Podcasts about franklin delano roosevelt

Public leadership doesn't mean that the “leader” has to have all the solutions, but instead must be open to others with problem-solving ideas.That was one of Franklin Roosevelt's great strengths when he came into the White House. Facing the full-blown crisis of a national Depression, he brought his top advisors together with an open mandate for creativity: “Do Something,” he told them. “If it works, do more of it. If it doesn't work, do something else.”In some surprisingly good news, this spirit of innovative public leadership is flourishing today! Not at the national level, of course, where top federal officials are right-wing ideologues who obsequiously bow to “WDW” (Whatever Donald Wants). But hundreds of local and state officials across America are using their heads, hands, and imaginations to “do something” about the real problems our people face.School districts, for example. Many are facing a double whammy: First, developers and their politicians have gentrified many cities so severely that teachers and staff can't afford to live there; second a right-wing push for school consolidations and closures has left many campuses vacant. But could one problem plus the other one add up to zero?Yes, say education innovators in such districts as San Diego, Austin, and South Miami. Leaders there and elsewhere are converting vacated classrooms, offices, and school yards into high-quality family apartment complexes. They'll house several thousand teachers, janitors, and others, cutting rents by 50 percent or better!Encouraging this kind of free-wheeling problem-solving is not just thinking outside the box, it's eliminating the box. For more creative ideas to make public policy work for the public, go to StateInnovation.org.Jim Hightower's Lowdown is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit jimhightower.substack.com/subscribe

Is America standing on the edge of a grand new progressive era or a shift toward neofascism? Thom explores the collision course between corporate neoliberalism and the rising progressive movement. Drawing parallels to FDR's New Deal, we break down why the middle class has collapsed since the Reagan Revolution and how billionaires and dark money have rigged the system. Discover the path toward a progressive renaissance—including Medicare for All, student debt relief, and fair taxes on the morbidly rich—and why organized people are the only force that can overcome organized money. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

On Friday's Mark Levin Show, a major debate among conservatives will run through the 2028 Republican primaries, pitting Buchananites (post-liberal conservatives) against Reaganites and Trumpites, with some Trumpites sounding more like the former. It centers on national conservatism versus traditional constitutional conservatism and the proper use of government power. Some voices push interventionism resembling FDR or LBJ—socialist lite—without clear limits, seeking popular appeal while dismissing the strong growth of the 1980s. Such candidates could win a primary but lose the general election. Power is ubiquitous and shapes politics and liberty, yet is distinct from liberty itself.  Properly used, as in the American Revolution and the Constitution that replaced the weak Articles of Confederation, it secures ordered liberty through limited, divided government (“positive power”). Abused, it centralizes authority, erodes liberty, and turns democracies toward autocracy (“negative power”)—via courts overriding voters, people voting away their freedom, or bureaucratic expansion. Also, Doran Spielman, international spokesman in the Israeli Prime Minister's office, describes rising tensions as Erdogan moves military forces into Syria near Israel's border to exploit the situation, having taken over and militarized a former Russian base despite Netanyahu's warnings, prompting an Israeli Air Force strike. Erdogan is now sending more vehicles including tanks into southwestern Syria; Netanyahu has again warned against it, while Erdogan claims this is not Gaza and even the United States could not protect Israel if struck, to which Netanyahu replied that Israel has faced bigger empires. Later, President Trump campaigns for Sen Darline Graham in South Carolina and we take his remarks live! Finally, Ken Paxton calls in his Texas Senate race against James Talarico - a hardcore leftist who is trying to reinvent himself as a moderate Democrat. If a Democrat wins this seat, it would reshape Texas and threaten Republican control of the Senate. Paxton's top priority is the Save America Act to secure elections; he also prioritizes tackling the federal deficit, placing constitutional conservatives on the judiciary, and confronting China as America's primary economic and military challenge. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The Depression did not only impact the United States. It hit Europe as well because the world economy had become too interconnected for this to be a one-country issue anymore. And Europe responded to the crisis much differently than America. America turned to FDR. Germany turned to Hitler. And I am guessing you know the rest...Western Civ 2.0 

Marianne Williamson keeps a ticker running on her Substack, counting down the days to the midterms. In this episode, she and Jeff dig into why she thinks these midterms may be the last chance for a truly free and fair election in 2028, walk through the DNC dysfunction and the rise of the DSA, and get candid about her own two runs for president and what they taught her about the party. Why Williamson believes the 2026 midterms are more consequential than any in recent memory The redistricting battle reshaping the House, and why a "normal" Democratic wave may not be enough How the DSA and candidates like Zohran Mamdani are pulling the party back toward its FDR-era roots What her own 2020 and 2024 presidential campaigns revealed about the DNC's instincts, including an FBI briefing and a DNC official's apology Her case for why hope and reform are still possible, even in a "brutal" political moment This episode is for anyone trying to make sense of the Democratic Party's internal battles, and anyone wondering what's actually at stake in November. Marianne's new course, Midlife Awakening: Creating a Miraculous Next Chapter, guides students through the real work of this stage of life: atoning for old mistakes, practicing true forgiveness, and reframing midlife as a second puberty rather than a decline. Across eight sessions, it builds toward what she calls "rising as the phoenix," her framework for closing one chapter and consciously starting the next. Start the course for free at commune.to/awakening. Discover more from Marianne at marianne.com. This episode was made possible by:  LMNT: Get a free 8-count Sample Pack of LMNT's most popular drink mix flavors with any purchase at ⁠drinklmnt.com/commune⁠. Stemregen: Get 20% off your first order at stemregen.co/commune with the code COMMUNEPOD Vivobarefoot: Try Vivobarefoot risk-free with a 100-day return guarantee, and get 25% off your order at ⁠vivobarefoot.com/commune⁠. Stripes: Visit ⁠stripesbeauty.com⁠ and use the code COMMUNE20 for 20% off our entire product line. CocoaVia: Use code COMMUNE2026 for 25% off at CocoaVia.com

Bo Snerdley's Rush Hour is a fast-paced daily talk radio podcast covering the biggest political stories of the day. Designed for listeners on the go, each episode delivers sharp analysis, timely updates, and engaging commentary on the headlines shaping the national conversation.

In today's episode of The Quiz, we're testing your knowledge on everything from famous urban monikers to historic operatic compositions. Can you answer these? Wartime Speeches: Following the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, President Franklin D. Roosevelt famously declared that December 7th, 1941 would live forever in a specific way. Can you complete his quote? Subway Systems: Underground rapid transit transformed how Americans travel through cities, but do you know which metropolis launched the nation's very first subway system? Luxury Brands: Brand Finance compiles annual valuations of global fashion powerhouses. Do you know which luxury house earned a spot among the world's top ten apparel brands? Play. Share. Listen, with Emmy award-winning actress, Drea de Matteo. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In this episode of Hella Black, we look at how neoliberal containment strategies have followed the same playbook from BLM to the activism that's occurred in the U.S. in relation to Palestine. We talk about how neoliberal bureaucrats curate a misleadership class and hand you a false messiah, trained by the nonprofits and the universities and these leadership institutes. We also get into Mamdani milking FDR, Abdul El-Sayed sponsored by Kamala, the DSA as controlled opposition for the Democrats, and the good Muslim/bad Muslim paradigm. And we ask who the welfare state is actually built on, because it's the third world every time. Tap in!!! And be sure to pull up to our live show in Berkeley Sept 4th, 2026 at La Pena Cultural Center!

Give to help Chris make Truce Richard Vigueries. What can be written about him? His nickname was "the founding father of the Religious Right". He founded RAVCO, which was a fundraising organization that raised money for... well, who didn't it raise money for? In his book, Takeover, Viguerie laid out a detailed plan of how the far right could take over the Republican Party. It is a fascinating book, one that may not have had an overwhelming impact, but the idea within the book has. In this special epsiode, Chris walks listeners through the book and the impact of the ideas inside. Sources: Takeover by Richard Viguerie Reaganland and Before the Storm by Rick Perlstein The Evangelicals by Frances Fitzgerald God's Own Party by Daniel K Williams Revive Us Again by Joel Carpenter These Truths by Jill LePore A Choice Not An Echo by Phyllis Schlafly The Lord's Prayer Discussion Questions: Who was Richard Viguerie? What are some of his grievances? Why do you think he skipped the Republican presidents of the 1920s in his history? What did he think of FDR? Of Robert Taft? How do you see the conservative wound in this book? What were some of Viguerie's prescribed tactics for taking over the GOP? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Monday, August 17, 2026 Today, the Democratic National Committee passed resolutions that could inform the 2028 party platform; the Justice Department is expanding the military's law enforcement power; the Food and Drug Administration traveled to Mexico a month after linking Taylor Farms to cyclospora outbreak; U.S. and Ukrainian forces went head to head in a drone exercise and Ukraine won; the Tate brothers' custody hearing was postponed as they fight extradition; a Canadian petition to oust Hoekstra as the ambassador has nearly 200,000 signatures; plus Allison and Dana deliver your Good News. Thank You, IQBAR Text DAILYBEANS to 64000 to get 20% off all IQBAR products, plus FREE shipping. Message and data rates may apply.  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 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 Diamond Dames - Subscribe here: Diamond Dames - A Ted Lasso PodcastDiamond Dames - YouTube playlist   Guest: Heather Cox RichardsonLetters from an American | Heather Cox RichardsonHeather Cox Richardson - YouTubeinstagram.com/heathercoxrichardson@hcrichardson.bsky.social - Bluesky@HC_Richardson - Twitter The Latest Breakdown→ INSIDE Trump DOJ's BRUTAL Epstein Court Reckoning StoriesJustice Department expands military's power to detain migrants accused of trespassing | CBS News FDA in Mexico a month after linking Taylor Farms to cyclospora outbreak | The Washington PostDemocrats disagree over abolishing or reforming ICE at DNC meeting | AP News Tate brothers custody hearing postponed as they fight U.K. extradition | NBC News Good TroubleCards Against Humanity - Elon has no Friends →Friday August 28 in DC March On Washington 2026 -marchonwashington2026.com Check your voter registration and deadlines → Voter Registration Deadlines - Vote.org →Helpline Orientation- Spanish Speakers Needed! · VoteRiders →Help save Texas from Ken Paxton! →NO HATE in WA State →Stand With Minnesota →iceout.org Good NewsSpokAnimal animal rescue Oct 9 -Southwest Funny Fest:Dana Goldberg's Southwest FunnyFest - City of Albuquerque -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 Subscribe to the MSW on YouTube - MSW Media - YouTube Our Donation Links The Trevor Project - trevorproject.org/beans Blue Wave California - 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 - boomerang - pathways  Dana and The Daily Beans support of Human Rights Campaign ONE CAUSE HRC The Daily Beans supports It Gets BetterNational Security Counselors - Donate, 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, 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.

Last time we spoke about the beginning of the Pacific War. In late 1941, the Second Battle of Changsha ended with Chinese forces claiming victory despite suffering nearly 100,000 casualties against roughly 1,670 Japanese losses. Chiang Kai-shek's government launched an aggressive propaganda campaign, flooding international press with fabricated triumph narratives to sustain national morale. Behind closed doors, Chiang was furious at his generals' tactical failures, executing commanders and dismantling units. Meanwhile, geopolitical forces threatened China's survival. Japan's 1939 defeat at Nomonhan crushed hopes for a Soviet alliance against Tokyo. Germany's pact with the Soviet Union left China isolated, while Western powers remained reluctant to commit meaningful support. Britain offered little; the US provided only modest loans. By 1941, facing potential collapse, Chiang desperately searched for allies while Wang Jingwei's Japanese-backed rival government beckoned as an alternative. China's exhausted people endured horror—including a 1941 bombing massacre in Chongqing that killed over 400 trapped civilians. Then Japan unleashed a surprise attack on Pearl Harbor.   #215 An Implosion in the East Welcome to the Fall and Rise of China Podcast, I am your dutiful host Craig Watson. But, before we start I want to also remind you this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Perhaps you want to learn more about the history of Asia? Kings and Generals have an assortment of episodes on history of asia and much more  so go give them a look over on Youtube. So please subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry for some more history related content, over on my channel, the Pacific War Channel where I cover the history of China and Japan from the 19th century until the end of the Pacific War.   In the early morning of December 7, 1941, the US Pacific Fleet was anchored at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii. Two waves of Japanese bomber aircraft, launched from six aircraft carriers, attacked the vessels and their sleeping crews, destroying the battleship Arizona outright and damaging seventeen others, as well as most of the military aircraft parked nearby. Some 2,400 Americans died, and another 1,100 were wounded. Within a day Japanese invasion forces had attacked Siam, Malaya, and the Philippines. Chiang Kai-shek heard the news at one o'clock in the morning and immediately dictated a letter of support to President Roosevelt, pledging commitment to a new "common battle." The news reached Zhou Fohai in Shanghai as well. On December 8 across the international date line from Hawaii he had heard the sounds of firing as the Japanese took over the rest of the city, and then received reports that Japan had declared war on the Western powers. "I heard they'd bombed Honolulu, Manila, Singapore, and Hong Kong. From now on, the Pacific becomes a killing ground."   When Japanese carrier planes descended on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, they were executing far more than a tactical strike. They were unleashing the culmination of a strategic vision that had shaped Japanese military planning since the 1920s: the Nanshin-ron, or "Southern Advance" doctrine.    The Nanshin-ron represented a critical strategic choice that emerged from internal Japanese debates during the 1920s and 1930s. Japan faced an inescapable vulnerability: it was an island nation with virtually no natural resources of its own. The nation's population had doubled since the Meiji Restoration, growing to over 70 million by 1941. An industrial economy of tremendous sophistication, capable of producing world-class warships, aircraft, and military equipment, depended entirely on imported raw materials. Oil, rubber, tin, iron ore, bauxite, copper, and manganese all had to be acquired through foreign trade or conquest. This resource dependency was not a luxury problem; it was an existential one. A nation that could not feed itself or fuel its economy was a nation vulnerable to strangulation by enemies who controlled the resources it needed. Japanese strategic thinkers divided into two camps on how to resolve this vulnerability. The Hokushin-ron advocates, primarily within the Army, pushed for expansion northward into Siberia and Mongolia, seeking to conquer Soviet territory and resources. The Soviet Union possessed vast tracts of land, mineral wealth, timber, and agricultural output. From a purely materialist perspective, the Northern Advance made geographic sense—it was contiguous with Manchuria, which Japan had already secured in 1931. Yet by the late 1930s, the Hokushin-ron strategy had suffered a catastrophic blow. In 1938 and 1939, Japanese and Soviet forces clashed at Khalkhin Gol in Mongolia in what the Japanese called the Nomonhan Incident. The battles revealed a terrifying truth: the Soviet Red Army, under General Georgy Zhukov, was far more formidable than Japanese military planners had anticipated. Soviet armor, air power, and coordinated tactics annihilated Japanese forces. Japan suffered over 60,000 casualties while inflicting perhaps 10,000 on the Soviets. The defeat was concealed from the Japanese public, but it was unmistakable to military planners. A direct clash with Soviet power could end catastrophically. The Northern Advance, it became clear, would almost certainly provoke war with a nation capable of destroying the Japanese Army. This strategic defeat tilted the balance decisively toward the Nanshin-ron. If Japan could not safely expand northward, it must expand southward, toward Southeast Asia, the Dutch East Indies, Indochina, and the western Pacific. The appeal of the Nanshin-ron was immediately apparent to the Navy, which had always been more oriented toward maritime commerce and expansion across the ocean. The territories to the south were not militarily formidable. The colonial powers, Britain, the Netherlands, France, were either already defeated in 1940 or distracted by their own desperate struggles leaving Britain fighting alone against Germany. The United States, though potentially a formidable adversary, was not yet at war, and there was a chance, however slender, that a decisive blow against American naval power might convince America to negotiate rather than fight. But beyond strategic opportunity, the Nanshin-ron offered something that the Hokushin-ron did not: it offered resources of staggering abundance. The Dutch East Indies possessed oil reserves that could dwarf Japan's consumption for years. Malaya produced the world's rubber. Thailand offered agricultural bounty and geographic position. Burma's timber and agricultural products could feed Japan's growing empire. The Philippines possessed harbors, airfields, and economic output. These were not marginal additions to Japan's economy—they were transformative. Together, they would convert Japan from a resource-hungry island nation into the master of an imperial domain encompassing hundreds of millions of people and containing most of the strategic materials necessary for sustained industrial warfare. In the last episode I explained the western sanctions and embargoes that drained Japan's military of the resources they required to continue the China War. By 1941, Japan faced a civilization crisis. Japan imported roughly 90 percent of its petroleum, and the bulk of that came from the Dutch East Indies and the United States. Suddenly, the American supply was cut off entirely. Reserves would last perhaps 18 months if Japan's military and industrial consumption continued at existing rates. After that, the military machine would sputter and die. The industrial economy would collapse. Even civilian life would become impossible to sustain. Japan was facing not merely economic inconvenience but literal strangulation by the Western powers.   Yet it would be a mistake to reduce Japanese motivation to just materialism. Japanese military leaders wrapped their conquests in an ideological framework, one that many of them genuinely believed, or wanted to believe, served a higher historical purpose. The concept of the Daitoa Kyoeiken, the "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere," posited a new regional order in which Japan would play the leading role in liberating Asian peoples from Western colonial domination and creating an Asian-centered political and economic system. This ideology drew on genuine anti-colonial sentiment. For a century, Western powers had dominated Asia, treating Asian peoples and nations as subordinate, colonized territories existing to serve Western economic interests. Japan, which had modernized and Westernized enough to avoid colonization, saw itself as the natural leader of an Asian renaissance—a civilizing force that would restore Asian dignity and independence even as it established Japanese hegemony. Of course, this was propagandistic. Japanese conquest represented a substitution of one imperial master for another, and often a harsher and more brutal one at that. But for understanding Japanese decision-making, the ideology mattered profoundly. It provided Japanese leaders with a moral narrative for conquest. It allowed them to understand themselves as liberators rather than mere conquerors. It provided a rationale for extracting resources from occupied territories and for mobilizing subject populations to support the Japanese war effort. And it resonated with anti-Western sentiment throughout Asia, making Japanese occupation seem, in some quarters, preferable to continued Western colonial rule. The slogan Hakko ichiu—"eight corners under one roof", captured this ideological vision: a unified Asia and eventually world under Japanese guidance. Whether Japanese leaders truly believed this vision or cynically deployed it as propaganda, it shaped how they understood their actions and justified them to their subjects. Now I know this is a podcast dedicated to the century of humiliation, ie: China's experience. But I thought it was necessary just to have one episode explain what Dan Carlin titled "a supernova in the east" and I have titled an implosion in the east. I won't go into depth into the campaigns as some of them have a lot of Chinese involvement and we will be covering them in depth, but rather I will explain the rationale for Japan's numerous invasions following the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor.   Japan's assault on Malaya began within hours of the Pearl Harbor attack, indeed, Japanese troops were already landing on the Kota Bharu beachhead on the Malaysian peninsula before dawn on December 8, 1941 local time. Malaya was one of the world's largest rubber producers, and Singapore, at the tip of the peninsula, was the linchpin of British naval power in the Far East.The Japanese interest in Malaya was straightforward but crucial: rubber. The Japanese military consumed vast quantities of rubber for tires, gaskets, hoses, and countless other applications. American and Dutch rubber supplies were now cut off by embargo. Malaya's rubber plantations represented perhaps the world's richest reservoir of this strategic material. Beyond rubber, Malaya and the surrounding region were major tin producers—essential for alloys and manufacturing. For Japan to conduct prolonged warfare, Malaya was not a luxury target; it was a necessity. Singapore represented something different: a symbol of Western power in Asia and a strategic chokepoint. As the major British naval base in the region, Singapore served as the anchor of British imperial authority across the South China Sea. By seizing Singapore, Japan would not only capture crucial resources and port facilities but would also deliver a psychological blow to the entire edifice of Western dominance in Asia. The fortress city that the British considered nearly impregnable fell within seventy days, a stunning demonstration of Japanese military capability and the vulnerability of overextended Western empires. If Malaya was critical for rubber, the Dutch East Indies was essential for oil. The region, comprising present-day Indonesia, was the world's third-largest oil producer and had reserves that could sustain Japanese military operations for years. This was the jewel of the resource-conquest strategy. Japanese planners had long eyed the East Indies, but direct conquest had seemed risky while Britain and America remained neutral or opposed. With both now at war, the window of opportunity had opened. Japan needed the oil so desperately that when the Dutch East Indies Petroleum Company initially agreed to some Japanese oil purchases before the war, Tokyo was already planning its takeover. The conquest of the Dutch East Indies would provide not just oil but also tin, nickel, bauxite, and other materials essential to an industrial war machine. The islands would also provide air and naval bases from which Japan could defend its new empire and potentially threaten Australia. The Japanese invasion of the Dutch East Indies, which began in late December 1941 and accelerated through January and February 1942, was methodical and comprehensive. Various island groups were targeted systematically: Java, Borneo, Celebes, and the Moluccas. Dutch military forces, though brave, were overwhelmed. By March 1942, Japan had secured the entire archipelago,a stunning logistical and military achievement that delivered vast resources into Japanese hands. Thailand presented a fundamentally different case from Japan's other targets. Rather than conquest, Japan pursued alliance with military strongman Plaek Phibunsongkhram, who had seized power in a 1938 coup as a nationalist ideologue determined to reassert Thai sovereignty and recover territory lost to French colonialism in the nineteenth century. Thailand was the last independent state in mainland Southeast Asia, hemmed in by British-controlled Burma and Malaya to the west, and French Indochina to the east. For a century, Thailand had survived by playing European imperial powers against each other. But by the late 1930s, this strategy was becoming obsolete. Europe was distracted by Hitler's Germany. Colonial powers were weakening. Japanese power was visibly ascending. Phibunsongkhram recognized both danger and opportunity. He could resist Japan and invite invasion, or he could ally with Japan and profit from rising Asian power. Japanese diplomats approached Thailand with sophistication: they offered military alliance and support for Thai territorial expansion at French expense. This addressed Thailand's deepest national wound, the humiliation of nineteenth-century territorial losses to France. The Franco-Thai War of 1940-1941 became transformative. With Japan providing military support, advisors, tanks, aircraft, Thai forces defeated the French for the first time in history. By May 1941, Thailand had recovered 54,000 square kilometers of Cambodian territory and portions of Laos. For Phibunsongkhram, this was extraordinary: he had achieved what Thai leaders could not in a century, reclaiming territory from a Western imperial power. Domestically, his position was dramatically strengthened. The parallel to China's century of humiliation—the foundation of your podcast is striking: Thailand too was reversing colonial diminishment through association with rising Asian power. The Thai-Japanese relationship was unique. Unlike the Philippines, Malaya, or the Dutch East Indies, Thailand would retain nominal independence. Phibunsongkhram remained in power. Japanese occupation was light. Thai forces maintained their own command structure. Most importantly, Thailand's territorial gains from the Franco-Thai War were recognized and secured. Japan valued Thai cooperation more than conquest. Burma, controlled by the British, was the next target in Japan's southwestward advance. Japanese planners had multiple motivations for invading Burma. First, it was strategically positioned on India's eastern frontier, and Japan harbored ambitions of eventually striking toward India and linking up with Germany in the Middle East or at least destabilizing the British position in South Asia. Second, Burma was a significant producer of timber and agricultural products. Third, and perhaps most importantly, the invasion of Burma was meant to cut the Burma Road, the crucial supply line that allowed American aid to reach Nationalist China. The invasion of Burma began in late 1941 and accelerated through early 1942.  The invasion of the Philippines, which began on December 10, 1941, just days after Pearl Harbor, served multiple strategic purposes. Like the assault on Pearl Harbor itself, it was meant to neutralize American military power in the region, in this case, the American garrison under General Douglas MacArthur and the American colonial administration. But the Philippines were also valuable in their own right. The islands sat directly in the path of what Japan envisioned as its defensive perimeter. By controlling the Philippines, Japan would make it extraordinarily difficult for American forces to project power westward into Southeast Asia. The territory would provide naval and air bases critical to defending Japan's new empire. Additionally, the Philippines possessed some agricultural and industrial resources valuable to the war effort, and their conquest delivered a psychological victory, defeating American forces and ending American colonial rule in Asia, which appealed to anti-Western sentiment that Japan tried to cultivate. Beyond Southeast Asia and the Philippines, Japan rapidly invaded Guam and Wake island to extend Japan's defensive perimeter further into the Pacific and eliminate American air and naval bases that could threaten Japanese operations. Guam, seized on December 10, 1941, fell within two days, the American garrison was small and the island's strategic value lay primarily in denying the United States a forward staging ground for any counteroffensive. Wake Island, attacked the same day and finally captured on December 23 after a brief but heroic American defense, served similar purposes: cutting off American reconnaissance and interdicting potential supply lines to the Philippines.  Now I believe that's enough of the implosion in the east, let's get back to the situation in China. After Chiang Kai-shek sent his letter of support to President Franklin D. Roosevelt, pledging Chinese commitment to what he termed a new "common battle." he did something most revealing about his mood towards the global war. He played "Ave Maria" on his gramophone, celebrating with an almost spiritual gratitude the implications of what had just transpired in the American Pacific. This moment crystallized the profound difference Pearl Harbor would mean to different members of the emerging Allied coalition. For the United States, the attack was pure shock, a violation of the sanctity of American soil and the complacency of American isolationism. For Britain, it was like the pricking of a large, painful blister—painful but perhaps not entirely unexpected given Japan's regional ambitions. But for China, the relief that surged through the government and the consciousness of the Chinese people surpassed even Britain's response. For four long years, China had fought Japan almost alone, watching as Western nations remained neutral or limited their commitment to rhetorical support and modest material assistance. Now, suddenly, the trajectory of the entire conflict had shifted with breathtaking speed. Chiang's emotional state at this moment could scarcely be contained, and those close to him understood that beneath his carefully maintained Confucian composure burned an intoxicating sensation of vindication. These Western powers who had been so impatient with Chinese strategy, who had mocked the retreats of the Nationalist Army and spoken scornfully of Japanese capabilities, were now themselves in headlong retreat from those very islanders. In Hong Kong, Singapore, and Manila, British and American forces would be fighting desperately for their lives against the Japanese military that China had been contending with for years. Chiang could not have failed to perceive the irony: the Japanese had conquered vast stretches of China through relentless campaigns, yet Westerners had dismissed Chinese resistance as inadequate. Now the Japanese were proving that they posed a formidable challenge to Western military power as well. There was a bitter satisfaction in this vindication, even as Chiang understood that the strategic implications of American entry far outweighed any emotional satisfaction. What was pragmatic and strategically clear to Chiang, however, was far more important than any emotional satisfaction. The United States was now at war, and it was on China's side. This represented the transformation for which Chiang had labored for years, bringing the full weight of American industrial capacity and military might to bear against the Japanese enemy. The diplomatic foundations for this alliance had already been laid in the months preceding Pearl Harbor. Beginning in the spring of 1941, the United States had begun to commit significant resources to supporting China. In April 1941, following the conclusion of the Soviet-Japanese neutrality agreement, which had devastated Chinese morale by suggesting that Japan might attack the Soviet Union rather than move southward, the Roosevelt administration had determined to provide $45 million worth of militarily useful commodities to China as an immediate gesture of support. Then, on May 6, 1941, President Roosevelt had made a more formal commitment by announcing that the munitions provisions of the Lend-Lease Act applied to China, declaring a phrase that captured the strategic logic of American assistance: "defending China is the key to defending America." This declaration represented a significant shift in American policy, elevating China from a regional concern to a central element of American grand strategy in Asia. Subsequently, in July 1941, Roosevelt had sent Owen Lattimore to China to serve as political adviser to the Chinese government, a position that signaled deepening American engagement with Chinese affairs. In August, the administration appointed John Magruder as military attaché and head of the American Military Mission to China (AMMISCA), with the primary responsibility of overseeing the delivery of Lend-Lease material to the Chinese armed forces. On the diplomatic front, Chiang moved with remarkable alacrity. He had already severed relations with Germany on July 2, 1941, the very day after Hitler had formally recognized the Wang Jingwei puppet government in an attempt to appease Japan and encourage it to finally implement the Southern Advance. Now, on December 8, 1941, just one day after the Pearl Harbor attack, Chiang took the decisive step of formally declaring war against the Axis powers, Germany, Italy, and Japan. This declaration transformed China's position from a beleaguered nation fighting a war of survival into a formal member of the Allied coalition. Chiang had seized the opportunity that Pearl Harbor presented to ally China with a genuinely strong power against Japan, a gambit that fundamentally altered the diplomatic weight and international legitimacy of both the Chinese government and the Chinese cause. From a strategic perspective, the Japanese had committed what Chiang and others immediately recognized as a catastrophic blunder. On the operational level, Pearl Harbor was indeed a devastating tactical success, the American Pacific Fleet was crippled, and Japanese forces now enjoyed temporary naval superiority throughout much of the Pacific and Southeast Asia. Yet strategically, Pearl Harbor represented a failure of epic proportions, a miscalculation rooted in a fundamental misunderstanding of the intangibles of warfare: what motivated the Chinese people and what motivated the Americans. The Chinese had understood, through four years of brutal conflict, that warfare was about more than territorial conquest and resource acquisition. It was about will, about endurance, about the capacity to absorb punishment and continue fighting. The Japanese had learned this lesson imperfectly in China, where despite overwhelming military advantages they had been unable to force a decisive conclusion or compel Chinese surrender. The Americans would teach the Japanese this lesson even more emphatically. The attack on American sailors in Hawaii instantly galvanized the American population to prosecute an unlimited war, with Tokyo itself as the ultimate destination of American counterattack. While Americans would remember the "date that will live in infamy" primarily because of the assault on Pearl Harbor itself, the strategic consequence was that Japanese actions in Hawaii had introduced numerous new adversaries into the Pacific conflict: not only the United States, but also Britain, Australia, New Zealand, and the Netherlands. These additions transformed what had been, from the Japanese perspective, a regional conflict with manageable parameters into a global war that Japan could not possibly win through any conceivable means. What made this particularly disastrous for Japan was the context in which the new theater had been opened. Japan was already deeply mired in a quagmire in China—a "malignant quagmire," as one observer would later characterize it, that had consumed vast resources, inflicted enormous casualties, and failed to produce decisive victory. In military strategy, it is sometimes wise to open a new theater in order to attack an enemy from an additional and unexpected direction, thereby dispersing their forces and creating new challenges for them to manage. But opening a new theater that introduces an entirely new, powerful adversary, and doing so when one is already overextended in an existing theater is a prescription for strategic catastrophe. This was precisely what Japan had done at Pearl Harbor. Chiang Kai-shek understood the magnitude of Japan's miscalculation with crystalline clarity. He understood that whatever the military complexities that lay ahead, whatever the challenges of coordinating with Western allies, and whatever the limitations of Western military assistance to China might be, the fundamental equation had changed. The United States would ultimately defeat Japan. The Chinese did not need to defeat Japan by themselves; they merely needed to survive long enough for American industrial and military capacity to grind the Japanese military into defeat. In the immediate aftermath of Pearl Harbor, Chinese and American officials moved swiftly to formalize the alliance and establish the mechanisms of wartime cooperation. Roosevelt asked Chiang Kai-shek to serve as commander in chief of the Allied forces in the China theater, a designation that recognized China's central role in the Pacific War and elevated Chiang's international standing to something he had long sought: a position as an equal partner in the Allied coalition, a seat at the "top table of global decision-making" alongside Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin. To support this expanded role and to ensure effective coordination of the military effort, Roosevelt dispatched Lieutenant General Joseph W. Stilwell to China. Stilwell was not chosen randomly; he brought fifteen years of experience in China, a deep familiarity with the country, its military, and its complexities that few American officers possessed. Stilwell was appointed to serve simultaneously as the U.S. government's military representative in China, as chief of staff of the China Theater, and as commander in chief of the American forces in the China-Burma-India (CBI) theater. This appointment established the framework for joint Chinese-American military cooperation and represented an American commitment to the Asian theater that, while never receiving the resources devoted to the European theater, nonetheless signified recognition of China's strategic importance. Trust me, going forward we will be having a lot of time dedicated to the hilarious bromance / bro hatred of Vinegar Joe and Peanut.  Yet the formation of an alliance and the establishment of command structures was easier than the practical implementation of military cooperation. The fundamental challenge that would plague Chinese-American relations throughout the war emerged almost immediately: the problem of delivering military assistance to China. Before Pearl Harbor, the United States and China had reached agreement on three major points regarding military assistance. First, the United States would provide training and technical support to assist China in establishing a modern air force. Second, the United States would provide training and equipment for a ground army consisting of thirty divisions. Third, the United States would assist China in constructing railways and highways from Yunnan to Burma, along with the provision of rolling stock and vehicles to support these new transportation routes. These were ambitious plans, reflecting the extent of Chinese need and American willingness to support the Chinese war effort. However, the outbreak of the Pacific War threw American plans into disarray. The fundamental strategic doctrine guiding American policy was the "Europe first" strategy, which meant that the European theater and the defeat of Nazi Germany received priority over the Pacific theater. Additionally, China's geography made it extraordinarily difficult to supply. China could only be reached through supply lines of extraordinary length and complexity, either through the port of Rangoon in Burma and then overland via the treacherous Yunnan-Burma Road, or through the port of Hong Kong, which immediately fell into Japanese hands after Pearl Harbor. The first Sino-American loan agreement had specified that the United States would deliver commodities worth $45 million to China in 1941. However, shipping shortages meant that only $26 million worth of commodities actually left the United States. These commodities were shipped to the transit port of Rangoon, where a massive traffic jam developed as supplies accumulated faster than they could be distributed onward to China. Along the Yunnan-Burma Road, that "much-contested life line" as it came to be known, conditions were chaotic. The road had always been a source of trouble: it was long, extraordinarily difficult to keep in repair, fantastically dangerous to travel, and too narrow to permit much volume of traffic at any one time. Due to mismanagement and pilfering, the commodities that were shipped out of Burma suffered heavy losses in transit, and only one-third of them eventually arrived in Chongqing. Yet the United States had already established one valuable asset in China that could be deployed relatively quickly: an air force nucleus. Just before Pearl Harbor, a group of American aviators had been formally organized in Chongqing who worked on volunteer status for China under the command of Colonel Claire Chennault, an American aviation officer who served as instructor at the Chinese Air Force Cadet School. Some of these men had been flying in China since the Kuomintang first began purchasing American aircraft, having come to demonstrate the aircraft and remaining to pilot and teach. Others had hurried to China after being released from their volunteer service in Spain, where they had gained combat experience during the Spanish Civil War. It was a familiar joke that pilots from both sides of the Spanish conflict were likely to meet and work side by side in China, but political convictions proved immaterial to these professional aviators, they got on well enough with each other, mercenaries of the twentieth century united by their expertise and their willingness to fight. When American traffic on the Burma Road swelled in volume and became chaotic, with cargo lost to pilfering and trucks breaking down from mishandling, the air freight service into Chongqing became increasingly vital to maintaining Chinese military capabilities. The backbone of this organization was American, and it had been in operation for months before the Japanese attack. Halfway down the Burma Road, over the border in Burma, was a plane factory backed by American and Chinese capital, providing some degree of repair and maintenance capacity for the aircraft operating out of China. Recognizing the strategic value of these experienced aviators and the need to formalize and expand their operations, American and Chinese officials moved quickly to incorporate this volunteer group, formally known as the American Volunteer Group or "Flying Tigers," into the U.S. Army Air Force. This transformation of volunteer aviators into official American military personnel represented a commitment to providing air support to Chinese operations, recognizing that air power could compensate to some degree for Chinese numerical disadvantages in ground combat. In Chongqing, it was clear that among the United Nations fighting Japan, America was the only one taking China seriously, the only one prepared to invest significant resources in Chinese military capabilities and the Chinese war effort. Yet Pearl Harbor brought consequences that extended far beyond the strategic and diplomatic spheres. For Western civilians living in China,missionaries, teachers, doctors, businessmen, and journalists, the attack represented a catastrophic change in their status and their fate. Until December 8, 1941, Westerners residing in China had maintained a curious protected status as foreign neutrals, even in areas nominally controlled by the Japanese. This status had provided them with a measure of distance from, and protection against, the grinding reality of the war that had devastated Chinese populations. For a century, Americans had been part of an imperial presence in China, sometimes benevolent, sometimes violent, but always ultimately under Western control. That world came to an abrupt end on December 8, 1941. All across eastern China, Americans and Britons were rounded up and interned. The International Settlement of Shanghai—that remarkable oasis of neutrality that had persisted in the midst of a war-torn city—was now reunified under Japanese control. Thousands of foreigners with Allied nationality were sent to holding camps scattered throughout occupied China. Some, like the eleven-year-old British boy Jim Ballard, would remain imprisoned for the remainder of the war, enduring hunger, cold, and disease in camps like Longhua, which housed approximately 2,000 detainees. Forty years later, as the novelist J. G. Ballard, he would memorialized this experience in his semi-autobiographical novel Empire of the Sun. For missionaries like Velva Brown, the evacuation process was degrading and final. The missionary staff were permitted to pack no more than three suitcases with their belongings. As they prepared to leave, Japanese and Taiwanese "sightseeing" parties arrived to decide which houses they might want to occupy. The journey home aboard crowded Japanese ships offered no concessions to status or dignity; ambassadors, consuls, merchants, and missionaries alike were given "bed-sized strips of Chinese matting which we spread side by side on the iron floor of the hold," as Brown recorded. The humiliation was compounded by the finality of it all. For many, their decades-long presence in China was ending not in orderly retreat but in hasty evacuation, leaving behind "servants, many of whom had been with us for fifteen or twenty years." Despite these immediate human tragedies, the strategic transformation that Pearl Harbor wrought for China was undeniable. Chiang Kai-shek now embarked on an entirely new sort of life, heavily involved with the leaders and generals of the Western powers. He held diplomatic discussions with the leaders of the United Nations and military planning sessions with Western generals. In these unfamiliar circumstances, he did his best to live up to the Confucian ideal of the gentleman, seldom permitting the mask to slip—though the pressure of these new responsibilities and the intoxicating combination of vindication and anxiety would occasionally prove too much even for his considerable self-control. Within weeks of Pearl Harbor, Chiang demonstrated the value he could bring to the new alliance. He visited India and spoke with the leaders of the Indian independence struggle as an ally and friend, as a fellow non-European speaking to others seeking to escape from colonialism and imperial domination. He joined the Allies in their first joint campaign, not in China but in the jungles of neighboring Burma, committing Chinese forces to operations outside China's borders in support of the broader Allied military strategy. Yet the price that Chiang would pay for China's belated entry into the global alliance against the Axis powers would prove to be a heavy one. Chiang desperately needed his new American and British partners, but accepting this alliance would unleash forces within Chinese society that would threaten the very basis of his political control. The complexities of this bargain would become most visible in the four-year struggle between Chiang and General Joseph Warren Stilwell, the American officer who would become simultaneously his chief of staff and the administrator of American military assistance to China. This relationship, shaped by mutual suspicion, different strategic visions, and incompatible political agendas, would define Chinese-American military cooperation during the Pacific War and would have profound implications extending far beyond the battlefields of Asia. I would like to take this time to remind you all that this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Please go subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry after that, give my personal channel a look over at The Pacific War Channel at Youtube, it would mean a lot to me. Pearl Harbor's shock reverberated through Asia. Japan's assault on Hawaii, combined with invasions of Burma, the Philippines, Guam, and Wake Island, inadvertently transformed regional conflict into global war. Chiang Kai-shek, vindicated after four years of isolation fighting Japan, embraced American alliance with profound relief. The U.S. committed military aid, appointed General Stilwell as chief of staff, and recognized China as a co-belligerent. For Chiang, this partnership brought diplomatic status but also internal tensions that would define the Pacific War's final chapter.

August 14, 2026The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to allow it to build his White House Ballroom, The National Trust of Historic Preservation has sued to stop construction, Asking to spend taxpayer money on a vanity project is a stark contract to the actions of the government 91 years ago, On August 14, 1935,  FDR signed the Social Security Act into law, The Social Security Act permanently changed the nature of the American government, It enabled a federal system of benefits, providing a basic social safety net, The force behind the law was Frances Perkins, FDR's secretary of labor, A witness to the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire, she knew voluntary organizations would not be sufficient to improve worker's lives, The Social Security Act was hugely popular, The Act wrote into the law a longstanding political impulse that stood in contrast to the 1920s philosophy of rugged individualism, recognizing that pooling resources to take care of everyone was deeply seated, She asserted that Social Security was so firmly embedded in America's psychology that no one could destroy it. Watch today's recording here: https://www.youtube.com/live/g9TUa1Rwd6U?si=T8_KKcHQZElhpnZ-Get full, free access to Letters from an American here: https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/subscribeYou can also find me:Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/hcrichardson.bsky.socialInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/heathercoxrichardson/?hl=enFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/heathercoxrichardson/YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@heathercoxrichardson Get full access to Letters from an American at heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/subscribe

Eleanor et Franklin Roosevelt sont le couple présidentiel resté le plus longtemps à la Maison Blanche. Ils ont passé leur vie côte à côte, mais d'une manière bien singulière. Ils étaient des alliés politiques, mais des amants indépendants, détachés l'un de l'autre. Eleanor est une personnalité particulièrement fascinante, en avance sur son époque. Un podcast Bababam Originals Écriture et voix : Alice Deroide Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On Thursday's Mark Levin Show, Tucker Carlson and Matt Gaetz are lying again – accusing Mark of pushing for ground troops in Iran. On March 28, 2026, Mark discussed the possibility of special forces or elements of the 82nd Airborne securing Iran's enriched uranium if it could not be destroyed or altered, which is a specific, sophisticated mission rather than any call for hundreds of thousands of ground troops or regular infantry. Mark never advocated for large-scale ground forces. Carlson and Gaetz deliberately editing his remarks. They trash Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, the U.S., its military, and President Trump while rarely criticizing the Iranian regime, and aligning with Islamists. Also, Gov Kathy Hochul and Zohran Mamdani are excited that local law enforcement will not work with ICE to deport criminal illegal aliens. Are New Yorkers happy about this? How could anyone vote for a Democrat given this reality? Later, Rep Jim Jordan calls in and explains the substantial overlap between the Democratic Socialists of America and the modern Democratic Party, which has shifted from the party of FDR and JFK to one that is anti-Israel, antisemitic, and socialist while opposing common-sense policies such as supporting the police, ICE, and opposing sanctuary jurisdictions.  Finally, the family of 15-year-old American Malki Roth, killed in the 2001 Sbarro restaurant bombing in Jerusalem that claimed 15 lives and wounded about 122 others, has filed a civil lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against Ahlam Aref Ahmad al-Tamimi, the Hamas operative who planned and executed the attack. Malki Roth's father, Arnold Roth, calls in and explains that the terrorist remains free in Jordan, is celebrated as a national hero and expresses no regret beyond not killing more people, while Jordan refuses extradition despite a treaty. Roth explains the civil lawsuit which is under the Anti-Terrorism Act seeking to seize her assets and make her life less comfortable, with any recovered funds directed to the Malki Foundation. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Tarabuster Tuesdays with Tara Devlin. Aug 13, 2026

President Donald Trump speaks at a police academy in Garden City on Long Island, New York about his anti-crime and anti-illegal immigration agenda with Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman, Republican nominee for New York governor; North Carolina Democratic Senate nominee Roy Cooper continues his series of campaign events highlight affordability with a stop in Henderson; Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins starts a reelection bus tour in Kittery and is asked about ICE funding; Today is the 91st anniversary of Social Security being signed into law by President Franklin Roosevelt; Luigi Mangione pleads guilty in federal court to charges related to the shooting death of health care executive, Brian Thompson; President Trump comments about the alleged troubles surrounding the long deployment of the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier, and he says about the war with Iran he might declare the Strait of Hormuz a U.S. territory; On this five year anniversary of the Taliban retaking control of Afghanistan, a quarter of the world's nations, including the United States, condemn the Taliban's treatment of women and girls, and harboring of terrorists. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

“The Romans did that many, many times — until normal had changed so radically that there was nothing left of the republic to protect.” — Michelle Berenfeld on getting “back to normal” Are we Rome (yet)? Michelle Berenfeld fears we are. Back in April of last year, the professor of classics at Pitzer College published “The Roman Way to Trash a Republic” in the Atlantic. And now Berenfeld has expanded her argument into Lessons from a Lost Republic, a new book about what Ancient Rome can teach us about our current American moment. There are two Romes, Berenfeld reminds us: the Roman Republic and Imperial Rome. Nostalgic tech guys like Mark Zuckerberg are obsessed with the imperial world of emperors, legions, and world domination, while the more forward-thinking founders of the American republic used imperial figures like Caesar and Augustus as negative lessons from antiquity. Asking whether Trump is Roman is like asking whether the Pope is Catholic. Certainly he's a wannabe Caesar with his fleshy face on our currency, his imperial DC arch, his daily wars, and all those fake blood sports on the White House lawn. But the daily comedy show misses the longer-term political tragedy. Berenfeld fears the shift in power from Congress toward an imperial presidency, a trend she says predates Trump and will outlast him. The gravest Roman conceit was believing, after each crisis, that things could get “back to normal” — a mantra Roman citizens repeated endlessly until there was nothing left of the old republic to protect. Then there's Zuckerberg, who even named his daughters August and Aurelia. For Zuck, Augustus should be praised for doing “tough things” to usher in two centuries of peace and prosperity. But Berenfeld reminds us those tough things included drawing up enemies lists and killing everyone who crossed him. Meanwhile, this supposed peace and prosperity (de)generated the rule of Caligula and Nero. Augustus, Berenfeld argues, was one of history's great spin doctors, claiming to be restoring a corrupted republic while simultaneously dismantling it. No wonder, perhaps, Zuckerberg admires him so much. Berenfeld says that the Roman spectacle of “bread and circuses” should be a warning. Juvenal's complaint was that Romans traded their liberties for gladiatorial games and free grain. We're making the same trade in contemporary America, Berenfeld observes, and getting neither. Most Americans, she concludes sadly, can't even afford a World Cup ticket. Berenfeld's deepest lesson is about power and political agency. Political powers given up are not easily gotten back, she warns. Republics are not saved by Hollywood-style saviors, and there is no golden age to restore. That said, the Los Angeles-based classicist hasn't completely given up hope. Nothing about Rome's trajectory was inevitable, she reminds us. Remixing Benjamin Franklin, the American Republic is ours to keep, if we use our agency as citizens. Just don't tempt fate by naming your daughters August and Aurelia. Five Takeaways •       The Founders' Rome vs the Bros' Rome. Americans are obsessed with the wrong Rome. The TikTok meme, the billionaires, and the manosphere celebrate the empire — emperors, legions, gladiators, world domination — while the founders admired the republic: 500 years of government founded on the rejection of a king, with rule of law, guaranteed rights, and peaceful transitions of power, all rare in antiquity. They designed the American constitution in explicit dialogue with Rome's collapse, asking “what if someone like Sulla or Caesar got this position?” — and regarded the men the bros now worship as usurpers and dictators. Polybius' mixed constitution — part monarchy (consuls), part aristocracy (Senate), part democracy (assemblies) — became their template of checks and balances. A republic, as Franklin warned, if you can keep it.•       On the Nose — and Beside the Point. Trump's Romanism is almost comical: his face on coins, a triumphal arch, blood sport performed on the White House lawn. But Berenfeld's book — which she didn't want to be about Trump at all — argues the real Roman echo is structural: a Senate voluntarily handing its powers to one man, a trend that predates Trump and will outlast him. The gravest error is the “back to normal” fallacy: after each crisis, the Romans told themselves the republic had survived and things could return to normal — many, many times, until normal had shifted so radically that there was nothing left to protect. America's dichotomy of denial and despair repeats it: blaming everything on one president gives cover to everyone else who is ceding, normalizing, and waiting for the storm to pass.•       Bread, Circuses — and Neither. Juvenal's famous sneer, decoded: the circuses were amphitheater games staged sometimes every other day; the bread was a grain allotment for every Roman citizen — in effect, Berenfeld notes, a minimum basic income, something our politics would call socialism. The Roman people traded their liberties and their republic for that package. Americans, she argues, are making the same trade and receiving neither the bread nor the circuses — no basic income, and most people can't afford a World Cup ticket. The party structure rhymes too: the populares and the optimates were both parties of very rich men competing for a few powerful positions, and eventually they looked alike to ordinary Romans — much as America's two parties have begun to look alike to ordinary Americans.•       Marcus Aurelius Was Writing His Memoirs. Every American man Berenfeld meets brings up Marcus Aurelius. The Meditations contain genuine wisdom — thoughtful action, the equal shortness of all lives — but context deflates the cult: it was the private journal of an elderly emperor, written in Greek (the language of philosophy, not of his soldiers), barely read in antiquity and rediscovered much later. “It's a little bit like when George Bush started making paintings.” Andrew's Arendtian reading — stoicism as the inward turn of men whose empire had abolished politics — hangs over the manosphere's version. And the one way she wishes Trump were more Roman: the engineering. Roman concrete got stronger underwater; on the reflecting-pool problem in DC, “if I were an ancient Roman, I could tell him — I've got a guy.”•       Powers Given Up Are Not Easily Gotten Back. The book's core warning: when a legislature grants one man powers beyond his office — always in the name of crisis — those powers stick to the office long after the man is gone, and no savior restores them. Lincoln and FDR stretched their bounds and let go afterwards (or died, as Andrew noted; she conceded). Berenfeld refuses the fascism debate — Mussolini cast himself as a new Augustus, and 1930s historians bought the story — offering a sharper test instead: would you give these powers to a president whose politics you oppose? Nero's fiddle was posthumous PR; an emperor's reputation depends on his successor, which makes the augury of a President Vance worth watching. Nothing was inevitable — not Augustus, not Christianity, not the fall. Political agency is...

This Day in Legal History: The Social Security ActOn August 14, 1935, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Social Security Act, creating the foundation of the American social safety net and permanently changing the relationship between citizens and their government. Flanked by members of Congress and photographers, FDR put his signature to a law that guaranteed, for the first time in American history, a measure of economic security against the hazards of old age, unemployment, and poverty.The Act was born of the Great Depression, when the suffering of millions—elderly people with no savings, workers with no jobs, families with no support—overwhelmed the old assumption that hardship was a purely private matter. Social Security established old-age benefits funded by taxes on workers and employers, created a federal-state system of unemployment insurance, and provided aid for dependent children, the blind, and people with disabilities. Roosevelt himself was clear-eyed about its limits, saying at the signing that no law could insure everyone against every vicissitude of life, but that this one gave “some measure of protection” against poverty-ridden old age and unemployment.The legal significance runs deep, and it connects to a story we've told before on this show. When the Social Security Act was challenged as an unconstitutional federal overreach and an improper use of the taxing power, it reached a Supreme Court that had been striking down New Deal programs left and right. But in 1937—in the same term as the failed court-packing fight and the Court's famous doctrinal shift—the justices upheld Social Security, in Steward Machine Company v. Davis and Helvering v. Davis, broadly reading Congress's power to tax and spend for the general welfare. Those decisions helped cement the constitutional foundation of the modern administrative and welfare state. Ninety-one years later, Social Security remains the single largest program in the federal budget, and the principle it established—that the national government has a role in securing the economic dignity of its people—remains, as our opening quote from FDR suggests, a live measure of the country's progress.A federal trade court has upheld President Trump's authority to close the “de minimis” tariff exemption—handing the administration a rare courtroom win on tariffs. The U.S. Court of International Trade, a three-judge panel in New York, ruled that Trump lawfully used the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, to end the duty-free treatment that low-value imports—parcels worth $800 or less—had long enjoyed. Some quick background: the de minimis exemption is what let a flood of cheap packages, especially from Chinese e-commerce sellers, enter the U.S. tariff-free, and closing it has already generated over a billion dollars in new duty payments. What makes this ruling notable is that it cuts against the trend. Trump's tariff agenda has fared badly in court—the Supreme Court ruled in February that IEEPA does not authorize him to unilaterally impose sweeping tariffs, which led to that roughly $100 billion in refunds we covered, and the trade court later struck down a replacement tariff. So how does the administration win this one? The court drew a fine but important distinction: ending a duty-free privilege is not the same as affirmatively imposing a tariff. The challenger, an auto-parts importer, argued IEEPA gave the president no independent power to close the exemption, but the panel found that rescinding a trade-related “privilege” falls within the emergency-powers statute even if imposing new tariffs does not. The significance is that it carves out a narrow lane where the administration's emergency-powers theory actually holds up—a reminder that in the tariff wars, the difference between taking away a benefit and imposing a new burden can be the difference between winning and losing in court. US court backs Trump's power to close ‘de minimis' tariff exemption | ReutersCNBC · BloombergThe Supreme Court has taken up a case that sounds technical but goes to the heart of whether wrongly detained immigrants can find a lawyer at all. The question is whether attorneys who successfully challenge an immigrant's detention through a habeas corpus petition can recover their fees from the federal government. It turns on the Equal Access to Justice Act—a statute that lets people who beat the government in court recover their attorney's fees, unless the government's position was “substantially justified.” Here's why this matters enormously right now. As immigration detention has surged, so have habeas petitions challenging it: one court in California went from a handful of these cases in 2021 to hundreds in a single month this year, and courts have repeatedly ordered the government to pay fees after finding people were detained unlawfully. But two federal appeals courts, the Fourth and Fifth Circuits, have held that habeas challenges to immigration detention aren't the kind of “civil case” the fee statute covers—which would mean the lawyers who win these cases can't recover a dime. Think about the practical stakes. Detained immigrants are frequently poor, often can't work, and have no right to a free lawyer in immigration proceedings. Fee-shifting is a big part of what makes it economically possible for attorneys to take these cases at all. If the Supreme Court rules that EAJA doesn't apply, it doesn't change the substance of anyone's detention—but it quietly removes much of the financial incentive for lawyers to challenge unlawful detention, weakening one of the few real checks on the system. The significance is that this is access to justice in its most concrete form: whether the courthouse door stays open depends, as it so often does, on who can afford to walk through it. US Supreme Court case tests fees for immigration detainees | ReutersSCOTUSblog · Bloomberg LawAnd finally, a story from the frontier of AI misuse that is equal parts alarming and absurd. A Connecticut judge has sanctioned a plaintiff who hid secret instructions inside his own court filings—instructions aimed not at the judge, but at any artificial intelligence that might read the documents. The plaintiff, representing himself, buried text in white font on a white background, invisible to a human eye, telling any AI model reviewing the filing to side with him. This is what's known as a “prompt injection” attack, and it's reportedly the first documented instance of one aimed at a U.S. court. The court caught it—apparently tipped off by strange white spaces in the text—and issued an order warning him to stop. He didn't. At the next hearing, he'd hidden a message reading “hi, I hope you can't see me,” and, in another filing, a concealed link to a SpongeBob SquarePants video. The judge was not amused, issuing a decision bluntly titled “Court Sanction for Plaintiff's Use of Prompt-Injection.” The remedy is almost poetically low-tech: the plaintiff is now barred from filing electronically and must submit everything on paper. Now, it's easy to laugh—and the SpongeBob link earns a chuckle—but the serious point is real. This is a new species of the AI-integrity problem we've tracked all summer, alongside the fake hallucinated citations. It's an attempt to corrupt the decision-making process itself, and it quietly reveals something bigger: that courts and their staff may increasingly be using AI tools to help review filings, which creates a brand-new attack surface for litigants willing to game it. The significance is that the age-old duty of candor to the tribunal now has to contend with adversaries trying to whisper to the machines—and courts are going to need new rules, and sharp eyes, to catch them. Connecticut judge says plaintiff hid messages for AI in court filings | Reuters404 Media · Tom's Hardware This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Ben Wikler, the former Wisconsin Democratic Party chair and author of the new book This Is the Plan joins the Chuck Toddcast to argue that Democrats keep making the same category error: they keep winning change elections and then failing to deliver change, because they're trying to fix policy without first fixing the system that determines who gets to make policy. Wikler's framing is memorable and a little cheeky — you have to win the ring of power and then cast it into Mount Doom — but his point is serious. When the right wins power, it immediately restructures the system to entrench itself; Democrats win and then govern as though the rules are fixed. His plan runs through the state level, where free and fair elections are actually secured, and demands ending the filibuster and reforming the Supreme Court, including term limits for justices, because campaign finance reform is impossible without a Court willing to allow it. Wikler argues America is in the greatest period of political instability in its history, that inequality now exceeds the Gilded Age, that gerrymandering has left millions of people without a meaningful vote, and that both party bases increasingly want to fight more than they want to win — while swing and non-voters have simply given up on the system itself. He rejects the tired rebuilders-versus-renovators binary: FDR's Social Security pitch was a huge swing, incrementalism was the only path to Obamacare, and the actual art of politics is starting from values and vision and then figuring out what can pass. The conversation gets specific about Wisconsin and about trust. Wikler pushes back on the idea that Francesca Hong is too "Madison" for a statewide race, notes she's spent years traveling and listening across the state, and calls Tom Tiffany an election denier who is genuinely beatable in a cycle where affordability is the central issue. He and Chuck work through the puzzle of why Tony Evers' calm, steady approach succeeded where Biden's didn't — Evers came out forcefully against Dobbs, and, more fundamentally, you have to convince a majority of voters that government can actually work, which means doing what you said you'd do and then relentlessly telling people you did it. Wikler points to pandemic relief as the cautionary tale: those programs dramatically improved life for lower-income voters, the child tax credit cut child poverty in half, and then it all expired and Democrats got punished for the loss rather than credited for the gain — with an extension that had bipartisan support dying anyway, because the filibuster exists largely to deprive the other side of a win. He credits Ken Martin for investing in state parties, argues Democrats don't need a 50-state strategy so much as fifty different state strategies since the coalition looks different everywhere, and concedes that Trump has been the most successful Republican of this era, spawning an army of mini-mes modeling themselves on him. And yes, Chuck asks the obvious question — why not run for Senate yourself? Thanks to the sponsors of The Chuck ToddCast: Upgrade your everyday. Go to https://Quince.com/CHUCK for free shipping on your order and 365-day returns. Play ball and swing for the fences on FanDuel, an official partner of the MLB at https://FANDUEL.COM. For free and unbiased Medicare help, dial (980) 734-3985 to speak with my trusted partner, Chapter, or go to askchapter.org/chuck / *Paid Partnership Chapter and its affiliates are not connected with or endorsed by any government entity or the federal Medicare program. Chapter Advisory, LLC represents Medicare Advantage HMO, PPO, and PFFS organizations and stand alone prescription drug plans that have a Medicare contract. Enrollment depends on the plan’s contract renewal. While we have a database of every Medicare plan nationwide and can help you to search among all plans, we have contracts with many but not all plans. As a result, we do not offer every plan available in your area. Currently we represent 50 organizations which offer 18,160 products nationwide. We search and recommend all plans, even those we don’t directly offer. You can contact a licensed Chapter agent to find out the number of products available in your specific area. Please contact Medicare.gov, 1-800-Medicare, or your local State Health Insurance Program (SHIP) to get information on all of your options. Timeline: (Timestamps may vary based on advertisements) 00:00 Ben Wikler joins The Chuck ToddCast 01:00 Ben’s new book is “This Is The Plan” 01:15 What is the plan? 01:45 To get political change we need, we need to change the system 02:30 To secure free & fair elections, need to win at the state level 03:00 We need an end to the filibuster and Supreme Court reform 03:45 There’s no one office or candidate to get us out of this mess 05:45 We need to win the ring of power, then cast it into Mount Doom 06:15 When the right wins power, they immediately change systems 07:15 We keep having change elections, then not getting change 09:30 We’re in the greatest period of political instability in American history 12:30 Both party bases want to fight more than want to win 13:30 We’re so gerrymandered, people don’t really get a vote 15:00 Swing/Non voters have given up on the system itself 19:30 Are rebuilders or renovators going to win the argument? 20:00 FDR’s social security pitch was a big swing 22:30 Incrimentalism was the only way to pass Obamacare 23:15 The art of politics is values/vision, then figure out what can actually pass 24:15 A party should be able to change laws, then face the voters 25:30 Need to reform the Supreme Court to reform campaign finance laws 26:15 Advocate for term limits for Supreme Court justices in the book 26:45 Inequality is now worse than it was during the Gilded Age 28:00 Is Francesca Hong too “Madison” of a candidate for Wisconsin gov? 28:45 Hong has been traveling the state & listening for years 29:45 Wisconsin Dem gov primary has been topsy turvy 30:45 Tom Tiffany is an election denier & beatable candidate 32:00 Affordability is the central issue this election cycle 34:45 Why did “calming the waters” work for Tony Evers, but not Joe Biden? 35:30 Evers came out very strongly against Dobbs 36:15 You have to convince a majority of the public that government works 38:15 Trust is earned by doing what you say you’ll do, then highlighting it 39:45 Pandemic relief had a massive positive effect on lower income voters 40:15 Those programs stopped, and voters punished Dems for it 41:00 Child tax credit cut child poverty in half, great accomplishment for Dems 41:30 There was bipartisan support for extended tax credit, still didn’t get done 42:00 Filibuster is used to deprive the other side from getting a win 44:30 Politicians can lay out a succession plan, but voters get their say 46:00 Politicians are limited in setting out a succession plan 47:30 How big should the Democratic tent be? 48:30 The coalition looks different in different states 50:00 Donald Trump has been the most successful GOP politician of this era 50:45 Every Republican politician looks to Trump as the model 51:15 Trump has created an army of “mini-mes” 53:00 What Ken Martin is doing right: Building state parties 55:45 Democrats don’t need a 50 state strategy, they need 50 state strategies 56:45 You build a local brand through your actions over time 57:30 When did you first think about running for office? 59:30 Support Tammy Baldwin’s bill to provide live Packers games 1:01:00 Most excited about Jordan Love in the upcoming season 1:02:15 Why wouldn’t you run for the senate?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Chuck Todd unpacks David Crowley's astonishing photo-finish win over Francesca Hong in Wisconsin — a race Crowley dropped out of, re-entered with Tony Evers' backing, and then won by roughly 3,200 votes — and argues national Democrats are far more relieved than they'll ever admit. Had Hong won, she'd have become a face of the party while being forced to spend the fall answering for past statements about defunding police, abolishing prisons, and canceling Thanksgiving rather than talking about the economy, handing Republicans an absurdly easy story to tell. Chuck credits Tony Evers for refusing to fence-sit and mounting what amounted to an emergency rescue operation, while noting Crowley isn't remotely "establishment" — he came from genuinely modest roots and ran a campaign largely defined by what he wasn't. Chuck identifies Hong's central unforced error as nationalizing her race in the closing weeks, a fundraising-driven instinct in an era where media appearances increasingly function as fundraising appeals, forgetting that the national online audience and the local electorate are not the same people. Mamdani stayed disciplined and won; Hong drifted into boutique cultural debates and lost. But Chuck cautions against reading this as a repudiation of the left: Peggy Flanagan won in Minnesota, progressives are doing better this cycle than they have in years, and the 2027 House will be younger and slightly further left. The real structural lesson is that progressives struggle in higher-turnout and open primaries, still face a persistent obstacle with African American primary voters, and — most tellingly — keep getting rejected by the working-class voters they orient their entire message toward, which is more than a messaging glitch. Abdul El-Sayed emerges a quiet winner here, now much harder to lump in with the DSA, and Chuck notes that neither AOC nor Bernie ever endorsed Hong. The rest of the monologue is a run of results that keep pointing the same direction. Trump-endorsed candidates keep losing primaries: Mike Lindell was trounced in Minnesota, Darline Graham didn't clear a third of the vote and is no lock in her runoff, and Chuck's read is that Trump's grip is measurably slipping. Fourteen-term Congressman John Larson lost his primary, part of the highest incumbent-loss rate since 1970 — in a genuine wave, Chuck says, the House could see north of 25% turnover. On Iran, he echoes Chris Christie's warning that this war turns Trump into Jimmy Carter: Iran has issued a list of demands that amounts to an "F you" ransom note, is openly watching the American election calendar and timing its moves accordingly, and — just as in 1980 — the humiliation itself is the point. All of it, Chuck notes, was Trump's own choice. He closes somewhere unexpected: giving Mark Zuckerberg genuine credit. In his 6,500-word manifesto, Zuckerberg argued that the real danger of AI is the concentration of power, writing that hoping an absolute power will benevolently provide for humanity has historically never ended well — and committing Meta to a review process before models go public. Chuck notes the argument is being made by a deeply self-interested party and that the important parts got buried in what was really a debate with Sam Altman, but he singles out one thing worth emulating: Meta funneling data center tax revenue back into teacher bonuses and job training. Communities hosting this infrastructure have to win too, and he hopes more tech CEOs adopt that philosophy. Then, Ben Wikler, the former Wisconsin Democratic Party chair and author of the new book This Is the Plan joins the Chuck Toddcast to argue that Democrats keep making the same category error: they keep winning change elections and then failing to deliver change, because they're trying to fix policy without first fixing the system that determines who gets to make policy. Wikler's framing is memorable and a little cheeky — you have to win the ring of power and then cast it into Mount Doom — but his point is serious. When the right wins power, it immediately restructures the system to entrench itself; Democrats win and then govern as though the rules are fixed. His plan runs through the state level, where free and fair elections are actually secured, and demands ending the filibuster and reforming the Supreme Court, including term limits for justices, because campaign finance reform is impossible without a Court willing to allow it. Wikler argues America is in the greatest period of political instability in its history, that inequality now exceeds the Gilded Age, that gerrymandering has left millions of people without a meaningful vote, and that both party bases increasingly want to fight more than they want to win — while swing and non-voters have simply given up on the system itself. He rejects the tired rebuilders-versus-renovators binary: FDR's Social Security pitch was a huge swing, incrementalism was the only path to Obamacare, and the actual art of politics is starting from values and vision and then figuring out what can pass. The conversation gets specific about Wisconsin and about trust. Wikler pushes back on the idea that Francesca Hong is too "Madison" for a statewide race, notes she's spent years traveling and listening across the state, and calls Tom Tiffany an election denier who is genuinely beatable in a cycle where affordability is the central issue. He and Chuck work through the puzzle of why Tony Evers' calm, steady approach succeeded where Biden's didn't — Evers came out forcefully against Dobbs, and, more fundamentally, you have to convince a majority of voters that government can actually work, which means doing what you said you'd do and then relentlessly telling people you did it. Wikler points to pandemic relief as the cautionary tale: those programs dramatically improved life for lower-income voters, the child tax credit cut child poverty in half, and then it all expired and Democrats got punished for the loss rather than credited for the gain — with an extension that had bipartisan support dying anyway, because the filibuster exists largely to deprive the other side of a win. He credits Ken Martin for investing in state parties, argues Democrats don't need a 50-state strategy so much as fifty different state strategies since the coalition looks different everywhere, and concedes that Trump has been the most successful Republican of this era, spawning an army of mini-mes modeling themselves on him. And yes, Chuck asks the obvious question — why not run for Senate yourself? Finally, Chuck reveals his ToddCast Top 5 list of biggest non-presidential primary upsets, which David Crowley’s win taking the top spot. He also answers listeners’ questions in the “Ask Chuck” segment and weighs in on the highly suspicious sale of the Los Angeles Lakers to Jared Kushner’s brother. Thanks to our sponsors: Upgrade your everyday. Go to https://Quince.com/CHUCK for free shipping on your order and 365-day returns. Play ball and swing for the fences on FanDuel, an official partner of the MLB at https://FANDUEL.COM. For free and unbiased Medicare help, dial (980) 734-3985 to speak with my trusted partner, Chapter, or go to askchapter.org/chuck / *Paid Partnership Chapter and its affiliates are not connected with or endorsed by any government entity or the federal Medicare program. Chapter Advisory, LLC represents Medicare Advantage HMO, PPO, and PFFS organizations and stand alone prescription drug plans that have a Medicare contract. Enrollment depends on the plan’s contract renewal. While we have a database of every Medicare plan nationwide and can help you to search among all plans, we have contracts with many but not all plans. As a result, we do not offer every plan available in your area. Currently we represent 50 organizations which offer 18,160 products nationwide. We search and recommend all plans, even those we don’t directly offer. You can contact a licensed Chapter agent to find out the number of products available in your specific area. Please contact Medicare.gov, 1-800-Medicare, or your local State Health Insurance Program (SHIP) to get information on all of your options. Timeline: 00:00 Chuck Todd’s introduction 04:00 Unpacking David Crowley’s win over Francesca Hong in WI 04:45 Crowley got out, then back in to the race… yet still won 05:45 If Hong had won, she would have become a face of the Dem party 06:15 Hong had past statements that would have been problematic 07:15 She would have been forced to talk about Thanksgiving, not economics 08:15 Her win would have been an easy story for Republicans to tell 08:45 Abdul El-Sayed is a winner here, harder to be lumped in with DSA 10:00 National Democrats are more relieved than they will admit 11:00 Independents don’t want either party to let extremes take over 12:00 Democrats can make the distinction between themselves & socialism 13:30 The progressives didn’t blow it, Peggy Flannagan won in Minnesota 15:00 African-American primary voters remain an obstacle for progressives 16:30 Progressives gear toward working class voters, yet are rejected by them 17:30 Not winning working class voters is more than a messaging glitch 18:30 Structure of the primary has major impact on success of progressives 19:15 Progressives run into trouble in higher turnout primaries 20:30 Open primaries result in less extremist nominees 21:15 Hong’s big unforced error was campaigning nationally in final weeks 22:00 Nationalizing your race is about fundraising 22:45 Media appearances increasingly function as fundraising appearances 23:30 National online audience & local electorate aren’t the same people 24:15 Mamdani had a disciplined message & succeeded, Hong didn’t 25:00 Ideological candidates can win when the electorate agrees with them 26:00 Ideological movements forget they can sound weird to the normies 26:30 The establishment was dangerously close to screwing this up 28:15 The establishment side of the race was a chaotic mess 29:15 Tony Evers had to mount an emergency rescue operation for Crowley 30:30 David Crowley isn’t very “establishment”, came from modest roots 31:30 Tony Evers deserves credit for putting his capital behind Crowley 32:30 Notable AOC, Sanders and top progressives didn’t endorse Hong 33:45 Getting into boutique cultural debates ends up being a problem 34:30 In Michigan & Wisconsin, the campaigns that physically showed up won 36:15 If Crowley wins & El-Sayed loses, there will be a clear lesson for Dems 38:15 Tony Evers didn’t fence sit, he picked a side and it worked 40:00 Flannagan’s win dispels idea of total repudiation of progressives 42:00 Flannagan had establishment credentials while being progressive 42:30 Progressives aren’t running the table, but are doing better this cycle 43:15 The Democratic house in ‘27 will be younger & slightly further left 44:30 Crowley’s campaign was largely about what he wasn’t 46:00 There could be multiple demographic “first” Democratic governors 47:45 Could these new primary winners end up on a presidential ticket? 49:45 Progressives are doing better, but haven’t won control of the Dem party 50:45 Democrats can blunt the narrative that the socialists are taking over 51:15 Trump endorsed candidates keep losing their primaries 51:45 Mike Lindell was trounced in Minnesota primary 52:45 Trump endorsed Darline Graham didn’t get 1/3rd of the vote 53:15 Graham isn’t a shoo-in in the runoff 55:30 Trump’s endorsement isn’t a guaranteed win, his grip is slipping 57:00 14-term congressman John Larson loses his primary 57:45 Most incumbents have lost reelection this year since 1970 58:15 In a wave election, could see over 25% turnover of the House 59:30 Chris Christie says Iran war will turn Trump into Jimmy Carter 1:00:00 Iran is humiliating Trump, and it was all Trump’s choice 1:00:30 Iran issues list of demands, basically an “F You” ransom note 1:01:30 Iran are watching the American election calendar & acting accordingly 1:02:15 In 1980, the humiliation of Carter was the point, Iran sent a message 1:03:30 Mark Zuckerberg deserves credit for something he said 1:04:15 Zuckerberg argued that AI driven concentration of power is the danger 1:04:45 He says there’s no benevolent superintelligence held by one company 1:05:15 Committed to a review board to sign off on models before going public 1:05:45 At least the argument is being made… even if by a self-interested party 1:06:30 Revenue from Meta data centers has been paid to teachers & job training 1:07:15 Meta reinvesting in communities with data centers is the right model 1:08:00 The manifesto was a debate with Sam Altman, buried the important things 1:09:15 Hope more tech CEO’s share his philosophy. Communities have to win too 1:16:45 Ben Wikler joins The Chuck ToddCast 1:17:45 Ben’s new book is “This Is The Plan” 1:18:00 What is the plan? 1:18:30 To get political change we need, we need to change the system 1:19:15 To secure free & fair elections, need to win at the state level 1:19:45 We need an end to the filibuster and Supreme Court reform 1:20:30 There’s no one office or candidate to get us out of this mess 1:22:30 We need to win the ring of power, then cast it into Mount Doom 1:23:00 When the right wins power, they immediately change systems 1:24:00 We keep having change elections, then not getting change 1:26:15 We’re in the greatest period of political instability in American history 1:29:15 Both party bases want to fight more than want to win 1:30:15 We’re so gerrymandered, people don’t really get a vote 1:31:45 Swing/Non voters have given up on the system itself 1:36:15 Are rebuilders or renovators going to win the argument? 1:36:45 FDR’s social security pitch was a big swing 1:39:15 Incrimentalism was the only way to pass Obamacare 1:40:00 The art of politics is values/vision, then figure out what can actually pass 1:41:00 A party should be able to change laws, then face the voters 1:42:15 Need to reform the Supreme Court to reform campaign finance laws 1:43:00 Advocate for term limits for Supreme Court justices in the book 1:43:30 Inequality is now worse than it was during the Gilded Age 1:44:45 Is Francesca Hong too “Madison” of a candidate for Wisconsin gov? 1:45:30 Hong has been traveling the state & listening for years 1:46:30 Wisconsin Dem gov primary has been topsy turvy 1:47:30 Tom Tiffany is an election denier & beatable candidate 1:48:45 Affordability is the central issue this election cycle 1:51:30 Why did “calming the waters” work for Tony Evers, but not Joe Biden? 1:52:15 Evers came out very strongly against Dobbs 1:53:00 You have to convince a majority of the public that government works 1:55:00 Trust is earned by doing what you say you’ll do, then highlighting it 1:56:30 Pandemic relief had a massive positive effect on lower income voters 1:57:00 Those programs stopped, and voters punished Dems for it 1:57:45 Child tax credit cut child poverty in half, great accomplishment for Dems 1:58:15 There was bipartisan support for extended tax credit, still didn’t get done 1:58:45 Filibuster is used to deprive the other side from getting a win 2:01:15 Politicians can lay out a succession plan, but voters get their say 2:02:45 Politicians are limited in setting out a succession plan 2:04:15 How big should the Democratic tent be? 2:05:15 The coalition looks different in different states 2:06:45 Donald Trump has been the most successful GOP politician of this era 2:07:30 Every Republican politician looks to Trump as the model 2:08:00 Trump has created an army of “mini-mes” 2:09:45 What Ken Martin is doing right: Building state parties 2:12:30 Democrats don’t need a 50 state strategy, they need 50 state strategies 2:13:30 You build a local brand through your actions over time 2:14:15 When did you first think about running for office? 2:16:15 Support Tammy Baldwin’s bill to provide live Packers games 2:17:45 Most excited about Jordan Love in the upcoming season 2:19:00 Why wouldn’t you run for the senate? 2:20:30 ToddCast Top 5 biggest non-presidential primary upsets 2:22:30 #5 Joe Crowley loses to AOC 2:23:30 #4 Carol Moseley Braun 2:24:15 #3 Andrew Gillum 2:25:15 #2 Eric Cantor 2:26:15 #1 David Crawley 2:27:45 Honorable mentions 2:29:15 Ask Chuck 2:29:30 If Talarico wins close, could partisan officials mess with the outcome? 2:32:30 What makes a vice presidency successful & who makes your top 5? 2:40:15 What does it say about us that voters knew who Trump was and reelected him? 2:44:15 Can Jewish leaders like Pritzker & Ossoff campaign effectively for El-Sayed? 2:46:45 Lakers sold again, for $12B to Josh Kushner and Bob Iger 2:47:45 Mark Walter bought Lakers 14 months ago for $10B, and is already out 2:48:30 This story could be nothing… but the details warrant suspicion 2:50:00 Mark Walter’s businesses are under federal investigation right now 2:51:00 Nobody has been charged or accused of anything yet 2:51:45 Why did Walter sell so fast is not a rhetorical question anymore 2:52:30 Kushner was set to buy a piece of the World Cup, until boycott threats 2:53:30 Anyone close to Trump will be assumed guilty until proven innocent 2:55:00 Maybe everything is on the up and up… but the details are shockingSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Send us Fan MailWe walk through the weirdly powerful math that makes a stable $10,000 profit stream worth $50,000 in one world and $1,000,000 in another. Then we apply the same present value logic to politics and show how unpredictable rules raise transaction costs, inflate the effective discount rate, and freeze long-term investment. • the discount rate as the hidden driver of valuation • why the consol bond makes present value intuitive • P = X / R as a shortcut for long-lived assets • how low interest rates mechanically boost asset prices • discount rates as opportunity cost plus inflation plus risk • regime uncertainty as political risk priced into investment • how New Deal “experimentation” can prolong a downturn • modern examples through tariffs tax policy and regulation • a listener puzzle on why Coke concentrate costs more Tell me what the answer is. If anybody knows of a recording of the George M. Cohan play, Broadway musical, I would certainly like to be able to find it. Michael Munger, "How Interest Rates Set Asset Prices: One Weird Trick," The Daily Economy, May 28, 2025 Robert Higgs, "Regime Uncertainty: Why the Great Depression Lasted So Long and Why Prosperity Resumed after the War," The Independent Review, Spring 1997 Amity Shlaes, The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression (HarperCollins, 2007)Franklin D. Roosevelt, Oglethorpe University commencement address, May 22, 1932 Book o-da-week:  Robert Higgs, Depresssion, War, and Cold War, (reprint) Independent Institute. If you have questions or comments, or want to suggest a future topic, email the show at taitc.email@gmail.com !You can follow Mike Munger on Twitter at @mungowitz 

Craig Symonds, author of Nimitz at War: Command Leadership from Pearl Harbor to Tokyo Bay, Part One: Following the devastating attack on Pearl Harbor, Admiral Chester Nimitz assumed command of the Pacific Fleet with a mission to stabilize a wrecked command and shift from defeat to offense. Selected by FDR and Frank Knox despite initial skepticism from Admiral Ernest J. King, Nimitz's leadership was characterized by a calm, humble, and collaborative approach, contrasting with King's hard-driving nature. Central to his strategy was the concept of "calculated risk"—the principle of assuming no risk greater than the potential benefit. The narrative explores Nimitz's reliance on intelligence officers like Edwin Layton and Joseph Rochefort, whose code-breaking efforts were vital to successes at the Battle of the Coral Sea and the Battle of Midway. Nimitz demonstrated a keen ability to manage difficult personalities and navigate naval rivalries, such as the friction between "brown shoe" aviators and "black shoe" ship drivers. During the precarious Guadalcanal campaign, Nimitz made the critical decision to replace the cautious Admiral Ghormley with the aggressive William "Bull" Halsey to maintain momentum against the Japanese. Throughout this period, Nimitz balanced professional pressures with personal discipline, maintaining a rigorous exercise routine while communicating his private concerns only to his wife. (1)

Last time we spoke about the ending of the Second Battle of Changsha. In late September and early October 1941, Chinese commander Chen Cheng planned an operation to retake Yichang, a strategic Yangtze River city whose control was essential for protecting the approach to Chongqing. Japanese forces were pulling back from Changsha, weakened by supply problems and casualties, which created an opportunity for Chen to intensify his campaign. Yichang had been captured by Japan in 1940, a defeat that Chen carried as a personal and political burden. He therefore moved to encircle the Japanese 13th Division inside Yichang and drive it to collapse. Although the Chinese held a clear manpower advantage—fourteen divisions against the encircled Japanese—progress was slowed by stubborn fighting from prepared, entrenched positions. The battle inside the city produced desperate close-quarters combat and heavy casualties, showing how the fate of Yichang and the wider defense of Chongqing were tightly linked.    #214 War hits the Pacific Welcome to the Fall and Rise of China Podcast, I am your dutiful host Craig Watson. But, before we start I want to also remind you this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Perhaps you want to learn more about the history of Asia? Kings and Generals have an assortment of episodes on history of asia and much more  so go give them a look over on Youtube. So please subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry for some more history related content, over on my channel, the Pacific War Channel where I cover the history of China and Japan from the 19th century until the end of the Pacific War.   The guns fell silent on October 9, 1941, as the Ninth War Zone's forces restored their pre-battle positions, marking the end of the Second Battle of Changsha. The balance sheet was grim on both sides, but it was China that bore the heavier cost. The Ninth Military Front suffered 70,672 killed, wounded, or missing. The concurrent Yichang offensive added a further 21,368 casualties to the Sixth Military Front, a force that outnumbered its Japanese opponents ten to one yet still failed to retake the city. By the time the dust settled, the Chinese army had lost nearly 100,000 men across both theatres. The Chinese command was frank, at least in private, about what had gone wrong. The Japanese had moved with a speed that recalled Blitzkrieg, advancing 130 kilometres in eleven days and withdrawing at twelve kilometres a day, catching the defenders perpetually off-balance. The 26th, 37th, 10th, and 74th Corps had been picked apart piecemeal rather than fighting in concert, the original plan to destroy the Japanese south of the Miluo River coming to nothing. Elite formations had paid a disproportionate price: the 74th Corps suffered 14,521 casualties, the 37th Corps 14,015, and the 58th Division alone lost 6,192 of its 11,907 men, nearly its entire fighting strength.   Yet none of this was the story the public would hear. On October 10th, China's National Day, radio stations announced the "Second Great Victory in Northern Hunan", the annihilation of over 40,000 enemy troops. Newspapers rushed out special editions. Congratulatory telegrams flooded in from government ministries and civic organizations. Senior officials seized on the moment: Sun Ke, Premier of the Executive Yuan, declared that the victory "laid the foundation for the counter-offensive and the recapture of Hankou and Guangzhou," while General Bai Chongxi called it "the pivotal moment for us to turn defeat into victory." Chiang Kai-shek, reading through the pages of triumphant commentary produced overnight by his propagandists, was reportedly impressed by their industry, if not convinced by their content. He had not wanted to call it a victory at all, but the political calculus was unavoidable: after four years of war, an exhausted nation needed the psychological sustenance that only "victory" could provide.   The gap between public performance and private reality was nowhere more visible than in the arrival of a twenty-two-member international press delegation on October 13th. Journalists from Britain, the United States, France, the Netherlands, Portugal, Hong Kong, and major Chinese newspapers were flown to Changsha and carefully guided through selected battlefields, where they inspected mountains of war trophies and heard testimony from soldiers and civilians. They left satisfied, presenting their war souvenirs—swords, binoculars, Japanese military flags—to their audiences back home as proof of Chinese heroism and Japanese defeat. Both China and Japan were claiming victory simultaneously. The only conclusion the foreign press could draw was that one side was lying, and it was not the side that had shown them the evidence.   Chiang Kai-shek's real verdict came at the Third Nanyue Military Conference, held from October 16 to 21. His anger was withering. He condemned his generals for their obsession with defending sprawling outer perimeter lines while leaving city centres barely fortified, a mentality so rigid, he said, that the Japanese could announce the exact time of their advance and withdrawal in advance and still execute it on schedule without interference. "Generals, what a disgrace this is!" On the failure to capture prisoners, only 263 prisoners were claimed across the entire front, of whom only 16 names were actually published, he was almost incredulous: "We can definitely defeat the enemy, capture many enemy prisoners, and seize countless enemy weapons! Even if we cannot capture ten thousand prisoners, we should at least capture a thousand! If not a thousand, then at least a hundred! But now, you don't even have ten!" The conference handed down punishments to match the rhetoric. Liao Lingqi, commander of the shattered 58th Division, was sentenced to death for desertion and shot on October 22nd. His men were so outraged that three regimental commanders resigned in protest; the division was pulled from the order of battle entirely and given three months to rebuild. Li Yutang, commander of the 10th Corps, was dismissed—though the Third Battle of Changsha would begin before his replacement could take post, and he would be reinstated to play a key role in the city's defence.   On the Japanese side, the 11th Army acknowledged 1,670 killed, 5,184 wounded, and 14 missing, far fewer than Chinese claims, though post-war regimental histories suggest the true figure was higher. Lieutenant General Anami, who had championed the operation, found himself stung by the charge that the battle had served mainly as material for Chinese propaganda. On November 23rd, he reportedly reacted with visible displeasure when someone in his headquarters said as much aloud.  Anami's annoyance was easy enough to understand, but the accusation carried a troubling degree of accuracy. The Second Battle of Changsha had yielded no decisive strategic gain and no substantial alteration in the military balance. What it did generate, rather effectively, was a story and by the autumn of 1941, stories were one of the few things China still had in plentiful supply. The most consequential struggles were taking place not along the Miluo River, but in foreign ministries and embassies, in Washington and Moscow, in the messages passing between Chongqing and London, and in the increasingly strained calculations of statesmen trying to determine, amid rapidly changing circumstances, whom to support and for how long.   For Chiang Kai-shek, the challenge was never merely military. It was structural, and had been so from the outset. He had always seen clearly, precisely because he understood China's weakness, that Japan could not be defeated by China alone. The country lacked the industrial base, the logistical reach, and after four years of relentless attrition more and more the manpower needed to force a decisive result on the battlefield. China's survival depended on making its war inseparable from the wars of other powers. Since 1937, Chiang's diplomacy had pursued that single objective: convincing enough great powers that their interests were aligned with China's, and holding that coalition together long enough for Japan to be subdued. That effort turned out to be vastly more difficult than it ought to have been.   The problem started with the international order in which the war emerged. Chiang had hoped to assemble a concert of allies willing to help defend China against Japanese aggression. He was blocked not just by the reluctance of neutral states to aid China, but by the speed with which alliances shifted in the opening years of the Second World War. He had never welcomed the prospect of a general European conflict, correctly fearing that it would push China even further to the margins of world attention. Even so, he recognized that once the lines had hardened between the imperial democracies and fascism, new alignments might become possible. From his perspective, the growing amity between Berlin and Moscow was therefore disastrous. He had been eager to draw the USSR into war against Japan. Instead, the Soviets were now effectively aligned with the Nazis, who were themselves allied with Tokyo.   The world created after Versailles had already enraged many Chinese. After all, the May Fourth demonstrations of 1919 had arisen directly from the settlement reached at the Paris Peace Conference. Yet that older order had at least possessed recognizable anchors, especially the dominance of the two great European empires and the United States. Now those empires were weakening, and no one could say with confidence what the new geopolitical order would be. For all Chiang knew, Germany might emerge as Europe's new dominant power. The early years of the European war produced a bewildering spectacle of diplomatic realignment.   The Nationalist government had previously enjoyed a short-lived flirtation with Nazi Germany. In fact, Hitler's regime continued supplying Chiang with munitions in the first months of China's war against Japan. The Anti-Comintern Pact of 1936 had theoretically joined Germany, Italy, and Japan into the Axis, but mutual distrust prevented them from forming anything like a fully coherent alliance. Chiang found it useful to imply to Western powers that he might be pushed into closer alignment with Germany, a particularly disturbing possibility for the USSR, which faced enemies in both Europe and Asia. But eventually the contradictions in German policy toward East Asia became too severe. In April 1938, Germany yielded to Japanese pressure and ended its support for China.   Britain offered little meaningful help. Neville Chamberlain became prime minister in May 1937 at the head of a Conservative-led National Government, and was quickly overwhelmed by the deteriorating European situation. If Czechoslovakia was for him a "far-off country of which we know nothing," China's fate was even more distant and obscure to many,  perhaps most  policymakers in London. The Nationalists had more success in cultivating the United States. At the Nine-Power Conference in Brussels in November 1937, the Chinese delegation failed to persuade Washington to impose sanctions on Japan and confront it directly. By the middle of 1938, however, American views were beginning to shift. As Japan pushed deeper into southern China, it became increasingly obvious that the occupied territory would be closed to foreign trade. In December 1938, Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau arranged a private American loan of $25 million to China, to be repaid through shipments of tung oil, a varnish product whose real importance lay not in itself, but in what the arrangement signified: a quiet American expression of faith that Chongqing would survive. Chiang also held on to the hope of an even less likely partnership. He had become fiercely anti-Communist during the 1920s, yet in the early years of the anti-Japanese war his greatest hope still rested on Soviet entry into the conflict. Soviet advisers and pilots had aided China from 1937 to 1939, but the USSR never formally declared war on Japan. Still, as Japanese aggression in northern Asia intensified, it remained possible that the Soviets would eventually be drawn in.   Then, as so often happened whenever Chiang tried to impose some control over the course of the war, events beyond China's borders altered the struggle in fundamental ways. While Western attention remained fixed on Europe's darkening horizon, a battle with major consequences for East Asia unfolded on the frontiers of Outer Mongolia, Manchukuo, and the eastern Soviet Union. Throughout much of 1938 and early 1939, one faction within the Japanese Imperial Army sought to pressure the Soviets along their eastern frontier. The USSR appeared vulnerable; Stalin's paranoid purges had executed or exiled many of the Red Army's best officers. In May 1939, fighting broke out near Nomonhan between forces from Soviet-backed Mongolia and Japanese troops from Manchukuo. Within days, both sides had reinforced heavily, until nearly 60,000 Soviet troops faced about 40,000 soldiers from the Kwantung Army. Over the next four months, until mid-September, they fought a major battle ending in a decisive Japanese defeat and establishing the reputation of General Georgi Zhukov, who would later become one of Stalin's most celebrated wartime commanders. The much-derided Soviet Army had fought with formidable effectiveness, and the result was not only a ceasefire but also a nonaggression pact between the two sides, extinguishing, in one stroke, Chiang's hopes for a Chinese-Soviet military alliance. The final blow came after developments in northern Europe. In the Winter War of 1939–1940, the Soviet invasion of Finland led Britain and France to back a motion expelling the USSR from the League of Nations. China, then a member of the League Council, declined to use its veto to block the resolution. Stalin was enraged by Chiang's failure to prevent Soviet expulsion, and mutual suspicion thereafter poisoned relations between the two leaders for the rest of the war against Japan. China would now have to continue without further major Soviet backing.   By the spring of 1940, China's position had become deeply precarious. In March, senior Japanese negotiators sought an agreement with Chiang in Chongqing, while Wang Jingwei was trying to formalize his rival Nationalist government in Nanjing. This effort, known in Chinese as the Tong Operation, and in Japanese as Operation Kiri, led to talks in Hong Kong from March 7 to 10, 1940. Militarily, the Nationalists were in grave danger: the United States remained neutral, and Europe was in chaos. Indeed, that same spring, with France seemingly near collapse, the British government also sent out discreet feelers to explore the possibility of a negotiated peace with Germany. For China, Western assistance was nowhere in sight. The Japanese judged the moment favorable for pressing Chiang toward concessions. Faced with serious danger to his regime, Chiang allowed the door to negotiation to open just slightly.   As a consequence, the Japanese delayed full recognition of Wang Jingwei's new government. Through the summer and autumn of 1940, Tokyo remained uncertain about the defector. Prominent Japanese figures such as Count Arima Yoriyasu of the Privy Council said Wang's conduct demonstrated his untrustworthiness, and Foreign Minister Matsuoka Yōsuke continued to express interest in an agreement with Chongqing. Zhou Fohai captured the defectors' frustration, men who believed they had made the highest patriotic sacrifice when he wrote: "Chongqing sees us as collaborators, we see ourselves as heroes. We think only peace can save the country — that's why we think of ourselves as heroes. If we end up classed as heroes, then China and Japan will be at peace. If we end up classed as collaborators, then China and Japan will never be at peace."That formulation conveyed something genuine about the moral dizziness of the period. Most of the defectors were not men devoid of principles; they were men whose principles had carried them to a place that history would find exceptionally hard to pardon.   The "New Fourth Army Incident" brought to a close one of the most consequential years in modern Chinese political history. The battle of ideas unfolding in 1940 was already visible to informed contemporaries. Early in 1941, US Ambassador Nelson Johnson sent Washington a detailed assessment of the Chinese political situation in reply to another report passed along by Major Evans Carlson, an American officer who had made an extensive journey through the Chinese interior. The contrast between the two documents revealed a widening split in American views of China. Carlson, together with his travelling companion, the New Zealander Rewi Alley, had become increasingly sympathetic to the Communists after visiting their territories in 1938 and admiring their discipline. Carlson described the Nationalists as moving toward "fascism," and argued that American aid should be conditioned on Chiang's government being compelled to adopt more "democratic" institutions.   Johnson strongly disagreed. It was "only normal and natural," he wrote, that the Nationalists wanted to retain power, but during the war they had established the National Political Consultative Council, in which multiple parties, including the Communists, were represented. He also noted that the CCP could publish its own newspaper in Chongqing in a way that would have been impossible before the war. One might have expected the Nationalists to use the war as a justification "to extinguish . . . all political opposition," yet instead they had chosen to "muddle along." Johnson further thought that the influence of competing cliques inside the Nationalist Party had been overstated. Chiang Kai-shek, by contrast, had "grown in stature, as he has come to be recognized as the symbol of united resistance to Japanese encroachment"; ultimately, "it is he who makes the final decisions." Johnson did agree with Carlson that Chiang's regime was hesitant to encourage a broad-based popular movement animated by anything beyond anti-Japanese feeling, though he also pointed to Nationalist cooperative programs and county-level reforms. But he rejected the idea that American support should depend on sweeping political transformation. Chiang was committed to continuing the war against Japan, and Washington should back him in that effort. In a notably farsighted passage, Johnson wrote: "It is my view that since the fall of the Manchu dynasty and the collapse of the traditional Chinese concept of government the Chinese people have been feeling their way along toward a new evolving form of government. A definitive form of government has not yet been established and may not be established for decades; it may or may not be in the form of a democracy, but it will be a type of government that will be adapted to the needs of China and its people." The tension between these two American interpretations,  Carlson's idealized belief in the Communists and Johnson's pragmatic support for Chiang was more than a minor bureaucratic dispute. It foreshadowed a debate that would dominate American foreign policy for the next decade, and would still echo when the People's Republic was proclaimed in 1949.   The disastrous experience of 1940 seemed to cast doubt on whether any future for China existed outside the Japanese Empire. As 1941 wore on, another dreadful event shook the exhausted wartime capital. On June 5, Chongqing endured roughly five hours of bombing, driving the population into air-raid shelters. In one tunnel in the Shibati district, the conditions were even worse than usual. The large shelter was supposed to have lights and electric fans, but the generators had never been connected. Inside, the air was dark, hot, and suffocating. Around ten that evening, people began emerging from the tunnel when rumors spread that the Japanese were returning with poison-gas bombs. Air-raid wardens forced people back inside, even as others were still trying to come out. Bodies toppled over one another, and panic spread as people realized they could not breathe. Over the next few hours, hundreds died underground in the darkness. The exact number was never definitively established: the official figure was 461, though a contemporary police report placed it far higher, at 1,527. What rescuers remembered most vividly were the tortured expressions of the dead, people tangled together in each other's arms as they lost consciousness, clothing ripped to shreds by desperate hands clawing at one another, and bodies so drenched in sweat that they looked as though they had been soaked in water. One survivor, Tang Zhengchang, remembered a hand reaching out from a pile of corpses and pleading, "Sir, please help me . . ." The grip on Tang's shorts was so tight that it pulled them off; he escaped the tunnel naked from the waist down. Official descriptions of the disaster were softened. Even so, the tragedy deepened the city's gloom and in a place already saturated with grief, an added layer of darkness mattered a great deal.   Yet events elsewhere would soon offer the National Government a narrow margin of hope. Late in 1940, Franklin D. Roosevelt won re-election as president of the United States. "I am not going to send your boys into any foreign wars," he had proclaimed during the campaign against Wendell Willkie. But Roosevelt and Secretary of State Cordell Hull both understood that Nazi domination of Europe posed a grave challenge to American influence there. And with China's "Open Door" to trade effectively shut by Japanese occupation, it was becoming increasingly clear that strict neutrality might not remain viable. In a 1941 report on China's domestic and foreign situation, Ambassador Johnson noted that during Germany's sweeping victories across Europe in mid-1940, the Chinese had become anxious about whether the Allies would remain committed to their cause. Britain's refusal to surrender, however, together with continuing Soviet goodwill, lifted public morale in China. People now looked toward the United States and Britain for support and felt that "victory" was "virtually theirs."   Then, on June 22, 1941, the world awoke to news that roughly three million German soldiers were advancing into the Soviet Union. Operation Barbarossa, Hitler's invasion of the USSR, dramatically overturned the nonaggression that had governed relations between the two major European dictatorships for the previous two years. It transformed the war in Europe entirely. Less obviously, it also transformed the war in Asia. Thanks to intelligence leaks, Chiang Kai-shek had already realized that war between Germany and the USSR was likely. After the neutrality treaty between the USSR and Japan was signed on April 13, 1941, Chiang predicted that the United States would be drawn into the Asian war, and even that Japan might eventually reverse course and strike the Soviet Union. If that happened, China would become the critical Asian ally of both Washington and Moscow. Stalin had been caught off guard by the German assault — largely because he ignored increasingly urgent warnings from senior colleagues receiving intelligence from well-placed spies in Germany and the Comintern, eager to preserve its alliances, now pressed the Chinese Communists to cooperate more closely with the Nationalists. On June 23, 1941, the CCP Central Committee responded with a declaration that it would "persevere in the Anti-Japanese United Front, persevere in Nationalist-Communist cooperation," and would align itself with the British, the Americans, and others resisting the "fascist rulers" of the Axis.   In Chongqing and Yan'an, the German attack on the Soviet Union was interpreted as a hopeful sign that Japan's fortunes might be beginning to turn. In Nanjing, the reaction was different. On June 22, Zhou Fohai recorded in his diary that, although the outcome "cannot be predicted," members of the Nanjing regime "all believe Germany will win and will take Moscow within two months." Zhou speculated that Japan could not easily reconcile its neutrality treaty with the USSR and its membership in the Anti-Comintern Pact, which was supposed to unite the Axis against Soviet expansionism. Still, because Germany had struck first, Japan was under no formal obligation to help. Zhou also continued to view events through a lens he had never abandoned: that of Chinese nationalism. "If Chongqing joins the Allies and they win," he wrote, "then this is good for China." If they lost, it would be disastrous for Chiang Kai-shek; but because Wang Jingwei had established a government in Nanjing under Japanese sponsorship, China now had "a foot in both boats." It was a ruthless calculation, but not a wholly dishonorable one. Zhou was not merely advancing Japanese interests. He was hedging, wagering on multiple futures in the name of a China he believed would endure beyond whatever constellation of powers happened to dominate at the moment. Whether posterity would judge that conduct prudent or collaborative was a question he could neither settle nor live to see resolved to his satisfaction.   The summer of 1941 marked a major geopolitical turning point in the war. Until then, the conflicts in China and Europe had remained separate, if desperate, struggles on the Eurasian continent. Germany's invasion of the Soviet Union now forced Japan to decide whether it too would enter war against the USSR. Debate in Tokyo was brief. Although some officials, including Foreign Minister Matsuoka, favored striking north before moving south, both the Kwantung Army and the Navy advised against helping Germany at least until Germany had succeeded in drawing substantial Soviet forces away from Siberia and into Europe. Konoye, once again prime minister, agreed. With the northern option set aside, Japanese leaders turned toward another great power instead: the United States. Japan's failure to gain further decisive momentum in China had fueled demands for broader regional expansion, especially into Southeast Asia, with its abundant oil, rubber, and other strategic resources. From 1940 onward, measures such as the pressure to close the Burma Road made it increasingly obvious that Tokyo had adopted a more aggressive posture in Asia. Unable to subdue China, Japanese policymakers chose instead to escalate the conflict still further.   Japanese political life had become ever more dominated by the unresolved war in China. As early as 1938, military expenditures consumed about 70 percent of the national budget, and that same year a National Mobilization Bill granted the government "total war control" over the zaibatsu, Japan's major industrial conglomerates. By 1940, the New Order was making itself felt throughout everyday life, with campaigns against luxury and extravagant consumption taking on new prominence. In February 1940, a parliamentarian was expelled from the Diet simply for daring to criticize the "holy war" in China. In such an atmosphere, retreat from imperial ambitions became increasingly unthinkable. That figure, 70 percent of the national budget devoted to the military is worth dwelling on, because it reveals something essential about the trap in which Japanese strategists had placed themselves. The war in China had not been won, yet abandoning it would have meant admitting a failure so severe that it would have shaken the ideological and institutional foundations of military supremacy in Japanese politics. The only apparent ways out required pushing further in: more conquest, more extraction, more expansion. The logic was brutally clear, and profoundly destructive.   The Roosevelt administration watched these developments with growing alarm. Though still formally neutral, the United States was already using Lend-Lease to provide major assistance to Britain and the Soviet Union in their struggles against Germany. It now expanded aid to China as well. On February 10, Roosevelt's representative Lauchlin Currie visited Chongqing to inform Chiang Kai-shek that the United States would soon provide $45 million in military equipment. General John Magruder, head of the small AMMISCA mission,  the American Military Mission in China had been sent to Chongqing in September 1941, as part of quiet preparation for possible Chinese entry into an alliance against Japan. The China branch of the OSS, precursor to the CIA, was led by General William "Wild Bill" Donovan, whom Roosevelt had dispatched to China in early 1941.   The Americans repeatedly tried to discourage Japan from moving south into Southeast Asia, but relations only grew more confrontational. Japan occupied the southern part of French Indochina, and in response the United States imposed an oil embargo in July 1941. The consequences were immense. Japan imported around 80 percent of its oil from the United States. Without that supply, its navy, the essential instrument for southern expansion  had reserves for perhaps eighteen months. The real question facing Tokyo, then, was not whether it must act, but how soon. Unable any longer to resist mounting military pressure for war, Konoye resigned on October 16 and was replaced as premier by General Tōjō Hideki. Tokyo accelerated its preparations for conflict with the Western powers. Planned targets included Singapore, Hong Kong, Malaya, the Netherlands East Indies, and the Philippines. I should note, if you want to learn about all of this history in more detail, you can go check out the pacific war channel on youtube. I have a chronological series that is just now talking about events like the Japanese invasion of french indochina and the road to pearl harbor.   Throughout the autumn of 1941, increasingly desperate negotiations took place between Japan and the United States. Washington insisted that Japan withdraw from China; Tokyo was equally firm that it would do no such thing. From the Japanese point of view, the demand to leave China was not a serious negotiating position but a demand for national humiliation a call to repudiate four years of war, vast casualties, and the ideological basis of Japanese militarism in a single diplomatic act. In the end, the gulf between the two positions could not be bridged.   While civilian and military leaders in Tokyo argued over the pace at which they should move toward war, few among Japan's rulers doubted that war was coming. At the imperial conference of November 5, it was formally agreed that if no satisfactory diplomatic solution had been reached by December 1, war would follow soon after. Talks in Washington between Ambassador Nomura Kichisaburō, diplomat Kurusu Saburō, and Secretary of State Cordell Hull led nowhere. On November 26, Hull delivered a note repeating the American position that Japan must withdraw from both China and Indochina. On December 1, the imperial conference resolved to go to war; the following day, the date of attack was fixed as December 8, December 7 by American time. In one sense, this was the culmination toward which the entire previous decade had been moving. The war in China had started as a localized conflict, then expanded into a continental one, and was now about to become something larger still: a truly global war, stretching from the North Atlantic to the western Pacific. China's long, lonely resistance would suddenly gain new dimensions and new allies,  though not the ones Chiang had spent four years trying to cultivate, and not under circumstances he would have chosen.   In the early morning of December 7, 1941, the US Pacific Fleet lay anchored at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii, its sailors and officers still largely asleep as dawn crept across the Pacific. The attack did not come without warning signs,  American and Japanese diplomats had been locked in increasingly desperate negotiations throughout the autumn, each side hardening its position until no room remained to maneuver. Washington had demanded that Japan withdraw from China, a condition Tokyo viewed not as a serious opening offer but as a demand for national humiliation: a call to repudiate four years of brutal war, hundreds of thousands of casualties, and the entire ideological foundation upon which Japanese militarism rested. No agreement was possible on those terms, and both sides privately knew it.   The strike force assembled in secret was formidable. Six aircraft carriers,  the Akagi, Kaga, Sōryū, Hiryū, Shōkaku, and Zuikaku had sailed under strict radio silence across the North Pacific, launching their aircraft in two successive waves before the American base had any meaningful chance to respond. The first wave of approximately 183 planes swept in just before 8 a.m., targeting the rows of battleships moored along Battleship Row and the military airfields at Wheeler, Hickam, and Ford Island simultaneously, ensuring that American aircraft could not scramble in time to mount an effective defense. A second wave of roughly 170 planes followed less than an hour later, pressing the attack on damaged ships and harbor installations.   The destruction was staggering. The battleship Arizona suffered a catastrophic magazine explosion after a armor-piercing bomb penetrated her forward decks, killing nearly 1,177 of her crew in minutes, almost half of the total American dead from the entire attack. The Oklahoma capsized after being struck by multiple torpedoes. The West Virginia and California sank at their moorings. In total, seventeen vessels were damaged or destroyed, and the vast majority of military aircraft at the nearby airfields were caught on the ground and obliterated before they could take flight. Around 2,400 Americans were killed and another 1,100 wounded, making it the deadliest single attack on American soil or territory in the nation's history to that point.   Yet the attack was not a complete strategic success for Japan. The US Pacific Fleet's aircraft carriers, the vessels that would ultimately decide the naval war in the Pacific happened to be at sea that morning and escaped unharmed. The harbor's fuel storage and repair facilities were also left largely intact, allowing the fleet to reconstitute faster than Japanese planners had anticipated. What Japan achieved in tactical devastation, it partly squandered in strategic miscalculation. The attack ended American neutrality instantly and irrevocably. The following day, President Roosevelt addressed Congress, calling December 7 "a date which will live in infamy," and within hours the United States declared war on Japan. For China, after more than four years of fighting alone, the blow that devastated Pearl Harbor paradoxically carried a thread of desperate hope at last, the great power Chiang Kai-shek had spent years trying to draw into the conflict had arrived, not under circumstances he would have chosen, but arrived nonetheless. I would like to take this time to remind you all that this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Please go subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry after that, give my personal channel a look over at The Pacific War Channel at Youtube, it would mean a lot to me. After years of fighting, China's situation darkened in 1941 with intense bombing of Chongqing and fears of poison-gas attacks. Germany's invasion of the Soviet Union in June shifted alliances and pressured Japan toward wider war. Japan escalated plans for Southeast Asia, suffered an oil embargo, and negotiations with the United States broke down over withdrawing from China and Indochina. Then the Pearl Harbor attack began the Pacific War.

We often think of Jack Ruby as a creature of the dark, of smoky, neon-lit walkups, back-alley brawls, and shady financial deals. But for nearly three years during the height of the Second World War, Jacob Rubenstein proudly wore the olive drab uniform of the United States Army Air Forces. Stationed at various air bases across the American South, Private First Class Rubenstein served with an unblemished record as a highly skilled aircraft mechanic. In the military, Jacob found something he had been chasing his entire life: structure, respect, and a patriotic cause far bigger than himself.Yet, you cannot take the Chicago streets out of the soldier. In the barracks, the classic Jack Ruby contradictions and side hustles quickly emerged. He was a fastidious clean-freak who detested dirty work, yet forced himself to dive into the greasiest engine blocks just to prove to his younger bunkmates that he wasn't lazy. To keep his pockets lined, he set up a highly lucrative unofficial retail operation straight out of his bunk—shipping in boxes of commercial punchboards and premium chocolates from Chicago to sell to a bored, captive audience of soldiers, while dominating late-night barracks card and dice games.But the cool, professional exterior of Private Rubenstein had a deadly serious boundary. Fiercely and pathologically sensitive to his Jewish identity, Jacob was a powder keg waiting for a match. When an active-duty sergeant hurled a vile anti-semitic slur at him, Jacob instantly lunged, ignoring the strict military code, court-martial threats, and potential hard labor. He beat the sergeant mercilessly with his bare fists, drawing blood to defend his name. It was a staggering act of insubordination that was surprisingly swept under the rug, leaving his pristine conduct record intact.This episode closes with a deeply emotional, chillingly prophetic moment in April 1945. When the devastating news of President Franklin D. Roosevelt's death reached the base, Jacob broke down completely, sobbing hysterically in deep, inconsolable grief. While his fellow soldiers looked on in bewilderment at his raw, bizarre emotional breakdown, this intense, weeping grief for a fallen president would serve as a haunting, terrifying echo of the manic sorrow that would overtake Jack Ruby eighteen years later in Dallas.

The Greg Hill Show | Monday, August 10, 2026

This hour: Red Sox have lost a series for the first time since July; Courtney can't remember FDR; Vinatieri/Belichick beef is embarrassing to watch; Should TB12 have hopped off his yacht to see Adam V get into Canton?

The status quo is not getting the job done. People want populism and Trump ain’t it. Then again the Democratic establishment isn’t it either. The Trumpists want us to hate and fear those on the FDR left. Is it working? The post Which Party Do Voters Hate More? appeared first on KDA Keeping Democracy Alive Podcast & Radio Show.

Chuck Todd opens with the Greenland oil expedition, an episode so strange it borders on parody: an American oil company drilling in defiance of another country's laws, with Trump's blessing, and — the detail that breaks the brain — Dr. Phil hired to document the whole thing. It's a fitting overture for a week in which the Senate confirmed Todd Blanche as Attorney General 50-49 at four in the morning before fleeing town for recess, with only Collins and Murkowski defecting. Chuck admits he was wrong; he never thought Blanche would actually get there. What galls him is the surrender it represents. Bill Cassidy's rationale — that Trump "needs someone to tell him no" — is laughable given that Blanche has said outright that the rule of law belongs to Trump and the DOJ won't be independent. John Cornyn's shrug that "there's nothing we can do to rein in the president" is, Chuck argues, the confession of a coward: senators possess the authority and simply refuse to use it, giving away what little leverage they had. The debate has now been reduced to whether the Attorney General is the people's lawyer or the president's. Then takes on the question of why Democratic voters keep rewarding progressives whose politics they don't actually share, and his answer is that half the Democratic electorate did not suddenly become socialist — they're furious about 2024, and specifically about leadership deciding the nominee for them. They didn't dislike Harris; they wanted a choice, and they'd watched the establishment coalesce around Biden in 2020 to produce a presidency that ended with Trump's return. Progressives are the only Democrats willing to say the party screwed up, and voters will give you enormous latitude on the cure if they trust your diagnosis. Chuck illustrates it with a Washington Post story about the Conn brass instrument factory in Ohio, bought by Trump-supporting, tariff-championing investor John Paulson and now closing as production moves offshore — where the disillusioned employees don't plan to vote at all, because they feel the system has failed them for decades. He believes the opening in American politics right now isn't centrism, it's breaking up an establishment that voters believe is more worried about losing donors than losing their votes. He wonders aloud whether the answer is a military leader — he's intrigued by retired General Chris Donahue, essentially Captain America on paper, pushed out by Trump and Hegseth, with credibility across the aisle. Americans are exhausted by being told the other half of the country is the bad guy, they're desperate for honesty and a reboot of a captured government, and the space is wide open for someone to fill it. But Chuck’s closing caution matters: the system is badly screwed up, and that still isn't a reason to burn it all down. Finally, Chuck hops into the ToddCast Time Machine to revisit two different but related events: the signing of the Social Security Act by FDR, and Richard Nixon announcing price and wage controls to combat inflation. Chuck argues that America has always flirted with socialism even if we call it by another name. He also answers listeners questions in the “Ask Chuck” segment. Upgrade your everyday. Go to https://Quince.com/CHUCK for free shipping on your order and 365-day returns. Play ball and swing for the fences on FanDuel, an official partner of the MLB at https://FANDUEL.COM. For free and unbiased Medicare help, dial (980) 734-3985 to speak with my trusted partner, Chapter, or go to askchapter.org/chuck / *Paid Partnership Chapter and its affiliates are not connected with or endorsed by any government entity or the federal Medicare program. Chapter Advisory, LLC represents Medicare Advantage HMO, PPO, and PFFS organizations and stand alone prescription drug plans that have a Medicare contract. Enrollment depends on the plan’s contract renewal. While we have a database of every Medicare plan nationwide and can help you to search among all plans, we have contracts with many but not all plans. As a result, we do not offer every plan available in your area. Currently we represent 50 organizations which offer 18,160 products nationwide. We search and recommend all plans, even those we don’t directly offer. You can contact a licensed Chapter agent to find out the number of products available in your specific area. Please contact Medicare.gov, 1-800-Medicare, or your local State Health Insurance Program (SHIP) to get information on all of your options. Timeline: (Timestamps may vary based on advertisements) 00:00 Chuck Todd’s introduction 00:30 Trump’s crazy Greenland oil adventure 01:15 Trump is just ignoring the laws of another country 01:45 Craziest detail is oil company hired Dr. Phil to document the expedition 02:15 Trump has gone out of his way to alienate European allies 02:45 Oprah gave us Dr. Oz & Dr. Phil… which is not a good thing 06:45 U.S. senate leaves town for recess after passing funding bill 07:15 Todd Blanche is now the confirmed AG for the United States 08:00 Republicans passed none of the things they said are priorities 09:00 GOP has a trifecta and still can’t get anything done 10:00 Was wrong about Blanche, didn’t think he’d actually get confirmed 10:45 Confirmed 50-49, not surprising Collins & Murkowski defected 11:45 Cassidy’s rationale was “Trump needs someone to tell him no” 12:15 Cassidy’s rationale is laughable 13:15 Even Bill Barr had a line he wouldn’t cross with Trump 14:45 The senate gave away what little leverage they have with Trump 16:00 John Cornyn says “there’s nothing we can do to rein in the president” 16:30 These Republicans are cowards, won’t exercise their authority* 17:00 These senators need to do their job 18:00 Blanche said the rule of law belongs to Trump, DOJ won’t be independent 19:00 Debate is now if AG is the people’s lawyer or the president’s lawyer 19:45 If he were alive, Trump would have nominated Roy Cohn 20:30 You don’t want presidents deciding who gets investigated 21:30 Trump got involved with Reflecting Pool vandal case THIS WEEK 22:30 Trump’s entire life has been about wearing people down 23:15 Republicans have politicized DOJ more than any previous admin 23:45 MAGA’s premise is that two wrongs do make a right 24:15 Does anybody in congress understand the constitution? 25:30 Confirming Blanche will cause more public distrust in DOJ 26:30 Founders never wanted the president to determine rule of law 27:00 Senate didn’t get crypto or college sports bill passed before recess 27:45 Republicans claim SAVE act is existential, didn’t pass it 28:45 Why do voters entertain progressives that don’t align with them? 29:15 Half the democratic electorate didn’t suddenly become socialist 30:30 Democratic voters are pissed off, think party messed up in 2024 31:00 Voters are mad leadership decided who the ‘24 nominee would be 31:30 Voters didn’t dislike Harris, but they wanted a choice 32:30 In 2020, the establishment coalesced around Biden 33:15 Biden’s presidency was a failure since it resulted in Trump returning 34:00 Progressives are the only Dems saying the party screwed up 35:30 Like Trump, the progressives are saying leadership is full of shit 36:15 Voters will give you latitude on the cure if they trust your diagnosis 37:00 WaPo story about Conn factory closing & private equity 38:00 Factory is in Ohio, been making brass instruments 38:45 Factory is closing and laying off all the employees 39:30 Conn was bought by John Paulson, Trump supporter who supports tariffs 40:30 Paulson is moving production offshore after arguing against it 42:00 Plant employees were completely disillusioned with politics 43:00 Employees feel like the system has left them down for decades, won’t vote 44:30 Romney’s loss was due to millions of white voters sitting out entirely 45:15 Trump’s appeal brought those voters back into the electorate 47:15 Voters reward candidates that can diagnose & call out their problems 48:00 Trump proved politically dormant voters can be reactivated 48:30 There’s always a third destination for voters… the couch 49:00 If the two parties don’t reform themselves, they risk being replaced 50:15 The opening isn’t centrism, it’s breaking up the establishment 51:15 Politics requires huge amounts of money, results in capture 52:15 Voters believe reps are more worried about losing donors than their vote 53:00 Competence and morality are not the same thing in politics 53:45 Leaders need to admit that they screwed everything up 54:30 Americans are desperate for a reset & are embracing revolutionaries 55:00 A military leader might be exactly what we need in next president 55:45 Intrigued by retired general Chris Donahue & his resume 56:45 Donahue is basically Captain America & was forced out by Trump & Hegseth 58:15 Someone like Donahue could have the credibility across the aisle 59:30 Politics won’t acknowledge failure if they think it helps the other side 1:00:00 Americans are desperate for honesty & morality in politics 1:01:15 It’s exhausting being told the other half of America is the bad guys 1:03:15 Voters want to preserve the Republic, but don’t trust the leadership 1:04:00 Voters want a reboot, and a government that isn’t captured 1:05:00 The political space is waiting for someone to fill this vacuum 1:06:00 The system is screwed up, but we shouldn’t burn it all down 1:11:00 ToddCast Time Machine - Where America embraces socialism 1:12:30 Socialist policies have come from presidents of both parties 1:13:45 FDR signs the Social Security Act - Nixon announces price & wage controls 1:14:45 Americans worry about prosperity, not ideological consistency 1:17:15 Capitalism was being questioned after the Great Depression 1:17:45 FDR wanted to repair, not replace capitalism 1:18:30 Social Security started as a much smaller program than it is today 1:19:15 Congress continued adding to the program over the years 1:21:15 America imposed price & wage controls during WW2 that went beyond Nixon 1:22:00 August 15, 1971 - Nixon announces price & wage controls 1:23:15 Nixon was desperate to stop inflation 1:24:15 Administration announced ceilings on meat prices, caused shortages 1:25:30 The controls were lifted right before the election 1:26:45 We have plenty of socialist policies called by another name 1:27:45 The policies give the sense of individual control 1:28:30 Americans are allergic to government control over their choices 1:29:15 Government under Trump is acquiring stakes in American companies 1:31:00 America has always been more socialist than we like to admit 1:32:45 Ask Chuck 1:33:00 Are college educated Republican voters on the journey leftward? 1:37:00 How should Abdul El-Sayed respond to racist & Islamophobic attacks? 1:45:30 Do candidates on the same ballot create measurable coattails? 1:50:00 Any chance Republicans voted for El-Sayed thinking he’d be easier to beat? 1:53:00 Was Pirro’s dropping of Reflecting Pool case an offramp for Trump? 1:56:00 How does an everyday person help make real political change?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Chuck Todd opens with the Greenland oil expedition, an episode so strange it borders on parody: an American oil company drilling in defiance of another country's laws, with Trump's blessing, and — the detail that breaks the brain — Dr. Phil hired to document the whole thing. It's a fitting overture for a week in which the Senate confirmed Todd Blanche as Attorney General 50-49 at four in the morning before fleeing town for recess, with only Collins and Murkowski defecting. Chuck admits he was wrong; he never thought Blanche would actually get there. What galls him is the surrender it represents. Bill Cassidy's rationale — that Trump "needs someone to tell him no" — is laughable given that Blanche has said outright that the rule of law belongs to Trump and the DOJ won't be independent. John Cornyn's shrug that "there's nothing we can do to rein in the president" is, Chuck argues, the confession of a coward: senators possess the authority and simply refuse to use it, giving away what little leverage they had. The debate has now been reduced to whether the Attorney General is the people's lawyer or the president's. Then takes on the question of why Democratic voters keep rewarding progressives whose politics they don't actually share, and his answer is that half the Democratic electorate did not suddenly become socialist — they're furious about 2024, and specifically about leadership deciding the nominee for them. They didn't dislike Harris; they wanted a choice, and they'd watched the establishment coalesce around Biden in 2020 to produce a presidency that ended with Trump's return. Progressives are the only Democrats willing to say the party screwed up, and voters will give you enormous latitude on the cure if they trust your diagnosis. Chuck illustrates it with a Washington Post story about the Conn brass instrument factory in Ohio, bought by Trump-supporting, tariff-championing investor John Paulson and now closing as production moves offshore — where the disillusioned employees don't plan to vote at all, because they feel the system has failed them for decades. He believes the opening in American politics right now isn't centrism, it's breaking up an establishment that voters believe is more worried about losing donors than losing their votes. He wonders aloud whether the answer is a military leader — he's intrigued by retired General Chris Donahue, essentially Captain America on paper, pushed out by Trump and Hegseth, with credibility across the aisle. Americans are exhausted by being told the other half of the country is the bad guy, they're desperate for honesty and a reboot of a captured government, and the space is wide open for someone to fill it. But Chuck’s closing caution matters: the system is badly screwed up, and that still isn't a reason to burn it all down. Then, Oscar-nominated documentarian Rory Kennedy joins the Chuck Toddcast to discuss Freefall: A Reckoning for Boeing, her Netflix follow-up to 2022's Downfall premiering August 19th — a film built around the death of whistleblower John Barnett and the current and former employees who came forward after it. Kennedy's central finding is damning in its simplicity: at the end of Downfall, Boeing swore it had learned its lesson and changed its ways. It hadn't. More incidents followed, whistleblowers reached out to tell her conditions had actually gotten worse, and she says she believes Boeing bears responsibility for Barnett's death. Kennedy walks Chuck through the structural rot she sees behind the headlines — a near-total lack of competition, a revolving door between the FAA and the company it's supposed to regulate, a McDonnell Douglas merger that reoriented the entire culture around quarterly earnings instead of engineering excellence, and the decision to leave Seattle in search of a non-union workforce — which matters enormously, she notes, because unions are what give workers real whistleblower protection. Boeing is simultaneously one of the most heavily subsidized companies in American history and, right now, one that isn't being held accountable in any meaningful way. Kennedy is unusually direct about the practical takeaway: she won't fly on a 737 MAX and actively chooses flights on other aircraft, pointing out the counterintuitive reality that older model planes are often the safer bet — a consumer shift that has hit budget airlines hardest. She and Chuck get into the incidents that never made national news, including oxygen masks that failed to work, and she's blunt that the Trump administration hasn't provided anything resembling adequate regulatory oversight while families of the 346 crash victims are still fighting to hold the company responsible. Kennedy sees this fall's elections as a genuine chance to put people in place who care about the flying public, and reflects candidly on how she's feeling about American politics generally — that this administration is making choices that are hurting a lot of people. There's also a lovely detour into Ethel, her documentary about her mother, which she says holds a special place in her heart, plus a look at what she's working on next. Finally, Chuck hops into the ToddCast Time Machine to revisit two different but related events: the signing of the Social Security Act by FDR, and Richard Nixon announcing price and wage controls to combat inflation. Chuck argues that America has always flirted with socialism even if we call it by another name. He also answers listeners questions in the “Ask Chuck” segment. Upgrade your everyday. Go to https://Quince.com/CHUCK for free shipping on your order and 365-day returns. Play ball and swing for the fences on FanDuel, an official partner of the MLB at https://FANDUEL.COM. For free and unbiased Medicare help, dial (980) 734-3985 to speak with my trusted partner, Chapter, or go to askchapter.org/chuck / *Paid Partnership Chapter and its affiliates are not connected with or endorsed by any government entity or the federal Medicare program. Chapter Advisory, LLC represents Medicare Advantage HMO, PPO, and PFFS organizations and stand alone prescription drug plans that have a Medicare contract. Enrollment depends on the plan’s contract renewal. While we have a database of every Medicare plan nationwide and can help you to search among all plans, we have contracts with many but not all plans. As a result, we do not offer every plan available in your area. Currently we represent 50 organizations which offer 18,160 products nationwide. We search and recommend all plans, even those we don’t directly offer. You can contact a licensed Chapter agent to find out the number of products available in your specific area. Please contact Medicare.gov, 1-800-Medicare, or your local State Health Insurance Program (SHIP) to get information on all of your options. Timeline: 00:00 Chuck Todd’s introduction 00:30 Trump’s crazy Greenland oil adventure 01:15 Trump is just ignoring the laws of another country 01:45 Craziest detail is oil company hired Dr. Phil to document the expedition 02:15 Trump has gone out of his way to alienate European allies 02:45 Oprah gave us Dr. Oz & Dr. Phil… which is not a good thing 06:45 U.S. senate leaves town for recess after passing funding bill 07:15 Todd Blanche is now the confirmed AG for the United States 08:00 Republicans passed none of the things they said are priorities 09:00 GOP has a trifecta and still can’t get anything done 10:00 Was wrong about Blanche, didn’t think he’d actually get confirmed 10:45 Confirmed 50-49, not surprising Collins & Murkowski defected 11:45 Cassidy’s rationale was “Trump needs someone to tell him no” 12:15 Cassidy’s rationale is laughable 13:15 Even Bill Barr had a line he wouldn’t cross with Trump 14:45 The senate gave away what little leverage they have with Trump 16:00 John Cornyn says “there’s nothing we can do to rein in the president” 16:30 These Republicans are cowards, won’t exercise their authority* 17:00 These senators need to do their job 18:00 Blanche said the rule of law belongs to Trump, DOJ won’t be independent 19:00 Debate is now if AG is the people’s lawyer or the president’s lawyer 19:45 If he were alive, Trump would have nominated Roy Cohn 20:30 You don’t want presidents deciding who gets investigated 21:30 Trump got involved with Reflecting Pool vandal case THIS WEEK 22:30 Trump’s entire life has been about wearing people down 23:15 Republicans have politicized DOJ more than any previous admin 23:45 MAGA’s premise is that two wrongs do make a right 24:15 Does anybody in congress understand the constitution? 25:30 Confirming Blanche will cause more public distrust in DOJ 26:30 Founders never wanted the president to determine rule of law 27:00 Senate didn’t get crypto or college sports bill passed before recess 27:45 Republicans claim SAVE act is existential, didn’t pass it 28:45 Why do voters entertain progressives that don’t align with them? 29:15 Half the democratic electorate didn’t suddenly become socialist 30:30 Democratic voters are pissed off, think party messed up in 2024 31:00 Voters are mad leadership decided who the ‘24 nominee would be 31:30 Voters didn’t dislike Harris, but they wanted a choice 32:30 In 2020, the establishment coalesced around Biden 33:15 Biden’s presidency was a failure since it resulted in Trump returning 34:00 Progressives are the only Dems saying the party screwed up 35:30 Like Trump, the progressives are saying leadership is full of shit 36:15 Voters will give you latitude on the cure if they trust your diagnosis 37:00 WaPo story about Conn factory closing & private equity 38:00 Factory is in Ohio, been making brass instruments 38:45 Factory is closing and laying off all the employees 39:30 Conn was bought by John Paulson, Trump supporter who supports tariffs 40:30 Paulson is moving production offshore after arguing against it 42:00 Plant employees were completely disillusioned with politics 43:00 Employees feel like the system has left them down for decades, won’t vote 44:30 Romney’s loss was due to millions of white voters sitting out entirely 45:15 Trump’s appeal brought those voters back into the electorate 47:15 Voters reward candidates that can diagnose & call out their problems 48:00 Trump proved politically dormant voters can be reactivated 48:30 There’s always a third destination for voters… the couch 49:00 If the two parties don’t reform themselves, they risk being replaced 50:15 The opening isn’t centrism, it’s breaking up the establishment 51:15 Politics requires huge amounts of money, results in capture 52:15 Voters believe reps are more worried about losing donors than their vote 53:00 Competence and morality are not the same thing in politics 53:45 Leaders need to admit that they screwed everything up 54:30 Americans are desperate for a reset & are embracing revolutionaries 55:00 A military leader might be exactly what we need in next president 55:45 Intrigued by retired general Chris Donahue & his resume 56:45 Donahue is basically Captain America & was forced out by Trump & Hegseth 58:15 Someone like Donahue could have the credibility across the aisle 59:30 Politics won’t acknowledge failure if they think it helps the other side 1:00:00 Americans are desperate for honesty & morality in politics 1:01:15 It’s exhausting being told the other half of America is the bad guys 1:03:15 Voters want to preserve the Republic, but don’t trust the leadership 1:04:00 Voters want a reboot, and a government that isn’t captured 1:05:00 The political space is waiting for someone to fill this vacuum 1:06:00 The system is screwed up, but we shouldn’t burn it all down 1:13:00 Rory Kennedy (Freefall) joins the Chuck ToddCast 1:14:30 Documentary “Ethel” about her mother holds special place in her heart 1:15:30 It became evident that Boeing knew about faulty systems on 737 MAX 1:16:15 Boeing swore they’d change, then more incidents happened 1:17:15 Believe Boeing is responsible for whistleblower John Barnett’s death 1:19:15 Lack of competition is one of the reasons Boeing has been sloppy 1:20:15 There’s a revolving door between the FAA and Boeing 1:22:00 Are Boeing’s problems coming from a single source, or multiple? 1:23:45 Boeing has long been a foundational American company 1:24:30 Parts for Boeing planes come from all over the world 1:26:00 Whistleblowers reached out to say problems had gotten worse 1:27:00 Right now, Boeing isn’t being held accountable 1:27:30 Haven’t seen Boeing make significant changes 1:29:15 Focus on profits and quarterly earnings outweighed safety 1:30:00 Boeing is one of the most subsidized companies in US history 1:31:00 McDonnell-Douglas merger has contributed to Boeing’s downfall 1:33:30 Wouldn’t fly on a 737 MAX and choose flights on other planes 1:36:00 Consumers choosing not to fly on the 737 MAX hurt budget airlines 1:37:00 Older model planes are actually safer 1:38:30 Decision to leave Seattle was to find a non-union workforce 1:39:45 Unions protect workers, give them whistleblower protection 1:41:00 Airbus is a better run company than Boeing 1:42:30 Boeing and Airbus are the only two options 1:44:45 The Trump administration hasn’t provided proper regulation for Boeing 1:45:15 Families of crash victims are still trying to hold Boeing responsible 1:48:15 Elections this fall could put people in place who care about the public 1:49:45 Incidents where the oxygen masks weren’t working 1:51:30 How are you feeling about politics these days? 1:52:00 Administration is making choices that are hurting a lot of people 1:53:30 What projects do you have coming up next? 1:56:00 Had a screening at Boeing with top executives 1:57:15 ToddCast Time Machine - Where America embraces socialism 1:58:45 Socialist policies have come from presidents of both parties 2:00:00 FDR signs the Social Security Act - Nixon announces price & wage controls 2:01:00 Americans worry about prosperity, not ideological consistency 2:03:30 Capitalism was being questioned after the Great Depression 2:04:00 FDR wanted to repair, not replace capitalism 2:04:45 Social Security started as a much smaller program than it is today 2:05:30 Congress continued adding to the program over the years 2:07:30 America imposed price & wage controls during WW2 that went beyond Nixon 2:08:15 August 15, 1971 - Nixon announces price & wage controls 2:09:30 Nixon was desperate to stop inflation 2:10:30 Administration announced ceilings on meat prices, caused shortages 2:11:45 The controls were lifted right before the election 2:13:00 We have plenty of socialist policies called by another name 2:14:00 The policies give the sense of individual control 2:14:45 Americans are allergic to government control over their choices 2:15:30 Government under Trump is acquiring stakes in American companies 2:17:15 America has always been more socialist than we like to admit 2:19:00 Ask Chuck 2:19:15 Are college educated Republican voters on the journey leftward? 2:23:15 How should Abdul El-Sayed respond to racist & Islamophobic attacks? 2:31:45 Do candidates on the same ballot create measurable coattails? 2:36:15 Any chance Republicans voted for El-Sayed thinking he’d be easier to beat? 2:39:15 Was Pirro’s dropping of Reflecting Pool case an offramp for Trump? 2:42:15 How does an everyday person help make real political change?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

H.W. Brands, author of America First: Roosevelt vs. Lindbergh in the Shadow of War, Part One: In April 1939, world-famous aviator Charles Lindbergh returns to the United States as global tensions escalate. Lindbergh, who moved to Europe following the "trial of the century" regarding his son's kidnapping, admires German technical proficiency but is deeply skeptical of British endurance. President Franklin Roosevelt attempts to co-opt Lindbergh into his administration to control his influence, but Lindbergh refuses, fiercely guarding his independence. When war erupts in Europe, Lindbergh uses his celebrity status to broadcast radio appeals for neutrality, believing American intervention would repeat the "mistake" of World War I. Meanwhile, Roosevelt maneuvers to modify the Neutrality Act and shift public opinion toward supporting Britain. Lindbergh views the fall of France as vindication for staying out of the conflict, while FDRuses the international emergency to justify a historic third term, a move Lindbergh fears will lead to a "presidency for life." (1)

In the pre-World War II era of the "Chicago Cowboy," Jacob Rubenstein was a striking figure of manic energy on the West Side. Working out with desperate intensity at local YMCA clubs, he obsessed over his physical conditioning and receding hairline, famously boasting to anyone who would listen that he could "hit harder than Joe Louis." Struggling to stay afloat after the tragic murder of his labor union mentor, Jack teamed up with business associates to launch the Spartan Novelty Company. Operating out of cheap, transient hotel rooms, they chased the cash-heavy flow of "punchboards"—unregulated, highly addictive, gray-market gambling devices that were sweeping across the country.When the bombs fell on Pearl Harbor, Jack's deeply emotional patriotism spurred him to manufacture patriotic plaques and plaster busts of his idol, Franklin D. Roosevelt. However, his own perfectionistic psychology sabotaged the dream; his obsessive-compulsive design delays kept the products in development for months until cheap, mass-produced competitors flooded the market, leaving him completely broke once more. But as his commercial novelties fell apart, a much more physical struggle was brewing. Confronted by the rising local threat of the pro-Nazi German-American Bund, Jack and a crew of tough young Jewish brawlers from the Lawndale Pool Room mobilized, taking pool cues and heavy wooden clubs directly to the fascists' street rallies to defend their community with primal ethnic pride.This high-voltage era highlighted the ultimate Jacob Rubenstein paradox: he was a volatile, quick-tempered brawler, yet he acted with a deeply ingrained sense of chivalry. The same man who would crack heads at a Nazi rally was also a self-appointed protector of the weak who violently beat college students for hurling racial slurs at a Black piano player, and threw himself into a savage street fight to rescue an older woman being abused by a stranger. This riveting chapter of Jack's life draws to a close in May 1943 when the street hustler of Roosevelt Road is finally drafted into the U.S. Army Air Forces—setting the stage for a surprisingly disciplined military career that would be punctuated by explosive, defensive violence.

“There is a big chasm between defeat and surrender. Surrender is inherently a political decision.” — James M. Scott Exactly eighty-one years ago, on August 9, 1945, the United States dropped its second nuclear device on Nagasaki. Three days earlier, on August 6, the Enola Gay dropped the first bomb on Hiroshima. Little Boy and Fat Man. Our nuclear Rubicon had been crossed. Three days in August that changed the world. These historic 72 hours are the subject of Empire of Ashes: Truman, Hirohito, and the Descent into Total War, by James M. Scott, America's foremost chronicler of the Pacific War. This new book, Scott reveals, grew out of Black Snow, his history of the firebombing of Tokyo. But whereas Black Snow was a military study, he explains, Empire of Ashes focuses on Truman, Hirohito and the politics of nuclear warfare. By August 1945, Scott argues, Japan was already defeated. So surrender was a political decision — one that required a weak, figurehead emperor to summon the power to save his country from an even darker apocalypse. Should America regret these August days? Harry Truman certainly didn't, Scott notes. In fact, in 1958 Truman even held a press conference in Independence, Missouri, to fire back at Hiroshima's city council when it suggested that he should. Nor does Scott render much of a moral verdict of his own. “Nobody needs to hear James Scott in Charleston, South Carolina tell you what it is you should think,” he explains, suggesting that we can all make up our minds by reading Empire of Ashes. So two bombs, somewhere between 150,000 and 246,000 civilian deaths, and no crime? That, oddly enough, might be the biggest tragedy of those three days in August 1945 that changed the world forever. Five Takeaways •       Defeat Is Not Surrender. Scott's organizing insight: as destructive as it was, the atomic bomb was inherently a political weapon, aimed at the chasm between a nation defeated and a nation willing to say so. Surrender is a political act — and Japan's politics ran through Hirohito, ostensibly the center of political, cultural, and spiritual life, in practice a figurehead bypassed by militarists who had consolidated power through the 1920s and '30s under the standing threat of assassination. His first peace soundings had to be conducted incognito, for fear of his own army; not until June 1945 does he rise to the occasion. Truman, by contrast, emerges as strong and morally serious — a First World War artillery officer who inherited the Okinawa bloodbath, approved the invasion of Japan, chose what he saw as the lesser evil, and then stopped all further atomic use the moment surrender came.•       The Firebombing Precedent. Would FDR have made the same call? “Absolutely. No doubt about it.” The moral threshold had already been crossed on March 9, 1945, when Curtis LeMay abandoned precision bombing and burned Tokyo — 105,000 men, women, and children in a single night, the most destructive conventional raid in history. The Pentagon braced for public outrage, monitoring editorials, radio, and the floors of Congress. None came; Time wrote that “properly kindled, Japanese cities will burn like autumn leaves.” LeMay took the green light and burned 64 cities — 170 square miles — before the first atomic bomb ever fell. War Secretary Henry Stimson confessed his amazement to his diary; FDR, with every opportunity to rein it in, said nothing. When Elliott Roosevelt later claimed his father would never have dropped the bomb, Stimson publicly corrected him.•       The Second Bomb Mattered More. Scott's most counterintuitive argument: Nagasaki, not Hiroshima, ended the war. Atomic energy was the AI of its day — over a hundred academic papers in 1939 alone, new physics programs at Berkeley and Chicago, dreams of atom-powered ships — and Japan, which had its own failed program, knew exactly how ruinously expensive a bomb was to build. So after Hiroshima, the militarists reasoned the Americans could not possibly have another, and held to the plan of bleeding the invasion on the beaches for better terms. A second city destroyed seventy-five hours later shattered the illusion: if they can drop one every three days, they may have twenty — or two hundred. As for simply telling Tokyo? There were no channels beyond dropped leaflets and slow relays through neutral capitals. You could not, as Andrew noted, email in those days.•       In the Room Where It Happened. Scott's method — borrowed, he says, from Hamilton — is to put readers in the room: the White House, the Imperial Palace, and above all the streets. He has interviewed survivors in Tokyo, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki across multiple books, and the physics of the firestorm connects all three: heat that melts concrete, fuses coins into lumps, welds roof tiles to kitchenware. Only five photographs were taken in Hiroshima on the day of the blast — stunned people, sitting. Organized rescue took thirty hours to arrive. In Nagasaki, the thirsty and burned waded into the river to die, so many that their bodies formed a dam. Radiation sickness began within thirty minutes. These are beautiful, functioning cities today, Scott notes — which is exactly why the accounts matter.•       No Regrets, No Verdict. Truman defended the decision to his grave — and then some: when Hiroshima's city council passed a resolution in 1958 urging him toward remorse, he wrote back that Japan had started the war, then held a press conference at his museum in Independence to distribute the reply. The Oppenheimer film's chilly Oval Office scene is overdramatized, Scott thinks, but true to the core: the buck — and the moral weight — stopped with the commander-in-chief, not the scientists. Scott himself, pointedly, renders no verdict: “Nobody needs to hear James Scott in Charleston, South Carolina tell you what it is you should think.” Both sides laid out, 95 percent of the documents public, the reader left to grapple — which is perhaps why Black Snow sold well in Japan, and why Empire of Ashes will be published there next August 6. About the Guest James M. Scott is a Pulitzer Prize finalist, New York Times bestselling author, and former Nieman Fellow at Harvard, widely regarded as America's leading historian of the Pacific War. His books include Target Tokyo (Pulitzer finalist), Black Snow, Rampage, The War Below, and, with Jack Carr, Targeted: Beirut. A scholar-in-residence at The Citadel who leads battlefield tours across the Pacific, he lives in Charleston, South Carolina. Empire of Ashes: Truman, Hirohito, and the Descent into Total War (W. W. Norton) is out now. References: •       Empire of Ashes: Truman, Hirohito, and the Descent into Total War by James M. Scott (W. W. Norton). The Charleston Post and Courier: “An amazing accomplishment.”•       Black Snow by James M. Scott — the firebombing of Tokyo, and the book whose cut Hiroshima chapters beca...

This week on the Mark Levin Show, it's particularly annoying that numerous national political figures refuse to discuss the significant and growing Islamist threat in the United States. Islamism is the greatest cultural threat we face. What is the ruling class is doing to stop Islamists from entering the country? Are we reviewing the status of those already here who promote radical views? Conservatives need to take over at the local level and reject mosque expansions, which isn't about restricting religious freedom but defending it against Islamist intolerance of religious diversity. Meanwhile, issues like universal healthcare are falsely cast as civil rights to advance a Marxist agenda that expands “democracy” and “rights” while threatening programs like Medicare and opposing enforcement against illegal immigration; supporting candidates like Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan would harm both the state and the country. Also, Sen Chris Van Hollen is a radical nut job, Jew hater, and Israel hater. Van Hollen defends Democrats against communist labels by citing Republican attacks on FDR over Social Security. What did FDR do? FDR created internment camps of 120,000 Japanese Americans, refusing to sign a bipartisan anti-lynching bill to protect Southern votes, imposing Jewish immigration quotas during the Holocaust, and enacting socialist policies including industrial trusts and price/wage controls that prolonged the Depression, arguing socialism redistributes rather than creates wealth. Later, Wisconsin Governor candidate Francesca Hong views Thanksgiving as racist and posted in 2021 that Americans should cancel it. This is the problem with insufficiently patriotic immigrants welcomed into the Democratic Party's big tent. Later, by the skin of his teeth, Abdul El-Sayed is now the Democratic candidate for the Senate in Michigan. Early data shows El-Sayed did well with White, relatively wealthy college graduates, but not so well with union/blue collar workers and Blacks. El-Sayed will face Republican Mike Rogers, a good, solid candidate, in the November general election. El-Sayed will get the support of the media and he'll play down his Islamism and his association with people like Sen Bernie Sanders and Hasan Piker, who said America deserved 9/11. Let's not pretend El-Sayed is just another progressive. He's an Islamic Marxist. What Democrats have to figure out: how do you build a party around elitists? Claims from some on the fringes of the conservative movement—that younger people today face uniquely hard times due to student debt, homeownership barriers, and inflation driven by the war with Iran—are inaccurate and sound like leftist or socialist talking points. There have been far greater hardships faced by prior generations: the Great Depression's 25% unemployment, widespread business failures, and near-economic collapse, followed by World War II's draft of 16 million Americans with over 600,000 casualties under brutal conditions. Young people today simply do not have it as hard as those of 50–80 years ago - they simply don't. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Once again, Darrell Castle discusses war but with a little diplomacy and an historical reminder that technology constantly changes but human nature never changes. Transcription / Notes THE HUMILIATION FACTOR Hello, this is Darrell Castle with today's Castle Report. This is Friday the 7th day of August in the year of our Lord 2026. I'm afraid my beat is war once again but with a little diplomacy and an historical reminder that technology constantly changes but human nature never changes. For the history lesson I have to go back to December 7th, 1941, and perhaps even a few days before that. This story is important because of the title to this report but also because yesterday, August 6 was the 81st anniversary of the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima Japan. The United States was engaged in diplomacy with Japan regarding Japan's invasion of China and Roosevelt's refusal to sell them more oil until they left China. The Japanese had to import virtually all their raw materials and they got oil primarily from the U.S. The Japanese had behaved so horribly in China that Roosevelt tried to persuade the Europeans to join him in a conditional boycott but they refused so he decided to do it himself. If you want to know more about how the Japanese behaved in China I recommend Iris Chang's book “The Rape of Nanchang, The Forgotten Holocaust of World War ll. Well, at least the two sides were talking to each other through diplomats around a conference table in Washington D.C. The Japanese knew that if the U.S. continued to refuse to sell them oil they would have to get it by conquering the oil and rubber rich nations of the South Pacific so they made plans to do just that. Those nations could not be conquered with the U.S. Navy at large in the Pacific so Japan's plan included that Navy's destruction in an attack we know as Pearl Harbor. Admiral Yamamoto, commander of the Japanese Fleet, had given orders that a war warning had to given to the American diplomats about one hour before the attack but delays of various kinds caused the warning to be delivered one hour after battleship row was burning. The Japanese believed that when the decadent, luxury loving, American people were confronted with this debacle they would demand that their leaders negotiate a way out of it. There were an awful lot of American members of Congress and the Senate who were in office because they were opposed to fighting European wars. There was an America first contingent which measured about 140 members. How could any nation so divided muster the will to fight a long bloody war, but the Japanese were catastrophically wrong in their assessment. Immediately after the attack the America first group voted to disband. Charles Linberg, the most outspoken and most famous antiwar advocate tried to join the Army Air Corps. Men lined up around the block in every city in America. School boys lied about their age to enlist. Keep in mind that in Japan every radio receiver in every military unit was tuned to American broadcasts in order to discern the mood of the people. Military transcriptionists took down every word of every broadcast and on December 8th at 12:30 PM they were turned in for FDR's speech. He spoke for only 6 minutes and none of it was a call for patience or negotiation but instead he called it a day that will live in infamy. The American people and the President were fueled to righteous anger by the deceptive nature of it. The term sneak attack was on everyone's lips and worse because it happened while the two sides were negotiating. That's a long history report, folks, but there is a reason for it. The reason is that another sneak attack, conducted while the two sides were negotiating has now happened. The anger, the determination to fight on no matter how long it took that fueled American resolve is now being felt by citizens of The Islamic Republic of Iran. Yes American diplomats were negotiating with Iranian diplomats when the U.S, and Israeli bombers struck. The attack didn't just destroy Iranian military targets, but it killed their supreme leader and almost his whole family including his 14-month-old granddaughter. The next day American bombs struck a girls school and around 160 little girls were killed but just to make sure it was hit again. How are these people supposed to feel about negotiating with America to end this war. How can they be expected to ever trust an American's word again. The problem continues almost daily as U.S. negotiators, if there are any besides the president, continue to go back on their word which is diplomat speak for lying. For example, the 14-point Memorandum of Understanding the president announced the other day called for Iran to control the Strait of Hormuz. The next day the president reneged on that point. I read someone the other day and I can't remember who said it, but he said President Trump should get the Nobel Peace Prize because he has ended the Iran War 7 times and number 8 is coming soon. Think about the mindset that the U.S. sneak attack must have created in the minds of the Iranian people. Before it happened there did seem to be a lot of unrest and a lot of division. People were in the streets protesting the harsh measures of the regime and that regime proceeded to kill thousands of them. I imagine the President was told that his sneak attack would have the same effect on the Iranian people that the Japanese thought Pearl Harbor would have on the American people. Both those assumptions were catastrophically wrong. Instead of causing the Iranian people to riot and overthrow their government it brought them together. The hated Mullahs were once again respected leaders. Thousands attended the Ayatollah's funeral. I think it was Mark Twain who said history doesn't repeat itself but it rhymes. Now the situation is so much worse for the U.S. and of course for Israel which was, apparently, the reason for the sneak attack. The Strait is at least a very dangerous place and ships can't sail without extreme danger. The entire world's economy teeters on the brink of depression. Oil and other needed mineral resources are soaring in price since about 20% of them have to pass through that chokehold. Meanwhile the President has announced a new deal being brokered by his Board of Peace involving peace in Gaza. The lynch pin would require Hamas, a terrorist group financed by Iran, to give up its arms and identify all its tunnels etc. In other words, Hamas would cease to exist and Israel would leave Gaza so that the U.S. and the Middle East members of the Board such as the Saudis and the Gulf States could rebuild it and everyone would prosper. The moment the deal was announced Netanyahu said the President sent it to him and he didn't like it. He said Israel would not leave Gaza until Hamas completely disarmed and Hamas Says it will not disarm until Israel leaves. Qatar is apparently kicking Hamas out of its country and rumors have it moving its operations to Turkey which is apparently the President's hope for the role of ensuring Middle East peace. My point in all this is that it is humiliating and embarrassing, or it should be. This country is supposed to be trusted because we have laws and rules, and we are supposed to stand for something. There are things we simply will never do and financing another country's crimes is one of those things. The first law of the land of course is the Constitution because it says it is the supreme law of the land. It restricts the power of leaders and they all take an oath to it but for most that means nothing. The standard of completely disarmed is virtually impossible to know or measure and that leaves the door open for this conflict to continue indefinitely. In the meantime, Reuters reports that the U.S. has expended more than 80% of its antimissile defense missiles. The Iranians are very smart people and they have been for a long time. They just keep putting missiles into U.S. bases and into Israel knowing that only a few will get through but it requires the U.S. to expend its supply and what then. The President announces what turns out to be a temporary halt to bombing, I guess. The U.S. position with regard to Israel and the Middle East is indefensible and I guess that's why they no longer try to defend it. The attitude seems to be the old one made famous by Baghdad Bob. You are not seeing this so just move on because everything is fine. I chose humiliation as the title of this Report because it is humiliating for a great nation to force people to pay for their own destruction. A foreign nation somehow persuades the U.S. to give it money so it can use that money to buy U.S. politicians who will then vote to fund its expansionist wars. I'll close this report on our humiliation with a few words from old friend and economist Bill Bonner. “No matter how cynical you are, its probably not enough. Perhaps Donald Trump is playing a different game altogether. He marshalls DOGE to cut spending but does not actually cut a dime out of the swollen federal budget. He makes grand theater out of tariffs but trade deficits continue unmolested. No more foreign wars, he pledges and then attacks Iran.” Finally, folks, the way out of this seems very difficult to bear but wouldn't it be better to quit now so we can manage the withdrawal rather than wait until we are forced out. The Iran War was a mistake we should admit and we are sorry we made it. We are especially sorry for those Iranian school girls and we will pay compensation to their families. It's the same decision made by the French after Dein Bin Phu when we decided to take up their war. At least that's the way I see it, Until next time folks, This is Darrell Castle, Thanks for listening.

During World War II, the United States built 2,710 Liberty ships to move the cargo needed to fight a global war. They were plain, inexpensive, and often called “ugly ducklings,” but without them the Allied victory would have been impossible. Join the Veterans Breakfast Club as Glenn Flickinger welcomes award-winning journalist and author Doug Most to discuss his acclaimed new book, Launching Liberty: The Epic Race to Build the Ships That Took America to War. Doug tells the remarkable story of how Franklin Roosevelt, industrialist Henry J. Kaiser, naval architects, welders, engineers, and hundreds of thousands of ordinary Americans created one of the greatest industrial achievements in history. In just a few short years, American shipyards transformed shipbuilding from a process measured in months into one measured in weeks—and sometimes even days. Along the way, women, African Americans, migrants from across the country, and first-time shipbuilders became part of an extraordinary workforce that helped supply Allied armies around the globe. We'll talk about why Liberty ships mattered so much, how Henry Kaiser's innovative shipyards changed manufacturing forever, and how America's race to outproduce German U-boats became one of the great untold stories of World War II. Just as importantly, we'll remember the hundreds of thousands of workers—many of them building ships for the first time—whose efforts transformed the United States into the Arsenal of Democracy and helped win the war. The Veterans Breakfast Club creates communities of listening around veterans and their stories to connect, educate, heal, and inspire. #LibertyShips #WorldWarII #WWII #MerchantMarine #HenryKaiser #DougMost #MilitaryHistory #NavalHistory #GreatestGeneration #VeteransBreakfastClub #ArsenalOfDemocracy #HomeFront #History #WW2History

Season 2, Episode 132In this episode, Michael and Zach sit down with Charles Smits to discuss his Lowcountry roots, Christian education, homeschooling, family, and unexpected journey into musical theatre. Charles reflects on growing up at Ferndale School, the strengths and challenges of different approaches to Christian education, and his wife Angela's behind-the-scenes role as Head of Operations for House Theatre.The conversation also explores how Charles entered theatre through the involvement of his daughters, what it was like joining his first musical as an adult, and how his perspective changed through productions of Little House on the Prairie and Annie. He shares his experience performing several roles in Annie, including President Franklin Roosevelt, and discusses the research, comedy, family memories, and spiritual community that shaped the production. The episode concludes with reflections on fathers participating alongside their children, the Christian mission of House Theatre, possible future roles, and Charles's interest in launching a podcast of his own.Find our videocast here: https://youtu.be/vqbHgu9KPxEMerch here: https://take-2-podcast.printify.me/Music from #Uppbeat (free for Creators!):⁠https://uppbeat.io/t/reakt-music/deep-stone⁠License code: 2QZOZ2YHZ5UTE7C8Find more Take 2 Theology content at http://www.take2theology.com

“Jared Kushner is one of the most powerful American diplomats of the twenty-first century — and he has no skill set to speak of that I can see.” — Casey Michel Four years ago, the muckraking journalist Casey Michel came on this show to discuss how the United States has built the greatest money-laundering scheme in history. That pre-Trump 2.0 America, he says, looks quaint. His new book, United States of Oligarchy: How America's Wealthiest Ally with Dictators, Weaken the U.S., and Destroy Democracy, describes an American casino where the Trump family has become the dealer with a perennially stacked deck. The word “oligarchy” comes with 2,500 years of baggage. Aristotle, not averse to aristocracy, nonetheless warned of the rule of the few. Teddy Roosevelt preferred “plutocracy” as a way of describing the baronial rule of the late 19th century American capitalists. And, of course, it took a Roosevelt — the sickly scion of upper-crust New York — to dilute his own oligarchic caste with anti-trust law and inheritance & progressive income taxes. Exhibit A in this American oligarchy is Jared Kushner, who has leveraged his father-in-law's rotten casino to ally with dictators and destroy democracy both in America and around the world. Michel says Kushner has “no skill set to speak of” — apart, of course, from an insatiable greed for wealth and power. The banality of the deal. So what to do? Michel is waiting for a 21st century Teddy Roosevelt — he names Talarico and Ossoff — who will tax and perhaps even prosecute Kushner and his fellow oligarchs. But I fear he is waiting for Godot. Teddy isn't coming back. Nor is FDR. Don't expect the banality of the current highly lucrative deal to end anytime soon. Five Takeaways •       Child's Play. The anonymous shell companies and mystery donations of American Kleptocracy — dire enough in 2022 — now read as quaint. The scale has exploded (crypto, prediction markets, AI as accelerant), and so has the shamelessness: a Qatari luxury airliner gifted to a sitting president, and a $1.8 billion slush fund that will compensate January 6 rioters while granting Trump's family, inner circle, and “associates” carte blanche from tax audits, past and future. America has had corrupt administrations — Grant, Harding, Nixon — but nothing, Michel argues, on this magnitude. Trump himself is symptom rather than cause: the culmination of trends decades in the making. “Shameless does not begin to describe it. I have to laugh — otherwise, I'm sure I'd just be crying.”•       From Aristotle to the Trillionaire. Aristotle popularized oligarchy: rule of the few — who must also be the wealthiest. Teddy Roosevelt preferred “plutocracy,” and the Founders fought over “aristocracy”; Michel meets the 2020s where they are. The through line he found in the research: America's anti-oligarchic champions come from inside the elite — above all TR, the sickly, bloodlet, electroshocked child of upper-crust New York who grew into the singular force against concentrated wealth: inheritance tax, progressive income tax, and a bully pulpit used without apology. Today's benchmark: Gilded Age fortunes — Rockefeller's $30 billion in modern terms — are pocket change beside centibillionaires and America's first, briefly minted trillionaire.•       Exhibit A: Jared Kushner. One of the most powerful American diplomats of the twenty-first century — Israel and Gaza, Russia and Ukraine, the Gulf — with, in Michel's judgment, no skill set to speak of: a string of failures from 666 Fifth Avenue to the New York Observer, redeemed by the single best thing he ever did, marrying Ivanka Trump. MBS bragged Kushner was “in his pocket”; James Comer told an intermediary to tell him to fuck off — making Kushner, Michel suggests, a genuinely bipartisan target for future investigations. Andrew pushed back — the network of autocrats is real, the Harvard degree is real — and the conversation settled on Arendt: not evil, but indifferent to good and evil. What Kushner cares about: Ivanka and her father, his bottom line, and carrying water for Benjamin Netanyahu.•       The Incentive Machine. Michel's deeper argument indicts structures, not sinners: virtually none of this is illegal, which is precisely the problem. Corporate secrecy, campaign finance, and offshore taxation build an architecture in which allying with dictators is the rational move — if your competitor will meet MBS or Xi, you must too. Hence the corporate class's standing ovation for Xi Jinping in San Francisco; Google's Project Dragonfly censorship engine; Musk's Tesla leverage in Beijing (and DOGE actions conspicuously in Chinese interest); the NBA's progressive branding beside its Rwandan and Emirati partnerships; and Ireland, the thriving democracy at the bottom of the tax-haven barrel. Michel is happy to call the CCP one of history's most monstrous regimes — and to note that no ideology, only rank financial interest, lays American CEOs at its feet.•       Waiting for Teddy. Does oligarchy actually weaken America? Michel points to the Iran war's aftermath — collapsed interceptor stocks, an intact Tehran regime, Gulf monarchs getting their dirty business done at American expense — plus Greenland threats, wobbling alliances, and the nuclear proliferation he expects among abandoned allies. Andrew pressed the counter-case three times: Wall Street at record highs, half of America holding retirement accounts. Michel's answer: inequality beyond anything in the national experience — and a political moment, left and right, hungry for anti-oligarchic leadership. The GOP just moved to kill the shell-company database; the remedy is a twenty-first-century TR — a Talarico, an Ossoff — willing to be denounced as a communist agitator. “If Teddy Roosevelt can be, I suppose anyone can.” About the Guest Casey Michel is an author, investigative journalist, and director of the Combating Kleptocracy Program at the Human Rights Foundation. He is the author of American Kleptocracy — named by The Economist one of the best books for understanding financial crime — and Foreign Agents, and his writing on offshoring, foreign lobbying, and illicit wealth appears in The New York Times, Financial Times, The Atlantic, and Foreign Affairs, among others. He has testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee on illicit financial networks and national security, holds a master's from Columbia's Harriman Institute, and is currently sanctioned by the Russian regime for his work. United States of Oligarchy (St. Martin's Press, August 4, 2026) is his third book. References: •       United States of Oligarchy by Casey Michel (St. Martin's Press, Augu...

On Tuesday's Mark Levin Show, Abdul El-Sayed, who is running for the Democratic nomination for Senate from Michigan, is a very sick person, full of hate. He is on record supporting driver's licenses for illegals, opposing cooperation with ICE, and says America was founded on slavery. Slavery actually existed all over the world when America was founded: Black tribes sold other Africans to Europeans. Slavery exists today in Africa - where Islamists kill and capture Christians in Nigeria -- and in the Middle East. Women are treated horribly in the Middle East, North Africa and Pakistan -- all Islamic areas. America fought a Civil War and amended our Constitution to rid this country of slavery. Nirvana has never existed anywhere, but the America of today is as close as it has ever come. Meanwhile, issues like universal healthcare are falsely cast as civil rights to advance a Marxist agenda that expands “democracy” and “rights” while threatening programs like Medicare and opposing enforcement against illegal immigration; supporting candidates like Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan would harm both the state and the country. Also, Sen Chris Van Hollen is a radical nut job, Jew hater, and Israel hater. Van Hollen defends Democrats against communist labels by citing Republican attacks on FDR over Social Security. What did FDR do? FDR created internment camps of 120,000 Japanese Americans, refusing to sign a bipartisan anti-lynching bill to protect Southern votes, imposing Jewish immigration quotas during the Holocaust, and enacting socialist policies including industrial trusts and price/wage controls that prolonged the Depression, arguing socialism redistributes rather than creates wealth. Later, Wisconsin Governor candidate Francesca Hong views Thanksgiving as racist and posted in 2021 that Americans should cancel it. This is the problem with insufficiently patriotic immigrants welcomed into the Democratic Party's big tent. In breaking news, authorities arrested a man Sunday at President Trump's Los Angeles-area golf course after he appeared to monitor security preparations two days ahead of a fundraiser there. The man, who was taking photos and video, carried a 16-round magazine with ammunition in his pocket; a loaded pistol was recovered from his car. He was charged with allegedly carrying a concealed firearm and possessing prohibited ammunition. The arrest was announced by the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department as Trump prepared to arrive for a Republican National Committee fundraising dinner at the Trump National Golf Course in Rancho Palos Verdes. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Philosopher Stefan Molyneux lays out the road to hell by showing how pushing women into college debt and welfare traps kills marriage and kids while state coercion removes all feedback and responsibility.Questions:What challenges will we face in society in the future when some segments of the population have a Neuralink implant and others don't?Would you be interested in creating a series or long-form content similar to Andrew Wilson's Debate University but for the purpose of learning how to reason from first principles? Similar to the early white-board videos from FDR?Define the political Right and Left in the pure abstract without any reference to a particular time or place.Can you do a podcast/video about decreasing birthrates, decreasing fertility, decreasing sperm count, especially in the wester world? Studies suggest almost no one in the west will be able to have children naturally in 30 years... seems like a serious problem.Why are most European nations so determined to destroy their history culture and heritage through Middle Eastern migrants…Can you explain why young men commit suicide generally?Have you ever watched testimonies of people who have died and went to hell on youtube? There are a lot where they are revived and are able to share their story.How would you decide between a guaranteed mediocre life or a slim chance at wild success?You advocate against forgiveness without prior repentance from the perpetrator. Could it be possible that most people just can't walk between resentment and forgiveness, so in terms of total human suffering it is better just to forgive. And that in not forgiving, most people just become shitty judges.In principle I'm inclined to agree with your take but I dont know anyone that has escaped resentment without up front forgiveness. On the average, maybe they get taken for some sort of a ride but their overall life is better.I'm not talking about individual cases here, just on balance and overall human suffering levels, with the average human and their average human drama / life.How can you escape damnation?When society become unraveled, is it due to people forgetting the basics?A house falls when its foundation crumbles.How to solve population decline, gender wars and political divide when Women are getting more far left and men are getting more far right. When the division is being funded by rival countries /globalists?Are you friends with Styx? If so, have you checked on him lately? He's gone off the rails lately. Hope he finds some help.What do you think of the notion that, with some exceptions, conservatives cannot create good art?do you like cats?

For decades, Utah's Elbert D. Thomas represented Latter-day Saints on the national stage as one of the most influential members of Congress you've probably never heard of. In this episode of Church History Matters, Scott Woodward and Casey Griffiths explore the remarkable life and political career of the faithful Latter-day Saint, educator, missionary, and U.S. Senator who served during some of the most pivotal years in American history. After serving a five-year mission in Japan, Thomas brought a global perspective to Washington, D.C., where he became a leading advocate for workers' rights, public education, scientific research, and social welfare during the Great Depression. Scott and Casey examine his strong support of Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal programs, his efforts to strengthen labor protections, expand educational opportunities, and help establish institutions such as the National Science Foundation. They also discuss his role in promoting the Civilian Conservation Corps, support for veterans' education, and his work toward greater federal investment in education and public welfare. The conversation also highlights Thomas's international vision. Long before the end of World War II, he warned about the persecution of European Jews, advocated for Jewish refugees fleeing Nazi oppression, and later became a vocal supporter of the newly formed United Nations and America's leadership in building a more peaceful postwar world. His experiences as an LDS missionary in Japan shaped his lifelong commitment to diplomacy, religious understanding, and international cooperation. How did a devoted Latter-day Saint become one of the Senate's most progressive voices? Why did his impressive political career end amid the political tensions of the early Cold War? Join Scott and Casey as they uncover the fascinating story of Elbert D. Thomas and explore how his faith, education, and public service intersected during one of America's most consequential eras.

David Davenport provides a historical overview of how the concept of equality of opportunity has evolved from the American founding to the modern era. The discussion explains that while the Founders initially focused on dismantling European systems of caste and class, later leaders like Abraham Lincoln and Woodrow Wilson expanded federal power to address slavery and industrialization. As the frontier closed, the government shifted from merely protecting natural rights to actively managing social and economic outcomes. Franklin D. Roosevelt and Lyndon B. Johnson furthered this trend by implementing New Deal and Great Society programs aimed at correcting systemic poverty. Conversely, Ronald Reagan sought to revive the original philosophy by reducing government intervention and promoting individualism. Ultimately, the discussion highlights a contemporary shift in language where the traditional ideal of equality is increasingly being replaced by the more ambiguous term equity. (1)1800 BOSTON TREMONT STREET

5 Hours and 22 MinutesPG-13Thomas777 is a revisionist historian and a fiction writer.Here are the first 5 episodes of the World War 2 series with Thomas777 in one audio file.Episode 1: The Rise of the National Socialists in the Weimar Republic/Germany w/ Thomas777Episode 2: The Invasion of Poland and the U.S. Enters the War w/ Thomas777Episode 3: FDR and The New Dealers Push For War w/ Thomas777Episode 4: The Origins and Rise of Winston Churchill Pt. 1 w/ Thomas777Episode 5: The Origin and Rise of Winston Churchill Pt. 2 - The 1930s w/ Thomas777Thomas' SubstackThomas777 MerchandiseThomas' Book "Steelstorm Pt. 1"Thomas' Book "Steelstorm Pt. 2"Thomas on TwitterThomas' CashApp - $7homas777Pete and Thomas777 'At the Movies'Support Pete on His WebsitePete's PatreonPete's SubstackPete's SubscribestarPete's GUMROADPete's VenmoPete's Buy Me a CoffeePete on FacebookPete on TwitterBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-pete-quinones-show--6071361/support.

Philosopher Stefan Molyneux delivers the truth about Anthony Fauci by exposing how the hearing revealed repeated contradictions between his public statements and private notes on school closures, masks, virus severity, lab origins, and mandates.Sources: https://fdrurl.com/fauciResearch Notes: https://cdn.freedomain.com/FDR_6468_anthony_fauci.pdfGET FREEDOMAIN MERCH! https://shop.freedomain.com/SUBSCRIBE TO ME ON X! https://x.com/StefanMolyneuxFollow me on Youtube! https://www.youtube.com/@freedomain1GET MY NEW BOOK 'PEACEFUL PARENTING', THE INTERACTIVE PEACEFUL PARENTING AI, AND THE FULL AUDIOBOOK!https://peacefulparenting.com/Join the PREMIUM philosophy community on the web for free!Subscribers get 12 HOURS on the "Truth About the French Revolution," multiple interactive multi-lingual philosophy AIs trained on thousands of hours of my material - as well as AIs for Real-Time Relationships, Bitcoin, Peaceful Parenting, and Call-In Shows!You also receive private livestreams, HUNDREDS of exclusive premium shows, early release podcasts, the 22 Part History of Philosophers series and much more!See you soon!https://freedomain.locals.com/support/promo/FREEDOMAIN2026

Arthur Herman contrasts Woodrow Wilson's attempt to centrally manage industry during World War I, which resulted in logistical chaos and failure, with FDR's embrace of the private sector for World War II, appointing GM's Bill Knudsento lead mobilization. By relying on the incentives of the marketplace, Knudsen successfully converted American manufacturing into a massive war machine, producing more war material than the world imagined in just 18 months. (13)1867

C Constable reports from France on the high heat and smoke impact near Bordeaux. The discussion shifts to surging energy prices, with Brent crude rising 26% and European gas up 36%. Despite high energy costs, rising copper prices suggest potential industrial growth. (1)Simon Constable and Jim McTague continue with a quiz highlighting that typical data centers use 300,000 gallons of water daily, while larger ones can reach 5 million gallons. Currently, most centers are urban, but 67% of planned facilities are rural. In Lancaster County, a "tale of two data centers" emerges as one town embraces the revenue stream while another resists it due to misinformation and fear. (2)Cliff May argues for maximum pressure and coercive diplomacy to prevent the Islamic Republic of Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. He advocates for a naval blockade, specifically targeting oil exports from Kharg Island to strangle the regime's revenue. May emphasizes that the Iranian leadership's ideology makes them likely to use nuclear weapons, necessitating a strategy to cripple the regime's power. (3)John Hardie and Bill Roggio cover the significant leadership change in Ukraine as General Drapatyi replaces General Syrskyi as commander-in-chief. Drapatyi is seen as a representative of a new, western-style generation of officers who embrace technological innovation and listen to subordinates. The transition aims to "desovietize" the military and maintain the momentum of successful drone offensives against Russian infrastructure. (4)Anatol Lieven examines how the Ukraine and Iran conflicts are merging into one global struggle following a Ukrainiandrone strike on an Iranian vessel. This escalation threatens global energy supplies of refined oil products, as Russianrefineries struggle with capacity. While Ukraine targets the Russian middle class to undermine support for the war, Lieven warns of a widening proxy war involving China, North Korea, and Iran. (5)Anatol Lieven turns to Britain's new political era under Prime Minister Andy Burnham, who is described as the Labour Party's "last chance" to address a discredited government. Burnham faces immense financial pressure, particularly regarding the costs of healthcare for the elderly and dementia. To succeed, he may need to pivot from "Net Zero" policies to prioritize energy needs and seek a new mandate through an election. (6)Salvatore Vitale and Kalin Plunkett of MIT explain hierarchical merging, a process where black holes merge repeatedly to create larger "monsters." By analyzing gravitational waves from 155 binary pairs, they discovered that 14% are second-generation black holes, born from previous mergers rather than stellar collapse. These second-generation black holes are characterized by rapid spin and mass asymmetry, providing clues to how supermassive black holes form in galaxies. (7)Salvatore Vitale and Kalin Plunkett continue: to uncover the origins of the Milky Way's supermassive black hole, scientists propose building larger gravitational wave detectors scaled up by a factor of ten. These advanced observatories would allow researchers to peer further back into cosmic history, potentially detecting black holes from the very early universe. Expanding the global network to four or five detectors would help pinpoint host galaxies and detect the formation of heavy elements. (8)Arthur Herman recounts the historic 1896 meeting where Henry Ford pitched his internal combustion engine to a skeptical Thomas Edison. Edison's encouragement served as the catalyst for Ford's revolution in American transportation. This industrial transformation was further enabled by John D. Rockefeller, whose ability to lower oil prices made gasoline an economically feasible fuel for mass production. The segment also highlights George Washington's vision for a professional Continental Army. (9)Arthur Herman explains the American founders were heavily influenced by the Scottish Enlightenment, particularly the ideas of David Hume and Adam Smith regarding the pursuit of happiness. This subjective right was prioritized over property to potentially allow for the future abolition of slavery. The founding spirit extended to the Northwest Ordinance, creating communities like Marietta, Ohio, that were dedicated to education, religion, and freedom. (10)Arthur Herman characterizes Abraham Lincoln as a founder for his vision of an America without slavery and his willingness to risk the Union to fulfill the Declaration of Independence. His administration's legacy includes the Homestead Act and the Transcontinental Railroad, which expanded the "empire of liberty." Additionally, the Civil War era facilitated the rise of Andrew Carnegie, who later revolutionized the global steel industry using the Bessemerprocess. (11)Arthur Herman reframes the Gilded Age not as an era of greed, but as a period of unprecedented opportunity and connectivity driven by the railroad. James J. Hill's Great Northern Railway fostered regional prosperity and negotiated fairly with Native American tribes. Meanwhile, Thomas Edison's relentless competitiveness and "restless mind" led to the electrification of the nation and the invention of the phonograph, inspiring future generations of founders like Elon Musk. (12)Arthur Herman contrasts Woodrow Wilson's attempt to centrally manage industry during World War I, which resulted in logistical chaos and failure, with FDR's embrace of the private sector for World War II, appointing GM's Bill Knudsento lead mobilization. By relying on the incentives of the marketplace, Knudsen successfully converted American manufacturing into a massive war machine, producing more war material than the world imagined in just 18 months. (13)Arthur Herman presents Martin Luther King Jr. as a founder who refounded the American experiment by taking risks to fulfill the promise of equality. The segment explores the eternal conflict between the bold "founder mindset" and the cautious "manager instinct" that emerged in the 1950s. While managers seek stability and predictability, founders drive innovation and national greatness, preventing the American dream from becoming stagnant and stale. (14)Arthur Herman credits Vannevar Bush's "The Endless Frontier" manifesto with persuading FDR to fund basic scientific research through universities, laying the groundwork for Silicon Valley. This federal support enabled discoveries in information theory and microchip development, transforming the American economy. The evolution from massive mainframes like the IBM 360 to modern microchips illustrates the imaginative leap of founders who see opportunities where others see only current technology. (15)Arthur Herman concludes that today's founders, including Elon Musk and Donald Trump, continue the tradition of taking massive risks to fulfill bold visions. Musk's goals for SpaceX and Mars are described as a step-by-step process of industrial manufacturing and innovation. Central to this enduring success is the Patent Act of 1790, a unique constitutional protection that ensures individuals own the products of their minds, fueling 250 years of American discovery. (16)Corrections applied per the log: John Hardie (transcribed as "Hardy," segment 4) and Labour Party (UK spelling, segment 6). I also dropped the phonetic "(Chopati)" after General Drapatyi in segment 4 — that's Mykhailo Drapatyi, so the first spelling stands. One to confirm for the log: Kalin Plunkett (segments 7–8) — I couldn't verify this MIT researcher's spelling; if it's from audio, it may need checking against the MIT LIGO group roster.

Arthur Herman credits Vannevar Bush's "The Endless Frontier" manifesto with persuading FDR to fund basic scientific research through universities, laying the groundwork for Silicon Valley. This federal support enabled discoveries in information theory and microchip development, transforming the American economy. The evolution from massive mainframes like the IBM 360 to modern microchips illustrates the imaginative leap of founders who see opportunities where others see only current technology. (15)

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit andrewsullivan.substack.comMegan is an old friend, a journalist, and an OG blogger — starting way back in 2001. We were bloggers at The Atlantic together, and she went on to write for Newsweek, The Daily Beast, and Bloomberg View. She's now a WaPo columnist, a contributing writer at The Dispatch, and a co-host of the podcasts “Reasonably Optimistic” and “Central Air.” She's also the author of The Up Side of Down: Why Failing Well Is the Key to Success.For two clips of the episode — on the appeal of socialism to those under 30, and the secrecy of ailing politicians — head to our YouTube page.Other topics: growing up on the UWS; her prof dad meeting her mom while she TA'd for him; Frank Gannett in her family; peaking at 6'2'' in 7th grade; an eating disorder to try to counter her height; the heightism of women on dating apps; the coziness of elites in DC; Fauci worship by the Dems; his coziness with Jake Tapper and Hollywood celebs; his diary; Fauci's lie over masks; masks at the Floyd protests; vaccine mandates; lab leak; Mitch McConnell MIA; Rep. Granger in memory care; Rep. Kean's depression; Biden's infirmity; age limits on the presidency; FDR's overreach; post-Nixon reforms; the constitutional crisis over the Iran War; dwindling Tomahawks; Lindsey Graham's closeness with Bibi; 9/11 and Islamofascism; nuclear proliferation and the Saudis; whether Vance or Rubio would make a better successor to Trump; Rubio's designs on Cuba; Vance's populism and lecturing the Pope; presentism; Jon Ossoff; Rahm Emanuel; the Stonewall myth; misusing rape stats and the UVA hoax; critical theory; the DSA, and its over-educated, downwardly mobile youth.Browse the Dishcast archive for an episode you might enjoy. Coming up: Ross Barkan on the DSA and Mamdani, John O'Sullivan on conservatism, Emily Eakin on postmodernism, Arianna Huffington on AI, and Azam Ahmed on terrifying new drugs. Please send any guest recs, dissents, and other comments to dish@andrewsullivan.com.

Last week, the Mayor of New York City — a self-declared democratic socialist — sat down with Jon Stewart and delivered sixty minutes of the most carefully packaged pitch for socialist governance I have ever seen on mainstream American media. No shouting. No revolutionary slogans. Potholes. Childcare. Dignity. If you think this doesn't affect you because New York City is just New York City — understand this: what Mamdani is building is explicitly designed to be a national model. It is coming to your city next. So I'm going to break down his arguments and equip you with everything you need to not just defeat them, but to do so in such a way that robs him of the moral legitimacy that he is trying to steal.GET YOUR MERCH HERE: https://shop.nickjfreitas.com/BECOME A MEMBER OF THE IC: https://NickJFreitas.comInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/nickjfreitas/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/NickFreitasVATwitter: https://twitter.com/NickJFreitasYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@NickjfreitasTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@nickjfreitas3.000:00:00 – The three lies socialists always tell00:06:49 – Who really made NYC childcare unaffordable?00:12:35 – Fact-check: rent control and the true cost of "$60 million for tenants"00:17:22 – The non-answer: what democratic socialism actually is00:24:43 – Why the socialist utopia never arrives00:28:43 – How they really seize control: rent freezes and government grocery stores00:35:14 – The library lie: dressing up socialism as public goods00:40:51 – FDR, Mussolini, and socialist vs fascist economics00:43:07 – The dependency trap and Hayek's road to serfdom00:46:24 – The real definition, suspended elections, and Venezuela's collapse00:50:08 – No solutions, only tradeoffs: who hollowed out New York00:55:37 – The three lies, recapped

On this episode of Fox Across America, guest host Rich Zeoli gives his take on newly released diary entries in which Dr. Anthony Fauci bragged about the fame and power he had during the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic. Elections Correspondent for The Federalist Briana Lyman sheds light on how the rise of the DSA here in the United States can be traced all the way back to the days of FDR's presidential administration. New York Post financial correspondent Lydia Moynihan talks about how New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani's anti-wealth platform is prompting more billionaires to flee the Big Apple. Co-host of “The Big Money Show” on Fox Business Taylor Riggs looks back on some of the insane restrictions everyone had to follow during the COVID pandemic. PLUS, CEO of the Education Freedom Foundation Erika Donalds discusses the importance of the Trump administration's commitment to school choice. [00:00:00] Rich Zeoli's mono on the Fauci diaries [00:18:50] Brianna Lyman [00:38:04] Crazy positions of DSA candidates [00:50:45] Paul Mauro [00:55:27] Lydia Moynihan [01:14:03] Taylor Riggs [01:33:04] Erika Donalds Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

July 24, 2026Federal officials have admitted that cuts from clean energy projects were based on whether states had voted for Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential election, Rather than combatting waste, the administration is trying to use the power of the American people for its own ends, Trump has levied tariffs again, on goods from more than 80 countries that make up just short of 100% of US trade, Trump is frustrated as he cannot seem to find a way out of the Iran War, The Pentagon is restating the number of military personnel who have been killed in the course of the Iran War, The White House appears focused on the goals of Trump alone, Trump's actions are in sharp contrast to FDR's radio broadcast of July 24 1933 which urged Americans to act “in a group [to] accomplish things which no individual acting alone could even hope to bring about."Watch today's recording here: https://www.youtube.com/live/g9TUa1Rwd6U?si=T8_KKcHQZElhpnZ-Get full, free access to Letters from an American here: https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/subscribeYou can also find me:Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/hcrichardson.bsky.socialInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/heathercoxrichardson/?hl=enFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/heathercoxrichardson/YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@heathercoxrichardson Get full access to Letters from an American at heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/subscribe