Podcast appearances and mentions of Justice Thomas

On June 27th, the Supreme Court ruled in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton that Texas’s age-verification law did not violate the First Amendment's Free Speech Clause. Justice Thomas wrote the Court’s opinion, holding that States had a right to protect children from obscenity, even if that meant incidentally burdening adults’ own access to that content. Many are celebrating the 6-3 decision as a victory for the protection of children, as it will cement similar laws in the 21 other states that have implemented them. Yet, as in Justice Kagan's dissent, others worry about Paxton’s implications for Freedom of Speech in the digital age. When does an incidental burden become a substantial violation of adults' First Amendment Rights? What kind of precedent does Paxton set for speech cases going forward?

In this case, the court considered this issue: Does the Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act violate the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment?The case was decided on June 20, 2025.The Supreme Court held that the PSJVTA's personal jurisdiction provision does not violate the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause because the statute reasonably ties jurisdiction over the PLO and PA to conduct involving the United States and implicating sensitive foreign policy matters within the prerogative of the political branches. Chief Justice John Roberts authored the majority opinion of the Court.The Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause does not impose the same jurisdictional limitations as the Fourteenth Amendment because the federal government occupies a sovereign sphere dramatically different from that of state governments. While the Fourteenth Amendment's jurisdictional limits protect interstate federalism by ensuring states do not exceed their territorial boundaries as coequal sovereigns, these federalism concerns are inapplicable to the federal government, which possesses both nationwide and extraterritorial authority. The Constitution authorizes the federal government alone to regulate foreign commerce, prosecute offenses against U.S. nationals abroad, and conduct foreign affairs. Therefore, the Fifth Amendment permits a more flexible jurisdictional inquiry commensurate with the federal government's broader sovereign authority than the “minimum contacts” standard required under the Fourteenth Amendment.The PSJVTA represents a permissible exercise of this authority because it narrowly targets only two specific foreign entities that have longstanding, complex relationships with the United States involving terrorism concerns. The statute's jurisdictional predicates—payments to imprisoned terrorists and their families, and activities conducted on U.S. soil—directly implicate important federal policies aimed at deterring terrorism and protecting American citizens. The political branches' coordinated judgment in enacting this legislation warrants judicial deference, particularly given the statute's limited scope applying only to ATA cases and its clear notice to the PLO and PA that specified conduct would subject them to U.S. jurisdiction. Even assuming a reasonableness inquiry applies under the Fifth Amendment, the PSJVTA satisfies it given the federal government's compelling interest in providing a forum for terrorism victims, the plaintiffs' interest in obtaining relief, and the absence of any unfair burden on these sophisticated international organizations that have litigated in U.S. courts for decades.Justice Thomas authored an opinion concurring in the judgment, joined by Justice Gorsuch as to Part II, arguing that the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause imposes no territorial limits on the federal government's power to extend federal jurisdiction beyond the nation's borders.The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you. 

In Fuld v. Palestine Liberation Organization, the Court considered whether the Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act (PSJVTA) violates the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment. The court heard oral argument on April 1, 2025 and on June 20, 2025 a 9-0 Court ruled the PSJVTA did not violate the Fifth amendment because the statute "reasonably ties the assertion of jurisdiction over the Palestine Liberation Organization and Palestinian Authority to conduct involving the United States and implicating sensitive foreign policy matters within the prerogative of the political branches."Chief Justice Roberts authored the opinion for the Court, and Justice Thomas wrote a concurrence in which Justice Gorsuch joined as to Part II.Join us for a Courthouse Steps decision program where we will break down and analyze this decision and discuss the potential effects of this case.Featuring:Erielle Davidson, Associate, Holtzman Vogel Baran Torchinsky & Josefiak PLLC(Moderator) Shiza Francis, Associate, Shutts and Bowen LLP

In this case, the court considered this issue: Does a Tennessee law restricting certain medical treatments for transgender minors violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment?The case was decided on June 18, 2025.   The Supreme Court held that Tennessee's law prohibiting certain medical treatments for transgender minors is not subject to heightened scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and satisfies rational basis review. Chief Justice John Roberts authored the 6-3 majority opinion of the Court.First, the Equal Protection Clause does not require heightened scrutiny because Tennessee's law does not classify on any bases that warrant such review. The law contains only two classifications: one based on age (allowing treatments for adults but not minors) and another based on medical use (permitting puberty blockers and hormones for certain conditions but not for treating gender dysphoria). Classifications based on age or medical use receive only rational basis review—the most deferential standard of constitutional review. The law does not classify based on sex because it prohibits healthcare providers from administering these treatments to any minor for the excluded diagnoses, regardless of the minor's biological sex. When properly understood as regulating specific combinations of drugs and medical indications, the law treats all minors equally: none may receive these treatments for gender dysphoria, but minors of any sex may receive them for other qualifying conditions like precocious puberty or congenital defects.The law satisfies rational basis review because Tennessee's legislature had reasonable grounds for its restrictions. The state found that these treatments for gender dysphoria carry risks including irreversible sterility, increased disease risk, and adverse psychological consequences, while minors lack the maturity to understand these consequences and many express later regret. Tennessee also determined that the treatments are experimental with unknown long-term effects, and that gender dysphoria can often be resolved through less invasive approaches. Under rational basis review, courts must uphold laws if there are any reasonably conceivable facts supporting the classification. States have wide discretion in areas of medical and scientific uncertainty, noting that recent reports from health authorities in England and other countries have raised similar concerns about the evidence supporting these treatments for minors.Justice Clarence Thomas authored a concurring opinion, joined by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, arguing that Bostock v Clayton County (in which the Court held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act's prohibition on discrimination because of sex includes discrimination based on transgender identity or sexual orientation) should not apply to Equal Protection Clause analysis and criticizing deference to medical experts who lack consensus and have allowed political ideology to influence their guidance on transgender treatments for minors.Justice Barrett authored a concurring opinion, joined by Justice Thomas, arguing that transgender individuals do not constitute a suspect class under the Equal Protection Clause because they lack the “obvious, immutable, or distinguishing characteristics” of a “discrete group” and because suspect class analysis should focus on a history of de jure (legal) discrimination rather than private discrimination.

For thirty years, Clarence Thomas has been denounced as the “cruelest justice,” a betrayer of his race, an ideologue, and the enemy of the little guy. Today, Judge Amul Thapar will demolish that caricature. Every day, Americans go to court. Invoking the Constitution, they fight for their homes, for a better education for their children, and to save their cities from violence. “Finding the right answer,” Justice Thomas has observed, “is often the least difficult problem.” What is needed is “the courage to assert that answer and stand firm in the face of the constant winds of protest and criticism.”Become a Parshall Partner: http://moodyradio.org/donateto/inthemarket/partnersSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

We're joined by a special guest, Harvard Law Professor Stephen Sachs, to talk about Fuld v. Palestine Liberation Organization. Fuld is last week's big personal jurisdiction case, where the Court upheld federal laws extending jurisdiction to the PLO and PA for antiterrorism lawsuits. The author of several important articles on these issues and an amicus brief in Fuld, Steve gives us his take on the relationship between personal jurisdiction, international law and due process, and helps us evaluate the majority opinion and Justice Thomas's concurrence.

In Kousisis v. United States, the Supreme Court considered the question of whether a defendant who induces a victim to enter into a transaction under materially false pretenses may be convicted of federal fraud--even if the defendant did not seek to cause the victim economic loss. It heard oral argument on December 9, 2024, and on May 22, 2025, issued a unanimous decision authored by Justice Barrett affirming the lower court's holding that the defendant could be convicted of federal fraud.Although the Court was unanimous, there are an array of opinions. Justice Thomas filed a concurring opinion, Justice Gorsuch authored an opinion concurring in part and concurring in judgment, and Justice Sotomayor wrote to concur in judgment.Join us for a Courthouse Steps program where we will discuss the decision and the potential ramifications of the case.Featuring:Brandon Moss, Partner, Wiley Rein

Perhaps nobody was more surprised than the US gun industry when the Supreme Court yesterday issued a UNANIMOUS decision in their favor, and against the efforts of the failed narco-nationstate Mexico to sue the gun industry into oblivion.That means even our two dumbest justices--Sonya "the DEI wise latina" Sotomayor and Kentaji "I'm not a biologist, how would I know what a woman is" Jackson felt compeled to side with the gun makers.Perhaps as surprising, it was Justice Kagan--not Justice Thomas!--who authored the unanimous decision in favor of Smith & Wesson and other prominent gun manufacturers.Join me as I break down this enormous gun industry win into plain English!Get Your FREE Copy of Our Best-Selling Book: "The Law of Self Defense: Principles"Visit Here: https://lawofselfdefense.com/getthebook"You are wise to buy this material. I hope you watch it, internalize it, and keep it to the forefront whenever you even think of reaching for a gun"-Massad Ayoob (President of the Second Amendment Foundation) The #1 guide for understanding when using force to protect yourself is legal. Now yours for FREE! Just pay the S&H for us to get it to you.➡️ Carry with confidence, knowing you are protected from predators AND predatory prosecutors➡️ Correct the common myths you may think are true but get people in trouble​➡️ Know you're getting the best with this abridged version of our best-selling 5-star Amazon-rated book that has been praised by many (including self-defense legends!) for its easy, entertaining, and informative style.​➡️ Many interesting, if sometimes heart-wrenching, true-life examplesGet Your Free Book: https://lawofselfdefense.com/getthebook

Once again the Supreme Court of the United States has violated its sown oath to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, but allowing the anti-Second Amendment rulings of inferior federal courts to stand in place.Yesterday SCOTUS declined to review two vital Second Amendment cases involving assault weapons and large capacity magazine bans. Though Justice Kavanaugh in concurrence with the denial writes that they'll take on these issues "in a year or two," in the meantime tens of millions of Americans are being denied their Second Amendment rights. Justice Thomas wrote in dissent against this denial, and we'll break that down into plain English for all of you LIVE in this show. Get Your FREE Copy of Our Best-Selling Book: "The Law of Self Defense: Principles"Visit Here: https://lawofselfdefense.com/getthebook"You are wise to buy this material. I hope you watch it, internalize it, and keep it to the forefront whenever you even think of reaching for a gun"-Massad Ayoob (President of the Second Amendment Foundation) The #1 guide for understanding when using force to protect yourself is legal. Now yours for FREE! Just pay the S&H for us to get it to you.➡️ Carry with confidence, knowing you are protected from predators AND predatory prosecutors➡️ Correct the common myths you may think are true but get people in trouble​➡️ Know you're getting the best with this abridged version of our best-selling 5-star Amazon-rated book that has been praised by many (including self-defense legends!) for its easy, entertaining, and informative style.​➡️ Many interesting, if sometimes heart-wrenching, true-life examplesGet Your Free Book: https://lawofselfdefense.com/getthebook

Toby Leary covers the Supreme Court's denial of cert in Snope v. Brown—a major blow to gun owners in states with AR-15 bans. He breaks down Justice Thomas's scathing dissent and what it means for the future of the Second Amendment.

Feliciano v. Department of Transportation the Court was presented with the question of whether a federal civilian employee called or ordered to active duty under a provision of law during a national emergency is entitled to differential pay even if the duty is not directly connected to the national emergency. The Federal Circuit had initially held that Nick Feliciano, an air traffic controller with the FAA and reserve officer in the coast guard was not entitled to differential pay for parts of his time when he had been called to active duty during the early and mid-2010s. The Supreme Court heard oral argument on December 9, 2024, and on April 30, 2025 a 5-4 court reversed the decision below. Justice Gorsuch penned the majority opinion, and Justice Thomas wrote the dissent, which was joined by Justices Alito, Kagan, and Jackson. Join us for a Courthouse Steps Decision program where we break down and analyze the decision and the opinions, and discuss the potential ramifications of this case. Featuring: Prof. Gregory Dolin, Associate Professor of Law, University of Baltimore School of Law (Moderator) Craig E. Leen, Partner, K&L Gates, and Former OFCCP Director

Supreme Court Ruling: The Supreme Court issued an order blocking the deportation of Venezuelan illegal immigrants under an 18th-century law. Justice Alito and Justice Thomas dissented, criticizing the decision as hasty and legally questionable. The ruling was made without giving lower courts a chance to rule or hearing from the opposing party. Implications for the Trump Administration: The ruling poses a challenge to the Trump administration's efforts to deport illegal immigrants. The decision was seen as a significant roadblock, with concerns about its impact on future immigration policies. Procedural Concerns: The dissent highlighted procedural issues, including the quick turnaround time for the ruling and the lack of jurisdiction. The process was compared to emergency appeals in death penalty cases, where last-minute filings can lead to rushed decisions. Political Strategy: The discussion suggests that the Democrats might be aiming to frustrate the Supreme Court justices to influence future rulings against the Trump administration. The strategy involves creating legal and procedural hurdles to delay or block deportation efforts. Vandalism Incident: We also mention a separate incident involving a Minnesota state employee who vandalized multiple Tesla vehicles. The district attorney decided not to press charges, leading to frustration among law enforcement and the public. The discussion touches on broader issues of lawlessness and political bias in prosecuting crimes. Democratic Party Disarray: A discussion on the internal challenges within the Democratic Party. Polling data shows declining confidence in Democratic leaders, with significant dissatisfaction among party members. The potential for younger politicians to step forward and the impact of senior Democrats retiring are also discussed. Please Hit Subscribe to this podcast Right Now. Also Please Subscribe to the 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson and the Ben Ferguson Show Podcast Wherever You get You're Podcasts. Thanks for Listening #seanhannity #hannity #marklevin #levin #charliekirk #megynkelly #tucker #tuckercarlson #glennbeck #benshapiro #shapiro #trump #sexton #bucksexton#rushlimbaugh #limbaugh #whitehouse #senate #congress #thehouse #democrats#republicans #conservative #senator #congressman #congressmen #congresswoman #capitol #president #vicepresident #POTUS #presidentoftheunitedstatesofamerica#SCOTUS #Supremecourt #DonaldTrump #PresidentDonaldTrump #DT #TedCruz #Benferguson #Verdict #justicecorrupted #UnwokeHowtoDefeatCulturalMarxisminAmericaYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruzSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Democratic Senators' Stance on Illegal Immigration: The podcast criticizes Democratic senators for their stance on illegal immigration, particularly focusing on MS-13 gang members. Senator Chris Van Hollen from Maryland is highlighted for his visit to El Salvador to meet with an MS-13 gang member, which the hosts find astonishing and politically motivated. The discussion includes a critique of Van Hollen's defense of the gang member's due process rights and the broader implications of this stance for the Democratic Party. Supreme Court Decision on Deportations: The podcast covers a Supreme Court decision that temporarily halted the deportations of Venezuelan illegal immigrants. Justice Alito and Justice Thomas dissented strongly against this decision, arguing that it was hastily and prematurely granted. The hosts express concern about the implications of this ruling for the Trump administration's immigration policies and the broader legal and political landscape. Please Hit Subscribe to this podcast Right Now. Also Please Subscribe to the 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson and the Ben Ferguson Show Podcast Wherever You get You're Podcasts. Thanks for Listening #seanhannity #hannity #marklevin #levin #charliekirk #megynkelly #tucker #tuckercarlson #glennbeck #benshapiro #shapiro #trump #sexton #bucksexton#rushlimbaugh #limbaugh #whitehouse #senate #congress #thehouse #democrats#republicans #conservative #senator #congressman #congressmen #congresswoman #capitol #president #vicepresident #POTUS #presidentoftheunitedstatesofamerica#SCOTUS #Supremecourt #DonaldTrump #PresidentDonaldTrump #DT #TedCruz #Benferguson #Verdict #justicecorrupted #UnwokeHowtoDefeatCulturalMarxisminAmericaYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruzSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Favorite Things: Slow Burn: Becoming Justice Thomas Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

In 2019, Justice Clarence Thomas raised the prospect of overturning one of the most consequential free speech decisions ever made. New York Times Co. v. Sullivan is a 1964 landmark case that strengthened First Amendment protections by enabling journalists and writers, from top national outlets to local newspapers and bloggers, to pursue the truth without being afraid of being sued. In his book Murder the Truth, author David Enrich explores how Justice Thomas' words coincide with a surge in legal threats and litigation against journalists and media outlets.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

In 2019, Justice Clarence Thomas raised the prospect of overturning one of the most consequential free speech decisions ever made. New York Times Co. v. Sullivan is a 1964 landmark case that strengthened First Amendment protections by enabling journalists and writers, from top national outlets to local newspapers and bloggers, to pursue the truth without being afraid of being sued. In his book Murder the Truth, author David Enrich explores how Justice Thomas' words coincide with a surge in legal threats and litigation against journalists and media outlets.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

Mouth noises. Jack reads for Frost & Fury. How to extort potential sponsors. Face tats for an edge. How to extort your college admissions. Jack reads for Justice Thomas. The Questionable Material Stock Market Report: Amazon, Proctor & Gamble, Merck. Jack reads for GroverClevelandBook. qmpodcast.com

Riding Shotgun With Charlie #221 Mark Oliva NSSF,  Managing Director of Public Affairs   Heading down to Virginia for a few other shows, I was able to connect with Mark Oliva. He's been on my radar as a potential passenger for sometime. I met him last year at SHOT. You can't miss him. He wears a big cowboy hat. Many others do, too. But he has an NSSF badge that says “All Access.” We were able to meet at an “undisclosed location” in Northern Virginia. His job at NSSF takes him into DC regularly.    We start off with some Range Day benefits, like Mark being able to figure out what he wants on his Christmas list. Then we cover talking about taking new folks shooting and shopping for their first gun. And why it's important for ranges to have family friendly facilities and not just a five gallon bucket for a portable bathroom. If we want to get more people into the shooting sports, then we need to make it more comfortable and enjoyable for them. If places aren't welcoming to women, he calls it the “hey, little lady complex.” He and his wife, a former Marine, went to one of those ranges and his wife outshoot everyone else in the class.    Mark was born in New England and went into the Marine Corps right out of high school. He spent 25 years serving the country. He's lived all around the country while serving. And picked up a drawl living in the Carolinas. He got orders to work on Capitol Hill and then he was offered a position at the NSSF. Summing up one career into the other, he says that he went “from one big gun club to another.”   With his current position at NSSF as the Managing Director of Public Affairs, he's on 24/7. He's got two phones; a personal and a work phone. When the work phone rings, he has to answer it. Any day. Any time. Because he has to be knowledgeable about everything that's going on, he says he knows “a lot about a lot of things but it's hard to drill down and become a subject matter expert.” His job in the military was also in public affairs, so this was an easy transition. He enjoyed talking about the Marines and wanted the same thing in his other career.   I do love it when people say the 2A events around the country, SHOT, NRA AM, GRPC, are a family reunion. It is exciting to go to these events, but it's just as important to see and catch up with friends that we've made and the relationships we've built. Mark says the folks at the NSSF, no matter what they do, love hunting and shooting and keeping the firearm industry going and thriving.    Mark talks about how he doesn't give any credence to the media who want to take our rights away. So he can and does have to be firm with them. With everything that is going on, he can't walk blindly into conversations with reporters. When he has these discussions, he's got to have the facts to refute some of the untruths that reporters throw at him.    We talk about how big the industry is, but also about how small it is. He runs into people that are with one company, then move to another company doing the same thing. All these folks, the movers and shakers, know each other. It's a bit like the six degrees of separation. Or as I've heard it called, the Olympic rings of the gun community.    I ran into Mark at SHOT last week. He was wearing a cowboy hat. Shocking, I know. He's all over making sure everyone is getting the things they need and taken care of. SHOT week is really the NSSF's Super Bowl of the shooting and outdoor industry. Everyone is on the go, on their feet, from sunup to way after sundown. And it's always a great week!   Favorite quotes: “You come out to SHOT Show, you can't buy anything at the show. But man this is a great place to make a Christmas list.” “It was really easy and natural for me to have that kind of job, so why would I not want to do that in my next career?”  “When it comes to the facts, you've got to have a good solid knowledge of those facts, and a handle on those facts.” “You've seen Justice Thomas repeatedly say that the lower courts are denigrating the Second Amendment to a second class right. And he's frustrated with it.” NSSF Website https://www.nssf.org/   NSSF Facebook https://www.facebook.com/NSSFcomm/   NSSF Instagram https://www.instagram.com/thenssf/   NSSF LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/company/national-shooting-sports-foundation   NSSF YouTube https://www.youtube.com/user/thenssf   NSSF X https://x.com/NSSF Second Amendment Foundation https://secure.anedot.com/saf/donate?sc=RidingShotgun    Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms https://www.ccrkba.org/     Please support the Riding Shotgun With Charlie sponsors and supporters.    Dennis McCurdy Author, Speaker, Firewalker http://www.find-away.com/   Self Defense Radio Network http://sdrn.us/   Buy a Powertac Flashlight, use RSWC as the discount code and save 15% www.powertac.com/RSWC   SABRE Red Pepper Spray  https://lddy.no/1iq1n   Or listen on: iTunes/Apple podcasts https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/riding-shotgun-with-charlie/id1275691565

Tonight on The Last Word: The NOLA terrorist attack shows the stakes for the incoming administration's picks. Also, the Judicial Conference denies Democrats' request to refer Justice Thomas to the Justice Department for ethics violations. Plus, it is unclear if Mike Johnson has the votes to remain Speaker. And President Biden awards 20 outstanding Americans with the Presidential Citizens Medal. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse and Rep. Eric Swalwell join Lawrence O'Donnell.

On this week's episode of ‘The Katie Phang Show': As the year closes, Congress suits up for a turbulent year ahead that could see Speaker Johnson facing a tough battle to keep his Speakership. Rep. Becca Balint joins to share her thoughts on how Democrats plan to keep Congress functional. Plus, a new report from Senate Judiciary Democrats is laying out the specifics of the Supreme Court's ethics concerns. Slate's Mark Joseph Stern joins to discuss the report, as well as the status of any potential legislative reforms. All that and more on ‘The Katie Phang Show'.

  Move over, Hatfields and McCoys—America's got a new feud to gawk at. Except this time, there are no moonshine stills, shotgun standoffs, or Appalachian drama. Sadly for Democrats, this is the modern age, where political pettiness is played out on camera; with forced applause and awkward grins as the soundtrack. The players? Joe and Jill Biden vs. Kamala Harris and her “Second Gentleman” (because nothing says modern marriage like giving your husband a title that sounds like a rejected superhero name). The scene? The Kennedy Center Honors, where the Bidens pulled a move so cold Frosty the Snowman had to put on a sweater. Newsbreak https://www.newsbreak.com/share/3708714498817-the-bidens-ignore-harris-and-her-husband-at-kennedy-center-honors-event?s=a3&share_destination_id=MTk0ODc1NzU2LTE3MzM4Njk0MDYzMzA=&pd=0DBg5MN1&hl=en_US&send_time=1733869406&actBtn=bottomBar&_f=app_share&trans_data=%7B%22platform%22%3A1%2C%22cv%22%3A%2224.48.0%22%2C%22languages%22%3A%22en%22%7D&sep=ns_foryou_model_exp_24q4-v9%2Cns_foryou_blend_exp_24q4-v1%2Cns_foryou_rank_exp_24q4-v8%2Cns_local_strategy_24q4_exp-v7%2Cns_foryou_recall_exp_24q4-v8%2Cns_push_exp_rt_bucketv12-v6: "President Joe Biden and first lady Jill Biden gave a cold shoulder to Vice President Kamala Harris and her husband, second gentleman Doug Emhoff, as they entered the 47th Kennedy Center Honors to an applauding crowd. The president and first lady were seen on video not making eye contact or acknowledging the vice president and her husband as they walked past them and waved alongside them. The vice president and second gentleman remained effusive and applauded the Bidens during the standing ovation despite the first couple ignoring them." First of all, can we take a moment to appreciate the power of passive aggression? The Bidens basically perfected the art of the social snub. No glares, no side comments—just pure, unadulterated “I don't see you, Kamala” energy. That takes skill, or maybe just years of marriage practice. Still, when Joe and Jill Biden were announced, Kamala and hubby clapped like trained seals. Nevertheless, let's hit rewind. This tension didn't start at the Kennedy Center. It's been brewing since at least Veteran's Day, when Jill Biden gave Kamala the cold shoulder so sharp it could've sliced through steel. What's the beef? The plot to get rid of Joe. During the period where Democrats contemplated dumping Joe Biden, Harris quietly circled the Oval Office like a hawk eyeing a wounded rabbit. Everybody knows that she had been "read in" on the coup conspiracy". Remember, this partnership wasn't exactly built on a solid foundation of trust and camaraderie. Biden and Harris weren't teammates; they were co-workers forced into the same cubicle. And just like in any dysfunctional office, one person inevitably starts plotting their takeover the moment the boss trips over his own shoelaces—metaphorically or otherwise. Kamala's mistake? She forgot to be subtle. Harris was to Brutus as Biden was to Caesar. And on the https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/21/politics/fec-biden-harris-campaign-account/index.html, Harris lured Biden into the chambers and it was knives out. This feud isn't just personal—it's deeply ironic. These two were supposed to be the ultimate DEI power couple, the living embodiment of “diversity, equity, and inclusion.” And yet, their partnership has ended not with a bang but with a whimper—followed by a very public cold shoulder. DEI brought them together; meritocracy is tearing them apart. And let's not ignore the racial subtext here. If a Republican president had pulled this move on a Black female VP, the media would be spinning like a carnival ride. But with Joe Biden? Crickets. If anyone's keeping score at home, this is the same Joe Biden who gave Hunter a free pass on more crimes than your average Bond villain. But Kamala? She's not getting so much as a sympathy hug. So what's next for these two? The Bidens are on their way out, with Joe clutching his “most pardons handed out to family members” trophy. Kamala, meanwhile, is back to being a political punchline, waiting for someone—anyone—to take her seriously. As for the Second Gentleman? Let's just hope Doug has a good therapist on speed dial. The irony is almost poetic. Two political climbers brought together by convenience, undone by their own egos. It's like watching a reality TV show where everyone loses. In the end, the Biden-Harris feud won't go down in history like the Hatfields and McCoys. There won't be ballads sung or documentaries made. But for now, it's the perfect blend of comedy and tragedy to keep us entertained—until the next scandal comes along.  Subscribers and BSC I did my first podcast for Subscribers and I must say it is one of my best. Thanks Bill for reminding me that we needed to kick that off. Talk about a special broadcast. Only 14 people will get to hear it. But it's 14 of the finest people on the planet. I had a BLAST putting that together for you. For members of The Back Stage Club, get ahold of me, and we will make the broadcast available to you as well. I will do at least one of those every couple of weeks (minimum), and on BSC, we post things as we develop them. They come more in batches, but I will work on more consistency there too. I have observations from Japan, Mexico, and soon to be Thailand along with pictures and videos. Also, I found the video I made with Justice Thomas, so expect me to post that soon.     We Saved the Republic: The Fragile Triumph Over Chaos The last election preserved the constitutional republic we hold dear, narrowly steering the nation away from the precipice of destruction. Over the past 16 years, Democrats have spent 12 tearing at the fabric of the nation, creating cultural and political divides so wide that chaos seemed inevitable. A Harris presidency would have only accelerated this unraveling. Thankfully, we avoided that scenario. But the specter of such leadership reminds us how close we came to disaster. A Nation at Rest—or at Least at Pause Despite the dire warnings from the left, America hasn't plunged into chaos since Trump's return to the political arena. Recent events suggest a marked shift in the national climate. Consider Daniel Penny's recent exoneration—a moment that could have ignited protests led by Black Lives Matter. Yet, the country remained calm, unmoved by the provocations that once would have led to streets filled with unrest. This shift raises an interesting question: Are we finally moving past the endless state of cultural panic? Can figures like Darren Wilson reclaim their careers in law enforcement, or could Derek Chauvin see his conviction re-evaluated under a new climate of fairness? Perhaps, just perhaps, white America can finally lower the metaphorical "RED ALERT."Democracy vs. Republic: Are They What They Seem? According to a https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2019/05/14/more-than-half-of-countries-are-democratic/, as of 2017, 57% of the world's nations were considered democracies. But does this mean democracy is flourishing? By that measure, it may seem like global democracy is at a modern-day high. Yet, appearances can be deceiving. Many of these so-called democracies lack the principles that Americans associate with the term. Pew writes: Concern has been growing for the past several years about the https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/sites/default/files/Howe-28-4.pdf, and there is considerable https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2019/04/29/many-across-the-globe-are-dissatisfied-with-how-democracy-is-working/ with how democracy is working in practice. But public support for democratic ideals https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2019/04/29/many-across-the-globe-are-dissatisfied-with-how-democracy-is-working/, and by one measure, global democracy is at or near a modern-day high. As of the end of 2017, 96 out of 167 countries with populations of at least 500,000 (57%) were democracies of some kind, and only 21 (13%) were autocracies. Nearly four dozen other countries – 46, or 28% – exhibited elements of both democracy and autocracy. Broadly speaking, the share of democracies among the world's governments has been on an upward trend since the mid-1970s, and now sits just shy of its post-World War II record (58% in 2016). The totalitarian policies implemented during COVID-19 tell a different story. Lockdowns, mandatory vaccinations, and open-border policies—policies largely rejected by the people—showed how easily governments could abandon democratic ideals for autocratic actions.The Rise of Nationalism Across the globe, we're seeing a growing backlash. Immigration policies that once welcomed refugees have now become gateways for young, war-aged men aiming to establish caliphates within foreign nations. But the tides are turning. Countries are beginning to reclaim their national identities. Deportations of radicals have started, albeit slowly. Citizens demand leaders who prioritize cultural preservation over globalist agendas.  France has a long-standing history of legislation restricting Islamic clothing. In 2004, France banned religious Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-kevin-jackson-show--2896352/support.

On December 9, the Supreme Court denied certiorari in Boston Parent Coalition for Academic Excellence v. The School Committee for the City of Boston. The case involved an equal protection challenge to a change in admissions policy in Boston, where a competitive public school altered its admissions criteria in a manner that reduced the number of Asian and Caucasian students. The lower courts rejected the challenge, with the First Circuit indicating that an equal protection challenge to a facially neutral policy—like admissions criteria that do not mention race—must establish that the impact on the targeted race was so severe as to reduce their numerical presence in the school below their demographic numbers in the relevant population.By denying certiorari, the Court left the First Circuit’s opinion in place. Justice Alito, joined by Justice Thomas, issued a dissent from denial, as they had in a similar case earlier this year called Coalition for TJ. Justice Gorsuch issued a statement respecting the denial, stating that he largely agreed with Justice Alito’s dissent.This litigation update will evaluate the state of the law when it comes to “proxy discrimination” measures, and whether an equal protection claim must establish a particularly onerous disparate impact on the targeted race at issue.Featuring: Christopher M. Kieser, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation(Moderator) William E. Trachman, General Counsel, Mountain States Legal Foundation

[SEGMENT 1-1[ DEI Divorce: Biden-Harris   Move over, Hatfields and McCoys—America's got a new feud to gawk at. Except this time, there are no moonshine stills, shotgun standoffs, or Appalachian drama. Sadly for Democrats, this is the modern age, where political pettiness is played out on camera; with forced applause and awkward grins as the soundtrack. The players? Joe and Jill Biden vs. Kamala Harris and her “Second Gentleman” (because nothing says modern marriage like giving your husband a title that sounds like a rejected superhero name). The scene? The Kennedy Center Honors, where the Bidens pulled a move so cold Frosty the Snowman had to put on a sweater. Newsbreak reported: "President Joe Biden and first lady Jill Biden gave a cold shoulder to Vice President Kamala Harris and her husband, second gentleman Doug Emhoff, as they entered the 47th Kennedy Center Honors to an applauding crowd. The president and first lady were seen on video not making eye contact or acknowledging the vice president and her husband as they walked past them and waved alongside them. The vice president and second gentleman remained effusive and applauded the Bidens during the standing ovation despite the first couple ignoring them." First of all, can we take a moment to appreciate the power of passive aggression? The Bidens basically perfected the art of the social snub. No glares, no side comments—just pure, unadulterated “I don't see you, Kamala” energy. That takes skill, or maybe just years of marriage practice. Still, when Joe and Jill Biden were announced, Kamala and hubby clapped like trained seals. Nevertheless, let's hit rewind. This tension didn't start at the Kennedy Center. It's been brewing since at least Veteran's Day, when Jill Biden gave Kamala the cold shoulder so sharp it could've sliced through steel. What's the beef? The plot to get rid of Joe. During the period where Democrats contemplated dumping Joe Biden, Harris quietly circled the Oval Office like a hawk eyeing a wounded rabbit. Everybody knows that she had been "read in" on the coup conspiracy". Remember, this partnership wasn't exactly built on a solid foundation of trust and camaraderie. Biden and Harris weren't teammates; they were co-workers forced into the same cubicle. And just like in any dysfunctional office, one person inevitably starts plotting their takeover the moment the boss trips over his own shoelaces—metaphorically or otherwise. Kamala's mistake? She forgot to be subtle. Harris was to Brutus as Biden was to Caesar. And on the Ides of July, Harris lured Biden into the chambers and it was knives out. This feud isn't just personal—it's deeply ironic. These two were supposed to be the ultimate DEI power couple, the living embodiment of “diversity, equity, and inclusion.” [SEGMENT 1-2] Democracy on the rise? Subscribers and BSC I did my first podcast for Subscribers and I must say it is one of my best. Thanks Bill for reminding me that we needed to kick that off. Talk about a special broadcast. Only 14 people will get to hear it. But it's 14 of the finest people on the planet. I had a BLAST putting that together for you. For members of The Back Stage Club, get ahold of me, and we will make the broadcast available to you as well. I will do at least one of those every couple of weeks (minimum), and on BSC, we post things as we develop them. They come more in batches, but I will work on more consistency there too. I have observations from Japan, Mexico, and soon to be Thailand along with pictures and videos. Also, I found the video I made with Justice Thomas, so expect me to post that soon.     We Saved the Republic: The Fragile Triumph Over Chaos The last election preserved the constitutional republic we hold dear, narrowly steering the nation away from the precipice of destruction. Over the past 16 years, Democrats have spent 12 tearing at the fabric of the nation, creating cultural and political divides so wide that chaos seemed inevitable. A Harris presidency would have only accelerated this unraveling. Thankfully, we avoided that scenario. But the specter of such leadership reminds us how close we came to disaster. A Nation at Rest—or at Least at Pause Despite the dire warnings from the left, America hasn't plunged into chaos since Trump's return to the political arena. Recent events suggest a marked shift in the national climate. Consider Daniel Penny's recent exoneration—a moment that could have ignited protests led by Black Lives Matter. Yet, the country remained calm, unmoved by the provocations that once would have led to streets filled with unrest. This shift raises an interesting question: Are we finally moving past the endless state of cultural panic? Can figures like Darren Wilson reclaim their careers in law enforcement, or could Derek Chauvin see his conviction re-evaluated under a new climate of fairness? Perhaps, just perhaps, white America can finally lower the metaphorical "RED ALERT."Democracy vs. Republic: Are They What They Seem? According to a Pew Research report, as of 2017, 57% of the world's nations were considered democracies. But does this mean democracy is flourishing? By that measure, it may seem like global democracy is at a modern-day high. Yet, appearances can be deceiving. Many of these so-called democracies lack the principles that Americans associate with the term.   [SEGMENT 1-3] FBI at J6 1 J6 is unraveling for the Left. A Capitol Comedy: The FBI's J6 Revelations Newly revealed testimony confirms what skeptics of the January 6 narrative have long suspected: the FBI's involvement wasn't just passive oversight but an active participation, complete with paid informants and undercover agents. According to disclosures during congressional hearings, there were so many FBI confidential human sources (CHS) at the Capitol that the agency had to “poll” its offices afterward to figure out how many were on-site. The cherry on top? At least three of these informants were specifically directed to attend by their handlers.. If this sounds like the punchline to a poorly executed spy thriller, that's because it is. The Numbers Game: More Agents than We're Told? The FBI claims only three informants were actively encouraged to attend. But as a former Capitol Police chief has testified, there were at least 18 undercover FBI agents mingling in the crowd, in addition to an estimated 20 undercover operatives from the Department of Homeland Security. Defense attorneys in Proud Boys trials also revealed that eight CHSs had infiltrated their group, and at least one was physically inside the Capitol during the breach​. This raises the question: if we were told it was a spontaneous “insurrection,” why did federal agencies embed dozens of operatives in advance? Was this infiltration an attempt to mitigate violence—or to stoke it? FBI operations, including infiltrating groups or rallies, typically require meticulous planning and oversight. [SEGMENT 1-4] FBI at J6 2   [X] SB – Kamala Harris on J6 [X] SB – Paid protester on J6 [X] SB – Congressman speaks on the number of agents at J6   The FBI's focus on January 6 highlights a troubling pattern. While the bureau assigns agents to monitor political rallies, it seems conspicuously less effective at preventing other, more tangible threats. We've seen this pattern before—mass shooters who were already on FBI watchlists, an open southern border exploited by known terrorists, and even whistleblowers within the agency alleging systemic dysfunction​ If the FBI's resources were deployed to prevent violence, they failed spectacularly. If the goal was to justify the post-election crackdown on Trump supporters, well, they've done a bang-up job.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-kevin-jackson-show--2896352/support.

[SEGMENT 2-1] More Leftist lunacy 1 Leftism is not just an American disease. But we are the super spreaders. Not us, the people who listen to my program. But the people you ignore, because you find them too tedious to heed. Ignore them no more. You see what can happen when you do.   To paraphrase Shakespeare on how much I detest Leftists: How do I loathe thee? Let me count the ways.I loathe thee to the depth and breadth and spiteMy rage can muster, seeing Leftist blight,From Hunter's laptop to inflation's haze. I loathe thee for the lies spun every day,From "men can birth" to "science lights the way."I loathe thee freely, as you mandate masks;I loathe thee purely, dodging honest tasks. I loathe thee with the passion spared for fools,Who coddle Fauci and ignore his rules.I loathe thee with the grief of every lie,From "peaceful protests" to why prices fly. I loathe thee with my breath, my taxed-out sighs,My rolling eyes at claims that Joe's still spry.And, if God choose, when truth reclaims its throne,I'll loathe thee deeper, for the sins you own.   [X] SB – Katie Hopkins South Korean president impeached. France without a person running the Parliament. No elections until June 2025 Marine LePen could run France Notre Dame opening…invited Trump   Germany VW strike   Argentinian President Javier Milei is ending free social benefits for migrants. As part of his ongoing pro-Argentinian agenda, he will be ending free healthcare for foreigners and automatically deporting foreigners who commit crimes. Sounds pretty sensible to me.     The ACLU lawyer argued that a 2-year-old knows if he's a girl, and could be castrated…   [X] SB – Ketanji Brown-Jackson re transgender decision Justice Alito asking if trans status is immutable is one of the greatest legal questions I've ever seen. Civil Rights exist solely based upon immutable human traits. Gender fluidity, by definition, is not immutable. Pure brilliance by Alito today. Justice Thomas sprung a killer question on the ACLU lawyer: "What remedy are you seeking?" Strangio, flummoxed by such a seemingly simple question said an injunction. Justice Thomas then asked "practically, you would get different treatment based on sex?" and the trap was laid. Strangio said the plaintiff (a girl who identifies as a boy) would be allowed to get drugs for "a typical male puberty" despite having a "birth sex [of] female." That answer made clear that girls who identify as boys would get a right under the Constitution to testosterone, but boys who identify as boys would not, which is...sex discrimination! Genius.  [SEGMENT 2-2] More Leftist lunacy 2 - The View in crisis   The Pathology of Stupidity: A Case Study in “The View” Let's talk about The View, that daytime carnival of cackles, where nuanced debate goes to die and the echo chamber reigns supreme. Apparently, the show's ratings are in the gutter. Shocker! It's like discovering that deep-fried Oreos aren't a health food. According to RadarOnline.com, ABC executives are panicking, grappling with the reality that perhaps parroting the same tired Leftist talking points isn't exactly riveting television. Diversity... But Not Really These execs are reportedly throwing around the word "diversity" like it's a holy grail they just stumbled upon. But let's be clear: The View's definition of diversity starts and ends with making sure the Starbucks order includes soy milk. Political diversity? A broader perspective? Forget it. The panel is a monolith of progressive groupthink, with each member seemingly competing for the "most sanctimoniously out-of-touch" award. It's no surprise they've been labeled a "radical progressive insane asylum" by Meghan McCain, a former co-host. She's not wrong. The lineup is as ideologically varied as a vegan potluck. Ignorance as a Lifestyle Choice Here's the fascinating part: despite the ratings dive, the hosts refuse to even dabble in self-reflection. It's as if they've taken the phrase "ignorance is bliss" and made it their personal mantra. Let's explore the pathology of this blissful ignorance. To live in such a bubble, one must actively avoid the following:Challenging Assumptions: The second someone proposes a viewpoint outside the groupthink, they're immediately shut down. Alyssa Farrah's recent attempt to suggest that Joe Biden might have lied about not pardoning Hunter was met with Whoopi Goldberg's swift correction. And like a scolded puppy, Farrah backed down.Facing Reality: It must hurt, at least a little, to know that even the network higher-ups are tired of the echo chamber. Yet, the hosts seem perfectly content to marinate in their ignorance, like a steak left too long in soy sauce—bitter and mushy.Tension (or Lack Thereof): Successful productions thrive on tension, the kind that sparks intrigue and debate. The View? It's like listening to a jazz band where everyone plays the same note over and over. Even when someone hints at a differing opinion, the dissonance is squashed immediately.A Radical Idea: Testing Theories  [SEGMENT 2-3] More Leftist lunacy 3   I'm so willing to learn. I do sudoku and word games for plasticity of the brain. They say learning something NEW is how you keep your brain active. This is what we should do every day. Challenge yourself. Challenge your mind.   What if the hosts of The View ventured outside their comfort zones? What if they poked a toe into the other side of the political pool, just to see if their theories hold water? Imagine the content! Whoopi Goldberg agreeing to read a book by Thomas Sowell. Joy Behar watching a Trump rally without throwing a shoe at the screen. Sunny Hostin debating Tulsi Gabbard without resorting to ad hominem attacks. The possibilities are endless. But no. Instead, they'd rather bask in the warm glow of their own self-righteousness, convinced that their worldview is the only one worth having. It's like watching people on a sinking ship insist the water is just a new kind of jacuzzi. ABC executives are reportedly considering adding a pro-Trump panelist to spice things up. This move is akin to tossing a lit firework into a room full of dynamite. The current hosts won't know what to do with someone who doesn't immediately genuflect to their ideology. The irony here is rich. Leftists preach inclusivity and tolerance but can't tolerate a single dissenting voice in their midst. It's as if they've confused “diversity” with “uniformity in different hairstyles.” Is Ignorance Really Bliss? There's a saying: “If you're the smartest person in the room, you're in the wrong room.” The View ladies have managed to flip that on its head. They've created a room where being the dumbest is not only acceptable—it's celebrated. But ignorance, when worn as a badge of honor, does have consequences. At some point, reality comes knocking. For The View, that reality is sinking ratings, viewer fatigue, and the slow realization that parroting the same old talking points isn't working anymore. Why It Hurts Too much ignorance does hurt, even if they won't admit it. It's exhausting to constantly defend indefensible positions, to pretend that every gaffe by Biden is "fatherly love" and every Trump move is the end of democracy. At some point, the mental gymnastics have to take a toll. Or maybe not. Maybe they've transcended reason entirely and live in a state of perpetual denial, where facts are suggestions and logic is just a suggestion box no one checks. Final Thoughts If The View truly wants to save itself, it needs to embrace genuine diversity—not just in appearance but in thought. Until then, it will remain a cautionary tale of what happens when you marinate too long in your own sauce.      [SEGMENT 2-4] More Leftist lunacy 4 - CEO shot   [X] SB – Fox News on CEO got shot https://x.com/BNONews/status/1864531627755336119 The CEO of insurance giant UnitedHealthcare, Brian Thompson, who was fatally gunned down in Manhattan today, was under DOJ investigation. Was he about to take a plea deal and reveal all about congressional favors that gained them their monopoly? Someone check on Nancy Pelosi. On February 21, 2024, UnitedHealth discovered a cybersecurity breach. On the same day, Nancy Pelosi made her second purchase of call options in Palo Alto Networks, a cybersecurity company that was later chosen to investigate the breach. UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson was k*lled by a masked gunman today in the middle of a federal investigation led by the U.S. Department of Justice. Brian Thompson, CEO of UnitedHealthcare, was shot and killed in what looks like a professional hit job. The targeted killing occurred around 6:45 AM, outside the New York Hilton Midtown, where an investors meeting was being held. In the video footage, the killer is seen shooting Mr. Thompson Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-kevin-jackson-show--2896352/support.

In an unexpected turn of events in President-elect Donald Trump's ongoing legal battle in New York City, his legal attorneys have recommended that his hush-money case be dismissed and the indictment be vacated. Trump's counsel has leveraged two notable precedents to justify their stance: the presidential pardon of Hunter Biden and the case of Justice Clarence Thomas.Donald Trump, known for his unabashed remarks and business-oriented approach to politics, has seen a gamut of legal proceedings. However, this recent hush-money case has added another layer of complexity to the myriad of Trump's legal confrontations. The case revolves around payments alleged to have been made to conceal potential harmful statements which could have adversely affected his presidential campaign in 2016.Infused in this saga, is the precedent set by Hunter Biden's pardon. Hunter Biden, son of President Joe Biden, has faced a fair share of legal troubles. This pardon is deemed relevant to Donald Trump's case as it spotlights the discretionary powers vested in a president, resulting in his ability to write off legal troubles for himself or close confidants.Moreover, the reference to Justice Clarence Thomas adds another legal pivot to Trump's defense. Thomas, a well-known figure in American law, found himself implicated in controversial proceedings in the past. Thomas' case was ultimately dismissed, establishing a precedent that the Trump's legal team finds alluring in relation to the hush-money case.The dismissal request of Trump's case is controversial, raising questions about the role of a president in his own legal disputes, the use of presidential powers and the precedents set in the past. For Trump, vacating the indictment would mean a significant victory both in terms of legal vindication and the preservation of his political career.Hunter Biden's pardon and Justice Thomas' case serve as intriguing reference points in this scenario, potentially expanding the scope of legal discussions around Presidential pardon powers and judicial precedents. Despite the controversy surrounding this case, it adds another chapter to the ever-evolving legal and political narrative of Donald Trump.Will the judge see the arguments of Trump's legal team compelling enough to dismiss the case? Or will this development mark another twist in the legal labyrinth that has become a notable part of Trump's presidency? Whatever the outcome, the implications will be an impactful addition to the U.S. legal and political landscape.

In this case, the court considered this issue: May a Fourth Amendment malicious-prosecution claim proceed as to a baseless criminal charge so long as other charges brought alongside the baseless charge are supported by probable cause?     The case was decided on June 20, 2024.  The Supreme Court held that pursuant to the Fourth Amendment and traditional common-law practice, the presence of probable cause for one charge in a criminal proceeding does not categorically defeat a Fourth Amendment malicious-prosecution claim relating to another, baseless charge. Justice Elena Kagan authored the 6-3 majority opinion of the Court. First, the Court considered the Fourth Amendment issue. A Fourth Amendment malicious prosecution claim can proceed even when a baseless charge is accompanied by a valid charge. This is because a pretrial detention must be based on probable cause, and if an invalid charge causes a detention to start or continue, the Fourth Amendment is violated, even if a valid charge also exists. Second, looking at the common law tort of malicious prosecution, which was analogous to Fourth Amendment malicious prosecution claims when §1983 was enacted. Historical evidence shows that courts assessed probable cause on a charge-by-charge basis, and a plaintiff could bring a malicious prosecution claim for groundless charges even if they were coupled with well-founded ones. Based on these two lines of reasoning, the Court rejected the Sixth Circuit's categorical rule that barred Fourth Amendment malicious prosecution claims if any charge was valid and concluded that courts should evaluate such suits on a charge-by-charge basis. Justice Clarence Thomas authored a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Samuel Alito joined, reiterating Justice Alito's prior opinion (in which Justice Thomas joined) that a “malicious prosecution claim cannot be based on the Fourth Amendment.” Justice Neil Gorsuch authored a dissenting opinion, arguing that nothing in the language of the Fourth Amendment supports a malicious prosecution claim. The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you.  --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/scotus-opinions/support

WMAL GUEST; 7:05 AM - INTERVIEW - MARK PAOLETTA - Senior Fellow at Center for Renewing America, and co-editor of the book "Created Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own Words" and worked on Justice Clarence Thomas's confirmation SOCIAL MEDIA: https://x.com/MarkPaoletta MARK PAOLETTA: Kamala Harris supports Supreme Court packing plan that will DISQUALIFY Justice Clarence Thomas in May 2025 from participating in almost every case. It's most radical assault on Supreme Court's independence. Harris must be defeated in November. Kamala Harris supports radical legislation to pack the Supreme Court, appoint new justice every 2 years, Democrat senator says Where to find more about WMAL's morning show:  Follow the Show Podcasts on Apple podcasts, Audible and Spotify. Follow WMAL's "O'Connor and Company" on X: @WMALDC, @LarryOConnor,  @Jgunlock, @patricepinkfile, and @heatherhunterdc.  Facebook: WMALDC and Larry O'Connor Instagram: WMALDC Show Website: https://www.wmal.com/oconnor-company/ How to listen live weekdays from 5 to 9 AM: https://www.wmal.com/listenlive/ Episode: Tuesday, September 10, 2024 / 7 AM Hour  O'Connor and Company is proudly presented by Veritas AcademySee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

After a tumultuous Supreme Court term that included the presidential immunity opinion and reporting that showed Justice Thomas received undisclosed gifts and favors from a GOP megadonor, President Biden has proposed changes to the court, including term limits and a code of ethics. Elie Mystal, justice correspondent and columnist for The Nation magazine and host of the podcast, "Contempt of Court with Elie Mystal," and author of Allow Me to Retort: A Black Guy's Guide to the Constitution (New Press, 2022), offers legal analysis of the reforms, and talks about how much of a long a shot it is that any of this would make it through Congress. 

After a tumultuous Supreme Court term that included the presidential immunity opinion and reporting that showed Justice Thomas received undisclosed gifts and favors from a GOP megadonor, President Biden has proposed changes to the court, including term limits and a code of ethics.On Today's Show:Elie Mystal, justice correspondent and columnist for The Nation magazine, host of the new podcast, "Contempt of Court with Elie Mystal," and author of Allow Me to Retort: A Black Guy's Guide to the Constitution (New Press, 2022), offers legal analysis of the proposed reforms, and talks about how likely it is that they would make it through Congress.

Justice Clarence Thomas's wild summer with Republican megadonors is back under the microscope, as calls for criminal investigations into the justice mount amid public outrage with an off-the-rails Supreme Court. As ultra-right corrupt justices “shred” the Constitution and ignore ethics guidelines, President Biden prepares to back much-awaited SCOTUS reform. Noah Bookbinder, President for Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, joins Jessica Denson to delve into CREW's shocking findings on Justice Thomas, how Judge Aileen Cannon took his cue to dismiss the Trump classified documents case, and more. Support Jessica Denson's legal fund here: http://thejessicadenson.com/donate Subscribe to Jessica's Youtube: https://youtube.com/@JessicaDenson07 Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast The Influence Continuum: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/mea-culpa-with-michael-cohen The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show Burn the Boats: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 Political Beatdown: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/political-beatdown Lights On with Jessica Denson: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/lights-on-with-jessica-denson On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Coalition of the Sane: https://meidasnews.com/tag/coalition-of-the-sane Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On July 15, Judge Cannon granted former President Trump's motion to dismiss the indictment brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith for the alleged mishandling of classified documents. She found that Smith was appointed as a special counsel in violation of the Appointments Clause of the Constitution.In a live podcast recording, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes talked to Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett, Legal Fellow and Courts Correspondent Anna Bower, Senior Editors Alan Rozenshtein and Quinta Jurecic, and Columbia Law professor Michel Paradis about Judge Cannon's decision, what Special Counsel Jack Smith may do next, how the Eleventh Circuit may rule on an appeal, how Justice Thomas's immunity concurrence plays a role, and more.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/c/trumptrials.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas reports on a new filing by Special Counsel Jack Smith before Judge Aileen Cannon about Justice Clarence Thomas' concurrence in the Supreme Court absolute immunity decision. ZBiotics: Head to https://zbiotics.com/MEIDAS to get 15% off your first order when you use MEIDAS at checkout. Visit https://meidastouch.com for more! Join the Legal AF Patreon: https://Patreon.com/meidastouch Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast The Influence Continuum: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/mea-culpa-with-michael-cohen The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show Burn the Boats: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 Political Beatdown: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/political-beatdown Lights On with Jessica Denson: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/lights-on-with-jessica-denson On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Coalition of the Sane: https://meidasnews.com/tag/coalition-of-the-sane Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today's Headlines: On the second day of the NATO summit in DC, the focus is on defending against Russia's ambitions in Ukraine and beyond. NATO aims to "Trump-proof" the alliance, preparing for a possible US withdrawal if Trump is re-elected, and is committed to putting Ukraine on a path to NATO membership while calling out China for enabling Russia's invasion. Meanwhile, a Moscow court issued an arrest warrant for Yulia Navalnaya, widow of the late opposition leader Alexei Navalny, accusing her of participating in an extremist society. In the US, despite President Biden's insistence that his candidacy is settled, there is ongoing concern among Democratic lawmakers, donors, and even George Clooney, who suggested in a New York Times op-ed that the party needs a new nominee. On another front, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has filed articles of impeachment against Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito over undisclosed gifts, with two Senate Democrats requesting a special counsel to investigate Justice Thomas further. Finally, the Senate saw a rare moment of bipartisanship with an agreement on legislation to ban members of Congress, the president, and the vice president, along with their spouses and dependent children, from buying and selling stocks. Resources/Articles mentioned in this episode: WA Post: NATO leaders move to ‘Trump-proof' the alliance in Washington BBC: Russian court orders arrest of Yulia Navalnaya WA Post: Election 2024 latest news: Pelosi urges Biden to make a decision; Clooney calls for withdrawal  NY Times: George Clooney: I Love Joe Biden. But We Need a New Nominee Politico: AOC impeachment articles against Alito, Thomas - Live Updates The Guardian: Democratic senators call on DoJ to investigate Clarence Thomas CNBC: Senators strike bipartisan deal for a ban on stock trading by members of Congress Morning Announcements is produced by Sami Sage alongside Bridget Schwartz and edited by Grace Hernandez-Johnson Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The consequential question before the Supreme Court on the limit and scope of presidential immunity has been decided, in three essential buckets. Veteran prosecutors Andrew Weissmann and Mary McCord decipher the ramifications for the former president, for the January 6th case brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith, and for the broad constitutional authority of the presidency itself. And they are joined by Trevor Morrison, NYU law professor and Dean Emeritus, to discern the finer points of the decision and the warnings cast in dissents by both Justice Sotomayor and Justice Jackson.

Richard Epstein and John Yoo discuss the last two weeks of Supreme Court rulings covering challenges to Second, Fourteenth, and Sixteenth Amendments. They also preview the upcoming challenge to Chevron Deference and dive into disputes among the originalist thinkers on the court. Finally, they weigh in on criticisms of recent disclosures by Justice Thomas and future plans for a future Trump Administration from groups like Project 2025.

Richard Epstein and John Yoo discuss the last two weeks of Supreme Court rulings covering challenges to Second, Fourteenth, and Sixteenth Amendments. They also preview the upcoming challenge to Chevron Deference and dive into disputes among the originalist thinkers on the court. Finally, they weigh in on criticisms of recent disclosures by Justice Thomas and […]

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/carljacksonradio Twitter: https://twitter.com/carljacksonshow Parler: https://parler.com/carljacksonshow Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thecarljacksonshow http://www.TheCarlJacksonShow.com NEW!!!! THE CARL JACKSON SHOW MERCH IS HERE. SUPPORT THE PODCAST GETTING A T-SHIRT NOW! https://carljacksonmerch.itemorder.comSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

It's News Day Tuesday! Sam and Emma speak with Elie Mystal, justice correspondent and columnist at The Nation, to discuss the recent rulings by the Supreme Court and what is still to come. First, Sam and Emma run through updates on Israel's foreknowledge of Hamas' 10/7 attack, US military aid to Israel, today's primaries, a new path to citizenship, bump stock legislation, IRS policy, Adobe's DOJ problem, FEMA, and Philly's falling murder rates, before parsing a little deeper through the new reports on Israel's 3-week heads-up on Hamas' terror attack last October. Elie Mystal then joins, diving right into the diligent delays in SCOTUS' refusal to take on Trump's immunity case as a perfect example of the differing approaches to a justice's reign between the conservatives and the liberals, with the former insistent on getting what they want, getting paid, and getting out of there, while the latter gets hung up in symbols and institutionalism. Mystal then looks to the recent Supreme Court decision to strike down the Trump-era ban on bump stocks, parsing through Justice Thomas' decision to weigh the legality from the perspective of the gun, rather than the shooter, before briefly running through SCOTUS' recent rejection of a challenge to Mifepristone, and what it can teach us about where this far-right Court is looking next. Wrapping up, Elie, Sam, and Emma unpack the future of the Supreme Court's attacks on the Chevron Doctrine and the administrative state. And in the Fun Half: Sam and Emma watch Mehdi Hasan perfectly illustrate the belligerent ignorance of Zionists, Joe Biden takes on the big threat to his presidency (TikTok zoomers), and the MR Crew assesses Biden's major new immigration plan. Sean from Washington tackles the Supreme Court's bump stock-ban-ban, Ritchie Torres crowns himself king of the Jews, Hussain from LA explores the incredible work of student protesters at UCLA, and Candace Owens unpacks why World War 2 was a failure for the US, plus, your calls and IMs! Check out Elie's work at The Nation here: https://www.thenation.com/authors/elie-mystal/ Become a member at JoinTheMajorityReport.com: https://fans.fm/majority/join Take action with Raise the Wage Oklahoma here: https://www.mobilize.us/raisethewageoklahoma/ Check out all volunteering opportunities ahead of Rep. Jamaal Bowman's primary on Tuesday 6/25!: https://www.mobilize.us/jamaalbowman/ Check out this canvassing event for Rep. Jamaal Bowman and volunteer if you can!: https://actionnetwork.org/forms/new-york-canvassing-event?source=tmr Phone bank for Rep. Jamaal Bowman through the Working Families Party here!: https://www.mobilize.us/workingfamiliespartycoordinated/event/624109/ Phone bank for Rep. Jamaal Bowman through "Jews For Jamaal" here!: https://www.mobilize.us/nea/event/618446/ Find our Rumble stream here!: https://rumble.com/user/majorityreport Join Sam on the Nation Magazine Cruise! 7 days in December 2024!!: https://nationcruise.com/mr/ Check out the "Repair Gaza" campaign courtesy of the Glia Project here: https://www.launchgood.com/campaign/rebuild_gaza_help_repair_and_rebuild_the_lives_and_work_of_our_glia_team#!/ Check out StrikeAid here!; https://strikeaid.com/ Gift a Majority Report subscription here: https://fans.fm/majority/gift Subscribe to the ESVN YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/esvnshow Subscribe to the AMQuickie newsletter here: https://am-quickie.ghost.io/ Join the Majority Report Discord! http://majoritydiscord.com/ Get all your MR merch at our store: https://shop.majorityreportradio.com/ Get the free Majority Report App!: http://majority.fm/app Check out today's sponsors: Ritual: Essential for Men is a quality multivitamin from a company you can actually trust. Get 25% off your first month for a limited time at https://ritual.com/ MAJORITY. Start Ritual or add Essential For Men to your subscription today. That's https://ritual.com/ MAJORITY for 25% off. Blueland Cleaning Products: Blueland has a special offer for listeners. Right now, get 15% off your first order by going to https://Blueland.com/MAJORITY. You won't want to miss this! https://Blueland.com/MAJORITY for 15% off.  Sunset Lake CBD: Relax, recharge, and remember to visit https://SunsetLakeCBD.com before June 18th to save 30% on all of their tinctures and participating bundles. See their website for terms and conditions. Follow the Majority Report crew on Twitter: @SamSeder @EmmaVigeland @MattLech @BradKAlsop Check out Matt's show, Left Reckoning, on Youtube, and subscribe on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/leftreckoning Check out Matt Binder's YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/mattbinder Subscribe to Brandon's show The Discourse on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/ExpandTheDiscourse Check out Ava Raiza's music here! https://avaraiza.bandcamp.com/ The Majority Report with Sam Seder - https://majorityreportradio.com/

Kimberly Atkins Stohr hosts #SistersInLaw to discuss Hunter Biden's conviction, the validity of evidence from the laptop, Joe's response, the sentencing process, and if an appeal might lead to the loosening of gun restrictions.  Then, the #Sisters examine the SCOTUS rulings on mifepristone and bump stocks, looking at why the Justices ruled the way they did and how standing affects which cases come before the court.  They also cover recent recordings of Justice Alito and his wife that point toward a religious bias that might merit future recusal, Justice Thomas' acceptance of more lavish gifts, and what it will take to bring ethics back to the court. Get your #SistersInLaw merchandise at politicon.com/merch WEBSITE & TRANSCRIPT Email: SISTERSINLAW@POLITICON.COM or Thread to @sistersInLaw.podcast Get text updates from #SistersInLaw and Politicon.  Please Support This Week's Sponsors: HelloFresh: Get farm-fresh, pre-portioned ingredients and seasonal recipes from HelloFresh with a free appetizer item per box for life with code: SISTERSAPPS at hellofresh.com/sistersapps Blueland: For 15% off your order of green cleaning products, go to blueland.com/sisters Thrive Causemetics: For 10% off incredible clean and cause-focused beauty products, go to thrivecausemetics.com/sisters Aura: Protect yourself and your loved ones online with a 14-day trial plus a check of your data to see if your personal information has been leaked when you go to aura.com/sisters Mentioned By The #Sisters: From Kim on the differences between Hunter Biden's and Donald Trump's convictions How standing determines cases before the Supreme Court Get Barb's New Book:  Attack From Within: How Disinformation Is Sabotaging America Barb's Book Tour  Get More From #SistersInLaw Joyce Vance: Twitter | University of Alabama Law | MSNBC | Civil Discourse Substack Jill Wine-Banks: Twitter | Facebook | Website | Author of The Watergate Girl: My Fight For Truth & Justice Against A Criminal President Kimberly Atkins Stohr: Twitter | Boston Globe | WBUR | Unbound Newsletter Barb McQuade: Twitter | University of Michigan Law | Just Security | MSNBC

A bump stock is an attachment that converts a semi automatic rifle into a weapon that can fire as many as 800 rounds per minute - an intensity of gunfire matched by machine guns. The deadliest mass shooting carried out by a single shooter in US history - the October 2017 Las Vegas massacre - was enabled by a bump stock. On Friday, the US Supreme Court struck down a Trump-era bump stock ban introduced in the wake of that tragedy, in which 60 people were killed and hundreds more injured. Writing for a perfectly partisan six to three majority, gun enthusiast and ultra conservative Justice Clarence Thomas, decided the administration had overstepped its authority enacting the ban, and based the decision in a very technical, very weird reading of the statute. On this Opinionpalooza edition of Amicus, Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Slate's senior writer on the courts and the law - Mark Stern, and David Pucino, Legal Director & Deputy Chief Counsel of Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Together, they discuss the careful reasoning and research behind the ban, Justice Thomas' self-appointment as a bigger gun expert than the agency charged with regulating guns - the ATF, how the gun industry used its own “amicus flotilla” from extreme groups to undermine the agency, and how the industry will use this roadmap again. But, please don't despair entirely, you'll also hear from David about hope for the future of gun safety rules.  This is part of Opinionpalooza, Slate's coverage of the major decisions from the Supreme Court this June. We kicked things off this year by explaining How Originalism Ate the Law. The best way to support our work is by joining Slate Plus. (If you are already a member, consider a donation or merch!) Plus listeners have access to all our Opinionpalooza emergency episodes. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A bump stock is an attachment that converts a semi automatic rifle into a weapon that can fire as many as 800 rounds per minute - an intensity of gunfire matched by machine guns. The deadliest mass shooting carried out by a single shooter in US history - the October 2017 Las Vegas massacre - was enabled by a bump stock. On Friday, the US Supreme Court struck down a Trump-era bump stock ban introduced in the wake of that tragedy, in which 60 people were killed and hundreds more injured. Writing for a perfectly partisan six to three majority, gun enthusiast and ultra conservative Justice Clarence Thomas, decided the administration had overstepped its authority enacting the ban, and based the decision in a very technical, very weird reading of the statute. On this Opinionpalooza edition of Amicus, Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Slate's senior writer on the courts and the law - Mark Stern, and David Pucino, Legal Director & Deputy Chief Counsel of Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Together, they discuss the careful reasoning and research behind the ban, Justice Thomas' self-appointment as a bigger gun expert than the agency charged with regulating guns - the ATF, how the gun industry used its own “amicus flotilla” from extreme groups to undermine the agency, and how the industry will use this roadmap again. But, please don't despair entirely, you'll also hear from David about hope for the future of gun safety rules.  This is part of Opinionpalooza, Slate's coverage of the major decisions from the Supreme Court this June. We kicked things off this year by explaining How Originalism Ate the Law. The best way to support our work is by joining Slate Plus. (If you are already a member, consider a donation or merch!) Plus listeners have access to all our Opinionpalooza emergency episodes. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A bump stock is an attachment that converts a semi automatic rifle into a weapon that can fire as many as 800 rounds per minute - an intensity of gunfire matched by machine guns. The deadliest mass shooting carried out by a single shooter in US history - the October 2017 Las Vegas massacre - was enabled by a bump stock. On Friday, the US Supreme Court struck down a Trump-era bump stock ban introduced in the wake of that tragedy, in which 60 people were killed and hundreds more injured. Writing for a perfectly partisan six to three majority, gun enthusiast and ultra conservative Justice Clarence Thomas, decided the administration had overstepped its authority enacting the ban, and based the decision in a very technical, very weird reading of the statute. On this Opinionpalooza edition of Amicus, Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Slate's senior writer on the courts and the law - Mark Stern, and David Pucino, Legal Director & Deputy Chief Counsel of Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Together, they discuss the careful reasoning and research behind the ban, Justice Thomas' self-appointment as a bigger gun expert than the agency charged with regulating guns - the ATF, how the gun industry used its own “amicus flotilla” from extreme groups to undermine the agency, and how the industry will use this roadmap again. But, please don't despair entirely, you'll also hear from David about hope for the future of gun safety rules.  This is part of Opinionpalooza, Slate's coverage of the major decisions from the Supreme Court this June. We kicked things off this year by explaining How Originalism Ate the Law. The best way to support our work is by joining Slate Plus. (If you are already a member, consider a donation or merch!) Plus listeners have access to all our Opinionpalooza emergency episodes. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

SERIES 2 EPISODE 190: COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN A-Block (1:44) SPECIAL COMMENT: Timing is everything, and for once the timing was perfect. Steve Bannon has been ordered to go to prison. Ordered on June 6th. Ordered on the anniversary of D-Day, when we destroyed everything his predecessors stood for. He doesn't get it yet. We will destroy HIM and what HE stands for. And all who stand with him. And Trump. And as he stood outside court - jailed by a Trump-appointed judge who once clerked for Clarence Thomas - he was boasting to the vapid press that, no, he will destroy us and his fascism will subsume America, as he insisted no jail would ever shut him up, a protestor behind him drowned him out with shouts of "Lock Him Up!" because when all you have is noise and threats, you tend to forget that there is always somebody else with more noise and bigger threats. THERE IS ALSO NEW POLLING on what happens if Trump joins him in the slammer. The Reuters-Ipsos Poll says actual jail time could cost Trump 23% of his voters. That could be as much as 17,000,000 votes. Even as time and timidity wear that number down, it's a remarkable game-changer. PLUS: Trump glitched again at a Word Salad Rally in Phoenix, while the Democratic National Committee is actually putting up billboards near his events emphasizing "CONVICTED FELON DONALD TRUMP." And there's more from The Supreme Court: a watchdog group says Clarence Thomas may have gotten as much as $4,000,000 in gifts in the last 20 years. And Brett Kavanaugh is writing a book! Hey! Is it a book about assault? B-Block (24:00) THE WORST PERSONS IN THE WORLD: There's a name-that-hockey-team contest in Salt Lake City and the six final choices are all nightmarishly bad. So, Marco Rubio, Tim Scott, J.D. Vance, Doug Burgum, Ben Carson, Byron Donalds, and Elise Stefanik. You're being vetted to run with Trump? When he encouraged them to HANG the last guy? And your daily reason to fire Merrick Garland: there may be videotape of Carlson, Hannity, Ingraham and others at Fox vivisecting Trump and saying his 2020 Election claims are crap, and you are working to RETURN THESE TAPES TO FOX? C-Block (33:25) FRIDAYS WITH THURBER: Any time the news is full of Trump-driven drivel and MAGA conspiracies, is a good time to remember Thurber's account of the day in 1913 that the dam outside his home of Columbus, Ohio, broke and everybody fled. Only it hadn't broken - and they were running in the wrong direction anyway. "The Day The Damn Broke."See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

SERIES 2 EPISODE 185: COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN A-Block (1:44) SPECIAL COMMENT: Do not be fooled by the dismissive attitude of the media of the impact on Trump voting support of the jury's finding of Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, and not NOT-Guilty. If, as the most circumspect pre-verdict polling suggests, 2% of his voters would peel away, that (based on 2020) is 1,500,000 voters and at least 5 electoral votes, and (based on 2016) would have been enough to throw Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin to Clinton.  It reminds us that we should stop looking for the game-ender for Trump and rely instead on the incrementals, because they - and the justice that invoke them - will defeat him. Also, can the Trump cultists explain to me: are these 34 verdicts election interference that will stop Trump from winning, or are they a political gift that just gave him the election? Because you keep saying BOTH. PLUS: If you missed it, John Roberts just told Dick Durbin and Sheldon Whitehouse to go F themselves. He's king for life and he won't even talk to them about the Alito Scandal, or the OTHER Alito Scandal, or the Roberts scandal. Fine. Subpoena him. And if he ignores that, arrest him. This country is changing and those who act will decide whether it changes for the good or the bad, and we are the good guys. B-Block (32:40) THE WORST PERSONS IN THE WORLD: Clay Travis goes entirely racist on The View's Sonny Hostin (and even on the WNBA's Caitlin Clark). Minnesota GOP Senate likelihood Royce White (who played eight minutes and 55 seconds in the NBA and don't you forget it) is in trouble again. And the book sale numbers are in for Kristi Noem's Puppy Murder Diary book and I don't want to say they're not moving but the fall off from Week 1 to Week 3 is 9275% C-Block (41:25) FRIDAYS WITH THURBER: Only one story to tell on this day after: Thurber prophesying the life of Trump in something he wrote... in 1931!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this Opinionpalooza emergency bonus episode, Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern discuss Thursday's decision in Alexander v. South Carolina NAACP, highlighting the implications for racial gerrymandering and voting rights. They delve into Justice Alito's majority opinion, Justice Kagan's dissent, and Justice Thomas's concurrence. This decision would seem to effectively close the door permanently on racial gerrymander claims in federal courts. Dahlia and Mark discuss how this decision makes justice - and democracy - inaccessible for plaintiffs already shut out of the political system through racist maps with political excuses. In recent years, the Supreme Court has gutted the Voting Rights Act and now seems intent on hollowing out equal protection and diluting the reconstruction amendments; the constitutional provisions central to building a thriving diverse democracy. This episode is member-exclusive. Listen to it now by subscribing to Slate Plus. By joining, not only will you unlock exclusive SCOTUS analysis and weekly extended episodes of Amicus, but you'll also access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this Opinionpalooza emergency bonus episode, Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern discuss Thursday's decision in Alexander v. South Carolina NAACP, highlighting the implications for racial gerrymandering and voting rights. They delve into Justice Alito's majority opinion, Justice Kagan's dissent, and Justice Thomas's concurrence. This decision would seem to effectively close the door permanently on racial gerrymander claims in federal courts. Dahlia and Mark discuss how this decision makes justice - and democracy - inaccessible for plaintiffs already shut out of the political system through racist maps with political excuses. In recent years, the Supreme Court has gutted the Voting Rights Act and now seems intent on hollowing out equal protection and diluting the reconstruction amendments; the constitutional provisions central to building a thriving diverse democracy. This episode is member-exclusive. Listen to it now by subscribing to Slate Plus. By joining, not only will you unlock exclusive SCOTUS analysis and weekly extended episodes of Amicus, but you'll also access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

SERIES 2 EPISODE 177: COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN A-Block (1:44) SPECIAL COMMENT: A lawyer yelling "you're a liar" at a witness does not make him a liar, despite what Anderson Cooper says. The storyline before the Trump Trial began was: If Michael Cohen keeps his cool when Todd Blanche screams at him, he'll prevail. He did it, and yet the networks rushed to ignore it. Prosecutors have already said they'll only need about an hour of re-direct of Cohen next Monday, meaning that's all the time they expect to require to polish him back up. They are still winning - plus there is still the wild card that in his perpetual over-confidence Trump may testify. And yet that's not where I start because sometimes the most important story and the most interesting one are not the same thing. The primary sidebar takeaway from Cohen's testimony was based on a poorly worded tweet that the author, Ron Filipkowski, deleted. “Cohen testified that his main media contacts to get positive stories run about Trump were Maggie Haberman, Katy Tur, and Chris Cuomo." Except Cohen DIDN'T say that. He was asked if he had good relationships with reporters. Haberman? "Yes," he replied. Tur? "Yes." Cuomo? "Yes." I am thus in the position of defending - in part - the transactional Haberman, my appalling ex, and the ridiculous Cuomo.  Having said that, they are all imperiled because of what Cohen DID say.  Plus we have a really great punchline to the day in the courtroom in which a would-be Trump Insurrectionist learned that loyalty to him is a one-way street, even if the only thing you wanted was a wave. B-Block (29:43) POSTSCRIPTS TO THE NEWS: Exactly what American journalism needed: Chris Cillizza has authored a "Mission Statement." It is even more hilariously self-unaware than any actual article he's ever written. C-Block (51:44) FRIDAYS WITH THURBER: A lot in this episode about the media, so let's hear from Thurber and how they tried to turn him into a radio star and instead turned him into a nervous wreck: "How To Relax While Broadcasting."See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

SEASON 2 EPISODE 164: COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN A-Block (1:44) SPECIAL COMMENT: The 'Presidential Immunity' case beginning today at the Supreme Court? Trump's already won. Because while most of the coverage is binary (the Court will never invent something as anti-democracy as 'presidential immunity'/the Court will grant Trump presidential immunity) the real point here is that the delay already created by the Supreme Court's conspiracy to keep Trump from facing justice and to fix the election so he can seize power, has already guaranteed the jury can't possibly get the case before the election. The point from here on in is to extend that delay and the way to do that is to send the case BACK to Judge Chutkan with some lame ass "review" to see if there are parts of Jack Smith's indictments Trump might be immune from. Trump's already won. Plus: the Arizona Fake Elector Indictments are in. Trump is an unindicted co-conspirator and Giuliani and Christina Bobb are among EIGHTEEN just plain indicted. And as I always say, democracy survives not because of our efforts to preserve it, but by the stupidity of those who would destroy it. Fox nimrod Jesse Watters has found his analogy for Trump prevailing no matter how his enemies try to lay him low: Trump is King Kong. "And what happens with King Kong? You remember! So he's going to bust out of this cage eventually." Jesse doesn't know that King Kong gets killed. B-Block (24:09) THE WORST PERSONS IN THE WORLD: The L.A. Dodgers get an entertainer who has sung the anthem at their games five different times ARRESTED for asking them to let her bring her purse into the stadium with her. Pastor Shane Vaughn thinks if you say 'I'm not calling Joy Reid...' followed by a really racist insult, it means you didn't call her that. And Cornel West thinks he's going to beat Trump and apparently does not know the people trying to get the signatures needed to get him on the ballot work...for Trump. C-Block (35:48) THINGS I PROMISED NOT TO TELL: If it's Supreme Court day, why don't I tell the story of the day I was invited on a first date by a woman who thought the ideal thing to go see was...Clarence Thomas's chair at the Supreme Court. Yes, it was Laura Ingraham.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

SERIES 2 EPISODE 159: COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN A-Block (1:44) SPECIAL COMMENT: There's nothing better than a good NAP. “Now: Trump's head slowly dropped, his eyes closed. It jerked back upward. He adjusts himself. Then, his head droops again. He straightens up, leaning back. His head drops for a third time, he shakes his shoulders. Eyes closed still. His head drops. Finally, he pops his eyes open. My heart aches, and a drowsy numbness pains my sense, as though of hemlock I had drunk, or emptied some dull opiate to the drains." Honestly: You're Trump, on Monday they literally catch you napping. How do you possibly go in there yesterday and get caught napping… at least TWICE. One video, or one rapid-shutter sequence of still pictures of “Trump's head slowly dropped, his eyes closed. It jerked back upward. He adjusts himself. Then, his head droops again” and we don't have to WATCH the rest of the trial, he'd be DONE. Looks like we'll get this started Monday. Seven jurors chosen. I had forgotten what I learned during two days in the NYC jury pool in 2013: it is surprisingly easy to find enough people who don't know anything about anything to fill up a New York jury. Meanwhile Trump tried out his new defense: He knows nothing. Billionaire businessman, greatest mind of his or any other generation, but when it comes to paying off Stormy Daniels to bury her story and illegally keep bad facts about himself away from the eyes of the electorate weeks before the election, and then turning the thing into a clear crime by trying to write it off as a business expense? He knows nothing. He doesn't know the accountant. He doesn't know the lawyer. He didn't know anything about the document. He didn't know anything about the deduction. He just signed whatever they put in front of him. Because the billionaire businessman knows NOTHING about his own business! ALSO: The picture is a rare one of Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene with her mouth shut. It's in The New Republic and above it the magazine's question is: “Russia is Buying Politicians in Europe. Is it Happening Here Too?” After Greene decided to try to fire another Speaker of the House to destabilize our government further, and her screw-up in the Mayorkas hearing, it's a question worth exploring. B-Block (24:38) THE WORST PERSONS IN THE WORLD: Baseball's uniform scandal is back. The pitcher is wearing the batboy's pants. The Speaker of the House had his brain trust look at his new bill first: Libs of TikTok and DC Draino and a 1/6 defendant. And I used to think the Supreme Court Justices were merely not there to do justice or defend the constitution. Now I'm not sure they're from this country, nor have more of a legal education than I do (and I took one law class 37 years ago). C-Block (33:00) THINGS I PROMISED NOT TO TELL: Just passed the quarter century anniversary of one of the most fun, most unexpected events of my career. How many people do you know who can say this: Tom Hanks, Ben Affleck and Matt Damon pulled me on to the Red Carpet at the Oscars - and they broke my cummerbund!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode, I uncover the "Connected to Russia" Scam that has Plagued the Trump Presidency and Elections. Key figure that Mueller report linked to Russia was a State Department intel source US says Russia was given Trump campaign polling data in 2016 John Oliver offers Justice Thomas millions to 'get the f--- off the Supreme Court' Copyright Bongino Inc All Rights Reserved Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices