Former Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) got a little too specific when he attempted to describe Donald Trump’s body odor while speaking to Jimmy Kimmel this week.
“What did it smell like specifically?” Kimmel asked.
“So, if you take, like, armpits, ketchup, makeup and a little butt, it’s probably like that, all mixed up,” he said.
Smells like mean spirit.
Hey‽ That’s just the slogan for Trump Victory Gin with last ‘S’ left off…
Where’s the scar on his ear?
( Whaaa… we’re so mean to the Stinker. )
A percentage I heard today on MSNBC–400% surge in site visits–is being claimed by the Florida Republican Party, all due to the frenzy to purchase “Alligator Alcatraz”* merchandise.
The 400% figure isn’t showing up in citations but here’s the general story:
*Some are calling it Alligator Auschwitz. To-be-determined: which is more accurate.
This is far more accurate.
Alcatraz is where people were put when they committed serious crimes, after being found guilty during a trial with due process.
Auschwitz is where people were put because of their ethnicity and similar undesirable traits, by a bunch of terrorizing monsters who saw them as sub-human.
I think any POTUS should be able to be thrown in prison. Might keep them in line.
Does the “three strikes rule” apply to impeachments?
“Alligator Alcatraz”… that’s a video game just waiting to be made.
I can’t help but remember an episode of The Simpsons, titled (ironically enough), “Kill the Alligator and Run”. The Simpsons are in Florida for Spring Break, and end up being imprisoned for accidentally killing a famous local alligator.
If it was made today, they’d probably end up in Alligator Alcatraz.
I never saw the episode. Who’s the other one?
Not always. Sometmes he’s blaming Obama.
I think it’s just another guy waiting to see the judge.
An associate of Fat Tony’s, maybe.
It was Florida so probably not. I don’t think Fat Tony has any business outside of Springfield.
(Springfield is definitely not in Florida, as they are banned from Florida by the end of the episode.)
Not sure if this one has been posted yet:
Trump team axes contracts with publishing giant Springer Nature
The action comes as high-ranking US officials criticize top journals as ‘woke’ and ‘corrupt’
The administration of US President Donald Trump this month has cut some government agencies’ subscriptions to journals at Nature’s publisher, Springer Nature. And at least three government agencies say they are terminating all their contracts with the company.
The move comes amid criticisms of top academic journals by high-ranking Trump officials, and will mean that staff members at the affected agencies will no longer be able to easily access the company’s more than 3,000 journals, including the flagship title Nature. (The Nature news team is editorially independent of its publisher, Springer Nature.)
Although it’s unclear precisely how many contracts the Trump administration is terminating, the government-spending database USASpending.gov shows that the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the US Department of Energy (DOE) cut US$3 million in contracts with the company earlier this month. A spokesperson for the USDA told Nature’s news team that it “has cancelled all contracts and subscriptions to Springer Nature. The journal [sic] is exorbitantly expensive and is not a good use of taxpayer funds”. DOE says that it is now cancelling the remainder of its contract with the company. And NASA confirmed that it is cancelling its subscriptions.
When the news team reached out to the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) — the world’s largest funder of biomedical science — asking whether its subscriptions were still intact, a spokesperson initially said they were and that use of these resources helps staff members to “promote transparency and replicability in research”.
Hours later, Andrew Nixon, the top spokesperson for the NIH’s parent agency, the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), said: “All contracts with Springer Nature are terminated or no longer active. Precious taxpayer dollars should be [sic] not be used on unused subscriptions to junk science.”
Ah, yes. Let’s not spend money on peer-reviewed scientific journals with their “facts” and woke research. Let’s spend money of proving vaccines cause autism. A few weeks ago, there was reporting that government scientists would be restricted in what journals they can publish in, now it looks like the admin is trying to limit what journals they can even read at work. (Yes, I know governmental people can still read them by other means than a work subscription.)
While we’re at it, let’s show global warming is a hoax, clean energy kills wildlife and causes cancer, and fossil fuels are good for the environment and human health. Why, it’s almost like there’s a bunch of quacks, anti-scientists, and believers of woo in charge of these things. I wonder what forward thinker put them in charge of these things.
Not that I think Trump truly gives a shit about anything that doesn’t directly benefit himself as he sees it and is happy to let RFK, Jr. and his gang go do their thing, but if it upsets the “elites”, libs, eggheads, and any non-MAGAs that is just a cherry on top.
This is absolutely a bad decision, but to be clear, Springer still has not nailed down issues around peer review. If you follow Retraction Watch, last year you saw a steady stream of bulk retractions from Springer, which totaled almost 3,000 in 2024. To be fair, that’s out of 480,000 or so articles published in 2024, so it’s a miniscule percentage, but because many of those retractions were triggered by calls from outside researchers questioning details, I’d argue the number is likely much bigger. [much of the issue seems to be fake peer reviewers validated somehow by publication in vanity journals]
My two cents. Trump is still a scumbag, as is RFKJR, but Springer hasn’t done itself any favors.
Oh, I’m not a fan of Springer and I know there are issues with peer review; I’ve been a reviewer. I remember one paper published by my postdoc lab on work that was done before I got there and there were serious issues like the qPCR chemistry used wasn’t able to do what was reported and n (the number of replicates) was “a pool of 63 donors”. I was like WTF and “who reviewed this?” when I read this paper. I don’t think there was fraudulent intent, more of a lack of understanding of their assays and not understanding basic experimental design and statistics.
That said, it seems the admin doesn’t like “woke” research that isn’t conforming to/confirming their “reality” of how things should be, so they want to limit it–in conducting, publishing, and now even allowing access to it for government employees.
Since Retraction Watch was mentioned, here’s this from the article:
“When they say, ‘junk science’, it’s not clear what they mean,” says Ivan Oransky, a specialist in academic publishing and co-founder of the media organization Retraction Watch. With the lack of details justifying the cuts and because several of Springer Nature’s journals are considered prestigious, Oransky says, “I’m having a hard time taking at face value that this is not political”. It would be unprecedented for a prominent subscriber to make a “sweeping move like this for political reasons”, he added.
Trump announced that an Ultimate Fighting Championship event will take place at the White House in front of around 25,000 spectators next year as part of the America 250 celebration.
I want off this timeline.