Jury deliberations near in Weinstein sex crimes retrial

posted in: All news | 0

NEW YORK (AP) — Jurors in Harvey Weinstein’s sex crimes retrial are due to start deliberating Thursday, with dozens of witnesses, scores of documents and two days of closing arguments to sift through.

The seven-woman, five-man jury will start its private discussions after getting legal instructions from the judge Thursday morning.

Closing arguments concluded Wednesday, with prosecutor Nicole Blumberg saying the former movie studio boss “held the golden ticket” to show-business success and used it to sexually assault women who were afraid to cross him.

Related Articles


Women’s sports bar The Sports Bra set to expand to four new cities


A US judge halts the deportation of the Egyptian family of the Boulder firebombing suspect


A woman testifies Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs gave her night terrors by dangling her from a high-rise balcony


Edmund White, a groundbreaking gay author, dies at 85


Join scientists as they drive into hailstorms to study the costly weather extreme

Weinstein, 73, has pleaded not guilty to raping a woman in 2013 and forcing oral sex on two others in 2006. Defense lawyer Arthur Aidala told jurors Tuesday that Weinstein had entirely consensual encounters with the women, arguing that they were “using him” to advance their fledgling careers in entertainment.

Over the last seven years, the case has been seen as something of a crucible for the #MeToo movement. The anti-sexual-misconduct outcry took flight after allegations against Weinstein became public in 2017.

He was later convicted of sex crimes in New York and California. The New York conviction was overturned last year, and the case was sent back for retrial.

The new trial was expanded to include an accuser who wasn’t part of the first trial. One of the criminal sex act charges is based on her allegations.

Weinstein chose not to testify.

Judge says migrants sent to El Salvador prison must get a chance to challenge their removals

posted in: All news | 0

WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal ruled Wednesday that the Trump administration must give migrants sent to an El Salvador prison a chance to challenge their removals.

Related Articles


Trump promised to welcome more foreign students. Now, they feel targeted on all fronts


Inflation data threatened by government hiring freeze as tariffs loom


Trump’s tariffs would cut US deficits by $2.8T over 10 years and shrink the economy, CBO says


What is the CBO? A look at the small office inflaming debate over Trump’s tax bill


As trial opens, Mike Lindell’s attorneys say he spread claims about Dominion official because he was ‘triggered’

U.S. District Court Chief Judge James Boasberg said that people who were sent to the prison in March under an 18th-century wartime law haven’t been able to formally contest the removals or allegations that they are members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua. He ordered the administration to work toward giving them a way to file those challenges.

The ruling is the latest milestone in a monthslong legal saga over the fate of deportees imprisoned at El Salvador’s notorious Terrorism Confinement Center.

Lisa Jarvis: The MAHA report’s errors are just the start of its problems

posted in: All news | 0

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s new Make America Healthy Again report offers a road to wellness for the nation’s children paved not with the gold-standard science he promised, but with pyrite.

The report, created by a MAHA commission that includes all of President Donald Trump’s cabinet members, mixes nuggets of truth— like the idea that it’s important to focus on kids’ health — with gross misrepresentations of scientific research. Some of the studies are even made up.

The nonprofit news organization Notus first reported that some of the commission’s findings relied on research that doesn’t exist. The document, released last week, includes seven fabricated studies related to kids’ mental health and the overprescribing of medications for ADHD, depression and asthma. The New York Times later identified several other fake citations.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt attributed the inclusion of phony publications to “formatting issues” that would be corrected. An updated report that omits those studies and cleans up bizarre errors in several others has since been uploaded to the White House website. That version contained fresh errors, Notus reported.

Many suspect that the fake citations are the product of AI. That alone should be disqualifying. Rather than the thoughtful, evidence-based assessment our kids deserve, the first major report on Kennedy’s cornerstone initiative was a slapped-together treatise.

But there’s a bigger problem.

If the MAHA team did rely on AI to generate supporting data — and it seems likely it did — it wasn’t just cutting corners. It confirms this project was never a good faith effort to begin with. The team was assembling evidence to reinforce conclusions that supported Kennedy’s well-known narrative.

That pattern is bolstered by the report’s interpretation of the real studies it cites. Data is conveniently twisted to fit Kennedy’s personal beliefs. A recurring tendency is to exaggerate the size of the current problem by minimizing the significance of those in the past.

For example, the report points to a fivefold rise in the rates of celiac disease since the 1980s but fails to acknowledge a dramatic increase in diagnosis and awareness of the autoimmune disorder. The same is true for the report’s discussions of inflammatory bowel disease, childhood cancer and autism.

None of this should be surprising. In nearly every interview he gives, Kennedy repeats the same inflated statistics to drive home the terrible state of our kids’ health. His goal seems to be to scare the public into acquiescence. If the problem is this bad, if our kids are this sick, if health agencies have failed them this profoundly, why not blindly follow his ideas for fixing it?

Something more insidious is at play with all of the half-baked or made-up statistics. He is using them to undermine the real experts, making it increasingly hard for Americans to understand whose advice to trust. And ultimately, his willfully misleading analysis provides cover while he dismantles longstanding norms for scientific research and health policy.

In just a few short months, the secretary has wielded his authority in unprecedented and dangerous ways.

For example, amid the largest measles outbreak in 30 years, instead of emphasizing vaccines — which can prevent the disease — he asked the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to develop guidelines for treatments. There are no proven treatments for measles. At least three people have died, and nearly 1,100 cases of the disease have been reported.

In another disturbing move, Kennedy said he would unilaterally change the CDC’s COVID vaccine guidelines to preclude pregnant women and children from receiving shots. That upended the longstanding process that relies on outside experts’ careful analysis and open debate before making such decisions. Days later, the CDC amended its regulations to incorporate some, but not all of Kennedy’s proposed changes, leaving many confused not only about the actual policy but who sets it.

We should worry that his approach to measles and COVID is a preview of how he will treat the value of other routine shots. One of the most alarming sections of the report questions the evidence behind and safety of the childhood vaccine schedule and — without evidence — suggests it could be linked to chronic disease.

Kennedy has also used his platform to push policy changes on the use of fluoride in drinking water, which he has repeatedly linked to lower IQs (a tenuous claim that experts say is based on fluoride levels not used in the U.S). Fluoridation is regulated by state and local municipalities, but Kennedy said he would direct the CDC to stop recommending the practice and the Food and Drug Administration — also under his purview — later banned fluoride supplements based on unsubstantiated claims that they harm gut health.

His rhetoric on the topic appears to have emboldened the first two state bans on fluoride in public water. The MAHA report’s agenda suggests more changes are to come. Meanwhile, new research in JAMA found that removing fluoride from drinking water would result in 25 million more cavities in children at a cost of $9.8 billion to the U.S. healthcare system over five years.

Kennedy’s next move appears to be wresting control of health and science research altogether. “We’re probably going to stop publishing in the Lancet, New England Journal of Medicine, JAMA and those other journals because they’re all corrupt,” he said on a recent podcast with wellness influencer Gary Brecka.

Unless those top-tier journals “change dramatically,” health agencies will “create our own journals in-house,” he added. In other words, he’ll have a ready-made platform to showcase data that justifies whatever policy he wants to roll out next.

In another troubling sign of how data could be warped to fit a political agenda, President Donald Trump signed an executive order after the report was released directing a restoration of “gold standard science.”

The goal sounds reasonable enough: to ensure research is reproducible and reverse a decline in public trust in science and health agencies. But the language of the directive is concerning. It not only challenges the credibility of several agencies — including the CDC —  but suggests someone like Kennedy could exploit the language of research integrity to crack down on findings that don’t fit his personal agenda.

Kennedy has called the MAHA report “the diagnosis” and says he will “deliver the prescription” in the next 60 days. Given what we’ve seen over the last few months, we should worry what form that takes — and the far reaching consequences it could have on both American kids and the health infrastructure designed to protect them.

Lisa Jarvis is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering biotech, health care and the pharmaceutical industry. Previously, she was executive editor of Chemical & Engineering News.

Opinion: Pass the Affordable Waste Reduction Act

posted in: All news | 0

“The Affordable Waste Reduction Act ensures that businesses of all sizes, along with consumers, can play a role in reducing waste without facing exorbitant compliance costs.”

A supermarket in Inwood. (Photo by Adi Talwar)

New York for years has aimed to reduce packaging waste, and for good reason. A whole host of factors ranging from excess materials to outdated recycling infrastructure have resulted in packaging waste piling up in landfills and polluting our water.

Everyone recognizes this is a problem we need to solve. But previous attempts in the New York State Legislature to fix what’s broken have failed as they generated outrage from the hard-working families across New York who care about our environment, but who would have been forced to shoulder too great a burden. Thankfully, a new solution promises to change that.

In February, State Sen. Monica Martinez and Assemblymember Chantel Jackson introduced the Affordable Waste Reduction Act: a practical, effective path to achieving the state’s environmental goals while keeping costs manageable for working families and independent businesses alike. As owners of supermarkets on Long Island and across the five boroughsand representatives of the National Supermarket Association, which serves independent grocers all across the state we strongly support this legislation and urge lawmakers to pass it without delay.

For years, well-intentioned but flawed packaging reduction proposals have surfaced in Albany. They may promise to slash packaging waste, but they do so while threatening to drive up costs for consumers and force small businesses to navigate unrealistic mandates on even less realistic timelines.

What’s especially troubling is that many of our stores have a significant number of customers who participate in the SNAP program, and these misguided efforts would have an outsized impact on SNAP-eligible products and the families who rely on them. The Affordable Waste Reduction Act, by contrast, ensures that businesses of all sizes, along with consumers, can play a role in reducing waste without facing exorbitant compliance costs.

Our state needs smart, sustainable solutionsnot policies that disproportionately harm those least able to afford them. New Yorkers are already struggling with the rising costs of groceries, housing, and everyday necessities. Independent supermarkets, many of which serve working-class and immigrant communities, are fighting to keep shelves stocked and workers employed amid ongoing supply chain challenges and inflationary pressures. An approach that shifts the financial burden of waste reduction onto businesses like ours, and by extension, our customers, is simply not viable.

The Affordable Waste Reduction Act offers a balanced approach by focusing on systemic improvements rather than punitive restrictions. One of the bill’s key provisions is its investment in upgrading recycling infrastructure across the state. New York’s current systemwhich can’t process most types of plastics, sending more waste to landfills and incineratorsis outdated, inefficient, and inadequate. This bill creates a new fund that will fuel public investment in infrastructure, ensuring that more packaging waste actually gets recycled, and creating jobs in the process.

Equally important, this legislation provides businesses with practical, achievable benchmarks for reducing waste. Unlike past proposals that would have effectively banned essential packaging materials without available alternatives, this bill takes a more reasonable approach, encouraging innovation and collaboration among manufacturers, retailers, and policymakers. It acknowledges the need for gradual adaptation rather than imposing abrupt, unrealistic mandates that could force businesses to discontinue popular products or pass exorbitant costs onto consumers.

New York has the opportunity to learn from other states that have successfully implemented similar policies. Minnesota’s recently enacted waste reduction law, which serves as a model for the Affordable Waste Reduction Act, garnered support from a broad coalition of environmental advocates, business leaders, and consumer groups.

That kind of consensus is rare in today’s political climate, and it speaks to the strength of this approach. We should follow Minnesota’s lead by enacting a law that fosters progress without imposing unnecessary economic strain.

Past legislative efforts to tackle packaging waste have repeatedly failed because they ignored the real challenges faced by consumers and small businesses. But the Affordable Waste Reduction Act succeeds where others fell short: it balances the urgent need to reduce packaging pollution with the economic realities of everyday New Yorkers. Lawmakers must recognize that meaningful environmental progress does not have to come at the expense of affordability and economic stability.

As local independent supermarkets, we care about our communities. While we are committed to sustainability, we also recognizing the need for practical, real-world solutions that work for our employees and our customers. We applaud and stand with the growing chorus of policymakers who understand that the path to a greener future must be paved with policies that consider the needs of all stakeholders.

The Affordable Waste Reduction Act represents a tremendous step in the right direction, and we urge lawmakers to seize this opportunity to enact real, lasting change for New York.

Jenny Jorge is the owner of Gala Fresh and Gala Foods on Long Island. Ivan Bueno is the owner of Marketplace in Brooklyn. Rafy Nunez is the owner of C-Town in the Bronx. Jorge Guillen is general manager at Cherry Valley Marketplace in Queens.

The post Opinion: Pass the Affordable Waste Reduction Act appeared first on City Limits.