The clearest symptom yet of Trump’s mental decline

His brain is turning into sh*t

Robert Reich

After criticizing media coverage about him aging in office, Trump appeared to be falling asleep during a Cabinet meeting at the White House.

But that’s hardly the most troubling aspect of his aging.

In the last few weeks, Trump’s insults, tantrums, and threats have exploded.

To Nancy Cordes, CBS’s White House correspondent, he said: “Are you stupid? Are you a stupid person? You’re just asking questions because you’re a stupid person.”

About New York Times correspondent Katie Rogers: “third rate … ugly, both inside and out.”

To Bloomberg White House correspondent Catherine Lucey: “Quiet. Quiet, piggy.”

About Democratic lawmakers who told military members to defy illegal orders: guilty of “sedition … punishable by DEATH.”

About Somali immigrants to the United States: “Garbage” whom “we don’t want in our country.”

What to make of all this?

Trump’s press hack Karoline Leavitt tells reporters to “appreciate the frankness and the openness that you get from President Trump on a near-daily basis.”

Sorry, Ms. Leavitt. This goes way beyond frankness and openness. Trump is now saying things nobody in their right mind would say, let alone the president of the United States.

He’s losing control over what he says, descending into angry, venomous, often dangerous territory. Note how close his language is coming to violence — when he speaks of acts being punishable by death, or human beings as garbage, or someone being ugly inside and out.

The deterioration isn’t due to age alone.

I have some standing to talk about this frankly. I was born 10 days after Trump. My gray matter isn’t what it used to be, either, but I don’t say whatever comes into my head.

Trump Advent Calendar on sale now

This is NOT how numbers work.

The most you can reduce a product price is by 100%, making that produce free. To reduce a product price by 500%, the pharmacy would have to pay the consumer five times the sale price of the item. If the pills cost $10, the pharmacy would have to pay you $50. But hey, why let basic arithmetic spoil a good lie.

The next time you buy a prescription, be sure to demand your 500% discount. Tell them King Donald sent you.

Trump Wants Americans To Make More Babies

Critics Say His Policies Won’t Help Raise Them.

Stephanie Armour and Amanda Seitz

Maddy Olcott plans to start a career once she graduates from college. But the junior at the State University of New York-Purchase College is so far not planning to start a family — even with the Trump administration dangling inducements like thousand-dollar “baby bonuses” or cheaper infertility drugs.

“Our country wants us to be birthing machines, but they’re cutting what resources there already are,” said Olcott, 20. “And a $1,000 baby bonus? It’s low-key like, what, bro? That wouldn’t even cover my month’s rent.”

The Trump administration wants Americans to have more babies, and the federal government is debuting policy initiatives to reverse the falling U.S. fertility rate. In mid-October, the White House unveiled a plan to increase access to in vitro fertilization treatment. President Donald Trump has heralded such initiatives, calling himself “the fertilization president.”

Trump likes kids once they turn 14

But reproductive rights groups and other advocacy organizations say these efforts to buttress the birth rate don’t make up for broader administration priorities aimed at cutting federal programs such as Medicaid, its related Children’s Health Insurance Program, and other initiatives that support women and children. 

The pro-family focus, they say, isn’t just about boosting procreation. Instead, they say, it’s being weaponized to push a conservative agenda that threatens women’s health, reproductive rights, and labor force participation.

Some predict these efforts could deter parenthood and lead to increases in maternal mortality.

“The religious right wants more white Christian babies and is trying to curtail women’s reproductive freedom in order to achieve that aim,” said Marian Starkey, a spokesperson for Population Connection, a nonprofit that promotes population stabilization through increased access to birth control and abortion. “The real danger is the constant whittling down of reproductive rights.”

The White House did not respond to repeated interview requests.

Gas stoves are filling millions of homes with hidden toxic air

Maybe you love your gas stove but it may not love you back

Stanford University

For many people in the United States, spending time indoors does not guarantee protection from harmful air pollution. A new study led by Stanford University and published Dec. 2 in PNAS Nexus reports that gas and propane stoves release significant amounts of nitrogen dioxide. This pollutant has been associated with asthma, obstructive pulmonary disease, preterm birth, diabetes, and lung cancer. 

According to the research, switching from gas to electric stoves lowers nitrogen dioxide exposure by more than one quarter nationwide and by about half for people who use their stoves most frequently. Earlier studies documented nitrogen dioxide from gas stoves, but this work is the first to examine both indoor and outdoor exposure across the entire country.

"We know that outdoor air pollution harms our health, but we assume our indoor air is safe." said study senior author Rob Jackson, the Michelle and Kevin Douglas Provostial Professor in Earth System Science at the Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability. "Our research shows that if you use a gas stove, you're often breathing as much nitrogen dioxide pollution indoors from your stove as you are from all outdoor sources combined."

Indoor pollution can be as dangerous as outdoor emissions

Outdoor air pollution contributes to hundreds of thousands of deaths in the U.S. each year and leads to millions of new cases of childhood asthma worldwide. Laws such as the U.S. Clean Air Act have helped reduce outdoor pollution, but indoor air remains largely unregulated even though it can pose similar risks. This new analysis is the first nationwide evaluation of how much nitrogen dioxide people encounter from both indoor and outdoor sources, including gas stoves, vehicle traffic, and electricity generation.

Federal judge declares Trump wind memo blocking offshore wind farms to be unlawful

This is good news, but what will the Supreme Court do?

By Anastasia E. Lennon, Rhode Island Current

This story originally appeared in The New Bedford Light.

A federal judge on Monday ruled in favor of Massachusetts and more than a dozen states that sued the Trump administration in May over President Donald Trump’s day-one offshore wind memo. The directive has frozen permitting since January, pending a comprehensive review by federal agencies.

The states argued the memo is unlawful and has caused significant harm – stymieing domestic investment, jeopardizing states’ abilities to supply enough electricity, and creating an “existential threat” to the industry.

Judge Patti B. Saris seemed to agree with their legal claims: “The State Plaintiffs have produced ample evidence demonstrating that they face ongoing or imminent injuries due to the Wind Order.”

On the flip side, she delivered sharp criticism of the federal government’s arguments and the wind memo itself, writing that it fails to adequately explain or support such a significant change in course from the agencies’ prior permitting practices.

“Whatever level of explanation is required when deviating from longstanding agency practice, this is not it,” Judge Saris wrote.

We were warned this would happen

New US domestic terrorism priorities raise constitutional alarms

Melinda Haas, University of Pittsburgh

A largely overlooked directive issued by the Trump administration marks a major shift in U.S. counterterrorism policy, one that threatens bedrock free speech rights enshrined in the Bill of Rights.

National Security Presidential Memorandum/NSPM-7, issued on Sept. 25, 2025, is a presidential directive that for the first time appears to authorize preemptive law enforcement measures against Americans based not on whether they are planning to commit violence but for their political or ideological beliefs.

You’ve probably heard a lot about Donald Trump’s many executive orders. But as an international relations scholar who has studied U.S. foreign policy decision-making and national security legislation, I recognize that presidents can take several types of executive actions without legislative involvement: executive orders, memoranda and proclamations.

This structure allows the president to direct law enforcement and national security agencies, with little opportunity for congressional oversight.

This seventh national security memorandum from the Trump White House pushes the limits of presidential authority by targeting individuals and groups as potential domestic terrorists based on their beliefs rather than their actions.

The memorandum represents a profound shift in U.S. counterterrorism policy, one that risks undermining foundational American commitments to free speech and association.

ICE Barbie wishes you a Merry Christmas. This is real - not a joke

WHOA! Donald Trump explains how healthy he is in body and mind.

Says it's "seditious" and "treasonous" not to believe he's perfect. And "thank you for your attention to this matter."

How much carbon do our coastal wetlands absorb?

URI study reveals opportunity to improve blue carbon measurements in coastal wetlands

By Mackensie duPont Crowley

A new study finds a critical limitation in a widely used method for measuring organic carbon in flooded coastal sediments, a gap that could influence global carbon storage estimates and assessments of marsh resilience. (URI Photo/Courtesy Erin Peck)

Coastal wetlands, like salt marshes, keep pace with sea-level rise by accumulating sediment and burying organic carbon in their soils, an important natural process that also helps sequester carbon. Accurately measuring this stored carbon is essential for understanding marsh resilience and informing blue carbon strategies.

But a new study led by Erin Peck, an assistant professor at the University of Rhode Island’s Graduate School of Oceanography, and Serina Wittyngham, an assistant professor at the University of North Florida, identifies a fundamental limitation in a widely-used method for measuring organic carbon in flooded coastal sediments. 

This gap has implications for global estimates of carbon storage and marsh resilience. Traditional blue carbon methods assume that all measured organic matter contributes to long-term carbon storage and sediment volume. The new study shows this isn’t always the case. 

Some organic matter is dissolved in sediment porewater, while other portions adhere loosely to sediment particles or are bound within the internal structure of clay minerals. These forms of organic matter may not contribute to sediment volume, accretion, or marsh resilience.

By examining more than 23,000 tidal marsh sediment samples across multiple marsh systems, Peck, Wittyngham, and their collaborators demonstrated that this overlooked fraction of “volumeless” organic matter can lead to overestimates of both carbon storage and marsh elevation gains. Recognizing this nuance allows scientists to refine their estimates of carbon sequestration and resilience, ensuring that restoration planning, carbon accounting, and predictive modeling are based on the most accurate information possible.

The researchers’ findings were published recently in a peer-reviewed article in the journal Limnology and Oceanography Letters.

South County Habitat for Humanity receives $200,000 from Bank of America Neighborhood Builders Program

Welcome boost to addressing affordable housing shortage

Representatives from Bank of America and South County Habitat for Humanity. Photo: South County Habitat for Humanity

South County Habitat for Humanity (SCHH) has been named a 2025 Bank of America Neighborhood Builder, receiving $200,000 in unrestricted funding to support its mission of building affordable homeownership units in Washington County, Rhode Island. 

In addition to this funding, this prestigious award provides access to leadership development resources and training. SCHH joins fellow Rhode Island nonprofit Social Enterprise Greenhouse in receiving this distinguished designation.

“This year, as we celebrate the 35th anniversary of South County Habitat for Humanity, we are deeply honored to receive this incredible investment from our longtime partners at Bank of America,” said Colin Penney, Executive Director of SCHH. 

“Unrestricted support like this gives us the flexibility to strategically grow our capacity and better meet the needs of our community, ensuring every dollar advances our mission of a world where everyone has a decent place to live. With ambitious plans for larger-scale housing developments, this funding arrives at a pivotal moment. We are truly grateful for Bank of America’s partnership.”

Yes, the government can track your location – but usually not by spying on you directly

Your cell phone tells them where you are

Emilee Rader, University of Wisconsin-Madison

If you use a mobile phone with location services turned on, it is likely that data about where you live and work, where you shop for groceries, where you go to church and see your doctor, and where you traveled to over the holidays is up for sale. And U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is one of the customers.

The U.S. government doesn’t need to collect data about people’s locations itself, because your mobile phone is already doing it. While location data is sometimes collected as part of a mobile phone app’s intended use, like for navigation or to get a weather forecast, more often locations are collected invisibly in the background.

I am a privacy researcher who studies how people understand and make decisions about data that is collected about them, and I research new ways to help consumers get back some control over their privacy. Unfortunately, once you give an app or webpage permission to collect location data, you no longer have control over how the data is used and shared, including who the data is shared with or sold to.

Every time we debate taxing the rich in Rhode Island, this issue comes up

What the data shows about threats of a tax exodus by the wealthy

Cristobal Young, Cornell University

New York’s mayor-elect, Zohran Mamdani, campaigned on a promise to raise the city’s income tax on its richest residents from 3.9% to 5.9%. Combined with the state income tax, which is 10.9% for the top bracket, the increase would cement the city’s position as having the highest taxes on top earners in the country.

It set off a chorus of warnings about the tax flight of the city’s wealthiest residents.

Hedge fund billionaire Bill Ackman claimed that both the city’s businesses and wealthy residents “have already started making arrangements for the exits.”

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul echoed the concern, opposing the proposal “because we cannot have them leave the state.” Before the election, Mamdani’s opponent, former New York governor Andrew Cuomo, joked that if Mamdani won, “even I will move to Florida.”

I research whether high earners actually move when their taxes go up. My colleagues and I have analyzed millionaire taxes in New Jersey and California, the migration of Forbes billionaires globally and decades of IRS data tracing where Americans with million-dollar incomes live.

Top earners are often thought of as “mobile millionaires” who are ever searching for lower-tax places to live. In reality, they’re often reluctant to leave the places where they built their careers and raised their families.

At the same time, there are grains of truth in the tax migration arguments, so it’s important to carefully parse the evidence.

King Donald and his Xmas wish list

It's for real.