Spring Sale: Get 1 Year, Save 58%

“Inexcusable”: New report reveals GOP lawmakers who sent Jan. 6 texts to top Trump aide

There are 2,319 text messages that former chief of staff Mark Meadows turned over to the House Select Committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack and the events that led up to it.

Until today, the House committee revealed what the messages were, but not all of them were connected to the people who sent them. However, CNN is making more of the details public.

One text message read by the committee in a public hearing was a note saying, “POTUS needs to calm this sh*t down.”

CNN revealed that Rep. Jeff Duncan, R-S.C., was the one behind the message. Duncan was one of many Republican officials who voted to block the Electoral College count on Jan. 6. He has long been a supporter of former President Donald Trump, despite private anger about Trump’s role in the Capitol attack via text message.

Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, who was earlier enthusiastic about trying to block certification but later backed off when he realized the evidence of voter fraud simply wasn’t there, was similarly blunt.

“Fix this now,” wrote Roy in a text to Meadows that was previously revealed publicly.

Former communications aide Alyssa Farah Griffin spoke on The View that she appeared before the committee a second time and that the members had very pointed questions.

“I thought the President could stop it and was the only person who could stop it,” she explained. She’d previously left the White House the month before when Trump began to promote the so-called “Big Lie.”

“When he finally tweeted something hours and hours later, there are reports of people inside the building saying, ‘He’s saying to go home.’ They would have listened to him,” she also said.

“Potus has to come out firmly and tell protesters to dissipate. Someone is going to get killed,” she said to Meadows in another text message.

Former Trump chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, also told Meadows: “Mark: he needs to stop this, now. Can I do anything to help?”

He later told CNN, “I wish someone had responded to my outreach.”

“I thought there was only one person who could stop it and that was the President,” CNN cited a senior Republican. “I don’t know that I can think of another situation that was as grave for the nation, or as affecting for the nation, where the President didn’t say something.”

One associate of Meadows’ said that the Trump chief waited far too long to act.

“Two hours is just inexcusable … when the safety of the federal government is in question you have the duty immediately to speak out. And Trump was derelict in that duty,” the person told CNN.

Read the full details at CNN.com

“Increasingly radical”: Members of the Proud Boys are taking over Miami-Dade GOP leadership roles

For many years, the Miami-Dade County Republican Party was synonymous with former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and allies such as GOP strategist Ana Navarro, who is now a CNN pundit and an outspoken Never Trumper. Navarro’s husband, Havana-born Al Cárdenas, was another major player.

The Miami-Dade County GOP of the 1990s and 2000s was known for Reagan conservatism, and it attracted a lot of Cuban immigrants. The fact that Bush is a fluent Spanish speaker didn’t hurt.

But thanks to the influence of former President Donald Trump and Gov. Ron DeSantis, the Miami-Dade County GOP has taken a much more MAGA and increasingly radical turn in recent years — one that, according to New York Times reporters Patricia Mazzei and Alan Feuer, includes welcoming the violent Proud Boys with open arms.

“The concerted effort by the Proud Boys to join the leadership of the Party — and, in some cases, run for local office — has destabilized and dramatically reshaped the Miami-Dade Republican Party that former Gov. Jeb Bush and others built into a powerhouse nearly four decades ago, transforming it from an archetype of the strait-laced establishment to an organization roiled by internal conflict as it wrestles with forces pulling it to the hard right,” Mazzei and Feuer report in an article published on June 2. “The conflict comes at a pivotal moment for Republicans nationally, as primary voters weigh whether to wrench the Party from its extremist elements — or more fully embrace them.”

The Times reporters note that “at least a half-dozen current and former Proud Boys” have “secured seats on the Miami-Dade Republican Executive Committee, seeking to influence local politics from the inside” —and that includes some Floridians facing criminal charges in connection with the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol Building.

“Gilbert Fonticoba has been charged with obstructing Congress,” Mazzei and Feuer observe. “Gabriel Garcia, a former Army captain who says he has left the group, has been charged with interfering with law enforcement officers during the civil disorder on January 6, 2021.”

The reporters point out that after the attack on the U.S. Capitol Building, the Proud Boys “dissolved” their “national leadership” and “encouraged chapters to get involved in local issues.”

Mazzei and Feuer explain, “The Proud Boys’ encroachments into the Miami-Dade Republican Party are, by far, the group’s largest political success…. Such a rightward shift mirrors the evolution of state and national Republicans but is remarkable for Miami-Dade, Florida’s most populous county, which Democratic presidential candidates have won since 1992. Republicans vastly improved their showing in 2020, a swing that has soured Democrats’ prospects.”

The Johnny Depp and Amber Heard verdict: A victory for the war on free speech

On its surface, the verdict in the Amber Heard and Johnny Depp trials makes no rational sense. Not just because the jury clearly ignored the actual evidence at hand when finding Heard guilty of defamation and rewarding Depp for his frivolous lawsuit with an eye-popping $15 million. But also because the jury awarded Heard $2 million in her countersuit against Depp for defaming her with a conspiracy theory accusing her and her witnesses of lying and her photographs and her other documentation of all being fake. How can the jury both believe her and not believe her? 

Part of the problem is that it’s likely that the jury, which was notably not sequestered, was influenced by the incoherent but robust pro-Depp sentiment heavily peddled online and throughout right-wing media. Because of this, as many commentators pointed out, this verdict should be viewed not just as a reaction to the facts at hand. It’s part of a larger backlash to the #MeToo movement and other movements like Black Lives Matter, which are increasingly under fire for making people feel bad about the widespread injustices that persist in our society. That’s why it’s not quite right to argue that the debate is over whether or not we “believe” women. Opponents of #MeToo believe women just fine. They’re just sick of hearing about it.

RELATED: Depp defamation verdict excites the right: “A win for all men who have been wrongfully accused”

The mixed verdict reflects the sentiment driving our current anti-feminist backlash: Yes, we believe victims of gendered violence, we just want them to shut the hell up.

Depp may not personally identify as right-wing, but Republicans are eager to adopt him, as evidenced by the official party taunting #MeToo supporters online after the verdict. 


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


The popularity of Depp’s frivolous lawsuit with Republicans should be understood as part of a larger and nationwide trend of conservatives trying to stomp out any speech they find annoyingly “woke.” They would like to stay asleep, thank you very much, and feel increasingly entitled to stomp out any speech or writing that might trouble their unwoke minds with facts. 

Nothing disturbs the unwoke mind like a fact.

Consider the raft of book bannings and educator silencing laws being passed by Republicans across the country. Materials and ideas aren’t being banned by Republicans because they are inaccurate or unfactual. On the contrary, the more truth there is to an idea, the more likely Republicans are to target it for censorship. The “Stop WOKE” bill in Florida, for instance, bans ideas because they may cause “guilt, anguish, or other forms of psychological distress.” Learning that slavery and Jim Crow happened can be distressing, of course, so materials that include these facts are being censored across the country. Similarly, the “don’t say gay” bill in Florida is openly geared towards forcing educators to lie to children by penalizing them for acknowledging the fact that LGBTQ people exist. In Texas, the bans on factual information about race are so stringent that teachers are afraid to correctly identity the white supremacist motive of the recent mass shooting in Buffalo, New York. 

RELATED: The critics were right: “Critical race theory” panic is just a cover for silencing educators

Nothing disturbs the unwoke mind like a fact.

What we’re seeing with the GOP war on free speech is a belief that they are entitled to erase any information, no matter how true, as long as it makes them feel bad. Donald Trump escalated this attitude with actions like flinging the term “fake news” at any news that reports actual facts. Recently the Supreme Court struck down a law in Texas that banned social media companies from removing posts based on “the viewpoint of the user or another person.” This law was justified with disingenuous “free speech” arguments, with Republicans waxing poetic about free exchange and the supposed dangers of “cancel culture.” In reality, however, this law was a full-blown attack on free speech.


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


The court found that forcing social media companies to host content against their will is a violation of free speech rights. Additionally, anyone who has actually been on the internet could see how this law attacked free speech in an even more insidious way. The law would have made it impossible for social media networks to curb the troll problem that is a direct threat to free and robust discourse online. This law would have handed social media platforms over to COVID-19 denialists, white supremacists, men threatening to rape any woman with an opinion, etc. No one else would get a word in edgewise, and would largely leave these platforms rather than deal with non-stop lies and abuse. It’s only “free speech” for the most repugnant people in our society. For everyone else, it would be censorship through relentless harassment. 

The vast majority of what gets decried as “cancel culture” is not actual censorship, but anger at people on the left who use their own free speech to criticize bigoted opinions.

Republicans love to claim they’re for “free speech” and against “cancel culture.” But the vast majority of what gets decried as “cancel culture” is not actual censorship, but anger at people on the left who use their own free speech to criticize bigoted opinions. Actual censorship is what the right is really championing. Just look at their book bannings, attacks on educator freedom, and frivolous defamation suits to silence stories of abuse.

It’s tempting to characterize the conflict between GOP claims to be for “free speech” and their actual censorship efforts as hypocrisy. But it’s not, really. The right’s actions are entirely consistent with the belief that conservatives and bigots get to say whatever they want, and liberals have to shut up about it. It’s “free speech” for anti-woke, and socks in mouths for everyone else. 

This weeknight version of chicken & dumplings starts with rotisserie chicken and store-bought stock

In this new column, we’ll revisit favorite Yankee recipes from years past and update them for the way we cook now. So as we contemplated where to begin, the answer was easy: chicken and dumplings. This tried-and-true recipe is a consistent favorite among our readers, and with good reason. It is not, however, an easy weeknight dish. You simmer a whole chicken for an hour, then let the meat cool and take it off the bone. Meanwhile, you make the dumpling dough, roll it out, and cut it. It’s a wonderful recipe: cozy, economical, delicious. But it’s not the stuff of everyday cooking.

This updated version is. It starts with store-bought chicken stock (though you can always use homemade), a rotisserie chicken, and simple drop dumplings. We boost the flavor of the chicken stock by adding very aromatic vegetables such as leeks, carrots, celery, fennel, and garlic. And before you know it, dinner is ready. The flour from the dumplings thickens the broth, making it almost creamy. And if you want to make the dish more economical, you can always use the chicken carcass to cook up a whole new pot of stock.

***

Recipe: Weeknight Chicken and Dumplings

This updated version of old-fashioned chicken and dumplings starts with store-bought chicken stock, a rotisserie chicken, and simple drop dumplings. It was inspired by many Yankee variations over the years, including “Potted Chicken with Parsley-Bread Dumplings” from October 1942.

Yields
8 servings

Ingredients

For the soup

  • 3 tablespoons olive or canola oil
  • 2 celery stalks, diced
  • 1 leek (white and light green parts only), diced
  • 1 small onion (any kind), diced
  • 2 medium carrots, peeled and diced
  • 1/2 fennel bulb, cored and diced (reserve fronds for garnish)
  • 1 teaspoon kosher salt
  • 1/2 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
  • 7 cups reduced-sodium chicken stock
  • Meat from a 2- or 3-pound rotisserie chicken, chopped into bite-size pieces

For the dumplings

  • 2 cups all-purpose flour
  • 1 1/2 teaspoons baking powder
  • 1/2 teaspoon baking soda
  • 3/4 teaspoon kosher salt
  • 6 tablespoons salted butter, melted
  • 3/4 cup buttermilk

Directions

  1. In a large Dutch oven or soup pot, heat the oil over medium heat. Add all the vegetables, salt, and pepper, and cook, stirring often, until the onions are translucent, 6 to 8 minutes. Add the chicken stock, bring to a boil, then reduce heat to a simmer and cook for 15 minutes.
  2. Meanwhile, make the dumplings.
  3. In a large bowl, combine the dry ingredients. Stir in the butter with a fork until well distributed. The mixture will look crumbly. Add the buttermilk and gently stir with a spatula just until the dough comes together.
  4. Add the chicken to the soup pot, then use a cookie scoop or a large spoon to scoop out golf ball-size dumplings and drop them into the broth. Cover the pot and cook until the dumplings are fully cooked, 10 to 12 minutes more. Garnish with the reserved fennel fronds, and serve.

 

More by this author:

Michael Avenatti sentenced to four years in prison for bilking Stormy Daniels out of $300,000

Michael Avenatti, the former attorney to porn actress Stormy Daniels, was sentenced to four years in prison on Thursday for bilking Daniels out of nearly $300,000 in book proceeds. 

District Judge Jesse Furman reportedly called Avenatti’s actions “craven and egregious,” arguing that the disgraced attorney was motivated by “blind ambition.”

Prior to his sentencing, Avenatti said that he had “disappointed scores of people and failed in a cataclysmic way.”

RELATED: New details about alleged payoff schemes to Trump mistresses revealed: “Can you make this go away?”

The attorney was previously convicted back in February on one count of wire fraud and one count of aggravated identity theft, according to CNN. He is currently serving a 30-month sentence, but his new conviction will tack on another two and a half years. 

Thursday’s sentencing centers on proceeds that he secretly pocketed from Daniels’ book “Full Disclosure,” which was published in the fall of 2018. According to prosecutors, Avenatti siphoned off $300,000 of the book’s advance by forging a letter from Daniels that allowed him to direct payments from the book’s publisher to a bank account he controlled. 


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


During his trial, Avenatti reportedly fired his own attorneys and opted to represent himself. According to CNN, prosecutors called ten witnesses to the stand, including Daniels, who was cross-examined by Avenatti. At one point, Avenatti reportedly tried to cast doubt over his former client’s trustworthiness by adducing Daniel’s belief in the paranormal. Avenatti also attempted to argue that he was implicitly entitled to a larger portion of Daniel’s proceeds than was outlined in their contract. 

RELATED: Michael Avenatti was $15 million in debt during Nike extortion, prosecutors say

“Avenatti stole from his client. He did so to support his own business and fund his own lifestyle. He did so despite presenting himself to the world as his client’s champion and defender and despite using that feigned credibility to secure fame and pursue political influence,” prosecutors wrote in a sentencing memorandum. “And he did so by exploiting his position of trust and authority as an attorney, by forging his client’s signature, and by lying to his client and others repeatedly and callously for months.”

Avenatti first rose to prominence when Daniels retained him as part of an effort to get out of an October 2016 hush money agreement with Donald Trump, who directed $130,000 to cover up an alleged extramarital affair with the porn star. At the time, the lawyer repeatedly attacked Trump in various media appearances. 

Avenatti is also facing an upcoming trial in a California federal court over allegations that he stole $10 million from five separate clients.

Utah election upended by allegations of “ritualistic sex abuse” and “cannibalizing young children”

Chaos has erupted in an election for Utah County Attorney after incumbent David Leavitt was forced to deny QAnon-style claims that he and his wife engaged in cannibalism and ritual sex abuse of children.

Local news station KUTV reports that Leavitt held a press conference this week in which he lashed out at the Utah County Sheriff’s Office for announcing an investigation into “a child sex abuse ring that operated in Utah, Juab, and Sanpete counties between 1990 and 2010.”

Leavitt told reporters that he and his wife had both been investigated for being part of the alleged abuse ring, but had been cleared of any wrongdoing. He then accused Utah County Sheriff Mike Smith of making the announcement as a way to hurt him politically ahead of an upcoming election.

“There is no organized ring of abuse, it was debunked more than 10 years ago, it was dismissed by someone who was not in any respect affiliated with me and it wasn’t even investigated in a serious way by the sex crimes task force of Utah County,” he said. “That this all occurs less than one week before ballots drop in an election in which I am participating causes me tremendous concern.”

Leavitt said that a woman who was “tragically mentally ill” had accused him and his wife of “cannibalizing young children, and murdering young children” years ago in allegations that were totally unfounded.

However, Sheriff Mike Smith defended his department’s actions and slammed Leavitt for casting aspersions on the purported victim’s mental health.

“I take exception to any victim coming forward and being categorized as ‘tragically mentally ill,'” he said. “How dare you. These are victims of crimes who have mustered the courage to come forward and this is what you call them? Mentally ill. How dare you.”

“Unprecedented”: Michigan AG expects charges against Trump supporters in “coordinated” election plot

Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel reportedly said this week that she expects charges related to a “coordinated” effort to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

The Detroit News reported that Nessel made the remarks on Wednesday at the Mackinac Policy Conference.

The target of the investigation was said to be “supporters of former President Donald Trump.”

She told the paper that her office had been investigating an “unprecedented” and “coordinated” push to overturn the election on behalf of Trump.

“I have talked to countless people at our department who have been there 30, 40 or even 50 years,” the Democrat explained. “So this is really new territory. There’s no way to say, ‘Here’s how we’ve always handled this.'”

The Michigan Attorney General’s office has been involved in at least three investigations into the effort to overturn the election. But no charges have been filed.

Nessel wouldn’t say when the charges would be filed or provide specifics.

“I can’t speak to the details of many of these investigations, except to say: The public should know we’re aware of anything you have read in the news. … We’re aware of it. We are working on it. We’re looking into it,” the attorney general explained.

“It was just madness inside”: Mass shooting at Tulsa hospital leaves four people dead

Four people were murdered and as many as ten were wounded in Tulsa, Oklahoma on Wednesday evening after a gunman stormed a medical building and opened fire, according to police. 

“It was just madness inside, with hundreds of rooms and hundreds of people trying to get out of the building,” Tulsa Police Captain Richard Meulenberg told CNN.

The massacre reportedly unfolded around 5 PM local time at the Natalie Medical Building on the campus of the Saint Francis Hospital, where officers were dispatched three minutes after an emergency call was made. Upon arriving, said Tulsa Police Deputy Chief Eric Dalgleish, the officers were immediately “hearing shots in the building, and that’s what directed them to the second floor.”

According to CBS, the gunman, a Black male between the ages 35 and 40, was reportedly found dead at the scene, possibly as a result of self-inflicted gunshot wounds. According to the Associated Press, Tulsa’s police chief said the gunman targeted a doctor who performed back surgery, blaming him for his pain. 

RELATED: Texas Republicans loosened gun laws and slashed mental health funding before Uvalde shooting

Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt this week called the shooting a “senseless act of violence and hatred.”


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


“[Oklahoma First Lady Sarah Stitt] and I are praying for the families of those who lost their lives and for those who were injured,” he said. “I have offered Mayor G.T. Bynum any state resources that may be needed, and I ask all Oklahomans to come together in support of the Saint Francis Health System community and to grieve with those whose lives have been forever changed.”

Rep. Melissa Provenzano, D-Okla., whose district includes Saint Francis Hospital, called the medical facility “the center of our community.” Mayor Bynum likewise said that the campus is “sacred ground.”

Tulsa’s rampage comes on the heels of a spate of mass shootings this and last week. 

On Wednesday, a security guard at the Miami Valley Hospital in Dayton was shot and killed after a Montgomery County Jail inmate grabbed the guard’s gun. That same day, police responded to a shooting in Pittston Township, Pennsylvania at a Walmart Supercenter, where at least one person was injured in what police have called an “attempted homicide.”

RELATED: “Pot psychosis”: Laura Ingraham baselessly links marijuana consumption to mass shootings

All of this comes as the nation still reels from school shooting in Uvalde, Texas, where an 18-year-old gunman shot and killed 19 children and two adults at the Robb Elementary School. 

According to the Gun Violence Archive, Tulsa’s shooting marks the 233rd mass shooting in 2022.

“Guns aren’t the issue”: GOP congressman blames mass shootings on “abortion”

One Republican lawmaker has attempted to blame abortion for the shootings that have recently taken place across the United States. Now, he’s facing deep scrutiny for the argument.

On Wednesday, June 1, Rep. Billy Long, R-Mo., conducted an interview with the Missouri-based radio station, The Eagle 93.9. During that interview, they discussed the recent school massacre in Uvalde, Texas and the possibility of Republican lawmakers supporting changes that would introduce stricter gun laws.

According to HuffPost, Long pushed back and argued that “guns aren’t the issue. He criticized proponents of gun control for ‘trying to blame an inanimate object for all of these tragedies.'”

“When I was growing up in Springfield, you had one or two murders a year,” said Long who is currently running for the Senate. “Now we have two, three, four a week in Springfield, Missouri.

“So something has happened to our society,” he continued. “I go back to abortion, when we decided it was OK to murder kids in their mothers’ wombs. Life has no value to a lot of these folks.”

However, HuffPost highlighted the grave inaccuracies in Long’s claim. In 1970, three years before the passing of Roe v. Wade, HuffPost reports “499 murders were reported in Missouri. in 1975, the figure was 505. And in 2019, 568 murders were reported in the state.”

The news outlet also offered a breakdown of what data suggests about the United States’ increasing problem with guns.

“The data does show, however, that the gun problem in America is linked to the proliferation of guns and the ease at which people can obtain them,” HuffPost reported. “Other countries have had great success in curbing gun violence by tightening gun laws or banning guns and implementing gun buyback programs.”

Although the facts are clear, Long appears adamant about ignoring them.

“If there was something that would work that would prevent some of these things, any reasonable person is going to look at anything like that,” Long said.”But to this day and time, no one has been able to come up with any kind of a suggestion that would have helped in any of these situations.”

“Recipe for an accident”: Alarm after Abbott orders “unannounced, random intruder audits” in schools

Gov. Greg Abbott on Wednesday instructed state school security and education officials to start conducting “in-person, unannounced, random intruder detection audits on school districts” to find weak access points and see how quickly staff can enter a school building without being stopped.

The mandate was one of several the governor laid out in a letter to school security authorities in an effort to ensure district emergency operations plans are solid and school buildings are protected in the wake of the Uvalde school massacre that left 19 children and two adults dead.

In his letter to Texas School Safety Center director Kathy Martinez-Prather on Wednesday, Abbott said the tragedy in Uvalde last week demands more action.

“The State must work beyond writing words on paper and ensuring that the laws are being followed; it must also ensure that a culture of constant vigilance is engrained in every campus and in every school district employee across the state,” he said.

Education advocates and lawmakers swiftly condemned the idea of unannounced, fake intruders.

Clay Robison, a spokesperson for the Texas State Teachers Association, raised concerns about whether a person conducting unannounced drills puts themselves at risk to be attacked by someone on campus who sees them as a real threat.

“If it really does mean breaking into a school, it could be an accident waiting to happen,” he said, adding that he thought Abbott’s latest school proposals were “just another way to avoid addressing the issue of doing something about too many guns in the hands of the wrong people.”

Shannon Holmes, executive director of Association of Texas Professional Educators, raised similar concerns.

“It’s a recipe for an accident if there is not some coordination between the local campus or ISD and whoever’s conducting the audit,” Holmes said.

On Twitter, Texas Rep. Diego Bernal, D-San Antonio, a member of the House Education Committee, criticized the plan.

“So you want grown men to show up to schools unannounced and try as hard as they can to find a way in?” Bernal wrote on Twitter. “This is a terrible idea.”

The Texas School Safety Center, located at Texas State University, was launched in 1999 in the wake of the Columbine school shooting and authorized by the Legislature in 2001. It was created to serve as a clearinghouse for school safety and security information, training, assistance and applied research for Texas’ K-12 public schools, charter schools and community colleges. It receives funding annually within the state budget, as well as through state and federal grants to provide training and resources on everything from anti-tobacco campaigns to active-shooter threats.

It’s unclear if the Texas School Safety Center has conducted such security audits before or whether the school districts will be notified they are being audited beforehand.

The center did not answer emailed questions. In a statement, a spokesperson said they received the letter and that the center “is designing a program and action items to specifically address the governor’s directives within the prescribed timelines.”

State leaders also did not answer clarifying questions as to whether districts would be alerted of the audits beforehand.

“This is a new, enhanced level of audits,” Renae Eze, Abbott’s spokesperson, said. “Until now, the [Texas School Safety Center] has been conducting reviews of school districts emergency operations plans, following the passage of SB 11 in 2019. This is an audit of the implementation of those plans, specifically targeted to access control procedures.”

A spokesperson pointed The Texas Tribune to the safety center for more information.

The Texas Education Agency flagged that the Texas School Safety Center has a toolkit for districts to audit their own security practices, which state that facility staff should be unaware of the assessment and it should be unannounced.

“It is highly suggested that a member of the law enforcement jurisdiction and a district level administrator be notified of the assessment in the event someone calls in from the school, facility, district, or community in response to the intruder,” the toolkit states. The TEA did not immediately answer questions about its role in these audits and whether the agency has conducted similar audits before.

In addition to the random security audits, Abbott requested that the center conduct school safety reviews of all Texas public schools.

He instructed the center to alert each school district that they must meet this summer to review their emergency operations plans, including each district’s active threat plan, to ensure all staff and substitutes are trained on the plans and to conduct an assessment of building access points, including single-access-points protocols, locked instruction room door policies, visitor check-in rules, the effectiveness of exterior door locks and more by Sept. 1. The center will present findings to the governor by October.

Abbott also called on the center to make recommendations to the Texas Legislature to determine necessary funding or possible improvements to “continue the work of hardening our schools against outside threats.”

Abbott and other state leaders adopted similar rhetoric on improving school security in the wake of the 2018 school shooting in Santa Fe, southeast of Houston, though experts say there is no indication that the security measures most often promoted by public officials — including locked doors to the outside and in classrooms, active-shooter plans and security cameras — have reduced gun violence in schools.

In 2019, state lawmakers passed a package of school security laws including a law that gave the school safety center the authority to audit the school district’s emergency operations plans.

Under that law, if a school district does not satisfactorily submit an emergency operation plan, they must notify the community in a public meeting. If they do not hold such a meeting, the TEA can take over school leadership, according to Abbott’s letter.

An audit conducted by the center in 2020 found only 67 school districts out of 1,022 had viable emergency operations plans. Meanwhile, just 200 districts had active-shooter policies, while an additional 196 school districts had policies that auditors deemed insufficient.

Abbott’s letter comes the same day that he instructed the Texas Legislature to form special committees to make legislative recommendations in response to the Uvalde school shooting, stopping short of calling for a special Legislative session to consider possible legislation before the next session in 2023.

Senate Democrats and a few Republicans have called for a special session.

 

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

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at https://www.texastribune.org/2022/06/01/texas-greg-abbott-school-security-uvalde/.

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

“Insanely corrupt”: Despite failure, Bill Barr brags that John Durham boosted Trump’s Clinton smears

Former Attorney General Bill Barr on Wednesday heaped praise on special counsel John Durham for boosting former President Donald Trump’s “Russiagate” narrative even though his three-year investigation has been dismissed as an epic failure by legal experts.

Durham, the former U.S. attorney for Connecticut, was first assigned to investigate the origins of the FBI investigation into Trump’s ties to Russia in 2019 and was later appointed as a special counsel by Barr in 2020, ensuring the probe would continue after Trump left office.

Durham in September 2021 indicted former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussman, alleging he lied to the FBI about his ties to the campaign while discussing his suspicions about Trump’s ties to Russia with former FBI general counsel James Baker. Sussman’s attorney argued that the charge was a “circus full of slideshows” as Durham used the proceedings to stoke Trumpworld conspiracy theories. A jury acquitted Sussman on Tuesday in a major blow to the investigation, which Trump and his allies had hyped for years.

RELATED: The Durham investigation is a flop — but Donald Trump just can’t quit the conspiracy

Fox News host Jesse Watters on Wednesday pressed Barr on whether he felt “responsible” or “disappointed” for how the Durham situation unfolded.

Barr said he was responsible for his appointment but stressed he was “very proud” of the investigation.

“I think he and his team did an exceptionally able job, both digging out very important facts and presenting a compelling case to the jury,” he said.

Barr acknowledged that Durham “did not succeed in getting a conviction from the D.C. jury” but argued that he accomplished “something far more important”: boosting Trump’s narrative about the Justice Department probe into his Russia ties.

“I think he crystalized the central role played by the Hillary campaign in launching as a dirty trick the whole Russiagate collusion narrative and fanning the flames of it,” Barr said. “Second, I think he exposed really dreadful behavior by the senior ranks of the FBI who knowingly used this information to start an investigation of Trump.”

Barr’s claims and Durham’s probe are yet another attempt by Trump allies to make the former president out to be the victim of the Russia investigation, a narrative Trump has successfully pushed in some parts of the Republican Party. But the narrative ignores the fact that numerous Trump campaign officials and allies actively worked with or solicited help from Russians or Russian agents during his 2016 campaign.

Along with Russia’s hack of the Democratic Party and a top Clinton campaign official, as well as its efforts to influence the election on social media, Trump’s campaign operatives were repeatedly targeted in Russian efforts.

RELATED: “This is what collusion looks like”: GOP-led Senate report “far more devastating” than Mueller probe

“People like Paul Manafort, his campaign manager and consultant to Russia-linked actors; and like Carter Page, a foreign policy adviser who had previously been identified as a target for Russian intelligence efforts and who traveled to Moscow in early July 2016; and like George Papadopoulos, another adviser who had been told by a guy who was helping him set up a meeting between Trump and Russia’s president that Russia had some of Clinton’s emails,” The Washington Post’s Philip Bump explained. “That Russia had hacked the Democrats was known by mid-June 2016 and the Russia probe was opened by the end of July.”

Legal experts slammed the Durham probe as “incredibly weak” and a “roaring waste of money and time.”


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


“The case wasn’t a nothing-burger, but it was very thin, and it’s hard to understand why it was brought other than to support Trump’s allegation that the Clinton campaign falsely alleged a Trump-Russia connection,” Stephen Gillers, a legal ethics professor at New York University, told The New York Times. “That motive is unacceptable. The government’s only legitimate goal in bringing this case was conviction.”

Conservative attorney George Conway, a prominent Trump critic, called on the Biden Justice Department to shut down the probe.

“I hope it’s headed into the trash can. The Justice Department should put an end to this ridiculous investigation now. This case was a joke,” he told MSNBC. “There was nothing here to begin with.”

Barr’s admission that it was more important for Durham to stoke Trump’s narrative than get a conviction drew blowback from legal experts.

“Barr suggests that the value of Durham’s case against Sussman was that it brought out evidence against the Clinton campaign,” tweeted former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti. “Making evidence public is not a proper reason to charge someone with committing a crime. Sussman’s life was turned upside down before he was acquitted.”

Former FBI counterintelligence chief Peter Strzok, who was fired after being targeted by Trump for his involvement in special counsel Bob Mueller’s probe even though he was cleared of any wrongdoing by the DOJ, also hit out at Barr on Twitter.

“Barr brazenly saying the quiet part out loud: Durham using criminal prosecutions to get out a false Russia narrative is ‘far more important’ than actually achieving convictions,” he wrote.

Former Republican strategist Tim Miller called out Barr for arguing that “it doesn’t matter they failed in an utterly frivolous prosecution because they succeeded in smearing the Clinton campaign.”

“An insanely corrupt and politicized DOJ,” he wrote, “right out in the open.”

Read more:

Joe Biden is finding out that “better than Trump” is not nearly good enough

According to an article published this week by NBC News, President Biden is upset with his staff. It seems the president believes some members of his own administration have undercut his message on occasion, thereby leading to his extremely low poll numbers.

Joe, it seems, can’t get a break — and he thinks his own people are the cause.

Welcome to the party, pal. That’s exactly what I’ve been saying for several months. I won’t go back over the grisly details, but suffice it to say that it appears Biden has finally joined the chorus.

Biden has been blamed for every calamity that has befallen the country since he took office. His detractors blame him for high inflation, high gas prices, mass shootings and the pandemic, and if given the chance would probably blame him for climate change — though most of his detractors don’t believe in that, or at least claim not to. If they could, they’d blame him for toenail fungus.

RELATED: Jen Psaki and the Biden White House: When “almost normal” isn’t quite good enough

Then again, some diehard Trumpers were among those who cheered Biden when he was in Poland and said that “for God’s sake,” Vladimir Putin couldn’t remain in charge. Then 15 minutes later the president’s staff tried to walk back that comment — pissing off nearly 8 billion people on the planet. Hey, if you’re going to screw it up, go big or go home. Of course, the next day Biden had to double down on exactly what he had said the day before, and the whole thing made him look weak and vacillating. What Biden’s statement actually showed was how tone-deaf his staff is to what the rest of the country thinks. Americans have had enough of politicians saying, “What I really meant to say was . . .” and took Biden’s statement as a breath of fresh air, at least until his underlings screwed him.

June is now upon us and we’re staring at a long, hot summer before the midterm elections in the fall, which will decide whether the Biden administration lives or dies. According to NBC News, Rep. James Clyburn, D-S.C., whose endorsement in the 2020 Democratic primaries helped rescue Biden’s struggling candidacy, said, “I don’t know what’s required here, but I do know the poll numbers have been stuck where they are for far too long.”

Biden apparently wants more Democrats talking about his accomplishments this summer — and he’s not wrong. The infrastructure bill he signed and pushed through Congress does more for the average American, particularly those in red states, than any president has done for them in the last 40 years. You don’t hear about it much anymore, from Biden or any other Democrat — they’re too busy being swept under the bridge by current events. They haven’t framed political arguments well and they have left too much oxygen in the room for those who still want to promote sedition and the “Big Lie.”

But none of this is new. The fact that it’s taken so long for Biden to recognize this should be of concern to all of us. Maybe he’s got a handle on it now, but damn — how long does it take you to read a room?


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


Sure, he delivered a historic infrastructure package. We have historically low unemployment rates. We’ve gotten a whole lot of people vaccinated against COVID. America is once again respected and Biden appears to be making headway internationally — bolstering both NATO and Ukraine. And still, his approval ratings stink.

And then there’s Donald Trump — that’s a man who is excellent at reading the room, but has no idea what room he’s in. He just knows that wherever it is, he’s going to con someone out of their money.

So while Biden is wondering what he has to do or who he has to kill to get better polling numbers than his predecessor, the rest of the nation is wondering:

“Will Donald Trump ever get indicted?”

The last time I heard that question was at lunch with a Justice Department source I’ve known for close to 30 years. He asked me that.

“I don’t know. Isn’t that up to you guys?” I responded.

When a Justice Department source asks you, “Will Trump ever get indicted?” you know something has gone wrong.

My source, who has worked in Washington for most of his professional life, told me I had missed the point. According to him, Trump has yet to be indicted because of the fear that in doing so the DOJ will expose itself to charges of corruption, favoritism or incompetence. That echoes the sentiments of several former Trumpers, including his ex-fixer Michael Cohen. All of them want Trump prosecuted. They aren’t alone.

I also spoke with a judge in Georgia, where there’s some hope that Trump could be brought to justice because of his infamous phone call with Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger after the 2020 election. “Don’t count on it,” I was told.

And who gets the blame for that? Yeah, you guessed it: Joe Biden, and to a lesser extent Attorney General Merrick Garland. “It’s Biden’s fault because he appointed Garland,” we are often told. These naysayers aren’t Trumplicans. They’re Democrats, mostly progressives who are angry that Joe Biden isn’t Bernie Sanders.

Singer John Legend wants to clean up the Department of Justice. So does Michael Cohen. While Legend points to how minorities, women, immigrants and the LGBTQ community are treated differently, Cohen stresses that the corruption is far more pervasive and endemic. The truth is, according to Cohen, that Trump wouldn’t have been successful in manipulating the DOJ during his administration if it hadn’t already been corrupted.

And if that’s true, then you can’t even blame Trump for it, nor can you expect Biden to clean it up with a snap of his fingers. Trump just never gave us a chance to talk about it because he spewed rapid-fire paroxysms of violent rhetoric. On the other hand, Biden, in his attempt to appear more “presidential,” gives us plenty of time to ponder his administration’s shortcomings. 

But that word, “presidential,” doesn’t mean the same thing it used to. You can blame Fox News founder Roger Ailes, I suppose, for his contribution to the “television presidency” — after all, he was responsible for both Ronald Reagan and Mitch McConnell, two examples of cursed bipedal homo sapiens destined for a museum exhibit of life forms that thrived without functional brains. 

Biden is better at controlling the media than Trump ever was. But bringing Korean boy bands to the White House is just a pointless deflection.

It’s not that Biden doesn’t understand television or the media — in fact, his administration is better at controlling it than Trump ever was. But there’s the rub. Trump was dialed up to 11 all the time. Biden has dialed it back, curtailed his natural instincts to talk — remember, that was one of Barack Obama’s biggest criticisms of Biden — and has caged the media beast by not engaging us instead of actively fighting against us. But there is another way to do it.

Biden claims he loves the press, but his administration is run by those who constantly apologize for him when they shouldn’t, while trying to limit his interaction with us so they don’t have to run interference.

Biden’s also very good at deflection. On Tuesday in the White House briefing room, we were treated to the “Grammy-nominated international icons” BTS, a K-pop boy band. Many reporters cheered effusively. I almost choked watching it.

I thought of how Sam Donaldson or, God forbid, Helen Thomas, would have reacted to such blathering and I knew once again that the other problem in Washington is us — the press. We don’t wear ourselves out trying to dig out the news; we merely react to what is in front of us. We’ve become nothing more than stenographers — or fans.

“We have met the enemy and he is us,” Walt Kelly’s cartoon possum Pogo told us decades ago. Damned if he wasn’t right.

So, in the end Biden is right to be upset with his staff and his fellow Democrats for not touting his achievements, but wrong about where he places the blame. The president needs to look in the mirror, and needs to frame the arguments far better than he has so far. He has failed to get the country excited, failed to respond to legitimate criticisms and failed to communicate effectively.

The only consistent message out of the Biden camp boils down to “We’re better than Trump.”

That’s really not the ringing endorsement some smug and self-satisfied Democrats think it is. The country has had enough of Trump and his cretinous band of intolerant moles, who are more adept at living in the dark and feeding on garbage than the most resilient New York sewer rat. Hell, they did it for years even before Trump came along, skittering around the fringes of government, voting out of spite and angry at the world and their place in it, without ever understanding they were to blame for their own shortcomings. All Trump did was to bring them into the light and rally them to his narcissistic cause.

It doesn’t take much to say you’re better than that flea circus of pestilence. And ultimately Biden has to take personal responsibility for what’s gone wrong. 

Harry Truman famously said, “The buck stops here.”Donald Trump’s version was, “The sawbuck stops here — but blame is for everyone else.”

To right the American ship of state, Joe Biden has to own his shortcomings (a recurring campaign theme) and rally his troops with the energy of Donald Trump — but without the hate, the lies, the vitriol or the sedition.

In other words, he needs to not only act presidential, but he needs to be a leader. 

Biden has shown flashes of brilliance, but his administration has been wildly inconsistent. That’s not what the country needs, and it’s the biggest reason he faces a high risk of failure, or even disaster, in the midterms.

Read more from Brian Karem on the Biden White House:

Abortion opponents take risks by dropping exceptions for rape, incest, and the mother’s life

If it seems as though the anti-abortion movement has gotten more extreme in recent months, that’s because it has.

But it’s not the first time — positions taken by both sides of the abortion debate have ebbed and flowed repeatedly in the 49 years since the Supreme Court declared abortion a constitutional right.

Abortion opponents and those supporting abortion rights expect the Supreme Court to soon overturn its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, and both groups have reacted strongly. Abortion rights supporters unsuccessfully pushed Congress to pass the Women’s Health Protection Act, which would not only codify abortion rights but also eliminate lots of popular restrictions the court has allowed since 1973, most notably parental involvement laws.

But it’s abortion opponents’ efforts in many conservative states to exclude most exceptions — for rape or incest or to save the life of the mother — that have drawn headlines recently.

The efforts do not appear to have wide appeal. The majorities of Americans who support allowing those exceptions are nearly as large as the majorities who oppose abortion late in pregnancy, according to opinion polls.

Nonetheless, there are numerous examples of such efforts — going far beyond the banning of abortions after 15 weeks, which is at the crux of the Mississippi law being considered by the Supreme Court. A leaked draft opinion published last month suggests the court could use the case to overturn Roe. For example, over the past few months, Oklahoma has passed three laws restricting abortion. The latest one, signed by the governor May 25, bans abortion beginning at fertilization, which would, at least in theory, ban both in vitro fertilization and many forms of hormonal birth control. (The Oklahoma bill’s sponsor says that is not the law’s intent.)

During debate in the Oklahoma Senate on the strictest of the bans, Republican Sen. Warren Hamilton said he did not think the measure went far enough because it allowed abortions in the case of an ectopic pregnancy, a life-threatening medical emergency in which an embryo is growing outside the uterus.

That has horrified some medical professionals. “The fallopian tube and other places a pregnancy can implant cannot support a pregnancy,” Dr. Iman Alsaden, an OB-GYN and medical director of Planned Parenthood Great Plains, told reporters at a news conference May 19. “If you continue to let these pregnancies happen, there will be no viable baby afterwards. What will happen is [the fallopian tube] will burst and people will bleed to death.”

At the same time, an increasing number of state legislatures are contemplating bans that do not include exceptions for the health (as opposed to the life) of the pregnant person or for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest. Testifying on her bill in Ohio, GOP state Rep. Jean Schmidt in April told lawmakers that a child resulting from rape would be “an opportunity for that woman, no matter how young or old she is, to make a determination about what she’s going to do to help that life be a productive human being.”

Rape and incest exceptions have been an accepted part of most abortion bans since the early 1990s, but that was not always the case. For a dozen years, they were not part of the so-called Hyde Amendment, the provision inserted in annual federal spending bills that bars the use of almost all federal funds for abortion.

The more liberal (at least on abortion) Senate tried to keep the rape and incest (and health) exceptions intact back then, only to be forced to back off by the more conservative House, whose anti-abortion efforts were led by Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.). “The Supreme Court had said: ‘You may not impose capital punishment on a rapist. That’s cruel and unusual punishment,'” Hyde said during a 1988 debate over the issue. “But you are saying exterminate. Exterminate this innocently inconvenient residual of the rape.”

In 1993, Hyde himself put the rape and incest exceptions back into his eponymous funding ban, and they have remained there since. With Democratic president Bill Clinton in the White House, and large Democratic majorities in both the House and Senate, “I didn’t think the votes were there anymore for a straight ban on abortion funding,” he said at the time. Indeed, at that point, the entire ban was in danger of being dropped, and only Hyde’s parliamentary maneuvering kept the slightly less stringent ban in place.

Abortion bans with few or no exceptions are politically risky. In the 2012 Missouri race for U.S. Senate, the challenger, Republican then-Rep. Todd Akin, was favored to defeat incumbent Sen. Claire McCaskill until he said in a now-infamous interview that he didn’t support exceptions because women rarely get pregnant as a result of rape. “The female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down,” he said. The comments were disavowed by the Republican running for president that year, Mitt Romney, and his running mate, Paul Ryan. Akin eventually lost.

Now, however, anti-abortion forces appear to be on the cusp of being granted free rein by the Supreme Court to ban abortion to any degree they want. Activists clearly want the most comprehensive bans that lawmakers will pass. Whether voters will go along with that will be decided at the ballot box in November.

HealthBent, a regular feature of Kaiser Health News, offers insight and analysis of policies and politics from KHN’s chief Washington correspondent, Julie Rovner, who has covered health care for more than 30 years.

KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.

Subscribe to KHN’s free Morning Briefing.

Minority rules, children die: Our broken political system has lethal consequences

Our national tragedies follow their own dreary script. The unthinkable happens, again: School children are massacred, this time just a week after a hate-filled rampage in a grocery store. There is a ritual outpouring of sorrow and rage, a senator’s impotent anguish goes viral, and that rueful Onion headline gets updated as another community wails. 

Yet our politics remains trapped in a pitiable chorus of Surely, now, we will act and Sorry, no, nothing to be done. Even something as toothless as expanded background checks looks impossible. Dopey ideas like armed guards at single school entrances are proposed by politicians who have never apparently seen an American high school or a bored mall cop.

Such emptiness and repetition somehow makes these hellish days even more hopeless. A country that were even slightly less broken would not suffer from an epidemic of mass shootings. A political system less broken would at least try to prevent the slaughter of children and teachers from becoming commonplace. Ours can’t even pretend to be serious.

RELATED: Joe Manchin’s revisionist history: Filibuster stands after Senate Democrat sides with Republicans

There’s a viral tweet by the British journalist Dan Hodges that circulates after so many mass shootings that suggests Sandy Hook marked the end of the gun control movement, because “once America decided killing children was bearable, it was over.” This week, it had 231,000 likes and another 185,000 retweets.

The trouble is, that’s not exactly right. Voters never decided it was bearable to see children murdered, or that nothing could be done. The root problem remains the same: Our broken political institutions, in which small minorities exert veto power over much larger majorities, even while third-graders die.

Voters never decided it was tolerable to see children murdered, or that nothing could be done. That’s a function of our broken institutions, in which a shrinking minority exerts veto power.

Our gun nightmare, like so many other national emergencies, has been compounded and even rendered unsolvable, by our crisis of extreme minority rule. We can’t enact common sense reforms that bipartisan majorities support because gerrymandering, the Senate filibuster and federal courts filled with conservative ideologues — by presidents who lost the popular vote — all stand in the way of the people’s will. 

Public opinion has been consistent for years. Majorities of Americans support banning high-capacity ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. They support banning assault-style weapons. They support “red flag” laws that would allow a judge to remove guns from someone who is at obvious risk for violent behavior. They support creating a national gun database, adding background checks for private sales and gun shows, and even raising the age for gun ownership.  

But public opinion essentially doesn’t matter. So nothing changes, despite widespread agreement on a path forward, despite the political power of parents who tremble and hold their kids tighter at morning drop-off, despite the tears of presidents who comfort those moms and dads whose children don’t make it home, despite march after march by teenagers who ask nothing more than to be safe at school. 


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


As a result, those in power who are actually interested in reform have stopped trying. It’s hard to blame them for recognizing the true nature of the Sisyphean charade. 

The combination of gerrymandering and the filibuster ensured that nothing changed after Sandy Hook. Public backing for stricter gun laws grew to 58% after 28 died in that mass shooting nearly 10 years ago in Newtown, Connecticut. Yet the wildly gerrymandered House of Representatives, at the time controlled by Republicans opposed to gun control even though Democratic candidates had won 1.4 million more votes, never even considered any serious reforms. The GOP held a 234-201 edge in Congress because of six states, all of which were carried by Barack Obama and all of which had been redistricted the previous year by Republicans. Those states were Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Virginia and Florida, and collectively they sent 64 Republicans and 30 Democrats to Washington. 

The Republican House majority that blocked gun control after Sandy Hook was entirely the result of aggressive GOP redistricting in six states — all of them won by Barack Obama.

It’s absurd and illogical, of course, that states won by Democrats statewide give nearly two-thirds of their congressional seats to the opposition party. If the delegations from those six blue states had broken exactly even, 50/50, the result would have been a 218-217 Democratic majority. So the supposed “bipartisan compromise” on universal background checks that emerged after Sandy Hook had to begin in the Democratic-controlled Senate, where the bill, sponsored by Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va. and Pat Toomey, R-Pa., was, predictably, smothered by the filibuster. 

Ronald Brownstein, then with the Los Angeles Times, counted the number of people represented by the 54 votes in support of the bill and the 46 against. The 54 senators who voted yes represented 194 million people. The 46 who blocked consideration represented 118 million.

The arcane Senate filibuster — used for decades after the Civil War to stop civil rights legislation, and then honed into a powerful obstructionist tool by Mitch McConnell — allows any senator to hold up a vote with even the threat of holding the floor indefinitely, and requires an insurmountable 60-vote supermajority to break. 

The basic arithmetic of the U.S. Senate has changed little since, and it would be folly to imagine that today’s ever more polarized, gerrymandered and geographically sorted chambers are any more capable of reflecting the nation. No one really believes the Senate can or will do much of anything. Democrats have declined to kill off the filibuster because two of their members, in a 50-seat pseudo-majority, insist on keeping it. Nothing can pass in that environment.

Smaller, whiter, more rural states — which are far more likely to vote Republican and to oppose gun reforms — have effective veto power over any legislation. The 50 Democrats in today’s Senate represent 41 million more people than the 50 Republicans. As Sen. Angus King of Maine noted during the debate over expanding voting rights earlier this year — also blocked by the filibuster — 41 senators representing just 24% of the nation’s population can block most anything they’d like. (And of course, an illegitimate and radicalized U.S. Supreme Court majority may soon make it impossible for states or localities to enforce their own gun laws.) 

Of course, this isn’t just about guns. This minority-rule crisis infesting all levels of our politics helps explain why extreme anti-abortion laws proliferate even when majorities oppose them almost everywhere. It explains the failure of voting rights legislation that Americans supported in large numbers. It explains or lethal paralysis on climate change, which literally endangers the future of our planet. The problem is only getting worse. This is how democracies atrophy and how institutions collapse. Americans demand action, we know that our political system is incapable of providing it, and incapable of doing much of anything, even when children are gunned down in their classrooms. 

Democrats’ options are clear enough: Dump the filibuster, restructure the Senate to be fairer, find a way to win 60 seats — or uselessly rage and whine, choosing powerlessness.

A recent opinion piece in Reason magazine suggested that Democrats use the filibuster as a scapegoat instead of confronting their own inaction, and while the argument carries a whiff of disingenuousness — please, Democrats, reveal your powerlessness on more issues, frustrate majorities even more often — there’s an important kernel of truth there. This minoritarian veto power stands in the way of every progressive priority, and it’s not going away. The options are clear enough: Change the rules, build support for restructuring the Senate to be fairer and more representative, find a way to win a 60-seat majority — or uselessly rage on, having chosen powerlessness.

The Senate may have been designed to be a cooling “saucer” that slows down political action, but it was not intended to render all action impossible. Our national crises keep on mounting. Our political institutions leave us no option but to bury the dead and await the next numbing catastrophe. We are broken and nearly beyond repair. We the people are weaponized. And a small faction of our people have weaponized our political institutions against us as well. 

Read more from David Daley on the failure of democracy:

All the pieces of “The Wire” still matter: From cops, corners and Omar to the systems that fail us

The history of cop television can be split into two biblical epochs: Before “The Wire” and After “The Wire.” Sixty hours of a drama set in Baltimore, “that gave you all the realities of what was going on in Baltimore City,” as actor Tray Chaney puts it, debuted on HBO on June 2, 2002, and changed how police were depicted on screen.

And it did so much more than that, too. To explore the many layers of “The Wire” and its impact on its audience, TV narratives, Baltimore and the individuals who made it, I interviewed a dozen creatives involved in making the series, including creator David Simon and many actors from the cast, including Andre Royo (Reginald “Bubbles” Cousins), Sonja Sohn (Det. Kima Greggs) and Chaney, who played the young dealer Poot in all five seasons of the series. This short documentary by Salon, “All the Pieces of ‘The Wire’ Still Matter,” is the result. 

We talked about what “The Wire” meant to them, what it was like to create and inhabit those memorable characters, and what they feel the legacy of “The Wire” is now, 20 years after its debut. We’re still mourning the loss of Michael K. Williams, whose Omar Little remains one of the series’ most indelible characters, but his thoughts on playing Omar— on being “in the deep end of the pool, emotionally” — from my 2018 “Salon Talks” interview are here as well. 

“In the middle of shooting ‘The Wire,’ we ran into a lot of s**t,” Royo told me. “First, it was the mayor, and he was saying that we were showing Baltimore in a bad light. Then there was the activists. Then there was people in general saying, ‘Why do you show our neighborhood this way?'” 

Before “The Wire” 

Before “The Wire” I only remember hero cops. Or rather, I only remember seeing hero cops and their stories on film and TV. The police officers who worked in my neighborhood were anti-heroes; those guys couldn’t wait to break their foot off in your ass for any and every reason. But cops were different in the movies marketed to ’80s babies like me, in classics like “48 Hours” with Eddie Murphy, Arnold Schwarzenegger’s “Kindergarten Cop,” the “Die Hard” series starring Bruce Willis, the “Lethal Weapon” films with Mel Gibson and Danny Glover, “Beverly Hills Cop” with Eddie Murphy again — damn, Eddie was getting money in the ’80s — and Laurence Fishburne’s “Deep Cover.” 

Don’t get me wrong — some of the cops in those films had a little edge to them. And there were shows that dabbled in police corruption narratives while exploring the idea of the imperfect hero; however, the protagonists were almost universally good. Not to mention handsome, funny, fit, hyper-heterosexual, loved their wives and would only bend the rules if it meant providing justice to their beloved citizens. I never met police like that, but Hollywood did. The cops who collectively tried to ruin my childhood were the opposite — they were rarely in shape and never made my block laugh with witty punch lines. They threw around racial slurs instead, and would bend the rules just because they knew they could get away with it. 

RELATED: Thanksgiving and “The Wire”: My true Baltimore story about the streets, writing and TV

I don’t fault the actors, studio execs or even the screenwriters for how cops were portrayed then. In those days the wealthy didn’t yell, “Black Lives Matter!” Diversity was not the initiative. And most of those people probably had great relationships with police officers — their cop stories probably involved an eager young officer helping them change a flat tire on a dark highway, or a veteran detective who took time out of his busy day to rescue their cat Marbles who got stuck in the sycamore tree. Or even the cop they called to investigate a crime who showed up at their home, took impeccable notes and then actually solved the crime

There’s no way the people who created those ’80s and ’90s cop stories had to deal with the kinds of officers that made it into my stories once I became a writer. Cops like Monkey Man, who would put your head through drywall before dangling you out of a window by your ankles. Cops like Bowling Ball, who loved to strip kids naked and pull off in the patrol car with all of their clothes. The worst was Fries the Devil, who had to crack you in the head because that was the only way he could have a good day. Those were the cops I knew. The cops I know. The personalities that never got airtime in the time known as Before “The Wire.” 

“We were trying to get an argument onto the op-ed page off of the entertainment page.”

After “The Wire”

Now he’s an award-winning TV executive and part-time Twitter assassin. But David Simon started out as a crime reporter for the Baltimore Sun. There he honed his skills as a newspaperman, learning to peel through the many layers of the onion that makes up Baltimore. 

Crime in Baltimore, a city whose murder rate has been among the worst in the country over the past 30 years, is always at the forefront of local conversations. Sometimes those conversations go national. Simon’s gig gave him proximity to the city’s police department. I imagine he learned how complex the profession of policing a city like Baltimore was during those years. His first book, “Homicide: A Year on the Killing Streets,” published in 1991, details the good, the bad and the ugly that comes with being a detective. The book was adapted into a hit drama series for NBC. Simon wasn’t completely sold on becoming a TV executive initially, but he ended up falling in love with the medium. 

Simon’s next book, “The Corner: A Year in the Life of an Inner-City Neighborhood,” which he co-wrote with former Baltimore City police officer Ed Burns, came out in 1997. In “The Corner,” Simon moved away from covering the police department and focused on a family working their way through love, addiction and survival in West Baltimore. The book was made into a critically acclaimed HBO miniseries written by David Simon and David Mills, and directed by Charles S. Dutton in 2000. “The Corner” would win Simon’s team three Emmys and a Peabody.

After that came “The Wire,” which broke new ground by combining the perspective of police and city leaders with that of the people being policed and those underserved by the city. 

“Maybe we showed a little something about how much political argument you could strap to the back of a good narrative and get across,” Simon told me. “We were trying to get an argument onto the op-ed page off of the entertainment page.”

“The show had such a major impact on society.”

How to make “The Wire”: Add these parts to make a whole

STEP 1: THE LAW. Gather up all the complexities of a police department: the rules to being a beat cop, how long it takes to solve a murder, which district goes by what rules, what’s legal and not legal in police work and how often officers cross the line, the amount of alcohol consumed by average homicide detective, how the rank and file defines “good police,” directions to the district’s local watering hole, what the bosses want, what the community wants, what constitutes brutality, and toss in the conflicting philosophies of the many officers who attempt to do the job. 

STEP 2: THE PEOPLE. Collect all the different players needed to make up a drug crew, in addition to the different types of personalities that get caught up in street life, including the kids who never wanted to sell drugs and the kids who dreamed about hustling since they were in elementary school. Of course, you must name the most ruthless kingpins, the neighborhood rules, in which D-Boy can work which shift. Don’t forgot the rest of the citizens that make up Baltimore City who survive in Baltimore but want nothing to do with the drug trade but are still affected by it: the neighborhood boxing coach, the Department of Public Works staffer, the grandmas, the church members, the kids who never leave their steps, the security guard at the corner store. 

STEP 3: THE (ALLEGED) CHANGE-MAKERS. Identify the politicians, from every local council member to the mayor and the governor, along with the judges and court commissioners and state senators and delegates and everyone else who decided they should run for public office because they, and only they, have the answers. Don’t forget to include the ones who can’t wait to steal and are known for keeping their hand in your left pocket when you look right and in your right pocket when you look left, bellowing “sheee-itttttttttttttttttt” when you catch them, and also when they get away. 

STEP 4: THE MELTING POT­­. This is the most important part. After you accumulate all of the different items from the previous three steps, you must add them together. Multiply, connect and stir, stir, stir, hoping the contents will add up to change and knowing they won’t. But still, check the pot periodically. You’ll never see the change, but you get “The Wire,” the ultimate guide to why that change will never comes, instead. 

“When I sat and talked to so many people and got their story and got how they ended up where they were at that particular time, I saw no pattern. I just saw humanity.”

The result: Unforgettable characters and narratives

Simon and crew were able to masterfully merge the worlds of so many characters from so many different walks of life into a cohesive, addictive storyline like we had never seen before. Characters like Detective Kima Griggs (Sonja Sohn), a biracial lesbian officer who was the best at her job. We saw her be overlooked because she was a woman, fight through the challenges that come with being a part of an all-boys club, achieve success and report other crooked cops even though her actions could have been career suicide. 

On the other side of Greggs was the notorious Omar Little, played by the late Michael K. Williams, television’s groundbreaking gay gangster. Omar was iconic, not only because of his perfect one-liners and Western-esque showdowns with rival hustlers, but because he was proudly gay in a hyper-masculine environment. He wasn’t a joke, a checked box or punchline. Omar was a complete person, and his presence helped broaden the perspective of audiences, many of whom may have also suffered from homophobia. 

And then there was Reginald “Bubbles” Cousins (Andre Royo), a snitching drug addict who was funny as your favorite standup comedian, beyond loyal to his friends and so easy to love even though he spent multiple seasons stealing from people that didn’t deserve it. We didn’t see the writers minimize him to being nothing more than a rat. They allowed us to follow his journey, watch him struggle with addiction, meet his family, make multiple attempts at being clean and finally beating the deadly habit.

Bubbles wasn’t just a character to Royo; he was humbled by confronting his own preconceived ideas about unhoused people and addicts.

“I was part of the problem,” Royo told me. “Growing up where I grew up, I ignored the homeless, I ignored somebody that I saw nodding, like, they f**ked up, it’s their fault. I’m on my way, keep moving, that will never happen to me. Or that was my thought. But then when I sat and talked to so many people and got their story and got how they ended up where they were at that particular time, I saw no pattern. I just saw humanity.”

“The Wire” also introduced us to Malik “Poot” Carr, played by Tray Chaney. Yes, Poot was a drug dealer, but he cried, he was curious, he wanted to talk about global warming and he shared his dreams with his friends. We watched him finally leave the corner for a job in retail and who knows what kind of growth once he received an opportunity to do something positive. 

The role also made a big impact on Chaney’s own growth. “Those different layers and those different arcs for me, playing the character Poot, I think back on it and I say, man, that was shaping me,” he said. “That was molding me into the actor that I am today.”

“The Wire” allowed us to go home with characters from all walks of life in a way that was loving, caring and empathetic. The method of storytelling used by the writing team throughout the five seasons works so well it has been duplicated in the industry ever since. 

The complex characters also taught viewers who spent their lives romanticizing police officers that cops can be bad — extremely bad — which proved to be the ultimate precursor for our current moment of police exhaustion. Without the success of “The Wire” and the show’s ability to display the diversity that existed within police departments 20 years ago, we may not have been able to make “We Own This City” now.

“15 years after ‘The Wire,’ the policing only got worse, and the drug war only became more oppressive.”

“We Own This City” is a six-part HBO limited series about the Gun Trace Task Force (GTTF). The GTTF, led by Sergeant Wayne Jenkins (played by John Bernthal), consisted of a few so-called elite Baltimore Police Department officers who were granted special privileges as part of the city’s effort to get guns off the street. These cops used those privileges to commit a ridiculous amount of overtime fraud while spending their days partying and drinking on the taxpayers’ dime, as well as robbing civilians, sex workers, drug dealers and anyone else they thought had money. These officers were known to lie in their reports, which read like fiction manuscripts; plant drugs on people to juke their stats; plant guns on the kids they shot; and drive their squad cars like maniacs, even killing a person in the process, all while selling more narcotics than some of the biggest drug dealers in the city.

All of this was happening during the rise of Black Lives Matter, when the country was being overloaded with footage of police officers killing unarmed Black men on camera, including Freddie Gray, an unarmed west Baltimore man who died in police custody. While the city exploded into unrest after Gray’s death, Jenkins used the opportunity to steal pharmaceuticals from looted stores and sell them for a profit. His actions also perfectly mirrored those of the police officers I knew. 

RELATED: Jon Bernthal embedded with Baltimore police to play city’s dirtiest cop in HBO’s “We Own This City

“[In] Baltimore, 15 years after ‘The Wire,’ the policing only got worse, and the drug war only became more oppressive, and the quality and professionalism of the people coming into the police department is a generation removed from the people we were writing about in ‘The Wire,'” Simon said.

I wasn’t a writer back when “The Wire” was in production. I earned my stripes in the publishing world years after the show ended, and was lucky enough to get a writing job on “We Own This City.” Episode three is mine, however, I got a chance to be in the writer’s room and workshop and consult on the entire series, and I was not the only person involved to say that this show could not have been made 20 years ago — Before “The Wire.” Everyone in the writer’s room worked on “The Wire” except me, and we were charged with the task of showing America the kind of police officers I grew up with. Police officers who woke up everyday with the intentions to steal, rob, pillage and destroy lives. None of that was shocking to me, but it’s very important to remember that America loves its police, and convincing the dominant culture to view cops and their historically failed departments as the crooks that they are is not a job for the weak. Thanks to “The Wire” laying the ground work, so many finally feel heard. 

20 years of “The Wire” at Salon:

Tulsa shooting added to the growing list of recent tragedies

Tulsa police confirmed Wednesday that four people were killed, including the shooter, during a mass shooting at a medical facility in the northeastern Oklahoma city. 

The Tulsa World reports the shooting occurred Wednesday afternoon in a building just south of Saint Francis Hospital. Tulsa Police Capt. Richard Meulenberg described a “catastrophic scene” at the Natalie Building at 64th Street and Yale Avenue.

Tulsa City Councilor Connie Dodson was at St. Francis Hospital’s emergency room when the shooting took place.

“They locked it down without announcing anything, but then people heard the large presence of police and responders in the area and were getting alerts on their phones,” she told the World. “There were approximately 30 people in the ER at the time, but everyone was calm and watching the activity outside and live reports on the TV.”

According to the Gun Violence Archive, the incident is the 20th U.S. mass shooting—defined as acts in which at least four people are shot—since the May 24 massacre of 21 students and staff at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas.

It was also the second mass shooting in Oklahoma this week. One woman was killed Sunday and seven others were injured when a gunman fired more than 40 rounds during a Memorial Day festival in Taft, near Muskogee.

The Oklahoma shooting occurred on the 101st anniversary of the second and final day of the 1921 Tulsa Massacre, in which scores and possibly hundreds of Black residents of the city’s prosperous Greenwood District, popularly known as “Black Wall Street,” were shot, burned, beaten, and bombed to death by racist mobs of white people, at least 10 of whom were also killed.

Buffalo shooter charged with domestic terrorism

This Wednesday, a grand jury charged the white supremacist accused of fatally shooting 10 Black people at a Buffalo supermarket with domestic terrorism motivated by hate and 10 counts of first-degree murder, POLITICO reports.

The 25-count indictment against 18-year-old Payton Gendron also charges him of murder and attempted murder as a hate crime and weapons possession. He was previously charged with first-degree murder. He has pleaded not guilty.

According to investigators, Gendron drove about three hours from his home in Conklin, New York, to the supermarket in Buffalo with the intention of killing as many Black people as possible.

“Stranger Things” and the helpful orderly tap into our fear about what makes a villain truly scary

Acting can be traumatic. 

From difficult conditions on set, to what their characters must do, witness or endure, usually repeatedly in take after take, actors from Tom Hanks to Kate Winslet have reported feeling traumatized by roles. Leonardo DiCaprio was deeply upset by having to engage with inhumane treatment of mental illness for his film “Shutter Island.” Daniel-Day Lewis slipped into such a severe depression after filming “Phantom Thread” that he announced his retirement from the profession of acting. 

Trauma can come from performers engaging with violence, often at a young age. Sheryl Lee was only about 22 when she played Laura Palmer, the abused dead girl “wrapped in plastic” in “Twin Peaks.” She said much later: “it’s hard for me to unsee what I see now . . . all of the signs, and no one reaching out to help her.” Sophie Turner Jones said she knows she’ll exhibit symptoms of trauma after playing, starting at 15, a young character who was assaulted on “Game of Thrones.”

Instructed to make the pain seem real to audiences, it sometimes feels like it is. Most recently, actor Jamie Campbell Bower spoke publicly about the trauma of playing a really bad guy on the newest season of Netflix’s “Stranger Things.” He told Variety: “It was scary, I’ll be honest with you . . . I was just bringing up a lot of anger.”

What makes this “Stranger Things” villain different, and perhaps more intense, from the villains of other seasons, different enough that it could cause its actor pain? Scariest of all, Bower’s character Vecna is/was human.

RELATED: “On Wednesdays, we wear Hellfire Club shirts: “Stranger Things” and the real-life Satanic panic

Both Bower and the press were initially kept in ignorance about his character. The actor read dialogue from classic horror scripts, not “Stranger Things” scripts, for his audition, and his character name was released to the media at first as “Peter Ballard.” 

That’s only partally true. As the fourth season unfolds, it turns out his character has several names and identities. As Peter – how viewers first meet him – he is a white uniformed orderly who stands in the shadows, for a while, in the creepy Rainbow Room of the Hawkins Lab. As Henry, he is an unnerving child with abilities and the son of the mysterious Hawkins resident Victor Creel. As One, he is — you guessed it, the first one of Dr. Brenner’s (Matthew Modine) child experiments. And as Vecna, he kills kids already struggling with great trauma. 

It’s scary when someone’s cruel. But it’s scarier when someone is kind and then cruel. 

Campbell looks way too handsome to be a background character, so that’s your first clue that this orderly is not just an orderly. But that profession itself has a long history of queasiness in books, TV and films. TV Tropes put it bluntly: “Orderlies are Creeps.” 

From abusing patients to stealing from work, the fictional orderly, tasked with assisting hospital nursing staff in care and safety, is often deeply disturbing. Orderlies in fiction frequently assault patients, especially female patients who are incapacitated, like the orderlies Buck from “Kill Bill” and Blue from “Sucker Punch.” Remember when the orderly licked Sarah’s face in “Terminator 2: Judgement Day”? The mental hospital orderlies in one of my favorite films, “Return to Oz,” reappear later in the movie as the most unnerving and unhinged villains of my childhood: the wheelies.

Like Peter, the orderly character in “Firestarter,” the classic horror film to which “Stranger Things” owes a debt or two, is a double agent (well, Peter is a quadruple agent). And the horror flick that the Netflix series pays homage to the most this season, “A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors,” has its orderlies too: one creepy and assault-y, the other one kindly and helpful. 

Manipulation is a frightening thing. It’s also a human thing.

In the original “Firestarter,” George C. Scott’s character John Rainbird wins the trust of Drew Barrymore’s fire prodigy Charlie in order to betray that trust. To take advantage of the child because his employer needs her to perform and behave for them (but also because he’s a grade A creep). Peter does something similar, befriending a young El simply (it seems) to use her later.

It’s scary when someone’s cruel. But it’s scarier when someone is kind and then cruel. This is the stuff of gaslighting, thrusting someone into a confusing and isolating worldview where they can’t trust their own experiences and history, and the kind of deep trauma that Vecna later feeds on. 

Manipulation is a frightening thing. It’s also a human thing. Being rushed by Demodogs is terrifyingly dangerous, but being hurt by a person you believed and trusted?

Like buildings and roads and swimming pools have their dark counterparts in the Upside Down, maybe people do too. 

As One, Peter was the first child patient and something obviously went wrong with his “training,” bad enough that he was implanted with a device that keeps his violent behavior in check called Soteria. An evocative name, Soteria refers to both a mythological Greek goddess of safety and preservation from harm, as well as an approach in mental health which is community-based and uses minimal medication and no restraints.

Interesting interpretation Dr. Brenner has there: to use a device that eschews restraint to restrain someone. (It’s also the name of a gun silencer.) 

Millie Bobby Brown in “Stranger Things” (Netflix)But the motivation for the manipulation of the young El by the older “Stranger Things” villain still remains a little murky. How did Peter/Henry/One know for sure El would try to free him from his Soteria, allowing him to kill at will? Or, did the device regulate his behavior so much that it changed him fundamentally, and while under its influence, he was helping El out of the kindness of his (restrained) heart?


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


This season of “Stranger Things” is split in two. In the first half, which has aired so far, we don’t know too much about Vecna yet, like how he came to have his powers as the child Henry in the first place (something to do with his dad and chemical agents or experiments of the war?), or if one has to become a monster to survive in the Upside Down. Were the previous season’s big bads, like the Mindflayer, once human too? 

The Demogorgon of the first season is certainly humanoid. And one “Stranger Things” theory is that, like buildings and roads and swimming pools have their dark counterparts in the Upside Down, maybe people do too. 

But Peter was already a monster. As a human, tasked with protecting a little girl, he hurt her instead. That’s the stuff nightmares are made of.

More stories like this 

 

Jada Pinkett Smith: Will Smith and Chris Rock should “reconcile” and “heal” after Oscars slap

On Wednesday’s episode of the Facebook Watch series “Red Table Talk,” Jada Pinkett Smith finally spoke up about the infamous slap at the Oscars.

At the March awards ceremony, her husband Will Smith slapped Chris Rock on stage after the comedian poked fun at Pinkett Smith and her lack of hair. The televised altercation launched a million thinkpieces attempting to assign blame or identifying the most injured party.

Pinkett Smith had stayed mum until now, deciding to address The Slap in the opening of Wednesday’s episode: “About Oscar night, my deepest hope is that these two intelligent, capable men have an opportunity to heal, talk this out and reconcile,” she said.

“The state of the world today, we need them both. And we all actually need one another more than ever. Until then, Will and I are continuing to do what we have done for the last 28 years, and that’s keep figuring out this thing called life together. Thank you for listening.”

RELATED: What is alopecia, and why might someone (or their spouse) be sensitive about it?

Pinkett Smith then pivoted to the main topic of the “Red Table Talk” episode: alopeciaan autoimmune disorder that causes significant hair loss in people, including Pinkett Smith. The misinformation about the disorder, the psychological effects, and how the Oscars Slap occurred as the result of these forces all combine to make understanding alopecia essential.

“This is a really important ‘Red Table Talk’ on alopecia. Considering what I’ve been through with my own health and what happened at the Oscars, thousands have reached out to me with their stories,” Pinkett Smith said. “I’m using this moment to give our alopecia family an opportunity to talk about what it’s like to have this condition and to inform people about what alopecia actually is.”

Pinkett Smith talked about having to go bald “without a choice.”

“That gives me a lot of anxiety,” she said. “What’s my hair going to look like today?”


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


Pinkett Smith also sat down with Niki Ball, the mother of Rio, her 12-year-old daughter who had alopecia. Rio was frequently bullied for her looks, oftentimes being called a list of derogatory names by her peers at school. She died by suicide in March.

“With the hair loss, she was so strong,” Ball said of her daughter. “. . . With school coming up, we got her that super cute wig, she loved it, and she glowed then. But at school, within a couple of weeks, she was like, ‘I don’t want to wear it anymore, there’s no point.’ She had it ripped off her head. She’d get smacked upside on the head walking down the hallway. And that was within the first two weeks, three weeks. It got really bad for her.”

Watch Wednesday’s full “Red Table Talk” episode on Facebook Watch.

More stories you might like:

Vaccines reduce risk of long Covid by just 15 percent, study finds

One of the scariest consequences of contracting COVID-19 is the aftermath. Long Covid, a neologism that refers to long-term side effects which appear after the virus has cleared one’s body, occurs in at least 10 percent of patients who contract COVID-19. And while symptoms vary, long Covid can leave people with devastating and debilitating side effects. Internal tremors and vibrations, depression, or a lasting loss of taste and smell are all possible symptoms of long Covid, or post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection as it is formally known.

While not much is known about why some people get long Covid and others don’t, a growing body of research suggests that people who are vaccinated against COVID-19 are slightly less likely to develop long-term COVID-19 symptoms. Perhaps surprisingly, the degree to which the risk of long Covid is reduced in the vaccinated is not great. That’s according to a new study published in Nature Medicine, which is believed to be the largest peer-reviewed study on long Covid and breakthrough COVID-19 cases based in the United States. Their findings are particularly surprising given how much vaccines appear to protect against serious COVID-19 cases; indeed, those who are vaccinated and who have a breakthrough case of COVID typically have mild cases.


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


According to the study, which analyzed the medical records of 33,940 people who experienced breakthrough infections after vaccination, there was only a 15 percent reduced risk of the vaccinated getting long Covid (compared to unvaccinated people) six months after their initial diagnosis of COVID-19. For some of the most debilitating symptoms, there was no difference in risk; these include neurologic issues, cardiometabolic disease, fatigue and respiratory issues. Patients in the study either had two doses of the Moderna or Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines, or one dose of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. Notably, the study didn’t cover the time period in which the omicron variant and its subvariants have circulated.

“People with breakthrough infections can still get long Covid, and guess what? The features of long Covid in these patients were very, very similar to the features of long Covid in unvaccinated individuals,” Dr. Ziyad Al-Aly, the study’s senior investigator and Chief of Research and Development at the VA St. Louis healthcare system, told Salon. “Some of the long Covid manifestations that we were seeing in breakthrough infections were very similar, qualitatively, [in] clinical features to the long Covid that we see in unvaccinated individuals.”

“Let’s say SARS-CoV-2 is here for 10 years … Our current approach will likely leave a large number of people with chronic and potentially disabling conditions that have no treatments.” 

The greatest benefit of the COVID-19 vaccine in long Covid patients appeared to be in symptoms such as lung complications and a reduction in blood clotting.

The risk of long Covid in vaccinated people was slightly higher for those who were vaccinated and immunocompromised — 17 percent, compared to those who were previously healthy and vaccinated but experienced a breakthrough infection. In more positive news, the study did show that vaccination greatly reduces the risk of death, by 34 percent.

Long Covid was first identified after many patients began to report persistent symptoms early on during the pandemic, before the vaccine existed. According to the World Health Organization, long Covid is defined as having symptoms that last longer than two months and can’t be explained by another diagnosis. As Salon has previously reported, some of those who got COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic are still struggling with persisting symptoms that affect their daily lives over two years later.

RELATED: Long covid symptoms overlooked in seniors

“I’ve been sick now for two years; “I don’t know if I’m ever going to get better,” long Covid sufferer Leigh Jerome told Salon in February. “I’ve tried to be grateful, to maintain perspective, and I think I do a pretty good job of that, but on the other hand management is not the same thing as being okay.”

Last week, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released new statistics on the condition and the toll it has had on Americans. According to the report, one in five COVID-19 survivors between the ages of 18 of 64 years have at least one condition that persists after a COVID-19 diagnosis; that statistic increases to one in four for survivors over the age of 65. Those over the age of 65 were also at a higher risk of developing neurologic conditions and mental health conditions.

Al-Aly assured Salon that, despite this study, COVID-19 vaccines still provide some protection against long Covid.

“I would say that it offers partial protection, because it’s clearly definitely better than nothing,” Al-Aly said. “If you say, ‘Okay, what about fatigue?’ You know, fatigue reduction is by 30 percent, but overall, reduction is not zero. It works, but it’s not really going to be sufficient on its own as a long-term sustainable or long-term mitigation strategy.”

Al-Aly hopes the takeaway from this study is that we need to think more about how to protect against long Covid.

“Let’s say SARS-CoV-2 is here for 10 years,” Al-Aly said in a press statement. “Our current approach will likely leave a large number of people with chronic and potentially disabling conditions that have no treatments. This will not only affect people’s health, but their ability to work, life expectancy, economic productivity and societal well-being.”

Al-Aly added that moving forward, there needs to be “a candid national conversation about the consequences of our current approach.”

Read more on long COVID:

“The Real World Homecoming: New Orleans” recap: Somebody’s baby tonight

In the original season of “The Real World New Orleans,” which aired in 2000 when such hits as “Country Grammar” by Nelly and “It’s Gonna Be Me” by ‘NSYNC topped the charts, we were given a musical gift by Tokyo (David) Broom that we did not quite know, at that time, how to honor in the way it has always deserved to be honored. But now, seeing the whole cast of “The Real World Homecoming: New Orleans” take to the studio to recreate the infamous song as an ensemble, we’re fully ready to be somebody’s baby tonight. 

The backstory of how “Come On Be My Baby Tonight” came to be could fill its own 33 1/3 book, but it can all be traced back to the original season when the housemates were tasked with producing a weekly cable-access show called “The Real 7.” This whole assigning jobs thing was something MTV tried out for the first few seasons of “The Real World,” as a way to create and then maintain drama within the house, but it was phased out after awhile, probably when people realized that being on the show was work enough.

RELATED: “The Real World Homecoming: New Orleans” recap: Outer darkness

In a segment of “The Real 7” produced by Kelley Limp (now Wolf), the housemates were instructed to introduce themselves by answering a few questions about their personal interests. Tokyo (David), chose to break out of the standard format followed by everyone else in the house by performing a song instead, which he described as being “interpretive of what’s inside him.” And the rest is musical history.

“You can’t be ‘Tardy For the Party’ without being somebody’s baby tonight.”

Melissa Beck looks back at the origins of “Come On Be My Baby Tonight” and, like most everyone else, recognizes it as the watershed moment it was. Referencing other now viral reality TV songs by “Real Housewives of New York” stars Luann de Lesseps and Kim Zolciak-Biermann, she comments during an aside that Luann’s “Money Can’t Buy You Class” can’t top “Come On Be My Baby Tonight;” and that “You can’t be ‘Tardy For the Party‘ without being somebody’s baby tonight.” Both facts. 


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


With Kelley, Melissa, Julie Stoffer, Matt Smith, Danny Roberts and Jamie “I’m wearing a hat” Murray on backup vocals, Tokyo takes to the keys to make magic for a new generation of reality TV fans. Where 22 years ago this musical gold was laughed at by people like Dave Chappelle, it has found a permanent home in the pop culture zeitgeist, where it belongs. 

Breaking up this moment of shared sincerity and appreciation in an awkward and socially inappropriate way that has become her signature personality trait, Julie resumes her campaign against the sensibilities of the house by showing everyone nude photos of her husband, Spencer. Rushing forth, phone in hand, she shoves a picture in Kelley’s face and waits for a response. 

“What am I looking at?” Kelley asks. And then rushes off in disgust when it registers, as though she’d just been shown images from a fatal plane crash.

“I don’t wanna live in a house where it just feels icky all the time.”

No one person could come up with a proper excuse for why Julie behaves so “Julie” all the time, but Kelley is over it, summarizing her grievances by saying, “I don’t wanna live in a house where it just feels icky all the time.” Taking a page out of the Goop handbook with a direct and poised approach, she pulls Julie aside and tells her, “Have a seat.” Hearing these words spoken in this way filled the totality of my mind and body with a very specific fear, like maybe I was about to be fired, or arrested for tax evasion. People in Kelley’s past have attempted to f**k around and find out, but I would never dare to be one of them. Julie doesn’t seem to be too fazed though, sitting across from Kelley, face open and confused, with every one of her 32 teeth exposed as she is asked to please refrain from talking about masturbating and whatever the hell else in Kelley’s presence. Julie might think it’s OK to disrespect her own marriage by making personal photos public and going on about being given a “hall pass” to sleep with Jamie, but her whole deal makes Kelley visibly disturbed.

When the house receives an “incoming message” focusing on Kelley and her relationship with Peter, a man she met in New Orleans while filming the original season, we learn that a history of being bullied by other girls in high school led to her developing defense mechanisms that can sometimes read as icy to others. Kelley tells her housemates that “poised is protection,” but it seems like living with Julie is testing the limits of that poise. If Kelley is able to focus on the bond she’s maintained with Danny all these years, and her newly formed friendship with Melissa, she might be able to make it to the finale. But if Julie pushes her boundaries any further, Kelley is liable to pack up her picnic blanket and close this New Orleans chapter of her life for good.

Read more:

“The Real World Homecoming: New Orleans” recap: Sexy jump rope 

“The Real World Homecoming: New Orleans” recap: Have Mercy 

“The Real World Homecoming: New Orleans” recap: Changing the narrative

As Johnny Depp wins his defamation suit, “believe all women” loses

You didn’t have to follow all six weeks of the John C. Depp, II v. Amber Laura Heard  coverage to understand its potential to set a precedent in the court of public opinion. You didn’t even have to adopt the social media tendency of making it a competitive spectacle, pitting Johnny Depp’s very large, vocal, and emotionally invested fanbase against Amber Heard, to understand something larger was at stake.

All you need to understand is the optics playing out inside the district court in Virginia’s Fairfax County on Wednesday, where Heard, the defendant, sat on one side while Depp’s legal team represented its absent client as the verdict was read.

In that courtroom, as one cable news legal analyst pointed out, Heard was positioned closer to the jurors than Depp. They could see all of her reactions to statements being made about her on the stand by Depp and other witnesses.

RELATED: Depp verdict deemed “a win for all men”

Surely they noticed her deflated, downward gaze as each of the jury’s determinations on Depp’s claims was read, finding her liable for three counts of defamation to the tune of $15 million in damages. Depp’s award breaks down to $10 million in compensatory damages and $5 million in punitive, with the second number largely being symbolic. A Virginia statute caps any financial awards rendered by a court to punish wrongdoers at $350,000.

But this was never really about the money or a supposed reputational cleansing, as Depp’s team implied throughout the trial.

This was about publicly establishing the power differential between two messy people who used to be married. One is a man whose career and celebrity have been established for many more decades than those of the woman accusing him of abuse.  

This was never really about the money or a supposed reputational cleansing.

That’s why Heard had to be in that courtroom as the seven-person jury’s verdict was read, while Depp enjoyed his triumph in London. Yes – the cap to this long, strange trip has been the actor’s unscheduled appearances in Britain with guitarist Jeff Beck.

Their first jam took place Sunday at Sheffield City Hall in Yorkshire, followed by performances on Monday and Tuesday with the former Yardbirds guitarist at Royal Albert Hall.

The second London gig was reportedly attended by Depp’s ex Kate Moss, according to multiple reports. Moss took the stand on his behalf on Wednesday, May 25 to deny Heard’s claim that Depp had pushed Moss down the stairs when they were together in the 1990s.

“Six years later, the jury gave me back my life,” reads a statement from Depp, one that doesn’t explain how much of a downgrade he’s suffered given the fact that he’s still drawing crowds by appearing onstage with a two-time Rock and Roll Hall of Fame inductee, you know, just because.

Depp previously brought a libel suit against News Group Newspapers and Dan Wootton, the executive editor of its tabloid, the Sun, over publishing a story in April 2018 that referred to Depp as a “wife beater.” He lost that case in 2020 following a Royal Court justice’s determination that the Sun had proved its article was “substantially true.”

According to CNN Depp’s spokesperson described these London performances as her client fulfilling previous contractual obligations, and not taking an early victory lap in the land of his previous legal defeat.

Does it matter if he were? Not to his adoring public, some of whom likely strummed out some air guitar riffs in parasocial celebration.

Five men and two women unanimously decided that Heard defamed her ex-husband in a 2018 op-ed published in The Washington Post, in which she describes herself as a “public figure representing domestic abuse.” He contended the editorial’s publication led to Disney cutting ties with him, ending his starring role in the “Pirates of the Caribbean” franchise.

Heard never mentions Depp by name in the article, but his attorneys contend that it refers to the allegations she makes in the 2016 documents she filed to commence their divorce proceedings. The two were married from 2015 until 2017.

Heard filed a countersuit against him in 2020 for $100 million, which the jury also weighed and returned with a mixed verdict, determining that Depp defamed Heard in one of three counts in her countersuit linked to a statement by lawyer Adam Waldman. For this, she was awarded $2 million, including zero in punitive damages.

This punier number didn’t quite register at first on Fox News, which reacted in its headline chyron as the jury’s verdict was being read with, “Jury Finds Amber Heard Defamed Johnny Depp” before amending that to “Jury Finds Depp Proved All Elements of Defamation” to eventually just, in huge letters, “JURY RULES IN FAVOR OF JOHNNY DEPP” that stood for a time after the award in favor of Heard was read.

Eventually, this was toned down to match CNN’s “Jury finds both Heard and Depp liable for defamation” headline, for the folks sticking around for more context and analysis of what this all means.

CNN’s team seemed baffled by the verdict despite the weeks’ worth of Twitter and TikTok raging against Heard, which may not have influenced the jury but, at the very least, reflected some measure of how she and her testimony were perceived.

“This, you know, puts a bit of a stake in the heart of the notion that you believe all women,” says Martha MacCallum

Fox News, on the other hand, lodged its thermometer in right-wing America’s grumpy orifice from the trial’s start, and has been sharing its readings at every opportunity.

Accordingly, Judge Jeanine Pirro characterized the decision against Heard as the cost of her alleged dishonesty, “because a woman made a decision that she was going to ride on the coattails of real battered women.”

“I think the message that’s being sent by the jury, to anybody who wants to proclaim that they have been physically or sexually abused is you better be telling the truth, number one,” opined its legal analyst Brian Claypool.

And this reflects the outcome advocates for domestic abuse survivors have been fearing. Whether we invested any time or feelings into this trial, the outcome will resonate throughout the culture, and mainly in life-altering cases that may never see the inside of a courtroom or be registered at a police station.


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


Heard speaks to this notion in her public statement, released minutes after the verdict was read. “I’m even more disappointed with what this verdict means for other women,” it said. “It’s a setback. It sets back the clock to a time when a woman who spoke up and spoke out could be publicly shamed and humiliated. It sets back the idea that violence against women is to be taken seriously.”

One immediate reaction to the verdict came from host Martha MacCallum, who echoes this, albeit in a depressingly different and accurate way. “This puts a bit of a stake in the heart of the notion that you believe all women . . . that regardless of your sex, you can either be telling the truth or not be telling the truth depending on any given individual circumstance in these situations,” MacCallum said. “And for a while, that idea was gone. And it appears that with this some semblance of justice . . . was meted out by this jury.”

Those words, “some semblance of justice,” aren’t unexpected from Fox News, which has been firmly on Depp’s side since the trial began in April.

Siding with Team Depp is good for its bottom line and reflects the sentiment of all the pro-Jack Sparrow/ anti-Amber Heard trolls in its audience, and vindicates their righteous ire at a “crazy” woman taking on a man who, in this circumstance, they’ve cast as the hero.

Viewed by that standard, Depp was always going to win. And we’ll never know how many other people stand to lose because of these publicly established legal and social media-perpetuated precedents, simply because they aren’t famous enough for us to pay attention.

More stories like this:

 

The shortcut magic of mole paste

It was a languid and hazy San Diego afternoon, the sun lowering behind backyard trees and glimmering through windows, when I became acquainted with Doña María mole at my friend’s house. We were sitting at the kitchen table, talking to her mom, when she announced mole was for dinner. I loved mole, but I had no idea how to make it.

I sprang up to watch her hands work, my eyes dancing as she simmered and whisked and doctored this complex, rich, mysterious sauce — turning a paste into a feast. She laughed when I asked “peanut butter?” as she spooned some into the sauce. It nicked the heat and gave the flavor some backbone. Sugar was folded in, encouraging the mole to sweeten, balancing the nuttiness and spice. The Doña María jars, with their signature octagonal base, were rinsed and reused for water, juices, licuados — the iconic mark of a home that regularly delighted in this comforting paste.

A few years later, my grandma, whom I have always known as Tita, told me to add Nutella to mole (on top of the peanut butter). I thought it was her commercial American sweet tooth talking — my Tita is someone who drank Coca-Colas daily and had boxes of sugar packets stowed in her pantry — but I obliged anyway. I, too, like my black mole sweet. And though I didn’t understand it then, both the Nutella and peanut butter now make complete sense: Nuts and cacao are inherent in a black mole. These pantry items only enhance them.

A Mexican mother sauce, mole is parent to a bunch of dishes and sauces, from enmoladas to pollo con mole, romeritos, guisados, and more. There are myriad varieties and regional expressions, like coloradito, almendrado, poblano, mole amarillo, mole negro, mole chichilo, and many more. The word mole itself comes from the Nahuatl mulli, and it pre-dates colonialism — a sauce whose name means “sauce,” though it is much bigger than any word could describe.

Mole, a labor of love often comprising 30 ingredients or more, becomes easy to articulate in a shelf-stable paste. The jarred concoction has been an umbilical cord to the land I’m from, finding me in grocery store aisles no matter my location. If I come across a special paste, I won’t hesitate to cross the country with pints of mole in my checked luggage.

In the comforts of my kitchen, I open jars and blanket mole onto mushrooms (or cauliflower or squash) for tacos, or serve them with beans and rice, or use them as filling for tlacoyos or tetelas. I make enmoladas filled with beans, or flavor my tortillas with mole for quesadillas with oomph. Sometimes I mess up and make something new by mistake, like maíz tortilla mole crepes filled with sautéed squash and vegan cheese. But when I’m feeling fancy, when I want to treat someone, I make chilaquiles de mole with beans.

Some favorite moles

Doña María

Doña María is the classic accessible mole paste in the Mexican pantry. So much so that even their empty mole jars have become iconic recycled glassware in Mexican homes. Andrea Nguyen wrote for the LA Times that the woman behind this historic jar of mole got her start in 1945 by knocking on doors. By doing so, Doña María Pons and her husband, Don Pedro Degetau, not only opened doors for themselves — they opened doors to so many others.

Mulli Mole Negro by Coronado Spice & Tea

In this delectable Oaxacan mole negro, prunes and chiles come to the forefront. This Mexican-owned, San Diego–based spice and tea company also carries Oaxacan mole rojo, plus a mole veracruzano that’s imported from Veracruz and handcrafted by extended family.

Mole Poblano

Aromatic, savory, and vegetable-forward, Xilli’s mole poblano takes 30 ingredients and five days to make. Among their line of delicious Mexican salsas and accoutrements is pipian verde, an herbaceous green mole of Mayan origin made with a base of pumpkin seeds.

Chiles Secos

Found in Los Angeles’ Grand Central Market, Chiles Secos sells an unimaginable variety — their moles are displayed like ice cream flavors and scooped and sold by weight. The nutty almendrado is a particular fave.

¡Ya Oaxaca!

This jarred mole sauce cuts cooking time in half but with full-on, incredible flavor — especially the colorado, highlighting cacao and chile. Unlike paste, this sauce is ready to rock and roll from the jump, and it can be cooked on the fly, ready to coat tortillas or glaze guisados straight from the jar.

Recipe: Mole Caldillo Chilaquiles

How to steam carrots without cooking them to death

One of the easiest side dishes to make is steamed vegetables — like carrots — but they’re also one of the easiest to screw up. One second the vegetables are practically raw and the next they’re an overcooked mess that may as well turn into a mash. So what’s the best way to steam carrots so that they’re actually appealing?

How to steam carrots (no steamer basket necessary)

First, are you steaming baby carrots or large carrots? Will they be cooked whole, halved, or in smaller rounds? All of this will impact exactly how long to cook carrots for.

For an even more basic way to steam carrots, do this: Fill a large pan with an inch of water (use a deep skillet for large carrots or a medium-sized saucepan for baby carrots or carrot rounds). Bring the water to a boil, then add the carrots and salt, cover, and reduce the heat to medium. Cook the carrots for eight minutes, or until a fork can gently pierce them. Toss them with unsalted butterbrown sugar (or maple syrup or honey), salt and pepper for an easy side dish.

How to steam carrots in the microwave

All you need to make magic happen (aka speedy steamed carrots) is a microwave-safe bowl and microwave-safe lid (like our Five Two Airtight Silicone Lids or wrap. Add sliced carrot rounds to a glass bowl and add 2 to 3 tablespoons of water. Cook on high in the microwave for five minutes then immediately (carefully!) take out the bowl and tightly wrap a piece of plastic wrap over the top and let the carrots steam for another 2 to 3 minutes.

Carrot recipes

For argument’s sake, let’s look at this recipe for our Buttery Maple and Cumin Carrots, which calls for 1 pound of carrots, cut into batons about 1/2-inch thick. Add the carrots to a frying pan and sauté in butter and oil for three minutes; drizzle with maple syrup and keep cooking for another three to five or so minutes until caramelized. All in all, we’re looking at a total of six to eight minutes to cook 1/2-inch thick glazed carrots. These aren’t steamed using liquid, but rather with just a tiny bit of liquid from the syrup and naturally forming condensation.

In Dr. Jessica B. Harris’s recipe for Carrots With Ginger, she calls for 1 bunch of carrots cut into 1/2-inch rounds. Place the carrots in a medium-sized saucepan with a large piece of peeled, minced ginger and just ½ cup of orange juice. Cover and cook over moderate heat for about 10 minutes, until the carrots are fork-tender. Drain the carrots, reserving the cooking liquid, and season them to taste.

This recipe calls for more liquid and a slightly longer cook time. The recipe for Carrots With Ginger follows a more traditional steaming process compared to Buttery Maple and Cumin Carrots, which uses a sauté-steam combo. Let’s average the two together and say that carrots should be steamed for 8 to 10 minutes and not a minute more. Capeesh?