Fla. school yanks Amanda Gorman poem over complaint from one parent who “confused” her with “Oprah”

The poem written for President Joe Biden’s inauguration by Amanda Gorman was removed from the elementary school section of a Florida public school in Miami-Dade County due to one parent’s complaint.

CNN reported that a parent of a student at Miami Lake’s Bob Graham Education Center opposed the poem, “The Hill We Climb,” and incorrectly cited Oprah Winfrey as its author/publlisher, according to documents obtained by the Florida Freedom to Read Project.

The poem “is not educational and have (sic) indirectly hate messages,” the parent said in the complaint, adding that it would “cause confusion and indoctrinate students.”

Additional complaints the FFTRP obtained also showed the same parent objecting to a poetry-based biography of Black poet Langston Hughes called “Love to Langston,” “The ABCs of Black History” and two books about Cuba.

The K-8 school’s materials-review panel declined to entirely remove Gorman’s poem from the library. However, it did opt to relocate it and two other contested items to the middle school section, allowing older children access to the text, minutes from the school’s April meeting obtained by the FFTRP show.

Gorman, the nation’s first youth poet laureate, admonished the school’s decision and the nationwide rise of campaigns to ban literature in schools in a statement shared to Instagram and Twitter Tuesday evening.

“Statewide book bans” are coming to Florida’s classrooms, enforced by the far right

“I’m gutted. Because of one parent’s complaint, my inaugural poem, The Hill We Climb, has been banned from an elementary school in Miami-Dade County, Florida,” the statement began.

“I wrote The Hill We Climb so that all young people could see themselves in a historical moment,” Gorman wrote, adding, “Robbing children of the chance to find their voices in literature is a violation of their right to free thought and free speech.”

In a separate tweet, Gorman criticized the parent who voiced the opposition, posting an image of the complaint document to the platform.

“So they ban my book from young readers, confuse me with @oprah, fail to specify what parts of my poetry they object to, refuse to read any reviews, and offer no alternatives…Unnecessary #bookbans like these are on the rise, and we must fight back,” she said, calling others to donate to an Instagram fundraiser.

So they ban my book from young readers, confuse me with @oprah , fail to specify what parts of my poetry they object to, refuse to read any reviews, and offer no alternatives…Unnecessary #bookbans like these are on the rise, and we must fight back 👊🏿 DONATE here:… pic.twitter.com/p96dlnrSp4

— Amanda Gorman (@TheAmandaGorman) May 23, 2023

Miami-Dade County Public Schools spokesperson Elmo Lugo told CNN in a Tuesday evening statement that “No literature (books or poem) has been banned or removed.”

“It was determined at the school that ‘The Hill We Climb’ is better suited for middle school students and, it was shelved in the middle school section of the media center. The book remains available in the media center,” he said.

Though Gorman’s poem was not banned from the school, book bans targeting “queer and non-white voices” are on the rise in the country, as the poet described in her statement.

According to American Library Association data, LGBTQ books were the subject of less than 1 to 3 percent of book challenges filed in schools from the 2000s to the early 2010s. That number surged by 16 percent in 2018, 20 percent in 2020 and 45.5 percent by 2022.

In a Tuesday report, The Washington Post analyzed the ALA data alongside all the book challenges filed in the 2021-22 school year with the 153 districts a researcher with advocacy group PEN America identified as receiving formal book complaints last year. Officials in more than 100 school systems spread across the nation provided 1,065 complaints amounting to 2,506 pages.

The analysis found that 43 percent of the filings targeted texts with LGBTQ characters or themes while 36 percent challenged books dealing with race and racism or featuring characters of color.

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

The primary reason filers cited for challenging LGBTQ books was “sexual content” followed by the second most-common “explicit desire to prevent children from reading about lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, nonbinary and queer lives,” The Post said, with 61 percent and 18 percent of challengers listing these concerns, respectively.

“The theme or purpose of this book is to confuse our children and get them to question whether they are a boy or a girl,” a North Carolina filer reportedly wrote of “Call Me Max,” which revolves around a transgender boy.

The Post also discovered that the majority of the over 1,000 complaints were filed by just 11 people, who each brought 10 or more challenges in their school district. These serial challengers were responsible for 60 percent of all filings but comprised only 6 percent of all objectors.

In some cases, these challengers also galvanized a network of volunteers through conservative parent groups like Moms for Liberty.

Though there is little data on the effects of LGBTQ texts on children because of the recency with which LGBTQ books have become widely available, Amy Egbert, a University of Connecticut assistant professor who studies youth mental health, told The Post, “we do have a lot of data about other topics that doesn’t lead us to think that reading a book would make a child suddenly become gay.”

“Any time a certain identity is stigmatized, that tends to lead to more discrimination, more bullying, increased mental health challenges,” Egbert added of the risk in banning queer literature. “Everything we know suggests this is very harmful to LGBTQ kids.”

about right-wing book bans

Trump melts down on Truth Social immediately after judge warned him “like a truant child”

Former President Donald Trump on Tuesday claimed that a judge “violated” his First Amendment rights by explaining the terms of a protective order restricting Trump’s use of evidence in his hush-money case.

Trump appeared virtually for a Tuesday hearing that Judge Juan Manuel Merchan, who is overseeing Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s 34-count indictment against Trump over his role in wired payments made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels during the 2016 presidential campaign, scheduled earlier this month after establishing rules preventing the former president from using case evidence to attack witnesses or make a public spectacle.

“It’s certainly not a gag order. It’s certainly not my intention in any way to impede Mr. Trump’s ability to campaign … he’s certainly free to deny the charges … he’s free to do just about anything that doesn’t violate the specific terms of this protective order,” the judge said, according to The Daily Beast.

However, Merchan did advise the ex-president that dismissing the protective order could create a slew of legal issues, including fines or jail time.

“Violation of a court order or a court mandate could result in sanctions. There are a wide range of sanctions, but it could include up to a finding of contempt, and that is punishable,” he said.

Judge orders Trump to attend lecture on how not to use evidence to attack witnesses: report

NPR reported that Trump, who was tuning in from his Mar-a-Lago resort in West Palm Beach, Florida, spoke only once during the hearing, saying “I do” when asked if he had a copy of the order.

However, not long after the hearing had concluded, Trump took to Truth Social to bemoan what he felt had been a violation of his First Amendment rights.

“Just had New York County Supreme Court hearing where I believe my First Amendment Rights, ‘Freedom of Speech,’ have been violated, and they forced upon us a trial date of March 25th, right in the middle of Primary season,” Trump wrote. “Very unfair, but this is exactly what the Radical Left Democrats wanted. It’s called ELECTION INTERFERENCE, and nothing like this has ever happened in our Country before!!!”

During the hearing, Trump’s lead defense lawyer Todd Blanche prodded Merchan’s protective order, arguing that “because President Trump is running for president of the United States and is the current leading contender… he’s very much concerned that his First Amendment rights are being violated by this order.”

The order, which was signed by the judge on May 8, stipulates that any evidence shared by the DA “shall be used solely for the purposes of preparing a defense,” barring Trump from sharing the case materials online in any capacity. Additionally, Merhcan wrote that Trump is only permitted to “review the limited dissemination materials only in the presence of defense counsel.”

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

Former U.S. Attorney Harry Litman observed that Mechan “is treating Trump like a truant child.”

“Sounds as if Merchan was really tough on Trump in the hearing today — letting him and counsel know that if there’s any violation of the discovery order, it’s for him (Merchan) to handle, including possible criminal contempt,” he wrote on Twitter.

CNN legal analyst Norm Eisen warned that Trump faces a “grave risk” after being “lectured by judge” because he’s so “undisciplined.”

“If he violates the order, he’ll now face serious consequences,” he tweeted.

Ever since Bragg’s probe began to gain significant traction, the former president had unleashed a torrent of vitriol and personal attacks online. In March, he floated “death and destruction” in an early morning Truth Social rant before being indicted, calling Bragg a “degenerate psychopath that truly hates the USA.” Last month, Trump targeted Merchan in another Truth Social tirade, calling him “highly partisan” and claiming his family “are well known Trump haters.”

In March, Trump referred to the case as a “witch hunt,” alleging that Merchan hated him.

“The Judge ‘assigned’ to my Witch Hunt Case, a ‘Case’ that has NEVER BEEN CHARGED BEFORE, HATES ME,” Trump wrote. “His name is Juan Manuel Marchan, was hand picked by Bragg & the Prosecutors, & is the same person who ‘railroaded’ my 75 year old former CFO, Allen Weisselberg, to take a ‘plea’ deal (Plead GUILTY, even if you are not, 90 DAYS, fight us in Court, 10 years (life!) in jail. He strong armed Allen, which a judge is not allowed to do, & treated my companies, which didn’t ‘plead,’ VICIOUSLY.”

about Trump’s legal woes

Black holes beware: Gravitational wave detector back online after 3 year hiatus

After a three-year hiatus, scientists in the U.S. have just turned on detectors capable of measuring gravitational waves — tiny ripples in space itself that travel through the universe.

Unlike light waves, gravitational waves are nearly unimpeded by the galaxies, stars, gas and dust that fill the universe. This means that by measuring gravitational waves, astrophysicists like me can peek directly into the heart of some of these most spectacular phenomena in the universe.

Since 2020, the Laser Interferometric Gravitational-Wave Observatory — commonly known as LIGO – has been sitting dormant while it underwent some exciting upgrades. These improvements will significantly boost the sensitivity of LIGO and should allow the facility to observe more-distant objects that produce smaller ripples in spacetime.

By detecting more events that create gravitational waves, there will be more opportunities for astronomers to also observe the light produced by those same events. Seeing an event through multiple channels of information, an approach called multi-messenger astronomy, provides astronomers rare and coveted opportunities to learn about physics far beyond the realm of any laboratory testing.

Astronomers just solved a 60-year mystery regarding the brightest objects in the universe

Ripples in spacetime

According to Einstein’s theory of general relativity, mass and energy warp the shape of space and time. The bending of spacetime determines how objects move in relation to one another – what people experience as gravity.

Gravitational waves are created when massive objects like black holes or neutron stars merge with one another, producing sudden, large changes in space. The process of space warping and flexing sends ripples across the universe like a wave across a still pond. These waves travel out in all directions from a disturbance, minutely bending space as they do so and ever so slightly changing the distance between objects in their way.

When two massive objects – like a black hole or a neutron star – get close together, they rapidly spin around each other and produce gravitational waves. The sound in this NASA visualization represents the frequency of the gravitational waves.

Even though the astronomical events that produce gravitational waves involve some of the most massive objects in the universe, the stretching and contracting of space is infinitesimally small. A strong gravitational wave passing through the Milky Way may only change the diameter of the entire galaxy by three feet (one meter).

The first gravitational wave observations

Though first predicted by Einstein in 1916, scientists of that era had little hope of measuring the tiny changes in distance postulated by the theory of gravitational waves.

Around the year 2000, scientists at Caltech, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and other universities around the world finished constructing what is essentially the most precise ruler ever built – the LIGO observatory.

The LIGO detector in Hanford, Wash., uses lasers to measure the minuscule stretching of space caused by a gravitational wave.
LIGO Laboratory

LIGO is comprised of two separate observatories, with one located in Hanford, Washington, and the other in Livingston, Louisiana. Each observatory is shaped like a giant L with two, 2.5-mile-long (four-kilometer-long) arms extending out from the center of the facility at 90 degrees to each other.

To measure gravitational waves, researchers shine a laser from the center of the facility to the base of the L. There, the laser is split so that a beam travels down each arm, reflects off a mirror and returns to the base. If a gravitational wave passes through the arms while the laser is shining, the two beams will return to the center at ever so slightly different times. By measuring this difference, physicists can discern that a gravitational wave passed through the facility.

LIGO began operating in the early 2000s, but it was not sensitive enough to detect gravitational waves. So, in 2010, the LIGO team temporarily shut down the facility to perform upgrades to boost sensitivity. The upgraded version of LIGO started collecting data in 2015 and almost immediately detected gravitational waves produced from the merger of two black holes.

Since 2015, LIGO has completed three observation runs. The first, run O1, lasted about four months; the second, O2, about nine months; and the third, O3, ran for 11 months before the COVID-19 pandemic forced the facilities to close. Starting with run O2, LIGO has been jointly observing with an Italian observatory called Virgo.

Between each run, scientists improved the physical components of the detectors and data analysis methods. By the end of run O3 in March 2020, researchers in the LIGO and Virgo collaboration had detected about 90 gravitational waves from the merging of black holes and neutron stars.

The observatories have still not yet achieved their maximum design sensitivity. So, in 2020, both observatories shut down for upgrades yet again.

Upgrades to the mechanical equipment and data processing algorithms should allow LIGO to detect fainter gravitational waves than in the past.
LIGO/Caltech/MIT/Jeff Kissel, CC BY-ND

Making some upgrades

Collecting multiple channels like adding color and sound to a black-and-white silent film

Scientists have been working on many technological improvements. One particularly promising upgrade involved adding a 1,000-foot (300-meter) optical cavity to improve a technique called squeezing. Squeezing allows scientists to reduce detector noise using the quantum properties of light. With this upgrade, the LIGO team should be able to detect much weaker gravitational waves than before.

My teammates and I are data scientists in the LIGO collaboration, and we have been working on a number of different upgrades to software used to process LIGO data and the algorithms that recognize signs of gravitational waves in that data. These algorithms function by searching for patterns that match theoretical models of millions of possible black hole and neutron star merger events. The improved algorithm should be able to more easily pick out the faint signs of gravitational waves from background noise in the data than the previous versions of the algorithms.

Astronomers have captured both the gravitational waves and light produced by a single event, the merger of two neutron stars. The change in light can be seen over the course of a few days in the top right inset.
Hubble Space Telescope, NASA and ESA

A hi-def era of astronomy

In early May 2023, LIGO began a short test run — called an engineering run — to make sure everything was working. On May 18, LIGO detected gravitational waves likely produced from a neutron star merging into a black hole. LIGO’s 20-month observation run 04 will officially start on May 24, and it will later be joined by Virgo and a new Japanese observatory — the Kamioka Gravitational Wave Detector, or KAGRA.

While there are many scientific goals for this run, there is a particular focus on detecting and localizing gravitational waves in real time. If the team can identify a gravitational wave event, figure out where the waves came from and alert other astronomers to these discoveries quickly, it would enable astronomers to point other telescopes that collect visible light, radio waves or other types of data at the source of the gravitational wave. Collecting multiple channels of information on a single event — multi-messenger astrophysics — is like adding color and sound to a black-and-white silent film and can provide a much deeper understanding of astrophysical phenomena.

Astronomers have only observed a single event in both gravitational waves and visible light to date – the merger of two neutron stars seen in 2017. But from this single event, physicists were able to study the expansion of the universe and confirm the origin of some of the universe’s most energetic events known as gamma-ray bursts.

With run O4, astronomers will have access to the most sensitive gravitational wave observatories in history and hopefully will collect more data than ever before. My colleagues and I are hopeful that the coming months will result in one — or perhaps many — multi-messenger observations that will push the boundaries of modern astrophysics.

Chad Hanna, Professor of Physics, Penn State

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

about space

Facing probe, Texas AG calls on GOP House speaker to resign over alleged “debilitating intoxication”

Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

A Texas House committee revealed Tuesday it was investigating the office of Attorney General Ken Paxton over his push for $3.3 million in taxpayer dollars to settle a whistleblower lawsuit from former deputies who had accused Paxton of misconduct.

The news came hours after Paxton called on the House speaker, Dade Phelan, to resign over alleged drunkenness while leading the House, a remarkable moment of acrimony between two of Texas’ top Republicans.

Phelan’s office fired back, noting the investigation has been going on since March.

“The motives for and timing behind Paxton’s statement today couldn’t be more evident,” Phelan spokesperson Cait Wittman said in a statement. “Mr. Paxton’s statement today amounts to little more than a last ditch effort to save face.”

The series of events underscored the new legal jeopardy Paxton is facing on top of his already yearslong run of scandals. The House Committee on General Investigating has broad authority to probe alleged misconduct in state government and can initiate impeachment proceedings against a state officer.

The drama also underscored the political divide between Phelan and the vocally conservative Paxton, who hails from a wing of the Texas GOP that persistently criticizes the House as insufficiently conservative. Paxton is a loyalist of former President Donald Trump; Phelan is skeptical of Trump’s hold on the party.

News of the House investigation was initially revealed during a brief public meeting of the House Committee on General Investigating on Tuesday afternoon. The panel unanimously voted to issue two subpoenas in “Matter A” — one to “John Doe No. 6” and the other to Paxton’s office. The committee is scheduled to meet again at 8 a.m. Wednesday to hear testimony in the matter.

The committee also issued a letter directing Paxton’s office to preserve all evidence related to the investigation. That letter told Paxton the committee “has been conducting an investigation related to your request for $3.3 million of public money to pay a settlement resolving litigation between your agency and terminated whistleblowers.”

In February, Paxton reached a $3.3 million settlement with four former deputies who claimed they had been fired in retaliation for reporting Paxton’s alleged misconduct to federal investigators. Lawmakers in both chambers have balked at authorizing taxpayer dollars to pay for it, and Phelan has said he personally opposes it.

A draft of the state budget that lawmakers have to pass in the coming days prohibits state funds from going toward the settlement.

Paxton’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the news of the investigation. But about two hours before General Investigating Committee Chair Andrew S. Murr‘s announcement of the subpoenas, Paxton took to Twitter to abruptly call for Phelan’s resignation, accusing him of presiding over his chamber “in a state of apparent debilitating intoxication.” Paxton also asked the House General Investigating to probe Phelan’s conduct.

Over the weekend, a video clip went viral that showed Phelan slurring his words while overseeing House floor proceedings Friday night. Phelan’s office has repeatedly declined to comment on what took place.

Texas House Speaker Dade Phelan on May 19 Credit: Texas Legislature Online

Having trouble viewing? Watch this video on texastribune.org.

“After much consideration, it is with profound disappointment that I call on Speaker Dade Phelan to resign at the end of this legislation session,” Paxton said in a statement, posted on Twitter, that said Phelan was “in a state of apparent debilitating intoxication.”

“His conduct has negatively impacted the legislative process and constitutes a failure to live up to his duty to the public,” Paxton wrote.

The 44-second video clip of Phelan began circulating on social media over the weekend. It was pushed by Phelan’s intraparty critics, including former state Rep. Jonathan Stickland, R-Bedford. It was also the subject of anonymous text messages deriding Phelan as “Drunk Dade.”

Phelan’s defenders noted he seemed to speak normally before and after the clip. They also noted that the people pushing the video, like Stickland, may be out for revenge after the House voted to expel one of their political allies, ex-state Rep. Bryan Slaton, R-Royse City.

The House ousted Slaton after an investigation by the House Committee on General Investigating found he engaged in sexual misconduct with a 19-year-old aide.

Paxton has battled his own ethical problems for years. Months after taking office in 2015, he was indicted for securities fraud linked to private business deals in 2011. He has denied any wrongdoing.

In fall 2020, eight high-ranking officials in the attorney general’s office accused Paxton of improperly using his position to benefit his friend, real estate investor Nate Paul, who had donated $25,000 to Paxton’s campaign in 2018. All eight of those employees were fired or left the attorney general’s office soon afterward, and four of them — David Maxwell, Blake Brickman, Mark Penley and Ryan Vassar — sued Paxton under the Texas Whistleblower Act in November 2020.

In their lawsuit, the four former officials alleged that Paxton did political favors for Paul, including helping the Austin businessman gain access to investigative documents related to 2019 searches of Paul’s home and businesses by state and federal authorities. They also claimed that Paxton rushed through a written opinion that said foreclosure sales had to be suspended under pandemic safety rules, allowing Paul to delay a foreclosure sale for one of his properties two days later.

In return, Paul had helped Paxton remodel his home and had given a job to a woman with whom Paxton was allegedly in a relationship. Paxton is married to state Sen. Angela Paxton, R-McKinney.

The Legislature’s refusal to fund the settlement throws the fate of the whistleblower case up in the air. In February, lawyers for the fired employees asked the Texas Supreme Court to pause its consideration of the case after the two sides worked out a potential $3.3 million agreement that would end the lawsuit but was subject to legislative approval. When it became clear in March that neither legislative chamber supported using public dollars to settle the lawsuit, the lawyers asked the court to resume the case. The Supreme Court has not yet ruled.

Without the settlement, the employees’ lawyers argue, their clients would be subjected to a drawn-out legal battle with an undetermined resolution when they could have received compensation for what they say was an unfair termination of employment.

Importantly, the lawyers argue, their clients have already relayed their knowledge of alleged crimes to state and federal authorities. The FBI began investigating Paxton in 2020 after the employees’ allegations were made public. In February, that investigation was taken over by U.S. Department of Justice investigators in Washington, D.C.

Paxton also faces a 2022 lawsuit from the State Bar of Texas’ Commission on Lawyer Discipline accusing him of engaging in professional misconduct by making dishonest claims when he asked the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn Democrat Joe Biden’s 2020 election victories in four swing states. Paxton’s bid to dismiss the lawsuit is before the Dallas-based 5th Court of Appeals.

In his statement calling for Phelan’s resignation, Paxton also criticized the House for failing to “pass critical conservative priorities including protecting the integrity of our elections and preventing Chinese spies from controlling Texas land.” The regular legislative session is winding down — the last day is Monday — and those were among the proposals that fell victim to a bill-killing deadline Saturday in the House.

Paxton shares political ties with Slaton, the ousted lawmaker. A top campaign contributor to both has been Defend Texas Liberty PAC, the Stickland-run group that is mostly financed by conservative megadonors Tim Dunn and the Wilks family.

As for the House investigation into Paxton, Wittman, the Phelan spokesperson, said “committee minutes and official House records indicate the committee has been investigating ‘Matter A’ since March.” The committee does not publicly comment on pending investigations, meaning it had been secret what Matter A was about.

Since April 14, the committee has issued 13 subpoenas in Matter A. Six were to John Does and seven were to unnamed entities.

Zach Despart contributed reporting.

Disclosure: The State Bar of Texas has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.

Tickets are on sale now for the 2023 Texas Tribune Festival, happening in downtown Austin on Sept. 21-23. Get your TribFest tickets by May 31 and save big!

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at https://www.texastribune.org/2023/05/23/dade-phelan-ken-paxton-resign-intoxication/.

The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at texastribune.org.

Ron DeSantis — like Elon Musk’s Twitter — is really the second choice

Poor Fox News. They just can’t catch a break. First, they found themselves on the hook for over three-quarters of a billion dollars because they lied about the 2020 election. Then they fired their popular bomb-throwing white nationalist celebrity anchor Tucker Carlson and their ratings went into the toilet. And now, after spending months boosting Florida Governor Ron DeSantis (years, actually) angering their audience’s Dear Leader Donald Trump in the process, DeSantis slapped them in the face by deciding to formally announce his candidacy on Twitter instead of the network.

This is a man who actually signed election suppression legislation in a live exclusive on Fox News so you can be sure they expected they would get the long-awaited big event. Instead, like their cashiered bomb thrower Carlson, DeSantis raced into the arms of the right’s new “it boy,” Twitter owner Elon Musk. The best he could offer Fox was an appearance with D-List has-been Trey Gowdy later in the day. Rupert Murdoch must be fit to be tied. Don’t any of these people know the meaning of gratitude?

I hope everyone can contain their excitement until 6PM EST when DeSantis will be joined by Musk and Silicon Valley venture capitalist David Sacks (a member of what the Wall St. Journal calls Musk’s “shadow crew” of friends and consiglieri) to make the announcement nobody on earth didn’t know was coming. They will be on Twitter Spaces which, for those of you who are not as tuned in to the latest in online innovations as Ron DeSantis, is a platform “where users can have live audio conversations” in a “space.” Doesn’t that sound like fun?

Online is really the only place DeSantis makes sense — in front of real people, he sounds like he’s speaking in some sort of extra-terrestrial corporate patois.

Some of you may be a bit confused by all this and for good reason. After all, Elon Musk has sold himself as a “free speech absolutist” who ostensibly bought the platform for the purpose of opening it up to ideas across the spectrum and Ron DeSantis is the governor who is censoring educators, banning books, and retaliating against individuals, institutions and businesses that oppose those policies. You would think they would be enemies not comrades in arms.

The GOP’s heart of darkness: Why Ron DeSantis can never beat Donald Trump

As it turns out, Elon Musk may be a free speech absolutist in that he absolutely does allow every manner of freak, conman, porno hustler, liar, propagandist, goon, thug and saboteur free rein on the platform, but he will graciously allow foreign governments to censor their political opposition, something he tried and failed to prove the US Government had done against Donald Trump. And Musk has openly expressed his loathing for anyone and anything to the left of well… Ron DeSantis, so there is no doubt where he stands politically. Yes, he’s a tad incoherent, somehow believing that he’s non-ideological, but his prolific tweeting says otherwise.

Musk was always a troll on Twitter and said many stupid things. But like so many politically naive people who seem to have never developed any kind of bullshit detector, after wallowing in his newly created right-wing Twitter fever swamp, he’s gone full-blown, racist wingnut conspiracy monger and anti-semite. And as the owner of the company, he has the most followers on the platform — 140 million people — so he has quite a reach.

You can see why Tucker Carlson and Ron Desantis are eager to get on board. And they aren’t the only ones.

It was just announced that the vastly successful right-wing radio and podcast company The Daily Wire will be simulcasting some of its premium content on Twitter starting at the end of the month. (Apparently, the company has been penalized and suspended by other platforms such as Youtube and Facebook over misrepresentations and lies so they are going to the platform where nobody cares about such trifles.)

As for DeSantis, there is no politician on the planet more tuned into the online right than he is. In fact, his governorship and campaign are entirely based upon it. Every day he assails another aspect of the “woke” left by tuning into the latest obsessive outrage being passed around crazytown. At one point he even invited the noxious trans-hating “Libs of TikTok” tweeter to stay in the Florida governor’s mansion. I don’t know if he’s personally engaged online or has hired someone else to do it but his knowledge of arcane internet wingnuttia is impressive.

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

However, he’s so immersed in this stuff that online is really the only place DeSantis makes sense —- in front of real people, he sounds like he’s speaking in some sort of extra-terrestrial corporate patois. As Tim Miller of the Bulwark pointed out, this is a problem:

He’s tied himself to policies such as a six-week abortion ban and “constitutional carry” that even many Republicans don’t support. On top of that, his current stump speech requires a Ph.D. in based online discourse to have any idea what he’s talking about.

To wit: At a convention in Utah last week, DeSantis went off on wokeness, DEI, and ESG without even bothering to define these terms for his audience. Here are a few examples from DeSantis going over his policy objectives for this session.

“We are going to kneecap ESG in the state of Florida. . . . We are also going to be the first state to eliminate DEI. . . . We are going to prohibit the implementation in Florida of any central bank digital currency.”

Sure, your super online MAGA, Qanon, anti-vaxxer may know what those acronyms mean but does the average working, rural, white Republican voter have the vaguest clue what he’s talking about? It’s not as if he has the sort of charismatic personality that could turn that dull jargon into a rallying cry as Trump did in 2016 when he adopted much of the talk radio issue agenda that had been pumped into the right’s homes and workplaces for decades. DeSantis’ lack of personality just makes all of that “anti-woke” blather sound, dare I say, boring. And I suspect that is exactly what tonight’s meeting of the warriors against the “woke mind virus” is going to be.

DeSantis’ deal with the devil: Chasing the Christian right won’t help him

Remember DeSantis is really the second choice. Musk begged Trump to come back to Twitter with vulgar memes like this designed to entice the libertine ex-president:

And lead us not into temptation … pic.twitter.com/8qNOXzwXS9

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 21, 2022

Trump declined, preferring to stay with his sad Twitter clone, Truth Social. But who knows? Twitter Spaces is open to anyone. Maybe he’ll turn up tonight and throw a few insults DeSantis’ way at his big announcement. After all, Twitter is a free speech zone for lying, right-wing blowhards. Who’s going to stop him?

about Ron DeSantis ahead of his announcement

“Ultimate Hail Mary”: Experts say desperate Trump letter to Garland signals indictment is “imminent”

Donald Trump’s lawyers sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland on Tuesday requesting a meeting about the Justice Department investigations into the former president.

Special counsel Jack Smith is wrapping up his investigation into Trump’s handling of classified documents found at Mar-a-Lago and some of Trump’s close associates are “bracing for his indictment and anticipate being able to fundraise off a prosecution,” The Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday.

Trump hours after the report published a letter from his attorneys to Garland alleging that he was being “treated unfairly” by Smith.

“No President of the United States has ever, in the history of our country, been baselessly investigated in such an outrageous and unlawful fashion,” Trump attorneys John Rowley and Jim Trusty wrote in the letter. “We request a meeting at your earliest convenience to discuss the ongoing injustice that is being perpetrated by your Special Counsel and his prosecutors.”

Like clockwork, after @WSJ report that the special counsel probe of Trump’s classified doc handling is nearing indictment, Trump reveals he had his lawyers today demand a meeting with Attorney General Garland pic.twitter.com/tEqBoSmGjQ

— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) May 24, 2023

“Shocked at the stupidity”: Prosecutors obtain lawyer notes that blow up Trump’s Mar-a-Lago defense

It’s unclear whether Garland would accept such a meeting.

“Merrick Garland will not meet with Trusty or any of the other Trump lawyers,” former Garland spokesperson Anthony Coley told The New York Times. “Jack Smith is running this investigation, not Merrick Garland.”

Former Watergate prosecutor Jill Wine-Banks called the letter “wrong in so many ways,” rejecting the lawyers’ claims.

The “investigation is well founded in facts,” she wrote on Twitter, adding that President Richard Nixon was also “investigated for his crimes, although Trump’s are more numerous and far worse for democracy.”

“The lack of seriousness of sending this letter is evidenced by their putting it on Trump’s social media,” she wrote.

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

Former U.S. Attorney Harry Litman called the letter “the ultimate Hail Mary” that signals the Trump team expects an indictment.

“Sophisticated defense lawyers – and Trump still has one or two of those – understand that you ask for a meeting with the attorney general only as the very last step to stave off an indictment,” he tweeted. “That means team Trump expects the charges to come soon.”

Former federal prosecutor Andrew Weissmann, who served on special counsel Bob Mueller’s team, agreed that the letter signals a “federal indictment is nigh.”

“You don’t do this unless you think indictments are imminent,” wrote national security attorney Bradley Moss.

Former federal prosecutor Robert Ray, who served as Trump’s lawyer during his first impeachment, told CNN that the letter is an ominous sign for the former president.

“It suggests to me that, I think, they think the special counsel’s decision is a foregone conclusion,” he said, “which means the only avenue left to pursue is whether or not the attorney general will authorize the prosecution.”

about the special counsel probe

Chronic pain can be objectively measured using brain signals, opening door to future treatments

Using a brain implant that can record neural signals over many months, my research team and I have discovered objective biomarkers of chronic pain severity in four patients with chronic pain as they went about their daily lives.

Pain is one of the most important and basic subjective experiences a person can have. While there is plenty of evidence that perception of pain takes place in the brain, there is also a major knowledge gap regarding where and how pain signals are processed in the brain. Even though pain is universal, there has not been a way to objectively measure its intensity.

Most prior studies on the brain signals responsible for pain have relied on laboratory experiments in artificial environments. Until now, most research on chronic pain has used indirect measures of brain activity such as functional magnetic resonance imaging or electroencephalography. Furthermore, although doctors widely recognize that chronic pain is not just an extension of acute pain – like stubbing your toe – it remains unknown how the brain circuits behind acute and chronic pain relate to each other.

“I was 13 when doctors started telling me to have a baby”: A real-life tale of medical trauma

Our study was part of a larger clinical trial aimed at developing a new brain stimulation therapy to treat severe chronic pain. My team surgically implanted electrodes in the brains of four patients with post-stroke pain and phantom limb pain to record neural signals in their orbitofrontal cortex, an area of the brain associated with planning and expectation, and cingulate cortex, an area associated with emotion.

These brain signals could be decomposed into different frequencies, similar to how a musical chord can be broken down into individual sounds of different pitches

We asked the patients about their pain severity levels several times a day for up to six months. We then built machine learning models to try to match and predict each patient’s self-reported pain intensity scores with snapshots of their brain activity signals. These brain signals consisted of electrical waves that could be decomposed into different frequencies, similar to how a musical chord can be broken down into individual sounds of different pitches. From these models, we found that low frequencies in the orbitofrontal cortex corresponded with each of the patients’ subjective pain intensities, providing an objective measure of chronic pain. The larger the shift in low-frequency activity we measured, the more likely the patient was experiencing intense pain.

Next, we wanted to compare the relationship between chronic pain and acute pain. We examined how the brain responded to short-term, intense pain caused by applying heat to the patients’ bodies. Based on data from two participants, we found that the anterior cingulate cortex was more involved in processing acute pain than chronic pain. This experiment provides the first direct evidence that chronic pain involves information-processing areas of brain distinct from those involved in acute pain.

Why it matters

Chronic pain, defined as pain lasting more than three months, affects up to 1 in 5 people in the U.S. In 2019, the incidence of chronic pain was more common than that of diabetes, high blood pressure or depression.

Neuropathic pain resulting from damage to the nervous system, such as stroke and phantom limb pain, often doesn’t respond to available treatments and can significantly impair physical and emotional function and quality of life. Better understanding how to measure brain activity to track pain could improve the diagnosis of chronic pain conditions and help develop new treatments such as deep brain stimulation.

Deep brain stimulation has been used to treat severe depression.

What still isn’t known

Although our study provides a proof of concept that signals from specific brain regions can serve as an objective measure of chronic pain, it is more likely that pain signals are distributed over a wide brain network.

We still don’t know what other brain regions may harbor important pain signals that may more accurately reflect subjective pain. It is also unclear whether the signals we found would apply to patients with other pain conditions.

Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon’s weekly newsletter The Vulgar Scientist.

What’s next

We hope to use these newly discovered neural biomarkers to develop personalized brain stimulation as a way to treat chronic pain disorders. This approach involves incorporating signals into tailored algorithms that would govern the timing and location of brain stimulation on demand, similar to how a thermostat operates.

Prasad Shirvalkar, Associate Professor of Anesthesia, University of California, San Francisco

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

about this pain and neuroscience

Trump won’t leave E. Jean Carroll alone — so she’s going to make him pay

For someone so cowardly, Donald Trump is not a man gifted with a sense of prudence. Once at a safe distance from immediate danger, he’s always been possessed by a sociopath’s impulsivity and haunted by a narcissist’s inability to accept criticism with a modicum of grace. And, as I detailed in Tuesday’s Standing Room Only newsletter, Trump loves to boast about his crimes and troll his critics by flaunting his apparent immunity from consequences.

With all that in mind, it seems inevitable now that he would learn nothing from a jury declaring definitively that he sexually assaulted journalist E. Jean Carroll in the 90s, and that he defamed her with insults and lies when she spoke out about it during his presidency. Despite facing a $5 million judgment, Trump went straight onto CNN and defamed her again. To make it worse, after his perfunctory denials, he bragged about the assault. When asked how he feels about men getting away with sexual assault, he replied, “Fortunately.” As the MAGA crowd laughed in approval, he blamed Carroll for the assault, saying, “What kind of a woman meets somebody and brings them up and within minutes you’re playing hanky panky in a dressing room?

Of course, as the jury found, Carroll did no such thing. She gently ribbed a man who invited her to go shopping, and because he’s a sociopathic narcissist, he responded with violence. Trump was lying about Carroll again. So, showing more spine than legions of more powerful men have, Carroll is taking his sorry ass back to court. Her lawyer, Roberta Kaplan, has filed an amendment to the case Carroll already won. As former U.S. attorney Joyce Vance explained in her newsletter, “These new claims could cost Trump even more money than the $5 million he already owes Carroll,” because, “flagrant abuse could support a substantial punitive damages award to punish Trump.”

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

Likely, Trump doesn’t care about the money. He no doubt believes, from long experience, that he can use frivolous court filings until the end of time to avoid actually paying Carroll. And even if he does end up with a bill, he probably can get one of his many GOP donors, if not the party itself, to foot it for him.

But even if the financial aspect of this doesn’t worry Trump, the politics of it should. The real impact of Carroll’s continued legal action is that it will likely keep this story in the news, reminding voters repeatedly that Trump both sexually assaults women and then gloats about it later. Republicans are already paying a steep political price for their misogyny, losing elections they may have otherwise won but for their obsessive attacks on reproductive rights. With this story in the news all the time, it will only intensify the GOP’s branding as the Grab Them By The Pussy Party.

Trump has always been possessed by a sociopath’s impulsivity and haunted by a narcissist’s inability to accept criticism with a modicum of grace.

Right now, the major losses to the GOP fueled by women’s rage are being attributed, with good reason, to the 2022 Supreme Court decision, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, that ended abortion rights. But while that escalated women’s fury, it’s worth remembering the female-led backlash to Trumpism started well before then. Millions of women were shocked out of complacency in 2016 because a proud sex offender had been elected president. The result was the first Women’s March and a 2018 “blue wave” that saw a record number of female candidates getting elected, both to Congress and on a state and local level. Then the first female vice president. Now, repeatedly, we’re seeing women take to the polls to fight back against abortion bans.

As Trump’s legal woes mount, Republicans prep with a new talking point: Jury verdicts don’t count

Because the male-dominated press still underrates the importance of “women’s issues,” Carroll’s case initially received muted attention in the media — until she won. At that point, the outpouring of audience interest and public support for Carroll indicated that the women’s anger that fueled the Women’s March, the #MeToo movement and the backlash to Dobbs has not disappeared at all. Every time women are reminded of this crap, they get angry all over again — and become more likely to vote, organize, and donate.

On this front, Trump may prove to be his own worst enemy.

As the CNN town hall showed, Trump cannot shut his giant mouth, especially when he feels the urge to put a woman down for standing up to him. On Tuesday, he proved it again. A smart person would respond to Carroll’s new court filing by buttoning up. Trump, however, kept up the defamation, insisting she was lying, falsely accusing her of being part of a grand conspiracy against him, and even using racist language against her ex-husband.

With this story in the news all the time, it will only intensify the GOP’s branding as the Grab Them By The Pussy Party.

Trump’s loyalist voters, of course, love this behavior, hooting and hollering with joy as their cowardly bully of a leader lashes out at people from a safe distance. But a not-insubstantial number of swing voters tend to react quite negatively to reminders of Trump’s pettiness. Trump needs those voters to forget about the parts of him that they don’t like. Watching him freak out on the regular on Carroll will make it a lot harder to push his history of sexual abuse down the memory hole. Especially since, due to the jury verdict, this sexual assault is no longer in the “alleged” column. It’s now a publicly acknowledged fact.

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

The media tends to focus on the loyal MAGA voters, driven by a morbid fascination with their endless capacity to reject the overwhelming evidence of Trump’s repugnant character. It’s especially hard not to gawk at Republican women making excuses for Trump’s sexual abuse, and wonder out loud how they can live with themselves. But, in truth, those women and their support were already baked in. What Trump actually needs to do to win is persuade Joe Biden voters to stay home and/or convince reluctant swing voters he’s not so bad.

Continuing to defame a woman he’s already sexually assaulted does the opposite. It instead mobilizes Trump’s opposition, which was already led by women appalled by his misogyny. At the same time, it discourages his more fairweather supporters, causing them to either sit out the 2024 election or even vote for Biden. Trump likely knows that his political fortunes are best served if Carroll fades from the public memory. But, being a sexist bully, he can’t accept that the best way to make that happen is to leave the poor woman alone. He thinks he can defame her into silence. Instead, she’s fighting back, just like she did in the dressing room that fateful day. Trump keeps underestimating women, even though they defeated him at the polls in 2020. If he keeps it up, he’s making it that much more likely they’ll do it again in 2024.

about Trump’s history of harassment:

Donald Trump entered the Republican Party into “international arrangements of oligarchies”

Today’s Republican Party is a de facto criminal organization.

It has engaged in and otherwise supports a range of criminal activity including a coup, seditious conspiracy, political violence and terrorism. Today’s Republican Party also supports and has participated in fraud, corruption, self-dealing and other conflicts of interest, and corporate crime on a massive scale. It gives aid, comfort and material support to individuals and organizations that are engaged in criminal and other questionable behavior that violate both the letter and spirit of the law. And never to be overlooked or forgotten, the Republican Party and its leaders and agents on the federal, state, and local levels, both facilitated and directly engaged in acts of democide by sabotaging the country’s response to the COVID pandemic. These actions led to the unnecessary deaths of more than one million people in the United States.

The Republican Party crime organization and its boss Donald Trump do not operate in isolation: they are part of a global right-wing political crime operation.

Donald Trump is the head of the Republican Party crime organization. In that role, he and the other senior leaders of the Republican Party have both directly engaged in criminal and quasi-legal acts while also directly commanding their followers and other agents to engage in such behavior. Here are but a few of the most prominent examples:

The GOP’s heart of darkness: Why Ron DeSantis can never beat Donald Trump

Trump himself is the first president in American history to attempt a coup against the American people and their democracy in order to remain in power.

He is the first president to be impeached twice.

He is the first former president to be criminally indicted and arrested.

He is being investigated for a range of serious crimes including election theft, election fraud, and stealing top secret documents.

He has been found liable in civil court for sexually assaulting E. Jean Carroll (she is one of dozens of women who have credibly accused Donald Trump of sexual assault and/or rape).

During his decades of public life, Trump has been credibly accused of repeatedly engaging in real estate and financial fraud. Trump and his inner circle also used the White House and presidency to personally enrich themselves at the literal expense of the American people and the nation.

Donald Trump’s consigliere Rudy Giuliani was a key figure in the coup attempt on Jan. 6. Fueled by a reported addiction to Viagra, Giuliani is now being sued for allegedly sexually assaulting one of his female employees. As part of that lawsuit, it is also alleged that Giuliani and Trump were selling presidential pardons for 2 million dollars each. The lawsuit summarizes that Giuliani engaged in “unlawful abuses of power, wide-ranging sexual assault and harassment, wage theft, and other misconduct.”

The fabulist and pathological liar Rep. George Santos, R-N.Y., has finally been charged with committing a litany of crimes including several serious felonies. Yet the Republicans, led by Speaker Kevin McCarthy, are still refusing to vote to expel Santos from Congress.

There are dozens of Republicans in Congress who supported and/or directly participated in Trump’s Jan. 6 coup attempt. They have not been criminally charged or otherwise held accountable. Per the 14th Amendment, those Republicans and any other members of Congress who participated in a coup or other act of insurrection or rebellion against the United States government should be removed from office. These Republican fascists are undeterred and are continuing to work to kill the country’s multiracial democracy from within its highest legislative body.

And as revealed by ProPublica, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is manifestly and grossly corrupt. He has received millions of dollars in direct money, “favors”, gifts, and other compensation from right-wing plutocrat, megadonor and political operative (and apparent Nazi fetishist) Harlan Crow and others who had interests before the Supreme Court. Beyond a mere “conflict of interest,” Thomas did not recluse himself or otherwise make it known (until after the fact, if ever) that he was receiving money and other favors from those individuals and groups whose cases he would be deciding. In essence, Thomas (and the other right-wing members of the Supreme Court who are similarly compromised) were involved in an influence-peddling operation where the country’s most important laws were being rigged by immensely powerful right-wing interests who literally bought themselves a Supreme Court Justice(s).

Clarence Thomas’s wife was also a key figure in Trump’s Jan. 6 coup plot. If the coup had gone according to plan, Thomas and the other right-wing Supreme Court justices would have played a decisive role in making the coup “legal” and keeping Donald Trump in power.

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

Neofascism and other forms of authoritarianism are exercises in corrupt power. The rule of law (and equality and fairness in its application) is one of the foundations of a healthy democracy. As the Republican Party and “conservative” movement have embraced fascism and other forms of illiberal politics they have, quite predictably, become increasingly criminal and corrupt.

Beyond the specific criminal and quasi-legal actions of the Republican Party and its leaders, such behavior has encouraged a societal climate where antisocial behavior by members of the MAGA movement and “red state” America – including right-wing political violence and vigilantism – is increasingly encouraged and rewarded.

In all, America’s democracy crisis is much bigger than any one person or group of people. It is a cultural and societal problem where the legitimacy of democracy and its institutions, the country’s democratic culture, and the rule of law, the common good and the general welfare are increasingly imperiled.

Unfortunately, and in keeping with a larger pattern of failures to properly adapt to the realities of the Age of Trump and ascendant neofascism, the country’s news media and responsible political class are focused in on individual personalities, villains and heroes, instead of the larger systemic and institutional problems. Moreover, the very nature of the 24/7 news media and its profit-motivated and largely superficial coverage of important issues lends itself to a narrative that emphasizes good guys and bad guys, the villain and controversy of the day, and of course “horse race”, “bothsides”, “objectivity”, “fairness” and other frameworks that normalize the Republican fascists and MAGA movement and their war on democracy and human rights and decency.

As I have explained in previous essays here at Salon, Donald Trump does not really matter. Likewise, Ron DeSantis and the other leaders of the Republican Party and neofascist movement do not really matter. Justice Clarence Thomas does not really matter. George Santos most certainly does not really matter.

Why?

They and the other members of the American neofascist movement and larger white right are stand-ins, placeholders, symbols and signifiers, who are part of a much larger system of corrupt power. The fascist machine will replace such people with others very quickly once it is done with them. To hyper-focus on the individual malign actor is to again miss the true nature and scale of the political and societal crisis facing the United States.

Fox News falls for another hoax, as the Dominion defamation settlement pays off

In a recent edition of her newsletter, historian Ruth Ben-Ghiat explained the intersections between Trumpism, criminogenic politics, corruption, fascism and autocracy in the following way:

At the heart of strongman rule is the claim that he and his agents are above the law, above judgment, and not beholden to the truth,” I wrote in Strongmen in 2020. “In Trump’s America…the legal and the illegal, fact and fiction, celebrity and politics blend together until nothing means anything anymore and everything is ‘a confidence game’.”

When an amoral autocrat captures a political party, as former president Donald Trump did with the GOP, he remakes it in his own image. His values and methods become those of the party he controls. Individuals have worth and status only to the extent that they embrace those values and methods, no matter how criminal these may be. In this way, the autocrat and his proxies also act as corruptors: they do not just give permission to break the rules, but they also let it be known that they will reward those who do….When a criminal of the magnitude of Trump is in power, the whole window of possibility shifts at the local as well as national level, creating spaces for unscrupulous individuals to succeed.

The Republican Party crime organization and its boss Donald Trump do not operate in isolation: they are part of a global right-wing political crime operation.

Criminologist Gregg Barak, who is the author of the book “Criminology on Trump”, explained to Salon that “when we discuss the lawlessness or law-violating behavior — the crimes and corruption – of “Rudy, Trump, Santos, Thomas, etc. and how today’s GOP and ‘conservative’ movement are criminal organizations of sorts,” we are referencing the autocratic tendencies or authoritarian rule within these politically and criminally similar operating environments. From a systemic or institutional analysis, the former political type of “organized crime” is more amorphous and less structured than the traditional syndicated criminal kinds. Moreover, the Trumpian and GOP forms of “racketeering” reflect the changing political economy of global capitalism and the ongoing struggle between democratic and authoritarian capitalist regimes over the past 25 years.” He continues:

In short, we are talking about the international arrangements of oligarchies and kleptocracies. Oligarchs as well as kleptocrats use their power and money to buy or bribe politicians or to corrupt and/or steal from governments….

As oligarchies go, the US constitutes a multi-pyramid hybrid form of oligarchical rule as Americans enjoy many features of a constitutional democracy. Autocratically, however, especially over the past quarter of a century powerful corporations and affluent individuals have had a significantly larger and growing influence over the legislative and judicial branches of government compared to ordinary citizens due to changes primarily in the campaign finance laws where much of the fraudulent crime has been allowed to legally flourish.

Barak also detailed how Trump’s political regime and business empire were and continue to be integral aspects of his international corruption operation:

As this was already occurring in the political economy of global capital when Trump became POTUS, he adapted his global business model of the Trump Organization and merged it with the business of the White House. In the process, he set in motion the modernization of corruption in the executive office and subsequently the Republican party. In less than four short years he transformed governmental corruption from previously understood as simply officials using their positions of public trust to benefit themselves and their associates to a full-spectrum executive branch organizational style of corruption. A giant favor factory, populated with agents of special interests, the private raiding of public funds, handouts to the undeserving, flows of cash, jobs, freebies, and so on.

For example, when it comes to “pay to play” or the insider culture of lobbying and favor seeking, Trump turned his hotels and resorts into the Beltway’s new smoked-filled back rooms, where public and private business mix and special interests dominate. The line separating the Trump Organization from the Trump Administration as well as the post-administrative Trump apparatus at Mar-a-Lago (or where the line begins and ends between the former president and the 2024 presidential candidate’s public responsibilities and his private financial interests) has never been clear. (And won’t be sorted out until several lawsuits surrounding campaign fundraising are hopefully litigated.)

Here Barak offers specific examples of then-President Trump’s corruption and betrayal(s) of the public interest:

Likewise, 145 foreign officials from 75 governments had visited Trump properties with officials from Turkey leading the pack. A New York Times investigation found that over 200 companies and special-interest groups and foreign governments reaped benefits from patronizing and spending monies at his various properties. With political interests at stake, sixty of those business customers found them advanced by bringing nearly $12 million into the Trump family businesses during the first two years of his presidency.

At Trump’s vaunted “Winter White House,” Mar-a-Lago, the former president had hosted Chinese President Xi Jingping, the then Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, and lastly the former President of Brazil, Jair Bolsonaro, and a slew of his Brazilian officials. The Xi visit was the most successful promotional event in the history of Mar-a-Lago and an unparalleled moneymaker for Trump.

Speaking of the Chinese, among Trump’s fringe benefits were the granting of 46 foreign trademarks to his businesses from China. Until 2019 China’s biggest state-controlled bank rented three floors in Trump Tower stateside, a very lucrative lease that had generated accusations of a conflict of interest for the former president. For example, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) in its January 2021 report on corruption identified more than 3,700 conflicts of interest while Trump was president as a result of his decision not to divest from his business interests.

These matters of Trump’s corruption and how today’s Republican Party and the larger neofascist movement and right-wing operate as a de facto criminal organization are not abstract or esoteric. When such forces are able to operate with (relative) immunity in a supposed democracy, the faith and belief by the public in the legitimacy of their government is undermined and then lost. “Democratic backsliding” soon becomes full-on democratic collapse. In the United States that will likely take the form of a new Apartheid Christofascist electoral autocracy and plutocracy. Ultimately, the Age of Trump and ascendant neofascism is not “just” a political problem it is also a criminal one and the country’s leaders and institutions must respond appropriately if multiracial pluralistic democracy is to be saved.

about this topic

New exoplanet research indicates how volcanoes could generate alien life on other worlds

Astronomers have discovered yet another exoplanet to add to their growing list of other worlds that exist outside of our solar system. While thirty years ago, nobody knew if exoplanets existed, astronomers have quickly realized that they are quite common in the universe. Now the biggest question is how many exoplanets exist that are similar to Earth and might even harbor extraterrestrial life? This is why astronomers are so intrigued by a new exoplanet dubbed LP 791-18d.

Scientists have found a “super-Earth” right next door

Astronomers documented the details of a newly discovered exoplanet, published last week in the journal Nature, thanks to observations using data from NASA’s Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS) and 127 hours of data from the retired Spitzer Space Telescope. According to the paper, the exoplanet is located in our very own Milky Way about 90 lightyears away from us. Unlike Earth, the exoplanet is tidally locked, meaning that the same side constantly faces its host star, which is a small red dwarf in the Crater constellation.

Despite these differences, LP 791-18d does have some Earth-like qualities. For example, the group of astronomers estimate that it’s slightly more massive and larger than Earth. It’s also in its host star’s habitable zone, meaning that liquid water could exist on its surface. Perhaps most intriguing is there is also compelling evidence to suggest that it’s partly covered in volcanoes.

“What if it didn’t have volcanoes? Would that mean it’s bad for life?”

While the astronomers didn’t see volcanoes directly — it’s pretty far away to get a clear photograph — observations on how LP 791-18d interacts with nearby exoplanets has provided strong data pointing to volcanic activity on the planet. This important observation has surfaced a debate on how important volcanic activity is on exoplanets, and whether or not it can be a strong indicator of life elsewhere in the universe.

“The thing that makes this one so special is that it’s in the habitable zone, so that’s a positive,” Stephen Kane, a professor of planetary astrophysics at the University of California, Riverside and co-author of the paper, told Salon. “The huge amounts of volcanoes, that’s what makes this one stand out.”

Kane emphasized that it’s important for planets to be geologically active, but quickly cautioned that the mere presence of volcanoes might not be enough evidence to strongly suggest that life could exist. Nonetheless, it’s an important detail, especially given that volcanoes factor in some leading theories on the origin of life. But whether they are enough is an open debate.

“Back in March was the discovery that Venus has active volcanoes, and it is the opposite of habitable, so you need to be careful about things being described as ‘this is great, but is it everything that you need?'” Kane said, adding that another way to pose the question around volcanoes, exoplanets and the possibility of life, is: “‘What if it didn’t have volcanoes? Would that mean it’s bad for life?'”

Kane elaborated by saying if an exoplanet doesn’t have volcanoes that means it’s not contributing to its atmosphere anymore.

Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon’s weekly newsletter The Vulgar Scientist.

“The Earth’s atmosphere is actually getting blown away by the Sun, always, constantly, especially when the Sun is very active,” Kane said. “Those periods of solar activity can blow away parts of the Earth’s atmosphere, so the atmosphere needs to be rebuilt and the thing that’s doing that is the Earth being volcanically active.”

Without volcanoes, Kane said, Earth would look a lot like Mars, which has an atmosphere that’s primarily composed of carbon dioxide.

“[Mars] has had its atmosphere blown away, and it doesn’t have any active volcanoes, so it’s not able to replace it,” Kane said, though the red planet does have earthquakes, so it’s not entirely dead geologically. “So that’s why volcanoes are important; it’s important that you have an ecosystem of the atmosphere in which it’s been blown away and then it’s been restored.”

Two billion years ago, before the rise of oxygen, Earth would be unrecognizable

In other words, volcanoes on exoplanets could suggest that the exoplanet has an atmosphere. However, Kane said volcanoes can be somewhat of a “double-edged sword,” meaning that too many of them would not be favorable to the possibility of life.

Seth Shostak, a senior astronomer at the SETI Institute who was not involved in the study, said volcanoes are “nature’s way of cooling down.”

“But does it tell you that there’s life there? No,” Shostak said. “It just tells you that the usual chemical processes that you would find on Earth, you can on find any place where you have, oceans, or liquids, if you will.”

Shostak pointed to Jupiter’s moon Io, which is the most volcanically active world in our solar system.

“It’s got lots of volcanic activity too, but it’s not clear that there’s anybody alive on Io,” Shostak said. “Having lots of volcanic activity is a predictable consequence of being in an orbit that’s very close to a much larger body because that much larger body is going to be pushing and pulling anything that’s orbiting that close.”

Indeed, LP 791-18d is orbiting very close to exoplanets LP 791-18b and c. Kane told Salon he is “quite happy to be open” to the possibility of life existing on LP 791-18d.

“But the reason I say that is because we know so little about it,” Kane said. “My suspicion, in this case, is that you have a planet that may have some surface liquid water, which is what then in the habitable zone means, but if it has a ton of volcanoes, it means it could have a very carbon dioxide rich atmosphere.”

While this sounds like it’s bad news for the possibility of life, Kane said not necessarily.

“You have to remember that Earth’s early atmosphere was carbon dioxide dominated,” he said. ” The way a friend of mine put it really well, he said, ‘past Earth was not Earth-like,’ which is a very kind of profound statement.”

He said two billion years ago, before the rise of oxygen, Earth would be unrecognizable.

“Having a carbon dioxide atmosphere doesn’t preclude life, if in that case, as it was earlier, life just existed in the oceans,” he said. “And so that’s the sort of scenario that I imagine for this planet, potentially.”

about astronomy

Former top Pentagon official reveals brazen defense contractor price gouging

As the annual U.S. defense budget creeps closer to $1 trillion, an explosive interview with a former top Pentagon official has exposed private defense contractors’ brazen plot to price gouge the government on weapons and equipment — and reap billions upon billions of dollars of profits from taxpayers’ pockets in the process.

On Sunday, 60 Minutes aired an interview with Shay Assad, a former executive vice president and top contract negotiator for defense contractor Raytheon and former top Pentagon contract negotiator under several presidential administrations. Assad revealed that defense contractors, especially in recent decades, have been massively overcharging the government for nearly everything that it buys.

During his time in the Pentagon, Assad reviewed prices for many products, sometimes ordering official reviews for the costs of some weapons. In nearly all cases, Assad said, the government was paying far more than the product is worth in other markets or was worth in the past — with some things costing multiple times what they are actually worth, often costing the government hundreds of millions of dollars for one product.

“The gouging that takes place is unconscionable. It’s unconscionable,” said Assad. “No matter who they are, no matter what company it is, they need to be held accountable. And right now, that accountability system is broken in the Department of Defense.”

The former official, dubbed “the most hated man in the Pentagon” by Politico in 2016, brought up several examples of this price gouging.

In one example, he showed a picture of an oil pressure switch, an engine part, that he said NASA used to buy for $328. The Pentagon paid over $10,000 for the same part, he said.

“So what accounts for that huge difference?” asked 60 Minutes interviewer Bill Whitaker.

“Gouging,” Assad said. “What else can account for it?”

In another instance, Assad’s Pentagon team reviewed a contract with subcontractor TransDigm and found that the government is paying the company $119 million for parts that “should cost $28 million,” he said — over 4 times more.

This discrepancy, the former official said, is due to an immense amount of consolidation in the defense contracting industry. In 1993, then-Secretary of Defense Les Aspin, under President George H.W. Bush, held a covert dinner with top defense contractor executives to encourage them to consolidate. The companies followed suit, and the number of top contractors fell from 51 in the 1990s to five major companies today: Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, General Dynamics, Boeing and Northrop Grumman.

This consolidation paved the way for price gouging — TransDigm, though not one of the top companies, gained stock among the industry by buying up smaller companies within the industry. Its founder, Nick Howley, has been called before Congress to testify about the company’s excess profits — most recently after a 2022 Defense report found that the company was charging as much as 3,850 percent above market price for at least one part, netting the company $21 million in less than three years, according to the Project on Government Oversight.

The top defense companies are just as culpable. According to Assad, a certain shoulder-fired stinger missile used to cost $25,000 in 1991. Today, Raytheon, now the only manufacturer of the missile, charges more than $400,000 per missile — seven times more than the 1991 price, accounting for inflation and changes to the weapon.

The Patriot weapons system — the single most expensive weapons system sent by the U.S. to Ukraine during the current conflict at $1.1 billion — represents another instance of price gouging, Assad said. In 2015, his group reviewed the price of Patriot PAC-3 missiles and found that the profit margin for Lockheed Martin and Boeing was 40 percent profit over a seven year period, as compared to a typical profit margin of 12 to 15 percent for other contracts.

What’s more, it’s clear that the Pentagon is aware of this price gouging. A recent Pentagon study found that U.S. defense contractors “generate substantial amounts of cash beyond their needs for operations or capital investment,” and turn around and hand out profits to “shareholders so they can invest it elsewhere.”

With billions of dollars of profits, and roughly half of the yearly defense budget going toward private contractors, this is a major windfall for executives and shareholders. It is an extremely reliable windfall as well, as the defense budget represents by far the largest portion of annual federal appropriations spending and often increases by tens of billions of dollars each year. The Biden administration has requested $842 billion for the Department of Defense for 2024 — a record high request.

The Pentagon, the only federal agency that has never successfully passed an audit, seems to have little interest in combating price gouging. As Assad pointed out, the Pentagon cut 130,000 employees whose jobs were to negotiate defense contracts in the 90s, representing over 50 percent of such employees, he said.

“They were convinced that they could rely on the companies to do what was in the best interests of the war fighters and the taxpayers,” Assad said.

Instead, the cuts and consolidation led to an era of uninhibited price gouging, as former Air Force Lieutenant General Chris Bogdan, who oversaw many weapons purchases, added. “They are companies that have to survive, make profit. The Department of Defense, on the other hand, wants the best weapon systems it can have as quickly as possible and as inexpensively as possible,” Bogdan said. “Those are opposite ends of the spectrum. “

“But in our system, there’s nothing wrong with profit,” Whitaker remarked.

“No, there isn’t,” Bogdan replied.

Republicans are quietly moving to limit mifepristone access nationwide

A Republican-led House panel has advanced a 2024 budget bill that includes riders to revoke key Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approvals regarding where patients are allowed to access abortion drug mifepristone, in a quiet move aimed at limiting abortion access nationwide.

The legislation passed the House Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration Appropriations Subcommittee by voice vote on Thursday. It would revoke the FDA decision to nix the requirement for mifepristone to be obtained in person and allow it to be prescribed via telehealth and received by mail, which was first announced by the agency in 2021.

It would also reverse a decision to allow mifepristone to be dispensed at retail pharmacies like CVS and Walgreens, where before the drug was only allowed to be dispensed at certain mail-order pharmacies or specially certified health providers.

Together, the decisions finalized earlier this year by the FDA significantly expand access to mifepristone, one of the drugs used in medication abortions, the most common form of abortion in the U.S. It removes hurdles to abortion care for people without access to specialized health care providers, including people in rural areas and those who can’t access in-person visits; at the time, experts said that these approvals would be crucial to expanding abortion access.

Reversing those decisions, then, would restrict access, in an attack on the drug that is already under threat. It is likely no coincidence that Republicans target mifepristone in particular in the bill: the FDA’s 2000 approval of the drug is currently under legal threat, due to a concerted effort by anti-abortion activists.

Depending on whether or not courts rule to uphold the April decision by Texas Federal Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk to revoke that approval in coming months, the drug could end up being outlawed nationwide.

It’s unclear how that case, which is likely to reach the Supreme Court, will play out. But Republicans appear to be trying to score a win against the drug and restrict abortions however they can, including by attaching riders to the 2024 congressional appropriations bill; Republicans know that standalone bills restricting abortion access, like their proposal for a nationwide ban, would likely not survive the Senate or be signed by President Joe Biden.

Democrats on the committee protested the inclusion of the mifepristone restrictions. “I strongly oppose both these riders in the interest of public health,” said Rep. Rosa DeLauro, the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, during subcommittee markup on the bill.

It now goes to the full appropriations committee, where it’s unclear if the mifepristone provision will stand. Democrats would likely want to strike the proposal, although currently, the congressional budget process already includes one key anti-abortion measure that passes each year despite Democratic opposition: the Hyde Amendment, which bans federal funding from being used for most abortions.

The bill also includes other “poison pills,” as the Clean Budget Coalition points out. If included in the overall budget package and passed, it would block the FDA from working with food manufacturers to implement voluntary sodium reduction efforts and block the FDA from proposing rules to reduce nicotine levels in cigarettes to help curb addiction, according to the group.

Kyrsten Sinema illegally used $180K in campaign funds on lavish trips: complaint

Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, I-Ariz., has been hit with a complaint alleging that she illegally used a huge cache of campaign funds over the course of three years to fund lavish trips across the U.S. and to Europe.

The complaint, filed by PAC Change for Arizona 2024 on Thursday, says that Sinema “committed serious violations” of federal campaign finance laws by spending over $180,000 on luxury items like hotels, flights, meals at Michelin-starred restaurants and winery visits between 2019 and 2022. These trips include at least 17 marathons that appear to have been funded with campaign or public funds.

These trips, to cities where she ran marathons in the U.S. and to international locales like Paris, London and Barcelona — among other expenditures — “appear to serve no legitimate campaign purpose,” according to the complaint. Rather, the PAC says that she has been funding her luxurious lifestyle through money from special interests, to the detriment of her own constituents.

The group is also known as Replace Sinema and was formed in 2021 to defeat Sinema in the 2024 election. It called for the Federal Election Commission (FEC) to launch a probe into Sinema to root out potential abuses.

“While Sinema is on international trips or running marathons or pursuing her high-end wine hobby — each of which has been subsidized by campaign donors — Arizona families are struggling with an increased cost of living and a housing crisis partially fueled by the very same private equity firms that donate to Senator Sinema’s campaigns,” Change for Arizona 2024 wrote in the complaint.

Sinema spokesperson Hannah Hurley called the complaint a “political attack” and claimed that Sinema is focused on issues like addressing the so-called “border crisis.”

The filling comes after an article in the Daily Beast last week unveiled Sinema’s seeming habit of spending thousands of dollars on trips to run in marathons, staying at luxury hotels and resorts — and then pairing those trips with fundraising events in attempts to make the spending a legitimate campaign expense.

In April 2022, for instance, Sinema collected $16,000 from Massachusetts-based donors — the same month that the campaign spent nearly $8,500 on expenses at a Ritz-Carlton hotel and Sinema posted a photo seemingly in the hotel celebrating her completion of the Boston Marathon, according to the Daily Beast.

Campaign finance experts told the publication that these expenses may technically be within the letter of the law, but are pushing the limits of what could be considered legal.

“Tacking some personal activities on to a fundraising trip is generally going to be fine,” Brendan Fischer, deputy executive director of watchdog group Documented, said to the Daily Beast. “But this appears to be the inverse — tacking fundraisers on to personal trips to justify the use of campaign funds to cover the costs.”

The complaint alleges that, because Sinema appeared to have taken advantage of a seeming loophole in campaign finance laws, her activities warrant investigation. On the Boston trip, the group says that the senator “scheduled and took the trip primarily for the purpose of attending and participating in the Boston Marathon,” and it is unlikely that the trip was primarily for fundraising “given the physical demands of running in a marathon.” The complaint says that there are at least five other similar potential violations from the senator.

“To be clear: attaching incidental campaign meetings to a trip that was scheduled for the primary purpose of carrying out a personal hobby does not transform the entire trip into a legitimate campaign activity,” the complaint says.

Meanwhile, the complaint details multiple trips to Europe that Sinema appeared to have taken for personal reasons. Since 2021, it says, she has spent more than $20,000 in campaign funds on trips abroad, including a shopping trip to Paris in which she stayed at a luxury hotel. “Travel to Paris, Barcelona, and London is not an integral part of running for reelection to the United States Senate,” the complaint states.

It’s unclear if the FEC will act on the complaint. The agency is currently in a partisan deadlock and is consistently ineffective, as former FEC commissioners have said.

Pass the oat milk! It’s time that coffee shops stop charging extra for non-dairy milk

As much as I love my homemade Moka Pot coffee in the morning, there are days when I enjoy treating myself to a cup of coffee from my local cafe. Coffee has long been both a necessity and an essential part of my self-care routine. And I’ll never turn down a coffee run to fuel my prolonged addiction. But oftentimes, it comes at the expense of my wallet, especially as someone who is severely lactose intolerant.

If you’ve ever ordered a cup of coffee with non-dairy milk — be it almond, soy, oat, coconut or pea alternatives — you’re probably all too familiar with the surcharge that comes with it. Whether it’s food sensitivities or taste preferences, more coffee drinkers are opting for non-dairy milk in their drinks and cafes, in turn, are upping their prices. Take for example Starbucks and Dunkin’, where customers can pay up to $1 extra for non-dairy milks.

Within the U.S., most non-dairy milks cost more than dairy milk because the government subsidizes the dairy industry. That has only increased in recent years, thanks to an ongoing pandemic that hit dairy producers and regional dairy processors hard. Back in March of last year, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced an additional investment of $80 million in the Dairy Business Innovation (DBI) Initiatives. Just two years prior, DBI awarded $18.4 million to three current Initiatives at University of Tennessee, Vermont Agency for Food and Marketing and University of Wisconsin, and $1.8 million to a new initiative at California State University Fresno.

The unusual ingredient that Ashton Kutcher adds to his coffee

What actually constitutes “milk” has changed fairly recently, after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) acknowledged that PBMAs, or “plant-based milk alternatives” can use the term “milk” in their labeling and marketing; although, it also recommended they include a “voluntary nutrient statement” that conveys how the product compares with milk based on the USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service fluid milk substitutes criteria.

It’s only a matter of time till non-dairy milks will be deemed a part of the greater dairy industry. But aside from mere labels, non-dairy milks are, on average, slightly more expensive than cow’s milk. That’s all due to the additional labor needed to first grow the crops (either grains, nuts or fruit), then process and package them. It’s worth noting, however, that the actual price differences aren’t that great in comparison.

I’ll never turn down a coffee run to fuel my prolonged addiction. But oftentimes, it comes at the expense of my wallet, especially as someone who is severely lactose intolerant.

Per Bon Appetit’s Ali Francis, the least expensive store-bought whole milk was two cents per ounce, from Walmart, while almond milk was four cents per ounce and oat was six cents per ounce. Yet cafes are going berserk with their upcharges, so much so that a simple non-dairy milk latte can cost anywhere between $10 to $15.

The increasingly high costs of non-dairy beverages feels more like punishment to lactose sensitive drinkers, who can’t control what their bodies are able to tolerate. Lactose sensitivity also seems to be on the rise, as noted by NBC News. About two-thirds of people around the world have lactose malabsorption, or difficulty digesting lactose, per the National Institutes of Health (NIH). In the U.S., lactose malabsorption is more prevalent among Black and Indigenous people, Asian Americans and Latinos than non-Latino white people. So, is charging extra for non-dairy milks also a little bit racist? Perhaps it is.

It’s about time that coffee shops stop charging extra for non-dairy milk because coffee lovers, especially those with dietary restrictions, should be able to enjoy a cup of coffee without stressing about the extra costs that come with their drink. For some, coffee is a must-have in the morning. And for others, coffee is purely an occasional treat. Regardless, cafes should support a more inclusive coffee culture, that doesn’t punish those who are trying to be more sustainable or cater to their personal preferences.

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

That being said, several cafes have already begun removing additional non-dairy milk charges. Caribou Coffee dropped the extra fee for non-dairy milk on May 4th, but only for those who sign up to be a member of Caribou Perks, the chain’s loyalty program. Customers also need to order their beverages through the app if they want the reduced prices.

Caribou reportedly charges 80 cents more for non-dairy milks in any espresso-based beverage, according to VegNews. And approximately 20% of their drinks are made with either oat or almond milk. So, the recent initiative, while not entirely clear-cut, comes with a few conditions to allow for the chain to still make a profit.

In addition to Caribou, there’s Peet’s Coffee, which dropped the additional 80 cents for non-dairy milk for the month of April as part of a trial-run for a possible policy change. Blue Bottle even offers surcharge-free almond and oat milk.

It’s possible for cafes to drop the extra charges. And hopefully, the cafes that have already done so will serve as inspiration for others. Let’s make coffee enjoyable and accessible for everyone.

about coffee:

Jordan’s FBI “whistleblower” may have lied under oath about funding from Trump ally: report

One of House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan’s, R-Ohio, so-called FBI “whistleblowers” is facing questions about whether he lied under oath about receiving financial support from longtime Trump ally Kash Patel, according to The Guardian.

Former FBI agent Garrett O’Boyle testified last week in Jordan’s investigation into what Republicans have called the “weaponization” of agencies like the FBI against conservatives. Rep. Dan Goldman, D-N.Y., asked O’Boyle during the hearing whether Patel was helping to fund his legal defense.

“Not that I’m aware of,” O’Boyle replied.

However, during a February interview with the House of Representatives weaponization subcommittee, O’Boyle stated that his legal fees were being paid for by Fight With Kash, or the Kash Foundation, a nonprofit organization helmed by Patel, according to The Guardian.

Additionally, a Democratic staff report published in March indicated that Patel had appointed former Trump attorney Jesse Binnall to be O’Boyle’s counsel. The Guardian reported that Binnall is on the board of directors for the Kash Foundation.

Report outs Jim Jordan’s weaponization subcommittee “whistleblowers” as frauds paid by Trump ally

Jordan, a staunch Trump ally, dismissed the scrutiny surrounding O’Boyle.

“Yet again the Democrats distorted the facts in their report on our brave FBI whistleblowers. Jesse Binnall is representing Mr. O’Boyle pro bono,” a Jordan spokesperson told The Guardian.

But Goldman said the contradiction raises a serious issue.

“Mr. O’Boyle’s answers in the subcommittee hearing on Thursday appear to contradict his previous testimony in the transcribed interview with subcommittee staff,” Goldman told The Guardian. “In order to ensure witnesses are truthful when they come before the subcommittee, Chairman Jordan must determine whether or not Mr. O’Boyle lied under oath on Thursday.”

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

O’Boyle was among a group of former FBI employees who accused the organization of politicization after the FBI revoked security clearances from two members for having participated in the Capitol riots or advancing fraudulent claims about the event.

Among the other witnesses at the hearing were members of far-right groups, as well as anti-vaxxers and individuals who rejected the results of the 2020 presidential election, per watchdog The Congressional Integrity Project.

“Mr. O’Boyle’s testimony in this week’s hearing should be investigated immediately by Chairman Jordan’s subcommittee,” Kyle Herrig, executive director of The Congressional Integrity Project, Kyle Herring, told The Guardian. “The fact that O’Boyle’s own lawyer has such deep ties to Kash Patel, a January 6 co-conspirator and close ally of Donald Trump, is already enough to call any of his testimony into question.”

about Jim Jordan

An expert explains why killer whales keep attacking boats

Orcas living off Europe’s Iberian coast recently struck and sunk a yacht in the Strait of Gibraltar. Scientists suspect that this is the third vessel this subpopulation of killer whales has capsized since May 2020, when a female orca believed to be the originator of this behaviour suffered a traumatic encounter with a boat.

In most reported cases, orcas are biting, bending and breaking off the rudders of sailboats. So how did they learn to imitate this behaviour – and why? We asked Dr. Luke Rendell, who researches learning, behaviour and communication among marine mammals at the University of St Andrews.

Why do you think orcas appear to be attacking boats off the Iberian coast?

Any answer that I (or anyone else, really) give to this question is speculation – we just don’t know enough about killer whale motivations to be certain. The puzzle for biologists is to understand how this behaviour developed.

Damaging boats in such a determined way is, however, not something I have ever heard orcas do before.

The lack of obvious fitness-enhancing rewards (like food, for example) means this is unlikely to have evolved because it enabled the whales to better survive in their environment. That is what we would call an adaptive trait: it confers a direct evolutionary benefit by helping the animal find food, mate, or successfully raise offspring.

For the first time, an orca was seen raising another whale species’ young

But I can say what this behaviour looks like. There are multiple accounts of single and groups of orcas developing idiosyncratic and not obviously adaptive habits. These range from one group engaging in what seemed like a short-term fad of carrying dead salmon on their heads, to another vocally mimicking sea lions (there may be an adaptive outcome to convincing sea lions that you are a sea lion too, not a voracious predator, but there’s no evidence of this occurring).

There are other kinds of behaviour that do appear to bring rewards – for example, captive orcas learning to regurgitate fish to use as bait for gulls, which they apparently prefer to eat over the fish. But the origin and spread of these boat attacks currently fits very well with the characterisation of a temporary fad, and it remains to be seen how long it persists.

If instead there is an adaptive explanation, my hunch is it has to do with curiosity sometimes leading to important innovations around food sources, which can then be shared.

How do you suspect this behaviour is being transmitted among killer whales in the region?

This behaviour probably started with individual orcas, but would appear to spread through social learning. We recently published a paper on a similar fad-like behaviour in bottlenose dolphins, where we identified the dolphin that promoted a tail-walking behaviour it had acquired during a temporary period of captivity.

This is pretty similar to the account of an academic journal on the recent yacht sinking, in that a specific individual was identified as the potential source. This orca was prompted to engage in the behaviour due to a past trauma – perhaps being struck by a boat rudder, according to the account.

The precise reason is very hard to know for sure, but we do know the behaviour has spread through her group. And it’s difficult to explain that dynamic without involving some kind of social learning – the spread of information.

Is there evidence of killer whales behaving this way in the past?

I have experienced orcas swimming very close to our boat in the waters near St Vincent, in the eastern Caribbean, during a research survey. Our vessel, like those involved in these interactions, was about the size of a large whale (a humpback, for instance). Maybe they were investigating us, but it never escalated to any kind of physical interaction.

An illustration from an early edition of Herman Melville’s Moby-Dick. Augustus Burnham Shute

My impression was that they were interested in the boat’s propeller, and the currents it created – they came so close on one occasion that we had to take the engine out of gear to prevent an injury. So, approaching boats is not novel. Damaging them in such a determined way is, however, not something I have ever heard orcas do before.

It is, of course, known to happen in other species – notably sperm whales, giving rise to the story of Moby Dick: a combination of accounts of a white whale off the South American coast dubbed “Mocha Dick”, and the account of the whaler Essex, sunk by a large sperm whale in equatorial waters.

The subpopulation of orcas responsible for these attacks is critically endangered. Do you think the group’s conservation status is relevant in some way?

I don’t think it’s particularly relevant to the origin and spread of the behaviour, but it is highly relevant to how we should manage this population.

If these killer whales continue attacking boats, it will make protecting them harder. Not only does interacting with revolving propellers increase the risk of injury to these animals, it also threatens people – from the injuring of crews to the sinking of vessels – which will create political pressure for something to be done.

Of course, small vessel operators do not need to navigate the areas along the Atlantic coasts of Spain and Portugal where these interactions with orcas have been happening. Preventing them from doing so would solve the problem – but for many boat operators and owners, this is their shortest route, while heading offshore makes for riskier passages. A loss of tourism revenue if these vessels stop will add to pressure for a permanent solution.

If these killer whales continue attacking boats, it will make protecting them harder.

It is possible that some will call for these orcas to be controlled, up to and including having them killed if they continue to threaten human life and livelihoods. This poses significant ethical questions about our relationship with these animals.

Should we, as the species that ultimately holds the greatest power, vacate small, vulnerable vessels from the orcas’ habitat as part of a shifting relationship to the sea, which we know is deteriorating as a result of our actions? Or should we confer on ourselves the right to navigate as we please and control any nonhuman animals that impede it, up to and including culling them?

Historically, the latter view would almost certainly have prevailed, and perhaps it will here. But it is a question which society, rather than scientists, must answer, and it will be telling which way the relevant authorities ultimately turn.

Reports indicate a ‘traumatised’ victim of a boat collision initiated the behaviour. Are notions of solidarity and self-defence among killer whales outlandish?

I regard this as plausible speculation. The authors of the recent paper cast it as one of a number of assumptions about how the behaviour might have developed, with generally increased pressure on their habitat and the idea of natural curiosity as other options (the latter is what I think is most likely).

Notions of collective self-defence in cetaceans (aquatic mammals including whales, dolphins and porpoises) are far from outlandish. We have accounts of sperm whales rising to each other’s defence when orcas attack, for example. Solidarity is a more subjective issue, and we don’t have access to the internal mental states of these animals to really understand whether this is going on.

I can, however, point to a different cetacean: humpback whales apparently aid other species, notably seals, that are under attack from orcas. The scientist who led the description of this behaviour, Robert Pitman, said he regards it as “inadvertent altruism” based on a simple rule of thumb: “When you hear a killer whale attack, go break it up.”

These accounts raise interesting questions about the motivations behind orcas attacking boats that we cannot yet answer. It is not impossible that these orcas perceive their own common aggressor in us – but it is also entirely possible they have no such concept.

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

about orcas and dolphins

Coca-Cola’s biggest challenge in greening its operations is its own global marketing strategy

Coca-Cola is one of the world’s most widely recognized brands. Its global reach, spanning more than 200 countries, was the theme of a 2020 commercial that showed families drinking Coke with their meals in cities from Orlando, Florida, to Shanghai, London, Mexico City and Mumbai, India.

Operating on that scale creates a big carbon footprint. The company uses over 200,000 vehicles to distribute its products every day and runs hundreds of bottling plants and syrup factories across the globe.

But Coke’s single largest contribution to climate change comes from its refrigeration equipment.

Running refrigerators uses a lot of electricity and some coolants in these systems are greenhouse gases that trap heat in the atmosphere. Almost two-thirds of the climate impact of refrigeration comes from electricity consumption and refrigerants account for the rest. As of 2020, refrigeration produced nearly 8% of global greenhouse gas emissions.

History suggests that the most effective way to shrink Coca-Cola’s refrigeration emissions may be to question whether the company needs that cooling equipment running around the clock at convenience stores on street corners worldwide. That’s a heretical notion for a company obsessed with making sure Coca-Cola is always within “an arm’s reach of desire,” as one Coke president put it.

As I show in my new book, “Country Capitalism: How Corporations from the American South Remade Our Economy and the Planet,” major companies like Coca-Cola have profited handsomely by making their products readily available worldwide. In doing so, they have created a fast-paced, long-distance form of commerce that is a major driver of our planet’s current ecological crisis.

Wanted: an ideal refrigerant

Refrigerants first became an environmental issue because of concerns about ozone loss, not climate change. Before the 1980s, the primary coolants used in refrigerators were chlorofluorocarbons or CFCs. Discovered in the 1920s by a chemist at General Motors, these compounds were odorless, nonflammable and seemingly nontoxic — all properties that made them useful to industry. In the following decades, CFCs became the chief refrigerant used to keep things cool.

Then, in the 1970s, researchers at the University of California found that CFCs could destroy stratospheric ozone, a gas in the atmosphere that protects life on Earth from the Sun’s ultraviolet radiation. Nations ultimately moved to ban use of CFCs through the 1987 Montreal Protocol, one of the most successful environmental treaties on record.

Chemical companies such as DuPont led the way in promoting new chlorine-free refrigerants, called hydrofluorocarbons or HFCs, that would not deplete the ozone layer. Like CFCs, HFCs appealed to industry because they were odorless, nonflammable and posed no serious threats to human health.

But HFCs had a big drawback: They were powerful greenhouse gases that trapped heat in the Earth’s atmosphere, warming the planet’s surface. Some HFCs had warming impacts more than 1,000 times greater than carbon dioxide, the most abundant greenhouse gas.

How refrigerants work and why they’re bad for the climate.

HFC politics

Companies like Coca-Cola knew about HFCs’ climate-warming effects when they began transitioning to this new refrigerant in the 1990s. Bryan Jacobs, a Coca-Cola engineer who worked on this transition, told me in an interview that early on, refrigeration technicians in Europe recommended another promising path instead.

Greenpeace advocates in Germany had worked closely with refrigeration engineers to develop what came to be known as Greenfreeze cooling equipment: machines that used hydrocarbons, including isobutane and propane, as refrigerants. These refrigerants, which had a global warming impact radically lower than HFCs, offered the prospect of protecting both the ozone layer and the climate.

Jacobs told me that Coca-Cola was “pretty dismissive,” largely because his team feared that these refrigeration units filled with flammable material might explode — especially in rural areas lacking technical support. Instead, Coca-Cola shifted to HFCs.

In response, Greenpeace launched a major campaign at the 2000 Sydney Olympics to expose how Coca-Cola’s HFC units were warming the planet. Doug Daft, an Australian who was Coke’s CEO at the time, committed the company to eliminating HFC refrigeration from its systems in the years ahead.

Always within arm’s reach

Since 2000, Coca-Cola has become a world leader in developing HFC-free refrigeration equipment. At first it invested heavily in a novel type of refrigerator that used carbon dioxide as the key refrigerant. Soon, however, the company recognized that hydrocarbon refrigerants posed fewer safety risks than they had initially feared and began adopting these units as well.

Coca-Cola also convinced other companies to shift away from HFCs. Partnering with Unilever, Pepsi, Red Bull and other big firms, the company launched Refrigerants, Naturally!, an organization committed to transitioning major food and beverage companies toward HFC-free refrigeration. In 2010, Coke CEO Muhtar Kent persuaded some 400 consumer goods companies to commit to eliminating HFCs from their refrigeration systems.

By 2016, Coke reported that 61% of all new cooling equipment it purchased was HFC-free. Four years later, that figure reached 83%.

Still, as of 2022, more than 10% of Coke’s new refrigeration units contained HFCs and refrigeration remained its single largest greenhouse gas emissions source. Part of the problem is that all of these units run on electricity, much of which is generated by burning fossil fuels. With Coca-Cola selling roughly 2.2 billion drinks every day, keeping Coke cold still has an enormous carbon footprint. The same is true for Coke’s competitors.

Coca-Cola sells hundreds of beverage brands worldwide, reflecting its strategy for dominating the beverage market.

In an interview with Coca-Cola’s former chief sustainability officer, Jeff Seabright, I asked him whether the company had ever considered thinking more broadly about the necessity of cooling all those Cokes around the clock. Seabright’s response was an emphatic “No,” and that the company was still driven by the mantra of making Coke available for immediate consumption at the point of sale.

Despite the resources that Coca-Cola has invested in changing refrigerants, its cooling equipment is still warming our planet. As I see it, perhaps it’s time for Coke to question whether it needs all those machines in the first place — and for consumers to consider whether their have-it-now expectations are worth the environmental costs they impose.

Bart Elmore, Professor of History, The Ohio State University

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

“Trump keeps defaming E. Jean Carroll”: Trump’s new Truth Social attack could badly backfire

Donald Trump attacked E. Jean Carroll after she amended her 2019 defamation lawsuit to include the former president’s attacks at this month’s CNN town hall.

Carroll’s Monday filing followed Trump’s continued denial of her sexual assault and defamation allegations, even after a jury found the ex-president liable for both counts on May 9. The columnist is seeking further damages in addition to the $5 million she was awarded earlier this month.

During a CNN town hall appearance only a day after being found liable, Trump repudiated Carroll’s claims, calling her a “wack job” and referring to the case as “a rigged deal.”

“This conduct supports a very substantial punitive damages award in Carroll’s favor both to punish Trump, to deter him from engaging in further defamation, and to deter others from doing the same,” the filing says.

NBC reported that the newly refined suit seeks a total of at least $10 million in damages as well as additional “punitive damages in an amount to be determined at trial.”

Carroll takes action over Trump CNN attack — experts say “verdict could be greater than $5 million”

“I don’t know E. Jean Carroll,” Trump wrote in a Tuesday Truth Social post. “I never met her or touched her (except on a celebrity line with her African American husband who she disgustingly called the “Ape,”), I wouldn’t want to know or touch her, I never abused her or raped her or took her to a dressing room 25 years ago in a crowded department store where the doors are LOCKED, she has no idea when, or did anything else to her, except deny her Fake, Made Up Story, that she wrote in a book. IT NEVER HAPPENED, IS A TOTAL SCAM, UNFAIR TRIAL!”

Trump also argued that the Carroll case had a distinctly political motivation, writing that it was “part of the Democrats playbook to tarnish my name and person, much like the now fully debunked Russia, Russia, Russia Hoax, the 51 Intelligence Agents, FBI/Twitter Files, and so much more.”

“It is being funded and tried by Democrat operatives, although this was denied by them, and when they got caught in the lie, the Clinton appointed judge would not let us use it in trial,” he continued. “Time will prove him to be highly partisan & very unfair. Where’s the dress she said she had?”

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

Trump, who waived his right to testify in the trial, has filed notice that he will appeal the May 9 verdict.

“Trump keeps defaming E Jean Carroll,” Jose Pagliery, who covered the trial for The Daily Beast, tweeted in response to Trump’s latest attack. “This afternoon, a NY state court judge in an unrelated case will warn Trump about his online behavior. He’s giving the judge ample reason to doubt whether he can abide by court orders—and common decency. Quite the fast-moving train wreck.”

“Trump just wants to keep paying @ejeancarroll more and more money in damages,” quipped MSNBC legal analyst Katie Phang.

Trump keeps defaming E Jean Carroll.

This afternoon, a NY state court judge in an unrelated case will warn Trump about his online behavior.

He's giving the judge ample reason to doubt whether he can abide by court orders–and common decency.

Quite the fast-moving train wreck. pic.twitter.com/GZ8LgXZlk2

— Jose Pagliery (@Jose_Pagliery) May 23, 2023

about Trump’s attacks on Carroll

Teen who crashed U-Haul near WH had Nazi flag and made “threatening comments” about Biden: reports

The driver of a U-haul truck that crashed across the street from the White House Monday night reportedly had a Nazi swastika flag.

Sai Varshith Kandula, 19, of Chesterfield, Missouri, will be charged with assault with a dangerous weapon and threatening harm to the president, vice president or family members, per authorities.

Secret Service spokesperson Anthony Guglielmi tweeted a statement on Monday evening to notify the public that “a box truck” had “collided with security barrier on the north side of Lafayette Square at 16th Street.”

“There were no injuries to any Secret Service or White House personnel and the cause and manner of the crash remain under investigation,” the statement continued.

Vehicle collision at Lafayette Square: Roadways and pedestrian walkways are closed as teams investigate. pic.twitter.com/4QqNyRoa0T

— Anthony Guglielmi (@SecretSvcSpox) May 23, 2023

Guglielmi shared a follow-up post early Tuesday morning stating that “the driver may have intentionally struck the security barriers at Lafayette Square. Charges will be filed by the United State Park Police with investigative support from the #SecretService.”

The truck has been deemed safe by @DCPoliceDept & preliminary investigation reveals the driver may have intentionally struck the security barriers at Lafayette Square. Charges will be filed by the United States Park Police with investigative support from the #SecretService.

— Anthony Guglielmi (@SecretSvcSpox) May 23, 2023

Police probe possible neo-Nazi ties of Texas gunman who wore “Right Wing Death Squad” patch: report

A law enforcement source told CBS that, after driving onto Lafayette Square, the man made “threatening statements” toward President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris. The source added that background checks on the man turned up clean and he was not named on any watch lists.

A bomb squad that searched the truck found no evidence of explosives or incendiary devices, per a source that spoke to CNN.

Troy Pope of WUSA tweeted an image of a Nazi flag from the scene of the crash, writing, investigators “have pulled what appears to be a Nazi flag out of the U-haul, but they haven’t provided further details.”

NEW: Investigators pulled what appears to be a Nazi flag out of the U-Haul, but they haven't provided any further details.

Here's what we know: https://t.co/cXt81Ji2NA pic.twitter.com/jBsb1uPJA3

— Troy Pope (@troycpope) May 23, 2023

CNN law enforcement analyst Andrew McCabe, a former assistant FBI director, drew a parallel between the driver of the U-haul’s alleged Nazi flag and MAGA supporters who stormed the Capitol on January 6.

Speaking with CNN anchors Poppy Harlow and Sarah Sidner, McCabe argued that “the charges alone speak to the intentionality of the act.”

“So prosecutors have to have a factual basis to be able to charge this person with those, with trying to, attempting to kill or maim the president. They’ve got to have probable cause to be able to do that. So they have some information or evidence that indicates very clearly that this was an intentional act,” McCabe said.

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

“That’s coming not just from obviously the physical things that we see, the video of the truck ramming the barricade, but likely even from material they collected from within the truck,” he explained. “We’ve heard that there’s been a notebook. There may be writings or statements or maybe postings online, things like that, that are telling them that this person’s intent was, in fact, to target the president or someone in the White House, which is, you know, particularly, particularly concerning.”

McCabe also addressed Sidner’s observation that “white supremacism, far right wing extremists are the biggest threat to this country and its safety.”

“This is certainly the number one terrorist threat that they’re tracking right now, that is domestic violent extremists, and particularly domestic violent extremists who are motivated by anti-Black racial sentiments. Right. So this fits very neatly within that warning that we’ve heard again and again,” he said.

“And I think you have to draw a line from this apparent attack on the White House by someone bearing a Nazi flag to at least some of the people, it’s hard to say how many, but some of the people involved in the January 6th attack on the Capitol,” McCabe continued. “How do we know that? Because some of those folks were carrying the same sort of symbols, Nazi flags, Confederate flags, things like that, that show you a commonality of ideology.”

“It doesn’t mean that they all know each other and they were all planning those two events together,” he clarified. “But it shows you there is a thread of extremism, and particularly racially-motivated extremism in this country that is also now directed at institutions of government. So these are things that our security professionals are very focused on right now. And as we saw last night, for good reason.”

“It’s terrifying,” Harlow agreed.

about the rise of white supremacists

Is turmeric really as “good for you” as we’re led to believe?

Turmeric has been used by humans for more than 4,000 years. As well as cooking and cosmetics, it’s been a staple of the traditional medicine practice of Ayurveda, used to treat a variety of conditions from arthritis to wind.

Even today turmeric remains a popular health supplement. There are plenty of articles and social media posts claiming the benefits of this spice for everything from brain function to reducing pain and inflammation.

But while some of these claims are linked to evidence, most of this research is in cells and animals, making the actual effects on humans less clear.

While turmeric is reported to contain over 100 different compounds, most of its reported health benefits are linked to specific compounds called curcuminoids (the most abundant being curcumin).

Curcuminoids are phenolic compounds, which are molecules that plants often make as pigments or to discourage animals eating them. This is what gives turmeric its distinctive color, but it can also change how cells function.

Many of the potential health effects of turmeric have been linked to these phenolic compounds which, in the lab, have been shown to have an antioxidant effect.

Antioxidants are substances which prevent or slow damage caused by free radicals — a harmful type of molecule that can cause inflammation and has also been linked to heart disease and cancer.

But while turmeric does indeed act as an anti-inflammatory, many of the health benefits caused by this effect have only been proven in the lab (using cells) or in animals.

For example, one study fed obese mice one gram of curcumin per kilogram of body weight. After 12 weeks, they found that the mice given curcumin had similar improvements in brain function and lower levels of inflammation in their liver as the mice who had been on a weight loss diet.

So while this may have translated to healthier mice, it’s unclear whether the same would be true in humans. Not to mention that had this study been conducted in humans, an average 70kg person would have needed to consume over 2kg of turmeric daily during the trial — which would be impossible.

Since no similar studies have yet been conducted on humans, we still don’t understand whether turmeric reduces inflammation in a similar way.

Effect on pain

Yet despite the lack of research showing benefits in humans, turmeric (and curcumin) are widely marketed as anti-inflammatory supplements for a range of conditions — including joint pain and arthritis.

According to the results of one review, it does seem that in human trials turmeric supplements may have a modest benefit on pain compared to a placebo — and in some cases as as beneficial as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

But the studies included in this review appear to be of variable quality. Many were conducted using a very small population (ten people or fewer) and had a wide variation in the amount of turmeric participants were given. This means it’s hard to make a clear recommendation that turmeric is effective for pain.

Turmeric has also been suggested to have anti-cancer properties due to its anti-oxidant effect. In the lab, curcumin has been shown to reverse DNA changes in cells which cause breast cancer. But it’s less clear whether turmeric reduces the risk of cancer or supports treatment in humans.

Some research has shown that using a turmeric gargle could reduce the side effects of radiotherapy in people with head and neck cancers, however.

It may also help people with a rare genetic condition called familiar adenomatous polyposis, with one clinical trial finding that consuming 120mg curcumin (about the same as a teaspoon of turmeric) was linked with fewer cancer-causing polyps for people with this condition — which can be a sign of the early stages of cancer.

With inflammation being linked to many cognitive health conditions such as dementia, some research has sought to understand whether turmeric can benefit brain function. So far, it’s unclear whether turmeric has any effect.

The trials that have been conducted in humans have generally been very small, with a lack of consistency in study design, dosage and how they measured cognitive effects. Again, this makes it difficult to see whether turmeric really does have an effect or whether any cognitive improvements are due to other factors.

Does turmeric really work?

A major challenge in getting turmeric to work in our bodies is getting it from our gut into our bloodstream. Curcumin is quite a large compound — and as such can be hard for the body to absorb into the bloodstream because it isn’t very soluble in water.

But other research suggests that turmeric works by acting on the bacteria in our guts. Although more data is needed on whether this is true in humans, it could suggest that turmeric doesn’t need to be absorbed into the bloodstream in order to provide health benefits because it’s already absorbed through our gut.

Another challenge is the amount of turmeric needed to see benefits. In many studies only the curcumin extract is used — which makes up only about 3% of turmeric powder itself. With many studies giving greater than 1g of curcumin per kilogram for a mouse or rat, the equivalent amount for these effects to be seen in a human would be difficult to achieve — even in supplement form.

Turmeric is a great spice, giving a pleasant earthy flavor and vibrant natural yellow color to food. But it’s far from clear how its reported benefits translate to human health. So, enjoy turmeric as a spice and a color in food, but don’t rely on it to deliver major health benefits or to treat or cure disease.

Duane Mellor, Lead for Evidence-Based Medicine and Nutrition, Aston Medical School, Aston University

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

Healthcare workers are divided over whether unmasking in medical settings has merit

Days before the nation’s Public Health Emergency ended last week, signaling the end of the emergency pandemic era, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) updated its masking recommendations for healthcare facilities. In the update, the CDC advised healthcare facilities to take a risk-based approach when it comes to universal masking in healthcare facilities.

However, aside from instances where healthcare workers are directly working with COVID-19 positive patients or a facility is grappling with a known outbreak, face masks will still no longer be required. The CDC does advise face masks to be considered when working with high-risk populations, but the public health agency does appear to be taking a case-by-case basis in terms of universal masking, depending on hospital admission levels as the CDC will longer track individual cases.

Why the US may never recover from COVID

While many hospitals and healthcare facilities have been walking back on masking since March, the end of the Public Health Emergency was the final push for some facilities, including Kaiser Permanente, to follow suit and go away with universal masking entirely. In April, the California Dental Association stated it would no longer require dentists to wear masks unless they were performing a clinical procedure. Universal masking was long thought to be a pandemic change that stayed in clinical practice, but it’s becoming more likely that doctors won’t always be masked in healthcare facilities in our post Public Health Emergency (PHE) future.

In March, the California Nurses Association condemned California lifting its masking requirement in healthcare settings. “This is an attack on frontline health care workers, who will now face greater risk of Covid-19 infections, reinfections, and long Covid,” Cathy Kennedy, a RN and president of California Nurses Association, said in a statement, describing a condition in which COVID symptoms linger for months or even years. “The more Covid infections someone has had, the more likely they are to develop long Covid. It’s surreal that political leaders would put nurses, patients, and community members at greater risk of developing chronic conditions like heart disease, stroke risk, diabetes, pulmonary embolism, cognitive impairment, and long-term immune dysfunction.”

But is that what healthcare professionals actually want? And is this putting certain patients at undue risk? Dr. Eric Topol, Director of the Scripps Research Translational Institute and a professor of molecular medicine, said he doesn’t believe it’s time to unmask just yet.

“There are still viruses circulating, and immunocompromised people, people who are of advanced age are vulnerable, and I do think masks help.”

“I wear a mask in my clinic,” Topol told Salon. “Obviously, it would be nice if we can avoid those, but right now, there are still viruses circulating and immunocompromised people [and] people who are of advanced age are vulnerable. I do think masks help and that we should be careful.”

Topol added that despite the end of the country’s public health emergency, COVID-19 is still circulating and can still do a lot of damage. Indeed, studies have shown that it can increase a person’s risk of long-term brain problems and risk of getting diabetes. Research continues to show that a COVID-19 infection can have a lasting impact on a person’s heart.

“I think we need to keep our guard up,” Topol said, adding that medical workers often exhibited presenteeism, which is working despite feeling sick. “A lot of healthcare workers come to work and are not perfectly healthy and they may be COVID carriers. In my profession, the show must go on and you must see your patients even when you’re not feeling well.”

Topol referenced an editorial published in the Annals of Internal Medicine last week arguing that healthcare workers aren’t ready to unmask. The editorial cited presenteeism as one of the main reasons why medical professionals should keep their masks on, and pointed to how the AIDS crisis ushered in an era of medical professionals wearing gloves. “During the early HIV/AIDS epidemic, some physicians said they simply could not—for a host of reasons—wear gloves even when situations were associated with likely exposure to blood or bloody body fluids,” the authors stated. “Health care personnel have adjusted to this requirement, and glove use in such situations has now become the standard of care and is widely accepted as part of standard precautions.”

The editorial came a month after a separate editorial published in April stated that masking had “come and gone, for now” in healthcare facilities. Monica Gandhi, an infectious disease doctor and professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, was not an author of the editorial, but agrees that masking should end in healthcare settings. “Not only are masks not as effective as we had thought, as summarized in this systematic review article, but face masks on healthcare providers can cut down on patients’ impressions of empathy and caring per a randomized trial,” Gandhi said in an email.

“Face masks on healthcare providers can cut down on patients’ impressions of empathy and caring.”

Since the beginning of the pandemic, masks have been a source of debate. It wasn’t long after the outbreak that face masks became politicized as well. For a while, even a year into the pandemic, scientific studies showed time and time again that masks — cloth, surgical, N95 masks, and sometimes a mix of two — were a key step in stopping the spread of COVID-19. However, as the coronavirus mutated, cloth masks alone became ineffective.

However, masks classified as N95 and KN95 (referring to their ability to filter a high percentage of airborne particles), have still been demonstrated to significantly reduce the risk of infection. In the review Gandhi pointed to, the authors stated that updated evidence suggested that masks are only associated with a small reduced risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection in community settings. Nonetheless, the benefits of N95s couldn’t be ruled out.

For Thomas LaVeist, Dean of the School of Public Health at Tulane University, the trend of unmasking in healthcare settings is “an unfortunate thing.”

“The masks serve many different purposes, it protects people against multiple viruses — not just COVID-19 — and I think we should continue to mask in healthcare settings and other settings,” he said, adding that he was in Taiwan and noticed more masks being worn. “I do think it would be a good thing if culturally in the U.S., people would just wear masks as a precaution, if they were feeling under the weather or something.”

about COVID-19

The legacy of Anna Nicole Smith and why we need to retire the term “gold digger”

Many of the people in Smith’s life, from doctors to lawyers, and eventually the public, wrote her off as a manipulative, drug-addicted gold digger.

Netflix’s documentary “Anna Nicole Smith: You Don’t Know Me” premiered May 16, about the blonde bombshell best known for being a Guess Jeans model in the ’90s, for her E! Channel reality show and for marrying elderly oil tycoon J. Howard Marshall II, for which she received much public criticism. Her life was arguably a sad one in many ways, but in watching her documentary, I wondered about the brief narrative spun around Smith. Is that all she was – a tragic cautionary tale for young girls with dreams of Hollywood stardom?

Anna Nicole Smith was born Vickie Lynn Hogan in the small town of Mexia, Texas in 1967. She was a girl who always had big dreams, but was – according to her uncle – always out chasing boys. The documentary includes interviews from family members, friends and employees as well as a lot of never-before-seen footage. As an adult, she moved to the big city of Houston and began dancing at a topless bar. In 1991, at 23 years old, an 86-year-old customer by the name of J. Howard Marshall came into the club and was the man who would become her husband. Marshall was a billionaire – with a “b” – from Texas oil money.

7 heartbreaking Anna Nicole Smith revelations from Netflix’s documentary “You Don’t Know Me”

Smith’s career as a dancer led her to modeling for Playboy, which inevitably led to her famous and highly lucrative Guess Jeans campaign, landing her on billboards all over the country from L.A. to New York and beyond. Shortly thereafter, through a combination of addiction, trauma, and legal woes, Anna’s life began a slow unraveling. She was pronounced dead on Feb. 8, 2007 with cause of death listed as an accidental drug overdose. She died only a few months after her son, Daniel, was also found dead of an overdose and only months after the birth of her daughter, Dannielynn.

Anna Nicole Smith: You Don’t Know Me (Netflix)

I myself have done pretty much every kind of sex work, including what is known as “sugaring.”

Many of the people in Smith’s life, from doctors to lawyers, and eventually the public, wrote her off as a manipulative, drug-addicted gold digger. Kelly Moore, a former attorney for Smith, recounts in the documentary how a senior attorney she was working with at the time rolled his eyes when J. Howard Marshall attempted to file paperwork to legally adopt Smith’s son, Daniel. The doctor prescribing Smith’s Methadone at the time of her death also talked about how the doctor who referred Smith to him warned him how manipulative she was. A trait not uncharacteristic of people dealing with addiction.

While most of the information in “You Don’t Know Me” is presented in a neutral manner, there was something that still bothered me. I myself have done pretty much every kind of sex work, including what is known as “sugaring.” A sugar baby/sugar daddy (or mommy) relationship is one of a transactional nature without the explicit parameters of prostitution. There can be many variations, but most commonly it exists as an older man who seeks a younger, attractive woman for sexual purposes and on the opposite side, a younger attractive woman who trades on her youth and beauty for financial means.

One of the biggest issues I have always had with the criticism of Smith is the label of “gold digger” that seems to be her most enduring and unfortunate legacy. Her life was a testament to the pitfalls of being a woman trying to make it in a man’s world, and yet the documentary seemed to reinforce the trope of Anna Nicole Smith as a warning for all the wrong reasons. Is it really justified to paint the narrative of her life as a cautionary tale for women who seek power akin to a man’s? The documentary is somber in its depiction of Smith getting everything she asked for but for which she was not prepared. However, there is another way to interpret her story.

Smith faced a kind of sexist gaslighting through all of her fame that was reinforced for me in this documentary. Her legitimacy as a model, wife, and mother were debased as a means of patriarchal control and deprivation. Consider the first line of the 2005 song “Gold Digger” by Kanye West, aka Ye:

She takes my money when I’m in need
Yeah she’s a triflin’ friend indeed
Oh, she’s a gold digger way over town
That digs on me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vwNcNOTVzY

It’s a bit provincial to look down one’s nose at a woman wanting something from a man and give a pass to a man who arguably would have never given her a second glance had she not been a beautiful, blonde Playboy Playmate. Rather than singling out and condemning Anna Nicole Smith, we should be pointing our fingers at the inequities and systemic failures that put people like me and Smith in positions where obtaining money and resources from men, directly or indirectly, is our best option for survival. What we should be doing instead is asking why women have more barriers to accessing financial stability than men? All relationships are transactional in some way, and reducing this to an issue of morality is myopic and neglects the complexity of the human experience.

Rather than viewing this as black and white, we could look deeper past our sense of discomfort around sex and money and include a more compassionate perspective with room for complexity vis-à-vis intersecting experiences of poverty, abuse and patriarchy. Not everyone is given access to all the same advantages in equal measure. If we inspect this issue further, we could recognize that for many, participating in underground (illegal) economies like prostitution, drug dealing, pimping, etc., is a matter of access and opportunity.

Anna Nicole Smith: You Don’t Know Me (Netflix)

As a former sex worker, most of my motivation for doing the work was a perfect storm of needing to come up with a quick, low-barrier means of survival while simultaneously being faced with limited options for accessible alternatives. The term “sex work” (as opposed to prostitution) is by definition always between two consenting adults, therefore it is a valid means of income, especially if we aren’t blinded by moral hysteria. Any harm present in doing sex work, including sugaring, is rooted in the stigma attached to it. I myself have been a sugar baby. My first sugar daddy was a local restaurant chain owner who advertised for wanting a sugaring relationship on the now defunct Craigslist Personals section. I experienced a lot of abuse from him, but was never able to get help because of the stigma associated with our relationship and the fact that sugaring is to many – especially law enforcement – indistinguishable from prostitution.

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

All relationships are transactional in some way.

Though most of my adult life has been spent working in the sex trade, people are often surprised to learn I have almost eight years sober from drugs and alcohol, a degree and that I have consulted for organizations like the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, the U.S. Department of Justice, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and more. I spend most of my personal time in bed reading or watching sitcoms from the ’90s, or taking my three-legged rescue pup Coco Bean for meditative walks in nature. In other words, I’m way more boring than Anna Nicole Smith. While she may have ticked a lot of the stereotype boxes – drug addiction, abuse, manipulative behavior, money-hungry – I have to believe that wasn’t just all there was. Because that’s not all I am. She never had a chance to have a legacy because stigma took that chance from her.

If we can take anything away from this documentary, let it be compassion and a search for understanding rather than judgment. It’s easy to look at her life and dismiss her as undeserving of our empathy. But she wasn’t just some gold digger. She wasn’t just some “manipulative” addict, or a washed-up model slurring through a stupor on the E! Network for all of us to laugh at. She was a fellow human being just trying to make it the best way she knew how, using every advantage she had at her disposal to do so. To call her a gold digger is to blame someone for just existing in a broken system they did not create. There are so many reasons why we need to retire the word gold digger, as well as the belief system behind it. And maybe this could be the legacy of Anna Nicole Smith.

“Anna Nicole Smith: You Don’t Know Me” is currently streaming on Netflix.

about sex work on screen

Carroll takes action over Trump CNN attack — experts say “verdict could be greater than $5 million”

E. Jean Carroll, a longtime columnist who was awarded $5 million in damages after a jury found Donald Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation earlier this month, is taking aim at the former president once more.

Carroll in a Monday filing in Manhattan federal court asked for a “very substantial” additional amount of money from Trump over comments he made during an appearance on CNN only a day after being found liable. The New York Times reported that the filing is part of a separate defamation lawsuit that Carroll filed against Trump in 2019 — Carroll alleged that Trump raped her in a department store dressing room in the late 1990s, subsequently slandering her name by denying the event when she went public.

During his May 10 CNN town hall, Trump doubled down on his long-standing rejection of Carroll’s claims, arguing they were “fake” and “made up.” The ex-president denied having ever met Carroll — despite a photograph of the two together — and called her a “wack job,” while referring to the trial as “a rigged deal.”

Carroll responded to Trump’s CNN sit-down in an interview with Times, saying, “It’s just stupid; it’s just disgusting, vile, foul; it wounds people.”

The writer’s most recent filing asserts that Trump’s remarks “show the depth of his malice toward Carroll, since it is hard to imagine defamatory conduct that could possibly be more motivated by hatred, ill will or spite.”

“He is confessing on live TV”: Legal experts say Trump’s CNN town hall could badly backfire in court

Roberta Kaplan, Caroll’s attorney, told the Times on Monday that Trump’s statements make “a mockery of the jury verdict and our justice system if he can just keep on repeating the same defamatory statements over and over again.”

Trump’s legal team has argued that no damages were valid in Carroll’s 2019 suit because he was president at the time. Alina Habba, one of Trump’s lawyers, called the Monday filing “a desperate, last-ditch effort by Ms. Carroll to upend this case.”

Former U.S. Attorney Harry Litman called Trump’s repeated defamatory comments “gratuitous,” arguing that he “opened the door for her to amend her other defamation action,” which should get around any argument that Trump was acting within “his scope of employment.”

Trump's gratuitous repeat of his defamatory comments about E Jean Carroll on CNN opened the door for her to amend her other defamation action, which sh get around any arg that Trump was acting w/in his scope of employment. Looking forward to discussing on @TheLastWord at 10 PM ET

— Harry Litman (@harrylitman) May 23, 2023

Former U.S. attorney Joyce Vance tweeted that Carroll’s new claims “could cost Trump even more money than the $5 million he already owes Carroll.”

“That’s because a jury could decide Trump’s conduct is outrageous—he defamed her again just one day after the first jury rendered its verdict against him,” she explained.

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

“That sort of flagrant abuse could support a substantial punitive damages award,” she wrote. “Punitive damages punish a defendant who has acted maliciously & discourage others from doing the same. A jury could award Carroll damages in an amount that exceeds what she got in the first case.”

“It would be easier and safer for Carroll to take her earlier win and remove herself from the public spotlight,” Vance added. “But she is not a woman to take the easy way out. Bullies don’t go away until someone stands up to them, and sometimes that means standing up to them again and again.”

5/Why is this significant? The new claims could cost Trump even more money than the $5 million he already owes Carroll. That’s because a jury could decide Trump’s conduct is outrageous—he defamed her again just one day after the first jury rendered its verdict against him. AND,

— Joyce Alene (@JoyceWhiteVance) May 23, 2023

Speaking with MSNBC’s Chris Hayes on Monday, former Trump ally and attorney George Conway stated that he feels Carroll’s 2019 defamation suit “had more damage potential than the case that she already won … because he was president at the time.”

“It was the very, very first libel that he made on E. Jean Carroll. And now the fact that he has repeated the libel after being found to have sexually abused her is really, really outrageous,” Conway said. “And it is supportive of punitive damages. This verdict could be greater than the $5 million that she got in the first place. Frankly, I hope it is, because I think, at some point, he’s got to stop lying about this and stop lying about her. How many times we’re gonna have to go through this?”

about E. Jean Carroll

NAACP issues travel advisory to Florida over anti-Black history education laws

Over the weekend, the NAACP Board of Directors voted to issue a formal travel advisory warning people of color and LGBTQ people about “hostile” conditions in the state of Florida.

The advisory, which was published on Saturday, was originally proposed by the Florida chapter of the NAACP, which asked the national organization to issue such an advisory in March. The advisory comes just a week after Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) — who has signed a number of bills restricting public school educators in the state from teaching core Black history subjects in classrooms — signed legislation banning diversity, equity and inclusion programs at public colleges throughout the state.

The advisory specifically states that DeSantis and other Republicans’ attacks on the teaching of Black history create a hostile situation for nonwhite people.

“Before traveling to Florida, please understand that the state of Florida devalues and marginalizes the contributions of, and the challenges faced by African Americans and other communities of color,” the advisory says.

The NAACP urged people who have to travel to Florida “to join the NAACP in our fight against the unjust attack on civil liberties, principles of diversity and inclusion, the right to vote and the right to assemble in peaceful protest.” It also requests that current residents “defeat the regressive policies of this Governor and this state legislature.”

The advisory remains in place “until further notice,” the organization added.

Officials in the DeSantis administration dismissed the complaint, with one spokesperson saying they wouldn’t “waste our time worrying about political stunts.”

NAACP President & CEO Derrick Johnson warned that the actions taken by DeSantis and other Republican lawmakers were undemocratic and harmful to Black Americans.

“Under the leadership of Governor Desantis, the state of Florida has become hostile to Black Americans and in direct conflict with the democratic ideals that our union was founded upon,” Johnson said. “He should know that democracy will prevail because its defenders are prepared to stand up and fight. We’re not backing down, and we encourage our allies to join us in the battle for the soul of our nation.”

Barbara Ransby, a historian, author and activist based in Chicago, condemned DeSantis’s laws restricting the teaching of Black history in an op-ed for Truthout in January.

Like Johnson, Ransby described DeSantis’s actions as anti-democratic and “proto-fascist,” noting that the laws are about “intimidation, silencing potential dissident voices, preempting critical thinking from young people that might lead to informed political action.”

“In attacking African American studies, DeSantis has taken one more step toward not only a full-on embrace of white nationalism and authoritarianism, but also toward situating himself in a truly ‘alternative reality,’ where facts don’t matter, research is irrelevant, expertise is sidelined, and young people are scurrilously miseducated,” Ransby said.

Other organizations have issued similar travel advisories for the state, including mainstream LGBTQ groups like Equality Florida.
Equality Florida’s travel advisory, which was published in early April, “comes after passage of laws that are hostile to the LGBTQ+ community, restrict access to reproductive health care, repeal gun safety laws and allow untrained, unpermitted carry, and foment racial prejudice,” its leaders said.

“The Governor has also weaponized state agencies to impose sanctions against businesses large and small that disagree with his attacks on diversity, equity, and inclusion,” Equality Florida added in a statement last month.