Spring Sale: Get 1 Year, Save 58%

“Pack your stuff and get out”: Mom boots Patriot Front member son out of her house after arrest

One of the Patriot Front extremists was kicked out of his mother’s house after his arrest with dozens of white nationalists allegedly conspiring to provoke violence at an Idaho LGBTQ+ pride event.

Karen Amsden, the mother of Jared Michael Boyce, told The Daily Beast that her son had struggled since his father left their family years ago and came out as gay, and she said she was going public in hopes of damaging her son’s reputation in the group and finally cut ties with white nationalism.

“I would love to do whatever I can to out him [as a Patriot Front member] so that he can’t be a part of it,” Amsden said, “and that they don’t want him to be a part of their group because his mom has loose lips and a big mouth and he’s never going to get away with anything.”

Amsden said her son had vowed to remain with the group after his release from jail, so she gave him an ultimatum.

“I told him, ‘Well, then you can’t live here. You can choose between Patriot Front and your family,'” she said, “and he’s like, ‘Well, I can’t quit Patriot Front.’ I’m like, ‘Well, then you’ve just chosen. So pack your stuff and get out of my house.'”

Police said the 27-year-old from Springville, Utah, was among 31 masked men from various states who were spotted climbing into a U-Haul truck packed with riot gear, shields and a smoke grenade, along with an “operations plan” for a possibly violent confrontation at the parade.

“They’re not just white nationalists, they are not Western nationalists, they are not patriots,” said researcher Jon Lewis, of George Washington University’s Program on Extremism. “They are neo-Nazis.”

An anonymous donor bailed the group members out of jail, Boyce told his mother, and he justified his actions using language that has filtered up from the QAnon fringes to Fox News prime time programming and GOP lawmakers.

“Don’t believe the media, mom,” Boyce said according to his mother. “We were just there because they’re grooming kids.”

Boyce found the group online in 2018, when he was married with his then-wife and their children, and Amsden said he quickly changed and his views became repugnant to her.

“He’s so misguided and bought into all their rhetoric, it just makes me sick,” Amsden said. “This is not who I raised. This is not the example that was set for him.”

“American people support me, not you!”: Bernie Sanders confronts Lindsey Graham at Fox News debate

In an Oxford-style debate Monday with Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, Sen. Bernie Sanders argued that progressive policy goals such as Medicare for All, Social Security expansion, and a higher minimum wage are “what the American people want” and blasted the political establishment—including his GOP colleague—for ignoring the most important crises facing the United States, from the climate emergency to obscene levels of economic inequality.

“That’s what the establishment does, and Lindsey is a very good and effective representation of the establishment,” Sanders said after Graham delivered his opening remarks of the debate, which was held at the Edward M. Kennedy Institute in Boston and streamed live by Fox Nation. “Does Lindsey have a concern that we are the only major country on Earth not to guarantee healthcare to all people? That some 60,000 people a year die because they don’t get to a doctor on time? I didn’t hear much about that in that opening statement.”

“Does Lindsey care that we have the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs, and that the pharmaceutical industry right now has 1,500 paid lobbyists in Washington, D.C. to make sure that in some cases we pay 10 times more for the medicine that we need?” Sanders asked. “Did Lindsey talk about the fact that we have, in South Carolina and all over this country, tens of millions of workers working for starvation wages? Did he talk about a corrupt political system in which billionaires today can start a super PAC—and I guess you have some familiarity with super PACs, they help fund your campaign—who can spend unlimited amounts of money to elect candidates.”

“I didn’t hear Lindsey talk about the crisis of climate change,” the Vermont senator continued. “Do you have a concern that two people own more wealth than the bottom 42%? … Bottom line is: we are moving toward oligarchy. And if we don’t stand up and say that we need a government that represents working people and the middle class, I worry very much about the future of this country.”

Watch:

Sanders, who has appeared on Fox News several times in recent years to counter right-wing narratives and make the case for a progressive agenda, did so again during Monday’s event, forcefully dismissing Graham’s attempt to cast basic and popular policy objectives as “full-on socialism” and detached from public sentiment.

“The policies that I advocate are taking place all over the world,” countered Sanders, who identifies as a democratic socialist. “I would like to ask Senator Graham: Do you think raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour is socialistic? Do you think doing what every other major country on Earth does—guaranteeing healthcare to all people—is socialistic? Do you think expanding Medicare to cover dental care is quite socialistic?”

“I think we should increase benefits for Social Security recipients by lifting the cap… is that socialistic?” he continued. “Is making sure that all of our kids are able to get a higher education, is that socialistic? Is saying that three Wall Street companies should not control $20 trillion in assets, and we gotta break them up, is that socialistic?… Take a look at the issues we are fighting for: on every one of those issues, Lindsey, guess what, the American people support me, not you.”

Yes, Trump supporters are victims of the Big Lie scam. No, you don’t have to feel sorry for them

One of the bigger revelations during the Monday House hearing about the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol is that the scope of the House committee’s investigation had grown beyond Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the election. We learned on Monday that they also have evidence that Trump used his coup as a means for financial fraud.

During the entire two and a half months between Election Day and Jan. 6, Trump was shaking down his gullible supporters for cash that he claimed would help fight “election fraud.” Those funds, however, largely appeared to go into the pockets of Trump and his allies. 

“The big lie was also a big ripoff,” declared Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., during her opening remarks on Monday. She argued that the campaign used “false claims of election fraud to raise hundreds of millions of dollars from supporters who were told their donations were for the legal fight in the courts.” In reality, however, most the money — which is estimated to be a cool $250 million — went into a super PAC. From there, it was redirected into the coffers of Trump himself and towards various friends and family members

RELATED: Jan. 6 committee makes the case clear for Merrick Garland: Failure to prosecute Trump is political

In response to these revelations, there’s been a standard response from the anti-Trump majority: Couldn’t have happened to nicer people.

Salon started covering the way Trump uses the Big Lie to grift his followers mere days after the 2020 election, so I was used to seeing this reaction. And they will get no argument from me. One really can’t deny that Trump’s supporters had bad motives and that no one should feel sorry for them. The problem is that the vast majority of Trump’s supporters will never admit that they’ve been had. So it’s up to the rest of us to insist that this large-scale cash grab be taken seriously and investigated as a potential crime. 

“The big lie was also a big ripoff.”

The good news is this: Demanding justice doesn’t require sympathizing with victims. Fraud is fraud, no matter how repulsive the victims may be.


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


There’s one way to view Trump’s “fundraising” schemes during his coup effort, which is that he snookered gullible people who sincerely believed that the election was “stolen.” And that may even be true in some cases. The larger — and uglier — truth, however, is this: Trump separated fools from their money by exploiting their worst instincts.

He made racist appeals about voters in Detroit and Philadelphia being “frauds.” Trump’s lawyer Sidney Powell promised to “release the Kraken” and excited the “let’s go Brandon” crowd because they wanted to swindle Joe Biden’s voters out of their victory. A lot of wallets opened up because Trump supporters got caught up in Trump’s self-mythologizing about how he knows how to cheat the system, and that he would be able to leverage that talent toward stealing an election. Implicit in Trump’s many appeals to his followers was that he would, with enough money, be able to overwhelm the courts with lawsuits until they just gave in and let him keep the White House. And it’s no wonder they believed that, as Trump has a long history of abusing the courts with frivolous lawsuits and other resource-wasting tactics to get his way. Trump loves a frivolous lawsuit so much he’s been the plaintiff in thousands of cases. But the presidency is too big a prize to obtain through legal harassment, which is why Trump ended up resorting to siccing a violent mob when his court abuse strategy failed. 

RELATED: Trump’s loss was radicalizing: His promise to “cheat” the system has further deluded his fans

The adage that “you can’t cheat an honest man” has never been truer than when it comes to the GOP base. Indeed, Trump is far from the first to figure out that Republican voters are easy to grift. Historian Rick Perlstein wrote the classic “The Long Con” for the Baffler in 2012, which documented how GOP voters have long been targeted with things like mail order scams. People like Alex Jones make most of their money off hawking snake oil marketed with false promises of vitality and, uh, “enhanced” masculinity. Now you can add cryptocurrency to the pile, as well as the industry of “alternative” COVID-19 treatments like ivermectin.  

Trump separated fools from their money by exploiting their worst instincts

Defrauding odious people is just being a smart criminal, precisely because it’s so hard to see the marks as victims. There was a great deal of concern over this during the fraud trial for Elizabeth Holmes of Theranos since Holmes tended to steal from absolute monsters. She absconded with money from Rupert Murdoch and the DeVos family and snookered people like Henry Kissinger, all of which is so funny that you almost want to root for her. That’s why the prosecution focused so heavily on the patients who got bad test results from the faulty Theranos devices, even though the trial was about investment fraud and not medical malpractice. They understood that securing a conviction is a lot harder when people see the victims as people who had it coming in the first place. 


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


Charges for fraud are appealing from a potential prosecution angle since it’s about money, which creates a paper trail to present in court. The problem, which the Jan. 6 committee members seem aware of, is that “Trump steals from people who deserve it” isn’t the most politically scintillating pitch. That’s likely why they’re focusing on outrages like Kimberly Guilfoyle getting $60,000 to speak for two minutes at the Jan. 6 rally/riot incitement.

The people Trump pumped for cash aren’t exactly innocent, but it’s important to remember he and his buddies are even worse. 

The main thing is keeping an eye on the prize: Saving democracy from Trump’s continuing machinations. Voting rights can’t get past the filibuster and voter enthusiasm for Democrats is going to be hard to drum up in the current economic situation. So it’s increasingly clear that the most viable path — perhaps the only path — to preventing another coup is for the Justice Department to start imposing legal consequences on Trump and his allies. If fraud prosecutions are the way to make that happen, then so be it. We don’t need to pity Trump’s marks in order to believe he should still see the inside of a jail cell for defrauding them. 

RELATED: Trump PAC dupes donors into giving twice with sneaky fundraising tactic

“I don’t know”: Ohio governor stumped when asked if his bill to arm teachers will stop shootings

Ohio Governor Mike DeWine (R) on Monday announced that he had signed a bill into law that would allow teachers to be armed in schools. But when a reporter questioned DeWine during a press conference if the legislation effectively addresses calls from the public to take meaningful action to reduce gun violence after the 2019 mass shooting at Ned Peppers Bar in the Oregon District of Dayton, DeWine was unable to provide a concrete response.

“After the Dayton shooting, members of the crowd said ‘do something.’ Do you feel what you’re doing today is exactly what those people intended you to do?” the journalist asked.

“I don’t know,” DeWine replied. “My job is to try to do things and we have done – and I outlined them for you a moment ago – we have done a number of different things.”

DeWine then abruptly changed the subject.

“What I didn’t mention, for example, another one that we have done without legislation, another thing that we have done is by talking to local law enforcement, we’ve gone from about 10 percent of the outstanding warrants that are entered into the national database to 85 percent,” he said.

Watch below via Heartland Signal:

National Public Radio noted that “the new law dramatically reduces the amount of training a teacher must undergo before they can carry a gun in a school safety zone. Instead of more than 700 hours of training that’s currently required, school staff who want to be armed would get training that ‘shall not exceed’ 24 hours, House Bill 99 states.”

NPR also pointed out that “both the Ohio Federation of Teachers and Ohio Education Association urged DeWine to veto the bill, saying it is ‘dangerous and irresponsible’ to put more guns in schools in the hands of people who aren’t adequately trained.”

The organizations said in a joint statement that “House Bill 99 will make Ohio’s students less safe in their schools.”

Additional opposition to House Bill 99 became apparent in a torrent of criticism on social media.

Skepticism swirled around the implementation and potential repercussions of House Bill 99.

Mitch McConnell enraged that Democrats want SCOTUS security for “nameless staff that no one knows”

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., on Monday expressed outrage at the House’s unwillingness to pass a Senate-approved bill designed to shore up security for the Supreme Court after a failed assassination attempt against conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh. 

“The version of the Supreme Court security bill that apparently [the Democrats are] going to try to pass on suspension tonight is not going to pass the Senate,” McConnell told reporters this week. “The security issue is related to Supreme Court justices, not nameless staff that no one knows.”

McConnell’s comments come weeks after the Senate passed a bill in May to enhance the Supreme Court’s security detail amid pro-choice protests in the wake of a report that the court would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 landmark law establishing America’s constitutional right to abortion. 

On Monday, the Senate-backed bill did not appear on the House’s schedule, leaving Republicans frustrated by the delay. 

RELATED: Why the right-wing is having a complete meltdown over the Supreme Court’s leaked anti-abortion draft

“All we’re trying to do is give the justices the very same protection that is available to members of Congress,” said Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee. “Capitol police can provide protective details for people who are under imminent threat, but they don’t have the authority in the Supreme Court to do the same thing, and I think this is playing with fire.”

The holdup appears to stem from a Democratic effort to extend the bill’s security provisions to Supreme Court staff as well. 


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


“This issue is not about the justices; it’s about staff and the rest,” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. “The justices are protected; you saw the attorney general even double down on that.”

RELATED: Mitch McConnell demands Democrats rush to pass security bill to protect Brett Kavanaugh

McConnell, for his part, has threatened to block Pelosi’s version of the bill, arguing that its scope is unnecessarily large.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., has likewise said that Pelosi’s reasoning “makes no sense” because it was only Kavanaugh – and not his staff – who was unsuccessfully targeted by 26-year-old Nicholas John Roske last week. Roske, who turned himself into police outside of Kavanaugh’s residence with a gun and a tactical knife, has been charged with the attempted murder of a federal judge.

On Tuesday, Pelosi indicated that the House would approve the Senate-backed bill, a move that would officially end the legislative standoff, according to CNN. At present, Supreme Court justices already have personal security details, but the bill would extend that protection to their immediate families. Supreme Court staffers, meanwhile, are currently under increasing scrutiny from right-wing media and internal investigation to find the source of the Alito leak. 

Read more:

Supreme Court reportedly cracking down on clerks’ cell phones as leak investigation continues

“The place sounds like it’s imploding”: SCOTUS insiders spill more dirt as court hunts for leaker

Anti-abortion zealots target Sotomayor aide as source of leak: Their threats are no joke

“MAGA inc is laughing at you”: House Republican calls out Kim Guilfoyle’s $60,000 payday for Jan. 6

Kimberly Guilfoyle, the girlfriend of Donald Trump Jr.’s fiancée, was paid $60,000 to introduce Donald Trump in a speaking engagement during the “Stop the Steal” rally preceding the Capitol riot, according to CNN.  

Members of the January 6 committee told the outlet that numerous people within the former president’s inner circle personally enriched themselves from the event. 

“We know that Guilfoyle was paid for the introduction she gave at the speech on January 6. She received compensation for that,” Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., told CNN on Monday. “$60,000 for two-and-a-half minutes.” 

Still, she told the outlet, it remains unclear Guilfoyle’s address constitutes any kind of financial crime. “I don’t know,” she explained. “You know, we’re a legislative committee. So that’s, that’s for somebody else to decide. But for example, we know that Guilfoyle was paid for the introduction she gave at the speech. I mean, on January 6, she received compensation for that.”

RELATED: Kimberly Guilfoyle hawks “MAGA” steaks from company stripped of Better Business Bureau accreditation

“I’m not saying it’s a crime,” she added, “but I think it’s a grift.”

A Republican member of the committee also called out Guilfoyle’s payday as a “scam.”

Guilfoyle, Illinois Rep. Adama Kinzinger tweeted, is “so committed to the cause that she took 60K for a two min speech. It’s a scam folks. And MAGA inc is laughing at you.”

twitter.com/adamkinzinger/status/1536682158374457344

News of Guilfoyle’s speaking fee comes as part of an investigation into Trump’s apparent scheme to mislead donors shortly after President Biden won the 2020 election. 

According to investigators, Trump bilked his loyal fanbase out of some $250 million during the two months following his loss by promising to use the money in lawsuits challenging the 2020 election. Instead, the committee said, much of that sum went to his Save America PAC as well as his personal allies, including Guilfoyle. The fund also went to lawsuits challenging various social media platforms over their content moderation policies.


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


“These weren’t rich people,” Lofgren said of Trump’s donors. “They were conned by the president. It was a big lie and it was also a big rip-off.”

https://twitter.com/PoliticusSarah/status/1536424082526416898

Adav Noti, a former associate general counsel at the Federal Election Commission, called Trump’s alleged deceit “dangerously close to fraud.”

RELATED: Kimberly Guilfoyle bragged about raising $3 million for Jan. 6 rally: report

“If a regular charity – or an individual who didn’t happen to be president of the United States – had raised tens of millions of dollars through that sort of deception, they would face a serious risk of prosecution,” she told The Guardian.

Guilfoyle agreed to meet with the committee back in April. According to CNN, the panel subpoenaed her after she abruptly ended a closed-door interview earlier this year. 

Death threats and doxxing: Neo-Nazis target Idaho cops for busting Patriot Front white supremacists

On Monday, The Daily Beast reported that the police department in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho is being bombarded with angry messages — including death threats — after a high-profile mass arrest of the members of the white supremacist group Patriot Front.

The arrests took place over the weekend, after 31 men were caught piled into a rented truck, on their way to a local Pride event where they allegedly were intending to cause a riot. The arrested white supremacists came from at least 11 states around the country, and included 23-year-old Thomas Ryan Rousseau of Grapevine, Texas, believed to be the group’s leader.

“Police Chief Lee White said Monday the department had received 149 phone calls since the arrests, some of which have included death threats,” reported Alice Tecotzky. “About half of the calls were complimentary, White told reporters, ‘and the other 50 percent — who are completely anonymous, who want nothing more than to scream and yell at us and use some really choice words — offer death threats against myself and other members of the police department.’ Some callers have threatened to publish officers’ personal information, such as their phone numbers or addresses, online.”

According to Nick Martin of the independent hate group tracker The Informant, white supremacist activists are already zeroing on on the Coeur d’Alene police department as a target after the arrests took place.

“Neo-Nazis on other social media platforms have started doxxing members of law enforcement in Coeur d’Alene. Names, home addresses, phone numbers and photos are being circulated,” wrote Martin. “One of the members of the Coeur d’Alene Police Department is being described by neo-Nazis as an ‘Anti-American and Pedophile Apologist’ because the arrests prevented the Patriot Front members from allegedly planning to disrupt a Pride event.”

Coeur d’Alene, a town in the Idaho panhandle near Spokane, Washington, is part of a region that has become a notorious hotbed for right-wing paramilitary extremists.

Capitol Police: Republican led Capitol complex tour that “inexplicably grew” the day before Jan. 6

Congressional Republicans have released evidence from Capitol police about a U.S. Capitol tour led by Rep. Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga.

The Georgia Republican brought a group of 12 constituents that inexplicably grew to 15 people into the Capitol complex the day before the Jan. 6 insurrection, but Capitol police chief J. Thomas Manger said an investigation did not reveal any suspicious behavior by the group.

“We train our officers on being alert for people conducting surveillance or reconnaissance, and we do not consider any of the activities we observed to be suspicious,” Manger said in a letter about the tour.

A congressional staffer met the group at 11 a.m. at the entrance to the Rayburn Building, where the U.S. House of Representatives has its offices, and accompanied them to Loudermilk’s office, and the lawmaker then went with the group at 1 p.m. to the Cannon House Office Building and briefly reviewed some exhibits there before leaving alone.

The group stayed in the Cannon House Office Building but did not go into any of the tunnels to the Capitol, where they were not permitted to go without a lawmaker, and police said officers would not have let them in without a congressional escort.

Democratic lawyer warns Trump his 12-page Jan. 6 response rant is “admissible in any future trial”

Former President Donald Trump is being mocked and attacked online after issuing a 12-page statement that is partly a typical Trump rant but follows with a case his campaign has made that questions nebulous things like “ballot stuff” and alleges that because ballots were counted after midnight they’re fraudulent.

As Democratic election lawyer Marc Elias noted, Trump’s lawyers should let him know that statements like these can be used against him in any forthcoming legal proceedings. Typically, lawyers advise their clients to stay quiet and refrain from speaking out.

Former Trump biographer Tim O’Brien pointed out that the statement is perpetuating the “big lie.”

But it was Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., who responded in real-time as the statement came in. According to the fellow Jan. 6 committee member, Trump’s claims about the committee, in particular, are “silly” because the courts have upheld the legitimacy of the committee and its existence.

CNN host Erin Burnett noted that many of the claims cited by Trump are obviously false that even Fox News won’t repeat them.

You can see other comments below:

 

“Drama”: Jan. 6 committee chairman says they won’t refer Trump to DOJ — and Liz Cheney is not happy

Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., the chairman of the House Jan. 6 committee, said Monday that the panel would not make any criminal referrals against former President Donald Trump or others — sparking pushback from other members.

“No,” Thompson told reporters when asked about the prospect of a criminal referral against Trump, according to CNN. “We’re going to tell the facts. If the Department of Justice looks at it, and assume that there’s something that needs further review, I’m sure they’ll do it.”

Thompson argued that the committee doesn’t “have authority” to make criminal referrals.

“That’s not our job. Our job is to look at the facts and circumstances around January 6, what caused it and make recommendations after that,” he said.

The comments sparked a “little bit of drama that we don’t normally see play out in public,” noted CNN Congressional Correspondent Ryan Nobles, who reported the story. Members of the committee quickly pushed back on Thompson’s remarks.

“The January 6th Select Committee has not issued a conclusion regarding potential criminal referrals,” tweeted Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., the committee’s vice-chair. “We will announce a decision on that at an appropriate time.”

RELATED: Jan. 6 committee makes the case clear for Merrick Garland: Failure to prosecute Trump is political

Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., who has repeatedly called for the Justice Department to investigate Trump, also appeared surprised by the comment when asked about it by CNN’s Anderson Cooper.

“You know, I haven’t seen the chairman’s statements,” he told the host. “We haven’t had a discussion about that, so I don’t know that the committee has reached a position on whether we make a referral or what the referrals might be. I thought we were deferring that decision until we concluded our investigation. At least that’s my understanding.”

Rep. Elaine Luria, D-Va., disputed Thompson’s characterization of the committee’s authority.

“Our committee has yet to vote on whether we will recommend criminal referrals to the Department of Justice. If criminal activity occurred, it is our responsibility to report that activity to the DOJ,” she wrote on Twitter.

Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., had a different take, telling CNN that the committee is “less concerned with whether or not there was a specific statutory offense than making clear to the public that there was no rational basis upon which anyone could conclude that (Trump) had actually won the election.”


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


Thompson’s comments are a departure from his previous view of the committee’s role. He told NBC News earlier this year that evidence uncovered by the committee suggests that the “potential for criminal referrals is there.”

“If, in the committee’s review, we find something that the committee and staff feel warrants criminal referral, we will not hesitate one scintilla in making that referral. … We are not shrinking violets,” he said in January.

A spokesperson for the committee similarly told CNN in response to Thompson’s comments that criminal referrals are on the table.

“The Select Committee has no authority to prosecute individuals, but is rather tasked with developing the facts surrounding the January 6th riot at the Capitol,” the spokesperson said. “Right now, the committee is focused on presenting our findings to the American people in our hearings and in our report. Our investigation is ongoing and we will continue to gather all relevant information as we present facts, offer recommendations and, if warranted, make criminal referrals.”

Thompson on Monday, however, argued that the DOJ could simply read the committee’s report.

“It’s a public document. Anybody can have access to it,” he said. “And if they want, after reviewing it, to come back and ask to talk to some of the staff or the members who helped produce the report, I’m sure they will.”

Members of the committee have spent weeks pressuring Attorney General Merrick Garland to investigate Trump. Schiff told ABC News on Sunday that there is “credible evidence” Trump and his team may have committed crimes. A federal judge in March determined that Trump and attorney John Eastman, who helped craft the Jan. 6 strategy, “more likely than not” committed a crime with the scheme. And the committee itself in court filings while seeking Eastman’s records has argued that there is a “good-faith basis for concluding that the President and members of his Campaign engaged in a criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States.”

Still, the DOJ does not need a referral from Congress to investigate Trump or anyone else. Garland on Monday vowed that he and prosecutors overseeing the DOJ probe into Jan. 6 are paying close attention to the committee’s work.

“I am watching, and I will be watching all the hearings, although I may not be able to watch all of it live,” he said. “But I will be sure that I am watching all of it. And I can assure you that the January 6 prosecutors are watching all of the hearings as well.”

Read more:

In remote Ecuador, pandemic health care is stretched thin

Karen Topa Pila looks around the windowless reception area in the small health care station of Hoja Blanca, Ecuador, its pale yellow walls stained with patches of mold. “When did the electricity go out last night?” Topa Pila, a doctor in this remote corner of the country, asks. Her co-workers shrug, throwing worried glances at a small container filled with ice packs. It’s only 8:30 a.m. one morning in December 2021, but outside it’s already over 70 degrees.

Topa Pila closes a cooler containing 52 Covid-19 nasal swabs. “Those tests need to be refrigerated and we only have one fridge, which is exclusively for vaccines,” she says. Her team has nowhere to store the tests, she adds, and so to avoid getting them spoiled in the jungle heat, the clinic wants to use up all of them on the same day. The very next morning, a health care worker is going to take them to the laboratory in the district hospital.

Topa Pila, 25, and her team arrived in Hoja Blanca, a village of 600 located in the heart of Ecuador’s Esmeraldas province, in September 2021. As freshly graduated health care professionals, they all are required to serve an año rural, working one year in a rural community in order to get their professional license or advance into postgraduate courses in medicine. (The Ministry of Public Health implemented the año rural in 1970, and the practice is also common across Latin America.) Topa Pila’s team is the third deployed in Hoja Blanca since the start of the pandemic. The Hoja Blanca station is also responsible for six other communities, made up of mestizos, Indigenous Chachis, and Afro-Ecuadorians — about 3,000 people in total. Some of the communities are so remote that to reach them, the health care workers traverse thick rainforest and then travel by canoe for a whole day.

Ecuador has suffered big losses from the pandemic. In the early months, corpses littered the streets of the country’s biggest city, Guayaquil. By June 2020, the mortality rate from the virus reached 8.5 percent, one of the highest in the world at the time. As of June 5, 2022, the country recorded 35,649 official Covid deaths, although the real count is likely far higher.

Many public health experts agree that Covid-19 has also surfaced deep-rooted systemic problems in Ecuador’s rural health care system. In 2022, Ecuador, the smallest of the Andean nations, reached more than 18 million inhabitants; an estimated 36 percent live in rural communities. As with private health care providers, the country’s public health care system is fragmented, divided among various social security programs and the Ministry of Public Health. There are about 23 physicians and 15 nurses per 10,000 people on average. But only a small portion of the country’s health care professionals — roughly 9,800, by the estimate of John Farfán of the National Association of Rural Doctors — serve the more than 6.3 million rural Ecuadorians.

Although Ecuador is relatively financially stable, many Ecuadorians lack access to adequate medical care and the country has some of the highest out-of-pocket health spending in South America. In rural areas, access to hospitals — as well as clinics like Hoja Blanca’s — is hampered by bad infrastructure and long distances to facilities. Before the pandemic, Ecuador was undergoing budget cuts to counter an economic crisis; public investment in health care fell from $306 million in 2017 to $110 million in 2019. As a result, in 2019, around 3,680 workers from the Ministry of Public Health were laid off. Ecuador has also experienced long-standing inconsistencies in health leadership. Over the last 43 years, the country has had 37 health ministers — including six since the start of the pandemic.

Before the Ministry of Public Health’s selection system placed Topa Pila for her service, she had never been to Hoja Blanca, and it took her more than eight hours to get there. She says that when she first arrived at the modest health care station, she thought, “This is going to collapse.”

Early in the pandemic, Ecuador weathered shortages in everything: face masks, personal protective equipment, medications, and even health care workers. By April 2020, the government had relocated dozens of doctors and nurses from rural areas to urban hospitals and health centers, leaving many communities without medical attention.

At one point, says Gabriela Johanna García Chasipanta, a doctor who spent her año rural in Hoja Blanca between August 2020 and August 2021, her team didn’t even have basic painkillers like acetaminophen or ibuprofen. It was an “infuriating” experience, she says. “I even had to buy medication out of my own pocket to give to some patients, the ones who really needed it and didn’t have the economic means to get it.” Some rural outposts had to resort to desperate DIY solutions during the worst months of the pandemic, says Esteban Ortiz-Prado, a global health expert at the University of Las Américas in Ecuador — jury-rigging an oxygen tank to split it between four patients, for instance, and using plastic sheets to create “isolation tents” in a one-room health center.

The pandemic has strained rural doctors in other ways, too. In 2020 and 2021, Ecuador’s National Association of Rural Doctors received many complaints of delayed salaries, some more than three months late. “There were rural health care workers who were even threatened by their landlords that they were going to be evicted,” says Farfán, a doctor and former association president.

Even under better conditions, remote health care outposts are only equipped to provide primary care. Anything more serious requires referral to the district hospital, which in Hoja Blanca’s case means a 300-mile round trip to the parish of Borbón.

The health administration used to take into account Ecuador’s geographical and cultural diversity and the poor infrastructure in rural areas. But in 2012, the government restructured the system into nine coordination zones that public health experts say no longer follow a geographical logic.”You cannot make heads or tails of it,” says Fernando Sacoto, president of the Ecuadorian Society of Public Health. “This is not just a question of bureaucracy, but also something that has surely impacted many people’s health.”

Although there have also been significant developments in the health care sector in the past 15 years — including universal health coverage and a $16 billion investment in public health from 2007 to 2016 — it mostly focused on the construction of hospitals, says Ortiz-Prado. But the country’s leadership “didn’t pay too much attention” to prevention and primary health care, he adds. “The system was not built to prevent diseases, but was built to treat patients.”

In 2012, the government also dismantled Ecuador’s Dr. Leopoldo Izquieta Pérez National Institute of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine — which was responsible for emerging diseases research, epidemiological surveillance, and vaccine production, among other things. (It was replaced by several smaller regulatory bodies, one of which failed completely, according to Sacoto.) The majority of a nationwide network of laboratories shut down as well. Sacoto and other experts believe that if the government had continued investing in the Institute rather than dismantling it, it would have lessened the severity of the pandemic’s impacts in Ecuador.

Initial plans to track and trace Covid-19 cases faltered; the country had barely any machines to process PCR tests, the gold-standard Covid-19 tests. “During the first days of the pandemic, samples collected in Guayaquil were taken to Quito by taxi,” Sacoto says, because that was the only place PCR tests were being analyzed. But public transportation to rural communities is limited, so even the few rural residents who had access to tests sometimes waited two weeks for test results.

Topa Pila’s team tries to convince everyone they cross paths with — the butcher’s wife, people waiting for the bus, men at the cockfighting arena — to take a Covid-19 test. While the PCR results are faster than they used to be, they still take a week, as one of the health care workers has to personally shuttle the samples to Borbón — a 3-day roundtrip that involves a motorcycle, two different buses, and crossing a river with a shabby ferry. “Up until yesterday, we had Covid-19 rapid tests. Today, the [district] leader took all the tests we had,” says Topa Pila. The district hospital had requested the rapid tests, she adds, because “they’ve run out of tests and they need them.”

Since Hoja Blanca is fairly isolated, the community has had very few Covid-19 cases, and all were mild. Topa Pila fears having any patients in a critical condition, Covid-19 or otherwise, because all she can do is ask the villagers and ferry operator for help with transport. There are no ambulances. “We don’t have oxygen because the tank we have over there is expired and you can’t use it anymore,” she says. “We’ve asked for replacement but nothing has happened.”

The way Topa Pila sees it, it’s a lot to ask of the inexperienced health care workers on their año rural. “We start from zero without knowing anything every year,” she says, recalling that the previous team had already left by the time she arrived in Hoja Blanca. “And all of those patients whose treatments have been supervised by a doctor for a year lose their treatments, because they knew the doctor would come to their house,” she says. “We arrive and don’t know where they live, since as you can see there are no addresses here.” The Covid-19 pandemic has further distanced the rural doctors from their patients, she adds. Between the lockdowns and the coronavirus, other health matters like childhood vaccinations have been put off.

As in other parts of Latin America, the Covid-19 crisis in Ecuador also allowed corruption to fester. Sacoto says he believes the health care sector has become a “bargaining chip” among politicians. “There really are mafias embedded in, for example, public procurement,” he says, because the public procurement system is so convoluted that “only the person who knows how the fine print works benefits.” Between March and November 2020, the country’s Attorney General’s office reported 196 corruption cases related to the Covid-19 pandemic, including allegations of embezzlement and inflated pricing of medical supplies.

Lately, there have been signs of improvement. After taking office in May 2021, the government of Guillermo Lasso has accelerated vaccination efforts against Covid-19, approved a new program to tackle children’s malnutrition, and announced a Ten-Year Health Plan to improve health equity.

Sacoto says he remains skeptical whether these plans will translate to concrete and lasting actions. A good start would be decentralizing the health care system by building more rural clinics, he says, which could build up a network for preventative care for everything from childhood malnutrition to future pandemics. Ortiz-Prado says the country should better integrate its fragmented health care systems to make it easier for patients — and their records — to move between them when needed. And it needs to improve the working conditions and salaries of rural health care workers to make the work more appealing, Farfán says, while also creating more permanent positions focused on rural communities. There is a “lack of concern, lack of budget,” he says, adding, “It’s a vicious circle, and sadly, governments are trying to apply Band-Aid solutions for the health issues here.”

But all of that is in the future. Now, back at the Hoja Blanca health care station, the lights flicker back on in less than a day. The vaccines in the fridge are safe. But the 52 Covid-19 tests are still at risk: A health care worker must take the cooler to the lab in Borbón. There were heavy rains the night before, though, and water levels haven’t dropped enough for the river ferry to restart operations. It’s just the first leg of what will ultimately be a 13-hour journey, and the icepacks are quickly melting amid the balmy equatorial heat.


Kata Karáth is an Ecuador-based freelance journalist and documentary filmmaker covering science, environment, and indigenous issues.

This reporting project was produced with the support of the International Center for Journalists and the Hearst Foundations as part of the ICFJ-Hearst Foundations Global Health Crisis Reporting Grant.

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

“Jesus, guns, babies”: Religious violence is now at the core of the Republican Party

At the tail end of last week, Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado took the stage at the Charis Christian Center’s Family Camp Meeting. The event claims that, “you will hear God’s Word shared through speakers who have proven God’s Word,” and follows the speakers’ list with Acts 2:17-18: 

And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams; even on my male servants and female servants in those days I will pour out my Spirit, and they shall prophesy.

The apocalyptic context notwithstanding, Boebert’s talk made quite a splash because of her invocation of Psalm 109:8 in the context of praying for President Biden — “May his days be few and another take his office” — before laughing at the cheers of the crowd. This is certainly not a new use of that text by the GOP — Sen. David Perdue of Georgia invoked it against Obama in 2016, and it became an anti-Obama slogan featured on bumper stickers. With the passage divorced from its full context, people can laugh — but Psalm 109 is a war psalm, calling for the death of the man in question, with 109:9 reading “Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow.” And that’s the point: As with so many aspects of contemporary Christian nationalism, give the line people can nod along to, and hold back the violent context. This is a prayer for the death of the president, and it is one we can honestly say has become normal for Republicans to use about Democratic presidents.

Maybe that’s a big enough problem that we should acknowledge it not just as a fringe phenomenon, but as part of the core problem of the contemporary, MAGA-infused GOP.

RELATED: From the Pilgrims to QAnon: Christian nationalism is the “asteroid coming for democracy”

Of course, Boebert has gone much further than prayers against the president. She met with organizers of the Jan. 6 coup attempt beforehand. She tweeted the locations of lawmakers, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi, as insurrectionists were breaking into the Capitol. Like Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, Boebert and her family have posed for Christmas cards with AR-15-style weapons, with all of the problematic associations of the birth of Jesus of Nazareth with weapons designed for combat. These things — Jesus, guns and, with family photos, babies — are in fact pillars of the Christian nationalist branch of the GOP.

Georgia candidate Kandiss Taylor called fellow Republican Brian Kemp “Luciferian” and defined the First Amendment as “our right to worship Jesus freely — that’s why we have a country.”

Kandiss Taylor’s failed Republican gubernatorial primary campaign in Georgia was incredibly instructive on where the GOP now stands. Her campaign bus, which literally had “Jesus, Guns, Babies” emblazoned on the side, was just the most overt aspect of her Christian nationalist campaign. She told followers to pray for good sheriffs and said that corrupt ones would be executed for treason, strongly implying her belief in the extremist “constitutional sheriff” doctrine, which holds sheriffs are arbiters of what the law is in their counties, not enforcers of it. She said at one campaign rally, “We’re gonna do a political rally and we’re gonna honor Jesus. They’re not gonna tell us ‘separation of church and state.’ We are the church! We run this state!” — an aggressively Christian nationalist idea. Taylor called Gov. Brian Kemp’s administration a “Luciferian regime,” said that as governor she would release an executive order against the “Satanic elites,” and vowed to tear down the “Satanic” Georgia Guidestones.

Taylor even championed Native genocide, saying, “The First Amendment right, which is our right to worship Jesus freely — that’s why we have a country. That’s why we have Georgia. That’s why we had our Founding Fathers come over here and destroy American Indians’ homes and their land. They took it.” And, of course, she champions the Big Lie, saying on Twitter, “We are in a spiritual war … it’s God versus Satan. If GA goes down, if we let them steal the election from us .. we’re gonna steal it back if we have to.” That carried over to her own loss — despite losing the primary by 70 points, she refused to concede


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


We might well ask: So what? Taylor was defeated by a staggering margin, as were numerous other Christian nationalist candidates. Rep. Madison Cawthorn, for example, lost his primary race in North Carolina after the Republican establishment turned on him. Idaho Lt. Gov. Janice McGeachin embraced extremism, appearing with militia members in photo ops, administering oaths to them reserved for the state military, and appeared on video at the America First PAC meeting, saying, “God calls us to pick up the sword and fight, and Christ will reign in the state of Idaho.” She lost by 20 points. The Republican candidate for secretary of state in California, Rachel Hamm, said she decided to run for office because she was a prophetic dreamer, and because her youngest son, “a seer,” had found Jesus in the closet where she prays, holding a scroll telling her to run. She also lost and then claimed fraud, tweeting, “When you’ve fought the good fight, had an honest contest & lost, that’s when you concede. So, in my case, there will be no concession. Stolen elections=stolen Republic.”

And then there those who are still running. Greg Lopez, a GOP gubernatorial candidate in Colorado, believes in a blanket ban on abortion, rejects climate change, has said that the “educational system has now been converted into state indoctrination centers” and is a proponent of the Big Lie. He appeared, alongside a range of conspiracy theorists and far right figures, at the Western Conservative Summit at the beginning of the month. And he is not shy about his negative views of the LGBTQ community, a common theme among GOP candidates. 

Mark Burns in South Carolina, for example, was an early Trump supporter in 2016. He’s an evangelical minister, a conspiracy theorist and pastor at the Harvest Praise & Worship Center. He’s running for Congress in the state’s 4th congressional district, and his platform reads like a grab bag of right-wing ideas: 

  • Our right to bear arms is INHERENT, given to us by God almighty — NOT by any man;
  • If we don’t fix these elections NOW, America will be lost. Without open, honest, transparent elections, no other issue matters;
  • Life begins at conception;
  • Marriage is defined as between one man and one woman;
  • Critical Race Theory is Communist, anti-white Racism;
  • Vaccine and mask mandates are medical tyranny, and have no place in America;
  • The Pelosi budget opens the door wide open to full-blown communism.

And while these may sound like wild ideas, they’re nothing compared to what Burns says. He has called for reviving the House Un-American Activities Committee — yes, the infamous Red-hunters of the 1940s — to investigate LGBTQ “indoctrination,” which he calls a national security threat, saying that anyone engaged in it (or in gun control) should be tried for treason, and executed. Burns is literally calling for reviving the “lavender scare,” which has a certain evil logic because that, in essence, is where Christian nationalists have settled in the culture wars: anti-trans legislation, anti-LGBTQ rallies and attacks, and pushing to re-criminalize sexual minorities.

One South Carolina candidate literally wants to bring back the anti-LGBTQ persecution of the “lavender scare,” which has a certain logic: That’s where Christian nationalists have landed in the culture wars.

The Jesus part is obvious. The guns have been covered, be it Pennsylvania gubernatorial candidate Doug Mastriano’s links to the apocalyptic Rod of Iron Ministries or the marketing of AR-15-style guns as sacred weapons. But babies may be the most important part of it. Attacks on the LGBTQ community must be understood in the context of right-wing ideas about sexual purity and a full-blown mania for forced birth legislation. Anti-abortion laws, attacks on contraception and attacks on sexual minorities are all part of a Christian nationalist assault on the nation. Movements like Quiverfull, taken from Psalm 127, have a number of political aspects alongside a belief system that shuns birth control and believes God will give them the right number of children. They literally believe that whoever has the most babies wins, and see that as the fundamental political and spiritual battle. One Quiverfull-affiliated author has said:

It is the womb that conceives and nourishes the “godly seed” who will come forth to be the light in the darkness and who will destroy the works of Satan in this world. God is looking for an army. … The womb is a powerful weapon against Satan. Some women fear to bring babies into this evil world, but this is one of the greatest reasons for having children — to be the light in this dark world!

Quiverfull is a Christian patriarchy movement, not only pushing female submission to husbands and fathers, and eschewing education and contraception to win the culture war — as Salon reporter Kathryn Joyce has detailed in her book “Quiverfull: Inside the Christian Patriarchy Movement” — but also contributing to the protection of sexual predators in church communities and vigorously promoting the anti-abortion and forced birth laws being passed around the country

I would also suggest, rather forcefully, that Christian patriarchy and Christian nationalism are linked to the “great replacement” theory, the deeply racist and xenophobic notion that nonwhite people are being brought into Western countries to “replace” white voters, in order to further a specific political agenda, leading to the supposed extinction of white people. As is well understood, this delusional ideology has fueled multiple massacres, including the mass shooting in Buffalo in May and earlier mass shootings in El Paso, Pittsburgh and Christchurch, New Zealand. Forced-birth laws and abortion bans are also part of this perceived demographic war, part and parcel with the spiritual battles Christian nationalists believe they are fighting and the very real stockpiling of arms, association with militia groups and opposition to government. PRRI’s August 2021 survey shows that “great replacement” ideas are growing in evangelical circles, and have only become more mainstream since then. 

Religious violence is the bedrock of Christian nationalism, and Christian Nationalism is becoming the bedrock of the contemporary Republican Party. Forced birth laws, anti-LGBTQ legislation and the “great replacement” theory are all forms of violence, and all but certain to fuel the spread of more lethal violence. is violence. “Jesus, Guns and Babies” may seem like a laughable slogan, stripped of context. But it isn’t funny at all. 

Read more on Christian nationalism and the far right:

A month after Buffalo: Is white America ashamed — or has it already forgotten?

On May 14, an avowed white supremacist killed 10 Black people at a supermarket in Buffalo. If that evil act has not precisely been forgotten, it has been all but washed away by the onrushing torrent of the news cycle. For Black people, Buffalo offered one more example of existential terror, one more illustration that Black people in America cannot safely do the most mundane things without facing the danger of racist violence.

The alleged murderer shouted racial slurs while using his AR-15 assault-style rifle to kill Black people while they shopped for groceries. He attempted to livestream the massacre as a kind of white supremacist snuff film. The killer also transformed his assault-style rifle into a totem and fetish object: It was inscribed with the names of other white supremacist terrorists whose deeds he admired and was now imitating. 

The apparent Buffalo shooter wrote a so-called manifesto, a 180-page document where he offered his explanation for the “reasoning” behind his mass murder: He claimed he was trying to “protect” the “white race” from “extinction” or “annihilation” by Black and brown people. Nothing about these claims was new; the document was a rehash of boilerplate white supremacist thinking, decades or centuries old.

RELATED: Buffalo: This is where Donald Trump’s race-war fantasies lead

As I argued in an earlier essay at Salon, the Buffalo shooter’s manifesto channeled, almost verbatim, the types of language and beliefs circulated on an almost daily basis by Fox News, Donald Trump, numerous leading Republicans and the “conservative” movement and white right more generally:

[It] reads like a script from Tucker Carlson’s Fox News show. That is not a coincidence. Carlson and other Fox News personalities are radicalizing their viewers into white supremacy and other forms of right-wing political extremism. The process is strikingly similar to the radicalization process used by ISIS as it recruits and indoctrinates its followers into committing acts of Islamic terrorism.

The white supremacist “great replacement” conspiracy theory is not “stupid” or “silly” or any of the other dismissive adjectives used by too many liberals and others to minimize its power. In various forms, the white supremacist “great replacement” conspiracy theory has shaped the modern world through colonialism, imperialism, genocide, chattel slavery, pogroms, the theft of wealth and resources and other racial projects that have directly or indirectly caused the deaths of tens of millions of nonwhite people around the world. 

Don’t call the “great replacement” theory stupid or silly. Don’t minimize its power. In various forms, it has shaped the modern world.

In his book “‘Exterminate All the Brutes’,” Sven Lindqvist famously observed: “Everywhere in the world where knowledge is being suppressed, knowledge that, if it were made known, would shatter our image of the world and force us to question ourselves — everywhere there ‘Heart of Darkness’ is being enacted.”

Within less than a month, the Buffalo massacre has largely been forgotten by America’s mainstream news media, white opinion leaders, and the white public as a whole. White America is entirely too comfortable with Black and brown people’s misery, pain and death — and has used it as the scaffolding for a larger culture of cruelty, oppression and exploitation.

In a recent essay for ScheerPost reprinted at Salon, Chris Hedges observes:

White people built their supremacy in America and globally with violence. They massacred Native Americans and stole their land. They kidnapped Africans, shipped them as cargo to the Americas, and then enslaved, lynched, imprisoned and impoverished Black people for generations. They have always gunned down Black people with impunity, a historical reality only recently discernible to most white people because of cell phone videos of killings. …

Historian Richard Slotkin calls our national lust for blood sacrifice the “structuring metaphor of the American experience,” a belief in “regeneration through violence.” Blood sacrifice, he writes in his trilogy “Regeneration Through Violence: The Mythology of the American Frontier,” The Fatal Environment: The Myth of the Frontier in the Age of Industrialization” and “Gunfighter Nation: The Myth of the Frontier in Twentieth-Century America,” is celebrated as the highest form of good. Sometimes it requires the blood of heroes, but most often it requires the blood of enemies. This blood sacrifice, whether at home or in foreign wars, is all too often racialized.

Has the Buffalo massacre led to a collective reckoning or great awakening for white America, finally willing to purge its racism and its allegiance to white supremacy? It has not. In post-civil rights America — especially since the rise of Trump — we no longer hear the pretense that we need a “national conversation on race,” in Barack Obama’s famous phrase. For many Republicans and Trump followers, overt white supremacy and racial authoritarianism have been mainstreamed, franchised and laundered into something positive and noble in the alternate reality of MAGA World.

Did the massacre in Buffalo (and the massacre of children only days later in Uvalde, Texas) force a sane response to America’s sick gun culture, where an 18-year-old person can buy assault rifles and other weapons of de facto mass destruction but cannot buy an alcoholic drink? By no means.  


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


We may see some modest gun reforms emerge from Congress, but they will change little. The gun industry, the NRA, Federalist Society judges, right-wing interest groups and organizations, the small proportion of white men who own the vast majority of guns in America, the Republican Party and the right-wing “Christian” churches have the American people in a literal death grip.

Did Republicans and Trump supporters feel shame and disgust about themselves when they learned that the terrorist who killed 10 black people in Buffalo shared their delusional beliefs about white people being “replaced” or “oppressed” in America? Of course not. If anything, the Buffalo attack appears to have reinforced their commitment to protecting white privilege and white power by any means necessary.

new Yahoo News/YouGov poll conducted from May 19 to May 22, only days after the Buffalo killings found that 61% of Trump voters believed in the central claim of the “great replacement” theory that “a group of people in this country are trying to replace native-born Americans with immigrants and people of color who share their political views.” Fewer than one in four Trump voters disagreed with that statement. Virtually identical majorities of both Republicans and Fox News viewers (54% and 53%, respectively) agreed with the claim.

According to this poll, almost three-fourths of Trump voters and more than 60% of Republicans believed the fantastical claim that “discrimination against white people has become as big a problem as discrimination against Black people in the U.S.” 

Did conservatives feel ashamed or disgusted to learn that the Buffalo terrorist shared their delusional beliefs about white people being “replaced” or “oppressed”?

There is no substantive evidence to support such beliefs: White people control every major social, economic and political institution in America. Other research has repeatedly shown that white victimology is highly correlated with support for Trump, other types of anti-Black and anti-brown racial animus, and “old-fashioned” racism and bigotry as well.

Large majorities of Trump supporters and Republicans (69% and 66% respectively) reported that they were either very or somewhat concerned that “native-born Americans are losing economic, political, and cultural influence in this country to immigrants.”

Social scientists have repeatedly shown that a belief in the “great replacement” theory and its associated claims is also connected to support for right-wing political violence, racial authoritarianism, fascism, conspiracy theories and other anti-democratic ideas and behavior. Another new poll, this one conducted in April by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and Tulchin Research, found that while a plurality of Americans had “a positive view of the country’s changing demographics,” that was not true for Republicans, “a majority of whom viewed those changes not only negatively, but as a threat to white Americans”:

And a large majority — 67% — believe the country’s demographic changes are being orchestrated by “liberal leaders actively trying to leverage political power by replacing more conservative white voters.”

That belief was also “correlated with other conspiratorial beliefs”: 

Over three-quarters of those who believe the 2020 presidential election was “fraudulent, rigged and illegitimate” also at least somewhat agree that liberals are replacing conservative white voters, while 75% of those who believe the government is using the Jan. 6 insurrection to justify the political persecution of conservative Americans also agree with the replacement conspiracy….

Right-leaning Americans are more likely to view movements aimed at building an equitable society, including feminism and the Black Lives Matter movement, as threatening. Many believe that elements of today’s political environment — including the 2020 racial justice protests and demographic changes — unfairly malign or threaten white people. This is combined with pervasive distrust of democratic institutions and feelings that more conservative Americans are being persecuted by the government and the political left. 

With the beginning of televised public hearings by the House Jan. 6 committee, this finding is especially noteworthy:

While each side views the other as similarly threatening, Republicans rank “extremists in the Democratic Party” as the most pressing threat facing the country, while Democrats believe the top three threats, in descending order, are Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump and extremists in the Republican Party. … When asked whether they believed that “some violence might be necessary to protect the country from radical extremists,” 41% of Republicans agreed, compared to 34% of Democrats and 29% of independents. Over half of Republicans say the country seems headed toward a civil war in the near future, compared to 39% of Democrats.

This new polling data reinforces once again that today’s Republican Party (along with the larger “conservative” movement) has become the world’s largest white supremacist and white identity organization. Based on its increasing support for right-wing political violence, the Republican Party is now a de facto terrorist organization as well.

Whatever nomenclature that is used to discuss the “great replacement” white supremacist conspiracy theory, its core tenets are simple and predate the founding of the United States. In that sense, Donald Trump’s slogans about “America first” or making America “great again” are just restatements of the old principles of herrenvolk democracy with its “white freedom”, “white power” ideologies and Chief Justice Roger Taney’s infamous decision in the Dred Scott case that Black people had “no rights which the white man was bound to respect.” 

According to that worldview and white racial logic, America is first, foremost and most fundamentally a white man’s (and white woman’s) country. Everyone else is just a guest. White supremacy may put on different robes and masks. It may wear suits and ties, dresses and pantsuits, chinos and polo shirts. But it remains a constant in American history. 

Read more on the Buffalo massacre and the threat of political violence:

Jan. 6 committee is spectacle taking the place of politics: It will accomplish nothing

The Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol, whose televised hearings began last Thursday, is spectacle replacing politics. There is nothing substantially new in the accusations. The committee lacks prosecutorial power. No charges have been filed by Attorney General Merrick Garland against former President Donald Trump and none are expected. The choreographed hearings, like the two impeachment trials of Trump, will have no effect on Trump voters, other than to make them feel persecuted, especially with more than 860 people already charged (including 306 guilty pleas) for their role in storming the Capitol. The committee echoes back to Trump opponents what they already believe. It is designed to present inaction as action and substitute role-playing for politics. It perpetuates, as Guy Debord writes, our “empire of modern passivity.”

The committee, which most Republicans boycotted, hired James Goldston, a documentary producer and former president of ABC News, to turn the hearings into engaging television with slick packaging and an array of pithy soundbites. The result is, and was meant to be, politics as reality television, a media diversion that will change nothing in the dismal American landscape. What should have been a serious bipartisan inquiry into an array of constitutional violations by the Trump administration has been turned into a prime-time campaign commercial for a Democratic Party running on fumes. The epistemology of television is complete. So is its artifice.

RELATED: Elegy for a lost America: Will the Jan. 6 committee really change anything?

The two established wings of the oligarchy, the old Republican Party represented by politicians such as Liz Cheney, one of two Republicans on the committee, and the Bush family, are now united with the Democratic Party elite into one ruling political entity. The ruling parties were already in lockstep for decades on the major issues, including: war, trade deals, austerity, the militarization of police, prisons, government surveillance and assaults on civil liberties. They worked in tandem to pervert and destroy democratic institutions on behalf of the rich and corporations. They desperately work together now to stave off the revolt by enraged and betrayed white working men and women who support Donald Trump and the far right. 

Committee members cloyingly seek to sanctify themselves and their hearings by holding up the Constitution, democracy, the Founding Fathers, due process, the consent of the governed and the electoral process.

Bennie Thompson, chairman of the committee, talked about “domestic enemies of the Constitution who stormed the Capitol and occupied the Capitol, who sought to thwart the will of the people, to stop the transfer of power.” Liz Cheney called the Capitol “a sacred space in our constitutional republic.”

Bennie Thompson and Liz Cheney didn’t discuss how the “will of the people” has been subverted to serve the billionaire class, or how the “sacred space” of our republic has been invaded by armies of lobbyists.

There was no acknowledgment by committee members that the “will of the people” has been subverted by the three branches of government to serve the dictates of the billionaire class. No one brought up the armies of lobbyists who are daily permitted to storm the Capitol to fund the legalized bribery of our elections and write the pro-corporate legislation that it passes. No one spoke about the loss of constitutional rights, including the right to privacy, because of wholesale government surveillance. No one mentioned the disastrous trade deals that have deindustrialized the country and impoverished the working class. No one spoke of the military fiascos in the Middle East that cost taxpayers over $8 trillion, the for-profit health care system that gouges the public and prevents a rational response to the pandemic, already resulting in over a million deaths, or the privatization of institutions of government, including schools, prisons, water treatment, trash collection, parking meters, utilities and even intelligence gathering, to enrich the billionaire class at our expense.

The gaping hole between the reality of what we have become and the fiction of who we are supposed to be is why spectacle is all the ruling class has left. Spectacle takes the place of politics. It is a tacit admission that all social programs, whether the Build Back Better plan, a ban on assault weapons, raising the minimum wage, ameliorating the ravages of inflation or instituting environmental reforms to stave off the climate emergency, will never be implemented. Those who occupy the “sacred space” of “our constitutional republic” are capable only of pouring money into war, allocating $54 billion to Ukraine and passing ever higher military budgets to enrich the arms industry.


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


The wider the gap becomes between the ideal and the real, the more the proto-fascists, who look set to take back the Congress in the fall, will be empowered. If the rational, factual world does not work, why not try one of the many conspiracy theories? If this is what democracy means, why support democracy? 

The right wing also communicates through spectacle. What were the four years of the Trump presidency but one vast spectacle? Spectacle versus spectacle. The aesthetic of spectacle, as in the dying days of the Roman Empire or Czarist Russia, is all that is left. “Our politics, religion, news, athletics, education and commerce have been transformed into congenial adjuncts of show business,” Neil Postman writes in “Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business.” The current ruling class, blinded by their hubris and pomposity, however, is not very good at it.

The far-right spectacle is more entertaining, even as it accelerates corporate tyranny: Vaccines cause autism, angels exist and a cabal of cannibalistic sex traffickers are trying to destroy Trump.

The far right, which believes vaccines cause autism, angels exist, a cabal of satanic, cannibalistic sexual abusers of children that run a global child sex trafficking ring are trying to destroy Trump, and the inerrancy of the Bible, is far more entertaining, even as it accelerates the solidification of corporate tyranny. If the republic is dead, do you want to watch Joe Biden mumble his way through another press conference or the burlesque of Rand Paul chain-sawing the tax code in half and Ted Cruz accusing Barack Obama of trying to provide “expanded Medicaid” to ISIS? Do you want to wake up to the newest rhetorical outrage by Trump, who when he campaigned for president accused Obama of founding ISIS, suggested Ted Cruz’s father was involved in the assassination of John F. Kennedy, argued that noise from windmills cause cancer and recommended ingesting disinfectant to fight COVID, or pay homage to a set of values long ago discarded by the ruling class for lies, corruption and greed?

In short, since the system has betrayed and fleeced you, why not take it down with the vulgarity and crudity it deserves? Why not be entertained by political arsonists? Why engage in the polite civility and political decorum demanded by those who destroyed our communities, wrecked the nation, looted the U.S. Treasury, oversaw a series of costly military debacles and took away our ability to make an adequate living, as well as our children’s future? 

In 1924, the government of Weimar Germany decided to get rid of Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist German Workers’ Party, or Nazis, by trying Hitler for high treason in the People’s Court. Hitler was clearly guilty. He had tried to overthrow the elected government in the botched 1923 “Beer Hall Putsch,” which, like the Jan. 6 riot, was as much farce as insurrection. It was an open-and-shut case. The trial, however, backfired, turning Hitler into a national martyr and boosting the political fortunes of the Nazis.

The reason should have been apparent. Germany, convulsed by widespread unemployment, food riots, street violence and hyperinflation, was a mess. The ruling elites, like our own, had no credibility. The appeal to the rule of law and democratic values was a joke.

There was a revealing moment in the hearings when Capitol police officer Caroline Edwards, who suffered a concussion during the violence of Jan. 6, related an exchange she had with Joseph Biggs, a leader of the Proud Boys who was indicted, along with four other Proud Boy leaders, for seditious conspiracy in connection with the storming of the Capitol.

The tables started turning, once the — what is now that — the Arizona group — that’s what you said — the crowd with orange hats, they came up chanting “F-U-C-K antifa!” Edwards told the committee. “And they joined that group. And once they joined that group, Joseph Biggs’ rhetoric turned to the Capitol Police. He started asking us questions like, ‘You’ve — you didn’t miss a paycheck during the pandemic,’ mentioning stuff about — our pay scale was mentioned, and, you know, started turning the tables on us.”

That brief exchange highlighted the yawning gap between the haves and the have-nots, which, if not addressed, will turn Trump, his supporters, Biggs, the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers into martyrs.

Congress is a cesspool. Corrupt politicians whore for the rich and get rich in return. This reality, which the hearings ignore, is apparent to most of the nation, which is why the hearings will not bolster the flagging fortunes of the ruling political class, desperate to prevent displacement.

The old ruling class is slated for extinction, not that what follows it will be better. It won’t. But the game of pillage and corruption in the name of sacred democratic values no longer works. A new game is taking its place, one where narcissistic buffoons, who stoke the fires of hate and only know how to destroy, entertain us to death.

Read more from Chris Hedges on war, lies and power:

Trump is backing a full-fledged QAnon extremist in Ohio

In Ohio, much of the focus on former President Donald Trump’s endorsements of Republican candidates has been on “Hillbilly Elegy” author J.D. Vance, who is competing with Rep. Tim Ryan, the Democratic nominee, in Ohio’s 2022 U.S. Senate race. One Trump-endorsed MAGA candidate and GOP nominee in Ohio who hasn’t received nearly as much national attention as Vance is J.R. Majewski, a full-fledged QAnon conspiracy theorist running for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives via Ohio’s 9th Congressional District.

Majewski is hoping to unseat the Democratic nominee, long-time Rep. Marcy Kaptur. If the 43-year-old Majewski managed to defeat Kaptur, it would be a political shocker; the Ohio Democrat was first elected to the U.S. House in 1982. Kaptur, now 75, has the distinction of being the only woman who has been serving in that branch of Congress for almost 40 years.

Kaptur survived the red waves of 1994 and 2010 and was reelected both years. But thanks to gerrymandering, it isn’t out of the question that Majewski — even with his support of QAnon — could win.

The Guardian’s Adam Gabbatt, in an article published on June 13, observes, “This is no quixotic campaign…. The 9th District has been redrawn for 2022, and is now rated as a toss-up by the Cook Political Report, ahead of elections in which Republicans are increasingly hopeful of winning the House and the Senate. If that happens, (President) Joe Biden will face extreme difficulty in passing any meaningful legislation for the rest of his first term.”

Majewski is among the extremists who buys into the Big Lie and doesn’t believe that Biden legitimately won the 2020 presidential election — never mind the fact that numerous recounts confirmed the fact that he did. The Ohio Republican marched with fellow Big Lie promoters in Washington, D.C. on January 6, 2021, although he wasn’t part of the mob who broke into the U.S. Capitol Building.

The Big Lie isn’t the only conspiracy theory that Majewski believes. QAnon has been claiming that the United States’ federal government has been hijacked by an international cabal of pedophiles, child sex traffickers, Satanists and cannibals and that Trump was put in the White House to fight the cabal.

Majewski, Gabbatt notes, repainted a pro-Trump sign on his front law so that it was changed into a sign promoting QAnon.

“The sign repainting wasn’t Majewski’s only dalliance with QAnon — a baseless right-wing conspiracy theory which has been labeled a potential domestic terror threat by the FBI — and which states, among other things, that a cabal of Democrats and liberals are engaged in child trafficking,” Gabbatt reports. “In a television interview about the sign, Majewski was wearing a QAnon t-shirt — and Media Matters, a media watchdog, documented multiple instances of Majewski posting images and hashtags relating to the baseless conspiracy theory.”

Majewski has also called for red states to secede from the United States. In a video posted on the Periscope app, Gabbatt notes, Majewski said, “I didn’t want to be a hype beast, but I’ve had it in my back pocket to say that every state that went red should secede from the United States. I don’t think it sounds out there.”

Bipartisan “gun deal” slammed for caving to GOP demands while mostly ignoring “the f**cking guns”

A group of 20 U.S. senators announced a deal Sunday on an outline of a bill designed to give the appearance that they are taking meaningful action on gun violence and mass shootings.

But gun safety advocates were quick to point out that the deal mostly ignored guns—and rather focused on those areas that the NRA and their Republican supporters prefer the debate to be: mental health and hardening of schools.

“Today, we are announcing a commonsense, bipartisan proposal to protect America’s children, keep our schools safe, and reduce the threat of violence across our country. Families are scared, and it is our duty to come together and get something done that will help restore their sense of safety and security in their communities,” the group said in a statement on Sunday. “We look forward to earning broad, bipartisan support and passing our commonsense proposal into law.”

The “commonsense” deal doesn’t include any of the key provisions gun safety advocates say are necessary. The proposal has:

  • No ban on semi-automatic weapons
  • No ban on high-capacity magazines
  • No 21 minimum age to buy AR-15-style rifles
  • No universal background checks
  • No safe storage rules at homes
  • No requiring background checks on Internet sales and at gun shows
  • No banning family members purchasing weapons for their kids

Ryan Shead, a disabled veteran, gun control advocate and Arizona State Rep candidate, tweeted: “This bill is a joke! This makes it sound like mental health is the cause for gun violence. It’s the fucking guns! Funding for school safety? It’s the fucking guns! Do better!! Kids are dying.”

 

New report shows Ginni Thomas’ effort to overturn election much bigger than previously reported

Ginni Thomas, the right-wing activist and wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, lobbied far more Arizona state lawmakers than previously known to try to overturn the state’s 2020 election results—a revelation that reignited calls on Friday for Justice Thomas to recuse himself from cases related to the election.

In addition to emailing two state representatives in November and December 2020, calling on them to “choose” electors who would grant former President Donald Trump a victory in the state, Thomas used a platform called FreeRoots.com to call on 27 other state lawmakers to put aside President Joe Biden’s victory. “The Washington Post”, which first reported the news, obtained the emails Thomas sent via Arizona’s public records law.

On November 9, as part of a campaign organized by Every Legal Vote—a group that has supported Trump’s “Big Lie” that the election was stolen from him—Thomas sent an email saying the lawmakers must “stand strong in the face of political and media pressure” and claiming they had the “power to fight back against fraud.”

“The wife of a sitting Supreme Court justice was very much a part of the seditious conspiracy” that culminated in the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol, said Democratic strategist Sawyer Hackett on Friday in response to the new reporting.

Prior to the January 6 rally—which she briefly attended—Thomas also wrote to 22 state House members and one state senator on December 13, a day before they were scheduled to count their votes, warning them to “consider what will happen to the nation we all love if you don’t stand up and lead.”

“Never before in our nation’s history have our elections been so threatened by fraud and unconstitutional procedures,” Thomas wrote.

When the letters to two lawmakers were reported by the “Post” last month, U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) was among the critics who said Thomas’s efforts to keep Trump in office represented a “conflict of interest.”

Thomas’s husband was the lone dissenter earlier this year when the court rejected Trump’s bid to block the release of presidential records regarding the January 6 insurrection.

The Thomases have long claimed that they keep their work separate from one another, but journalist Mark Joseph Stern said Friday, “As obvious as the symmetry between Clarence and Ginni Thomas’ work was three weeks ago, it’s even more glaring now.”

Thomas’s lobbying of 29 state lawmakers to overrule the will of Arizona voters represented “a completely egregious attack on democracy by the wife of a sitting SCOTUS justice,” tweeted Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.).

Friday’s revelations come two-and-a-half months after the “Post” and “CBS News” obtained text messages that Thomas sent to former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows in the weeks following the election, calling on him to “save us from the left taking America down.”

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) issued a “friendly reminder that Ginni Thomas has a government position and absolutely should not,” referring to her position on the Library of Congress Trust Fund Board, to which Trump appointed her.

“Her egregious actions to push the White House Chief of Staff and others to overturn a free and fair election make her a threat to democracy and should disqualify her for any role of public trust at the Library of Congress or anywhere else in government,” said CREW in April.

Arsenal of autocracy? Major weapons makers cash in worldwide — not just in Ukraine

Putting that nightmarish possibility aside, there’s another question that comes to mind (mine, anyway): Does arming Ukraine really make Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, and their cohorts “defenders of democracy”? 

As someone who has followed Washington’s arms production and its global weapons sales for decades now, my answer would be: far from it. At best, those firms are opportunists, selling their wares wherever they’re allowed to, regardless of whether their products will be used to push back a Russian invasion of Ukraine or fuel the world’s worst humanitarian catastrophe of this century in Yemen. 

If they were truly to become part of an “arsenal of democracy,” those militarized mega-firms would have to trim their client lists considerably. I suspect, in fact, that if we were looking at their global sales in a more clear-eyed way, we would have to come up with a more apt term for them entirely.  My own suggestion when it comes to Boeing, Raytheon, General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin, and similar firms would be “arsenal of autocracy.” Let me explain why I think that term would be all too apt.

Missing News on the Weapons Trade

U.S. weapons contractors aren’t exactly fussy about which regimes they send weapons to. Quite the contrary, they seek out as many sales to as many places as the political market will bear.  Those companies also devote considerable time, effort, and (of course) money to expanding their potential markets. They do so in particular by lobbying to lower restrictions on where the U.S. government is willing to promote weapons deals. 

Nowhere is the “arsenal of autocracy” moniker more apt than in the case of the war in Yemen, where the United States has sold tens of billions of dollars of weaponry to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) for their grim intervention there.  The results have been horrific — thousands of civilians killed by indiscriminate air strikes (using weaponry from those very companies) and millions on the brink of famine due to a Saudi-led air and sea blockade that has dramatically reduced Yemeni imports of fuel and other essential commodities.  At this moment, a rare two-month, United Nations-negotiated truce between the Saudi-led coalition and the opposition Houthi rebels is about to end. During that truce, air strikes have been limited, but sadly the blockade has largely continued.  And there is a real danger that fighting may resume on June 2nd, at which point U.S.-supplied weapons will once again be the backbone of the Saudi war effort.

The impact of American arms in Yemen has been anything but abstract.  Groups like the Yemen-based Mwatana for Human Rights, as well as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, have documented the devastating role of bombs produced by Raytheon, General Dynamics, and Lockheed Martin in air strikes that hit, among other civilian targets, a marketplacea wedding, and even a school bus. When Amnesty International surveyed 22 arms makers about their role in enabling these Saudi crimes, many of them refused to answer, and those few that did offered variations on the government-let-me-do-it explanation, seeming to suggest that Washington’s imprimatur absolved them of any responsibility. They also cited customer confidentiality, as if that somehow justified participating in the slaughter of innocents.

The response from Raytheon was a case in point: “Due to legal constraint [and] customer relations issues… Raytheon does not provide information on our products, customers or operational issues.” As Amnesty noted, Raytheon “went on to say that military and security equipment is subject to a government review which includes ‘consideration of international human rights and international law.'”

So much for defending democracy. In recent years, U.S. weapons have flowed to other reckless, repressive regimes like the UAE, a partner-in-crime with Saudi Arabia in the war in Yemen, as well as a serial violator of the United Nations arms embargo on parties in the civil war in Libya. Other rogue regimes on the receiving end of U.S.-manufactured arms include Egypt, where the government of President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi has jailed and tortured human rights and democracy advocates and waged a scorched earth counterinsurgency campaign in the northern Sinai desert, killing civilians and displacing tens of thousands of people; the Philippines, where the regime of President Rodrigo Duterte killed thousands under the guise of an anti-drug campaign, including journalists, labor leaders, and land rights activists; and Nigeria, whose military has become notorious for killing and torturing civilians.  And that’s not an exhaustive list either.

In none of those cases have any executives in the American weapons-making firms expressed the slightest qualms about their role in fostering human rights abuses and fueling destabilizing, unnecessary conflicts.  And don’t hold your breath waiting for questions about such cases the next time an arms industry official speaks to the media.

The Dictators Lobby

Even as arms industry executives take cover behind Washington’s decisions to weaponize repressive regimes, their companies are working hard to bend the rules in their favor when it comes to who’s eligible to receive their products.  Over the past two decades, military firms have spent $2.5 billion on their lobbying efforts while giving $285 million in campaign contributions to key members of Congress, according to Open Secrets, a group devoted to promoting government transparency.  In an average year, the industry employs around 700 lobbyists, or more than one for every congressional representative.

Such industry efforts to influence arms-sales policy are further reinforced by lobbyists for foreign governments that want those weapons.  As my Quincy Institute colleague Ben Freeman has noted, Howard P. “Buck” McKeon, the former chair of the House Armed Services Committee, has worked for Saudi Arabia and Lockheed Martin, both of which have a strong interest in pushing such weaponry out the door with as few questions asked as possible.  Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN), Freedom Forward, and other organizations promoting human rights and democracy in the Middle East have placed operatives like McKeon who advocate for repressive regimes in their “lobbyist hall of shame.” 

One well-documented case study of such lobbying from within the government itself offers a glimpse into how the process works.  Charles Faulkner, a former Raytheon lobbyist, came to serve as a member of the State Department’s Office of Legal Affairs during the Trump administration.  In September 2018, he pressed to give Saudi Arabia a clean bill of health when it came to whether or not it was intentionally targeting civilians in its Yemen air strikes.  He won that argument, which laid the groundwork for a sale of Raytheon precision-guided bombs to the Saudis to move forward.  Then, in the spring of 2019, Faulkner sparked concern among lawmakers over his apparent role in crafting a plan to use emergency procedures to make an end run around Congress when it came to a package of weaponry destined for Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Jordan.  

Detailed examples like that are hard to come by because the arms industry does so much behind closed doors.  It’s important to note, however, that the weapons makers don’t always win the day.  When Raytheon’s then-CEO Thomas Kennedy showed up at the office of Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chair Robert Menendez (D-NJ) to press him to lift a hold on a Raytheon deal with Saudi Arabia, he was rebuffed.  Menendez summarized his response to Kennedy this way to a New York Times reporter:

“I told him I don’t have an ideological problem; I have supported other arms sales.  But you cannot, as a company, be promoting the arms sales to a country that is using it in violation of international norms.  I understand the motivation for profit, but I don’t understand the motivation for profit in the face of human rights violations and civilian casualties.”

In short, lobbying doesn’t always work, which is one reason the industry puts so many resources into it.

 Stemming the Flow of Arms to Autocracies

Despite their lobbying power, weapons makers are facing significant resistance to their efforts to keep the weapons flowing to regimes like Saudi Arabia and the UAE.  During the Trump years, bipartisan majorities voted to end military support for the Saudi armed forces under the War Powers Act and to block a sale of precision-guided bombs to the Kingdom, only to have those measures vetoed by President Trump. 

Representatives Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) and Peter DeFazio (D-OR) will be introducing a new War Powers Resolution in hopes of changing the Biden administration’s policy of continuing to arm Saudi Arabia and the UAE. In doing so, the president and his officials have ignored their earlier criticisms of the Saudi regime and its de facto leader Mohammed bin Salman who launched the war in Yemen in 2015 and was implicated in the 2018 murder of Saudi journalist and U.S. resident Jamal Khashoggi.

There are also bills in the works to “flip the script” on arms-sales decision-making. These would require congressional approval for major sales, thereby preempting the ability of the president to veto efforts to block specific deals.  Such initiatives represent a high-water mark in Congressional efforts to restrict runaway arms sales since the passage of the Arms Export Control Act in 1976, more than four decades ago. Will they succeed in the Ukraine war moment when the weapons industry is riding so high and proclaiming its good deeds all too loudly? 

It’s hard to say since this country has long been working to create and support global arsenals of autocracy.  If the arms industry were truly focused on “defending democracy” on this planet, its firms would have already allowed the above-mentioned reforms to go through without objection, or even, heaven forbid, supported them. The fact that they won’t do so tells you all you need to know about their true intentions in what is for them a genuine gold-rush moment.

“Jurassic World: Dominion” is not a movie. It’s a museum

My brother-in-law summed up “Jurassic World: Dominion” the best. As we stumbled into the sunlight of the movie theater parking lot after seeing the film, he said: “That was a terrible movie. And I enjoyed every minute of it.” 

You don’t go to see a summer blockbuster expecting great art. It is what it is, a popcorn delivery system, a way to hopefully forget the increasingly troubled real world as you sit in some air conditioning (which, of course, is contributing to the problems of the real world – but that’s another story). But you do expect a movie. And “Jurassic World: Dominion” ain’t that. 

It’s a scrapbook with a two-hour, 27-minute runtime, a collection of homages that together add up not to a plot, but to a museum piece  – one that, like popcorn, makes you feel full with empty calories, yet never sated. It’s also the latest in our era of deep nostalgia: terrible, totally forgettable, shallow and a blast (from the past). Despite being a kids’ movie, it’s for aging parents and taps into our longing to go back.

RELATED: Laura Dern, Sam Neill and a “Jurassic” age difference that seems troubling now

“Jurassic World: Dominion” is so forgettable, it’s hard to describe the plot. It’s the third and allegedly final installment in the “World” trilogy, which started in 2015 with Chris Pratt as animal behavior specialist Owen, who has a way with the raptors — they love how he holds up his hand! — and Bryce Dallas Howard as Claire, Jurassic World operations manager, who has the distinction of wearing high heels while being chased by dinosaurs (an Ellie Sattler she is not) and is aunt to some nephews who get lost, as nephews do. 

We get museum pieces. Dioramas of old faces. 

The second film, which “Dominion” is a direct sequel to, “Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom,” (2018) sees Owen and Claire return to that pesky Isla Nublar to rescue some now-feral dinos from the ruined remains before a volcano erupts. The idea is that the creatures will be relocated to a sanctuary, but due to some double-crossing and murder, the dinosaurs come up for sale at an underground auction of creepy millionaires and well-funded mercenaries. Aided by young girl Maisie (Isabella Sermon), the granddaughter of dino visionary John Hammond’s former partner, Sir Benjamin Lockwood, a child who happens to be a clone of her late mother scientist, the dinosaurs get out. They always do. But this time, they get out in Northern California. 

That film has the distinction of making me feel really bad about a fictional brachiosaurus. I’m still not over it, but “Fallen Kingdom” is my favorite of the trilogy, and the long-awaited (and long-plagued) “Dominion” starts with this promising premise: dinosaurs are everywhere. In daily life. In America, like starlings brought over by a Shakespeare fan

And like those birds, the dinos are invasive. They do serious damage to crops (so do some prehistoric-esque locusts in this film), animal and human life.

So many references pepper the soup of “Dominion” that it is less soup, more pepper.

Not enough, though. One complaint about “Dominion” is that weirdly, it doesn’t have a lot of dinosaurs. There are long stretches without them, especially when Owen and Claire go on an “Indiana Jones” adventure (don’t ask). The opportunity for dinos to destroy the world, a la aliens in “Independence Day,” is high, but the film doesn’t take near enough advantage of this. (My audience did cheer when a man on a city scooter was chomped.)

Instead, we get museum pieces. Dioramas of old faces. As in Season 4 of “Stranger Things,” our cast of characters have been separated. Exhibit: Owen, Claire and Maisie in a found family, holing it up, Unabomber-style, in a cabin in the snowy Northern California woods. Pratt is weirdly tan for the snowy winter. Maisie is wanted by evil scientists for “research,” similar to Charlie in “Firestarter” and the kids of “Escape to Witch Mountain” before her, so her adoptive parents (Pratt and Howard — good luck with those therapy bills) try to keep her hidden.

Exhibit: Ellie (Laura Dern) comes to the dig site of Alan Grant (Sam Neill) to ask for his help in some Earth-friendly espionage. Exhibit: Ian Malcolm (Jeff Goldblum) is giving lectures at the Google-like campus of corporation Biosyn where the Hammond/Elon Musk self-appointed visionary of this film (Campbell Scott in a cool jacket) plots under the guise of altruism.

Jurassic World: DominionDr. Ian Malcolm (Jeff Goldblum), Dr. Alan Grant (Sam Neill), Dr. Ellie Sattler (Laura Dern), Claire Dearing (Bryce Dallas Howard), Owen Grady (Chris Pratt), Maisie Lockwood (Isabella Sermon) and Kayla Watts (DeWanda Wise) in “Jurassic World: Dominion” (Universal Pictures / Amblin Entertainment)Our characters will be further separated when Maisie gets kidnapped and Owen and Claire go after her, but they get separated too. At one point, I had to leave the theater to take a child to the bathroom. When I returned, not only was it completely seamless to fall back into the film, but later, my adult movie-going companions could not tell me what I had missed. “Nothing?” they said.

The thing that the museum of “Jurassic” leans hardest into is the homage. These references are Easter eggs hidden for the smallest of children, the ones who might not spot a brightly colored egg unless it is literally handed to them, the ones who need to be carried to the hunt. So many references pepper the soup of “Dominion” that it is less soup, more pepper.

Jurassic World: DominionA baby Nasutoceratops, Dr. Ellie Sattler (Laura Dern) and Dr. Alan Grant (Sam Neill) in “Jurassic World: Dominion” (Universal Pictures / Amblin Entertainment)Ellie is drawn to an ill triceratops. She wears a ring that looks like a copy of Hammond’s amber-headed walking stick. A predator attacks in basically a scene-by-scene recreation of the first “Jurassic Park” and the T-Rex. The T-Rex here turns itself into a logo. You know it. You know it well.

 Maybe we didn’t need to know how Boba Fett escaped the Sarlacc either – only that he did.

Even the Barbasol can makes an appearance, as does the wildly fictionalized dilophosaurus who took Newman out. None of these are subtle appearances, either. These are “hit you over the head like an ankylosaurus tail” references. And the shaving cream can, like our hearts, is for sale.

This Jurassic film occupies a museum mile that also includes the new/old “Top Gun,” “Stranger Things” and ’80s and ’90s novelists like Christopher Pike. That thriller king, whose books I had to hide from my parents when I was a child, is seeing an adaptation in Netflix’s upcoming “The Midnight Club,” perhaps riding on the success of the streaming service’s R.L. Stine trilogy “Fear Street.” And of course, Disney keeps mining “Star Wars” and Marvel like a robber baron.

On one hand, who doesn’t like their beloved characters returning? On the other, it can tarnish the fiction a bit. Did we need to know how the wizards of the “Harry Potter” universe went to the bathroom? No. But maybe we didn’t need to know how Boba Fett escaped the Sarlacc either – only that he did.

The danger of lifting the curtain on the man behind it again and again is that we know how the magic works. And it becomes less magic; it becomes less special or singular every time. When all the magic comes from the past, does it even still shine?

This is supposed to be goodbye for the franchise, and “Dominion” tries to quickly wrap up most of the storylines, including the romance of Ellie and Alan (who make more sense together now that they’re both older and Ellie has had her children, which Alan didn’t want). But tying everything up in neat knots leaves . . . a lot of knots. It also doesn’t leave much for a younger generation to dream about, to wonder about. Although it tries to resolve them, “Dominion” doesn’t expand the stories of the characters. It doesn’t expand much at all.

Jurassic World: DominionDr. Ellie Sattler (Laura Dern) and Dr. Alan Grant (Sam Neill) in “Jurassic World: Dominion” (Universal Pictures / Amblin Entertainment)I attended a screening of “Dominion” in the early evening the day the movie premiered. With the exception of a couple who brought their baby, my child was the only child there. A blockbuster summer film with only one child in the audience? Who is “Dominion” for? Adults.

Despite resembling a slideshow at an elementary school graduation, the movie smashed the box office like an apex predator, earning $143 million its first weekend, as reported by Variety. Look, whatever “Dominion” was, however bad the reviews were (and they are bad, my friends; “It’s a spy movie! It’s a Western! It’s a mess!” reads the CNET review), I was going to see it. So were and are a lot of people my age and older. But will kids? 

It’s almost as if the last few years have been so terrible — from Trump to COVID to increasing mass shootings — we want to forget they ever happened. We want to go back.

We’re into everything old right now, but not into innovating: instead, simply rehashing. This year’s “Firestarter” is a pretty faithful remake, except somehow worse than the original. After the Disney+ “Chip ‘n Dale: Rescue Rangers” film trod with tiny feet on my heart, ’80s and ’90s fare slated for the remake machine include “Escape from New York,” “Flight of the Navigator” (again with the Howard), “Night Court” and “Clue.” Will they be graveyards to nostalgia, like “Jurassic World: Dominion”? 

It’s almost as if the last few years have been so terrible — from Trump to COVID to increasing mass shootings — we want to forget they ever happened. We want to go back. But you can never go back, not again, not home.


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


Hollywood has always leaned heavily into remakes — easier than to write, pay for or to take a chance on than an original story — but “Jurassic World: Dominion” is supposed to be new. It’s fun, it’s cheesy. I enjoyed it (except for the weird and rampant ableism, including a knock on audiobooks), yet despite the valiant efforts of actors like Mamoudou Athie of “Archive 81” as Biosyn protégé Ramsay Cole, it’s nothing original. Nothing new. And as such, it’s forgettable, brittle as a fossil. If this is our goodbye, will we remember it? 

More stories like this

The only vegan macaroni and cheese recipe you’ll ever need

While I think there’s a greater understanding than there used to be about the fact that a vegan diet isn’t just composed of an endless string of undressed salads, one of the things that many folks still worry about when transitioning towards eating less meat and dairy is that they won’t be able to enjoy their favorite comfort foods anymore. 

In my case, I knew that I’d have to find a way to crack the code for making a delicious dairy-free macaroni and cheese. 

Related: Slutty Vegan founder Pinky Cole on creating a Black-owned, plant-based empire

When done right, mac and cheese is the epitome of comfort food. It’s creamy, cheesy and carb-heavy — a trifecta of deliciousness. 

Without the traditional additions of actual cheese and cream, however, it may feel hard to hit the right notes. As such, I’ve spent the last several weeks testing different combinations, from straight vegan shreds melted down in dairy-free milk to more involved sauces built on coconut milk, nutritional yeast and a prayer. 

This iteration combines all the best elements of the test versions — good vegan cheddar, dairy-free cream cheese, oat milk and nutritional yeast — for a velvety, smooth sauce. When mixed with basic elbow macaroni and a toasted Panko topping, the result is peak comfort food that fits your dietary needs. 

***

Recipe: The Best Vegan Macaroni and Cheese

Yields
6 servings
Prep Time
10 minutes
Cook Time
35 minutes

Ingredients

  • 1 pound elbow macaroni (or any short, tube-y pasta); reserve pasta water
  • 4 tablespoons vegan butter 
  • 2 tablespoons flour 
  • 2 teaspoons powdered mustard 
  • 2 teaspoons turmeric powder
  • 1 teaspoon paprika 
  • 1 tablespoon nutritional yeast 
  • 2 cups oat milk (See Chef’s Note)
  • 1/2 cup vegan cream cheese 
  • 12 ounces vegan cheddar, divided
  • 1/2 cup Panko breadcrumbs 
  • Olive oil 
  • Salt and pepper to taste 

 

Directions

  1. Cook the macaroni according to the directions on the package, reserving at least 1 cup of pasta water

  2. Meanwhile, melt the vegan butter in a large pot or Dutch oven over medium heat. Add the flour, powdered mustard, turmeric powder and paprika. Whisk the mixture over medium heat until the resulting paste — called a roux — looks slightly toasted. At this point, the flour won’t taste like just “raw” flour. 

  3. Add the oat milk to the pot and whisk pretty aggressively until no clumps or lumps of flour remain. Allow the mixture to come to a light simmer, whisking consistently, until the sauce thickens.

  4. To the sauce, add 1/2 cup of vegan cream cheese, the nutritional yeast and 6 ounces of vegan cheddar. Whisk, whisk, whisk! (Vegan cheddar sometimes gets a bad rap for not melting as effortlessly as its dairy counterpart, but there are a lot of good brands out there these days. I like Field Roast Chao’s shreds.) Salt and pepper to taste. 

  5. It’s time to add the macaroni to the sauce. If it’s a little too thick, use the reserved pasta water to adjust the consistency. Once it’s fully incorporated and creamy, set the pot aside and preheat the oven to 350 degrees. 

  6. Meanwhile, add a glug of olive oil to a small pan and bring it up to medium heat. Add the Panko bread crumbs to the pan. Season with salt and pepper, then stir over the heat until toasted. 

  7. If you made the vegan macaroni and cheese in an oven-safe pot or Dutch oven, leave it be. If not, transfer it to a baking dish. Top with the remaining 6 ounces of shredded cheddar and the breadcrumbs. 

  8. Bake for 20 minutes, then remove from the oven and serve. 


Cook’s Notes

You can swap out the oat milk with NotMilk, which is probably the closest analog I’ve found to whole dairy milk. Read more about how the dairy-free alternative stacks up against the crowd here


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


More vegan recipes we love: 

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.

Why Rebel Wilson was pressured to come out before an Australian paper could do it for her

Rebel Wilson shared a heartfelt Instagram post last week announcing her relationship with girlfriend Ramona Agruma, revealing she’s queer in the process. While many fans celebrated the announcement especially during Pride, it was marred after an Australian news outlet complained about the actor basically scooping them on her coming-out.

In a now-deleted Saturday story published by the Sydney Morning Herald, columnist Andrew Hornery claimed he had reached out to Wilson and gave her two days to provide him with a comment before he planned on “publishing a single word” about her. She instead posted her own announcement.

“I thought I was searching for a Disney Prince . . . but maybe what I really needed all this time was a Disney princess,” reads the caption.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CelyiLZLHa2/?utm_source=ig_embed&ig_rid=75801419-7802-471e-89ad-8e8f6c8a289d

Her own self-outing presumably beat the Herald to the punch, judging from Hornery’s anger over the post.

“Big mistake,” he wrote about giving her the heads-up on his article. “Wilson opted to gazump the story, posting about her new ‘Disney Princess’ on Instagram early Friday morning, the same platform she had previously used to brag about her handsome ex-boyfriend, wealthy American beer baron Jacob Busch.”

While many believe a person’s outing to be a private and personal decision, Hornery’s language and outrage appears to be treating it as any regular news item for which he believed to have the exclusive scoop. That she decided to use her own platform – and not give confirmation to a reported outlet – also appears to be a point of contention.

He wrote the actor’s decision to not respond to “discreet, genuine and honest queries” was “underwhelming” considering how “bitterly she complained about poor journalism standards” when she sued Women’s Day — and won — for defaming her as a serial liar.

RELATED: Rebel Wilson lied to us about her age and history because we asked her to

Hornery also kept referring to Wilson’s past dating men and posting about her “hunky boyfriend,” somehow implying that it gave her an immunity to queerphobia. 

“Up to now, Wilson had identified publicly as a heterosexual woman,” Hornery wrote. “It is unlikely she would have experienced the sort of discrimination let alone homophobia — subconscious or overt — that sadly still affects so many gay, lesbian and non-hetero people.”

The article quickly garnered hate on social media as critics and Wilson’s fans accused the publication of planning on “outing” her.

“I am so beyond disgusted at this. Turns out Rebel Wilson only came out to avoid being forcefully outed and now that newspaper is pissed at her for ruining their scoop??” tweeted one user. “So they wrote this mess?? I am so angry and so sorry for Rebel, no one deserves this.”

Another user wrote, “In case you were wondering how Pride Month is going, the [Sydney Morning Herald] got in touch with Rebel Wilson to say they’d be outing her in the next few days, so when Rebel came out herself the journalists are throwing a tantrum that she robbed them of an exclusive.”


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


On Monday, Hornery’s inflammatory column was removed and updated with an apology titled, “I made mistakes over Rebel Wilson, and will learn from them.” In it, he wrote his intentions were not to “out” Wilson and he added that as a gay man himself, he is “well aware of how deeply discrimination hurts.

“The last thing I would ever want to do is inflict pain on someone else,” he continued. Hornery also acknowledged that the publication “mishandled steps in our approach.”

Wilson emphasized how difficult the entire fiasco has been for her in a response to a tweet written by journalist Kate Doak.

“So apparently it wasn’t @RebelWilson’s choice to come out . . . The [Sydney Morning Herald]/@theage have admitted to giving her a heads up 2 days in advance that they were going to ‘out’ her,” Doak’s tweet read. “What’s worse, openly gay men at the Sydney Morning Herald were involved in this.”

“Thank you for your comments,” Wilson later replied. “It was a very hard situation but trying to handle it with grace.”

Agruma and Wilson have appeared in public together often, as evidenced by the actor’s Instagram. Her post, however, was the first time she acknowledged the status of their relationship.

More stories you might like:

Having COVID-19 during pregnancy is linked to neurodevelopment delays in infants

Practically since the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic, experts have noticed neurological and mental health symptoms among recovered patients and expressed concern. Much as the polio pandemic of the mid-20th century left a generation of children in wheelchairs and crutches, it is possible that the COVID-19 pandemic could leave a future generation struggling with neurodevelopmental diseases. The challenge, at least when it comes to diagnosing these ailments in younger patients, is that it can take years for experts to build up the necessary body of research.

A new study in the journal JAMA Network Open is now doing its own small part to fill that void — and its news is not promising.

RELATED: Did your at-home COVID test yield a false negative? You’re not alone — here’s what’s going on

Researchers from Harvard Medical School and Mass General Brigham studied 7,772 infants who were delivered during the pandemic. Within that cohort, 222 were born to mothers who had “a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test during pregnancy” — in other words, were exposed to the virus that caused COVID-19. The researchers found that infants whose mothers had this exposure were “more likely to receive a neurodevelopmental diagnosis in the first 12 months after delivery, even after accounting for preterm delivery.” Most of these disorders that were diagnosed involved either movement or speech and language.

The news might seem immediately alarming to those who had COVID-19 while pregnant. But it is crucial to note the limitations to this type of research, many of which have to do with how neurodevelopmental diseases are diagnosed in the first place. For example, autism is not usually diagnosed until a child’s second birthday at the earliest, and children conceived during the early days of the pandemic have not yet reached that milestone.


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


Indeed, experts with whom Salon spoke emphasized that there is no “definitive” link yet. 

“This study is ‘hypothesis generating’ but, as the authors state, their findings do not suggest a definitive link between COVID exposure in utero and neurodevelopmental delays,” Dr. Monica Gandhi, an infectious disease doctor and professor of medicine at the University of California–San Francisco, told Salon by email. “In fact, a mother diagnosed with COVID during pregnancy may experience significant stress, and we saw in the 1918 pandemic that stress experienced by mothers during the pandemic led to significant effects on the children later on in terms of health and socioeconomic attainment.”

“This observation is a serious concern and must be taken seriously,” Dr. Benjamin wrote to Salon, describing it as “another example of how early evidence raises red flags.”

Gandhi argued that a logical conclusion of the study is that “pregnant women should be vaccinated against COVID to avoid COVID infection during pregnancy (since the vaccines are safe and effective), and that physicians should help pregnant women with stress management during pregnancy.”

Dr. Georges Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association, echoed Gandhi’s belief that the study reinforces the public need for widespread vaccination. (Neither Gandhi nor Benjamin were involved in the study.)

“This observation is a serious concern and must be taken seriously,” Benjamin wrote to Salon, describing it as “another example of how early evidence raises red flags. It also gives more evidence on the need for pregnant women to get vaccinated to protect their babies to reduce the risks of preventable developmental problems. We will continue to learn more about these risks with more study.”

Questions about the effect of COVID-19 on a developing fetus have swirled since the onset of the pandemic. Indeed, research reveals that pregnant people face a higher risk of experiencing severe illness from COVID-19 compared to the rest of the population. Likewise, several studies have having COVID-19 during pregnancy increases the risk of preterm birth, stillbirthpreeclampsia, and other complications.

In contrast, vaccination during pregnancy seems to offer a host of benefits. Indeed, previous studies found that being vaccinated while pregnant is very safe. 

For more Salon articles on COVID-19:

“Garbage in. Garbage out”: Trump’s former chief of staff trashes Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell

Donald Trump’s former White House Staff White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney on Monday called members of the former president’s inner circle “garbage” during the January 6 hearings. 

“Trump’s inner circle at the end was … [Rudy] Giuliani, Sidney Powell, Lin Wood, Peter Navarro,” Mulvaney tweeted. “Garbage in. Garbage out.”

twitter.com/MickMulvaney/status/1536372165032878085

RELATED: Ex-chief of staff Mick Mulvaney slams Trump’s “inexcusable” failure after his kid can’t get tested

Mulvaney’s comments come as the select committee investigating the Capitol riot holds its second day of televised hearings, during which new evidence was brought to light surrounding Donald Trump’s failed efforts to overturn the election. 

During the hearings, Bill Stepien, Trump’s former campaign manager, revealed that Trump allies like Giuliani and Powell had fed the former president grandiose, yet baseless, stories of widespread voter fraud with which Trump could create a narrative that the election had been “stolen” by President Biden. 

Mulvaney, a former U.S. representative, was once a staunch Trump backer. In February 2020, Mulvaney claimed it was “absolutely 100% true” that the deep state – a shadowy body of non-elected and influential conspirators – was plotting to undermine Trump’s presidency. After Trump lost the 2020 election, Mulvaney predicted that the former president would concede “gracefully” and will “fight to make sure the results are fair.”

Since then, Mulvaney, who stepped down in the wake of the Capitol riot, has become a vocal critic of Trump.


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


Back in July, the former Trump aide slammed Trump for failing to ramp up COVID-19 testing to his liking, calling the delay “inexcusable.”

RELATED: Mick Mulvaney undercuts Trump defense, admits Ukraine aid was blocked to force investigation

“I know it isn’t popular to talk about in some Republican circles, but we still have a testing problem in this country,” he wrote in an op-ed at CNBC. “That is simply inexcusable at this point in the pandemic.”

And last March, after the former president claimed that the Capitol rioters posed “zero threat” to the Capitol police, Mulvaney trashed Trump’s allegations as “manifestly false.”

“I was surprised to hear the President say that,” Mulvaney said in a CNN interview. “Clearly there were people who were behaving themselves, and then there were people who absolutely were not, but to come out and say that everyone was fine and there was no risk, that’s just manifestly false – people died, other people were severely injured.”

James Patterson laments white male writers are facing racism, and then receives immediate backlash

Bestselling author James Patterson, who currently ranks third on the list of richest — and most successful — authors of all time, caught heat after suggesting that white, male writers are struggling to find work during these trying times.

Patterson voiced his concerns during a Sunday interview with The Times, in which he asserted that white men are facing racism within the film, theater, TV and publishing industries.

″[It’s] just another form of racism,” Patterson said. “What’s that all about? Can you get a job? Yes. Is it harder? Yes. It’s even harder for older writers. You don’t meet many 52-year-old white males.”

It didn’t take long for the “Alex Cross” author to garner backlash on social media, with critics highlighting his astounding wealth and sheer privilege as a white, male author in the publishing world.  

RELATED: James Patterson: “Amazon could actually dedicate itself to saving books and literature in this country”

“James Patterson, one of the richest authors in the world, thinks its hard for 52 year old white men to succeed,” one commenter tweeted. “Because, as we all know, old white men are so poorly represented as writers in film, tv, theatre, and publishing.” 

Per a 2020 New York Times op-ed, 89% of books were written by white writers while a 11% were written by authors of color. And within the film industry, a 2022 Hollywood Diversity Report conducted by the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) found that white, male directors continue to be an overwhelming majority throughout the years — in 2019, 85.6% of directors were white while 84.9% were male. 

“Amending my previous quote to ‘when you’re accustomed to insane privilege, even slightly less insane privilege apparently feels like oppression. (It’s still not.),” wrote American film executive Franklin Leonard. 

“This is why the highest paid writer in the world is a Black woman, right? No? It’s still James Patterson?” authors Daniel Abraham and Ty Franck – who collectively go by the pen name  James S. A. Corey and are known for “The Expanse” novels – also wrote

A separate user tweeted, “For anyone who doesn’t know, James Patterson launched a children’s imprint that published many diverse works, then up and decided one day it would only publish his own work. His whole ‘white authors are suffering thing’ comes after a ‘I want to profit off diversity’ thing.”

In his interview, Patterson also blasted Hachette Book Group, the initial publisher of Woody Allen’s 2020 memoir that backed out of the project in March of that same year after employees staged a walkout and Allen’s estranged son, Ronan Farrow, also disapproved of the move. Allen’s memoir, titled “Apropos of Nothing,” was later published by Arcade Publishing.


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


“I hated that,” Patterson said of the publishing house’s decision. “He has the right to tell his own story.”

He added: “I’m almost always on the side of free speech.”

In addition to being one of the wealthiest authors, Patterson holds the record for the most New York Times best sellers. His most recent publication, “Run, Rose, Run: A Novel,” was co-authored with Dolly Parton and tells the tale of a young singer-songwriter who is trying to escape her dark past.

More stories you might like: