Podcasts about Constitution

The history behind a rebellion against a state of the new United States, why it happened, its impact on our Constitution, and what it means today. From a 2014 cast, but it's been a while.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today's guests are Chef Mehreen (Reenie) Karim and up-and-coming media mogul Alice Ma. The two join host Kerry Diamond to talk about “Picky Eaters,” the new social media food competition show hosted by Reenie and produced by Mad Realities, the modern media company co-founded by Alice. They discuss the making of the show, how they snagged guests like Padma Lakshmi, Reenie's experience on Gordon Ramsay's “Next Level Chef,” and how Alice (and friends) almost bought a copy of the U.S. Constitution.  Cherry Bombe's Farmers & Makers weekend Order the Cherry Bombe Game Changers issue Become an Official Bombesquad Member  Sign up for our free Radio Cherry Bombe newsletter at cherrybombe.substack.com Follow Alice on Instagram Follow Reenie on Instagram Follow Kerry on Instagram

It's Monday, August 3, A.D. 2026. This is The Worldview in 5 Minutes heard on 140 radio stations and at www.TheWorldview.com.  I'm Adam McManus. (Adam@TheWorldview.com) By Adam McManus Equipping the Persecuted's warnings about endangered Nigerian Christians unheeded On July 1st, Equipping The Persecuted issued multiple terror alerts warning that Islamist Fulani Ethnic Militia were preparing coordinated attacks in Nigeria against Christian communities in the Plateau, Benue, and Southern Kaduna states. They publicly pleaded with the Nigerian government to protect these vulnerable villages before it was too late. Tragically, their warnings were ignored. In the three weeks since, more than 250 Christians have been murdered in the very communities they identified. The latest massacre took place on Saturday, August 1st in Naridon village in Southern Kaduna, where more than 30 Christians were slaughtered as terrorists attacked for hours. Once again, innocent families paid the price while help never came. Equipping The Persecuted is the only organization consistently issuing terror alerts to warn vulnerable Christian communities before attacks occur while also deploying immediate emergency aid when those attacks happen. While others document the tragedy, their teams are already on the ground paying hospital bills, delivering emergency food, caring for the wounded, and helping bury the dead. Based on the intelligence they are receiving,  Equipping The Persecuted believes this current wave of violence is only the beginning. If you want to help our brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ in Nigeria, go to www.EquippingThePersecuted.org/donate Senator Hawley to Dr. Fauci: “A million people dead. You're getting rich!” As The Worldview reported last Friday, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee questioned Dr. Anthony Fauci, the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, about his culpability in a cover-up about the source of the COVID-19 virus and what happened subsequently.  Shockingly, Dr. Fauci invoked the Fifth Amendment 111 times, reported FoxNews. Republican Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri got righteously angry. HAWLEY: “Well, nothing says honesty like taking the Fifth, huh Doc? Let's try something. What day of the week is it today?” FAUCI: “On the advice of counsel, I respectfully decline to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution.” HAWLEY: “What color tie are you wearing?” FAUCI: “On the advice of counsel, I respectfully decline to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution.” HAWLEY:  “Let's just get one thing straight. You don't have any rights under the Fifth Amendment because you've been pardoned, as you very well know, as the Supreme Court has been clear for a century and more. Brown vs Walker, 1896: ‘When he has been pardoned, he may not stand upon his privilege.' “You know that. Your lawyers sitting behind you, now shifting nervously in their chairs, they know it. This isn't about the Constitution. This isn't about the law. This is about contempt -- contempt for this body and contempt for the American people. “But I think I know why you're doing it. It's because you don't want to answer questions. It's because you did all kinds of terrible things. It's because during the pandemic you got rich. I mean, your net worth now is north of $12 million! “You got over a million dollars in cash awards during COVID, during a 24-month span during COVID. A million bucks you knocked down in cash money using federal resources. Now you're worth more than $12 million. You've got a pension that, in its first year, paid out north of $400,000 a year. “A million people dead. You're getting rich! A million people dead. You're using federal employees to get cash awards for you. A million people dead, and you're here taking the Fifth because you don't want to admit that what really happened in all that time was a multi-month, multi-year course of self-dealing. Isn't that true, Dr. Fauci?” FAUCI: “On the advice of counsel, I respectfully decline to answer, based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution.” HAWLEY: “Yeah, well, silence is admission. And here's the real thing. At the end of the day, it wasn't just about the money, really. Was it? It was really about a power trip. I mean, through all of this, you wanted to be the most famous scientist in the world. You were so focused on getting every award and every drop of cash that you could, all because you wanted to be on TV. “You wanted to be the ‘sun god' of science. You wanted to be the guy who was in charge of it all. You wanted to lambast Trump. You wanted to make sure that nobody else stole your spotlight. You wanted to be ‘the guy.' “You had time to sit for InStyle magazine. Here's what you were doing with your time. You could sit for InStyle Magazine, but you can't answer questions for the American people. You could sit for InStyle Magazine, but you're here taking the Fifth. You could sit for InStyle Magazine and get a million bucks in cash awards, but now the cat's got your tongue. I bet he does. I tell you what. “Here's my conclusion from all of this. This was really all about you the whole time. Somewhere along the way, you lost your way. You may have been a good public servant at one time. I don't know, but I can tell you from reading your emails now, from looking at what you did, how you used your employees. Somewhere along the line, it became all about you. “You became a narcissist and a megalomaniac and a liar. You've lied to the American people, and you've lied to this body, and you've disgraced your profession by doing it. You called yourself ‘the most famous scientist in the world.' You've done more to harm science than anybody in my lifetime, and I hope you'll go home and write that in your diary.” Romans 14:12 says, “So then, each of us will give an account of ourselves to God.” By the way, check out a fascinating 17-minute video in which Scott Rouse, a behavior and body language expert, analyzes how he can tell Dr. Fauci was feeling tremendous stress during Senator Hawley's line of questioning. You can find it in our transcript today at www.TheWorldview.com. When can someone plead the Fifth? The Pour Over media outlet addressed when someone can plead the Fifth Amendment.  Any time a statement is compelled and might incriminate you.  If someone is asked to testify or hand over evidence that could get them prosecuted, they can plead the Fifth. Is there anything that can override someone's Fifth Amendment right? Yes: immunity or a pardon which Dr. Fauci had from President Joe Biden.  Pardoned people are exempt from prosecution, meaning they cannot incriminate themselves, and therefore should be allowed to invoke the Fifth Amendment. Leftist TV Host SHOCKED about our God-given rights Back on July 5, 2025, House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana, an Evangelical, affirmed that our rights come from God, not government, something he has affirmed many times since then. JOHNSON: “We are so blessed. We should not take it for granted. We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal. It does not say born equal. It says created equal. “It is our Creator that gives us our rights. We are the first nation in the history of the world that acknowledged that our rights do not derive from government. They come from God Himself. (cheers) Those words up there, that motto, it says, "In God we trust” right above the speaker's rostrum. “Congress voted to put that there as a rebuke to the Soviets' worldview at the height of the Cold War. Why? Because communism, socialism find their root in Marxism, and Marxism begins with the belief that there is no God. It's wrong, and this Congress made a stand those many years ago, and we should do it again. “We're different. We're distinct. We're exceptional because we acknowledge that right there.” On July 27th, 2026, Speaker Johnson's affirmation that our rights come from God got under the skin of leftist TV host Katy Tur on MS NOW, formerly called MSNBC,  She moderated a panel in which she questioned the legitimacy of that claim.   Listen. TUR: “What about this passage from Mike Johnson declaring that ‘our rights do not derive from government, they come from You, our Creator and Heavenly Father.' Is this him putting God over the Declaration of Independence?” Needless to say, the most famous line of the Declaration of Independence says, “We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” Jarrett Stepman of The Daily Signal rightly points out that “the concept that God is ‘above' the Declaration of Independence is in the Declaration of Independence. God's law supersedes man's law. Governments that deprive citizens of rights endowed by their Creator, without due process, are bad governments and are possibly illegitimate.” One of Katy Tur's guests on the leftist MS NOW network, Atlantic writer McKay Coppins, weighed in. He noted that her audience may not be familiar with the concept of God-given rights. COPPINS: “That idea is not wholly uncommon. I mean the idea that we have unalienable rights that come from God can be read in a fairly benign way -- which is basically that we have innate human rights, that our Constitution and our democratic government, are meant to codify. “The thing that might alarm some people is some of the rhetoric that we heard at this rally that we are in a spiritual battle, that the forces of good and evil are at work here, and that partisan politics is injected directly into the spiritual, Biblical rhetoric. “We have heard that for the last couple of years. It's been ratcheted up more and more, especially since Donald Trump lost in 2020. It can lead to some pretty dangerous places.” Lesbian co-owner of Seattle WNBA team fined for confrontation w/Christian teens As The Worldview reported on July 27th,  29-year-old Sophie Cunningham, an outspoken Christian WNBA player on the Indiana Fever team, has publicly opposed biological males competing in female sports and coming into female bathrooms and locker rooms. During the July 28th game against the Seattle Storm, two teenage girls, wearing XX-XY Athletics t-shirts, held a sign which read, “Thank you Sophie for speaking up for girls,” reports The Christian Post. Those shirts and the sign got under the skin of Celeste Keaton, a lesbian co-owner of the Seattle Storm who is faux married to co-owner Lisa Brummel.  Romans 1:24 and 26 says, “Therefore, God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. ... God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones.” Not only did Keaton use foul language, calling the teen girls “insane,” but Keaton also claimed that somehow Jesus needed to forgive the Christian girls for affirming God's design of men and women. In an interview with Brandi Kruse, who organized an event affirming Cunningham outside the arena, one of the teen girls explained what happened. TEENAGE GIRL: “We were just sitting there with our signs that said, ‘We love Sophie. Thank you, Sophie, for speaking up.' Watching the game, being super respectful. We're just holding our signs and cheering for both teams. “And this lady, older lady, comes up to us. ‘Oh, I hope Jesus can forgive you for what sin you've done.'” Kruse interjected that she noticed the girl was crying. The girl agreed and said this. TEENAGE GIRL:  “I've never been yelled at like that. I mean, I've had people hate on me on the internet, but that just took me by surprise because I thought she was gonna be nice. And then she started screaming at us. It's disappointing though too, because she's also a woman, and she just cussed out two 16-year-olds that were just trying to have fun. We're just trying to support Sophie.” Sophie Cunningham complimented the teens and blasted the Seattle Storm lesbian co-owner. Thankfully, the WNBA fined Keaton an undisclosed amount and suspended her from attending the Storm's next five home games, reports Fox13. In response, the Storm organization said, "We respect the league's decision to fine and suspend co-owner Celeste Keaton. We remain committed to creating a welcoming and respectful environment for anyone who attends a Storm game." In an X post, Sophie Cunningham wrote, “Bravo to those girls for standing up for what they believe.” She added that she was embarrassed about Seattle Storm co-owner Celeste Keaton's actions, saying, ”Shows the type of leader she is.” Three homeschool moms from Missouri, Colorado & Ontario weigh in Here at The Worldview, Nicki Jones in Carthage, Missouri said, “As a homeschool mom of four boys -- Adam (15), Elijah (13), Uriah (11), and Isaac (8), we enjoy listening to the newscast nearly every morning at the breakfast table as we do our Bible time and worldview discussions. Thank you for your faithfulness in this ministry!” Cherise in Bennett, Colorado wrote and said, “Adam, I just made a $102 donation from my children -- Dawson (14), Caidence (13), and Carmia (10). They tithe 10% to our church from cleaning houses, doing yard work, and babysitting. On top of that, they have another 10% for ‘blessings' and they chose to donate it to The Worldview. We hope it blesses you and the many, many people who listen to your newscast! Thank you for putting it out every weekday!” And Liz Williams in Ontario, Canada said, “Adam, I'm a homeschooling mom of two, with just one-year experience in homeschooling. I quit my full-time job to homeschool my 12 and 15-year-old. I'm very thankful for the work and the quality of work that The Worldview in 5 Minutes is doing. My kids and I listen to it during car rides or meals and love it. “I think one of the reasons we stick around, besides all the other good reasons, is your voice. I know you are a professional radio host. Your voice just made us feel like we are listening to a large radio station's production. I also deeply appreciate the news from a Christian worldview.” 43 Worldview listeners gave $15,409.17 And finally, by Saturday night at 6:15pm Central, 42 Worldview listeners stepped up to the plate and invested their treasure to fund the 6-member team behind The Worldview for another year. Our thanks to Josh and Gayathri in Goddard, Kansas, Yetta in Hudson, New York, and Daniel in Lititz, Pennsylvania – each of whom gave $25 as well as David in Brookings, South Dakota who gave $35. We appreciate Alan in Amelia Court House, Virginia, Amanda in Burpengary, Queensland, Australia, James in Barry, Wales, United Kingdom, and Leslie in Florham Park, New Jersey – each of whom gave $50 as well as Daniel in Clackamas, Oregon, Royal in Topeka, Kansas, Henry in Tazewell, Virginia, Mark in Grand Forks, North Dakota, Robert in Salado, Texas, and Chris in Dubois, Pennsylvania – each of whom gave $100. We're grateful to God for Cherise in Bennett, Colorado who gave $102, Daniel in Mayflower, Arkansas who pledged $10/month for 12 months for a gift of $120, Iris in Wasilla, Alaska who gave $150, Rick and Susan in Shelton, Washington who gave $200, Jeremiah in Independence, Missouri who gave $203, Tami in Dry Ridge, Kentucky and Martita in Rock Hill, South Carolina – both of whom gave $250 as well as the McVeda Family in Great Falls, Montana who gave $282.17 and Nancy in Peabody, Massachusetts who pledged $25/month for 12 months for a gift of $300. We were touched by the generosity of Dennis and Alyssa in Castle Rock, Colorado who gave $347, Ben in Ames, Iowa who gave $350, James and Mary in Glade Valley, North Carolina who gave $365, Matthew in Marysville, Ohio who gave $400, Nicki in Carthage, Missouri who will continue her $35 monthly pledge for another year for a gift of $420, as well as Lee in Rapid City, South Dakota who gave $480, and an anonymous couple in Fort Belvoir, Virginia who will continue their pledge of $40/month for 12 months for a gift of $480. And we were blown away by Krystoffer in Fullerton, California who gave $500, Justin in Wray, Colorado who gave $500, Jack in Post Falls, Idaho who gave $500, Dean in Carol Stream, Illinois who gave $500, Matt, Amanda, Malachi and Samuel Dreyer in Greencastle, Indiana who gave $500, an anonymous donor from Kitchener, Ontario, Canada who gave $500, Keith and Nicole who pledged $50/month for 12 months for a gift of $600, Nellie in Caldwell, Idaho who gave $1,000, Albert in LaGrange, Indiana who gave $1,000, Dorian in Aurora, Colorado who gave $1,000, Tim and Toni in Keller, Texas who gave $1,000, Keith in Watrous, Saskatchewan, Canada who pledged $83.34/month for 12 months for a gift of $1,000, and Elizabeth in Carol Stream, Illinois who pledged $100/month for 12 months for a gift of $1,200. Wow! Those 43 gifts add up to $15,409.17.  That's the most donors and the largest total amount we've seen in a single day throughout this July 2026 fundraiser. Ready for our new grand total? Drum roll please. (drum roll sound effect) $109,679.17 (sound effect of people cheering) For those of you who stepped up to the plate throughout the month, we are deeply grateful for your love and your sacrifice.  We need to raise $13,820.83 by tonight! But we're not across the finish line yet! In order to hit our final goal of $123,500 on this spill over day – Monday, August 3rd -- God needs to prompt folks to give the FINAL $13,820.83 in order for the 6-member Worldview newscast team to be fully funded for another year. Would you prayerfully consider being one of 27 friends to give a one-time gift of $500 or a monthly pledge of $41.67 for 12 months? Or could you be one of 14 friends to give a one-time gift of $1,000 or a monthly pledge of $83.34? To put your potential donation into perspective, think about how much you spend on your monthly cable bill or your monthly  phone bill or eating out at restaurant.  When you think about it that way, finding 27 friends to pledge $41.67 a month or 14 friends to pledge $83.34 a month seems pretty doable! Just go to TheWorldview.com, click on Give, select the dollar amount, and make sure to click on the “recurring” button if that's your wish.  And remember this, if you want to continue your monthly pledge to The Worldview that you started prior to July 1, 2026, please email us so we can count your generous ongoing gift toward our total.  That would help tremendously. Help us get across this finish line. What is God prompting you to do right now? Go to TheWorldview.com and click on Give. Close And that's The Worldview on this Monday, August 3rd, in the year of our Lord 2026. Subscribe for free by Spotify, Amazon Music, or by iTunes or email to our unique Christian newscast at www.TheWorldview.com.  Plus, you can get the Generations app through Google Play or The App Store. I'm Adam McManus (Adam@TheWorldview.com). Seize the day for Jesus Christ.

Fauci 'Diaries' - The 'Woke' Smithsonian - MUCH MORE! Conversations centered around the American Experiment and our Constitution and Bill of Rights! Our goal is to provide different perspectives - give historical context - model how to talk with those whom we may disagree with - tie foundational principals to today's headlines - PLUS, have some fun along the way. Please leave us a review and share with your friends! (A PODCAST PROVIDED AND OWNED BY DURING THE BREAK PODCASTS) Brought to you by Eric Buchanan and Associates: www.buchanandisability.com ===== THANK YOU TO OUR SPONSORS: (Welcome to our NEW sponsor) Signal Investigations: https://www.signalpi.com/ Nutrition World: https://nutritionw.com/ Vascular Institute of Chattanooga: https://www.vascularinstituteofchattanooga.com/ The Barn Nursery: https://www.barnnursery.com/ Optimize U Chattanooga: https://optimizeunow.com/chattanooga/ Guardian Investment Advisors: https://giaplantoday.com/ Alchemy Medspa and Wellness Center: http://www.alchemychattanooga.com/ Our House Studio: https://ourhousestudiosinc.com/ Team Montieth Real Estate - Lori Montieth: https://www.findchattanoogarealestate.com/ Ballinger and Associates - Risk Management: https://ballingerandassociates.com/ AirSpace Acoustics: https://www.airspaceacoustics.com/ BWELL4EVER: Labs and IV Therapies: https://www.bwell4ever.org/ ALL THINGS JEFF STYLES: www.thejeffstyles.com PART OF THE NOOGA PODCAST NETWORK: www.noogapodcasts.com Please consider leaving us a review on Apple and giving us a share to your friends! This podcast is powered by ZenCast.fm

The October 24, 2025 hearing centered on Tyler Robinson's request to appear at future court proceedings in civilian clothing and without restraints. His attorneys argued that routinely presenting him in jail clothing and shackles would undermine the presumption of innocence, interfere with his ability to participate in his defense and create prejudicial images that could spread through extensive media coverage. They maintained that the Constitution required the court to make an individualized security assessment rather than rely upon a blanket policy, emphasizing that Robinson had surrendered, had behaved appropriately in court and had not been shown to present a specific courtroom threat. The defense also opposed suggestions that Robinson could simply attend meaningful hearings remotely, arguing that he needed to be physically present to observe witnesses, communicate with counsel and participate fully in the proceedings.Prosecutors and attorneys representing the sheriff's office argued that restraints and jail clothing were justified by transportation and courtroom-security concerns, particularly given the seriousness and public profile of the case. They proposed using virtual or hybrid proceedings for noncritical hearings and said civilian clothing could make Robinson harder to identify during an emergency, also pointing to allegations that he had changed clothes while fleeing after Charlie Kirk's shooting. The defense separately asked the judge to strike the sheriff's office's filing on the grounds that the sheriff was not a party to the criminal case, although the parties agreed the judge could still consider its security information. Judge Tony Graf questioned whether jail clothing itself could prejudice potential jurors, treated clothing and restraints as separate issues and reserved his rulings until a public WebEx hearing the following Mondayto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:tyler-robinson-redacted-hearing-transcript.pdf

During the summer break, the 15-Minute History team will be republishing some of your favorite episodes. This episode originally aired on February 9, 2026.---American progressives at the turn of the 20th century saw major flaws in the United States Constitution and worked to correct them through the process of amendments. Each one was the subject of debate and controversy, and all four made measurable changes to American society (though one can debate the merits of some). Join us for this survey of the four progressive amendments--as well as a funny story from Jon's classroom--and tune in next week for our discussion about how these amendments shaped the future course of American history.

What is the American Dream—and what happens when a nation begins to question whether that dream is still within reach? For generations, the American Dream has represented opportunity, freedom, equality, and the belief that individuals can shape their own futures. But it has also been a promise that requires constant reflection, participation, and protection. Today's guest invites us to examine that promise through a deeper moral and philosophical lens. John Roth is the author of Saving the American Dream: Meditations for Dark Times, a thoughtful exploration of the American Dream as an ethical ideal and a guiding principle rooted in the Constitution. Through a series of meditations, Roth asks difficult but necessary questions: What matters most for America today? Are we living up to our highest ideals? And how can citizens respond when democratic values face serious challenges? Drawing from the wisdom of American philosophers, historians, novelists, poets, essayists, and religious thinkers, Roth argues that preserving the American Dream requires more than nostalgia—it requires awareness, engagement, and action. Today we'll discuss democracy, civic responsibility, constitutional values, moral courage, and why reflection itself can become a form of resistance and renewal.

durée : 01:13:54 - Les Nuits de France Culture - par : Albane Penaranda - En 1978, à l'occasion des 20 ans de la Constitution de 1958, Michel Debré et André Chandernagor étaient invités à débattre du bilan de cette dernière dans l'émission "Dialogues", tout en abordant également les problématiques essentielles des circonscriptions et de la décentralisation. - équipe : Mathias Le Gargasson, Antoine Dhulster, Rafik Zénine, Vincent Abouchar, Emily Vallat, Hassane M'Béchour, INA Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France

Au Cameroun, le gouvernement brise le silence sur l'absence prolongée du président Paul Biya, depuis 56 jours hors du pays. Le ministre de la Communication René Emmanuel Sadi, également porte-parole du gouvernement, dans une interview exclusive à RFI, annonce pour imminent le retour de  Paul Biya au Cameroun. Aux informations qui disent ce dernier malade et hospitalisé dans une clinique genevoise, il n'en est rien, répond le membre du gouvernement, qui rejette les spéculations sur l'idée de la vacance du pouvoir, entretenue par l'opposition. René Emmanuel Sadi est au micro de Polycarpe Essomba.  RFI : Le président de la République, Paul Biya, est absent depuis le 7 juin. Que répondez-vous à l'opposition qui demande que soit constatée par le Conseil constitutionnel une vacance du pouvoir ? René Emmanuel Sadi : La question de la vacance du pouvoir à la tête de l'État ne devrait pas se poser. D'abord pour la simple raison que cette question est bel et bien encadrée par notre Constitution, qui précise clairement les conditions à partir desquelles on peut parler de vacance du pouvoir. Par ce propos, en effet, la Constitution parle de décès, de démission, d'empêchement définitif, et tout ceci doit être préalablement et formellement constaté par le Conseil constitutionnel. Je tiens à vous faire remarquer que nulle part, on ne parle de séjour prolongé. Alors, les figures de l'opposition qui réclament à corps et à cris une constatation de la vacance des pouvoirs à la tête de l'État, et qui sont du reste, vous le savez, pour la plupart de brillants juristes, devraient, me semble-t-il, avoir une lecture de la loi fondamentale qui soit plus rigoureuse et plus objective. Une lecture qui colle à la lettre et non pas qui procède d'une interprétation manifestement biaisée. Autrement dit, le Conseil constitutionnel ne s'est pas prononcé pour déclarer une vacance du pouvoir à la tête de l'État. Le président Paul Biya est en vie et n'a pas démissionné. Je dois le dire : le président Paul Biya va bientôt rentrer au Cameroun et donc on ne peut pas parler à ce stade de vacances à la tête de l'État. « Le président va bientôt rentrer au Cameroun », pouvez-vous préciser ? Est-ce qu'il y a une échéance ? Une date ? Je ne peux pas vous dire avec exactitude quand est-ce que le président Paul Biya reviendra. Et même si je le savais, il ne m'appartient pas de l'annoncer ici. Je peux au moins me permettre de vous dire qu'il revient très bientôt. Quand le président a quitté le Cameroun le 7 juin dernier, la présidence avait déclaré à l'époque qu'il partait pour un court séjour privé en Europe. Plus de 50 jours plus tard, est-ce qu'on peut encore soutenir la thèse d'un court séjour privé en Europe ? Je vais vous faire remarquer que même en l'absence du président de la République, les institutions de notre pays fonctionnent normalement. Les principaux responsables de l'administration vaquent à leurs occupations et c'est la preuve que notre pays est stable. Et il me semble qu'il est tout à fait normal que les Camerounais, notamment celles et ceux qui sont de bonne foi, de mon point de vue, et qui l'ont massivement élu, réélu en octobre dernier, il est tout à fait normal que toutes celles et tous ceux-là se soucient du président de la République. Comme je dis, c'est bien, les gens sont contents quand leur président est là, c'est le père de la nation. Et quand le père est absent, ça peut préoccuper les membres de la famille. C'est tout à fait normal. Mais il peut s'absenter pour des raisons qui parfois sont indépendantes de sa volonté. Il peut prolonger son séjour pour des cas de force majeure, mais en s'assurant que la famille continue de fonctionner dans de bonnes conditions. Selon plusieurs sources, le président aurait été opéré du genou. Pouvez-vous nous dire si cette opération est effective ? A-t-elle eu lieu et comment voir le président aujourd'hui ? Il a fait une intervention, il y a quelque temps. J'ai bien précisé que le président était bien à Genève, mais qu'il n'était pas hospitalisé. Et ceci, je ne vois pas en quoi cela pourrait être un problème. J'ai dit que le président peut très bien juger l'opportunité de saisir sa présence, son séjour à Genève, pour envisager quelques consultations simples. Alors, si le président est à Genève, comme vous l'admettez, il est plutôt à l'hôpital ou à l'hôtel ? Je ne suis pas à Genève avec le président. Ceux qui sont à Genève pourraient vous donner des éclairages là-dessus de façon plus précise. Parmi les chantiers à venir, il y a la formation d'un nouveau gouvernement, comme cela avait été promis et annoncé par le chef de l'État lui-même le 31 décembre dernier, après sa réélection en octobre. Huit mois plus tard, pourquoi cela traîne ? Celui qui apprécie l'opportunité de former un nouveau gouvernement, c'est le président de la République. S'il ne l'a pas fait jusqu'à présent, c'est sans doute qu'il a des raisons pour ne pas l'avoir fait. Je ne peux pas me mettre à sa place pour vous donner une réponse péremptoire là-dessus. Depuis 8 mois, tous les ministres sont sur un siège éjectable, y compris vous-même, en tant que porte-parole du gouvernement. Est-ce que, par conséquent, cette situation ne paralyse pas un peu l'action du gouvernement ? Les ministres qui ne seraient plus tout à fait sereins se livreraient, comme beaucoup disent, à des batailles ? Le président a fait une annonce. Il n'a pas décidé que dorénavant les ministres devraient se contenter de gérer les affaires courantes. C'est ainsi que ça se passe quand on vous dit que vous n'êtes plus en poste. Il a fait une annonce, mais tous les ministres sont en poste. Le Premier ministre est en poste. Je pense qu'au lieu de faire une fixation sur ce nouveau gouvernement, les uns et les autres devraient s'atteler à conduire les tâches qui sont les leurs dans leurs différentes administrations ministérielles. Et tant qu'ils sont là, ils sont ministres. Au mois d'avril dernier a été adoptée une révision constitutionnelle instituant un poste de vice-président. Pour l'instant, le poste n'est pas pourvu. J'ai encore envie de vous demander : qu'est-ce qui bloque ? Le président de la République prend son temps pour apprécier l'opportunité de désigner tel ou tel à tel ou tel poste, a fortiori s'agissant d'un vice-président de la République. On peut convenir qu'il est tout à fait normal qu'il prenne son temps pour confier une charge aussi élevée à un de ses concitoyens. Quel pourrait être le profil de ce vice-président ? Un homme ou une femme d'expérience, ou plutôt un jeune homme ? Je n'ai rien contre les jeunes gens. Moi-même, j'ai été jeune et on peut être jeune et compétent. On peut être jeune, mais en toute sincérité, je pense qu'il y a un terme qu'on utilise ces derniers temps qui n'est pas un slogan, mais c'est un terme qui véritablement est lourd de sens, c'est l'expérience. C'est quelque chose qui se conquiert avec le temps. Celui qui a décidé de créer ce poste, je peux vous dire, et je le dis sans détour, est mieux placé que quiconque pour savoir qui il devra désigner à ce poste de très grande importance. Vous êtes candidat à la vice-présidence, Monsieur Sadi ? Moi, je ne m'agite pas. Justement, je ne me considère pas parmi ceux qui s'agitent parce que je sais, comme je vous le dis, que ce sont des choses qui ne dépendent pas de nous.   À lire aussiCameroun: l'absence prolongée de Paul Biya continue de susciter interrogations et inquiétudes

Près de 20% de la population mexicaine appartient à des peuples indigènes qui sont reconnus par la Constitution mexicaine. Le dernier à avoir obtenu ce statut : le peuple de la « Nación Ndée » au nord du pays. Si leur existence a longtemps été niée par l'histoire mexicaine héritée de la colonisation, marquée par les meurtres et le racisme, plusieurs membres revendiqués de la communauté Ndée sortent de l'ombre et tentent de sauver ce qu'il reste de leur culture. Au Mexique, il existe officiellement 70 peuples originels - 69 peuples indigènes et le peuple afromexicain, reconnus depuis un peu plus de 30 ans par la Constitution mexicaine. Le gouvernement a lancé un projet de loi générale pour les droits de ces populations. Au nord du Mexique, le peuple de la « Nación Ndée » , est le dernier à avoir obtenu cette reconnaissance. Longtemps, leur existence contemporaine a été niée par l'histoire mexicaine héritée de la colonisation, marquée par les meurtres et le racisme. À tel point que même si les terres Ndées s'étendaient entre les immensités du Mexique et des États-Unis, on disait qu'ils avaient disparu de ce côté de la frontière. Mais depuis des années, quelques membres de la communauté qui se reconnaissent Ndés dans les États du nord du Mexique sortent de l'ombre, se battent pour leurs droits et tentent de sauver ce qu'il reste de leur culture. Notre correspondante Gwendolina Duval est allée à leur rencontre dans l'État de Chihuahua. À écouter aussiSur les traces des descendants d'Afrique au Mexique   Des incendies ravagent le continent nord-américain Les feux de forêt se multiplient, en Amérique du Nord, et particulièrement au nord-ouest du continent. Des incendies fulgurants ravagent la ville de Spokane, la deuxième plus grande ville de l'État de Washington, à l'est de Seattle. Ils s'inscrivent dans un contexte de sécheresse extrême et de fortes chaleurs dans l'État de Washington. Selon le gouverneur, Bob Ferguson, il s'agit de la quatrième année consécutive de sécheresse dans l'État. Dave Upthegrove, commissaire aux terres publiques de l'État de Washington, parle d'une saison des feux « exceptionnelle », et assure que la conjonction de conditions météorologiques défavorables et la multiplication des incendies dans tout l'Ouest « mettent les personnes mobilisées à rude épreuve ». Selon l'ONU, près de 2 millions d'hectares ont brûlé aux États-Unis depuis le début de l'année 2026. Et de l'autre côté de la frontière, au Canada, il s'agit de la pire saison de feux de forêt jamais connue, avec 3,8 millions d'hectares brûlés en 2026. Des feux souvent non maîtrisés, car ils se trouvent dans des zones reculées, difficilement accessibles par la route... À lire aussiÉtats-Unis: le suspect d'un des incendies de Los Angeles aurait agi par vengeance contre les riches   Les États-Unis durcissent encore les règles de l'immigration Depuis quelques mois, l'administration Trump inflige aux étrangers ayant reçu l'ordre de partir, des amendes aux montants astronomiques. Les autorités étasuniennes utilisent pour cela une loi de 1996 qu'aucun autre président, hormis Donald Trump, n'avait jamais appliquée. Les modalités ont été simplifiés et les délais pour faire appel raccourcis. Des actions en justice ont été lancées.  À lire aussiLes États-Unis expulsent encore des dizaines de personnes vers l'Afrique   Début des inscriptions sur les listes électorales dans certains départements haïtiens En Haïti, le gouvernement et le Conseil électoral provisoire mettent le cap vers l'organisation des prochaines élections, un exercice démocratique auquel les citoyens n'ont plus participé depuis plus de dix ans. Après la publication d'un nouveau calendrier électoral, le CEP a lancé cette semaine l'opération d'inscription des électeurs dans le département de l'Ouest, notamment à Delmas, Tabarre et Pétion-Ville. Plusieurs citoyens ont répondu à l'appel. Si certains saluent enfin le démarrage du processus, d'autres restent sceptiques dans un contexte marqué par l'insécurité. Suivant le calendrier publié par le Conseil électoral, le premier tour des élections présidentielle et législatives est fixé au 13 décembre 2026, et la publication des résultats définitifs de l'ensemble du processus, le 7 mars 2027. Un dossier signé Peterson Luxama, qui a sillonné plusieurs centres d'inscription.  À écouter aussiHaïti : «Sans sécurité, les élections ne seront qu'un leurre» Journal de la 1ère Alex Leveillé nous donne les résultats de la lutte contre l'insécurité à Saint Martin et Saint Barthélémy sont plutôt encourageants, et a recueilli le témoignage d'une femme qui craint d'avoir été droguée lors d'une soirée en Guadeloupe, sans avoir pu porter plainte à la gendarmerie.

As the fight over the SAVE Act, voter ID, and election integrity dominates Washington, one question matters above all: what does the Constitution actually say about voting? - - - Today's Sponsor: Shopify - Stop thinking about your business. Start building it. Free trial at https://shopify.com/shapiro - - - DailyWire+ Become a Daily Wire Member and watch all of our content ad-free: https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe

The October 24, 2025 hearing centered on Tyler Robinson's request to appear at future court proceedings in civilian clothing and without restraints. His attorneys argued that routinely presenting him in jail clothing and shackles would undermine the presumption of innocence, interfere with his ability to participate in his defense and create prejudicial images that could spread through extensive media coverage. They maintained that the Constitution required the court to make an individualized security assessment rather than rely upon a blanket policy, emphasizing that Robinson had surrendered, had behaved appropriately in court and had not been shown to present a specific courtroom threat. The defense also opposed suggestions that Robinson could simply attend meaningful hearings remotely, arguing that he needed to be physically present to observe witnesses, communicate with counsel and participate fully in the proceedings.Prosecutors and attorneys representing the sheriff's office argued that restraints and jail clothing were justified by transportation and courtroom-security concerns, particularly given the seriousness and public profile of the case. They proposed using virtual or hybrid proceedings for noncritical hearings and said civilian clothing could make Robinson harder to identify during an emergency, also pointing to allegations that he had changed clothes while fleeing after Charlie Kirk's shooting. The defense separately asked the judge to strike the sheriff's office's filing on the grounds that the sheriff was not a party to the criminal case, although the parties agreed the judge could still consider its security information. Judge Tony Graf questioned whether jail clothing itself could prejudice potential jurors, treated clothing and restraints as separate issues and reserved his rulings until a public WebEx hearing the following Mondayto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:tyler-robinson-redacted-hearing-transcript.pdf

Il y a quatre-vingt dix ans, l'Espagne basculait dans la guerre civile. Le 17 juillet 1936, le pays entrait dans l'une des tragédies majeures du XXè siècle, une guerre qui a brisé durablement la société espagnole et dont les mémoires restent, aujourd'hui encore, profondément disputées. Et si l'Espagne regarde encore autant son passé, c'est aussi parce qu'elle est traversée, au présent, par de fortes tensions politiques : sur la mémoire, sur les autonomies, sur le rapport à l'opposition, sur la place du pays en Europe et dans le monde. Que nous dit encore 1936 de l'Espagne d'aujourd'hui ? Dans un contexte assombri par les scandales de corruption qui planent sur son entourage et l'orbite du PSOE, comme du gouvernement, Pedro Sanchez conduit un pays toujours travaillé par de fortes crispations.   Invités : Amalio de Marichalar y Saenz de Tejada, coordinateur d'« Espagnol à Espagnol pour la Constitution » et de 33 associations de la société civile de toute l'Espagne Miguel Angel Garcia Carrasco, chargé de recherche à la Fondation pour la Recherche Stratégique Benoît Pellistrandi, historien, spécialiste de l'Espagne. Les fractures de l'Espagne. De 1808 à nos jours, collection Histoire chez Folio.  

The Supreme Court has ruled that the Office of the Special Prosecutor's power to prosecute does not violate Article 88 of the 1992 Constitution. We unpack what the decision means.

As DSA and postliberal pirates storm the decks of the HMS Remnant, Captain Jonah Goldberg would seem to be in dire straits. Nonetheless, Captain Jonah—with an eerie air of calm—draws his cutlass, sets down his cigar, and smiles. Prepare, gentle listener, for a bloodbath. Today Jonah deftly handles every controversy on the docket, including Hasan Piker, Ukraine as Israel, the Michigan Senate race, Anthony Fauci, Covid in retrospective, rap music, Napoleon III, J.D. Vance, the common good, subsidiarity, the Constitution, and Hamas.  Show Notes: —Hasan Piker collar video —Last week's Ruminant  —Friday's DisPod —Rebecca Heinrichs Remnant  —Aaron MacLean Remnant  —Grayson Logue in The Dispatch - “Why We Can't Move On From the Pandemic” —Matt Ridley Remnant —Matt Ridley's book Viral: The Search for the Origin of COVID-19 —John Barry - The Great Influenza: The Story of the Deadliest Pandemic in History —Jonah's book Liberal Fascism —The Argument  —NYT Heritage Foundation piece —JD Vance's book —Justice Scalia's Congressional testimony  The Remnant is a production of ⁠The Dispatch⁠, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a nonpartisan perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings—including the Saturday Ruminant, audio versions of all our articles and newsletters, and Jonah's twice-weekly G-File—⁠click here⁠. Instructions on how to set up your members-only feed can be found here, and if you'd like to remove all ads from your podcast experience, consider becoming a premium Dispatch member ⁠by clicking here⁠.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Long before the Supreme Court handed down the landmark Obergefell ruling on equal marriage in 2015, activists were canvassing door-to-door, courting any lawmaker who would listen, and losing at the local level—a lot. Their scrappy determination helped convince family members, neighbors and eventually the rest of the country that the Constitution's guarantees of liberty and equality applied to same-sex couples. In Episode 3 of By the People, equal marriage campaign architect Marc Solomon joins Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern to trace the movement's "quixotic" beginnings in 2001. As this series continues to explore how ordinary Americans—not just nine justices—can interpret and enforce the Constitution, the campaign for equal marriage offers examples and tools that dedicated citizens can use to make constitutional meaning.The episode also confronts an uncomfortable question: If popular pressure can produce a ruling you love, like Obergefell, it can produce one you might not, like the court's decision to enshrine an individual right to bear arms in 2008's D.C. v. Heller. Dahlia and Mark discuss what happens when popular constitutionalism is retrofitted as originalism, and why no constitutional win, no matter how popular, is ever truly permanent.By the People is Slate's end-of-term project exploring how ordinary Americans have shaped the meaning of the Constitution outside the Supreme Court. You can read the full package of articles accompanying this series at slate.com/bythepeopleThe justices publish their opinions a few dozen times a year. Dahlia and Mark share theirs every week. Slate Plus gets you all of it: Amicus ad-free with a weekly bonus segment, and no paywalls anywhere on Slate. Join now. Visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen.You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Long before the Supreme Court handed down the landmark Obergefell ruling on equal marriage in 2015, activists were canvassing door-to-door, courting any lawmaker who would listen, and losing at the local level—a lot. Their scrappy determination helped convince family members, neighbors and eventually the rest of the country that the Constitution's guarantees of liberty and equality applied to same-sex couples. In Episode 3 of By the People, equal marriage campaign architect Marc Solomon joins Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern to trace the movement's "quixotic" beginnings in 2001. As this series continues to explore how ordinary Americans—not just nine justices—can interpret and enforce the Constitution, the campaign for equal marriage offers examples and tools that dedicated citizens can use to make constitutional meaning.The episode also confronts an uncomfortable question: If popular pressure can produce a ruling you love, like Obergefell, it can produce one you might not, like the court's decision to enshrine an individual right to bear arms in 2008's D.C. v. Heller. Dahlia and Mark discuss what happens when popular constitutionalism is retrofitted as originalism, and why no constitutional win, no matter how popular, is ever truly permanent.By the People is Slate's end-of-term project exploring how ordinary Americans have shaped the meaning of the Constitution outside the Supreme Court. You can read the full package of articles accompanying this series at slate.com/bythepeopleThe justices publish their opinions a few dozen times a year. Dahlia and Mark share theirs every week. Slate Plus gets you all of it: Amicus ad-free with a weekly bonus segment, and no paywalls anywhere on Slate. Join now. Visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen.You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Need to set up your Slate Plus feed? If you subscribed through Slate.com, check out our FAQ at slate.com/podcastfaqs for easy instructions. Members subscribed via Apple Podcasts get automatic access—no setup required. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Last week, Ralph, along with our constitutional law expert, Bruce Fein, organized another symposium in Washington DC on impeaching Donald Trump. On today's program, we play you highlights from that symposium with eight of the participants, each of whom are going to give listeners their perspective on why Donald Trump should be impeached even before the midterm elections.The rhetoric from many Democratic leaders has not kept up with the horror and the urgency of what [Donald Trump] is inflicting on America and the American people. He has moved very, very quickly to develop a fascist dictatorship embodying a kleptocratic corporate state that is marked by non-regulation, tax cuts for the wealthy, and tax escapes for the wealthy and major corporations, as well as expanded corporate welfare in the midst of personal and institutional two-way bribery and extortion. It's very important to punctuate the seriousness of what he's already done.Ralph NaderCelinda Lake is a political strategist and president of Lake Research Partners.What I love about polling is: conventional wisdom is wrong about 90% of the time, plus or minus 5%. Beltway conventional wisdom is wrong about 100% of the time, plus or minus 5%. So, “Everybody knows impeachment is unpopular.” No, it's not. It's very popular. A majority of people support it. “Everyone knows that it'll energize the other side.” No. The other side, to the extent they're going to be energized, they're already energized. We need to energize our side. We need to get our people out to vote… “Everyone knows it's very volatile.” No, it's not. Attitudes about impeachment track with job performance… And finally, “Everybody knows that nobody understands impeachment.” Well, frankly, voters understand it better than a lot of elected officials.Celinda LakeSuparna Reddy is the Senior Counsel for Free Speech For People.Let us be clear: Congress should impeach and remove Trump for each and every one of these hundreds of offenses. And we have a duty to record his every abuse of power. But in the process, we should not miss the forest for the trees— Trump is intentionally and systematically dismantling our democratic institutions to consolidate his own power and line his own pockets.Suparna ReddyRichard Painter is the S. Walter Richey professor of corporate law at the University of Minnesota Law School and was the chief White House ethics lawyer from 2005 to 2007.We have seen serious, indeed, tragic financial conflicts of interest in the executive branch never before seen in the history of our country—unless we look at our very early Presidents who held vast plantations with slave labor, a clear economic conflict of interest with their official duties. A conflict of interest shared by many Senators and Representatives and Justices of the Supreme Court, and indeed a tragic conflict of interest for the first eighty years of our history that ended only with a bloody civil war. But since then, we have not had at least a President who is embroiled in financial conflicts of interest with his official duties.Richard PainterDoug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, specializing in foreign policy and civil liberties.We need to make a persuasive argument for people, whether they like Donald Trump or not, to understand the Constitution transcends this President. The Constitution transcends future Presidents and future crises. We need to convince Americans across the political spectrum to stand with the rule of law, to stand with accountable government, to stand with an accountable executive, responsible legislatures. History tells us that one person making these decisions is not good. Plenty of authoritarians in the past have made these decisions and brought their countries to disaster.Douglas BandowErwin Chemerinsky is the Dean and Jesse H. Choper Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law.We're now at a moment when the federal government is a threat to our rights. The actions of the Trump administration are unprecedented in the violations of the Constitution. And so I think it's crucial that state and local governments step in so as to protect rights. It's interesting that through American history, Federalism has always been equated, states' rights have always been equated with regressive policies… But now it's time for progressives to use states' rights and look for the opportunities for states to safeguard our constitutionErwin ChemerinskyKeira Havens is a United States Air Force veteran, a former scientist, and a longtime political activist. She is the executive director of Citizens' Impeachment.Everybody has agency. Everybody has a role that they can play. Everybody can take action. As a private citizen, I can say, “Man, there are a lot of things wrong with what's happening.” In fact, I wrote several articles of impeachment: tyranny, treason, obstruction of justice, and of course, corruption, right? Members of Congress have more power than that. They need to do more than say things. They have to take action. Courage is an action. It's what you do after you say the words that really matters. And every single member of Congress is able to take action. They are able to introduce articles of impeachment, and they are refusing.Keira HavensJessica Denson is a former Trump staffer and founder of the Removal Coalition.The American people (and particularly Democratic primary voters) are looking for fighters. For God's sake, what could you do better than to exert the power that you have—this one privilege in the House, Rule 9, that gives any member of the Congress, including the minority, the ability to force a vote any time. Why would you sit on that? Why would you wait? Instead, in my activism, I've had to resort to relying on literally one Congressman. This is so pathetic. He is a dear friend, and I am so grateful for him. But to this day, I think it is pathetic that I have to rely on one Congressman to bring forth articles of impeachment and force votes, and that's Representative Green.Jessica DensonNews 7/31/26* Our top stories this week have to do with the Democratic National Committee. Several stories have recently come out about DNC Chair Ken Martin, ranging from interpersonal issues to his utter failure to raise money for the Democratic Party. The most stunning example of this comes from NOTUS, which reports that Martin “put [the DNC's] physical headquarters up for collateral last year in order to obtain a $15 million line of credit to help invest in off-year elections.” While the party has used this mechanism before, it underlines the gaping disparity between the DNC, which is currently over $2 million in debt compared to the Republican National Committee (RNC), which can boast $128.5 million cash on-hand.* Compounding the issues of the already cash-strapped DNC, the New Republic reports the Democratic National Committee was scammed out of nearly $29,000 by an email from someone pretending to be Chair Ken Martin last year. DNC spokesperson Mia Ehrenberg is quoted saying “The DNC takes seriously our duty to protect the funds provided to us by millions of patriotic Americans chipping in to fund our mission…this was a one-off mistake that was promptly caught and addressed, and no similar issues have occurred since.” That said, only $7,000 worth of this money has been recovered. As TNR puts it, “This has all been very embarrassing. Martin can't raise money, can't keep money, and can't unite the base under the big tent' he likes to talk about.” Martin may also be facing an outright rebellion led by party insiders.* One surprising proposal to this effect is coming from a very unlikely source. The Hill reports veteran Democratic strategist James Carville, while tearing into Martin, opened the door to former DNC Vice-Chair David Hogg taking the reins. Carville said the DNC appears “dysfunctional” and that the committee needs to “figure out a way maybe they could be somewhat relevant,” adding that “If David Hogg wants to take it over, I ain't stopping you…Go ahead, man, I don't really care.” This is a stark turnabout from Carville's position on Hogg when the latter was in DNC leadership; back then, Carville dismissed him as “a contemptible little twerp.” In an interview, Hogg highlighted this exact reversal, while simultaneously saying that he did not want to lead the crumbling Democratic Party organization. Ben Wikler, the former Wisconsin Democratic Party Chair who challenged Ken Martin in 2025 has also resisted calls to take over the DNC, with rumors circulating that he is gearing up to run for Senate in the Badger State next cycle. While pressure continues to mount on Martin, alternative leadership remains elusive.* Speaking of lackluster leadership, Sources Say News reports Capitol CNCT has launched The Scoop which they describe as “a confidential rating system that lets current and former Hill staffers weigh in on the members and offices they have worked for.” As one might imagine, some reviews are extremely scathing. This piece cites one that reads, “Leadership is abusive. Lies about promotions and bonuses…This place will leach at your mental health like a vampire…Beware.” Sources Say highlights the fact that “Unlike most workplaces, Congress has no HR department, which means bad behavior by members and senior staff can go unreported and unchecked for years.” The new site verifies that the posters are or were real employees of these offices, but keeps their names anonymous to protect them from retaliation.* In more news from Congress, POLITICO reports Maryland Representative and House Judiciary Committee ranking member Jamie Raskin is launching a new investigation into Jeffrey Epstein, this time focusing on whether the deceased sex offender and financier acted as an unregistered foreign agent. In a letter to Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Director of National Intelligence Jay Clayton, Raskin writes that “Jeffrey Epstein never registered as a foreign agent…Yet numerous recently released documents now show he acted aggressively on behalf of multiple foreign governments, including several with interests adverse to the United States, in order to influence policies of the first Trump Administration.” The declassified files reveal that Epstein “offered to serve as a conduit between Saudi Arabia and members of the Trump administration, consulted with Russian officials on engaging with the president and advised former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak.” This inquiry is likely to raise fresh questions about not only Epstein's role working on behalf of foreign governments, but his possible connections with intelligence and espionage organizations including the CIA and Mossad.* Other progressive members of Congress, led by Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, have issued a formal response to a new Trump administration report on Cuba. These members interpret this report – which claims that the tiny Caribbean nation of 10 million people has “waged a sustained campaign” to “conquer” the United States and is backing “left-wing terrorism on American soil” – is in fact an instrument the administration plans to use to persecute “Trump's perceived political enemies.” Omar, joined by Representatives Jim McGovern, Delia Ramirez, Rashida Tlaib, AOC and more, contend that Trump is “hell-bent on taking America back 70 years to the height of Cold War McCarthyism, when hawkish foreign policy was paired with unsubstantiated accusations of communist subversion and political repression against dissidents at home.” The administration report singled out several organizations and activists, including the National Lawyers Guild, Hasan Piker, and campus activist Isra Hirsi, daughter of Congresswoman Omar. This from Common Dreams.* In more news from the left, POLITICO reports Donavan McKinney – who is challenging incumbent Congressman Shri Thanedar in Detroit – picked up a major batch of endorsements this week from members of the Congressional Black Caucus. These new endorsers include Representatives Steven Horsford, the former chair of the CBC, along with Lateefah Simon and Ayanna Pressley. These endorsements, particularly that of Congressman Horsford, are notable because Thanedar retains the support of House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and his deputies, Representatives Pete Aguilar and Katherine Clark. McKinney said he was “honored” by these endorsements, adding that he “[looks] forward to working alongside these incredible leaders to pass critical legislation to protect voting rights, get big money out of our politics, and ensure all families have access to the resources they need to not just survive, but to truly thrive.” McKinney's primary will be held on August 4th, along with the more closely watched Senate primary between progressive Abdul El-Sayed and his moderate, establishment-backed opponent Haley Stevens.* Meanwhile, in New York City, Mayor Zohran Mamdani continues to fulfill campaign promises at an astonishing rate. First, Forbes reports that Mamdani has officially introduced a $124.7 billion city budget which includes funding for five city-run grocery stores which will sell staple foods at a 30% discount compared to private grocery stores. These staples are set to include produce, dairy, bread, select meat and seafood, and approximately 20 other products. Being city-owned, these stores will not have to pay rent or property taxes, ensuring they can operate more cheaply than their competitors in the private sector. This piece notes that similar experiments in smaller cities like Baldwin, Florida, and Erie, Kansas proved unsustainable financially, while proposals in Chicago and Kansas City struggled to get off the ground. There is reason to believe New York will prove a different matter entirely, but that remains to be seen. At the same time, Jacobin reports Mamdani is launching a new initiative called “Talk to Tenants,” which will “send volunteers door-to-door in buildings with chronic housing code violations, connecting renters with organizing resources, neighborhood organizations, and training on tenants' rights and how to build tenant associations.” This effort will be led by the Office of Mass Engagement in partnership with the Office to Protect Tenants. It is extremely encouraging to see Mamdani utilizing a varied array of tools at his disposal – including both direct action by the city as on grocery stores or using city resources to promote the formation of non-governmental organizing efforts – in order to achieve his vision of a just and affordable American metropolis.* In more troubling, if not surprising, news, the Wall Street Journal is out with a new report finding that the Department of Justice is giving a green light to corporate criminals. The Journal cites examples ranging from Alibaba to Boeing and EagleBank to Abbott Laboratories where the Trump DOJ “declined to charge companies even when prosecutors thought executives or managers were involved in the wrongdoing.” This follows from directives given by Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, who has “said prosecutors shouldn't view prosecuting companies as their goal and should instead focus on holding individual wrongdoers accountable.” This piece cites a December speech by Blanche in which he stated that “Companies don't go to jail, people do.” Yet, it seems that under the Trump Justice Department, neither do.* Finally, in more corporate news, the antitrust lawsuit filed by over a dozen state attorneys general has at least temporarily succeeded in halting the mega-merger between Warner Bros. Discovery and the Ellisons' media conglomerate, Paramount Skydance. After the lawsuit was filed, a federal judge in Oakland ordered a pause on the deal, and since then, the Ellisons themselves have agreed to put the merger “on ice” pending the outcome of the trial, Variety reports. This piece also highlights the private sentiments of anonymous Warner Bros. executives who apparently hope that the deal hits a “legal landmine” and is ultimately “nixed.” However, in an internal memo, David Ellison maintained that “the facts and the law are on our side, and a full hearing will demonstrate why the plaintiffs' arguments should not prevail.”This has been Francesco DeSantis, with In Case You Haven't Heard. Get full access to Ralph Nader Radio Hour at www.ralphnaderradiohour.com/subscribe

Long before the Supreme Court handed down the landmark Obergefell ruling on equal marriage in 2015, activists were canvassing door-to-door, courting any lawmaker who would listen, and losing at the local level—a lot. Their scrappy determination helped convince family members, neighbors and eventually the rest of the country that the Constitution's guarantees of liberty and equality applied to same-sex couples. In Episode 3 of By the People, equal marriage campaign architect Marc Solomon joins Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern to trace the movement's "quixotic" beginnings in 2001. As this series continues to explore how ordinary Americans—not just nine justices—can interpret and enforce the Constitution, the campaign for equal marriage offers examples and tools that dedicated citizens can use to make constitutional meaning.The episode also confronts an uncomfortable question: If popular pressure can produce a ruling you love, like Obergefell, it can produce one you might not, like the court's decision to enshrine an individual right to bear arms in 2008's D.C. v. Heller. Dahlia and Mark discuss what happens when popular constitutionalism is retrofitted as originalism, and why no constitutional win, no matter how popular, is ever truly permanent.By the People is Slate's end-of-term project exploring how ordinary Americans have shaped the meaning of the Constitution outside the Supreme Court. You can read the full package of articles accompanying this series at slate.com/bythepeopleThe justices publish their opinions a few dozen times a year. Dahlia and Mark share theirs every week. Slate Plus gets you all of it: Amicus ad-free with a weekly bonus segment, and no paywalls anywhere on Slate. Join now. Visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen.You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Don't Imbibe the Kool-Aid with Pastor David Whitney – Pastor David Whitney and Rochelle Porto examine election integrity, alleged voter fraud, state authority under the Constitution, and Pennsylvania's Act 77. They urge citizens to stay informed, demand lawful elections, protect voting rights, and preserve liberty within America's constitutional republic for future generations and beyond...

The hiatus for the rebooted 3WHH is over! We got the band back together, and to further paraphrase the political philosophy of the Ellwood brothers, it's 70 minutes to the end of this podcast, we've got a full glass of whisky, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark, and we're wearing sunglasses. Just like Anthony Fauci in his glam cover shot for In Style magazine back in 2021.Most of our changes are cosmetic, and it it still a work-in-progress, but the two main new features on display this week is a short "cameo" appearance from a slate of contributors we're signing up, and responding to the best reader/listener question. This week's cameo is from Alex Priou of the University of Austin, who has some definite opinions about The Odyssey. Two main topics are on our mind this week: the mendacious Dr. Fauci, and what pathways for legal redress might still be open despite President Biden's pardon. Second, we spend some time discussing the "republican guarantee clause" of Article IV of the Constitution, which is usually overlooked, and thought to be non-justiciable, if not in fact a nullity, similar to the 9th Amendment. We take up this question because of Glenn Reynolds' mischievous suggestion on his Substack that President Trump might be able to invoke the clause to justify sending federal authorities into states with high potential for vote fraud. Here's the key passage from Glenn's article:"So if President Trump announces that we have uncovered massive electoral fraud — as he almost certainly will — and that he is dispatching huge numbers of federal election watchers to oversee voting and counting in areas where fraud has occurred, he would be acting directly under a power that the Constitution has vested in him. For a state to have a “republican form of government,” it must have meaningful elections, and elections that are rigged are not meaningful. Stopping them from being rigged would be protecting a republican form of government.  Congress has passed other election laws, mostly for reasons of combating race discrimination, but those aren't strictly applicable to these circumstances. . ."Could make for some fun times!

Is war ever justified? Andrew Wommack, Alex McFarland, and E.W. Jackson tackle current events from a biblical worldview. They discuss President Trump's actions against Iran, the spiritual truth about self-defense, Sharia law vs. the U.S. Constitution, and why Christians must stand for liberty.Subscribe to our newsletter: https://www.truthandliberty.net/subscribe  Donate here: https://www.truthandliberty.net/donate  

The October 24, 2025 hearing centered on Tyler Robinson's request to appear at future court proceedings in civilian clothing and without restraints. His attorneys argued that routinely presenting him in jail clothing and shackles would undermine the presumption of innocence, interfere with his ability to participate in his defense and create prejudicial images that could spread through extensive media coverage. They maintained that the Constitution required the court to make an individualized security assessment rather than rely upon a blanket policy, emphasizing that Robinson had surrendered, had behaved appropriately in court and had not been shown to present a specific courtroom threat. The defense also opposed suggestions that Robinson could simply attend meaningful hearings remotely, arguing that he needed to be physically present to observe witnesses, communicate with counsel and participate fully in the proceedings.Prosecutors and attorneys representing the sheriff's office argued that restraints and jail clothing were justified by transportation and courtroom-security concerns, particularly given the seriousness and public profile of the case. They proposed using virtual or hybrid proceedings for noncritical hearings and said civilian clothing could make Robinson harder to identify during an emergency, also pointing to allegations that he had changed clothes while fleeing after Charlie Kirk's shooting. The defense separately asked the judge to strike the sheriff's office's filing on the grounds that the sheriff was not a party to the criminal case, although the parties agreed the judge could still consider its security information. Judge Tony Graf questioned whether jail clothing itself could prejudice potential jurors, treated clothing and restraints as separate issues and reserved his rulings until a public WebEx hearing the following Mondayto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:tyler-robinson-redacted-hearing-transcript.pdf

The October 24, 2025 hearing centered on Tyler Robinson's request to appear at future court proceedings in civilian clothing and without restraints. His attorneys argued that routinely presenting him in jail clothing and shackles would undermine the presumption of innocence, interfere with his ability to participate in his defense and create prejudicial images that could spread through extensive media coverage. They maintained that the Constitution required the court to make an individualized security assessment rather than rely upon a blanket policy, emphasizing that Robinson had surrendered, had behaved appropriately in court and had not been shown to present a specific courtroom threat. The defense also opposed suggestions that Robinson could simply attend meaningful hearings remotely, arguing that he needed to be physically present to observe witnesses, communicate with counsel and participate fully in the proceedings.Prosecutors and attorneys representing the sheriff's office argued that restraints and jail clothing were justified by transportation and courtroom-security concerns, particularly given the seriousness and public profile of the case. They proposed using virtual or hybrid proceedings for noncritical hearings and said civilian clothing could make Robinson harder to identify during an emergency, also pointing to allegations that he had changed clothes while fleeing after Charlie Kirk's shooting. The defense separately asked the judge to strike the sheriff's office's filing on the grounds that the sheriff was not a party to the criminal case, although the parties agreed the judge could still consider its security information. Judge Tony Graf questioned whether jail clothing itself could prejudice potential jurors, treated clothing and restraints as separate issues and reserved his rulings until a public WebEx hearing the following Mondayto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:tyler-robinson-redacted-hearing-transcript.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

ABC:LHS #089    ...slavery was an essential part of the colonial economy. The enslaved people of President George Washington have been in the news recently. John and Bohl  Despite Philadelphia's northern location...Bohlen were German immigrants who made their fortunes in the New World dealing with "gin and slaves," according to their relatives. Stephen Duncan was simultaneously a Pennsylvania businessman and a Natchez nabob, the owner of more than 2000 enslaved human beings.   Robert Stewart Ralston was severely beaten by his former enslaved manservant whom he had freed, but retained in employment. The largest trial for treason ever conducted in the United States was conducted in Philadelphia following the Christiana Resistance of 1851, an armed pushback against slave catchers sent to retrieve some self-emancipated African Americans. OPTIONAL: I asked CoPilot, a Large Language Model assembler of information, to develop a counterfactual for me - What would the USA be like if slavery were abolished with the Constitution, and Immigration were limited after 1800. Although purely speculative, it is a fascinating read.   

On Thursday's Mark Levin Show, Spain has seen a massive influx of over 80,000 illegal immigrants from Morocco and Northern Africa, with humanity as far as the eye can see breaking into the country while its socialist, radical leftist, anti-American and anti-Israel president does nothing.  This mirrors the rapid destruction possible in a single government cycle, as occurred under Biden in America. Communists in the Democrat Party, Democratic Socialists of America and their allies oppose immigration enforcement and attack ICE precisely because they seek such open-border circumstances as a regular occurrence to replace the current citizenry with people from the Third World. This is revolution by immigration that will destroy the country; there is no discussion of assimilation or the true purpose of immigration.  Americans must fight for our country by explaining its greatness and rejecting Marxism as totalitarianism and Islamism as contrary to civilization due to its embrace of murder, rape, and other evils.  Also, a new Texas poll shows Republicans in trouble ahead of the midterms, with Democrat James Talarico leading Ken Paxton by five points in the Senate race and Governor Greg Abbott leading by only three points against Gina Hinojosa. Close races also appear in the attorney general contest and other key states. Republicans fail to effectively counter Democratic messaging on affordability despite improvements in gas prices, food costs, incomes, and inflation, while open borders and demographic shifts threaten long-term Republican prospects in Texas.  Later, a Free Press piece details individuals around the President seeking to dissuade him from a more aggressive posture in the coming weeks that would significantly weaken or destroy the regime; such efforts amount to treachery that undermines the original reasons for involvement.  President Trump should evaluate his advisers and rely on those who favor victory and reject isolationist or appeasement voices. It is time to arm and train the Iranian people with air and military support, and to capture or destroy Kharg Island—the regime's economic core—since eliminating its ability to fund the IRGC, army, police, and militias would create power struggles and collapse the police state, even after the elimination of dozens of top leaders.  Finally, if the Isolationists had prevailed, Iran would already possess workable nuclear weapons.  Trump has long recognized that Iran cannot obtain nukes, but isolationists claim he is manipulated by warmongers and RINOs; in reality, the isolationists themselves are the RINOs—a throwback to 1950s conservatism that Reagan rejected in favor of victory over the Soviet Union. Isolationists are stupid because they refuse to study the enemy, which seeks to wipe America off the earth, destroy its faiths, civilization, and Constitution alongside Marxists, and originates from Islamist regimes in the Middle East and places such as Pakistan. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The Constitution Study with Host Paul Engel – Remember that SAVE America Act? A lot of people have been promoting it for the “good” it will do for the country. Sadly, no one I've heard opposing it has mentioned that it violates the Constitution. In fact, Senator Schumer appears to have admitted that this would prevent 25 million people from illegally voting. That hasn't stopped...

It's Friday, July 31st, A.D. 2026. This is The Worldview in 5 Minutes heard on 140 radio stations and at www.TheWorldview.com.  I'm Adam McManus. (Adam@TheWorldview.com) By Adam McManus Syrians in America have to leave the country The expiration of Temporary Protected Status for Syrians in America this week has renewed attention on the fragile security environment facing civilians in Syria, particularly Christians who remain vulnerable 18 months after the fall of Bashar al-Assad's dictatorship in this 87% Muslim country, reports International Christian Concern. Temporary Protected Status is a humanitarian immigration designation that allows nationals of countries experiencing armed conflict to remain and work legally in the United States for a limited period. The designation does not provide a pathway to permanent residency but shields recipients from deportation while conditions in their home country are deemed unsafe for return. In December 2024, rebel forces, led by Ahmed al-Sharaa, forced al-Assad from power.  Al-Sharaa's group had previously been associated with Muslim jihadist movements, including al-Qaeda. Before the Syrian civil war, Christians represented a significant minority of Syria's population concentrated in Damascus — where the Apostle Paul was converted on the street. While Christians have not experienced the same level of targeted mass violence as other groups, there has been harassment and attacks on Christian communities. President Trump floats temporarily pulling Blache nomination to be AG President Donald Trump said on July 30 that he was willing to temporarily withdraw his nomination of Todd Blanche to be Attorney General until next year, if two Republican senators continued to withhold their support, reports The Epoch Times. Blanche's nomination has been held up in the Senate Judiciary Committee after Republican Senators John Cornyn of Texas and Thom Tillis of North Carolina said they would not back bringing it to the floor for a full vote. Those two votes are necessary for the nomination to advance. Earlier this year, both Cornyn and Tillis lost their bid for re-election after President Trump endorsed their opponents during the primaries. The president now intends to wait them out. In the meantime, Blanche will remain the acting head of the Department of Justice. You can express your objection to the senators for dragging their feet by calling Senator John Cornyn at 202-224-2934 and Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina at 202-224-6342. You can call 24 hours a day/7 days a week and leave a voicemail. Dr. Fauci invoked Fifth Amendment 90 times in GOP-led committee In a hearing of the Senate's Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee on July 29th, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, announced in his opening statement that he would invoke the Fifth Amendment and not answer any questions about his culpability in a cover-up about the source of the COVID-19 virus or what happened subsequently. Listen. FAUCI: “Members of the committee, I served at the NIH for over 54 years, 38 of those as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Over that period, I proved that I believe in and respect the value of legitimate congressional oversight. In fact, I testified before and/or briefed Senate and House committees well over 200 times over those 38 years. During and after the COVID pandemic, I have appeared multiple times for hearings in the Senate and the House, usually under oath, and sat for several days-long, transcribed, sworn interviews answering questions about the very issues that are now the subject of this hearing. “However, given Senator [Rand] Paul's obvious obsession with calling for my prosecution, his repeated slanderous comments about me, and recently his publicly releasing my unredacted personal diary aimed at embarrassing and intimidating me, the only conclusion I can reach is that the sole reason he is calling me before this committee is to get me to say something, anything, that could vindicate his repeated public pledges that I end up, in his words, ‘behind bars'. “Any reasonable person who has followed his unhinged obsession with me would readily come to the same conclusion. Therefore, although it pains me to do so because of the respect I have for the legislative branch of government and my decades-long record of cooperating with Congress, under the advice of my attorneys, I will invoke my right, under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution, to refrain from answering your questions.” Over the course of his time in front of the Senate Committee, Dr. Fauci invoked the Fifth Amendment a whopping 111 times, reports Fox News. Dr. Fauci stonewalled Senator Rand Paul numerous times Dr. Anthony Fauci repeatedly stonewalled Republican Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, the Chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. The senator started with asking about former President Joe Biden's bizarre “full and unconditional” pardon of Dr. Fauci. PAUL:  “As a member of the White House Coronavirus Task Force, or the White House COVID-19 Response Team, or as Chief Medical Advisor to the President, have you refused this pardon? Or do you have any reason to believe this full and unconditional pardon, this grant of immunity, would somehow require you to plead the Fifth Amendment?” FAUCI: “On the advice of counsel, I respectfully decline to answer, based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.” PAUL: “Based on the facts presented, I'm going to direct you to answer the questions. The committee has issued a valid subpoena. They have requested your presence here. The questions are very pertinent to your decision making as head of [the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases], as well as a chief advisor to the president, do you still refuse to answer the questions?” FAUCI: “On the advice of counsel, I respectfully decline to answer, based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.” PAUL:  “Were you ever made aware of gain-of-function research on monkeypox being conducted at the National Bio Defense Analysis and Countermeasures Center, and back at Fort Detrick, [the center of the U.S. biological weapons program from 1943 to 1969]?” FAUCI: “On the advice of counsel, I respectfully decline to answer, based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.” PAUL:  “Dr. Fauci, did the CIA ever transfer funds to [the National Institutes of Health] under interagency agreement?” FAUCI: “On the advice of counsel, I respectfully decline to answer, based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.” And Senator Rand Paul took this parting shot. PAUL: “The chairman has denied your assertion of privilege and directed you to answer, but you nonetheless refuse and stand on privilege despite the existence of the pardon. The committee will have to consider after this hearing what appropriate action should be taken against you for the failure to testify after being directed to do so. “It's against the law to obstruct an investigation of Congress. There will be repercussions to your refusal to testify today.” Watchdog group: Medical groups should condemn transgender surgeries on minors The medical watchdog group, Do No Harm, is calling on 10 major medical associations to explicitly condemn transgender genital surgeries on minors, reports The Daily Signal. On July 29th, Do No Harm sent open letters to the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American Medical Association among others. In the letter, the group wrote, “Do No Harm, and its 54,000 members, are calling on your society to publicly reject genital surgery on minors for the purpose of producing [so-called] ‘gender transitions.' While this process is uncommon, we believe that it should never occur.” In Matthew 19:4, Jesus asked, “Have you not read that [God], who created them from the beginning, made them male and female?” Marijuana should not be reclassified as a less dangerous drug Marijuana could be reclassified as a less dangerous substance under federal law. Kevin Sabet, CEO of Smart Approaches to Marijuana and the former drug policy advisor for the Clinton, George W. Bush and Obama presidential administrations as well as President Trump's former U.S. Attorney General William Barr, thinks that would be a terrible idea. He said that reclassifying marijuana as a drug with accepted medical use and a lower risk of abuse than drugs subject to greater controls would be reckless. Sabet added, “The evidence presented at the hearing confirmed what decades of data have shown: Raw marijuana has no scientifically established medical value and carries a high risk of abuse. Today's marijuana is more dangerous than ever before. [Reclassifying] marijuana would create the false impression that it is safe, would reduce penalties for peddling the drug illegally and would give those who purvey it legally a huge tax windfall. That would be a disaster.”  The Department of Justice held a hearing last month to consider it at President Donald Trump's request. Despite the fact that President Trump is a teetotaler who eschews alcohol and drugs, he told his administration last December to push forward on easing marijuana restrictions, after an aggressive lobbying push by advocates including a cannabis CEO, a Florida sheriff, and a Mar-a-Lago member, the Wall Street Journal previously reported. Jim Daly, President of Focus on the Family, previously wrote, “Use of cannabis increases a person's chance of developing a bipolar disorder or schizophrenia by an average of 47%. It's also shown to significantly increase hallucinations and paranoia. “In fact, it's been determined that regular use of medical marijuana leads to a higher chance of heart attack, stroke and coronary artery disease. … If the established goal is to make America healthy and great again, this objective will not be reached by increasing access to poisonous pot.” In 1 Corinthians 6:19-20, the Apostle Paul asked, “Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, Who is in you, Whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore, honor God with your bodies.” Montana listeners like our brevity and updates on the persecuted Here at The Worldview in 5 Minutes, Winston and Heather Royal in Helena, Montana, wrote, “Adam, we appreciate the newscast because it's short, to the point, and from a Christian perspective. We appreciate hearing about our Christian brothers and sisters around the world. And we often listen to it at breakfast time. Thank you for your work!” Texas listener values boldness and truthfulness of The Worldview And Byron Barlowe in Plano, Texas wrote, “Adam, your newscast is something I've evangelized about for four reasons. I find the integration of a Biblical worldview into reporting the news to be effective and refreshing. Brevity matters more than ever. I also relate to the brevity of your newscast since Probe Ministries, a group I write for, produces a 3-minute daily feature. The candor among you and the two other writers of The Worldview is bold, truthful, and necessary. For example, I appreciate your reference to homosexual faux marriage instead of so-called ‘gay marriage.' Spade-calling is truth-telling and, when done in a gracious spirit led by the Spirit of God, can have good effect. You have a golden radio voice that emanates masculinity without undue forcefulness. Both women and men need that in the era of so-called ‘toxic masculinity' and the feminized Church which follows a confused culture. I just like it, too.” Byron, thanks for your encouragement as we use the instruments of our laptops and voice to communicate. 23 Worldview listeners gave $13,150.04 And finally, by Thursday night at 9:00pm Central, 23 Worldview listeners stepped up to the plate and invested their treasure to fund the 6-member team behind The Worldview for another year. Our thanks to Jerry in Angie, Louisiana and Thomas in Spartanburg, South Carolina – both of whom gave $25 as well as David in Wilmington, Ohio and Lori in Rockford, Illinois – both of whom gave $50. We appreciate Tony and Jennie in Palmdale, California who gave $80.04, Samuel in Greensboro, North Carolina who gave $90, and Jeanne in Thomasville, North Carolina and Ron in Orange Park, Florida – both of whom gave $100. We're grateful to God for Jody in Westerlo, New York and Kevin and Shelly in Columbus, Nebraska – both of whom gave $200, Glenn and Linda in Palmdale, California who gave $240, Marlowe in Freetown, Prince Edward Isalnd, Canada who gave $250, Kelly in Rio Rancho, New Mexico who pledged $25/month for 12 months for a gift of $300, and Vanessa in Templeton, California and Nicki in Carthage, Missouri – both of whom pledged $35/month for 12 months for a gift of $420. We were touched by the generosity of Serge in Simpsonville, South Carolina who gave $500, Charles and Pamela in Sierra Madre, California  who gave $500, Sean in Burlington, Wisconsin who gave $500, and Francesca in Rockaway Township, New Jersey who also gave $500. All four of them were matched by our friend in Naples, Florida who gave another $2,000. And we were blown away by Frederick in Gainesville, Florida who pledged $50/month for 12 months for a gift of $600, Jeff in Sevierville, Tennessee who gave $1,000, and Steve and Carla in Katy, Texas who gave $5,000. Wow! Those 23 gifts add up to $13,150.04. That's the largest total amount in a single day throughout this July 2026 fundraiser. Ready for our new grand total? Drum roll please. (drum roll sound effect) $94,270 (sound effect of people cheering) We need to raise $29,230 by midnight tonight, July 31st! That means in order to hit our final goal of $123,500 by midnight tonight, Friday, July 31st, God needs to prompt folks to give an astounding $29,230 in order for the 6-member Worldview newscast team to be fully funded for another year. So, as I've said over the last several days, if you have been waiting until the last minute, this … is … it!  We could really use your help.  The finish line is upon us. Perhaps in our national audience, there are three others, just like Steve and Carla in Katy, Texas, who feel led by God to give a one-time gift of $5,000. If that $15,000 comes in, we would need just 15 people to either give a one-time gift of $1,000 or make a monthly pledge of $83.33 for 12 months which adds up to $1,000. If all of that is way out of your budget, just give what you can. $10. $20. $30. Every dollar gets us closer. Now, if you can't give a dime, then pray. Pray that God would stir the hearts of those who can give! Just go to TheWorldview.com, click on Give, select the dollar amount, and make sure to click on the “recurring” button if that's your wish.  And remember this, if you want to continue your monthly pledge to The Worldview that you started prior to July 1, 2026, please let me know so we can count your generous ongoing gift toward our total. This newscast team champions the truth and uses the Bible as our plumbline.  We actually cite relevant Bible verses that really come alive as we look at the news of the day.  Plus, we report, and we're unique in this, on the persecuted church, the battles for life and a godly perspective on sexuality, often including action steps on how you can make a difference as a believer. Don't forget: The Worldview in 5 Minutes is also commercial free. We have no sponsors. Nor do we have a pay wall.  Anyone who wants to access this newscast can get it for free. So, all we have is you! What is God prompting you to do right now? Go to TheWorldview.com and click on Give. Close And that's The Worldview on this Friday, July 31st, in the year of our Lord 2026. Subscribe for free by Spotify, Amazon Music, or by iTunes or email to our unique Christian newscast at www.TheWorldview.com.  Plus, you can get the Generations app through Google Play or The App Store. I'm Adam McManus (Adam@TheWorldview.com). Seize the day for Jesus Christ.

You know how to assert a Fifth Amendment privilege in a deposition. But how to withdraw it, once the threat of criminal prosecution is gone? It's a dangerous minefield for the uninformed. In this episode, Jim Garrity explains the process, backed by both brand-new and enduring case law. Invaluable stuff, with a long list of supporting cites in the show notes for your research files.SHOW NOTES:United Healthcare Services, Inc. v. Mortazavi, et al., No. 3:21=cv=1547-L, 2026 WL 2076020 (N.D. Tex. July 16,, 2026) (order allowing defendant to withdraw prior assertion of Fifth Amendment rights, reopening discovery for the limited purpose of allowing defendant to testify fully in deposition and serve amended answers to interrogatories and request for admissions; excellent discussion of invocation and withdrawal of Fifth Amendment assertion)Skillz Platform, Inc. v. Papaya Gaming, Ltd, et al., Case No. 24-cv-1646-DLC, 2026 WL 915251 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 3, 2026) (in order to invoke the privilege, a witness must have “reasonable cause to apprehend danger from a direct answer” and have “reason to fear that any such answer might be used to incriminate him in future criminal proceedings;” “to be a “credible” threat of prosecution the fear of criminal prosecution may not be “imaginary or wholly speculative;” court refused to allow witnesses to testify where invocation was sought to be withdrawn three weeks )In re Kowalsky, Case No. 24-19919-VFP, Adversarial Proceeding Case No. 24-1664, 2026 WL 2101871 (D. N.J. July 21, 2026) (in adversarial bankruptcy proceeding where sexual assault victim sought to bar debtor-defendant from discharging state-tort claim against him, court considered but declined to draw negative inference from debtor-defendant's assertion of Fifth Amendment privilege when ruling on summary judgment motions)Davis-Lynch, Inc. v. Moreno, 667 F.3d 539, 547 (5th Cir. 2012) (elaborating on the factors a court should consider in evaluating whether and under what circumstances party may withdraw its indication of the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination in a civil case, saying that generally, a litigant may withdraw the indication, even at a late stage in litigation, if (1) the litigant was not using the privilege in a tactical, abusive manner, AND (2) the opposing party would not experience undue prejudice as a result)United States of America v. 650 Fifth Avenue and Related Properties, Case 1:08-cv-10934-LAP, CM/ECF Doc. 1684-6 (S.D.N.Y. May 15, 2017) (filed, jointly-submitted agreed jury instruction on the jury's right to draw an adverse inference against individuals that asserted the Fifth Amendment; instruction based on Sand, Modern Federal Jury Instructions, Instr. 75-5, Libutti v. United States, 107 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 1997).In re 650 Fifth Ave. & Related Properties, 934 F.3d 147, 169-170 (2d Cir. 2019) (District Court should take a liberal view toward applications by civil litigants to withdraw their previously-about for the amendment privilege; when confronted with the parties request to withdraw its previous indication of its Fifth Amendment rights, threshold issues are whether the request is “timely” and whether its opponent suffered “undue prejudice from a litigants later-regretted decision to invoke the Fifth Amendment”)United States v. Certain Real Prop. & Premises Known as 4003-4005 5th Ave., Brooklyn, N.Y., 55 F.3d 78, 83-84 (2d Cir. 1995) (stating that when confronted with a parties request to withdraw its previous indication of the Fifth Amendment, threshold issues are whether the request is timely, will cause undue prejudice from a litigants later-regretted decision to invoke the Fifth Amendment, the nature of the proceeding, how and when the privilege was invoked, and the potential for harm or prejudice to opposing parties)Spevak v. Klein, 385 U.S. 511, 515 (1967) (the Constitution limits “the imposition of any sanction which makes the assertion of the Fifth Amendment privilege ‘costly;'” courts should seek out ways to permit as much testimony as possible to be presented in the civil litigation, despite the assertion of the privilege)Skillz Platform, Inc. v. Papaya Gaming, Ltd. et al., Case 1:24-cv-01646-DLC, CM/ECF Doc. 1 (S.D.N.Y filed March 4, 2024) (Complaint detailing allegations of bot usage versus humans in online gaming platform)In re Vrusho, 321 B.R. 607, 612 (Bankr. D.N.H. 2005) (stating that when a party to civil actions refuses to provide discovery invoking its Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, a negative inference may be drawn at the summary judgment stage as well as trial)In re WorldCom, Inc. 377 B.R. 77, 109 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2007) (saying that at summary judgment, the court is required to draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the non-moving party, despite the potential for the ultimate trier of fact to draw an adverse inference from the assertion of Fifth Amendment privileges)

Is war ever justified? Andrew Wommack, Alex McFarland, and E.W. Jackson tackle current events from a biblical worldview. They discuss President Trump's actions against Iran, the spiritual truth about self-defense, Sharia law vs. the U.S. Constitution, and why Christians must stand for liberty.Subscribe to our newsletter: https://www.truthandliberty.net/subscribe  Donate here: https://www.truthandliberty.net/donate  

The October 24, 2025 hearing centered on Tyler Robinson's request to appear at future court proceedings in civilian clothing and without restraints. His attorneys argued that routinely presenting him in jail clothing and shackles would undermine the presumption of innocence, interfere with his ability to participate in his defense and create prejudicial images that could spread through extensive media coverage. They maintained that the Constitution required the court to make an individualized security assessment rather than rely upon a blanket policy, emphasizing that Robinson had surrendered, had behaved appropriately in court and had not been shown to present a specific courtroom threat. The defense also opposed suggestions that Robinson could simply attend meaningful hearings remotely, arguing that he needed to be physically present to observe witnesses, communicate with counsel and participate fully in the proceedings.Prosecutors and attorneys representing the sheriff's office argued that restraints and jail clothing were justified by transportation and courtroom-security concerns, particularly given the seriousness and public profile of the case. They proposed using virtual or hybrid proceedings for noncritical hearings and said civilian clothing could make Robinson harder to identify during an emergency, also pointing to allegations that he had changed clothes while fleeing after Charlie Kirk's shooting. The defense separately asked the judge to strike the sheriff's office's filing on the grounds that the sheriff was not a party to the criminal case, although the parties agreed the judge could still consider its security information. Judge Tony Graf questioned whether jail clothing itself could prejudice potential jurors, treated clothing and restraints as separate issues and reserved his rulings until a public WebEx hearing the following Mondayto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:tyler-robinson-redacted-hearing-transcript.pdf

The October 24, 2025 hearing centered on Tyler Robinson's request to appear at future court proceedings in civilian clothing and without restraints. His attorneys argued that routinely presenting him in jail clothing and shackles would undermine the presumption of innocence, interfere with his ability to participate in his defense and create prejudicial images that could spread through extensive media coverage. They maintained that the Constitution required the court to make an individualized security assessment rather than rely upon a blanket policy, emphasizing that Robinson had surrendered, had behaved appropriately in court and had not been shown to present a specific courtroom threat. The defense also opposed suggestions that Robinson could simply attend meaningful hearings remotely, arguing that he needed to be physically present to observe witnesses, communicate with counsel and participate fully in the proceedings.Prosecutors and attorneys representing the sheriff's office argued that restraints and jail clothing were justified by transportation and courtroom-security concerns, particularly given the seriousness and public profile of the case. They proposed using virtual or hybrid proceedings for noncritical hearings and said civilian clothing could make Robinson harder to identify during an emergency, also pointing to allegations that he had changed clothes while fleeing after Charlie Kirk's shooting. The defense separately asked the judge to strike the sheriff's office's filing on the grounds that the sheriff was not a party to the criminal case, although the parties agreed the judge could still consider its security information. Judge Tony Graf questioned whether jail clothing itself could prejudice potential jurors, treated clothing and restraints as separate issues and reserved his rulings until a public WebEx hearing the following Mondayto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:tyler-robinson-redacted-hearing-transcript.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Byron Keelan of Freedom Principle Missouri explains why he supports Amendment 4 and argues it would protect Missouri's Constitution from special interests and out-of-state funding.

When one considers that the doctrine of the separation of church and state, interpreted from the U.S. Constitution, protects both the right to freely worship AND the right not to have the religious beliefs of others incorporated into law - one might also consider that it might be a bad move for Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick to have declared war upon it. We discuss with Progress Texas Board Member and Secular Houston founder, Dr. Wil Jeudy.Learn more about Secular Houston at https://secularhouston.org/.Thanks for listening! Learn more about Progress Texas and how you can help support our ongoing work at https://progresstexas.org/.

Darrell Castle talks about the testimony or better said, the refusal to give testimony, of Doctor Anthony Fauci before the Senate Committee headed by Senator Rand Paul. Transcription / Notes THE SCIENCE TAKES THE 5TH Hello, this is Darrell Castle with today's Castle Report. This is Friday the 31st day of July in the year of our Lord 2026. I will be talking about the testimony or better said, the refusal to give testimony, of Doctor Anthony Fauci who was the Director of the National Institute of Health Division of Allergy and Infectious Disease for about 30 years especially during the COVID years. He finished his medical residency in the 1960's and has been a government bureaucrat since then. Yes, Dr. Fauci who famously remarked when told that we should follow or stick to the science said, “I am the science.” For years it seems Senator Rand Paul had been trying to get Dr. Fauci to testify before his Senate committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs but the science steadfastly refused. Finally, Senator Paul was able to persuade the members to issue a subpoena and that compelled the science to show up at the hearing with his team of lawyers. Senator Paul had to have his lead attorney escorted out of the hearing by security because he was disruptive and acting like his narcissistic client. President Biden issued or rather his autopen issued a pardon to Fauci for any crimes he may have committed during the last 10 years. In other words, a preemptive pardon in case some charging agency decided to indict him for oh say mass murder. The committee obviously knows he can't be charged for the crimes he may have committed so what was the purpose of the subpoena. The purpose was to put him in a position to do one of two things but he was unwilling to do either. Either he would admit to some of the most horrible crimes in American history none of which could bring prosecution, or he would lie about them under oath which would constitute the crime of perjury and that is a new crime for which he has not been pardoned. Here's the opening statement from the science read as part of his opening attack on Senator Paul. “Although it pains me to do so, because of the respect I have for the Legislative Branch for government, and my decades long record of cooperating with congress, under the advice of my attorneys, I will invoke my right under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution to refrain from answering your questions.” So, he told them that he would not testify or answer any questions at all. When Senator Josh Hawley got his turn to ask questions he asked him what day is today and the science simply repeated the same quote. Senator Hawley said let me be clear you have no 5th Amendment protection because you were pardoned but obviously the Senator got a little carried away because a pardon does not take away the bill of rights. It even protects those for whom it has been nothing more than toilet tissue for their years of government service. However, it is an open question as to whether a person can be compelled to give answers to questions about crimes for which he cannot be prosecuted. The real problem with all this is a class of people who know they are completely above the law and nothing they do no matter how evil can ever reach them. Apparently they view the rest of us as sheep to be sheared. When these folks look in the mirror they are very happy with what they see. Fauci was one of the highest paid government employees in history and still receives the highest pension, and he is quite aware of his untouchability. The hearing followed the release of a diary that Dr. Fauci kept personally during the COVID nightmare. Yes, this man is so incredibly egotistical that he kept a written record of his crimes. How did Rand Paul come to have possession of Fauci's private diary. He was so confident that he was untouchable he put his diary on a government server. Senator Paul released the diary to the public and social media ran with it but interestingly mainstream media did not.  The diary is more than 1000 pages of private thoughts and is now a permanent record of the pandemic's entire existence. It presents this so-called expert in a very unfavorable light and I'm not surprised he didn't want to talk about it. He knows his media friends will cover for him as they always have. He comes across as one who was very aware of his growing celebrity and the adept way that he learned to play the game of Washington politics. He seemed to understand how to play President Trump and that the President didn't have the confidence to fire him. The science was preoccupied, even in dire moments for the nation, of his growing fame. There are multiple entries recorded in his own writing of his adoration pictured in the media coverage. He made note of each flattering article, for example quoting the science from his comments about a Washington Post article in May of 2020, “its not hyperbole to say that today I am the most famous and talked about person in the country and one of the most recognizable persons in the world.” Some of his proudest moments were regarding calls or meetings with adoring celebrities. Comments such as “great call” with Barbra Streisand in which he gave her advice on the mRNA vaccine. He also made note of his interactions with Julia Roberts, Steph Curry, and many others. It all concludes with his embrace of Hunter Biden at the Kennedy Center Honors night with a special note about what he thought the reaction to the photo would cause. My guess is that he did not tell Ms. Streisand that five months after he had the vaccine he had a myocardial infarction which I believe is doctor speak for heart attack. Well, that's enough about the good Dr.'s ego but what did he record of actual substance. On January 26, 2020, he wrote that epidemiological and genomic data showed the first infection occurred in early December and was unconnected to the Wuhan market. “Now we know the market was not the source it was the amplifier.” To me that is an admission that he knew the source was not natural but lab produced. That is despite the years of statements that he was certain it was of natural origin. He recorded his now famous conference call with other members of the science of virology and only two of them believed it had a natural origin and the rest thought “deliberate insertion was possible” They discussed the possibility of accidental or deliberate release by a lab as the source. He knew all that time that it was lab grown and he had financed its gain of function using your money. Doctors and scientists tell us that gain of function occurs when there is an existing virus which is harmless and usually doesn't jump from animals to humans. That virus is then combined with another in a lab creating a new virus completely. That virus is much more dangerous and much more transmissible thus it has gained in function. These horrible crimes for which normal people across the world suffered terribly were all pardoned by President Biden or were they. Whether or not the autopen was an actual pardon is an ongoing question. Hear this quote from the clemency warrant that made the pardon. “For any offenses against the United States which he may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 1,2014, through the date of this pardon arising from or in any manner related to his service as Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, as a member of the White House Coronavirus Task Force or the White House COVID-19 Response Team, or as Chief Medical Advisor to the President.” The President is supposed to issue a pardon to correct what he views as an injustice and the pardon is therefore personal to him but there is no evidence that President Biden reviewed all 39 pardons he issued including several family members and the entire Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol. This all raises the question of whether the pardon is Constitutionally valid. One other question I have is that if he has been pardoned why is he afraid to testify and answer simple questions. What is he afraid of but I guess nothing screams out innocence as loudly as taking the 5th. The answer I believe is that he would have to admit mass murder if he answered truthfully and the new, unpardoned crime of perjury if he lied. In conclusion, I want to give you a few words from Paul Craig Roberts. “The COVID virus was a man-made virus. The work to make the virus easily spreadable was funded by Fauci, first at a North Carolina University and then in Wuhan China. The virus was meant to be deadly, but was not, as a backup human extermination tool, a deadly “vaccine” was created and mandated by ignorant and corrupt governments and employers, including the Biden Secretary of Defense.” This information has been extensively and thoroughly documented. Books such as Soren Korsgaard's The New September 11th and Tom Woods Diary of a Psychosis come to mind as examples of extensive documentation. Finally, folks, this is a vitally important case for the future of our country. Once again from Mr. Roberts, “Clearly in our stupidity and our ignorance we are not safe. Soon there will be a second attack on us. Bill Gates gloats about it. At least that's the way I see it, Until next time folks. This is Darrell Castle, Thanks for listening.

I joined The Andrea Kaye Show to expose how Flock cameras are quietly building a nationwide surveillance system capable of tracking where Americans drive, worship, eat, meet, and spend time with their families. These AI-powered license plate readers are sold as a convenient way to catch criminals, but the same infrastructure gives government agencies and Big Tech the power to monitor innocent people, weaponize personal data, and lay the groundwork for a Chinese-style social credit system. Technology always comes with a price, and surrendering constitutional freedom for government efficiency is a bill Americans cannot afford to pay.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-jeff-dornik-show--4788100/support.Follow The Jeff Dornik Show on Apple Podcasts and leave a 5-star review. That's how we reach more people and bypass Big Tech suppression.Watch LIVE daily at 7pm ET on Rumble and subscribe so you never miss a show:https://rumble.com/c/jeffdornikBig Tech is silencing truth while harvesting your data to feed the machine. That's why I built Pickax, a free speech platform where creators own their content and your voice isn't controlled. Join now:https://pickax.com/?referralCode=y7wxvwq&refSource=copy

En RD Congo, la Cour constitutionnelle a validé la loi référendaire ouvrant la voie à un possible troisième mandat pour le président Félix Tshisekedi. La coalition d'opposition C64 monte au créneau et donne rendez-vous au peuple congolais le 15 août. Prince Epenge, l'un des porte-parole de la coalition Lamuka et membre de la plateforme C64, est notre invité.

Happy Birthday America - Day 31: Facts About the Founding of Our Country! Conversations centered around the American Experiment and our Constitution and Bill of Rights! Our goal is to provide different perspectives - give historical context - model how to talk with those whom we may disagree with - tie foundational principals to today's headlines - PLUS, have some fun along the way. Please leave us a review and share with your friends! (A PODCAST PROVIDED AND OWNED BY DURING THE BREAK PODCASTS) Brought to you by Eric Buchanan and Associates: www.buchanandisability.com This podcast is hosted by ZenCast.fm

Constitutional Deep Dive: Article 6-Section 3: The Oath and Affirmation Clause! Thanks to our sponsor - Eric Buchanan and Associates: www.buchanandisability.com Conversations centered around the American Experiment and our Constitution and Bill of Rights! Our goal is to provide different perspectives - give historical context - model how to talk with those whom we may disagree with - tie foundational principals to today's headlines - PLUS, have some fun along the way. Please leave us a review and share with your friends! (A PODCAST PROVIDED AND OWNED BY DURING THE BREAK PODCASTS) Brought to you by Eric Buchanan and Associates: www.buchanandisability.com This podcast is hosted by ZenCast.fm

This Day in Legal History: America's First PatentOn July 31, 1790, the United States issued its first patent under the newly enacted Patent Act of 1790. The patent was granted to Samuel Hopkins of Vermont for an improved method of producing potash and pearl ash, chemicals widely used in fertilizer, soapmaking, and glass production. President George Washington, Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson, and Attorney General Edmund Randolph personally signed the patent—a reminder that, in the nation's earliest years, the federal government itself directly evaluated patent applications.The Patent Act of 1790 was one of Congress's first major efforts to implement the Constitution. Article I, Section 8 authorizes Congress to “promote the progress of science and useful arts” by granting inventors exclusive rights to their discoveries for limited periods. Rather than viewing patents as natural rights, the Framers saw them as legal incentives designed to encourage innovation while ultimately benefiting the public.The original patent system was remarkably small. A board consisting of Jefferson, Randolph, and Secretary of War Henry Knox decided whether an invention was “sufficiently useful and important” to merit protection. As the country industrialized, that system quickly became overwhelmed, leading Congress to create a more formal Patent Office in 1836 with professional examiners and standardized procedures.The first patent issued on this day marked the beginning of what has become one of the world's most influential intellectual property systems. Today, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office grants hundreds of thousands of patents each year, and patent law continues to shape industries ranging from pharmaceuticals and biotechnology to software and artificial intelligence.President Donald Trump is pressing Senate Republicans to confirm acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, whose nomination has stalled because of a dispute over a proposed $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund. Republican Senators John Cornyn and Thom Tillis have withheld their support while demanding written assurances that the Justice Department will not establish the program. The fund emerged from a proposed settlement of Trump's $10 billion lawsuit accusing the Internal Revenue Service of improperly handling his tax records. Critics contend that the program could use taxpayer money to compensate Trump supporters who claim they were unfairly targeted by federal authorities, including people investigated or prosecuted in connection with the January 6 Capitol attack. Trump defended the proposal by arguing that victims of government misconduct deserve compensation and maintained that he would not personally benefit from it. Cornyn and Tillis have also objected to a separate provision that could shield Trump and certain associates from future IRS audits. Blanche reportedly met with the senators as the Justice Department attempted to resolve the disagreement. Even without confirmation, Blanche may be able to remain acting attorney general while his nomination is pending, provided that Trump does not formally withdraw it and the Senate does not reject it.Trump defends ‘anti-weaponization' fund as Blanche nomination stalls | ReutersNew York Attorney General Letitia James has sued prediction-market operator Kalshi, alleging that the company is offering illegal gambling without a state license. Kalshi allows customers to trade contracts tied to the outcomes of sporting events, elections, television programs, and other future events. New York argues that these transactions function as wagers because customers risk money on outcomes they cannot control. State officials also object to Kalshi allowing customers between the ages of 18 and 20 to participate, while New York generally requires mobile sports bettors to be at least 21. The lawsuit seeks to stop the allegedly unlawful activity, recover Kalshi's gains, impose civil penalties worth three times those gains, and obtain restitution for customers. James previously brought similar cases against prediction-market platforms operated by Coinbase and Gemini. Kalshi argues that its contracts are federally regulated derivatives under the exclusive authority of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, rather than gambling products governed by individual states. The CFTC has supported that position and filed an emergency request seeking to prevent New York from enforcing its gambling laws against the company. Courts in several other states have already restricted Kalshi's operations, while a federal judge in New York recently declined to protect the company from state enforcement. The litigation could determine whether prediction markets must comply with state gambling laws, federal commodities regulation, or both.New York Says Kalshi's Prediction Markets Are Illegal GamblingFormer federal health official Anthony Fauci could face a contempt-of-Congress referral after refusing to answer more than 100 questions during a Senate investigation into the government's response to COVID-19. Senator Rand Paul, the Republican chair of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, said the panel would consider referring Fauci for prosecution. Federal law makes it a crime for a person summoned by Congress to deliberately refuse to provide relevant testimony or requested documents. Congress cannot prosecute the offense itself, however, so a committee must approve a referral, followed by the full Senate or House, before the Justice Department decides whether to pursue charges. Reuters reported that a Senate referral would likely require 60 votes, meaning some Democratic support would be necessary. Prosecutors would then need to persuade a grand jury that Fauci intentionally refused to answer questions that fell within the committee's legitimate investigation. Fauci would likely argue that the Fifth Amendment allowed him to remain silent because his testimony could expose him to criminal liability. President Joe Biden previously pardoned Fauci for possible federal offenses committed between 2014 and January 2025, but that pardon does not cover conduct occurring after Biden left office. The pardon creates an unsettled legal issue because courts have not clearly decided whether a witness may invoke the Fifth Amendment regarding conduct already covered by a presidential pardon. Even if Congress approves a referral, the Justice Department and a Washington grand jury would still have separate opportunities to decline the case.Could Fauci face criminal charges for refusing Senate COVID questions? | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

“The Mexican Nation, which for three hundred years has not had its own will, nor the free use of its voice, rises today from the oppression in which it has lived… [The Mexican Nation] solemnly declares, through its Supreme Junta of the Empire, that it is a Sovereign Nation and independent from old Spain, with which, in the future, it will not maintain another union but that of a close friendship, in the terms prescribed by international treaties…” -Declaration of Independence of the Mexican Empire (1821) In today's episode, we explore the actual and perceived influence of the American Revolution on Spanish American revolutions. Topics include: -the debate over the influence of the American Revolution on subsequent Latin American independence movements -the history of New Spain (aka Mexico) -an exploration of the Age of Revolutions in Latin America, beginning with Venezuela in July 1811 -critiques of the claim that the US Declaration of Independence acted as a model for Latin American declarations of independence -the very different cultural, political, economic, and religious contexts that influenced American and Latin American -differences in British and Spanish forms of imperial governance, which led to different outcomes for the self-rule of the new United States and the new Latin American nations -the fact the representative institutions, local assemblies, and democratic cultures did not exist in the Spanish Empire--and were therefore difficult to create after the Latin American independence movements -a unique aspect of the Mexican insurgency as opposed to the American revolt, namely that the Mexican leaders were conservative Catholic priests, Miguel Hidalgo and Jose Maria Morelos -the impact of the new liberal Spanish Constitution, the Constitution of Cadiz of 1812, on Spanish America -the story of Agustin de Iturbide, or Agustin 1, the first emperor of Mexico -a reconsideration the claim that the American Revolution was influential in Spanish America The cover image depicts the Congress of Chilpancingo, which issued Mexico's first semi-official Declaration of Independence in 1813.

In an era of instant global communication, it is hard to fathom a time when it took it took months to communication across the Atlantic or weeks to send letters across the colonies.  But that's the world in which our country was founded.  The role of newspapers is such a vital component to our founding as it's how word of the new Declaration of Independence was transmitted to gain public support for the American Revolution.  To further expound on the role of newspapers and "viral" content for that era, we are pleased to welcome a close friend of Constituting America, Gary Porter to our show.  Gary Porter is a prolific writer and is the founder of former executive director of the Constitution  Leadership Initiative.

What?  You've never heard of Founding Father James Wilson? The man who had a major influence on the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution? The Supreme Court justice who helped shape America's judicial system? You're not alone! Jesse Wegman will tell us why.

The Constitution Study with Host Paul Engel – Remember that SAVE America Act? A lot of people have been promoting it for the “good” it will do for the country. Sadly, no one I've heard opposing it has mentioned that it violates the Constitution. In fact, Senator Schumer appears to have admitted that this would prevent 25 million people from illegally voting. That hasn't stopped...

Dr. Anthony Fauci will face a contempt of Congress vote next weekDr. Anthony Fauci will face a contempt of Congress vote in a Senate committee next week after he invoked the Fifth Amendment in a hearing about his handling of the COVID-19 pandemic and its origins.Kentucky Senator Rand Paul led the charge to have the now-retired infectious disease expert testify.But Fauci declined to answer dozens of questions from senators."Any reasonable person who has followed his unhinged obsession with me would readily come to the same conclusion," said Fauci."Therefore, although it pains me to do so because of the respect I have for the legislative branch of government and my decades-long record of cooperating with Congress, under the advice of my attorneys, I will invoke my right under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution to refrain from answering your questions. Thank you."Paul told CBS News he believes Fauci could be prosecuted for not answering questions during the hearing.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

“On the advice of counsel, I respectfully decline to answer based upon my rights under the 5th Amendment to the Constitution,” Dr. Fauci told the Senate and the American people, in response to every question about his involvement in funding dangerous gain of function research in Wuhan, China, and new revelations found in his COVID-era diary released by Senator Rand Paul. “What does the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution say?” Senator Moreno asked Fauci. “On the advice of counsel, I respectfully decline to answer based upon my rights under the 5th Amendment to the Constitution,” Fauci replied, again. Dr. Fauci also pleaded the fifth about communications with Dr. David Morens, the Ecohealth Alliance, the millions of dollars in cash rewards he received in prizes – and even about the color tie he was wearing. Dr. Peter McCullough and Jeffrey Tucker join Dr. Drew to react to Dr. Fauci's hearing, the bombshells in Sen. Paul's new documents, and if Dr. Fauci will ever tell the full truth about the pandemic. Dr. Peter McCullough is a renowned internist, cardiologist, and epidemiologist, and serves as Chief Scientific Officer of The Wellness Company. He is co-author of the New York Times Bestseller “Vaccines: Mythology, Ideology, and Reality” and of “The Courage to Face COVID-19.” Follow at https://x.com/P_McCulloughMD Jeffrey Tucker is founder and president of the Brownstone Institute, a 501c3 nonprofit focused on public health, economics, and the philosophical foundations of freedom, with a particular focus on post-pandemic rebuilding. He is also Senior Economics Columnist for Epoch Times and author of books including Life After Lockdown and Liberty or Lockdown. Follow at https://x.com/jeffreyatucker 「 SUPPORT OUR SPONSORS 」 • FATTY15 – The future of essential fatty acids is here! Strengthen your cells against age-related breakdown with Fatty15. Get 15% off a 90-day Starter Kit Subscription at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://drdrew.com/fatty15⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ • PALEOVALLEY - "Paleovalley has a wide variety of extraordinary products that are both healthful and delicious,” says Dr. Drew. "I am a huge fan of this brand and know you'll love it too!” Get 15% off your first order at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://drdrew.com/paleovalley⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ • THE WELLNESS COMPANY - Counteract harmful spike proteins with TWC's Signature Series Spike Support Formula containing nattokinase and selenium. Learn more about TWC's supplements at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://twc.health/drew⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ 「 ABOUT THE SHOW 」 This show is for entertainment and/or informational purposes only, and is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Executive Producers • Kaleb Nation - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://kalebnation.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ • Susan Pinsky - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://x.com/firstladyoflove⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Content Producer • Emily Barsh - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://x.com/emilytvproducer⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today's SWAPA Number is 10. That's the number of subject matter experts and executives that were on the town hall that took place on July 28th. So for this episode, we are providing you an opportunity to hear that town hall in case you missed the live event, during which we posed questions ranging from SWAPA's relationship with the company to where we are with implementation to the status of our move through the strategic plan. It truly had so much in it that we felt it worthy of a second listen.Four questions did not get addressed on air as we ran out of time and can be found below. It seems there are many more 4 day trips and 4 day reserve blocks in elitt then ever before. I know there is a cap on the percentage of 4 days but it seems to be growing each month. What is causing this? The number of 4-day pairings in the system has increased from ~18% to 20% of the pairing mix which is due to a multitude of reasons, but the increase in ELITT is a combination of vacation shifting to drop more, training bidding + a longer training footprint this year which can lead to two pairings being dropped on each side (whereas the last contract they optimized to the lowest cost/trip pull). Each category is unique, but the upgrade schedule this year has been aggressive so some bases see a full month of pulls to send Pilots to training. In addition, Crew Planning has increased the number of blank lines which means more 4-day pairings get pulled from blank lines for the above reasons that then fall directly into MOT and ELITT opening.   How much does it cost to have the ELITT Red-Filter to actually work?  “Cost" may be difficult to pin down, but there will be additional filtering available across systems in CWA between now and ongoing modernization efforts. Some of the disconnect right now is that there is the contractual definition of "red-eye" which encompasses flights that operate across 0200 domicile time, whereas there are "enterprise red-eyes" that launch after 0200 domicile time, so the CWA system doesn't flag those as "red-eye". We've said multiple times that this is causing confusion and hopefully we'll make progress over time with additional filtering logic that will include all variations of red-eye operations.  If a SWAPA rep were to seek and be hired for a job at HQ SWA, would one open up at SWAPA? Do we have any language in our bylaws to prohibit this or anything planned?  Short answer: yes, a position would open up, but no, we don't have anything on the books that stops someone from taking that job in the first place. The mechanism is our Constitution that defines membership classes based on who you work for and in what capacity. If a Pilot moves into a management, executive, or supervisory role at Southwest, they're no longer classified as an Active Member — they become an Executive Member. Executive Members aren't eligible to hold elected or appointed positions in SWAPA, period. So in the event that job offer is accepted, that person is no longer eligible to serve at SWAPA in any capacity. The vacancy gets filled the same way we fill any other vacancy as outlined in the Constitution.  While we don't have an enforceable rule that says SWAPA personnel can't apply for or accept a management job at Southwest like you're describing, Section 10, Appendix A of the Policy Manual speaks to the Code of Ethics and Conduct Policy. This 'pledge' in paragraph IV says (in part) that no individual covered by this policy may accept a supervisory position within Southwest Airlines or its subsidiaries for a period of at least twenty-four (24) months following the completion of SWAPA service.  So it's not a fully closed loop. It's a fair thing to raise, and it's exactly the kind of item our Constitution Review Committee reviews every year before the May Board meeting. If the membership wants stronger language here, that's the process to bring it forward, and we'd encourage anyone who feels strongly about it to push it through their Domicile Rep for attention.  Regarding sick leave buyback, is this something the company really wants, the membership, or a combination of both?  We can't speak for the Company, but from the membership side, the appetite for a sick leave buyback was seen in Leading Edge 2.0 back in March. The open ended in person interviews we conducted and the online surveys revealed the membership's interest in such a program, characterized best as “tell me more about it.”  The Benefits and Leaves Survey sought to gain more insight from the membership. The Education was a deep dive into the pros, cons, industry comparisons, and it's potential relationship with disability and sick accrual. The polling results will drill down exactly where the membership is sitting – including what the parameters are for having one at all.If you have any feedback for us at all, please drop us a line at comm@swapa.org or tap here to send us a text.Follow us online:Twitter - https://twitter.com/swapapilotsFacebook - https://www.facebook.com/swapa737

The October 24, 2025 hearing centered on Tyler Robinson's request to appear at future court proceedings in civilian clothing and without restraints. His attorneys argued that routinely presenting him in jail clothing and shackles would undermine the presumption of innocence, interfere with his ability to participate in his defense and create prejudicial images that could spread through extensive media coverage. They maintained that the Constitution required the court to make an individualized security assessment rather than rely upon a blanket policy, emphasizing that Robinson had surrendered, had behaved appropriately in court and had not been shown to present a specific courtroom threat. The defense also opposed suggestions that Robinson could simply attend meaningful hearings remotely, arguing that he needed to be physically present to observe witnesses, communicate with counsel and participate fully in the proceedings.Prosecutors and attorneys representing the sheriff's office argued that restraints and jail clothing were justified by transportation and courtroom-security concerns, particularly given the seriousness and public profile of the case. They proposed using virtual or hybrid proceedings for noncritical hearings and said civilian clothing could make Robinson harder to identify during an emergency, also pointing to allegations that he had changed clothes while fleeing after Charlie Kirk's shooting. The defense separately asked the judge to strike the sheriff's office's filing on the grounds that the sheriff was not a party to the criminal case, although the parties agreed the judge could still consider its security information. Judge Tony Graf questioned whether jail clothing itself could prejudice potential jurors, treated clothing and restraints as separate issues and reserved his rulings until a public WebEx hearing the following Mondayto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:tyler-robinson-redacted-hearing-transcript.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Join Federalist Editor-In-Chief Mollie Hemingway and Washington Examiner Senior Writer David Harsanyi as they analyze Dr. Anthony Fauci's diary entries and discuss whether Covid tyrants will ever face accountability for their actions. Mollie and David also dive into the challenges facing the pro-life movement, raise questions about Mitch McConnell's absence from the Senate, and review Christopher Nolan's The Odyssey, The Sheep Detectives, and Manhunter.Order and review Mollie's book Alito: The Justice Who Reshaped the Supreme Court and Restored the Constitution here.The Federalist Foundation is a nonprofit, and we depend entirely on our listeners and readers — not corporations. If you value fearless, independent journalism, please consider a tax-deductible gift today at TheFederalist.com/donate. Your support keeps us going.

Can the U.S. Constitution survive the rise of socialism in America? Fox News contributor and Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University, Jonathan Turley, joins to discuss his new book, Rage and the Republic. He examines the current rise of socialism in the United States, focusing on the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) and their political agenda. He shares his observations on how radical ideologies threatening the Supreme Court, free markets, and the Rule of Law are gaining traction among young Americans—and what must be done to stop them. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices