Spring Sale: Get 1 Year, Save 58%

Goop’s $10, bejeweled, alpaca-wool diaper sparks outrage — and turn out to be a publicity stunt

Gwyneth Paltrow’s high-end lifestyle brand Goop has made a fortune selling an array of absurd and impractical goods, many of which have gone viral due to their surreal weirdness. First, there was the possibly tongue-in-cheek, possibly earnest “This Smells Like My Vagina” candle, inspired by Paltrow’s own feminine scent. Then there was the OLGA Gold Dildo (priced at a whopping $3,490) followed by a $2,000 Ouija Board. And let’s not forget the infamous Jade Egg, marketed as a vaginal insert, and which was bashed by gynecologists for being a good way to give yourself toxic shock syndrome.

Goop’s newest must-have — advertised in an Instagram post on Wednesday — is The Diapér, a not-so-eco-friendly nappy that’s said to be “lined with virgin alpaca wool and fastened with amber gemstones, known for their ancient emotional-cleansing properties.” The diapers, which sell for $10 each, are also infused with scents of jasmine and bergamot perfect “for a revitalized baby.”

https://www.instagram.com/p/CdbWBaJumhb/?utm_source=ig_embed&ig_rid=5934dc24-976e-4cd2-9460-888bf015f4bd

RELATED: Salon gets Goopy to delve into the wacky, vulva-friendly world of Gwyneth Paltrow’s lifestyle brand

The fatuous announcement and the ridiculous accented name prompted followers on social media to question the authenticity of the Diapér.

“Is it April Fools day?” one comment simply read. Another asked if it was a Saturday Night Live skit.

“If this is a joke, the timing is confusing. If it’s not a joke, you gotta understand, Gwyneth…this is why ppl don’t like you,” a concerned fan stated.

“For Buckingham Palace I suppose,” another commenter simply wrote.

According to the brand’s post, The Diapér was slated to go on sale Thursday at 11 a.m. Eastern Time.

Then, in true Goop fashion, its founder later admitted that the advert was actually a publicity stunt meant to call attention to the high cost of essential products, like diapers.

“Goop launched a luxury disposable diaper at $120 for a pack of 12 and there was a lot of outrage,” Paltrow said in an Instagram video posted Wednesday evening. “Good. It was designed to piss us off. Because if treating diapers like a luxury makes you mad, so should taxing them like a luxury.”

https://www.instagram.com/p/CdcA-ABgK80/?utm_source=ig_embed&ig_rid=07b8143a-7e6d-471a-a50f-dee78221fb1c

“Despite the absolute necessity of diapers, in 33 states they aren’t treated like an essential item. They’re taxed like a luxury good,” she continued. “This leaves one in three families struggling to afford them. While eliminating the diaper tax is not a complete solution, it could allow many families to pay for another month’s supply.”


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


“Right now, many families in need are also struggling as a result of the nationwide formula shortage,” Paltrow wrote in her caption. She then urged her fans to donate to the mega diaper bank and nonprofit organization Baby2Baby, which helps families in need by providing them with diapers, formula and other necessary goods.

Per Vice’s Motherboard, the Goop and Baby2Baby stunt was first exposed in a press release email sent by an unnamed PR company on Wednesday afternoon.

“Tomorrow, Goop CEO Gwyneth Paltrow will reveal on Instagram that ‘The Diapér’ is designed to expose the ridiculousness of taxing diapers like a luxury product,” the brief message outlined.

More stories you might like:

Have you tried the new Wordle-style game for foodies? Martha Stewart thinks Phoodle is “lots of fun”

In a natural expansion of the Wordle universe, a new food-centric version of the five-letter word game that swept the nation dropped earlier this week.

Phoodle, the brainchild of cookbook author and art dealer Julie Loria, spins off the concept of the original word game created by Josh Wardle into a new daily puzzle for those with “an appetite for words.”

In this culinary twist, the answer to each day’s puzzle is a food-related term. As Loria explained on Instagram, the responses may include anything “from ingredients to appliances to famous chefs and more.”

RELATED: Wordle was fun while it lasted

Speaking of famous chefs, Phoodle quickly attracted the attention of none other than Martha Stewart. On its first day of launch, the original domestic goddess was already singing the game’s praises to her more than 1.5 million Instagram followers. 

“If you want a new word game to play, and who does not!” Stewart began her Phoodle-dedicated post, which rated the game “lots of fun.” 

As it turns out, this enthusiasm for word games from Stewart is nothing new. “Martha loves brain teasers,” an article on her namesake website reads. “In fact, the one thing our founder does every morning to keep her mind sharp is a crossword puzzle.”

To the chagrin of some followers, Stewart’s post shared a screengrab with the answer to one of this week’s Phoodle puzzles. As Wordle fans know, that is arguably one of the gravest faux pas one can commit.

What Stewart regularly shares on Instagram are photos of her swoon-worthy meals. Those are something we can all get behind — here are 5 of our favorites to enjoy as you play.

5 Martha Stewart recipes to make while you play Phoodle

1. Baked Feta-Marinara Dip

Sick of that feta pasta dish that went viral during the pandemic? This dip, which was originally published in Martha Stewart Living in 2018, is a fantastic alternative. Here, piquillo peppers offer a sweet and smoky twist. Ready in less than 30 minutes, it’s the definition of no-fuss. 

2. Skillet Chili Nachos

Nachos never go out of season. For a quick and easy weeknight dinner, try Stewart’s skillet chili nachos. These nachos only take 20 minutes to cook  and most of the ingredients that you need to prepare them may already be on hand in your kitchen. 

3. Creamy Lemon Chicken with Spinach and Artichokes

Only Stewart could have reimagined one of our favorite dips as dinner and made it tastier and healthier in the process. This recipe comes together in one pot, meaning you’ll spend more time enjoying great food at the dinner table than cleaning up your kitchen later. Not to mention, everything comes together on the stove in about half an hour. As Stewart herself puts it, “Sautéed chicken cutlets cook fast, and cream cheese provides a little richness with less fat than heavy cream.”

4. Eggplant Parmesan Stacks

Eggplant parmesan is verifiably one of the most delicious dishes in existence. But what is one to do if you want the flavors, warmth and medley of textures without the effort that goes into making the Italian-American classic? Stewart has the answer!

If you need a stellar finger food for your next party, or relish in the delight of eating handheld snacks, these eggplant parmesan stacks are what your dreams are made of. 

5. Sausage-and-Kale Stuffed Shells

If you’re running low on dinner ideas and want something that will nourish your tummy and soul, then you might want to try these sausage and kale stuffed shells from Stewart.

This dish has all of the good stuff you’d expect in a pasta casserole dish, plus the added benefit of being freezer friendly. You can double up while prepping and get two dinners for the effort of one!

Read more: 12 additional Martha Stewart recipes we can’t stop making

Many states’ abortion bans have life-saving “exceptions.” Experts doubt they will work as intended

On October 21, 2012, a woman named Savita Halappanavar went to the hospital in Ireland because of back pain that had lasted for 12 hours. At 17 weeks pregnant, doctors had to deliver devastating news to her: she was miscarrying. Her pregnancy was, inevitably, not going to be viable.

The next day, her water broke, but her body didn’t go into labor and expel the fetus on its own. Her family repeatedly asked for her to be induced, for the pregnancy to be terminated, but the doctors said they couldn’t because there was still a fetal heartbeat — and in Ireland, at the time, abortion was prohibited, even in a situation like Halappanavar’s, where the fetus was not going to be viable.

On October 28, 2012, Halappanavar died of multi-organ failure following a sepsis infection.

In Ireland, Halappanavar’s tragic death led to an outpouring of public attention and anger. That ultimately led to the repeal of Ireland’s Eighth Amendment, which effectively banned abortion.

In the likely event Roe v. Wade is overturned, many states will immediately make abortion illegal. Now, doctors and pro-choice advocates in the United States are fearful that scenarios similar to what happened to Halappanavar may be apt to happen in the United States. 

“It is really critical to have abortion as part of safe, comprehensive, high-quality maternity care. It’s part of the whole continuum of maternal maternity care.”

“On nights like this I can’t help but think of Savita Halappanavar, a beautiful 31 year-old dentist who died at 17 weeks pregnant after being denied an abortion in Ireland because it was illegal then,” Jo Kaur, founder of the Riaan Research Initiative, a non-profit organization hunting for a cure for rare genetic diseases affecting children, tweeted when news of the SCOTUS opinion leaked last week. “She died of sepsis [because] they wouldn’t abort. How many Savitas will die in the US?”

RELATED: Why did Ireland deny a suicidal woman an abortion?

In light of news about the leaked SCOTUS opinion, public attention is fixed on the estimated 13 states that have “trigger laws,” meaning laws which would make abortion immediately illegal once Roe v. Wade is overturned. All 13 states with trigger laws technically have language that make exceptions to the bans for either pregnant females whose lives are at risk or “medical emergencies.” But in some states, discretion in such a scenario would be left to the physician, in addition to other problems that could surface from the vagueness of the language in these laws.

For example, in Louisiana, the law states a “physician shall make reasonable medical efforts” to save the life of a pregnant person and the unborn child. In South Dakota, the law states that there is an exception for a medical professional to make a “reasonable medical judgment that performance of an abortion is necessary to preserve the life of the pregnant female” and the unborn child. While these laws have exceptions, there is a fear that they’re likely to create hesitation from the physician — when in an emergency — that time can’t be spared.


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


“Physicians will now be put in a position of trying to figure out whether the emergency is emergency enough,” Kim Mutcherson, Dean and Professor of Law at Rutgers Law School told Salon. “I do think that there will be healthcare providers who are a little nervous about how to proceed and when to proceed, and there’s something really disturbing thinking about a physician whose immediate thought is ‘OK, the way to treat this patient is to give her the medication she needs, or to proceed with an abortion,’ but then stops herself and says, ‘Well, am I setting myself up for potential either civil liability or criminal liability?'”

Seema Mohapatra, a health law and bioethics expert at Southern Methodist University, agreed.

“Medicine is more of an art than a science and so, it’s hard if you are in a very aggressive atmosphere like Texas that is aggressively anti-abortion,” Mohapatra said. Texas has a trigger law in place that would make performing an abortion a felony. “I think that providers are going to be reluctant to be the ones that are on the line for a $100,000 penalty and life in prison if they can’t justify that it was going to save someone’s life,” Mohapatra continued. 

“I’m very concerned that the overturning of Roe v. Wade and that the ensuing trigger laws will cause serious harm to pregnant people, especially for things situations like ectopic pregnancies,” Simon said. According to Planned Parenthood, one in 50 pregnancies are ectopic.

Last year, Texas passed Senate Bill 8, which bans abortions as early as six weeks. While the law includes an exception for ectopic pregnancies, immediate available treatment hasn’t been easy to come by. That’s because the law prohibits several medications as abortion-inducing drugs; one of those drugs, methotrexate, is used to treat ectopic pregnancies. As reported by NPR, some doctors reported they received a letter from a pharmacy stating that it would no longer fill methotrexate in the case of ectopic pregnancy.

Dr. Melissa Simon, an obstetrician and gynecologist (OB/GYN) at Northwestern University, explained to Salon there are many immediate cases where an abortion is needed right away to save a pregnant female’s life. For example, an ectopic pregnancy which is when a fertilized egg implants and grows outside of the uterus in the abdomen, a female’s cervix or more commonly, fallopian tubes.

“I’m very concerned that the overturning of Roe v. Wade and that the ensuing trigger laws will cause serious harm to pregnant people, especially for things situations like ectopic pregnancies,” Simon said. According to Planned Parenthood, one in 50 pregnancies are ectopic.

“This is a life threatening type of pregnancy whereby there is no way that an ectopic pregnancy can become a full-term pregnancy and a person cannot give birth,” Simon added.

Simon noted there are many other reasons why a pregnant person’s life could be at risk. For example, if a woman has Marfan syndrome, which poses a significant risk of transmission to the fetus and injuries that could cause death or serious injury to the pregnant female. Simon added women who have miscarriages could bleed or get an infection, and the treatment is an abortion.

“I have been in many circumstances with many women who have delivered the babies or who had, regardless of the gestational age, bled profusely, hemorrhages… and if we didn’t intervene, they would have died,” Simon said. “It is really critical to have abortion as part of safe, comprehensive, high-quality maternity care. It’s part of the whole continuum of maternal maternity care.”

Indeed, while the trigger laws technically have carve-outs, the fact that such an essential part of maternity care is going to be prohibited will inevitably put more pregnant peoples’ lives at risk. One study from the University of Colorado-Boulder estimates that pregnancy-related deaths could increase by 21 percent in the event of a nation-wide abortion ban.

Mutcherson said it is “deeply problematic” that state legislatures who aren’t healthcare providers are making such decisions that could impact peoples’ lives.

“The legislatures, all of the people that that we have elected to Congress in the Senate, really need to hear this because right now we’re at a critical juncture,” Dr. Simon added. “Our country, which is deemed one of the best healthcare systems on the entire planet, has the worst maternal mortality rate of any high resourced country on the planet,  and that is just egregious already… so having a decrease in access to this very safe part of the full continuum of maternity care, completely banned in more than half the states is dangerous, and will only promulgate those maternal mortality numbers.”

Read more on the Supreme Court leak and the end of Roe v. Wade:

Ewan McGregor rewatched the Star Wars prequels before “Obi-Wan Kenobi”

We’re less than a month out from “Obi-Wan Kenobi,” the next Star Wars series to stream on Disney+. Though Disney has put out plenty of Star Wars content since it acquired Lucasfilm back in 2012, this one feels extra special. The six-part limited series will see Ewan McGregor and Hayden Christensen reprise their roles as Obi-Wan and Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader from the prequel trilogy, and will feature other familiar faces like Joel Edgerton as Uncle Owen and Bonnie Piesse as Aunt Beru. Composer John Williams even made a rare jump from movies to television to write the main theme.

Appearing on “Jimmy Kimmel Live!,” McGregor revealed that in order to get back in the headspace to portray Jedi Master Obi-Wan he revisited the Star Wars prequel trilogy. “I watched all of them to prepare for this because the last one I did, we shot Episode III in Sydney, Australia, in 2003, I think,” the actor said. “So it’s been quite some time — almost 20 years.”

Ewan McGregor reflects on the legacy of the Star Wars prequels

Despite the hype behind “Star Wars: Obi-Wan Kenobi,” when the prequel films came out back in the early 2000s they were not well received by all the fans. However, that’s not to say the prequels weren’t liked, especially among those who were still kids or teenagers when they came out.

“It was tricky at the time. They weren’t overwhelmingly embraced by everybody when they came out, our prequels,” McGregor said. “It was nice to watch them now knowing that people love them. That the kids who we made them for at the time — they loved those films a lot. It was nice to watch them with that sense.”

McGregor has previously said that he “found it quite hard” seeing the negative response to the prequels at the time. But time heals all wounds, and “Obi-Wan Kenobi” is leaning pretty heavily into the prequel trilogy mythos; it’s a direct continuation of Obi-Wan and Anakin’s story from “Revenge of the Sith.”

Ewan McGregor’s uncle was in the original Star Wars trilogy

Another really fascinating tidbit to come out of the interview is that actor Denis Lawson, who played Wedge Antilles in the original Star Wars trilogy, is actually McGregor’s uncle.

“I remember standing outside the school, I was five or six, and I was standing outside the school with my brother. And my mom and dad picked us up, and they were taking us to the ‘big city’ to watch a movie that my uncle Denis was in,” McGregor recalled. “So we went and we were so excited to go and see…you know, your uncle in a movie, it was so exciting. And then we sat down there and it was Star Wars. It just sort of blew our minds away.”

McGregor called Lawson his acting hero, stating that if he ever felt stuck with something in his own work, his uncle was one of the only people he’d call on the phone to ask for advice. The Force is strong in their family.

The first two episodes of “Star Wars: Obi-Wan Kenobi” hit Disney+ on May 27. After that, the following four episodes will premiere weekly on Wednesdays.

The tie-in novel “Star Wars: Brotherhood” by Mike Chen is out today, which explores how Obi-Wan and Anakin’s relationship evolved during the turbulent Clone Wars.

Feds launch new grand jury investigation into how classified docs ended up at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago

Former President Donald Trump is facing another grand jury investigation.

The New York Times reports that prosecutors have convened a grand jury to investigate Trump’s mishandling of classified documents that he improperly removed from the White House and brought with him to his resort at Mar-a-Lago after his term ended in January 2021.

“In recent days, the Justice Department has taken a series of steps showing that its investigation has progressed beyond the preliminary stages,” the paper writes. “Prosecutors issued a subpoena to the National Archives and Records Administration to obtain the boxes of classified documents… The authorities have also made interview requests to people who worked in the White House in the final days of Mr. Trump’s presidency, according to one of the people.”

The Times notes, however, that “charges are rarely brought in investigations into the handling of classified documents” and that the DOJ “typically conducts them to determine whether any highly sensitive information may have been exposed so the intelligence community can take measures to protect sources and methods.”

The investigation into Trump’s handling of classified documents came after the National Archives revealed that it had to go to Mar-a-Lago to obtain documents that were being requested by the House Select Committee investigating the January 6th riots at the United States Capitol building.

The National Archives sent a letter to Congress back in February in which it confirmed that it has “identified items marked as classified national security information within the boxes” that were removed from Mar-a-Lago earlier this year after the Supreme Court ruled that Trump could not shield January 6th-related documents from the committee.

The easiest way to melt chocolate chips is right under your nose

Do you ever just want to melt chocolate chips and I don’t know, like, eat the puddle of semi-sweet chocolate by the spoonful? Same. Biscotti are better when dipped in melted chocolate, as are coconut macaroons. Melt chocolate chips in the microwave, then fold the gooey mixture into brownie batter for a super fudgy dessert. Dip potato chips into melted chocolate and let it harden for the perfect salty-sweet snack. We’re on the same page that there’s not much that melted chocolate can’t make more delicious, right? Good. So there’s only one thing left to discuss: our best tips and tricks for melting chocolate chips.

Chocolate chips vs. baking chocolate

In general, chocolate chips will have added ingredients such as sugar, cocoa butter, milkfat, soy lecithin, and natural flavors. High-quality baking chocolate will contain basically the same breakdown of ingredients, with the exception of milkfat and added flavors. When choosing baking chocolate to temper, use high-quality dark chocolate that contains 60% to 72% cacao.

Chocolate can easily veer into overcomplicated culinary techniques, but we try to keep it as unfussy as possible. That means that if a recipe for brownies or cookies calls for melted chocolate, use what you have on hand and what you love. Obviously, if a recipe specifies using milk chocolate chips, like our Chocolatey Tahini Cups, or bittersweet chocolate (like Dorie Greenspan’s Top Secret Chocolate Mousse, then use that.

How to melt chocolate chips

On the stovetop

Traditionally, melting chocolate is done over a bain-marie, aka a double boiler. A heat-proof glass bowl, such as sturdy Pyrex, is set over a deep pot filled with about an inch of water. Chocolate chunks are added and slowly melt, thanks to the heat of the simmering water beneath it. Make sure that the water never comes to a boil and that the bowl does not touch the water; if it gets to be too hot, you’ll be more likely to burn the chocolate. It’s also important to stir the chocolate consistently for the same reason. Within five minutes, you’ll have a shallow pool of melted chocolate that is shiny as a head of brunette hair in a Pantene commercial.

In the microwave

The easier, but less formal (aka French) way of melting chocolate is in the microwave. Pour a bag of chocolate chips or chopped chocolate in a glass bowl, then place it in the microwave and heat it up. You can also use a stainless steel bowl, so long as it doesn’t touch the sides of the microwave (mindblowing, I know). Every 30 seconds, stop the microwave and stir the chocolate with a wooden spoon or spatula. This will ensure that the chocolate chips and newly melted chocolate are well-incorporated; plus, you’ll be less likely to overheat the chocolate, which would otherwise result in a sad, sticky, sloppy mess or burnt chocolate.

Safety tip: wear oven mitts or use potholders when you remove the bowl from the microwave or bain-marie, as it will be super hot. For the same reason, rest it on a trivet to protect your countertops, too.

Wait, but what does tempering chocolate mean?

So how does melting chocolate in the microwave differ from the fancy French technique known as “tempering?” Both are a method of achieving glossy, silky melted chocolate but tempering requires more of a careful hand . . . and the results are usually better.

Tempering chocolate involves heating and melting chocolate chunks over a bain marie, cooling some of the melted chocolate or incorporating new, unmelted chocolate chunks, and whisking furiously until the mixture comes together. You’ll know the chocolate is tempered when it reaches 90 degrees Fahrenheit (check this using a candy thermometer or meat thermometer).

While you can get away with simply melting chocolate for the majority of your cooking and baking, you’ll need to temper your chocolate to delve into the world of confections. That’s a story for another day, though — after all, we’re here for melted chocolate, stat.

16 easy dessert recipes with 5 ingredients or less

When it comes to dessert recipes, it’s all too easy for ingredient lists to become very long, very fast. Most of the time, they can’t help themselves. Take this yellow layer cake with chocolate frosting for instance. There are a dozen ingredients — and most of those are non-negotiable: flour, sugar, butter, eggs, baking powder, vanilla . . .

But not every dessert is like this.

From two-ingredient nut brittle to three-ingredient Oreo balls, our site is full of low-effort, big-reward sweets. These have been the biggest inspiration since starting Big Little Recipes — my weekly column all about big-flavored recipes with teeny-tiny ingredient lists. Something sweet doesn’t haveto mean something complicated. Here are five of my fave Big Little desserts to prove it:

Easy desserts with so few ingredients

1. Totally Homemade, Ridiculously Easy Hot Fudge Sundae

When I say three-ingredient hot fudge sundae, you probably think ice cream, hot fudge, and whipped cream. And you’re right — but only sort of. Here, we’re actually using three ingredients to make ice cream, hot fudge, and whipped cream, all from scratch: sweetened condensed milk, unsweetened chocolate, and heavy cream. No ice cream machine required.

2. Butter Pecan Cookies

These cookies need no leavener, no electric mixer, no fuss. I took a classic Mexican wedding cookie template and made a few Big Little adjustments: browning the butter for increased coziness and increasing the amount of nuts for As Much Pecan Flavor As Possible (AMPFAP). Just don’t hold back on the confectioners’ sugar coating.

3. Croissant Brittle

I went to Seattle for the oysters, but ended up finding this cookie game-changer from Sea Wolf Bakery: croissant brittle. While more-classic nut brittle involves sugar boiling, candy thermometers, and a giant mess, this rendition couldn’t be simpler. Just dunk croissant slices in a creamy sugar syrup and bake until crispy. (Last minute holiday gift? You know it.)

4. Lime Posset with Graham Cracker Streusel

If you like pudding, you’ll love posset. This custard is egg-free and citrus-thickened, which means all you have to do is heat up cream and sugar, add lime juice, and wait. (Yep, no gelatin, no cornstarch.) I’d be happy with that and a spoon, but this recipe adds a bonus: graham cracker streusel. Think of it like Key Lime Pie in a bowl.

5. Brown-Sugared Apples and Cream

Can we even call this a recipe? You’ll read it once, then never look at it again — and good! Here’s the cheat sheet: Toss sliced apples with brown sugar and cinnamon. Pour lots of cream on top. That’s it. Repeat from now until springtime.

6. Salty Chocolate Cheesecake

Even no-bake cheesecakes often called for nearly a dozen ingredients. This recipe is not only a no-bake cheesecake, but also a four-ingredient one (two for the crust and two for the filling).

7. Salted Matzo Toffee

To offset the sweetness of the toffee, I use salted matzo, bittersweet chocolate, and flaky sea salt. And because this is a Big Little recipe, that’s about all there is to it! Keep it super simple, or add a few toppings, like nuts or dried fruit, if you’d like.

8. Easier Chocolate Truffles

All chocolate truffles are easy, but these are easier. There’s no butter or shortening or vanilla. There’s no rolling by hand either. In fact, all you need is crème fraîche and bittersweet chocolate.

9. Flourless Walnut Brownies

For brownies that taste practically like fudge, skip the flour altogether. Thanks to the walnuts’ buttery fat and zero gluten, the result is rich, crackly, and halfway to chocolate ganache.

10. No-Churn Butter Pecan Ice Cream

You don’t need any equipment at all to make this old-fashioned ice cream flavor. For the best nutty flavor, roast the pecans in advance, which brings out their sweet, slightly caramel flavor.

11. 3-Ingredient Peanut Butter Cookies

PB&J for dessert? Yes please. These easy cookies (dare I say easiest ever?) are made with unsweetened peanut butter, eggs, and your favorite type of jam. Which type would you choose? Let us know in the comments.

12. 3-Ingredient Buckwheat Brownies

Another easy dessert with very few ingredients. Here, buckwheat flour adds a dark, earthy flavor, which offsets the sweetness of Nutella.

13. Baked Feta with Honeyed Strawberries

Baked feta pasta was wildly popular during the early days of TikTok (and the pandemic). I came up with a sweeter version of the viral dish using a block of feta and a pound of fresh strawberries.

14. Cookies and Cream Frozen Yogurt

A more sophisticated version of cookies and cream ice cream, but just as delicious. Make this shortcut frozen yogurt by churning together whole-milk yogurt, sugar, and crushed chocolate sandwich cookies.

15. Salted Almond Butter Cookies

Just like your favorite peanut butter cookies. Except I ditched the peanut butter — and most other ingredients, for that matter — in favor of almond butter, plus granulated sugar and an egg.

16. Chocolate Granita

If you like the idea of homemade ice cream or frozen yogurt but are intimidated by the churning process (or just don’t have an ice cream machine), make granita. This chocolatey dessert is totally dairy-free and equipment-free — a large, shallow dish and fork are all you need.

Texas court says it was wrong to sentence Black woman to 5 years in prison for “illegal” voting

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has told a lower appeals court to take another look at the controversial illegal voting conviction of Crystal Mason, who was given a five-year prison sentence for casting a provisional ballot in the 2016 election while she was on supervised release for a federal conviction.

The state’s court of last resort for criminal matters on Wednesday ruled a lower appeals court had wrongly upheld Mason’s conviction by concluding that it was “irrelevant” to Mason’s prosecution that she did not know she was ineligible to cast a ballot. The ruling opens the door for Mason’s conviction to ultimately be overturned.

Mason’s lawyers turned to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals after the Tarrant County-based Second Court of Appeals found that her knowledge that she was on supervised release, and therefore ineligible to vote, was sufficient for an illegal voting conviction. Mason has said she did not know she was ineligible to vote and wouldn’t have knowingly risked her freedom.

On Wednesday, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ruled that the lower court had “erred by failing to require proof that [Mason] had actual knowledge that it was a crime for her to vote while on supervised release.” They sent the case back down with instructions for the lower court to “evaluate the sufficiency” of the evidence against Mason.

“I am pleased that the court acknowledged issues with my conviction, and am ready to defend myself against these cruel charges,” Mason said in a statement released Wednesday. “My life has been upended for what was, at worst, an innocent misunderstanding of casting a provisional ballot that was never even counted. I have been called to this fight for voting rights and will continue to serve my community.”

Mason’s case dates back to 2016 when, after discovering she was not on the voter roll, Mason submitted a provisional ballot in that year’s presidential election on the advice of a poll worker. Her ballot was rejected because she was not eligible to participate in elections while still on supervised release for a federal tax fraud conviction. But she was arrested a few months later.

Mason’s prosecution hinged on an affidavit she signed before casting her provisional ballot that required individuals to swear that “if a felon, I have completed all my punishment including any term of incarceration, parole, supervision, period of probation, or I have been pardoned.”

A trial court judge convicted her of illegally voting, then a second-degree state felony, after a poll worker testified he watched Mason read, and run her finger along, each line of an affidavit. Mason said she did not read the entire affidavit. At trial, a supervisor from the probation office overseeing her release testified that no one from that office had informed her she was still ineligible to vote.

In Wednesday’s ruling, the court held that the Texas election code requires individuals to know they are ineligible to vote to be convicted of illegal voting.

“To construe the statute to mean that a person can be guilty even if she does not ‘know the person is not eligible to vote’ is to disregard the words the Legislature intended,” the court wrote. “It turns the knowledge requirement into a sort of negligence scheme wherein a person can be guilty because she fails to take reasonable care to ensure that she is eligible to vote.”

The court on Wednesday ruled against Mason on two other issues. They rejected her arguments that the lower court had interpreted the state’s illegal voting statute in a way that criminalized the good faith submission of provisional ballots, and that the appeals court had wrongly found she “voted in an election” even though her provisional ballot was never counted.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals’ ruling marks the latest turn in a prosecution that thrust Mason into the political quagmire surrounding the Republican-led crackdown on voter fraud, partly fueled by baseless claims of rampant illegal voting. The lack of evidence that illegal votes are cast on a widespread basis has turned attention to a handful of attention-grabbing prosecutions of people of color, including Mason, who is Black.

Insisting they’re not criminalizing individuals who merely vote by mistake, Tarrant County prosecutors have said Mason’s case is about intent. The case against her has hinged on the affidavit she signed when submitting her provisional ballot.

A spokesperson for Tarrant County District Attorney Sharen Wilson declined to comment Wednesday because the case is still pending.

But the legal landscape underpinning Tarrant County’s prosecution shifted while the case was under review.

Last year, the Texas Legislature included in its sweeping new voting law several changes to the election code’s illegal voting provisions. The law, known as Senate Bill 1, added new language stating that Texans may not be convicted of voting illegally “solely upon the fact that the person signed a provisional ballot,” instead requiring other evidence to corroborate they knowingly tried to cast an unlawful vote.

The Legislature’s change to the election code — along with a resolution passed in the Texas House regarding the interpretation of the illegal voting statute — are “persuasive authority” that the lower court’s interpretation of the law’s “mens rea” requirement was incorrect, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ruled on Wednesday.


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/2022/05/11/crystal-mason-illegal-voting-texas/.

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

Steve Schmidt: GOP strategist’s ties to Russia nearly led to 2008 presidential campaign “fistfights”

What started out as a battle between a top campaign adviser to the late Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and his daughter has become an exposé about the way that Russia has allegedly managed to make its way into influencing the Republican Party over the past two decades.

Speaking to the Kyiv Post, former McCain advisor Steve Schmidt outlined the dominating influence of Paul Manafort and his business partner Rick Davis over the GOP.

“Let’s look at some past presidential campaigns: In ’96 Senator Bob Dole was an insider; in 2000 Senator George W. Bush was an outsider; in 2004 we had Bush’s re-election and in 2008 Senator John McCain was an insider. If you take a look at those campaigns, you can see that one firm, in particular, had an inside track. It was a Washington DC firm that had represented Russia’s interests across Eastern Europe,” Schmidt said.

If McCain had won the 2008 race, Davis, who had close ties to Russia, would have been the chief of staff to the president, Schmidt warned. McCain suspected that there was a concerning link and was certainly told about it enough times by aides, but Schmidt thinks he compartmentalized it.

“This was the issue during the McCain 2008 leadership campaign between Rick Davis and [campaign strategist] John Weaver. It was on this issue that there were sparks flying. Literally, like almost fistfights,” said Schmidt.

He went on to say that by December of 2007, McCain’s campaign was functionally bankrupt because Davis and Manafort mandated that every purchase from the McCain campaign be run through their company, where they added on a percent to everything.

“It didn’t matter if it was pens, coffee or banners: They wanted their cut,” said Schmidt. “I mean, in normal campaigns you go down to the local hotel and take the free sugar and coffees in the lobby – but no, they wanted to make money first and foremost.”

McCain thought that he needed David and Manafort to win. “What I came to understand during the McCain race was that there was no way to get rid of this pro-Russian lobbyist, Rick Davis, he was ‘in.’ He wasn’t leaving or going anywhere,” Schmidt continued.

He explained that the reason he’s coming out about all of it now is that he has been accused of being pro-Russian.

“Only someone who is certifiably crazy would ever say something as ridiculous as that I’m in any way pro-Russian. Anyone who knows me knows that I have done everything I can to root out Russia’s influence in American politics,” said Schmidt.

The important detail for Schmidt is to note that Donald Trump was not the first presidential candidate that Moscow had its eyes on.

“Either way, the U.S. needs to wake up to the malevolent influence of Russia in our politics. Specifically, the relationship with the lobbyists who represent Putin’s interests and then rub elbows with our political and governmental leaders,” he said.

He fears that with Americans’ attention span at gerbil level that there is a chance that people will forget.

“We fix it by rooting out those tied to Russia,” he closed. “We fix it by reforming the lobbying culture. There cannot be a turn-style [sic] between personal interests and power.”

Court revives Texas GOP law banning social networks from booting users over “anti-conservative bias”

A federal appeals court on Wednesday reinstated a Republican-backed Texas law that prohibits large social media companies from banning users over their political viewpoints.

The decision hands a win to Republicans who have long criticized social media platforms such as Twitter for what they call anti-conservative bias — disapproval that was amplified when President Donald Trump was banned from Twitter for violating the platform’s rules on inciting violence during the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol.

The order did not evaluate the law on its constitutionality but instead allows the law to go back into effect while the case proceeds in district court, according to a statement from one of the plaintiff groups. The ruling came from a three-judge panel on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals — which is often considered the most conservative appeals court in the country — and was not accompanied by a written opinion explaining the decision at the time of publication.

Two large industry trade groups that represent companies such as Google and Twitter sued to block the law last fall.

In December, a federal district court judge ruled in favor of the groups and blocked the law while the lawsuit continues, reasoning that the First Amendment protects a company’s right to moderate content and called parts of the law “prohibitively vague.” As a result, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton appealed the district judge’s decision to the circuit court.

Passed during a special session last year, House Bill 20 also requires social media platforms with more than 50 million monthly users to publicly disclose information about content removal and account suspensions.

“HB 20 is an assault on the First Amendment, and it’s constitutionally rotten from top to bottom,” Chris Marchese, counsel for the NetChoice industry trade group, tweeted after the ruling. “So of course we’re going to appeal today’s unprecedented, unexplained, and unfortunate order by a split 2-1 panel.”

The decision comes as businessman Elon Musk is poised to buy Twitter and possibly remake the company’s moderation policies — a move that conservatives have cheered. Musk recently said he would reinstate Trump’s account if the acquisition is completed.

“Sadly, we have a handful of people in America today who want to control the town square, who want to control social media and want to enforce silence,” state Sen. Bryan Hughes, R-Mineola, said in support of the bill last year. “If you have a viewpoint different from theirs, they want to shut you up. That’s not the American way, and that is not the Texas way.”

The law does not provide any specific civil penalties for breaking the law, besides allowing users to sue to recuperate their court costs from the company found in violation. The law also empowers the attorney general to pursue violations.

The Texas attorney general’s office said in a tweet late Wednesday that the appeals court made the right decision and said it would continue defending the Texas law.

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


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/2022/05/11/texas-social-media-law-reinstated/.

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

Susan Collins goes full MAGA on abortion

Republican Sen. Susan Collins still wants voters to believe she is pro-choice. During the hearings for Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Collins defended her decision to vote for the Federalist Society-linked judge by claiming to believe his assurances to her that he had no plan to overturn Roe v. Wade. In the three and a half years since, there’s been a raging debate over whether she said that because she’s stupid, or just a liar that knows she can’t win in Maine without maintaining the illusion that she’s a moderate Republican.

So she continues to insist on Kavanaugh’s pro-Roe credentials, even after he cast an anti-Roe vote in 2020 with the minority of the court. Facing down a genuinely pro-choice Democratic challenger in 2020, Collins voted against confirming Justice Amy Coney Barrett. Observers noted, however, that she could get away with it because Barrett had enough votes to get confirmed anyway. Then after a draft opinion from the Supreme Court was leaked, showing that her beloved Kavanaugh was once again voting to overturn Roe, Collins insisted that it was “completely inconsistent” with what Kavanaugh told her in meetings prior to his confirmation. 

Republicans used to write anti-abortion bills that had exceptions for health or for victims of rape or incest, but this new crop of abortion bans are absolutist.

I’ve always believed Collins isn’t that big an idiot but is simply that big a liar.

Kavanaugh, after all, repeatedly lied under oath — in comically obvious ways — during his confirmation hearing. Collins rewarded him with a vote to confirm and then was rewarded handsomely for her vote with donations from the Federalist Society, money which likely helped push her over the top in her 2020 campaign. On Wednesday, she and other fake moderate Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska voted against the Women’s Health Protection Act, which codifies Roe and recognizes abortion as a right. By taking this vote, Collins and Murkowski reveal beyond any reasonable doubt that they are not, in fact, pro-choice, even as they continue to insist otherwise on TV. 

RELATED: Is the Federalist Society rewarding Susan Collins for her Kavanaugh vote with campaign cash?

Sure, Collins is still pretending that she’s pro-choice despite repeatedly standing in the way of abortion rights. She put out a statement defending her vote by accusing the Democrats of designing the bill to fail. She claimed that the bill eliminates “basic conscience protections that are relied upon by health care providers who have religious objections to performing abortions.”

This, like the claim to believe Kavanaugh wouldn’t overturn Roe, is flat-out false. The bill only protects the right of doctors to perform abortions. It certainly doesn’t require any doctor to do so. Even the most robust pro-choice activists don’t want, say, an ophthalmologist in the business of providing abortions just because patients ask. And while it would be nice if there weren’t any misogynist gynecologists using religion as a cover to deny women abortions, it’s also for the best that such bigots aren’t in the business of dealing with patients who need compassionate and safe care. 


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


Collins also claims she plans “to continue working with my colleagues on legislation to maintain” abortion rights, citing an alternative bill she and Murkowski have written that supposedly protects abortion rights. In fact, the bill allows states to pass serious restrictions that make it hard, if not impossible, for providers to operate. If any bill is “designed to fail,” it’s this one Collins wrote that she knows full well will never come up for a vote. 

Just a few years ago, both Murkowski and Collins were willing to be moderates in deed as well as word, voting against Donald Trump’s 2017 effort to repeal Obamacare. Now they won’t even stand up for a right that is supported by a strong majority of Americans. This reflects a larger shift to the right in the GOP. Those who aren’t willing to go along with it face the danger of being purged. Much of the purge is centered around loyalty to Trump’s Big Lie, but it’s also clear that Republican politicians increasingly feel that they must toe the MAGA line in all ways — even on abortion rights — or else face losing to primary challengers that are even more far-right than they are. 

RELATED: Why can’t Susan Collins admit that she was wrong about Brett Kavanaugh?

Republicans used to write anti-abortion bills that had exceptions for health or for victims of rape or incest, but this new crop of abortion bans are absolutist. Republicans used to be more circumspect about their hostility to contraception access, but now are speaking more openly about plans to repeal the right to use birth control, as well. Justice Samuel Alito’s leaked draft opinion really underscores how shameless the misogyny has become, as he quite literally cites a pro-rape witch-burner from the 13th century as an authority on whether women have legal rights. (He was not for the idea!) In this environment, it’s no surprise that Murkowski and Collins feel their careers would be in real danger if they stood against the rabidly misogynist GOP base on the issue of abortion rights. 

The whole situation is a perfect illustration of the greatest conundrum of current American politics: undemocratic election systems and high rates of voter complacency allow Republicans to be wildly overrepresented in federal power.

On the first front, the problem is simple enough. More Americans vote for Democrats, but because electoral maps favor rural and suburban areas over urban ones, Republicans win disproportionate numbers of seats. On the latter front, the issue is a little more complicated. Primary voters tend to be both more ideological than general election voters. So Republicans keep sending far-right radicals to the ballot. They then win mainly because a huge chunk of voters don’t pay much attention to politics, and have no idea that they’re voting for foaming-at-the-mouth MAGA radicals.


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


The election of Gov. Glenn Youngkin of Virginia is the most recent example of the latter phenomenon. The man is a Trumpster through and through. However, he managed to tamp down on the most rabidly fascist behaviors in public, giving Democratic Virginians an excuse to skip voting and allowing some swing voters to feel okay backing him. And sure enough, now Virginia voters are feeling betrayed by how far-right Youngkin turned out to be. Of course, this was entirely predictable if they had just paid a modicum of attention.  

I’ve always believed Collins isn’t that big an idiot but is simply that big a liar.

Collins, in particular, seems like she’s trying to thread the needle by not taking actions that could alienate the MAGA base while putting on an empty pro-choice act for moderate voters. It goes a long way to explain her comically over-the-top reaction to a group of pro-choicers writing a demand that she vote for abortion rights in chalk on her sidewalk. The cops were called to deal with what Collins described as “the defacement of public property in front of our home.” After having the cops called on them for “defacement” that will disappear the next time it rains, the chalkers returned to write messages reminding Collins that they also have a right to free speech. 

Collins obviously does not like any kind of message that might remind her moderate voters that she is not actually pro-choice. But her reaction of trying to get the chalkers arrested speaks volumes about why she’s gone full MAGA, instead of quietly retiring like so many of her more moderate Republican friends have done. Her entitled reaction echoes the same MAGA petulance that led Trump to call for shooting Black Lives Matter protesters and pushed Trump supporters to storm the Capitol rather than accept a lost election. Collins is all aboard with the power-at-any-price mentality, especially since it’s other women who will have to suffer the consequences of forced childbirth. 

RELATED: “Clean up your mess”: Cops called to home of Sen. Susan Collins over chalk protest

“Totally unprecedented”: Feds probe “mysterious” financial ties among Trump-linked dark money groups

A federal inquiry is shedding light on the mysterious financial connection between more than a dozen political committees and dark money organizations aligned with former President Donald Trump.

According to The Daily Beast, the issues with the organizations also appear to be connected to former Trump White House aide Corey Lewandowski. In fact, the news outlet reports that: “Anyone who’s taken even the quickest of peeks at Trump’s personal financial disclosures would recognize the pattern.”

Speaking to The Beast, Brendan Fischer, deputy executive director of the government accountability organization, Documented, weighed in with details about the extent of the questionable nature of these Trump-aligned organizations.

Per The Beast, a list of more than 12 political committees and dark money groups has been released. In fact, all of the organizations contain similar names and wording.

  • Make America Great Again PAC (converted from the old Trump campaign)
  • Make America Great Again Action (super PAC)
  • Make America Great Again, Again! (super PAC)
  • Trump Make America Great Again (small-dollar joint fundraising committee)
  • Make America Great Again Policies Inc (a 501(c)(4) nonprofit)
  • America First Policy Institute (a 501(c)(3) nonprofit)
  • America First Works (formerly America First Policies; a 501(c)(4) nonprofit)
  • America First Legal Foundation (a 501(c)(3) nonprofit)
  • America First Action (super PAC)
  • Save America (leadership PAC)
  • Save America JFC (joint fundraising committee)
  • Trump Victory (high-dollar joint fundraising committee)

“Typically, former presidents focus on their presidential library, or start a charitable foundation, but Trump is staying in the political game and raising a staggering amount of cash,” Fischer said.

“It is worth emphasizing: All of this is totally unprecedented for a former president,” Fischer told The Daily Beast. “Even if Trump kept it simple, and just had one hard money PAC, a single super PAC, and a pair of 501(c)(3)/501(c)(4) nonprofits, there would be no parallel with any former president in American history.”

The handling of each organization also includes distinctive activity patterns which The Beast has pointed out.

“His first such disclosure revealed positions with more than 500 entities, nearly 400 of which used his name or initials. And Trump has ‘organized’ the mess in a stultifying Russian-nesting-doll structure—companies within companies within companies. Frequently, one company will be held under multiple Trump companies at the same time, each with stakes in still other Trump companies.”

It has also been noted that the structure of each entity has given the Trump Organization a substantial advantage for “financial flexibility while making it difficult to follow the billions of dollars that Trump, his family, and his accountants move across the organization.”

Brett Kappel, a campaign finance specialist who also focuses on nonprofit law for Harmon Curran, offered his assessment of the situation.

“The central lesson of Watergate is ‘Follow the money,'” Kappel told the news outlet. “And this byzantine structure of different types of legal entities—which are subject to different fundraising restrictions and file different reports with different agencies according to different filing schedules—appears to be designed to make that task as difficult as possible.”

Legal expert finds “fatal flaw” in Samuel Alito’s leaked abortion opinion

The leaked draft Supreme Court decision overruling Roe v. Wade has a fatal flaw, according to the off-air legal analyst for MSNBC’s “The Rachel Maddow Show.”

“Beyond the practical consequences of overturning Roe, however, then there are the legal analyses of Justice Samuel Alito’s draft. Before detailing why that draft is so flawed legally, a brief outline of Justice Alito’s approach is in order. In concluding that Roe and Casey ‘must be overruled,’ Alito reasons that because ‘the Constitution makes no reference to abortion,’ the right to abortion, like any right purportedly implicit in the Constitution, can be recognized only if it is ‘deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition’ and ‘implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.'”

“That standard, known as the Glucksberg test, is lifted from the 1997 case upholding Washington’s ban on assisted suicide,” Lisa Rubin wrote. She then explained why Washington v. Glucksberg is key.

“But what makes Justice Alito’s analysis truly disingenuous is its distortion of the one case on which it depends: Glucksberg. In that case, the Court found a person’s liberty interest, as recognized by Casey, was not limitless and did not guarantee terminally-ill adults the right to end their own lives. Yet in distinguishing physician-assisted suicide from ‘those personal activities and decisions that this Court has identified as so deeply rooted in our history and traditions, or so fundamental to our concept of constitutionally ordered liberty, that they are protected by the Fourteenth Amendment,’ the Court left no doubt which decisions and history it meant,” she explained. “In fact, it expressly lists them in a footnote, as the clinic’s lawyer reminded Justice Alito at oral argument, that includes Griswold v. Connecticut, which established a right to contraception; Loving v. Virginia, which guaranteed the freedom to marry a person of another race; and Roe itself, noting that that opinion ‘stat[ed] that at the Founding and throughout the 19th century, ‘a woman enjoyed a substantially broader right to terminate a pregnancy.””

Rubin then explained that Alito’s legal reasoning did not add up.

“In other words, Obergefell treats Glucksberg as wholly inappropriate for any analysis of marriage and intimacy rights. In fact, in dissenting from Obergefell, Justice Roberts — who, as of this week, had not joined Justice Alito’s opinion in Dobbs — went even further, complaining that Obergefell ‘effectively overrule[d] Glucksberg.’ So if Glucksberg itself held that decisions like Loving v. VirginiaGriswold v. ConnecticutRoe, and Casey, which established our rights to interracial marriage, contraception, and abortion, fulfilled its standard and Obergefell distinguished Glucksberg as irrelevant to marriage and intimacy, how can Justice Alito justify overruling Roe with a case that, by its own terms, recognizes its vitality?” she wondered.

Rubin suggested that the flaw in Alito’s reasoning could eventually undo the decision.

“Still, I hope the expected dissents expose this fatal flaw of Alito’s analysis, among others. Highlighting its legal contortionism won’t make the holding any less binding. Nor will it offer any comfort to the millions of Americans whose options, identities, families, and lives are now at risk. But as Justice Alito knows well, today’s dissent can grow tomorrow’s revolution,” she wrote.

Read the full analysis.

Marjorie Taylor Greene trades Twitter blows with fellow Republican Rep. Dan Crenshaw

Republican Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., and Dan Crenshaw, R-Tex., got into an online spat on Wednesday over providing U.S. aid to Ukraine, with Crenshaw accusing the Georgia freshman of going after “a slot of Russia Today.”

The beef started after Crenshaw was criticized for expressing alarm over the rising cases of fentanyl overdoses, which are occuring, he claimed, because the drug is “pouring” across our “open border.” 

“Yeah you sound off about that stuff but then you vote yes on the $40 billion to Ukraine,” one user responded on Twitter, suggesting that Crenshaw was prioritizing foreign policy over domestic policy. 

“Yeah, because investing in the destruction of our adversary’s military, without losing a single American troop, strikes me as a good idea,” the lawmaker clapped back. “You should feel the same.”

That’s when Green jumped in.

Crenshaw’s comment, apparently, did not sit well with Greene, who casted doubt over whether America should be providing aid at all. 

“So you think we are funding a proxy war with Russia? You speak as if Ukrainian lives should be thrown away, as if they have no value. Just used and thrown away,” told Crenshaw. “For your proxy war? How does that help Americans? How does any of this help?”

Crenshaw responded: “Still going after that slot on Russia Today huh?”

RELATED: Marjorie Taylor Greene says Ukraine should give up

Since Russia’s incursion began, the U.S has supplied Ukraine with billions of dollars of military and humanitarian aid. On Tuesday, the House passed $40 billion more in aid in an overwhelming 368-57 vote. The bill comes as Democrats and Republicans remain gridlocked on key pieces of domestic legislation. 


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


It isn’t the first time that Greene and Crenshaw have clashed. Back in January, Greene castigated the Texas congressman for supporting expanded COVID-19 testing, saying that Americans don’t need FEMA to provide more testing for “sneezes, coughs and runny noses.” 

“He needs to stop calling himself conservative, he’s hurting our brand,” Greene said of Crenshaw. 

“Hey Marjorie, if suggesting we should follow Trump policy instead of Biden mandates makes you mad, then you might be a Democrat — or just an idiot,” Crenshaw responded. 

RELATED: GOP civil war heats up: Dan Crenshaw calls out GOP “grifters” and “performance artists” in Congress

A month earlier, Crenshaw suggested that the House Freedom Caucus, of which Greene is a member, is full of “grifters” and “performance artists”

“We have grifters in our midst,” Crenshaw said at the time. “I mean in the conservative movement. Lie after lie after lie because they know something psychologically about the conservative heart — we’re worried about what people are going to do to us, what they’re going to infringe upon us.”

DeSantis-appointed judge says his map is an unconstitutional assault on Black voting power

A Florida judge said Wednesday that he would block Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis’ congressional map because it unconstitutionally suppresses Black voters.

Leon County Circuit Judge Layne Smith, who was appointed by DeSantis, said he would issue a formal order this week blocking the map approved by the governor from taking effect.

“I am finding that the enacted map is unconstitutional under the Fair District amendment … because it diminishes African Americans’ ability to elect the representatives of their choice,” Smith said during a hearing, according to CNN.

The move came after an unprecedented intervention from DeSantis’ office into the state’s redistricting process. Republican state lawmakers were working on their own maps in January when DeSantis’ office tried to hijack the process and proposed its own map so-called “race-neutral” map that would cut the number of predominantly Black districts in the state from four to two. Republican lawmakers passed their own maps instead but they were vetoed by DeSantis and the GOP ultimately caved and agreed to approve DeSantis’ map. DeSantis’ proposal would give the GOP an advantage in 20 of the state’s 28 congressional districts. The map would eliminate the district represented by Rep. Al Lawson, D-Fla., one of the state’s Black congressmen, and reduce the number of Black voters in the Orlando-area district represented by Rep. Val Demings, D-Fla., who is running for Senate.

DeSantis argued that Lawson’s district was unconstitutional because it stretched 150 miles to connect from Tallahassee to Jacksonville but Smith said at the hearing that the district had historical roots in Black communities in a region that had been populated with plantations during slavery, according to CNN. DeSantis’ map violates state court precedent that requires minority voters to be able to “elect representatives of their choice,” Smith said.

RELATED: Ron DeSantis wants to hijack Florida redistricting — and cut number of Black districts in half

“The judge recognizes that this map is unlawful and diminishes African Americans’ ability to elect representatives of their choice,” Lawson said in a statement to the Associated Press after the hearing. “DeSantis is wrong for enacting this Republican-leaning map that is in clear violation of the U.S. and state constitutions.”

DeSantis’ office vowed that the ruling would “undoubtedly” be appealed.

“As Judge Smith implied, these complex constitutional matters of law were always going to be decided at the appellate level. We will undoubtedly be appealing his ruling and are confident the constitutional map enacted by the Florida legislature and signed into law passes legal muster. We look forward to defending it,” spokeswoman Taryn Fenske told CNN.

Critics have contended for months that DeSantis’ proposal was an attempt to suppress Black voting power.

“No matter how they repeatedly tried to justify themselves, it should come as no surprise to the Governor and this Republican-led legislature that the map is a violation of Florida’s Fair Districts amendments and the U.S. constitution,” state Rep. Kelly Skidmore, the top Democrat on the redistricting subcommittee, told CNN.

The Florida legislature approved a different map and a backup in case the first one got struck down but the plan was ultimately vetoed by DeSantis in March before he called lawmakers in for a special session where they passed his proposal. Smith said he would issue an order replacing DeSantis’ map, likely with one of the two passed by the legislature earlier in the year.

Republicans currently hold a 16-11 advantage in the state’s House delegation, though Florida added a 28th seat after the latest census. DeSantis’ map would give the GOP a 20-8 advantage while the legislative proposal would give Republicans an 18-10 advantage and preserves Lawson’s district.


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


The DeSantis map was challenged by voting rights and civil rights groups, who argued the plan illegally pushed about 370,000 Black voters from one district into four whiter districts. The groups called for an immediate injunction before a full trial before primary deadlines in June.

“Once an election is done, there’s no do-over,” attorney John Devaney told the judge, according to Politico. “The harm is done. The only way to protect against that harm is to assure that a constitutional voting map is put in place before the election actually occurs.”

The case is now expected to be decided by appellate courts and could go to the Florida Supreme Court, which not long ago had a liberal majority but has since been filled with DeSantis’ conservative appointees. But the state Supreme Court in February refused to weigh in on DeSantis’ request to determine whether Lawson’s district must be kept intact, writing that the question requires a more complex review that it would undertake if the map is appealed.

Lawson at the time praised the court for “making the right decision.”

“DeSantis wanted the Supreme Court to violate the separation of powers and engage the judicial branch in partisan politics,” he told Politico. “They wisely and correctly rejected his request.”

Read more:

Louisana’s abortion criminalization bill goes too far for even the state’s top anti-choice group

Louisiana’s leading anti-abortion organization does not support a bill set for a Thursday vote that would qualify abortion as murder under state law. 

“Our long-standing policy is that abortion-vulnerable women should not be treated as criminals,” Louisiana Right to Life said in a Friday statement, noting that the bill criminalizes abortion seekers. “Instead, we should hold accountable the individuals performing the abortion or selling or providing the chemical abortion drugs.”

The group’s statement centers on the “Abolition of Abortion in Louisiana Act” (H.B. 813), a Republican-backed state bill that would punish abortion-seekers with a crime that carries a life sentence in prison. It establishes that life begins “from the moment of fertilization,” calling an unborn child “an individual human being from fertilization until birth.” The bill, sponsored by state Rep. Danny McCormick, was passed out of committee earlier this month and is scheduled to be considered Thursday for a floor debate by the full House, according to The Daily Advertiser.

RELATED: Abortion bounty hunters could use location data to track down patients

“Murder is murder,” McCormick told USA Today. “It’s real simple. We’re having the debate about whether the pre-born have the same protections as the born.”


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


While Louisiana Right to Life opposes criminalizing abortion-seekers, it still supports making the provision of abortion a criminal offense. The group is currently backing a S.B. 342, which, according to The Illuminator, would make it easier to punish anyone who performs an abortion. The legislation would also make abortion punishable by up to 10 years in prison and a $100,000 fine for abortions after 15 weeks into pregnancy. 

Pastor Brian Gunter of Livingston First Baptist expressed disapproval with the group’s position, telling a Fox affiliate that it was “being inconsistent and not following their pro-life ethic.”

He added that “if you don’t want to end abortion and criminalize it, you’re saying that some people can be killed without criminal consequences.”

But other religious groups are also speaking out against the crackdown.

The Louisiana Conference of Catholic Bishops, whose board comprises the bishops in charge of the seven Roman Catholic dioceses in Louisiana, came out against the legislation on Tuesday, according to The Advocate

RELATED: How to access abortion in a post-Roe world

Both bills come as part of a broader Republican crusade to restrict abortion in every state across the country. Last week, Politico reported that the Supreme Court has already voted to informally overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 ruling establishing America’s constitutional right to abortion. 

According to the Guttmacher Institute, 23 states already have abortion bans on their books and 13 have “trigger laws” that would immediately ban all or nearly all abortions if Roe is overturned. 

The Love Canal disaster: Anatomy of an environmental tragedy

By the late 1970s, the odor seemed just about everywhere on the east side of Niagara Falls, New York, in a neighborhood with thousands of residents and two area public schools. Noxious fumes seeped into basements. The stench filled backyards. It clung to one engineer’s sweater for days after his visit. A chemical stain appeared on the bed sheets of one factory worker. The odor was spreading from drums the Hooker Chemical Company had unceremoniously dumped decades prior in an unfinished canal.

That canal was built by a shady developer who — in journalist Keith O’Brien’s telling — had skipped town by 1896. His name was William Love. The neighborhood built atop the toxic landfill would become a household name, cultural shorthand for catastrophe: Love Canal. 

O’Brien’s book “Paradise Falls: The True Story of an Environmental Catastrophe” begins in the 1970s, as children unearthed rocks that made their eyes burn. “Secrets,” O’Brien writes, “long kept in Niagara Falls, began bubbling to the surface on the east side of town, seeping into people’s homes, newspaper stories, national headlines, and finally the American consciousness at large.”

O’Brien, a longtime contributor to National Public Radio, focuses on the women who put Love Canal on the map — and on the national news. Chief among them: Lois Gibbs and Luella Kenny, two mothers whose efforts to leave their neighborhood were galvanized by fears, ultimately well-founded, that toxins were seeping into their children’s bodies and doing harm. 

Gibbs started by knocking on doors, organizing a homeowners’ association, as “a loose, somewhat disorganized, and increasingly contentious group of people who really had only one thing in common: they had made the unfortunate decision to buy an affordable home on the cusp of the old Hooker landfill.” The two crossed paths after Kenny’s son unexpectedly became sick and died. O’Brien has a penchant for unlikely duos: Gibbs is described as a 20-something smoker who “barely graduated from high school” and didn’t attend church; Kenny, in her 40s, worked as a scientist, had her kids attend Catholic school, and “never touched cigarettes.”

Kenny, who was initially wary of being a public figure, searched for links between chemical exposure and her son’s problems. She and her husband copied scientific journals in the library, which is not exactly heart-pumping reading. But O’Brien does his best to play up the drama. The blue light of the photocopier flashes on their faces. “They had compiled a stack of journal articles that would have worried any parent, and they knew what they needed to do next,” he writes. “They needed to start speaking out, Luella said. Go public. Talk to the reporters who kept calling. Something.”

“Paradise Falls” retreads some familiar turf. Gibbs’s story, quite literally, became a 1982 made-for-TV movie, and O’Brien describes her as “America’s most famous citizen activist.” O’Brien draws in a wider cast, including hidden figures who played key supporting roles, like Bonnie Casper, a congressional aide, who pressed her colleagues on the issue, and Maria Crea, the doctor who first correctly diagnosed Kenny’s son. He spends a significant amount of time with Beverly Paigen, a scientist who helped the local residents collect data and presented officials with alarming results showing elevated rates of miscarriages and birth defects around Love Canal. (O’Brien casts Paigen and her husband as another unlikely pair.)

Paigen faced potential retaliation, but, O’Brien writes, “She was willing to sacrifice her career for Love Canal, and for what she believed was right.” The book also includes Elene Thornton, a single Black mother, who advocated for the low-income tenants of her housing development, hinting at the tension within a movement that had spotlighted White homeowners.

Hundreds of citizens rallied in the streets. Activists faced down corporate suits at Occidental Petroleum, the parent company of Hooker Chemical. Residents deal with bumbling bureaucrats and politicians, and eventually convince what O’Brien calls “a veritable wall of state scientists and medical doctors.” The action sometimes unfolds in a kind of “Forrest Gump” fashion, where characters bump elbows with major figures in recent American history: Jimmy Carter (who, in O’Brien’s retelling, makes for another unlikely duo with then-New York governor Hugh Carey), Mario Cuomo, Al Gore Jr., and Jane Fonda are among the politicians and celebrities making brief appearances.

The narrative has refreshingly little exposition. O’Brien occasionally weaves historical reference points, such as the publication of “Silent Spring,” Rachel Carson’s groundbreaking book, but the story follows characters chronologically over the span of nearly four years. Gibbs called her neighbors to systematically collect data. With Paigen’s help, they analyzed and presented what one scientist derisively deemed “useless housewife data.” The results went public. The action all came to a head when Gibbs and other community activists held hostage two Environmental Protection Agency employees (yet another “odd couple,” according to O’Brien). Around that same time, Kenny flew to California and disrupted the Occidental shareholder meeting.

Their crusade paid off: The federal government announced it would evacuate their neighborhood and pay for the relocation of families. Two years later, the houses of Love Canal would begin to be razed.

O’Brien frames the story as the result of collective action, although the pace sometimes slows as the book’s overstuffed cast of characters grows. Take Michael Brown, a journalist for The Niagara Gazette, who drove a red Mustang and initially broke the story after catching wind of Love Canal at one of the “boring, endless meetings” (as O’Brien puts it) local reporters are forced to endure. Brown subsequently gets hauled before Hooker executives just as he’s about to land a story with The Atlantic. O’Brien leaves it at that — without making it clear the company did not snuff out the story: a quick search of The Atlantic’s archives makes it clear the story ran in 1979. Further along in O’Brien’s tale, Brown resurfaces, one of many threads loosely woven into a human tapestry of exceptional thread count.

Clearly, O’Brien has done a lot of research — in archives, in previously unreleased personnel records, and in confirming first-hand accounts — and he does his best to convey the emotional undertow and sensory details of the hearings and many meetings. When Gibbs first grabbed the microphone in 1978 — an act that marks her turn to activism — there’s a shriek of feedback. Foul odors permeated the auditorium during that raucous meeting. After another grueling night, Gibbs comes home and hungrily scarfs down some dessert, only to realize later that she’s eaten her son’s birthday cake. Ultimately, though, as any local reporter will tell you, there are only so many public meetings one can endure before nodding off.

Eventually, fences go up around the emptied neighborhood. Life goes on. In an epilogue, the author chronicles the long-lasting repercussions. Love Canal undeniably became a landmark in the history of environmental disaster, and “Paradise Falls” testifies to the power of ordinary people who did science and made history — and did so against some stiff political headwinds. The book doesn’t delve too deeply into more recent scholarship highlighting the tensions between environmental racism and environmental justice. In the end, it’s a feel-good tale about the women’s triumph, accomplishing something no one thought possible: they confront the corporate villain, and their activism leads to lasting change.

Their actions led directly to the 1980 Superfund program, which, despite the shortcomings noted in the book, continues to transform industrial sites and landfills and has almost certainly prevented future disasters. “The legislation — sparked by Love Canal, developed by EPA administrators, supported by elected officials across the political spectrum in a lost era of bipartisanship, and signed by Carter in one of his final acts as president — has saved or improved countless American lives.”


Peter Andrey Smith is a freelance reporter. His stories have been featured in Science, STAT, The New York Times, and WNYC Radiolab.

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

Sanitation workers in India forced to wear GPS watches

Munesh sits by the roadside near a crowded market in Chandigarh, a city in India’s north, on a January day. She is flanked by several other women, all of them sweepers hired by the Chandigarh Municipal Corporation. She shows the smartwatch she is wearing and says, “See, I didn’t even touch it, but the camera has turned on.”

Munesh, who estimates she is in her 40s and, like many Indians, goes by just one name, is one of around 4,000 such sanitation workers. The corporation makes it mandatory for them to wear smartwatches — called Human Efficiency Tracking Systems — fitted with GPS trackers. Each one has a microphone, a SIM embedded for calling workers, and a camera, so that the workers can send photos to their supervisors as proof of attendance. In Chandigarh, this project is run by Imtac India, an IT services company, at a cost of an estimated $278,000 per year. Meanwhile, sanitation workers say that the government has not invested in personal protective gear throughout the Covid-19 pandemic, and that they have long worked without medical care and other vital social services.

From the time the sanitation workers turn on their watches until they turn them off, their GPS locations are monitored in real time by officials at the Command and Control Center of the Chandigarh Municipal Corporation. The workers appear as green dots on a computer screen and as they move around in their assigned areas, the green dot moves along a line.

The camera fitted on the tracker is what scares Munesh and many other sanitation workers, who mostly come from the Dalit community or other Hindu lower castes. (In the Indian subcontinent, the caste system has long categorized and limited people’s education and work prospects; the job of cleaning or sanitation has always been linked to the lower castes.) Wearing the tracker is mandatory. According to Krishan Kumar Chadha, the former president of the Chandigarh Sanitation Workers’ Union, taking it off incurs a fine of half a day’s salary, around $3 to $4, although Abhay Khare of Imtac India denies there is such a fine. Workers also have to take the devices home. They worry about privacy leaks and the inability to turn off the trackers and cameras — even when they are in the bathroom.

One of the flagship programs of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is to bring “digital innovations” to the country. Under this Digital India initiative, Modi has been pushing for cashless or digital transactions, digital attendance, and surveillance systems, like the one in place for the sanitation workers. This digital attendance and tracking system is also part of another much-hyped campaign of the government: the Clean India Mission, also known as Swachh Bharat Abhiyan, which launched in October 2014 with the goal of a clean and sanitary India.

These systems come with incentives for the municipalities. Civic bodies with a digital attendance system earn extra points toward an annual list of the country’s “cleanest” cities, an honor that gives them bragging rights. This online surveillance of sanitation workers is currently operational in more than a dozen cities, including Indore, Nagpur, Navi Mumbai, Panchkula, Thane, and Mysuru.

The Chandigarh Municipal Corporation introduced GPS-enabled smartwatches for its sanitation workers in 2019. The government says that the tracking devices bring transparency into the attendance system and prevent workers from allowing someone else to sub in for them.

But the workers have been protesting ever since, arguing that the watches violate their privacy and rights. For her part, Munesh says, “it’s like an iron shackle around our necks.”

In August 2017, the Supreme Court of India, through a judgment, recognized privacy as a fundamental right.

“Among basic rights conferred on individuals by the Constitution as a shield against excesses by the State, some rights are at the core of human existence,” the top court said in its judgment. “Thus, they are granted the status of fundamental, inalienable rights essential to enjoy liberty. Liberty is the freedom of an individual to do what he pleases and the exercise of that freedom would be meaningless in the absence of privacy.”

In 2018, a 10-member committee, headed by a retired Supreme Court judge, submitted a comprehensive report on data protection. The committee also suggested a draft data protection bill; a revised version is still pending before a Joint Parliamentary Committee and could be scrapped in favor of new data privacy legislation.

When it comes to surveillance of sanitation workers, “the Constitution does not allow this kind of a thing,” says Pavan Duggal, a cyberlaw consultant and advocate for the Supreme Court of India. As such, Duggal argues, the sanitation tracking system violates workers’ right to privacy.

Although a law passed in 2000 called the Indian Information and Technology Act does allow digital surveillance or interception of citizens under certain circumstances, Duggal adds, the sanitation trackers amount to “crystal clear illegal interception.”

A 29-year-old cleaner named Neerjo didn’t know that officials at the Command Center can trace the location of her house through the tracker until her interviews with Undark. She was taken aback. “We did not know this,” she says and looks at her co-workers in surprise. “We have never been told anything about the watch.” Undark repeatedly contacted Chandigarh Municipal Corporation Commissioner Anindita Mitra to verify this and other details about the smartwatch program; the calls and emails went unanswered.

Still, Abhay Khare, business head of Imtac India — a distribution partner of ITI Limited in Chandigarh — insists that the GPS trackers are not breaking laws, and that they follow all the parameters of data safety and privacy. He adds that the devices are also used for government security, “so the ITI Limited is very careful about these parameters.”

Before he left his position as project coordinator of Chandigarh’s human efficiency tracking system program, Suraj Kumar also told Undark that on the smartwatches, neither the microphone nor the camera can be controlled remotely, which means that no one in the control center can turn them on.

But that does not assuage the fears of the sanitation workers, particularly women. Many say they avoid using the bathroom while on duty. Others put the smartwatches in purses or pockets beforehand — because, says a worker named Mithlesh, “sometimes we go to [the] washroom and the camera turns on automatically, causing problems.” Around a dozen women who spoke to Undark shared the same concern.

And even though the officials at the CMC stress that the data of sanitation workers are secured and deleted after three months, the workers also complain they often receive spam calls on their smartwatches. “One night, I was awoken by a call on my smartwatch around 11:30 [p.m.],” says one worker, Shakuntala. “I picked it up and some man was asking me who I was. I hung up, knowing it was an unknown number and not someone from my office. How did he get my number if the SIM was given by the Corporation?”

Khare says the GPS trackers do not allow unwanted calls. “It’s impossible they would get spam calls,” he says, adding he had checked it himself.

The workers say the tracking device invades their personal lives. They are required to charge GPS devices at home each night, to make sure the watches remain on during working hours the next day. If the watch is off, the workers are marked absent, risking their wages. According to Chadha of the Chandigarh Sanitation Workers’ Union, the fine for losing the tracker ranges from around $107 to $134, almost their month’s salary.

Taking these devices home aggravates the problems, says Shakuntala. “When I am around the watch, I get conscious,” she adds.

In each part of the city, a supervisor looks after a team of sanitation workers and marks their attendance. A supervisor named Satyapal Singh tells Undark that if a worker’s watch turns off or shows them outside the area where they should be working, even if they are marked present on the register, they don’t get paid.

Pradeep, who drives a sewage truck, says he once got a call from his supervisor, inquiring why he was absent for a week. Although he had been at work, at the Command Center, he was marked inactive. It took Pradeep a few days to prove that he was on duty, he says: “My salary would have been slashed otherwise.”

few days before India’s Republic Day in January 2022, Chadha, the former president of the Chandigarh Sanitation Workers’ Union and a current senior member, sits in his office, a makeshift tin shed, outside a bustling market near the Municipal Corporation office. He sits with workers as they talk about the cleanliness preparation ahead of the special occasion.

But he also stresses the union’s presence at an upcoming protest against the tracking devices.

He breaks his conversation with a worker and points towards his smartwatch: “What is this watch?” he asks and leans forward. Then he pauses and sinks in his chair and answers himself, “It is a handcuff that enslaves poor workers.” Chadha draws reference from ancient times, saying it is akin to the times when lower castes were physically chained and forced to do menial jobs.

Khare of IMTAC India boasts of the increased productivity the tracking system has achieved. He says that some local governments using the smartwatches to track field workers have detected employees farming out their work to other people, and that it has been able to save a huge amount of state expenditure.

But the workers complain not only of surveillance, but poor working conditions. At the height of the Covid-19 pandemic, doctors and other health workers in India sometimes faced discrimination and harassment for working with infected patients. But they were also called “frontline warriors” and promised medical insurance. The sanitation workers, who were out on roads, keeping the cities clean, say they have not received adequate personal protection equipment during the pandemic. In a June 2020 independent survey of 214 sanitation workers in several Indian states and metropolitan areas, 56 percent said they weren’t given any Covid-19 safety instructions or training. (Twenty-six of those surveyed did not answer this question.)

Even before the Covid-19 pandemic, the sanitation workers say, they were never provided with any safety or protection gear. They also say they are not given any paid leave, medical treatment, or insurance.

Bezwada Wilson, National Convener of Safai Karmachari Andolan — a human rights organization pushing to end manual scavenging, a traditional practice reserved for Indians from Scheduled Castes — says the surveillance, which he calls illegal, is dehumanizing. It reinforces the idea of slavery, he adds, and stems from the casteist mindset.

“It’s modern-day slavery,” he said, adding that India’s “dominant” castes “still see the sanitation workers as untouchables. As if that was not enough, this tracking device has only reinforced that idea.”

Before her lunch break ends, Munesh asks for help with checking how many steps she has walked so far that day. Since her shift started at 7 a.m., her tracker shows she has walked 2,231 steps in the first half of her shift. There are four more hours to go, and one of her coworkers says they cannot afford breaks. Even if they finish their jobs early, they should appear in motion on the screen.

As soon as her lunch break ends, Munesh prepares to leave. She picks up a broom, walks away towards a bustling market, and bends to sweep the litter.

White nationalists get religion: On the far-right fringe, Catholics and racists forge a movement

Last Sunday, as pro-choice supporters reacted to the leaked Supreme Court draft opinion that will likely overturn Roe v. Wade, a series of videos shot in lower Manhattan went viral. In one, a group of young men stood before an arched wooden doorway at the Basilica of St. Patrick’s Old Cathedral, reciting the Rosary while protesters demonstrated outside the church gates. In their center was a young man wearing an America First hat and an FDNY fleece, closing his eyes as he prayed. By that afternoon, the video had been shared on social media by far-right Republican Reps. Paul Gosar and Marjorie Taylor Greene, who praised the men as “heroes” “defending their churches against the abortionist horde.” 

In two other videos taken the same day at the same location, the man in the America First hat heckled protesters, shouting from the church steps, “I am the people. The people have decided, the court has decided. You lose. You have no choice. Not your body, your choice. Your body is mine and you’re having my baby.” 

The man was not, as the New York City Fire Department quickly pointed out, a firefighter. Nor was he merely a devout Catholic. Rather, he was a right-wing activist affiliated with white nationalist wunderkind Nick Fuentes’ gleefully racist and antisemitic America First/”groyper” movement, which at its third annual America First Political Action Conference (AFPAC) this February drew widespread condemnation for its glorification of Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, Fuentes’ praise of Hitler and the call by one speaker, a state senator from Arizona, to build “gallows” to hang political enemies.

RELATED: Christian nationalism drove Jan. 6: Now it wants to conquer America

On a popular groyper livestream show Sunday night, host and movement leader Dalton Clodfelter said he recognized the man in the videos and called him to join the show. As journalist and Western States Center senior fellow Nick Martin reported, Clodfelter said the man had made “a really bold statement today and it’s going to be heard by a lot of people.” The man claimed that many of the other praying men who assembled that afternoon were also groypers, described the demonstrators he’d been heckling as “demonic creatures” and “animals” and said that one Black protester should be “enslaved” or “shot.” “Whatever church they’re going to attack next,” he pledged, “we’ll be there, and we’ll crush them.”

None of that seemed to matter to the right-wing politicians and media who held the man up as a hero of the faith. Prominent among those was Church Militant, a far-right Catholic media outlet that promoted its Monday night coverage of the protest with a picture of the groyper’s face. That was more than accident or coincidence — Church Militant and the groypers are increasingly collaborating to mobilize their respective audiences to confront what both are calling “proabortionist demons” at pro-choice rallies across the country, and, more generally, to grow their movements on both sides. 

All of this is part of a broader pattern of increasing overlap between the far right, including overtly white nationalist movements and leaders, with the extreme right-wing fringe of the Roman Catholic Church. This emerging coalition includes such figures as Milo Yiannopoulos, who was effectively expelled from the MAGA movement in 2017 over his remarks about child sex abuse; Canadian white nationalist Faith Goldy, similarly disgraced after appearing on a podcast of the neo-Nazi website Daily Stormer; onetime “Stop the Steal” organizer Ali Alexander; and “Kent State gun girl” Kaitlin Bennett. 

All four have rebranded themselves as “traditional” Catholics (or “trad-Caths,” in internet parlance) and allied themselves with an existing network of far-right Catholics that includes Pizzagate provocateur-turned conservative commentator Jack Posobiec, Trump confidant and adviser Steve Bannon and groyper-guru Nick Fuentes himself. 

In post-Trump America, white nationalists and Christian nationalists are putting their differences aside in a push to roll back abortion rights and enshrine white Christian dominance.

At one point, Resistance, the activist wing of Church Militant, began to mobilize supporters to counter-protest Planned Parenthood marches scheduled for this Saturday in Chicago, Nashville, Washington, San Antonio, Los Angeles and other cities. On Monday on the alternative social media site Telegram, Clodfelter called on groypers to attend these rallies. By Wednesday evening, more than five-dozen groypers on the site had eagerly signed on. As of Friday, however, Church Militant seemed to have abandoned this initiative, though Clodfelter still claims the groypers will rally in Nashville.

As we will discuss in part 2 of this investigation, at least one prominent staff member at Church Militant is also a groyper, and other employees of the right-wing Catholic group appear eager to build a united front between the two formations. In the larger political landscape of Trump-era America, this is more evidence that white nationalist and Christian nationalist movements, despite some meaningful differences on principle, strategy and tactics, are working side by side in the right’s broader push to roll back abortion rights and enshrine white Christian dominance in America.

“We have to push the envelope” 

From its beginnings, the groyper movement sought to straddle the gap between the white and Christian nationalist movements. In the later years of the Trump presidency, as the largely pagan or atheist alt-right fell into disarray, Fuentes sought to distinguish the mostly Gen-Z groyper movement from its disgraced predecessor by garnishing its core white nationalist principles with the flag and the cross.

“[The alt-right] was a racialist, atheist, post-American, revolutionary and transnational movement,” Fuentes explained to followers in November 2019, attempting to chart a new direction for white nationalism in the U.S. “America First is a traditionalist, Christian, conservative, reformist, American nationalist Movement.” While other white nationalists had given up hope of transforming the conservative establishment, the groypers, Fuentes argued, would redouble their efforts to influence the mainstream Right. This project continues today. “We have to push the envelope,” Fuentes told followers in May 2021. “We are the right-wing flank of the Republican Party…we have got to be on the Right, dragging these people kicking and screaming into the future, into the right wing, into a truly reactionary party.”

“We are the right-wing flank of the Republican Party,” said Nick Fuentes last year. “We have got to drag … these people kicking and screaming into the future … into a truly reactionary party.”

In today’s groyper movement, classic white nationalist themes of “white genocide,” white identity politics and conspiratorial antisemitism blend seamlessly with fervent appeals to Christian piety, slogans like “Christ is King” and militant calls to enshrine Christian fundamentalism as state policy. Most groypers are young and enthusiastic adherents of Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Latter-day Saints or other Christian faith traditions, and many are first drawn into the movement through its ubiquitous “trad” subculture — a largely online aesthetic celebrating a rejection of modernity and embrace of patriarchal, anti-LGBTQ values — and become “red-pilled” on the tenets of white nationalism along the way. 

For the groypers, hard-edged, traditionalist opposition to LGBTQ rights, abortion and feminism is rooted in uncompromising misogyny and male supremacy, a worldview in which straight, white, Christian Gen-Z men are valorized as the rightful heirs to and guardians of the American nation. Today, the groypers’ strategic blend of white and Christian nationalism has arrived right on time, helping the movement find natural allies among hard-right Christian groups — particularly Catholic right groups like Church Militant — and, from there, to build new pathways towards mainstream acceptance.  


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


In a parallel project, Church Militant also seeks to transform mainstream Catholicism from its rightward flank. Just two weeks ago, Church Militant made national news for its hourlong interview with Rep. Greene, in which the Georgia congresswoman suggested that Satan is controlling the Catholic Church (mostly because of Catholic support for refugees at the U.S. southern border). While it might seem odd for a Catholic media site to celebrate such a charge coming from an evangelical Protestant — Church Militant titled the first segment of its weeklong promotion of the interview “Marjorie for Pope” — the outlet has long waged a vitriolic campaign against the church’s current hierarchy, which it derides as both milquetoast and liberal and an “international crime syndicate” run by a “lavender mafia.” By comparison, Church Militant presents itself as the home of authentically orthodox Catholicism (even as the Archdiocese of Detroit, where Church Militant is headquartered, compelled the outlet more than a decade ago to stop using “Catholic” in its name and has repeatedly denounced the group). 

Last November, the outlet hosted a noisy, daylong rally on the Baltimore waterfront to protest the annual meeting of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops next door. Church Militant’s emcee for the event, fallen “alt-lite” star turned groyper leader Yiannopoulos — who joined Church Militant as a regular contributor in 2021 after declaring himself “ex-gay” — directed the roughly 1,200-person audience to chant “Lock them up” at the bishops gathered nearby. It was he, in fact, who reportedly arranged for Marjorie Taylor Greene to speak at Fuentes’ AFPAC III in February. 

Michelle Malkin told a Church Militant rally that the Catholic bishops had the goal of “fundamentally transforming the United States of America,” directly echoing the “great replacement” conspiracy theory.

Another groyper leader speaking at Church Militant’s Baltimore rally was anti-immigrant pundit Michelle Malkin. The day after speaking at the white nationalist American Renaissance conference, Malkin told the Church Militant crowd that USCCB aid to immigrants and refugees had the “ultimate goal of fundamentally transforming the United States of America and destroying the historic American nation” — white nationalist language that echoes the “great replacement” conspiracy theory, according to which whites in the U.S. are being “replaced” by non-white immigration. 

Many of Church Militant’s targets are within the Catholic Church itself. It has run articles “exposing” bishops as registered Democrats; called the first Black cardinal in the American church “African Queen”; demanded that Pope Francis resign; and vowed to use its claimed network of hundreds of priests and church staff, as well as thousands of lay activists, to dig up dirt on any bishops who “go after a good priest.” 

But much of the site’s writing and advocacy is more directly political, as when it compared the Black Lives Matter movement to fascism, attacked the Catholic bishops’ support for immigrants as a numbers game meant to “shore up” a “shrinking, shriveling church,” and, in 2020, declared that “every Democratic leader in the country” should be “immediately arrested and imprisoned” for their role in pandemic public health restrictions. Church Militant was such an avid supporter of Trump’s reelection campaign that it repeatedly warned readers that if Joe Biden were elected, Catholics would be “identified, hunted down, declared ‘illegal,'” “gun[ned] down in the streets,” or “herded onto the trains heading for the camps.” 

Church Militant is widely considered, even among many conservative Catholics, as so outrageous and aggressive that it is best ignored. But as Commonweal’s Paul Moses reported, that outlet and the fellow-traveling LifeSiteNews together “garnered nearly 10 million visits to their alt-right ‘news’ websites during the last three months of 2020,” helping to “spread bogus election-conspiracy claims to a huge Catholic audience.” On Jan. 6, 2021, both Church Militant and its staff celebrated the riot at the U.S. Capitol, tweeting images of pro-Trump protesters carrying Catholic iconography and declaring the rioters “patriots.” 

The outlet has made common cause with many of the most controversial figures on the right, promoting interviews with Roger Stone, Joseph Flynn (brother of QAnon hero Michael Flynn), Gab founder and CEO Andrew Torba and Steve Bannon, who was to be the keynote speaker at Church Militant’s Baltimore rally, although he ultimately didn’t attend — because he was arrested that week and charged with contempt of Congress. Beyond its Baltimore rally, the organization routinely platforms voices connected to the groyper movement as well. Multiple Church Militant articles have featured Torba and YouTube streamer John Doyle, who are both longstanding Fuentes allies and were featured as speaker and special guest, respectively, at AFPAC III. Church Militant founder Michael Voris recently appeared on a show hosted by white nationalist former Senate candidate Lauren Witzke, another prominent Fuentes ally. 

Just a week after the Capitol insurrection, Voris interviewed another Fuentes acolyte, Jan. 6 planner Ali Alexander, about his then-recent conversion to Catholicism as well as their shared sense — in the immediate aftermath of the Capitol riot — that “dying an honorable death is an awesome thing.” Alexander said he had come to realize there was a “war between the church and the people who have infiltrated the church,” and Voris recounted attending several of Alexander’s “Stop the Steal” protests in Michigan, including one at the state capitol in Lansing. That rally was led by Nick Fuentes and John Doyle and celebrated on Church Militant’s Twitter account.

These points of overlap exemplify how the white nationalist movement and the Catholic right are both drawing together and influencing each other. But it is in the youth movement, and on the streets, where the most significant collaboration is now unfolding. 

Church Militant founder Michael Voris says “establishment conservatism” has “betrayed the cause,” and it’s time to fight for “straight up, terrible, glorious Catholic truth.”

“We are intensely trying to cultivate the youth,” Voris said in a February 2022 video entitled “CM Youth Movement,” claiming that 24 of Church Militant’s 63 employees are under the age of 30. “As men, it’s really important that we act,” professed one young Church Militant staffer in the video. “We can’t just sit by and watch our civilization and church collapse into a cesspool of degeneracy.”

Voris took note when Fuentes held AFPAC III, praising the conference as “where all the youthful (read: future) energy is” in the “real struggle for the heart and soul of the [conservative] movement” — a struggle, Voris said, echoing Fuentes’ framing, which “will dictate the future of the [Republican] party and, to a large extent, the nation.” 

In a subsequent video entitled “Young Conservative Catholics,” Voris drove the point home. Bemoaning the “collapse of the American empire,” Voris compared contemporary young Catholics to the “first young Romans” who, in the wake of the collapse of the Roman Empire in the 4th century AD, “conquered the barbarians” and instituted a new Catholic civilization. 

“Just like in the days of Rome, as it collapsed,” Voris explained, “there was a generation of 20-somethings that beheld it, so too now, here, in the U.S…in the coming years but beginning now, what must be fought for is Catholic truth. Straight up, terrible, glorious Catholic truth.” He went on to say that “establishment conservatism has betrayed the cause” and “it is the young more than anyone else who must understand the real war here.” Fuentes and Yiannopoulos both shared Voris’ video on Telegram, with a caption framing it as a direct appeal to the groypers: “‘The cry “Christ is King” must ring loud across the land.’ Church Militant’s Michael Voris on America First.” 

Part 2: Church Militant and the groyper movement have become increasingly intertwined, and both dream of bigger things.

Read more on religion and the American far right:

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

Jen Psaki spent her last Wednesday afternoon as Joe Biden’s first press secretary much as she spent the last 16 months — working from the computer in her West Wing office while taking calls, handling staff and dealing with the press.

Surrounding her in the office, in most un-Psaki-like fashion, were half-filled boxes of personal belongings she’s packing away as she prepares to leave the White House. It seemed a bit incongruous, the buttoned-down Psaki in an office that looked like chaos. 

Of course, that’s been the hallmark of her time as press secretary.

Psaki came into the White House after four years of dumpster fires, gaslighting, meaningless confrontations and an administration that seemed often more intent on pissing people off than informing them — and even more interested in dictating a narrative to the American people that was based on lies and not facts. It was the epitome of chaos. Trump staffers complained about it. The press complained about it. The world complained about it. Chaos was as common as QAnon cultists being raised by Trump supporters.

RELATED: Aloof, silent and disengaged: Why the Biden White House is in crisis

That was a lot of crazy to put to bed quickly when Biden walked into the White House for the first time. Ultimately, much of the responsibility for that definitive and much-needed change fell on Psaki’s shoulders. When Biden took office he pledged to change the national tune. But he doesn’t yearn for the cameras the way Trump does, so the American people have often relied on Psaki to make good on the president’s promises. She has been the leading voice of the administration for 16 months. 

She took the job with an apparent resolve to be polite, indulgent and professional, to speak in the president’s best interest and to do it with a smile while maintaining a marriage and a family. (She has two children.) In a town of energetic professionals, she was the long-distant sprinter. 

Lying? Well, you could call it that. Public relations always includes a fair amount of spin. Psaki did it well on occasion, and not so well on other occasions. Her fans are as rabid as her haters and there is no reasoning with the extremes.

For the most part, Psaki took over the briefing room and doused it with a sedative. Gone were the days of screaming at reporters, or openly fighting with them. Her staff refers to the press as “friends,” and Psaki has mastered the art of handling opposition. Her briefings lack the emotion of a Trump briefing, and that’s by design. Some reporters call her approach “boring” and reminiscent of the Obama years, when the press corps endured tedious briefings by Josh Earnest that lasted 90 minutes or more and featured multiple references to his favorite sports teams. 

Psaki took over the briefing room and doused it with sedatives: No more screaming at reporters or openly feuding with them. For some in the press corps, that was too “boring.”

Psaki has also been criticized for failing to work her way around the room to more reporters during her briefings. Her staff’s ability to return emails and phone calls has been called “lackluster” or “nonexistent.” But she is personally well-liked among the press corps — so much so that reporters have overlooked slights they wouldn’t or didn’t from previous press secretaries.

For those who have been around for a while, she has been compared to Mike McCurry, the  Clinton press secretary who is most often cited as the best of the last 40 years.

Many in the press recognize that some of the communications problems inside the White House are outside Psaki’s ability to control, and give her a pass for that. But there’s no question she is at least complicit in one of the administration’s biggest problems: lack of access to the president.

In the early days of the administration she told me that she believed limiting Biden’s access to the press was beneficial to him. “I think he interacts too often,” she said.

But as I sat and spoke with her Wednesday, she praised Biden’s work in front of crowds. I again told her that one of the biggest problems I had with the administration was that it hasn’t put Biden in front of people more often. “He’s better than you all are,” I told her. She agreed. 


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


Then she asked for a point of clarification. When I said that Biden should be in front of people, Psaki wanted to know if I meant reporters in a press conference. He’s only done one of those in 16 months, and that was before a carefully curated group. So, yes: Yes, I wanted to see Biden in front of reporters, where he could take questions and answer them on the fly. 

Politicians seem to believe that merely standing up for a speech or appearing at a town-hall event is good enough to count as being “in front of the people.” But in reality, it is how many times a president answers questions from disinterested, third-party observers that offers the best metric to determine not just the quantity, but the quality of his (or her, someday) interaction with the public.  

How often does the president face questions about his policies or other matters of public interest?

For that, you need reporters. Presidents often like to differentiate between the American public and reporters. Trump called us the “enemy of the people” — but the truth is we’re just people who ask questions for a variety of reasons. Biden and Psaki are not nearly as horrific as Trump and his preschool-quality press secretaries in terms of dealing with the press — but then again, if Trump had put one of those circus bears that rides tricycles and toots a horn in the Brady Briefing Room to answer our questions, that would have been a marked improvement.

How often a president takes real questions from disinterested, third-party observers may offer the best metric of his (or, someday, her) interaction with the public.

But the Biden administration has trouble with us too — even if Psaki and others downplay it — and we’ve had issues with the Biden administration, albeit far more normal ones than those the press faced during the Trump years. In many ways, Psaki and Biden remind me of the Reagan administration, circa 1986 — the first one I covered. But they also remind me of the Clinton years, both Bush administrations and Obama. They remind me of every president I’ve covered, in fact — except the previous one. Psaki lowered the temperature and improved the atmosphere immensely in the West Wing. Anyone who would argue otherwise is either suffering from the effects of a near-fatal dose of illegal hallucinogens, needs to be escorted to a rubber room, or should sign up to run for Senate as a Republican. You’re their kind of crazy. Hell, pull a hat trick and do all three.

Psaki’s calming performance was seen by some in the press as refreshing, by some as condescending and by others as the act of a softer, gentler liar. She didn’t lose her cool, though I know that on a few occasions she either avoided my questions or fumbled them. She was also criticized for being circumspect in her answers and for obfuscating the facts. 

I have criticized this administration, and by extension Psaki, for being too slow to reopen the Brady Briefing Room, the East Room, the South Lawn and the Rose Garden for everyone in the press corps, as had been the norm prior to the pandemic. I’ve criticized them for too few press conferences and for other problems I’ve already mentioned.

COVID gave Trump cover at the end of his term.  He faced a diminishing number of reporters, as we tried to follow federal guidelines to help people stay safe from a fatal viral infection. Biden and Psaki faced that same situation in the first year of this administration — and Biden did a far better job of controlling media access than Trump ever did.

COVID gave Trump an excuse to face a diminishing number of reporters — but Biden has controlled media access far more than Trump ever did.

Of course it’s true that the administration tries to control the press. All administrations do. But some of the criticism of Jen Psaki should be aimed at reporters. After the Trump fiasco, the press corps was spent. A changeover occurred and many new reporters joined the ranks, alongside a smaller number of veterans. Psaki isn’t to blame for the quality of questions she has fielded, or even for taking advantage of younger reporters’ naiveté or their all-consuming desire for access. She can’t be criticized for trying to put the president’s best foot forward. That’s her job.

What Psaki ultimately can be criticized for is contributing to the effort to reduce the president’s presence in front of the press. She can be criticized for taking advantage of less experienced reporters. She can be criticized for a variety of common complaints about every press secretary I’ve known at the White House since the days of Larry Speakes. 

If you want to criticize Psaki for anything, is it for being so blatantly normal as to be boring? I heard one reporter say of her that her relentless smile was “mind-numbing. ” Some call her elitist. Some say she’s disingenuous.

She’s earned criticism, even if some of it has been unjust. She’s dealt with it. I’m not fond of some of the answers I’ve been given, but I’m a big boy. I got notice just this week that the suit I filed against Donald Trump to keep my press pass was turned into a permanent injunction, thus solidifying and enhancing a reporter’s First Amendment right to cover the president. It’s up to us to take advantage of that. No press secretary can help us if we don’t help ourselves. 

As for Jen Psaki, here’s what she cannot be criticized for: How she has conducted herself. It has been, for the lack of a better term, “adult-like.” She’s been the best since McCurry — but not as good as him. For those of us who survived four years of death threats, belittlement, anger, resentment, lies, damn lies and stupid statistics, this has been a walk in a D.C. park — with only occasional poodle bombs to dodge.

But the thing is, that wasn’t quite enough.

Read more from Brian Karem on the struggles of the Biden White House:

Librarians push back against book-banning

The American Library Association, the American Federation of Teachers, and more than two dozen other organizations on Tuesday formed a coalition to fight the far-right’s record-breaking censorship barrage—wherein nearly 1,600 books were targeted for removal from public shelves and schools across the United States in 2021.

The goal of Unite Against Book Bans—which also includes the Authors Guild and prominent publishers such as Penguin Random House and Simon & Schuster—is “to empower individuals and communities to fight censorship and protect the freedom to read,” according to the ALA.

“This is a dangerous time for readers and the public servants who provide access to reading materials,” Deborah Caldwell-Stone, director of the ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom, said in a statement. “Readers, particularly students, are losing access to critical information, and librarians and teachers are under attack for doing their jobs.”

“It’s time that policymakers understand the severity of this issue,” said Caldwell-Stone. “ALA is taking the steps necessary to protect individuals’ access to information, but we can’t do this alone.”

Last month, the group launched the Unite Against Book Bans initiative to coincide with the publication of its annual report, which documented 729 attempted bans of 1,597 unique titles last year—the highest number of challenges to library, school, and university materials in a 12-month period since the ALA began tracking more than two decades ago.

In a separate report released last month, PEN America found that U.S. school districts with a combined enrollment of more than two million students successfully banned 1,145 books between July 1, 2021 and March 31, 2022. Thanks to resistance from students, teachers, librarians, and local residents, however, some book bans have been reversed in recent months.

The ALA hopes to leverage “the strength and reach” of the 26 national organizations that have so far joined its growing coalition. “These groups,” the ALA noted, “are uniting around the principles of reading as fundamental to learning, the right of readers to access a variety of books, and the need to work together to protect that right.”

AFT President Randi Weingarten said in a statement that “reading is foundational.”

“It helps us dream, helps us create, and helps us access opportunity. Whether you’re a kid in rural West Virginia, in the suburbs of Texas, or in a shelter in New York City, opening a book means you’re opening the world,” she continued. “But reading is hard without books.”

“Book bans are about limiting kids’ freedom to read and teachers’ freedom to teach,” said Weingarten. “Parents agree—they want their children to learn the lessons of the past in an age-appropriate way, even as certain politicians try to turn classrooms into cultural battlefields and censor what gets taught.”

Recent polling shows that over two-thirds of voters oppose efforts to remove books from public libraries and school libraries.

Book bans are part of the Republican Party’s broader war on public education that continues to sweep the country. In addition to trying to remove specific titles from schools, colleges, and libraries, GOP lawmakers in 42 states have introduced more than 180 bills since January 2021 that seek to limit the ability of educators and students to discuss gender, racism, and other topics, according to PEN America.

Weingarten noted that the majority of recent book bans “target titles with racial and LGBTQ themes, cruelly erasing young readers’ lived experience.”

“While it’s uncomfortable to talk about tough issues like genocide, slavery, and racism,” she added, “reading honest history helps kids learn the good and the bad about our country and emerge as well-informed, engaged citizens of the world.”

Caldwell-Stone stressed that “our partners and supporters are critical in moving the needle to ultimately bring an end to book bans.”

Calling Tuesday’s announcement “just the beginning,” Caldwell-Stone said that she is “excited to see how this growing collective will influence local boards and state and national legislation to protect the rights of readers and students and the librarians and educators who provide the books they read.”

“There’s clearly a disconnect between what most persons want and the actions of elected officials, given the large number of book bans happening around the country,” she added. “As the campaign evolves, our growing network of supporters will join forces to prevent those bans, ensuring access to information for all and advocating for the important work of libraries and librarians.”

This Trump election lawyer and “Big Lie” promoter owes the IRS more than $100,000

Following the 2020 presidential election, Virginia-based attorney Jesse Binnall was an aggressive promotor of Donald Trump’s Big Lie — falsely claiming, along with fellow Trump attorneys Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell, that the election was stolen from the then-president when in fact, now-President Joe Biden enjoyed a decisive victory. Binnall’s favorite cable news outlet after the election was Fox News, as CNN and MSNBC were quick to debunk the Big Lie.

Binnall’s post-election activities raise serious ethics concerns. But long before the Big Lie, Binnall had another problem, according to Daily Beast reporter Roger Sollenberger: a six-figure tax debt.

“Former President Donald Trump and his top election-fraud lawyer, Jesse Binnall, have a number of things in common — they both falsely believe the election was stolen, they hobnob with some of the right’s most unhinged conspiracy theorists, and they routinely complain that they’re the focus of a witch hunt,” Sollenberger reports in an article published on May 6. “But another similarity has flown under the radar: Both men avoid paying taxes.”

Sollenberger continues, “According to IRS records, Binnall owes the U.S. government for unpaid taxes dating back to 2010. The IRS filed a $139,242 lien against Binnall almost four years ago — in August 2018 — and it covers unpaid amounts every tax year from 2010 to 2015. Records on file with the City of Alexandria, VA show that, as of May 5, Binnall has not paid off the lien.”

The Beast discussed Binnall’s tax case with Leslie Levin of the University of Connecticut Law School in Hartford.

Levin told the Beast, “It depends on why the lien was levied and why he hasn’t paid. If he refused to file, that raises ethical issues. The deliberate failure to file constitutes a crime. If he has a good faith basis for contesting whether he owes the money, however, there is no ethical violation there.”

Binnall has represented plenty of well-known Republicans, from former President Trump and his son Donald Trump, Jr. to disgraced former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn to the Republican National Committee (RNC). He has also represented Defending the Republic, Inc., a “Stop the Steal” group of far-right conspiracy theorists tied to Powell and Georgia-based attorney Lin Wood.

Over the years, Binnall has falsely claimed that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) likes to single out conservatives — which is nonsense. Plenty of liberals and progressives in Democrat-leaning areas have been audited by the IRS.

“Binnall publicly attacked the agency twice, falsely alleging that the agency targets conservatives,” Sollenberger notes. “The IRS’ bias against conservative groups was the subject of an Obama-era scandal, but years later, a full audit revealed that the agency had also targeted progressive groups at the same time — and the IRS never even revoked a tax-exempt status for a political group.”

According to Sollenberger, Levin “cautioned against judging lawyers by the people they represent.” Their conduct in service of those clients, Levin emphasized, is what matters.

Levin told the Beast, “If he made false representations to the court while representing his clients, he can be subject to discipline. Even false out-of-court statements that he makes in his capacity as a lawyer for his clients could result in discipline.”

“Our Father”: the 5 creepiest moments from Netflix’s harrowing fertility fraud documentary

Netflix’s latest documentary feature “Our Father” is an intricate real-life horror tale about fertility fraud that manages to grow more unsettling by the minute.  

The harrowing investigation focuses on the misdeeds of disgraced fertility doctor Dr. Donald Cline, who artificially inseminated his own sperm into his female patients, without their knowledge or consent. During the 1980s, Cline was hailed as one of the best fertility doctors in Indianapolis, praised for his medical expertise and his endearing promise to give countless parents the gift of a child. The doctor’s motives, however, proved to be more vile in nature after it was revealed that he had fathered 94 children and counting, all of whom are half-siblings.  

RELATED: HBO’s unflinching “Baby God” corrects pop culture’s tendency to treat fertility fraud lightly

One of Cline’s children, Jacoba Ballard, uncovered the truth when she grew suspicious of the doctor after taking a 23AndMe DNA test in search of possible half-siblings. At first there were just five siblings, which soon grew to 10, then 15 and finally, over 50 individuals. The documentary features just a handful of Ballard’s half-siblings, including Julie Harmon (No. 14), Matt White (No. 17), Heather Woock (No. 22), Lisa Shepherd-Stidham (No. 33), Jason Hyatt (No. 48), Carrie Foster (No. 53) and Alison Kramer (No. 61).

The identities of all 90-plus children still remain a mystery — “Our Father” ends on a solemn note with Fox59 reporter Angela Ganote, who first covered the story, asking women who have consulted Dr. Cline in the past to urge their children to take a DNA test.

From Cline’s disturbing insemination process to his possible ties with the Quiverfull movement, here are five horrifying revelations from the documentary:

1 The creepy first meeting between Cline and his “children”

When Ballard realized that her biological father was Cline, she consulted both Doug and Donna — two of the four children Cline had with his wife — to arrange a group meeting with their father and fellow half-siblings. 

Ballard recalled the intensity of Cline’s footsteps and the sound of his cane hitting the floor, which were menacing and foreboding. She said the doctor showed no visible emotion during the meeting and managed to stay calm and composed in the face of his children. The doctor also carried with him a gun, which Ballard claimed was an intimidation tactic. 

She then said that Cline introduced himself and asked his children, who were all seated at a table, to each share their name, age and profession. “It was almost like he was ranking us,” Ballard stated. “Like, ‘Let me see which one of my offspring made it to the top.’ I felt like we were being judged.”

Ballard noted that some of her half-siblings suffered from auto-immune disorders, so she asked Cline for his detailed medical history. The doctor, however, dismissed her request and asserted that there was nothing to worry about. 

Things quickly became heated when Cline offered Ballard a piece of paper that contained scripture from Jeremiah 1:5 to help her cope with the news. She declined the so-called “gift,” angrily telling Cline, “You’re not gonna use my God to justify your actions.”

When asked why he used his own sperm in his patients, Cline said he was only trying to help desperate mothers and families. He then reassured his children that there were only 15 siblings in total, no more than that. 

2 Liz White’s story

White, the mother of Ballard’s fellow half-sibling Matt White, visited Cline’s office frequently when she was trying for a child despite her struggles with infertility. White noted that Cline was always alone in his office, whether it was during the weekend or during the week or during midday or late evening. She would wait in one room, where she undressed and prepared for her appointment in private, while Cline went to his office to gather her donor sperm samples — or so she thought. Years later, White learned that Cline spent that time masturbating and placing his own sperm into a syringe, which was then inserted into White during her procedure. 

“When Matt’s DNA test came back, my first words were, ‘I was raped 15 times and didn’t even know it,'” she said tearfully.

3 Cline’s alleged threats and secret attacks

As Cline’s story garnered increased attention from local news outlets, the doctor grew fearful of losing his marriage and tainting his relationship with the church, thus prompting him to threaten and harass his children over the phone. They also suspected Cline of committing a slew of strange attacks, even though they never caught him in the act.

In one instance, the lug nuts from all four tires of Ballard’s car were removed and missing. In another, Harmon’s computer was hacked and her files and emails on Cline were erased. And for Woock, the designated 22nd sibling received harassing phone calls from the cemetery, asking her if she wanted to purchase a plot for her to be buried in.  

“I think it was to rattle me. To re-traumatize me so that I would be quiet,” Woock claimed. “I don’t think he wanted any of us to talk publicly if he could help it.”

4 Cline’s obsession with a higher calling

Cline grew increasingly religious following a brutal car accident, in which he ran over and killed a young girl. According to Ballard, that moment encouraged Cline to change his life and devote himself entirely to God. 

“Maybe he thought that this was his way of giving back, that he took a life that really wasn’t his fault,” said Mark Farber, Cline’s former colleague, of the doctor’s medical crimes. “Now, he was going to give back. Maybe that was a psychological process going through his mind. But it doesn’t really matter because that should not have been a way that he was trying to make amends.”

Cline’s office was also littered with Christian sayings, such as, “If you want to get to Heaven, you need to be Christian.” The doctor also served as an elder of the Church and hosted baptisms at his home swimming pool.  

5 Cline’s possible ties to the Quiverfull movement

Many of Cline’s children also believed he was part of the Quiverfull movement, a fundamentalist subculture of conservative Christians who denounce contraception, abortion and sterilization but laud widespread procreation. The Duggars, of TLC show “19 Kids and Counting” fame, is probably the most well-known family that follows a Quiverfull-like lifestyle.

The children first suspected the doctor’s affiliation after Ballard received an email from an unnamed individual with a Quiverfull domain name. They also found that the Quiverfull website heavily quoted Jeremiah 1:5, which says “Before I formed you in your mother’s womb, I knew you.” The scripture, which is found at the opening of the documentary, was also found in Cline’s office and previously given to Ballard when they first met in person.

Additionally, it is believed that the Quiverfull movement advocates for more white children to help uphold white supremacy ideals and preserve the white race over others. In an emotional moment from the documentary, the children acknowledge their glaring Aryan-like similarities — they are all white and have both blonde hair and blue eyes.  

“Our Father” is currently streaming on Netflix. Watch a trailer for it below, via YouTube.

More stories you might like:

Facing shortages, chemists propose “mining” electronic waste for rare earth metals

Some metals, like nickel and lithium, are household names; indeed, advertisements for batteries play on the exotic sound of “lithium-ion” as though it were a novelty, despite lithium’s ubiquity in electric cars and gadgets. Yet the true drivers of the digital economy are the rare earth metals, without which modern electronic devices would not work. Once virtually unknown outside of geochemistry research, these metals, which include neodymium and praseodymium, as constituents of powerful magnets used in hard drives and computer speakers. 

Rare earth elements are so named because they are uncommon on Earth; yet these metals, which comprise an entire row of the periodic table and then some, are clearly crucial to the modern economy. Unfortunately, the rarity of the rare earths extends beyond their dearth in the Earth’s crust. Recently, they’ve become rarer in human supply chains, as evidenced by recent price spikes: the price of neodymium surged 75% between January 2020 to December 2020, and terbium doubled in price, according to a Physics Today report from 2021. 

To the United States, control over these resources is a matter of market stability. Russian dominance over nickel and a power grab for a Ukrainian lithium reserve exacerbated existing supply chain shortages. 

Hence, the scramble for rare earth elements has prompted an intriguing proposal from the influential Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC). The  United Kingdom–based learned society with over 50,000 members recently proposed that rather than mining for increasingly scarce raw materials in the ground, perhaps it is time humans rummaged through junk drawers — or landfills — to feed consumer demand.


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


“Developing a circular economy where minerals used in tech devices are salvaged and repurposed could help us to bypass supply chain issues in the future while also helping to reduce environmental impacts,” Professor Tom Welton, President of the RSC, stated. “It is essential that governments and businesses urgently do more to develop a circular economy which can tackle the world’s growing e-waste crisis and alleviate the strain on supply chains.”

The idea — of “mining” e-waste, as it were, for already-processed and refined minerals — is both an economic as well as an environmental proposal. The mining of rare earth elements is tremendously environmentally taxing, and produces foul waste: radioactive thorium tends to accumulate in the same ore as rare earth elements, and the toxic element is a byproduct that is difficult and dangerous to handle. Likewise, for reasons that date back to the formation of the solar system, rare earth elements tend to be found together, and are very resource-intensive to separate in refining, which generates more pollution.

Meanwhile, a vast, untapped stockpile of e-waste continues to accumulate dust in homes around the world — which has components with pre-refined rare earth metals that can be pried out, without any refining or thorium pollution as a byproduct. Hence, to the RSC, whether damaged or obsolescent, haphazardly hoarded devices represent a potentially massive boon for the green economy.

RELATED: Shortages of rare earth elements could limit clean energy development

Rolling out results from a new survey about consumer attitudes on rare earth elements, the RSC noted that “the device you’re reading this on contains at least 30 different naturally-occurring elements” in a graphic on Twitter. Following the original statement, the same graphic asked, “do you know its environmental impacts?”

Professor Welton advocated for a more dedicated infrastructure for recycling such metals. 

“Not only do we need governments to overhaul recycling infrastructure and tech businesses to invest in more sustainable manufacturing practices, we need greater public and private investment in research to enable chemical scientists like those at N2S to progress methods of separating critical raw materials from electronic waste for recycling purposes,” Professor Welton advocated.

Most Americans and indeed most people worry about environmental impacts of e-waste and want the government to do more to address the issue, the RSC found. To the average consumer, who actively seeks sustainable products, it is not worth a higher price, believing manufacturers should bear responsibility for recycling. Yet, waste management solutions lag.

Giving a more sobering perspective on the matter, Professor Michael Bau, a geophysicist with the Jacobs University research group Critical Metals for Enabling Technologies, offered a balanced perspective on the gravity of the situation. Curtailing damaging mining operations and finding better remediation techniques are necessary, he explained, but e-waste recycling remains 20% efficient worldwide.

“We may leave the age of fossil fuels — we may get out of oil and gas and coal, but what we will do is reenter an age of metals. It’s just that these metals are very different from those that we needed in the past.”

“Sustainable mining is a dream,” he explained. “We exploit the resource, let’s face it. We exploit the planet, and that has all sorts of negative results for the planet and for all the organisms, including us who live on the planet, but we need that to sustain our modern society.”

Marvels of the twentieth century from smartphones to MRIs would not exist without at least a handful of these rapidly disappearing resources. Moreover, some of these are essential for solar panels, wind turbines, hydrogen fuel cells, and other green technologies. Not only that but many are not even in the e-waste stream yet. Scandium, a component that would be necessary to produce hydrogen fuel cells, is in few if any consumer product waste streams.

“We may leave the age of fossil fuels,” he asserted. “We may get out of oil and gas and coal, but what we will do is reenter an age of metals. It’s just that these metals are very different from those that we needed in the past.”

Without these critical raw materials, an energy transition will not be feasible, according to Professor Bau. It would take a concerted global effort and even then recycling would need to become exponentially more efficient. Precluding a true, closed-loop, there will always be a need for continued extraction of rare earth metals within an economic system necessitating continuous growth and maintenance of current technological abilities. 

“We need to actually mitigate the effects of climate change,” he added. “Of course, we have to make sure that what we do does not actually create bigger problems than the ones that we actually already have, so we have to understand how to actually find critical metals and then produce them from deposits in an environmentally friendly way, and that’s the important point. At the same time, we have to understand how these elements behave in the environment and how can we prevent that in case they are toxic, that in case we release them into the environment that in case we contaminate our rivers and lakes, our groundwater, our soils, our oceans how can we actually clean up the sites.”

Read more on mining and rare earth elements: