Home

The Supreme Court Gave Trump a New Way to Break the Government

Leave a comment

Click the link below the picture

.

In 2002, Congress created the Election Assistance Commission to administer the Help America Vote Act, which assists states in reforming their elections. On Thursday, the EAC dropped below a quorum after President Donald Trump fired its three remaining members. By statute, the commission requires the affirmative vote of at least three members to act. In the middle of an election year, Trump has hamstrung the only federal agency dedicated to helping states run their elections.

The EAC is one of dozens of multimember commissions that make up an overlooked part of the federal government. Some, such as the Federal Reserve or the Federal Trade Commission, are household names. Others, like the Marine Mammal Commission, are quite obscure. In establishing these commissions, Congress wanted the commissioners to use their expertise and collective decision-making to shape important areas of policy without partisan influence. Although the president appoints these commissioners with the advice and consent of the Senate, Congress often—but not always—protected them from removal except for cause.

In Trump v. Slaughter, the Supreme Court struck down these removal protections as a violation of the president’s power under Article 2, overruling a 91-year-old precedent that reached the opposite conclusion. With the exception of the Fed, Slaughter allows the president to remove appointees from these commissions at will.

Much of the discussion of Slaughter has focused on the president’s ability to shape the behavior of commissioners by threatening to remove them from their positions. Before Slaughter, presidents who wanted to reshape a multimember commission generally needed to wait for the commissioners’ terms to expire to nominate replacements who shared their policy preferences. Slaughter allows presidents to immediately remove and nominate commissioners.

But Slaughter also provided Trump with a new, more dangerous weapon: the ability to incapacitate these commissions by depriving them of a quorum. A quorum is the minimum number of members who must be present for the commission to engage in rulemaking, issue final decisions in adjudications, initiate enforcement actions, and otherwise conduct business. Many commissions cannot conduct business without a quorum of a simple majority of commissioners.

Consequently, a president who dislikes the work performed by a commission can now dismantle it without securing new legislation to defund or abolish it. Because commissions are small—often three to five members—a well-timed pair of firings can leave a group without the number of members it needs to act. With the president’s removal of enough members to drop the commission below its quorum, then refusal to fill the vacancies, the agency continues to exist on paper but cannot decide cases, promulgate rules, or approve enforcement actions.

Part of the problem stems from the way the law handles vacant positions in these multimember commissions. The Federal Vacancies Reform Act, which normally lets the president name an acting official when a Senate-confirmed appointee leaves, does not cover most commissioners. The seat stays empty until the Senate confirms someone new. If the president chooses not to nominate a replacement, the seat stays empty indefinitely.

The Trump administration has already demonstrated the danger of quorum losses. In the first 10 months of the president’s term, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Federal Communications Commission, the Federal Election Commission, the Merit Systems Protection Board, the National Labor Relations Board, and the Tennessee Valley Authority all lost their quorums. In an empirical study, my co-author Todd Phillips and I found that at least 15 commissions were inquorate at some point during that period. Most of the losses were caused, directly or indirectly, by presidential removal.

The clearest costs are borne by Americans who use adjudicatory commissions to enforce rights they cannot apply anywhere else. For example, federal employees have a constitutional and statutory right to a hearing before they can be fired from their positions. For federal employees, that hearing takes place at the Merit Systems Protection Board. Supreme Court precedent bars going directly to federal court—even when the MSPB lacks a quorum. Employees must first exhaust their administrative remedies at an agency that cannot decide their case. From 2017 to 2022, the MSPB lost its quorum, and its backlog reached roughly 3,800 cases. Employees waited over five years for the board to decide whether they had been unlawfully removed from their positions. In 2025, the MSPB again lost its quorum after Trump removed one of its two remaining members, leaving thousands of employees without a forum to vindicate their constitutional rights. (That removal, though unlawful at the time, was later upheld by Slaughter.)

The Federal Election Commission presents a similar case. The commission enforces federal campaign-finance laws against candidates, parties, and outside spenders, but doing so requires four affirmative votes from six commissioners. Since May 2025, the FEC has had three or fewer members. As of this writing, it has only two members. Although the commission continues to receive complaints about violations of campaign-finance laws, it is unable to conduct investigations, finalize pending cases, or issue civil penalties against rule breakers. With the 2026 midterms approaching, some complaints will expire under the five-year statute of limitations before Congress manages to restore the FEC’s quorum. Presidents who want to sap campaign-finance enforcement during their own election year need not persuade Congress to repeal the law. They need only ensure that the commission cannot muster four votes.

Even after Slaughter, Congress could largely fix this problem by statute. Three reforms would go a long way. First, Congress should authorize plaintiffs to file claims in federal court whenever an adjudicatory commission lacks a quorum to decide them, giving individuals an alternative forum when the president enfeebles the agencies charged with protecting their constitutional and statutory rights. Second, Congress should explicitly empower federal courts to set aside any action a commission takes while inquorate. That authority is, oddly enough, not currently enshrined in statute.

Third, Congress should establish a default quorum rule requiring a simple majority of statutorily authorized seats—not sitting members—to transact business, foreclosing the strategy of running a five-member commission through a single loyalist. Together, these reforms raise the cost of quorum-busting. A president who hobbles a commission by removing members risks having its remaining actions unwound in court and its docket rerouted to Article 3 judges, leaving the commander in chief with less control over the commission’s work, not more.

As Max Sarinsky recently noted in Slate, reform of multimember commissions may be possible if Democrats take the Senate in this year’s midterms, creating conditions for a compromise. None of these reforms would displace Slaughter’s core holding. Presidents would remain free to fire commissioners. What the reforms would discourage is the strategic use of firings to immobilize the commissions themselves.

In the meantime, lower courts should test the limits of Slaughter by enjoining removals that hamstring agencies by denying them a quorum. The Supreme Court told us in Slaughter that the president’s constitutional duty is to take care that the laws be faithfully executed. But a president cannot execute the laws by undermining the agencies that Congress designed to execute them. Whether Congress and the courts will act to protect those agencies is a separate question. It is, however, the one that will determine whether Slaughter is a decision about accountability or a decision about power.

.

https://compote.slate.com/images/b547af20-dfe9-433f-baf0-8936fb55b845.jpeg?crop=2222%2C1481%2Cx0%2Cy0&width=1280Photo illustration by Slate. Photos by Kenny Holston/Pool/Getty Images and Getty Images Plus.

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2026/07/supreme-court-slaughter-trump-congress-fix.html

.

__________________________________________

In Iran, Trump Has Found an Opponent He Cannot Easily Dominate

2 Comments

Click the link below the picture

.

On the 136th day of his war against Iran, President Trump came up with a new plan. He would impose tolls on ships traversing the Strait of Hormuz in exchange for protecting them from Iranian forces.

But that was then. On Day 137, he had another new plan. No tolls after all.

Mr. Trump’s 180-degree reversal on Tuesday in the face of protests from his Arab allies, who were not so excited about paying tolls, reflected how adrift he seems to be in prosecuting his war against Iran. What was supposed to be a clean four-to-six-week operation is now in its messy 20th week. Improvisation and impulse are not working.

A president who has made flexing his power on the world stage a hallmark of his second term has found in Iran an opponent that so far will not bend to his will and a geopolitical conflict that cannot be won through nasty social media posts or tariff threats. The memorandum of understanding that he brokered with Tehran last month to halt the fighting turns out to have been a memorandum of misunderstanding, and Mr. Trump now seems to have neither a clear military nor diplomatic strategy.

“He’s encountered a country that is not willing to play by his set of rules, which is you bend and kiss the ring and tell him how great he is and try to get whatever concession he’s willing to give,” said Vali Nasr, a professor at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies who has advised presidents and secretaries of state on the Middle East.

Mr. Trump’s no-end-in-sight venture in the Middle East has become a fresh lesson in why the region has been a sinkhole for presidential ambition for generations. The instruments of power that help advance U.S. interests elsewhere around the globe do not necessarily work there, as many of Mr. Trump’s predecessors have discovered.

It has been especially frustrating for Mr. Trump, who has reveled in getting his way since returning to office last year and even boasted that he might be the most powerful man in world history. But while he has successfully pressured NATO allies into increasing military spending, extracted concessions from trading partners, and essentially took over Venezuela with a one-night surgical commando raid, it is not clear that he can get his way in the Persian desert.

“Trump’s forceful approach to the world in his second term has benefited from some luck and the occasional willingness of other states to facilitate an off-ramp,” said Suzanne Maloney, vice president and director of foreign policy at the Brookings Institution. “Nothing in the past 47 years should have led him to believe that Tehran would follow that route.”

John Hannah, a former national security adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney and now a senior fellow at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America, in the past has supported the limited use of military force to stop Iran from building a nuclear weapon. But he said that by going for “a massive decapitation strike,” Mr. Trump had clearly underestimated the theocratic power structure that took power in the 1979 Iranian revolution and overestimated American capacity to topple it.

“In retrospect, this was clearly a war based on fatally flawed assumptions,” Mr. Hannah said, “none more damaging than the president’s apparent conviction that Iran’s revolutionary regime was a flimsy house of cards ready to collapse in a hail of American airstrikes and bellicose Truth Social posts.”

“Compounding the error,” he added, “there was no rigorous national security apparatus around the president prepared to speak truth to power and subject his wrongheaded assumptions to systematic questioning based on the knowledge and experience of real foreign policy, defense and intelligence professionals.”

The cease-fire that has now collapsed amid nightly strikes was not even a particularly far-reaching agreement. It was meant to be a stopgap to quiet the guns for 60 days so that the two sides could negotiate the truly thorny disputes, particularly the future of Iran’s nuclear program. If a temporary deal cannot last, it is hard to see how the two sides can get to a permanent accord requiring painful compromises.

Mr. Trump seems uncertain how to proceed. He has turned back to the use of military force and ordered the resumption of a naval blockade in the Strait of Hormuz. He has threatened to take “a nice, big fat shot” at Pickaxe Mountain, a fortified site near one of Iran’s main nuclear facilities. But with popular opinion against the war, he has given little indication that he is willing to resume the sort of full-fledged bombardment that marked the beginning of the war.

At the same time, he has suggested there will be further negotiations but has not articulated how talks that failed before could succeed now. In fact, he has expressed deep skepticism that they could, although of course that might simply be a way of lowering expectations. Instead, Mr. Trump seems to think that he can outlast the Iranians because their economy is in dire shape, while the Iranians seem to think that they can outlast him because of the politics of gas prices heading into midterm elections at home.

Trump’s in a box, and he’s facing a brutal and tenacious adversary whose objectives — maintaining leverage over the strait and a newfound desire for hegemony over the Gulf — now hold him hostage,” said Aaron David Miller, a former Middle East peace negotiator who served presidents of both parties and is now a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

“Iran consumed and tarnished the legacy of one president,” he added, referring to Jimmy Carter and the 1979-81 hostage crisis. “And the way it appears now, with time on Iran’s side, not on Trump’s, it could very well tarnish or ruin the legacy of another.”

Other foreign policy experts rejected the analogy and cautioned against overstating the impact of the Iran war on Mr. Trump’s presidency.

.

https://static01.nyt.com/images/2026/07/14/multimedia/14dc-trump-iran-vztw/14dc-trump-iran-vztw-superJumbo.jpg?quality=75&auto=webpA banner in Tehran last week threatening President Trump. Credit…Arash Khamooshi/Polaris for The New York Times

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/14/us/politics/iran-trump-war.html

.

__________________________________________

250 years later, new history is uncovered from the Battle of Bunker Hill

Leave a comment

Click the link below the picture

.

On June 17, 1775, some 1,000 rebel colonial troops faced down the British war machine on a hill on a peninsula north of Boston, allegedly conserving scarce ammunition by waiting to fire until they could see the whites of the redcoats’ eyes.

The Battle of Bunker Hill, as it became famously—albeit misleadingly—known, happened as the revolutionaries were looking to keep British troops contained in the city and had scrambled to fortify its surroundings. Though the British ultimately won the battle, but they suffered heavy losses, leaving George Washington time to eventually roust them from the region the next spring.

Though the battle became part of Revolutionary War lore, being widely known is no guarantee of being fully understood. That’s why archaeologists decided to celebrate America’s 250th anniversary with a new excavation at the battle site using much more detailed radar scans than were available during a previous survey in the 1990s. The dig focused on the “Rebel Redoubt” fortification patriots had constructed on Breed’s Hill—the actual site of the Battle of Bunker Hill. Scientific American spoke to Joe Bagley, Boston’s city archaeologist, about what the team found.

What did you find at the site? Was there anything particularly exciting?

From the actual battle itself, we found seven musket balls and three gunflints. The gunflints could have been from either side, because they used the same gunflints. The musket balls are both provincial (or the American side) and British, based on their size. We have an expert that’s going to be studying them each very carefully and give us a full report of who shot it, what happened, how was it fired, what did it hit—that kind of thing. We’ll have an exact accounting of all of that.

The other thing that was really exciting was that we started to find a lot of tea ware, such as broken teacups and bowls—things that would be in a dining set, a fairly fancy one. We found wig curlers—which would have been a men’s object—and really fancy buttons. So there’s all this really nice stuff. From the June battle through March the following year, there were about a hundred soldiers and six officers stationed at the redoubt, so it looks like we’re finding stuff from them. Were they taken from nearby houses? Were they brought overseas with the troops? That’s some of the research that we still need to do.

There’s a lot more stuff on the site than we were really expecting, and our job is now going to be going through all of it. We have to wash it, we have to sort it, we have to catalog it, and then we have to figure out what it says about the site. That’s going to be a minute to go through.

What big questions about the battle were you hoping the dig could shed light on?

One of the big questions that we have is basically: How structured was the effort going into the battle from the folks that were organizing what they didn’t realize was going to be the first battle of the Revolution?

Farmers marched to the site, having no idea that they were going there to build a fort, and they had absolutely no idea that the next day they were going to be starting a massive battle with the world’s biggest army. What were they being asked to do, and how big of an ask was it? Was it just like, it’s the middle of the night, we’re going to try to fortify this hill? Were they trying to go for a really structured fort, or were they trying to just bang it out?

“When the first gunflint came out, it drove home the horror of the whole thing”—Joe Bagley, Boston’s city archaeologist

.

An earlier version of the survey that happened up there concluded that the fort was basically a sloppy oval on the top of the hill, and then every map after that was drawing these crisp little squares and angles, like they were out there with a protractor making the fort. The results that we’re seeing from the radar really do look like they were building this much more structured, designed, angular fort, and I think that just speaks to the ambition of folks in this early phase.

It’s also just trying to have an accurate representation of what actually happened up there. For me, when the first gunflint came out, it drove home the horror of the whole thing. There’s this tendency to romanticize and dramatize things, but the reality is this was hell. These folks were scared—they were brave, but they were terrified. [The British] set fire to [nearby Charlestown], so there was this black column of smoke that went up and over the actual battlefield by hundreds of feet, probably thousands of feet. The sounds of all the muskets going off, the cannons, the screaming. It was a bloody, gory war. And hundreds of people were killed—people were walking and slipping in blood.

We were basically digging on the site of a massacre, and I think that’s an important part of the story that people need to remember. If we’re just talking about the heroism of the whole thing, it downplays the reality of how tough it is.

What was it like to excavate there?

I’m not a big military buff, but I knew that was a place where people died, and that is a huge responsibility. To know I’m going to be trying to tell the story of people who didn’t get to tell their story after that day—that’s a heavy thing. To be there on that day with them when you find the musket ball that went through them or the gunflint that was in their pocket that slipped out as they were running for their lives—it’s like you’re right there. The last time this interacted with another person was the day that the person that put it in their pocket died or fled for their life. It’s a tingling moment.

.

https://static.scientificamerican.com/dam/asset/f6951b48-e119-4719-9504-c55d1d04dc50/bunker-hill-web.jpg?m=1783017539.292&w=900

A painting of the Battle of Bunker Hill. Library of Congress

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/archaeologists-uncover-new-history-from-the-battle-of-bunker-hill-the-first-major-battle-of-the-american-revolution/

.

__________________________________________

What Lindsey Graham’s death means for South Carolina’s Senate race

Leave a comment

Click the link below the picture

.

The death of Senator Lindsey Graham has triggered a dual-track process in South Carolina to fill his vacant seat in the chamber and his spot as the Republican nominee on the November ballot.

Graham, a prominent foreign policy hawk who served in the Senate since 2003 and became one of President Donald Trump’s closest allies, died Saturday night following what his office described as a “brief and sudden illness.” He was 71.

The fourth-term senator had secured the GOP nomination for a fifth term in the state’s June 9 primary. His death introduces sudden political uncertainty just months ahead of the November midterm elections, where Republicans are fighting to protect a narrow 53-47 Senate majority.

Trump paid tribute to Graham early Sunday, calling him “one of the greatest people and Senators I have ever known” and a “true American Patriot.”

Graham, who served as chairman of the Senate Budget Committee at the time of his death, first entered federal politics in 1994 when he was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives.

Newsweek has contacted the South Carolina governor’s office and South Carolina’s State Election Commission for comment outside of office hours.

Appointing a Temporary Successor

The path forward to replace Graham follows two distinct avenues under South Carolina law: an interim appointment to the active Senate seat and a separate process to name a new nominee for the upcoming general election.

Republican South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster praised Graham as “the fiercest of fighters for South Carolina and America — and a loyal and steadfast friend.”

McMaster will hold the authority to make an immediate, temporary appointment to fill the vacant seat. Under the South Carolina code of laws, the governor can appoint a successor to serve until January 3 following the next general election.

However, that appointment is strictly temporary and does not automatically grant the appointee the Republican nomination to face Democratic challenger Annie Andrews in November.

A Special Primary Timeline

Determining the permanent Republican nominee will require a separate process dictated by South Carolina Code § 7-11-55.

The statute mandates that the death of a nominee selected through a primary election creates a vacancy that must be resolved through a special primary election.

  • Filing Period: The filing window for candidates seeking the nomination opens on the second Tuesday following the vacancy, which places the opening date on July 21.
  • Filing Close: The filing period remains open for one week, closing on July 28.
  • Special Primary: The special primary election will be held on the second Tuesday following the close of filing, scheduling the vote for August 11.
  • Run-Off Election: If no candidate secures a majority, a run-off election must be held two weeks later, on August 25.

State law requires the final nomination to be officially certified no less than two weeks before the general election, establishing an October 20 deadline. If certification occurs later than that window, the office must be filled via a separate special election held the month after the general election.

Ballot Management

Because election logistics are already underway, the statute addresses the potential complications of printed ballots. Election officials are not legally required to reprint ballots that have already been finalized, though they are permitted to reprint them or cover the deceased candidate’s name where feasible.

Under South Carolina Code § 7-13-370, votes cast for a deceased candidate whose name remains on a printed ballot will automatically be counted for the newly certified nominee.

.

U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican, is seen during a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on Capitol Hill on May 12 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images.)

U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican, is seen during a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on Capitol Hill on May 12 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images.)

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

What Lindsey Graham’s death means for South Carolina’s Senate race

.

__________________________________________

Burnout, frustration and heartbreak: Amazon layoffs take their toll in saturated job market

Leave a comment

Click the link below the picture

.

On an early morning in January, Jake Linsley woke up to a text from Amazon that was lighting up his phone.

“I thought it was saying, ‘Your package is delayed,’” Linsley said in an interview. “I read it again and was like, ‘Holy s—, I got fired.’”

Linsley, who worked as a finance manager at Amazon for nearly six years, was one of roughly 16,000 employees swept up in the company’s mass layoffs in late January. Combined with the more than 14,000 staffers let go three months earlier, it marked the steepest cuts in Amazon’s history.

As an Amazon employee, Linsley was part of an American corporate elite: working for a tech giant with opportunities for growth, promotion, high salaries, and enviable perks. But he and the other laid-off workers suddenly entered the harsh reality of a job market being rapidly reshaped by artificial intelligence — and competing with hordes of others who had been let go by Meta, Salesforce and Cisco. In some cases, the jobs they’d been hired to do simply don’t exist anymore. And the tech giants continue to cut roles in part to fund the hundreds of billions of dollars they’re investing in AI.

The tech sector has laid off roughly 140,000 employees in the U.S. so far this year, more than any other industry, according to consulting firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas. In May, layoffs across the industry reached their highest for any month since August 2024, before easing in June.

AI was the main reason companies gave for the cuts for a fourth straight month, Challenger said in a report last week. The firm said AI has been cited in about 23% of all job cut announcements in 2026.

“Tech remains the epicenter of this year’s cuts,” Challenger said. “AI is the dominant force as companies are restructuring around it, automating roles and reallocating budgets toward new capabilities. The sector is being reshaped in real time.”

 Amazon has been downsizing more aggressively than many of its peers, laying off more than 57,000 staffers since 2022, or roughly 16% of its corporate workforce. According to data from the website

Amazon CEO Andy Jassy has warned employees that AI “should change the way our work is done,” and that in the next few years, efficiency gains from the technology “will reduce our total corporate workforce.” The company has looked for ways to unwind its pandemic-era hiring binge and eliminate bureaucracy so that it can operate like “the world’s largest startup.”

CNBC spoke to more than a dozen people laid off by Amazon over the past eight-plus months about how they’ve navigated the job market at a time of swelling industry unemployment and, for many, a sense of diminishing opportunity.

While some have since landed roles at places like Apple or Salesforce, others are staring at hundreds of unanswered job applications and roles with pay cuts. Some described the dark irony of going all in on AI at Amazon only to find themselves replaced by it.

Montana MacLachlan, an Amazon spokesperson, said in a statement that the cuts were made to ensure the company can move fast and serve customers. Amazon continues to hire and invest in strategic areas that are critical to its future, she added.

“We don’t make decisions to eliminate roles lightly, and we work hard to support employees who are impacted,” MacLachlan said.

AI wasn’t the reason for the vast majority of the layoffs, Amazon said.

Linsley’s job search lasted for about three months, before he took a position in April as a vice president at a health-care IT startup.

“I’d rather have a stable job than one that can grow 5x and disappear overnight,” he said.

The job hunt

Courtney Haeflinger applied to hundreds of jobs but struggled to land interviews.

For months after she was laid off from Amazon Web Services in January, she’d begin her day in front of her computer at 8:30 a.m., diligently scanning job boards and refreshing her inbox, hoping to hear back from recruiters.

As soon as a job was posted, there would quickly be 200 to 300 applicants, Haeflinger said. She couldn’t tell if it was due to the raft of unemployed workers, or if bots were running wild.

“It makes it harder for us as real job seekers to get in the door,” said Haeflinger, 49, who landed a job last week at AT&T. “It’s frustrating.”

In the months after her departure from Amazon, the pace of cuts across the industry turned a difficult task into a seeming impossibility.

Haeflinger applied for a few jobs at Meta, around the time the company was announcing plans to eliminate 10% of its staff. A job at Oracle came across her feed. But when she saw the software vendor was cutting thousands of jobs, she hesitated to apply. 

.

https://image.cnbcfm.com/api/v1/image/108217469-1761596968439-gettyimages-2221389323-AFP_63TY9KL.jpeg?v=1761597002&w=1480&h=833&ffmt=webp&vtcrop=y

People pass by The Spheres in downtown Seattle, Washington, on June 25, 2025. Juan Mabromata | AFP | Getty Images

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/07/11/burnout-frustration-and-heartbreak-amazon-layoffs-take-their-toll.html

.

__________________________________________

Does Matt Damon Look Greek? No. So Stop Complaining About Lupita Nyong’o.

Leave a comment

Click the link below the picture

.

Helen of Troy is starting wars again. But this time the legendarily beautiful, semi-divine queen of myth, whose adulterous elopement with the Trojan prince Paris brought on the 10-year-long Trojan War, has launched a thousand tweets.

In the buildup to the release of Christopher Nolan’s $250 million, all-IMAX retelling of Homer’s “Odyssey,” the director revealed that he had chosen the Oscar-winning actress Lupita Nyong’o to play Helen. A firestorm of controversy followed, fueled largely by self-appointed guardians of the Homeric epics who consider the casting of a Black woman as Helen to be a grotesque violation — a “woke” gesture designed to “destroy Western civilization and everything that helped create it,” as one voice on X put it.

X’s owner, Elon Musk, used the platform to accuse Mr. Nolan of “pissing on Homer’s grave,” referring to the director as an “anti-White racist,” and suggesting that he chose Ms. Nyong’o in a cynical bid to win over Oscar voters. (“He wants the awards.”) Donald Trump Jr. has also complained about the casting of Mr. Nolan’s movie, wishing that Hollywood would “stop pushing this crap on us.”

“Not one person on the planet actually thinks that Lupita Nyong’o is ‘the most beautiful woman in the world,’” the conservative commentator Matt Walsh declared.

Some of Mr. Nolan’s equally vocal defenders have argued that it’s silly to complain about “authenticity” when speaking of mythological figures; Helen, after all, was hatched from a swan’s egg, so how literal can we really be? A few classicists reason that Mr. Nolan’s colorblindness is in fact authentic, since the Greeks didn’t have a concept of race in the way that we do. (If they had, they surely would object to the choice to cast the open-faced, all-American Matt Damon as the wily Mediterranean Odysseus.)

Still, it seems safe to assume that Mr. Nolan’s choice of Ms. Nyong’o was meant to be pointed. The last major big-screen depiction of Helen was in the 2004 “Troy” (Donald Jr. was a fan), in which she was played by the extremely Aryan-looking German actress Diane Kruger.

So what is Mr. Nolan up to? As it turns out, the auteur is using Helen just as the Greek authors did: to provoke, challenge and discomfit how we think about beauty and identity, about who we are and how we relate to our world.

It’s worth noting that we actually have no idea what Helen looked like. Homer confines his descriptions to generic banalities — “she looked awfully like the immortal gods” — while the two visual adjectives he gives her, “beautiful-haired” and “white-armed,” are conventional and used of other female characters as well. (She is also described as “shudder-inducing”; go try to cast that.) Later authors, such as the playwright Euripides, introduce new adjectives, for instance, “reddish-blonde.” But on the whole, the Greeks didn’t care much what she looked like.

What they did care about was how she talked. Already in Homer’s telling, Helen is an effective and indeed seductive speaker. In the “Iliad,” she eloquently rues her mad infatuation with Paris, delivers some nice jabs in an argument with no less a debate opponent than the goddess Aphrodite and effectively has the last word in the epic, pronouncing a powerful final eulogy for the fallen Trojan hero Hector. In the “Odyssey,” she beguiles a group of dinner guests with tales of her efforts to help the Greek cause from behind enemy lines in Troy. But her cuckolded husband, Menelaus, with whom she has long since been reunited, counters with a very different tale, one in which it’s clear that she was working to betray the Greeks.

From the dawn of Greek literature, then, Helen has been at the center of an extremely self-conscious debate that, like beauty itself, is about the tension between insides and outsides: How do we know when someone is telling the truth?

Helen’s way with words made her an irresistible subject for a number of later writers. The lyric poet Stesichorus (circa 630-555 B.C.E.) wrote a poem in which he criticized her wayward behavior. In revenge, it was said, she blinded him. Soon enough, he wrote a retraction, or “Palinode,” in which he defends Helen’s honor, explaining that it was merely a phantom Helen who had run away with Paris, while the real Helen, faithful and innocent, was spirited away to Egypt. Duly placated, so the tale goes, she restored his sight.

The ease with which different sides of Helen’s case could be argued appealed to the so-called Sophists of the classical period, who prided themselves on their ability to “make the weaker argument appear the stronger.” The Sicilian philosopher and rhetorician Gorgias, born in 483 B.C.E., composed an exhibition speech in which he rattled off not one but four separate arguments in favor of Helen, each one of which could effectively absolve her of any blame for her actions.

Euripides, a contemporary of Gorgias, put Stesichorus’ tale of a phantom Helen to work in a tragicomic drama that bears her name, here again in order to explore the relationship between truth and fiction, rhetoric and reality. Helen’s dilemma bears an uncanny resemblance to that of many people who find themselves embroiled in heated exchanges on social media: How do you argue the truth when the whole world has swallowed a falsehood?

And yet, in the same playwright’s “Trojan Women,” Helen appears not as a hapless victim of false rhetoric but as a canny manipulator of it. In the presence of the grief-stricken Trojan wives and mothers who have been enslaved at the end of the war she herself had started, this Helen coolly exculpates herself with a series of gallingly disingenuous arguments. (She says we should lay the blame on Paris’ mother, Hecuba, since she gave birth to him in the first place.) In the play’s dark conclusion, her sophistries get her off scot-free.

The historians, too, found in Helen a useful figure. In his sprawling account of the wars between the Greeks and Persians fought in the early 400s B.C.E., Herodotus establishes his bona fides as a historian by discounting the poets’ tall tales about Helen and Paris, abductions and seductions. In Book 2 of his “Histories,” he whizzes through a series of practical reasons that Homer’s accounts couldn’t possibly be true, concluding that “it’s impossible to think that the Trojans would have fought amidst such great disasters just for Helen.” Helen couldn’t have been in Troy, he calmly concludes, since its king, Priam, like any ruler worth the name, would surely have given her back once the casualties started piling up.

And so the woman whom we associate with great beauty was, at least for the Greeks, all talk. Both a skilled orator and the object of skillful oratory, the “real” Helen of Troy, you could argue, was a figure associated above all with profound debates about the nature of reality and the power of words, the seductiveness of falsehood and the fragility of truth. In that sense, at least, the controversy about the new “Odyssey” movie, like so many of the arguments being conducted today, connects us to the Greeks’ Helen in a far more authentic way than the choice of this or that actress could.

It seems only right to leave the last word in this debate to a woman. A lyric by Sappho (circa 630-570 B.C.E.), considered by the Greeks to be the “10th Muse,” wonderingly recounts how Helen of Troy, “considered the most beautiful by far of all human beings, abandoned her most excellent husband and sailed off to Troy with nary a thought for her child or her beloved parents.” Why ever would she do so? Because there’s no rhyme or reason when it comes to what we yearn for, no absolute standard for beauty. “The most beautiful thing on this black earth,” Sappho writes, “is whatever you happen to desire.” Whatever else the debate over Christopher Nolan’s casting has proved, it certainly shows that, by forcing people to confront — or reveal — their own often irrational notions of what is beautiful and ugly, true and false, Helen of Troy still has something to tell us.

.

https://static01.nyt.com/images/2026/07/12/opinion/06mendelsohn-image/06mendelsohn-image-superJumbo.jpg?quality=75&auto=webpIllustration by Sam Whitney/The New York Times

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/10/opinion/odyssey-movie-lupita-nyongo-nolan.html

.

__________________________________________

Isaiah 59:14, Jeremiah 5:21

18 Comments

 

.

.

“It is not 

Necessary for a presidential candidate to be able to read or even write even a congenital idiot can run for the presidency of the United States of America and serve if you were elected “

Edgar Rice Burroughs 

 

Proverbs 27:22
New Living Translation
22 You cannot separate fools from their foolishness,
    even though you grind them like grain with mortar and pestle.

.

EVIL PEOPLE

They had been long accustomed to do evil. They were taught to do evil; they had been educated and brought up in sin; they had served an apprenticeship to it, and had all their days made a trade of it. It was so much their constant practice that it had become a second nature to them. – Matthew Henry

“When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn’t become a king, the palace instead becomes a circus. — Turkish proverb,”

 

Hmmmmm…History is repeating itself yet again!

 

Isaiah 59:14

New Living Translation

14 Our courts oppose the righteous,
and justice is nowhere to be found.
Truth stumbles in the streets,
and honesty has been outlawed.

 

Jeremiah 5:21

New Living Translation

21 Listen, you foolish and senseless people,
with eyes that do not see
and ears that do not hear.

.

__________________________________________

Isaiah 59:9-15

11 Comments

.

This sounds just like today’s World although it was written about Israel in Babylonian captivity.

History repeats itself

Isaiah 59:9-15

New Living Translation

So there is no justice among us,
and we know nothing about right living.
We look for light but find only darkness.
We look for bright skies but walk in gloom.
10 We grope like the blind along a wall,
feeling our way like people without eyes.
Even at brightest noontime,
we stumble as though it were dark.
Among the living,
we are like the dead.
11 We growl like hungry bears;
we moan like mournful doves.
We look for justice, but it never comes.
We look for rescue, but it is far away from us.
12 For our sins are piled up before God
and testify against us.
Yes, we know what sinners we are.
13 We know we have rebelled and have denied the Lord.
We have turned our backs on our God.
We know how unfair and oppressive we have been,
carefully planning our deceitful lies.
14 Our courts oppose the righteous,
and justice is nowhere to be found.
Truth stumbles in the streets,
and honesty has been outlawed.
15 Yes, truth is gone,
and anyone who renounces evil is attacked.

The Lord looked and was displeased
    to find there was no justice.

.

__________________________________________

Words From a Follower of Christ

4 Comments

Click the link below the picture

.

You might find these videos enlightening!

.

A. R. Bernard: one of many

.

.

Click the link below for the videos:

https://www.youtube.com

.

__________________________________________

Should you be taking creatine?

Leave a comment

Click the link below the picture

.

Of all the dietary supplements out there, creatine is perhaps the one with the most fervent fan base. Long a favorite among athletes looking for a workout boost, creatine has been credited with tamping down perimenopausal mood swings, controlling blood sugar, and perhaps even helping recovery from concussions.

But what does the science say? It’s important to note that creatine is a dietary supplement, and it is not regulated in the same way as medications, which need to go through rounds of clinical trials to gain approval for sale by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. And the nutrition supplement market is notoriously rife with overblown claims and false advertising.

When it comes to creatine, however, experts say there is some solid evidence backing the supplement up.

Creatine is generally considered safe, and unlike many supplements, it has been studied for decades, particularly for its role in boosting strength and power in athletics, says Katherine Basbaum, a registered dietitian at the University of Virginia Health. In more recent years, some studies have suggested that creatine may support brain and muscle health as we age, too.

But it’s far from a “magic bullet,” cautions Bonnie Jortberg, a professor of family medicine at the University of Colorado Anschutz School of Medicine. “You’re not going to start taking creatine, then all of a sudden feel like a new person.”

To help sort the science from the hype, Scientific American spoke with health and nutrition experts about how creatine works and who might benefit the most from taking it.

What does creatine do to your body?

Creatine is a natural compound that your body produces and uses for energy, Basbaum explains. It’s made using three amino acids—arginine, glycine and methionine. You can also get creatine from your diet, by eating foods such as seafood and meats, or by taking a supplement, such as creatine monohydrate.

Once ingested, creatine gets converted into a compound called creatine phosphate (also known as phosphocreatine), which helps supply adenosine triphosphate, or ATP, to your muscles. “Your brain and your muscles need energy,” Basbaum says. Creatine helps provide a rapid-acting and immediately available source of ATP. That’s why creatine can help athletes: more ready-to-use energy means more power in the gym and potentially more muscle growth.

Is creatine FDA-approved?

Creatine monohydrate is the most-studied form of creatine. Still, the FDA doesn’t assess and approve dietary supplements in the same way as for drugs. Rather, the agency has designated creatine monohydrate as a “Generally Recognized as Safe” (GRAS) substance.

Decades of clinical evidence back that designation up. A 2025 analysis of more than 650 studies found creatine has no significant side effects compared with placebo. “The safety profile on creatines is very good,” says Richard Kreider, the first author on that paper and director of the Exercise & Sport Nutrition Lab at Texas A&M University.

Creatine is also among the most popular sports supplements in the world, and the tally of adverse events associated with creatine in international registries is “very tiny,” Kreider says—around 0.0007 percent of adverse event reports mentioned creatine, his team’s analysis found.

“There have now been, over the last 30 years, billions of servings, literally billions of servings, provided in dietary supplements. This is not new,” he says. (Kreider has conducted industry-sponsored creatine research and has served as an advisor for dietary supplement makers.)

What do we know—or not know—about creatine?

Overall, the strongest and most extensive evidence for creatine is as an “ergogenic aid” to support athletic performance, Basbaum says.

Research shows it may help you lift slightly heavier weights at the gym, for instance, or push out a few more repetitions or help your muscles recover faster afterward.

More recent evidence suggests creatine may help us stay healthy as we age, too. “What had started as a supplement for athletes and performance has now blossomed over the last 20 to 25 years into a supplement that clinical trials are showing efficacy in a number of therapeutic interventions,” Kreider says.

The most promising of these avenues is “active aging,” he says. As we get older, our muscles tend to get weaker. Research suggests creatine, when combined with resistance training, may help maintain strength and muscle mass and prevent falls and injuries such as hip fractures in older populations, Kreider says.

Creatine could also be helpful during perimenopause and menopause, when women may have a harder time building and maintaining muscle, Basbaum says.

There is also preliminary evidence to suggest creatine may help support brain cognition for women during this time of life, possibly by supplying more ATP to brain cells, Jortberg says.

“These are limited studies, but I think they’re promising. [Findings suggest] that creatine may be beneficial—‘may be’ is the keyword there—when it comes to mental cognition,” Jortberg adds.

To improve athletic performance, the International Society of Sports Nutrition recommends people take about three to five grams of creatine monohydrate per day. For more rapid results, some athletes might start with a “loading” period of about 0.3 gram per kilogram of creatine monohydrate for five to seven days, the organization says.

But the exact amount will vary based on your body’s needs.

Is there anyone who shouldn’t take creatine?

Experts were divided on this question. Creatine is generally considered safe, but Jortberg says that kidney problems could interfere with your body’s ability to process the supplement.

“People who might have any kind of a kidney issue or any kind of compromised kidney function should absolutely not be taking a creatine supplement,” she says.

Kreider, on the other hand, argues that those fears are overblown. “The fact is that there’s no evidence that creatine causes any adverse effect to kidney function, even in patients with kidney disease,” he says.

Still, the experts Scientific American spoke to agreed that if you’re interested in taking creatine, it’s best to consult a doctor first.

“Anytime you take a dietary supplement of any kind, it goes without saying that it’s good to check with your health care provider,” Basbaum says, “creatine or otherwise.”

.

https://static.scientificamerican.com/dam/asset/90a24d9e-9678-4d12-8c4e-d2975f6e4096/GettyImages-870988378.jpg?m=1783430788.912&w=900Casimiro/Getty Images

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/should-you-be-taking-creatine-heres-what-the-science-says/

.

__________________________________________

Older Entries Newer Entries

In Between the Lines

Thoughts on books, language, meaning, and the culture around it.

Great Lakes Mindset

Outdoor Recreation & Adventure in the Great Lakes Region

Nelsapy

News, Info, Bio, Articles, Reviews, Lyrics, Technology, Science, Inspiration, Motivation, Philosphy and many more...

Becoming HIS Tapestry

Christian Lifestyle Blogger

Finanzalibera.com

Finanzalibera.com per una libertà finanziaria

Joe Mullins Commissioner

CEO and president of The Mullins Companies

The Luttie Board

Two Cultures. One Life. Endless Stories

Charles Maxwell DeCook

Real Estate Development Specialist

Amor Entre Estrellas

¡Bienvenido de vuelta viajero!

Heart of Loia `'.,°~

so looking to the sky ¡ will sing and from my heart to YOU ¡ bring...

Michael Ciullo

CEO and Founder of Nsight Health

Nelson MCBS

Catholic News, Prayers, HD Images, Rosary, Music, Videos, Holy Mass, Homily, Saints, Lyrics, Novenas, Retreats, Talks, Devotionals and Many More

global geopolitics

Decoding Power. Defying Narratives.

Talk Photo

A creative collaboration introducing the art of nature and nature's art.

Movie Burner Entertainment

The Home Of Entertainment News, Reviews and Reactions

C r i s t i a n a' s Fine Arts ⛄️

•Whenever you are confronted with an opponent, conquer him with love.(Gandhi)

TradingClubsMan

Algotrader at TRADING-CLUBS.COM

Comedy FESTIVAL

Film and Writing Festival for Comedy. Showcasing best of comedy short films at the FEEDBACK Film Festival. Plus, showcasing best of comedy novels, short stories, poems, screenplays (TV, short, feature) at the festival performed by professional actors.

Bonnywood Manor

Peace. Tranquility. Insanity.

Warum ich Rad fahre

Take a ride on the wild side

Madame-Radio

Découvre des musiques prometteuses (principalement) dans la sphère musicale française.

Ir de Compras Online

No tiene que Ser una Pesadilla.

Kana's Chronicles

Life in Kana-text (er... CONtext)

Jam Writes

Where feelings meet metaphors and make questionable choices.

emotionalpeace

Finding hope and peace through writing, art, photography, and faith in Jesus.

Essu Center

Essu Center TV

Wearing2Gowns.Com

Love God. LOVE ❤️ PEOPLE!!!

...

love each other like you're the lyric to their music

Luca nel laboratorio di Dexter

Comprendere il mondo per cambiarlo.

Tales from a Mid-Lifer

Mid-Life Ponderings

Creative

Travel,Tourism, Life style "Now in hundreds of languages for you."

freedomdailywriting

I speak the honest truth. I share my honest opinions. I share my thoughts. A platform to grow and get surprised.

The Green Stars Project

User-generated ratings for ethical consumerism

Cherryl's Blog

Travel and Lifestyle Blog

Sogni e poesie di una donna qualunque

Questo è un piccolo angolo di poesie, canzoni, immagini, video che raccontano le nostre emozioni

My Awesome Blog

“Log your journey to success.” “Where goals turn into progress.”

pierobarbato.com

scrivo per dare forma ai silenzi e anima alle storie che il mondo dimentica | Sito Gratuito No-Profit