The “Tesla Terrorism” Problem, 3 BIG Trump Losses, What the JFK Files Have Exposed So Far, & More
PDS Published 03/19/2025
-
Tesla is taking hits right now, and the latest comes from Tim Walz.
“I was saying on my phone, I know some of you know this, on the iPhone they’ve got that little stock app. I added Tesla to it to give me a little boost during the day. 225 and dropping. And if you own one, we’re not blaming you. You can take dental floss and pull the Tesla thing off, you know.” (0:00-0:24)
Right, he made those comments during a speech in Wisconsin last night as part of a national tour of town halls he is doing all over the country to reach voters in red districts.
And he could not help but take a shot at how much stock in Elon Musk’s Tesla has fallen since the start of the year. ][
And it is a dig that has proved to be very divisive, right, depending on where you go online, you will see very different reactions.
On TikTok, the comments are filled with people who thought it was very funny and appreciated the pettiness, wishing he was the current VP and saying that he should run for president. []
But then on Twitter, he is getting eaten alive by people who think a politician should not be rooting for or celebrating the stock of an American company that employs people all over the country falling.[][][][][]
With Elon responding himself by writing:
“Sometimes when I need a little boost, I look at the @JDVance portrait in the @WhiteHouse and thank the Lord.”[]
But Tim Walz is far from the first person to hop on the Tesla hate train lately.
Right, ever since Elon’s DOGE started taking a knife to government agencies, there has been a string of Tesla protests all over the country, with people gathering outside dealerships and showrooms saying things like:
“We don’t want your Nazi cars, let’s send Elon back to Mars! We don’t want your Nazi cars, let’s send Elon back to Mars!” (0:00-0:08)
And while tons of these protests have been peaceful and uneventful, they are starting to kind of reach a boiling point with acts of vandalism popping up.
Shots have been fired at a Tesla dealership in Oregon, and while no one was harmed there was damage to the building and cars there.
Yesterday in Las Vegas, cars at a Tesla center were shot at and lit ablaze by a Molotov cocktail, with authorities calling it a targeted attack.[]
And the FBI is investigating an arson attack at a Tesla location in Kansas City.
In Seattle, authorities are also investigating a fire that damaged four cybertrucks.
With cases like this popping up abroad as Teslas have been burnt in Berlin, too.
According to the Associated Press, no injuries have been reported as these incidents are popping up.[]
With a sociologist telling the AP that they have likely become so prominent because “Tesla is an easy target,” adding:
“They’re rolling down our streets. They have dealerships in our neighborhoods.”
And Elon has responded to all this, saying:
“This level of violence is insane and deeply wrong.”[]
AG Pam Bondi also condemning the violence, issuing a statement yesterday saying:
“The swarm of violent attacks on Tesla property is nothing short of domestic terrorism…We will continue investigations that impose severe consequences on those involved.”
And the latest update from this ordeal comes out of Canada, where the Vancouver International Auto Show opted to cut Tesla’s display from its lineup over safety concerns.
With a spokesperson for the event telling CNN that they made this choice after giving Tesla “multiple opportunities to voluntarily withdraw” and that their “primary concern is the safety of attendees, exhibitors, and staff.”
And while safety was the big issue here, you also had people noting a lot of Canadians are not thrilled with Elon Musk right now, and there have been some Tesla Takedown protests up north as well. []
But I would love to know any thoughts you have to all this Tesla related backlash, whether it be about Walz and his comments, the protests or the vandalism, anything here
-
I have four pieces of general Trump administration news you should know today.
Now, of course, there are WAY more than four major stories — the whole strategy of the administration is overwhelm, overwhelm, overwhelm.
But there’s no possible way we could cover all of it — and, more importantly, no possible way that you could listen to it without your ears bleeding and your brain exploding.
So consider this your daily dose of Trump news.
(Phil/edit: Might be fun to do this in a v/o like pharmaceutical ads with a little graphic in the corner)CAUTION! Exceeding your daily dose of Trump news may result in vomiting, diarrhea, uncontrollable bleeding, unspecified organ failure, spontaneous combustion, existential pain, and death.
Starting with the news that, exactly as I predicted — and honestly, now that I’m thinking about it, probably just to spite me, Philip DeFranco — the Trump administration released the last batch of JFK assassination files right after the show went up yesterday.
And those documents revealed an absolutely MASSIVE, incredibly shocking bombshell: Lee Harvey Oswald still did it.
I know, I was stunned too.
But, in all seriousness, if you were waiting for any kind of revelation or even new information, you’re going to have to wait a while longer.
Right, we’re talking more than 63,000 pages of documents — it’s going to take historians months, probably years, to fully pour over all the pages.
But many scholars expect that most of the documents released yesterday don’t really contain significant new information that hasn’t already been in the public domain for a long time.
Right, there probably aren’t going to be any major, sweeping revelations that totally undermine everything we thought we knew — if there were, they probably wouldn’t release them at all…
In fact, some experts say that at least some of what we’ll see will probably be full versions of documents that were previously available but just with less redactions that add a name or two to the record.
And other documents will likely just be duplicates of variants of materials that have been in the public record for a long time.
But, of course, that doesn’t mean there won’t be some interesting details that were previously unknown.
And so far, from what has been pawed through and analyzed, that seems to be the case: we’re mostly just getting various tidbits that are fascinating for history buffs but not really any of us normal people.
Just kidding… you’re all God’s beautiful children…
And I will make sure to link to a couple different resources that are keeping track of those various findings for those of you who are interested.
But there’s also been a lot of discussion over the chaotic process by which these records were released.
Right, according to reports, Trump totally blindsided his top security aides when he announced on Monday that he would be releasing the last batch of documents the following day.
With The New York Times reporting that Trump’s national security team “was stunned and forced to scramble” after he made the announcement “with only 24 hours’ notice.”
Right, work had already been underway to release the documents since January when Trump signed an executive order mandating the move.
But, again, we’re talking about tens of thousands of pages of documents, so that process was still ongoing when Trump suddenly announced the remaining materials would be made public.
And, according The Times, the tight deadline raised a number of concerns among the nation’s top security officials.
With sources telling the outlet that some officials were worried about the unintended consequences of rushing the release.
Including the possible disclosure of sensitive personal information like addresses or Social Security numbers of people named in the documents who are still alive today.
And, in fact, we’ve seen at least one report of this happening.
With an attorney who works on National Security issues accusing the Trump administration of “doxxing” former public servants who staffed the congressional investigation into JFK’s assassination by revealing their Social Security numbers in full.[]
But honestly, that’s pretty par for the course for the Trump administration.
And for now, we’ll just have to wait and see if anything notable arises from this latest document dump.
Judge denies Trump’s bid to dismiss Mahmoud Kahlil’s case, agrees that matter should be heard in New Jersey instead of Louisiana
But that brings us to the other three pieces of Trump-related news I want to talk about — all of which revolve around some very significant court rulings.
First up, just this morning, we saw a judge rejecting Trump’s efforts to dismiss the deportation challenge brought by Mahmoud Khalil (Mawk-Mood Kah-Leel — “Mawk” like “hawk”).
Right, as we talked about before, he is a Palestinian rights activist and former Columbia graduate student who the administration detained and is trying to deport.
This despite the fact that he is a green card holder married to an American citizen and he still hasn’t actually been charged with any actual crime.
Instead, the administration has just broadly accused Kah-Leel of leading and engaging in “activities aligned to Hamas” and is attempting to deport him under a rarely used and little-known provision of the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act.
A provision that gives the Secretary of State the power to remove people from the country if their presence is deemed to “have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States.”
With Secretary of State Marco Rubioarguing that it is a policy of the United States to restrict the spread of antisemitism.
Though many people — including plenty of American Jews — have said that’s bullshit given that Trump and others in hisadministration have embraced anti-semitic conspiracies and rhetoric.
With legal experts and many others across the political spectrum — including those who oppose Kah-Leel’s views — arguing that this is an explicit violation of free speech.
Accusing the Trump administration of trying to illegally detain and deport someone purely based on ideological differences.
And that is also what Kah-Leel’s lawyers have argued in their effort to seek his release.
Claiming that the administration exceeded its legal authority and violated his constitutional rights to free speech and due process.
And in his decision today rejecting the administration’s efforts to toss Kah-Leel’s claims, Manhattan-based U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman noted the severity of the allegations here, writing:
“These are serious allegations and arguments that, no doubt, warrant careful review by a court of law. The fundamental constitutional principle that all persons in the United States are entitled to due process of law demands no less.”
But that wasn’t the only loss Furman dealt the Trump administration here — he also rejected their efforts to transfer the case to Louisiana , where Kah-Leel is currently being detained.
Right, Kah-Leel was initially arrested in Manhattan before being moved to New Jersey and then later Louisiana, where the government is trying to have the matter heard.
But Kah-Leel’s lawyers have argued that the case should be heard in New York because that’s where they first filed the challenge to his arrest.
With his legal team accusing the administration of trying to avoid having the case heard in New York or New Jersey.
Right, as experts have noted, if the matter was heard in Louisiana, it would be under the jurisdiction of the highly conservative Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which could have set a sweeping precedent for deportations Trump would favor.
And in his ruling, Judge Furman acknowledged that the legal challenge had indeed been filed in New York, but by that time, Kah-Leel had been moved to New Jersey, so that is where the case should be heard.
Writing that requiring Kah-Leel to move his case to Louisiana:
“would also mean litigating far from his lawyers, from his eight-months-pregnant wife and from the location where most (if not all) of the events relevant to his petition took place.”
Though, notably, Furman also added that all additional matters will also need to be determined by the New Jersey court, including whether Kah-Leel should be released or transferred from the Louisiana detention center.
But, regardless, you had Kah-Leel’s legal team cheering this move as a victory.
So for now, we’ll have to wait and see how all that plays out.
But that brings us to the next legal setback the Trump administration has experienced in the last roughly 24 hours.
Which is that a judge has temporarily blocked DOGE’s efforts to dismantle USAID and ordered the administration to partially restore agency functions, marking yet another blow to Trump’s efforts to purge the bureaucracy.
Though, very notably here, this decision appears to be especially damning for one person in particular: Elon Musk.
With The New York Times reporting that the move “appeared to be the first time a judge has moved to rein in Mr. Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency directly.”
And adding: “The finding that Mr. Musk had personally, and unlawfully, overseen the dismantling of the agency offered a firm rejection of his operation’s authority.”
Right, and specifically, the ruling in question stems from a case brought by a group of USAID workers who claim that the power Musk has assumed over federal agencies is “unprecedented in U.S. history.”
Arguing that, under the Constitution, that kind of authority can only be exercised by someone who has been nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate as an “Officer of the United States.”
With the suit also contending that, regardless of Musk’s role, DOGE’s effort to unilaterally eliminate USAID is unconstitutional because the agency was created by Congress, so only Congress can get rid of it.
And yesterday, the federal judge overseeing the case ruled that Musk himself and his team had violated the Constitution “in multiple ways.”
Writing that Musk’s ascent to power as an unappointed official appears to be unconstitutional, as does the unilateral dismantling of USAID without approval from Congress.
With the judge also ordering Musk and his team to immediately stop all efforts to get rid of the agency, reinstate email access to all employees, and submit a plan for workers to reoccupy a federal office they were evicted last month.
And, very significantly here, the judge also appeared to reject the argument by the Trump administration’s lawyers that Musk doesn’t actually lead DOGE and that he serving in an advisory capacity with no ability to steer decisions on his own.
So this is definitely a very significant move against Musk, but it’s also unclear exactly how large of an overall impact this will have on Trump’s efforts to abolish USAID, given that most of the workforce and agency contracts have already been terminated.
What’s more, while the judge said the unilateral dismantling of USAID was likely unconstitutional, he also made it clear that his order only applies to Musk and DOGE — not USAID officials themselves, who are not parties in the case.
With him acknowledging that, at least under this current ruling, USAID officials could continue efforts to unwind the agency.
Including Secretary of State Rubio, who has assumed control of the agency.
So this ruling could be very short-lived, but you still had lawyers for plaintiffs cheering the move as a victory while a White House spokeswoman condemned it.
Accusing “rogue judges” of “subverting the will of the American people in their attempts to stop President Trump from carrying out his agenda.”
Judge blocks Trump’s ban on trans people in the military
And that brings us to our final story here, which is that ANOTHER judge has blocked Trump’s executive order attempting to ban trans people from the military.
Right, as we’ve talked about before, right after taking office, Trump signed an executive order that paved the way for a ban by directing the Pentagon to revise medical standards.
With Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth then issuing a series of memos obtained by the media that said the military would stop accepting new trans troops who wished to join and remove most current trans service members.
But the administration was promptly sued by both active-duty military personnel and others who wished to join the service.
With the plaintiffs arguing that the order violated their equal protection rights under the Fifth Amendment.
And yesterday, a federal judge in Washington agreed with that argument and issued a preliminary injunction blocking the policy.
And in her ruling, the judge took aim at the language in the executive order that referred to being transgender as a “falsehood” inconsistent with the “humility and selflessness required of a service member.”
With her arguing that the order’s pronouncements are “pure conjecture” and that the policy provides “nothing to support Defendants’ view that transgender military service is inconsistent with military readiness” adding:
“Plaintiffs face a violation of their constitutional rights, which constitutes irreparable harm. Indeed, the cruel irony is that thousands of transgender servicemembers have sacrificed — some risking their lives — to ensure for others the very equal protection rights the Military Ban seeks to deny them.”
With her also going to accuse the Trump administration lawyers of misrepresenting the studies they provided as evidence to back up their claim.
And arguing that while policies impacting transgender troops were “adopted after careful study and review,” Trump enacted this order so soon after taking office that “No one knows what he relied on, if anything.”
So yeah, yet another setback for Trump — and this after other federal judges have other orders targeting trans Americans.
Including policies halting federal support for gender-affirming care for transgender youth and forcing incarcerated trans women to move to men’s facilities.
But, with this and all the other judicial orders we talked about today, we’re going to have to wait and see how everything plays out in the long run.
-
President Trump and President Putin had a long phone call yesterday, with some hailing it as a positive step in ending the Ukraine War and others calling it a clear example that Putin is in full control.
The call ended up being about an hour long, and by the end of it, the White House said that "both leaders agreed this conflict needs to end with a lasting peace.”
“They also stressed the need for improved bilateral relations between the United States and Russia. The blood and treasure that both Ukraine and Russia have been spending in this war would be better spent on the needs of their people."
And the Kremlin largely echoed that, with their spokesperson saying this morning that both the US and Russia understand each other well. []
In a post on Tuesday, Trump gave some details about the ceasefire, writing:
"We agreed to an immediate Ceasefire on all Energy and Infrastructure, with an understanding that we will be working quickly to have a Complete Ceasefire and, ultimately, an END to this very horrible War between Russia and Ukraine.”?
We also know that a prisoner exchange just happened today.
But this news probably falls short of the 30-day general ceasefire that Zelensky had previously agreed to.
Though Trump himself said that a general ceasefire wasn’t possible without more talks, telling Fox News in a pre-taped interview:
“Well, you have a situation where you have a lot of guns pointing at each other -- foolishly because it would have never happened if I was president -- that was not a war that was supposed to happen but it did happen. That’s where we are. So right now you have a lot of guns pointing at each other and a ceasefire without going a little bit further would have been tough. Russia has the advantage as you know.” @0:10-0:43
And while Zelensky said he was skeptical about the limited ceasefire, “if there is a partial ceasefire, this is a positive result.” []
…Except Russia may have thrown a wrench into any serious peace talks already.
That’s because just hours after speaking with Trump and claiming to agree to a limited ceasefire pending more talks, Russia launched a series of drone strikes all across Ukraine.[] (broll)
Technically, this wouldn’t violate the limited ceasefire as long as energy infrastructure wasn’t hit.
But according to Ukraine, the drone strikes did just that, with Zelensky saying:
"This confirms that we must continue to pressure Russia for the sake of peace.”
"Only a real halt to Russia's attacks on civilian infrastructure can signal a genuine desire to end this war and bring peace closer."
Which brings us to this morning, when Trump and Zelensky reportedly had their own call that our president described as “very good.”
He went on to write on Truth Social that "Much of the discussion was based on the call made yesterday with President Putin in order to align both Russia and Ukraine in terms of their requests and needs. We are very much on track.”
From here, US Special Envoy Steve Witkoff will be working on trying to get a full ceasefire going.
Talks for that are expected to happen over today and tomorrow, with a bigger meeting planned to happen in Saudi Arabia on Sunday. []
He’s optimistic that this ceasefire on energy infrastructure is just a short jump to a full-on ceasefire.
But many have pointed out that parts of the Russian demands seem like a non-starter for Ukraine.
For example, Putin doesn’t want Ukraine to mobilize more troops or get more arms shipments… although it’s unclear if this only applies to US arms shipments or European ones also.[]
While the US might agree to halt weapons shipments to Ukraine, European countries seem to be moving the opposite way.[]
(Another issue is that it’s not like Russia is going to stop arming itself or mobilizing troops, which opens the door to them just using the break in fighting as a chance to better prepare for more attacks).
Witkoff is probably right in saying that “...the devil is in the details,” but the Trump administration seems eager to get a ceasefire going.
However, some feel that Trump might be too eager to work with Putin with moves like ending anti-Russian sabotage campaigns and even ignoring “clear” insults.
They point to Putin allegedly making a “power move” by forcing Trump to wait an hour for their call yesterday.
That’s backed up by a Russian broadcast where Putin was reminded on stage about the call before saying he could finish that event first.
But others claim this is just reading way too much into the situation and that there was no official time for the call as long as it was done before the evening.
Additionally there are a lot of different views about how this limited ceasefire is being portrayed.
The Trump administration is calling it a success and solid first step in the peace process.
And supporters back that up, saying things like
“Trump’s deal with Putin shows strength, not weakness. Trust the process!” []
And “Why not have a relationship with Russia? Why shouldn’t Trump and Putin work together to make the world a safer place? I don’t see anything wrong with having a good working relationship with Russia and Putin. It’s about peace in the world.” []
But there have been far more takes blasting Trump for the deal.
First off, they criticize that the administration has made it seem like this was a great deal to work out… despite going into it demanding a 30-day general ceasefire.
(which is something Ukraine did agree to as long as Russia did).
Take former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who wrote:
“What a surprise - Putin rejects an unconditional ceasefire. He wants to keep bombing and killing innocent Ukrainians. He wants Ukraine disarmed. He wants Ukraine neutralised. He wants to make Ukraine a vassal state of Russia. He isn’t negotiating. He’s laughing at us.” []
On top of that, there’s an argument to be made that the ceasefire on energy infrastructure disproportionately helps Russia.
That’s because Ukraine has increased attacks on Russian oil refineries which are a major source of income there.
In the end, there’s a real sense that the Trump Administration has made it very clear that they are moving in a pro-Russia direction.
Such as a massive database the US has been keeping of Ukrainian children that Russia has abducted and forcibly moved.
There are now concerns that the database will be -- or has been -- deleted completely.
But as of right now it seems like everyone is an armchair expert and we’ll need to wait until Sunday to have a much better idea of whether a serious ceasefire is on the way.
Go to Sundays for Dogs to get 50% off your first order of Sundays for Dogs!
-
We should talk about how people in one Arkansas prison will no longer be getting their phone call.
And then, connected to that, how a soon-to-be Republican majority on the FCC could reshape the agency.
But we’re starting with Baxter County Sheriff John Montgomery who recently announced that the county’s 100-person jail will eliminate phone service entirely on March 30 –
Writing in a statement that the decision is due to regulations being put in place by the [FCC] that begin on April 1 –
And claiming it will no longer be feasible to keep and maintain the inmate phone system at the Baxter County Detention Center. []
And with that, Montgomery is referring to an FCC decision made way back in July, when the agency voted to end what it described as “exorbitant phone and video call rates that have burdened incarcerated people and their families for decades” –
Announcing that under new rules, the cost of a fifteen-minute phone call would drop to ninety cents from as much as eleven dollars and thirty-five cents in large jails…
And in small jails to a buck-thirty-five from twelve dollars and ten cents. []
With the agency also issuing new rules preventing prison telecom providers from passing the majority of surveillance costs onto incarcerated people and their families.
As well as prohibiting jails from collecting commissions on phone calls — a practice which reportedly enabled counties to share revenue with prison telecom companies in exchange for contracts. []
It was a decision that immediately sparked backlash from the industry and a number of Republican-led states.
With fourteen Republican attorneys general, led by those from Arkansas and Indiana, suing to block the FCC’s new rate caps.
Notably, with the National Sheriffs’ Association filing a legal brief last month supporting the lawsuit, noting that:
Unlike traditional telecom service, “where access to communications is a matter of a customer purchasing a service from a provider, access to IPCS for incarcerated people is not a given.” []
And there, you had Sheriff Montgomery making a similar argument, claiming:
“An inmate phone system is a means of communication that may be provided for inmates at a detention facility, but it is not required to be provided by law.” []
Though, notably, also announcing that the prison would be offering additional in-person visitation dates and/or times to compensate, as well as more frequent local radio broadcasts to inmates of local news and community information, and saying:
“We regret that the Federal government took this step last year as we know this will place a hardship on families.”
“If at such time the [FCC] reverses their adverse regulations, the Baxter County Sheriff's Office will revisit the feasibility of reimplementing the inmate phone system.[]
And now, with Trump in charge, you have many wondering if the agency may just do that – and beyond that, what else it might do, or rather, undo.
Right, on one hand, even Republican Brendan Carr, who’s now FCC Chair, voted in part to approve the new prison phone call regulations.
But since Trump’s been inaugurated, he’s been investigating media organizations and been looking into the DEI practices of Verizon and Comcast.
And then, more recently, he has announced that the agency is launching a massive, new deregulatory initiative –
Opening a new docket entitled “Delete, Delete, Delete” in which the agency seeks comment on every, quote, “rule, regulation, or guidance document the purposes of alleviating unnecessary regulatory burdens.” []
With Carr saying in a statement:
“Under President Trump’s leadership, the Administration is unleashing a new wave of economic opportunity by ending the regulatory onslaught from Washington.”
And adding: “The FCC is committed to ending all of the rules and regulations that are no longer necessary.” []
And of course, his actions against independent media and going after DEI seem to be the very opposite of deregulation.
But however paradoxical or hypocritical, implementing this agenda will soon be getting easier.
Right, Democratic Commissioner Geoffrey Starks announced this week that he will resign from the agency this spring, which would leave a Republican majority.
And in any case, the Republicans likely would have gained a majority soon, as Trump has already nominated a Republican to fill another empty seat.
And of course, she is likely to be approved by the Republican-controlled Senate.
Although, I will say, US law prevents either party from obtaining a supermajority so Trump can’t totally stack the commission. []
But still, critics say there’s a lot of damage that can be done, and so we’ll have to wait and see where this ends up.
-
Gal Gadot’s Walk of Fame ceremony led to altercations between protesters yesterday.
Right, she was getting her own star on Hollywood boulevard, and those are big to-dos, so there was a whole event and speakers lined up to honor the moment.
But per the LA Times, protesters managed to delay the ceremony, with both Pro-Palestine and Pro-Israel groups present, holding signs and flags and chanting.[]
And as for why this conflict would be making its way to Wonder Woman’s star on the Walk of Fame, well, Gal is Israeli, and she is reportedly the first Israeli actor to get a star.
And she has been very vocal about her support for the country and previously served in the IDF.
And so you had one protester telling Reuters:
“We need to boycott everything that is related to Israel, including arts and culture. This person should not be getting a star on the Walk of Fame.” (0:41-0:48)
But, like I said, both sides were represented here, and when Gal gave a speech and mentioned being from Israel, she was met with cheers.
“I’m just a girl from a town in Israel [cheering] yes!” (5:19-5:30)
And there was reportedly a scuffle between the two sides.
With a Variety reporter writing that a Pro-Palestine demonstrator stole a pro-Israel protester’s flag, and posted a video of what appears to show the person running away and getting chased, with police joining the chase on foot.
“Get out of the way! (running, chasing, commotion ensues) Don’t touch her! Don’t touch her!” (0:13-0:24)
That same reporter also sharing footage of protesters getting handcuffed against a wall.
But according to the LA Times, no arrests were made.
And this comes as Gal is making more headlines than usual, right, she is in the Snow White live-action remake that comes out this weekend, starring as the Evil Queen.
And it seems the potential for protest was anticipated by Disney, because last week there were reports that the studio opted to scale the film’s premiere back due to Gal’s controversies,
As well as due to other mostly unrelated backlash Rachel Zegler, the actress playing Snow White had previously faced, including from people who called her casting “woke” or did not like comments she made about the original animation.[]
Some also noting that Rachel’s views on this conflict here are opposite of Gal’s, as she has posted “Free Palestine” messages on social media.[]
But even though there has been a sort of frenzy leading up to the film’s release Disney is still hoping for a box office success, aiming to make around $50 million stateside and another $55 million abroad. []
And this is notably not even the only Disney movie to face an Israel-specific backlash recently, right, Hollywood in general has seen quite a few of these protests now.
Most recently, the new Captain America film saw protests and boycott calls because it features an Israeli superhero.
Though, it still ended up faring pretty well at the box office.
So that is where we are on this situation, we will have to see if Gal Gadot-related protests or anything impact her upcoming movie.
As well as how Hollywood continues to respond to protests related to this, right, this was not the first, it’s likely not to be the last.
-
Depending on where you live, you might be aging faster than you would be somewhere else.
That’s the conclusion of a new study looking at the link between heat exposure and what scientists call your epigenetic age. [Study]
Right, you may have heard this before; you’ve got your chronological age, and then you’ve got your biological age.
Right, to make this extremely clear, just look at anyone with progeria [Pro-jeeria], the rare genetic disorder that causes them to age several times faster than normal. [B roll, 00:36]
So this kid, for example, is only 12 years old; it’s incredibly sad. [Same B roll]
But even for everyone else, lots of other things from diet and exercise to stress and pollution can speed up your biological clock.
And one way scientists measure this is with epigenetics; right, let me explain.
Your DNA is packed together by something called chromatin, but some areas are packed more tightly than others. [B roll, 00:56]
With the more tightly packed genes getting suppressed, and the more loosely packed ones expressing themselves. [Same B roll]
Which is all good and normal, so long as the chromatin tightens and loosens around the correct genes.
But in the time you’ve been watching this video, your DNA has naturally broken apart in millions of different places. [Same B roll, 01:22]
And just as fast, your cells have rushed in to repair that damage, but in doing so, they’ve slightly altered your genetic structure. [Same B roll]
So the chromatin tightens in some spots and loosens in others, particularly the areas around breaks. [Same B roll]
Meaning that genes which should express themselves don’t, and genes which shouldn’t express themselves do. [Same B roll]
With these changes accumulating over the course of your life, offering scientists a convenient metric for biological age.
So for this study, the researchers took blood samples from over 3,600 older adults across the U.S., then compared their epigenetics to their heat exposure over a six-year time period.
And what they found was dramatic.
Someone living in a place that surpassed 90-degree temperatures for at least 140 days in a year, say Phoenix, could age up to 14 months faster than someone living in a place that only got that hot 10 days in the year, say Seattle. [Quote, find “140”]
And that’s after controlling for finances, education, physical activity and smoking.
Now of course, the consequences extend way beyond your beautiful bastard skin getting a few more wrinkles.
Right, premature aging has been linked to an earlier onset of dementia, diabetes and cardiovascular disease, among other issues. [Quote, find “dementia”]
With the study's lead researcher telling NPR the impact is “similar to the effect of smoking and drinking.” [Quote same link]
And that’s on top of the immediate dangers posed by heat stress, such as stroke, heart problems, diabetes, asthma and weakened immunity. [Quote, find “asthma”]
But whether you’re in Phoenix or Seattle, climate change is gonna make all of us feel these effects more.
With the National Climate Assessment projecting that the number of extreme heat days in the U.S. could rise by 20 to 30 across much of the country by the middle of the century. [Quote, find “30”]
So that pressure could make people age faster biologically at the same time that the country as a whole is becoming older chronologically. [Image]
And those trends interact, since older people’s bodies deal with heat less well than younger people’s. [Image]
Right, they tend to sweat less, feel less inclined to drink water, and have less blood flow to the skin. [Quote, find “instincts”]
With a heat physiology expert telling NPR:
"It's basically like if you're trying to tread water and someone hands you a brick. It's extra strain on all your physiological systems. It's just an extra weight that needs to be responded to in order to maintain homeostasis.” [Quote]
Now as eye-opening as this study is, there are still a lot of questions that need to be answered.
Things like how staying indoors and using air conditioning affects aging, what kinds of epigenetic changes heat exposure causes, whether acute exposure causes long-term effects, and whether the aging process is reversible.
So we can expect to hear about more research into this in the future, but for now, stay cool, y’all, especially as this summer approaches.
-
I don’t care how toxic your masculinity is; I don’t care how deeply those emotions are repressed; you will be in tears by the end of this story.
And it begins just over three years ago with seemingly the most ordinary of women: Jessica Higgs. [Image]
Right, she was an Instacart shopper in Dalton, Georgia, and one day she recalls getting an order that at first she ignored.
But after finishing the rest of her orders, she says she noticed it still sitting there a little while later, so she figured, why not? It’s a bit of extra money. [Quote, find “little while”]
With her going to the store and grabbing all of the listed items, saying that she learned they were for a woman’s elderly father, who couldn’t shop for himself. [Quote same link, find “elderly dad”]
Then, she recalls arriving at the house, with the woman having instructed her to just leave the bag on the porch, but when the father opened the door and greeted her, she thought he looked sick. [Quote same link, find “sick”]
So feeling an intuition that she needed to help, she says she brought the groceries inside for him.
And immediately she says she felt dizzy, smelling a strong odor and noticing the culprit: a propane tank. [Throw up stock image of propane tank]
Now naturally she wanted to message the man’s daughter about it, but here’s the thing.
According to her, Instacart policy prohibited shoppers from entering customers’ homes.
And being a 27-year-old single mom just trying to pay her rent with Instacart as her sole source of income, she says even a small risk of losing her job was scary.
But in the end, she hit send on that message, explaining to People Magazine:
“I came to realize someone’s life is more important than my job.” [Quote]
And that’s it. It was done. But then the next day, she got a notification from Instacart.
Except it wasn’t the company firing her; instead, it was the customer telling her something that immediately broke her down.
With her opening up TikTok and recording.
[Clip, 02:11 - 02:55] Caption: “She changed her tip from $14 to $100, which I’m grateful for but I’m crying because of what she commented this morning. And I’ll show you. She commented, ‘Thank you so much. Once my son went to check on my dad, it turned out it definitely was leaking. You definitely saved my dad and my younger son’s life.’ So that being said, I’m just an Instacart worker, but if you see something, say something. I did, and I’m so happy I did and I’m so happy that he can live a better life.”
Now first of all, I gotta correct Jessica on one thing.
You are not just an Instacart worker; you’re a motherfucking BAMF.
And I’m not alone in saying that; right, almost 20 million people have watched that video now.
Partly because she reposts it every year on the anniversary of that delivery, and every time, she says it still brings tears to her eyes.
With her telling People after the most recent repost:
“The more people that see it, the better. It’s not for me. Not for the comments or likes. It's for the message. The message is strong. And a tearjerker. I read every single comment. Every single message sent.” [Quote]
Adding, “It gave me a purpose and a completely different outlook on life, because you truly just never know.” [Quote same link]
Now the thing is, after all these years, she says she still hasn't been able to get in touch with the woman or her father, telling the outlet:
“I remember him to this day and think of him often. How he’s doing? And if he’s still doing okay?” [Quote same link]
“My email is in my bio, and I hope that one day they will reach out.” [Quote same link]
So maybe this will work, maybe not, but it’s worth a shot.
If any of y’all who are watching this know the family, or know someone who knows the family, tell them Jessica’s looking for them.
Get an exclusive NordVPN deal. It’s risk-free with Nord's 30-day money-back guarantee!
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/gal-gadot-Vin-Diesel-Patty-Jenkins-031825-44a25f93b9ba49afab0a35f9a0b6b019.jpg){kind=link}
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():focal(499x0:501x2)/jessica-higgs-instacart-shopper-saved-life-031825-tout-0d3dde00f7244f3e9eefdbf01fcc58fc.jpg){kind=link}