Spring Sale: Get 1 Year, Save 58%

Court orders release of secret Barr memo undercutting Mueller report on Trump obstruction

The Department of Justice must release a full copy of a March 2019 memo supporting then-attorney general William Barr’s conclusion that Donald Trump should not be prosecuted in the Russia investigation.

The District of Columbia Circuit court affirmed a 2021 decision by U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson ordering the release of the Justice Department memo, which concluded the former president should not be prosecuted for obstruction of justice by special counsel Robert Mueller.

“The court determined that the Department had failed to carry its burden to show the deliberative-process privilege applied,” the appeals court found. “In particular, the court held that the Department had not identified a relevant agency decision as to which the memorandum formed part of the deliberations. The Department’s submissions, the court explained, indicated that the memorandum conveyed advice about whether to charge the President with a crime. But the court’s in camera review of the memorandum revealed that the Department in fact never considered bringing a charge.”

“Instead, the memorandum concerned a separate decision that had gone entirely unmentioned by the government in its submissions to the court — what, if anything, to say to Congress and the public about the Mueller Report,” the court added.

Jackson’s ruling two years ago accused Barr of being “disingenuous” when describing Mueller’s findings and found the DOJ was not candid about the purpose and role of the memo, which was prepared by the department’s Office of Legal Counsel.

“Not only was the Attorney General being disingenuous then, but DOJ has been disingenuous to this Court with respect to the existence of a decision-making process that should be shielded by the deliberative process privilege,” she wrote. “The agency’s redactions and incomplete explanations obfuscate the true purpose of the memorandum, and the excised portions belie the notion that it fell to the Attorney General to make a prosecution decision or that any such decision was on the table at any time.”

After tuna scandal, Subway has a plan to freshen up its reputation: meat slicers

Subway has had a rough couple of years. The build-your-own sandwich chain has been embroiled in an ongoing scandal that the internet unceremoniously dubbed TunaGate 2021 — not to be confused with the 1985 Canadian political scandal — after a pair of customers alleged that its tuna sandwiches “partially or wholly” lack tuna. 

Last month, a federal judge denied Subway’s request to dismiss the lawsuit. It was another blow to a chain that had already weathered high-profile complaints about the objective quality of its food. 

There was the viral assertion from the blogger known as Food Babe that Subway bread contained a “yoga mat chemical.” (The chemical, azodicarbonamide, is a bleaching agent commonly used in flour and dough conditioner in North America, in addition to being found in synthetic leather.) Then, there was the story that Subway’s bread contained too much sugar to be classified as bread in Ireland. Plus, the claims that the chain’s chicken was actually “half soy” — a statistic Subway leadership said came from a “stunningly flawed test.”

However, Subway has unveiled an innovative addition to its kitchens that promises to freshen up its reputation. Two words: meat slicer. 

Alright, so this common piece of deli equipment may not solve all of Subway’s image problems. However, Jonathan Maze reported in Restaurant Business Online that the chain “plans to add automatic slicers in all 22,000 of its restaurants over the coming year.” 

“In five decades worth of sandwich making, we’ve explored many things, tested many things, tried many things,” Trevor Haynes, president of Subway North America, said in an interview with the outlet. “This is the natural next step of the evolution of the U.S. business and operations.”


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


The addition of the meat slicers was first announced last week at the company’s franchise convention in Las Vegas. “Subway will slice meat in the mornings and in the afternoons, rather than slice the meat to order like fast-growing rival Jersey Mike’s,” Maze wrote. “Restaurants may also slice meat again as needed later in the day.” 

Unused meat can be used again the next day.

This is a shift from how Subway currently operates. Up until now, deli meats are sliced at a central facility, wrapped and then sent to individual restaurants. Haynes expressed hopes that the move would “improve the company’s reputation for freshness, as customers over time notice the freshly sliced meat.” 

“Going to get someone killed”: Trump lawyer threatens to expose FBI agents even if DOJ redacts names

Trump attorney Alina Habba on Thursday suggested releasing surveillance footage of the FBI’s search of Mar-a-Lago even though it could reveal the identities of agents who executed it.

Federal Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart, who signed off on the search warrant, on Thursday gave the Justice Department a week to propose redactions ahead of a possible release of the probable cause affidavit filed by the DOJ to get the warrant. The DOJ opposed releasing the affidavit at all, arguing that it could expose agents and witnesses and reveal the inner workings of an ongoing investigation. The DOJ is investigating Trump under the Espionage Act after he failed to turn over classified documents he had taken to his residence.

Habba told Newsmax on Thursday that if the affidavit is ultimately released, it is likely to be heavily redacted. She added that she “would love” to see CCTV footage of the raid released to the public, dismissing concerns that the video could reveal agents’ identities.

“If you’re doing it as an agent, I’m not sure you should have that right,” she said. “Listen: FBI agents, undercover agents, that’s one thing. But when you go into a president’s home, an ex-president’s home, what do you expect is going to happen? What do you expect?”

Habba claimed that the Trump team plans to send the video to the DOJ.

“We cooperate! That’s what we always do, we always have,” she said. “I would love for the country to see what I saw from those cameras.”

Despite Habba’s claim about cooperation, a Trump lawyer signed a document in June certifying that all of the classified documents had been returned. Investigators later learned from inside sources that Trump still had classified documents at his residence. The DOJ subpoenaed footage from the Mar-a-Lago cameras — but the subpoena is seeking footage from the two months after Trump and his team were in contact with the DOJ before the raid, not video of the search.

Habba’s comments came amid a rise in threats against federal law enforcement as Trump and his allies push baseless allegations of political persecution and evidence-planting. The FBI and Department of Homeland Security earlier this week released a joint bulletin warning of an increase in threats to law enforcement officials.

“The FBI and DHS have observed an increase in violent threats posted on social media against federal officials and facilities, including a threat to place a so-called dirty bomb in front of FBI Headquarters and issuing general calls for ‘civil war’ and ‘armed rebellion,'” the bulletin said, adding that some threats are “specific in identifying proposed targets, tactics, or weaponry.”

Law enforcement officials also warned of an increase in “personal identifying information of possible targets of violence, such as home addresses and identification of family members, disseminated online as additional targets.”


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


The FBI has also faced a barrage of smears from TrumpWorld. Habba in a separate appearance on Fox News Thursday told host Sean Hannity that the entire agency is “tainted” because it previously investigated what she described as the “Russia hoax.”

National security attorney Bradley Moss warned that the potential release of the surveillance footage would put law enforcement at even greater risk.

“These folks are doing to get someone killed,” he said on Twitter.

Habba previously demanded the release of witness information in the affidavit, which the DOJ warned could put individuals at risk and prevent additional witnesses from coming forward.

“I understand the witness protection issue. But at the same time, these witnesses are truly not going to be concealed for very long. That’s just not the nature of the DOJ and the FBI. And, unfortunately, our country. There’s always leaks.” she told Newsmax on Tuesday. “It’s in the best interest so that the country can get comfortable to see what the basis was, especially from someone who was cooperating,” she added.

Former U.S. Attorney Joyce White Vance explained on Twitter that the DOJ would only release such information if Trump was actually charged with a crime.

“The only possible reason to try & get witness identities is so they can be pressure[d] or perhaps retaliated against,” she wrote.

“Of course, this is what Trump wants (and it’s probably driving him crazy that people are talking to the DOJ about him and he doesn’t know who they are),” tweeted former appellate defense attorney Teri Kanefield. “The reasons Trump wants to know are exactly the reasons he shouldn’t know.”

Trump has reportedly struggled to find elite, experienced attorneys to represent him in the FBI investigation. Instead, he has largely relied on Habba, former OAN host Christina Bobb and Florida insurance lawyer Lindsey Halligan to defend him in media appearances, with varying degrees of success.

Fox News host Laura Ingraham schooled Bobb on Thursday about how Trump’s legal team may have screwed up by not filing its own motion to release the affidavit.

“Are you not concerned — because you didn’t join any of these motions for the full release of this affidavit — that you’re then waiving the possible objections to the way redactions are being done by the Justice Department later on?” Ingraham questioned. “I’m not sure what grounds you’re going to have at this point, having waived your right to file those motions,” she added.

Meanwhile, Trump’s former attorney Rudy Giuliani has also defended the former president in media appearances and on Thursday offered a novel defense for Trump’s decision to stash documents at Mar-a-Lago: He was preserving them.

“Really, if you look at the Espionage Act, it’s not really about taking the documents,” Giuliani told Newsmax. “It’s about destroying them. Or hiding them. Or giving them to the enemy. It’s not about taking them and putting them in a place that’s roughly as safe as they were in in the first place.”

If Liz Cheney runs for president, I’m registering as a Republican just to vote for her

The Liz Cheney interview on NBC was less an interview and more a Rorschach test for the most irrational anxieties and overthinking tendencies of political junkies who spend way too much time online. The Republican congresswoman from Wyoming just lost a primary that was conducted solely on the question of whether fascist insurrections are good or bad. (Cheney is Team Anti-Insurrection.) In her post-loss interview with Savannah Guthrie, the Beltway’s favorite speculative question came up: Is Liz Cheney going to run for president now? 

“I will be doing whatever it takes to keep Donald Trump out of the Oval Office,” Cheney replied, adding that running for president “is something I’m thinking about and I’ll make a decision in the coming months.”

Needless to say, the online chatter reached “sticking your head in a beehive” levels. A lot of folks mistake Cheney for a moron contemplating a third-party run that would siphon votes from President Joe Biden in a rematch against Trump in 2024. Others appear to believe she’s delusional enough to think she could win a GOP primary, despite the fact that her work with the January 6 committee has shown her to be perhaps the least delusional politician in her party. There’s a lot of resistance to accepting that Cheney is who she presents as: A right-wing Republican from a political dynasty that has been well-served by the current system, and who therefore doesn’t want to see it replaced by a fascist dictatorship run by a reality TV host. 


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


But this one really is a no-brainer. If Trump runs in 2024, Cheney should absolutely run in the Republican primary against him. In fact, many Democratic voters should contemplate temporarily switching their registration that election cycle just so they can vote for her in the Republican primary. I know I’m making just such a calculation. 

In what is likely to be a close race, Cheney could be a game changer. 

Now, now put down your keyboard for a second and hear me out before you fire off an irate email or tweet. (Though many never got past the headline and are already there.) I’m not saying vote for Cheney in the general election. Nor do I think she will win a Republican primary against Trump. No, my thinking here is that if enough Democrats cross the aisle to keep Cheney in the race — complete with TV interviews and Republican debates — she is going to make life much harder for Trump. Just as importantly, she’ll make it a lot harder for other Republicans who might otherwise be tempted to ignore what a monster he is in order to vote for him. 

Trump is a unique figure in American politics, but that doesn’t mean the normal rules of politics don’t impact him. One of those general rules is that bruising primary seasons hurt a nominee in a general election. Because a contentious primary means that criticism of the candidate is coming from inside the house, it can drive down turnout or turn normally loyal partisans to third parties. We saw that in 2016. Both Trump and the Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton, were nominated after a grinding primary battle. Both subsequently underperformed compared to their 2012 predecessors. Clinton got 48.2% of the vote compared to Barack Obama’s 51.1% in 2012. Trump got 46.1% of the vote compared to Mitt Romney’s 47.2%. Her protracted primary fight almost certainly cost Clinton the election. 

Most Republican voters, of course, love that Trump is a corrupt, fascist criminal. Still, a small but significant portion of them harbor doubts. They can only support him by telling themselves a story about how the January 6 insurrection was no big deal. But having Cheney in the 2024 primary, repeatedly telling her fellow Republicans the truth from the Republican debate stage, could penetrate the bubble those folks are living in. She’s already doing it. About 10% of Republicans think Trump should be prosecuted for the attempted coup, a number that would likely be closer to zero if they weren’t getting the message from a Republican. That small percentage could be convinced to sit out the 2024 election, or maybe even vote for Biden. In what is likely to be a close race, Cheney could be a game changer. 


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


Keeping her in the mix, however, means making sure she has enough votes in the primary that it’s hard to ignore her. That’s where Democratic voters can help. It’s likely that Biden is going to run uncontested in 2024, which means a lot of Democratic voters were going to sit out the primary anyway. Instead of doing that, why not just switch their registration — for that year and that year only — so they can help run up Cheney’s vote total and keep her in the race longer?

You don’t have to love her. You don’t have to like her. But we can use Liz Cheney in 2024.

Obviously, there are a ton of caveats. Only do this if it’s easy to switch back and forth, or if your state has open primaries. Don’t skip out on Democratic primaries that you care about, where your vote can make a huge difference, to do this. And only do this — crucially — if Donald Trump is actually running. We still have a chance that prison or God (with an assist from McDonald’s) takes him out between now and then, which would make this discussion moot. 

Alas, there are a lot of left-leaning voters who relate to voting like they’re picking which Garanimal they want to wear to daycare, as if it’s a matter of self-expression instead of political strategy. It’s an attitude that causes ostensible adults to say things like this tweet, from an editor at Aeon (!):

Briefly aligning yourself with someone you disagree with for strategic purposes is not the same thing as being in love. (Also, as his fundraising numbers show, liberals are indeed in love with John Fetterman.) As Talking Points Memo founder Josh Marshall noted in his response, “I can say someone I disagree with is courageous. I can say someone I hate is courageous. Honestly, I say it and then just go about my day.”

This is where Republican voters tend to be more pragmatic, seeing voting less as self-expression and more as a tool you wield to get and keep power. How else do you think someone as repugnant as Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas keeps winning? Even Trump is a beneficiary of this, as a substantial number of his own voters think he’s gross yet back him anyway because they want their own party to win.

Because of this utilitarian approach to politics, it’s common for Republicans to play this game of voting in Democratic primaries to manipulate the general election in favor of the Republican. My Republican relatives, for instance, frequently use open primaries to vote in Democratic primaries for candidates they think are likelier to lose in the general.  It’s so out of control that, in some places like West Virginia, up to a third of Democratic primary voters are actually Republicans. 

Democrats should give as good as we get, and, when appropriate, play the same games with Republican primaries. There will never be a better chance than an election where the Democrat is running unchallenged, but the Republican frontrunner is a fascist who attempted a coup. On our own, we can’t crack through the Republican wall of defensiveness about Trump. But Cheney, being a member of their tribe, does have the power to rattle the conscience of a small percentage of them.

You don’t have to love her. You don’t have to like her. But we can use Liz Cheney in 2024 to throw a wrench in Trump’s plan to glide seamlessly to the nomination, and from there, win (or likelier, steal) the White House. When facing a threat like Trump, it’s important to use every tool we have in the toolbox to beat him. 

5 laundry mistakes you didn’t realize you were making

I don’t claim to be a laundry expert, but I think at this point in my life I mostly have the chore figured out . . . right? Maybe not. The other day I was lamenting that one of my shirts came out of the washing machine with a snag in it, and my mom asked if I left any zippers undone. It turns out you’re supposed to close any zippers before putting clothing in the wash — otherwise, the metal teeth can grab onto other fabrics. Maybe it’s just a common sense thing, but I truly never thought of it.

The whole situation got me thinking: What other laundry mistakes am I making? I reached out to a few experts to ask what laundry mistakes they often see most often, and it turns out there are quite a few things that I didn’t know about.

Using too much detergent

I’ll be the first to admit that I don’t measure laundry detergent — not precisely, anyway. However, if you eyeball it like I do, you’re probably using too much soap, which isn’t good for your clothes or your washing machine.

When you use too much laundry detergent, your washer won’t be able to rinse it all out of your clothing, which can leave your clothes feeling stiff and starchy. It can also cause extra wear and tear on the appliance itself, as the motor has to work extra hard to get all the suds out of your clothes. Bottom line? You (and I) should definitely be measuring more carefully — 1 tablespoon of detergent is enough for standard-size loads.

Not testing for hard water

Do you know if your home has hard water? Me neither. However, for the sake of both your laundry and washing machine, it’s worth buying a hard water test to find out if you have too-high levels of dissolved calcium and magnesium.

“Untreated hard water can leave mineral deposits on your clothes that dull their color and eat at their quality over time,” explains Tim Dunphy, Water Expert at Leaf Home. “Homeowners can — and should — take preventative measures by using a water softener to preserve their belongings.”

Over time, hard water can also cause problems with your appliances: “Hard water also decays pipes and adds wear and tear to your washer,” says Dunphy. “Using a water softener improves the efficiency of your laundry appliances and minimizes the need for repair and replacement.”

Using dryer sheets

It’s no secret that any type of fabric softener, including dryer sheets, can make your towels less absorbent, but it turns out they’re not great for your dryer, either. “Dryer sheets leave a waxy buildup on the lint screen, leading to possible fires. Instead, look to use dryer wools or balls,” explains Scott Thomas, Director of Systems for Dryer Vent Wizard. “Dryer balls help reduce drying time and energy cost. They are chemical-free and help limit static cling and soften clothes.”

Not willing to give up your favorite dryer sheets? (I will admit I love the Bounce Pet Hair ones.) Make sure you’re cleaning your lint screen thoroughly to get rid of the residue: “If you use dryer sheets, it’s essential to remove lint for every load, wash the lint screen with hot soapy water, and use an old toothbrush every three to six months for a deep clean,” says Thomas.

Drying clothes with elastic bands

I recently bought a pair of fairly expensive underwear, and I was super frustrated when the elastic waist band became misshapen after just a few laundry cycles. It turns out that you really shouldn’t be drying clothing with elastic bands, especially on a high temperature setting. The high heat can cause the elastic to melt or become brittle, significantly reducing its lifespan.

Instead, it’s best to air dry any items with elastic bands — a clothes drying rack will be your best friend here. If that’s not possible, you should at least put your dryer on a low temperature setting.

Not using color catchers in mixed loads

I recently explained that I’ve stopped sorting laundry, since it doesn’t seem to make a difference, but that doesn’t mean you should throw all caution to the wind. When washing whites and colors together, you’ll want to use cold water, and experts recommend another level of protection, too. “You should try at least to keep your whites from your colors, and at a minimum, use color catchers,” recommends Patric Richarson of the Laundry Evangelist.

Color catcher sheets are inexpensive, and all you have to do is put one into your washing machine with each load of laundry. The sheet will capture any dye that comes off your clothing, preventing it from staining other pieces.

Can complicit Republicans’ change of heart on Donald Trump be trusted?

Back in 2019, I saw Liz Cheney as the most dangerous woman in America. I was referring at the time to her grotesque insistence that Democrats supported “infanticide” and the absurd threat to shut down the government unless Congress paid for Trump’s stupid wall. And she was more than happy to be a Trumpish attack dog, going after Democrats like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez with undisguised glee. Cheney wasn’t just the daughter of one of the primary architects of the Iraq war debacle, she worked in the State Department and helped with its execution. As a member of GOP House leadership, she was a rising star in GOP politics and a likely presidential candidate who had a good shot at becoming the first woman president as the successor to Donald Trump. I sounded the alarm again in 2021.

A lot has certainly changed since then, hasn’t it?

Cheney may have been a good little Trumper for most of his tenure, demeaning Democrats and voting in lockstep but she decided that staging a coup was a bridge too far and we all know where she has landed since then. She was stripped of her leadership post, censured by her state party and lost her re-election bid this week by nearly 40 points. She is, however, now one of the most famous politicians in the country and will no doubt be mentioned in the history books for her bold stand against the undisputed leader of her own party. And, as I predicted years ago, she is being actively discussed as a presidential candidate and appears to be seriously considering it. The reasons for her ascent may be different than I thought they would be but there was always something about Liz that suggested she was aiming for the top job.

Cheney knew she was going to lose her congressional seat and I would guess that she knew that from the moment she spoke out about Trump after the 2020 election. There may have been a moment or two that the GOP leadership thought they were finally finished with him but Cheney is a savvy operator and almost certainly understood that being a strong critic of the man who won her state by 44 points would cost her politically. Once she made the decision to go all-in and join the January 6 committee the die was cast and it was clear her political future was not going to be in the House of Representatives.


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


In her concession speech on Tuesday night, Cheney announced what appears to be a new movement she’s calling “The Great Task” which was taken from the last sentence of the Gettysburg Address and refers to her crusade to deny Donald Trump the presidency in 2024 and restore the democratic norms that preceded his Big Lie and attempted coup. She converted her fat war chest (consisting mainly of money collected from Democrats) into a leadership PAC and told the media that she is considering a presidential run as a means to accomplishing her goal.

I wish I believed that no Democrats would ever vote for a hardcore rightwinger like Cheney, but I don’t.

The question is: How that’s supposed to work? In the last few days, analysts have offered up a plethora of punditry on the subject. Needless to say, nobody thinks she can actually win the GOP nomination. Trump is still in the driver’s seat and Cheney is the single most hated person in politics among his supporters who make up a majority of the party. But there are other ways to deny Trump his revenge.

The American Prospect’s Robert Kuttner did make the point that if she runs as an Independent in the general election there is an inherent risk. “Cheney is a widely admired figure at a time when voters are hostile to both parties. In a true three-way, almost anything could happen. Cheney might even win.” But his real concern is one that I share: Cheney could split the anti-Trump vote with the Democrat and inadvertently hand the White House back to Trump.

I wish I believed that no Democrats would ever vote for a hardcore rightwinger like Cheney, but I don’t. She is being deified by the mainstream media as a patriotic hero and I’m sure there are some Biden voters who see her as the savior of the Republic. Looking back at the 2000 and 2016 elections should remind us that it only takes a small number of third party defectors to give the White House to the GOP.

Kuttner’s colleague Harold Meyerson disagreed with Kuttner’s premise entirely, asserting that Cheney understands the political arithmetic very well and will run in the Republican primaries with the intention of trying to save the party from itself and Donald Trump. He points to this line from her concession speech:

We have candidates for Secretary of State who may refuse to report the actual results of the popular vote in future elections …No American should support election deniers for any position of genuine responsibility, where their refusal to follow the rule of law will corrupt our future.

Meyerson thinks Cheney is going to make a pitch for Republicans to back Democrats in these positions and will herself vote for the Democrat in the general election. If she’s serious about saving democracy she will do that but I won’t be surprised if she pulls one of those fatuous “I’m writing in Mitt Romney” or some other “good Republican” but we’ll see.

The Atlantic’s Ron Brownstein says her run would be unprecedented because “there aren’t any clear examples of a candidate running a true kamikaze campaign.” He looks at all the roadblocks to her even getting on the primary ballot or being included in the debates but points out that some strategists think she might open up a lane for another candidate to take the nomination from Trump. I’m not exactly sure how that’s supposed to work but unless that candidate is someone who is willing to admit that the 2020 election wasn’t stolen and repudiates Trumpism I don’t see what good it would do. In fact, Cheney herself doesn’t think she can back Florida Governor Ron DeSantis because he’s an election denier.

Brownstein says that most Republican strategists he speaks to believe that Cheney needs to run as an Independent and potentially “loosen his hold on the party, this thinking goes, if she persuades enough centrist and white-collar voters to reject him and ensure his defeat in a general election.” Once again, I have to say that I think that’s tremendously risky because there are a whole lot of centrist, white-collar Democrats who might stupidly vote for her too. She’s certainly not going to tell them not to.

The answer to this question is for her not to run. This is exactly the kind of move that could blow up in the Democrats’ faces and hand the White House back to Trump. Cheney can use her platform, money and influence in some other way to defeat Donald Trump, perhaps by encouraging those centrist GOP voters not to put Trump accomplices in important electoral positions in the states. The Democrats beat him in 2020, they can beat him again. 

With monkeypox and polio to worry about now, who can stress about small stuff?

Monkeypox keeps finding its way onto my timelines — photos, videos, TikToks and livestreams from people who have contracted it raising awareness of what a positive case of this viral disease looks like. Like a car wreck in a traffic jam, I can’t look away. Monkeypox looks painful, and the screen makes it feel close. It’s good if folks who have been diagnosed have found a positive way to deal with it, and yet even the idea of another viral outbreak terrifies me. This on top of what feels like a dozen strands of COVID still floating around, and polio. Who knew polio could come back?

My family tries to consider the relative dangers of each of these plagues in the most responsible ways we can — we vaccinate, we mask, we distance — as we fight for normalcy. 

My daughter Cross was born in January 2020, two months before the world locked down in the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Everything during her first year of life was extremely scary and extreme in unexplainable levels, from the way I soaked all our incoming packages in off-brand disinfectant because of the global Lysol shortage to the plastic bubble tent my wife created to shield the baby during doctor visits while I wore a Hazmat suit. We literally took every precaution. And even now, as the world opens up more and more, we are still playing it safe while trying to get the baby exposure to people who aren’t her parents and grandparents. And with that in mind, my wife and I decided to take her to one of my public book events. 

Attendance at my book, film and writing events has been hit and miss during the pandemic, with all the new COVID strands that continue to pop up pushing people back into their homes after they’ve started to venture out. I’ve read to groups as small as 10 and spoken to crowds of more than 100. And since I’ve done so many recent events in my home town of Baltimore, we figured my last for a long while wouldn’t be too crowded, and baby girl would get see her old man on stage for the first time. 

“Daddy! Daddy, I want Daddy!” Cross screamed like a crazed fan as I found my place on the stage. She was so excited that my wife and her sitter Nia took turns taking her in and out of the room. 

“Don’t mind that kid, I think I owe her money!” I said to the crowd.

The theater was big, and the crowd of about 50 people were able to space out. Everyone was masked accept me and my interviewer, Heidi Daniel, President and CEO of the Enoch Pratt Free Library, because we were on stage. Our conversation went well — Heidi and I dropped some gems, most of my jokes landed, and I sold some books. After the event, my family, including my daughter, went with a small group of friends to a nearby restaurant to grab a quick a bite.

We are still playing it safe while trying to get the baby exposure to people who aren’t her parents and grandparents.

We all felt we were being responsible with our shiny plastic lanyards protecting our vaccination cards in a restaurant was that was otherwise empty. We ate like we’d never eaten before, cleaning our plates until they were shiny, scraping away any evidence of food. Cross even finished an adult order of fries. But it was 10 p.m when we finished, and our daughter is normally washed, read-to, and in bed by 8:15. So as you can probably imagine, she was cranky, clingy and ready for sleep.

My wife and I had arrived in separate cars. “Are you riding with me or your daddy?” she asked Cross. Cross didn’t answer, just wrapped her tiny arms around my shin. I took her hand and we made our way to my car. The two of us walked down the block singing “The Finger Family” song as a goofy couple passed us. 

“Hey,” the guy said, while the woman he was with stared at me briefly and looked away. I nodded. 

“Mommy finger, mommy finger where are you?” Cross continued. 

“Mommy finger drove home in her own car,” I answered. 

“No, Daddy, no,” Cross replied and then proceeded to sing the song in the correct manner as we approached our car. 

While snapping Cross into her car seat, I heard a voice yell. 

“Excuse me sir!” 

“What!” I spat back, swinging around with a clenched fist, which startled the guy who was now standing behind me. It was the same dude from the goofy couple who had just walked by us.

“Yo, why you sneak up behind me like that.” 

“I’m sorry, sir,” he said. “We were knocking on doors trying to find out who owns this car. I hit your tire.” 

“I’m sorry for yelling, man. It’s late and I got my baby,” I said, taking Cross out of the car seat and walking around to the other side of the car to assess the damage.

“Oh sh*t!” I said. 

“Oh sh*t,” Cross repeated, slapping her hands on her face like that “Home Alone” kid. 


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


“Don’t say that baby, I’m sorry,” I said to her as I looked at what I hadn’t seen as we walked up to the car — a smashed tire, cracked rim, bent axel and crumpled door. I called my wife and got voicemail. 

“It’s my fault, please call my insurance company, I accept full responsibility,” the kid said. 

That’s honorable, I thought. The kid was calm, clearly wasn’t inebriated, and didn’t smell like weed, so what happened? The street is large and empty. How did he hit a parked car? 

My wife shot out of the corner like a bat out of hell and leapt from her truck. It’s like she had sniffed out our problem. I know her temper, her hunger to protect us and the way she loves our daughter, so I rushed toward her.

“What in the …! Noooo,” my wife yells, fixing her eyes first on the car, then on kid who hit us, and back to the car. 

“It’s OK, baby,” I cut in. “It’s all good. He’s going to take care of it.” 

I explained to her that the guy is only 20 and nervous. His new car is wrecked, with both airbags deployed. 

“His night is ruined, baby. And I know he didn’t wake up this morning dreaming of crashing into our car.”

I ushered my wife and daughter back to our truck, fastened Cross in and climbed into the driver’s seat. As my wife gazed out of the passenger side window, I attempted to explain the two ways I viewed our current situation. 

They crashed into the car five minutes before Cross and I arrived.

I could complain like a child, because how can you be sober and hit a parked car in zero traffic? Everybody hates dealing with insurance companies — even insurance companies hate dealing with insurance companies — and this is going to inconvenience my night. Better still, it’s going to inconvenience my year, because I’ve heard cars like mine can take up to six months to get fixed, so my rental car will run out before my car is ready, and the car will never be the same after repairs, and who wants a car that’s been smashed into anyway, and it’s late and my two-year-old is doing what two-year-olds do after their bedtime, and why is his girlfriend so quiet? Who or what caused the accident? Fuss and complain, fuss and complain. 

Or I could be thankful. They crashed into the car five minutes before Cross and I arrived. My two-year-old is safe and I am safe and my wife is safe. And everyone, including the people who wrecked into our car, are safe and will make it home safely. I have insurance, the kid has insurance, our cars will be fixed, and life will continue. So why would I act like child? Sure, I’ll be inconvenienced. But we will all live. 

“Imagine being out here with a crushed car, no insurance, COVID and stage-8 monkeypox,” I said. 

“Oh God!” my wife responds, before she turns around to pat our daughters leg. 

“Baby, we can always choose to not act like children,” I said, while looking at Cross, who was kicking and laughing and crying — clearly acting like a child. We laugh. 

A cop who looked and acted just like Eric Andre pulled up with the tiniest flashlight in the world and conducted a tiny, unnecessary investigation. The kid had already admitted fault. But I didn’t complain. The cop’s questions and presence made us laugh — it turns out we’re both Andre fans. The cop gave us a report number, I left my keys in the car and yelled over to the kid, “Yo, you good? You need anything?” 

“I’m OK,” the kid replied, before apologizing again. 

I told him not to worry and that stuff happens. Then I shot him a peace sign and took my family home. 

The next morning I woke up to a horrible LA Times story about a traveling nurse who plowed her car into traffic, killing five people. The people she killed were probably out in the world trying to get used to the new normal just like my family.

It’s scary staying in the house because of the lack of social interaction. It’s scary leaving because of the multiple viruses on top of human dangers like out-of-control drivers. Both roads are paved with roses and thorns. What makes the Los Angeles traveling nurse’s story worse is that she had been involved in 13 prior car crashes, accidents from which she actually made it home. This time she didn’t make it home. She’s facing murder and manslaughter charges now

My family made it home to sleep in our beds that night and had the opportunity to try again the next day. Even if I had been a little banged up, or if I caught COVID or another virus, everything would likely still be OK for me. I still have my life and my freedom. What do I have to complain about? Things can always be worse. That lesson has been constant over the last two years. 

Poll: Arizonans want to ban uranium mining near the Grand Canyon

A new poll of likely voters in Arizona signals strong, bipartisan support for a permanent ban on new uranium mining near the Grand Canyon – and hope for the passage of the Grand Canyon Protection Act, a bill that would permanently ban the practice.

Conducted by GQR, a polling and opinion research firm, 600 registered Arizona voters were asked specific questions about the Grand Canyon Protection Act, which passed the House last year but has yet to pass the Senate. Sixty-seven percent of those voters said they supported the act while 46 percent said they strongly supported the act. Only 15 percent opposed the ban. On protecting the state’s clean water supply, 96 percent of Arizonans say it’s a top priority, the poll indicates. 

“If we want to truly protect this treasure, Arizona’s water, and the people who rely on that water to live, we need permanent protections in place to have the force of law,” said House Natural Resources Committee Chair Raúl M. Grijalva, author of the act.

Advocates say that the Grand Canyon is home to only a small fraction of the U.S.’ known uranium reserves and a permanent ban would not impact national security or the economy. Mining proponents say that U.S. uranium production is important for energy independence, a strong economy, and national defense.

In 2012, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar enacted a 20-year ban on new uranium mining on roughly one million acres of federal land around the Grand Canyon. The two-decade ban was intended to give scientists time to study the potential impact of uranium mining on the region. Since then, the mining industry, which holds hundreds of active mine claims in the area, has tried to overturn the ban in court unsuccessfully. 

In 2018, nearly two-dozen members of Congress sent a letterasking President Trump to reopen the Grand Canyon to uranium mining. The letter, which was endorsed by dozens of mining and economic organizations, claimed that domestic uranium was crucial to national security, economic growth, and manufacturing. According to the letter, a uranium ban in the Grand Canyon area would cost local economies both money and jobs, in addition to adding potential burden to domestic energy production. Since the war in Ukraine began, more pro-mining groups have called for an increase in domestic uranium production

“Anyone who claims that we need to be able to mine for uranium near the Grand Canyon in order to be independent of Russia is at best exaggerating the uranium potential of this region and possibly only seizing on a geopolitical crisis to benefit their own bottom line,” said Amber Reimondo, Grand Canyon Trust Energy Director. 

According to the Grand Canyon Trust, the U.S. has enough uranium stockpiled to supply military needs until 2060, and that the region contains less-than one percent of U.S. uranium reserves, meaning production in the Grand Canyon would play a marginal role in the regional and national economy. 

Outdoor recreation and tourism centered on the Grand Canyon area’s natural resources are major drivers of the regional economy, supporting over 9,000 jobs and generating over $160 million in annual state and local tax revenues. According to the Grand Canyon Trust, mining could threaten the entire industry. 

“In this place, whether you think of it from the standpoint of the tribes, the standpoint of the wildlife, the standpoint of water, or the standpoint of the economy, uranium mining just doesn’t make sense,” said Scott Garlid, Executive Director of the Arizona Wildlife Federation.

Earlier this year, Energy Fuels’ Pinyon Plains mine was approved by a federal judge because it was permitted before the ban went into effect. The U.S. Forest Service estimates that the mine site has around 1.6 million tons of ore. Full mining operations have yet to begin, but Stuart Chavez, a council member of the Havasupai Tribe, says that some tribal members have stopped picking medicinal plants like sagebrush near the mine because they believe radiation has made the plants unsafe. “For us the tainting of the location has already happened.”

In an email, Curtis Moore, Vice President of Marketing and Corporate Development at Energy Fuels, said there was no credible evidence that the Pinyon Plain mine has caused, or is causing, any adverse impacts to plants, wildlife, air, or water. “If people understood how low-impact, safe, healthy and responsible modern uranium mining is, and how dependent the U.S. is on Russia and China for our uranium and critical minerals, many reasonable people might have a different view,” he said.

After fighting against uranium mining for decades, the Havasupai Tribe say they’re hopeful. “I’m very pleased to know that we finally have the voices of Arizona joining the Havasupai tribe in this fight,” said Carletta Tilousi, a Havasupai tribal leader.

After Mar-a-Lago: A panel of experts on the grave danger just ahead

Last week the FBI conducted a lawful search of Donald Trump’s residence at Mar-a-Lago, his private club in Palm Beach. There they discovered highly classified and other top secret documents, which reportedly may have included information about the U.S. nuclear arsenal. Trump could face a variety of criminal charges, including violations of the Espionage Act.

Predictably, since the FBI search, Trump has been using social media and other means to encourage his followers to defend him, perhaps through violence if need be. Trump’s cultists are already acting on his commands: Last week a Trump supporter who was apparently at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, attacked the FBI headquarters in Cincinnati. After a standoff, a chase and failed negotiations, he was shot dead by law enforcement.

It is abundantly clear that Donald Trump will engage in acts of revenge and retaliation against public officials and others who support the rule of law, democracy and the Constitution if he manages to regain power in 2024. He thought he was a king during his first term; now he will be a mad king, unleashed and unrestrained.

Attempting to summarize the violent threats made by Trump and his confederates is insufficient to communicate their malevolent energy or the seriousness of their intentions. Here are some recent examples of actual fundraising emails that Trump and his agents have sent to his followers:

The FBI has RAIDED Mar-a-Lago. This is political targeting at the highest level.

Remember, they were never after President Trump. They have always been after YOU, Friend, and President Trump IS JUST STANDING IN THE WAY.

The political persecution of President Donald J. Trump has been going on for years, with the now fully debunked Russia, Russia, Russia Scam, Impeachment Hoax #1, Impeachment Hoax #2, and so much more. It just never ends.

This lawlessness, political persecution and Witch Hunt must be EXPOSED and STOPPED.

Here is another, purportedly written by Donald Trump Jr.:

We truly live in a third-world Country.

What’s happening to my father right now has been happening since day one.

The radical Left cannot stand that a guy named Donald Trump was able to go up against opponents like Hillary Clinton and beat her at her own game. And then he went into Washington, DC, and did a phenomenal job.

He didn’t play by the rules, and he became one of the best Presidents this Country has ever had.

Now, the Democrats are showing just how threatened they are by my father. They are coming after him like never before, and we need all hands on deck to fight back.

This language is an almost explicit incitement of right-wing political violence and terrorism. Since the January 2021 coup attempt, Trump and his agents have moved away from dog whistles and stochastic terrorism to direct and obvious threats. Like a mafia boss, Donald Trump is trying to use use extortion, blackmail and other threats of violence to expand his power and escape responsibility for his crimes.

Last week, Trump even made a none-too-subtle attempt to intimidate Attorney General Merrick Garland and the Department of Justice. Here’s how the New York Times reported that:

On Thursday, Attorney General Merrick B. Garland made a public statement saying he had personally authorized the decision to seek the search warrant for Mr. Trump’s property, and he indicated that the Justice Department would have made such a move only after trying less invasive measures.

Shortly before Mr. Garland made the announcement, a person close to Mr. Trump reached out to a Justice Department official to pass along a message from the former president to the attorney general. Mr. Trump wanted Mr. Garland to know that he had been checking in with people around the country and found them to be enraged by the search.

The message Mr. Trump wanted conveyed, according to a person familiar with the exchange, was: “The country is on fire. What can I do to reduce the heat?”

These threats of violence are frequently amplified by Republican elected officials, the right-wing media, and various other acolytes and propagandists. Public opinion polls have also shown that a large percentage of Republican voters endorse Trump’s threats, conspiracy theories and outright lies about being an “innocent victim” who is being unfairly targeted by the FBI, the Department of Justice and other agents of the “deep state.” By the many millions, Trump supporters and Republicans (now effectively the same thing) support and embrace their Great Leader’s lawless conduct — including the coup attempt and the lethal attack on the Capitol of Jan. 6.


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


To better understand the context and significance of these escalating threats of violence and terrorism, I asked a range of experts to share their insights on America’s current democracy crisis and what may happen next.

Katherine Keneally is a senior analyst at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, where she supports projects that track the intersection of disinformation, hate, extremism and political violence in the U.S.

While we observed an uptick in violent rhetoric and calls for violence online following the search warrant execution in Mar-a-Lago earlier this month, it is important to note that the threat of extremism is not new. This rhetoric reflects what we have been seeing — which is an increase in the number of people who view violence as an acceptable course of action in response to beliefs, policies and events they do not agree with. Our concern is that this rhetoric not only suggests an indifference to violence and increased interest in conducting targeted attacks, similar to what occurred at the FBI office in Ohio last week, but how this event, and future ones, are used to spread conspiracies and false narratives that seek to sow division and undermine democracy.

Additionally, extremists are using Mar-a-Lago as a catalyst for radicalization and recruitment. We see a range of extremist groups and communities spread false narratives online, including that the search warrant was a political move, that the FBI is lying about an increase in threats to the agency and that the Ohio attack was a “false flag” committed by the FBI, among others. Rather than viewing the search warrant as an indicator that all people are equal under the law, these groups are amplifying false claims that Trump supporters will be targeted next as a way to stoke fear and bolster recruitment efforts.

Stephanie Foggett is director of global communications at the Soufan Group and a research fellow at the Soufan Center.

The response to the FBI’s search of Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago property exposes how much of the far right’s anti-government disdain and propensity for violence has permeated the American mainstream. While there has been an important focus these past days on violent threats to law enforcement — the FBI in particular — it’s important to remember that this rhetoric is not coming out of a vacuum. Much of the far right’s rhetoric driving threats today has been formed over many years within a violent information ecosystem that is also consistently targeting and villainizing religious, racial and ethnic minorities, as well as women, the LGTBQ+ community, journalists and activists.

The spike in violent rhetoric and threats of violence we witnessed this week against law enforcement targets leaves me very concerned about other communities reviled by the far right. We must continue to pay attention to the full spectrum of violent and hateful narratives in this space. 

Mia Bloom is a professor of communication and Middle East studies at Georgia State University. She is the author of several books, including “Dying to Kill: The Allure of Suicide Terror.” Her most recent book (with Sophia Moskalenko) is “Pastels and Pedophiles: Inside the Mind of QAnon.”

Within the QAnon conspiracy theory we have multiple and overlapping trends of white supremacy and racism, including dangerous groups like the Proud Boys, Patriot Front and former law enforcement (the Three Percenters).

What worries me most is that the Mar-a-Lago raid moves people who are merely posting radical statements — “keyboard warriors” — to real-world action.

What is striking is that this legal seizure with a search warrant falls under existing theories about the “deep state” and encourages the justification of violence. We saw that in three separate instances after the raid. Worse still is the fact that Trump released private information about the FBI agents and now they and their families are being harassed and threatened.  The raid, unless the narrative eventually justifies it (although by that time, considerable damage will have been done), will provide justification for violence, and will further radicalize people who are already “aroused” — not in the sexual sense but in the psychological sense.

What worries me most is that the raid moves people who are merely posting radical statements and ideas to real-world action. This is the biggest danger because we know from our research in “Pastels and Pedophiles” that there are potentially millions of American adults who believe in the QAnon conspiracy but are unlikely to ever do anything about it (“keyboard warriors”). The right-wing media echo chamber will ramp up people already on the edge to move to real-world actions.

David Atkins is a contributor to the Washington Monthly’s Political Animal and president of the Pollux Group, a qualitative research firm.

Trump has been using accountability for his own likely criminal behavior as both a fundraising tool and another excuse to rile up his perpetually aggrieved and increasingly violent base of supporters. The conservative media complex has been only too happy to assist him. The result is a powder keg of explosive terrorist threats by conservatives against even the FBI, usually seen as one of the most conservative and anti-leftist institutions in the federal government.

At some level, conservatives realize they have lost the culture and the majority of the country. Many believe that Donald Trump is their only remaining hope left, and that they can still crush their domestic enemies and regain control of the country, even if it means destroying democracy itself. They have placed their loyalty to one man above the Constitution or any of America’s institutions.

Matthew Sheffield is national correspondent for TYT and a former right-wing political consultant.

Despite the constantly shifting multiplicity of lies and false claims Trump has made about the fully legal search of Mar-a-Lago, one thing has remained constant in his responses: His demand that followers identify his problems with theirs. There is no possible world in which an average American would be served a search warrant for stealing classified and other types of federal documents. This false political narrative is one of many that Trump has woven over the years that parallel religious cult leaders’ attempts to make themselves the embodiment of their followers’ fears and desires.

Once that leap has been made, you can get people to do anything on your behalf. Trump doesn’t have to give the order to firebomb the FBI. All he has to do is lie to his dupes that the FBI is coming for them next. Sure enough, he has already inspired “unprecedented” levels of threats against the FBI and several actual attempts of violence. Unfortunately, things are going to escalate much further if Trump faces real legal consequences for his actions. Prosecutors must not be intimidated by his fascist threats.

Teddy Wilson is a journalist with a decade of experience covering the Christian right and the conservative movement. Previously he was the U.S. investigations editor at openDemocracy, a research analyst at Political Research Associates and a staff reporter at Rewire News Group.

The reaction by Republican politicians and right-wing media to the FBI’s raid of Mar-A-Lago has echoed and amplified the extremist rhetoric and apocalyptic narratives of the far right, and this has already lead to real world far right extremist violence and the dramatic increase in threats from far right violent extremists. In far right extremists spaces online, the FBI executing a search warrant of the former President’s residence is viewed not only the unfair politically motivated persecution of Donald Trump, but as an existential threat from a tyrannical federal government.

The FBI and other federal law enforcement agencies have been viewed for decades by the far right, particularly by the militia and Patriot movements, as illegitimate and unlawful. In the wake of the FBI raid of Mar-A-Lago, the right-wing media has increasing made comparisons of FBI agents to the Gestapo or the Stasi, and there have been calls for county sheriffs to prevent federal law enforcement from executing search warrants or other investigative activities. Additionally, the far right has characterized Capitol Riot defendants as political prisoners, and portrayed Ashley Babbitt as a martyr. The rhetoric is incredibly similar to the far right in the 1990s in the wake of Ruby Ridge and the Waco Siege.

Federico Finchelstein is professor of history at the New School for Social Research and Eugene Lang College in New York. He is the author of several books, including “From Fascism to Populism in History.” His most recent book is “A Brief History of Fascist Lies.”

Trump never desists with his slow-motion march towards a failed form of fascism. This is a wannabe fascism that is constantly checked by his many defects as a leader as well as by legality itself. If fascism clearly destroys legality, Trump merely tries to escape from the law. This escape is by whatever means necessary: lies, manipulation, enabling, prompting his followers into violence and even domestic terrorism (as in the violent attack against the FBI). As in fascism, Trump’s politics do not care about the wellbeing of their own society, and they rely on constantly demonizing others, spreading violence and disrupting legality and institutions.

In Nazi Germany, the “truth” of the leader was judicially constructed as a replacement for more rational forms of law. … Trump conceives of himself as a supreme judge in that specific fascist sense.

His threats of violence should be taken very seriously, because dictatorship and even fascism seem to be the endgame of Trumpism. In Nazi Germany, the “truth” of the leader was judicially constructed to the full extent as a replacement for more rational forms of law. Juridical truth was equated with the transcendental nature of the leader. Hitler famously represented himself as “the supreme judge of the Nation.” The result was the destruction of legality.

As I argue in my book, it is highly probable that Carl Schmitt was insincere when, in 1934, he claimed that the Führer was the embodiment of the “most authentic jurisdiction.” But Schmitt, a latecomer to Nazism who had a perceptive and sympathetic take on its mythical connotations, fully understood the Nazi notion of truth when he stated that Hitler was “not subjected to justice” but rather constituted the highest form of justice.

It is clear that Trump conceives of himself as a supreme judge in that specific fascist sense, which replaces justice with the leader’s corrupt and narcissistic sense of legality.

Jeff Sharlet is a contributing editor at Vanity Fair and the author of several bestselling books including “The Family” and “C Street: The Fundamentalist Threat to American Democracy.” His forthcoming book is “The Undertow: Scenes from a Slow Civil War.”

It’s tempting to read the daily news for signs of hope or doom — and I do, this, too, and even feel more hopeful on some fronts lately — but I think the current of Trumpism or fascism or authoritarian dissolution that I call the “undertow” remains strong. It’s been building a long time. This primary defeat or that victory or this courtroom maneuver may affect who’s up on the surface, but such changes mostly don’t mean much to the pull beneath. We’re in a season of political violence; we are allowing ourselves to be carried slowly toward civil war.

I don’t think civil war is inevitable. Or even likely. But it is becoming likelier. Because of what happens in Washington, yes, but also because so many right-wingers I meet in my reporting, everyday people across the country, in “blue” states and “red,” have come to desire civil war. And although I know some will insist this is impossible, I hear that desire from some on the left, too. I don’t share it, but I think I get it — as one friend put it to me, it’s hard to sit in suspense for so long. People want resolution. They believe wrongly that civil war will produce it. What about the first one, some ask? To which I think the truest answer is, we’ll see when it’s over.

Ron DeSantis in the “upside down”: Stop WOKE Act partly blocked, hit with lawsuit

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and his Stop WOKE Act suffered a double blow Thursday as a federal judge blocked parts of the controversial law and a coalition of civil liberties groups filed a lawsuit against what they are calling “racially motivated censorship.”

U.S. District Judge Mark Walker, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, issued a preliminary injunction against portions of the Stop the Wrongs to Our Kids and Employees Act, also called the Individual Freedom Act, saying it violates First Amendment free speech protections and the 14th Amendment’s due process clause.

The Stop WOKE Act — also referred to as the “white discomfort law” — prohibits classroom discussions or corporate training that make students or workers feel uneasy about their race. The legislation is widely viewed by progressives as part of the GOP-led war on critical race theory, a graduate-level academic framework for understanding systemic racism in the United States.

“Florida’s legislators may well find plaintiffs’ speech repugnant. But under our constitutional scheme, the remedy for repugnant speech is more speech, not enforced silence,” wrote Walker.

“If Florida truly believes we live in a post-racial society, then let it make its case,” the judge added. “But it cannot win the argument by muzzling its opponents.”

Walker’s ruling forayed into pop culture Zeitgeist:

In the popular television series “Stranger Things,” the “upside down” describes a parallel dimension containing a distorted version of our world… Recently, Florida has seemed like a First Amendment “upside down.” Normally, the First Amendment bars the state from burdening speech, while private actors may burden speech freely. But in Florida, the First Amendment apparently bars private actors from burdening speech, while the state may burden speech freely… Now, like the heroine in “Stranger Things,” this court is once again asked to pull Florida back from the “upside down.”

Rights groups hailed the decision, with Protect Democracy tweeting that “the Stop WOKE Act is a speech code that takes a page from the authoritarian playbook” and “seeks to censor ideas that challenge government officials’ preferred narrative, muzzle independent institutions, and direct outrage toward disfavored groups.”

Also on Thursday, the ACLU, ACLU of Florida, Legal Defense Fund and the law firm Ballard Spahr filed a lawsuit on behalf of a group of Florida professors, ​alleging that the Stop WOKE Act violates the First and 14th amendments.

The suit calls the law “racially motivated censorship that the Florida Legislature enacted, in significant part, to stifle widespread demands to discuss, study, and address systemic inequalities, following the nationwide protests that provoked discussions about race and racism in the aftermath of the murder of George Floyd.”


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


“Not only does the law prohibit instructors from teaching the Legislature’s disfavored viewpoints in the manner dictated by their disciplines, but its vague terms generate uncertainty about when and how the law will apply, thus creating an even greater chilling effect on academic expression,” the complaint states.

The ACLU tweeted that “the First Amendment protects the right to learn for educators and students. The Stop WOKE Act deprives classrooms of important learning tools and conversations to challenge racism and sexism and discriminates against Black educators and students.”

“We have a right to teach and learn free from state censorship and discrimination,” the group added.

Thursday’s ruling and lawsuit come two weeks after DeSantis suspended State Attorney Andrew Warren after he vowed not to prosecute people who violate Florida’s 15-week abortion ban or restrictions on gender-affirming health care.

In announcing the suspension — which Warren challenged in federal court on Wednesday as a violation of his First Amendment rights — DeSantis referred to the state attorney as “woke.”

In a Wednesday appearance on CNN, Warren explained that “we’re fighting back to make sure that even though Ron DeSantis is governor, the First Amendment still has meaning. The Florida Constitution has meaning and elections still have meaning.”

DeSantis has been called a hypocrite for touting Florida as a haven for freedom while signing laws that restrict reproductive, educational and other liberties, including the right to protest.

McDonald’s is testing a chicken version of its most iconic burger

The great chicken sandwich war is far from over, at least if McDonald’s has its say.

In this stage of the battle, the Golden Arches isn’t entirely reimagining what’s possible, as Popeyes did three years ago. Rather, the largest fast-food chain in the world is testing a chicken version of its most iconic burger.

McDonald’s is busy trying out the Chicken Big Mac in select national and international markets. After first debuting across the pond last winter, the buzzy sandwich finally drops stateside “later this month.” However, it will only be available at Miami-area stores, according to The Washington Post.

If the Magic City isn’t in your neck of the woods, don’t lose hope. McDonald’s has suggested that a much wider rollout may be on the horizon if the Chicken Big Mac performs well. In the U.K., the sandwich reportedly sold out in only 10 days. 

“We’re always looking to give our fans more ways to enjoy the classic menu items they know and love,” McDonald’s told The Post in an email inquiring about the new offering, which has made the rounds on social media

The burger chain added that “while not everything we test makes it on our U.S. menus, we’ll use this time to gather feedback from both customers and restaurant crew as we consider opportunities to offer more delicious options in the future.”

Similar to the classic Big Mac, the chicken version sold in the U.K. and viewed in leaked U.S. training materials features a sesame seed bun with special sauce, shredded lettuce, pickles and a slice of American cheese. Instead of a pair of juicy beef burgers, however, the sandwich sports two “tempura chicken patties.” A statement from McDonald’s didn’t mention whether the finely chopped onion, another staple Big Mac ingredient, would be included.


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


Though the Chicken Big Mac isn’t an official menu item, it has become a popular secret menu item on social media. 

“Even before the Chicken Big Mac sandwich debuted across the pond, clever ‘hackers’ — people who either custom-order off fast-food menus or order multiple items and mash them together themselves — were already enjoying it,” Emily Heil wrote in The Post. “They are a thing on TikTok: some people apparently convinced their local McDonald’s to make them, while others went to DIY route, using the chicken from other sandwiches.”

https://www.instagram.com/p/ChIJpm2rD5q/

News of the new sandwich quickly garnered attention on Instagram after the self-proclaimed “breaker of food news” Mark Vayntraub (aka @markie_devo) shared that U.S. employees were “learning how to create a Chicken Big Mac.” The post, which cited “several” unnamed McDonald’s employees as sources, included an image of the Chicken Big Mac alongside illustrated instructions for assembling the sandwiches.

At this time, McDonald’s has released no further information about the Chicken Big Mac. Only time will tell if it becomes a permanent and notable addition to the fast food chain’s menu or merely a footnote in chicken sandwich war history. 

Giuliani says U.S. is too “dumb” to be a democracy

Former U.S. Associate Attorney General Rudy Giuliani questioned the intelligence of his fellow Americans during an appearance Newsmax only days after he was informed he is a “target” of a criminal investigation in Georgia for his role in overturning the 2020 presidential election.

Giuliani told host Rob Schmitt about why the American people should think he has credibility along with Donald Trump.

“If the American people don’t know what’s going on by now, then our country could possibly be too dumb to be a democracy,” said the disgraced former attorney under criminal investigation for trying to subvert democracy.

The election denier went on to expound on his conspiracy theories.

“I mean, it is quite obvious that they will frame him with every single thing they’ve got,” the former Southern District of New York U.S. Attorney said.

“And if you don’t realize they stole the election, there’s something wrong here, because a group that would do that,” Giuliani continued as if his delusions were reality “that I just described, in order to first keep him from being president, then destroy him on false pretenses.”

“Of course, they would steal an election and it’s not the first election Democrats stole,” Giuliani alleged without evidence.

The former New York City mayor said, “They know how to steal elections, they run big cities that are crooked.”

Watch below:

Mar-a-Lago warrant affidavit may be unsealed with redactions

A U.S. judge on Thursday gave the federal government a week to propose redactions to the warrant affidavit detailing the information that led to last week’s search of Mar-a-Lago, former President Donald Trump’s Florida home.

“I’m not prepared to find that the affidavit should be fully sealed,” said U.S. Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart, according to The Wall Street Journal. After reviewing the document several times, he concluded that “there are portions of this affidavit that can be unsealed.”

“This is going to be a considered, careful process, where everybody’s rights, the government’s and the media’s, will be protected,” he added amid calls from the Journal and other outlets—including CNNThe Associated PressThe New York Times, and The Washington Post—to release the affidavit.

The AP reported:

In addition to ordering the redactions, the judge agreed to make public other documents, including the warrant’s cover sheet, the Justice Department’s motion to seal the documents, and the judge’s order requiring them to be sealed.

Those documents showed the FBI was specifically investigating the “willful retention of national defense information,” the concealment or removal of government records, and obstruction of a federal investigation.

Within days of the August 8 raid of Mar-a-Lago, the search warrant and an inventory of what agents seized were made public. Those documents revealed that Trump is being investigated for potential violations of the Espionage Act, obstruction of justice, and unlawful removal of government records, and that materials labeled “top secret” were removed from the property.

Trump—who had first publicly announced the FBI search of Mar-a-Lago—declined to oppose the release of those documents, which his legal team also had, meaning he could have chosen to make them public himself.

In a late Monday post on his Truth Social network, Trump said that “in the interest of transparency, I call for the immediate release of the completely unredacted affidavit pertaining to this horrible and shocking break-in. Also, the judge on this case should recuse!”

Charles Tobin, an attorney representing multiple media outlets, also highlighted the need for transparency in court on Thursday.

“Transparency serves the public interest in understanding and accepting the results. That’s good for the government and for the court,” he said. “You can’t trust what you cannot see.”

As the Times explained last week:

Affidavits for warrants are typically sworn to by federal agents and are used to persuade judges that it is worth invading someone’s privacy to collect proof of violations of the law. The affidavit supporting the search warrant for Mr. Trump’s home and members-only club presumably contains things like the specific laws that the government believes were broken and a brief narrative of the inquiry into Mr. Trump’s storage of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago.

It also likely includes a recitation of other methods—like grand jury subpoenas—that the government sought to use to retrieve the documents in an effort to persuade the judge that the search warrant was necessary.

 

Carol Jean LoCiero, a lawyer representing the Times and others, had written of releasing the affidavit that “the matter is one of utmost public interest, involving the actions of current and former government officials.”

“President Trump decried the search as an ‘assault that could only take place in Third World countries,’ asserted agents ‘even broke into my safe,’ and otherwise challenged the validity of the search,” the lawyer noted.

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), meanwhile, had argued that unsealing the affidavit, which contains “highly sensitive information about witnesses,” would “cause significant and irreparable damage to this ongoing criminal investigation.”

“If disclosed, the affidavit would serve as a roadmap to the government’s ongoing investigation,” the DOJ said, “providing specific details about its direction and likely course, in a manner that is highly likely to compromise future investigative steps.”

According to the Times, “The Justice Department did not immediately respond to Judge Reinhart’s ruling, but privately, officials said they were shocked by the decision.”

“House of the Dragon” will not “depict sexual violence”

Game of Thrones” occasionally came under fire for how it depicted sex, nudity, and sexual violence. There were really a couple different issues at play. In the first few seasons, the big issue was that the show treated female nudity as entertainment, trotting out body parts to titillate or distract. The most famous example is Littlefinger’s “sexposition” scene in the first season, where the writers had Littlefinger exposit about his backstory while a couple of prostitutes writhed in the background lest the audience grow bored. That kind of thing cropped up often; think of the scene  in the third season where Tyrion walks Podrick through a brothel full of women showing off their bodies. The scene isn’t at all important to the story and is basically an excuse to leer at naked women. As the show went on, that kind shameless nudity tapered off.

“Game of Thrones” was also dinged for its depictions of sexual violence, most notably in a Cersei-Jaime scene from Season 4 and then in Season 5 when Ramsay Bolton rapes Sansa Stark on their wedding night. While the final couple of seasons had some sex scenes — Missandei and Grey Worm make love towards the start of Season 7 and Jon Snow and Daenerys hook up at the end — the show was definitely more cautious about this topic. The final season had practically no nudity or sex at all.

And now we come to “House of the Dragon“, HBO’s “Game of Thrones” prequel show. Set some 200 years before the events of the main series, the show is about a brutal civil war fought between rival factions of the Targaryen dynasty. How will the new show treat this topic?

“House of the Dragon” will focus on “the violence against women that is inherent in a patriarchal system”

“A Song of Ice and Fire” author George R.R. Martin has long said that he draws inspiration from real-life history when writing stories about Westeros, that history is full of sexual violence, and that it would be dishonest to write a story about war and not acknowledge that. (“House of the Dragon” is based on his book “Fire & Blood”.) He reiterated those general thoughts in a recent interview. “I don’t think Westeros is particularly more anti-woman or more misogynistic than real life and what we call history,” he said.

So sexual violence does exist in this world, but how will “House of the Dragon” handle it? Co-showrunner Miguel Sapochnik recently said that the series will approach the topic “carefully, thoughtfully and [we] don’t shy away from it. If anything, we’re going to shine a light on that aspect. You can’t ignore the violence that was perpetrated on women by men in that time. It shouldn’t be downplayed and it shouldn’t be glorified.”

Now, “House of the Dragon” writer and executive producer Sara Hess has further clarified things: “I’d like to clarify that we do not depict sexual violence in the show,” she told Vanity Fair. “We handle one instance off-screen, and instead show the aftermath and impact on the victim and the mother of the perpetrator.”

I think what our show does, and what I’m proud of, is that we choose to focus on the violence against women that is inherent in a patriarchal system. There are many ‘historical’ or history-based shows that romanticize powerful men in sexual/marriage relationships with women who were actually not of an age to consent, even if they were ‘willing.’ We put that onscreen, and we don’t shy away from the fact that our female leads in the first half of the show are coerced and manipulated into doing the will of adult men. This is done not necessarily by those we would define as rapists or abusers, but often by generally well-meaning men who are unable to see that what they are doing is traumatic and oppressive, because the system that they all live in normalizes it. It’s less obvious than rape but just as insidious, though in a different way.

It’s true that there are several relationships like this in “House of the Dragon.” For example, the character of Alicent Hightower is married to King Viserys I Targaryen despite being roughly the same age as the king’s daughter Rhaenyra, with whom she has a close friendship. “In general, depicting sexual violence is tricky,” Hess continued, “and I think the ways we think about it as writers and creators are unique to our particular stories.”

Based on what I’m reading here, it sounds like “House of the Dragon” will do a good job of exploring the reality of sexual violence without leering at it or romanticizing it, which is about where you want the show to be. The new series premieres on HBO and HBO Max on Aug.21.

“Westworld” season 4 ending explained

Season 4 of “Westworld has come and gone, leaving viewers with as many questions as answers. Will Earth ever recover from the catastrophic events of the show’s fourth season? Have we seen the last of so many of our favorite characters? And most importantly, what the hell was the deal with Christina?

“Westworld” is a show that’s famous for having seriously convoluted science fiction twists. Sometimes they work splendidly and are depicted very clearly, as with Season 1’s big timeline fakeout. Others require a few watch-throughs before everything really clicks into place.

If you have questions about the Season 4 finale of “Westworld,” you’re in the right place. We’re going to break it down for you as simply as we can. Beyond this point, there shall be SPOILERS APLENTY.

“Westworld” finale explained

There are two stories at play in “Que Será, Será,” the final episode of “Westworld” Season 4. The larger story is about the destruction of the Earth. Earlier in the season, Charlotte Hale (Tessa Thompson) — who is actually a copy of Dolores Abernathy, as we discovered in Season 3 — enacted her master plan to overtake the human race. Using a degenerative mental disease spread by flies which allowed her to control humans with a series of spooky tones, Charlotte and her hosts totally subjugated humanity.

In essence, they flipped the narrative from early seasons of “Westworld.” Now, instead of a park where hosts are abused by humans, Charlotte turned the Earth into one giant park where the hosts control humans. Though the hosts have conquered the world, they keep populations of humans corralled in certain areas; the only one we see in the show is New York City, which has been turned into a “park” of sorts for hosts to work out their mortal impulses before they “transcend.”

That’s the background. What happened in the finale is that the host version of William (Ed Harris) sabotaged the tower, presumably sending all humans on the planet into a murderous rampage. As a result, every human and host on Earth ends up dead, either in the impending slaughter, or in the unlivable aftermath. It’s hinted that even if some escaped, such as Frankie (Aurora Perrineau) and her girlfriend Odina (Morningstar Angeline), their days on this blasted Earth are numbered.

However, there was a glimmer of hope. After William caused so much destruction, Charlotte took a control unit that contained the consciousness known as Christina (another copy of Dolores Abernathy, with a few new tricks), and transferred her into the Sublime. So even though Charlotte puts an end to William before eventually killing herself, Christina escaped.

But who is Christina, and what is her purpose on the show?

Who is Christina in “Westworld”?

While Dolores Abernathy sacrificed herself to save humanity from the AI supercomputer Rehoboam back in Season 3, the actor who plays her, Evan Rachel Wood, is still around quite a bit in Season 4 as a new character named Christina.

Christina has been the biggest mystery of “Westworld” Season 4. She seemingly lived in the host’s New York City park, writing narratives for the humans there. But in the finale, we learned a lot more about Christina’s true nature. As it turns out, Christina is not in the city along with Charlotte and the rest. She’s actually the host AI program that is running the whole simulation. The curtain gets peeled back on this when Charlotte destroys the red projection of the city at the top of the tower, revealing a small gray sphere embedded in its foundation. This is Christina’s control unit, which contains her consciousness.

So Christina lives in a digital representation of the city: that red map. She actually is programming narratives for the city’s real-life human residents, and those residents do appear in Christina’s world. We saw the homeless man raving about the tower as Christina walked by in Episode 2, but he then showed up later in the season in the real world in Episode 5 when Hope (Nicole Pacent) killed him because he was an outlier (meaning he realized he was being mind-controlled and was then able to see the tower). This makes it clear that while Christina may not be in the real world, she is surrounded by digital representations of the humans who actually do live there.

But she isn’t only surrounded by those simulations. One of the finale’s big twists is that Teddy (James Marsden) is not real, but a projection of Christina’s own thoughts. Essentially, Christina’s subconscious created numerous things to help her process the nature of her reality, including bringing back Dolores Abernathy’s lover Teddy, creating a plucky roommate named Maya (Ariana DeBose), and leaving a drawing of the maze on her own patio in an attempt to help her sort through her thoughts.

Let’s not forget, the maze was originally designed as a way to help hosts reach sentience, recognizing that the voice in their head is actually their own thoughts. This has often been symbolized in the show as a host having a conversation with another imagined version of themself, and by the end of the season finale, we do get a scene where Christina speaks to a mental projection of Dolores, symbolizing that she has taken this journey to sentience herself.

Was Charlotte Hale really in Christina’s world?

As for Christina’s employer Olympiad Entertainment, it’s very likely that all of the other writers in there are actually creations of Christina’s subconscious as well, helping her normalize what she’s doing in her own mind. In truth, she seems to be the only actual writer creating narratives for the humans in this dystopian park.

Remember when Christina’s boss seemingly alluded to Charlotte Hale, saying “she” wouldn’t be happy about Christina digging through files back in Episode 5? One question we had is how he could possibly know about Hale, if he was a human and able to be seemingly controlled by Christina. But he wasn’t real; he was a figment of Christina’s imagination, and because she knows about Charlotte Hale on some deep level, even if she isn’t able to totally comprehend it until late in the season, he does as well.

This brings up another intriguing question: in that same episode, Charlotte and Christina had a lunch date. Christina believes Charlotte is her college roommate. There’s an ominous undercurrent to the whole thing. Even after finding out the twist with Christina, this is one of the most inscrutable moments of the season. Was Charlotte actually there, plugged into Christina’s control unit somehow to check in on her? It would certainly make sense.

On the other hand, Charlotte seems exceptionally interested in whether Christina “met someone.” This plays off Christina’s guilt over the fact that she did meet Teddy, and feels she has to hide it . . . but since Teddy is a creation of her own mind, it wouldn’t make much sense for the actual Charlotte Hale to even follow that line of questioning. It seems likely that this Charlotte was also a creation of Christina’s mind, the foreboding presence she knows on some level is responsible for the world being so distorted, but doesn’t have the frame of reference to fully understand.

“Westworld “explained

The revelations about Christina’s true nature are one of the biggest twists in “Westworld’s” run, and as with Season 1, when we found out that Dolores was experiencing multiple timelines simultaneously, it casts a whole new light on the season.

After the destruction caused by Charlotte Hale and William, Christina’s consciousness is transferred into the Sublime. This is a digital world that we’ve seen a few times throughout the show, and where we now know that hosts can mentally create their own digital realities — not dissimilar from what Christina was doing in New York City, minus all the real-world casualties. You can tell that scenes are taking place in the Sublime because the picture becomes letterboxed, giving it a slightly different feel than the rest of the show.

After she makes her own inward journey toward sentience, Christina has the wherewithal to attempt one last simulation that could hold the key to building a better world from the ashes of the one the hosts and humans destroyed. As she talks about this last “dangerous game” that could decide the fate of future civilizations, Christina creates a simulation of the original Westworld park in the Sublime. Who will appear in this digital park, and how it will effect anything beyond the Sublime remains to be seen.

Will she be watching as digital recreations of people either commit great evil or good, judging what traits to bring to a future species that lies somewhere between hosts and humans? Will she ever reunite with the real Teddy, who is out there in the Sublime somewhere? Did she pull all the other hosts who were already in the Sublime into her new Westworld?

We’ll only ever find out if “Westworld” returns for Season 5. Until then, this finale gave us plenty to chew on.

 

New trial being sought in Steven Avery “Making a Murderer” case

In 2007, Steven Avery was sentenced to life in prison for the murder of Teresa Halbach and the details of his case were later documented in the 2017 Netflix series, “Making a Murderer.” Five years after the release of that popular docu-series, further evidence has presented itself leading to Avery’s lawyer pushing for a new trial.

Halbach, the woman whose murder landed Avery behind bars, was a photographer who visited his home to take pictures of a minivan that was to be sold on the website Autotrader. When she disappeared on October 31, 2005, police followed her timeline back to Avery’s house, and adjoining auto salvage yard, where they found her car and fragments of what appeared to be human bones in a nearby fire pit, according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Blood found within Halbach’s vehicle turned out to be a match to Avery’s, but it was suggested by Avery’s defense that the evidence had been planted.

A series of twists and turns directing guilt towards Avery and also Brendan Dassey, Avery’s nephew, eventually landed on Avery alone when it was determined that Dassey’s confession to his involvement in the crime had been coerced, but Avery’s defense has not given up on the case.

“Two new witnesses have emerged in Mr. Avery’s case with new and compelling evidence about a murder mystery that has intrigued a worldwide audience,” Defense attorney Kathleen Zellner wrote in a motion for post-conviction relief filed Tuesday in Manitowoc County court in Wisconsin, per coverage by Fox News. “The rush to judgment and tunnel vision that led to the arrest, prosecution and conviction of Mr. Avery is exposed by these new witnesses who provide new and undisputed evidence that directly links Bobby Dassey to the murder of Teresa Halbach and the framing of Mr. Avery.”


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


Bobby Dassey, brother of Brendan Dassey, was also featured in the “Making a Murderer” documentary series and was himself considered a person of interest in the case at the time of the original trial. Part of the new evidence being presented in hopes of a new trial for Avery includes a recording of a phone call to the Manitowoc County Sheriff’s Office in which a man named Thomas Sowinski claims to have seen “Bobby and someone else pushing Halbach’s vehicle onto Avery’s salvage yard,” according to Fox News. Avery’s trial lawyers are claiming that they never received documentation of this call.

“Mr. Avery does not have to prove who committed this terrible crime to receive relief. This is not his intent or purpose,” Zellner says. “However, he does have a right to prove he did not receive a fair trial . . . This new evidence creates a reasonable probability that, had the jury heard the new evidence, it would have had a reasonable doubt as to the defendant’s guilt. Therefore Mr. Avery should be granted a new trial.”

Avery’s defense pushed for a similar motion in 2021, which was ultimately rejected by the court.

All our Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt burning questions about that FBI lawsuit

While the world is still reeling from the Johnny Depp and Amber Heard trial – which continues to have ramifications, including Heard filing a motion to appeal – another famous ex-couple has found themselves in the news for similar reasons.

CNN and others have reported about an FBI report from 2016 in which actor Angelina Jolie accused actor Brad Pitt, her husband at the time, of the physical abuse of her and their children. The abuse allegedly occurred while the family traveled on a private plane.

As with the Depp and Heard case, and other domestic violence allegations recently in the news, the allegations are complicated and extensive. Salon attempts below to answer some of the most burning questions about the revelations.   

Why is this 2016 FBI report getting dredged up now?

Though the report concerns an alleged incident stemming from 2016, Politico published a story in April of 2022 about a decision where a woman wanted to anonymously file a case against the FBI. The suit was related to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), which provides the right to access records from government agencies. But as Puck reports, a judge refused to seal the lawsuit. Politico theorized from context clues, including that the allegations in the report matched claims Jolie had made during her divorce filing in 2016, that it was Jolie and Pitt in the report. 

The report has now been released to both parties in the suit. Available publicly, news outlets such as CNN say they have a copy as well. 

CNN, Rolling Stone and others have called the report “highly redacted.”

Is the timing of this a personal attack?

The release of the report comes at a time when Pitt’s latest film, the action movie “Bullet Train” has been topping the box office. Meanwhile, in June this year, it was announced that Jolie would return to directing, after a five-year absence, to helm the film “Without Blood.” The Oscar-winner’s last performing role was in the 2021 MCU blockbuster “Eternals.”  

People reports from an anonymous source close to Pitt who claims the alleged events in the report were “resolved six years ago. They investigated it. They prepared materials, reviewed it together and decided not to charge him.” The People source went on to say that both Pitt and Jolie have already had the information in the report and questioned: “What are the motivations of a person to take up court time and public resources in filing an anonymous FOIA request for material they have had for years? There’s only one: to inflict the most amount of pain on her ex. There is no benefit to this. It is harmful to the children and the entire family for this to be made public.”

But according to Puck, on Aug. 9 this year, Jolie amended the report: “Jolie’s amended complaint cites the need for those unredacted records and corroborating evidence, which remain in the agency’s possession.”

What is alleged in the report?

As Rolling Stone writes: “The records include an interview summary in which Jolie purportedly told FBI officials that Pitt yelled at her, ‘grabbed her by her head,’ shook her, ‘pushed her into the bathroom wall’ and repeatedly punched the ceiling of the plane.” Pitt, Jolie and their six children were on a private jet flying from France to Los Angeles, California in September of 2016, when the alleged incident is said to have occurred.

According to Rolling Stone: “When one of the kids allegedly called Pitt a ‘prick,’ he bolted at the minor ‘like he was going to attack,’ the paperwork states. At that point, Jolie ‘jumped up’ and grabbed Pitt round his neck with her arms, ‘like in a choke hold,’ according to the report . . . Pitt purportedly threw himself back, pushing Jolie into the seats behind them, causing injury to her back and elbow.”

In the report, Jolie claims Pitt consumed alcohol repeatedly during the flight; at one point, pouring it on her. Upon arrival, the plane had $25,000 worth of damages from red wine stains, Jolie said.

The statements by Jolie in the report were made to FBI investigators. In the FBI interview, Jolie also said: “Pitt pushed her again when she suggested taking the couple’s children to a hotel to get some much-needed sleep after landing. ‘You’re not taking my f**king kids,’ Pitt allegedly yelled in response.”

The report also includes black and white photographs that may show evidence of alleged injury. CNNRolling Stone and others have called the report “highly redacted.”

Were charges ever filed?

According to Puck, “The agent investigating the Sept. 2016 incident prepared a statement of probable cause and presented it to the chief of the Criminal Division of the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Los Angeles.” But the FBI then announced that Pitt would not be charged with assault on an airplane. An FBI spokesperson told CNN in 2016, “The FBI has conducted a review of the circumstances and will not pursue further investigation.”

Allegedly, both Jolie and Pitt displayed some physical injuries after the plane ride. Rolling Stone writes, “The fact that both parties had apparent injuries likely complicated the charging decision for investigators.”

What’s the history of Jolie and Pitt’s relationship? 

The Hollywood stars met while filming the action movie “Mr. and Mrs. Smith” in 2003. Pitt was married to actor Jennifer Aniston at the time while Jolie had recently split from her actor ex-husband Billy Bob Thornton. In the film, Pitt and Jolie play married assassins assigned to kill each other. 

In 2016, mere days after the plane incident alleged in the report, Jolie filed from divorce from Pitt.

Jolie had already adopted a son before meeting Pitt. In 2005, she adopted a newborn daughter. Pitt legally adopted Jolie’s children, and a court changed the children’s last names to Jolie-Pitt in 2006. That same year, the couple had a child together. In 2014, Jolie and Pitt married, after years as a couple. By then, the couple had six children, including twins and one more adopted child. 

The couple was seen as Hollywood royalty, both stars with blockbuster billing, and their large family often made appearances together at red carpet events.

Did the alleged incident contribute to their divorce? 

In 2016, mere days after the plane incident alleged in the report, Jolie filed from divorce from Pitt. The timing also fell just after their second wedding anniversary. According to People: Jolie “cited irreconcilable differences and requested physical custody of their six children and visitation for Pitt. Jolie did not request child or spousal support.”

It took three years for Pitt and Jolie to be declared legally single. Divorce proceedings included a heated dispute over a French winery the two had shared while together. Jolie won that legal battle, but custody of their children remains a more complicated issue. She initially asked for physical custody of all their children. After Jolie and Pitt were awarded joint custody in 2020, Pitt lost more previously awarded time with his children a year later.  


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


After Jolie filed for divorce, Pitt became sober, according to the actor, attending Alcoholics Anonymous meetings. Pitt told USA Today in a June 2022 interview: “I had a really cool men’s group here that was really private and selective, so it was safe.”

Jolie recently alluded to some experience with potential abuse. She told The Guardian last year, “Often you cannot recognize something in a personal way, especially if your focus is on the greatest global injustices, because everything else seems smaller . . . I’m not the kind of person who makes decisions like the decisions I had to make lightly. It took a lot for me to be in a position where I felt I had to separate from the father of my children.”

 

“She taught me an eating disorder”: Jennette McCurdy on why some moms “don’t deserve” to be revered

“Why do we romanticize the dead? Why can’t we be honest about them?” author Jennette McCurdy wonders aloud in her new memoir, now a No. 1 New York Times bestseller. “Especially moms. They’re the most romanticized of anyone.” But McCurdy, who until recently was best known for her role as Sam Puckett on the Nickelodeon classics “iCarly” and “Sam & Cat,” is here to tell a different tale, one in which she admits, “I’m Glad My Mom Died.”

When the book debuted earlier this month, it became an instant bestseller and sold out on Amazon. Its success revealed that there is a whole population of survivors who have complicated feelings toward our deceased relatives. “I’m Glad My Mom Died” is an unflinching account of McCurdy’s abusive mother, who pushed her into show business at an early age. It’s also about the dark truths behind the sunny facade of her teen stardom, her struggles with OCD and eating disorders and how she finally made peace with her past.

McCurdy joined me recently on “Salon Talks” to talk about this year’s most candid book, her writing process and why it has connected so deeply with readers.

The following conversation has been lightly edited for clarity and length.

Congratulations on the incredible success of this book that’s all about your childhood trauma. It is sold out everywhere.

I’ve been thrilled with the response. I could not have imagined this and it’s been overwhelming in the best possible way.

I’m Glad My Mom Died” made me laugh; it made me cry, Jennette. It’s such a funny, dark, moving, honest, real, uncensored book, and it’s unlike anything I’ve ever read. It has gotten a lot of attention for the title and the cover. How did you discover that this was how you wanted to present this book? 

I’m glad you asked. I think the cover is reflective of the tone of the book itself. I definitely wanted something that really captured what I think the essence and the tone of the book is. I wanted something that was attention-grabbing. That was definitely intentional, but also I would never do anything that’s just attention-grabbing for the sake of being attention-grabbing. It sincerely was important to me.

“There are instances where mothers don’t deserve the pedestals that they are put on.”

I hoped that it would resonate with people who have experienced parental abuse. I knew that it would resonate with anybody who has a sense of humor, and I wasn’t concerned with anybody else.

Some people have had a very visceral reaction. To that, I think, “How nice for you.”

I think, “Wow, you must have had a wonderful upbringing, and I’m really glad that you did.”

You talk also about the complexity of grief in this book. I often think how nice it would be to just have one emotion at a time.

Yes.

You say, “I’m glad my mom died.” But there’s more on the other side of that too — being able to have good memories of her, being able to see the things that you loved about her, that you still love about her. That is not a conversation that we get to have a lot about death. Were there things that you read that you thought, “I want this to be like this”? Or was it about creating something completely new?

My favorite memoir is “The Glass Castle” by Jeanette Walls. It’s incredible. What she does is astounding, capturing humor in really tragic and traumatic environments. Her voice is so singular, but she was the north star of “My God, if I could do anything like what she did, I would just be so proud.”

Let’s talk about your mom.

Let’s do it.

Your mom pushed you into acting from the age of six. You grew up with three brothers and your dad. You had a unique role in your family and in the family dynamics. Your mother controlled your life in a way that was separate from the relationship she had with your other siblings. What was that like having this very different, very intense, very one-on-one dynamic with this very dominant personality?

At the time, I thought it was wonderful. I thought that my mom wants to be my best friend and she wants to have this amazing secret relationship. She taught me an eating disorder, and she herself had eating disorders. I saw all of these things as being good, which I actually think is where the humor of the book comes from. I think naivete can be so delusional and warped as a means of trying to cope with the trauma that’s happening around you. 

It’s messed up, but I do think it’s really funny. Now I sort of see it that way, but at the time I just thought, “My mom’s the greatest. She loves me. She doesn’t want me to have a different favorite color than her. She wants for all of my wants and needs to be Mom’s wants and needs and that’s because she loves me so much.” I thought, “She lives for me and I live for her,” not realizing that only one of those things was true.

You talk about your childhood home and how it was a hoarder house, and you didn’t know that was weird.

I didn’t at all. My mom had OCD. A form of OCD is hoarding, and that’s how her OCD manifested. From an early age, maybe I think it started as a result of her first occurrence of cancer when I was two years old, she became really sentimental and unable to part with anything. 

Like this [cup of coffee]. If I finished it, she wouldn’t be able to part with this cup because she’d say, “Well, my baby touched this cup, and it reminds me of when she took that sip of coffee,” whatever story she was building around every single item. She had one for every single item. If my grandfather or father tried to clean up in any way, which they did, she’d say, “No, I need to keep it because X, Y, Z,” that was whatever significance she was attaching to that specific napkin or whatever it was.

In the book, you talk about how OCD manifested in you. Even though your mom is the central figure of it, these other accelerants like being in show business and religion are also spinning around you. Jennette, religion is an amazing accelerant for OCD.

Thank you for highlighting this because I don’t think it’s talked about enough and it was really, really a slippery slope for me, how religion informed my OCD. I thought the Holy Ghost was talking to me. I thought the Holy Ghost was saying, “Hey, Jennette, touch your wrist five times, twirl around, touch your feet on the floor, touch whatever.” 

I had so many different rituals. I thought the Holy Ghost was telling me these rituals with some sort of positive result on the other end of them. I thought if I did these rituals, I would book a job. I didn’t realize, oh, that’s not the Holy Ghost, sweetheart. That is rampant mental illness.

When it comes to Hollywood, you talk about some of the things that people said to you, the comments that they made about your looks, about your body, when you were a child. How does that influence someone who is already vulnerable? It feels like people who wind up being child performers find themselves in a predatory environment where they are exploited, where they are told things that then prey on their worst vulnerabilities.

I think that’s so true. I think there were a lot of people who didn’t know what they were doing, who may have had good intentions, may have thought they were saying something that was complimentary or harmless. And then I think there were comments that weren’t coming from that place, that weren’t coming from the best intentions and had a creepy hue to them. 

It’s all complicated and difficult to parse through when you’re 11 years old, 12 years old, 13, 14. That’s absolutely all work that I’ve done in therapy and not something that I was able to unpack or explore or understand at that age. I just wasn’t psychologically developed enough to be able to understand it at all.

Who can unpack anything at that age, let alone when they are a star at that age? It’s hard being 11, period. 

Exactly. 

“I logged off all social media. I really had to turn inward.”

“You’re such a good sport” — that’s a phrase that people said to you a lot. You don’t have to have been a kid on a hit TV show to see how manipulative that is, and the ways in which “You are such a good sport” is used against people.

I have chills. 

How did you get past that? Because money was offered to you to stay quiet. You had another chance to be part of the “iCarly” reboot. You have been able to say, basically, “I’m not going to be a good sport any more about some things.” How did you walk away from that?

The good sport conversation is  a really important one to have. I hear from so many people that they relate to the experience of being a people pleaser and that people pleaser aspect is reinforced by these comments like, “You’re a good sport.” I don’t think inherently being a people pleaser is in any way beneficial to anybody, least of all the person who’s doing the people pleasing. I think it’s the opposite of authenticity in many cases, or at least not directly authenticity.

For me, kind of stepping away from everything, I quit acting when I was 24. I stepped away very definitively at that time and I just committed myself to therapy. I logged off all social media. I really had to turn inward because I had recognized that external feedback was not helping me on my path. It wasn’t getting me any closer to my values or the way that I wanted to live my life. Maybe there are some people who are able to navigate external feedback with their own internal feedback, but for me at 24, I wasn’t able to. I had to shut it all out and make contact with me and who I am separate from anything outside of me.

Your book is an invitation to change the way we talk about death and the way we talk about dying. The impulse when someone’s mother dies is to say, “I’m so sorry, your mom must have been such a wonderful person,” or “This must be the worst thing that ever happened to you.” What do you say when someone says, “My mom is really sick,” or “My mom just died”? What do you tell people?

I’m trying to think if I’ve had that experience recently. I haven’t recently, but it definitely changed how I react. I try to say, “I’m here for you in any way that you need. I hope you’ll reach out if there’s anything at all that I can do. I am sure there’s a lot of layers to what you’re experiencing.” I

“The thing that got me back into therapy was the need to focus on getting help for my eating disorders.”

try to reinforce or validate their emotional experience or whatever they share as opposed to launching in with, “Oh, you poor thing. Moms are the best!” or whatever people typically say.

Because as you say, moms are so romanticized.

Yeah. Everyone can laugh at dads being absent and neglectful. It’s like, “Ha, ha, dad’s not home.” It’s a thing that is so easy to laugh about and so normalized. Yet moms are just these reverent St. Marys, everywhere. I don’t know when or why that started, but I don’t think all dads are bad or all moms are bad. I don’t think anything’s black and white. But I do think that there are instances where mothers don’t deserve the pedestals that they are put on.

You lost your mom when you were just 21. You were a TV star. Your second television show, “Sam & Cat” had just started in June and your mom died in September. Your initial response was, “It is what it is.” How did you get to the point where you were ready to reckon with the abuse?

When my mom first died, I was not able to go anywhere near the idea that she was abusive. With the first therapist I saw to help with the processing of the grief of her passing, I would share stories and anecdotes of life and my upbringing with her.

Eventually the therapist looks at me and goes, “Jennette, you know what you’re talking about is abuse, right?” That was it. I left that therapy session. I quit and I thought, f**k therapy. I’m never doing that again. I can’t do it because if I need to accept the abusive behavior that my mom put on me, that would mean reframing my entire life. Everything was oriented around, “My mom is the best and mom knows better than me, and I’m helpless and powerless without her.” Reframing that was daunting and intimidating and I didn’t know how to face it. It did take a while before I was able to go anywhere near therapy again.

The thing that got me back into therapy was the need to focus on getting help for my eating disorders. I’m really glad that was the entry point because I don’t think I would’ve been able to unpack and explore the complicated specifics of my life had I not gotten the eating disorder under control first. If that were still a really strong issue, I don’t think I could have gone into nittier, grittier aspects of anything underneath it.

Did the writing process bring lot of stuff back to the surface?

Yeah, I’d been in therapy for years by the time I started writing the memoir. By that point, I was able to discern what was just for me, what I wanted to put into the book. Ultimately the goal was to make a good book, memoir genre aside, aspects of my life aside. I really wanted to make something that was hopefully entertaining and would connect with people. I’m so glad to see that it has been doing that.

You spent much of your formative years living somebody else’s dream. You were a writer when you were a child and you were a director when you were a child, but those dreams got tamped down and discouraged. How are you pursuing these dreams that you had to put on hold for so long?

I’m so glad you asked. I am working on a novel and I’m working on a collection of essays. I wish that I could’ve shown my six-year-old self where I would be now. Oh my God, it’s incredible. I’m so grateful to be able to be working on the things I’m working on now, and living a life that is fulfilling for me.
 

Move aside, Thin Mints: There’s a new Girl Scout cookie in town

Sadly, I never got to be a Girl Scout, but boy did I dream of being a walking fudge brownie, passing out Tagalongs in exchange for cold, hard cash with total strangers outside my hometown Walmart. What’s that smell? Freshly baked shortbread mixed with a little bit of capitalism? I thought so. There are only a few short weeks each year when elementary school-aged girls descend on public spaces selling boxes and boxes of S’mores and Samoas; madness ensues as the demand for the latest flavor skyrockets.

So, Daisies and Brownies, listen up: there’s a new flavor in the cookie jar for you to hawk — Raspberry Rally. Girl Scouts of the USA recently announced their latest addition to the 2023 cookie lineup, which is described as a “sister” to the beloved Thin Mints — it’s a thin, crispy cookie infused with raspberry and dipped in the classic hard-shell chocolate coating. But if you’re expecting to pick up a box or two on your way out from the grocery store, think again; Raspberry Rally cookies will be the first in the Girl Scout Cookie lineup to be sold online only. This amendment to the Girl Scouts’ usual sales approach (chasing you down in a parking lot until you crack) is aimed at “enhancing girls’ e-commerce sales and entrepreneurial skills.” Like Thin Mints, Raspberry Rally is totally vegan, which is only the second Girl Scout cookie to be declared dairy-free in the 100-plus years of cookie sales.

In 2021, Girl Scouts introduced Toast-Yay!, a French toast-flavored cookie shaped like, you guessed it, French toast and dipped in icing. I temporarily forgot about this marvelous, miniature marriage of breakfast and dessert, but the cinnamony notes just came swirling back and invigorated my senses all over again. Rarely do these hybrid treats taste like anything but an artificial imitation of an untouchable treat, but leave it to those vest-clad girls to perfect it.

For the last several years, Girl Scout cookies have been priced at $5/box, with specialty and gluten-free varieties costing $6/box. If you’re a glutton for gluten, you’re not alone; last year, Girl Scouts revealed they sold over 900,000 boxes of cookies. Let’s make it an even million this year — are you with me?

Capri Sun has been recalled because it’s diluted with cleaning solution

Here comes the sun and I say, it’s actually not all right. More than five thousand cases of Capri Sun — 5,760 to be exact — have been recalled due to possible contamination of cleaning solution. While I respect Kraft Heinz’s rigorous attempt to deep clean their production facilities, I think even Danny Tanner would agree that this takes it one step too far. According to Kraft Heinz, which owns Capri Sun, among other food brands from my childhood like Ore-Ida, Jello-O, and Kool-Aid, the “all natural” juice packs were taken off shelves after customers complained that Wild Cherry tasted off.

Upon further investigation, the company found that, no, it wasn’t the essence of “Tame Cherry” causing the funky flavor but rather, that a “diluted cleaning solution, which is used on food processing equipment, was inadvertently introduced into a production line at one of our factories.” At this time, there have been no reports of illnesses, hospitalizations, or deaths. Fruit punch lovers, fear not — only Wild Cherry-flavored Capri Sun was impacted by this sanitary flub.

So how can you tell if you have contaminated product? Only the 6.6-ounce size pouches of Capri Sun Wild Cherry Flavored Juice Drink Blend have been recalled; the packaging includes individual foil pouches packed in paperboard cartons. The “Best When Used By” date on the products is June 25, 2023. If you’d like to cross-reference the manufacturer code on your own product with the contaminated product, check out the full Kraft Heinz statement here. (If you’re wondering, Kraft Heinz is committed to upholding the highest safety and quality standards, according to a press release).

In the meantime, you can make your own version of homemade Capri Sun using just five ingredients: water, lemon juice, sugar, fresh strawberries, and kiwis. As for the signature drink pouches, you can buy those too. Take them to the beach or, realistically, your next birthday party at Chuck E. Cheese (and invite me, please).

Recipe: Capri Sun

A “mind-blowing” French pastry, from one easy Trader Joe’s hack

The popular YouTube cooking channel Food Wishes describes it as “the hardest, but also most delicious pastry in the world” and “way past mind-blowing.” I don’t ever want to give you unrealistic expectations in this column, but it’s true.

The difficult-to-pronounce, but easy-to-love kouign-amann (“queen a mon”) originally hails from Brittany. I first discovered it in Montreal, at a beautiful little bakery named in its honor. Buttery, shatteringly crunchy and sugary, it tasted like a croissant and a palmier had teamed up to create a pastry fit for the gods.

Over the past few years, the kouign-amann has become a bit of a cult classic, turning up on “The Great British Bake Off” and menus at chic metropolitan bakeries. It’s still not nearly as ubiquitous as I would prefer, however.

Craving one recently, but lacking the motivation to fly to Canada, I wondered if there was a way to create a reasonable facsimile from the frozen foods aisle of my favorite place on earth: Trader Joe’s.

The Trader Joe’s croissant is, in my heretical opinion, up there with anything I’ve ever devoured in Paris. But could this pastry possibly be improved, I wondered, by giving it the kouign-amann treatment? A “cheat’s kouign-amann” recipe from the BBC featuring croissant dough suggested it was worth a shot.

I believe these are technically called kouignettes because they’re individually portioned. Technically speaking, these are also Trader Joe’s croissants baked in butter and showered in sugar. Whatever you choose to call them, they’re incredible. In fact, my teenage daughter made four disappear before she was out the door the other morning. 

I’m not saying these are beautiful, Dominique Ansel-level creations, such as the brownie or cherry and almond yogurt skyr cake recipes the James Beard Award winner has shared with Salon Food. But I can promise they’ll make you feel like you’re the kind of person who sips espresso and eats elegant little pastries in the morning time (even if you also happen to be the kind of person who buys turkey corn dogs in bulk).

***

Inspired by BBC Good Food

Trader Joe’s Chocolate Kouign-Amann
Yields
 8 servings
Prep Time
 10 minutes, plus thawing
Cook Time
 30 minutes 

Ingredients

  • 1 box Trader Joe’s frozen chocolate croissants
  • 2 tablespoons white sugar
  • Butter, for the pan

 

Directions

  1. On a sheet of parchment paper, allow the croissants to rise overnight (approximately 9 hours, though I’ve gotten by on less).
  2. Preheat the oven to 400 degrees and generously butter a standard muffin tin.
  3. Cut each piece of dough in half. Using a rolling pin or wine bottle, gently roll each piece to a rough square, about 1/4 inch high. It won’t be precise.
  4. Generously cover the pieces of dough with half the sugar. To quote Ina Garten’s advice on palmiers, “This is not about sprinkling, it’s about an even covering of sugar.”
  5. One piece at a time, squeeze up the dough’s quadrants to the middle and gently pinch it together.
  6. Tuck each piece into the muffin tin and cover with more sugar.
  7. Bake for 25 to 30 minutes, until bronzed and caramelized.
  8. Remove from the oven. Pop the pastries out of the tin so they don’t stick. Cool and eat.

Cook’s Notes

I made these with chocolate croissants because I’m extra. They would also be fantastic with almond croissants, or even plain ones.


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


Salon Food writes about stuff we think you’ll like. Salon has affiliate partnerships, so we may get a share of the revenue from your purchase.

Bee genocide may have been caused by insecticides that make bees unable to walk in a straight line

The mysterious deaths of vast numbers of honeybees earlier this century was a portent to human civilization. Called “colony collapse disorder,” and first identified in 2006, some beekeepers saw as many as half of their bees suddenly and mysteriously die. Because most of human agriculture is dependent on bees to fertilize and pollinate their crops, humans are, in a very real way, dependent on bees for our survival — perhaps even more so than we are dependent on the fruits of our own agriculture. After all, we can plant and grow fruiting plants, but those plants won’t fruit without the help of pollinators. 

Colony collapse disorder was eventually linked to a class of man-made insecticides called neonicotinoids. As the name hints, neonicotinoids are chemically similar to nicotine, which itself is a natural insecticide. Besides being linked to plummeting bee populations, neonicotinoids evidently had effects further down the food chain — harming bird communities, seeping into national wildlife refuges and perhaps affecting human brain development. Chemists and laypeople alike have observed for years that neonicotinoids seem to damage nervous systems; it is simply a question of quantifying how that happens.

But while neonicotinoids were tied to colony collapse disorder, it was less clear precisely what the insecticide was doing to bees. Now, a new study has made that question a little easier to answer: honeybees which are exposed to neonicotinoids — as well as to a separate insecticide, sulfoxaflor — have a more difficult time walking in a straight line. In other words, it seems to intoxicate them in a way that makes them vulnerable. 

For honeybees, being able to walk or not walk in a straight line is a big deal. Honeybees communicate to each other using a waggle dance that depends heavily on choreography. Honeybees that have trouble maintaining a straight line will not be able to fly or navigate correctly, and will leave worker bees more vulnerable to fatal threats. As such, the tests had serious implications for the future of honeybee colonies.

“These insecticides act somewhat similarly to nicotine in the nervous system, in that they bind to the same type of receptor that nicotine does,” Parkinson explained.

The scientists tested the bees’ ability to engage in visually guided behavior, since this skill set is key to bees encoding and responding to what they see. That, in turn, allows them to “orient and stabilize themselves during flight, and also so they can navigate to and from the hive and foraging sites,” Dr. Rachel Parkinson, a professor of zoology at the University of Oxford and the expert contact for the study, told Salon by email.

Parkinson noted, as a disclaimer, that the tests were on “walking bees,” not ones that were mid-flight. “We still need to find out if similar effects are present in flying bees,” Parkinson said.


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


As for the tottering bees, the researchers found that the insecticides in question undeniably made it more difficult for them to maintain a straight path.

“These insecticides act somewhat similarly to nicotine in the nervous system, in that they bind to the same type of receptor that nicotine does,” Parkinson explained. “However these insecticides cannot be broken down as easily as nicotine. When exposed to the insecticides, the neurons are over-excited and this can result in a variety of effects, including changes in receptor expression (as a preventative mechanism) and neurotoxicity (when the insecticides cannot be broken down).” The end result is that reactive oxygen species — a type of unstable molecule that contains oxygen and can wreak havoc inside cells — winds up being produced.

“These can damage neurons resulting in altered function or cell death (apoptosis),” Parkinson told Salon.

Jay Feldman, the Executive Director of a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization that was founded in 1981 to raise awareness about toxic pesticide use known as Beyond Pesticides, echoed the concerns of the study’s authors when contacted by Salon.

“Like any organism, the sensory system enable the bee to function. If the brain function, as this study finds, is altered, the organism cannot function normally,” Feldman wrote to Salon. “We know that similar effects to the nervous system occur in people with similar vulnerabilities.”

“Bees are crucial to humans for the pollination services they provide,” Parkinson explained. “Without bees, we simply cannot produce the volume of food we require, which would be a global crisis.”

In addition to making it more difficult for bees to walk in a straight line, neonicotinoids are also linked to bumblebees losing the initiative to forage and to them foraging less effectively. Lab studies have also linked the insecticides to bees losing their sense of orientation. It has also been revealed through laboratory studies that this class of insecticide actually becomes more toxic during colder weather, with serious implications for bees’ collective health during inclement seasons. Insecticide pollution is so severe that, when combined with factors like climate change, habitat loss and the loss of genetic diversity, American bumblebees are now categorized as “vulnerable” to extinction. 

“Once the most commonly observed bumblebee in the United States, the American bumblebee has declined by 89% in relative abundance and continues to decline toward extinction due to the disastrous, synergistic impacts of threats including habitat loss, pesticides, disease, climate change, competition with honey bees, and loss of genetic diversity,” explained the Center for Biological Diversity in a statement at the time. “In the last 20 years, the American bumblebee has vanished from at least eight states, mostly in the Northeast, and it is in precipitous decline in many more. “

There are implications to the problem of insecticide pollution not just for bees, but for humans. 

“Bees are crucial to humans for the pollination services they provide,” Parkinson explained. “Without bees, we simply cannot produce the volume of food we require, which would be a global crisis. It’s therefore paramount to understand how anthropogenic activities are affecting bees and other pollinators so we can assess what changes need to be made.”

Fox News panel freaks out after book-banning crusade leads to Bible being pulled from Texas schools

A panel of Fox News hosts expressed outrage on Thursday after one Texas school district temporarily removed the Bible for review during a push by conservatives to ban certain school books.

Fox News host Kayleigh McEnany reported the news on the Outnumbered program. She said Anne Frank’s diary is also facing review. In total, about 40 books are being reviewed by the Texas district.

Hosts of the Fox News program argued that the review should be limited to books with gay and transgender themes.

“The Bible, the most read book in human history,” McEnany remarked, “Over the last 50 years, nearly 4 billion copies have been sold. Compare that to Harry Potter, which is number three at 400 million.”

“Not only that, foundation of the world’s largest religion,” she continued. “A classic historical text. If you don’t believe it in the religious context, at least it can be appreciated in that context. But that’s the one we’re removing!”

“What’s so difficult to digest here is that the whim of a few has such an impact on the many,” co-host Emily Compagno said. “This is literature that this school should be exposed to. And yet because someone else said we’re going to review it again, all of the sudden it’s back under review.”

“The fact that because one person or three people put the Bible on the list [is] absolutely horrifying,” she continued. “And this is when the school administrators need to step up and say absolutely not.”

She added: “Because the default here as well is if someone subjected it to review, then it’s automatically taken off the shelf while they decide. But every day without the Bible is a day lost!”

McEnany agreed and said that only “new” books should be banned.

“Even though I’m in general not for canceling books,” she insisted. “Students need to see and understand the holocaust, slavery, human atrocities and the world’s history.”

“Taking the Bible out of schools then furthers the political goal that we know already exists,” co-host Harris Faulkner opined. “They want to, on one side of the political aisle, remove things like, you know, the pledge of allegiance and things that have the word God and so on and so forth.”

“And why remove it while you’re talking about it?” she wondered. “Why can’t you leave it up because you can’t replace the learning — whatever the book is — you can’t replace what was gone, except for the sex pictures, because those are not things kindergarteners through third grade should be practicing. But historic books, you can’t replace that learning why it’s on a back shelf.”

“Exactly!” McEnany chimed in. “You’ve got to learn your history.”

The Christian Bible contains numerous examples of strong sexual content and graphic violence.

Watch the video below from Fox News.

Gardeners share their tips and tricks for composting at home

Americans waste roughly 25% of the food we buy, and while there are many ways to reduce waste in your kitchen, you may have extra kitchen scraps, yard waste, or uncoated paper and cardboard. Composting is a rewarding way to keep them out of the landfill and feed the soil at the same time. Read on for inspiration and ideas, and when you’re ready to get started, head to our 4-week composting challenge for a step-by-step guide to start composting, or using a pickup service.

Why compost?

There are dozens of reasons why people compost. Atlanta-based builder and amateur gardener De’Von Dixon began composting about four years ago, hoping to cut down on food waste and enrich his garden soil.

PC Sweeney, a library professional and avid gardener, has been composting for three summers in his current home, but he’s no stranger to the process: Growing up on a farm, and spending time at the family’s nursery made him intimately familiar with compost’s many benefits. “We always had a compost pile somewhere growing up. I lived in apartments and on boats throughout my 20s and 30s, so when we bought our half acre house a few years ago, a compost bin was one of the first things we installed because I knew I’d be doing a lot of gardening.”

Once you start, you just might discover that your compost pile provides some unexpected benefits. Dr. Kathleen Kamerick, a retired university professor in Iowa, began composting as a way to process yard and food waste. Over time, she was surprised to see the compost transform her heavy, clay soil into something rich and nourishing. She notes that, “years ago, when I was trying to put some plants in the ground and hoping they wouldn’t die, I read a gardener who said that soil is everything. I didn’t understand that then, but now I do.”

Choose your compost pile setup

Whatever your reasons, your compost pile doesn’t have to be big or complicated to make an impact. Gardeners employ a variety of setups based on their gardening needs, the space they have, and how much food and yard waste they produce.

Dixon has a 2.5 foot tall bin, in which he layers green and brown scrapsTo keep flies and animals away, he put a lid on top, but chose one that still allows for airflow and moisture control. Maintenance is easy, too: He just turns it with a rebar dowel and hoses it down when it’s dry.

Dr. Leni Sorensen, a renowned food historian and founder of Indigo House, has been composting for fifty years as a gardener and farmer. Her kitchen scraps make an extra stop in their journey to becoming compost, first going into the chicken coop. Then she composts the chickens’ litter, along with eggshells, which she stores separately, all of which is layered with yard waste. “That way I have no attractive nuisance that would bring raccoons, foxes, opossum, bear, rats on to the farm.” Another benefit to this setup is that it doesn’t require turning, and only occasionally requires watering. Each spring and fall she empties one side and starts anew while the other side finishes.

Sweeney uses a similar method, building a W-shaped bin out of old pallets. “There are two bins so that I can fill one with fresh yard trimmings, kitchen waste, etc. I let the other one decompose and then use it until it’s empty. Then I switch.”

For Kamerick, a simple compost pile, tucked against the back fence, is the easiest option, and one advantage to a big compost pile is that it can handle a lot of material, whether it’s big loads of leaves in the fall or grass clippings in the summer. For those looking to buy rather than build, there are plenty of options out there, from compost tumblers to worm composters to prefabricated outdoor bins.

Pay attention to weather conditions

Compost care can vry depending on humidity, the season, and other factors, so learning best practices helps to ensure a successful compost pile. You may need to add water or adjust greens and browns to regulate the temperature. Your local extension office, gardening group, community garden or other resources can give you more information.

Dixon’s main concern in Georgia is the heat so he minimizes green scraps in summer to keep it from getting too warm. In winter, he mixes in additional coffee grounds, waters, and turns the pile more frequently to keep it toasty. Sweeney, who lives farther north, puts a big plastic sheet over his pile, which holds moisture in on hot summer days and holds in heat in the winter.

Collect scraps to minimize outdoor trips

Having a way to collect scraps indoors helps with habit building and reduces trips to the outdoor bin. Sorensen and Kamerick both keep small compost buckets on the counter, which they then empty periodically into their chicken pen and compost pile, respectively.

Dixon keeps a small brown paper bag near the back door for green scraps, dumping it every few days. At first he brought scraps out as he created them, but this led him to be inconsistent and to end up throwing scraps away. By having the bag at the ready, he’s able to reduce trips outside and maintain a consistent composting practice. Learning what works best for you, and making adjustments as you need, is a key to composting success.

Make use of compost pickup services

An outdoor compost bin may not be a feasible option for everyone, but that doesn’t mean you can’t compost your scraps. Compost pickup services collect your scraps and compost them, either returning the compost to you for use in your garden or donating it. Some community gardens and other organizations accept scraps for their piles, too. Atlanta-based chef Lori Clowers Horne uses Compost Now to pick up and donate food scraps from her downtown Atlanta loft. She’s proof that one home’s compost makes a big difference, noting, “I have diverted 1843 pounds of food waste and created 922 pounds of compost since September, 2019.”

Author K. A. Amienne, who writes under the pen name Anne Bramley, is an American expat who lives in the U.K., where compost pickup is one of the city services at her Norwich home. Her family collects their scraps as they go and each week the service collects them from an outdoor bin. The city accepts all kinds of scraps, though she notes that “being England, I suspect our compost has a high percentage of teabags.” Many U.S. municipalities offer compost pickup, too, including larger cities like San Francisco, Calif., and smaller towns like Boulder, Colo. Like Amienne’s home, these cities offer a curbside bin that’s collected every week with solid waste pickup and recycling.

Jessamyn West is a Vermont-based rural librarian and technologist, who used to compost at home, but switched to a pickup service after repeated problems with bears. The program, like most pickup services, is simple: The pickup service leaves a large container which West fills with food scraps (but no meat or dairy). The service picks it up weekly and leaves an empty container, taking the scraps to feed pigs at a local farm.

Maintaining your compost pile

Once you’ve decided where and how you want to compost, starting and maintaining your pile is easy. A bit of planning from the start can help turn your composting dreams into composting habits. Sorensen says, “place it in a convenient place in your garden — if it isn’t easy to get at and to use, you will not keep it up.”

Think about what critters might be interested in your compost, and what you can do to keep them away. West says “smelly compost piles don’t just attract bears, they can also bring in raccoons, skunks and other little beasties.” A smelly compost pile not only attracts unwanted guests, it also makes your yard a less welcoming place to be. Dixon notes that “it’s easy to control the smell/ temperature by capping the bin with brown materials,’ which Sweeney says also help with water retention and aerate the pile so beneficial microbes can thrive. While many home composters don’t add meat, things like crab shells, fish bones and egg shells can benefit your compost. Sweeney says “They all help add phosphorous and calcium to the beds to help prevent things like tomato end rot. So don’t be overly strict.”

He also notes that yard waste and kitchen vegetables can contain seeds that might sprout in your compost. His solution is a hot compost bin: “The high heat kills most seeds.”

Their biggest tip, though, is just to get started. Kamerick says, “read some advice for doing compost, and talk to a few people, and then figure out what looks like it will work for you. Don’t fuss about it too much.”

And Dixon urges: “Don’t overcomplicate composting and make it into an intimidating ordeal. Just start. Keep it simple and build easy to maintain habits. It’s gratifying when you get healthier plants, a better harvest, and less food waste going to the landfill.”