Monday, November 21, 2022

EK Janaki Ammal: The 'nomad' flower scientist India forgot

  • Published
IMAGE SOURCE,GEETA DOCTOR
Image caption,
Janaki Ammal was a pioneering Indian scientist

In March, the magnolias begin blooming at Wisley.

For the next few weeks, rows of pink flowers dot the small town in Surrey in the UK, beckoning passers-by to stop and smell them.

Few know, however, that many of these blooms have Indian roots.

They were planted by EK Janaki Ammal, a scientist who was born in the southern Indian state of Kerala in the 19th Century.

In a career spanning almost 60 years, Janaki studied a wide range of flowering plants and reworked the scientific classification of several families of plants.

"Janaki was not just a cytogeneticist - she was a field biologist, a plant geographer, a palaeobotanist, an experimental breeder and an ethno-botanist and not in the least, an explorer," says Dr Savithri Preetha Nair, a historian who has researched the scientist's life for years.

It's difficult, Dr Nair says, to name even one Indian male geneticist from the time who adopted such cross-disciplinary methodology in their research.

"She talked about biodiversity as early as the 1930s."

Janaki lived an inspiring life, but for decades, her work went largely unappreciated and her contribution to science was barely acknowledged.

But this year - which also marks Janaki's 125th birth anniversary - Dr Nair hopes to change that with an in-depth biography. The book, titled Chromosome Woman, Nomad Scientist: E.K. Janaki Ammal, A Life 1897-1984, was released earlier in November and is the product of 16 years of research spread across three continents.

It also marks, Dr Nair says, the beginning of "a grand project" of recovering stories about Indian women in science.

"Until now, published sources on women scientists have focused on Europe and North America," she says, adding that women from Asia and other regions "hardly figure anywhere".

IMAGE SOURCE,COURTESY OF THE JOHN INNES FOUNDATION
Image caption,
Magnolia kobus 'Janaki Ammal' flower, named after the Indian botanist

An extraordinary life

While Janaki's professional achievements were numerous, her family members say the way she lived her life was also inspiring.

"She thrived on human possibility," says Geeta Doctor, a writer and Janaki's grand-niece. "She was passionate about everything, completely liberated and always fixated on her work."

Janaki was born in Tellichery (now Thalassery) in Kerala in 1897. Her father, EK Krishnan, was a high court sub-judge in the Madras Presidency, an administrative subdivision in British India.

She grew up in privilege, in a large family that lived in a house called Edam, which Ms Doctor says was "the centre of Janaki's life".

The two-storey house had a grand piano, a sprawling library and spacious halls, its large windows overlooking a carefully-tended garden.

Janaki belonged to Kerala's Thiyya community, which is regarded as socially backward under the Hindu caste system.

But at Edam house, Janaki's life was far removed from any prejudices, Ms Doctor says.

That didn't mean she did not face caste discrimination in her life, she adds - but she never allowed it to stop her.

"If somebody displeased her, she would just move on."

IMAGE SOURCE,GEETA DOCTOR
Image caption,
Janaki spent many years in England

Touch of sweetness

After she finished school, Janaki moved to Madras (now Chennai) for higher education.

In 1924, she was teaching at a women's college when she received a prestigious scholarship from the University of Michigan in the US.

Eight years later, she became the first Indian woman to be awarded a doctorate in botanical science.

She returned to India shortly after, and taught botany in her home state before joining the Sugarcane Breeding Station at Coimbatore.

It was here that Janaki worked on cross-breeding sugarcane and with other plants to create a high-yielding variety of the crop that could flourish in India.

She was the first person to successfully cross sugarcane and maize, which helped in understanding the origin and evolution of sugarcane, Dr Nair says.

A particular hybrid she created, the historian adds, went on to produce many commercial crosses for the institute but she didn't receive credit for it.

In 1940 - just after World War Two had started - Janaki moved to London and joined the John Innes Horticultural Institution to continue her research.

The next few years were the most formative ones of her career. Five years later, she became the first woman scientist to be employed at the Royal Horticultural Society Garden at Wisley.

It was also a time of hardships and hard work - Britain was facing the brunt of the war and food supplies were heavily rationed.

"But Janaki was unfazed," Ms Doctor says. "When the bombs fell, she would just dive under the table or sleep under the bed - all in a day's work."

IMAGE SOURCE,COURTESY OF THE RHS LINDLEY COLLECTIONS
Image caption,
Janaki with her colleagues outside the laboratory at RHS Garden Wisley, 1947

This attitude extended to her personal life, she says.

"[The children of her family] were her equals and she expected us to keep up with her strict ways."

But there was a sweeter side to her as well.

Ms Doctor recalls that her grand-aunt gave them amazing books and took them on delightful picnics.

And she was always brimming with stories - about Kapok, the small black-striped palm squirrel that she had smuggled in her sari to keep her company in London; and her doll Timothy, who fascinated everyone at Edam.

Ms Doctor does not put dates to these memories - the past is simply the past - but she vividly remembers Janaki's strident personality and commanding presence; her vibrant yellow saris; and her "energetic yet subtle" ways.

"She enjoyed life in its minutiae and also the grand scheme of things, but with a rigorous scientific mind."

Dr Nair says that this was also evident in her work, which was not about one seminal revelation, but a series of small-scale discoveries which contributed "to the grand history of human evolution".

"The questions she asked were fundamental ones about plants and man."

IMAGE SOURCE,COURTESY OF THE RHS HERBARIUM
Image caption,
A Rhododendron specimen made by Janaki at RHS

Homecoming

In 1951, India's prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru asked Janaki to return to the country and help restructure the Botanical Survey of India (BSI).

Janaki, who was greatly inspired by the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi, went immediately.

"But her male colleagues refused to take commands from a woman and her attempts to re-organise BSI were turned down," Dr Nair says, adding that Janaki was never entirely accepted at the institute.

This caused her great pain and she could never entirely recover from it. So she took refuge in exploring the country in search of new plants.

In 1948, Janaki became the first woman to go on a plant-hunting expedition to Nepal which, according to her, was the most unique part of Asia botanically, says Dr Nair.

When she was 80, the Indian government awarded her a Padma Shri, one of the country's highest civilian honours. She died seven years later, in 1984.

Ms Doctor says that even though Janaki did not receive the recognition she deserved, she never lost her passion for studying life.

"She would always say 'my work will survive' - and it did."

Dr Nair agrees.

"Janaki's life continues to be a blazing testament to intellectual integrity."

Rabindranath Tagore: When Hitler purged India Nobel laureate's paintings

Soutik Biswas - India correspondent
Sun, November 20, 2022 




Rabindranath Tagore was the first Indian to win a Nobel prize

They were five artworks in all, depicting birds and humans, and one of a girl in a red robe.

Painted in coloured inks and gouache by Rabindranath Tagore, India's most famous poet, they found a place in a leading museum in Berlin. Tagore, the first non-European to win the Nobel literature prize, had gifted the paintings to Germany in 1930.

Seven years later, the paintings were purged by the Nazi regime which had begun to classify some "inappropriate" art works as degenerate.

Hitler, a failed artist himself, believed post-impressionist modern art to be "evidence of a deranged mind" and ordered more than 16,000 artworks, including ones by Van Gogh and Man Ray, to be removed from German museums.

The Nazis considered such art "degenerate" and even staged an exhibition to ridicule them.

Degenerate art: The art the Nazis hated

There appears to be scant record of how and why Tagore's paintings were targeted in a notorious campaign by Hitler. Art historians speculate that it was easy for the Nazis to demonise his art because they were modernist by nature - Hitler once said that "anyone who sees and paints the sky green and fields blue ought to be sterilised".

Tagore visited Germany thrice - in 1921, 1926 and 1930. Two dozen of his books were already available in German translation. "Wherever he spoke, the halls were packed. The newspapers reported scuffles and regular fights by people who were refused entry," says Martin Kampchen, a German author who has translated Tagore's works. The local media hailed the Indian poet as the 'wise man from the East'; and a 'prophet, a mystic and a messiah'.

In 1930, a solo show carrying some 300 of Tagore's artworks travelled to Europe. More than 100 of his paintings were shown in Paris, and at least half of them at the National Gallery of Art in Berlin before the exhibition proceeded to London.

Five of Tagore's paintings are listed in a German inventory of 'degenerate art'

Until 1937, Tagore's paintings were housed in Berlin's baroque Crown Prince Palace, which also housed the National Gallery. When Hitler's purge began, a "deportation list from 15 October 1937 shows the five paintings listed amongst those of many famous expressionist painters which were removed from the palace and brought to a depot with restricted access in the city", according to art historian Konstantin Wenzlaff.

What exactly happened next still remains unclear.

A "degenerate art" inventory compiled in 1941-42 - later widely used to identify the provenance of paintings that went missing during the Nazi era - clearly lists the five paintings, loosely titled Mask, Portrait, Girl [in a red robe], Mask and Two Birds.

In pictures: Long-lost art unveiled in Germany

The confiscated works were listed alphabetically by artist and used symbols such as T (for exchanged), V (for sold) and X (for destroyed) for information on each painting.

In the case of Tagore, the inventory lists two paintings as exchanged and two as destroyed. The fifth one, Two Birds, was untagged in the list.

One of the purged paintings is housed in a museum in Munich, according to a German curator

Mr Wenzlaff has written that Tagore's works "disappeared" from the gallery and "have not been recovered so far".

Three paintings were to be returned to Tagore in 1939 - a letter from the Reich Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda apparently inquired about the exact address of the poet's heirs, even though he was alive at that time.

Art historian R Siva Kumar, who has researched Tagore's artworks extensively, believes that these three paintings were returned to Tagore in 1939 and the remaining two were lost.

The Nazi art hoard that shocked the world

But Oliver Kase, the chief curator of modern art at Munich's Pinakothek der Moderne museum, told me that one of the two paintings believed to be lost has been in the collection of The Bavarian State Painting Collections in the city since 1964.

Dr Kase describes the painting of a "half-shadowed head" as both "austere and dreamily spiritual" and an example of what was branded as "degenerate art" by the Nazis.

"I believe that is the only work by Tagore in a German public collection," Dr Kase says. The second painting was sold in an auction in October 1996 to a private collector in the UK, he adds.

"The three remaining works that were returned to Tagore [in India] are lost."

Hermann Goering and Adolph Hitler at an exhibition of 'degenerate art' put together by the Nazi party

Prof Siva Kumar believes he "might have seen one of the returned paintings" in the archives at Visva-Bharati, the university founded by Tagore in West Bengal's Shantiniketan town. Nilanjan Bandopadhyay, who runs the archive, told me that he does not know of this painting "off hand, and some visual reference would help".

Tagore began painting in his mid-sixties and ended up producing more than 2,300 artworks over a decade before he died in 1941.

"He always wanted to paint. He was doodling in his manuscripts. Around 1928, he was producing his first paintings," says Professor Siva Kumar.

The prodigious Bengali polymath - poet, novelist, teacher, philosopher, composer - drew imaginary animal figures, geometric patterns, female figures, self-portraits, landscapes and masks that looked like real people. Art historians believe Tagore's art was informed by his widespread exposure to Art Nouveau - the first self-consciously international modern art movement - and the more expressive ancient folk arts.

"What he did was to bring an idea of freedom into his art in India. In the 1930s US and UK had not yet warmed up to modern art. When Tagore was shown in Germany people compared his work to surrealists and expressionists," says Prof Siva Kumar. Until they were purged by the Nazis.


Humanity’s first cultural revolution and how can it help us today

Image via Shutterstock.

November 13, 2022

We live in a fast-moving, technology-dominated era. Happiness is fleeting, and everything is replaceable or disposable. It is understandable that people are drawn to a utopian vision. Many find refuge in the concept of a “return” to an idealized past—one in which humans were not so numerous, and animals abounded; when the Earth was still clean and pure, and when our ties to nature were unviolated.

This article was produced by Local Peace Economy, a project of the Independent Media Institute.

But this raises the question: Is this nothing more than a utopian vision? Can we pinpoint a time in our evolutionary trajectory when we wandered from the path of empathy, of compassion and respect for one another and for all forms of life? Or are we nihilistically the victims of our own natural tendencies, and must we continue to live reckless lifestyles, no matter the outcome?

Studying human prehistory enables people to see the world through a long-term lens—across which we can discern tendencies and patterns that can only be identified over time. By adopting an evolutionary outlook, it becomes possible to explain when, how, and why specific human traits and behaviors emerged.

The particularity of human prehistory is that there are no written records, and so we must try to answer our questions using the scant information provided for us by the archeological record.

The Oldowan era that began in East Africa can be seen as the start of a process that would eventually lead to the massive technosocial database that humanity now embraces and that continues to expand ever further in each successive generation, in a spiral of exponential technological and social creativity. The first recognizable Oldowan tool kits start appearing 2.6 million years ago; they contain large pounding implements, alongside small sharp-edged flakes that were certainly useful for, among other things, obtaining viscera and meat resources from animals that were scavenged as hominins (humans and their close extinct ancestors) competed with other large carnivores present in their environments. As hominins began to expand their technological know-how, successful resourcing of such protein-rich food was ideal for feeding the developing and energy-expensive brain.

Stone tool production—and its associated behaviors—grew ever more complex, eventually requiring relatively heavy investments into teaching these technologies to successfully pass them onward into each successive generation. This, in turn, established the foundations for the highly beneficial process of cumulative learning that became coupled with symbolic thought processes such as language, ultimately favoring our capacity for exponential development.

This had huge implications, for example, in terms of the first inklings of what we call “tradition”—ways to make and do things—that are indeed the very building blocks of culture. Underpinning this process, neuroscientific experiments carried out to study the brain synapses and areas involved during toolmaking processes show that at least some basic forms of language were likely needed in order to communicate the technologies required to manufacture the more complex tools of the Acheulian age that commenced in Africa about 1.75 million years ago. Researchers have demonstrated that the areas of the brain activated during toolmaking are the same as those employed for abstract thought processes, including language and volumetric planning.

When we talk about the Acheulian, we are referring to a hugely dense cultural phenomenon occurring in Africa and Eurasia that lasted some 1.4 million years. While it cannot be considered a homogenous occurrence, it does entail a number of behavioral and technosocial elements that prehistorians agree tie together as a sort of unit.

Globally, the Acheulian technocomplex coincides generally with the appearance of the relatively large-brained hominins attributed to Homo erectus and the African Homo ergaster, as well as Homo heidelbergensis, a wide-ranging hominin identified in Eurasia and known to have successfully adapted to relatively colder climatic conditions. Indeed, it was during the Acheulian that hominins developed fire-making technologies and that the first hearths appear in some sites (especially caves) that also show indications of seasonal or cyclical patterns of use.

In terms of stone tool technologies, Acheulian hominins moved from the nonstandardized tool kits of the Oldowan to innovate new ways to shape stone tools that involved comparatively complex volumetric concepts. This allowed them to produce a wide variety of preconceived flake formats that they proceeded to modify into a range of standardized tool types. Conceptually, this is very significant because it implies that for the first time, stone was being modeled to fit with a predetermined mental image. The bifacial and bilateral symmetry of the emblematic Acheulian tear-shaped handaxes is especially exemplary of this particular hallmark.

The Acheulian archeological record also bears witness to a whole new range of artifacts that were manufactured according to a fixed set of technological notions and newly acquired abilities. To endure, this toolmaking know-how needed to be shared by way of ever more composite and communicative modes of teaching.

We also know that Acheulian hominins were highly mobile since we often find rocks in their tool kits that were imported from considerable distances away. Importantly, as we move through time and space, we observe that some of the tool-making techniques actually show special features that can be linked to specific regional contexts. Furthermore, population densities increased significantly throughout the period associated with the later Acheulian phenomenon—roughly from around 1 million to 350,000 years ago—likely as a result of these technological achievements.

Beyond toolmaking, other social and behavioral revolutions are attributed to Acheulian hominins. Fire-making, whose significance as a transformative technosocial tool cannot be overstated, as well as other accomplishments, signal the attainment of new thresholds that were to hugely transform the lives of Acheulian peoples and their descendants. For example, Acheulian sites with evidence of species-specific hunting expeditions and systematized butchery indicate sophisticated organizational capacities and certainly also suggest that these hominins mastered at least some form of gestural—and probably also linguistic—communication.

All of these abilities acquired over thousands of years by Acheulian peoples enabled them not only to settle into new lands situated, for example, in higher latitudes, but also to overcome seasonal climatic stresses and so to thrive within a relatively restricted geographical range. While they were certainly nomadic, they established home-base type living areas to which they returned on a cyclical basis. Thus, the combined phenomena of more standardized and complex culture and regional lifeways led these ancient populations to carve out identities even as they developed idiosyncratic technosocial behaviors that gave them a sense of “belonging” to a particular social unit—living within a definable geographical area. This was the land in which they ranged and into which they deposited their dead (intentional human burials are presently only recognized to have occurred onward from the Middle Paleolithic). To me, the Acheulian represents the first major cultural revolution known to humankind.

So I suggest that it was during the Acheulian era that increased cultural complexity led the peoples of the world to see each other as somehow different, based on variances in their material culture. In the later Acheulian especially, as nomadic groups began to return cyclically to the same dwelling areas, land-linked identities formed that I propose were foundational to the first culturally based geographical borders. Through time, humanity gave more and more credence to such constructs, deepening their significance. This would eventually lead to the founding of modern nationalistic sentiments that presently consolidate identity-based disparity, finally contributing to justifying geographic inequality of wealth and power.

Many of the tough questions about human nature are more easily understood through the prism of prehistory, even as we make new discoveries. Take, for instance, the question of where the modern practice of organized violence emerged from.

Human prehistory, as backed by science, has now clearly demonstrated that there is no basis for dividing peoples based on biological or anatomical aspects and that warlike behaviors involving large numbers of peoples, today having virtually global effects on all human lives, are based on constructed imaginary ideologies. Geographical boundaries, identity-based beliefs, and religion are some of the conceptual constructs commonly used in our world to justify such behaviors. In addition, competition buttressed by concepts of identity is now being accentuated due to the potential and real scarcity of resources resulting from population density, consumptive lifestyles, and now also accelerated climate change.

On the question of whether or not the emergence of warlike behavior was an inevitable outcome, we must observe such tendencies from an evolutionary standpoint. Like other genetic and even technological traits, the human capacity for massive violence exists as a potential response that remains latent within our species until triggered by particular exterior factors. Of course, this species-specific response mode also corresponds with our degree of technological readiness that has enabled us to create the tools of massive destruction that we so aptly manipulate today.

Hierarchized societies formed and evolved throughout the Middle and Late Pleistocene when a range of hominins coevolved with anatomically modern humans that we now know appeared in Africa as early as 300,000 years ago. During the Holocene Epoch, human links to specific regional areas were strengthened even further by the sedentary lifestyles that developed into the Neolithic period, as did the inclination to protect the resources amassed in this context. We can conjecture the emergence of a wide range of sociocultural situations that would have arisen once increasing numbers of individuals were arranged into the larger social units permitted by the capacity to produce, store, and save sizable quantities of foodstuffs and other kinds of goods.

Even among other animals, including primates, increased population densities result in competitive behaviors. In this scenario, that disposition would have been intensified by the idea of accumulated goods belonging, as it were, to the social unit that produced them.

Bringing technology into play, we can clearly see how humans began to transform their know-how into ingenious tools for performing different acts of warfare. In the oldest toolkits known to humankind going back millions of years, we cannot clearly identify any artifacts that appear adequate to be used for large-scale violence. We don’t have evidence of organized violence until millions of years after we started developing tools and intensively modifying the environments around us. As we amplified the land-linked identity-based facet of our social lives, so did we continue to develop ever more efficient technological and social solutions that would increase our capacity for large-scale warfare.

If we can understand how these behaviors emerged, then we can also use our technological skills to get to the root of these problems and employ all we have learned to finally take a better hold of the reins of our future.


Author Bio: Deborah Barsky is a researcher at the Catalan Institute of Human Paleoecology and Social Evolution and associate professor at the Rovira i Virgili University in Tarragona, Spain, with the Open University of Catalonia (UOC). She is the author of Human Prehistory: Exploring the Past to Understand the Future (Cambridge University Press, 2022).

Sunday, November 20, 2022

Some QAnon believers are enraged by Trump's 2024 announcement and have started ignoring 'Q drops.' But experts say the movement is as fervent as ever.




Alia Shoaib
Sun, November 20, 2022

A Trump supporters holds up a large QAnon sign while waiting in line to see President Donald J. Trump at his rally on August 2, 2018.Rick Loomis/Getty Images

Many QAnon believers reacted angrily to Trump's 2024 announcement as it negated their election fraud beliefs.

Q-aligned candidates did badly at the midterms, and recent "Q drops" failed to make a stir.

But experts told Insider why the movement is as strong as ever.


When former President Donald Trump announced that he was planning to run for president in 2024, there was confusion and anger in the extremist QAnon community.

The QAnon conspiracy movement, which is based around the belief that Trump is secretly working to expose a cabal of Satan-worshiping pedophiles that run the world, has in recent years grown to become a part of mainstream politics.

While many QAnon believers reacted to his long-anticipated announcement with excitement, some voiced their anger, because it implied he was accepting that he lost the 2020 election – something he and his most ardent supporters have spent the last two years rejecting.

"Hey you guys, the elections are all rigged… But [vote] for me again! This is literally 1984-tier doublethink," one user wrote on 8kun, according to screenshots posted on Twitter.

"He just conceded 2020 election we're just gonna skip over the 2020 and 2022 fraud," another user wrote on Telegram. "There's no justice for treason, there's no justice for crimes against humanity."



The QAnon movement was already on the back foot. The midterm elections were a failure for the conspiracy theory movement, as dozens of candidates aligned with it lost their races for Congress and high-ranking state offices.

And earlier this month, the latest posts by the so-called "Q" on the forum 8kun were met with a lukewarm response.

All of this could be taken as evidence that the movement is losing steam. However, experts believe this is far from the case – and that it is simply evolving and changing shape.

"It's becoming much more mainstream and less devoted to the mythology of Q itself," Mike Rothschild, a QAnon expert who wrote "The Storm is Upon Us," told Insider.

"It certainly still venerates Trump, but a lot of people think Q itself was just a big dead end. The mainstream has embraced the conspiracy theories about the stolen election, COVID being a hoax, etcetera."
One in five Americans believe in the core tenets of QAnon

While it is hard to track how widespread belief in QAnon is, the nonpartisan Public Religion Research Institute published a study in February that found that nearly one in five Americans believes in its core tenets.

"Our surveys show that QAnon conspiracy theories are not losing popularity over time, despite their championed leader being out of power," said Natalie Jackson, director of research at PRRI, in a press release for the study.

The movement's feverish ideas have contributed to some radicalized individuals committing acts of violence, and others have had their families torn apart and their lives ruined.

Trump's role as a messiah-like figure has long been a key part of QAnon mythology. He has often winked to the movement, increasingly so in recent months, sharing dozens of messages alluding to QAnon on his social media platform Truth Social.

At a Trump rally in September, a song linked to QAnon was played while his supporters raised their index fingers in an unusual salute.

Former President Donald Trump speaks during a campaign rally at Minden-Tahoe Airport on October 08, 2022 in Minden, Nevada.Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

But following his announcement of a third presidential run, many rank-and-file QAnon believers voiced their unhappiness because of its implications for their election fraud beliefs. Moreover, they have long expected him to return to power through "The Storm," which would involve him spearheading a mass arrest of their political enemies and even executions of members of the "Deep State."

Although some are losing faith, some QAnon influencers seem to be throwing their support behind Trump and trying to stub out the bickering. One told followers: "This talk about being angry if he announces a 2024 run needs to cease."

"They're still devoted to him and still worship him as a god figure," Rothschild said. "But some influencers are a little less enthusiastic, essentially starting to give up on the idea of anything good ever happening."

"A few are angry that he's running in 2024 without 'fixing 2020,' as he didn't mention election fraud at all in his announcement. But every time big influencers get mad at Trump, they eventually come around, so they'll be all in on him again soon," he said.
To Q and beyond

The week of the midterm elections, three new "Q drops" appeared. These are cryptic online posts made by an anonymous person called "Q," who claims to be a high-ranking government insider with access to classified information.

The cryptic messages that sparked the conspiracy theory movement were initially posted on the forum 4chan and later moved to the site 8chan which has since been renamed 8kun.

While previous Q drops were met with excitement and flurries of posts from followers scrambling to decode them, the latest drops were largely met with ambivalence.

Fredrick Brennan, who founded 8chan but has since dedicated himself to exposing those behind the Q movement, told Insider that the reaction to the latest Q drops was comparatively "muted" following controversial drops in the summer.

In June of this year, the mysterious Q reappeared after nearly two years of silence. However, observers asserted that the new posts were likely written by Jim Watkins, who owns 8kun, or someone close to him, because of a technical change that was made involving the site's tripcodes, used to identify anonymous users.

People in the movement want action and arrests


Fredrick Brennan and Jim Watkins.YouTube

Brennan, who previously worked closely with Watkins and his son Ron, played a key role in linking Watkins to the new posts at the time.

"In June, there was a big negative reaction. This month, due to that negative reaction, the reaction was basically, you know, muted, who cares," Brennan told Insider.

The father and son duo have long been suspected of being behind QAnon, but they have both denied it.

Another reason why the drops have lost their allure is the long periods of Q's absence.

"Q can't really sustain itself with a few drops every few months," Rothschild said. "And the new drops just have nothing interesting to say and are almost certainly being written or posted by 8kun owner Jim Watkins. People in the movement want action and arrests, not more cryptic questions and rhetorical nonsense."
The power of QAnon influencers

The momentum is now with QAnon influencers, who gained prominence in decoding and translating Q drops and have gone on to amass tens of thousands of followers.

High-profile offshoots include the group led by Michael Protzman, who goes by the username Negative48, and who led his followers to camp out in Dallas with the bizarre promise that John F. Kennedy would reappear. Needless to say, the assassinated former president never showed up.


Michael Brian Protzman, also know as Negative48 and the supposed leader of a QAnon cult, talks with supporters before a rally for former President Donald Trump in Wilmington, North Carolina on September 23, 2022.Madeline Gray for The Washington Post via Getty Images

Many of these influencers act as interpreters and gatekeepers for their followers, picking and choosing which theories and drops they consider to be canonical and worth paying attention to.

Brennan said that he believes these influencers are enjoying the freedom and power they have in a post-Q world.

"They realized that they had a lot more power in a world without Q. In the past, influencers could lose thousands of followers overnight if Q said something that was against one of their pet theories," Brennan said.

However, Rothschild believes that many of the splinter groups like Negative48's are "too weird and outside the norm" for most believers to go along with. "It's all very much in flux without Q to guide the movement," he said.

It remains to be seen how the movement will respond to Trump's third presidential campaign and whether he will be selected as the Republican nominee for 2024.

Despite Q's predictions having not come to fruition, many believers appear to be undeterred in their faith – although it is unclear how long they will wait for the storm that never arrives.



Republicans Lost the Races Where They Spent the Most

Roger Sollenberger
Thu, November 17, 2022 

Photo Illustration by Thomas Levinson/The Daily Beast/Getty

Pay Dirt is a weekly foray into the pigpen of political funding. 


While the midterm elections dashed Republican hopes for a “red wave,” the green wave wasn’t much more kind to them either.

The Daily Beast reviewed the most expensive House and Senate races in the country, and found that, with a few exceptions, Republican candidates were on the losing end.

Republicans lost three of the five most expensive Senate races, per CRP data, with Democrats clinching the top three—Pennsylvania, Georgia, and Arizona. (The Georgia contest, where Sen. Raphael Warnock received the most votes, is headed to a runoff.)

While Republicans are now projected to win a slim majority in the House—far below their expectations—Democrats took all five of the most expensive races, according to CRP data.

Republicans also came up short in outside spending. The top two outside spending groups of the midterms, per CRP, were super PACs aligned with Republican Senate and House leadership, with their Democratic counterparts coming in third and fourth.

GOP Gets Its Consolation Prize: A Bare-Bones House Majority

Those two GOP groups alone had spent nearly $400 million on their efforts to take back the legislature just ahead of the election, where Republicans were favored to win. But Democrats—whose top two super PACs had only spent $225 milliondefied the odds in the House and held their Senate majority, and they can still pick up a seat in Georgia.

The GOP’s Senate Leadership Fund super PAC alone spent nearly as much as its Democratic counterparts combined. It invested ads most heavily in Georgia ($39 million), with Pennsylvania (lost) and North Carolina (won) next.

Overall, the Senate money wasn’t evenly distributed, with wide gaps across the most expensive races.

The most costly battle overall—Pennsylvania—commanded a total of $374.4 million in spending, according to CRP data. That’s about $90 million more than the second-most expensive race, in Georgia; the tenth-most expensive, Missouri, only saw $65 million in spending—or about 17 percent as much as Pennsylvania.

The Republican Senate victories, however, are notable, because Democratic candidates—who have outraised Republicans this year—put more cash into most of those races, but still lost. Democrats saw this phenomenon in some marquee 2020 contests, where top-money draws like South Carolina’s Jamie Harrison and Kentucky’s Amy McGrath both came up short in the vote count that year.

The two most glaring discrepancies this time around were Val Demings in Florida (raising $72.3 million to Sen. Marco Rubio’s $46.6 million) and Tim Ryan in Ohio, who outraised his opponent J.D. Vance nearly four-to-one.

How J.D. Vance Found a Way to Love Trump and Win in Ohio

To some extent, the outcomes reflect widely reported GOP concerns this summer that Senate candidates in critical battleground states were struggling to raise money. Those concerns sparked a political budget crisis, with party leaders fighting over who was to blame and who could help make up the difference as the campaigns headed into the home stretch.

That air support was scattered. Where SLF focused on Pennsylvania, Georgia, and North Carolina, the National Republican Senatorial Committee spent more money on ads in Arizona ($9 million, per Politico) than any other state. The GOP candidate there, venture capitalist Blake Masters, failed to raise much money—$12.1 million as of Oct. 19, compared to Sen. Mark Kelly’s $81.8 million—and lost the election by more than five points.

But Republicans fared much worse in the House. While the GOP still eked out a majority, they haven’t won a single seat in the top 10 most expensive races, though two of them still remain too close to call as of this writing. The GOP’s Congressional Leadership Fund outspent its Democratic counterpart $188.1 million to $93.6 million to get there.

The total cost of the 2022 midterms is staggering. The Center for Responsive Politics projected the amount to exceed $16.7 billion—more than double the price tag in 2018. And with that much money on the line, blame spreads quickly.

The disappointment among Republicans has sent a shockwave through party ranks. Republicans now face a leadership crisis in both houses, including internal challenges to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy.

And to an extent, the crisis reflects the financial crisis that reared its head this summer. McCarthy, the top fundraiser in the House, now finds his presumed speakership at risk from a fractious, fiscally hawkish Freedom Caucus. And McConnell, aligned with SLF, has survived a challenge from NRSC leader Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL).

But Scott is taking flak, too. On Tuesday, Sens. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) and Thom Tillis (R-NC) called for an audit of the NRSC’s midterm spending. Scott welcomed the prospect, and said he had worked to reform previous failures since taking over in 2021.

“When that’s your starting point, you work really hard to make sure there are transparent processes, and we are more than happy to sit down with any member of the caucus to walk them through our spending,” he said.

CRIMINAL CAPITALI$M

Trumps had role in fraud scheme, former exec testifies at company's trial

Former Trump Organization chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg testified in court Thursday, describing how Donald Trump and two of his children allegedly participated in a scheme to defraud tax authorities.

Weisselberg said Donald Trump, or at times Eric Trump or Donald Trump Jr., signed checks to pay up to $100,000 for private school tuition for Weisselberg's grandchildren. Weisselberg said he then instructed the company's controller to deduct the $100,000 from his salary, allowing him to report a smaller income. Copies of some of the checks signed by the Trumps have been shown in court.

Weisselberg said the first time Trump signed a tuition check, Weisselberg told him, "Don't forget, I'm going to pay you back for this." The payback, he said, was the salary reduction.

Two Trump Organization entities and Weisselberg are accused of more than a dozen counts of fraud and tax evasion. Weisselberg entered a guilty plea in August, admitting to charges filed by the Manhattan District Attorney's Office accusing him of receiving more than $1.7 million in untaxed compensation.

Weisselberg, who is still on the Trump Organization's payroll, has over the first two days of testimony described a litany of benefits he and several other executives received for which he said their salaries were similarly reduced to avoid paying taxes.

He said for himself and several other executives, the salary reductions were then mitigated by hefty bonus checks paid to the executives as if they were independent contractors for Trump Organization entities.

"Donald Trump always wanted to sign the bonus checks" before he became president in 2017, Weisselberg said.

That practice ceased during the next two years after an internal review led to changes at the company, he said.

"We were going through a company-wide cleanup process, making sure that since Mr. Trump was now president, everything was being done properly," Weisselberg said.

Former Trump Organization chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg testifies at the company's trial on fraud charges in New York. / Credit: Jane Rosenberg

Defense attorney Alan Futerfas later asked Weisselberg, "(Trump) didn't authorize you to commit tax fraud did he?"

"Of course not," Weisselberg replied.

Weisselberg said the funds delivered as independent contractor payments were used to set up Keogh retirement plans, tax-deferred pension accounts designed for people who are self-employed.

Defense attorneys for the Trump Organization have said the company did nothing wrong, and laid the scheme squarely at Weisselberg's feet, saying he hid the salary reductions and independent contractor payments from the Trumps.

Futerfas asked Weisselberg, "What human being did you scheme with?"

Weisselberg replied, "Jeff McConney," referring to the company's controller, who previously testified during the trial. McConney was granted immunity in exchange for grand jury testimony in the case, and blamed Weisselberg for the scheme.

Futerfas continued with questions seeking to differentiate the Trumps from the executives who worked beneath them.

"Did you conspire with any member of the Trump family?" Futerfas asked.

"No," Weisselberg replied.

"Did you scheme with Jeff McConney?" Futerfas asked.

"Yes," Weisselberg replied.

"Did you scheme with any member of the Trump family?" Futerfas asked.

"No," Weisselberg replied.

Later, Futerfas asked, "Aside from family members, you were among the most trusted people they knew. Is that right?"

"Correct," Weisselberg replied.

Soon after, Futerfas asked, "Are you embarrassed about what you did?"

Choking up, Weisselberg replied, "More than you can imagine."

Earlier Thursday, Weisselberg said under questioning by a prosecutor that other executives at the company were active participants in, and beneficiaries of, similar salary and bonus arrangements.

Weisselberg described arranging for his son Barry's family to live in a newly-renovated apartment on New York's tony Central Park South. He said the location was convenient for Barry Weisselberg's job as manager of an ice rink and carousel run by the Trump Organization in Central Park. Allen Weisselberg said his son paid $500 out of pocket and $500 from his salary per month to rent the apartment, which he described as a "below market" rate.

At the time, Allen Weisselberg and his wife lived in an $8,200 per month company-owned apartment under a lease agreement signed by Donald Trump himself.

Allen Weisselberg said he provided his son's tax paperwork for preparation to the outside accountant who was in charge of the entire Trump Organization's annual tax account. Allen Weisselberg said his son's reported salary at the time "was probably lower than it should have been."

Peter Stambleck, an attorney for Barry Weisselberg, declined to comment.

Ex-Trump Organization CFO says Trump family was in the dark on tax fraud scheme

Former President Donald Trump and his two eldest sons signed the checks the Trump Organization's chief financial officer used to cheat on his taxes, but they didn't know it was fraud, the ex-CFO testified Thursday.

Allen Weisselberg, 75, testified for a second day in the criminal trial of Trump's family business in New York City that the only other person in the company who knew about the tax fraud scheme was its controller, Jeffrey McConney.

Asked by Trump lawyer Alan Futerfas in cross-examination whether Trump or anyone else in the company gave him permission to "commit tax fraud," Weisselberg said, "No."

"Did you conspire with the Trump family?" Futerfas asked. "No," Weisselberg said.

Trump Organization's former Chief Financial Officer Allen Weisselberg and attorney Alan Futerfas in the courtroom in New York on Nov. 17, 2022. (Christine Cornell)

Weisselberg also testified he hadn't been taking off-the-books perks to benefit the company — he said he was doing it for himself.

"Your decision not to pay taxes was solely to benefit Allen Weisselberg?" Futerfas asked. "Correct," Weisselberg answered.

He acknowledged the company benefited financially but said, "It was my own personal greed that led to this."

Weisselberg, the prosecution's key witness, was indicted along with the Trump Organization in April of last year in what the government described as a 15-year scheme to cheat the system out of tax money.

Weisselberg pleaded guilty in August and agreed to testify for a lesser sentence. While he was removed as CFO after he was indicted, he testified Tuesday that his duties are largely the same and that he's still making the same amount of money — about $1 million a year.

Weisselberg received $1.76 million in “indirect employee compensation” through the scheme, including a rent-free apartment, expensive cars, private school tuition for his grandchildren and new furniture, prosecutors said in court filings. Other executives got similar perks and were paid bonuses as independent contractors, saving the company payroll taxes.

Weisselberg said Trump was aware of the perks he was getting because he and then later his sons Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump would sign the checks.

Under questioning from Futerfas, Weisselberg said the only person who knew he wasn’t paying the proper taxes on the perks was McConney.

McConney testified last week that Weisselberg as the lone bad actor, calling him a “micromanager” who had to sign off on all financial decisions.

Image: Trump Organization's former Chief Financial Officer Allen Weisselberg, left, arrives to the courtroom in New York on Nov. 17, 2022. (Yuki Iwamura / AP)

Weisselberg was the only individual charged in the case. Under the terms of his agreement with prosecutors, he agreed to pay nearly $2 million in taxes, interest and penalties and serve five months in jail, followed by five years of probation. He also agreed “to testify truthfully at the upcoming trial of the Trump Organization” or face up to five to 15 years in prison.

He testified earlier Thursday that the Trump Organization cleaned up its business practices after Trump was elected president because of the extra scrutiny it was under.

"Everyone was looking at our company from every different angle you could think of,” including Trump himself, Weisselberg said.

Futerfas asked him whether he'd broken the family's trust with the fraud. "Yes," Weisselberg answered.

Asked whether he was ashamed of his actions, he replied, "More than you can imagine."

This article was originally published on NBCNews.com

Trump Ex-CFO Tells Jury He and Others Committed Tax Fraud


Patricia Hurtado and Greg Farrell
Thu, November 17, 2022 


(Bloomberg) -- The Trump Organization’s longtime chief financial officer, Allen Weisselberg, testified that greed fueled a tax fraud scheme he says he engaged in with the firm’s controller and the two Trump companies standing trial.

Weisselberg, the prosecution’s star witness against the two business units, told a jury in Manhattan on Thursday that the scheme, which spanned more than a decade, was driven by the simple determination to evade taxes.

“It was my own personal greed that led to this,” the 75-year-old former CFO said on his second day on the witness stand in New York state court.

Alan Futerfas, a lawyer for Trump Payroll Corp., one of the two units, tried to show during his cross-examination that Weisselberg’s machinations were concealed from Donald Trump and his family. Weisselberg, who is still drawing his $640,000 annual salary at the Trump Organization even after pleading guilty in the case this summer, grew emotional when Futerfas asked if he had betrayed the family, for whom he has worked for almost 50 years.

Linchpin of Case

Weisselberg’s admission that he committed his crimes together with the Trump companies is the linchpin of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s case against them. Donald Trump himself, who isn’t charged, has called the trial a baseless vendetta.

“Given that you were getting about $200,000 in expenses, without it being taxed, wasn’t this a savings to the Trump Corporation, because they saved themselves from having to give you a double raise?” Executive Assistant DA Susan Hoffinger asked Weisselberg.

“The Trump Corporation saved some payroll taxes, yes,” he said. Weisselberg later acknowledged that Trump Corp., the other company of the pair, would have had to award him at least $400,000 more to make up for the taxes he’d owe if his compensation weren’t hidden within perks like luxury cars and high-end housing.

Read More: Trump Firm’s Tax Fraud Trial Promises Ex-CFO as Star Witness

“I committed those crimes with Jeff McConney, who I dealt with directly, and Trump Payroll and the Trump Corporation,” Weisselberg told the jury under questioning by Hoffinger.

Trump Organization Controller Jeffrey McConney, who was the prosecution’s first witness, was granted immunity in exchange for his testimony but proved so evasive on the stand that he was declared a hostile witness.

What About the Trumps?

Weisselberg told the jurors Thursday the scam was already in place when he began working for Trump in 1986.

“Did you scheme with any member of the Trump family?” Futerfas asked in his cross-examination.

“No,” Weisselberg said.

Read More: Trump CFO Got Demotion, ‘Small Birthday Cake’ After His Plea

Weisselberg has admitted that Donald Trump personally paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in private school tuition for the executive’s grandchildren. The former CFO and his wife each got a Mercedes-Benz and an apartment paid for by the Trump companies. Prosecutors say these perks were all part of the fraud.

At one point Weisselberg appeared to help the prosecution significantly when Futerfas asked him whether the Trump companies had benefited from the fraud -- a crucial part of the DA’s case.

“I didn’t do the analysis,” Weisselberg said, “but I knew there was a benefit to the company.”

Yet when asked whether not paying taxes on the perks was his decision alone and solely for his own benefit, Weisselberg said yes.

Emotional Testimony

He grew emotional when Futerfas asked if he had lived up to the trust the Trump Organization had placed in him.

“Did you betray that trust?” Futerfas asked.

“Yes,” Weisselberg said.

“And you did it for your own personal gain?” the lawyer asked.

“Correct,” Weisselberg said.

Read More: Trump Firm’s Fraud Trial Sees Drama as Witness Declared Hostile

The executive -- who has worked for three generations of Trumps, starting under Donald Trump’s father, Fred -- then grew teary, his voice cracking.

“Are you embarrassed by what you did?” Futerfas asked.

“More than you can imagine,” Weisselberg said.

“Ashamed?” the attorney pressed.

“Yes, very much so,” Weisselberg said, his face reddening.

He continues his testimony when the trial resumes Friday.

The case is People v. Trump Organization, 01473-2021, New York State Supreme Court (Manhattan).