Man Detained by ICE Found Dead, Hanging With Hands and Feet Tied—Attorney

The man was found with his hands and feet tied behind his back.  That is what hog tied means.  Please explain to me how he could then put a noose around his neck and hang himself?  And it has happened more than once according to this?  Some people are killing the detainees and ICE is covering up for it.  Hugs


https://www.newsweek.com/ice-detainee-death-family-questions-hands-feet-tied-11066992

Nov 18, 2025 at 04:04 PM EST

updated

Nov 20, 2025 at 07:16 AM EST

By 

Politics Reporter

A Chinese immigrant was found dead in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention, with his hands and feet tied behind him, an attorney has alleged.

Chaofeng Ge died four days after entering ICE custody in Pennsylvania on August 5, with an agency report stating he was found by agents with “a cloth ligature around his neck”.

After an autopsy report, his family is calling for more answers from the Department of Homeland Security.

“I am devasted by the loss of my brother and by the knowledge that he was suffering so greatly in that detention center,” Yanfeng Ge, the brother of Chaofeng, said in a statement shared with Newsweek. “He did not deserve to be treated that way. I want justice for my brother, answers as to how this could have happened, and accountability for those responsible for his death.”

Why It Matters

As detention numbers have spiked within ICE facilities under the Trump administration, deaths have also begun to rise. At least 15 immigrants died within ICE facilities, or while under their care, under this administration, compared to 12 for the entire fiscal year 2024. Advocacy groups and attorneys have repeatedly warned that ICE detention conditions are poor, but DHS has said otherwise.

Chaofeng Ge, 32, died while in ICE detention in Pennsylvania in August 2025. | Ge family handout

What To Know

Ge, 32, arrived at the U.S.-Mexico border near Tecate, California, on November 22, 2023, and was arrested by the Border Patrol for unlawful entry. Officers released him into the U.S. with a Notice to Appear for a hearing at a later date.

The records from ICE went quiet for over a year before agents encountered Ge in Lower Paxton Township, Pennsylvania, in January 2025. He was accused of accessing a device issued to another who did not authorize its use, conspiracy – accessing a device issued to another who did not authorize use, theft by deception—false impression, conspiracy—theft by deception, criminal use of a communication facility, and unlawful use of a computer—access to disrupt function.

Ge, who lived in Queens, New York, was convicted of the first two of these charges by the Court of Common Pleas in Dauphin County, Pennsylvania, on July 31, and he was sentenced to six to 12 months with credit for time served, so he was released from local custody and ICE agents detained him.

ICE is required to issue reports on all deaths within its custody, including Ge’s. The report states he was assessed with the help of a Mandarin interpreter on August 1, when he denied any past medical or mental health issues.

Four days later, on August 5 at around 5:20 a.m., officers at the Moshannon Valley Processing Center (MVPC) in Philipsburg say they found him in a shower stall with the cloth around his neck. Despite getting him onto the ground and attempting lifesaving measures, including CPR, Ge was pronounced dead roughly 40 minutes later.

For Ge’s family, this does not answer all their questions, and they have filed a lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security in the Southern District of New York.

An autopsy report seen by Newsweek showed Ge was found tied with a bedsheet, with linens around his wrists and ankles in what the report described as a “hog-tied” position. The medical examiner noted that there had been other reported incidents of people who had hung themselves having done something similar, and that there were no obvious defense wounds.

These details were also laid out in the criminal complaint filed by the family’s attorney, David Rankin, a partner at Beldock Levine & Hoffman LLP in New York City. The complaint alleges that ICE denied Ge the mental health care he needed and ignored requests for more details on the conditions at the MVPC.

Newsweek asked DHS whether Ge had been tied up and whether it was cooperating with the lawsuit filed in New York. Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin did not answer these questions, but repeated similar messaging on detention deaths: that ICE takes each one seriously and thoroughly investigates them all.

What People Are Saying

David B. Rankin, the family’s attorney, in a statement to Newsweek: “It is truly mystifying how any detention facility can let someone leave their room, create three nooses and then hang themselves without anyone knowing. What’s worse is the lack of mental health care which could have prevented this tragedy. Mr. Ge’s death represents a totally failure on the part of the GeoGroup and the DHS.”

DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin, in a statement to Newsweek: “Chaofeng Ge passed away at the Moshannon Valley Processing Center. All in-custody deaths are tragic, taken seriously, and are thoroughly investigated by law enforcement. ICE takes its commitment to promoting safe, secure, humane environments for those in our custody very seriously.”

What’s Next

The lawsuit is asking for a judge to force DHS and ICE to release the details on Ge’s case.

If you or someone you know is considering suicide, please contact the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline by dialing 988, text “988” to the Crisis Text Line at 741741 or go to 988lifeline.org.

Mamdani Hits The Ground Running

RFK And Trump’s “Fleshy Dominoes”

Young Wisconsin man dies from asthma attack after price of inhaler skyrocketed nearly $500: lawsuit

https://abc7chicago.com/post/cole-schmidtknecht-dies-asthma-attack-price-advair-diskus-inhaler-skyrocketed-500-lawsuit/15862168/

A young Wisconsin man died from an asthma attack after the price of his inhaler skyrocketed nearly $500, according to a lawsuit filed by his family.

From birth, Cole Schmidtknecht suffered from chronic asthma that he treated with an Advair Diskus inhaler that cost him no more than $66.

That changed last year when OptumRx, a subsidiary of UnitedHealth Group, decided it would no longer cover the inhaler Schidtknecht used for a decade.

On January 10, 2024, Schmidtknecht, 22, went to his local OptumRx-Walgreens pharmacy in Appleton, Wisconsin, expecting to fill his usual prescription when he was advised by Walgreens that his medication was no longer covered by his insurance and would cost him $539.19 out of pocket, according to the lawsuit.

He was given no notice and, the lawsuit said, Walgreens did not offer him a generic alternative “and further told Cole that there were no cheaper alternatives or generic medications available.”

Unable to afford the inhaler, he left the store without it.

“Over the next five days, Cole repeatedly struggled to breathe, relying solely on his old ‘rescue’ (emergency) inhaler to limit his symptoms, because he did not have a preventative inhaler designed for daily use,” the lawsuit continued.

On January 15, 2024, Cole suffered a severe asthma attack and never woke up. He was pronounced dead January 21.

His parents are now suing Walgreens, its parent company Boots Alliance and Optum Rx, the pharmacy benefits manager, for negligence.

“Defendant OptumRx had a duty to not artificially inflate prescription drug prices for medications such as Advair Diskus for insured patients, including Cole Schmidtknecht, making them so unaffordable that patients could not obtain the medications their physicians prescribed,” the lawsuit said. “Walgreens Defendants failed to exercise reasonable care in that they knew, or should have known, of the unreasonable risk of harm to asthmatic patients, including Cole Schmidtknecht, that would result from their failing to provide him with Advair Diskus or a medically equivalent alternative medication at an affordable price at the point of service.”

The lawsuit comes less than two months after the assassination-style killing of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson, whose death renewed debate about how health insurance companies treat their customers.

Minnesota day care hoax is fueled by MAGA psychosexual weirdness

OK let’s discuss the hidden thing here.  A 20 plus year old claims he has never had sex.  I remember being a 16 yr old newly inducted into the SDA church.  Any touching of your male members was a huge sin they constantly harped on.  I did try, but seriously, a teen boy with my history but any normal teen boy is going to do the deed to get off.  And for many of them it leaves them with after crippling guilt of not pleasing their god who watched them do it.  God is a perv.   I can’t tell you the number of boys in that church school I hugged with and they cuddled with me … but we never had sex.  Two wanted to but if I got thrown out of the school I had to return to the brutal home I was using the school to escape from.  But the idea of just ignoring one’s hormone driven sex drive is not healthy and the religious leaders pushing that all did it when they were teens.  But the grift has to be kept up.  Hugs

https://www.salon.com/2026/01/05/minnesota-day-care-hoax-is-fueled-by-maga-psychosexual-weirdness/

The racism underlying MAGA’s latest obsession is intertwined with misogyny

Senior Writer
MAGA influencer Nick Shirley speaks during a roundtable discussion on antifa at the White House on Oct. 8, 2025. ( Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)
MAGA influencer Nick Shirley speaks during a roundtable discussion on antifa at the White House on Oct. 8, 2025. ( Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)
Nick Shirley really wants the world to know that he’s never had sex. The YouTuber who moved from “prank” videos to the more lucrative world of creating MAGA disinformation apparently believes that sexual inexperience is an armor against accusations that he’s a liar. “I’m a virgin. I don’t have sex with random girls. You’re not gonna catch me on those sexual allegation charges,” he rambled on “PBD Podcast,” insisting that he is “religious” and doesn’t “have any vices.”
 

A deeper dig shows even more how ridiculous this situation is. Shirley has a history of dishonesty, which includes paying immigrant laborers to hold pro-Biden signs, clearly hoping voters would think they were self-motivated. In another video, he claimed Portland had “fallen” and “antifa” had taken “control of the city,” an unvarnished lie.

CNN verified that children were being dropped off at a day care center Shirley had targeted. The Minnesota Star Tribune visited the day cares in question and found, when they were allowed access, children playing and napping peacefully. CBS News reviewed security footage showing kids being dropped off at one targeted center. Others were indeed empty; they had gone out of business before Shirley filmed outside the buildings.

Shirley stands accused of lying for racist reasons, so his “but I’m a virgin” defense is irrational — at least on the surface. But it makes more sense, in a psychosexual way, in light of the right’s long-standing fear and loathing of day cares.

Shirley stands accused of lying for racist reasons, so his “but I’m a virgin” defense is irrational — at least on the surface. But it makes more sense, in a psychosexual way, in light of the right’s long-standing fear and loathing of day cares. After all, the scandal Shirley is exploiting isn’t really about day cares. It’s about a larger case in Minnesota of Feeding Our Future, a fraudulent food pantry that was run by Aimee Bock, a white woman who was convicted in March of cheating taxpayers out of nearly $250 million of pandemic funds. While Bock was the mastermind, other defendants in the case are Somali American. On Dec. 30, a federal judge cleared the way for the government to seize $5.2 million in assets from Bock.

If Shirley was only interested in building his hoax on that existing and very real case, he could have targeted anti-hunger charities for his fake sting. Instead, he went after day cares, which are only tangentially related insofar as they are — along with churches, mosques, schools and community centers — sites that were supposed to get assistance from the fraudsters but never received it.

These businesses were picked almost certainly because Shirley and his colleagues have tapped into the long-standing tendency of paranoid reactionaries to make day cares the subject of conspiracy theories. Along with birth control and abortion — whose providers are also smeared constantly with right-wing lies — day care is loathed on the right for allowing women to work instead of being financially dependent on a husband. In the 1980s, day care workers were accused of being Satanists. Now, during the MAGA era, the scapegoat for men’s fears of female independence has shifted from imaginary devil-worshippers to real immigrants. White women are implicitly accused of using immigrant labor as a cheat to avoid their god-given duty to quit work to stay home and raise babies. Vice President JD Vance has been especially loud with his belief that day care is pushing women away from their supposedly inherent desire to be housewives.


Want more Amanda Marcotte on politics? Sign up for her free newsletter, Standing Room Only, now also on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts.


Vance almost certainly doesn’t believe his own narrative. For one thing, it’s illogical to believe women would think, “Gosh, I want nothing more than to stay at home, but if there’s a day care down the street, I guess I have to use it.” His own wife has been outspoken about how much she loved working at her law firm that offered on-site childcare — and how much she misses it. But Vance has apparently decided that the bulk of support for his 2028 presidential bid will be rooted in the world of extremely online, sexually dysfunctional misogynists that love shady influencers like Shirley. The vice president’s messaging strategy has long been focused on this loose conglomerate known as the “manosphere”: bitter divorced men, “incels” (involuntarily celibates) and devotees of the “red pill,” an ideology that holds that dating and marriage aren’t about love but about men tricking or forcing women into submission.

The manosphere isn’t just deeply misogynist; it’s also incredibly racist. For liberals taking a cursory glance into that world, it can be very confusing how MAGA men can somehow blame immigrants for their own dating woes. But in the cesspool of incoherent resentment that Vance is clearly absorbing, the alleged evils of feminism and immigration are seen as part of a larger “woke” conspiracy against the white man. Before he died, Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk often posted about how “who we actually can’t stand are angry, liberal, white women.” He would portray white women as idiots for not perceiving immigrants as a threat. “If woke is a mind virus,” he posted, “then white college indoctrinated women are the most susceptible hosts.” Influencers like LibsofTikTok hold up white women who resist mass deportations as selfish ninnies who just want to keep their babysitters.

Shirley has engaged in this rhetoric himself. “White liberal women tend to support the people that steal and rob from them,” he claimed in one post. Another was more ominous: “Liberal white womens [sic] logic and empathy will get them killed eventually.”

In this toxic stew of sexual resentment, misogyny and racism, it makes more sense that Shirley thinks his virginity is relevant. Anti-immigrant sentiment is woven into a larger MAGA narrative about expelling allegedly decadent and foreign influences. White male dominance, people like Shirley believe, can be restored by adhering to strict sexual and social mores prescribed by right-wing Christianity. Abstaining from sex until marriage is part of a larger program meant to produce male-dominated marriages,  where wives are too busy with large broods of white children to hold jobs. Attacking Black immigrants at a day care center has powerful symbolic resonance; it’s seen as an important front in a war both to make America whiter and to restore white women to a submissive role in the home.

The irony is that Shirley’s diatribe about his sexual status only underscores how much the attack on the day cares is not, contrary to his claims, driven by a nonpartisan, disinterested desire to end fraud. That much was always obvious. Shirley loves Donald Trump, who is himself a convicted fraudster who continues to use his office to enrich himself in blatantly corrupt ways. Shirley has followed the president’s lead — he, too, has a long history of posting racist vitriol about immigrants.

But bringing his sexuality and views on gender relations into the discussion — when no one else has done so — suggests that those issues aren’t far from mind, either. The fixation on “purity” is a common fascist obsession, manifesting in backwards fantasies of racial and sexual purity. None of this has any relation to the real world where people of all races and genders are just trying to do their jobs, raise their children and live their lives.

THE HISTORY OF RELIGIOUS CONFLICT IN THE UNITED STATES: REVOLUTION TO SEPTEMBER 11TH

Roger sent this to me and I thought it was so grand and important that I want to share it before I shut down my blogging computer.    Hugs

https://web.stanford.edu/class/e297a/The%20History%20of%20Religious%20Conflict.htm

 Throughout its history, the United States has characteristically remained a country of two things: a country of immigrants, and a country of unmatched religious diversity.  And yet when compared with the rest of the world – where these two very factors alone have so often engendered horrible religious wars and decades of enduring conflict – the history of religious conflict in the United States seems almost nonexistent.

That is not to say the United States has been immune to its share of conflict explicitly rooted in religion.  This paper explores the various manifestations of religious conflict throughout the history of the United States, from the Revolutionary War to the attacks of September 11th and their fallout.  A distinction is drawn between religious intolerance, which is not the focus of this paper, and outright religious persecution or violence.  Similarly, the paper reflects efforts made to de-conflate religious conflict from ethnic and racial conflict, which has been much more prominent throughout the history of the United States.  In examining the history of religious violence, intolerance, discrimination, and persecution in the United States, we arrive at some possible explanations for why the United States has seen such minimal religious conflict despite being so religiously diverse.

The Revolution

It has been said that the United States is a nation founded on religious conflict.  The colonies were settled by those escaping religious persecution in Europe.  There is even some evidence that religion played a major role in the American Revolution and that revolutionaries believed it was willed by God for the Americans to wage war against the British.[1]

As the Church of England was striving to establish one, uniform religion across the kingdom, colonial America was divided, each of the colonies being dominated by their own brand of Christianity.  Due to the distance from England and the room in the colonies, many religions were able to establish themselves in America, colony by colony.  For example, Anglicans, who conformed to the Church of England, populated Virginia. Massachusetts was home to the Puritans.  Pennsylvania was full of Quakers.  Baptists ruled in Rhode Island.  And Roman Catholics found a haven in Maryland, where they could establish themselves amid the other colonists’ protestant majority.  Each of these colonies maintained a distinct religious character and favored one religious denomination’s power.

The American colonists saw the revolution not only as a war for political independence, but to protect the religious diversity of the thirteen colonies.  Put in other terms, it was a war for religious independence and freedom.  To sever ties with Mother England would be to ensure that the various Christian denominations could co-exist on the American continent.  The conflict was, in part, a conflict that pitted the various American religious denominations against the Church of England, who wanted to impose a uniform, Anglican religion on the colonies.

Early Religious Persecution

The period after the Revolutionary War saw a lot of infighting between the various states and Christian denominations.  Virginia, which was home to the largest portion of Anglicans loyal to the Church of England, was the scene of notorious acts of religious persecution against Baptists and Presbyterians.  Anglicans physically assaulted Baptists, bearing theological and social animosity.  In 1771, a local Virginia sheriff yanked a Baptist preacher from the stage at his parish and beat him to the ground outside, where he also delivered twenty lashes with a horsewhip.  Similarly, in 1778, Baptist ministers David Barrow and Edward Mintz were conducting services at the Mill Swamp Baptist Church in Portsmouth, Virginia.[2]  As soon as the hymn was given out, a gang of men rushed the stage and grabbed the two ministers, took them to the nearby Nansemond River swamp, and dunked and held their heads in the mud until they nearly drowned to death.

The period during and soon after the Revolutionary War also saw abundant political manifestations of religious conflict.  At the time, some states abolished churches, while supporting others, issued preaching licenses, and collected tax money to fund and establish state churches.  Each state constitution differed in its policy on religious establishment, or state-supported religion.  It would not be until well after the adoption of the Constitution of 1789 and the First Amendment religion clauses that the disestablishment for which the United States is so recognized became the de facto practice.

1800s

The early part of the 19th Century was relatively quiet in terms of religious conflict in America.  The religious conflict that stands out in this period involves tensions between Catholics and Protestants, culminating in violence directed at Irish Catholic immigrants.  The surge in immigration from Europe during the 19th Century coincided with and influx of Catholics and the rise of activist Protestantism in the U.S.  As strong Protestant values permeated the country, immigrants who were Catholic also became viewed as outsiders and undemocratic.  These views are separate from, but on top of, the harsh anti-Irish sentiment that also spread during the period.

In the 1830s and 1840s, anti-Catholic violence broke out in the Northeast and elsewhere.  In 1835, one incident was ignited by a speaking tour by Lyman Beecher, who published Plea for the West, a book about a Catholic plot to take over the U.S. and impose Catholic rule.  After Beecher’s speaking tour passed through Charlestown, Massachusetts, a mob set fire to the Ursuline convent and school.[3]  In Philadelphia in 1844, pitched gun battles broke out between “native” Americans and mostly Irish Catholics.  Martial law had to be declared in order to end the violence.[4]

The Mormon War, the Utah War

Around the same time as anti-Catholic violence broke out in the Northeast, another religious group was being chased out of the same area.  The Mormons, who emerged after the 1830 discovery of The Book of Mormon, were a religious community chased out of New York, out of Ohio, out of Missouri, and out of Illinois, to Utah, where they finally settled.

In Illinois in 1839, the Mormons settled Nauvoo and built a thriving Mormon town there, complete with a large Mormon temple.  In the short period of three years, the Mormons prospered, announced the doctrine of polygamy, and founder Joseph Smith announced his candidacy for president of the United States.  Locals were intimidated and envious.  Smith and his brother Hyrum were arrested on morals charges and held in jail.  On June 27, 1844, an anti-Mormon mob attacked Nauvoo and burned it to the ground.[5]  They also invaded the jail cells where Smith and his brother were being held, and executed them.

Shortly after the sacking of Nauvoo, Brigham Young announced his leadership of the Mormons and led them to Utah, where they flourished.  In 1857, fears of a religious state of Mormons grew and the president ordered federal troops to enforce the installation of federal judges and a new non-Mormon governor.  At some point in the interim, this is still a subject of debate, the infamous Mountain Meadow Massacre happened – in which local Mormons slaughtered a group of 120 California-bound pioneers who were openly hostile toward their religion and making threats to return from California to attack them.[6]

The massacre only fueled anti-Mormon sentiment.  Tensions escalated. The Mormon army, also known as the Nauvoo Legion, was called out to respond to the imminent arrival of 2,000 U.S. Army troops.  Salt Lake City was evacuated on standing orders to burn the city should an invasion occur.  No violence was to break out, as attention was diverted to the Civil War.

As the federal government focused its energies on fighting the Civil War, legal sanctions and political oppression of the Mormons continued that virtually dissolved the church by 1887.  It wasn’t until the 1890s, when the Mormons ended the practice of polygamy, that Utah finally achieved statehood in 1896.[7]

The Jewish Experience

At the end of the 1890s, the U.S. began seeing the first wave of anti-Semitism, just as the federal government began restricting immigration from Europe.  While concentrations of Jews have lived in America since colonial times, they were largely tolerated and discriminated against in localized incidents.  By the 1920s, immigration quotas had taken effect and limits on the basis of national origin.  These quotas were not repealed during the Holocaust, even as Jewish refugees were fleeing Hitler’s Europe.

Between 1933 and 1939, the period of the Great Depression, anti-Semitic fervor reached heights never before seen or later seen in entire the history of the Jewish experience in America.  In urban areas such as New York and Boston, Jews were violently attacked.[8]  Most anti-Jewish sentiment was manifested in social and political discrimination.  Assaults, propaganda and intimidation were mostly carried out by special societies, such as the Silver Shirts or the Ku Klux Klan.

Overall, the experience of Jews in America has been encouragingly free from the violent persecution seen elsewhere in the world.  Indeed, racial and social intolerance persisted since the colonial days until the 1950s, as Jews were not allowed membership in country clubs, excluded from colleges, banned from practicing medicine, and from holding political office in many states.  However, religious conflict rooted in anti-Semitism has been largely non-violent.

Hate Crimes as Religious Conflict

The incidents of violence against individual Jews that characterized the anti-Semitism of the Great Depression would have fallen under the category of religious hate crimes if the FBI, then known as the Bureau of Investigation, were collecting those statistics at the time.  Despite the diversity of the United States, in all aspects such as race, national origin, religion and sexual orientation, the federal government (by way of the FBI) did not start keeping tabs on hate crimes until 1992.  Religiously speaking, anti-Semitic hate crimes have always dominated the national hate crime statistics gathered by the FBI for the past ten years.  However, the current numbers paint a changing landscape.

According to the ACLU, the U.S. is home to more than 1,500 religions and 360,000 religious centers.[9]  Christianity has long dominated the country’s religious make-up, followed by Judaism.  According to the latest statistics released by the Harvard University Religious Pluralism Project, Islam has surpassed Judaism and is the country’s Number Two religion.[10]

Following the terrorist attacks of September 11th, the FBI found that anti-Muslim sentiments spiked and verifiable, religiously motivated hate crimes against Muslims in the U.S. increased 1,600 percent in 2001 from the prior year.[11]

In fact, the FBI, which has tracked hate crimes since 1992, reports that Anti-Muslim hate crimes had previously been the second-least reported.  But in 2001, they became the second-highest reported, second only to anti-Jewish hate crimes.  It should be noted that these statistics are separate from crimes motivated against race, national origin or ethnicity – these are crimes against person and property in which religion was a motivating negative factor.

Conclusion

The U.S. has been fortunate in that it has not witnessed religious war and conflict of the scale seen in the Middle East and Europe.  Although the number of different religions in the U.S. has steadily grown over the decades, this diversity has not let to conflict.  Some propositions for why this may be:

The United States as a country of immigrants

This factor defuses historical and religious claims to territory, which are not as strong as they are in places such as the West Bank and Ireland.  It also may explain a greater likelihood for a system of conflict to eventually resolve itself in favor of tolerance rather than further conflict, as each new group of immigrants to America has generally shared a story of persecution.

Constitutional protections and religious disestablishment

The American tradition of the separation of church and state cannot be overlooked in mediating and possibly preventing religious conflict to erupt.  In many other parts of the world, religion is still highly influential and, in some cases, sponsored by the state.  However, in a country with such religious diversity, religious disestablishment has proved necessary so that the government could not take sides in a religious conflict.

Diversity creates tolerance

The argument also exists that the immense diversity in and of itself has promoted tolerance among religions.  Religious pluralism inspires attitudes that homogeneity is a natural part of the religious environment and that there is room for each religion to exist in America.

As the United States enters the 21st Century, these important factors will prove to be influential in the face of catastrophic events, and economic, social and political changes that challenge the level of religious tolerance the nation has maintained for over two centuries.

[1] Religion and the American Revolution. “Religion and the Founding of the American Republic.” Ed. James H. Huston.  1998.  http://lcweb.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel03.html

[2] Ibid.

[3] Encyclopedia of American Religious History, Revised Edition, Vol. II.  “Religious violence.” Edward L. Queen II. Page 601. 2001.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Queen, 602.

[6] Emily Eakin. “Reopening a Mormon Murder Mystery.” The New York Times, section B, page 9, Oct. 12, 2002.

[7] Queen, 605.

[8] “Antisemitism in the Depression Era (1933-1939),” Leonard Dinnerstein. Religion in American History, A reader.  Page 413. 1998.

[9] “Religious Liberty.” American Civil Liberties Union.  http://www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLibertyMain.cfm

[10] “Geographic Distribution of Religious Centers in the U.S” Committee on the Study of Religion. Harvard University, Jan. 2002. http://www.plurarlism.org/resources/statistics/distribution.php

[11] “Foreword.” Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation. http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/01hate.pdf

A Great Info & Opinion Piece About The Rich, The Poor, Capitalism, & Socialism

A good explainer written with a sense of humor. Nice things are not always bad things. -A.

We Regret To Infomrm You Zohran Mamdani’s Wife Wore Nice Boots.

Ready, Boots? Start walking!

Robyn Pennacchia Jan 05, 2026

Since returning to office, Donald Trump’s personal wealth has nearly doubled, from $3.9 billion in 2024 to $7.3 billion this past September, which includes $2 billion from his cryptocurrency ventures that no one had been buying into prior to his reelection. Donald Trump Jr. is now worth six times what he was in 2024, also due in part to the family crypto scam.

But did you hear? Zohran Mamdani’s wife, Rama Duwaji, wore some cute boots to his inauguration like a common Imelda Marcos! Quelle horreur!

The New York Post breathlessly reported:

Their “affordability” agenda got off on the wrong foot.

New York City’s first lady Rama Duwaji appeared to wear $630 “artisan” leather boots from a high-end designer to her Democratic socialist husband Zohran Mamdani’s mayoral swearing-in ceremony — a luxury look that flew in the face of the politician’s “everyman” image, eagle-eyed critics said Thursday.

Duwaji, a 28-year-old artist, gave more socialite than socialist on New Year’s Day as she apparently rocked one of the fashion house Miista’s pricey boot designs — one which is said to be crafted from “vegetable tan cow leather” and feature an “ultra-cushioned memory foam insole.”

Not “vegetable tan cow leather”! NOT A MEMORY FOAM INSOLE!

Not that it matters, really, but $630 for boots is not “luxury.” I mean that technically. Obviously $630 is a good amount of money, but it’s not luxury. It’s what’s called “bridge” — meaning that it’s high quality and expensive, but not at the same level as actual luxury brands, which cost at least twice that. It’s not Chanel or Versace or Alexander McQueen or Louis.

Now, it turns out that the boots (and the entire outfit) were actually rented/loaned for the occasion, as her stylist Gabriella Karefa-Johnson explained in a blog post about the event:

Rama wore a vintage Balenciaga coat from Albright Fashion Library and archival earrings from New York Vintage, both rented during a single marathon day spent diving into the racks and cupboards of the city’s best small, circular fashion businesses. […]

C’mon formal shorts!! Those are from The Frankie Shop, and the boots are *ON LOAN* from Miista.

I’m just going to have to get comfortable with the fact that people on the internet do not understand what being lent a SAMPLE that has been borrowed before and will be borrowed again means but, you know what, that’s okay.

This is a big part of what stylists do. Most of the time, when you see a celebrity wearing something fancy on the red carpet or at an event like this, it’s not something from their own closet, it’s on loan from a designer (because cheap advertising) or something like the Albright Fashion Library. This is also how a lot of wardrobing for television and movies works.

But even if they weren’t on loan, the idea that “it’s hypocrisy for a Democratic socialist or even a regular liberal to wear nice boots!” is absurd. It only seems like “hypocrisy” to people who think socialism means everyone should be poor and miserable and standing in bread lines all day wearing cardboard boxes on their feet instead of shoes.

The reality is … that’s capitalism. Like, for most people, that is capitalism, except you don’t even get any free bread out of it. Indeed, most of the people in the comments on the Post’s tweet for the article were talking about how they, the proud capitalists that capitalism is definitely working out really well for, only spend $40 on boots at Walmart or Amazon. Actually, buying shoes that will only last a season (and will fuck up your feet) because that’s all you can afford, instead of boots that cost a lot up front but last forever, is a perfect example of why it costs more to be poor than it does to be rich. (This is not to say that you can’t get decent boots for a not-crazy price — I do very well at Nordstrom Rack and Marshalls, thank you very much — but you get my point.)

What we want is for people to not have to spend $2,000 a month on health insurance or on rent so that they can have nice things, so that they can buy a nice pair of boots or a warm winter coat. So that they can go out to dinner sometimes without worrying about breaking the bank. That is the whole damn point! That’s the “hearts starve as well as bodies; give us bread, but give us roses too” of it all.

Right now, 60 percent of Americans cannot afford $1,000 for an emergency expense. That’s not socialism that did that, that’s capitalism as practiced in the United States of America. Our economy literally has poverty built into the system. We literally cannot function without people to work the kind of jobs that currently do not pay enough for survival. Austerity is a way of life for a very large percentage of us, which also means that those whose income is dependent on other people having expendable income are also screwed.

New NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s affordability plans don’t just benefit the poor, they benefit everyone. If people aren’t taking certain jobs because transportation costs too much to make it worth their while or they can’t afford to live in the city, everyone’s quality of life goes down. A city where only rich people can afford to live is a city where rich people have absolutely nothing to do, which kind of defeats the whole point of being rich in the first place.

The commenters complaining about all the people they could supposedly feed with the $630 those boots cost are also missing the point. Besides clearly not being how socialism is supposed to work, caring for the poor by way of charity and philanthropy is lovely, but it’s not the most effective and efficient way of doing so. Taxes are. Social programs are. GoFundMe raises about $650 million a year for medical causes, with some people getting far more than they could ever need and others getting nothing. That is a stupid way of doing things. You want to spend less on healthcare? Make the entire United States one giant insurance group with a shit ton of leverage and bulk buying power, make medical school free and invest tax money into creating more internship programs. That is how you take care of people, not by not buying a pair of shoes.

Capitalists want philanthropy to replace taxation. Right-wing libertarians frequently argue that if you just didn’t tax the rich, they would happily give huge chunks of their fortunes away to the poor, which is patently ridiculous (and, again, not effective or efficient even if things did shake out that way).

Champagne socialists are good, actually. Why on earth would it be better to be a miserly rich person than a rich person who actually believes they should be taxed at a fair rate because they want to see everyone living well? The idea that the Left wants a world in which everyone lives like they’ve taken a vow of poverty and no one gets to be “successful” is a fantasy created by rich assholes who don’t want to share and don’t care if they live in a society where everyone has at least their basic needs met.

We actually love success, which is why we want more of it for more people, rather than just one percent of one percent of people. We love people, which is why we want a safety net that keeps them from falling so far they can’t get back up again. We love ingenuity, which is why we want people to be able to go into business for themselves without having to worry about what will happen to their kids if they can’t afford good health insurance on their own right away. We want their kids to feel like it’s not hopeless to try their best in school because they don’t think they’ll be able to afford to go to college without being in debt the rest of their lives. We don’t think it’s enough that people can “dream” of being billionaires but factually never be able to afford their own home.

And yes, we even want some people to be able to afford to actually buy $630 shoes, so that other people can get paid a fair wage for designing, making and selling those $630 shoes.

Hope that clears things up!

Preparing For War: White Christian Nationalism’s Extremist History

Many in Gaza to ‘Lose Access to Critical Medical Care’ as Israel Suspends Doctors Without Borders

Criminal Israel has violated every aspect of the “ceasefire” and made a mockery of the promises of security guarantees tRump gave Hamas / the Palestinians.  It should make Ukraine really nervous of the same things he has promised them.  All tRump can see or cares about is his personal profit of building on Palestinian lands making profits over the dead bodies of the Palestinians.   He is OK with Israel hurrying up the slaughter to get to that profit point.  I hate this.  You should also.   Hugs


https://www.commondreams.org/news/israel-doctors-withour-borders

Funeral of Dr. Hussein Najjar of Doctors Without Borders

People attend the funeral of Dr. Hussein Najjar, a member of the Doctors Without Borders team who was killed by shrapnel from an Israeli airstrike, in Deir al Balah, Gaza on September 16, 2025

 (Photo by Alaa Y. M. Abumohsen/Anadolu via Getty Images)
“The humanitarian response in Gaza is already highly restricted, and cannot afford further dismantlement,” the renowned organization warned.

The Israeli government said Tuesday that Doctors Without Borders, one of the largest medical organizations currently operating in Gaza, is among the 25 humanitarian groups that will be suspended at the start of the new year for their alleged failure to comply with Israel’s widely criticized new registration rules for international NGOs.

According to the Associated Press, Israel’s Ministry of Diaspora Affairs “said the organizations that will be banned on January 1 did not meet new requirements for sharing staff, funding, and operations information.” The Israeli government specifically accused Doctors Without Borders, known internationally as Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), of “failing to clarify the roles of some staff that Israel accused of cooperation with Hamas and other militant groups,” AP reported.

In addition to providing medical assistance to desperate Palestinians, MSF has been an outspoken critic of what has it described as Israel’s “campaign of total destruction” in Gaza. The group said in a report released last December that its teams’ experiences on the ground in Gaza were “consistent with the descriptions provided by an increasing number of legal experts and organizations concluding that genocide is taking place.”

Ahead of Tuesday’s announcement, Doctors Without Borders warned that the looming withdrawal of registration from international NGOs “would prevent organizations, including MSF, from providing essential services to people in Gaza and the West Bank.”

“With Gaza’s health system already destroyed, the loss of independent and experienced humanitarian organizations’ access to respond would be a disaster for Palestinians,” the group said in a statement last week. “The humanitarian response in Gaza is already highly restricted, and cannot afford further dismantlement.”

“If Israeli authorities revoke MSF’s access to Gaza in 2026, a large portion of people in Gaza will lose access to critical medical care, water, and lifesaving support,” the group added. “MSF’s activities serve nearly half a million people in Gaza through our vital support to the destroyed health system. MSF continues to seek constructive engagement with Israeli authorities to continue its activities.”

Pascale Coissard, MSF’s emergency coordinator for Gaza, noted that “in the last year, MSF teams have treated hundreds of thousands of patients and delivered hundreds of millions of liters of water.”

“MSF teams are trying to expand activities and support Gaza’s shattered health system,” said Coissard. “In 2025 alone, we carried out almost 800,000 outpatient consultations and handled more than 100,000 trauma cases.”

Israel’s announcement came shortly after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met with US President Donald Trump in Florida, where both dodged questions about their supposed “peace plan” for Gaza after more than two years of relentless bombing. The Israeli military has been accused of violating an existing ceasefire agreement hundreds of times since it took effect in October.

Al Jazeera reported Tuesday that “Israeli forces have carried out strikes across the Gaza Strip as they continue with their near-daily violations of the ceasefire agreement, with Israel’s genocidal war on the besieged enclave continuing apace and displaced Palestinians enduring the destruction of their few remaining possessions in flooding brought about by heavy winter rains.”

 

Go, AZ!

Arizona cancels medical debt for almost half-a-million residents

Another more than $200 million in medical debt has been wiped out for Arizonans.

And the recipients are going to know who to thank: Gov. Katie Hobbs.

The new figure was announced Monday by Allison Sasso. She’s the president and CEO of Undue Medical Debt, a company that agreed earlier this year to use some $10 million in state American Rescue Plan COVID relief dollars to buy up medical debt from hospitals and doctors for a few pennies on the dollar, eliminating a negative mark on the credit reports of those who racked up the bills.

All totaled, according to the governor’s office, the program has so far erased $642 million owed by more than 485,000 Arizonans.

And under a deal the state cut with Undue Medical, the beneficiaries all get letters crediting not just United Medical but also the governor.

What’s behind all this is a program that United Medical has been offering across the nation.

Established in 2014, it uses government funds and private donations to acquire portfolios of medical debt from health care providers or debt buyers.

What makes the money go farther, according to company officials, is the debt has reached the point where those holding the rights are willing to sell them for pennies on the dollar.

People can’t actually apply. Instead, Undue Medical has to find them.
It starts with eligibility.

The program is aimed at those whose medical debt whose income is less than 400% of the federal poverty level. That is currently $128,600 for a family of four.Also eligible are those whose debt is 5% or more of their annual income. That would aid those who have higher income levels than the cutoff—but much higher debt than they may be able to handle.

Undue Medical works with a credit reporting agency, buying what it calls “relevant income data” from them. That’s how it gets the names of individuals who owe money.

That is then compared with the information it gets from medical providers and others who are the holders of past-due debts.

Once the bills have been paid off, the patient gets a letter in an Undue Medical envelope informing for the first time that the obligation has been wiped out and the credit bureau has been notified.

But the recipients do get some inkling at that time of who to credit.

The deal Hobbs cut with the charity when she first signed the deal in 2024 requires that beneficiaries know that the financial relief is happening because governor’s action: It spells out that any fliers, advertisements, press releases or other marketing materials to include “logos or insignia as required by the governor’s office and approved by the governor’s office before publication.”

Gubernatorial press aide Christian Slater, in defending that provision when the program was announced in July, said that is appropriate. He said the letters are designed to tell people not just that their medical debt was relieved but “how it happened.”

And why do they need to know that the governor gets credit?

“The medical debt relief would not be possible without the governor’s leadership and focus on lowering costs and delivering economic opportunity for every Arizonan,” Slater said.

Undue Medical said what’s also crucial is that the patient starts from scratch.

Generally speaking, when a debt is forgiven, it can be considered income for tax purposes. But Courtney Story, the charity’s vice president of government initiatives, said in July that doesn’t apply when the money comes from a “disinterested third party.”

“Because we’re a nonprofit, we’re not part of the health care system, we count as a disinterested third party, as does the government,” she said.

Ditto, Story said, with private donors, though they have the option of remaining anonymous or disclosing their names to recipients.

In the press release Monday, Hobbs included the anonymous comments of three Arizonans who said they were thankful that the debt had been wiped out.

She got them because the contract the state has with Undue Medical said that “patient stories and related insights shall be shared with the governor’s office on a regular basis.”

As to what the governor can do with those testimonials, a company spokesman said when the program was announced that, “to my knowledge, there isn’t a restriction on how they can be used.”

In unveiling the plan in 2024, Hobbs insisted that there’s nothing illegal about the state using money it has received from the federal government to pay off the medical debts of private Arizonans.

A provision of the Arizona Constitution makes it illegal to “make any donation or grant, by subsidy or otherwise, to any individual, association or corporation.”

“I can assure you we would not be taking this action if we weren’t fully confident in the legality of it,” Hobbs said.

Anyway, she said, Arizona wouldn’t be the first jurisdiction to use COVID dollars from the American Rescue Plan Act in this way.

Undue Medical has provided press releases from other jurisdictions that have taken advantage of the program, with recent press releases from Delaware Gov. Matt Meyer, Gov. Ned Lamont of Connecticut, Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, and one from the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors for a local program.

https://www.knau.org/knau-and-arizona-news/2025-12-22/arizona-cancels-medical-debt-for-almost-half-a-million-residents