Showing posts sorted by date for query CLOCK. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query CLOCK. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Thursday, April 10, 2025

DESANTISLAND
More cuckoos than a Swiss clock factory: FL Republican pushes ludicrous ‘chemtrails’ bill


Photo by Andrew Palmer on Unsplash


Craig Pittman, 
April 10, 2025

TALLAHASSSEE — If you’re one of the 900 new people who move to Florida every day, you may not know this crucial secret of Florida government. I’m a Florida native, so let me clue you in. Lean in close and I’ll whisper it in your ear. Are you ready?

The Florida Legislature contains more cuckoos than a Swiss clock factory.

Now that you’re aware of this fact, how are you holding up? How’s your blood pressure? Can you handle the truth?

You want some evidence? Just last year, a legislator claimed his new anti-bear bill was necessary because there were bears on crack invading people’s houses. This was, of course, a complete fantasy. Yet his colleagues didn’t question his sanity or call the paramedics. They just passed the bill. It’s the law now!

This year there’s one that’s even kookier. I am referring to the so-called “chemtrails” bill.

In case you’re unfamiliar with that debunked conspiracy theory, the folks who believe in “chemtrails” are convinced the government (or maybe it’s the Illuminati) is dispatching planes to fly over us unsuspecting Americans and spray chemicals on us.

Why? The chemtrails can change the weather, say the diehards. Or maybe they can control people’s minds. Or maybe they’re just going to poison everybody they don’t like. Who knows? After all, it’s a secret, like the 1947 UFO crash landing in New Mexico.

Anyway, there’s a bill in the Legislature to track and attack chemtrails. Instead of being laughed out of the Capitol building, as it deserves, the bill was just passed by the full Senate, because that’s what our state’s elected leaders are like right now. I wish I could tell you the “Looney Tunes” theme song played while they voted.

“The measure (SB 56), sponsored by Miami Republican Ileana Garcia, would prohibit the injection, release, or dispersion of any means of a chemical, chemical compound, substance, or apparatus into the atmosphere for the purpose of affecting the climate,” my colleague Mitch Perry reported in the Phoenix last week. “Any person or corporation who conducts such geoengineering or weather modification activity would be subject to a third-degree felony charge, with fines up to $100,000.”

The bill would require the Florida Department of Environmental Protection to set up a hotline so anyone concerned about streaks in the sky can call and report them. I’m sure the DEP will jump right on those reports, just the way the agency has jumped on reports of rampant water pollution that fuels toxic algae blooms, kills seagrass, and leaves manatees to starve.

I tried calling Sen. Garcia to ask her some questions about her bill. While I waited to talk to her, I was struck by a subversive thought:

What if the chemtrails bill becomes law and we folks who still live in the real world use it to flip the script? What if we employ its provisions to go after the people who really ARE changing the weather — with their greenhouse gas emissions?
A healthy skepticism

The most shocking thing about this chemtrails bill is not that it was filed — filed, I should add, by a senator who won her seat by just 32 votes, thanks to an illegal ghost candidate scheme backed by Florida Power & Light.

Nor is the most shocking thing that it passed one house of our Legislature by a vote of 28-9 and now is headed for the other.

No, what’s shocking is that it was endorsed by Senate President Ben Albritton and Gov. Ron DeSantis, two allegedly well-educated people. At this rate, they’ll next endorse a taxpayer-funded expedition to explore how we ended up living inside a Hollow Earth.

Actually, DeSantis’ endorsement isn’t that much of a surprise. He’s happy to appease the Tinfoil Hat Brigade if it gets him a mention on Fox News or its imitators.

Remember, DeSantis is the guy who appointed as his surgeon general the world’s biggest vaccine skeptic and now lets him run around the state trying to convince everyone to stop preventing children’s tooth decay. I sometimes wonder if he and RFK Jr. share a brain worm.

But Albritton’s comments threw me. He’s a longtime citrus man who’s familiar with the need for accurate weather forecasts. Yet he actually called this lunacy “a great piece of legislation” that would address “real concerns from our constituents.”

If some of those constituents also think their elected politicians are all lizard people, presumably he’d be fine with legislation requiring a reptilian DNA test before administering the oath of office.

“I have heard the conspiracy theories out there,” Albritton said about Garcia’s bill, “but the fact is we should not be shutting down legitimate concerns. Healthy skepticism is important. There’s a lot we don’t know in this field of science and people are rightfully concerned.”

Because I grew up in Florida, I have a healthy skepticism toward anything Florida politicians say. Albritton’s statement suggests that I’m right to be skeptical because there’s a lot that’s wrong with his comments.

We actually know quite a lot about the weather modification attempts. We know they don’t work and have mostly been discontinued.

Florida law currently requires anyone who wants to modify the weather to get a permit first. A Senate bill analysis of SB 56 points out, “There have been no applications for weather modification licenses in the past 10 years.”

Four years ago, eight Western states tried cloud seeding to produce rains to end a lengthy drought. However, Scientific American reported, “there is little evidence to show that the process is increasing precipitation.”

Yet “weather modification” is what our Legislature chooses to tackle instead of lowering property insurance rates, boosting educational test scores, or any one of a dozen more important issues. Maybe they’re under some bizarre mind control method that requires them to be ineffective at good governing.
Legitimate concerns

Albritton’s statement about people being “rightfully concerned” about chemtrails sounds like he’s endorsing the bogus claims that spread last year that the government steered two hurricanes to clobber specific communities ahead of the election.

Those rumors were, of course, lies spread by the unscrupulous to fool the gullible. They became so pervasive that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration had to put out a press release denying it.

“NOAA does not modify the weather, nor does it fund, participate in or oversee cloud seeding or any other weather modification activities,” it said.

Given how Elon Musk is rapidly dismantling the agency now, I doubt they can control the thermostat in their office buildings, much less the weather.

I wish Albritton were as supportive of the “legitimate concerns” many of us Floridians feel about climate change.

We’re on the front lines of it, with our rising sea levels, more intense hurricanes, higher storm surges, and increased temperatures even at night. It’s hurting everything from our seafood industry to our sea turtle nesting. Heck, it’s even hurting Albritton’s own industry, agriculture.

Hard-headed property insurance companies recognize the dangers and disruptions of climate change. Why can’t our state officials?

“If lawmakers want to protect Floridians by addressing substances affecting the temperature, weather, and climate, they should hold power companies and the oil and gas industry accountable,” said longtime Florida climate activist Susan Glickman of the CLEO Institute, a non-profit dedicated to climate education and advocacy. “The pollution they release is warming the climate in increasingly extreme and deadly ways.”

But last year the Legislature voted to delete most references to climate change from state law under the well-known scientific theory of “If We Don’t Talk About It, Surely It Will Go Away.” Given how we were all beaten up by intense hurricanes and big storm surges last year, I don’t think it went away.

Fortunately, I see a way to take this “chemtrails” bill and turn it into a “let’s fight climate change” bill. Let me explain.
Contrail confusion

I have a confession to make: Every time I read someone’s rants about chemtrails, I always crack up. That’s because I always picture Cary Grant fleeing the evil crop-duster in the movie “North by Northwest,” which is the silliest and most inefficient murder method ever attempted.

Was the pilot supposed to crash into Cary and kill himself too? Cut Cary’s head off with the propeller, which would make the plane stop flying? Or maybe force him to cough up a lung because of all the pesticide he was inhaling? None of these options seem practical.

Similarly, the whole chemtrails theory falls apart on practical questions. How often and how much do you need to spray those chemicals in the sky to affect everyone? There are 23 million people in Florida alone. That’s a lot of folks to spritz with your mind-control concoction.

Seems to me you’d need WAAAAAY more chemical spraying than what we’re seeing if you plan to coat every single one of us with the goop. You’d need to dump it out in quantities like the helicopter pilots dropping the contents of an entire pond on a wildfire.

Nope, what we’re seeing up in the sky are simple contrails — droplets of water vapor clinging to particles of soot that were emitted by an airplane’s engine.

So imagine my surprise when Rafe Pomerance of Rethink Energy Florida told me, “Water vapor is a greenhouse gas.”

“Say what now?” I replied, displaying my usual incisive intellect.

“You warm up the earth, and one of the effects is an increase of water vapor in the atmosphere,” he explained. Then the vapor traps heat in our atmosphere just like carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases do. The heat that created the vapor gets amplified by the vapor.

When I expressed that old healthy skepticism, he referred me to a scientist named Adam Boies of Stanford University. He’s an expert on contrails. He confirmed that chemtrails are bogus and also confirmed what Pomerance told me.

Some of the contrails disappear in minutes after the plane that created them leaves the area, Boies said. But some, say about 20%, linger longer. Those are the dangerous ones that can trap heat in the atmosphere.

Airplane engine manufacturers are worried about this so they are working on engine designs that will stop producing contrails, he said.

“The airlines are so concerned about this that they’re willing to try new fuels or rerouting flight patterns to try to avoid them,” Boies told me.

Thus, for once, the Legislature might do the right thing for the wrong reason — asking people to report something that actually is a cause of climate change. That’s why I think we should embrace this silly chemtrails bill and join DeSantis and Albritton in pushing it forward.

Then, once the bill passes, I say we all start contacting that DEP hotline to report, say, Florida Power & Light and its fellow utilities for burning fossil fuels to produce electricity. They’re building a lot of solar farms now, but they ought to replace their older plants too.

The same goes for all the municipal incinerators across the state, too, and the Big Sugar companies burning their fields and sending billows of thick smoke into the communities south of Lake Okeechobee. I say we report every one of these folks messing up our state.

“Hello, DEP,” we can say, “there’s a chemical plant in Pensacola that’s altering the weather with its nitrous oxide emissions. The clouds of pollutants are going up in the atmosphere and trapping heat here! You should do something about that, pronto.”

Or how about, “Hello, is this the DEP? I want to report someone for altering the weather. It’s the Florida DOT. They’re building a lot of roads for heavily polluting cars and trucks and doing nothing for mass transit. No electric vehicle charging stations, either. Can you get after them for that?”

By the way, I never did reach the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Garcia. It’s too bad. I was ready to congratulate her for doing more to combat climate change than either DeSantis or his predecessor, Rick Scott. Of course, to hear me speak, she’d first have to unwrap all that tinfoil from around her head.


Florida Phoenix is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Florida Phoenix maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Michael Moline for questions: info@floridaphoenix.com


Wednesday, April 09, 2025

 

US Hospitals enhance care for babies exposed to substances in womb



American Academy of Pediatrics funds eight hospitals for learning collaborative



University of Oklahoma

Benazir Drabu, M.D. 

image: 

Benazir Drabu, M.D., associate professor of pediatrics at the University of Oklahoma College of Medicine, is a neonatal hospitalist at Oklahoma Children's Hospital OU Health.

view more 

Credit: University of Oklahoma




OKLAHOMA CITY – In years past, health care providers took a punitive stance toward women giving birth to babies exposed to substances like opioids in the womb. Today, backed by research showing better outcomes through an educational, compassionate approach, providers at Oklahoma Children’s Hospital OU Health have created a process for surrounding mom and baby with the care they need in the hospital, at home and in their communities for the years to come.

The American Academy of Pediatrics granted funding to the University of Oklahoma for hospital providers to refine and improve the discharge process for mothers and babies with neonatal abstinence syndrome, also known as neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome. The project, called the Perinatal Health and Substance Use Quality Improvement Virtual Learning Collaborative, is helping establish best practices for this transition. Oklahoma Children’s Hospital is one of eight hospitals nationwide chosen for the program.

Babies born with neonatal abstinence syndrome may experience withdrawal from the drugs that crossed the placenta while in utero. Symptoms include jitteriness, trouble sleeping, diarrhea, vomiting, poor appetite and, in severe cases, seizures. If symptoms can be managed in the Mother-Baby Unit, the health care team focuses on soothing techniques, feeding and sleep support. If a higher level of care is required, including medications, the baby is transferred to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit. Once discharge is possible, it is essential to have a well-structured plan to ensure caregivers receive adequate guidance and support.

“We want to provide continuity of care for mom and baby,” said neonatal hospitalist Benazir Drabu, M.D., associate professor of pediatrics at the OU College of Medicine and team leader for the project. “Care starts prenatally and goes through labor and delivery, and for this project, we are focusing on our discharge planning. This is work we are already doing, but participating in the collaborative will allow us to learn how to do it better.”

Mothers and babies affected by substance use usually stay in the hospital longer than the general population of birthing mothers. When discharge approaches, an interdisciplinary team of physicians, nurses, social services providers, physical therapists and occupational therapists shifts its focus to keeping the family well-supported at home.

Soothing strategies used in the hospital are reinforced, including providing the family with a “sleep sack” that swaddles the baby and teaching them how to console a fussy baby. Safe sleep at home is also emphasized. The team encourages caregivers to have a crib or “pack and play” instead of letting babies sleep with parents.

“In many cases, families don’t have a separate place for the baby to sleep, so they put them in their own bed, which puts the baby at risk for an adverse event,” said neonatologist Patricia Williams, M.D., associate professor of pediatrics at the OU College of Medicine and a co-leader of the project.

Mothers are screened for depression and coached on successful breastfeeding. The hospital team also aims to strengthen communication with primary care providers to ensure continuity of care. Social service providers connect the family to community organizations, such as Sooner Start and Oklahoma Family Network, that provide everything from diapers to respite care to support groups.

In addition, families are referred to the Little STAR clinic for an appointment 30 to 90 days after hospital discharge. Little STAR is a follow-up program to the Substance Use Treatment and Recovery (STAR) prenatal clinic at OU Health.

“Studies have shown that babies who have prenatal substance exposure can have poor developmental outcomes, both cognitively and behaviorally,” said developmental and behavioral pediatrician Susan Redwine, M.D., an assistant professor of pediatrics in the OU College of Medicine and co-leader of the project. “We want to prepare caregivers for that but also give them hope because there are clinics and programs that can help. Early intervention is so important, as is being non-judgmental. Our goal is to provide as much support as possible.”

When babies reach 1 year old, they qualify for services at OU’s Child Study Center, which continues developmental and behavioral support up to age 7. “We want to be the bridge between the baby leaving the hospital and getting families into programs at the Child Study Center,” Redwine said.

OU was previously part of a national effort to improve the care of babies exposed to substances in the womb with its participation in the “Eat, Sleep, Console” clinical trial funded by the National Institutes of Health. The trial evaluated the “ESC” approach to caring for babies with neonatal abstinence syndrome. ESC includes feeding babies every three hours around the clock to address the weight loss that often comes with substance exposure. ESC also prioritizes consoling and ensuring babies get adequate sleep. If a baby cannot be consoled within 10 minutes, medication may be considered. The trial had good outcomes, including a shorter hospital stay and decreasing the likelihood the baby would need medication. ESC has now become the standard of practice.

“It gives us a sense of fulfillment to help these babies and their caregivers and to keep them together as much as possible,” Drabu said. “Sending them home happy and prepared is priceless.”

###

About the University of Oklahoma

Founded in 1890, the University of Oklahoma is a public research university with campuses in Norman, Oklahoma City and Tulsa. As the state’s flagship university, OU serves the educational, cultural, economic and health care needs of the state, region and nation. In Oklahoma City, OU Health Sciences is one of the nation’s few academic health centers with seven health profession colleges located on the same campus. OU Health Sciences serves approximately 4,000 students in more than 70 undergraduate and graduate degree programs spanning Oklahoma City and Tulsa and is the leading research institution in Oklahoma. For more information about OU Health Sciences, visit www.ouhsc.edu.

 

Study provides snapshots of mammoth genetic diversity throughout the last million years


Stockholm University
The Old Crow mammoth 

image: 

Woolly mammoth molar (Mammuthus primigenius) from the Old Crow river, Yukon Territory Canada.

view more 

Credit: Photo credit: Hans Wildschut




A new genomic study has uncovered long-lost genetic diversity in mammoth lineages spanning over a million years, providing new insights into the evolutionary history of these animals.

The new study has successfully extracted and analysed 34 new mammoth mitochondrial genomes (mitogenomes), including specimens dating back to the Early and Middle Pleistocene geological periods. A total of 11 specimens come from these periods, with their ages spanning from 1.3 million to 125 000years ago. The findings, published in Molecular Biology and Evolution, shed light on mammoth evolutionary history and demonstrate the power of ancient DNA in characterising past genetic diversity.

“Our analyses provide an unprecedented glimpse into how major deep-time demographic events might have shaped the genetic diversity of mammoths through time”, said Dr J. Camilo Chacón-Duque, researcher at the Department of Zoology, Stockholm University, and Centre for Palaeogenetics and lead author of the study.

A million years of mammoth evolution

Most of today’s biodiversity evolved during the last 2.5 million years. Understanding the evolutionary processes that shaped this diversity requires access to genetic information throughout this timeframe. Until now, very few DNA samples have surpassed the 100-thousand-year threshold due to preservation challenges. By recovering DNA from mammoth specimens spanning over more than a million years, this study showcases the importance of temporal sampling to characterise the evolutionary history of species.

By analysing these new mitogenomes alongside over 200 previously published mammoth mitogenomes, the researchers were able to find that diversification events across mammoth lineages seem to coincide with well described demographic changes during the Early and Middle Pleistocene. Their findings support an ancient Siberian origin for major mammoth lineages and reveal how shifts in population dynamics might have contributed to the expansion and contraction of distinct genetic clades.

“With the ever-decreasing costs of sequencing technologies, mitogenomes have been somewhat forgotten. However, our study shows that they remain crucial for evolutionary biology since they are more abundant than nuclear DNA,” said Dr Jessica A. Thomas Thorpe, researcher at the Wellcome Sanger Genome Institute (UK) and co-first author of the study.

A big contribution to evolutionary biology

The study not only advances our understanding of mammoth evolution but also contributes to the broader field of ancient DNA research. The team developed and applied an improved molecular clock dating framework, refining how genetic data can be used to estimate the ages of specimens beyond the radiocarbon dating limit. This methodological advancement offers a powerful tool for future research on extinct and endangered species.

“These results add to our earlier work where we reported million-year-old genomes for the first time. I’m very excited that now we have genetic data from many more mammoth specimens sampled across the last million years, which helps us understand how mammoth diversity has changed through time,” said senior author professor Love Dalén at Stockholm University and Centre for Paleogenetics.

Read article in Molecular Biology and Evolution https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msaf065

Read more about Centre for Palaeogenetics
-----

Key Findings and Future Implications

  • The study includes 34 newly sequenced mammoth mitogenomes, with 11 dating back over 100 000 years, increasing substantially the number of mammoth DNA samples beyond this time point, pushing the boundaries of ancient DNA research.
  • The team identified the oldest known mammoth DNA in North America, from a specimen found in the Old Crow River, Yukon Territory, Canada and dating to more than 200 000 years ago.
  • Their results confirm previous research (van der Valk et al., 2021), showing that mammoths from around a million years ago do not closely resemble later mammoths.
  • The study refines DNA-based methods for estimating the ages of ancient specimens, paving the way for more accurate reconstructions of evolutionary histories.

By combining cutting-edge molecular techniques with computational advances, this research highlights the critical role of deep-time DNA in uncovering the genetic past of extinct species. Future studies may apply these methodologies to other long-extinct or endangered species, further enriching our understanding of evolutionary biology.

 

Contact:
J Camilo Chacón-Duque, researcher at the Department of Zoology, Stockholm University, and Centre for Palaeogenetics
Phone: +44 76 112 9754 E-mail: camilo.chacon-duque@su.se

Love Dalén, professor at the Department of Zoology, Stockholm University, and Centre for Palaeogenetics
Phone: ++46 707772794 E-mail: love.dalen@zoologi.su.se

Jessica A. Thomas Thorpe, researcher at the Wellcome Sanger Genome Institute
E-mail: jt30@sanger.ac.uk

Love Dalén Photo: Gleb Danilov


J Camilo Chacón-Duque  Photo credit: Natalia Romagosa

Photos:
The Old Crow mammoth.
Woolly mammoth molar (Mammuthus primigenius) from the Old Crow river, Yukon Territory Canada. Photo credit: Hans Wildschut 

J Camilo Chacón-Duque  Photo Natalia Romagosa

Love Dalén Photo: Gleb Danilov

'Enormous risk': Experts alarmed as Musk's private security force deputized by US Marshals

SARAH BURNS
April 7, 2025
RAW STORY


U.S. Marshals Service alongside partner federal agencies and local law enforcement conduct enforcement operations focusing on state and local felony cases of homicide, sexual assault, robbery and assault during Operation North Star II (ONS II) in Columbus, Ohio, January 2023. USMS Director Ronald L. Davis launched ONS II, a month-long National Enforcement Initiative aimed at combating violent crime in nine cities: Albuquerque, N.M., Buffalo, N.Y., Cleveland, Ohio, Columbus, Ohio, Detroit, M.I., Jackson, Miss., Kansas City, M.O., Milwaukee, W.I., Oakland, C.A., and the U.S. Territory of Puerto Rico, all which have a significant rate of homicides and shootings. (U.S. Marshals Service photo by Bennie J. Davis III)


Tech billionaire Elon Musk's private security detail was deputized by the Marshals Service, alarming experts,  according to Mother Jones.

"The Marshals Service regularly deputizes people outside the agency—often local or state cops—to help with specific tasks for a set period of time," the report explained. "These deputized officers are known as special deputy marshals, and they usually have the power to make federal arrests, execute search warrants, serve subpoenas, and carry firearms in federal buildings, just like regular deputy marshals do."

Musk's team used them after a staffer in the Department of Government Efficiency told Marshals that Jan. 6 defendants weren't being released fast enough. A marshal "reportedly prodded judges," said MoJo.

Last month, The New York Times and the Washington Post reported that DOGE used the Marshals to break into the offices of a small federal agency, leading to "a frantic and 'traumatizing' scene," the report said.

It rattled MSNBC host Rachel Maddow, who implied it was strange for a federal agency to turn on another, the report continued.

“We have reason to question whether the men reported as US marshals, now in multiple press accounts, are actually US marshals in the usual sense,” Maddow said.

The confusion is whether they were indeed marshals or if they were Musk's private security.

The Justice Department refused to give Maddow any information on the men's identities, but a nonprofit is now suing using the Freedom of Information Act.

"Even though federal policy allows the Marshals Service to deputize private actors, it’s rare for the agency to do so," Mother Jones said. "The former USMS officers I spoke with had never witnessed it happening. All the special deputy marshals" that one supervisory deputy marshal in New York until 2020 "interacted with were from law enforcement agencies like the NYPD."

“It’d be unusual to deputize someone who wasn’t a law enforcement officer or didn’t have the law enforcement experience required,” special deputy marshal James Meissner told Mother Jones.

There is an open question about whether Trump is politicizing the Marshals Service and if that could have "constitutional implications."

Rutgers University Law School professor David Noll, who studies private enforcement of the law, told Mother Jones that “deputizing purely private actors” is “not really a thing that’s been done in the 21st century or the 20th century."

“If you have a private security force that is exercising the power of the marshals, you have to start worrying about whether they are acting in the public interest and whether they understand the rules that apply to marshals,” Noll told the outlet.

Another expert agreed that alarm bells are ringing.

“The risk to people’s civil rights is enormous,” said Jonathan Smith, who helped lead the Justice Department’s civil rights division during the Obama administration. Typically, when private forces gain policing power, he said, “there are real questions about who they’re accountable to and what rules they’re going to play by.”

Read the full report here.























DOJ accused of ‘abuse of power’ after sending armed US Marshals to whistleblower’s home


David Badash, 
The New Civil Rights Movement
April 7, 2025 


Fired U.S. Department of Justice pardon attorney Liz Oyer testifies during a hearing organized by Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate about President Donald Trump's administration's treatment of the Justice Department and law firms who act in cases disliked by the president, on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., April 7, 2025. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz

A former U.S. Department of Justice pardon attorney delivered sworn testimony before Congress on Monday, accusing her former agency—now under the leadership of Attorney General Pam Bondi—of “corruption and abuse of power.” She claimed that armed U.S. Marshals were sent to her home to deliver what she described as a “warning” from the DOJ, cautioning her about the risks of testifying.

Liz Oyer “told U.S. media outlets that her firing came shortly after she declined to recommend restoring gun rights to actor Mel Gibson, a supporter of President Donald Trump,” Reuters reports. She reportedly was fired by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche on March 7.

CNN’s Kaitlan Collins last month reported that “Oyer says she was fired as the pardon attorney at the Justice Department within hours of saying she couldn’t add Mel Gibson to a list of individuals she recommended should have their gun rights restored.”

“Within hours of my decision not to do that,” Oyer said, “I was escorted out of my office by DOJ security officers.”

During her testimony, Oyer described the tense situation.

“The letter was to be served at my home between 9 o’clock and 10 o’clock on Friday night,” she explained (video below). “I was in the car with my husband and my parents, who are sitting behind me today, when I got the news that the officers were on their way to my house, where my teenage child was home alone. Fortunately, due to the grace of a very decent person who understood how upsetting this would be to my family, I was able to confirm receipt of the letter to an email address, and the deputies were called off.”

Oyer blasted the DOJ.

“At no point did Mr. Blanche’s staff pick up the phone and call me before they sent armed deputies to my home,” she said in her testimony. “The letter was a warning to me about the risks of testifying here today. But I am here because I will not be bullied into concealing the ongoing corruption and abuse of power at the Department of Justice.”

“DOJ is entrusted with keeping us safe, upholding the rule of law, and protecting our civil rights. It is not a personal favor bank for the President. Its career employees are not the president’s personal debt collectors.”

“It should alarm all Americans that the leadership of the Department of Justice appears to value political loyalty above the fair and responsible administration of Justice. It should offend all Americans that our leaders are treating public servants with a lack of basic decency and humanity.”

Attorney Michael Bromwich, who is representing Oyer, in a letter to DOJ called it an “unusual step” to direct “armed law enforcement officers to the home of a former Department of Justice employee who has engaged in no misconduct, let alone criminal conduct, simply to deliver a letter.” He characterized the act as “both unprecedented and completely inappropriate.”

Bromwich also challenged the administration’s apparent claim of executive privilege over Oyer’s testimony, calling it”baseless,” and wrote “that she is entitled to certain legal protections for whistleblowers.”

According to NBC News, Bromwich also accused Blanche of appearing “to be using the Department’s security resources to intimidate a former employee who is engaged in statutorily protected whistleblower conduct, an act that implicates criminal and civil statutes as well as Department policy and your ethical obligations as a member of the bar.”

Former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance, a professor of law and popular MSNBC/NBC News legal analyst, remarked: “Sending two armed marshals to a former DOJ lawyers [sic] home at 9pm to ‘deliver a letter’ when they’re in email contact with her or could have just called smacks of an effort to intimidate.”

CBS News justice correspondent Scott MacFarlane posted a copy of the letter Oyer was sent.

Watch the video below or at this link.







Tuesday, April 08, 2025

 “All Governments Lie”: Why We Need a Radical and Independent Free Press Now

If the Government makes a mistake, the newspapers will find out and the problem may then be fixed. But if freedom of the press were lost, the country would soon go to pieces. -- IF Stone



Media scholar Carl Jensen was deeply influenced by the independent muckraking journalists of the twentieth century—so much so that he founded Project Censored at Sonoma State University, in 1976, in the wake of the Nixon administration’s Watergate scandal, as a watchdog organization focused on exposing “the news that didn’t make the news.” Project Censored began in a sociology course Jensen taught at Sonoma State, but quickly evolved into a national effort to promote independent journalism and news literacy. The Project produced an annual list of the most important investigative news reports, which attracted attention—and praise—from some of Jensen’s best-known contemporaries, including broadcast journalists Walter Cronkite and Hugh Downs, reform activist Ralph Nader, and a contemporary muckraker, investigative journalist I.F. “Izzy” Stone.

Jensen’s purpose was not to tear down so-called “mainstream” media outlets but to constructively criticize their news judgment. By showing what the major media missed, or even “censored,” he hoped to improve what he saw as the lifeblood of democracy: a truly free press. Industry professionals didn’t always take kindly to such criticism, which led Jensen to turn his critique into a systematic study of what they did cover. He discovered a morass of fluff, sensationalism, and pap—what used to be called “yellow journalism” in the early 1900s. Jensen called it Junk Food News in 1983. He saw that the public would ultimately pay the price for the major media outlets’ myopic focus and critical omissions in the form of accelerating civic decay. Sadly, he wasn’t wrong.

Today, we are awash in 21st-century versions of junk food news, as produced by corporate media and propagated on social media. Worse, we are also subject to ‘round-the-clock infotainment and propaganda masquerading as journalism, what Jensen’s successor, sociologist Peter Phillips, called News Abuse in the early 2000s (now also referred to as malinformation). Of course, numerous media critics and scholars—including Edward Herman, Noam Chomsky, Ben Bagdikian, Neil Postman, and Robert McChesney—have long warned against rising levels of mis- and disinformation, increased consolidation of media ownership, and their combined toll on press freedom and a well-informed public. In the last decade, with the moral panic around the weaponized epithet of “fake news,” these challenges have spawned a cottage industry of so-called fact-checkers—supposedly objective third parties trying to reverse the troublesome trend of declining public trust in the Fourth Estate.

However, most of those efforts have been exposed as Trojan horses for re-establishing corporate media dominance in a digital era of podcasts, TikTok, Instagram reels, and “tweets” (or “posts” as they are now called on X). As Wall Street Journal editor-in-chief Emma Tucker bemoaned last year at the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, news industry leaders are losing control of the narrative (emphasis added):

If you go back really not that long ago, as I say, we owned the news. We were the gatekeepers, and we very much owned the facts as well. If it said it in the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, then that was a fact. Nowadays, people can go to all sorts of different sources for the news, and they’re much more questioning about what we’re saying. So, it’s no longer good enough for us just to say, this is what happened, or this is the news. We have to explain– almost like explain our working. So, readers expect to understand how we source stories. They want to know how we go about getting stories. We have to sort of lift the bonnet, as it were, and in a way that newspapers aren’t used to doing and explain to people what we’re doing. We need to be much more transparent about how we go about collecting the news.

“Lift the bonnet.” “Explain to people what we’re doing.” It’s almost as if the public wants more fact-based, transparently sourced reporting in their news, not partisan propaganda. And, go figure, in a rabidly consumerist culture, they want receipts too. Tucker seems to agree, though the corporate media and their advertisers/investors from Big Pharma, Big Tech, the Military-Industrial Complex, and other powerful institutions whose narratives the public is questioning, likely do not. For Tucker and other gatekeepers, this public scrutiny is inconvenient, perhaps even impertinent, but also a market reality news organizations must now at least pay lip service to addressing. Perhaps this is what has contributed to record-low levels of approval and trust of the news media among the public.

Indy Journalism Can Build Public Trust While Fighting Fake News

Media scholars have described this conundrum as an epistemic one, the ushering in of a “post-truth” world “in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief.” The mis- and disinformation ecosystem that has emerged in this post-truth climate has establishment institutions from the WEF to Congress and the mass media themselves clutching pearls. Even the American public has come to believe that the lack of trustworthy information is a greater threat than terrorism. With the return of Donald Trump to the presidency, these concerns, along with increasing existential attacks on journalists and the news media itself, including ABCCBSNPR/PBS, and even the Associated Press as “enemies of the American people,” are growing rapidly and in unprecedented ways.

There certainly are major issues with corporate media and establishment outlets, which we at Project Censored have documented for nearly half a century. However, our critiques are not meant to undermine major media for partisan gain. Instead, the Project’s criticisms of corporate news expose systemic gaps and slant in coverage, in order to pressure the nation’s most prominent news outlets to use their massive budgets and influence to serve the public good, rather than private interests, by holding corporate and government abusers of power accountable. Given the well-documented limitations of corporate media, we support a robust, independent, and public media system, because a commercial, for-profit model cannot “tell the people what is really going on,” as George Seldes once put it. The solution to our present journalistic woes does not lie with industry leaders, biased fact-checkers, or Big Tech content moderators. It rests on critical media literacy and a fiercely independent free press.

In support of this proposed solution, Project Censored advocates for a healthy democracy by promoting news literacy education, especially by providing hands-on training in critical media literacy for students, through our curriculum, student internships, and Campus Affiliates Program, each of which distinguishes Project Censored from other news watch organizations and press freedom groups. Further, each year, Project Censored also recognizes some of the best independent journalists, reporting factually, transparently, and ethically in the public interest, pointing out that these are among the best advocates of news literacy, literally teaching by example. So, ironically, the very solutions to the revitalization of our failing Fourth Estate are its most radical independent practitioners, not their owners/employers or meddling partisan outsiders. History shows this to be the case, and we should listen to what the past can teach us.

“All Governments Lie”

Among the many books Jensen published, one of the most significant might be Stories That Changed America: Muckrakers of the 20th Century. In it, he collected exemplary work by nearly two dozen legendary journalists, his selection of the previous century’s most significant truth-tellers, including excerpts from decisive reports by Ida Tarbell (The History of the Standard Oil Company), Lincoln Steffans (The Shame of the Cities), Upton Sinclair (The Jungle and The Brass Check), George Seldes (In Fact), Edward R. Murrow (In Search of Light), and I.F. Stone (I.F. Stone’s Weekly). As Jensen wrote, “Their words led to a nationwide public revolt against social evils and [decades] of reforms in antitrust legislation, the electoral process, banking regulations, and a host of other social programs.” The reporting Jensen collected in Stories That Changed America continues to inspire those of us who believe journalism can make a difference.

“All governments lie, but disaster lies in wait for countries whose officials smoke the same hashish they give out,” the iconic muckraker “Izzy” Stone once wrote. But Stone had great faith in the power of the press to expose and counter those lies. We need brave, independent journalists and newsrooms to tackle the most controversial and suppressed issues of our era. Stone relentlessly exposed governmental prevarications and injustices throughout his career. He also saw the shortcomings of his own profession, to the point of resigning from the National Press Club in 1941, rather than kowtowing to its racism and political sycophancy. After realizing he had limited influence in the establishment press, he started I.F. Stone’s Weekly and dared to report the truth on his own. He took on McCarthyism at a time when his peers were being attacked, arrested, deported, and disappeared. He fought for truth and peace in the face of the unjust, murderous conflicts of the Cold War, especially in Vietnam. Sound familiar?

Governments lie. Stone’s insight is timeless, but it seems more relevant than ever in 2025. The Trump administration and its enablers bombard us daily with lies and half-truths, what Reporters Without Borders has characterized as “a monumental assault on freedom of information.” At best, the establishment press seems capable of little more than chronicling the barrage; at worst, they capitulate to it.

The notion of a press “watchdog” on a governmental leash did not begin with the current administration—as Jensen and his students at Sonoma State noted in 1976 looking back on the eve of Richard Nixon’s re-election, no major news outlet even mentioned the Watergate scandal—and the roots of a subservient press reach back to the earliest history of American journalism on the presidency. But the return of Trump to power is a nadir for many of our cherished freedoms, including those of the First Amendment, which links freedom of speech and press with the rights to assemble and petition—and the public, our democracy, needs journalism that can help us awaken from what historian Timothy Snyder has described as a “self-induced intellectual coma” that is characteristic of  “the politics of inevitability.”

The Izzy’s Are Coming!

Calling out counter-democratic measures is one way to resist the onslaught of authoritarianism. A free press provides the means for this, but people need to act in response. Rather than complain that “the left” needs a media power like Rupert Murdoch’s to “compete,” we should open our eyes and support the amazing people and organizations doing this invaluable work already. Project Censored highlights the most important but under-reported independent news stories each year, promoting the work of independent journalists, news outlets, and press freedom organizations that exemplify “media democracy in action.” Their work embodies the very spirit of resistance and amplifies the voices of those trammeled by oligarchs and would-be despots.

The Park Center for Independent Media (PCIM) at Ithaca College shares this ethos, supporting independent media as a bulwark against everyday injustices and creeping tyranny. Among the only academic centers of journalism in the United States focused solely on independent media, each year, PCIM honors the leading independent journalists of our time with its Izzy Award, named in honor of I.F. “Izzy” Stone. April 30 marks the seventeenth annual award ceremony, which will also be the occasion for numerous muckraking journalists and free press organizations to convene and build coalitions, strengthen solidarity, and fight to protect our democratic republic from anyone, whether they bat for Team Red or Team Blue, who would subvert it for their own private gain.

The Izzy Award celebrates the practice of radical muckraking journalism in the public interest, and its continuing relevance in our current Gilded Age of Big Tech plutocracy. The work at PCIM and Project Censored reminds us that we cannot wait for change to simply emerge; we must create it ourselves. If past is prologue, we also have much to learn from and pass on to the next generation, whose experiences and voices will inform and express the stories that change America again, to paraphrase Jensen.

Now is not a time for cowering; it is a time to exhibit what political activist and whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg called civil courage, regardless of the odds. Or, as Izzy noted, it is time “to defend the weak against the strong; to fight for justice; and to seek, as best I can to bring healing perspectives to bear on the terrible hates and fears of [humankind], in the hope of someday bringing about one world, in which [people] will enjoy the differences of the human garden instead of killing each other over them.”

Hear, hear. Let’s not get lost in the smoke of the hashish blown in our faces by elite media and government actors. Let’s instead recognize and support the reportorial canaries in the coal mines, from the climate crisis and Kafkaesque raids on the vulnerable among us to the dismantling of education, attacks on the arts, and an ongoing genocide. Let’s act on the information independent journalists share at their own risk, for we ignore them at our own.

Mickey Huff is the third director of Project Censored (founded in 1976) and is the president of the nonprofit Media Freedom Foundation. Huff joined Ithaca College in New York fall of 2024, where he now also serves as the Distinguished Director of the Park Center for Independent Media and Professor of Journalism. Since 2009, he has coedited the annual volume of the Censored book series with associate director Andy Lee Roth, published by Seven Stories Press in New York, and since 2021 with The Censored Press, the Project’s new publishing imprint. His most recent books include Project Censored’s State of the Free Press 2025, co-edited with Shealeigh Voitl and Andy Lee Roth (The Censored Press/Seven Stories Press, 2024); The Media and Me: A Guide to Critical Media Literacy for Young People (co-authored with Project Censored and the Media Revolution Collective, The Censored Press/Triangle Square, 2022), as well as Let’s Agree to Disagree: A Critical Thinking Guide to Communication, Conflict Management, and Critical Media Literacy (Routledge, 2022) and United States of Distraction: Media Manipulation in Post-Truth America (and what we can do about it), published by City Lights Books, 2019, both co-authored with Nolan HigdonRead other articles by Mickey.