Podcasts about nixonian

This week, Canadians didn't just politely shuffle into voting booths: they kicked the door down and destroyed Conservative leader and longtime MAGA fanboy Pierre Poilievre, who lost his seat to Bruce Fanjoy (who we're now, quite literally, major fans of. More on him in this episode!) Meanwhile, here in the U.S., specifically kleptocrat-besieged New York City, we've got our own political swamp to drain. Mayor Eric Adams, who once likened himself to Biden, now seems more Nixonian, dodging Department of Justice corruption charges by reportedly cozying up to Donald Trump and Tucker Carlson. The result? NYC turned into an ICE command center for Trump's creeping authoritarianism, part of a wannabe-gulag stretching from New York to El Salvador. On this week's Gaslit Nation, Andrea and Terrell Starr of the Black Diplomats Podcast and Substack celebrate Canada's heroic stand and urge the world to focus on NYC's upcoming Democratic mayoral primary June 24, one of the most pivotal fronts in the global fight against kleptocracy and for the soul of America. The Left must reclaim “socialism” as quality of life advocacy, building better schools, healthcare that won't bankrupt you, and a social safety net for all, not just those who can afford one. We highlight two standout challengers: Comptroller Brad Lander, a fierce Ukraine supporter who led the effort to divest the City's pension from Russian investments, and Queens Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani, who led a hunger strike for taxi driver debt relief. The question isn't just who can beat Adams, who's running as an independent, and predator Andrew Cuomo, desperate for a comeback. It's who has the record to lead New York in resisting Trump and dismantling the oligarchy. Want to enjoy Gaslit Nation ad-free? Join our community of listeners for bonus shows, ad-free episodes, exclusive Q&A sessions, our group chat, invites to live events like our Monday political salons at 4pm ET over Zoom, and more! Sign up at Patreon.com/Gaslit!   Show Notes: Opening clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ahh0jINl-PU   Canadian election: https://bsky.app/profile/youranoncentral.bsky.social/post/3lnwgjxcnk22l   Bruce Fanjoy's Green House: This big blue house runs green and clean https://www.nationalobserver.com/2023/08/28/news/big-blue-house-runs-green-and-clean   Here's who's running for New York City mayor in 2025 Get to know the candidates in a wide, weird and unsettled field. https://www.cityandstateny.com/politics/2025/04/heres-whos-running-new-york-city-mayor-2025/401994/   Ukraine is the front line in the battle against oligarchic capitalism: The war in Ukraine is not just a fight for sovereignty, but a battle against the global rise of oligarchical capitalism, with the future of democracy and economic justice at stake. https://kyivindependent.com/ukraine-is-the-front-line-in-the-battle-against-oligarchic-capitalism/   Adams to skip New York City's Democratic primary, run for reelection on nonpartisan line: The mayor has been at odds with his party and wants time to recover from now-dismissed federal charges. https://www.politico.com/news/2025/04/03/eric-adams-reelection-independent-00267865   Judge Ends Eric Adams Case, but Sharply Criticizes Trump's Justice Dept. Judge Dale E. Ho refused to let the government leave open the prospect of reinstating charges against the mayor. But he acknowledged the president's power to determine the fate of prosecutions. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/02/nyregion/eric-adams-case-dismissed.html?unlocked_article_code=1.DU8.N7E9.W-opYY3A0W4N&smid=url-share   Adams Doubles Down on Trump Alliance, Praising F.B.I. Director's Book: In the mayor's first comments after a judge ordered corruption charges against him dropped, he urged New Yorkers to read a book by the Trump administration's F.B.I. director. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/02/nyregion/eric-adams-kash-patel-book.html?unlocked_article_code=1.DU8.FskD.fhDP-pm2rpfe&smid=url-share   Incumbents are losing around the world, not just the U.S. https://www.marketplace.org/story/2024/11/14/incumbents-are-losing-around-the-world-not-just-the-u-s   ICE Blocked from Rikers as Judge Extends Order Halting Cooperation With Feds https://www.thecity.nyc/2025/04/25/ice-trump-rikers-eric-adams-city-council/   The Great Hack: The Cambridge Analytica documentary https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iX8GxLP1FHo   The Bibi Files episode https://gaslitnation.libsyn.com/hitler-youth   Stop Netanyahu's Political Purge of the Defense Establishment https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/editorial/2025-02-20/ty-article-opinion/stop-netanyahus-political-purge-of-the-defense-establishment/00000195-2008-d2a5-a39d-e778797b0000   Russia used hundreds of fake accounts to tweet about Brexit, data shows https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/nov/14/how-400-russia-run-fake-accounts-posted-bogus-brexit-tweets   Trump fraud ruling adds to his string of legal losses in New York https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-fraud-ruling-new-york-legal-losses/ EVENTS AT GASLIT NATION: June 2nd 4pm ET – Book club discussion of Octavia Butler's The Parable of the Sower   Indiana-based listeners launched a Signal group for others in the state to join, available on Patreon. Florida-based listeners are going strong meeting in person. Be sure to join their Signal group, available on Patreon. Have you taken Gaslit Nation's HyperNormalization Survey Yet? Gaslit Nation Salons take place Mondays 4pm ET over Zoom and the first ~40 minutes are recorded and shared on Patreon.com/Gaslit for our community 

This week Sarah and George talk about Tulsi Gabbard gorging herself on Russian propaganda, Trump's Nixonian enemies list, and whether President Biden should preemptively pardon people to protect them from Trump's retribution. Exclusive $45-off Carver Mat at https://AuraFrames.com. Use code ASKGEORGE at checkout to save! F*%k your khakis and get The Perfect Jean 15% off with the code ASKGEORGE15 at https://theperfectjean.nyc/ASKGEORGE15 #theperfectjeanpod    Start your new morning ritual & get up to 43% off your @MUDWTR order by going to https://mudwtr.com/askgeorge! #mudwtrpod #sponsored

On today's show, 2:06 pm CT, 3:06 pm ET: I Beg Your Pardon: Biden pardoning his son 'shows a degree of contempt' for the American people, says Constitutional Law Prof. Jonathan Turley - DOJ special counsel says Hunter Biden's indictment should not be dismissed - Breitbart's Nolte claims Biden White House conspired for months to mislead public about Hunter pardon - Karine Jean-Pierre called out by reporters - Constitutional attorney KrisAnne Hall says charges, prosecution and sentences could still be brought - CNN's Scott Jennings says history will remember Biden as ‘Complete and total disgrace' over Hunter pardoning - Many in cable news media twist themselves into logic pretzels after claiming for moths President Biden would not pardon Hunter - is pardon Nixonian? - we'll analyze. Sanctuary: Denver mayor vows to blockade mass deportations; will he go to jail? - Chicago residents rip mayor over spending on migrants, claim he's 'Worst mayor in America' - we'll examine. Plus, Family feud errupts in one of the largest Christian cable channels in America - threats of lawsuits fly against Christian 'Youtubers' and podcasters - we'll explore. http://www.spreaker.com/show/christian-talk-that-rocks https://christiantalkthatrocks.net or http://christiantalkthatrocks.com

As the author of The Rise and Fall of the Neoliberal Order, the Cambridge University historian Gary Gerstle was one of first people to recognize the collapse of neoliberalism. But today, the real question is not about the death of neoliberalism, but what comes after it. And, of course, when I sat down with Gerstle, I began by asking him what the Trump victory tells us about what comes after neoliberalism.Gary Gerstle is Paul Mellon Professor of American History Emeritus at the University of Cambridge. Gerstle received his BA from Brown University and his MA and PhD from Harvard University. He is the author, editor, and coeditor of more than ten books.  He is currently the Joy Foundation Fellow at the Harvard-Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University, where he is working on a new book, Politics in Our Time: Authoritarian Peril and Democratic Hope in the Twenty-First Century.  He resides in Cambridge, Massachusetts.Named as one of the "100 most pivoted men" by GQ magazine, Andrew Keen is amongst the world's most pivotal broadcasters and commentators. In addition to presenting KEEN ON, he is the host of the long-running How To Fix Democracy show. He is also the pivotal author of four prescient books about digital technology: CULT OF THE AMATEUR, DIGITAL VERTIGO, THE INTERNET IS NOT THE ANSWER and HOW TO FIX THE FUTURE. Andrew lives in San Francisco, is married to Cassandra Knight, Google's VP of Litigation & Discovery, and has two cats, both called Pivot.Keen On is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. TRANSCRIPT“It's important to recognize that the neoliberal triumph carried within it not just the triumph of capitalism, but the triumph of freedom. And I think the that image of the wall coming down captures both. It's people wanting to claim their freedom, but it also paves the way for an unregulated form of capitalism to spread to every corner of the world.” -Gary GerstleAK: Hello everybody. As we try to make sense of the aftermath of the US election this week, there was an interesting headline today in the Financial Times. Donald Trump apparently has asked, and I'm quoting the F.T. here, the arch-protectionist Robert Lighthizer, to run U.S. trade policy. You never know with Trump, he may change his mind tomorrow. But nonetheless, it suggests, and it's not a great surprise, that protectionism will define the Trump, presidency or certainly the second Trump presidency. And it speaks of the structural shift in the nature of politics and economics in the United States, particularly given this Trump victory. One man who got this, I think before anyone else, is the Cambridge historian Gary Gerstle. He's been on the show a couple of times before. He's the author of a wonderful book, The Rise and Fall of the Neoliberal Order: America and the World in the Free Market Era. It's a profound book. It's had an enormous impact on everybody. And I'm thrilled and honored that Gary is back on the show. This is the third time he's been on the show. Gary, is that important news? Have we formally come to the end now of the neoliberal order? GARY GERSTLE: I think we have, although there's an element of neoliberalism which may revive in the Trump administration. But if we think of a political order as ordering political life so that all participants in that order have to accept its ideological principles, we have moved out of that order. I think we've been out of it for some time. The critical election in this case was 2016, and the critical move that both Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders made in 2016, the two most dynamic presidential candidates in that year, was to break with the orthodoxy of free markets, the orthodoxy of globalization, the orthodoxy of a world without borders where everything was free to move and the market was supreme. And the only role of government in the state was to ensure as full access to markets as was possible in the belief that if governments got out of the way of a private capitalist economy, this would spur the greatest growth for the greatest number of people everywhere in the world. This was governing orthodoxy, really from the time of Reagan until 2016. Trump broke it. Sanders broke it. Very significant in this regard that when Biden came into office, he moderated some of the Trump tariffs but kept the tariffs on China substantially in place. So there's been continuity for some time, and now we're going to see an intensification of the protectionist regime. Protectionism used to be a dirty word in American politics. If you uttered that word, you were excluded from serious political discourse. There will be other terms that are used, fair trade, not just because protectionism has a negative connotation to it, but we are living in an era where governments assert the right to shape markets as they wish to in the interests of their nation. So, yes, we are living in a different era, although it must be said, and we may get into a discussion of this at some point, there are sectors of the Trump coalition that want to intensify deregulation in the domestic market, that want to rollback government. And so I expect in the new Trump administration, there is going to be tussles between the protectionists on the one hand and those who want to, at least domestically, restore free trade. And by that I mean the free operation of private capital without government regulation. That's an issue that bears watching.AK: Is that a contradiction though, Gary? Can one, in this post-neoliberal order, can governments be hostile to regulation, a la Elon Musk and his association with Trump, and also be in favor of tariffs? I mean, do the two—can the to go together, and is that the outline of this foggy new order coming into place in the second quarter of the 21st century?GARY GERSTLE: They can go together in the sense that they have historically in the past gone together in the United States. In the late 19th century, the US had very high tariffs against foreign goods. And domestically, it was trying to create as free a domestic market as possible. What was known as the period of laissez-faire domestically went along with a commitment to high tariffs and protection of American laissez-faire against what we might call global laissez-faire. So it has been tried. It did work at that time. But I think the Republican party and the constituencies behind Donald Trump are divided on this question. As you noted, Elon Musk represents one pole of this. He certainly wants protection against Chinese imports of electric cars and is probably going to get that because of all the assistance he gave Trump in this election. But domestically, he wants no government interfering with his right to conduct his capitalist enterprises as he sees fit. So that's going to be one wing. But there's another wing of the Republican Party under Trump that is much more serious about industrial policy that says we cannot leave the market to its own devices. It produces too many human casualties. It produces too many regions of America left behind, and that we must use the government to help those people left behind. We must structure free enterprise industry in a way that helps the ordinary working-class man. And I use the word “man” deliberately in this context. Interestingly, JD Vance, the vice president, embodies both these tendencies, sees, on the one hand, a creature of venture capital, Silicon Valley, close to the Musks and Peter Thiels of the world. On the other hand, he has talked explicitly, as in his vice-presidential acceptance speech, about putting Main Street over Wall Street. And if he's serious about putting Main Street over Wall Street, that's going to involve a lot of government intervention to displace the privileged position that finance and venture capital now has in the American economy.AK: Gary, you're a historian, one of the best around, you're deeply versed in the past, you bring up Vance. He presents himself as being original, even has a beard. But I wonder whether his—I don't know what you would call it—a Catholic or Christian socialism, or at least a concern with the working class. Is it in any way new, for you, historically? I mean, it certainly exists in Europe, and there must be analogies also in American history with him.GARY GERSTLE: Well, if he is a convert to Catholicism, I don't know how well-versed he is in the papal doctrines of years past. Or decades. Or even centuries passed. But there was a serious movement within the Catholic Church in the late 19th and early 20th century to humanize capitalism, to declare that free market capitalism produced too many human casualties. Too many ordinary Catholic workers and workers who are not Catholic were hurt by unemployment, poverty, being thrown out of work in the troughs of business cycles, having no social welfare to fall back on, as a result of injury or misfortune in life. And so there was a profound movement within Catholic churches, in the United States, and in Europe and other parts of the world as well, to humanize capitalism. Whether this very once important Catholic tradition is an active influence on Vance, I don't know, because he's a recent convert to Catholicism, and I don't know how deeply has imbibed its history or its doctrine. But there is a rich tradition there. And it's possible that this is one of the sources that he is drawing on to shape his contemporary politics.AK: We were talking before we ran live, Gary, I said to you, and I think you agreed, that this use of the word "fascism" to describe Trump isn't always particularly helpful. It reflects a general hysteria amongst progressives. But I wonder in this context, given the way in which European Catholicism flirted, sometimes quite openly, with fascism, whether the F-word actually makes a little more sense. Because after all, fascism, after the First World War, was a movement in the name of the people, which was very critical of the capitalism of that age and of the international market. So, when we use the word fascism now, could it have some value in that context as a kind of a socioeconomic critique of capitalism?GARY GERSTLE: You mean fascism offering a socioeconomic critique of U.S. capitalism?AK: Yes. For better or worse.GARY GERSTLE: I'm reluctant to deploy the term fascism, since I think most people who enter the conversation or who hear that word in the United States don't really know what it means, and that's partly the consequence of historians debating its meaning as long as they have, and also suggesting that fascism takes different forms at different times and in different places. I prefer the term authoritarianism. I think that tendency is clearly there and one can connect that to certain traditions within the church. The United States once had a intense anti-Catholic political tradition. It was unimaginable in the 19th century. AK: Yeah, it drove the KKK. I mean, that was the Klan hated the Catholics probably more than they hated the Jews.GARY GERSTLE: It drove the Klan. And the notion in the 19th century—I'm not remembering now whether there are 5 or 6 Catholics who sit on the Supreme Court—but the notion in the 19th century that 5 or 6 Catholics would be the chief custodians and interpreters of America's most sacred doctrine and document the Constitution was simply unthinkable. It could never have happened. There was a Catholic seat. As for a long time, there was a Jewish seat on the Supreme Court, but understood that this would be carefully cordoned off and limited and that, when push came to shove, Protestants had to be in charge of interpreting America's most sacred doctrine. And the charge against Catholics was that they were not democratic, that they vested ultimate power in God and through an honest messenger on Earth, who was the pope. John F. Kennedy, in 1960, became the first Catholic president of the United States. Biden is only the second. Vance is the first Catholic vice president. Before in the campaign that Kennedy was running in 1960, he had to go in front of thousands of Protestant ministers who had gathered in Houston so he could persuade them that if he became president, he would not be handing America over to the pope, who was seen as an authoritarian figure. So for a long time, Catholicism was seen as a carrier of authoritarianism, of a kind of executive power that should not be limited by a human or secular force. And this promoted, in the United States, intense anti-Catholic feeling, which took the country probably 200 years to conquer. Conquered it was, so the issue of so many Catholics on the Supreme Court is not an issue. Biden's Catholicism is not an issue. Vance's Catholicism is not an issue. But Vance himself has said, talking about his conversion, that of his granny—I forget the term he uses to describe his granny—were alive today, she would not be able to accept his conversion because she was so deeply Protestant, so evangelical, so—AK: A classic West Virginian evangelical. So for me, the other contradiction here is that Vance is unashamedly nationalist, unashamedly critical of globalization. And yet, by embracing Catholicism, which is the most international of face, I don't quite understand what that suggests about him, or Catholicism, or even history, that that these odd things happen.GARY GERSTLE: Well, one thing one can say in history is that odd things happen and odd couples get together. I don't know myself how fully Vance understands his Catholicism. I believe Peter Thiel led him to this. Vance is still a young man and has gone through a lot of conversions for a young man. He was—AK: Well, he's a conversion expert. That's the narrative of his life, isn't it?GARY GERSTLE: Yes. Yes. And he began as being a severe anti-Trumper, almost a Never-Trumper. Then he converted to Trumpism. Then he converted from Protestant to Catholicism. So a lot of major changes in his life. So, the question you just posed is a fascinating one. Does he understand that the church is a catholic church, meaning small c catholic in this case, that it's open to everyone in the world? Does he really understand that? But I would extend my puzzle about religion beyond Catholicism to ask, for all the evangelical supporters of Trump: where is Jesus's message of peace and love? Where did that go? So there are puzzles about the shape of Christian religion in America. And there's no doubt that for its most devout supporters in the United States that has taken a very hard nationalist turn. And this is true among Protestants, and it is true among many Catholics. And so, I think the question that you posed may be one that no one has really confronted Vance with.“What we have to think about in regard to Trump is, will they take on projects that will threaten the constitutional foundation of the United States in order to achieve their aims? What does Musk represent, and what does part of Trump represent? It represents unbounded executive power, unconstrained by Congress, to promote conditions of maximum freedom. And the freedom they have in mind is not necessarily your personal freedom or mine.” -Gary GerstleAK: And I would extend that, Gary. I think that the most persistent and credible critics of Trump also come from the religious community. Peter Wehner, for example, former—I don't know if you're familiar with his work. He writes a lot for the Times and The Atlantic. Very religious man, is horrified—worked in the Bush and the Reagan administrations. Let's go back to—I was looking at the cover of the book, and obviously authors don't pick the covers of their books—GARY GERSTLE: I did. I picked this.AK: Okay. Well, when you look at the—GARY GERSTLE: This is this is not the original cover.AK: Right, so, the book I'm looking at, and for people just listening, I'm going to describe. The dominant picture is of the Berlin Wall being knocked down in the evening of November 1989. It's odd, Gary, isn't it, that...for the rise and fall of the neoliberal order, which is an economic order in a free market era, you should have chosen the image of a political event, which, of course, Fukuyama so famously described as the end of history. And I guess, for you as an economic historian who is also deeply interested and aware of politics, is the challenge and opportunity to always try to disentangle the economics and politics of all this? Or are they so entangled that they're actually impossible to disentangle, to separate?GARY GERSTLE: Well, I think sometimes you need to disentangle them, sometimes they move in different directions, and sometimes they move in the same direction. I think to understand the triumph of the neoliberal order, we have to see that politics and economics move in tandem with each other. What makes possible the neoliberal triumph of the 90s is the fall of communism between 1989 and 1991. And no picture embodies that better than the taking down of the Berlin Wall. And that connotes a message of freedom and escape from Soviet and communist tyranny. But the other message there is that tearing down of those walls opens the world to capitalist penetration to a degree that had not been available to the capitalist world since prior to World War One, prior to the war, and most importantly, to the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917. And where communists came to power everywhere, they either completely excluded or sharply curtailed the ability of capitalist business to operate within their borders. Their message was expropriate private property, which meant expropriate all corporate property. Give it over to the state, let the state manage it in the interest of the proletariat. This was an extraordinary dream that turned into an awful tyrannical outcome. But it animated the world, as few other ideas did in the 20th century, and proposed a very, very serious challenge to capitalist prerogative, to capitalist industry, to free markets. And so the collapse of communism, which is both the collapse of a state—a communist state, the Soviet Union—but perhaps more importantly, the collapse of the belief that any governments could structure the private economy in ways that would be beneficial to humankind. It's what opened the way in the 1990s to the neoliberal triumph. And it's important to recognize that the neoliberal triumph carried within it not just the triumph of capitalism, but the triumph of freedom. And I think the that image of the wall coming down captures both. It's people wanting to claim their freedom, but it also paves the way for an unregulated form of capitalism to spread to every corner of the world. And in the long term—we're in the mid-term—that was going to create inequalities, vulnerabilities to the global financial and economic systems, that were going to bring the global economy down and set off a radically different form of politics than the world had seen for some time. And we're still living through that radically different form of politics set off by the financial crash of 2008/2009, which, in my way of thinking, was a product of untrammeled capitalism conquering the world in the aftermath of the Soviet Union's and communism's collapse.AK: Yeah, and that's the other thing, isn't it, Garry? I mean, it goes without saying that the bringing down of the war fundamentally changed the old Soviet economy, the East European economies, Poland, Hungary, eastern part of Germany. But what no one—I think very, very few people imagined in '89 was that perhaps the biggest consequence of this capitalist penetration wasn't in Warsaw or Moscow or the eastern part of Berlin, but back in West Virginia with guys like JD Vance. How did the bringing down of the wall change America, or at least the American economy? I've never really quite understood that.GARY GERSTLE: Through the mass exporting of manufacturing to other countries that—AK: Wasn't that before? Wasn't that also taking place before '89, or did it happen particularly in the '90s?GARY GERSTLE: It began before 1989. It began during the Great Recession of the 1970s, where the first districts of manufacturing in the U.S., places like Buffalo, New York steelmaking center, began to get hollowed out. But it dramatically intensified in the 1990s, and this had to do with China permitting itself to be a part of this global free market. And China was opened to capitalist penetration from the United States and Europe. And what you saw in that decade was a massive shift of manufacturing to China, a shift that even intensified in the first decade of the 21st century with the admission of China in 2001 to the World Trade Organization. So China was a big factor. Also, the passage of NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement, which rendered the northern half of the Western Hemisphere one common market, like the European Common Market. So, enormous flight of jobs to places like Mexico. And the labor costs in places like China and Mexico, and then East Asia already leaving Japan for Korea, Indonesia, Thailand, parts of the South Asian subcontinent. The flight of jobs there became so massive, and the labor costs there were so cheap, that American industry couldn't compete. And what you begin to see is the hollowing out of American industry, American manufacturing, and whole districts of America just beginning to rot. And no new industries or no new economies taking the place of the industries and the jobs that had left. And this America was being ignored, largely in the 1990s and first decade of the 21st century, in part because the ideology of neoliberalism said, we understand that this global free market is going to increase inequality in the world, it's going to increase the distance between rich and poor, but the distance between rich and poor is okay because all boats will rise. All people will benefit. This is not just an American story, this is also the story of other parts of the North Atlantic economy. Britain certainly, Germany was a partial exception, France, other places, and this was the ideology...growth would benefit everyone, and this was not the case. It was a fallacy. But the ideology was so strong that it held together until the financial crash of 2008/2009. After that crash, it became impossible to make the point that all boats were rising under the neoliberal regime. And this is when the forgotten Americans and the forgotten Brits of the northern part of the of Great Britain. This is when they began to make their voices heard. This is when they began to strike a very different note in politics. And this is where Donald Trump had his beginnings with these forgotten, angry people who felt ignored, left behind, and were suffering greatly, because by the early decades of the 21st century, it wasn't just jobs that were gone, but it was healthy marital life, divorce rates rising, rampant drug use. Two Cambridge economists wrote a book called Depths of Despair.AK: Yeah, that book comes up in almost every conversation. I once went down to Princeton to interview Angus Deaton. Like your book, it's become a classic. So let's fast forward, Gary, to the last election. I know you're writing a book now about politics in our time of authoritarianism, and you're scratching your head and asking whether the election last week was a normal or an apocryphal one, one that's just different or historical. And I wonder, in that sense, correct me if I'm wrong, there seems to have been two elections simultaneously. On the one hand, it was very normal, from the Democrats' point of view, who treated America as if it was normal. Harris behaves as if she was just another Democratic candidate. And, of course, Trump, who didn't. My interpretation, maybe it's a bit unfair, is that it's the progressives. It's certainly the coastal elites who have become, implicitly at least, the defenders of the old neoliberal order. For them, it kind of works. It's not ideal, but it works and they can't imagine anything else. And it's the conservatives who have attacked it, the so-called conservatives. Is there any truth to that in the last election?GARY GERSTLE: Well, I think the Democrats are certainly seen by vast sectors of the population as being the defenders of an old order, of established institutions controlling the media, although I think that's less and less true because the legacy media has less and less influence and shows like yours, podcasting and rogue Fox Television and all kinds of other outlets, are increasingly influential. But yes, the Democrats are seen as a party of the establishment. They are seen as the party of the educated elite. And one of the factors that determines who votes for who now is now deeply educational in the sense of, what is your level of educational achievement? If you are college educated, you're much more likely to vote Democratic, regardless of your income. And if you're high school educated or less, you're much more likely to vote Republican. I don't think it's fair to say that the Democrats are the last protectors of the neoliberal order, because Biden broke with the neoliberal order in major, consequential ways. If the defining characteristic of the neoliberal order is to free the market from constraints and to use the state only to free up market forces—this was true, to a large extent, of Obama and of Clinton—Biden broke with that, and he did it in alliance with Bernie Sanders, set of task forces they set up in 2020 to design a new administration. And his major pieces of legislation, reshoring CHIPS manufacture, the biggest investment in clean energy in the country's history. $1 trillion infrastructure bill, the biggest infrastructure project since the interstate highway system of the '50s, and arguably since Roosevelt's fabled New Deal. These are all about industrial policy. These are all about the government using its power and resources to direct industry in a certain way so that it will increase general happiness, general welfare, general employment. So this represents a profound change from what had come before. And in that way, the Biden administration can't be seen as the last defenders.“The question is, will they be able to get further than past generations of Republicans have by their willingness to break things? And will they go so far as to break the Constitution in the pursuit of these aims?”AK: And let me jump in here, Gary, there's another really important question. There was a very interesting piece, I'm sure you saw it, by Nicholas Lemann in the New Yorker about Bidenomics and its achievements. You talked about the New Deal, the massive amount of investments—it was post COVID, they took advantage of the historical crisis. Trillions of dollars have been invested in new technologies. Is Bidenomics new in any way? Or is it basically just a return to the economics, or the political economy, of FDR?GARY GERSTLE: Well, it certainly draws inspiration from FDR, because at the core of the New Deal was the conviction that you could use government to direct industry to positive uses that would benefit not just the corporations, but the population as a whole. But there was nothing like the Green Energy Project in the New Deal. The New Deal, except for hydroelectric projects, was primarily about prospering on a cheap fossil fuel economy. The New Deal also was very comfortable with accepting prevailing gender and race conceptions of the proper place of women and African Americans in American life in a way that is unacceptable to Bidenomics. So there are redirections under Bidenomics in ways that modify the New Deal inspiration. But at its core, Bidenomics is modeled on the New Deal conviction that you need a strong federal government to point industry in the right direction. And so in that sense, there's a fundamental similarity in those two progressive projects. And I think people in the Biden administration have been quite conscious about that. Now, the particular challenges are different. The world economy is different. The climate crisis is upon us. So, it is going to take different forms, have different outcomes. But the inspiration clearly comes from Franklin Delano Roosevelt and his New Deal.AK: Well, let's go over to the other side and Trump. You scratching your head and figuring out whether this is unusual. And of course, it's the second time he's won an election. This time around, he seems to be overtly hostile to the state. He's associated with Musk, who's promised to essentially decimate the state. In historical terms, Gary, is there anything unusual about this? I mean, certainly the opponents of FDR were also very hostile to this emergent American state. As a historian, do you see this as something new, the pleasure in essentially blowing the state up, or at least the promise of blowing the state up?GARY GERSTLE: That impulse is not new. There have been members of the Republican party who have been talking this language since the New Deal arrived in America in the 1930s and '40s during the '50s and '60s and early '70s, they were marginal in American politics. And then with the neoliberal order coming into being in the '70s and with Reagan as president, their voice has gained enormous traction. One of Reagan's key advisors in the 1980s and 1990s, one of his favorite lines was, “I want to shrink the size of the federal government until we can drown it in the bathtub.” It's a wonderful image and metaphor, and captures the intensity with which conservative Republicans have wanted to eliminate the strong centralized state. But they have not been able to do it to a degree that makes that have satisfied them. It turns out that Americans, for all their possible ideological opposition to big government like big parts of it, like Social Security, like Medicare, like a strong military establishment that's gonna protect the country, like clean air, clean water. So it's proved much more difficult for this edifice to be taken down than the Reaganites had imagined it would be. So, the advocates have become more radical because of decades of frustration. And what we have to think about in regard to Trump is, will they take on projects that will threaten the constitutional foundation of the United States in order to achieve their aims? What does Musk represent, and what does part of Trump represent? It represents unbounded executive power, unconstrained by Congress, to promote conditions of maximum freedom. And the freedom they have in mind is not necessarily your personal freedom or mine, as the abortion issue signifies. What they have in mind is corporate freedom. The freedom of Elon Musk's companies to do whatever they want to do. The freedom of the social media companies to do whatever they want to do. The question is, will they be able to get further than past generations of Republicans have by their willingness to break things? And will they go so far as to break the Constitution in the pursuit of these aims? Peter Thiel has said, very forthrightly, that democracy no longer works as a system, and that America has to consider other systems in order to have the kind of prosperity and freedom it wants. And one thing that bears watching with this new Trump administration is how many supporters the Peter Thiel's and the Elon Musk's are going to have to be free to tear down the edifice and the institutions of the federal government and pursuit of a goal of a reconfigured, and what I would call rogue, laissez-faire. This is something to watch.AK: But Gary, I take your point. I mean, Thiel's been, on the West Coast, always been a convenient punchbag for the left for years now, I punched him many times myself. I wanted to. But all this seems to be just the wet dream of neoliberals. So you have Musk and Thiel doing away with government. Huge corporations, no laws. This is the neoliberal wet dream, isn't it?GARY GERSTLE: Well, partly it is. But neoliberalism always depended on a structure of law enforced by government that was necessary to allow free markets to operate in a truly free and transparent manner. In other words, you needed elements of a strong government to perfect markets, that markets were not perfect if they were left to their own devices. And one of the dangers of the Elon Musk phase of the Trump administration is that this edifice of law on which corporations and capitalism thrives will be damaged in the pursuit of a radical libertarianism. Now, there may very well be a sense that cooler heads prevail in the Trump administration, and that this scenario will not come to fruition. But one certainly has to be aware that this is one of the possible outcomes of a Trump administration. I should also say that there's another very important constituency in the Republican party that wants to continue, not dismantle, what Biden has done with industrial policies. This is the other half of JD Vance's brain. This is Tom Cotton. This is Marco Rubio, this is Josh Hawley, senator from Missouri. And they want to actively use the government to regulate industry in the public interest. And there's a very interesting intellectual convergence going on between left of center and right of center intellectuals and policymakers who are converging on the importance of having an industrial policy, because if Elon Musk is given his way, how is the abandoned heartland going to come back?AK: It's cheering me up, Gary, because what you're suggesting is that this is a fairly normal moment. You've got different wings of the Republican Party. You've got the Cottons and the Rubios, who were certainly not revolutionary. Why should we believe that this is a special moment then?GARY GERSTLE: January 6th, 2021. That's the reason. Trump remains the only president in American history to authorize an attack on the very seat of American democracy. That being: Congress sitting in the Capitol. And once he authorized the attack, he waited for three hours hoping that his attackers and his mob would conquer this building and compel the legislators inside to do—AK: And I take your perspective. I'm the last person to defend that. But we're talking about 2024 and not 2021. He won the election fairly. No one's debating that. So, why is 2024 a special election?GARY GERSTLE: Well, here's the key. Well, maybe it's a special election in two ways. It may signify the reconfiguration of a genuinely populist Republican party around the needs of ordinary working-class Americans. And we should say, in this regard, that Trump has brought into his coalition significant numbers of Latinos, young blacks. It has the beginning of a look of a multiracial coalition that the Democrats once had, but now appear to be losing. So it may be an epochal moment in that regard. The other way in which it may be an epochal moment is: what if Trump does not get his way in his term in office for something he really wants? Will he accept that he is bound by the Constitution, that he is bound by the courts? Or will he once again say, when he really wants something, no constitution, no law, will stand in my way? That's how January 6th, 2021, still matters. I'm not saying he's going to do that, but I think we have to understand that that is a possibility, especially since he has shown no remorse for the outcome of the last election. If I read into your comments, I hear you saying: he won this time. He doesn't have to worry about losing. But Trump is always worried about losing. And he is a man who doesn't really know the Constitution, and the parts that he knows and understands he doesn't especially like, because his dream, along with Elon Musk's dream, and this is one reason why I think they are melding so tightly, at the apex of American government should be unbounded executive power. This is not how the country was set up. And as Congress and as the courts begin to push back, will he accept those limits, that there must be bounds on executive power? Or will he try and break through them? I'm not saying that's going to happen, but it's something that we have to be concerned about.AK: I wonder, again, wearing your historical cap you're always doing, the more you talk, the more Trump and Trump's Republican party is Nixonian. This obsession with not being responsible for the law. The broadening of the Republican party. Certainly the Republican party under Nixon was less singularly white than it became later. Isn't, in some ways, Trump just a return to Nixon? And secondly, you're talking about the law and Trump ransacking the law. But on the other hand, everything he always does is always backed up by the law. So, he has a love hate relationship with the law himself. He could never have accomplished anything he's done without hiring all these expensive lawyers. I don't know if you saw the movie this year, The Apprentice, which is built on his relationship with what's with Roy Cohn, of course, who schooled him in American politics, who was McCarthy's lawyer. So, again, I'm not trying to defend Trump, but my point is: what's different here?GARY GERSTLE: Well, a key difference from Nixon is that when push came to shove, Nixon submitted to the rule of law, and Trump did not. Nixon did not unleash his people on Congress when a group of senators came to him and said you're going to be impeached if you stay in office, you should resign. He resigned. So the '70s was a moment of enormous assertion of the power of Congress, and assertion of the power and authority of the Constitution. That is not the story of Donald Trump. The story of Donald Trump is the story of the Constitution being pushed to the side. If you ask, is there anything new about Americans and politicians trying to manipulate the law in their favor? There's nothing new about that. And Trump, having made his fortune in New York real estate, knows there's no such thing as perfect markets, knows that judges can be bought and corrupted. And so, he has very little regard for the authority of courts. Everything's a transaction. Everything can be bought and sold. So, he understands that, and he has used the law to his advantage when he can. But let me bring you back to his first inauguration speech. There was no mention of the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution in what he had to say that day. I think we'd be hard pressed to find another inaugural speech that makes no reference to the sacred documents having to do with the founding of the American Republic. And so I think in that way, he is something new and represents, potentially, a different kind of threat. I'm not saying that's going to happen, but it's certainly possible. And let me add one other element that we have to consider, because I'm suggesting that he has a fondness for forms of authoritarian rule, and we have to recognize that hard rights are on the march everywhere in the world right now. The social democratic government of Germany has just fallen. Britain may soon be alone in terms of having a left-center party in control and upholding the values of liberal democracy. The world is in a grip of an authoritarian surge. That is not an American phenomenon. It is an international phenomenon. It is not a phenomenon I understand well enough, but if we're to understand the kind of strongman tendencies that Trump is exhibiting, the appeal of the strongman tendencies to so many Americans, we have to understand the international context in which this is occurring. And these movements in these different countries are fully aware of each other. They draw strength from each other's victories, and they get despairing from each other's defeats. So this is an international movement and an international project, and it's important, in that regard, to set Trump in that historical context.AK: Final question, Gary, there's so much here, we'll have to get you back on the show again in the new year. There's certainly, as you suggested, a great deal of vitality to conservatives, to the Cottons, the JD Vances, the Steve Bannons of the world. But what about on the left? We talked earlier, you sort of pushed back a little bit on the idea that the progressive elites aren't defenders of the neoliberal order, but you kind of acknowledged there may be a little bit of truth in that. In response to this new conservatism, which, as you suggested, is in some ways quite old, what can and should progressives do, rather than just falling back on Bidenomics and reliance on a new deal—which isn't going to happen now given that they had the opportunity in the COVID crisis to spend lots of money, which didn't have any impact on this election, for better or worse. Is there a need to re-architect the progressive politics in our new age, the age of AI, a high-tech age? Or do we simply allow the Bernie Sanders of the world to fall back on 20th-century progressive ideas?GARY GERSTLE: Well, I'm not sure where AI is taking us. AI may be taking us out of democracy altogether. I think one of—AK: You're not giving it any chance, if that's the case.“What if Trump does not get his way in his term in office for something he really wants? Will he accept that he is bound by the Constitution, that he is bound by the courts? Or will he once again say, when he really wants something, no constitution, no law, will stand in my way?”GARY GERSTLE: Well, there are different versions of AI that will be coming. But the state of the world right now suggests that democracy is on the defensive, and authoritarianism is is on the march. Those who predict the death of democracy have been wrong in the past. So I'm not predicting it here, but we have to understand that there are elements of life, technology, power in in private hands today, that make democracy much harder to do effectively. And so, this is a period of reflection that groups who care about democracy at all points on the political spectrum have to be thinking very seriously about. As for the here and now, and politicians don't think in terms of 10 or 20 years—or you have to be a leader in China, where you can think in terms of 10 or 20-year projects, because you never have to face any election and being tossed out of office—but in the here and now, I think what Democrats have to be very aware of, that the party that they thought they were is the party that the Republican Party has become, or is becoming: a multiracial, working-class party. And if the Democrats are to flourish—and in that regard, it's very significant—AK: It's astonishing, really.GARY GERSTLE: It is astonishing. And it's important to to note that Trump is the first Republican nominee for president since George W. Bush in 2004 to get a majority of votes. And the only person to do it before him in the last 30 years was his father, George H.W. Bush, in 1988. Kamala Harris came within 200,000 votes of becoming president of the United States. That's not well enough understood yet. But if 200,000 votes had changed in three states, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, she would be the president elect of the United States. However, she would have been the president elect while losing the popular vote. And one has to go very far back in history to find the Democrats being the beneficiaries of the Electoral College while losing the popular vote. And I think the fact that they lost the popular vote for only the third time in the last 50 years, maybe? I mean, when they elected someone...has to suggest that they have to do some serious thinking about how to reclaim this. Now, Bernie Sanders is coming out and saying, they should have gotten me on the public stage rather than Liz Cheney, that going after suburban Republican women was the wrong route. You should have stuck with me. We had a left/center alliance that worked in 2020. We could have done it again. But that's not my reading of the situation. My reading of the situation is that Bernie-style politics is distinctly less popular in 2024 than it was in 2020. The Democrats have to figure that out, and they have to figure out what they have to do in order to reclaim majorities in American life. And in order to do that, I think their economic programs are actually on the right track, in that respect, under the Biden administration. I think they probably have to rethink some of their cultural policies. There were three issues in this election. The economy was number one. The immigration issue was number two. And then, the trans issue was number three. The Republicans ran an estimated 30,000 ads declaring that the Democratic party was going to take your children away by turning them from boys to girls or girls to boys. The Democratic party has to do some hard thinking about how to have a progressive policy on immigration and how to have a progressive policy on issues of trans matters without losing a majority of the American people, who clearly are, at this moment, not with them on those important issues.AK: It's an astonishing moment, Gary. And I'm not sure whether it's a revolutionary moment or just surreal.GARY GERSTLE: Well, you've been pressing me, on a number of occasions, as to whether this is just the normal course of American politics, and if we look in that direction, the place to look for normality is...incumbents always do badly in high-inflationary times. And Ford and Carter lost in the 1970s. Every incumbent during COVID and during the inflationary period in Europe seems to have lost a recent election. The most normal course of politics is to say, this is an exceptional moment having to do with the enormity of COVID and what was required to shut down the economy, saved people, and then getting started up again, and we will see something more normal, the Democrats will be back to what they normally do, in 2028. That's a possibility. I think the more plausible possibility is that we are in the midst of some pretty profound electoral realignment that is giving rise to a different kind of political order. And the Democrats have to figure out if that political order is going to be under their direction, what they have to do to pull that off. AK: And maybe rather than the neoliberal order, we're talking about, what, a neo-authoritarian order? Is that—GARY GERSTLE: Well, the Trump forces are maybe neo-authoritarian, but we don't have a name for it. Pete Buttigieg—AK: Well, that's why we got you on the show, Gary. Don't you have a name for it?GARY GERSTLE: No. You know—AK: We're relying on you. I hope it's going to be in your next book.GARY GERSTLE: Well, I have till January 20th, 2025, to come up with the name. Pete Buttigieg called it the Big Deal rather than the New Deal. I don't think that cuts it. And there's some other pundits who are arguing about building from the middle out. That doesn't cut it.AK: That sounds terrible. That sounds like—GARY GERSTLE: This is part of Biden's—AK: Designing political parties by committee. It's like an American car.GARY GERSTLE: This is part of Biden's problem. You can't name, effectively, in a positive way, what he's done. One thing that's going to happen—and this may be a sign that things will continue from Biden to Trump, in terms of industrial policy. Do you have any doubt that Trump is going to plaster his name on every computer chips plant, every battery factory? Trump brought this to you, he's got to be there for every opening. He's not going to miss a beat. He'll see this as a grand publicity tour. I think there's a good chance he will take credit for what Biden has started, and that's going to upset a lot of us. But it may also signify that he may be loath to abandon many of these industrial policies that Biden has put in place, especially since the Biden administration was very clever in putting most of these plants, and chip plants, and battery plants, in deep red Republican districts.AK: Well, Gary, I know you're not particularly cheerful. I don't suppose most of our audience are, but you actually cheered me up. I think things are a little bit more normal than some people think. But we will get you back on the show after January—what did you say—January 25th, when you'll have a word to describe the New World Order?GARY GERSTLE: Well, I said after January 20th, 2025, you can expect me to have a name. I probably should—AK: Gary, now, we'll have you back on the show. If you don't have a name, I'm going to report you to Trump.GARY GERSTLE: You'll have to bury me.AK: Yeah. Okay. Well, we're not burying you. We need you, Gary Gerstle, author of Rise and Fall of the Neoliberal Order, a man who makes sense of our present with historical perspective. Gary, as always, a pleasure. Keep well and keep safe. And we'll talk again in the not-too-distant future. Thank you so much.GERSTLE: Thank you. A pleasure talking with you. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

It's all about the cover-up. NEW MERCH IS NOW AVAILABLE at https://ivehadit.store and Subscribe to I've Had It wherever you get your podcasts by visiting linktr.ee/ivehaditpodcast Thank you to our sponsors: Homes.com: When it comes to finding a home - not just a house - we have everything you need to know, all in one place. https://homes.com. We've done your home work. Nurx: Thanks to Nurx for sponsoring this podcast! Taking control of your reproductive health starts here. Go to https://nurx.com/hadit to get started. Results may vary. Not offered in every state. Medications prescribed only if clinically appropriate, consultation required. Signos: Go to https://signos.com and get up to 20% off select plans by using code HADIT today. Sundays: Get 40% off your first order of Sundays. Go to https://sundaysfordogs.com/HADIT or use code HADIT at checkout. To watch our post-show for this episode and much more - subscribe to our Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/IveHadItPodcast Follow Us: I've Had It Podcast: @Ivehaditpodcast Jennifer Welch: @mizzwelch Angie "Pumps" Sullivan: @pumpspumpspumps

Roger Stone is a Republican strategist, consultant and author. He is most often described as a self-confessed political dirty trickster and longtime Trump adviser, given to flamboyance in tailoring and swinging as well as campaign stunts. Now 70, Stone started out as a student volunteer on Richard Nixon's re-election campaign in 1972, “Pulling… penny-ante tricks” against Democrats or, in the Nixonian vernacular, “ratf**king” the president's opponents. Before Nixon's downfall in 1974, amid the Watergate scandal, Stone worked for the Committee to Re-elect the President, or 'CREEP'. After Nixon, Stone, who has a tattoo of the 37th president on his back, worked with Paul Manafort and Charles Black to build a Washington lobbying firm that flourished in the 1980s, often representing clients other firms might have found unsavoury.   Find out more about Roger at: Website: https://rogerstone.substack.com/p/welcome-to-stone-cold-truth Twitter: https://twitter.com/Rogerjstonejr YT Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@RogerStoneJr/   Check out our YouTube Channel: Jeremyryanslatebiz See the Show Notes: https://www.jeremyryanslate.com/1122 You may watch the FULL Video Episode also via my Rumble channel: https://rumble.com/c/JeremyRyanSlate

Roger Stone is a Republican strategist, consultant and author. He is most often described as a self-confessed political dirty trickster and longtime Trump adviser, given to flamboyance in tailoring and swinging as well as campaign stunts. Now 70, Stone started out as a student volunteer on Richard Nixon's re-election campaign in 1972, “Pulling… penny-ante tricks” against Democrats or, in the Nixonian vernacular, “ratf**king” the president's opponents. Before Nixon's downfall in 1974, amid the Watergate scandal, Stone worked for the Committee to Re-elect the President, or 'CREEP'. After Nixon, Stone, who has a tattoo of the 37th president on his back, worked with Paul Manafort and Charles Black to build a Washington lobbying firm that flourished in the 1980s, often representing clients other firms might have found unsavoury.   Find out more about Roger at: Website: https://rogerstone.substack.com/p/welcome-to-stone-cold-truth Twitter: https://twitter.com/Rogerjstonejr YT Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@RogerStoneJr/   Check out our YouTube Channel: Jeremyryanslatebiz See the Show Notes: https://www.jeremyryanslate.com/1122 You may watch the FULL Video Episode also via my Rumble channel: https://rumble.com/c/JeremyRyanSlate

On today's show, 1:06 pm CT, 2:06 pm ET: Bidengate: Biden investigation turns "Nixonian", now incriminating recordings involved - Deputy FBI director grilled before lawmkers - GOP senator left shocked when deputy FBI director admits agents 'unintentionally' spied on 278,000 Americans - US Rep. Anna Paulina Luna: House could vote on Biden impeachment next week - Biden grins, chuckles when asked about alleged tapes of him getting bribed - we'll examine. Transitory: Parents track 17,000 schools advising teachers how to hide gender transitions from parents - Parents furious at school board for sexually grooming kids despite choosing removal - State senator encourages parents to 'flee' California rather than risk being forced to affirm their child's 'gender identity' someday - California Bill aimed straight at Christian parents - we'll analyze. Plus, Jonathan Turley criticizes DOJ's decision to charge Trump under Espionage Act. And, Action taken on AZ lawmaker who stole Bibles and hid them. https://www.spreaker.com/show/christian-talk-that-rocks https://christiantalkthatrocks.net or http://christiantalkthatrocks.com

Roger Stone is a Republican strategist, consultant and author. He is most often described as a self-confessed political dirty trickster and longtime Trump adviser, given to flamboyance in tailoring and swinging as well as campaign stunts. Now 70, Stone started out as a student volunteer on Richard Nixon's re-election campaign in 1972, “Pulling… penny-ante tricks” against Democrats or, in the Nixonian vernacular, “ratf**king” the president's opponents. Before Nixon's downfall in 1974, amid the Watergate scandal, Stone worked for the Committee to Re-elect the President, or 'CREEP'. After Nixon, Stone, who has a tattoo of the 37th president on his back, worked with Paul Manafort and Charles Black to build a Washington lobbying firm that flourished in the 1980s, often representing clients other firms might have found unsavoury. Find out more about Roger at: Website: https://rogerstone.substack.com/p/welcome-to-stone-cold-truth Twitter: https://twitter.com/Rogerjstonejr YT Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@RogerStoneJr/   Check out our YouTube Channel: Jeremyryanslatebiz See the Show Notes: www.jeremyryanslate.com/1059 Unremarkable to Extraordinary: Ignite Your Passion to Go From Passive Observer to Creator of Your Own Life: https://getextraordinarybook.com/

Roger Stone is a Republican strategist, consultant and author. He is most often described as a self-confessed political dirty trickster and longtime Trump adviser, given to flamboyance in tailoring and swinging as well as campaign stunts. Now 70, Stone started out as a student volunteer on Richard Nixon's re-election campaign in 1972, “Pulling… penny-ante tricks” against Democrats or, in the Nixonian vernacular, “ratf**king” the president's opponents. Before Nixon's downfall in 1974, amid the Watergate scandal, Stone worked for the Committee to Re-elect the President, or 'CREEP'. After Nixon, Stone, who has a tattoo of the 37th president on his back, worked with Paul Manafort and Charles Black to build a Washington lobbying firm that flourished in the 1980s, often representing clients other firms might have found unsavoury. Find out more about Roger at: Website: https://rogerstone.substack.com/p/welcome-to-stone-cold-truth Twitter: https://twitter.com/Rogerjstonejr YT Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@RogerStoneJr/   Check out our YouTube Channel: Jeremyryanslatebiz See the Show Notes: www.jeremyryanslate.com/1059 Unremarkable to Extraordinary: Ignite Your Passion to Go From Passive Observer to Creator of Your Own Life: https://getextraordinarybook.com/

John is joined by Jason Garcia and Josh Martin for a reaction to the results of the 2022 Minneapolis primary election. Though this episode premieres two days after election day, Josh announces results as if in real time, accompanied by breaking news music. We ponder the meaning of Rep. Ilhan Omar's surprisingly small margin of victory; Mary Moriarty's comfortable first place finish in the Hennepin County Attorney's race; Don Samuels and Martha Holton-Dimick's failure to win in North Minneapolis, despite touting their community connections; and the geographic strengths and weaknesses of the candidates. John suggests Ryan Winkler's loss can be attributed to never finding a lane -- being neither the progressive choice nor a bomb throwing law and order type. Jason announces results from Meg Tuthill's front yard. John wonders if Don Samuels was making a Nixonian dog whistle on law and order by using the phrase "exhausted majority" during his triumphant concession speech. We take a fond look back at the video highlights from the Tad Jude campaign, aka Batman's police friend. Watch: https://youtube.com/wedgelive Join the conversation: https://twitter.com/wedgelive Support the show: https://patreon.com/wedgelive Wedge LIVE theme song by Anthony Kasper x LaFontsee

The President sent troops to South Sudan. NSA spying has been judged unconstitutional. The US is over $17 trillion in debt. Young people are checking out. Obama's approval rating has reached Nixonian levels. Draconian legislation is being fast-tracked. So, let's talk about what that guy on that TV show said. Tonight on Ground Zero, Clyde Lewis closes out the week with our old friend Jack Blood as we go ‘Tugging the Media's Beard‘!Originally Broadcast On 12/20/2013

This week we commemorate the death of G. Gordon Liddy by tracing Nixonian corruption, through Reagan to Limbaugh to Fox to Trump to Matt Gaetz etc.

·         Texas governor lifts mask mandate and allows businesses to open at 100% capacity, despite health officials' warnings - CNN·         Biden says $2,000 checks to 'go out the door immediately' if Democrats win in Georgia (msn.com)·         Dow sheds 346 points as yields climb on Powell's inflation remarks (freep.com)·         Why is there a silicon chip shortage? 3 factors are to blame (fastcompany.com)·         • Chart: China Is the World's Manufacturing Superpower | Statista·         Neera Tanden Withdraws As Biden's OMB Nominee : NPR·         Bomb Libya and take its oil: Biden budget chief pick Neera Tanden agreed with Trump | The Grayzone·         INVESTIGATION: Cuomo Gave Immunity to Nursing Home Execs After Big Donations — Now People Are Dying - The Daily Poster·         Cuomo-gate: a Nixonian scandal is engulfing New York | Andrew Cuomo | The Guardian·         'Joe Biden Just Dropped Bombs on Syria. Here We Go Again': US Responds to Rocket Attacks With Airstrikes | Common Dreams News

Washington, DC news correspondent Dr. Colin Campbell joins us to discuss the scandal in New York. Governor Andrew Cuomo is facing increasing pressure as legislators in his own party move to restrict his power. Meanwhile, Cuomo is taking an authoritarian position as he threatens to retaliate rather than negotiate. Also, the federal government is considering opening a probe into his actions during the spring of 2020. Dr. Yolandra Hancock, board-certified pediatrician and obesity medicine specialist, joins us to discuss the coronavirus. The Pfizer vaccine is being reconsidered for a second dose as the first dose seems to be highly effective. Also, COVID deaths along with heart attacks, drug overdoses and other pandemic-related illnesses has caused life expectancy to drop a full year in the United States. Dr. Emmitt Riley, a political scientist and assistant professor of Africana studies at DePauw University, joins us to talk about Texas. Texas governor Greg Abbott is facing mounting opposition as the storm related power outages cause misery for millions. Meanwhile, the loss of power is creating supply chain shortages and food, water, and basic supplies are getting scarce. Jim Kavanagh, a writer at The Polemicist and CounterPunch and author of "The American Farce Unravels: Shreds of January 6th," joins us to discuss domestic politics. Former President Trump launched a devastating attack on Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell, in which he unveiled his plan to primary establishment congressional Republicans. Also, a number of civil libertarian and human rights organizations are pushing President Joe Biden to halt the use of "dangerous" facial recognition technology.Kevin Gosztola, managing editor of Shadowproof.com, joins us to discuss US sanctions. The Trump administration created a suite of sanctions that was nicknamed the "sanctions wall," designed to dissuade future presidents from rejoining the Iran nuclear agreement. Will the Biden team bypass the roadblock or use it as an excuse? Also, a New York Times article discusses America's use of sanctions as a basis for statecraft, arguing that "not only does it consistently fail to advance U.S. interests, it actually mitigates Washington's influence, while leaving behind a trail of worsening humanitarian woes." Medea Benjamin, the founder of Code Pink, joins us to discuss endless wars. In her latest article, Medea and Nicholas Davies argue that "Electing Joe Biden is not enough to ensure a saner and less belligerent foreign policy." They discuss the US war machine from a historical perspective, and in that light they say that the war machine is just the same monstrous beast under new management. Teri Mattson, Latin America coordinator for Code Pink, joins us to discuss the Biden administration's complaint that Nicaragua has followed in their footsteps by enacting a "foreign agent registration act" and requiring US funded NGOs to register. Also, Ecuadorian voters face down a massive coalition of US, OAS, and Columbian operatives working to interfere with their election on behalf of right-wing candidates. Marvin Weinbaum, scholar-in-residence and director of the Middle East Institute's Center for Pakistan and Afghanistan Studies, joins us to discuss Afghanistan. The Biden administration and their EU junior partners are indicating that they plan to renege on former President Trump's deal to leave the war torn nation. Also, the Taliban is signaling that they are ready to launch a major offensive if their peace deal is abandoned. Will the Afghanistan war fire back up in the near future?

Book Vs Movie: “All the President’s Men” (1976) The Margos search for 70's creeps, dogged reporting, and “Deep Throat” “Follow the money.” The Watergate scandal of the early 1970s made headlines around the world as Richard Nixon and his loyal group of henchmen basically tried to intimidate their way into making Nixonian policies the law of the land (while breaking the law!)  And they would have gotten away with it too if it weren’t for those meddling Washington Post reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein who painstakingly investigated the Watergate hotel break-in for years. Under the leadership of publisher Katharine Graham and editor Ben Bradlee, Woodward and Bernstein helped expose the corruption of the Nixon administration and made newspapers look cool.  “All the President’s Men” was published in 1974 and immediately became a bestseller and made stars out the Washington Post team. So, of course, Hollywood came calling with an adaptation directed by Alan J. Pakula and a screenplay by past Book Vs Movie subject William Goldman.  Robert Redford’s production company “Wildwood Enterprises” helped bring together the team which includes himself play Bob Woodward and Dustin Hoffman as Carl Bernstein. Jason Robards won a Best Supporting Actor Academy Award for playing Ben Bradlee.  So between book & movie--which did we like better? Have a listen!  In this ep the Margos discuss: The true story of Nixon’s crimes and why he almost got away with his multiple crimes The process of reporting and how much work went into it in a short period of time Who was “Deep Throat” and why didn’t anyone listen to Nora Ephron? The cast: Robert Redford (Woodward,) Dustin Hoffman (Carl Bernstein,) Jason Robards (Ben Bradlee,) Jack Warden (Harrey Rosenfeld,) Martin Balsam (Howard Simons,) Hal Holbrook (Deep Throat,) Jane Alexander (Bookkeeper,) and Ned Beatty (Dardis.)  Clips used: All The President’s Men  trailer  Woodward and Bernstein decide who is the better writer Woodward and Berstein working on the story Deep Throat gives advice Ben Bradlee stands by the story Music by David Shire  Join our Patreon page to help support the show! https://www.patreon.com/bookversusmovie  Book Vs. Movie podcast https://www.facebook.com/bookversusmovie/ Twitter @bookversusmovie www.bookversusmovie.com Email us at bookversusmoviepodcast@gmail.com Brought to you by Audible.com You can sign up for a FREE 30-day trial here http://www.audible.com/?source_code=PDTGBPD060314004R Margo D. @BrooklynFitChik www.brooklynfitchick.com brooklynfitchick@gmail.com Margo P. @ShesNachoMama https://coloniabook.weebly.com/ 

Join us for a virtual conversation with Neal Gabler, award-winning author and film critic, to discuss volume one of his new biography of Ted Kennedy—an immersive journey through the life of a complicated man and a sweeping history of the fall of liberalism. Gabler pursues the Ted Kennedy seldom seen beneath the well-known images of the reckless hedonist who rode his father's fortune and his brothers' coattails to a Senate seat at the age of 30, and finds a man both racked by and driven by insecurity. Considered by his contemporaries as the least of the Kennedys, his childhood was filled with numerous humiliations, including self-inflicted ones, all the while being pressured to rise to his brothers' level. Kennedy entered the Senate to low expectations—a show horse, not a workhorse. But he drew upon his “ninth-child's talent” of deference to and comity with his Senate elders to become an influential legislator. Using his brothers' moral authority, Kennedy became a moving force during the great “liberal hour” that saw the passage of the anti-poverty program and the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts. Then, after the deaths of John and Robert and the election of Richard Nixon, Kennedy became the leading voice of liberalism, challenging Nixon to keep the American promise to the marginalized, and provoking Nixonian terror of a Kennedy restoration. Gabler also chronicles how the fatal accident on Chappaquiddick Island in 1969 dealt a serious blow not just to Kennedy's political career but to liberalism itself. MLF ORGANIZER George Hammond Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Microsoft urges Exchange server patching. Sure it does your taxes, but it’s got another agenda, too: the GoldenSpy backdoor may be in your tax software if you do business in China. Magecart ups its game. DDoSecrets says they’re not going to roll over for Twitter’s “Nixonian” schtick. Camille Stewart from Google and Lauren Zabierek from Harvard’s Belfer Center on the #Sharethemicincyber event and why systemic racism is a threat to cybersecurity. Rick Howard wraps up cybersecurity canon week with guests Richard Clarke and Robert Knake, authors of The Fifth Domain. And there’s another unsecured Amazon S3 bucket, and this exposure could present a serious risk to some people who already have trouble enough. For links to all of today's stories check out our CyberWire daily news brief: https://www.thecyberwire.com/newsletters/daily-briefing/9/124 - More info on the #Sharethemicincyber event. - Camille Stewart's essay on systemic racism in cyber.

For decades conservatives have tried to paint the left as wine-sipping elitists out of touch with the common man (and yes, I mean man). I look at the present-day manifestation of that familiar trope and attempt to trace its Nixonian provenance. More: Tom Cotton's crackpot op-ed in the NY Times; Insurrection Act of 1807 --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/strangesound/message

RadioPublic|LibSyn|YouTube|Patreon|Square Cash (Share code: Send $5, get $5!) Enough! Way more than enough, and yet somehow not hardly enough. David Waldman chronicles the destruction and potential rebirth of America with added light repartee: This weekend, Donald Trump tweeted out his betaness in all caps, while hiding in the basement, and cowering in the dark, tears running down his eyes like a dog, hoping in vain that his cosplay cavalry would charge to his rescue. Today, he squealed at alphas to do something now or else. Beta-beta Tom Cotton figures mowing down the first row or two of protesters should fix things. Greg Dworkin picks through the bad apples to sort out the good. Some orchards are bad right down to the roots. Greg tells us that presidential election prospects are looking very good for Joe Biden. Not me—I don't want to jinx things. However, Greg does have some good points. Joe Biden should take into account present events while considering a woman of color to be his vice president—and he should take time to make that decision. It is not 1968. Riots will not help Trump's reelection campaign, because nothing could ever happen that would ever make Donald Trump seem more like a leader to anyone, and comparisons with Joe Biden will just seem more silly by the day. Misinformation however, is guaranteed to exceed Nixonian levels. Meanwhile, the Overton mail slot is moving to a more vote-by-mail friendly location. Oh, and there is the COVID-19 thing. Coronavirus could be a blood vessel disease, which could explain everything. Nearly 6 in 10 aren’t ready to resume pre-pandemic activities. Protesters actually do care about the wellbeing of others. Trump couldn’t care less about West Point cadets. Donald cares enough about Brazil to send the very worst.

There's a beautifully written speech that was never delivered. Written for President Richard Nixon by Bill Safire, the speech elegizes astronauts Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong of Apollo 11, who'd become stuck on the moon, and were left to die there. In reality, Buzz and Neil made it home safely, but this contingency speech was written anyways, just in case. Sometimes it's called The Safire Memo and is sometimes called In Event of Moon Disaster.The latter title share its name with an installation that's (as of publish date) on display for the first time at IDFA in the Netherlands. This project by Francesca Panetta and Halsey Burgund explores an alternate past where Aldrin and Armstrong don't make it home from the moon. The film portion of the installation heavily features a reading of The Safire Memo by a computer generated version of President Nixon sitting in the Oval Office, reading from notes, making all the familiar facial expressions, sharing the same vocal tics, presidential timbre, and some of the Nixonian je ne sais quoi that makes the fake nearly believable. But it's not Nixon. And it's not entirely accurate to say it's an actor. It's a kind of mix of the two, a synthetic Nixon generated by a booming form of artificial intelligence called “deep learning” which creates mathematical models of complex systems, like speech. Lewis Wheeler (the actor tasked with providing the voice of Nixon) did not have to imitate Nixon's voice, only provide a proper pacing an intonation. From there, the artists hired several companies (including Re-Speecher and Vocal ID) trained a computer model to translate Lewis's voice into Nixon's.This kind of deep-learned fakery (called “deepfakes”) currently usually falls somewhere in the uncanny valley—the tech is good enough to get create a strong impersonation of a voice, but one that sounds still a bit mechanical, or metallic. This won't be the case for long though, as more and more convincing deepfake voices emerge with each generation of new code. And on the visual front, current video deepfakes are often so good as often pass the gut check of credibility. This may have been most famously demonstrated in a Buzzfeed article where comedian Jordan Peele impersonates President Obama's voice and a video deepfake moves his face along with the spoken words. With the 2020 presidential elections looming, it seems almost inevitable that deepfakes will enter the media fray that's meant to discredit political enemies, creating scandals that never happened. And outside of politics, deepfake pornographers take up the task of swapping pornographic actresses' faces with those of celebrities or the faces of female journalists they seek to discredit. On this episode of Here Be Monsters, Francesca and Halsey tell producer Jeff Emtman that deepfakes aren't going to rupture society. We've dealt with this before, whether it's darkroom manipulations or photoshop, societies eventually learn how to detect deception. But the adjustment period can be rough, and they hope that In Event of Moon Disaster will help educate media consumers on the danger of taking media at face value, regardless of whether it's deepfakes or just old-fashioned photo mis-captioning.Also on this episode, Ahnjili Zhuparris explains how computers learn to speak, and we listen to some audio examples of how computer voices can fail, using examples from the paper Location-Relative Attention Mechanisms For Robust Long-Form Speech Synthesis. Also heard: a presidential parody deepfake from user Stable Voices on Youtube. Producer: Jeff EmtmanEditor: Bethany DentonMusic: The Black Spot

There’s a beautifully written speech that was never delivered. Written for President Richard Nixon by Bill Safire, the speech elegizes astronauts Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong of Apollo 11, who’d become stuck on the moon, and were left to die there.  In reality, Buzz and Neil made it home safely, but this contingency speech was written anyways, just in case.  Sometimes it’s called The Safire Memo and is sometimes called In Event of Moon Disaster.The latter title share its name with an installation that’s (as of publish date) on display for the first time at IDFA in the Netherlands.  This project by Francesca Panetta and Halsey Burgund explores an alternate past where Aldrin and Armstrong don’t make it home from the moon.  The film portion of the installation heavily features a reading of The Safire Memo by a computer generated version of President Nixon sitting in the Oval Office, reading from notes, making all the familiar facial expressions, sharing the same vocal tics, presidential timbre, and some of the Nixonian je ne sais quoi that makes the fake nearly believable. But it’s not Nixon.  And it’s not entirely accurate to say it’s an actor.  It’s a kind of mix of the two, a synthetic Nixon generated by a booming form of artificial intelligence called “deep learning” which creates mathematical models of complex systems, like speech.  Lewis Wheeler  (the actor tasked with providing the voice of Nixon) did not have to imitate Nixon’s voice, only provide a proper pacing an intonation.  From there, the artists hired several companies (including Re-Speecher and Vocal ID) trained a computer model to translate Lewis’s voice into Nixon’s.This kind of deep-learned fakery (called “deepfakes”) currently usually falls somewhere in the uncanny valley—the tech is good enough to get create a strong impersonation of a voice, but one that sounds still a bit mechanical, or metallic.  This won’t be the case for long though, as more and more convincing deepfake voices emerge with each generation of new code.  And on the visual front, current video deepfakes are often so good as often pass the gut check of credibility.  This may have been most famously demonstrated in a Buzzfeed article where comedian Jordan Peele impersonates President Obama’s voice and a video deepfake moves his face along with the spoken words.  With the 2020 presidential elections looming, it seems almost inevitable that deepfakes will enter the media fray that’s meant to discredit political enemies, creating scandals that never happened.  And outside of politics, deepfake pornographers take up the task of swapping pornographic actresses’ faces with those of celebrities or the faces of female journalists they seek to discredit.  On this episode of Here Be Monsters, Francesca and Halsey tell producer Jeff Emtman that deepfakes aren’t going to rupture society.  We’ve dealt with this before, whether it’s darkroom manipulations or photoshop, societies eventually learn how to detect deception.  But the adjustment period can be rough, and they hope that In Event of Moon Disaster will help educate media consumers on the danger of taking media at face value, regardless of whether it’s deepfakes or just old-fashioned photo mis-captioning.Also on this episode, Ahnjili Zhuparris explains how computers learn to speak, and we listen to some audio examples of how computer voices can fail, using examples from the paper Location-Relative Attention Mechanisms For Robust Long-Form Speech Synthesis.  Also heard: a presidential  parody deepfake from user Stable Voices on Youtube. Producer: Jeff EmtmanEditor: Bethany DentonMusic: The Black Spot

The real scandal is the Nixonian media. Date: 08-29-2019

A new poll reveals the people’s true thoughts on congressional term limits, Richard Nixon pulls the bait and switch to create “Nixonian” limits, Common Sense with Paul Jacob, and an interview with Allen Johnson of termlimitpledge.org||| View transcript and music credits at www.termlimits.com/NUT51

Former Trump Campaign staffer Michael Caputo says he hasn't spoken to President Trump since Inauguration Day due to the pending investigations on Capitol Hill and the Special Counsel. But after the Mueller Report was released, Caputo's phone rang and it was the President. He tells "The Investigation" about their Oval Office meeting, the President's feelings about impeachment, and what most concerns him most about his best friend Roger Stone's upcoming trial. "The Investigation" co-anchors Kyra Phillips and Chris Vlasto also sit down with former Congressional investigator and later Congresswoman Barbara Comstock, who gives insight into all the nuts and bolts of a Congressional Investigation, including the pending issue over access to President Trump's tax returns: "We never went after tax returns because that was Nixonian." Follow Kyra on Twitter @kyraphillips Follow Chris on Twitter @vlasto Follow Matt on Twitter @mattmosk Follow John on Twitter @santucci Support this podcast with a review on Apple Podcasts: http://bit.ly/2UJIsJs Recommended listening... -- Start Here: The daily 20-minute news podcast from ABC News. http://bit.ly/2SA62eg -- Powerhouse Politics: Headliner interviews and in-depth looks at the people and events shaping U.S. politics. http://bit.ly/2SsGwr7 -- FiveThirtyEight Politics: Nate Silver and the FiveThirtyEight team cover the latest in politics, tracking the issues and "game-changers" every week. https://53eig.ht/2RF3eb1 ==================== The Investigation is produced by ABC Radio.

On episode Nixonian episode, 68, we are not crooks, Mental is giving away Plymouths like Oprah, Jeff picks the wrong week to quit sniffing plasti-dip, Chrissy brings pie on an airplane, and Chris has Laguna track maps on the back of his eyelids.  We also talk all about how excited we are to race with Lucky Dog Racing League at Laguna Seca. We talk about what to expect, all of the differences from what we are used to, and our prep for the weekend at a new and amazing track. Lucky Dog Fueling Safety Video - https://youtu.be/y9az_f7rWUkE1R Bingo, https://mfbc.us/m/w4f8cjLucky Dog Racing: https://www.racelucky.com24 Hours of Lemons: www.24hoursoflemons.comChampcar https://champcar.org/World Racing League http://www.worldracingleague.org/American Endurance Racing http://americanenduranceracing.com/Xtreme Xperience: www.XXSpeed.com save 25% with code EveryoneRacersLeMons Rallys https://24hoursoflemons.com/lemons-rally/Long roof for life:https://jalopnik.com/strong-growth-in-wagon-sales-may-be-the-opening-salvo-i-1831561302?utm_campaign=socialflow_jalopnik_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow&utm_source=jalopnik_facebook 

EPISODE #146-- Cruz and James return to the podcasting game with special guest Lezlie Moore (IG: Lezlie_Moore). Today we talk about the Nixonian comedy "Dick!" Get it! Donate to the cause at Patreon.com/Quality. Follow James on Twitter @kislingtwits and on Instagram @kislingwhatsit. You can watch Cruz and show favorite Alexis Simpson on You Tube in "They Live Together." Thanks to our artists Julius Tanag (http://www.juliustanag.com) and Sef Joosten (http://spexdoodles.tumblr.com).  Review us on iTunes. Tell a friend. Warn an enemy.

A new podcast compares and contrasts President Trump's firing of FBI director James Comey and President Nixon's infamous "Saturday Night Massacre."

The words “Nixonian” and “Watergate territory” are being used increasingly in connection with the Trump Administration.

Guess what we're talking about this time... more fucking Trump!  It appears the Russia investigation was going a little too well for the Great Orange Menace.  What's the next chapter of this saga?  Only fictional baby Jesus fucking knows!  #Nixonian

President Trump fired FBI Director James Comey Tuesday. Contrary to Democratic talking points, this is actually more Clintonian than Nixonian. Also: Emergency at the Hanford nuclear waste site.

Bill Press welcomes Niels Lesniewski, Danielle Paquette, & Adam Smith to discuss Donald Trump's abrupt decision to fire FBI director James Comey, a bipartisan condemnation of the firing in the Senate, Ivanka Trump's conflicts of interest, & the Kushner company's golden visas - the full Wednesday edition of the Bill Press Show!

Career counterintelligence expert Malcolm Nance joins Rick and Michael to discuss how former FBI Director Comey's dismissal will affect the investigation into potential collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia. Jim Robenalt, an attorney, author and expert on President Nixon and Watergate, addresses the Nixonian elements of President Trump firing FBI Director Comey.

Just Christian and Joe talking a little about the outrageous first week of the new administration (refugees, emoluments, Russia, and more) and then opening up the mailbag. Nixonian firings, self-driving cars, and more. No other show notes this week!

Buck recently was the star of a reality TV show. He discusses his experience as much as he can wihin the bounds of his non-disclosure agreement. Later, Tod reveals the people on his Nixonian enemies list. Download audio file (223-Tods-Enemies-List-.mp3)

Nicole recaps Eric Holder's press conference from yesterday. She explores how these "scandals" have been escalated to Nixonian - yet nothing Bush did ever came close - with Lee Fang, author of "The Machine" and Crooks and Liars' John Amato. Plus, She's History's Amy Simon on the rape culture in the military.

From the Think Progress Blog************************************Last week, conservative talk-show host Rush Limbaugh assailed the Center for American Progress Action Fund’s “Global Boiling” Progress Report, which explained that the extreme weather events causing death and destruction across the United States “are consistent with the changes scientists predicted would come with global warming.” He called it a “piece of propaganda” by “wackos” but refused to read any of it — “You can imagine what it says.” He continued: You know, it is a crying shame to have to sit out here and just do nothing but refute a bunch of lies that are repeatedly told by leftist activist groups and then amplified and promulgated by willing accomplices in the Drive-By Media.The “leftist activist groups” Rush is attacking now includes not only us but also the Bush administration, whose multiagency Climate Change Science Program has released two reports this week on the damage climate change is doing to the United States. The first, released Thursday, said: Many extremes and their associated impacts are now changing. For example, in recent decades most of North America has been experiencing more unusually hot days and nights, fewer unusually cold days and nights, and fewer frost days. Heavy downpours have become more frequent and intense. Droughts are becoming more severe in some regions, though there are no clear trends for North America as a whole. The power and frequency of Atlantic hurricanes have increased substantially in recent decades, though North American mainland land-falling hurricanes do not appear to have increased over the past century. Outside the tropics, storm tracks are shifting northward and the strongest storms are becoming even stronger. Friday’s report on the effect of global warming on our continent’s ecosystems finds that “Climate change has very likely increased the size and number of forest fires, insect outbreaks, and tree mortality in the interior West, the Southwest, and Alaska, and will continue to do so.”Its warning for the future? The resilience of many ecosystems is likely to be exceeded this century by an unprecedented combination of climate change, associated disturbances (e.g., flooding, drought, wildfire, insects, ocean acidification), and other global change drivers (e.g., land-use change, pollution).To conclude: the U.S. Climate Change Science Program — comprised of the Agency for International Development, Department of Agriculture, National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Department of Defense, Department of Energy, National Institutes of Health, Department of State, Department of Transportation, US Geological Survey, Environmental Protection Agency, National Aeronautics & Space Administration, National Science Foundation, and the Smithsonian Institution — has found that global warming has likely or very likely worsened: Intense rainfall Heat waves Winter storms Hurricanes Wildfires Insect outbreaks Coral bleaching The future, in addition to the above, will see worse: Droughts Ocean acidification Storm surges Wildlife disruption Extreme coastal erosionIt’s important to note that none of these are new findings — these are simply summaries of thousands of works of scientific research from the past decades. And even with the release of these long-delayed reports, the Bush administration continues to violate its lawful mandate to take action on global warming, as the president’s Nixonian assertion of executive privilege on Friday makes clear. So, despite Rush’s attacks, these “wackos” at the Center for American Progress Action Fund will continue to report the truth and hold his friends accountable.