gun in the case for some time with House Oversight Chair James Comer, R- Ky., and Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley flamboyantly announcing last May that they'd sent a letter to the Justice Department stating that there was evidence of “an alleged criminal scheme involving then-Vice President Biden and a foreign national relating to the exchange of money for policy decisions" and demanding that the department release this damning evidence to the public. Comer even threatened the FBI with contempt if they didn't turn over the documents immediately. Grassley took the lead in leaking out tidbits of information about this evidence which was attributed to an FBI confidential informant who had been informed of the bribe by a Ukrainian businessman. And lordy, they said there were tapes of Biden and Hunter being bribed, electrifying the right-wing media and leading to hours of feverish innuendo on Fox News and other outlets.

Media Matters has tracked Fox News' obsession with this story for some time:

Hannity’s show aired at least 85 Hunter Biden segments in 2023 promoting the dubiously sourced and wholly unproven notion that Mykola Zlochevsky, the Ukrainian oligarch who controlled Burisma, paid a $5 million bribe to Joe Biden. This is an extension of the Ukraine conspiracy theory with all the problems detailed above, in addition to its own issues, but nonetheless is treated credulously by the Fox host. Of those 85 segments, 28 were Hannity monologues.

Those hysterical monologues are truly something to see. Here's a bit of the one Hannity gave on the day Grassley released the document:

There are now real and growing concerns that your president, the president of our country, is compromised. After months of obfuscation from the FBI and the DOJ, that FD-1023 form that documented allegations of bribery from a trusted FBI confidential human source has now finally been released, thanks to Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa. Now, its contents are devastating…this is about the big guy himself, Joe Biden, a corrupt career politician who is now very credibly accused of public corruption on a scale this country has never seen before.

It was never very credible. One of the red flags, as I noted at the time, was the fact that this five million dollar bribe seemed to be a "sloppy conflation with a five million dollar bribe that was revealed in September 2020 when they arrested three Burisma executives for offering five million dollars to Ukrainian anti-corruption officials and which the Ukrainian government went to pained lengths to say neither Hunter Biden nor Joe Biden had anything to do with." There is also the fact that there were quite a few Republicans who were very cagey about this breathless assertion that there were tapes of the bribes.

We need your help to stay independent

It makes you wonder what they knew or suspected about this whole thing now that it turns out that their smoking gun witness was arrested in Las Vegas yesterday on charges of lying to the FBI and creating false records. The indictment, returned by a grand jury and filed by Special Counsel David Weiss, tells quite a tale.

Informant Alexander Smirnov, the indictment reads, “transformed his routine and unextraordinary business contacts with Burisma in 2017 and later into bribery allegations against [Biden], the presumptive nominee of one of the two major political parties for President, after expressing bias against [Biden] and his candidacy.”

In the original interview, Smirnov had claimed that he'd been told about the bribe in 2016. But, apparently, Smirnov couldn’t have had that conversation in 2016 because he “met with officials from Burisma for the first time in 2017, after [Biden] left office in January 2017.” The indictment says that Smirnov's meetings with Burisma were "unremarkable" pitch meetings, not discussions of bribes to then-VP Biden.

Smirnov's accusation was cited over and over as the main basis for the impeachment inquiry of Joe Biden, despite the fact that they knew the information was unverified:


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


None of the Fox News celebrity hosts mentioned this indictment tonight, after flogging in relentlessly for the past year. James Comer issued a statement expressing no remorse for his role and even criticized the FBI for not being forthcoming about its investigation of his big witness, despite the fact that he and Grassley made the whole thing public over their protests. He told CNN, “to be clear, the impeachment inquiry is not reliant on the FBI’s FD-1023. It is based on a large record of evidence, including bank records and witness testimony, revealing that Joe Biden knew of and participated in his family’s business dealings." None of that has panned out thus far.

Oh, and by the way, this is the second major Comer witness to be indicted. The first was Gal Luft indicted last July on 8 counts of arms trafficking, sanctions violations and acting as an unregistered agent for China. He's now a fugitive from justice.

These Republicans sure know how to pick 'em. Or, to be more precise, these unsavory characters know how to pick Republicans. 

Inner ear of extinct ape species is overlooked aspect of human bipedal evolution, study finds

The inner ear may not seem like a particularly bony place, but human ears in fact have three small bones (also known as ossicles): the malleus, the incus and the stapes. While most people would assume that these bones are necessary for hearing, one would not imagine that they relate much to how we walk.

Yet according to Chinese and American scientists working together for a study in the journal The Innovation, the ear bones of ancient apes can teach us a lot not only about our primate ancestors, but also about ourselves.

In a sense, the inner ear bones of the Lufengpithecus is a missing link in the evolutionary history of human locomotion.

It all comes down to bipedalism, or the fact that humans walk on two legs. Because our various primate ancestors were often quadrupedal (walking on four legs), evolutionary scientists have often wondered how we made the shift from being a four-legged species to one that relies on two legs. The experts turned to the seemingly obvious places for answers: They studied the bones of ancient monkeys when they came from their limbs, pelvis, shoulders and spine. Yet in The Innovation study, the team of scientists looked instead to the inner ear. They specifically chose the remains of a Lufengpithecus, an ape from China that has been extinct for 7 to 8 million years.

"The semicircular canals, located in the skull between our brain and the external ear, are critical for our sense of balance and position when we move, and they provide a fundamental component of our locomotion that most people are probably unaware of," Zhang Yinan, first author of the study and a Ph.D. student at the Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, said in a press statement. "The size and shape of the semicircular canals have mathematical correlation with how mammals, including apes and humans, move around their environment. Using modern imaging techniques, we are able to visualize the internal structure of fossil skulls and study the anatomical details of the semicircular canals to reveal how extinct mammals moved."

After doing this, the scientists observed that the Lufengpithecus inner ear revealed an animal that moved in ways unlike anything previously known about ancient or modern primates. Instead, it is believed that the primate moved around by combining various motion types — clambering, climbing, bipedalism, quadrupedalism and forelimb suspension. The ancestors of the Lufengpithecus did not move anything like this — their locomotion was more analogous to what we see today among gibbons in Asia — and humans developed their bipedalism afterward. In a sense, the inner ear bones of the Lufengpithecus is a overlooked connection in the evolutionary history of human locomotion.

As the authors of the study explain, it is because the inner ear bones yield information about the locomotion of primates that cannot be found through traditional methods.

"The bony labyrinth of the inner ear of vertebrates houses the peripheral vestibular system comprised of three fluid-filled semicircular canals that are functionally tied to sense of balance, spatial orientation, posture, and body movements," the authors explain. "This, in turn, is linked to modes of locomotion among living and extinct taxa."


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


"The dramatic increase in the average evolution rate of semicircular canals" within these apes may illuminate that "the rapid evolution of bipedalism in the human lineage in response to gradual global cooling."

Interestingly, natural climate change may have also played a role in this ear evolution. After observing that evolutionary rates tend to slow down as global temperatures rise, the authors point out that "the dramatic increase in the average evolution rate of semicircular canals" within these apes may illuminate that "the rapid evolution of bipedalism in the human lineage in response to gradual global cooling." The Lufengpithecus lived during a warm period in the Pliocene era, one that "marks the beginning of Plio-Pleistocene continuous cooling and the onset of Northern Hemisphere alaciation. Against the backdrop of global cooling, the increase of grassy vegetation driven by regional-scale environmental factors may be the trigger for the accelerated evolution of" primates and humans walking on two legs in Africa.

Studying our primate relatives has shed enormous light on our own evolution. A paper last year in the journal iScience studied chimpanzees and bonobos to determine if they possess a trait known as "vocal functional flexibility." Vocal functional flexibility refers to an animal's ability to produce complex sounds that form speech, as opposed to the more simple sounds that come forward from screaming, crying, laughing or making other basic sounds.

Humans are not born with vocal functional flexibility but rather develop it over stages, and it is considered one of the prerequisites to creating actual speech. In their research, the authors of the iScience study discovered that grunting chimpanzees from newborns through to ten-year-old youths display vocal functional flexibility.

"The logic is, if we find good evidence for something in humans and good evidence for something in chimpanzees, then we’re kind of justified in making the inference that this was also a trait that was held by the last common ancestor," Dr. Derry Taylor, the paper's corresponding author and a professor at the University of Portsmouth, told Salon at the time. "So we can say with a reasonable degree of confidence that whatever those vocal communication systems were like, they probably at least had this type of flexibility.”

Another study — this one published last year in the journal Current Biology — involved scientists performing a magic trick known as the "French drop effect" in front of three types of monkeys: common marmosets, Humboldt's squirrel monkeys and yellow-breasted capuchin monkeys. The trick involves a scientist putting food in one hand, presenting it to the money and then putting their other hand over the treat while appearing to grab it.

We need your help to stay independent

In fact, the scientists did not grab the treat with their second hand, therefore leading those monkeys that had opposable thumbs to be surprised when discovering it was still in the first hand. Yet the one species of monkey in the group that lacks opposable thumbs, the marmosets, were less likely to be fooled by the trick because they lacked the same digital frame of reference.

"It tells us something about how we think without work," Dr. Nicky Clayton, a professor at the University of Cambridge and corresponding author on the paper — explained to Salon at the time. "We know this because we know . . . there's this massive power in this non-verbal communication. And then I think of seeing non-human animals respond in that way to these non-verbal stimuli. It creates all kinds of questions in your mind, doesn't it? Why is it so soothing to us? What does it mean for the animals that watch it?"

Whether it is in shedding light on the origins of human locomotion and speech or helping us understand our very sense of selves, scientists who study primates both living and extinct continue to learn a lot more about human beings.

Trump trials give MAGA a false sense of confidence

Just before Donald Trump stepped into a New York courtroom Thursday, he stopped and spoke with reporters. He ranted. He raved. He didn’t make much sense. He called all the court actions taken against him “election interference run by Joe Biden.” He then said it is a terrible time for our country, “a real dark period,” to which a reporter remarked on a live-mic “Jesus Christ.”

Jesus has nothing to do with Donald Trump, still, Trump thinks he is being crucified. Meanwhile, Manhattan came to a standstill as Trump’s motorcade brought him to court. Dean Obeidallah, a SiriusXM host noted, “The NYPD is closing roads by me in NYC during rush hour to allow Trump to get to the courthouse in lower Manhattan.” The networks covered it as if it were a coronation, and Trump soaked up the attention.

"Some Trump supporters are happy Trump could go to prison and defeat the Democrats while at the same time believe he never will because he’s smarter than the so-called Deep State."

At about the same time, Tucker Carlson, still on the Putin bandwagon, told us Russians have it much better than Americans (after shopping in a Moscow grocery store). And if that wasn’t circus enough for you, Fulton County District Attorney Fanni Willis jumped into the Trump-related drama by running into court and defending herself against charges that she abused her power and shouldn’t be allowed to prosecute Trump on some very serious state criminal charges in Georgia. She was seen on Thursday talking about cruises, trips to Aruba and who paid for what dinner while she dodged haters, moved out of her house, took care of her father, used private security and dated lead prosecutor Nathan Wade who is overseeing the Donald Trump case in Fulton County, Georgia.

What does all of this testimony have to do with Donald Trump? Absolutely nothing. But Trump and a co-defendant in Georgia want to delay the start of the only trial Trump can’t control should he be re-elected. Or, he wants to try and kill the charges outright because of the alleged inappropriate use of public funds. The allegation is Wade used money he got paid as a prosecutor to go on a cruise and some road trips with Willis. Even a few members of the Trump team that still talk with me have said, “who gives a shit?” Though they also like that it muddies the water “for the boss.” And they cackled with glee watching the drama in Georgia.

“Don’t get cute with me,” Willis said at one point under direction questioning. My grandfather and uncle, who were both circuit court judges often said, “Lawyers make the worst witnesses. They don’t know when to shut up.” Willis tried to guess what the line of questioning was about, cut it off, and spit it back at her accusers while the judge sat by trying to guide her into calmer waters. 

"I'm not on trial no matter how much want to put me on trial," Willis stated defiantly

And, if that’s not drama enough for the day, in speaking with several members of the Republican Party, many of them said they are embarrassed by Donald Trump, “though most (of the GOP) are loyal to him,” but some are seeing Trump’s drama coming to an end in court soon and want to find a seat before the music stops. It is worth saying that the number of people doing this is very low.

Yes, we’ve all heard this before. Donald Trump is trouble. Donald Trump is going down and who will be left to pick up the pieces? Trump found out today that his first test in criminal court will be in Manhattan in what many believe is the weakest case he faces; the payment of hush money to Stormy Daniels. Michael Cohen, his former fixer, and David Pecker (no pun intended) the former CEO of American Media figure prominently in the case. Cohen, Trump tells us, is a liar, a cheat and a bum. What Cohen routinely calls Trump can’t be said in front of small children. But, despite Trump’s insults at Cohen’s expense, Cohen has, so far, proved to be the spear in Trump’s side he cannot ignore. He might just be the witness that helps put Trump in prison. “He deserves it,” Cohen said. 

Will that make a difference to what remains of the Republican Party? Probably not. One GOP stalwart told me, “We may have to find another candidate, but we probably won’t even if Trump goes to prison – which a lot of us think won’t ever happen. But come on, you have to admit that Trump beating Biden while in prison would be delicious irony.” I would call it something else, but there is no denying that some in Trump’s camp would secretly relish that outcome – though others openly admit it could destroy what’s left of the “United” in the “United States.”

Many Trump supporters have also told me that this year’s Super Bowl already accomplished that goal. One Q-Anon (remember Q-Anon? Turns out this is a story about Q-Anon) supporter proudly believes the Deep State engineered the Kansas City victory in the Super Bowl to promote LGBTQ “weirdoes who want men to play women’s basketball.” I can’t make this stuff up and wouldn’t try. 

This source was happy about Willis’s testimony in Georgia. “She was great for us,” he said. “You couldn’t ask for a better outcome.” According to Trump supporters, Willis showed her backside and tainted the case against Trump. “They’ll have to throw it out.” And Cohen, “A known liar” according to the same source said, “won’t be able to lay gloves on Trump.”

So, some Trump supporters are happy Trump could go to prison and defeat the Democrats while at the same time believe he never will because he’s smarter than the so-called Deep State.

We need your help to stay independent

That only leaves the Mar-A-Lago classified documents case to consider. Trump supporters say it “will never be heard. It will be delayed until after the election that Trump will win.” These same supporters say, “Trump only got one good judge and it was in Florida.” And in the D.C. federal case, many of Trump’s cronies believe the Supreme Court, three members of which were handpicked by Trump, will “make sure justice is done and Trump will be granted unlimited immunity.”

I suppose if that’s the case it will just be a matter of time before either Trump or Biden use Seal Team 6 to take out their rivals. “I’m betting on Trump. The military loves him and so do the leaders of all the other countries. Even Putin,” I was told.

Well, especially Putin. Different story.

Meanwhile, Lara Trump is being considered as a co-chair of the Republican National Committee (RNC) and recently vowed that every cent raised by the RNC will be spent on Donald Trump. Mind you, that still probably wouldn’t pay off Trump’s massive legal bills.  Technically those funds should not be used for that purpose, but we are talking about Trump who makes his own rules. Using “every cent” for Trump could bankrupt the Republican Party, and would be problematic for down ballot Republican candidates – who usually count on RNC funding to mount a competitive race in purple states. Not helping out other MAGA candidates (okay I’ve given up calling them Republicans, because they aren’t) is inspired lunacy. Since Lara Trump said this, some of Trump’s other folks have walked it back a bit and said that the RNC will spend money on voter “integrity,” which to the Democrats sounds like voter suppression. That is also a different story.

Michael Cohen said months ago he thought Lara Trump was an idiot, and folks, he ain’t wrong. Left to her devices, she would commit political suicide for the entire MAGA party.

Democrats are cheering. They believe they are watching the demise of a national party in real time, and while MAGA supporters don’t see it, the fact that they have painted themselves into a corner with Trump is confirmation enough for outsiders to agree with that sentiment. 

If Donald Trump is whacked with a large fine in the New York civil business case, and if he should face prison time, MAGA supporters say they’ll back him no matter what. They’ve already ex-communicated everyone in the former Republican Party who has opposed Trump. Sen. Lindsey Graham once famously said that if the GOP embraced Trump it would be the demise of the party, and he has proven himself correct, though he never took his own advice.


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


Adam Kinzinger and Liz Cheney are the two most infamous ex-Republicans. There are many others, and while former Maryland Lt. Governor Michael Steele said he would be like “Motel 6” and keep the light on for legitimate conservatives and not the MAGA cult, he has been unsuccessful in stemming the tide of racism and corruption that has swept the MAGA cult into power.

The stench is so overpowering, the wailing of the Trump banshees so loud, the rending of hair and gnashing of teeth so complete that Thursday afternoon the White House briefing room was an afterthought in the news cycle – even though Biden and his administration are dealing with a potential threat of nuclear weapons launched from space-based Russian satellites.

If it all sounds like theater, and in Donald’s case it always is. The question remains, who – if anyone – can pick up the pieces if Donald isn’t around?

Trump staffers see their glorious leader riding high and reclaiming the promised land of the presidency this fall so he can then cage migrants, become a dictator for a day and, as Rep. Jamie Raskin so aptly put it, “rule over the ruin and rubble.”

Still, the same Trump staffers who privately said Trump is vulnerable also think that Nikki Haley could, indeed, be the nominee if something were to happen to Trump. “The beauty of that,” I was told, “is that it would kill the Democrats. If the Republicans (his word not mine) elected the first female president – and a minority at that – it would destroy the Democrats and then I wouldn’t be happier.”

With the MAGA party, it is always about victory at all costs. Democrats and most Republicans think Haley could never get the nomination because she defied Trump and continues to attack him, and stubbornly stays in the presidential race. She’s a woman and that doesn’t sit well with the aging white rednecks of MAGA.

But, they love to win – and they’ll probably close their eyes and hold their noses as the vote for Haley if they must – after all they’ve already swallowed Donald Trump. They’ve proven they’ll swallow anything.

Then, after the loss, they’ll scream that the fix was in – like Donald did before, and continue ranting and raving like the lunatics that they are.

Get ready for a fun Spring, Summer and Fall.

MAGA fatigue and the “exhaustion of outrage addiction”

Last weekend the American mainstream news media, especially its elite agenda-setting outlets such as the New York Times, had a choice to make. They could repeat and amplify the nakedly partisan, inaccurate, unprofessional, editorializing, “report” by former Trump regime member special counsel Robert Hur about President Joe Biden’s non-existent classified documents “scandal” and his supposed “memory problems,” or they could instead focus on how Donald Trump is continuing with his threats and promises to be a dictator, create a concentration camp system and engage in illegal mass deportations of hundreds of thousands of black and brown undocumented residents that will involve martial law and an invasion by the military of “blue states” before giving Vladimir Putin permission to attack Western Europe.

Predictably, the American mainstream news media chose the first option.

"The anti-establishment rage is one of the more potent forces for mobilizing voters in today’s politics, and if many voters think that the system is horrible, then they will vote for the candidate who is vowing to crush it."

In terms of the mainstream news media as an institution, and its centrists and careerists especially, their behavior is odious as they appear to be actively diminishing President Biden and his successes and further normalizing Donald Trump’s dangerousness in order to create a horse race narrative that they believe will be most financially and personally profitable for them even as it imperils American democracy and the future of the country. The recent coverage of Biden’s supposed “memory problems” by the New York Times – what is clearly a coordinated act of political character assassination – is almost stupefying in its irresponsibility.

For its claims to objectively and fairness, the Times and the country’s other elite media have been mostly treating Biden and his administration quite the opposite. This pattern of anti-Biden framing and bias is having a clear impact on the 2024 election, where a new poll from the Economist/YouGov shows that President Biden is losing to Donald Trump by one percentage point. This poll also finds that “Registered voters are slightly more likely to expect a Trump victory than a Biden one if the expected Biden-Trump matchup materializes (43% vs. 40%).”

Writing at the Philadelphia Inquirer, William Bunch correctly described this most recent example of media malpractice: “The press corps’ feeding frenzy over Biden’s brain is maybe the worst example we’ve seen in 2024 of reporters playing the odds of a political horse race, as defined by media critic Jay Rosen, while ignoring what’s at stake between the only actual choices we have, Biden and Trump.”

In an attempt to gain some clarity about this increasingly bewildering “longest election ever," what the early public opinion polls mean and how many political observers are deeply concerned that the 2024 election is increasingly feeling like a repeat of the disastrous 2016 election, I recently asked a range of experts for their thoughts and suggestions.

Matthew Dallek teaches at George Washington University and is the author of “Birchers: How the John Birch Society Radicalized the American Right.”

I struggle to understand how 47/48 percent of voters can continue to support Trump and, by extension, his cruelty, conspiracy theories, and criminality. Tens of millions of Americans believe the big lie that 2020 was stolen from Trump, and they have such scant faith in the judicial system that they buy Trump’s baseless conspiracy theory that Democrats orchestrated a plot to put him in jail. My feeling that I’m out of touch is worsened by my belief that Joe Biden has been a good president. He has passed emergency COVID aid, infrastructure reform, landmark climate change legislation, the CHIPs Act boosting US manufacturing, achieved some student debt relief, appointed the nation’s first African-American woman to the Supreme Court, and inflation has come way down, while the US has enjoyed the best post-Covid economy of any advanced industrial country. His leadership on Ukraine has been resolute, measured, and grounded in values like national self-determination and anti-authoritarianism. I’ve heard the knocks against him, but the perils of a second Trump term – to democracy, the rule of law, mainstreaming political violence and Trumpian vengeance—are far more dire than any of Biden’s defects, real or perceived. “The longest election” in U.S. history is a trope that doesn’t hold much explanatory power for me. The primary is likely to be over soon, but Trump has never stopped campaigning, and Biden has long spoken of the risks Trump poses to democracy and stability. I think the “longest election” is likely shorthand for a jaded sense among some in the press corps, and affirmed by polling, that the country has to endure a Trump-Biden rematch.

We know that the election is likely to be very close for all of the familiar reasons (partisan polarization, the nature of the electoral college, six swing states). We also know that Trump is unlikely to concede if he were to lose the election; he will do anything to win the White House and stop his criminal cases from going to trial. What we don’t know is more than what we do know. Here are four of the biggest questions that have not been answered: What will the economy look like in the late summer/early fall? Will the Israel-Hamas war have ended by November? Will Trump be a convicted felon by then, and will felony convictions cause him to lose votes? Will young voters of color and Arab-American voters vote third party and risk a Trump presidency, or will they return to the Democratic fold?

Like a lot of observers, I’ve been frustrated that so much coverage is poll-dependent. The most impressive data – see Simon Rosenberg’s Hopium Chronicles for more – is that Democrats have won election after election after election. If democracy and abortion rights are really top of mind for voters, then one would think that the 2024 results would mirror the 2018, 2020, 2022, and off-year/special elections where Democrats have mostly prevailed in key swing districts and states.

The 2024 campaign feels very different from 2016. Trump is a known quantity, and his authoritarian, anti-abortion, strongman impulses are far easier for Americans to see today. Biden has a presidential record to defend and a different set of challenges than Hillary Clinton. But there is a simmering rage in the electorate, and it is metastasizing. Trump has been extremely adept at tapping this hate-the-system, burn-it-all-down mood. Since Vietnam and Watergate, Americans have had little faith in government to do what’s right and to improve their lives, but MAGA has brought this “deep state” vibe to its apotheosis. For a whole slew of reasons, a lot of voters have also become comfortable with the idea of tyranny; many seem to want a strongman to rule with an iron fist by using any means necessary (legal or illegal) to stop illegal immigration, to send the military to stop crime in the cities, and to destroy the civil service and dispense with the notion of checks and balances. The anti-establishment rage is one of the more potent forces for mobilizing voters in today’s politics, and if many voters think that the system is horrible, then they will vote for the candidate who is vowing to crush it. Democracy can’t really survive if too many people think their government is out to hurt them. I’d add here that the hope comes from the fact that there remains in the United States an anti-MAGA majority—pro-abortion rights, pro-democracy, pro-rule of law. If this majority shows up and votes, then Trump can be defeated for the second time in a row.

Gregg Barak is an emeritus professor of criminology and criminal justice at Eastern Michigan University and author of "Criminology on Trump." His sequel to that book, "Indicting the 45th President: Boss Trump, the GOP, and What We Can Do About the Threat to American Democracy," will be published in April 2024.

The polling does not mean much to me at this point since the majority of people would prefer other candidates than the two they are likely to be stuck with. From my vantage point, Trump is overvalued, and Biden is undervalued based on their comparative records and behavior. I would prefer Biden throwing everybody a curveball at the August convention and that another capable and younger Democrat gets the nomination. If that fantasy is realized, then I would look for Trump to be blown away as badly as Barry Goldwater was back in the day because all of the youth and people of color, etc. will come home to the Democrats with all the enthusiasm they can muster. Best of all, the GOP will be clueless in their response with only 90 days or so before the election.

We need your help to stay independent

If it were not for the undemocratic and unfair electoral college, we could all go to sleep since Trump will lose decisively in the popular vote once again as he and the Republican candidates always do except for "once in a blue moon." That, of course, is why they have to do everything they can to lie, cheat, and steal because otherwise they would rarely if ever win.

We are already in the middle of an ongoing U.S. insurgency from Trumpism with or without their sociopathic leader, and I believe that even our flawed system of democracy or our prevailing tyranny of a minority will prevail over the authoritarian or autocratic alternative as it won't sit well with the majority of Americans. And, if I am correct, then we will live another day in order to establish a new and improved democracy or a tyranny of the majority as I argue in Indicting the 45th President.

Investigative reporter and author Heidi Siegmund Cuda writes about U.S. politics and culture for Byline Times and Byline Supplement.

As a practical matter, what does this “longest election” mean? There will be staged horror events daily, forcing Biden to fight too many fronts, but this is because Trump does not have the votes. So, these are not signs of strength. Tucker Carlson being summoned to Moscow is not a show of strength. It’s evidence of weakness. From Kansas to Ohio, it is clear that voters are waking up to the stakes — overwhelmingly showing that women’s health care rights matter, as people quietly exit MAGA. The dark money villains who cynically fund organizations that weaponize people to destroy their own democracy now realize they overshot the mark when Roe was overturned. So, they find new targets, new boogeymen, to take over from the diabolical plot that turned people into single-issue voters. They take aim at trans people, immigrants, books, Taylor Swift, whatever sells in the much coveted 18 to 49 demo. But they’re failing, as the exhaustion of outrage addiction has given way to a fatigue and desire for some semblance of democratic normalcy.

It is, of course, troubling to see the merger of the MAGA-QAnon Cult, because we can’t reach people who are brainwashed. They’re addicted to Russian conspiracy theories sold to them as patriotism, with the Democrats in the role of witch. I do, however, believe there will be a resounding repudiation of Trumpism in November, as the merger of the MAGA and QAnon Cult will not prove strong enough to derail Joe Biden’s re-election. Mike Flynn is the wild card. Am I concerned about Mike Flynn ginning up violence and promising black swan events as he traipses around the countryside of swing states with his merry band of grifters selling Kremlin talking points as patriotism? Indeed. But I am heartened by the tireless work independent investigative journalists are doing to expose U.S. Putinists. The Kremlin and US traitors may have the internet by the throat, but they have not yet won the hearts of the majority of the American people. I think we should not underestimate them this time.

"Mike Flynn is the wild card."

Trump has been on an impressive losing streak since 2018. The people who truly concern me, however, are those stuck in neutral. Neutrality benefits the dictator, as Elie Wiesel said. In order to secure democratic victories in all three branches of government, we need to waken the silent. They can be reached with back-to-basics messaging — fix the damn roads, save public education, teachers are not your enemies — burning books is unpopular. Seeing a QAnon candidate with a flamethrower burning books isn’t actually a winning message.

Public opinion polls are psyops. I don’t pay attention to them. They are designed to cause despair and anguish, which are weapons of fascism. The metrics on Trump have been trending downward for six years, but billionaire-owned media is big business and big business bets on fascism. Recall, William Randolph Hearst offering a syndicated column to Benito Mussolini. When we defeat these fascists — and we will — corporate media will have been the biggest villain.

It's unbelievably rare to have voted out a dictator while he was in the process of authoritarian capture — that just doesn’t happen. Americans should feel really good about that. It was messy and it’s ongoing, but the rest of the world could see us take a stand for democratic values after being duped. So now, we have the knowledge that we were attacked in 2016 — our unresolved issues of misogyny and racism exploited by Russian military intelligence and a network of US white supremacist cells. The cover-up continues as the same group of criminals tries to downplay the crimes of 2016 and are involved in 2024 election subversion campaigns, but many of us are aware of what happened and remain rooted in reality. Unfortunately, Putin is desperate for a win in Ukraine, and Ukrainians are putting up an unbelievable fight, so information warfare is cranked up to 11, continuing to inflict casualties on a daily basis. People are being dragged down rabbit holes of dystopian lies every minute— and the ultimate goal is to conjoin MAGAnon with Putin, as we see by Tucker Carlson bouncing on his knee. Western leaders need to step up and let their citizens know we are target nations of information warfare and begin the inoculation process. Information warfare will continue regardless of what happens in November, and that is our real fight — likely, the fight of our lifetime.


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


Media is failing to confront the fact that their outdated ideas of journalistic impartiality are failing the very people they’re meant to serve. Neutrality benefits the dictator. This crisis we find ourselves in is existential both for those who want to see our imperfect democracy continue so we can get to the deep structural reforms necessary and those who are trying to snuff it out for the end goal of authoritarianism. And we can’t even frame the conversation properly while the world looks on in horror, bracing for the worst. We have what my friend Keir Giles calls collective amnesia — not one single member of the media should be covering this election like a horse race. That is not what this is. Our country is under attack, the attacks are ongoing — this isn’t Democrats vs Republicans. It’s Putin vs. America. That’s the framework. That messaging needs to get out to the Cult — they are currently united by their hatred for Biden and their belief in American exceptionalism. If they knew that Putin was weakening America with his information warfare attacks — literally making fools and zombies of people — they wouldn’t like that. If they knew that supporting Ukraine would make America strong, they might then see the wisdom in backing the fight against Russian imperialism. We need to at least arm them with the proper messaging. We have allowed hostile nations to tube-feed their poison into our minds, and we have to get tougher. We have to be made of tougher stuff. I’m tired of America playing the role of victim-nation to these malign forces — both foreign and domestic.

Jared Yates Sexton is a journalist and author of the new book "The Midnight Kingdom: A History of Power, Paranoia, and the Coming Crisis."

My feelings have changed. Curdled, to an extent. Watching our media not just repeat but worsen the mistakes of the past, as well as the larger dialogue about things culturally and politically declining, has saddened me with grim dread. I am still hopeful for the long term because of things that have very little to do with the 2024 Election itself, but to watch this sludge of a race start to take its ugly shape before we've even arrived at the South Carolina primary doesn't bode well. The radicalization is boiling and it's only going to get worse.

Polling is practically extinct at this point. Everything from the death of landlines to rank polarization has made the whole thing largely moot. All we know about November right now is how everybody feels about the two most likely candidates. But considering their age and their health, we don't even know for sure that these candidates will make it to that date. That doesn't mean there isn't work to do to fight back against things and help create a better outcome. But polling wise, it's a lot of flying blind.

We're in a precipitous decline as a culture and nation, and so the old things that should have marked victories or landslides or anything else are kind of out of the window. We could very well ping-pong back and forth between single-term presidencies as things get worse and people just want to change. Or, we could end up with a dictatorial president or a transformative one. I don't feel good about this whole situation. At all. Trump is great for the new media’s business and profits. The Democrats have become guardians of a wildly unpopular status quo. It isn't great.

Pausing menopause? Scientists using frozen ovary technique may delay menopause indefinitely

The arc of a biological female’s life is often defined by milestones involving her uterus. A first period. A first pregnancy. A first birth. All of which lead up to the concluding event: menopause, the one-year timeframe after a menstrual cycle’s chaotic final run.  

At birth, the average female ovary contains about 1 to 2 million eggs. After releasing all viable eggs, and without the ability to produce more during a lifetime, between the ages of 40 and 50 most women lose their ability to sexually reproduce. As a result, their monthly menstrual cycles end indefinitely. Ovaries atrophy and the hormones that stimulate the process, like estrogen, decline.

This can cause a flood of symptoms physically and emotionally, from hot flashes to anxiety to memory loss to dry skin and extreme mood changes. Menopause is a normal biological, albeit most times unpleasant, process that encapsulates two very taboo topics: female aging and female fertility. As a result, it’s been frequently treated as a disease and has been surrounded by shame. But what if we lived in a world where menopause could be delayed by decades, or even indefinitely? 

You might be thinking, this sounds like the premise of Ann Patchet’s book “State of Wonder," in which a character searches for a drug that treats menopause. But in reality, doctors and scientists have been working toward this possibility since at least 1999. That’s when Dr. Kutluk Oktay, an ovarian biologist and director of the Laboratory of Molecular Reproduction and Fertility Preservation at Yale School of Medicine, performed the first ovarian transplant procedure with cryopreserved tissue in the world. 

New estimates suggest that for most healthy women under the age of 40, ovarian cryopreservation could delay menopause by decades.

When a woman ovulates, only one mature egg is released, leaving many unused sitting on a top layer of the ovaries. In the process of ovarian tissue cryopreservation, doctors like Oktay remove that top layer, freeze it and store them for future use. Ovarian cryopreservation has become an effective option for women who have cancer when treatments, like chemotherapy, negatively impact the ovaries and can cause them to stop releasing eggs and estrogen. Oktay said hundreds of infants have been born from this procedure around the world. It’s no longer experimental. 

“So, we started asking the question whether this could also be used for healthy women if they wanted to delay reproductive aging?” Oktay explained in an interview with Salon. “Once your eggs age, or you run out of eggs, you can’t get pregnant, nor are you producing hormones, so the procedure to freeze ovarian tissue preserves both.”


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


According to a recent study published in the American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, co-authored by Oktay, new estimates suggest that for most healthy women under the age of 40, ovarian cryopreservation could delay menopause by decades. Precise estimates depend on when the ovarian tissue is harvested and replanted (an interactive calculator can provide more details for those who are curious), but for women under 30, according to the study, the procedure may be able to prevent menopause altogether. Oktay gave an example that if a woman has ovarian tissue frozen at age 28 and it's replanted at age 49 or 50, it could delay menopause by 50 years — potentially exceeding that person’s lifespan. 

“The idea is that for many women, menopause is a rocky transition in their lives, and associated with many medical problems,” he said. “Freezing the tissue at a younger age, tapping into the surplus and returning it right before menopause, would enable them to delay that process.”

But does that mean we’d live in a world where 70-year-old women are having babies? While this has already happened with the help of in vitro fertilization (IVF), Oktay emphasized that the goal isn’t necessarily to enable women to have children into their 60s or 70s, but instead slow down the fertility aging process. As more women are having children later in life, and access to fertility treatment intersects with race and socioeconomic status, this could be another fertility option and perhaps make it more accessible. In part because this can be done in conjunction with another surgery, like an endometriosis surgery or cesarean section. 

“Freezing the tissue at a younger age, tapping into the surplus and returning it right before menopause, would enable them to delay that process.”

Plus, there are other barriers removed when it comes to ovarian cryopreservation. The process doesn’t require a patient to be ovulating, like egg freezing does, which means a patient doesn’t have to undergo hormone treatments. When it comes to potential health benefits, Oktay added there is research that suggests that women who experience menopause later in life — after the age of 55 — are less likely to have cardiovascular disease, bone loss, dementia, depression, anxiety or die early. Yet, delayed menopause has also been associated with an increased risk of endometrial and breast cancer.

But not everyone is convinced delaying menopause indefinitely is a good idea. Lynette Sievert, a biological anthropologist at UMass Amherst, told Salon one concern is that the risks associated with pregnancies, like preterm delivery, increase with age. If delaying menopause allows biological females to get pregnant later in life, these risks are bound to increase.

“You can say, ‘We're not going to have a menopause because we still have these viable eggs,’ but the risk of pregnancy is going to keep going up,” she said. “They haven't figured out a way to prevent that.”

She added that many evolutionary biologists believe in the grandmother hypothesis, which suggests that female humans evolved the menopause experience (which is not something all mammals do), so they can help out with their grandchildren later in life instead of being distracted by their own children. From that perspective, it’s better for natural selection for younger females to have children instead of older ones. “You end up with more genes in the next generation,” she explained.

We need your help to stay independent

But even if this becomes more common in the future, she’s not convinced it would totally remove the menopause from the human species in the future. Although it could be another option for fertility treatments, the current structure of the U.S. healthcare system inevitably restricts access to many.

“I can't imagine Medicare, for example, is ever going to say 'Okay, well, the 70 year old woman wants to have a baby now, so we're going to pay,'” she said. “So I don't think it's going to have a big evolutionary impact.”

Finally, there’s the concern that delaying menopause doesn’t guarantee a woman won’t experience menopausal symptoms, which Sievert said is one of the most stigmatized aspects of menopause. As one study noted, advances need to be made in the process as the science on eliminating menopause symptoms despite a delay is limited.

“If there aren’t any eggs left by the time she's 50, they're not going to be producing much in the way of estrogens, so she will still have an increased risk of osteoporosis,” Sievert said. “She will still have vaginal dryness, she will still have skin changes, she will still have all of these sorts of aging things that go along with a decline in estrogen — saving those eggs isn't going to make any difference.”

Former FBI informant charged with providing phony intel on the Bidens’ business relationships

An indictment in a California federal court made public on Thursday sheds new light on the special counsel's investigation into the Biden family's foreign business dealings, with an ex-FBI informant charged with falsifying intel related to the proceedings.

The informant, Alexander Smirnov, relayed information to agents years ago that President Biden and his son Hunter sought two $5 million bribes from a Ukrainian energy company, according to The New York Times, alleging that the sum was in exchange for protection against an investigation into the company by the country’s prosecutor general at the time. It's highlighted in these new developments that Smirnov has a history of making his dislike of the Biden family known, having sent text messages to a fellow agent that the president was "going to jail.”

With it being concluded that a bulk of the allegations against the Bidens in this particular inquiry stem from what has now been determined to be outright lies, Smirnov faces two charges for making false statements and obstructing the government’s work which, if convicted, could land him up to 25 years in prison.

 

The Black origins of the banjo in country music

Beyoncé's surprise new country album has kicked open the saloon doors to a new audience.

While this may not be Beyoncé's first rodeo when it comes to country music, people are now exploring the genre through her two new songs "16 Carriages" and "Texas Hold 'Em." The latter is a banjo-heavy ode to the singer's home state of Texas, and seems to be already causing controversy due to an Oklahoma country music station refusing a request to play the song because Beyoncé is not traditionally seen as a country artist. The station reneged eventually caved after receiving backlash from Beyoncé's unrelenting fans, but the incident has shed light on the larger misunderstanding of country music's origins. 

The banjo's history within roots music is as loaded and complex as the U.S.' relationship with race because they are both inextricably intertwined.

In the song "Texas Hold 'Em," Beyoncé features live banjo and viola playing by Black country musician Rhiannon Giddens, who has been credited for highlighting that Black people created and played the banjo before it was popularized and appropriated by white country artists. So, there's no way to confuse Beyoncé's new era as anything but country especially if songs like "Texas Hold 'Em" heavily feature a historically Black southern instrument like the banjo.

However, the banjo's history within roots music is as loaded and complex as the U.S.' relationship with race because they are both inextricably intertwined. Long before the banjo was considered a staple instrument in mainstream country music, it went through several iterations, but it always had been deeply connected to the Black experience.

African lutes, the banjo's predecessor, were documented to be used in early 16th century West Africa in countries such Gambia, Senegal and Guinea-Bissau. Still used today by West Africans, the instrument's main parts are a gourd, and a stick attachment and a bridge for its three to four strings, paralleling a modern banjo. It is also tuned just like a banjo and similarly played by hand, The Black Music Project reported.

At the height of the transatlantic slave trade, abducted Africans were brought to the Caribbean islands first before they were forcibly taken to the American South. It's in these two regions where enslaved people created iterations of instruments that mimicked the ones in their native land to keep the tradition alive during the brutality and subjugation of slavery, The Smithsonian said. Early versions of the banjo were reportedly used in Jamaica in 1687.

Despite the horrific and complex system of slave labor camps, plantations and rural and urban settings — enslaved Africans musical traditions and instruments were upheld and passed down by generations. However, the banjo's creation eventually became a blending between West African and European traditions mostly due to minstrel shows in the 1800s. The instrument was first reported in the U.S. in 1736 and eventually by the 1800s it had its way to New England.

The banjo became the backbone of American roots music and culture through minstrelsy — white America's most popular form of entertainment in the early 1800s – in which white performers blackened their faces and performed as exaggerated versions of enslaved Africans on plantations, cementing a grotesque caricature of Black people in white American society. In these images, these caricatures were seen playing banjos.

White minstrel performers like Joel Walker Sweeney were credited with popularizing the instrument that inspired a vital part of popular music in the country seen as "hillbilly" music. But this couldn't have be done without the help of formative Black banjoists like Scott Joplin, Horace Weston, the Bohee Brothers, Hosea Eason and James Bland. In the 20th century, white artists like Earl Scruggs, who popularized the bluegrass genre were largely seen as banjo virtuosos for their unique playing style. Currently, the four-five string banjo is the product of the influence of many different groups of people and regions just like how American roots music has inspiration from Scots-Irish and Appalachia roots too alongside its Black influences.

Sadly, despite the banjo's origins, Black artists have slowly lost their ties to the instrument. But in the 21st century, Black folk-blues banjoists like Amythyst Kiah, Taj Mahal, Allison Russell, Otis Taylor and Giddens are reviving banjo playing in popular music, The African American Registry said.

We need your help to stay independent

In an interview with Variety last year, Giddens said that learning the banjo's Black roots was even a surprise to her. "That shifts your whole view of what we’ve been told about American music. If the very foundation of what we’ve been told is as wrong as it is, what does that mean for everything that’s built on top of it?"

She continued, "History isn’t simple — especially American history, which is super complicated because of the way that America came to be and the amounts of different cultures that mixed and mingled, and the economic juggernaut that was slavery.

"The banjo is existing in this world. And I guess what I want people to understand is that you can’t talk about the banjo without talking about slavery," she said. "You have to talk about slavery, you have to talk about minstrelsy, you have to talk about the segregation of American music."

Check out Giddens' banjo playing on "Texas Hold 'Em":

“You’re confused”: Fani Willis reminds lawyers that she’s not on trial to defend her personal life

Delivering pointed and deliberate testimony during a hearing to determine whether or not she had a personal relationship with a lead prosecutor in the criminal case against former President Donald Trump, potentially resulting in a conflict of interest that could interfere with the case, Fulton County, Ga., District Attorney Fani Willis reminded lawyers that she's not the one on trial here, Trump is.

Speaking to essentially defend her own honor, Willis fired back on the stand saying, "You've been intrusive into people's personal lives. You're confused. You think I'm on trial. These people are on trial for trying to steal an election in 2020. I'm not on trial, no matter how hard you try to put me on trial . . . I object to you getting any personal records of mine."

After waiting for the court to produce three filings against her, Willis used them as props to point out examples of the lies being lobbed her way in the hearing. 

“It’s highly offensive when someone lies on you," Willis furthered

Willis maintains that her relationship with the prosecutor in question, Nathan Wade, began after she brought him on to lead the Trump prosecution, and that it's a non-issue. 

 

“Powerful evidence”: Legal experts say Trump’s NY criminal trial could “completely upend” election

A New York judge on Thursday set a trial date for next month in former President Donald Trump’s case centered on hush-money payments made to adult film star Stormy Daniels during the 2016 campaign.

This sets the stage for the first-ever prosecution of a former American president after Judge Juan Merchan rejected Trump's motion to have the 34 felony counts pending against him dismissed.

Merchan affirmed the jury selection in the trial will begin on March 25 and said he expects the trial to last six weeks.

Trump’s lawyer Todd Blanche argued that his client's constitutional rights were being violated since he was given insufficient time to prepare for the trial. 

“It is completely election interference to say you are going to sit in this courtroom in Manhattan when there is no reason for it,” Blanche said, adding “it’s truly an impossible position for anyone to be in.”

The Manhattan case will be the first of four criminal cases against Trump to go before a jury. The former president is facing three additional prosecutions and a civil fraud lawsuit that may result in significant financial penalties, potentially amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars.

His cases in Georgia, Florida and Washington, D.C. have all encountered delays or faced the potential risk of disruption. The ex-president’s lawyers have largely argued that the court should consider the context of the election campaign – a similar tactic Blanche tried to employ in the Manhattan courtroom. 

“As the court is aware, we are in the middle of primary season,” Blanche said.

But Merchan said that March 25 was a "date certain,” adding: "You don't have a trial date in Georgia. You don't have a trial date in Florida."

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg charged Trump with falsifying business records to hide a series of payments made to his former "fixer" and lawyer Michael Cohen. The alleged payments were reimbursements for a hush money payment to Daniels to keep her from going public with her affair allegations during the final weeks of the 2016 campaign.

But Trump's legal team has denied that they were part of a cover-up, instead arguing that he was reimbursing Cohen for legal expenses.

While it is difficult to assess the “strength” of this case without hearing the witness testimony first, Cohen, who is a convicted perjurer, will be subject to “vigorous cross-examination,” former U.S. Attorney Barb McQuade, a University of Michigan law professor, told Salon. But if the case is largely built on documents, then Cohen’s “baggage” may not matter all that much. 

“Documents are powerful evidence because documents don’t lie and documents don’t forget,” McQuade said. 

We need your help to stay independent

It's not a very complicated case, Gregory Germain, Syracuse University law professor, told Salon. They have “strong evidence” that the Trump Organization attempted to “disguise” hush payments to Daniels as attorney fees to Cohen through Cohen's own testimony and records.  

“Whether covering up a personal matter constitutes felony criminal conduct is a larger question of law that will likely be resolved by the appellate courts,” Germain said. 

The ex-president's legal challenges have escalated in the months following the previous court hearing, with his schedule becoming increasingly occupied by various court dates.

A judge in Georgia on Thursday is also hearing testimony to determine whether District Attorney Fani Willis, who brought election interference charges against Trump, should be removed from the case.

Trump’s lawyers have alleged that Willis is engaged in an improper “romantic relationship” with one of the lead prosecutors handling the case and was “profiting significantly from this prosecution at the expense of the taxpayers.”

Judge Scott McAfee, who is overseeing the case, said a financial conflict of interest, or the appearance of one, could be grounds to disqualify the prosecutors. 

The case by Bragg has emerged as a “bellwether” for all the criminal cases against Trump, V. James DeSimone, a California civil rights attorney, told Salon. Bragg was the first prosecutor to charge Trump and now Merchan has taken a strong stand by saying even a presidential campaign won’t derail this case, and nor should it. 

“It’s a sign that other judges will hold firm and uphold the law when the same push to delay the trial is brought to their courts,” DeSimone said.

The federal election interference case in Washington, which involves Trump's attempts to reverse Joe Biden’s victory, remains on hold as the former president’s lawyers appealed a circuit court ruling that found he has no immunity for alleged crimes committed as president.


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


The trial was originally scheduled for March 4, but that date is now on hold as Trump appeals a rejected presidential immunity claim to the High Court. The Supreme Court could act as soon as this week.

The public perception is “extremely divided,” with Trump supporters focusing on the political motivations behind the prosecutions, and Trump opponents supporting “full-throated prosecutions” and hoping to eliminate him from the ballot, Germain said. 

The outcome of the cases is only going to make those divisions “more pronounced,” he continued. These divisions are going to cause “more problems” to the political system than they solve, by “further polarizing the country.”

“Even if Trump only receives a one-year sentence in this trial after a conviction, it will completely upend the 2024 election,” DeSimone said. “Trump could be sitting in a prison cell come election day. And the further this case progresses, the more that possibility will become evident to voters and the more his supporters will have to think twice about Trump.”

The 6 most harrowing moments from Netflix’s deadly love triangle doc “Lover, Stalker, Killer”

Following Valentine’s Day, the No. 1 movie on Netflix is a true-crime documentary that spotlights a love triangle gone fatal.

The nearly two-hour-long feature centers on Dave Kroupa, whose dating escapades following a long-term relationship resulted in a mysterious disappearance and a jaw-dropping murder. In 2012, Kroupa found himself newly single in a new town and eager to date, albeit with no intention to commit for the long term. He created an online dating profile and met Liz Golyar and Cari Farver, two single mothers whom he enjoyed great connections with.

What unfolded next wasn’t anything Kroupa could have ever predicted. Two weeks after hitting it off with Farver, Kroupa received a slew of menacing messages from her, who vowed to wreck Kroupa’s life after he rejected her request to progress their relationship to the next stage. Farver also seemingly disappeared from town and began threatening Golyar, even committing arson in one instance.

Kroupa’s disturbing dating horror story is explored in Netflix’s “Lover, Stalker, Killer,” a new documentary from director Sam Hobkinson (“Fear City”). “We enter this story from the perspective of Dave, who is caught in a complete web of falsehood,” Hobkinson told Tudum. “I wanted the storytelling to somehow reflect that confusion, and ultimately, his total disbelief when he realizes what’s happened.”

“Lover, Stalker, Killer” features interviews with Kroupa, his ex-partner and the investigators who worked tirelessly to make sense of what was actually going on. Here are the six most harrowing moments from the documentary:

01
Farver threatened to “ruin” Kroupa’s life
Lover, Stalker, KillerDave Kroupa in “Lover, Stalker, Killer” (Photo courtesy of Netflix)

Following his divorce in 2012, Kroupa moved to Omaha, Nebraska, and began dating again, solely to have fun and meet new people in the area. Kroupa created an online dating profile on Plenty of Fish, where he first met Golyar, a single mother and animal lover. He later met Farver, another single mother who previously visited Kroupa’s auto shop to have her car repaired.

 

After two weeks of seeing Farver, Kroupa said he received a text message from her saying they should officially move in together. “I’m thinkin’, ‘I’ve been seeing you for two weeks,’” Kroupa recalled in the documentary. “‘Yes, it’s been hot and heavy; it’s also been two weeks.’”

 

Kroupa turned down Farver’s request, which sent her into an immediate frenzy. Kroupa said he received a “barrage of texts” from Farver, who allegedly wrote back, “Fine f**k you,” “You’ve ruined my life,” and “I never want to see you again.”

 

After not hearing from Farver for a couple days, Kroupa said she began sending him texts again that were more threatening in nature. “You are a bastard,” read one of Farver’s messages, followed by, “I’m going to destroy the things you care about,” “Your life will be ruined for ruining mine.”

 

“Why she’d be harassing me, I just didn’t get it,” Kroupa said.

02
Farver seemed to disappear, but the harassment continued
Lover, Stalker, KillerLover, Stalker, Killer (Photo courtesy of Netflix)

Shortly after Farver’s mother, Nancy Raney, reported her daughter missing, Raney began receiving cryptic Facebook messages from Farver. Farver allegedly wrote, “I am not missing, I just don’t want to come home right now. I love you all very much, but I need time.” Raney said Farver’s text messages eventually became “one to two words” that “just got steadily nastier and nastier.”

 

In addition to harassing Kroupa, Farver also harassed Golyar. In one instance, she keyed Golyar’s car and sent her texts and emails, saying, “I will do more if you don’t leave Dave alone,” and “Whore.” Farver also spray-painted Golyar’s garage door and even broke into her home.

 

For the first several days, the texts from Farver came from her original phone number, but after that, they started coming from multiple other phone numbers (“20, 30, 40 . . . You couldn’t block ‘em fast enough,” Kroupa said). Farver’s emails were also under different aliases, “or just under random names, and upwards of 125 a day,” Kroupa recalled.

03
Farver set Golyar’s house on fire
Lover, Stalker, KillerLover, Stalker, Killer (Photo courtesy of Netflix)

Farver set Golyar’s house on fire, telling Kroupa in a text, “I hope the whore and her kids die in it.” Golyar and her children weren’t in the house at the time. Golyar’s pets, however, all died. Her house and many of her personal belongings were also gone for good.

 

After the fire, Golyar took whatever she could salvage from the house and moved, although she never told Kroupa where she was going. Kroupa said he felt like the “only thing I could do was also pack up and move.” He changed phones, got a new job and moved to Council Bluffs, Iowa, in hopes of rebuilding his life away from Farver.

04
Police learned that the stalker in question wasn’t Farver after all
Lover, Stalker, KillerLover, Stalker, Killer (Photo courtesy of Netflix)

Within the Farver case, there were thousands of text messages and emails that spanned across two years. Tony Kava, special deputy for the Pottawattamie County sheriff’s office, was asked to join the case to help investigate the digital evidence in hopes of locating Farver. Kava sought to find an IP address for an email or text message that would trace back to a specific location. Whoever was sending those messages, however, was using different services to hide their real IP address, thus making the task quite difficult.

 

Kava ultimately wrote a program named Dex that would help him uncover the IP address he needed. Out of the millions of IP addresses available, 13,000 were revealed to be unique. Out of the top 10 IP addresses seen throughout the case, eight of them were VPN services.

 

The top most IP address was connected to a house in Council Bluffs, Iowa, that belonged to Todd Butterbaugh, an IT professional who worked for Kava at the Pottawattamie County sheriff’s office. Butterbaugh said he had an on-and-off, live-in girlfriend who began living at his house after her house was burned down. His girlfriend was revealed to be Golyar.

 

“Everything suggested Liz [Golyar] had been impersonating Cari [Farver] from the moment Cari went missing,” said Pottawattamie County sheriff’s office investigator Ryan Avis. “Every message that was sent to Dave, to Liz, to Nancy, to Max came from Liz herself.”

 

“We believed that Liz was the victim. That’s not true. In fact, Liz is the stalker.”

05
Golyar murdered Farver in her car and took a photo of her dead body
Lover, Stalker, KillerLover, Stalker, Killer (Photo courtesy of Netflix)

A micro SD card from an old, abandoned tablet that Kroupa found in his storage unit contained several selfies and pictures of Golyar. It didn’t take investigators long to realize that the tablet’s SD card was actually from Golyar’s phone, back when Farver went missing.

 

In the documentary, Kava said there was one picture in particular that caught his attention. He initially mistook it for a piece of rosewood but upon closer inspection, realized it was a picture of a foot post mortem. The foot was identified as Farver’s because it contained a tattoo of the Chinese symbol for “mother,” which Raney confirmed belonged to her daughter.

 

Investigators concluded that Farver was killed in Omaha. She had been stabbed multiple times by Golyar.

06
Golyar was sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole
Lover, Stalker, KillerDave Kroupa and Amy Flora in “Lover, Stalker, Killer” (Photo courtesy of Netflix)

Golyar was convicted of murder in 2017. At the time of her conviction, Farver’s body had not been found. A Nebraska judge ultimately found beyond a reasonable doubt that Golyar intentionally killed Farver with “deliberate and premeditated malice on or about Nov. 13, 2012, in Douglas County, Nebraska.”

 

The documentary also specified that Golyar was sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole.

“Lover, Stalker, Killer” is currently available for streaming on Netflix. Watch a trailer for it below, via YouTube:

 

Bassem Youssef slams “Genocide Joe,” says he lost “Superman” role after speaking out about Palestine

Jon Stewart is back on air hosting "The Daily Show" — but only one day a week. Meanwhile, Bassem Youssef — the man known as the “Jon Stewart of the Middle East” — is working every day to both make people laugh and educate them about the horrific humanitarian tragedy in Gaza. I spoke to Youssef, whom I have known for many years, on "Salon Talks" about his current comedy tour, his exchange with Piers Morgan about Gaza that went viral, losing work in the entertainment industry after speaking out about Palestinian humanity and more. The former heart surgeon turned wildly popular comedian did not hold back.

The Egyptian-born comedian, who has become friends with Stewart and appeared many times on "The Daily Show," believes that Stewart “will always be relevant” even though he was away from the show for nine years. He wonders if younger people will embrace Stewart since so many get their news from social media, as opposed to cable television.

Youssef, whose current tour is selling out 3,000-seat theaters, became very passionate when talking the situation in Gaza, calling it the “worst genocide” that “we're seeing it in real time” yet, he frustratingly added, “Nobody is doing anything about it.” And Youssef, who became a US citizen several years ago, also slammed President Joe Biden for in his view allowing this to happen on his watch. As a result, Youssef made it clear that he’s no longer, “Vote Blue no matter who.”

But speaking out about the Netanyahu administration’s actions in Gaza does not come without price, as Youssef explained. The comic shared that he lost a role as a villain that he had been offered in the upcoming James Gunn-directed "Superman: Legacy" movie. While Youssef noted that the official reason given was a script change, the timing coincided with others in Hollywood being fired for championing Palestinian humanity. To him, the real reason was apparent. (Salon reached out to Warner Bros. for comment, but did not hear back. According to a Variety report on Friday, a source close to production says no formal offer was made and the character had been written out "prior to Hamas' attack in Israel, and before the writers strike began.")

Despite the intensity of our conversation about the Middle East, Youssef’s live comedy show does not touch on Gaza. Rather, it’s autobiographical about his life and the challenges of doing comedy back in Egypt under a dictatorship where the leader can’t be mocked. Depending on the election results this November, that experience may be training for what we see in the United States come 2025. 

Watch our full "Salon Talks" conversation here on YouTube or read a transcript of our conversation below. 

This interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

Jon Stewart is coming back. You're friends with Jon, you've been on his show countless times.

I'm so happy for him, man.

He came to your show in the Middle East when you were doing it there. It’s his first time back hosting "The Daily Show" after nine years. You think it'll be as relevant and as news-making as he was nine years ago?

Jon will always be relevant, but the thing is, is the genre of the parody news, that maybe younger children might not be familiar with, because we grew up with that. We were the generation that got our news from “The Daily Show,” which according to Jon himself, it's ridiculous. But this is how we actually knew the news.

I don't know how the younger generation will react because they get their news from elsewhere, from TikTok, from people dancing, I don't know. It's different. But because we grew up with CNN, with MSNBC, with Fox News, Jon was the mirror parody of that, so it resonated with us. I don't know how the younger people would feel about it, but who cares? Who cares about younger people? They have TikTok; we have Jon.

I remember talking to you years ago, and you said something that stuck with me. You said the White House Correspondents dinner, where the president would go and get mocked, said so much about the United States of America, and that it was one of your favorite things.

Yes.

Then Donald Trump refused to go. What does it mean to you that Donald Trump refused to go to the White House Correspondents dinner in the past? Now running for president, lashing out against anybody who mocks him, and is this similar to what you saw in dictatorships?

"People tell you, ‘Go, speak, be our voice,’ and then you get burned."

It is very worrying because even if it was an empty gesture, the White House Correspondents dinner was even a symbol that you can go and you can mock the strongest man in the world, right in their face. That was a tradition, that even the biggest enemies of the United States would look at that, and it's like, "Oh, that's amazing. That's incredible."

When Donald Trump came, for four years, he parted with that tradition. The only other president who didn't attend the Correspondents dinner was Ronald Reagan and he was shot and he even called in from the hospital. This is how important it was. So it kind of worries me because there's so many signs of being an authoritarian or a dictator, but the fact that you don't let anybody mock you, or you despise that, that's a very worrying sign.

I wonder if Jon Stewart will get under his skin. Jon used to, to the point where Donald Trump, before he ran for office, would smear him, would attack him online.

But Donald does this. Donald is a bully. He talks to people who like to see pigs fight in the mud, and they like that. It's like the savage battles of the Coliseum. "Donald, kill him, kill him." He likes that, this kind of raw anger. He knows his audience. His audience, his constituents, are angry, because of the economy, because of whatever there is. So he knows that this is a great outlet for them. He used to do that on “The Apprentice,” to get people down, push people down. So he knows that this is like fodder for them. This is entertainment. There's entertainment.

People say, "With Donald Trump, the cruelty is the point." But that should be a comma. Because it's not cruelty to the point, in the sense of, "Only be cruel." It's because the base loves it. His base loves when he's mean, when he's cruel, when he attacks people. 

A lot of people actually vote for him, not because they like him, but because they hate the liberals. A lot of people actually, they don't care about even voting for anybody, but they hate the other side because the other side gives them a lot of reasons to hate. We have to admit. They do.

Well, I'm on that side. I am glad to give them a lot of reasons to hate. That's my goal. Look, you're Bassem Youssef. You think they love you? You're a Brown guy selling out theaters, 3,000 seats, and in their mind, you've stolen their job.

They always say, "Oh, we're good with immigrants, but it has to be legal." But they don't understand that many of the people who come from our part of the world are actually mostly legal. They have a problem with people coming from Latin America, and it's not about even the immigrants, it's about what do they think about their mind and their image?

You cannot blame them because their media tells them that this is a danger to America, and you need a common enemy. You always need a common enemy. How do you do that? You have to find that enemy, and the enemy will have to be an outsider. Whether you are a Jew in Germany, whether you're a Palestinian in Israel, whether you are a Hispanic in the United States, a brown person in Europe, you have to have an enemy because how can you unite all of these people and get a common enemy because there's no solution? There's always something to be worried about.

What you just went through is really the academic definition of what a fascist movement is, where it's never about solving problems. It's about ginning up anger, and then picking a minority to make the target for all of your problems. 

You lived in Egypt and you had to flee because of your comedy, making fun of certain people in power at the time. From living under that, and seeing where Trump is going, what are your concerns? What can you share with fellow Americans about what life could be under a true authoritarian?

I have to say that I don't care.

You don't care what it's going to be like? Tell me why. 

"The whole thing about blackmailing us with Trump, so we have to vote for Biden, it doesn't work."

Because I was one of those people who would vote blue, no matter who. I voted for Bernie Sanders, I voted for Joe Biden, and Joe Biden came with all of the liberal promises of equality, of rights for minorities, and then we see him supporting a genocide. So why would I vote for him?

Honestly, the whole thing about blackmailing us with Trump, so we have to vote for Biden, it doesn't work. If this has to be, America, so, enjoy, guys, because Joe Biden delivered the worst genocide in history, and I don't really care about voting in the United States elections anymore.

I hear what you're saying. I don't think it's the worst genocide in history, but it is horrific.

Well, it is the worst genocide as we are seeing it. I mean, it's not a competition. All right, there are worse genocides, but at least it's the only genocide that has been filmed, live, and we're seeing it in real time. Maybe other genocides, we knew about it after they were done, but now, we are living it, day by day, and we're seeing it, and nobody is doing anything about it. So honestly, I don't care about Joe Biden, and I call him “Joe Geriatric Genocide Biden.” That is him, because he doesn't even have the honor to be Genocide Joe, because he's a geriatric, he's senile, he's old, and he doesn't know even what he's doing. He's the worst mockery of a genocide enabler in history.

I mean, even other genocide people like Mussolini, whatever, they had charisma, but that guy has nothing. He says, "Who? Blah, blah. President of Mexico. Blah, blah."

So you're a campaign operative for the Biden campaign, clearly.

I don't care, but you know what's funny? I came here to America, took the American citizenship, I'm voting, I'm so happy that I'm voting now, and it took America four years to make me check out of elections, so good job, America.

But is it one person’s [fault]? It's Joe Biden's policy in the Middle East?

I don't want Trump to win, but I want Joe Biden to lose.

And that's the screwed-up system we have, right? When I say it's not the worst genocide in the world — I'm Palestinian heritage. It is the worst thing I've ever seen in my entire life. — But I just want to put it in context, because I don't think we have to, in any way, be hyperbolic about how bad it is. This is the worst thing I've ever seen in my entire life play out. The cruelty, the collective punishment, the killing of children and of women by the Israeli military, in response to a terrorist attack. 

You made a lot of headlines going viral with Piers Morgan, and you’ve talked to him several times. You guys are like buddies now. There have been serious speakers about the Middle East a lot, but you went viral. Is it something about comedy? You were an Egyptian guy talking about Palestinian issues. Is it something about comedy that you think elevated that?

I didn't do comedy. I've just repeated their talking points to them. They said, "How many Palestinians should we kill?" I was like, "Kill more." Because this is what they do. This is what happens. "We're just going to go to the north of Gaza.” “Now, we're going to do Khan Younis.” “Ah, it's just in Rafah.” “We are not going to bomb any hospitals." Every hospital is bombed. "We're not going to bomb any schools." Every school is bombed. "We're not going to bomb any university." Every university is gone.

"Why, in the United States of America, you can talk about Joe Biden, and you can talk about Donald Trump, but you cannot criticize a foreign government?"

The thing is, they are wasting time by asking useless questions like, "What is the proportional response?” “What can they do?" While they're stalling to give them time to do the killing. It was the worst exposed cover-up in history because we see what they're doing, and they're playing them, and then they come and they lecture us about liberalism and democracies and equality.

I said it on Piers Morgan, I'm saying it again: Israel has corrupted the West for a hundred years to come. It has morally corrupted the West. The West has absolutely no right to come and lecture us about equality and human rights anymore because human rights, for them, it really depends on the color of your skin and who's doing the killing. So it's very hypocritical, and it's sad.

It's not like America's reputation on the world stage was pristine, especially after the Iraq war and Afghanistan, especially the Iraq war. Are you saying the U.S. is essentially . . . 

I'm not saying the U.S. I say the U.S. administration because there's a lot of good people in the U.S. that do not approve of that.

Right, but do you think the United States' reputation is greatly tarnished? It's destroyed in the world from this? Give me a sense. How do you and the world see it? In the Arab world?

I've always heard people from the American administration complaining, "Why do these people hate us? Oh, they hate us because of our lifestyle." No, we hate your policies, because the way that you blindly support a genocidal, murderous, terrorist regime like Israel doing whatever they want, and I don't know, how is this actually helping you?

Basically they choose this regime over hundreds of millions of people in the Middle East, and the Islamic world and the Arab world that could be more beneficial to them, but they have chosen people who actually do exactly what was done to the Jewish people in the Second World War, so I don't understand the logic.

I recently interviewed Bernie Sanders, and he said, "We are now complicit," and he said, "If we give more aid, we are even more complicit."

And it doesn't matter, because they will call him a self-hating Jew. Because that's what they do. They called Jon Stewart a self-hating Jew. This is the thing, if you're not Jewish, you're antisemitic. If you're Jewish, you're a self-hating Jew, and this is the worst gaslighting I've ever seen. It's like gaslighting as the textbook gaslighting.

Well, look, we're American citizens. Are we complicit too? That our tax dollars are being used?

I mean, if you don't pay taxes, the IRS will come and get you. I mean, at least we speak about it. We speak up about it. I hope we're not. At least we have something to say about it. But what is complicit, really, is the authority and the media. 

So is that then the burden on you and us, to talk about it? What motivates you to be so passionate about this?

Listen, you can go to my social media. I'm not an activist. I don't tweet or post every single day. I get invited to places. I get asked about the matter and I tell my opinion because I don't want to be again involved as an activist in this because I have been burned in Egypt when I had my show and it's just very difficult to be put in that position, where people tell you, "Go, speak, be our voice," and then you get burned. So I'm trying to focus on my comedy, but when I get asked about these things, I can't avoid it.

You mentioned to me though, you went on Piers Morgan and went viral. You've been very outspoken on behalf of Palestinian humanity, and that you lost a role in the new “Superman” movie and some other projects. What do you want to share? What do you feel comfortable sharing about?

I was a little bit bitter about losing the role, and I was kind of very sad, like why, in the United States of America, you can talk about Joe Biden, and you can talk about Donald Trump, but you cannot criticize a foreign government? Which is kind of very sad. 

"If you're coming to the show, don't expect that I'm going to do the jokes about Piers Morgan."

Because of that, I was cast in the movie, “Superman,” and then they told me, "We changed the script," after this Piers Morgan interview. I want to assume good faith. I want to know, I want to believe that this is true. I was a little bit bitter, and I wanted to go, I was like, "Oh, screw DC, screw Warner Bros." But then I understand, I understand the emotional burden that those people have. I mean, those people have a connection with Israel. I understand. For them, Israel is not a place, it's not just a country, it is an emotional connection because those people and their ancestors went through generational trauma that I understand. So for them, the whole world, when they give up on them, they have a place, a strong place that can defend them. So I understand that connection.

And I understand maybe the people who are in charge, that took the decision, looked at me and didn't want to have me. And maybe I understand. If I'm an Arab Muslim, I was the head of Warner Bros., I wouldn't like a pro-Zionist or a pro-Israel to be in my movie if he attacked my people. I understand. This is the thing that we need to dissect: when I attack Israel, I attack its policy, I'm not attacking Jewish people. I want to tell those people, "I'm not a danger to you." Because that dream, that idea that you long for, and it's important to have, the right-wing government in Israel has spoiled that dream. It has ruined it, and you should not feel obliged to continue supporting something that's so heinous and hideous.

If you look at the facts, I think Israel is the biggest threat to Jewish people all around the world. Those people don't have to feel connected to defend, or obliged to defend Israeli action, the same way that I don't feel obliged to defend ISIS' actions. And yes, I have just compared ISIS to Israel, and I don't care. 

And same thing with Saudi Arabia. Do we feel compelled to defend Saudi Arabia? I don't want Islam to be defined by Saudi. I call out Saudi all the time.

People attack Saudi Arabia and Iran and Egypt, and I never call them Islamophobes.

Right, exactly.

Because they are governments, and governments should be criticized for anything. But the thing is, when I criticize the government, I'm not attacking the Jewish people. As a matter of fact, if there is Jewish hate in the world, and there is, a huge part of it comes from the actions of the Israeli government, and they need to understand that it is never about a problem with Jewish people. Never. 

It sounds like a broken record, but what Israel is doing is a big disservice to the Jewish people all around the world, because nothing that Israel does goes with the principles of the religion of Judaism, and I don't think it's right for Jewish people.

I agree with you. It's not like Netanyahu, before he orders a missile strike, looks at the Old Testament.

Netanyahu is friends with all the antisemitic Congress people. Netanyahu is friends with people who said the most horrible things about Jewish people, but at the same time, they support Israel, which is a crazy paradox.

So when you're doing your comedy, do you process this passion that you have for getting the word out about the Middle East on the stage?

No. In my comedy, I have my hour, and this is the same hour that I've been doing before all of that broke out, and I do the same as it is, because we tour the same hour until we're able to sell it, so I don't want it to be a big part of my show because I don't feel comfortable talking about it in my show when it's still going on. If you're coming to the show, don't expect that I'm going to do the jokes about Piers Morgan. It's the same show. It's a good show.

Are you doing jokes about Biden?

Oh yeah. A lot of them.

Trump?

Yeah.

You perform your show, you do some tours in Arabic and some tours in English. This one's in English right now. You're in Jersey, D.C., you're sold out all over the place. Is there a difference in content?

"If you don't care about what happened to people getting killed, I really don't care about what happens here under Trump."

Yeah, yeah. It's totally different shows. My English show is my journey from being a doctor, and to coming here to the United States and staying. It's kind of like my story between being a doctor, going to the show, having my show, being interrogated for my jokes, and then coming here to find myself in a totally new, different environment. The Arabic show is before that. It is my life growing up until I became a doctor. It's different, because the Arabic show, for me, believe it or not, is three times more difficult than the English show.

Why?

The English language is a unifying language. Everybody can come and understand you. In Arabic, as you know, there are 22 dialects, and the Arabic dialects are very different. It's not like the difference between Texas and New York. You're talking about the difference between someone in Alabama and someone in Wales or in Scotland. It is just different, and the humor is different, the reference is different. A big part of it is how to play with the dialects, with people from Morocco and from Tunisia, and from Saudi Arabia and from Egypt, and from Syria and from Lebanon. It's a very difficult show, and it's part of the show, playing with these dialect differences.

And it's also challenging that there's words in Arabic that mean so many different things. 

That's part of the show.

So look, I so respect your passion for the Palestinian people, being of Palestinian heritage, and you put your neck out there, and you've suffered a backlash as a result, and you've canceled some things, and I know that you're upset with Biden administration, but you're a unique person. You lived in a dictatorship, you live in autocracy, and I know you don't care right now. 

I want people to know what life would be like — not just comedy, but even comedy, if you wanted to touch on that — if Donald Trump were to get back in, and I'm not telling you to advocate for Biden or Trump, just so people understand. Because again, you're unique. You lived under a dictatorship.

We all lived under Trump for four years. People have already seen that.

But this guy's gotten worse. This guy's in a different place. He's running on retribution and revenge.

Yeah, let's do that. Let's see it. Let's bring it all down. This is going to be interesting. I really don't care.

So you just want to see it happen.

I really don't care. If you don't care about what happened to people getting killed, I really don't care about what happens here under Trump.

Poll: Nearly 1 in 5 Americans believe Taylor Swift is part of a federal operation to re-elect Biden

Almost 1 in 5 Americans — 18% — believe that singer Taylor Swift is involved in a clandestine federal effort to see President Joe Biden re-elected in 2024, per a new poll from Monmouth University in New Jersey. For months, members of the alt-right have spread unfounded conspiracy theories that Swift was attempting to control American politics through the NFL, given that her current boyfriend and Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce has now secured two back-to-back Super Bowl titles. Conservatives have also speculated that the relationship was fabricated by the government. Just last month, former Republicans presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy tweeted, "I wonder who’s going to win the Super Bowl next month. And I wonder if there’s a major presidential endorsement coming from an artificially culturally propped-up couple this fall. Just some wild speculation over here, let’s see how it ages over the next 8 months."

Monmouth University's poll noted that of the 18% of Americans who believe the baseless theory, 71% identify with or lean toward the GOP and 83% indicated that they were likely to support former president Donald Trump in the November election. Additionally, the poll observed that nearly three-quarters, or 73%, of those who believe the Swift theory to be true also believe that the 2020 presidential election outcome was bogus.

The study also clarified that of those who indicated that they believe the theory has merit, 42% had not heard of it prior to being contacted by the university. “The supposed Taylor Swift PsyOp conspiracy has legs among a decent number of Trump supporters," said Patrick Murray, director of the independent Monmouth University Polling Institute. "Even many who hadn’t heard about it before we polled them accept the idea as credible. Welcome to the 2024 election."

 

The smog case before the Supreme Court puts America’s air quality at risk

In recent years, the U.S. Supreme Court has become an abattoir for environmental laws. The casualties so far include a comprehensive plan to control greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from power plants, Clean Water Act protections for a hundred million acresacre of wetlands, and — soon — the Chevron deference principle that has kept judges from second-guessing many of EPA’s regulations.

On February 21, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in yet another challenge by industries and conservative states to a federal regulation. And yet again, the Court isn’t just threatening our health. It’s challenging the legal principles that used to limit the power of unelected judges in our society.

As with many of the Supreme Court’s recent forays into environmental law, the Court is hearing Ohio v. EPA in an unprecedented context. No lower court has said that the regulation at issue violates the law. Instead, industry and their allies are asking the Court to temporarily block the regulation even though a lower court refused to do so before ruling on its validity — and they aren’t asking the high court to rule on the regulation’s validity itself.

To understand the threat, it helps to understand how the Clean Air Act works. Like many environmental laws, the Act gives states a major regulatory role. EPA scientists decide how polluted our air can be, but it’s up to state officials to develop plans for achieving that minimum air quality.

The EPA’s analysis shows that for an annual cost of $910 million, the plan would deliver health benefits worth $4 billion to over $15 billion.

This system gives states considerable flexibility, but there’s a problem: downwind states face a disadvantage. Their air drifts in from other states, pre-polluted by sources they can’t control. To address that problem, Congress put a backstop provision in the Act that prohibits one state from running air quality programs that create air quality problems for another. Hence the name: the Good Neighbor Provision.

Last year, EPA concluded that 21 states are not doing enough to help their downwind neighbors meet air quality standards for ground-level ozone, better known as smog. EPA “disapproved” inadequate Clean Air Act implementation plans in those states, and — as the Clean Air Act requires — set out a federal plan to replace them. EPA’s “Good Neighbor Plan” requires upwind states to control major pollution sources inside their borders (think cement kilns, power plants, incinerators) to help their neighbors meet smog standards.


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


The smog standards we’re talking about are neither new nor ambitious, by the way. While they were drafted during the Obama administration, the Trump administration kept them, and endorsed them again in 2020 with the support of GOP politicians. Even the industry-aligned National Association of Manufacturers agrees that they are “based on sound science’ and would support “sustainable domestic growth.”

Because smog is so harmful, particularly to children, actually achieving these standards would deliver enormous benefits. That’s what the Good Neighbor Plan aims to do, and that’s why it’s worth implementing now. The EPA’s analysis shows that for an annual cost of $910 million, the plan would deliver health benefits worth $4 billion to over $15 billion. For a 1 percent increase in electricity costs, the rule will prevent over 2,000 hospital visits, avoid 25,000 lost days of work, and avoid 430,000 missed school days for kids whose asthma would otherwise keep them at home. All that in 2026 alone.

Polluters in upwind states, of course, focus only on one side of that ledger. They warn of impossible standards and crippling costs. Companies driven by short-term returns are practically required to say these things before regulations come into effect. But history shows that they then innovate to cut pollution in new and cheaper ways. As a result, studies suggest that EPA is likely overestimating the costs of the Good Neighbor Plan.

The Supreme Court used to reserve its own stay authority for true emergencies. There’s none here.

That doesn’t mean that we should deny polluters their day in court. Congress recognized that polluters will always question new air regulations. But it also knew that having this play out in multiple courts would create chaos. So the Clean Air Act requires anyone who wants to challenge regulations like the Good Neighbor Rule to do so in a single court that can hear them all together: the D.C. Circuit.

Cue the gamesmanship. Polluting industries and some conservative states skirted this requirement by challenging the EPA decision that disapproved their state plans — not the federal Good Neighbor Plan. By taking a national matter to regional courts that didn’t consider the full consequences of their rulings, they got decisions that effectively blocked the Plan, at least temporarily, in 12 states.

The challengers then sought to leverage this patchwork of regional stays into a national stay of the entire Good Neighbor Plan. They told the D.C. Circuit that if the Plan couldn’t go into effect everywhere, it shouldn’t go into effect anywhere, that the court should stay—that is, pause—the entire project until they could finish all their legal challenges. The D.C. Circuit declined to do so before ruling on the plan’s validity, but the challengers knew where to go next.

We need your help to stay independent

The Supreme Court used to reserve its own stay authority for true emergencies. There’s none here. By the time the Court hears arguments, it’ll have been over four months since the stay applications were filed. If the Court really thought that the D.C. Circuit had mishandled an emergency situation, surely it would have moved more quickly. What’s worse, the industry petitioners haven’t identified any obvious legal flaw of the type normally required to justify a stay. They’re just asking the Court to second-guess EPA’s decision on a legally complex issue involving exhaustive scientific analysis. Judged by the normal standards of Supreme Court practice, it’s surprising — shocking even — that the Court hasn’t already denied relief.  

The Supreme Court could easily have let these challenges, like thousands of other challenges brought every year, proceed through the lower courts in the normal course of business. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that it is treating environmental and other public health regulations as guilty until proven innocent. That is not the way our legal system is supposed to work.

The proper response would have been for the Court to wave away any request to stay EPA’s Good Neighbor Plan before the D.C. Circuit rules on its validity. It still can. Our right-wing Justices should follow the rules the Court created for these situations, rather than their ambition to serve as our regulators-in-chief. 

“Literal soap opera”: Trump case in “big trouble” after friend contradicts DA’s relationship claim

A former friend of Fulton County, Ga., District Attorney Fani Willis contradicted her claim about the timeline of her relationship with a top prosecutor in the criminal case against former President Donald Trump.

Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee ordered top prosecutor Nathan Wade to testify about his relationship with Willis after a witness claimed that the pair started dating earlier than they claimed, according to Politico.

Robin Yeartie, a former employee at the D.A.’s office and longtime friend of Willis who said they lived together for a time, contradicted Willis’ claim that the relationship did not begin until after Wade was hired to work on the case in 2021.

Yeartie, who said she had a falling out with Willis two years earlier, said she had “no doubt” the pair were in a romantic relationship beginning in 2019.

Willis claimed in a court filing that her relationship with Wade began in 2022.

Yeartie said she knew of the relationship because she saw “hugging, kissing, just affection.”

Prosecutors argued that Yeartie was a disgruntled former employee seeking to take down Willis.

Wade was ordered to testify by the judge and insisted that the relationship began in “early” 2022, according to The New York Times.

“It's starting to feel like the dispute in Fulton County is going to come down to semantics – for example, Wade and Willis may have dated occasionally before 2022, but did not begin a ‘relationship,’ at least as Wade defines it, before his appointment,” tweeted Randall Eliason, a law professor at George Washington University. “Let's not get out over our skis in Fulton County – so far a single defense witness, who may have an ax to grind with the DA, has testified that the relationship began earlier than Wade said it did,” he added.

Thursday’s hearing came about after Ashleigh Merchant, an attorney for Trump co-defendant and former campaign official Mike Roman, alleged an improper relationship between Willis and Wade and claimed that Wade had used his earnings from the case to finance lavish trips for the pair.

Wade claimed on Thursday that Willis reimbursed him for the trips in cash, calling her an “independent strong woman” who insisted that “she is going to pay her own way.”

The hearing was recessed until after 1 pm. It’s unclear if McAfee will order Willis to testify.

Georgia State University Law Prof. Eric Segall described the hearing as a “literal soup opera” playing out in Fulton County Superior Court.

“Unless there’s a surprise ending, the Ga case is in big trouble,” he predicted.

We need your help to stay independent

MSNBC legal analyst Caroline Polisi called Yeartie contradicting Willis “epic” and “monumental.”

“If things are going in the direction we think, Fani Willis lied to the court, it’s game over for her. She will be disqualified. If they had a relationship prior to when they represented truth to the court, it’s a huge deal. I can’t overstate,” she said in a clip flagged by Mediaite.

Polisi told the outlet that Willis could be “disqualified, which means her entire staff is disqualified, which means the case will have to be re-assigned and languish with the PAC of Georgia, effectively killing the case. Her credibility is completely shot.”


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


Eliason argued that the hearing so far has only established that “Willis and Wade have a relationship and that Wade went through a messy divorce, both of which were uncontested. Nothing about Willis having any financial stake in the case that would justify disqualification.”

But Segall argued that the prosecutors needed to make sure everything was “kept squeaky clean” in their prosecution of Trump.

“No matter what happens next, this was terrible judgment by the DA and Wade,” he wrote. “Really sad, maybe tragic. Infamous phone call happened here.”

Martha Stewart’s 7 best vegan and vegetarian recipes

Domestic doyenne Martha Stewart, known for her vast knowledge of all things food and home — as seen in the new CNN documentary about her life — is also quite adept within another culinary realm: plant-based and vegetarian food. 

While Martha has top-tier recipes for all things carnivorous, her vegetarian cuisine and more-recent plant-based options are versatile, easy-to-make and totally delicious. Also, her vegan fare uses all fresh produce, so if you're not especially into protein crumbles or plant-based "meat" options, you're all set with her recipes. 


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


With options for soups, main courses and desserts that are all either plant-based or vegetarian, Martha's got you covered, no matter if you're cooking for one or for a large gathering. 

Butternut squash soup is a classic go-to for many, especially vegans and vegetarians. Earthy, rich and smooth, butternut makes for a superb base for a soup, but in this iteration, coconut milk, ginger, coriander and garlic brighten the whole mixture up even further.
 
Hate working with butternut? Buy a package of pre-cut squash for a much easier cooking experience. And don't throw out the seeds! They make a great finishing garnish. 
Why not enjoy this superb vibrant, colorful ratatouille while watching the movie of the same name? This classic amalgamation of a slew of fresh vegetables, from tomatoes and eggplant to peppers and zucchini, is bolstered by a secret ingredient (spoiler: it's the red wine vinegar). 
 
P.S. you better not skip the bay leaf. It contributes so much more than you might realize. 
03
If you're not familiar, japchae is an amazing Korean noodle dish. Martha's version includes soy sauce, brown sugar, Korean sweet potato noodles (called dangmyeon), mushrooms and carrots before being garnished with scallions and sesame seeds. It's stellar and makes for the ideal weeknight meal, quick snack or easy lunch.
 
I can't recommend it enough. Serve with kimchi on the side!

We need your help to stay independent

This is a fabulous recipe that is as healthy as it is colorful and flavorful. The creamy, coconut broth ties together the tofu and broccoli, which is all enhanced by ginger, chiles, tamari, lime, shallot and cilantro. Green curry paste can do wonders for any dish. Serve with rice for a filling, totally vegan comfort meal. 
Of course, Italian and Italian-American cuisine is always and forever my culinary kryptonite, but this variation is a bit lighter: with no breading or frying, this eggplant is simply grilled, adding an unusual touch of char to the standard flavor base. With nothing else but tomatoes, shallot, olive oil, basil, mozzarella and bread, this is a simple recipe to put together on a frenzied night, while also keeping it light, smoky, and generally healthful. 
For some, macaroni and cheese is insurmountable: the ideal comfort food, the ideal vegetarian food, the potential cheesiest option. Martha's version adheres pretty closely to the classic formula. with a cheddar-Gruyere-and-Pecorino studded bechamel (with a hint of nutmeg, of course), mixed with cooked elbow macaroni being before topped with bread crumbs and browned. 
 
It's spectacular. Nothing much else to say about it! Macaroni and cheese always speaks for itself.
You'll take one look at this and never even know it's vegan. With moist cake, fluffy icing and a lush ganache, this cake is a showstopper. It has all the standard players (cocoa powder, oil, flour, baking soda, sugar, espresso powder, vanilla), plus some interesting inclusions (apple cider vinegar, margarine, dairy-free soy creamer, golden or brown rice syrup) and, of course, tons of chocolate. 
 
Throw a party just so you have an excuse to make this cake. Or make it for yourself and enjoy it all on your own.

Israeli siege has placed Gazans at risk of starvation

The stories of hunger emerging from war-ravaged Gaza are stark: People resorting to grinding barely edible cattle feed to make flour; desperate residents eating grass; reports of cats being hunted for food.

The numbers involved are just as despairing. The world's major authority on food insecurity, the IPC Famine Review Committee, estimates that 90% of Gazans – some 2.08 million people – are facing acute food insecurity. Indeed, of the people facing imminent starvation in the world today, an estimated 95% are in Gaza.

As an expert in Palestinian public health, I fear the situation may not have hit its nadir. In January 2024, many of the top funders to UNRWA, the U.N.'s refugee agency that provides the bulk of services to Palestinians in Gaza, suspended donations to the agency in response to allegations that a dozen of the agency's 30,000 employees were possibly involved in the Oct. 7, 2023, attack by Hamas. The agency has indicated that it will no longer be able to offer services starting in March and will lose its ability to distribute food and other vital supplies during that month.

With at least 28,000 people confirmed dead and an additional 68,000 injured, Israeli bombs have already had a catastrophic human cost in Gaza – starvation could be the next tragedy to befall the territory.

Indeed, two weeks after Israel initiated a massive military campaign in the Gaza Strip, Oxfam International reported that only around 2% of the usual amount of food was being delivered to residents in the territory. At the time, Sally Abi Khalil, Oxfam's Middle East director, commented that "there can be no justification for using starvation as a weapon of war." But four months later, the siege continues to restrict the distribution of adequate aid.

 

Putting Palestinians 'on a diet'

Israeli bombs have destroyed homes, bakeries, food production factories and grocery stores, making it harder for people in Gaza to offset the impact of the reduced imports of food.

But food insecurity in Gaza and the mechanisms that enable it did not start with Israel's response to the Oct. 7 attack.

A U.N. report from 2022 found that a year before the latest war, 65% of Gazans were food insecure, defined as lacking regular access to enough safe and nutritious food.

Multiple factors contributed to this food insecurity, not least the blockade of Gaza imposed by Israel and enabled by Egypt since 2007. All items entering the Gaza Strip, including food, become subject to Israeli inspection, delay or denial.

Basic foodstuff was allowed, but because of delays at the border, it can spoil before it enters Gaza.

A 2009 investigation by Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz found that foods as varied as cherries, kiwi, almonds, pomegranates and chocolate were prohibited entirely.

At certain points, the blockade, which Israel claims is an unavoidable security measure, has been loosened to allow import of more foods; for example, in 2010 Israel started to permit potato chips, fruit juices, Coca-Cola and cookies.

By placing restrictions on food imports, Israel seems to be trying to put pressure on Hamas by making life difficult for the people in Gaza. In the words of one Israeli government adviser in 2006, "The idea is to put the Palestinians on a diet, but not to make them die of hunger."

To enable this, the Israeli government commissioned a 2008 study to work out exactly how many calories Palestinians would need to avoid malnutrition. The report was released to the public only following a 2012 legal battle.

The blockade also increased food insecurity by preventing meaningful development of an economy in Gaza.

The U.N. cites the "excessive production and transaction costs and barriers to trade with the rest of the world" imposed by Israel as the primary cause of severe underdevelopment in the occupied territories, including Gaza. As a result, in late 2022 the unemployment rate in Gaza stood at around 50%. This, coupled with a steady increase in the cost of food, makes affording food difficult for many Gazan households, rendering them dependent on aid, which fluctuates frequently.

 

Hampering self-sufficency

More generally, the blockade and the multiple rounds of destruction of parts of the Gaza Strip have made food sovereignty in the territory nearly impossible.

Much of Gaza's farmland is along the so-called "no-go zones," which Israel had rendered inaccessible to Palestinians, who risk being shot if they attempt to access these areas.

Gaza's fishermen are regularly shot at by Israeli gunboats if they venture farther in the Mediterranean Sea than Israel permits. Because the fish closer to the shore are smaller and less plentiful, the average income of a fisherman in Gaza has more than halved since 2017.

Meanwhile, much of the infrastructure needed for adequate food production – greenhouses, arable lands, orchards, livestock and food production facilities – have been destroyed or heavily damaged in various rounds of bombing in Gaza. And international donors have hesitated to hastily rebuild facilities when they cannot guarantee their investment will last more than a few years before being bombed again.

The latest siege has only further crippled the ability of Gaza to be food self-sufficient. By early December 2023, an estimated 22% of agricultural land had been destroyed, along with factories, farms, and water and sanitation facilities. And the full scale of the destruction may not be clear for months or years.

Meanwhile, Israel's flooding of the tunnels under parts of the Gaza Strip with seawater risks killing remaining crops, leaving the land too salty and rendering it unstable and prone to sinkholes.

 

Starvation as weapon of war

Aside from the many health effects of starvation and malnutrition, especially on children, such conditions make people more vulnerable to disease – already a significant concern for those living in the overcrowded shelters where people have been forced to flee.

In response to the current hunger crisis in Gaza, Alex de Waal, author of "Mass Starvation: The History and Future of Famine," has made clear: "While it may be possible to bomb a hospital by accident, it is not possible to create a famine by accident." He argues that the war crime of starvation does not need to include outright famine – merely the act of depriving people of food, medicine and clean water is sufficient.

The use of starvation is strictly forbidden under the Geneva Conventions, a set of statutes that govern the laws of warfare. Starvation has been condemned by United Nations Resolution 2417, which decried the use of deprivation of food and basic needs of the civilian population and compelled parties in conflict to ensure full humanitarian access.

Human Rights Watch has already accused Israel of using starvation as a weapon of war, and as such it accuses the Israeli government of a war crime. The Israeli government in turn continues to blame Hamas for any loss of life in Gaza.

Yet untangling what Israel's intentions may be – whether it is using starvation as a weapon of war, to force mass displacement, or if, as it claims, it is simply a byproduct of war – does little for the people on the ground in Gaza.

They require immediate intervention to stave off catastrophic outcomes. As one father in Gaza reported, "We are forced to eat one meal a day – the canned goods that we get from aid organizations. No one can afford to buy anything for his family. I see children here crying from hunger, including my own children."

Yara M. Asi, Assistant Professor of Global Health Management and Informatics, University of Central Florida

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

The Omakase Room’s “Welcome Cocktail” is a masterclass in mocktail magic

I’ve never much gone for the sexed-up verbiage we impose upon non-alcoholic drinks. I may be alone here, but I made peace with “mocktail” long ago. The word is simple, punny, self-explanatory, and even historically significant. According to Merriam-Webster, mocktail was first used in 1916, so it — unsurprisingly — just slightly predates Prohibition

Perhaps some find it humiliating to pull up at some chi-chi bar and ask about the mocktail offerings. But I feel just as stupid asking to see the “N/A” or “zero-proof” list or, trendier yet, those “spirit-frees.” Whether teetotaling, temperance or virgin, they’re just drinks, after all — though I suppose their intricacy beyond fresh-squeezed juice demands we label them something nobler. 

In any case, the most delicious boozeless cocktail I’ve tasted in recent memory didn’t even bother announcing itself as spirit-free: The Welcome Cocktail at the Omakase Room at Sushi-San in Chicago’s River North neighborhood is exactly that, a miniature concoction intended to refresh and prime the appetite, which happens to be free of the demon drink. A server handed me this cocktail — a chilled mixture of oolong tea, coconut water and pandan syrup in a pretty ridged glass — after I sank into a lounge chair to await the start of an exemplary 18-course sushi dinner. 

The three-sipper was delicate, balanced and gently aromatic; the shortbread butteriness of the tea lent a toasty backbone to the juicy, tropical notes of the coconut and mildly bitter, nutty-sweet pandan. As I drank, I became aware that I was perched on the edge of my seat, fully at attention as I attempted to unriddle its intriguing, distantly familiar contents. When the server returned to retrieve the glass, I got territorial over the last few drops, saying I still “needed a minute.” 

We need your help to stay independent

What I like least about the notion of a mocktail is that it implies abstinence, or some lesser experience. All I know is, I thought about that mini cocktail long after it was gone. I pictured pouring myself a nip of it then settling into a squashy chair to read a book on a Saturday afternoon, or preparing a tray of them to hand to guests upon arrival at my next dinner party. Would I serve it alongside spiced mixed nuts or salty quicos? No. I’d offer it up solo, just as the Omakase Room did: a sipper worth contemplating in all its nuanced beauty — up there with some of the loveliest cocktails I’ve tasted. 

A note on pandan

The Welcome Cocktail incorporates simmered fresh pandan leaves. Affectionately referred to as “the fragrant plant” in Chinese for their singular, sweet aroma, pandan leaves are palm-like in appearance — bright-green, long and spiky. When cooked, the leaves lend a grassy sweetness that bears notes of almond, cooked rice, rose, vanilla, and a whisper of coconut. Pandan is often incorporated into Southeast Asian savory cooking, desserts and drinks, not just for its sweetness but its striking green hue. It’s sold in fresh, frozen, paste, extract and powdered forms. This cocktail works best with gentler-tasting fresh or frozen pandan leaves, which can be found in Asian and international grocery stores and many Whole Foods Market locations. 

Courtesy of Kevin Beary, beverage director at Lettuce Entertain You

Welcome Cocktail
Yields
2 1/4 cups
Prep Time
5 minutes, plus time to chill
Cook Time
10 minutes

Ingredients

150-200 milliliters oolong tea

250 milliliters coconut water

100 milliliters 2:1 Pandan Syrup*

 Pandan Syrup

50 grams fresh or frozen pandan leaves, roughly chopped

500 milliliters water

Granulated sugar, as needed




 




 

 

Directions

  1. Brew tea; Beary recommends 7 grams of tea per 200 milliliters of water, with a 5-minute steep time. Strain, and allow tea to fully cool. 

  2. Add coconut water and Pandan Syrup, stirring to combine. Cover, and chill for at least 30 minutes before serving. Pour into small decorative glasses to serve.

  3. To make the Pandan SyrupBring water to a simmer, and add the pandan. Simmer for 10 minutes. 

    Strain out leaves, and pour the liquid back into a measuring cup. I was left with 250 milliliters after simmering the leaves uncovered. 

    Add half the amount of white sugar by weight (1 milliliters equals about 0.7 grams of sugar. This  means for 250 milliliters, you’ll need 87.5 g or about ¼ cup sugar). Stir to combine, and allow to fully cool.