Spring Sale: Get 1 Year, Save 58%

The race to produce green steel

In the city of Woburn, Massachusetts, a suburb just north of Boston, a cadre of engineers and scientists in white coats inspected an orderly stack of brick-sized, gunmetal-gray steel ingots on a desk inside a neon-illuminated lab space.

What they were looking at was a batch of steel created using an innovative manufacturing method, one that Boston Metal, a company that spun out a decade ago from MIT, hopes will dramatically reshape the way the alloy has been made for centuries. By using electricity to separate iron from its ore, the firm claims it can make steel without releasing carbon dioxide, offering a path to cleaning up one of the world’s worst industries for greenhouse gas emissions.

An essential input for engineering and construction, steel is one of the most popular industrial materials in the world, with more than 2 billion tons produced annually. This abundance, however, comes at a steep price for the environment. Steelmaking accounts for 7 to 11 percent of global greenhouse-gas emissions, making it one of the largest industrial sources of atmospheric pollution. And because production could rise by a third by 2050, this environmental burden could grow.

That poses a significant challenge for tackling the climate crisis. The United Nations says significantly cutting industrial carbon emissions is essential to keeping global warming under the 1.5 degrees Celsius mark set under the 2015 Paris climate agreement. To do so, emissions from steel and other heavy industries will have to fall by 93 percent by 2050, according to estimates by the International Energy Agency.

Facing escalating pressure from governments and investors to reduce emissions, a number of steelmakers — including both major producers and startups — are experimenting with low-carbon technologies that use hydrogen or electricity instead of traditional carbon-intensive manufacturing. Some of these efforts are nearing commercial reality. 

“What we are talking about is a capital-intensive, risk-averse industry where disruption is extremely rare,” said Chris Bataille, an energy economist at IDDRI, a Paris-based research think tank. Therefore, he added, “it’s exciting” that there’s so much going on all at once.

Still, experts agree that transforming a global industry that turned over $2.5 trillion in 2017 and employs more than 6 million people will take enormous effort. Beyond the practical obstacles to scaling up novel processes in time to reach global climate goals, there are concerns about China, where over half the world’s steel is made and whose plans to decarbonize the steel sector remain vague.

“It’s certainly not an easy fix to decarbonize an industry like this,” said Bataille. “But there’s no choice. The future of the sector — and that of our climate — depends on just that.”


Modern steelmaking involves several production stages. Most commonly, iron ore is crushed and turned into sinter (a rough solid) or pellets. Separately, coal is baked and converted into coke. The ore and coke are then mixed with limestone and fed into a large blast furnace where a flow of extremely hot air is introduced from the bottom. Under high temperatures, the coke burns and the mixture produces liquid iron, known as pig iron or blast-furnace iron. The molten material then goes into an oxygen furnace, where it’s blasted with pure oxygen through a water-cooled lance, which forces off carbon to leave crude steel as a final product.

This method, first patented by English engineer Henry Bessemer in the 1850s, produces carbon-dioxide emissions in different ways. First, the chemical reactions in the blast furnace result in emissions, as carbon trapped in coke and limestone binds with oxygen in the air to create carbon dioxide as a byproduct. In addition, fossil fuels are typically burned to heat the blast furnace and to power sintering and pelletizing plants, as well as coke ovens, emitting carbon dioxide in the process.

As much as 70 percent of the world’s steel is produced this way, generating nearly two tons of carbon dioxide for each ton of steel produced. The remaining 30 percent is almost all made through electric arc furnaces, which use an electrical current to melt steel — largely recycled scrap — and have far lower CO2 emissions than blast furnaces.

 

But because of the limited scrap supply, not all future demand can be met this way, said Jeffrey Rissman, an industry program director and head of modeling at the San Francisco-based energy and climate policy firm Energy Innovation. With the right policies in place, recycling could supply up to 45 percent of global demand in 2050, he said. “The rest will be satisfied by forging primary ore-based steel, which is where most emissions come from.”

So “if the steel industry is serious” about its climate commitments, he added, “it will have to fundamentally reshape the way the material is made — and do so fairly quickly.”


One alternative technology being tested replaces coke with hydrogen. In Sweden, Hybrit — a joint venture between the steelmaker SSAB, the energy supplier Vattenfall, and LKAB, an iron ore producer — is piloting a process that aims to repurpose an existing system called direct reduced iron. The process uses coke from fossil fuels to extract oxygen from iron ore pellets, leaving a porous iron pellet called sponge iron.

The Hybrit method instead extracts the oxygen using fossil-free hydrogen gas. The gas is created through electrolysis, a technique that uses an electric current — in this case, from a fossil-free energy source — to separate water into hydrogen and oxygen. (Most pure hydrogen today is made with methane, which produces CO2 when burned.) The resulting sponge iron then goes into an electric arc furnace, where it’s eventually refined into steel. The process releases only water vapor as a byproduct.

“This technology has been known for a while, but it’s only been done in the lab so far,” said Mikael Nordlander, head of industry decarbonization at Vattenfall. “What we are doing here is to see if it can work at [the] industrial level.”

Last August, Hybrit reached its first milepost: SSAB, which produces and sells the end product, delivered its first batch of fossil-free steel to the automaker Volvo, which used it in vehicle prototypes. It is also planning a plant for commercial-scale production, which it aims to complete by 2026.

Another Swedish venture, H2 Green Steel, is developing a similar commercial-scale hydrogen steel plant with the help of $105 million raised from private investors and companies including Mercedes-Benz, Scania, and IMAS Foundation, an organization linked to Ikea. The company plans to begin production by 2024 and produce 5 million tons of zero-emissions steel annually by the end of the decade. Other companies testing hydrogen-powered steelmaking include ArcelorMittal, Thyssenkrupp, and Salzgitter AG in Germany; Posco in South Korea; and Voestalpine in Austria.

Electricity can also be used to reduce iron ore. Boston Metal, for example, has developed a process called molten oxide electrolysis, in which a current moves through a cell containing iron ore. As electricity travels between both ends of the cell and heats up the ore, oxygen bubbles up (and can be collected), while iron ore is reduced into liquid iron that pools at the bottom of the cell and is periodically tapped. The purified iron is then mixed with carbon and other ingredients.

“What we do is basically swapping carbon for electricity as a reducing agent,” explained Adam Rauwerdink, the company’s senior vice president of business development. “This allows us to make very high-quality steel using way less energy and in fewer steps than conventional steelmaking.” As long as power comes from fossil-free sources, he added, the process generates no carbon emissions.

He said the company, which currently runs three pilot lines at its Woburn facility, is working to bring its laboratory concept to the market, using $50 million raised last year from an investor group including Breakthrough Energy Ventures, backed by Bill Gates, and the German carmaker BMW. A commercial-scale demonstration plant is expected to be up and running by 2025.

“I feel all these solutions have their place, depending on location, resource availability, and targeted product,” said Sridhar Seetharaman, a professor of materials science and engineering at Arizona State University. “However I do not think for now any one alone will give you a silver bullet to meet the demand.”

“Hydrogen has a bit of a head start being based on an established system and it’s also ahead in commercialization,” said Bataille, the IDDRI energy economist. “But achieving a net-zero steel industry will take more carbon-free pathways, so I think there will be enough room in the market for all of them in the end.”


Although greener steelmaking processes appear to be gaining momentum, there remain a number of serious challenges to confront. Chief among them is the massive expansion in renewable energy infrastructure that an industry-wide shift to these new methods would entail, said Thomas Koch Blank, senior principal at the Colorado-based nonprofit Rocky Mountain Institute. He estimates that the world would need up to three times the currently installed solar and wind energy sources to electrify the existing primary steel production.

Another barrier is cost. Switching to electricity or hydrogen would require vast amounts of capital spending to erect new plants and retrofit old ones. In the case of the clean hydrogen method, the price tag for steel will increase largely because steel producers are located close to low-cost coking coal rather than low-cost hydrogen, pointed out Koch Blank. “These upfront costs will likely drive up the price of both steel and the end products, at least in the beginning.”

According to Rissman, the analyst in San Francisco, legislation on both the supply and the demand side could help offset those higher costs and encourage more investment in greener technologies. Governments, he said, could incentivize the use of low-carbon steel for building and infrastructure by requiring state-funded projects to use low-carbon versions of designated construction materials. They could also enforce policies that make it more expensive to buy from countries where rules on emissions are less stringent. That will help domestic producers “stay competitive” as the market for clean steel “grows and new production processes achieve economies of scale,” said Rissman.

Perhaps the biggest roadblock is China, where about 90 percent of steel production is achieved using blast furnaces. In September 2020, President Xi Jinping announced that the country aims to become carbon neutral by 2060. In a bid to reduce pollution from domestic steel mills, which account for roughly 15 percent of the nation’s overall carbon emissions, Beijing has also pledged to achieve peak steel emissions by 2030. Even so, 18 new blast-furnace projects were announced in China just in the first six months of 2021, according to the Helsinki-based research group Center for Research on Energy and Clean Air.

Steel is one of the most important and challenging industries to decarbonize, said Rissman, so global coordination on it would help greatly.

Back in Boston, Rauwerdink, surveying Boston Metal’s factory lines, agreed. “It’s a fantastic challenge that we’re up against,” he said. But, he added, “We are showing that solutions exist — and work.”


Marcello Rossi is a freelance science and environmental journalist based in Milan, Italy. His work has been published by Al Jazeera, Smithsonian, Reuters, Wired, and Outside among other outlets.

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

Cats know the names of other cats that are their friends, study says

Humans are social creatures, and our individuality is so important to us that it is considered insulting to forget someone’s name. Yet one might think that cats, freed of human social customs, wouldn’t feel the pressure to remember each other’s names in the same way. 

According to a new study, that assumption would be wrong. Researchers believe that cats recall both other cats and humans based on their specific names and specific faces.

RELATED: Human breeding of cats has made them look like they are always in pain

“We examined whether cats matched familiar cats’ names and faces… and human family members’ names and faces…” the authors explained in a study published by the journal Scientific Reports. For example, “Cats were presented with a photo of the familiar cat’s face on a laptop monitor after hearing the same cat’s name or another cat’s name called by the subject cat’s owner… or an experimenter.”

“It is still an open question how cats learn the other cats’ names and faces,” researchers note.

The studies found that household cats would pay attention to a given monitor for a longer period of time if the name that they heard did not match the face on the screen. Researchers say this indicates that the cats were expecting the “correct” name to be uttered and were confused when that did not happen. In turn, this indicates that the cats identified the names with the faces.


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


“These results indicate that only household cats anticipated a specific cat face upon hearing the cat’s name, suggesting that they matched the stimulus cat’s name and the specific individual,” the authors explain, differentiating household cats from “café cats,” or cats that live in cafés where strange people can freely interact with them. “Cats probably learn such name-face relationships by observing third-party interactions; a role for direct receipt of rewards or punishments seems highly unlikely. The ability to learn others’ names would involve a form of social learning.”

The authors added that the cats may also learn names and faces by observing other cats and humans, but they “could not identify the mechanism of learning.”

 

Takagi wrote to Salon that “we have found that cats listen carefully to human speech. I think cats and humans can get along better by talking to each other a lot and communicating.”

 

“It is still an open question how cats learn the other cats’ names and faces,” researchers note.

“What we discovered is astonishing,” Saho Takagi, a research fellow specializing in animal science at Azabu University in Kanagawa Prefecture and the initiator of the study from her work at Kyoto University, told The Asahi Shimbun. “I want people to know the truth. Felines do not appear to listen to people’s conversations, but as a matter of fact, they do.”

Takagi wrote to Salon that “we have found that cats listen carefully to human speech. I think cats and humans can get along better by talking to each other a lot and communicating.”

This is not the first time that Takagi has pioneered studies on feline intelligence. Last year she was the first author on a study published in the journal PLoS One which determined that cats express confusion when they hear a familiar voice but do not see the animal associated with that voice. This proved that cats are able to associate humans with their voices. Takagi also led a study published in the journal Animal Cognition which proved cats understand certain laws of physics, particularly “that cats used a causal-logical understanding of auditory stimuli to predict the appearance of invisible objects. The ecology of cats’ natural hunting style may favor the ability for inference on the basis of sounds.”

“Cats basically do not engage in referential vocal communication within the same species, so this may be an ability seen in the evolutionary process from wildcats to cats,” Takagi explained. “It may be the result of selection pressure to coexist with humans.”

Scientists also know that cats can feel emotional attachments to their human owners and cat friends, which provide them with a motivation to learn their names. It is rooted in evolution.

“Cats basically do not engage in referential vocal communication within the same species, so this may be an ability seen in the evolutionary process from wildcats to cats,” Takagi explained. “It may be the result of selection pressure to coexist with humans.”

“Cats certainly feel attachment to their owners which could be considered a form of affection or love,” Dr. Stacy Choczynski Johnson, a veterinarian, told Salon by email last year. “Even outdoor feral cats form an attachment bond because we provide food and shelter. We also bond with our cats through play and entertainment.”

There has been a flurry of research into cat cognition in the past few years. Recently, a large study of animals involved teaching them to use a button-word system to communicate their needs. At least one cat, a 13-year-old domestic cat named Billi, was able to use the system to appear to communicate with her owner, asking questions about the other pets in the house and seemingly communicating her hunger. 

We also know that cats can struggle with communication due to human breeding. Certain facial deformities bred into cats by humans can make it more difficult for them to communicate with both us and each other, according to one study. 

“Cats are basically being bred only for their external beauty, so the effect on cognitive abilities is not yet known,” Takagi told Salon.

For more Salon articles on cats:

“Saturday Night Live” becomes part of the Heard-Depp media circus problem with its disturbing skit

In the cold open of the Saturday, May 14 episode, “Saturday Night Live” mocks the ongoing Amber Heard/Johnny Depp defamation trial. The odd skit starts with Kate McKinnon as MSNBC anchor Nicolle Wallace who calls the trial “cuckoo.” It only goes downhill from there, switching to a courtroom where Cecily Strong portrays an eager judge who is viewing the case, with its extreme and repeated allegations of domestic and sexual violence, as a fun diversion. 

In half-heartedly attempting to talk about the problem of using domestic violence for entertainment, “SNL” makes itself part of the problem in a major way.

RELATED: Johnny Depp “hated, hated” James Franco, claims Amber Heard

Actors Heard and Depp are in are in Virginia’s Fairfax County Circuit Court due to a contentious lawsuit. Depp sued Heard for defamation after her name was attached to a 2018 op-ed where she discussed being a domestic abuse and sexual abuse survivor, though Depp was not mentioned in the article. Heard then counter-sued Depp for damage to her career, the reason for the continuing legal battles. Depp and Heard are divorced, after being married for a little over a year and being in a relationship for several years.

Many horrific details have emerged in court, particularly about alleged physical abuse, sexual abuse and substance abuse. But men’s rights activists, TikTok and now “SNL” have fixated on one detail: fecal matter found in the couple’s bed. Depp alleges Heard or a friend defecated in their bed to punish him; she said it was one of their dogs, ill after ingesting marijuana that belonged to Depp. It’s a widely disputed story — and a minor detail in a case that also includes allegations of martial rape — but “SNL” won’t let it go.

The show makes it the focus of the sketch, with a courtroom viewing of a “surveillance video” where Depp and Heard household staff discover the mess in the bed. Repeatedly, cast members in the skit acknowledge how ridiculous this is, yet they keep going, with Strong uttering lines such as she’d “like to see more of this video . . . because it’s funny,” and “We don’t have to watch any of it but we want to. So, hush.” Strong’s judge character says she finds the trial “amusing . . . You bad, Captain Jack.” She then lifts up a full glass of wine in toast to Depp, on the stand.

Strong appears less and less committed to the sketch as it goes on, perhaps realizing the scene is bombing with the studio audience (and the viewers at home) or perhaps never enthusiastic about the lackluster sketch to begin with. It is telling that it’s the women cast members who are forced to perform the primary roles in the sketch — yet Heard is not represented — along with actors of color: in the show, Depp and Heard’s entire domestic staff are Latinx or Black. 

Reactions to the sketch have been overwhelmingly negative, with many viewers responding harshly to the show making light of very serious allegations of abuse. By focusing on the juvenile fecal matter story, “SNL “makes the case more of a joke. “This trial is fun,” Strong’s character says.

But it isn’t fun. Coming at a time when the rights of vulnerable people are more and more under attack, when Chris Rock – who endured violence witnessed by millions – can make a quip like, “Believe all women except Amber Heard,” “SNL” has never been less funny or less relevant. As Kristyn Burtt wrote, the show “confirmed just how little empathy we have.”


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


Several times in the sketch, women performers express in lackluster asides how they enjoy the case and how they’re relieved it isn’t about them. As McKinnon’s news anchor says: “With all the problems in the world, isn’t it nice to have a news story we can collectively watch and say, ‘I’m glad it ain’t me.'” 

But for millions of women, it is them. According to the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, 1 in 4 women will experience severe domestic violence, sexual violence from a partner or stalking from an intimate partner leading to injury, PTSD and more. That amounts to about 20 people per minute being abused. The mockery around the trial, the vitriol directed specifically at Heard, the jokes that focus on the most immature aspect (while ignoring real stories of violence) all make it harder for victims to come forward, to seek support — to leave, already a nearly insurmountable task. We need to do anything other than what “SNL” did, which is to disbelieve, to downplay and dismiss.

Watch the “Saturday Night Live” sketch below, via YouTube.

More stories like this

An overnight oats recipe that tastes like a luxurious dessert for breakfast

I’ve reached the point of the year where my desire to be outside greatly outweighs my desire to cook, especially if that cooking involves heat of any kind.

I have my ways of coping, of course. I love beautiful, shaved vegetable salads, and sometimes I count an Aperol spritz as part of a well-rounded dinner. 

To kick off my days, however, I need something that’s a little more substantive than cold brew (even if it’s really good cold brew, like these picks over here). That’s where these blueberry-coconut pie overnight oats come into play.

Related: The best 10-minute vegan breakfast starts with instant rice and canned coconut milk

The only cooking required? A quick 10-minute simmer on the stove that renders the blueberries almost like a jammy pie-filling. Do it while the sun is down, then wake up the next morning to a fresh, luxurious breakfast that’s ready on your schedule. 

***

Recipe: Blueberry-Coconut Pie Overnight Oats 

Yields
2 servings
Prep Time
5 minutes
Cook Time
10  minutes, plus chilling

Ingredients

  • 1 13.5-ounce can full-fat coconut milk 
  • 1 cup rolled oats 
  • 1 cup fresh or frozen blueberries 
  • 2 tablespoons brown sugar, separated 
  • 1 teaspoon vanilla extract 
  • 2 teaspoons cinnamon 
  • 4 tablespoons chopped pecans 
  • 2 tablespoons coconut cream, plus shredded coconut for topping 


 

Directions

  1. In a mixing bowl, add the full-fat coconut milk, rolled oats, 1 tablespoon of brown sugar, vanilla extract, cinnamon and chopped pecans. Stir until well combined, then separate between two pint-sized Mason jars
  2. In a small pot, add the blueberries, remaining brown sugar and enough water to cover the mixture. Bring to a boil, then reduce to a simmer. Stir occasionally, until the berries take on a jam-like consistency, about 10 minutes.
  3. Once cooled, divide the jam mixture in half and layer over the oats. 
  4. Finally, top each Mason jar with 1 tablespoon of coconut cream and shredded coconut to taste. 
  5. Allow the overnight oats to chill for at least 6 hours.

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


More of our favorite quick breakfast recipes: 

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

Amber Heard testimony denies pranking Depp with poop, details a “bruise kit” to hide alleged abuse

The Johnny Depp-Amber Heard trial is back in session, following a week-long hiatus, with Heard taking the stand at Virginia’s Fairfax County Circuit Court and resuming her testimony on Monday.

The “Aquaman” actor spoke about the physical assault she endured throughout her relationship with Depp and detailed the makeup routine she followed to cover up marks on her face. Heard told jurors that she used a color correction wheel (similar to the Milani Cosmetics color-correcting palette showed by her attorney earlier in the trial) — which she referred to as her “bruise kit” — and how she learned to transition from green to orange shades when her bruises became more blue and purple.

“The idea is that you want to counteract whatever color you’re working with on the bruise,” she said, per NBC News. “So first day of bruising, well the immediate is red. The red is what shows up right away. So you want to go with the opposite on the color wheel by dabbing on a bit of the green or something to counteract the red.”

Heard’s claims were accompanied by graphic photos of her face with red marks and swelling, which she sustained after an altercation with Depp in May 2016. According to the actor, Depp threw a phone at her face. Shortly afterwards, Heard filed for divorce and obtained a temporary restraining order against Depp following a courthouse hearing.

RELATED: Amber Heard vs. Johnny Depp: Divorce, domestic violence, and the shifting economy of marriage

During her Monday testimony, Heard added that she never filed criminal charges and never went to the police because she did not want to be framed as a victim.  

“I didn’t want this to go to a prosecutor. I didn’t want this to hurt Johnny. I don’t want this to hurt Johnny,” she explained.

Despite her lack of action, Heard mentioned that Depp was also verbally abusive and branded her as a liar and threatened to “ruin” her profession.  

“I would be selling Depends [the adult diaper] is what he said, and that he’d ruin my career,” she continued. “All I have is my integrity. All I have is my name, and that’s what he agreed to take from me.”

In another moment, Heard accused Depp of spewing transphobic and homophobic slurs at her close friend iO Tillett Wright, who is a transgender man and uses he/him pronouns.

“[Depp was] telling iO that he can have me . . . screaming at him,” Heard said. She claimed that Wright told her she was not safe while conversing on speaker phone, which Depp also heard. Depp then left the room but returned to scream at Wright “every imaginable horrible name that you can say to an LGBTQIA person, for one, and any human being, ever.”

As NBC News also notes, Depp repeatedly misgendered Wright throughout his testimony, saying he was “born a female, if that’s the right terminology these days, born a female but she had chosen she at a very young age, she had decided that she was she was a male, and she identified as a male.”

Heard also said that one of her final fights with Depp was over his accusations that she had defecated in their bed. Depp previously said that Heard left behind human feces before she left for Coachella in April 2016 after a fight. Heard, however, asserted the feces belonged to the couple’s teacup Yorkshire terrier named Boo, whose longstanding bowel problems were exacerbated after it had accidentally ingested Depp’s marijuana.

Heard said Depp frequently claimed that she and her friends attempted to “prank” him with human fecal matter.

“Absolutely not,” she told jurors about the so-called prank. “I don’t think that’s funny. I don’t know what grown woman does. I was not in a pranking mood.”

“I tried to point out how that didn’t make sense. . . . My friends wouldn’t do that,” Heard explained. “That’s not something a bunch of 30-year-old women think is funny. What is he [Depp] talking about? And he just kept going on and on about it.”

The situation, however, soon became violent, with Depp once again tossing Heard’s phone, screaming and grabbing her by the head.


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


“I don’t know if he was intending to hit me in the face or if he was just trying to grab my face, but he was making this gesture around my face. . . .  He said like, ‘Yeah, let me see how bad I hurt you this time,'” Heard recalled. She mentioned that her friend, Raquel, who lived in an apartment near the couple’s home, later ran in and attempted to stop the fight and calm Depp.

“He hit both of her arms . . . and barreled towards me,” Heard said. “I instinctively curl up on the couch, and I just feel her arms come around me.”

Heard recounted another violent incident involving Depp, which took place at a remote French chateau after the “Pirates of the Caribbean” actor mistook a body double participating in a sex scene for Amber Heard in the 2018 film “London Fields.” According to the Daily Beast, Heard said Depp slapped her across the face and punched her jaw.  

“I did not actually film the scene. He demanded that we watch it,” she told the court.  

“So I have an incredibly jealous man who already is upset with me for breaking the rule that I had a sex scene, on top of that I’m telling him, ‘It wasn’t me, I didn’t shoot that scene,'” Heard continued. “You can imagine how upset he was. He was irate and was calling me a liar, a whore, among other things. That combined with the fact that I had even entertained doing this job with James Franco was a pressure cooker. I called it a week of hell later.”

More stories you might like:

How to safely open a coconut

I wish I could tell you that I learned how to open a coconut while I was vacationing in Tahiti, or that I first cracked one open out of thirst-quenching necessity after a day spent surfing Oahu’s North Shore. But I’ve never been to Tahiti, and I immediately run toward shore at the first sign of a 5-foot wave. No, I actually learned how to crack open a coconut in my kitchen, through trial and error, after being lured by a full stack of whole coconuts at the grocery store. I had grabbed one and placed it in my cart nonchalantly, hoping my fellow shoppers would catch a glimpse (you’re lying if you say you don’t glance sneakily at other people’s carts) and think I was the kind of cool person who consumed fresh coconut as often as a piece of toast. This is real, this is me. Narrator: It was not real. Let’s learn how to open a coconut together.

How to open a coconut

Step One

Locate the “three eyes” on the top of the coconut. Stare at the coconut and watch as it stares back at you. Use a metal skewer to poke and prod the eyes like an optometrist and find the one that feels the softest; once you do, push the skewer through to create a hole. You may need to use a mallet or hammer for added pressure, but do so carefully.

Step Two

Invert the coconut over a bowl or measuring cup to drain the liquid, aka coconut water. Drink the water as is (it’s like what you get from a carton or can, only fresher!) or store it in the refrigerator for up to a few days.

Step Three

OK, time to crack it open. Hold the coconut between a plush kitchen towel and, using the same mallet or hammer, gently pound against the “equator” line on the coconut until the shell starts to crack in half. Once it seems like the shell will easily come apart, twist it until the coconut halves break apart.

Step Four

Cut the coconut halves into smaller pieces with a sharp knife and use a vegetable peeler to remove the outer layer of brown fuzzy skin. Once the skin is completely removed, quickly rinse the coconut meat under cold water to get rid of any excess fibers or impurities.

What to do with fresh coconut

You lived to tell the tale! Now, what can you do with coconut water, coconut milk, and coconut meat? Make a pot of Yi Jun Loh’s One-Pot Coconut Water ABC Soup or this fluffy Turmeric Coconut Rice. “During cooking, the coconut water hydrates the rice without overwhelming the grains, and it imparts a delicate, sweet tropical lilt,” writes recipe developer Andrea Nguyen. As for the coconut meat, shred it into fresh flakes using a vegetable peeler or box grater, dehydrate the flakes lightly in a low-temperature oven, and then use them for coconut macaroons or cream pie, or sprinkle them into oatmealyogurt, or buttercream frosting.

10 best garlic recipes to make today and every day

We’re doing what garlic enthusiasts do best: sharing our favorite garlic recipes to make today and every day. There are versatile recipes like garlic confit and garlic stock that you can apply in so many ways, plus one-off recipes to complete your garlic celebration (looking at you, pull-apart garlic knots).

Our go-to garlic recipes

1. Garlic Confit

Slow-roasted garlic is like candy — candy that you’ll want to serve on a charcuterie board with cheese, jam, crostini, and so much salami.

2. Garlic Stock

Forget about the bones from your butcher, the celery and carrots, the bay leaves and peppercorns. All you need is garlic and salt to make this ridiculously simple, totally vegan stock.

3. Garlickiest Garlic Bread

Our favorite way to show our love for garlic is by cooking the largest loaf of ciabatta bread that we possibly can and then spreading it with the garlickiest garlic butter.

4. Pull-Apart Garlic Knots in a Multi-Cooker

There is no such thing as too much garlic bread, do you hear me? This time, it’s in the form of knots made in a multi-cooker. So much fun to pull apart.

5. Broccolini with Very Delicious Garlic Sauce

We love the sweetness of broccolini (aka baby broccoli) and we love how it only gets better with, what else, but garlic.

6. Crispy Garlic Dip

Emma Laperruque was inspired to make an easier version of onion dip with the same savory qualities that dare you to double dip. Enter: garlic.

7. Pot Roast with 40 Cloves of Garlic

Chicken meets its match with this beefy twist on the classic garlic-forward recipe.

8. Honeyed Garlic Sauce

This sauce is so much more than just honey and garlic: There’s lemon juice, soy sauce, cayenne pepper, and vanilla extract. And yes, a lot of garlic (four heads, to be exact).

9. Tomato Soup with a Whole Head of Garlic

Amp up this classic comfort food with an entire head of roasted garlic. “It adds such a nice touch, sweet and creamy, not overpowering, just right,” writes recipe developer Carolina Gelen.

10. Pasta with Garlic Butter Sauce

If you’ve spent all day wondering what to have for dinner, this is it: a three-ingredient, 10-minute pasta recipe that you can dress up any which way.

Americans reeling after major shootings rock 4 U.S. cities in 1 weekend

At least four major shootings took place this past weekend, leaving dozens injured and thirteen dead in four cities across the country. 

In Buffalo, New York, 18-year-old Payton S. Gendron opened fire in a Tops Friendly Markets on Saturday, killing ten people and leaving three wounded. The gunman appears to have specifically targeted a Black neighborhood in eastern Buffalo, with at least eleven of the victims being Black. 

Gendron, who reportedly streamed the massacre live online, drove 200 miles from his hometown in Conklin to conduct “reconnaissance” during the day preceding the attack. Before the shooting, Gendron has also reportedly published a 180-page manifesto expressing antisemitic sentiment and promoting the “Great Replacement,” a baseless right-wing conspiracy theory alleging that the Democrats are attempting to loosen border to diminish the electoral power of white Americans. 

According to CNN, Gendron made a “generalized threat” to his high school last year. He was arraigned on Saturday and faces a maximum sentence of life in prison.

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

That same day, at least 21 people were injured in three separate shootings where thousands of people were gathered for an NBA Bucks game in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, according to NPR. Police said there was an exchange of gunfire around 11:09 PM after the game had ended, with victims ranging between 15 and 47 years old. All are expected to survive.

Thus far, ten people have been arrested in connection to the shooting. Police are reportedly still looking for more suspects. It still remains unclear what led to the attack. 

On Sunday, a man similarly opened fire in a Southern California church, killing one person and injuring at least five. The victims, all Asian men, ranged from ages 66 to 92. 

The shooting took place around 1:30 PM, when 30 to 40 members of the Irvine Taiwanese Presbyterian Church were together for a lunch reception, as the Associated Press reported. The suspect, David Chou, 68, had reportedly already been hog-tied by parishioners once deputies had arrived. 

“He has been booked on one felony count of murder and five felony counts of attempted murder,” said the Orange County sheriff’s department. Police have not yet ascertained a clear motive, according to CNN

Sunday also saw a deadly afternoon shooting in a Houston flea market, where two were left dead and three hospitalized. Thousands of patrons were circulating the market at the time. 

“We thought it was something like for family, you know you can come with your kids, but with everything, you don’t know,” Dolores Guerrero, who visits the area often, told a Fox affiliate. “It’s scary.”

The incident reportedly stemmed from an argument between a group of men who later pulled at guns and exchanged crossfire. Two men in their twenties reportedly died. Police said that no one outside the skirmish was harmed, according to CBS News.

RELATED: Buffalo sheriff: Mass shooting was racist hate crime

And while not having resulted in fatalities, authorities in Dallas are investigating a series of shootings that appear to have targeted Asian American businesses in recent weeks, including injuring three women at a spa on Wednesday. 

“Absolutely no regrets”: FOX defends Rudy Giuliani casting on “The Masked Singer”

Despite controversy and low ratings and viewership, FOX execs are standing by their decision to cast Rudy Giuliani on “The Masked Singer,” saying the broadcasting company has “absolutely no regrets.”

According to Variety, the news was disclosed by Rob Wade, the president of alternative entertainment & specials at Fox Entertainment, during a conference call announcing the network’s upcoming fall lineup.

RELATED: For the good of the nation, let’s not normalize any Trump flunkies with primetime TV cameos

“Yeah, absolutely no regrets,” Wade said. “The marketing is all about delivering jaw-dropping moments, which is exactly what the casting accomplished. And whether it was on set or with the viewers at home I suppose my only regret or surprise was obviously the reveal was spoiled [by the press], but kudos to you guys. Just please don’t do it again. Thanks a lot.”

Giuliani’s appearance on the seventh episode this season was initially teased as “the biggest event in ‘Masked Singer’ history.” The former Trump attorney was dressed as the Jack in the Box and sang an off-key rendition of “Bad to the Bone” by George Thorogood and the Destroyers.

His unveiling later prompted judges Ken Jeong and Robin Thicke to exit the stage, albeit briefly.

The episode, which aired on April 20, received a 0.6 demo rating and a total of 3.6 million total viewers, which was a newly recorded season low for “The Masked Singer.” Giuliani’s episode was also bested by several cable show competitors that share the same broadcast time, including CBS’ “Survivor”  and NBC’s “Chicago Med.”


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


When Giuliani’s cameo was first hinted at back in February, many media outlets and critics alike questioned the divisive stunt and the consequences it may have on the show’s own future. As many pointed out, Giuliani — who is a proud, self-declared anti-masker — has also been embroiled in controversy, notably his involvement in helping overturn the 2020 presidential election and hosting a botched press conference.

According to Giuliani, his decision to be on “The Masked Singer” was to set an example for his granddaughter, Grace.

“I want her to know that you should try everything, even things that are completely unlike you and unlikely,” Giuliani told the show’s host, Nick Cannon. “I couldn’t think of anything more unlike me and unlikely than this. And I enjoy the show, I have for years, and it just seemed like it would be fun. I don’t get to have a lot of fun.”

More stories you might like:

The state behind Roe’s likely demise also does the least for new parents in need

When it comes to reproductive care, Mississippi has a dual distinction. The state spawned the law that likely will lead to the Supreme Court striking down Roe v. Wade. It is also unique among Deep South states for doing the least to provide health care coverage to low-income people who have given birth.

Mississippians on Medicaid, the government health insurance program for the poor, lose coverage a mere 60 days after childbirth. That’s often well before the onset of postpartum depression or life-threatening, birth-related infections: A 2020 study found that people racked up 81% of their postpartum expenses between 60 days and a year after delivery. And Mississippi’s own Maternal Mortality Review Committee found that 37% of pregnancy-related deaths between 2013 and 2016 occurred more than six weeks postpartum.

Every other state in the Deep South has extended or is in the process of extending Medicaid coverage to 12 months postpartum. Wyoming and South Dakota are the only other states where trigger laws will outlaw nearly all abortions if Roe falls and where lawmakers haven’t expanded Medicaid or extended postpartum coverage.

“It’s hypocrisy to say that we are pro-life on one end, that we want to protect the baby, but yet you don’t want to pass this kind of legislation that will protect that mom who has to bear the responsibility of that child,” said Cassandra Welchlin, executive director of the MS Black Women’s Roundtable, a nonprofit that works at the intersection of race, gender and economic justice.

Efforts to extend coverage past 60 days have repeatedly failed in Mississippi — where 60% of births are covered by Medicaid — despite support from major medical associations and legislators on both sides of the aisle.

Mississippi House Speaker Philip Gunn, a Republican, said shortly after he killed the most recent bill that would’ve extended postpartum coverage that he’s against expanding any form of Medicaid. “We need to look for ways to keep people off, not put them on,” he told The Associated Press in March. When asked about the issue during a May 8 interview on CNN, Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves said, “When you talk about these young ladies, the best thing we can do for them is to provide and improve educational opportunities for them.” (Neither Gunn nor Reeves responded to requests for comment.)

During the pandemic, a change in federal rules prevented states from cutting off Medicaid recipients, which has allowed people in Mississippi and elsewhere to retain postpartum coverage beyond 60 days. But at the end of the federal public health emergency declaration — which is set to expire in July 2022 — states will revert to their prior policies. “What we are afraid of is that when that does end, it will go back to what we knew was pre-pandemic health care,” Welchlin said.

We discussed the implications of Mississippi’s post-Roe reality with Welchlin and two other experts in the field: Alina Salganicoff, the Kaiser Family Foundation’s director for women’s health policy, and Andrea Miller, president of the National Institute for Reproductive Health. Their answers have been lightly edited for length and clarity.

What services does Medicaid provide postpartum?

Salganicoff: Typically, everything from assistance if the person is having problems breastfeeding to screening for depression services.

Welchlin: We know the struggles of so many who have had life threatening illnesses such as heart conditions and hypertension. We know of course that Medicaid helps in that.

What have you seen in terms of postpartum needs in Mississippi?

Welchlin: One of the stories that really touched me over the course of this pandemic was that of a mom who already had a child, and she needed access to child care so she could get back and forth to the doctor. During this particular pregnancy she had a severe heart disorder where she couldn’t breathe, and she had to get rushed to the hospital. Because she was so connected to doulas and a supportive care organization like us, she was able to get admitted and sure enough that’s when they diagnosed her with that heart condition. And she was a mom on Medicaid.

What happens when mothers lose Medicaid coverage postpartum?

Miller: Only giving someone two months postpartum doesn’t allow for the kind of continuation of care that you need. If there are indications of problems in the postpartum period, they don’t all necessarily show up within the first two months. And we certainly know that the ability to have a healthy infant and keep an infant healthy is also related to whether you have coverage. The extension to 12 months really allows for that kind of continuum of care.

Welchlin: We know in the state of Mississippi, women die at higher rates, and of course it’s higher for Black women. And so, when women don’t have that coverage, what happens is they die.

What does it mean to not extend postpartum Medicaid coverage if Roe falls?

Miller: These bans on abortion are going to be layered on top of an already-unconscionable maternal and infant health crisis that most particularly impacts those who are struggling to make ends meet. It particularly impacts Black women and other communities of color. … A state like Mississippi that is so clearly wanting to ban abortions — the fact that they refuse to extend basic health care benefits that will help during pregnancy and postpartum just clearly indicates that they are not interested in the health and well-being of women and families and children, that they are purely on an ideological crusade.

Anything else that you wanted to add?

Salganicoff: We’re very focused on that first year of life. But if you’re speaking about a woman who is not going to be able to get an abortion that she seeks and ends up carrying the pregnancy, the supports that she’s going to need and her child is going to need go far beyond the first year of life.

Miller: You can’t have a conversation about legality or soon-to-be illegality of abortion in these states and not have a conversation simultaneously about the existing crisis around maternal and infant health. These things are all interconnected, and that’s why it is so deeply disturbing that the states trying to ban abortion are the same states that are refusing to expand Medicaid under the ACA, that are failing to take advantage of the ability to extend postpartum [coverage] by 12 months, that don’t invest in child care, that don’t invest in education — these are all part of the same conversation.

Welchlin: Audre Lorde said, “There is no such thing as a single-issue struggle because we do not live single-issue lives.” So, abortion access, reproductive justice, voting rights, racial justice, gender equity — these are not separate issues, they are intersecting issues that collectively determine the quality of our lives.

Elena Kagan calls out “corruption” after SCOTUS backs Ted Cruz to strike down campaign finance law

The U.S. Supreme Court struck down a federal law Monday that capped the number of campaign dollars political candidates could use to repay themselves for money they personally loaned their campaigns, handing a victory to U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, who challenged the law.

The nation’s high court said in a 6-3 ruling that the 2002 law — which puts a cap of $250,000 raised after an election to pay back loans that candidates gave their own campaigns before election day — violated the First Amendment, with the majority opinion saying it “burdens core political speech without proper justification.” The court’s three liberal justices dissented.

Chief Justice John Roberts said in the court majority’s opinion that disallowing candidates from being able to fully recoup their funds past the cap could lead to less campaign messaging.

[Ted Cruz has never recouped more than $500,000 he loaned his first campaign. He’s working to overturn the law that’s blocked him.]

“That risk in turn may deter some candidates from loaning money to their campaigns when they otherwise would, reducing the amount of political speech,” Roberts wrote.

When Cruz was first fighting for his spot in the U.S. Senate, he was up against then-Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, a wealthy, better-known opponent. So Cruz loaned his 2012 campaign over $1 million to close the gap.

Because of the 2002 federal law struck down Monday, he could never recoup $545,000 of that loan, leading him to explore options to overturn the limit.

During his 2018 campaign, Cruz loaned himself $260,000 one day before winning reelection, intentionally going $10,000 above the legal limit for repayment to trigger a new case to argue against the law.

Justices Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor disagreed with the conservative majority’s opinion to strike down the limit.

Kagan wrote in her dissent that when political candidates are recouping money for a personal loan they made to their campaign, the dynamics of contributions change because the money is going straight to the politicians’ pockets, unlike traditional campaign dollars. She alleged that striking down the law allows for the lawmakers to get paid directly and, in exchange, they can offer political favors.

“The politician is happy; the donors are happy. The only loser is the public,” Kagan wrote about the new arrangement. “It inevitably suffers from government corruption.”


Tickets are on sale now for the 2022 Texas Tribune Festival, happening in downtown Austin on Sept. 22-24. Get your TribFest tickets by May 31 and save big!

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at https://www.texastribune.org/2022/05/16/ted-cruz-supreme-court-campaign-finance/.

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

 

 

Bernie Sanders: Manchin and Sinema “sabotaged” Democrats to help “wealthy campaign contributors”

Sen. Bernie Sanders on Sunday called Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema out by name for undercutting their own party’s legislative agenda, including desperately needed action to rein in carbon emissions, reduce income and wealth inequality, and protect abortion rights.

“It should not be a head-scratcher,” Sanders, the chair of the Senate Budget Committee, told MSNBC‘s Chuck Todd after the host expressed confusion as to why congressional Democrats ended up with nothing to show for months of negotiations on Build Back Better, a central component of President Joe Biden’s domestic agenda that proposed billions in spending on climate action and poverty-reducing social programs.

The legislative package passed the House in November but died in the Senate due largely to Manchin and Sinema’s obstruction.

“You’ve got two members of the Senate, Sen. Manchin and Sen. Sinema, who have sabotaged what the president has been fighting for,” Sanders said Sunday.

When Todd interrupted to suggest “sabotaged” was a “strong word,” Sanders replied: “Well, you help me out with a better word here. You got 48 members of the Senate who wanted to go forward with an agenda that helped working families, that was prepared to take on the wealthy and the powerful. You got a president who wanted to do that. You had two people who prevented us from doing that.”

“You have a better word than ‘sabotage’? That’s fine,” Sanders continued. “But I think that is the right word.”

Sanders went on to urge the people of West Virginia and Arizona to bring pressure to bear on Manchin and Sinema, both of whom receive substantial campaign donations from the fossil fuel industry, Big Pharma, and other corporate sectors that had a financial interest in tanking the Build Back Better package.

“Why don’t you stand up for ordinary Americans and not just your wealthy campaign contributors?” Sanders asked in a message directed at his Senate colleagues. “Why don’t you have the guts to take on the drug companies and the insurance companies and the fossil fuel industry?”

Sanders’ remarks came days after Manchin teamed up with Senate Republicans for a second time to filibuster legislation that would enshrine abortion rights into federal law as the U.S. Supreme Court’s right-wing majority appears poised to overturn Roe v. Wade—and as the GOP strategizes for a potential nationwide abortion ban.

Next Monday, a coalition of grassroots progressives in West Virginia and Arizona plan to engage in marches, protests, and other nonviolent direct actions at Manchin and Sinema’s home-state offices to pressure them to drop their support for the 60-vote legislative filibuster, a key obstacle to the Democratic agenda in the Senate.

“Bernie says it’s time for Arizonans and West Virginians to put pressure on Sinema and Manchin to stop sabotaging Biden’s plans,” Kai Newkirk, an Arizona-based activist and one of the organizers of next week’s demonstrations, wrote on Twitter Sunday. “If you agree, join us to rally, march, and sit in on 5/23 in Tucson and Charleston.”

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

Days after an 18-year-old alleged supporter of the “great replacement” theory opened fire in a Buffalo grocery store located in a Black neighborhood, killing ten people and injuring three more on Saturday, right-wing pundits are attempting to downplay the mass shooting by baselessly claiming that the perpetrator was motivated by left-wing ideology. 

Conservative commentators appear to be pushing back against the notion that the accused shooter, Payton S. Gendron, who is now in custody, was acting on his belief in the “great replacement,” an unsubstantiated theory – now widely shared amongst the far-right, including Fox News host Tucker Carlson – that Democrats are deliberately loosening border restrictions in order to offset the electoral power of white Americans. Gendron’s apparent belief in the theory was first reported after outlets obtained the shooter’s 180-page manifesto, written before the shooting took place, that contains explicit references to the “great replacement” in addition to a medley of hateful and racist rants. 

Since the shooting, many on the right have either doubled down on their promotion of such paranoia, downplayed the massacre by pointing to other crimes or misleadingly suggested that the shooter, whose gun was reportedly emblazoned with the word “N***er,” was actually motivated by left-wing ideology.  

Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., who recently came under fire for promoting the theory in a number of campaign ads, first put out a statement decrying the link to her past support before doubling down on her claim that Democrats are plotting to bring immigrants into the country in an effort to politically harm the Republican Party. 

“Democrats desperately want wide open borders and mass amnesty for illegals allowing them to vote,” she tweeted on Monday. “Like the vast majority of Americans, Republicans want to secure our borders and protect election integrity.”

Blake Masters, the Silicon Valley billionaire running for U.S. Senate in Arizona, said on Saturday that the Democrats’ “electoral strategy” is to “open borders so they can bring in and amnesty **tens of millions** of illegal aliens.”

RELATED: Mass shooting in Buffalo: Tucker Carlson and other right-wing conspiracy theorists share the blame

“The Buffalo shooter did not say a single thing about Tucker Carlson and wrote that he hated Fox News,” wrote Greg Price, Senior Digital Strategist at X Strategies. “By contrast, the congressional baseball shooter who almost killed Steve Scalise declared his love for Rachel Maddow in writings. Did Rachel Maddow almost kill Scalise?”

“He literally writes that he’s an anti-Semitic, anti-Christian Nazi leftist but the same ghoulish grifters who always rush to exploit tragedy for political points somehow glossed over this,” echoed far-right radio host and former spokesperson for the National Rifle Association Dana Loesch. 


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


Alt-right social media personality Mike Cernovich picked out a series of quotes from the manifesto, suggesting that Gendron rejected Christianity and admitted to being a left-wing authoritarian who believes in “green nationalism.” 

“Twitter bans people for linking to these documents even though it helps us understand what is true and what isn’t,” Cernovich wrote. “I can’t post it but what I said above is true and verifiable. 

The commentator also implied that the FBI has been misusing its resources for not flagging Gendron’s online activity earlier. 

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

“The FBI in New York had time to raid James Okeefe and Project Veritas for doing journalism but not to follow up on credible school shooting threats the Buffalo shooter was reported to police for making,” he tweeted. “Does it make sense now?”

https://twitter.com/erikmbaker/status/1525952846247649287/photo/1

Christina Pushaw, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ press secretary, also chimed in, suggesting that the mainstream media is attempting to spin the story. 

“Authoritarian left wing” = National Socialist = Nazi,” she said in response to Cernovich. 

Some fringe conservatives, however, reverted back to their old habit of casting mass shootings as false flag affairs, including Arizona state Sen. Wendy Rogers and white nationalist Nick Fuentes. 

“Fed boy summer has started in Buffalo,” Rogers tweeted, implying that the shooter was a federal operative. On Saturday, Fuentes similarly described the shooting over Telegram as a “new false flag.” 

There is no evidence that the shooting was a staged event.

Clarence Thomas complains Roe leak hurt “trust” in Supreme Court: “It’s like infidelity”

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas believes the controversial draft opinion leak may have forever changed the relationship dynamic between the high court and the American public.

On Friday, May 13, Thomas appeared at the Old Parkland Conference in Dallas, Texas. During the conference, which, according to the Associated Press, has been described as an outlet “to discuss alternative proven approaches to tackling the challenges facing Black Americans today,” Thomas expressed concern about Americans’ loss of trust in the court.

“When you lose that trust, especially in the institution that I’m in, it changes the institution fundamentally,” Thomas said of the draft opinion that suggests the Supreme Court is slated to overturn Roe v. Wade. “You begin to look over your shoulder. It’s like kind of an infidelity that you can explain it, but you can’t undo it.”

In fact, one man in the audience even asked Thomas about the relationship dynamics between past justices. Although there have always been liberal and conservative justices on the bench, it’s no secret the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the late Justice Antonin Scalia fostered a life-long friendship despite their political differences. “How can we foster that same type of relationship within Congress and within the general population?” the man asked.

Instead of offering a direct answer to the question, Thomas responded saying, “Well, I’m just worried about keeping it at the court now.” He added, “This is not the court of that era.

Thomas also noted another distinct difference between the court of the past and the present day, saying, “it was beyond ‘anyone’s imagination’ before the May 2 leak of the opinion to Politico that even a line of a draft opinion would be released in advance, much less an entire draft that runs nearly 100 pages.”

Associated Press noted: “Thomas said that previously, ‘if someone said that one line of one opinion’ would be leaked, the response would have been: ‘Oh, that’s impossible. No one would ever do that.'”

However, things are different now. “Now that trust or that belief is gone forever.”

At one point, Thomas also said, “I do think that what happened at the court is tremendously bad…I wonder how long we’re going to have these institutions at the rate we’re undermining them.”

He also condemned protesters pushing back against the war on abortion. He also attempted to argue that conservatives would never behave in such a manner although history suggests otherwise. “You would never visit Supreme Court justices’ houses when things didn’t go our way. We didn’t throw temper tantrums. I think it is … incumbent on us to always act appropriately and not to repay tit for tat,” he said.

Despite Thomas’ claims, he is also at the center of controversy due to his wife’s behavior and her alleged involvement in the plot to overturn the 2020 presidential election.

Leading Pennsylvania Democratic candidate John Fetterman hospitalized for stroke days before primary

John Fetterman, the Democratic Lt. Governor of Pennsylvania who is also running for the open U.S. Senate seat in the state, announced Sunday afternoon that he suffered a stroke over the weekend but was already feeling better after the medical condition was treated at a local hospital.

In a statement put out by his campaign, Fetterman said there had been warning signs but ultimately credited his wife, Gisele, for being on top of the situation as it unfolded:

On Friday, I wasn’t feeling well, so I went to the hospital to get checked out. I didn’t want to go—I didn’t think I had to—but Gisele insisted, and as usual, she was right. I hadn’t been feeling well, but was so focused on the campaign that I ignored the signs and just kept going. On Friday it finally caught up with me. I had a stroke that was caused by a clot from my heart being in an A-fib rhythm for too long. Fortunately, Gisele spotted the symptoms and got me to the hospital within minutes. The amazing doctors here were able to quickly and completely remove the clot, reversing the stroke, they got my heart under control as well. It’s a good reminder to listen to your body and be aware of the signs.

With the primary set for Tuesday, there are just days left in the Democratic race and Fetterman has been making headlines for his popularity compared to his rivals in the field.

Recent polls show Fetterman, the most progressive candidate in the race, outpacing corporate-friendly Congressman Conor Lamb and State Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta, also more aligned with the party’s establishment wing.

Both Lamb and Kenyatta tweeted their sympathies and well-wishes to Fetterman following the news.

“As I said at the first debate, John Fetterman is an incredible family man,” said Kenyatta, “My prayers are with him and his family as he recovers from this stroke. I look forward to seeing him back on the campaign trail soon.”

And Lamb tweeted, “I just found out on live TV that Lieutenant Governor Fetterman suffered a stroke. Hayley and I are keeping John and his family in our prayers and wishing him a full and speedy recovery.”

Fetterman and Gisele also posted a video Sunday afternoon which was filmed at Penn Medicine Lancaster General Hospital where Fetterman received treatment from what he described as “the kick-ass staff and doctors”:

“The good news is I’m feeling much better, and the doctors tell me I didn’t suffer any cognitive damage,” Fetterman added in his statement. “I’m well on my way to a full recovery. So I have a lot to be thankful for. They’re keeping me here for now for observation, but I should be out of here sometime soon. The doctors have assured me that I’ll be able to get back on the trail, but first I need to take a minute, get some rest, and recover. There’s so much at stake in this race, and I’m going to be ready for the hard fight ahead.”

Despite acknowledging the need for some rest, Fetterman said “our campaign isn’t slowing down one bit, and we are still on track to win this primary on Tuesday, and flip this Senate seat in November. Thanks for all the support, and please get out there and vote.”

Photos: Pennsylvania Republican Kathy Barnette caught marching on Capitol with Proud Boys on Jan. 6

On Monday, NBC News’ Dasha Burns revealed new photographs that purportedly show Pennsylvania Senate candidate Kathy Barnette marching with members of the Proud Boys toward the U.S. Capitol on January 6. Some of those members of the Proud Boys were later charged with breaking into the Capitol and assaulting police officers.

The Proud Boys are a self-described “Western Chauvinist” group known for their violent brawling tactics.

There is no evidence that Barnette herself breached the Capitol, and her campaign denies she did so, saying, “any assertion that [Barnette] participated in or supported the destruction of property is intentionally false. She has no connection whatsoever to the Proud Boys.”

Barnette, a right-wing talk show host, has surged in polls recently, despite former President Donald Trump backing daytime television celebrity Dr. Mehmet Oz for the Senate race and explicitly warning his supporters that Barnette is not electable.

She has drawn controversy for her extreme beliefs, including calling for the abolition of Islam in the United States and claiming that transgender people are “deformed.”

She is not the only high-profile Pennsylvania Republican candidate linked to the events of January 6. Doug Mastriano, a Trump-endorsed far-right candidate for governor, paid for buses to bring people to the Capitol on January 6 and was present at the complex during the attack, but claims he did not participate himself.

Nebraska GOP governor vows to force rape and incest victims to give birth if Roe is overturned

During an appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union,” Gov. Pete Ricketts, R-Neb. made it perfectly clear that, if Roe v. Wade is overturned by the conservative Supreme Court as expected, he doesn’t want to see any exceptions made for victims of rape or incest.

Speaking with host Dana Bash, the lawmaker brushed aside concerns about victims of horrific crimes being forced to give birth.

With Nebraska having just failed to pass a so-called “trigger law” that would ban abortions entirely, host Bash asked, “The abortion ban you tried to pass did not include any exceptions for rape or incest,” then added, “Can you clarify: do you think that the state of Nebraska should require a young girl who was raped to carry that pregnancy to term?”

Ricketts replied by labeling his state as a “pro-life state” before adding, “Those are babies, too. If Roe v. Wade — a horrible constitutional decision — gets overturned by the Supreme Court, which we’re hopeful of, here in Nebraska we’ll take further steps to protect those preborn babies.”

“Including in the case of rape or incest?” the CNN host pressed.

“They’re still babies, too. Yes, they’re still babies,” he replied before adding, “I will work with our speaker of the legislature to have a special session and do more to protect preborn babies.”

Watch below or view here:

Supreme Court set to give the most extremist movement in the US a big win — and it’s not abortion

This weekend’s horrific mass killing in Buffalo serves as a tragic reminder that the radicalism of the American right-wing is not confined to abortion policy or an anti-democratic movement to take over the election machinery for partisan gain. The most established extremist movement in the country is the unfettered gun rights movement.

Much like the anti-abortion zealots, gun extremists have been methodically chipping away at existing gun safety laws in states while pushing for federal action that would finally achieve their goal of legal possession of deadly firearms by anyone, anywhere, for any reason. There hasn’t been as much talk about it, but the Supreme Court heard a case this session that could do for gun proliferation advocates what the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case looks poised to do for the anti-abortion movement. The decision could even be announced on the same day. It was just 14 years ago, in a case called District of Columbia v. Heller, that a bare majority of the Supreme Court held for the first time that the Constitution grants an individual right to bear arms. It was a landmark case that handed the gun lobby the definition it had long sought. Former Justice John Paul Stephens called it the worst decision of his tenure, noting that when he came on the court there was not even any discussion of gun ownership being a “fundamental right.” Over the years, however, the NRA worked very hard to make the case and Heller was finally taken up by the conservative majority in 2008. However, even with that proclamation, the court did not suggest that this meant states had no right to enact gun safety measures. The author of the opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia held that while people had the right to keep guns in their homes, communities still had an interest in public safety and keeping dangerous modern weapons off the streets. That was unsatisfying for the gun fetishists so they immediately began taking steps to ensure that interest was as proscribed as possible.

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

The case the court heard this term, New York State Rifle and Pistol Asso­ci­ation v. Bruen, involves New York’s long-standing law that only people with a specific need (“proper cause“) can be licensed to carry a concealed weapon in the state. The plaintiffs in this case both applied for and were granted concealed carry permits but were restricted in where they were allowed to carry their guns. They, along with the NRA, sued, saying they have an unfettered 2nd Amendment right to carry their guns virtu­ally whenever and wherever they feel they might need to defend themselves. In other words, they believe they have a constitutional right to carry a gun at all times.

The most established extremist movement in the country is the unfettered gun rights movement.

The thinking among legal observers is that this court is not going to uphold New York’s law as it currently stands, which seems obvious. The only question is whether they find a workaround of the “proper cause” standard to keep it on the books without any real purpose or use the case to greatly expand gun rights. Law professor Eric Ruben explains what that means:

Bruen could be a turning point for how judges evaluate all Second Amendment cases – whether they’re about assault weapons, tasers or felon-in-possession offenses. Until now, judges have generally assessed whether such restrictions are justified by current public safety concerns.

Many gun rights advocates are asking the Supreme Court to reject that approach. Instead, they want judges to decide cases on the sole basis of history and tradition unless the judiciary’s interpretation of the text of the Second Amendment resolves the issue. This is known as the “text, history and tradition” test.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh is credited with first articulating this test in a dissent he issued prior to his rise to the Supreme Court. Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett all have embraced similar judicial philosophies to some degree.

Unless they’ve all had some kind of wake-up call over the leaked abortion draft, I don’t think you need to be a professional fortune-teller to read the tea leaves on this one. There is an excellent chance they are going to overturn the New York law under this specious new philosophy from the beer-swilling Kavanaugh and that will be that.


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


Ruben points out that in 1980 most Americans lived in states that regulated concealed carry of weapons. The NRA managed to lobby many of them to overturn those laws leaving big, populous states New York and California, along with Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Rhode Island refusing to go along, thus necessitating the organization to use the courts to get their way when the people in those states refused.

The states in question represent one-quarter of the U.S. population. If the Court overturns the New York law, the gun proliferation advocates will tell the people in those states they just don’t know what’s good for them and that “an armed soci­ety is a polite soci­ety.”  The evidence is clear that this simply isn’t true.

This ruling would open the door to confusing litigation based upon this daft “text, history and tradition” test that will require judges to figure out if other, long -standing, regulations adhere to it. They will be forced to decide if regulation of large capacity magazines or semi-automatic weapons are constitutionally based upon their similarity to guns and laws in use 150 years ago which is ridiculous.

Legal observers worry that the Court could take the most extreme approach and introduce this new “text, history and tradition” test at least partly because of trumped up partisan grievance politics that insist the 2nd Amendment has been treated as a “second class” right. The whining, self-pitying tone underlying Alito’s draft in the abortion decision suggests that the radical majority is not immune to such all-too-common, self-indulgent right wing predilections.

No one knows for sure, but the assumption among some court watchers is that Justice Clarence Thomas will probably write the Bruen opinion since he seems to be particularly energized over the prospect of blowing up all gun regulations and turning the country into even more of a free fire zone than it already is. I doubt if he, or any of the other ultra-right wingers on the Court, would be any more respectful of precedent in gun rights cases than they are in women’s rights cases. They have a revolutionary agenda and they aren’t going to let anything stand in their way.  

Liz Cheney calls out GOP leaders for enabling “white supremacy” after Buffalo shooting

Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., accused Republican leaders of enabling “white supremacy” after a shooter who espoused “Great Replacement” theory talking points embraced by some in the GOP killed 10 people at a Buffalo supermarket on Saturday.

Police say a white 18-year-old gunman livestreamed his attack on a Tops store in Buffalo, killing 10 and injuring three others. The suspect posted a so-called manifesto online detailing his plan to target a Black community and discussing his white supremacist ideology. The suspect wrote that he was motivated by the “Great Replacement” theory boosted by Republican lawmakers and Fox News hosts like Tucker Carlson, arguing that immigration is being used to replace and diminish the influence of white people.

Cheney, who served as the No. 3 Republican in the House before she was ousted by her party for criticizing former President Donald Trump, called out GOP leadership for boosting a conspiracy theory that inspired not only the Buffalo shooter but other mass shooters as well.

“The House GOP leadership has enabled white nationalism, white supremacy, and anti-semitism,” Cheney wrote on Twitter. “History has taught us that what begins with words ends in far worse. @GOP leaders must renounce and reject these views and those who hold them.”

Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., the only other Republican who serves alongside Cheney on the House Jan. 6 committee, tweeted that his “replacement theory” is that “we need to replace” House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., and Reps. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y.; Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga.; and Madison Cawthorn, R-N.C., among others.

“The replacement theory they are pushing/tolerating is getting people killed,” Kinzinger wrote.

The congressman in another tweet again called out Stefanik for pushing the “white replacement theory” while serving as the No. 3 Republican in the House, a position Cheney was removed from for “demanding truth.”

RELATED: Buffalo shooting comes eight months after Rep. Elise Stefanik called out over “Great Replacement”

Kinzinger linked to an article about Stefanik being called out by her hometown newspaper over a “despicable” Facebook ad it said echoed “Great Replacement” rhetoric. The ad showed images of migrants reflected in President Joe Biden’s sunglasses while accusing Democrats of planning a “permanent election insurrection.”

“Back in 2017, white supremacists marched in Charlottesville, Va., carrying torches and chanting, ‘You will not replace us’ and ‘Jews will not replace us.’ Decent Americans recoiled at the undeniable echo of Nazi Germany,” the Times-Union editorial board wrote in September 2021. “That rhetoric has been resonating ever since in the right wing, repackaged lately in what’s known as ‘replacement theory,’ espoused by conservative media figures like Fox News’ Tucker Carlson. And it has seeped into the mainstream political discourse in the Capital Region, where Rep. Elise Stefanik has adapted this despicable tactic for campaign ads.”

The editorial added that Stefanik “isn’t so brazen to use the slogans themselves; rather, she couches the hate in alarmist anti-immigrant rhetoric that’s become standard fare for the party of Donald Trump.”

Stefanik made no mention of the role that racism played in the shooting but used her condolence tweet to highlight that it is National Police Week and “we must thank & honor our law enforcement & first responders who heroically face skyrocketing violent crimes.”

Alex deGrasse, a Stefanik adviser, pushed back on the criticism of her ad.

“Any implication or attempt to blame the heinous shooting in Buffalo on the Congresswoman is a new disgusting low for the Left, their Never Trump allies, and the sycophant stenographers in the media,” deGrasse told the Washington Post. “The shooting was an act of evil and the criminal should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Despite sickening and false reporting, [the] Congresswoman has never advocated for any racist position or made a racist statement.”


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


Stefanik is not the only prominent Republican to push the theory. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., last year accused the left of bringing in immigrants to “drown traditional, classic Americans with as many people as they can.”

House Freedom Caucus Chairman Scott Perry, R-Pa., said during a committee hearing last year that many Americans believe “we’re replacing national-born American — native-born Americans — to permanently transform the political landscape of this very nation.”

Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., defended Carlson’s rants making the same points, tweeting last fall that the Fox host was “CORRECT about Replacement Theory as he explains what is happening in America.”

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., in 2018 posted a video on Facebook that argues that Jews are orchestrating a mass migration to replace white people in “the biggest genocide in human history.”

Lesser-known Trump allies like Arizona state Sen. Wendy Rogers, who suggested the Buffalo shooting was faked, have also claimed that “we are being replaced and invaded” by illegal immigrants, echoing similar rhetoric from Trump himself.

The ideology has quickly seeped in among the party’s voter base. Nearly half of Republicans, and nearly one-third of the country, believe that “there is a group of people in this country who are trying to replace native-born Americans with immigrants who agree with their political views,” according to an Associated Press/NORC poll conducted in December. Respondents who watched right-wing networks like OAN, Newsmax, and Fox News were far more likely to believe in the conspiracy theory, according to the survey.

No mainstream figure has been linked to pushing the conspiracy theory more than Carlson, who has pushed the idea that Democrats and elites are trying to force demographic change through immigration in more than 400 episodes of his show, according to a New York Times analysis.

Though there is no indication the Buffalo suspect watched Carlson but some of his rhetoric could have come directly from the host’s scripts.

“Why is diversity said to be our greatest strength? Does anyone even ask why? It is spoken like a mantra and repeated ad infinitum,” the suspect wrote in his manifesto.

The line is eerily similar to a talking point Carlson has pushed repeatedly.

“How, precisely, is diversity our strength?” he questioned in one 2018 segment highlighted by the Times out of many. “Since you’ve made this our new national motto, please be specific as you explain it.”

Salon’s Amanda Marcotte wrote on Sunday that it’s doubtful the Buffalo shooting will have any effect on the host’s or his fans’ rhetoric since the conspiracy theory has only grown in popularity since other “great replacement”-inspired shootings in an El Paso Walmart and a Pittsburgh synagogue.

“We cannot legitimately hope that they will be chastened by this latest round of violence,” Marcotte wrote, “but we can make clear that their hateful rhetoric helped to unleash it.”

Read more:

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

Donald Trump is a human cocktail of white racism, white rage and white supremacy. He also represents a special type of white freedom to act without accountability. Ta-Nehisi Coates wrote about this in his widely-read 2017 essay for the Atlantic on Trump as America’s “first white president”:

It is insufficient to state the obvious of Donald Trump: that he is a white man who would not be president were it not for this fact. With one immediate exception, Trump’s predecessors made their way to high office through the passive power of whiteness — that bloody heirloom which cannot ensure mastery of all events but can conjure a tailwind for most of them. Land theft and human plunder cleared the grounds for Trump’s forefathers and barred others from it. Once upon the field, these men became soldiers, statesmen, and scholars; held court in Paris; presided at Princeton; advanced into the Wilderness and then into the White House. Their individual triumphs made this exclusive party seem above America’s founding sins, and it was forgotten that the former was in fact bound to the latter, that all their victories had transpired on cleared grounds. No such elegant detachment can be attributed to Donald Trump — a president who, more than any other, has made the awful inheritance explicit….

The first white president in American history is also the most dangerous president — and he is made more dangerous still by the fact that those charged with analyzing him cannot name his essential nature, because they too are implicated in it.

The evidence is clear that Donald Trump was elected in 2016 primarily because of racism and white supremacy. Those toxic beliefs continue to define his enduring power and the loyalty of his millions of followers.

Like other forms of fascism, Trumpism is fueled by violent hostility toward “the Other,” however that is defined. Today’s Republican Party is America and the world’s largest white identity and white supremacist organization. Ever since Trump first launched his candidacy in 2015, America has seen a great increase in hate crimes and other racially motivated violence directed against Black and brown people, Jewish people, Muslims, LGBTQ people and other minority groups. Encouraged by Trump’s rhetoric and the literal and symbolic power of his presidency, white supremacists and other members of the global right have committed numerous mass shootings and other acts of terrorist violence.

RELATED: Donald Trump’s fantasies of racial violence reflect an all-too-real history

Donald Trump infamously described the white supremacists who rampaged in Charlottesville in 2017 as “very fine people.” Three summers later, he disparaged supporters of the Black Lives Matter movement as un-American traitors. At his campaign rallies, Trump has repeatedly encouraged violence against protesters and other supposed enemies.

During his presidency, the Trump regime put nonwhite refugees and migrants in concentration camps and stole their children as part of a policy of “deterrence” driven by White House senior adviser Stephen Miller, an evident white supremacist.

The Trump cabal’s attempted coup on Jan. 6, 2021, was an attack on multiracial democracy, and indeed on the premise that Black and brown Americans should have equal voting rights and an equal say in the country’s present and future. In many respects, that coup attempt continues unabated.

Trump is now holding rallies across the country to support Republicans in this year’s midterms, and quite likely to prepare for his 2024 presidential campaign. At these events, he often encourages violence against “traitors” and “socialist Democrats” who reject his fascist leadership and movement. He is fond of jokes about racial slurs. At one recent rally, Trump told attendees they should be willing to fight and die in order to protect their (white) children and (white) families and (white) country from the white supremacist “critical race theory” moral panic bogeyman.

Trump’s 2022 rallies are full of racial slurs, calls for violence, coded appeals to QAnon and the “great replacement” and invocations of the Lost Cause.

Trump also makes coded appeals to the antisemitic and racist QAnon and “great replacement” conspiracy theories, telling his followers that (nonwhite) “invaders” are coming to “take over” and kill off “true” (white) Americans like them. He frequently channels the white supremacist Lost Cause narrative, with its claims that the treasonous war of the Confederacy for the “right” to keep Black people in bondage was somehow noble and honorable.

At these rallies, Trump wallows in malignant narcissism and white victimology, with a series of scurrilous lies alleging that Democrats, the news media, elites, the “deep state” and Black and brown people are somehow “oppressing” and “persecuting” him and his followers. Trump has even called for his followers to descend upon majority Black and brown cities if he is prosecuted for his crimes against democracy.

Of course Trump also continues to amplify and repeat his Big Lie about the 2020 presidential election, claiming that he is America’s “real president” and that Joe Biden’s victory was tainted by fraud and “fake ballots” in “urban” areas. The clear implication being that black and brown people “stole” the election from him and his white MAGA “real American” voters. 

As I have previously suggested, through his words, deeds, and use of stochastic terrorism as well as overt threats, Donald Trump has shown that he is eager to incite a white-on-Black “race war.” He believes such a calamity will help him return to national power. This is far from an empty threat or a hollow fantasy: Trump’s followers have repeatedly shown that they are willing to kill and die at his command.

Consider what happened last Saturday in Buffalo. It appears that a day earlier, an 18-year-old white man named Payton Gendron drove more than 200 miles to Buffalo, from his home in a predominantly white and rural area of central New York state. The evidence suggests — most notably his own words — that his express purpose was to commit an act of white supremacist terrorism directed against Black people.

Gendron explained his plan and the logic and motivations behind it in a 180-page manifesto he published online, which makes repeated references to the “great replacement” conspiracy theory and its claims that white people are under threat of replacement or extinction by nonwhite groups. Gendron also referenced “critical race theory” and made fantastical claims that Jewish people are somehow manipulating world events.

Gendron was armed with an AR-15 assault-style rifle. He had a pistol and another rifle in his car, wore body armor and had other tactical equipment in his possession. There was a racial slur written on Gendron’s AR-15, which he reportedly fired at least 50 times during the attack at a Buffalo supermarket.  

As explained in his manifesto, Gendron targeted that particular neighborhood because its population is predominantly Black. He spent Friday conducting reconnaissance on the targeted community. On Saturday, he used that information and experience to attack the Tops Friendly Market at a time when he would inflict maximum carnage, live-streaming his rampage on the Internet. He shot 13 people in the supermarket and parking lot outside, 11 of them Black. Ten of the 13 shooting victims died.

Gendron’s online manifesto reads like a slightly more sophisticated version of the photocopied newsletters that white supremacist or neo-Nazi groups once had to spread by mail.

He surrendered to local police at the scene, and was reportedly eager to explain his motivations. It has subsequently been reported that Gendron made a “generalized threat” of violence a year ago, as a student at Susquehanna Valley Central High School in his hometown of Conklin. He was taken into custody and subjected to a mental health evaluation, but released two days later.

Gendron has been charged with first-degree murder. The FBI and Department of Justice are now investigating these killings as a hate crime and terrorist act. His manifesto could be described as an updated, slightly more sophisticated version of the photocopied white supremacist tracts like “The Turner Diaries” that neo-Nazis, Kluxers, and other white supremacists and racial fascists used to distribute by mail or in person.

(White) America is so accustomed to gun violence that we observe a de facto public ritual for events like the Buffalo shooting. Or at least we do when the accused killer is a white man and a “conservative” or apparent member of a right-wing group. The ritual is generally quite different if the accused mass shooter is a Muslim or a Black person, for example.


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


  • He will be described as a “lone wolf” who “acted alone.” In important respects, this is misleading. Whether or not Gendron had personal contact with other right-wing fanatics, he is part of a global white supremacist project that includes the Trump movement and the Republican Party.
  • His actions will be attributed to “mental illness.” In fact, in Gendron’s manifesto he makes clear that he knows what he is doing and why. He clearly articulates the motivations, reasoning and planning involved in his act of anti-Black terrorism. Of course, the vast majority of people with mental illnesses are not violent.
  • The Buffalo attack is “shocking.” This is an absurd reaction. The Buffalo attack was wholly predictable and is the obvious result of an American neofascist ideology that has taken control of the Republican Party and much of the right-wing media and “conservative” movement.
  • “A good guy with a gun can stop a bad guy with a gun.” This is an appeal to the disproved claim that more guns equals less crime. There was an armed security guard at the supermarket in Buffalo. He shot Gendron several times without seriously injuring him. Gendron’s body armor stopped the bullets. The brave guard, whose name was Aaron Salter Jr., was then shot and killed by Gendron.
  • It is too soon to talk about what happened. We must wait for the facts. The facts about what happened in Buffalo on Saturday are self-evident. A white man drove hundreds of miles to kill Black people because he believed they and other nonwhites, as directed by an imaginary global Jewish cabal, were “taking away” what he believed what “his country.” 
  • We must not politicize mass shootings. This is a tragedy: We send thoughts and prayers. Gun violence is a public safety issue. White supremacy is a public safety issue, as well as a national security issue. The same is true of domestic terrorism. It is the responsibility of a government to keep its citizens safe. These are inherently political matters.

The mainstream news media has already begun pivoting to a narrative of “healing” and “hope” in the aftermath of the Buffalo attack. That too is part of a long history in which the suffering and pain of Black and brown people is minimized so as not to injure the sensibilities and feelings of white society. Moreover, minimizing that suffering also serves to negate Black and brown people’s demands for justice and equal treatment.

We will be told, ad infinitum, that Payton Gendron is an individual who is responsible for his own actions, and that it’s unfair to suggest that Donald Trump, the Republicans or the right-wing media had anything to do with what happened in Buffalo. In point of fact, racism and white supremacy are learned behaviors. One of the greatest luxuries enjoyed by white people in American society is that of being perceived as the ultimate individuals, whose behavior is never understood to reflect on the larger group.

In the aftermath of Gendron’s alleged crimes, we will hear no public demands that “white leaders” speak out and condemn white supremacist violence, or the larger movement it represents. There will be no demands by political leaders or media commentators for a national conversation about the “white family” or “white culture,” and the pathological and other unhealthy values taught and learned there.

In fact, we should absolutely talk about those things, or at least about the values of white supremacy and white racial violence spread by the Republican Party and the larger right-wing ecosystem. The “great replacement” conspiracy theory and related claims that Gendron summons in his manifesto are now commonplace in right-wing public discourse. As seen with the moral panic about “critical race theory,” these ideas are infecting the white American public more generally as well.

This kind of racist paranoia is not new in American or European society — but what is novel is the way these hysterical claims are being used to undermine and destroy democracy.

Of course this kind of racial paranoia is not new in American and European society. Such claims can trace their origins back to the invention of the concept of “race” in the 17th century. What is relatively novel is the way these hysterical claims about white people being driven to extinction are now a daily feature of mainstream right-wing politics and media, and are being used as part of a fascist campaign to delegitimate, undermine and overthrow American democracy.

This is all taking place at a moment when America’s racial demographics are experiencing a historic change, from a “majority-white” country (who is deemed to be “white” being a concept that has itself shifted over time) to one where white people will remain the largest and most powerful group, but will no longer be an absolute majority of the population.

In this context, the “narrative laundering” of these previously fringe ideas about white extinction and white replacement has been highly effective. More than 30 percent of American adults now believe there is a plan to replace native-born Americans with immigrants as a way to win elections. In addition, almost half of Republican voters believe that white people are being “replaced” through mass immigration or some other means.

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

In a recent essay at MSNBC, Cynthia Miller-Idriss explains how Carlson goes beyond conspiracy theory to spread anti-immigrant bigotry, “using exclusionary, incendiary and dehumanizing rhetoric and language like a ‘flood of illegals’ alongside descriptions of mass immigration as making America ‘poor and dirtier'”:

Carlson isn’t the only Fox News figure pushing the great replacement theory. Laura Ingraham has warned viewers that “the Democrats want to replace many of you,” suggesting there is an “invasion of the country” and referring to Texas as a state that is “completely overrun” by an illegal invasion. … [As] the country moves closer to the actual demographic changes that are manipulated in replacement and genocide conspiracy theories, invoking the idea of a “great replacement” as an existential threat on mainstream network news reinforces and legitimizes white supremacists’ fears and sense of urgency in a way that feels unique to this time….

These conspiracy theories … that have been core to white-supremacist beliefs for decades have no place on mainstream networks that beam into millions of Americans’ living rooms each evening. And yet, here we are, with former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke praising Carlson, host of the most-watched show on cable news, for “finally” promoting the “great replacement,” and a white supremacist website describing him as “literally our greatest ally.”

As Matt Gertz at Media Matters has documented, the “great replacement” theory and other appeals to white supremacy are central to Fox News and its marketing strategy. As a former Fox News employee told Nick Confessore of the New York Times, Gertz writes, Carlson decided to “double down on the white nationalism” because the network’s “minute-by-minute viewership numbers” made clear that the viewers loved it.

Indeed, a Times analysis of 1,150 episodes of his program reveals that Carlson “amplified the idea that Democratic populations and others want to force demographic change through immigration” in more than 400 episodes. That’s the heart of the “great replacement” conspiracy theory, which is popular among white nationalists and was previously confined to the fringes of U.S. media. That racist trope motivated the likes of the mass shooters at a Pittsburgh synagogue in 2018 and an El Paso, Texas, Walmart and two New Zealand mosques in 2019.

Donald Trump, the Republicans and the larger white right did not start the slow, long-burning fire of white supremacy in America. But they have gleefully thrown gasoline, grenades and other explosives on the fire and then danced around the flames as they spread. 

Fascism is an ideology based on racial authoritarianism and violence. As the conflict created by the Trump movement heats up, we are likely to see more terrorist attacks against Black and brown people and other targeted groups, attacks just as horrifying as the one last Saturday in Buffalo, or perhaps worse. There is a line inscribed in blood that leads from Donald Trump’s hateful rhetoric to Jan. 6, 2021, to last Saturday in Buffalo. Where it will lead next? Unfortunately, we will soon find out as the next chapter in the new American neofascist nightmare is being written all around us in real time.

Read more on white nationalism and the “great replacement” theory:

GOP governor warns sovereign Native American tribes to not make abortion accessible on their land

Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt, a Republican, has warned many of the state’s Native American tribes that if they allow abortion on sovereign land he will intervene.

“Oklahomans will not think very well of that if tribes try to set up abortion clinics,” Stitt said on Fox News Sunday.

“You know, the tribes in Oklahoma are super liberal,” he said. “They go to Washington, D.C. They talk to President [Joe] Biden at the White House; they kind of adopt those strategies. So yeah, we think that there’s a possibility that some tribes may try to set up abortion on demand. They think that you can be 1/1,000th tribal member and not have to follow the state law. And so that’s something that we’re watching.”

The tribes aren’t liberal. In fact, some, particularly in Eastern Oklahoma, work with Republican Rep. Tom Cole (OK) on issues.

RELATED: Oklahoma Republicans ram through most restrictive abortion ban in the nation

Native American tribes are allowed to govern themselves on their own land. Their sovereignty is the reason that they can have things like casinos in states where it is banned. Once known as Indian Territory, the state has more than 40 tribes in its borders.

It was just last month that Oklahoma politicians faced off against tribes in an ongoing refusal to cooperate with the Supreme Court decision in McGirt v. Oklahoma.

“In the McGirt ruling, the Supreme Court held that much of eastern Oklahoma is Indian country under the terms of an 1833 treaty between the U.S. government and the Muscogee Creek Nation,” explained Professor Kirsten Matoy Carlson of Wayne State University. “Based on that treaty and an 1885 federal law, the ruling effectively means that the state of Oklahoma cannot prosecute crimes committed by or against American Indians there. Federal and tribal officials are the only ones who can pursue these cases.”


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


Oklahoma’s state government has asked the Supreme Court to rehear the case over 40 times. Under the existing Supreme Court rulings, about 43% of Oklahoma is ruled by tribal lands. It ultimately means that the GOP governor doesn’t have control over the whole state when it comes to his laws.

There has been a conversation among activists searching for loopholes in anticipation of the unmaking of Roe v.Wade that putting clinics under tribal lands could be possible. Such a decision would require involvement by tribal councils, however. Sources involved in the tribal government of one Oklahoma tribe told Raw Story that many are unlikely to rock the boat.

RELATED: Abortion providers sue to block Oklahoma bans

If Stitt and others in the Oklahoma legislature attempt to restrict the tribes under the guise that they are trying to stop abortions, they could end up in a considerable legal battle over the right for Native tribes to govern themselves.

Stitt is up for reelection in November.

Buffalo gunman’s racism appears linked to mainstreaming of white nationalism

Amid the outpouring of grief and heartache following Saturday’s massacre in Buffalo that left 10 people dead and three wounded, critical observers say the racial animus which evidence shows motivated the killer must be seen in the larger context of a white nationalist mindset that has increasingly broken into the mainstream of the right-wing political movement and Republican Party in recent years.

Taken into custody at the scene of the mass shooting at the Tops Market was Payton Gendron, the white 18-year-old male who has charged with murdering the victims. Gendron live-streamed his attack online and also posted a detailed, 180-page document that has been described by those who have reviewed it — including journalists and law enforcement — as a white nationalist manifesto rife with anti-Black racism, antisemitism and conspiracy theories about “white replacement.”

RELATED: Mass shooting in Buffalo: Tucker Carlson and other right-wing conspiracy theorists share the blame

According to local outlet News 4 in Buffalo:

The document, which News 4 has reviewed, plotted the attack in grotesque detail. The writer plotted his actions down to the minute, included diagrams of his path through the store and said he specifically targeted the Tops Markets location on Jefferson Avenue because its zip code has the highest percentage of Black people close enough to where he lives.

“This was pure evil,” said Erie County Sheriff John Garcia during a press conference on Saturday. The attack, he said, “was straight-up racially motivated hate crime from somebody outside of our community.”

A senior law enforcement official in Buffalo told NBC News that officials were working to verify the document’s authenticity and confirm Gendron was behind it. 

“We are aware of the manifesto allegedly written by the suspect and we’re working to definitively confirm that he is the author,” the official said.

NBC, which reviewed the document, reports:

The manifesto includes dozens of pages of antisemitic and racist memes, repeatedly citing the racist “Great Replacement” conspiracy theory frequently pushed by white supremacists, which falsely alleges white people are being “replaced” in America as part of an elaborate Jewish conspiracy theory. Other memes use tropes and discredited data to denigrate the intelligence of non-white people.

In the manifesto, Gendron claims that he was radicalized on 4chan while he was “bored” at the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic in early 2020.

The document also claims “critical race theory,” a recent right-wing talking point that has come to generally encompass teaching about race in school, is part of a Jewish plot, and a reason to justify mass killings of Jews.

The manifesto also includes repeated references to another mass shooter motivated by racial hate, Brenton Tarrant, who in 2019 live-streamed his vicious Islamophobic assault on a mosque in Christchurch, New Zealand, where he murdered 51 people and wounded dozens of others.


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


With these and other facts established about Gendron’s apparent motivations and ideology, many of those horrified by Saturday’s killings responded by saying the brutal and deadly attack in Buffalo cannot — and should not — be separated from the growing embrace of the far-right nationalism that has increasingly found a home inside more mainstream institutions in the U.S., including right-wing media outlets like Fox News and a Republican Party enthralled by the xenophobic and fascistic conspiracy theories of Donald Trump.

“We are horrified, heartbroken, and enraged at the news of the vicious attack on our neighbors and loved ones in Buffalo, New York,” said People’s Action, the progressive advocacy group, in a statement.

“This racist attack is a pure example of evil,” the group added. “It’s also the predictable result of the relentless onslaught of white nationalist and antisemitic conspiracy theories spewed from the far right, increasingly distributed by major corporate news outlets like Fox News and the extremist politicians their billionaire allies have cultivated.”

“In Christchurch, New Zealand and El Paso, Texas and Poway, California and now again in Buffalo, New York, a gunman motivated by a white nationalist conspiracy theory about invading immigrants shot and killed people of color,” said Sumayyah Waheed, senior policy council for Muslim Advocates, in a statement referencing a series of mass shootings carried out by white supremacists in recent years.

“In Christchurch, El Paso, Poway, California, and now in Buffalo, a gunman. motivated by white nationalist conspiracy theory … shot and killed people of color.”

“Just like in Christchurch,” Waheed continued, “the alleged Buffalo shooter both posted a manifesto about the ‘great replacement’ conspiracy theory and also livestreamed his massacre on social media. Our hearts go out to the families of the victims and to the people of Buffalo.”

In a statement on Sunday, Kina Collins, a gun violence prevention advocate and Democratic congressional candidate running for Congress in Illinois’ 7th district, made similar arguments.

Calling the shooting a “devastating and sickening display of the racism, white supremacy, hate, and gun violence that plague this country,” Collins said, “Black people in Buffalo were targeted for no reason other than that they are Black.”

“This was an act of terrorism and it should be treated as such,” she added. “It is another reminder that white supremacy has and will always be America’s greatest threat. White supremacy has infiltrated our military and police departments. It was also on display on January 6th last year as insurrectionists, fueled by white supremacy, attacked our Capitol and threatened the lives of sitting members of Congress.”

Journalist Sam Sacks also made a connection between the Buffalo shooter and the “Big Lie” movement that drove the Jan. 6 insurrection last year.

Waheed in his statement said, “This hateful, white nationalist rhetoric is not just being spread by lone gunmen.”

Such rhetoric, he said, “can also be found on cable news and in the rhetoric of politicians today. On his cable news show, Tucker Carlson said that ‘the Democratic Party is trying to replace the current electorate, the voters now casting ballots, with new people, more obedient voters from the Third World.’ In campaign ads, Donald Trump described Latino immigrants as an ‘invasion.’ In a speech, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene called the election of Reps. Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib ‘an Islamic invasion of our government.'”

With Republicans and major media personalities “normalizing white nationalist, anti-immigrant, anti-Black, anti-Latino, antisemitic and anti-Muslim conspiracy theories,” and gunmen like the one in Buffalo carrying out such attacks, Waheed said it is now “clear that white nationalism is the greatest threat to our nation’s security and we must hold everyone who spreads this hate accountable before anyone else is harmed.”

Read more on white nationalism and the “great replacement” theory:

Neofascist minority rule is laying waste to the United States

Minority rule is killing America. This is most obvious in our Senate and Supreme Court, although it’s also hurt the credibility of the presidency and is damaging many of our states.

It’s happening because of two issues dating back to the founding of our republic, which brought us the Electoral College and unequal representation in the US Senate.

First, here’s how the Electoral College came about, stripped of all the mythology (hint: it mostly had to do with avoiding somebody like Donald Trump ending up in the White House):

After the Revolutionary War, the nation was abuzz about one of that war’s most decorated soldiers, Benedict Arnold, once considered a shoo-in for high elected office, selling out to the British in exchange for money and a title.

Arnold’s name had been floated for president, and it raised the question of how we could make sure that a stooge working for a foreign government — or just for his own enrichment — didn’t end up in the White House.

Back then, America was so spread out it would be difficult for most citizen/voters to get to know a presidential candidate well enough to spot a spy or traitor, Alexander Hamilton explained in Federalist 68. Therefore, the electors — having no other governmental duty, obligation, or responsibility — would be sure to catch one if it was tried.

“The most deadly adversaries” of America, Hamilton wrote, would probably “make their approaches [to seizing control of the USA] from more than one quarter, chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils.”

A hostile foreign power influencing public opinion or owning a senator was nothing compared to having their man in the White House. As Hamilton wrote:

“How could they better gratify this, than by raising a creature of their own to the chief magistracy [presidency] of the Union?”

But, Hamilton wrote, the Framers of the Constitution “have guarded against all danger of this sort, with the most provident and judicious attention.”

The system they set up to protect the White House from being occupied by an agent of a foreign government was straightforward, Hamilton bragged. The choice of president would not “depend on any preexisting bodies of men, who might be tampered with beforehand to prostitute their votes.”

Instead, the Electoral College would be made up of “persons [selected] for the temporary and sole purpose of making the appointment” of president.

The electors would be apolitical because it would be illegal for a senator or house member to become one, an injunction that is still in the Constitution.

Hamilton wrote:

“And they have excluded from eligibility to this trust, all those who from situation might be suspected of too great devotion to the President in office. No senator, representative, or other person holding a place of trust or profit under the United States, can be of the numbers of the electors.”

This, Hamilton was certain, would eliminate “any sinister bias.”

Rather than average but uninformed voters, and excluding members of Congress who may be subject to bribery or foreign influences, the electors would select a man for president who was brave of heart and pure of soul.

“The process of election [by the electoral college] affords a moral certainty,” Hamilton wrote, “that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.”

Indeed, while a knave or rogue or traitor may fool enough people to even ascend to the office of mayor of a major city or governor of a state, the Electoral College would ferret out such a con man or traitor.

Hamilton wrote:

“Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity, may alone suffice to elevate a man to the first honors in a single State; but it will require other talents, and a different kind of merit, to establish him in the esteem and confidence” of the men in the Electoral College who would select him as president “of the whole Union. . .”

Hamilton’s pride in the system that he himself had helped create was hard for him to suppress. He wrote:

“It will not be too strong to say, that there will be a constant probability of seeing the station filled by characters preeminent for ability and virtue.”

Unfortunately, things haven’t worked out that way (as we can see with Trump still clinging to his loyalty to Putin and refusing to condemn Russia’s attack of Ukraine).

By the time the telegraph was in widespread use in the late 19th century, the Electoral College had long outlived its usefulness. And now in the past few decades we have seen two terrible presidents, Bush and Trump, put into the White House over the objection of the majority of American voters.

The Senate is also profoundly unequal in its representation of the American people; this is mostly because different states have different sizes and resource bases.

While this was a small problem at the nation’s founding, today, for example, California’s vast resources (unknown in 1787 — Lewis and Clark were still children and thus hadn’t even hit the Pacific yet) have turned it into a such an economic powerhouse that if it were independent it would be the sixth richest nation in the world.

California alone contains 39 million people, almost nine percent of the entire population of the United States, larger than Canada’s 37 million people, with an economy larger than Russia’s.

And yet it is represented by only two senators, the same as Wyoming which has only a half-million citizens (the size of Micronesia), a tiny economy, and few natural resources.

These inequalities have been exacerbated over the past 40 years both because of these 18th century structural errors built into our Constitution, and because, over the past 40 years, a campaign has been undertaken to exploit them by a small group of rightwing billionaires and religious fanatics, with the Powell Memo as their polestar.

They’ve used the wealth and power they’ve inherited or accumulated to manipulate and seize control of our lawmaking institutions at the federal level and in nearly every state.

And Americans have noticed that fair competition has died:

Neither of the last two Republican presidents, for example, was elected by the majority of Americans; the Senate is massively out of balance; and almost every House seat has been gerrymandered to the point where it is no longer in play.

Which is creating a crisis for our nation.

Humans, like most animals, are wired for fairness. Give five toddlers a cookie each and everything is fine; give one of them an extra five cookies and all hell will break loose.

Democracy is in our genes, as is the case with virtually every other animal species on Earth.

When fish swim, bees swarm, or birds migrate it seems like their actions are coordinated telepathically. In fact, each wingbeat or tail twitch left-or-right is noticed as a “vote” by those around them. When more than 50% of the group are twitching to the left, for example, the entire school, swarm, or flock veers to the left. Democracy.

When a mob showed up at the US Capitol threatening to murder the Vice President and Speaker of the House, it was because they genuinely believed Donald Trump’s lie that the majority of Americans had voted for him. People will put their lives and their freedom at risk to right such a perceived minority-rule wrong.

Minority rule almost always ends up producing unfair results that are resented by the majority. We’re seeing this today with a Supreme Court dominated by four rightwing justices who were appointed by presidents who lost the majority vote and who were confirmed by Republican senators who represent 41.5 million fewer Americans than the Senate’s Democrats.

Minority rule has taken over the White House:

We saw it when Bush and Cheney lied us into the war in Iraq after being put in the White House by five Republicans on the Supreme Court, despite having lost the vote to Al Gore by a half-million votes. It provoked the largest demonstrations against a presidential action in the history of the world at the time.

Similarly, when millions protested Trump’s inauguration it was motivated in large part by the widespread knowledge that he’d lost the 2016 election by nearly 3 million votes.  Unfairness infuriates people, and rightly so.

Minority rule has taken over our Supreme Court:

A small group of wealthy ideologues spent millions to pack our courts, and we’ll see the backlash in our streets this weekend as people across the nation come out to protest Alito’s assertion that Sir Matthew Hale’s 1670 interpretation of British witchcraft laws should determine the fate of America’s 21st century women.

Minority rule has taken over Congress:

Democrats in the Senate represent 41.5 million more Americans than do Republicans. Yet that minority of Republicans, using the filibuster, have been able to stop everything from voting rights to healthcare to rebuilding our nation from the damage of 40 years of Reaganomics’ neoliberalism.

total of 77.3 million Americans voted in 2020 for Democrats for the House of Representatives; only 72.8 million voted for Republicans. 

Multiple states where the statewide vote is within a point or three of 50/50 (including Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Texas, Georgia, Arizona, North Carolina, Kentucky, Louisiana, and Wisconsin) send far more Republicans than Democrats to the US House than their votes would dictate because of Republican gerrymanders. 

This fall things will get even worse because of 2021 gerrymanders, meaning that when over half of Americans again (if history and polling holds) vote for Democrats for the House, the GOP will nonetheless likely take control of that body.

Minority rule has taken over multiple states:

Most of the states listed above suffer from the same problem in their own legislatures. In statewide elections, because most voters choose Democrats, all but two of those states ended up with Democratic governors; nonetheless, even though only a minority voted for Republicans, their legislatures are still Republican-controlled because of gerrymandering.

Whenever a minority rises up and tries to rule over a majority, particularly if that rule violates basic principles of fair play and empathy, the result is conflict.

In most minority rule situations, that conflict is managed with the power of guns and jail cells: nations that were once democracies — like Russia, Turkey, Egypt, the Philippines, Hungary, Venezuela and others — become police states where dissent and political activity are not tolerated.

We saw Donald Trump, who lost the majority vote in 2016, try this when he ordered Defense Secretary Mark Esper to have our military shoot protestors in the streets of Washington, DC.

We humans, like most animals from the simplest to the most complex, are wired by evolution for majority-rule to make the decisions that will best serve our immediate interests as well as preserve our species.

The principal idea of democracy is that there is wisdom in numbers. That the majority is more often right than any minority. As Aristotle wrote in his Politics, “[I]t is possible that the many, though not individually good men, yet when they come together may be better, not individually but collectively…”

If we want to preserve this nation, we must try actual representative democracy.

Whoever wins the majority vote becomes president, as 15 states and the District of Columbia — representing 195 electoral votes — have chosen (states representing another 75 votes are needed to end the Electoral College).

Expanding and unpacking the Supreme Court would restore fairness and balance to the head of that branch of government, and adding Washington, DC and Puerto Rico as states would help ease the unfairness of representation in the Senate.

And Congress must pass a federal mandate that every state cease gerrymandering and use nonpartisan redistricting commissions like California and several other Democratic-controlled states have already done to insure fairness and equal representation.

Republicans not only cling to minority rule, they now want to go to the next step and impose a neofascist Taliban-style government on America run by the morbidly rich and fanatically religious.

Jim Acosta calls out Tucker Carlson, Fox News for profiting off white supremacy

CNN host Jim Acosta pointed to the Fox News network for its ongoing promotion of the theory the Buffalo, New York, shooter allegedly adopted as his philosophy. Police discovered a manifesto that addressed the “great replacement” theory, which holds that Democrats are somehow orchestrating an increase in people of color to intentionally dominate white people.

Fox hosts Laura Ingraham and Tucker Carlson have both hosted shows about the theory.

“What Tucker Carlson is doing by peddling ‘replacement theory’ and other white nationalist talking points is dangerous and we called it out today,” Acosta said on Twitter. It was part of an interview with NAACP chair Derrick Johnson, who called on the Justice Department to step up efforts in regulating terrorism online.

RELATED: Mass shooting in Buffalo: Tucker Carlson and other right-wing conspiracy theorists share the blame

“The real question is, what are we going to do as a society?” asked Johnson. “Are we going to continue allowing domestic terrorism to dominate the public discourse every so many months? We have seen this before. The question is now, when will the Justice Department aggressively pursue these domestic terrorist cells that are populating on social media platforms? When will social media platforms finally stand up to their community responsibility and remove these cells? When will News Corp. stop funding Fox News to promote theories that only divide and create tribalism?”

The neighborhood that the Buffalo shooter specifically targeted was known for being predominantly Black. Not responding to white supremacist terrorism means that more of it will continue, Johnson said.

“How are we going to pivot away from this domestic terrorism that we have seen?” asked Johnson. “We have to come to grips with the racist dogma out there that is causing harm to the African American community, the Jewish community. We have to stand up as a society.”

Acosta then showed a supercut of videos from Fox News host Tucker Carlson, who has been pushing the “replacement” theory on his show for over a year. He noted that the clips are just “a few examples” of many that the researchers found. He went on to show the New York Times report on Carlson, which cited his record of promoting white supremacy. Carlson took a photo of himself pointing to the story and laughing at it.


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


“Millions of people absorb this garbage on his program on a regular basis,” said Acosta. “Fox does nothing about it. They make millions of dollars off of it. We have not shied away from calling that out and calling Tucker out on this program, because what he’s doing is very dangerous. What do you think can be done about this, and what do you say to all of that?”

See the interview below, from YouTube:

Read more on Tucker Carlson and Fox News: