MSNBC: It Is Hilarious That Illegal Immigration Is Top Issue for Republican Virginia Voters

If we define an ocean as simply a large body of liquid‚ then the biggest ocean in the Solar System is inside Jupiter. Not that it would be anything like we are used to. Under enormous pressures and high temperatures‚ hydrogen is in its metallic liquid state‚ sloshing about the planet’s interior. This is responsible for the planet’s strong magnetic field and its peculiarities.And new research shows that it is peculiar indeed. Changes happening within a four-year period indicate there is more complexity inside the planet‚ and observations from Juno over the last several years have connected what goes on in the atmosphere with magnetic anomalies. At first approach‚ Jupiter’s magnetic field is very similar to Earth's but 20 times stronger. There is a dipole‚ which means that there is a north and a south‚ so the magnetic field lines connect one pole to the other. But that is not all. The volcanic moon Io produces a lot of plasma that affects the magnetosphere of Jupiter‚ and there is a long magnetic band in the northern hemisphere.But a true oddity is located around the equator. It is a vast‚ sort-of circular region that was nicknamed the "Great Blue Spot". The spot is not actually blue‚ unlike Jupiter's Great Red Spot – the name comes from the color coding of magnetic fields‚ red for north‚ blue for south.In the latest analysis‚ researchers found an atmospheric jet associated with the Great Blue Spot. Some of Juno’s recent orbits have studied this region in particular and shown that there are periodic variations. A first hypothesis suggested that this might be related to convective flow deep within the metallic hydrogen ocean. That would be expected to take centuries‚ but the changes seen here are way too fast.With the wave-like fluctuations repeating every four years‚ the team is suggesting two different hypotheses. The fluctuations could be caused by oscillation around the axis of rotation of the planet or by Alfvén waves‚ which are waves moving along the magnetic field lines. The scenarios are very different‚ so the team hopes to find more details to be able to differentiate between the two.Juno continues to produce observations crucial to expanding our understanding of the planet Jupiter and its mysterious interior. And with follow-up to this work‚ we might better understand the development of magnetic fields in giant planets.The study is published in the journal Nature.   

A committee of scientists has voted down a proposal to introduce a new geological age known as the Anthropocene‚ defined by humanity's growing influence on our environment. For over a decade‚ scientists have argued about whether or not we are living in a new geological epoch. Geologists separate time into geological eras based on distinct differences we see in rocks around the world.Currently‚ as defined by geologists‚ we are living in the Holocene. This period began around 11‚700 years ago‚ following on from the Last Glacial Period‚ or the last Ice Age. The Holocene is defined by human population growth‚ and changing our environment through agriculture.In those 11‚700 (ish) years‚ our influence on our environment has accelerated‚ in ways we can see in the geological record. For this reason‚ geologists have proposed defining a new epoch – the Anthropocene – from when this acceleration began. When it was first proposed in 2002 by atmospheric chemist Paul Crutzen‚ he suggested that it began during the Industrial Revolution."For the past three centuries‚ the effects of humans on the global environment have escalated. Because of these anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide‚ global climate may depart significantly from natural behaviour for many millennia to come‚" Crutzen wrote in his paper‚ published in Nature. "It seems appropriate to assign the term 'Anthropocene' to the present‚ in many ways human-dominated‚ geological epoch‚ supplementing the Holocene – the warm period of the past 10–12 millennia. The Anthropocene could be said to have started in the latter part of the eighteenth century‚ when analyses of air trapped in polar ice showed the beginning of growing global concentrations of carbon dioxide and methane."Since then‚ however‚ the Working Group on the Anthropocene suggested that the new period should begin around 1950. The working group agreed that there had been an acceleration in our influence on the planet‚ which can be found in the geological record."Phenomena associated with the Anthropocene include: an order-of-magnitude increase in erosion and sediment transport associated with urbanization and agriculture; marked and abrupt anthropogenic perturbations of the cycles of elements such as carbon‚ nitrogen‚ phosphorus and various metals together with new chemical compounds; environmental changes generated by these perturbations‚" the group writes on the Quaternary Stratigraphy website‚ "including global warming‚ sea-level rise‚ ocean acidification and spreading oceanic ‘dead zones’; rapid changes in the biosphere both on land and in the sea‚ as a result of habitat loss‚ predation‚ explosion of domestic animal populations and species invasions;  and the proliferation and global dispersion of many new ‘minerals’ and ‘rocks’ including concrete‚ fly ash and plastics‚ and the myriad ‘technofossils’ produced from these and other materials."However‚ they suggested the beginning of this period should be around "the great acceleration" as our pollution of the planet accelerated‚ and nuclear bomb tests left traces of radioactivity in sediments in Crawford Lake in Ontario‚ Canada.At a recent meeting of the Subcommission on Quarternary Stratigraphy‚ naming this period the Anthropocene was rejected by a vote of 12 to four‚ with two abstentions. Though geologists agree that humans' influence on the planet has accelerated‚ there are a few reasons why the proposal may have been rejected."Our last boundary‚ between the Holocene and the Pleistocene‚ was almost one-third of this planet being covered by ice‚" Joe Desloges‚ professor in the geography and Earth sciences departments at the University of Toronto‚ told CBC News‚ adding that people are skeptical about how long-lasting the radioactive sediment will be on the geological record. "The sheer magnitude and scale of that tends to be what people are looking for when they define these boundaries."The issue of when this new era began was potentially a sticking point. "If there is one main reason why geologists rejected this proposal‚ it is because its recent date and shallow depth are too narrow to encompass the deeper evidence of human-caused planetary change‚" Erle C. Ellis‚ Professor of Geography and Environmental Systems at the University of Maryland‚ wrote in a piece for The Conversation. "As geologist Bill Ruddiman and others wrote in Science Magazine in 2015‚ 'Does it really make sense to define the start of a human-dominated era millennia after most forests in arable regions had been cut for agriculture?'"Though it has been rejected – for now – as a new geological epoch‚ the term still remains useful. It remains a geological event‚ with clear marks in the geological record‚ despite not being given its own epoch.

The nematodes inhabiting the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone (CEZ) give precisely zero fucks about the background radiation levels surrounding the ill-fated power plant‚ new research has revealed. After analyzing the microscopic worms’ genomes‚ scientists discovered that the creatures’ DNA remains completely unaltered despite having been exposed to levels of ionizing radiation that we humans think of as harmful.“The 1986 disaster at the Chornobyl Nuclear Power Plant transformed the surrounding region into the most radioactive landscape known on the planet‚” write the study authors. Almost 40 years on‚ a 30-kilometer (18.6-mile) region around the site remains abandoned due to high levels of lingering radiation‚ although it’s currently unclear how this has affected the local wildlife.  "Did the sudden environmental shift select for species‚ or even individuals within a species‚ that are naturally more resistant to ionizing radiation?" ponders study author Sophia Tintori in a statement. To investigate‚ she and her colleagues collected 15 nematodes from different areas of the CEZ and compared their genomes to those of five other worms of the same species from different parts of the world.Because ionizing radiation can cause double-strand breaks in DNA‚ the researchers suspected that the Chernobyl worms would display “heritable chromosomal rearrangements”‚ passed down through multiple generations of exposed nematodes. To their surprise‚ however‚ the CEZ specimens showed no chromosomal differences when compared to worms from Germany‚ the US‚ Australia‚ Mauritius‚ and the Philippines.Further analyses revealed that the nematodes from Chernobyl displayed no more recently acquired mutations than their international counterparts‚ all of which suggests that their DNA has not been damaged by the radiation at Chernobyl."This doesn't mean that Chornobyl is safe – it more likely means that nematodes are really resilient animals and can withstand extreme conditions‚" says Tintori. "We also don't know how long each of the worms we collected was in the Zone‚ so we can't be sure exactly what level of exposure each worm and its ancestors received over the past four decades."Wondering if the nematodes from the CEZ might simply have a special mechanism for repairing damaged DNA‚ the researchers then exposed the animals to three different mutation-causing chemicals and observed how these mutations were passed on to future generations. Overall‚ they found that different nematode strains displayed different levels of tolerance to these mutagens‚ but that their responses could not be predicted by their exposure to radiation.In other words‚ the worms from Chernobyl were not systematically better at protecting their DNA than nematodes from elsewhere‚ suggesting that radiation levels within the CEZ have not selected for strains with higher degrees of genetic resilience. Instead‚ it seems that nematodes are simply not bothered by ionizing radiation.While these findings are obviously great news if you’re a microscopic worm‚ they also hold significance for humans. For instance‚ they could help scientists understand why some people are more susceptible to DNA damage than others‚ thus leading to new insights into the development of cancer and other diseases."Now that we know which strains of [nematode] are more sensitive or more tolerant to DNA damage‚ we can use these strains to study why different individuals are more likely than others to suffer the effects of carcinogens‚" says Tintori.The study is published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Some 38 million years ago‚ a termite couple snuck off to engage in some prehistoric sexy time‚ only to be swamped in tree resin and immortalized in amber for eternity. How embarrassing. This incredible 38-million-year-old amber specimen was unearthed at the Yantarny mine in Kaliningrad‚ Russia. Inside the clear specimen‚ you can see two members of the extinct species Electrotermes affinis engaging in courtship behavior.“Termite fossils are very common‚ but this piece was unique because it contains a pair. I have seen hundreds of fossils with termites enclosed‚ but never a pair.” Dr AleÅ¡ Buek‚ study author and head of the Laboratory of Insect Symbiosis at the Czech Academy of Sciences‚ said in a statement.The position of the pair is unusual – and not just because they were trying to “spice things up” in the bedroom. Today’s termites typically engage in courtship behavior called “tandem running‚” in which they line up vertically with the male’s mouth touching the female’s backside. However‚ this unfortunate duo became stuck side-by-side with the female’s mouthparts touching the tip of the male’s abdomen.Was this just how extinct termite species did things? Or did their awkward death change their behavior?The full-sized image of the image above.Image credit: N. Mizumoto et al/PNAS (2024)To find out‚ researchers at the Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology carried out a few experiments involving living termites. The team laid out mating pairs of termites on sticky paper to imitate the process of becoming stuck in gloopy tree resin‚ hoping to see how their behavior became altered. The experiments revealed that being stuck on the tape resulted in the mating pairs ending up in a very similar position to the pair that were entrapped in the amber. When the sticky situation emerged‚ the partners did not split from each other – isn’t that cute? – but the female did turn around and move towards the male‚ resulting in this unexpected position. “If a pair encounters a predator‚ they usually escape but I think on a sticky surface they do not realize the danger and get trapped‚” explained Dr Nobuaki Mizumoto‚ currently working as an assistant professor at Auburn University.            Famed for its gorgeous orange color‚ amber is simply fossilized tree resin. It’s fairly remarkable how many amber specimens have been found with wildlife entrapped within them‚ providing modern-day observers with a crystal clear insight into their forms and behavior. It isn’t always just bugs‚ either. Scientists have discovered examples of extinct baby bird feathers stuck in ancient amber‚ as well as 50-million-year-old mushrooms growing out of an ant's butthole. Isn’t nature beautiful sometimes?The study is published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 

No matter how advanced we get; no matter where or when we live – some things will always be true. A triangle will always have three sides. Two will always equal two. And there’s always money in figuring out new ways to let people kill each other.One company taking advantage of that quirk of human nature is defense contractor Teledyne FLIR. In last month’s annual SHOT Show in Las Vegas (the name stands for “Shooting‚ Hunting‚ and Outdoor Trade”‚ and the show is an expo for the shooting sports‚ hunting‚ and firearm industries) they unveiled the HISS HD: a new sniper sight that they say will allow the shooting of targets at unprecedented distances without giving away the sniper's position.For those of us who don’t have experience sniping – or interacting with a whole bunch of war movies or video games that approximate sniping – here’s why that’s a big deal. Snipers are often thought of as being the unseen killers of armed forces: they specifically position themselves either too far away for enemies to detect them‚ or in places where they’re concealed by the environment. From there‚ they use high-precision – and‚ these days‚ ultra-high-tech – weaponry to kill targets from a distance of sometimes miles away.But here’s the problem: when you’re so far away‚ how do you know how on-target you are? That’s where tracers come in: bullets that contain a small pyrotechnic charge‚ so that when they’re fired they burn brightly enough to be seen with the naked eye.Unfortunately‚ if you can see them‚ then so can the enemy – and‚ like anybody with a vested interest in remaining alive‚ they might just start shooting back. So what’s a 900-billion-dollar industrial complex to do?Well‚ for a little while actually‚ one answer has been “cooled thermal sights”. These are specialized camera tech that follows fired rounds with a thermal sight whose sensor temperature has been lowered to cryogenic temperatures – that is‚ below 120 Kelvin‚ or -153°C (-243.4°F). Those might strike you as overly low‚ considering bullets average between 50 and 90°C (122 to 194°F) after leaving a gun‚ but it’s done for a good reason: it reduces thermal noise‚ allowing for increased image resolution. “What happens is the bullet leaves the barrel at extreme speed – close to 2‚500 feet per second in the case of a 7.62mm machine gun‚” Zachary Fuller‚ senior sales manager for weapon sights and handhelds for Teledyne FLIR and formerly an Army Special Forces sniper and Army Special Operations Command optics and target engagement manager‚ told Forbes.“You don’t see it for the first few meters‚” he explained. “But because you’re firing on an arc‚ once the bullets get out a distance in front of you and decelerate a bit‚ you can see all of them.”The HISS HD isn’t the first sight to use this technology – but what sets it apart from its predecessors is both how clear the image is‚ and the distances at which this clarity can be maintained. The result‚ according to Forbes‚ is akin to “being able to see an enemy soldier’s arm move across a weapon at over a mile away‚ day or night.”Being waterproof‚ lightweight‚ and autofocusing‚ the sight is “the unmatched choice for precision shooters‚” according to a statement from Teledyne FLIR. But it’s not only a super-soldier death gadget‚ Fuller pointed out: it can also be used separately from a weapon to surveil objects and export video to higher-ups for evaluation.“You can monitor the enemy at a significant distance and still see a lot of detail‚” he suggested. “Your commander might want the video-out view to pipe down to a tablet inside the truck he’s typically riding in. He’s going to have various tools for situational awareness and I think the HISS HD is an added tool in his toolkit.”“Even deconfliction‚” he added; “knowing who the friendlies are‚ knowing who’s armed or unarmed all gets easier.”

MRC contributing writer Stephanie Hamill was a guest on Tuesday’s Fox News at Night with host Trace Gallagher to discuss the results from the Super Tuesday presidential primaries and media bias in the 2024 presidential election.   Gallagher tossed to a clip of MSNBC cutting away from former President Donald Trump’s Super Tuesday victory speech‚ where host Rachel Maddow explained that they don’t allow lies to be told on air. And again‚ MSNBC cuts away from Donald Trump’s speech while Rachel Maddow complains and pretends to care about “allowing lies” on air. So pretentious and sickening. pic.twitter.com/jBe6JyrnzN — ALX 🇺🇸 (@alx) March 6‚ 2024   Hamill: The major networks and the anchors who are cutting away from Donald Trump during his speeches are really hurting themselves‚ their credibility and their ratings. The people and the voters have the right to hear from the serious candidates‚ especially Donald Trump. As we've seen— he’s been dominating in the polls and so for them to do this is truly unethical. Remember these are so-called journalists who say they are looking out for the little guy‚ they are the watchdogs of America‚ — but they don't think your responsible enough to hear and interpret what a former president and a presidential candidate has to say. To me‚ I mean it's just really just egregious that they do this.

While we focus on Joe Biden's undeniable cognitive decline‚ perhaps more attention should be directed to related problems that Nicolle Wallace might be experiencing. The issue arises because on her Deadline White House show on MSNBC on Tuesday‚ Wallace seemed to confuse the electoral situation in the US with that in Gaza and the West Bank. Said Wallace:  "Americans will have to face the fact that this is‚ in the words of a dear friend of this show‚ do-you-want-to-have-any-more-elections‚ election. Where voters are not just choosing between two candidates‚ but making critical decisions about the basic fundamentals of our democracy." In other words‚ Wallace‚ more than suggesting‚ outright asserted as a "fact" that if Trump is elected‚ there will be no more elections in our country.   Perhaps Wallace‚ in her confusion‚ was thinking of the history of the end of elections among Palestinians. In the West Bank‚ Mahmoud Abbas was elected President of the Palestinian National Authority in January 2005 for a four-year term that ended on January 9‚ 2009. The last elections for the Palestinian Legislative Council  were held on 25 January 2006. There have not been any elections either for president or for the legislature since those two elections. In Gaza‚ Hamas won power in the election of 2006. Eighteen years later‚ there has never been another election. But this was her cartoon of the campaign. There’s Biden‚ “who has an agenda that commands broad public support. Whose commitment to our democracy and our institutions has never been in doubt. But who's dogged by some lackluster polling that doesn't match up with support for his policies.” And there’s Trump‚ “who also makes no bones about his specific and concrete plans to rule as an autocrat‚ a‚ quote‚ dictator‚ on day one if he's re-elected. And whose tenure in office was marked by an endless series of low points‚ not just for the presidency‚ but for the country. Each one more disgraceful than the one that preceded it.” Concrete plans? That's "missing context‚" as the liberals like to say." In December‚ Fox host Sean Hannity asked Trump‚ "Under no circumstances — you are promising America tonight — you would never abuse power as retribution against anybody?” Trump joked "Except for Day One...I want to close the border‚ and I want to drill‚ drill‚ drill." Hannity pushed for a firmer answer‚ and Trump said he wouldn't be a dictator‚ "no no‚ no‚ except for Day One." Wallace failed to name her "dear friend" who made the ominous prediction‚ that Wallace described as "fact‚" of the end of elections if Trump is elected. But she did start the show in her traditional fashion by saying‚ "we begin with some of our favorite reporters and friends."  That's Wallace's way of assuring her viewers that their sensitive ears will be protected from any dissenting voices‚ and that only an Amen chorus of Republican/Trump-haters will be heard. Her punditocracy is an autocracy.

The Washington Post economics columnist Catherine Rampell seemed to forget a rule of thumb when analyzing polls: read the crosstabs. Either that or she deliberately twisted data to make it seem like Americans are happier with President Joe Biden’s decrepit economy than they actually are. Rampell’s blaring March 5 headline would make one believe that Americans did an about-face in their view of Bidenomics: “Americans are happier about the economy. Why are they crediting Trump?” Rampell declared‚ “The good news for President Biden: Americans are finally starting to appreciate the strength of the U.S. economy.” She pointed to at least four polls to make her point‚ but ended up butchering the interpretation of the data in order to claim that “In recent months‚ public perceptions of the economy seemed to be catching up to how good the economy looks on paper. Sure‚ views of the economy might not be rosy just yet‚ but they’re definitely rosier.” Her primary issue‚ apparently‚ was that Americans still preferred the Trump economy‚ and she wound up undercutting her own story by whining how “[t]hrough most of this period‚ though‚ Americans have been incongruously grumpy.” [Emphasis added.] Oy vey‚ where to begin? Rampell first cited a February Wall Street Journal poll showing that 31 percent of respondents said “the economy had gotten better over the past two years‚ which is 10 percentage points higher than was the case in December.” But she failed to mention that this same question found that a majority‚ 57 percent of respondents‚ said it was getting worse‚ which was only a slight improvement from the 58 percent that responded the same way in Aug. 2023‚ when consumer price inflation would post its biggest monthly increase for the year at that time. When a majority of respondents are still saying things are getting worse‚ “happier” isn’t the description that accurately reflects the position of the population. But there’s more. Rampell didn’t even bother mentioning another question asked by The Journal‚ probably because the results of that inquiry ended up blowing apart her narrative. When The Journal respondents were asked how they would “rate the strength” of the U.S. economy —the very thing Rampell literally claimed Americans were appreciating more in her first paragraph — the numbers were damning. A whopping 61 percent of respondents answered “Not so good/Poor‚” and only 38 percent responded “Excellent/Good.” To put that into perspective‚ those results were worse than March of 2022‚ when America was grappling with a sky-high 8.5 percent inflation rate‚ the fastest pace since 1981 at the time. In addition‚ 68 percent of respondents still concluded that inflation was headed in the wrong direction while only 28 percent held a positive view‚ nearly identical to The Journal's December 2023 poll figures (68% "Wrong" direction; 26% "Right" direction). No wonder Rampell didn’t bother mentioning any of this.  (Source: The Wall Street Journal) She also trotted out surveys “from CBS News‚ YouGov and the New York Times-Siena College‚” in an apparent attempt to bolster her point about “improvements in perceptions of economic conditions‚” but she missed the mark here too. On the question of the “condition” of the U.S. economy‚ The Times reported that only seven percent of its respondents said “Excellent” and 19 percent answered “Good‚” which on its face looks like an upward trend from the 2 percent (“Excellent”) and 18 percent (“Good”) from the previous Times poll conducted in July 2023. But not so fast: The percentage of respondents who answered “Poor” also worsened. A majority 51 percent of respondents now say the “condition” of the U.S. economy is “Poor‚” which is worse than the 49 percent who responded the same way in the July 2023 survey.  In fact‚ just the number of people who responded “Poor” in The Times’s most recent survey dwarfed the combination of respondents who responded either “Excellent” or “Good” (26%). (Source: The New York Times) When the same question was asked‚ CBS News found that a majority 57 percent of its respondents concluded the “condition” of the economy to be “Fairly Bad/Very Bad” while only 39 percent said “Fairly Good/Good.” YouGov wasn’t much better. On the question of whether the economy was getting better or worse‚ a sizable plurality of 47 percent responded “worse” and only 25 percent responded “better.” None of these numbers indicate that Americans are clearly “happier” with Biden’s economy. But for someone who shows no problems with twisting stats to serve a political narrative‚ butchering survey results is par for the course. As the old saying goes: “There are 3 kinds of lies: lies‚ damned lies‚ and statistics.” Conservatives are under attack. Contact The Washington Post at 202-334-6000 and demand it tell the truth about how the American people feel about Biden’s faltering economy.

Despite the political world being focused Tuesday on the slew of presidential primaries‚ there was still a White House press briefing and‚ thankfully‚ Fox’s Peter Doocy and Fox Business’s Edward Lawrence were there to hold the ever-inept Karine Jean-Pierre to account on the border‚ inflation‚ Laken Riley’s murder‚ and President Biden’s growing need for notecards to function. Doocy went second in Jean-Pierre’s portion and‚ on the border‚ it concerned an interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes with the head of the Border Patrol from Biden’s first two years in office: “How’s President Biden going to fix the border if he can go years without talking to the head of Border Patrol?” Jean-Pierre initially played dumb‚ but after Doocy mentioned Raul Ortiz saying in the interview that he never once spoke to Biden or Harris did Jean-Pierre answer‚ claiming “he was invited‚ I believe‚ to participate in the President’s...visit to El Paso...in January of 2023 and he did not attend.” Jean-Pierre then attacked Republicans‚ saying they’re unconcerned about the border “because of what the former President‚ Donald Trump‚ told them to do — told him to reject” the bipartisan Senate deal. This led to Doocy’s question about Laken Riley: “[W]ill President Biden publicly address Laken Riley’s murder allegedly at the hands of an illegal immigrant‚ was released by law enforcement multiple times on Thursday night. I know he’s cut a statement‚ but what about at the State of the Union?”     As usual‚ Jean-Pierre’s answer consisted of constantly tripping over her words‚ insisting “I do want to always acknowledge and extend our deepest condolences” to her loved ones‚ but wouldn’t commit to anything concerning the State of the Union. Jean-Pierre callously linked Riley’s murder to Republicans not taking the Senate border deal supported by the White House (click “expand”): Look‚ let me — I do want — this is such a tragic — uh — story and‚ obviously‚ situation. This is someone’s life that was lost‚ so I do want to always acknowledge and extend our deepest condolences to — to her family and to her friends and the people who — who loved her. And so‚ I want to always be sure to say that and because it’s so tragic. Look‚ um — I don’t have anything to share about the President’s speech as it relates to that particular question that you have. But we‚ you know‚ we want to always‚ always be sure that we left — lift up the families who have lost their loved ones in that way and I would reiterate — you just asked me about the Border Patrol chief. The President was just there with the current Chief Owens. The President went to the border — obviously Brownvilles [sic]‚ Texas‚ to lift up the importance of doing something — of doing something at the border‚ and I would be remiss if I did not continue to say that Republicans rejected a bipartisan proposal that came out of the Senate. And so‚ if they truly‚ truly cared about what was going on at the border‚ if they truly cared about this immigration policies [sic] and trying to fix that‚ trying to move forward and a step in a way where we have a tough and fair law‚ they would work with us on it. They wouldn’t listen to the former President‚ who is clearly telling them to reject — telling Republicans to reject it for their — for his own political game and that’s shameful. That’s truly shameful. Doocy actually had a question prior to those‚ but Jean-Pierre dodged it since it concerned the 2024 campaign and not wanting to run foul of the Hatch Act: “President Biden has said a possible endorsement by Taylor Swift is classified. How disappointed is he that she is telling people to vote‚ but not for him?” Fast-forward to the back end of the briefing and Lawrence kicked off with a series of questions about the (clearly coordinated) effort by the White House and Sesame Street’s Cookie Monster to cry foul over shrinkflation (click “expand”): LAWRENCE: So‚ Cookie Monster posted on X that shrinkflation is making his cookies smaller. The White House official Twitter‚ or X‚ responded that blaming shrinkflation — basically on companies. So‚ does the President‚ again‚ believe that shrinkflation and inflation are solely a company problem or do his policies play any role in that? JEAN-PIERRE: So‚ also from my tweet‚ I believe we said C is — is for consumers getting ripped off‚ right? And‚ uh — and the President — the President has called on — on companies to — top stop — to stop‚ you know‚ taking advantage of Americans. He’s been very clear about that. He’s repeatedly called on large corporations‚ more specifically‚ to pass along their savings on to their customers. We’ve said that. We’ve been very consistent about that. And that includes rip offs such as shrinkflation. We see that and where the size of a product‚ for those who don’t know‚ gets smaller‚ even as the price stays the same or increases. That’s what we’ve been seeing and so‚ it’s giving families less bang for their buck and the President has said‚ and I’ll quote him‚. “tired of being” — you know‚ the President said‚ “Americans are tired of being played for suckers.” And so‚ the President’s going to have the American people’s back. That’s what he’s going to continue to do. He’s going to talk about this‚ not just shrinkflation‚ but other ways that he sees corporations are ripping off Americans. You’re going to hear from him shortly about — about what he’s doing next to — to — to deal with junk fees‚ and I think that’s really important. That’s what Americans want to see. They want to see their President fighting on their behalf. LAWRENCE: And‚ out of that Competition Council‚ the President is announcing that strikeforce — why did it take the Cookie Monster to speak up? Or an election year for this strikeforce to go? Why not do it — year — a couple of years ago when inflation was nine percent? JEAN-PIERRE: I don’t — I disagree with the premise of your question there. It did not take the Cookie Monster — if anything‚ it feels like the Cookie Monster is responding to us and what we’ve been saying about for shrinkflation. I can’t believe I’m having a conversation about the Cookie Monster at the podium.  (....) LAWRENCE: But why did it take — why did it take so long to announce a strikeforce —  JEAN-PIERRE: I mean‚ look. Here’s — LAWRENCE: — when inflation was nine percent? JEAN-PIERRE: — well‚ here’s the thing. The President’s Competition Council has been going — going on for some time now‚ right? He has taken this very seriously and finding ways to lower costs for the American people as we are‚ obviously‚ dealing with inflation — right — obviously dealing with that because of what we are coming out of with the — with the pandemic. So‚ the President has taken actions. He’s going to continue to do that.  I would say the strikeforce is just another way. along of many other announcement [sic] that this President has made in dealing with large corporations ripping off Americans — right — and dealing with how do we get rid of junk fees. And so‚ that’s what you’re going to hear from the from the President. So‚ to say that‚ you know now all of a sudden he cares about this is not true. It is a false premise. It’s a false question because the President has been dealing with this for some time now‚ and now he’s making a new announcement on — on the strikeforce‚ and I think it’s important and so you’ll hear more from him momentarily. Lawrence drew a miffed and somewhat angry response from Jean-Pierre when he pointed to Biden needing notecards to make it through even germane public appearance: “The President — I noticed‚ had — had note cards at the border when he was doing his briefing there. He also had note cards last Friday with the Italian prime minister. Why does the President relies so heavily on note cards?”     “You’re upset because the President has no cards? You’re — you’re asking me a question about the President having note cards‚” she seethed as Lawrence clapped back that he’s “not upset” but merely “asking why”. Instead‚ Jean-Pierre continued to lecture him for daring to ask that when Biden “has had — a — probably one of the most successful first three years of an — an administration than any modern day president” and “done more...than most presidents who had two terms.” Amid a slew of shouts and even Newsmax’s James Rosen joining in‚ Lawrence insisted he’s simply wondering “why he relies so heavily on notecards‚” but Jean-Pierre ignored it: “I think what’s important here and what the American people care about is how this President is delivering for — for them‚ and that’s what he’s doing. And that’s what’s the most important thing here.” Moving to questions from the left‚ Patsy Widakuswara of taxpayer-funded Voice of America wondered if Biden “will...use any part of his state of the Union address‚ acknowledge the anger of American Arabs and Muslims and Progressive Democrats and explain to them why he’s not imposing conditionalities on Israel”. Going back to much earlier in the briefing‚ The Independent’s Andrew Feinberg drew fiery responses from John Kirby when he asked what’s stopping Biden from telling the Israelis “if they don’t allow aid‚ we will not continue supplying weapons”: Now THIS is quite the exchange from John Kirby. Good to see at least someone at the WH who still has a backbone to support the Israel The @Independent's @AndrewFeinberg: “The President and the Vice President and you‚ for that matter‚ have both said that the situation with… pic.twitter.com/IMXXMDM0aR — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) March 5‚ 2024 To see the relevant transcript from the March 5 briefing transcript‚ click here.