Spring Sale: Get 1 Year, Save 58%

Three astronauts from Chinese space station land safely after 6 months afloat

China's three-astronaut Shenzhou 16 crew rare back on Earth in good health after landing in a return capsule Tuesday at the edge of the Gobi desert near the Jiuquan Satellite Launch Center, according to the Xinhua News Agency. Chinese taikonauts (as the space-farers are known) Zhu Yangzhu, Gui Haichao and commander Jing Haiping arrived safely back on terra firma following their May 2023 launch aboard a Long March 2F rocket and their six-month stay aboard the Tiangong space station. At just one-fifth the size, Tiangong is China's answer to the International Space Station after being excluded from the collaborative space lab. Tiangong was assembled in low Earth orbit over about 18 months and completed in late 2022 with the addition of the Mengtian module.

The team's replacement crew, Shenzou 17, arrived at Tiangong on Oct. 26, led by mission commander Tang Hongbo, age 48. The seventh and youngest crew to visit Tiangong also includes former People's Liberation Army Air Force fighter pilot Tang Shengjie and Jiang Xinline, aged 34 and 35 respectively. The new crew will conduct a variety of scientific experiments during their stay, including a spacewalk to inspect and potentially repair the station's solar arrays which China's Manned Space Agency says have suffered minor (but expected) damage due to increased space debris.

"Build a dream at the Tiangong space station and continue to work hard," the two teams said in unison during the station's welcome ceremony. "China's space station is always worth looking forward to."

Extremism scholar: Trump’s violent rhetoric echoes fascist commitment to a bloody societal rebirth

Former President Donald Trump’s rhetoric has regularly bordered on the incitement of violence. Lately, however, it has become even more violent. Yet both the press and the public have largely just shrugged their shoulders.

As a political philosopher who studies extremism, I believe people should be more worried about this.

Mark Milley, the outgoing chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, is guilty of “treason,” Trump said in September 2023, just for reassuring the Chinese that the U.S. had no plans to attack in the waning days of the Trump administration. And for this, Trump says, Milley deserves death.

And back in April, Trump said that his indictment by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg would result in “death and destruction.” Then, in early October, Trump urged people to “go after” Letitia James, the New York attorney general who filed suit against him for business fraud.

Trump’s prior rhetoric is also now on record as having inspired many of those convicted to engage in insurrection at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

But it is not just government officials whom Trump suggests be targeted for extrajudicial killings. Mere shoplifters should be killed too. “Very simply, if you rob a store, you can fully expect to be shot as you are leaving,” Trump said to cheers at the California Republican Party convention in September.

With some wielding weapons and wearing protective gear, rioters clash with police on the steps of an entrance to the U.S. Capitol.

Trump supporters storm the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Brent Stirton via Getty Images News

More than crazy bluster

This rhetoric may seem like crazy bluster, which is no doubt why many people appear prepared to ignore it. But put in its historical context, what Trump is doing is echoing views that are part of a long tradition of illiberal and outright fascist thought. For fascists have always seen the use of violence as a virtue, not a vice.

First, this is the natural result of the way that fascist communities define themselves. According to Carl Schmitt, a prominent Nazi and for a time the official legal theorist of the party under Adolf Hitler, one builds and maintains a community by identifying and vilifying its enemies. And in this kind of highly polarized environment, the threat of violence always hangs in the air.

Second, among fascists, machismo is much admired. Former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, whose own outrageous rhetoric has also encouraged violent behavior by his supporters, simply “beamed” when Russian President Vladimir Putin praised him for his masculinity.

Trump often acts as a sycophant for Putin too, and machismo also is a big part of Trump’s own public persona.

Third, fascists are obsessed with purity. They long for a world where they can live among their own racial, ethnic, religious and ideological kind on land they view as exclusively theirs.

But in the real world, people are too intermixed for this to occur naturally. True purity of community is an aspiration that can be made real only through violence and subjugation. Hence the Holocaust,genocide and ethnic cleansing, and other more limited attacks on minority and immigrant populations.

Violence as noble and intoxicating

Fascists, then, see violence as noble and intoxicating. For example, Julius Evola, a far-right intellectual active in Italy from 1920 to 1970 and the author, among other things, of “Fascism Viewed from the Right” and “A Handbook for Right-Wing Youth,” writes that violence “offers man the opportunity to awaken the hero that sleeps within him.”

Today, Evola is a favorite of the alt-right, and he suggests that a hero’s death is preferable to a life built on liberal compromise. “The moment the individual succeeds in living as a hero,” Evola writes, “even if it is the final moment of his earthly life, weighs infinitely more on the scale of values than a protracted existence consuming monotonously among the trivialities of cities.”

The ultraconservative Catholic authoritarian and opponent of the French Revolution Joseph de Maistre, who is recognized as one of the intellectual forefathers of fascism, goes even further.

“The whole earth, perpetually steeped in blood, is nothing but a vast altar upon which all that is living must be sacrificed without end, without measure, without pause, until the consummation of things, until evil is extinct, until the death of death,” Maistre writes. Indeed, without an executioner, the man who kills other men, Maistre claims society could not exist. For violence is necessary to satisfy “men’s natural desire to be destructive,” he writes; it leaves them feeling “exalted and fulfilled.”

With the Washington Monument in the background, a group of protesters march.

Patriot Front – labeled a ‘white supremacist group’ by the Anti-Defamation League – marches in Washington, D.C., in May 2023. Nathan Posner/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images

Social disruption and destruction

These comments make clear that fascists see violence as something to be used for more than just personal retribution and intimidation. It is to be used to create wider social disruption and destruction. Not only are individuals to be subject to attack, but institutions and norms as well.

Consider “The Fourth Turning: An American Prophecy,” a work by two amateur historians popular on the far right.

The book is actually a restatement of Evola’s theory of historical regression, set forth in his “Revolt against the Modern World.”

The idea is that history moves in cycles, the first one being the best and each one thereafter representing a further decline. The fourth cycle is the worst, and it ends only when all existing social institutions are destroyed. This, in turn, is an application of the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche’s idea that “one can build only in a space which has been previously razed to the ground.”

Then history will reset and cycle once again.

Trump’s former adviser Steve Bannon admires these ideas so much he made a movie about them.

Trump appears to embrace these ideas too. “When the economy crashes, when the country goes to total hell, and everything is a disaster, then you’ll have riots to go back to where we used to be, when we were great,” he says.

Viewed in this context, not taking Trump’s violent rhetoric more seriously seems dangerous indeed.

 

Mark R. Reiff, Research Affiliate in Legal and Political Philosophy, University of California, Davis

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

Paul McCartney says Beatles final song “Now and Then” with late John Lennon is “quite emotional”

The Beatles are releasing their final song "Then and Now" with late members, John Lennon and George Harrison finally finished by Paul McCartney and Ringo Starr more than four decades after its conception. McCartney recently deemed the highly anticipated release (out Nov. 2) was "quite emotional."

The song was originally brought to life by Lennon — he wrote and performed it in 1977 in his New York City home but he never returned to "Now and Then," ultimately leaving it unfinished. Well, that is until Yoko Ono, Lennon's wife, gifted her husband's demos to his bandmates McCartney and Starr, who recently completed their late friend's work with the help of AI.

Deemed the last Beatles song, "Now and Then" had newly recorded parts from Harrison, McCartney and Starr in the '90s but technological limitations prevented Lennon's voice and piano from being separated for a full, crisp song. It was shelved until a production team had the challenge of resurrecting Lennon's voice from the original 1977 cassette recording in 2022 using machine-assisted learning or MAL to isolate Lennon's voice. This allowed, McCartney and Starr to work their Beatles magic and they added 1995 guitar work from Harrison with some additional newly recorded string arrangments.

Related

"Now and Then": The history of the Beatles' final song and how it's getting released 46 years later

“There it was, John’s voice, crystal clear. It’s quite emotional," McCartney said in the band's announcement posted to their website. "And we all play on it, it’s a genuine Beatles recording. In 2023 to still be working on Beatles music, and about to release a new song the public haven’t heard, I think it’s an exciting thing.”

“It was the closest we’ll ever come to having him back in the room, so it was very emotional for all of us. It was like John was there, you know. It’s far out,” Starr said.

"Now and Then" is said to be "deceptively hopeful paean about love and our inherent despair over the possibility of losing it." It also a "simply breathtaking, a plaintive reminder of the majesty of the Beatles’ narrative itself, as well as our sense of irreparable loss over Lennon and Harrison’s absence from the story," Salon's Beatles expert and contributor Kenneth Womack wrote.

The iconic British rock band has been teasing this new song since the summer and is set to release a Peter Jackson-directed music video for it on Friday, Nov. 3. The last installment of the Beatles' discography will be followed by new editions of compilation albums always seen as the definitive introduction to their work: "The Red Album" which spans the band's work between 1962 and 1966 and "The Blue Album" which spans 1967-1970. The albums will showcase some of the band's most popular work like the song "Love Me Do."

Lennon and Ono's son, Sean Ono Lennon said, “It was incredibly touching to hear them working together after all the years that dad had been gone. It’s the last song my dad, Paul, George and Ringo got to make together. It’s like a time capsule and all feels very meant to be.”

Read more

about the Beatles

How is decaf coffee made? And is it really caffeine-free?

Coffee is one of the most popular drinks in the world and its high levels of caffeine are among the main reasons why. It's a natural stimulant that provides an energy buzz and we just can't get enough.

However, some people prefer to limit their caffeine intake for health or other reasons. Decaffeinated  or "decaf" coffee is widely available and its consumption is reported to be on the rise.

Here's what you need to know about decaf coffee: how it's made, the flavor, the benefits — and whether it's actually caffeine-free.

How is decaf made?

Removing caffeine while keeping a coffee bean's aroma and flavor intact isn't a simple task. Decaf coffee is made by stripping green, unroasted coffee beans of their caffeine content and relies on the fact that caffeine dissolves in water.

Three main methods are used for removing caffeine: chemical solvents, liquid carbon dioxide (CO₂) or plain water with special filters.

The additional steps required in all of these processing methods are why decaf coffee is often more expensive.  

         

Solvent-based methods

Most decaf coffee is made using solvent-based methods as it's the cheapest process. This method breaks down into two further types: direct and indirect.

The direct method involves steaming the coffee beans and then repeatedly soaking them in a chemical solvent (usually methylene chloride or ethyl acetate) which binds to the caffeine and extracts it from the beans.

After a pre-determined time, the caffeine has been extracted and the coffee beans are steamed once more to remove any residual chemical solvent.  

The indirect method still uses a chemical solvent, but it doesn't come into direct contact with the coffee beans. Instead, the beans are soaked in hot water, then the water is separated from the beans and treated with the chemical solvent.

The caffeine bonds to the solvent in the water and is evaporated. The caffeine-free water is then returned to the beans to reabsorb the coffee flavors and aromas.

The solvent chemicals (particularly methylene chloride) used in these processes are a source of controversy around decaf coffee. This is because methylene chloride is suggested to be mildly carcinogenic in high doses. Methylene chloride and ethyl acetate are commonly used in paint stripper, nail polish removers and degreaser.

However, both the Australian New Zealand Food Standards Code and the United States Food and Drug Administration permit the use of these solvents to process decaf. They also have strict limits on the amount of the chemicals that can still be present on the beans and in reality practically no solvent is left behind.

 

Non-solvent-based methods

Non-solvent-based methods that use liquid carbon dioxide or water are becoming increasingly popular as they don't involve chemical solvents.

In the CO₂ method, liquid carbon dioxide is pumped into a high-pressure chamber with the beans, where it binds to the caffeine and is then removed through high pressure, leaving behind decaffeinated beans.

The water method (also known as the Swiss water process) is exactly what it sounds like — it involves extracting caffeine from coffee beans using water. There are variations on this method, but the basic steps are as follows.

For an initial batch, green coffee beans are soaked in hot water, creating an extract rich in caffeine and flavour compounds (the flavourless beans are then discarded). This green coffee extract is passed through activated charcoal filters, which trap the caffeine molecules while allowing the flavours to pass through.

Once created in this way, the caffeine-free extract can be used to soak a new batch of green coffee beans — since the flavours are already saturating the extract, the only thing that will be dissolved from the beans is the caffeine.

           


            
         

Is caffeine fully removed from decaf?

Switching to decaf may not be as caffeine free as you think.

It is unlikely that 100% of the caffeine will be successfully stripped from the coffee beans. Just like the caffeine content of coffee can vary, some small amounts of caffeine are still present in decaf.

However, the amount is quite modest. You would need to drink more than ten cups of decaf to reach the caffeine level typically present in one cup of caffeinated coffee.

Australia does not require coffee roasters or producers to detail the process used to create their decaf coffee. However, you might find this information on some producers' websites if they have chosen to advertise it.

 

Does decaf coffee taste different?

Some people say decaf tastes different. Depending on how the beans are decaffeinated, some aromatic elements may be co-extracted with the caffeine during the process.

Caffeine also contributes to the bitterness of coffee, so when the caffeine is removed, so is some of the bitterness.

           

Do caffeinated and decaf coffee have the same health benefits?

The health benefits found for drinking decaf coffee are similar to that of caffeinated coffee, including a lower risk of type 2 diabetes, some cancers and overall mortality.
More recently, coffee has been linked with improved weight management over time.

Most of the health benefits have been shown by drinking three cups of decaf per day.

Moderation is key and remember that the greatest health benefits will come from having a balanced diet.

Lauren Ball, Professor of Community Health and Wellbeing, The University of Queensland and Emily Burch, Dietitian, Researcher & Lecturer, Southern Cross University

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

House GOP wants to pair Israel military aid with IRS cuts that help rich tax cheats

House Republicans released legislative text on Monday that pairs around $14 billion in military aid for Israel with steep cuts from Internal Revenue Service funding that has given the agency more capacity to pursue wealthy tax cheats.

The GOP bill would strip $14.3 billion in funds from the IRS, a move that would undercut the agency's renewed enforcement push and nix efforts to build out a free digital tax filing system to compete with private tax-prep firms, which have lobbied aggressively against the IRS alternative.

While the House GOP's proposed IRS cuts were widely presented as "offsets" for the new aid for Israel's military, such cuts would in fact add to the federal deficit by depriving the agency of resources to collect taxes from rich tax dodgers who are costing the U.S. tens of billions in revenue.

"Every $1 you cut IRS funding will lose about $2 of revenue," noted Marc Goldwein of the conservative Center for a Responsible Federal Budget. "So that means this bill would add about $30 billion to the deficit."

The IRS said earlier this month that it has collected $160 million in back taxes from millionaires this year thanks to new enforcement funding provided under the Inflation Reduction Act. The agency also recently launched an initiative aimed at cracking down on tax dodging by large corporations.

Senate Finance Committee Chair Ron Wyden, D-Ore., argued on social media late Monday that "House Republicans are using aid for Israel as a political pawn in order to slash taxes for their wealthy donors."

"Making it easier for rich people to cheat on their taxes isn't an offset, it adds to the deficit," Wyden wrote.

House Republicans' bill comes in response to President Joe Biden's request for $14.3 billion in military aid for Israel as part of a broader $106 billion emergency funding request that also called for military assistance for Ukraine, disaster relief in the U.S., and some humanitarian aid for Gaza that human rights advocates say could bolster Israeli efforts to forcibly displace Palestinians.

The GOP legislation, which is likely dead on arrival in the narrowly Democratic U.S. Senate, only contains funding for Israel.

The bipartisan push to approve new military aid for Israel comes despite warnings from legal experts that the U.S. could be complicit in genocide and other war crimes against Palestinians in Gaza.

Israel's bombing campaign has killed more than 8,000 people — including more than 3,400 children — and sparked a humanitarian catastrophe, displacing more than a million Gazans, destroying or damaging roughly 40% of the territory's housing units, and pushing the enclave's healthcare system to the brink of total collapse.

The National Priorities Project cautioned in response to Biden's supplemental funding request that "more military aid to Israel will mean more deaths."

"In the face of massive suffering in Gaza and disregard for international law by the Israeli government, the U.S. must not provide additional military aid or weapons that would cause more deaths," the group said. "Instead, the U.S. should use its considerable diplomatic strength to call for an immediate cease-fire."

Lori Loughlin could return to Hallmark’s “When Calls the Heart,” post-college admissions scandal

College admissions scandal figurehead Lori Loughlin could be making her return to television after a short two-month prison sentence in 2020 for her involvement in paying bribes to get her daughters into the University of Southern California.

The disgraced former "Full House" actress best known as Aunt Becky, starred in "When Calls the Heart" on the Hallmark channel before she was exposed in the scandal. The show's co-creator Brain Bird said that there have been "good conversations" about Loughlin's return to her role as Abigail Stanton. She hasn't been on the show since the scandal rocked the country in 2019.

"We can't guarantee anything, but there are good conversations happening around this topic," Bird said.

He also said that Loughlin "assured us that she has found some peace and she's made it through . . . her and her husband's ordeal, and she's in a much better place than she was."

The actress was released from a short prison stint after pleading guilty to a single count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and mail fraud for paying $500,000 for the college admissions of her two daughters. The actress was fired from her acting jobs, her daughters were forced to drop out of USC, and her family's involvement in the scandal opened the doors into the systems of privilege and inequity in American higher education. 

Another actress caught in the scandal, Felicity Huffman, who served 11 days in jail for her involvement is also set to for a comeback as the lead in ABC's "The Good Lawyer," a spinoff of "The Good Doctor."

 

How can kids have a healthier Halloween?

Halloween is a very exciting time for children and let's face it, for many adults, too.

The costumes, decorations and of course the treats all contribute to the thrill of this spooky holiday. However, as parents and dietitians who research children's eating, we often find ourselves grappling with the challenge of the avalanche of sugary treats.

Depending on how much your children collect on the night, the candies can hang around for days or weeks.

Balancing our children's enjoyment of treats with their health can be a challenging task, but there are strategies to help.

 

A balanced approach to sugar

The food your child eats over the whole year is more important than the foods they eat in one day or week of the year.

As part of promoting healthy eating, it's important not to demonise sugar but teach your child it can be consumed as part of a healthy diet. This balanced approach can help children develop a healthy relationship with all foods.

Guilt and shame around eating certain foods can disrupt normal eating patterns.

A positive relationship with food means you give some thought to food selection so you get nutritious food but aren't so wary and restrictive that you miss out on enjoyable times. Food and eating take up some of your time and attention, but keep their place as only one important area of your life.

You can encourage a healthy relationship with food by:

  • avoiding the 'good' vs 'bad' label: Instead of labelling foods, focus on moderation and variety. Teach your child it's okay to enjoy treats and fun foods occasionally and they don't need to feel guilty about it.

  • modeling healthy habits: Children learn by example, so be sure to model healthy eating habits yourself. Show them you enjoy a range of foods without guilt or shame.

 

How can you have a healthier Halloween?

Halloween is a time of celebration and fun. It can also be an opportunity to promote eating in a positive and balanced way. Here are some ideas:

  • have a filling meal before you head out: A full stomach means kids are less likely to fill up on candies. Having only candies for dinner will lead to a sugar crash and leave children hungry and cranky at bedtime

  • give your kids child-sized baskets: A smaller container can limit the number of candies your child collects and eats. Encourage them to take only one piece from each house, promoting moderation and helping kids understand there needs to be enough left over for other children

  • keep active: Incorporate physical activity into your Halloween celebration. Perhaps you have a long walk around your neighborhood, so you get exercise while you trick or treat. Or you could have a zombie dance party when you get home. These activities can help your child shake out their sillies from the excitement of the night

  • have treats on hand that are not candies: The Teal Pumpkin Project (led by Food Allergy Research and Education) celebrates Halloween with non-food treats and supports kids with food allergies who may not be able to have typical Halloween candies. Instead of candies, you could have stickers, glow sticks, pens and pencils, bubbles or small toys.

 

What about all the leftover candies?

Some kids get to the end of Halloween evening and have an enormous haul of candies they cannot possibly eat — even if they would like to try.

So it's a good idea to have a "leftover lolly plan".

Decide how many candies your child can keep and what to do with the excess. As a general guide, you should stick to one-to-two fun-size treats a day for three-to-eight-year-olds and one fun-size treat a day for toddlers two-to-three years.

But on Halloween, it's likely they will have more than this. Don't stress too much and remember it's only one night of the year. But please note babies under 12 months can choke on candies and don't need to have them.

For older children, consider donating some to food banks or sharing their haul with their peers at school or sporting clubs. You could also trade excess candy for other rewards like toys or activities. Or parents could "buy" the candy in exchange for more pocket money.

You could even create a homemade advent calendar with Halloween candy leading into Christmas.

Clare Dix, Research Fellow in Nutrition & Dietetics, The University of Queensland and Stella Boyd-Ford, Research Fellow, The University of Queensland

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

“Alarming implications”: Legal scholar says Trump disqualification case headed to Supreme Court

The January 6, 2021, Capitol attack is at the core of a lawsuit seeking to disqualify former President Donald Trump from Colorado’s 2024 ballot under the 14th Amendment’s “insurrection clause.”  

Six Colorado voters filed a lawsuit in September, under the state’s law governing primary elections, which grants the secretary of state the power to “certify” the “names and party affiliations of the candidates to be placed on any presidential primary election ballots.” With the help of a watchdog group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, the plaintiffs argued that Trump is ineligible to hold office again under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which disqualifies anyone who “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” against the Constitution. 

CREW contends that permitting Trump ballot access would violate the secretary's duties under both state law and the Fourteenth Amendment due to Trump's constitutional ineligibility for the presidency.

“As ‘eligible electors,’ Petitioners have standing under Colorado law to challenge the constitutional eligibility of candidates in the 2024 Republican presidential primary election,” according to the lawsuit. “If an ineligible candidate appears on the ballot that Petitioners will cast in the election, Petitioners will suffer an injury in fact to a legally protected interest under Colorado law because the election would not be among eligible candidates, the Secretary of State would have violated her duties under the U.S. Constitution and Colorado law, the ineligible candidate would have affected the integrity and fairness of the election, and the party could end up with an ineligible nominee in the general election.”

Related

“Immediate disqualification”: Conservative legal scholars say Constitution bars Trump from office

The trial opened on Monday i​​n a Colorado state court with a lawyer representing the six Colorado voters arguing that Trump “incited a violent mob” to attack the Capitol on Jan. 6 “to stop the peaceful transfer of power under our Constitution.” Such actions deem Trump “ineligible” to be president again, the lawyer said.

The plaintiff's lawyers assert that the issue is straightforward — disqualifying Trump from the presidency is similar to disqualifying a candidate who does not meet the Constitution's minimum age requirement of 35 for office. But Trump’s legal team contended that the lawsuit, which they characterized as "anti-democratic," is equivalent to "interfering with the election" in the upcoming 2024 presidential race, where the former president is “the candidate most likely to win the presidency,” according to Trump attorney Scott Gessler.

The former president’s legal team has raised a number of questions, including whether the provision was originally intended to apply to the presidency, given the absence of explicit mention even though “presidential and vice presidential electors” are mentioned, and whether it targets those who exercised free speech to support unpopular causes or only those who resort to violence, HuffPost reported. 

Related

“There is no magic legal wand to make Trump go away”: Experts split on whether Trump is disqualified

Sarah Wallace, the state district court judge presiding over the case, has established nine key issues to be addressed during the week-long trial. These include determining if Section 3 of the 14th Amendment is applicable to presidents, clarifying the definitions of "engaged" and "insurrection" within that section, determining whether Trump's actions align with these definitions, and examining whether the amendment is "self-executing," The New York Times reported.  

Since the Jan. 6 attack, these questions have been the subject of debate, particularly after Trump declared he was running for president, but there is limited historical context available to provide clear answers. The language that exists in the Constitution is also “black and white” and “has never been repealed and must be reckoned with,” professor of law Kim Wehle pointed out, explaining that the 14th Amendment was ratified soon after the Civil War.

The disqualification clause was originally applied to people who had fought for the Confederacy, and modern interpretations have had few instances of being tested, especially never in a case so significant. 

We need your help to stay independent

Subscribe today to support Salon's progressive journalism

But the Amendment “clearly states that anyone who has rebelled against the United States – including a President – cannot hold office or execute the nation’s laws,” Bennett Gershman, a law professor at Pace University, told Salon. 

“When he assumed the presidency, Trump took an oath, required by the Constitution, to ‘faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States,'” Gershman explained. “Can an ex-president who swore to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution and who thereafter betrayed that oath be allowed to hold that office again?”

While the case may seem less prominent than the four high-profile criminal trials awaiting Trump, it stands as the sole one with the potential to directly influence the 2024 election. Similar lawsuits are also pending in Michigan, New Hampshire and Minnesota, where oral arguments are scheduled to begin Thursday.

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

Regardless of the decision reached in the Colorado and Minnesota courts, it's almost certain that the case will be appealed to higher courts, with the Supreme Court ultimately expected to address the question of whether Trump can be disqualified from the presidency, Gershman explained. 

“There has been no Supreme Court ruling on the disqualification of an official, certainly not a former president, who has been found to have engaged in or supported an insurrection against the government that compels that official’s disqualification from holding office,” he added. “This case will come to the Supreme Court as an extraordinary, unprecedented, and momentous case with uncertain and alarming implications.”

Read more

about the Trump ballot challenges

“Ceasefire now!”: Anti-war protesters interrupt Antony Blinken’s Senate testimony

Protestors interrupted Secretary of State Antony Blinken's testimony during Tuesday's Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on the Biden administration's national security funding request, calling for a cease-fire in the Gaza Strip, CBS News reports. One woman could be heard yelling "People are not animals!" before being ushered away, while another shouted, "Cease-fire now!" Silent protestors also sat in the chamber with red-painted hands raised and signs demanding a cease-fire and an end to U.S. funding in Israel. 

The protestors were from an organization called CODEPINK, a news release sent to CBS News showed. According to the anti-war group, authorities arrested multiple members, including 29-year U.S. Army veteran and former diplomat Col. Ann Wright and peace activist David Barrows, for their actions. The audience's red hands, the organization added, were meant to symbolize blood. Throughout the interruptions, Blinken continued outlining President Joe Biden's $106 billion request for supplemental funding, which would go toward aid showing "enduring support" to Ukraine, Israel as well as other areas. Of the sum, $14 billion would go to Israel, while another $50 billion will go to the U.S. military and U.S. businesses, Blinken said. 

The United States' support of Israel has garnered backlash in recent weeks. Since Hamas carried out the bloody terror attacks on Oct. 7, Israel and the group have exchanged missile fire, and an Israeli ground invasion of Gaza is underway. The Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry has said there have been thousands of deaths — many of them of children and civilians — in the territory since Oct. 7, sparking greater outcry. Blinken addressed the concern in his remarks, noting that he and Biden have "stressed the need for Israel to operate by the law of war and in accordance with international humanitarian law, and to take all possible measures to avoid civilian casualties." 

“Friends” cast is processing the “unfathomable loss” of Matthew Perry

The "Friends" cast are commemorating and grieving their late friend and cast member Matthew Perry after his unexpected death on Saturday.

In a statement to CNN, the cast comprised of Jennifer Aniston, Courteney Cox, Lisa Kudrow, David Schwimmer and Matt LeBlanc said, “We are all so utterly devastated by the loss of Matthew. We were more than just cast mates. We are a family.

“There is so much to say, but right now we’re going to take a moment to grieve and process this unfathomable loss,” the statement continued. “In time we will say more, as and when we are able. For now, our thoughts and our love are with Matty’s family, his friends, and everyone who loved him around the world.”

The late actor was found dead in his Los Angeles home on Saturday afternoon after his assistant found him unresponsive in a hot tub. His cause of death has been “deferred,” according to the Los Angeles County Medical Examiner’s Office. Many news outlets had initially written he had died from an apparent drowning. The medical examiner's officer said that an autopsy has been conducted but "examiners are awaiting the results of toxicology reports in order to determine Perry’s cause of death.” 

Perry, 54, was widely known for his portrayal of fan-favorite sarcastic but loveable Chandler Bing in the hit sitcom "Friends" from 1994 to 2004. "Friends" was one of the most watched and popular shows in its late '90s to the early aughts. The cast did a successful reunion in 2021 on Max.

 

“Whistling past the graveyard”: Judge scolds Trump lawyers for pushing “simply incorrect” claim

In an exchange with defense attorneys over the state's expert witness, a New York judge said that leveling fines against Donald Trump — one of the key issues being decided at the former president's civil fraud trial — is "clearly an available remedy" despite the defense's argument to the contrary, ABC News reports. Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron ruled in a partial summary judgement last month that Trump had provided "fraudulent valuations" for his assets on his financial statements, setting aside the trial to determine what additional actions he might take and penalties, if any, the defendants should receive. 

Engoron's statement came as Trump's attorneys attempted to impede the testimony of the attorney general's expert witness. While denying their effort, the judge also rejected their argument that disgorgement, or fining Trump for illegal profits, isn't an option for the former president. "For reasons this court has explained ad nauseam, that view is simply incorrect," Engoron said. "Disgorgement is a clearly available remedy." But Trump lawyer Chris Kise disagreed. He countered that the state has failed to prove that banks would have acted differently if they had known Trump's statements were fraudulent.

Kise then cited Deutsche Bank executive Nicholas Haigh's testimony, during which Haigh deemed loaning money to the former president a "good credit decision." Engoron again rebuffed Kise's point. "Several witnesses have testified that they would have acted differently had they known the statements of financial condition were fraudulent," the judge replied, adding, "I think, to a certain extent, the defendants are whistling past the graveyard here."

Sohla El-Waylly wants to make you a culinary “expert in your own home”

Sohla El-Waylly  wants you to make mistakes. She wants you go ahead and mess up. "Anyone who's really good at anything was terrible once," she reassured during a recent "Salon Talks" conversation about her debut cookbook "Start Here: Instructions for Becoming a Better Cook." And that wisdom comes straight from experience.

The prolific food writer and personality has built a diverse following thanks to shows like "Ancient Recipes with Sohla" and HBO Max's "The Big Brunch," but you might not have pegged her as a future culinary star from her early days. "Everything was hard. I was terrible," she recalls. In one her first tryouts, "I was really scared, and I did such a bad job that they pulled me aside and they said, "I don't think you should be in food." What she learned from those trials by fire is that the flubs are all part of learning — and that's the same for all of us, professionals and home cooks alike. "It's just about practice, and the more mistakes you make, the more confident you'll become. 

You can watch my full "Salon Talks" interview with El-Waylly here, or read the transcript of our conversation below to find out what's changed in the industry from her days of being   "the only girl" in the kitchen, how her new baby has affected her cooking technique (I've gotten really good at making things with one hand) and why when in doubt, "An egg is always good."

Who did you want to write this book for? It almost sounds like it's a book for beginners, but then it's not at all.

I was thinking about little Sohla when I started cooking. I really wanted the book that I wish I had. There's a lot of amazing cookbooks with great recipes, but I really was always someone who wanted to know more. This book focuses on giving you deep dives on techniques, lots of science and history, and everything you want to know. I was a difficult child, and I would not do anything someone told me to do. I needed to know why. So this book goes into all the whys. It's for anyone who really wants to know more, get really in-depth and really fully understand techniques. By the time you're done with this book, I want you to be able to make your own recipes because you know exactly what searing is and braising is and poaching is, and when to use it and how to do it.

What are some of the obstacles that you find people really coming up against a lot in their cooking? 

"Anyone who's really good at anything was terrible once."

The great thing about being online is I can hear feedback directly from folks about recipes. A recipe can only give you so much information. I'll tell you that this will take around this much time, but I don't know your burner or your pan or your oven. I want to give you the knowledge to troubleshoot on your own. So, if something takes a long time, maybe you can think about it and be like, "Oh, it's because I used Dutch oven instead of a stainless steel pan, so the heat didn't conduct as quickly." Or if you bake a cake and the top burned, I want you to be able to figure out, like, "Maybe it's because it was on the top rack, and not in the middle." I want to give everyone that information so they can troubleshoot, because no recipe is going to be perfect, so you need to get in there and use your intuition. I want to hone your intuition, so you can be an expert in your own home.

You say in the book, “You're going to mess it up, and it's going to be okay.” That is one of the biggest obstacles for a lot of us, the fear of messing up. Plus, food is expensive. Groceries are expensive. I don't want to mess up dinner, and then I've got to redo dinner for my family or for my guests.

Just eat a bad dinner one day. It's okay.

What are some ways that are lower stakes, so that you can get comfortable with making your mistakes, and you can get comfortable with repetition?

I think it's important to remember that anyone who's really good at anything was terrible once. Remembering that makes it easier on you when you're starting anything new. You are totally going to mess up, and I think you learn the most from those mistakes. If you are really nervous, the recipes go in order of difficulty. Before you try and sear a scallop, you can learn about temperature by frying an egg, and that's much lower stakes. It's an egg. And honestly, an egg is always good. If you mess up an egg, is it really messing it up? It's just a different egg.

I want people to feel comfortable with these skills, with simple things like starting off by steaming rice before you make tahdig, and then you can work your way up. But also know that if you do mess up, for more difficult recipes, there's a “What the Hell Happened?” section. You can analyze it and figure out on your own what happened, and try and make it again, and do better because I really want people to make stuff more than once.

When I was growing up, I didn't have a lot of resources. We didn't have internet. We didn't have Food Network. We definitely didn't have social media, so I was limited to the recipes. I had two books. If a recipe didn't work out, I just had to make it over and over again. I think a lot of times you make a recipe, it doesn't work, and then you just move on to another recipe. It's like, no, just keep trying. You're going to get there, and you're going to learn a lot more when you make the same recipe multiple times.

Related

Try these 10 expert techniques for the best scrambled eggs of your life

When you were starting out, what were some of the things that were harder for you? 

Everything was hard. I was terrible. Not just when I was a kid cooking in my mom's kitchen, but one of my first trails — a trail is kind of like an audition for a restaurant job, and you work for a day for free, and they get just to assess your skills — one of my first trails was at one of the top restaurants in the world. I was really scared, and I did such a bad job that they pulled me aside and they said, "I don't think you should be in food." I was terrible, just a disaster. Walking around, knocking over bins of sugar. But it's just about practice, and the more mistakes you make, the more confident you'll become. 

"If you mess up an egg, is it really messing it up?"

One really big obstacle was just confidence because I think a lot of times, you're so scared to fail that you don't even try. Once I failed enough, I got over that, and then I just went for it. One of the things I struggled the most with was pie crust. I have a really detailed pie section, because in the cookbooks I was looking at, there were no photos, and the instructions were a little vague, and they would tell you to cut butter into flour, and if you've never made pie crust or seen someone make it, that makes no sense. What are you cutting it with? They would mention a pastry blender. I was like, "What is a pastry blender?" That was a really tough one, and it took me years of just doing it over and over again. It turns out the secret is just technique. I've tried it with vodka, and I've tried all the different tricks. Nothing matters. It's in your hands, and you got to do it.

You also talk about having a game plan. Talk about what that means and how we can start to develop that when we're thinking about the meals we make.

My mom was an amazing cook, and she worked full time and she still put a multi-course dinner on the table every day and threw elaborate dinner parties every weekend. It was all because she made a lot of game plans. I would do them with her. We'd sit down at the table together. I was little, so she was really doing them and I was just nearby, but I got to see her plan. She would plan out a menu, plan out how many days in advance she can do things, ingredient list, different stores she needs to go to, and even she would break down, "I'm getting this from this aisle, and that from that aisle." That level of organization really made her efficient in the kitchen, which she had to be, as a working mom.

Then when I went into restaurants I took that with me, because I was terrible, as I mentioned. I got better by breaking down my day into 15-minute increments. Having a game plan, it doesn't just make you organized and efficient, but I feel like it relieves stress and anxiety. I'm not worried about everything I have to do that day. I can just focus on what I have to do in these 15 minutes, and try and make it perfect, and then I would think about the next 15 minutes, and it's really made me able to accomplish a lot in the kitchen in a short amount of time.

There are times when you need to multitask, and there are times you can multitask, and then there are times where you really have to keep your eye on the ball. What's the difference? How do we know, and how do we develop those instincts in our moving around, in the dance of making a meal? 

"I did such a bad job that they pulled me aside and they said, 'I don't think you should be in food.'"

That's one of those things that you figure out with more experience, and that's why I try to give people advice about it in the book. There are times where you can totally multitask. If you look at a recipe and it's simmering for 15 minutes, you can get that going while you prep for the next step. You don't have to do all your prep first, and then work in order.

Then there are times where multitasking is really not smart, like if you're making caramel. It's one of those things where things happen fast. It's really dangerous. You've got to just sit there and stare at the pot. I try and let people know what things can be multitasked, what can't. But also, it's kind of up to you to read through a recipe and really analyze it and think about it, and you'll be able to figure it out. You'll be able to figure it out for any recipe, if you take your time and think about what is active cooking and what's not active cooking.

I love in the book, you say when you're making caramel, you clear the room, warn everybody.

Yeah. Those burns are scary.

When you talk about making mistakes, that's a lesson you might need to learn a few times. I certainly have the scars on my arms.

Yeah. The flesh will just burn right off of you.

I want to talk about equipment, because you go through a lot of the things that you need. Some of them are expected, some of them aren't. What are your ride or die? 

The first thing might seem obvious, but a large cutting board. A large, high-quality cutting board. I prefer wood. It actually has natural antibacterial properties, so it's going to be cleaner, and then also when you get a really thick, high-quality wooden cutting board, it might be an investment, but you can sand it down, and it'll literally last you a lifetime. You can pass that down to your children. I love a big cutting board, and make sure it's big enough that you are able to work on it and prep your stuff and put it in piles. You don't need little bowls. You're not shooting a video. You can just have things organized. You can do all of your work on a big cutting board. I think that's number one.

Then, I cook almost everything in a cast iron. I love my cast iron pan. It's another thing that, when you take care of it, will really last forever. It's very affordable. Anyone can get a cast iron pan, and seasoning it is actually easier than you think. I have a whole breakdown in there. When you season your pan really well, it's basically non-stick, but you can cook at a really high temp, and there isn't anything else that'll give you that. Non-sticks aren't meant to be cooked at really high temperatures. They don't give you a good sear, but a well-seasoned cast iron skillet can do everything.

I felt very validated that you come out as anti-pressure cooker in this book. Please tell me why. 

First of all, I don't think it does things faster. I know a lot of people like to cook rice or grains in there, but the pressure cooker, sure, it cooks something in 15 minutes, but it takes a certain amount of time for it to come up to pressure and then for it to come down from pressure, so it actually takes a pretty long time. For certain things, it'll take just as long.

And then I don't think it cooks anything particularly well. Yeah, you can cook beans in there, but half of them will explode. You can braise meat in there, but oftentimes the broth tastes better than the meat, and the meat comes out dry. You can't go in there and check and make adjustments. It's like you lock it in there, and then you've just got to hope and pray that everything's perfect. I want to peek, and I want to make sure things are good, and I want to make adjustments as I go. So I don't like them, unless it's broth.

How do we get better at tasting our food when we’re making it? 

The best way to get better at tasting is by eating, which is super fun. Then when it comes to being able to riff with recipes, I am hoping I can get people to think about what a recipe's doing, and think about ingredients in categories. There's this one turmeric potato dish. It's cooking the potatoes really gently, and low and slow and they get starchy. You could make that with any root vegetable. The potatoes are cooking a really long time. What else benefits from that kind of low, slow? Then you can figure out how to swap it in, so it's more like stepping back and trying to analyze what the recipe is doing, so you can riff.

This book is so full of so many beautiful and exciting recipes, was there one that was particularly challenging? 

"The best way to get better at tasting is by eating."

I had a really hard time with the cake recipe because I wanted to make a really stable cake batter so you can play around with it. It needed to be very well-emulsified so that it didn't get tough, so you could add mix-ins, change extracts. I wanted to give people a really solid, foundational cake recipe that they can play around with and get creative with the flavors. 

One of my first things I ever made was box mix cake, and I loved it, and it was such a fun way to get into baking, and I wanted to give people that same feeling of fun, but you're leveling it up. You're making this cake, and it's going to be even more delicious.

One of my favorite things about the book is you really give equal time to baking and cooking. We live in such a binary world, and you talk about people who   brag,   "I've never baked, I don't bake." Why is it important for you to make a book like this and what can we learn from being interdisciplinary in the way that we approach our food?

When I was in kitchens, I was often the only girl, so a lot of times, they would just have me do pastry because they thought pastry was for girls and savory was for boys. It's really stupid, because we should all do everything. They require totally different skills. Cooking is more improv. You taste as you go. You can fix something at any point, really. Every ingredient's different, so you can't have strict measurements. While with pastry, it's a lot more about precision, technique, timing. Once you put something together, there's no going back. When you make a cake, you can't fix the batter when it's in the oven. You make it and you go, and you  follow directions.

I feel like when you mix those two things together, that's when you can become a really exceptional cook. I think the best professionals can do both because then you've got that discipline and precision from pastry, with that improv of savory. When you put it together, you can make the best food, and also, why don't you want to be able to do it all?

Related

"Make every mistake once": Natasha Pickowicz's secret to being a great baker

When you talk about being the only girl in the room,   a lot of us discovered you first, Sohla, in the pandemic, on video. Then we discovered you as a person who was speaking out about equity, and speaking out about some of the things that were unfair. You've also talked about your experience in the restaurant world. Now you've been around a couple of years. Do you feel the food industry has changed? Do you feel that things are different now, in terms of opportunities, visibility and the kinds of foods that people want to eat and be exposed to? 

"Everyone's just better behaved. I was in there at a time where people were very badly behaved. It is harder for things like that to fly with more women in the room."

Yeah, definitely. When I look at kitchens now, it's very divided. There's a lot of women in kitchens. I think it's making the restaurants better. First of all, everyone's just better behaved. I was in there at a time where people were very badly behaved. It is harder for things like that to fly with more women in the room, so it's really great to see that. I think more women are speaking up for themselves. For me, it felt like there was no choice. You had to put up with certain things, because, especially when you are the only girl, you start to think, "Am I the problem?" It's really easy to get in your head. So I do think it's great. You're seeing a lot more women and you're seeing a lot more diversity.

When you just go look at menus, people are experimenting with a lot more flavors. I feel like when I started, only French food was fine dining. They're the only ones that got a lot of respect. Eventually, you saw more Japanese. But now there's all culinary influences that are getting that kind of Michelin star respect, which is pretty awesome. You're seeing the same thing with recipe developers. A lot more diversity, a lot more different kinds of foods. Something like a curry isn't looked at as this foreign thing. It's like, yeah, this can be a weeknight meal for everybody. It's changed a lot.

You pull from all over the world in this book. It seems very intentional to me, that you wanted to do a book that pulls from the best flavors and the best cuisines from around the world.

And also what's great is there are no special ingredients anywhere. You can get ingredients to make everything in this book from your local grocery store, which was really intentional because I want to show that you can have a very diverse culinary experience with just a handful of stuff that everyone has access to.

You recently became a mom. That changes everything overnight. Now you're in the kitchen in a different way. You're approaching meal preparation in a different way. Your schedule is different. How are you already seeing your approach to food, the timing, the tasting, all of that, as a mom?

I've gotten really good at making things with one hand. Minimal knife work, because you can't chop with one hand. There are certain pantry staples that I'm really embracing. Our freezer always has bone broth. If you have a solid stock, you can put together a quick meal. Just steam some rice with bone broth and put a bunch of greens on top, and we're done. Dinner's getting faster, more efficient, because you've got to sneak it in whenever you can.

Watch more

"Salon Talks" with chefs

“It’s done, he’s going to be convicted”: Christie says Mark Meadows poses “deadly” threat to Trump

"It's over" for Donald Trump, who knows "he's going to be convicted" in his criminal cases, fellow 2024 Republican presidential candidate Chris Christie declared Tuesday on MSNBC, blaming the former president's recent flubs on the campaign trail — struggling to remember Joe Biden's name and forgetting which city he's stopping in — on the stress of his intensifying legal battles. The former New Jersey Governor and ex-U.S. attorney appeared on the Tuesday edition of MSNBC's "Morning Joe" to talk Trump's legal woes, telling the hosts that former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows likely adds to the former president's worries after securing an immunity deal with federal prosecutors. 

"I think it's the stress of what he knows is coming in his criminal problems, and I think this week, because a lot of that was from the last week. That's all post-Mark Meadows," Christie said. "Everyone watching needs to understand, from somebody who did this work for seven years, you don't give Mark Meadows immunity unless the evidence he has is unimpeachable." He then described what Trump will likely face when Meadows takes the stand in the federal election subversion case's March 2024 trial. "He's going to be sitting in a courtroom in Washington, D.C., with Mark Meadows 20 feet away from him, saying, 'He committed crimes in front of me, on my watch,'" Christie predicted. "Look, this is a guy who was velcroed to Trump's hip for the entire 2020 campaign and all the post-campaign nonsense, so this is deadly. It's done, he's going to be convicted – it's over," Christie added later, noting that he doesn't believe Trump will be able to delay the trial based on his impression of the presiding district court judge, who reinstated a gag order against Trump on Sunday, and the lack of co-defendants in the case. 

How I got my Halloween groove back after candy thieves robbed me of that joy

I used to love Halloween all the way up until some candy snatching a**holes robbed me of that joy; however, my daughter maybe forcing me to reconsider. 

For some reason, my 3-year-old daughter loves Halloween more than bodybuilders love thongs and grease. She starts talking about Halloween on Jan. 1 and doesn't stop until Jan.1 rolls around again, and then she starts over. 

Her love for Halloween has nothing to do with candy. The small girl has the patience and calf muscles needed to walk miles, in combination with the strength to carry buckets of chocolate, gummies and all the other crap they pass out on Halloween – but doesn't eat it. I know what you are thinking; a child that doesn't eat all the candy up means that I'm incredibly blessed and always receive glowing reports from her kiddy dentist. Yes, this is all true, and I'm thankful for that reality. My wife and I usually leave most of her candy at the door, where other people's children and stressed out grown-ups who visit us can indulge as much as they like.

So if she's not in it for the candy, why does my daughter love the dark holiday? Simple, she’s in to the monsters, scary creatures and scaring people – which is even scarier.  

Related

A totally objective Halloween candy ranking

For giggles, she enjoys hiding behind pillows, leaping out of closets and springing up from under the bed, with her tiny face twisted in the most uncomfortable way possible, screaming, "Arrrrrrrrhhhhhhhhhh!" 

Sometimes, I slip up and laugh because she's way too cute to be scary, which is never good enough for her. So, she takes a deep breath, twists her face even more and lets out a bigger, "Arrrrrrrrhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!"

In response to her second or third attempt, I scream at the top of my lungs and shoot off in search of a safe hiding space. 

"Oh no, you are the scariest baby in the world!" I say, in an effort to grease her ego. 

This makes my daughter laugh hysterically and leaves her feeling like she completed the mission. I used to be excited about Halloween, just like her. 

I loved Halloween as a kid, mainly for the candy; terrorizing people was a bonus. There was no Amazon back when I was a kid, so you couldn't get a costume or anything shipped to your house in one to three days. We had to rely on big chain stores like Kmart and Walmart to supply us with the necessary costumes and accessories. Children like myself from east Baltimore never really prioritized Halloween, as it was something that we only thought about around the last week of October. So, when we finally decided what we wanted to be and rolled up to Kmart searching for the Dracula outfit, everything would be picked through, smashed up and gone. This allowed us kids to be extra experimental. 

White people are historically known to give out better candy on Halloween – this is true, has been proven, please go debate someone else. As a matter of fact, I would argue that Halloween is like Juneteenth for white people.

Now, keep in mind I started the journey of dressing up and trick-or-treating on my own in the late '80s and early '90s, which happened to be at the height of the crack era­­ ­­­– which means if you spilled over into my neighborhood, most of the kids were dressed as three things: a crack addict, a homeless person which we called a hobo or a crack addict hobo. Yes I understand that these terms are not acceptable in today's society, but I'm talking about 1989. 

The sickest part of this story, or maybe the only instance in American history where that the pendulum of racist actions swung in favor of our white counterparts, is candy options. White people are historically known to give out better candy on Halloween. This is true, has been proven – please go debate someone else. As a matter of fact, I would argue that Halloween is like Juneteenth for white people. 

"We must never trick-or-treat on our block under any circumstances," my cousin Kevin would tell me with wide eyes, "All of the good candy resides with the white people."  

We would walk over a mile into the white section of east Baltimore near Patterson Park, and Kevin was right. Those white families decorated every inch of their home, create a haunted houses for us kids to run in and out of and more importantly  gave away whole Reese's cups, large Kit Kat bars, jumbo Snickers, bags of peanut M&M's and the big Three Musketeers. They never heard of terms like bite-sized or fun-sized; these people were swimming in candy, and we would fill trash bags. The candy I collected on Halloween used to last from the night of the 31st to way past my birthday in February; it was terrific. Terrific until those awful bag snatchers started popping out. 

What bag snatchers do is all in the name; they snatch bags. Usually, older kids sit back in the shadows, waiting for you to finish your two to three hours of knocking on doors and collecting just so they can pop out and take it from you. And there's nothing you can do about it because they are normally bigger and faster, and even if you caught them, they were older, so they would kick your a**. 

I was the victim of this, and it was extra embarrassing because a group of girls rolled up on me, like, “OK boy, you so cute!” 

I should have identified the red flag instantly because girls didn't walk up to me, telling me how cute was; however, my sneakers were new, and I had just gotten a haircut so go ahead and insert the male ego. I rolled up to the young woman looking to grab some phone numbers. As one touched my hair, another girl ripped the bottom of my trash bag, spilling all of my candy into the street. Her friend swooped it all up from the ground and took off in every direction, leaving me candy-less. That was my last time trick-or-treating. From then on, I decided to be a bag snatcher, too. 

The uniform for snatching a bag is minimal; you only need a black hoodie and a ski mask. If you were tough, you would go out to grab without cover, but I thought showing your face was silly. That is as much as I know about the rules because I only tried this once, and it was a complete disaster. 

My friends and I shot jumpers on the basketball court, waiting until it was very dark outside, giving the neighborhood kids enough time to fill their sacks. Around 9:00 p.m., we left the court and relocated to an alley next to a busy block. I saw about five kids my age, maybe a year younger or older, who all had full candy bags. So, I darted right into the center of them and snatched. Who knew I would try to take a bag from the only kid with the foresight to own a canvas tote in the early '90s and who happened to have the strongest hands in the city. I yanked the bag and felt my whole body swing back in the direction of the kid, who was also double my size, which I overlooked from the distance when I initially spotted him. His ghostly costume hid about 65 pounds.

My baby girl has it figured out. The holiday is about fun.

"I'll kill you over this bag, little f**ker!" He screamed, strengthening his grip. I remained silent as we both fell to the ground, the giant ghost still clutching his bag. His more petite friend tried to help, so I snatched his plastic bag – success! This petite kid let out the scream of all screams; I mean, she sounded like Whitney Houston hitting a high note. 

Yes, it wasn't a boy; it was a little girl, but I couldn't tell because she was dressed like a hobo. In a panic, I tossed her bag back towards their group and disappeared in the shadows. Snatching bags was not for me; I was never a thief, and I'm thankful for two things. The first is that stealing always felt terrible to me, and the second is that my daughter wouldn't care if a bag was snatched from her because she doesn't even eat the candy. 

My baby girl has it figured out. The holiday is about fun. She's only been on this earth for a few years and has already dressed up as a pumpkin twice, a ballerina pumpkin, a mermaid and Diana Ross – but as the diva's version of Dorothy from The Whiz. As soon as we finish snapping on her little costumes, she runs to the mirror, laughs and giggles, and is excited to go mix in with the other kids who are dressed up as well. 

She enjoys Halloween so much that my inner child is sporting a toothy smile and making me love the day as much as I used to. Because of her, and then I'm too big and old to have my bag snatched, I'm happy to give the day another chance. 

For that, I remain thankful. Happy Halloween. 

Read more

about this topic

New study brings us closer to solar space farms that beam renewable energy back to Earth

It sounds like a long shot to some: The idea of solar power plants orbiting the Earth and beaming renewable energy back to us. But new research from the U.K., along with the development of ultra-lightweight solar cells made of cadmium telluride, is generating new hope that solar panel farms in space could be closer to becoming a reality than ever before. 

Between the increasing power needs of spacecraft payloads and the Earth's own accelerated need for zero-carbon electricity, calls have grown louder for new ways to capture and use solar power both in space and on Earth. Two major obstacles have stood in the way of scientists' efforts to get that near-boundless solar energy from a fleet of light-collecting panels in orbit down to the power lines on the planet: a too-high cost of creating solar panel farms in the first place, and the cost of maintaining them against punishing levels of radioactivity. 

New findings from the Universities of Surrey and Swansea, however, show that the production of a new, lightweight solar panel is possible — and that it could withstand solar radiation for more than six years, generating power even after 30,000 orbits of the planet. Craig Underwood, emeritus professor of spacecraft engineering at the University of Surrey Space Centre, is the study's lead author. 

Related

A new EPA proposal is reigniting a debate about what counts as ‘renewable’

“We are very pleased that a mission designed to last one year is still working after six. These detailed data show the panels have resisted radiation and their thin-film structure has not deteriorated in the harsh thermal and vacuum conditions of space," Underwood said in a release from the university. 

The new research appeared in the journal Acta Astronautica on Oct. 24. Unlike previous panels, the new panels have photovoltaic cells made of cadmium telluride. Researchers say the new cells mean that the panels are much more lightweight, a quality that can quickly determine whether or not the new solar panels are worth the at-scale production. 

"This ultra-low mass solar cell technology could lead to large, low-cost solar power stations deployed in space, bringing clean energy back to Earth."

Planetary physicist Phil Metzger, of the University of Central Florida, has been studying the frontier of spaceflight tech for decades — including a 30-year stint at NASA where he co-founded the Swamp Works research lab. Metzger's focus is now on developing "economic planetary science." 

"It is not just the low mass of this technology that is important, but also the fact that it is flexible enough to be launched on rollers then deployed to a very large size using a simple mechanical process. This will reduce the mass of the deployment system and make it more reliable, greatly reducing the cost," Metzger, who was not involved in the research, told Salon. 

Not only are the panels larger, more lightweight and cheaper to produce — Underwood said they also provide more power output per cell than current cell tech. 

"This ultra-low mass solar cell technology could lead to large, low-cost solar power stations deployed in space, bringing clean energy back to Earth – and now we have the first evidence that the technology works reliably in orbit," he said.  

Related

Green jobs are booming, but too few employees have sustainability skills to fill them

The new tech — and the study results — aren't without issue, though. Although the new solar cells outperformed current tech, they still lost their efficiency over time. 

The University of Swansea's Dr. Dan Lamb is still encouraged by the results, however. He sees in-roads into future iterations of the tech, and a path toward viability opening up. 

"The successful flight test of this novel thin film solar cell payload has leveraged funding opportunities to further develop this technology. Large area solar arrays for space applications are a rapidly expanding market and demonstrations such as this help to build on the U.K.’s world class reputations for space technology," Lamb said.

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

And those funding opportunities could grow as the tech's cross-market usefulness grows from the rarified tech needs of commercial spaceflight payloads to the broader needs of countries of all sizes. 

"I think it is inevitable that large solar farms in space will one day be economically viable as the technology continues to improve."

"There are advocates who point out that niche markets already exist for space solar power, like providing energy to smaller island nations or to large-scale operations like military campaigns that need on-demand power," said Metzger. "After the niche markets are served, the experience curve and economies of scale will begin reducing the cost of space solar power so it becomes viable in even more markets. Technology advancements like this one are crucial to getting the virtuous cycle started."

We need your help to stay independent

Subscribe today to support Salon's progressive journalism

Metzger sees advances like those from Surrey and Swansea as part of a larger, unstoppable march toward a future where renewable power from space is an economically normalized part of our collective energy tech. 

"I think it is inevitable that large solar farms in space will one day be economically viable as the technology continues to improve," he said. "Solar power from space can be collected at the ground using a thin wire mesh that can be deployed over cropland or forests or the ocean without blocking the sunlight, so it doesn’t harm ecosystems that depend on the land. This dual-land use will become increasingly important as we move toward more renewable energy." 

Read more

about renewable energy development

Matthew Perry’s death reminds us what we need to be doing right now

My arm was stretching into one of my jacket's sleeves when the first text about Matthew Perry’s death gently buzzed my phone. “Damn, did you see this?” my best friend had typed, introducing a link to one of the first stories notifying the world that a “Friend” had died. 

The 54-year-old actor was discovered in his Los Angeles home on Saturday, Oct. 28, apparently having died in his hot tub. He was pronounced dead on the scene by Los Angeles Fire Department officials. 

His performance represents a mask many of us wear to fool the world into thinking we’re OK.

That headline caught me on my way out the door from a post-funeral gathering for a family elder – precious time spent with a brother, sister and cousins I don't visit enough. Given those circumstances, maybe you’ll understand my delayed ability to appreciate what Perry brought to the world beyond his work in “Friends,” the part to which most of our thoughts race first. That's natural, although what Perry represents on that show and everything he did afterward provides a more lasting lesson.

A year ago, in conjunction with the release of his bestselling memoir “Friends, Lovers, and the Big Terrible Thing,” Perry told People magazine,  “If I did die, it would shock people, but it wouldn’t surprise anybody. And that’s a very scary thing to be living with.”

This is one of many observations people have called “prescient” in the days since the news of his death first broke. 

Related

Celebrities mourn the loss of "Friends" star Matthew Perry

In his 2022 book, Perry says he spent more than $7 million and had been to rehab at least 15 times. In various interviews, he stressed that he wanted his life story to serve as both an example of sobriety and a journey of never giving up.

We knew none of this when “Friends” introduced him as Chandler Bing. Instead the decade Perry spent on the show cemented how closely his character came to represent people we knew well or thought we knew. 

Some of this was a matter of emulation, since Chandler is the funniest of the New York sextet. Like the show's theme song promises, Chandler, Ross, Rachel, Monica, Joey and Phoebe demonstrate all the ways they are there for each other in every episode. Chandler, though, stands out as the one who strolls into every situation with a flawlessly quotable sardonic reaction locked and loaded. (If you ever prefaced your reaction to some scenario with a smarmy, “Can [you/it/this] be any more . . .” then you have, at some point, fallen under Perry’s influence.)

Other critics have sorted through Perry’s talent and career highlights more extensively and meticulously than I could without simply relitigating what he brought to one of the most consistently popular TV shows ever. His career successes stretched beyond NBC's top Must-See TV comedy, including starring roles in theatrical rom-coms, acclaimed work in Aaron Sorkin’s “Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip” and more praise for the criminally underappreciated 2012 comedy “Go On,” where he nails his performance as a grieving sportscaster who reluctantly joins group therapy.

But as Perry revealed more about his lifelong battle to maintain his sobriety over the years one might have reconsidered the ways his performance represents a mask many of us wear to fool the world into thinking we’re OK.

Although Perry was consistently candid about his addiction struggles, we never saw them in Chandler. Yet the intergenerational appeal of “Friends” translates to millions of people ruminating on Perry’s loss through our relationship with that show. And that lends to some contemplation about the ways his character reflects a truth about loved ones whose boisterous natures guard vulnerabilities and bruises they’d rather hide. 

The not-so-secret charm Chandler disguises in sarcasm is his kindness, generosity and the level of forbearance he affords his friends that he doesn’t always extend to himself. (There are also aspects of Chandler that, like the rest of the show, did not age well.) We all know people like that, and we probably don’t appreciate them enough. Perry says as much in that People profile, where he gives himself credit for “being sober today, for caring about others, for never giving up” and “helping people as much as I do.”

Loneliness, he adds, taught him “to treasure the people that really love you. And there are some.” 

We need your help to stay independent

Subscribe today to support Salon's progressive journalism

Hearing about Perry’s death did not make the previous hours and days my family spent weathering our grief any heavier. Instead, it prompted me to recall the people I’ve told myself over the years that I’ll get around to checking in on eventually, some of whom are alive and others who aren’t.

We — I — still put off reaching out to those who pass through our thoughts, assuming there's always more time to pick up the phone.

I thought about the college friend who improvised dizzying jazz piano compositions, spun heady, wild prose and tumbled into addiction sometime after we graduated.  At some point in my 20s, he reached out after he’d gotten sober to let me know he’d moved to my city and gotten a job in a popular local bookstore, asking if I'd like to hang out. I told myself we’d get around to seeing each other eventually. A relapse and overdose ensured that would never happen. 

I thought about my childhood best friends whose lives diverged from mine because we all became busy – me with my career, they with their children and their related social obligations and networks. These aren’t absences, not deaths, but they nevertheless carry the risk of leaving questions unanswered, love unexpressed and truths unsaid. 

I thought about the ever-present possibility that someone, anyone I love, will simply go to sleep one day and not wake up. That can happen to any of us, regardless of health or age. It seems to happen more often in the era of COVID. Yet we — I — still put off reaching out to those who pass through our thoughts, assuming there's always more time to pick up the phone.

Perry was by all accounts in a good place, maintaining his efforts to help others to get sober and remain sober, and keeping in shape by playing pickleball. The officials who found his body said there was no evidence of drug use or foul play, although a toxicology report is pending.

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

In an interview conducted last November in Toronto, Perry told Canadian musician and broadcaster Tom Power that he didn’t want “Friends” to be the first thing people remember him for when he died.

"I'd like to be remembered as somebody who lived well, loved well, was a seeker," he said. "And his paramount thing is that he wants to help people. That's what I want."

Don’t take that the wrong way; seeking comfort in a “Friends” rewatch is as acceptable now as it has been in past bouts of depression and mourning, valleys we've traveled regularly since the pandemic exploded in 2020 and that many are slogging through now.

This time, though, perhaps we can make a point to seek comfort in our people: the ones we check in with regularly; the ones that need more attention but don’t necessarily show it or say so; the ones we may assume are done with us but whose frayed bonds aren’t beyond restoration. That may be a better way to honor a lost "Friend" than anything we may see on TV.

Read more

about this topic

 

Billionaire GOP donor warns against Trump: “Divisive human being who belongs in jail”

Hedge fund billionaire Leon Cooperman, a prominent Republican donor who clashed with Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., over her proposed wealth tax, warned that it "would be terrible for the country if Donald Trump were reelected."

Cooperman, who has historically donated to GOP campaigns, previously said he "very reluctantly" voted for President Joe Biden in 2020. But he told CNN that he is not happy about the prospect of a Trump-Biden, rematch, calling them both "bad choices." Cooperman predicted, for some reason, that neither Biden nor Trump would be their party's nominee but added that he would not vote if it came down to those two. “I’m looking for centrists, not radical left or right,” said Cooperman, who donated to former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie's campaign earlier this year.

Trump spokesperson Steven Cheung, in response to Cooperman's remarks, claimed that Trump “will be the nominee and will beat Biden because he’s the only person who can supercharge the economy, secure our border, safeguard communities and put an end to unnecessary wars. Americans want to return to a prosperous nation and there’s only one person who can do that – President Trump."

Mike Johnson’s wife removes website comparing LGBTQ+ relations to bestiality and incest: report

The wife of newly elected House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., recently deactivated the website for her company after HuffPost found that the business' bylaws likened homosexuality to bestiality and incest. 

Kelly Johnson is the owner and chief executive of Onward Christian Counseling Services, a pastoral counseling service rooted in faith, per a Friday report from HuffPost. Johnson's website, which was yanked from public access on Saturday, featured a link to an eight-page operating agreement from 2017 that detailed how the company was structured around the belief that any sort of sexual relations other than those between a man and a woman were considered "sinful and offensive to God."

“We believe and the Bible teaches that any form of sexual immorality, such as adultery, fornication, homosexuality, bisexual conduct, bestiality, incest, pornography or any attempt to change one’s sex, or disagreement with one’s biological sex, is sinful and offensive to God,” reads a section of the document.

Related

"Sexual anarchy": New House Speaker Mike Johnson showcases the incel-ization of the modern GOP

The Johnsons have long upheld their beliefs in far-right religious ideals, starting with their 1999 covenant marriage, a legally distinct unification in three states — Arizona, Arkansas, and Louisiana — in which spouses obtain pre-marital counseling and accept more stringent grounds for seeking divorce in the future. In a 2001 sit-down with Dianne Sawyer for Good Morning America, Kelly shared, “From a woman’s perspective, I’ve been in some bad relationships before, and I just knew that when I met the man that I was supposed to marry, I wanted to know it was for a lifetime. … It gives me such peace and security.”

In 2005, during an interview with ABC, Mike stated that his own parents' divorce led to his want of a covenant marriage. 

"My wife and I both come from traditional Christian households," Johnson said. "My own parents are divorced. As anyone who goes through that knows, that was a traumatic thing for our whole family. I'm a big proponent of marriage and fidelity and all the things that go with it, and I've seen firsthand the devastation [divorce] can cause."

Kelly affirmed her husband's statements, adding, "I think that it would be a pretty big red flag if you asked your mate or your fiancé, 'Let's do a covenant marriage,' and they said they don't really want to do that."

We need your help to stay independent

Subscribe today to support Salon's progressive journalism

More recently, after Johnson secured the win for the speakership, he shared why his wife was in attendance, saying, "She’s spent the last couple of weeks on her knees in prayer to the Lord. And, um, she’s a little worn out.”

What remains to be determined is the extent to which the new House speaker was involved in drawing up the bylaws for his wife's company. HuffPost reported that the language Kelly adopted in the bylaws for Onward Christian Counseling Services is nearly identical to that contained in the bylaws for a document created for a nonprofit faith group founded by her husband. The website for Freedom Guard, which is founded upon “contending for the Christian faith through strategic litigation” is also currently disabled, as HuffPost notes.

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

During an interview with Fox News host Sean Hannity last week, Johnson claimed that he "didn't even remember" criticism over his arguments against gay marriage and sex. 

“I was a litigator that was called upon to defend the state marriage amendments," the House speaker said. "If you remember back in the early 2000s, I think there [were] over 35 states, somewhere in that number, that the people went to the ballot in their respective states and they amended their state constitutions to say marriage is one man and one woman. Well, I was a religious liberty defense and was called to defend those cases in the courts.”

Johnson also asserted that he “genuinely” loves all people regardless of their “lifestyle choices” because he is a “Bible-believing Christian," a statement in seemingly deep contrast to Kelly's company bylaws. 

“Someone asked me today in the media, they said, ‘it’s curious, people are curious. “What does Mike Johnson think about any issue under the sun?”’ I said, ‘Well, go pick up a Bible off your shelf and read it – that’s my worldview. That’s what I believe and so I make no apologies for it.’”

Read more

about Mike Johnson

George Conway: Trump is “gonna have to liquidate everything – including places like Mar-a-Lago”

If former President Donald Trump were to lose his ability to do business in New York after Judge Arthur Engoron issued a summary judgment finding Trump liable of fraud in Attorney General Letitia James' $250 million fraud lawsuit, he would likely have to sell off his most prized assets, conservative attorney George Conway predicted. During a MSNBC appearance, Conway argued that Trump is increasingly "making mistakes" and "babbling incoherently even more than usual" because his mogul status is "coming crashing down."

Engoron's ruling, which is currently on pause while Trump appeals, "puts him out of business," Conway told MSNBC host Jen Psaki. "Which means he’s gonna have to liquidate everything – including places like Mar-a-Lago, which are owned by New York LLCs. But then the question of how much of the proceeds of those sales, when he has to be put out of business go to the state of New York. And that’s what this is about." Psaki asked whether Trump could pay a potential judgment because he's "rich" but Conway explained that Trump will be forced to sell off his assets if the ruling is upheld. “Their right to do business in New York is canceled, as is the certificates of incorporation of the various LLCs and companies that he himself owns that are incorporated in New York,” he said. “So, he can’t do business… This is a death blow to Trump's businesses."

For colder weather, try Samin Nosrat’s 5 most comforting dishes

Samin Nosrat has had a meteoric rise in years, aided by the immense success of her cookbook and Netflix show of the same name, "Salt Fat Acid Heat." Her intelligence and kindness, unassumingly relatable nature and genial humor have endeared her to leagues of fans — but it's primarily her exceptionally delicious (and clearly rigorously tested) recipes that have made her so widely respected. 

Related

From Samin Nosrat to Julia Child, here are what top chefs' roast chicken recipes have in common

As the weather continues to cool and we enter holiday season, Nosrat's recipes are excellent options for a warming, filling lunch on a dreary Saturday afternoon or an especially cozy meal on a blustery, rainy Tuesday night.

Peruse these options, do some food shopping and let Samin take you to a wonderfully comfy place with these A+ recipes. 

We need your help to stay independent

Subscribe today to support Salon's progressive journalism
01
Buttermilk Marinated Roast Chicken
Unquestionably Nosrat's most generally agreed upon "best recipe," this is a surefire winner. The buttermilk lends a subtle tartness and acidic bite to the chicken, which will be almost alarmingly moist — trust me. I wasn't totally sure how this would turn out, seeing as it seems like a ton of buttermilk and a touch of salt and . . . not much else, but Samin knows what she's doing. This chicken will blow away anyone you serve it to, rest assured. Simplicity can be perfection and this is recipe is a perfect example of that.
02
Straciatella alla Romana (Italian egg drop soup)
Straciatella can invoke many a different image for most Italians and Italian-Americans based on the context, but here, Nosrat presents a stellar, warming variation of the classic Italian soup. It is warming and filling, simple yet complex and an absolutely stellar option for a rainy day. 
 
With nothing more than onions, eggs, nutmeg, stock, cheese, plus a bit of oil and salt, this satisfying soup is so much more than the sum of its parts. Add some poached chicken or perhaps even a noodle, starch or grain to gussy this up a bit and make it more of a meal than a starter. 
03
Farro e Pepe
This recipe — a take on the splendid and ubiquitous Roman dish cacio e pepe — features farro instead of pasta and is a bit more streamlined than the traditional recipe, which can often accidentally result in a messy, clumpy amalgamation of water and grated cheese instead of a silky, viscous sauce. Nosrat's technique allows for an easier approach and a more toothsome bite, still featuring the familiar flavors of cacio e pepe that is grounded by the chew of the farro.
 
Toss in whatever cheese you have on hand — they'll all be delicious.

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

04
Tahdig
This Persian classic might be the single best way to make rice. With only five ingredients, you'll be astonished at the end result of perfectly crisped, exceptionally cooked rice.
 
The instructions are rather long, but be sure to read every word: Once you get the technique down, you'll be thrilled and be able to whip up this gem any day of the week. It's also a showstopper and helps to reframe rice from mere side dish to something really special.
05
Turkey alla Porchetta
One of my all-time personal favorite dishes, porchetta is the perfect centerpiece for a holiday meal or a special dinner of any celebration. However, porchetta — as it name implies — often uses pork. Here, Nosrat brilliantly swaps it out for turkey, which helps to make this dish a bit friendlier to tastes and diets. The recipe does still include prosciutto, but feel free to leave that out if you're not eating pork — that's precisely what I do. 
 
The turkey is deeply flavored with a mix of fennel, garlic, rosemary and sage and rolled up for a presentation (and flavor) that'll knock everybody's socks off.

Read more

about this topic

Joe Biden’s lethal trap: His embrace of Israel has become support for war crimes

For the past three weeks, President Biden has played a key role in backing Israel’s worsening war crimes while touting himself as a compassionate advocate of restraint. That pretense looks like lethal nonsense to most of the world as Israel persists with mass killing of civilians in Gaza.

The same standards that led to fully justified condemnation of Hamas’ murders of more than a thousand Israeli civilians on Oct. 7 should apply to the Israeli military's ongoing assault on Gaza, which has already taken the lives of several times as many Palestinian civilians. And it's clear that Israel is just getting started.

“We need an immediate ceasefire,” Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., wrote in an email Saturday evening, “but the White House and Congress continue to unconditionally support the Israeli government’s genocidal actions.”

Related

Hamas, Israel and "terrorism": If we have to use the label, at least let's use it honestly

That unconditional support makes Biden and the vast majority of Congress directly complicit in mass murder and, at least arguably, also in genocide, which is defined as “the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group.” That definition would seem to fit the words and deeds of Israel’s leaders to this point.

“Israel has dropped approximately 12,000 tons of explosives on Gaza so far and has reportedly killed multiple senior Hamas commanders, but the majority of the casualties have been women and children,” Time magazine reported at the end of last week. Israel’s military has killed civilians in homes, stores, markets, mosques, refugee camps and health care facilities. We can expect information about such realities to become even sparser now that communications between Gaza and the outside world are only intermittently available, at best.

For reporters, being on the ground in Gaza is very dangerous; Israel’s assault has already killed at least 27 journalists. From the Israeli government's point of view, the fewer journalists are reporting directly from Gaza, the better. If the international media must rely on official handouts, news conferences and interviews, Israel can control more of the narrative.

We need your help to stay independent

Subscribe today to support Salon's progressive journalism

Pro-Israel frames of reference and word choices are routine in U.S. mainstream media. Yet some exceptional reporting has shed light on the merciless cruelty of Israel’s actions in Gaza, a congested enclave of 2.2 million people with roughly the same land area as the city of Philadelphia.

After Biden spoke with Benjamin Netanyahu last week, the White House issued a statement without the slightest expression of concern about the carnage and destruction that Israeli bombing was inflicting on civilians in Gaza.

On Oct. 28, "PBS News Weekend" provided a human reality check as Israel began a ground assault while stepping up its bombing of Gaza. “As Israeli ground operations intensified there, suddenly the phone and internet signal went out,” correspondent Leila Molana-Allen reported. “So people in Gaza, voiceless through the night as they were under these intense bombardments … were unable to call ambulances, and we’ve heard this morning that ambulance drivers were standing at high points throughout, trying to see where the explosions were, so they could just drive directly there. People unable to communicate with their families to see if they’re all right. People this morning saying, ‘We’ve been digging children out of the rubble with our bare hands because we can’t call for help.’”

While residents of Gaza “are under some of the most intense bombardment we’ve ever seen,” Molana-Allen added, they have no safe place to go: “Even though they’re still being told to move to the south, in fact most people can’t get to the south because they have no fuel for their cars, they can’t travel and even in the south bombardment continues.”

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

Meanwhile, Biden has continued to express his unequivocal support for Israel's actions. After he spoke with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu last week, the White House issued a statement without the slightest expression of concern about the carnage and destruction that Israel’s bombing campaign was inflicting on civilians in Gaza. Instead, the statement simply said that the president had “reiterated that Israel has every right and responsibility to defend its citizens from terrorism and to do so in a manner consistent with international humanitarian law.”

Biden’s support for the relentless assault on Gaza is largely echoed in Congress. As Israel began its fourth week of this rapidly escalating war, only 18 members of the House appeared on the list of co-sponsors for H.Res. 786, “Calling for an immediate de-escalation and cease-fire in Israel and occupied Palestine.” All 18 of those members are people of color.

While Israel kills large numbers of Palestinian civilians each day — and clearly intends to kill many thousands more — we can see the “progressive” masks falling away from numerous members of Congress who remain silent, as if paralyzed by political conformity and cowardice.

“In a dark time,” poet Theodore Roethke wrote, “the eye begins to see.”

Read more

about the war in Gaza

Experts: Trump already “in violation” of D.C. gag order — and may “spend a night or weekend in jail”

Former Trump White House lawyer Ty Cobb predicted on Monday that the former president could be jailed for violating the gag order in his D.C. election interference case.

U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan on Sunday reinstated a partial gag order barring Trump from targeting court staff, the special counsel’s team and potential witnesses after prosecutors complained that Trump used a pause in the order to target witnesses like former chief of staff Mark Meadows. Trump’s post targeting Meadows, which Chutkan cited in her ruling as a likely violation of the order, remains up on his Truth Social feed and the former president attacked another potential witness — former Attorney General Bill Barr — on his social platform just an hour after the gag order was reimposed.

Former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance told MSNBC on Monday that Trump is likely already in violation of the court order because he’s “back on Truth Social talking to Bill Barr in similar ways to the way he talked about Mark Meadows."

“I struggled because I don't want to call it a truth, but that's what they call it on Truth Social, so Trump has this 'truth' that he posts while the gag order is stayed," she continued. "He doesn't take it down when the gag order is reimposed, and technically, that means he's in violation of the gag order. It doesn't say, if you say it before the gag order and keep saying it, we'll give you grace. Here, Trump's failure to take it down is something, I think we'll see prosecutors bring to the court's attention pretty quickly."

Related

Legal experts: Trump may have already “violated” gag order minutes after judge reimposed it

Trump has already been fined twice for violating a gag order in his New York civil fraud trial after repeatedly targeting Judge Arthur Engoron’s clerk.

Cobb, who served on Trump’s White House legal team during the Mueller investigation, told CNN on Monday that the civil case in New York is “not as consequential as Judge Chutkan’s case.”

“I think she’ll come in with a much heavier penalty, and ultimately, I think he’ll spend a night or a weekend in jail,” he told host Erin Burnett.

“I think it’s gonna take that,” Cobb added after Burnett expressed surprise at his prediction. “I think it’ll take that to stop him.”

Related

Trump explodes in late-night Truth Social rant after Judge Chutkan reimposes gag order

Trump’s attacks on court officials and prosecutors have caused growing concern after his supporters have targeted prosecutors and judges and their families with threats.

“I’m very protective of my staff, and I believe I should be; I don’t want anybody killed,” Engoron said last week.

Just on Monday, the Justice Department announced charges against an Alabama man who threatened violence against Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis and Fulton County Sheriff Patrick Labat over their role in investigating Trump. The Trump supporter warned Willis “when you charge Trump on that fourth indictment, anytime you’re alone, be looking over your shoulder;” and “what you put out there, [expletive], comes back at you ten times harder, and don’t ever forget it,” according to prosecutors.

We need your help to stay independent

Subscribe today to support Salon's progressive journalism

“Sending interstate threats to physically harm prosecutors and law enforcement officers is a vile act intended to interfere with the administration of justice and intimidate individuals who accept a solemn duty to protect and safeguard the rights of citizens,” U.S. Attorney Ryan K. Buchanan said in a statement.  “When someone threatens to harm public servants for doing their jobs to enforce our criminal laws, it potentially weakens the very foundation of our society.”

Former federal prosecutor Andrew Weissmann, who served on special counsel Bob Mueller’s team, said it was “chilling” that Trump’s lawyers sought to distance the president’s rhetoric from his supporters’ actions in appealing Chutkan’s gag order.

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

The filing essentially says “I can say whatever I want, and if people act on it, don’t look at me,” Weissmann told MSNBC.

“That I find the most chilling because any responsible person who is trying to avoid violence, who is trying to avoid the fear and intimidation … would be saying ‘I’m trying to do everything to not have that happen, to not be using my words in a way that they would be used for that,’” he said.

“Any normal person would be trying to make sure that they wouldn’t in any way be responsible for harming another person,” he added. “And this is quite the contrary where you have the government correctly saying, ‘These words he knows darn well are going to lead to these consequences.’”

Read more

about Trump's D.C. case

Parasites are the bedrock of life and evolution. It’s time to give them the respect they deserve

It’s Halloween season, the liminal period when the general public seems to have a greater tolerance for stomach-churning content, so let’s talk about parasites, perhaps the most disgusting — and successful — form of life on this planet.

Even though I find parasites fascinating, there’s a skin-crawling feeling that is instantly triggered by the sight of a tick, lamprey or mosquito, to say nothing of hairworms, scabies and other unsettling creatures. I can’t help it. I evolved this trait for a reason and can’t molt it as easily as a rat flea sheds its skin.

We think of parasites in chiefly negative terms, as takers that literally suck the blood from us, nothing more than an evil scourge. The bedbug calamity recently reported in France is a perfect example, in which an alleged outbreak of the blood-sucking insects sparked international disgust (and may have also been part of a Russian disinformation scheme). If that was the Kremlin's work, it's playing on an age-old fear: many people agree that if we deleted all parasites from nature, there would be no love lost.

Related

Zombies abound in nature: Viruses and parasites can cause real-world zombification

But nothing could be further from the truth. Parasites are the glue that holds all life on this planet together. The simplified web of life we learned about in elementary school starts with plants, that are eaten by bugs that are eaten by birds or rodents which are eaten by apex predators like hawks, wolves and humans. But almost every spoke in between those relationships is a parasite.

We haven’t come close to identifying the true number of parasites in the world. It’s a form of life that turns out to be more successful and more common than being a self-sufficient organism.

Any form of life can be parasitic, whether it’s fungi, bacteria, plants or animals. Several estimates suggest that parasites actually outnumber “free living” organisms by about 3 to 2. Beetles, for example, are likely the most biodiverse insects on Earth. There are more species of them than any other creature. But some experts disagree, saying that for every one beetle, there are an average of two to three wasp parasites. Many insect species are undescribed or unknown to science, as we haven't really done a thorough inventory of insects, especially flying ones, so we haven’t come close to identifying the true number of parasites in the world. This is only one example of how abundant parasites are. It’s a form of life that turns out to be more successful and more common than being a self-sufficient organism.

There are even hyperparasites: parasites of parasites, such as Aphelinus mali, a tiny wasp that turns woolly apple aphids (a parasite of apple trees) into “mummies.” There are even hyperhyperparasites, as described in this delightful report of “a fungus on a fungus on a fungus on a tree.” It’s parasites all the way down.

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

Parasitism is a type of symbiosis, in which animals live in close relationship. Ah, but aren’t symbiotic relationships inherently beneficial? The plover birds that peck the scraps from crocodile teeth without getting eaten — that’s symbiosis, right? Technically, that’s mutualism, a subset of symbiosis in which both creatures get something from the deal. Next time you’re at a party, you can kill the vibe by unleashing this pedantic point. Everyone will be grateful (when you leave).

More importantly, parasites keep populations in check and resilient. Most successful parasites want to take from their host while giving back, so they don’t lose their primary food source. After all, it's kind of counterintuitive to bite off the hand — or neck or small intestine — that feeds you.

There is a theory that the relative lack of human parasites — which have been largely eradicated in the modern world — could be the underlying cause for autoimmune diseases like celiac.

Some parasites will even attack other parasites in order to protect their hosts or modulate their immune system to work in their favor. Of course, there are the murderous kinds of parasites, especially wasps (which are everywhere, though I appreciate that as well because wasps are freaky and cool), which kill their hosts. These are technically called parasitoids and are a little more specialized than your general parasites.

There is a theory that the relative lack of human parasites — which have been largely eradicated in the modern world — could be the underlying cause for autoimmune diseases like celiac, in which the body’s own immune system attacks itself. There may be some truth to this: Humans evolved for millions of years alongside our parasites, everything from tapeworms to pubic lice. Our immune systems have long been primed to fight them off. Suddenly, within the last century, we’ve made our parasites disappear.

But like a speeding race car with no brakes, our bodies still want to fight something, so they turn on themselves. This theory — sometimes known as the “hygiene hypothesis” — is so attractive that some people have taken to infecting themselves with gastrointestinal worms. (Somewhat off topic, this serves as yet another indictment of our ghastly health care system.)

We need your help to stay independent

Subscribe today to support Salon's progressive journalism

Clearly, parasites are more beneficial than most people will give them credit for. They serve as fundamental drivers of evolution and without them, our ecosystems would be out of balance. We not only should appreciate parasites more, we should actively try to protect them, just like we do with pandas and whales. Save the pygmy hog-sucking louse! Now that’s an environmental campaign sure to be popular.

One final thought: Are humans parasites? If Earth is one giant organism that we live on, as some scientists speculate in the "Gaia hypothesis," it’s clear that we are extracting resources from that organism like a leech sucking blood. This is more than just a metaphor. Every rain forest we bulldoze for cattle and every open pit lithium mine we carve out to power our Teslas is hardly different than a Cordyceps fungus turning its host into a zombie.

Personally, I think it seems more apt, both literally and metaphorically, to compare our relationship to the Earth to a cancer than to a parasite. The primary difference, arguably, is that, unlike a tapeworm, humans are conscious and intelligent enough that we can learn to coexist with the life around us. We could, at least hypothetically, learn to take what we need while giving more back, protecting our environment and preserving our future instead of destroying both of them.

An earlier version of this article originally appeared in Salon's Lab Notes, a weekly newsletter from our Science & Health team.

Read more

about biodiversity

Earth’s salt cycle is swinging out of balance, posing yet another “existential threat,” study finds

It is not pleasant to imagine that human activity is making the planet uninhabitable, but we typically think of this in terms of greenhouse gases, rising sea levels or acidifying the oceans. We aren't typically concerned with how salty things are.

Yet a recent study published in the journal Nature Reviews Earth & Environment identifies a wealth of industrial activities from construction and agriculture to water and road treatment as making the planet Earth too salty — literally.

"There is a need to identify environmental limits … before planetary boundaries are exceeded, causing serious or irreversible damage across Earth systems."

"There is a need to identify environmental limits and thresholds for salt ions and reduce salinization before planetary boundaries are exceeded, causing serious or irreversible damage across Earth systems," the study authors report, arriving at their conclusion following a systematic review of existing studies on Earth's natural salt cycle and how it has been accelerated by human activities.

They warn of an “existential threat”  that could lead to a problem known as freshwater salinization syndrome, or a condition in which traditionally un-salted water is suddenly filled with the stuff. Freshwater salinization syndrome can make the water uninhabitable to creatures that previously called it home and, similarly, render it unusable for human consumption.

Related

Humans are dangerously pushing the limits of our planet in ways other than climate change

“If you think of the planet as a living organism, when you accumulate so much salt it could affect the functioning of vital organs or ecosystems,” University of Maryland geology professor Sujay Kaushal, who holds a joint appointment in UMD’s Earth System Science Interdisciplinary Center, said in a press statement. “Removing salt from water is energy intensive and expensive, and the brine byproduct you end up with is saltier than ocean water and can’t be easily disposed of.”

This phenomenon was described by the authors as an "anthropogenic salt cycle" that is managing to supersede and hyper fuel nature's much slower salt cycle, during which salt ions are gradually brought to the surface by geological and hydrological processes. This is in stark contrast to humans forcing salts like calcium, potassium, magnesium and sulfate ions to the surface on a regular basis thanks to practices like mining and land development.

When most people think of salt, they tend to think of sodium chloride, the same stuff as table salt.

"But our work over the years has shown that we’ve disturbed other types of salts, including ones related to limestone, gypsum and calcium sulfate,” Kaushal said in the press statement. These salt ions are being dislodged in such large amounts that, according to the new study, human-caused salinization is affecting approximately 2.5 billion acres of soil around the world — an area roughly the size of the United States. And that only accounts for the land itself; salt ions also increased in rivers and streams over the last 50 years, which is consistent with global patterns in salt production and consumption.

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

"It’s a cycle — from the deep Earth to the atmosphere — that’s been significantly perturbed by human activities.”

“Twenty years ago, all we had were case studies. We could say surface waters were salty here in New York or in Baltimore’s drinking water supply,” study co-author Gene Likens, an ecologist at the University of Connecticut and the Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies, said in the press statement. “We now show that it’s a cycle — from the deep Earth to the atmosphere — that’s been significantly perturbed by human activities.”

When the study's authors refer to "planetary boundaries," they are utilizing a concept that has appeared in other academic literature. Earth has a number of physical limits that exist in terms of being able to support life, and scientists repeatedly warn that those planetary boundaries are in danger of being exceeded. A September study in the journal Science Advances demonstrated that humans are putting Earth in dangerous territory with six of its planetary boundaries. These include land system change, freshwater change, climate change, biosphere integrity, the flows of biological and geological chemicals and novel entities like plastics, pesticides and industrial chemicals.

We need your help to stay independent

Subscribe today to support Salon's progressive journalism

"We can think of the Earth's resources as the currency that supports us," the study's lead author Dr. Katherine Richardson, professor in Biological Oceanography at the University of Copenhagen's Sustainability Science Centre told Salon at the time. "The planetary boundaries framework is like a bank statement — it tells us how much of various components (resources) of the Earth system we can allow ourselves to us without greatly increasing the risk that our activities will lead to dramatic and potentially irreversible changes in the overall environmental conditions we experience on Earth."

As humans continue to emit greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, they trap heat and cause our planet to unnaturally warm. This is why a recent study in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) Ii global temperatures increase by at least 1 degree Celsius, temperatures will rise so much that billions of people will every year confront heat so intense their bodies will be unable to naturally cool themselves. This explains why climate change is such an important issue, but it's also far from the only one. Every resource we consume comes at a cost, and that include even simple things like salt.

Read more

about environmental destruction