Pope Francis

Pope Francis’ sex abuse advisor reiterated the pontiff’s unwavering obligation to exterminate the problem, and explained that it was being done through a “victim-first” approach. Speaking at Rome’s Pontifical Gregorian University on 23 March, Cardinal Sean O’Malley said that there was no doubt of the pontiff’s goal to make the church a place of safety.


“Let there be no doubt about it: Pope Francis is thoroughly committed to rooting out the scourge of sex abuse in the church,” he said. “Making our church safe for all people demands our collaboration on all levels.”


The Church has been blamed of dragging its feet in regards to sex abuse and taking swift and strong action against the abusers. O’Malley explained that it was imperative to “learn from our experiences, including our mistakes,” and target the problem head-on.


His statement follows the much-publicized resignation of Marie Collins from the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors. Collins, the only member who is a clerical abuse victim, claimed “lack of cooperation” by the Roman Curia and said that there was “lack of resources”, “inadequate structures,” and “cultural resistance” from the Vatican.


“I have come to the point where I can no longer be sustained by hope,” she wrote in her resignation statement. “As a survivor, I have watched events unfold with dismay.”


O’Malley said the commission planned to discuss Collins’ resignation and the issues she brought up at the next closed-door plenary meeting. “There is simply no justification in our day for failures to enact concrete safeguarding standards for our children, young men and women and vulnerable adults,” he said adding that the church needs to “reform and renew” its own institutions.

 Related content


The former ethics lawyer for George W. Bush believes the FBI investigation into the Trump campaign’s alleged ties to Russia has uncovered evidence of treason.


Richard Painter, who joined a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of President Donald Trump’s foreign business ties, tweeted a link late Wednesday to a McClatchy report on a federal investigation into whether U.S. right-wing websites coordinated with Russian operatives to attack Hillary Clinton.


“(The) FBI uncovering evidence of treason,” Painter said. “There is no other word for it.”


Painter also agreed with Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) that an independent commission or select committee was needed to investigate possible collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign.

“Senator McCain is right – Congress has no credibility in undertaking the Trump-Russia investigation,” Painter tweeted.


Related content 


Just one day after the full extent of former Donald Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort’s alleged crimes in Ukraine was publicly revealed, the Russian dissident who would have been a star witness against him has been shot to death in Kiev.  Denis Voronenkov, a former elected official in Russia who fled to Ukraine and joined the resistance against Vladimir Putin, was murdered earlier this week according to CNN. So what’s his connection with Manafort?


Yesterday, the government of Ukraine released evidence which established the longtime rumors that Paul Manafort had been taking tens of millions of dollars in payments from a Kremlin intermediary while he was running the political campaign of Russian puppet Viktor Yanukovych in Ukraine. Yanukovych was elected president before eventually being chased out of the country by the Ukrainian people.


Denis Voronenkov was helping Ukraine build a treason case against Yanukovych, but they were never going to be able to get him back from Russia in order to put him on trial. In contrast, the government of Ukraine has become increasingly vocal about wanting to put Paul Manafort on trial for his financial crimes in relation to installing Yanukovych into power. In addition, Ukraine recently stated its intention to go after Manafort for the deaths of several Ukrainian protesters; Manafort’s own daughter alleges the deaths were arranged by Manafort for Yanukovych’s political gain.


Considering the extent to which the FBI is investigating Paul Manafort for his alleged criminal conspiracy with Russia to rig the 2016 election in Donald Trump’s favor, and the mounting evidence against him, it seems likely that he’ll have to answer for his crimes in the United States one way or the other. But if Ukraine decides to separately try Manafort, Denis Voronenkov would have been a key witness. And because Voronenkov spent time in Russian parliament, he could have used the trial to air out Putin’s most unethical secrets in the process.


So his murder today (source: CNN) may help Putin, but it probably doesn’t help Manafort. Voronenkov’s murder makes him the tenth prominent Russian to die suspiciously during the course of the Trump-Russia scandal.


FBI investigations may come and go, but tweets? Tweets are forever.


Kellyanne Conway can attest to this, seeing as how one of her tweets from October 2016 — back when she was criticizing Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server — has recently come back to bite her.


FBI Director James Comey confirmed last Monday that his agency was currently investigating Russia’s attempts to obstruct the 2016 election as well as any conspiracy with Donald Trump’s campaign, and Twitter users got to digging. Someone quickly unearthed a Conway tweet that lay dormant in the 140-character archives for months, just waiting to be revived and relevant again in Trump’s America.

Kellyanne Conway

✔ @KellyannePolls

Most honest people I know are not under FBI investigation, let alone two. https://twitter.com/foxnews/status/792159005774794753 …

8:12 PM – 28 Oct 2016

Conway was quick to share her feelings about the Democratic presidential candidate’s character among the FBI’s investigation of her use of a private email server while she was secretary of state. 


In a 2016 interview with Fox News, Conway commented on Clinton, saying, “If you’re under your second FBI investigation in the same year then you do have a … corruption and an ethics problem.” Then, following the interview, she tweeted the quote along with what, at the time, probably seemed like a good burn.

“Most honest people I know are not under FBI investigation, let alone two,” she sassed. 


That tweet may have seemed like a good idea at the time, but now that Trump and his administration are under FBI investigation, it’s pretty damn hilarious, ’cause, like, now she’s saying Trump and his campaign, which includes her, aren’t honest, right? Woo!


Related Content






Posted by: maboulette | March 25, 2017

Why Does the President Continue To Lie About Obama

Trump 2

The head of the Senate Intelligence Committee has seen no evidence that the Obama administration “wire tapped” Trump Tower, according to a brief statement issued Thursday.


“Based on the information available to us, we see no indications that Trump Tower was the subject of surveillance by any element of the United States government either before or after Election Day 2016,” Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) said, providing no other details.


Burr joins a steady drumbeat of Republicans who have evidently try to get information on President Trump’s explosive claims that he was surveilled during the campaign.


The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), also disavowed the claim on Wednesday, calling any literal interpretation of Trump’s tweet “wrong.”

“As I told you last week about the issue with the president talking about tapping Trump Tower, that evidence still remains the same, that we don’t have any evidence that that took place,” Nunes told reporters.

“In fact, I don’t believe just in the last week of time, the people we’ve talked to, I don’t think there was an actual tap of Trump Tower.”


Trump earlier this month tweeted that former President Obama “had my wires tapped.”


The Justice Department has been under fierce pressure from both Democrats and Republicans to disclose whether there is any truth to the president’s claims.


Most experts have argued that the accusation is far-fetched under current U.S. surveillance law.


White House press secretary Sean Spicer on Tuesday said Trump is “extremely confident” that the Justice Department will produce evidence to back up his assertion. He said Trump believes the evidence will “vindicate him.”

“I think there’s significant reporting about surveillance techniques that existed throughout the 2016 election,” Spicer said.

Both Burr’s and Nunes’ committees are investigating Russian interference in the U.S. election including any links between Trump campaign officials and Moscow

Why are the Republicans letting this man continue with the lies, and actions unbecoming a President?

Related Content

Posted by: maboulette | March 25, 2017

Scientists Can Reverse DNA Aging in Mice

reversing aging in DNA

Researchers have found a way to guard a mouse’s DNA from the damage that comes with aging, and they’re ready to test it in people.


Dr. David Sinclair, from Harvard Medical School, and his colleagues revealed their new findings in the latest issue of Science. They focused on an exciting compound with anti-aging properties called NAD+, short for ‘nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide’.  It’s been known that younger mice had more of it than older mice and back in 2013, the researchers found that when they boosted the NAD+ levels in older mice, they looked, biologically, like much younger animals.


In the latest paper, the scientists exposed new details on how NAD+ works to keep cells young. Sinclair put drops of NAD+ into the water of a group of mice, and within a couple of hours, their NAD+ levels started to rise. Within the first week, the scientists saw obvious age reversal in muscle and improvements in DNA repair. “We can’t tell the difference between the tissues from an old mouse that is two years old versus a young mouse that is three to four months old,” Sinclair says.


The reason they think NAD+ has these effects is because the compound is linked to DNA repair functions in the body. Each time cells divide, DNA copies itself—but it’s not always a perfect process, and errors are sometimes introduced, causing damage to the DNA. (Exposure to certain chemicals, environmental pollutants and medical radiation from CT scans can also damage DNA.) Normally, most of these insults can be repaired, as long as there’s enough of a DNA-repair compound, called PARP1.


This repair compound and NAD+ are intimately linked. When NAD+ levels are high, PARP1 is activated and can do its job. But when NAD+ levels drop—as they do in older people—PARP1 also starts to decline, which leads to gathering of DNA damage.


Scientists have harnessed this to target cancer cells. A class of cancer drugs called PARP inhibitors, which are prescribed for breast cancer, interfere with PARP’s ability to repair DNA in the tumor, which ultimately leads to their demise. But not all people who take the drug respond well to it, and manipulating NAD+ levels may be one way to enhance their response.


The ultimate test, of course, will be to see if such quick reversal of aging in tissues is also possible in people. Sinclair co-founded a company in Boston, called MetroBiotech, to take the leap of developing and testing a human-grade version of NAD+. He has formulated a capsule version of a precursor to NAD+ called ‘nicotinamide mononucleotide’ (NMN)—a naturally occurring compound found in small amounts in foods like broccoli, cucumber, avocado and edamame—and plans to test 25 people to see if the compound is safe.


If those studies are positive, Sinclair hopes the idea of using NAD+ to protect DNA from age-related damage might have broader applications, such as shielding cancer patients from the side effects of radiation treatments or even protecting people who are exposed to higher radiation work environments from DNA damage.

“The idea is to protect the body from radiation exposure here on earth, either naturally occurring or doctor-inflicted,” he says. “If I were going to have an X-ray or a CT scan, I would take NMN beforehand.” He already has plans to go even farther than earth: NASA is collaborating with Sinclair’s group on the human tests to see if it’s possible to insulate astronauts from the effects of cosmic radiation in space.

Related content 


Posted by: maboulette | March 25, 2017

How the White House Cleans Up After a Tweetstorm

Trump tweets

Christopher Wilson Editor

Yahoo News March 13, 2017

Donald Trump entered public life on the strength of the lie that Barack Obama was born outside the United States and ineligible to be president, and even after disavowing it at the last possible moment of his presidential campaign, Trump has continued to say things for which — to put it as generously as possible — there is no discernible evidence.


As a private citizen, he was rarely held to account for anything he said, and on Twitter — which by its nature doesn’t lend itself to nuance or elaboration — he could drop bombshells as he sees fit and move on. But now, as president, he is at least in principle responsible for what he tells the American people. And he has an entire staff of White House assistants, counselors and spokespeople to defend, justify and explain away his misstatements, attack the credibility of his critics and deflect additional questions.


The difficulty for the administration officials begins with the fact that the president bases his messaging as much around what he’s watching on cable news as he does on any sort of strategy or policy briefing. The White House didn’t even have a communications director — whose job is to coordinate the administration’s messaging — until nearly a month after the inauguration. In the rocky first few weeks the administration’s role was filled by press secretary Sean Spicer, whose performance reportedly displeased Trump early on.


One of Spicer’s favorite fall-backs when challenged is a variation of, “The president’s tweet speaks for itself,” as if the 140-character firebombs dispatched in response to “Fox and Friends” segments or Breitbart stories require no further context. He’s also leaning on more traditional Washington tactics, such as simply refusing to answer a question, such as this example when asked about whether the president would apologize to Heidi Cruz during a White House dinner:

Q from @HallieJackson: Is Trump going to apologize to Ted & Heidi Cruz at dinner tonight?

The one thing Spicer has not done is admit that the White House made a mistake, even if it requires him to deny the plain meaning of something the president said. Perhaps the most conspicuous example is this tweet, blaming Obama for releasing prisoners from Guantánamo who returned to the battlefield:

Trump tweeted 122 vicious prisoners, released by the Obama Administration from Gitmo, have returned to the battlefield. Just another terrible decision!

Confronted by the inescapable, mathematical truth that the great majority of those prisoners were actually released under President George W. Bush, Spicer said Trump “meant in totality the number that had been released on the battlefield” under both presidents, as if he were simply clarifying Trump’s completely explicit statement. He passed up a reporter’s invitation to apologize.


Vice President Mike Pence has been attempting to deal with questions about the president’s words since Trump accepted the former Indiana governor’s pitch to fill out the Republican ticket, often going with a “Let Mike Be Mike” strategy that put Pence at odds with the top of the ticket. Pence has also leaned on his evangelical background to spin some of Trump’s more controversial statements. One example is his response to the leaked “Access Hollywood” tapes in which Trump made a series of lewd comments about women, after which Pence said that Trump showed “grace” in his apology and deserved “forgiveness.”


Pence has remained active through the transition and start of the administration.

In a December interview with ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos, Pence suggested that Trump stating things he believed to be true without offering evidence — in this instance, the claim that millions of people had voted illegally — was “refreshing” to the American people:

STEPHANOPOULOS: It’s his right to make false statements?

PENCE: Well, it’s his right to express his opinion as president-elect of the United States.

I think one of the things that’s refreshing about our president-elect, and one of the reasons why I think he made such an incredible connection with people all across this country is because he tells you what’s on his mind.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But why is it refreshing to make false statements?

PENCE: Look, I don’t know that that is a false statement, George, and neither do you. The simple fact is that. …

STEPHANOPOULOS: I know there’s no evidence for it.

PENCE: There is evidence, historic evidence from the Pew Research Center, of voter fraud that’s taken place. We’re in the process of investigating irregularities in the state of Indiana that were leading up to this election. The fact that voter fraud exists is. …

STEPHANPOULOS: But can you provide any evidence — can you provide any evidence to back up that statement?

PENCE; Well, look, I think he’s expressed his opinion on that. And he’s entitled to express his opinion on that. And I think the American people — I think the American people find it very refreshing that they have a president who will tell them what’s on his mind. And I think the connection that he made in the course. …

STEPHANOPOULOS: Whether it’s true or not?

PENCE: Well, they’re going to tell them — he’s going to say what he believes to be true, and I know that he’s always going to speak in that way as president.

Pence echoed those comments in February when defending Trump’s use of the term “so-called judge.”

“I think the American people are very accustomed to this president speaking his mind and speaking very straight with them,” said Pence.


Spicer and Pence are far from the only two voices attempting to clean up the president’s statements; there is a small army of cabinet officials, and there are former campaign surrogates on cable news programs and White House staffers at the ready. One advantage for the Trump surrogates is that they generally only have to dodge a single issue for a few weeks before their boss drops another bomb, requiring a different test of the pliability of the truth. Consider three claims from the president that would be massive news stories requiring intense government and media scrutiny if true:

  • Millions of people voted illegally, thus invalidating potentially hundreds of races across the country
  • There was an imminent national security threat that required his executive order restricting travel from seven majority-Muslim countries
  • Former President Barack Obama personally ordered an illegal wiretap of his campaign


The problem with all three statements is that there’s been no legitimate evidence offered to support any of them. State election officials — Republicans and Democrats alike — have unanimously disputed Trump’s allegations about the magnitude of voter fraud. In lieu of evidence, the White House announced it would form a special commission — chaired by Pence – to investigate illegal voting. That was in early February, and thus far, there’s been limited movement on the fraud investigation, with a Pence spokesman telling NPR last week that the vice president was “still doing the necessary groundwork.” Millions of instances of voter fraud should be the biggest story in the country, but because so many other purported issues have cropped up since — the travel ban, the wiretapping accusation, the fight over health care reform, etc., etc. — it’s been buried.


Another White House advantage is a seemingly inexhaustible reserve of people to throw at the media. Each month, the administration has found a new face to feed to the Sunday morning shows — each delivering questionable results. On January 22, the second full day of Trump’s term, Kellyanne Conway coined the now-infamous term “alternative facts” in her attempt to defend Spicer’s statements about the size of the crowd at the Trump inauguration.


After mockery about the use of the term “alternative facts,” it only got worse for Conway, who managed to couple the citation of a non-existent “Bowling Green massacre” in multiple interviews with a potential ethics violation by plugging Ivanka Trump’s fashion products. The string of missteps continued when she said National Security Adviser Michael Flynn had “the full confidence of the president” hours before Flynn resigned. “Morning Joe” co-host Mika Brzezinski said Conway was no longer welcome on the show, and CNN also cut back on her appearances.


With Conway’s credibility apparently depleted, the White House dispatched policy adviser Stephen Miller to the February 12 Sunday shows. His performance was viewed so poorly in some corners that Sean Hannity and Joe Scarborough got in a spat over the latter’s criticism, with the MSNBC host calling Miller “awful on every level.” The critique came about Miller’s tactics on the show, which was essentially to double down on everything the president had said and talk up the power of the executive branch.


When asked by ABC News about Trump’s claims of rampant voter fraud, Miller insisted that it was essentially a known secret in some states.

“I can tell you that this issue of busing voters into New Hampshire is widely known by anyone who’s worked in New Hampshire politics,” said Miller. “It’s very real. It’s very serious. This morning, on this show, is not the venue for me to lay out all the evidence.”

When pressed about the claim, Miller tripled down:

“George, it is a fact and you will not deny it — that there are massive numbers of noncitizens in this country who are registered to vote. That is a scandal.”


Miller hasn’t appeared on a Sunday show since, although the president tweeted that he had done a “great job” representing him. This meant another surrogate was forced to draw the shortest of straws this month after Trump accused Obama of ordering a wiretapping of the Republican’s campaign with zero evidence. The White House turned to Sarah Huckabee Sanders, deputy press secretary and daughter of former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.


Sanders’ tactic to defend the accusation was to cite a number of mainstream outlets and say that they had already confirmed what Trump had tweeted. The only problem was that none of the cited news organizations had actually reported that. This tactic — deferring to an authority that viewers would conceivably trust — might have worked in some venues, but ABC News’ Martha Raddatz pushed back, which led to Sanders using Spicer’s “The tweet speaks for itself”:

RADDATZ: OK. Let me just say one more time. The president said: I bet a good lawyer could make a great case out of the fact that President Obama was tapping my phones in October. So the president believes it is true?

SANDERS: I would say that his tweet speaks for itself there.

RADDATZ: And Sarah, I just want to go back again to the president’s tweet one more time. And Sean Spicer tweeting today as well — reports that potentially politically motivated investigations immediately ahead of 2016 election are very troubling. Sounds like the White House is really doubling down on what President Trump says happened.

SANDERS: As we should, Martha. If this happened, once again, this would be the greatest abuse of power and overreach that’s probably ever occurred in the executive branch. And something that certainly —

RADDATZ: Well, what about these accusations? You keep saying, if, if, if. The president of the United States said it was a fact. He didn’t say, ”I read a story in Breitbart” or “The New York Times” or wherever else. He said: “Just found out that Obama had my wires tapped in Trump Tower.” That’s not an if.

SANDERS: Look, I — I will let the president speak for himself. But in terms of where we are in the White House, our ask —

RADDATZ: You’re his spokesperson.

SANDERS: And I’m speaking about it right now.

RADDATZ: But you’re backing off of it. You’re backing off of it.

SANDERS: How am I backing off of it while I’m saying that I think that this happened —

RADDATZ: Because you’re saying “if.”

SANDERS: And I think the American people have a right to know. And I think that we should get definitive answers. I think we need to put out hard facts that show that this happened.

RADDATZ: OK, that’s what President Trump was clearly doing in those tweets. Thank you very much for joining thus morning, Sarah. Appreciate it.


Just as Trump supported Miller despite criticisms of his Sunday morning appearances, Sanders was dubbed “a rising star” in the administration in an Associated Press story last week. Conway has been given further chances, and on Monday she told CNN, “I’m not in the job of having evidence” when asked to defend the wiretapping charges. Trump appeared to have her back, tweeting shortly after her appearance that the media had been “rude” to his representatives and that they’d do “much better” by being nice.


If you attempted to describe the White House tactics in bullet points, it would probably look something like this:

  • Hope that there are enough stories in the mix that you never have to defend individual claims for an extended period of time;
  • Rotate voices as others potentially lose credibility;
  • Rely on the traditional respect afforded to the occupant of the Oval Office, and say that Trump obviously must have a good reason for anything he says;
  • Argue that even the most outlandish claims had already been confirmed by other outlets or are common knowledge;
  • Say that the American people love that the president says whatever is on his mind, regardless of what he’s saying;
  • When all else fails, ignore the fact that you’re speaking for the president and say that Trump’s words — and especially his  tweets — speak for themselves, even if they don’t.


Related Content

Adam Schiff

Congressman Adam Schiff is the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee. He’s seen classified evidence regarding Donald Trump’s Russia scandal that even most of his fellow committee members aren’t yet privy to. Heading into his committee’s Trump-Russia hearings, there are things he can’t yet disclose to the public. But he just offered a big hint about the Trump-Russia cover-up being worse than the crime.


Appearing on Chuck Todd’s NBC show Meet the Press on Sunday morning, Congressman Schiff stated the following about Donald Trump and his campaign’s involvement with Russia during the campaign: “There is circumstantial evidence of collusion. There is direct evidence, I think, of deception. And that’s where we begin the investigation.” He went on to explain that there is a certain threshold of evidence necessary to “bring to a grand jury for purposes of a criminal indictment.”


That last part is not an approach that Congress can legally use against a sitting President, so it was a clear reference to one or more of Donald Trump’s campaign co-conspirators on Russia. At this point there are too many names to choose from to be able to exactly guess whom Schiff might have been referring to with regard to potential criminal indictments. Roger Stone? Carter Page? J.D. Gordon? Jeff Sessions? Paul Manafort? Michael Flynn? Take your pick. But the real key here is Schiff’s emphasis on the “direct evidence of deception” being stronger than the evidence of collusion.


“Deception” in this case is a rewording for cover-up, or obstruction of justice. Trump and his top people have now been caught repeatedly lying about their Russian communications and connections, some while under oath. It may be tricky to legally prove that the near constant communications between the Trump campaign and the Russian government were in fact a plot to conspire in election-rigging on the part of both sides. But when crimes this big are covered up after the fact, smaller crimes are often committed by underlings during that cover-up. Those crimes can be used to pressure underlings to flip on the boss, and their testimony then proves what the evidence itself couldn’t.

Currently there are several included Roger Stone and Paul Manafort who are ready to testify to the Intelligence Committee.


Hillary Clinton said she was “ready to come out of the woods” during a St. Patrick’s Day speech on Friday night in Pennsylvania in front of an overflow crowd — an signal that she plans to shed the low profile she has been keeping since the election.


Mrs. Clinton, the presidential candidate and a former secretary of state, made her comments at the end of a nearly 20-minute talk she gave at a yearly St. Patrick’s Day celebration held by a women’s group in Scranton — in the northeast corner of a battleground state that made for one of her most surprising electoral losses in November.


Mrs. Clinton, whose grandfather and father grew up in Scranton spoke about her family’s connections to the area, including many summers she spent at a nearby lake as a child. But at the end of the speech, given in the ballroom of a local Hilton hotel, her words turned, if only glancingly, to current affairs.

“I’m like a lot of my friends right now. I have a hard time watching the news, I’ll confess,” she said, according to a video of the event. “I am ready to come out of the woods and to help shine a light on what is already happening around kitchen tables, at dinners like this.”


Mrs. Clinton spoke to a crowd of nearly 700 people, according to Mary Clare Kingsley, as president of the Society of Irish Women, which held the event: about 500 people in the ballroom and an additional 175 who watched the speech via video in an overflow room. Ms. Kingsley said this was the largest attendance for the event, even surpassing the total when the group hosted Barack Obama during the presidential campaign of 2008.


The group hoped for years to land Mrs. Clinton and sent her an invitation letter in December.


“We figured if anyone could motivate women, who better to have there than her,” Ms. Kingsley said.


Taking the stage before the dinner was served Mrs. Clinton spoke at length about her grandfather, who came to Scranton with his parents when he was 3, the sixth of an eventual 11 children from a family that left the coal mines in England “searching for a better life and more opportunity.”


She emphasized their connection to industrial prosperity in the United States, speaking glowingly of her grandfather’s job at a lace mill in the area, where she said he worked as a teenager until his retirement more than 50 years later. And she told the story of her father, who “hopped a freight train” to Chicago dreaming of bigger opportunities — “I don’t recommend this,” she said — and ended up selling textiles before serving in the Navy during World War II.


She also spoke of her own visits to Scranton with her family as a child and trips to a nearby lake, Lake Winola.

 “The house that my grandfather built did not have indoor plumbing,” she said. “So, don’t tell anybody this, we’d go down to the lake.”


Ms. Kingsley, who described herself as a Clinton supporter, said the atmosphere in the room during Mrs. Clinton’s speech was “ecstatic.”


Lackawanna County, where Scranton is, voted narrowly for Mrs. Clinton, 49.8% to Donald J. Trump’s 46.3%, but Mr. Trump received a significantly higher percentage of votes than the previous two Republican nominees. But his victory in Pennsylvania was the first time since 1988 the state went to a Republican presidential nominee.


The Society of Irish Women is a group of about 100 that was founded in the 1990s because the local chapter of the Friendly Sons of Saint Patrick, an Irish-American group founded in 1906, did not permit women at its St. Patrick’s Day event, Ms. Kingsley said. (The national organization introduced its first female members in 2016.)

“Women were sitting here and watching their husbands go in their tuxedos to celebrate St. Patrick’s Day,” she said. “They decided to start their own group. But men are allowed at our dinner.”

Related Content



Posted by: maboulette | March 24, 2017

4 People Charged With Theft of 500 Million Yahoo Accounts

Older Posts »


%d bloggers like this: