Podcasts about Humphrey

Spain take on Argentina in the final. This is Morning Cupdate, brought to you by The Home Depot.In today's show, we look forward to the final between Spain and Argentina: we break down the big tactical battles and the teams' journey to this point. We also look back at the crazy result of the Bronze final. It's time to reveal the results from Morning Cupdate vs The Night Cup, and finally we present our own awards for the tournament.Tune into Night Cup tonight where Rog, Rory, and Humphrey will retreat to the big orange bus one last time to recap the Final: https://mibcourage.co/4wQozCb Come be with us today at Fanatics Fest for our last Match Day Live show with Vozinha, Method Man, Becky Sauerbrunn and Tiki Barber. Plus, stick around after the show for a live watch party for the Final with Ryan Reynolds, Flo Balogun, and more. Get there early for the BofA Fan Band™ giveaway. Tickets here (use code MIB20 for 20% off): https://mibcourage.co/4yt9gRx See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

“We have a Justice Department which is now 100% the political pawn of the president,” warns Brookings senior fellow Jonathan Rauch. “He points, and they shoot.” Point and shoot. Like an old Kodak camera. Not exactly assuring words, you might think, from a man who begins our conversation looking back at the first six months of 2026 by announcing that he's significantly less alarmed than he was a year ago. Yes, Rauch acknowledges, Trump's approval ratings have sunk, the courts have pushed back, Elon Musk's DOGE rampage has petered out. And yet the pointing and the shooting goes on. Rauch, who only months ago diagnosed eighteen “distinct and unmistakable signs” of an American fascism in a much touted Atlantic piece, now admits he may never crack the Trumpian code. Every time you nail it to the wall, he says, it morphs, creeps or sails away. Like an Iranian gunboat in Hormuz. Slippery stuff for the liberal Brookings analyst. Fascism one month, McKinley-style imperialism the next, then Gilded Age plutocracy — although without those ontologically undeniable Carnegie libraries. Meanwhile, America's 250th birthday party fizzled into what Rauch calls a “damp squib,” its reflecting pool turning an opaque green rather than a clarifying blue. A muddy madness in DC. Still, amidst all the opacity, Rauch remains a defiantly optimistic liberal. In contrast with yesterday's guest, the reality hallucinating Turi Munthe, Rauch believes not only that there is an ontological reality, but that it's good. Frank Fukuyama was right, Rauch insists. Liberalism is not only the only political system that creates wealth, produces knowledge and settles disputes, but also establishes an undeniable reality. Liberals just need to relearn how to clearly tell its story. Perhaps. Though storytelling is certainly simpler when nobody is waving a gun at you. Five Takeaways •       Less Alarmed, Still Scared. Rauch opens with the good news: he is significantly less alarmed than he was a year ago, when the administration was running rampage, putting agencies out of business and demanding Greenland. Approval ratings have dropped, so Trump has less political space; the courts have pushed back, so he has less judicial space; Stephen Miller has vanished from view. And then comes the caveat that gives the episode its title: the Justice Department is now 100% the political pawn of the president — he points, and they shoot — and Trump has shown that as his ratings fall, he becomes more willing, not less, to use those tools. •       I May Never Crack the Code. Only months ago, Rauch diagnosed eighteen distinct and unmistakable signs of a modern American reinvention of fascism in The Atlantic. He doesn't regret the essay — but he has gone back to being confused. The Trump phenomenon is slippery: every time you nail it to the wall, it morphs, creeps or slides away. Fascism one month, McKinley-style imperialism in Venezuela the next, an Iran war with no rationale at all. Trump is such an improviser, and so disorganized, that Rauch concedes there is an element of randomness he may never decode — though he accepts Andrew's suggestion that attention is now the coin of the political realm. •       Not the Gilded Age — No Carnegie Libraries. The new inequality, Rauch argues, is different in kind: a class of people almost superhuman in the wealth they control, and strangely narcissistic and nihilistic toward the broader society. The Gilded Age tycoons did some bad things, but they also built — Carnegie's libraries, Mellon's National Gallery, Rockefeller's University of Chicago, Stanford's university. This group builds rockets and sounds, in the case of Marc Andreessen, like a parody of an Ayn Rand novel — or, as Andrew corrects him, not a parody at all: they simply repeat what they've read. Even so, Rauch is not sorry to see politics reacting to a world where Musk can casually drop $300 million into a presidential race. •       The Gloves-Off Court and the Accelerating Presidency. The Supreme Court term brought the clearest statement yet of the conservative agenda: Humphrey's Executor overturned after eighty years, making it far easier for presidents to fire agency heads at will; what remained of the Voting Rights Act effectively gutted; birthright citizenship surviving by a shockingly narrow margin. The imperial presidency is not new, Rauch notes — what's new is the speed. A president can now simply refuse to run a congressionally mandated agency, and the Senate, forty quietly nixed nominations notwithstanding, remains lacking in spine. The Todd Blanche nomination, he says, is the next test of whether any line exists at all. •       Fukuyama Was Right — and Liberals Should Say So. Rauch sees a moral vacuum and, for the first time, a craving to fill it: the pope's AI encyclical, multi-faith clergy bearing witness in Minnesota, the Episcopalians and Latter-day Saints finding their voices. His prescription for the second half of 2026 is a liberal one, in the nineteenth-century sense — science, markets, constitutions, rule of law. Fukuyama, widely misunderstood, was right: there is only one system that produces knowledge, peace, freedom, and wealth on a global scale, and it's ours. It needs fixing — he cheers the bipartisan housing bill Trump refused to sign — but liberals must relearn how to tell that story, and how to brag. About the Guest Jonathan Rauch is a senior fellow in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution and a contributing writer at The Atlantic. He is the author of nine books, including The Constitution of Knowledge: A Defense of Truth (2021), Cross Purposes: Christianity's Broken Bargain with Democracy (Yale, 2025), and Kindly Inquisitors: The New Attacks on Free Thought. A recipient of the National Magazine Award, he serves on the boards of Heterodox Academy and Civic Life, and is a longtime friend of the show. References: •       Rauch's Atlantic essay identifying eighteen “distinct and unmistakable signs” of a modern American reinvention of fascism — the piece he stands by, even as he admits the phenomenon keeps morphing. •       His recent essays for The UnPopulist on why liberal societies need grand stories about themselves, and why liberals must relearn how to brag about liberalism. •       Jonathan Rauch and Peter Wehner in The New York Times — the earlier argument, which Rauch says still holds, that the Republican Party is more dangerous to the constitution and the rule of law than the Democratic Party. •       Tim O'Reilly in The Economist — on Elon Musk building a form of capitalism that Adam Smith would hate. •       Francis Fukuyama — whose widely misunderstood The End of History thesis Rauch defends: there is only one system that creates wealth, produces knowledge, and settles political disputes on a global scal...

Teenage girls today are facing more pressure than ever to fit in, measure up, and find their place in a constantly changing world. This week, I'm joined by Margaret Humphrey, founder of Choose to Live Freely and Dream Freely, to talk about why identity matters and how one caring adult can change the course of a young person's life.Margaret shares how her own mentors inspired her passion for serving teen girls, the vision behind the first-ever Dream Freely Gathering, and why helping girls become anchored in Christ is more important than ever. We also talk about the role parents, grandparents, and mentors can play in encouraging the next generation with grace, patience, and unconditional love.To find out more about the Dream Freely Conference, visit https://choosetolivefreely.com/.To purchase Margaret's book, visit https://a.co/d/08hazaQCWant to be a guest on Life Stories Podcast? Send Shara Goswick a message on PodMatch, here: https://www.joinpodmatch.com/lifestoriespodcast

Fan Mail: Tell Wendy how you're saying yes to yourself!In this episode, Wendy sits down with Sarah Barnes-Humphrey about what happens when your entire life plan disappears overnight. Ten days before her 37th birthday, the family business she'd wanted to run since age 16 closed its doors. Job gone. Title gone. Future gone. It was the worst day of her life, but she didn't stay there.They explore:When you lose everything, you discover what you're actually made of, and how resilience looks less like inspiration and more like showing up brokenThe moment someone told her the work was worth $1,000 and she believed it: how discovering your worth changes everythingThe ongoing battle: autoimmune disease, panic attacks since her 20s, a dysregulated nervous system, but continuing to say yes to what matters anywaySarah's story isn't about bouncing back perfectly or finding the silver lining. It's about climbing out of rock bottom while still carrying the wounds. It's about rebuilding while your body and mind are still fighting. It's raw, honest, and real.Connect with Sarah:Get her book, I Buried Her in a French Press: amazon.com/Buried-Her-French-Press-Finding/dp/1544549466?tag=syty-20Instagram: instagram.com/sarahbarneshumphreyLinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/sarahbarneshumphreyBlendedPledge.orgSarahBarnesHumphrey.comPodcasts: sarahbarneshumphrey.com/contentReferenced in this Episode:On Our Best Behavior by Elise Loehnen: amazon.com/dp/059324303X/?tag=syty-20Lewis Howes Podcast: lewishowes.com/sogpodcast________________________________________________________________________________________Connect with Wendy:LinkedinInstagram: @wendy.harropFacebook: Phineas Wright HouseWebsite: Phineas Wright House PWH Farm StaysPWH Curated Experience and TravelInterested in being a guest on the show? Send your pitch to podcast@phineaswrighthouse.comPodcast Production By Shannon Warner of Resonant Collective Want to start your own podcast? Let's chat!If this episode resonated, follow Say YES to Yourself! and leave a  5-star review. It helps more women in midlife discover the tools, stories, and community that make saying YES not only possible, but powerful.

The award-winning Compliance into the Weeds is the only weekly podcast that takes a deep dive into a compliance-related topic, literally going into the weeds to explore it in greater depth. Looking for some hard-hitting insights on compliance? Look no further than Compliance into the Weeds! In this episode of Compliance into the Weeds, Tom Fox and Matt Kelly discuss the June 29 Supreme Court decision in Trump v. Slaughter. This decision upheld the president's power to fire independent agency commissioners at will (with a carve-out for the Federal Reserve), overturning long-standing protections from Humphrey's Executor. Kelly argues the ruling will politicize and degrade regulatory agencies, deter qualified minority-party commissioners, increase rulemaking volatility, and shift power away from Congress toward courts as rules are challenged. As an example, they cite the SEC's proposal to allow semi-annual rather than quarterly reporting, which drew about 80,000 comments, with roughly 99% opposed, yet they predict it may proceed and later be reversed, creating compliance burdens. They then cover Georgia author Jean Wilson, sentenced to 10 years for a $66 million Medicare fraud scheme while writing healthcare compliance books. Key highlights: The Slaughter Ruling Regulatory Volatility Ahead Who Will Serve as Commissioners Fed Carve-out and Court Power Compliance Impact and No Easy Answers Healthcare Compliance Fraud Story (Or is it from The Onion?)  Resources: Matt in Radical Compliance  Tom Instagram Facebook YouTube Twitter LinkedIn A multi-award-winning podcast, Compliance into the Weeds was most recently honored as one of the Top 25 Regulatory Compliance Podcasts, a Top 10 Business Law Podcast, and a Top 12 Risk Management Podcast. Compliance into the Weeds has been conferred the Davey, Communicator, and W3 Awards, all for podcast excellence. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Two constitutional battles dropped in the last 72 hours that go to the exact same question: Who runs the executive branch of the United States government? Is it the President that the American people elected — or is it unelected bureaucrats and Democrat governors who've decided they know better?SPONSOR: Alliance Defending FreedomAlliance Defending Freedom is challenging a Colorado law that forces business owners to use pronouns that violate their religious beliefs, defending a Christian bookstore and a sports apparel company after a court ruled against them. Your support helps protect free speech in cases like this across the country, and for a limited time your first gift is doubled while matching funds last.Have your gift doubled. Text NICK to 83848 or go to https://www.JoinADF.com/Nick-----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 – Trump fires the Election Assistance Commission00:02:00 – What the commission actually does (and doesn't do)00:03:54 – Who got the grant money? Calls for congressional oversight00:10:29 – Pritzker invokes the 25th Amendment — what it actually says00:14:46 – Is the president "unable to discharge" his duties?00:16:39 – Can Trump legally fire commissioners? Humphrey's Executor (1935)00:18:53 – Seila Law and Collins v. Yellen: the Supreme Court changes course00:20:47 – Article II: executive power and faithful execution of the laws00:24:37 – The verdict00:27:21 – Being honest about Trump too: Iran and the War Powers Act00:28:32 – Final ruling for the president — and shrinking the bureaucracy

Adam White hosts Chief Judge Susan G. Braden (Ret.) to discuss the Supreme Court's decision in Trump v. Slaughter, which held the Federal Trade Commission's statutory independence unconstitutional and explicitly overruled Humphrey's Executor. Braden argues the ruling will ripple across administrative law by treating agencies with authority to file lawsuits on behalf of the United […]

American history is riddled with collisions between legally defensible rulings and morally costly outcomes. Still, "the purpose of law in any society is to embody a moral framework in practice," says Yuval Levin, who joins Mark Labberton to explore the moral architecture in the foundation of the American legal system, as they review the most recent rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court has just closed one of the most consequential terms in recent memory, articulating the tension between faithfulness to the Constitution and enacting justice and morality. Together they reflect on why and how a system founded on equality must be both majoritarian and counter-majoritarian at once; why a judge's job is to articulate their legal (rather than their moral) opinion; the rise of Constitutional originalism; why pre-Trump conservative arguments win at this Court while "Trumpy" ones lose; the contemporary relevance of the Federalist Papers; what recourse citizens have when they believe the Court has done wrong; and why the American legal system's worst failures still cluster around race. They explore several of the 2025-26 rulings of the Supreme Court, including imposition of tariffs, immigration enforcement, and birthright citizenship, and the Voting Rights Act. Episode Highlights "The purpose of law in any society is to embody a moral framework in practice." "This is a very good time to get to know The Federalist Papers." "The role of the judge in the American system is to apply the law, not to find the moral answer per se. We hope the law does that, though it doesn't always and we know it." "The American system of government, very much for moral reasons, is expected to be both majoritarian and counter-majoritarian." [Regarding Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh] "They grew up in the same place. They literally went to the same high school and had the same history teacher. Their mothers knew each other … They agreed with each other 52% of the time in this last term of the Supreme Court." [Courts to Trump] "You are in charge of the executive branch, but the executive branch is not in charge of the American government." "If you come to this court with a pre-Trump conservative legal argument, you're going to win. If you come to this court with a Trumpy legal argument, you're going to lose." "We experienced the high water mark of executive power about a year ago, and it is now receding." "The areas where it has failed most are concentrated around questions of race. That has been true from the beginning. It is thankfully less true than it used to be, but it is still true, and I think we have to be uniquely sensitive to those questions for that reason." About Yuval Levin Yuval Levin is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, where he holds the Beth and Ravenel Curry Chair in Public Policy and directs Social, Cultural, and Constitutional Studies. He founded and edits National Affairs, and he is a senior editor at The New Atlantis and a contributing editor at National Review. His books include "The Great Debate," "The Fractured Republic," "A Time to Build," and most recently, "American Covenant." He served on the White House domestic policy staff under George W. Bush and earned his PhD at the University of Chicago's Committee on Social Thought. Helpful Links and Resources Yuval Levin at the American Enterprise Institute: https://www.aei.org/profile/yuval-levin/ National Affairs, the publication Levin founded and edits: https://nationalaffairs.com/authors/detail/yuval-levin American Covenant, by Yuval Levin: https://www.hachettebookgroup.com/titles/yuval-levin/american-covenant/9780465040742/?lens=basic-books A Time to Build, by Yuval Levin: https://www.hachettebookgroup.com/titles/yuval-levin/a-time-to-build/9781541699281/?lens=basic-books The Federalist Papers, full text at the Library of Congress: https://guides.loc.gov/federalist-papers Trump v. Slaughter, the decision overturning Humphrey's Executor (June 29, 2026): https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/25-332_qn12.pdf Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, the IEEPA tariffs decision (February 20, 2026): https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-1287_4gcj.pdf Louisiana v. Callais, the Voting Rights Act decision (April 29, 2026): https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-109_21o3.pdf Coverage of the birthright citizenship ruling in Trump v. Barbara, SCOTUSblog: https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/06/supreme-court-strikes-down-trumps-order-ending-birthright-citizenship/ Show Notes Yuval Levin's legal/constitutional frame: The law exists to put a society's moral convictions into workable practice. On "All men are created equal": If no one has natural authority over anyone else, we decide by majority vote—but equality also means the minority keeps its rights no matter who wins The Constitution assigns those two jobs to different institutions and lets them fight: Congress and the president answer to majorities, the courts deliberately do not Life tenure and fixed salaries exist so justices can protect minority rights without fear of majority reprisal A judge's job is to say what the law is, not to reach the most just result; therefore good judges regularly land where they might wish they didn't. What citizens can do when the Court rules wrongly: If it misread a statute, Congress can rewrite it. Constitutional rulings are harder to undo, but examples include the 16th Amendment (re: income tax) and the 14th Amendment (re: black citizenship, answering the Court directly) The pro-life movement's 50-year strategy to overturn Roe v. Wade Levin on the difficulty of simply being in the political minority, and why the system tries to make everyone a winner sometimes Originalism began as a limit on judicial power and judges' preferences Legal originalism looks for original public meaning, not the drafters' intent Parallel to biblical interpretation, where faithful readers reach wildly different conclusions The challenge of interpreting and applying the Constitution to matters of freedom and democracy today With Congress mostly absent, the Court is now deciding questions of executive power the Federalist Papers were written about Justices Kavanaugh and Gorsuch: Same age, same hometown, same high school history teacher, agreed only 52% of the time this term Trump v. Slaughter ends the independent agency: the Court overturned Humphrey's Executor, and the president can now fire FTC-style commissioners at will 2026 Court rulings also told the president no: on tariffs, on the National Guard in Illinois without the governor's consent, and on birthright citizenship Levin's rule of thumb: Pre-Trump conservative arguments win at this Court, Trumpy arguments lose Yuval Levin: Executive power peaked about a year ago and is now receding. Louisiana v. Callais guts Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act by requiring proof of racial intent A legal bind: Black voters vote Democratic by 90% in the South, so a racist map and a purely partisan map look identical Levin defends the ruling as law and grieves it as outcome—several Black-held Southern seats will likely be redistricted away Why he opposes reauthorizing the VRA with race-based set-aside districts, and where he thinks change should come from instead Software now lets parties gerrymander voter by voter—in New England, Trump won 35% and Republicans hold zero House seats The deceptions of the human heart Does constitutional structure just launder self-interest? The system's deepest failures have always clustered around race Gratitude for the Constitution in America's 250th year #SupremeCourt #Constitution #VotingRights #Originalism #ExecutivePower #FaithAndPolitics #YuvalLevin #Conversing Production Credits Conversing is produced and distributed in partnership with Comment Magazine and Fuller Seminary.

In Trump v. Slaughter, the Supreme Court held 6-3 that the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) statutory for-cause removal protection violates the separation of powers, overruling Humphrey's Executor. The Court reasoned that subordinates who exercise the President’s power are subject to removal by him. Thus, because the FTC exercises executive power, its Commissioners must be removable by the President at will.Yet in Trump v. Cook, the Court, 5-4, denied the government’s request to stay an injunction blocking the removal of Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook. The Court held that a president’s asserted “for cause” statutory basis for removing a Federal Reserve governor is judicially reviewable and that Cook was entitled to notice and an opportunity to respond before removal. Writing for the Court, Chief Justice Roberts reasoned that the statute was enacted against the backdrop of the common law, and that any definition of “cause” in this context must reflect the Federal Reserve’s unique historical status and role.Join us for a webinar breaking down both decisions, the separate opinions, and what they may mean for presidential removal power, independent agencies, the Federal Reserve, and the future of the administrative state.Featuring:Erin M. Hawley, Supreme Court & Appellate Litigation Chair, Lex Politica; Of Counsel, Alliance Defending FreedomAdam White, Laurence H. Silberman Chair in Constitutional Governance and Senior Fellow, American Enterprise Institute; Co-Director, Antonin Scalia Law School’s C. Boyden Gray Center for the Study of the Administrative State

Adam White hosts Chief Judge Susan G. Braden (Ret.) to discuss the Supreme Court's decision in Trump v. Slaughter, which held the Federal Trade Commission's statutory independence unconstitutional and explicitly overruled Humphrey's Executor. Braden argues the ruling will ripple across administrative law by treating agencies with authority to file lawsuits on behalf of the United States as executive agencies subject to presidential control, and by limiting “independent” agencies to advisory roles.Sign up for email updates from the Gray Center hereJudge Braden's paper on the future of the FTCAdam White's analysis of Slaughter and Cook in SCOTUSblog

www.marktreichel.comhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/mark-treichel/In this episode of With Flying Colors, host Mark Treichel welcomes back David Reed of Reed & Jolly, PLLC — a longtime credit union attorney, former general counsel, and self-described “recovering supervisory committee member” who served a decade on a supervisory committee, including six or seven years as chair. David reached out after listening to Mark's earlier coverage of the Jackson Area Federal Credit Union case, just as he was kicking off a two-day national supervisory committee school, and the timing made for a rich conversation.The heart of the discussion is fraud prevention through the lens of the supervisory committee. Using the Jackson Area allegations as a teaching tool — and stressing repeatedly that everything is alleged, drawn from NCUA's amended lawsuit — David walks through why trust is not an internal control, why insider accounts are the single greatest fraud risk at smaller credit unions, and why occasional reviews of senior executives' own accounts (even just by volume) should be routine and done independently. He and Mark unpack the “clipboard audit” problem, the limits of pop teller audits, and the difference between a full CPA opinion audit, agreed-upon procedures, and a supervisory committee doing the work itself.David makes a direct case that the $500 million CPA opinion-audit threshold is outdated — arguing it should drop to $250 million — because technology has erased the product-and-service gap between small and large credit unions while leaving the same fraud exposure. He notes that many of his sub-$500 million clients already choose to get CPA audits because they add accountability and assurance, and that scope can be added to any audit like a cafeteria plan, including a targeted review of senior-executive and insider accounts.The conversation then broadens. On the NCUA board, David explores the implications of changes to Humphrey's Executor — the prospect of removable board members, a possible “clean sweep” every administration, the chilling effect on recruiting qualified people to serve partial terms, and the resulting shift of power toward the permanent bureaucracy. On succession planning, he champions a “junior varsity governance” model with associate board and committee members, and reframes every incumbent nomination as a re-selection that deserves real evaluation. On collections, he urges credit unions to turn the same predictive analytics they use to find lending opportunities inward — reaching members before they fall two or three payments behind and stop answering the phone.Throughout, David returns to one theme: most credit unions already have the tools, processes, and even the results they need — the question is whether anyone is actually activating and reviewing them. Reach David Reed at david@reedandjolly.com.

A man who has feared death every day of his life wakes among strangers who cannot die — and finds that to them, he is something called an “atavus” — drawn by lot into what they have waited five hundred years to do.Look for this podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, iHeart Radio, Amazon Music, Pandora, TuneIn Radio, and other podcast apps. Get a list of free listening apps here: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/OTRCHAPTERS & TIME STAMPS (All Times Approximate)…00:00:00.000 = Show Open00:01:30.028 = CBS Radio Mystery Theater, “Wise Child” (March 24, 1978) ***WD00:45:57.515 = Arch Oboler's Plays, “Immortal Gentleman” (June 17, 1939) ***WD01:14:01.420 = Barry Craig, “Corpse On Delivery” (November 31, 1951)01:41:53.419 = BBC Radio 4/Radio 7, “Mortmain” (April 22, 1992)02:26:10.177 = Night Beat, “Lost Souls” (November 16, 1951) ***WD02:55:47.576 = Beyond The Green Door, “Mk. Arkady Bradian, Bolder and TNT” (1966)02:58:57.644 = Man In Black (The Black Book), “The Price of the Head” (February 02, 1952) ***WD03:13:42.390 = Blackstone The Magic Detective, “The Ghost That Wasn't” (November 28, 1948) ***WD03:26:24.838 = Box 13, “The Professor And The Puzzle” (January 09, 1949)03:52:53.344 = Calling All Cars, “The Human Bomb” (December 20, 1933) ***WD04:22:42.424 = Casey Crime Photographer, “A Tooth For a Tooth” (July 15, 1946) ***WD04:48:33.183 = Show Close(ADU) = Air Date Unknown(LQ) = Low Quality***WD = Remastered, edited, or cleaned up by Weird Darkness to make the episode more listenable. Audio may not be pristine, but it will be better than the original file which may have been unusable or more difficult to hear without editing.CUSTOM WEBPAGE: https://weirddarkness.com/WDRR0713Weird Darkness presents Retro Radio: Old Time Radio in the Dark, a collection of vintage broadcasts spanning psychological horror, hard-boiled detective work, ghost stories, and the strange corners where the two overlap.It opens with the CBS Radio Mystery Theater and E.G. Marshall's presentation of "Wise Child," written by Sam Dann and starring Ralph Bell. Joyce and Calvin Spurlock argue their way off a turnpike into a storm near a place called Kiowa Flats, sleep the night in their stalled car, and wake to find a newborn baby lying naked on a hillside — alive, unharmed, and abandoned. Joyce insists the child is a miracle and claims him as her own, inventing a birth story to secure a certificate. Calvin Junior never grows, not an ounce, not a fraction of an inch, while doctors find him perfectly healthy. Then a newspaper report reveals that the wilderness north of Kiowa Flats had been used as a secret dumping ground for atomic waste — and Calvin begins to sense something in the air, a force, a light, a power that lets him read the minds of his boss, his sister, and his customers, reshaping his entire life around whatever entered that child during the storm.From there, Arch Oboler's "Immortal Gentleman" arrives with Edmund O'Brien and Anne Shepherd, in which a man terrified of death his entire life screams aloud in a crowded auditorium and then explains why to the woman beside him. Sitting through a political speech, he found himself displaced into a future where science has abolished death entirely — a world of young people conditioned for fifty years, filled with all human knowledge, living two hundred, three hundred, five hundred years with nothing to do because "the old ones" never die and never surrender their positions. They call him an atavus, a throwback that surfaces once in every two thousand embryos. Twenty-four of them draw lots in a darkened room, and he is handed a black box and told to throw it at a woman who has lived five thousand years.Next, William Gargan stars as Barry Craig, confidential investigator, in "Corpse On Delivery." Bail bondsman Sam Solloway hires Craig to find Joey Florio, a racketeer who jumped a fifty-thousand-dollar bond, and offers ten percent to get him back. A merchant seaman named Stacy Crocker is stabbed four separate times outside Craig's office door before he can deliver whatever he came to sell. A blonde in ballerina sweaters frisks the corpse for its papers, a rifle shot grazes Craig's skull along West Street, and monogrammed pillows in a room at the Hotel Mohansic spell out the answer in two letters.The episode continues with John Metcalfe's "Mortmain," dramatized for radio by Rebecca Wilmshurst, set in the south of England before the war. Salome Clare marries Humphrey Ramsden Child, a man obsessed with moths, boats, and his dead mother Harriet, who vows at the altar that marriage binds souls beyond death throughout eternity. At an anniversary dinner deliberately set for thirteen guests aboard his houseboat, a woman is attacked by a swarm of moths in an upstairs bathroom, and a decomposing dog is dragged from the linen closet. Humphrey is committed as criminally insane, dresses in his mother's clothing, and promises from inside a straitjacket that death shall not part them. After his death, Salome marries John Temple — and on their honeymoon, a rotting pink boat begins rising out of the water behind them.Frank Lovejoy follows as Randy Stone in "Lost Souls," walking South State Street on Chicago's Skid Row, where a woman named Ruth Martin has spent eight hundred dollars buying steaks, clean sheets, and champagne for every derelict on the block. She refuses to answer a ringing telephone. Her purse holds a hotel key and a brand-new loaded .32. Twenty years earlier, watching police drag a screaming thirty-year-old woman into a wagon, Ruth made her friend Vivian Clark promise to kill her if she ever turned out the same way. Vivian Clark died at eleven years old — and every night for three weeks, the phone has rung wherever Ruth runs, from St. Louis to Kansas City to Duluth to Chicago.Basil Rathbone then delivers a short piece from Beyond the Green Door about a magician turned bank robber who kills two guards in Croesus, Maine, and hides in an abandoned granite quarry by disguising himself as a boulder — until a truck from the Eastern Maine Gravel Corporation pulls in to set the dynamite charges. The Man in Black, starring Paul Frees, presents John Russell's South Seas story "The Price of the Head," in which Christopher Pellet, a red-whiskered drunk with a bad name in the islands, murders a bartender at Fufuti and is saved by a Bougainville native named Karaki, who steals a canoe, sails eight hundred miles, nurses him through withdrawal, kills two white men in a cutter, gives him the last of the water, and combs his red hair and whiskers twice every day.Blackstone the Magic Detective investigates "The Ghost That Wasn't" at the Weldon mansion, where Mortimer Weldon's brother Clarence accepted a dare to spend the night in the tower room and was found in the courtyard with a broken neck behind a door locked from the inside — and where a grandfather clock that has always kept excellent time is suddenly two minutes slow. Alan Ladd stars as Dan Holliday in "The Professor And The Puzzle," a Box 13 adventure in which a college crystallographer named Martin Gardner is found shot through the heart with his own gun, his niece abruptly breaks her engagement to marry her uncle's lab assistant Ed Macklin, and Macklin turns up stabbed with his own knife. Registered mail receipts and a bank book under the name Samuel Stoner lead Holliday to an office building and a case of illicit diamond cutting.Calling All Cars reaches back into the records for "The Human Bomb," the true story of Carl Weiss, who walked into police headquarters wearing a sheepskin hood, green goggles, and a soldier's campaign hat, carrying a blood-red box packed with sixty-six sticks of dynamite and holding a spring-loaded trigger that would fire the moment he let go. He demanded to see Paul Shoup, president of the Pacific Electric Railway, and threatened to level the building unless the railroad workers got a raise. Two hundred and sixty prisoners were evacuated by streetcar while Chief Sebastian stalled him, and Officer Sam Brown eventually thrust his bare hand through the glass top of the box to smother the lit fuse.The episode closes with Staats Cotsworth as Casey, Crime Photographer, in "A Tooth For a Tooth" by Charles Holden. Rewrite man Henry Brower confesses a premonition of his own death and admits that a man named Renat — no licensed dentist, but a self-described research scientist on River Road — filled his teeth for free to test a new metal. Brower vanishes that night, and Lieutenant Logan writes him off as a debtor who skipped town. Casey recognizes the shape of a Colorado cattleman's case from 1931, and a bartender's habit of spelling words backward hands him the name he needs.

This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Editor in Chief and co-host emeritus Benjamin Wittes and Senior Editors Anna Bower and Michael Feinberg to talk through the latest in national security news, including:“Humphrey's Executioner.” On June 29, the Supreme Court closed out its term with a trio of decisions on the president's power to fire officials at supposedly independent agencies. In Trump v. Slaughter, a 6–3 majority upheld Trump's firing of FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter and overruled the 90-year-old precedent Humphrey's Executor, handing the president at-will removal power over roughly two dozen multimember agencies. The same day, in Trump v. Cook, the Court refused 5–4 to let Trump remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, carving out a special exemption for the central bank. And a day later, in Blanche v. Perlmutter, the justices declined to let Trump oust Register of Copyrights Shira Perlmutter, whose office sits within the legislative branch. Taken together, what do these cases tell us about the unitary executive and the future of agency independence?“For Your Lies Only.” The Office of the Director of National Intelligence is in freefall. Since Bill Pulte—a housing-finance official with no intelligence background—took over as acting DNI on June 19, he has demanded a roster of every employee, fired the head of the office that oversees the President's Daily Brief, and all but liquidated the National Intelligence Council. The fight over his appointment has already cost the government its Section 702 surveillance authority, which lawmakers let lapse rather than leave in his hands, and Trump abruptly canceled the confirmation hearing for his own permanent nominee, Jay Clayton, to keep the “less shackled” Pulte in place. How did the nation's top intelligence coordinator get here—and how much damage can a politicized ODNI actually do?“Fixer Upper.” In one of the stranger turns of the Trump era, Michael Cohen—the former “fixer” whose testimony helped convict Trump of 34 felonies—says he and the president have reconciled. Cohen, who once vowed to flee the country if Trump won, said that the ice between them “didn't just melt, it broke,” and he is now taking a weekend slot on a conservative station with what he says was Trump's “glowing recommendation.” The thaw arrives as Trump's appeal of his New York conviction and related civil fraud judgment grind forward—and after Cohen publicly claimed he felt “pressured and coerced” to testify. What might Cohen's turn mean for that pending appeal?In object lessons, everyone is in a unifying mood. Ben demonstrates how RAGtime, his co-creation with AI overlord Claude to develop and analyze datasets, can find common cause between this week's co-hosts. Mike is enthusiastic about the new Criterion Collection bringing together all of Stanley Kubrick's works. Scott is reaching for perhaps humanity's greatest unifier—a certain beverage that can be enjoyed across political persuasions and coasts alike. And Anna is bringing us all to the world of personal essays with Jo Ann Beard's “The Fourth State of Matter.” To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Live from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg Center in Washington, D.C., Sarah Isgur and David French review the OT25 term with Akhil Amar, professor of law and political science at Yale University, and David Lat, author of Original Jurisdiction. The four break down the most consequential cases of the past term—from the tariffs case to Humphrey's Executor, birthright citizenship, and what it all means for President Trump's relationship with the court. The Agenda: –Thank you to the ACLU for sponsoring our SCOTUSblog Summit at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg Center –Getting deep into trucking Twitter –How the culture war is shifting toward separation-of-powers fights –Counting jelly beans and winning heifers –The demise of Humphrey's Executor in Slaughter –Did Trump win or lose this term? –What even makes a “big” case? –Previewing OT26 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Editor in Chief and co-host emeritus Benjamin Wittes and Senior Editors Anna Bower and Michael Feinberg to talk through the latest in national security news, including:“Humphrey's Executioner.” On June 29, the Supreme Court closed out its term with a trio of decisions on the president's power to fire officials at supposedly independent agencies. In Trump v. Slaughter, a 6–3 majority upheld Trump's firing of FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter and overruled the 90-year-old precedent Humphrey's Executor, handing the president at-will removal power over roughly two dozen multimember agencies. The same day, in Trump v. Cook, the Court refused 5–4 to let Trump remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, carving out a special exemption for the central bank. And a day later, in Blanche v. Perlmutter, the justices declined to let Trump oust Register of Copyrights Shira Perlmutter, whose office sits within the legislative branch. Taken together, what do these cases tell us about the unitary executive and the future of agency independence?“For Your Lies Only.” The Office of the Director of National Intelligence is in freefall. Since Bill Pulte—a housing-finance official with no intelligence background—took over as acting DNI on June 19, he has demanded a roster of every employee, fired the head of the office that oversees the President's Daily Brief, and all but liquidated the National Intelligence Council. The fight over his appointment has already cost the government its Section 702 surveillance authority, which lawmakers let lapse rather than leave in his hands, and Trump abruptly canceled the confirmation hearing for his own permanent nominee, Jay Clayton, to keep the “less shackled” Pulte in place. How did the nation's top intelligence coordinator get here—and how much damage can a politicized ODNI actually do?“Fixer Upper.” In one of the stranger turns of the Trump era, Michael Cohen—the former “fixer” whose testimony helped convict Trump of 34 felonies—says he and the president have reconciled. Cohen, who once vowed to flee the country if Trump won, said that the ice between them “didn't just melt, it broke,” and he is now taking a weekend slot on a conservative station with what he says was Trump's “glowing recommendation.” The thaw arrives as Trump's appeal of his New York conviction and related civil fraud judgment grind forward—and after Cohen publicly claimed he felt “pressured and coerced” to testify. What might Cohen's turn mean for that pending appeal?In object lessons, everyone is in a unifying mood. Ben demonstrates how RAGtime, his co-creation with AI overlord Claude to develop and analyze datasets, can find common cause between this week's co-hosts. Mike is enthusiastic about the new Criterion Collection bringing together all of Stanley Kubrick's works. Scott is reaching for perhaps humanity's greatest unifier—a certain beverage that can be enjoyed across political persuasions and coasts alike. And Anna is bringing us all to the world of personal essays with Jo Ann Beard's “The Fourth State of Matter.” To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.serioustrouble.showHumphrey's Executor, which has been obviously dead for some time, is now officially overturned. Except! The Federal Reserve is special and unique and in a historical tradition. Also this week: John Bolton has pleaded guilty to mishandling national defense information and might even get jail time. In Florida, federal prosecutors mistakenly disclosed Jack Smith's report on the documents investigation to Carmen Mercedes Lineberger, as part of their prosecution of Lineberger for stealing a copy of the report (which she labeled as a “bundt cake recipe,” oops).For paying subscribers: In Chicago, US Attorney Andrew Boutros is in more trouble. And in Minnesota, more subpoenas have been quashed as politically motivated. Alleged pipe bomber Brian Cole hasn't been pardoned. Todd Blanche doesn't want to release more Epstein documents. A prosecution relating to Trump's reflecting pool is likely to face problems. Florida's “Stop WOKE Act” has been thrown out. And the ACLU of Maine wants the Secret Service to let the “Cats on a Couch” lady troll JD Vance in person.Upgrade your subscription now at serioustrouble.show.

the for-cause removal protections for Federal Reserve governors. The report reviews how federal law, including 12 U.S.C. 242, limits presidential removal of governors to for-cause grounds and outlines implications for monetary policy and supervision. It situates the dispute within Supreme Court precedents such as Humphrey's Executor, Free Enterprise Fund, Seila Law, and Collins v Yellen. Possible outcomes could influence leadership turnover expectations, Treasury yields, and corporate credit spreads. The analysis also highlights potential effects on bank capital and liquidity rulemakings and on corporate borrowing and hedging strategies. Businesses are advised to plan for a wider range of interest rate paths and monitor developments from the Board of Governors and the courts.Learn more on this news by visiting us at: https://greyjournal.net/news/ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Well, that was quite a finish for this year's Supreme Court term, which, as usual, released the most controversial and consequential cases on the very last day of its sitting. This wrap-up episode—the first of a double-episode package for Jul4 4 since we missed last week's regular episode—dwells a lot on the birthright citizenship case, with sharp disagreements among the 3WHH bartenders, but from there we move on to ponder the ambiguity of the "Humphrey's Straddle," and the significance of the ruling striking down one of the key pillars of government regulation of campaign financing—the so-called "coordination" rule. We close out this first of our double-header with a celebration of America's new heroine, Sophie Cunningham, who is making is forget all about Sydney Sweeney.

Rog, Rory Smith, and Humphrey Ker go LIVE after the final whistle to discuss the United States' impressive win over Bosnia & Herzegovina, including Folarin Balogun's hot start and controversial red card, as well as Malik Tillman's majestic set piece goal. Rog, Rory, and Humphrey breakdown the grit shown by this squad, how it all stems from Mauricio Pochettino, and why this US team matches up favorably against Belgium in the Round of 16. Plus, Harry Kane's special performance to lead England over DR Congo, and Belgium's incredible comeback over Senegal.Get your Go Go USA gear for the Round of 16: https://mibcourage.co/3QwEaHVCheck out our “Why Not Us” and "Coachy Poachy" Cup Tees here: https://mibcourage.co/4gbrxfISubscribe to the Men in Blazers newsletter for tomorrow morning's discount on Coach Poch's iconic Hugo Boss overshirt: https://mibcourage.co/4eFiQZVJoin our Twitch Watchalong tomorrow, July 2, for the Spain-Austria match: https://mibcourage.co/4eFX5t5See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

OpusClip: Start clipping at https://opus.pro/ich SAN: No agenda - just the facts. Get started at https://san.com/ich to download the App AMP: Check it out at https://amp.ai and use code ICED for 10% OFF Your order Incogni: Take your personal data back with Incogni! Use code ICED at the link below and get 60% off an annual plan: https://incogni.com/iced FanDuel: Every Goal Matters! Visit https://fanduel.com to get started Subscribe to  @humphrey  Humphrey Yang Here! *

✅ Victories 1. Expansion of Presidential Power Case: Trump v. Slaughter Outcome: The Court overturned Humphrey’s Executor (a long-standing precedent). Meaning: The President now has broader authority to fire officials in independent agencies (like the FTC). Seen as strengthening Article II executive power. A related case (Trump v. Cook) ruled the opposite for the Federal Reserve, limiting presidential removal power there. This creates a partial exception, showing the Court did not fully embrace unlimited executive control. 2. Transgender Athletes in Women’s Sports Case: West Virginia v. BPJ Outcome: States can restrict participation in women’s sports based on biological sex. Impact: Laws in 27 states are upheld. The Court ruled such restrictions do not violate the Equal Protection Clause or federal law. 3. Campaign Finance / Free Speech Case: NRSC v. FEC Outcome: Political parties can spend unlimited money in coordination with candidates. Impact: Expands political speech rights. Removes restrictions on party-candidate coordination. ❌ Losses 1. Birthright Citizenship Key points: The Court affirmed that such a major change cannot be done via executive action. Leaves open: Constitutional amendment Possible congressional legislation 2. Mail-in Ballots / Election Law Case: Watson v. RNC Outcome: States may count ballots received after Election Day if postmarked on time. Impact: Election rules remain state-controlled. Some states can allow extended ballot receipt windows. Please Hit Subscribe to this podcast Right Now. Also Please Subscribe to the 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson and The Ben Ferguson Show Podcast Wherever You get You're Podcasts. And don't forget to follow the show on Social Media so you never miss a moment! Thanks for Listening YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruz/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/verdictwithtedcruz X: https://x.com/tedcruz X: https://x.com/benfergusonshowYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruzSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The big opinions are coming fast and furious as the Term ends. This episode, we take on two related cases from the penultimate opinion drop day: Trump v. Slaughter, which overrules Humphrey's Executor and clears away for-cause protection for the independent agencies, alongside its interim-docket companion Trump v. Cook, where the very same logic somehow spares the Federal Reserve. The big question: if the President can fire an FTC commissioner at will, what actually makes the Fed different — is "history" doing the work, or is the Court just saving the bond markets? Along the way: Heidegger's "always already," whether the metaphor of a living tree is consistent with originalism, a Goldilocks definition of "cause," the Chief leaning on his own unworkable precedents, the Ex parte Young mystery that keeps escaping the Court's grasp, and the first appearance of "the interim docket" in the U.S. Reports.Highlights[00:00:18] The penultimate opinion day — four down, four to go[00:00:50] The last-day pileup, and the McCain-Feingold campaign-finance case still pending[00:03:25] A confession: staircase wit, and the metaphor Will wishes he'd used[00:04:27] The living tree as an originalist — and the petrified-tree rejoinder[00:06:01] The new custom-cover workflow, and what Claude still isn't allowed to write[00:07:00] The day's four opinions: Cook, Slaughter, Chatrie, and Watson v. RNC[00:09:50] Is the Court strategic about opinion timing? A walk back through OT21's last days[00:13:55] Slaughter before Cook: the general rule before the exception[00:15:08] "Humphrey's Executor has always already been overruled" — by way of continental philosophy[00:17:36] Slaughter: the question, Humphrey's Executor, and the road from Morrison v. Olson through Seila Law[00:22:12] Why presidents mostly haven't tested removal — and whether this shifts the equilibrium[00:25:29] Walking the opinion: Roberts for the Court, the Thomas non-join, a Sotomayor (not Kagan) dissent[00:27:30] The Decision of 1789, the history fight, and the "good arguments on both sides" that made Will a "witless hack"[00:33:19] Part III-B's reserved questions and the Gorsuch concurrence's non-delegation wish list[00:43:06] Cook: procedurally on the interim docket, and why it comes out the other way[00:46:00] The Chief's history tour — the Bank of North America, Hamilton, and an accomplished yachtsman[00:49:00] The Fed as the "third bank"; Bamzai & Nielson and the monetary-vs-regulatory problem[00:50:25] The chain of moves: reviewability, a Goldilocks "cause," and the equity remedy[00:53:11] Footnote 2 and the Ex parte Young mystery — Armstrong, CASA, and Bivens[00:58:41] Process not received: a Truth Social post isn't enough, and what Cook gets next[01:00:54] "The interim docket" enters the U.S. Reports[01:01:52] The separate writings: Kavanaugh (save the economy), Jackson (equities), Thomas's solo dissent[01:04:45] Alito-Gorsuch and Barrett: hard questions, and skepticism of a carve-out defended "for secret reasons"[01:11:26] Sign-off: if there's a long delay before the next episode, it's because we've lost removal protectionRelevant linksCasesTrump v. Slaughter — slip opinion · SCOTUSblog analysisTrump v. Cook — slip opinion · SCOTUSblog analysisChatrie v. United States — slip opinion · SCOTUSblog analysisWatson v. Republican National Committee — slip opinion · SCOTUSblog analysisCommentary & articlesAditya Bamzai & Aaron L. Nielson, "Article II and the Federal Reserve" — the leading qualified defense of Fed independence (Cornell L. Rev.)Samuel L. Bray, "Remedies in the Officer Removal Cases" — relied on by the Cook majority on the equity-remedy question (Journal of Legal Analysis); draft/announcement on the Divided Argument blogWilliam Baude, "How To Save The Federal Reserve" — Will's prior take on preserving Fed independence under the removal cases

Marc Cox opens Hour 3 teasing the Supreme Court decision that will reshape American government for a generation before bringing in Heritage Foundation Executive VP Derek Morgan to break it all down. The overturning of Humphrey's Executor ends 90 years of congressional insulation for unelected deep state bureaucrats — Derek drops the receipts showing over 90% of USAID employees donated to Democrats and 75% of high-paid DC government workers said they would defy a lawful presidential order. Derek and Marc also torch the birthright citizenship ruling together, with Derek citing Justice Alito's historic rebuke and calling Justice Thomas's 93-page dissent a monument to principled originalism. On court packing, it is a naked power grab. On John Roberts, he is too worried about the DC cocktail circuit. Then Dr. David Yablonsky, Medical Director of Victory Men's Health, joins in studio for Men's Health Month and publicly shames Marc Cox on air for skipping his follow-up blood work — before laying out what he calls a genuine epidemic of ground-down American men suffering from fatigue, low testosterone, weight gain, and sexual dysfunction while the Wild West of unregulated clinics peddles medications without proper screening or monitoring. Victory Men's Health's fifth flagship location in Glen Carbon is weeks from opening. Kim on a Whim closes the hour with a flag freedom showdown — UK citizens getting fined thousands for flying their flag wrong while Marc Cox replaces his American flag with a Trump flag just to spite his HOA Karen neighbor, and the duo walks through proper American flag code ahead of July 4th. Hour 3 Hashtags: #MarcCoxMorningShow #Hour3 #DerekMorgan #HeritageFoundation #HumphreysExecutor #DeepState #TrumpWins #JusticeAlito #JusticeThomas #BirthrightCitizenship #DrDavidYablonsky #VictoryMensHealth #MensHealth #MedicalWeightLoss #KimOnAWhim #AmericanFlag #July4th #PatriotismMatters #TrumpFlag #ConservativeMissouri #StLouis Hour 3 Guest List: Derek Morgan — Heritage Foundation Executive VP breaking down Humphrey's Executor gutting the deep state and the birthright citizenship dissents of Justices Alito and Thomas Dr. David Yablonsky — Victory Men's Health Medical Director on the male health epidemic, medical weight loss protocols, and the Wild West of unregulated men's clinics

Heritage Foundation Executive VP Derek Morgan joins Marc Cox to break down the Supreme Court decision that could reshape American government for a generation — and almost nobody is covering it. The overturning of Humphrey's Executor ends 90 years of congressional protection for the unelected bureaucrats embedded in federal agencies, and Derek has the receipts: over 90% of USAID employees donated to Democrats, and 75% of high-earning DC government workers told Rasmussen they would flat-out disobey a lawful presidential order they disagreed with. That is the deep state — and this ruling gives Trump the legal authority to start cleaning it out. Derek and Marc also tear into the birthright citizenship ruling, with Derek citing Justice Alito's extraordinary rebuke that the court has made one of the most serious mistakes in its history, and calling Justice Thomas's 93-page dissent — written in chapters — a monument to principled originalism. On court packing, Derek calls it a naked power grab. On John Roberts, he says the Chief Justice is too worried about what the DC cocktail circuit thinks. And on whether Trump could swap Roberts for Alito as Chief Justice — turns out he can't, but Marc Cox says maybe it's worth testing the waters anyway. Hashtags: #MarcCoxMorningShow #DerekMorgan #HeritageFoundation #HumphreysExecutor #DeepState #SCOTUS #TrumpWins #FireAtWill #JusticeAlito #JusticeThomas #BirthrightCitizenship #14thAmendment #CourtPacking #JohnRoberts #TemporaryProtectiveStatus #DailySignal #ConservativeMissouri #StLouis #OriginalistJudges #DrainTheSwamp

The Supreme Court has been making waves with its recent decisions, and this episode of the Carl Jackson Show is a must-listen for anyone interested in staying informed about the latest developments. Joining Carl Jackson in the studio is Zach Smith, a constitutional attorney from the Heritage Foundation, who breaks down the key takeaways from the Supreme Court's recent rulings. This episode covers a range of topics, from the contentious issue of birthright citizenship to the importance of executive authority and the Second Amendment. The Supreme Court's decisions have significant implications for the future of American politics and law, and Zach Smith provides expert analysis and insight into what these rulings mean for the country. From the Court's surprising decision on birthright citizenship to the restoration of executive authority, this episode is a comprehensive guide to the latest Supreme Court news. Zach Smith shares his expertise on the Supreme Court's recent decisions, including the birthright citizenship case, the election integrity case, and the Humphrey's Executor case. He also discusses the implications of these rulings for the future of American politics and the role of the executive branch in government. With his clear and concise explanations, Zach Smith makes complex legal concepts accessible to listeners and provides a deeper understanding of the issues at play. If you're interested in staying informed about the latest Supreme Court news and its impact on American politics, this episode is a must-listen. Join Carl Jackson and Zach Smith as they discuss the key takeaways from the Supreme Court's recent decisions and what they mean for the future of the country. Follow Carl Jackson:Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/carljacksonradioX/Twitter: https://twitter.com/carljacksonshowInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/thecarljacksonshowWebsite: http://www.TheCarlJacksonShow.comStore: https://CarlJacksonStore.comSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Donate (no account necessary) | Subscribe (account required) Bryan's Op Ed on Dem Communists (Click Here) Join Bryan Dean Wright, former CIA Operations Officer, as he covers today's top stories shaping America and the world. In this episode of The Wright Report, Bryan breaks down a major Supreme Court ruling giving Presidents broad authority to fire agency appointees, plus a separate ruling on the Federal Reserve and a surprising decision allowing late-arriving mail-in ballots to be counted. Bryan also tackles a growing panic on Wall Street as New York's wealthy realize they have no real plan to stop the rise of Communist Democrats in Gotham, and he gives his blunt take on why it is too late to reverse the trend. From there, Bryan covers new developments in Iran, including a Pentagon database failure now blamed for the deadly strike on a girls school during Operation Epic Fury, and a vigilante known as "Mexican Batman" taking justice into his own hands against cartel-linked criminals. Plus, the US deepens its Pacific strategy with new underwater drones for the Philippines and a major deal pulling Vanuatu back from China's orbit, China's AI models close the gap with American systems, and Ford rehires veteran engineers after learning AI cannot fully replace human judgment. "And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." - John 8:32   Keywords: Bryan Dean Wright, The Wright Report, Supreme Court ruling, Humphrey's Executor, Federal Reserve, Lisa Cook, mail-in ballots, Amy Coney Barrett, John Roberts, SAVE America Act, Zohran Mamdani, Communist Democrats, NYC Wall Street panic, Daria-liza Avila Chevalier, Dan Goldman, Scott Wiener, Iran nuclear talks, Doha Qatar, Strait of Hormuz, Operation Epic Fury girls school strike, Pentagon targeting failure, Mexican Batman, vigilante justice, Cartel corruption, Sheinbaum, Battle for the Pacific, Philippines underwater drones, Vanuatu China debt trap, Australia Vanuatu deal, China AI Z Dot, Anthropic Mythos, Ford rehiring engineers, AI Revolution

Today's Headlines: Clarence Thomas showed up to Congress yesterday and was all sus about why, though Politico reported Republicans say he was there for the special members-only doctor's office. The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that mail ballots postmarked by election day can be counted even if they arrive up to five days later — not what Trump wanted, who went off on the justices despite his own voters benefiting equally — and separately declined to hear his appeal of the E. Jean Carroll verdict, meaning he has to pay her $5 million. The Court also overturned the 91-year-old Humphrey's Executor precedent, allowing Trump to fire FTC commissioners without cause and setting a standard that applies to basically every federal regulator except the Federal Reserve Board, meaning he still can't fire Fed Governor Lisa Cook like he wanted. More major rulings are expected this week on transgender athletes in sports, campaign finance, and birthright citizenship, which the administration is determined to end. In other news, Airbnb cofounder Joe Gebbia, now running Trump's "National Design Studio" alongside DOGE veterans, has reportedly been quietly rebuilding government websites — including passport applications, TrumpRX, and a White House-controlled mirror of vote.gov — with tracking code that records and replays every click, scroll, and keystroke and sends the data somewhere off the public internet, so that's normal. Meanwhile, a Wall Street Journal investigation found that over 1,000 viral Polymarket betting videos showing people winning big were entirely staged — Polymarket paid influencers to post fake wins using a password-protected dupe website that mimicked real trades, then paid clippers to spread the videos, racking up 140 million views of completely fabricated winnings. And finally, Comcast announced it's spinning off NBCUniversal — including Bravo, SNL, Law & Order, the theme parks, and Peacock — to focus on broadband, and investors loved it, sending shares up over 4% after a rough year. Resources/Articles mentioned:  The Daily Beast: Clarence Thomas, 78, Busted on Mystery Medical Visit SCOTUS Blog: Justices uphold state law allowing for late-arriving mail-in ballots The Hill: Supreme Court won't hear Trump's bid to overturn Carroll sexual abuse verdict  SCOTUS Blog: Supreme Court allows Trump to fire FTC commissioner and overturns major restraint on presidential power | SCOTUSblog SCRIPPS News: Eight cases await Supreme Court ruling as major opinion day arrives Monday The Guardian: ‘It's dangerous and it's going to erode trust': redesign of US government websites stokes surveillance fears | Trump administration WSJ: They Looked Like They Were Getting Rich on Polymarket—but None of It Was Real WSJ: Comcast Plans Company Split as Competition Escalates Subscribe to the Betches News Room and join the Morning Announcements group chat. Go to: betchesnews.substack.com Morning Announcements is produced by Sami Sage and edited by Grace Hernandez-Johnson Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today was not “Trump becomes king.” That's too simple, too tidy, and frankly too flattering to the man currently dry-humping a football he doesn't realize is on a leash.On this episode of We Saw the Devil, Robin breaks down the Supreme Court's decision day and the story most of the coverage is already getting wrong: Trump did gain power, yes. But the Court gained something bigger. It kept the keys.The centerpiece is Trump v. Slaughter, where the Supreme Court torched a ninety-one-year-old rule protecting independent agency officials from being fired just because the president finds them annoying, inconvenient, or insufficiently obedient. That decision did not just weaken the FTC. It cracked open the entire independent-agency structure and dragged the unitary executive theory out of the Federalist Society basement and into the law of the land.But the real twist is this: the Court did not simply hand Trump a crown. It handed him a lease.From Trump v. Cook, where the Court blocked his attempted firing of Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook for now, to the mail-in ballot ruling, to E. Jean Carroll's surviving verdict, to the Medicaid work requirement lawsuit, the pattern is the same. The Court is not retreating. It is positioning itself as the final landlord of the executive branch. Trump got more power. The Court kept control.This episode covers:The Supreme Court's decision in Trump v. SlaughterThe end of the ninety-one-year protection from Humphrey's ExecutorWhy independent agencies like the FTC, FCC, SEC, and NLRB are now in dangerThe unitary executive theory and how a once-fringe legal idea became majority doctrineWhy Trump v. Cook is not the clean “Trump loss” people want it to beHow the Court protected Lisa Cook while keeping the door open for future Fed fightsThe mail-in ballot ruling and why the win still comes with a warning labelE. Jean Carroll's verdict surviving Trump's latest appealThe new Medicaid work requirement fight and how bureaucracy becomes a weaponSotomayor's dissent, “chaos will follow,” and the undefined exceptions that give the Court even more powerWhat is still coming tomorrow: birthright citizenship, transgender athlete bans, and campaign financeBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/we-saw-the-devil-unfiltered-political-analysis--4433638/support.Website: http://www.wesawthedevil.comPatreon: http://www.patreon.com/wesawthedevilRobin's Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/robin_wstdTwitter: http://www.twitter.com/WeSawtheDevilInstagram: http://www.instagram.com/wesawthedevilpodcast.TikTok: tiktok.com/@wesawthedevilpolitics

The Supreme Court has been making waves with its recent decisions, and this episode of the Carl Jackson Show is a must-listen for anyone interested in staying informed about the latest developments. Joining Carl Jackson in the studio is Zach Smith, a constitutional attorney from the Heritage Foundation, who breaks down the key takeaways from the Supreme Court's recent rulings. This episode covers a range of topics, from the contentious issue of birthright citizenship to the importance of executive authority and the Second Amendment. The Supreme Court's decisions have significant implications for the future of American politics and law, and Zach Smith provides expert analysis and insight into what these rulings mean for the country. From the Court's surprising decision on birthright citizenship to the restoration of executive authority, this episode is a comprehensive guide to the latest Supreme Court news. Zach Smith shares his expertise on the Supreme Court's recent decisions, including the birthright citizenship case, the election integrity case, and the Humphrey's Executor case. He also discusses the implications of these rulings for the future of American politics and the role of the executive branch in government. With his clear and concise explanations, Zach Smith makes complex legal concepts accessible to listeners and provides a deeper understanding of the issues at play. If you're interested in staying informed about the latest Supreme Court news and its impact on American politics, this episode is a must-listen. Join Carl Jackson and Zach Smith as they discuss the key takeaways from the Supreme Court's recent decisions and what they mean for the future of the country. Follow Carl Jackson:Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/carljacksonradioX/Twitter: https://twitter.com/carljacksonshowInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/thecarljacksonshowWebsite: http://www.TheCarlJacksonShow.comStore: https://CarlJacksonStore.comSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On the June 30, 2026 broadcast of The Tara Show, the opening segment broke down a massive, yet underreported, executive branch victory for Donald Trump at the Supreme Court. The hosts highlighted a major 6-3 ruling that overturned 91 years of legal precedent from the 1935 Humphrey's Executor case, effectively dismantling the unconstitutional wall that long protected independent federal agencies—like the FTC, SEC, and NLRB—from direct presidential authority. While the media focused heavily on Trump's concurrent losses regarding mail-in ballot deadlines and birthright citizenship challenges, the show emphasized that this monumental SCOTUS decision restores the founders' original intent by giving the president the power to fire rogue, weaponized bureaucrats at will.

During the second segment of Hour 3 on Tuesday, June 30, 2026, host Tara Servatius praised a monumental, yet largely underreported, 6-3 Supreme Court ruling that granted President Donald Trump the constitutional authority to fire a Federal Trade Commission (FTC) commissioner. Tara emphasized that the true impact of this decision extends far beyond a single agency, effectively dismantling the 1935 Humphrey's Executor v. United States precedent that had long legally shielded independent federal bureaucracies from direct presidential oversight. She argued that for nearly a century, these unelected agencies—such as the SEC, NLRB, and EEOC—had operated as unaccountable, totalitarian fiefdoms, weaponizing fake investigations and forcing banks to target conservatives without warrants. With this wall of protection gone, Tara celebrated that Trump can now systematically remove deep-state holdovers who are actively trying to block his agenda from within the executive branch, declaring the ruling a miraculous victory that stops a runaway bureaucratic dictatorship.

The end is nigh! Or, the end of this Supreme Court term is nigh, at least. On the second to last day of this term, the court's right wingers delivered a sweeping ruling that will reshape the federal government for years to come. In Trump v. Slaughter, the conservative supermajority voted 6-3 to allow the president to fire members of independent regulatory agencies—overturning Humphrey's Executor, a 91-year-old unanimous precedent—and handing Trump effective control over agencies that regulate consumer protection, nuclear energy, union activity, mine safety, and more. But the Roberts majority weren't quite ready to hand the nation's credit card (and their investment portfolios) over to the mad king, and so the Federal Reserve got a carve-out in a separate 5-4 ruling in Trump v. Cook. How did they reach these wildly different conclusions in such closely related cases? Justice Roberts offered a barely argued rationale, but who needs a rationale if your red lines are painted in a crimson of pure cynicism?The court also handed down a significant Fourth Amendment ruling on geofence warrants, with Justice Kagan writing for a 6-3 majority that such warrants constitute a "search" under the Fourth Amendment. And in Watson v. Republican National Committee, the court upheld state laws allowing mail-in ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted if they arrive shortly after. But the squeaker of a 5-4 majority was deeply alarming in a case that played to some of the justices' fox-brained ideas about election fraud. Justice Alito and his fellow dissenters appear to have signed onto the wholly unsupported view that Democrat wins are always suspect, and the only way to restore trust in voting is to restrict voting. As Rick Hasen writes for Slate, we won't be as lucky next time. The term wraps this week and Amicus is with you all the way for clear-eyed analysis of the final raft of decisions. Slate Plus members can also sign up for our special end-of-term conversation. Join Dahlia and Mark as they unpack this Supreme Court term with some of the smartest legal analysts in the business as part of our live online audience, July 10 at noon EDT. Slate Plus members will also have access to an exclusive Q&A with Dahlia and Mark. Submit your questions now to amicus@slate.comThis is part of Opinionpalooza, Slate's coverage of the major decisions from the Supreme Court. The best way to support our work is by joining Slate Plus. (If you are already a member, consider a donation or merch!)This episode is member-exclusive. Listen to it now by subscribing to Slate Plus. By joining, not only will you unlock weekly bonus episodes of Amicus—you'll also access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The end is nigh! Or, the end of this Supreme Court term is nigh, at least. On the second to last day of this term, the court's right wingers delivered a sweeping ruling that will reshape the federal government for years to come. In Trump v. Slaughter, the conservative supermajority voted 6-3 to allow the president to fire members of independent regulatory agencies—overturning Humphrey's Executor, a 91-year-old unanimous precedent—and handing Trump effective control over agencies that regulate consumer protection, nuclear energy, union activity, mine safety, and more. But the Roberts majority weren't quite ready to hand the nation's credit card (and their investment portfolios) over to the mad king, and so the Federal Reserve got a carve-out in a separate 5-4 ruling in Trump v. Cook. How did they reach these wildly different conclusions in such closely related cases? Justice Roberts offered a barely argued rationale, but who needs a rationale if your red lines are painted in a crimson of pure cynicism?The court also handed down a significant Fourth Amendment ruling on geofence warrants, with Justice Kagan writing for a 6-3 majority that such warrants constitute a "search" under the Fourth Amendment. And in Watson v. Republican National Committee, the court upheld state laws allowing mail-in ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted if they arrive shortly after. But the squeaker of a 5-4 majority was deeply alarming in a case that played to some of the justices' fox-brained ideas about election fraud. Justice Alito and his fellow dissenters appear to have signed onto the wholly unsupported view that Democrat wins are always suspect, and the only way to restore trust in voting is to restrict voting. As Rick Hasen writes for Slate, we won't be as lucky next time. The term wraps this week and Amicus is with you all the way for clear-eyed analysis of the final raft of decisions. Slate Plus members can also sign up for our special end-of-term conversation. Join Dahlia and Mark as they unpack this Supreme Court term with some of the smartest legal analysts in the business as part of our live online audience, July 10 at noon EDT. Slate Plus members will also have access to an exclusive Q&A with Dahlia and Mark. Submit your questions now to amicus@slate.comThis is part of Opinionpalooza, Slate's coverage of the major decisions from the Supreme Court. The best way to support our work is by joining Slate Plus. (If you are already a member, consider a donation or merch!)This episode is member-exclusive. Listen to it now by subscribing to Slate Plus. By joining, not only will you unlock weekly bonus episodes of Amicus—you'll also access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen.Need to set up your Slate Plus feed? If you subscribed through Slate.com, check out our FAQ at slate.com/podcastfaqs for easy instructions. Members subscribed via Apple Podcasts get automatic access—no setup required. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In part one of our Supreme Court decisions coverage, Charles C. W. Cooke, Richard Epstein, and John Yoo break down the decisions handed down today, beginning with the Court's treatment of presidential removal power in Trump v. Slaughter and Trump v. Cook (no relation) —the first apparently overruling Humphrey's Executor for ordinary agencies, the second preserving a major carveout for the Federal Reserve. They also debate Chatrie v. United States, a Fourth Amendment case involving law enforcement's use of geofencing warrants and cellphone location data, and close with Watson v. Republican National Committee, in which Justice Amy Coney Barrett held that states may count mail-in ballots received after Election Day unless Congress clearly says otherwise. Along the way, the hosts argue over the administrative state, judicial independence, election integrity, and whether the Roberts Court is as predictable—or as partisan—as its critics claim. Part two will be on Thursday, with a decision expected on (cue dramatic music)...birthright citizenship!

The end is nigh! Or, the end of this Supreme Court term is nigh, at least. On the second to last day of this term, the court's right wingers delivered a sweeping ruling that will reshape the federal government for years to come. In Trump v. Slaughter, the conservative supermajority voted 6-3 to allow the president to fire members of independent regulatory agencies—overturning Humphrey's Executor, a 91-year-old unanimous precedent—and handing Trump effective control over agencies that regulate consumer protection, nuclear energy, union activity, mine safety, and more. But the Roberts majority weren't quite ready to hand the nation's credit card (and their investment portfolios) over to the mad king, and so the Federal Reserve got a carve-out in a separate 5-4 ruling in Trump v. Cook. How did they reach these wildly different conclusions in such closely related cases? Justice Roberts offered a barely argued rationale, but who needs a rationale if your red lines are painted in a crimson of pure cynicism?The court also handed down a significant Fourth Amendment ruling on geofence warrants, with Justice Kagan writing for a 6-3 majority that such warrants constitute a "search" under the Fourth Amendment. And in Watson v. Republican National Committee, the court upheld state laws allowing mail-in ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted if they arrive shortly after. But the squeaker of a 5-4 majority was deeply alarming in a case that played to some of the justices' fox-brained ideas about election fraud. Justice Alito and his fellow dissenters appear to have signed onto the wholly unsupported view that Democrat wins are always suspect, and the only way to restore trust in voting is to restrict voting. As Rick Hasen writes for Slate, we won't be as lucky next time. The term wraps this week and Amicus is with you all the way for clear-eyed analysis of the final raft of decisions. Slate Plus members can also sign up for our special end-of-term conversation. Join Dahlia and Mark as they unpack this Supreme Court term with some of the smartest legal analysts in the business as part of our live online audience, July 10 at noon EDT. Slate Plus members will also have access to an exclusive Q&A with Dahlia and Mark. Submit your questions now to amicus@slate.comThis is part of Opinionpalooza, Slate's coverage of the major decisions from the Supreme Court. The best way to support our work is by joining Slate Plus. (If you are already a member, consider a donation or merch!)This episode is member-exclusive. Listen to it now by subscribing to Slate Plus. By joining, not only will you unlock weekly bonus episodes of Amicus—you'll also access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In part one of our Supreme Court decisions coverage, Charles C. W. Cooke, Richard Epstein, and John Yoo break down the decisions handed down today, beginning with the Court's treatment of presidential removal power in Trump v. Slaughter and Trump v. Cook (no relation) —the first apparently overruling Humphrey's Executor for ordinary agencies, the second preserving a major carveout for the Federal Reserve. They also debate Chatrie v. United States, a Fourth Amendment case involving law enforcement's use of geofencing warrants and cellphone location data, and close with Watson v. Republican National Committee, in which Justice Amy Coney Barrett held that states may count mail-in ballots received after Election Day unless Congress clearly says otherwise. Along the way, the hosts argue over the administrative state, judicial independence, election integrity, and whether the Roberts Court is as predictable—or as partisan—as its critics claim. Part two will be on Thursday, with a decision expected on (cue dramatic music)...birthright citizenship!

Joshua Brisco reacts to the absurd start to the NFL's annual Top 100 list before talking about everything else with Tucker Franklin. —

Stephen Serda is back to catch up on the latest with the Kansas City Chiefs and all the news across the NFL. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, Adam Torres interviews Humphrey Ho, President & Managing Partner of Helios & Partners. Humphrey shares his investment philosophy, discusses the importance of supporting founder-led consumer brands, and explains why Helios & Partners focuses on identifying businesses with the potential to become enduring brands across beauty, luxury, wellness, and consumer markets. Follow Adam on Instagram at https://www.instagram.com/askadamtorres/ for up to date information on book releases and tour schedule. Apply to be a guest on our podcast: https://missionmatters.lpages.co/podcastguest/ Visit our website: https://missionmatters.com/ More FREE content from Mission Matters here: https://linktr.ee/missionmattersmedia Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Humphrey the Pug has left his body, leaving his spirit with us. It is another beautiful demonstration of the cycle of life. Let us all acknowledge our part in that cycle. 

Dr. Rajesh Rao interviews Dr. Michael Marmor on his recent Ophthalmology Retina editorial, A New Visual Field for Hydroxychloroquine Screening, and discuss the performance of the Humphrey 24-2C visual field test for detecting parafoveal and pericentral hydroxychloroquine retinopathy. A New Visual Field for Hydroxychloroquine Screening. Marmor M.  Ophthalmology Retina, Volume 10, Issue 3, 221-222.  

In this episode, Billy Humphrey shares insights from over 20 years of leading 24-7 prayer and worship at Gate City Church in Atlanta. He and Matthew explore the impact of continuous prayer on regional Christianity, the evolution of prayer movements, and practical steps churches can take to deepen their prayer and worship practices.

In the early twentieth century, as variety shows flooded Canadian stages, new forms of blackface, inspired by modern forms of amusements, changed the theatre. In this era marked by progressive social reforms, the stage embodied the modern ethos of imitation, mimicry, and change. Staging Blackface in Canada: Public Amusements, Variety Shows, and Racial Acts in an Age of Imitation, 1898-1919 (Wilfrid Laurier Press, 2026) covers a moment when Canadians did not produce professional theatre, but they built amusement parks, wrote songs, and produced records. As the stage (drama), and its variants (burlesque, light opera) adapted elements from the new stages (amusement parks, social dance, and film), the modern culture popularized forms of blackface that impacted white, Anglo-Protestant, and English-speaking audiences, and drew theatrical criticism. This book explores a twenty-year period in Canada's history when there was no media regulation, and no mandate to promote Canadian culture. Through an examination of theatrical reviews, images, and textual records, Staging Blackface in Canada locates how the Canadian stage became a playground for ethnic jokes, racial caricature, and women's emancipation. It also locates some of the first Black musicals and operas to appear on Canadian stages. This episode also mentions a previous Additions to the Archive episode with assistant curator of New York City's Poster House museum, Es-pranza Humphrey, and her exhibition “Act Black: Posters From Black American Stage & Screen.” You can find Cheryl at her website, on Instagram, and on LinkedIn And check out her previous appearances on the Additions to the Archive podcast and Substack. Subscribe, like, follow, and rate Additions to the Archive with Sullivan Summer on Instagram, Substack, and wherever you get your podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

In the early twentieth century, as variety shows flooded Canadian stages, new forms of blackface, inspired by modern forms of amusements, changed the theatre. In this era marked by progressive social reforms, the stage embodied the modern ethos of imitation, mimicry, and change. Staging Blackface in Canada: Public Amusements, Variety Shows, and Racial Acts in an Age of Imitation, 1898-1919 (Wilfrid Laurier Press, 2026) covers a moment when Canadians did not produce professional theatre, but they built amusement parks, wrote songs, and produced records. As the stage (drama), and its variants (burlesque, light opera) adapted elements from the new stages (amusement parks, social dance, and film), the modern culture popularized forms of blackface that impacted white, Anglo-Protestant, and English-speaking audiences, and drew theatrical criticism. This book explores a twenty-year period in Canada's history when there was no media regulation, and no mandate to promote Canadian culture. Through an examination of theatrical reviews, images, and textual records, Staging Blackface in Canada locates how the Canadian stage became a playground for ethnic jokes, racial caricature, and women's emancipation. It also locates some of the first Black musicals and operas to appear on Canadian stages. This episode also mentions a previous Additions to the Archive episode with assistant curator of New York City's Poster House museum, Es-pranza Humphrey, and her exhibition “Act Black: Posters From Black American Stage & Screen.” You can find Cheryl at her website, on Instagram, and on LinkedIn And check out her previous appearances on the Additions to the Archive podcast and Substack. Subscribe, like, follow, and rate Additions to the Archive with Sullivan Summer on Instagram, Substack, and wherever you get your podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

In the early twentieth century, as variety shows flooded Canadian stages, new forms of blackface, inspired by modern forms of amusements, changed the theatre. In this era marked by progressive social reforms, the stage embodied the modern ethos of imitation, mimicry, and change. Staging Blackface in Canada: Public Amusements, Variety Shows, and Racial Acts in an Age of Imitation, 1898-1919 (Wilfrid Laurier Press, 2026) covers a moment when Canadians did not produce professional theatre, but they built amusement parks, wrote songs, and produced records. As the stage (drama), and its variants (burlesque, light opera) adapted elements from the new stages (amusement parks, social dance, and film), the modern culture popularized forms of blackface that impacted white, Anglo-Protestant, and English-speaking audiences, and drew theatrical criticism. This book explores a twenty-year period in Canada's history when there was no media regulation, and no mandate to promote Canadian culture. Through an examination of theatrical reviews, images, and textual records, Staging Blackface in Canada locates how the Canadian stage became a playground for ethnic jokes, racial caricature, and women's emancipation. It also locates some of the first Black musicals and operas to appear on Canadian stages. This episode also mentions a previous Additions to the Archive episode with assistant curator of New York City's Poster House museum, Es-pranza Humphrey, and her exhibition “Act Black: Posters From Black American Stage & Screen.” You can find Cheryl at her website, on Instagram, and on LinkedIn And check out her previous appearances on the Additions to the Archive podcast and Substack. Subscribe, like, follow, and rate Additions to the Archive with Sullivan Summer on Instagram, Substack, and wherever you get your podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/performing-arts

DMV Hoops Podcast – Episode 109

Mikee P. grabs ITM contributor and exercise rider Will Humphrey for a look at the $1 minimum Late Pick 4 Tuesday, 6/2 at Assiniboia Downs. The bet has a 15% takeout and a $50,000 Guarantee.

Stories from the 1968 election, including an important factor driving it, and a bit about 1968 radio. And a little bit from the late political advisor David Gergen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices