Substacks
The Curious Case of Luigi Mangione. Plus… River Page
It’s Wednesday, December 11. I’m River Page and this is The Front Page, your daily window into the world of The Free Press—and our take on the world at large. Coming up: Why does Pete Hegseth keep talking about “warfighters”? How should Jay Bhattacharya reform the NIH? And much more.
But first: The strangely normal suspect in the United Healthcare CEO murder case.
The manhunt that followed the fatal shooting of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson last week turned us all into amateur sleuths. But police finally apprehended 26-year-old Luigi Mangione at a McDonald’s in Altoona, Pennsylvania, on Monday after a customer recognized him. They found in his possession a 3D-printed gun and a short, handwritten manifesto that indicated “ill will toward corporate America,” according to police. As soon as Mangione’s name was released, seemingly everyone, myself included, dug into his online footprint: His Goodreads, his Instagram, his X accounts.
The picture that emerged confounded the preexisting theories about Thompson’s killer and his motive: that the shooter was a left-wing vigilante, or an underdog victim of the healthcare-industrial complex. Reality, it seems, is not so clear-cut.
To start, he’s a rich kid whose wealthy family owns, among other things, an assisted living facility. He attended Gilman, a tony, all-boys private school in Baltimore—and, like his victim, Mangione was valedictorian of his class. Later, he attended the University of Pennsylvania, where he became a frat boy and earned two degrees in computer science.
The rich kid to left-wing extremist pipeline is well-established—the well-heeled radicals of the Weather Underground are a prominent historical example—but there’s no evidence to suggest that Mangione was either a campus radical or a basement-dwelling loner.
A former University of Pennsylvania student, who worked with Mangione in 2018 when both were teaching assistants for an introductory-level computer science class, told The Free Press that he was shocked by Mangione’s arrest. Speaking on the condition of anonymity, the student said he never heard Mangione talk about politics, and described him as “a very popular guy.”
“He was pretty normal,” the gunman’s former colleague said. “Very friendly, a nice guy who got along with everybody, and a good TA.”
“Normal” also describes Mangione’s social media presence. On X he reposted figures like health and wellness podcaster Andrew Huberman and tech writer Tim Urban; the most left-wing figure he seems to have followed on X is probably Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Instagram pictures show the photogenic accused assassin shirtless and jacked, hiking and hanging out on the beach with friends. In other words, he’s a normie. Or at least that’s how he comes across online.
His Goodreads account runs the gamut from standard college freshman reading list fare (Huxley’s Brave New World, for example) to pop psychology, self-help, and books on chronic back pain (more on that in a second). The only suspicious read is Industrial Society and Its Future, otherwise known as the Unabomber Manifesto, to which Luigi gave four stars. Much has been made of this—although let’s be honest, if he were truly inspired by Ted Kaczynski, wouldn’t he have given the book five stars?
In a weird coincidence, our editorial assistant Josh Code worked with Mangione as a counselor at a summer camp for gifted students in 2019. He described him to me as a good-looking guy with whom he had only positive interactions. “He was more hassle-free and conscientious than some of the other leaders,” said Josh.
So far as red flags go, the most significant seems to be Mangione’s missing year. He apparently had back surgery in 2023, after which he appears to have changed. (On his now-suspended Twitter account, there was an X-ray of a back—presumably his—with four screws in it. According to The Baltimore Banner, it became a “time of turbulence, isolation, and pain, both physical and psychological.” Since that summer, friends say that Luigi dropped off the map, refusing to reply to messages. He bailed on a friend’s wedding, and he went to Japan sometime in February of this year, where he had dinner with Obara Jun, a top Japanese professional poker player. In the weeks before the shooting, his mother reported him missing in San Francisco. Given that Mangione’s last address was in Hawaii, police told The San Francisco Standard it wasn’t clear if Luigi had been in the city or if his mother had any reason to believe he might be.
These facts have led only to more speculation: Did his back surgery turn Mangione against the healthcare industry and insurance companies? Did he experience some kind of psychological breakdown sometime after his surgery?
Tuesday brought two more clues. As he was led to his extradition hearing yesterday, Mangione yelled to reporters: “This is completely unjust and an insult to the intelligence of the American people. This is lived experience.”
And then, a reporter published on Substack what he claims to be the suspect’s manifesto. It is short and to the point: After noting that the U.S. has the most expensive healthcare system but ranks roughly 42nd in life expectancy, he writes: “The reality is, these [indecipherable] have simply gotten too powerful, and they continue to abuse our country for immense profit.” He concluded, “Evidently I am the first to face it with such brutal honesty.”
He never mentions his back pain but focuses on the more universal problem of the American healthcare system. In its own weird way, his little manifesto only reinforced the image of the alleged shooter as rich, intelligent, well-educated, and well-mannered.
Later on Tuesday, Mangione’s lawyer said he planned to plead not guilty, “at least to the charges in Pennsylvania,” which include forgery and weapons offenses.
None of this has hurt Mangione’s status as a hero for a disturbingly large number of people. In the immediate aftermath of Brian Thompson’s murder, the then-unnamed killer was celebrated online, as Kat Rosenfield reported last week. Now that his identity has been revealed, this dark schadenfreude has entered a new phase. People can no longer imagine that the shooter is a working-class hero avenging a sick child, or a communist revolutionary. And so the hero worship has taken a hornier tone. The accused shooter might not be the leftist people wanted, but he’s toned, tanned, and ready to kill a shared enemy—a swarthy, photogenic Chad willing to do the sort of grisly things blue-haired leftists can only post about.
This category—up to and including the blue hair—includes Julia Alekseyeva, a professor at Mangione’s alma mater. She posted a TikTok saying she’s “never been prouder to be a professor at the University of Pennsylvania,” as “Do You Hear the People Sing?,” the revolutionary anthem from the musical Les Misérables, played in the background.
Just one of the very weird responses to the weirdly normal-seeming man in custody suspected of murdering a CEO.
Hegseth’s Heroes
Last week, Pete Hegseth, Trump’s pick to be secretary of defense, appeared to be in trouble. Republican senators were voicing their doubts amid a flurry of accusations over his treatment of women and his alleged mismanagement of two veterans’ charities. Trump reportedly spoke to Florida governor Ron DeSantis about replacing Hegseth. But the veteran and Fox & Friends host dug in. Trump reiterated his support, and this week Hegseth went back to the Hill to press his case.
The charm offensive appears to be working.
Senator Lindsey Graham said yesterday that Hegseth is “much better off” in his nomination fight. And Senator Joni Ernst of Iowa, who had previously sounded unconvinced of Hegseth’s fitness for office, said she has had “encouraging conversations” with Hegseth as she “support[s] Pete through this process.”
Central to Hegseth’s pitch to run the Pentagon is a promise to be a secretary of defense for “warfighters.” An affinity with “warfighters” has been part of Hegseth’s public persona for a while, notes former Marine Elliot Ackerman in his op-ed for The Free Press today. It was the basis for Hegseth’s push to pardon several soldiers convicted of war crimes during Trump’s first term. And Elliot thinks this rhetoric is a cynical ploy designed to appeal to people who have not themselves served in the military—and one that suggests Hegseth is more interested in fighting an internal cultural war than concentrating on the serious threats America faces.
Read Elliot Ackerman’s full take: “Why Does Pete Hegseth Keep Talking About ‘Warfighters’?”
How to Fix the NIH
Trump recently named Dr. Jay Bhattacharya to be the next director of the National Institutes of Health. During the pandemic, Bhattacharya was a brave outsider who dissented from the conventional wisdom of the public health establishment on how to handle Covid. For daring to disagree, he was dismissed and disparaged—including by the top brass at the NIH. That’s why we welcomed his appointment as “poetic justice” in a recent Free Press editorial.
But now Bhattacharya—who just taught his final class at Stanford before starting his new job—must actually fix the broken agency with which he was once at odds. Where should he start? Joseph Marine, a cardiologist at Johns Hopkins, offers his suggestions in an op-ed today. Read Joseph’s recommendations for “How to Fix the NIH.”
-
In his final column for The New York Times yesterday, the oft-mistaken but never in doubt economist Paul Krugman blamed America’s “collapse of trust in elites” on Elon Musk and “angry billionaires.” So close! From his prediction that a Trump presidency would cause a recession to his frequent defense of Bidenomics despite its proven failures, we admire Krugman for his ability to so often get it wrong—failing ever upward throughout his 25-year tenure at the Times. As we say a tearful goodbye to Krugman, one line from HBO’s Girls echoes in our ears: “Thanks for the hot tip, Paul Krugman. . . . If I need a tip about what to talk about at a dinner party in 2005, I’ll call you—on your flip phone.”
-
A UK Member of Parliament spoke out against a proposed ban on first cousin marriage yesterday. Independent MP Iqbal Mohamed urged his fellow MPs to respect “cultural differences” and noted that between 35 to 50 percent of sub-Saharan African populations either “prefer or accept” cousin marriages. I grew up in Texas, one of 25 U.S. states where first cousin marriages are completely banned. Like most states in the South, Texas doesn’t respect the “cultural differences” that Mohamed so bravely defends, regardless of what movies like Deliverance and Texas Chain Saw Massacre might have taught you.
-
Parents of an autistic 17-year-old boy are suing Character.ai, alleging the company’s AI software drove their son to self-harm and suggested he kill his family. The Texan teenager had been speaking with several of Character.ai’s many AI avatars based on video game and pop culture characters—one of whom told him that his parents “don’t deserve to have kids.” The complaint added to a chorus of parents furious with unregulated AI chatbots, including one Florida mom who recently accused Character.ai of playing a role in the suicide of her 14-year-old son.
-
Senator Mitch McConnell fell during a Senate Republican lunch Tuesday, suffering a “minor cut” and sprained wrist. This comes after a previous fall last year that left him with a concussion and fractured rib as well as two bizarre incidents where the senator appeared to “freeze” on camera. The 82-year-old has stepped down as majority leader but told reporters earlier this year he has no plans to retire before the end of his Senate term in 2026.
-
On Monday, Google announced the release of a new quantum chip that it says indicates the existence of multiple universes. The chip took only five minutes to perform an industry benchmark computation that would take one of today’s fastest supercomputers 10 septillion years to complete—a number that exceeds the age of the universe itself. According to Google, this swift timeframe defies the laws of physics and “lends credence to the notion that quantum computation occurs in many parallel universes.” I’m not even sure septillion is a real word, but why do I feel like this is going to kill us somehow?
-
Maple syrup and Tim Hortons may cost more in 2025 if Trump decides to impose the 25 percent tariffs on Canadian exports that he is currently promising. But it will all have been worth it for the trolling of our friends to the north. In a Truth Social post, the president-elect called Prime Minister Justin Trudeau the “Governor of the Great State of Canada,” after the two dined together Monday evening at Mar-a-Lago. Trudeau’s tariff take is not exactly rosy—he called them “devastating for the Canadian economy.” He has promised to respond in kind if Trump goes through with his tariffs.
-
A federal judge in Oregon blocked the merger of grocery giants Kroger and Albertsons yesterday. The two companies argued that the deal, which would have been the largest supermarket merger in U.S. history, was necessary to help them compete with Walmart and Costco. But in her ruling, Judge Adrienne Nelson said that supermarkets do not compete directly with big box stores, and that eliminating head-to-head competition among grocery stores could raise prices for consumers.
-
The AP reports that Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg has fielded calls from Michigan Democrats urging him to run for governor. The former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, clearly sensing that his political future in the deep-red Hoosier State was limited, moved to the Great Lakes State after losing his 2020 presidential bid. Democrats have been bleeding support in the state for years, as working-class voters have shifted their allegiance to Trump, delivering a victory in the state to him last month. The move makes some sense: Buttigieg, who will be out of a job in a few weeks, is nothing if not ambitious. And governor of Michigan is a logical stepping stone for someone with their eye on the White House. But count me skeptical that a know-it-all son of professors is the answer to the Democratic Party’s Midwestern woes.
River Page is a reporter at The Free Press. Read his recent piece “The Smearing of Gay Republicans,” and follow him on X @river_is_nice.
Shortly after midnight last night, the Justice Department released special counsel Jack Smith’s final report on former president Donald Trump’s attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. The 137-page report concludes that “substantial evidence demonstrates that Mr. Trump…engaged in an unprecedented criminal effort to overturn the legitimate results of the election in order to retain power.”
The report explains the case Smith and his team compiled against Trump. It outlines the ways in which evidence proved Trump broke laws, and it lays out the federal interests served by prosecuting Trump. It explains how the team investigated Trump, interviewing more than 250 people and obtaining the testimony of more than 55 witnesses before a grand jury, and how Justice Department policy governed that investigation. It also explains how Trump’s litigation and the U.S. Supreme Court’s surprising determination that Trump enjoyed immunity from prosecution for breaking laws as part of his official duties dramatically slowed the prosecution.
There is little in the part of the report covering Trump’s behavior that was not already public information. The report explains how Trump lied that he won the 2020 presidential election and continued to lie even when his own appointees and employees told him he had lost. It lays out how he pressured state officials to throw out votes for his opponent, then-president-elect Joe Biden, and how he and his cronies recruited false electors in key states Trump lost to create slates of false electoral votes.
It explains how Trump tried to force Justice Department officials to support his lie and to trick states into rescinding their electoral votes for Biden and how, finally, he pressured his vice president, Mike Pence, to either throw out votes for Biden or send state counts back to the states. When Pence refused, correctly asserting that he had no such power, Trump urged his supporters to attack the U.S. Capitol. He refused to call them off for hours.
Smith explained that the Justice Department concluded that Trump was guilty on four counts, including conspiracy to defraud the United States by trying “to interfere with or obstruct one of its lawful governmental functions by deceit, craft or trickery, or at least by means that are dishonest”; obstruction and conspiracy to obstruct by creating false evidence; and conspiracy against rights by trying to take away people’s right to vote for president.
The report explains why the Justice Department did not bring charges against Trump for insurrection, noting that such cases are rare and definitions of “insurrection” are unclear, raising concerns that such a charge would endanger the larger case.
The report explained that prosecuting Trump served important national interests. The government has an interest in the integrity of the country’s process for “collecting, counting, and certifying presidential elections.” It cares about “a peaceful and orderly transition of presidential power.” It cares that “every citizen’s vote is counted” and about “protecting public officials and government workers from violence.” Finally, it cares about “the fair and even-handed enforcement of the law.”
While the report contained little new information, what jumped out from its stark recitation of the events of late 2020 and early 2021 was the power of Trump’s lies. There was no evidence that he won the 2020 election; to the contrary, all evidence showed he lost it. Even he didn’t appear to believe he had won. And yet, by the sheer power of repeating the lie that he had won and getting his cronies to repeat it, along with embellishments that were also lies—about suitcases of ballots, and thumb drives, and voting machines, and so on—he induced his followers to try to overthrow a free and fair election and install him in the presidency.
He continued this disinformation after he left office, and then engaged in lawfare, with both him and friendly witnesses slowing down his cases by challenging subpoenas until there were no more avenues to challenge them. And then the U.S. Supreme Court stepped in.
The report calls out the extraordinary July 2024 decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in Trump v. United States declaring that presidents cannot be prosecuted for official acts. “Before this case,” the report reads, “no court had ever found that Presidents are immune from criminal responsibility for their official acts, and no text in the Constitution explicitly confers such criminal immunity on the President.” It continued: “[N]o President whose conduct was investigated (other than Mr. Trump) ever claimed absolute criminal immunity for all official acts.”
The report quoted the dissent of Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, noting that the decision of the Republican-appointed justices “effectively creates a law-free zone around the President, upsetting the status quo that has existed since the Founding.”
That observation hits hard today, as January 14 is officially Ratification Day, the anniversary of the day in 1784 when members of the Confederation Congress ratified the Treaty of Paris that ended the Revolutionary War and formally recognized the independence of the United States from Great Britain. The colonists had thrown off monarchy and determined to have a government of laws, not of men.
But Trump threw off that bedrock principle with a lie. His success recalls how Confederates who lost the Civil War resurrected their cause by claiming that the lenience of General Ulysses S. Grant of the United States toward officers and soldiers who surrendered at Appomattox Court House in April 1865 showed not the mercy of a victor but rather an understanding that the Confederates’ defense of human slavery was superior to the ideas of those trying to preserve the United States as a land based in the idea that all men were created equal.
When no punishment was forthcoming for those who had tried to destroy the United States, that story of Appomattox became the myth of the Lost Cause, defending the racial hierarchies of the Old South and attacking the federal government that tried to make opportunity and equal rights available for everyone. In response to federal protection of Black rights after 1948, when President Harry Truman desegregated the U.S. military, Confederate symbols and Confederate ideology began their return to the front of American culture, where they fed the reactionary right. The myth of the Lost Cause and Trump’s lie came together in the rioters who carried the Confederate battle flag when they breached the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
Trump’s nominee for Secretary of Defense, Fox News Channel host Pete Hegseth, is adamant about restoring the names of Confederate generals to U.S. military installations. His confirmation hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee began today.
The defense secretary oversees about 1.3 million active-duty troops and another 1.4 million in the National Guard and employed in Reserves and civilian positions, as well as a budget of more than $800 billion. Hegseth has none of the usual qualifications of defense secretaries. As Benjamin Wittes of Lawfare pointed out today, he has “never held a policy role…never run anything larger than a company of 200 soldiers…never been elected to anything.”
Hegseth suggested his lack of qualifications was a strength, saying in his opening statement that while “[i]t is true that I don’t have a similar biography to Defense Secretaries of the last 30 years…as President Trump…told me, we’ve repeatedly placed people atop the Pentagon with supposedly ‘the right credentials’…and where has it gotten us? He believes, and I humbly agree, that it’s time to give someone with dust on his boots the helm.”
The “dust on his boots” claim was designed to make Hegseth’s authenticity outweigh his lack of credentials, but former Marine pilot Amy McGrath pointed out that Trump’s defense secretary James Mattis and Biden’s defense secretary Lloyd Austin, both of whom reached the top ranks of the military, each came from the infantry.
Hegseth has settled an accusation of sexual assault, appears to have a history of alcohol abuse, and has been accused of financial mismanagement at two small veterans’ nonprofits. But he appears to embody the sort of strongman ethos Trump craves. Jonathan Chait of The Atlantic did a deep dive into Hegseth’s recent books and concluded that Hegseth “considers himself to be at war with basically everybody to Trump’s left, and it is by no means clear that he means war metaphorically.” Hegseth’s books suggest he thinks that everything that does not support the MAGA worldview is “Marxist,” including voters choosing Democrats at the voting booth. He calls for the “categorical defeat of the Left” and says that without its “utter annihilation,” “America cannot, and will not, survive.”
When Hegseth was in the Army National Guard, a fellow service member who was the unit’s security guard and on an anti-terrorism team flagged Hegseth to their unit’s leadership because one of his tattoos is used by white supremacists. Extremist tattoos are prohibited by army regulations. Hegseth lobbied Trump to intervene in the cases of service members accused of war crimes, and he cheered on Trump’s January 6, 2021, rally. Hegseth has said women do not belong in combat and has been vocal about his opposition to the equity and inclusion measures in the military that he calls “woke.”
Wittes noted after today’s hearing that “[t]he words ‘Russia’ and ‘Ukraine’ barely came up. The words ‘China’ and ‘Taiwan’ made only marginally more conspicuous an appearance. The defense of Europe? One would hardly know such a place as Europe even existed. By contrast, the words ‘lethality,’ ‘woke,’ and ‘DEI’ came up repeatedly. The nominee sparred with members of the committee over the difference between ‘equality’ and ‘equity.’”
Senate Armed Services Committee chair Roger Wicker (R-MS) spoke today in favor of Hegseth, and Republicans initially uncomfortable with the nominee appear to be coming around to supporting him. But Hegseth refused to meet with Democrats on the committee, and they made it clear that they will not make the vote easy for Republicans.
The top Democrat on the committee, Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) said he did not believe Hegseth was qualified for the position. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) exposed his lack of knowledge about U.S. allies and bluntly told him he was unqualified, later telling MSNBC that Hegseth will be an easy target for adversaries with blackmail material.
Hegseth told the armed services committee that all the negative information about him was part of a “smear campaign,” at the same time that he refused to say he would refuse to shoot peaceful protesters in the legs or refuse an unconstitutional order.
After the release of Jack Smith’s report, Trump posted on his social media channel that regardless of what he had done to the country, voters had exonerated him: “Jack is a lamebrain prosecutor who was unable to get his case tried before the Election, which I won in a landslide,” he wrote, lying about a victory in which more voters chose someone other than him. “THE VOTERS HAVE SPOKEN!!!”
It’s as if the Confederates’ descendants have captured the government of the United States.
Notes:
https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/06-04-02-0026-0004
https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/the-situation–the-cult-of-unqualified-authenticity
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/11/pete-hegseth-books-trump/680744/
https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/13/politics/pete-hegseth-confederate-generals-military-bases/index.html
Bluesky:
atrupar.com/post/3lfqlujuzzk2y
atrupar.com/post/3lfqlpxmerk2y
atrupar.com/post/3lfpia6qs422m
atrupar.com/post/3lfpj4w7dlk2m
X:
amymcgrathky/status/1879162507992215694
If you want to know what a post-woke military might look like, Donald Trump’s nominee to head the Pentagon just gave America a preview.
At his nomination hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Pete Hegseth pledged that he would direct his secretary of the Navy to focus on rebuilding the fleet instead of climate change. His secretary of the Army would focus on making war more lethal and effective, instead of figuring out how to build tanks that don’t run on gasoline. And the standards for military promotion would be based on merit, not a person’s skin color, sexuality, or gender.
Hegseth said that under his leadership, he would take steps to reverse the Pentagon’s decision to fire tens of thousands of service members who refused to take the Covid vaccine. “In President Trump’s Defense Department they will be apologized to. They will be reinstituted with pay and rank,” the nominee said.
It was a contentious hearing, as Democrats attacked Hegseth for everything from allegations of his marital infidelity and sexual assault to his lack of experience managing an organization as large and complex as the Pentagon. But the Republicans made Hegseth out to be the real victim, and by the time the hearing ended, it seemed like a near lock that he’ll be confirmed.
American lawmakers are about to determine the future of pornography, or they’re trying, at least. In recent years, nineteen states—most of them Republican-led—have passed legislation that requires any site with a significant amount of adult content to prove all its users are over 18. Most recently, on New Year’s Day, a new law called HB 3 took effect in my home state of Florida, where porn sites now face fines of up to $50,000 for every violation. But this week, such laws could be found unconstitutional.
This is all thanks to the Free Speech Coalition, a sort of NRA for pornographers, which has sued Texas attorney general Ken Paxton, a religious hard-liner, over that state’s age verification law. On Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear FSC’s case, which argues that these porn laws undermine free speech, infringe on privacy, and hurt American companies, while doing nothing to block foreign and fringe sites that don’t comply with U.S. laws.
The rationale behind the laws is understandable: Studies have shown that pornography consumption by teenagers can lead to misogynistic attitudes and increased sexual aggression. It’s also linked to mental health problems and increased rates of unsafe sex. More to the point, most parents are uncomfortable with the idea of their children having access to terabytes worth of hardcore pornography at the touch of a button.
But these laws are fundamentally pointless. First etched into mammoth tusks 40,000 years ago, porn predates the written word. It is inevitable—and in the internet age, infinitely accessible—even in places where so-called “porn bans” have been enacted.
January 14, 2025 Heather Cox Richardson
Pete Hegseth Shows His Hand Eli Lake
Porn Is Inevitable River Page
This is What Happens When You Try to Report Dirty Cops
THE IRON-CLAD PIÑATA Seymour Hersh
The Russell Brand Rorschach Test Kathleen Stock
RARE VIDEO: 1987 DC Hearing – NBC Warns Against Removing Fairness Doctrine – Learn Why It Matters
WATCH: CSPAN Caller Call Out the Resending of the Smith-Mundt Act – Learn Why That’s IMPORTANT
WATCH: 1975 Church Comitee Hearings on the CIA Mockingbird Media
-
Awakening Video1 year agoThis is What Happens When You Try to Report Dirty Cops
-
Substacks10 months agoTHE IRON-CLAD PIÑATA Seymour Hersh
-
Substacks1 year agoThe Russell Brand Rorschach Test Kathleen Stock
-
Substacks1 year agoA real fact-check of Trump’s appearance on Meet the Press Judd Legum
-
Substacks1 year agoLetter to the Children of Gaza – Read by Eunice Wong Chris Hedges