We didn’t have a Pure Michigan summer. Pay attention to those climate warning signs.
Ali Abazeed – September 29, 2023
As summer draws to a close, it would be easy to forget the weather patterns and disruptions that took us about as far from a Pure Michigan summer as you can get. But we’re moving into an uncertain future, and we must pay attention to these warning signs.
Metro Detroit experienced unprecedented air quality alerts this summer, with over 23 days of air quality gauged unhealthy or worse, the first-ever air quality alert for the entire state, our own rash of fires due to unprecedented hot and dry conditions, and, thanks to Canadian wildfire smoke in early June, another air-quality alert first: a warning based on PM2.5, a form of fine particulate matter that wreaks havoc on the respiratory system.
Hospitals across the state reported increased admissions of patients suffering breathing problems due to poor air quality. For a region of the country that already ranks poorly in particle pollution, this summer’s alerts serve as a clarion call for action.
And it wasn’t just poor air quality. We’ve witnessed increases in extreme flooding, extreme heat, tornadoes and high winds, just this summer. If left unchecked, we are looking at scenarios that will lead to profound environmental degradation — and this for a state deemed a potential “climate haven” for its ability to weather the even more destructive effects of climate change.
Beyond the ‘hottest summer ever’: How climate extremes impact us
Flooding and erosion will likely disrupt Michigan’s precious freshwater systems, and could contribute to harmful algal blooms that damage aquatic life and pose a risk to human health. Just last week, the Michigan Department of Natural Resources added two new invasive species to the state’s watch list, likely the result of alterations in habitat conditions due to climate change. These environmental flags have far-reaching consequences for the region, our state’s social fabric, and public health.
The consequences of climate extremes extend beyond just the environment and health. The stress and uncertainty generated by extreme weather events also corrode our built environment and social square.
Upheaval due to extreme weather is leading to significant changes in the fabric of society. Research shows that climate change is causing “social tipping points”: fast and fundamental changes in human values, behaviors, the nature of relationships, technologies and institutions that are just as intractable and hard to undo as climate change itself.
Constant worry about the next flood or extreme weather event takes a toll on interpersonal relationships, and has a deleterious effect on community bonds. Neighborhood squares, once the bedrock of local culture and interaction, face an existential crisis as people are forced to move, houses are abandoned and the pressures of climate change reshape communities. The ironclad law of climate change is this: Underserved communities and communities closest to the pain will always bear the brunt of displacement, insecurity and devastation due to extreme weather.
This is to say nothing of the already growing political tensions likely to rise due to extreme weather.
Research has repeatedly shown that more extreme weather contributes to many adverse outcomes, including violent crime, political instability and even the collapse of global regimes. Locally, we have diverging views on accepting the science of climate change, let alone addressing its disastrous effects. Politicizing what should be a shared concern for our state will make it harder to enact meaningful change.
Climate change is a public health crisis – and a social challenge
So, what can we do?
First, we must accept that extreme weather is not just an environmental issue, but a public health crisis and a social challenge. A public health approach centers on the health and well-being of communities near and far, but also emphasizes the importance of our built environment and its effect on our health. If our built environment is constantly reconfigured and disrupted by the ensuing floods, droughts, storms, or wildfires, the consequences on our health will continue to be disastrous.
We must adopt and enforce policies that limit emissions and promote sustainable practices now.
It’s important to expand our conception of community, and invest in regional efforts vital to increasing the resilience of communities, like long overdue investments in regional transit.
Downstream communities like Dearborn cannot solve flooding alone — we need cooperation and support from upstream communities to improve resiliency.
Though climate change is often globalized, seen as a concept far removed from our day-to-day, local actions can provide significant outcomes in the short term. For example, research shows that though most climate-related actions save money and provide benefits in the long run, the benefits of emission reductions for improved air quality provide immediate results regarding improved health outcomes, agricultural benefits, medical expenses and economic benefits.
Actions at the local level matter, and there are essential steps you can take now in your own community: Encourage investment in green infrastructure that makes our terrain more resilient to inevitable extreme weather, shift toward renewable energy sources, and educate yourself and others on climate adaptation. Ask your local government whether it has a sustainability plan. When new developments are proposed in your community, make sure those developments move us closer to a green future. Political leaders should incorporate public health concepts and terminology into their climate policies to engage communities that are facing the brunt of the devastation.
The summer of 2023 was a glaring preview of what’s at stake for Michigan’s future. Our health, communities and shared social bonds are on the line.
The time for more decisive action was yesterday.
Ali Abazeed is a Dearborn native, founding director of public health for the City of Dearborn, where is is currently the city’s chief public health officer, and is a faculty member at Wayne State University.
How To Get Rid of Mice — Easy Home Remedies as Inexpensive as They Are Effective: Pest Pro Reveals
Lindsey Bosslett – September 28, 2023
Ahh, we love the nip in the air that means fall is finally here. Unfortunately, the dip in outdoor temperatures means mice will be looking to take up residence in warmer surroundings, namely your home. If all through your house a creature is stirring, don’t worry — it’s easier than you think to banish mice. And it’s important to know: Not only are mice a nuisance, they can also import other pests, like ticks and mites, into your home. In fact, according to Discovery Wildlife, 42% of homeowners with an unwanted “mouse guest” will experience damage to their home’s structure and furnishings; 31% to food supplies; and 9% to insulation and wiring. And since a single mouse can give birth to 50 or more babies a year! We’ve tapped pest pros to give us the best way to get rid of mice without having to call…a pest pro!
How to tell if you have mice
Jose A. Bernat Bacete/Getty images
“Mice are primarily nocturnal, so the chances you’ll actually see one are low unless you’re a night owl,” explains Nicole Carpenter, pest control specialist with Black Pest. Signs you have one or more living among you include:
Holes chewed into boxes of food, pet food and litter
Holes chewed into furniture, blankets or pillows with stuffing disturbed
Cylindrical, pointy-ended droppings about 6 mm long
The smell of ammonia, which is caused by their urine
Hearing scurrying, squeaking or gnawing sounds in your walls, vents or ceiling
Seeing tooth marks in furniture, walls or wires
Dirty-looking smears along walls or floors, which is caused by the grease on their fur
Why mice can be hazardous to your health
Mice can carry several diseases that can be transferred to their human roommates, including hantavirus, leptospirosis, lymphocytic choriomeningitis, typhus and even the bubonic plague, according to the Centers for Disease Control. And though it’s rare to get sick from the rodents, it’s important to throw away any food they may have gotten into to ensure you stay disease-free.
How to get rid of mice: the best no-trap deterrent home remedies
If you’ve found signs that little critters have set up shop in your home, try the following simple home remedies to create a mouse-free zone without needing to trap and kill them:
1. The smell of peppermint
Jenny Dettrick/Getty Images
Mint is one of the best all-natural mice deterrents there is. “Mice really hate the smell and will go out of their way — even leave their cozy nests behind —to avoid it,” Carpenter reveals. “Just take some cotton balls, soak them in peppermint essential oil and leave them near spots you think the mice are active in your home.”
2. The smell of mothballs
Raunamaxtor/Getty
May as well call them miceballs, mothballs contain naphthalene and paradichlorobenzene — as these chemicals break down, they produce an odorous gas that creates that signature “mothball” scent. Mice not only find the smell unpleasant, the gas is also unhealthy for them, so they’ll take off for clearer air elsewhere. “Simply place mothballs near where you think the mice are nesting,” says Thomas.
3. The smell of white vinegar
Another scent mice won’t want to be around is white vinegar. Carpenter says there are two ways to put it to work: “First, you can soak cotton balls in white vinegar and put them where you suspect mice might be. Change these every few days to keep the vinegar smell strong. Or you can mix equal parts white vinegar and water in a spray bottle and spritz it along baseboards, corners and entry points. Repeat this as needed.”
How to get rid of mice: humane trap home remedies
Humane traps let you capture mice, then release them unharmed away from your home. Experts recommend driving at least two miles away, otherwise the mice will often try to return. A few to try: Wanqueen Humane Trap 4-pack, (Buy from Amazon, $12.99) or Harris Catch and Release Humane Mouse Trap 2-pack, (Buy from Home Depot, $14.39).
If you are considering using traps that kill mice, the best choice is a spring trap, which can be found at your local supermarket or dollar store and are the least likely to cause the mouse any suffering.
Most pest experts recommend staying away from glue traps due to cruelty, and from poisons, as these not only cause an unpleasant death for the mouse, but they can wind up perishing inside your walls or vents and be difficult to remove. Plus, if the bait or poisoned mouse is eaten by pets or other wildlife, they can wind up being poisoned, as well.
Can a cat help rid my home of mice?
Not all cats are interested in hunting, and even those who do like to stalk prey typically cannot tackle a true infestation. Bottom line: Kitties are great pets, but generally not a reliable form of mouse control.
How to keep mice from ever darkening your door
To avoid even needing to know how to get rid of mice using home remedies, the first line of defense is to keep mice out of your home in the first place, says Sean Thomas, owner of DIY pest control blog Conquer Critters. His easy how-tos:
1. Tweak your pantry
Food is one of the top reasons mice enter homes, according to Thomas, and they can detect scents up to 10 miles away — which means they can sniff out crumbs left on your counters and floors, as well as food left in paper or cardboard containers, which includes pantry staples like rice, cereal, oats, sugar and pasta. Give your kitchen a quick daily sweep to stay on top of crumbs, Thomas advises. “And store food in airtight, mouse-proof packaging.” Look for hard plastic food storage bins at the dollar store. Or you can buy entire sets, like the Mibote 28-piece airtight storage container set (Buy at Walmart, $49.99). Not only are they mouse-proof, they also keep your food fresher longer and can transform your pantry from cluttered to a beautifully curated space.
2. Plug sneaky leaks
LoveTheWind/Getty Images
Like every other creature, mice need water to live. “So if there are any leaking pipes or standing water, that can draw them in too,” Carpenter explains. Just do a quick check under sink cabinets and near drains in basements to make sure there are no water issues you need to address — in addition to mice, these can also cause mold and mildew problems that may impact your health. (Click through to learn more about how to get rid of mold in your bathroom.)
3. Bar common entry points
Shelter is the other top reason mice enter homes — most people believe they only invade in winter while looking for warmth, but they will also seek the cool, dry comfort of your house to escape the summer heat and rain.
“Shoring up your house from shelter-seeking mice takes a bit of a sharp eye,” says Thomas. “Mice have collapsible rib cages, which means they can flatten their bodies to fit in a tiny gap between, say, the bottom of your garage door and the floor, or a hole as small as 2 cm. They are also adept climbers, so the entryways don’t need to be ground-level.”
Where to check for mice
When looking for mouse entryways, grab a flashlight and check these areas key inside your home:
Around doors and windows
Inside cabinets, particularly the kitchen and bathrooms
Along baseboards and near vent openings
Behind appliances
Around pipes and floor drains
Along basement walls and crawl spaces
Then head outside and inspect these spots:
The foundation
Around pipes, gas lines or electrical wiring
The garage door and walls
Around any weather stripping
Any outdoor vents and airways
Attic windows
See holes and gaps? A home remedy that works: Use copper or steel wool to fill in holes, as mice typically won’t put in the effort to chew through it.
Or, you can fill them in using expandable mouse-proof foam insultation, such as DAP Mouse Foam Sealant, (Buy from Amazon, $18.62) or Smart Dispenser 12 oz. Pestblock Insulating Spray Foam Sealant, (Buy from Home Depot, $9.97)
These Are the Best Mouse Traps, Whether You Prefer to Snap, Zap, or Catch and Release Them
Kevin Cortez, Alex Rennie – September 27, 2023
The Best Mouse Traps for Getting Rid of RodentsVictor
“Hearst Magazines and Yahoo may earn commission or revenue on some items through these links.”
Whether you think mice are pests to be eliminated by any means necessary or simply cute and cuddly guests to be relocated, one thing is true: They need to be removed. And you should know how to get rid of mice. Although serious infestations will require a professional pest control expert, there’s still a lot you can do to mitigate your rodent problem by employing mouse traps. These are designed to be easy to use, and since they’re available in a variety of types and sizes, you can choose exactly how you’d like to deal with captured mice.
Catch and Release (No-Kill), Snap Traps (Kill), or Glue (Either/Or)
The most important thing to remember when choosing a mouse trap is whether or not you want to kill your mice or keep them alive after they’re caught. If you’d prefer not to kill the unwanted houseguests, choose a “catch and release” trap. These contraptions usually feature a mechanism that allows the mouse to enter then quarantines them inside until you can transport them to wherever you plan to release them. They’re also typically reusable and come in various sizes, from catching one mouse to up to 10. Catch and release is considered, naturally, a humane pest control tactic. When releasing, just be careful not to make contact with any urine or droppings to prevent exposure to hantaviruses.
Choose a snap-style or glue trap if you plan to kill your mice. Snapping traps do just that: snap their jaws onto the mouse once the animal steps on the trigger. These are usually disposable as, once a mouse has been killed in it, other mice will tend to avoid it.
Glue traps are another lethal option and use a strong adhesive to trap and immobilize the mouse when it steps on it, eventually killing it. Although we have been able to use glue traps without killing the mice they caught (we used olive oil to free them successfully), you should consider these traps lethal. Rats often get stuck and will rip off their skin and fur when trying to escape them, so be mindful of this if you consider the glue trap. All glue traps are made with nontoxic adhesive, so if a small child or pet accidentally touches one, they won’t be exposed to harmful chemicals or poisons. However, the CDC does not recommend glue traps as they can scare mice and rats, causing them to urinate, which can increase risk of rodent-related illnesses.
We don’t recommend using poisons. These baits and pellets cause rats and mice to die slowly over time, resulting in dead bodies scattered around the house—maybe inside your walls or in other hard-to-reach areas. That can also create an odor that’s difficult to locate and, therefore, clean up. Poisons also cause rodent bodies to become poisonous, thus poisoning any animal that may eat a carcass—pets included.
Bait
Regardless of what kind of trap you choose, you’ll need bait. Some traps include gel baits that attract mice to their scent, while others require you to use something that you may already have to invite mice, like food. Pest control companies often recommend loading traps with small bits of cheese, nut butter, chocolate, or seeds. Be careful not to overload a trap, as mice may easily be able to grab pieces without setting them off. Too much bait also risks attracting other pests like roaches and ants.
How We Selected
We’ve used nearly every mouse trap and took that experience, as well as several hours of research, to determine which are the best. We considered advice, guides, and explainers from various pest control services and publications to find what makes a mouse trap effective, and, importantly, only chose lures with nontoxic additives. No poisonous baits were considered, as they’re too dangerous for homes with animals and children. We did our best to include a range of trap sizes, so whether you’re in a studio apartment with minimal room or need help controlling an outdoor infestation, you’ll find a trap that best suits your living space. Because there isn’t much variation among traps of a certain type between brands, we selected only six as the best: two catch-and-release, two snap, and and one glue trap, plus an electric option for the quickest kill possible.
Press ’N Set Mouse Trap
This snap trap served us well during a particularly aggressive mouse infestation. It’s extremely simple to set up, so there’s minimal risk of pinched fingers. You just press the rear tab, the jaw opens, and the trap is ready to go.
Best of all, the top jaw has a handy cutout, so you can bait the trigger before you even expose the teeth. Despite this simple operation, the trap is stronger than you might think, and ours was even able to catch three mice in a single snap. Its white plastic body is also easier on the eyes than black or metal traps, which was a nice perk.
Shop NowPress ’N Set Mouse Trapamazon.com$36.86More
M154 Mouse Trap
If you’re looking to trap several mice but don’t have the budget for more expensive disposable traps, this classic Victor snap trap is a great fit—given you’re okay with kill traps. You get a dozen with each purchase, making it ideal for placing along a runway or area that rodents frequently use, increasing chances of success.
This old-school, prototypical mouse trap isn’t as easy to set as newer traps—it has more tension when setting them. Relatedly, users find the trigger less sensitive than on other traps, and featherweight or younger mice may not be heavy enough to set it off. Others say it’s fragile and, while labeled reusable, is likely not. Still, most users say this classic trap is the way to go, as it instantly kills mice, thus, limiting exposure to potential rodent-related diseases via droppings or urine—no wait, and minor cleanup.
This lethal trap features a unique system to destroy the mice it captures—using an electric current to quickly electrocute any rodents that walk inside its “kill chamber.”
The chamber is detachable, so it’s easy to empty and clean out and allows you to re-bait it before reattaching. A green indicator light also lets you know as soon as a mouse is caught and will stay lit for up to a week so that you won’t miss it.
Replacing batteries in any tool can be inconvenient, but since this model can kill 100 mice per charge, you won’t need to switch them out often.
Shop NowM250S No Touch, No See Mouse Trapamazon.com$78.23More
Heavy Duty Glue Mouse Trap
This Catchmaster glue trap covers a large surface area—10 by 5 inches—which increases your chances of trapping your furry intruders. They’re simple to use—just pull the two boards apart and place them on the ground—and should last for up to a year under normal circumstances.
Plus, the integrated floor anchors (tabs of putty at each corner of the trap) keep them in place, even if your mouse tries to pull them away. The large size of these traps might not make them the most practical choice for heavy traffic areas like your kitchen, where pets or kids might accidentally get stuck.
This RinneTrap bucket trap is designed to humanely capture multiple mice, making it well-suited for barns, warehouses, or anywhere else with large mice populations that need removing.
A simple ramp and tipping lid means no poisons or chemicals on your property. You simply attach this device to a standard 5- or 20-gallon bucket, load it with bait, check the trap, and release the rodents if full. It doesn’t include the required bucket, though you should be able to find one at your local hardware store. RinneTraps are quite pricey when compared to other traps here, however.
Shop NowFlip N Slide Mouse Trapamazon.com$34.99More
M310SSR Tin Cat Multi-Catch Live Mouse Trap
The Victor Tin Cat mouse trap is large enough to catch up to 30 mice before reaching capacity, but its 1.9-inch height still makes it compact enough to use in your home without taking up too much space. Its cutout window lets you know when a mouse is inside, and the lid is simple to open, so you can quickly release them whenever ready.
Its metal construction ensures a mouse can’t simply open its list and slip out, plus it makes cleaning bait, like peanut butter and cheeses, off its surface. This trap is safe for kids and animals and can be reused or disposed of when finished.
Some users say it’s ineffective for catching small and baby mice, as they can slip through the trap’s openings. Others note that it works well when used outdoors and can withstand mild weather like rain and snow.
Shop NowM310SSR Tin Cat Multi-Catch Live Mouse Trapamazon.com
The Judge Who Wants to Drag Us Back to the Victorian Era
Melissa Gira Grant – September 27, 2023
From the federal bench in Amarillo, Texas, Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk laid another plank last week in the expanding Christian nationalist platform for the United States, in a ruling favoring a public university president who banned a drag show organized by a campus LGBTQ student group. In this court order, the latest twist in a casefiled in March by Spectrum WT, a student organization at West Texas A&M University, Kacsmaryk denied the group’s request to restrain the school’s president and his administration from banning drag while their case is still in process. With Kacsmaryk’s order, we are witnessing the strengthening of the Christian right’s preferred legal reality, in which drag performance is not protected speech or expression under the First Amendment—thanks in part to the (literally) Victorian turn Kacsmaryk has made.
The university president’s drag ban comes as recently passed drag bans in several states face their own legal scrutiny. On Tuesday, Texas’s June 2023 drag ban was ruled unconstitutional, following a similar drag ban that was also overturned earlier this year in Tennessee. Other drag bans in Florida and Montana were also temporarily blocked by courts because of the damage the bans could do in their respective states while these cases were being argued. Kacsmaryk refused to follow suit.
In an order that points to his likely eventual ruling in the Spectrum WT case, Kacsmaryk deploys the same arguments as the Christian-right players behind the drag bans: that drag is “sexualized” expression or conduct, thus a danger to children, and thus fair game for their restrictions. Judge Kacsmaryk does not shy from the source of such spurious reasoning in the written order. He cited not only Christopher Rufo, the self-admitted architect of the moral panic that incited drag bans, but also Gays Against Groomers, the pseudo-grassroots group that claims to be “a coalition of gay people” opposed to “gender identity” (and whose rhetoric neatly follows the rest of the Christian right’s anti-trans rhetoric).
But another curious mention caught my eye in Kacsmaryk’s recent ruling: the Comstock Act. In his ruling, Kacsmaryk asserted that this 1873 law banning the dissemination of information related to sexuality (among many other things) is part of what he termed a “Free Speech ecosystem” that he claims went ignored by the students in their case. Whatever he means by “free speech ecosystem” aside, in reaching back to the Comstock Act—a law that has been chipped away at by the courts since its passage, and remains all but discarded in practice—Kacsmaryk claims to have found justification for excluding drag from constitutional protections.
Yet again, it appears that the Christian right’s latest go-to legal strategy is to summon the ghost of Anthony Comstock, the Victorian era’s arch foe of “obscenity.” It is not even the first time Kacsmaryk has referenced Comstock in a ruling siding with the Christian right. In April, in a case to restrict access to mifepristone argued by the Christian-right law group Alliance Defending Freedom, Kacsmaryk claimed that the Comstock Act may apply when it comes to the legal distribution of the drug, given its prohibitions around mailing anything that may cause an abortion (the Justice Department, it should be noted, had preemptively disagreed with this take). In a sense, by deploying Comstock now against both abortion and drag, Kacsmaryk is picking up on something quite true about the Comstock Act: Abortion, contraception, queerness, transness, sex work, sex ed, all of it is what Comstock was originally seeking to outlaw—and that Victorian sensibility is being resurrected from the dead.
But why revive Comstock now? To understand what Kacsmaryk is doing with the Comstock Act in both the drag and abortion cases, one must look to the Christian-right law projects that have both laid the groundwork for Christian nationalist legal theories and paved Kacsmaryk’s way to the federal bench.
Nearly a decade ago, Kacsmaryk joined the Texas-based First Liberty Institute, or FLI, a group that claims to be the largest legal project in the U.S. “focused exclusively on religious liberty.” From 2014 to 2019, Kacsmaryk was employed as an FLI attorney, where he represented clients fighting “the government’s effort to punish business owners and ministry leaders for following their religious beliefs and moral convictions,” as he said in 2017 after an FLI meeting with the Trump administration. As a lawyer working for the Christian right, Kacsmaryk was part of an effort aimed at rolling back contraception coverage in the Affordable Care Act—a provision that made birth control available to millions of people in the U.S. at no extra charge—on purported “religious liberty” grounds. In the movement for queer and trans rights too, according to Kacsmaryk, “religious liberty” is fundamentally at odds with “sexual liberty.” Since leaving FLI in 2019 to assume his place on the federal bench in Amarillo, coming down on the side of religious liberty is an effort Kacsmaryk can sustain with near-perfect continuity. Now with the power to decide from the front of the courtroom, he is able to tee up such cases for the Supreme Court.
After his nomination, FLI celebrated Kacsmaryk’s lifetime appointment as “a major win for religious-freedom practitioners, proving that a principled attorney may zealously advocate for the rights of … faith-based ministries without forfeiting the opportunity to serve on the bench,” and boasted that “Matthew is the first [emphasis its own] confirmed judge who’s gone directly from a religious liberty law firm to the federal judiciary.” Kacsmaryk’s nomination was not solely thanks to FLI: He also held a leadership position in the Federalist Society, the group that vetted a list of judicial nominees for Trump, curated by its board chair (and “friend” of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and his wife, Ginni) Leonard Leo. Having a Christian right–friendly judge like Kacsmaryk on a court is a boon to these legal players; having Kacsmaryk on a court in which he hears at least 95 percent of civil cases filed there is only more so.
First Liberty Institute, like the better-known Alliance Defending Freedom, or ADF, imagines that in the U.S., Christians are a persecuted minority. This assertion is something both groups would claim is not representative of their philosophy, pointing to their stated, broader defense of “religious freedom”—which in practice is a “freedom” reserved primarily for those Christians who use their faith as a rationale for violating the Constitution and civil rights protections. FLI’s founding president Kelly Shackelford was among the first on the Christian right to identify the post–Obergefell v. Hodges moment as the opening of a “a new war over religious freedom,” as he wrote in 2015. Within five years, he was declaring victory in that war. Shackelford said he was “watching history change on its axis,” marveling that groups like FLI were now suddenly prevailing—“because of what’s happening with the judges”—reflecting on, as Sarah Posner reported, the success their movement had putting millions of dollars into their crusade, using Trump’s power to stack the judiciary with their own.
Shackelford and FLI have continued to go to bat for the man who won for their side with “their” judges. They’ve even helped to substantiate Trump’s conspiracy theories about a stolen election: Shackelford joined a December 30, 2020, letter from a number of Christian-right groups that advanced Trump’s “fake electors” scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, and asked Senate Republicans to contest legitimate electoral votes, claiming that there was “substantial evidence” of “large numbers of illegal votes” (which there was not). Today, FLI is part of a group preparing the way for Trump’s return, the 2025 Presidential Transition Project, an effort led by the Heritage Foundation. It is a plan for overhauling the government as they see fit, starting from day one; it’s authoritarian in scope and features a “top to bottom overhaul” of the Justice Department, including demands to prosecute anyone providing medication abortion by mail, as well as classifying as “sex offenders” those who distribute what the plan deems “pornography”—which it claims is “manifested today in the omnipresent propagation of transgender ideology and sexualisation of children.” It’s a project already in progress.
Little of this powerful backstory is apparent in the federal courthouse in Amarillo when Judge Kacsmaryk is at work. Likewise, it’s not immediately obvious what the Christian right of today, from its wealthy backers making martinis from glacier ice with Supreme Court justices, to its prayerful warriors engaged in combat outside the Capitol on January 6, has to do with Anthony Comstock. That man died in 1915, leaving behind less a legacy and more a joke in the periodic usage of the term Comstockery to denote censorious impulses. Matthew Kacsmaryk, on the other hand, was only born in 1977, and he will most likely have many more decades on the bench in service to the Christian right.
How much does it cost to buy a federal judge? How much to buy one willing to raise Anthony Comstock from the dead? I sincerely suspect Kacsmaryk might throw that summoning in for free.
Arizona’s monsoon will end as one of the hottest and driest on record. What happened?
Hayleigh Evans, Arizona Republic – September 27, 2023
Summer 2023 ended as the hottest on record in Phoenix, and now the 2023 monsoon season will end as the driest.
During a summer of unprecedented and prolonged heat in metro Phoenix, many people had eagerly waited for the monsoon season to begin and fend off the scorching temperatures. But aside from a few storms that offered temporary reprieves, monsoon precipitation was weeks delayed and below average.
The monsoon season officially ends on Saturday having produced fewer storms overall than previous years, especially in central and southeastern Arizona.
Although parts of the state depend on the monsoon for much of their annual rainfall, lack of precipitation during this season will not endanger water supplies, especially following a wet winter and the strengthening of El Niño conditions.
Here’s some of what to know about the monsoon:
How much rainfall did Arizona get during the 2023 monsoon?
Phoenix posted its driest monsoon ever, with just 0.15 of an inch of rainfall at Sky Harbor International Airport, compared to a 2.28-inch average. While rain gauges in other parts of metro Phoenix recorded higher totals, the airport reports the official figure.
Statewide, the 2023 monsoon was hotter and drier than previous years. While season totals have not yet been released, based on figures from June, July and August, it was the 20th-warmest and 10th-driest season. (The monsoon season starts June 15 and ends Sept. 30, while meteorological summer covers June, July and August.)
Although residents of central and southeastern counties experienced an exceptionally arid monsoon, precipitation in the north and west offset the drier areas.
“Fortunately, this monsoon season was dry but not the driest. The 2020 ‘nonsoon’ season remains the precipitation loser,” said Erinanne Saffell, director of the Arizona State Climate Office and the state climatologist, regarding 2020’s status as the driest monsoon.
Tucson and Flagstaff also recorded below-average precipitation. As of Sept 26, Tucson fared the best with 4.73 inches of rain compared to a 5.39 average between 1991 and 2020. Flagstaff had 4.24 inches of precipitation compared to a 7.2-inch average.
The monsoon typically accounts for about half the yearly rainfall in the central and northern regions and roughly two-thirds to three-fourths of annual precipitation in southern Arizona.
Northern and western counties saw more rain than usual, particularly Yuma, Mohave and Coconino counties. Remnants of Tropical Storm Harold (which originated in the Atlantic Ocean) and Hurricane Hilary (which developed in the Pacific) played a role in bringing more precipitation to these areas.
Why was Arizona’s monsoon delayed?
It took weeks for monsoon thunderstorms to develop, which is a key reason why some areas saw less rain. The Arizona monsoon season begins on June 15, but storms did not arrive in central and southern counties until mid-to-late July.
Monsoon storms need two key elements to occur: a northward wind shift that brings in summertime moisture from the Pacific and the Gulf of Mexico, and high daytime temperatures. Together, intense surface heating and increased moisture produce monsoon thunderstorms during the summer.
The first storms generally require three consecutive days with a dew point higher than 55 degrees and temperatures between 100 and 108 degrees to develop. Typically, temperatures over 100 degrees in June help build a high pressure, subtropical ridge that summons moisture from the south. Arizona’s abnormally cool June delayed the onset of the monsoon by about six weeks.
This hot high-pressure ridge settled over central Arizona instead of the Four Corners, where it typically stays during the monsoon, bringing moisture through the state.
“When you’re underneath that bubble of heat, there’s really not much moisture, and the opportunity for thunderstorms is limited,” said Michael Crimmins, a climatologist from the University of Arizona. “When the monsoon doesn’t behave correctly, we can get into these really nasty heat spells.”
And yes, the lack of monsoon storms contributed to the 31-day streak of high temperatures at or over 110 degrees in Phoenix. Monsoon showers typically offset the heat in July, and the record-breaking heat wave finally came to an end on July 31 following storm activity.
Because the high-pressure system stalled over central Arizona, western and northern areas around the edges of the system saw some precipitation. Along with tropical storm activity, this subtropical system spurred more rainfall in the north and west.
Despite a lackluster monsoon, the state overall is on track for an average water year. The water year spans from October 1 to September 30, coinciding with the end of the monsoon, and tracks statewide precipitation during that time.
Based on data collected from 1896 to 2022, the average annual precipitation in Arizona is 12.26 inches. Between October 2022 and August 2023, the state had 11.43 inches of rainfall, and experts hope September’s precipitation will bring numbers even closer to the annual average.
Does below-average monsoon rainfall affect water levels?
While every drop counts during Arizona’s ongoing 23-year drought, the state does not rely on the monsoon to replenish its rivers and reservoirs. Watershed from snowmelt is the backbone of the Colorado, Salt and Verde river systems.
During the 2023 monsoon, Salt River Project’s watershed had its second-driest season. As of Sept. 17, SRP reported a combined watershed rainfall of 3.45 inches, 61% of the average precipitation.
SRP’s reserves are still high following winter storms that brought above-average snowmelt to Arizona. The SRP system is at 86% of capacity, compared to 65% during the same time last year.
“It’s not operationally something that we are concerned about, especially given that it was on the heels of an incredibly productive and wet winter, which completely filled our reservoir system,” SRP meteorologist Jesus Haro said.
Precipitation from the monsoon helps alleviate downstream demand from water sources and can affect releases from lakes and reservoirs. For example, the Bureau of Reclamation temporarily increased the minimum amount of water released hourly from Glen Canyon Dam on Sept. 14 to improve boater safety in the absence of monsoon showers.
In June, scientists from the National Weather Service declared an El Niño Advisory, saying they observed El Niño weather conditions and expected them to strengthen through 2023 and into 2024.
El Niño is a climate phenomenon that creates above-average sea surface temperatures in the Pacific Ocean near the equator. It usually occurs every three to five years and lasts for nine to 12 months. While it is difficult to predict the exact weather implications, El Niño events can impact weather patterns that trigger heavy rainfall and droughts around the world.
Experts say it is hard to determine El Niño’s impact on summer weather, but it may contribute to higher summer temperatures and delay the monsoon because it can weaken and reposition the subtropical ridge that summons moisture from the south.
While this summer was drier than normal, climatologists are hopeful for another wet winter. Out of the nine El Niño events since 1994, seven brought above-average precipitation in Arizona during the winter.
“Statistically, we tend to get more precipitation in the winter when we have an El Niño event,” Saffell said. “How much? We don’t know how much is going to come out of the sky, but we’re all crossing our fingers.”
Hayleigh Evans covers environmental issues for The Arizona Republic and azcentral.
Vanity Fair hits the Kennedy family’s Cape Cod compound for a peek into the controversial 2024 candidate’s wet hot American summer.
By Joe Hagan – September 27, 2023
On an overcast afternoon in mid-August, I find myself on a ferry to Nantucket with Robert F. Kennedy Jr.—son of Bobby, nephew of John, Democratic candidate for president of the United States. Trapped between Kennedy on my left and a window facing the Atlantic Ocean to my right, it is no exaggeration to say this is the low point of my summer—a supposedly fun thing I wish I’d never done.
A couple weeks before, Kennedy had responded to an interview request by calling and expressing exasperation at various hatchet jobs in mainstream media and skepticism that a correspondent for Vanity Fair, a card-carrying member of the legacy media, might be fair to him. “Your editor won’t let you write anything positive,” he promised.
Kennedy had had a rough ride since the summer started (he was virtually set ablaze by New York magazine) and so I proposed that instead of raking over his many controversial ideas—like his belief that the media has been infiltrated by the CIA, as he told the right-wing provocateur James O’Keefe in an interview this year; or his claim that pesticides in drinking water are causing “sexual dysphoria” in boys, as evidenced by a frog study—we meet up at the Kennedy compound and talk about his family history. Lean into his Kennedyness, have a little fun. I was scheduled to be on Cape Cod for vacation anyway and figured I’d go take the cut of his jib.
“So you’re saying this won’t be a hit piece?” he wrote back.
And so Kennedy agreed, reasoning that since we had a mutual friend in the late Peter Kaplan, his college roommate from Harvard and a mentor of mine in the journalism business, I would treat him fairly. The onetime editor of the weekly New YorkObserver taught me to give subjects a fair shake, though not to be afraid to have a point of view either. The first thing Peter used to ask when I returned from an interview was, “Did you like him/her?”
“What do you think is a greater threat to the republic, censorship or January 6?” Kennedy asked, then clarified that the answer is censorship. “You could blow up the Capitol and we’d be okay if we have a First Amendment.”
When I arrive at the Hyannis Port compound, I’m told Kennedy is on a boat somewhere and running late. And so I idle in the dining room of his house, a white colonial with soccer balls on the lawn and bicycles piled against the siding. I peruse books on his shelf: Best American Crime Writing 2004;How Al-Anon Works for Families & Friends of Alcoholics;Anything for a Vote: Dirty Tricks, Cheap Shots, and October Surprises in U.S. Presidential Campaigns. There’s a photograph of Kennedy with a falcon on his arm and a picture of him and his brothers as young men, posing shirtless in an outdoor bathtub together. Near the front door are two iconic photos, one of the late Bobby Sr., holding his son; the other of John and Jackie Kennedy on a boat, Jackie’s scarf blowing in the wind.
A woman strolls in, barefoot and wearing hot pink sweatpants and a sleeveless T-shirt. It’s Kick Kennedy, RFK Jr.’s 35-year-old daughter. I tell her I’m waiting for her father, who by now is 45 minutes late. “Welcome to my life,” she says. She lives in Los Angeles and had planned to come out to the compound for a week but then one week became two which became three and, well, you know how summer on the Cape is.
Word comes down that I’m to meet Kennedy at the boat dock and go directly to the ferry terminal—he has to catch the 4:15 to Nantucket for a fundraiser and our time at the compound is scotched. When I express disappointment, Kick offers to take me to the crow’s nest upstairs for a quick view of the compound. It’s the same view Kennedy Jr. used as a backdrop in a social media post this summer, meant to underscore his family legacy. We climb a nautically themed stairwell and pass by a room with a man face down on a bed (Kick asks me to whisper lest we wake her friend) and emerge on the roof to a sweeping view of the houses that make up the compound, each one tidy and separated by fences. Boats dot the harbor beyond.
She points to a grand mansion festooned with red, white, and blue bunting. “That’s the house that everyone thinks is ours and it’s actually John Wilson’s from the college-admissions scandals,” she says casually, referring to the chief executive of Hyannis Port Capital accused of bribing college administrators to help his kid get into the Ivy League.
That house is a false flag, I joke.
That’s funny, she laughs, because she works at an art gallery called False Flag.
Kick surveys the surrounding property. “Grandma’s over there, and this was Jackie’s house, and now it’s Teddy Jr.’s house, and our house is new, meaning we’ve had it for 20 years,” she says. “Then over there, if you walk straight down, you’ll see the famous field where the touch football games happened.”
“I give famously good tours,” she adds. If I wasn’t presently scheduled to meet her father, she says, “I would have grabbed a golf cart and taken you to Squaw Island,” a scenic marshland nearby.
“Have fun with whatever they’re going to force you to do,” she says and wanders back to the living room.
Iwalk down the street toward the boat landing and soon see the unmistakable figure of Robert Francis Kennedy Jr., 69, barefoot in a T-shirt and faded neon-print swim trunks. I greet him and his entourage, which includes Maria Shriver and her brothers, Timothy and Mark. Everybody is jovial and relaxed, just back from a trip to Baxter’s, the famous fried-seafood shack near the Hyannis ferry terminal. “He’s going to do the first nice article about me,” Kennedy says by way of introduction. “The first one.”
“Oh, thank God!” says Maria, laughing.
Then Kennedy is informed he has to leave in 10 minutes to catch the 4:15 ferry.
“4:15? Fuck.”
Yeah.
He still has to tie up his sister Kerry’s motorboat after their pleasure cruise and I join him as he jogs to the dock and motors back into the harbor. His piercing blue eyes stare straight ahead, jaw firm, face stony, the classical profile of a Kennedy. I’d recently read his memoir American Values: Lessons I Learned From My Family, and I ask where his maternal great-grandfather, John Francis “Honey Fitz” Fitzgerald, used to sunbathe nude. He gestures faintly to a beach along the southern shore but is distracted because he can’t find the mooring.
I spy one with “Kennedy” printed on it and motion him toward it. There’s a pink buoy with a long stick for hauling the line up. “Grab the whip!” he yells hoarsely over the motor. “Haul it aboard super fast, get the whole rope on board.”
I yank the wet rope on board and Kennedy ties up the boat. The motor is still running but Kennedy can’t figure out how to turn it off. A dock worker who comes to fetch us says he’ll do it for him and we race back to the house and jump into a black SUV with Kennedy’s hired security guards. “If we go fast,” says Kennedy, “we can make it in like seven minutes.”
We gun it to the terminal and are fast-walking to the gangway, the last to board the ferry, when we’re stopped by a guard in mirrored glasses. “Sir, you gotta put shoes on, please,” he says, motioning to Kennedy’s bare feet.
An aide quickly digs his formal dress shoes out of a suitcase and Kennedy yanks them on, looking faintly ridiculous as he strides onto the ferry in neon trunks and black dress shoes. He heads to the upper deck, known as the Captain’s View, and we sit side by side in bucket seats.
After the whole mad scramble, we now have an hour to talk. My original plan scuttled, I turn to my notebook, which is full of questions.
Three days before my arrival, Peter Baker of The New York Times had published a story on the Kennedy family’s unhappy feelings about Robert’s campaign; his taking on their friend and ally Joe Biden; his claim that John, and possibly Bobby Kennedy, were assassinated by the CIA. “That’s the third story the Times has done,” Kennedy says grimly. “The same story, three times.”
“Well, I have a big family,” he says. “Some of them agree with me, some of them don’t agree with me. I think it’s like everybody’s family. People are entitled to their opinions. I can love people who disagree with me about the Ukraine war or about censorship, whatever.”
He notes that sister Kerry, a critic of his campaign, loaned him her boat for the afternoon. No hard feelings. “She saw my boat didn’t have a key so she said, why don’t you take my boat?”
He crunches some numbers. “I think there’s 105 cousins now,” he explains. “So I think four or five of them made statements against me. And then a lot of other ones showed up for my announcement.”
Does it hurt his feelings?
“No,” he says. “We grew up in a milieu where we were taught to argue with each other passionately every night at the dinner table. There’s five or six members of my family who work with the Biden administration. And there’s a lot of other ones who have 501c3s that are doing business with the Biden administration.”
Kennedy finds President Biden “congenial” but disagrees vehemently with the war in Ukraine (he believes the US is partly responsible for starting it) and accuses the administration of censoring his views on COVID vaccines and lockdowns (in short, the former are dangerous, the latter unnecessary and dangerous). Indeed, he joined a lawsuit against a consortium of media and tech companies, including the BBC, The Washington Post, and Google, over alleged violations of his First Amendment rights. Among other things, it accuses the White House of leaning on Twitter to take down his posts or labeling them misinformation. (A week after I see Kennedy, a federal judge will deny Kennedy’s request for a temporary restraining order against Google and YouTube, citing “the public interest of preventing the spread of illness and medical misinformation”; later still, an appeals court will rule against the White House, saying it “coerced the [tech] platforms to make their moderation decisions by way of intimidating messages and threats of adverse consequences.”)
For Kennedy, the “legacy media” is corrupted by pharmaceutical companies and an implicit allegiance to the Democratic Party. The federal judge who ruled against him is an appointee of President Joe Biden and is therefore in bed with the whole gang too—as am I. I assure Kennedy I wasn’t given any marching orders from the DNC or Big Pharma, nor was I on the CIA payroll. “You wouldn’t be sitting there if you were willing to depart from official orthodoxy,” he tells me, “so there’s a self-censorship that goes on.”
To be honest, it isn’t a great way to start off an interview. But for Kennedy, this is clearly personal. “I was the first person censored by the White House,” he says. “Thirty-seven hours after he took the oath of office, White House officials contacted Twitter and told them to take down my post.”
The post suggested baseball legend Hank Aaron’s death was related to his COVID vaccine. None other than Ohio Republican Jim Jordan would later defend Kennedy, saying “there was nothing there that was factually inaccurate. Hank Aaron, real person, great American, passed away after he got the vaccine. Pointing out, just pointing out facts.”
“Nobody has ever pointed to a single post that I made, ever, that was factually inaccurate,” Kennedy continues. “We have probably the most robust fact-checking operation of any news organization in the country.”
He’s referring to his nonprofit, the Children’s Health Defense, which he says has 350 PhD scientists and medical doctors who make sure all his public statements are “vetted and super vetted.”
Kennedy says he lost a lot of followers after Twitter took down his anti-vax posts. “They lost me 800,000 followers,” he says. “They removed 268,000 people. People still, in this country, don’t know that the vaccine is killing kids. There’s what, 1,500 student athletes that have dropped dead on the field for myocarditis? Americans don’t know that…and none of it’s recorded. It’s all censored.”From the Archive: Far From the Tree
I’d actually read that claim before—Ron DeSantis’s controversial surgeon general in Florida, Joseph Ladapo, hyped the theory from a study that admitted in the fine print that it could not “provide a definitive functional proof or a direct causal link between vaccination and myocarditis”—so it couldn’t have been very successfully censored, no?
“Well, you read little tiny bits, but you’re not reading about the kids that I read about every day,” he says. “New children dying. If an individual died of COVID, it’s front-page. If a guy dies of the COVID vaccine, you will not find it in a paper. That’s not right.”
Tonally, Kennedy’s raspy voice can make it hard to tell whether he’s pissed off or just struggling to make himself understood, but it’s ambiguous enough that I ask him if he’s pissed off.
“Do I go around angry?” he says. “No.”
But as I question him, he gets increasingly tense. His arms are crossed tightly across his chest. He hasn’t laughed or smiled once since we started talking. Given all that he’s saying about Biden, plus his wholesale embrace of, and by, the conservative media, plus his appearance before the Republican-led, anti-Democrat Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, not to mention unlikely fans like Donald Trump, Roger Stone, Steve Bannon, and Ron DeSantis (who said he would consider making Kennedy the head of the FDA in his administration), I can’t help but wonder who Kennedy would vote for in a general election matchup between Joe Biden and Donald Trump in 2024.
“I wouldn’t answer that question,” he replies. “I think the Ukraine war is an existential war for us. I think we are walking along the edge in a completely unnecessary war.”
But as a Democrat, I press, wouldn’t Robert F. Kennedy Jr., of the vaunted Democratic Kennedy family, vote for the Democratic nominee? “You’re giving me a hypothetical situation,” he says. “It depends what their positions are on issues.”
The first issue he mentions, Ukraine, is one that aligns him with Trump’s pro-Putin position. “Well, maybe,” he says, pointing out that he’s also critical of Trump’s COVID policies from 2020. “Trump engineered a $16 trillion useless expenditure with the COVID lockdowns,” he says.
Of DeSantis’s idea, Kennedy says, “It’s nice for him to express confidence in me. I’m not going to express umbrage at that.”
In liberal circles, these kinds of answers feed the suspicion that Kennedy, whose super PAC is largely financed by a Trump donor named Timothy Mellon, is a kind of Manchurian candidate set on spoiling Biden’s chances against Trump. Kennedy insists he won’t run as an independent (“Even if I was going to run as a third-party candidate, which I’m not, I would probably take more votes from Trump than I would from Democrats”), but feeling unloved by the press, he has embraced people like Joe Rogan, to whom he can fire off his theories without being fact-checked in real time, and Fox News, where Sean Hannity has given him free rein to espouse what Kennedy calls his “mal-information” (supposedly factually accurate information that Democrats don’t want you to hear).
Then there’s former Fox host Tucker Carlson, with whom Kennedy seems to have a burgeoning bromance. “For years, I was trying to get Fox News to take endocrine disruptors seriously. It’s a toxin that affects sexuality in children. I’ve been fighting them for 40 years. So about a year ago, Tucker Carlson did a show, finally. He did a really detailed show on endocrine disruptors and the whole Democratic left came down against him. What is that about?”
As it happens, Kennedy had taped an interview with Carlson only the night before we meet and came away with fresh questions about the January 6 insurrection, which right-wing media theorizes was sparked by a Capitol rioter named Ray Epps, who they surmise was an FBI agent running a false flag operation to implicate Trump fans (Epps has since sued Fox News for spreading the lie and has pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge in connection with the January 6 attack).
Given how aggrieved Kennedy seems, I ask whether some of this treatment in the press might not be his communication style—the hyperbolic language, a certain undisciplined (and paranoid) style.
“Like what?” he asks.
Like his claim that the media, including The New York Times and The Washington Post, have been “compromised” by the CIA in a new version of the old 1960s CIA program, Operation Mockingbird.
Nope, he actually believes that.
“I had dinner about three weeks ago with Mike Pompeo,” Kennedy recounts, “and he said to me, ‘When I was at the CIA, I did not do a good job at reforming that agency.’ And he said, ‘I should have and I didn’t.’ And he said, ‘I failed.’ And he said to me, ‘The top echelon of that agency, all of the people who are in the top tier of that agency, are people who do not believe in the Democratic institutions of the United States of America.’”
The strongest proof of corruption at the top levels of the government and media is how Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is being treated by the press. “Even Trump was not treated like this,” he says. “Tucker said it’s the worst treatment that he’s ever seen in his life, of any public figure.”
“And that’s why I initially said I wasn’t interested in talking to you,” he explains, “because I know that it would be very unusual for me to get fair treatment from a mainstream journal.”
He gives me an extended lecture about “what reporters are supposed to do” and how the media “did the opposite. They became propaganda vessels for a certain point of view. And they became manipulators of the public. And that is why you’re seeing the division in this country, because people know when they’re being lied to and when they’re being manipulated.”
For example, he says, the media keeps “censoring” Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
“It’s that the media will not report what I say,” he says. “They call me an anti-vaxxer. I’ve never been an anti-vaxxer on any vaccine. I was trying to get mercury out of fish for 40 years and nobody called me anti-fish. I want safe vaccines. I want good science. I want to have vaccines that are tested against placebos like every other medicine, prior [to] licensure. I think most people would agree with that. I tell it to every reporter like you and you won’t report it.”
For what it’s worth, Kennedy has said as recently as July that “there’s no vaccine that is safe and effective” and called the COVID vaccine “the deadliest vaccine ever made.” His presidential campaign is aligned with his nonprofit, which consistently espouses anti-vaccine opinion. One might argue that Kennedy is not so much censored as simply disbelieved, but censorship also happens to be the genesis and thrust of his campaign for president. “I thought if I ran for president, I’d actually get to talk to Americans instead of having the press be the dishonest intermediary.”
At this, Kennedy turns toward me with his whole body, muscles flexing, and grips the tray table between us. “You’re lying to me,” he says, furious.
In other words, people like me are actually the reason he’s running—so he can get around me, even though he’s right in front of me.
And this is where the interview takes a sour turn.
The day before, I had listened to the sample chapter of his 2021 book, The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health, published by Skyhorse Publishing and his anti-vaccine nonprofit, and read the synopsis on Amazon, and a few reviews, the gist of which is this: Fauci, former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, along with Microsoft founder Bill Gates, and various “heads of state and leading media and social media institutions,” allegedly formed a “Pharma-Fauci-Gates alliance” that “exercises dominion over global health policy” with the intent of controlling the general populace. The process, Kennedy claims, began in early 2000 when “Fauci shook hands with Bill Gates in the library of Gates’ $147 million Seattle mansion, cementing a partnership that would aim to control an increasingly profitable $60 billion global vaccine enterprise with unlimited growth potential.”
Skeptical, I ask Kennedy about his claim that Fauci was somehow “corrupt” or “nefarious”—my words—and wonder if perhaps he wasn’t overstating Fauci’s motives given that we were, after all, in an unpredictable global pandemic in 2020 that was killing hundreds of thousands of people.
At this, Kennedy turns toward me with his whole body, muscles flexing, and grips the tray table between us.
“You’re lying to me,” he says, furious.
Shocked, I ask what he means. People in nearby seats glance over nervously.
“Because you didn’t read the book,” he says. “Because I don’t do that. I don’t look into [Fauci’s] head the whole book. What I do in that book, I document what happened. Not a single factual error has been found in that book. It’s 2,200 footnotes. Show me something I got wrong.”
He accuses me of not doing my “homework” and expresses regret at doing the interview.
“I thought this was going to be something different,” he says. “You said it was going to be lighthearted.”
It’s worth pausing for a moment to describe what happened in the days following this interview.
Later that night, and over the next three days, Kennedy texts me links to articles about alleged vaccine-related deaths among people 18 to 34 as well as a report, from a site called Slay News, that 92% of COVID deaths in England in 2022 were people who were vaccinated. He also mails me his 2022 book, A Letter to Liberals, also published by Skyhorse Publishing and his anti-vaccine nonprofit, wherein he rails against the modern Democratic Party and the media “cabal” supposedly collaborating in a cover-up of inconvenient truths about the COVID vaccine.
I read the book. In Chapter 1, Kennedy publishes 12 pages of charts that allegedly illustrate how weekly COVID deaths around the world spiked in 2021 after the introduction of “mass vaccination.” Paraguay, Vietnam, Nepal, Ireland—in country after country, COVID deaths appear to go up after vaccinations are introduced, which is supposed to demonstrate that the vaccine had “negative efficacy”—indeed, that vaccinations tended to worsen illness and death. He goes on to claim the US death rate is “consistent” with “global patterns” and that more Americans died of COVID in 2022 than in 2020. “Because this truth has not been reported by corporate media,” he writes, “it’s understandable that you might find it surprising or unbelievable. And, nonetheless, it’s true.”
Kennedy’s analysis is wildly misleading and false. The first of his charts, for Ireland, depicts vaccinations starting in December 2020 and a spike in weekly deaths from COVID in February. According to Ireland’s own public health care data, less than 1% of the Irish population had been vaccinated in February. One might presume, from Kennedy’s supposition, that the rate of weekly COVID deaths would escalate as more people became vaccinated. It’s the opposite: Weekly COVID deaths declined as the percentage of the vaccinated population went up. By August of 2021, the Irish government reported that it had fully vaccinated 80% of the adult population. Weekly COVID death rates never returned anywhere near the February 2021 peak again.
The second chart is for Portugal. Kennedy’s chart shows vaccinations beginning in late December and a spike in weekly COVID deaths in late January 2021. According to data from Johns Hopkins University, 0.67% of the population had received full vaccination at the time. And again, if the vaccine had “negative efficacy,” as Kennedy claims, then the rate of weekly deaths should have gone up as the percent of the vaccinated population increased. It didn’t.
Again and again, Kennedy pulls this sleight of hand: A chart shows a spike in weekly COVID deaths as COVID-19 deaths were peaking globally but when only a fraction of the world’s population had been fully vaccinated. Kennedy also lumps Cambodia into this argument, showing a spike in weekly COVID deaths four months into the vaccination process. Cambodia had one of the highest rates of vaccination in the world (higher than the US) and by November of 2021 the government reopened the country after a period of lockdowns. As of 2023, the country has limited the number of COVID deaths to 3,056 in a population of 16.8 million, according to the World Health Organization.
Kennedy conspicuously does not show a US chart. But as with other countries, the first major spike in weekly COVID deaths in 2021 was in late January, about a month after vaccinations began, and weekly COVID death rates never returned to that peak again. And contrary to Kennedy’s claim, the number of COVID deaths in the US was less in 2022 (244,986) than in 2020 (350,831), according to Centers for Disease Control statistics. Those numbers might have been much better had states like Mississippi and Wyoming, hot beds of anti-vaccine sentiment, managed to get more than 55% of the population fully vaccinated. Instead, those states have had some of the highest per capita rates of COVID-19 mortality in the country. Indeed, data from the CDC shows that unvaccinated people between ages 65 and 79, among the most vulnerable populations, were nine times likelier to die from COVID as vaccinated people.
Kick Kennedy surveys the surrounding property. “Grandma’s over there, and this was Jackie’s house, and now it’s Teddy Jr.’s house, and our house is new, meaning we’ve had it for 20 years.”
I later wonder whether Kennedy had left out the context to hype his claim or whether he himself had been duped by his 350 scientists and medical physicians. Neither seemed particularly promising for a candidate for president of the United States—though, in these Trumpian times, neither did it seem particularly surprising. As his pal Tucker Carlson has illustrated, paranoia and innuendo sell. But if Kennedy can’t get his biggest claim correct in Chapter 1 of the “revised” edition of his book, why should we believe anything he says?
We still have 20 minutes to Nantucket and Kennedy won’t even look at me.
I try to smooth things over by promising to give the Fauci book a closer read. (When I do, later on, I’m convinced of one thing for sure: Kennedy would be terrific at writing thrillers.) I feel bullied by Kennedy, harangued and insulted into becoming a fact-checker for his many speculative and debunked theories. But my job is to keep asking him questions and so I do.
Does he think this focus on censorship is helping his campaign?
“I don’t think it’s hurting me,” he says. “It’s hurting me among the people that I need to become nominated—so that 28%. And they’re the people that watch MSNBC, CNN.”
He means Democrats, who one presumes he’ll need to get to the White House as a Democrat. How does he propose to get through to them? “When polling starts to indicate that I can win and that President Biden can’t,” he ventures, “we’ll see. And then there’s also the possibility”—he stops short of saying what I think he’s about to say—“there’s all kinds of possibilities that could happen.”
He’s waiting for Biden to drop out—or, you know, off. He points to Cory Booker and Gavin Newsom, who he says are running shadow campaigns in case of the same eventuality.
I gently suggest to Kennedy that Donald Trump is the existential threat that animates Democratic voters, not vaccines. When I ask for his view on the Trump indictments, he declines to talk about it but asks rhetorically, “What do you think is a greater threat to the republic, censorship or January 6?”
“I don’t have a way of measuring that,” I reply.
“To me, it’s obvious,” he says. “If the press is condoning censorship by the government or the media, that’s the end of democracy.”
He continues: “You could blow up the Capitol and we’d be okay if we have a First Amendment. Why are we hearing about the Capitol day after day after day after day and nobody’s talking about the First Amendment?”
The conversation once again morphs into a lecture on the failures of the press, about which he is an expert and I, a reporter for Vanity Fair, am implicated.
By now it’s clear that Kennedy sees himself as the lone truth teller in a world of lies and deceit, crusading against a vast conspiracy of interlocking powers involving the Biden and Trump administrations, the tech companies, the pharmaceutical industry, the CIA, the FDA, and the mainstream media, who have coordinated to stifle the truth of a “three-year experiment performed on the American people.”
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., like his father and uncle before him, was born to slay dragons. “From my youngest days I always had the feeling that we were all involved in some great crusade,” he writes in his memoir, “that the world was a battleground for good and evil…It would be my good fortune if I could play an important or heroic role.”
In a time when both the far left and far right find common ground in a paranoid distrust of power, when faith in institutions is at an all-time low, here stands Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to unite the people in their mutual distrust of everything—if only the damned reporters will report what he’s saying, or report what he means to say, or report what he’s decided to say on any particular day. I think of our mutual friend Peter Kaplan, onetime editor of the New York Observer. Kennedy says Peter would have been “depressed” by the state of the media if he were alive today. Sure—aren’t we all? But he, like many of Kennedy’s oldest and dearest friends, would have been downright heartbroken by the state of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
I see Nantucket on the horizon and breathe a sigh of relief.
And I think of Peter Kaplan’s old query: Did I like Robert F. Kennedy Jr.? No, I did not. He is a humorless bully living in a paranoid fantasy in which reporters like me are cast as corrupt dupes whose only redemption is to follow Robert F. Kennedy Jr. into this miasma of overheated conspiracies. It’s a script that’s beneath Netflix, let alone the Kennedy legacy.
At a loss for words, I note that Kennedy seems very passionate.
“I wouldn’t describe myself that way,” he says.
How would he describe himself?
“Well, I don’t think I’m governed by passion,” he says. “I think I’m governed by evidence.”
A passion for the evidence perhaps?
“Okay,” he says. “I’ll settle for that.”
If only.
CORRECTION: This article has been updated to accurately reflect Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s middle name. It is Francis.
Joe Hagan is a special correspondent at Vanity Fair and a cohost of the podcast Inside the Hive. He’s the author of the critically acclaimed Sticky Fingers: The Life and Times of Jann Wenner and Rolling Stone Magazine (Knopf) and has profiled everybody from Beto O’Rourke and Stephen Colbert to Liz Cheney and Henry Kissinger.
Trump’s threats to Milley fuel fears he’ll seek vengeance in second term
Brad Dress – September 27, 2023
Former President Trump’s violent rhetoric toward Gen. Mark Milley is raising fears he will use a second term in the Oval Office to seek retribution against his enemies.
Trump suggested Friday that Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff who is stepping down from his post at the end of the week, deserves the death penalty for allegedly betraying him and committing an act of treason.
The threat came just days after Milley warned that if Trump wins the presidency in 2024, he would enact vengeance against those he felt have done him wrong.
And Milley believes he is at the top of that revenge list.
“He’ll start throwing people in jail, and I’d be on the top of the list,” Milley told The Atlantic in a profile of the four-star general published last week.
Kristy Parker, a legal counsel at Protect Democracy who leads litigation on abuses of power and interference with government functions, said Trump’s comments about Milley are “deeply troubling” for American democracy.
“Even just the threats have an incredibly chilling effect on public actors’ ability to do the jobs we need them to do to have a functional democracy,” she said.
“Trump has shown and talked about weaponizing the Justice Department to retaliate against people who he perceives as his enemies and he did, in fact, do that to people when he was president the first time.”
The Trump-Milley feud has simmered for years, with the two clashing over the military’s role in the 2020 racial justice protests and the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.
But long after the administration ended, Milley remains at the top of Trump’s mind as books and articles have documented steps the general says he took to protect against Trump’s erratic behavior.
Last week’s death threat stems from reports that at the end of his presidency, Milley reassured Chinese officials there would be no threat to Beijing in the final days of Trump’s administration, according to the 2021 book “Peril” by journalists Bob Woodward and Robert Costa.
The communication has long infuriated Trump, who took to Truth Social last week to condemn Milley’s years of service as “treasonous” ahead of his retirement from the Joint Chiefs later this week.
“[Milley] was actually dealing with China to give them a heads up on the thinking of the President of the United States,” he posted. “This is an act so egregious that, in times gone by, the punishment would have been DEATH!”
Peter Feaver, a civil-military relations scholar who recently published a new book on public confidence in the military, said Trump is so enraged by Milley because of these public accounts portraying the general as a protector against his presidency.
Feaver said Trump’s quest to castigate Milley is also designed to warn other potential critics from speaking out. He said the strategy has damaged the civilian-military relationship and could backfire on Trump and his allies.
“Trump thinks he can just personalize this to Milley,” said Feaver. “But he’s failing to understand how this is going to be corrosive of civil-military relations more generally [because …] if they haven’t done something wrong and you’re punishing them, then you get a perverse civil-military relationship.”
The spat is the second time this year their feud has come into the spotlight. Trump has also lobbed accusations at Milley over Iran, disputing claims that the general moved to ensure he wouldn’t attack the country and arguing Milley was the one who recommended an attack.
But Milley is not the only one in Trump’s crosshairs: Former Attorney General Bill Barr and former Defense Secretary Mark Esper have also drawn his ire.
Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie wrote on X, formerly Twitter, that Esper, Barr and Milley were all once “praised by Trump” but are “now all regularly attacked by Trump because they had the nerve to put the country ahead of him.”
“What kind of person threatens execution on a third-tier social media site? A sad and disturbed person who has no place being near the White House, let alone living inside it,” said Christie, a Republican presidential candidate challenging Trump.
Esper told CNN that Milley “deserves praise and thanks” and “does not deserve what he is receiving from President Trump right now.”
Referring to the China conflict, Esper said after the 2020 election, he told Chinese officials the U.S. was steady and directed Milley to send a similar message to his Chinese counterpart.
Esper said the way Milley’s main offense was offering “candid, frank advice” did not comport with Trump’s expectations.
“He wants to find ‘yes’ men in his office,” Esper said.
“The president has also said that a second term would be about retribution, right? So, I think these are all legitimate concerns,” he later added.
While experts agree Trump would have no case to prosecute Milley for treason, the death threats alone are already alarming advocacy groups.
Abe Bonowtiz, the founder of Death Penalty Action, an organization working to abolish the death penalty, said, “Trump has an unhealthy addiction for the dictatorial power to execute political rivals.”
“The death penalty is a very serious matter,” he said in a statement, “and it’s being tossed around as a political tool by Republican presidential candidates, which should concern everyone.”
US surgeons are killing themselves at an alarming rate. One decided to speak out
Christina Frangou – September 27, 2023
Carrie Cunningham puffed out her cheeks and exhaled. She looked out at the audience filled with 2,000 of her peers, surgeons who were attending the annual meeting of the Association of Academic Surgery, a prestigious gathering of specialists from universities across the United States and Canada.
Cunningham, president of the organization, knew what she was about to reveal could cost her promotions, patients and professional standing. She took a deep breath.
“I was the top junior tennis player in the United States,” she began. “I am an associate professor of surgery at Harvard.
“But I am also human. I am a person with lifelong depression, anxiety, and now a substance use disorder.”
The room fell silent.
Cunningham knew others in the room were struggling, too. Doctors are dying by suicide at higher rates than the general population. Somewhere between 300 to 400 physicians a year in the US take their own lives, the equivalent of one medical school graduating class annually.
Surgeons have some of the highest known rates of suicide among physicians. Of 697 physician suicides reported to the CDC’s national violent death reporting system between 2003 and 2017, 71 were surgeons. Many more go unreported.
For years, no one in surgery talked publicly about mental distress in the profession; surgeons have long experienced a culture of silence when it comes to their personal pain. They have a reputation as stoic, determined and driven. They are taught, throughout a decade of grueling training, to dissociate themselves from their body’s natural cues, telling them that it is time to rest, eat or urinate.
The patient’s needs always come first – that’s part of what makes a good surgeon. But this approach can have consequences for a surgeon’s own mental health.
Cunningham had already lost one friend to suicide. She decided that if her job was to save lives, she would begin with her own and those of her colleagues.
She started to tell her story.
When Cunningham was seven, her stepfather put a tennis racket in her hand and discovered a prodigy. She quickly became a star, competing in international tournaments barely three years after she’d first hit a ball.
By 12, she had her own psychologist and nutritionist. She was put on a 3,330-calorie-a-day diet, aiming to gain 3lbs each month on her 4ft 7in frame. She’d run so hard that she’d hyperventilate. Her legs bore constant bruises from banging her racket against them.
She was praised for being scrappy and mentally tough, for being a perfectionist.
Carrie Cunningham at the US Open in 1992. Photograph: colaimages/Alamy
In 1987, when she was 16, World Tennis Magazine named her the top junior female player of the year. The next year, she made her debut as a professional player. In one of her first major tournaments, the teenage Cunningham faced the top-ranked Steffi Graf in the Australian Open and lost, but barely.
A psychologist taught her to hide her feelings from her opponents. Never let them know you are struggling, went the mantra. SoCunningham mastered the art of disguising her emotions. An outside observer would see a determined athlete; inside, Cunningham felt riddled with anxiety.
When she was 18, she lost in the French Open. The defeat sent her into her first major depressive episode. She sat in a Paris hotel room, alone with shades drawn, and hardly ate for a week.
After graduating high school, she climbed to No 32 in the world. She appeared to be thriving, but she was racked with loneliness. She did not earn the kind of income that allowed her to travel with family or friends. In an era before cellphones and widespread email, she was on her own. Her closest friends were her fellow competitors – people who understood what her life was like, but not people she could talk to about her struggles or doubts.
Just after she turned 20, she injured her wrist and took six months off to rehabilitate and take university courses. By the time she was healthy enough to return to play, she did not want to go back on the road and decided to retire.
She spiraled into another bout of depression – again, undiagnosed. She’d lost her identity. Cunningham dealt with her feelings the only way she knew how: busying herself with everything but her distress.
She moved to Ann Arbor to study at the University of Michigan, loaded her schedule with extra classes and began training for a marathon.
“I was awake for weeks,” she says. “I don’t remember sleeping at all. But yet, I would still work out in the day.”
She does not believe her depression was perceptible to anyone else. She got high marks, dated and went to parties. But she often felt that she was separated from the rest of the world. “It’s like being alone in a room full of people.”
She was drawn to medicine, with its intellectual challenge and the satisfaction that came from making a difference. She graduated in 2001 and married one of her classmates. The same skills that made her a tennis phenom made her an excellent doctor. Together, she and her husband were accepted for residency training at one of the country’s most prestigious programs, at Weill Cornell Medicine in New York City. After that, they moved to Harvard Medical School in Boston to do fellowships.
Cunningham was on her way to becoming an endocrine surgeon who could care for patients with diseases affecting their thyroid, parathyroid or adrenal glands. She loved the action of the operating room and working with her hands; she thrived in the long hours and fraternity of people who were taking on the seemingly impossible.
On the outside, Cunningham was winning.
Inside was another story.
In medical school and residency, doctors in training work around the clock. They eat or sleep when they can. Often, they are pushed to their limits.
“They feel miserable,” says Jessica Gold, a psychiatrist at Washington University in St Louis School of Medicine who specializes in physician wellness. “We basically think that feeling bad is part of medicine, and we can’t identify that we’re doing poorly, or that we should take time for ourselves and figure out that we actually might be depressed.”
Surgery, especially, has always been cruel to its practitioners, who suffer high rates of burnout, ergonomic injuries, miscarriages and infertility. They are trained in an apprenticeship model that lasts a minimum of five years, but usually seven or eight. Residents begin as juniors and progress up the hierarchy, adopting the skills and behaviors of those who came before them.
See one, do one, teach one is shorthand for this system. It’s how surgeons develop their technical skillset, but also how they conform to the cultural norms of the profession.
The training system was developed by William Halsted, a pioneering surgeon who worked at Johns Hopkins hospital in the late 19th and early 20th century. Halsted battled addiction throughout his career, even as he revolutionized surgery by developing new surgical techniques, advancing anesthesia and promoting infection control. He became hooked on cocaine in 1884 while conducting experiments with the drug. Using morphine to help wean himself off cocaine, he developed a new addiction that plagued him until his death at 69. He became erratic and withdrawn, sometimes disappearing for weeks at a time. His oddities, though, were tolerated because of the enormity of his achievements.
“This man created a culture where you lived in the hospital,” says Michael Maddaus, a retired surgeon who developed a narcotics addiction while working as a professor of surgery at the University of Minnesota. “Part of the ethos of that is you don’t complain … You just do your work and shut up and have discipline to be strong and pretend you’re OK when everything’s not.”
In 2003, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, which oversees medical training in the US, ruled that trainees could work a maximum of 80 hours a week in clinical care. The first time that any national limit had been set on trainee work hours, it cut into the 100-hour-plus weeks that were often the norm for surgical trainees. But many surgeons protested that the reduced schedule did not leave enough time to adequately train surgical residents. (When an 80-hour workweek for residents was first rolled out in New York state in 1989, surgical trainees were exempt.) In response, most surgical trainees now add one or two extra years of fellowship training after residency in order to get in more hours in the operating room before embarking on their own practice.
Surgery is a high-stakes endeavor; patients’ lives hang in the balance. Small mistakes have catastrophic outcomes. One of the first lessons of surgery is that surgeons are expected to take responsibility for what happens to their patients. The American College of Surgeons, in a document for medical students that outlines the skills needed to become a surgeon, says: “At the core, surgeons must be able to accept responsibility.”
The heightened sense of responsibility comes at a personal cost. Surgeons often fall into a trap of feeling like what they do “needs to be superhuman because they are the last line of defense, if you will, for a patient”, says Colin West, a professor of medicine at Mayo Clinic who specializes in physician wellbeing. When a patient does poorly after an operation – especially when there has been a mistake in their care – surgeons suffer emotional turmoil, anxiety, sadness, guilt and shame. In a 2017 study, an anonymous surgeon described the aftermath of an error: “We all hide our grief, suffer in silence. The pain can be close to debilitating.”
On Cunningham’s first night as an intern, three of her patients died. Their deaths were expected, but the losses still hurt. “I didn’t know how to call out a death certificate or even pronounce someone dead,” she recalls. “And I was like, ‘I’ll guess I’ll get used to it.’”
Then, in 2012, death hit very close to home.
Cunningham first met Christina Barkley during medical school at the University of Michigan, where Barkley was a few years behind. They met up again at Harvard, when Barkley arrived to start a surgical residency. Their partners were good friends and they became friends.
In her last year of residency, Barkley had a mental health breakdown. She saw a psychiatrist at her hospital who started her on medication, and Barkley quickly returned to work. “She felt pressured by everyone around her to just finish her residency program,” says her sister Jill Barkley Roy. “That was the resounding message from everyone in her life – probably me included.”
Six months later, a neighbor found Barkley at home with a self-inflicted wound. Barkley’s colleagues believe she’d tried to take her life, but her sister is convinced that Barkley’s intention then was not to die. She says Christina told her that she’d just wanted to end her surgical career.
For the next two years, Barkley cycled in and out of hospitals, oscillating between depression and mania. In April 2012, three days after being discharged from hospital, she ended her life.
“I felt very angry for a very long time at the medical field,” says Barkley Roy. “My sister was so fearful about ramifications to her career and ramifications to her job and her reputation.”
Cunningham was shocked by Barkley’s death. “We imagined a lifetime of incredible things she’d continue to do not only as not only as a surgeon, but a wife, and a daughter, a sister and a friend,” she says.
Over the next decade, Cunningham’s career soared. She became an associate professor of surgery at Harvard Medical School and received a grant from the National Institutes of Health to investigate thyroid cancer. She was appointed to the executive council of national surgical organizations. She gave birth to two children and also had a terrible miscarriage, which led to thoughts of suicide. Depression came and went, repeatedly. She saw therapists off and on, but didn’t always have time.
When her mental health was bad, she buried herself a little more deeply in work.
“But the busier I was, the better,” she says. “Going on vacation was just torture for me … because when I sat still, all the internal stuff just percolated.”
Then the pandemic brought upheaval. After 25 years of marriage, Cunningham moved out of the family home. She and her ex-husband, also a surgeon, remain good friends. But the split was crushing. She felt like she was failing as a mom. She had frequent panic attacks, which she hid from her colleagues. A few friends questioned her about her mental health, but she pushed them off.
At night, she’d come home from work and open a bottle of wine. She looked forward to the way alcohol could prevent her from dwelling on the things that hurt. She drank to escape her anxiety and depression, but alcohol worsened both. So she drank more, and then more.
On a Friday night in spring 2022, Cunningham joined some colleagues at a local bar for a friend’s birthday. After a few drinks, Cunningham started openly talking about her depression. “I don’t even know exactly what I said, but I was talking about feeling suicidal,” she says.
The next day, a co-worker called Cunningham’s boss and told him that they were concerned. Her boss called her immediately and said he was coming to visit her at home. He told her that she needed help and she could take time out if she needed. The department would stand by her. She listened without protest. “It didn’t surprise me,” she says. “It was time.”
The following day, she flew to Orlando to take the helm as president of the Association of Academic Surgeons. That week, she white-knuckled her way through her talks, feeling awkward every time she saw one of her colleagues.
When she got home, she volunteered for a five-day professional evaluation from the Massachusetts Medical Society’s physician health services, which provides confidential assessments, referrals and monitoring of physicians. She expected to be connected with resources that would set her back on track. She was ready to throw all her willpower into recovery.
The results stunned her: Cunningham, who’d never had a DUI or any problems at work, was deemed unfit to practice medicine. She would have to participate in rehabilitation and then a monitoring program in order to return to work.
Fifty years ago, in a landmark report called The Sick Physician, the American Medical Association declared physician impairment by psychiatric disorders, alcoholism and drug use a widespread problem. Even then, physicians had rates of narcotic addiction 30 to 100 times higher than the general population, and about 100 doctors a year in the US died by suicide.
The report called for better support for physicians who were struggling with mental health or addictions. Too many doctors hid their ailments because they worried about losing their licenses or the respect of their communities, according to the medical association.
Following the publication, state medical societies in the US, the organizations that give physicians license to practice, created confidential programs to help sick and impaired doctors. Physician health programs have a dual purpose: they connect doctors to treatment, and they assess the physician to ensure that patients are safe in their care. If a doctor’s condition is considered a threat to patient safety, the program may recommend that a doctor immediately cease practice, or they may recommend that a physician undergo drug and alcohol monitoring for three to five years in order to maintain their license. The client must sign an agreement not to participate in patient care until their personal health is addressed.
In rare and extreme cases, the physician health program will report the doctor to the state medical board to revoke their license.
Physician health programs are designed to address the myth that illness automatically means impairment, says Chris Bundy, the executive medical director of the Washington Physicians Health Program and the immediate past president of the national federation that oversees the state programs. An addiction or mental illness may require a physician to take time off, but does not justify an automatic revoking of someone’s license.
“People can function at high levels within their profession very expertly with depression, with anxiety, with substance use issues,” he says. He says the key is to get a physician to treatment early before their condition becomes severe enough to affect patient care.
A psychiatrist, Bundy developed a severe alcohol use disorder and was in monitoring for five years, during which time he joined the VA system as chief of mental health. He approached his state physician health program for help. He likes to quip: “I’m not only the hair club president, I’m also a client.” He has now been sober for 15 years.
But these programs remain shrouded in stigma. Doctors worry that, if they seek help, they will lose their license or the trust of their communities – so much so that they often stay away from treatment.
Lorna Breen, an emergency room doctor in New York, died by suicide in April 2020, after telling her family that she worried she would lose her medical license, or be ostracized by her colleagues, because she was suffering anguish from her work on the front lines of the Covid-19 crisis. Her family and friends started the Lorna Breen Foundation, which wants to see changes to the medical licensure process. The foundation wants licensing bodies to limit their questions on physicians’ health to current issues and not previous mental health diagnoses.
So far, only 21 states meet this standard. Meanwhile, physicians continue to suffer. In Medscape’s Physician Suicide Report 2023, 9% of male physicians and 11% of female physicians said they had suicidal thoughts. The study authors noted that they felt that physicians were under-reporting their distress because of privacy concerns.
Cunningham was shocked and furious at the results of her evaluation.
“I wanted to throw up when I read that the first time,” she says. “I was angry because I hadn’t done anything that was illegal or harmed a patient or anything.” The one consolation was that her license was not revoked. The program recommended that she undergo rehab, and then return to work with routine monitoring including breathalyzer tests and random drug testing. She’d never even tried the drugs she was being tested for, she says.
Cunningham decided she was going to recover with the same drive she’d once poured into tennis and surgery. She’d check the recovery box and back to work. “I was still in that fierce mode of ‘I’m gonna prove everyone wrong. Screw you.’”
She spent four weeks in rehab, the first time in 20 years that she’d taken more than a week off. She thought about her to-do list: research projects waiting for her attention, and lectures that she was supposed to deliver at universities around the world. She finished the rehab program a day early to rush back to Harvard, where she interviewed candidates for fellowships in the coming year.
At the end of the day, she sat in her car in the parking lot and cried.
One week later, she relapsed. She called the physician health program and told them. Then, she left for a seven-week intense rehab program in Illinois designed for physicians and other professionals.
She calls recovery the hardest thing she has ever done. “It felt like being forced through a wall of fire, terrified of walking through it and having no idea what was on the other side,” she says.
She kept her illness and rehab secret to all but a few. When she returned to work, she did so slowly. In order to maintain her license, she needs to prove her sobriety three times a day with a breathalyzer test for three years. She participates in multiple recovery meetings and goes to therapy every week. It’s been excruciatingly hard, but worth it, she says.
“I’m a better doctor now. I’m more connected with my patients,” she explains. “And look, if you feel badly enough, if you’re not alive, you can’t be a surgeon anyway.”
As her year as president came to a close, Cunningham started to think about what she would say in her outgoing speech to her colleagues. She knew the potential consequences of revealing what she’d been through in her year as president. Patients might refuse to see her. Her colleagues might be afraid to refer patients to her. She was a strong contender to become a chair of surgery one day, and she’d be putting that at risk, too.
But she felt that she could make a difference. And she’d be honoring Barkley, whose name had disappeared from conversations after her death, like many who die by suicide.
“I could not stand up there and act like everything was fine,” she says. “If there was a reason I [am] on this planet, it is for me to give that speech.”
With Barkley’s sister in the front row, Cunningham told her story in full, describing her tennis career and depression, and showed an image of the online message saying she’d been found temporarily unfit for practice.
She urged the audience to put their health first. Surgeons should encourage colleagues to seek help before they become so sick that they are reported to a medical licensing board or they end up taking their lives, she said.
“I will never know what would have happened if those friends had not intervened. But I am sure I would have spiraled further with much worse consequences,” she said.
“I wish I could get those of you in this room that are struggling the courage it takes to seek help. But I can’t. I can promise you that people will show up for you as you would for anyone else who asked for help,” she said.
“I have to accept that I will always have tough days. I can expect recurrent bouts of depression throughout my life,” she said. “It is a disease, not a character flaw. It does not define me.”
Surgeons in the audience gave her a standing ovation, and her talk has been watched 29,000 times – nearly 30 times the figure for most lectures posted by the same organization.
“It’s a real watershed moment in that particular profession to be able to say it’s OK for us to talk about these things, and let’s change the subculture of surgery,” says Bundy, who was in the audience.
Since then, none of the terrible consequences Cunningham feared about going public have come to fruition. The only negative effect has been that she was turned down for life insurance.
Cunningham’s phone has been ringing off the hook since her talk. Surgeons from around the globe call her to share their stories and thank her for speaking out. She tells them what she told the audience: “I do not have all the answers. I do know that it won’t get better unless we talk about it openly and honestly.”
The Biggest Bombshells in Trump Whistleblower Cassidy Hutchinson’s New White House Memoir
Kyler Alvord – September 26, 2023
In her newly published book, “Enough,” the former White House aide shares disturbing allegations involving several D.C. power players, including Rudy Giuliani, Matt Gaetz and President Trump himself
Candace Dane Chambers; Simon and SchusterCassidy Hutchinson pictured in Washington, D.C. in September 2023; Hutchinson’s new memoir, “Enough,” out now
After laying low for more than a year, former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson is returning to the public eye with the release of a new tell-all memoir, Enough, that’s already put some of Donald Trump‘s allies on the defensive.
Hutchinson, who served as a top aide to former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, became an instant public figure last summer when she testified against Trump in a televised hearing before the House committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot. Immediately after her explosive testimony, she had to go into hiding for safety reasons, holed up in a Washington, D.C. hotel for several days before temporarily relocating to Atlanta to wait out the backlash.
In her 356-page book, published Tuesday, Hutchinson puts forth several previously unheard claims, walking readers through the ups and downs of her life, including her once-skyrocketing career. Along the way, the 26-year-old shares countless stories about her time before, during and after working in Trump’s White House, offering a brief on all of the major players in the modern Republican Party and the inner-workings of the Trump administration.
Candace Dane ChambersCassidy Hutchinson stands before the U.S. Capitol in September 2023
Chock-full of details both consequential and just plain juicy, the book covers everything from Trump officials’ favorite candies (Jared Kushner gravitated to peach rings, she writes) to various lawmakers’ personalities (Sen. Ted Cruz lacked a sense of humor and once called her a “tattletale,” she alleges) to the president’s erratic leadership style (examples of which are too vast to summarize).
Hutchinson explains how various high-ranking Republicans reacted to the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection, and uses a wide range of anecdotes to exemplify her high-profile friendships in Washington, including with now-House Speaker Kevin McCarthy.
Tia Dufour/The White HouseHouse Republican leader Kevin McCarthy, White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and powerful GOP Rep. Jim Jordan, walk past the Rose Garden with Cassidy Hutchinson on April 4, 2020
Some of the more damning claims in Hutchinson’s book include an alleged incident of groping by disgraced ex-Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani on the morning of the U.S. Capitol Riot, the “vain” reason Trump didn’t want to be seen wearing a N95 mask during the pandemic, Meadows’ apparent sense of guilt surrounding prominent Republican Herman Cain‘s premature COVID death, and a couple of uncomfortable encounters with firebrand House Freedom Caucus member Matt Gaetz.
Asked whether she fears the attacks that may come as people pore over the details in her memoir, Hutchinson tells PEOPLE that she doesn’t, and that she stands by all of her claims.
“If somebody wants to attack the way that they come off in the book, I’m not going to hold myself responsible for what they may say about the way that they’re framed,” she says. “I’m holding them accountable to their own actions.”
Here, five of Hutchinson’s most memorable allegations scattered throughout the pages of Enough.
Trump refused to wear masks during the pandemic because his bronzer turned the straps visibly orange
Drew Angerer/GettyPresident Donald Trump stands in front of Dr. Anthony Fauci while speaking about coronavirus vaccine development in the White House Rose Garden on May 15, 2020
According to Hutchinson’s new book, the anti-mask movement that Trump supporters spearheaded during COVID-19 — leading to countless preventable deaths nationwide — stemmed from a makeup mishap involving the president early on in the pandemic.
“The president tried on several N95 masks at the Honeywell plant in Phoenix, Arizona, which manufactured all manner of personal protective equipment (PPE). He was not thrilled that staff urged him to wear a mask, believing it would make him look weak and afraid of the virus,” Hutchinson writes. “He decided on a white mask and strapped it to his face before asking each staffer whether or not he should wear it in front of the press pool.”
Hutchinson says that the president looked to her for input, making a “thumbs-up/thumbs-down” gesture. She shook her head, signaling that he shouldn’t wear it.
“I pointed at the straps of the N95 I was holding,” she recalls. “When he looked at the straps of his mask, he saw that they were covered in bronzer. ‘Why did no one else tell me that,’ he snapped. ‘I’m not wearing this thing.'”
“He wore safety goggles on the tour,” she continues in the book. “The press would criticize him for not wearing a mask, not knowing that the depth of his vanity had caused him to reject masks—and then millions of his fans followed suit.”
Cassidy says Rudy Giuliani groped her on the morning of the Jan. 6 Capitol riot
Eric Lee/Bloomberg via Getty
Buried in Hutchinson’s account of the chaos that ensued on Jan. 6, 2021, is a disturbing allegation that former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani groped her — in the presence of a fellow Trump attorney, John Eastman.
In her memoir, Hutchinson recalls frantically looking for Giuliani as the morning’s rally was beginning — she says she was trying to get more information on what Trump and his confidants were planning that day, as well as convince the president’s closest advisers to keep Trump from meeting his supporters at the Capitol. She eventually tracked Giuliani down in a tent near the rally stage, and when Giuliani saw her, she says “the corners of his mouth split into a Cheshire cat smile.”
Waving a stack of documents — which he allegedly told her was evidence that Trump could still win the election — Giuliani approached Hutchinson “like a wolf closing in on its prey,” she writes.
“Rudy wraps one arm around my body, closing the space that was separating us. I feel his stack of documents press into the small of my back,” she writes. “I lower my eyes and watch his free hand reach for the hem of my blazer.”
After complimenting her leather jacket, she alleges, “His hand slips under my blazer, then my skirt. I felt his frozen fingertips trail up my thigh. He tilts his chin up. The whites of his eyes look jaundiced. My eyes dart to John Eastman, who flashes a leering grin.”
Responding to the groping claim, Giuliani’s political adviser, Ted Goodman, told PEOPLE, “It’s fair to ask Cassidy Hutchinson why she is just now coming out with these allegations from two and a half years ago, as part of the marketing campaign for her upcoming book release.”
Eastman’s personal attorney, Charles Burnham, said his client “categorically denies” the allegation that he witnessed Hutchinson get groped, claiming that Eastman didn’t know who she was until her testimony before the Jan. 6 House committee in June 2022. “Dr. Eastman is considering defamation litigation against those responsible for making or publishing these libelous allegations,” he wrote in a statement shared with PEOPLE.
Cassidy says Matt Gaetz made a pass at her at Camp David, and raised red flags among top Republicans prior to his sexual abuse allegations
Drew Angerer/GettyRep. Matt Gaetz leaves a closed-door meeting with former White House counsel Don McGahn on June 4, 2021
In Hutchinson’s Jan. 6 testimony, she alleged that Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz was among a handful of Republican lawmakers who sought a pardon from Trump before he left office. In her memoir, though, she shares multiple other stories centered around Gaetz — including a couple of uncomfortable moments she allegedly had with the controversial House Freedom Caucus member, resulting in a confrontation at Camp David at which Republican House leader Kevin McCarthy was present.
According to Hutchinson, she organized a May 2020 retreat at Camp David to which some of Trump’s closest friends in the House GOP were invited, including Gaetz and McCarthy. By the time the House members arrived in the evening, Trump and Meadows had already gone off to their cabins for the night. McCarthy “ordered a few bottles of bourbon and wine” from the bar and invited some of the members over to his cabin to drink, Hutchinson writes. Then around 1 a.m., she alleges, the few who were still hanging around heard a knock at McCarthy’s cabin door.
“I thought it was Camp David’s staff coming to quiet us down—Kevin’s cabin was across from the president’s. But when Kevin opened the door, we discovered Matt Gaetz leaning against the door frame,” she writes in the book. “Matt straightened his posture when Kevin asked him what he wanted, and he explained that he had seen my golf cart parked outside and thought that this was my cabin.”
She continues: “Embarrassed, I got up and asked Matt what he needed. He explained that he was lost and needed me to escort him back to his cabin. I told him to proceed around the circle drive—all the cabins were clearly marked and it was impossible to get lost. He asked me one more time to leave with him. ‘Get a life, Matt,’ Kevin said, then shut the door.”
At various points in the memoir, Hutchinson briefly mentions other strange interactions with Gaetz, like at a bar following Trump’s first impeachment vote, when she writes that Gaetz “chuckled and brushed his thumb across my chin” before allegedly asking her, “Has anyone ever told you that you’re a national treasure?”
In the later days of the administration, when Gaetz began dropping by on occasion to seek a pardon from Trump, Hutchinson writes, “I tried to dismiss Matt’s antics but began wondering why he was pushing so hard for a pardon. I raised the issue with Mark one day after Matt had left and asked if there was anything I should know about. ‘Between you and me,’ Mark said, ‘DOJ may be looking into something about Matt. Best to stay away from him. Can you do that for me?’ I nodded and promised I would.”
It was later reported that Gaetz was the subject of a sex trafficking probe for an alleged sexual relationship with an underage girl, but he was ultimately not indicted by the Justice Department. The House Ethics Committee reportedly reopened its own probe into his conduct in June 2023, the status of which is unknown.
Asked for comment about the alleged encounters with Hutchinson, Gaetz told PEOPLE in a statement: “I don’t remember either of these events and based on Cassidy’s prior false statements, I doubt they occurred.”
The written statement continued: “I did date Cassidy for a few weeks when we were both single years ago. We parted amicably and remained friends thereafter, even during President Trump’s post presidency when she asked me to help her secure housing in South Florida because she was eager to continue working for President Trump. It is sad to see Cassidy dishonestly turn against so many people who cared about her for fame and book sales.”
Hutchinson denied ever dating Gaetz in a Monday night interview on The Rachel Maddow Show, saying that they were friends at times but that he “does not have the best track record for relationships” and that she has “much higher standards in men.”
Mark Meadows privately took some responsibility for former presidential candidate Herman Cain’s COVID-19 death
NICHOLAS KAMM/AFP via GettyOnetime presidential candidate Herman Cain (seated, left) attends a Trump 2020 rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Cain fell ill with COVID-19 days after the rally, and died of complications the following month.
Hutchinson’s book details the moment she informed Mark Meadows that former presidential candidate Herman Cain died from COVID-19 complications after attending Trump’s first pandemic-era campaign rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma. She alleges that Meadows felt at least some responsibility for Cain’s death.
“I had slipped into Mark’s office when I got the news, my middle finger and thumb tapping together as I gnawed the inside of my cheek, wrestling with my words. ‘Chief, have you heard about Herman Cain?'” Hutchinson writes, recalling the July 30, 2020, conversation.
By her account, Meadows responded asking if Cain was all right, to which she replied, “No, Mark, he’s dead.” Hutchinson says the blood drained from Meadows’ face, and he began asking her questions: “He was in Tulsa wasn’t he?” (Yes, sir.) “That’s where he caught COVID, right?” (Yes, sir.)
“Mark had briefly turned his attention to the TV. I had assumed that he was wondering if the news had been made public,” she continues in the memoir. “He looked back at me and said flatly, ‘We killed Herman Cain.’ I could hear him swallow. ‘Get me his wife’s number,’ he said sadly.”
Earlier in the book, Hutchinson writes that Trump was getting stir-crazy in the first months of the pandemic, leading to the early campaign rallies: “What little patience the president possessed had been exhausted. He wanted to be out on the campaign trail. ‘We have to start doing rallies again,’ he stressed to anyone within earshot.”
“The consensus among senior staff was that rallies were a bad idea both for reasons of public health and because it wasn’t the time to wade into politics. Clearly indoor rallies were off-limits, for the former reason,” she continues in the book. “‘Antifa is having rallies every day on the streets,’ countered Trump, referring to the Black Lives Matter protests. ‘We are going to plan a big rally, and it’s going to happen as soon as possible.'”
Hutchinson writes that Trump’s adamancy signaled the planning of the June 20, 2020, Tulsa rally that Cain would ultimately attend.
“I had seen [Cain] in the risers behind the stage in Tulsa,” Hutchinson recalls in the book. “He grabbed my wrists and pumped my arms above my head, flashing his enigmatic smile as he cried out, ‘We’re going to win! We’re going to win! Four more years! Four more years!'”
Cassidy says Liz Cheney secretly helped her break free from Trump’s legal team during the Jan. 6 investigation
Brandon Bell/GettyCassidy Hutchinson hugs Rep. Liz Cheney, vice chair of the Jan. 6 House committee, after her two-hour live testimony on June 28, 2022
Initially represented by a Trump-aligned lawyer after getting subpoenaed by the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, Hutchinson struggled with what she characterized as his alleged instruction to be unforthcoming with the committee’s search for answers — and, eventually, to refuse testifying in subsequent depositions, even if it ran the “small risk” of being held in contempt of Congress.
“I knew in my heart that was a luxury I could not afford,” she writes. “There was only one option — to fulfill my moral and civic obligations.”
Hutchinson says she had already tried finding independent legal representation, meeting numerous lawyers and brainstorming ways to scrape together money — even visiting her estranged father to ask for financial help — but was met with unreasonably high fees at every turn.
“To honor the oath I swore to defend, I had to free myself from Trump World,” she remembers thinking in the book. “All I had to do was figure out a way to free myself without doing anything that would draw their attention and arouse suspicion.”
In an earlier deposition, Hutchinson had tried to slyly feed committee members some helpful answers without appearing insubordinate to the Trump attorney accompanying her, and afterward, committee vice chair Liz Cheney had walked up to her, given her a hug, and whispered, “Thank you.” But she writes that she had more to say, and that she felt her attorney was trying to keep her from saying it.
In a bind, she quietly turned to one of the few people she felt she could trust — Cheney — arranging a phone call to discuss her situation and ask for help finding a new, affordable lawyer so she could come clean about what she saw in Trump’s White House.
The next day, Hutchinson says, Cheney provided her with a list of lawyers to reach out to that she believed would help. “I thanked her and promised that I would figure out a way to do the right thing, regardless of the outcome of the search for new counsel,” she writes. “I could not find the words to tell her that the committee was giving me one of the greatest gifts I could have received: hope.”
Soon, Hutchinson had signed an engagement letter with two lawyers who’d worked in the Justice Department under President George W. Bush. They agreed to represent her pro bono.
Hutchinson writes that she formed a friendship with Cheney after breaking free from Trump’s orbit, saying that when she was exiled after testifying live, she knew that she could always look to the Wyoming congresswoman for support.
“Liz checks on me every day,” she writes of the time that she was in hiding after testifying. “She sends encouraging articles, shares stories about the public support we’ve received since the hearing, and relays messages from prominent figures in the Republican Party, our Republican Party. We talk and laugh, I cry, we laugh some more. Liz is becoming my rock.”
“Liz reminds us that true leadership is grounded in principle, and that change can be achieved through unyielding loyalty to our democratic ideals,” it reads. “May this book serve as a testament to the transformative power of leaders like Liz, who inspire us to be agents of the truth in our republic, and beyond. That we, as individuals, are enough.”
Joe Biden makes history by joining UAW picket line
Bernd Debusmann Jr, Sarah Smith, Natalie Sherman September 26, 2023
US President Joe Biden has backed striking cars workers in Michigan during a visit to their picket line – a first for a sitting US president.
Mr Biden said that the workers “deserve” raises and other concessions they are seeking.
The visit comes a day before his would-be challenger, Donald Trump, is due to arrive.
But workers told the BBC they felt the rivals might politicise the strike, and urged them to “just stay away”.
In brief remarks to the picketing workers on Tuesday, the Democratic president said that they “deserve the significant raise you need and other benefits”.
He added that the workers should be doing as “incredibly well” as the companies that employ them.
While US lawmakers – and presidential candidates – frequently appear at strikes to express solidarity with American workers, it is considered unprecedented for a sitting president to do so.
Some workers said they hoped the attention from Mr Biden and his rival would help their cause, but others dismissed the visits as political stunts aimed at getting votes, which would have little practical impact on the negotiations.
“We would much rather neither of them showed up,” longtime Ford worker Billy Rowe told the BBC. “We don’t want to divide people and when you bring politics into it, it’s going to cause an argument.”
Earlier in September the UAW declared a strike targeting Ford, General Motors and Stellantis, pushing the three major car companies for better pay and conditions.
The White House, which was heavily involved in resolving a 2022 labour dispute with rail workers, was “not part of the negotiations”, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters on Tuesday.
Officials had previously refused to be drawn on whether Mr Biden supports the current UAW proposal, with Ms Jean-Pierre insisting the administration would “leave it to the UAW and the big three”.
Mr Biden’s presence in Michigan is instead intended to show support to the car workers, Ms Jean-Pierre said.
The president believes “that the men and women of the UAW deserve a fair share of the record profits they’ve helped to create”, she added.
The White House announced Mr Biden’s visit to the UAW workers last week, soon after Mr Trump announced he would skip the 27 September Republican presidential debate in California to visit Detroit, the heart of US vehicle manufacturing.
On his social media platform Truth Social, Mr Trump said he had provoked the presidential visit.
“Crooked Joe Biden had no intention of going to visit the United Autoworkers, until I announced that I would be headed to Michigan to be with them [and] help them out,” he wrote.
Mr Biden was invited to visit the UAW members by the group’s president, Shawn Fain, who has sometimes been critical of Mr Trump.
In his Truth Social post, Mr Trump – who has not been invited by the UAW – vowed that car workers are “toast” if they do not endorse him and if he does not win the election.
UAW members Frankie Worley (L) and Billy Rowe (Centre) have expressed dismay at the visit of both Mr Biden and Mr Trump
On the picket line in Michigan, word of the duelling visits was greeted by groans and “a lot of eye rolls”, according to Billy Rowe, 61, one of half a dozen workers huddled in the rain holding picket signs outside a Ford factory near Detroit, receiving regular honks of support from passing cars and trucks.
Mr Rowe, who has worked at Ford for 27 years, said he saw the dispute as one between workers and the companies.
Another Ford employee, Frankie Worley, said that “politics shouldn’t be involved” in the issue.
“They come down here and get a picture and say they support us, but really, do they?” said Mr Worley, who has spent 28 years at the company, including 20 on the assembly line. “This involvement is just to put their face against us and say they’re helping us. Just stay away.”
The strike, he added, is his first. He said he was partly motivated by the fact that his pay has only risen $4 (£3.2) from $28 an hour 25 years ago to $32 today.
“It’s hard to make a living now,” he said.
The visits by Mr Biden and Mr Trump – currently the frontrunner for the Republican nomination – come as Republicans and Democrats alike focus on the electorally important Midwestern “Rust Belt”, where blue-collar workers such as UAW members form a vital voting bloc.
The battle for those votes in Michigan promises to be intense. Democrats narrowly won the state in the 2020 presidential election after losing there in 2016.
Meanwhile, the UAW endorsed Mr Biden in 2020, but has yet to name a preferred candidate for the 2024 election, saying that the union’s support needs to be “earned”.
Though the UAW has long been allied with the Democratic party, Mr Worley said that many of its members are upset about issues including inflation and illegal border crossings, weakening support for Mr Biden among the rank-and-file.
“I’ve seen a big shift,” he said.
Mr Biden’s visit to the picket line also comes as his administration pushes for more electric vehicle (EV) production in the US – a cause for concern for union members who worry that EVs require fewer workers to build them and could be made in non-union factories for much lower wages.
In a statement issued on Tuesday afternoon, Mr Trump called Mr Biden’s visit a “PR stunt” to “distract and gaslight” the US public from other issues, including immigration and public safety.
Surveys suggest that a majority of Americans back the UAW’s cause, and a recent Gallup poll found that 67% support unions more generally.