Podcasts about inauguration day

Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded its latest Term. And over the past few weeks, the Trump administration has continued to duke it out with its adversaries in the federal courts.To tackle these topics, as well as their intersection—in terms of how well the courts, including but not limited to the Supreme Court, are handling Trump-related cases—I interviewed Professor Pamela Karlan, a longtime faculty member at Stanford Law School. She's perfectly situated to address these subjects, for at least three reasons.First, Professor Karlan is a leading scholar of constitutional law. Second, she's a former SCOTUS clerk and seasoned advocate at One First Street, with ten arguments to her name. Third, she has high-level experience at the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), having served (twice) as a deputy assistant attorney general in the Civil Rights Division of the DOJ.I've had some wonderful guests to discuss the role of the courts today, including Judges Vince Chhabria (N.D. Cal.) and Ana Reyes (D.D.C.)—but as sitting judges, they couldn't discuss certain subjects, and they had to be somewhat circumspect. Professor Karlan, in contrast, isn't afraid to “go there”—and whether or not you agree with her opinions, I think you'll share my appreciation for her insight and candor.Show Notes:* Pamela S. Karlan bio, Stanford Law School* Pamela S. Karlan bio, Wikipedia* The McCorkle Lecture (Professor Pamela Karlan), UVA Law SchoolPrefer reading to listening? For paid subscribers, a transcript of the entire episode appears below.Sponsored by:NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment at nexfirm dot com.Three quick notes about this transcript. First, it has been cleaned up from the audio in ways that don't alter substance—e.g., by deleting verbal filler or adding a word here or there to clarify meaning. Second, my interviewee has not reviewed this transcript, and any transcription errors are mine. Third, because of length constraints, this newsletter may be truncated in email; to view the entire post, simply click on “View entire message” in your email app.David Lat: Welcome to the Original Jurisdiction podcast. I'm your host, David Lat, author of a Substack newsletter about law and the legal profession also named Original Jurisdiction, which you can read and subscribe to at davidlat dot Substack dot com. You're listening to the seventy-seventh episode of this podcast, recorded on Friday, June 27.Thanks to this podcast's sponsor, NexFirm. NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment at nexfirm dot com. Want to know who the guest will be for the next Original Jurisdiction podcast? Follow NexFirm on LinkedIn for a preview.With the 2024-2025 Supreme Court Term behind us, now is a good time to talk about both constitutional law and the proper role of the judiciary in American society. I expect they will remain significant as subjects because the tug of war between the Trump administration and the federal judiciary continues—and shows no signs of abating.To tackle these topics, I welcomed to the podcast Professor Pamela Karlan, the Montgomery Professor of Public Interest Law and Co-Director of the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic at Stanford Law School. Pam is not only a leading legal scholar, but she also has significant experience in practice. She's argued 10 cases before the Supreme Court, which puts her in a very small club, and she has worked in government at high levels, serving as a deputy assistant attorney general in the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice during the Obama administration. Without further ado, here's my conversation with Professor Pam Karlan.Professor Karlan, thank you so much for joining me.Pamela Karlan: Thanks for having me.DL: So let's start at the beginning. Tell us about your background and upbringing. I believe we share something in common—you were born in New York City?PK: I was born in New York City. My family had lived in New York since they arrived in the country about a century before.DL: What borough?PK: Originally Manhattan, then Brooklyn, then back to Manhattan. As my mother said, when I moved to Brooklyn when I was clerking, “Brooklyn to Brooklyn, in three generations.”DL: Brooklyn is very, very hip right now.PK: It wasn't hip when we got there.DL: And did you grow up in Manhattan or Brooklyn?PK: When I was little, we lived in Manhattan. Then right before I started elementary school, right after my brother was born, our apartment wasn't big enough anymore. So we moved to Stamford, Connecticut, and I grew up in Connecticut.DL: What led you to go to law school? I see you stayed in the state; you went to Yale. What did you have in mind for your post-law-school career?PK: I went to law school because during the summer between 10th and 11th grade, I read Richard Kluger's book, Simple Justice, which is the story of the litigation that leads up to Brown v. Board of Education. And I decided I wanted to go to the NAACP Legal Defense Fund and be a school desegregation lawyer, and that's what led me to go to law school.DL: You obtained a master's degree in history as well as a law degree. Did you also have teaching in mind as well?PK: No, I thought getting the master's degree was my last chance to do something I had loved doing as an undergrad. It didn't occur to me until I was late in my law-school days that I might at some point want to be a law professor. That's different than a lot of folks who go to law school now; they go to law school wanting to be law professors.During Admitted Students' Weekend, some students say to me, “I want to be a law professor—should I come here to law school?” I feel like saying to them, “You haven't done a day of law school yet. You have no idea whether you're good at law. You have no idea whether you'd enjoy doing legal teaching.”It just amazes me that people come to law school now planning to be a law professor, in a way that I don't think very many people did when I was going to law school. In my day, people discovered when they were in law school that they loved it, and they wanted to do more of what they loved doing; I don't think people came to law school for the most part planning to be law professors.DL: The track is so different now—and that's a whole other conversation—but people are getting master's and Ph.D. degrees, and people are doing fellowship after fellowship. It's not like, oh, you practice for three, five, or seven years, and then you become a professor. It seems to be almost like this other track nowadays.PK: When I went on the teaching market, I was distinctive in that I had not only my student law-journal note, but I actually had an article that Ricky Revesz and I had worked on that was coming out. And it was not normal for people to have that back then. Now people go onto the teaching market with six or seven publications—and no practice experience really to speak of, for a lot of them.DL: You mentioned talking to admitted students. You went to YLS, but you've now been teaching for a long time at Stanford Law School. They're very similar in a lot of ways. They're intellectual. They're intimate, especially compared to some of the other top law schools. What would you say if I'm an admitted student choosing between those two institutions? What would cause me to pick one versus the other—besides the superior weather of Palo Alto?PK: Well, some of it is geography; it's not just the weather. Some folks are very East-Coast-centered, and other folks are very West-Coast-centered. That makes a difference.It's a little hard to say what the differences are, because the last time I spent a long time at Yale Law School was in 2012 (I visited there a bunch of times over the years), but I think the faculty here at Stanford is less focused and concentrated on the students who want to be law professors than is the case at Yale. When I was at Yale, the idea was if you were smart, you went and became a law professor. It was almost like a kind of external manifestation of an inner state of grace; it was a sign that you were a smart person, if you wanted to be a law professor. And if you didn't, well, you could be a donor later on. Here at Stanford, the faculty as a whole is less concentrated on producing law professors. We produce a fair number of them, but it's not the be-all and end-all of the law school in some ways. Heather Gerken, who's the dean at Yale, has changed that somewhat, but not entirely. So that's one big difference.One of the most distinctive things about Stanford, because we're on the quarter system, is that our clinics are full-time clinics, taught by full-time faculty members at the law school. And that's distinctive. I think Yale calls more things clinics than we do, and a lot of them are part-time or taught by folks who aren't in the building all the time. So that's a big difference between the schools.They just have very different feels. I would encourage any student who gets into both of them to go and visit both of them, talk to the students, and see where you think you're going to be most comfortably stretched. Either school could be the right school for somebody.DL: I totally agree with you. Sometimes people think there's some kind of platonic answer to, “Where should I go to law school?” And it depends on so many individual circumstances.PK: There really isn't one answer. I think when I was deciding between law schools as a student, I got waitlisted at Stanford and I got into Yale. I had gone to Yale as an undergrad, so I wasn't going to go anywhere else if I got in there. I was from Connecticut and loved living in Connecticut, so that was an easy choice for me. But it's a hard choice for a lot of folks.And I do think that one of the worst things in the world is U.S. News and World Report, even though we're generally a beneficiary of it. It used to be that the R-squared between where somebody went to law school and what a ranking was was minimal. I knew lots of people who decided, in the old days, that they were going to go to Columbia rather than Yale or Harvard, rather than Stanford or Penn, rather than Chicago, because they liked the city better or there was somebody who did something they really wanted to do there.And then the R-squared, once U.S. News came out, of where people went and what the rankings were, became huge. And as you probably know, there were some scandals with law schools that would just waitlist people rather than admit them, to keep their yield up, because they thought the person would go to a higher-ranked law school. There were years and years where a huge part of the Stanford entering class had been waitlisted at Penn. And that's bad for people, because there are people who should go to Penn rather than come here. There are people who should go to NYU rather than going to Harvard. And a lot of those people don't do it because they're so fixated on U.S. News rankings.DL: I totally agree with you. But I suspect that a lot of people think that there are certain opportunities that are going to be open to them only if they go here or only if they go there.Speaking of which, after graduating from YLS, you clerked for Justice Blackmun on the Supreme Court, and statistically it's certainly true that certain schools seem to improve your odds of clerking for the Court. What was that experience like overall? People often describe it as a dream job. We're recording this on the last day of the Supreme Court Term; some hugely consequential historic cases are coming down. As a law clerk, you get a front row seat to all of that, to all of that history being made. Did you love that experience?PK: I loved the experience. I loved it in part because I worked for a wonderful justice who was just a lovely man, a real mensch. I had three great co-clerks. It was the first time, actually, that any justice had ever hired three women—and so that was distinctive for me, because I had been in classes in law school where there were fewer than three women. I was in one class in law school where I was the only woman. So that was neat.It was a great Term. It was the last year of the Burger Court, and we had just a heap of incredibly interesting cases. It's amazing how many cases I teach in law school that were decided that year—the summary-judgment trilogy, Thornburg v. Gingles, Bowers v. Hardwick. It was just a really great time to be there. And as a liberal, we won a lot of the cases. We didn't win them all, but we won a lot of them.It was incredibly intense. At that point, the Supreme Court still had this odd IT system that required eight hours of diagnostics every night. So the system was up from 8 a.m. to midnight—it stayed online longer if there was a death case—but otherwise it went down at midnight. In the Blackmun chambers, we showed up at 8 a.m. for breakfast with the Justice, and we left at midnight, five days a week. Then on the weekends, we were there from 9 to 9. And they were deciding 150 cases, not 60 cases, a year. So there was a lot more work to do, in that sense. But it was a great year. I've remained friends with my co-clerks, and I've remained friends with clerks from other chambers. It was a wonderful experience.DL: And you've actually written about it. I would refer people to some of the articles that they can look up, on your CV and elsewhere, where you've talked about, say, having breakfast with the Justice.PK: And we had a Passover Seder with the Justice as well, which was a lot of fun.DL: Oh wow, who hosted that? Did he?PK: Actually, the clerks hosted it. Originally he had said, “Oh, why don't we have it at the Court?” But then he came back to us and said, “Well, I think the Chief Justice”—Chief Justice Burger—“might not like that.” But he lent us tables and chairs, which were dropped off at one of the clerk's houses. And it was actually the day of the Gramm-Rudman argument, which was an argument about the budget. So we had to keep running back and forth from the Court to the house of Danny Richman, the clerk who hosted it, who was a Thurgood Marshall clerk. We had to keep running back and forth from the Court to Danny Richman's house, to baste the turkey and make stuff, back and forth. And then we had a real full Seder, and we invited all of the Jewish clerks at the Court and the Justice's messenger, who was Jewish, and the Justice and Mrs. Blackmun, and it was a lot of fun.DL: Wow, that's wonderful. So where did you go after your clerkship?PK: I went to the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, where I was an assistant counsel, and I worked on voting-rights and employment-discrimination cases.DL: And that was something that you had thought about for a long time—you mentioned you had read about its work in high school.PK: Yes, and it was a great place to work. We were working on great cases, and at that point we were really pushing the envelope on some of the stuff that we were doing—which was great and inspiring, and my colleagues were wonderful.And unlike a lot of Supreme Court practices now, where there's a kind of “King Bee” usually, and that person gets to argue everything, the Legal Defense Fund was very different. The first argument I did at the Court was in a case that I had worked on the amended complaint for, while at the Legal Defense Fund—and they let me essentially keep working on the case and argue it at the Supreme Court, even though by the time the case got to the Supreme Court, I was teaching at UVA. So they didn't have this policy of stripping away from younger lawyers the ability to argue their cases the whole way through the system.DL: So how many years out from law school were you by the time you had your first argument before the Court? I know that, today at least, there's this two-year bar on arguing before the Court after having clerked there.PK: Six or seven years out—because I think I argued in ‘91.DL: Now, you mentioned that by then you were teaching at UVA. You had a dream job working at the NAACP Legal Defense Fund. What led you to go to UVA?PK: There were two things, really, that did it. One was I had also discovered when I was in law school that I loved law school, and I was better at law school than I had been at anything I had done before law school. And the second was I really hated dealing with opposing counsel. I tell my students now, “You should take negotiation. If there's only one class you could take in law school, take negotiation.” Because it's a skill; it's not a habit of mind, but I felt like it was a habit of mind. And I found the discovery process and filing motions to compel and dealing with the other side's intransigence just really unpleasant.What I really loved was writing briefs. I loved writing briefs, and I could keep doing that for the Legal Defense Fund while at UVA, and I've done a bunch of that over the years for LDF and for other organizations. I could keep doing that and I could live in a small town, which I really wanted to do. I love New York, and now I could live in a city—I've spent a couple of years, off and on, living in cities since then, and I like it—but I didn't like it at that point. I really wanted to be out in the country somewhere. And so UVA was the perfect mix. I kept working on cases, writing amicus briefs for LDF and for other organizations. I could teach, which I loved. I could live in a college town, which I really enjoyed. So it was the best blend of things.DL: And I know, from your having actually delivered a lecture at UVA, that it really did seem to have a special place in your heart. UVA Law School—they really do have a wonderful environment there (as does Stanford), and Charlottesville is a very charming place.PK: Yes, especially when I was there. UVA has a real gift for developing its junior faculty. It was a place where the senior faculty were constantly reading our work, constantly talking to us. Everyone was in the building, which makes a huge difference.The second case I had go to the Supreme Court actually came out of a class where a student asked a question, and I ended up representing the student, and we took the case all the way to the Supreme Court. But I wasn't admitted in the Western District of Virginia, and that's where we had to file a case. And so I turned to my next-door neighbor, George Rutherglen, and said to George, “Would you be the lead counsel in this?” And he said, “Sure.” And we ended up representing a bunch of UVA students, challenging the way the Republican Party did its nomination process. And we ended up, by the student's third year in law school, at the Supreme Court.So UVA was a great place. I had amazing colleagues. The legendary Bill Stuntz was then there; Mike Klarman was there. Dan Ortiz, who's still there, was there. So was John Harrison. It was a fantastic group of people to have as your colleagues.DL: Was it difficult for you, then, to leave UVA and move to Stanford?PK: Oh yes. When I went in to tell Bob Scott, who was then the dean, that I was leaving, I just burst into tears. I think the reason I left UVA was I was at a point in my career where I'd done a bunch of visits at other schools, and I thought that I could either leave then or I would be making a decision to stay there for the rest of my career. And I just felt like I wanted to make a change. And in retrospect, I would've been just as happy if I'd stayed at UVA. In my professional life, I would've been just as happy. I don't know in my personal life, because I wouldn't have met my partner, I don't think, if I'd been at UVA. But it's a marvelous place; everything about it is just absolutely superb.DL: Are you the managing partner of a boutique or midsize firm? If so, you know that your most important job is attracting and retaining top talent. It's not easy, especially if your benefits don't match up well with those of Biglaw firms or if your HR process feels “small time.” NexFirm has created an onboarding and benefits experience that rivals an Am Law 100 firm, so you can compete for the best talent at a price your firm can afford. Want to learn more? Contact NexFirm at 212-292-1002 or email betterbenefits at nexfirm dot com.So I do want to give you a chance to say nice things about your current place. I assume you have no regrets about moving to Stanford Law, even if you would've been just as happy at UVA?PK: I'm incredibly happy here. I've got great colleagues. I've got great students. The ability to do the clinic the way we do it, which is as a full-time clinic, wouldn't be true anywhere else in the country, and that makes a huge difference to that part of my work. I've gotten to teach around the curriculum. I've taught four of the six first-year courses, which is a great opportunityAnd as you said earlier, the weather is unbelievable. People downplay that, because especially for people who are Northeastern Ivy League types, there's a certain Calvinism about that, which is that you have to suffer in order to be truly working hard. People out here sometimes think we don't work hard because we are not visibly suffering. But it's actually the opposite, in a way. I'm looking out my window right now, and it's a gorgeous day. And if I were in the east and it were 75 degrees and sunny, I would find it hard to work because I'd think it's usually going to be hot and humid, or if it's in the winter, it's going to be cold and rainy. I love Yale, but the eight years I spent there, my nose ran the entire time I was there. And here I look out and I think, “It's beautiful, but you know what? It's going to be beautiful tomorrow. So I should sit here and finish grading my exams, or I should sit here and edit this article, or I should sit here and work on the Restatement—because it's going to be just as beautiful tomorrow.” And the ability to walk outside, to clear your head, makes a huge difference. People don't understand just how huge a difference that is, but it's huge.DL: That's so true. If you had me pick a color to associate with my time at YLS, I would say gray. It just felt like everything was always gray, the sky was always gray—not blue or sunny or what have you.But I know you've spent some time outside of Northern California, because you have done some stints at the Justice Department. Tell us about that, the times you went there—why did you go there? What type of work were you doing? And how did it relate to or complement your scholarly work?PK: At the beginning of the Obama administration, I had applied for a job in the Civil Rights Division as a deputy assistant attorney general (DAAG), and I didn't get it. And I thought, “Well, that's passed me by.” And a couple of years later, when they were looking for a new principal deputy solicitor general, in the summer of 2013, the civil-rights groups pushed me for that job. I got an interview with Eric Holder, and it was on June 11th, 2013, which just fortuitously happens to be the 50th anniversary of the day that Vivian Malone desegregated the University of Alabama—and Vivian Malone is the older sister of Sharon Malone, who is married to Eric Holder.So I went in for the interview and I said, “This must be an especially special day for you because of the 50th anniversary.” And we talked about that a little bit, and then we talked about other things. And I came out of the interview, and a couple of weeks later, Don Verrilli, who was the solicitor general, called me up and said, “Look, you're not going to get a job as the principal deputy”—which ultimately went to Ian Gershengorn, a phenomenal lawyer—“but Eric Holder really enjoyed talking to you, so we're going to look for something else for you to do here at the Department of Justice.”And a couple of weeks after that, Eric Holder called me and offered me the DAAG position in the Civil Rights Division and said, “We'd really like you to especially concentrate on our voting-rights litigation.” It was very important litigation, in part because the Supreme Court had recently struck down the pre-clearance regime under Section 5 [of the Voting Rights Act]. So the Justice Department was now bringing a bunch of lawsuits against things they could have blocked if Section 5 had been in effect, most notably the Texas voter ID law, which was a quite draconian voter ID law, and this omnibus bill in North Carolina that involved all sorts of cutbacks to opportunities to vote: a cutback on early voting, a cutback on same-day registration, a cutback on 16- and 17-year-olds pre-registering, and the like.So I went to the Department of Justice and worked with the Voting Section on those cases, but I also ended up working on things like getting the Justice Department to change its position on whether Title VII covered transgender individuals. And then I also got to work on the implementation of [United States v.] Windsor—which I had worked on, representing Edie Windsor, before I went to DOJ, because the Court had just decided Windsor [which held Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional]. So I had an opportunity to work on how to implement Windsor across the federal government. So that was the stuff I got to work on the first time I was at DOJ, and I also obviously worked on tons of other stuff, and it was phenomenal. I loved doing it.I did it for about 20 months, and then I came back to Stanford. It affected my teaching; I understood a lot of stuff quite differently having worked on it. It gave me some ideas on things I wanted to write about. And it just refreshed me in some ways. It's different than working in the clinic. I love working in the clinic, but you're working with students. You're working only with very, very junior lawyers. I sometimes think of the clinic as being a sort of Groundhog Day of first-year associates, and so I'm sort of senior partner and paralegal at a large law firm. At DOJ, you're working with subject-matter experts. The people in the Voting Section, collectively, had hundreds of years of experience with voting. The people in the Appellate Section had hundreds of years of experience with appellate litigation. And so it's just a very different feel.So I did that, and then I came back to Stanford. I was here, and in the fall of 2020, I was asked if I wanted to be one of the people on the Justice Department review team if Joe Biden won the election. These are sometimes referred to as the transition teams or the landing teams or the like. And I said, “I'd be delighted to do that.” They had me as one of the point people reviewing the Civil Rights Division. And I think it might've even been the Wednesday or Thursday before Inauguration Day 2021, I got a call from the liaison person on the transition team saying, “How would you like to go back to DOJ and be the principal deputy assistant attorney general in the Civil Rights Division?” That would mean essentially running the Division until we got a confirmed head, which took about five months. And I thought that this would be an amazing opportunity to go back to the DOJ and work with people I love, right at the beginning of an administration.And the beginning of an administration is really different than coming in midway through the second term of an administration. You're trying to come up with priorities, and I viewed my job really as helping the career people to do their best work. There were a huge number of career people who had gone through the first Trump administration, and they were raring to go. They had all sorts of ideas on stuff they wanted to do, and it was my job to facilitate that and make that possible for them. And that's why it's so tragic this time around that almost all of those people have left. The current administration first tried to transfer them all into Sanctuary Cities [the Sanctuary Cities Enforcement Working Group] or ask them to do things that they couldn't in good conscience do, and so they've retired or taken buyouts or just left.DL: It's remarkable, just the loss of expertise and experience at the Justice Department over these past few months.PK: Thousands of years of experience gone. And these are people, you've got to realize, who had been through the Nixon administration, the Reagan administration, both Bush administrations, and the first Trump administration, and they hadn't had any problem. That's what's so stunning: this is not just the normal shift in priorities, and they have gone out of their way to make it so hellacious for people that they will leave. And that's not something that either Democratic or Republican administrations have ever done before this.DL: And we will get to a lot of, shall we say, current events. Finishing up on just the discussion of your career, you had the opportunity to work in the executive branch—what about judicial service? You've been floated over the years as a possible Supreme Court nominee. I don't know if you ever looked into serving on the Ninth Circuit or were considered for that. What about judicial service?PK: So I've never been in a position, and part of this was a lesson I learned right at the beginning of my LDF career, when Lani Guinier, who was my boss at LDF, was nominated for the position of AAG [assistant attorney general] in the Civil Rights Division and got shot down. I knew from that time forward that if I did the things I really wanted to do, my chances of confirmation were not going to be very high. People at LDF used to joke that they would get me nominated so that I would take all the bullets, and then they'd sneak everybody else through. So I never really thought that I would have a shot at a judicial position, and that didn't bother me particularly. As you know, I gave the commencement speech many years ago at Stanford, and I said, “Would I want to be on the Supreme Court? You bet—but not enough to have trimmed my sails for an entire lifetime.”And I think that's right. Peter Baker did this story in The New York Times called something like, “Favorites of Left Don't Make Obama's Court List.” And in the story, Tommy Goldstein, who's a dear friend of mine, said, “If they wanted to talk about somebody who was a flaming liberal, they'd be talking about Pam Karlan, but nobody's talking about Pam Karlan.” And then I got this call from a friend of mine who said, “Yeah, but at least people are talking about how nobody's talking about you. Nobody's even talking about how nobody's talking about me.” And I was flattered, but not fooled.DL: That's funny; I read that piece in preparing for this interview. So let's say someone were to ask you, someone mid-career, “Hey, I've been pretty safe in the early years of my career, but now I'm at this juncture where I could do things that will possibly foreclose my judicial ambitions—should I just try to keep a lid on it, in the hope of making it?” It sounds like you would tell them to let their flag fly.PK: Here's the thing: your chances of getting to be on the Supreme Court, if that's what you're talking about, your chances are so low that the question is how much do you want to give up to go from a 0.001% chance to a 0.002% chance? Yes, you are doubling your chances, but your chances are not good. And there are some people who I think are capable of doing that, perhaps because they fit the zeitgeist enough that it's not a huge sacrifice for them. So it's not that I despise everybody who goes to the Supreme Court because they must obviously have all been super-careerists; I think lots of them weren't super-careerists in that way.Although it does worry me that six members of the Court now clerked at the Supreme Court—because when you are a law clerk, it gives you this feeling about the Court that maybe you don't want everybody who's on the Court to have, a feeling that this is the be-all and end-all of life and that getting a clerkship is a manifestation of an inner state of grace, so becoming a justice is equally a manifestation of an inner state of grace in which you are smarter than everybody else, wiser than everybody else, and everybody should kowtow to you in all sorts of ways. And I worry that people who are imprinted like ducklings on the Supreme Court when they're 25 or 26 or 27 might not be the best kind of portfolio of justices at the back end. The Court that decided Brown v. Board of Education—none of them, I think, had clerked at the Supreme Court, or maybe one of them had. They'd all done things with their lives other than try to get back to the Supreme Court. So I worry about that a little bit.DL: Speaking of the Court, let's turn to the Court, because it just finished its Term as we are recording this. As we started recording, they were still handing down the final decisions of the day.PK: Yes, the “R” numbers hadn't come up on the Supreme Court website when I signed off to come talk to you.DL: Exactly. So earlier this month, not today, but earlier this month, the Court handed down its decision in United States v. Skrmetti, reviewing Tennessee's ban on the use of hormones and puberty blockers for transgender youth. Were you surprised by the Court's ruling in Skrmetti?PK: No. I was not surprised.DL: So one of your most famous cases, which you litigated successfully five years ago or so, was Bostock v. Clayton County, in which the Court held that Title VII does apply to protect transgender individuals—and Bostock figures significantly in the Skrmetti opinions. Why were you surprised by Skrmetti given that you had won this victory in Bostock, which you could argue, in terms of just the logic of it, does carry over somewhat?PK: Well, I want to be very precise: I didn't actually litigate Bostock. There were three cases that were put together….DL: Oh yes—you handled Zarda.PK: I represented Don Zarda, who was a gay man, so I did not argue the transgender part of the case at all. Fortuitously enough, David Cole argued that part of the case, and David Cole was actually the first person I had dinner with as a freshman at Yale College, when I started college, because he was the roommate of somebody I debated against in high school. So David and I went to law school together, went to college together, and had classes together. We've been friends now for almost 50 years, which is scary—I think for 48 years we've been friends—and he argued that part of the case.So here's what surprised me about what the Supreme Court did in Skrmetti. Given where the Court wanted to come out, the more intellectually honest way to get there would've been to say, “Yes, of course this is because of sex; there is sex discrimination going on here. But even applying intermediate scrutiny, we think that Tennessee's law should survive intermediate scrutiny.” That would've been an intellectually honest way to get to where the Court got.Instead, they did this weird sort of, “Well, the word ‘sex' isn't in the Fourteenth Amendment, but it's in Title VII.” But that makes no sense at all, because for none of the sex-discrimination cases that the Court has decided under the Fourteenth Amendment did the word “sex” appear in the Fourteenth Amendment. It's not like the word “sex” was in there and then all of a sudden it took a powder and left. So I thought that was a really disingenuous way of getting to where the Court wanted to go. But I was not surprised after the oral argument that the Court was going to get to where it got on the bottom line.DL: I'm curious, though, rewinding to Bostock and Zarda, were you surprised by how the Court came out in those cases? Because it was still a deeply conservative Court back then.PK: No, I was not surprised. I was not surprised, both because I thought we had so much the better of the argument and because at the oral argument, it seemed pretty clear that we had at least six justices, and those were the six justices we had at the end of the day. The thing that was interesting to me about Bostock was I thought also that we were likely to win for the following weird legal-realist reason, which is that this was a case that would allow the justices who claimed to be textualists to show that they were principled textualists, by doing something that they might not have voted for if they were in Congress or the like.And also, while the impact was really large in one sense, the impact was not really large in another sense: most American workers are protected by Title VII, but most American employers do not discriminate, and didn't discriminate even before this, on the basis of sexual orientation or on the basis of gender identity. For example, in Zarda's case, the employer denied that they had fired Mr. Zarda because he was gay; they said, “We fired him for other reasons.”Very few employers had a formal policy that said, “We discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation.” And although most American workers are protected by Title VII, most American employers are not covered by Title VII—and that's because small employers, employers with fewer than 15 full-time employees, are not covered at all. And religious employers have all sorts of exemptions and the like, so for the people who had the biggest objection to hiring or promoting or retaining gay or transgender employees, this case wasn't going to change what happened to them at all. So the impact was really important for workers, but not deeply intrusive on employers generally. So I thought those two things, taken together, meant that we had a pretty good argument.I actually thought our textual argument was not our best argument, but it was the one that they were most likely to buy. So it was really interesting: we made a bunch of different arguments in the brief, and then as soon as I got up to argue, the first question out of the box was Justice Ginsburg saying, “Well, in 1964, homosexuality was illegal in most of the country—how could this be?” And that's when I realized, “Okay, she's just telling me to talk about the text, don't talk about anything else.”So I just talked about the text the whole time. But as you may remember from the argument, there was this weird moment, which came after I answered her question and one other one, there was this kind of silence from the justices. And I just said, “Well, if you don't have any more questions, I'll reserve the remainder of my time.” And it went well; it went well as an argument.DL: On the flip side, speaking of things that are not going so well, let's turn to current events. Zooming up to a higher level of generality than Skrmetti, you are a leading scholar of constitutional law, so here's the question. I know you've already been interviewed about it by media outlets, but let me ask you again, in light of just the latest, latest, latest news: are we in a constitutional crisis in the United States?PK: I think we're in a period of great constitutional danger. I don't know what a “constitutional crisis” is. Some people think the constitutional crisis is that we have an executive branch that doesn't believe in the Constitution, right? So you have Donald Trump asked, in an interview, “Do you have to comply with the Constitution?” He says, “I don't know.” Or he says, “I have an Article II that gives me the power to do whatever I want”—which is not what Article II says. If you want to be a textualist, it does not say the president can do whatever he wants. So you have an executive branch that really does not have a commitment to the Constitution as it has been understood up until now—that is, limited government, separation of powers, respect for individual rights. With this administration, none of that's there. And I don't know whether Emil Bove did say, “F**k the courts,” or not, but they're certainly acting as if that's their attitude.So yes, in that sense, we're in a period of constitutional danger. And then on top of that, I think we have a Supreme Court that is acting almost as if this is a normal administration with normal stuff, a Court that doesn't seem to recognize what district judges appointed by every president since George H.W. Bush or maybe even Reagan have recognized, which is, “This is not normal.” What the administration is trying to do is not normal, and it has to be stopped. So that worries me, that the Supreme Court is acting as if it needs to keep its powder dry—and for what, I'm not clear.If they think that by giving in and giving in, and prevaricating and putting things off... today, I thought the example of this was in the birthright citizenship/universal injunction case. One of the groups of plaintiffs that's up there is a bunch of states, around 23 states, and the Supreme Court in Justice Barrett's opinion says, “Well, maybe the states have standing, maybe they don't. And maybe if they have standing, you can enjoin this all in those states. We leave this all for remind.”They've sat on this for months. It's ridiculous that the Supreme Court doesn't “man up,” essentially, and decide these things. It really worries me quite a bit that the Supreme Court just seems completely blind to the fact that in 2024, they gave Donald Trump complete criminal immunity from any prosecution, so who's going to hold him accountable? Not criminally accountable, not accountable in damages—and now the Supreme Court seems not particularly interested in holding him accountable either.DL: Let me play devil's advocate. Here's my theory on why the Court does seem to be holding its fire: they're afraid of a worse outcome, which is, essentially, “The emperor has no clothes.”Say they draw this line in the sand for Trump, and then Trump just crosses it. And as we all know from that famous quote from The Federalist Papers, the Court has neither force nor will, but only judgment. That's worse, isn't it? If suddenly it's exposed that the Court doesn't have any army, any way to stop Trump? And then the courts have no power.PK: I actually think it's the opposite, which is, I think if the Court said to Donald Trump, “You must do X,” and then he defies it, you would have people in the streets. You would have real deep resistance—not just the “No Kings,” one-day march, but deep resistance. And there are scholars who've done comparative law who say, “When 3 percent of the people in a country go to the streets, you get real change.” And I think the Supreme Court is mistaking that.I taught a reading group for our first-years here. We have reading groups where you meet four times during the fall for dinner, and you read stuff that makes you think. And my reading group was called “Exit, Voice, and Loyalty,” and it started with the Albert Hirschman book with that title.DL: Great book.PK: It's a great book. And I gave them some excerpt from that, and I gave them an essay by Hannah Arendt called “Personal Responsibility Under Dictatorship,” which she wrote in 1964. And one of the things she says there is she talks about people who stayed in the German regime, on the theory that they would prevent at least worse things from happening. And I'm going to paraphrase slightly, but what she says is, “People who think that what they're doing is getting the lesser evil quickly forget that what they're choosing is evil.” And if the Supreme Court decides, “We're not going to tell Donald Trump ‘no,' because if we tell him no and he goes ahead, we will be exposed,” what they have basically done is said to Donald Trump, “Do whatever you want; we're not going to stop you.” And that will lose the Supreme Court more credibility over time than Donald Trump defying them once and facing some serious backlash for doing it.DL: So let me ask you one final question before we go to my little speed round. That 3 percent statistic is fascinating, by the way, but it resonates for me. My family's originally from the Philippines, and you probably had the 3 percent out there in the streets to oust Marcos in 1986.But let me ask you this. We now live in a nation where Donald Trump won not just the Electoral College, but the popular vote. We do see a lot of ugly things out there, whether in social media or incidents of violence or what have you. You still have enough faith in the American people that if the Supreme Court drew that line, and Donald Trump crossed it, and maybe this happened a couple of times, even—you still have faith that there will be that 3 percent or what have you in the streets?PK: I have hope, which is not quite the same thing as faith, obviously, but I have hope that some Republicans in Congress would grow a spine at that point, and people would say, “This is not right.” Have they always done that? No. We've had bad things happen in the past, and people have not done anything about it. But I think that the alternative of just saying, “Well, since we might not be able to stop him, we shouldn't do anything about it,” while he guts the federal government, sends masked people onto the streets, tries to take the military into domestic law enforcement—I think we have to do something.And this is what's so enraging in some ways: the district court judges in this country are doing their job. They are enjoining stuff. They're not enjoining everything, because not everything can be enjoined, and not everything is illegal; there's a lot of bad stuff Donald Trump is doing that he's totally entitled to do. But the district courts are doing their job, and they're doing their job while people are sending pizza boxes to their houses and sending them threats, and the president is tweeting about them or whatever you call the posts on Truth Social. They're doing their job—and the Supreme Court needs to do its job too. It needs to stand up for district judges. If it's not willing to stand up for the rest of us, you'd think they'd at least stand up for their entire judicial branch.DL: Turning to my speed round, my first question is, what do you like the least about the law? And this can either be the practice of law or law as a more abstract system of ordering human affairs.PK: What I liked least about it was having to deal with opposing counsel in discovery. That drove me to appellate litigation.DL: Exactly—where your request for an extension is almost always agreed to by the other side.PK: Yes, and where the record is the record.DL: Yes, exactly. My second question, is what would you be if you were not a lawyer and/or law professor?PK: Oh, they asked me this question for a thing here at Stanford, and it was like, if I couldn't be a lawyer, I'd... And I just said, “I'd sit in my room and cry.”DL: Okay!PK: I don't know—this is what my talent is!DL: You don't want to write a novel or something?PK: No. What I would really like to do is I would like to bike the Freedom Trail, which is a trail that starts in Montgomery, Alabama, and goes to the Canadian border, following the Underground Railroad. I've always wanted to bike that. But I guess that's not a career. I bike slowly enough that it could be a career, at this point—but earlier on, probably not.DL: My third question is, how much sleep do you get each night?PK: I now get around six hours of sleep each night, but it's complicated by the following, which is when I worked at the Department of Justice the second time, it was during Covid, so I actually worked remotely from California. And what that required me to do was essentially to wake up every morning at 4 a.m., 7 a.m. on the East Coast, so I could have breakfast, read the paper, and be ready to go by 5:30 a.m.I've been unable to get off of that, so I still wake up before dawn every morning. And I spent three months in Florence, and I thought the jet lag would bring me out of this—not in the slightest. Within two weeks, I was waking up at 4:30 a.m. Central European Time. So that's why I get about six hours, because I can't really go to bed before 9 or 10 p.m.DL: Well, I was struck by your being able to do this podcast fairly early West Coast time.PK: Oh no, this is the third thing I've done this morning! I had a 6:30 a.m. conference call.DL: Oh my gosh, wow. It reminds me of that saying about how you get more done in the Army before X hour than other people get done in a day.My last question, is any final words of wisdom, such as career advice or life advice, for my listeners?PK: Yes: do what you love, with people you love doing it with.DL: Well said. I've loved doing this podcast—Professor Karlan, thanks again for joining me.PK: You should start calling me Pam. We've had this same discussion….DL: We're on the air! Okay, well, thanks again, Pam—I'm so grateful to you for joining me.PK: Thanks for having me.DL: Thanks so much to Professor Karlan for joining me. Whether or not you agree with her views, you can't deny that she's both insightful and honest—qualities that have made her a leading legal academic and lawyer, but also a great podcast guest.Thanks to NexFirm for sponsoring the Original Jurisdiction podcast. NexFirm has helped many attorneys to leave Biglaw and launch firms of their own. To explore this opportunity, please contact NexFirm at 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment at nexfirm dot com to learn more.Thanks to Tommy Harron, my sound engineer here at Original Jurisdiction, and thanks to you, my listeners and readers. To connect with me, please email me at davidlat at Substack dot com, or find me on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn, at davidlat, and on Instagram and Threads at davidbenjaminlat.If you enjoyed today's episode, please rate, review, and subscribe. Please subscribe to the Original Jurisdiction newsletter if you don't already, over at davidlat dot substack dot com. This podcast is free, but it's made possible by paid subscriptions to the newsletter.The next episode should appear on or about Wednesday, July 23. Until then, may your thinking be original and your jurisdiction free of defects. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit davidlat.substack.com/subscribe

Benjamin Netanyahu has done it before: making positive noises about a Gaza truce before boarding a plane to America, only for it all to unravel after he lands. For the Israeli prime minister's third visit to the White House since Inauguration Day, the noises are more positive than they've been in a while, but hard evidence of progress is thin and these meetings with Donald Trump always feel loosely scripted; perhaps even improvised. The last time Netanyahu visited the Oval Office, he was ambushed by his host who gushed about Turkey's leader and announced direct talks with Iran. What about this time, after that 12-day war that roped in US fighter planes? We ask about an eventual deal. And how to feed Palestinian civilians forced to risk their lives each time they approach one of those US and Israeli-backed aid distribution centres, the ones that bypass international aid agencies? Could Sunday's announcement that Israel's war cabinet approved aid for northern Gaza Strip signal call time on that concept? Read more'Blood for food': The US soldier-spies sidelining UN aid work in Gaza And then there's the rebuilding of a territory that's been flattened. Does Trump still cling to his Gaza Riviera real estate development plan? Does Israel want to occupy Gaza? The US wants normalisation between Israel and the likes of Syria and Saudi Arabia. How badly? And where do Palestinians figure in all the grand bargaining? Produced by François Picard, Rebecca Gnignati, Juliette Laffont, Ilayda Habip, Alessandro Xenos.

Project 2025, championed by the Heritage Foundation and a coalition of conservative organizations, has become one of the most ambitious and controversial policy blueprints in contemporary American politics. Its authors envision a sweeping reconstruction of federal power, “placing the federal government's entire executive branch under direct presidential control,” as Heritage president Kevin Roberts has openly declared. The plan's backbone is a robust endorsement of the unitary executive theory, which grants unprecedented authority to the president, superseding the traditional independence of agencies like the Department of Justice, FBI, and the Federal Communications Commission. Roberts insists, “All federal employees should answer to the president,” reflecting a philosophy that would uproot decades of precedent regarding agency autonomy.The heart of Project 2025 lies in its plan to replace thousands of federal officials with ideologically vetted loyalists. It recommends dismissing nearly all senior State Department employees prior to Inauguration Day and filling those roles with temporary leaders who, notably, do not require Senate confirmation. Kiron Skinner, who contributed to the project's State Department chapter, has been candid in critiquing existing personnel as “too left-wing,” advocating for a transformation in which “those more loyal to a conservative president” would fill the ranks.This push for centralized authority is not just theoretical. Since January 20, under the Trump administration and the Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency, Project 2025's playbook has begun to reshape the bureaucracy. Entire agencies, including the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and USAID, have been eliminated or gutted through unprecedented executive actions. Challenger, Gray & Christmas, Inc. reports that approximately 280,253 federal workers and contractors have either been laid off or face imminent dismissal. This seismic reduction affects at least 27 agencies and is touted as part of an effort to save $1 trillion.Specific policy objectives underscore the project's breadth. In criminal justice, the blueprint advises that the Department of Justice intervene aggressively in local prosecutions deemed insufficiently tough, even seeking to remove elected district attorneys who decline to prosecute certain crimes. The document urges that “the DOJ should remove local DAs who ‘deny American citizens the ‘equal protection of the laws' by refusing to prosecute criminal offenses in their jurisdictions.'” This would deter local prosecutors from pursuing alternative justice models, such as drug treatment instead of incarceration, under threat of federal override. Additionally, Project 2025 advocates expanding federal law enforcement's reach into local affairs, particularly in areas where local policy diverges from its agenda.Environmental and labor policies are equally targeted. The Center for Progressive Reform notes that Project 2025 is tracking executive action proposals across 20 federal agencies, warning that the rapid rollout of these initiatives is already producing “devastating consequences for workers, the environment, public health, and the rights of millions of Americans.” The real-time rollback of environmental and public safety regulations has become a flashpoint in states nationwide, as advocates sound alarms over declining protections and oversight.The implications of Project 2025 ripple far beyond administrative reshuffling. Critics argue that the project's zeal for efficiency and loyalty risks hollowing out institutional expertise, weakening checks and balances, and unsettling the rule of law. Proponents, however, see it as a necessary correction—streamlining government, empowering the president, and ensuring a coherent, values-driven administration.As these reforms surge forward, the coming months and years will test both the legal and cultural boundaries of executive power. With tens of thousands of jobs on the line, agency missions in flux, and contentious legal battles unfolding, one thing is certain: Project 2025 has set the stage for a fundamental clash over the future of American governance.Thank you for tuning in. Please come back next week for more.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.ai

The nation collectively exhaled a sigh of real as Joe Biden was inaugurated the 46th president of the United States. His address was a marked contrast from Trump's dystopian American Carnage speech four years prior. But the new president inherits a nation beset by crisis and pandemic with bitter internal divisions. The elephant in the room remains the now former President Trump whose impeachment trial looms. Meanwhile America waits for justice to be served. David Enrich from the New York Times joins Michael to discuss Trump's perilous financial future and is own date with legal jeopardy. For cool Mea Culpa gear, check out www.meaculpapodcast.com/merch To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices The nation collectively exhaled a sigh of real as Joe Biden was inaugurated the 46th president of the United States. His address was a marked contrast from Trump's dystopian American Carnage speech four years prior. But the new president inherits a nation beset by crisis and pandemic with bitter internal divisions. The elephant in the room remains the now former President Trump whose impeachment trial looms. Meanwhile America waits for justice to be served. David Enrich from the New York Times joins Michael to discuss Trump's perilous financial future and is own date with legal jeopardy. For cool Mea Culpa gear, check out www.meaculpapodcast.com/merch To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Donald Trump sold us a different kind of Pax Americana. The US-led global rules-based order was always about soft power backed by bulk military might. Trump's rules on Inauguration Day veered instead to the utilitarian: yes to the world's top superpower staking imperial claims to parts of the planet deemed vital to national interests. Yes to coveting Greenland's strategic minerals and Panama's essential waterway. No to forever wars in places like Ukraine where the US pays while Europe reaps the benefits of curbing Vladimir Putin's westward march. So why now the sudden pull of the Middle East? The US president is weighing whether to go all-in with Israel's pre-emptive war against Iran? One whose stated aims oscillate between nuclear deterrence and regime change. Why Iran and not Ukraine? And what conclusions can Europe draw from the evolution of warfare in 2025? Both Ukraine and Israel inflicting damage with spectacular operations that combine special ops in the field, drones and artificial intelligence. Sales reps are all smiles at the big Paris Air Show but how should cash-strapped states be buying for their militaries? Can an unmanned gizmo really inflict as much damage as a state-of-the-art fighter jet? If so, just how volatile a world we live in?   Produced by Rebecca Gnignati, Elisa Amiri, Ilayda Habip.

Send us a textWhen we finished our 14th Season it was Inauguration Day for Bill Clinton. In this episode, we pick up where we left off on Inauguration afternoon and evening. We will witness the celebrations of the victors and the agony of the defeated as Bill Clinton and the democrats enjoy their victory until late into the evening. It was for them a fun night, and first few days at the helm of power. But when they wake up from the honeymoon it will be Bob Dole who will be ready to get down to the business of running the country. Here is day one of the Clinton Administration.  Questions or comments at , Randalrgw1@aol.com , https://twitter.com/randal_wallace , and http://www.randalwallace.com/Please Leave us a review at wherever you get your podcastsThanks for listening!!

BRIGHTMOSS – heal your body from the inside out. Visit: https://mybrightcore.com/andweknow and get 25% off with code: AWK Or call (888) 317-9941) for up to 50% off!  ———— Get your protection from EMF damages to your body: https://ftwproject.com/ref/532 ——— Protect your investments with And We Know http://andweknow.com/gold Or call 720-605-3900, Tell them “LT” sent you. ————————————————————— *Our AWK Website: https://www.andweknow.com/ *Our 24/7 NEWS SITE: https://thepatriotlight.com/ ————————— Leftist woman is mad Target https://x.com/andweknow/status/1929337157027786999 SCOTUS HANDS TRUMP FULL CONTROL OF FEDERAL AGENCIES — LAWFARE ERA IS OVER https://x.com/andweknow/status/1929450871370272819 It's a good time to share this video of John Kasich admitting live on air that John McCain was put to death. https://x.com/MelissaRedpill/status/1929301419774922866 Good thing the far right didn't win in France. https://x.com/NiohBerg/status/1928963490422636769 ‘Let's face it, Joe's shot.' https://x.com/ShteinMichael/status/1929023036541317620 2016. After Trump won, Lindsey Graham and his warmonger friends went to Ukraine https://x.com/mazemoore/status/1929285246710669666 White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller torches the Democratic Party, https://x.com/bennyjohnson/status/1929142160172982477 Just a reminder that on Inauguration Day in 2021, Biden got a gun salute reserved for funerals, https://x.com/JackStr42679640/status/1929326133398618143 ————————— *DONATIONS SITE: https://bit.ly/2Lgdrh5 *Mail your gift to: And We Know 30650 Rancho California Rd STE D406-123 (or D406-126) Temecula, CA 92591 ➜ AWK Shirts and gifts: https://shop.andweknow.com/ ➜ Audio Bible https://www.biblegateway.com/audio/mclean/kjv/1John.3.16 Connect with us in the following ways:

Get insights on the President's polling 100 days in and how Americans view crucial domestic issues.  The Administration's approval rating has declined from 51% to 45% since Inauguration Day, but that's relatively in line with historical precedent. What does the President's polling tell us about the American public today—and how they might vote in the 2026 midterms?  Join Steve Odland and guest Clifford Young, president of polling and societal trends at Ipsos, to explore the President's polling versus his first term, the nuances of polling on immigration and taxes, and why domestic issues matter more to Americans than foreign affairs.    (00:55) Themes in Recent Polls: Trepidation and the President (02:22) The Administration's Approval Ratings and Public Perception (07:15) Consumer Confidence and Economic Behavior (13:46) Geopolitical Issues and Immigration For more from The Conference Board:  The Next One Hundred Days—and Beyond: What Lies Ahead  Navigating Washington: Insights for Business  Unpacking 2024's Election Polling with Ipsos' Clifford Young 

Plus: Lowe's shares drop as the company maintains its outlook and discloses lower sales. Google shares rebound from yesterday's dip fueled by concerns about AI. T.J. Maxx's earnings outlook misses expectations due to tariff-affected merchandise. Ariana Aspuru hosts.   Sign up for the WSJ's free What's News newsletter.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit andrewsullivan.substack.comClaire Lehmann is a journalist and publisher. In 2015, after leaving academia, she founded the online magazine Quillette, where she is still editor-in-chief. She's also a newspaper columnist for The Australian.For two clips of our convo — on how journalists shouldn't be too friendly with one another, and how postmodernism takes the joy out of literature — pop over to our YouTube page.Other topics: a modest upbringing in Adelaide; her hippie parents; their small-c conservatism; her many working-class jobs; ADHD; aspiring to be a Shakespeare scholar; enjoying Foucault … at first; her “great disillusionment” with pomo theory; the impenetrable prose of Butler; the great Germaine Greer; praising Camille Paglia; evolutionary psychology; Wright's The Moral Animal and Pinker's The Blank Slate; Claire switching to forensic psychology after an abusive relationship; the TV show Adolescence; getting hired by the Sydney Morning Herald to write op-eds — her first on marriage equality; Bush's federal amendment; competition among women; tribalism and mass migration; soaring housing costs in Australia; rising populism in the West; creating Quillette; the IDW; being anti-anti-Trump; audience capture; Islamism and Charlie Hebdo; Covid; critical Trump theory; tariffs; reflexive anti-elitism; Joe Rogan; Almost Famous; Orwell; Spinoza; Oakeshott; Fukuyama and boredom; tech billionaires on Inauguration Day; the sycophants of Trump 2.0; and X as a state propaganda platform.Browse the Dishcast archive for an episode you might enjoy (the first 102 are free in their entirety — subscribe to get everything else). Next week: David Graham on Project 2025. After that: Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson on the Biden years, Sam Tanenhaus on Bill Buckley, Robert Merry on President McKinley, Walter Isaacson on Ben Franklin, and Paul Elie on his book The Last Supper: Art, Faith, Sex, and Controversy in the 1980s. Please send any guest recs, dissents, and other comments to dish@andrewsullivan.com.

The American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI) has released research defending the repeal of the Federal Excise Tax on new trucks and trucking equipment; you will not believe the amount of the tax and what the tax was to fund; Kevin reviews the data and offers his insights. U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright is evaluating loans issued from the $400 Billion Green Bank fast-tracked in the period between the time President Trump was elected and Inauguration Day; Kevin digs into the data. The U.S. Department of Transportation announced changes to a Federal Highway Administration rule for states to establish emission-reduction goals; Kevin discusses the reasons for the changes. Oil and gas prices react to changes on the demand side, geopolitical events in the Mideast, additional sanctions on Russia. OPEC+'s increase in production and the U.S. dollar fluctuation

The American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI) has released research defending the repeal of the Federal Excise Tax on new trucks and trucking equipment; you will not believe the amount of the tax and what the tax was to fund; Kevin reviews the data and offers his insights. U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright is evaluating loans issued from the $400 Billion Green Bank fast-tracked in the period between the time President Trump was elected and Inauguration Day; Kevin digs into the data. The U.S. Department of Transportation announced changes to a Federal Highway Administration rule for states to establish emission-reduction goals; Kevin discusses the reasons for the changes. Oil and gas prices react to changes on the demand side, geopolitical events in the Mideast, additional sanctions on Russia. OPEC+'s increase in production and the U.S. dollar fluctuation

President Donald Trump was sworn into office just over 100 days ago. And ever since Inauguration Day, tech industry leaders like Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg have been a regular presence at the White House. But the start of Trump's term — from tariffs to antitrust trials to DOGE cuts — has been rocky for Silicon Valley. On POLITICO Tech, reporter Brendan Bordelon joins host Steven Overly for a debrief on Trump's first 100 days in office, and a look at what's to come in the next 100. Steven Overly is the host of POLITICO Tech and covers the intersection of trade and technology. Nirmal Mulaikal is the co-host and producer of POLITICO Energy.  Alex Keeney is a senior audio producer at POLITICO. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Donald Trump took office as president on January 20, 2025, having already served one term. Immediately, however, he made clear his second term would be even more unpredictable than his first. He put one of the world's richest men — and his biggest campaign donor — in charge of a shadowy new entity with seemingly unfettered access to government data. Trump also blitzed the system with a barrage of executive orders, which have seemingly upended the government. He has done everything from threatening judges and lawyers to attacking the very concept of birthright citizenship, while Congress has remained largely on the sidelines.In short, Trump has moved aggressively against many of the checks and balances that American democracy has built in. As he works to consolidate power for the executive branch, other players have stepped up to challenge the president's moves — Campaign Legal Center among them. In this special episode of Democracy Decoded, our host Simone Leeper speaks with Trevor Potter, the president and founder of Campaign Legal Center, and Adav Noti, the executive director of Campaign Legal Center, to discuss what they've seen and what they're doing during this unprecedented moment.Host and Guests:Simone Leeper litigates a wide range of redistricting-related cases at Campaign Legal Center, challenging gerrymanders and advocating for election systems that guarantee all voters an equal opportunity to influence our democracy. Prior to arriving at CLC, Simone was a law clerk in the office of Senator Ed Markey and at the Library of Congress, Office of General Counsel. She received her J.D. cum laude from Georgetown University Law Center in 2019 and a bachelor's degree in political science from Columbia University in 2016.Trevor Potter is President at Campaign Legal Center. A Republican former Chairman of the Federal Election Commission (FEC), Trevor was general counsel to John McCain's 2000 and 2008 presidential campaigns and an adviser to the drafters of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law. To many, he is perhaps best known for his recurring appearances on The Colbert Report as the lawyer for Stephen Colbert's super PAC, Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow, during the 2012 election, a program that won a Peabody Award for excellence in reporting on money in politics. The American Bar Association Journal has described Trevor as “hands-down one of the top lawyers in the country on the delicate intersection of politics, law and money.” He has provided testimony and written statements to Congress on federal election proposals, campaign finance regulation and, recently, the effects of the January 6th attack on our democracy. During the 2020 election season, Trevor was named to the cross-partisan National Task Force on Election Crises.Adav Noti is Executive Director at Campaign Legal Center. He has conducted dozens of constitutional cases in trial and appellate courts and the United States Supreme Court. He also advises Members of Congress and other policymakers on advancing democracy through legislation. Prior to joining CLC, Adav served for more than 10 years in nonpartisan leadership capacities within the Office of General Counsel of the Federal Election Commission, and he served as a Special Assistant United States Attorney for the District of Columbia. Adav regularly provides expert analysis for television, radio, and print journalism. He has appeared on broadcasts such as The Rachel Maddow Show, Anderson Cooper 360, PBS NewsHour, and National Public Radio's Morning Edition, and he is regularly cited in publications nationwide, including the New York Times, Washington Post, USA Today, Politico, Slate, and Reuters.Links:The Trump Administration's (Second) 100 Days: What You Need to Know – Campaign Legal CenterIt's almost Inauguration Day. Will there be any checks on Trump's power? – The Hill op-ed by Trevor PotterBad Signs for Democracy as First 100 Days Begins – CLC newsletter, From the Desk of Trevor PotterOn the Question of Crisis – CLC newsletter, From the Desk of Trevor PotterAbout CLC:Democracy Decoded is a production of Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan nonprofit organization which advances democracy through law at the federal, state and local levels, fighting for every American's right to responsive government and a fair opportunity to participate in and affect the democratic process. Learn more about us.Democracy Decoded is part of The Democracy Group, a network of podcasts that examines what's broken in our democracy and how we can work together to fix it.

To help us assess the Trump administration's first 100 days in power, I've called back to the podcast guests who have all been on to talk about different aspects of this administration. Dr. Scott Waller, Dr. Matt Van Hook, and Dustin Steeve all on the podcast on individual prior episodes to discuss Inauguration Day and the GOP platform (Dr. Waller), VP Vance's Munich speech and the Trump foreign policy (Dr. Matt Van Hook), and the work of Elon Musk and DOGE (Dustin Steeve). In this conversation, we revisit each of these arenas while more broadly discussing the pros and cons of “first 100 days” assessments, the legislative efforts of the Trump administration, and how to think about President Trump's ongoing conflicts with the judiciary branch.Subscribe to Tim Talks Politics⁠⁠⁠⁠ on Substack⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ for the full show notes (30% for podcast listeners)!

In the shadow of Donald Trump's goading, Canadians are casting ballots in a general election. US tariffs and talk of making the world's second largest nation by size the 51st state are helping flip the momentum from the opposition conservatives to Liberals that suffered from incumbent fatigue after a decade in power – that is until 99 days ago. Starting on Inauguration Day, Trump's belligerent tone stunned his neighbours to the north. We asked about former central banker Mark Carney who stepped in and called the snap vote after unpopular predecessor Justin Trudeau bowed out. What's the plan for a nation unsure about the lasting damage across the world's longest unprotected border?And what to make of rival Pierre Poilievre, who hails from the right wing of the Conservative Party? The MP from Ontario was actually born in Alberta, the oil-rich western province often depicted as Canada's answer to Texas and the most sympathetic to Trump. Is Canada polarising the way the US has?In Canada, whose head of state remains Britain's monarch, the fault line in politics has long been between English speakers and the sovereigntist of French-speaking Québec. What's changed?Produced by Rebecca Gnignati, Ilayda Habib and Aurore Laborie. 

In the final episode of season 26, we are sharing a poignant discussion with Ruth and  TC team member, Tina Harris. Tina shares her experience of tarrying as a communal and immersive practice deeply rooted in music, openness, and collective healing. Ruth and Tina explore various themes, including the confrontation of disappointment, doubt, disillusionment, and deconstruction within the tarrying process, and the transformative power of redemptive suffering. They also touch on the importance of lament in spiritual practice and the significance of embracing vulnerability, especially during Holy Week. At the end of this episode we encourage you to reflect deeply and engage fully in the practice of tarrying, to sit with your suffering in the presence of Jesus. We are journeying through Lent with a podcast season entitled “Tarry with Me Awhile: Learnings from the Black Church.” We will use Dr. Selina Stone's book, Tarry Awhile: Wisdom from Black Spirituality for People of Faith, as a guide. Black spirituality has much to offer us in understanding the practice of tarrying as a Lenten practice. Together we will seek a deeper understanding of waiting on God in the liminal space—where the resurrection feels far off, and our deaths and suffering are present.    Tina Harris (TC15) is ordained in the United Methodist Church and holds a Master of Divinity from St. Paul School of Theology. She has served the church in a variety of roles, including Lead Pastor of Grand Avenue Temple UMC and Director of Mission, Service and Justice Ministries in the Missouri Conference of the United Methodist Church. Tina is passionate about community engagement and has served and/or actively supported several civic organizations and ministries. As an attorney and diversity leader, a common thread in her work is to gather individuals into communities, challenge comfort zones and invite those whom society has overlooked to take their place at the table.   Music this season is provided by Julian Davis Reed. Julian Davis Reid (TC20) is an artist-theologian from Chicago who uses sound and word to offer hope to the searching, presence to the sorrowful, and rest to the weary. A pianist, composer, and producer, his projects featured on this podcast are the two solo piano records Rest Assured (2021) and Beside Still Waters (2024) and his single Moan (Matthew 2:18) featuring Tramaine Parker, released on Inauguration Day 2025 on the project When Souls Cry Out. Julian steadily releases music under his own name and with his group, The JuJu Exchange. You can learn more about his work at juliandavisreid.com. Mentioned in this episode: Tarry Awhile: Wisdom from Black Spirituality for People of Faith by Dr. Selina Stone Strength to Love by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Music Credit: Kingdom Come by Aaron Niequist The Way of the Cross from Lent- Music in Solitude Moan (Matthew 2:18) by Julian Davis Reed Are you interested in learning more about Haven, our newest community offering from the Transforming Center? Haven is a community that meets alternately online and in person to create space for leaders to forge a stronger connection between their souls and their leadership. Each gathering (online and in-person) offers spiritual practices that increasingly open us to God over time. This new 18-month community experience will provide more intentional opportunities to engage with a diverse community of believers who are united around Christ. Learn more about dates and how to apply! Support the podcast! This season patrons will receive special bonus episodes with each guest, exploring different practices associated with Lent, such as solitude, self-examination, confession, and more. Become a patron today by visiting our Patreon page!     The Transforming Center exists to create space for God to strengthen leaders and transform communities. You are invited to join our next Transforming Community:® A Two-year Spiritual Formation Experience for Leaders.  Delivered in nine quarterly retreats, this practice-based learning opportunity is grounded in the conviction that the best thing you bring to leadership is your own transforming self! Learn more and apply HERE.   *this post contains affiliate links

Back on Inauguration Day in January, Reset spoke with Kathy Salvi, the chair of the Illinois Republican Party. At the time, she said that concerns that President Trump's mass deportation policies would overreach and extend to students, legal residents and citizens were unfounded and a result of “fearmongering.” Nearly three months into the Trump administration, we check back in with her to hear her thoughts on how tariffs and the president's mass deportation agenda are impacting Illinois residents and businesses. For a full archive of Reset interviews, head over to wbez.org/reset.

April 20 has become a national day of celebration for the hedonistic cannabis subculture, but it has also long been marked by the radical right and Nazi-nostalgists around the world for unsavory reasons. It now emerges that Trump's Inauguration Day executive order declaring a state of emergency on the southern border also set a deadline of April 20 for a joint Pentagon-Homeland Security recommendation on whether to invoke the Insurrection Act. This has sparked much speculation that Trump will immediately do so, declaring martial law and consolidating a dictatorship... this weekend. How likely is this, and is the date a mere coincidence? In Episode 274 of the CounterVortex podcast, Bill Weinberg breaks it down. Listen on SoundCloud or via Patreon. https://www.patreon.com/countervortex Production by Chris Rywalt We ask listeners to donate just $1 per weekly podcast via Patreon -- or $2 for our new special offer! We now have 70 subscribers. If you appreciate our work, please become Number 71!

S26 Ep 6 |Desperate for God to Intervene: The Ongoing Tarry In this episode, Ruth engages in a profound conversation with Joy and David Bailey. Together, they delve into the themes from Dr. Selena Stone's book 'Tarry Awhile,' focusing on chapter six about healing. Joy and David share their extensive journey of dealing with Joy's chronic health issues, exploring how it has shaped both their faith and community life. They discuss the complexities of suffering, the importance of community support, and how leaning into God's presence has been vital in their ongoing struggle.  We are journeying through Lent with a podcast season entitled “Tarry with Me Awhile: Learnings from the Black Church.” We will use Dr. Selina Stone's book, Tarry Awhile: Wisdom from Black Spirituality for People of Faith, as a guide. Black spirituality has much to offer us in understanding the practice of tarrying as a Lenten practice. Together we will seek a deeper understanding of waiting on God in the liminal space—where the resurrection feels far off, and our deaths and suffering are present.    As a photographer and writer, Joy Guion Bailey (TC15) walks the tension between the hopeful, faithful now and the not yet. Her desire is that the spaces she curates in her life and work invite willing participants to their place at the communion table through pieces that encourage the viewer to stay, listen, and engage deeply with their own story and the narratives playing out around them. A practicing professional artist for 15 years, Joy resides in Richmond, Virginia, with her husband, David Bailey.    David Bailey (TC15) is a public theologian, culture maker, and catalyst focused on building reconciling communities. David is the founder and Chief Vision Officer of Arrabon, a spiritual formation ministry that equips the American Church to actively and creatively pursue racial healing in their communities. He is the co-author of the study series, A People, A Place, and A Just Society, and the executive producer of the documentary 11 am: Hope for America's Most Segregated Hour and the Urban Doxology Project. David is rooted at East End Covenant Fellowship, serving on the preaching team, and his greatest honor is to be married to his wonderful wife, Joy.   Music this season is provided by Julian Davis Reed. Julian Davis Reid (TC20) is an artist-theologian from Chicago who uses sound and word to offer hope to the searching, presence to the sorrowful, and rest to the weary. A pianist, composer, and producer, his projects featured on this podcast are the two solo piano records Rest Assured (2021) and Beside Still Waters (2024) and his single Moan (Matthew 2:18) featuring Tramaine Parker, released on Inauguration Day 2025 on the project When Souls Cry Out. Julian steadily releases music under his own name and with his group, The JuJu Exchange. You can learn more about his work at juliandavisreid.com. Mentioned in this episode: Tarry Awhile: Wisdom from Black Spirituality for People of Faith by Dr. Selina Stone One is Theology of the Womb by Christy Bauman Invisible Women: Data Bias in a World Made for Men by Caroline Criado-Perez Music Credit: Kingdom Come by Aaron Niequist Besides Still Waters by Julian Davis Reed Surely Goodness and Mercy by Julian Davis Reed Are you interested in learning more about Haven, our newest community offering from the Transforming Center? Haven is a community that meets alternately online and in person to create space for leaders to forge a stronger connection between their souls and their leadership. Each gathering (online and in-person) offers spiritual practices that increasingly open us to God over time. This new 18-month community experience will provide more intentional opportunities to engage with a diverse community of believers who are united around Christ. Learn more about dates and how to apply! Support the podcast! This season patrons will receive special bonus episodes with each guest, exploring different practices associated with Lent, such as solitude, self-examination, confession, and more. Become a patron today by visiting our Patreon page!     The Transforming Center exists to create space for God to strengthen leaders and transform communities. You are invited to join our next Transforming Community:® A Two-year Spiritual Formation Experience for Leaders.  Delivered in nine quarterly retreats, this practice-based learning opportunity is grounded in the conviction that the best thing you bring to leadership is your own transforming self! Learn more and apply HERE.   *this post contains affiliate links

This week, Ruth welcomes artist and pastor Delwin Eiland to discuss the spiritual practice of tarrying. Delwin shares his experience as a worship leader, emphasizing the importance of silence and restraint in spiritual life. The episode delves into how communal tarrying can create space for deeper connection with God and the role of the Holy Spirit in guiding these moments. Ruth and Delwin also discuss how silence can act as a form of resistance and sovereignty over one's inner life. The episode concludes with a tarrying moment held by one of Delwin's songs, titled 'Wait for You.' We are journeying through Lent with a podcast season entitled “Tarry with Me Awhile: Learnings from the Black Church.” We will use Dr. Selina Stone's book, Tarry Awhile: Wisdom from Black Spirituality for People of Faith, as a guide. Black spirituality has much to offer us in understanding the practice of tarrying as a Lenten practice. Together we will seek a deeper understanding of waiting on God in the liminal space—where the resurrection feels far off, and our deaths and suffering are present.    Delwin Eiland (TC19) is an artist, pastor, & leader who exists to create trustworthy connections, God-centered affirmation, empathetic challenge, and steady, vulnerable leadership. He sees his work as a means to the end of building bridges and cultivating lasting connections. With over 25 years as a professional musician, Delwin brings experience and leadership in church environments and venues ranging from 30 to 30,000. He is a proven strategic & creative collaborator with work including Bethany Christian Services, the FILO Conference, and the Global Leadership Summit. Delwin currently serves as the worship pastor for Mars Hill Bible Church in Grand Rapids, MI, as well as the worship leader for The Transforming Center. He and his wife, Ashlee, have three children.   Music this season is provided by Julian Davis Reed. Julian Davis Reid (TC20) is an artist-theologian from Chicago who uses sound and word to offer hope to the searching, presence to the sorrowful, and rest to the weary. A pianist, composer, and producer, his projects featured on this podcast are the two solo piano records Rest Assured (2021) and Beside Still Waters (2024) and his single Moan (Matthew 2:18) featuring Tramaine Parker, released on Inauguration Day 2025 on the project When Souls Cry Out. Julian steadily releases music under his own name and with his group, The JuJu Exchange. You can learn more about his work at juliandavisreid.com. Mentioned in this episode: Tarry Awhile: Wisdom from Black Spirituality for People of Faith by Dr. Selina Stone The Sovereignty of Quiet: Beyond Resistance in Black Culture by Kevin Quashie Music Credit: Kingdom Come by Aaron Niequist Yesterday, Today, Forever from Music in Solitude Wait For You by Delwin Eiland Are you interested in learning more about Haven, our newest community offering from the Transforming Center? Haven is a community that meets alternately online and in person to create space for leaders to forge a stronger connection between their souls and their leadership. Each gathering (online and in-person) offers spiritual practices that increasingly open us to God over time. This new 18-month community experience will provide more intentional opportunities to engage with a diverse community of believers who are united around Christ. Learn more about dates and how to apply! Support the podcast! This season patrons will receive special bonus episodes with each guest, exploring different practices associated with Lent, such as solitude, self-examination, confession, and more. Become a patron today by visiting our Patreon page!     The Transforming Center exists to create space for God to strengthen leaders and transform communities. You are invited to join our next Transforming Community:® A Two-year Spiritual Formation Experience for Leaders.  Delivered in nine quarterly retreats, this practice-based learning opportunity is grounded in the conviction that the best thing you bring to leadership is your own transforming self! Learn more and apply HERE.   *this post contains affiliate links

Ruth is joined this week by Rasool Berry, teaching pastor and director of partnerships and content development at Our Daily Bread Ministries. They continue our conversations about tarrying, this time focusing on justice and the transformative nature of tarrying. Rasool shares his journey from a non-church upbringing to embracing faith, how tarrying helps him orient himself to God's reality, and highlights the deep spiritual lessons learned through practices of waiting and quiet. The conversation underscores the importance of embodying the spirit of justice and the need for contemplative action in today's disorienting world.   We are journeying through Lent with a podcast season entitled “Tarry with Me Awhile: Learnings from the Black Church.” We will use Dr. Selina Stone's book, Tarry Awhile: Wisdom from Black Spirituality for People of Faith, as a guide. Black spirituality has much to offer us in understanding the practice of tarrying as a Lenten practice. Together we will seek a deeper understanding of waiting on God in the liminal space—where the resurrection feels far off, and our deaths and suffering are present.    Rasool Berry (TC19) serves as Teaching Pastor at The Bridge Church in Brooklyn, New York, and is Director of Partnerships & Content Development at Our Daily Bread Ministries. He is the host of the Where Ya From? podcast, is featured in the award winning, Juneteenth: Faith & Freedom documentary directed by Ya'Ke Smith. He is the general editor of the book and video series called, The Whole Man which focuses on spiritual development for African American men. Rasool graduated from the University of Pennsylvania with a bachelor's degree in Africana Studies and Sociology. He lives in Brooklyn with his wife, Tamica, and their daughter. Music this season is provided by Julian Davis Reed. Julian Davis Reid (TC20) is an artist-theologian from Chicago who uses sound and word to offer hope to the searching, presence to the sorrowful, and rest to the weary. A pianist, composer, and producer, his projects featured on this podcast are the two solo piano records Rest Assured (2021) and Beside Still Waters (2024) and his single Moan (Matthew 2:18) featuring Tramaine Parker, released on Inauguration Day 2025 on the project When Souls Cry Out. Julian steadily releases music under his own name and with his group, The JuJu Exchange. You can learn more about his work at juliandavisreid.com. Mentioned in this episode: Tarry Awhile: Wisdom from Black Spirituality for People of Faith by Dr. Selina Stone The Spirit of Justice by Jemar Tisby The Sovereignty of Quiet: Beyond Resistance in Black Culture by Kevin Quashie Music Credit: Kingdom Come by Aaron Niequist O Sacred Head, Now Wounded from Lent- Music in Solitude In the House of the Lord My Whole Life Long by Julian Davis Reid   Are you interested in learning more about Haven, our newest community offering from the Transforming Center? Haven is a community that meets alternately online and in person to create space for leaders to forge a stronger connection between their souls and their leadership. Each gathering (online and in-person) offers spiritual practices that increasingly open us to God over time. This new 18-month community experience will provide more intentional opportunities to engage with a diverse community of believers who are united around Christ. Learn more about dates and how to apply!   Alumni: The Alumni Membership Community is here! For Transforming Community Alumni who are still cultivating rhythms that allow them to flourish in their life and leadership, you have the opportunity to stay on the journey with TC alums through a membership community! This exclusive membership is a safe place to be honest about the challenges of spiritual leadership, to remember the teachings and practices that open us up to God, and to be supported by an ongoing community that sustains us in the hope and the mystery of God's transforming work in the world — starting with us! Membership window is open March 12-31, 2025. Join today! Support the podcast! This season patrons will receive special bonus episodes with each guest, exploring different practices associated with Lent, such as solitude, self-examination, confession, and more. Become a patron today by visiting our Patreon page!     The Transforming Center exists to create space for God to strengthen leaders and transform communities. You are invited to join our next Transforming Community:® A Two-year Spiritual Formation Experience for Leaders.  Delivered in nine quarterly retreats, this practice-based learning opportunity is grounded in the conviction that the best thing you bring to leadership is your own transforming self! Learn more and apply HERE.   *this post contains affiliate links

This week, Ruth and guest Reverend Dr. Phaedra Blocker are exploring chapter 3, “Movement,” of Selina Stone's book Tarry Awhile: Wisdom from Black Spirituality for People of Faith. The two delve into the rich tradition of waiting on the Holy Spirit as taught in Black spirituality and its relevance for people of faith. They explore the significance of being aware of our contribution to others' sense of belonging, the challenges of socioeconomic and physical mobility for Black communities, and the biblical narrative of Hagar as a lens for understanding agency and divine justice. The episode concludes with practical advice on active tarrying as self-examination and readiness to act on divine guidance.   We are journeying through Lent with a podcast season entitled “Tarry with Me Awhile: Learnings from the Black Church.” We will use Dr. Selina Stone's book, Tarry Awhile: Wisdom from Black Spirituality for People of Faith, as a guide. Black spirituality has much to offer us in understanding the practice of tarrying as a Lenten practice. Together we will seek a deeper understanding of waiting on God in the liminal space—where the resurrection feels far off, and our deaths and suffering are present.    Rev. Dr. Phaedra D. Blocker (TC8) is a preacher, educator, and consultant dedicated to empowering individuals and organizations (particularly clergy and congregations) to move toward wholeness and actualize their potential as agents of shalom in the world. She is the Founder and President of the Center for Clergy & Congregational Wellness, a nonprofit organization that empowers ministry leaders to facilitate health and wholeness in themselves, their ministry contexts, and their adjacent communities. In addition, she serves as Affiliate Professor in Leadership & Formation at Palmer Theological Seminary of Eastern University. She is also a visiting professor at Northern Theological Seminary. Her most recent professional affiliations have included serving on the boards of the Transforming Center, Grace & Race Ministries, Inc., and Black Faith Rising. Music this season is provided by Julian Davis Reed. Julian Davis Reid (TC20) is an artist-theologian from Chicago who uses sound and word to offer hope to the searching, presence to the sorrowful, and rest to the weary. A pianist, composer, and producer, his projects featured on this podcast are the two solo piano records Rest Assured (2021) and Beside Still Waters (2024) and his single Moan (Matthew 2:18) featuring Tramaine Parker, released on Inauguration Day 2025 on the project When Souls Cry Out. Julian steadily releases music under his own name and with his group, The JuJu Exchange. You can learn more about his work at juliandavisreid.com. Mentioned in this episode: Tarry Awhile: Wisdom from Black Spirituality for People of Faith by Dr. Selina Stone Music Credit: Kingdom Come by Aaron Niequist Mercy We Need by Julian Davis Reid   Are you interested in learning more about Haven, our newest community offering from the Transforming Center? Haven is a community that meets alternately online and in person to create space for leaders to forge a stronger connection between their souls and their leadership. Each gathering (online and in-person) offers spiritual practices that increasingly open us to God over time. This new 18-month community experience will provide more intentional opportunities to engage with a diverse community of believers who are united around Christ. Learn more about dates and how to apply!   Alumni: the Alumni Membership Community is here! For Transforming Community Alumni who are still cultivating rhythms that allow them to flourish in their life and leadership, you have the opportunity to stay on the journey with TC alums through a membership community! This exclusive membership is a safe place to be honest about the challenges of spiritual leadership, to remember the teachings and practices that open us up to God, and to be supported by an ongoing community that sustains us in the hope and the mystery of God's transforming work in the world — starting with us! Membership window is open March 12-28, 2025. Join today! Support the podcast! This season patrons will receive special bonus episodes with each guest, exploring different practices associated with Lent, such as solitude, self-examination, confession, and more. Become a patron today by visiting our Patreon page!     The Transforming Center exists to create space for God to strengthen leaders and transform communities. You are invited to join our next Transforming Community:® A Two-year Spiritual Formation Experience for Leaders.  Delivered in nine quarterly retreats, this practice-based learning opportunity is grounded in the conviction that the best thing you bring to leadership is your own transforming self! Learn more and apply HERE.   *this post contains affiliate links

President Donald Trump declared America is entering a “Golden Age” on Inauguration Day. But as inequality grows, some historians say that the country is in a new Gilded Age.

In this episode, Ruth and special guest Reverend Dr. Prince Rivers discuss the second chapter of Selina Stone's book, Tarry Awhile. Prince shares personal stories from his life and ministry. He explores his experience of “two-ness” as a child, straddling two different worlds and identities. Prince also sheds light on the profound impact of communal worship, the importance of acknowledging embodied experiences in faith, and how these practices serve as a source of dignity and healing for marginalized communities. The conversation highlights the synergy between pastor, musicians, and congregation in creating transformative worship experiences, emphasizing the importance of being attuned to the Spirit as a part of the practice of tarrying.    We are journeying through Lent with a podcast season entitled “Tarry with Me Awhile: Learnings from the Black Church.” We will use Dr. Selina Stone's book, Tarry Awhile: Wisdom from Black Spirituality for People of Faith, as a guide. Black spirituality has much to offer us in understanding the practice of tarrying as a Lenten practice. Together we will seek a deeper understanding of waiting on God in the liminal space—where the resurrection feels far off, and our deaths and suffering are present.  Reverend Prince Raney Rivers (TC8) is the Senior Pastor of Union Baptist Church in Durham, NC. Prior to this appointment, he served for twelve years as Senior Pastor of United Metropolitan Missionary Baptist Church in Winston-Salem. Rev. Rivers received a Bachelor's degree in Psychology from Morehouse College and a Master of Divinity degree from Duke University Divinity School. He has earned a Doctor of Philosophy in Leadership Studies from North Carolina A&T University. He also completed the Harvard Divinity School Summer Leadership Institute and was a fellow of the Pastor-Theologian Program at Princeton Theological Seminary. Rev. Rivers and his wife, Dr. Monica Corbitt Rivers, have two wonderful children.   Music this season is provided by Julian Davis Reed. Julian Davis Reid (TC20) is an artist-theologian from Chicago who uses sound and word to offer hope to the searching, presence to the sorrowful, and rest to the weary. A pianist, composer, and producer, his projects featured on this podcast are the two solo piano records Rest Assured (2021) and Beside Still Waters (2024) and his single Moan (Matthew 2:18) featuring Tramaine Parker, released on Inauguration Day 2025 on the project When Souls Cry Out. Julian steadily releases music under his own name and with his group, The JuJu Exchange. You can learn more about his work at juliandavisreid.com. Mentioned in this episode: Tarry Awhile: Wisdom from Black Spirituality for People of Faith by Dr. Selina Stone Music Credit: Kingdom Come by Aaron Niequist I Fear No Evil by Julian Davis Reid   Are you interested in learning more about Haven, our newest community offering from the Transforming Center? Haven is a community that meets alternately online and in person to create space for leaders to forge a stronger connection between their souls and their leadership. Each gathering (online and in-person) offers spiritual practices that increasingly open us to God over time. This new 18-month community experience will provide more intentional opportunities to engage with a diverse community of believers who are united around Christ. Learn more about dates and how to apply!   Alumni: the Alumni Membership Community is here! For Transforming Community Alumni who are still cultivating rhythms that allow them to flourish in their life and leadership, you have the opportunity to stay on the journey with TC alums through a membership community! This exclusive membership is a safe place to be honest about the challenges of spiritual leadership, to remember the teachings and practices that open us up to God, and to be supported by an ongoing community that sustains us in the hope and the mystery of God's transforming work in the world — starting with us! Membership window is open March 12-28, 2025. Join today! Support the podcast! This season patrons will receive special bonus episodes with each guest, exploring different practices associated with Lent, such as solitude, self-examination, confession, and more. Become a patron today by visiting our Patreon page!     The Transforming Center exists to create space for God to strengthen leaders and transform communities. You are invited to join our next Transforming Community:® A Two-year Spiritual Formation Experience for Leaders.  Delivered in nine quarterly retreats, this practice-based learning opportunity is grounded in the conviction that the best thing you bring to leadership is your own transforming self! Learn more and apply HERE.   *this post contains affiliate links

(0:00) The Besties welcome Joe Lonsdale! (3:51) Jason recaps an eventful week in Washington (8:29) Trump's tariffs: endgame, impact, chaos, master plan (26:25) DOGE, IRA grifting, do campaign contributions need to be capped? (53:42) CoreWeave IPO (1:03:36) Trump 2.0 favoring Main Street over Wall Street, bond market breakdown, re-balancing the economy (1:14:19) State of Ukraine/Russia, the Western alliance, and how techno-optimism plays into the future of defense pacts (1:24:31) GPT-4.5, Grok 3 on X, and the Golden Age of language models (1:33:47) All-In for F1 Miami! (1:37:34) David Sacks joins Jason to break down the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and Digital Asset Stockpile (1:48:30) Sacks addresses clearing all of his crypto-related positions prior to Inauguration Day (1:57:23) Importance of disclosures and updates on a market structure bill GET TICKETS for All-In Live: Miami https://allin.com/events Follow Joe: https://x.com/JTLonsdale Follow the besties: https://x.com/chamath https://x.com/Jason https://x.com/DavidSacks https://x.com/friedberg Follow on X: https://x.com/theallinpod Follow on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/theallinpod Follow on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@theallinpod Follow on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/allinpod Intro Music Credit: https://rb.gy/tppkzl https://x.com/yung_spielburg Intro Video Credit: https://x.com/TheZachEffect Referenced in the show: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/114093526901586124 https://x.com/JTLonsdale/status/1896245689488920748 https://x.com/Jason/status/1896235076456739138 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/114093946326587357 https://www.reuters.com/technology/tsmc-ceo-meet-with-trump-tout-investment-plans-2025-03-03 https://x.com/AutismCapital/status/1896655215899893968 https://x.com/USATODAY/status/1897248477081460849 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-rejects-trump-administrations-bid-avoid-paying-usaid-con-rcna194230 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/114116432894994278 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/114112015891353323 https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/trump-auto-tariff-rate-will-be-around-25-2025-02-18 https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/USGOVT https://x.com/DOGE/status/1897464303428755692 https://electrek.co/2025/02/07/renewables-90-percent-new-us-capacity-2024-ferc https://www.thefp.com/p/a-20-billion-slush-fund-nonprofits https://x.com/bariweiss/status/1896992192197013888 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/114117008305421663 https://x.com/chamath/status/1895948351516131515 https://x.com/chamath/status/1895948351516131515 https://x.com/unusual_whales/status/1897737394964906437 https://x.com/great_martis/status/1897194563800064153 https://x.com/great_martis/status/1897581115952804248 https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1769628/000119312525044231/d899798ds1.htm https://x.com/chamath/status/1896052861500604884 https://www.newsweek.com/map-global-thorium-reserves-country-2039893 https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-bitcoin-cryptocurrency-stockpile-6f1314f5e99bbf47cc3ee6fc6178588d https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/strengthening-american-leadership-in-digital-financial-technology https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/03/establishment-of-the-strategic-bitcoin-reserveand-united-states-digital-asset-stockpile https://x.com/dmartkc/status/1896260059640025113 https://x.com/ryangrim/status/1896306748052623852 https://x.com/_Andre_Ellis/status/1896935969041104981 https://x.com/KyleSamani/status/1897130321021411750 https://x.com/pbartstephens/status/1897008176467468349 https://x.com/HHorsley/status/1897461451675328879

The United States has officially imposed broad tariffs on two of its largest trading partners, Canada and Mexico, marking one of the most aggressive trade measures in recent history. With potential economic fallout looming, world leaders, economists, and businesses are scrambling to assess the impact of President Donald Trump's latest move.From Trade Deals to Trade Wars: How We Got HereDuring Trump's first term, his administration took a mixed approach to tariffs. While he aggressively targeted China with import duties — many of which remain under President Biden — his strategy with Canada and Mexico was more nuanced. Initial tariffs on specific industries such as lumber, steel, and aluminum eventually gave way to the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), a revised version of NAFTA that stabilized trade relations.However, with Trump back in the White House, he has revived concerns over trade imbalances, particularly with Canada and Mexico. On January 20th, Inauguration Day, Trump signed an executive order launching a review of USMCA, with findings due in April. But before that process could unfold, he moved forward with major tariff increases.On February 1st, Trump announced two executive orders imposing sweeping tariffs. Canadian imports now face a 25% tariff, with a lower 10% tariff on energy exports like oil and gas. Mexico has been hit with a flat 25% tariff on all imports. Though negotiations initially delayed the tariffs by 30 days, they have now gone into full effect, shaking up a $1.3 trillion annual trade relationship.To justify the tariffs, Trump invoked the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a legal framework typically used for sanctions. He linked the move to national security concerns, specifically citing fentanyl trafficking and illegal immigration.Sweeping Tariffs Hit North America HardThe response from Canada and Mexico has been swift and severe. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau condemned the tariffs as "absolutely unacceptable" and unveiled a $30 billion retaliatory tariff package, with plans for an additional $125 billion in tariffs within 21 days if the dispute is not resolved. Several Canadian provinces have announced bans on U.S. products, pulling American wine, beer, and liquor off store shelves.In Mexico, President Claudia Sheinbaum issued a sharp protest but has not yet outlined a formal retaliation. However, Mexican officials have signaled that they may target key U.S. industries, including soybeans, pork, and beef exports.Domestically, the tariff decision has sparked significant economic concern. Stock markets tumbled following the announcement, and major retailers like Target and Best Buy have warned that prices on imported goods will rise sharply, with businesses passing the cost onto consumers.Economists overwhelmingly predict inflationary pressure, warning that tariffs could lead to a U.S. recession and further damage trade relations. The automotive industry is expected to see major price hikes, as will sectors reliant on steel and aluminum, energy resources, agriculture, and consumer goods such as electronics, clothing, and household appliances.Trump's Endgame: Tough Negotiation or Economic Gamble?These tariffs will likely be felt most harshly by Canada and Mexico, as the United States is their largest export market. Seventy-five percent of Canadian exports go to the U.S., while for Mexico, that number is even higher at 80%. By limiting these exports, Trump is exerting maximum pressure on both countries, but the strategy raises significant questions.Is he using tariffs as leverage to renegotiate USMCA? Does he expect Canada and Mexico to cave under economic strain? Or is this a broader shift toward economic protectionism, despite warnings from economists?Trump's decision could make or break his administration. While his supporters may see the move as a strong stance against unfair trade practices, rising prices and economic downturns could alienate voters — especially those who supported him for his stance on inflation control. The coming months will reveal whether these tariffs are a negotiation tool or a long-term policy shift. For now, both the U.S. and its North American neighbors brace for an economic showdown.Chapters* 00:00:00 - Introduction* 00:02:39 - Ukraine Mineral Deal Fallout* 00:06:35 - The Impact of Tariffs on Trade Relations* 00:17:22 - Consequences of Tariffs on the Economy* 00:22:15 - Interview with Bill Scher* 00:58:09 - Update introduction* 01:00:13 - J.D. Vance's European Controversy* 01:03:02 - GOP Government Funding Bill* 01:04:48 - Democrats' Plans to Protest Trump's Speech* 01:08:00 - Interview with Katie Harbath* 01:45:25 - Outro This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe

We are journeying through Lent with a podcast season entitled “Tarry with Me Awhile: Learnings from the Black Church.” We will use Dr. Selina Stone's book, Tarry Awhile: Wisdom from Black Spirituality for People of Faith, as a guide. Black spirituality has much to offer us in understanding the practice of tarrying as a Lenten practice. Together we will seek a deeper understanding of waiting on God in the liminal space—where the resurrection feels far off, and our deaths and suffering are present.    In this inaugural episode of season 26, Ruth sits down with Dr. Selina Stone, herself. Dr. Stone, a lecturer in theology and ethics at the University of Edinburgh, shares her journey and the inspiration behind her book. They discuss the profound concept of 'tarrying' as a spiritual practice, its roots in Black Pentecostal traditions, and its significance in contemporary faith practices. Dr. Stone highlights the intersection of spirituality and social justice, the role of women in leading spiritual spaces, and the transformative power of waiting on the Holy Spirit. We conclude with a guided 'tarrying moment' accompanied by the music of Julian Davis Reed, emphasizing reverent waiting in the presence of God during the Lenten season. Over on Patreon this week Ruth and Selina discuss self-examination within the context of tarrying and how we can view tarrying as both a communal and a solitary practice. Become a $10/month patron to receive all the bonus episodes this season.    Dr. Selina Stone is a lecturer in theology and ethics in the School of Divinity at the University of Edinburgh, UK. She is a theologian whose work is focused on the questions of justice, power, and healing within the church and in our shared life nationally and globally. Prior to her work at Edinburgh, Dr. Stone was based at Durham University and in the theological education sector. She is a trained community organiser, a preacher, and the author of several books, the latest of which, A Heavy Yoke: Theology, Power and Abuse in the Church, will be published in summer 2025 by SCM Press. She is the host of the Sunday School for Misfits podcast.   Music this season is provided by Julian Davis Reed. Julian Davis Reid (TC20) is an artist-theologian from Chicago who uses sound and word to offer hope to the searching, presence to the sorrowful, and rest to the weary. A pianist, composer, and producer, his projects featured on this podcast are the two solo piano records Rest Assured (2021) and Beside Still Waters (2024) and his single Moan (Matthew 2:18) featuring Tramaine Parker, released on Inauguration Day 2025 on the project When Souls Cry Out. Julian steadily releases music under his own name and with his group The JuJu Exchange. You can learn more about his work at juliandavisreid.com. Mentioned in this episode: Tarry Awhile: Wisdom from Black Spirituality for People of Faith by Dr. Selina Stone Azusa Reimagined: A Radical Vision of Religious and Democratic Belonging by Keri Day   Music Credit: Kingdom Come by Aaron Niequist Returning from Lent- Music in Solitude They Comfort Me from Beside Still Waters by Julian Davis Reid Support the podcast! This season patrons will receive special bonus episodes with each guest, exploring different practices associated with Lent, such as solitude, self-examination, confession, and more. Become a patron today by visiting our Patreon page!     The Transforming Center exists to create space for God to strengthen leaders and transform communities. You are invited to join our next Transforming Community:® A Two-year Spiritual Formation Experience for Leaders.  Delivered in nine quarterly retreats, this practice-based learning opportunity is grounded in the conviction that the best thing you bring to leadership is your own transforming self! Learn more and apply HERE.   *this post contains affiliate links

Tonight, President Trump will give his first major address to the nation since the inauguration of his second term. He'll probably talk about how great of a job he's doing, the Gulf of America and deporting undocumented immigrants. Who knows, he might even rant about the Russian influence investigation some more. Democratic Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut tells us why he won't be attending Trump's address — and why the president is vying to become Russian President Vladimir Putin's new best friend. And later in the show, California Democratic Representative Lateefah Simon is set to deliver the Working Families Party response to the president. She previews her speech for us.In headlines: Trump's 25-percent tariffs on Mexican and Canadian imports are set to take effect today, First Lady Melania Trump made her first public appearance since Inauguration Day, and the Senate confirmed Linda McMahon as Education Secretary.Show Notes:Subscribe to the What A Day Newsletter – https://tinyurl.com/3kk4nyz8Support victims of the fire – votesaveamerica.com/reliefWhat A Day – YouTube – https://www.youtube.com/@whatadaypodcastFollow us on Instagram – https://www.instagram.com/crookedmedia/For a transcript of this episode, please visit crooked.com/whataday

We are very fortunate to live in a country built on ideals of freedom. Near our founding, High-minded documents, and the Constitution were drafted. The Constitution was created to ensure our rights, to protect states and citizens, and to prevent the federal government from infringing on rights and laws. This glorious document is referred to (more...)

The crypto industry threw its weight and money behind Donald Trump, in hopes of legitimizing the industry. Before his Inauguration Day was over, Donald Trump was already enriching himself via a memecoin, one of the scammier, least legitimate-looking uses of crypto. Guest: David Yaffe-Bellany, reporter covering cryptocurrency for the New York Times. Want more What Next TBD? Subscribe to Slate Plus to access ad-free listening to the whole What Next family and all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The crypto industry threw its weight and money behind Donald Trump, in hopes of legitimizing the industry. Before his Inauguration Day was over, Donald Trump was already enriching himself via a memecoin, one of the scammier, least legitimate-looking uses of crypto. Guest: David Yaffe-Bellany, reporter covering cryptocurrency for the New York Times. Want more What Next TBD? Subscribe to Slate Plus to access ad-free listening to the whole What Next family and all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

OA1123 - Insurrection enthusiast Donald Trump sure seems to be looking for an excuse to invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807 in a little-noticed section of one of his flurry of Inauguration Day executive orders. We review the history of how the Constitution and subsequent acts of Congress were written specifically to keep the President from deploying troops on US soil without a very good reason, and how and why the Act has been invoked 30 times in US history. When does civil disorder become an “insurrection” and when, if ever, can the President send in troops that a state hasn't requested? And why is Trump so determined to declare an insurrection on the border? 10 USC 251-255 (colloquially known as “The Insurrection Act”) “The President's Authority to Commit Troops Domestically Under the Insurrection Act,” Harold Hongju Koh & Michael Loughlin, American Constitution Society (September 2020)  “Policy Brief: The U.S. Military May Be Used to Secure the Border,” Ken Cuccinelli & Adam Turner (3/24/24) Insurrection Act of 2024 (IA updates proposed by Democrats) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do! To support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

We spent Inauguration Day distracting ourselves learning about the history of Kohl’s and interspersing some Martin Luther King Jr. quotes for good measure. Bryan updates us on LGBTQ+ momentum around the world including Germany’s Self-Determination Act, Denmark and Czechia allowing gay and bisexual men to donate blood and conversion therapy being banned in Mexico. Erin calls out beauty influencers including Jordan Younger and Kim Rogers aka “The Worm Queen” for using the LA wildfires as a way to generate income. For this week's bonus 48 Hours Recap visit www.patreon.com/attitudesSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Tonight's rundown:  Hey BillOReilly.com Premium and Concierge Members, welcome to the No Spin News for Tuesday, January 21, 2025. Stand Up for Your Country.  Talking Points Memo: Bill looks into how both Donald Trump and Joe Biden have used their power to pardon. CIS Research Director Steven Camarota joins the No Spin News to discuss Trump's executive orders on immigration and Mexican cartels. The Laken Riley Act returns to the House, Bill highlights several Senate Democrats who voted against it. Why is Vivek Ramaswamy no longer part of the new Department of Government Efficiency? This Day in History: During the French Revolution, King Louis XVI is executed for treason. Final Thought: BillOReilly.com will bring you the best financial information. In Case You Missed It: Read Bill's latest column, He's Back For a limited time, get Bill O'Reilly's bestselling The United States of Trump and a No Spin Mug for only $39.95. Get Bill's latest book, CONFRONTING THE PRESIDENTS, out NOW! Now's the time to get a Premium or Concierge Membership to BillOReilly.com, the only place for honest news analysis. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Donald Trump takes the oath, and Elon does... what? Warning: this is a heated political episode. Support the show and download the DraftKings Sportsbook app. New customers can bet $5 to get $200 in bonus bets instantly with the code PATDOWN. This episode is brought to you by BetterHelp. Give online therapy a try and get on your way to being your best self at https://www.betterhelp.com/PATDOWN Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Episode 4208: Golden Age Of Trump Inauguration Day Hour 3

WarRoom Battleground EP 689: Golden Age Of Trump Inauguration Day

Episode 4206: Golden Age Of Trump Inauguration Day

Episode 4207: Golden Age Of Trump Inauguration Day Cont.

Today's word of the day is ‘lucky 7' as in Patrick Mahomes as in Travis Kelce as in Andy Reid as in the Kansas City Chiefs. Back in the AFC Championship Game. Patrick Mahomes vs Josh Allen is what the people wanted. The Ravens blew it. Jayden Daniels is a rookie to watch. Saquon Barkley is unreal! (14:30) Roki Sasaki signed with the Dodgers. Who could have seen that coming? Are the Dodgers bad for baseball? So much spending. So many deferrals. (28:00) Anthony Santander signed with the Blue Jays. They finally signed someone! (33:31) Review: Virgin River. (37:25) Donald Trump is back in office. Yesterday was Inauguration Day. (45:40) It is Baseball Hall of Fame Day! Who is getting in? Who is left out? (50:18) NPPOD Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

President Trump prepares to take his oath of office for the second time; Trump 2.0 prepares for immediate action with a slate of executive orders; and Joe Biden leaves office in disgrace. Click here to join the member-exclusive portion of my show: https://bit.ly/3WDjgHE Ep.2120 - - - DailyWire+: Join the celebration! Use code 47 at https://dailywire.com/subscribe for 47% off your membership today! "Identity Crisis" tells the stories the mainstream media won't. Stream the full film now, only on DailyWire+: https://bit.ly/3C61qVU Get your Ben Shapiro merch here: https://bit.ly/3TAu2cw - - - Today's Sponsors: Oracle - Oracle is offering to cut your current cloud bill in HALF if you move to OCI. See if your company qualifies for this special offer at https://Oracle.com/PRESIDENT PureTalk - Exclusive discount for our listeners at: https://PureTalk.com/SHAPIRO Balance of Nature - Go to https://balanceofnature.com and use promo code SHAPIRO for 35% off your first order as a preferred customer, PLUS get a free bottle of Fiber and Spice. Tax Network USA - For a complimentary consultation, call today at 1 (800) 958-1000 or visit their website at https://TNUSA.COM/SHAPIRO - - - Socials: Follow on Twitter: https://bit.ly/3cXUn53 Follow on Instagram: https://bit.ly/3QtuibJ Follow on Facebook: https://bit.ly/3TTirqd Subscribe on YouTube: https://bit.ly/3RPyBiB

Donald Trump becomes the 47th president of the United States; the ceasefire between Hamas and Israel is in effect; and TikTok is back after going offline temporarily, but will it stick around?For more comprehensive analysis of the most important news of the day, plus a little fun? Subscribe to the Up First newsletter.Today's episode of Up First was edited by Anna Yukhananov, Denice Rios, Jerome Socolovsky, Olivia Hampton and Alice Woelfle. It was produced by Ziad Buchh, Nia Dumas, Milton Guevara. We get engineering support from Arthur Laurent, and our technical director is Stacey Abbott.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

Enjoy Charlie’s remarks at the Capital One Arena in Washington DC to a crowd of patriots celebrating Trump’s return to the White House on this historic day.Support the show: http://www.charliekirk.com/supportSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today, we bring you live coverage of Donald Trump's 2025 inauguration. Tune in as we dive into the heart of Washington, D.C., capturing every moment as Trump is sworn in for his second term. From the moment Trump takes the oath of office at noon ET with Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, to his inaugural address, and everything that follows. Whether you're a Trump supporter or just interested in the political theater of an inauguration, we promise an entertaining, and perhaps even controversial look at one of the most significant political events of the year. Watch live as we navigate through the pomp, the politics, and the people on this historic day!GUESTS: Pops Crowder | Josh FirestineTODAY ONLY! Go to Crowder Shop to get 47% OFF SITE-WIDE with promo code: MAGA47 https://crowdershop.com/discount/MAGA47Tax Network USA's tax specialists have settled over $500 million in tax debts to the IRS and state taxing authorities. Call 1 (800) 245-6000 or visit www.tnusa.com/crowderDOWNLOAD THE RUMBLE APP TODAY: https://rumble.com/our-appsConnect your Mug Club account to Rumble and enjoy Rumble Premium: https://support.locals.com/en/article/how-do-i-connect-my-locals-account-to-my-rumble-account-on-rumble-vhd2st/SOURCES: https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/sources-inauguration-day

Jase, Al, and Zach deliberate what the next four years under President Trump's leadership will bring and offer up a prayer for his guidance of the American people. While Zach schools Jase on the Federal Reserve, Jase relives that time he befriended and baptized an actual currency counterfeiter. Al looks forward to seeing the impact of having multiple tech billionaires onboard with the new administration, and the guys find a way to poke fun at Zach's brief career in politics. In this episode: Hebrews 3, verse 4; Romans 13, verses 1-3 “Unashamed” Episode 1026 is sponsored by: https://fieldofgreens.com — Get 20% OFF your first order with promo code UNASHAMED  https://helixsleep.com/unashamed — SAVE 27% sitewide & get two FREE dream pillows with your mattress purchase! — Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Happy Inauguration Day! Today, we sit down with Kevin Roberts, president of the Heritage Foundation, to discuss our feelings about Trump's new term as president of the United States. He also tells us more about Project 2025 and how the Left was able to fearmonger about it, when in reality, it's mostly just average Republican policy. We also discuss the potential dissolution of the Department of Education, and Kevin also gives us insight into how the Republican Party can best overcome its internal disagreements between factions. Kevin tells us how America-loving people can best reclaim our major institutions from the Left and how hopeful we can be for the good that the Trump-Vance administration will do for our country. Buy Kevin Roberts' new book, “Dawn's Early Light: Taking Back Washington to Save America”: https://a.co/d/2lLzJOp Buy Allie's new book, "Toxic Empathy: How Progressives Exploit Christian Compassion": https://a.co/d/4COtBxy --- Timecodes: (01:08) Happy Inauguration Day! (09:24) Kevin's feelings on Inauguration Day (10:55) Project 2025  (18:18) Disagreements in Republican Party  (22:01) Dissolution of the Dept. of Education (25:54) Parental Bill of Rights (31:25) Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act (34:51) Kevin's new book, “Dawn's Early Light”  (37:12) How American-loving people can reclaim the institutions (39:23) Overhaul of our intelligence agencies ---   Today's Sponsors: America's Christian Credit Union — Switch to America's Christian Credit Union today for faith-aligned banking with exceptional rates and nationwide access. ACCU will donate a box of EveryLife diapers to a Christian pregnancy resource center for every new member who opens a checking account before January 31st, and pay a $100 bonus to a new account when you sign up with code "ALLIE". Visit https://www.americaschristiancu.com/allie to get started! Cozy Earth - Go to COZYEARTH.COM/RELATABLE and use code “RELATABLE” for up to 40% off! --- Related Episodes: Ep 1032 | Project 2025: Truth vs. Lies https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ep-1032-project-2025-truth-vs-lies/id1359249098?i=1000661942041 ---   Buy Allie's book, You're Not Enough (& That's Okay): Escaping the Toxic Culture of Self-Love: https://alliebethstuckey.com/book Relatable merchandise – use promo code 'ALLIE10' for a discount: https://shop.blazemedia.com/collections/allie-stuckey Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today is Inauguration Day in DC. As of around noon ET, we will officially be living under a Donald Trump administration. Again. The president-elect's inaugural committee has raised a record $170 million for the ceremony and accompanying festivities — a huge jump from the then-record $107 million raised for Trump's first inauguration. We talk to reporter Ilya Marritz, former co-host of the WNYC podcast ‘Trump Inc.,' to explore the parallels between today's inauguration and 2017.And in headlines: TikTok restored service to its more than 170 million users in the U.S, a temporary ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas went into effect, and the federal government is rushing to develop a bird flu vaccine.Show Notes:'The Harvard Plan' - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-harvard-plan-pt-1-a-president-on-trial/id1767012898?i=1000679405864'Trump, Inc.' - https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/trumpincCheck out Pod Save The World – crooked.com/podcast-series/pod-save-the-world/Support victims of the fire – votesaveamerica.com/reliefSubscribe to the What A Day Newsletter – https://tinyurl.com/3kk4nyz8What A Day – YouTube – https://www.youtube.com/@whatadaypodcastFollow us on Instagram – https://www.instagram.com/crookedmedia/For a transcript of this episode, please visit crooked.com/whataday

The history behind Inauguration Day in America... Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On the final broadcast day of Biden's presidency, Glenn lays out the horrific era that Biden brought to America, which is finally coming to an end. A new era is coming, and it's time we leave Biden's hateful era behind. Will President-elect Trump be safe from attackers on Inauguration Day? Trump has hired his own private security team in preparation for the big day. SCOTUS upheld the TikTok ban, but Biden announced he would not enforce it and will let Trump handle it when he takes office. Should the ban go through? Cinematographer and director of “Hotshot” Gabriel Kirkpatrick Mann joins to discuss the documentary he made exposing California's true history of wildfires, which he released independently after multiple streaming services declined to release it due to its message. Author Brad Meltzer joins to discuss his newest book, “The JFK Conspiracy,” which exposes the untold story of the failed plot to assassinate John F. Kennedy before his inauguration. Brad and Glenn also discuss the potential validity of a tape that implicates Lyndon B. Johnson as being behind the actual assassination of JFK and the conspiracy theories surrounding presidential assassinations. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices