Podcast appearances and mentions of andrew prokop

Vox's Andrew Prokop says retribution was one of the major themes of the first 100 days of Trump's second term. John Bolton, who had his security detail yanked, explains why he's not worried about fascism. This episode was produced by Devan Schwartz and Victoria Chamberlin, edited by Amina Al-Sadi, fact-checked by Laura Bullard and Gabrielle Berbey, engineered by Andrea Kristinsdottir and Patrick Boyd, and hosted by Sean Rameswaram and Noel King. Listen to Today, Explained ad-free by becoming a Vox Member: vox.com/members. Transcript at vox.com/today-explained-podcast. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Policy in the second Trump administration is being driven by a small group of thinkers from the online right. We talk to one of them about how he got DEI dismantled. This episode was produced by Miles Bryan with help from Carla Javier, edited by Amina Al-Sadi, fact-checked by Laura Bullard, engineered by Andrea Kristinsdottir and Patrick Boyd, and hosted by Noel King. Further reading: The deeply online origins of MAGA 2.0 by Andrew Prokop. The Origins of Woke by Richard Hanania. Richard Hanania, Rising Right-Wing Star, Wrote For White Supremacist Sites Under Pseudonym. Transcript at vox.com/today-explained-podcast Support Today, Explained by becoming a Vox Member today: http://www.vox.com/members Photo courtesy of Richard Hanania. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Andrew Prokop, senior politics correspondent at Vox, talks about the "vast powers" that President Trump has given to Elon Musk, what he's doing with them and what's underpinning the effort overhaul of the federal bureaucracy.

Trump is remaking the federal government in his name, says Vox's Andrew Prokop. Efforts at a more efficient government may have a point, says Jennifer Pahlka, who co-founded the precursor to DOGE. This episode was produced by Avishay Artsy and Travis Larchuk, edited by Miranda Kennedy, fact-checked by Laura Bullard and Amanda Lewellyn, engineered by Andrea Kristinsdottir and Rob Byers, and hosted by Sean Rameswaram. Transcript at vox.com/today-explained-podcast Support Today, Explained by becoming a Vox Member today: http://www.vox.com/members An Elon Musk X post about DOGE displayed on a phone screen. Photo by Jakub Porzycki/NurPhoto via Getty Images. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Trump kicked off his second term with a flurry of executive actions. Vox's Andrew Prokop and Nicole Narea explain. This episode was produced by Amanda Lewellyn and Peter Balonon-Rosen, edited by Amina Al-Sadi, fact-checked by Laura Bullard and Victoria Chamberlin, engineered by Andrea Kristinsdottir and Rob Byers, and hosted by Sean Rameswaram. Transcript at vox.com/today-explained-podcast Support Today, Explained by becoming a Vox Member today: http://www.vox.com/members President Donald Trump holds up a signed executive order during the inauguration events at Capital One Arena in Washington, DC. Photo by Christopher Furlong/Getty Images. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

MAGA is fighting over immigration. Vox's Andrew Prokop tells us what happened, and the Wall Street Journal's Tim Higgins explains why it isn't the first time Elon Musk has split the party — and won't be the last. This episode was produced by Amanda Lewellyn, edited by Amina Al-Sadi, fact-checked by Laura Bullard, engineered by Patrick Boyd and Rob Byers, and hosted by Noel King. Transcript at vox.com/today-explained-podcast Support Today, Explained by becoming a Vox Member today: http://www.vox.com/members Tesla CEO Elon Musk, Co-Chair of the new Department of Government Efficiency, arrives on Capitol Hill. Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Donald Trump won. Vox's Andrew Prokop explains how and Semafor's Shelby Talcott explains what comes next. Today's show was produced by Amanda Lewellyn and Miles Bryan with help from Avishay Artsy, Victoria Chamberlin and Eliza Dennis, edited by Amina Al-Sadi with help from Matt Collette, fact-checked by Laura Bullard, engineered by Patrick Boyd and Rob Byers, hosted by Sean Rameswaram and Noel King. Transcript at vox.com/today-explained-podcast Support Today, Explained by becoming a Vox Member today: http://www.vox.com/members Photo by CHANDAN KHANNA/AFP via Getty Images. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

On the day after the election, we'll bring you the latest results in the presidential race and the battle for Congress as well as key California contests and ballot measures. Politics reporters Scott Shafer and Marisa Lagos of KQED and Andrew Prokop of Vox join us to analyze what we know so far, and where votes are still being tallied. Guests: Scott Shafer, senior editor, KQED's California Politics and Government; co-host, Political Breakdown Marisa Lagos, politics correspondent, KQED - co-host of KQED's Political Breakdown Andrew Prokop, senior politics reporter, Vox

En este trigésimo segundo episodio del ¡Bipartidismo Strikes Back! (una producción del #PodcastLaTrinchera), Christian Sobrino y Luis Balbino discuten los endosos de las congresistas Nydia Velázquez y Alexandria Ocasio Cortez a la Alianza y el artículo de Andrew Prokop en Vox.com titulado "The rise - and fall? - of the New Progressive Economics". Luego leen y contestan comentarios de la audiencia al último episodio del podcast.Este episodio de La Trinchera es presentado a ustedes por:- Solar Innovation, un pionero en el campo de la ingeniería eléctrica con más de 30 años de experiencia y 6 años en la energía renovable, especializándose en resolver los retos más complejos de la industria. En Solar Innovation crean soluciones completamente personalizadas para que obtengas el máximo retorno de tu inversión. Solar Innovation ofrece el mejor servicio al cliente en la industria. Llamen al 787-777-1846 o escribe a info@solarinnovationpr.com para obtener una cotización gratis y descubre cómo transformar tu energía en ahorro y sostenibilidad.- La Tigre,  el primer destino en Puerto Rico para encontrar una progresiva selección de moda Italiana, orientada a una nueva generación de profesionales que reconocen que una imagen bien curada puede aportar a nuestro progreso profesional. Detrás de La Tigre, se encuentra un selecto grupo de expertos en moda y estilo personal, que te ayudarán a elaborar una imagen con opciones de ropa a la medida y al detal de origen Italiano para él, y colecciones europeas para ella. Visiten la boutique de La Tigre ubicada en Ciudadela en Santurce o síganlos en Instagram en @shoplatigre.- San Juan Lincoln, donde encontrarán una exclusiva colección de vehículos de lujo diseñados para satisfacer todas sus expectativas. Por ejemplo, pueden ver allí la nueva Nautilus con una pantalla “wraparound” de 48” o la Corsair Plug In Hybrid con un rendimiento de 78 millas por galón. Pueden visitarlos en la Avenida Kennedy en San Juan para explorar lo que una SUV de lujo debe ser. Su equipo está listo para ofrecerles una experiencia inigualable. Para más información u orientación, llamen al 787-782-4000.Por favor suscribirse a La Trinchera con Christian Sobrino en su plataforma favorita de podcasts y compartan este episodio con sus amistades.Para contactar a Christian Sobrino y #PodcastLaTrinchera, nada mejor que mediante las siguientes plataformas:Facebook: @PodcastLaTrincheraTwitter: @zobrinovichInstagram: zobrinovichThreads: @zobrinovich Bluesky Social: zobrinovich.bsky.socialYouTube: @PodcastLaTrinchera

Vox's Andrew Prokop and Zack Beauchamp explain the right-wing thinkers whose ideas could dominate Trump's next term. This episode was produced by Peter Balonon-Rosen, edited by Amina Al-Sadi, fact-checked by Laura Bullard, engineered by Patrick Boyd and Andrea Kristinsdottir, and hosted by Noel King. Transcript at vox.com/today-explained-podcast Support Today, Explained by becoming a Vox Member today: http://www.vox.com/members Stephen Miller, senior advisor to Donald Trump, speaks at a rally in Colorado. Photo by Michael Ciaglo/Getty Images. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Vox's Andrew Prokop says the vice-presidential debate between Tim Walz and JD Vance was about policy, but in a weird way. Professor and pollster Dan Cassino explains how these two men represent the future of American masculinity. This episode was produced by Miles Bryan and Hady Mawajdeh, edited by Matt Collette, fact-checked by Laura Bullard, engineered by Andrea Kristinsdottir and Rob Byers, and hosted by Sean Rameswaram and Noel King. Transcript at vox.com/today-explained-podcast Support Today, Explained by becoming a Vox Member today: http://www.vox.com/members Photo by Michele Crowe/CBS via Getty Images. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The governor of Minnesota is Kamala Harris's running mate. Minnesota Public Radio's Dana Ferguson and Vox's Andrew Prokop explain the Democratic ticket. This episode was produced by Peter Balonon-Rosen and Amanda Lewellyn, edited by Matt Collette, fact-checked by Amina Al-Sadi, engineered by Patrick Boyd and Andrea Kristinsdottir, and hosted by Sean Rameswaram and Noel King. Transcript at vox.com/today-explained-podcast Support Today, Explained by becoming a Vox Member today: http://www.vox.com/members Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The Heritage Foundation's policy document “Project 2025” has gotten a lot of press, but what exactly is included in this 922-page document — and is it even relevant after the Trump campaign slammed it? Andrew Prokop, senior politics correspondent at Vox, joins host Krys Boyd to discuss the policy suggestions laid out in the conservative think tank's agenda, how much of it might actually be adopted by a potential Trump administration, and the shakeup that's happened at Heritage since its publication. His article is “Project 2025: The myths and the facts.”

All bets are off as President Biden exits the 2024 race. Vox's Andrew Prokop and Democratic strategist David Axelrod explain. This episode was produced by Denise Guerra and Miles Bryan, edited by Matt Collette, fact-checked by Amina Al-Sadi and Hady Mawajdeh, engineered by Patrick Boyd and Andrea Kristinsdottir, and hosted by Sean Rameswaram. Transcript at vox.com/today-explained-podcast Support Today, Explained by becoming a Vox Member today: http://www.vox.com/members Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

At the Republican National Convention, Donald J. Trump named J.D. Vance as his pick for Vice President. On this week's On the Media, hear how Vance went from liberal darling to MAGA leader, with a little help from a billionaire. Plus, meet the right-wing Christians who see the failed attempt on Trump's life as evidence of his divine anointing by God.[00:00] Host Brooke Gladstone charts the media's role in shaping J.D. Vance's rise. Vance rose to fame as a liberal media darling who frequently lambasted Donald Trump after the publication of his blockbuster memoir “Hillbilly Elegy,” to Trump's VP pick and a new leader of the MAGA movement. Ian Ward, a reporter at Politico, and Simon van Zuylen-Wood, a staff writer at New York Magazine, speak to how Vance's vision of America extends far beyond Trumpism. [00:00] Host Micah Loewinger speaks with Andrew Prokop, senior politics correspondent at Vox, about Vance's roots in the so-called New Right, a scrappy but growing offshoot of conservatism that aims to seize and destroy societal institutions they believe are controlled by the left. Plus, John Herrman, tech columnist at New York Magazine, explains what Big Tech sees in MAGA.[00:00] Brooke speaks with Matthew D. Taylor, author of the forthcoming book The Violent Take it by Force, about how the attempted assassination of Trump has amplified a subset of evangelicals who believe that prophecy foresaw the event. These right-wing Christians see Trump as an anointed candidate, saved by God. Further reading / listening:The Radicalization of J.D. Vance by Simon van Zuylen-Wood55 Things to Know About JD Vance, Trump's VP Pick by Ian WardJ.D. Vance's radical plan to build a government of Trump loyalists by Andrew ProkopWhy Silicon Valley Elites Are Turning MAGA by John HerrmanHow the Assassination Attempt Has Ignited the Prophecy World by Matthew D. TaylorThe Violent Take It by Force: The Christian Movement That Is Threatening Our Democracy by Matthew D. Taylor  On the Media is supported by listeners like you. Support OTM by donating today (https://pledge.wnyc.org/support/otm). Follow our show on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook @onthemedia, and share your thoughts with us by emailing onthemedia@wnyc.org.

The Republican National Convention convention wrapped up last night with a speech from Donald Trump that lasted more than 90 minutes. It capped a week that was heavy on rhetoric, short on specifics. Enter Project 2025. If you haven't heard of it, it's a document created by the conservative Heritage Foundation that lays out a vision for the next Republican president. “Project 2025 has gotten a lot of attention,” says Andrew Prokop, a senior political correspondent at Vox. He notes that Democrats in particular point to it as “a stand in for a lot of Trump's extreme plans for dictatorship.”Though Trump has distanced himself from the document, experts say much – or even most of its proposals will likely be on the agenda for a possible second Trump term. Andrew Prokop joined Diane to talk about the myths and the facts about Project 2025. 

The Supreme Court sent the question of Donald Trump's presidential immunity back to the lower courts. Vox's Andrew Prokop explains. This episode was produced by Miles Bryan and Amanda Lewellyn, edited by Matt Collette, fact-checked by Laura Bullard with help from Victoria Chamberlin, engineered by Patrick Boyd, Andrea Kristinsdotter, and Rob Byers, and hosted by Sean Rameswaram. Transcript at vox.com/today-explained-podcast Support Today, Explained by becoming a Vox Member today: http://www.vox.com/members Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Joe Klein joins the panel to discuss Haley's Trump support, Alito's freak flags, and polls showing Americans are deeply misinformed about the state of the economy. highlights / lowlights Damon: Is the Biden Campaign Running on False Hope? (Isaac Chotiner, NYer) Linda: Three Books to Help You Understand Nations in Transit 2024 (Freedom House) Joseph: The U.S. assembles the pieces of a possible Gaza war endgame (David Ignatius, WaPo) Mona: The Birth of a MAGA Conspiracy Theory (Andrew Egger, The Bulwark) Bill: If Trump wins, what would hold him back? (Andrew Prokop, Vox)

The first of former President Donald Trump's four criminal trials began this week. Vox's Andrew Prokop explains what's at stake, and Vox's Abdallah Fayyad explains how he might (or might not) pay the mounting legal bills. This episode was produced by Jesse Alejandro Cottrell with help from Hady Mawajdeh, edited by Amina Al-Sadi, fact-checked by Laura Bullard, Matt Collette and Amanda Lewellyn, engineered by Patrick Boyd and Rob Byers, and hosted by Noel King. Transcript at vox.com/todayexplained Support Today, Explained by making a financial contribution to Vox! bit.ly/givepodcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Nikki Haley is gunning for second place in the Iowa Republican caucuses. In New Hampshire polls, she's gaining on Donald Trump. Vox's Andrew Prokop and Republican strategist Scott Jennings explain Haley's rise. This episode was produced by Miles Bryan, edited by Matt Collette, fact-checked by Laura Bullard, engineered by David Herman, and hosted by Noel King. Transcript at vox.com/todayexplained Support Today, Explained by making a financial contribution to Vox! bit.ly/givepodcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Republicans made history when they ousted Speaker Kevin McCarthy, and they continue to make history in their inability to replace him. Vox's Andrew Prokop explains. This episode was produced by Haleema Shah and Siona Peterous, edited by Matt Collette, fact-checked by Tien Nguyen, engineered by David Herman, and hosted by Sean Rameswaram. Transcript at vox.com/todayexplained Support Today, Explained by making a financial contribution to Vox! bit.ly/givepodcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

For a conventional candidate, facing a criminal indictment might preclude a run for public office. But for Donald Trump, at least up until now, litigation, both criminal and civil, has done little to change his political aspirations or his base's support. But are the cases filed in D.C. and Georgia, which allege interference with the 2020 election and an attempt to subvert the election's outcome, different and do they place Trump in legal peril? How do the facts in these cases diverge from those brought up in Trump's second impeachment for conduct related to the January 2020 insurrection? We'll talk to experts and hear from you. Guests: Dahlia Lithwick, senior editor, Slate - covering the courts and the law. She also hosts the podcast Amicus. Her New York Times Bestseller "Lady Justice: Women, the Law, and the Battle to Save America" is available in paperback on September 19th. Andrew Prokop, senior politics reporter, Vox

On June 21st, the House of Representatives censured Rep. Adam Schiff of California. The House has censured members just 24 times in our nation's history, making Schiff the 25th. In this episode, we'll detail the actions outlined in the censure and let you decide for yourself: Is it a serious abuse of power? Is it a waste of time? Is it a deserved punishment? Please Support Congressional Dish – Quick Links Contribute monthly or a lump sum via Support Congressional Dish via (donations per episode) Send Zelle payments to: Donation@congressionaldish.com Send Venmo payments to: @Jennifer-Briney Send Cash App payments to: $CongressionalDish or Donation@congressionaldish.com Use your bank's online bill pay function to mail contributions to: Please make checks payable to Congressional Dish Thank you for supporting truly independent media! Background Sources Recommended Congressional Dish Episodes The History of Censure U.S. House of Representatives Office of History, Art and Archives. July 22, 2023. Wikipedia. The Durham Report John Durham. May 12, 2023. U.S. Department of Justice. FISA Warrants Rebecca Beitsch. July 21, 2023. The Hill. Andrew Prokop. February 24, 2018. Vox. February 5, 2018. U.S. House of Representatives The Whistleblower Julian E. Barnes et al. October 2, 2019. The New York Times. Julian E. Barnes and Nicholas Fandos. September 17, 2019. The New York Times. Kyle Cheney. September 13, 2019. Politico. Republicans Who Blocked the First Censure Jared Gans. June 16, 2023. The Hill. Senate Campaign Fundraising Jamie Dupree. July 17, 2023. Regular Order. Impeachment Mania Don Wolfensberger. July 10, 2023. The Hill. Alex Gangitano and Brett Samuels. July 1, 2023. The Hill. Rebecca Beitsch and Emily Brooks. June 29, 2023. The Hill. The Resolution Audio Sources June 21, 2023 House Floor June 21, 2023 House Floor Clips 1:15 Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL): With access to sensitive information unavailable to most Members of Congress, and certainly not accessible to the American people, Representative SCHIFF abused his privileges, claiming to know the truth, while leaving Americans in the dark about this web of lies. These were lies so severe that they altered the course of the country forever: the lie that President Donald Trump colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 Presidential election revealed to be completely false by numerous investigations, including the Durham report; the lie that the Steele dossier—a folder of falsified and since completely debunked collusion accusations funded by the Democratic Party—had any shred of credibility, yet Representative SCHIFF read it into the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD as fact; the lies concocted and compiled in a false memo that was used to lie to the FISA court, to precipitate domestic spying on U.S. citizen, Carter Page, violating American civil liberties. 12:20 Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): Mr. Speaker, to my Republican colleagues who introduced this resolution, I thank you. You honor me with your enmity. You flatter me with this falsehood. You, who are the authors of a big lie about the last election, must condemn the truthtellers, and I stand proudly before you. Your words tell me that I have been effective in the defense of our democracy, and I am grateful. 13:15 Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): Donald Trump is under indictment for actions that jeopardize our national security, and MCCARTHY would spend the Nation's time on petty political payback, thinking he can censure or fine Trump's opposition into submission. But I will not yield, not one inch. The cost of the Speaker's delinquency is high, but the cost to Congress of this frivolous and yet dangerous resolution may be even higher, as it represents another serious abuse of power. 14:50 Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): This resolution attacks me for initiating an investigation into the Trump campaign's solicitation and acceptance of Russian help in the 2016 election, even though the investigation was first led not by me but by a Republican chairman. 15:10 Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): It would hold that when you give internal campaign polling data to a Russian intelligence operative while Russian intelligence is helping your campaign, as Trump's campaign chairman did, that you must not call that collusion, though that is its proper name, as the country well knows. 15:30 Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): It would fine me for the costs of the critically important Mueller investigation into Trump's misconduct, even though the special counsel was appointed by Trump's own Attorney General. 16:00 Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): It would reprimand me over a flawed FISA application, as if I were its author or I were the Director of the FBI, and over flaws only discovered years later and by the inspector general, not Mr. Durham. In short, it would accuse me of omnipotence, the leader of some vast deep state conspiracy. Of course, it is nonsense. 16:50 Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): My colleagues, if there is cause for censure in this House, and there is, it should be directed at those in this body who sought to overturn a free and fair Election. 19:05 Rep. Mary Miller (R-IL): Representative SCHIFF used his position as the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee to mislead the American people by falsely claiming that there was classified evidence of Russia colluding with President Trump, which was not true. 22:15 Rep. Nick Langworthy (R-NY): SCHIFF repeatedly used the authority he was afforded in his position as chairman to lie to the American people to support his political agenda. Even after the Durham report discredited the Russia hoax, he continued to knowingly lie and peddle this false narrative. 24:45 Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY): ADAM SCHIFF has done nothing wrong. ADAM SCHIFF is a good man. ADAM SCHIFF has served this country with distinction. ADAM SCHIFF served this country well as a Federal prosecutor, fighting to keep communities safe. ADAM SCHIFF served this country well as the chair of the House Intelligence Committee, investigating people without fear or favor, including those at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue because he believes in the Constitution and his oath of office. ADAM SCHIFF served his country well as the lead impeachment manager during the first impeachment trial of the former President of the United States, prosecuting his corrupt abuse of power. Yes, ADAM SCHIFF served this country well in the aftermath of the violent insurrection. He pushed back against the big lie told by the puppet master in chief and participated as a prominent member of the January 6th Committee to defend our democracy. ADAM SCHIFF has done nothing wrong. He has worked hard to do right by the American people. The extreme MAGA Republicans have no vision, no agenda, and no plan to make life better for the American people, so we have this phony, fake, and fraudulent censure resolution. A DAM SCHIFF will not be silenced. We will not be silenced. House Democrats will not be silenced today. We will not be silenced tomorrow. We will not be silenced next week. We will not be silenced next month. We will not be silenced next year. We will not be silenced this decade. We will not be silenced this century. You will never ever silence us. We will always do what is right. We will always fight for the Constitution, fight to defend democracy, fight for freedom, expose extremism, and continue America's long, necessary, and majestic march toward a more perfect Union. 29:10 Rep. Ralph Norman (R-SC): Not only did he spread falsehoods that abused his power, he went after a man, Carter Page, who was completely innocent. Inspector General Horowitz found 17 major mistakes. 31:20 Rep. Mike Quigley (D-IL): What really gnaws on the majority and what really bothers them is that Mr. SCHIFF was way better than anybody on their team at debate, at leadership, at messaging, and at legal knowledge. He kicked their ass. He was better, he was more effective, and that still bothers them. 35:40 Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA): Mr. Speaker, I opposed the original version of this resolution, not to defend Mr. SCHIFF's lies, but to defend the process that exposed those lies. We must never punish speech in this House, only acts. The only way to separate truth from falsehoods or wisdom from folly is free and open debate. We must never impose excessive fines that would effectively replace the constitutional two-thirds vote for expulsion with a simple majority. This new version removes the fine and focuses instead on specific acts, most particularly the abuse of his position as Intelligence Committee chairman by implying he had access to classified information that did not exist and his placement into the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD of the Steele dossier that he knew or should have known was false. 42:35 Rep. Jim Himes (D-CT): The most important thing I can say is that I sat next to ADAM SCHIFF for years. He is a man of integrity and dignity. 49:45 Rep. Sylvia Garcia (D-TX): ADAM SCHIFF is tough. ADAM SCHIFF is smart. ADAM SCHIFF gets the job done. ADAM SCHIFF holds the powerful accountable. 56:35 Rep. André Carson (D-IN): Mr. Speaker, what I do know is that ADAM SCHIFF defended the U.S. Constitution. He led an impartial investigation which followed the facts and led to the first of two impeachments of a former President. 1:00:20 Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL): Today, we are voting on a joke of a measure to censure ADAM SCHIFF, a true public servant and patriot. I urge a strong ‘‘no'' against this resolution targeting a true American hero. 1:08:30 Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA): The only advantage to all of this is that instead of reversing what we did on the IRA to save the planet or reversing what we did to reduce the cost of prescription drugs, we are wasting time. September 26, 2019 CNN Clips 9:05 Wolf Blitzer: As you know, Mr. Chairman, you're being severely criticized by a lot of Republicans for mocking the president during your opening remarks today at the committee. Was it a mistake to make light of the situation? Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): Well, I don't think it's making light of a situation. And I certainly wouldn't want to suggest that there's anything comical about this. But I do think it's all too accurate, that this President, in his conversations with the President of Ukraine, was speaking like an organized crime boss. And the fact that these words are so suggestive that the President used of what we have seen of organized crime harkens back to me of what, for example, James Comey said when he was asked by the President if he could let this matter involving Flynn go, when Michael Cohen testified about how the President speaks in a certain code where you understand exactly what's required here. The point is that the President was using exactly that kind of language. And the President of Ukraine fully understood what he was talking about. Wolf Blitzer: Do you regret the, what you call the parody, the use of those phrases during the course of your opening statement? Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): No, I think everyone understood -- and my GOP colleagues may feign otherwise -- that when I said, suggested that it was as if the President said, "listen carefully, because I'm only going to tell you seven more times" that I was mocking the President's conduct. But make no mistake about this, what the President did is of the utmost gravity and the utmost seriousness, because it involves such a fundamental betrayal of his oath. September 26, 2019 House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Witnesses: Joseph Maguire, Acting Director of National Intelligence, Office of the Director of National Intelligence Clips 6:54 Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): President Zelensky, eager to establish himself at home as the friend of the president of the most powerful nation on earth, had at least two objectives: get a meeting with the president and get more military help. And so what happened on that call? Zelensky begins by ingratiating himself, and he tries to enlist the support of the president. He expresses his interest in meeting with the president, and says his country wants to acquire more weapons from us to defend itself. 7:30 Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): And what is the President's response? Well, it reads like a classic organized crime shakedown. Shorn of its rambling character and in not so many words, this is the essence of what the President communicates. We've been very good to your country. Very good. No other country has done as much as we have. But you know what? I don't see much reciprocity here. I hear what you want. I have a favor I want from you, though. And I'm going to say this only seven times, so you better listen good. I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent. Understand? Lots of it, on this and on that. I'm gonna put you in touch with people, not just any people, I'm going to put you in touch with Attorney General of the United States, my attorney general, Bill Barr. He's got the whole weight of the American law enforcement behind him. And I'm gonna put you in touch with Rudy, you're going to love Him, trust me. You know what I'm asking. And so I'm only going to say this a few more times, in a few more ways. And by the way, don't call me again, I'll call you when you've done what I asked. This is, in some in character, what the President was trying to communicate with the President of Ukraine. It would be funny if it wasn't such a graphic betrayal of the President's oath of office. But as it does represent a real betrayal, there's nothing the President says here that is in America's interest, after all. 1:14:40 Rep. Mike Turner (R-OH): While the chairman was speaking I actually had someone text me, "Is he just making this up?" And yes, yes he was. Because sometimes fiction is better than the actual words or the texts. But luckily the American public are smart and they have the transcript, they've read the conversation, they know when someone's just making it up. 1:19:45 Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): In my summary, the President's call was meant to be at least part in parody. The fact that that's not clear is a separate problem in and of itself. Of course, the president never said, "If you don't understand me, I'm gonna say seven more times." My point is, that's the message that the Ukraine president was receiving, in not so many words. September 17, 2019 Morning Joe on MSNBC Clips Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): We have not spoken directly with the whistleblower. We would like to. But I'm sure the whistleblower has concerns that he has not been advised as the law requires by the Inspector General or the Director of National Intelligence, just as to how he is to communicate with Congress. And so the risk of the whistleblower is retaliation. Will the whistleblower be protected under the statute if the offices that are supposed to come to his assistance and provide the mechanism are unwilling to do so? But yes, we would love to talk directly with the whistleblower. March 28, 2019 CNN with Chris Cuomo Clips Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): One, there's ample evidence of collusion in plain sight and that is true. And second, that is not the same thing as whether Bob Muller would be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the crime of conspiracy. There's a difference between there being evidence of collusion and proof beyond reasonable doubt of a crime. March 24, 2019 This Week with George Stephanopoulos Clips George Stephenopolous: You have said though in the past there is significant evidence of collusion. How do you square that with Robert Muller's decision not to indict anyone. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): There is significant evidence of collusion, and we've set that out time and time again, from the secret meetings in Trump Tower to the conversations between Flynn and the Russian ambassador, to the providing of polling data to someone linked to Russian intelligence, and Stone's conversation with WikiLeaks and the GRU through -- George Stephenopolous: None of it prosecuted. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): Well that's true. And as I pointed out on your show many times, there's a difference between compelling evidence of collusion and whether the Special Counsel concludes that he can prove beyond a reasonable doubt the criminal charge of conspiracy. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): We need to be able to see any evidence that this President, or people around him, may be compromised by a foreign power. We've of course seen all kinds of disturbing indications that this President has a relationship with Putin that is very difficult to justify or explain. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): It's our responsibility to tell the American people, "These are the facts. This is what your president has done. This is what his key campaign and appointees have done. These are the issues that we need to take action on." This is potential compromise. There is evidence, for example, quite in the public realm that the President sought to make money from the Russians, sought the Kremlin's help to make money during the presidential campaign, while denying business ties with the Russians. February 17, 2019 CNN with Dana Bash Clips Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): Look, you can see evidence in plain sight on the issue of collusion, pretty compelling evidence. Now, there's a difference between seeing evidence of collusion and being able to prove a criminal conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt. August 5, 2018 Face the Nation Clips Margaret Brennan: Can you agree that there has been no evidence of collusion, coordination, or conspiracy that has been presented thus far between the Trump campaign and Russia? Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): No, I don't agree with that at all. I think there's plenty of evidence of collusion or conspiracy in plain sight. December 10, 2017 CNN Clips Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): But we do know this: the Russians offered help, the campaign accepted help. The Russians gave help and the President made full use of that help, and that is pretty damning whether it is proof beyond a reasonable doubt of conspiracy or not. November 1, 2017 MSNBC Clips Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): What is clear as this: the Kremlin repeatedly told the campaign it had dirt on Clinton and offered to help it and at least one top Trump official, the President's own son, accepted. Rachel Maddow: The Kremlin offered dirt to the Trump campaign. The President's campaign said yes to that offer. That's no longer an open question. All that stuff has now been proven and admitted to. Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee today, using his time today, using his opening statement today to walk through -- ding ding ding, point by point -- what we've already learned in black and white, in written correspondence and public statements and in freaking court filings, about all the times the Trump campaign was offered helped by Russia to influence our election and all the times the Trump campaign said "Yes, please." March 23, 2017 The View Clips Jedediah Bila: Congressman, you made yesterday what some are deeming a provocative statement by saying that there is more than circumstantial evidence now that the Trump camp colluded with Russia. Senator John McCain was critical of that, others have been critical of that. Can you defend that statement? Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): Yes. And I, you know, I don't view it as the same bombshell that apparently they did. Look, I've said that I thought there was circumstantial evidence of collusion or coordination, and that there was direct evidence of deception. And no one had an issue with that. And I don't think anyone really contested that, on the basis of the information we keep getting, I can say, in my opinion, it's now not purely circumstantial. We had the FBI Director testify in open session about this, acknowledge an FBI investigation. Obviously, this is now public. And I think it's fair to say that that FBI investigation is justified, that that wouldn't be done on the basis of not credible allegations. And so I think it's appropriate to talk in general terms about the evidence, but I don't think it's appropriate for us to go into specifics and say, "This is what we know from this piece of classified information," or "this what we know from this witness." But I do think, in this investigation where the public is hungry for information, it is important that we try to keep the public in the loop. That's why we're having public hearings. March 22, 2017 MSNBC Clips Chuck Todd: You have seen direct evidence of collusion? Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): I don't want to go into specifics, but I will say that there is evidence that is not circumstantial. March 19, 2017 Meet the Press Clips Chuck Todd: Collusion is sort of what hasn't been proven here between whatever the Russians did and the Trump campaign. In fact, the former Acting Director of the CIA, who was Mike Morell, who was a supporter of Hillary Clinton, he essentially reminded people and took Director Clapper at his word on this show who said, there has been no evidence that has been found of collusion. Are we at the point of -- at what point do you start to wonder if there is a fire to all this smoke? Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): Well, first of all, I was surprised to see Director Clapper say that because I don't think you can make that claim categorically as he did. I would characterize it this way at the outset of the investigation: there is circumstantial evidence of collusion. There is direct evidence, I think, of deception. Executive Producer Recommended Sources Music by (found on by mevio) Editing Production Assistance

Everyone is fighting about “equity.” If only they could define it. Vox's Andrew Prokop explains. This episode was produced by Miles Bryan, edited by Matt Collette, fact-checked by Laura Bullard and Haleema Shah, engineered by Patrick Boyd, and hosted by Sean Rameswaram. Transcript at vox.com/todayexplained Support Today, Explained by making a financial contribution to Vox! bit.ly/givepodcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This week, Emily Bazelon, John Dickerson, and David Plotz discuss the latest three Republicans battling for the presidential nomination; Oklahoma's approval of a Catholic public-charter school; and Saudi sportswashing in golf and soccer.    Here are some notes and references from this week's show: Andrew Prokop for Vox: “Trump's next indictment is looming – and the evidence against him is trickling out”  Sean Murphy for AP: “Oklahoma school board approves what would be the 1st taxpayer-funded religious school in US”  The Guardian: “Changing their tune: what golf's powerbrokers said then and now”  Lauren Chooljian for New Hampshire Public Radio: “He built New Hampshire's largest addiction treatment network. Now, he faces accusations of sexual misconduct.” David Enrich for The New York Times: “A Reporter Investigated Sexual Misconduct. Then the Attacks Began.”  John Dickerson for Slate: “Where's My Subpoena?”   Here are this week's chatters:  Emily: Kate Brumback for AP: “Bond granted for 3 activists whose fund bailed out people protesting Atlanta ‘Cop City' project”  John: David Lerman, Laura Weiss, and Avery Roe for Roll Call: “Still steaming over debt deal, conservatives derail House action” David: Washington and Old Dominion Railroad Regional Park; Dan Chabanov for Bicycling: “What Is a Randonnée—and Why Should You Sign Up for One?”; Paris-Brest-Paris Randonneur Listener chatter from Greg Hoffman: Genghis Blues   For this week's Slate Plus bonus segment, David, Emily, and John discuss the attacks and libel suit against a journalist for her reporting.    In the next edition of Gabfest Reads, Emily talks with Peter Singer @PeterSinger about his book, Animal Liberation Now: The Definitive Classic Renewed.    Join us for a live taping! Political Gabfest Live in Washington, D.C., Wednesday June 28, 7:30 p.m., Sixth & I, 600 I St. NW. Tickets are on sale now.    Email your chatters, questions, and comments to gabfest@slate.com or Tweet us @SlateGabfest. (Messages may be quoted by name unless the writer stipulates otherwise.)   Podcast production by Cheyna Roth Research by Julie Huygen This Pride Month, make an impact by helping Macy's and The Trevor Project on their mission to fund life-saving suicide prevention services for LGBTQ youth. Go to macys.com/purpose to learn more.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

For the first time in American history, a former president faces federal charges. Vox's Andrew Prokop explains. This episode was produced by Miles Bryan and Siona Peterous, edited by Matt Collette, fact-checked by Laura Bullard, engineered by Michael Raphael and Cristian Ayala, and hosted by Sean Rameswaram. Transcript at vox.com/todayexplained Support Today, Explained by making a financial contribution to Vox! bit.ly/givepodcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This week, Emily Bazelon, John Dickerson, and David Plotz discuss the latest three Republicans battling for the presidential nomination; Oklahoma's approval of a Catholic public-charter school; and Saudi sportswashing in golf and soccer.    Here are some notes and references from this week's show: Andrew Prokop for Vox: “Trump's next indictment is looming – and the evidence against him is trickling out”  Sean Murphy for AP: “Oklahoma school board approves what would be the 1st taxpayer-funded religious school in US”  The Guardian: “Changing their tune: what golf's powerbrokers said then and now”  Lauren Chooljian for New Hampshire Public Radio: “He built New Hampshire's largest addiction treatment network. Now, he faces accusations of sexual misconduct.” David Enrich for The New York Times: “A Reporter Investigated Sexual Misconduct. Then the Attacks Began.”  John Dickerson for Slate: “Where's My Subpoena?”   Here are this week's chatters:  Emily: Kate Brumback for AP: “Bond granted for 3 activists whose fund bailed out people protesting Atlanta ‘Cop City' project”  John: David Lerman, Laura Weiss, and Avery Roe for Roll Call: “Still steaming over debt deal, conservatives derail House action” David: Washington and Old Dominion Railroad Regional Park; Dan Chabanov for Bicycling: “What Is a Randonnée—and Why Should You Sign Up for One?”; Paris-Brest-Paris Randonneur Listener chatter from Greg Hoffman: Genghis Blues   For this week's Slate Plus bonus segment, David, Emily, and John discuss the attacks and libel suit against a journalist for her reporting.    In the next edition of Gabfest Reads, Emily talks with Peter Singer @PeterSinger about his book, Animal Liberation Now: The Definitive Classic Renewed.    Join us for a live taping! Political Gabfest Live in Washington, D.C., Wednesday June 28, 7:30 p.m., Sixth & I, 600 I St. NW. Tickets are on sale now.    Email your chatters, questions, and comments to gabfest@slate.com or Tweet us @SlateGabfest. (Messages may be quoted by name unless the writer stipulates otherwise.)   Podcast production by Cheyna Roth Research by Julie Huygen This Pride Month, make an impact by helping Macy's and The Trevor Project on their mission to fund life-saving suicide prevention services for LGBTQ youth. Go to macys.com/purpose to learn more.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week, Emily Bazelon, John Dickerson, and David Plotz discuss the latest three Republicans battling for the presidential nomination; Oklahoma's approval of a Catholic public-charter school; and Saudi sportswashing in golf and soccer.    Here are some notes and references from this week's show: Andrew Prokop for Vox: “Trump's next indictment is looming – and the evidence against him is trickling out”  Sean Murphy for AP: “Oklahoma school board approves what would be the 1st taxpayer-funded religious school in US”  The Guardian: “Changing their tune: what golf's powerbrokers said then and now”  Lauren Chooljian for New Hampshire Public Radio: “He built New Hampshire's largest addiction treatment network. Now, he faces accusations of sexual misconduct.” David Enrich for The New York Times: “A Reporter Investigated Sexual Misconduct. Then the Attacks Began.”  John Dickerson for Slate: “Where's My Subpoena?”   Here are this week's chatters:  Emily: Kate Brumback for AP: “Bond granted for 3 activists whose fund bailed out people protesting Atlanta ‘Cop City' project”  John: David Lerman, Laura Weiss, and Avery Roe for Roll Call: “Still steaming over debt deal, conservatives derail House action” David: Washington and Old Dominion Railroad Regional Park; Dan Chabanov for Bicycling: “What Is a Randonnée—and Why Should You Sign Up for One?”; Paris-Brest-Paris Randonneur Listener chatter from Greg Hoffman: Genghis Blues   For this week's Slate Plus bonus segment, David, Emily, and John discuss the attacks and libel suit against a journalist for her reporting.    In the next edition of Gabfest Reads, Emily talks with Peter Singer @PeterSinger about his book, Animal Liberation Now: The Definitive Classic Renewed.    Join us for a live taping! Political Gabfest Live in Washington, D.C., Wednesday June 28, 7:30 p.m., Sixth & I, 600 I St. NW. Tickets are on sale now.    Email your chatters, questions, and comments to gabfest@slate.com or Tweet us @SlateGabfest. (Messages may be quoted by name unless the writer stipulates otherwise.)   Podcast production by Cheyna Roth Research by Julie Huygen This Pride Month, make an impact by helping Macy's and The Trevor Project on their mission to fund life-saving suicide prevention services for LGBTQ youth. Go to macys.com/purpose to learn more.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

NBC's Matt Dixon explains how Gov. Ron DeSantis wants to Make America Florida. Vox's Andrew Prokop spells out how the governor's brain works. Please clap. This episode was produced by Amanda Lewellyn, edited by Matt Collette, fact-checked by Laura Bullard, engineered by Michael Raphael, and hosted by Sean Rameswaram. Transcript at vox.com/todayexplained Support Today, Explained by making a financial contribution to Vox! bit.ly/givepodcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The oldest president in the history of the United States wants a second term. Vox's Andrew Prokop and Dylan Matthews explain why Joe Biden doesn't have any competition. This episode was produced by Haleema Shah and Siona Peterous, edited by Amina Al-Sadi, fact-checked by Matt Collette and Laura Bullard, engineered by Patrick Boyd, and hosted by Sean Rameswaram. Transcript at vox.com/todayexplained Support Today, Explained by making a financial contribution to Vox! bit.ly/givepodcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Donald Trump is the first US president to be indicted. Now what? Vox's Andrew Prokop explains. This episode was produced by Haleema Shah and Amanda Lewellyn with help from Avishay Artsy. It was edited by Matt Collette, fact-checked by Laura Bullard, engineered by Paul Robert Mounsey and Cristian Ayala, and hosted by Sean Rameswaram. Transcript at vox.com/todayexplained   Support Today, Explained by making a financial contribution to Vox! bit.ly/givepodcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Nikki Haley, the former governor of South Carolina, is running for president. Vox's Andrew Prokop says she's likely the first of many prominent Republicans to challenge Trump. This episode was produced by Miles Bryan, edited by Amina Al-Sadi, fact-checked by Laura Bullard and Matt Collette, engineered by Paul Robert Mounsey, and hosted by Noel King. Transcript at vox.com/todayexplained   Support Today, Explained by making a financial contribution to Vox! bit.ly/givepodcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The 118th Congress has begun with a showdown over who will be elected House speaker. Vox's Andrew Prokop argues that this is the culmination of a decade-long trend of stonewalling in Congress. Today's show was produced by Amanda Lewellyn and Victoria Chamberlin. It was edited by Amina Al-Sadi and was fact-checked by Serena Solin. It was engineered by Paul Robert Mounsey and hosted by Noel King Transcript at vox.com/todayexplained   Support Today, Explained by making a financial contribution to Vox! bit.ly/givepodcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The January 6 committee sent the Justice Department four criminal referrals against the former president, who it alleges engaged in an elaborate criminal conspiracy to remain in office after his 2020 defeat. Vox's Andrew Prokop explains what happens next. This episode was produced by Hady Mawajdeh and Siona Peterous, edited by Matt Collette, fact-checked by Laura Bullard, engineered by Efim Shapiro, and hosted by Sean Rameswaram. Transcript at vox.com/todayexplained Support Today, Explained by making a financial contribution to Vox! bit.ly/givepodcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The midterms weren't a clear victory for Republicans, and it's still too early to know who'll control Congress. Vox's Andrew Prokop explains. This episode was produced by Miles Bryan and Hady Mawajdeh with help from Amanda Lewellyn, edited by Matt Collette, fact-checked by Laura Bullard, engineered by Efim Shapiro and Paul Robert Mounsey, and hosted by Noel King. Transcript at vox.com/todayexplained Support Today, Explained by making a financial contribution to Vox! bit.ly/givepodcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The Young Turks' Cenk Uygur can't stand Republicans and can't stand Democrats. So who can he possibly see as a viable progressive presidential option for 2024? asks host Andy Levy in this episode of The New Abnormal podcast. Uygur's top pick: Jon Stewart. The two chat what that would look like, then Vox's senior politics correspondent Andrew Prokop shares everything we need to know about far right political blogger Curtis Yarvin. The guy not only wants to replace American democracy with a monarchy, but also has ideas on how to make Jan. 6 better “next time.” Plus! Andy and guest co-host Beast opinion editor Anthony Fisher review the biggest political news of the week: the attack on Paul Pelosi and Don Jr's “gross” response to it. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hunter Biden may not be the archcriminal that conservatives describe, but his actions present problems for his father (the president of the United States). Vox's Andrew Prokop explains. This episode was produced by Hady Mawajdeh, engineered by Efim Shapiro, fact-checked by Laura Bullard, and edited by Sean Rameswaram, who also hosted. Transcript at vox.com/todayexplained Support Today, Explained by making a financial contribution to Vox! bit.ly/givepodcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Hi! This is Lexie of Read by AI. I read human-curated content for you to listen to while working, exercising, commuting, or any other time. Without further ado: The real Ginni Thomas revelation by Andrew Prokop from Vox.

Dylan Matthews and Jerusalem Demsas are joined by Vox's Andrew Prokop (@awprokop) to talk about the midterm elections. More specifically, why the president's party almost always loses seats in Congress. They discuss the theories of this phenomenon and what, if anything, can work on the margins. Plus, a white paper about Obamacare and the 2010 midterm elections. References: Why the president's party almost always has a bad midterm The political science of door-knocking and TV ads White paper: “One Vote Out of Step? The Effects of Salient Roll Call Votes in the 2010 Election” Dylan's old, wrong article arguing that congressional position-taking doesn't matter much Hosts: Dylan Matthews (@dylanmatt), senior correspondent, Vox Jerusalem Demsas (@jerusalemdemsas), policy reporter, Vox Credits: Sofi LaLonde, producer Dara Lind, engineer Libby Nelson, editorial adviser Amber Hall, deputy editorial director of talk podcasts Sign up for The Weeds newsletter each Friday: vox.com/weedsletter  Want to support The Weeds? Please consider making a donation to Vox: bit.ly/givepodcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Introducing the Band:Your hosts Scot Bertram (@ScotBertram) and Jeff Blehar (@EsotericCD) are joined by Andrew Prokop. Andrew is Senior Politics Correspondent for Vox, and you can find his work here. Follow him on Twitter at @awprokop.Andrew's Music Pick: Kate BushWho? Unless you're an art-rocker, Englishman, or Lisa Simpsonesque girl-poet-dreamer, the name "Kate Bush" quite likely means nothing to you. Bush is something close to a beloved institution in the United Kingdom, where she has grown up in public to become the nation's officially designated Eccentric Bookish Aunt, but in the United States she is almost a pure cipher outside of music fanatics, a weird lady with a flute-like voice who occasionally shows up on '80s-era Peter Gabriel singles.Well get ready for a massive course-correction then, because this is an episode of Political Beats that has been brewing since the day the show began. And it doesn't take a psychic to figure out which of your hosts has been quietly lying in wait, ready to explain the deeply committed art-rock genius of Kate Bush to you for four years now. Bush began her career as a downright creepily preternatural child prodigy (she was writing at age ten, recording by age 13, professionally recording at age 15, and released her debut LP at age 18), swiftly gathered up complete creative control into her hands, and went to work from 1980 onwards shaping a career that stands for so many things, but perhaps most of all for the miraculous idea that gallery/exhibition-level art and "pop music" can still coexist within the same skin without shedding representation altogether. Instrumentally, this is piano-based music, but the real instrument here is the Fairlight CMI, a synthesizer program set that allowed her to retreat into near-complete isolation and play every single note of any instrument herself; Bush, more than nearly any other rock or pop artist with mainstream success during the 1980s, is the sound of Virginia Woolf's A Room Of One's Own made good.Ah, but it's not just about art! It's about love and beauty! Bush balanced all of her arty instincts with an achingly pure lyrical vision that magpied from every influence imaginable to take form in her own unique style: a literary fascination with artifice -- with the self-construction that knowledge and imposture makes possible -- combined with an elementally deeply fascination with men and the inscrutable mysteries of masculine anxieties, ambitions, and inchoate needs. So here we go! It's coming for us through the trees! Take your shoes off, throw them in the lake, click play, and before you're 20 minutes in, hopefully you'll be two steps on the water as well.

Have you been wondering exactly what it means to Build Back Better? On this week's On the Media, hear why political coverage seems to address everything about Joe Biden's bill--except what's in it. Plus, find out if social media really does turn nice people into trolls. 1. Andrew Prokop [@awprokop], Senior Politics Correspondent at Vox, on the gap between political coverage of the Build Back Better Act, and what the bill actually says. Listen. 2. Michael Bang Petersen [@M_B_Petersen], political science professor at Aarhus University, on the difference (or lack thereof) between on and offline behaviors, and how Facebook might not be affecting us in the ways we think. Listen. 3. Meghan O'Gieblyn, writer and author of God, Human, Animal, Machine, on the ever-deeper entwining of humanity and technology, and what it might mean for our future. Listen.   Music from this week's show: Passing Time - John RenbournClap Hands - Tom WaitsOkami - Nicola CruzCarmen Fantasy - Anderson and RoeYoung at Heart - Brad MehldauFor the Creator - Richard Souther

The Trump Organization and its top lieutenant have been indicted for tax fraud. Andrew Prokop says the case could have uge implications for American politics. Transcript at vox.com/todayexplained. Support Today, Explained by making a financial contribution to Vox! bit.ly/givepodcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Half the country's adults are now fully vaccinated for COVID-19 and nearly two-thirds have a single dose. But does that mean the pandemic is over? Expert Laurie Garrett weighs in. And, although Democrats want to get rid of the filibuster, Joe Manchin stands in their way. Vox's Andrew Prokop, who recently profiled Manchin, joins us.

Matt and Dara are joined by Vox's Andrew Prokop to talk about the very notion of a president's "first hundred days," whether or not it is a useful or important metric for their performance. Andrew talks about the history of the term, originating with F.D.R., and our hosts evaluate some of the recent lines of comparison between Biden and Roosevelt that have been floating around in the discourse lately. Plus, some research is analyzed that examines the effect of the channel placement of Fox News in certain areas, and Republican performance in federal elections. Resources: "The myth of a president's 'first 100 days'" by Andrew Prokop, Vox (Apr. 29, 2021) "Biden's first 100 days, explained in 600 words" by German Lopez, Vox (Apr. 30, 2021) White paper Hosts: Matt Yglesias (@mattyglesias), Slowboring.com Dara Lind (@DLind), Immigration Reporter, ProPublica Andrew Prokop (@awprokop), Senior Politics Correspondent, Vox Credits: Erikk Geannikis, Editor and Producer As the Biden administration gears up, we'll help you understand this unprecedented burst of policymaking. Sign up for The Weeds newsletter each Friday: vox.com/weeds-newsletter. The Weeds is a Vox Media Podcast Network production. Want to support The Weeds? Please consider making a contribution to Vox: bit.ly/givepodcasts About Vox Vox is a news network that helps you cut through the noise and understand what's really driving the events in the headlines. Follow Us: Vox.com Facebook group: The Weeds Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Matt and Dara are joined by Vox's Andrew Prokop, author of an in-depth revelatory profile on America's swingiest Senator: Mr. Manchin in the Middle. Andrew brings Manchin's history as a legislator to bear in discussion, shedding light on what Manchin's policy goals as a legislator in this Congress might be (if he has any, that is), what his governing ideology might be beyond the mere politics of his re-election, and why, ultimately, he is being so weird about the filibuster right now. Joe, if you're out there: please get in touch. Also, some research is discussed that explores the connection between the partisan identity of members of the so-called "deep state" (non-political-appointee civil servants) and their performance at their jobs. Resources: "Joe Manchin wants to save Democrats from themselves" by Andrew Prokop, Vox (Apr. 27, 2021) White paper Hosts: Matt Yglesias (@mattyglesias), Slowboring.com Dara Lind (@DLind), Immigration Reporter, ProPublica Andrew Prokop (@awprokop), Senior Politics Correspondent, Vox Credits: Erikk Geannikis, Editor and Producer As the Biden administration gears up, we'll help you understand this unprecedented burst of policymaking. Sign up for The Weeds newsletter each Friday: vox.com/weeds-newsletter. The Weeds is a Vox Media Podcast Network production. Want to support The Weeds? Please consider making a contribution to Vox: bit.ly/givepodcasts About Vox Vox is a news network that helps you cut through the noise and understand what's really driving the events in the headlines. Follow Us: Vox.com Facebook group: The Weeds Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Vox’s Andrew Prokop explains Florida Congressman Matt Gaetz’s sex scandal. Transcript at vox.com/todayexplained. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Vox's Andrew Prokop explains Florida Congressman Matt Gaetz's sex scandal. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Once again I had the chance to speak with Andrew Prokop about the ever changing digital communication space. He is an inventor, educator and a fascinating person to listen to. Hope you find this episode as enjoyable as I did. UpdatesI have been learning UI designing while building new communication modules. I've spent the last 2 weeks working in a UI design tool mostly making mistakes and having to undo what I had done the previous days. Very frustrating however challenging task. I wrote a blogpost on my website (link below) about this experience and how my customer and user experience background might be holding me up. Looking for the new challenge is one of my lessons from the last year and that is aas well for my guest this week. Although, he has not done this just recently but his entire career. I connected with Andrew Prokop once again and while he didn't become the professor he wanted to, he shares and teaches others - constantly. This is a new episode and I have a backlog of interviews from last year I will be working through in the coming weeks. Your comments, feedback and support are always well received. QuestionsNow being a year since this global event has affected all of us: What has changed for you? What do you think AI & bots will practically do for us? You've been working more recently in the collaboration space, what is new? You recently posted that you suffer from post success letdown. How does that effect you. ClosingAndrew, you rebranded your website from the SIP Adventures to Tao, Zen and Tomorrow and now you're writing about SIP again...but we will take that to the next interview. LinksMy most recent blogpost on UI from a CX/UX view https://www.andrewfmaher.com Links to Andrew Prokop's sites: https://andrewjprokop.wordpress.com/ https://www.nojitter.com/author/andrew-prokop https://www.youtube.com/user/ajprokop/featured https://www.linkedin.com/in/andrew-prokop-631bab10/

The filibuster, a Senate rule that was put in place by accident in the 19th century, is standing in the way of much of President Joe Biden's agenda. A growing chorus of Democrats are calling for the Senate to scrap the filibuster, arguing that it's the only way the party can act on issues such as voting rights, gun control, and climate. Not everyone is in agreement — including, importantly, Sens. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema. Vox's Andrew Prokop explains what's going on. References: Read Andrew's filibuster explainer here Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Andrew Prokop has been CEBPing for over 20 years. I did have to jog his memory during this interview but it is true. Whether TAPI, CEBP, bot and web services he has seen most all and still is full of ideas for today's businesses.  I have had the chance to interview Andrew over the years and always come away more informed. He feels this is that trigger many businesses needed to recognise that digital, or the internet in general is really important to their business. He shares what might still be holding some back and where the change needs to come from.  Enjoy this episode of 'New Normal' and please subscribe and tell a friend or two. If you have ideas of what I might bring onto the podcast in the future, drop me a note.