Podcasts about in trump

On April 2nd, the U.S. government announced a host of sweeping tariff hikes with every single one of America's trading partners. The aim of the so-called “Liberation Day” tariffs was ostensibly to “rebalance” the global trading system, as some Trump advisors have put it.However, the drastic measure roiled markets and eventually resulted in the President imposing a 90-day pause on most tariffs, with the exception of strategic sectors and imports from China. India, for its part, was slapped with a 26% tariff even as top officials were negotiating a bilateral trade agreement with their American counterparts.While the fate of future tariffs and any side agreements are unknown, the episode raises serious questions about India's global economic strategy. To talk about where India goes from here, Milan is joined on the show this week by Shoumitro Chatterjee. Shoumitro is an Assistant Professor of International Economics at Johns Hopkins-SAIS. His research lies at the intersection of development economics, trade, and macroeconomics, but he has also done seminal work on the role of agriculture in development.Milan and Shoumitro discuss India's surprising export-led success, its underperformance in low-skilled manufacturing, and the country's inward turn post-2017. Plus, the two discuss how India can take advantage of the current global uncertainty and where the politically sensitive agricultural sector fits in.Episode notes:1. Shoumitro Chatterjee, “In Trump's tariff world, India must say: We are open for business,” Indian Express, April 4, 2025.2. Abhishek Anand, Shoumitro Chatterjee, Josh Felman, Arvind Subramanian, and Naveen Thomas, “How quality control orders are crippling India's trade competitiveness,” Business Standard, March 4, 2025.3. Shoumitro Chatterjee and Arvind Subramanian, “India's inward (re)turn: is it warranted? Will it work?” Indian Economic Review 58 (2023): 35-59.4. Shoumitro Chatterjee, Devesh Kapur, Pradyut Sekhsaria, and Arvind Subramanian, “Agricultural Federalism: New Facts, Constitutional Vision,” Economic and Political Weekly 62, no. 36 (2022): 39-48.5. Shoumitro Chatterjee and Arvind Subramanian, “India's Export-Led Growth: Exemplar and Exception,” Ashoka Center for Economic Policy Working Paper No. 01, October 2020.6. Shoumitro Chatterjee and Arvind Subramanian, “To embrace atmanirbharta is to choose to condemn Indian economy to mediocrity,” Indian Express, October 15, 2020.7. Shoumitro Chatterjee and Arvind Subramanian, “Has India Occupied the Export Space Vacated by China? 21st Century Export Performance and Policy Implications,” in Euijin Jung, Arvind Subramanian, and Steven R. Weisman, editors, A Wary Partnership: Future of US-India Economic Relations (Washington, D.C.: Peterson Institute for International Economics, 2020).8. Shoumitro Chatterjee and Devesh Kapur, “Six Puzzles in Indian Agriculture,” India Policy Forum 13, no. 1 (2017): 185-229.

In Trump v. United States, the Supreme Court held that the president has "absolute immunity from criminal prosecution" for official acts.To reach that conclusion, the High Court grappled with this question: how much power a president should have?And some legal scholars say the ruling draws on the unitary executive theory — which, in its most extreme interpretation, gives the president sole authority over the executive branch.But did it pave the way for Trump's second term and the constitutional questions it's raised: From the dismantling of federal agencies established by Congress to the deportation migrants to third party countries without due process?For sponsor-free episodes of Consider This, sign up for Consider This+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org.Email us at considerthis@npr.org.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

THIS IS NOT INVESTMENT ADVICE. INVESTING IS RISKY AND OFTEN PAINFUL. DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH.A confluence of events caught my attention this week. Here's what I noted:* The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court verbally intervened to defend the judiciary.* The Federal Reserve said they won't raise rates if tariffs boost inflation, but they will cut them if tariffs hurt growth.* The April 2 deadline to impose sweeping, across-the-board tariffs (the administration is calling it “Liberation Day”) turns out to be a day where they might announce high tariffs—subject to discussion and lawsuits, which could take months—rather than implement them.* Technical, flow-based measures on the stock market became more two-sided and possibly, temporarily, supportive.I suspect a bear market has been set in motion, but there will be ebbs and flows. The ingredients for the bear market are high valuations, tariffs, and long positioning. I say “suspect” because, so far, we lack hard data on a sharp decline in actual economic activity, which will be required for the bear market to manifest. We only have soft data that reflects high uncertainty. The key question is—will many people lose their jobs? So far, fears of this have skyrocketed, but actual evidence of mass firings is scant. If tariffs are aggressively implemented, firings will come.Recent bear markets unfold in five stages—down, up, down, up, and down—and it is only in the final down phase that most investors finally retch into a can, declare defeat, and swear off stocks. Timing such ebbs and flows is devilishly complex, and even the best practitioners can capture only parts of them, which is why bear markets are so destructive to wealth. Either they hurt your compounding (some popular stocks like Meta fell as much as 70% only a few years ago), or shorting them causes massive oscillations in wealth and mood.As a result, once a bear market arrives, I look for catalysts that could catch people unawares—either making things worse or leading to a squeeze higher. This week has a number of them, hence this note. I'll discuss each in turn as well as, further down, introduce my podcast guest. The administration launched a policy blitzkrieg, large parts of which have been judged illegal. These challenges will now make their way through the courts. Musk and the administration have attacked judges who challenged their decisions. As a result, Chief Justice Roberts stated:“For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.”He is making it clear that the Supreme Court is not, unlike the Senate, a pliant observer. They want to uphold the balance of power.Second, the Fed met this week and did nothing in terms of policy but did provide guidance. Powell dismissed inflationary pressure in the data as irrelevant. In essence, he said that if the Fed sees any weakness in growth, they will cut rates, regardless of inflation. Stocks and bonds rallied, but now bonds are priced such that if any data turn out not to be weak, bonds will run into a problem, which will then hurt stocks.Third, the administration went quiet on tariffs—until this morning when Trump tweeted about Liberation Day. In recent months, any time key administration members opened their mouths about tariffs, stocks promptly fell, which is what happened again today. What exactly happens on April 2? We don't know. It may be a day when they claim to apply tariffs but, in reality, only name their levels. I try to visualize the incentives of different leaders. While Putin operates with geopolitical and territorial ambitions involving overt aggression, Trump's approach is centered at least as much on maintaining prominence in the national conversation. These are different objectives. In Trump's case, the trade policy narrative—like the use of tariffs—can function as a serialized story, drawing ongoing attention much like a long-running TV drama. So, an April 2 announcement may simply transition into the next chapter or it may be something more dire. To help frame my understanding, I interviewed Jennifer Dresden, a strategist at Protect Democracy.org and an expert in authoritarianism. I found the conversation helpful and hope you do as well.Lastly, stock market flows: There is a cottage industry of people who analyze equity flows at major banks. The net of this “wisdom” now is that a lot of fast money (like commodity trading advisors) is short stocks, meaning that if pension funds or others come in to buy stocks at the end of the quarter, they could trigger a short squeeze and drive stocks (temporarily) sharply higher. Eventually, I suspect protracted drama will crush the economy, but it may take a while. We have yet to see hard data demonstrating this. Until we do, US stocks might go violently sideways or even up. If evidence emerges that this policy is hurting growth, watch out—markets will move so fast you won't be able to keep up. Bear markets are tough. I'm told that teams of traders have already been fired due to the AI rout. This document is strictly confidential and is intended for authorized recipients of “A Letter from Paul” (the “Letter”) only. It includes personal opinions that are current as of the date of this Letter and does not represent the official positions of Kate Capital LLC (“Kate Capital”). This letter is presented for discussion purposes only and is not intended as investment advice, an offer, or solicitation with respect to the purchase or sale of any security. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure, or distribution of the material in this presentation is strictly forbidden without the express written consent of Paul Podolsky or Kate Capital LLC.If an investment idea is discussed in the Letter, there is no guarantee that the investment objective will be achieved. Past performance is not indicative of future results, which may vary. Actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied. Unless otherwise noted, the valuation of the specific investment opportunity contained within this presentation is based upon information and data available as of the date these materials were prepared.An investment with Kate Capital is speculative and involves significant risks, including the potential loss of all or a substantial portion of invested capital, the potential use of leverage, and the lack of liquidity of an investment. Recipients should not assume that securities or any companies identified in this presentation, or otherwise related to the information in this presentation, are, have been or will be, investments held by accounts managed by Kate Capital or that investments in any such securities have been or will be profitable. Please refer to the Private Placement Memorandum, and Kate Capital's Form ADV, available at www.advisorinfo.sec.gov, for important information about an investment with Kate Capital.Any companies identified herein in which Kate Capital is invested do not represent all of the investments made or recommended for any account managed by Kate Capital. Certain information presented herein has been supplied by third parties, including management or agents of the underlying portfolio company. While Kate Capital believes such information to be accurate, it has relied upon such third parties to provide accurate information and has not independently verified such information.The graphs, charts, and other visual aids are provided for informational purposes only. None of these graphs, charts, or visual aids can of themselves be used to make investment decisions. No representation is made that these will assist any person in making investment decisions and no graph, chart or other visual aid can capture all factors and variables required in making such decisions. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit paulpodolsky.substack.com

There's no such thing as a ceasefire this morning. It's all breaking down in the Middle East. Netanyahu's come out with more fighting talk and the rockets are back on. And for Ukraine, Trump hasn't exactly cloaked himself in glory with this so-called deal. And I say so-called deal because it hasn't actually held. First, it was only partial. There wasn't a full ceasefire like Zelensky agreed to. Second, it covered energy infrastructure not being hit for a 30 day pause. But already the Russians have fired at energy facilities, roads, and two hospitals. Now, if you go and have a look at the read-out from the call between Trump and Putin it says Putin gave the order to his top brass to immediately stop the firing on this energy infrastructure. So, either the military is going rogue and firing anyway, or Putin's up to his old tricks. Actually, both of things could be happening. Hell, with Russia they both could be true. But either way, for Trump and the big game he likes to talk, the art of the deal has just hit the Kremlin wall. In Trump's favour, reputation-wise, is at least people are talking about peace. We've just had three years of war and whenever world leaders meet it's always talk about more, more and more war. A ceasefire, an armistice and a peace deal all require action. At least the phones are ringing. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Just months after the fall of President Bashar al-Assad, Syria has been rocked by an eruption of violence. Coastal towns have turned into killing fields, with forces aligned with the government accused of massacring hundreds of civilians from religious minorities. The Syrian online space is also littered with misinformation - part of an information war that is inciting sectarian fear and deepening divisions, in a country still raw from years of civil war and decades under a brutal regime. Lead contributors: Zaina Erhaim – Journalist Ahmad Primo – Founder, Verify Syria Ola Suliman – Campaigns lead, The Syria Campaign Rim Turkmani – Syria research programme director, LSE On our radar: The Trump White House is waging an unprecedented crackdown on pro-Palestine activism on university campuses. Meenakshi Ravi reports on Mahmoud Khalil - a Columbia graduate and, in theory, permanent US resident, who now faces deportation. ICE's PR blitz: Immigration raids as entertainment In Trump's America, immigration enforcement isn't just policy - it's a spectacle. With ICE raids increasingly staged for the cameras, and journalists given front-row access to capture dramatic arrests, is it law and order or a made-for-TV performance? The Listening Post's Tariq Nafi explores the media's role in shaping the immigration debate. Featuring: Patrick Bet-David – Host, PBD podcast Michelle Garcia – Journalist and author Abraham Paulos – Deputy director, Black Alliance for Just Immigration

Europe is not typically the focus of the Grand Tamasha podcast but recent developments involving Europe, the United States, and India raise fresh questions about the future shape of the international order.Last week, a high-level European Commission delegation embarked on a historic trip to New Delhi, where the two sides spoke optimistically of a promising new chapter in their relationship. Across the ocean in Washington, however, there were alarming signs of a breakdown in the Trans-Atlantic relationship, with the unprecedented Oval Office dressing down of Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy.To discuss where things stand in Europe, India, and the United States, Milan is joined on the show this week by Tara Varma. Tara is a visiting fellow in the Center of the United States and Europe at the Brookings Institution. Until December 2022, she was a senior policy fellow and the head of the Paris office of the European Council on Foreign Relations. She has previously worked and lived in Shanghai, London, New Delhi, and Paris.Milan and Tara discuss the growing wedge between the United States and Europe, the significance of the recent EC visit to New Delhi, the prospects of an EU-India trade pact, and the prospects of a “New Yalta” summit between China, Russia, and the United States. Plus, the two discuss the emerging bonhomie among right-wing nationalists and the prospects of the Trump administration engineering a Sino-Russia split.Episode notes:1. Sophia Besch and Tara Varma, “A New Transatlantic Alliance Threatens the EU,” Carnegie Emissary (blog), February 20, 2025.2. Patricia M. Kim et al., " The China-Russia relationship and threats to vital US interests,” Brookings Institution, December 16, 2024.3. Tara Varma and Caroline Grassmuck, “What is going on in France?” Brookings Institution, December 13, 2024.4. C. Raja Mohan, “In Trump's world, India and Europe need each other,” Indian Express, February 27, 2025.

Truth Be Told with Booker Scott – Ironically, the repeated theme within the speech was ‘a common sense revolution,' which seemed odd considering it was delivered to a collection of 535 people most lacking any common sense in the country. In Trump's words, this common sense revolution will bring the golden age to America. The speech resonated with the American people, as instant post-speech polls showed...

Last year, as March Madness kicked into gear, there was one athlete everyone seemed to be talking about: Caitlin Clark. The then University of Iowa guard was on her way to leading her team to the NCAA finals, selling out stadiums everywhere she went and creating an unprecedented level of excitement around women's basketball. This interest followed her to the WNBA when she signed with the Indiana Fever.Our guest, USA Today sports columnist Christine Brennan, is writing a book about Caitlin Clark called On Her Game, which tells the story of Clark's rise to become the most famous female team sport athlete in history.Christine has been a long-time chronicler and advocate for women in sports. She's also deeply interested in politics and has a keen understanding and appreciation for how sports and politics intersect.We wanted to have Christine on to help tell the story of how laws like Title IX helped pave the way for a phenom like Caitlin Clark. And we also wanted Christine to reflect on where we are today when it comes to politics, sports and gender.These three topics have always been intertwined in our culture, but the Trump era has brought it to a different level. In Trump's first few weeks in office alone he appeared at the Super Bowl and signed an executive order banning transgender athletes from competing in women's athletics. We also had Canadians booing the U.S. national anthem at an international hockey game in response to Trump's tariff threats as well as his references to annexing our northern neighbor.Christine Brennan is an award-winning national sports columnist for USA Today. She's a commentator for CNN, ABC News, and PBS NewsHour. Her book about Caitlin Clark is available right now for preorder on Amazon. It will be available wherever books are sold in early July.Pre-order Christine Brennan's book: https://www.amazon.com/Her-Game-Caitlin-Revolution-Womens/dp/1668090198Learn more about The Cook Political Report: www.cookpolitical.com/subscribe

Patrick addresses complex life issues from a moral and ethical standpoint. He explores the Catholic perspective on challenging topics like ectopic pregnancies and the implications of IVF, highlighting the need for deeply rooted pro-life values. Conversations with listeners reveal the tension between personal beliefs and political stances, specifically the criticism surrounding recent executive orders. Patrick emphasizes the necessity for open discourse on controversial issues while maintaining pro-life integrity. He discusses the vital ethical matters of today, encouraging informed choices grounded in faith and conscience. Anna - What would be the Catholic Church's look on having surgery for ectopic pregnancy? (1:17) Karen - I can understand why the girl in the audio from the first hour would want to implant an embryo. She is validating the personhood of those embryos (3:13) Candace - Impregnating herself with her mother’s frozen twins? Isn’t that a form of incest? (8:14) George - What do you think you are accomplishing by pointing out that President Trump is imperfect candidate (9:54) Mariah - I am a big supporter of Trump. I appreciate the platform but still agree IVF is abortion. In Trump's mind, maybe he sees IVF as prolife? (23:19) Raul – Donald Trump has become their God (30:29) Christina - George just thinks we need to act as if Trump is a Saint. I think there is more good which is why he is elected but we must discuss negatives too (33:02) Cheryl (email) - I voted for Donald Trump and am very glad I did, but I am extremely bothered by the direction things are moving on the IVF issue within the conservative party. (36:39) Philomena (email) - What are the health problems that are causing women to be infertile? (38:18) Gwen (email) - Many people have no idea what is involved in IVF (39:17) Mike - George doesn’t want to go back to the way things were before Trump. (42:23) Louise - My husband and I are both physicians. Many don't know of the evils of IVF. (46:56)

In tonight’s podcast, we discuss several events that garnered attention over the past week. We kick things off with a Golden-hoofed, Trump cash-covered Goat idol at Mar-a-Lago covered in one fake one hundred dollar bill with Trump’s face and “In Trump we trust” written on the currency that sparked outrage across social media outlets. We […]

In this episode of Bongino Report: Early Edition, Evita covers Trump dismantling USAID, Canada retaliating against U.S. tariffs, and Kanye West's wife making a nude appearance at the Grammys. Check out our amazing Sponsor Genucel - Go to Genucel.com/NEWS save over 70% off Genucel's complete skincare package The Media Don't Want ‘Independence' In Trump's Admin. They Want Insubordination Team Trump Is Winning The Media Battle By Treating Left-Wing Press As The Propagandists They Are Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

It's been a whirlwind few days for Donald Trump, the first criminal president in U.S. history. On January 20, Trump returned to office despite being convicted of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in a New York trial court. The case stems from his efforts to illegally influence the 2016 presidential election by hiding reimbursements made to adult film star Stormy Daniels.The trial court granted Trump an "unconditional discharge," meaning he won't face imprisonment, probation, or a fine. However, the conviction remains on his record, making him the first and only criminal elected to the presidency. Trump's legal team has been working to overturn the conviction, pointing to the landmark Supreme Court decision in Trump v. United States, which could potentially lead to the reversal of his New York conviction.In Trump v. United States, the Supreme Court established a new constitutional rule that evidence related to a president's "official acts" cannot be admitted in subsequent criminal cases unless prosecutors clear a high legal threshold. Trump's team argues that the trial court failed to follow this new framework, which could render the conviction invalid.Before his sentencing, Trump asked the Supreme Court to intervene and block the proceedings, claiming that the charges were politically motivated and that he was entitled to presidential immunity. However, New York prosecutors urged the justices to allow the sentencing to go ahead as scheduled, emphasizing that Trump's conviction rests on conduct for which he is not entitled to immunity.The prosecutors argued that Trump can attend the sentencing hearing by video to minimize any burden and that he can appeal after being sentenced. They also dismissed Trump's suggestion that he cannot be sentenced because he is the president-elect, stating that no judicial decision or guidance from the Department of Justice has ever recognized that the unique temporary immunity of the sitting president extends to the president-elect.Despite Trump's efforts to have the Supreme Court intervene, the justices declined his request. However, four conservative justices – Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Thomas – publicly noted their disagreement with this decision, signaling that they may be ready to take up the issue of Trump's conviction sooner rather than later.As the case heads to the New York Court of Appeals, Trump's legal team is likely to continue arguing that the Supreme Court's decision in Trump v. United States requires the conviction to be erased. The Supreme Court's eventual involvement seems inevitable, and the outcome could have significant implications for Trump's presidency and the institution of the presidency as a whole.

In Trump's 2025 Inauguration, we see a tired and exhausted Left, with failed lies and a poor attempt at Marxism in it's wake, what's next for the left?Watch all of our videos and subscribe to our channel for the latest content >HereHere

Donald Trump has wasted no time in his first days as president of the United States in signing executive orders to enforce mass deportations, gender laws and American expansionism. And within this new Republican omnicause, support for Israel has become a mainstay. In the inauguration, Rabbi Ari Berman delivered a presidential blessing that took a swipe at college campuses and advocated for releasing the remaining Israeli hostages. In Trump's first week, he reversed sanctions on Israeli settlers in the West Bank and is getting credit for the ceasefire deal that was struck before he took office. But then he also pardoned the Jan. 6 rioters—including blatant antisemites—and there's the whole Elon Musk maybe-Nazi-salute thing. To break down the first week of Trump's second presidency, we're joined by Gil Troy, an American presidential historian, former CJN columnist and author of the new book, To Resist the Academic Intifada: Letters to My Students on Defending the Zionist Dream. After Trump talk, they turn to the future of political movements in Israel and the shifting identity of the left in a post-ceasefire world. Credits Hosts: Avi Finegold and Phoebe Maltz Bovy (@BovyMaltz) Production team: Michael Fraiman (producer), Zachary Kauffman (editor) Music: Socalled Support The CJN Subscribe to the Bonjour Chai Substack Subscribe to The CJN newsletter Donate to The CJN (+ get a charitable tax receipt) Subscribe to Bonjour Chai (Not sure how? Click here)

Political and business leaders are expressing caution about Canada's potential use of retaliatory tariffs in response to Donald Trump's renewed trade threats. Critics warn that Canada's economic leverage may fall short, risking significant harm to key industries. The premiers appear divided on the issue, despite Ontario Premier Doug Ford's insistence that “country comes first.” In Trump's first week as the 47th president of the United States, West of Centre host Kathleen Petty explores the implications of his aggressive trade stance. Joining the conversation are Deborah Yedlin, president and CEO of the Calgary Chamber of Commerce; Adam Legge, president of the Business Council of Alberta; and Gitane De Silva, Alberta's former senior representative to the U.S. during Trump's first term. 

Der grüne Kreisverband Pankow steht Kopf. Der Skandal weitet sich aus, erreicht den Landesverband und geht bis in den Bundesvorstand. Eine Kommunalpolitikerin wirft einem Bundestagsabgeordneten sexuellen Missbrauch vor. Die Queerpolitikerin und Mitarbeiterin in der grünen Abgeordnetenhausfraktion bezeichnet sich als autistisch, links und chronisch wütend. Doch jetzt richtet sich die Wut gegen sie. Hat sie mit falschen Vorwürfen den etablierten Politiker versucht zu vernichten? Marcel Joppa und Benjamin Gollme räumen nicht nur hinter den Grünen auf. Sie feiern die USA und bereiten sich auf den neuen Präsidenten vor. In Trump we trust?

On January 6, 2021, we watched on live television as Donald Trump and several Republican members of Congress incited a violent attempted overthrow of our democracy. This insurrection led to several deaths, including police officers who later died by suicide. When Joe Biden was sworn in as President in January 2021, Democrats controlled both chambers of Congress. Instead of using their time in power to pass a resolution or bill banning Trump and his supporters from holding office under the 14th Amendment's "insurrection clause" (Section 3), they held hearings that concluded with a report and a referral to the Department of Justice for possible criminal prosecution. In the 2022 midterms, Democrats lost the House due to America's worsening gerrymandering crisis. Attorney General Merrick Garland waited two years to appoint Special Prosecutor Jack Smith. While some credit the Democrats' January 6 committee for prompting Garland to take action, the reality is that both Democrats and Garland wasted valuable time. In the four years since January 6, 2021, no resolution or bill was passed in Congress to enforce the insurrection clause of the 14th Amendment. Instead, a group of voters and legal experts attempted to bar Trump from the ballot in Colorado, leading to legal cases such as Trump v. Anderson. In early 2024, the Supreme Court ruled that states could not bar federal candidates, and that applying the 14th Amendment was up to Congress. So, why didn't Democrats act in 2021 and 2022 when they had two years to enforce the U.S. Constitution? We need an honest accounting of how an insurrectionist will be president just four years after leading a violent attempt to overthrow our democracy. Democrats deferred to Merrick Garland, who then deferred to Jack Smith, who ultimately dismissed his Trump cases in November 2024, after Trump won one of the closest elections in U.S. history. This election took place amid rampant disinformation and the consolidation of far-right media, including Elon Musk's takeover of Twitter, turning it into a platform for (pro-Trump and Russia) disinformation–the largest in the world. At the same time, Republicans and the Supreme Court over the years undermined the Voting Rights Act and expanded voter ID laws–a modern day poll tax, disenfranchising 21 million Americans. As Andrea and Terrell discuss in this week's episode, the 2024 election was neither free nor fair. The institutions meant to protect us failed. As Gaslit Nation has long warned, an unpunished attempted coup leads to a successful one. The institutionalists and controlled opposition who enabled this crisis don't realize they are not safe either. Once a dictator is in power, no one can control them. We also point out that George Orwell warned us about fascist bootlickers like Trump/Musk fanboy Lex Fridman, whose three-hour interview with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky can be summed up by Orwell's quote: "Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind." Gaslit Nation officially calls on Lex Fridman to stop quoting Orwell on his podcast—Orwell would have hated you. Want to enjoy Gaslit Nation ad-free? Join our community of listeners for bonus shows, ad-free episodes, exclusive Q&A sessions, our group chat, invites to live events like our Monday political salons at 4pm ET over Zoom, and more! Sign up at Patreon.com/Gaslit!   Show Notes:   Republicans just took control of the House because of partisan and racial gerrymandering. Here's how https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/11/16/2136410/-Republicans-just-took-control-of-the-House-because-of-partisan-and-racial-gerrymandering-Here-s-how   In Trump's second term, evidence suggests corruption will be worse, not better Donald Trump's first term was astonishingly corrupt. There's already reason to believe his second will be worse. https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trumps-second-term-evidence-suggests-corruption-will-worse-not-better-rcna179589    U.S. to probe Tesla's 'Full Self-Driving' system after pedestrian killed https://www.npr.org/2024/10/19/g-s1-29030/us-probe-tesla-full-self-driving-system   The Republican Structural Advantage Republicans start every election cycle with structural advantages regardless of the issues and all the other factors that usually determine who wins elections. https://prospect.org/power/republican-structural-advantage/   How conservative media helped the far-right take over the Republican Party https://www.vox.com/2015/7/30/9074761/conservative-media-republican-party   How Media Consolidation Paved the Way for Right-Wing Insurrection A battle playing out at the Supreme Court could make media monopolies way worse. https://inthesetimes.com/article/supreme-court-media-consolidation-fcc-echo-chamber   Media Consolidation Means Less Local News, More Right Wing Slant https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/media-consolidation-means-less-local-news-more-right-wing-slant   The Right-Wing Media Takeover Is Destroying America The purchase of The Baltimore Sun is further proof that conservative billionaires understand the power of media control. Why don't their liberal counterparts get it? https://newrepublic.com/post/178256/baltimore-sun-liberal-billionaires-media-failure   The growth of Sinclaire's conservative media empire https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/10/22/the-growth-of-sinclairs-conservative-media-empire   How Gerrymandering Tilts the 2024 Race for the House Facebook LinkedIn Skewed maps give Republicans big advantages in 11 states, mostly in the South and Midwest. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/how-gerrymandering-tilts-2024-race-house   Elon Musk Being Investigated for Violating Terms of "Top Secret" Clearance He has become a major liability for the government. https://futurism.com/elon-musk-investigated-violating-terms-top-secret-clearance   Elon Musk didn't show up for testimony in a probe over his $44 billion Twitter takeover. Now the SEC wants sanctions https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/20/tech/sec-sanctions-elon-musk-testimony-twitter-probe/index.html   The Women's March Rebranded and Reorganized. Now They're Ready for 2025 https://time.com/7203169/womens-march-donald-trump-protest-change/   ABC Settles With Trump in a Case It Could Have Won https://fair.org/home/abc-settles-with-trump-in-a-case-it-could-have-won/   Why Gerrymandering Has Gotten Worse https://www.cbsnews.com/news/why-gerrymandering-has-gotten-worse/   The North Carolina GOP's Latest Ploy to Steal a State Supreme Court Seat https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/12/north-carolina-gop-state-supreme-court.html   North Carolina's Unfair Voting Maps Gave GOP Congress Majority https://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/article296319684.html   Judge agrees to dismiss Donald Trump's 2020 election interference case President-elect Trump faced charges over his handling of classified documents and his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss, which culminated in the U.S. Capitol attack. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/jack-smith-files-drop-jan-6-charges-donald-trump-rcna181667    The lost year: How Merrick Garland's Justice Department ran out of time prosecuting Trump for January 6 https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/06/politics/doj-trump-jan-6-riot/index.html  

In Trump's first term it took him 97 days to have his cabinet selections confirmed – the second longest process in modern presidential history.

In Trump's first term we all saw that he knew how to build the most robust economy we ever had, and he can do it again. This has caused a new optimism in the country — what a great time to be alive. It's a time where you get to witness the Marxist Left, who have tried to erase the Constitution, particularly are free speech, be destroyed. It's also a time to foment the idea of freedom and the conservative values that will make America enter a golden age of peace, prosperity, security and justice under Donald Trump. Guest: Roger StoneSponsors: My PillowWww.mypillow.com/johnPromo code ‘John' for max savings on all products!See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In Trump's first term we all saw that he knew how to build the most robust economy we ever had, and he can do it again. This has caused a new optimism in the country — what a great time to be alive. It's a time where you get to witness the Marxist Left, who have tried to erase the Constitution, particularly are free speech, be destroyed. It's also a time to foment the idea of freedom and the conservative values that will make America enter a golden age of peace, prosperity, security and justice under Donald Trump. Guest: Roger StoneSponsors: My PillowWww.mypillow.com/johnPromo code ‘John' for max savings on all products!See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Unlike Obama, Donald Trump is not really know for his oratory and more times than not, he's being criticized for something he said. This speech, however, is really good! He names all the bad groups and uses language like, "we have to root out the corrupt globalist and war mongers". He's right when he says that the enemy is not Russia and China but within These United States and they have been put on notice. That's just really good news if he can manage to follow through on it. In Trump's last presidency he was just completely shut down but this time he seems prepared to tackle these people head. We should know pretty soon how this is going to turn out. Donald Trump Speech on the Enemy Within https://x.com/SpartaJustice/status/1861147163050549398 Peak Prosperity Charts - Stock Market in REAL MONEY https://1drv.ms/f/s!Ah3nb96hFDd6hYVjzI9pJytgQUALGg?e=pq6WJf

On Tuesday's Mark Levin Show, DA Alvin Bragg and Judge Juan Merchan have done enormous damage to the rule of law in Donald Trump's NY case. Merchan should have dismissed the case, but he didn't. This isn't a great victory because this case still hangs over Trump's head. There are legal pathways to deal with this, but the Trump team must go on the offense. Also, the issue of recess appointments is coming up and some in the media are saying Trump is threatening liberty. No, the Framers put recess appointments in the Constitution. In Trump's first term, the Democrat Congress slow-walked all his nominees. This time around he needs his people to get through quickly. Later, the Drill Down exposes the collusion of the Virginia Attorney General's office with radical animal rights activists. These awful organizations devoured what was a legit movement. Finally, Caroline Glick calls in to explain that the left wing in Israel is trying to oust PM Benjamin Netanyahu before President-elect Donald Trump takes office in January. They'll stop at nothing to stop Netanyahu from achieving total victory over its enemies. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

  0:00 - Rick Scott: I believe in the Trump agenda   12:23 - Tom Homan on Fox & Friends   32:15 - The Realignment   51:07 - Fox Valley Activists   01:07:33 - In-depth History with Frank from Arlington Heights   01:09:18 - Madeleine Kearns, associate editor at The Free Press: Democrats Picked the Wrong Women's Rights Issue. Follow Madeleine on X @madeleinekearns   01:23:15 - President at Wirepoints, Ted Dabrowski, on the Illinois Republican Party "it's lost its brand, it has to be rebuilt" Get Ted's latest at wirepoints.org   01:39:03 - Senior writer for the Dispatch and author of In Trump's Shadow: The Battle for 2024 and the Future of the GOP, David Drucker, looks at the race for senate majority leader   Keep updated with David on X @DavidMDrucker   01:56:16 - Spiked columnist & founder of CIEO, Joanna Williams, points out the rage against white women we've seen since the election. Joanna is also author of How Woke Won: The Elitist Movement that Threatens Democracy, Tolerance and Reason     See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

3pm: Vetreran's Day - The undeniable charm and appeal of NAVY Seals // How Trump’s Victory will shape geopolitics and war // In Trump victory, Netanyahu sees himself as ‘the great winner’ // Hamas Calls for 'Immediate' End to War After Trump Election Win // Qatar to Hamas leaders: You’re not welcome here // Sam Campbell - Election Misinformation claims are ... Misinformed. // 'Starlink' Election Conspiracy Theory Spreads Online // John convinces a man NOT to wear a MAGA hat on a flight home to Seattle

Join our upcoming GRE live event right here! - ‘New Turnkey Properties with ZERO Money Down' on Thursday 10/24. Keith discusses the financial health of tenants, noting that 75% of new renters earn over $75,000 annually. He is joined by GRE Investment Coach Naresh Vissa to highlight the incentives offered by new build property providers, including interest rates in the 4's and up to $30,000 in immediate equity. New build homes now cost only 1% more than resale homes. Rent-to-income ratios remain stable at 31%, despite wage growth outpacing rent growth. Current market conditions offer a unique opportunity to build wealth through real estate. Attend the live online event on Thursday, October 24 at 8pm Eastern to learn more about the new build property incentives. Show Notes: GetRichEducation.com/524 For access to properties or free help with a GRE Investment Coach, start here: GREmarketplace.com Get mortgage loans for investment property: RidgeLendingGroup.com or call 855-74-RIDGE  or e-mail: info@RidgeLendingGroup.com Invest with Freedom Family Investments.  You get paid first: Text FAMILY to 66866 For advertising inquiries, visit: GetRichEducation.com/ad Will you please leave a review for the show? I'd be grateful. Search “how to leave an Apple Podcasts review”  GRE Free Investment Coaching: GREmarketplace.com/Coach Best Financial Education: GetRichEducation.com Get our wealth-building newsletter free— text ‘GRE' to 66866 Our YouTube Channel: www.youtube.com/c/GetRichEducation Follow us on Instagram: @getricheducation Complete episode transcript:   Automatically Transcribed With Otter.ai    Keith Weinhold  0:01   Welcome to GRE. I'm your host. Keith Weinhold, we check in on the health of your tenant. How are they doing financially? Learn why new build homes now cost about the same as existing homes. Then learn about creative financing and how to put zero money down on an income property today on Get Rich Education.   Speaker 1  0:26   Since 2014 the powerful get rich education podcast has created more passive income for people than nearly any other show in the world. This show teaches you how to earn strong returns from passive real estate investing in the best markets without losing your time being a flipper or landlord. Show Host Keith Weinhold, writes for both Forbes and Rich Dad advisors, and delivers a new show every week since 2014 there's been millions of listener downloads of 188 world nations. He has a list show. Guess who keep top selling personal finance author Robert Kiyosaki, get rich education can be heard on every podcast platform, plus it has its own dedicated Apple and Android listener phone apps build wealth on the go with the get rich education podcast. Sign up now for the get rich education podcast, or visit get rich education.com   Corey Coates  1:11   You're listening to the show that has created more financial freedom than nearly any show in the world. This is get rich education.   Keith Weinhold  1:27   Welcome to GRE from Lewiston, Maine to Lewiston, Idaho and across 488 nations worldwide. I'm Keith Weinhold, and you are listening to get rich education. Don't live below your means. Grow Your means, you need a proven wealth building vehicle that pays you multiple ways, like real estate or a business, because in order to build legacy wealth, otherwise, how many Papa John's coupons are you going to have to collect that's living below your means, something that's not sustainable long term, not where you want to be. And you know something your first million that takes a while for you to reach a net worth of a million dollars, that can take over 30 years, like the first 30 plus years of your life. Let's say then you are age 32 until you reach the million dollar mark. Well, your next million Okay, so a $2 million net worth, that's not going to take you another 32 years, but maybe, if your sole source of income is trading your time for dollars at a job, you won't hit the $2 million net worth Mark until age 40 to 45 but instead, if you've got leveraged rental property, ah, now you've got other people's money working for you, and a 5x multiplier on your skin in the game, and that's something that a 401K is never going to give you. And instead of hitting 2 million at age 40 or 45 like the day job worker, well, you can hit a four or $5 million net worth mark at that age, setting you up for an early retirement, or at least that option to do so your life is going to feel different when working is An option, not an obligation, and all that sure can happen even sooner. If you think you are behind, from what I was just talking about, there, you find yourself behind those net worth figures. Well, the vehicle of real estate pays five ways. Is what's going to allow you to catch up, and you might be simultaneously measuring your wealth in cash flow as much or more than in net worth terms. Anyway, chances are you do, though, have more wealth today than you have ever had in your entire life, and that's because here in late 2024 we're at a time when just about every asset imaginable is at or near all time highs, real estate, stocks, gold, Bitcoin, and perhaps the number one traded commodity in the world, oil, is one of the few substantial outliers where that is not true. Well, now that we've checked in on how your wealth building is progressing. How about the financial health of your tenant? That's important because you want them to have the ability to pay your mortgages and your operating expenses for you. Well, there seems to be a weird narrative that tenants, you know, like they're always these jilted wannabe homeowners, or like they're auditioning for a season of Survivor, barely living above the poverty line, destitute and eating macaroni and cheese three times a day. Now, there are some of those cases, for sure, but 75% of new rent. Have incomes above $75,000 well, then maybe they eat at the Cheesecake Factory monthly. Even the wealthiest Americans are turning into forever renters. We have seen the rise of the millionaire renter. More than 11% of renters have an annual income over $750,000 that is pretty Wall Street Journal. Gosh, I guess that caviar and truffles are in the home. And what are they doing for cheese? Forget Kraft Singles. My guess for them is that only artisanal cheeses are eaten off of little wooden boards. The census itself recently published research declaring this headline, incomes are keeping up with rent increases. Now you might find it really surprising that tenant rent to income ratios haven't materially changed over the last dozen years. Last year, US renters shelled out a 31% share of their income on rent, and that is actually much like they have for a long time. In fact, between 30 and 32% every year since 2011 that's what the figure's been and to be clear, what we're talking about here again is the rent to income ratio. It's simple. It's just the proportion of your tenants income that goes toward rent. 31% or you might think, Well, wait, how can this be? Because there sure are a lot of headlines around rent burdened households. And for a while there previously, we had wage growth lagging rent growth, although wage growth is ahead of CPI now, and it has been for quite a few months. All right. Well, here's what's happening. Really, it's three things, renter incomes are growing faster than homeowner incomes. Secondly, the struggle is real for low income renters. And thirdly, new construction units. In recent years, they tend to be created for middle and upper income households. All right, so let's break this down. The first phenomenon occurring, renter incomes are growing faster than homeowner incomes. Yes, younger Americans, they're more often renters, and they have more income growth than older generations do. Secondly, like I was saying, the struggle really is a thing for low income renters, they tend to rent apartments more often than single family homes, and census stats show the rent burden household growth in those is occurring with those that make under 75k a year. That's where their distress is, and of course, it's especially bad among those making under 50k a year, and many of them don't receive rental assistance, and inflation has affected that group worse. And then the third reason for these stable rent to income ratios are that new construction units in recent years, they tended to be created for middle and upper income households, so we haven't built nearly enough affordable housing driving demand and rent prices, and again, that crushes those lower income households. And hey, I do want to credit terrific rental housing economist Jay Parsons for bringing some of this to light. The bottom line here and what you've learned about the financial health of renters today, actually, you didn't learn anything. All I did was talk about cheese, really, though, the lesson is that Rental Affordability has become more bifurcated. It's worsened for the lowest income households, but overall, rent to income ratios are still steady near 31% I mean, really, who knew that stability could be so predictable? Now there's another sort of misconception, or I guess anomaly really, in today's real estate market, and that is the fact that new build homes don't cost much more than older resale homes. In fact, today, the median new bill home sells for 421k That's not much more than that of an existing home at 417k that's only about a 1% difference. It's really an unusually small disparity, just a 1% premium for a new home today over a resale home. All right. Well, what is going on here? One reason for this is the very well documented interest rate lock in effect existing homeowners aren't giving up their property. Another is that the new build properties are smaller than they were in years past. Helping keep their prices in check. And a third reason for why new build homes cost almost the same as existing homes today, weirdly, is that home builders they are giving buyers incentives to purchase new build homes today because buyers often need down payment and closing cost help in order to get in. And we're going to talk about one especially good new build incentive program for these brand new properties later in the show today, and what you can do with creative financing there. The real lesson here is, if you can, you want to give more consideration to owning more new build income property today than you might have in years past, because they're down to about the same price as resale properties, only costing 1% more, on average, and this is all based on data from the census, HUD and the NAR. So again, just about 421k for new builds and 417k for resale single family homes today, they are the median prices   you can follow get rich education at all the usual places on social, Facebook, Instagram, Tiktok X and YouTube. To highlight one of those, you will find particular value in the get rich education YouTube channel that is me over there, video of me speaking directly to you and showing you things there visually on YouTube that I cannot do here on an audio podcast. Also, if you have a particular thought, comment, question or concern, understand, we can't personally respond to them all, but you can go ahead and write in or leave voice communication at getricheducation.com/contact we do read and listen to them all that's getricheducation.com/contact in order to reach us. And thank you so much for all of the sincere congratulations and wishes that you left over there for us on the GRE podcast, hitting 10 years of contribution to real estate investors, serving you every single week without fail and never playing any repeat episodes, always serving you with a fresh episode. Much more. Next, I'm Keith Weinhold. You're listening to get rich education.   Hey, you can get your mortgage loans at the same place where I get mine, at Ridge lending group NMLS, 42056, they provided our listeners with more loans than any provider in the entire nation because they specialize in income properties. They help you build a long term plan for growing your real estate empire with leverage. You can start your pre qualification and chat with President changley Ridge personally. Start now while it's on your mind at ridgelendinggroup.com That's ridgelendinggroup.com.   Your bank is getting rich off of you. The national average bank account pays less than 1% on your savings. If your money isn't making 4% you're losing your hard earned cash to inflation. Let the liquidity fund help you put your money to work with minimum risk, your cash generates up to an 8% return with compound interest year in and year out, instead of earning less than 1% sitting in your bank account, the minimum investment is just 25k you keep getting paid until you decide you want your money back. Their decade plus track record proves they've always paid their investors 100% in full and on time. And I would know, because I'm an investor too, earn 8% hundreds of others are text FAMILY to 66866, learn more about freedom. Family Investments Liquidity fund on your journey to financial freedom through passive income. Text FAMILY to 66866.   Robert Helms  13:57   Hey everybody, it's Robert Helms of the real estate guys radio program. So glad you found Keith Weinhold in get rich education. Don't quit your Daydream.   Keith Weinhold  14:19   Well, I'd like to welcome in a GRE investment coach. He's got both the formal credentials, and he's doing the real thing too, holding a master's degree from Duke's business school, and then, before coming to GRE in 2021 he worked at both banks and financial publishing companies, but importantly, for years now, he's been an active real estate investor, just like you and I. Hey, welcome back onto the show. Naresh Vissa.   Naresh Vissa  14:45   Thanks so much for having me back on looking forward to talking real estate. There's a lot going on for sure.   Keith Weinhold  14:51   You know, I always give you an illustrious bio to live up to before you speak, but then you do always live up to it. Well, Naresh. Before we narrow down, let's pull back and take a wide angle view. Give us your take on the direction or trends. What's important in today's market for real estate investors?   Naresh Vissa  15:11   Keith, the market has changed a lot, and it's very much investor friendly right now. The reason is because, and we've talked about this, I think, in my last two or three episodes where we previous saw rising interest rates and stagnant interest rates that were relatively high for let's say a millennial. That's been a hot topic called millennials aren't able to afford home buying what we're seeing now because the Federal Reserve cut interest rates tremendously, significantly and almost unexpected. The First Cut they did was 50 basis points, which I think was a mistake, just like I think it was a mistake for them not to raise rates one more time last year, in 2023 one or two more times to help bring inflation down further, I think they're making a mistake by jumping the gun, and instead of a 25 BPS cut as the first cut, doing a 50 BPS cut. The reason why I bring this up is because mortgage rates are plummeting. They have plummeted, and they continue to plummet. So as a home buyer, where the economy still isn't we're not at peak employment. In fact, the unemployment rate is still in the fours, so the economy isn't the greatest which means home values aren't at peak levels. Per se, some people are making the case that we could see home values could be coming down while interest rates come down. So right now, what that means is, when you have falling interest rates and either stagnant home values or maybe even some declining real estate values in some areas of the country, that markets that we focus on other markets we don't focus on, when you combine all that, this is that inflection point where it's actually a really, really good time to jump in. There is a little bit of political uncertainty in that we don't know who's going to win the election. We don't know who's going to win Congress. What's even more important than who becomes president is Congress. Which party wins the house, which party wins the Senate? Because you've written about it in your newsletter, Keith, the Democrats and the Republicans have very different housing policies, and we could do an entire episode on each party and what their housing policy is. I will keep it simple. Here's the cliff note version. If we have the same party in all the chambers of the government the same political party, then we'll see a tremendous impact in the real estate market. I think if the Democrats sweep then you're going to see real estate home values go back up, inflation go back up. Because Kamala Harris is, she is a main proponent of giving basically a $25,000 off coupon to first time homebuyers. So that's across the board all 50 states. Basically you got $25,000 off. What I've learned with coupons, I'm sure you know this, Keith, most coupons actually are a terrible deal. You get something in the mail that's a coupon. You either spend it or you call the service provider and they jack up the price. So you think you're getting a good deal, but they end up jacking up the price even more than what market value is, and that's what's going to happen to housing where you're going to have so many young like I said, millennials, Gen Zers, who are looking to buy their first home, they think they're getting such a great deal because of this $25,000 off coupon, when, in reality, after about three months of this program, you're going to see we're going to be back to 2021, end of 2021, beginning of 2022, all over again, where homes will enter into bidding wars. Now, if there's a split, President is one party and Congress has split, then there's actually going to be almost no change, which could be a good thing. We're not going to see much change at all. It's just going to be the mostly the status quo. Really the only change is going to be on tariffs, If Trump were to win, or foreign policy, those are going to be the two main issues, regardless of which party wins, if there's a split. So the bottom line is that right now, despite this uncertainty, I've heard from a lot of GRE clients, oh, I don't want to do anything because of this election. I've asked for the logic and like, the election, should it really change? Because right now is still an excellent time, like I said, with stagnant home values with plummeting interest rates, really through the end of the year, and as the Fed keeps cutting rates, which I think they're going to engage in a prolonged rate cut cycle for quite a while, and rates are only going to keep going down. So that's my general view of the current state of mortgage rates, the Federal risk. Reserve the election housing markets?   Keith Weinhold  20:03   Yes, Naresh is talking about a newsletter that I sent to you last month where I basically show that, historically, presidential elections really don't affect the real estate market price appreciation much at all. They might affect stocks in the short term, though, which are more volatile and Naresh, do you want to tell me a bit more about why you seem to be rather bullish this year for real estate investors, of course, things change. Last year you were more bearish. You had more negative sentiment about the investor environment. So are there any other reasons why you see more positivity today, other than lower interest rates?   Naresh Vissa  20:37   Yeah. Well, last year, like I said, where I touched on, we saw peak interest rates. So the Fed stopped raising around the end of last summer. I want to say maybe July of 2023 it was, yes, the interest rates stayed high. There was almost no movement until relatively recently, let's say over the last three months, when it was factored into the market that the Fed was going to begin its rate cutting cycle. So the reason why I don't want to say I was bearish on real estate last year, because we have some providers, for example, partners of ours, who offered really, really good and they still are offering really, really good incentives, which help offset the high interest rates this time around, like I said, with the unemployment situation, we're in the force in more layoffs. Archive, the media isn't talking enough about layoffs, large companies, large tech companies, manufacturing jobs. Layoffs have been rampant for the past two years. This is not a recent phenomena, and it's finally showing up in the unemployment data. And if you look at real unemployment data at a website like shadow stats, it's really more than 4% and the number of people are working multiple jobs. That's not really factored into the unemployed. You know, one person working three jobs, for example, you gotta have a way to factor that in, which government hasn't figured out lately. So the point that I'm making here is that if you have a job right now, if you're making cash flow, if you have a job, then you're going to find this as an opportunity with the lower interest rates, with knowing that home values have somewhat declined recently, this is a good opportunity to jump in and get good cash flowing real estate. Now, I did touch on the previous question about Kamala Harris's real estate plan, $25,000 coupon, which will certainly lead to real estate. You can call it real estate appreciation. You can call it inflation. But one thing that I should talk about the other side, which is if Trump and the Republicans were to sweep, then we're going to see mass deportations of undocumented immigrants, illegal immigrants, and that's going to affect the housing market tremendously. And how is it going to do that? Because it's estimated that at least 8 million people are going to be deported over the four year period. Those 8 million people right now are all renters. Close to 100% of them are renters. I think that would actually be somewhat deflationary, at least in the rental market, maybe not in the housing market per se, because a lot of these people aren't necessarily home buyers, but in the rental market, we could likely see a stagnation of rental growth mixed in that's making the assumption that building picks up, and Trump has already said. Both Trump and Harris have said that they're going to incentivize home builders to build more multifamily, build more apartments, build more. In Trump's case, he did these opportunity zones, which he wants to do more of, build more single family housing. It's definitely a supply side issue more so than a demand issue, but both supply and demand always contribute to the equation as a whole. So what does all this mean? Again? Forget about the election. Forget about November 5, which is election day. Right now is a really good time, because interest rates are plummeting. Home values have remained stagnant. In some cases, home values have come down. And the best part, we work with providers who are still offering really amazing incentives. And on october 24 at 8pm we are hosting a webinar to share what I think is our best incentive program yet. That's Thursday, October 24 where you can get class, a new build of properties with interest rates in the 4's that's with that you're not even buying down the interest rate, the interest with special deals, special incentives, special financing, interest rates in the fours, up to $30,000 in immediate equity because of these incentives. And the best part, we even have an option that's zero money down, zero money down there are incentives that are giving back cash at closing. So it's, you buy a property, you as a buyer, get cash back at closing. There are just too many incentives to name here. I've named, I think, five different ones. And this is not a case of you pick one out of the five. In some cases, you might qualify for all five. So october 24 it's before the election. It's live. I'm going to be on live with a special guest who is a very well known, seasoned real estate investor and licensed real estate broker, one of the most well known real estate personalities in the country. So I highly recommend our file go to GREwebinars.com GREwebinars.com to register for that free special event.   Keith Weinhold  25:46   Now you, as a real estate investor, are probably encouraged by this environment of lower and lower interest rates as well you should be, but sometimes it can help to ask yourself the question, okay, how do lower interest rates affect who I'm purchasing a property from. In this case, with the event narration I are talking about, it's new build properties and home builders. They see more competition now coming from the resale market due to the fact that interest rates have fallen so interest rates are thawing out the locked up resale market thawing out this lock in effect, and that's because existing home sellers, well, they're a little bit more willing to sell because the replacement home no longer has an interest rate that's as high over there in the resale market, and lower rates also, of course, mean that more buyers qualify to buy resale homes. So see new home builders, they now have more competition from the resale market, so consequently they're more willing to give you a strong incentive to buy from them. So take advantage of what Naresh and I are talking about coming up in just three days here on Thursday.   Naresh Vissa  26:53   Yes, and I want to reiterate, GREwebinars.com GREwebinars.com this is a online special event. We've done several of these in the past. I've done, I think this is maybe my fifth online special event. Again, I've never seen incentives like what our provider is going to be sharing on this webinar. And you can only get these incentives by attending the webinar, or registering for the webinar, watching the replay after we're talking the rates in the 4's, they will buy down the rate for you. So it's a great deal to have somebody else buy down your rate. You'll get money back at closing if you opt for that. So that's basically a rebate that you'll be getting as the home buyer. Just really, really good overall incentives being offered. And like I said, we set this up because this is a perfect time. We are in a situation, the first time since 2020 since the pandemic, where we're seeing plummeting interest rates, stagnation of home values, kind of uncertainty, because we're in this time of purgatory, just like we were in 2020 before the election. Just think about how many investors, most real estate investors, say right now, they say, Oh, I wish I bought everything in 2020, right? Well, we're in a similar situation now, where, again, home values, interest rates, and this state of purgatory of what's going to happen. We're in a very similar situation. And just think about that emotion, because I hear it almost every day, or when I tell people, Hey, I own real estate myself, and I bought most of my properties before 2021 the last property I bought was in 2020 and they say, Oh, wow. Like, you're a genius. You're so smart. Like, how did you know to buy man and again, similar environment, even 2009 2010 2011 even 2012 similar environment where interest rates were very low. 2009 was when they were plummeting. And you think back of I was too young back then, but I know, Keith, you were an investor back then, but you bought in 2009 you did even better than buying in 2020   Keith Weinhold  29:00   That's right. And in fact, in all the years that I've been buying real estate, I have never bought a property with incentives as good as what you and your co host are going to be talking about at GRE's live event coming up on Thursday night, just starting with a full 10% of the purchase price in credit back to the buyer, and there's more to it. You'll learn all about it again on GRE 's live event for new build, turnkey income properties with zero money down potentially. It is co hosted by Naresh in the guest that I had here last week, Zach. Again, it is on Thursday, October 24 at 8pm Eastern. You can register now at GREwebinars.com and you will be hearing more from Naresh then. Naresh has been great having you back on the show.    Naresh Vissa  29:49   Thank you, Keith and I'll see everyone on october 24 GRE webinars.com to register. Thanks.   Keith Weinhold  30:01   yes, you'll hear more from Naresh and co host Zach on Thursday's live event each year, homebuyers often take a step back in the fall, this time of year. Understand though, that year over year, they are up about 4% per the NAR as of this time. And when it comes to the political effect on housing. You already know what I think. I don't put much emphasis there. Today, I am better off than I was four years ago, and it has nothing to do with who the President was or was in Congress, and in the preceding four years, I became better off during that time period too, because what happens in my house and what happens in your house is more important than what happens in the White House. As Naresh and I are talking about new build property here, and you're hearing about extremely attractive incentives. Hey, let's not let the point be lost. New build properties can be profitable for you over time due to lower maintenance costs. New builds have lower insurance premiums, and that's on top of how we discussed you could get low interest rates in in southeastern high growth path of progress markets in our upcoming live online event, and at the least, you will learn about creative deal structuring, and you know, when it comes to zero money down like that very concept, there was a time in my life where I thought, yeah, that sounds about as real as athletic brand beer, or about as real as lab grown meat, but all three actually exist. Here's what's exciting, we have partnered with major builders that are sitting on excess new build inventory right now, like Lennar and DR Horton, to help bring you institutional level pricing. Your name does not have to be BlackRock. And this is something we've never done before here at GRE these new build properties in those fast growing areas of the southeast, they're often single family rentals. And yes, you know what I like to say about single family rentals. Stainless steel appliances are great, as long as you or your tenant never touch them. But to be clear, there are two levels of incentives we've been promised. So we've got to have this event now before they vanish. You can potentially use both, first, up to a 10% credit at closing, so yes, on a 250k market value property, as much as a 25k credit and then secondly, a 5% down payment we've paired with credit unions in local markets that make Portfolio loans to investors, and that is up to five properties max. And to get that 5% down, you must qualify, just like you would for most any mortgage loan. And by the way, do you know what a portfolio loan means? That means when the bank or credit union makes the loan, it'll go sell that off to a secondary market and have it packaged into a mortgage backed security. What the bank or the credit union does is they keep that in their own portfolio. A portfolio loan does not mean that the lender makes a loan against your existing properties in your portfolio. That's what I used to think when I was a new investor, but that is a misnomer. That's not what a portfolio loan is. Well, with these incentives, if you get a 10% credit and only spend a 5% down payment plus four to 5% on closing costs, hey, there you are. You are in with zero down payment. It's a chance for you to get your fit together. Yes, what fits you is zero down right for you. I mean, you know that I am a staunch leverage proponent, but if that's not right for you, you can use your 10% cash back discount elsewhere, like buying down your mortgage rate to about 4% maybe even three point something percent. And see right here, this is exactly where the deal structuring gets fun incentives like this don't last. When the inventory is gone, it's gone show up live, and that way you can also have any of your questions answered if you have them, yes, our online event is an even bigger deal in fantasy football. Well, I trust that you learned something useful today on this week's episode of the get rich education podcast, to review, it's how tenant rent to income ratios are actually stable near 31% on why new build properties only cost about 1% more than existing properties today. And all about creative deal structuring, where you can own brand new new build income properties potentially with as little as 5% down and perhaps zero down payment. It's a really good opportunity. We sure have mentioned it before, but one last time, all the action takes place Thursday, October 24 at 8pm eastern at GREwebinars.com. Until next week, I'm your host, Keith weinhold, don't quit with your Daydream   Speaker 2  35:27   Nothing on this show should be considered specific, personal or professional advice. Please consult an appropriate tax, legal, real estate, financial or business professional for individualized advice. Opinions of guests are their own. Information is not guaranteed. All investment strategies have the potential for profit or loss. The host is operating on behalf of get rich Education LLC, exclusively.   Keith Weinhold  35:55   The preceding program was brought to you by your home for wealth building Getricheducation.com.  

Welcome back to the show. Thank you for being here. My guest today is Kenny Wyland, a small business owner and real estate investor. This episode was originally designed to have two average American guys talking about why one of them loves Trump and one does not. For the sake of understanding either "side".  Sadly my conservative Trump fan had scheduling conflicts and in the interest of time we had to move on without him. Stay tuned for a follow up with just him as soon as possible. I try to be as balanced as possible on this show. Kenny puts forth a decent and fairly conservative argument about why Donald Trump could be dangerous for democracy.  The conversation may surprise you. And all of us ought to be very concerned. In Trump's Own Words FoxNews Story . . . #LoveTrump #AnyoneButTrump #HarrisWalz #RomneyObama #ProtectTheConstitution #Leftism #Conservatism #TrumpIsHitler #ConstitutionTrumpsAll #TerminateTheConstitution #FoxNews #LiberalMedia #NewYorkTimes

In Trump v. United States, we have said that the Court went far astray from the Constitution and from its duty, endangering the nation in the short and long terms.  Many have shared this opinion and these fears, and reaction has been profound. In the New York Times, two law professors take up the pen and offer a number of suggestions that purport to restrain and direct the Court towards Congress' will, assuming that Congress agrees with the authors, that is.  Senator Schumer in a recent bill took a similar though not as extreme direction. We identify the flaws with these approaches, and offer an alternative that would be constitutional, and has an actual chance of being effective, based upon history and constitutional structure. We also take up some fascinating readers' questions, including one which might matter for some overseas voters.  CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.

Welcome to #Millennial, the home of pretend adulting and real DEBATE talk! Starting this week we're releasing video episodes on YouTube! Subscribe and watch us each week! We're coming to you right after Tuesday night's Presidential debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump and boy, was that a doozy. It began with Kamala establishing dominance by forcing a handshake, and it all went downhill from there. We kept a running list of the best and worst moments of the debate, but one of our favorite takeaways of the night was ABC's moderators fact checking Trump's lies on the spot. FINALLY! In Trump dystopian fantasy world, undocumented migrants are taking over our cities and... eating peoples' pets? Kamala really gets under the orange guy's skin by bringing his crowd sizes and engagement into question, and that's where he really starts to flip. Trump used immigration as his pivot topic for... pretty much everything. FOX News called, they want their talking points back! "Donald Trump was fired by 81 million people and he's having a hard time processing that." How are we feeling about how things stand with the Presidential race post-debate? Kamala killed it, but Trump is playing a different game than traditional politics. Will this debate move the needle further out of his favor? The next debate will be between Tim Walz and JD Vance on Tuesday 10/1, so we'll see you for more debate coverage soon! This week's recommendations: get your updated flu and covid shots if eligible (Laura), Trader Joe's Pumpkin Spice cold brew concentrate (Pam), and Taco Cat Goat Cheese Pizza, the card game (Andrew). And in this week's installment of After Dark: Let's talk strategies to be safe and sane for the rest of the election season. How will we be voting - in person, or absentee? Let's recap where we were when the election was called for Biden in 2020, and make predictions about how long it will take to get results this time. Is it worth it to pay much attention to the media and polling? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

September 9, 2024The Daily Mojo is 2 hours of news, commentary, comedy, and auditory deliciousness."The New New McCarthyism"Brad plays a memory from Star Trek Day (September 8th) that would be tough to pull off on present-day Earth. Much like the 50s, we're on a search for Commies, but nothing makes sense. The FBI continues to be a joke. George W Bush doesn't surprise us...again. Phil Bell's Morning Update - Says - If you love this country and believe In Trump - show It! HERERon asks whatever happened to Common Sense in his TWISIOur affiliate partners:We've partnered with The Wellness Company – a based, dedicated group of medical pros – including Dr. Peter McCullough – to bring you a single trustworthy source for your health.www.GetWellMojo.comPromo Code: Mojo50Dave and his crew were roasting historically great coffee before some of these newcomers even thought about creating a coffee brand. He's still the best, in our eyes! www.AmericanPrideRoasters.comNothing says “I appreciate you” like an engraved gift or award. Ron and Misty (mostly Misty) have the perfect solution for you if you need a gift idea for family or your employees!www.MoJoLaserPros.comWe love to support Mike Lindell and his company. He's a real patriot and an American success story!www.MoJoMyPillow.com Promo Code: Mojo50Be ready for anything from a hurricane to man-created stupidity (toilet paper shortage, anyone?). The tools and food storage you need to weather the storm.www.PrepareWithMojo50.com Stay ConnectedWATCH The Daily Mojo LIVE 7-9a CT: www.TheDailyMojo.com (RECOMMEDED)Rumble: HEREFacebook: HEREMojo 5-0 TV: HEREFreedomsquare: HEREOr just LISTEN:The Daily MoJo Channel Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-daily-mojo-with-brad-staggs--3085897/support.

In Trump v. United States, the Supreme Court addressed the issue of presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for actions taken while in office. Former President Trump's legal team argued that a former president should have absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts performed during their tenure, citing the need for presidents to act boldly without fear of future prosecution. They contended that all allegations in the indictment fell within Trump's official duties as president. The United States government, represented by Special Counsel Jack Smith, argued that while presidents may have some immunity for official acts, this does not extend to criminal conduct or actions outside the scope of presidential duties. The Court ruled in a 6-3 opinion that former presidents have absolute immunity for actions within their "conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority" and presumptive immunity for other official acts, but no immunity for unofficial acts. The case was remanded to lower courts to determine which of Trump's alleged actions were official or unofficial.Please join us in discussing the decision and its future implications.

0:00 - Dan & Amy Review Day 1 of DNC   11:02 - Jasmine Crockett apparently cries a lot when it comes to Kamala   25:17 - Biden Farewell Speech    46:20 - Thomas Weitzel, retired Chief of Police of Riverside, reviews the Chicago Police performance from Day 1 at DNC. Chief Weitzel is a great follow on X  @ChiefWeitzel   59:50 - In-depth History with Frank from Arlington Heights   01:03:04 - Senior writer for the Dispatch, David Drucker, on the challenges ahead for Kamala Harris and the Democrats response to Biden's late night speech at the DNC. David is also the author of In Trump's Shadow: The Battle for 2024 and the Future of the GOP   01:22:37 - President at Wirepoints, Ted Dabrowski, explains why Chicago is the perfect place for the DNC as Illinois is a prime example of Democrat "greed" Get Ted's latest at wirepoints.org   01:38:18 - America's Lab Rats? 02:01:10 - Illinois State Rep 8th district, LaShawn Ford, shares his favorite moments from Day 1 at the DNC. Keep updated with LaShawn on X @RepFord8See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Across the political divide Americans view each other with ever deepening sentiments of distrust and suspicion.  Historian Matthew Rowley argues that the absence of shared memories of a national past fuels this polarization and the rise of violence in American politics.  In Trump and the Protestant Reaction to Make America Great Again, Rowley looks at what the published work of American Protestants from across the political spectrum reveals about the challenges and possibilities of forging a common narrative that could bridge the current divide.  

In episode 1719, Jack and Miles are joined by comedian, Pallavi Gunalan, to discuss… The Rock Is NOT Good At Convincing Young Men To Die For American Imperialism?! Republicans Act Like They Are ‘Surprised' Or ‘Disappointed' In Trump's Racism, Athletes Give The Olympic Village Food Underwhelming Reviews On TikTok—Except The Chocolate Muffins and more! The Rock Is NOT Good At Convincing Young Men To Die For American Imperialism?! Athletes Give The Olympic Village Food Underwhelming Reviews On TikTok—Except The Chocolate Muffins Athletes served raw meat as Olympic village rations food French 'cuisine' in athletes' village gets thumbs-down from Biles Problems Plaguing Paris Olympics: Political Uncertainty, False 'Anti-Sex' Bed Rumors And More Paris wanted an AC-free Olympics. Visiting nations had other plans. LISTEN: Mo Ṣe B'ọ́lá Tán by Dele SosimiSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

It's Monday, July 15th, A.D. 2024. This is The Worldview in 5 Minutes heard at www.TheWorldview.com. I'm Adam McManus. (Adam@TheWorldview.com) By Adam McManus Pakistan among worst violators of religious freedom The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom has recommended that the State Department designate Pakistan as a “Country of Particular Concern”, citing its Islamic blasphemy laws as a prime reason for religious freedom violations, reports Morning Star News. Muslims in Pakistan continues to perpetrate widespread abuses of religious freedom, including forced conversions of Christian and Hindu girls to Islam, and targeted violence against religious minorities, according to the 2024 USCIRF report. (p.40-41) If the U.S. State Department designated Pakistan as a Country of Particular Concern, it would subject it to potential sanctions and other diplomatic measures aimed at improving religious freedom conditions. Attempted assassination of Donald Trump at campaign rally As former President Donald Trump was delivering a speech in Butler, Pennsylvania on Saturday evening, shots rang out, and he clutched his right ear, which was bleeding, as filmed by Fox 45 Baltimore. Just seconds before the shooting, Trump called Joe Biden the worst president in America for allowing millions of illegal immigrants to cross our Southern border. Listen. TRUMP: “And then the worst president in the history of our country took over and look what happened to our country. Probably 20 million people. And you know, that's a little bit old --  that chart. That chart's a couple of months old. And if you want to really see something that's sad, take a look at what happened. …” (audio of shots) SECRET SERVICE AGENT 1: “Get down. Get down.” SECRET SERVICE AGENT 2: “What are we doing?” Later, on his Truth Social account, Trump wrote, “I was shot with a bullet that pierced the upper part of my right ear. I knew immediately that something was wrong in that I heard a whizzing sound, shots, and immediately felt the bullet ripping through the skin. Much bleeding took place, so I realized then what was happening. GOD BLESS AMERICA!” After those shots rang out, Secret Service agents swarmed the president, taking him to the ground while shielding him from any additional fire. SECRET SERVICE: “Shooter is down. Are we good to move? Are we clear? We're clear. Let's move. Let's move. We're clear.” As the Secret Service were ready to move him to his car, Trump asked them to wait. TRUMP:  “Wait, wait, wait.” (You can click on this link to hear everything the microphones picked up). The former president, his face smeared with blood, thrust his fist into the air and told the crowd, “Fight, fight, fight.” The crowd erupted in a tidal wave of approval, followed by chants of “USA.” CROWD: (cheers) “USA. USA. USA. USA. USA.” Eyewitness saw man with rifle bear crawling up a nearby roof The BBC interviewed an eyewitness outside the security perimeter who claimed he saw the shooter who had bear crawled up a roof with a rifle just five minutes before firing shots. EYEWITNESS 1: “We noticed the guy crawling, bear crawling, up the roof of the building beside us, 50 feet away from us. We're pointing at the guy crawling up the roof.” BBC REPORTER: “And he had a gun, right?” EYEWITNESS 1:  “He had a rifle.” REPORTER: “A rifle.” EYEWITNESS 1: “You can clearly see him with a rifle. Absolutely! We're pointing at him. The police are down there running around on the ground. We're like, ‘Hey, man, there's a guy on the roof with a rifle.' You know, we're like, ‘Hey, right here on the roof. We can see from right here. We see him.' “I'm thinking to myself, I'm like, ‘Why is Trump still speaking? Why have they not pulled him off the stage?' I'm standing there pointing at him for two or three minutes. Secret Service is looking at us from the top of the barn. I'm pointing at that roof. Next thing you know, five shots rang out.” REPORTER: “You're certain that the shots came from that guy on the roof?” EYEWITNESS 1: “100%. 100%. The roof the way the slope went, he was behind where they could see. But why is there not Secret Service on all of these roofs here? I mean, this is not a big place.” REPORTER: “You're pretty sure they shot the guy.” EYEWITNESS 1: “Absolutely. 100%. Yep.” Romans 13:3-4 says, “For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. For the one in authority is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God's servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.” One killed and another injured in the stands Sadly, Trump was not the only innocent person who was shot.  A Trump rally participant, who was an eyewitness to the two other people who were shot in the stands, told ABC News what he saw. EYEWITNESS 2: “I was just about, like, 30 feet from Trump. And then I saw the people that had been shot. They were bringing them down in the stands right above me. I just saw the man that was hit in the head. There was a lot of blood and I knew there was no way he was going to survive that and then there were two of them that they brought down but it was like real chaos.” ABC NEWS REPORTER: “What was going through your mind as you saw that person with tons of blood on them?” EYEWITNESS 2: “Maybe this was the shooter and that he committed suicide. I didn't think about just like someone that was in the stands.” In Trump's Truth Social post, he wrote, “Most importantly, I want to extend my condolences to the family of the person at the rally who was killed, and also to the family of another person that was badly injured.” EYEWITNESS 2: “Trump survived. It would have been horrible news and worst news if he had been killed. So, that's good. Every generation thinks, ‘Well, we're past that. We're not going to have any more assassination attempts.' And then you have something else.” Biden: “There's no place in America for this kind of violence.” On Saturday night, President Joe Biden made a 2-minute statement about the apparent assassination attempt, reports CNN. BIDEN: “I have tried to get a hold of Donald. He's with his doctors. Apparently, he's doing well. I plan on talking to him shortly, I hope. “Look, there's no place in America for this kind of violence. It's sick. It's sick. It's one of the reasons why we have to unite this country. “The bottom line is the Trump rally was a rally that he should have been able, to be conducted peacefully without any problem. But the idea that there's political violence or violence in America is just not appropriate. Everybody must condemn it. Everybody.” Senator Rubio: “God protected President Trump.” Republican Senator Marco Rubio of Florida tweeted, “God protected President Trump.” Gary Bauer, Senior Vice President of Public Policy for the Dr. James Dobson Family Institute, said, “The Left has produced this vicious atmosphere with their constant demonization of Trump, of Christians, of conservatives, and pro-life activists. They have used this hate for nearly a decade. We must stand up and fight back to save our country.” And Pastor Robert Jeffress of First Baptist Church in Dallas, Texas, told Fox News, "The attempted assassination of President Trump is evidence of the reality of evil in the world. We thank God for protecting the life of this courageous leader who is a warrior for truth and the friend of Christians everywhere." Don Lemon vs. Candace Owens on homosexual faux marriage And finally, former CNN host Don Lemon, a self-avowed homosexual, asked Candace Owens, a conservative, what she thought about his homosexual faux marriage to a man. LEMON: “What do you think about same-sex marriage?” OWENS: “It's a sin.” LEMON: “You think it's a sin?” OWENS: “It is a sin.” LEMON: “So, you think I'm sinful?” OWNS: “What's that?” LEMON: “You think I'm sinful because I'm married to a man.” OWENS: “Yeah.” LEMON: “You do?” OWENS: “Yeah. You're sinning. You are in a sinful relationship. I don't believe, I actually don't believe marriage can be between two men.” In response to Lemon's post of that clip, two of the first people to react, agreed with Candace Owens. One tweeted, “You asked a Christian what their opinion on same-sex marriage was, they gave you the Biblical response, and you're shocked?” And the other said, “It isn't enough for you to live freely with whoever you choose, you want society to approve and celebrate it too? You're greedy.” Romans 1:24 says, “Therefore, God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.” Close And that's The Worldview on this Monday, July 15th, in the year of our Lord 2024. Join me Adam McManus, and my two sons, Honor and Valor, at the Colorado Father-Son retreat Thursday, August 15th through Sunday, August 18th. Go to ColoradoFatherSon.com.  Subscribe by iTunes or email to our unique Christian newscast at www.TheWorldview.com. Or get the Generations app through Google Play or The App Store. I'm Adam McManus (Adam@TheWorldview.com). Seize the day for Jesus Christ.

In a recent telephonic conversation with Sean Hannity, presented by Fox News, the likely GOP candidate Donald Trump aired his views on why Joe Biden, the President, is not bowing out of the race. A central factor offered by Trump was Biden's 'ego', along with a mention of Biden's family playing a role in insulating him from critique, thereby encouraging him to remain in the race. In Trump's words, 'Biden's cognitive deterioration is being shielded by his family and largely ignored by the media, but that's proving a tough task now'. He suggestively remarked on Biden's resistance to stepping down, attributing it to his ego as well as his desire to stay relevant. Trump went on to talk about Hunter Biden, who, having faced conviction on multiple criminal charges, still manages to join White House discussions with his father. Trump voiced his disapproval of such practices, categorically stating that this course of action is harmful to our nation's interest. Trump added, 'Giving up does not seem an option for Biden, and he would feel regret for a long time if he quit'. The 45th President voiced an appeal to discuss with Biden's doctors, while expressing that Biden has been cushioned from a reality-check by dishonest media, hence his reference to them as 'Fake News'. This detailed commentary from Trump ensued post the declaration by Biden, the seasoned 81-year-old Democrat, that he has no intention of withdrawing from the race, a decision that goes against the popular demand of his party. This stubborn resistance has stirred fresh controversies in the political realm.  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Listen to Zooming In at The UnPopulist in your favorite podcast app: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Google Podcasts | RSS | YouTubeLandry Ayres: Welcome to Zooming In at The UnPopulist. I'm Landry Ayres.As the 2024 election draws nearer and Donald Trump's second-term plans come into greater focus, critics of his, across the ideological spectrum, are torn as to whether Trump's movement is continuous with historical fascism. Does the dreaded “f”-word apply to him? Or is it an unhelpful exaggeration?On today's episode, The UnPopulist senior editor Berny Belvedere reconnects with his former Arc Digital colleague and international relations professor at the University of Illinois, Nicholas Grossman. The two discuss the propriety of using historically-weighty labels in our public discourse today, where to situate Trump within the not-so-grand tradition of authoritarianism, and break down how the Heritage Foundation-powered Project 2025 would fuel further democratic backsliding. We hope you enjoy.A transcript of today's podcast appears below. It has been edited for flow and clarity.Berny Belvedere: Nick, do you believe terms like “fascism,” “Nazism,” “communism” are overused today? If so, why do you think they are?Nicholas Grossman: So, in a way they're overused and also not. “Nazi” came to be a word that just meant bad, the thing that we all agree on is bad, and can be used in very serious contexts and comedic contexts—like the Soup Nazi in Seinfeld, and all the running jokes and memes of Godwin's law and “everything I don't like on the internet is Hitler” and anything else along those lines. So people do overuse it. But also, with “Nazi” in particular, it can reach a level where people then think that any lesson from Nazi Germany or any lesson from the 20th century more broadly is ipso facto wrong, that there's something inherently wrong about comparing the right-wing nationalist-populist movement that won an election and then lost power and then attempted a putsch and then reconsolidated and ran for power again, to America's right-wing nationalist-populist movement that won an election and then lost power by election and then attempted a putsch and then sought power again. That seems pretty ridiculous that you couldn't connect any of those.As for “fascism,” with thinking of it as this thing nearly everybody agrees was wrong that happened in the 20th century, when people try to apply it more loosely to things that are, say, authoritarian but not necessarily fascist … that could reduce the power of the word. But I think at this point, people using the word like Joe Biden used “semi-fascism,” to describe Trump's authoritarian project … I don't think is unreasonable.Berny: So when Biden used “semi-fascism,” how is it that that qualifier, “semi,” managed to successfully avoid the trap of requiring a perfect historical parallel while at the same time bringing in a term that has enough connotative heft to meet the gravity of Trump and MAGA's offenses? How is it that a word as simple as “semi” is able to successfully get us out of this jam?Nicholas: You know, that's a really good point. I hadn't quite thought about it that way, but it does look like the “semi” modifier has threaded that needle where it's a way of indicating, “Okay, I'm not saying this is literally Hitler and that we are headed for World War III and another Holocaust.” I mean, to pick a kind of obvious example: When Hitler wrote Mein Kampf, there is explicit calls for genocide. In Trump's largely ghostwritten books, you don't see anything like the final solution for the Jews. That runs into the problem of, “No, you're being hyperbolic.” So “semi” makes it where, “I'm not saying it's exactly that. I'm saying it bears enough resemblance to that that we should think of it as serious and bad.” And given that I and many others do think of it as serious and bad, and in particular as anti-democratic and authoritarian, the “semi” adds a way to use a word that connects with a lot of people without running into those, “So you're saying this is literally Hitler” counterarguments.Berny: As an international relations professor who has taught classes on terrorism, you've argued convincingly that misapplications of that word, “terrorism,” can have real consequences and that therefore applying the word well, in a more narrowly defined way, is really important. Is the issue with misapplications of the word “Nazi” or “fascism” on that same level, or not really?Nicholas: You're right that I'm a stickler on the word “terrorism,” that it's something that I teach and have taught for a while, and I take issue with a common usage of it to be basically a synonym of “bad,” a synonym of “thing I don't like.” If you Google “Republican terrorists” or “Democratic terrorists,” you get millions of hits. I think it is important for us to be able to really understand that “terrorism” refers specifically to violent political actions targeted against non-combatants by non-state actors. It's important for conceptual clarity, but in particular for developing counter-strategies and executing them well.I tend not to use “fascism” as well. I stick more to something like “authoritarianism” because the usefulness about it is: Trump's project is clearly authoritarian and there's no ambiguity about it. He's calling for the termination of the Constitution, saying, “I'll be a dictator”—he's quite open about it. You could have judged it from actions, but also now from statements. Whereas with something like the word “fascism,” that leads to debates that are potentially distracting. So I think it's a mistake to really fixate on the word, to be very insistent upon it.My concern with the word “terrorism” is not throwing it around so often and so loosely that it loses its power. And I feel that way about “fascism” as well—as a word that we shouldn't throw around loosely. I'll give you a recent example of this. When some people were reacting to police shutting down various campus protests, some cases seemed, to me and to many others, like an excessive use of force, just the sheer number of manpower and police presence that was being used. I saw comments along the lines of, “Why would you be concerned about fascism? Fascism is clearly already here.” And, no, that's really not it. So, the police arrested a bunch of people and, if any of them are charged with a crime, they'll have a chance to defend themselves in court. And that maybe is bad—certainly somebody can criticize it—but it's also not fascism. There's a danger of a “boy who cried wolf” effect where, if you're constantly calling anything you don't like this maximal bad word, then when something that is actually like that thing comes around, people are less inclined to believe you.Then again, the lesson of “The Boy Who Cried Wolf” is not that wolves aren't real and you don't need to worry about them.Berny: We're going to focus on more than just the term “fascism” here in this discussion, but I want to stay on the term for just a sec because it is a prominent issue in our discourse that keeps popping up.So, we humans tend to be incorrigibly committed to clarifying our world by describing it, by capturing it linguistically. But there's an inherent limitation to doing that that seems to always rear its head. Calling something a “Nazi” or “neo-Nazi” initiative helps to situate it within a particular historical movement. But the downside to that is historical episodes, by their very nature, are in the minds of many people tethered to particular circumstances, the ones that they temporally existed in. So history gives us these movements that have a fixed shape. And that can somewhat frustrate new applications of those labels.The part that a lot of people are underestimating is just how incredibly powerful institutional authority is. This idea of, it's norms all the way down … the idea that powerful people should follow the law is a norm. It is only a law to the extent that the people in power enforce it. And if the people in power, just enough of the people in power, don't enforce it, then it might as well not be a law. — Nicholas GrossmanSo to continue with the Nazi example, when some form of discourse today, whether it's a meme or a trope, or some rhetoric that a politician uses, gets characterized as “Nazi” or “neo-Nazi,” skeptics who don't detect a full-blown, genocidal antisemitism in that discourse will suggest that the “Nazi” label is overblown or being unfairly applied. I think the same thing happens, though at a lower scale, with “fascism.”My own take is that proponents and skeptics alike of these terms have in mind different aspects of those movements when they apply the labels or when they hear the labels applied. So when Trump gets called a “fascist” or a “neo-fascist,” the idea isn't necessarily that he's literally continuing Mussolini's project or that he's done the same exact things Franco did in Spain or whatever. Sometimes it means that. But sometimes I suspect the term is applied because a commentator or analyst just wants to note that Trump has similar impulses or inclinations or beliefs. The idea isn't that there's a perfect or near perfect match between the concrete actions Trump has taken and the ones past fascists have taken—because those will always be indexed to a particular time horizon. I think the idea, instead, is that Trump's posture toward democracy, toward the nation, the individual's role within the nation, and so on, is meaningfully similar to past fascist leaders and how they viewed things.If institutions exist today that reliably frustrate Trump's ability to carry out a more full-bodied fascistic reign, more so than they ever did for someone like Mussolini, that doesn't suggest, and it shouldn't suggest, that Trump lacks fascistic tendencies. Because, of course, that's just something external. Trump has routinely praised Putin and Kim and the way the societies they rule over are organized around their whims and wishes. The fact that he can't achieve that level of compulsory, fawning admiration here doesn't mean that he doesn't hold those yearnings.Does the fact that at any given time some discourse participants may have in mind tendencies and beliefs, whereas others have in mind concrete actions and historical parallels, and that therefore there's always going to be a talking past each other dynamic, does that suggest that historical terms like “fascism” are more unhelpful than helpful and should be retired?Nicholas: It can. I think that makes a lot of sense. This is also the purpose of those qualifiers like “semi.” One that's especially popular when you talk about things like political ideologies is “neo”—like a new version that's kind of like the one in the past. That tends to be how people thread the needle.But I do think that you're right in the tied-to-historical-circumstances aspect of it. And that also makes it where it is not necessarily the best or clearest form of communication or of persuasion because it can send some people down a rabbit hole of, “Let's compare that circumstance in history to this today,” whereas somebody who is using it might want to say, “These are similar”—or, often in some cases, it's a way of almost saying, “I think this is really bad.” So maybe a word like “authoritarian” doesn't have a real kick; “fascist,” “Nazi,” you know, has more of a kick and maybe is more likely to get people to pay attention—but it also, as you say, can make it more likely for people to shut off or to resist it. That's why I tend to say “anti-democracy” or “authoritarian,” or a more political science term, “democratic backsliding,” because that is unambiguously what is happening and it doesn't carry that same “historical circumstance” baggage.Berny: So, what is fascism, historically?Nicholas: So there's some debate about that, which again is one of the reasons why maybe it is not the most politically useful, or I guess discourse-useful, word. Historically, people place the origins in Italy, with Mussolini as the first real practitioner. When I was studying this, the person that I read the most was an Italian named Alfredo Rocco. He said that there were a couple of central principles: there's a hyper-nationalism, and an ethnic nationalism. Organicism, which is the sense that cell is to body as individual is to state … in other words, you give over everything to the state, as if you don't personally matter. Belief in superiority, then also militarism and foreign aggression. There are a number of other points that people like Umberto Eco have listed.There is a kind of later argument, and one that I find pretty persuasive, that fascism is almost a kind of anti-politics in that it is fixated on the past, often a fictional past, one in which there's not only nostalgia but trying to reclaim past glory and is a rejection in a way of the very idea of politics in the sense of we debate and argue about various pieces of evidence and facts and then come up with things like what might be the best solution or what do we agree would be a better solution rather than a worse solution. Whereas fascism often is much more an appeal to feelings and a fundamental rejection of the value of truth itself.Berny: I want to shift to a description of actions that can be categorized as fascistic, although if you just use a pure description of them, as you were suggesting earlier, you could also analyze them purely on their own merits. You were talking about how you prefer the word “authoritarianism” and “assaults on democracy.” In your latest for Arc Digital, you write that “American institutions are hanging by a thread.” And you argue that a model of instantaneous authoritarianism or revolutionary illiberalism, or as you put it, “a dramatic seizure of power,” is kind of the wrong model to expect America to fall prey to. Instead, you argue that if authoritarianism arrives in the U.S., it will do so via a more incremental process of democratic backsliding. Can you expound on what that is?Nicholas: Sure. That's a term that I think is very valuable in describing what's happening. So a lot of people, when they picture authoritarianism, they think of—and probably a lot of 20th-century takeovers were a big part of this—something like a big dramatic scene, something out of a movie. Think Mussolini or Hitler, the Iranian Revolution in 1979, or the Russian revolution, communist revolution—any of these big dramatic moments in which somebody seizes power and then holds onto it and then executes their authoritarianism and asserts their power throughout the country. What is more likely to happen in the United States, what in fact has been happening decently more to some democracies in the 21st century, is this idea of democratic backsliding, which is the process by which a leader gains power legally, legitimately via election, and then proceeds to abuse power while in office, to erode rule of law, erode checks and balances, try to put themselves above the law, and give themselves unfair advantages in elections.An egregious example of this, one that was backsliding from an already low baseline, is Putin's Russia. That Putin just got reelected—I don't know if you can hear my air quotes through the mic—in what was very clearly not an actual election, and yet they went through the motions and he claimed a popular mandate from it. Earlier, when Russia's laws had required him to step down, he just reworked the offices of president and prime minister, gave himself the prime minister job, gave his flunky, Dmitry Medvedev, the president job and continued running the country until that term was up and then just became president again.In the 21st century, we've seen versions of the sort of democratic backsliding that the U.S. should be afraid of in Turkey, India, Israel, Hungary, Poland, Peru, and a few others. Hungary, in particular, is the model for Trump in that the leader there, Viktor Orbán, won via election and then proceeded to do things like force just about all independent media outlets to go into this new kind of umbrella corporation which he had a flunky run and then change their commentary from sometimes critical of the government to basically government propaganda. An example of what happened in Poland was, they didn't like some of the judicial rulings, so they made a law that said that the maximum age for a Supreme Court justice or their equivalent is set at just right below the people that they wanted to get rid of. Then they got rid of those. And then they said, “Actually, the age can be different,” and then appointed their own people.We can also see that that sort of democratic backsliding has happened in part of the United States: with the failure of reconstruction after the Civil War and the imposition of Jim Crow—that people in those southern states did get power via elections and then you abuse that power to reduce the ability to vote and generally repress black people. So they still had elections, but they weren't free and fair, especially not in the way that the post-Civil War amendments tried to create and which the U.S. didn't really have until the Civil Rights acts.If he manages to get power again, there is zero reason to believe that he wouldn't try to do the thing that he literally did last time that he and his team have been spending over three years planning for, to try to fix the problems of that so they could do it again more successfully. I think there's a lot of naïveté about how somebody would stop it. Well, who? Congress? Why? — Nicholas GrossmanWhere we are hanging by a thread is: Trump has managed to already break through a lot of those institutional barriers that separate democracy from authoritarianism. And one of the things that a lot of people tend to misunderstand about this, and this also goes back to the glorious takeover vision of authoritarianism, is that authoritarians don't actually need to be strategic and good at this for it to work. This was a point that Hannah Arendt made in The Origins of Totalitarianism in 1951 that really resonates today, which is that incompetence can be an asset to wannabe authoritarians because it ends up getting competent people to quit and then opens up more spots for loyalists and makes it that they don't have this fundamental hesitancy when it comes to, “But, I'm violating a norm or I'm violating a law.”That can create a lot of the democratic backsliding. The United States saw that with Trump beating both impeachments. Why would he be concerned about Congress? And if he does manage to get reelected after being charged with a number of very serious crimes, including crimes associated with a coup attempt to overthrow the Constitution, if he then gets national power anyway, after all of that, there is no reason to expect that he will be bound or restricted by the law at all because he clearly does not respect it himself. At that point, there will be nobody left to potentially enforce it against him.Berny: In that same Arc piece, you made a list of the battles Trump has waged against our democratic institutions, and you put the number at nine. One of the battles that he's waged includes that he's violated internal rules of the executive branch. Can you give me an example?Nicholas: That was one of the easiest for him to violate because it was within the executive branch and the president is the elected head of the executive branch, so legal authority in the executive branch flows from the president. Just about everything you think of as government, besides the courts and Congress, is executive branch. So there's this immense power. And yet: America has a president, not a king. Presidents are subject to rule of law. As Teddy Roosevelt famously put it: “No man is above the law.”In response to Watergate, there were a number of reforms to try to create some internal restrictions on the power of the presidency—an example of this was to create the position of Inspector General and put it in a variety of executive branch departments. The press tends to refer to these people as the internal watchdog of whatever, and Trump, because he was doing things that was tripping these wires and getting these internal watchdogs to publicize the violations that he was doing, he then removed the inspectors general from Health and Human Services and the Defense Department and the intelligence community, among some others. And the only purpose of those positions is to monitor the executive branch, make sure that everybody's following the law, and if they're not following the law, report it, especially to Congress. So by removing them and either not replacing them or putting some loyalist hack in their place, that meant greater ability to get away with more.The Mueller investigation was another example of this in what finally ended it, at least the potential threat it posed to Trump, was he got a new attorney general, William Barr, and Barr proceeded to mislead the public about what the Mueller report had actually said. And he set a lot of the narratives and then he shut down further investigation of the president. That was an example where the executive branch was investigating itself for some malfeasance by its own leaders, and yet he was able to shut that down in part because it is entirely within the executive branch. So those were the first barriers that he got through. And the third, the one that ended up then bringing in congressional oversight, was when Trump tried to extort Ukraine by secretly withholding military aid and saying to the Ukrainian president Zelenskyy that he would release the aid if Zelenskyy did him a favor by lying and manufacturing an investigation into Joe and Hunter Biden, which Trump would then use as a basis for lies for his reelection campaign. That got caught by a whistleblower, someone on the National Security Council, who went through the proper procedures that got that information to Congress. That's what led to the first impeachment.So it was Trump's repeated efforts to break through various internal executive branch controls that eventually got the attention of Congress, which is a bigger barrier, but he burst through that too.Berny: Another battle he waged was against the transfer of power itself—a key presidential tradition within American history. He met that process, that idea, with violence rather than with peaceful acceptance. Do you consider that one to be the most dangerous, or is there one that's worse than that?Nicholas: I don't know if I can pick out an individual worst one because it's cumulative. My first instinct was to say, “No, the worst one is the current one against the legal system.” But a lot of what the legal system is trying to hold them accountable for was the coup attempt, which grew out of a violation of bunch of norms. So if I had to pick one, I'd still say the January 6 coup attempt, where introducing that level of political violence into American politics, making it the first in all of modern U.S. history to not have a peaceful transfer of power—it was literally not peaceful.The one about post-election norms … I think it's easy to underrate that one. Norms, because they're not codified, they're not laws, they're not written down, sometimes it doesn't feel like violating something important, but those are the ways that we do things. And if somebody then does it egregiously differently, violates those norms and gets away with it, or manages to even succeed with it, then what they've done is create a new normal, new expectations.With every previous losing presidential candidate, as soon as the election was called, shortly after they gave a concession speech. Hillary Clinton did it the morning after networks called the election for Trump in 2016. Probably the biggest example of this was Al Gore, who pursued legal means. I'm not criticizing Trump here for doing things like filing lawsuits to try to question some aspects of the election. Some of those were in bad faith, probably all of those were in bad faith, but still it is a legal measure. Others have done it too. But what Gore did was, after the Supreme Court made a ruling about the Florida recounts that resulted in George W. Bush becoming president, Gore publicly accepted the results of the election. And then, because he was vice president, he was in the Mike Pence role of being the presiding officer at the Senate that was officially acknowledging the Electoral College votes. And he gaveled in his own loss. So that was the norm.The other part of that was an outgoing president brings the new president-elect to the White House to peacefully transfer power, to begin the transfer. Obama did that with Trump—invited him to the White House, hosted him as the president-elect shortly after Hillary conceded. Every previous president did this. George H.W. Bush famously lost reelection and wrote a—what is now publicized, what was then private—letter of encouragement to Bill Clinton that basically amounted to, “I didn't want you to be president, but now that you are, I really wish you the best. You're the leader of our country and I love our country and I want you to do really well. Here are some suggestions.”That was just the way we always did things. By Trump incessantly lying about the election and conspiring to overthrow it, and after exhausting legitimate means, turning to illegitimate and illegal ones, and then, of course, after all of this, just hammering the Big Lie, the “up is down” lie, about the election results over and over and over again, and turning it into this kind of loyalty litmus test for Republicans that want to seek office or just want to speak in public about this stuff, has made it now where most Republicans just expect that challenging an election result and insisting that if you lost you actually won is just something you do now and that that is normal. Then a lot of the mainstream press treats it as, “Well, that's just another political strategy” and talks about it in these kind of horse-race sports language type of terms as opposed to, “This was a egregious violation of the most core principle of constitutional democracy and not something that we should treat lightly at all.”Granted, a lot of people didn't. Liz Cheney is a good example of somebody who did not treat it lightly. Nevertheless, it has become more normalized and it's reached a point where just about everybody expects that, if Trump loses the 2024 election, there will be similar claims that it's illegitimate, that it doesn't count, that it should be overthrown, or any other version of that. And that alone is something that is bad for the country, bad for democracy, and I don't really know how we fix.Berny: What is Project 2025?Nicholas: Project 2025 comes out of the Heritage Foundation think tank, and it is essentially a blueprint for democratic backsliding, for an internal authoritarian takeover after winning election. The biggest provision along those lines that is in it is a plan to purge the federal government of people who were hired because of their qualifications, not because of their political loyalty—people who are fundamentally loyal to the Constitution, not to Donald Trump personally. People have to swear to honor the Constitution. You don't swear to the president. The oath is to the Constitution—to protect and defend the Constitution. The plan is to get all those people out of the federal government. We're talking literally thousands of federal employees. That amounts to removing the barriers that thwarted Trump's last coup attempt.Where he ultimately failed was not enough people went along with the lies—Mike Pence being the most prominent one. So, Project 2025 is best understood as a plan to get anybody who followed the Constitution out and replace them with people who think that Donald Trump being in power is the end all, be all and are perfectly fine with breaking the law about that.That goes back to the Hannah Arendt line about you don't really need to be competent to do this. If anything, having competent people, smart people, there makes them less likely to be blind loyalists. So, they don't even need to necessarily be good at it. The first coup attempt failed, because it was haphazard, something that Trump and Co. came up with on the fly. Their plan was to win the election, and if not, lose it by one state, probably Pennsylvania, and then try to throw the count in Pennsylvania into chaos. But they weren't able to do that because Biden won most of the swing states, with Arizona and Georgia being two, plus Michigan and Wisconsin.There's a danger of a “boy who cried wolf” effect where, if you're constantly calling anything you don't like this maximal bad word, then when something that is actually like that thing comes around, people are less inclined to believe you. Then again, the lesson of “The Boy Who Cried Wolf” is not that wolves aren't real and you don't need to worry about them. — Nicholas GrossmanNow, they've spent the last three-and-a-half years stewing about that failure and trying to figure out ways to make it work next time. Project 2025 is already on the way. So whereas Trump came into office last time—and this is pretty typical of wannabe authoritarians in their first term—and didn't really know what he was doing, didn't really know how the system works, took some time to learn it as is fairly typical of populist leaders, he hired a number of establishment figures that the press called “the adults in the room.”—think, for example, Secretary of Defense James Mattis. Those were ones who were not willing to put Trump above the Constitution. Gradually, over the course of his term, accelerating in his last year after he beat the first impeachment, they started removing a number of these people and replacing them with loyalists. So now you've got people at the Heritage Foundation who have been working on vetting people to make sure that they are loyal to Trump and his authoritarian project rather than to the Constitution and American democracy. They are ready to hit the ground running with a lot of these democratic backsliding plans.Also connected to this are policy ideas like abortion bans and rounding up all the illegal immigrants and deporting them, which is a good one to describe how this would actually go because it's not that they would necessarily succeed at finding 11 million people and removing them from the country. It's that such a project is so massive and, because they are not the most competent people when it comes to policy execution, even trying would be chaotic and would lead to a lot of federal officers, probably state officers, and vigilantes going after people that they think look illegal, meaning just basically Latino, rather than, say, carefully checking everybody's papers and making this more of a rule of law effort. But that project couldn't happen without having enough of the people in place that would carry it out, people who react to it with, “Yes, sir, absolutely,” or in a bloodthirsty nature of being excited to do it.Berny: I want to bring the word “fascist” back in here for a sec. The threat of political violence can sometimes be just as effective as political violence itself. Figures associated with Project 2025 have called on Trump, if he gets reelected, to invoke the Insurrection Act on day one. Can this sort of preemptive reliance on police or military force in order to quell popular demonstrations of dissent be characterized as fascistic or semi-fascistic, in your view? Nicholas: I think so. That's one where I would use the label of authoritarian, because you don't necessarily have those ethno-nationalist aspects to it, though I do think the rounding up of a whole bunch of brown people and putting them in camps, yeah, you can safely call that fascist.Berny: You've written that if Donald Trump wins the 2024 election and becomes president again, American democracy is done. Why are you so definitive about America's prospects if Trump wins again?Nicholas: Because the record of national leaders who attempt a coup, fail, and then get power again is really bad for democracy. And because I think that people are—not everybody, of course, but quite a few Americans—stuck in a “it can't happen here” complacency, or just a natural tendency to think that the future will look like the past, that there isn't going to be any sort of drastic change. Also, they did see him in office and see that America did not turn into a dictatorship—so, you know, why necessarily would that happen in a second term?That gets it backwards in that it's the second term when democratic backsliding tends to go really bad. Turkey and India are both good examples of this, because then you had a leader who is not uncertain at all, who has shown their true colors. And we have in Trump's case very serious, just egregious, violations of the law.To put this in perspective: the trial in New York for fraud, to cover up hush money payments that he paid to porn star Stormy Daniels, is the sort of thing that's being treated as trivial. If it were at any other person at any other time in the past, it would be one of the biggest scandals in all of presidential history. It's the sort of thing that you'd have to say is at least on par with something like Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky, and yet it pales in comparison to the charges that he's facing for things like stealing, retaining, and exposing very high-level national-security secrets, and of attempting to overthrow the government, conspiring to defraud the United States out of its presidential election, conspiring to defraud Georgia out of its presidential vote.If he manages to get power again, there is zero reason to believe that he wouldn't try to do the thing that he literally did last time that he and his team have been spending over three years planning for, to try to fix the problems of that so they could do it again more successfully. I think there's a lot of naïveté about how somebody would stop it. Well, who? Congress? Why? He got impeached but didn't get kicked out of office because Republicans protected him even when he caused a violent attack on their own building. So, in that case, Congress is toothless. He'll be protected legally from anything. And if he manages to beat the criminal justice system, then anytime somebody says, “That's a violation of the law,” you can just say, “I don't care. What are they going to do about it?”The part that a lot of people are underestimating is just how incredibly powerful institutional authority is. This idea of, it's norms all the way down … the idea that powerful people should follow the law is a norm. It is only a law to the extent that the people in power enforce it. And if the people in power, just enough of the people in power, don't enforce it, then it might as well not be a law. So the inflection point is the 2024 election. If they get power, they are not going to willingly give it up and they're not going to be checked while using it because they have already burst through those barriers, all those checks and balances. They've already beaten them—or, at least, if he gets reelected, would have already beaten them.Some people get into a bit of a fantasy: “Well, it'll be like the past in that we'll work hard in the midterms and then Congress will check him.” But why? Or, some that I've seen, especially from more radical people on the left, that there'll be all these great protests. You mentioned the Insurrection Act—I don't think Americans have really absorbed what it looks like when the government sends the military to fire on protesters. We already saw Trump do a bit of this in his first term in the infamous photo-op at Lafayette Square in DC in which had security services violently clear an area so that Trump could go through to this church and take a photo. Incidentally, he took it with the Bible upside down, but you know, still.There were also these weird paramilitary forces that showed up in Portland, Oregon that were throwing people into vans that were federal officers, but unmarked and turned out to be this force cobbled together from border patrol and others. That was basically a separate, semi-legal force. So having seen this already, and then having that validation of reelection despite fighting the law, despite not following the law and violating the law, there is a decent chance that would do it.This doesn't mean that every single member of the U.S. military is going to go, “Yes, sir. I'm going to violate my oath and shoot people.” But some probably will. Certainly some will out of a sense of, “Look, this is the commander in chief. That's what he's saying.” Some will because they like it and because they agree with him. The two possibilities, then, are either the security forces and the military honor the order and then they violently put down these protests in a way that modern America at least has never seen or that causes some sort of split in the military, which is also devastating and would break the country.This was a point that Hannah Arendt made in The Origins of Totalitarianism in 1951 that really resonates today, which is that incompetence can be an asset to wannabe authoritarians because it ends up getting competent people to quit and then opens up more spots for loyalists and makes it that they don't have this fundamental hesitancy when it comes to, ‘But, I'm violating a norm or I'm violating a law.' — Nicholas GrossmanBerny: Imagine that we stripped our vocabulary of labels and just used descriptors. Imagine that historians all formed a pact to no longer use labels and just lay out what each historical movement and figures have done. And so we get to a point where, with historical distance, we read descriptions of what Mussolini and other fascist movements in the 20th century believed and carried out, and we get descriptions of what Trump in the 21st century believed and carried out. What do you think would be the biggest difference in those descriptions? And then what would be the element with the most overlap between them?Nicholas: The most overlap is democratic backsliding: an elected leader abusing power to gain unchecked authority and then use that to violate our various core tenets of democracy up to and including individual rights and future elections.For the least parallel, maybe actually not as sound as it used to be, but the part where it's most different is in the aggressive military force abroad, the desire for conquest. You have a number of these historical cases where the new leader goes to conquer some foreign people, usually some people that they consider lesser, racially or in some other way, where they consider themselves the rightful masters. We talked about the Europeans a lot, but you can see this with Imperial Japan in the 20th century.With Trump and the MAGA movement, something that has caught my attention is increasing discussions of invading Mexico, of using military force against Mexico, usually tied up not in a desire for conquest and domination per se … it's usually more to stop illegal immigration, or to stop drug dealers. But if they had actually thought any of it through, it amounts to a U.S. war with Mexico. The Mexican government already works with the United States in a coordinated fashion on things like dealing with drug traffickers—maybe not as much or as well as some would like, but nevertheless there is a decent amount of coordination. So, if they actually tried to go through with this, Mexico would resist it and that could create really serious problems spiraling from there. But I'd say the main focus of the MAGA movement is a lot more domestic and really want to dominate and repress groups of Americans that they don't like, rather than to be violently dominant and repressive of bordering countries as well. So I would not expect that the U.S. is going to gear up for a military invasion of Canada. That would be lower on my list of worries, whereas something like an authoritarian power within the United States that focus on domestic enemies is decently more likely.Berny: Nick, thank you so much.Nicholas: Thanks, Berny.Landry: Thank you for listening to Zooming In, a project of The UnPopulist. For more like this, make sure to subscribe for free at theunpopulist.net. Until next time.The UnPopulist invites interesting thinkers from across the political spectrum to foster a wide-ranging and thoughtful conversation to advance liberal values, including thinkers it may—or may not—agree with.© The UnPopulist 2024Follow The UnPopulist on: X, Threads, YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, and Bluesky. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theunpopulist.net

On a recent Thursday, the anticipated GOP frontrunner Donald Trump utilized the Truth Social platform to assert that the House January 6 Committee members should face indictment. The indictment, he advocated, should relate to the alleged 'unlawful destruction and eradication' of files, including documents inherent to the committee's probe into the Capitol Riot incident. The avowal from Trump came on the heels of the pronouncement that his previous advisor, Steve Bannon, was instructed to report to jail as of July 1. He had been found in contempt of Congress for his defiance when presented with a subpoena from the J6 Committee. In Trump's own words posted on Truth Social, 'The current scenario where the arguably dishonest Joe Biden's Department of Injustice is so desperate to incarcerate Steve Bannon, and every other Republican for that matter, for refraining from compliance with the Unselect Committee of Political Intimidators, who are all Democrats, and a pair of radically disoriented former Republicans, namely Adam Kinzinger and Liz Cheney, is nothing short of an American catastrophe.' Trump asserted that 'it is undoubtedly established that the actual perpetrators were the Unselects, who committed actual crimes by erasing and demolishing all material evidence in a feeble effort to shield Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats from the TRUTH – I DID NOTHING, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WRONG.'See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

There are four specific pieces of testimony that jurors In Trump‘s criminal hush money trial are requesting to rehear. They involve interactions between David Pecker and Donald Trump. What does that man in regards to their focus? What does the length of deliberation signify? We'll ask former federal prosecutor and now defense attorney, David Katz for his legal analysis.

Today's Headlines: Yesterday, Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi, the foreign minister, and other top cabinet members died in a helicopter crash in northwest Iran near the Azerbaijan border. Raisi was a contender to succeed Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Now, Khamenei's son is a likely, though unpopular, successor. Iran will hold a presidential election on June 28th. Meanwhile, the ICC prosecutor is seeking arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and Hamas leaders for war crimes, sparking backlash from Netanyahu and President Biden. The U.S. House may vote on sanctions against the ICC. In Trump's trial, Michael Cohen's testimony ended, and the defense introduced surprise witnesses. The judge reserved judgment on a dismissal motion. Additionally, Truth Social's parent company reported significant financial losses but remains highly valued due to meme stock status. Finally, the Senate plans to vote on a bipartisan border package, though it's expected to face opposition from Republicans despite their past negotiations. Resources/Articles mentioned in this episode: AP News: Iran's president killed in helicopter crash, election set for next month WA Post: Biden criticizes ‘outrageous' ICC arrest warrant ask for Israeli leaders  WA Post: Prosecution rests in Trump hush money trial Axios: Trump's Truth Social loses $328 million in the first quarter Axios: Senate will again vote on bipartisan border package Morning Announcements is produced by Sami Sage alongside Bridget Schwartz and edited by Grace Hernandez-Johnson Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today's Headlines: President Biden is moving to reclassify marijuana from a Schedule I to a Schedule III drug, which would officially recognize its medical benefits and allow for more federal research. The DEA has opened a 60-day public comment period on this proposal, inviting Americans to weigh in. At the same time, Congress has passed the $105 billion FAA Reauthorization Act, aimed at making flying safer and more accessible for people with disabilities, including better provisions for wheelchair users and improved emergency procedures. In other news, a recent review shows Latine students are more segregated in schools now than they've been since 1968, often ending up in under-resourced schools. In Trump's criminal trial, Michael Cohen's credibility was put under intense scrutiny during cross-examination, with the trial expected to conclude soon. Lastly, Vice President Harris has agreed to participate in a vice-presidential debate hosted by CBS News. The debate will take place after the Republican National Convention, where she'll learn who her opponent will be. Resources/Articles mentioned in this episode: NBC News: Justice Department takes 'major step' toward rescheduling marijuana NPR: Senate passes FAA reauthorization bill, sending legislation to the House  Axios: Latino students are the most segregated they've been since 1968 AP News: Michael Cohen pressed on his crimes and lies as defense attacks key Trump hush money trial witness Axios: Biden-Harris campaign accepts VP debate invite from CBS Morning Announcements is produced by Sami Sage alongside Bridget Schwartz and edited by Grace Hernandez-Johnson Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In Trump v. United States, the Justices consider if a President has absolute immunity from criminal prosecution, and what constitutes an official action as opposed to a personal one? The implications extend far beyond Trump's fate in 2024. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In a recent conversation, former President Donald Trump partook in an unconventional discussion with radio host Hugh Hewitt, an established voice among conservative thinkers. During the expansive talk, the former Commander-in-Chief made a surprise proposition regarding President Joe Biden's potential for participation in the forthcoming presidential debates. Central to Trump's contention was the insinuation that perhaps some kind of stimulant might be influencing Biden's performance. The core of Trump's argument during the radio chat revolved around the unexpected discovery last summer of a notable substance in the heart of the nation's capital. Reports suggested that the substance in question, found in the White House lobby near the West Executive Avenue entrance, was cocaine. Trump then took this revelation, weaving it into his argument regarding Biden's potential participation in the debates. Trump brought attention to Biden's conduct during a recent important assembly in the country. The former President observed stark fluctuations in Biden's energy levels during this assembly, which he seemed to find rather curious. His assertion was that Biden started the meeting with an unusually elevated sense of vigor, declining rapidly towards the end, something Trump found suspicious. In expressing his interest in participating in imminent debates, Trump proposed an additional caveat. To ensure a level playing field, he suggested that candidates, particularly President Biden, undergo a drug test ahead of the debates. This idea stemmed from his underlying suspicion around the unexpected energy fluctuations noted in his counterpart's performance. When the radio host pressed further to clarify if Trump was outright accusing Biden of cocaine use, the former president chose to leave the topic more nebulous. He did not specify the exact nature of his allegation but maintained his stance that Biden's performance seemed abnormally heightened, similar to being 'higher than a kite.' Regardless of allegations or insinuations, Trump minced no words in stating his opinion about Biden's profound address. In his estimation, it was one of the most disappointing such displays he had witnessed. The erstwhile President used the opportunity to criticise the content and delivery of the address, terming it anything but an accurate representation of the American state. In Trump's assessment, he found discrepancy between the somnolent image frequently projected by Biden and the surprising level of energy exhibited in the address. This led him to the conclusion that there may be external aids influencing Biden's energy levels. The abrupt change in demeanor, as Trump observed, highlighted an inconsistent landscape. Underlining the importance of the State of the Union address, Trump stated his disappointment as he watched an address that he believed did not resonate with the people. The former president asserted that the intention of the address is to mirror the state of the nation; in this case, he felt the connection missed its mark. In a summarizing note, Trump conveyed a mix of anticipation and concern about the impending presidential debates. He expressed a strong desire to return to the debating stage, albeit with an extra layer of scrutiny. An integral part of his recommendation was to incorporate drug testing into the process as a standard measure. As part of his discussion with Hugh Hewitt, Trump comprehensively addressed the recent cocaine discovery at the White House. While the former president did not directly connect the discovery with the current administration, he did allude to a potential link, an indication that further clarification is needed in the interest of transparency. Looking forward, Trump's comments left many speculating about the probability of implementing pre-debate drug testing procedures. The former president seemed to perceive it as an essential benchmark for facilitating fair and unbiased debates. While his suggestion may be controversial, it continues to spark conversations among political commentators and the wider public. In the heart of Trump's comments was his critique of the current administration's representation of the American people. He underscored his discontentment with what he described as a lack of proper representation, resonating with his listeners who share similar viewpoints. Trump retains his eager readiness to step into the debating arena once again, craving the platform it offers him to voice his views. However, his desire for the inclusion of drug testing for participants, especially President Biden, adds an unexpected dimension to his eagerness to return to political engagement. While the dust has far from settled on this contentious discourse, it undeniably introduces a novel examination of presidential debates. Only time will highlight if former President Donald Trump's unconventional proposition regarding drug testing will indeed influence future presidential debates or fade as a fleeting suggestion in an ever-evolving political landscape. Real News Now Website Connect with Real News Now on Social Media Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/RealNewsNowApp/ X Twitter: https://twitter.com/realnewsapp Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/realnews/ TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@realnewsnowapp Threads: https://www.threads.net/@realnews/ Tumblr: https://www.tumblr.com/realnewsnow Truth Social: https://truthsocial.com/@RealNews YouTube:https://www.youtube.com/@realnewsnowapp End Wokeness: https://endthewokeness.com #realnewsnow See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Both Diddy and former President Donald Trump have had their properties searched by law enforcement authorities pursuant to search warrants. Diddy just recently had his properties searched by Homeland Security and in August 2022, Trump had his Mar-a-Lago home searched by the FBI. Both searches took place after judges reviewed sworn affidavits from law enforcement officers alleging that evidence of criminal activity was present at the locations. Judges then issued the warrants for gathering evidence of potential crimes. In Trump's case, the warrant called for the seizure of the allegedly classified documents from Trump's Florida residence. Trump's search warrant was issued after numerous requests and a subpoena for the return of the documents were unsuccessful. Subpoenas and search warrants are often confusing to the average citizen. It is sometimes difficult to understand the difference. They also should not be construed, alone, as indicators of crimes. On this edition of Spectrum, host and retired judge Tom Hodson joins with legal analyst and retired judge Gayle Williams-Byers to explain subpoenas and search warrants in understandable terms. They talk about how they are issued, executed, and enforced if there is noncompliance. They explain the complexities of these legal processes by using simple examples to which all people can relate.

Emerging onto the presidential race, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., now an independent candidate, has recently named Nicole Shanahan, a prominent attorney and known Democratic benefactor, as his potential deputy. Shortly after this revelation, former President Donald Trump did not mince words in labeling Kennedy as 'the most radical Left-leaning contender in the field.' Tuesday's announcement indicated Shanahan's association with the Democratic establishment as she ardently supported Joe Biden during the 2020 presidential campaign against Trump. Her commitments also extended to monetary support, exemplified by her $150,000 donation to the campaign of George Gascon, the notable leftist District Attorney of Los Angeles County. Trump believes that Kennedy's choice of Shanahan as a running mate firmly roots him in the radical Left-wing domain. However, the former president seems to view this selection as beneficial, envisioning that the Kennedy and Shanahan ticket might inadvertently assist his own campaign and serve as a disadvantage to Biden. In Trump's message posted on Truth Social, he stated, 'RFK Jr. stands as the most radically Left-oriented candidate in this race, without a doubt. He appears to be an avid admirer of the Green New Deal which, along with other disastrous mechanisms, threatens our economy.' The tone of Trump's comments imploded into a sage prediction, 'Considering this, it's plausible that he will syphon off votes from Biden, which could be a significant boon for our nation.' Kennedy is the progeny of a political dynasty, being the son of Senator Robert F. Kennedy and the nephew of President John F. Kennedy. He entered the race originally associated with the Democratic Party, but later shifted his allegiance to become an independent. His criticisms pointed towards the Democratic Party and the Biden administration becoming synonymous, creating an environment that stunts the possibilities for any challengers to rise against the present command. His campaign majorly challenges the federal policies on health, particularly the intense push for COVID-19 vaccination. Discontent with the Democratic Party shifted the focus of Kennedy's campaign towards an aggressive scrutiny of the government's health policy decisions. Kennedy also positions himself as a commanding figure in environmental advocacy. Insinuating that he is 'arguably the leading environmentalist in the country,' Kennedy has in no uncertain terms declared his stance on pressing ecological issues. National polls currently suggest Kennedy holds around 10% of the favour in a five-party contest that encompasses him, Trump, Biden, Green Party contender Jill Stein, and independent aspirant Cornel West, as per the average reported by RealClearPolitics. With time counting down to the 2024 election, Kennedy's campaign team is progressively persuading states to feature their candidate on the voting ballots. The arduous path towards the election sees Kennedy's team investing considerable effort in securing their candidate's place on the ballots. Their recent victory came in the form of ballot admissions in Arizona and Georgia. These two states bear strategic importance as swinging states, known to flip between parties. Both were wrested by Biden in the last electoral round of 2020, following Trump's win in 2016. The capability of Kennedy's campaign to secure positions in these two crucial locations aptly demonstrates their strategic insight and determination, which could play a key role in shaping the outcome of the upcoming presidential race. Kennedy's strategies, as well as his emphasis on health policy and environmental advocacy, set him out as a distinctly unique candidate. As the son and nephew of political personalities, his journey toward the presidential race has not been without its share of turning points. The road to the 2024 presidential election is lined with intense competition. With each candidate bringing their unique ideologies and campaign strategies forward, the contest promises to be a dynamic one. The final outcome remains to be seen. What is clear, however, is that the stakes are high and the strategies, especially those centered on securing ballot spots, could tilt the scales in favor of any of the contenders. An air of anticipation and uncertainty lingers as the nation looks ahead to the election. Real News Now Website Connect with Real News Now on Social Media Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/RealNewsNowApp/ X Twitter: https://twitter.com/realnewsapp Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/realnews/ TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@realnewsnowapp Threads: https://www.threads.net/@realnews/ Tumblr: https://www.tumblr.com/realnewsnow Truth Social: https://truthsocial.com/@RealNews YouTube:https://www.youtube.com/@realnewsnowapp End Wokeness: https://endthewokeness.com #realnewsnow See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Donald Trump is urging the incumbent US President, Joe Biden, to engage in a series of presidential debates - suggesting the details be left to Biden's discretion in terms of date, venue, and broadcast channel. An 81-year-old Biden is portrayed as a senior figure whose memory isn't quite as sharp as it used to be, this characterization stemming from a special counsel's description. A reluctance on Biden's side to accept the proposal for 2024 discussions has been apparent. In Trump's posts on Truth Social, he expressed his firm belief about the crucial importance of these debates for the nation. He articulated that the discussions revolving around pressing issues would be beneficial not only for America but also for its citizens. His flexible proposition echoes 'ANYTIME, ANYWHERE, ANYPLACE,' indicating an eagerness for such a debate to occur. He also added a bit of a twist to his proposition, stating that the responsibility of the orchestration of these debates could fall on the DNC - often accused of corruption - or their affiliate, the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD). This offer laiden with implications seemed to add an extra layer to his call. However, the response from the White House was less straightforward. When Fox News correspondent Peter Doocy inquired about this recent development to White House Press Secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre, she remained tight-lipped, refusing to offer her statement about the matter. Now that the competition for the highest office in the land seems to be dwindling down to likely contenders, Doocy prodded further about Biden's stance. Would he commit to a debate with Donald Trump? This question proved vital. The Press Secretary's response was predictable yet unsatisfying. She redirected the question, suggesting that it was more appropriately handled by the campaign team. But this dodge was not quite enough to quell the growing curiosity around the topic. According to public opinion, a significant majority appears to question Biden's capacity to serve effectively due to his age. A recent New York Times/Siena College survey revealed that a substantial 73% of polled voters shared this validity of concern. Conversely, a mere quarter of those surveyed expressed confidence in Biden's ability to continue his duties effectively as President despite his advanced age. This stark contrast in public sentiment seems to underscore the overall concern about the President's capabilities. Doocy continued to probe the age topic, asking Jean-Pierre whether restriction from the debate would serve to exacerbate worries about the President's seniority and mental acuity. Once again, Jean-Pierre found herself in the hot seat, tasked with addressing a sensitive subject. Her response was quite similar to her previous reactions. She refused to engage in a discussion about the proposed debate, reiterating that this was a matter for the campaign to deal with. It was clear she would rather not make a public comment about the topic. One undeniable truth is that in an era of instant information and high stakes, both candidates and the public are under immense pressure. Candid and open discussions are increasingly a vital part of democracy and politics. As citizens, we all play a part in shaping the direction of our nation. Engaging in meaningful dialogues about the issues that matter most to us is arguably one of the most integral methods of involvement we can employ. The presidential debate platform has long been revered as one such space where those dialogues can take place. Whether or not Biden decides to embrace this tradition remains uncertain. In the end, the final decision lies in the hands of the ruling parties and their electoral strategies. However, it's without a doubt that the eyes of America, and the world, are focused on this developing story. The unfolding situation remains fascinating, with Americans looking for transparency and open discussion from their political leaders. The anticipation for a resolution to the debate dilemma continues to simmer, holding the nation in suspense. READ Trump Calls on Biden to Debate Anywhere, Anytime, on Any TV Network on Real News Now Real News Now Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/RealNewsNowApp/ X Twitter: https://twitter.com/realnewsapp Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/realnews/ TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@realnewsnowapp Threads: https://www.threads.net/@realnews/ Truth Social: https://truthsocial.com/@RealNews YouTube:https://www.youtube.com/@realnewsnowapp End Wokeness: https://endthewokeness.com WATCH on YouTube: https://youtu.be/cM4c7wl_JP8  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today's Headlines: In recent political developments, Ron DeSantis, who had previously insisted on staying in the Republican primary race and not endorsing Donald Trump, surprised many by dropping out of the presidential race and endorsing Trump. With less than a year until Inauguration Day 2025, the New Hampshire primary is imminent, where unaffiliated individuals, not registered Democrats, can vote in the Republican primary. Meanwhile, Nikki Haley and Trump traded accusations, with Haley clarifying that she was not in charge of security on January 6th, as Trump erroneously claimed. In Trump's ongoing legal battles, he expressed a desire to testify at the E. Jean Carroll trial, where his attorney renewed a mistrial request. In the federal election interference case in Georgia, allegations of an improper relationship between the prosecutor and the district attorney have surfaced, leading to a potential investigation. Iran blamed Israel for recent airstrikes in Syria, escalating tensions in the region. Lastly, a study published in the scientific journal Sleep suggests that wearing an eye mask at night can improve memory and alertness in the morning by blocking minimal light exposure. Resources/Articles mentioned in this episode: NBC News: Ron DeSantis suspends his presidential bid and endorses Trump NY Times: Trump Falsely Claims Democrats Can Vote in New Hampshire's GOP Primary - The New York Times AP News: Nikki Haley questions Trump's mental fitness after he appears to confuse her for Nancy Pelosi ABC News: E. Jean Carroll defamation case: Trump expected to attend trial, possibly testify Monday - ABC News NBC News: Credit card statements show Trump special prosecutor appointed by Georgia DA Fani Willis bought her plane tickets WA Post: Trump case in Georgia likely damaged by allegations against Fani Willis BBC: Iran warns air strike on Syria will not go unanswered WA Post: This $10 purchase can improve your sleep and boost your brain health Morning Announcements is produced by Sami Sage alongside Amanda Duberman and Bridget Schwartz Edited by Grace Hernandez-Johnson Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In episode 1579, Jack and Miles are joined by comedian, Brian Bahe, to discuss… Christo-Fascist Indoctrination of Children NOT Popular You Say? Way To Go Ohio, Cocaine Bear < Taco Bell Bear, People Magazine's ‘Sexiest Man Alive' Continues To Be Garbage and more! Christo-Fascist Indoctrination of Children NOT Popular You Say? Way To Go Ohio Ohio voters approve amendment to establish right to abortion in state constitution, CBS News projects Kentucky's incumbent Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear reelected, CBS News projects If Trump wins, more voters foresee better finances, staying out of war — CBS News poll Election 2023 results: Democrats pick up wins on Ohio abortion ballot measure, Kentucky governor's race and Virginia Legislature Anti-abortion misinformation mounting ahead of key Ohio vote, experts warn Ohio votes to legalize marijuana for adult recreational use, becoming 24th state to do so Who is campaigning against recreational marijuana in Ohio, and how? Ohio voters to decide on recreational marijuana with Issue 2; Gov. DeWine opposes passage Cocaine Bear < Taco Bell Bear Bear in Florida steals $45 Taco Bell delivery off someone's porch moments after it was dropped off People Magazine's ‘Sexiest Man Alive' Continues To Be Garbage People magazine roasted for making ‘irrelevant' Patrick Dempsey ‘Sexiest Man Alive': ‘It's not 2005' Inside the ‘Sexiest Man Alive' selection ‘Grey's Anatomy' Book Details “HR Issues” Behind Patrick Dempsey's Exit Ellen Pompeo Reportedly Accepted Hush Money to Stay Quiet About Patrick Dempsey's “Tyrant” Behavior On ‘Grey's Anatomy' Set All the Sexiest Man Alive Covers The Root's Black Choices for the Sexiest Man Alive 2023 Gwen Stefani Is Set to Marry a Trump Supporter. The '90s Are Dead. In Trump's America, Homophobe Blake Shelton Is the ‘Sexiest Man Alive' Here are all of the men who have been crowned as People's Sexiest Man Alive Barbara Walters grills Sean Connery about his defense of hitting women: ‘Depends … on the circumstances' LISTEN: Like A Tattoo (Skep's Jungle Edit) by SadeSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Subscribe to Know Your Enemy on Patreon to listen to this premium episode, and all of our bonus content: https://www.patreon.com/knowyourenemyFormer president Donald Trump is currently facing 91 criminal charges in four different jurisdictions — Georgia, Florida, New York, and the District of Columbia. Two of these indictments — Special Prosecutor Jack Smith's in D.C. and District Attorney Fani Willis's Fulton County, Georgia — take up Trump's and his co-conspirators efforts to steal the 2020 election, efforts that culminated with the insurrection on January 6. In this episode, Matt and Sam try to make sense of them and weigh the possible risks and rewards of "breaking the seal" and criminally charging a former president. In particular, they give closes readings to the two January 6-related indictments and discuss what they reveal about the deranged efforts Trump and his team made to overturn the election and a Republican Party that seemed to mostly go along with it, along with some of the problems with the RICO statute Trump and others are being charged under in Georgia. And of course, these indictments came down just as we're entering presidential election season — how will Trump's legal problems effect the 2024 race?Sources:Charlie Savage and Adam Goldman, "The Trump Jan. 6 Indictment, Annotated," NYT, Aug 1, 2023Alan Feuer, et al, "The Trump Georgia Indictment, Annotated," NYT, Aug 15, 2023Charlie Savage, "The Four Trump Criminal Cases: Strengths and Weaknesses," NYT, Aug 28, 2023James Risen, "In Trump's Georgia Indictment, a Tale of Two Election Workers," The Intercept, Aug 17, 2023Rick Rojas and Sean Keenan, "Dozens of ‘Cop City' Activists Are Indicted on Racketeering Charges," NYT, Sept 5, 2023Laurence Tribe, "Anatomy of a Fraud," Just Security, Aug 8, 2023Matthew Sitman, "Will Be Wild," Dissent, Spring 2023Damon Linker, "How Do You Solve a Problem Like Trump?" Notes from the Middleground, July 18, 2022

Constitutional scholars, both Republican and Democrat, are unifying behind one position: section 3 of the 14 Amendment disqualifies Donald Trump from holding any federal office in the future, including the presidency, because he engaged in an insurrection against the United States, after taking an oath to support the Constitution. Scholars say the constitutional disqualification is self-executing, requiring no act of Congress, no act of any state legislature, and no court proceeding, civil or criminal. Glenn breaks down, in layman's terms, the arguments made in a lengthy law review article authored by two conservative constitutional law professors, William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulsen. Then, more and more of Donald Trump's aides, associates, and underlings are beginning to point the criminal finger at Donald Trump. As Politico reported, " Trump's co-defendants are already starting to turn against him." Glenn points out - in large conspiracy cases, there is always a point in time when co-defendants begin flipping against the bigger criminal fish. In Trump's prosecutions, that time has arrived.For our Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise shop, please visit:https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkir...Please consider becoming a #TeamJustice patron at: https://www.patreon.com/glennkirschnerAnd check out Glenn's website at glennkirschner.comFollow Glenn on:Threads: https://www.threads.net/glennkirschner2Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/glennkirschner2Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirsch...See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.