Rocker Lenny Kravitz said he’s been celibate for almost a decade, calling it a “spiritual thing” for him after not being in a serious relationship for nine years. During an interview with The Guardian, the 60-year-old singer talked about the dating he did after he and actress Lisa Bonet divorced in 1993, admitting that not having sex has given him a sense of control over his life. Kravitz talked about his own father’s infidelity when he was growing up, how his dad said he’d end up cheating on his spouse, and he said his dad had ended up being right. “After the marriage, I became more like him. I was becoming a player,” Kravitz told the outlet. “I didn’t like it,” he added. “I didn’t want to be that guy. So I had to tackle that and it took years.” Lenny Kravitz is celibate — and hasn’t been in a serious relationship in 9 years https://t.co/oPs6q8sLhB pic.twitter.com/wW7mZvlrqf — New York Post (@nypost) May 30, 2024 When pressed by the interviewer on how he tackled it, the famed rocker said, “By taking responsibility. Discipline. Not letting my own desires take over.” Kravitz said it’s been nine years since he was in a serious relationship, and explained that he decided to remain celibate until he found the right person. “It’s a spiritual thing,” the singer said, noting that being in a relationship now might be a struggle. “I have become very set in my ways, in the way I live.” In 2008, Kravitz told CBS Sunday Morning he believed that “in the end [being celibate]” was “going to help me to find the right person.” ”So I’m not going to waver on that,” the rocker said at the time. “That’s a promise I made to God three years ago.” Speaking to CBS co-anchor Gayle King recently, Kravitz admitted he was open to what the future may bring, whatever that might be, whether he ended up in a relationship or not. “I find that when you don’t look is when you find it,” Kravitz said. “And I’m at a place where I’ve said this for several years: ‘I’m ready, I’m ready, I’m ready.’ I wasn’t ready. I thought I was ready, right?” “Well, I can say that I’ve never felt how I feel now,” he added. Kravitz and Bonet tied the knot in 1987 and welcomed daughter Zoe to the world in 1988. The famed rocker and the actress divorced in 1993. After that, Kravitz was romantically linked with model Adriana Lima and Nicole Kidman, TMZ noted.

Presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. defended former President Donald Trump on Thursday after a jury in a deep blue part of the country returned a guilty verdict against him. The case brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg — who is backed by Democrat megadonor George Soros — has been controversial from the start and has remained so throughout with nearly every facet showing what critics and various legal experts have alleged is bias against the former president, including the judge who presided over the case, the legal theory used to bring the charges, the instructions given to jurors for deliberations, and more. RFK Jr. — a lifelong Democrat who only recently became an Independent because he was unable to overtake Biden as the Democrat Party’s nominee — said that the party’s entire plan to stop Trump was to beat him with the criminal prosecutions initiated by Democrat prosecutors. “The Democratic Party’s strategy is to beat President Trump in the courtroom rather than the ballot box,” he posted on X. “This will backfire in November. Even worse, it is profoundly undemocratic. America deserves a President who can win at the ballot box without compromising our government’s separation of powers or weaponizing the courts.” “You can’t save democracy by destroying it first,” he continued. “The Democrats are afraid they will lose in the voting booth, so instead they go after President Trump in the courtroom.” CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP Another Democrat who defended Trump was former Illinois Democrat Governor Rod Blagojevich, who posted on X: “I love Trump more today than ever! When you’ve lived through it yourself you recognize when they do it to someone else. The political fix was in from the beginning. Disgraceful and corrupt convictions of the leading candidate from the opposition party by a handpicked politicized Dem judge who denied a former President a chance to put on a defense and allowed ridiculously unlawful jury instructions. That Dem Judge and those Dem prosecutors ought to go right to F’n jail for what they are doing to our democracy and our country.”

For Amrita Chavan, leaving Mumbai for Canada at the age of 19 was the start of a new experience, but it also marked the beginning of a completely new life, at a distance. She vividly recalls the heartbreaking goodbye at the airport, surrounded by her crying relatives. She had no idea how painful it would be to lose loved ones thousands of miles away. “We had no idea what it meant to leave home,” she recalls. Chavan was surprised to face the reality of international grieving over 12 years after her departure. In early 2020, she received tragic news from her mother: her adored grandma in Sydney, Australia, had become unwell and died. Chavan, who was stuck in Winnipeg, Canada, felt emotionally paralyzed and unable to fully mourn. “I felt very frozen for a long time,” she says. Understanding transnational grief Transnational grieving, or bereavement, is a unique experience for immigrants who lose loved ones while living in a different country. The inability to be present for the final moments and traditional rituals complicates the grieving process. According to Zohreh Bayatrizi, a grief researcher at the University of Alberta, “There is a strong sense of guilt. There is a strong sense of regret that they weren’t able to be with their loved one as the loved one died,” For many immigrants, the burden of transnational mourning is exacerbated by issues such as unauthorized status, which prevents them from traveling for funerals or rituals. Kristina Fullerton Rico, a sociologist at the University of Michigan, emphasizes the issues confronting illegal immigrants: “People described these experiences of grief and long-distance mourning as one of the most difficult parts of being undocumented in the United States.” Coping strategies and rituals Regardless of the distance, immigrants find comfort in inventing their own rituals to memorialize their loved ones. Psychologist Gabriela Encina walks clients through personalized grief procedures that include letter-writing and reliving shared experiences. These ceremonies offer a sense of closure and help people to start healing. During the pandemic, creative outlets were critical for processing grief. Chavan found that taking a writing lesson changed his life. Through writing, she recalled cherished memories of her grandma, allowing herself to reconnect with her emotions and begin the healing process. Addressing systemic challenges To minimize the impact of transnational grieving, fundamental reforms in immigration rules and employment norms are required. Fullerton Rico highlights the value of expedited citizenship for immigrants, which allows them to see family members in times of need. Furthermore, having paid bereavement leave ensures that individuals can take time off work without facing financial consequences. Creating a supportive group is critical for immigrants dealing with bereavement from afar. Organizations and religious institutions play an important role in offering therapy, mental health resources, and virtual support groups. Bayatrizi emphasizes the importance of social contact in the grieving process, saying, “Grief is something of a social experience… It’s an emotional experience that’s shaped through our social interactions.” Finding strength in your community Despite the hardships, immigrants like Chavan find strength in supportive communities. Sharing stories and connecting with people who understand their hardships may be quite empowering. Chavan’s healing journey was aided by the compassion of her boyfriend and in-laws, as well as the global network she discovered while writing about her loss. Knowing you’re not alone during difficult times may be a wonderful source of consolation. Communities that promote understanding and empathy can provide important assistance to immigrants negotiating the challenging terrain of transnational sorrow.The post Coping with transnational grief first appeared on The Optimist Daily: Making Solutions the News.

Breweries are well-known for producing wonderful beer, but what if their waste could also be used to combat water pollution? Recent MIT research reveals an innovative way in which recycled beer yeast can help remove hazardous lead from water, providing a sustainable and cost-effective solution. The magic of years: a natural purifier Yeast, the microorganisms that cause fermentation, have a remarkable ability to filter water by absorbing heavy metal ions such as lead. According to MIT researchers, the process known as biosorption has enormous promise. The researchers explain that yeast cells may bind and absorb heavy metal ions at concentrations as low as one part per million. A brewing conundrum: removing the yeast Initially, researchers faced a dilemma: while yeast could effectively remove lead from water, recovering the yeast afterward proved difficult. However, after three years of intense research, a breakthrough was discovered in the form of hydrogel casings made of polyethylene glycol (PEG), a widely utilized UV light-sensitive polymer. The “multivitamin solution” origin story Devashish Gokhale, an MIT graduate student and co-author of the paper, describes their creative approach: “What we decided to do was make these hollow capsules — something like a multivitamin pill, but instead of filling them up with vitamins, we fill them up with yeast cells.” By combining freeze-dried yeast with PEG polymers and UV radiation, the researchers constructed semipermeable outer capsules around the yeast cells, enabling efficient lead removal while preventing yeast from escaping into the water. Testing the waters: a proof-of-concept biofilter To validate their method, the researchers built a proof-of-concept biofilter with hydrogel-yeast granules. The filter successfully eliminated trace lead from water over 12 days, demonstrating its efficacy and endurance in the face of fluid forces in faucet water. Importantly, the device used less energy than traditional filtration methods such as membrane filtration. A sustainable solution for clean water The consequences of this research go beyond laboratory experiments. Given the abundance of yeast and the low cost of the hydrogel-yeast filter, this innovation has the potential to provide a sustainable and affordable water treatment solution, particularly for low-income regions confronting water pollution concerns.  Looking ahead, researchers are looking into ways to recycle and replace filter yeast, as well as produce eco-friendly hydrogels made from renewable sources. They also intend to expand the filter’s capabilities to address other contaminants such as microplastics and persistent chemicals, thereby furthering water purification efforts. Source study: RSC Sustainability— Yeast-laden hydrogel capsules for scalable trace lead removal from waterThe post Solutions are brewing! Recycled beer yeast surprising solution for water pollution first appeared on The Optimist Daily: Making Solutions the News.

'It sets a new standard of how Boeing does business'

'They just jumped into the water'

Hahahahaha! I'm loving this as a Jets hater

Venezuela's Socialist Will Cheat in the Upcoming Election and That Could Be a Big Problem for the US

Thursday’s CBS News Special Report on the guilty verdict for former President Trump reveled in the sham trial brought by far-left Manhattan D.A. Alvin Bragg as “an extraordinary moment” of “enormous gravity” in which “everything about politics and law and our orientation to both are convulsed as never before”, but bemoaned the incoming “grievance war” from the Trump team and took exception to longtime correspondent Jan Crawford’s reality check. After it became known Trump was guilty on all 34 counts in the so-called “hush money” trial that’s interfered in the 2024 election, CBS Evening News anchor Norah O’Donnell paused to collect herself before saying in hushed tones, “this is an extraordinary moment.” Chief Washington correspondent Major Garrett concurred, saying “to hear you read what you just read is a moment of enormous gravity for this country” and something “we cannot overlook” as America has entered “completely uncharted territory”.     “This is not just a legal moment for this country. It is not just a political moment for this country. It is a moment where everything about politics and law and our orientation to both are convulsed as never before,” he added. Chief elections and campaign correspondent Robert Costa also sounded concerned and bemoaned Team Trump won’t simply accept the verdict and instead “fight”, lamenting “they plan to mount a grievance war across the country” in what should be “a moment of seriousness for the country in a legal, political, and democratic front”. After pointing out “there were cheers that went up in the park around us as the conviction was made clear”, Costa gloated the term convicted felon is “a tag that Donald Trump can no longer escape” and could haunt him with “swing voters in places like Michigan, Pennsylvania, and the suburbs across the country”.     Not surprisingly, there was eager talk of whether Trump could face jailtime. Here was one such moment (click “expand”): O’DONNELL: Can he vote? GARRETT: Yes, cause he’s not — I mean, so he is not adjudicated fully, because the appellate process goes on, so it is not over until it's over, over and as Cy Vance indicated, that may take a considerable period of time, because the former President will try to find every venue possible, legal, to reevaluate and possibly overturn this verdict.  O’DONNELL: And in reading all the —  GARRETT: Until all that is done, he is a voter in good standing, to my understanding. O’DONNELL: There are former prosecutors who have said that it is unlikely that a         77-year-old former President, since this is his first offence, would be sentenced to jail. But it could happen. but could he be elected president while serving prison time? CRAWFORD: Well obviously that’s never happened, right? [GARRETT LAUGHS] But there is nothing that we know of that would stop that from happening. Even if he doesn't go to jail, I mean, there are a number of other options available to this judge including house arrest. What does that mean for the campaign? It is almost inconceivable —  O’DONNELL: Right. CRAWFORD: — to kind of think about all, you know, the road ahead for us now as this political campaign starts with a convicted felon thus potentially the Republican nominee. GARRETT: And our polling division and election analysts, Anthony Salvanto, others, know how difficult it has been, impossible Norah, to actually gauge what people's reaction is going to be if there was a conviction.  Garrett then proclaimed that, since America’s “now in the first hours of the country absorbing this”, there are no doubt those who are “enraged” and others finding “solace” in “accountability institutionally in our country” who are scared about what this means if he’s elected. Before she irked the rest of the CBS panel, Crawford noted Trump “set the groundwork” for doubt about our system on Wednesday “saying that Mother Teresa would not have even beaten these charges and that the system was rigged” and that “people will believe that”. Despite saying that and arguing “many people say that Donald Trump caused” Americans to lose “faith in our institutions”, she nonetheless faced serious pushback from O’Donnell and January 6 correspondent Scott MacFarlane when she simply stated the fact that Manhattan is an extremely liberal part of the country (click “expand” below the video):     MACFARLANE: There is going to be this process to try to discredit jurors. We have seen that in the previous prosecutions that are aligned to January 6 and the 2020 Election where they say it is a liberal jury in Washington, D.C., a liberal jury in Manhattan. Almost like there’s — CRAWFORD: Well, there is a liberal jury in Manhattan. MACFARLANE: And CRAWFORD: I think that is hard to argue with. MACFARLANE: — but from the moment the jurors met behind closed doors, you function as a jury. And the foreman had to get up and hold the microphone today and announce a verdict against a former U.S. President. And there is always is concern anybody related to the nexus of a Trump case has the threat of being threatened, doxed, or hassled. O’DONNELL: But Jan, those jurors also swore that they could be impartial. CRAWFORD: Oh, absolutely. O’DONNELL: So, just to say that they’re from a liberal area —  CRAWFORD: But we can’t also, like, deny — O’DONNELL: — that votes liberally and votes Democratic does not mean that they did not promise under oath that they could be impartial. CRAWFORD: And I certainly am not implying that. I'm saying that we have to acknowledge what the facts are, because those are facts that the American people are going to hear. GARRETT: To — to Jan's point, inferences will be drawn. O’DONNELL: Yeah. GARRETT: Inferences in the political dialogue across this country will be drawn about the composition of this jury and the location of this case.  Thankfully, Crawford wasn’t pounced on when she offered a second reality check, which was that there’s questions to be answered for “why the case wasn't brought initially under the previous district attorney and why the federal government didn't pursue these federal election charges against Trump.” “I mean, there’s a number of questions people are going to have, there’s number of questions that Trump is going to raise on appeal starting from the very beginning with the indictment itself, and how some of — you know, what was some of those underlying object offenses? There are constitutional issues that he can raise,” she correctly stated. To read the relevant CBS transcript from May 30, click here.

On Thursday afternoon, former President Donald Trump was found guilty of 34 felony counts related to so-called hush-money payments to his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, in connection with an alleged affair with porn actress Stormy Daniels.Legal analyst Jonathan Turley claimed the verdict "saddened" him. "I had hoped that the jurors might redeem the integrity of a system that has been used for political purposes," Turley wrote on X.I obviously disagree with this verdict as do many others. I believe that the case will be reversed eventually either in the state or federal systems. However, this was the worst expectation for a trial in Manhattan. I am saddened by the result more for the New York legal system…— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) May 30, 2024 So, what does this conviction mean for Trump in the immediate future with Election Day 2024 looming on the horizon?SentencingJudge Juan Merchan requested that the prosecution and defense file their motions, which will include sentencing recommendations, by June 13.She added that a jail sentence for Trump 'would have political implications that ... Judge Merchan would want to avoid.'He also scheduled Trump's sentencing hearing for 10 a.m. on July 11. Trump's lawyers have the option of asking for a later date, perhaps even after the November election, but such a request is likely to be denied.Between now and July 11, Trump will be able to move about as he pleases. He will also no longer have to adhere to gag-order restrictions which previously prevented him from discussing witnesses or the judge and his family members. Trump has previously noted that Merchan's daughter is a political consultant who raises funds for high-profile Democrats such as Rep. Adam Schiff of California.Trump will also likely participate in a pre-sentencing interview with a probation officer, who will then submit a sentencing report to Merchan.Judge Merchan will have almost exclusive authority to determine Trump's sentence, and he has several options to consider, including jail. Though Trump has been convicted of 34 felonies, they are nonviolent, class E felonies, the least serious in the state of New York, and often don't result in jail time. Trump also has no prior criminal record and at 77 years old is not likely to be a threat to the public, all factors that could play in his favor.Cheryl Bader, a law professor at Fordham University, thinks it's "unlikely" that Merchan will give Trump time behind bars. "Given that he is a former president, has a Secret Service detail and is also the presumptive Republican nominee, I think a term of incarceration would be logistically very difficult," she told the Guardian,She added that a jail sentence for Trump "would have political implications that ... Judge Merchan would want to avoid."Merchan has previously expressed a disinclination to send Trump to jail. On May 6, after Trump had allegedly violated aspects of the gag order issued against him, Merchan told Trump: "The last thing I want to do is to put you in jail. You are the former president of the United States and possibly the next president, as well." Merchan ultimately ended up fining Trump $1,000 per alleged violation, as Blaze News previously reported.In addition to a possible jail sentence, Trump could receive probation, fines, and/or community service. "I would like to see community service – picking up trash on the subway," said Karen Friedman Agnifilo, a former top prosecutor in the Manhattan district attorney’s office.AppealWhatever the sentence, Trump will almost assuredly appeal his conviction. The first step would be to file an appeal in the New York Appellate Division’s First Judicial Department. If that court upholds the conviction, he can then appeal to the Court of Appeals, New York’s highest court. Should that court also uphold the conviction, Trump may even take his case to the U.S. Supreme Court. However, to have SCOTUS justices agree to take it, Trump's attorneys must first convince them that the case, decided by a Manhattan jury, is a federal or constitutional matter.Such processes can take months or even years. During that time, the actual imposition of Trump's sentence is likely to be delayed.CampaignThe Constitution does not bar felons from running for president, so this conviction should have no bearing on Trump's attempt at securing a second term this November.If anything, Trump seems more determined than ever to make his case to the American voters. "This was a rigged, disgraceful trial," he said after the verdict on Thursday. "The real verdict is going to be November 5 by the people. And they know what happened here, and everybody knows what happened here. You have a Soros-backed DA, and the whole thing, we didn’t do a thing wrong.""It’s okay. I’m fighting for our country," he continued. "I’m fighting for our Constitution. Our whole country is being rigged right now. This was done by the Biden administration in order to move or hurt an opponent, a political opponent. And I think it’s just a disgrace. And we’ll keep fighting; we’ll fight to the end, and we’ll win. Because our country has gone to hell."Should he win and take office next January, Trump will be unable to pardon himself in this case since it is currently a state issue, not a federal one.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!