Spring Sale: Get 1 Year, Save 58%

Team Trump meets the press — and eats the press

On his ninth day, Donald Trump’s new administration finally summoned the White House press corps to the Brady Briefing Room. It was vintage Trump.

For close to an hour on Tuesday, the youngest White House press secretary in history, Karoline Leavitt, decried legacy media, disparaged the Biden administration and personally insulted the former president. At one point she said that Joe Biden probably hadn’t taken presidential action on  the price of eggs because he was “upstairs in the residence sleeping.”

That’s right. She bore false witness against her neighbor while wearing a cross around her neck declaring her Christian beliefs. Leavitt also said she was committed to telling the truth while speaking on behalf of President Donald Trump. So if he lies, as he does on a daily basis, will she repeat it? She didn’t say and no one asked. I guess she thinks she can have it both ways. 

Other things that went unasked and unanswered? No one asked how the president, through an executive order, could freeze government spending. The Constitution specifically states that Congress has the job of imposing taxes and spending money, giving it what is colloquially known as “the power of the purse.” On Wednesday, the White House rescinded that budget memo, which had sparked confusion and multiple legal challenges. To create still more confusion, Leavitt said later on Wednesday afternoon that while the memo had been rescinded, the actions of the president remained in full force. Hello?

No one asked Leavitt to explain why she believes birthright citizenship is unconstitutional when the 14th Amendment states things clearly: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States of the state wherein they reside.”

Many members of the press seemed ecstatic to be in the briefing room. They took selfies. They laughed. The room was packed. At least half of them beamed and smiled and offered Leavitt fulsome thanks, especially the “content providers” to whom she offered seats along the wall that are usually reserved for White House staff. One of those folks lauded her efforts, saying she was doing a great job. Only April Ryan gave her a deadpan, sober salutation: “Welcome to the briefing room.” 

There was a time when White House briefings didn’t include fawning reporters eager to be seen and heard as they bowed and scraped in front of the press secretary. I have to admit, that was long ago.

Many members of the "press" seemed ecstatic to be in the briefing room. They took selfies. They laughed. The room was packed, and at least half of them were beaming and smiling and offering Karoline Leavitt fulsome thanks.

Sam Donaldson, Helen Thomas and scores of others whom I looked up to and learned from as a young reporter were among the best. They asked tough questions. They spoke truth to power. They broke stories. They informed the world. A ringside seat at the White House was something earned through decades of slogging through the political and journalistic mud. Now, Leavitt wants to give preferential seating to media influencers who have no experience but are producing “news-related” content.

Some will blame the “legacy media” for this turn of events, and they wouldn’t be wrong. The failures of corporate media are the direct cause of its spiral into irrelevance. But of course, every president since Ronald Reagan has also been complicit in that demise, which has led us to “independent content creators” who are nothing more than propagandists and shills. Because of them and their questions, the 27-year-old press secretary can show her subservience to the Don with a wry smile and a cheerful expression. 

We need your help to stay independent

Reporters today seem too busy bending the knee to the power of a man convicted of multiple felonies. Ask Jim Acosta. He was squeezed out at CNN because he spoke up against Trump and had his press pass revoked. I should know; the same thing happened to me. Trump hates him. Acosta is defiant. “It is never a good time to bow down to a tyrant. Don’t give into the lies. Don’t give into the fear. Hold on to the truth and to hope,” he said, signing off for the last time at CNN. 

Trump responded by calling Jim “a major loser” and “one of the worst and most dishonest reporters in journalistic history; a major sleazebag.” I have to wonder whether Trump was shouting into his makeup mirror when he wrote that one.

At any rate, most of us in the media have traded our responsibility to the American people for access to the known con man now in the White House, who claims he is deporting violent criminals, while at the same time releasing 1,500 of them from prison — the ones, of course, who attacked the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. He calls those criminals “patriots.”

Leavitt blasted the legacy media in her first press conference, but it was completely disingenuous. She claimed Trump has already held press conferences, which is a lie. He’s had extended “pool sprays,” where the protective “pool” of reporters has asked some easy questions, but he has not appeared before the full White House press corps. The “pool,” by the way, consists mostly of nameless and faceless refugees from the Actors Studio who work for legacy media. And those reporters he has faced are mostly the ones who parrot White House press releases. 

It gets worse. According to the White House Correspondents Association, the first week of the second Trump administration has been “great.” In an email to WHCA members, president Eugene Daniels wrote, “The great news is our pools have had facetime with President Trump multiple times over the last week, and every signal from the administration is that will continue. In each of those gaggles, our pools have been able to ask tough, and informed questions cordially, while getting news over and over again.” 

Well, the American people are getting something “over and over again” but I wouldn’t call it news. The word I’d prefer can’t be fully spelled out on this website. 

Whatever you want to call it, it almost always concerns the day’s headlines, or some personality clash with Trump. When he was asked about his recent trip to California to view the wildfire devastation in Los Angeles, this exchange occurred:

Q: Are you disappointed that Sen. [Adam] Schiff hasn’t joined you on this trip? It’s reported that you invited Sen. Schiff to join you on this trip, and he was too busy. Are you disappointed by that?
 
Trump: I don't know. I was told that Schiff was going to travel with us to California. I wasn't thrilled, to be honest with you. (Laughter.) And I saw him last night on television. It looks like he got hit with a baseball bat or something. What happened to him? Something happened to him.

Very presidential. 

Trump has actually shown up just once before a group of White House reporters so far, other than the local or travel pool. That was for two minutes, when he held a “chopper talk” session while walking from the White House to Marine One last week.  

If you are not a member of the WHCA, then you didn’t know about it until after the fact. Why? Because until Tuesday, the Trump administration didn't publish a daily schedule. The good folks at the WHCA did. Daniels told us: “The good news is that the administration is working to get up to speed quickly for both week ahead guidance and daily guidance. It may not be immediate, but they are working on it. I have been sending out information” — but not to the entire press corps, just to his group’s members.


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


That’s a blatant conflict of interest. It is not the WHCA’s job to assist the president’s publicity team. You cannot speak truth to power if you are doing the power’s bidding. 

I wrote to the WHCA asking them to include other journalists in the publication of the daily presidential guidance, since the group was being pressed into service as Trump’s lackeys. I got no response. 

When I emailed Leavitt to ask how the administration could justify saying that birthright citizenship was unconstitutional when it’s made explicit mentioned in the 14th amendment, she didn’t answer me either. Makes you wonder just how closely the WHCA and the White House are working together.

The fact is, these days reporters don’t exactly wear ourselves out trying to dig up the news, as romance once had it. We have, to paraphrase H.L. Mencken, slipped supinely into the estate and dignity of a golf player. American journalism suffers from too many golf players, who love walking around the course with the Golfer in Chief.

Some look at Donald Trump and see the "father figure" we need in the White House, ready to smack down "spoiled teens" who are used to getting their way. But Donald Trump is not our father or our king. He's our elected employee.

Real reporters have largely  been replaced by those who want to be “cordial” and bow to power. Years ago I challenged George H.W. Bush in a press briefing and was summarily fired for “being rude” to the president. Arnaud de Borchgrave, the former editor of the Washington Times and the first host of CNN’s “Reliable Sources,” had me on the first broadcast to berate me. “Nobody’s challenging your right to challenge the president,” he said. “What I’m challenging is your right to be rude.”

ABC’s Sam Donaldson, the king of “rude” during his time at the White House, said, “I’m not advocating rudeness . . . but I’m far more concerned about the reporters who are either too afraid or too disinclined to ask a question.”

Dan Rather was even blunter. In an interview with the Boston Herald in 1991, he said, “There’s no joy in saying this, but beginning in the 1980s, the American press by and large somehow began to operate on the theory that the first order of business was to be popular with the person or organization or institution that you cover.”

This is not a new phenomenon. Mencken wrote this in 1926: “They come in as newspapermen . . . trained to get the news and eager to get it; they end as tinhorn statesmen, full of dark secrets and unable to write truth if they tried.”

Today, we are lazy, dishonest, stupid and cowardly.

Traditionally, we approached our jobs in the press as comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable. If the comfortable found us rude, then so be it. Those days are gone.

Some look at Donald Trump and see the “father figure” we need in the White House, ready to smack down “spoiled teens” who are used to getting their way. I’ve seen this meme posted on X and Facebook, by someone I’ve known for years. I shrug that off: I look at Donald Trump as an elected employee. My taxes pay his salary, as well as the salary of everyone who works for him in the executive branch. I don’t need a father there. I had my own. Since we are supposedly a government of, by and for the people, Trump works for us. He’s not a father, a king, a despot or a dictator. He’s an employee.

As Mencken put it, “If experience teaches us anything at all, it teaches us this; that a good politician, under democracy, is quite as unthinkable as an honest burglar. His very existence, indeed, is a standing subversion of the public good in every rational sense.”

Gone are the days of reporters who risked it all to hold those in power accountable. Ben Bagdikian, former editor of the Washington Post, reminded us that our responsibility is to the people. Not to the people who pay us, to our editors, our sources, our friends “or to the advancement of your career. It is to the public.” 

That remains true even when the public doesn’t like what we say. 

So I take no pleasure in saying that Donald Trump doesn’t meet the press. Instead, Donald Trump eats the press – and I don’t know whether we’ll ever wake up to that fact and do something about it. But I still naively cling to hope.

“Squid Game 3” release date and first-look photos reveal ominous shadows ahead

Cue the haunting "Pink Soldiers" soundtrack. "Squid Game" will be back for one more turn on the death merry-go-round this summer.

On Wednesday morning, Netflix told reporters that the third and final season of the series will be released in June. At the streamer's preview event at the Egyptian Theatre in Hollywood, menacing figures dressed as the pink-suited, mask-wearing "Squid Game" guards marched onto stage to help deliver the news.

"They really don’t want me to tell you this, but I’ve got good news for anyone who binged Season 2 of 'Squid Game' over the holidays," said Netflix Chief Context Officer Bela Bajaria. "I can officially announce that the final season is coming out on June 27th. And I have a sneak peek of Season 3 — but let’s keep it between us so we don’t upset the Front Man."

The South Korean drama series in which impoverished, debt-ridden citizens compete in deadly games in hopes of winning a life-changing amount of cash had ended its second season on a cliffhanger. When last we left Gi-hun, aka Player 456 (Lee Jung-jae), his attempt to overthrow Front Man (Lee Byung-hun) and those at the top ended in a dismal failure and the death of his closest friend. At the time Season 2 had dropped right after Christmas, creator Hwang Dong-hyuk had confirmed that the third season had already been shot and that it would be released by either summer or fall 2025.

On Thursday, Netflix also released first-look images, including the one above featuring Gi-hun handcuffed to a dormitory bed, for the final season. Here's a look at the rest of the images:

Kang No-eul (Park Gyu-young), aka 011, is pictured in her pink suit but sans fencing mask. As a former soldier and North Korean defector, she works as a sharp shooter and guard for the games, killing eliminated players. She took the job after multiple failures to find her daughter who had remained in North Korea. When last we saw No-eul, she had seemingly relented and no longer opposed the other guards' scheme to sell the organs of eliminated players on the black market.

"Squid Game" Season 3 (Netflix)The surviving players — including former special forces soldier Hyun-ju (Park Sung-hoon), pregnant crypto investor Jun-hee (Jo Yu-ri), elderly mom Geum-ja (Kang Ae-shin) and her feckless adult son Yong-sik (Yang Dong-geun) — who were left in the dorm come upon one of the coffins adorned with a pink bow. What — or who — could be inside? 

"Squid Game" Season 3 (Netflix)In this image, the Front Man appears to be among the VIPs — the wealthy elite who bet on the outcome of the games for sport — in their luxurious viewing lounge. Last season he had masqueraded as Player 001, fooling Gi-hun into trusting him throughout the games and with the armed rebellion, which Front Man of course sabotaged.

"Squid Game" Season 3 (Netflix)Front Man, previously known in his pre-games life as Hwang In-ho, unmasks in private. Perhaps he is listening to "Fly Me to the Moon," a song he seems to be obsessed with.

"Squid Game" Season 3 (Netflix)And finally, here's the first poster for Season 3, showing a guard dragging the body of a player toward a coffin. What's intriguing are the shadows of what appear to be the deadly "Red Light, Green Light" doll Young-hee and her boyfriend Cheol-su, whom was introduced in the end credits for Season 2. The entire gruesome tableau takes place on a field of flowers, which is new imagery that may hint at a game we haven't seen yet.

Key art for "Squid Game" Season 3 (Netflix

"Squid Game" Season 3 will drop on June 27 on Netflix.

“I don’t need this”: John Mulaney cheekily quotes RFK Jr. while promoting new Netflix live talk show

“We will never be relevant,” quipped John Mulaney about his upcoming live talk show at Netflix’s 2025 preview event on Wednesday morning.

And yet, the comedian did quote Robert F. Kennedy Jr., President Trump’s pick to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, from the confirmation hearing earlier that morning. In front of gathered journalists at the Egyptian Theatre in Hollywood, Mulaney introduced his upcoming series “Everybody’s Live With John Mulaney,” which is inspired by his limited series “Everybody’s in LA” from 2024.

“I will have the most successful talk show in world history.”

Mulaney explained, “Netflix and I discussed this summer not being done with the show, and I was thrilled to do that. It was a total blast and it was one of those shows that neither Netflix nor I really needed to do. I never wanted to host a talk show, and they were getting out of the talk show game. So it was the perfect moment to do this.

“And I just heard Robert F Kennedy Jr. say during the confirmation hearing, ‘I have a nice life and a happy family. I don’t need this,'” said the comedian, reading from his notes.

Although Mulaney is paraphrasing, he did indeed grasp the gist of the opening speech, in which Kennedy Jr. said about his dedication to the nation’s health care: “I know how to fix it, and there’s nobody who will fix it the way that I do because I’m not scared of vested interest. I don’t care. I’m not here because I want a position or a job. I have a very good life and a happy family. This is something I don’t need.'”

After this uncharacteristic foray into newsiness, Mulaney doubled down on his self-deprecating style of underselling his series “Everybody’s Live,” which will air live weekly starting March 12 for 12 weeks.

“We will be live globally with no delay,” he continued. “We will never be relevant. We will never be your source for news. We will always be reckless. Netflix will always provide us with data that we will ignore.

“This will be the one place where you could see Arnold Schwarzenegger sitting next to Nikki Glaser sitting next to a family therapist with music by Mannequin P***y. That’s just a brief sampling of guests. We don’t know if we can lock in Mannequin P***y, but we are in talks with them.

“Not since Harry and Meghan has Netflix given more money to someone without a specific plan.”

“This is a really fun experiment. Not since Harry and Meghan has Netflix given more money to someone without a specific plan. . . . I think that this show will be something that people will want to tune into live. We will have a host in a suit taking calls from viewers. It’s Netflix’s commitment to embracing the 20th century. There is absolutely nothing new about what I’m doing but, by taking a lot of elements other people have already done and doing them out of order, it feels new and that’s what’s important.

“If we can be one-tenth as popular on Netflix as anything from South Korea, I will have the most successful talk show in world history.”

As with his Los Angeles series, Mulaney will be joined by the delivery cart robot Saymo and actor Richard Kind, who plays a goofier version of himself in the role of talk show announcer and sidekick.

Besides “Everybody’s Live,” the streamer also announced its upcoming slate of movies, TV shows and other programming, using the tagline, “You’re not ready for what’s next,” which some could see as an accurate statement about 2025 overall. A video for the slate features a Netflix hero who takes on the various roles from the streamer’s globally popular shows returning this year including “Stranger Things,” “Wednesday,” “Squid Game” and “Alice in Borderland.”

The Netflix event also afforded the network an opportunity to acknowledge the recent fires still ravaging parts of Los Angeles, that have taken 29 lives and left many without homes and/or jobs.

Mulaney referred to the fires elliptically when discussing last year’s Los Angeles series. “We had a blast,” he said. “We had many comedians who were in town for the festival. We had lots of guests. We had a hypnotist. We had an expert on coyotes in Los Angeles. We had a palm tree expert. We had an earthquake expert. We covered most all natural disasters that take place in California . . . except for one. We just weren’t ready.”

Tina Fey, who had introduced her upcoming series adaptation of Alan Alda’s 1981 movie “The Four Seasons,” said, “It’s nice to be here with you all in person. I love Los Angeles and I wanna thank Netflix for this chance to come in from New York and check on my friends.”

And even before the presentation began, Chief Content Officer Bela Bajaria commented to the press, “I feel so lucky that I called Southern California home since I was 9 years old. I love L.A. I love West Coast rap — true story. I still think palm trees are breathtaking and I defend L.A. whenever people talk s**t about it. So that’s why it’s also been so heartbreaking to see what’s happened to this community over the last couple of weeks, and sorry to see that some of you and your colleagues have lost homes and have your lives turned upside down. Between COVID, the strikes, the fires, this town has been through a lot in the past few years, but just like we’ve gotten through everything else together, we will rebuild the [Pacific] Palisades, Malibu, Altadena and all the areas that have been devastated.”

Before leaving, the press was presented with a bag containing a t-shirt with “City of Angels” printed on it and a note that stated proceeds from the item would go to the American Red Cross to “support their critical work in responding to the LA wildfires.”

How meritocracies make the rich richer

In years to come, when we reflect on the legacy of Donald Trump’s second presidential term, it may well include perpetuating one of America’s most pervasive myths

Minutes after taking his oath of office, Trump in a bombastic inaugural speech — more jingoistic battle cry than celebratory diplomatic remarks — declared that, henceforth, the U.S. would be a perfect meritocracy, with no need for diversity, equity and inclusion programs.

"I will […] end the government policy of trying to socially engineer race and gender into every aspect of public and private life," he boasted. "We will forge a society that is color blind and merit- based." He then signed several executive orders dismantling DEI programs across the federal government and encouraged the private sector to follow suit. 

In the past, phrases like "color blind" and "merit-based" — though loaded, sometimes racist and certainly complex — have been used across the labor market, and frequently even with good intentions. 

Many hiring managers, at least consciously, have believed that when they’ve made job offers and offered pay rises, they’ve done so to candidates who are the most qualified, skilled, knowledgeable and perhaps the hardest working. They’ve believed that those who are turned down are not rejected on the basis of their gender, sexuality, identity or race. 

Decades of relying on the rules of an ostensible meritocracy, however, have proven one thing: that it's an illusory social ideal. Meritocracies don’t work. They exacerbate inequality. They make the rich — who in this country are already ludicrously wealthy — richer, the poor poorer, and they squeeze the marginalized even further out of the picture.

We need your help to stay independent

Self-validating merit

When Trump uttered the phrase "merit-based" during his inaugural speech, Michael Smets, a professor at the University of Oxford’s Saïd Business School in the U.K.—watching on TV from the other side of the Atlantic — flinched. 

"I immediately thought to myself, 'But killing DEI programs actually undermines meritocracy,'" he said. Smets’ logic isn’t hard to follow. When we rely on meritocracies — when we tell ourselves that we’re capable of judging merit "objectively," whatever that might mean — bias and heuristics inevitably come into play. 

In 2012, Lauren Rivera, a professor at Northwestern’s Kellogg School of Management, coined the term "looking glass merit" to describe the unconscious tendency that humans have to define merit in a way that is self-validating. 

If a manager is told to hire, promote or offer a pay rise to someone who is "ambitious" or "driven," that manager will bestow that award on someone who resembles him or her. After all, don’t we all consider ourselves to be ambitious and driven?

And to be clear, being biased does not mean that someone is bad or malicious — it just means that someone is human, said Elaine Lin Hering, the author of Unlearning Silence, a book about how to recognize and unlearn unconscious patterns. "All humans have biases," she explained. And in addition to being wired to prefer people who are like us, we are also conditioned to believe that they pose less social threat because they feel more known to us, Hering says. 

"Without concrete and consistent criteria, our biases color our perceptions of someone’s merit," she noted. "Even with criteria, men are often evaluated based on their perceived potential while women are evaluated on performance."

"Even with criteria, men are often evaluated based on their perceived potential while women are evaluated on performance"

Iris Bohnet, a behavioral economist and professor at the Harvard Kennedy School, said she knows of "more than 300 studies" that show that when employers screen identical resumes where only the name, age or religion of a job-seeker differ, there are substantial differences in the chances of getting an interview.

"That is the power of unconscious bias," said Bohnet, who co-wrote a book called "Make Work Fair" about redesigning the workplace using data. "So, unless we do something about stereotypical judgments and in-group bias, and the many other ways in which unfairness can undermine our workplaces, meritocracy indeed remains a myth."

And this is precisely what Smets is talking about. 

But there’s also something even more basic that triggered his reaction. "I wonder how ‘meritocratic’ a $1 million gift from daddy is to get your business started?" he mused. "Not much meritocracy there."

A painful paradox

One particularly troubling piece of research on meritocracies shows that even the simple act of explicitly championing meritocracy as a core corporate value can promote discriminatory behavior — which can manifest in all kinds of ways, including promotion gaps and pay gaps.

In 2010, Emilio Castilla, a management scholar at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and the sociologist Stephen Benard at Indiana University published their paper based on their studies of companies that tried to implement meritocratic practices, such as performance-based compensation.

Shockingly, they found that in companies in which meritocracy was openly espoused as a core value, men were paid less than women in cases in which both genders had identical performance review evaluations. When meritocracy was not explicitly promoted as a company value, the differences vanished.

"This finding demonstrates that the pursuit of meritocracy at the workplace may be more difficult than it first appears and that there may be unrecognized risks behind certain organizational efforts used to reward merit," the authors wrote.

Trump and his administration have already demonstrated that their mode of governing is to make bold, swashbuckling declarations — including on concepts like meritocracy. Trump’s team is also the richest ever to run the U.S. government. He has tapped at least 13 billionaires for jobs in his administration. 

Meanwhile, a report recently published by the Congressional Budget Office shows that between 1979 and 2021, the average income of the richest 0.01% of households in the U.S. grew nearly 27 times as fast as the income of the bottom 20% of earners.

Separate research shows the richest U.S. cities are now almost seven times wealthier than the poorest regions — a disparity that has practically doubled since 1960.

In January 2012, the late economist Alan Krueger, who at the time was Barack Obama’s chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, laid out in a speech precisely why inequality in the U.S. is bad for everyone in the U.S., regardless of income. 

It reduces productivity, spending and morale, and it weakens the middle class which in turn destabilizes markets, he explained. In other words, he concluded, "restoring more fairness to the economy would be good for all parts of American society." This is not,” he added, "a zero-sum game."

One might almost be tempted to say that making America fairer again could be the best way to make America great again. But making America merit-based again? What an utter tragedy that would be. 

“AI nurses” as “good as any doctor”: RFK Jr. confirms he wants to take away people’s health care

It sure seemed like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. had a cold on Wednesday. During his Senate hearing as Donald Trump's nominee to head the Department of Health and Human Services, Kennedy snuffled, cleared his throat, coughed, blew his nose and, most painfully for those forced to listen, wheezed heavily into a perplexingly unmuted microphone while others spoke. I'm not his doctor, of course, and cannot diagnose him. I'm just saying that even the most stalwart believer that COVID-19 is a hoax might nonetheless be reluctant to sit next to their fellow conspiracist. For a man who claims it's time for a "break" in medical research into infectious disease, it was likely an irritating irony to present such a compelling reminder of the validity of germ theory. 

(No, I'm not referring to Kennedy's vocal disorder, which causes his voice to shake. It doesn't cause the phlegm-fest he struggled to contain on Wednesday.) 

Despite his apparent malady, Kennedy stuck to his shtick of reframing health as a matter of private virtue rather than public concern. Over the course of the hearing, it became clear why this lifelong Democrat has switched to the GOP. His view that sick people did it to themselves and deserve what's coming to them offers a nifty justification for Republicans' long-standing desire to deny health care to millions of Americans. Kennedy may dress this up as "prevention" or concern for children, but the message came through loud and clear: Medical patients are parasites who suck up resources from better, more responsible people. 

Kennedy noted in his opening statement that the U.S. spends "far more on health care" than other developed nations, but declined to note the obvious reason: No other nations is so deeply committed to a for-profit insurance system. He dismissed that objection with a red herring: "Shifting the burden around between government, corporations and families is like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic," he said, evading reams of proof that different entities have different scales of cost-effectiveness in health care delivery. 


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


Instead, Kennedy blamed "chronic disease," a vague category that encompasses a cornucopia of ailments like "autoimmune diseases, neurodevelopmental disorders, asthma, Alzheimer’s, ADHD, depression, addiction" and, with special emphasis, diabetes. I'll leave it to the experts and fact-checkers to explain how badly he misrepresented the diverse causes of these conditions. What matters here is the rhetorical purpose "chronic disease" plays: Blaming the victims, and creating the pretext for taking their health care away. 

Kennedy has spent decades as an anti-vaccine conspiracy theorist, and his training as a B.S. artist was on full display at Wednesday's hearing. He waxes poetic about the importance of "prevention." to the point where even those of us who know he's full of it can get sucked in, at least until we remember that he rejects the single most important form of preventive care ever developed. (Vaccines, duh.) But as the hearing went on, it became clear that "prevention" was just an RFK code word for victim-blaming. 

When asked how he would implement "prevention" for Medicare and Medicaid patients, Kennedy replied that it was about "making them accountable for their own health care, so they understand the relationship between eating and getting sick." He argued that people on food assistance should have their options reduced so they can't buy processed foods. That's designed to sound vaguely positive while doing nothing to help people. No living person believes that Oreos are better for you than apples. Lecturing them about it and restricting their food budget will do nothing to reduce their medical costs, but it does creates an excuse to deny health care by claiming that they made themselves sick. 

When Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., asked whether health care is a right, Kennedy got closer to showing his true colors by refusing to answer the question. 

SANDERS: Do you agree healthcare is a human right? RFK Jr: I can't give you a yes or no answer

[image or embed]

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) January 29, 2025 at 12:18 PM

Under prolonged badgering, Kennedy all but admitted he thinks care should be denied if your past behavior wasn't "healthy" enough. "Free speech doesn't cost anybody anything, but in health care, if you smoke cigarettes for 20 years and you get cancer you are now taking from the pool. Are you guaranteed the same right?" Kennedy snapped at Sanders.

On its surface, that may sound fair. Most people don't have much sympathy for smokers these days. But this must be seen in the larger context of Kennedy's constant refrain: Most illnesses are a result of what people eat, so almost any health problem can be blamed on "personal choices," especially when you're as divorced from scientific facts as Kennedy is.

There's an entire "wellness" industry, which Kennedy is deeply plugged into, that sells the idea that "clean" food and healthy living will prevents every kind of ailment. We saw this in operation during the pandemic, when influencers like Joe Rogan peddled the idea that diet and exercise were superior "prevention" to the vaccine. In other cases, it's more complicated: There's no question that diabetes has both diet and genetic factors. But it's not a huge leap to move from false or dubious claims about personal health practices to blaming sick people for not taking your advice. 

Kennedy's eagerness to slash access to health care burbled up repeatedly during the hearing, most comically when he offered computer software as an alternative to doctors. When asked about provider shortages in rural areas, he raved about an article he read describing "an AI nurse that you cannot distinguish from a human being, that has diagnosed as good as any doctor." I don't know what's scarier: replacing doctors with chatbots, or the fact that Kennedy wants upend the medical system based on a half-remembered article. 


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


On a more serious note, Kennedy repeatedly nodded at the long-standing Republican dream of slashing Medicare and Medicaid. He hyped Medicare Advantage, a privatization scheme set up to cannibalize Medicare, even though studies repeatedly show it raises patient costs without improving care. There was an especially telling exchange with Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., who sneered at people who consider Medicaid "sacrosanct" and declared that the program, which covers nearly one in five Americans, "is not producing positive outcomes." 

That is a lie, since 83% of people on Medicaid rate the program positively, which is slightly higher than ratings for remployer-provided insurance. But Kennedy couldn't agree quickly enough, declaring, "We're spending $900 billion. People are getting sicker every year." No doubt Republicans were pleased, since they are proposing massive cuts to Medicaid to fund yet another tax cut for the wealthiest Americans. 

Kennedy uses his status as a former Democrat as a shield to seem "reasonable" despite his decades of conspiracy theory-mongering, but what he dished out on Wednesday was the same glib right-wing nonsense we've heard forever. Kennedy implied that health care spending is doing nothing to help people, and may even make their situation worse. In reality, lower-income people have worse health outcomes in no small part because they have sporadic or incomplete access to medical care, and Medicaid — which is mainly an insurance program, not a provision program — can do little to address that. Taking away whatever access people now have will not compel them to bootstrap their way to better health. Kennedy and his new Republican bosses know this, which is why they've got their excuses lined up when health outcomes get even worse: Sick people are to blame. 

Trump’s first week: “Designed to destroy the United States from within”

Donald Trump's most dangerous quality may be his honesty.

During his 2024 campaign, he vowed to rule on "Day One" as a "dictator," and promised the "most extraordinary first 100 days of any presidency in American history." He would launch a “shock and awe” campaign to enforce his will and remake American society and government in the far-right MAGA movement's desired image.

During the first 10 days of his second term, Trump has delivered all that and more. As I wrote earlier this week, his dozens of  executive orders and other edicts have included "freeing virtually all of his supporters who attacked the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, attempting to nullify the 14th Amendment and end birthright citizenship, declaring a national emergency on the U.S.-Mexico border, launching nationwide raids against undocumented immigrants and their communities as part of 'the largest deportation plan in American history,' escalating attacks on the LGBTQ community, closing down government programs and offices focused on diversity, equity and inclusion, withdrawing from both the World Health Organization and the Paris climate accord, and throwing out many other changes made by the Biden administration regarding the environment, the economy, education and other areas." None of that should have come as a surprise.

At the New Republic, Michael Tomasky summarizes Trump's unprecedented first week:

What have we learned? Three things, all of them ugly:

  1. They came in prepared this time, with outrageous and lawless executive orders written and ready to roll out.
  2. When Trump makes an impromptu decision…. it’s based on his worst and most authoritarian instincts.
  3. Obviously, this administration will act totally without regard to precedent or law.

In a bold new essay, Thom Hartmann defines the goal of Trump and the MAGA movement’s revolutionary project: “Trump is hell-bent-for-leather to turn America into a tin pot dictatorship as fast as he can, establishing the same sort of single-party state his mentors, Vladimir Putin and Viktor Orbán, run in Russia and Hungary.”

In a roundtable discussion for the New York Times, David French issues a similar warning: “You can paint a picture where the combination of Trump’s obstinance, the total unyielding loyalty of MAGA, plus the abuse of the pardon power — which he’s established as of right now as having no real limits in his mind — create a situation of absolutely sustained and profound lawlessness.”

Nearly lost in the tsunami of intentional confusion and chaos created by Trump’s “shock and awe” assault are orders that the U.S. stop accepting refugees, end most foreign aid assistance (except military assistance to Egypt and Israel), prohibit the use of federal money for women’s reproductive health services, and shut down grants at the National Institutes of Health. Trump also ordered the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to stop cooperating with the World Health Organization.

At this writing, the status of the Office of Management and Budget order dictating a "pause" in all federal grants and loans remains unclear. Its intention is to shut down or redirect the many billions of dollars of spending on education, health care, poverty and food assistance, housing, disaster relief, science, the environment, and numerous other areas of American society and life. For the moment, that pause appears to be on hold, thanks to a federal court order.

By normal standards, such an action would immediately be understood as a violation of the U.S. Constitution and an attempt to abrogate the spending power granted to Congress. These are not normal times. The right-wing justices on the Supreme Court have declared Trump a de facto king who can act with impunity. 

In an attempt to make sense of Trump’s "shock and awe" first week and what may happen next, I reached out to a range of experts.

Steven Beschloss is a journalist and author of several books, including "The Gunman and His Mother." His website is America, America.

For anyone who pays close attention to politics and cares about a democratic future, as I do, it’s hard not to feel overwhelmed right now. None of it is surprising, but that doesn’t make the reality any more tolerable. The pardoning of violent Jan. 6 MAGA people stands out as a particularly vile demonstration of Trump’s desire to reject the rule of law, stoke fear and incite more violence, now with aggrieved paramilitary shock troops ready to do his bidding.

I have made the decision to focus more on the helpers, the first responders and the motivated members of the opposition who are doing what they can to support the vulnerable and minimize the damage. This is not only helpful as Trump accelerates his agenda of cruelty and hate, but a way for us to positively manage the emotional toll.

"This is part of the larger failure of an information ecosystem and education system that have bred an uninformed citizenry that fails to comprehend the danger we are now facing."

The fact that tens of millions of Americans voted to reinstall this abusive narcissist tragically underscores how pervasive racism, bigotry and the need by white Americans to scapegoat immigrants and people of color remains. But this is also part of the larger failure of an information ecosystem and education system that have bred an uninformed citizenry that fails to comprehend the danger we are now facing. In 1796, George Washington warned us in his Farewell Address that the nation would suffer without an educated electorate and with the rise of a self-serving despot who rejects public liberty.

America is trapped in the ugly nexus of an abusive leader who demands obedience and will never be satisfied. This period demands fierce opposition by the Democratic Party. That means elected officials must refuse to work with him and abandon the mistaken idea that collaboration can mitigate the damage or is the only way they can accomplish something. The more they give him, the more he will take. The more they communicate that they accept his dominance and respect his power, the more he will exploit their vulnerability, particularly because he relishes harming and demeaning others. Only by opposing Trump and his authoritarian regime driven by reckless and incompetent sycophants do we have the chance to imagine a better future.

That said, the overwhelming nature of this agenda seeking to dismantle our democratic government, further enrich the billionaire class and model cruelty toward innocent people can quickly lead to burnout. I hear from many who already feel like they need to disengage from politics and ignore the news. I get it. That’s why I’m encouraging people to pick one or two issues that matter most. Prioritize them and look for ways to help. That effort should also include acts of kindness toward others who are in danger and struggling. Let’s not lose sight of what we are fighting for.

Cheri Jacobus, a former Republican, is a political strategist, writer and host of the podcast "Politics With Cheri Jacobus."

This past week has been the longest year of my life. My closest friends feel the same. We are gutted. But we will fight on and resist. 

While many are claiming that Trump is doing precisely what he said he would do during the campaign, that is not entirely true. He is causing more harm and destruction than he ever hinted at during the campaign. He knew that most of what he and his allies had in store for us cannot be squeezed into even the most naive and stupid definition of "Make America Great Again" for even the most naïve, gullible and unintelligent of his cult followers.

Did Trump promise at his campaign rallies to invade Greenland? Panama? Launch economic war against Canada? Of course not. 

Did he promise to end FEMA? Did MAGA understand he would pull the U.S. out of the WHO and revoke the 1965 executive order prohibiting employment discrimination in federal hiring based on gender, race and religion? Do they have any idea what taking us back 60 years will do to anyone who is not white and male?

"MAGA people are most assuredly enjoying a sick satisfaction witnessing the cruelty and brutality Trump inflicts on migrants and others they hate. They have not yet figured out that they too will soon be victims of Trump."

Did Trump announce to a cheering MAGA campaign crowd that he would end cancer research and clinical trials? Or that instituting a science and health freeze will make liquid nitrogen unavailable — which is needed for specialized replacements for birth defects and will go bad within 10 days — causing an increase in infant mortality rates? 

Every move Trump has made in his first week appears designed to destroy the United States from within. The firehose of destructive and, in some cases, unconstitutional and illegal executive orders makes it impossible for rank-and-file MAGA people to keep up, and unlikely that the compromised courts can stop him on the vast majority of firebombs he lobs our way. Of course, MAGA followers exist in their own alternate reality and media echo chambers.

MAGA is entertained, and most assuredly enjoying a sick satisfaction witnessing the cruelty and brutality Trump inflicts on migrants and others they hate. They have not yet figured out that they too will soon be victims of Trump. MAGA people are pawns of Trump and the wealthy oligarchs who are now looting this once great nation.

Nathan J. Robinson is the co-founder and editor-in-chief of Current Affairs magazine. He is the author of several books, and co-author with Noam Chomsky of "The Myth of American Idealism." His articles have appeared in the New York Times, the Washington Post and the New Republic, among others.

I alternate between feeling overwhelmed and feeling energized. On the one hand, Trump’s return to power is depressing and demoralizing. Many of the measures he is introducing will inflict major harm on the country, and there are so many of them that in the time it takes to write an explanation of why one thing is wrong, five more things have happened. It can be exhausting and make one wish to give up. I remind myself, however, that without a strong, principled, loud opposition, Trump will get away with all of it, and I am determined not to let that happen. So, I feel energized, because there is important work to be done. I have not specifically checked the personal feelings of too many others, but I get the impression that there is a similar mix of feeling demoralized and feeling as if we must act.


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


My impression is that Trump’s use of “shock and awe” is effective at making people feel the situation is hopeless and making them feel totally powerless against the steamroller of right-wing politics. That is very dangerous, because the thing that will guarantee Trump’s success is the crumbling of opposition, so it is important not to succumb to this feeling.

What does this all reveal about America’s “national character” and “personality,” as some public voices have reflected on and struggled with? I think it’s playing into Trump’s nationalist worldview to speak of “national character.” This is a highly diverse country full of hundreds of millions of people. Most Americans did not indicate they wanted this (Trump did not crack 50% of the popular vote). It is a mistake to say that the Trump presidency displays America’s “national character.” Most people are thoroughly disgusted by politics and don’t really care for either option. The spectacle is designed to reinforce Trump’s narrative that he has a clear mandate from the American people. Such a mandate does not exist, and we must point that out over and over.

"I think it’s playing into Trump’s nationalist worldview to speak of 'national character.' This is a highly diverse country full of hundreds of millions of people. Most Americans did not indicate they wanted this."

I believe that part of the plan all along was to begin with a bang, a slew of executive orders designed to make Trump look as if he’s immediately taking action on his agenda. Over time we could see him successfully implement that agenda, but on the other hand, we could see internal fissures within the administration that cause much of it to fizzle. Already it seems like the much-touted DOGE that was supposed to gut the federal workforce is suffering from internal tension, with co-leader Vivek Ramaswamy booted out. Now there is tension between Trump and Elon Musk. Hopefully, the MAGA movement will tear itself apart and Trump’s presidency will fizzle, a not unlikely outcome since Trump tends to surround himself with backstabbing people.

It is too early to draw conclusions about whether Trump’s presidency will be a successful authoritarian nightmare or an embarrassing failure. It might be some hybrid of the two. Either way the task is clear: to identify the worst and most harmful policies, focus on organizing opposition to those, and build a credible force that can counter MAGA-ism.

“Are we on the side of our donors?”: DNC race puts spotlight on money and “good billionaires”

The election for the next chair of the Democratic National Committee is the first major milestone in the party’s path forward after the 2024 election. While the leading candidates largely agree in reorienting towards winning back working-class voters and expanding support for state and local parties, the chair candidates have not committed to broader structural reform for the party, like banning PAC money in primaries.

On Feb. 1, the 448 voting members of the DNC will convene to elect a new party chair, who is charged with promoting the party's agenda and managing the 2028 presidential primaries. Perhaps the biggest question, though, is how a new leader will or will not transform the party's finances amid a debate over the role of billionaire money in politics.

At the DNC candidate forum in Detroit earlier this month, each candidate described different priorities, like reinvesting in the party’s infrastructure, restoring the party’s identity, reconnecting with the working class and ramping up legal battles against racial gerrymandering.

With Democrats out of power and without a clear leader of the party, the chair will also play an important role in making the case for Democrats and their policies over at least the next two years, according to David Hogg, a March for Our Lives activist and candidate for DNC vice chair.

“The chair is one of the main leaders of our parties when we don't have a president,” Hogg told Salon. “We need them to be out there highlighting what Democrats are doing.”

The importance of their role as the party spokesperson is something where the candidates agree: The party chair needs to be out there making the case for Democrats year-round and across the country. The leading candidates, Ken Martin, the Minnesota party chair, and Ben Wikler, the Wisconsin party chair, have both run on commitments to implement a 50-state organizing strategy and have received glowing endorsements regarding their ability to manage the party in terms of administration and organizing.

One of the areas where chair candidates have been less outspoken, however, is in how the party is funded — and, specifically, the party's relationship to billionaire donors and interest groups. At last week's candidate forum, both Martin and Wikler were pressed about how they would approach funding from billionaires if elected chair of the DNC.

“Are we on the side of our donors, or are we on the side of the people that are leaving our party because they don’t feel like we’re fighting for them?” Martin responded. “We will not take money from people who do not share our values as the Democratic Party.”

We need your help to stay independent

Martin went on to say that it’s important for voters to feel like “we’re not taking money from the people that are working against them,” adding: “There are a number of billionaires in this country that have no interest in helping the working class in this country.” Asked who, specifically, he would not take money from, Martin said: “There’s too many to name.”

“There are a lot of good billionaires out there that have been with Democrats, who share our values, and we will take their money, but we’re not taking money from those bad billionaires,” Martin said.

Wikler responded to the question by saying: “We’re not going to take money from people who are actively union busting. We’re not going to take money from the people who funded Stop the Steal.” He added, “If they try to donate we’re going to send that money back.”

When the whole panel was asked whether any of the candidates would support a blanket ban on campaign contributions from tech executives — the same class of billionaires mentioned by former President Joe Biden in his farewell address as forming an American oligarchy — none of the candidates would commit.

While declining money from the same billionaires and interest groups that fund Republicans would be an improvement, Denae Ávila-Dickson, a spokesperson for the Sunrise Movement, told Salon that this commitment is insufficient if the party truly wants to prioritize the interest of voters over donors, who she says have a "corrosive influence" on the party. The Sunrise Movement has been leading a campaign to pressure the next DNC chair to ban PAC spending in primaries and to revive the Obama-era ban on corporate donations to the DNC.

"We need to see a much stronger commitment [from] the DNC chair committing to banning super PAC spending in party primaries," Ávila-Dickson said. “What we saw in 2024 is the same donors who are giving big to Republican causes and supporting Donald Trump, including Elon Musk, are interfering in Democratic primaries to try to elect their chosen candidate.”

We need your help to stay independent

The highest profile example of this phenomenon was when the American Israel Public Affairs Committee spent millions to oust incumbents like Rep. Jamaal Bowman, D-N.Y., and Rep. Cori Bush, D-Mo. However, Ávila-Dickson explained, this is far from the only example.

The crypto industry, for example, was among the biggest spenders in the 2024 election and deployed millions to elevate Democrats friendly to the crypto industry over those more hawkish on regulation in the primaries. For example, they pumped $3.4 million into Rep. Julie Johnson's, D-Texas, bid in Texas's 32nd District.

“It is no coincidence that Donald Trump and his allies are making it a priority to promote the crypto industry,” Ávila-Dickson said. “It’s deeply dangerous for Democrats to claim to be the party of working people while having elected officials who are putting their needs above the needs of their constituents.”

Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Texas, is another good example of a Democrat who was elevated by special interests, winning his 2022 primary against Jessica Cisneros by fewer than 200 votes after receiving considerable support from the oil and gas industry. Now, Cuellar, who has voted with Republicans on matters affecting the oil and gas industry during his time in Congress, is under indictment for charges of bribery and acting as a foreign agent. He has denied wrongdoing.

“I think what we’re asking for is twofold: one we’re calling for this because we believe it's what's right. We believe that billionaire donors shouldn't shape the Democratic party otters should shape the party,” Ávila-Dickson said. “Two: We believe it’s what is needed to win elections and defeat Donald Trump.”

Usamah Andrabi, a spokesperson for the Justice Democrats, told Salon that his organization, which has helped elect progressives like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., backed the Sunrise Movement's commitment because “We cannot continue to pretend that this is a war between good billionaires and evil billionaires.”

“Instead of just talking about how we can talk differently we need to act differently,” Andrabi said. “We can either continue to go down the same path that we have been going down or we can make a radical change in how this party works and who it works for. If we don't make this change we will continue to lose elections and lose to fascism in this country.”

Is DeepSeek really better for the environment than ChatGPT and Gemini?

When Chinese entrepreneur Liang Wenfeng revealed DeepSeek’s newest app to the world earlier this month, most people had never even heard of the artificial intelligence company. But the new app took the world by storm, as many in the tech community marveled at how DeepSeek functioned at a fraction of the cost of other large language models like OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Google’s Gemini. That’s presumably good news for the environment, as many have criticized the AI craze as being extremely taxing on electrical grids — so much so that some tech companies like Google and Meta have reopened coal plants.

In theory, any AI alternative that consumes fewer resources should be better for the environment. Yet when Salon reached out to experts about the potential promise in DeepSeek’s potential “Sputnik” moment (to quote billionaire software developer Marc Andreessen), they expressed cautious optimism.

“There is almost no information available about either ChatGPT or DeepSeek, so any numbers [about their environmental impact] are speculation,” David Rolnick, an assistant professor in the School of Computer Science at McGill University, told Salon. “It's unlikely that there is a massive difference between these two algorithms, but it's hard to say the biggest differences in terms of the energy consumption aspects of large AI algorithms are how much you use.”

That said, DeepSeek could still represent a step in the right direction, at least in terms of sustainability. Climate scientists  are rightfully worried about the huge energy drain from data centers in the U.S., which is expected to either double or triple by 2028. Rolnick explained that the environmental impacts of very large AI models include the energy use associated with developing training and querying them, water usage for cooling data centers and impacts associated with manufacturing hardware like servers and chips.

"There is almost no information available about either ChatGPT or DeepSeek, so any numbers [about their environmental impact] are speculation."

Yet Rahul Sandhil, the vice president and general manager for global marketing and communications at the semiconductor company MediaTek, told the Associated Press that DeepSeek offers hope for reducing those impacts. It is known as an “open-weight” model, which means it can be downloaded and run locally, assuming one has the sufficient hardware. If their claims hold up, some routine AI queries in the future may not need data centers at all and could instead be shifted to phones. The fact that the LLM is open source is another plus for DeepSeek model, which has wiped out at least $1.2 trillion in stock market value. Meanwhile, companies like OpenAI, which have been operating for a decade, have yet to be profitable.

What it ultimately comes down to is whether people actually use it over other models. It doesn’t matter if it’s “better” for the environment if it doesn’t see much adoption. Additionally, as noted by Prof. Anthony Cohn at the University of Leeds and Foundation Models Lead at the Alan Turing Institute, said in a statement “the DeepSeek models are still language only, rather than multi-modal – they cannot take speech, image or video inputs, or generate them.  No doubt the future will see such a release, though the computational demands of handling multi-modal data are much greater than when just handling language.”


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


That could explain it’s seemingly lesser impact on the planet. On a financial level, how DeepSeek functions with fewer resources will raise unavoidable sustainability questions when other AI companies attempt to succeed using more consumptive models.

“The DeepSeek announcement should prompt regulators all across the country to feel empowered to rigorously interrogate forecasts used to justify lock-in of fossil fuel infrastructure,” Julie McNamara, deputy policy director with the Climate & Energy program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, told Salon. In contrast to claims that AI demands massive investments of money and electricity — often hand-waved away as a “trade off” for the bright future this tech will allegedy usher in — policymakers and investors should instead acknowledge that AI could be effectively developed without a catastrophic carbon footprint.

“There is no question that electricity demand will be ratcheting up over the years and decades to come, regardless of data center needs,” McNamara said. “But this is a transition that must be approached with a necessarily long view, built on strong foundations that ensure the needs of the public are elevated throughout.”

"There is no question that electricity demand will be ratcheting up over the years and decades to come, regardless of data center needs."

Additionally, policymakers and investors should also ask which AI programs are truly necessary. If many routine AI functions can be performed without massive data centers, then limiting AI use to situations when it is necessary and irreplaceable could at least somewhat mitigate its environmental harms.

“Fundamentally, society has to decide how much you want to use an immense generative AI algorithm, and I think that as a whole, we haven't yet worked out whether they are useful in the vast majority of cases in which they're being used,” Rolnick said. People can often perform Google searches or ask humans to perform tasks that AI business leaders argue should be outsourced to AI.

We need your help to stay independent

“It is unclear to me that the vast majority of uses of algorithms like DeepSeek and ChatGPT are providing benefits in many places,” Rolnick said. “If we are to think about environmental benefits associated with one model or another, these will pale in comparison to the decision whether or not to use such AI algorithms as compared either with non-AI approaches.”

McNamara acknowledges that — with the fossil fuel industry’s political allies in control of the presidency, legislature and courts — this will not be easy.

“Recently, the massive energy requirements associated with AI development have been invoked to justify the build-out of scores of new gas-fired power plants,” McNamara said. “But such a turn is entirely out of step with the true needs of a forward-looking economy.” That is why, above all else, the unveiling of DeepSeek is relevant for inhabitants of Earth as an opportunity to challenge narratives about humanity’s use of fossil fuels.

“Fossil fuel companies are seizing this moment to attempt a blatant end-run around critical climate and public health standards to lock-in new gas infrastructure for decades to come,” McNamara said.

“Tough place to get out of”: Trump announces plans to hold detained immigrants at Guantanamo Bay

Donald Trump stepped up his assault on migrants on Wednesday evening, announcing plans to hold detained immigrants at the notorious military prison at Naval Station Guantanamo Bay.

Trump shared his vision for the Cuban prison before signing the Laken Riley Act. That law requires the detention of undocumented immigrants who have been accused of certain crimes. Expecting a glut of immigrants in detention, Trump signed a memo ordering the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Defense to prepare the prison to hold 30,000 additional detainees. 

"Most people don't even know about it. We have 30,000 beds in Guantanamo to detain the worst criminal illegal aliens," Trump said. "That's a tough place to get out of."

The U.S. has operated a base at the site since 1903. The prison began operation in the wake of the September 11 attacks and has since been used to detain suspects accused of terrorism or declared enemy combatants. The prison and its practice of detaining people who have not been charged with crimes has been a regular sticking point in the years since. President Barack Obama campaigned on plans to close the detention facility, but that never came to fruition. 

Guantanamo does house a migrant processing center already, but it doesn't operate at anywhere near the scale of Trump's request. Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canal called the order an "act of brutality" and lambasted the United States for housing migrants "next to the well-known prisons of torture and illegal detention."

Newly confirmed Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth supported the move in a stop by Fox News' "The Will Cain Show."

"This is a temporary transit, which is already the mission of naval station Guantanamo Bay, where we can plus up thousands and tens of thousands if necessary, to humanely move illegals out of our country where they do not belong, back to the countries where they came from in proper process," Hegseth said. "We're ramping up for the possibility to expand mass deportations."

Meta settles with Trump for $25 million

Meta has agreed to settle a lawsuit brought by President Donald Trump for $25 million, according to news reports.

The settlement reportedly includes $22 million earmarked toward Trump's presidential library, with the remainder going to legal fees and other plaintiffs in the case. Trump reached similar terms with ABC News last month.

Trump sued the Facebook parent company after it chose to suspend his account on that platform following the Jan. 6 riots at the U.S. Capitol. Trump had shared two posts the social media platform said supported the rioting and violated their terms. 

"The shocking events of the last 24 hours clearly demonstrate that President Donald Trump intends to use his remaining time in office to undermine the peaceful and lawful transition of power to his elected successor, Joe Biden,” Meta head Mark Zuckerberg wrote at the time. "We believe the risks of allowing the President to continue to use our service during this period are simply too great. Therefore, we are extending the block we have placed on his Facebook and Instagram accounts indefinitely and for at least the next two weeks until the peaceful transition of power is complete."

After finding himself booted from YouTube, Facebook and X, Trump launched his own competing social media platform. Trump's accounts on Facebook and X have since been reinstated. 

The agreement to settle comes as Zuckerberg has made clear efforts to ingratiate himself with the Trump administration. Beyond appearances on conservative talking point clearinghouses like "The Joe Rogan Experience" and donations to Trump's inauguration,  Meta has rolled back protections against misinformation and removed some hate speech guidelines

The moves drew recrimination from outgoing President Joe Biden

"Americans are being buried under an avalanche of misinformation and disinformation enabling the abuse of power. The free press is crumbling, editors are disappearing," Biden said in his farewell address. "Social media is giving up on fact-checking. The truth is smothered by lies, told for power and for profit."

“Corrupted to the core”: Menendez pleads for help from Trump after sentencing

Former New Jersey Sen. Bob Menendez was anything but contrite after being sentenced to 11 years in prison on federal corruption charges Wednesday.

The 71-year-old called the case, in which he was found guilty of taking hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of bribes while serving in the Senate, a "political witch hunt." Standing outside the U.S. District Court building in Manhattan, Menendez announced his plans to appeal his case and called upon an unlikely ally. 

"President [Donald] Trump was right. This process is political, and it’s corrupted to the core," he said. I hope President Trump cleans up the cesspool and restores the integrity to the system."

Prosecutors successfully argued that Menendez took bribes that included cash payments and gold bars in exchange for peddling influence on behalf of Egypt and Qatar. Last year, Menendez was found guilty on 16 counts that included bribery and acting as a foreign agent. NBC News reported that Menendez has been seeking a pardon from President Trump behind closed doors.

Menendez's case took place in a familiar venue for Trump. It was there the president was found liable for sexual abuse and defamation of the writer E. Jean Carroll, with two judgments handed down by U.S. District Court Judge Lewis Kaplan totaling more than $88 million in damages. Trump went on a pardoning spree in his first week in office that included clemency for 1,500 accused Jan. 6 rioters. Still, he's given no indication he might want to stick his short thumb in the court's eye.

“We’ve seen nothing like it before”: Sinema, Trump campaign manager join Coinbase advisory board

Coinbase is making moves to take advantage of President Donald Trump's pro-crypto push. 

The cryptocurrency exchange announced on Wednesday that it had brought on Trump's 2024 campaign manager Chris LaCivita and former Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema as advisers on its Global Advisory Council.

Sinema made no attempts to hide her goals as a former lawmaker now working in the speculative space, saying in an interview with the Wall Street Journal that she wants to use her inside knowledge of the legislative process to get favorable laws passed.

“I think one of the most important things for the crypto community is to get a piece of legislation passed in both the House and Senate, in a bipartisan way, and signed by President Trump,” she said.

LaCivita shared that Trump learned "a lot about [crypto] from Barron" and said that he "wants to be on the forefront" of the industry in his second term.

While it’s not unusual for financial firms to seek out the expertise of former lawmakers, Coinbase’s profile and prominence as a political donor is raising questions about an administration’s ability to oversee the burgeoning industry impartially.

Sinema herself didn’t receive any funding from crypto PACs this past election cycle as she had announced her retirement from the upper chamber. Ruben Gallego, who took her Senate seat, received $10 million in backing from crypto PACs, according to data compiled by independent researcher Molly White.

Coinbase is a public company and is one of the largest cryptocurrency exchange platforms in the world. They've only recently become politically active, making their debut in a big way during the 2024 election cycle. Coinbase gave at least $75 million to the blockchain-aligned Fairshake PAC, making it one of the largest contributors from the industry. 

“Prior to this cycle, they were not a major political donor, and any contributions they made were mostly directed to individual candidates and were modest in size,” White told Salon.

For industry watchdogs, this marks uncharted territory. The crypto industry seems to have a long stretch of green lights as it looks to maximize its influence and power under a pro-crypto administration that is itself launching crypto ventures.

"It’s partially payback for services rendered, and it's also a demonstration to current officeholders that the money is there for you too if you vote our way," Robert Weissman, co-president of Public Citizen, told Salon. "We’ve seen nothing like it before."

RFK Jr. claims he had “nothing to do” with Samoan measles outbreak, but record suggests otherwise

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., President Donald Trump's pick to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, faced tough questioning from Democrats on Wednesday over his criticism of vaccines and his role in stopping measles vaccinations in Samoa, which led to the infection of 57,000 Samoans, dozens of whom died.

"In 2021, in a book called 'The Measles Book,' you wrote that parents had been 'mislead into believing measles is a deadly disease and that measles vaccines are necessary, safe and effective,'" Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said at the hearing. "The reality is that measles are in fact deadly and highly contagious, something that you should have learned after your lies contributed to the deaths of 83 people, most of them children, in a measles outbreak in Samoa."

After two Samoan children died in 2018 from vaccines that nurses accidentally infused with muscle relaxant, the Samoan government suspended its vaccination program. By the time it restarted the program 10 months later, health officials admitted that there was a lot of "catching up" to do, and a surge in anti-vaccine sentiment dissuaded thousands of people from getting their shots.

Kennedy told Wyden that because the suspension was imposed before he set foot on the island, he couldn't be held responsible for the outbreak.

"I arrived a year later [in June 2019] when vaccination rates were already below any previous level. I went there — nothing to do with vaccines — I went there to introduce a medical informatics system that would digitalize records in Samoa and make health delivery much more efficient … I never gave any public statement about vaccines. You cannot find a single Samoan who said I didn't get a vaccine because of Bobby Kennedy," he claimed.

While Kennedy may not have visited Samoa or directly contacted the Samoan government before June 2019, his anti-vaccine nonprofit, Children's Health Defense, made several Facebook posts that used the deaths of two Samoan children to launch a broader attack on vaccines in general. When the government debated and ultimately lifted the suspension, local anti-vaccine activists like Edwin Tamanese cited posts and statements by Kennedy and Children's Health Defense to discourage the use of vaccines among the population.

We need your help to stay independent

In 2021, Kennedy would recall in an article that, during his June 2019 visit to Samoa, he offered advice to the prime minister about measuring health outcomes "following the 'natural experiment' created by the national respite from vaccines" — a different story from the one he told Wednesday. He said in the article that the trip was arranged by Tamanese and reprimanded the "Global Medical Cartel" for using a "mild measles outbreak" to scapegoat his Samoan friend.

Just months later, as measles raged across Samoa in the fall of 2019, Kennedy wrote in a four-page letter to the prime minister that the measles vaccine itself might have created a new strain that caused the outbreak.

"I was dismayed — but not surprised — to see media reports that linked the current measles outbreak to the so-called 'anti-vaccine' movement," he wrote. "To safeguard public health during the current infection in and in the future [sic], it is critical that the Samoan Health Ministry determine, scientifically, if the outbreak was caused by inadequate vaccine coverage or alternatively, by a defective vaccine."

Even as Kennedy continued to offer counsel to the Samoan government, he has steadfastly denied any culpability in the 2019 measles outbreak, sometimes claiming that the disaster happened in spite of his advice rather than because of it, while at other times downplaying his role completely.

"I had nothing to do with people not vaccinating in Samoa. I didn't tell anybody not to vaccinate," he said while being interviewed for "A Shot in the Arm," a documentary that covered the outbreak.

 

Trump OPM hires include recent high school grad who interned at Musk’s Neuralink

Recent hires to the Office of Personnel Management have tipped Elon Musk's hand and revealed the only qualification that will matter in the coming Musk-assisted shakeups of the federal government: personal loyalty. 

A report from Wired revealed that Musk lackeys have been placed throughout the structure of the OPM, an agency that acts as a human resources department for federal employees. While the insertion of former employees at Musk's Boring Company and xAI as advisers is alarming, nothing quite illustrated the point like the hiring of two former Musk associates who aren't yet old enough to rent a car. 

The outlet reports that the upper echelons of OPM include a 21-year-old software engineer who formerly worked at Palantir, the analytics company owned by Musk's former Paypal partner Peter Thiel. Another unnamed employee graduated from high school this year and reportedly lists bicycle mechanic and camp counselor on their resume, alongside an internship at Musk's Neuralink.

Musk was hand-picked by Trump to head the Department of Government Efficiency, with a mandate to cut government spending by slashing the federal workforce. The Trump administration side-stepped the red tape of advisory committees by creating DOGE out of the already existing U.S. Digital Service. His early acts appear to be moves to surround himself with loyalists that could help him politicize the formerly neutral OPM. 

“My guess is that typically, in the past, there have been only one or maybe two political appointees in all of OPM. All the rest are career. So this seems like a very political heavy presence in an organization that is not very political,” Harvard professor emeritus Steven Kelman told the magazine.

The OPM has already signaled its intentions to weed out employees involved in diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives. Many federal employees received an email promoting a digital tip line for employees to rat on supposed DEI programs within the government. Kelman said that the system of "turning in your friends to the government" was reminiscent of "Soviet Stalinism."

Why fizzy water won’t help you lose weight – despite what some studies might suggest

For years it has been claimed that sparkling water may aid weight loss by helping you feel fuller – reducing your desire to snack and overeat.

Now, a recent hypothesis has suggested that sparkling water may help you lose weight by boosting your body's blood sugar (glucose) uptake and metabolism.

But before you go and stock your fridge up with fizzy water, it's important to actually take a look at the study itself and how it was conducted. This publication makes it clear that it isn't new research – rather, it's a new hypothesis formed by referencing the results of a study published in 2004 — alongside additional supplementary research to support the theory.

It should be noted that the old study was not even looking at the effect of fizzy water on body weight. It was actually an observation of what happens to blood when it goes through a kidney dialysis machine (haemodialysis) and how it might lower blood glucose. No fizzy water was consumed as part of this study either.

The effect of haemodialysis is said to mimic the effect of carbon dioxide in the blood – which increases the pH or alkalinity inside red blood cells. This then encourages the red blood cells to metabolise more glucose.

Using the figures from the 20-year-old paper, it's estimated that a four hour dialysis session seems to increase glucose use by 9g – only around 36 additional calories burned.

But the study the hypothesis was based on wasn't looking at the effects of carbon dioxide in the blood. Rather, it was looking at how haemodialysis changes the pH of red blood cells — and how that affects blood glucose. This makes it difficult to compare how the carbon dioxide in fizzy water may affect blood glucose when it enters the bloodstream.

So why the fuss?

The paper itself contains a valid scientific idea worthy of discussion. But unfortunately, some of its nuance has been lost in the way the study has been promoted – with media headlines exaggerating the paper's findings.

To understand whether this hypothesis stands, research will need to be done which investigates whether a significant amount of carbon dioxide actually does enter our bloodstream when we drink sparkling water, and how quickly this is absorbed by the body – which will tell us how long the potential effects last.

But a glass of sparkling water contains less than a gram of carbon dioxide – and this will be absorbed in minutes. This amount of carbon dioxide is a tiny fraction compared to the kilogram our body naturally produces in an average day) through respiration – how our body uses energy.

Looking at these numbers, fizzy water will probably not have a measurable effect on blood carbon dioxide levels – and therefore no effect on metabolism and weight.

The hypothesis's author itself is careful to state in the paper that carbonated water is not a standalone solution for weight loss and that healthy diet and physical activity are both key.

Does fizzy water at least help with appetite?

Another claim that has sometimes been made about fizzy water in the media and in other studies (though not by the author of this latest hypothesis) is that it can help you feel fuller for longer, which may aid in weight loss. However, the evidence here is not conclusive.

While some studies have found that people who drank carbonated water reported it helped them feel fuller for longer, other studies have actually shown it may have the opposite effect. Research in rats that looked specifically at weight and appetite hormones found that sparkling water increased both weight and levels of the hunger hormone ghrelin. In a parallel study these researchers conducted on 20 men, it was shown that fizzy water also increased their ghrelin levels. This suggests fizzy water could actually make people more hungry.

It seems the data is not conclusive about the effect of fizzy water on hunger. In theory, fizzy water might help to stretch our stomach causing us to feel full. However, the data does not seem to agree with this theory.

In order for fizzy water to do this, it would need to stay in the stomach longer than still water – and science suggests this isn't the case. A study which compared drinking fizzy water versus drinking still water after a meal found both seem to leave the stomach at the same rate.

What's more, drinking water with meals does not have a significant effect on appetite and feeling full. This is all down to the shape of the stomach and how it churns and breaks down our food. The bottom curve of our stomach has a channel called the Magenstrasse or "stomach road" which allows liquids to flow quickly into the small intestine where it can be absorbed.

While we might wish a glass of sparkling water could help support weight loss or at least help us feel fuller for longer, there's currently little to no data to support this. The only real effect that drinking fizzy water (or even still water) has on body weight seems to be that when people use it to replace sugary drinks, it means they consume fewer calories on average.


The Conversation has spoken with Akira Takahashi, doctor of medicine and head of department at Tesseikai Neurosurgical Hospital, the author of the hypothesis. He writes that based on the 2004 study's findings, it would be difficult to simulate the effect of haemodialysis through drinking carbonated water – and that it's unlikely fizzy water alone could lead to weight loss.

He states that the mechanism shown in the haemodialysis study, by which CO2 can reduce blood sugar levels, may behave similarly to the CO2 absorbed from drinking fizzy water — and that this may result in glucose consumption in the blood near the stomach. However, he says more research will be needed to measure blood sugar levels before and after drinking carbonated water to validate this effect. Takahashi also thinks the feeling of fullness caused by drinking carbonated beverages warrants further research, as carbon dioxide releases bubbles that stimulate the stomach's stretch receptors – creating a sensation of fullness.

Takahashi writes: "It is important to note that carbonated water alone is unlikely to contribute significantly to weight loss. A balanced diet and regular exercise remain essential for effective weight management."The Conversation

Duane Mellor, Visiting Academic, Aston Medical School, Aston University

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

Federal court could let North Carolina decide whether to overturn a Democrat’s November win

Judges on the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals this week grappled with the merits of a jurisdictional dispute that could bring an end to the now months-long fight over North Carolina's Supreme Court race.  

The three-judge panel heard oral argument in North Carolina Supreme Court Justice Allison Riggs' appeal of a federal district court decision to send the election protests from her November opponent, Judge Jefferson Griffin, back to the state's GOP-led Supreme Court for consideration. Riggs leads Griffin in the race by just 734 votes, her victory confirmed by two recounts.

Monday's oral argument revolved largely around what the Fourth Circuit judges described as "complicated" procedural issues as the judges mulled precedent for federal removal, how to respect state court orders and what justified a federal court hearing the case at all. As the panel peppered counsel for each party with questions on in-the-weeds technical matters, how it might ultimately rule on the matter remained unclear.

Chris Shenton, senior counsel for voting rights for the Southern Coalition for Social Justice, told Salon that the panel showed both a "sincere skepticism" that Griffin's arguments were right and a "genuine concern" over whether they could actually grant Riggs relief, should they even want to. 

"That explains the tension and grappling the court was doing yesterday and why there wasn't a clear answer coming out of yesterday," Shenton, who was in attendance, said in a phone interview.

Appellate Judge Jefferson Griffin asked the North Carolina Supreme Court in December to compel the state Board of Elections to throw out more than 60,000 votes he alleges are invalid because voters did not provide some identification information on their registration applications. The state Supreme Court unanimously dismissed the case last week and remanded it back to the Wake County Superior Court, ordering it to consider the case on an expedited basis. It also left in place the stay on election certification it granted earlier this month. 

After Griffin first filed his election protests in the North Carolina Supreme Court in December, the state election board — which had rejected those protests — sought to have the case removed to federal court. The district court, however, rejected that request earlier this month and sent the case back to the state Supreme Court. Riggs, who recused herself from the case and intervened as a defendant, appealed that decision, leading to Monday's oral argument before the Fourth Circuit.  

Riggs and the state Board of Elections asked that the court reverse the lower court ruling and move the case back into federal court, arguing that Griffin's request for the board to throw out votes would be asking it to disenfranchise voters in violation of the National Voter Registration Act, the Voting Rights Act and the equal protection clause of the Constitution. During oral argument, Riggs' counsel also asked that the court rule quickly.

"This case belongs in federal court, because federal law stands between Judge Griffin and the mass disenfranchisement he seeks," Riggs argued in her opening brief. "Judge Griffin is well aware of those federal obstacles; he filed this action directly in the N.C. Supreme Court on the mistaken belief that, by skipping the North Carolina trial and intermediate appellate courts, he could thwart federal jurisdiction."

Griffin, however, asked the Fourth Circuit to affirm the lower court's ruling to remand the case back to state court, accusing the North Carolina Board of Elections of attempting "to delay things even more" by appealing to have the case handled in federal court. 

Part of what makes the case before the Fourth Circuit so complex is the North Carolina Supreme Court's dismissal. In hearing arguments from the appellants, the judges focused heavily on what remedy they could even provide Riggs and the state board should they rule to move the case back into federal court.

"Assume everything you're saying is correct — we get the case back from the Supreme Court of North Carolina. We have a case in which a writ of prohibition was filed," Circuit Judge Paul Niemeyer, a President George H.W. Bush appointee, said to counsel for the state Board of Elections. "The North Carolina Supreme Court dismissed it. What do we do with it? Do we review the Supreme Court motion to dismiss the prohibition writ?"

Niemeyer also questioned whether the federal court had the power to reverse the state court rulings, emphasizing the legitimacy of the order the North Carolina Supreme Court made last week. 

"If the state court legitimately has it, we have to respect its orders," he said. "There's a lot of comity here between a state and a federal court, and even on a federal issue, we have to respect state court rulings."

We need your help to stay independent

While questioning lawyers for Griffin, the judges focused more intently on the merits of his argument for affirming the district court's decision. The panel appeared skeptical of the arguments that the district court's refusal to take on the case was appropriate and of Griffin's conception of federal removal.

"Seems to me, if somebody contends that the action by the Supreme Court of North Carolina is null and void because it should have been in federal court, they can appeal the North Carolina Supreme Court to the Supreme Court of the United States," Niemeyer said to Griffin's counsel at one point.  

Shenton noted that the stakes of Griffin's petitions for North Carolina voters had been left out of Monday's oral argument. 

"It's always frustrating to me, as someone who swims in these waters, when these legal issues obscure the substantive right that is underlying all of them, which is people cast a ballot for their preferred candidates in a way that is core to American governance and American democracy, and that's being obscured by whether or not abstention doctrines are appropriate," he said. 

In his election protests, Griffin argued that the North Carolina Board of Elections erroneously and unlawfully counted 60,000 votes from voters he says did not provide driver's license or social security numbers when registering to vote. He also argues the same of another 5,509 absentee votes he claims are invalid because overseas voters, including military personnel, failed to provide photo identification. Tossing those votes, he argues, will deliver him a win. 

The Wake County Superior Court, in accordance with the state Supreme Court's order last week, will begin hearing the case on Feb. 7.

Shenton said that the Fourth Circuit has three basic paths it could take in ruling on the matter. It could order the case to proceed exclusively in federal court; determine that the remand to state court was appropriate and allow it to proceed exclusively in state court for now; or order parallel proceedings to continue in both state and federal court.

No matter what the ruling ultimately is, however, it'll be the next step in the case rather than the final step, he said. 

"Suffice to say that there is no simple way out of all of this right now," he said. "It's a complicated issue, and it's … a fractured proceeding right now. The Fourth Circuit can add some clarity to that — I think they will — but that clarity won't necessarily come with simplicity."

Snoop Dogg responds to “all the hate” following Trump inauguration gig

Snoop Dogg has a few words for his critics, after receiving considerable backlash for his performance at the Crypto Ball event celebrating Donald Trump's inauguration over a week ago.

In an Instagram Live video posted Sunday, the California rapper addressed the controversy in his signature style — smoking a blunt and vibing to music. As he sat in his car, The Winans' "Ain't No Need to Worry" played in the background. "It's Sunday, man, I got God filling my heart right now," he said. "For all the hate, I'm answering it with love. Y'all can't hate enough on me. I love too much."

He added, "Get your life right. Stop worrying about mine. I'm good. I'm together. Still a Black man. Still 100% Black."

While the rapper did not mention the Crypto Ball directly, thousands of comments on his video took the statement as a response to the controversial inauguration performance. The responses pointed out Snoop's prior contradictory views on Trump — specifically his view on musicians who performed at his last inauguration.

One comment said, "As a black man, I wonder how you feel knowing that the man you shucked and jived for in less than 24 hours after you left the stage, started rolling back protections for black and brown people?"

Another stated, "No one is hating on you. We are disappointed in you, especially after all you said about who would perform at his last inauguration. We feel like you sold us out and danced for massa. All money ain’t good money. No hate in my heart. You’re the one who has to live with that."

"Snoop you disappointed us. We been riding with you since we were kids. This one hurts for real," a third comment said.

Many other comments called the former anti-Trumper a "sell out" and "MAGA." 

In the wake of Snoop's performance at the Crypto Ball, he's reportedly lost more than half a million followers on social media.

It’s official: This popular Girl Scout Cookie flavor is getting the Wendy’s Frosty treatment

The exciting food collaborations keep coming.

On Wednesday, Wendy’s announced that it’s teaming up with Girl Scouts of the USA (GSUSA) to transform the organization’s popular cookie flavor into a frozen dessert. The Thin Mints Frosty features the signature “minty-chocolatey” flavors of Thin Mints cookies and a crumbly, cookie butter-like texture, TODAY reported.

Customers can get the “Thin Mints-inspired swirl” with a Chocolate or Vanilla Frosty base, per Wendy’s. The frosty will be available at Wendy’s stores nationwide starting Friday, Feb. 21 and for a limited time only.

Wendy’s latest release comes after the fast-food chain collaborated with Paramount back in October to release the Krabby Patty Kollab in celebration of SpongeBob SquarePants’ 25th anniversary. The "Kollab" includes the Krabby Patty Kollab Burger, a quarter-pound burger topped with two slices of melted American cheese, lettuce, tomato, pickle, onion and a special Krabby Kollab sauce; along with an all-new Pineapple Under the Sea Frosty, made from a Vanilla Frosty blended with a Pineapple Mango-flavored purée.

As for Girl Scouts, the organization announced that they’re saying farewell to two cookie flavors at the end of this year's cookie season: S’mores and Toast-Yay! S’mores cookies were introduced in 2017, while Toast-Yay! cookies were introduced in 2021.

“Girl Scout Cookie season is about so much more than selling the iconic cookies people know and love,” GSUSA chief revenue officer Wendy Lou said in a statement obtained by TODAY. “The funds girls earn throughout the season directly power girls’ journeys in leadership, entrepreneurship and community building. The sweet success of each sale is a testament to how much girls can change the world when they put their minds to it.”

Trump administration rescinds OMB memo that imposed illegal freeze on federal spending

President Donald Trump's budget office is rescinding the wording, but not necessarily the substance, of its previous order for a blanket suspension of most federal aid, according a memo leaked to independent reporter Marisa Kabas.

The order issued on Monday was widely criticized by Democrats, NGO leaders and political activists as an unconstitutional power grab by the White House. A federal judge blocked the order Tuesday after the group Democracy Forward sued the Trump administration.

"OMB memorandum M-25-13 is rescinded. If you have questions about implementing the President's executive orders, please contact your agency General Counsel," reads the memo sent by Matthew Vaeth, acting director of the Office of Management and Budget. The news was confirmed by The Washington Post.

Less than an hour later, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt clarified on X that the latest memo was "NOT a rescission of the federal funding freeze … it is simply a rescission of the OMB memo" in order to "end any confusion created by the court's injunction."

"The President's EO's on federal funding remain in full force and effect, and will be rigorously implemented," she continued.

The stated objective of the grants suspension was to ensure that government agencies were complying with Trump's policy agenda to “to the extent permissible under applicable law," though critics of the order pointed out that almost everything in the original memo violated the constitutional principle that Congress decides how federal spending is disbursed, not the president.

Several groups, including Democracy Forward and a coalition of Democratic state attorneys general, challenged the grants suspension in court. On Tuesday evening, Judge Loren AliKhan in the District of Columbia issued a temporary restraining order on the OMB directive, stating that she would render a more permanent decision on Feb. 3.

The administration's reversal comes as the Senate prepares to vote on the confirmation of Trump's pick to lead OMB, Project 2025 architect Russ Vought.

Seeking new foods, scientists look to bacteria, algae and more

As a teenager growing up in Nigeria, Helen Onyeaka was obsessed with microorganisms. The tiny lifeforms, which include bacteria and yeast, can be grown quickly and in huge quantities. Onyeaka wondered if that abundance could be harnessed to feed people in conflict zones where children were suffering from malnutrition, their distended stomachs a clear sign of protein deficiency. "I used to dream microbes as food," she recently recalled.

Today, Onyeaka is an industrial microbiologist and a deputy director of the Birmingham Institute for Sustainability and Climate Action, at the University of Birmingham in the U.K. In her lab, she is testing her decades-old hypothesis, trying to identify microorganisms that could one day serve as an alternative protein source while using a fraction of the land, water, and industrial fertilizer needed to support traditional crops and livestock.

She's not the only person studying what are sometimes called single-cell proteins or edible microorganisms. While human diets have long included relatively small quantities of microbes — think of the live bacteria in yogurt, or the oven-killed yeast in bread — researchers at universities and dozens of startups across the globe are now investigating whether some microbes could serve as a caloric substitute for a wide range of foods and ingredients, including eggs, milk, meat, and flour.

Some products have already been cleared for sale in the U.S. And, late last year a Finnish company called Solar Foods completed requirements, outlined by the Food and Drug Administration, that allow the company to sell a powdery protein made of pasteurized bacteria.

Edible microbes face considerable hurdles to going mainstream, however. Would-be producers need to ensure that their organisms are safe to eat in large quantities and amenable to mass production. And ideally, any new product should look, feel, and taste as good as the food it replaces — and be able to overcome any skepticism from consumers uncertain about using bacteria in their kitchen.

For now, few edible microbes are ready for primetime, according to Onyeaka and other experts. Still, said Onyeaka, "the potential is there."

According to a report from the Good Food Institute, a nonprofit that advocates for alternative proteins, at least 80 companies are focused on producing food from yeast, bacteria, fungi, certain strains of algae, and other microorganisms. Some products are already on the market, wrote Adam Leman, a GFI scientist. In an email to Undark, he pointed to Quorn, a meat substitute made from fungal cells that was launched in 1985.

Over the past decade, a boomlet of new companies has emerged. Among them is Solar Foods. Prior to co-founding the company in 2017, CEO Pasi Vainikka worked for a government-owned research center, where he oversaw the largest renewable energy program in Finland. Agriculture is responsible for a large portion of the world's greenhouse gas emissions, said Vainikka. Cow burps and deforestation are particularly problematic.

One solution, Vainikka continued, is to replace livestock with an organism that doesn't produce much greenhouse gas or require fertile land. His company selected a bacterium from nature that doesn't eat sugar or perform photosynthesis. Instead, it gets its energy from hydrogen. At the company's factory in Finland, a fermentation machine captures carbon dioxide and water from the surrounding air. Electricity is then used to split the water molecules, freeing up hydrogen atoms. The microbes multiply as they consume the hydrogen, the carbon dioxide, and a few additional nutrients, such as calcium and phosphorous.

Eventually, the bacteria are removed from the fermenter, pasteurized, and dried. The final product — dubbed Solein — is about 75% protein, has a yellow hue, and tastes a bit like mushrooms. Solein has been used in restaurants in Singapore, said Vainikka, including as a milk substitute in ice cream. The company recently filed paperwork with U.S. regulators saying that the ingredients are generally recognized as safe, and according to Vainikka, the goal is to introduce Solein as an ingredient in packaged goods at some point in 2025.


In herU.K. lab, Onyeaka is growing Chlorella vulgaris, a green single-celled algae about 2 to 10 microns in diameter — roughly the width of a strand of spider silk. She and a graduate student feed the algae different nutrients to influence its protein content. The end goal, said Onyeaka, is to grow nutritious algae in quantities large enough to be used as flour by the baking industry. "At the end of the work, we're going to be making green bread, green cakes — so watch out," she said with a laugh.

Onyeaka readily admits her Chlorella has a long way to go. Last November, she co-authored a review article noting the significant challenges along that path — including high production costs and the organism's capacity to accumulate heavy metals from the surrounding environment. She and her team will eventually have to ensure that the microbe is safe for human consumption by testing it for potential toxins and allergens, among other risks.

Another issue highlighted in the review paper: Chlorella doesn't taste very good. (The researchers describe "an earthy, strong flavor and smell" that is "quite unpleasant" to some consumers.) The product may need to be blended with other strong-flavored ingredients, the paper suggests, or perhaps researchers might look for new, more mild strains.

Some people are finding ways to make microbes delicious. Chef Greg Baxtrom was initially approached to see if he'd be interested in serving a meal featuring Solein at his Brooklyn restaurant, Olmsted. He didn't want to force the new product onto the menu, he said, but was curious to see if he might be able to use the protein-rich powder to create egg- or dairy-free versions of some of the restaurant's classic dishes.

He couldn't get the Solein to work as an egg substitute in his carrot crepe. But he could get it to replace the crepe's butter and milk. And Solein did work as an egg substitute in a beer batter for squash rings. Ultimately, he found it worked particularly well as a milk substitute in spaetzle, a German noodle traditionally made from milk, flour, and eggs.

Baxtrom said he planned to experiment with the product a bit more in January. "I'm not going to try to force it, but if it works, then great," he said. "I can accommodate more allergies."

Vainikka said that he frequently consumes Solein in dishes served at the small restaurant located within Solar Foods' headquarters. In the long run, he said, he sees the business as "an organism company with a selection of different strains for different purposes." A person might balk at glass of yellow milk made from Solein, he pointed out, but perhaps there's a white microbe that would be less visually objectionable. The company could also supply microbes with different tastes, textures, and nutritional profiles, said Vainikka.

For her part, Onyeaka is looking beyond academia, communicating with companies that share her interest in Chlorella. Using advanced molecular tools, one Chinese company has learned that the typically green microbe can change colors, depending on what it's fed, she said.

She added, "Chlorella is just amazing."

 

This article was originally published on Undark. Read the original article.

Grimes denounces “Nazi-ism and white supremacy” in her online fandom after Elon Musk gesture

Singer-songwriter Grimes (Claire Boucher) is openly denouncing white supremacy and Nazism online just a week after Elon Musk — her ex-partner, with whom she shares three children — caused a stir with a hand gesture made during an inauguration rally for Donald Trump — one that historians have said "was a Nazi salute."

On Monday, Grimes addressed "a certain toxicity in the Grimes fandom," taking to Musk's platform, X, to point out that "for a few years now, persistent trolls on Reddit have been pushing this white supremacy/Nazi thing." However, Grimes added that Reddit has refused to address the issue.

"If it wasn't clear, I very much denounce Nazi-ism and white supremacy," the singer emphasized in her statement. "I am sorry I didn't take this more seriously sooner, I did not realize the extent of the issue. But it has come to my attention from some of y'all that this has been creating a lot of trouble."

Grimes revealed that some fans have harassed and stalked her family and friends, crossing personal boundaries. Despite this, she encouraged her supporters to report such behavior to her directly, assuring them that she would take action.

"I am sad at the division in the world [right now]. And I'm [really] sorry anyone has had to see super toxic negative things in the Grimes fandom on my behalf," she wrote. 

This is the second time Grimes has denounced Nazism following the Musk incident. However, Musk himself has mocked the comparisons, stating on X: “Frankly, they need better dirty tricks. The ‘everyone is Hitler’ attack is sooo tired.”

“I am not him. I will not make a statement every time he does something," Grimes stated on the topic of her ex. But in another post, she went on to emphasize, “I’m happy to denounce Nazi-ism – and the far alt-right. Would that help clear things up?”

The former couple went official with their relationship in 2018 but separated just three years later. In 2023, the musician sued Musk for the parental rights of their three children and has since kept their relationship private, Rolling Stone reported.

New White House lawyer described himself as a “raging misogynist,” praised Nazi theorist

Andrew Kloster, the newly-appointed general counsel for the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), the federal government’s human resources agency, is a self-described "raging misogynist" who said that "slaves owe us reparations" and "consent is probably modern society's most pernicious fetish," according to a report from the Project on Government Oversight.

During President Donald Trump's first term, Kloster served as associate director in the White House Office of Presidential Personnel and deputy general counsel at the OPM. He is also an active member of the Federalist Society, a right-wing legal network that in turn lauds him as a "fixture in the conservative movement."

As the OPM's chief lawyer, he will have wide-ranging responsibility over Trump's plans to strip protections from professional civil servants, with the apparent goal of firing some of them to make an example and installing political loyalists in their place. The OPM has already issued a slew of memos issuing orders to that effect, in addition to implementing a total hiring freeze and banning pro-diversity practices, threatening "adverse consequences" for those who do not report attempts to conceal such practices by their colleagues.

Shortly after his appointment as general counsel at the OPM, the POGO compiled records of sexist and racist remarks he made online, but did not publish the one part of their query that Kloster said was "false" when reached for comment.

But according to POGO, the man now in charge of the federal government's H.R. department did not specifically deny a slew of other comments that were published. In a response to a 2012 post on The Volokh Conspiracy legal blog about laws prohibiting sex with animals, Kloster wrote that "consent is probably modern society's most pernicious fetish." In February 2023, about six months after he was served a temporary restraining order for domestic violence — in a case that was dismissed days later after an agreement — he tweeted that "I need a woman who looks like she got punched."

Two days later, he said that he's a "100% women respecter precisely because I’m a raging misogynist … I’m so kind you’ll want to kill yourself and die, which is the goal." After a week, he re-emerged with a tweet that "slaves built america. Therefore,,, Slaves owe us reparations."

We need your help to stay independent

Kloster also appeared to express admiration for German political theorist Carl Schmitt, a staunch Nazi and opponent of liberalism who helped Adolf Hitler consolidate legal and executive power over the entire state.

"I do think Schmitt stands the test of time, every political crisis continues to just rhyme with his analysis of the conflict between liberalism and democracy," he wrote in a 2024 post that defended him from critiques by his American counterpart Leo Strauss, who like Schmitt was a proponent of reactionary thought.

According to Steven Monacelli, a special investigative reporter for the Texas Observer, the email address Kloster used to sign up for his X (formerly Twitter) account appears in a leak for an escort review website.

Kloster made the social media posts just as he began a stint as general counsel for former Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Florida, who was recently investigated for child sex trafficking and statutory rape. During the 2020 election, he allegedly yelled at election workers and police while acting as an observer for the Wisconsin Republican Party — an accusation he rejects — and participated in a GOP-led effort to legally challenge the election results that ultimately found no evidence of voter fraud.

Days after the Jan. 6 assault on the Capitol, he responded to a tweet suggesting a “civil war” was inevitable with hand clap emojis between the words “Do it.”

A White House spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The year of the snake: How my mother came to embrace her zodiac sign

"Horses are boring and gullible. Dragons are overrated, all show and no substance. Pigs are . . . well, pigs," my mom said, referring to the different zodiac animals that each occupy a slot in the 12-year lunar calendar cycle adopted by the Chinese and other Eastern cultures.

"I'm definitely a snake."

Starting on Jan. 29 and continuing for 15 days, people around the world, particularly those of East and Southeast Asian descent, will celebrate the Lunar New Year. This time, it’s the snake – emblazoned on decorations and slithering through parade routes in the form of paper, cloth or polyester – who will enjoy its turn as the focus of celebration alongside those who were born in its year, like the woman born Linda Wang in 1965, the Year of the Wood Snake.

At first, my mother Linda took little heed of her sign and which traits it supposedly embodies. Now, after overcoming a difficult adolescence and the challenge of nurturing a neurodivergent son, she feels much more ectothermic than she did during her childhood in Benghazi, Libya.   

"I like being a snake," Linda said. "If someone told me that my birthday was wrong and I was actually born in 1966, the Year of the Horse, I would not be able to relate. I would tell them, no, I'm definitely a snake."

But for a shrewd trick of one mythological snake, Linda would have been born a horse. According to one popular legend, a race was held to cross a great river, and the result would determine the order of the animals in the zodiac cycle. It's said that the snake, being a poor swimmer, curled itself around the horse's hoof, and only at the very last moment sprang free, scaring the horse and finishing just before its unsuspecting ride. Therefore, the official order for the zodiac animals is as follows: rat, ox, tiger, rabbit, dragon, snake, horse, goat, monkey, rooster, dog and pig.

She too needed to channel the snake in her to find elusive healthcare for her family.

Whatever the historicity of this story, it captures the perceived image of a snake in China and other East Asian countries: resourceful, audacious, cunning, alert to opportunity and conscious of the power it holds in reserve. In some contexts, those traits might describe a Lady Macbeth or even the devil himself, who took the form of the snake to tempt Eve into sin.

Linda insists she's more like Bai Suzhen, a female snake spirit who in Chinese mythology risked everything to steal an immortal herb that could save her ailing husband. The comparison is apt. Though Linda did not steal anything nor break any rules, she too needed to channel the snake in her to find elusive healthcare for her family — and specifically for me, her autistic son.

In 1999, I really liked watching subway doors open and close, spinning around in circles, and playing the same Freddy Fish game over and over again. Linda hoped that I could expand my interests and enjoy more of the world with time and education, but her mind was dominated by more pressing concerns for a son who also couldn't control his furious outbursts, enjoyed knocking down his classmates’ Lego sets, and refused to swallow food that wasn't yellow, white or brown.

Treatment for autism in Hong Kong was sparse, and in a world where the internet was still young, it was hard to distinguish clinics that provided ethical care from those that, in seeking to suppress rather than adjust behavior, practiced borderline abuse. To get one doctor's diagnosis and referral to start therapy, the stated wait time was two years.

"I just called over and over again asking for an update," Linda recalled. "But it was not just dull persistence. I wanted them to know me so well that when there was a last-minute cancellation, I would be the first person they thought of."

Eight months in, there was a last-minute cancellation, and Linda was the first person they thought of. "It all felt natural enough," she said with a hint of casual pride. "When I was a girl, I was so shy and reactive. But when you have to live by yourself at age 14 in a foreign country, you have to be astute in everything, or the world will eat you up."

What other animal would help her navigate through this challenging and occasionally depressing life as well as her own?

Because secondary education in Libya, where she grew up in a Chinese expatriate community, ended at age 14, she moved with her sister to live with their aunt in the United States, where they could continue their education while their parents remained behind. But the aunt treated them poorly, and when she overheard the Wang sisters complain to their parents over the phone, she threw them out. Their mother came reluctantly to take care of them, but asked Linda to skip the last grade of high school so she could leave this strange foreign land and return to Libya.

That was when Linda began to think to herself: if she was born in the Year of the Snake, then it was for her benefit. What other animal would help her navigate through this challenging and occasionally depressing life as well as her own?

Linda does not believe in the predestination of zodiac signs, but there is nothing stopping her from choosing to represent her own, at her own free will. "I couldn't just passively let the snake come to me. I had to remind myself of what my zodiac sign was, to encourage myself," she said.

In college, Linda worked as a secretary to the vice president. When she got a transfer offer to New York University, she paid him a visit to say goodbye. "Save your money for business school," he suggested. "I can get you a full scholarship for the rest of your time here."

"What if you leave before my two more years in college are up?" she asked him then.

He claimed he wouldn't. She told him it would be more reassuring if he put the promise in writing, with another dean as a witness, and he agreed. One year later, he took a post at a different university, but kept his word, and she kept getting her funding.

"For me, being a snake is not about elaborate schemes and lying or anything unscrupulous. It's just having the presence of mind to account for everything," my mom told me.

As soon as I began my autism therapy in 1999, Linda asked the therapists to cosign a page of notes after every session and recorded hours worth of video to present to health insurance officials. In addition to denying coverage on the grounds of treatment being "medically unnecessary," insurance companies also liked to discontinue existing coverage if they considered the treatment to be "medically useless." The notes and recordings were designed, she said, to “make it impossible for them to find an excuse" — and it helped that the therapy was working.

Now, I'm about as dysfunctional and self-defeating as the average adult man who occasionally enjoys life's offerings. It's more than could be hoped for someone whose initial prognosis was having a "moderate chance of attending, but not necessarily completing, a normal primary and secondary school system." 

But maybe I could do even better, if I learned how to be more serpentine, like my mom. 

"Do you feel like a snake? Or do you just calculate that you are one?" I ask her. 

"The second one. I decided that it's practical," she responds. Of course it's the second one — it’s the choice that any snake would make. 

David Lynch’s musical collaborations built worlds out of what was heard as much as what was seen

Today, Trent Reznor is an Oscar-winning artist who’s composed some of the most evocative movie scores in recent memory, including the pulse-pounding electronic soundscapes for “Challengers,” “The Social Network” and the tranquil, Eno-esque “Soul.” 

But the Nine Inch Nails founder didn’t have experience in Hollywood when David Lynch called and said he wanted Reznor to work on music for 1997’s “Lost Highway.” Lynch trusted him implicitly, though—and had a clear vision for what he wanted to hear.

“He’d describe a scene and say, ‘Here’s what I want. Now, there’s a police car chasing Fred down the highway, and I want you to picture this: There’s a box, OK? And in this box, there’s snakes coming out; snakes whizzing past your face. So, what I want is the sound of that – the snakes whizzing out of the box – but it’s got to be like impending doom,’” Reznor told Rolling Stone in 1997. 

The kicker? “He hadn’t brought any footage with him,” Reznor continued. “He says, ‘OK, OK, go ahead. Give me that sound.’” The resulting music is suitably creepy, encompassing decaying jazz, abrasive industrial and the occasional section of ambient unease.

It should be no surprise that Lynch, who died January 15 at the age of 78, heard music in such a vivid way. After all, his movies and TV shows were visually stunning. But as his conversation with Reznor demonstrates, Lynch was committed to ensuring that any music he used enhanced the emotional impact of these visuals. No note was extraneous or wasted—and he understood more than most the mutually beneficial relationship between sound and vision.

“I used to say picture dictates sound, but sometimes it’s the other way around,” Lynch once told The Paris Review. “Sounds will conjure an image . . . to get it to marry to the picture is the trick. It’s not just a sound effect for a sound effect; it’s in that world, it marries to it, and you work and work and work until you get that.”


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


This is certainly true for one of Lynch’s most famous soundtracks, for his 1977 cult favorite “Eraserhead.” The songs he composed with Alan R. Splet create a proto-industrial soundscape with haunting effects, unsettling dialogue and vocals, and roaring synthesized white noise — like Eno descending into hell. You didn’t even have to see the movie to glean the gist of its plot; the music started filling in the blanks. 

Unsurprisingly, Lynch viewed the “Eraserhead” music as especially immersive, less like a discrete soundtrack and more like the noise of a daily existence. “I didn’t think of [these experiments] as music,” Lynch said in 2024, “but I thought of them as building a world. It’s more like room tones, tones of an industrial city, tones of a room in a certain kind of apartment building. Tones that paint a picture of how it is there in that factory area.”

Yet Lynch always had more than a touch of surrealism within these everyday sounds, something demonstrated by the way he wasn’t afraid of using space within his compositions. Lynch knew this approach amplified any unease, like the aural equivalent of weathering an uncomfortable silence in a real-life conversation. 

Julee CruiseSinger Julee Cruise performs during the sixth annual Twin Peaks UK Festival at Genesis Cinema on October 3, 2015 in London, England. (Amy T. Zielinski/Redferns/Getty Images)You hear this phenomenon especially in his work with frequent collaborator Angelo Badalamenti for “Twin Peaks” and elsewhere, notably “Mysteries Of Love” from the 1986 film “Blue Velvet.” Julee Cruise’s siren vocals intertwine with imperceptible grooves that swell like gentle ocean waves. Lynch’s own solo work also demonstrated more than a touch of shapeshifting temporal vibes. On the 2010 compilation “Dark Night of the Soul,” a collaboration with Danger Mouse and Sparklehorse, Lynch contributes vocals to two songs. The title track sounded like a crackling victrola, while “Star Eyes (I Can’t Catch It)” resembles out-there psychedelic pop. 

Lynch wasn’t just writing about women; his collaborations with women represented some of his most compelling musical works.

The specificity of Lynch’s music and imagery was also singular. On the collection “Twin Peaks Music: Season Two Music and More,” the songs named for the women in the TV show are rich and full of depth. “Shelly” begins like a drowsy jazz number before segueing into a lullaby-like song reminiscent of “Blue Moon”; “Audrey” is shapeshifting jazz with restless rhythms; and “Laura’s Dark Boogie” is aptly named, a skin-crawling, spidery lament full of shivering tension. 

But Lynch wasn’t just writing about women; his collaborations with women represented some of his most compelling musical works. Perhaps most notable are two albums with Julee Cruise, 1989’s “Floating into the Night” and 1993’s “The Voice Of Love,” both of which featured Lynch lyrics and production and music from Angelo Badalamenti. The full-lengths reside at the intersection of haunted dream-pop, gothic rock, and burned-out western twang, but always center Cruise and her evocative vocals. 

Elsewhere, “Pinky’s Dream,” a throttling western blues number from Lynch’s 2011 solo debut album “Crazy Clown Time,” features Yeah Yeah Yeahs vocalist Karen O. She coos, whispers, and wails the song, interpreting the tragic story of the enigmatic, erratic Pinky with empathy. 

Chrysta BellSinger Chrystabell, presented by David Lynch, performs at The Hollywood Forever Cemetery on May 12, 2013 in Los Angeles, California. (Kevin Winter/Getty Images)On his 2013 solo album “The Big Dream,” Lykke Li initially oozes gilded angelic sadness with “I’m Waiting Here.” But as the song progresses, her voice firms up and incorporates a knowing (if wistful) tone, matching lyrics that describe a narrator warning an ex-lover he’ll regret not being with her.

On that same solo album, Lynch covers “The Ballad of Hollis Brown,” using distorted vocals, diffracted keyboards and plodding beats to create a disorienting effect. And while Dylan often feels like an apt comparison for Lynch’s solo work—particularly how the electronic music experiments cloak his askew worldview and unorthodox vocals—he had a different intention with the cover. 

“It’s not really a cover of Bob Dylan as much as it is a cover of a Nina Simone cover of Bob Dylan,” Lynch told Billboard. “It was Nina Simone’s version that was sort of the driver of the boat.” It fit perfectly on the album, he added; the album didn’t feel right without it being in the sequence. 

More recently, he collaborated with the artist Chrystabell, led by the 2024 effort “Cellophane Dreams,” a searing (and solemn) album reminiscent of PJ Harvey. “Before I was introduced to David by someone who suggested we collaborate musically, I had no idea that he was a composer or musician,” she once said. “Indeed he approaches creating music from a different angle than most. From my perspective, David sees the music as a path to the feeling. The feeling emerges during recorded improvisational sessions in his recording studio he calls ‘experiments.’”

Chrystabell hits on the essential qualities of Lynch’s music. More than anything, he had an uncanny ability to tap into the instinctual and ephemeral—and an uncanny ability to make the personal resonate in universal ways.