US politics

Subterms

    More stories

    • 175 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump says Hegseth is ‘doing a great job’ despite reports of second Signal chat

      by

      Donald Trump offered public support for defense secretary Pete Hegseth a day after it emerged that Hegseth had shared information about US strikes in Yemen last month in a second Signal group chat that included family, his personal lawyer and several top Pentagon aides.“He’s doing a great job. Ask the Houthis how he’s doing,” Trump said dismissively, referring to the rebel group in Yemen targeted by those missile strikes, on the sidelines of the White House Easter egg roll event on Monday.Hegseth was revealed to have shared, in a series of messages, plans about US strikes against the Houthis on 15 March before they happened in the Signal group chat that included his wife, his brother and a number of his top military aides.The details that Hegseth sent in were essentially the same information that he shared in a separate Signal group chat earlier this year that mistakenly included the editor of the Atlantic in addition to JD Vance and other top Trump officials, a person directly familiar with the messages said.But pressure on Hegseth has so far come from people outside of the White House. Trump called the defense secretary on Sunday after the story broke and aides concluded that it had been leaked to the news media by a former Hegseth aide who was in the group chat but abruptly fired last week.Trump has resisted firing top officials in his second term, not wanting to be seen as caving to a media swarm even if he has been unhappy with the negative coverage. Trump also stuck by his national security adviser, Mike Waltz, who had added the editor of the Atlantic to the first chat.According to a person familiar with the call, Trump told Hegseth that he had his support and that disgruntled leakers were to blame for the story, which was first reported by the New York Times.Trump also told his team to back Hegseth in public, and senior Trump aides repeated their defense line that none of the information shared in either of the group chats were classified, although the accusations have centered on why it was shared with Hegseth’s wife, for instance, since she is not a Pentagon official.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe defense secretary himself appeared furious when asked about the second Signal chat during the White House Easter egg roll event on the South Lawn, telling reporters that the story was a “hit piece” that repeated his defense that it had been pushed by “disgruntled former employees”.But Hegseth faced growing pressure to resign after John Ullyot, his former spokesperson, wrote in an extraordinary opinion essay in Politico on Sunday that the Pentagon was “in disarray under Hegseth’s leadership”.Republican congressman Don Bacon, who sits on the House armed services committee, did not explicitly call for Hegseth’s resignation but suggested he would not keep Hegseth in place were he was the president.“I had concerns from the get-go because Pete Hegseth didn’t have a lot of experience,” said Bacon, a former air force general. “I’m not in the White House and I’m not going to tell the White House how to manage this … but I find it unacceptable and I wouldn’t tolerate it if I was in charge.” More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      US supreme court hears challenge to Obamacare free preventive healthcare

      by

      The US supreme court on Monday heard arguments in a case that could threaten Americans’ access to free preventive healthcare services under the Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare.At issue is the constitutionality of the US preventive services taskforce, which plays a critical role in determining which preventive services health insurers must cover without cost to patients. The 16-member panel of medical experts, appointed by the health secretary without Senate confirmation, has designated dozens of life-saving screenings and treatments as essential preventive care.If the justices uphold the lower court’s ruling, health associations said in a filing, life-saving tests and treatments that have been cost-free would become subject to co-pays and deductibles, deterring many Americans from obtaining them.The case represents the latest in a long series of legal challenges to Barack Obama’s signature healthcare legislation to reach the nation’s highest court since its passage in 2010. A big critic of the program during his first term, Trump and his administration have now taken over the case after the Biden administration initially filed the appeal.In oral arguments, the justices posed sharp questions over whether the law gives the HHS secretary the appropriate level of supervision over the taskforce, including the power to influence its recommendations and fire members at will, or if the group operates as a largely independent governmental body whose recommendations effectively have the force of law.Jonathan Mitchell, the conservative lawyer representing the plaintiffs who previously represented Trump in ballot access litigation, insisted that taskforce members are “principal officers” because “their preventive care coverage mandates are neither directed nor supervised by the Secretary of Health and Human Services”.Mitchell’s argument hinges on interpreting statutory language requiring the task force to be “independent” and “protected from political pressure”, which he argues is incompatible with secretary oversight: “We don’t see any way that statutory language can be squared with the regime envisioned by the government,” he told the justices.Several justices appeared skeptical of Mitchell’s reading of the statute, with Justice Elena Kagan questioning whether Congress would create a board without specifying who appoints its members: “I mean, it would be an odd statute. I doubt you could find another where Congress has set up a board and … just not said who should appoint.”The taskforce is made up of medical experts who serve four-year terms on a volunteer basis. It reviews medical evidence and public feedback and issues recommendations about which preventive services would be most effective for detecting illnesses earlier or addressing ailments before a patient’s condition worsens.The taskforce has identified dozens of preventive services as having a high or moderate net benefit to patients including screenings to detect diabetes and various types of cancer, statin medications to lower the risk of heart disease and stroke, and interventions to help patients quit smoking or unhealthy alcohol use.The New Orleans-based fifth US circuit court of appeals ruled in 2024 that the taskforce’s structure violates the constitution, as the plaintiffs claimed. The government’s appeal of the fifth circuit’s decision initially was filed by Biden’s administration before being taken up by Trump.Trump’s administration argued in a supreme court brief that the taskforce’s preventive care recommendations cannot become legally binding on insurers without the HHS secretary’s permission.“The secretary can remove them at will, and the threat of removal is the ultimate tool for control over final decisions on recommendations,” justice department lawyers wrote.For this and other reasons, justice department lawyers argued, the taskforce’s members should be seen as so-called “inferior officers”, meaning they can be lawfully appointed by an executive branch department head – like the HHS secretary – and do not require Senate confirmation under the constitution.In a supreme court filing, the plaintiffs argued that the Affordable Care Act has transformed the longstanding taskforce from an advisory body into one that now issues “decrees” to insurers, adding that the HHS secretary has no authority to stop taskforce recommendations from becoming binding law.The taskforce’s lack of supervision, they argued, makes its members “principal officers” who must be presidentially appointed and Senate confirmed under the constitution.Before the case was narrowed to the appointments issue, the lawsuit included a religious objection to being required to cover pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV. They claimed that such drugs “facilitate and encourage homosexual behavior, prostitution, sexual promiscuity and intravenous drug use”.The fifth circuit’s ruling also rejected the government’s request to remove certain offending words from the Obamacare provision at issue – a process called severing – in order to make that part of the law conform to the constitution. That issue was also part of the appeal before the supreme court.The supreme court’s decision was expected by the end of June. More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump official threatens New York governor over halt of congestion pricing

      by

      US transportation secretary Sean Duffy issued a warning to New York governor Kathy Hochul on Monday saying that the state of New York “risks serious consequences” if it does not suspend its congestion pricing program.New York City’s congestion pricing initiative, which was approved by the Biden administration last year and began on 5 January, charges a $9 toll on most passenger vehicles entering Manhattan south of 60th Street during peak hours.Similar systems are already in some major global cities such as London and are popular with environmental groups.In a letter dated Monday and addressed to Hochul, the Trump administration reiterated its demand that she halt the collection of congestion pricing tolls and gave the governor until 21 May to either certify that the collection of tolls has ceased, or provide an explanation for why its continuation does not violate federal law.“I write to warn you that the State of New York risks serious consequences if it continues to fail to comply with Federal law,” Duffy wrote.“President Trump and I will not sit back while Governor Hochul engages in class warfare and prices working-class Americans out of accessing New York City,” Duffy wrote. “The federal government sends billions to New York — but we won’t foot the bill if Governor Hochul continues to implement an illegal toll to backfill the budget of New York’s failing transit system We are giving New York one last chance to turn back or prove their actions are not illegal.”Duffy warned that the administration could begin taking action against the state as early as 28 May if the congestion tolls remain in place, such as withholding federal funding and approvals for future transportation projects in the state.The latest letter follows multiple deadlines previously set by the Trump administration to cease the program.The administration had given Hochul a deadline of 20 April and before that 21 March, but both times Hochul did not end the program.New York leaders have said that the program for Manhattan was designed to reduce traffic congestion, lower pollution, and generate revenue for public transit projects and improvements in the state.In February, the Trump administration said it was terminating the program by revoking the federal approval.The Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA), which operates the tolls, has challenged the administration’s decision in federal court and says the scheme does not violate federal law – a position backed up so far by a judge.Since the program took effect, both the MTA and the governor have defended the program, asserting that it is already achieving its intended goals.In March, Hochul touted the early success of the program, saying that “traffic is down and business is up” since the program took effect.According to her office, traffic declined 11% in February, compared to the same period last year. That month, traffic also moved 30% faster on bridge and tunnel crossings, per the governor’s office.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionCommuters entering the zone are also reportedly saving up to 21 minutes per trip, she said.The MTA CEO and chair, Janno Lieber, said in March: “Congestion relief is working, cars and buses are moving faster, foot traffic is up and even noise complaints are down.”The program, according to the New York Times, is also delivering financially, reporting in February that the program raised $48.6m in tolls during its first month, exceeding expectations.MTA data released earlier this month also shows that around 560,000 vehicles entered the congestion zone daily in March – a 13% drop from the roughly 640,000 vehicles the agency projected would have entered without tolling.The agency also said in late March that the program is on track to generate $500m in revenue by the end of the year.A March survey found that 42% of New York City residents support keeping the toll, according to NBC New York, while 35% backed Donald Trump’s attempts to squash it.Statewide, favorability for the program is weaker, with only about one-third of people in New York state supporting the program, compared to 40% who want it halted, per NBC.Just last week, according to the Associated Press, a federal judge in Manhattan dismissed a number of arguments in lawsuits filed by the local trucking industry and other groups attempting to block the tolling system. More

    • 188 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Gunman who killed 23 in racist attack at El Paso Walmart pleads guilty to murder

      by

      The gunman who killed 23 people in a racist attack at a Walmart in El Paso, Texas – one of the deadliest mass shootings in US history – pleaded guilty on Monday to capital murder in a state district court.Patrick Crusius was automatically sentenced to life in prison without parole for the massacre near the US-Mexico border. The change of plea comes after local prosecutors took the death penalty off the table.The people who were killed ranged in age from a 15-year-old high school athlete to elderly grandparents. They included immigrants, a retired city bus driver, a teacher, tradesmen including a former iron worker, and several Mexican nationals who had crossed the US border on routine shopping trips.Crusius has acknowledged he targeted Hispanics on 3 August 2019, when he opened fire in a Walmart in the Texas border city that was crowded with weekend shoppers from the US and Mexico.The El Paso county district attorney, James Montoya, declined to pursue the death penalty. Montoya says that decision was driven by a majority of victims’ relatives who want the case to be over.Crusius has already been sentenced to 90 consecutive life terms at the federal level after pleading guilty to hate crimes and weapons charges.Crusius was expressionless before the hearing began at the El Paso county courthouse, which was under heightened security. Crusius wore a striped jumpsuit, shackles and a protective vest.About 100 people from victims’ families were seated in the gallery behind a few rows reserved for media, prosecutors and Crusius’s defense team.If the plea arrangement proceeds, families will be able to give victim impact statements. Dozens of people made emotional statements during a similar hearing in federal court in 2023 that lasted for three days.Crusius, a white community-college dropout, was 21 years old when police say he drove more than 700 miles (1,100km ) to El Paso from his home near Dallas.Not long after posting a racist rant online that warned of a Hispanic “invasion”, he opened fire with an AK-style rifle inside and outside the store. Crusius was arrested shortly after.Joe Spencer, a defense attorney in the state and federal cases, said Crusius had been diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder that can be marked by hallucinations, delusions and mood swings, and has suffered from debilitating mental illness for most of his life. More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Full-blown meltdown’ at Pentagon after Hegseth’s second Signal chat revealed

      by

      Pressure was mounting on the US defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, on Monday following reports of a second Signal chatroom used to discuss sensitive military operations, while a former top Pentagon spokesperson slammed the US’s top military official’s leadership of the Department of Defense.John Ullyot, who resigned last week after initially serving as Pentagon spokesperson, said in a opinion essay published by Politico on Sunday that the Pentagon has been overwhelmed by staff drama and turnover in the initial months of the second Trump administration.Ullyot called the situation a “full-blown meltdown” that could cost Hegseth, a 44-year-old former Fox News host and national guard officer, his job as defense secretary.“It’s been a month of total chaos at the Pentagon. From leaks of sensitive operational plans to mass firings, the dysfunction is now a major distraction for the president – who deserves better from his senior leadership,” Ullyot wrote.Donald Trump Jr pushed back on the opinion piece, saying the author is “officially exiled” from Trump’s political movement. “This guy is not America First,” Trump Jr wrote on X. “I’ve been hearing for years that he works his ass off to subvert my father’s agenda. That ends today.”The warning came as the New York Times reported that Hegseth shared details of a US attack on Yemeni Houthi rebels last month in a second Signal chat that he created himself and included his wife, his brother and about a dozen other people.The Guardian has independently confirmed the existence of Hegseth’s own private group chat.According to unnamed sources familiar with the chat who spoke to the Times, Hegseth sent the private group of his personal associates some of the same information, including the flight schedules for the F/A-18 Hornets that would strike Houthi rebel targets in Yemen, that he also shared with another Signal group of top officials that was created by Mike Waltz, the national security adviser.The existence of the Signal group chat created by Waltz, in which detailed attack plans were divulged by Hegseth to other Trump administration officials on the private messaging app, were made public by the Atlantic magazine’s Jeffrey Goldberg, who had been accidentally added to the group.The existence of a second Signal chat, coupled with Ullyot’s devastating portrait of the Pentagon under Hegseth, is likely to increase pressure on the White House to take action.Trump defended Hegseth at the annual Easter egg roll event at the White House.“Pete’s doing a great job,” the president said. “Just ask the Houthis how he’s doing. It’s just fake news. They just bring up stories. It sounds like disgruntled employees. He was put there to get rid of a lot of bad people and that’s what he’s doing. You don’t always have friends when you do that.”Hegseth himself blamed “disgruntled former employees” in remarks to reporters at the same event.“What a big surprise that a few leakers get fired and suddenly a bunch of hit pieces come out from the same media that peddled the Russia hoax,” Hegseth said. “This is what the media does. They take anonymous sources from disgruntled former employees, and then they try to slash and burn people and ruin their reputations.”He continued: “Not going to work with me, because we’re changing the defense department, putting the Pentagon back in the hands of war-fighters. And anonymous smears from disgruntled former employees on old news doesn’t matter.”The Pentagon’s chief spokesperson, Sean Parnell, issued a statement in a post on X on Sunday night following the New York Times report.“Another day, another old story – back from the dead,” Parnell said. “The Trump-hating media continues to be obsessed with destroying anyone committed to President Trump’s agenda. This time, the New York Times – and all other Fake News that repeat their garbage – are enthusiastically taking the grievances of disgruntled former employees as the sole sources for their article.“There was no classified information in any Signal chat, no matter how many ways they try to write the story. What is true is that the Office of the Secretary of Defense is continuing to become stronger and more efficient in executing President Trump’s agenda. We’ve already achieved so much for the American warfighter, and will never back down.”Tammy Duckworth, a Democratic senator from Illinois and combat veteran, said in a statement that the second Signal chat put the lives of US men and women in uniform at greater risk:“How many times does Pete Hegseth need to leak classified intelligence before Donald Trump and Republicans understand that he isn’t only a f*cking liar, he is a threat to our national security?“Every day he stays in his job is another day our troops’ lives are endangered by his singular stupidity,” Duckworth said. “He must resign in disgrace.”Jack Reed, a Democratic senator from Rhode Island and a senior member of the Senate armed services committee, said the report, if true, “is another troubling example of Secretary Hegseth’s reckless disregard for the laws and protocols that every other military service member is required to follow”.Reed called on Hegseth to “immediately explain why he reportedly texted classified information that could endanger American service members’ lives on a commercial app that included his wife, brother, and personal lawyer”.Reed said he had “warned that Mr Hegseth lacks the experience, competence, and character to run the Department of Defense. In light of the ongoing chaos, dysfunction, and mass firings under Mr Hegseth’s leadership, it seems that those objections were well-founded.”Ullyot warned that under Hegseth “the Pentagon focus is no longer on warfighting, but on endless drama” and said “the president deserves better than the current mishegoss at the Pentagon.” More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      The Trump administration is sabotaging your scientific data | Jonathan Gilmour

      by

      United States science has propelled the country into its current position as a powerhouse of biomedical advancements, technological innovation and scientific research. The data US government agencies produce is a crown jewel – it helps us track how the climate is changing, visualize air pollution in our communities, identify challenges to our health and provide a panoply of other essential uses. Climate change, pandemics and novel risks are coming for all of us – whether we bury our heads in the sand or not – and government data is critical to our understanding of the risks these challenges bring and how to address them.Much of this data remains out of sight to those who don’t use it, even though they benefit us all. Over the past few months, the Trump administration has brazenly attacked our scientific establishment through agency firings, censorship and funding cuts, and it has explicitly targeted data the American taxpayers have paid for. They’re stealing from us and putting our health and wellbeing in danger – so now we must advocate for these federal resources.That’s why we at the Public Environmental Data Partners are working to preserve critical environmental data. We are a coalition of non-profits, academic institutions, researchers and volunteers who work with federal data to support policy, research, advocacy and litigation work. We are one node in an expansive web of organizations fighting for the data American taxpayers have funded and that benefits us all. The first phase of our work has been to identify environmental justice tools and datasets at risk through conversations with environmental justice groups, current and former employees in local, state, and federal climate and environment offices, and researchers. To date, we have saved over a hundred priority datasets and have reproduced six tools.We’re not fighting for data for data’s sake; we’re fighting for data because it helps us make sense of the world.The utility of many of these datasets and tools comes from the fact that they are routinely updated. While our efforts ensure that we have snapshots of these critical data sources and tools, it will be a huge loss if these cease to be updated entirely. That’s why we are “life rafting” tools outside of government – standing up copies of them on publicly accessible, non-government pages – hoping that we can return them to a future administration that cares about human and environmental health and does not view science as a threat.The second phase is to develop these tools, advocate for better data infrastructure, and increase public engagement. There’s a question of scope – if the government stops sharing National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration data, we don’t have the resources to start monitoring and tracking hurricanes. For many of these critical data sources, the government is the only entity with the resources to collect and publish this data – think about the thousands of weather stations set up around the world or the global air pollution monitors or the spray of satellites orbiting the earth. On the other hand, we do have the expertise to build environmental justice tools that better serve the communities that have borne the brunt of environmental injustice, by co-creating with those communities and by building from what we have saved from the government – like the Council on Environmental Quality’s CEJST, the Environmental Protection Agency’s EJScreen, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Social Vulnerability and Environmental Justice tools.A common refrain of the saboteurs is that if these functions that they are targeting are important enough, the states or the private sector will step in to fill the gap. While some of these functions of the federal government are replicable outside of government, privatization will render them less accessible, more expensive and subject to the whims of the markets. The states can also step in and fill some gaps – but many of the biggest challenges that we’re facing are best tackled by a strong federal government. Furthermore, many states are happily joining this anti-science crusade. The climate crisis and pandemics don’t stop politely at state borders. If data collection is left up to the states, the next pandemic will not leave a state untouched because it dismantled its public health department – but such actions will leave a gaping hole in our understanding of the risks to the residents of that state and its neighbors. What’s more, some states do not have the resources to stand up the infrastructure required to shoulder the burden of data collection. Coordination between federal and state governments is essential.Data is being stolen from us; our ability to understand the world is being stolen from us. Americans will die because the Trump administration is abdicating its responsibility to the people – this censorship regime will have dire consequences. That’s why we must stand up for science, we must be loud about the importance of federal data and we must put the brakes on Trump’s un-American agenda.

      Jonathan Gilmour is a data scientist at Harvard’s TH Chan School of Public Health, a fellow at the Aspen Policy Academy, and coordinator at the Public Environmental Data Partners. More

    • 200 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      From peppercorns to plastic forks: US businesses that rely on Chinese products reel from Trump tariffs

      by

      Chang Chang, a Sichuan restaurant in Washington DC, was already noticing that some of its business had dropped off after tens of thousands of federal workers living in the area lost their jobs. But the recent tariff rate hikes mark an even greater blow for the restaurant.Sichuan peppercorns, which create the signature numbing spice of the regional Chinese cuisine, along with other ingredients, face an at least 145% tariff after last week’s tit-for-tat trade battle between China and the United States. The steep rate is an existential threat for restaurants across the country that rely on specialty ingredients imported from China to craft the authentic flavors of their dishes, said operators who were blindsided.“We’re really worried,” said Jen Lin-Liu, the director of events for Chang Chang. The restaurant is part of the Peter Chang restaurant group that operates a dozen Sichuan restaurants across Washington, Virginia and Maryland.The restaurant group sources meats and vegetables from local farmers, including an Amish community in the Finger Lakes region that supplies its shiitake mushrooms and organic pork. Still, it is dependent on imported items such as fermented chili peppers and soy sauce, which give the dishes their unique taste.“Some of the products that we need just do not exist in the United States,” Lin-Liu said.The cost of other items is rising as well. “There are increases in any supply you can think of, from takeout boxes to printer paper to menu printing paper,” she said, adding that if the tariff rates stick, the price of a $20 dish may rise to $35 or $40.View image in fullscreenGeorge Chen, the chef who created Eight Tables, a fine-dining restaurant in San Francisco, said that while some of the items on his menu may be replaceable with options from Taiwan, it undermines the integrity he’s put into sourcing the unique ingredients for his dishes.“Replacements disrupt complex long-term relationships,” explained Chen. “It took me years to find the special spice vendors or the organic tea farmer in China from my many years living and working there.”Eight Tables is part of a larger marketplace called China Live, which includes a dining hall, a cold-drinks bar and a shop that sells wares including chopsticks, glass tea mugs and pots.“The area most concerning is our retail platform,” said Chen. For those items, “it’s not possible to re-order at the tariff rates”.For direct importers, like the Mala Market, an online shop, the tariffs on Chinese products threaten its entire business model. Sichuan peppercorns are popular on the site, but it also sells a number of items produced in their original region using traditional methods. The owner, Taylor Holliday, calls these “heritage products”, which include soy sauce handcrafted in Zhongba, fermented soybeans aged for three years in Sichuan and sesame paste stone-ground in Shandong.“These are products which have been made in that exact area for hundreds if not thousands of years,” said Holliday. “They have such a history, there’s no way these products can be made anywhere else.”While part of Holliday’s business supplies wholesale items to restaurants around the country, the majority of its orders are from home cooks.“A lot of our customers are people who have a cultural or emotional attachment to China,” Holliday said. “It’s more than just the food, it’s a cultural attachment to these products.”EMei, a Sichuan restaurant in Philadelphia, sources not only its peppercorns from China but also items such as chopsticks and plastic cutlery for takeout orders. Similar to many Chinese restaurants, delivery is a major part of the restaurant’s business.“So far, this is the main impact for us,” said Dan Tsao, the owner of EMei, who said the tariff hikes add about $1 to $1.50 to each delivery order.The tariffs may also create a supply issue for these items.“Importers are pausing more of their orders from China. They think 125% is crazy,” Tsao said.While the restaurant sources many of its ingredients from local farmers, it still relies on some imports from other countries. It orders broccoli from Mexico, shrimp from Ecuador and rice from Thailand. Rice is especially critical; the restaurant runs through a supply of about 200 pounds each night, Tsao said. Since Donald Trump’s “liberation day” announcement earlier this month, the price per pound has already risen more than 25%.View image in fullscreenThe frenetic nature of the tariff policy shifts has left owners and suppliers cautious about which steps to take and how to plan for the future.Tsao has plans to open two more restaurants later this year and has noticed some construction estimates for renovations rising. Most of the building materials come from China, too.“I’m hesitating now,” he said. The possibility of a recession while the prices of supplies and renovations keep going up may change his calculation. “There will be all these ripple effects on the system and there’s so much economic uncertainty,” he added.Holliday said she has one container of product already on the way from China that is scheduled to clear US customs in about five weeks, but will not raise prices until she is forced to.“I’m praying that something happens by then,” she said. But if it doesn’t, she’s resigned to paying the tariffs.“There’s no other way we can run our business,” she said. More

    • 288 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Fox’s new game show makes people guess what Trump’s been up to. Somehow I can’t see the joy in that | Dave Schilling

      by

      The classic television gameshow is one of the simplest pleasures available to the sedentary, socially maladjusted people we used to call “couch potatoes”. An average Joe is required to perform a task – ranging from answering a trivia question or spinning a large, colorful wheel to keeping a hand on a Toyota Land Cruiser for as long as possible – in exchange for the possibility of winning a cash prize (or a truck). For the viewer, there is the satisfaction of believing, perhaps falsely, that you could win the prize if you were in the contestant’s place. Maybe you identify with that contestant and actively root for their success. Or perhaps you just want to see some poor bastard shot out of a cannon, like on TBS’s dearly departed series Wipeout. Whatever your pleasure might be, it’s not an uncommon or esoteric one.We watch gameshows because they are basic human drama distilled into an easily repeatable format. TV development executives have tried to modernize it with the fancy graphics of something like NBC’s The Wall or the gratuitous flesh-baring of the 2000s disasterpiece Are You Hot, in which a panel of “celebrity” judges such as Lorenzo Lamas critiqued people on the number of visible abs on their bodies. The simpler a gameshow premise – guessing the cost of basic household items, answering multiple choice questions in a spooky room, or doing menial tasks for a man who combs his hair forward – the better. Perhaps this is why my initial reaction to the press release for the forthcoming mini-series Greg Gutfeld’s What Did I Miss?, on the Fox Nation streaming service, was so immediately negative.In the new series, Gutfeld (who made an entire career out of sporting a perpetually self-satisfied smirk that turns liberals into feral animals running around in circles and urinating on the floor) quizzes contestants on the headlines. The unusual part: these contestants have been sequestered in upstate New York for three months, “with no contact to the outside world – no phones, internet, television, or social media” – not unlike the short-lived BBC series The Bubble. Some of the headlines Gutfeld offers are real. Some are fabricated. It is up to the sad group of media-starved test subjects to ferret out what’s real from what isn’t.Imagine, a blissful 90 days of not knowing what is happening outside your window. A three-month vacation of regular meals, uninterrupted sleep and zero temptation to spend hours scrolling TikTok for videos of people marinating chicken in NyQuil. Doesn’t that sound lovely? Jared Leto spent 12 days in blissful meditative isolation at the start of the Covid pandemic and when he came back into civilization, someone had to tell him he couldn’t eat inside at Nobu any more. I feel bad for the guy, but he probably reminisces about those 12 days constantly.The blessed contestants of What Did I Miss? were afforded not just 12 days of peace, but 90 of them. That’s almost eight times what Jared Leto got! And on the other side, there’s the chance to win $50,000. Hopefully the inflation rate doesn’t spike again and that money keeps its value. They’re gonna need it when they hear about those tariffs.I suppose What Did I Miss? is more of a stunt than a traditional gameshow premise. Something closer to Joe Millionaire, a dating show where women vie for the attention of a man they think is rich but is actually not. How many times can you do something like that before the novelty wears off? You can only sequester so many people for three months before it starts to feel even cheaper than it is.Of course, beyond the show being crass, it trivializes everything in our current moment of social upheaval and angst. “Isn’t that Donald Trump a wacky guy? He’s so wild, you’ll never guess the nutso stuff he got up to last week!” Being that this is a Fox Nation production starring Fox News’s favorite bobblehead doll, it stands to reason that the audience for the show is people who still find something funny about news headlines. We are far beyond the days when someone could riff for hours on the image of George HW Bush puking on the prime minister of Japan. That was, in fact, quite amusing. I mean, man, just look at him hurl! That’s something else, isn’t it, folks?Donald Trump has yet to vomit on a world leader, but we can certainly say he has soiled the basic functions of democracy. This is not speculating on what your crazy uncle got up to after he raided the liquor cabinet. Are these contestants expected to suss out the fake headline from choices like “sent an innocent man to a supermax prison that looks like it was ripped off from Judge Dredd comics” or “threatened to tank the world economy just to see what would happen”? Call me a stick-in-the-mud if you like, but I’m just not seeing the breezy joy of the standard gameshow in a series in which people must guess whose human rights have been denied and why.The Fox Nation president, Lauren Petterson, said in the press release: “Truth can be stranger than fiction and who better to help isolated Americans catch up on the headlines they missed during an unprecedented news cycle than Greg Gutfeld.” The word I’m thinking of for all of this is not “strange”. “Grim”? Yes. “Dispiriting”? Sure. “Morally reprehensible”? Bingo.Instead of calling what we are witnessing a series of preventable calamities, we refer to it as a “news cycle”. Life is reduced to the whims of the media machine. It is, itself, a gameshow played for big money, where the object is to do or say the worst thing possible so people pay attention to you. That seems like the aim of the entire endeavor – to use cheeky TV smarm to make all of this palatable. It flattens that which we should be outraged about into a sickly sweet pancake of gameshow pablum. I hope the winner of this farce refuses the money in exchange for being sent back to the little house in upstate New York, free of the knowledge that human suffering is now government policy.

      Dave Schilling is a Los Angeles-based writer and humorist More