Texas takes another step into the abyss

Daniel Perry was an uber driver who ran a red light, drove into a crowd of Black Lives Matter protesters, and when one of them approached his car carrying an AK-47 (which, stupid and dangerous as it is, is legal in Texas), opened fire with a handgun and killed him. He was found guilty of murder in a jury trial.

In Texas. After he threatened to kill someone online.

Perry’s defense team argued that he acted in self-defense, but prosecutors contended that Perry instigated what happened. They highlighted a series of social media posts and Facebook messages in which Perry made statements that they said indicated his state of mind, such as he might “kill a few people on my way to work. They are rioting outside my apartment complex.”

A friend responded, “Can you legally do so?” Perry replied, “If they attack me or try to pull me out of my car then yes.”

Guess what? The governor wants to free him immediately.

Abbott wants an army of undisciplined thugs who will murder people he doesn’t like. It’s the authoritarian mindset.

“It’s what happens in Uganda or El Salvador,” said Cofer, a former prosecutor. “Total abrogation of the rule of law. And what’s even worse is that Abbott knows better. He was a smart Texas Supreme Court Justice. He knows this is legally wrong. Profoundly wrong. Pure politics.”

But it works! I know I would never consider living in Texas. I won’t even visit the state anymore. Abbott is doing a great job of driving anyone who would oppose him away.

Rich white man…guilty? Unbelievable!

I was living in Philadelphia during the OJ Simpson trial, and every day on my commute I’d pick up a copy of the Daily News, the city’s tabloid paper, and it was pretty much non-stop OJ coverage. It was weirdly fascinating, since OJ was that terrible combination of rich, famous, and obviously guilty. The trial was a prolonged spectacle of justice twisted to support a joyful media that knew a cash cow when they saw it, and a team of showboating lawyers who were more about putting on a show than practicing law. And then OJ was acquitted! The rich guy got off (although that was complicated by the fact that it was the rich black guy who escaped justice — there were a lot of people cheering for him, too.)

The latest law event comparable was the Alex Murdaugh trial. It was inescapable! It was unbelievable! It was a string of crimes where the culprit was clearly the corrupt Southern lawyer who seemed to think he could distract the law as it came crashing down on him by committing yet another clumsily executed murder, butchering his own family members. He was so obviously guilty that every death of everyone with any connection to the family began to look like another victim of a Murdaugh conspiracy.

I am so cynical that as the evidence piled up, I was convinced that Murdaugh was also going to be acquitted. The more damning the evidence became, the more certain I was that he was going to walk, because justice in America is synonymous with money. I was surprised when the jury adjurned and came back with a guilty verdict in only 45 minutes!

Amanda Marcotte has been reading my mind all this time.

Ah yes, why would cable news fixate on this truly bonkerballs string of crimes — corruption, fraud, drug abuse, and of course, murder — that would put any Southern gothic novel to shame? It hardly seems a mystery, especially when it seems that time spent not on this murder is instead dedicated to endless speculation about presidential primaries that are a year away and already have painfully predictable outcomes. (It’s Donald Trump and Joe Biden again, folks. Sorry to spoil the surprise.) And it’s not like they’re going to suddenly start having fruitful discussions on policy that will no doubt invite viewers to turn the channel.

Accusations of frivolity are something true crime fans have had to deal with for roughly forever. It’s a charge that has more than an air of sexism to it, as most such enthusiasts are women. But the Murdaugh case thoroughly exposes how wrong the “crime stories don’t matter” talking point is. The case cuts straight to the heart of so much of what is driving our current social-political climate, and in a more insightful way than most of the content the Beltway press is producing. (Oh boy, another interview with weaselly Trump voters in diners!) We’re in the midst of what is likely a decade, if not longer, of American crisis over exactly how much impunity we’ve allowed white men, especially those with money.

I think I’ve adopted a bleak mindset in which I’m helpless as rotten, stupid, rich men are going to trample all over the country with impunity. We can think of a few, I’m sure.

Donald Trump attempted a coup that led to a violent insurrection and he is not in prison yet. (And may be president again!) Social media owners like Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk are profiting off the destruction of democracy, and there seems to be no check on their power. Sure, Harvey Weinstein finally went to prison, but the powers that protect pampered white men have come roaring back, shielding other accused abusers like Johnny Depp and Kevin Spacey from consequences. Endless whining about “cancel culture” and “wokeness” is the battle cry of white male privilege — they will never fold to the forces demanding accountability!

The Murdaugh family story resonates because it’s so in tune with these societal concerns.

I’m still in disbelief that Trump is campaigning for president right now. The most corrupt and incompetent president in my lifetime, and he gets a free pass because he’s rich.

There are more.

Clearly, however, Murdaugh and his lawyer hoped he could bullshit his way out of this situation. It wasn’t a baseless belief. Murdaugh has a long history of evading justice that suggests he could pull it off. So it wasn’t hard to draw the connection between Murdaugh and the endless stream of glib rich white guy liars we’re subjected to on a daily basis: Trump. Tucker Carlson. Steve Bannon. Ben Shapiro. Ron DeSantis. I could go on forever. Men are always pissing on our legs and telling us it’s raining. We’re drowning in it.

What the Alex Murdaugh conviction tells us, though, is that there’s hope. Maybe, sometimes, we’ll see the wealthy and their puppets get their comeuppance.

The university administration is spooked

The Michigan State University shooting has our university officials concerned. I’ve been getting multiple emails from them telling us what to do if it happens here, which could very well occur, and that’s the first time that’s happened. This country has shootings every day, and finally, someone in the administration calls attention to our situation. We’re an openly liberal institution promoting liberal values — we’ve faced protests from outside because we support gay and trans students, for instance — and we’re imbedded deep in red state/Trump country. All it takes is one maladjusted hater to grab his gun and decide hunting season has opened on campus.

Unfortunately, the only advice I’ve seen is a link to this university page, with the advice to RUN-HIDE-FIGHT. Oh, yeah? Like I never would have thought of that. It is basically telling us the obvious, that we’re on our own and are desperately helpless.

I take that back. There are bits I wouldn’t have considered, like, when running, “Keep your hands visible.” Why? Oh, right, the other thing they tell us is that the campus police are around. We wouldn’t want to be shot by a cop while running away! Also:

How to React When Law Enforcement Arrives
Remain calm; follow officers’ instructions

Keep your hands up and out in front of you, assuring your hand are empty

Keep hands visible at all times

Avoid making quick movements towards officers such as attempting to hold on to them for safety

Avoid pointing, screaming and/or yelling

Move quickly towards the nearest exit or where directed to by police

Do not stop to ask officers for help or directions when evacuating

OBEY. DO NOT STARTLE THE POLICE. I guess that’s important advice. It’s the lengthiest section of the page.

Really, this advice is nothing but “try not to get shot by the shooter or police,” and none of it is particularly useful. When dealing with an active shooter, we should be thinking about active prevention, like with tighter gun laws. Instead of endangering the innocent, maybe the police ought to be confiscating guns from dangerous people, before the shooting starts. The Michigan State murderer had been found to have mental health issues, and had been arrested on a felony weapons charge…and the justice system had done nothing, letting him walk away armed. It’s time to end that.

I’m tired of seeing scenes like this.

At least one Michigan state representative has the right idea.

SBF is finding out

Every where I turn, there’s another interview with Sam Bankman-Fried. He’s been chattering away like a chimpanzee on meth to anyone who asks for a few minutes of his time.

Bankman-Fried has spent the past few weeks in his Bahamas estate, giving numerous interviews to reporters and making dozens of social media posts trying to explain how his company went from being one of the biggest and most-respected crypto exchanges to filing for bankruptcy after it could not meet its customers’ withdrawal requests. The company owes its top creditors $3 billion, according to bankruptcy filings, and investigators have sought answers on whether it used customer funds to lend money to Bankman-Fried’s investment arm, Alameda Research.

Bankman-Fried has said he made grave mistakes but has denied any malicious wrongdoing.

Yeah, “mistakes”. Is that what we call gross negligence, incompetence, and profiteering? Sure. “Mistakes.”

All those “mistakes” are adding up to this result:

Sam Bankman-Fried, the founder of the collapsed cryptocurrency exchange FTX, was arrested Monday in the Bahamas after U.S. prosecutors filed an indictment against him.

Good.

I want to know who funded the kidnapping

Prime suspect: this thug

As I’m sure you’ve already heard, Venezuelan migrants in Florida were rounded up an induced to take planes to Martha’s Vineyard in Massachusetts, as part of badly aimed right-wing scandal mongering. The conservatives were using these people as pawns to trigger some hypocritical liberal response (which they didn’t get — right-wingers lack the empathy required to understand that liberal perspective, so they constantly miss the mark), so they fucked around and are about to find out.

A group of Venezuelan migrants who were flown from Texas to Martha’s Vineyard last week — allegedly after being falsely promised work and other services — have filed a class-action lawsuit against Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) and other officials who arranged the flights, saying the officials used fraud and misrepresentation to persuade them to travel across state lines.

One question keeps bouncing around in my head about this story, and I’m not seeing it answered. They made up a professional-looking, shiny brochure, purportedly listing “Massachusetts Refugee Benefits”. They chartered two planes for a 1300 mile, 6 hour flight. They gave them gift cards to trick them into boarding.

In his interview with Hannity, DeSantis said that the migrants “all signed consent forms to go.” But the lawsuit alleges that migrants suffering from food insecurity were pressured “to sign a document in order to receive a $10 McDonald’s gift card.”

That all adds up to a substantial bill.

Who paid for it?

Did this come out of the state budget for Florida, or did some wealthy donor hand the perpetrators a bucket of money? Somebody had to fork over the cash for this kidnapping scheme, and it had to have been premeditated, planned without anyone considering the ethics of their crime, which, to be honest, is typical of conservative planning and doesn’t narrow the field of suspects very much.

I’m sure someone has remembered the principle of “follow the money,” I’m just not seeing much discussion in the news about it yet. I’ll be looking forward to the inevitable revelations that the lawsuit will smoke out.

There’s no such thing as a good boss

I was suspicious (just because I’m always suspicious of good stories), but ultimately I was fooled. This Seattle CEO, Dan Price, was doing wonderful things — he slashed his own salary to $70,000, he gave all his employees a uniform raise to $70,000, he seemed to be doing all the right stuff to be a fair and just employer.

Of course it all fell apart. It turns out he was an egotistical glory hound who was doing it all to get laudatory tweets and followers. “He is definitely obsessed with how seemingly you can just become famous,” And women. He wanted lots of women. He divorced his wife.

Mr. Price told media outlets that his divorce several years earlier was amicable. But his former wife, Kristie Colón, had given a TEDx talk in October 2015 in which she described their relationship as abusive.

“He got mad at me for ignoring him and grabbed me and shook me again,” Ms. Colón read from her old journal. “He started punching me in the stomach and slapped me across the face.” She recalled once locking herself in a car, “afraid he was going to body-slam me into the ground again or waterboard me in our upstairs bathroom like he had done before.”

His activities on the dating scene were less than savory.

Mr. Price messaged Serena Jowers, a fitness coach near Seattle, in December 2020, after she liked some of his posts on Instagram. On their third date, Ms. Jowers said, he pulled up videos on Pornhub, to show her what he liked. After she resisted watching pornography, he pressured her into having sex, she said. She realized he was touching her with only one hand, then saw him holding his phone. He was recording them.

Ms. Jowers jumped up and grabbed the nearest blanket, yelled at him, and fled, she said. The next morning she texted him, saying the filming made her feel like she was not in control of her own body. “I want you to delete any video/pics you took,” she wrote.

“I’ll do that,” he immediately texted back. Three other women, two of whom he also first messaged on social media, also told me that they learned Mr. Price secretly filmed them.

Porn sites are not a good place to learn about sex, and surreptitiously recording an encounter is more than a red flag. Then there were multiple other reports.

In January, they had dinner at a restaurant in Seattle’s Capitol Hill, where she said they discussed politics. What happened next was detailed in interviews, a police report and text messages.

As the restaurant closed, her Uber app wasn’t working, and Mr. Price suggested they stay warm in his Tesla as she downloaded it again.

Sitting in the front seats, he tried to kiss her and grabbed her throat, she told the police.

“He did not let go of my throat right away,” she recalled.

“After I rejected him,” she said, “he transformed.”

Ms. Hayne called her boyfriend, pretending he was her brother, and asked him to rush and get her. Mr. Price sped north, driving her to a Park N Ride.

She was scared because he was “very drunk,” the police report said.

“Hurryyyyyyy,” she texted her boyfriend.

Mr. Price raced up to the top floor of the parking lot, drove the car in doughnut circles and pulled into a spot, she told the police. He reached over to kiss her and grabbed her throat again, his hand pulsing in and out “for minutes,” the police report said.

“SQUEEZING HARD,” she would text a friend the next morning.

And then, he let go. “I’m too drunk,” Ms. Hayne recalled him saying, as he went into the back seat to pass out.

Well, now he’s front page news in the New York Times. He definitely figured out how to become famous.

How to undermine Alzheimer’s research

Stop smiling already.

Uh-oh. As I get older, I’d like to think science will come up with treatments for cognitive decline (don’t worry, I’m not showing any symptoms…yet. I don’t think. How would I know?), and Alzheimer’s is serious problem. Judging by the fact that we always get a couple of seminars on Alzheimer’s from our graduating seniors, it’s of concern to even young people. Unfortunately, every prospective drug against the disease seems to flop in clinical trials. It’s entirely possible that 16 years of research has been misled by one study that identified a candidate amyloid protein as the causal agent.

The first author of that influential study, published in Nature in 2006, was an ascending neuroscientist: Sylvain Lesné of the University of Minnesota (UMN), Twin Cities. His work underpins a key element of the dominant yet controversial amyloid hypothesis of Alzheimer’s, which holds that Aβ clumps, known as plaques, in brain tissue are a primary cause of the devastating illness, which afflicts tens of millions globally. In what looked like a smoking gun for the theory and a lead to possible therapies, Lesné and his colleagues discovered an Aβ subtype and seemed to prove it caused dementia in rats.

Why did it have to be the University of Minnesota?

That initial paper that set the field charging off in a specific direction seems to have been fraudulent.

A 6-month investigation by Science provided strong support for Schrag’s suspicions and raised questions about Lesné’s research. A leading independent image analyst and several top Alzheimer’s researchers—including George Perry of the University of Texas, San Antonio, and John Forsayeth of the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF)—reviewed most of Schrag’s findings at Science’s request. They concurred with his overall conclusions, which cast doubt on hundreds of images, including more than 70 in Lesné’s papers. Some look like “shockingly blatant” examples of image tampering, says Donna Wilcock, an Alzheimer’s expert at the University of Kentucky.

The authors “appeared to have composed figures by piecing together parts of photos from different experiments,” says Elisabeth Bik, a molecular biologist and well-known forensic image consultant. “The obtained experimental results might not have been the desired results, and that data might have been changed to … better fit a hypothesis.”

Lesné has gone silent. The university is investigating. Lawyers are, I’m sure, standing by with bated breath.

The evidence is built around Western blots, which are used to resolve individual proteins from a sample. A bunch of the published (and some of the unpublished) data show unmistakeable, unambiguous evidence of tampering, and someone in that lab was clearly going into the data and patching it up to look more convincing. Human eyes aren’t very good at detecting slight variations in a semi-random smear of pixels, but computers excel at it, and the evidence of copy/pasting and merging jump out at you.

Why does anyone pull this kind of crap with their data? If the raw data doesn’t show it, if it can’t be extracted with a statistical analysis of the original image, it doesn’t exist. You can’t compensate for a negative result by artificially pasting the result you wanted in place.

This is a catastrophe. One ambitious researcher faked data in order to get a paper in Nature, and now it’s a quarter billion dollar industry built on a false foundation.

The Nature paper has been cited in about 2300 scholarly articles—more than all but four other Alzheimer’s basic research reports published since 2006, according to the Web of Science database. Since then, annual NIH support for studies labeled “amyloid, oligomer, and Alzheimer’s” has risen from near zero to $287 million in 2021. Lesné and Ashe helped spark that explosion, experts say.

The paper provided an “important boost” to the amyloid and toxic oligomer hypotheses when they faced rising doubts, Südhof says. “Proponents loved it, because it seemed to be an independent validation of what they have been proposing for a long time.”

Great. Forgery and confirmation bias make a terrific pairing.

The grift continues!

Oh boy! They’re making “NFT the Movie”, which I presume is going to be something like the emoji movie, only with lower production values and more obfuscation. For example…

Although the video is titled “What’s an NFT?” they never quite get around to explaining it. It has a couple of crypto bros rattling off bizarre buzzwords, with a narration by Brittany Kaiser, “award winning documentarist/NFT expert”. I had to look her up. She was the former business director for Cambridge Analytica (alarm bells should be ringing). IMDB doesn’t find any documentaries made by Kaiser, but she was a central figure in one of them, The Great Hack. I haven’t seen it, so I’ll have to go by the reviewers’ comments.

Interesting to see how it all works, but my beef with the flick is the one-sided view of one of the main characters in Kaiser.

Plain to see that this is a person with little to no moral compass, that happily did what she did to hobnob and feel important/to make an impact. When it was apparent that the sky was falling, she happily turned “whistleblower” and spilled everything she could on operations. I failed to see her show any remorse for the work she did in setting up the whole infrastructure over 3.5+ years. Yet throughout the film she is portrayed as being free from blame and just a source of information, when she clearly sold her soul to make money and for other purposes known only to her. The film-makers almost portray her as a victim and instead of asking the hard questions, appear to be content to play best friend.

She’s promoting NFTs — lack of moral compass confirmed!

When will people wise up? It doesn’t help that people are making “movies” about this grift, but maybe it’ll help that the movie will be cheesy and incomprehensible, and will bomb.