motherjones--2020-12-30--Heroes of 2020: All Gas No Brakes

Heroes of 2020: All Gas No Brakes

“ Sunlight is the best disinfectant.
” As an allegorical aphorism , it is almost never true .
Enabled by social media , conspiracists , white supremacists , and general hoax types have garnered more exposure—more “ sunlight ” —and their hate and ignorance has only gone viral and grown .
What has slowed down toxic provocateurs like Alex Jones , Milp Yiannopoulos , Baked Alaska , and many others has been their removal from social media .
That is a better disinfectant .
It turns out giving hateful rhetoric airtime and a platform doesn ’ t repulse everyone .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to them .
At scale , sunlight isn ’ t very helpful .
But when administered by consummate deadpanner and budding gonzo journalist Andrew Callaghan , it ’ s not only effective—its very entertaining .
Callaghan created All Gas No Brakes , his YouTube channel , in 2019 .
Since then he ’ s been crossing the country in RV stuffed with friends , documenting the outermost threads that make up America ’ s extensive tapestry of subcultures .
In the past year or so , they ’ ve made it to FurFest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Talladega Superspeedway .
As coronavirus ravaged the U.S. he didn ’ t slow down , throwing on a mask to get uncomfortably close to the bizarre underbelly of Americana .
Most of Callaghan ’ s videos are great .
But his most important work has come from his forays into the far-right , where he ’ s just turned the camera on and mostly let them speak .
“ I understand sometimes when the left is like ‘ Ah well , [ the Proud Boys ] are violent !
’ It ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like assault , ” a shrugging Proud Boy leader , Enrique Tarrio , told Callaghan at a summer rally for the group , a neo-fascist organization that describes itself as “ western chauvinist.
” Its often violent members have managed to dodge the brutal tendencies of police , sometimes even getting chummy with them—something critics suspect is because the groups share discreet relationships , which reporting shows is at least sometimes true .
A few minutes later Callaghan bluntly asked Tarrio : “ Do Proud Boys communicate with the police ?
” Some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ day similarly incriminated themselves explicitly—and , implicitly , the rest of the Proud Boys , by making it clear that there are some absolute dangerous weirdos in the group .
He lets a man dressed only in what looks like a black morph suit—except for his hunting-camo hat and wraparound sunglasses—make himself look even more and more buffoonish the longer the tape rolls , as he confidently prattles off the obscure conspiracy theories he believes .
Another guy wearing a softball helmet and ski goggles while holding a massive Trump flag muses that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so bad , before he decides to cut the interview short after realizing what he just said out loud .
Callaghan then turns to a guy nearby who has an unspecified vendetta , as evinced by a sign he was holding , against George Soros .
One can guess why , given the anti-Semitic roots of far-right attacks targeting the liberal philanthropist .
This is generally how Callaghan ’ s interviews go .
Aside from some cuts to move things along and making Vic Berger-styled surrealist and goofy edits to underscore the absurdity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lets them hang themselves with their own rope .
And , every time , they do .
In almost every video , his patient but general questioning about why they believe what they do consistently reveals anti-Semitic thinking .
These are the people he always finds , uncoincidentally , hanging around Proud Boys rallies , Flat Earth events , anti-coronavirus lockdown protests , and the like .
It ’ s really effective .
The far-right groups of 2020 , wittingly or not , are antecedents of the far-right internet culture of the mid-2010 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , beta , redpill—came out of 4chan and Gamergate adjacent and affiliated Reddit communities .
These were spaces where cruelty was disguised as irony .
Being racist was a joke , a troll for the lulz .
So ironically throwing up the white power sign to troll the libs in public , while privately identifying as a white supremacist segregationist , is just a slightly less online version of what 4chan trolls were doing in 2014 .
Callaghan meets on them their own terms .
They make jokes to disguise their racism .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , disguised as a joke .
Inevitably , journalists reporting on and outlets and publications running straight news stories about the far-right will always register , in some minds , on a frequency aside from irony or disgust .
This often well-intentioned coverage will nonetheless prove attractive to swathes of the country , especially the irony-poisoned internet youth who Proud Boys and the like try so hard to convert .
While sternly condemning neo-fascists in a crisp , expensive suit and ironed tie is something fancy people who wear fancy suit and ties @ @ @ @ @ @ @ broadcaster raising an eyebrow and saying that the alt-right is “ racist ” in a slightly raised baritone is never going to resonate with the extremely online .
But with his rumpled clothes and flat affect , All Gas No Brakes has figured out how to out-irony the edgelords .
Callaghan himself isn ’ t just in it for the bit .
His lampoons are laced with empathy for some of the subjects he ’ s critical of .
In an interview with Twitch political personality Hasan Piker , Callaghan lamented how often @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ It ’ s unfortunate , because these are very curious , investigative people , who are willing to put in tons of independent research time—which most people aren ’ t down to do , ” he explained , bemoaning that their interests and conspiracy thinking always “ go back to the Jews every time.
” Given he ’ s handling such dark currents , Callaghan isn ’ t blithe about the limits of letting people speak completely freely in videos that will reach a big audience .
( All Gas No @ @ @ @ @ @ @ times on YouTube alone , where the channel has 1.5 million subscribers . )
He told Vice in an April interview that despite disseminating hours of candid conservations with some of the most unsavory people he can find , he ’ s still holding on to footage that he has ” refused to broadcast because doing so would directly give a platform to hate speech.
” He told the news site that he once cut an interview short because an interviewee at a Flat Earth conference alluded to denying the holocaust .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Callaghan made sure to include clips from the event showing a student journalist who was shoved to the ground and kicked in the head by a Proud Boy , and of another who accused an independent journalist of bias since she was “ Arab.
” In highlighting moments like these , Callaghan ’ s All Gas No Brakes shows what it actually takes to make sunlight work as a disinfectant .
In a year where hate , violence , and those who push them have been an ever-present specter , that makes @ @ @ @

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
“Sunlight is the best disinfectant.” As an allegorical aphorism, it is almost never true.
Enabled by social media, conspiracists, white supremacists, and general hoax types have garnered more exposure—more “sunlight”—and their hate and ignorance has only gone viral and grown. What has slowed down toxic provocateurs like Alex Jones, Milo Yiannopoulos, Baked Alaska, and many others has been their removal from social media. That is a better disinfectant.
All Gas No Brakes documents the outermost threads in America’s extensive tapestry of subcultures.
It turns out giving hateful rhetoric airtime and a platform doesn’t repulse everyone. In many, cases it actually appeals to them. At scale, sunlight isn’t very helpful. But when administered by consummate deadpanner and budding gonzo journalist Andrew Callaghan, it’s not only effective—it’s very entertaining.
Callaghan created All Gas No Brakes, his YouTube channel, in 2019. Since then he’s been crossing the country in an RV stuffed with friends, documenting the outermost threads that make up America’s extensive tapestry of subcultures. In the past year or so, they’ve made it to FurFest, the Adult Video News Awards, and Talladega Superspeedway. As coronavirus ravaged the U.S. he didn’t slow down, throwing on a mask to get uncomfortably close to the bizarre underbelly of Americana.
Most of Callaghan’s videos are great. But his most important work has come from his forays into the far-right, where he’s just turned the camera on and mostly let them speak.
“I understand sometimes when the left is like ‘Ah well, [the Proud Boys] are violent!’ It’s ‘cause we make self-defense look like assault,” a shrugging Proud Boy leader, Enrique Tarrio, told Callaghan at a summer rally for the group, a neo-fascist organization that describes itself as “western chauvinist.” Its often violent members have managed to dodge the brutal tendencies of police, sometimes even getting chummy with them—something critics suspect is because the groups share discreet relationships, which reporting shows is at least sometimes true.
A few minutes later Callaghan bluntly asked Tarrio: “Do Proud Boys communicate with the police?”
“We do,” he admitted.
Some of Callaghan’s interview subjects that day similarly incriminated themselves explicitly—and, implicitly, the rest of the Proud Boys, by making it clear that there are some absolute dangerous weirdos in the group.
He lets a man dressed only in what looks like a black morph suit—except for his hunting-camo hat and wraparound sunglasses—make himself look even more and more buffoonish the longer the tape rolls, as he confidently prattles off the obscure conspiracy theories he believes. Another guy wearing a softball helmet and ski goggles while holding a massive Trump flag muses that Black Lives Matter maybe isn’t so bad, before he decides to cut the interview short after realizing what he just said out loud.
Callaghan then turns to a guy nearby who has an unspecified vendetta, as evinced by a sign he was holding, against George Soros. One can guess why, given the anti-Semitic roots of far-right attacks targeting the liberal philanthropist.
This is generally how Callaghan’s interviews go. Aside from some cuts to move things along and making Vic Berger-styled surrealist and goofy edits to underscore the absurdity of his subjects, Callaghan mostly just lets them hang themselves with their own rope. And, every time, they do. In almost every video, his patient but general questioning about why they believe what they do consistently reveals anti-Semitic thinking. These are the people he always finds, uncoincidentally, hanging around Proud Boys rallies, Flat Earth events, anti-coronavirus lockdown protests, and the like.
Extremists make jokes to disguise their racism. Callaghan makes journalism that elucidates their racism, disguised as a joke.
It’s really effective. The far-right groups of 2020, wittingly or not, are antecedents of the far-right internet culture of the mid-2010’s. Their vocabulary of terms—cuck, beta, redpill—came out of 4chan and Gamergate adjacent and affiliated Reddit communities. These were spaces where cruelty was disguised as irony. Being racist was a joke, a troll for the lulz. So ironically throwing up the white power sign to troll the libs in public, while privately identifying as a white supremacist segregationist, is just a slightly less online version of what 4chan trolls were doing in 2014. Callaghan meets them on their own terms. They make jokes to disguise their racism. Callaghan makes journalism that elucidates their racism, disguised as a joke.
Inevitably, journalists reporting on and outlets and publications running straight news stories about the far-right will always register, in some minds, on a frequency aside from irony or disgust. This often well-intentioned coverage will nonetheless prove attractive to swathes of the country, especially the irony-poisoned internet youth who Proud Boys and the like try so hard to convert. While sternly condemning neo-fascists in a crisp, expensive suit and ironed tie is something fancy people who wear fancy suit and ties should definitely keep doing, a self-serious broadcaster raising an eyebrow and saying that the alt-right is “racist” in a slightly raised baritone is never going to resonate with the extremely online. But with his rumpled clothes and flat affect, All Gas No Brakes has figured out how to out-irony the edgelords.
Callaghan himself isn’t just in it for the bit. His lampoons are laced with empathy for some of the subjects he’s critical of. In an interview with Twitch political personality Hasan Piker, Callaghan lamented how often anti-Jewish bigotry came up in his filming. “It’s unfortunate, because these are very curious, investigative people, who are willing to put in tons of independent research time—which most people aren’t down to do,” he explained, bemoaning that their interests and conspiracy thinking always “go back to the Jews every time.”
Given he’s handling such dark currents, Callaghan isn’t blithe about the limits of letting people speak completely freely in videos that will reach a big audience. (All Gas No Brakes videos have been watched 61 million times on YouTube alone, where the channel has 1.5 million subscribers.) He told Vice in an April interview that despite disseminating hours of candid conservations with some of the most unsavory people he can find, he’s still holding on to footage that he has ”refused to broadcast because doing so would directly give a platform to hate speech.” He told the news site that he once cut an interview short because an interviewee at a Flat Earth conference alluded to denying the holocaust.
In his video documenting the Proud Boys rally, Callaghan made sure to include clips from the event showing a student journalist who was shoved to the ground and kicked in the head by a Proud Boy, and of another who accused an independent journalist of bias since she was “Arab.” In highlighting moments like these, Callaghan’s All Gas No Brakes shows what it actually takes to make sunlight work as a disinfectant. In a year where hate, violence, and those who push them have been an ever-present specter, that makes him a hero.


motherjones--2020-12-30--Trump, Turmoil, and 2020: Our MoJo Podcast Team Replays the Year’s Defining Moments

A disease , global in reach but intimate in its cruelty .
A nation plunged into economic ruin .
A president raging and incompetent .
Society ’ s unforgiving disparities revealed like never before .
The arrival of the coronavirus in 2020 “ found a country with serious underlying conditions , ” wrote the Atlantic ’ s George Packer , a lifetime ago in June .
“ Chronic ills—a corrupt political class , a sclerotic bureaucracy , a heartless economy , a divided and distracted public—had gone untreated for years.
” The death toll has tripled since then , to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ set against an often bonkers election campaign , one that featured the resurrection of a Democratic candidate thought to be on life support and a ruling party in total surrender to an unhinged autocrat .
What a year to be putting out a weekly news podcast .
On this week ’ s episode of the Mother Jones Podcast , the entire production team joins host Jamilah King to reflect on 2020 and replay what we thought were the most meaningful moments from the 58 shows we broadcast this year .
It seemed like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these extraordinary events , from the beginning of the pandemic to a riveting , protracted election and its aftermath .
We start as the coronavirus catches fire in New York City .
In March , producer Molly Schwartz wrapped her microphone in a compost bag and followed reporter Noah Lanard to document how restaurants in Flushing , Queens , faced imminent collapse .
Little did either of them know just what a turning point it would turn out to be .
New York City shut down days later .
I soon contracted COVID-19 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I turned to Peter Staley , a prominent AIDS activist who worked ( and sparred ) with Dr. Anthony Fauci in the early days of that epidemic , during the Reagan administration .
Fauci , then as now , was chief of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases .
Staley ’ s scathing indictment of Trump ’ s inaction haunts me still .
“ We know now we don ’ t have to wait till the end , ” Staley told me .
“ We know now that he messed up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is the reason we might have 100 to 200,000 deaths in the US.
” “ The deaths are all on his head , ” he said .
“ The blood is all on his hands .
The people dying now are Trump deaths.
” That was back in late March .
We could not have imagined that those numbers he suggested would have so dramatically underestimated the death toll .
As some of our colleagues , like parents of school-aged children all over the country , struggled to deal with Zoom classrooms , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ became apparent .
Learning from home was hard enough , but Molly found that remote education in a place known as the “ valley of the telescopes ” —in Pocahontas County , West Virginia , where WiFi is outlawed to preserve the integrity of a massive radio telescope—was a complete disaster .
Filing homework was all but impossible , another example of the deepening divide between the digital haves and have-nots that the pandemic only exacerbated .
But other historic fissures were soon to crack open anew .
The death of George Floyd @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Minneapolis police was broadcast to the world and “ pushed nearly anyone with a political conscience into physical action , ” Jamilah wrote soon after , in a painful but galvanizing personal essay we turned into radio .
“ Black people have long been exhausted , talking about why our lives matter , ” Jamilah explains in this recap episode .
“ It was important to say , you know what , I ’ m tired .
We ’ re all tired .
And we can be angry and tired at the same @ @ @ @ @ @ @ touchstone .
As we neared November 3 , it didn ’ t take much to imagine a contested election and , after Kenosha , armed right-wing vigilantes patrolling American cities .
“ Make no mistake , if you give power to Joe Biden , the radical left will defund police departments all across America , ” Trump seethed , Gaddaffi-like , during his RNC acceptance speech .
“ No one will be safe in Biden ’ s America.
” Later , to the militant Proud Boys , he offered an incitement , both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ back and stand by.
” Trump ’ s enablers , everywhere , were loving it , including Senate Leader Mitch McConnell , who upon the death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in September , began ramming through a new conservative justice .
“ His entire vision for the Trump presidency has been to pack the courts , the only thing he has done , every single week , ” reporter Ari Berman explained during a podcast about this unfolding democratic emergency .
“ That ’ s how the Republican Party and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ power long after Donald Trump long after Mitch McConnell have disappeared from the political scene.
” Jamilah recalls the breathtaking hypocrisy of McConnell and the Republican party in the run up to Amy Coney Barrett ’ s confirmation : “ It was a moment that kind of signaled that ‘ we ’ re done ’ , ” she says .
“ We ’ re done , being run over and being dictated to .
We were fed up , and we decided to do something about it in our own way.
” And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , finally , to hold .
After intimations of violence at polling places and grim possibilities that repeated efforts at voter suppression would win out , Election Day 2020 was a picture of democracy in action .
In the swing state of Arizona , long a laboratory for anti-immigrant laws , reporter Fernanda Echavarri documented a new group of activists determined to turf Trump from office , a coalition that became emblematic of Joe Biden ’ s ultimate victory in November .
Voters turned out in record numbers to topple the president .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Fernanda says of the effort to flip Arizona .
“ Young , old , rich , poor , people came together and said , ‘ We ’ re not going to have this here in Arizona anymore .
And not only that , we ’ re not going to have this country be run by somebody like this anymore . '
” And come January 20 , 2021 , it won ’ t be .
“ It was great for me to be reminded that change takes time , ” Jamilah @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tragic , unnerving , historic year .
Check out the full 2020 recap by listening to the Mother Jones Podcast , below : Listen to the latest episode of the Mother Jones Podcast : Subscribe using Apple Podcasts , Spotify , Stitcher , or your favorite podcast app .

A disease, global in reach but intimate in its cruelty. A nation plunged into economic ruin. A president raging and incompetent. Society’s unforgiving disparities revealed like never before. The arrival of the coronavirus in 2020 “found a country with serious underlying conditions,” wrote the Atlantic’s George Packer, a lifetime ago in June. “Chronic ills—a corrupt political class, a sclerotic bureaucracy, a heartless economy, a divided and distracted public—had gone untreated for years.” The death toll has tripled since then, to over 326,000, a daily horror show set against an often bonkers election campaign, one that featured the resurrection of a Democratic candidate thought to be on life support and a ruling party in total surrender to an unhinged autocrat.
What a year to be putting out a weekly news podcast.
On this week’s episode of the Mother Jones Podcast, the entire production team joins host Jamilah King to reflect on 2020 and replay what we thought were the most meaningful moments from the 58 shows we broadcast this year. It seemed like the best way—both personal and journalistic—to chart these extraordinary events, from the beginning of the pandemic to a riveting, protracted election and its aftermath.
We start as the coronavirus catches fire in New York City. In March, producer Molly Schwartz wrapped her microphone in a compost bag and followed reporter Noah Lanard to document how restaurants in Flushing, Queens, faced imminent collapse. Little did either of them know just what a turning point it would turn out to be. New York City shut down days later.
“The blood is all on his hands. The people dying now are Trump deaths.”
I soon contracted COVID-19 myself, and as I recovered, I turned to Peter Staley, a prominent AIDS activist who worked (and sparred) with Dr. Anthony Fauci in the early days of that epidemic, during the Reagan administration. Fauci, then as now, was chief of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Staley’s scathing indictment of Trump’s inaction haunts me still. “We know now we don’t have to wait till the end,” Staley told me. “We know now that he messed up big time, that first month is the reason we might have 100 to 200,000 deaths in the US.”
“The deaths are all on his head,” he said. “The blood is all on his hands. The people dying now are Trump deaths.”
That was back in late March. We could not have imagined that those numbers he suggested would have so dramatically underestimated the death toll.
As some of our colleagues, like parents of school-aged children all over the country, struggled to deal with Zoom classrooms, the unequal impact of coping with quarantine became apparent. Learning from home was hard enough, but Molly found that remote education in a place known as the “valley of the telescopes”—in Pocahontas County, West Virginia, where WiFi is outlawed to preserve the integrity of a massive radio telescope—was a complete disaster. Filing homework was all but impossible, another example of the deepening divide between the digital haves and have-nots that the pandemic only exacerbated.
“I’m tired. We’re all tired. And we can be angry and tired at the same time.”
But other historic fissures were soon to crack open anew. The death of George Floyd in May at the hands of the Minneapolis police was broadcast to the world and “pushed nearly anyone with a political conscience into physical action,” Jamilah wrote soon after, in a painful but galvanizing personal essay we turned into radio. “Black people have long been exhausted, talking about why our lives matter,” Jamilah explains in this recap episode. “It was important to say, you know what, I’m tired. We’re all tired. And we can be angry and tired at the same time.”
Anger indeed was a 2020 touchstone. As we neared November 3, it didn’t take much to imagine a contested election and, after Kenosha, armed right-wing vigilantes patrolling American cities. “Make no mistake, if you give power to Joe Biden, the radical left will defund police departments all across America,” Trump seethed, Gaddaffi-like, during his RNC acceptance speech. “No one will be safe in Biden’s America.” Later, to the militant Proud Boys, he offered an incitement, both dog whistle and bullhorn: “Stand back and stand by.”
Trump’s enablers, everywhere, were loving it, including Senate Leader Mitch McConnell, who upon the death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in September, began ramming through a new conservative justice. “His entire vision for the Trump presidency has been to pack the courts, the only thing he has done, every single week,” reporter Ari Berman explained during a podcast about this unfolding democratic emergency. “That’s how the Republican Party and the conservative movement will hang on to power long after Donald Trump long after Mitch McConnell have disappeared from the political scene.”
“We were fed up, and we decided to do something about it in our own way.”
Jamilah recalls the breathtaking hypocrisy of McConnell and the Republican party in the run up to Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation: “It was a moment that kind of signaled that ‘we’re done’,” she says. “We’re done, being run over and being dictated to. We were fed up, and we decided to do something about it in our own way.”
And that was the sentiment that turned out, finally, to hold. After intimations of violence at polling places and grim possibilities that repeated efforts at voter suppression would win out, Election Day 2020 was a picture of democracy in action. In the swing state of Arizona, long a laboratory for anti-immigrant laws, reporter Fernanda Echavarri documented a new group of activists determined to turf Trump from office, a coalition that became emblematic of Joe Biden’s ultimate victory in November. Voters turned out in record numbers to topple the president. “It really was this full circle,” Fernanda says of the effort to flip Arizona. “Young, old, rich, poor, people came together and said, ‘We’re not going to have this here in Arizona anymore. And not only that, we’re not going to have this country be run by somebody like this anymore.'”
And come January 20, 2021, it won’t be.
“It was great for me to be reminded that change takes time,” Jamilah says, neatly summarizing this tumultuous, tragic, unnerving, historic year.
Check out the full 2020 recap by listening to the Mother Jones Podcast, below:


motherjones--2020-12-30--Heroes of 2020: Ed Yong and His Prescient, Terrifying, and Inspiring Coronavirus Writing

There was a point for all of us , somewhere near the beginning of the pandemic , where we said to ourselves , oh shit .
One of my first oh-shit moments arrived after reading Ed Yong ’ s sobering feature , “ How the Pandemic Will End , ” in the Atlantic in March .
The coronavirus , Yong wrote , was “ unlikely to disappear entirely , ” and he explained that it was possible that “ COVID-19 may become like the flu is today—a recurring scourge of winter.
” I repeat : Yong wrote this in March @ @ @ @ @ @ @ United States had so far detected around 68,000 cases of COVID-19 and documented less than 1,000 deaths , according to the CDC .
In the days ahead of its publication , California became the first state to mandate its citizens stay home ; Dr. Anthony Fauci , director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases , said that Americans would likely need to socially distance for “ at least several weeks ” ; and President Donald Trump said he wanted to have the country “ opened up and just raring to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the country simmered in uncertainty , Yong ’ s piece was a wake-up call .
( And let ’ s not forget , of course , that Yong basically predicted the pandemic—and warned how unprepared we ’ d be for it—back in 2018 and 2016 , respectively . )
I apparently wasn ’ t alone in my shock about the story ’ s findings .
The piece was shared by the likes of Barack Obama , Rep. Adam Schiff ( D-Calif. ) , and even Catfish star Nev Schulman .
While I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how many people read Yong ’ s piece , Atlantic editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg cited Yong ’ s work , among that of others , in bringing a surge of 36,000 new subscribers in March , along with 87 million unique visitors to their website , Nieman Lab reports .
“ We have never , in the 163-year history of this magazine , had an audience like we had in March , ” Goldberg reportedly wrote in an email to staff .
Over the next nine months , Yong , already one of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would emerge as a leading coronavirus communicator , writing about masks , immunology , and the state of COVID research , among other areas .
The guy was churning out Atlantic feature stories like they were free samples at Trader Joe ’ s .
( Check out his most recent cover story , “ How Science Beat the Virus , ” here . )
As much of the media clumsily figured out how to responsibly and accurately report on the ever-moving target that is the coronavirus , he delivered sharp and potentially life-saving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ science journalist a few years out of college , I felt like a gnat watching an Olympic gymnast .
Even before this year , I was mildly obsessed with the award-winning writer for his articles on odd-ball topics like milk-producing spiders , toxic hippo poop , the history stored in whale earwax , and the wonders of hagfish slime ( !
? )
.
The stories were accessible , fresh , and , from what I could tell , founded on a love of science .
The pandemic only solidified my admiration for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in my internal monologue as “ Yong-form journalism.
” Let me give you a specific example .
This paragraph—about false-positive rates in early antibody testing from his April article “ Why the Coronavirus Is So Confusing “ —made my little nerd heart flutter : False positives are a problem , too .
Many companies and countries have pinned their hopes on antibody tests , which purportedly show whether someone has been infected by the coronavirus .
One such test claims to correctly identify people with those antibodies 93.8 percent of the time .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 4.4 percent of people who don ’ t have them .
That false-positive rate sounds acceptably low .
It ’ s not .
Let ’ s assume 5 percent of the U.S. has been infected so far .
Among 1,000 people , the test would correctly identify antibodies in 47 of the 50 people who had them .
But it would also wrongly spot antibodies in 42 of the 950 people without them .
The number of true positives and false positives would be almost equal .
In this scenario , if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , your odds of actually having them would be little better than a coin toss .
It ’ s not especially elegant prose , or deeply investigative , but it ’ s instructive , clear , digestible .
It doesn ’ t underestimate nor overestimate the intelligence of readers .
And it transforms a relatively complex topic into something one might bring up at a dinner party among friends ( okay , okay , at least with my friends ) .
And that ’ s what science writing is all about .

There was a point for all of us, somewhere near the beginning of the pandemic, where we said to ourselves, oh shit.
One of my first oh-shit moments arrived after reading Ed Yong’s sobering feature, “How the Pandemic Will End,” in the Atlantic in March. The coronavirus, Yong wrote, was “unlikely to disappear entirely,” and he explained that it was possible that “COVID-19 may become like the flu is today—a recurring scourge of winter.”
I repeat: Yong wrote this in March. The day it published, the United States had so far detected around 68,000 cases of COVID-19 and documented less than 1,000 deaths, according to the CDC. In the days ahead of its publication, California became the first state to mandate its citizens stay home; Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said that Americans would likely need to socially distance for “at least several weeks”; and President Donald Trump said he wanted to have the country “opened up and just raring to go by Easter.” While the rest of the country simmered in uncertainty, Yong’s piece was a wake-up call. (And let’s not forget, of course, that Yong basically predicted the pandemic—and warned how unprepared we’d be for it—back in 2018 and 2016, respectively.)
I apparently wasn’t alone in my shock about the story’s findings. The piece was shared by the likes of Barack Obama, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), and even Catfish star Nev Schulman. While I can’t tell from the outside how many people read Yong’s piece, Atlantic editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg cited Yong’s work, among that of others, in bringing a surge of 36,000 new subscribers in March, along with 87 million unique visitors to their website, Nieman Lab reports. “We have never, in the 163-year history of this magazine, had an audience like we had in March,” Goldberg reportedly wrote in an email to staff.
Over the next nine months, Yong, already one of the country’s best science writers, would emerge as a leading coronavirus communicator, writing about masks, immunology, and the state of COVID research, among other areas. The guy was churning out Atlantic feature stories like they were free samples at Trader Joe’s. (Check out his most recent cover story, “How Science Beat the Virus,” here.) As much of the media clumsily figured out how to responsibly and accurately report on the ever-moving target that is the coronavirus, he delivered sharp and potentially life-saving information and analysis. As an early-career science journalist a few years out of college, I felt like a gnat watching an Olympic gymnast.
Even before this year, I was mildly obsessed with the award-winning writer for his articles on odd-ball topics like milk-producing spiders, toxic hippo poop, the history stored in whale earwax, and the wonders of hagfish slime (!?). The stories were accessible, fresh, and, from what I could tell, founded on a love of science. The pandemic only solidified my admiration for what I’ve at least dubbed in my internal monologue as “Yong-form journalism.”
Let me give you a specific example. This paragraph—about false-positive rates in early antibody testing from his April article “Why the Coronavirus Is So Confusing”—made my little nerd heart flutter:
False positives are a problem, too. Many companies and countries have pinned their hopes on antibody tests, which purportedly show whether someone has been infected by the coronavirus. One such test claims to correctly identify people with those antibodies 93.8 percent of the time. By contrast, it identifies phantom antibodies in 4.4 percent of people who don’t have them. That false-positive rate sounds acceptably low. It’s not. Let’s assume 5 percent of the U.S. has been infected so far. Among 1,000 people, the test would correctly identify antibodies in 47 of the 50 people who had them. But it would also wrongly spot antibodies in 42 of the 950 people without them. The number of true positives and false positives would be almost equal. In this scenario, if you were told you had coronavirus antibodies, your odds of actually having them would be little better than a coin toss.
It’s not especially elegant prose, or deeply investigative, but it’s instructive, clear, digestible. It doesn’t underestimate nor overestimate the intelligence of readers. And it transforms a relatively complex topic into something one might bring up at a dinner party among friends (okay, okay, at least with my friends). And that’s what science writing is all about.


motherjones--2020-12-30--Monsters of 2020: Roger Ailes and Fred Trump

Imagine having the power to save tens of thousands of lives—maybe even more—with no more than a few simple gestures , and not doing so .
How monstrous would that be ?
It is hard not to anoint Donald Trump as the uber-monster of 2020 .
Had he done the bare minimum and consistently advised Americans to wear masks and practice social distancing during the horrific coronavirus pandemic , there is no doubt that thousands upon thousands of Americans who have been lost to COVID-19 would have survived this killing year .
Put aside the arduous task of standing up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump could not be bothered with—he still could have prevented so much death by saying ( and repeating ) the advice of his own public health experts .
Yet he could not bring himself to do that .
Consequently , many of our neighbors and fellow citizens perished , and this month we have experienced a daily 9/11 death toll .
Instead of even acknowledging this devastation , Trump mounted a political coup in a clownish but dangerous attempt to overturn the election and subvert American democracy .
Trump is the villain of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Perhaps of the century .
( It ’ s early . )
But let ’ s take a step back : Who are the monsters and villains behind this depraved soul who has robbed so many families of their loved ones ?
Who delivered him—who unleashed him upon America ?
Who has made possible his assault on democracy and the nation ’ s public health ?
No doubt , many helped place Trump on the path that brought him here .
But two deserve special honors : Fred Trump and Roger Ailes .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s father died in 1999 , and the creator of Fox News expired in 2017 .
But in 2020 , their evil influence and malfeasance lived on and led to tens of thousands—perhaps hundreds of thousands—of deaths .
Trump , as many have observed , is a broken human being , a pathological narcissist with no empathy who promotes hatred and division .
His deeply rooted flaws shaped his inept and uncaring response to the pandemic .
Because he did not want the crisis to interfere with his reelection prospects , he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And because of that , people died .
Trump , of course , is responsible for his own misdeeds and character defaults .
But this year , we learned that much of his ugly soul was molded by his father .
In her best-selling book , Too Much and Never Enough : How My Family Created the World ’ s Most Dangerous Man , Mary Trump , Donald Trump ’ s niece , presents a horrifying portrait of Fred Trump .
She chronicles how the family patriarch had destroyed his oldest son ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Freddy had defied his father ’ s wishes to take over the family real estate business and opted to become a commercial pilot . )
Donald watched his father demolish his older brother , and that trauma warped his character .
The book is full of anecdotes revealing how the family cauldron forged by Fred Sr. , a cold-hearted and awful person , had yielded the mean-spirited , bullying , vengeful , bigoted , misogynistic , dishonest , insecure , self-obsessed Donald Trump , a man thoroughly unequipped to handle a pandemic and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have been widely disparaged and forsaken by all—including Republicans and conservatives—for his profound mismanagement of this historic national emergency , had it not been for his chief enabling force and amen choir : Fox .
In 1996 , Ailes , a former Republican campaign consultant , launched Fox for Rupert Murdoch as a conservative cable news platform .
Two decades later , it became a zealous cheerleader for Trump ’ s presidential campaign and then the equivalent of state television for Trump ’ s cult-of-personality presidency .
Whatever Trump said—be it disinformation or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was the network ’ s great cause .
It constantly reaffirmed Trump as the dear leader for right-wingers and GOPers .
It defended him against all accusations .
It unceasingly countered and attacked reality-based media that reported on Trump ’ s lies , deceits , and wrongdoing .
It reinforced Trump worship as the holy faith of the right .
It promoted him as an infallible champion and characterized criticism of Trump as nothing but leftist whining from the “ fake news media ” and nefarious plotting from a Deep State .
When @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the coronavirus .
When Trump called it a hoax , Fox called it a hoax .
When Trump refused to prioritize mask-wearing and social-distancing , Fox followed suit .
Whatever Trump did in reaction to the pandemic—which often was not much—Fox backed him .
As Trump tried to hornswoggle Americans into believing that he was handling the crisis perfectly , Fox echoed the carnival barker in chief .
It covered for his failure to encourage Americans to adopt basic preventative measures , for his failure to model the appropriate behavior , for his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as widespread testing and tracing .
It celebrated his super-spreading campaign rallies .
Millions of Americans more readily believed Trump ’ s COVID lies because Fox was continuously broadcasting , bolstering , and mirroring his dangerous and lethal anti-reality .
The propaganda system that Ailes had built worked with deadly efficiency .
American lives ended because of this profit-generating operation .
Fred Trump and Roger Ailes did not live to see the creature they created fail the United States at a time of severe testing .
They did not see the bodies pile @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s incompetence and uncaring .
But they each helped Trump become who and what he is : a president whose reckless , self-centered , and irresponsible actions have contributed to the deaths of a great many Americans .
They are the monsters behind this monster .

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
Imagine having the power to save tens of thousands of lives—maybe even more—with no more than a few simple gestures, and not doing so. How monstrous would that be? It is hard not to anoint Donald Trump as the uber-monster of 2020. Had he done the bare minimum and consistently advised Americans to wear masks and practice social distancing during the horrific coronavirus pandemic, there is no doubt that thousands upon thousands of Americans who have been lost to COVID-19 would have survived this killing year. Put aside the arduous task of standing up an extensive national testing and contact-tracing program—which Trump could not be bothered with—he still could have prevented so much death by saying (and repeating) the advice of his own public health experts. Yet he could not bring himself to do that. Consequently, many of our neighbors and fellow citizens perished, and this month we have experienced a daily 9/11 death toll. Instead of even acknowledging this devastation, Trump mounted a political coup in a clownish but dangerous attempt to overturn the election and subvert American democracy.
Trump is the villain of the year. Of the decade. Perhaps of the century. (It’s early.) But let’s take a step back: Who are the monsters and villains behind this depraved soul who has robbed so many families of their loved ones? Who delivered him—who unleashed him upon America? Who has made possible his assault on democracy and the nation’s public health? No doubt, many helped place Trump on the path that brought him here. But two deserve special honors: Fred Trump and Roger Ailes.
They are both long gone. Trump’s father died in 1999, and the creator of Fox News expired in 2017. But in 2020, their evil influence and malfeasance lived on and led to tens of thousands—perhaps hundreds of thousands—of deaths.
Trump, as many have observed, is a broken human being, a pathological narcissist with no empathy who promotes hatred and division. His deeply rooted flaws shaped his inept and uncaring response to the pandemic. Because he did not want the crisis to interfere with his reelection prospects, he downplayed and lied about the coronavirus. And because of that, people died. Trump, of course, is responsible for his own misdeeds and character defaults. But this year, we learned that much of his ugly soul was molded by his father.
In her best-selling book, Too Much and Never Enough: How My Family Created the World’s Most Dangerous Man, Mary Trump, Donald Trump’s niece, presents a horrifying portrait of Fred Trump. She chronicles how the family patriarch had destroyed his oldest son (her father), Fred Jr. (Freddy had defied his father’s wishes to take over the family real estate business and opted to become a commercial pilot.) Donald watched his father demolish his older brother, and that trauma warped his character. The book is full of anecdotes revealing how the family cauldron forged by Fred Sr., a cold-hearted and awful person, had yielded the mean-spirited, bullying, vengeful, bigoted, misogynistic, dishonest, insecure, self-obsessed Donald Trump, a man thoroughly unequipped to handle a pandemic and serve a much-in-need public.
Trump might have been widely disparaged and forsaken by all—including Republicans and conservatives—for his profound mismanagement of this historic national emergency, had it not been for his chief enabling force and amen choir: Fox. In 1996, Ailes, a former Republican campaign consultant, launched Fox for Rupert Murdoch as a conservative cable news platform. Two decades later, it became a zealous cheerleader for Trump’s presidential campaign and then the equivalent of state television for Trump’s cult-of-personality presidency. Whatever Trump said—be it disinformation or not—Fox eagerly amplified the message. He was the network’s great cause. It constantly reaffirmed Trump as the dear leader for right-wingers and GOPers. It defended him against all accusations. It unceasingly countered and attacked reality-based media that reported on Trump’s lies, deceits, and wrongdoing. It reinforced Trump worship as the holy faith of the right. It promoted him as an infallible champion and characterized criticism of Trump as nothing but leftist whining from the “fake news media” and nefarious plotting from a Deep State.
When Trump downplayed the coronavirus, Fox downplayed the coronavirus. When Trump called it a hoax, Fox called it a hoax. When Trump refused to prioritize mask-wearing and social-distancing, Fox followed suit. Whatever Trump did in reaction to the pandemic—which often was not much—Fox backed him. As Trump tried to hornswoggle Americans into believing that he was handling the crisis perfectly, Fox echoed the carnival barker in chief. It covered for his failure to encourage Americans to adopt basic preventative measures, for his failure to model the appropriate behavior, for his failure to implement fundamental actions, such as widespread testing and tracing. It celebrated his super-spreading campaign rallies. Millions of Americans more readily believed Trump’s COVID lies because Fox was continuously broadcasting, bolstering, and mirroring his dangerous and lethal anti-reality. The propaganda system that Ailes had built worked with deadly efficiency. American lives ended because of this profit-generating operation.
Fred Trump and Roger Ailes did not live to see the creature they created fail the United States at a time of severe testing. They did not see the bodies pile up, a result of Trump’s incompetence and uncaring. But they each helped Trump become who and what he is: a president whose reckless, self-centered, and irresponsible actions have contributed to the deaths of a great many Americans. They are the monsters behind this monster.
Honorable mention: Mark Burnett


motherjones--2020-12-30--“Misleading” and “Propaganda”: Advocates Slam DOJ’s New “Myths and Facts” Immigration Report

This month , the Executive Office for Immigration Review ( EOIR ) , a Department of Justice division that oversees immigration courts and judges , issued its latest update to its previous report , “ Myths vs Facts About Immigration Proceedings.
” The 10-page document attempts to debunk what they describe as 29 myths about asylum claims , legal representation , video hearings , and the performance and decisions by immigration judges .
What it appears to have accomplished instead , according to immigration lawyers and advocates , is to further underscore the reality of how politicized and flawed the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump administration .
In response to the document , Kansas City-based immigration attorney Matthew Hoppock , who specializes in immigration-related federal appeals , tweeted : As Hoppock notes , the factsheet itself is not entirely new : It expands on a previous iteration of the document from May 2019 that presented 18 statements about immigration as “ myths ” and then provided their corresponding “ facts.
” According to EOIR , for instance , the perception that a wide discrepancy exists among different courts in the rates of granting asylum is a myth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have a grant rate of 19 percent or lower .
Yet , the disparities are well-documented and have been compiled in data from the office itself .
Practicing lawyers , advocates , and even retired judges have challenged many of the supposed misconceptions , sometimes pointing to a disconnect between myth and fact , or the failure to capture the whole picture .
When the list was first released , the Washington Post fact-checked four of the 18 claims concluding that , in some cases , EOIR officials were cherry-picking data , used @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and told only part of the story .
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick , a policy counsel at the non-partisan American Immigration Council .
characterized some of the “ myths ” as straw men and the “ facts ” as opinions .
With this new and expanded version , EOIR continues to argue that immigration judges are unbiased and impartial adjudicators not “ swayed by partisan interests or public clamor.
” It also still claims that the DOJ ’ s Legal Orientation Program ( LOP ) , which provides basic legal information to detained immigrants , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stays in detention .
“ If people know and assert their rights , the court may need to hold more hearings—which will make the case take longer .
If they give up , not knowing how to defend themselves , it will go faster , ” Michael Kagan , a law professor and director of the immigration clinic at the University of Nevada , Las Vegas , says .
“ This statement suggests that EOIR thinks its job is to help DHS deport people faster , rather than to make sure that people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a fair hearing.
” Kagan also noted ways in which EOIR is “ basically lying with statistics.
” To oppose the “ myth ” that immigration judges have seldom approved asylum cases in recent years , it argued that between 2017 and 2020 , judges granted 57,000 applications—an average of more than 14,000 grants per year and the highest four-year total in the office ’ s history .
But , according to Kagan , the reasoning ignores the significant increase in denials , plus the aggregate data only reflects a higher number of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rate .
“ They ’ re saying , you can trust us to decide incredibly high stakes cases fairly and yet , they ’ re engaging in rhetoric , distortion , and cherry picking of data as if they ’ re a politician running for office , ” he says .
“ And maybe we shouldn ’ t trust them with people ’ s lives.
” In July of this year , Hoppock described the 2019 list as the “ most politically slanted and repeatedly false publication by the agency to date.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the updated document is even worse , describing it as more “ explicitly propagandistic , ” misleading , and filled with disingenuous or misconstrued arguments and “ statistical and logical fallacies.
” In a May 2019 letter to James McHenry , the director of EOIR , former immigration judges and members of the Board of Immigration Appeals said the previous memo presented “ imagined myths ” and “ wildly inaccurate and misleading information ” as facts , equating it to “ political pandering , at the expense of public faith in the immigration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ further criticized the list for implying that asylum seekers are deceitful and have invalid claims , and that legal representation makes no difference in the outcome of cases .
“ Such statements indicate a bias which is absolutely unacceptable and , frankly , shocking , ” the letter stated .
In a statement debunking several of the myths that EOIR claimed it had debunked , the National Association of Immigration Judges ( NAIJ ) offered its own criticism .
( The Federal Labor Relations Authority recently moved to decertify the organization , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ grounds that immigration judges are management officials and , therefore , not granted union representation . )
The NAIJ found at least eight key assertions made in the previous DOJ document that either mischaracterized or misrepresented facts .
One of the discredited myths that still appears on the updated document states that most asylum seekers with representation are granted protection , an assertion the NAIJ said misses the point : numerous studies have shown that asylum seekers who have access to legal counsel have better chances at winning their cases than those who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not use the term ‘ fact sheet ’ to describe this document , ” Ashley Tabaddor , president of NAIJ , said in a statement at the time .
During a January congressional hearing on the state of judicial independence and due process in immigration courts , Tabaddor referred to the “ Myths and Facts ” memo again , saying that “ issuing blatantly one-sided political talking points ” harmed the public perception of judges .
“ Why are taxpayer ’ s dollars being spent on such campaign-like tasks ?
” she asked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can such statements be squared with the primary duty of any court to remain impartial ?
” Some of the assertions in the December document are apparent attempts to justify or respond to recent criticism that the independence of immigration courts has been further compromised by the Trump administration ’ s practice of hiring judges who have backgrounds in law enforcement and promoting others with extremely high asylum denial rates to the Board of Immigration Appeals .
“ There is nothing unusual or inappropriate about the elevation of a trial-level judge to an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ notes , emphasizing that referring to judges ’ past employment to predict their “ views on particular issues is both misguided and likely inaccurate.
” It also rebuts reports about documented inaccuracies in the data on asylum and other types of cases released by the office .
Further , it disputes that video hearings are unreliable and violate due process , even though an internal study found that judges had a hard time assessing body language cues and recommended limited use of the technology .
Reichlin-Melnick tweeted that the new “ Myths and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Trump administration is “ a stunning admission of the agency ’ s failures.
” He suggested that it makes an even stronger case for the need for an independent court system free from interference from the executive branch .
“ It ’ s unclear why EOIR is releasing this in the last week of the year , but it may be to defend themselves against well-earned criticism of their midnight policy changes before the Biden administration takes over , ” he wrote in an email .
“ In the waning days @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all pretense of independence from ICE and worked tirelessly to transform the courts into an assembly line for deportation .
This document , which debunks a series of straw men and contains multiple falsehoods , seems designed to justify some of these draconian changes .
”

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
This month, the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), a Department of Justice division that oversees immigration courts and judges, issued its latest update to its previous report, “Myths vs Facts About Immigration Proceedings.” The 10-page document attempts to debunk what they describe as 29 myths about asylum claims, legal representation, video hearings, and the performance and decisions by immigration judges. What it appears to have accomplished instead, according to immigration lawyers and advocates, is to further underscore the reality of how politicized and flawed the immigration system is—and has been throughout the Trump administration.
In response to the document, Kansas City-based immigration attorney Matthew Hoppock, who specializes in immigration-related federal appeals, tweeted:
Last week the @DOJ_EOIR quietly updated its list of "Myths vs. Fact." I haven't factchecked the new one, but it's much longer and at first glance appears to even more misleading than the previous one. https://t.co/uDwIFsQuuf — Matthew Hoppock (@MatthewHoppock) December 28, 2020
As Hoppock notes, the factsheet itself is not entirely new: It expands on a previous iteration of the document from May 2019 that presented 18 statements about immigration as “myths” and then provided their corresponding “facts.” According to EOIR, for instance, the perception that a wide discrepancy exists among different courts in the rates of granting asylum is a myth, and 52 out of 69 courts have a grant rate of 19 percent or lower. Yet, the disparities are well-documented and have been compiled in data from the office itself.
Practicing lawyers, advocates, and even retired judges have challenged many of the supposed misconceptions, sometimes pointing to a disconnect between myth and fact, or the failure to capture the whole picture. When the list was first released, the Washington Post fact-checked four of the 18 claims concluding that, in some cases, EOIR officials were cherry-picking data, used questionable information to dispute common claims, and told only part of the story. Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a policy counsel at the non-partisan American Immigration Council. characterized some of the “myths” as straw men and the “facts” as opinions.
With this new and expanded version, EOIR continues to argue that immigration judges are unbiased and impartial adjudicators not “swayed by partisan interests or public clamor.” It also still claims that the DOJ’s Legal Orientation Program (LOP), which provides basic legal information to detained immigrants, costs taxpayers money and results in longer stays in detention.
“If people know and assert their rights, the court may need to hold more hearings—which will make the case take longer. If they give up, not knowing how to defend themselves, it will go faster,” Michael Kagan, a law professor and director of the immigration clinic at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, says. “This statement suggests that EOIR thinks its job is to help DHS deport people faster, rather than to make sure that people in detention know their rights and get a fair hearing.”
Kagan also noted ways in which EOIR is “basically lying with statistics.” To oppose the “myth” that immigration judges have seldom approved asylum cases in recent years, it argued that between 2017 and 2020, judges granted 57,000 applications—an average of more than 14,000 grants per year and the highest four-year total in the office’s history. But, according to Kagan, the reasoning ignores the significant increase in denials, plus the aggregate data only reflects a higher number of decisions made, not a higher grant rate.
“They’re saying, you can trust us to decide incredibly high stakes cases fairly and yet, they’re engaging in rhetoric, distortion, and cherry picking of data as if they’re a politician running for office,” he says. “And maybe we shouldn’t trust them with people’s lives.”
Others have already started pointing out the statistical and logical fallacies in they document from @DOJ_EOIR. It is a corrosion of government for what should be a neutral, expert agency to put out rhetorical documents in guise of reliable information. https://t.co/gX0pY1tjQK — Michael Kagan (@MichaelGKagan) December 28, 2020
In July of this year, Hoppock described the 2019 list as the “most politically slanted and repeatedly false publication by the agency to date.” He and other critics are now saying the updated document is even worse, describing it as more “explicitly propagandistic,” misleading, and filled with disingenuous or misconstrued arguments and “statistical and logical fallacies.”
In a May 2019 letter to James McHenry, the director of EOIR, former immigration judges and members of the Board of Immigration Appeals said the previous memo presented “imagined myths” and “wildly inaccurate and misleading information” as facts, equating it to “political pandering, at the expense of public faith in the immigration courts” and propaganda. The letter further criticized the list for implying that asylum seekers are deceitful and have invalid claims, and that legal representation makes no difference in the outcome of cases. “Such statements indicate a bias which is absolutely unacceptable and, frankly, shocking,” the letter stated.
“Such statements indicate a bias which is absolutely unacceptable and, frankly, shocking.”
In a statement debunking several of the myths that EOIR claimed it had debunked, the National Association of Immigration Judges (NAIJ) offered its own criticism. (The Federal Labor Relations Authority recently moved to decertify the organization, which was founded in 1971, on the grounds that immigration judges are management officials and, therefore, not granted union representation.) The NAIJ found at least eight key assertions made in the previous DOJ document that either mischaracterized or misrepresented facts. One of the discredited myths that still appears on the updated document states that most asylum seekers with representation are granted protection, an assertion the NAIJ said misses the point: numerous studies have shown that asylum seekers who have access to legal counsel have better chances at winning their cases than those who don’t.
“I would not use the term ‘fact sheet’ to describe this document,” Ashley Tabaddor, president of NAIJ, said in a statement at the time. During a January congressional hearing on the state of judicial independence and due process in immigration courts, Tabaddor referred to the “Myths and Facts” memo again, saying that “issuing blatantly one-sided political talking points” harmed the public perception of judges. “Why are taxpayer’s dollars being spent on such campaign-like tasks?” she asked. “Perhaps most importantly, how can such statements be squared with the primary duty of any court to remain impartial?”
NEW- Retired immigration judges and former members of the BIA submitted a letter to EOIR Director McHenry in response to EOIR’s Myths vs. Fact memo issued on 5/8/2019. The letter characterizes EOIR’s memo as “political pandering.” https://t.co/Mv8ZEHzM4p pic.twitter.com/920ySeuMsu — Laura Lynch (@LLynch1) May 13, 2019
Some of the assertions in the December document are apparent attempts to justify or respond to recent criticism that the independence of immigration courts has been further compromised by the Trump administration’s practice of hiring judges who have backgrounds in law enforcement and promoting others with extremely high asylum denial rates to the Board of Immigration Appeals. “There is nothing unusual or inappropriate about the elevation of a trial-level judge to an appellate judge position,” the document notes, emphasizing that referring to judges’ past employment to predict their “views on particular issues is both misguided and likely inaccurate.” It also rebuts reports about documented inaccuracies in the data on asylum and other types of cases released by the office. Further, it disputes that video hearings are unreliable and violate due process, even though an internal study found that judges had a hard time assessing body language cues and recommended limited use of the technology.
Reichlin-Melnick tweeted that the new “Myths and Facts” sheet appearing at the end of the Trump administration is “a stunning admission of the agency’s failures.” He suggested that it makes an even stronger case for the need for an independent court system free from interference from the executive branch.
“It’s unclear why EOIR is releasing this in the last week of the year, but it may be to defend themselves against well-earned criticism of their midnight policy changes before the Biden administration takes over,” he wrote in an email. “In the waning days of the Trump administration EOIR has abandoned all pretense of independence from ICE and worked tirelessly to transform the courts into an assembly line for deportation. This document, which debunks a series of straw men and contains multiple falsehoods, seems designed to justify some of these draconian changes.”


motherjones--2020-12-31--Monsters of 2020: Trump’s Fascist Fist Pump

On October 5 , President Donald Trump lumbered out of the doors of Walter Reed Medical Center , three days after he ’ d been checked in with a case of COVID-19 .
He stopped , raised his right hand in a fist and shook it a few times in a motion that combined a pumped-up “ rock on ” and a jerking-off “ whatever.
” The gesture instantly conveyed that humility would not be a lasting effect of Trump ’ s run-in with the disease that he ’ d downplayed even as it had killed more than 200,000 Americans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The Trump fist pump is the visual punctuation mark of his presidency , dropped during arrivals and departures , at the kickoff of a speech or in the afterglow of a rally , even in a Christmas message .
In the moment , it can come off as a cheesy throwaway move .
It often makes Trump look like a duck-faced doofus , like when he did a double-fisted pump in the cab of a big rig or on his way to a 9/11 commemoration .
But when it ’ s frozen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a defiant , menacing embodiment of authoritarian swagger .
Trump ’ s presidency opened with the image of him raising his clenched fist at the end of his inaugural speech , in which he ’ d embraced the nativist slogan “ America First ” and called for “ total allegiance ” to the nation .
It signaled not a transition but a power grab .
This July 4 , he posed , fist aloft , in front of Mount Rushmore before denouncing “ far-left fascism that demands absolute allegiance , ” a rhetorical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a historian noted “ echoed a classic technique of past fascist leaders.
” Like so much of Trump ’ s flirtation with autocracy , the fist pump hides its darkest intentions behind plausible deniability : If athletes , musicians , and kids can lift or waggle their fists in excitement , why can ’ t the president , or his fans ?
And isn ’ t the raised fist also the symbol of Black Power and leftist solidarity ?
In late June , Trump retweeted a video of a fist-pumping supporter in Florida @ @ @ @ @ @ @ White House claimed the president had not heard the slogan but remained impressed by the “ tremendous enthusiasm ” on display .
Even if the fist ’ s ideology is gloved , it is an obvious articulation of Trump ’ s constant need to assert his energy and dominance , not just to us but to himself .
It ’ s a flash of power posing , of “ gestural metonymy ” : A fist is powerful , therefore forming a fist imbues you with power .
The earliest photos I ’ ve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the 1990 opening of his Taj Mahal casino in Atlantic City .
In them , he stands next to a giant magic lamp , like he ’ s just had his wishes fulfilled with the erection of another tower with his name on it .
( If you think all this armchair psychologizing is , um , getting out of hand , let me just add that this is a man who was so psyched out by Spy magazine mocking his allegedly short fingers in the ’ 90s that he was compelled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of his totally-not-tiny paws and his penis during a primary debate in 2016 . )
Coming from a master of branding boondoggles , Trump ’ s fist is easy to dismiss as more ironic than iron , a slight of hand distracting attention from a flawed product .
( After Trump went bankrupt , the Taj would eventually be sold off for 4 percent of its original value . )
Yet as with so much of Trump ’ s behavior , the fist pump is no less terrifying for its brazen dumbness .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the final images of his presidency—a valedictory , ham-fisted attempt to brandish his grip on our democracy even as he walks away from the carnage .

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
On October 5, President Donald Trump lumbered out of the doors of Walter Reed Medical Center, three days after he’d been checked in with a case of COVID-19. He stopped, raised his right hand in a fist and shook it a few times in a motion that combined a pumped-up “rock on” and a jerking-off “whatever.” The gesture instantly conveyed that humility would not be a lasting effect of Trump’s run-in with the disease that he’d downplayed even as it had killed more than 200,000 Americans to date. He was still winning.
The Trump fist pump is the visual punctuation mark of his presidency, dropped during arrivals and departures, at the kickoff of a speech or in the afterglow of a rally, even in a Christmas message. In the moment, it can come off as a cheesy throwaway move. It often makes Trump look like a duck-faced doofus, like when he did a double-fisted pump in the cab of a big rig or on his way to a 9/11 commemoration. But when it’s frozen in photographs, the fist hardens into a defiant, menacing embodiment of authoritarian swagger.
Trump’s presidency opened with the image of him raising his clenched fist at the end of his inaugural speech, in which he’d embraced the nativist slogan “America First” and called for “total allegiance” to the nation. It signaled not a transition but a power grab. This July 4, he posed, fist aloft, in front of Mount Rushmore before denouncing “far-left fascism that demands absolute allegiance,” a rhetorical denial of his own anti-democratic instincts that a historian noted “echoed a classic technique of past fascist leaders.”
Like so much of Trump’s flirtation with autocracy, the fist pump hides its darkest intentions behind plausible deniability: If athletes, musicians, and kids can lift or waggle their fists in excitement, why can’t the president, or his fans? And isn’t the raised fist also the symbol of Black Power and leftist solidarity? In late June, Trump retweeted a video of a fist-pumping supporter in Florida shouting “white power!” The White House claimed the president had not heard the slogan but remained impressed by the “tremendous enthusiasm” on display.
Even if the fist’s ideology is gloved, it is an obvious articulation of Trump’s constant need to assert his energy and dominance, not just to us but to himself. It’s a flash of power posing, of “gestural metonymy”: A fist is powerful, therefore forming a fist imbues you with power. The earliest photos I’ve seen of the Trump fist pump are from the 1990 opening of his Taj Mahal casino in Atlantic City. In them, he stands next to a giant magic lamp, like he’s just had his wishes fulfilled with the erection of another tower with his name on it. (If you think all this armchair psychologizing is, um, getting out of hand, let me just add that this is a man who was so psyched out by Spy magazine mocking his allegedly short fingers in the ’90s that he was compelled to announce the correlation between the size of his totally-not-tiny paws and his penis during a primary debate in 2016.)
Coming from a master of branding boondoggles, Trump’s fist is easy to dismiss as more ironic than iron, a slight of hand distracting attention from a flawed product. (After Trump went bankrupt, the Taj would eventually be sold off for 4 percent of its original value.) Yet as with so much of Trump’s behavior, the fist pump is no less terrifying for its brazen dumbness. No doubt it will provide one of the final images of his presidency—a valedictory, ham-fisted attempt to brandish his grip on our democracy even as he walks away from the carnage.


motherjones--2020-12-31--The Heroes and Monsters of 2020

The Heroes and Monsters of 2020

As coronavirus infection rates are rising and the death toll is climbing to horrific heights every day , millions of people are facing eviction , hunger , poverty , and illness .
Meanwhile , Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-Ky. ) seems completely unbothered by the widespread misery engulfing the country .
After agreeing to a COVID relief package in March at the beginning of the public health crisis , which included $ 1,200 stimulus checks for more than 127 million people , and $ 600 a week unemployment insurance for the people out of work , nine months @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from Kentucky spent months resisting passing any more aid .
A few points of contention existed with several items in the various bills—one gnarly issue was that the Dems wanted funds to go to states and cities while the Republicans viewed local aid as bailouts for liberal enclaves—but McConnell and his party ’ s recalcitrance boiled down to much more than a few dollar signs .
The majority leader had bigger interests to protect : namely making sure that corporations would have liability shields over coronavirus lawsuits .
Not only would McConnell ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ repercussions for failing to keep workers safe , the Senate ’ s inability to pass a bill meant that the Biden administration would have an even more difficult job in trying to fix the economy .
Then , McConnell could argue , since the economy is in such bad shape , the government couldn ’ t afford to spend money to help the public .
Win , win—if you ’ re a Republican senator .
When another coronavirus aid package finally passed three days before Christmas , it was nine months into the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ close to what the public actually needs .
And since it ’ s worth keeping score , six Republican Senators voted against it .
The Republicans ’ refusal to act on a meaningful coronavirus relief package is part of their larger pattern of either ignoring or trampling on the common good .
Whether it ’ s trying to dismantle the Affordable Care Act or passing tax cuts that disproportionately favor the wealthy , this year has revealed that not only are their priorities backwards , many of them seem perfectly fine with untold @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the systematic undermining of democratic institutions .
And while the GOP certainly doesn ’ t hold a monopoly on grotesque self-interest—though they seem determined to prove that they ’ re the best at it—as far as I ’ m concerned , the US Senate , especially Republicans in the so-called world ’ s greatest deliberative body , has been unique in displaying monstrous contempt for the common good .
And it ’ s not just coronavirus relief they made close to impossible .
As the Black Lives Matter protest movement , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in cities , suburbs , and small towns , exploded earlier this year , some senators concluded that this era was the perfect time to open a new front in the battle against civil rights .
Exhibit A could be Sen. Tom Cotton ( R-Ark . )
, who wrote an incendiary and controversial op-ed for the New York Times entitled “ Send In The Troops.
” ( After criticism from readers and NYT employees , an editors note was attached , the top Opinion ’ s editor was fired and another one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much like the military needed to force a high school in Little Rock , Arkansas , to integrate its schools , it also needed to quash protest movements .
“ One thing above all else will restore order to our streets : an overwhelming show of force to disperse , detain and ultimately deter lawbreakers , ” Cotton wrote .
“ But local law enforcement in some cities desperately needs backup , while delusional politicians in other cities refuse to do what ’ s necessary to uphold the rule of law.
” Of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the American military be deployed on American streets , he failed to mention that the troops were sent to his home state in 1957 because racist whites refused to let Black students inside .
The military was sent to protect Black students .
But it was not just protesters demanding rights that drew Cotton ’ s ire this summer .
He was also singularly obsessed with arguing against statehood and representation in Congress for Washington , DC .
Cotton once posited that sure , the District may have a bigger population than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well-rounded , working-class state.
” I ’ m sorry , could you repeat that Senator ?
I couldn ’ t hear you over the sound of your racist bullhorn .
But despite the many controversies surrounding Trump and his administration—when he shut down the federal government over funding for a border wall , his years-long refusal to release his tax returns , or his incessant and incendiary tweets that would have had Republicans calling for Barack Obama ’ s resignation—the GOP Senators stood beside him , terrified of his sway over the conservative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ checks and balances , the Senate was there to defend Trump and ignore his misdeeds while working to please corporate interests at the expense of everyone else .
Donald Trump ’ s absurd , long-shot and yet still terrifying attempt to reverse the outcome of the presidential election might not have gained so much traction without some friends in high places .
Before the electoral college vote , the Washington Post only found 27 Republicans in Congress who would acknowledge that Biden had won the election .
Sens .
Ted Cruz ( R-Tex @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) are the best examples of Republicans whose towers of convictions can be toppled by the gentle winds of political convenience .
Remember , they were both once representatives of the NeverTrumpers , and had very good reasons for their positions .
Cruz , still upset over Trump ’ s obscene insults to both his wife and father , pointedly refused to endorse Trump at the Republican National Convention in 2016 .
And Graham , still smarting from Trump ’ s publicizing his personal cell phone number , warned that if the GOP @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deserve it .
Ah , how times have changed .
Over the last four years , both men seem to be fighting over the spout to see who can guzzle more Trump Kool-Aid .
( Graham was the source of mockery in 2017 after tweeting about Trump ’ s spectacular golf game . )
After Trump lost the presidential election by more than 6 million votes and 74 electoral college votes , they still couldn ’ t find their principles .
Graham tried to get election officials in Georgia to toss out ballots @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president argue his baseless case in front of the Supreme Court , should the new conservative majority yield to the president ’ s demands and grant a hearing .
Fortunately , despite Trump ’ s confidence that appointing three new justices during his term meant they would rollover like the Republican Party , the nine justices declined to hear the suit .
Though I ’ ve singled out a few individuals , the problem of the Senate won ’ t be solved by simply voting McConnell , Graham , and Cruz out of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ institution is a dysfunctional mess .
Because each state gets two senators regardless of size , and the two major parties have divided themselves along rural and urban lines , Republican Senators often only compete in smaller and less-populated states .
As a result , in the incoming Congress ( excluding the Georgia runoffs ) , the Democrats will represent at least 20 million more people than the Republicans .
But if Republicans win at least one of the Senate seats in Georgia , they ’ ll have the ability to obstruct any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t like—which is to say , all of it .
It ’ s been a deeply terrible year .
The pandemic , the killings of Black people that sparked racial justice uprisings , climate disasters , and a slow-motion coup attempt—destined to fail , but designed to undermine democracy—have all combined to form sort of a rolling nightmare for the United States .
In November , Donald Trump ’ s loss offered a moment of hope , but now that Biden has secured the electoral college vote and even McConnell managed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ five weeks after it happened , the threat of a Republican-led Senate looms large .
Any short-term solutions , economic aid , or a competent pandemic response , are likely to be hampered by McConnell ’ s greed , partisan blindness , and utter disregard for the welfare of the American people .
Any long-term solutions , fighting climate change or expanding healthcare access , would be dead-on-arrival .
The GOP has already signaled that the party plans to obstruct the Biden administration any chance they get .
As bad as 2020 has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are poised to make 2021 just as bad—or , hard to imagine but it ’ s possible , even worse .

As coronavirus infection rates are rising and the death toll is climbing to horrific heights every day, millions of people are facing eviction, hunger, poverty, and illness. Meanwhile, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) seems completely unbothered by the widespread misery engulfing the country. After agreeing to a COVID relief package in March at the beginning of the public health crisis, which included $1,200 stimulus checks for more than 127 million people, and $600 a week unemployment insurance for the people out of work, nine months into the pandemic, the Republican senator from Kentucky spent months resisting passing any more aid. A few points of contention existed with several items in the various bills—one gnarly issue was that the Dems wanted funds to go to states and cities while the Republicans viewed local aid as bailouts for liberal enclaves—but McConnell and his party’s recalcitrance boiled down to much more than a few dollar signs.
The majority leader had bigger interests to protect: namely making sure that corporations would have liability shields over coronavirus lawsuits. Not only would McConnell’s wealthy friends and funders not face repercussions for failing to keep workers safe, the Senate’s inability to pass a bill meant that the Biden administration would have an even more difficult job in trying to fix the economy. Then, McConnell could argue, since the economy is in such bad shape, the government couldn’t afford to spend money to help the public. Win, win—if you’re a Republican senator.
When another coronavirus aid package finally passed three days before Christmas, it was nine months into the crisis and didn’t even come close to what the public actually needs. And since it’s worth keeping score, six Republican Senators voted against it.
The Republicans’ refusal to act on a meaningful coronavirus relief package is part of their larger pattern of either ignoring or trampling on the common good. Whether it’s trying to dismantle the Affordable Care Act or passing tax cuts that disproportionately favor the wealthy, this year has revealed that not only are their priorities backwards, many of them seem perfectly fine with untold economic ruin, unimaginable human suffering, and the systematic undermining of democratic institutions. And while the GOP certainly doesn’t hold a monopoly on grotesque self-interest—though they seem determined to prove that they’re the best at it—as far as I’m concerned, the US Senate, especially Republicans in the so-called world’s greatest deliberative body, has been unique in displaying monstrous contempt for the common good.
And it’s not just coronavirus relief they made close to impossible. As the Black Lives Matter protest movement, a multiracial and generational demonstration that took root in cities, suburbs, and small towns, exploded earlier this year, some senators concluded that this era was the perfect time to open a new front in the battle against civil rights.
Exhibit A could be Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), who wrote an incendiary and controversial op-ed for the New York Times entitled “Send In The Troops.” (After criticism from readers and NYT employees, an editors note was attached, the top Opinion’s editor was fired and another one was demoted.) Cotton argued that much like the military needed to force a high school in Little Rock, Arkansas, to integrate its schools, it also needed to quash protest movements. “One thing above all else will restore order to our streets: an overwhelming show of force to disperse, detain and ultimately deter lawbreakers,” Cotton wrote. “But local law enforcement in some cities desperately needs backup, while delusional politicians in other cities refuse to do what’s necessary to uphold the rule of law.”
Of course, in his rush to demand that the American military be deployed on American streets, he failed to mention that the troops were sent to his home state in 1957 because racist whites refused to let Black students inside. The military was sent to protect Black students.
But it was not just protesters demanding rights that drew Cotton’s ire this summer. He was also singularly obsessed with arguing against statehood and representation in Congress for Washington, DC. Cotton once posited that sure, the District may have a bigger population than Wyoming, but Wyoming was a “well-rounded, working-class state.” I’m sorry, could you repeat that Senator? I couldn’t hear you over the sound of your racist bullhorn.
I’m sorry, could you repeat that Senator? I couldn’t hear you over the sound of your racist bullhorn.
But despite the many controversies surrounding Trump and his administration—when he shut down the federal government over funding for a border wall, his years-long refusal to release his tax returns, or his incessant and incendiary tweets that would have had Republicans calling for Barack Obama’s resignation—the GOP Senators stood beside him, terrified of his sway over the conservative base. Instead of a system of checks and balances, the Senate was there to defend Trump and ignore his misdeeds while working to please corporate interests at the expense of everyone else.
Donald Trump’s absurd, long-shot and yet still terrifying attempt to reverse the outcome of the presidential election might not have gained so much traction without some friends in high places. Before the electoral college vote, the Washington Post only found 27 Republicans in Congress who would acknowledge that Biden had won the election. Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) are the best examples of Republicans whose towers of convictions can be toppled by the gentle winds of political convenience. Remember, they were both once representatives of the NeverTrumpers, and had very good reasons for their positions. Cruz, still upset over Trump’s obscene insults to both his wife and father, pointedly refused to endorse Trump at the Republican National Convention in 2016. And Graham, still smarting from Trump’s publicizing his personal cell phone number, warned that if the GOP nominated Trump, they would get destroyed—and deserve it.
Ah, how times have changed. Over the last four years, both men seem to be fighting over the spout to see who can guzzle more Trump Kool-Aid. (Graham was the source of mockery in 2017 after tweeting about Trump’s spectacular golf game.) After Trump lost the presidential election by more than 6 million votes and 74 electoral college votes, they still couldn’t find their principles. Graham tried to get election officials in Georgia to toss out ballots, and Cruz agreed to help the president argue his baseless case in front of the Supreme Court, should the new conservative majority yield to the president’s demands and grant a hearing. Fortunately, despite Trump’s confidence that appointing three new justices during his term meant they would rollover like the Republican Party, the nine justices declined to hear the suit.
Though I’ve singled out a few individuals, the problem of the Senate won’t be solved by simply voting McConnell, Graham, and Cruz out of office—and people have tried! The entire institution is a dysfunctional mess. Because each state gets two senators regardless of size, and the two major parties have divided themselves along rural and urban lines, Republican Senators often only compete in smaller and less-populated states. As a result, in the incoming Congress (excluding the Georgia runoffs), the Democrats will represent at least 20 million more people than the Republicans. But if Republicans win at least one of the Senate seats in Georgia, they’ll have the ability to obstruct any part of the Biden agenda they don’t like—which is to say, all of it.
It’s been a deeply terrible year. The pandemic, the killings of Black people that sparked racial justice uprisings, climate disasters, and a slow-motion coup attempt—destined to fail, but designed to undermine democracy—have all combined to form sort of a rolling nightmare for the United States. In November, Donald Trump’s loss offered a moment of hope, but now that Biden has secured the electoral college vote and even McConnell managed to acknowledge Biden’s victory a mere five weeks after it happened, the threat of a Republican-led Senate looms large. Any short-term solutions, economic aid, or a competent pandemic response, are likely to be hampered by McConnell’s greed, partisan blindness, and utter disregard for the welfare of the American people. Any long-term solutions, fighting climate change or expanding healthcare access, would be dead-on-arrival. The GOP has already signaled that the party plans to obstruct the Biden administration any chance they get. As bad as 2020 has been, the Republicans in the Senate are poised to make 2021 just as bad—or, hard to imagine but it’s possible, even worse.