Spring Sale: Get 1 Year, Save 58%

DOJ: Trump’s top money man secretly stripped 9/11 mentions from GOP platform to protect Saudi pals

Former President Donald Trump’s billionaire friend Thomas Barrack altered the GOP platform at the 2016 Republican National Convention to shield the Saudi royal family’s ties to the 9/11 hijackers.

The Department of Justice updated its indictment against the chairman of Trump’s 2017 inaugural committee, who was arrested last year on charges of foreign lobbying and obstruction of justice, to show the role Barrack played in the RNC convention held in Cleveland, Ohio, reported The Daily Beast.

“It underscores the hypocrisy of the Trump camp, because at that time, there was an active presidential campaign going on,” said Brian McGlinchey, an independent journalist from Texas who has pushed for the release of missing records from the 9/11 probe. “You’ve got the candidate out front raising deep suspicions about Saudi involvement, at the same time you have these back channel maneuvers at the Republican convention to help the Saudis avoid embarrassment.”

Congressional investigators have already learned that Barrack allowed the Saudis and Emiratis to alter a Trump campaign speech on energy, where he pledge to “work with our Gulf allies,” and the DOJ’s revised indictment shows that someone identified only as “Person-1” emailed Barrack to massage GOP talking points at the convention.

“We need to talk about language for me to put in [the national political party] platform at national convention. Can be much more expansive than what we did in speech,” wrote that person, who the news site Middle East Eye suspects was Paul Manafort. “Platform language [should be] based on what you hear from your friends.”

Trump had pledged to release the infamous 28 pages that were missing from the 9/11 Commission Report that showed the Saudi royal family’s ties to the hijackers, but “Person-1” demanded that anything that could be considered “anti the Saudi Royal Family” must be removed from the platform.

Barrack then forwarded that email to Emirati businessman Rashid Al-Malik, who has been indicted by the DOJ for allegedly passing information to United Arab Emirates spies.

“Very confidential but you can share with HH,” Barrack wrote to Al-Malik. “Please do not circulate any further since it is very sensitive.”

However, federal investigators say Al-Malik forwarded that email to an unnamed Emirati official, and Barrack is also accused of sharing that message with yet another unnamed Emirati official who has been identified by reporters as UAE ambassador Yousef Al Otaiba, who remains in that post in Washington, D.C.

Barrack has been indicted on two new charges of lying to the FBI during a July 2019 interview, after investigators say he lied about having an additional phone that was a dedicated line for secretly communicating with the Emiratis.

Former Fox News reporter suggests putting network’s hosts in jail after Buffalo shooting

The internal dynamics at Fox News were explained by a former insider after the network received harsh criticism for its primetime using rhetoric that mirrors the racist conspiracy theory cited in a 106-page manifesto by the New York man accused of murdering ten people in the Buffalo mass shooting.

Carl Cameron, often called “Campaign Carl,” spent two decades at Fox News and was interviewed on Tuesday by MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace.

Wallace played clips of Fox News personalities Laura Ingraham and Tucker Carlson.

“I mean, obviously a mass shooter is responsible for the violence and the heinous acts that the mass shooter committed,” Wallace noted. “It is also true that the ideology left in the mass shooter’s screen mirrors the ideology championed by Tucker Carlson.”

“What happens at Fox News when something like this happens?” Wallace asked.

“I can’t even imagine,” Cameron replied. “That’s partly why I ended up getting out of there.”

“It really is kind of horrible to think that journalists with national and international capacity are putting together this type of nonsense,” he explained. “I think the president did a great job. I wish he had done a lot of this a lot sooner, and we need a lot more from the left and the middle, and we got to watch out because the Republicans have become the purveyors of misinformation, and when our two-party system is broken like that, democracy is seriously in trouble.”

“The president acknowledged that it’s time to actually start doing things and maybe taking some names and putting people in jail,” he said.

“I really can’t channel how Tucker believes in any of this stuff and how the network can go through with it. I will say this, however, it is very clear that this type of lying and deception is catching on,” he warned. “There’s racism across the borders, immigrants are being beaten up and being harassed more than ever. Judaism is constantly under fire, and all of this is essentially being accepted by a left — excuse me, a far, far-right community of people who have nothing but grievance based on lies.”

Watch video below or at this link.

Jenn de la Vega has 4 separate pantries (at least)

Welcome to Jenn de la Vega‘s pantry! In each installment of this series, a recipe developer will share with us the pantry items essential to their cooking. This month, we’re exploring seven staples stocking Jenn’s kitchen, which includes Japanese, West Indian, American Southern, and Filipinx ingredients.

I struggle defining the cuisine that I cook. When confronted, I’ll stammer about being a Filipina from California, and living now in Brooklyn, New York. If you ask what I do, the answer depends on the time of year. From January to June, I’m a recipe developer and cookbook recipe tester. Between August and December, I’m mostly a wedding caterer. I say “mostly” because there might be craft services for an indie flick, food styling for a magazine, or a nonprofit fundraiser dinner. On Tuesdays, I curate the hot dogs at a local bar called Wonderville. We look to video games to inspire the names. My current favorite is called “Pancit! At the Disco Elysium,” an all-beef hot dog with vegan stir-fried noodles and crunchy lumpia chips on top. As a result of all these different jobs, I don’t have just one pantry; I have four.

Growing up between San Francisco and Palmdale, my large family gathered frequently. Friends at school would ask me about weekend plans, and my constant answer would be, “a family party,” to which they were always invited. Our pantry was constantly stocked from my parents’ generational habit of bulk shopping at Costco. It was as big as a walk-in closet, which became a running joke when Great Auntie Pina gifted my mom, Ditas, a white plastic sign with red bubbled lettering that said “Ditas’ Sari Sari Store,” a tribute to the bodega-like convenience stalls in the Philippines.

My current pantry reflects both my work and what it is like to live in New York City. For every cookbook project, I keep a plastic bin with a locking lid to represent each cuisine. This allows me to keep an accurate inventory (and stack the boxes). Right now, I have Japanese, West Indian, American Southern, and Filipinx. Before that, I had bags of wood chips for a barbecue book and various types of rice for an all-onigiri recipe collection. As I complete projects, I’m left with a slew of options to improvise with: spices, grains, legumes, and flours from all over the world. Hundreds of unique combinations are born. I derive great joy when I introduce a sauce like ajvar or ingredients like shiitake mushroom powder to my friends. The delivery mechanisms I use are familiar vehicles balanced with new, surprising concepts, like mango chutney hot dogs, Gorgonzola nachos, chile colorado burritos, and ancho morita s’mores. I experiment with flavors and textures of different traditions in a way that points to living in a city where neighbors, friends, and coworkers hail from overlapping diasporas. My dishes stem from this intersectional reality rather than an aim to fuse two cultures. A friend pointed out that my approach is a lot like an artist who presents sketches or works in progress to the public as they tinker.

I’m a culinary chameleon. It’s exciting to imagine and grasp at what is possible in the kitchen. Recipe development lets me flex technical accuracy with a creative touch. While I may not have a single clear cuisine, my style of cooking is rooted in comfort, joy, and family.

My 7 pantry ingredients

1. Dried black beans

It’s more cost-effective to buy dried black beans in bulk as opposed to canned. I can passively soak them before I go to bed and move them to the slow-cooker before work. I make black beans with lots of dried chiles, garlic, a good broth, and a stick of cinnamon to perfume it. From there, I can make as many burritos as my heart desires — and turn leftovers into black bean soup.

2. Cream cheese (or Neufchâtel)

Cream cheese and its lesser-known cousin, Neufchâtel, are my go-to bases for spreads and sauces. The latter is pretty much the same in flavor, but it is softer and has 10% less fat. I use them to make pillowy-soft scallion cream cheese or cinnamon-spiced black bean cream cheese that doubles as a dip for crudités and a spread for sandwiches, burritos, and homemade tlayudas.

3. Nori

I use roasted seaweed half-sheets to wrap onigiri or rice balls “kimono style.” This is when you place a triangular rice ball in the center of a half-sheet of nori and fold the sides over it diagonally, forming the V-neck of what looks like a kimono. I like having them around so I can make hand rolls, sushi, and kimbap. Any sheets that I ruin get sliced up for garnishing cold soba noodles or thrown into my always-evolving tub of homemade furikake.

4. Datu Puti Sukang Iloco

Datu Puti is a brand of sugarcane vinegar from the Philippines. The Sukang Maasim bottle is white sugarcane and perfumy, a bit more acidic than rice vinegar. The Sukang Iloco Native Vinegar is darker, because it’s made from molasses, and its flavor is closer to the depth of sherry vinegar, with the sweetness of balsamic. Use it to ‘adobo’ anything, make sawsawan dipping sauce for fried foods, and mix a tropical base for North Carolina whole-hog barbecue sauce.

5. Dried chile peppers

Dried guajillo chiles always go into my Crockpot of black beans. I love sniffing pasillas as they toast for salsa macha with roasted peanuts. I mix and match varieties: fruity Scotch bonnets and Thai bird’s-eye chiles go in Chinese hot pot and smoky tasso chili.

6. Fresh curry leaves

I fell in love with fresh curry leaves when I tried a recipe for cashew curry. They crisp up quickly in oil or ghee. I started using them to garnish butternut squash soup and kitchen-sink-style salads, as well as a crunchy topping for my adobong mani recipe.

7. Spanish red skin peanuts

I don’t like to buy roasted nuts because you can’t cook them much further (but they are great for snacking, or for adding extra protein to spicy fried rice with chorizo and cilantro). Raw Spanish peanuts with the skins still on are the star of adobong mani, my dad’s favorite street snack from when he was growing up.

Recipe: Adobong Mani with Fried Curry Leaves

This post contains products independently chosen (and loved) by our editors and writers. As an Amazon Associate and Skimlinks affiliate, Food52 earns an affiliate commission on qualifying purchases of the products we link to.

Progressive Summer Lee declares slim victory after overcoming “multimillion-dollar smear campaign”

Summer Lee declared victory late Tuesday in the Democratic primary race to represent Pennsylvania’s 12th Congressional District in the U.S. House, voicing confidence that the remaining uncounted votes will favor her campaign over corporate attorney Steve Irwin’s.

With 93% of precincts reporting, Lee holds a 446-vote lead over Irwin, a former Republican U.S. Senate staffer who benefited from super PAC cash that poured into the district in the contest’s final stretch. Irwin has not conceded defeat as the race remains too close to formally call.

United Democracy Project (UDP), a super PAC founded by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), spent nearly $3 million in recent weeks boosting Irwin and attacking Lee, a progressive state representative who supports Medicare for All, a Green New Deal, and Palestinian rights.

“The people took on the corporations and the people won,” Lee said in a statement. “We built a movement in Western Pennsylvania that took on corporate power, stood up for working families, and beat back a multimillion-dollar smear campaign.”

“This was never about one candidate—it was about the people of this district who have been left behind by corporations who put their profits over our lives,” she added. “Today is a new way forward for everyone in the Commonwealth with no one left behind.”

PA United, a group that ran a major field operation for Lee alongside Justice Democrats and the Working Families Party, said Wednesday morning that “as a long time leader of the progressive movement and the first Black woman to be elected as a state representative from Western PA, Summer’s campaign energized a strong multiracial, working class base and overcame the political machine yet again.”

“PA United is proud to have helped Summer Lee overcome massive spending by her opponents and AIPAC and help supercharge her ground game,” the organization added. “The supercharged field program is likely to have provided the margin of victory—knocking more than 30,000 doors, calling more than 35,000 people, and sending 25,000 texts to help ensure a victory. PA United will continue to stand by Rep. Lee through the November election and as she gets to work in Congress next year.”

The youth-led Sunrise Movement, which also led a turnout operation in support of Lee in Pennsylvania’s 12th District, declared in a statement that “this election pit people power against millions of dollars, and… Summer Lee proved that money is surmountable when you organize and run on a progressive platform.”

“Young and working people were able to defeat Super PACs through local organizing,” said Varshini Prakash, the group’s executive director. “We showed our power, we knocked on doors, we called voters, and we decided this election.”

If her victory is confirmed, Lee will face off against Republican Mike Doyle, the council president of Plum, Pennsylvania who ran unopposed in the GOP primary.

“We got here because of the power of the people,” Lee said during her election party Tuesday night.

2022 GOP primaries prove that MAGA is now bigger than Donald Trump

Last night, Pennsylvania Republicans nominated a Big Lie proponent and January 6th “Stop the Steal” attendee named Doug Mastriano to run for governor of Pennsylvania in November. Mastriano is so MAGA that even Donald Trump was afraid to endorse him — until it became obvious that Mastriano was going to win so he jumped on the bandwagon last Friday in order to keep his followers from wondering where his loyalties lie.

Kathy Barnette, the other super MAGA GOP candidate running for the open Senate seat, made a late surge but was unable to overcome her opponents, the Trump-endorsed TV celebrity Dr. Mehmet Oz and his arch-rival David McCormick, a wealthy hedge fund executive with establishment credentials. That race remains too close to call this morning and could be decided by late counted mail-in ballots. Funny that. The irony is so thick it would take a chainsaw to cut through it.

So, in the big marquee primary races in Pennsylvania, it appears that one undisputedly far right MAGA candidate won despite not being endorsed by Trump himself until the last minute and the other will be won by a hair by either the Trump endorsee or a man pushed hard by the GOP establishment. 

Naturally, the big question among all the political analysts is whether or not Trump still has any clout.


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


He did seem to push JD Vance to the top in last week’s Ohio Senate primary, but as you can see, it didn’t seem to mean that much in Pennsylvania. Last week his chosen candidate for Nebraska governor (a fellow accused sexual abuser) lost badly, and last night Trump’s choice for Idaho Governor (a far-right candidate in the Mastriano mold) also went down in flames.

RELATED: Cawthorn’s loss highlights Trump’s waning influence but election deniers win big in GOP primaries

Congressman Madison Cawthorn, meanwhile, in North Carolina lost his race, after a brutal barrage of negative opposition from the GOP establishment in D.C. which decided that he’d crossed their red line when he publicly mentioned that he’d been invited to cocaine-fueled orgies by members of Congress he’d always looked up to. Trump had endorsed Cawthorn and even stepped in belatedly on the day before the election to appeal to voters to give Cawthorn a second chance.  So that’s another one in the loss column. Soothing the wound, however, was the big win by Ted Budd for Senate in North Carolina. Trump had endorsed Budd very early against the wishes of the state GOP.

So, the Trump endorsement clout game has been a mixed bag.

You can see that Trump obviously did not want to offend the MAGA voters …

He, of course, will take credit for the wins and ignore the losses as he always does and his followers won’t even notice. In fact, it seems pretty clear at this point that while they remain enthralled by Trump himself, MAGA is bigger than he is — and Pennsylvania’s Mastriano is its poster boy. He’s more Trump than Trump.

RELATED: Leading GOP candidate for Pennsylvania governor opposes health exceptions for abortion

If there is an important story coming out of the primaries so far it’s that there are two kinds of candidates in the Republican Party, those who are led around by the nose by the MAGA base and those who are the MAGA base. Ironically, Trump himself is one of the former. He’s always been tuned into the right and far right’s zeitgeist and he follows it closely. Take for instance what he said about the insurgent candidate Kathy Barnette in the days just before the election:

“Kathy Barnette will never be able to win the General Election against the Radical Left Democrats. She has many things in her past which have not been properly explained or vetted, but if she is able to do so, she will have a wonderful future in the Republican Party — and I will be behind her all the way.”

That mealy-mouthed comment was worthy of Rep. Kevin McCarthy at his most unctuous. You can see that Trump obviously did not want to offend the MAGA voters who were flocking to her. They aren’t his. He is theirs. 

In fact, every Republican candidate has to ensure that he doesn’t antagonize the base and even if he or she is trying hard to walk the line between the less doctrinaire Trump voters and the true believers in statewide races, some positions are non-negotiable.

RELATED: Is Pennsylvania losing it? Hate groups proliferate as state GOP descends into MAGA paranoia

For instance, no GOP candidates are allowed to admit that the Big Lie is a big lie otherwise they risk alienating a huge portion of the GOP electorate. Trump started that, of course. But it’s no longer really about him. It’s now a MAGA litmus test — a sign of respect, a sort of loyalty oath to the movement. If you aren’t ready to deny reality in service to the cause, you simply aren’t MAGA. 

Candidates like JD Vance and Dr. Oz are willing to follow the base and do a fairly good job of sounding like they mean it. If David McCormick ekes out a win you can bet he’ll have to do some fancy footwork to keep the base happy. But if you want a candidate who is the real deal, it’s Doug Mastriano. He is the MAGA base. He’s a hardcore evangelical Christian Nationalist, retired Army Colonelfar-right insurrectionist and QAnon conspiracy nut. He’s got it all.

And if he wins this race, he will be able to choose his own secretary of state to administer elections in the important swing state of Pennsylvania. We don’t have to guess what will happen:

There is nothing curious about it. They are saying that if elected Mastriano will ensure that Pennsylvania’s 20 electoral votes will go to Donald Trump — or whomever they choose. They aren’t even trying to hide it.

Doug Mastriano is the perfect reflection of today’s GOP and you can bet they are thrilled that he has won such an important election. But just as the evangelical base happily made common cause with the libertine Trump in order to get their social conservative courts, the base will back others who are clearly inauthentic as long as they follow the party line. In the end it really doesn’t matter what they believe in their heart of hearts, the end result is the same. The MAGA genie is out of the bottle and it’s unclear if the American people will be able to put it back in.  

Centrist Conor Lamb loses by 30 points despite Joe Manchin’s endorsement and millions from Wall St.

Pennsylvania Lt. Gov. John Fetterman handily defeated Rep. Conor Lamb in the Democratic primary for the battleground state’s open U.S. Senate seat on Tuesday, pitting the progressive against whichever right-wing candidate prevails in the deadlocked GOP contest between Mehmet Oz and Dave McCormick.

In a statement following his 33-point victory over Lamb, whose campaign was endorsed by right-wing Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and bankrolled by Wall Street financiers, Fetterman thanked his supporters for sticking with him, particularly after he suffered a stroke just days before the election.

“The fact that so many of you entrusted me with your vote means the world to me, and it’s something I’ll never take for granted,” said Fetterman, who underwent successful pacemaker implant surgery on Tuesday. “I’m feeling better every day, and I’m going to be back on the campaign trail to thank you all in person soon.”

Fetterman—who has vowed to be a decisive Senate vote in favor of abortion rightspro-labor legislation, and abolishing the filibuster—went on to emphasize the stakes of the upcoming contest between him and the Republican nominee, a race that will determine who fills the seat left open by Sen. Pat Toomey’s, R-Pa., retirement.

The winner, Fetterman noted, could determine which party controls the U.S. Senate next year.

“This is the most important race in the country,” he declared. “Control of the Senate is going to come down to Pennsylvania, and we have to flip this seat. We have a hard fight ahead of us—but Pennsylvania is worth fighting for. We’re going to win in November the same way we won tonight—by fighting for every county, and every vote. Because every place matters, and no place deserves to be written off.”

Conceding defeat, Lamb promised to do “everything I can to help Democrats win” in the general election.

“Our entire democracy is on the line in November,” said Lamb. “Democrats need to be unequivocally united in our defense of this democracy, and we will be. John’s vote in the Senate is essential to protect this democracy, and he will have my vote in November.”

President Joe Biden, who stayed on the sidelines in the closely watched Pennsylvania race, said in a statement that Democrats “are united around John, who is a strong nominee, will run a tough race, and can win in November.”

Meanwhile, the GOP primary race between Dr. Oz—a television personality widely viewed as a crank and a peddler of dangerous misinformation—and McCormick, a former hedge fund executive, is likely headed for a recount as the latest tally showed Oz leading by just 0.2 percentage points with 94% of the vote counted.

Kathy Barnette, a far-right GOP candidate with a long history of bigoted rhetoric against Muslims and gay people, surged in the final weeks of the Senate campaign but ultimately fell behind Oz and McCormick, ending up with just under 25% of the vote.

Former President Donald Trump endorsed Dr. Oz in the race, claiming that “people love him, otherwise he wouldn’t have been on air for 18 years.”

Fetterman’s small-donor-funded campaign said late Tuesday that no matter who emerges as the Republican nominee, the lieutenant governor and former Braddock mayor is well-positioned to win in November.

“In a tough midterm election in which traditional Democrats are going to struggle, John doesn’t have to convince people he’s not like other Democrats or other politicians—they can see it for themselves,” the campaign said in a statement. “John is the perfect candidate for 2022—regardless of who the Republicans nominate tonight.”

“To win in 2022, Democrats will have to do things differently,” Fetterman’s team added. “It won’t just come down to Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. Margins in rural areas will matter. Democrats will have to focus on turning out voters across the state—in rural towns and cities.”

Speaking at an election-night rally as the Democratic nominee continued his recovery in the hospital, Fetterman’s wife Gisele told supporters that the November contest is “a race for the future of every community across Pennsylvania.”

“For every small town, for every person who calls those small towns home, and for every person who’s considered leaving because they didn’t see enough opportunities,” she added. “It’s a race for a better Pennsylvania and for a better country.”

Cawthorn’s loss highlights Trump’s waning influence but election deniers win big in GOP primaries

Republican candidates backed by former President Donald Trump had a mixed night on Tuesday but election deniers dominated contested primary contests.

Several prominent candidates backed by Trump went down in defeat as five states held primaries.

Rep. Madison Cawthorn, R-N.C., conceded his race to three-term state Sen. Chuck Edwards before the election was even called on Tuesday. Cawthorn faced a growing number of personal scandals amid attacks from both the left and Republicans in his own party, including Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C. Trump begged voters to give Cawthorn a “second chance” despite “some foolish mistakes” but Cawthorn ultimately narrowly lost the race, trailing Edwards by just over 1,300 votes with 95% of ballots counted.

RELATED: Madison Cawthorn’s scandalous freshman term: 12 controversial moments since joining Congress

Trump-backed Idaho Lt. Gov. Janice McGeachin, who ran a MAGA challenge to Gov. Brad Little after repeatedly trying to usurp his powers, lost her race to the incumbent by more than 20 points.

In perhaps the most-watched contest of the night, Trump-backed celebrity doctor Mehmet Oz is locked in a too-close-to-call race with hedge fund manager David McCormick, who also worked in the George W. Bush administration. Oz led McCormick by just 0.2% with 95% of precincts reporting, but McCormick’s camp said they are “confident” that a large number of outstanding absentee ballots — which Trump world has long decried — would ultimately put him back in the lead. Kathy Barnette, a surging Republican who sought to out-MAGA Trump’s pick, ultimately fizzled and came in third.

While the contests showed Trump’s waning influence among the party’s base, particularly following the loss of Trump-backed Nebraska Republican gubernatorial candidate Charles Herbster amid sexual assault allegations, election deniers had a big night whether they were backed by Trump or not.

Neither Oz nor McCormick has acknowledged Trump’s 2020 loss, meaning the party’s nominee will be an election denier regardless who wins. They’ll join Trump-backed gubernatorial candidate Doug Mastriano, a state senator who attended the Jan. 6 rally ahead of the Capitol riot and served as a phony Trump elector in an effort to overturn his loss. Mastriano won his primary on Tuesday in a landslide after Trump endorsed him despite pleading from the state GOP that it could cripple their chances of winning the governor’s mansion in November.

Trump-backed Rep. Ted Budd, R-N.C., trounced former Gov. Pat McCrory by more than 30 points. Budd voted against certifying Trump’s election loss after the Jan. 6 riot and later texted then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows to push a repeatedly discredited claim that Dominion voting machines, which Trump allies falsely claimed flipped votes from Trump to President Joe Biden, were linked to Democratic billionaire George Soros. Even on Tuesday, Budd refused to acknowledge Biden as the legitimate winner.

And despite Cawthorn’s loss, Trump scored a big win in North Carolina’s 13th District, where 26-year-old Bo Hines, a right-wing Big Lie promoter who has been likened to Cawthorn, won his primary in a safe Republican district.


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


The rise of election deniers, particularly in races for governor and secretary of state, could pose a significant threat to future elections. Mastriano has been one of the most avid backers of Trump’s Big Lie and “there is almost certainly no chance that a Democratic presidential candidate’s victory in Pennsylvania in 2024 will be certified” if he wins, Washington Post columnist Greg Sargent warned.

But Mastriano’s extremism also poses a risk for Republicans in the purple state. The Pennsylvania GOP panicked after Trump’s endorsed the conspiracy theorist over concerns that he would cost them a winnable seat.

Mastriano “has appeal to base Republicans, but I fear the Democrats will destroy him with swing voters,” Republican state Senate Majority Leader Kim Ward wrote last week, adding that “winning the primary and losing the general because the candidate is unable to get the voters in the middle, isn’t a win.”

Mastriano will face state Attorney General Josh Shapiro, who ran unopposed in the Democratic primary. The winner of the Oz-McCormick race, which is likely headed for a recount if the final margin is less than 0.5%, will face off against Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, who easily defeated centrist Rep. Conor Lamb, D-Pa., in the Democratic primary.

Lamb’s defeat signaled a tough night for the centrist wing of the Democratic Party. Centrist Democrats also spent big to elect attorney and activist Steve Irwin in Pennsylvania’s 12th District but the newcomer appears to have lost to progressive state Rep. Summer Lee, who led by several hundred votes with 93% of precincts reporting.

Rep. Kurt Schrader, D-Ore., a centrist Democrat backed by Biden despite helping to kill his plan to lower prescription drug costs, also appears to be headed for a loss against progressive challenger Jamie McLeod-Skinner, who leads by more than 20 points with more than half of the vote in.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s PAC also backed newcomer Carrick Flynn, whose bid was backed by millions in donations from a crypto billionaire, but Flynn conceded the race as progressive state Rep. Andra Salinas led by nearly 20 points with more than 70% of the vote in.

“The stunning wins come as the party debates who is to blame for President Biden’s sinking approval rating and increasingly dire forecasts of upcoming midterm losses,” wrote The Intercept’s Ryan Grim. “Tuesday’s results suggest Democratic voters – at least those in Pennsylvania and Oregon – would prefer that Democrats do more rather than less, delivering a stinging rebuke to the Kyrsten Sinema-Manchin wing of the party.”

Read more:

Pandemic brings new hardships to India’s domestic workers

On a typical humid Sunday afternoon in July, Soni Tirki would be polishing off the chicken and rice that her mother makes every time the 20-year-old returns home. “I sit at ease and enjoy my meal,” Tirki says. “I eat however much I want. Nobody can stop me. Nobody can judge me.”

But on this Sunday, she has come to a village on the outskirts of New Delhi to join around 20 other women to discuss issues they have faced during the Covid-19 pandemic. As live-in domestic workers, the women rarely get a chance to step out of their employers’ homes; in fact, some expect to get an earful in the evening, but they say they don’t care anymore. After all, many of them say their salaries have been pending for several months. And, under the pretext of Covid-19 safety, their employers have further restricted the workers’ limited freedoms.

Although many of the women say they have always felt confined by their work, Covid-19 has given employers a means to justify restrictions, says Kavita Dang Rani, who works in a household in one of the several plush gated communities abutting the village, offering a stark contrast to the one-storied mud and brick houses where a few of the workers’ families live. Colorful pictures of Hindu gods adorn the outer walls of some of the one-room houses in the village.

Tirki’s parents, she says, helped construct those communities. Now, she adds, “we are working inside these buildings like slaves.” She and many other laborers report working for 12 to 16 hours a day “with no more than two days of leave a month, eating leftovers from previous days and managing a dozen health issues that come from that.”

Official estimates suggest there are around 5 million domestic workers in India. But according to the International Labor Organization, an agency of the United Nations, the true number is somewhere between 20 million and 80 million. Most are girls and women from oppressed castes and communities, who migrate from poor or calamity-prone states, often to escape poverty and hunger. Once they arrive in big cities like New Delhi and Mumbai, many of them remain severely malnourished, says Anita Kapoor, an activist and general secretary at Shehri Mahila Kamgar Union, or Urban Women Domestic Workers’ Union, which helped convene the Sunday afternoon gathering. “Most young workers I work with have anemia,” she says.

While many of India’s domestic workers juggle multiple caregiving, cooking, and cleaning jobs, others are live-in, essentially on call every day of the week. In a big city like New Delhi, they earn around 10,000 rupees per month, or $130, for round-the-clock service to their employers. Even before the pandemic, most had virtually no legal options for reporting abuse or mistreatment.

Public health measures intended to fight the pandemic, workers and advocates say, have often made those conditions even worse. And policymakers have rarely taken domestic workers’ needs into account. “The entire discourse on sanitization, health, disinfection, again, comes from the perspective of a certain class,” says Neha Wadhawan, National Project Coordinator of the Work in Freedom program at the International Labor Organization. “I think workers’ perspectives are completely missing.”

Some human rights groups liken these conditions to modern-day slavery. “And now,” says Kapoor, “the pandemic has taken away whatever little liberties they had.”

* * *

India instituted nationwide lockdowns in March 2020. At the time, advocates worried that the public health restrictions would have devastating effects for vulnerable migrant workers. “We risk converting a health crisis into a socioeconomic crisis,” one activist told Science that month.

Indeed, with the sudden announcement of the lockdown, millions of migrant workers were stranded miles away from their homes. Many part-time workers lost their jobs. And some live-in domestic workers found themselves trapped with abusive employers for months.

As the pandemic has dragged on, workers say, conditions have remained poor. All 10 workers interviewed for the story, working in and around New Delhi, say they are being made to work overtime during the pandemic, with no additional compensation or benefits.

“We are working almost 24-7 now, as most of the household members are working from home,” says Tirki. “During the lockdown, they would have house parties, while we would keep up all night to make them snacks, serve them drinks, and do the dishes.”

Citing the risk of infection, employers have increased restrictions on movement since the pandemic, preventing workers from seeing their families and friends as often as they wish. “They say that until you are fully vaccinated, you are not allowed to leave,” Dang Rani said during the July meeting, before vaccines were available to most people in India. “I am so scared that I can’t even sneeze in front of them. I have to rush to the bathroom. If they hear it, they might think I am sick and remove me from the job.”

Another worker, Lakshmi Kumari, says she was fired from her job when she left the household to see the family of a dead friend. “I had left for just one hour,” she says. “When I came back, they said they don’t need me anymore.” The 21-year-old, who says she is not allowed to use her phone while working, was also forced to provide care to her Covid-positive employers. “When they tested positive, my mother urged them to give me a leave and send me home,” she says. “But they said they had brought me medicines when I had a fever and I would be selfish to leave them during their difficult times. So I stayed.”

Before the pandemic, many workers reported rampant caste-based violence in the workplace. Upper-caste employers required live-in workers to use separate utensils, or barred them from entering the family’s place of worship. According to the workers, they have strict instructions to only use the elevators designed for them — or to use the stairs if the elevators are out of order, even if the employers’ apartment is on the 20th floor.

A 2021 report by the International Labor Organization found that the pandemic has worsened these discriminatory practices under the garb of Covid-19 risk management. “A lot of domestic workers were made to do all the work from outside the house,” says Wadhawan, noting that they “felt extremely hurt that they’re expected to carry out the work — wash utensils, wash clothes — but their entry into the house is barred.” Such practices, she adds, reinforce traditions that treat lower-caste people as a source of pollution or impurity.

During the peak of the pandemic, many workers were “sanitized” using chemical sprays and pipes. Tirki says that she had developed an allergy and dark spots on her hands as a result of the chemical exposure. Other workers reported similar reactions to the disinfectants.

Asked about the chemical spraying, Chandrakant Lahariya, an epidemiologist working with the World Health Organization, says clearer official guidance could help to stop the ineffective practice. Public health agencies, he says, “need to categorically state what should not be done, while telling people what should be done.”

According to Kapoor, employers have increasingly withheld workers’ wages during the pandemic. Some employers also confiscate identification documents required for renting a house or buying train tickets, so they don’t escape. “The pandemic has been crippling for domestic workers,” she says. “The restrictions may have been necessary to contain the virus, but I have heard too many tearful stories of workers either being trapped or rendered penniless.”

Neither the Ministry of Labor and Employment nor the Ministry of Women and Child Development responded to repeated requests for comment on the impact of the pandemic on domestic workers.

At the root of these problems, some advocates say, is a years-long failure to implement basic labor protections for domestic workers.

* * *

The issues begin with the unregulated placement agencies that, according to the ILO, play a crucial role in pushing migrant women from historically marginalized communities into domestic work, while offering little transparency about salaries and working conditions.

“The 24-hour workers, in Delhi, most of them come through agencies,” says Elizabeth Khumallambm, national coordinator at the National Platform for Domestic Workers, a coalition of domestic workers’ unions and organizations in India. Many such workers, she says, are young girls, whose wages are either set through the agencies or between the employers and family members.

The market for these agencies has grown significantly in the past decade, says Hasina Kharbhih, founder and chairperson of Impulse NGO Network, which fights human trafficking in northeastern India. More and more young urban professionals are seeking domestic help. At the same time, entrenched poverty and climate-change-induced calamities are pushing potential workers toward cities.

Placement agencies see this kind of demand and jump in to fill the supply chain, Kharbhih says. While agencies that are registered with the government will provide data on domestic work, “there are also the mushrooming placement agencies that are actually not registered,” she says. In some cases, workers may be referred to families through their others in their communities. But without oversight, she asks, “who is doing the check of the credential of these families, who is doing the check of the extended families?”

For years, activists have pressed the government to regulate illegal agencies — and to implement other protections for workers.

In the past, policymakers have signaled their intention to pass such legislation. India is a signatory to the 2011 ILO Convention 189, an international agreement that aims to provide domestic workers with protection against harassment and abuse. The treaty requires the member countries ensure domestic workers know the terms and conditions of their employment, “preferably, where possible, through written contracts in accordance with national laws, regulations or collective agreements, in particular.” It also emphasizes the protection of these workers — but India has not ratified the treaty.

In 2020, the Indian parliament amended and consolidated old labor laws and passed the Code on Social Security with an aim to extend benefits like insurance, a retirement fund, and maternity assistance to laborers in some informal arrangements. But Khumallambm says it hasn’t done much for domestic workers, because individual households are not recognized as workplaces.

Recently, the government has taken steps to register domestic workers, potentially helping them get access to benefits and some protections. But, Khumallambm adds, it will all take time to yield results.

* * *

For now, many workers are stuck navigating a pandemic with few protections.

When Chhoti moved from her village to Delhi around six years ago, she did not imagine that she would be cleaning her employer’s toilet with her bare hands, with only a scrubber as her aid. She was barely 18 then.

After years of physical and mental abuse by various employers and agencies, Chhoti decided to quit. But the pandemic pushed her back after her husband lost his job and started beating her. “I preferred living with the abusive employers than see my husband make ruckus in the streets and then beat me up every night,” she says. Chhoti, who goes by only one name, often wonders if she will ever be able to get out of the system. “I am just too traumatized right now, too broken,” she says. “I hate it when random people call me on my phone and say, ‘Is this Chhoti Maid?’ Am I always going to be a maid?”

Meanwhile, Tirki, like other workers who spoke with Undark, says she would like to quit her job and never do it again. “I want to study.” She also wants to dance, she says, her eyes shining. “Full-time domestic work is such a lonely job. You live with them, you raise their children, but you are never a part of their family. You are always a maid, on your own, just all alone.”

* * *

Romita Saluja is an independent journalist covering gender, development, and human migration in India. This report was written and produced as part of a media skills development program delivered by the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

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

India’s “man-eating” tigers entangled in a blame game

On a late August afternoon in 2019, a farmer named Shivamadaiah walked with his cattle near Bandipur National Park. The roughly 330-square-mile forested reserve, known for its resident wildlife, lies serenely in the foothills of the Western Ghats in India’s southwest state of Karnataka.

That night, Shivamadaiah didn’t return home. When a few people went to find him the next day, they initially came upon his ripped slipper. The group walked further, recalls his son, Madhusudhan, who like his father and many Indians, goes by one name. After half a mile, they found Shivamadaiah’s half-eaten body lying under a large banyan tree. A tiger had initially aimed for the cows, says Madhusudhan. But then it pounced on their owner instead.

The tiger had taken to roaming outside the forest in order to avoid competing with other tigers for food, says Madhusudhan. “It started getting close to human habitats,” he says; it preyed upon cattle. After attacking Shivamadaiah, the big cat went on to kill another local resident.

Madhusudhan is now a forest watcher in the reserve — a job offered to him as compensation for his father’s killing. The two tragic deaths troubled the local people, he says, so they lobbied for the tiger’s removal from the park. The forest authorities responded, tranquilizing the cat and relocating it to a zoo.

India is home to more than 70 percent of the world’s tigers. They are the country’s national animal, placed under Schedule I of the Wildlife Protection Act, which confers the highest degree of protection for wild animals on the subcontinent. Tigers occupy a significant place in Hindu mythology, and the big cats are symbols of magnificence and valor.

But tiger conservation has not always been a top priority. Widespread hunting, along with habitat destruction, reduced their numbers from an estimated 40,000 in the 1950s to a mere 1,827 in the early 1970s. That decline prompted Parliament to pass the Wildlife Protection Act in 1972. The following year, the Indian government launched Project Tiger, which created nine reserves. India now has more than 50 reserves and nearly 3,000 tigers, according to the latest census.

As the carnivores have rebounded and reclaimed some of their historic range, humans have pursued development in areas not far from tiger habitat. Likely as a result, from 2010 through 2019, tigers killed 383 humans and valuable livestock. People are starting to lose their tolerance for the big cats, some wildlife biologists say. In 2019, villagers in the state of Uttar Pradesh beat a tigress to death after she attacked a local resident.

But the majority of tigers do not attack humans, and according to some experts, it is important to identify and remove those that do present a threat, in order to minimize human suffering and maintain popular support for tiger conservation. To this end, the Indian government developed guidelines for classifying “man-eating” tigers (the official term has since changed). But classification of individual tigers is often fraught, as are decisions about whether to kill or tranquilize and relocate these large carnivores.


Although the exact number of human-eating tigers remains unknown, wildlife experts say that tigers rarely treat humans as prey, stalking and consuming them only under certain conditions. Bengal tigers live up to 16 years in the wild on average, according to the World Wide Fund for Nature-India, and as they age, they lose strength in their teeth and claws. “All these things will make the tiger slightly weaker than its younger cousins,” says N.S. Manoharan, a wildlife veterinarian located in the southern state of Tamil Nadu.

These aging or injured tigers may move towards newer spaces, outside of the forest boundaries, in order to avoid younger tigers that dominate the area. This raises the likelihood that they will encounter humans and livestock — easy prey, even for a debilitated tiger. The problem is exacerbated when humans develop land that is adjacent to traditional tiger habitats.

This is a familiar pattern, exhibited in other animals. For example, while bear attacks in general are rare, bears may prey on humans when they’re unable to find other food in the wild, for reasons such as being older or having damaged teeth, says Chris Servheen, a now-retired associate professor of wildlife conservation at the University of Montana. And some crocodiles may attack humans when they lose access to the fish that comprise the bulk of their diet, according to Brandon Sideleau, a wildlife biologist and co-creator of CrocBITE, a website that maintains records of crocodile attacks on humans globally. Fatal attacks are more likely to occur when there has been human encroachment on the reptiles’ habitats. In parts of Indonesia, tin mining has led to declines in fish, says Sideleau, so crocodiles are “pretty much going after whatever food they can get, which are people, dogs, cattle.”

To address the problem, India’s tiger conservation body, the National Tiger Conservation Authority, established a set of guidelines aimed at preventing tigers from attacking humans. These guidelines included creating buffer zones around tiger habitats and monitoring the movement of tigers that wander near human settlements. The guidelines also described conditions under which a tiger can be declared a “man-eater” and outlined steps for dealing with such problematic animals.

Those guidelines specified two distinct categories for tigers that kill humans: “man-killing” and “man-eating.” The former included big cats that had killed a human as a direct result of being startled during sleep or intruded upon while sheltering cubs, for example. These killings were considered accidental. “Man-eating,” on the other hand, included tigers that had stalked and attacked humans then eaten the body. These latter carnivores, according to the guidelines, needed to be promptly removed from the wild. Authorized personnel were permitted to kill the aberrant tiger in certain cases, though updated guidelines stress this “should be the last option” if efforts to capture and tranquilize it fail.

Currently, to determine whether a tiger should be considered dangerous to humans, forest officials are advised to inspect the cameras that hang from trees and posts in all of India’s tiger reserves. These camera traps, as they are known, record tiger movement and allow officials to identify individual cats by their unique stripe pattern. Officials may also order molecular analysis, testing a suspected tiger’s fecal matter to check for the presence of human DNA.

Over the past few years, wildlife activists have accused state governments of killing tigers in the absence of such evidence. In 2018, the Maharashtra Forest Department issued a shoot-at-sight order for a tigress named Avni, a mother of two cubs, that had allegedly killed 13 villagers. Wildlife activist Jerryl Banait maintained that there was no evidence to confirm that Avni caused all 13 deaths — a view echoed by others.

India’s Supreme Court said that efforts must be made to tranquilize the animal before killing it. Within two months of that ruling, Avni was killed not by the hunter hired by the state, but by the hunter’s son. The tigress’s death sparked widespread outrage across the country.

After Avni’s death, the National Tiger Conservation Authority prepared a new report, which stated that problematic animals should be referred to as “dangerous to human life” and not “man-eaters.” The government has since followed suit, and no longer appears to use the term in official documents.

Not all experts have embraced the new wording. “Even a snake is dangerous — a venomous snake is dangerous to human lives,” says Yadvendradev Jhala, dean of the Wildlife Institute of India, a research institution within the Ministry of Environment, Forest, and Climate Change. The new term is too broad, says Jhala. (He similarly characterized “man-eater” as “loose terminology.”) A better term would clearly convey that a tiger has a proven track record of human attacks, he says. But new guidelines aside, Indian officials and wildlife experts continue to use the term man-eater.

Jhala also noted that the current guidelines are stringent and difficult to implement in the field. “You need to have camera trap evidence or visual sighting, and then recognize the animal, either from its stripes or from its DNA,” he says. “And that takes a long time to do. Meanwhile, that tiger, if it is a proclaimed man-eater, or has a propensity to kill humans and eat them, is going to continue on the rampage.”


Once a tiger has been determined to pose a threat to humans, it’s important to promptly kill it so that it doesn’t take more human lives, says Ullas Karanth, a tiger expert and former director of the Center for Wildlife Studies in India, who notes that such cases are rare. Unlike most activists, and even some of his own colleagues, Karanth says that shooting is generally the most effective solution because of the challenges inherent in tranquilizing and then relocating a wild tiger. To tranquilize a tiger, the animal needs to be within close range and away from thick vegetation. Because those attempts are likely to fail, he says, the tiger can continue to kill more people in the meantime. Even when big cats are captured and relocated to zoos, he adds, they often don’t adapt well to captivity.

“Once it gets to the stage of killing several human beings, the entire public turns hostile to wildlife conservation. So, for saving this one animal, you’re putting the life of all tigers at risk in the region,” says Karanth. He also notes that tigers breed quickly so killing one human-eater does not threaten their overall population.

City-dwellers, Karanth adds, have no idea what it’s like to live within range of a human-eating carnivore, and he says they are often the ones to pressure the government not to kill persistent predators. Yet nearly 250 million people in India live in or near forests. This past October, the capture of a tiger known as T-23 sparked conflicts between forest authorities and forest area residents. The big cat that prowled lush green forests in Tamil Nadu reportedly killed four people and more than 20 cattle. Local residents urged state wildlife officials to capture the tiger as quickly as possible, says Thangavel, a local resident who witnessed the second mauled body. The image, he adds, haunted him for nearly a week.

After repeated attempts to capture the animal alive, Shekhar Kumar Niraj, the state’s chief wildlife warden, issued a hunting order. A squad of forest officials, veterinarians, and other experts set out on a vigorous search to hunt the tiger. The mission, which Niraj led, went on for two weeks, and during this time, local people were prohibited from entering the areas around the forest. This was a blow to their livelihoods, says Thangavel, as the villagers could not bring their livestock to graze nearby.

Although the deaths of three people were ascribed to the tiger, T-23 “was not a man-eater,” says Niraj. Nevertheless, under Indian law, chief wildlife wardens can use their discretion to issue hunting orders on a case-by-case basis. In this case, Niraj determined that T-23 posed a threat because the region was densely populated with humans. The tiger had also become weak and had some problems with its teeth. “It had lost its hunting capacity,” he says.

To ensure the long-term survival of big cats, it might be necessary to do more than simply classify and remove human-eaters, says wildlife conservationist Latika Nath. In India today, hundreds of villages overlap with tiger habitat. Going forward, it may be necessary to create more spaces that are truly free of human presence. Dual use spaces will continue to exist, though, and it’s important for everyone to be on the same page when it comes to land management, she says.

Mathen “Rajeev” Mathew, a wildlife consultant with India’s Center for Innovations in Public Systems, shared an additional view, one that has begun to emerge among some tiger conservationists: “We have to come to a point where we realize that it’s only so many animals that we can have,” he says. “Anything over it should be removed.”

As the issue is debated and weighed, many Indians, forest dwellers included, continue to hold tigers in high regard. For his part, Madhusudhan has not lost his empathy for the big cats. As a forest watcher, it’s his job to monitor wildlife, and on a couple of occasions, he says, he has safely stood as close as 30 to 60 feet from a tiger.

He adds: “They are just animals.”


Niranjana Rajalakshmi is a science journalist and a former veterinary physician, currently based in New York City. She covers health, climate crisis, biodiversity, and conservation.

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

America needs baby formula now: It’s time for Biden to send in the Army

One day in the spring of 2020, I had a very unusual feeling: Donald Trump is really going to like my idea. The president and I had almost never agreed in our previous dealings. But as I waited for the White House operator to connect us, I said to myself, “This time will be different.” It was the height of the first COVID wave in New York City and here was I, a progressive Democrat, asking Trump, in effect, to send in the Army. I thought it would be music to his ears.

What followed in the weeks and months after that is one of the unexamined chapters of our nation’s response to the pandemic: Why our military was so tragically underutilized in the fight against Covid. At the same time, our government made minimal use of an extraordinary power that was available the whole time: the Defense Production Act.

As we face yet another painful logistical crisis, this time the sudden drop in our national supply of baby formula, I fear that the federal government is going to underplay its hand again. For millions of American families, this could lead to even worse hardship than the last two years have already dealt them. And our best assets for solving this problem will be sitting unused, at factories and military bases around the nation.

RELATED: Republicans’ “pro-life” pivot: GOP suddenly outraged by baby formula shortage

So what happened during my fateful phone call that day in 2020? Well, it started off well enough. President Trump seemed to share my sense of urgency. We talked about just how bad the situation was on the ground in New York’s neighborhoods, including his native borough of Queens. He seemed to embrace the notion that the military could help us profoundly. He referred me to Defense Secretary Mark Esper and Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff. I really thought something big was about to happen.

But what happened was just a drop in the bucket. Although the Navy thankfully sent the hospital ship USNS Comfort to our city and all the branches sent us crucially-needed medical personnel, the White House did not initiate a fuller mobilization. The unparalleled logistical and transportation capacity of our armed forces was barely tapped. During arguably the worst crisis in the history of the republic, the strongest military in the history of the world was only given a bit part.

Likewise, the potential impact of the Defense Production Act was barely tapped. Seemingly out of an unwillingness to discomfit the private sector, industrial production lines that could have been converted to “wartime” use continued to produce the same old consumer products. Unlike the heroic efforts during World War II to convert factories of all kinds to support the war effort, there was an eerie lack of urgency. Desperate at the epicenter of the crisis, we in New York found businesses willing to stop everything to save lives. They had never produced a face mask or surgical gown or a ventilator before, but they learned how and they got to work. Imagine what might have been, if there had been a national mandate to produce these lifesaving products when we needed them most.

Today, we face a challenge that couldn’t be more personal and urgent for millions of American parents, for whom nothing is more important than making sure their babies are safe and healthy. For these families, they literally cannot feed their children and also go to work if there isn’t a supply of baby formula. Yet formula stockpiles are now 43% lower than normal, and that could get worse very quickly. Beyond the personal desperation parents are feeling, there is that seething question: Why can’t a great nation provide something as simple as baby formula to its people?


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


The answer lies in our persistent unwillingness to activate a public-sector answer to a private-sector problem. The most admired and effective part of our government, our military, could help organize and implement a solution — just as it could have during the COVID pandemic. But in 2020, the order was never given. It needs to be now. The full industrial might of America can be unleashed to solve this most human of crises, but only if the federal government acts with more urgency and uses all its powers. The Defense Production Act may have been written with war in mind, but today’s challenges are harming our home front in every corner of this country in ways no war ever did. Whether the issue is COVID or climate change or the breakdown of the supply chain, we are in a peacetime that demands solutions once only reserved for wartime.

Whether the issue is COVID or the climate or the breakdown of the supply chain, we’re in a peacetime that demands wartime solutions.

During those tense days in 2020, I quickly realized the cavalry wasn’t coming. But it wasn’t because the military was unwilling. I may not have had a lot in common with Secretary Esper and Gen. Milley, but I knew well the careful language of conscientious leaders who were not authorized to act. They each described the vast capacity at their disposal and their deep desire to help, but diplomatically avoided saying exactly why they couldn’t.

Although I never got along with President Trump, I sincerely believed he would give the order. That never happened. Now President Biden can start to right that wrong. He can start to mobilize the country’s full power to address a temporary problem — and in the process prepare us for the more permanent challenges ahead. We will need these solutions more and more in the years ahead. And in a time of fear and confusion, our country yearns for any form of action. Americans are desperate to see things work again. They want to believe in something better than what we’re living through now.

Joe Biden got this country vaccinated and brought our economy back to life. He believes deeply in American exceptionalism and he wants to restore faith in our nation’s future. He has tools at his disposal that have never been employed in a time like this. May he be bold enough to use them.

Read more on the supply-chain issues, inflation and Biden’s presidency:

How to grow basil, summer’s favorite herb

You can Grow Your Own Way. All spring and summer, we’re playing in the vegetable garden; join us for step-by-step guides, highly recommended tools, backyard tours, juicy-ripe recipes, and then some. Let’s get our hands dirty.

One of the common goals of new and experienced gardeners alike is to grow an endless supply of herbs for cooking. Basil often finds itself high on that list because who doesn’t love the idea of plucking fragrant, beautifully cupped leaves and scattering them atop a homemade pizza or happy-hour cocktail?

I’ll admit I’ve had some real fist-in-the-air struggles with basil in the past. I was forcing it to grow in places that I wanted it to grow . . . and in turn, it showed me it was not pleased. It wasn’t until after a few rounds of experimenting with container gardening and succession sowing that I was able to figure out a reliable, full-season production of gorgeous tender greens (and purples!). And thankfully, it’s not that hard.

Consider this your crash course in how to grow basil. By following a few of these tips, you’ll see how simple it really can be to grow any herb, but especially delicious, use-everywhere basil.

Some like it hot

Basil is quite effortless when given the right conditions, the first of which is warm weather. More specifically, warm soil (ideally 50 to 70 degrees Fahrenheit), which encourages germination and steady growth. Start seeds or transplant starts in a location that gets 6 to 8 hours of sun each day in well-draining soil — I’ve had my best luck growing in large containers where I can keep soil healthy and consistently watered. Bonus points if you can place basil in an area that you check on often, like outside the kitchen or patio door.

Seed vs. nursery starts

Seeds can be started indoors as early as six weeks before the last frost, or sowed directly outdoors in your location of choice. Common problems when starting from seed are either planting too deeply or too closely together. Sow seeds no more than 1/4-inch deep — and once sprouts have 2-3 leaves each, thin the plants down to 10 to 12 inches apart. I know thinning is painful, but at least you can toss these microgreens into a sandwich.

If you’re looking for basil on the quick, nursery plants are an excellent way to go. In fact, I like to do a combination of nursery starts and seed sowing in the same container to have a continuous source of plants to harvest from throughout the spring and summer season. When shopping for plants, look for an abundance of healthy green leaves (no yellowing or brown spotting) and, if possible, choose one with little to no flowering.

For bushier plants — regardless whether you started from seed or start — pinch back several sets of leaves from the top of the plant, leaving behind at least two sets of leaves on each stem. This will encourage additional branching (aka: less leggy plants, and more leaves for you to harvest throughout the season).

Watering and fertilizing

Moisture is your friend: Basil likes it best with consistent watering and very little drying-out between drinks. Like most garden plants, try to avoid any overhead watering that will splash soil onto leaves, which will steer you clear of (most) future pest or disease issues.

Mulching is a great way to retain moisture during the hottest months; experiment with compost or garden straw, but keep either from touching your plant’s stem. I prefer to use compost as a top-dressing mulch since that doubles as a fertilizer and soil-health enhancer, but you could also use a 5-10-5 fertilizer sparingly. Basil really doesn’t need the extra care, so don’t stress too much about it.

The not-so-goods

Japanese beetles, slugs, and aphids are your top three suspects when it comes to bugs on basil. Hand-removal of pests is preferred over pesticides (as gross as that might seem), so keep an eye out for early nibbles or changes in leaf color to stop pests before they spread. I like to use a strong jet of water to knock those bugs right off.

Bacterial leaf spot, or basil shoot blight, is a major uh-oh when it comes to pathogens. With appropriate watering (i.e. never soaking the plant’s leaves or splashing soil onto the stems), removal of deceased or damaged leaves, and consistent harvesting to increase airflow, you’ll keep the plant happy and strong.

Harvesting

The beautiful thing about herbs is that the more you harvest, the more you get . . . when done right. Always work from the top of the plant downwards, pinching off above a set of two leaves to stimulate new growth. If you want to lengthen the plant’s production of leaves, simply snip off any flower buds to push energy back into the plant rather than allowing it to go to seed. In other words, don’t be shy about plucking your goods.

Extra credit

There are two gardening techniques that I like to incorporate when growing basil, and they’re both easy, and will give you a longer, more productive growing season:

Succession sowing 

This is the practice of sowing seeds several times over the course of the season to fill the gap between the first harvest and subsequent regrowth. I like to sprinkle in new seeds every two weeks to keep new plants germinating.

Companion planting

Did you know that certain plant pals work together to resist pests and make your food more delicious? Try planting basil alongside marigolds to deter pests, borage to attract more beneficial bees, chamomile chives or oregano to enhance aromatics, and tomatoes to increase their yields as well as flavor.

Basil varieties to add toy your mix

It’s estimated that there are more than 150 species of basil cultivars and hybrids out there. Here are four unique, yet easy-to-find varieties to add flair to your next basil harvest:

Cardinal basil

Grown more for its beautiful blooms than its leaves, these giant purple pom-poms are so beautiful you’ll find yourself wanting to harvest them for a vase instead of dinner. Well, the cinnamon-clove flavor and hints of anise are pretty irresistible as well.

Dark opal basil

These dark purple-hued leaves are a beautiful addition to your basil bouquet. I love succession sowing these in between other Italian sweet basil varieties for a steady supply of herbs; its unique, sweet-savory, and earthy flavor is a great addition to the more common basil varieties.

Holy basil

A highly regarded medicinal herb also known as tulsi, this basil is most commonly dried and used for tea, but is also a delightful addition to Thai cooking.

African blue basil

This particular variety is a staple in my garden; I have several large clusters of these and love the minty herbaceous flavor that the leaves add to my salads and caprese. A perennial herb that the bees go crazy for, it grows back year after year even with hard pruning. Don’t forget to let them flower so they can attract pollinators.

What is “ecofascism” — and what does it have to do with the Buffalo shooting?

For years, social scientists have warned that mass shootings can be contagious: Intensive media coverage, particularly when a shooter’s name and face become widely known, can serve as incentive to would-be copycats seeking the same notoriety. Likewise, the motivations for mass killing events can be contagious as well, particularly when perpetrators leave behind grandiose manifestos that inspire, or directly call on, others to follow suit. 

That’s doubly true of the massacre that took place last Saturday, when an 18-year-old white man from New York’s Southern Tier traveled to Buffalo to target a supermarket in a predominantly Black neighborhood, killing 10 people and wounding three more. The shooting was only the latest in a series of mass killing attacks in recent years driven by the white nationalist “replacement theory,” which holds that there is an orchestrated effort to replace white people in Europe, North America and elsewhere with nonwhite immigrants (or, for that matter, nonwhite citizens). 

It’s the same theory cited by the killers who targeted Muslims in Christchurch, New Zealand; Latinos in El Paso; Jews in Pittsburgh; and socialists in Norway. These days, you can readily find the theory reflected on the highest-rated cable news show on TV, or in the mouths of leading Republicans, charging that Democrats seek to “replace” white Americans with immigrants who will fundamentally change the country’s demographics and also become reliable Democratic voters. Linked to that is the call for more white babies. As the Buffalo shooter wrote in the manifesto he posted online before the massacre — much of which, it turns out, was plagiarized from the Christchurch shooter’s screed — “If there’s one thing I want you to get from these writings, it’s that White birth rates must change.” 

RELATED: What “great replacement”? Right wants us to shut up about Buffalo shooter’s ideology

But further down in the 180-page document, a seemingly unrelated idea appears as well: The shooter represents himself as driven by environmental concerns. Alongside genocidal threats to “non-whites on White lands” (“Leave while you still can”), the shooter decries the environmental impact of cryptocurrency mining and laments that the “natural environment” has become “industrialized, pulverized and commoditized.” In a section entitled “Green nationalism is the only true nationalism,” he declares, “There is no conservatism without nature, there is no nationalism without environmentalism … The protection and preservation of these lands is of the same importance as the protection and preservation of our own ideals and beliefs.” 

He goes on to argue: “There is no Green future with never ending population growth,” that “Continued immigration into Europe is environmental warfare” and that there can be “no traditionalism without environmentalism.” 

As Political Research Associates researcher and Salon contributor Ben Lorber has pointed out, most of these passages were not the Buffalo shooter’s own words, but were lifted wholesale from the Christchurch shooter’s manifesto. And like the Christchurch shooter, whom he cites as inspiration, the Buffalo shooter declares himself an “ecofascist.” 

Alongside genocidal threats against “non-whites on White lands,” the shooter decries the impact of cryptocurrency mining and laments that the “natural environment” has been  “industrialized, pulverized and commoditized.”

The ideology of “ecofascism” — which combines far-right authoritarian politics with environmental concerns or climate issues — represents an increasingly common thread in incidents of massive right-wing violence. As Alex Amend, a researcher on the far right, noted in a 2020 report in The Public Eye, there has been a “murderous daisy chain” of mass killings linked to both replacement theory and ecofascism, starting in 2011 with the massacre of 77 people in Norway by a man who blamed socialists for enabling “‘third-world’ overpopulation that was threatening to overtake Europe” and who called for “radical policies” to reduce the global population to less than 3 billion people. 

The Norwegian massacre inspired the Christchurch shooter, who declared that immigration, demographics and environmentalism were all inextricably bound, writing, “they are the same issue…The invaders are the ones over populating the world. Kill the invaders, kill the overpopulation and by doing so save the environment.” The Christchurch shooter in turn inspired the El Paso shooter, who explained in his manifesto that he sought to kill “invaders” in order to address a worsening environment and enable a “more sustainable” way of life. 

There’s a longer history to this, Amend writes, dating back to 19th-century German nationalists whose naturalist mythology binding the German “soil and volk” led to a version of right-wing environmentalism that tied protection of the land to an exclusionary sense of who should inhabit that land. 

These days, says Joseph Henderson, an environmental social scientist at Paul Smith’s College in northern New York, that sort of sentiment is showing up not just in the screeds left behind by mass killers, but also in classrooms and in some mainstream environmentalist rhetoric. As a specialist in ecofascism as well as the anthropology of environmental education, Henderson says he’s “deeply worried that we’re starting to see fascist responses to climate change.” He spoke with Salon this week. 

How did you start researching this issue? 

A couple of years ago I had a student, a young white man, who wrote a paper about how the solution to climate change is essentially genocide: that we need to secure the homeland for whites who have to have access to resources. I had never seen that argument before. And one of the fundamental questions I ask as an anthropologist who studies learning is: What’s the ecosystem that produces something like that? Where was he getting these ideas?

I started meeting with him weekly and trying to understand him. He was a member of one of the groups on the ground in Charlottesville, Virginia [during the deadly 2017 “Unite the Right” rally]. He was an alienated young white man in search of meaning, with untreated mental health issues in an area where mental health care is scarce. And he would sit online and get drunk and watch really horrific videos on 4chan and 8chan, mass shooting videos. I have no training in de-radicalization, but I was trying to help him see that he was being taken advantage of, that there were people preying upon him. 


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


From that, I started reading about ecofascism and how environmental studies itself is rooted in and perpetuates some of these things. Reading the Buffalo shooter’s manifesto, it’s disjointed and all over the place, like these things usually are, but the personality type strikes me as very similar.

On a more basic level, what is ecofascism? 

It’s an appropriation of nature for reactionary political purposes. It’s related to ethnonationalism and authoritarianism because it’s about the construction of the nation state as a geographic area. So it makes nation-state claims to nature. If you think about the Charlottesville guys, they were chanting “blood and soil.” There’s a long history of this: the Nazis had a land ethic related to this. But there’s this conception of natural purity and racial purity, or gender purity or ethnic purity, that goes along with that. For me, it’s fundamentally about who gets to claim land and for what reasons.

People often assume that environmentalism and climate change are issues only associated with the left. 

In environmental studies, we tend to talk about environmentalisms — that there are different kinds of environmental ideologies and differences even within the left-wing versions of them. In the United States, it has mostly been people on the left, at least since Nixon, who have been concerned with environmentalism as a political project. There’s a long history of how the Republican Party turned away from environmentalism and became actively hostile to it as its own counter-movement and political strategy, although that’s complicated too, because there are right-leaning conservation groups and things like that. But climate change denial has predominantly been a right-wing phenomenon in this country. 

A lot of people assume that if we teach people about climate change, they will want to create a world that is more just and peaceful. That’s really ideologically blinkered.

The reason we are really concerned about ecofascism is that you’re starting to see this rise. A lot of people assume that if we teach people about climate change, they will want to create a world that is more just and peaceful. And that’s really ideologically blinkered. My student who was an ecofascist fully understood the science of climate change. He got it. But he took it places that were illiberal, authoritarian, anti-democratic. It doesn’t follow that if you teach people about climate change, they’re all of a sudden going to create a world that is more just. They’re going to integrate it into their existing politics. And what we’re starting to see, especially among the more fringe elements of the right wing, is that there is an awareness of climate change and they’re taking it in these more fascistic, anti-democratic ways. 

If you look at El Paso, there is a through-line between him and the New Zealand mosque shooter. A lot of these guys look to the New Zealand mosque shooter, or the guy in Norway, as oracles. They look to them for education; they’re a “community of practice,” if you want to use the anthropology term. It’s an online decentralized community of practice where they learn these things, seek notoriety and stream their violence. And when you read these manifestos, they take environmentalism seriously, but from a right-wing perspective. 

How does ecofascism relate to the larger focus on replacement theory and ethno-nationalism? 

I tend to see white supremacist movements as materially oriented as much as culturally oriented. If you look at something like the U.S. Constitution, which preferences white landholders, or the system of U.S. slavery, or settler colonial genocide and the destruction of indigenous people and their lands, a lot of that is about the racist control of land. Anthropologically speaking, land is a source of value, a source of production. So what ties these things together is the need to control: the need to control land, the need to control other people in the service of that land, the need to not be controlled. It’s about being the people who control others in service of this larger social arrangement and economic system. 

To tie that to climate change, we are in a present, and heading toward a future, where there are going to be really serious contests over resources. That’s not new. We’ve been colonizing lands of Black and brown people for a long, long time. And the more intense climate change becomes, the uglier it’s going to get. 

This guy targeted this area of Buffalo because of its racial composition. There is a jargony term in anthropology, “necropolitics,” which basically means, who is disposable in a society? Who must suffer in order for others to survive?

Buffalo is a place of intense racial and economic segregation. And we live in a society that treats minority populations as disposable. There’s this tendency to look at these events as if they’re out of the ordinary. But look how we treat Black life in this country: Heavily policed, more likely to die from COVID, higher levels of environmental pollution, doctors don’t take their claims to pain or health as seriously. This is a particularly nasty version of what’s a much larger pattern of disposability in this country. 

Elise Stefanik, the representative in my area, is literally out there tweeting this morning the same kind of stuff. You can’t draw a direct line between Stefanik’s speech and what this guy did, but there are broader social conditions that legitimize it. And there are people doubling down on replacement theory today. There’s recent polling that says something like 30% of Americans believe in replacement theory, and 50% of Republicans. I think that’s a reflection of the fact that we’re becoming a more diverse country. People are tapping into a fear of losing power.

How widespread is this ideology? In the early days of COVID, for example, some people pointed out the ecofascist undertones of memes like “Humans are the virus.” 

Environmentalism has a lot of apocalyptic narratives, and that tends to provoke an authoritarian response: People want someone to come in to re-establish order.

My research isn’t on numbers or percentages. But I think there are a lot of unexamined assumptions in modern environmentalism that feed into these things. Within environmentalism there are a lot of apocalyptic narratives: The world is ending, we’re all screwed. Some scholarship shows that when you surround people with apocalyptic narratives, it tends to provoke an authoritarian response, because people seek out order. And if they feel like the world is being disordered, they want someone to come in — often a kind of father figure — to re-establish order. You see this in societies like Brazil with Bolsonaro, and with Trump as well. So I think some of the apocalypticism coming out of environmentalism can be dangerous. 

One of the huge issues in environmental studies is the fixation on population and population control. When I talk casually to my students about environmental problems and ask “what’s the solution?” overwhelmingly they say it’s population control: “There’s too many humans, we need to thin the herd.” What’s interesting about that is they’re never talking about themselves, even though when you look at who impacts ecosystems the most, it tends to be white Westerners with high incomes. But population control and eugenics have long targeted racial minorities, women, indigenous people.  

One of my students, who’s now my co-author, Bronwyn Bishop, did a qualitative analysis of research papers that were handed out at a recent wildlife biology conference. It was all this really nasty population control, anti-immigrant, “invasive species” rhetoric. 

Referring to humans? 

To refer to humans. The broader theme is this very anti-human rhetoric, and you can see that in extremist literature. But the thing I’m more interested in is not the extremes, but how it manifests in everyday contexts. My students, most of whom are not extremists, still have these ideas that are kind of ecofascist-adjacent. There are other ideas, like “purity logics,” where nature is sacred and humans are impure. That very quickly goes into things like racial purity logics and race science. 

What needs to be done to start addressing this?

When you think about climate change, you have to also think about things like democracy and how those are related. We need to be honest about some of the root causes of these problems, like settler colonialism, like racial capitalism, like the continued need to dominate nature and other people. You can’t address these issues unless you understand those root causes. When I teach climate change, I teach it as an artifact of colonialism: that it’s mostly white, wealthy nations building themselves on the back of others. And when you look at where climate denial is, it’s in those nations. When I took my students to South Africa, I asked a government minister, “Do you have climate deniers here?” He said, “We don’t have the privilege of climate denial.” That has sat with me for a while. 

Read more on the Buffalo shooting, and what led to it:

Behind the Joe Biden v. Jeff Bezos beef: What their inflation spat is really about

The White House clapped back at Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos on Monday after the multibillionaire criticized the president’s plan to combat inflation with steeper corporate taxes, saying that “it doesn’t require a huge leap to figure out why” Bezos, whose $1.63 trillion company paid no taxes last year, would be opposed to the plan. 

The online crossfire began on Friday, shortly after President Biden took to Twitter by saying, “You want to bring down inflation? Let’s make sure the wealthiest corporations pay their fair share.”

Though Biden did not namecheck Amazon directly, his comment did not sit well with Bezos, who immediately accused the president of pushing disinformation by drawing a connection between inflation and corporate taxes

“The newly created Disinformation Board should review this tweet, or maybe they need to form a new Non Sequitur Board instead,” Bezos said in response. “Raising corp taxes is fine to discuss. Taming inflation is critical to discuss. Mushing them together is just misdirection.”

Bezos even praised West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin’s obstruction of his own party’s anti-poverty and climate action agenda. 

RELATED: Taking the Amazon union battle to the C-suite: Shareholders fight back against “higher immorality”

But the White House did not back down from the executive’s criticism. 

“It doesn’t take a huge leap to figure out why one of the wealthiest individuals on Earth opposes an economic agenda for the middle class that cuts some of the biggest costs families face … by asking the richest taxpayers and corporations to pay their fair share,” White House spokesperson Andrew Bates told CNBC. 


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


The Bezos-Biden spat comes as the price of food and fuel soars across the U.S., putting millions of working Americans at further risk of food insecurity and eviction as the nation still reels from the pandemic. The annual rate of inflation was about 8.3% ending in April, the highest it’s been in 40 years. Meanwhile, Securities and Exchange Commission filings for 100 U.S. companies reveal that corporations have used inflation as a pretext for raising prices while boosting their profits.

On Twitter, however, Bezos appeared to attribute the radical rise in prices to federal spending, a talking point that Republicans have used to pin the blame on Biden.

“Remember the Administration tried their best to add another $3.5 TRILLION to federal spending,” he tweeted. “They failed, but if they had succeeded, inflation would be even higher than it is today, and inflation today is at a 40 year high.”

But as Salon reported back in April, many experts have told a different story, citing corporate consolidation, corporate profiteering, and deregulation as chief reasons for price increases across the board. “You don’t see any correlation between inflation and the generosity of fiscal relief. Inflation is up everywhere, regardless of whether countries were stingy or generous,” Josh Bivens, Director of Research at the Economic Policy Institute, told Salon at the time. 

RELATED: Mitch McConnell leads Republicans in profiting off of corporate price hikes

Lindsay Owens, Executive Director of the Groundwork Collaborative, told Salon that in order to fight inflation, Biden will need to disincentivize companies from applying the profit-driven markups to their products that are causing prices to rise. (Markups represent the difference between a product’s selling price and its production cost.)

“Since the pandemic, about 54% of the price increases we’re seeing are coming from what we call the markup,” she said in an interview, citing research from the Economic Policy Institute. “That piece gets a lot less fun and a lot less lucrative,” she added, when “it’s taxed back and shipped off to the Treasury.”

Even Larry Summers, who attributed the inflation to Biden’s fiscal spending, echoed Owens’ sentiment this week over Twitter, saying that Bezos is “mostly wrong in his recent attack on the @JoeBiden Admin. It is perfectly reasonable to believe, as I do and @POTUS asserts, that we should raise taxes to reduce demand to contain inflation and that the increases should be as progressive as possible.”

RELATED: Why Joe Biden is afraid to blame Big Business for inflation

Some experts have suggested that higher corporate taxes could actually lead to higher inflation. In one Washington Post article, Bloomberg Opinion columnist Karl W. Smith argued that such hikes would “reduce the profitability of new investments, further dampening the incentive to increase production.” Because “less investment also leads to less supply,” he added, “the net effect could be to increase inflation pressures.”

However, Owens disputed this claim, citing the aftermath of Trump’s decision to cut the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21% in 2017. 

“We just had a big reduction in the corporate tax rate under President Trump with the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act,” she said. “It didn’t result in big wage increases for workers, it didn’t result in a lot of additional productive investment and growth in the real economy, and it definitely didn’t translate into lower prices for consumers.

New documents reveal how drug companies targeted doctors to increase opioid prescriptions

Twelve years ago, ProPublica set out to build a first-of-its-kind tool that would allow users, with a single search, to see whether their doctors were receiving money from an array of pharmaceutical companies.

Dollars for Docs generated a huge rush of interest. Readers searched the database tens of millions of times to see if their doctors had financial ties to the companies that made the drugs they prescribed. Law enforcement officials used it to investigate drug company marketing, drug companies looked up their competitors and doctors searched for themselves.

A trove of recently released documents offers the public an unvarnished look inside those relationships from the perspective of drug companies themselves. The material shows company officials worked to deflect the media scrutiny even as they sought to take advantage of relationships that they had built with doctors they were paying significant sums of money.

The documents were published online by the University of California San Francisco and Johns Hopkins University and became available as a result of drugmakers settling lawsuits against them for their role in the opioid crisis. These are exactly the kinds of documents we wanted to see when we started working on the Dollars for Docs series in 2010, but of course, no one was willing to show them to us.

Reading them should give patients even more pause about the financial entanglements their doctors have with the drug industry and spur them to ask questions (we have some ideas about specifics below).

The Washington Post mined the records and found that more than a quarter of the 239 medical professionals ranked as top prescribers by opioid maker Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals in 2013 “were later convicted of crimes related to their medical practices, had their medical licenses suspended or revoked, or paid state or federal fines after being accused of wrongdoing.” The article was replete with examples of doctors whose problems were well known but who were targeted anyway by sales representatives.

This was a familiar finding. Back in 2010, we found that hundreds of doctors paid by drug companies to promote their drugs had been accused of professional misconduct, were disciplined by state boards or lacked credentials as researchers or specialists.

The document trove included some mentions of our earlier work.

Among them: a 2010 email from a senior director of global compliance at Cephalon Inc., a small drug company that was subsequently acquired by Teva Pharmaceuticals.

In the message, the director notes that what ProPublica found — Cephalon had paid doctors who had been sanctioned by their states to deliver promotional talks on its behalf — was, indeed, true, and that the company was undertaking a review of all of its doctors in light of our findings.

Another document included a list of those doctors.

And there’s a 2017 presentation from an official at Mallinckrodt about the state of transparency around payments to doctors. It called ProPublica the “most thorough and vocal media source re: Open Payments data. Their analyses and searchable database are likely the go-to place for anyone wanting to do a comparison of companies and physicians.”

Our Dollars for Docs data often was picked up by news outlets across the country, including WNBC-TV in New York City. In one document, a spokesperson for the company Covidien was happy that the reporter had not asked about Exalgo, a new opioid made by the company. “Based on our conversation, I do not believe that the reporter is aware of Exalgo — and I am certainly not planning to make him aware,” she wrote in 2013.

The document trove also shows firsthand how drug companies targeted doctors and used information purchased from data brokers to rank them and gain insight on how many of their drugs each doctor prescribed each week.

When we first started working on our stories, we were very eager to see what pharma drug reps knew about the prescribing practices of doctors. So we asked a company then called IMS Health, which purchased data from pharmacies on which drugs each doctor prescribed and then sold it to the drug companies, if it would sell that data to us. IMS, now known as IQVIA, told us we could not buy the data at any cost.

The document trove includes a number of samples of what that data looks like and makes clear why the industry was so reluctant to have it come into public view.

The following chart was put together for Covidien about Exalgo. For every doctor in the Las Vegas region, it shows their prescribing, by week, of the drug and notes whether they are a “target.”

Documents then show how such information was used when meeting with doctors. In this email, a Covidien drug rep brags about how she was able to turn a doctor’s office staff into allies who would feed her information and talk up the company’s drugs to the doctor. “The nurse got very excited … and wanted to know all about the product, the coverage, how to use it, etc. She even took the liberty of detailing the doctor when he walked into to (sic) lunch as well.”

The documents also showed how closely Covidien measured the performance of drug reps in getting doctors to prescribe their drugs.

Covidien spun off Mallinckrodt in 2013 as a specialty pharmaceutical company, managing drugs such as Exalgo. (Mallinckrodt stopped promoting Exalgo in 2015 and no longer sells it.) Covidien focused on medical devices and was acquired by Medtronic.

In 2020, Mallinckrodt agreed to pay $1.6 billion to settle with states and the federal government for its role in the opioid crisis. That figure has since grown to $1.725 billion. In response to a request for comment, a spokesperson for the company sent a statement identical to one it had sent to the Post: “While Mallinckrodt does not agree with the allegations regarding decade-old issues, it has spent the past three years negotiating a comprehensive, complete and final settlement that resolves the opioid litigation against it, provides $1.725 billion to a trust serving affected communities, and allows Mallinckrodt to continue to serve patients with critical health needs under an independently monitored compliance program.”

This year, Mallinckrodt also agreed to pay $260 million to resolve allegations that it underpaid rebates to the Medicaid program and paid illegal kickbacks related to another of its drugs, H.P. Acthar Gel. As it happens, ProPublica has also written about that drug, raising questions about the public spending on it in light of questions about its efficacy.

We stopped updating our Dollars for Docs tool in 2019 because the government’s Open Payments database is robust and refreshed annually and has gotten better with time.

Still, searching through these documents reinforced my view of how important it is for patients to know about their doctors’ relationships with drug companies and talk directly to their doctors about the drugs they are prescribed.

Here are some of the questions you may want to ask:

  • What type of work do you do with these companies?
  • Have you prescribed me any drugs that are manufactured by companies you’ve taken payments from?
  • Are there non-drug alternatives that I may want to consider first?
  • Are there less expensive generic alternatives to the drugs you have prescribed?
  • What devices have you used in my care that are manufactured by companies you’ve taken payments from?

 

Have you used Dollars for Docs or Open Payments? What have you found? I’d love to hear your story.

In Midwestern schools, LGBTQ teachers face discrimination, hate and their own fears

The national debate about LGBTQ issues in schools has come to the Midwest. In the wake of the passage of Florida’s so-called “don’t say gay” law, more than a dozen other states – including Missouri, Iowa, Tennessee and Ohio – have proposed similar legislation aimed at limiting how teachers discuss topics of gender identity or sexual orientation.

Based on my own experience, that of my collaborator Steven Gill, and our initial research, teachers in the Midwest are having experiences similar to those elsewhere around the country.

We have both faced invalidating, even scary, obstacles in our journeys as out queer educators, and we have seen our queer and trans students suffer as well.

Our stories

For me, being a faculty sponsor for the school’s gay-straight alliance student group was both heartwarming and heartbreaking. I started my career at an urban school serving a high-poverty population in Nebraska in 2001 and found that the school’s GSA membership was just a handful of students.

During my first year as a volunteer sponsor of the group, another teacher was invited by the official sponsor to one of our meetings and showed a video of people claiming to be “former gays.” He then pulled out a Bible and had a discussion with the students about how who they were was a sin. The official sponsor, a school counselor, smiled throughout and let him continue speaking.

I fought back tears of anger as I heard students say, “I know I’m going to hell, but I can’t control how I feel and I’ve tried not to be gay, but it’s impossible.” I was furious that this was allowed to happen in what was supposed to be a safe and affirming space in a public school where this type of proselytizing should not be allowed. I watched as all the confidence and self-esteem drained from the students.

When I became the official sponsor, I ensured that teacher would not be allowed back to speak to the group. Later, he told a lesbian teacher he was praying for her soul. Twenty-one years later, he is still at that school – in a leadership role.

By the time I left in 2011, students were out and proud as allies and as a part of the LGBTQ community. While I won two national awards for my work there, neither was acknowledged by my school.

I witnessed students being disowned when they came out while also being rejected by religious shelters. There were many suicide attempts and countless mental health crises, and grades would drop as a result of bullying and harassment by teens and adults.

I have always been out as a queer woman, and many students thanked me for that. But I was told that two other teachers called me a “dyke” in the staff lounge because I participated in the Day of Silence to support LGBTQ rights. Some students told me they were praying for my soul around the flagpole. A parent accused me of turning his child gay because they went home with a rainbow ribbon and he threatened to follow me home and show me “what a real man is.” The school had two visits by the infamously homophobic Westboro Baptist Church. Its members held signs across the street saying “God hates fags” and tried to distribute literature to our students as they left the school building.

My collaborator Steve Gill reports, “I’m a current middle and high school social studies teacher who is out as nonbinary, and queer, to my students, and my school system. When I was going through elementary, middle, and high school and college I had no out queer or nonbinary or transgender teachers, or any type of representation.

“This caused me feelings of isolation and loneliness, as I did not have close queer icons or representations to look up to.

“In adulthood, as a teacher, I firmly and confidently tell students ‘I am Coach Gill, I go by “Coach” because I am nonbinary. I am also Black and Queer.’ I choose to be out despite the discrimination I have faced, continue to face, and will face in the future. I choose to be out because representation does matter.

“I want the people in my community to know that LGBTQ people exist in everyday jobs, not just as famous celebrities. I have students who come out to me because I am a safe space. I know of students who have been kicked out of their homes, misgendered, and they are mocked and ridiculed for being out at home.”

Our survey and what the preliminary results found

Our research shows that we are not alone. Many schools in the Midwest are places where queer and trans educators cannot thrive and do their jobs without fear or hesitation.

We posted a preliminary survey on social media, seeking teachers in the Midwestern states of Nebraska, Iowa and Minnesota. Out of the 45 educators who responded, 12 place their identities in the broad spectrum of LGBTQ community. But just four of them are out in their schools.

While our initial survey data is limited to these 45 respondents, the results are not surprising given our lived experiences and other research into schools’ treatment of LGBTQ people.

But our experiences and those of our survey participants are being lost as lawmakers restrict what teachers can and cannot say in the classroom, how students can and cannot participate in school programs, and what symbols teachers can and cannot have in their classrooms. We plan to conduct more research to better understand how schools can participate in making the future more fair and just for everyone.

Ferial Pearson, Assistant Professor of Teacher Education, University of Nebraska Omaha

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

In a strange congressional hearing, Navy official revealed UFO “sightings are frequent” in the U.S.

Congress held a strained hearing Tuesday on UFOs, in which defense officials juggled a genuine attempt to provide adequate transparency while maintaining measured closure with regard to sensitive intelligence.

Two top defense officials, Deputy Director of Naval Intelligence Scott Bray and Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security Ronald Moultrie, appeared before Congress to testify. Rep. André Carson (D-Ind.) led the first public government hearing in over 50 years on the matter of UFOs, or Unidentified Aerial Phenomena as the Department of Defense has rebranded them.

“Since the early 2000s, we have seen an increasing number of unauthorized and or identified aircraft or objects in military-controlled training areas and training ranges, and other designated airspace reports of sightings are frequent and continuing,” Bray told members of Congress.

RELATED: U.S. Navy confirms Tom DeLonge of Blink-182 was right about UFOs

Bray attributed this increase to efforts in the Navy to destigmatize reporting of unexplained sightings through the UAP Task Force. He also added that improved capabilities of various sensors, as well as a greater presence of unmanned aircraft and debris such as balloons in the airspace, contributed to the rise. An unclassified report from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence revealed that 80 out of 144 UAPs between 2004 and 2021 were recorded on multiple instruments. The cause of most remains unknown, putting the UAP in an “other bin” as Bray called it.

A variety of potential explanations — airborne clutter, natural atmospheric phenomena, government or industry developmental programs, foreign adversary systems — could explain the event. Though defense officials maintained that UAP has never been attributed to extraterrestrial sources, both Bray and Moultrie were open to the possibility of extraterrestrial visitors as a possible cause.

“We want to know what’s out there as much as you want to know what’s out there,” Moultrie explained with an air of levity. “Finding what’s out there is important, but first and foremost, it’s important for us to do that so that we can ensure that our people, our personnel, our aviators, our bases, and installations are safe.”

A science-fiction aficionado, Moultrie took a few humorous jabs from members of Congress about his attendance at certain unnamed comic conventions. Leaning into it, Moultrie seemed to don an everyman persona, speaking about his family’s lines of questioning about aliens, adding that intelligence officials are “people just like you” curious about extraterrestrial life.


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


The curious line of questioners and commenters included a curious moment from Rep. Rick Crawford (R-Ark.), who at one point seemed to confused the social media platform TikTok with the popular candy Tic Tac. Crawford’s technological stumbles continued; at another moment during the hearing, the subcommittee sat in relative silence as Bray struggled to pause a video on a frame of one UAP as it whizzed past a fighter jet.

In the video shown, the brief blip on the screen appears to operate with an unknown source of propulsion. Nearly giving up at one point, Bray finally landed on a frame of an indiscernible reflective sphere after several minutes of toggling. Bray said defense officials have no explanation for phenomena like this.  

You need to show us, Congress and the American public, whose imaginations you have captured, you are willing to follow the facts where they lead,” Carson said. “We fear sometimes that the DOD is focused more on emphasizing what it can explain, not investigating what it can’t.”

Despite breaking down a couple of videos, the two defense officials revealed little new information to the public. Nothing indicates they are alien, but they go in the “other” category in a new system of classification that leaves room for the unexplained.

To those hoping for some grand revelation of extraterrestrial life, the hearing was a disappointment. What it highlighted was a need for better calibration and advancement of instruments and an emergent concern in congress about unnecessary military secrecy, a relic of Cold War intelligence operations. 

“You need to show us, Congress and the American public, whose imaginations you have captured, you are willing to follow the facts where they lead,” Carson said. “We fear sometimes that the DOD [Department of Defense] is focused more on emphasizing what it can explain, not investigating what it can’t. I’m looking for you to assure us today that all conclusions are on the table.”

Five months after a National Defense Authorization Act sought to establish a permanent office to address UAP sightings, part of the hearing in the Counterterrorism, Counterintelligence, and Counterproliferation Subcommittee was held publicly. The act also required an annual report on UAP activity and semiannual briefings for Congress.

Representing a shift toward transparency, the act followed several high-profile video leaks of unidentified aircraft and a subsequent stream of documents relating to UAP released to the public. At various points, Moultrie and Bray committed to transparency and disclosing findings to the public when doing so would not reveal military secrets to “potential adversaries.”

Repeatedly, lines of questioning about Department of Defense intelligence were met with the same response: They could discuss it in the closed hearing held afterward.

When pressed by Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-Wisc), both denied knowledge of any official DOD investigations into UAP between the termination of Project Blue Book in 1969 and the recently uncovered Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program that ended in 2017.

Rep. Carson made comments early on that UAP investigations represent “one of the few times we can demonstrate some degree of bipartisanship.” With the goal of assessing the stalled establishment of the Airborne Object Identification and Management Synchronization Group (AOIMSG), the C3 Subcommittee quickly devolved into partisan incoherence.

At one point Rep. Darin LaHood (R-Ill.) suggested those who attempt to spread misinformation about UAP sightings should be treated criminally. Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) on the other hand wondered how defense officials could investigate these reports considering “it’s not at all beyond the pale that there would be a visit here.”

Read more on extraterrestrials and the US government:

“There must be consequences”: New lawsuit could cost fake Wisconsin Trump electors $200,000 each

A lawsuit has been filed against fake Donald Trump electors who signed official documents that falsely stated the former president won the 2020 election in Wisconsin.

The phony electors are already under investigation by federal prosecutors, but the suit prepared by the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection and the pro-democracy group Law Forward could cost each of them $200,000 in damages, reported HuffPost.

“The scheme to overturn the election nevertheless caused permanent and irreparable damage to the country’s political institutions generally, and to representative government in Wisconsin specifically,” reads the complaint. “Defendants not only helped lay the groundwork for the events of January 6, 2021, but also inflicted lasting damage on Wisconsin’s civic fabric.”

The suit was filed in Dane County against 10 phony electors and two pro-Trump lawyers by two electors for Joe Biden, whom state officials certified as the winner, and a Wisconsin voter who claims the fraud harmed her as well.

“The fraudulent electors tried to contradict the will of Wisconsin’s voters, and that’s dangerous for our democracy,” Khary Pennebaker, one of the two legitimate Wisconsin electors among the plaintiffs in the suit, said in a statement. “There must be consequences for their behavior and this suit gives our court system the chance to prevent this from happening again.”

How Johnny Depp’s and Amber Heard’s careers have been impacted by the mutual abuse claims

Johnny Depp‘s and Amber Heard’s testimonies within their ongoing defamation trial continue to highlight how the ex-couple’s history of legal battles have impacted their individual careers.

On Tuesday, Heard returned to the stand at Virginia’s Fairfax County Circuit Court to testify that Warner Bros. allegedly dropped her from the upcoming “Aquaman” sequel over her divorce battles with Depp. Per Variety, Heard said she was “actively scheduling timing for filming” the future project. But after Depp’s team called her a liar concerning her abuse allegations, “communications” about the sequel “stopped at that point.”

According to reports from earlier this year, Heard appears in approximately 10 minutes of the film, which is called “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom.” Heard, who plays the superhero and warrior Mera, first showcased her character in “Justice League.” She then reprised her role in James Wan’s 2018 film “Aquaman” and starred alongside Jason Momoa, who plays the titular character.

RELATED: Johnny Depp isn’t being boycotted — he’s a powerful man with options

Heard said she earned $1 million for starring in the first film but earned twice the amount for “Aquaman 2,” even though she described her current role as “a very pared-down version.”

“I was given a script and then given new versions of the script that had taken away scenes that had action in it, that depicted my character and another character, without giving any spoiler aways, two characters fighting with one another, and they basically took a bunch out of my role,” she said. “They just removed a bunch out.”

While Heard has not been dropped from any major film projects, the same can’t be said for Depp. In December 2018, Disney dropped Depp from the sixth installment of “Pirates of the Caribbean” shortly after Heard’s Washington Post op-ed — in which she details personal accounts of abuse but refrains from naming Depp as her abuser — was published. Depp addressed the incident at his cross-examination, when Heard’s lawyer, Ben Rottenborn, asked about a Daily Mail article that claimed Depp was “out as Jack Sparrow.”


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


“I wasn’t aware of that, but it doesn’t surprise me,” Depp testified, per an April 20 Variety report. “Two years had gone by of constant worldwide talk about me being this wife beater. So I’m sure that Disney was trying to cut ties to be safe. The #MeToo movement was in full swing at that point.”

“I would be a real simpleton to not think that there was an effect on my career based on Ms. Heard’s words, whether they mentioned my name or not,” he continued. Depp added that his career was practically “done” from “the second the allegations were made against me.”

On Sunday, Jerry Bruckheimer, who produced the “Pirates of the Caribbean” films, revealed in an interview with The Times that Depp would not be returning as Sparrow anytime soon. Bruckheimer simply stated, “the future is yet to be decided.”

Instead, the producer said he’s working on a sequel with a female lead.

We’re talking to Margot Robbie,” he said. “We are developing two ‘Pirates’ scripts — one with her, one without.”

Just two years after Depp’s departure from the swashbuckling “Pirates” series, the actor was forced to exit the “Fantastic Beasts” movies after losing a libel case against the British tabloid The Sun, which called Depp a “wife beater” in an article. Depp’s departure took place during filming for “Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore,” the third installment in the film series based on J.K. Rowling’s “Wizarding World of Harry Potter” media franchise. Depp was replaced by Danish actor Mads Mikkelsen, who now stars as Gellert Grindelwald.

Depp is a marquee name and therefore has the massive fanbase and resume to match. While losing out on work from two major franchises is a blow, his long and successful career has afforded him some comfort and stability. While Heard’s career is not inconsiderable,  work loss likely affects her far more since she is younger and doesn’t command the same pay as her former partner.

More stories you might like:

“Better Call Saul” and the chameleonic importance of being Lalo Salamanca: This evil travels

Eduardo “Lalo” Salamanca styles himself as a gentleman with a soft smile that betrays little. The “Better Call Saul” villain, played by Tony Dalton, doesn’t raise his voice, and when he does speak, he infuses his words with melodic cheer. The first time we meet him, which happens late in the fourth season, he’s cooking while singing with the radio. When one of the Salamanca cartel’s top men in Albuquerque walks in to confer with him, Lalo offers him a plate.

“Never in your life have you tasted something so delicious, it’s true. Wait . . .” Lalo effuses in Spanish, dancing around the stove like a happy gourmand as he plates his creation.

Then he presents it to his man with what could be either an invitation or a threat: “You’re gonna die.”

He’s talking about the flavor but, this being “Better Call Saul,” he’s also making a promise. The man he’s chatting up is Nacho (Michael Mando) which, intentionally or not, makes this exchange a bit premonitory. This marks their first meeting, and it’s quickly followed by a visit to the infirm Don Hector, Lalo’s uncle, whose spirits Lalo lifts by reminiscing with him about a time dear tío tortured a hotelier to death.

RELATED: “Better Call Saul” cost of breaking good

Then Hector’s nephew presents him with a souvenir from that crime that forever solidifies Lalo in the lore of both “Saul” and the “Breaking Bad” universe: the front desk’s bell.

We haven’t seen much of Lalo in the first half of this final season of “Better Call Saul,” but now that he’s resurfaced, the show’s writers and Dalton remind us of this character’s essential role in the story’s examination of corruption.  They cement in the viewer the truth that Lalo’s charm and diplomacy are the traits that make him singularly terrifying and dangerous. He’s a man who can take down two armed human traffickers without much fuss, but he’ll also politely return the cash the men took from the people they were going to smuggle with a gentle offer of “be careful” before he walks off.

Lalo’s charm and diplomacy are the traits that make him singularly terrifying and dangerous.

Lalo seems like the most reasonable of the Salamancas. Nothing like Tuco, the rage-aholic who frightened Walter White and breaks someone’s legs if they look at him wrong. Not like The Cousins, Leonel and Marco, the heartless assassins who make offerings to some dark deity before they silently hunt their quarry. Dalton makes Lalo civil and sociable, the kind of man you would be fine inviting into your home under the right circumstances. That’s the scariest part about him.

But the fifth and sixth episodes of the finale season demonstrate another aspect of Lalo’s anxiety-provoking horror we may not have considered before, which is that he’s a Mexican man who looks more European than indigenous. He’s white, in other words, and that gives his brand of sinister global access that his nemesis Gus Fring (Giancarlo Esposito) doesn’t enjoy as easily.

Dalton’s performance doesn’t specifically lean into that in his portrayal. Instead, the writers drop a few hints into the script in scenes where the Salamancas disparage Gus, especially when the latter over-delivers and shows up the criminal organization’s legacy crew. Along with that, the actor capitalizes on the added weight with which his suave conviviality endows his character.

Gus and Lalo are two sides of the same coin. Both men have built an underground network to serve their needs: Gus’ front involves thousands of chickens on a farm outside of town that appears to supply his chicken restaurants, Los Pollos Hermanos.

Lalo’s involves a network of loyal regular folks South of the border supported by the Salamancas, as we see at the end of the fifth season and the opening of this sixth. After surviving an assassination, Lalo stumbles through the desert to find one of the families he’s provided for.  

Better Call SaulTony Dalton as Lalo Salamanca in “Better Call Saul” (Greg Lewis/AMC/Sony Pictures Television)Unluckily for them, the man also happens to look a look like Lalo . . . meaning they too have always been livestock. Gus fries poultry; Lalo burns humans. The world needs to think he’s dead. These two satisfy that aim by standing in for the bodies.

Gus is miles more elegant and well-mannered than Lalo is because he must be. His refinement and local philanthropy mask his criminal enterprises. He also has to behave impeccably in the community and to his cartel boss to survive. Whereas Lalo can simply be as he is and fit in with a few small adjustments, which is how Dalton delicately shades his psychopath.

RELATED: “Hawkeye” reminds us why Jeremy Renner’s archer is the least Avenger

When Lalo pops up for the first time since the series premiere in the fifth episode, “Black and Blue,” he’s in a bar in Germany, wearing the suit of a handsome American who eases his way into the company of a woman named Margarethe. Lalo is soft-spoken and kind, and she views it as a coincidence that he’s from the same town where her husband died.

But there’s no such thing as chance in Lalo’s world – she knows her husband, Werner Ziegler, was hired in secret by Gus, but never had proof of the reason or why.

This Lalo is charming, empathetic, and a bit melancholy. He wins her confidence with his wit and intellect and makes us fearfully hold our breath when it seems she might invite him into her home for a nightcap, or something more.

Because we know he’s capable of a bloody sight more. We’ve seen the evidence. That’s why he further frays our nerves when he breaks into her house the next day while she’s at work and almost gets caught there when she doubles back.  It’s a relief that he doesn’t ruin the fantasy he created the night before, choosing to exit by a window instead of lay in wait to kill her, as he easily could have.

The tension between Lalo and Gus has always been a matter of competing intellects.

Lalo is more than a survivor, you see. He’s also a butcher. In Margarethe’s home, he finds a means of tracking down the men who worked with Werner on Gus’ mystery construction. In the sixth episode, “Axe and Grind,” he finds one named Casper (Stefan Kapičić), one of Werner’s former employees, calmly walking onto his property with the same friendly smile before pursuing him through the woods.

“Axe and Grind” is the first episode that Esposito directs, giving the man who plays Gus Fring a shot at contributing to the legacy of his character’s nemesis. This layers an extra measure of precision to what we see, especially at the point where it looks like Lalo may meet his end by way of an ax chop.


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


Casper and Lalo end up in a dimly lit shed where Lalo lets Casper think he has him on the ropes, wheezing Margarethe’s name just to get him close enough to stab Casper and then chop through his leg – all a precursor to what is certain to be an information-gathering torture fest. Even then there’s no yelling; Lalo simply pulls off his belt and hands it to Casper. “Tie that off before you bleed to death,” he says. “You and I are going to have a talk.”

From the moment Lalo enters the picture, he is obsessed with taking down Gus.

The Salamancas and Gus are the two sides of the cartel’s New Mexico operation, with the former providing the muscle and the latter facilitating the operational side of their drug running.

But the tension between Lalo and Gus has always been a matter of competing intellects. Lalo always (correctly) suspected that Gus was sabotaging the Salamancas’ side of the operation and building something outside of the cartel’s reach; Gus (correctly) suspected that Lalo was on to him, which is why he tried to have him killed.

That mission’s failure means the threat of Lalo has haunted these last few episodes, always felt but not seen, and the Germany trip reminds us of why Gus and his men, along with Kim (Rhea Seehorn) and Jimmy (Bob Odenkirk) are so nervous about his survival. His encounter with Margarethe substantiates that he can slide into any place and any conversation and gain people’s trust without being questioned.

“Axe and Grind,” the penultimate episode before “Better Call Saul” takes its midseason break, is noteworthy for its glimpse at a formative episode in Kim Wexler’s life, where we learn why she’s drawn to Jimmy and his grifting ways.

This explains why she’s so willing to toss aside an opportunity that would enable her to do legitimately philanthropic work in her field to assist Jimmy to pull off the season-long con he’s been teeing up to take down his former boss and tormentor Howard Hamlin (Patrick Fabian).

But Lalo’s exploits in Germany explain why Lalo is one of the most fascinating characters in this universe, joining Nacho as the other “Better Call Saul” character who was mentioned but never seen in “Breaking Bad.”

To Walter White, he was a name. To us, and through Dalton, he is the type of demon we can’t look away from – one who wears the enticing skin of a seducer and lures us to a place of intimacy before slicing apart our sense of safety.

New episodes of “Better Call Saul” air at 9 p.m. Mondays on AMC.

More stories like this:

 

A love letter to bucatini, the perfect pasta shape

Does there exist for you a single food that can reliably improve your mental state? That wholly encompasses the textural, sensual, soothing joy of eating? That gives you a shred more faith in human whimsy and capability? 

For me, this food is bucatini pasta. You know, the long, thick spaghetti with a hole down the middle. So named from the Italian word “bucato,” meaning pierced, bucatini were literally engineered to cook evenly (inside and out simultaneously) and capture sauce — a thought I find endlessly comforting.

Indeed, no shape more elegantly envelops eggy carbonara, amatriciana with tomatoes and rich guanciale or anchovies melted in olive oil with garlic and cheese. Yet this glistening, twirled heap is no art exhibit; bucatini all but come alive from your first bite. They bounce, they squeak, they whistle, they fling sauce in unpredictable directions. 

In the centuries Italian dried pasta artisans have been making bucatini (reports indicate since roughly 16th-century Sicily, National Pasta Association chef and spokesperson Rosario DeNero tells me), they’ve taken great pains to ensure we eaters have such a whimsical, sensual experience. 

This glistening, twirled heap is no art exhibit; bucatini all but come alive from your first bite. They bounce, they squeak, they whistle, they fling sauce in unpredictable directions.

Like all dry pasta, bucatini only requires two ingredients: water and coarse durum wheat semolina. After the dough is kneaded to the correct consistency, it is pushed, or extruded, through a die, or metal disk with holes in it, to cut the desired shape. In this case, each hole contains a small metal piece in the center to create the pasta’s tubular shape. Traditional dies were entirely made of bronze, which create a rough surface ideal for capturing sauce. Nowadays, many industrial dies are made out of Teflon, giving the pasta a smoother, more even texture. 

Of course, electric (or, hell, even donkey- or people-pulled) extruders weren’t around in the 1500s when bucatini originated, as DeNero points out. 

“Back then, Sicilians were said to use a wooden or iron rod, very thin like you find on umbrellas,” DeNero says. “They’d take a little ball of pasta the size of a chestnut, roll it on the iron to create a tube, then remove the pasta from the iron and you get this handmade bucatino. Sicilians still call them pasta e ferretti (meaning pasta with iron).” 

RELATED: This saffron-packed chickpea and almond pasta will transport you to Spain

As the kingdoms of Sicily and Naples often united politically, the shape eventually found its way to central and southern Italy, becoming popular in the Lazio region, particularly Rome, where it remains a favorite today. This explains why we so often see bucatini paired with Roman sauces like cacio e pepe, the aforementioned amatriciana and gricia (amatriciana without the tomatoes). 

To ensure even cooking, bucatini requires long — often more than a day — drying at moderate temperatures. “Originally, people used to hang them to dry in the sun with the breezes of the sea, so it wouldn’t be too fast,” DeNero says. 

If you happened to be wandering around Gragnano, a small hill town southeast of Naples, a century ago, you indeed would have seen sheets of pasta hanging to dry above the streets like clothes on a line. 

RELATED: My pasta, myself: Forging a home in New Mexico through Hatch green chile pasta

“They had built the whole village so that the main road, called Via Roma, would catch this particular breeze from the mountains to the sea,” says Beatrice Ughi, founder and president of specialty Italian food importer Gustiamo, in the Bronx. “Every family took advantage of this breeze and would hang their pastas to dry for days at a time.”

Gragnano, also known as the Città della Pasta (City of Pasta), has purportedly been making seccata (dried pasta) since the 1200s, owing to its proximity to wheat-growing fields and clear spring water running down from mountains that encase it on three sides — not to mention those favorable maritime breezes. 

It’s in this village, at a small 115-year-old, family-run factory called Faella, where the bucatini is still extruded through bronze dies and slow-dried for almost two days to produce rough-edged, toothsome bucatini that smell of toasted grain and fresh baked bread when they cook. Faella’s painstaking, expensive process (the bronze dies have to be replaced every two to three years) yields considerably small supplies.

It’s in this village, at a small 115-year-old, family-run factory called Faella, where the bucatini is still extruded through bronze dies and slow-dried for almost two days to produce rough-edged, toothsome bucatini that smell of toasted grain and fresh baked bread when they cook.

“What is small?” Ughi asks, before answering herself: “It’s like one shift of pasta production at (industrial pasta giant) Barilla is equivalent to what Faella produces in a year; it’s remarkable.” 

I later confess to Ughi that at least an hour before our phone call, I’d begun talking myself into Faella’s $38 “big bag” of bucatini in Gustiamo’s online shop. “Five and a half pounds should last me six weeks!” I reason. 

This hoarding mentality of mine dates back two years, to a certain temporary bucatini shortage that occurred early in the pandemic — when consumers were cleaning stores out of pasta almost as fast as toilet paper. 

DeNero attributes the bucatini shortage a “perfect storm” of factors, including demand far outstripping already limited supply of this speciality pasta (harder to make because of its signature hole) and Italian manufacturer De Cecco’s strange, untimely barring from the U.S. border, which writer Rachel Handler covered in spectacular detail for New York Magazine’s Grub Street. The latter resulted from an U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) investigation concerning a slight deficiency in the iron content of De Cecco’s bucatini — which has to meet a certain minimum to be sold in the U.S. In a follow-up piece published in February, Handler reported that De Cecco had solved the issue internally and was waiting on the FDA to remove its automatic hold. 

Naturally, I expanded my pasta library in those longs months without bucatini, via long fusilli bucati resembling impeccably permed ringlets, fat ribbons of pappardelle, ruffled campanelle bells and coarse-edged, slow-cooking pici.


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


It had been months when I finally got my hands on a box of Rustichella d’Abruzzo bucatini. I methodically worked through the carbonara recipe I’d taken a decade to perfect, feeling an almost giddy joy as I captured a ladleful of starchy pasta-cooking liquid, which jumpstarts the frenzied process of turning egg and cheese and pork fat into a sauce. Indeed, part of the reason bucatini holds sauce so well relates to how it’s cooked, which is the final piece of this perfect pasta puzzle. 

“To get what we call ‘mantecatura,’ when you actually make pasta creamy with starches by finishing the cooking in the sauce, the long cuts react better to this phenomenon,” DeNero says. “That’s what makes pasta so great — this whole sensual experience of eating something that is not just one just texture, but multi-textured.”

I can’t help but marvel at this delicate mingling of art and precision engineering, perfected by thousands of epiphanies achieved across hundreds of years — in fields, towns and factories, in home and professional kitchens alike. All in the name of one pasta shape. It’s enough to give me pause over this glossy, creamy work of art before I dutifully attack it with lively, joyful abandon. 

More stories about pasta from this author: 

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

Kimberly Guilfoyle, the former advisor to President Donald Trump’s failed re-election campaign who later become engaged to his eldest son, is hawking steaks for a meat delivery service whose Better Business Bureau (BBB) accreditation has been revoked. In online reviews, customers allege that the curated meat boxes from Good Ranchers, which may cost hundreds of dollars, are not only a “rip off” but also sometimes never arrive. 

On May 15, Guilfoyle uploaded a video of herself standing over a smoking indoor grill, flipping thin cuts with little visible marbling over the flames. “I’m here with these beautiful steaks from goodranchers.com,” she says. “And this is the way you show your family you love them — by buying this meat that is born and raised here in the United States.” 

Guilfoyle continues by claiming “85% of the meat that they sell in stores today is not even from the United States.” That statement is inaccurate; according to the Department of Agriculture, only 8 to 12% of the beef sold in the US comes from foreign sources. (Guilfoyle may be referring to grass-fed beef, of which 75 to 80% is imported, though often processed in the US.) 

According to a review of its website by Salon, Good Ranchers’ mail-order beef bundles begin with the $179 “Ranchers Classic” and top out at the $1,299 “Prepper Kit” — which includes 17 pounds of bone-in steaks, 15 pounds of boneless steaks, 15 pounds of signature ground beef and 40 pounds of various chicken breasts. 

While many of the reviews on the Good Ranchers website from “verified buyers” are positive, reviews elsewhere online include allegations from customers who claim that they paid hundreds of dollars for beef that never showed up.

“I restarted my subscription, ordering $139.00 box,” a customer who identified as Lisa G. wrote on the BBB profile for the company. “I got an email last night announcing it had come. We were home at 9:28 when the email came in and went straight to the front porch, but there was no box, and we’ve received nothing.” 

Related: A new wave of politicians are shedding the misconception that cooking and politics don’t mix

Lisa G. said she attempted to contact the company, but she did not receive a response. 

“My next move is to stop payment through my bank or have them pursue the company for restitution,” she added. 

A customer named Karen W. described a similar experience. “I have been trying to contact you via email for the past 3 days,” she wrote. “My order/shipment went to another state and I would like to have this corrected. Please respond to my emails.” 

In the string of one-star reviews on the BBB profile for Good Ranchers, customers also complained about issues such as the quality of its beef and difficulties contacting customer service. Five patrons used either the phrase “rip off” or “ripped off.” 


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


“Don’t waste your money. Poor quality of meat. Good sales pitch though!!” Kristen M. wrote. “I would love to send this meat back. I was ripped off.”

“I paid $203 for beef and got ripped off. Con man selling the steaks,” Jeff M. added. “Told me there were 20 steaks in a box and there were 10. Filets were 2 oz and filled w fat and chewy and filled with veins. Could not eat any of the filets and used for pulled beef sandwiches. Totally deceived. Would never buy these again. $203 is a lot of money.”

In the latter instance, Good Ranchers responded to the complaint. “Jeff, We’re sorry your experience with us what not a great one ! We want to make it right,” they wrote. “We offer a 100% Money back guarantee.” (A statement containing a satisfaction guarantee and email for customer support are listed on the company’s website.)

It’s unclear if that complaint, which was dated August 4, 2021, was resolved. However, the Board of Directors of the BBB revoked Good Ranchers’ accreditation on Dec. 2, 2021, “due to failure by the business to adhere to the BBB requirement that Accredited Businesses meet and abide by” several standards. They included addressing disputes forwarded by the BBB quickly and in good faith; approaching all marketplace transactions and commitments with integrity; and providing responses to complaints that are professional and explain “why any relief sought by the company cannot or should not be granted.” 

Salon’s request for comment was not returned by Good Ranchers prior to the publication of this article. Though the BBB “cannot guarantee the accuracy or truthfulness of a review,” it takes “steps to minimize misuse and improve consumer experience.” These steps, which are detailed on its website, include confirming that “a marketplace interaction took place between the reviewer and the business” and giving “the business an opportunity to respond to the review.”

Guilfoyle does not mention these allegations in her advertisement for Good Ranchers, but she does offer purchasers a Trump-adjacent coupon code. As she wrote on Twitter, “Use code ULTRAMAGA to get 2 POUNDS of American wagyu burgers FREE with your first order.”

On the company’s website, you can also enter to win a meet-and-greet with conservative commentator Candace Owens or read endorsements from Charlie Kirk or Ben Shapiro. A quote from Donald Trump Jr., meanwhile, claims that “you support American Patriots when you shop with the great people at Good Ranchers.”

On the company’s website, you can also enter to win a meet-and-greet with conservative commentator Candace Owens . . .

With these advertisements, Guilfoyle and her fiancé continue the Trump family legacy of mixing red meat not only with politics but also with business.

In 2007, Donald Trump launched Trump Steaks, which were supplied by Buckhead Beef, an Atlanta-based company and subsidiary of Sysco. The steaks, which were sold via QVC and the Sharper Image, arrived in bundles that ranged from $199 to $999. The latter retailer reportedly yanked the product after only two months because of poor sales. The trademark for Trump Steaks was eventually canceled in 2014. 

That didn’t stop Trump, as Salon reported, from trotting the name back out like nothing happened at a campaign event in 2016. Between mocking fellow candidates like “little Marco” Rubio and “lyin’ Ted” Cruz, servers provided attendees with what were advertised as “Trump Steaks.” However, press on hand “started tweeting pictures . . . of the wrapped steaks, labeled Bush Brothers, the West Palm Beach butcher that supplies all of Trump’s South Florida properties.”

In the end, those attendees got their red meat. If the reviews are any indication, will those who order steaks based on Guilfoyle’s recommendation get theirs?

Read more stories at the intersection of food and culture: 

GOP Sen. Ron Johnson denies he’s heard of “great replacement” while espousing replacement theory

Last month, Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisc., went on Fox News to deliver a diatribe about the apparent ills of open borders, a policy that President Biden has never supported but was nevertheless cited by the senator as an attempt to “remake the demographics of America.” 

But now, in the wake of a deadly mass shooting carried out by white supremacist who echoed a similar sentiment, Johnson’s comments are coming back to bite him, with many commentators arguing that the senator supports a racist conspiracy theory that’s likely to lead to more violence in the months to come.

The uproar stems from a shooting this weekend in Buffalo, New York, where ten people were killed and three were injured as part of a racially-motivated attack on a predominantly Black neighborhood in the city. Prior to the attack, the 18-year old killer, Payton Gendron, published a 180-page manifesto online, making multiple references to the “Great Replacement,” a baseless right-wing conspiracy theory alleging that the Democrats are attempting to loosen borders in order to replace the white electorate with more pliant citizens from the Third World. 

Two days after the shooting, Johnson took to Twitter to express his condolences, saying that “Americans around the country are praying for the victims of the horrific attack that occurred in Buffalo. We mourn for their loved ones and thank law enforcement for their heroism.”

RELATE: How the “great replacement” theory went from Charlottesville to the GOP mainstream


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


But with no apparent segue, Johnson then turned his attention to Biden’s “open border policies,” arguing that criticizing the administration’s stance on immigration is not tantamount to subscribing to the “Great Replacement.”

“Pushing the lie that criticizing this admin’s policies in any way supports ‘replacement theory’ is another example of the corporate media working overtime to cover up the Biden admin’s failures,” Johnson tweeted. 

But the conservative lawmaker has, at the very least, tacitly supported the theory without naming it directly. 

RELATED: Doubling down on “great replacement” paranoia: How the right is reacting to the Buffalo shooting

In one Fox Business interview last month, the senator baselessly claimed Biden “wants complete open borders,” adding: “And you have to ask yourself why? Is it really they want to remake the demographics of America to ensure their – that they stay in power forever? Is that what’s happening here?”

And on Tuesday, Johnson employed a similar line of inquiry after being asked to condemn the “Great Replacement.”

“Why are [the Democrats] letting millions of people in this country … [Biden] ought to answer why are they doing that?” he told the Wall Street Journal. “It doesn’t make any sense to me at all. None. It makes no sense. I can’t explain a lot of things. Why are they pushing for mail-in ballots?”

Johnson’s spokesperson, Alexa Henning, has described any allegations of Johnson’s belief in the “Great Replacement” theory as “100% false.” 

“The senator has spoken extensively on the inhumanity of the Biden administration’s open border policies, not some racist ‘theory,'” she said in a Tuesday statement, according to the Wisconsin State Journal.

Johnson, elected in 2011, as an adamant opponent of illegal immigration. Back in 2017, the senator supported Donald Trump’s decision to defer the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, which provided children with temporary relief from deportation

Doctors explain why it’s not safe to make your own baby formula at home

As supply chain breakdowns have led to baby formula shortages throughout America, some enterprising social media personalities have proposed MacGyvering the situation by making your own baby formula. Indeed, numerous recipes for homemade formulas are currently circulating online; for example, Darla Shine, author of “Happy Housewives,” recently tweeted a baby formula recipe from the 1950s.

There’s certainly something appealing about the idea of making formula at home. After all, most of us cook food at home for adults and children; how much harder can it be to mix something up for infants? Do the big baby formula companies really have to have a monopoly on making the stuff?  

Unfortunately, it turns out that homemade baby formula recipes aren’t necessarily a good idea. In fact, doctors advise against homemade baby formulas in general. 

“I attribute the current shortage to an overall failure to invest in maternal-child health,” Felder explained.

What makes it so hard to replicate? It turns out that the problem is simply that, because babies are so vulnerable, it is not easy to create a formula that ideally serves their nutritional and other biological needs. Nutritionists create baby formulas in a very precise way for a good reason. Likewise, it is hard to maintain sterility in a home kitchen to the degree that baby food requires.

RELATED: Republicans’ “pro-life” pivot: GOP suddenly outraged by baby formula shortage

“I can understand that parents are overwhelmed and are trying to create a solution to make sure their babies are fed; however, creating homemade formula is not recommended,” Dr. Tisha Felder, an associate professor at the University of South Carolina who focuses on women’s health research, told Salon by email. “According to the American Academy of Pediatrics [AAP], it is not recommend and can actually be unsafe and harmful to babies because these homemade options do not provide the right balance of nutrients that infants need.”

Dr. Jenifer Lightdale, a member of the AAP Committee on Nutrition, told Salon that she is worried about parents creating homemade formulas because there are so many details to making healthy and effective formulas.


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


“It’s been known for a long time that it is dangerous to take milk off the grocery shelf, whether its cow’s milk, soy milk or goat milk, and doctor it so that it has the right ratios of proteins,” Lightdale explained. “We also know that the wrong ratio can injure a baby’s kidneys or affect their immune systems.”

Homemade formulas could also hurt babies if they do not have the right amount of electrolytes, sodium, potassium and phosphate, Lightdale added, with errors in those calculations potentially leading to problems like “electrolyte instability, serious dehydration, and even seizures in babies.”

Baby formulas also need to be made in a highly sterile environment, as babies have young immune systems that may not always be successful in warding off disease.

“Even if your kitchen is super clean, it is not a sterile environment in the way it should be when making up an infant formula,” Lightdale pointed out. “Bacterial and other organisms that don’t affect us as adults are naturally everywhere, even when we do our best to use disinfectants, and these can cause serious infections in infants.” The recall in the Abbott Laboratories facility that has contributed to the product shortage was reportedly prompted by one such bacteria, Cronobacter sakazakii, Lightdate noted.

Homemade formulas could also hurt babies if they do not have the right amount of electrolytes, sodium, potassium and phosphate, Lightdale added, with errors in those calculations potentially leading to problems like “electrolyte instability, serious dehydration, and even seizures in babies.”

Both experts also agree that the underlying problem behind the baby formula shortage is that, quite simply, America’s infrastructure has not been developed with the possibility of such a shortage in mind.

“I attribute the current shortage to an overall failure to invest in maternal-child health,” Felder explained. “The fact that we have few manufacturers who control the supply of infant formula in this country reflects our lack of forethought that a shortage could likely occur and dramatically impact U.S. families.” She noted that federal agencies like the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) have failed to come up with programs that increase access to baby formula for women, children and infants until now, even though they could have done so earlier. This “is just another example of how we are not thinking in advance of how we can better support children and families. The U.S. has one of the highest infant and maternal mortality rates in the world, and this infant formula shortage is a glaring reminder that we must do more and do better to protect our babies,” Felder added.

Lightdale also pinpointed the Abbott recall as the first domino to fall in a system that was already precarious.

“We were aware prior to Abbott’s recall in February there were already supply chain shortages, just like we’re all seeing with many American items, due to ingredient shortages and transportation woes,” Lightdale explained. “Presumably, this was due to the pandemic. I think the recall of essentially all of the powdered formula made by Abbott, which is one of the biggest formula companies in the US, just sent everything over the edge.” 

For other Salon stories on the baby formula shortage and supply chain issues:

Editor’s note: This story was updated on May 18, 2022, to correct the university where Felder works at (University of South Carolina). 

 

Bob Mackie slams Kim Kardashian’s “big mistake” for daring to wear Marilyn Monroe’s iconic 1962 gown

Alongside internet critics and costume historians, Bob Mackie is also not a fan of Kim Kardashian’s Marilyn Monroe showcase at the Met Gala.

The legendary fashion designer — who notably sketched Monroe’s original 1962 Jean Louis gown, in which she sang “Happy Birthday” to President John F. Kennedy — told Entertainment Weekly that Kardashian wearing the starlet’s famed dress “was a big mistake.”

“[Marilyn] was a goddess. A crazy goddess, but a goddess. She was just fabulous. Nobody photographs like that. And it was done for her. It was designed for her,” Mackie continued. “Nobody else should be seen in that dress.” He added that Kardashian donning the dress was damaging its preservation and overall, diminished its historical significance.

“The Kardashians” star lost 16 lbs. in three weeks to fit into the original dress, which was flown to her privately from Ripley’s Believe It or Not Museum in Orlando, Florida. She told Vogue that she didn’t starve herself but followed an extremely strict regimen.

“I would wear a sauna suit twice a day, run on the treadmill, completely cut out all sugar and all carbs, and just eat the cleanest veggies and protein,” she explained.

RELATED: The 6 most heartbreaking Marilyn Monroe moments from Netflix’s “The Unheard Tapes” documentary

Kardashian only wore the dress for a few minutes on the Met Gala red carpet before changing into a lookalike gown. The brief moment, however, was enough to break the internet as fans and followers critiqued the decision and deemed it as a sign of disrespect.

Per Art News, the International Council of Museums (ICOM) emphasized the importance of protecting historical garments, like Monroe’s gown, and explained that specific things (which were probably at the public event), like fragrance, makeup, jewelry, stage lighting, humidity, and photographic flashes, all ruin an outfit’s quality.

“Historic garments should not be worn by anybody, public or private figures,” ICOM said in a statement. “Prevention is better than cure. Wrong treatment will destroy an object forever.”


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


Kardashian later expressed her appreciation for being able to wear the dress and emphasized that she did everything she could to make sure it stayed in tip-top shape.

“I’m extremely respectful to the dress and what it means to American history. I would never want to sit in it or eat in it or have any risk of any damage to it and I won’t be wearing the kind of body makeup I usually do,” she stated. “Everything had to be specifically timed and I had to practice walking up the stairs.”

On Met Monday, the reality television personality also wore the sequined Norman Norell dress, which Monroe famously wore to the Golden Globes in 1962. Kardashian told Vogue that channeling Monroe’s style felt appropriate for the event’s “In America: A Lexicon of Fashion” theme.

“The idea really came to me after the gala in September last year,” she said. “I thought to myself, what would I have done for the American theme if it had not been the Balenciaga look? What’s the most American thing you can think of? And that’s Marilyn Monroe.”

More stories you might like: