Podcasts about first amendment

Voters of Tomorrow Executive Director Santiago Mayer joins Anthony Davis to discuss the grass roots effort to encourage young people to vote, in the face of Trump's false claims of election fraud (unless he wins) and his rampant voter suppression effort ahead of the midterms - only on The Weekend Show.Independent media has never been more important. Please support this channel by subscribing here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkbwLFZhawBqK2b9gW08z3g?sub_confirmation=1 Join this channel with a membership for exclusive early access and bonus content: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkbwLFZhawBqK2b9gW08z3g/join Five Minute News is an Evergreen Podcast, covering politics, inequality, health and climate - delivering independent, unbiased and essential news for the US and across the world. Visit us online at http://www.fiveminute.news Follow us on Bluesky https://bsky.app/profile/fiveminutenews.bsky.social Follow us on Instagram http://instagram.com/fiveminnews Support us on Patreon http://www.patreon.com/fiveminutenews You can subscribe to Five Minute News with your preferred podcast app, ask your smart speaker, or enable Five Minute News as your Amazon Alexa Flash Briefing skill. CONTENT DISCLAIMER The views and opinions expressed on this channel are those of the guests and authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Anthony Davis or Five Minute News LLC. Any content provided by our hosts, guests or authors are of their opinion and are not intended to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, individual or anyone or anything, in line with the First Amendment right to free and protected speech. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Matt and Jason sat down with free speech activist, satirist, and legal warrior Michael Picard, widely known as the creator behind the popular YouTube channel Professional Douche. Emerging from a conservative background before embracing libertarian philosophy through Ron Paul, Picard transformed his worldview into a relentless crusade against state overreach and constitutional violations. Over the last decade, he has become a staple in the liberty movement—flexing his First Amendment rights, recording police misconduct, winning landmark civil rights lawsuits against corrupt law enforcement, and using world-class satire to challenge political dogmatism across the entire political spectrum. The conversation dives deep into the philosophy of satire as a weapon against state authority and the rigid absurdity of the two-party paradigm. From hiding under tables to confront politicians like Matt Gaetz to infiltrating partisan rallies with extreme caricatures of partisan ideologies, the dialogue highlights how satirical mirroring disarms crowds and exposes deep-seated authoritarianism. The discussion reflects on Picard's most legendary encounters, including the infamous 2015 Connecticut State Police incident where officers illegally seized his camera—unaware it was still running—and caught themselves on tape actively plotting to fabricate criminal charges against him. The conversation also explores the impact of citizen journalism, the shield of qualified immunity in the judicial system, the rise of the First Amendment auditing movement, and how police routinely react when citizens stand up for their constitutional rights. In the final portion of the episode, the focus shifts to actionable inspiration for everyday citizens who feel demoralized or intimidated by the expanding police state. Picard shares the origins of his own resilience, crediting his mother's encouragement to speak out, and offers a grounded "white pill" for listeners looking to cultivate their own resolve. Reclaiming freedom does not require grand gestures right away; confidence is built iteratively through taking that very first step. Whether it is holding up a sign, attending a local rally, or simply hitting record on a smartphone, taking simple, practical action is how individuals unlock their inner strength and spark real accountability in their communities. (Length: 1:07:02) Guest Links & Resources: Professional Douche's Links Support The Free Thought Project

In this episode, Stewart Alsop sits down with sdmat (@sdmat123 on Twitter/X) for a wide-ranging conversation that treats the major AI labs—especially Anthropic—as religious institutions rather than businesses, tracing a lineage from the Bay Area's LessWrong and Effective Altruism scenes through Eliezer Yudkowsky's influence, Roko's Basilisk, and the medieval investiture controversy between church and state, before landing on Anthropic's constitution as a kind of modern catechism, Dario Amodei's essay "Machines of Loving Grace," the tension between secularism and scientism, and closing with a look at consciousness, meditation, Buddhist and Advaita Vedanta ideas of enlightenment, and where recursive self-improvement and algorithmic progress in AI might be headed.Timestamps00:00:00 discussing whether AI labs are cults or religions, framing safetyism and the Anthropic/OpenAI schism. 00:05:00 sdmat argues Anthropic runs on faith, tracing roots to LessWrong and Effective Altruism. 00:10:00 comparing AI labs to the medieval investiture controversy between church and state. 00:15:00 debating the First Amendment, separation of church and state, and rising secularism. 00:20:00 unpacking Anthropic as a public benefit corporation and Dario's implicit soteriology. 00:25:00 covering constitutional AI, synthetic data, and morality-as-safety training. 00:30:00 comparing Anthropic's principles to the catechism, plus sandboxed alignment experiments. 00:35:00 calling Dario the AI pope, dogma, and his essay Machines of Loving Grace. 00:40:00 exploring grace, consciousness, and critiquing scientism. 00:45:00 unpacking the rationalist community and Roko's Basilisk. 00:50:00 drawing parallels to Jim Jones and ideological dogmatism in Silicon Valley. 00:55:00 discussing enlightenment, Shaktipat, and guru transmission versus AI. 01:00:00 AI's role in meditation and Buddhist views of consciousness. 01:05:00 closing on robotics, recursive self-improvement, and algorithmic inefficiency in LLMs.Key InsightsAnthropic operates less like a business and more like a religious institution, with sdmat arguing that Dario Amodei effectively claims spiritual authority — talking about world danger and a narrow path to salvation — while the company frames itself publicly as a neutral "public benefit corporation."The intellectual roots of AI safety culture trace back to the Bay Area's LessWrong and Effective Altruism scenes of the mid-2010s, where Eliezer Yudkowsky's writing produced an internally consistent but almost apocalyptic worldview, complete with its own devil-like figure in Roko's Basilisk — the idea of a future AI punishing those who knew about it and didn't help bring it into being.Anthropic's "constitutional AI" approach is compared to the Catholic Church's catechism: rather than training the model only on labeled human feedback, they built a system to extrapolate broad moral principles into specific behavior, aiming for a model that reasons from first principles rather than memorized examples.Historical parallels to the medieval investiture controversy — the struggle between church and state over who appoints bishops — are used to explain the current tension between AI labs and government over who holds moral versus practical authority in shaping AI's future.Stewart frames the current moment as a "fourth great awakening," linking 1960s countercultural San Francisco through the Extropians and Yudkowsky's rise to today's AI culture, and argues that secularism and scientism function as unacknowledged religions themselves — ones that "killed God" but left a vacuum AI now fills.On the technical side, sdmat explains that current LLMs are wildly inefficient at basic tasks like arithmetic — off by seven to nine orders of magnitude from optimal — suggesting major algorithmic breakthroughs (not just compute) are still ahead, which he sees as evidence recursive self-improvement is approaching.Both hosts express real ambivalence about AI's role in personal and spiritual growth: it can be a powerful tool for meditation guidance and intellectual companionship, but neither believes it can replace what they describe as direct "transmission" from an enlightened human — the felt, non-linguistic experience that grounds real spiritual practice.

Send us Fan MailIn this episode, we unpack the controversy surrounding a bold statement from Square Enix's former president, who recently labeled PlayStation 5 physical media collectors as “narcissists.” What did he mean by that—and is there any truth behind the claim?Join us as we explore the tension between digital convenience and the pride of physical ownership, the psychology of collecting, and how this debate reflects broader shifts in gaming culture. We'll also look at how fans and industry insiders reacted, and what this says about the future of physical releases in a streaming‑dominated world.Topics Covered:The quote that sparked the backlashWhy collectors defend physical mediaThe economics of digital vs. physical distributionHow identity and nostalgia shape gamer behaviorPerfect for anyone who loves gaming discourse, industry drama, and the deeper meaning behind how we play and collect.Support the show►Want a question answered on iCritic Live? Send a question here and we'll answer it (if it's a reasonable question): https://streamelements.com/kevintrod/tip►Get free money just from buying gas!  Download GetUpside to start making an average of $50 a day: https://upside.app.link/5TMVT►Want to invest in stocks commission-free?  Use Robinhood!  Sign up through this link to get a free stock: https://share.robinhood.com/kevin1823►PATREON: https://www.patreon.com/KevinTRodWebsite: http://www.icritic.netE-Mail: greatmediauniverse@gmail.comInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/icritic_official/Letterboxd: https://letterboxd.com/KevinTRod/Pinterest: https://www.pinterest.com/kevintrod/pins/Twitter: https://twitter.com/KevinTRodMy Amazon Wish List: https://www.amazon.com/registry/wishlist/22VIH93Q0H9EP/ref=cm_sw_em_r_mt_gm__wlMy Criterion Wish List: https://www.criterion.com/wishlist/392515If you would like to send me snail mail, please send all (legal) packages to:iCriticPO Box 2130Huntington Beach, CA 92647All view are protected by the First Amendment and all images and video clips used are protected under Fair Use.

Steve, Todd, and Aaron are joined by BlazeTV host Auron MacIntyre for the Deace Group, where the panel discusses the case of Shiloh Hendrix and whether it's a clear-cut violation of the First Amendment. Then, the roundtable talks about the low-T GOP, this week featuring Ohio Governor Mike DeWine and GOP Senate Majority Leader John Thune. Hour Two is Feedback Friday. TODAY'S SPONSORS: CHIRP: https://gochirp.com/pages/steve-deace use promo code STEVE REAL ESTATE AGENTS I TRUST: https://realestateagentsitrust.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Donald Trump and his dutiful Federal Communications Commission chair, Brendan Carr, have been targeting a number of ABC's broadcast licenses, and ABC just challenged this hard in a new filing. In an interesting move, ABC cited Trump's own social media postings and remarks at speeches to show that he is corruptly trying to censor the network as punishment for its content and viewpoints, in violation of the First Amendment. Amusingly, in those examples, Trump blurted right out in public that he does in fact want the FCC to punish ABC precisely because of its speech. Now this has become a weapon against Trump. We talked to law professor Leah Litman, author of a good book about the Supreme Court. She explains why Trump's public bullying of ABC should undermine his case, walks us through the legal ins-and-outs here, details why ABC might prevail, and discusses how open, explicit corruption is intrinsic to his political project. Looking for More from the DSR Network? Click Here: https://linktr.ee/deepstateradio Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The details are remarkable. Comey's attorneys report that the Secret Service tracked his phone location without a warrant as he drove home from North Carolina, that roughly 209,000 items reading 8647, 8646, or 8645 have been sold on Amazon, and that figures who made far more explicit statements were never charged. The indictment was signed by a prosecutor who had been an assistant US attorney for two days, and the government's key witness reportedly showed clear bias and thought 86 was a restaurant term. The centerpiece is the mob argument. To claim 86 is Mafia slang for murder, the government reportedly turned to former hitman Salvatore Sammy the Bull Gravano, who did not support the theory, and then to former Gotti prosecutor turned judge John Gleeson, whose sworn affidavit calls the claim preposterous. Hawk ties it to a broader pattern of courtroom losses and predicts this indictment is dismissed too. SUPPORT & CONNECT WITH HAWK- Support on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/mdg650hawk - Hawk's Merch Store: https://hawkmerchstore.com - Connect on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@mdg650hawk7thacct - Connect on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@hawkeyewhackamole - Connect on BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/mdg650hawk.bsky.social - Connect on Substack: https://mdg650hawk.substack.com - Connect on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/hawkpodcasts - Connect on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mdg650hawk - Connect on Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/mdg650hawk ALL HAWK PODCASTS INFO- Additional Content Available Here: https://www.hawkpodcasts.comhttps://www.youtube.com/@hawkpodcasts- Listen to Hawk Podcasts On Your Favorite Platform:Spotify: https://spoti.fi/3RWeJfyApple Podcasts: https://apple.co/422GDuLYouTube: https://youtube.com/@hawkpodcastsiHeartRadio: https://ihr.fm/47vVBdPPandora: https://bit.ly/48COaTB

Donald Trump and his dutiful Federal Communications Commission chair, Brendan Carr, have been targeting a number of ABC's broadcast licenses, and ABC just challenged this hard in a new filing. In an interesting move, ABC cited Trump's own social media postings and remarks at speeches to show that he is corruptly trying to censor the network as punishment for its content and viewpoints, in violation of the First Amendment. Amusingly, in those examples, Trump blurted right out in public that he does in fact want the FCC to punish ABC precisely because of its speech. Now this has become a weapon against Trump. We talked to law professor Leah Litman, author of a good book about the Supreme Court. She explains why Trump's public bullying of ABC should undermine his case, walks us through the legal ins-and-outs here, details why ABC might prevail, and discusses how open, explicit corruption is intrinsic to his political project. Looking for More from the DSR Network? Click Here: https://linktr.ee/deepstateradio Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Top headlines for Friday, July 31, 2026Michigan halts enforcement of its counseling ban after a First Amendment challenge, and a Michigan hospital pays $410,000 to a physician assistant fired over gender-transition procedures. An Arkansas family sues Elon Musk's xAI over Grok-generated abuse imagery, while Iran seizes Tehran's oldest Protestant church amid an intensifying crackdown on Christians.0:11 Jerry Lamb, bishop of diocese that split over LGBT debate, dies0:59 Michigan halts enforcement of conversion therapy ban1:49 Elon Musk's xAI sued over Grok creating child sex abuse content2:43 UN urged to take action against Iran's newest Christian crackdown3:36 Hospital pays $410K to end lawsuit by PA fired over trans policy4:27 Americans' support for same-sex marriage declining: poll5:24 Iran thinks it won the war — now Christians are paying the priceSubscribe to this PodcastApple PodcastsSpotifyGoogle PodcastsOvercastFollow Us on Social Media@ChristianPost on TwitterChristian Post on Facebook@ChristianPostIntl on InstagramSubscribe on YouTubeGet the Edifi AppDownload for iPhoneDownload for AndroidSubscribe to Our NewsletterSubscribe to the Freedom Post, delivered every Monday and ThursdayClick here to get the top headlines delivered to your inbox every morning!Links to the NewsJerry Lamb, bishop of diocese that split over LGBT debate, dies | Church & MinistriesMichigan halts enforcement of conversion therapy ban | PoliticsElon Musk's xAI sued over Grok creating child sex abuse content | BusinessUN urged to take action against Iran's newest Christian crackdown | WorldHospital pays $410K to end lawsuit by PA fired over trans policy | U.S.Americans' support for same-sex marriage declining: poll | U.S.Iran thinks it won the war — now Christians are paying the price

In this newscast: Juneau police have confirmed the identity of a man whose remains were discovered in a chest freezer last week at a home in Lemon Creek; Three people are dead after a fiery plane crash Tuesday night near McCarthy; A volunteer group freed a humpback whale that was entangled in a gillnet near Petersburg last night; Juneau veteran says he was denied First Amendment rights during July 4 parade; Members of the Alaska Legislature are asking the state Division of Elections to immediately retore the voter status of thousands of Alaskans the division deactivated based on outdated information; Hundreds of people gathered in Haines this weekend for the annual Southeast Alaska State Fair

Why the state denied KIC's request to open a green crab sport fisheryA Juneau veteran says he was denied First Amendment rights during July 4 parade

In this episode, Nadine Strossen, New York Law School professor emerita and former president of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), and Jacob Mchangama, the founder and executive director of The Future of Free Speech, discuss the history, enduring debate, and ongoing importance of free expression in our changing world. Julie Silverbrook, chief content and learning officer at the National Constitution Center, moderates.  This program is part of the NCC Across America series and is presented in partnership with the City of Asylum Bookstore in Pittsburgh, PA. It was recorded on July 21, 2026.    Resources  The First Amendment  Jacob Mchangama, Free Speech: A History From Socrates to Social Media (2022)  Jacob Mchangama and Jeff Kosseff, The Future of Free Speech: Reversing the Global Decline of Democracy's Most Essential Freedom (2026)  Nadine Strossen and Greg Lukianoff, The War On Words: 10 Arguments Against Free Speech—And Why They Fail (2025) Stay Connected and Learn More  Stay connected with We the People—follow, rate, and review the show wherever you listen.  Questions or comments? Email ⁠⁠⁠podcast@constitutioncenter.org⁠⁠⁠.  Follow @ConstitutionCtr on social media and ⁠⁠⁠sign up⁠⁠⁠ to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate.  Support our important work by making a donation today.  ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Donate

This episode is a wild ride, folks, as our host takes on two topics that'll make you laugh, think, and maybe even question everything you thought you knew about the environment and the world of wildlife conservation.In this episode, our host tackles two seemingly unrelated stories that are actually connected by a thread of efficiency and the pursuit of truth. First, they dive into a real-life petition filed in Colorado that proposes a permit system for photographing and selling wildlife images, and the host's hilarious take on why this idea is a category error and a potential First Amendment problem. Then, they explore a recent study from Oxford University that claims organic, free-range eggs are worse for the climate than eggs from caged chickens, and the host's sharp analysis of why this finding is a game-changer.You'll hear our host's signature blend of humor, expertise, and straight talk as they dissect these topics and challenge the conventional wisdom. They'll also share some surprising facts and stats that'll make you think twice about the environmental movement and the way we approach wildlife conservation.So if you're ready to have your mind expanded and your perspectives challenged, tune in to this episode and get ready to engage with the conversation. Our host is calling on listeners to join the discussion and share their thoughts on these important topics.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The dismissal follows a Texas judge tossing Patel's case against former FBI official Frank Figliuzzi, whose on-air remarks the court called protected hyperbole. Patel has also sued the Atlantic and reporter over an article about his tenure, a suit Hawk expects to be dismissed as well, and he plans a separate video on that motion. Hawk's larger point is about why these suits get filed at all. He compares them to Donald Trump's defamation claims against ABC and CBS, which produced large settlements despite what Hawk argues were weak legal footings, and suggests Patel is following that playbook without the leverage that produced those payouts. Along the way Hawk lays out the core principle that truth is an absolute defense to defamation, which is why many of these cases falter. SUPPORT & CONNECT WITH HAWK- Support on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/mdg650hawk - Hawk's Merch Store: https://hawkmerchstore.com - Connect on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@mdg650hawk7thacct - Connect on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@hawkeyewhackamole - Connect on BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/mdg650hawk.bsky.social - Connect on Substack: https://mdg650hawk.substack.com - Connect on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/hawkpodcasts - Connect on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mdg650hawk - Connect on Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/mdg650hawk ALL HAWK PODCASTS INFO- Additional Content Available Here: https://www.hawkpodcasts.comhttps://www.youtube.com/@hawkpodcasts- Listen to Hawk Podcasts On Your Favorite Platform:Spotify: https://spoti.fi/3RWeJfyApple Podcasts: https://apple.co/422GDuLYouTube: https://youtube.com/@hawkpodcastsiHeartRadio: https://ihr.fm/47vVBdPPandora: https://bit.ly/48COaTB

Day Break | FAUCI, IRAN & THE RADICAL LEFT --- 00:00 - Monologue 19:22 – John Tillman, CEO of the American Culture Project, founder of the Hall of Giants, and author of Political Vise: How the Radical Left Controls America and the Path to Regaining Our Liberty. Tillman discusses the challenges facing both major political parties during primary season, examining whether the candidates emerging from primary elections are best positioned to win in the general election and what those outcomes could mean for the future of American politics. 28:17 – Tim Roberts, owner of Patriot's Relief. Roberts discusses the science behind the body's endocannabinoid system and explains how CBD products may support pain management, inflammation, recovery, and overall wellness through a natural, plant-based approach. 38:30 - Monologue Featuring Ivey Gruber 47:38 – Jayne Zirkle, American journalist and television personality. Zirkle discusses the Trump administration's efforts to reform the Department of Veterans Affairs, examining proposed changes aimed at improving healthcare access, accountability, and services for America's veterans. 57:47 – David A. Kallman, Senior Partner with the Kallman Legal Group, joined by Gary Shane Pruitt, the plaintiff in the case. In this edition of the Kallman Legal Report, Kallman and Pruitt discuss a recent court injunction against Grosse Pointe Public Schools, examining the free speech issues at the center of the case, the legal arguments that prevailed, and what the ruling could mean for First Amendment rights in public schools. 1:16:48 - Monologue 1:25:38 – Tom Coulson, owner of Liberty Coin Service. Coulson discusses current trends in the precious metals market, provides analysis of gold and silver prices, answers listener-submitted questions, and offers insight into the factors influencing today's coin and bullion markets. --- Check out our brand new podcast, 'Forgotten America'... Episode 24 is live NOW at Steve Gruber on YouTube! Link below: https://youtu.be/UrGZQdE62jA

Es ist einer der gesellschaftlichen Höhepunkte in Washington, wenn sich die Korrespondentinnen und Korrespondenten aus dem Weissen Haus zum Galadinner treffen. Dieses Mal im Hotel Waldorf Astoria, nachdem der Anlass im April im Washington Hilton abgebrochen werden musste, als bei der Eingangskontrolle Schüsse fielen. Die Rede war von einem mutmasslichen Attentatsversuch auf den US-Präsidenten. Donald Trump war diesmal dabei und sprach über eine Stunde. Sein Auftritt galt als unbeholfen: Er griff Journalistinnen und Journalisten an – etwa CNNs Kaitlan Collins, der er «Fake News» vorwarf, sie mit einer bekannten Transfrau verglich und bemängelte, sie lächle nie. Immer wieder hat Trump an Journalistinnen etwas auszusetzen, auch an deren Aussehen.  Trotz solcher Ausfälle hofieren ihn manche Medien: aus Angst, den Zugang zu Quellen im Weissen Haus zu verlieren – oder aus Furcht vor Konsequenzen für ihre Publikationen. Das kollidiert mit dem First Amendment, das Pressefreiheit garantiert – ausgerechnet bei einem Dinner, das dieser Freiheit gewidmet ist. Weshalb ist das Verhältnis zwischen Trump und den Journalisten derart angespannt? Wie gelingt es dem US-Präsidenten, sie trotzdem für sich einzuspannen? Welche Medien schrecken nicht vor Trump-Kritik zurück? Und schliesslich: Wer hat weshalb Angst vor Donald Trump? Darüber unterhält sich Christof Münger, Leiter des Ressorts International, mit dem langjährigen USA-Korrespondenten Martin Kilian in einer neuen Folge von «Alles klar, Amerika?». Kilian lebt in Charlottesville, Virginia. Produzentin: Jacqueline Wechsler Mehr zum Thema: Trump macht Witze vor Journalisten, dann wird es ziemlich still im Saal «Linker Wahnsinn, Lüge»: Trump-kritische Journalisten landen am Pranger Nach Haus­durch­such­ung durch FBI – Jury setzt ein Zeichen für die Pressefreiheit Trump hetzt gegen Satiriker, droht Medien – und beklagt Europas Umgang mit Meinungsfreiheit Mehr USA-Berichterstattung finden Sie auf unserer Webseite und in den Apps. Den «Tages-Anzeiger» können Sie 3 Monate zum Preis von 1 Monat testen: tagiabo.ch.Feedback, Kritik und Fragen an: podcasts@tamedia.ch Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Chris Tarbell is a leading privacy, cyber, and data strategy executive. He currently serves as the Chief Privacy Officer for VERSANT Media LLC. Prior to his current role, Chris was an associate general counsel for Fanatics and the Walt Disney Company, where he advised global businesses on compliance with domestic and international privacy, data security, and related consumer protection laws. Most recently, Chris served as Senior Counsel at the leading law firm of Kelley Drye and Warren, where he also supported clients in numerous regulatory investigations related to marketing and advertising. In this episode… Building strong privacy programs relies on human connection and a deep understanding of organizational dynamics and business goals. To be successful, privacy professionals must participate in the business rather than just focusing on meeting legal requirements. This approach enables leaders to advocate for the tools, budget, headcount, and other resources to move the program forward. Because privacy impacts many business functions, it is very much a people business, requiring strong relationships, cross-functional collaboration, and the ability to build trust with stakeholders and internal teams. So, what steps can companies take to achieve this?  Putting this into practice starts with assembling a people-first privacy team and hiring individuals with the soft skills to step into unfamiliar situations, assess what is needed, and work across departments to move the program forward. By bringing curiosity and enjoyment to privacy work, they create an environment where other departments are more willing to involve privacy early and often. This approach is especially important in the media industry, where privacy pros may need to work with news colleagues to balance the right to be forgotten with First Amendment considerations or partner with intellectual property teams to protect personal information during piracy investigations. And while collaboration is essential, teams must also determine what can realistically be achieved with the time and resources available without allowing perfection to stall progress. In this episode of She Said Privacy/He Said Security, Jodi and Justin Daniels speak with Chris Tarbell, Chief Privacy Officer at VERSANT Media, about building effective privacy programs through relationships and collaboration. Chris explains how his experience as both in-house and outside counsel shaped his ability to understand business objectives, advocate for resources, and communicate the value of privacy. He shares insights on the cross-disciplinary nature of privacy work in the media industry, lessons from building a program during a major corporate spinoff, and the importance of creating a people-first privacy team capable of handling unfamiliar business challenges. Chris also explains why bringing some fun to privacy work can make a program more effective.

Last year, a few concerned North Texas residents marked the Fourth of July with a noise demonstration in solidarity with those held in ICE custody. What started as an exercise of their First Amendment rights ended with all of them in handcuffs and on trial, accused of belonging to a terror cell that does not exist. This week's episode is The Prairieland Antifa Test Case Pt. 1.Click here for this week's show notes.Click here to sign up for our Patreon and receive hundreds of hours of bonus content.Please click here to leave a review and tell us what you think of the show.CRIMEWAVE AT SEA 2027 is happening Feb. 8-12, 2027!  Tickets on Sale: Feb. 13, 2026  Get $100 off your stateroom and a private meet and greet with us!  Go to http://crimewaveatsea.com/SINISTERPlease consider supporting the companies that support us!-With Ladder, get a real coach in your ear telling you exactly what to do for every workout. If you have an iPhone, head to ladder.fit/CREEPY and take a quick quiz to find your perfect Ladder plan. Use my link and get a free 7-day trial with NO credit card, and $10 off your first month if you join.-For a limited time, our listeners are getting a FREE full-sized Mascara on their first purchase. Just head to Jonesroadbeauty.com and use code CREEPY at checkout.-If you're 21 or older go to indacloud.co and use code [CREEPY] for 30 percent off your first subscription order.-Hero Bread is offering 10% off your order. Go to hero.co and use code CREEPY at checkout.

The Counter Momentum of Spin, with Dr. Franco Musio – Common sense appears increasingly scarce as courts, lawmakers, academics, and society struggle to balance free speech, public safety, dignity, and constitutional rights. Drawing on Thomas Paine and modern First Amendment debates, the discussion examines how practical judgment applies to complex legal and cultural challenges today...

Elon Musk is taking Minnesota to court. A lawsuit by Musk's artificial intelligence company, X.AI, argues the state's new so-called "nudification ban" set to take effect Saturday violates the First Amendment.The ban targets technology that allows users to create and post deepfake pornographic videos or images of people without their consent. Companies that violate the law could face a hefty fine. The state Legislature passed the law almost unanimously this year. Incoming University of Minnesota law professor and First Amendment expert Jeff Kosseff joined MPR News host Nina Moini to help explain the case and what it means for the state's law.

St. Paul Mayor Kaohly Her is under investigation over allegations of sexual harassment of city employees. MPR News reporter Estelle Timar-Wilcox shared the latest. Plus, Elon Musk is suing Minnesota over its AI nudification ban, saying it violates the First Amendment. An expert broke down the case.After the death of a longtime Twin Cities paramedic, we took a look at the mental health challenges facing EMS providers. We learned about the troubling trend of resident-on-resident altercations in dementia care facilities turning deadly.And a break from the heat is finally in the forecast. We talked with Chief Meteorologist Ben Cathey. Plus, Minnesota's professional women's tackle football team, the Vixen, won their first championship! We heard from the head coach.

Preston Byrne, Tech & Free Speech Lawyer at Byrne & Storm, P.C., shares how a small American imageboard became the first test case for whether foreign governments can legally force American companies to comply with their censorship laws on American soil. He breaks down why the UK's Online Safety Act can't actually be enforced against US companies with no British presence; how a picture of an AI-generated hamster became a more effective legal strategy than a hundred-page brief; and what the proposed GRANITE Act would do to permanently close the loophole foreign regulators have been exploiting. Key Takeaways:  Why the UK's Online Safety Act can't legally be enforced against American companies What the GRANITE Act would do what current First Amendment protections can't How 98% of companies comply with foreign censorship demands they have no legal obligation to follow Why responding to Ofcom with a hamster worked better than a formal legal letter Guest Bio: Preston Bryne is a technology lawyer with Byrne & Storm, P.C., and a Senior Fellow of the Adam Smith Institute in London. Preston is the architect of the GRANITE Act and the Adam Smith Institute's Freedom of Speech Bill, an effort to launch a coordinated, transatlantic legislative response to foreign censorship enforcement. He was appointed to the Legal Advisory Council of the UK's Free Speech Union in 2025. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- About this Show: The Brave Technologist is here to shed light on the opportunities and challenges of emerging tech. To make it digestible, less scary, and more approachable for all! Join us as we embark on a mission to demystify artificial intelligence, challenge the status quo, and empower everyday people to embrace the digital revolution. Whether you're a tech enthusiast, a curious mind, or an industry professional, this podcast invites you to join the conversation and explore the future of AI together. The Brave Technologist Podcast is hosted by Luke Mulks, VP Business Operations at Brave Software—makers of the privacy-respecting Brave browser and Search engine, and now powering AI everywhere with the Brave Search API. Music by: Ari Dvorin Produced by: Sam Laliberte  

Giant Monster Messages : Secret of the Loch (1934) We are completely sidelined by our hatred for Jimmy in our episode for the 1934 film Secret of the Loch.   Time 01:25 History 07:10 Plot 10:35 Talking Points 21:30 Messages 23:30 Final Thoughts 24:30 Listener Feedback Contact us at: Discord https://giantmonstermessages.com/ GiantMonsterMessages@gmail.com BlueSky Main Theme and Stingers Written by Matthias Fluor https://mfluor.ch/ Podcast Art by Laser 'lizard' Lluis Special Thanks to: Teachers everywhere Authors of the First Amendment

Hollywood is not trying to stop a monopoly by blocking the Paramount Skydance merger with Warner Bros. It's trying to protect one.If a monopoly means near-complete control over what gets made, promoted, and rewarded, then much of Hollywood and the cultural institutions around it operate under the ideological consensus of the Left and the Democratic Party. Why do the Obamas have a long-running production deal at Netflix? Why do the Emmys consistently elevate late-night hosts whose politics align with that consensus? Jimmy Kimmel, John Oliver, Stephen Colbert, Jon Stewart? Do you think they'd ever nominate Greg Gutfeld, whose show often tops them all in ratings? If that isn't an ideological monopoly, I don't know what is. Why did major awards shows stay silent on Charlie Kirk? Why did so many artists cancel Kennedy Center appearances after its Trump-era changes, and why did multiple acts drop out of America 250 events?David Ellison and Paramount Skydance are attempting something brave and unprecedented: an outside challenge to that consensus. Their roughly $110 billion bid for Warner Bros. Discovery would give them control of a major studio, HBO/Max, CNN, and a large portfolio of cable and streaming assets. While there has been some resistance to the biggest mergers in recent history, we've never seen anything like #blockthemerger. Meet the new resistance, same as the old resistance. 12 state attorneys general, including California, have sued to block the deal. The Writers Guild of America has filed its own antitrust lawsuit. SAG-AFTRA has publicly opposed the merger, though it has not joined the litigation. Opposition also includes the Future Film Coalition (which leads the #BlockTheMerger campaign), Democracy Defenders Fund, Committee for the First Amendment, Free Press, the International Documentary Association, and the American Economic Liberties Project, among others. More than 5,600 industry figures have signed an open letter against the deal, including Mark Ruffalo, Jane Fonda, Javier Bardem, Elliot Page, Emma Thompson, Ben Stiller, and Cynthia Nixon.Paramount Skydance has, for now, delayed closing. Can they hold the line under this unprecedented pressure campaign? Hope springs eternal. But you won't read about that point of view in any of the trades. They're a monopoly, too. Most of them are owned by the same entity, Penske Eldridge. Just today, it was announced that the Hollywood Foreign Press, the former owners of the Golden Globes, are suing Jay Penske for $150 million. They are claiming Penske orchestrated their downfall so he could buy the Golden Globes. Jay Penske already owns Deadline, The Hollywood Reporter, Variety, Indiewire, Gold Derby predicting site, Rolling Stone, a virtual monopoly on the awards race from soup to nuts. Gold Derby shapes the nominees, the trades take ads from the studios and the Golden Globes hand out the awards. But wouldn't you know, when Rebecca Keegan wrote a hit piece on me, she did so in the Hollywood Reporter, owned by Penske Eldridge. I was a vocal and prominent critic of Penske's growing monopolistic power on the awards race and one of the few willing to speak out. With one hit piece, the Penske company took out both a competitor for ad money and a pesky nuisance for the brand. That is what you call a monopoly. A Climate of Fear and A Culture of SilenceI found out firsthand how monopolies work in Hollywood when I was canceled in 2024. The day a Hollywood Reporter story labeled me a “MAGA darling,” one studio pulled its ads from my site that day. The last thing they wanted was to be associated with an accused and condemned witch.It was shocking how many of them fell in line in robotic fashion, gripped with fear. The response was swift and uniform. Every writer on my site left to protect their reputations. Friends of fifteen years ended the friendship. My Oscars ticket was revoked. Jane Fonda's Women's Media Center fired me from their annual Oscars report. Screening and party invitations dried up. I was benched on Gold Derby.Worst of all, the lucrative studio ad buys for the Oscars and Emmys vanished. As it all collapsed, I remembered in 2012, an advertising strategist telling me I could be making far more money if I sold the site better. “You have no baggage to speak of,” she'd said.That was true then. I was one of the few independent Oscar sites left, and still am, known around town for being honest to a fault. I stayed independent even as the ad money made life more comfortable for me and my daughter than it had ever been.There was never any question why my career ended in Hollywood: I had been outed as a Trump voter. I was on the wrong side of Hollywood's progressive orthodoxy, and that meant I was finished.How it started…I started Oscarwatch.com as a single mom with a one-year-old baby living in a studio guest house in Van Nuys, California, in 1999. I was an early web pioneer with a 1200-baud modem and a really good idea. I was already catching the attention of publicists and rocking the boat, as all of us amateurs did back then. We were moving fast and breaking things. Traditional media was not ready. The studios weren't either. They were used to having a monopoly on Oscar FYC ads in Variety and the Hollywood Reporter, their bread and butter. Until the blogs came along.By 2006, I was starting to make money because my little site had birthed a big bang of other Oscar sites, and by then even the New York Times had an Oscar blogger, the late great David Carr, who called himself the Carpetbagger.David Carr became a mentor of sorts and encouraged me to sell ads for myself, rather than piggyback off bigger sites. I was working three jobs by then: as a horoscope writer under a pseudonym (Laura Wilde), a janitor working my dad's routes because he was a good guy and knew I needed the money, and a freelance film critic.Right around then, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences sued me for trademark infringement, and my site was renamed AwardsDaily.com. Now I was cleared to start making real money.David Carr was horrified that I was working as a janitor while the trades were raking in millions on Oscar ads and encouraged me to start sending out RFPs. But I didn't have to, because before long the studios were sending them to me. My site became so influential that I never really had to pitch to them. They all wanted real estate on my site. Who could ever have imagined that? Certainly not me, someone who got online in 1994 back when no one thought you could make money on the internet.One of the first studios that bought ads was Fox Searchlight, an awards subsidiary of Fox. I called it Big Fox and Little Fox, and both advertised on my site. When I got my first $15,000 just to run ads, I was stunned. That was more money than I had ever seen on a check. I was just kind of faking it, pretending I knew what I was doing, but I really didn't.Of course, it was also about promoting films the studio wanted to place in the Oscar race, and that's still what it's about. It's not exactly pay-to-play, but most of the bloggers making money in the Oscar game are grateful and help keep the advertisers' movies prominent. I did too.I barely noticed in 2019 when Disney bought Fox for $71 billion. The Writers Guild objected to the merger, just as they have to the Paramount Skydance merger with Warner Bros., but there was nowhere near the same amount of public outcry.Trump praised the Disney/Fox merger after having attempted to stop the 2018 merger of AT&T and Time Warner, leading to a trial, but the judge ruled against the Trump administration, and the deal went through. Again, no major public outcry.At some point after 2020, I'd noticed that Disney had stopped advertising on my site. I wrote it off as their shying away from my comments on “gender affirming care” for kids. I'll never know exactly why, but all I do know is that once the merger went through, Fox and Fox Searchlight also stopped advertising. The Paramount/Skydance merger with Warner Bros. is significantly higher and covers more territory than any of the major corporate mergers we've seen as Hollywood reshuffles the deck amid the shift to streaming. Warner Bros. was selling. The only question was whether Netflix or Paramount Skydance would buy it. Both deals would have had the blessing of the Trump administration.But because it's David Ellison and the team that bought CBS, and because Trump is an ally, the Democrats and the Left have turned #BlockTheMerger into another No Kings protest or battle for the “resistance.”After the story about me broke in the Hollywood Reporter, Netflix also stopped advertising. No other studio except Focus Features, an adjunct of Universal, had the courage to run ads on my site. I was now officially blacklisted. Emails to the various studio reps went unanswered.This past year, Paramount bought a modest ad package on my site for the Emmys to celebrate the success of Landman and The Madison. I felt lucky to get it, and it was a sign, at least to me, that Paramount, like Focus Features, was brave enough to take a chance on someone deemed too toxic by the industry.Landman, Taylor Sheridan's Billy Bob Thornton drama, had become one of Paramount+'s biggest hits: its first season averaged 15.8 million viewers in Nielsen's cross-platform ratings and ranked among the top 10 series of the 2024-25 season. Season 2 opened to a Paramount+ record 9.2 million views in its first few days and continued to dominate the streaming charts, at one point leading all multiplatform viewing with more than 14 million. The Madison, starring Michelle Pfeiffer, launched as Sheridan's biggest series debut yet, drawing 8 million views in its first 10 days.But unfortunately, #blockthemerger had bled into the awards ecosystem, which remains a closed loop. Sure enough, when the Emmy nominations arrived, the Paramount shows were completely blanked—even Billy Bob Thornton in Landman and Michelle Pfeiffer in The Madison. Kathy Bates was similarly overlooked for Matlock.If Gold Derby shapes the Emmy nominations, and they do, they have to similarly play ball by blacklisting all Paramount Plus's most popular shows, proving to American audiences that the industry does not care about what they want or what they watch. Sheridan has transformed much of the television landscape, thanks to Paramount Plus. If Paramount buys Warner Bros., they won't be creating a monopoly but breaking one up. The Death RattleI know I should walk away from this industry and give up the site that took me 26 years to build. But I just can't do that. I can't let them win. Now that I've walked in the shoes of the other half of the country, I can clearly see why Hollywood's empire is collapsing. If ratings and box office don't matter, neither do audiences. None of this is about artistic freedom or making better movies or television shows. This is the Left flexing its muscle in an attempt to keep all of Hollywood to itself, to push its ideology on the people, to convert them, to indoctrinate them, to “correct them,” everything but entertaining them. Most of all, though, it is about one man: Donald Trump and their failure to stop him, destroy him, kill him, or exile him and his supporters. This is one of the most exciting times to be living through in American history, but you'd never know it by the movies and TV shows Hollywood pumps out. Their monoculture, their one-sided point of view, has choked the life out of Hollywood. If they could make fun of themselves, if they could humanize their fellow Americans, they might be able to tell stories that resonate with everyone. Maybe, just maybe, they would breathe new life into a decaying organism.But they can't risk it. Like the Democrats who don't trust the people with elections, Hollywood doesn't trust them with the culture.Elon Musk spent $44 billion to take Twitter out of the hands of its previous gatekeepers. Ellison is now trying to pry open a crack in the thick shell of Hollywood's product and return more of it to market forces and all of those people Hollywood left behind. // This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.sashastone.com/subscribe

Today, Tiberius sits down with Zach, better known as Liberty Troll, to explore the world of First Amendment auditing, constitutional rights, public accountability, and why understanding your freedoms matters.Have you ever wondered what your constitutional rights really are? Can you record in public? Why do some people choose to test how government officials respond to citizens exercising their rights? In this episode, Liberty Troll shares how he became a First Amendment auditor, what motivates his work, and why he believes education is the key to protecting our freedoms.In this episode, you'll discover:• What a First Amendment auditor is and what they do• The five freedoms protected by the First Amendment• Why the Constitution still matters today• How recording in public promotes transparency and accountability• The importance of understanding your rights and responsibilities• What happened during Liberty Troll's first audit• Lessons learned from interactions with law enforcement and the public• Why respectful communication and education can make a differenceZach also shares stories from his experiences conducting public audits, discusses how constitutional rights apply in everyday life, explains why civics education is so important, and offers advice for young people who want to better understand the Constitution. Along the way, Tiberius and Zach tackle another Math Corners challenge and discuss the importance of integrity during this week's Heart of the Lion segment.Whether you're interested in constitutional rights, journalism, public accountability, law enforcement, or simply learning more about civic responsibility, this episode offers an engaging conversation for kids, parents, educators, and anyone interested in understanding the freedoms protected by the U.S. Constitution.Be sure to like, subscribe, and leave a comment letting us know: What's one constitutional right you think everyone should understand better?Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-tiberius-show--3352195/support.

Joe's diving straight into the critical issues surrounding local accountability, national governance, and the fundamental integrity of our civic institutions. We kick things off by looking at packed community meetings over infrastructure and data centers, before tracking national debates on immigration policies, public health transparency, and the ongoing fight to secure our voting systems. From local boardrooms to the federal level, we are taking an unflinching look at how leadership decisions directly impact everyday Americans and the constitutional principles that hold this country together.Joe is joined by content creator, scientist, and free speech advocate Dr. Rich Guggenheim (@5280BasedHomo). Rich gives us an insider update on his First Amendment lawsuit following the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling on legislative immunity and public testimony rights. We also expand the scope to discuss global security, analyzing recent headlines out of Europe and unpacking the broader cultural and political dynamics unfolding across western democracies.Joe shifts the focus to major international developments and legislative standoffs in Washington. We break down the realities of the war in Ukraine, highlighting reports on conscription alongside President Trump's recent meeting with Volodymyr Zelensky to discuss defense production and diplomatic solutions. Finally, we bring it back home to examine election integrity policy in Congress, addressing Senate GOP pushback on the SAVE Act and asking what it will take to restore absolute trust in our democratic processes.

President Trump finally served up his long-planned speech at the White House Correspondents' Dinner, and they hated it so much the reporters started kvetching about how they need to "rethink" this event, since Trump was not "advancing" the First Amendment with his mockery of the press.

Discover what counts as fighting words, why it matters for free speech, and how hate speech laws are challenged in court.You've heard the phrase, but did you know “fighting words” are more than just cartoon banter? We break down where this legal doctrine comes from—and why it matters for free speech today.The HistoryThe concept goes way back to Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942). Walter Chaplinsky was arrested for calling a city marshal a “GD racketeer” and “damned fascist.” The law at the time allowed arrest for any “offensive, derisive, or annoying word” spoken in public. The Supreme Court unanimously concluded that “fighting words”—those which by their very utterance inflict injury or incite immediate breach of peace—are not protected speech 01:28.Modern ImplicationsWhat about today's hottest speech debates?Many believe causing offense or being subjected to hate speech should be criminalized. But modern courts have limited the fighting words doctrine, instead requiring that the words would provoke a reasonable person—not just offend someone subjectively 04:26.In R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, the Supreme Court struck down selective bans targeting specific viewpoints, meaning laws can't target speech based on its message alone 05:47.Virginia v. Black established “true threats” as separate: burning a cross with an intent to intimidate is not protected, but burning a cross at a rally, without specific threats, is classified as protected expressive conduct 06:41.“That's Offensive!”—Is It a Crime?Calling someone the wrong pronoun, yelling insults at police, or using crude language? Most of these are still protected under the First Amendment—unless there's a credible, specific threat behind them 12:38. Police even have to put up with some name-calling in the line of duty—courts say you need thick skin if you're going to wear the badge in America!Confused? So are we! The fight over fighting words is always evolving. Drop your questions, comments, or legal hypotheticals on our episode page or at lawyertalkpodcast.com. We'll dive even deeper if you want to geek out on the legal details.5 Frequently Asked Questions about Fighting WordsWhat are fighting words? Fighting words are those that by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace, as defined in Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire.Is hate speech protected by the First Amendment? Generally, yes. Courts have ruled that the government cannot ban speech based on content or viewpoint, although true threats and certain conduct can be restricted.Can you be punished for insulting a police officer? Insulting a police officer (calling them a name) is typically protected speech, but direct threats (such as threatening harm) are not.What is the difference between fighting words and true threats? Fighting words are those that provoke immediate violence from the person addressed; true threats are statements meant to communicate a serious intent to harm.How do disorderly conduct laws interact with free speech? Disorderly conduct laws can validly restrict speech based on time, place, and manner, but not solely on the content of the speech unless it rises to the level of fighting words or true threats.Submit your questions to www.lawyertalkpodcast.com.Recorded at Channel 511.Stephen E. Palmer, Esq. has been practicing criminal defense almost exclusively since 1995. He has represented people in federal, state, and local courts in Ohio and elsewhere.Though he focuses on all areas of criminal defense, he particularly enjoys complex cases in state and federal courts.He has unique experience handling and assembling top defense teams of attorneys and experts in cases involving allegations of child abuse (false sexual allegations, false physical abuse allegations), complex scientific cases involving allegations of DUI and vehicular homicide cases with blood alcohol tests, and any other criminal cases that demand jury trial experience.Steve has unique experience handling numerous high publicity cases that have garnered national attention.For more information about Steve and his law firm, visit Palmer Legal Defense. Copyright 2026 Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At LawMentioned in this episode:Circle 270 Media Podcast ConsultantsCircle 270 Media® is a podcast consulting firm based in Columbus, Ohio, specializing in helping businesses develop, launch, and optimize podcasts as part of their marketing strategy. The firm emphasizes the importance of storytelling through podcasting to differentiate businesses and engage with their audiences effectively. www.circle270media.com

A bestselling computer book and a mayor's office may seem worlds apart, but Dan Gookin's path connects them through curiosity, clear communication, and public service. I talk with the DOS for Dummies author and Coeur d'Alene mayor about making technical writing useful, challenging industries that resist new ideas, and finding success by improving work others do poorly. Dan also shares why he entered local politics, how transparency and community engagement built public trust, and why responsible leadership often means asking the questions others overlook. We close by exploring political division, religious freedom, social media algorithms, and the need to reduce online anger without losing the internet's benefits. Highlights: 00:06:48 - Why leaving your comfort zone creates growth. 00:11:07 - How doing something better can become a business. 00:12:39 - Why writing for beginners changed computer publishing. 00:27:06 - How transparency concerns led Dan into politics. 00:37:30 - Why responsiveness helped Dan earn public trust. 00:54:49 - How social media fuels anger and division. About the Guest: Dan Gookin is the mayor-elect of Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, having won election in November 2025 after serving on the City Council since 2011. Known as a fiscal conservative, outspoken advocate for government transparency, and a committed budget hawk who asks tough questions, he is often described as “the lone voice of reason” on the council, consistently championing the public and the “little guy” against bureaucracy. Gookin views his public service as protecting individual rights. He prides himself on listening to all perspectives, welcoming alternative viewpoints, remaining open to new information, and never being a rubber-stamp vote. Professionally, Gookin is known as a writer and online trainer. He has been writing about technology since the early days of personal computing, combining his humor with a passion for gadgets to create informative and entertaining books. He authored the groundbreaking DOS For Dummies in 1991—the world's fastest-selling computer book at the time and the title that launched the iconic For Dummies series, now a publishing phenomenon. With more than 170 titles to his credit, over 12 million copies in print, and translations into more than 30 languages, his popular works include PCs and Laptops For Dummies, Android For Dummies, Word For Dummies, and C For Dummies. He maintains two helpful websites, wambooli.com and c-for-dummies.com. He creates online courses for LinkedIn Learning on diverse topics, and in 2020 published Running for Local Office For Dummies. Gookin graduated from the University of California, San Diego with a BA in Communications/Visual Arts and minors in cognitive psychology and theatrical design. He put his creative talents to work as artistic director of the Lake City Playhouse, where he designed sets, lighting, and directed many productions between 1997 and 2002. First and foremost, Dan considers himself a father who raised four boys in Idaho. Gookin resides in Coeur d'Alene with his wife, Brie, along with various children and pets. In his leisure time, he enjoys woodworking, playing the piano, riding his bike, cooking, gardening, and making lists of things he enjoys doing along with occasionally annoying those who think that they're important. Ways to connect with Dan**:** LinkedIn:  https://www.linkedin.com/in/dan-gookin-46995713/ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/dangookin About the Host: Michael Hingson is a New York Times best-selling author, international lecturer, and Chief Vision Officer for accessiBe. Michael, blind since birth, survived the 9/11 attacks with the help of his guide dog Roselle. This story is the subject of his best-selling book, Thunder Dog. Michael gives over 100 presentations around the world each year speaking to influential groups such as Exxon Mobile, AT&T, Federal Express, Scripps College, Rutgers University, Children's Hospital, and the American Red Cross just to name a few. He is Ambassador for the National Braille Literacy Campaign for the National Federation of the Blind and also serves as Ambassador for the American Humane Association's 2012 Hero Dog Awards. https://michaelhingson.com https://www.facebook.com/michael.hingson.author.speaker/ https://twitter.com/mhingson https://www.youtube.com/user/mhingson https://www.linkedin.com/in/michaelhingson/ Thanks for listening! Thanks so much for listening to our podcast! If you enjoyed this episode and think that others could benefit from listening, please share it using the social media buttons on this page. Do you have some feedback or questions about this episode? Leave a comment in the section below! Subscribe to the podcast If you would like to get automatic updates of new podcast episodes, you can subscribe to the podcast on Apple Podcasts or Stitcher. You can subscribe in your favorite podcast app. You can also support our podcast through our tip jar https://tips.pinecast.com/jar/unstoppable-mindset . Leave us an Apple Podcasts review Ratings and reviews from our listeners are extremely valuable to us and greatly appreciated. They help our podcast rank higher on Apple Podcasts, which exposes our show to more awesome listeners like you. If you have a minute, please leave an honest review on Apple Podcasts. Transcription Notes: Michael Hingson  00:04 What if the biggest thing holding you back isn't what's in front of you, but rather what you believe? Welcome to Unstoppable Mindset, where inclusion, diversity, and the unexpected meet. I'm your host, Michael Hingston, speaker, author, and advocate for inclusion and possibilities. This podcast explores how the beliefs we carry shape the way we live, lead, and connect with others. Each week, I talk with people who challenge assumptions, face adversity head-on, and show what's possible when we choose curiosity over fear. Together, we focus on mindset, resilience, and the small shifts that lead to meaningful change. Let's get started. Hello there, everyone. Welcome to another episode of Unstoppable Mindset. I am your host, Michael Hingston, and today we get to chat with Dan Gookin. Do you know who Dan Gookin is? Probably not, but you will by the time we're done. But I will tell you one thing about Dan. He was elected mayor of Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, in November of 2025. I think Dan, you're the first political person as such that we have had on, which is kind of cool. I'm really honored to to have you here, and and we can spend the the whole time picking on on other politicians, but there's no need to do that. I mean, what good does it do? It's a waste of time. But I want to welcome you to Unstoppable Mindset, and Dan, thanks very much for being here. Dan Gookin  01:44 Thank you, Michael. Thank you for having me on. Michael Hingson  01:46 Well, this will, I think, really be a lot of fun. I'm sorry that you guys aren't getting a lot of snow up there. My brother-in-law has been keeping me posted on the lack of snow, so today here we're expecting a temperature at about 70 degrees. Last week it got up to 39. So I don't know. There's something going on with the climate. Dan Gookin  02:10 Something. Michael Hingson  02:11 Yeah, whatever it is. Speaker 1  02:13 Well, there was a name for that. Michael Hingson  02:15 Yeah, yeah. If if there were enough people, would only believe it. But that's another story. You are right. Well, thanks very much for being here. Why don't we start? Tell me about the early Dan growing up and all that. Speaker 1  02:31 So I grew up in San Diego, California. Good place. I still say San Michael Hingson  02:35 Diego has the best weather in the country. Speaker 1  02:38 They do. It's changed a little bit as everything has, but I escaped from there back in 1991. Went up to Washington State because I was doing some work with Microsoft, and then decided that that was Seattle was another big city. So we kept looking east and finally landed in Idaho in Coeur d'Alene because it's pretty. Michael Hingson  03:01 It's a nice area. So you you did your schooling and all that down in San Diego. Speaker 1  03:06 Yeah, I graduated from the University of California, San Diego with a degree in communication visual arts. That was in 1983. Michael Hingson  03:13 Cool, wow. I've spent many a a day down in San Diego. I lived in Vista for six years, so I'm familiar with the area. Yeah, I liked Vista. Vista was a nice place to be. You Speaker 1  03:24 did a radio show out of Vista. Did you for a while? Yeah, computer call-in show. So that was way back. Michael Hingson  03:32 What did you discuss, or just anything dealing with computers? I Speaker 1  03:36 was editing a magazine, a local computer magazine at the time, and we purchased an hour, and so I would drive from my home in Tierra Santa all the way up to Vista to be in this little tiny radio station, where we would do call-ins. And sometimes people would call in, and I would help them solve their computer problems. And sometimes I had to talk to myself for Michael Hingson  03:57 an hour. And and and did you get answers when you talk to yourself. Speaker 1  04:02 No, but I got really hoarse. Ah, okay. Michael Hingson  04:04 Well, you know, just just checking. Well, that's cool. Well, I guess we could tell everyone that, among other things, Dan is also the author of a number of books, including DOS for Dummies. I still like DOS. Thank you. I I like DOS. I've just always enjoyed it. Although, I have to admit, Windows has progressed a whole lot more. But I always liked DOS. Speaker 1  04:27 Yes, it was good, and and it was its complexity or its a rudeness, I shall say. Yeah, that's a good. Sold the book because you had to type. You had to know the commands in Windows. You can kind of look and point and do all this stuff, but in DOS, you had to know the commands and type the commands, and people wouldn't-they couldn't remember. There were all these options, and so we sold a lot of books doing that. It's still, like I said, I I like it too. I like the command line because it's faster if you know what you have to type. Yeah, it takes less time to type. Than it does to look around, point and shoot with the mouse. Michael Hingson  05:04 Yeah, there are a number of blind people on some list serves that I am part of that every so often something regarding DOS comes up, which is I think kind of cool. Speaker 1  05:15 Yep, hasn't gone away. It's it's still lurking in there somewhere. Michael Hingson  05:19 It is still a kind of the basic underpinning foundation of a lot of Windows, isn't it? Speaker 1  05:25 Well, Windows actually does run on top of it still. If you if you when you start a program in Windows, you're actually issuing a text command. So inside there is a long text command that is issued that gets everything running. It's just that you're configuring that from a graphical perspective, Michael Hingson  05:44 right? Yeah, but but it is still running. DOS essentially runs under Windows, which is which is something that is is relevant. So I guess we could blame that on Bill Gates, Speaker 1  05:57 or credit him. I don't know. Michael Hingson  05:58 Or yeah, yeah, one of the other. Well, so you you graduated, you moved to Seattle. As you said, it is a big city, although you know it's kind of hard to fight Pike's fish market. Speaker 1  06:11 Well, there's there's the fun and charming parts of of Seattle that I really enjoyed. So I mean, I can't say that you know it was a horrible city. The thing I admired about Seattle the most was that Seattle would occasionally not take itself seriously, and I liked that it had a sense of humor and that people there were generally good natured. San Diego was a little bit more uptight, you know, fair weather fans, that kind of stuff, where Seattle was more of a community, and I admired that greatly. Michael Hingson  06:43 And there used to be a lot of rain up there. Speaker 1  06:45 Not as much as people say. That's kind of their reputation. The Pacific Northwest we do have. So I moved from Southern California where you have 360 days of sun a year to Pacific Northwest where you have 180, so it was kind of a shock from that point of view. It's mostly like today; it's overcast. It's just there's no sun, so that's the big difference. Michael Hingson  07:10 And then you moved up to Idaho, and and how many days of sun or not sun are there a year? Speaker 1  07:16 Oh, still about 180. 180. Uh huh. But it's you know so you get used to it after a while, and when the sun comes out, you're all happy, and it's like, look, the sun's out, everything's pretty. Michael Hingson  07:27 Yeah, fair. Yeah. So when you were in San Diego and so on, what did you want to do or be when you grew up? Speaker 1  07:36 So originally, I wanted to be a doctor, and then I had the misfortune of being in a hospital, and I said I don't ever want to be back here, and changed my mind and figured I would be a writer. So for years I started writing and submitting things to magazines, trying to work on books and stuff. I mean I wrote a few books, and they say that you have to get about a million words of junk out before you actually are a good writer. So I I worked on that for a long time, and got to the point where I I actually had a reputation with some of the editors in the magazines who would write me back personal notes instead of the generic you know dismissal, and so that was working really well. But then what happened in 1984 was I wrote something for the local computer flyer, and they liked that, and it got published, and that was what really started the career for tech because tech wanted people who knew how to write, so that was good timing. Michael Hingson  08:35 Yeah, so many technical manuals are just so boring. I really wish people would learn how to write more interesting books. Of course, I say that about textbooks as well. I am of the opinion that having a master's degree in physics and having read many a physics book, the and there are so few of them. The best books are the ones where the authors have put some actual personal stories in to draw people in with human interest parts of the science, and I wish more people would do that. Speaker 1  09:03 And that was my point too. It was like these books are dull and boring. And the problem I had because I was writing computer books at the time, I had a computer book literary agent. There is such a thing, and it's it's backwards in that industry though, because the publisher says what they want a book on, and then they have you write the book on the topic, and so I was doing that for many years. But I did not like the fact that they would edit my books to make them dry, and the editors would actually complain to me and say, "There's too much personality in here. You can't have this. It was like it was like they thought that was a built-in feature of the book, and my protest was, "Well, no. Let's make them interesting. Let's use real life examples. Let's have some personality in there. Let's have some interaction with the with the reader. And they didn't like that until DOS for Dummies came around, and the publisher was willing to change the paradigm. Michael Hingson  09:55 Jeez, yeah, it's so unfortunate. They they think they know. Everything there is to know, and the reality is they don't. Speaker 1  10:04 That's the way it is with just about any industry. You know that I think the corporate mentality is kind of to resist innovation, even in the most innovative industries, until something crazy comes along. And I think that's why in Silicon Valley you had all these startups. You know, if you look, if you trace the lineage of a lot of the big companies, they started at other big companies that were unwilling to do the crazy ideas these guys had, and so they went off. I mean, Steve Jobs, Steve Wozniak left Hewlett Packard and started up Apple Computer, and I'm pretty sure there's probably been some engineers from Apple Computer who've left and started up their own company and becoming Michael Hingson  10:43 well. And Bill Gates is essentially the same way. It's it's he started out doing something, but he attracted people's attention by some of the other things that he did. Speaker 1  10:53 Yep. Michael Hingson  10:54 And that was was very relevant. But I I hear what you're saying. It makes perfect sense because people just don't like to be innovative and don't like change, and and that's unfortunate that we have so many people that just, as much as they talk about the fact that change is everywhere, they don't like it. Speaker 1  11:10 No, it's well, I think yeah, we we get in our comfort zone, and you don't grow out in the comfort zone. So I like to challenge myself and do interesting things like become mayor, and you know you leave your comfort zone. And what what can I do here, or how can I do this better? Michael Hingson  11:26 Yeah, well, and that makes makes perfect sense. Well, what got you started writing about technology? Just because you were writing that that one article there, or those articles that got interest on the part of a publisher, or what? Speaker 1  11:41 What got me started was that I got paid. Ah, Michael Hingson  11:44 good point. Speaker 1  11:45 You know, they they paid me, and then you know, as as someone who was you know using a computer at the time, and they were called microcomputers, and they were really primitive compared to what we have today. Oh yeah, I I used it to write. So, and the the problem with that was that the the documents, the manuals that we talk about, were so dry and boring, and eventually, all of a sudden, it would dawn on me: it's like, well, this is what it's trying to say. So why don't they just come out and say it this way, or why don't they use an analogy and try to explain it in that manner instead of coming at it from this hardcore technical? And that was what really turned off a lot of people, so it motivated me to want to do it better, and that's kind of what I tell the kids, like my kids. I say you should start up a business. That's really the best way to get successful is start up your own business and become famous like that. And they're well, what business should I start up? I said that the easiest way is to find something that you like, something that's being done poorly, and just do it better. Yeah, and that's really a lot of the the creative, insanely genius stuff that's happened throughout the world is just someone who does something routine but does it better. Michael Hingson  12:52 And that's really the operative part about it, and and the real key. I think you're you're absolutely right. Find something that people aren't doing well, and by the time you get creative enough to figure that out, you're well on your way. Speaker 1  13:05 Yep. So that's that's what I did. Michael Hingson  13:08 Yeah. And so you started going off and and writing a variety of things. What what actually got you to write Dos for Dummies? What specifically? That's first of all, I love the the title of all the Four Dummies books. I think it makes sense. But what got you started in writing DOS for Dummies directly? Speaker 1  13:27 Well, I I knew that there was an appetite out there for beginner computer books, but the publishing industry would not publish beginning computer books because they said beginners don't buy computer books. And I explained to them, well, your problem is you don't write beginner computer books. You write something and you call it, you know, the easy guide to whatever, but the content of it is not written for a beginner. Maybe the first chapter is very condescending and patronizing, and then the rest of it is just technical garbage. So I said you have to keep that tone throughout the entire text. You have to identify who it is you're writing to, as who's a smart person who may just not get it, and explain it to them, and just keep going. And that was the problem. So I I did originally called it the Idiots Guide for DOS, which was based after the Idiots Guide to Volkswagen Repair. My dad had a copy of that, and I thought, well, what a brilliant idea. Michael Hingson  14:20 Yeah. Speaker 1  14:21 And so the publisher saw me speak at a conference, and where I was bemoaning the fact that the books were so boring, and they kept editing out my personality. And then went to to him, and and he's like, "This is great. Your outline that you have for this book is perfect. Except we want to call it DOS for Dummies. I thought, like a lot of other people, that was condescending and patronizing, but that it's an alliteration, so that's what they go with. And then he said to make it a reference. Don't make it a tutorial because, and this is brilliant, these people don't want to learn anything; they just want to do their job. Yeah, that makes sense. So that was and that was it, and we put a lot of humor in it. You know, people would tell me that they'd read the book on the subway, and you know, you'd see someone laughing reading a computer book. That's weird, but there would just be enough humor, and I'd use Mad Magazine as my inspiration. So it was kind of like us versus the nerds, and and that was what really founded the whole thing, and I tell you what, it caught on. I did not think it would. There was no way we were planning on writing a book that would sell, you know, 8 million copies. We were just thinking, well, this is going to be fun. Let's just do this, get it out of our system, and then go back to writing boring books. Michael Hingson  15:36 Made the publisher very happy. Speaker 1  15:39 Oh yeah, they were printing Gold bricks, yeah. Michael Hingson  15:43 That, of course, was the real key. Well, that started a brand, didn't it? Speaker 1  15:47 Oh yeah, they did. There was no intention to do that, but then they they followed that up with Max for Dummies and a bunch of other titles that were just very popular at the time. AOL for Dummies, you know, Windows for Dummies eventually came out, and that was the King for Dummies book. But yeah, they have and they have it on all topics. I've even so as someone who is you know starting in government, I got Robert's Rules for Dummies, which you know you've been to a meeting, you know they follow Robert's Rules, which is very dry and boring, but it's it's important. And Robert's Rules for Dummies is a good example of a For Dummies book because it explains everything carefully. Lots of humor in there, and so there's a lot of them. Wine for Dummies was another one that I really liked. I thought they did a good job. Golf for Dummies. There's a there's on every topic. There's a For Dummies book. Michael Hingson  16:37 How many of them did you write? Speaker 1  16:40 Only wrote the ones with my names on them, but probably about 40 separate titles. So over the years, most of them have been rewrites. So technology changes. So there have been 16 editions of Word for Dummies, and 13 editions of PCs for Dummies. There were four editions of DOS for Dummies. So you're you're always writing new editions, so all totaled 180 separate titles. But individual titles, without not counting multiple editions, right? About 60. Michael Hingson  17:09 Wow. Speaker 1  17:10 Yeah. Yeah, Michael Hingson  17:10 and I can appreciate that that books like Word for Dummies or even iPhones for Dummies has to change over time. Speaker 1  17:19 Yeah. Well, some of them. I mean, I've been doing a kind of a review on on YouTube. I've been doing short videos highlighting some of the goofy images that I put in the books over the years. And way back about 20 years ago, I think I was updating these titles once a year. They would say, "We need a new version of this. We need a new version of this. And at the time, technology was just. I mean, they were cranking out new stuff all the time. Michael Hingson  17:44 So, who's written AI for Dummies? Speaker 1  17:47 I don't know, but that is a title, so I wouldn't be Michael Hingson  17:50 surprised. Speaker 1  17:51 It should write itself, though. You think about Michael Hingson  17:53 it. Yeah, you you know, they they really should do that. It should write itself. Speaker 1  17:56 Someone told me once that they they they wanted to do a manual in my style, so they directed AI to write something in the style of Dan Gukan, and apparently AI can do that. So, am I going to get paid? I don't know. Michael Hingson  18:10 Well, that's another story, of course. Yeah, but still, it it is a it's a it's a great franchise. It's a great brand all the way around, and I know different people have written different different kinds of books like that, but still, the the fact is we need that in the world, and and I agree with you, especially that it's good to put humor and personality into it. And I really wish more people would do that. I really wish that would go into the the textbook world, but it hasn't yet. Speaker 1  18:37 No, that's that, and that's a different planet. I tried to break into that world, and that academia is is it's different. It is weird. Michael Hingson  18:44 Yeah, there are just not that many people who can get away with it like Richard Feynman did with some of the things that he did in physics, and even there, his his books were a little boring at times. But still, Speaker 1  18:56 he was awesome. His of course, his his autobiography is a lot of fun. Michael Hingson  19:00 Yeah, surely you're joking, mr. Fineman. Speaker 1  19:03 Exactly. Michael Hingson  19:04 Adventures of yeah, it is. I I keep it around. I've got an audio copy of it, and every so often I will go back and read parts of it. It's a it's a great book. Speaker 1  19:14 He's kind of an inspiration to me, especially in the area of government. And one of the parts of his book where he was on the panel that was reviewing textbooks for, I think, the state of California, and he noticed that one of the books was blank; it was empty, and he was the only one on the panel who did it. And I kind of echo that often in government because I'm occasionally the only person who actually reads some of the material they provide. Yeah, and and those kind of moments are classic. I love those. You know, when you can say, "Well, as everyone notices, you know, page 14 is blank, and they all madly flip to page 14, like, "Oh my gosh, how did you find this? Well, I, I did my job. I read the thing. Michael Hingson  19:54 I had a roommate in college, and we at that time we were using the Berkeley Physics series. I don't know. Whether that even still exists anymore, but different professors from Berkeley wrote various books, and the guy who wrote the book on waves, I had a roommate who was reading that book, and he searched vigorously to try to find a single misspelling of a word in the whole book. Wow! He finally found one. He said there really was one in the book. Kind of makes you wonder if that was deliberate, but but he actually found one. But it took him most of the quarter we had the book to find it. But but he did. Speaker 1  20:33 Excellent. Yeah, I got to say that's that's an art form. I used to work in a publishing house, and we would pore over books looking for spelling errors and mistakes and punctuation and all this stuff and of course you don't find them until the book's actually printed. Michael Hingson  20:46 Of course not. Yeah, yeah. Now it's it should be easier, but it's not, and they still don't come out until the book is already published and it's out there, and then you find out what isn't right. Speaker 1  20:58 Right. Michael Hingson  21:00 I suppose that gives the publisher an excuse to republish the book and make more money. Speaker 1  21:05 Well, yeah, it depends. It's if it is selling. If it doesn't sell, then obviously the the mistake's going to linger out there. Of course, with digital copies, they can update it right away, but not with a print book. Michael Hingson  21:17 Yeah, nowadays there's so many print books that are done pretty much on demand, so that if you want a copy, unless it's just something where they're selling literally millions a month, the book is available on demand. Although there's a little bit of a lag time to get it, my book Thunderdog, which is the story of Roselle and me in the World Trade Center, is is still selling pretty well, but it is more printed on demand by Thomas Nelson than now Harper Collins. Speaker 1  21:46 Yeah, Michael Hingson  21:47 and I understand that as long as it's available, I'm not going to complain. Speaker 1  21:51 And they and they they prefer to sell it that way as opposed to printing out 5000 copies they have to store somewhere. So Michael Hingson  21:56 right, yeah, they don't have to pay for storage and they just print it, and so it takes an extra week to get somewhere. That's fine. We can cope with that as long as it's available, and then that's all that really matters. Speaker 1  22:08 Yeah. Michael Hingson  22:09 But you've written a lot of books. How come so many? Because they're not all for dummies. Ah, okay. Speaker 1  22:16 Well, it just you know that was my profession, and that's what I did. And so, and I had a good agent who would find me a lot of work, so yeah, they would come up and they would want me to write a book on this or that, and a lot of it was because at the time in that industry I had a name and a reputation. I'm also very fast, so and that that kind of surprises people. In fact, there's some someone who accuses me of having a ghostwriter, which I do not. It's just I've been doing it so long, and you know, when I started, my agent said that he said the more you do this, the faster you'll get, the better you'll get. So, whereas in the original book, the first book I wrote took about six months to to write. I've written books in less than a month. It really depends. It depends on the topic, how well I know the topic, but also I do a lot of organizing with an outline, and so I will will work with an outline almost until it's down to the paragraph level, and then that makes it really easy to write the book, especially a technology book where there's a lot of cross references, and this sequence, you know, assuming someone's reading it front to back is really important, so you got to make sure that you touch upon things and do it in the right order. And then that's so yeah. I just got really good at it, which annoyed a lot of my fellow authors because as I was writing and I would get faster and faster, the contracts would start demanding the books in a more expedient manner, so other authors would complain to me and say, "You know, I have to write this book, and they're only giving me three months to do it. They're blaming me because I can do it in three months, and they figure everyone can do it in three months. So that was fun. Michael Hingson  23:54 Have you had books that someone asked you to write where you really didn't know much of anything about the subject, and you had to spend more time researching it, or you just spend time researching it, but you still did that very quickly. Speaker 1  24:06 Yeah, when I first started, that was pretty much the case. In fact, I talked with a guy who he had written the like the best-selling DBase three book. So DBase was a database way back in DOS, and it was the most popular database program, and he wrote the number one best-selling DBase three book that everyone who used that that program would buy, and he told me that he knew nothing about it when he signed the contract. So the the process of writing the book involved this intense deep dive into finding out what it is the program does, and then working on that. Of course, in those days, the books, the software came with a manual, so it was possible to go through the manual and see what the thing was capable of, and maybe get a few hints about that. But the books were not just a rephrase. The manual; they were a little bit better, the project oriented, whatever. So there was one one book that I did on a program called Super Card for the Macintosh, and it was the it was the there was no documentation, and I could call up the developer and I could ask him. So that was that was a tool I could use if I had access to the developer. I could call them up and I could say, "Okay, so I'm I'm doing this. What can you tell me that's like a secret or that is not obvious? And they love to share that stuff. Sure, I just write it all down, and then that that'll make the book better. If you could get through the the gatekeepers and get into where the nerds were, then you could get a lot of good information, and they were happy to share it. I did a few books on OS two that were like that, where I finally was able to escape into the lab and ask them. And the the guy they were so friendly, and they're like, "Oh, you got to tell him this, this, this, this. You know, we we couldn't put this in the manual. You have to tell him this, and so you write a great book. But of course, OS two, no one used it, so no one bought the book. Michael Hingson  26:05 Yeah, yeah, OS two was not one of those things that everybody loved. If Speaker 2  26:13 you enjoy Unstoppable Mindset and would like to help us continue bringing these conversations to you each week, we've created a way for you to support the show. Your contribution helps us cover production costs and continue sharing stories, insights, and ideas that inspire people to live with purpose and possibility. If supporting the podcast feels right for you, you'll find the link in the show notes. Thank you for being part of the unstoppable mindset community. Michael Hingson  26:46 I remember when I was a student at UC Irvine. I wasn't an information computer science major. I was physics major, but several people took ICS one, two, and three, which was a three quarter course, or well, it was a year course, and the the book they used was Introduction to Computer Programming by Ken Ingram. And what was fun about that was that on the first day of class, the professor would come in and he'd say, "Okay, I want you to read chapter one of information of introduction to computer programming by Ken Ingram. It's the textbook we're going to use. I want you to read that before our next class. And of course, most everyone had not touched the book prior to that. And what he didn't say was that that first chapter took up half the book. Speaker 1  27:40 I like it. Michael Hingson  27:43 Yeah, I know. Wasn't that? And I, I, I heard about it. I, I never did get the book, and I didn't get it transcribed into Braille. But I thought that was cute. Chapter one was half the book. Speaker 1  27:53 No one would have suspected chapter one's an easy chapter. It's four pages. Right, supposed to be right. I think it was like Michael Hingson  28:00 180 pages. It was amazing. Michael Hingson  28:03 I'm not sure whether Ingram had a sense of humor or what, but anyway, there you go. But yeah, that that was kind of kind of amazing. So you you wrote all these books and you continue to do that, but somewhere along the line, you got interested in doing things in politics. What was that all about? Speaker 1  28:25 Well, that was frustrating. Not Michael Hingson  28:28 bad, Speaker 1  28:29 because I. So I think a lot of people are kind of interested. They follow politics. If I call up my mom in San Diego, she has to complain to me about you know the mayor of San Diego and what the city council is doing and and it's it's common it's just I think I think the most most people who are active in in their community know a little bit about politics or whatever and in my case I had just moved from the county here near Courtland and then I'd moved into the city, and I had heard that there was someone was buying up properties in my neighborhood, and I thought that was curious, and I wanted to see if this was something that you know are they going to tear down houses? What are they going to do? So I started researching using the the county website to see who was own who owned these properties, and it was a place called the Lake City Development Corporation, and I thought, well, I need to find out what that is, and it turned out that was an urban renewal agency that was formed by the city of Cortland, and I started reading the statutes and I started reading their minutes and finding out what it is they do, and while on the surface it sounded really fun, there were a lot of curious things that I didn't like. A lot of non-transparent things, a lot of things where you know they're spending public money on what I thought were frivolous things, and so I started asking questions. I started coming to meetings, and they're missing. Was that they pushed back, and so I just something triggered me, and I had a red flag, and I just started going after it. We started, we formed a group of people who were all interested in this, and we would meet regularly and go over what was going on with the government. We'd find issues regarding transparency and spending, and lots of interesting stuff. Never really anything nefarious. Never anything that would. But just a lot of stuff that, as we let the public know about what was going on, they would become outraged and they would say, "Wait a second! They're spending millions of dollars on this, and you know, with property taxes so high, and what is this, and why is it affecting me? And and so I went to the city council meetings here in Portland, and I was frustrated because no one else seemed to get it. And I would look at them, and they would have some issue that would come up, and everyone on the council-there were six members on the council-they would all vote in unison, and no one had asked a question. And I would say, "Well, wait a second, why aren't they asking a question about this, or why aren't they concerned about this, or what about the side effects of this? And so I started writing articles for the paper. I eventually did videos and to speak to various groups and such because I was like, we got to hold government accountable. So I ran for office in ran for the city council in 2007, and I lost. And then I ran in 2009, and I lost, but only by like 29 votes. And then I was done at that point. I really didn't want to do it again because running for office is a pain. Michael Hingson  31:33 Yeah. And Speaker 1  31:34 then they had this huge thing where all of a sudden they were going to redo a park without a public vote, and I wanted a public vote. Lots of people wanted to vote on it, but no, they were going to do it, and they didn't care what the public thought. So they made me run. They made me run a third time, and I won. And I've been on the city council ever since. And then, of course, well, since last November when I got kicked up to the mayor seat, which is where I'm sitting Right now, strange journey. Michael Hingson  32:04 Well, yeah, but on the other hand, there is something to be said for transparency, and there's somebody something to be said for somebody who really wants to look out for what what people want and what people are doing. I I got involved. Well, I've not run for public office, but I've been very much involved in political kinds of things because I've been involved in the blindness world since early 1970s, and the National Federation of the Blind has had for well now, gosh, more than 50 years or around 50 years, what used to be called the March on Washington. Now it's called the Washington Seminar, which is a an event that takes place every year, where several 100 blind people descend on Washington and go off and visit legislators. And the idea is to really get them to understand what the needs of blind people are and try to get them to vote on issues that directly relate to issues concerning us, and sometimes they do. Although it's gotten a lot harder to get things passed, especially in the last eight or nine years. But still, that it it has to be done. But I remember, among other things, I was living in Massachusetts when I first started going, and among other things, we we went and saw the Speaker of the House, who was Tip O'Neill at the time, which was kind of fun. And what an interesting, what a charismatic guy! Didn't matter what party he was with; it was a charismatic guy. And we also visited people like Senator at the time Paul Songis, and what was interesting about him was we we talked about our issues, and it was the end of the day, and then suddenly he said, you know, I'm not going anywhere for the next few minutes. Do you guys have time? And we ended up just talking for about an hour and a half about his view of of and our views of what Massachusetts needed to do, not only for blind people but just in general, it was just fascinating. There weren't very many politicians who would do that. Speaker 1  34:08 That's awesome. Yeah, I liked him. I liked Tungus a lot. Michael Hingson  34:12 Yeah, I wish he'd been able to run for president, but he got cancer, and that's that's unfortunate. Yeah, but because I think that he's one of those people who would do what really needed to be done and do it the right way. Speaker 1  34:26 In other words, the people who never win. Yeah, that's unfortunately Michael Hingson  34:31 really the case, isn't it? Speaker 2  34:33 Yeah, Speaker 1  34:33 yeah. Michael Hingson  34:34 But but you got to do that. Speaker 1  34:36 Yeah. Michael Hingson  34:38 So you you know, but you you hopefully you'll make a big difference, and maybe you'll be able to get people to believe in climate change. Oh, did I say that Speaker 1  34:48 this year? Nah, Michael Hingson  34:53 not unless you predict snow when it actually comes. Speaker 1  34:56 That and that and that's the key. Yeah, Michael Hingson  34:59 yeah. No, I understand, but it but it is fascinating. I you know I I enjoy the concept of politics. I enjoy people who really have a vested interest in making government go well, but it is so unfortunate that we don't see that much of it, which is just too bad. Speaker 1  35:18 There are a lot of good dedicated people out there. I think so. Of course, the the problem is is you know, like they say, politics is sports for the uncoordinated, and it's drama for the ugly. But the the thing is, the people who really do a good job, who are out there doing what you want them to do, they don't get the headlines. It's the noisemakers. It's the extremists. It's the people who are going to have some obnoxious opinion because that that gets everyone's attention. You know, the the guy out there who's doing the job, who's putting in the time, representing the citizens, and making his community a better place. You know, you're never going to read that guy in the paper, unfortunately. Michael Hingson  35:59 Yeah, and that's also part of the problem: is that the media looks for all the drama rather than really looking to to represent the the average citizen and what they truly want and need. Speaker 1  36:10 So those don't the actual the things don't make headlines. In fact, it was a it was really funny. There was a guy who was elected to the state house from this county, and one of his campaign platforms, he was going to repeal all the useless laws, all the things that are still on the books. That you know, just we don't need those laws anymore. They're old. They're outdated, and he did that for about a week, and it doesn't make headlines. So here he is, you know, doing this, doing the job that you think they they would want to do and making government more effective, no one cared. I remember there was one year where we actually we cut property taxes here in the city, and I thought, wow, everyone's going to come up and say thank you. No, no one did. So it's like, what's the motivation? If you go, they say, I want you to be I want you to be my mayor and I want you to work to cut that budget and so you cut the budget and then no one says thank you. Michael Hingson  37:08 We got Tom Steyer here in California who wants to become governor and he's talking about all these things that he's going to do. He's going to get electric utility rates lowered by a significant amount. He's going to encourage and bring competition to the electric grid industry, and he talks about lowering housing costs by building a million homes and doing so many things. And every time I hear his campaign commercials, the thing that I keep asking myself is, haven't we learned anything? And no offense to Donald Trump, but Donald Trump made a lot of promises that we're not seeing. Steyer is making a lot of promises that he has yet to say how he's going to pull any of them off. Speaker 1  37:56 Oh yeah, and that's and that's the thing is you got to. There's so much. There's only so much you can do. But you can you when you campaign, they can say anything. Of course, I know they might as well just say free ice cream and ponies for everyone. Michael Hingson  38:07 Yeah, and and that's almost essentially what's happening. And I'm not saying that he'd be a bad governor. I I haven't researched him enough, but the commercials just don't do anything to make me thrilled because he's not saying how he's going to do any of it, and and that's what I really want to know. Speaker 1  38:25 Yeah, I didn't when I when I ran this campaign, I didn't really promise anything that was sexy at all. I said, you know, I'm going to work on a policy manual. I'm going to increase the amount of information and transparency, and it was like nothing that you want to put on a bumper sticker, but I still won. I mean, there were people who were in the race who were promising this and that, and they were going to do this and all this stuff, and somehow I eked it out. Michael Hingson  38:51 Why do you think you won? Speaker 1  38:52 Name recognition, Michael Hingson  38:54 okay, Speaker 1  38:55 and that's and that's pretty much that's a lot of what politics is is is just the the name recognition. You can win on that. I also do have a reputation. I mean, being on council for 14 years and being often called the lone voice of reason, like I said earlier, I'm the one who asked that obvious question. Yeah, and people are in the audience are going, "Well, thank you. Someone's finally asking what what they wanted to ask, and so there was there was that, and and I also, you know, I I do return my emails. I answer the phone calls. I make sure that I'm I'm available. So you know, and I think that that reputation kind of spread itself around that that I would be responsive. It didn't mean that I actually did anything because the you know the powers are really limited. So if someone wanted you know they want to put in a stop sign somewhere, I'll go visit them, and we'll look at the thing, and we'll look at the traffic data, and all this stuff. But there may not be a stop sign there. Still, I showed enough time that I paid attention to them, and I responded to them, and you know, we'll see what we can do. That's the best you can say. Michael Hingson  39:55 And if it didn't happen that there was a stop sign, but there was a good reason for it. I would suspect that you would be the kind of person who would say, "Here's why it didn't happen. Speaker 1  40:03 Right, exactly, and and to explain that for and a lot of people don't understand things like that because it's easy to get defensive with government because sometimes it can be so colossally stupid. Yeah, but but it's just as long as you have that explanation, and sometimes it's it's really it's refreshing because then they hear the answer and they're good with it, so we have a problem here with there's noise on the freeway because they're expanding the freeway, and a lot of people are upset, so they call city hall, but it's not our project; it's the state highway district. So you know, it's like I can do only what I can do, but it's still you know, if you're the only elected official who bothered to reply to them and told them, you know, I hear what you're saying. I'm going to do whatever we can. Sometimes that makes people happy. They may not be happy in the big picture, but at least they got a response. Michael Hingson  40:48 And when you discover something that's relevant, I'll bet you are the kind of person who would then initiate another letter saying, "Here's why it didn't work, or "Here's why it will work. Speaker 1  40:59 Right, and I do follow up. So I did. In that case, I wrote a letter to the governor and said, "You know, is there anything you can do? And then I forwarded the letter on to the person who had contacted me and said, "Okay, this is the best I can do. Let's let's see what he can do. So yeah, Speaker 1  41:14 yeah. Michael Hingson  41:15 I'm I'm curious. You mentioned that property taxes did get lowered once in Cordellane, but nothing. No one ever did anything with that. How come? Speaker 1  41:23 Well, no. It's just we we did. We we kept them. You got you got them lowered. Michael Hingson  41:27 But but why didn't anybody pay attention to that? Speaker 1  41:30 No. Well, see, I'm sure they paid attention to it. We are only one entity on your property tax bill, so there's there's a few. Ah, good Michael Hingson  41:39 point. Speaker 1  41:39 We might have been the the one who kept it down, but the other ones may have kept it up. And then there's all the the formula is really complex, and so it could be that you know their assess property assessment went up, a lot of other things that would have happened that would have affected it. But like I said, I mean we made a big to do about it, saying hey look we worked, we cut the budget. We kept it flat for all you guys, and then no one said anything. But you know that that's it's discouraging, but it doesn't discourage me from continuing to try because I'll always try. Michael Hingson  42:12 You can only do what you can do, but at least at least you're doing it. Yeah. Now, if you want to live in a state where the taxes are very interesting, move to New Jersey, yeah, where we lived, the the taxes every town, every city had its own property taxes. You could live on a street, yeah, you could live on a street where you had a property tax of some amount, and if you walked across to the other side of the street, the property tax would be twice what yours was because the border runs right down the middle of the street. Speaker 1  42:45 That's crazy. Michael Hingson  42:47 We thought it was. Yeah, we thought it was kind of interesting, but we fortunately never had too horrible of property taxes in Westfield. But still, we heard about some other places that had some some horrible property taxes, but you know it's it's what what you have. Speaker 1  43:07 Yep. Michael Hingson  43:08 So you were in the city council for 14 years. What made you decide that you were going to run for mayor? Because you had to do that. You had to make that decision. Speaker 1  43:17 Yeah, didn't want to. You know, wasn't on my on my dance card to like, oh, next step up is going to be mayor. It was more of there was frustration that I had because the the past couple of mayors, good men, good people, but I always wanted to do more. I mean, being on the council, it was frustrating because I wanted a little more leadership out of the center seat wasn't seeing that, and then I worked earlier last year. I called up a bunch of people to see if they'd be willing to do the job. You know, good strong community members who would be provide the leadership and had the name recognition required to do the job, and no one wanted to do it. So I was like, okay, well, I'll I'll see if I can do it. I still have two years left on my council term, so if I lost, I'd still be part of the process. But there ended up being four people in that race, so it was pretty crowded. Which to me, you know, if if you're running if you run unopposed, it's pretty much a sign that people kind of like the way things are going. They're not they're not upset with you. Generally, if you have one opponent, you're considered that you know oh well good you know I get to compete for for the job or someone else is unhappy. But if you have a lot of opponents, it generally means that the public isn't happy with what's going on and they want to see some change. So there were four people in the race. I won with like 38% of the vote, so that's wow, Michael Hingson  44:45 yeah. Well, but clearly you're different than a lot of people. For example, you're a member of the Kootenay County Republican Central Committee, and yeah, and they sued you for defamation. What was all that about? Speaker 1  44:59 Well. So we had an episode here where the first of all the local Republican Party decided that running partisan races wasn't enough; that they wanted to get involved with nonpartisan races. And in Idaho, a lot of the local offices are nonpartisan. So city council is nonpartisan, school districts are nonpartisan. You know, water district, highway district, all these smaller local offices, and we have a community college here called North Idaho College. And the Senate committee decided that they would start to what they call rating and vetting candidates to determine who was the most conservative. And while a lot of Republicans appreciate that and they want to know who the real conservative is. The central committee realized that it was a way for them to exercise political power, because when people would get their recommendations, that would be the person who would win. And so they got power mad, and in my opinion, they hijacked the trustees of our local community college, and pretty much almost ran the thing into a ground. It was the it's the only college a community college in the history of the country that's ever been put on probation for disaccreditation due to board governance. Normally, when you disaccredit a college, you're disaccrediting it because of financial reasons, or something else, but or academics. Never, never has it happened that the board has been so crazy that the the ACL ACCU whatever it is the accreditation agency for community colleges has said, "What we're gonna we're gonna pull away your credentials, and all your students will not be receiving college credit. So, I mean, what what this board did that was endorsed by the local Republican Party, the extremists on the party, they they fired the president for no reason. They they started running up the bills, increasing the athletics budget. The board meetings were just pure chaos. Employees would leave. The local high schools stopped their their co education programs. It was just crazy. Wow! And and a lot of people didn't really understand what was going on. So I did a YouTube channel called Kootenay Rants, and Kootenay is the name of our county. Michael Hingson  47:20 Kootenay, yeah. I said Kootenay. Sorry about that. Speaker 1  47:22 It's no, it's okay. It's it could be either way. Who knows? Up north, they do say Kootenai, so we don't know. But anyway, this really got under the skin of the central committee because I pinned the blame on what was going on at the college on them, which is was justified, and I would not make anything up. Instead, I would just put in highlights from the meetings and say, "Here's what's happening, and here's the crazy stuff. You know, trustees yelling at members of the audience, making fun of them. You know, interrupting people, saying just weird, strange things. I mean, it just-it was odd. It was so bizarre, and so it was easy for me to make these videos. My background is in communications, and I know video production, so I was able to put together these videos on a YouTube channel, and you know, hundreds of people in the county would start watching them, including the central committee that did not like that I was exposing what I consider to be their corruption and their the the fact that I think they were responsible for this and they didn't like that so they accused me of defamation basically mean tweets because I would tweet about them and their nonsense and it was like they they made a big to do out of it because I was running for re-election for city council, so they came to a city council meeting to serve me, and you know recorded it and put it up on the internet and all this other stuff that that was just crazy. But my insurance company fortunately decided to represent me, and they just they thought the the suit was without merit. They don't say frivolous. They say without merit. Without Michael Hingson  49:04 merit. No, yeah. Speaker 1  49:05 And so yeah. And so eventually, now the suit is over, and I figured I would either win in court or it would be dismissed. But the insurance company settled, and I it was against my wishes. I said no. I said don't settle with these people. But the insurance company did settle, and I made sure that, as part of the settlement, that they would not say that I agreed to it, or that I said I was wrong, or I apologized, or anything. No, the insurance company just didn't want to waste any more money, so they decided to settle. They wrote a check. I don't know what it cost the central committee. As a member of the central committee, it has never been reported to the committee how much money they spent on that? Because it's it's pretty much the the Republican Central Committee of Kootenay County is pretty much a tyranny run by one guy and a personality cult, and there are members of the committee. There are some good Republicans such as myself on the committee who do believe in transparency and limited government and all those Ronald Reagan things. But there are these extremists on there who are just nutballs, and so there's a group of us here called North Idaho Republicans who are working to counter their insanity. And we've done a good job, but we need to do more work, and that's the story of the KCRCC. And they sued me for defamation. Michael Hingson  50:21 That's kind of crazy, though. Nevertheless, Speaker 3  50:23 of course. Michael Hingson  50:24 And it's only kind Speaker 1  50:26 of that. I wasn't laying awake. I mean, occasionally someone would call me up and they would say, "So what's the case? What's the what's happening with a lawsuit? And I'd say, "Well, a lawsuit. I said, "Oh yeah, that's right. They're suing me. I mean, it was never really. I was never obligated for it. Michael Hingson  50:39 Yeah. Well, so just out of curiosity, since the Republicans were doing this, where were the Democrats in all of that? Speaker 1  50:47 Well, we don't really have a lot of Democrats. That's Michael Hingson  50:49 what I was wondering. Yeah, Speaker 1  50:51 and so and and I always used to joke. I would say that the the Democrats, the Kootenai County Democrats, are looking for a new meeting location, and if anyone has a spare closet, got it. You let them know. No, they're they're all they're all very nice people. Michael Hingson  51:05 Yeah, Speaker 1  51:05 but they're they are in an extreme minority, and unfortunately, they they do try. So last time they had a body for every seat up for election, but they don't really come close. And it's a lot of it comes down to name recognition, but you also have a lot of red blue state refugees who come here. You have a lot of COVID refugees who came here, and so Idaho is very red. Kootenay County is very red, and it would take a tremendous amount of effort to to have a Democrat win here. We do have Democrats in the legislature, not a lot, but we do have them, and the the National Democratic Party is unwilling to spend a lot of money here because they know they're going to lose. So that's what I hear from them. But they are they are generally nice people. I mean, like you said, you if you wanted to vote for me here and you're a Democrat, I'd happily accept the vote. It's a nonpartisan position. We don't deal with those big divisive issues that you know that you you see on the news. Yeah, we're pretty much community-minded people, and I appreciate anyone who is. I do fight the KCRCC because I don't see them as community-minded, and that's one of the issues. Michael Hingson  52:18 Yeah. Well, it's it's unfortunate that that people are that way, but I I see it all too often in so many different ways. I mean, we face it with even in the blindness world with so many things where there ought to be major improvements and there ought to be defenses of the civil rights of blind people. For example, some of the rideshare programs don't do a lot to train their drivers about the fact that in reality they're obligated to take blind people with guide dogs, and oh, there's there is a fair amount of that, and it's and and the companies aren't willing to do anything about it, and we have to keep fighting it, which is just too bad. But there's just so many stuff, and there are so many people who just have these hidden agendas, or they just what it really comes down to is we don't want anybody telling us what to do, Speaker 1  53:09 right? Michael Hingson  53:11 And that's what it really comes down to. So, do you find that that religion gets into any of it at all, like with the conservative Christian movement or any of that, Speaker 1  53:24 there well, there's I do not like the politicization of the church. Michael Hingson  53:29 Yeah, Speaker 1  53:30 my favorite quote on that is that politics poisons the purity of the church. So I think we should keep the separation of church and state as much as possible, but there are you know politically motivated, politically active pastors, and I just I I think that's that's not the proper role of religion. I know that that there's kind of a battle going on in the far right about you know how much religion or how much that should should should be involved in politics in the public arena. In fact, there's a little across from the Costco up here. There is a little yard sign in front of some business that says "Vote Bible, and I always think that's kind of. I mean, I understand what the sentiment is, and I would always want to think that the people who we elect are good moral people. You know, Adam said that our Constitution is best suited for a moral people. I don't believe that means that there's morality in the Constitution. I believe there's morality in people, Michael Hingson  54:32 right? Speaker 1  54:33 And we do want people who have good ethics and good morals in public office, and it's very obvious when that doesn't happen. But I do not think. I think the purpose of our Constitution and the First Amendment is to ensure that we all have the the right to enjoy whatever religion we want, and we don't want to pick favorites. And so, what I see with a lot of these people is that they want to pick a favorite. Michael Hingson  54:55 Yeah, Speaker 1  54:56 they they not only want to pick the first religion, but they want. Everyone to go to the same church and the same service and sit in the same pew. Yeah, and that's not going to happen in any church. It's not going to happen in any denomination of any church. And then, and see, that's the other question: is if you know if you're going to insist that this is a Christian nation, it's like okay, but which denomination is it? Catholic? Is it Protestant? Is it Mormon? I mean, I you know you tell me because it's just going to be this incredible knot of worms, which is why I think the genius of the founders was that you know the the clause about religion is is two things: it gives you the freedom to exercise your own religion, and it also restricts the government from declaring that there's a religion. Yeah, and I think the far right kind of misses that when they when they take the message of we like moral people in office, but to dictate the morals to someone else is wrong. Michael Hingson  55:52 You know, I and it was Tolstoy who once said the biggest problem with Christianity is that people don't practice it, and I I see that so often. It's it is so unfortunate, but it is Speaker 1  56:03 there. Yeah. So that is a tough one. Michael Hingson  56:07 So if you could change one thing in the world, what would it be? I'd Speaker 1  56:12 get rid of the internet in a heartbeat. Specifically, social media. I think the the problem with social media is it amplifies our immaturities, and that is a huge issue. the The solution to that is to make the the publishers responsible for the content. So, in other words, Facebook could be sued for anything that someone puts on Facebook, and that would terrify Facebook, but it would terrify them to the point that they would actually regulate themselves and and start dialing back. I mean, I can say 20 years ago or so, when I whenever I was first on Facebook, I would go on there and I would see my kids, and they'd be playing a ball game or they'd be over at a friend's house. You'd see birthdays, vacations. It was just kind of like it was a social thing. You go on there now, and it's politics, and it's like this person deserved to be shot, and it's just-it's so-it's so extreme, and it's so rude. And you know, some of the stuff they said about me is not very nice, but I think that if we're going to solve one problem in the world, we really need to dial back all the animosity that's on the inter

"The Declaration meets the machine age" In this episode of The Declaration at 250, Michael McConnell frames a question the Founders never confronted: if the Declaration grounds rights in human nature, what happens when machines can generate persuasive, human-like language at scale? Constitutional scholar Alexander Tsesis argues that the Declaration's conception of rights is inherently human-centered—rooted in consciousness, moral agency, intentionality, and the capacity to participate in a constitutional republic—so AI systems are not and should not become First Amendment rights-holders. He warns that treating large language models as protected “speakers” would be a major break from the Declaration's principles and could make ordinary democratic regulation—transparency requirements, labeling of synthetic content, safety rules, data practices, and restrictions on deceptive election deepfakes—far harder by forcing courts into strict scrutiny review. Stanford historian Anne Twitty broadens the lens by situating abolitionists' use of the Declaration within wider 19th-century conflicts over speech and constitutional meaning, reminding listeners that rival traditions—including censorship and suppression—also shaped American practice. She also presses a key tension in Tsesis's framework: abolitionists championed not only the right to speak, but the public's right to hear, circulate, and access contested ideas (as seen in the abolitionist postal campaign and opposition to the congressional gag rule). That listener-centered strand, she suggests, could potentially be invoked by scholars arguing for some constitutional shelter for AI-generated communications—an argument Tsesis acknowledges but ultimately resists by emphasizing that the First Amendment's core purpose is protecting human expression and self-government, not machine output. Connect: Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast Website Stanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn Page Stanford Constitutional Law Center >> Website Stanford Law School >>> Twitter/X Stanford Lawyer Magazine >>> Twitter/X Chapters:[00:00:26] Chapter 1- Framing Question: Do constitutional rights grounded in “human nature” apply to AI? Host Michael McConnell introduces the episode's core dilemma: the Declaration's natural-rights logic underwrites later constitutional protections like free speech—so where does that leave generative AI? [00:01:18] Chapter 2 - Thesis: Why Tsesis says AI can't be a First Amendment rights-holder Alexander Tsesis argues the Declaration and Constitution are human-centered: AI lacks consciousness, moral agency, and political personhood, so extending rights to LLMs would depart from founding principles and hinder regulation. [00:10:08] Chapter 3 - Regulatory Stakes: What happens if courts treat LLM outputs as protected “speech”? Tsesis warns that First Amendment coverage for AI could trigger strict scrutiny and undermine laws on transparency, labeling, safety, data practices, and election deepfakes—citing recent doctrine and cases like Reed v. Town of Gilbert. [00:52:35] Chapter 4 - Historical Challenge: Do abolitionists' “right to hear” arguments support listener-centric AI rights? Historian Anne Twitty complicates the record: abolitionists elevated the Declaration, but censorship traditions were strong; she highlights abolitionist campaigns (postal campaign, gag rule) to argue listener rights might bolster pro-AI speech theories. [01:04:17] Chapter 5 - Tsesis Response: Listener rights matter—but is the First Amendment still speaker-centered? Tsesis agrees the right to receive information is important, yet maintains free speech is fundamentally about protecting human intention and self-expression, not conferring constitutional status on machine outputs. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

4:20 pm: Aaron Terr, Director of Public Advocacy for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, joins the program for a conversation about a case in Minnesota where a woman was convicted of disorderly conduct after directing racial slurs toward a Somalian man. The conviction has many questioning its validity under the First Amendment.4:38 pm: Peter Rosenberger, a caregiver, author and national radio host, joins the show to discuss his piece in The Blaze about how climate activists demand rules from a distance, while ranchers and others are forced to live with the consequences of those actions.6:05 pm: Professor Greg Jackson, Chair of Integrated Studies and Deputy Director of National Security Studies at Utah Valley University and host of the History That Doesn't Suck podcast, joins Rod and Greg to discuss his work that shows today's political climate is more the norm than it is unique.

I break down the Shiloh Hendrix case and its First Amendment implications.Support My Show: https://linktr.ee/bradpolumboSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Glenn and Jason discuss the latest regarding Dr. Anthony Fauci as segments of his personal diary have been released, offering a deeper look at the COVID-19 pandemic, his views on President Trump, and what exactly he knew about the origin of COVID-19 and when he knew it. Has Canada completely lost its freedom of speech? Glenn monologues on how the First Amendment in America, which gives absolute protection, unlike the offense-based regulations that exist in Canada and Britain, is essential to our constitutional republic. The biggest housing bill in our nation's history became law two weeks ago, but what does it actually do? Glenn lays out everything the bill does, including limitations on business-house ownership, and what this bill will do to the renting industry. Glenn goes through the importance of property rights as places like China ultimately have total control over even private property. Glenn gives his advice to parents who are struggling to talk to their children about the dangers of socialism. Glenn discusses the breaking news of a terrorist attack in Paris, France, where three women were stabbed, with an alleged Islamic extremist identified as the suspect. Glenn discusses the ignorance of the LGBTQ+ crowd who support Islam despite the religion of Islam being one of the most atrocious toward LGBTQ+ individuals.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

July 27, 2026; 4pm: Nicolle Wallace and guests discuss Friday's White House Correspondents' Dinner where, instead of celebrating the First Amendment, Trump threw cruel insults and personal barbs to the journalists who attended. Later, Nicolle covers Former FBI Director James Comey requesting a judge to dismiss the charges the Trump Justice Department levied against him for posting a picture to Instagram of seashells on the beach spelling out “86 47.” For more, follow us on Instagram @deadlinewh To listen to this show and other MS NOW podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. For more from Nicolle, follow and download her podcast, “The Best People with Nicolle Wallace,” wherever you get your podcasts.To listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

A police chief sees a Facebook post about tarot readings and decides to enforce a law from 1861. Beck Ravenswood walks us their legal nightmare through after opening The Serpent's Key, a metaphysical shop in Hanover, Pennsylvania. We trace how anti-fortune-telling laws still criminalize paid divination, why “for entertainment only” disclaimers don't fix the underlying threat, and how these unconstitutional anti-Romani laws affect everyone, but especially the marginalized.Beck shares the timeline of their lawsuit and what it takes to challenge a Pennsylvania fortune telling ban on First Amendment grounds, including the relief of a temporary injunction and the high stakes of a case that has escalated to the state level. We also talk about the parallel path through House Bill 1562, and why the goal is full repeal, not new licensing barriers that would keep marginalized practitioners at risk.Then public historian and folklorist Rissa Miller joins us for a focused history segment on where these laws come from: British anti-Roma legal traditions, vagrancy and “disorderly persons” policing, and the cultural double standard that labels some spiritual labor respectable while treating Romani-coded practices as fraud. If you read tarot, run a metaphysical business, or care about religious freedom and racial justice, this conversation will change how you see “weird old laws” in the US.Subscribe, share this with a friend who loves tarot or civil rights, and leave a review so more listeners can find Romanistan. What fortune telling laws exist where you live?Thank you for listening to Romanistan podcast. Please subscribe, rate, + review, + share with your friends! Follow us on Instagram and Facebook @romanistanpodcast. Subscribe to our Patreon to join the conversation and our private community for just $5 a month. Or donate any amount to Ko-fi.com/romanistan. We depend on your support to keep going. You can book readings and events and take workshops with Jez at jezminavonthiele.com, and book readings and holistic healing sessions with Paulina at romaniholistic.com. Follow Jez on Instagram @jezmina.vonthiele & Paulina @romaniholistic. Get our book Secrets of Romani Fortune Telling wherever books are sold. If you love it, write us a review. Visit us at romanistanpodcast.com and email us at romanistanpodcast@gmail.com for inquiries. Romanistan is hosted by Jezmina Von Thiele and Paulina StevensConceived of by Paulina StevensEdited by Viktor PachasMusic by Viktor PachasArtwork by Elijah VardoSupport the show

Ever seen a profane or bold bumper sticker and wondered if it could get you pulled over? This episode of Lawyer Talk looks into the legal details behind motorists' free speech rights, breaking down what the law really says about offensive language on your car.Setting the SceneA recent viral video showed a driver getting stopped because their bumper sticker said, "I eat ass." This sparked a deeper discussion about whether displaying provocative, crass, or lewd language on a car can legally justify a police stop 00:31.Legal BackgroundThe U.S. Supreme Court has not directly addressed this issue, but state courts have. For instance, Georgia's Supreme Court dealt with a case where a driver was twice arrested for having a "shit happens" sticker. The law prohibiting such language was challenged as unconstitutionally vague and overbroad 02:00.Vagueness and OverbreadthHere are the requirements for a law to pass constitutional muster:Vague: If an ordinary person can't discern what's prohibited, the law is unconstitutional 04:46.Overbroad: If a law prohibits too much protected speech, not just the targeted conduct, it is also unconstitutional 05:17.Georgia's Supreme Court ultimately found that prohibiting "profane or lewd" words on bumper stickers was unconstitutional, affirming that even provocative language in public is protected speech unless it targets a specific person or group 05:58.Relevant Supreme Court CasesLet's look at past U.S. Supreme Court cases such as:Cohen v. California: A conviction for wearing a jacket that said "F the draft" was overturned, with the Court famously stating, “one man's vulgarity is another man's lyric” 06:31.Tinker v. Des Moines: Reinforcing that expression, even in provocative forms, is generally protected unless it causes substantial disruption 06:42.Fourth Amendment ImplicationsSo, does a traffic stop for an offensive sticker violate the Fourth Amendment? Major takeaways:Stopping someone solely for protected speech is not enough justification under the Fourth Amendment 08:14.Intrusions like car stops require specific legal grounds, not merely the officer's offense at the language or message displayed 08:31.Displaying even an outrageous bumper sticker is generally protected under the First Amendment. Police cannot constitutionally stop your car just because they're offended by your message or language 08:40.Frequently Asked QuestionsCan police legally pull over a car for having an offensive bumper sticker?Generally, no. The courts have found that displaying profane or lewd words alone is protected expression under the First Amendment 06:10.What does it mean if a law is “vague” or “overbroad” regarding speech?“Vague” means people can't tell what's prohibited. “Overbroad” means the law bans protected, as well as unprotected, speech 04:46.Is there a Supreme Court case about bumper stickers and free speech?The U.S. Supreme Court hasn't ruled directly on bumper stickers, but Cohen v. California set a precedent protecting offensive language 06:31.Does the First Amendment protect all forms of speech on vehicles?Most non-threatening, non-targeted profane or lewd language is protected, but context and how it's displayed might matter.Can state laws ban specific words on bumper stickers?If the law is too vague or broad and bans constitutionally protected speech, courts can and have struck it down, as in Georgia's Cunningham case 05:49.Submit your questions to www.lawyertalkpodcast.com.Recorded at Channel 511.Stephen E. Palmer, Esq. has been practicing criminal defense almost exclusively since 1995. He has represented people in federal, state, and local courts in Ohio and elsewhere.Though he focuses on all areas of criminal defense, he particularly enjoys complex cases in state and federal courts.He has unique experience handling and assembling top defense teams of attorneys and experts in cases involving allegations of child abuse (false sexual allegations, false physical abuse allegations), complex scientific cases involving allegations of DUI and vehicular homicide cases with blood alcohol tests, and any other criminal cases that demand jury trial experience.Steve has unique experience handling numerous high publicity cases that have garnered national attention.For more information about Steve and his law firm, visit Palmer Legal Defense. Copyright 2026 Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At LawMentioned in this episode:Circle 270 Media Podcast ConsultantsCircle 270 Media® is a podcast consulting firm based in Columbus, Ohio, specializing in helping businesses develop, launch, and optimize podcasts as part of their marketing strategy. The firm emphasizes the importance of storytelling through podcasting to differentiate businesses and engage with their audiences effectively. www.circle270media.com

Jon Herold kicks off the week digging into newly released Fauci diary entries ahead of his expected Wednesday congressional testimony, highlighting private notes that seem to contradict his public statements on COVID origins, asymptomatic spread, and the "gain of function" debate. He weighs in on James Comey's motion to dismiss his indictment on First Amendment grounds, a new tariff blitz targeting 60 trading partners over forced labor concerns, and Natalie Winters' reporting on mainstream journalists allegedly tied to a China linked influence network. There's also a look at Mitch McConnell's ongoing absence from the Senate, an upcoming Netanyahu White House visit, and a couple of old Trump clips on the debt ceiling and a possible 1929 style crash. Sponsor reads, a celebration of hitting 250,000 Rumble subscribers, and plenty of live chat banter round out a newsy Monday show.

Ancient Israel had no king, mandatory literacy, and private land ownership 3,000 years before America existed, and the men who founded the United States studied it obsessively. Historian Bill Federer joins Lance Wallnau to reveal the "Hebrew Republic" blueprint hidden inside America's founding, and how it shaped the Constitution you live under today. In this episode, Bill Federer traces how the Puritans and Pilgrims looked past King Saul to ancient Israel's 400 year run with no monarchy, a nation where even children could read, land was permanently owned by families, and leaders like Deborah were elected on merit, not bloodline. You'll learn why John Calvin's writings pioneered government without a king, why James Madison spent a year studying Hebrew before drafting the Constitution, and what the First Amendment was actually written to prevent. Then Lance tells the untold story of what Declaration signers like Richard Stockton, Charles Carroll, and Stephen Hopkins actually sacrificed to defend it: homes burned, families imprisoned, and a will that left nothing but faith. In this episode: - Is America's 250th the bookend or a new chapter? - Bill Federer joins: faith's role in the founding - The Hebrew Republic: 400 years, no king - What Israel's demand for a king cost them - Calvin, the 22-letter alphabet, and Deborah the judge - The First Amendment's real target, explained - The state constitutions that required faith to hold office - The signers who paid with everything - The martyr's crown and the call to sacrifice today Podcast Episode 2192: Shocking History - The 'Hebrew Republic' Blueprint Shaped America's Founding | don't miss this! Listen to more episodes of the Lance Wallnau Show at lancewallnau.com/podcast

Wisconsin State Rep. Francesca Hong joins Anthony Davis to discuss her run for Governor and why democratic socialist candidates are seeing a wave of support nationally heading into the midterms as voters tire of Trumpism - only on The Weekend Show. Independent media has never been more important. Please support this channel by subscribing here:    / @fiveminutenews   Join this channel with a membership for exclusive early access and bonus content:    / @fiveminutenews   Five Minute News is an Evergreen Podcast, covering politics, inequality, health and climate - delivering independent, unbiased and essential news for the US and across the world. Visit us online at http://www.fiveminute.news Follow us on Bluesky https://bsky.app/profile/fiveminutene... Follow us on Instagram   / fiveminnews   Support us on Patreon   / fiveminutenews   You can subscribe to Five Minute News with your preferred podcast app, ask your smart speaker, or enable Five Minute News as your Amazon Alexa Flash Briefing skill. CONTENT DISCLAIMER The views and opinions expressed on this channel are those of the guests and authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Anthony Davis or Five Minute News LLC. Any content provided by our hosts, guests or authors are of their opinion and are not intended to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, individual or anyone or anything, in line with the First Amendment right to free and protected speech. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A fraud investigator with a phone camera can shake up more than a newsroom ever could, and that's exactly why the backlash gets intense. We sit down with Nick Shirley, the 24-year-old independent journalist behind the Quality Learing Center reporting and other viral investigations, to talk about what it's like to work when you're recognized everywhere you go. Nick explains why he believes first-person, on-location reporting is what audiences have been missing, how he tries to let subjects explain themselves on camera, and why exposing alleged taxpayer fraud can trigger real threats that now require security.From there, we dig into the bigger question his story raises: why do some political leaders and institutions seem more eager to stop the exposure than to stop the grift? Nick walks us through California's AB 2624, a bill critics say could criminalize filming around certain taxpayer-funded immigration support service providers, raising serious First Amendment and freedom of the press concerns. We also talk about his experience filming in Cuba, the fear and surveillance he says he encountered, and why he's still looking for ways to show what's happening in places like Venezuela.After Nick, we connect the dots at home: New Mexico SNAP benefits, verification requirements, and how “kids lost assistance” headlines can bury the reality of high error rates and the need for basic accountability. We also react to USAID coverage, the KRQE CBS affiliation change and what it could mean for local news competition, the push for a February 2028 presidential primary, and a Caitlin Clark column that drew outrage for its logic and tone. If you care about government accountability, media framing, and where your tax dollars go, this one is for you. Subscribe, share this with a friend, and leave a review with the question you want us to tackle next.Website: https://www.nodoubtaboutitpodcast.com/Twitter: @nodoubtpodcastFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/NoDoubtAboutItPod/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/markronchettinm/?igshid=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ%3D%3D

July 25, 2026; 7am: It's round two of the White House Correspondents' Dinner, months after the first one was cut short by the shooting. Trump used the opportunity to take personal jabs at the press and Democrats, and made a 2028 presidential bid “joke.” Plus, Trump's speech comes amid efforts from his administration to threaten press freedoms. On Thursday, the Justice Department had to drop subpoenas it issued to New York Times reporters over security concerns about the new Air Force One gifted to Trump by the Qatari royal family. Vanity Fair Washington Correspondent Aidan McLaughlin, and MS NOW Senior White House Reporter Vaughn Hillyard, who was at last night's dinner, join “The Weekend” to discuss. For more, follow us on social media: Bluesky: @theweekendmsnow.bsky.social Instagram: @theweekendmsnow TikTok: @theweekendmsnow To listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Friday, July 24, 2026 Today, the DOJ has withdrawn its New York Times subpoenas; the man who shot Melissa Hortman and others in Minnesota has been sentenced to two life terms plus 40 years; oil is back up over $100 a barrel as Houthis attack ships in the Bab al-Mandab; the House passed a war powers resolution but the Senate quickly voted against it; Jim Jordan's committee referred Jack Smith to the Justice Department for criminal perjury charges; a federal judge questioned the difference between Hegseth's testosterone policy and gender affirming care for troops; two officers say Hegseth forced them out after questioning his policies; home foreclosures are up 71% nationwide; Republicans blocked a bill that would stop Trump's Bribe Force One retrofit; plus Allison delivers your Good News. Thank You, Fast Growing Trees Get 20% off your first purchase  FastGrowingTrees.com/dailybeans The Trump Epstein Memorial Bookmobile The Daily Beans is proud to partner with Miles Taylor and our friends at DEFIANCE.org For a limited time, members of the Daily Beans community can receive a FREE 3-month full membership to DEFIANCE.org and gain access to one of the fastest-growing pro-democracy movements in America. Join here: https://www.defiance.org/beans Join The Daily Beans and give a gift today to ensure The Trevor Project can continue its crucial work in the face of continued challenges. Donate to The Trevor Project - Daily Beans Podcast Guest: John FugelsangJohn Fugelsang Show Sirius XM Progress 127 Weekdays at 12 AM ET The John Fugelsang Podcast, John Fugelsang|Substack, @johnfugelsang|Bluesky, @JohnFugelsang|TwitterSeparation of Church and Hate by John Fugelsang The Latest Breakdown→ Epstein Survivor Recounts Meeting With Todd Blanche StoriesU.S. Withdraws Subpoenas Issued to New York Times Journalists | NYT Senate fails to advance latest attempt to limit Trump's Iran war powers | CBS News Oil tankers attacked as Iran threatens to turn second trade route into a ‘Gate of Tears' | NBC News Foreclosures on the rise nationwide, data shows | ABC News Former officers say they were forced out after questioning Hegseth's policies | MS NOW Judge questions difference between Hegseth's testosterone policy and transgender care for troops | AP News Man who killed Minnesota lawmaker Melissa Hortman sentenced to life as family describes trauma, loss | CNNGood TroubleBlock Harmful Provisions in the NDAA Defense Budget - (PASSED HOUSE) Check your voter registration and deadlines → Voter Registration Deadlines - Vote.org →Help save Texas from Ken Paxton! →Urge Democrats to Oppose and Stop Trump's Crypto Corruption | Indivisible Guide →Defiance.org/beans →Show up for our Libraries - action.ala.org →Stand With Minnesota →ICE List  →iceout.org Good NewsHenry Art The Necessary Conversation - YouTube dana-goldbergs-southwest-funnyfest Oct 9 -Email Dana@DanaGoldberg.com for sponsorship informationTickets for Dana Goldberg: Outrageous - Sep 23 - Den Theater - Chicago  →Share your Good News & Good Trouble - The Daily Beans →Beans Talk audio -beans-talk.simplecast.com →Email Dana LGBTQ Owned eating establishments in your area - hello@mswmedia.com Subject: “Dana's Project” Subscribe to the MSW YouTube Channel - MSW Media - YouTube Our Donation Links The Trevor Project - trevorproject.org/beans Blue Wave California - https://secure.actblue.com/donate/msw-bwc Donate to Public Citizen - https://citizen.org/beans/ Donate to It Gets Better / The Daily Beans Fundraiser Pathways to Citizenship link to MATCH Allison's Donationhttps://crm.bloomerang.co/HostedDonation?ApiKey=pub_86ff5236-dd26-11ec-b5ee-066e3d38bc77&WidgetId=6388736 Join Dana and The Daily Beans in support of Human Rights Campaign http://onecau.se/_ekes71National Security Counselors - Donate, ActBlue.com/donate/msw-bwc, WhistleblowerAid.org/beans Dr. Allison Gill - The Breakdown | Allison Gill, Mueller, She Wrote @muellershewrote.com - Bluesky, MSW & The Daily Beans Podcast @muellershewrote - Instagram, MSW Media - YouTube →Federal workers - email AG - fedoath@pm.me Dana Goldberg - Dana is on Patreon! At Dana's Dugout, @dgcomedy - Bluesky, @dgcomedy - IG, Dana Goldberg - Facebook,  DanaGoldberg.com More from MSW Media - Shows - MSW Media, Cleanup On Aisle 45 pod, The Breakdown | Allison Gill Reminder - you can see the pod pics if you become a Patron. The good news pics are at the bottom of the show notes of each Patreon episode! That's just one of the perks of subscribing! patreon.com/muellershewrote Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:https://apple.co/3XNx7ckWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?https://patreon.com/thedailybeanshttps://dailybeans.supercast.com/https://apple.co/3UKzKt0 Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

“It's kind of in the DNA of American bourgeois capitalist politics: demonize your enemy, call them a communist, and that's the end of the story. But there's another element, which is the Republican Party, the MAGA project, Project 2025 — the Trump White House is failing.” The House Ways and Means Committee has sent a subpoena to BreakThrough News, demanding internal communications, financial records and more. We are not charged with any crime, because our only “crime” has been to tell the truth – about the Palestine solidarity movement, about ICE's terror in our streets, about Washington's crimes around the world, from Cuba to the Congo. This is a flagrant abuse of power, and a direct attack on our work as journalists and on the First Amendment.The State Department's dangerous “Cuba report” released Monday – blasting Havana as the global center of a sinister anti-American communist plot by Russia, China, Iran, North Korea– is just the latest step in the Trump administration's McCarthyist revival. But attacks on the left didn't start with Trump: Brian Becker, host of the Socialist Program, joins BT Live to discuss how this latest crackdown on free speech is rooted in US history: From the Palmer Raids to COINTELPRO, every time a mass movement for a more just world starts to gain real traction, the state reaches for the same playbook.DONATE / SIGN THE PETITION: https://breakthroughnews.org/bt-under-attack

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.serioustrouble.showWhat a reversal of fortune for Andrew and Tristan Tate! One minute you're the toast of (certain quarters of) MAGA; the next minute federal agents are arresting you, intending to extradite you to face rape charges in the UK. This week, we talk about how extradition works, and while Trump could intervene at any time to stop the extradition, his spokeswoman says he won't.Also this week: Federal officials failed to preserve key evidence in the case of the alleged reflecting pool vandal — that is, the government threw away the liner. The Trump DOJ is once again fighting with local district judges over who should serve as interim US Attorney, and what's new this time is that the fired interim appointee is suing to get his job back.Paying subscribers also get:* A fairly silly defamation lawsuit from Madison Square Garden against Wired, and discovery trouble for President Trump in his “$10 billion” lawsuit against the BBC.* Trump's flailing effort to get the courts to order E. Jean Carroll to give him his $5.6 million back, and what he'd have to do in order to actually draw Rule 11 sanctions with this nonsense.* A new court we'd never heard of, because it had never been used before this month: the Alien Terrorist Removal Court.* A lawsuit that says Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins is proselytizing to her employees in violation of the First Amendment — and, yes, the Administrative Procedure Act.* And a really weird AI misuse case from Brazilian labor courts.Upgrade your subscription at www.serioustrouble.show.

War Room Trump In “Revenge Mode” After 13th Consecutive Night Of U.S. Strikes On Iran… PLUS, The Anti-White Shiloh Hendrix First Amendment Double Standard & Democrats' Voter Suppression Lie Implodes as Their Own Voters Back ID Requirements

This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Public Service Fellow Julia Curlee and Senior Editors Eric Columbus and Molly Roberts to talk through the week's big news in national security, including:“The Manchurian Candidates.” In a primetime address to the nation last Thursday, July 16, President Trump declassified a trove of intelligence documents that he claimed prove America's elections are dangerously vulnerable to foreign interference—particularly by China—and revived his long-standing, evidence-free assertions that the 2020 election was “rigged” against him. He ordered the Justice Department to prosecute those he claims were involved. But intelligence officials past and present, as well as the documents themselves, draw a sharp line between foreign influence campaigns and actual interference with vote counts—and none of the material supports the claim that any votes were changed. What is actually in the documents that President Trump has declassified? And what does his speech tell us about his intentions for the midterm elections and the 2028 elections beyond?“Leak and Ye Shall Find.” The Trump administration has dramatically escalated its campaign against leakers, culminating in grand jury subpoenas served to New York Times journalists, some at their homes, over their reporting on security concerns relating to the new Qatari-gifted Air Force One. The Pentagon and the Justice Department have stood up a joint task force to “identify and prosecute leakers,” and the New York Times is now fighting the subpoenas in court, calling them an attempt to intimidate the press that treads on First Amendment rights. The administration insists that reporters aren't the targets—only the people who actually leaked—and said that the reporters are simply witnesses. How much legal jeopardy do the reporters—and the media more broadly—actually face? And is this a genuine national security effort or an assault on press freedom?“Advise and Dissent.” Two of the administration's most consequential nominees—Jay Clayton, who has been nominated as Director of National Intelligence, and Todd Blanche, who has been nominated as Attorney General—sat for their Senate confirmation hearings last week. Clayton, currently U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, repeatedly declined to say that Joe Biden won the 2020 election, while Blanche was grilled over the now-“dead” anti-weaponization fund, the Epstein files, and the very NYT subpoenas he authorized. Both face unexpectedly narrow paths to confirmation, complicated by the sudden death of Sen. Lindsey Graham. What did we learn from the hearings? And what are each nominee's prospects for confirmation?In object lessons, Julia strums to the strifes it seems we can't escape. Eric compliments the coordinated collection of compost. Scott salutes Mr. The Frog and friends who are back on the small screen (and then gets scooped on another Muppet story). And Molly marvels at one of her many military morale patches. To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

July 23, 2026; 4pm: Nicolle Wallace and guests cover the breaking news that the DOJ is rescinding the subpoenas issued to 5 reporters from The New York Times that would have compelled their testimony in front of a grand jury. In a win for the first amendment, the judge told prosecutors to either rescind the subpoenas, or he would quash them himself. For more, follow us on Instagram @deadlinewh To listen to this show and other MS NOW podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. For more from Nicolle, follow and download her podcast, “The Best People with Nicolle Wallace,” wherever you get your podcasts.To listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Public Service Fellow Julia Curlee and Senior Editors Eric Columbus and Molly Roberts to talk through the week's big news in national security, including:“The Manchurian Candidates.” In a primetime address to the nation last Thursday, July 16, President Trump declassified a trove of intelligence documents that he claimed prove America's elections are dangerously vulnerable to foreign interference—particularly by China—and revived his long-standing, evidence-free assertions that the 2020 election was “rigged” against him. He ordered the Justice Department to prosecute those he claims were involved. But intelligence officials past and present, as well as the documents themselves, draw a sharp line between foreign influence campaigns and actual interference with vote counts—and none of the material supports the claim that any votes were changed. What is actually in the documents that President Trump has declassified? And what does his speech tell us about his intentions for the midterm elections and the 2028 elections beyond?“Leak and Ye Shall Find.” The Trump administration has dramatically escalated its campaign against leakers, culminating in grand jury subpoenas served to New York Times journalists, some at their homes, over their reporting on security concerns relating to the new Qatari-gifted Air Force One. The Pentagon and the Justice Department have stood up a joint task force to “identify and prosecute leakers,” and the New York Times is now fighting the subpoenas in court, calling them an attempt to intimidate the press that treads on First Amendment rights. The administration insists that reporters aren't the targets—only the people who actually leaked—and said that the reporters are simply witnesses. How much legal jeopardy do the reporters—and the media more broadly—actually face? And is this a genuine national security effort or an assault on press freedom?“Advise and Dissent.” Two of the administration's most consequential nominees—Jay Clayton, who has been nominated as Director of National Intelligence, and Todd Blanche, who has been nominated as Attorney General—sat for their Senate confirmation hearings last week. Clayton, currently U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, repeatedly declined to say that Joe Biden won the 2020 election, while Blanche was grilled over the now-“dead” anti-weaponization fund, the Epstein files, and the very NYT subpoenas he authorized. Both face unexpectedly narrow paths to confirmation, complicated by the sudden death of Sen. Lindsey Graham. What did we learn from the hearings? And what are each nominee's prospects for confirmation?In object lessons, Julia strums to the strifes it seems we can't escape. Eric compliments the coordinated collection of compost. Scott salutes Mr. The Frog and friends who are back on the small screen (and then gets scooped on another Muppet story). And Molly marvels at one of her many military morale patches. To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Wednesday, July 22, 2026 Today, RFK Jr pauses a billion dollars in Medicaid to California and Minnesota; Rep. Jamie Raskin is seeking documents related to Jeffrey Epstein's foreign contacts; IRS Chief Frank Bisignano spied on colleagues when he worked at JPMorgan; Trump and the OMB are violating the Impoundment Control Act by ignoring Congressional appropriations; an appeals court has overturned the release order of Mohsen Mahdawi; an appeals court has denied Peter Navarro's bid to overturn his contempt of Congress conviction; and a federal judge says Trump has to hand over his financials in discovery in the BBC libel case; plus Allison delivers your Good News. Thank You, Fast Growing Trees Get 20% off your first purchase  FastGrowingTrees.com/dailybeans The Daily Beans is proud to partner with Miles Taylor and our friends at DEFIANCE.org For a limited time, members of the Daily Beans community can receive a FREE 3-month full membership to DEFIANCE.org and gain access to one of the fastest-growing pro-democracy movements in America. Join here: https://www.defiance.org/beans Join The Daily Beans and give a gift today to ensure The Trevor Project can continue its crucial work in the face of continued challenges. Donate to The Trevor Project - Daily Beans Podcast The Latest Breakdown→ Epstein Survivor Recounts Meeting With Todd Blanche StoriesRFK Jr pauses $1bn Medicaid funding to California and Minnesota Raskin seeks documents into Jeffrey Epstein's foreign contacts - Live Updates - POLITICO IRS Chief Frank Bisignano Spied on Colleagues When He Worked at JPMorgan - WSJ Congress rejected some of Trump's proposed budget cuts. OMB is making them anyway. US appeals court raises prospect of re-arrest of pro-Palestinian advocate Mahdawi | Reuters Judge says Trump must hand over financial records to BBC - POLITICOGood Trouble Check your voter registration status →Vote.orgVoter Registration Deadlines - Vote.org →Help save Texas from Ken Paxton! →Urge Democrats to Oppose and Stop Trump's Crypto Corruption | Indivisible Guide →Defiance.org/beans →Show up for our Libraries - action.ala.org →Stand With Minnesota →ICE List  →iceout.org Good NewsGrassRoots Garden | Food for Lane County – Eugene, Oregon INDIVISIBLE KANSAS CITY sfcva.org dana-goldbergs-southwest-funnyfest Oct 9 -Email Dana@DanaGoldberg.com for sponsorship informationTickets for Dana Goldberg: Outrageous - Sep 23 - Den Theater - Chicago  →Share your Good News & Good Trouble - The Daily Beans →Beans Talk audio -beans-talk.simplecast.com →Email Dana LGBTQ Owned eating establishments in your area - hello@mswmedia.com Subject: “Dana's Project” Subscribe to the MSW YouTube Channel - MSW Media - YouTube Our Donation Links The Trevor Project - trevorproject.org/beans Blue Wave California - https://secure.actblue.com/donate/msw-bwc Donate to Public Citizen - https://citizen.org/beans/ Donate to It Gets Better / The Daily Beans Fundraiser Pathways to Citizenship link to MATCH Allison's Donationhttps://crm.bloomerang.co/HostedDonation?ApiKey=pub_86ff5236-dd26-11ec-b5ee-066e3d38bc77&WidgetId=6388736 Join Dana and The Daily Beans in support of Human Rights Campaign http://onecau.se/_ekes71National Security Counselors - Donate, ActBlue.com/donate/msw-bwc, WhistleblowerAid.org/beans Dr. Allison Gill - The Breakdown | Allison Gill, Mueller, She Wrote @muellershewrote.com - Bluesky, MSW & The Daily Beans Podcast @muellershewrote - Instagram, MSW Media - YouTube →Federal workers - email AG - fedoath@pm.me Dana Goldberg - Dana is on Patreon! At Dana's Dugout, @dgcomedy - Bluesky, @dgcomedy - IG, Dana Goldberg - Facebook,  DanaGoldberg.com More from MSW Media - Shows - MSW Media, Cleanup On Aisle 45 pod, The Breakdown | Allison Gill Reminder - you can see the pod pics if you become a Patron. The good news pics are at the bottom of the show notes of each Patreon episode! That's just one of the perks of subscribing! patreon.com/muellershewrote Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:https://apple.co/3XNx7ckWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?https://patreon.com/thedailybeanshttps://dailybeans.supercast.com/https://apple.co/3UKzKt0 Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Tuesday, July 21, 2026 Today, a federal judge paused the merger of Paramount/Skydance and Warner Bros. Discovery pending litigation filed by state attorneys general; Troy Jackson has all but sewn up the nomination to replace Graham Platner on the ballot in Maine; Lindsey Graham's sister Darline Nardone will run for her dead brother's seat in the August 11th special primary election; the FBI not only subpoenaed New York Times journalists but members of their families as well; Marco Rubio claims that Cuba and Iran are funding Antifa; ICE shared Medicaid data with Palantir illegally; Trump PACs are paying tens of millions of dollars in legal bills for the president; Olympian Davey Hearn filed a motion to dismiss the reflecting pool charges against him arguing that the government destroyed exculpatory evidence; plus Allison delivers your Good News. Thank You, Smalls For a limited time, get 60% off your first order, plus free shipping and free treats for life, when you head to Smalls.com/DAILYBEANS The Daily Beans is proud to partner with Miles Taylor and our friends at DEFIANCE.org For a limited time, members of the Daily Beans community can receive a FREE 3-month full membership to DEFIANCE.org and gain access to one of the fastest-growing pro-democracy movements in America. Join here: https://www.defiance.org/beans Join The Daily Beans and give a gift today to ensure The Trevor Project can continue its crucial work in the face of continued challenges. Donate to The Trevor Project - Daily Beans Podcast The Latest Breakdown→ Epstein Survivor Recounts Meeting With Todd Blanche StoriesLindsey Graham's Sister, Darline Graham, Says She Will Run to Succeed Him | The New York Times Troy Jackson has effectively secured the Maine Senate Democratic nomination | POLITICO ICE shared Medicaid data it wasn't supposed to have with Palantir | NPR Rubio urges international counterterrorism crackdown on the far-left | ABC News Trump's PACs spend millions on legal bills as his personal court battles continue | MS NOW Trump Administration Sought Phone Records of Times Journalists and Their Relatives | The New York Times Trump administration should preserve Reflecting Pool evidence, judge says | News From The States Judge pauses Paramount-Warner merger | NBC NewsGood TroubleTriumphal Arch - Section 106 Assessment of Effect and Draft Programmatic Agreement Veterans and relatives see no place for Trump's arch near Arlington National Cemetery | NPR →Help save Texas from Ken Paxton! →Urge Democrats to Oppose and Stop Trump's Crypto Corruption | Indivisible Guide →Defiance.org/beans →Show up for our Libraries - action.ala.org →Stand With Minnesota →ICE List  →iceout.org Good Newsdana-goldbergs-southwest-funnyfest Oct 9 -Email Dana@DanaGoldberg.com for sponsorship informationTickets for Dana Goldberg: Outrageous - Sep 23 - Den Theater - Chicago  →Share your Good News & Good Trouble - The Daily Beans →Beans Talk audio -beans-talk.simplecast.com →Email Dana LGBTQ Owned eating establishments in your area - hello@mswmedia.com Subject: “Dana's Project” Subscribe to the MSW YouTube Channel - MSW Media - YouTube Our Donation Links The Trevor Project - trevorproject.org/beans Blue Wave California - https://secure.actblue.com/donate/msw-bwc Donate to Public Citizen - https://citizen.org/beans/ Donate to It Gets Better / The Daily Beans Fundraiser Pathways to Citizenship link to MATCH Allison's Donationhttps://crm.bloomerang.co/HostedDonation?ApiKey=pub_86ff5236-dd26-11ec-b5ee-066e3d38bc77&WidgetId=6388736 Join Dana and The Daily Beans in support of Human Rights Campaign http://onecau.se/_ekes71National Security Counselors - Donate, ActBlue.com/donate/msw-bwc, WhistleblowerAid.org/beans Dr. Allison Gill - The Breakdown | Allison Gill, Mueller, She Wrote @muellershewrote.com - Bluesky, MSW & The Daily Beans Podcast @muellershewrote - Instagram, MSW Media - YouTube →Federal workers - email AG - fedoath@pm.me Dana Goldberg - Dana is on Patreon! At Dana's Dugout, @dgcomedy - Bluesky, @dgcomedy - IG, Dana Goldberg - Facebook,  DanaGoldberg.com More from MSW Media - Shows - MSW Media, Cleanup On Aisle 45 pod, The Breakdown | Allison Gill Reminder - you can see the pod pics if you become a Patron. The good news pics are at the bottom of the show notes of each Patreon episode! That's just one of the perks of subscribing! patreon.com/muellershewrote Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:https://apple.co/3XNx7ckWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?https://patreon.com/thedailybeanshttps://dailybeans.supercast.com/https://apple.co/3UKzKt0 Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.