==Nayib Bukele
@nayibbukele
President Bukele lands in Joint Base Andrews for meetings with Trump (tarmac video)
8:30 PM · Apr 12, 2025
·1.4M
Views
https://x.com/nayibbukele/status/1911215433300037830
THEY ALL LOVE THE REAL CHIEF!!!😎🇺🇸🔥🔥🔥
1:02
https://rumble.com/embed/v6ptz3z/?pub=4
LIL X WILL HAVE SO MANY STORIES TO TELL!!!😂😂😂
0:24
https://rumble.com/embed/v6ptyoh/?pub=4
YUUUGE WIN BY DOM!!!🥳🥳🥳
The fighter did a Golf Swing for Trump.
0:24
https://rumble.com/embed/v6ptxd7/?pub=4
BOSS IN THE BUILDING!!!😎🇺🇸🥳🥳🥳
2:47
https://rumble.com/embed/v6ptwm3/?pub=4
Trump is like a good luck charm when he comes. I’m sure God from Heaven can hear those cheers
Wisconsin teen allegedly killed parents in extremist plot to assassinate Trump, FBI says
ByNadine El-Bawab andVictoria Arancio
April 12, 2025, 4:03 PM ET
• 4 min read
Nikita Casap, 17, is accused of killing his mother and stepfather.
Teen kills parents in extremist plot to assassinate Trump: FBIWaukesha County prosecutors charged Nikita Casap, 17, with killing his mother and stepfather inside their Wisconsin home in February.WISN
A Wisconsin teen allegedly killed his parents to "obtain the financial means and autonomy necessary" to kill President Donald Trump and overthrow the U.S. government, federal authorities said in court documents.
Nikita Casap, 17, was arrested in March and charged with two counts of first-degree murderand two counts of hiding a corpse, according to Waukesha County authorities. Other charges include theft of property over $10,000 and misappropriating ID to obtain money.
Court documents show investigators are pursing federal charges including conspiracy, presidential assassination and use of weapons of mass destruction.
The teen's stepfather, Donald Mayer, 51, and mother, Tatiana Casap, 35, were both found dead inside their home by the Waukesha County Sheriff's Department on March 1, according to a press release from the department.
The sheriff's department issued a search warrant and say they found material on the teen's phonerelated to "The Order of Nine Angles," which is "a network of individuals holding new-Nazi racially motivated extremist views," according to investigators.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation reviewed documents allegedly written by the teen, which calls for the assassination of Trump and the start of a revolutionto "save the white race,"according to federal court documents.
The alleged writings shows images of Adolf Hitler with the following text: "HAIL HITLER HAIL THE WHITE RACE HAIL VICTORY," according to court documents. (So how can Trump be a Nazi, when American Nazis hate him?)
"He was in touch with other parties about his plan to kill the President and overthrow the government of the Unites States. And he paid for, at least in part, a drone and explosives to be used as a weapon of mass destruction to commit an attack," investigators said in the federal affidavit.
"Other parties, with whom Casap was in contact, appear to have been aware of his plan and action and to have provided assistance to Casap in carrying them out," according to the affidavit.
Casap was in court on April 9 for a preliminary hearing on his state charges. He has not yet offered a plea and remains in custody. His next court appearance is for an arraignment on May 7, according to the Waukesha County court docket.
https://abcnews.go.com/amp/US/wisconsin-teen-allegedly-killed-parents-extremist-plot-assassinate/story?id=120750496
I wonder if this FBI entrapment?
Fury over plans for 'spy dungeons' beneath new Chinese embassy in London
The Conservatives have accused Keir Starmer of adopting ‘a policy of appeasement’ towards China.
Downing Street is under fire over revived plans to build a vast Chinese "super embassy" in London — a proposal previously blocked by the former Conservative government.
Planning documents for the proposed site, located at the historic Royal Mint buildings near the Tower of London,reveal “two suites of anonymous unlabelled basement rooms and a tunnel”, with their intended purpose redacted “for security reasons”.
The Conservatives have accused the government of "appeasement" towards Beijing, warning the so-called "dungeons" could be used for espionage or to intimidate dissidents, according to the Mail on Sunday.
Levelling Up Secretary Kevin Hollinrake has written to Prime Minister Keir Starmer,claiming the government has been caught "red-handed in an attempt to ram this mega-embassy" through the planning system.
He added:"It would be a barbarous irony that a site so close to the medieval Tower of London could become a modern-day dungeonunder a Starmer government."
Mr Hollinrake also criticised the "striking" level of redactions in the embassy’s planning documents, asking: "Why does the use of the basement rooms need to be redacted, given they are not in public sight and there is no public access?"
He warned: "This subterranean zone will undeniably be used for intelligence work by the Chinese Communist Partyand its arm, the United Front Work Department.
But there is also a chilling prospect that it could be used for the abduction, intimidation or torture of anti-Chinese dissidents living in the United Kingdom."
The original embassy planswere blocked under the Conservative government following objections from British intelligence agencies and Scotland Yard, who raised concerns about the proximity of sensitive data cables that could be intercepted by Chinese spies.
But the application was resubmitted in January this year, shortlybefore Chancellor Rachel Reeves visited China. President Xi Jinping is said to have personally lobbied for the embassy’s approval.
The government has yet to comment publicly on the renewed application. Meanwhile,internal divisions persist over whether to officially classify China as a hostile state alongside Iran and Russia.
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper and Foreign Secretary David Lammy are reportedly in favour of adding China to the Foreign Influence Registration Scheme — designed to expose covert activity —but Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves are said to have opposed the move.
Concerns over Chinese influence in the UK have been growing.Unofficial Chinese "police service stations" have reportedly operated in Croydon, Hendon, Glasgow and Belfast, allegedly used to monitor and intimidate dissidents.
In his letter, Mr Hollinrake cited the case of a Hong Kong pro-democracy protester who was dragged into the Chinese consulate grounds in Manchester and assaulted.
Amnesty International has also raised concerns that Chinese embassies are being used as surveillance hubs,warning of a "sinister pattern of transnational repression" targeting Chinese and Hong Kong students in the UK.
The embassy site would be situated between London's financial hubs in the City and Canary Wharf, and near three major data centres — further heightening security fears.
According to diplomatic sources,the US government under Donald Trump would have reconsidered intelligence-sharing with the UK if the embassy were approved.
Scotland Yard and Tower Hamlets Council reportedly dropped their objections within two weeks of Reeves’ visit to China earlier this year.
A spokesperson for the Chinese embassy has denied allegations that the site could be used for spying, saying: "Anti-China elements are always keen on slandering and attacking China."
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/chinese-super-embassy-london-spying-fears-b1222229.html
(UK has no problem imprisoning their citizens, why should China is their reasoning) insanity
AP is begging for money since they got cut off from USAID(I doubt anyone is donating, since the crank out Anti Trump articles daily)
Trump goes with his gut and the world goes along for the ride
Trump goes with his gut and the world goes along for the ride1/2
WASHINGTON (AP) — After President Donald Trump reversed course on his tariffs and announced he would pursue trade negotiations, he had a simple explanation for how he would make decisions in the coming weeks.
“Instinctively, more than anything else,” he told reporters this past week. “You almost can’t take a pencil to paper, it’s really more of an instinct than anything else.”
It was the latest example of how Trump loves to keep everyone on edge for his next move. Trump has not only expansively flexed the powers of the presidency by declaring emergencies and shredding political norms, he has eschewed traditional deliberative procedures for making decisions. The result is that more of life around the country and the world is subject to the president’s desires, moods and grievances than ever before.
“We have a democratic leader who seems to have the authority to act as whimsically as a 19th century European autocrat,” said Tim Naftali, a historian and senior research scholar at Columbia University. “He sneezes and everyone catches a cold.”
The White House rejects criticism that Trump is overstepping his authority or improperly consolidating power.Administration officials frequently emphasize that the Republican president won a clear election victory and is now pursuing the agenda that he campaigned on.In this view, resisting his will, such as when courts block his executive orders, is the real threat to democracy.
“Trust in President Trump,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Friday while answering questions about economic policy. “He knows what he’s doing.”
The presidency has been accumulating power for years, long before Trump ran for office, and it is not unusual for administrations to veer in various directions based on political and policy priorities. But Trump’s new term has been different in the early months, and he seems to recognize it.
“The second term is just more powerful,” Trump marveled recently. “When I say ‘do it,’ they do it.”
Although international trade offers the most extensive example of Trump’s inclination to act unilaterally since he returned to office in January the same approach has been evident elsewhere.
He installed himself as chair of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts to overhaul programming at Washington’s premier cultural institution. He issued an order to purge “improper ideology” from the Smithsonian Institution’s network of museums. He punished law firms associated with his opponents. He directed the Justice Department to investigate former officials who crossed him during his first term.
When Trump decided to remove regulations on household water efficiency — he wants more water flowing in showers — his executive order said the normal public comment period “is unnecessary because I am ordering the repeal.”
“What the president ends up having is what he wants, which is everyone’s attention all of the time,” Naftali said.
Trump’s ambitions stretch beyond the United States, such as his goal of annexing Greenland.Vice President JD Vance visited the island last month to talk about its strategic location in the Arctic, where Russia and China want to expand their influence, but also its importance to Trump himself.
“We can’t just ignore the president’s desires,” Vance said.
https://apnews.com/article/trump-tariffs-presidential-power-instinct-decision-making-3d1215e5675ef534bbebe8dfe8f136a5
2/2
Trump has spent decades trying to turn his impulses into reality, whether it’s skyscrapers in Manhattan or casinos in Atlantic City, New Jersey. He once sued a journalist for allegedly underestimating his net worth. During a deposition, Trump said “it goes up and down with the markets and with attitudes and with feelings, even my own feelings.”
A lawyer for the journalist appeared puzzled. “You said your net worth goes up and down based upon your own feelings?”
Trump said yes. “I would say it’s my general attitude at the time that the question may be asked.”
He took a similar approach into the White House for his first term. While talking about the economy with The Washington Post, Trump said “my gut tells me more sometimes than anybody else’s brain can ever tell me.”
Leon Panetta, who was White House chief of staff under Democratic President Bill Clinton and later served in national security roles for Democratic President Barack Obama, said there normally is a more deliberative process for critical issues.
“If you throw all of that out of the window and operate based on gut instincts, what you’re doing is making every decision a huge gamble,” Panetta said. “Because you just haven’t done the homework to really understand all of the implications.” (It’s better than lying while all you security people concoct your own CS, like the Iraq and Afghanistan war for Bush and Cheny’s money endeavors.)
“When you roll dice,” he added, “sometimes it’s going to come up snake eyes.”
Because Trump does not have a clear process for making decisions, Panetta said “that means everybody has to kowtow to him because that’s the only way you’re going to have any impact.” (He has one, he’s just not going to tell you!)
Trump has seemed to enjoy that aspect of the ongoing controversy over tariffs. During a Republican dinner this past week, he said foreign leaders were “kissing my ass” to talk him out of his trade agenda.
The saga began on April 2 when Trump declared that trade deficits — when the U.S. buys more products from some countries than it sells — represented a national emergency, enabling him to enact tariffs without congressional approval.
The stock market collapsed and then the bond market began to slide. On Wednesday, Trump backed off his plans.
Although high taxes have been left in place on imports from China, many of the other targeted tariffs have been paused for 90 days to allow time for negotiations with individual countries.
“Americans should trust in that process,” said Leavitt, the press secretary.
Scott Lincicome, vice president of general economics at the conservative Cato Institute, expressed concern that the course of international trade was becoming dependent on the “whims of a single dude in the Oval Office.”
Lincicome said the White House timeline to reach trade deals was “not credible” given the complexity of the issues. A more likely scenario, he said, is that the resulting agreements will be nothing more than “superficial nothingburgers” and Trump will ”declare a great victory and all this stuff settles down.”
Peter Navarro, Trump’s trade adviser, said in an interview with Fox Business Network that there’s “a whole portion of our White House working day and night” on negotiations.
“We’re going to run 90 deals in 90 days,” he said. “It’s possible.”
(https://apnews.com/article/trump-tariffs-presidential-power-instinct-decision-making-3d1215e5675ef534bbebe8dfe8f136a5
(When Trump is successful, AP won’t retract this!)
Roaring UFC crowd welcomes Trump, chanting 'USA!' #ufc314 #trump #elonmusk #ufc
'Fox & Friends Weekend' hosts discuss President Donald Trump attending UFC 314 in Miami this weekend.
6:36
https://youtu.be/RZ1aNYH6cj0
'DEAD SERIOUS': Hegseth reveals how far US will go to prevent nuclear Iran
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on countering China's influence at the Panama Canal and nuclear talks with Iran.
10:02
https://youtu.be/7QTwlqbkbos
New airport rules mark the 'biggest shakeup' in the airline industry yetgoing fully digital, don’t think I like that!
Kurt 'CyberGuy' Knutsson joins 'Fox & Friends Weekend' to discuss the new airport rules allowingpassengers to scan their face rather than use a boarding pass.(I’ll stay with the boarding pass)
3:23
https://youtu.be/HP-w9sJBntk
Tyrus fed up after Tim Walz's latest Elon Musk diatribe(whose idea was it to release this Walz rat from the cage of his demented mind?)
Fox News host Greg Gutfeld and the panel discuss Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz encouraging Democrats to 'demonize' Elon Musk on 'Gutfeld
6:36
https://youtu.be/f7YeswWIlFs
‘MAKING HISTORY’: MS students are making the grade with score improvements
Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves explains what is behind the Magnolia State’s ‘phenomenal’ test score improvement on ‘Fox & Friends Weekend.’
This is a state in the Deep South doing better than most states, that should wake up the others
3:53
https://youtu.be/3L8UyNcpIdA
‘STALLING’ STRATEGY: China may try to ‘wait Trump out,' expert warns
Heritage Foundation senior fellow Michael Pillsbury addresses several aspects of the China threat on ‘Life, Liberty & Levin.’ (Trump and Sun Tzu teachings can only help)
5:03
https://youtu.be/SW0QS4iGhqM
This is a 'race we can't lose' to China, Doug Burgum warns
Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum discusses President Trump's executive order to boost coal production, why coal is crucial to American energy independence and swearing in DJ Daniel as a U.S. Park Police officer. (It seems like PDJT got to choose from the most experienced to enact his far ranging policy to Make America Great Again. The first term has shit for brains appointees.)
5:46
https://youtu.be/JKThn3zL0oU
Have We Been Thinking About A.D.H.D. All Wrong?April 13, 2025 (very long anger provoking article…posting 4 parts.I’ve been on ADHD drugs since 2006, thanks assholes!)
1/4
In the early 1990s, James Swanson was working as a research psychologist at the University of California, Irvine, where he specialized in the study of attention disorders. It was a touchy time for the field. The Church of Scientology had organized a nationwide protest campaign against the psychiatric profession, and Ritalin, then the leading medication prescribed to children diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, was one of its main targets. Whenever Swanson and his colleagues gathered for a scientific conference, they were met by chanting protesters waving signs and airplanes overhead pulling banners that read, “Psychs, Stop Drugging Our Kids.”
It was true that prescription rates for Ritalin were on the rise.The number of American children diagnosed with A.D.H.D. more than doubled in the early 1990s, from fewer than a million patients in 1990 to more than two million in 1993, almost two-thirds of whom were prescribed Ritalin. To Swanson, at the time, that increase seemed entirely appropriate. Those two million children represented about 3 percent of the nation’s child population, and 3 percent was the rate that he and many other scientists believed was an accurate measure of A.D.H.D. among children.
Still, you didn’t have to be a Scientologist to acknowledge that there were some legitimate questions about A.D.H.D. Despite Ritalin’s rapid growth,no one knew exactly how the medication worked or whether it really was the best way to treat children’s attention issues. Anecdotally, doctors and parents would observe that when many children began taking stimulant medications like Ritalin,their behavior would improve almost overnight, but no one had measured in a careful, large-scale scientific study how common that positive response was or, for that matter, what the effects were on a child of taking Ritalin over the long term. And so Swanson and a team of researchers, with funding from the National Institute of Mental Health, began a vast, multisite randomized controlled trial comparing stimulant treatment for A.D.H.D. with nonpharmaceutical approaches like parent training and behavioral coaching.==
Swanson was in charge of the site in Orange County, Calif.He recruited and selected about 100 children with A.D.H.D. symptoms, all from 7 to 9 years old. They were divided into treatment groups — some were given regular doses of Ritalin, some were given high-quality behavioral training, some were given a combination and the remainder, a comparison group, were left alone to figure out their own treatment. The same thing happened at five other sites across the continent. Known as the Multimodal Treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Study, or M.T.A., it was one of the largest studies ever undertaken of the long-term effects of any psychiatric medication.
‘We have a clinical definition of A.D.H.D. that is increasingly unanchored from what we’re finding in our science.’
The initial results of the M.T.A. study,published in 1999, underscored the case for stimulant medication. After 14 months of treatment, the children who took Ritalin every day had significantly fewer symptoms than the ones who received only behavioral training.Word went out to clinics and pediatricians’ offices around the country: Ritalin worked. This was good news not only for families with children who struggled with attention issuesbut also for the corporations that offered them pharmaceutical solutions. In the years after the study’s initial publication, Swanson began consulting for drug companies. He advised Shire, which manufactured Adderall, a similar stimulant medication, on how to formulate an extended-release version of its product, so that children could take just one pill each morning instead of needing to visit the school nurse’s office in the middle of the day.
https://dnyuz.com/2025/04/13/have-we-been-thinking-about-a-d-h-d-all-wrong/
2/4
Though Swanson had welcomed that initial increase in the diagnosis rate, he expected it to plateau at 3 percent. Instead, it kept rising, hitting 5.5 percent of American children in 1997,then 6.6 percent in 2000. As time passed, Swanson began to grow uneasy. He and his colleagues were continuing to follow the almost 600 children in the M.T.A. study, and by the mid-2000s,they realized that the new data they were collecting was telling a different — and less hopeful — storythan the one they initially reported. It was still true that after 14 months of treatment, the children taking Ritalin behaved better than those in the other groups.But by 36 months, that advantage had faded completely, and children in every group, including the comparison group, displayed exactly the same level of symptoms. Swanson is now 80 and close to the end of his career, and when he talks about his life’s work, he sounds troubled — not just about the M.T.A. results but about the state of the A.D.H.D. field in general.“There are things about the way we do this work,” he told me, “that just are definitely wrong.””
I’ve spent the last year speaking with some of the leading A.D.H.D. researchers in the United States and abroad, and many of them, like Swanson, express concern over what they see as a disconnect between the emerging scientific understanding of A.D.H.D.and the way the condition is being treated in clinics and doctors’ offices. Edmund Sonuga-Barke, a researcher in psychiatry and neuroscience at King’s College London, described the situation in personal terms.“I’ve invested 35 years of my life trying to identify the causes of A.D.H.D., and somehow we seem to be farther away from our goal than we were when we started,” he told me. “We have a clinical definition of A.D.H.D. that is increasingly unanchored from what we’re finding in our science.
Despite the questions these scientists have begun to raise,the growth of the diagnosis shows no signs of stopping or even slowing down. Last year, the Centers for Disease Control and Preventionreported that 11.4 percent of American children had been diagnosed with A.D.H.D., a record high. That figure includes 15.5 percent of American adolescents, 21 percent of 14-year-old boys and 23 percent of 17-year-old boys.Seven million American children have received an A.D.H.D. diagnosis, up from six million in 2016 and two million in the mid-1990s.
The preferred treatment for A.D.H.D. remains stimulant medications, including Ritalin and Adderall, and the market for those stimulants has expanded rapidly in recent years, in step with the growth of the diagnosis.From 2012 to 2022, the total number of prescriptions for stimulants to treat A.D.H.D. increased in the United States by 58 percent.Although the prescription rate is highest among boys ages 10 to 14,the real growth market today for stimulant medication is adults. In 2012, Americans in their 30s were issued five million prescriptions for stimulants to treat A.D.H.D.; a decade later, that figure had more than tripled, rising to 18 million.
That ever-expanding mountain of pills rests on certain assumptions: that A.D.H.D. is a medical disorder that demands a medical solution; that it is caused by inherent deficits in children’s brains; and that the medications we give them repair those deficits.Scientists who study A.D.H.D. are now challenging each one of those assumptions— anduncovering new evidence for the role of a child’s environment in the progression of his symptoms. They don’t question the very real problems that lead families to seek treatment for A.D.H.D., but many believe that our current approach isn’t doing enough to help — and that we can do better. But first, they say, we need to rethink many of our old ideas about the disorder and begin looking at A.D.H.D. anew.
A.D.H.D. has always been a controversial diagnosis. Skeptics argue that many of the classic symptoms of the disorder — fidgeting, losing things, not following instructions — are simply typical, if annoying, behaviors of childhood. In response, others point to the serious consequences that can result when those symptoms grow more intense, including school failure, social rejection and serious emotional distress.
https://dnyuz.com/2025/04/13/have-we-been-thinking-about-a-d-h-d-all-wrong/
2/4
Though Swanson had welcomed that initial increase in the diagnosis rate, he expected it to plateau at 3 percent. Instead, it kept rising, hitting 5.5 percent of American children in 1997,then 6.6 percent in 2000. As time passed, Swanson began to grow uneasy. He and his colleagues were continuing to follow the almost 600 children in the M.T.A. study, and by the mid-2000s,they realized that the new data they were collecting was telling a different — and less hopeful — storythan the one they initially reported. It was still true that after 14 months of treatment, the children taking Ritalin behaved better than those in the other groups.But by 36 months, that advantage had faded completely, and children in every group, including the comparison group, displayed exactly the same level of symptoms. Swanson is now 80 and close to the end of his career, and when he talks about his life’s work, he sounds troubled — not just about the M.T.A. results but about the state of the A.D.H.D. field in general.“There are things about the way we do this work,” he told me, “that just are definitely wrong.””
I’ve spent the last year speaking with some of the leading A.D.H.D. researchers in the United States and abroad, and many of them, like Swanson, express concern over what they see as a disconnect between the emerging scientific understanding of A.D.H.D.and the way the condition is being treated in clinics and doctors’ offices. Edmund Sonuga-Barke, a researcher in psychiatry and neuroscience at King’s College London, described the situation in personal terms.“I’ve invested 35 years of my life trying to identify the causes of A.D.H.D., and somehow we seem to be farther away from our goal than we were when we started,” he told me. “We have a clinical definition of A.D.H.D. that is increasingly unanchored from what we’re finding in our science.
Despite the questions these scientists have begun to raise,the growth of the diagnosis shows no signs of stopping or even slowing down. Last year, the Centers for Disease Control and Preventionreported that 11.4 percent of American children had been diagnosed with A.D.H.D., a record high. That figure includes 15.5 percent of American adolescents, 21 percent of 14-year-old boys and 23 percent of 17-year-old boys.Seven million American children have received an A.D.H.D. diagnosis, up from six million in 2016 and two million in the mid-1990s.
The preferred treatment for A.D.H.D. remains stimulant medications, including Ritalin and Adderall, and the market for those stimulants has expanded rapidly in recent years, in step with the growth of the diagnosis.From 2012 to 2022, the total number of prescriptions for stimulants to treat A.D.H.D. increased in the United States by 58 percent.Although the prescription rate is highest among boys ages 10 to 14,the real growth market today for stimulant medication is adults. In 2012, Americans in their 30s were issued five million prescriptions for stimulants to treat A.D.H.D.; a decade later, that figure had more than tripled, rising to 18 million.
That ever-expanding mountain of pills rests on certain assumptions: that A.D.H.D. is a medical disorder that demands a medical solution; that it is caused by inherent deficits in children’s brains; and that the medications we give them repair those deficits.Scientists who study A.D.H.D. are now challenging each one of those assumptions— anduncovering new evidence for the role of a child’s environment in the progression of his symptoms. They don’t question the very real problems that lead families to seek treatment for A.D.H.D., but many believe that our current approach isn’t doing enough to help — and that we can do better. But first, they say, we need to rethink many of our old ideas about the disorder and begin looking at A.D.H.D. anew.
A.D.H.D. has always been a controversial diagnosis. Skeptics argue that many of the classic symptoms of the disorder — fidgeting, losing things, not following instructions — are simply typical, if annoying, behaviors of childhood. In response, others point to the serious consequences that can result when those symptoms grow more intense, including school failure, social rejection and serious emotional distress.
https://dnyuz.com/2025/04/13/have-we-been-thinking-about-a-d-h-d-all-wrong/
3/4
So where do you draw the line? How do you tell a normally rambunctious kid from a child with A.D.H.D.? The tool that clinicians use to make that distinction is the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or D.S.M., which provides a checklist of symptoms to use in diagnosing patients, including nine potential symptoms for inattention and nine for hyperactivity/impulsivity. To qualify for the diagnosis, achild must display six symptoms from either category, of sufficient severity and level of impairment, for at least six months, starting before age 12, and those symptoms must be present in two different settings (like home and school).
That seems pretty scientific — six symptoms, two settings, six months, age 12 — and it reflects a longstanding effortby many in the field to portray A.D.H.D. as a straightforward medical condition with clear diagnostic boundaries. Russell Barkley, one of the most prominent A.D.H.D. researchers,has labeled the disorder “diabetes of the brain,” and in a lecture that has been viewed more than four million times on YouTube, he says that like diabetes, A.D.H.D. is “a chronic disorder that must be managed every day to prevent the secondary harms it’s going to cause.” In a recent article in ADDitude, a popular magazine for families and patients, Wes Crenshaw, a psychologist who is listed as a member of the magazine’s medical-review panel,drew the borders of A.D.H.D. even more sharply. “Your child either has A.D.H.D. or he does not,” Crenshaw wrote. “If he does have it, he is either impaired, or not. And if he is impaired, talk therapy or supplements or nutrition or exercise or discipline isn’t going to resolve that.”
Now, however, some scientists have begun to argue that the traditional conception of A.D.H.D. as an unchanging, essential fact about you — something you simply have or don’t have, something wired deep in your brain — is both inaccurate and unhelpful. According to Sonuga-Barke, the British researcher, the traditional notion that there is a natural category of “people with A.D.H.D.” that clinicians can objectively measure and define “just doesn’t seem to be the case.”
Accurately diagnosing A.D.H.D. can be challenging, for a number of reasons.Unlike with diabetes, there is no reliable biological test for A.D.H.D.The diagnostic criteria in the D.S.M. often require subjective judgment, and historically those criteria have been quite fluid, shifting with each revision of the manual. The diagnosis encompasses a wide variety of behaviors.There are two main kinds of A.D.H.D., inattentive and hyperactive/impulsive, and children in one category often seem to have little in common with children in the other. There are people with A.D.H.D. whom you can’t get to stop talking and others whom you can’t get to start. Some are excessively eager and enthusiastic; others are irritable and moody.
A.D.H.D. is defined in the D.S.M. as a neurodevelopmental disorder, but the symptoms of A.D.H.D. can be produced by a variety of environmental causes as well. Difficulty sitting still and sustaining attention can also be symptoms of a serious head injury, fetal alcohol syndrome, childhood lead exposure, early trauma and more.(or someone really bored with the person teaching or talking!)There is also a high rate of overlap between the symptoms of A.D.H.D. and those of other psychiatric disorders, including depression, anxiety, dyslexia and autism.Although the D.S.M. specifies that clinicians shouldn’t diagnose children with A.D.H.D. if their symptoms are better explained by another mental disorder,more than three quarters of children diagnosed with A.D.H.D. do have another mental-health condition as well, according to the C.D.C. More than a third have a diagnosis of anxiety, and a similar fraction have a diagnosed learning disorder. Forty-four percent have been diagnosed with a behavioral disorder like oppositional defiant disorder.
This all complicates the effort to portray A.D.H.D. as a distinct, unique biological disorder. Is a patient with six symptoms really that different from one with five? If a child who experienced early trauma now can’t sit still or stay organized, should she be treated for A.D.H.D.? What about a child with an anxiety disorder who is constantly distracted by her worries? Does she have A.D.H.D., or just A.D.H.D.-like symptoms caused by her anxiety?
To try to clarify and better define the boundaries of A.D.H.D.,researchers have long sought to identify a biological signature, or “biomarker,” for the disorder — a clear test, like the blood-glucose test for diabetes, that would allow clinicians to say for sure which children have A.D.H.D. and which do not. And in the early years of the 21st century, it seemed as though they were on the verge of success.
https://dnyuz.com/2025/04/13/have-we-been-thinking-about-a-d-h-d-all-wrong/
4/4
To try to clarify and better define the boundaries of A.D.H.D.,researchers have long sought to identify a biological signature, or “biomarker,” for the disorder — a clear test, like the blood-glucose test for diabetes, that would allow clinicians to say for sure which children have A.D.H.D. and which do not. And in the early years of the 21st century, it seemed as though they were on the verge of success.
In 2002,Russell Barkley, then a professor of psychiatry and neurology at the University of Massachusetts Medical Schoolas well as the author of several popular books on A.D.H.D.,drafted an “international consensus statement,” signed by 85 prominent researchers, that defended the validity of the A.D.H.D. diagnosis. It leaned heavily on early studies that suggested that there were indeed solid biomarkers for the disorder, asserting, for instance, thatpeople with A.D.H.D. had “less brain electrical activity” in certain regions than those without the diagnosis; that a single gene had been found to be associated with the disorder; and that people diagnosed with A.D.H.D.had “relatively smaller areas of brain matter.”
In the years since the consensus statement was published, however,the evidence for each of these A.D.H.D. biomarkers has faltered. Attempts to replicate the studies that showed differences in brain electrical activitycame up empty. And though scientists have identified complex collections of genes that together may be signs of greater risk for A.D.H.D.,they have failed to find a specific gene that predicts the disorder. “There is no single-gene story,” John Gabrieli, an M.I.T. neuroscientist, told me recently. “Fifteen years ago, there was incredible optimism, and now we realize how far away we are.”
‘There literally is no natural cutting point where you could say, “This person has got A.D.H.D., and this person hasn’t got it.”’
The most ambitious effort to find a biomarker for A.D.H.D. was run by the Enigma Consortium, a global network of scientists that shares brain-scan data from more than 4,000 subjects. Earlier studies had found indications of physical differences in the brains of patients diagnosed with A.D.H.D. — the “relatively smaller areas of brain matter” in Barkley’s statement.But when a team led by Martine Hoogman, a Dutch neuroscientist, spent years comparing the “cortical volumes” of Enigma subjects diagnosed with A.D.H.D. with those of a control group, the results were once again disappointing.Among adults and adolescents, there was no difference at all between the two groups; among children, the differences were so minor as to be almost imperceptible. As Edmund Sonuga-Barke told me, “What Enigma showed is that what we thought was there isn’t really there.”
To the surprise of many, when Hoogman and her teampublished their results in 2017, they claimed that the data, in fact, showed the opposite, conclusivelydemonstrating the biological nature of A.D.H.D.: “We confirm, with high-powered analysis, that patients with A.D.H.D. have altered brains;therefore A.D.H.D. is a disorder of the brain,” the researchers wrote. “This message is clear for clinicians to convey to parents and patients, which can help to reduce the stigma of A.D.H.D. and improve understanding of the disorder.”
When I interviewed Hoogman by email recently,I was surprised to learn that she now wishes she could have revised that statement. “Back then, we emphasized the differences that we found (although small), but you can also conclude that the subcortical and cortical volumes of people with A.D.H.D. and those without A.D.H.D. are almost identical,” she wrote.In retrospect, she added, it wasn’t fitting to conclude from her findings that A.D.H.D. is a brain disorder. “The A.D.H.D. neurobiology is so much more complex than that.”
Sonuga-Barke goes further,arguing that the entire decades-long quest for a biomarker has been “a red herring” for the field. He understands his colleagues’ desire to find airtight evidence for the biological nature of A.D.H.D. that could help them defend the diagnosis against those who would dismiss it altogether. “In the field, we’re so frightened that people will say it doesn’t exist,” he says. “That this is just bad parenting, from the right, or this is just a product of our postindustrial society, from the left.We have to double down because we’re terrified of what will happen to the kids who can’t get the meds. We’ve seen the impact they can have on people’s lives.”
But the reality,he says, is that “there literally is no natural cutting point where you could say, ‘This person has got A.D.H.D., and this person hasn’t got it.’Those decisions are to some extent arbitrary. .. (read the rest to get angrier)
California, other states sue Trump administration over clawback of COVID School Funds
March 12, 20251/2
California and a coalition of other states sued Thursday to block the Trump administration’s attempt to take back hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding intended to support the academic recovery of students whose education was disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. (No it wasn’t, it was done by the Teachers Union and Governors that shut their states down. Georgia wasn’t shut down.)
The previously awarded funding — including more than $200 million for California alone — is currently being used by schools for after-school and summer learning programs, student mental health services,new classroom technology and other infrastructure needs, all of which would be in danger if the funds are stripped away, California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said in an interview with The Times. (What’s that have to do with Covid?)
While the COVID-19 emergency has ended, the negative impacts of school closures and on-line learning persist, with students across the country lagging behind academically, Bonta said.
The Biden administration had granted an extension to use the funds. But Education SecretaryLinda McMahon announced last month that the funding would be immediately rescinded because the pandemic is over. Bonta called the action “arbitrary and capricious” and therefore illegal under federal law.
“The Biden administration extended the funding because the funding is not related to just a state of emergency. It’s related to ongoing challenges, like the ongoing mental health challenges that students are facing, that we all know about and that have been well documented, [and] the need to address learning loss,” Bonta said. “It’s a complete fallacy and a red herring to suggest that, since the state of the emergency is over, the funding should end, too.”
California’s lawsuit, which it filed alongside 14 other states and the District of Columbia in federal court in New York, alleges McMahon’s withdrawal of funding violates the Administrative Procedure Act, and calls on the court to preempt serious harm the withdrawal will cause to the states’ students by immediately restoring access to the funds through March 2026.
Neither the Education Department nor the White House immediately responded to a request for comment Thursday. Several school districts in the L.A. region also were unable to comment.
McMahon’s March 28 letter, sent to school districts around the country, was one of the latest moves by the Trump administration to eliminate or claw back federal funding previously allocated to the states — part of a wider effort by the administration to eliminate what it calls waste, fraud and overspending by a bloated federal government.
Trump has directed McMahon to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education, and in early March laid off about half of the agency’s employees,which California and other states are also suing to stop. Democrats have criticized Trump’s stated intention of shuttering the Education Department as illegal and reckless — it would take an act of Congress to shut it down entirely — and many in Congress similarly blasted McMahon’s attempt to rescind remaining COVID-19 funds.
In her letter, McMahon wrote thatthe school districts had been given ample time to spend the funding, missed their original deadlines for doing so, and would therefore be stripped of it.= The Biden administration extension to spend the funding “does not change anything” or preclude the rescinding of the funds now, because the extension was “discretionary” and “subject to reconsideration.”==
“Extending deadlines for COVID-related grants, which are in fact taxpayer funds, years after the COVID pandemic endedis not consistent with the Department’s priorities and thus not a worthwhile exercise of its discretion,” McMahon wrote.
She said that new extensions would be considered on “an individual project-specific basis,” upon request by districts.
In their own April 7 letter, Democratic members of Congress — including Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) and a handful of House representatives from California — called on McMahon to reverse the decision immediately, saying many districts had received extensions more than six months prior to McMahon’s letter and already allocated the funding.
The lawmakers called McMahon’s move an “abrupt and chaotic revision of policy” that was “not helpful to students,” and said they were alarmed by McMahon’s “lack of recognition of the lasting effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on our nation’s students.”
https://archive.is/4KV4l
Didn’t CA get caught spending $300 million on illegal immigrants for Medicaid programs?
2/2
The lawmakers pointed to recent National Assessment of Educational Progress results,which showed national scores below pre-pandemic levels in all grades and subjects, and continued high rates of chronic absenteeism. (All because the states closed the schools, it’s your problem by bad decisions)
The lawmakers alleged McMahon’s decision was “yet another way this administration is seeking to strip educational opportunities for students in order to pay for tax cuts for billionaires and large corporations.”
Bonta said there may be a lawful way for the White House and the Education Department to carefully review educational funding and reassess individual grants, but McMahon’s sweeping decision — on the argument that COVID-19 disruptions have ended — was “not it.”
Thursday’s lawsuit is the 13th filed against the current Trump administration by Bonta’s office, and not the first based on allegations that the Trump administration has violated the Administrative Procedure Act.
“We believe he has broken the law again here and in the process deprived children, America’s students, of critical funding,” Bonta said. “We’re not going to stand for it and we’ll see them in court.”
The funding in question was originally allocated under two 2021 measures, the American Rescue Plan Act and the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act.
California was joined in the lawsuit by Arizona, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and the District of Columbia. Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro also joined, though the state — represented by a Republican attorney general — did not.
Other litigation is also pending against the Education Department.
A lawsuit brought by the Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates and two parents last month alleges the Trump administration’s hollowing-out of the department has hampered investigations by its Office for Civil Rights into school-based discrimination.
“Even as OCR generally stopped investigating complaints from the public based on race or sex discrimination, it cherry-picked and, on its own initiative, began targeted investigations into purported discrimination against white and cisgender students,” the complaint alleges.
On Thursday, several additional parents and students with pending discrimination claims joined the case,which asks the court to “restore the investigation and processing capacity of OCR and to process OCR complaints promptly and equitably.”
https://archive.is/4KV4l
Hey CA where’s all the money to clean up for the wild fires. These states should be required to send in reports on project and on every penny they spent Covid money on.
Sunday Talks: Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett Explains China and Global Tariff Distinctions
April 13, 2025 | Sundance |
You can watch Jake Tapper’s brow grow increasingly furrowed in real time as White House Economic Council Director, Kevin Hassett, smiles through the narratives and talks clearly about what is happening with President Trump’s tariff agenda.
This is a REALLY good interview. Kevin “quokka” Hassett just keeps outlining clear examples of what regional tariffs are happening and why there are distinctions.The interviewer Jake Tapper keeps trying to throw confusion at Hassett, who smiles and explains the reason why Tapper’s framework is silly.WATCH:
(Tapper doesn’t understand he is talking to the Obi Wan Kenobi of economics!)
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2025/04/13/sunday-talks-economic-council-director-kevin-hassett-explains-china-and-global-tariff-distinctions/
https://youtu.be/zh-T02eqiGM
Sunday Talks: Secretary of Commerce Outlines Purpose of Tariff “Exemptions” – Sector Specific Tariffs Coming Soon
April 13, 2025 | Sundance
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick appears on ABC This Week, to explain and clarify the purpose of the recently announced tariff exceptions.
According to the explanation, there are two “sector specific” tariffs in Semiconductors and Pharmaceuticals that will be announced in the next few months. The recently announced “exemptions” are products that will be included in the sector specific tariffs that are also identified as “non-negotiable” tariffs.
Semiconductor items, automobiles, steel and aluminum as well as pharmaceutical products will fall under categories or ‘sectors’ of products that will be non-negotiable in all trade agreements for the tariff levy applied.Any nation who enters negotiations for new Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) will not be permitted to negotiate trade on semiconductor products, automobiles, steel, aluminum and medications. WATCH:
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2025/04/13/sunday-talks-secretary-of-commerce-outlines-purpose-of-tariff-exemptions-sector-specific-tariffs-coming-soon/
(Lutnick is enjoying the intentional fake confusion the stock market injects.)
https://youtu.be/cYGb2Sgy_Vk
13 Apr, 2025 12:11
Russian missile strikes Kiev troops during award ceremony in Sumy – Ukrainian MP
More than 20 people have been killed and over 80 wounded in the blast, according to local authorities
A Russian missile has struck Ukrainian troops lining up for an award ceremony in the city of Sumy near the front line, according to Ukrainian lawmaker Mariana Bezuglaya, a former member of Vladimir Zelensky’s political party.
The acting mayor of Sumy, Artyon Kobzar, said that the strike on the city’s center on Sunday left more than 20 people dead and over 80 wounded.
Bezuglaya claimed in a post on Telegram later in the day that those killed were Ukrainian servicemen.
“An appeal to [Ukraine’s commander-in-chief, Aleksandr] Syrsky and separately to the commander of the Territorial Defense Forces: Do not gather the troops for award ceremonies, especially in civilian cities,”she wrote.
The legislator, who used to be a member of Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky’s ‘Servant of the People’ party,also alleged that “the Russians had information about the gathering.”
“Do not do roll calls. Do not stage award ceremonies,” she urged the military.
Ukrainian journalist and former MP Natalya Mosiychuk also confirmed that the Russian strike had targeted a muster of the Ukrainian servicemen.She called for the arrest of the head of the Sumy military administration Vladimir Artyukh and Zelensky party legislator Mikhail Ananachenko, who she blamed for organizing and promoting the award ceremony. “Beside the soldiers, they gathered civilians, including children there.Bastards and scumbags!”
The Russian Defense Ministry did not mention a strike in Sumy during its daily bulletin on Sunday.
Bezuglaya, 36, has repeatedly criticized Ukraine’s senior military commanders since quitting Zelensky’s party last February.In July 2024, she was blacklistedby the notorious Ukrainian website Mirotvorets, a semi-official database of perceived enemies of the state.
https://www.rt.com/russia/615704-sumy-missile-strike-ukraine/