Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
RIP Toby Keith: The Trump Curse Befalls Another One of His Supporters
267 views
Skip to first unread message
Big Trump Failure
Feb 7, 2024, 11:27:13 AM2/7/24
to
Was Toby Keith a Donald Trump Supporter? What We Know
Published Feb 06, 2024 at 10:15 AM EST
Toby Keith Dead Aged 62
By Tom Norton
The death of 62-year-old country music star Toby Keith, following a
stomach cancer diagnosis, has led to a flood of tributes across the worlds
of music and politics.
Tributes and messages about Keith spread across social media on Tuesday,
including from Donald Trump Jr. who posted a photo on X, formerly Twitter,
that he took with Keith in 2018.
Trump Jr. wrote alongside: "Ugh. We lost a legend this week. R.I.P Toby
Keith."
Toby Keith Trump
Country singer Toby Keith performs for then US President-elect Donald
Trump and his family during a welcome celebration at the Lincoln Memorial
in Washington, DC, on January 19, 2017. BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty
Images
The country star not only performed at Trump's inauguration in 2017 but
was awarded a National Medal of Arts by the former president in 2021. His
pro-American, pro-military lyricism and macho personality arguably echoed
some of Trump's policies and posturing too.
Keith's performance at Trump's 2017 presidential inauguration did not
happen in a vacuum. Keith accepted the gig amid reports that other major
stars had refused the invitation to play at the Lincoln Memorial.
According to Vulture, these included Elton John, Celine Dion, Kiss, and
fellow country music star Garth Brooks.
Reports of the struggles to secure big names for the inauguration made
Keith's name stand out. However, in a 2017 interview with The Atlantic, he
said the decision to play was a matter of duty rather than tacit support
toward Trump, saying if "the president of the frickin' United States asks
you to do something and you can go, you should go instead of being a jack-
off."
Asked about the controversy surrounding artists agreeing to perform at
Trump's inauguration, Keith reinforced his support for America, not Trump
or the Republican Party. "I don't apologize for performing for our country
or military," he said in a statement to Entertainment Weekly. "I performed
at events for previous presidents [George W.] Bush and Obama and over 200
shows in Iraq and Afghanistan for the USO."
Keith was a registered Democrat until 2008, when he re-registered as an
independent, telling the Chicago Tribune in 2016, "I was a Democrat my
whole life. They kind of disowned me when I started supporting the troops,
then I went and registered independent,"
"I've never been a registered Republican. It just keeps people off
balance. They don't know what to think."
In 2008, he told The Washington Post that he voted for Clinton twice and
twice for George W. Bush as well. "I didn't care for Gore or Kerry," he
said.
Keith would not say whether he voted for Barack Obama or John McCain, but
when asked in 2009 if he approved of Obama, he didn't seem to have any
problem with the president. "I think he's doing fine," he told CNN.
Keith also made biting criticisms of Trump and Hillary Clinton in the run-
up to the 2016 election.
"This is by far the best country you could ever live in, and we picked
these two candidates to be media whores and go out there and take care of
the world, huh?" he said in September 2016 at the Route 91 Harvest
Festival in Las Vegas. He also called the election a "dumpster fire,"
according to Rolling Stone.
These comments echoed what he told the Chicago Tribune in 2016, saying
"This election, I don't think it makes a difference," when asked if he
knew which candidate he would vote for.
"I can't believe there's 300 million Americans in this country and we've
got these two as our final two. It's absolutely crazy."
Speaking to The Atlantic in 2017, Keith praised parts of Trump's early
performance as president, particularly his use of military generals as
advisers.
Read more
He also dismissed one of Trump's most controversial moments, the infamous
"grab 'em by the p****" comment, recorded while speaking to then Access
Hollywood host Billy Bush in 2005, saying "Guys talk like that
everywhere."
"Bill Clinton, everyone was on him about getting a BJ," Keith said.
"I was like, 'It doesn't affect the way he's running the country.'
Keith would later go on to be awarded a National Medal of Arts by Trump,
reported only a week after the January 6 riots at the U.S. Capitol, as
Trump was being impeached for the second time. It was reported at the time
that he had not posted about his award on social media.
Published Feb 06, 2024 at 10:15 AM EST
Toby Keith Dead Aged 62
By Tom Norton
The death of 62-year-old country music star Toby Keith, following a
stomach cancer diagnosis, has led to a flood of tributes across the worlds
of music and politics.
Tributes and messages about Keith spread across social media on Tuesday,
including from Donald Trump Jr. who posted a photo on X, formerly Twitter,
that he took with Keith in 2018.
Trump Jr. wrote alongside: "Ugh. We lost a legend this week. R.I.P Toby
Keith."
Toby Keith Trump
Country singer Toby Keith performs for then US President-elect Donald
Trump and his family during a welcome celebration at the Lincoln Memorial
in Washington, DC, on January 19, 2017. BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty
Images
The country star not only performed at Trump's inauguration in 2017 but
was awarded a National Medal of Arts by the former president in 2021. His
pro-American, pro-military lyricism and macho personality arguably echoed
some of Trump's policies and posturing too.
Keith's performance at Trump's 2017 presidential inauguration did not
happen in a vacuum. Keith accepted the gig amid reports that other major
stars had refused the invitation to play at the Lincoln Memorial.
According to Vulture, these included Elton John, Celine Dion, Kiss, and
fellow country music star Garth Brooks.
Reports of the struggles to secure big names for the inauguration made
Keith's name stand out. However, in a 2017 interview with The Atlantic, he
said the decision to play was a matter of duty rather than tacit support
toward Trump, saying if "the president of the frickin' United States asks
you to do something and you can go, you should go instead of being a jack-
off."
Asked about the controversy surrounding artists agreeing to perform at
Trump's inauguration, Keith reinforced his support for America, not Trump
or the Republican Party. "I don't apologize for performing for our country
or military," he said in a statement to Entertainment Weekly. "I performed
at events for previous presidents [George W.] Bush and Obama and over 200
shows in Iraq and Afghanistan for the USO."
Keith was a registered Democrat until 2008, when he re-registered as an
independent, telling the Chicago Tribune in 2016, "I was a Democrat my
whole life. They kind of disowned me when I started supporting the troops,
then I went and registered independent,"
"I've never been a registered Republican. It just keeps people off
balance. They don't know what to think."
In 2008, he told The Washington Post that he voted for Clinton twice and
twice for George W. Bush as well. "I didn't care for Gore or Kerry," he
said.
Keith would not say whether he voted for Barack Obama or John McCain, but
when asked in 2009 if he approved of Obama, he didn't seem to have any
problem with the president. "I think he's doing fine," he told CNN.
Keith also made biting criticisms of Trump and Hillary Clinton in the run-
up to the 2016 election.
"This is by far the best country you could ever live in, and we picked
these two candidates to be media whores and go out there and take care of
the world, huh?" he said in September 2016 at the Route 91 Harvest
Festival in Las Vegas. He also called the election a "dumpster fire,"
according to Rolling Stone.
These comments echoed what he told the Chicago Tribune in 2016, saying
"This election, I don't think it makes a difference," when asked if he
knew which candidate he would vote for.
"I can't believe there's 300 million Americans in this country and we've
got these two as our final two. It's absolutely crazy."
Speaking to The Atlantic in 2017, Keith praised parts of Trump's early
performance as president, particularly his use of military generals as
advisers.
Read more
He also dismissed one of Trump's most controversial moments, the infamous
"grab 'em by the p****" comment, recorded while speaking to then Access
Hollywood host Billy Bush in 2005, saying "Guys talk like that
everywhere."
"Bill Clinton, everyone was on him about getting a BJ," Keith said.
"I was like, 'It doesn't affect the way he's running the country.'
Keith would later go on to be awarded a National Medal of Arts by Trump,
reported only a week after the January 6 riots at the U.S. Capitol, as
Trump was being impeached for the second time. It was reported at the time
that he had not posted about his award on social media.
Skeeter
Feb 7, 2024, 11:33:33 AM2/7/24
to
rema...@domain.invalid
Feb 7, 2024, 3:20:03 PM2/7/24
to
In <uq0b0u$1gg87$1...@dont-email.me> A fool Big Trump Failure
<bigtrump...@protonmail.com> wrote:
Tens of thousands of bogus research papers are being published in
journals in an international scandal that is worsening every year,
scientists have warned. Medical research is being compromised, drug
development hindered and promising academic research jeopardised
thanks to a global wave of sham science that is sweeping
laboratories and universities.
Last year the annual number of papers retracted by research journals
topped 10,000 for the first time. Most analysts believe the figure
is only the tip of an iceberg of scientific fraud.
“The situation has become appalling,” said Professor Dorothy Bishop
of Oxford University. “The level of publishing of fraudulent papers
is creating serious problems for science. In many fields it is
becoming difficult to build up a cumulative approach to a subject,
because we lack a solid foundation of trustworthy findings. And it’s
getting worse and worse.”
The startling rise in the publication of sham science papers has its
roots in China, where young doctors and scientists seeking promotion
were required to have published scientific papers. Shadow
organisations – known as “paper mills” – began to supply fabricated
work for publication in journals there.
The practice has since spread to India, Iran, Russia, former Soviet
Union states and eastern Europe, with paper mills supplying
fabricated studies to more and more journals as increasing numbers
of young scientists try to boost their careers by claiming false
research experience. In some cases, journal editors have been bribed
to accept articles, while paper mills have managed to establish
their own agents as guest editors who then allow reams of falsified
work to be published.
“Editors are not fulfilling their roles properly, and peer reviewers
are not doing their jobs. And some are being paid large sums of
money,” said Professor Alison Avenell of Aberdeen University. “It is
deeply worrying.”
The products of paper mills often look like regular articles but are
based on templates in which names of genes or diseases are slotted
in at random among fictitious tables and figures. Worryingly, these
articles can then get incorporated into large databases used by
those working on drug discovery.
Others are more bizarre and include research unrelated to a
journal’s field, making it clear that no peer review has taken place
in relation to that article. An example is a paper on Marxist
ideology that appeared in the journal Computational and Mathematical
Methods in Medicine. Others are distinctive because of the strange
language they use, including references to “bosom peril” rather than
breast cancer and “Parkinson’s ailment” rather Parkinson’s disease.
Watchdog groups – such as Retraction Watch – have tracked the
problem and have noted retractions by journals that were forced to
act on occasions when fabrications were uncovered. One study, by
Nature, revealed that in 2013 there were just over 1,000
retractions. In 2022, the figure topped 4,000 before jumping to more
than 10,000 last year.
Of this last total, more than 8,000 retracted papers had been
published in journals owned by Hindawi, a subsidiary of the
publisher Wiley, figures that have now forced the company to act.
“We will be sunsetting the Hindawi brand and have begun to fully
integrate the 200-plus Hindawi journals into Wiley’s portfolio,” a
Wiley spokesperson told the Observer.
The spokesperson added that Wiley had now identified hundreds of
fraudsters present in its portfolio of journals, as well as those
who had held guest editorial roles. “We have removed them from our
systems and will continue to take a proactive … approach in our
efforts to clean up the scholarly record, strengthen our integrity
processes and contribute to cross-industry solutions.”
But Wiley insisted it could not tackle the crisis on its own, a
message echoed by other publishers, which say they are under siege
from paper mills. Academics remain cautious, however. The problem is
that in many countries, academics are paid according to the number
of papers they have published.
“If you have growing numbers of researchers who are being strongly
incentivised to publish just for the sake of publishing, while we
have a growing number of journals making money from publishing the
resulting articles, you have a perfect storm,” said Professor Marcus
Munafo of Bristol University. “That is exactly what we have now.”
The harm done by publishing poor or fabricated research is
demonstrated by the anti-parasite drug ivermectin. Early laboratory
studies indicated it could be used to treat Covid-19 and it was
hailed as a miracle drug. However, it was later found these studies
showed clear evidence of fraud, and medical authorities have refused
to back it as a treatment for Covid.
Wilkinson added that he and his colleagues were trying to develop
protocols that researchers could apply to reveal the authenticity of
studies that they might include in their own work. “Some great
science came out during the pandemic, but there was an ocean of
rubbish research too. We need ways to pinpoint poor data right from
the start.”
The danger posed by the rise of the paper mill and fraudulent
research papers was also stressed by Professor Malcolm MacLeod of
Edinburgh University. “If, as a scientist, I want to check all the
papers about a particular drug that might target cancers or stroke
cases, it is very hard for me to avoid those that are fabricated.
Scientific knowledge is being polluted by made-up material. We are
facing a crisis.”
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2024/feb/03/the-situation-has-
become-appalling-fake-scientific-papers-push-research-credibility-
to-crisis-point
<bigtrump...@protonmail.com> wrote:
Tens of thousands of bogus research papers are being published in
journals in an international scandal that is worsening every year,
scientists have warned. Medical research is being compromised, drug
development hindered and promising academic research jeopardised
thanks to a global wave of sham science that is sweeping
laboratories and universities.
Last year the annual number of papers retracted by research journals
topped 10,000 for the first time. Most analysts believe the figure
is only the tip of an iceberg of scientific fraud.
“The situation has become appalling,” said Professor Dorothy Bishop
of Oxford University. “The level of publishing of fraudulent papers
is creating serious problems for science. In many fields it is
becoming difficult to build up a cumulative approach to a subject,
because we lack a solid foundation of trustworthy findings. And it’s
getting worse and worse.”
The startling rise in the publication of sham science papers has its
roots in China, where young doctors and scientists seeking promotion
were required to have published scientific papers. Shadow
organisations – known as “paper mills” – began to supply fabricated
work for publication in journals there.
The practice has since spread to India, Iran, Russia, former Soviet
Union states and eastern Europe, with paper mills supplying
fabricated studies to more and more journals as increasing numbers
of young scientists try to boost their careers by claiming false
research experience. In some cases, journal editors have been bribed
to accept articles, while paper mills have managed to establish
their own agents as guest editors who then allow reams of falsified
work to be published.
“Editors are not fulfilling their roles properly, and peer reviewers
are not doing their jobs. And some are being paid large sums of
money,” said Professor Alison Avenell of Aberdeen University. “It is
deeply worrying.”
The products of paper mills often look like regular articles but are
based on templates in which names of genes or diseases are slotted
in at random among fictitious tables and figures. Worryingly, these
articles can then get incorporated into large databases used by
those working on drug discovery.
Others are more bizarre and include research unrelated to a
journal’s field, making it clear that no peer review has taken place
in relation to that article. An example is a paper on Marxist
ideology that appeared in the journal Computational and Mathematical
Methods in Medicine. Others are distinctive because of the strange
language they use, including references to “bosom peril” rather than
breast cancer and “Parkinson’s ailment” rather Parkinson’s disease.
Watchdog groups – such as Retraction Watch – have tracked the
problem and have noted retractions by journals that were forced to
act on occasions when fabrications were uncovered. One study, by
Nature, revealed that in 2013 there were just over 1,000
retractions. In 2022, the figure topped 4,000 before jumping to more
than 10,000 last year.
Of this last total, more than 8,000 retracted papers had been
published in journals owned by Hindawi, a subsidiary of the
publisher Wiley, figures that have now forced the company to act.
“We will be sunsetting the Hindawi brand and have begun to fully
integrate the 200-plus Hindawi journals into Wiley’s portfolio,” a
Wiley spokesperson told the Observer.
The spokesperson added that Wiley had now identified hundreds of
fraudsters present in its portfolio of journals, as well as those
who had held guest editorial roles. “We have removed them from our
systems and will continue to take a proactive … approach in our
efforts to clean up the scholarly record, strengthen our integrity
processes and contribute to cross-industry solutions.”
But Wiley insisted it could not tackle the crisis on its own, a
message echoed by other publishers, which say they are under siege
from paper mills. Academics remain cautious, however. The problem is
that in many countries, academics are paid according to the number
of papers they have published.
“If you have growing numbers of researchers who are being strongly
incentivised to publish just for the sake of publishing, while we
have a growing number of journals making money from publishing the
resulting articles, you have a perfect storm,” said Professor Marcus
Munafo of Bristol University. “That is exactly what we have now.”
The harm done by publishing poor or fabricated research is
demonstrated by the anti-parasite drug ivermectin. Early laboratory
studies indicated it could be used to treat Covid-19 and it was
hailed as a miracle drug. However, it was later found these studies
showed clear evidence of fraud, and medical authorities have refused
to back it as a treatment for Covid.
Wilkinson added that he and his colleagues were trying to develop
protocols that researchers could apply to reveal the authenticity of
studies that they might include in their own work. “Some great
science came out during the pandemic, but there was an ocean of
rubbish research too. We need ways to pinpoint poor data right from
the start.”
The danger posed by the rise of the paper mill and fraudulent
research papers was also stressed by Professor Malcolm MacLeod of
Edinburgh University. “If, as a scientist, I want to check all the
papers about a particular drug that might target cancers or stroke
cases, it is very hard for me to avoid those that are fabricated.
Scientific knowledge is being polluted by made-up material. We are
facing a crisis.”
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2024/feb/03/the-situation-has-
become-appalling-fake-scientific-papers-push-research-credibility-
to-crisis-point
rema...@domain.invalid
Feb 7, 2024, 4:10:04 PM2/7/24
to
> The baby was the size of a small hog before it was yanked out.
> She didn't want the baby anyway, she just wanted the welfare
money.
A medical examiner on Tuesday released the manner of death for a
baby whose mother accused a Georgia hospital and others of
decapitating during delivery, ruling it a homicide.
The Clayton County, Georgia Medical Examiner’s office said the baby
died from a broken neck and the baby’s head was detached, according
to a news release shared with CNN.
The 20-year-old mother, Jessica Ross, filed a lawsuit in August
alleging the Southern Regional Medical Center attempted to conceal
the manner of death of the baby, Treveon Isaiah Taylor Jr., from her
and her boyfriend, Trevon Isaiah Taylor Sr., along with the whole
family.
The medical examiner’s office said Ross’s baby died from “fracture-
dislocation with complete transection, upper cervical (C1-C2) spine
and spinal cord,” due to “shoulder dystocia, arrest of labor, and
fetal entrapment in the birth canal,” according to the news release.
The medical examiner said pregnancy-induced diabetes and premature
rupture of membranes were also significant conditions contributing
to Taylor’s death.
The medical center is in Riverdale, some 13 miles south of downtown
Atlanta. The baby, who was named after his father, was delivered at
full term, according to the family attorney.
Ross went into labor on July 9 and her doctor attempted to deliver
the baby using various methods, including “applying traction to the
baby’s head,” the lawsuit says.
During the attempted delivery, “the baby did not properly descend
due to shoulder dystocia,” a condition when a baby’s shoulders
become stuck in the vaginal canal, the lawsuit says.
Ross says the doctor “grossly” and “negligently applied excessive
traction” on her baby’s head and neck, the complaint says. The
doctor is also accused of failing to do a Caesarean section “in a
timely and proper manner,” which resulted in the baby’s decapitation
and death, according to the lawsuit. The Caesarean section was
completed at about 3 a.m. on July 10, the filing said.
In August, after Ross filed the lawsuit, the hospital said in a
statement it “denies the allegations in the complaint referencing
the hospital.”
The family’s spokesperson has said that when Ross and Taylor
“demanded to see and hold their baby, hospital staff told them that
they were not allowed to touch or hold their child.”
“Our heartfelt thoughts and prayers are with the family and all
those impacted by this tragic event,” the medical center’s statement
reads. “Our prayers also remain with the dedicated team of
physicians, nurses and staff at Southern Regional Medical Center who
cared for this patient. Our commitment is to provide compassionate,
quality care to every single patient, and this loss is
heartbreaking.”
The workers only allowed the couple to see their dead child’s body,
the family’s spokesperson said.
“During this viewing, their baby was wrapped tightly in a blanket
with his head propped on top of his body in a manner such that those
viewing him could not identify that he had been decapitated,” the
statement said.
“I have never witnessed anything like this before. No one in our
office has seen anything like this. Everyone we have consulted has
never seen a situation like this before,” Clayton County Medical
Examiner’s Director Brian Byars told CNN on Tuesday. “I find it very
unusual that the hospital didn’t contact our office due to the
amount of trauma that was involved in this incident.”
The case is still under investigation by the Clayton County Police
Department and could be referred to the District Attorney’s office,
the release said.
Ross and her boyfriend are expected to give a public press
conference in Atlanta on Wednesday at 11 a.m.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/06/us/babys-head-detached-during-
delivery-ruled-homicide/index.html
> She didn't want the baby anyway, she just wanted the welfare
money.
A medical examiner on Tuesday released the manner of death for a
baby whose mother accused a Georgia hospital and others of
decapitating during delivery, ruling it a homicide.
The Clayton County, Georgia Medical Examiner’s office said the baby
died from a broken neck and the baby’s head was detached, according
to a news release shared with CNN.
The 20-year-old mother, Jessica Ross, filed a lawsuit in August
alleging the Southern Regional Medical Center attempted to conceal
the manner of death of the baby, Treveon Isaiah Taylor Jr., from her
and her boyfriend, Trevon Isaiah Taylor Sr., along with the whole
family.
The medical examiner’s office said Ross’s baby died from “fracture-
dislocation with complete transection, upper cervical (C1-C2) spine
and spinal cord,” due to “shoulder dystocia, arrest of labor, and
fetal entrapment in the birth canal,” according to the news release.
The medical examiner said pregnancy-induced diabetes and premature
rupture of membranes were also significant conditions contributing
to Taylor’s death.
The medical center is in Riverdale, some 13 miles south of downtown
Atlanta. The baby, who was named after his father, was delivered at
full term, according to the family attorney.
Ross went into labor on July 9 and her doctor attempted to deliver
the baby using various methods, including “applying traction to the
baby’s head,” the lawsuit says.
During the attempted delivery, “the baby did not properly descend
due to shoulder dystocia,” a condition when a baby’s shoulders
become stuck in the vaginal canal, the lawsuit says.
Ross says the doctor “grossly” and “negligently applied excessive
traction” on her baby’s head and neck, the complaint says. The
doctor is also accused of failing to do a Caesarean section “in a
timely and proper manner,” which resulted in the baby’s decapitation
and death, according to the lawsuit. The Caesarean section was
completed at about 3 a.m. on July 10, the filing said.
In August, after Ross filed the lawsuit, the hospital said in a
statement it “denies the allegations in the complaint referencing
the hospital.”
The family’s spokesperson has said that when Ross and Taylor
“demanded to see and hold their baby, hospital staff told them that
they were not allowed to touch or hold their child.”
“Our heartfelt thoughts and prayers are with the family and all
those impacted by this tragic event,” the medical center’s statement
reads. “Our prayers also remain with the dedicated team of
physicians, nurses and staff at Southern Regional Medical Center who
cared for this patient. Our commitment is to provide compassionate,
quality care to every single patient, and this loss is
heartbreaking.”
The workers only allowed the couple to see their dead child’s body,
the family’s spokesperson said.
“During this viewing, their baby was wrapped tightly in a blanket
with his head propped on top of his body in a manner such that those
viewing him could not identify that he had been decapitated,” the
statement said.
“I have never witnessed anything like this before. No one in our
office has seen anything like this. Everyone we have consulted has
never seen a situation like this before,” Clayton County Medical
Examiner’s Director Brian Byars told CNN on Tuesday. “I find it very
unusual that the hospital didn’t contact our office due to the
amount of trauma that was involved in this incident.”
The case is still under investigation by the Clayton County Police
Department and could be referred to the District Attorney’s office,
the release said.
Ross and her boyfriend are expected to give a public press
conference in Atlanta on Wednesday at 11 a.m.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/06/us/babys-head-detached-during-
delivery-ruled-homicide/index.html
0 new messages