Podcast appearances and mentions of jen briney

Plus, the US Congress is actually the best at online resources. So sayeth Jen Briney!Starring Tom Merritt and Robb DunewoodShow notes can be found here.

In the intersection of politics and technology, few innovations have had as significant an impact as online donation platforms. ActBlue, the Democratic Party's premiere fundraising tool, has revolutionized small-dollar contributions since its inception in 2004. However, recent internal turmoil at the organization is raising serious questions about both its future and about the broader landscape of political donations.A Game-Changer for DemocratsActBlue was an early pioneer in digital fundraising, allowing Democratic candidates and progressive causes to tap into small-dollar donors efficiently. Through gamification and mobile accessibility, the platform made it easy for supporters to donate with just a few clicks, contributing billions of dollars to campaigns over the years.By 2024, ActBlue played a crucial role in helping President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris amass over $1.5 billion in campaign funds, outpacing the Republican counterpart, WinRed, which raised $900 million for Donald Trump. The platform also helped Democrats dominate small-dollar fundraising in Senate races, with candidates like Sherrod Brown (Ohio) and John Tester (Montana) outraising their Republican opponents, despite ultimately losing their races.A Leadership Exodus and Rising ConcernsDespite its success, ActBlue is now facing a crisis. In February 2025, seven senior staff members resigned suddenly, including the organization's chief legal officer, vice president for customer service, and a technical expert with 14 years of experience. This mass departure was alarming enough that two employee unions publicly voiced concerns, warning that confidence in the organization's stability was eroding.This followed a December 2024 letter from over 140 political stakeholders — consultants, campaign staff, donors, and academics — urging ActBlue to implement stronger safeguards to prevent donor exploitation.One particularly cryptic development came when a newly appointed technical leader at ActBlue reminded employees of whistleblower protections, a warning that suggests internal concerns about potential misconduct.Allegations of Financial MisconductWhile ActBlue's success has been attributed to its superior technology and network effect, some critics argue that there may be fraudulent activity behind its fundraising dominance.A GOP strategist, Mark Block, filed a racketeering lawsuit against ActBlue, alleging that his identity was stolen to make 385 fraudulent donations totaling $884. He claims that these small donations — each under $200 — were used to exploit a loophole in Federal Election Commission (FEC) reporting requirements.This practice, known as “smurfing,” is a form of money laundering that involves breaking large donations into smaller, untraceable amounts to avoid detection. Block's lawsuit cites donation receipts from an old campaign email account, showing repeated micro-donations averaging just $3.24 each, many of which he did not authorize.Additionally, there have been reports of:* Elderly individuals discovering numerous small donations in their names without their knowledge.* Foreign nationals using surrogates to funnel money into U.S. elections, a violation of campaign finance laws.These allegations, combined with the sudden staff exodus, suggest that ActBlue could be facing a major financial scandal.The Potential FalloutIf these accusations are substantiated, the implications for ActBlue — and Democratic fundraising — could be severe:* Small donors may hesitate to contribute if concerns about fraud persist, resulting in a loss of trust in one or both parties.* The FEC or other watchdogs may launch formal investigations, leading to stricter oversight.* With ActBlue in turmoil, Democrats may struggle to replicate their past fundraising successes in upcoming elections.There is also speculation that WinRed, the Republican alternative, could face similar scrutiny. If both major fundraising platforms are found to have engaged in unethical practices, the entire online political donation system could be upended.Looking Ahead to 2028ActBlue's situation is still unfolding, but one thing is clear: The Democratic Party's dominant fundraising machine is in serious jeopardy. If ActBlue collapses or loses credibility, Democrats will need to quickly find an alternative — something that won't be easy given the platform's deep integration with campaign operations.With the 2026 midterms and the 2028 presidential race on the horizon, the future of small-dollar political fundraising is more uncertain than ever.Chapters00:00:00 - Intro00:01:05 - Interview with Matt Laslo00:21:00 - ActBlue Chaos00:32:22 - Update00:33:46 - US/Canadian Tariffs00:35:29 - Ukraine Ceasefire00:37:35 - Mahmoud Khalil's Arrest00:40:17 - Interview with Jen Briney01:15:08 - Wrap-up 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

President Trump has been threatening to “take back” the Panama Canal since he regained power. In this episode, listen to testimony from officials serving on the Federal Maritime Commission who explain why the Panama Canal has become a focus of the administration and examine whether or not we need to be concerned about an impending war for control of the canal. Please Support Congressional Dish – Quick Links Contribute monthly or a lump sum via Support Congressional Dish via (donations per episode) Send Zelle payments to: Send Venmo payments to: @Jennifer-Briney Send Cash App payments to: $CongressionalDish or Use your bank's online bill pay function to mail contributions to: Please make checks payable to Congressional Dish Thank you for supporting truly independent media! Background Sources Recommended Congressional Dish Episodes Current Events around the Panama Canal March 5, 2025. the Associated Press. Sabrina Valle, Suzanne McGee, and Michael Martina. March 4, 2025. Reuters. Matt Murphy, Jake Horton and Erwan Rivault. February 14, 2025. BBC. May 1, 2024. World Weather Attribution. World Maritime News Staff. March 15, 2019. World Maritime News. July 29, 2018. Reuters. Panama Canal Treaty of 1977 U.S. Department of State. The Chinese “Belt and Road Initiative” Michele Ruta. March 29, 2018. World Bank Group. The Trump-Gaza Video February 26, 2025. Sky News. Laws Audio Sources Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation January 28, 2025 Witnesses: Louis E. Sola, Chairman, Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) Daniel B. Maffei, Commissioner, FMC , Professor, Scalia Law School, George Mason University Joseph Kramek, President & CEO, World Shipping Council Clips 17:30 Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX): Between the American construction of the Panama Canal, the French effort to build an isthmus canal, and America's triumphant completion of that canal, the major infrastructure projects across Panama cost more than 35,000 lives. For the final decade of work on the Panama Canal, the United States spent nearly $400 million, equivalent to more than $15 billion today. The Panama Canal proved a truly invaluable asset, sparing both cargo ships and warships the long journey around South America. When President Carter gave it away to Panama, Americans were puzzled, confused, and many outraged. With the passage of time, many have lost sight of the canal's importance, both to national security and to the US economy. 18:45 Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX): But the Panama Canal was not just given away. President Carter struck a bargain. He made a treaty. And President Trump is making a serious and substantive argument that that treaty is being violated right now. 19:10 Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX): President Trump has highlighted two key issues. Number one, the danger of China exploiting or blocking passage through the canal, and number two, the exorbitant costs for transit. 19:20 Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX): Chinese companies are right now building a bridge across the canal at a slow pace, so as to take nearly a decade. And Chinese companies control container points ports at either end. The partially completed bridge gives China the ability to block the canal without warning, and the ports give China ready observation posts to time that action. This situation, I believe, poses acute risks to US national security. 19:50 Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX): Meanwhile, the high fees for canal transit disproportionately affect Americans, because US cargo accounts for nearly three quarters of Canal transits. US Navy vessels pay additional fees that apply only to warships. Canal profits regularly exceed $3 billion. This money comes from both American taxpayers and consumers in the form of higher costs for goods. American tourists aboard cruises, particularly those in the Caribbean Sea, are essentially captive to any fees Panama chooses to levy for canal transits, and they have paid unfair prices for fuel bunkering at terminals in Panama as a result of government granted monopoly. Panama's government relies on these exploitative fees. Nearly 1/10 of its budget is paid for with canal profit. 21:25 Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX): Panama has for years flagged dozens of vessels in the Iranian ghost fleet, which brought Iran tens of billions of dollars in oil profits to fund terror across the world. 21:40 Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX): And Chinese companies have won contracts, often without fair competition, as the infamous Belt and Road Initiative has come to Panama. China often engages in debt trap diplomacy to enable economic and political coercion. In Panama, it also seems to have exploited simple corruption. 32:40 Louis Sola: The Panama Canal is managed by the Panama Canal Authority, ACP, an independent agency of the Panamanian government. The ACP is a model of public infrastructure management, and its independence has been key to ensure a safe and reliable transit of vessels critical to the US and global commerce. 33:25 Louis Sola: In contrast, the broader maritime sector in Panama, including the nation's ports, water rights, and the world's largest ship registry, falls under the direct purview of the Panamanian government. 33:35 Louis Sola: Unfortunately, this sector has faced persistent challenges, including corruption scandals and foreign influence, particularly from Brazil and China. These issues create friction with the ACP, especially as it works to address long term challenges such as securing adequate water supplies for the canal. 33:55 Louis Sola: Although the ACP operates independently, under US law both the ACP and the government of Panama's maritime sector are considered one in the same. This means that any challenges in Panama's maritime sector, including corruption, lack of transparency, or foreign influence, can have a direct or indirect impact on the operations and long term stability of the canal. This legal perspective highlights the need for diligence in monitoring both the ACP's management and Panama government's policies affecting maritime operations. 34:30 Louis Sola: Since 2015, Chinese companies have increased their presence and influence throughout Panama. Panama became a member of the Belt and Road Initiative and ended its diplomatic relations with Taiwan. Chinese companies have been able to pursue billions of dollars in development contracts in Panama, many of which were projects directly on or adjacent to the Panama Canal. Many were no bid contracts. Labor laws were waived, and the Panamanian people are still waiting to see how they've been benefited. It is all more concerning that many of these companies are state-owned, and in some cases, even designated as linked to the People's Liberation Army. We must address the significant growing presence and influence of China throughout the Americas and in Panama, specifically. 35:20 Louis Sola: American companies should play a leading role in enhancing the canal's infrastructure. By supporting US firms, we reduce reliance on Chinese contractors and promote fair competition. 36:55 Daniel Maffei: Because the canal is essentially a waterway bridge over mountainous terrain above sea level, it does depend on large supplies of fresh water to maintain the full operations. Panama has among the world's largest annual rainfalls. Nonetheless, insufficient fresh water levels have occurred before in the canal's history, such as in the 1930s when the Madden Dam and Lake Alajuela were built to address water shortages. Since that time, the canal has undertaken several projects to accommodate larger, more modern ships. In the last couple of years, a trend of worsening droughts in the region, once again, has forced limits to the operations of the canal. Starting in June of 2023 the Panama Canal Authority employed draft restrictions and reduced the number of ships allowed to transit the canal per day. Now the Panama Canal limitations, in combination with the de facto closure of the Suez Canal to container traffic, has had serious consequences for ocean commerce, increasing rates, fees and transit times. 39:30 Daniel Maffei: Now, fortunately, Panama's 2024 rainy season has, for now, alleviated the most acute water supply issues at the canal, and normal transit volumes have been restored. That said, while the Panamanian government and Canal Authority have, with the advice of the US Army Corps of Engineers, developed credible plans to mitigate future water shortages, they also warned that it is likely that at least one more period of reduced transits will occur before these plans can be fully implemented. 41:55 Eugene Kontorovich: We shall see that under international law, each party to the treaty is entitled to determine for itself whether a violation has occurred. Now, in exchange for the United States ceding control of the canal which it built and maintained, Panama agreed to a special regime of neutrality. The essential features of this regime of neutrality is that the canal must be open to all nations for transit. That's Article Two. Equitable tolls and fees, Article Three. An exclusive Panamanian operation, Article Five. The prohibition of any foreign military presence, Article Five. Article Five provides that only Panama shall operate the canal. Testifying about the meaning of the treaty at the Senate ratification hearings, the Carter administration emphasized that this prohibits foreign operation of the canal, as well as the garrisoning of foreign troops. Now, Article Five appears to be primarily concerned about control by foreign sovereigns. If Panama signed a treaty with the People's Republic of China, whereby the latter would operate the canal on Panama's behalf, this would be a clear violation. But what if Panama contracted for port operations with a Chinese state firm, or even a private firm influenced or controlled in part by the Chinese government? The Suez Canal Company was itself, before being nationalized, a private firm in which the United Kingdom was only a controlling shareholder. Yet this was understood to represent British control over the canal. In other words, a company need not be owned by the government to be in part controlled by the government. So the real question is the degree of de jure or de facto control over a Foreign Sovereign company, and scenarios range from government companies in an authoritarian regime, completely controlled, to purely private firms in our open society like the United States, but there's many possible situations in the middle. The treaty is silent on the question of how much control is too much, and as we'll see, this is one of the many questions committed to the judgment and discretion of each party. Now turning to foreign security forces, the presence of third country troops would manifestly violate Article Five. But this does not mean that anything short of a People's Liberation Army base flying a red flag is permissible. The presence of foreign security forces could violate the regime of neutrality, even if they're not represented in organized and open military formations. Modern warfare has seen belligerent powers seek to evade international legal limitations by disguising their actions in civilian garb, from Russia's notorious little green men to Hamas terrorists hiding in hospitals or disguised as journalists. Bad actors seek to exploit the fact that international treaties focus on sovereign actors. Many of China's man made islands in the South China Sea began as civilian projects before being suddenly militarized. Indeed, this issue was discussed in the Senate ratification hearings over the treaty. Dean Rusk said informal forces would be prohibited under the treaty. Thus the ostensible civilian character of the Chinese presence around the canal does not, in itself, mean that it could not represent a violation of the treaty if, for example, these companies and their employees involved Chinese covert agents or other agents of the Chinese security forces. So this leads us to the final question, Who determines whether neutrality is being threatened or compromised? Unlike many other treaties that provide for third party dispute resolution, the neutrality treaty has no such provision. Instead, the treaty makes clear that each party determines for itself the existence of a violation. Article Four provides that each party is separately authorized to maintain the regime of neutrality, making a separate obligation of each party. The Senate's understanding accompanying to ratification also made clear that Article Five allows each party to take, quote, "unilateral action." Senator Jacob Javits, at the markup hearing, said that while the word unilateral is abrasive, we can quote, "decide that the regime of neutrality is being threatened and then act with whatever means are necessary to keep the canal neutral unilaterally." 46:35 Joseph Kramek: My name is Joe Kramek. I'm President and CEO of the World Shipping Council. The World Shipping Council is the global voice of liner shipping. Our membership consists of 90% of the world's liner shipping tonnage, which are container vessels and vehicle carriers. They operate on fixed schedules to provide our customers with regular service to ship their goods in ports throughout the world. 47:15 Joseph Kramek: As you have heard, using the Panama Canal to transit between the Atlantic and Pacific saves significant time and money. A typical voyage from Asia to the US or East Coast can be made in under 30 days using the canal, while the same journey can take up to 40 days if carriers must take alternate routes. From a commercial trade perspective, the big picture is this. One of the world's busiest trade lanes is the Trans Pacific. The Trans Pacific is cargo coming from and going to Asia via the United States. Focusing in a bit, cargo coming from Asia and bound for US Gulf and East Coast ports always transits the Panama Canal. Similarly, cargo being exported from US and East Coast ports, a large share of which are US Agricultural exports, like soybeans, corn, cotton, livestock and dairy also almost always transits the Panama Canal. The result is that 75% of Canal traffic originates in or is bound for the United States. 48:55 Joseph Kramek: We've talked about the drought in 2023 and the historic low water levels that it caused in Lake Gatún, which feeds the canal locks, a unique system that is a fresh water feed, as contrasted to an ocean to ocean system, which the French tried and failed, but which is actually active in the Suez Canal. These low water levels reduced transits from 36 transits a day to as low as 22 per day. Additionally, the low water levels required a reduction in maximum allowable draft levels, or the depth of the ship below the water line, which for our members reduced the amount of containers they could carry through the canal. This resulted in a 10% reduction in import volumes for US Gulf and East Coast ports, with the Port of Houston experiencing a 26.7% reduction. 51:10 Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX): Are you aware of allegations from some vessel operators of disparate treatment such as sweetheart deals or favorable rebates by Panama for canal transits? Louis Sola: Thank you for the question, Mr. Chairman, we have become aware through some complaints by cruise lines that said that they were not getting a refund of their canal tolls. When we looked into this, we found a Panamanian Executive Order, Decree 73, that specifically says that if a cruise line would stop at a certain port, that they could be refunded 100% of the fees. And as far as I know, that's the only instant where that exists. 53:05 Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX): So Panama was the very first Latin American country to join China's Belt and Road Initiative, and right now, China is building a fourth bridge across the Panama Canal for car traffic and light rail. Chairman Sola, why should Chinese construction of a bridge near Panama City concern the United States? Louis Sola: Mr. Chairman, we all saw the tragedy that happened here in the Francis Scott Key Bridge incident and the devastation that had happened to Baltimore. We also saw recently what happened in the Suez Canal, where we had a ship get stuck in there. It's not only the construction of the bridge, but it's a removal of a bridge, as I understand it, called the Bridge of the Americas. It was built in 1961 and that would paralyze cargo traffic in and out of the canals. 53:55 Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX): Panama also recently renewed the concessions for two container ports to a Chinese company, Hutchison Ports PPC. Of course, Chinese companies are controlled by the Communist Party. How does China use control of those ports for economic gain? Louis Sola: Mr. Chairman, I am a regulator, a competition regulator. And the Chinese ports that you're referring to, let me put them into scope. The one on the Pacific, the Port of Balboa, is roughly the same size as the Port of Houston. They do about 4 million containers a year. They have about 28 game tree cranes. The one on the Atlantic is the same as my hometown in Miami, they do about 1 million containers. So where Roger Gunther in the Port of Houston generates about $1 billion a year and Heidi Webb in Miami does about $200 million, the Panama ports company paid 0 for 20 years on that concession. So it's really hard to compete against zero. So I think that's our concern, our economic concern, that we would have. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX): Commissioner Maffei, anything to add on that? Daniel Maffei: Yeah, I do too also think it is important. I would point out that you don't have to stop at either port. It's not like these two ports control the entrance to the canal. That is the Canal Authority that does control that. However, I think it's of concern. I would also point out that the Panamanian government thinks it's of concern too, because they're conducting their own audit of those particular deals, but we remain very interested as well. 56:25 Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX): Would the facts discussed here be considered violations of the neutrality treaty in force right now between the United States and Panama? Eugene Kontorovich: So I think Senator, I think potentially they could, but it's impossible to say definitively without knowing more, in particular, about the degree of Chinese control and involvement in these companies. I think it's important to note that these port operation companies that operate the ports on both sides, when they received their first contract, it was just a few months before Hong Kong was handed over to China. In other words, they received them as British companies, sort of very oddly, just a few months before the handover. Now, of course, since then, Hong Kong has been incorporated into China, has been placed under a special national security regime, and the independence of those companies has been greatly abridged, to say nothing of state owned companies involved elsewhere in in the canal area, which raised significantly greater questions. Additionally, I should point out that the understandings between President Carter and Panamanian leader Herrera, which were attached to the treaty and form part of the treaty, provide that the United States can, quote, "defend the canal against any threat to the regime of neutrality," and I understand that as providing some degree of preemptive authority to intervene. One need not wait until the canal is actually closed by some act of sabotage or aggression, which, as we heard from the testimony, would be devastating to the United States, but there is some incipient ability to address potential violations. 58:10 Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX): If the United States determines that Panama is in violation of the treaty, what is the range of remedies the United States would have for that treaty violation? Eugene Kontorovich: So I think it may be shocking to people to hear today, but when one goes over the ratification history and the debates and discussions in this body over this treaty, it was clear that the treaty was understood as giving both sides, separately, the right to resort to use armed force to enforce the provisions of the treaty. And it's not so surprising when one understands that the United States made an extraordinary concession to Panama by transferring this canal, which the United States built at great expense and maintained and operated to Panama, gratis. And in exchange, it received a kind of limitation, a permanent limitation on Panamanians sovereignty, that Panama agreed that the United States could enforce this regime of neutrality by force. Now, of course, armed force should never be the first recourse for any kind of international dispute and should not be arrived at sort of rationally or before negotiations and other kinds of good offices are exhausted, but it's quite clear that the treaty contemplates that as a remedy for violations. 1:03:20 Louis Sola: I believe that the security of the canal has always been understood to be provided by the United States. Panama does not have a military, and I always believed that there's been a close relationship with Southern Command that we would provide that. And it would be nice to see if we had a formalization of that in one way or another, because I don't believe that it's in the treaty at all. 1:05:05 Daniel Maffei: While we were down there, both of us heard, I think, several times, that the Panamanians would, the ones we talked to anyway, would welcome US companies coming in and doing a lot of this work. Frankly, their bids are not competitive with the Chinese bids. Frankly, they're not that existent because US companies can make more money doing things other places, but even if they were existent, it is difficult to put competitive bids when the Chinese bids are so heavily subsidized by China. 1:06:10 Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX): What would China's incentive be to heavily subsidize those bids to undercut American companies and other companies? Daniel Maffei: Yeah, it's not a real short answer, but Senator, China's made no secret of its ambitious policies to gain influence of ports throughout the globe. It's invested in 129 ports in dozens of countries. It runs a majority of 17 ports, that does not include this Hong Kong company, right? So that's just directly Chinese-owned ports. So it has been a part of their Belt and Road strategy, whatever you want to call it, the Maritime Silk Road, for decades. So they believe that this influence, this investment in owning maritime ports is important to their economy. 1:07:05 Sen. Deb Fischer (R-NE): In 2021, Hutchison was awarded those two ports, Port Balboa and Port Cristobal, in a no-bid award process. Can you tell me, does the United States have any authority or recourse with the Panama Canal Authority under our current agreement with Panama to rebid those terminal concession contracts. And perhaps Mr. Kantorovich, that's more in your purview? Louis Sola: Senator, both of those ports were redone for 25 years, until 2047, I believe. And they have to pay $7 million is what the ongoing rate is for the Port of Houston- and the Port of Miami-sized concessions. Sen. Deb Fischer (R-NE): And it can't be rebid until after that date? Louis Sola: Well, I believe that that's what the comptroller's office is auditing both of those ports and that contract. That was done under the previous Panamanian administration. A new administration came in, and they called for an audit of that contract immediately. 1:20:10 Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-AK): Are the companies now controlling both sides of the Panama Canal, the Chinese companies, subject to the PRC national security laws that mandate cooperation with the military, with state intelligence agencies. Does anyone know that? Eugene Kontorovich: They're subject all the time. They're subject to those laws all the time by virtue of being Hong Kong companies. And you know, they face, of course, consequences for not complying with the wishes of the Chinese government. One of the arguments -- Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-AK): Wouldn't that be a violation of the treaty? And isn't that a huge risk to us right now that the Chinese -- Eugene Kontorovich: That is a threat to the neutrality -- Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-AK): If they invaded Taiwan, invaded the Philippines, they could go to these two companies saying, Hey, shut it down, make it hard, sink a ship in the canal. And wouldn't they be obligated to do that under Chinese law if they were ordered to by the PLA or the CCP? Eugene Kontorovich: I don't know if they'd be obligated, but certainly the People's Republic of China would have many tools of leverage and pressure on these companies. That's why the treaty specifically says that we can act not just to end actual obstructions to the canal. We don't have to wait until the canal is closed by hostile military action. Thatwould be a suicide pact, that would be catastrophic for us, but rather that we can respond at the inchoate, incipient level to threats, and then this is up to the president to determine whether this is significantly robust to constitute -- Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-AK): So aren't we kind of walking up to the idea of a suicide pact, because we've got two big Chinese companies on both ends of the Panama Canal, who, if there's a war in INDOPACOM, Taiwan that involves us and China, these companies would be obligated to do the bidding of the Chinese Communist Party and PLA? I mean, are we kind of walking up to a very significant national security threat already? Eugene Kontorovich: Yeah, certainly, there's a threat. And I think what makes the action of the Chinese government so difficult to respond to, but important to respond to, is that they conceal this in sort of levels of gray without direct control. Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-AK): Let me ask you on that topic, as my last question, Professor, let's assume that we find out. And again, it wouldn't be surprising. I think you can almost assume it that these two companies have Chinese spies or military officials within the ranks of the employees of the companies. Let's assume we found that out, somehow that becomes public. But I don't think it's a big assumption. It's probably true right now. So you have spies and military personnel within the ranks of these two companies that are controlling both ends of the Panama Canal for you, Professor, and Chairman Sola, wouldn't that be a blatant violation of Article Five of the neutrality treaty, if that were true, which probably is true? Eugene Kontorovich: Yeah, I do think it would be a clear violation. As former Secretary of State, Dean Ross said at the ratification hearings, informal forces can violate Article Five as well as formal forces. Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-AK): Is there any evidence of Chinese spies or other nefarious Chinese actors embedded in these companies? Louis Sola: Senator, we have no information of that. That's not under the purview of -- Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-AK): But you agree that would be a violation of Article Five of the neutrality treaty? Louis Sola: I do. 1:26:25 Daniel Maffei: Senator Sullivan was talking about Hutchison Ports. That's actually the same company that runs terminals on both ends of the canal. I am concerned about that. However, if we want to be concerned about that, all of us should lose a lot more sleep than we're losing because if there are spies there, then there might be spies at other Hutchinson ports, and there are other Hutchinson ports in almost every part of the world. They own the largest container port in the United Kingdom, Felix Dow, which is responsible for nearly half of Britain's container trade. They control major maritime terminals in Argentina, Australia, the Bahamas, Germany, Indonesia, Mexico, Myanmar, the Netherlands, South Korea and Tanzania. If owning and managing adjacent ports means that China somehow has operational control or strategic control over the Panama Canal, they also have it over the Suez, the Singapore Straits, the Mediterranean Sea and the English Channel. 1:35:45 Louis Sola: The fees that I think we are looking at, or have been looked at, the reason that we went there was because of the auctioning of the slots. And so what Panama did is they had a smaller percentage, maybe 20% allocation, and then they moved it up to 30% and 40% because it became a money maker for them. So as they were doing -- Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN): Okay, let me interject here. The auctioning of the slots gives these the right to skip the queue? Louis Sola: Yes, ma'am. Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN): Okay, so just for the record there. Continue. Louis Sola: So the auctioning of the slots. Under maritime law, it's first come first serve, but Panama has always put a certain percentage aside, and they started to put more and more. So we got a lot of complaints. We got a lot of complaints from LNG carriers that paid $4 million to go through, and we got a lot of complaints from agriculture that didn't have the money to pay to go through, because their goods were gonna go down. So if you look at the financial statements -- I'm a nerd, I look at financial statements of everybody -- the canal increased the amount of revenue that they had from about $500 million to $1.8 billion in the last three years just because of those fees. So this is what is very concerning to us. 1:39:20 Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN): Do you know of any instances where the United States has been singled out or treated unfairly under the neutrality treaty in the operation of the canal? Daniel Maffei: I do not. I would add that one of the reasons why saying the US is disproportionately affected by raises in Canal fees and other kinds of fees at the canal is because the United States disproportionately utilizes the canal. 1:44:55 Louis Sola: We have a US port there, SSA, out of Washington State that I actually worked on the development of that many years ago, and helped develop that. That used to be a United States Navy submarine base, and we converted that. As far as the two ports that we have, they're completely different. One is a major infrastructure footprint, and also a container port that's moving 4 million containers a year. That's really phenomenal amount. That's more than Miami, Fort Lauderdale, and you've probably got to get Tampa and a little bit of Jacksonville in there to get that type of volume. And on the other side, we have a very small port, but it's a very strategic port on the Atlantic. So how are the operations done?I don't know how they don't make money. I mean, if you want to come right down to it, if they've been operating the port for 20 years, and they say that they haven't made any money, so they haven't been able to pay the government. That's what concerns me is I don't believe that we're on a level playing field with the American ports. 1:58:50 Eugene Kontorovich: I think the charges and fees are less of an issue because they don't discriminate across countries. We pay more because we use more, but it's not nationally discriminatory. 1:59:00 Eugene Kontorovich: The presence of Chinese companies, especially Chinese state companies, but not limited to them, do raise serious issues and concerns for the neutrality of the treaty. And I should point out, in relation to some of the earlier questioning, the canal, for purposes of the neutrality treaty, is not limited just to the actual locks of the canal and the transit of ships through the canal. According to Annex One, paragraph one of the treaty, it includes also the entrances of the canal and the territorial sea of Panama adjacent to it. So all of the activities we're talking about are within the neutrality regime, the geographic scope of the neutrality regime in the treaty. 2:00:30 Daniel Maffei: I actually have to admit, I'm a little confused as to why some of the senators asking these questions, Senator Blackburn, aren't more concerned about the biggest port in the United Kingdom being run by the Chinese. Petraeus in the port nearest Athens, one of the biggest ports in the Mediterranean, is not just run by a Chinese-linked company, it's run directly by a Chinese-owned company, and I was there. So you're on to something, but if you're just focusing on Panama, that's only part. 2:01:45 Louis Sola: About a year ago, when we were having this drought issue, there was also a lot of focus on Iran and how they were funding Hamas and the Houthis because they were attacking the Red Sea. What the United States has found is that Iranian vessels are sometimes flagged by Panama in order to avoid sanctions, so that they could sell the fuel that they have, and then they can take that money and then they can use it as they wish. Panama, at the time, had a very complicated process to de-flag the vessels. There was an investigation, there was an appeals process. By the time that OFAC or Treasury would go ahead and identify one of those vessels, by the time that they were doing the appeals and stuff like this, they've already changed flags to somewhere else. So when we went to Panama, we met with the Panamanian president, and I must say that we were very impressed, because he was 30 minutes late, but he was breaking relations with Venezuela at the time because the election was the day before. We explained to him the situation. The very next day, we met with the maritime minister, with US embassy personnel and Panama actually adjusted their appeals process so to make it more expedient, so if the United States or OFAC would come and say that this Iranian vessel is avoiding sanctions, now we have a process in place to go ahead and do that, and 53 vessels were de-flagged because of that. 2:06:05 Sen. John Curtis (R-UT): Is there any reason that China can't watch or do whatever they want from this bridge to get the intel from these containers? And does that concern anybody? Louis Sola: Well, it definitely concerns Southern Command, because they've brought it up on numerous occasions that there could be some sort of surveillance or something like that on the bridges. 2:20:30 Sen. Tim Sheehy (R-MT): We segregate ourselves artificially in a way that they do not. We segregate ourselves. Let's talk about military. Let's talk about intelligence. Let's talk about economics. They don't. China doesn't work that way. It's a whole of government approach. They don't draw a delineation between an economics discussion and a military one. And their attack may not look like Pearl Harbor. It may look like an everyday ship that decides, you know, it pulls into the locks and blows itself up. And now the locks are non-functional for our usage, and we can't support an inter ocean fleet transfer, and our ability to defend it, as you referred to Chairman, is now inhibited by the fact that we no longer have the military infrastructure around the canal that we did just as recently as 1999. 2:21:10 Sen. Tim Sheehy (R-MT): So from a commercial perspective, do the shipping companies have concerns over the security of the narrow waterways? We've the Strait to Malacca, we've got the Suez Canal, we've got Gibraltar, we've got Panama. Is that a concern that's thrown around in the boardrooms of the largest shipping corporations in the world? Joseph Kramek: Senator, I think it's something they think about every day. I mean, really, it's drawn into sharp relief with the Red Sea. It was what I call a pink flamingo. There's black swans that just come up and there's pink flamingos that you can see, but you don't act. But no one really thought a whole lot that one of the most important waterways in the world could be denied, and moreover, that it could be denied for such a sustained period. The good news is that -- Sen. Tim Sheehy (R-MT): And denied, I might add, by a disaffected non-state actor of Bedouins running around with rocket launchers, who also managed to beat us in a 20 year war in Afghanistan. My point to saying all this is we're just debating operational control of the canal, yet it seems very clear to all of us that a very simple act can debilitate the canal and eliminate our ability to use it in a matter of minutes with no warning, and we have no ability to intervene or stop that. To me, that means we do not have operational control of the canal. 2:30:40 Daniel Maffei: I will say that certainly we need to look at other kinds of ways to get US companies in positions where they can truly compete with the Chinese on some of these things. Blaming it all on Panama really misses the point. I've seen the same thing in Greece, where Greece didn't want to give the concession of its largest port to a Chinese company, but because of its financial difficulties, it was getting pressure from international organizations such the IMF, Europe and even maybe some of the United States to do so. So I just ask you to look at that. 2:31:20 Daniel Maffei: Panamanians are making far more on their canal than they ever have before. That's not necessarily a bad thing, as long as it's going to the right place. But where they're really making the money is on these auctions, and that is why it remains a concern of mine and I'm sure the chairman's. That is where we are looking at, potentially, using our authority under Section 19 of the Merchant Marine Act where we could, if we can show that it is a problem with the foreign trade of the US, it's interfering with foreign trade of the US, there are certain things that we can do. Senate Foreign Relations Committee January 15, 2024 Clips 4:01:40 Marco Rubio: The thing with Panama on the canal is not new. I visited there. It was 2016. I think I've consistently seen people express concern about it, and it's encapsulized here in quote after quote. Let me tell you the former US ambassador who served under President Obama said: "the Chinese see in Panama what we saw in Panama throughout the 20th century, a maritime and aviation logistics hub." The immediate past head of Southern Command, General Laura Richardson, said, "I was just in Panama about a month ago and flying along the Panama Canal and looking at the state owned enterprises from the People's Republic of China on each side of the Panama Canal. They look like civilian companies or state owned enterprises that could be used for dual use and could be quickly changed over to a military capability." We see questions that were asked by the ranking member in the house China Select Committee, where he asked a witness and they agreed that in a time of conflict, China could use its presence on both ends of the canal as a choke point against the United States in a conflict situation. So the concerns about Panama have been expressed by people on both sides of the aisle for at least the entire time that I've been in the United States Senate, and they've only accelerated further. And this is a very legitimate issue that we face there. I'm not prepared to answer this question because I haven't looked at the legal research behind it yet, but I'm compelled to suspect that an argument could be made that the terms under which that canal were turned over have been violated. Because while technically, sovereignty over the canal has not been turned over to a foreign power, in reality, a foreign power today possesses, through their companies, which we know are not independent, the ability to turn the canal into a choke point in a moment of conflict. And that is a direct threat to the national interest and security the United States, and is particularly galling given the fact that we paid for it and that 5,000 Americans died making it. That said, Panama is a great partner on a lot of other issues, and I hope we can resolve this issue of the canal and of its security, and also continue to work with them cooperatively on a host of issues we share in common, including what to do with migration. 4:38:35 Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT): Now, President Trump has recently talked a little bit about the fact that there are some questions arising about the status of the Panama Canal. When we look to the treaty at issue, the treaty concerning the permanent neutrality and operation of the Panama Canal, we're reminded that some things maybe aren't quite as they should be there right now. Given that the Chinese now control major ports at the entry and the exit to the canal, it seems appropriate to say that there's at least an open question. There's some doubt as to whether the canal remains neutral. Would you agree with that assessment? Marco Rubio: Yes. Here's the challenge. Number one, I want to be clear about something. The Panamanian government, particularly its current office holders, are very friendly to the United States and very cooperative, and we want that to continue, and I want to bifurcate that from the broader issue of the canal. Now I am not, President Trump is not inventing this. This is something that's existed now for at least a decade. In my service here, I took a trip to Panama in 2017. When on that trip to Panama in 2017 it was the central issue we discussed about the canal, and that is that Chinese companies control port facilities at both ends of the canal, the east and the west, and the concerns among military officials and security officials, including in Panama, at that point, that that could one day be used as a choke point to impede commerce in a moment of conflict. Going back to that I -- earlier before you got here, and I don't want to have to dig through this folder to find it again, but -- basically cited how the immediate past head of Southern Command, just retired general Richardson, said she flew over the canal, looked down and saw those Chinese port facilities, and said Those look like dual use facilities that in a moment of conflict, could be weaponized against us. The bipartisan China commission over in the House last year, had testimony and hearings on this issue, and members of both parties expressed concern. The former ambassador to Panama under President Obama has expressed those concerns. This is a legitimate issue that needs to be confronted. The second point is the one you touched upon, and that is, look, could an argument be made, and I'm not prepared to answer it yet, because it's something we're going to have to study very carefully. But I think I have an inkling of I know where this is going to head. Can an argument be made that the Chinese basically have effective control of the canal anytime they want? Because if they order a Chinese company that controls the ports to shut it down or impede our transit, they will have to do so. There are no independent Chinese companies. They all exist because they've been identified as national champions. They're supported by the Chinese government. And if you don't do what they want, they find a new CEO, and you end up being replaced and removed. So they're under the complete control of their government. This is a legitimate question, and one that Senators Risch had some insight as well. He mentioned that in passing that needs to be looked at. This is not a joke. The Panama Canal issue is a very serious one. 4:44:30 Marco Rubio: In 2016 and 2017 that was well understood that part of the investments they made in Panama were conditioned upon Panama's ability to convince the Dominican Republic and other countries to flip their recognition away from Taiwan. That happened. Jen Briney's Recent Guest Appearances Travis Makes Money: Give and Take: Music by Editing Production Assistance

Jen Briney is the host of the Congressional Dish podcast, which delves into the actions of the U.S. Congress. What sets Jen apart is her dedication to providing unbiased, thoroughly researched information on government proceedings, avoiding the sensationalism and political commentary often found in similar shows. Her commitment to the "value for value" model, where listeners directly support her work, has allowed her to maintain editorial independence and build a dedicated audience, generating over $200,000 annually through Patreon and other creator monetization methods.]On this episode we talk about:– How Jen Briney generates over $200,000 a year with her podcast, Congressional Dish.– The "value for value" model and why Jen refuses to take sponsorships.– The importance of providing well-researched, unbiased information.– Jen's journey from working various jobs to becoming a successful podcaster.– The challenges of marketing a podcast that covers government without being perceived as politically biased.– The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and its legitimacy.Top 3 Takeaways1. Focus on providing value: Create content that is intrinsically valuable to your audience, and they will be more likely to support you through direct contributions.2. Stay true to your mission: Don't be swayed by trends or opportunities that don't align with your core values and the purpose of your content.3. Think long-term: Building a successful podcast takes time and consistency. Be prepared to work hard for years before seeing significant financial returns.Notable Quotes– "I've made the commitment that I will never have a sponsor because my show examines government... I just feel like having freedom to tell people what I think they need to hear."– "I create episodes that I think have intrinsic value because I... make a very big distinction that my show is not about politics... My show is about government, and so I'm doing stuff that nobody wants to do."– "You've got to start thinking in terms of decades when it comes to living your dream life, not in terms of months."Connect with Jen Briney:Website: https://congressionaldish.com/Our Sponsors:* Check out Kinsta: https://kinsta.com* Check out Trust & Will: https://trustandwill.com/TRAVISAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

RE-UNION Episodes Are FLASHBACKS To Some Amazing Past Union of The Unwanted Episodes You Might of Missed, or Maybe Forgot About, Enjoy! VIDEO LINK:  The Union of the Unwanted: 12: G. Edward Griffin: https://rumble.com/v6mm0ou-the-union-of-the-unwanted-012-g.-edward-griffin.html?e9s=src_v1_upp UOTUW LinkTree: https://linktr.ee/TheUnionOfTheUnwanted ▀▄▀▄▀ THE UNWANTED: HOSTS ▀▄▀▄▀ Ricky Varandas: The Ripple Effect Podcast Website: www.TheRippleEffectPodcast.com X: https://x.com/RvTheory6 YouTube Clips: https://www.youtube.com/@RickyVarandas Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/c-745495 Charlie Robinson: Macroaggressions Website: https://www.macroaggressions.io/ Rokfin: https://www.rokfin.com/Macroaggressions X: https://x.com/macroaggressio3 Sam Tripoli: Tin Foil Hat Podcast Website: www.SamTripoli.com Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/SamTripoli X: https://x.com/officialtripoli X: https://x.com/samtripoli Midnight Mike: The OBDM Podcast Website: http://obdmpod.com/ X: https://x.com/obdmpod ▀▄▀▄▀ SPECIAL GUESTS ▀▄▀▄▀ G. Edward Griffin, Richard Grove, Teace Snyder, Dan Dicks, Kingsley Edwards, Brian Festa, Dr. Kendra Becker, Sean Dustin, Jen Briney, Zach Vorhies, Maryam Henein, Brett Veinotte, Gordo Rochford, Josh Sigurdson, Tim Picciot, John Sneisen, Nancy Guberti, Jason Bermas, Monica Perez, The TruthZilla Podcast hosts, Ernest Hancock, Tim James and Mel K.

It's a DOGE-eat-DOGE world.Before I get into my thoughts on DOGE—and I have quite a few—the reason I haven't written much about it (we did touch on USAID in Wednesday's update) is that I'm still wrapping my head around it.There's a lot of noise surrounding DOGE, and beyond the clatter, it's unclear exactly what's happening. Meanwhile, the Democratic Party is in the valley. They lost a big election, have no effective power in government for at least the next two years, and have been throwing a lot of spaghetti at the wall. Chuck Schumer was parading around with a Corona and lime when it looked like we were going to hit Mexico with 25% tariffs, and now, the focus of the last 72 hours has been Elon Musk and DOGE.Because DOGE sits at the center of a political noise machine, I tend to be cautious about jumping in while everything is still in motion.That being said, DOGE is a significant development. What they're doing is something every Republican candidate in my lifetime has promised—and it may very well be illegal. We don't know if they're actually cutting the budget in the way they claim, nor do we know if anything they're doing is truly unlawful. But the fact that both of those questions exist simultaneously is reason enough to take a deeper look.Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency—DOGE—was conceived during Donald Trump's 2024 campaign and made official on January 20, 2025, the first day of Trump's second term. However, it is not a formal cabinet department. Instead, it began under the U.S. Digital Service, which was rebranded as the U.S. DOGE Service, before being placed under the Chief of Staff's office—likely to avoid transparency requirements. The stated goal of DOGE is to modernize federal technology and software to maximize government efficiency, with Musk claiming they aim to cut $2 trillion from the federal budget. Musk has admitted that if they say $2 trillion, they might actually cut $1 trillion, but the ambition remains.DOGE operates out of the Eisenhower Executive Building next to the White House with a small headquarters of about 20 people. Rather than a traditional hierarchy, it functions as a task force embedded across government agencies, with small teams of DOGE operatives placed inside agencies to audit systems and pursue efficiency measures. Musk himself serves as a special government employee, a temporary advisory role that grants him broad access while allowing him to bypass disclosure requirements that apply to full-time officials. This is especially notable given Musk's extensive business interests in China—something so controversial that a bipartisan group of lawmakers banned TikTok last year.Key figures in DOGE include Steve Davis, CEO of The Boring Company and a longtime Musk confidant, who allegedly leads day-to-day operations. Then there are the so-called “DOGE Kids”—young adults, typically aged 19 to 24, from elite universities with backgrounds in Musk companies or the Peter Thiel machine. Some, like Luke Farritor, gained fame for achievements like using AI to decode ancient Roman scrolls. Others, like Marko Elez, have already faced controversy. Ellis resigned after the Wall Street Journal uncovered racist posts he made in 2024, including advocating for eugenic immigration policies and saying he would never marry outside his ethnicity.In its first 80 hours, Musk tweeted that DOGE had canceled $420 million worth of federal contracts. Get it. The issue? DOGE doesn't technically have the authority to cancel contracts. That power belongs to Congress and the departments that administer the funds. So the real question is whether DOGE is canceling these contracts or simply recommending their termination, with the speed of the Trump administration making it appear as though they're acting unilaterally.DOGE's aggressive approach has already ruffled feathers. On inauguration day, Musk's team assumed control of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) headquarters, installing sofa beds in the director's office and working around the clock. Within days, they cut off career OPM staff from internal systems, effectively giving Musk's team exclusive control over federal HR records. Two OPM employees filed a lawsuit in late January, alleging that DOGE unlawfully installed a private server on the agency's network.Things escalated further when DOGE turned its attention to the U.S. Treasury Department's payment system, which processes $5 trillion annually, handling everything from Social Security checks to federal salaries. When David Liebrich, a top Treasury official, refused to grant DOGE access, he was reportedly forced out. By January 31, Trump's new Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent, approved DOGE's access. Soon after, a DOGE tech aide obtained unrestricted access to the payment system's code base and began making changes with minimal supervision—an alarming development that has raised red flags in Congress.And then there's USAID. Musk tweeted, “We're shutting it down,” referring to the agency responsible for international aid. But does Musk actually have the authority to do that? Or is he merely advising Marco Rubio, who, as head of the State Department, technically oversees USAID?If Musk is making these decisions, it's illegal. If Rubio is doing it, it's just an unusually fast-moving government operation. The speed and opacity of DOGE make it difficult to tell the difference.Meanwhile, DOGE has brought a renewed focus on federal spending. Social media has been ablaze with revelations about who benefits from government funds. Bill Kristol, a Never Trump figure, was found to have received money through USAID-funded organizations. More controversially, it was revealed that Politico received $8.2 million in federal funding last year. While some jumped to the conclusion that this was a Democratic subsidy for favorable coverage, the truth is more complicated. The money was for Politico Pro, a premium service used by government officials and lobbyists for networking and policy tracking. However, everyone I talked to in pulling this together told me Politico Pro sucks. Specifically compared to competitors like Bloomberg Government, raising questions about why agencies chose it over better alternatives.So how does this end? At some point, DOGE will hit a regulatory or legal wall that slows its momentum. They need enough public goodwill to sustain them when that happens, or the entire operation could grind to a halt.There's already evidence that Musk's influence is waning. A YouGov poll from November 2024 showed that 47% of Republicans wanted Musk to have significant influence in government. That number has since dropped to 26%, with 43% now preferring that he have only limited influence. Among all Americans, only 13% want Musk to have a lot of influence, while 46% want him to have none.DOGE's speed and disruption are unprecedented, but whether they represent true reform or reckless overreach remains an open question.All that… plus Jen Briney gives me her Doge thoughts and our final assessments of the confirmation hearings. Karol Markowicz joins the show to discuss Trump's musings on Gaza and the GOP infighting in Florida over immigration.Chapters00:00 Intro00:56 Let's Talk DOGE24:02 Jen Briney on DOGE and Confirmation Hearings40:18 Jen Briney on Confirmation Hearings01:10:02 UPDATE01:19:06 Karol Markowicz 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

The wolves are out for two of the Trump administration's most unconventional cabinet picks. Can Tulsi Gabbard and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. survive their hearings this week?Let's start with Bobby.Caroline Kennedy has publicly stated her opposition to RFK Jr.‘s appointment. Caroline is deeply embedded in the power structure of the modern Democratic Party—she has served multiple times as an ambassador and was one of the first major endorsers of Barack Obama back in 2008. So, make of that what you will. RFK Jr., the black sheep of the family, is now stepping into a Republican administration, a move that surely raises eyebrows. Though, if we're speculating, old Joe Kennedy probably wouldn't have had much of a problem with it. Then there's Tulsi Gabbard. A recent New York Times article titled “A Vatican Meeting Added Scrutiny of Tulsi Gabbard's Foreign Travels” befuddled me. If you remember Gabbard's complaints about being placed on a TSA watch list, this article confirms it—but oddly enough, it doesn't treat that as the headline. Instead, the focus is on why she was put on the list, with government sources leaking that it stemmed from her attendance at a Vatican conference organized by a man who was reportedly on a terror watch list.The Times knows this man's name but chose not to publish it because they couldn't verify why he was on the list. Essentially, the government gave the reporters a briefing, naming this individual as the reason Gabbard was flagged, but when pressed on why he was on the list, they refused to elaborate. And yet, the Times still ran with the story.The article tacks on another odd claim—an intelligence briefing reportedly revealed that two Hezbollah members once mentioned Gabbard in a conversation that was passed on to US intelligence. During Gabbard's controversial trip to meet with Bashar al-Assad she also met with “the big guy,” according to the Hezbollah fighters. My first thought? She met with Joe Biden? No, apparently, “the big guy” in this case was either a Hezbollah leader or a Lebanese government official with ties to Hezbollah, which, given the region, isn't exactly uncommon.But what's the real takeaway here? The way this story is framed makes little sense. If the government comes to you with information about a public figure, I understand reporting on it. But why not fold it into a larger piece digging deeper into the actual process behind it? Why not talk to Gabbard directly? Why not investigate the TSA's reasoning in more detail? Instead, this piece presents her as suspicious without providing substantial evidence.And knowing now that the government proactively brought this information to the Times, it only raises more red flags. That's a weak justification for placing a high-profile critic of the current administration on a TSA watch list. It's probably a bad thing to do in general. It's even worse that they felt the need to leak it to the media. But, of course, the real motive is clear—they don't want her confirmed. There's no other reason for the government to hand this story to the Times unless they're trying to sink her nomination.Chapters00:00 Introduction01:34 Why didn't I Cover The J6 Pardons More?17:02 UPDATE: MI Senate Race Heats Up, Trump Funding Pauses, Buyouts?34:23 Previewing Tulsi Gabbard and RFK Jr. Hearings with Jen Briney 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

What would you do if you stumbled upon an act of arson in progress? How do you process the devastation of wildfires destroying communities, homes, and lives? On this episode of The Food Heals Podcast, we ponder these questions and more as we dive into the devastation of the recent California wildfires. Host Allison Melody is joined by two powerhouse guests: Jen Briney, host of Congressional Dish and We're Not Wrong, and Jeremy Ryan Slate, CEO of Command Your Brand and host of the Jeremy Ryan Slate Show. Together, they share personal stories and insightful perspectives on the causes, consequences, and human impact of these apocalyptic fires. In this episode, we explore: Jeremy's shocking discovery of arson in progress and its aftermath. Jen's reflections on growing up with wildfires and how they've shaped her understanding of resilience. What may have caused these fires and their devastating long-term repercussions. The questions of accountability: Who or what is to blame? These fires tore through the Los Angeles area, displacing families, destroying thousands of structures, and claiming dozens of lives. With economic losses potentially exceeding $50 billion, this disaster serves as a sobering reminder of the vulnerabilities of our communities. Tune in for a raw and real conversation that sheds light on the challenges we face and the resilience we need to rebuild. Thank You to Our Sponsors! Organifi If you've been affected by the California wildfires—or even if you haven't—your body may be carrying a toxic load it can't handle alone. That's where Organifi Green Juice comes in! With 11 superfoods like moringa, chlorella, turmeric, and ashwagandha, it supports detoxification, immunity, and stress relief. Amazing Deals:

Donald Trump is the president of these United States again. And with it comes a flurry of executive orders that could reshape America.It's officially Joe-ver for Biden. But before it was over he reshaped the concept of American presidential pardon power. We discuss all of it LIVE from Washington DC with Jen Briney.Politics Politics Politics relies entirely on your donations to travel the country and cover national politics. Join us, won't you? 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

Pete Hegseth is your next Secretary of Defense. Nothing from Tuesday's contentious hearing will likely pluck GOP votes away from him. If anything the histrionics of the Democrats on the panel will make it harder for skeptical Republicans to stray. The way you collapse a nominee when you are in the minority is you give them enough rope to hang themselves. Ask cordial questions that elevate in complexity and hope they screw something up. That is the most likely possibility with Trump's slate who are being painted as unready and unprepared.They did not do that.Instead we got screeds on Hegseth's personal history, financial management and his opinion of women. What standing does a Republican Senator have if he is on the side of Sen. Tim Kaine taking the moral high road on infidelity? That being said, even if the Democrats had played a more strategic hand it looks like the GOP had effectively closed ranks. The lynchpin of a potential washout was Iowa's Joni Ernst and she spent the first portion of her time discussing the importance of a Pentagon audit (the upside of finding someone from outside the traditional drafting grounds for SecDef since DoD has routinely failed audits) and then played home run derby pitcher on the subject of women in the military. Yesterday, Hegseth was the most vulnerable of Trump's nominees. Today, betting markets pin that honor on Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Tulsi Gabbard.But if the Republicans are on the same page the Democrats are going to take this seriously, then I would bet on the full slate sailing through. Also, on the this podcast…Jen Briney, host of Congressional Dish, joins to discuss the stakes of these hearings and the ideological divides within Trump's coalition. Dave Levinthal, the money man, is back to discuss Kamala Harris 24 continuing to charge donors months after losing.Chapters* 00:00:00 - Episode Introduction and Live Show Announcement* 00:01:35 - Pete Hegseth's Confirmation Hearing Analysis* 00:10:17 - Breakdown of Trump's Coalition Cabinet* 00:21:00 - Marco Rubio's Focus on Foreign Policy* 00:30:00 - Tulsi Gabbard and Kash Patel: Challenges and Prospects* 00:43:10 - Upcoming Events and Political Updates* 00:52:49 - Dave Levinthal 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

The Green Party is America's fourth-largest party, and also has sufficient ballot access to have a legal path to an electoral victory. The party is a blend of environmentalism, socialism, and non-interventionist foreign policy. Jen Briney joins to discuss the latter.

Android 15 is releasing this fall. What can users expect from the latest Android OS and why is the roll-out timeline so weird? And we talk to Jen Briney about the reasons why manufacturers are lobbying against legislation to allow the US military to repair its own hardware.Starring Sarah Lane, Robb Dunewood, Ron Richards, Jen Briney, Roger Chang, Joe.Link to the Show Notes.

Android 15 is releasing this fall. What can users expect from the latest Android OS and why is the roll-out timeline so weird? And we talk to Jen Briney about the reasons why manufacturers are lobbying against legislation to allow the US military to repair its own hardware. Starring Sarah Lane, Robb Dunewood, Ron Richards, Tom Merritt, Jennifer Briney, Roger Chang, Joe. To read the show notes in a separate page click here! Support the show on Patreon by becoming a supporter!

In this episode, Justin Robert Young and Jennifer Briney discuss their experiences at the Republican and Democratic conventions. Justin also cover topics such as the money spent on political ads, the importance of swing states like Pennsylvania and Georgia, and the Kamala Harris campaign's efforts to redefine her image. Chapters00:00 Introduction03:35 Polling Data and Key States07:08 Ad Spending and the Money Gap14:22 Concerns for House and Senate Republicans18:58 Arrest of Linda Sun and Chris Hu20:39 JD Vance's Media Strategy22:37 RFK Jr.'s Lawsuit Against North Carolina State Board of Elections25:31 Jen Briney and the DNC Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Justin Robert Young, Jen Briney and Andrew Heaton discuss various topics, including Justin's announcement of his wife's pregnancy, the decline in tax refunds, and the impeachment proceedings against Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. 00:00 Introduction and Announcement of Pregnancy09:22 The Decline in Tax Refunds and Changes in the Tax System38:19 The Impeachment Proceedings Against Alejandro Mayorkas45:36 The Role of Congress in Immigration54:09 The Need for Term Limits01:06:07 Running for Office Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hey gang, I will be joining Jen Briney and Justin Robert Young for a live show of our podcast "We're Not Wrong" at 7:00 PM at the Share Brewing Company in Manchester, NH, this Saturday, January 20th. If you're in the area, this is a great alibi--come on out!

In this episode, Jen discusses her experience at the Mother Ship and the growth of the comedy scene in Austin. They then delve into the topic of funding for Ukraine and the Biden administration's pitch for it, highlighting the economic benefits. Finally, they explore Prince Harry's legal challenge against the UK Interior Ministry regarding his security arrangements. In this part of the conversation, the hosts discuss the casting of Prince Charles in The Crown and express their disappointment with the portrayal of his character. They also talk about the creative license taken in portraying Diana and Dodie's relationship and question the accuracy of certain events depicted in the show. The conversation then shifts to a discussion about the primary system and the frustration with the length of the primary season. They also touch on the job market and economic sentiment, as well as listener feedback and interactions. In this episode, Justin Young and Jen Briney discuss various topics, including the role of technology in our lives, congressional news stories, the loss of moderate voices in Congress, challenges in Congress, and political updates.Chapters00:00Introduction and Discussion of Comedy Club07:16Funding for Ukraine31:24Prince Harry's Security Challenge46:07Casting of Prince Charles in The Crown47:03Prince Charles' quest for power47:51Creative license in portraying Diana and Dodie49:28Inaccuracies in portraying Diana and Dodie's relationship50:06Speculation about Harry's paternity51:25Discussion about the primary system52:17Conversation about legislators and their interactions53:36Perception of individual members of Congress56:08Due process in removing Trump's name from the ballot57:07Length of the primary season58:48Job market and economic sentiment01:20:25Comparison of the American economy now and in the 1950s01:27:43Feedback and listener interactions01:29:01Preview of next episode01:30:24The Role of Technology in Our Lives01:31:36Congressional News Stories01:32:44Loss of Moderate Voices in Congress01:33:14Challenges in Congress01:33:56Political Updates01:34:40Closing Remarks Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

December is busy season in a Congress that has done nothing all year. In this bonus episode - which features Congressional Dish host Jen Briney as a guest on the December 1st episode of Politics, Politics, Politics with Justin Robert Young - we take a look at what we expect in Congress during the final month of a Congressionally chaotic year. Please Support Congressional Dish – Quick Links Contribute monthly or a lump sum via  Support Congressional Dish via  (donations per episode) Send Zelle payments to: Donation@congressionaldish.com Send Venmo payments to: @Jennifer-Briney Send Cash App payments to: $CongressionalDish or Donation@congressionaldish.com Use your bank's online bill pay function to mail contributions to:  Please make checks payable to Congressional Dish Thank you for supporting truly independent media!   Listen to the full December 1 episode of Politics, Politics, Politics  

All the best moments from a frisky debate between Ron DeSantis and Gavin Newsom. Jen Briney joins the show to talk congress. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The War in Israel reorders priorities both foreign and domestic.The Republicans need a new leader and they are no closer to getting one. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this eye-opening interview, Jeremy Ryan Slate sits down with Jen Briney, host of The Congressional Dish podcast, to delve into the complexities of the Ukraine conflict. They discuss the role of corruption, both domestic and international, in perpetuating the crisis, and how the media's biased reporting has further muddied the waters. Jen provides a detailed account of the events leading up to the conflict, shedding light on the hidden agenda behind the regime change in Ukraine and the subsequent Russian intervention. She emphasizes the need for Americans to take control of their own Congress by electing independent representatives who prioritize the interests of the people over corporate influence. As they explore potential solutions, they also touch upon the importance of banning stock ownership by members of Congress and reducing polarization in media. This thought-provoking conversation offers a fresh perspective on the Ukraine conflict and encourages viewers to seek alternative sources of information to gain a deeper understanding of global events. Find out more about Jen at: Website: https://congressionaldish.com LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jennifer-briney-7022a6104/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CongressionalDish/ Instagram: https://instagram.com/congressionaldish Twitter: https://twitter.com/JenBriney YT Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@CongressionalDishPodcast Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/congressional-dish/id572967793?mt=2 Check out our YouTube Channel: Jeremyryanslatebiz See the Show Notes: https://www.jeremyryanslate.com/1125 You may watch the FULL Video Episode also via my Rumble channel: https://rumble.com/c/JeremyRyanSlate

In this eye-opening interview, Jeremy Ryan Slate sits down with Jen Briney, host of The Congressional Dish podcast, to delve into the complexities of the Ukraine conflict. They discuss the role of corruption, both domestic and international, in perpetuating the crisis, and how the media's biased reporting has further muddied the waters. Jen provides a detailed account of the events leading up to the conflict, shedding light on the hidden agenda behind the regime change in Ukraine and the subsequent Russian intervention. She emphasizes the need for Americans to take control of their own Congress by electing independent representatives who prioritize the interests of the people over corporate influence. As they explore potential solutions, they also touch upon the importance of banning stock ownership by members of Congress and reducing polarization in media. This thought-provoking conversation offers a fresh perspective on the Ukraine conflict and encourages viewers to seek alternative sources of information to gain a deeper understanding of global events. Find out more about Jen at: Website: https://congressionaldish.com LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jennifer-briney-7022a6104/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CongressionalDish/ Instagram: https://instagram.com/congressionaldish Twitter: https://twitter.com/JenBriney YT Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@CongressionalDishPodcast Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/congressional-dish/id572967793?mt=2 Check out our YouTube Channel: Jeremyryanslatebiz See the Show Notes: https://www.jeremyryanslate.com/1125 You may watch the FULL Video Episode also via my Rumble channel: https://rumble.com/c/JeremyRyanSlate

The Political Triad (Justin, Andrew Heaton, and Jen Briney) convene to put the final two fake presidents in the bracket to a vote. Will the idyllic Aaron Sorkin penned monologue-machine Jed Barlet take the gold, or the ruthless, but savvy Jack Stanton? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Jen Briney of the Congressional Dish joins Sam to talk about how she got into academic analyses of congressional matters. Together, they examine at lawmaker approaches to veterans' issues and break them down in a way common listeners can understand. Learn more about the PACT act as well as phenomena impacting veterans and their families. Her podcast: https://congressionaldish.com/ Episodes on Veterans Issues Jen Recommends: The Pact act: https://congressionaldish.com/cd257-pact-act-health-care-for-poisoned-veterans/ The Choice program: https://congressionaldish.com/cd161-veterans-choice-program/ Want to find the other episodes go to www.eku.edu/kcvs/podcast. Want to support the center? Go to go.eku.edu/give-KCVS  To subscribe to this podcast put this link in your favorite podcatcher: https://servicetoservice.libsyn.com/rss Send feedback to kcvspodcast@eku.edu Bumbly March by Kevin MacLeod Link: https://incompetech.filmmusic.io/song/3463-bumbly-march License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

We're Not Wrong is my other political podcast, with host fellows Justin Robert Young and Jen Briney. On this episode we discuss “national divorce,” the rise and fall of James O'Keefe of Project Veritas, and the difference between journalism and activism.  If you enjoy it, check out the podcast WE'RE NOT WRONG! 

Let's discuss today's Bad Faith episode and whatever else is on your mind! We also cover Ukraine funding, Marianne 2024, and got an update from Jen Briney of Congressional Dish on what the left should take away from the 1/6 testimony. Download the Callin app for iOS and Android to listen to this podcast live, call in, and more! Also available at callin.com

Congressional Dish host, Jen Briney lets us know how much Congress and High School have in common. Px3 host Justin Robert Young get surprised by Matt and Jacob's opinions in nuclear waste in Nevada. Plus, how many people know enough about the movie Milo & Otis? Oh, and scoopmail features both the best and the worst poems we've ever received. Neither can be missed! Scoopardy Jock Vs. Nerd Trivia also a gem.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Live from Austin, Texas, Justin is joined by Andrew Heaton, Jen Briney, and Brian Brushwood for the 2022 midterms.

"We're Not Wrong" Podcast cohosts, Justin Young and Jen Briney pop into the Churn (along with scoop, LA Jay). Everyone clears up the difference of Van Life vs. Homelessness and edging vs. gooning. We also take a shallow dive into the current state of San Francisco and whether nose picking can give you Alzheimer's disease. You are going to learn a lot today. Plus Scoop Mail and Jock Vs. Nerd Scoopardy trivia.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Inside what it was like to live through Hurricane Andrew in 1992. How do hurricanes affect Florida politics and why is the insolvency of Citizens insurance a bad issue for Ron DeSantis? Herschel Walker's campaign is tested by two different scandals. Meanwhile, in Pennsylvania another campaign plays Hide-a-John. A selection from We're Not Wrong with Andrew Heaton and Jen Briney on what's on and off limits in campaigning.

The CDC will overhaul operations after an external review found shortcomings in handling COVID. The future for Liz Cheney: It's time to break out those credit cards, Lincoln Project fans. The Political Triad reconvenes, at least, in a way. Tune into a We're Not Wrong discussion with Andrew Heaton and Jen Briney as they talk all things Russia - live from Europe!

Jen Briney, Andrew Heaton and Justin Robert Young discuss the ramifications of the FBI raid on Mar-A-Lago. Dissect our fascination with Alex Jones. Openly threaten Iowa's supremacy in the nomination process. Get more! Patreon.com/WereNotWrong

Jennifer Briney feels that if you do something of value, that something is a product. This is the premise upon which her Congressional Dish podcast is built. CongressionalDish.com states that it's, "a podcast that aims to draw attention to where the American people truly have power: Congress. From the perspective of a fed-up taxpayer with no allegiance to any political party, Jennifer Briney will fill you in on the must-know information about what our representatives do AFTER the elections and how their actions can and do affect our day to day lives." This is an apt description and the content of Congressional Dish is indeed something of value. Jennifer and I met at the Podcast Movement 2021 conference in Nashville and I'm honored to feature her in this episode of Morning Tempo. She's is doing important work on Congressional Dish and doing so in as much non-partisan fashion as one can hope for. The podcast was an eye-opener for this listener and for anyone who get their news from outlets such as cable TV, popular newsfeeds such as Apple or Reuters, or social media. Although we do discuss the content of Congressional Dish, our conversation isn't exclusively focused on the podcast. But I did get to know a little about Jennifer as a person. Our conversion covers Jennifer's history with Podcast Movement, the Congressional Dish business model (yes it's a business), her legendary AMA on Reddit, her digital-nomad/travel lifestyle (which Congressional Dish helps to fund), the big lessons learned in her journey as host of Congressional Dish, and building trust one person at a time. I encourage you to check out an episode (or two) of Congressional Dish. You can find it wherever fine podcasts are found and at CongressionalDish.com. And you can find Jennifer @JenBriney on Twitter and Instagram. Please enjoy my conversation with Jennifer Briney of Congressional Dish. Mentioned in this Episode Congressional Dish Washington Journal C-SPAN interview No Agenda Show w/Adam Curry and John C. Dvorak How Jen Briney Got Her AMA to the Frontpage of Reddit Jennifer Briney on Unity and Divisions (Challenging Opinions podcast episode) Talking Fat podcast w/Jen Briney and Jonathan Oakes  GovTrack.us Stay in touch! Visit MorningTempo.com/Podcast for related links, episode transcripts and past guests. Sign up for the Morning Tempo email newsletter at MorningTempo.com @RobonzoDrummer on Twitter  and  Instagram @MorningTempo on Facebook  and  YouTube Support this Podcast The Morning Tempo podcast exists solely through the generosity of its listeners, and we gladly accept support in a variety of ways. Please visit our Crowd Sponsor page to learn more. Learn how to support the podcast. Recommended Resources ConvertKit Free Plan for Beginner Creators – Email marketing the way it should be. Web hosting by Dreamhost See more of my recommended resources. Some of the links in this post, such as those in the above section, are affiliate links. This means I make a small commission, at no extra charge to you, if you purchase using those links. Thanks for your support!

Well, we're back! It's time to relax, grab your favorite drink, nerd out with us, have fun, and end the week right! Remember. No agenda. No format. ANYTHING GOES! And… Ugh… well… I finally caught The ‘Vids. The COVIDs. I did EVERYTHING in my power to stay healthy, protect my health, and those around me, but NOOOOOOOOO… I still got it. In This Episode We're on YouTube! PLEASE SUBSCRIBE!!

There is a new panel podcast! It's the Political Triad! Subscribe wherever you listen to podcasts!

AFTER HOURS PRIMARY COVERAGE featuring Jen Briney of Congressional Dish

Join Brian, Justin, Brett Weaver, Jennifer Briney, and Bryce in the Green Room.  Mister Mister and a mister finds a miss. White guy shit: owning a house and taxes.  Plus, Bryce and Cory talk about skinny European fashion, the Monaco of Miami, and binging 1993 races!  Check out Jen on Twitter at https://twitter.com/JenBriney Get a bonus episode every week only at https://www.patreon.com/greatnight and enjoy the preshow and postshow in all the public feeds! Not watching the show? Follow us on YouTube to see all the smirks and our upcoming Scoopfest videos http://watchgreatnight.com Email us! GreatNightPod@gmail.com

Join Brian, Justin, Brett Weaver, Jennifer Briney, and Bryce in the Green Room.  Mister Mister and a mister finds a miss. White guy shit: owning a house and taxes.  Plus, Bryce and Cory talk about skinny European fashion, the Monaco of Miami, and binging 1993 races!  Check out Jen on Twitter at https://twitter.com/JenBriney Get a bonus episode every week only at https://www.patreon.com/greatnight and enjoy the preshow and postshow in all the public feeds! Not watching the show? Follow us on YouTube to see all the smirks and our upcoming Scoopfest videos http://watchgreatnight.com Email us! GreatNightPod@gmail.com

Steve Schmidt, Lincoln Project founder and former strategist to major Republican candidates, including John McCain. He airs his Meghan McCain grievances and we look at a New York Times piece from the 2000 election that highlighted John McCain's alleged affair. Have we reached peak inflation? The Democrats struggle to find footing as Republicans place rising costs and a failing market at the feet of a Democratic administration. The Political Triad (Justin, Andrew Heaton, and Jen Briney) reconvene to tease a new project, discuss renewable energy, and to break down the infamous Madison Cawthorn footage.

We wanted to talk about Ukraine, Putin, Sunflower seeds and the rest but, as it turns out, it's incredibly complicated so we brought on a ringer. We welcome back the Congressional Dish's own Jen Briney to the podcast to share her significant knowledge about what exactly is happening. Enjoy! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Tell us what you think: Facebook:https://www.facebook.com/beatadeadsource ( https://www.facebook.com/beatadeadsource) Twitter:https://twitter.com/dead_source ( https://twitter.com/dead_source) Instagram:https://instagram.com/beatadeadsourcepodcast ( https://instagram.com/beatadeadsourcepodcast) Patreon:https://www.patreon.com/beatadeadsource ( https://www.patreon.com/beatadeadsource) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Congressional Dish 244: Keeping Ukraine - Dec 19, 2021 https://congressionaldish.com/cd244-keeping-ukraine/ (https://congressionaldish.com/cd244-keeping-ukraine/) Congressional Dish 248: Understanding the Enemy - Feb 27, 2022 https://congressionaldish.com/cd248-understanding-the-enemy/ (https://congressionaldish.com/cd248-understanding-the-enemy/) Putin Will Lose, Here's Why - Johnny Harris https://youtu.be/FQ4hvLqNfqo (https://youtu.be/FQ4hvLqNfqo) Kyle Rittenhouse Gonna Sue The Media, Please Send Money  (THANKS CARRIE!) https://abovethelaw.com/2022/02/kyle-rittenhouse-gonna-sue-the-media-please-send-money/ (https://abovethelaw.com/2022/02/kyle-rittenhouse-gonna-sue-the-media-please-send-money/)

Jen Briney of "Congressional Dish" joins to discuss sanctions, economic warfare, and the underlying rationale for Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Support the show! www.patreon.com/andrewheaton Venmo: @andrew-heaton-1 Paypal: andrew@mightyheaton.com

This week, I spoke to Bernie foreign policy advisor Matt Duss about the conflict on Ukraine. Tonight, I'll be talking to folks with a critique of his foreign policy analysis, including Bryce Greene, who wrote an important piece last month in FAIR/Black Agenda Report titled “what you should really know about Ukraine.” Also, Jen Briney of the excellent Congressional Dish podcast, and Stephen Semler of Speaking Security substack — following the money on US foreign (and domestic) policy topics. It's a great show. Watch the Bad Faith interview free on YouTube, like and subscribe, trad Bryce's article, and tune in tonight. https://fair.org/home/what-you-should-really-know-about-ukraine/ Download the Callin app for iOS and Android to listen to this podcast live, call in, and more! Also available at callin.com

Justin and Jen Briney discuss everything they can think of related to the bizarre Ukraine and Russia stand off as well as the role the United States and United Kingdom have in it. Heaton couldn't make it so we are joined by TWO to replace him... Tom Merritt (Daily Tech News Show) and Brian Brushwood (World's Greatest Con).

How do you separate COVID facts from COVID fiction?  Andrew Luskin, Epidemiologist for the Virginia Rural Health Association joined the Rural Health Voice to share information that will help you make good decisions. VRHA has a wide variety of resources for COVID-19 on our website.  Just go to vrha.org and click the buttons on the main page. You may also be interested in a review of what has been discussed in Congress related to COVID-19.  That can be found in Episode 211 of the Congressional Dish podcast. Please note that VRHA does not endorse Congressional Dish nor is affiliated with that podcast in any manner.  Comments on that podcast belong to host Jen Briney and are not to be attributed to VRHA.   CLICK HERE FOR INTERVIEW SUMMARY (.PDF) CLICK HERE FOR INTERVIEW SUMMARY (.DOC)

This is special show, recorded right before Podcast Movement 2019 on August 11, featuring not only my awesome co-host Rob Walch VP of Podcaster Relations at Libsyn, but also, Rob Greenlee VP of Podcasting Partnerships and Dave Jackson from the School of Podcasting and also part of our awesome support team! We cover the big news released last week that Libsyn is IAB 2. 0 compliant aka we are certified! Some fantastic Google Podcasts updates , an interesting study from Coleman Insights, leaving Apple Podcasts because of negative ratings, women podcasting stats, plus of course our latest user agent and geographic stats! You will not wanna miss this! Audience feedback drives the show. We'd love for you to email us and keep the conversation going! Email thefeed@libsyn.com or call 412–573–1934. We'd love to hear from you! Quick Episode Summary Special intro with Elsie and her daughter The Rob, Rob, Dave and Elsie conversation Libsyn is IAB v2 certified! And what exactly does that mean? Entercom buys Pineapple Street Media and Cadence 13 and what that means to podcasters Google Podcasts updates directly from the Google Team! A very interesting study from Coleman Insights Can you record a Skype conversation from your iPhone? Folks we need help! The Top 7 Creative Business Podcasts You Should Listen to Right Now There is a difference between your feed categories and Apple Podcasts categories, we clarify a bit So who is the oldest podcaster out there? Jen Briney from Congressional Dish was on C-SPAN! Do negative ratings affect your ranking on Apple Podcasts? You will be surprised by the answer! Rob's worst email of the week Geographic stats! Country Spotify stats! User agent stats! During our where have we been segment Rob reveals some incredible stats about women in podcasting Thank you to Nick from MicMe for our awesome intro! Podcasting Articles and Links mentioned by Rob and Elsie Our SpeakPipe Feedback page! Leave us feedback :) Google will start surfacing individual podcast episodes in search results Google․com adds powerful podcast search, also coming to Assistant Coleman Insights Study Shows Joe Rogan Topping Podcast Listener Awareness The Top 7 Creative Business Podcasts You Should Listen to Right Now Why a 94-year-old war veteran started a podcast to save democracy New Media Show Live @ Podcast Movement 2019 #297 Where is Libsyn Going? (In Real Life) She Podcasts Conference DragonCon Content Marketing World Military Influencer Conference HELP US SPREAD THE WORD! We'd love it if you could please share #TheFeed with your twitter followers. Click here to post a tweet! If you dug this episode head on over to Apple Podcasts and kindly leave us a rating, a review and subscribe! Ways to subscribe to The Feed: The Official Libsyn Podcast Click here to subscribe via Apple Podcasts Click here to subscribe via RSS You can also subscribe via Stitcher FEEDBACK + PROMOTION You can ask your questions, make comments and create a segment about podcasting for podcasters! Let your voice be heard. Download the FREE The Feed App for iOS and Android (you can send feedback straight from within the app) Call 412 573 1934 Email thefeed@libsyn.com Use our SpeakPipe Page!

Want holiday merch? We've got you covered with the cutest holiday designs! Get yours today and support Podcasting and give that perfect podcasting gift! Quick Episode Summary: Intro :07 Audio Rockin' Libsyn Podcast: Super Power U 1:34 How you can be featured by Libsyn! 6:38 PROMO 1: The Ace Report 7:56 Elsie and Rob Conversation 8:27 No power and a love for the Samson Q2U A new app for shrinking your graphics called Squoosh Unsplash is no longer going out of business Why you should have a standalone app for your show Nope, you can't even play short snippets of any music on your podcast PROMO 2: He Said, She Said 20:02 More details on getting other shows (that you've been on) on to your feed Rob and Elsie called out! Why are the top charts in Apple Podcasts not supporting their own episode number tags? Why doesn't Jen Briney show up with searches for her name? Grant Baciocco sends us feedback about recycling content AUDIO FEEDBACK 34:30 Are people hacking the Apple Podcasts charts? Pros and cons publishing a new podcast on the same feed What's that audiobook company looking for voice over artists? Audio feedback from Win 46:00 The Podcast Host is doing a survey about ‘podcast discoverability' How much money you will make if you have a $7 CPM and how it will affect your audience Cast.plus is no more What does directory.libsyn.com search for? How are radio shows able to cross post their shows as podcasts and use copyrighted music? How to change change the iTunes tags en masse Steve Goldstein wrote a post about why Google Podcasts was failing so hard And we have some NPR RAD news and insight PROMO 3: Sibercast 1:14:16 Stats, stats, stats! Geographic and user agents for the month of November! Featured Podcast Promos + Audio Super Power U The Ace Report He Said, She Said Movie Reviews Sibercast Grant from The Radio Adventures of Dr. Floyd Win from Ask Win Thank you to Nick from MicMe for our awesome intro! Podcasting Articles and Links mentioned by Rob and Elsie Our SpeakPipe Feedback page! Leave us feedback :) Squoosh Unsplash Podcast Discovery Survey Why is the Google Podcasts App failing so bad? NPR announces new measurement system Elsie feature on Podchaser Podchaser, get your creator profile! Where is Libsyn Going? (In Real Life) Podcon in Seattle Podfest in Orlando Proclaim 19 NAB in Las Vegas HELP US SPREAD THE WORD! We'd love it if you could please share #TheFeed with your twitter followers. Click here to post a tweet! If you dug this episode head on over to Apple Podcasts and kindly leave us a rating, a review and subscribe! Ways to subscribe to The Feed: The Official Libsyn Podcast Click here to subscribe via Apple Podcasts Click here to subscribe via RSS You can also subscribe via Stitcher FEEDBACK + PROMOTION You can ask your questions, make comments and create a segment about podcasting for podcasters! Let your voice be heard. Download the FREE The Feed App for iOS and Android (you can send feedback straight from within the app) Call 412 573 1934 Email thefeed@libsyn.com Use our SpeakPipe Page!

Jen Briney is a superhero to me. Truly. She is a person who cares about facts over emotion and lives to decipher what laws can truly give people comfort and happiness in their lives. She's one of the good ones--but she's kinda a ball buster. It's not tough love-it's real love she has for her listeners. She loves the Truth. And during this time in politics, the truth doesn't seem to be anywhere. I loved this conversation with her and I even had a few of my own "Ah-has". If you're sick of politics--listen. If you are still all about politics--listen. Find all things Jen at: http://www.congressionaldish.com/ And download her podcast Congressional Dish wherever you listen to podcasts: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/congressional-dish/id572967793?mt=2See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Jen Briney is a trailblazer in crowdfunding podcast journalism. During this episode, we talk about what actually goes into producing an episode of Congressional Dish, and discuss downloads, listener-based financial models, what it's like to get bad reviews, and how you can grow a big audience by focusing on creating solid content.   Main Questions Asked: When did you introduce the Listener Contribution Model? Talk about the behind the scenes production work on Congressional Dish. Do you mingle with the other podcasters in your category on iTunes, or just focus on your own thing?   Key Lessons Learned: Congressional Dish Podcast The first episode released in Sept 2012. Congressional Dish involves reading and outlining a bill. It is entertaining, educational, and has opinion. The show has two episodes per month, and Jen does all her interviews in one week.  The research alone takes a solid week. The show is high in the Government category on iTunes, but Jen doesn't feel as though she is in the political clique. Jen will fire at certain people for job-related scandals but not personal scandals.   The Funding Model The show is an advertising-free space and makes money from listener contribution.   Show Notes & Outsourcing The show notes are the most valuable part of the show, as there are links to actual provisions. Jen hired an audio engineer to edit the show, which saves her a day of work.   Download Stats After 30 days, if your episode has 165 downloads, you are doing better than 50% of the podcasts on iTunes. Congressional Dish garners 10,000 downloads per episode.   Marketing It's good to market your podcast from the beginning, but don't let it replace quality content.   Point of Difference So many podcasts are using the same ‘recipe' and same questions. Be different.   Journalism & Journalists There are a lot of people who call themselves journalists but are actually pundits. The question is, ‘Are you delivering information or opinion?' Congressional Dish also has opinion and slant, but the information is always backed up rather than made up.   Resources: Congressional Dish Electoral College Episode Horse Radio Network Walking Deadcast Heather Havenwood: The Win The Ladygang   Live Webinar:  Text ‘rock' 72000 Jessicarhodes.biz/webinar   Subscribe to the show in iTunes or Stitcher Radio! The music in today's episode was written by The Danger Os and produced by Nick Palmer. Check them out at https://www.facebook.com/thedangerosmakemusic 

Help support The Sci-Fi Movie Podcast by becoming a Patron! Hosted by Remi Lavictoire, Jonathan Colbon and Kyran Mountain. Get the Sci-Fi Movie Podcast Archive for 5 Bucks! This week on The Sci-Fi Movie Podcast, Jonathan, Rem and Kyran present the final episode of The Sci-Fi Movie Podcast!   Movie News: Jonathan: 'Godzilla Resurgence' Becomes Biggest Live-Action Film of Year Kyran: Death on the set of Blade Runner 2 Rem: IBM's computer Watson creates a trailer for new movie ‘Morgan' --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Movies to see: Jonathan: About Time (2013) Rem: Westworld (1973) Kyran: Zathura (2005) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Movies To Avoid: Rem: Mad Max: Fury Road (2015) Kyran: Zathura (2005) Jonathan: Battlefield Earth (2000)   Top Five List of Essential Sci-Fi Movies Listener picks 1. Blade Runner 2. The Matrix 3. Star Wars 5: Empire Strikes Back 4. Star Wars IV: A New Hope 5. Aliens Honourable Mentions: Alien Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan Serenity Dune Enemy Mine Forbidden Planet The Day The Earth Stood Still The Terminator X-Men 3: The Last Stand Combined Host Top 5 List (Rem, Jonathan, Kyran) 1. Star Wars IV: A New Hope 2. Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan 3. 2001: A Space Odyssey 4. The Martian 5. Blade Runner Rem's picks: 1. 2001: A Space Odyssey 2. Blade Runner 3. The Matrix 4. War Of The Worlds 5. The Day The Earth Stood Still Honourable Mentions: Alien The Terminator Star Wars IV: A New Hope Contact Jonathan's picks: 1. Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan 2. Star Wars IV: A New Hope 3. Inception 4. The Iron Giant 5. Serenity Honourable Mentions: Galaxy Quest Star Wars V: The Empire Strikes Back District 9 Kyran's picks 1. The Martian 2. Star Wars Series 3. Back To The Future 4. Edge Of Tomorrow 5. Minority Report Honourable Mentions: The Last Starfighter Ender's Game   Big thanks to Ian Fults, our co host partner from the very beginning. Thanks some of our previous guests, and Ian, Bonnie and Tim, and everyone else who joined us: Trevor Laboucane, Judy Marston, Jaime Pahal, Jason Cabassi, Kevin Bachelder, Cris Nicols, Cecile Korst, Josh Readon, Rob Cesternino, Nick Miller, Wayne Henderson, Robin Ess, Tony, Mr. Blahg, Dallas Ross, Scott Hertzog, Christina Smith, Andrew Jackson, Elizabeth Round, Pi'ilani and her daughter Kanoi, Daniel McIntyre, Jen Briney, Seth Heasley, Brian Campbell, Doug Ferguson, Roger Cousineau We'll leave the Podcast in iTunes and the Website will be online for the next 6 months. Listener Feedback Wayne Henderson I'm sorry to hear about the end of the SFMP, Rem. I sure have enjoyed listening to it, over the years! Top 5 Essential SF movies: 3. Star Wars - A New Hope. 4. Star Wars - Empire Strikes Back. 2. The Matrix. 1. Blade Runner. 5. Alien. Bonnie Beyea NNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!! Cathy Oliver I'm sad to hear this Rem. I may not have participated but that is only because it isn't my genre of movie. You know I support you always and hope whatever you have in store keeps you happy! Rena Lavictoire You must be on your way to another form of sharing yourself...I hear Skype works really well on Sundays Jeff Ritchot Sorry to hear bud you and Jonathan are extremely talented and very entertaining to listen to can't wait to support your next adventure cheers man! David Oliver Sorry to hear its the end Rem. ' Here are my picks for the essential Sci-Fi movies. 1-Blade Runner, 2-The Matrix 3-The 5th Element 4-Serenity 5-Silent Running (Yes, Im that old) Oscar Esquivel 1-alien 2-original 3 star wars 3-inception 4-john Carter (i know, I know) 5-edge of tommorow Hans-Kristian Moslund Amazing journey for you guys, what an effort and pleasure for the fans. You have followed me in many hours of driving and house cleaning, and it will never be the same agin. Rem and Jonathan - you are the best !! - and you absolutely have made a difference for me !! Thank you - thank you - thank you !!!. Mark Des Cotes Thanks for the ride guys. My top 5 would be, in reverse order. 5 - Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan 4 - The Matrix 3 - Ghostbusters (The Original) 2 - Back To The Future 1 - Star Wars A New Hope Stefan Kanzok I can only echo everyone else here. More of a passive listener but I enjoyed every episode immensely. You always made me feel like being one at the same table discussing the movies we love. You will be sorely missed. THANK YOU!! My top 5 essential Sci-fi movies would be 1. Serenity, 2. The Empire strikes back, 3. The Matrix, 4. The Martian, 5. Star Trek (2009). Thanks again and all the best to you!!! Kelly A. Beam Sorry to hear that you're ending the podcast. It's been great listening to you guys. It's probably too late for this, but here are my top 5 (in no particular order): Star Wars (A New Hope) Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan Jurassic Park The Matrix Aliens Chuck Moore No! Don't go! Andrew Lantz Nooooooooooo Steve Ferguson So sorry to hear your podcasting adventure is coming to an end. I'd like to personally thank you for your recommendations, your commentary, and the hours of entertainment I've had listening to you. Good fortune and much love to whatever you gents wind up pursuing! Now on to my top five list... 5) Back to the Future. 4) Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind 3) Star Trek II - The Wrath of Khan 2) Star Wars Episode 5 - The Empire Strikes Back 1) Blade Runner: The Final Cut Ton de Witte Well all good things must come to an end still a pity I loved listening. 5 the Matrix 4 blade runner 3 gattaca 2 the day the earth stood still 1 forbidden planet Not necessarily in this order these movies have influenced other movies or were very original and they made an impression on me. Jeff Pierce Awwww man..... sorry to hear this. but really enjoyed everything you guys have done. thanks for the fun. all the best Jennifer Robertson Such a shame. I will miss you guys and I wish you all the luck for the future. Jennifer Robertson Insert "Wilhelm Scream" here Shawn Smalldridge Thanks for all the great shows guys! Matt Young Nooooooooooooo, just found you guys when you joined Podcastica. Really sorry to hear that it's ending now. Live long and prosper, where you're going, you won't need roads.... it's a trap! David Zapanta Well, damn. You will be missed. Thanks for making my commute more bearable. Much luck to all of you in your future endeavors...! Now, as for my Top 5 Essential Sci-Fi Movies, here they are in no particular order:...See More Scott Chappel Spent many hours listening as I traveled for work. 1-The Matrix, 2-Blade Runner, 3- Empire Strikes Back, 4-Inception and 5- Wrath of Khan. You will be missed. Bair Innokentev I wish all the best for Rem, Jonathan, Kyran and Ian, your show was truly a masterpiece from start to finish! As for Top 5 Movies, I would like to list the following: - The Terminator - Robocop - Minority Report - Inception - Disctrict 9 Honorable mentions: - Men In Black - Galaxy Quest (I have to admit, I still haven't seen Wrath of Khan, but until that, Galaxy Quest is the best Star Trek movie for me) Michael Simshauser Ok, my top five for the last episode: 1) Alien, 2) 2001, 3) Sleeper, 4) The Day the Earth Stood Still & 5) The Last Starfighter Graeme McKenzie Did you run of movies? Good luck in the future guys Lisa Lyons NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!! The top 5 of David and Lisa Lyons... 1: Aliens 2: Star Wars Empire Strikes Back 3: Star Trek Wrath of Khan 4: The Martian 5: District 9 - Guys, we just want to thank you for so many thought-provoking discussions, and a wonderful series of podcasts. I'm honestly going to miss your presence in the car on the way to and from work; and hope that whatever you end up doing works out well for you all! Hans-Kristian Moslund top 5: 1. Blade Runner, 2. The Matrix 3 : Edge Of Tomorrow 4. Aliens 5: Star Wars. will miss you guys - thanks for the great work - it made a difference Liz Irwin I'm so sad to see you guys go. Honestly one of my favorite all time podcasts. 1. Dune I can't narrow it down after that...but man, I'm so sad!! Jamie Piper No way ! So sad . Love your podcast.What about Earth Girls are Easy ? Scott Buchanan Star Wars (the original, still the best. And yes I know I'm showing my age) Blade Runner The Empire strikes back (running theme here) Star Trek the Undiscovered Country X-men Days of future past (it's borderline close enough for me) Thank you for the excellent work these past 140 episodes Kisses! Sooz Lee Ean Beecham Nooo! Why?! One of my favourite podcasts, listen to it while I'm commuting all the time, will be missed! John Sheehy All the best, and congratulations on an excellent podcast series that will be missed 1. X-Men 3: The Last Stand 2. Star Trek 2: Wrath of Khan 3. Star Wars 5: Empire Strikes Back 4. Aliens 5. Terminator 2: Judgement "Holding a Mirror Up to Society" 1. District 9 2. Robot & Frank 3. Cube 4. Ex-Machina 5. Gattaca Doug Ferguson Man, I'm going to miss this show. You guys helped me become a better podcaster myself. Plus HOURS and HOURS of entertainment and opinions. What a good run. Your show will be missed. Only 5 of the top Sci-fi movies?? Yikes! In no particular order... Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind Children of Men Terminator 2: Judgement Day Alien Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back Pi'ilani Req I'm so sad that you're going dark. But, I have a list of five sci Fi movies I need to watch now   The Sci-Fi Movie Podcast is a member of the Podcastica Network, visit Podcastica.com The Sci-Fi Movie Podcast is partially funded by Patreon. You can help make the Sci-Fi Movie Podcast even better by becoming a support. Go to our Patreon page and show your support! Please share your comments and thoughts on The Sci-Fi Movie Podcast Facebook page or send us Email and we'll add your feedback to the show! Subscribe to The Sci-Fi Movie Podcast Newsletter!         Sci Fi Movie Podcast September 2016

Help support The Sci-Fi Movie Podcast by becoming a Patron! Hosted by Remi Lavictoire, Jen Briney, Jonathan Colbon and Ian Fults Podcast length: 59:30 This time on The Sci-Fi Movie Podcast, we're digging deeper into “Contagion” from 2011, directed by Steven Soderberg. We're very happy to welcome Jen Briney from the Congressional Dish Podcast, and an […] The post Sci-Fi Movie Podcast – Contagion appeared first on The Sci-Fi Movie Podcast.