Podcasts about Federal Trade Commission

Is the key to freedom a life without Amazon? This week, Ross talks to Lina Khan, former Chair of the Federal Trade Commission about how unchecked corporate power has limited choice in our day-to-day lives, and how her fight against Big Tech unites left and right.02:41 - What's wrong with big business?09:27 - The political costs of corporate consolidation11:39 - How the 2008 financial crisis shaped Lina Khan's philosophy17:49 - The antitrust consensus from Reagan to Obama21:54 - How the left and right align against big business 26:12 - Khan's wins and losses at the FTC 36:53 - Is the Trump administration embracing or rejecting Khan's vision?42:32 - Is anti-monopoly policy the solution to our economic problems?48:38 - Can Big Tech be broken up?(A full transcript of this episode is available on the Times website.) Thoughts? Email us at interestingtimes@nytimes.com. Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

This Day in Legal History: JuneteenthOn this day in legal history, June 19, 1865, Union Major General Gordon Granger arrived in Galveston, Texas, and issued General Order No. 3, announcing that all enslaved people in Texas were free. This day, now known as Juneteenth, marked the effective end of slavery in the United States—coming more than two years after President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863. The delay was due in large part to the limited presence of Union troops in Texas to enforce the proclamation.Granger's announcement informed Texas residents that “all slaves are free,” a declaration that redefined the legal and social landscape of the state and solidified the federal government's authority over the Confederacy's last holdout. While the Emancipation Proclamation had declared freedom for slaves in Confederate states, it did not immediately end slavery everywhere, nor did it provide enforcement mechanisms beyond Union military power. Juneteenth represents the day when emancipation finally reached the furthest corners of the Confederacy through legal and military authority.In the years following, Juneteenth became a symbol of African American freedom and resilience, celebrated with community gatherings, education, and reflection. Texas made Juneteenth a state holiday in 1980, the first state to do so. On June 17, 2021, it became a federal holiday when President Joe Biden signed the Juneteenth National Independence Day Act into law. The legal significance of Juneteenth lies in its embodiment of both the promise and the delay of justice, highlighting the gap between the law's proclamation and its realization.A conservative legal group, Faculty, Alumni, and Students Opposed to Racial Preferences (FASORP), has sued the Michigan Law Review and its affiliated leadership, claiming that its member selection process illegally favors women, racial minorities, and LGBTQ+ applicants. Filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, the complaint alleges that personal statements and holistic review metrics are evaluated using race and sex preferences, violating both federal and state anti-discrimination laws. The group contends that conservative students, especially those associated with the Federalist Society, are excluded from review committees due to their presumed opposition to the practice.FASORP is backed by attorney Jonathan Mitchell and America First Legal, led by former Trump official Stephen Miller. The organization has brought similar legal challenges against NYU and Northwestern, and its suit aligns with broader attacks on diversity policies at elite institutions. It seeks an injunction, damages, and court oversight of a revised selection process for the journal, along with a halt to federal funding until changes are made.The group claims violations of Title VI and Title IX, as well as 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1985, the First and Fourteenth Amendments, and the Equal Protection Clause. The review's five-part selection process—including essays and grades—has no fixed evaluation formula, which FASORP argues opens the door to discriminatory discretion. Judge Judith E. Levy is assigned to the case.Conservative Group Accuses Michigan Law Review of Selection BiasA federal judge in Texas has struck down a Biden administration rule aimed at protecting the privacy of patients seeking abortions and gender-affirming care. Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk ruled that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) overstepped its authority when it adopted the rule, which barred healthcare providers and insurers from disclosing information about legal abortions to state law enforcement. The decision halts enforcement of the rule nationwide.Kacsmaryk, a Trump appointee, argued that HHS lacked explicit congressional approval to implement heightened protections for procedures viewed as politically sensitive. The rule was introduced in 2024 following the Supreme Court's reversal of Roe v. Wade, as part of the Biden administration's efforts to defend reproductive healthcare access.The lawsuit was brought by Texas physician Carmen Purl, represented by the conservative Alliance Defending Freedom, which claimed the rule misused privacy laws unrelated to abortion or gender identity. Previously, Kacsmaryk had temporarily blocked enforcement of the rule against Purl, but this week's decision broadens that to all states.HHS has not responded publicly to the ruling, and a separate legal challenge to the same rule remains active in another Texas federal court. The case underscores ongoing tensions between federal privacy regulations and state-level abortion restrictions in the post-Roe legal environment.US judge invalidates Biden rule protecting privacy for abortions | ReutersXlear, a hygiene product company, has filed a lawsuit against the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), challenging the agency's authority to require “substantiation” for product claims under its false advertising rules. The suit, filed in federal court in Utah, follows the FTC's recent decision to drop a case it had pursued since 2021, which alleged that Xlear falsely advertised its saline nasal spray as a COVID-19 prevention and treatment product.Xlear argues that the FTC is exceeding its legal mandate by demanding scientific backing for advertising claims, stating that the FTC Act does not explicitly authorize such a requirement. The company's legal team is leaning on the 2024 Supreme Court ruling in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which limited the deference courts must give to federal agencies when interpreting statutes—a significant departure from the longstanding Chevron doctrine.The company seeks a court ruling that merely making claims without substantiation does not violate FTC rules. Xlear has also criticized the agency for engaging in what it calls “vexatious litigation,” claiming it spent over $3 million defending itself before the FTC abandoned its lawsuit without explanation.The FTC has not yet commented or made a court appearance in this new case. The challenge could set important precedent on the scope of agency power over advertising standards in the wake of the Supreme Court's shift on judicial deference.Lawsuit challenges FTC authority over 'unsubstantiated' advertising claims | ReutersA federal judge in Rhode Island signaled skepticism toward the Trump administration's attempt to tie federal transportation funding to state cooperation with immigration enforcement. During a hearing, Chief U.S. District Judge John McConnell questioned whether U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy had legal authority to impose immigration-related conditions on grants meant for infrastructure projects. McConnell, an Obama appointee, challenged the relevance of immigration enforcement to the Transportation Department's mission, drawing a parallel to whether the department could also withhold funds based on abortion laws.The case involves 20 Democratic-led states opposing the April 24 directive, which conditions billions in infrastructure grants on compliance with federal immigration law, including cooperation with ICE. The states argue the requirement is unconstitutional, vague, and attempts to coerce state governments into enforcing federal immigration policy without clear legislative authorization.Justice Department lawyers defended the policy as aligned with national safety concerns, but struggled under McConnell's probing. He noted that the administration's broad language and public stance on sanctuary jurisdictions could not be ignored and appeared to support the states' argument that the directive lacks clarity and statutory grounding.The judge is expected to issue a ruling by Friday, before the states' grant application deadline. This lawsuit is part of a broader legal and political battle as Trump pushes sanctuary cities and states to aid in mass deportations.US judge skeptical of Trump plan tying states' transportation funds to immigration | 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

As I delve into the intricacies of Project 2025, a sense of profound transformation and potential upheaval in the U.S. federal government becomes increasingly clear. This initiative, born out of a convergence of conservative ideologies and strategic planning, aims to reshape the very fabric of American governance in ways that are both sweeping and contentious.Project 2025 is the brainchild of a coalition of conservative organizations, notably the Heritage Foundation, and was formalized in a 927-page policy blueprint released in April 2023. This document, often referred to as “Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise,” outlines a radical restructuring of the federal government, with each of its 30 chapters dedicated to a specific department. The overarching goal is stark: to “destroy the Administrative State” and consolidate executive power under the presidency[5].At the heart of Project 2025 lies the unitary executive theory, an expansive interpretation of presidential power that seeks to centralize control over the government in the White House. Proponents argue that this concentration of power is necessary for efficient governance, but critics warn it could lead to an unprecedented erosion of checks and balances. Kevin Roberts, a key figure in this initiative, has stated that all federal employees should answer directly to the president, a notion that resonates with the Federalist Society and conservative justices who have supported stronger executive powers since the Reagan administration[4].One of the most striking aspects of Project 2025 is its plan for the Department of State. Kiron Skinner, who authored the State Department chapter, advocates for the dismissal of all leadership roles within the department before January 20, 2025. These positions would then be filled with ideologically vetted appointees who do not require Senate confirmation. Skinner's rationale is that many current State Department employees are too left-wing and thus need to be replaced by those more loyal to a conservative president. When questioned about specific instances where State Department employees obstructed Trump policies, Skinner admitted she could not provide any examples[4].This approach is not isolated to the State Department; it is part of a broader strategy to ensure that key positions across the federal government are filled with political loyalists. Project 2025 includes a 180-day playbook detailing specific steps for implementing these reforms, starting with a stack of prepared Executive Orders ready for the new president to sign on the first day in office. This playbook is designed to expedite the transition and ensure that political appointees, rather than career civil servants, hold the reins of power[5].A critical component of this plan is the use of Schedule F, a scheme that allows for the hiring of unlimited political appointees without expiration dates. This mechanism also enables the transfer of apolitical civil service employees into Schedule F, stripping them of their civil service protections and leaving them vulnerable to political overreach and abuse of power. This move would grant the president and their loyalists unparalleled control over the Executive Branch, raising significant concerns about corruption and the politicization of federal agencies[5].The implications of these proposals are far-reaching and have sparked intense debate. For instance, Project 2025 seeks to eliminate the independence of various federal agencies, including the Department of Justice, the FBI, the Federal Communications Commission, and the Federal Trade Commission. This centralization of power under the presidency could undermine the integrity and autonomy of these agencies, potentially leading to a loss of public trust and the erosion of democratic institutions[4].Experts and critics alike have sounded the alarm about the potential consequences of Project 2025. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has highlighted the immense impact that such a reorganization could have on civil liberties and the rule of law. The AFL-CIO's Federal Employees union (AFGE) warns that up to 1 million federal workers could be terminated as part of this restructuring, exacerbating job insecurity and destabilizing essential public services[2][4].As we approach the 2024 elections and the potential implementation of Project 2025 in 2025, the stakes are high. The success of this initiative hinges on a Republican victory in the upcoming elections, after which the blueprint's detailed proposals would be swiftly executed. The coming months will be crucial in determining whether this radical vision for American governance will become a reality.In reflecting on Project 2025, it becomes clear that this is not just a policy initiative but a fundamental challenge to the existing structure of the U.S. government. As we move forward, it is imperative to engage in a nuanced and informed discussion about the potential impacts of such profound changes. The future of American governance hangs in the balance, and the decisions made in the next year will shape the course of the country for years to come.

Lina Khan has inspired an unusually bipartisan coalition of allies — and antagonists. As chair of the Federal Trade Commission, she became known as the most hated regulator on Wall Street. As too principled for Donald Trump and Elon Musk. Too bold for Ticketmaster and the NCAA. But Khan isn't done taking on the corporate class — or finding strange bedfellows like Steve Bannon and Michael Jordan. Can her alleged "hipster anti-trust" movement inspire a "standing army" for the people? And could she be our next Supreme Court justice? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Lina Khan has inspired an unusually bipartisan coalition of allies — and antagonists. As chair of the Federal Trade Commission, she became known as the most hated regulator on Wall Street. As too principled for Donald Trump and Elon Musk. Too bold for Ticketmaster and the NCAA. But Khan isn't done taking on the corporate class — or finding strange bedfellows like Steve Bannon and Michael Jordan. Can her alleged "hipster anti-trust" movement inspire a "standing army" for the people? And could she be our next Supreme Court justice? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In episode #378 of The Hormone Puzzle Podcast, our guest Becky Ackerman, talks about Sleep--It's So Important, and Yet So Undervalued. More about Becky: Becky Ackerman is a Fertility Coach and the founder of Lily & Bee Fertility. Becky works with women who are struggling to conceive and feel thoroughly stressed out and overwhelmed by the fertility process. Her focus on the connection between the mind and body helps women feel calm, confident, and in control, while also naturally boosting their fertility. Becky lives in New Jersey with her husband and three children, and if she's not working, chances are good you can find her on a tennis court. Thank you for listening! This episode is made possible by Puzzle Brew's Fertility Tea: https://hormonepuzzlesociety.com/fertility-tea Follow Becky on Instagram: @‌lilyandbeefertility Get your FREE 12 Fertility Journal Prompts to Reduce Stress and Boost Your Mindset HERE. Follow Dr. Kela on Instagram: @‌kela_healthcoach Get your FREE Fertility Meal Plan: https://hormonepuzzlesociety.com/ FTC Affiliate Disclaimer: The disclosure that follows is intended to fully comply with the Federal Trade Commission's policy of the United States that requires to be transparent about any and all affiliate relations the Company may have on this show. You should assume that some of the product mentions and discount codes given are "affiliate links", a link with a special tracking code This means that if you use one of these codes and purchase the item, the Company may receive an affiliate commission. This is a legitimate way to monetize and pay for the operation of the Website, podcast, and operations and the Company gladly reveals its affiliate relationships to you. The price of the item is the same whether it is an affiliate link or not. Regardless, the Company only recommends products or services the Company believes will add value to its users. The Hormone Puzzle Society and Dr. Kela will receive up to 30% affiliate commission depending on the product that is sponsored on the show. For sponsorship opportunities, email HPS Media at media@hormonepuzzlesociety.com

Think tanks are a vital part of the policy ecosystem, but what do they do? In this installment of Science Policy IRL, host Jason Lloyd talks to Neil Chilson, head of AI policy at the Abundance Institute. He has been involved in science and technology policy for his whole career, previously practicing telecommunications law and serving as the Federal Trade Commission's chief technologist.In this episode, Chilson discusses what it's like to work at a policy think tank, the questions about artificial intelligence that motivate his work, and why he is optimistic about our technological future. ResourcesCheck out Neil Chilson's book, Getting Out Of Control: Emergent Leadership in a Complex World.Find more of Chilson's work on his website and explore his Substack, including: “Red Teaming AI Legislation: Lessons from SB 1047”: How the concept of “red teaming” can be applied to creating legislation. “10 Years After the Best Tech Policy Movie Ever”: Lessons from The Lego Movie for emergent leadership.Learn more about the Abundance Institute's vision for artificial intelligence policy by reading their recommendations here. 

As I delve into the intricacies of Project 2025, a sense of profound change and potential upheaval in the U.S. federal government becomes increasingly clear. This initiative, spearheaded by conservative organizations and former Trump administration officials, aims to reshape the very fabric of American governance, centralizing executive power in ways that have sparked both fervent support and vehement opposition.At the heart of Project 2025 lies the unitary executive theory, an expansive interpretation of presidential power that seeks to place the entire executive branch under direct presidential control. This vision is championed by figures like Kevin Roberts, who advocates for all federal employees to answer directly to the president, eliminating the independence of critical agencies such as the Department of Justice, the FBI, the Federal Communications Commission, and the Federal Trade Commission[4].One of the most striking aspects of Project 2025 is its plan for the Department of State. Kiron Skinner, who authored the State Department chapter of the project, proposes dismissing all current leadership roles within the department before January 20, 2025. Skinner, who briefly headed the department's office of policy planning during the Trump administration, believes that most State Department employees are too left-wing and should be replaced with ideologically vetted leaders appointed to acting roles that do not require Senate confirmation. When questioned about instances where State Department employees obstructed Trump policies, Skinner admitted she could not name a single example[4].This radical overhaul is part of a broader "Mandate for Leadership," a 900-plus page policy playbook that outlines sweeping reforms across various federal agencies. For instance, Project 2025 suggests consolidating or eliminating programs like those managed by the Economic Development Administration (EDA), which has been instrumental in investing billions of dollars into transformative infrastructure projects. These investments have generated nearly $20 billion in private investment and created over 220,000 jobs. By dismantling such programs, Project 2025 could severely undermine the federal government's ability to invest in communities, potentially devastating working people, small businesses, and the overall health of the economy[5].The project also targets the data-collection capacities of key agencies. By consolidating the Bureau of Economic Analysis, Census Bureau, and Bureau of Labor Statistics, Project 2025 would significantly impair the ability of these agencies to provide independent, partisan-free data. This data is crucial for businesses, researchers, and government organizations, and its manipulation could have far-reaching consequences for the economy. As the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics notes, their data is intentionally independent from partisan interests and is relied upon by a wide range of stakeholders[5].The implications of these changes are profound. If implemented, Project 2025 would not only centralize power in the White House but also fundamentally alter the relationship between the executive branch and other government agencies. This shift would align with a trend that has been building since the Reagan administration, where the Supreme Court has increasingly supported a stronger unitary executive, often backed by conservative justices and organizations like the Federalist Society and the Heritage Foundation[4].Critics argue that these proposals would have devastating consequences for workers and the broader public. The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) warns that Project 2025 could lead to the termination of up to 1 million federal workers, dismantling essential agencies and disrupting critical government services[2].As we approach the potential implementation date of January 20, 2025, the stakes are high. The project's proponents see it as a necessary step to streamline government and align it more closely with conservative ideals. However, opponents view it as a dangerous erosion of checks and balances, threatening the independence of vital agencies and the integrity of data collection.Looking ahead, the next few months will be crucial. As the project's executive action proposals are tracked across 20 federal agencies, the public will gain a clearer picture of what these changes might mean in practice. The Center for Progressive Reform is already monitoring these developments, highlighting the potential devastating consequences for workers and the public[3].In the end, Project 2025 represents a pivotal moment in American governance, one that could redefine the balance of power within the federal government. Whether this initiative succeeds or fails, its impact will be felt for years to come, shaping the trajectory of U.S. policy and the lives of millions of Americans. As we navigate this uncertain landscape, it is imperative to remain vigilant, ensuring that the principles of democracy and the public interest are upheld.

As I delve into the intricacies of Project 2025, a sense of unease settles in, akin to witnessing a seismic shift in the foundational landscape of American governance. This initiative, spearheaded by conservative organizations, aims to radically reshape the federal government, centralizing power in the White House and dismantling the independence of various federal agencies.At its core, Project 2025 is rooted in the unitary executive theory, an expansive interpretation of presidential power that seeks to consolidate control over the entire executive branch under direct presidential oversight. Kevin Roberts, a key proponent, succinctly captures this vision: "all federal employees should answer to the president."[4]One of the most striking aspects of Project 2025 is its plan to eliminate the independence of agencies like the Department of Justice, the FBI, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). These agencies, designed to operate without political interference, are now targeted for overhaul. The project dismisses these entities as "so-called independent agencies," reflecting a disdain for the checks and balances that have long been a cornerstone of American democracy[5].For instance, the Federal Trade Commission, a body established to protect consumers and promote competition, would no longer enjoy the autonomy granted by Congress and upheld by the Supreme Court in *Humphrey's Executor v. United States*. Under Project 2025, the president would gain the power to remove FTC commissioners at will, should they not align with the president's agenda. This change would fundamentally alter the FTC's ability to function independently, potentially turning it into a tool for partisan policy implementation[5].The State Department is another focal point of this initiative. Kiron Skinner, who authored the State Department chapter of Project 2025, advocates for the dismissal of all State Department employees in leadership roles before January 20, 2025. These positions would be filled by ideologically vetted leaders appointed to acting roles, bypassing the need for Senate confirmation. Skinner's rationale is telling: she believes most State Department employees are too left-wing and need to be replaced by those more loyal to a conservative president. When questioned about specific instances where State Department employees obstructed Trump policies, Skinner admitted she could not name any[4].The implications of such reforms are far-reaching and profound. By centralizing power and eliminating the independence of federal agencies, Project 2025 would effectively create an "imperial presidency," where the president's authority is virtually unchecked. This would shatter the system of checks and balances that has been a bulwark of American democracy since its inception. As the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) notes, the re-election of a president aligned with these policies would have "immense" consequences, potentially undermining the very fabric of democratic governance[1].The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) within the White House would also play a critical role in this new landscape. Project 2025 proposes that OIRA should review and potentially revise or block rules and significant guidance issued by independent agencies. This would further erode the autonomy of these agencies, ensuring that all regulatory actions align with the president's agenda rather than serving the public interest[5].The potential impacts of these changes are alarming. Experts warn that such a concentration of power could lead to policies that are detrimental to workers, consumers, and the broader public. The Center for Progressive Reform is tracking these executive action proposals across 20 federal agencies, highlighting the devastating consequences for various sectors, from labor rights to environmental regulations[3].As we approach the milestones outlined in Project 2025, the stakes are high. The plan's proponents are pushing for significant changes to be implemented by January 20, 2025. This timeline underscores the urgency and the need for vigilant scrutiny from both policymakers and the public.In reflecting on Project 2025, it becomes clear that this initiative represents a fundamental challenge to the democratic principles that have guided the United States. It is a call to action, a reminder that the balance of power in American governance is not a static entity but a dynamic system that requires constant vigilance and engagement. As we move forward, it is crucial to monitor these developments closely, ensuring that the checks and balances that safeguard our democracy are not dismantled in the name of executive power. The future of American governance hangs in the balance, and the decisions made in the coming months will have lasting implications for generations to come.

As I delve into the intricacies of Project 2025, a sense of profound change and potential upheaval in the American governance landscape becomes increasingly clear. This initiative, spearheaded by The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank with deep ties to the Trump administration, aims to reshape the federal government in ways that are both sweeping and contentious.At the heart of Project 2025 is a vision to consolidate executive power, a concept often referred to as the "unitary executive theory." This theory, championed by figures like Kevin Roberts, the president of The Heritage Foundation, seeks to place the entire executive branch under direct presidential control. Roberts has been unequivocal about this goal, stating that all federal employees should answer directly to the president, a stance that reflects a broader effort to centralize power in the White House[4].One of the most striking aspects of Project 2025 is its proposal to dismantle or significantly alter several key federal agencies. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), for instance, would be eliminated, and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) would be privatized. This move is particularly alarming given the critical roles these agencies play in national security and disaster prevention, roles that were established in response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The idea of reverting to a pre-9/11 era in terms of national security is, as described by critics, "irresponsible" and poses significant risks to public safety[2].The Department of Education is another target, with plans to eliminate it and transfer oversight of education and federal funding to the states. This change would not only decentralize education policy but also gut regulations that prohibit sex-based discrimination and discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation in schools. The implications are far-reaching, potentially undermining hard-won protections for marginalized students[2].The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is also in the crosshairs, with proposals to eliminate many of its regional labs, offices of enforcement and compliance, and scientific integrity and risk information divisions. This would essentially give corporations and big businesses a free hand to pollute, endangering public health by compromising the air, water, and food quality[2].The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) would face a similar fate, with its responsibilities potentially shifted to the Department of Interior or the Department of Transportation. This move would burden states and local governments with the costs of disaster preparedness and response, a shift that could be catastrophic in the face of natural disasters[2].Beyond the dismantling of agencies, Project 2025 also seeks to undermine the independence of various regulatory bodies. Independent agencies like the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) are designed to operate without political interference, ensuring they can make decisions based on law and evidence rather than partisan politics. However, Project 2025 dismisses these agencies as "so-called independent agencies," aiming to bring them under direct presidential control and strip them of their autonomy[5].The project's advocates argue that this centralization of power is necessary to streamline government and ensure that all branches are aligned with the president's vision. However, critics see this as a dangerous erosion of the system of checks and balances that has been a cornerstone of American democracy. As one analysis from the Center for American Progress notes, "Project 2025 would destroy the U.S. system of checks and balances and create an imperial presidency," giving the president almost unlimited power to implement policies without oversight[5].The personal and ideological motivations behind these proposals are also worth examining. Kiron Skinner, who wrote the State Department chapter of Project 2025, has expressed a deep distrust of current State Department employees, whom she views as too left-wing. She advocates for replacing these employees with ideologically vetted leaders who would be more loyal to a conservative president. This approach to personnel management is not just about policy; it's about creating a government that is ideologically aligned with the president's vision, regardless of the consequences for institutional integrity[4].As I reflect on the scope and ambition of Project 2025, it becomes clear that this initiative is not just a set of policy proposals but a fundamental challenge to the way America governs itself. The ACLU, for example, has outlined a comprehensive strategy to combat the civil rights and civil liberties challenges that a second Trump presidency, aligned with Project 2025, would present. This includes going to court to protect rights, working with Congress to enact policy solutions, collaborating with state lawmakers, and organizing community efforts to educate the public about their rights and the potential harms of Project 2025[1].Looking ahead, the implementation of Project 2025 hinges on several key milestones and decision points. The 2024 election will be pivotal, as it will determine whether the political landscape will be conducive to these sweeping changes. If the proponents of Project 2025 succeed in their electoral ambitions, the following years will likely see intense legal battles, legislative showdowns, and public mobilization efforts.As we navigate this complex and contentious landscape, it is crucial to remain vigilant and informed. Project 2025 is not just a policy initiative; it is a vision for a fundamentally different America, one where executive power is centralized and the traditional checks and balances are significantly diminished. Whether this vision becomes reality will depend on the actions of policymakers, the judiciary, and the American public in the days and years to come.

Is "Abundance" the answer to our housing, energy, and pharma crises—or just neoliberalism in a new outfit?In this in-depth conversation, Capital Forum's Teddy Downey sits down with Sandeep Vaheesan of the Open Markets Institute to dissect "Abundance", the much-hyped book by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson. Sandeep—legal director, historian, and author of Democracy and Power—offers a sweeping critique of the book's policy proposals and ideological foundations.We talk about:

In episode #377 of The Hormone Puzzle Podcast, our guest Caroline Ashurst, talks about The Power of Ritual in Your Fertility Journey. More about Caroline: Caroline Grace Ashurst, M.Ac ., L.Ac., is the founder of The Fertility Formula Functional Holistic Fertility Coaching and Restorative Harmony Acupuncture. With nearly 15 years of clinical experience in Chinese medicine and training alongside functional and naturopathic doctors—and drawing from over 25 years of personal hormonal healing—Caroline has supported women worldwide in growing their families. Her whole-woman approach to fertility blends ancient wisdom with modern science. Caroline integrates advanced lab testing, personalized treatment plans, nutrition, supplements, and lifestyle guidance, alongside hormone balancing and compassionate, heart-centered coaching to empower women on their fertility journeys. Thank you for listening! This episode is made possible by Puzzle Brew's Fertility Tea: https://hormonepuzzlesociety.com/fertility-tea Follow Caroline on Instagram: @‌restorativeharmony Grab a FREE copy of How to Balance Your Hormones and Get (+Stay)Pregnant Faster Guide HERE. Follow Dr. Kela on Instagram: @‌kela_healthcoach Get your FREE Fertility Meal Plan: https://hormonepuzzlesociety.com/ FTC Affiliate Disclaimer: The disclosure that follows is intended to fully comply with the Federal Trade Commission's policy of the United States that requires to be transparent about any and all affiliate relations the Company may have on this show. You should assume that some of the product mentions and discount codes given are "affiliate links", a link with a special tracking code This means that if you use one of these codes and purchase the item, the Company may receive an affiliate commission. This is a legitimate way to monetize and pay for the operation of the Website, podcast, and operations and the Company gladly reveals its affiliate relationships to you. The price of the item is the same whether it is an affiliate link or not. Regardless, the Company only recommends products or services the Company believes will add value to its users. The Hormone Puzzle Society and Dr. Kela will receive up to 30% affiliate commission depending on the product that is sponsored on the show. For sponsorship opportunities, email HPS Media at media@hormonepuzzlesociety.com

Fix SLP was never just about making noise—it was built to challenge systems that gatekeep, exploit, and mislead. In this foundational episode, Dr. Jeanette Benigas and Preston Lewis, MS/SLP, explain why the CCC isn't just unnecessary—it might be illegal.We walk through the Sherman Antitrust Act, our official complaint to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and how we allege ASHA's CCC requirement may violate federal law by restricting access to jobs, supervision, and professional advancement in speech-language pathology.We expose the financial structure behind ASHA's business model, the myth of the clinical fellowship year, and how the CCC props up a pay-to-play system that disproportionately harms new grads, small business owners, and anyone without institutional backing.This is the legal case that lit the fire behind Fix SLP, and we're just getting started.Find Fix SLPs resources for students and new grads here.Want to earn some PDHs or CEUs with a discount? Find our most up-to-date promo codes and discounts here.Want to lead or join your state team? Email your name and state to states@fixslp.com.Become a sustaining partner to support our work.Follow us on Instagram.Find all our information at fixslp.com, and sign up for our email list to be alerted to new episodes and content.Email us at team@fixslp.com.Leave a message on our Minivan Meltdown line! ★ Support this podcast ★

Recent data on scams and fraud from the Federal Trade Commission and the FBI is, to no surprise, trending in the wrong direction. But there is confusion around such national reporting, and that is part of the problem. "There is no central figure leading this fight," says ABA's Paul Benda, who describes important challenges to addressing scams and fraud on a national scale on this week's edition of the ABA Fraudcast. ABA offers resources to help banks prevent, identify, measure and report fraud, and to serve and protect consumers and their financial data.​

Custom Communications, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission

As I delve into the intricacies of Project 2025, a sense of profound transformation and controversy envelops me. This initiative, backed by influential conservative think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation, is nothing short of a revolutionary blueprint aimed at reshaping the federal government of the United States.At its core, Project 2025 advocates for an expansive interpretation of presidential power, often referred to as the unitary executive theory. This concept centralizes greater control over the government in the White House, a vision that has been gaining traction since the Reagan administration. Kevin Roberts, a key proponent, succinctly captures this ideology: "all federal employees should answer to the president."[2]One of the most striking aspects of Project 2025 is its proposal to eliminate the independence of several critical federal agencies. The Department of Justice, the FBI, the Federal Communications Commission, and the Federal Trade Commission are all targeted for direct presidential control. This move is part of a broader strategy to consolidate executive power, a plan that has been bolstered by conservative justices and organizations like the Federalist Society[2].The State Department is another focal point, with Project 2025 recommending the dismissal of all employees in leadership roles before January 20, 2025. Kiron Skinner, who authored the State Department chapter of the project, believes that most current employees are too left-wing and should be replaced by those more loyal to a conservative president. When questioned about specific instances where State Department employees obstructed Trump policies, Skinner admitted she could not provide any examples[2].The scope of Project 2025 extends far beyond these administrative changes, however. It proposes the elimination of entire agencies that have been cornerstone institutions in American governance. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), created in response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks, would be dismantled, and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) would be privatized. This move is seen as a significant step backward in national security efforts, as DHS and TSA have played crucial roles in coordinating national security and preventing terrorist attacks[3].The Department of Education is another agency on the chopping block, with oversight of education and federal funding set to be handed over to the states. This shift not only undermines federal standards but also jeopardizes regulations against sex-based discrimination, gender identity discrimination, and sexual orientation discrimination in schools[3].Environmental protection is also under threat. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would see the elimination of its regional labs, offices of enforcement and compliance, and scientific integrity and risk information divisions. This would essentially give corporations and big businesses a free rein to pollute, endangering public health and the environment[3].The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is slated for elimination as well, with its responsibilities potentially being absorbed by the Department of Interior or the Department of Transportation. This change would shift the costs of disaster preparedness and response to states and local governments, a move that could leave many communities vulnerable during crises[3].The Consumer Financial Protection Board, USAID, and other agencies have already been targeted by the Trump administration, which has been executing Project 2025's blueprint in a manner described as chaotic and legally questionable. Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has been at the forefront of these changes, aiming to save $1 trillion through the elimination of agencies and the layoffs of tens of thousands of federal workers. To date, this has impacted 280,253 federal workers and contractors across 27 agencies[5].As I reflect on the sheer ambition and scope of Project 2025, it becomes clear that this initiative is not just a set of policy proposals but a fundamental redefinition of American governance. The stated goals of efficiency and centralized control are juxtaposed against concerns of accountability, public safety, and the erosion of civil service independence.In the words of critics, Project 2025 represents a "devastating" set of consequences for workers, public health, and national security. The AFGE (American Federation of Government Employees) warns that these changes are "not only irresponsible but also puts all of us at risk"[3].As we approach the milestones outlined in Project 2025, the nation stands at a critical juncture. The upcoming months will see continued implementation of these policies, with significant decision points looming. Will the consolidation of executive power enhance governance, or will it undermine the checks and balances that have long defined American democracy? The answers to these questions will shape the future of the federal government and the lives of millions of Americans.In this journey through the complexities of Project 2025, one thing is certain: the path ahead is fraught with both promise and peril, and the choices made now will have lasting impacts on the fabric of American society.

Independent regulatory agencies like the Federal Trade Commission and the Securities and Exchange Commission have come under more scrutiny given a recent Trump executive order intended to make them more accountable to the politics of the President. Here to discuss whether this a new problem or a continuation of a trend is the Director of the Regulatory Studies Center and Professor of Practice at George Washington University, Roger Nober.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

As I delve into the intricacies of Project 2025, a sense of profound transformation and controversy envelops me. This initiative, backed by influential conservative think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation, is more than just a policy blueprint; it's a vision for a radically reshaped federal government, one that centralizes power in the White House and challenges the very fabric of American governance.At its core, Project 2025 is rooted in the unitary executive theory, an expansive interpretation of presidential power that aims to consolidate control over the entire executive branch under direct presidential oversight. Kevin Roberts, a key proponent, succinctly captures this ambition: "All federal employees should answer to the president."[4]One of the most striking aspects of Project 2025 is its plan to dismantle the independence of various federal agencies. The Department of Justice, the FBI, the Federal Communications Commission, and the Federal Trade Commission are all targeted for reform, with the intention of placing them firmly under presidential control. This move is not merely administrative; it represents a fundamental shift in how power is distributed within the federal government.For instance, the State Department is slated for significant overhaul. Project 2025 advocates for the dismissal of all leadership roles within the department before January 20, 2025, to be replaced by ideologically vetted leaders appointed to acting roles that bypass Senate confirmation. Kiron Skinner, who authored the State Department chapter of the project, reflects this ideological bent, suggesting that most State Department employees are too left-wing and need to be replaced by those more loyal to a conservative president. When questioned about specific instances where State Department employees obstructed Trump policies, Skinner admitted she couldn't name any[4].The scope of these changes is vast and far-reaching. The 900-page policy proposal outlines the elimination of entire agencies, such as the Consumer Financial Protection Board (CFPB) and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). These actions are part of a broader effort to streamline the government and save $1 trillion, but they come with significant human and institutional costs. As of the latest data, the Trump administration, guided by Project 2025, has either laid off or plans to lay off 280,253 federal workers and contractors across 27 agencies[5].The execution of these plans has been anything but smooth. The Trump administration, aided by Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), has implemented these reforms in a manner described as chaotic and legally questionable. Musk's DOGE has taken the Project 2025 blueprint and amplified its impact, often through methods that test the legal boundaries of executive power. This turbulent approach has led to the elimination of agencies and the firing of tens of thousands of workers, all while pushing the limits of what the executive branch can legally achieve[5].Experts and critics alike warn of the devastating consequences of these actions. The Center for Progressive Reform is tracking the executive action proposals under Project 2025, highlighting the potential harm to workers and the broader public. These actions, they argue, will have "devastating consequences for workers, the environment, and public health and safety"[3].As I reflect on the ambitions and implications of Project 2025, it becomes clear that this initiative is not just about administrative reforms but about reshaping the fundamental balance of power in the U.S. government. The project's proponents see it as a necessary step to streamline government and align it with conservative ideals, while critics view it as a dangerous erosion of checks and balances.Looking ahead, the next few months will be crucial. As the proposed changes continue to roll out, the legal and political fallout will likely intensify. The Supreme Court, which has historically supported a stronger unitary executive, will play a pivotal role in determining the legality of these actions. Meanwhile, the public and Congress will need to grapple with the consequences of a government that is increasingly centralized and ideologically driven.In this journey through the complexities of Project 2025, one thing is clear: the future of American governance hangs in the balance. As the project's vision continues to unfold, it will be up to the American people, their elected representatives, and the judiciary to ensure that the principles of democracy and the rule of law are upheld. The path ahead is fraught with uncertainty, but one thing is certain – the impact of Project 2025 will be felt for years to come.

Ralph welcomes Heidi Shierholz, president of the Economic Policy Institute, to break down the budget bill passing through Congress that is the largest transfer of wealth from the poor and working-class to the wealthy in United States history. Then, insurance expert, Robert Hunter returns to discuss the recent rise in auto insurance rates.Heidi Shierholz is the president of the Economic Policy Institute, a nonprofit, nonpartisan think tank that uses the power of its research on economic trends and on the impact of economic policies to advance reforms that serve working people, deliver racial justice, and guarantee gender equity. In 2021 she became the fourth president EPI has had since its founding in 1986.We've never seen a budget that so plainly takes from the poor to give to the rich… The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office found that lower and lower middle-income people will actually lose out. They may get something of a tax break, but they lose benefits. So that on net, their after-tax income will be lower after this bill, while the rich just make out like bandits.Heidi Shierholz, President of the Economic Policy InstituteThe draconian cuts that we are seeing to the safety net are not big enough, because the tax increases are so huge that this bill also increases the deficit dramatically.Heidi ShierholzMany folks are calling this the MAGA Murder Bill. They're not wrong. People will die because of the cuts that we're seeing here.Heidi ShierholzRobert Hunter is the Director Emeritus of Insurance at the Consumer Federation of America. He has held many positions in the field, both public and private, including being the Commissioner of Insurance for the State of Texas being the President and Founder of the National Insurance Consumer Organization and served as United States Federal Insurance Administrator.Decide how much you need. Don't ask for more than you really need. And then once you have it, “I need this much for my car. I need this much if I hit somebody” and so on. And then you get that statistic, and you send it out to several companies and get quotes.Robert Hunter on buying auto insuranceThere isn't any program benefiting the American people that Trump is not cutting in order to turn the country over to the giant corporations and the super-rich. It's basically an overthrow of the government and an overthrow of the rule of law.Ralph NaderNews 6/6/251. On May 23rd, the Trump administration Department of Justice officially announced it had reached an agreement with Boeing to drop its criminal case against the airline manufacturer related to the 2018 and 2019 crashes that killed 346 people, NPR reports. The turnover at the federal government in recent years has prolonged this case; the first Trump administration reached a deferred prosecution agreement with Boeing in 2021, but prosecutors revived the criminal case under President Biden, and as NPR notes, “Boeing agreed last year to plead guilty to defrauding regulators, but a federal judge rejected that proposed plea deal.” Just before the deal was reached, Senators Elizabeth Warren and Richard Blumenthal penned a letter calling on the DOJ not to “allow [Boeing] to weasel its way out of accountability for its failed corporate culture, and for any illegal behavior that has resulted in deadly consequence,” but this was clearly ignored. Paul Cassell, a law professor at the University of Utah and former federal judge who, according to NPR, is representing the families of victims for free, said, “This kind of non-prosecution deal is unprecedented and obviously wrong for the deadliest corporate crime in U.S. history…My families will object and hope to convince the court to reject [the deal]."2. That same day, Trump signed a new executive order to “cut down on regulations and fast-track new licenses for [nuclear] reactors and power plants,” per Reuters. According to the wire service, “Shares of uranium mining companies Uranium Energy…Energy Fuels…and Centrus Energy…jumped between 19.6% and 24.2%” following this announcement. Sam Altman-backed nuclear startup Oklo gained 23.1%. The administration's new interest in the nuclear industry is spurred in part by increased demand for energy as, “power-hungry data centers dedicated to artificial intelligence and crypto miners plug into the grid.” The nuclear industry is also expected to retain many tax incentives stripped away from green energy initiatives in the so-called Big Beautiful Bill.3. In yet another instance of the Trump administration going soft on corporate greed, the Republican-controlled Federal Trade Commission has dismissed their case against PepsiCo. As the AP explains, “The lawsuit…alleged that PepsiCo was giving unfair price advantages to Walmart at the expense of other vendors and consumers,” citing the 1936 Robinson-Patman Act, which bans companies from “using promotional incentive payments to favor large customers over smaller ones.” Current FTC Chair Andrew Ferguson called the case a “dubious partisan stunt,” in a press release. Former Chair Lina Khan however, called the dismissal “disturbing,” and wrote, “This lawsuit would've protected families from paying higher prices at the grocery store and stopped conduct that squeezes small businesses and communities across America. Dismissing it is a gift to giant retailers as they gear up to hike prices.”4. Instead of utilizing the federal regulatory apparatus to protect consumers and the public, the Trump administration instead continues to weaponize these institutions to target progressive groups. According to Axios, the FTC is “investigating…Media Matters over claims that it and other media advocacy groups coordinated advertising boycotts of Elon Musk's X.” As this report notes, “X [formerly Twitter] sued Media Matters for defamation in 2023 for a report it publicly released that showed ads on X running next to pro-Nazi content. X claimed the report contributed to an advertiser exodus.” While it seems unlikely the social media platform could prevail in such a suit, the suit has effectively cowed the advertising industry, with the World Federation of Advertisers dismantling their Global Alliance for Responsible Media just months after the suit was filed. Media Matters president Angelo Carusone is quoted saying, “The Trump administration has been defined by naming right-wing media figures to key posts and abusing the power of the federal government to bully political opponents and silence critics…that's exactly what's happening here…These threats won't work; we remain steadfast to our mission.”5. On Thursday, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cotez endorsed State Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani in his bid for Mayor of New York City, POLITICO reports. This endorsement came the morning after the first mayoral primary debate, a rollicking affair featuring nine candidates and including a testy exchange in which the moderators disregarded their own rules to press Mamdani to say whether he believed in “a Jewish state of Israel?” Mamdani responded that he believed Israel has a right to exist “as a state with equal rights.” This from the Times of Israel. In her endorsement, AOC wrote “Assemblymember Mamdani has demonstrated a real ability on the ground to put together a coalition of working-class New Yorkers that is strongest to lead the pack…In the final stretch of the race, we need to get very real about that.” Ocasio-Cortez said she would rank Adrienne Adams, Brad Lander, Scott Stringer and Zellnor Myrie in that order after Mamdani.6. Turning to Palestine itself, the Times of Israel reports notorious Biden State Department spokesman Matthew Miller admitted in an interview that, “It is without a doubt true that Israel has committed war crimes” in Gaza. While Miller stops short of accusing the Israeli government of pursuing “a policy of deliberately committing war crimes,” and repeats the tired canard that Hamas resisted ceasefire negotiations, he admits that the Biden administration “could have done [more] to pressure the Israeli government to agree to…[a] ceasefire.” Hopefully, Miller's admission will help crack the dam of silence and allow the truth to be told about this criminal military campaign.7. Even as Miller makes this admission, the merciless bombing of Palestinians continues. The Guardian reports “On Sunday, at least 31 Palestinians were killed after Israeli forces opened fire at the site of a food distribution centre in Rafah…On Monday, another three Palestinians were killed by Israeli fire at the same site…And on Tuesday, 27 people were killed after Israeli forces opened fire again, say Gaza officials.” This report continues, citing UN human rights chief, Volker Türk, who said on Tuesday that “Palestinians in Gaza now faced an impossible choice: ‘Die from starvation or risk being killed while trying to access the meagre food that is being made available.'” Türk added that by attacking civilians, Israel is committing yet more war crimes.8. Some high-profile activists are taking direct action to deliver food to Gaza. Democracy Now! reports 12 activists aboard The Madleen, part of the Freedom Flotilla Coalition, have departed from the Italian port of Catania. This group includes Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg, actor Liam Cunningham, and Rima Hassan, a French member of the European Parliament. Despite the previous ship being targeted by a drone attack, Thunberg is quoted saying “We deem the risk of silence and the risk of inaction to be so much more deadly than this mission.” Threats to the flotilla continue to pour in. South Carolina Republican Senator Lindsey Graham tweeted, “Hope Greta and her friends can swim!” In Israel itself, IDF spokesman Brigadier General Effie Defrin ominously stated “we will act accordingly," per FOX News.9. In more foreign policy news, Gareth Gore – a Washington Post reporter and author of Opus, an exposé of the shadowy Opus Dei sect within the Catholic Church – reports Pope Leo has given Opus Dei six months to “pass comprehensive reforms” and has told the group that if significant changes are not made by December, “necessary measures will be taken.” Gore further reports that in addition to the reforms, “[Pope] Leo has also demanded an investigation into abuse allegations…[including] human trafficking, enslavement…[and] physical and psychological abuse of members.” According to Gore, the reforms were first ordered by Pope Francis in 2022, but “Opus Dei dragged its feet – in the hope the pope would pass away first.” Upon his death, Pope Francis had been on the, “cusp of signing into canon law a huge reform of Opus Dei.” The Vatican was also moving to force a vote on a revised Opus Dei constitution, which was, “quietly cancelled” within hours of Francis' death. Perhaps most tellingly, Gore reports “The Vatican has privately reassured Opus Dei victims who have long campaigned for justice that they ‘won't be disappointed'”10. Finally, a political earthquake has occurred in South Korea. Listeners may remember the failed coup attempt by right-wing former President Yoon Suk Yeol, which culminated in his ouster and could ultimately lead to a sentence of life in prison or even death. Now, the country has elected a new president, Lee Jae-myung, by a margin of 49.4% to 41.2%. Lee, who leads Korea's Democratic People's Party, has “endured a barrage of criminal indictments and an assassination attempt,” since losing the last presidential election by a margin of less than 1 per cent, per the Financial Times. Lee is a former factory worker who campaigned in a bulletproof vest after surviving being knifed in the neck last year. The FT notes “Lee…grew up in poverty and suffered [a] permanent injury at the age of 13 when his arm was crushed in a machine at the baseball glove factory where he worked…in 2022 [he] declared his ambition to be a ‘successful Bernie Sanders'.” That said, he has pivoted to the center in his recent political messaging. Beyond the impact of Lee's election on the future of Korean democracy, his tenure is sure to set a new tone in Korea's relations with their neighbors including the US, the DPRK, China and Japan.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

As I delve into the intricacies of Project 2025, a sense of profound transformation and controversy emerges. This initiative, backed by influential conservative think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation, is a comprehensive blueprint aimed at reshaping the federal government of the United States. At its core, Project 2025 seeks to consolidate executive power, placing the entire federal government's executive branch under direct presidential control.One of the most striking aspects of Project 2025 is its adherence to the unitary executive theory, an expansive interpretation of presidential power that centralizes control in the White House. Kevin Roberts, a key proponent, has explicitly stated that all federal employees should answer directly to the president. This vision is not new; it has roots in the Reagan administration and has been reinforced by conservative justices and organizations like the Federalist Society[4].The plan's ambition is evident in its proposals for radical changes within federal agencies. For instance, Project 2025 advocates for the dismissal of all Department of State employees in leadership roles before January 20, 2025. These positions would be filled by ideologically vetted leaders appointed to acting roles, bypassing the need for Senate confirmation. Kiron Skinner, who authored the State Department chapter of the project, has been vocal about her belief that most State Department employees are too left-wing and need to be replaced by those more loyal to a conservative president. When questioned about specific instances where State Department employees obstructed Trump policies, Skinner admitted she could not name any[4].The project's scope extends far beyond the State Department. It includes proposals to eliminate entire agencies, such as the Consumer Financial Protection Board (CFPB) and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). These actions are part of a broader effort to streamline the government and cut costs, with the goal of saving $1 trillion. However, the methods employed by the Trump administration, particularly through Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), have been criticized for their chaotic and legally questionable nature. Musk's DOGE has already led to the layoff or planned layoff of 280,253 federal workers and contractors across 27 agencies[5].The elimination of agencies like the CFPB is a stark example of Project 2025's intent to dismantle regulatory bodies seen as obstacles to conservative policy goals. The CFPB, established to protect consumers from financial abuse, is viewed by proponents of the project as an overreach of government power. By abolishing such agencies, Project 2025 aims to reduce what it perceives as bureaucratic inefficiencies and restore what it sees as proper executive authority.The potential implications of these changes are far-reaching and have sparked significant concern among various stakeholders. Critics argue that these actions will have devastating consequences for workers and the general public. The Center for Progressive Reform is tracking the executive action proposals under Project 2025, highlighting the potential harm to workers and the erosion of regulatory protections[3].Experts warn that the centralization of power envisioned by Project 2025 could undermine the independence of critical agencies like the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). This could lead to a politicization of law enforcement and judicial processes, compromising the integrity of these institutions. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) are also targeted for similar restructuring, which could have profound impacts on telecommunications and consumer protection policies[4].As we look ahead, the implementation of Project 2025 is likely to face numerous legal and political challenges. The chaotic execution by the Trump administration has already tested the legal system, and future actions will undoubtedly be scrutinized by courts and Congress. The upcoming months will be crucial as various stakeholders, including federal employees, advocacy groups, and lawmakers, navigate the implications of these sweeping changes.In conclusion, Project 2025 represents a seismic shift in American governance, driven by a conservative vision of centralized executive power. While its proponents see it as a necessary reform to streamline government and restore presidential authority, critics view it as a dangerous erosion of democratic checks and balances. As the project continues to unfold, it remains to be seen how these ambitious plans will shape the future of the federal government and the lives of millions of Americans. One thing is certain: the journey ahead will be marked by intense debate, legal battles, and a profound redefinition of the role of the executive branch in American politics.

The world your child plays in is bigger than you think, and it's changing faster than most parents can track. In this eye-opening episode, Dina Lamdany, a product manager at Roblox, joins us to unpack how the platform is evolving to protect kids and spark healthier digital conversations. But this isn't just about parental controls or privacy settings. It's about how we stay connected to our kids in a digital world that won't slow down. If you've ever wondered whether “no” is the safest answer, or if there's a smarter way to say “let's figure this out together,” this conversation will help you take the next step.What to expect in this episode:What Roblox is doing differently with kids under 13How to block games, limit screen time, and monitor your child's experienceWhy your child's input is key to digital safety (how to invite it and avoid trying to control them)About Dina LamdanyDina Lamdany is a product manager at Roblox, where she leads efforts to build safer, more transparent digital experiences for kids and families. With a focus on users under 13, she works across engineering, design, legal, and policy teams to develop parental controls, privacy protections, and age-appropriate content systems. A strong advocate for user safety and digital literacy, Dina brings both technical and legal expertise to her work, drawing from past experience at YouTube, the U.S. Congress, and the Federal Trade Commission.Connect with DinaWebsite: Dina Lamdany LinkedIn: Dina Lamdany For parents looking to understand and support their child's Roblox experience, roblox.com/family-center offers trusted tools, guides, and resources—all in one place.Related Links:Adult Material Online: Risks & Prevention for Children & Pre-Teenshttps://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ep-176-adult-material-online-risks-prevention-for-children/id1565976964?i=1000666070786No Time for Judgment: Talking to Teens About Pornographyhttps://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ep-177-no-time-for-judgment-talking-to-teens-about/id1565976964?i=1000666857225 Get your FREE copy of 12 Key Coaching Tools for Parents at https://impactparents.com/gift.Read the full blog here:https://impactparents.com/roblox-safety-tips-for-parents-new-parental-controlsConnect with Impact Parents:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/impactparentsFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/ImpactParentsLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/impactparentsSponsorsTime Timer – Because When Time is Visible, It's ManageableKids with ADHD often struggle to visualize time, making it harder to plan ahead, transition between tasks, or remember important events. Time Timer turns time into something they can see—supporting the brain's ability to build routines and recall meaningful moments.Visit timetimer.com/ip and use code IP25 for 5% off your order.

In episode #376 of The Hormone Puzzle Podcast, our guest Holly Leever, talks about The Use of Acupuncture for Menstrual Cycle Issues - PMS, Period Pain, Irregular Cycles. More about Holly: Holly is a Fertility Awareness Educator, licensed Acupuncturist, and Herbalist whose passion for women's health stems from her personal experience with cycle and fertility challenges. After recovering from anorexia, fertility awareness helped her reconnect with her body and has since supported her through natural pregnancy prevention, conception, and postpartum. In 2014, she founded Rosebud Wellness to help women optimize fertility and hormone balance through holistic care. She supports clients locally in Ojai, California, and virtually worldwide. When she's not supporting women on their wellness journeys, Holly enjoys spending time with her daughter, practicing yoga, and connecting with nature. She also hosts The Fertile Womb podcast, offering empowering education on fertility awareness and holistic reproductive health. Thank you for listening! This episode is made possible by Puzzle Brew's Fertility Tea: https://hormonepuzzlesociety.com/fertility-tea Follow Holly on Instagram: @‌rosebud_wellness Get a FREE 35-minute Training on Cycle Charting for Conception Success HERE. Follow Dr. Kela on Instagram: @‌kela_healthcoach Get your FREE Fertility Meal Plan: https://hormonepuzzlesociety.com/ FTC Affiliate Disclaimer: The disclosure that follows is intended to fully comply with the Federal Trade Commission's policy of the United States that requires to be transparent about any and all affiliate relations the Company may have on this show. You should assume that some of the product mentions and discount codes given are "affiliate links", a link with a special tracking code This means that if you use one of these codes and purchase the item, the Company may receive an affiliate commission. This is a legitimate way to monetize and pay for the operation of the Website, podcast, and operations and the Company gladly reveals its affiliate relationships to you. The price of the item is the same whether it is an affiliate link or not. Regardless, the Company only recommends products or services the Company believes will add value to its users. The Hormone Puzzle Society and Dr. Kela will receive up to 30% affiliate commission depending on the product that is sponsored on the show. For sponsorship opportunities, email HPS Media at media@hormonepuzzlesociety.com

On May 7, 2025, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of the Federal Trade Commission’s lawsuit challenging Microsoft's $69 billion purchase of “Call of Duty” maker Activision Blizzard, affirming the lower judge's order finding that the FTC was not entitled to a preliminary injunction blocking the deal, which closed in 2023. Hear from former agency officials and amici filers for the Business Roundtable, Communications Workers of America, and TechFreedom as they discuss the various views presented in the briefing and the ramifications of this decision on future merger enforcement at the Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice.Featuring:Allen P. Grunes, Shareholder, Brownstein Hyatt Farber SchreckHon. Maureen Ohlhausen, Partner, Antitrust and Competition, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & RosatiRahul Rao, Antitrust Partner, White & CaseBilal Sayyed, Senior Competition Counsel, TechFreedom Moderator: Lawrence J. Spiwak, President, Phoenix Center for Advanced Legal and Economic Public Policy Studies--To register, click the link above.

As I delve into the intricacies of Project 2025, a sense of unease settles in, akin to watching a seismic shift in the foundations of American governance. This initiative, spearheaded by conservative organizations, aims to reshape the federal government in ways that are both profound and troubling.At its core, Project 2025 is rooted in the unitary executive theory, an expansive interpretation of presidential power that seeks to centralize control over the government in the White House. Kevin Roberts, a key proponent, succinctly captures this vision: "all federal employees should answer to the president."[4]One of the most striking aspects of Project 2025 is its plan to dismantle the independence of various federal agencies. Agencies like the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and the Federal Election Commission (FEC), which have historically operated with a degree of autonomy to ensure they are not swayed by political whims, are now in the crosshairs. These agencies, designed to be quasi-legislative or quasi-judicial bodies, are protected by Supreme Court precedents such as *Humphrey's Executor v. United States*, which shields their commissioners from removal except "for cause." However, Project 2025 seeks to overrule this precedent, granting the president the power to remove these commissioners at will if they do not align with the president's agenda[5].The implications are far-reaching. For instance, the Department of State is slated for a significant overhaul. Kiron Skinner, who authored the State Department chapter of Project 2025, advocates for the dismissal of all leadership roles within the department before January 20, 2025. She intends to replace these positions with ideologically vetted leaders appointed to acting roles that do not require Senate confirmation. Skinner's rationale is stark: she believes most State Department employees are too left-wing and need to be replaced by those more loyal to a conservative president[4].This ideological purge is not limited to the State Department. The plan extends to other federal agencies, with the aim of ensuring that every branch of the executive government is directly answerable to the president. The White House's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) is proposed to play a more intrusive role, reviewing and potentially revising or blocking rules and significant guidance issued by independent agencies. This would further erode the independence of these bodies, aligning them more closely with the president's policies[5].The potential consequences of such reforms are daunting. Experts warn that these changes could destroy the system of checks and balances that has been a cornerstone of American democracy. As the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) notes, the re-election of a president aligned with these policies could have "immense" implications, potentially leading to an "imperial presidency" with almost unlimited power to implement policies without significant oversight[1][5].The broader theme here is the erosion of democratic guardrails. Project 2025 represents a fundamental shift away from the principles of separation of powers and towards a more authoritarian form of governance. This is not merely a theoretical concern; it has real-world implications for workers, consumers, and the general public. For example, the Federal Trade Commission, which plays a crucial role in protecting consumers from unfair business practices, could find its ability to act independently severely curtailed. Similarly, the National Labor Relations Board, which safeguards workers' rights, might see its authority diminished under a president who prioritizes corporate interests over labor rights[5].As I reflect on the scope and ambition of Project 2025, it becomes clear that this initiative is not just about policy reforms; it is about redefining the very fabric of American governance. The project's proponents argue that these changes are necessary to streamline government and ensure efficiency, but critics see it as a power grab that undermines the democratic process.Looking ahead, the next few months will be critical. As the 2024 elections approach, the fate of Project 2025 will likely be tied to the outcome. If a president aligned with these policies is elected, we can expect a swift and decisive push to implement these reforms. The Supreme Court, which has already shown a inclination towards a stronger unitary executive, may play a pivotal role in upholding or challenging these changes[4].In conclusion, Project 2025 is a stark reminder of the ongoing battle for the soul of American democracy. As we navigate these uncharted waters, it is imperative that we remain vigilant and informed, ensuring that the principles of democracy and the rule of law are not sacrificed at the altar of political ideology. The future of American governance hangs in the balance, and the decisions made in the coming months will have lasting impacts on the nation's trajectory.

SUMMARYIn today's Weekly Business News, host Ryan Alford delves into key business topics. He discusses the impact of AI on white-collar jobs, urging professionals to embrace and leverage AI technologies. Ryan highlights LeBron James's new grooming line, "The Shop," as a savvy blend of lifestyle branding and media. He also covers the surge in Bitcoin prices and the booming cryptocurrency mining market, advocating for crypto investments. Lastly, Ryan addresses the FTC's delay in implementing a rule to simplify subscription cancellations, emphasizing the need for consumer-friendly practices.TAKEAWAYSThe impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on white-collar jobs and the need for adaptation.Embracing AI as a tool for career enhancement and creativity.LeBron James's launch of a grooming line called "The Shop" and its connection to lifestyle branding.The surge in Bitcoin prices and its implications for the cryptocurrency market.The growth of the cryptocurrency mining industry and investment opportunities.The Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) delay on rules regarding subscription cancellations.Consumer frustrations with the difficulty of canceling subscriptions.The intersection of technology, business, and consumer rights.The importance of staying informed about current business trends.The blend of serious business discussions with pop culture elements.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Welcome to the Fraudian Slip, the Identity Theft Resource Center's (ITRC) podcast, where we talk about all things identity theft, fraud and scams that impact people and businesses. This month's episode focuses on whether or not the suspected fraud decline is real and if anti-fraud tools are working. After all the Memorial Day cookouts, proms and graduation ceremonies of the past week, you might have missed some news about cybercrimes, including identity theft, fraud and scams. Just before the long holiday weekend, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) released a report that noted the number of reported fraud and cybercrime victims experiencing financial losses had dropped. That's in keeping with a report from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the ITRC's own victim impact report due out in a few weeks. Follow on LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/company/idtheftcenter/ Follow on Twitter: twitter.com/IDTheftCenter

« Il est temps de démanteler Google. » La revendication émane de J. D. Vance : il l'a écrite et postée sur son compte X, le 23 février 2024. Soit quasiment un an avant qu'il ne devienne le vice-président des Etats-Unis et que ne s'ouvre le nouveau procès de la firme américaine.Google fait actuellement l'objet de deux procédures antitrust : accusée d'une part d'avoir maintenu sa position dominante dans la recherche, grâce à un coûteux accord avec Apple, et dans la publicité en ligne. De son côté, Meta se défend, face à un juge d'un tribunal fédéral de Washington, d'avoir écrasé la concurrence en rachetant Instagram en 2012 puis WhatsApp, deux ans plus tard. Dans les prochains mois, Apple et Amazon devront également convaincre la justice américaine qu'ils n'exercent pas de domination écrasante et illégale sur leur secteur économique.Très attendus aux Etats-Unis, ces procès antitrust contre des géants du numérique (Gafam, pour Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon et Microsoft) restent nimbés d'une forte incertitude, Donald Trump ayant la possibilité d'y mettre fin à tout moment. Mais le président américain, qui a pourtant vu tous les géants de la tech défiler lors de sa cérémonie d'investiture, multiplie les signaux contradictoires à leur égard.Comment expliquer que Donald Trump maintienne ces procédures ? Qu'est-ce que la justice américaine reproche précisément aux géants de la tech ? Et risquent-ils d'être démantelés ? Dans cet épisode du podcast « L'Heure du Monde », Alexandre Piquard, journaliste chargé des entreprises de la tech pour le service Economie du Monde, développe les enjeux soulevés par ces procès en cours.Un épisode de Marion Bothorel. Réalisation et musiques : Amandine Robillard. Présentation et suivi éditorial : Jean-Guillaume Santi. Dans cet épisode : lectures d'e-mails envoyés par Mark Zuckerberg en 2012 et cités par la Federal Trade Commission, d'un post de J. D. Vance publié sur le réseau social X le 23 février 2024 et extrait d'un sujet diffusé par Euronews le 8 juillet 2021.Cet épisode a été publié le 28 mai 2025.---Pour soutenir "L'Heure du Monde" et notre rédaction, abonnez-vous sur abopodcast.lemonde.frQue pensez-vous des podcasts du « Monde » ? Donnez votre avis en répondant à cette enquête. Hébergé par Audion. Visitez https://www.audion.fm/fr/privacy-policy pour plus d'informations.

Why should any of us care about monopolies? Lina Khan, the youngest-ever chair of the Federal Trade Commission, joins Preet to discuss the real-world impact of monopoly power, the surprising bipartisan support for antitrust enforcement, and her rapid rise to prominence after publishing a groundbreaking paper on Amazon's business practices during law school. Plus, Preet answers questions about the qualifications to become Surgeon General, Kid Rock's restaurant, and Bruce Springsteen. Join the Insider community to stay informed without the hysteria, fear-mongering, or rage-baiting. Sign up on our website, or find us on Substack. Thank you for supporting our work. Show notes and a transcript of the episode are available on our website.  You can now watch this episode! Head to the Stay Tuned Youtube channel and subscribe. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In episode #374 of The Hormone Puzzle Podcast, our host Dr. Kela Smith, talks about Building Emotional Resilience While TTC – Inside the Fertility Puzzle. At the end of every month on The Hormone Puzzle Podcast, Dr. Kela takes you Inside the Fertility Puzzle with a special solo episode dedicated to key fertility topics. From optimizing hormones and decoding lab results to fostering emotional resilience, these episodes deliver actionable advice and expert insights to support your journey to conception. Designed to equip you with the tools and knowledge needed to navigate your unique fertility challenges, this series is your guide to empowerment and clarity. Tune in and let's work together to solve your fertility puzzle with confidence! More about Dr. Kela: Dr. Kela Smith is a leading Holistic Integrative Fertility & Hormone Doctor, dedicated to supporting women and couples facing fertility challenges. After overcoming her own fertility struggles using the Hormone P.U.Z.Z.L.E Method, it has been her mission to help others solve their infertility puzzles so they can get and stay pregnant, have a healthy happy pregnancy, and easy postpartum. An accomplished author, she also hosts the Solving-Infertility Summit, and Healthy Happy Pregnancy Summit. Dr. Kela's expertise also extends to guiding and inspiring future fertility experts as the lead educator at the Hormone Puzzle Society Educational Institute. Thank you for listening! This episode is made possible by Puzzle Brew's Fertility Tea: https://hormonepuzzlesociety.com/fertility-tea Follow Dr. Kela on Instagram: @‌kela_healthcoach Get your FREE Fertility Meal Plan: https://hormonepuzzlesociety.com/ FTC Affiliate Disclaimer: The disclosure that follows is intended to fully comply with the Federal Trade Commission's policy of the United States that requires to be transparent about any and all affiliate relations the Company may have on this show. You should assume that some of the product mentions and discount codes given are "affiliate links", a link with a special tracking code This means that if you use one of these codes and purchase the item, the Company may receive an affiliate commission. This is a legitimate way to monetize and pay for the operation of the Website, podcast, and operations and the Company gladly reveals its affiliate relationships to you. The price of the item is the same whether it is an affiliate link or not. Regardless, the Company only recommends products or services the Company believes will add value to its users. The Hormone Puzzle Society and Dr. Kela will receive up to 30% affiliate commission depending on the product that is sponsored on the show. For sponsorship opportunities, email HPS Media at media@hormonepuzzlesociety.com

Revenge, the saying goes, is a dish best served cold. And this week, the Trump administration is serving up a veritable buffet. Whether blocking Harvard University from enrolling international students, launching a Federal Trade Commission investigation into Media Matters, or using the long arm of the DOJ to prosecute Democratic elected officials, President Donald Trump's government is mounting a show of force against its perceived opponents. But how does this revenge tour align with what MAGA voters expected from Trump 2.0? Playbook supervising editor Zack Stanton breaks it down with contributing author Adam Wren. Plus, swing-district House Republicans are already seeing the political liabilities that come with voting for the sprawling reconciliation package, and a stunned Washington mourns two Israeli embassy staffers murdered in downtown D.C.

Jonathan Kanter (former DOJ Antitrust) and Martin Gaynor (Carnegie Mellon Professor and former FTC official) join The Capitol Forum to discuss their groundbreaking paper, The Rise of Healthcare Platforms. They explain how companies like UnitedHealth have evolved into sprawling conglomerates—combining insurer, provider, pharmacy, and PBM functions—and why this consolidation threatens both market competition and patient care.

Donald Trump blocks Harvard from enrolling International students to root out anti-Americanism and antisemitism on campus. Harvard has called the move unlawful. A Business body in the United States has been giving reaction to Donald Trump's " big beautiful" bill. It contains tax cuts as well as money for defence spending and funds for his deportation programme.Presenter Rahul Tandon also looks at the U.S. Federal Trade Commission decision to drop a case which attempted to block Microsoft's $69-billion purchase of "Call of Duty" maker Activision Blizzard. It has said the case against the long-closed deal was not in the public interest.

Why should any of us care about monopolies? Lina Khan, the youngest-ever chair of the Federal Trade Commission, joins Preet to discuss the real-world impact of monopoly power, the surprising bipartisan support for antitrust enforcement, and her rapid rise to prominence after publishing a groundbreaking paper on Amazon's business practices during law school. Plus, Preet answers questions about the qualifications to become Surgeon General, Kid Rock's restaurant, and Bruce Springsteen. Join the Insider community to stay informed without the hysteria, fear-mongering, or rage-baiting. Sign up on our website, or find us on Substack. Thank you for supporting our work. Show notes and a transcript of the episode are available on our website.  You can now watch this episode! Head to the Stay Tuned Youtube channel and subscribe. Have a question for Preet? Ask @PreetBharara on BlueSky, or Twitter with the hashtag #AskPreet. Email us at staytuned@cafe.com, or call 833-99-PREET to leave a voicemail. Stay Tuned with Preet is brought to you by CAFE and the Vox Media Podcast Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Business body in the United States gives reaction to Donald Trump's " big beautiful" bill. It contains tax cuts as well as money for defence spending and funds for his deportation programme.The U.S. Federal Trade Commission has dropped a case which attempted to block Microsoft's $69-billion purchase of "Call of Duty" maker Activision Blizzard. It has said the case against the long-closed deal was not in the public interest.Presenter Rahul Tandon examines these stories as well as looking at the fallout from Manchester United's defeat in the Europa League final. He looks at what impact this could have on their future finances.

In episode #373 of The Hormone Puzzle Podcast, our guest Kirsty Smith, talks about How Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals (EDC's) Destroy Your Fertility . More about Kirsty: Kirsty is a Functional Medicine Health Coach specialising in hormone and gut health. She is also the founder of Natural Rays Wellbeing Consultancy. She works with individuals and employers to support them to better understand their hormones and how to work with them so that they can optimise their fertility for consistent energy, better mood, less brain fog, and the enthusiasm to live the life they have worked so hard to create. Thank you for listening! This episode is made possible by Puzzle Brew's Fertility Tea: https://hormonepuzzlesociety.com/fertility-tea Follow Kirsty on Instagram: @‌natural_rays_hormone_harmony Take the 2-min quiz to unlock your menstrual cycle saboteur and be on your way to a symptomless cycle HERE. Follow Dr. Kela on Instagram: @‌kela_healthcoach Get your FREE Fertility Meal Plan: https://hormonepuzzlesociety.com/ FTC Affiliate Disclaimer: The disclosure that follows is intended to fully comply with the Federal Trade Commission's policy of the United States that requires to be transparent about any and all affiliate relations the Company may have on this show. You should assume that some of the product mentions and discount codes given are "affiliate links", a link with a special tracking code This means that if you use one of these codes and purchase the item, the Company may receive an affiliate commission. This is a legitimate way to monetize and pay for the operation of the Website, podcast, and operations and the Company gladly reveals its affiliate relationships to you. The price of the item is the same whether it is an affiliate link or not. Regardless, the Company only recommends products or services the Company believes will add value to its users. The Hormone Puzzle Society and Dr. Kela will receive up to 30% affiliate commission depending on the product that is sponsored on the show. For sponsorship opportunities, email HPS Media at media@hormonepuzzlesociety.com

We spend the whole program with Nadav Wieman, a former IDF sniper and now executive director of Breaking the Silence, an organization of Israeli veterans who expose the reality of life in the Occupied Territories and work to end the occupation. He and Ralph discuss Nadav's experience in the IDF and his work trying to turn the tide of sentiment in Israel against the ongoing genocide.Nadav Weiman is the executive director of Breaking the Silence, an organization of Israeli veterans who expose the reality of life in the Occupied Territories and work to end the occupation. Mr. Weiman served in a sniper's team in the special forces of the Nahal brigade and attained the rank of staff sergeant. He also worked as a history and literature teacher and was the legal guardian at a home for underprivileged teens in Tel Aviv.Now the soldiers that gave us testimonies told us that they came to the commander and said, "Okay, this is too much." And the commander said, "Listen, we lost too many dogs in the dog unit, so we're using Palestinians as human shields."Nadav Wieman former IDF sniper and Executive Director of Breaking the SilenceWhen the first soldier came to us in December 2023 and told us about using Palestinians as human shields, I thought it was an isolated event. But then another soldier came and another soldier and another soldier, and then we understood. It's a new protocol. It's called the Mosquito Protocol. “Mosquito,” is a code name on the radio saying, take a Palestinian man and put him in an IDF uniform, and in some cases a GoPro camera on his chest. And then soldiers were ordered to send them into tunnels to sweep the tunnels or into homes to sweep the homes.Nadav WiemanYou have another protocol called “Wasp”. The Wasp Protocol is Palestinians sweeping tunnels, but this time our Palestinians working with the IDF were brought from the West Bank. And they were told that they will get something from us, a permit or something like that.Nadav WiemanNews 5/16/251. Trump has abruptly ended the American war on the Houthi militia in Yemen, saying in a press conference, “You know, we hit them very hard. They had a great capacity to withstand punishment…You can say there's a lot of bravery there…It was amazing what they took. But we honor their commitment and their word,” per Prem Thakker. Behind the scenes, a New York Times report exposes the jaw-dropping waste that precipitated the U.S. backing down from this campaign. Some highlights include that the Houthis almost shot down an F-35 fighter jet – which run about $100 million apiece – that this campaign used so many precision munitions that Pentagon contingency planners grew “increasingly concerned about overall stocks,” and U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM)'s reported metric of success was “bombs dropped,” evoking the failed campaigns in Vietnam, per the Stimson Center's Emma Ashburn. All in all, this campaign cost $1 billion over the course of just 30 days.2. In more stunning news of Pentagon profligacy, CNN reported on May 6th that a SECOND F/A-18 Super Hornet fighter jet fell off the USS Harry S. Truman aircraft carrier into the Red Sea following the first lost jet by just over a week. Each of these planes bear a price tag of over $60 million, according to the Navy, just in case you were wondering where your tax dollars are going now that Trump and Musk have slashed the budget of anything resembling a social program.3. In more foreign policy news, Edan Alexander, the last remaining U.S. citizen hostage in Gaza, has been released. Alexander was born and raised in New Jersey, then moved to Israel to serve in the IDF after graduating high school in 2022. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu was quoted saying “[Alexander's release] was achieved thanks to our military pressure and the political pressure exerted by President Trump. This is a winning combination.” Meanwhile Trump posted on Truth Social “Edan Alexander, American hostage thought dead, to be released by Hamas. Great news!” Despite this heraldry however, MSN reports Alexander “rebuffed” a personal meeting with Netanyahu. Counter Currents adds “In a video released by Hamas…last November, Alexander harshly criticized Netanyahu…[accusing] the Israeli leader of abandoning the…[hostages]…and urged Trump…to secure his release.” In this video, Alexander told Netanyahu, “You neglected us…We die a thousand times every day, and no one feels our pain.”4. In a similar vein, the Jerusalem Post reports, “The Trump administration's Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, criticized Israel in a meeting with hostage families…[saying] ‘We want to bring the hostages home, but Israel is not willing to end the war.'” Witkoff added “Israel is prolonging [the war] despite the fact that we don't see where else we can go and that an agreement must be reached.” Further, the New Arab reports “The Trump administration has…dropped its longstanding demand for Hamas to disarm as a precondition for a Gaza ceasefire.” This willingness to call a spade a spade regarding Israel's intractable opposition to peace, or even a lasting ceasefire – coupled with a seemingly genuine willingness to realistically approach peace talks – has been a marked point of departure compared to the Biden administration, which “Never Pressured Israel for Ceasefire,” according to Israeli Ambassador Yechiel Leiter, as reported in Drop Site News.5. Turning to some positive consumer protection news, “Ticketmaster will now show how much you'll pay for tickets — fees included — before checkout,” the Verge reports. This “All In Prices” initiative is an effort by the company to comply with the Federal Trade Commission's ban on junk fees. The FTC cracked down on Ticketmaster following the 2022 Taylor Swift Eras Tour “ticketing catastrophe.” In addition to the FTC, the Department of Justice sued Ticketmaster and its parent company, Live Nation in 2024, accusing them of “driving up prices as a result of their alleged monopoly,” while the House passed the TICKET Act in 2024, a law that would “force ticket sellers to show full prices upfront.” The Senate is considering that bill now.6. Meanwhile, Igloo has voluntarily widened a recall of their coolers, related to “possible amputation and crushing hazards,” per ABC. The Consumer Product Safety Commission issued a recall notice for a little over a million Igloo 90 Qt. Flip & Tow Rolling Coolers back in February, on the basis that “the tow handle can pinch consumers' fingertips against the cooler,” risking “fingertip amputation.” ABC reports this recall now includes “130,000 additional coolers, as well as approximately 20,000 in Canada and 5,900 in Mexico.” According to the CPSC, “since the recall was initiated in February, Igloo has received 78 reports of injuries involving the recalled coolers, including 26 reports of bone fractures, fingertip amputations or lacerations.”7. The first American Pope, Leo XIV, addressed the College of Cardinals on Sunday, in part explaining his decision to take that particular name. According to Business Insider, AI played a major role. The Pope told the college, “I chose to take the name Leo XIV…mainly because Pope Leo XIII in his historic Encyclical 'Rerum Novarum' addressed the social question in the context of the first great industrial revolution…In our own day, the Church offers to everyone the treasury of her social teaching in response to another industrial revolution and to developments in the field of artificial intelligence that pose new challenges for the defence of human dignity, justice, and labor.” In a January 2024 message, Pope Francis said “At this time in history, which risks becoming rich in technology and poor in humanity, our reflections must begin with the human heart.”8. Turning to domestic politics, 25-year-old Democratic National Committee Vice Chair David Hogg is fighting an uphill battle to remain in his post. The activist and survivor of the Marjory Stoneman Douglas school shooting has been a target of the party hierarchs since he refused to disassociate himself from the mission of the organization he cofounded – Leaders We Deserve – which seeks to primary “asleep-at-the-wheel” Democrats. On May 10th, POLITICO reported that Hogg sought a compromise with the party, vowing that he would erect a “internal firewall,” barring him from “accessing any internal DNC information about congressional and state legislative races as long as he was supporting challengers.” The DNC flatly refused. Instead, it would seem they are trying to oust Hogg by voiding his election, claiming it violated “fairness and gender diversity,” rules, per Semafor. On May 13th, the DNC's Credentials Committee voted to nullify the results of the February election, the Hill reports. According to POLITICO, the full DNC could “opt to hold a virtual vote ahead of the meeting later this summer. Otherwise it will take the issue up during its August meeting.”9. In Newark, New Jersey, Mayor Ras Baraka was “arrested and detained by masked federal immigration police Friday when he joined three Democratic congressmembers set to tour a newly reopened 1,000-bed [ICE] jail run by GEO Group,” Democracy Now! reports. This is the latest installment in the power struggle between federal agents and local officials over immigration, an escalation from the arrest of Judge Hannah Dugan in April. Dugan herself was indicted this week for supposedly “obstructing or impeding a proceeding,” per Wisconsin Public Radio. Alina Habba, U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey, tweeted, “The Mayor of Newark…committed trespass…He has willingly chosen to disregard the law…He has been taken into custody.” She added in all caps, “NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW.” Chilling words.10. Finally, we pay tribute to Uruguayan revolutionary, anti-dictatorship rebel and former president José “Pepe” Mujica, who passed away this week following a protracted battle with esophageal cancer. Mujica was celebrated throughout the world during his tenure as president for his humble lifestyle; He was called ‘the world's poorest president' famously driving a beat-up old VW bug and donating the bulk of his salary. In 2013, he delivered a bombshell speech at the United Nations in wherein he decried capitalism and the environmental destruction it has wrought. Pulitzer Prize-winning author and historian Greg Grandin eulogized Mujica, writing “He was a member of the insurgent, armed Tupamarus, and served 14 years in prison, much of it in solitary, subject to extreme torture techniques taught by US advisors… Upon his release, he helped build the Frente Amplio into one of the most successful left coalitions. He radiated humility and humanity but he knew that power was meant to be taken and used, and behind his smile was steel. He was 89.”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

This Day in Legal History: SCOTUS Upholds CFPB Funding StructureOn May 16, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court delivered a major ruling in Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Community Financial Services Association of America, Ltd., upholding the constitutionality of the CFPB's funding structure. In a 7–2 decision, the Court held that the agency's funding—drawn from the Federal Reserve and not subject to annual congressional appropriations—does not violate the Appropriations Clause of the Constitution. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice Roberts emphasized that the Constitution permits flexibility in funding mechanisms so long as they are authorized by law and subject to congressional oversight in some form. The ruling affirmed the CFPB's continued ability to regulate financial institutions and enforce consumer protection laws independent of Congress's annual budget process.The decision marked a significant moment in the Court's treatment of agency independence, particularly at a time of renewed scrutiny of the administrative state. It was widely seen as a victory for supporters of the CFPB, which had faced ongoing legal and political challenges since its creation under the Dodd-Frank Act in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis. However, the case also highlighted the growing skepticism among certain justices—and lawmakers—about the breadth of agency power and accountability.Just one year later, the CFPB's future is again uncertain. With a new administration openly hostile to the agency and legislative efforts underway to curtail its authority or restructure its funding, the May 2024 decision is already being treated as legal history. Though the Court upheld the agency's funding, the political battle over the CFPB continues, casting doubt on how long the victory will stand.Intel appeared before the EU General Court to contest a €376 million ($421.4 million) antitrust fine reimposed by the European Commission. The fine stems from the Commission's 2009 decision, which originally imposed a record €1.06 billion penalty for Intel's actions that allegedly excluded rival AMD from the market. Though the General Court overturned the majority of that decision in 2022, it upheld a portion related to so-called “naked restrictions”—payments Intel made to HP, Acer, and Lenovo to delay or halt rival products between 2002 and 2006.Intel's lawyer argued that the violations were narrow and tactical, not part of a broader strategy to shut out competitors from the x86 chip market. He claimed the Commission failed to weigh the limited impact of those actions and imposed a disproportionate and unfair fine. The Commission countered that the fine followed established guidelines and represented only a small fraction of Intel's turnover, asserting that the penalty was appropriate for the seriousness of the conduct.Both sides asked the court to settle the matter by determining the appropriate fine amount. A decision is expected in the coming months.Intel spars with EU regulators over $421.4 million antitrust fine | ReutersA federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., heard arguments in a case that could redefine the U.S. president's authority to remove officials from independent federal agencies. The Trump administration is appealing two lower court decisions that reinstated Democratic officials Cathy Harris to the Merit Systems Protection Board and Gwynne Wilcox to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) after President Trump removed them without cause earlier this year. Both boards, which handle labor disputes and federal employee appeals, were left effectively inoperable due to vacancies, with thousands of pending cases.The administration argues that statutory protections limiting removals to “cause” violate the president's constitutional authority to control the executive branch. Trump's legal team claims that these agencies exercise substantial executive power and therefore should not be shielded from presidential oversight. The case may hinge on Humphrey's Executor, a 1935 Supreme Court decision that upheld removal protections for members of independent commissions like the Federal Trade Commission. Conservative judges—including two Trump appointees on the panel—have recently questioned the decision's reach.If the D.C. Circuit sides with Trump, it could pave the way for a broader dismantling of long-standing removal protections across federal agencies. Legal scholars warn that such a move could give the president far-reaching power to reshape regulatory policy by purging officials who don't align with the administration's agenda. The case could ultimately reach the U.S. Supreme Court and lead to a narrowing or overruling of Humphrey's Executor.US court to weigh Trump's powers to fire Democrats from federal agencies | ReutersData obtained through a public records request reveals that recent buyouts at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) have significantly reduced staffing in key divisions. The legal, investment management, and trading and markets offices experienced workforce cuts ranging from 15% to 19% over just a few weeks. Regional offices in Chicago and Denver also saw nearly 20% reductions. Overall, the SEC's full-time staff has shrunk by 12% since January, with agency chair Paul Atkins recently noting a 15% decrease since October.These losses come amid ongoing hiring freezes and budget restrictions. While Atkins suggested that some roles may be refilled, he did not dismiss the possibility of more cuts. In parallel, more than 20 SEC employees have been reassigned to focus on contract reviews, part of a broader cost-cutting initiative coordinated with the Department of Government Efficiency (DGE), led by Elon Musk. DGE has expanded its presence at SEC headquarters and is reviewing agency operations, particularly IT services, to identify further savings.The SEC declined to comment on the staffing reductions, though a spokesperson confirmed it is working with DGE to improve efficiency. The full implications of these staffing losses for the agency's regulatory functions remain unclear.SEC buyouts hit legal, investment offices hardest, data shows | ReutersMeta Platforms asked a federal judge to dismiss the Federal Trade Commission's antitrust lawsuit, arguing the agency failed to prove that the company holds an illegal monopoly in social media. The case, which centers on Meta's acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp, claims these deals were aimed at neutralizing potential rivals and maintaining dominance in the market for apps used to share personal updates. The FTC wants to unwind those acquisitions, made more than a decade ago.Meta contends the FTC's case falls short of demonstrating that WhatsApp and Instagram posed meaningful competitive threats at the time of acquisition. The company pointed to internal evidence suggesting WhatsApp had no ambitions to become a social media platform and that Instagram actually thrived post-acquisition. Meta also argued the FTC has not clearly defined the relevant market, especially given competition from platforms like TikTok, YouTube, Reddit, and X (formerly Twitter), which Meta says all compete for user attention.The company maintains that its products face constant pressure to evolve in response to competitors. If the judge denies Meta's request to end the case now, the trial will continue through June with closing arguments and final briefs expected afterward. A ruling that Meta holds an illegal monopoly would trigger a second trial focused on potential remedies.Meta asks judge to rule that FTC failed to prove its monopoly case | ReutersThis week's closing theme is the second movement of Gustav Mahler's Symphony No. 1, titled “Kräftig bewegt, doch nicht zu schnell. Recht gemächlich”, which translates roughly to “Strongly moving, but not too fast. Quite leisurely.” Composed in the late 1880s and premiered in 1889, Mahler's First Symphony marked his audacious entry into the world of symphonic writing. At once expansive and deeply personal, the work fuses Romantic tradition with the beginnings of Mahler's own, modern voice.The second movement—our focus this week—is a rustic Ländler, an Austrian folk dance form, reimagined with orchestral power and emotional complexity. Mahler, who was born in 1860 in what is now the Czech Republic, grew up surrounded by folk tunes and military marches, and these influences saturate this section of the symphony. It opens with swagger and energy, driven by bold rhythms and a sense of physicality, before softening into a slower trio section that offers brief lyrical repose.Though the movement has a lively surface, its contrasting moods reflect Mahler's signature ability to intertwine the playful and the profound. His orchestration here is vivid but never ornamental—every detail serves a dramatic or emotional purpose. Mahler's symphonies often contemplate mortality, memory, and transcendence, but this movement reminds us that he could also be joyful, ironic, and grounded in the sounds of real life.By the time of his death in 1911, Mahler had transformed the symphony into a vessel for existential expression, bridging the 19th and 20th centuries. This movement from his First hints at all that was to come. As our week closes, we leave you with this music—bold, earthy, and unmistakably Mahler.Without further ado, Gustav Mahler's Symphony No. 1, titled “Kräftig bewegt, doch nicht zu schnell. Recht gemächlich.” 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

Lina Khan recently concluded her term as one of the Biden administration's most controversial leaders. Her tenure as chair of the Federal Trade Commission raised the profile of the relatively obscure antitrust agency charged with protecting competition. Her anti-monopoly outlook and more aggressive enforcement strategies, particularly toward Big Tech market power and protecting workers, earned the ire of the business community and the dedicated vitriol of the Wall Street Journal editorial board.Khan began her term as the youngest-ever appointee of the FTC. She initially rose to prominence for her 2017 Yale Law Journal article, “Amazon's Antitrust Paradox,” which went viral among the antitrust community for its argument that scholars and regulators must look beyond prices to understand what constitutes a harm from a lack of competition, especially in today's digital economy where many services are nominally provided for free to consumers. Fresh out of law school, Khan appeared on a Capitalisn't episode in our first season and wrote for our sister publication at the Stigler Center, ProMarket, as far back as 2018. She also delivered two keynote addresses at the Stigler Center's annual Antitrust and Competition Conferences while FTC chair.On this episode, Khan returns to Capitalisn't to reflect on her tenure, her vision of capitalism, and how her approach to enforcing existing laws with new thinking may have impacted the everyday lives of Americans. How does she respond to her critics, who include major Democratic business leaders? How does she view the new Trump administration, which is continuing many of her transformative policies, including revised merger guidelines and major lawsuits? As a senator, Vice President JD Vance said she was “one of the few people in the Biden administration actually doing a pretty good job.” Reflecting on her work, Khan also touches upon how conflicts of interest among corporate lawyers and consultants, former bureaucrats, and academics distort policymaking, court rulings, and market outcomes. Finally, she highlights the antitrust issues to pay attention to moving forward, such as algorithmic collusion.Show Notes: Also, check out ProMarket's series on the future of the Neo-Brandesian movement, of which Lina Khan is an emblematic figure.

Three Visions of Where Democrats Went Wrong | The Ezra Klein Show - Zephyr Teachout and Saikat ChakrabartiREALIGNMENT NEWSLETTER: https://therealignment.substack.com/PURCHASE BOOKS AT OUR BOOKSHOP: https://bookshop.org/shop/therealignmentEmail Us: realignmentpod@gmail.comElizabeth Wilkins, President and CEO of the Roosevelt Institute and alumn of the White House and Lina Khan's Federal Trade Commission, joins The Realignment. Marshall and Elizabeth discuss why the left has reacted critically to the abundance agenda, her agreement with Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson's emphasis on enhancing state capacity, and how to restore faith in government. They explore the tension between technocratic fixes and populist demands, the need for effective political storytelling, and why "small," tangible wins like banning junk fees and non-competes matter as much as big legislative wins.  

In episode #372 of The Hormone Puzzle Podcast, our guest Dr. Brad Montagne, talks about Thyroid - The Forgotten Link to Hormones, Cycles, and Pregnancy. More about Dr. Brad: Dr. Brad Montagne battled with his own chronic illness as a young child. He began managing his own illness by making his own diet and lifestyle changes when he was young. In adult life He conquered his own cases of chronic illness, Candida, Fungal Infections, Leaky Gut, Lyme disease, Babesia and more with the tools he presents here. Dr Brad has been a researcher and a pioneer in Functional Medicine Doctor for 4 decades. He is known for having one of the highest rates of helping restore health to people with the worst cases – even after “expert” care has failed. Coined “the most thorough doctor” by many, Dr. Brad now does primarily distance care. Thank you for listening! This episode is made possible by Puzzle Brew's Fertility Tea: https://hormonepuzzlesociety.com/fertility-tea Follow Dr. Brad on Instagram: @‌healthfullyu Follow Dr. Kela on Instagram: @‌kela_healthcoach Get your FREE Fertility Meal Plan: https://hormonepuzzlesociety.com/ FTC Affiliate Disclaimer: The disclosure that follows is intended to fully comply with the Federal Trade Commission's policy of the United States that requires to be transparent about any and all affiliate relations the Company may have on this show. You should assume that some of the product mentions and discount codes given are "affiliate links", a link with a special tracking code This means that if you use one of these codes and purchase the item, the Company may receive an affiliate commission. This is a legitimate way to monetize and pay for the operation of the Website, podcast, and operations and the Company gladly reveals its affiliate relationships to you. The price of the item is the same whether it is an affiliate link or not. Regardless, the Company only recommends products or services the Company believes will add value to its users. The Hormone Puzzle Society and Dr. Kela will receive up to 30% affiliate commission depending on the product that is sponsored on the show. For sponsorship opportunities, email HPS Media at media@hormonepuzzlesociety.com

Today's podcast features Stephen Calkins, a law professor at Wayne State University in Detroit and former General Counsel of the Federal Trade Commission (the “FTC”). President Trump recently fired, without good cause, the two Democratic members of the FTC, leaving only two Republican members as commissioners. He did this even though the FTC Act provides that a commissioner may be fired by the President only for good cause and that the commission is to be governed by a bi-partisan 5-member commission This is the third time in the past few weeks that Trump has fired without good cause democratic members of other federal agencies; the other two being the National Labor Relations Board (The “NLRB”) and the Merit Selection Protection Board (The “MSPB”). The statutes governing those two agencies, like the FTC Act, allow the President to fire a member of the governing board for good cause only. The fired members of all three agencies initiated lawsuits in federal district court for the District of Columbia, seeking mandatory preliminary injunctions requiring those agencies to reinstate them with back pay. We discuss the status of the two lawsuits and how the outcome will turn on whether the Supreme Court will apply or overrule a 1935 Supreme Court opinion in Humphrey's Executor, which held that the provision in the Constitution allowing the President to fire an FTC commissioner for good cause only did not run afoul of the separation of powers clause in the Constitution. Conversely, the Supreme Court will need to determine whether the Supreme Court opinion in Seila Law, LLC V. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau should apply to these two new cases. In Seila Law, the Supreme Court held on Constitutional grounds, that the President could fire without good cause the sole director of the CFPB even though the Dodd-Frank Act allowed the President to fire the sole director of the CFPB for good cause only. Until this gets resolved, the FTC will be governed only by two Republican commissioners who will constitute a quorum for purposes of conducting official business. Professor Calkins explains how a Supreme Court ruling in these two new cases upholding Trump's firing of the Democratic members of the agencies could enable the President to fire without good cause members of other multiple-member agencies, like the Federal Reserve Board. We then discuss the status of the following four final controversial FTC rule, some of which were challenged in court: the CARS Rule, the Click-to-Cancel Rule, the Junk Fee Rule, and the Non-Compete Rule. We also discuss the impact of President Trump's Executive Order requiring that all federal agencies, including so-called “independent” agencies, must obtain approval from the White House before taking any significant actions, like proposing or finalizing rules. Then, we discuss the status of enforcement investigations and litigation and whether any of them have been voluntarily dismissed with prejudice by the FTC under Trump 2.0, whether any new enforcement lawsuits been filed, and what they involve. We discuss our expectation that the FTC will be a lot less active in the consumer protection enforcement area during Trump 2.0. We then discuss the impact on staffing because of DOGE-imposed reductions-in-force. Finally, we touch upon the status of pending antitrust enforcement lawsuits. Alan Kaplinsky, former practice group leader for 25 years of the Consumer Financial Services Group and now Senior Counsel, hosts the discussion.

In March, Alvaro Bedoya and Rebecca Kelly Slaughter, two Democratic members of the Federal Trade Commission, were fired from their jobs by the Trump administration. They say this was done illegally and are challenging their dismissals. Michela talks with Bedoya about what happened, and why he thinks businesses should be concerned. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - For further reading:Trump's move to fire us is a terrible warning for the US economyTwo Democrats on US antitrust panel say they were ‘illegally fired' by Donald TrumpCould Donald Trump fire Federal Reserve chair Jay Powell? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Follow Alvaro Bedoya on X (@BedoyaFTC). Michela Tindera is on X (@mtindera07) and Bluesky (@mtindera.ft.com), or follow her on LinkedIn for updates about the show and more. Read a transcript of this episode on FT.com Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Would you strap a device on your wrist that listens to your every word every day so it can send you relevant reminders and summarize your conversations? WSJ senior personal tech columnist Joanna Stern did just that and shares her insights about the usefulness of such devices and the legal questions around their use. Plus: We get an update on the courtroom showdown between Meta and the Federal Trade Commission over whether the social-media company is operating a monopoly. WSJ reporter Dave Michaels brings us up to speed. Sign up for the WSJ's free Technology newsletter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Ralph welcomes back Erica Payne, founder of Patriotic Millionaires, to update us on that group's latest efforts to save American democracy by lobbying to raise wages for workers and tax the rich. Plus, according to our resident constitutional expert, Bruce Fein, the count of Trump's impeachable offenses is now up to twenty-two and rising faster than a Space X rocket.Erica Payne is the founder and president of Patriotic Millionaires, an organization of high-net-worth individuals that aims to restructure America's political economy to suit the needs of all Americans. Their work includes advocating for a highly progressive tax system, a livable minimum wage, and equal political representation for all citizens. She is the co-author, with Morris Pearl, of Tax the Rich: How Lies, Loopholes and Lobbyists Make the Rich Even Richer.What we saw on January 20th, I believe, was the result of a global oligarchical coup who just took the Queen on the chessboard. When you've got three people whose combined worth is around a trillion dollars standing behind who is an unethical at least, criminal at worst billionaire president, Houston, we have a problem here. And the problem is not actually Donald Trump. The problem is the preconditions that led to the rise of a vulnerability to an authoritarian leader and an oligarchy. And that vulnerability was brought about by the actions of both parties over decades.Erica PayneIf you ran a business, Ralph, would you ever fire your accounts receivable department? No. It would be the last department you would cut. So then it says he's either stupid because that's what he's cutting, which I think is probably inaccurate. So if he's not stupid, then why is he doing it? And he's doing it for the same reason that lawmakers have hacked at the IRS budget forever—they don't want their donors to get taxed. They don't want their donors to be audited. And so they cut the cops. So all these folks who are griping about black Americans calling to defund the police are actually defunding the police that is keeping them in line and keeping them honest.Erica PayneAt a divided moment in America, I think we can agree that the federal government shouldn't tax people into poverty, and (to the extent necessary) rich people should pick up the difference.Erica PayneBruce Fein is a Constitutional scholar and an expert on international law. Mr. Fein was Associate Deputy Attorney General under Ronald Reagan and he is the author of Constitutional Peril: The Life and Death Struggle for Our Constitution and Democracy, and American Empire: Before the Fall.I start out with the fundamental idea of due process—you simply cannot deprive someone of liberty without giving them an opportunity to explain or to refute what allegations the government has made. And the reason why I start out with that, Ralph, is we've had an experiment in World War II with what happens when you have no due process. We did that with 120,000 Japanese Americans. No, we just said that they're all likely to commit espionage or sabotage, got to put them in concentration camps. We made 120,000 errors (and later apologized for it in 1988). So there's a reason due process is not simply an academic concept. It's essential to preventing these kinds of egregious instances of injustice from happening.Bruce FeinThe Democrats and a lot of liberal economists are not keeping up with the horror show that's going on. They don't use words like cruel and vicious. They don't turn Trump's words like deranged, crazed, corrupt on him. They're still using words like authoritarian practices, or problematic, or distressing, or disconcerting, or concerning. They're not catching up with the horror show here. That's why Trump continues to have a soliloquy. The Democratic Party is now having gatherings to see how are they going to collectively deal with Trump? How does a bank deal with a bank robber? They let the bank robber rob the bank and flee with the gold while they deliberate how they're going to deal with a bank robber they see coming into the bank?Ralph NaderNews 5/2/251. At the eleventh hour, Representative Jim Jordan – Chair of the House Judiciary Committee – pulled his measure to strip the Federal Trade Commission of its antitrust enforcement powers and consolidate those within the Justice Department, Reuters reports. “The House panel…had included the proposal in its budget package on Monday. During a hearing on the package…the committee passed an amendment that would remove the measure.” Trump's FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson opposed Jordan's move and intervened with the White House. As Reuters notes, “The proposal mirrored the One Agency Act, a Republican bill that has gotten support from Elon Musk…[which] would effectively repeal the FTC's...authority to sue companies over unfair methods of competition, which the agency is using in cases against pharmacy benefit managers, Amazon…and John Deere.” In short, the FTC's antitrust powers survive today, but there is no guarantee about tomorrow.2. Yet, while avoiding the worst possible outcome on the corporate crime front, the Trump administration is still hard at work going soft on corporate crooks. Public Citizen's Rick Claypool reports “Two Wells Fargo execs had their fines reduced by 90% (related to the bank's accounting scandal) by Trump's [Office of the Comptroller of the Currency].” Claypool links to a piece in Radical Compliance, which explains that “David Julian, former chief auditor at Wells Fargo, saw his fines cut from $7 million to $100,000 [and] Paul McLinko, executive audit director, had his fines cut from $1.5 million to $50,000.” Both Julian and McLinko were part of the senior leadership team at Wells Fargo in the 2010s, when regulators “charged the bank with turning a blind eye to employees opening bank accounts without customer consent to hit sales quotas. That misconduct eventually led to a $3 billion settlement with Wells Fargo in 2020.”3. Lest you think the Democrats are in danger of seriously opposing Trump's policies, the Bulwark reports that House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries is putting the kibosh on the recent spate of Democrats' trips to El Salvador exposing the reality of the CECOT deportation scheme. This report alleges that “Cory Booker and the Hispanic Caucus were planning on going [to El Salvador],” but are no longer. Perhaps worse, Jeffries is not giving clear marching orders to the party rank and file. One Democrat is quoted saying “As a member of a party you need to be disciplined…They say, ‘Get on a plane,' ‘Don't get on a plane'—that's what you do. Nine out ten times you do what they ask. But you can't take that approach if you're not having regular communications… You have to be clear in messaging what the plan is and you have to do that regularly if you want to keep people in line.” This is just another example of Jeffries' weak and indecisive leadership of the caucus.4. Advocates are having more luck resisting the administration's overreach in court. On Wednesday, Mohsen Mahdawi – the Columbia student faced with deportation after being lured into an ICE trap with the false promise of a citizenship test – was freed by a federal judge, POLITICO reports. After the judge ordered his release, Mahdawi told the press “I am saying it clear and loud…To President Trump and his Cabinet: I am not afraid of you.” Mahdawi's ordeal is not over, but he will remain free while his case winds its way through the courts and a previous order blocked the administration from changing venues, meaning the case will proceed in the relatively liberal Second Circuit.5. Mahmoud Khalil also scored a major legal victory this week. The Huffington Post reports that the ICE agents sent to arrest Khalil did not, contrary to their false claims in court, have an arrest warrant. Amy Greer, a lawyer for Khalil, is quoted saying “Today, we now know why [the government] never showed Mahmoud [a] warrant — they didn't have one. This is clearly yet another desperate attempt by the Trump administration to justify its unlawful arrest and detention of human rights defender Mahmoud Khalil, who is now, by the government's own tacit admission, a political prisoner of the United States.” The ACLU, also defending Khalil, has now moved for this case to be dismissed.6. Despite these victories though, the repression of anything pro-Palestine continues. At Yale, Prem Thakker reports hundreds of students protested in advance of a speech by Itamar Ben-Gvir, Israel's radical National Security Minister who has previously been arrested many times for inciting racism and supporting pro-Jewish terrorism in Israel itself. Yet the university responded by “stripp[ing] the school's Students for Justice in Palestine Chapter…of its status as an official student group.” If students cannot even protest Ben-Gvir, what will the colleges regard as legitimate protest of Israel?7. In Yemen, Ryan Grim reports on CounterPoints that the Trump administration has been targeting strikes against the Houthis using data gleaned from amateur Open-Source Intelligence or OSINT accounts on X, formerly Twitter. Unsurprisingly, these are completely inaccurate and have led to disastrous strikes on civilians' homes, incorrectly identifying them as “Houthi bases.” One of these accounts is based in Houston, Texas, and another as far away as the Netherlands.8. According to a new World Bank report, Mexico reduced poverty more than any other Latin American country between 2018 and 2023. Not coincidentally, this lines up almost perfectly with the AMLO years in Mexico, which saw a massive increase in the Mexican minimum wage along with other social rights and protections. These policies are now being taken forward by AMLO's successor Claudia Sheinbaum, whose popularity has now surpassed even that of her predecessor, per Bloomberg.9. In Australia, Virginia Giuffre – the most outspoken accuser of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislane Maxwell – has passed away at the age of 41, the BBC reports. Police concluded that Ms. Giuffre died by suicide and her family released a statement indicating that the “toll of abuse... became unbearable.” Yet, her death was preceded by a bizarre chain of events. On March 31st, the BBC reported that Ms. Giuffre's car collided with a school bus, sending her into renal failure with her doctors saying she had “four days to live.” The Miami Herald also reported “At the time of her death, Giuffre had been in a contentious divorce and child custody battle with her husband, Robert.” The family's statement continued “The death is being investigated by Major Crime detectives; [but] early indication is the death is not suspicious.” One can only hope more details come to light.10. Finally, in a different kind of bizarre story, embattled incumbent New York City Mayor Eric Adams – who has already given up on the Democratic primary and was running for reelection as an independent – will now appear on two new ballot lines “EndAntiSemitism” and “Safe&Affordable,” POLITICO reports. Adams has gone to great lengths to cultivate and maintain his support in the Orthodox Jewish community in New York and is seeking to highlight his strengths and undercut former Governor Andrew Cuomo. Apparently, Adams only needs to secure 3,750 signatures from voters by May 27 for each of these ballot lines, a shockingly low threshold for the largest city in America. These ballot lines will appear without spaces, coming in just under the wire for the city's 15-character limit on ballot lines.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

First, Ralph welcomes Washington Post tech journalist Faiz Siddiqui to discuss his new book "Hubris Maximus: The Shattering of Elon Musk." Then, our resident legal expert Bruce Fein stops by to explain how Elon Musk and DOGE are breaking the law. Finally, David picks up our interview with Ralph about Ralph's new book "Civic Self-Respect."Faiz Siddiqui is a technology journalist who writes for the Washington Post and has covered companies such as Tesla, Uber, and Twitter (now X) for the Business Desk. His reporting has focused on transportation, social media and government transformation, among other issues. He is the author of Hubris Maximus: The Shattering of Elon Musk (excerpted here).Over and over throughout this book, there's this recurring theme of victimhood, or at least Elon feeling like his back is against the wall. And why? For what? He and his fans felt they were doing the right things, and yet they were being scrutinized and punished for it.Faiz SiddiquiIn the wake of many Facebook scandals, many Uber scandals, Tesla was the company to work for. Elon was the person to work for. There was no figure as magnetic, who inspired people in the way that Elon did. So recruiting was a strong suit of that company. And the pitch was: come here and change the world.Faiz SiddiquiI think what this book brings is a healthy dose of reality and skepticism… that so far has been lacking from the overall conversation around Musk. And what I you'll find is (I hope you'll find) that you can identify with some of the folks in the book who were lured in by the promises (or just enamored by the guy and what he might be able to bring to society if his goals were ultimately realized) but then ended up feeling disappointed or feeling like—hey, this guy was not all he was cracked up to be. Even if the goals were noble, even if the ambitions were the right ones, the ends might not have justified the means. And so I want people to find, ideally, that their understanding of one of the most powerful people in society today is enriched.Faiz SiddiquiBruce Fein is a Constitutional scholar and an expert on international law. Mr. Fein was Associate Deputy Attorney General under Ronald Reagan and he is the author of Constitutional Peril: The Life and Death Struggle for Our Constitution and Democracy, and American Empire: Before the Fall.[Elon Musk is] just a walking violation of the federal code.Bruce FeinThere's nowhere to go but up in terms of being a smart consumer. Unfortunately, our Elementary and high schools don't teach consumer skills (they prefer to teach computer skills) and consumer skills result in what is, in effect, a pay raise.Ralph NaderAdam Smith once said many centuries ago that the purpose of production is consumption. And if consumption is informed and feeds back, it can lead to a high-quality economy. It can lead to more integrity to your consumer dollar and to your health and safety. It can lead to less environmental damage. It could lead to stronger regulation of product defects and services that are harmful. It's sort of a bottom-up economic democracy.Ralph NaderComplexity is a tool of power. Complex tax regulations are often blamed on the federal bureaucracy. No, it's the corporate tax lawyers.Ralph NaderNews 4/25/251. On Monday, April 21st, Vatican News announced the death of Pope Francis. This came just one day after Easter Sunday, when Francis met with Vice-President JD Vance. The day prior, Francis had snubbed the VP, sending in his place Cardinal Pietro Parolintoto to “deliver a lecture on compassion,” per the Daily Beast. Pope Francis led the Catholic Church since 2013 and during his tenure sought to move the church in a vastly more progressive direction – preaching against capitalism's destruction of the environment, advocating for abolition of the death penalty and greater acceptance for LGBTQ Catholics within the church, and expanding the reach of the church into non-traditional areas such as Mongolia among many other initiatives. This won him the admiration of many around the world, but also drew the ire of the conservative clergy, particularly in the United States. Francis was the first Jesuit Pope and the first Pope to hail from the New World. Senior churchmen will now assemble to elect a new pope. This conclave is expected to be contentious, with progressives seeking to consolidate Francis' reforms, while the conservatives see an opening to take back the formal organs of the church.2. Instead of death, our next story concerns birth. Noor Abdalla – wife of Mahmoud Khalil, the Palestinian Columbia University student currently being held by ICE in Louisiana – gave birth to their son on Monday. According to a statement by Abdalla, reported by Arya Sundaram of WNYC, ICE denied a request for Khalil to be temporarily released to meet their son, a “purposeful decision by ICE to make [her], Mahmoud, and our son suffer.” Later in this statement, Abdalla writes, “I will continue to fight every day for Mahmoud to come home to us. I know when Mahmoud is freed, he will show our son how to be brave, thoughtful, and compassionate just like his dad.” Khalil's case continues to wind its way through the courts; the result of this case will have significant ramifications for the Trump administration's ability to remove individuals with legal status on the basis of political speech.3. In an encouraging sign, more and more congressional Democrats are getting personally involved in cases of Trump administration overreach on immigration. In addition to Senator Chris Van Hollen's highly-publicized visit to El Salvador, TruthOut reports that Senator Peter Welch met with Mohsen Mahdawi, the Columbia University student entrapped with a false citizenship test, in Vermont. Meanwhile Cape Cod Times reports that on April 22nd, Senator Ed Markey and Representatives Ayanna Pressley and Jim McGovern of Massachusetts – along with Democratic members of the House Troy Carter and Bennie Thompson – traveled to a Louisiana detention facility to demand the release of Rümeysa Öztürk, the Tufts University grad student who was abducted off the street last month by masked ICE agents. This delegation met with Öztürk herself, as well as Mahmoud Khalil. And CBS reports Representatives Robert Garcia, Maxwell Frost, Yassamin Ansari and Maxine Dexter traveled to El Salvador as well, keeping pressure up regarding the Kilmar Garcia case. Still, hundreds of immigrants of varying status have been deported to the ominous and shadowy CECOT prison camp in El Salvador without due process since Trump began this mass deportation campaign.4. In more troubling Congressional news, Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley of Iowa wrote a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel on April 16th calling for investigations into the progressive activist group CodePink as well as the New York City cultural center known as the People's Forum. This letter is almost textbook McCarthyite red-baiting, claiming CodePink and the People's Forum are nothing more than mouthpieces for the Chinese Communist Party, thereby violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act. Beyond the fact that these groups are engaging in nothing more than constitutionally protected political speech, it is clear from the citations within the letter that they are targeting these groups because of their pro-Palestine positions. This is just another escalation in the Orwellian suppression of free-speech critical of the Israel's illegal occupation. Unfortunately, just as with McCarthyism itself, we cannot count on congressional Democrats to go to bat for the free speech rights of the Left.5. In a win for consumers, Bloomberg reports Airbnb announced it will now display the total price of stays – including all fees – to comply with a Federal Trade Commission rule set to go into effect next month. Many worried that the FTC would rescind this rule with the changing of the administration, but for now at least, the Trump FTC seems poised to keep it. This new rule is expected to “nudge hosts to lower their cleaning fees to make rentals more affordable, as the sometimes-exorbitant fees have become a key reason why some customers preferred hotels over Airbnb.”6. Another positive move is that the Trump Department of Justice has proceeded with an anti-trust case against Google's advertising technology, or “adtech.” On April 17th, a judge found Google liable for “willfully acquiring and maintaining monopoly power,” in two markets for online advertising technology, per Reuters. This follows a similar judgment against Google regarding a monopoly on search, which is only amplified by its adoption of AI. Another trial will determine the remedy for this monopoly, which could include Google being forced to sell off aspects of its business. According to this report, “Google has previously explored selling its ad exchange to appease European antitrust regulators.” Senator Amy Klobuchar, former chair of the antitrust subcommittee, called the ruling “a big win for consumers, small businesses, and content creators that will open digital markets to more innovation and lower prices.”7. On the other hand, Public Citizen's Rick Claypool reports, “58 corporations facing federal investigations & enforcement lawsuits collectively gave $50 million to Trump's inaugural fund. Cases against 11 of these corporations have already been dismissed or withdrawn, and 6 have been halted.” More granular information about each of these enforcement actions is available through Public Citizen's Corporate Enforcement Tracker database, but the big picture is clear: If a corporation wants the government off its back, all they have to do is make a handsome contribution. The Trump administration is pay-to-play and open for business.8. In another instance of the administration tying the hands of key federal regulators, the Food and Drug Administration will “End its Routine Food Safety Inspections,” according to the National Public Health Information Coalition. The FDA plans to “shift most…food safety inspections to state and local agencies.” While some food inspections are conducted at the state and local level, public health advocates are raising concerns about “oversight and consistency.” According to CBS, these plans have not been finalized.9. Turning to the very worst part of this administration, NOTUS reports “The DOGE website, the only public accounting of Elon Musk and President Donald Trump's attempts to reduce federal government spending…[has posted]…revisions that suggest DOGE was previously overstating its savings by hundreds of millions of dollars.” These stunning, if not altogether surprising, overestimations are staggering in scale. “On Tuesday [April 15th] alone, DOGE removed around $962 million in previously claimed cuts and altered hundreds of others to boost individual items' purported ‘savings' values.” The incompetence of DOGE has led Musk to reduce the target goal of spending cuts, down from $1 trillion to just $150 billion – a drop in the bucket when it comes to federal spending and certainly not worth the evisceration of Social Security and other programs these cuts have entailed.10. Finally, in more bad news for Elon Musk, Reuters reports the Chinese Ministry of Industry and Information Technology is tightening electric vehicle battery safety standards, specifically to “ensure…batteries won't catch fire or explode.” This is quite a humble regulatory goal. However, this new regulation could spell disaster for Tesla. According to Tesla-fire.com, there have been 232 confirmed cases of Tesla fires and “83 Fatalities Involving a Tesla Car Fire.” If I were a Chinese EV regulator, I would be wary of allowing Tesla vehicles on the roads. But that's just me.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

It's the last Friday in April and it's time for Marketplace Tech Bytes Week in Review. This week, we'll talk about how the Federal Trade Commission is suing Uber over its subscription service.Plus, how the VC world is navigating the uncertainty created by the trade war.But first, a nonprofit pivot is facing some challenges. Open AI, the maker of ChatGPT was founded about a decade ago as a nonprofit research lab. It's now looking to restructure as a for-profit — specifically, a public benefit corporationBut that transformation is facing resistance. About 10 former Open AI employees, along with several Nobel laureates and other experts, have written an open letter asking regulators in California and Delaware to block the change. They argue that nonprofit control is crucial to Open AI's mission, which is to “ensure that artificial general intelligence benefits all of humanity."Marketplace's Stephanie Hughes spoke with Jewel Burks Solomon, managing partner at Collab Capital, about how unusual it is to see this kind of conversion. YouTube Video of Marketplace Tech BytesMore on everything we talked aboutAn Open Letter - Not For Private GainEx-OpenAI workers ask California and Delaware AGs to block for-profit conversion of ChatGPT maker - from the Associated PressOpenAI's Latest Funding Round Comes With a $20 Billion Catch - from the Wall Street JournalFTC Takes Action Against Uber for Deceptive Billing and Cancellation Practices - from the Federal Trade CommissionFTC sues Uber over difficulty of canceling subscriptions, “false” claims - from ArsTechnicaWhite House Considers Slashing China Tariffs to De-Escalate Trade War - from the Wall Street JournalVC manufacturing deals were already declining before tariffs entered the picture - from Pitchbook

It's the last Friday in April and it's time for Marketplace Tech Bytes Week in Review. This week, we'll talk about how the Federal Trade Commission is suing Uber over its subscription service.Plus, how the VC world is navigating the uncertainty created by the trade war.But first, a nonprofit pivot is facing some challenges. Open AI, the maker of ChatGPT was founded about a decade ago as a nonprofit research lab. It's now looking to restructure as a for-profit — specifically, a public benefit corporationBut that transformation is facing resistance. About 10 former Open AI employees, along with several Nobel laureates and other experts, have written an open letter asking regulators in California and Delaware to block the change. They argue that nonprofit control is crucial to Open AI's mission, which is to “ensure that artificial general intelligence benefits all of humanity."Marketplace's Stephanie Hughes spoke with Jewel Burks Solomon, managing partner at Collab Capital, about how unusual it is to see this kind of conversion. YouTube Video of Marketplace Tech BytesMore on everything we talked aboutAn Open Letter - Not For Private GainEx-OpenAI workers ask California and Delaware AGs to block for-profit conversion of ChatGPT maker - from the Associated PressOpenAI's Latest Funding Round Comes With a $20 Billion Catch - from the Wall Street JournalFTC Takes Action Against Uber for Deceptive Billing and Cancellation Practices - from the Federal Trade CommissionFTC sues Uber over difficulty of canceling subscriptions, “false” claims - from ArsTechnicaWhite House Considers Slashing China Tariffs to De-Escalate Trade War - from the Wall Street JournalVC manufacturing deals were already declining before tariffs entered the picture - from Pitchbook

Testimonies began this week in one of the most aggressive cases the government has ever brought against a big tech company. Over the next eight weeks, the Federal Trade Commission will argue that Meta, the company founded by Mark Zuckerberg, should be broken up.Cecilia Kang, who covers technology and regulatory policy, discusses the strange and contentious relationship between Mr. Zuckerberg and President Trump that has led to this moment, and what the case means for them.Guest: Cecilia Kang, a reporter covering technology and regulatory policy for The New York Times.Background reading: At trial, Mark Zuckerberg defended buying Instagram and WhatsApp.Tech C.E.O.s have spent millions courting the president. It has yet to pay off.For more information on today's episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday. Photo: Tom Brenner for The New York Times Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

Tonight, You or someone you know is about to “Download Danger!” According to the Federal Trade Commission, in 2023, one-point-one-four BILLION was lost in Romance Scams! But, hey, you're pretty savvy and you're not even looking for love. You know your way around a keyboard and can sniff out a scammer, right? Guess again… because the scammers we're talking about tonight are using Artificial Intelligence and Crypto Currency to separate you from your cold, hard cash. Lucy discusses her budding but troubling on-line relationship with a man named “Kane”. What Lucy didn't realize is that scammers were using A-I to bring a stolen identity to ‘life' and prey upon Lucy's trusting nature. Thank you to our sponsors: Tax Network USA: CALL 1-800-958-1000 or visit https://TNUSA.com/DRPHIL/  to speak to one of our strategists for FREE today Beam: Visit https://ShopBeam.com/DrPhil/ and use code DRPHIL for up to 40% off. Jase Medical: Go to https://Jase.com/  and enter code PHIL at checkout Preserve Gold: Visit: https://drphilgold.com/   Get a FREE precious metals guide that contains essential information on how to help protect your accounts. Text “DRPHIL” to 50505 to claim this exclusive offer from Preserve Gold today.