In the speech in question, which was given at the Minneapolis Hyatt Hotel at a celebration of the recent election in Puntland, a region of Somalia, Omar is reported to have told the audience that Somalia would remain united, and that she would use her influence to keep it that way, according to Minnesota Reformer, which, along with a befuddled understanding of the rest of her speech on the part of Republicans, ignited the questioning of her allegiance to the United States.

"Today, I’m introducing a Censure Resolution on Ilhan Omar for admitting she’s working as a foreign agent for a foreign country," Greene declared in a post to X (formerly Twitter) on Thursday. "I urge my colleagues to vote to Censure, but I wish I had the votes to expel and deport her."

Today, I’m introducing a Censure Resolution on Ilhan Omar for admitting she’s working as a foreign agent for a foreign country.

I urge my colleagues to vote to Censure, but I wish I had the votes to expel and deport her. pic.twitter.com/yNuh2kf7Ii

— Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene🇺🇸 (@RepMTG) February 1, 2024

A police officer testified, "It seemed like a very deliberate attempt ... to prevent access to the hotel for most delegates and the guests. People were really restricted from having access to the hotel.” If Thunberg and the other protesters are convicted, they could receive fines of up to 2,500 pounds (approximately $3,170), according to ABC News.

The arrests may not have happened if not for the recent policy by Suella Braverman, then the United Kingdom's Home Secretary, to lower the threshold in which police can arrest protesters by arguing that it can be justified for any “more than minor” disruption. This is consistent with a larger public trend of government officials attempting to stifle climate change-related dissent. "Climate activism is a threat to the fossil fuel status quo, so it makes sense that corporate polluters and their allies in government are striking back hard," Folabi Olagbaju, the democracy campaign director at Greenpeace USA, told Salon in an recent interview.

Later outside court, Thunberg made a statement alongside a few of her co-defendants: "Even though we are the ones standing here, climate, environmental and human rights activists all over the world are being prosecuted, sometimes convicted, and given... penalties for acting in line with science," the BBC reported. "We must remember who the real enemy is, what are we defending, who our laws are meant to protect," Thunberg said.

Proceedings in the case have been paused indefinitely for more than 50 days after Trump appealed U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan’s ruling rejecting his claim that presidential immunity protects him from prosecution for actions while in office.

A three-judge D.C. Circuit panel heard the appeal three weeks ago but has yet to issue a ruling. Any ruling is expected to be appealed to the Supreme Court.

Even if Trump’s immunity claim is rejected, “the protracted delays help the former president, whose strategy across his various trials has been to drag them out for as long as possible,” Politico’s Kyle Cheney and Josh Gerstein wrote. “Lengthy delays in his federal criminal cases create the possibility that, if he wins the presidency this November, Trump could avoid the charges altogether by having the Justice Department end the prosecutions or perhaps even by pardoning himself.”

Chutkan scheduled the trial for March 4 but suggested that the case is likely to be delayed in a recent order barring special counsel Jack Smith from filing substantive motions in the case until the appeal is resolved. If the D.C. Circuit and then the Supreme Court take additional weeks or months to deliver a final ruling, it could push Trump’s trial to the summer or fall, Politico reported, noting that at that point Trump and his allies would “exert intense pressure” to postpone the trial until after the election.

“The timing of a decision by the panel will indeed be a critical determinant of whether the case can go forward expeditiously,” Daniel Richman, a Columbia University law professor, told Politico.

Richman said Trump’s immunity claim is “outlandish” and is likely to be rejected but “quite a few stars would have to align before the trial can proceed.”

The delay has alarmed some legal experts.

Former federal prosecutor Andrew Weissmann, who served on special counsel Bob Mueller’s team, wrote that he and his podcast co-host Mary McCord, a Georgetown law professor and former DOJ official, are “worried” that the D.C. immunity appeal “could result in Trump losing that battle but winning the war, by avoiding a trial before the election.”

MSNBC legal analyst Lisa Rubin suggested that there may be some disagreement among the three appellate judges about what to do with the case.

“My guess is these three judges have a general agreement between them that Donald Trump should not be immune from prosecution in the federal election interference case,” Rubin said Wednesday. “How they get there, on the other hand, is a different matter. And in the ideal world, all three of them would like to be in total agreement. They'd like to issue what's called a per curiam agreement, where all three of them get to sign on, but of course, there are many different paths to getting there."

Judge Karen Henderson, a George H.W. Bush appointee, expressed opposition to taking up the case on an expedited basis and suggested the case could be sent back to the trial court for more analysis of whether Trump’s actions could be considered official acts.

"One judge suggested during an argument that what really matters to her is the allegations against Trump are ones that affect his duties, or that affect him in the campaign capacity, and suggested almost that you really had to parse the indictment," Rubin explained. "That would be the worst of all worlds, because that can mean sending the case back to Judge Chutkan to determine which aspects of the indictment are worthy of immunity and which are not. And that could even further elongate case beyond the appellate process.

"So I think that's behind the scenes, the two judges would like to get there, in an easier way more akin to Judge Chutkan, are really putting some pressure on Judge Henderson to try to get on board and see if they could do something unanimously," she added.

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

CNN legal analyst Elliott Williams, a former federal prosecutor, predicted that the judges are likely trying to reach a “unanimous decision.”

"Based on the oral argument they all seem to be in an agreement," Williams said. "They'll probably try to get a 3-0 opinion and that's bulletproof once that goes to the Supreme Court,” he added.

The subpoenas were initiated on behalf of Michael Roman, a former operative from Trump's 2020 presidential campaign who is one of 15 remaining defendants in the racketeering case that accuses Trump of orchestrating efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election results in Georgia.

The lawsuit accuses the Fulton County district attorney's office of "intentionally withholding information,” and "stonewalling" the attorney, Ashleigh Merchant, in her attempts to acquire records from the office using public information requests, ABC News reported.

Willis has come under significant public scrutiny following initial allegations that she derived financial benefits from a romantic relationship with the lead prosecutor, who the filings claim financed extravagant vacations with Willis using funds his law firm received from Fulton County. 

“If it is found that Wade and Willis had an improper relationship beginning before she hired him as special counsel, it could lead to state or federal charges because D.A. Willis may have financially benefitted from an undisclosed personal relationship at taxpayer expense,” Andrew Fleischman, Atlanta defense attorney, told Salon.

Willis hired Wade to assist with the case against Trump and his co-defendants. Roman has claimed that the two prosecutors benefited financially from the arrangement. While some legal experts have urged the district attorney to recuse herself to protect the case's integrity, sources told CNN that she is unlikely to take that step.

The allegations surrounding the supposed relationship between Wade and Willis were raised in a filing earlier this month that lacked any supporting evidence. Without citing any evidence, Roman claimed that Wade had been paid more than $650,000 by the district attorney's office and financed trips for the pair to places like Napa Valley, Florida and the Caribbean. 

Besides pursuing the dismissal of his charges, Roman is also pushing for Willis to be disqualified from the case.

The allegations can impact the case because if Willis is disqualified, it will be “almost impossible” to find another prosecutor to take the case before the election, and because it will “strengthen claims of bias and corruption” that defense attorneys may raise at trial, Fleischman said.

The issuing of subpoenas may pave the way for a high-stakes confrontation involving Willis and Wade. Despite their previous silence on the matter, they may now find themselves compelled to testify under oath in the televised hearing scheduled for Feb. 15, ABC News reported. 

Trump and other co-defendants are aiming to leverage these allegations to request the removal of Willis and Wade from the case, potentially leading to the dismissal of the indictment.

The hearing can play out in one of two ways, Fleischman suggested. In one scenario, there could be no conflict of interest found and the case proceeds as it was. 

“Defense counsel will almost certainly ask for a pretrial appeal, which they may or may not get,” Fleischman said. “If that happens, the case will be significantly delayed. If no pretrial appeal is granted, the disqualification issue will be preserved for appeal and any convictions procured at trial may be reversed.”

In the event that a conflict of interest is found, Willis and her entire office will be disqualified. The Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council of Georgia will select a new prosecutor, eventually. That new prosecutor will try the case in Fulton County, and must decide whether to try the case as “indicted, simplify it, or dismiss it,” he explained. 

Merchant, who made the misconduct allegations against Willis earlier this month, asserts in her new lawsuit that the D.A.'s office deliberately hindered her ongoing attempts to collect information on the issue, suggesting an intentional effort to delay the process, ABC News reported. 

"It is evidence that the [Fulton County District Attorney] has withheld the records without substantial justification," the complaint stated. "Indeed, it appears that [Fulton County DA's Office] is acting intentionally and in an effort to hide from public view public documents showing how [the office] has spent public monies related to the operation of the office."

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

The complaint alleges a violation of the state's Open Records Act by the office, detailing several open records requests submitted by Merchant to the office, some dating back to September. The lawsuit contends that these requests were either ignored, partially responded to, or met with assertions that the records did not exist, the outlet reported.

It's “not very serious” that the D.A.'s office may have violated the Open Records Act, Fleischman said, adding that there's often litigation around this law, and it usually settles out of court.

In a letter sent on Friday, the D.A.'s office informed Merchant that they "respectfully disagree with your disingenuous implication" of violating the Open Records Act, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported. The letter stated that the office has fulfilled all 14 of her requests, including 12 recently filed ones.

“This fight he’s about to pick with Taylor Swift, this might be what does it,” Jimmy Kimmel, host of "Jimmy Kimmel Live!" said on Wednesday, per the New York Times. “It won’t be Jan. 6, it won’t be the election fraud or the sexual assault or dancing with Jeffrey Epstein, or even fathering Don Jr. What’s finally going to bring down Donald Trump will be an army of pissed-off Swifties.”

Kimmel underscored the irony of Trump's claim, saying, "And unlike your rallies, her tickets aren’t free. People paid hundreds and even thousands of dollars to see her — and that’s just here in America. How’s your popularity in Tokyo? And Singapore? How’s your popularity in Gelsenkirchen, Germany? Because she’s doing three nights at a soccer stadium there that holds over 62,000 people even though no one has ever heard of Gelsenkirchen, Germany. It might not even exist.” 

Kimmel continued with more jabs. "If Taylor Swift told her fans to storm the Capitol on Jan. 6, they would have succeeded. They would be running the country right now," he quipped. "Taylor Swift is so popular, people want to watch her watching a football game," Kimmel added, referring to coverage of Swift attending boyfriend and Kansas City Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce's NFL games. As the NYT noted, other hosts, including Jimmy Fallon, Stephen Colbert, and Seth Meyers, have made similar jokes about Trump for his remarks about the singer. 

If you put something called Swamp Soup on your menu, it is to be kitschy and fun. Granted, this soup is delicious — but it does look swampy.

The broth is a light mud color and the beans and floating clumps of green, along with the other ingredients, look very reminiscent of the kinds of plant matter you would see in a stagnant wetland. You will love how it tastes, but it very much lives up to its name, especially the first time you have it. 

Swamp Soup has became increasingly popular where I live in large part because of Fish River Grill, where this soup gets a lot of love all year round. With four locations scattered around lower Baldwin County, Alabama, this seafood-heavy, locally-owned, light-spirited, southern-style restaurant has shined the light on one of our down home favorites since they opened their doors many years ago; in fact, their slogan is “A Funky, Junky, Redneck Joint & Home of the World Famous Swamp Soup.   

In other parts of the country — if Swamp Soup even exists in other areas — it may be common to use chicken or some other type of protein, but Conecuh sausage is very much essential to ‘proper’ Swamp Soup in southern Alabama. (Although, I must interject that I have been known to make a vegetarian version that is exceptionally good.) 

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

On the other hand, Turnip Green Soup is the non-swampy variation on the theme of greens and, in this case, peas. Resembling Hoppin’ John without the rice, it is a hearty concoction of collards, turnip greens (or a combo) and most often black-eyed peas, but lady peas, field peas, purple-hulled peas, crowder peas, cream peas, zipper peas also work — just not green “garden” peas. 

Unlike Swamp Soup, which uses sausage to season its base, bacon is the only protein in Turnip Green Soup. As you might guess; however, I have successfully converted it to vegetarian on a few occasions.    

I grew up with Turnip Green Soup, and I can remember craving it like you might Red Beans and Rice or Taco Soup or even Chili. The flavors are unique and satisfying. 

We do not have long, extended periods of freezing weather along the Gulf Coast, which is a good thing because we do not deal with it very well and neither do our pipes.

We do, however, get our fair share of chilly, dreary, overcast days, and our high humidity drives what cold we do have straight into my bones.

One of these soups served with a skillet of cornbread is soul food at its finest and the perfect accompaniment for sitting fireside. But like Fish River Grill, we do not relegate either of these to a certain time of the year. We find that the ingredients seem to call out every now and then. You just wake up thinking about how good a bowl would be for lunch or supper, regardless of the temperature.

Back in the day when I was in high school, if you were a cool kid with a car or access to a car, then you’d take your girlfriend on a date to the Red Lobster out in the county, which was about a 25-minute ride outside of the part of the inner city where most of us so-called cool kids lived. 

This is hilarious looking back because all of the best seafood restaurants were actually located three to five minutes away from our neighborhoods — meaning that we passed up on Obrycki's (where Oprah used to get her crab cakes), Phillips (an Inner Harbor staple) and Moe’s (home of the best crab meat-stuffed chicken breasts ever created, in my humble opinion.)

We drove in the opposite direction just to say we ventured to the county to feast on corporate seafood and those delicious cheddar biscuits. Red Lobster used to be so popular there was a line out front, and we'd gladly wait for our turn to be seated. 

I never knew a person who ate scallops, though. My family and most of my friends were always blue crab meat or jumbo shrimp kinds of people. I mean, we went to Red Lobster and never even thought about ordering the lobster. 

But once I was on a date with an upperclassman (two years older to be exact — I was an eager 10th grader and she was headed off to college) and I had the responsibility of looking more sophisticated. A young waiter came to our table and explained the specials and after recommending the scallops, I gave it a go. She had the lobster; go figure. Our plates came out rather quickly and looked corporately delicious. We dug in. 

A few minutes later, others in the restaurant watched her laughing hysterically at how my face frowned up after chewing the hard, tough pieces of meat. Scallops were the worst kind of seafood anyone had ever created, I thought — they looked and tasted like stale marshmallows dipped in fish oil. I vowed to never eat them again. 

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

It would be about a decade before I realized I was totally wrong. I was at a fancy restaurant in Washington, D.C. — you know, one of those places where the chef sends you out something special to welcome you right before you put in your drink order. It was a single scallop soaking in a tiny bowl of seafood bisque. I hesitated at first, remembering my only interaction with scallops, but then bit into a small piece of heaven. It left me forever changed. Scallops were not disgusting — only the people who overcook them are. 

When medium, they are fluffy and juicy. Fully cooked, they are rubbery golf balls — and that is the difference. 

It took me about two or three times to figure out how to make them perfectly, so pay attention to the directions. If you don't pop them out fast enough, then you will fail like I did initially and wind up going back to the store for more.

But if you get it right, then you will be able to save some money by cooking a dish that can run you a pretty penny in your favorite seafood restaurant. 

Police received word of the drug ring back in June of 2023, Delish reported. An investigation revealed that several individuals were selling meth out of a Dairy Queen in Clifton — a small town located just a few miles from Waco. Two people were arrested on Jan. 16 and eight others on Jan. 26. The arrests took place after police obtained multiple search warrants.   

“This led to us finding out that these individuals were also selling drugs at other locations around Clifton. During the investigation, we uncovered additional persons who were also trafficking methamphetamines in Clifton," read a Facebook announcement from Chief of Police Chris Blanton.

He continued, “To those who may still be selling drugs in our community just know that we are always watching, we probably already have you on our radar, and you never know when it’s your door we are busting through next.”

According to NPR, Baldwin is currently free pending trial and barred from leaving the country, consuming alcohol and possessing firearms. Gutierrez-Reed pleaded not guilty to involuntary manslaughter, tampering with evidence related to Hutchins's death and bringing a gun into a Santa Fe bar in the days ahead of the fatal shooting. Her trial will begin Feb. 22.

Morrissey, in a court filing on Monday, alleged that there is "substantial" evidence demonstrating that Gutierrez-Reed unknowingly brought live bullets to the set of the Western film. She was previously offered a "favorable plea" last September if she would admit to bringing the live rounds. “If Hannah can provide any answers regarding the origin of the live rounds I am happy to work with her but short of that we should just move on,” Morrissey wrote in an email to Gutierrez-Reed's attorney, per Variety.

As Salon Food reported, the Rockefeller Foundation is going to collaborate with the HHS  "to identify how food-based programs can lead to better health outcomes in marginalized communities." Feeding America and the Biden administration will work together to provide expanded food bank access, while "Insatcart will use its advocacy to expand access to healthy food."

In a release, the HHS, which is led by Secretary Xavier Becerra, who champions the “food is medicine” effort, said that "food is a powerful tool for preventing and managing health conditions, and HHS’s ‘Food is Medicine’ summit will examine the broad range of approaches that promote health … through nutritious food."

Public-private partnerships, especially in the realm of food security, are always an interesting endeavor, simply because hunger is such a pervasive issue in the United States; that’s why previous initiatives, such as the USDA’s Farm to School program, which promotes collaboration between schools and local farmers to provide fresh produce to students, have generally enjoyed bipartisan support. What is more interesting, however, is how and why the “Food is Medicine” initiative was started — and how the impetus behind the program seems to stand in sharp contrast to current conservative-led efforts to throttle anti-hunger programs like WIC and SNAP.

In September 2022, the Biden administration held the White House Conference on Hunger, Nutrition and Health, ultimately issuing a call to action to, per the HHS, “end hunger and reduce the prevalence of chronic disease in the United States by 2030.” The department built on this collective energy to develop a “Food is Medicine” initiative. 

“Food is Medicine approaches that focus on integrating consistent access to diet- and nutrition-related resources are a critical component to achieve this goal,” the department wrote in their description of the project. “The approaches are increasingly present across many communities and systems. There’s also increasing federal investment and action to support Food is Medicine approaches in a variety of settings.” 

How this looks in action will be different based on the communities in which programs are implemented; for instance, last summer, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, through the Indian Health Service, awarded $2.5 million in funding to support the development of produce prescription programs in tribal communities. The purpose of the IHS Produce Prescription Pilot Program is to help reduce food insecurity in Native American and indigenous communities by increasing access to traditional foods and produce. 

“Food is medicine and nutrition is health. It is critical that all Americans have access to healthy food,” HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra said at the time. “Programs like this feed directly into our Administration’s goal of building healthier communities at the local level.”

In a document outlining the framing language and principles of the “Food is Medicine” approach, the HHS writes that a food is medicine initiative: recognizes that nourishment is essential for good health, wellbeing and resilience; facilitates easy access to healthy food across the health continuum in the community; cultivates understanding of the relationship between nutrition and health; unites partners with diverse assets to build sustained and integrated solutions; and invests in the capacity of under-resourced communities. 

As Politico reported last November, The White House last year pledged billions to the movement, “and several state Medicaid programs are piloting such efforts. Backers say the programs — which don’t necessarily have a standard definition — can help prevent or treat some conditions and bolster health equity.”

Current data really drives home why addressing food insecurity is so critical. As Salon Food reported late last year, just a few days before Thanksgiving, new data from the Census Bureau’s Household Pulse Survey showed that nearly 28 million people reported experiencing food scarcity in October — both the highest number of 2023 and the highest number recorded by the survey since December 2020. 

Meanwhile, according to the HHS, “about half of all American adults — or 117 million individuals — have one or more preventable chronic disease, many of which are related to poor-quality eating patterns and physical inactivity. These include cardiovascular disease, high blood pressure, type 2 diabetes, some cancers, and poor bone health.” 

Lower food security is associated with higher probability of chronic disease diagnosis — including hypertension, coronary heart disease, hepatitis, stroke, cancer, asthma, diabetes, arthritis, COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), and kidney disease. Additionally, nearly $173 billion a year “is spent on health care for obesity alone.” 

However, despite all the evidence suggesting how much of an impact connecting Americans with nutritious, culturally-appropriate food could have, two of the most important anti-hunger programs in the United States have come under increased fire from conservative lawmakers. 

Last year, in a concession to avoid a default crisis, President Biden folded to Republican pressure and shifted the work eligibility requirements for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (or SNAP). Prior to the pandemic, people younger than 50 who met certain requirements had to volunteer, work or receive job training for 80 hours a month in order to receive regular assistance. The new budget cuts package raised the age of recipients required to work to 55 and, according to The Center for Public Integrity, made it harder for states to waive work rules in areas with high unemployment.

Coming into 2024, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children, or WIC, may not receive the funding it needs to adequately serve participants. In a December press release, the USDA itself wrote that WIC costs are higher this year than last year, in part because more eligible people are signing up for the program meaning, per the organization, that “more pregnant women, new mothers, infants, and children are getting access to nutritious food and important health resources they need to thrive” 

However, they still haven’t received the estimated $1 billion needed to address the greater level of need, and if they don’t, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which oversees the program, said in December that states will face “difficult, untenable decisions about how to manage the program” — something even select public-private partnerships likely can’t rectify. 

That, and the occasional tribute such as this. The word we’re looking for is b***hes. Real women either claim the term or despise it depending on who wields it and why.

Movie and TV audiences swallow the word more easily because the best of ‘em are a kick to watch – b***hes always get the best lines. A fast draw and devastating cleverness made us root for Valentina on “The White Lotus” and Cersei on “Game of Thrones,” along with Joan (“Mad Men”) and all the “Desperate Housewives” that came before her. Reach back further and your memory may be scratched by Alexis and Dominique’s wickedness on “Dynasty” and Amanda, the woman made Mondays a b***h on “Melrose Place.”

But the b***h queen might be Joan Crawford, who delivered that paraphrased line about kennel talk in 1939 as part of her comeback in “The Women.” Whether her reputation as a terror was legitimately earned or a costume worn well depends on who’s describing her.

Ryan Murphy shared his thoughts on the matter in 2017's “Feud: Bette and Joan.” His examination of Bette Davis’ rivalry with Crawford was equally sympathetic and venomous — and a good time all told, with each giving as good as she got.

Women like these are the lifeblood of Murphy’s oeuvre, especially his “American Horror Story” franchise. He’s excellent at writing them with hilariously insightful fury that's often written off as camp. That's not entirely the case; camp is diverting but cheap, whereas in work like "Feud" Murphy aims to be purposefully arch. His b***hes are not to be toyed with, but we come to see their very human aches and wounds. If they lash out at others, it is because so many sought to destroy them. Hence channeling Murphy’s brand of b***hery is an honor reserved for his main muses, typically Sarah Paulson and Jessica Lange, Murphy's Crawford against Susan Sarandon’s Davis.

Lange also shows up in “Feud: Capote Vs. The Swans,” but it’s Murphy’s name and reputation that’ll lure his faithful through the front door. But he’s merely the executive producer for this second installment in his "Feud" anthology series, leaving its eight episodes in the too-reverent hands of “Brothers & Sisters” creator Jon Robin Baitz.

Among those who recognize Truman Capote as the author of “In Cold Blood” are fewer for whom the name Barbara "Babe" Paley means anything, to say nothing of the other New York socialites in her flock. In playing Capote Tom Hollander sustains a constant level of pathetic deflation barely hidden by his disdainful behavior toward people who for reasons that are never persuasively explained, still care about him.

Alongside Naomi Watt’s Babe Paley, Hollander’s Capote convinces us of what a wreck of a human he is by the mid-‘70s despite floating along in the wake of his “swans,” an exclusive group of well-heeled Manhattanites who believe themselves to be the center of the universe.  

Babe has all the money and influence she could want as the wife of CBS chairman Bill Paley (Treat Williams, in his final role), wearing that mantle more gracefully than, say, her sometime-friend Lee Radziwill (Calista Flockhart), Jackie Kennedy’s sister, or their fellow ladies of leisure C.Z. Guest (Chloë Sevigny) and Slim Keith (Diane Lane). And Capote reminds each woman of this when the men in their life cheat on them – especially Bill.

Whenever their hearts are broken, Capote tells whatever ear is sympathetic to his high-pitched and ornate exaggerations that he’s the one who dusts them off and keeps them going, offering assistance with a downer or two or whatever else he’s on.

Hollander’s Capote is an unbearable drunk who uses people, including his friends, whom he tosses under the bus in a gossipy excerpt from his unfinished book “Answered Prayers” titled "La Cote Basque, 1965." After the piece runs in Esquire the women ice him out, making Capote persona non grata in New York high society.

This happens in the first episode, and the remaining seven show Capote struggling to get back in without ever justifying why he sold them out, and why they wanted him around in the first place.

This is the essence of what “Feud” is supposed to be, mind you. “Bette and Joan” never found a way past its namesakes' rivalry, which Murphy and his writers explained by weaving the tension between these women and their common despair. That first installment was a group effort, to be clear, but Murphy's fingerprints are more distinctly visible throughout. (He directed three of its episodes, shares a writing credit on the pilot and wrote the fifth and best chapter solo.) The scripts’ inspired exchanges and comebacks were obviously inspired by parts written for these women by the likes of Joseph L. Mankiewicz, who guided Davis in “All About Eve.”   

Speaking of which, isn’t it interesting how the most marketable b***hes in entertainment tend to be created or curated by men, including most of the modern examples I previously mentioned? Alas, those characters are frequently two-dimensional, which is “Capote Vs. The Swans” undoing.

Those examples of b***hery are mostly fictional ones too. Yet, they are archetypes from which Baitz could have borrowed in this adaptation of Laurence Leamer’s 2021 non-fiction bestseller “Capote’s Women: A True Story of Love, Betrayal, and a Swan Song for an Era” without dishonoring his subjects. 

But Baitz extensively invests in writing to one layer of these women’s interiority without convincing us that there's more to them than their vindictiveness, prejudice or selfishness. Murphy at least succeeds in developing other facets in his characters, even in projects that don’t entirely work.

“Bette and Joan” may have been simpler to portray in that respect because their legends preceded them, whereas only Capote’s voice and creative causticness are amply known in this story. That should be more than enough, to be clear. Men can be brilliant high-riding b***hes too; look at Roman Roy.  

That fact somehow missed Baitz, leaving the audience to wonder what’s to be gained by spending hours with any of these glamorous layabouts. Capote, especially, is written as a man with a knack for driving everyone away except for the ghost of his departed mother, played by Lange as if she were raised from the “Murder House” season of “AHS.”

Nevertheless, Gus Van Sant’s luxuriant directing ensures that “Capote Vs. The Swans” is aesthetically solid, especially in interludes such as the black and white third episode’s retreat to 1966 for a fictionalized project by the Maysles brothers – an invented scenario in which Capote plays each swan’s vanity against the others leading up to his storied Black and White Ball.

Another fabrication simultaneously worth savoring and lamenting is Chris Chalk's appearance as James Baldwin, who swoops in during the fifth episode to pull his dear fellow gay writer out of his funk. These scenes mean well and are employed to make a point about the soft-soled bigotry insinuated throughout the upper class. But they also make one wish this wan treatment had kept Baldwin’s name out of its mouth.

Chalk is enthralling as Baldwin, especially in a scene-chewing monologue near the close of his visit in which he indignantly lambastes Capote’s self-pity amid his incredible fortune. Both men are literary stars at this point, but while Capote was invited to make film and TV appearances, Baldwin followed the way of many Black artists and intellectuals in 20th century who became fed up with American racism and exiled himself to Paris. To picture Baldwin as caring enough about Capote’s sadness over losing access to his exclusionary patrons to drop what he’s doing and devote a “buck up, buttercup” day on the town with Capote beggars belief. 

One hint “Capote Vs. The Swans” doesn’t quite glide is that it’s being promoted as "the original Real Housewives,” which is a disservice to both Bravo socialite-wrangler Andy Cohen and this cast. Bravo’s housewives may be as shallow as Capote’s, but Cohen is a master at casting problematic people into addictive spectacles. Conversely, Baitz and that cast stuff so much effort into their characters as to make them stiff objects instead of granting them the flexibility to be wickedly real.

Along with Watts, “Capote Vs. The Swans” features Demi Moore as Ann Woodward, a walking cautionary tale as one of Capote’s early tragedies, and Molly Ringwald as Joanne Carson, who stuck by Capote in his dying days, heaven knows why. Moore’s performance makes more of a mark than Ringwald’s, which tends to be the fate of cheerful enablers in such stories.

But then it’s difficult to fathom any sorrow stirring for a group of people who both invite such misery on themselves and ask for little sympathy in return, which describes most of Capote’s women – and it is with them that we spent an inordinate amount of time. This is the story’s main obstacle. Not only are these swans relatively obscure beyond certain worlds to start with, but this “Feud” gives us few reasons to want to know them. But that’s the other side of b***hes, isn’t it? Unless they're unquestionably entertaining, the best course is to steer clear.

"Feud: Capote Vs. The Swans premieres at 10 p.m. Wednesday, Jan. 31 on FX and FXX and streams the next day on Hulu.

Now, after wrapping up four memorable seasons as the steely Gerri Kellman on the HBO hit, she's taking on an entirely different role in Peacock's new animated comedy "In the Know." As the much-maligned producer and “boomer witch” on a fictional public radio interview show, the theater-trained star gets to show off her acting skills using just her voice. "In the Know," which was co-created by Mike Judge of "King of the Hill," also pokes fun at both liberals and conservatives in a way that Judge does best. In our “Salon Talks” interview, Smith-Cameron, who is outspoken about her distaste for Trump, shared her frustrations with those on her own side, like how "we're sort of unable to fully rally behind our candidate ever." 

During our discussion, Smith-Cameron also revealed the genesis of her iconic chemistry with her "Succession" co-star Kieran Culkin, the origin of the infamous phrase "slime puppy," and why she thinks their dynamic resonated so well with viewers. "It was kind of sexy," she said, "but in an unusual, unexpected way that sneaks up on people." She also talks about what attaining high-profile success later in her career has meant. "It's a win for middle-aged and older women everywhere," she said. "It has been proof that it's not over until it's over."

You can watch our full “Salon Talks” here or read a transcript of our conversation below.

This interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

This show is a workplace comedy with puppets. You play a very different character from Gerri. Tell me about Barb.

Barb is the producer of “In the Know.” It's an NPR type show, and Barb is sort of the straight man in a way, although she's funny too in her own right. She's slightly Midwestern and very earnest and gets the short end of the stick around the office a lot, unfairly, because she's really the den mother and she's kind to everyone and she keeps the thing going along. 

This show pokes fun in a way that I only something Mike Judge affiliated could do by appealing to people on the left and on the right. It raises questions about those of us who consider ourselves progressive and interrogates our own hypocrisies and blind spots. You are outspoken about where you stand politically. Do you feel that the show is a reflection of the frustrations some of us on our side of the aisle feel with ourselves?

I definitely feel that way. It's kind of too bad that we're unable to fully rally behind our candidate ever. We're always nitpicking and virtue signaling a bit. It's too bad because the other side sort of plays dirty. I don't think we should play dirty, but I wish that we would toughen up and play offensive a little more, not just defensive.

You've done a lot of stage work. When people talk about you, they talk about your physicality. This is a very different skill set for you. What drew you to something that's so outside the box?

I've always thought it was interesting. Voice acting fascinates me. When I was a young actress, I had one job where I was hired to dub an actress's voice for a commercial. There was nothing wrong with her voice; they just wanted to make the character a little kookier without re-shooting the whole thing. I spent the whole day in the studio with cans on my ears and listening to her voice and just talking along with it and in between takes, I would hear it played back and I'd be like, "Wow, I really sound different than her." 

Then they let me see a rough cut at the end of the day of my voice with her face and actions, and it was like a third person. She seemed to move faster than she did before. She seemed to make funnier faces. She seemed to be a little more peculiar because my voice is a little more peculiar than hers, and yet I wouldn't have recognized my voice.

It's this invisible but powerful part of performing, and I've been fascinated to explore it. Also the same woman who dubs me in French for “Succession” dubbed me in French for “Rectify,” and I'm fascinated by that. There's whole voice actor industry in France where they take that very, very seriously. I think there are really good trained actors for that. 

This is also an interesting production because very often in voice work, the actors are in separate rooms. They record separately, but this was a really collaborative process.

That's true. They had us come and come to LA and we ran around the table some and we talked about it some, and then we got in the booth together, all of us, so we could play off each other. They even made note of our facial expressions and the way we would gesticulate, and they worked that into it a bit, so I would say it was unusually collaborative. Then we did a lot of more specific ADR post-production stuff on our own in the booth. Me, from New York, and everyone from where they were.

Speaking of collaborative performances, I have to ask you about “Succession.” You're coming off this award season where it has done very well, but it's also been a with this cast because it's been almost a year since you wrapped shooting. What has it been like having this somewhat bittersweet experience, because you're not going to see each other again in that professional way?

I know. It's so sad.

You seem very snuggly with Kieran Culkin.

Well, Kieran and I go way back, and then we just had to do such peculiar things on the show that we had to be tight or else. But he just loves to tease and give everyone a hard time. He's into insult humor, so he's his own thing. But Sarah Snook and Matthew Macfadyen and really all of them, Brian [Cox], Alan Ruck, I just got so close with all of them. We all did. Zoe Winters who played Kerry, she and I are now writing partners. We're trying to write something together. We became very close.

But it is bittersweet because it felt to us all that the show was just hitting its prime in a way. I can objectively see why Jesse [Armstrong] and the writers decided to end it where they did because of the family story, the succession story—after all, it's called “Succession”—needed to wind up, but the rest of it was just reaching a fever pitch. The whole election thing, and the corrupt big business stuff is just as relevant as ever, if not more. And so, I mean, it's sort of disappointing or hard to get through your head that it's not continuing, but that's show biz, as they say.

But you get to leave the room with everybody wanting more, I guess.

Including ourselves.

This was not a role that was written for a woman. This was not a role that was going to be this pivotal character. And then very early on, you became "indispensable." Tell me  about how that happens. There must have been something in the chemistry, not just with Kieran, but with the whole environment, with the writers and with the cast.

It was a very collaborative way that they worked. For one thing, at the end of every scene, they would give us what Mark Mylod called a “freebie,” which would be kind of do whatever you want, even if it meant saying something different. Then sometimes we would improv even when it wasn't the freebie and they would incorporate it. And also, I just think with that character, somehow I just got this idea for her. In my mind, it came off the text, but I mean, it was written for a guy, so I'm not sure what was intentional. 

What I got from it was this very driven woman who is extremely capable, but sort of a nervous wreck. It was very specific, and there were opportunities for her to be funny, and I saw her in glasses and I just saw her. And they welcomed that. They wanted actors to supply a lot of the character. You can see it with Nick Braun or Kieran, how they almost are written in their own cadence or Connor with Alan Ruck. It's sort of informed by the way their personalities are as well.

When you talk about those freebies or that improv, you came up with “slime puppy.”

I mean, we'd run out of dialogue, but they kept the camera rolling, so I had to come up with worse and worse things to call him.

I would never in a thousand years come up with slime puppy.

I don't know where it came from. I guess I was just inspired by Kieran.

Was it the first time you'd ever used that phrase in your life or to do you throw that one out a lot?

Certainly not.

Were you surprised with the reaction? That pairing, people have gone out of their minds for. What do you think it is about that sick twisted dynamic between these two twisted people that just people are fascinated with?

I don't know. It feels funny to say this myself, but I think somehow there's something kind of specifically sexy about it. We have a rapport, Kieran and I, and it's so unexpected. Our ages are different, and you see the age difference, but with the sexes reversed quite a lot, so it was kind of refreshing and to have something so unexpected. For my character, she was at the beginning so nonplussed every time he would flirt with me, I'd be like, "What? What are you talking about?" That just riled him up more. That seemed to be what turned him on was me being kind of mean with him. That doesn't answer your question, except I think it was kind of sexy, but in an unusual, unexpected way that sneaks up on people, maybe.

You have been working... I almost don't want to say it, for 40 years.

That means I started when I was about eight.

Obviously, you were a baby.

You've had a great deal of acclaim. You've had a great deal of steady work. And yet you have this breakthrough that takes your profile to a different level. Not to in any way diminish anything else that's come before, but you now are at a much wider level  of recognition in your sixties. Again, not that you're in your sixties, but if you were in your sixties.

If I were.

What does it mean to have this come to you at this stage of life?

Well, it's fantastic. It's fantastic, and I feel it's a win for middle-aged and older women everywhere. I was perfectly content with my career the way it was. I felt like I did really meaningful things in the theater, film, and TV all the time, and I loved it. I wasn't someone who expected fame or fortune, so I wasn't looking for it. But it's been great. It has been proof that it's not over until it's over.

It's not over, but we are living in a very changing world. I saw you on X recently talking about AI. It's concerning. 

So concerning.

As someone whose face could be manipulated, whose voice could be taken away from her, what are you looking at and thinking about as you're going forward in your career as a creative person?

This was one of the big points of the strike. It's very hard to resolve. Molly Shannon and I were talking about it, that it almost seems like something the government's going to have to come in and regulate. It wasn't clear at the beginning of the internet all the pitfalls with that and privacy, and then, how there had to be steps taken, measures taken to protect people. I'm hoping that that becomes the case here because I don't even think we can glimpse the ramifications. 

Some of it's obvious. There was already an article in the paper about a manipulated AI version of Joe Biden being used erroneously in a campaign ad, so it's very scary. I saw a thing also in the Times, I think, where they showed you faces and you had to guess which ones were AI and I didn't get any of them right.

It's really scary and I don't think we even know how big it's going to be, but I'm just hoping that it'll become clear to all parties somehow that it's got to be regulated somehow. I don't know how that is. I don't think we know the size of it yet.

I want to ask you one more thing, because you are such a busy lady. You're also going to be in a film version of John Green's “Turtles All the Way Down,” one of my favorite YA books of all time. Tell me about that, and some of the other things we can look forward to seeing or at least hearing you in.

Yes, I did that movie and that was delightful. That's a story about a young woman who has OCD and she's just crippled by it. She's this beautiful, sweet young girl and she can't have a relationship 'cause she's got so many issues with it. She discovers a scientist on the internet who fascinates her about what she says about it. I play that character. She goes to listen to her on a campus and they have a meaningful scene that sort of helps her a bit.

It's very poignant and it's very relatable, I think, whether you have that issue or your own thing because everybody's got something. John Green was on set and he is lovely, and I loved the whole cast and director and everybody. It was a good experience. We shot in Cincinnati, which is cool. I had never spent any time there.

And we're going to get you back on the stage.

Yes, I am going to do a play in London next year it looks like, but they can't quite announce that yet. We don't have the particulars.

So why the focus on Black farmers? It’s been estimated that, in 1910, Black Americans owned roughly 16 million acres of U.S. farmland, mostly in the South. That land was hard-earned, and represented the triumph of Black farmers despite limited opportunities to accumulate wealth in the Reconstruction era. But as of 2017, the year of the most recent Census of Agriculture, that had dropped to only 2.9 million acres — a more than 80% decrease during that 107 year period.

This land loss is the result of many factors, which we document in our new white paper: “Black Land Loss in the United States.” From outright violence and theft to exclusion from federal aid programs, Black farmers have frequently experienced discrimination and worse from both their government and the society in which they live. Because racism is systemic and pervasive, the impacts were compounded for many landowners over the course of the 20th century: Exclusion from aid led to financial trouble, which limited Black farmers’ ability to qualify for other loans in the future. And with often little money for legal resources, Black farming families have fallen prey to a host of exploitative maneuvers from property developers and other bad actors, speeding the decline in land ownership.

Those disparities are ongoing, with even the most recent research suggesting that Black farmers get loans and other aid at lower rates than their white counterparts. Meanwhile, attempts to resolve those gaps have been met with intense hostility from some white farmers and political activists.

The loss of farmland has done more than marginalize Black farmers: It’s a stolen opportunity for Black families to build wealth, one that researchers estimate represents more than $300 billion since the early 20th century. While fully repairing that damage would require a commitment from the government that seems politically unfeasible, further Black land loss is preventable, and even reversible with policies that compensate farmers who have faced discrimination in the past and that prevent it in the future by changing the culture and operations at agencies like the USDA.

Read more about the long history of racism in U.S. agriculture, the fight for land ownership and what must be done to protect and support Black farmers in “Black Land Loss in the United States.”

Ex-U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance explained that given that the case is about illegal retention of classified materials and not the "nature of the classified information," the proceedings pertaining to their presence in the trial under Section Four of the Classified Information and Procedures Act should have been "straightforward" as they are routine for a case like this.  

Cannon's schedule for the CIPA Section Four proceedings, for which she scheduled hearings for mid-February, has been unnecessarily drawn out, Vance argued Sunday, noting that Cannon could have held them earlier without delay. Following Wednesday's meeting, Cannon should "follow that simple path forward" for these types of proceedings, Vance added during a Wednesday MSNBC appearance. 

"Where we will see fireworks is if she does not," the MSNBC legal analyst argued. "If she tries to let the Trump lawyers, for instance, look at this, then there will undoubtedly be an appeal. And of course, the real ball game is what gets put into trial in a courtroom, ultimately."

Former Mueller prosecutor Andrew Weissman agreed that if Cannon "screws this up, to be blunt, this is the kind of issue that I would imagine the government would take an appeal so that they could have the 11th Circuit hear it."  

Weissmann went on to detail the circumstances that would prompt the government to appeal, including if Cannon drastically delays the proceedings or if she rejects Smith's requests for redactions or non-classified summaries to protect the sensitive intelligence.

"Nuclear secrets" or "military plans" the documents could contain are "the kind of data that of course the government would be saying 'I do not want that to be revealed," Weissmann told MSNBC.

Commenting on the U.S. Justice Department probe of Bush's alleged misuse of campaign funds to pay her now-husband Cortney Merritts to provide private security services, Rep. Troy Nehls (R-Texas) told CNN's Melanie Zanona that the progressive congresswoman "doesn't even support the police."

"But the idea to pay her thug money to try to help protect her this and that, for what?" he added. "Maybe if she wouldn't be so loud all the time, maybe she wouldn't be getting threats."

Republican Rep. Troy Nehls of Texas rolls out the racist tropes. Calls Rep. Cori Bush “loud”, and describes her husband as a “thug”. (Video: CNN) pic.twitter.com/yQy6udX2VY

— Mike Sington (@MikeSington) January 31, 2024

Asked by Zanona if Bush deserved to be threatened, Nehls replied: "No, what I'm saying is, is that when you're out there talking the way she does... she's pretty radical. And maybe she should tone it down a little bit."

Bush—who denies the allegations against her—said on social media that Nehls "just called my husband, a Black man and Army veteran, a thug. And I'm the loud Black woman who needs to be silent in order to be safe from violence, or else?"

.@RepTroyNehls just called my husband, a Black man and army veteran, a thug. And I’m the loud Black woman who needs to be silent in order to be safe from violence, or else?

This is the kind of rhetoric that endangers Black lives. He must apologize. https://t.co/QeqZ7yYfRX

— Cori Bush (@CoriBush) January 31, 2024

"Squad" members including Bush and Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) have repeatedly received death threats from white supremacists and others opposed to their progressive politics. Nehls' remarks resemble some of the worst threats Bush has received.

Tlaib said on social media that Nehls' "comments are racist, dangerous, and unacceptable."

These comments are racist, dangerous, and unacceptable. The racism in Congress is real. This is what we deal with as women of color on a regular basis. https://t.co/uY9yBNP7Yg

— Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib (@RepRashida) January 31, 2024

"The racism in Congress is real," she added. "This is what we deal with as women of color on a regular basis."

This isn't the first time Nehls has been accused of racism. Civil rights defenders said the former Fort Bend County sheriff racially profiled Latino motorists, who campaigners say were disproportionately stopped during his tenure. He was also fired from a previous law enforcement job for documented offenses including destruction of evidence and improper arrest.