POPULARITY
4 episodes with no kings
2 episodes with no kings
2 episodes with no kings
2 episodes with no kings
2 episodes with no kings
2 episodes with no kings
Pramila Jayapal accidentally had a moment of honesty about illegal immigration. Far-left Democrats are gushing over NYC mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani. The men who shot a man at Renton Transit Center will not be charged because prosecutors claim he was engaged in self-defense. The suspect that attacked independent journalist Cam Higby during Seattle’s ‘No Kings’ protest has been arrested. // If Democrats thought the Epstein fiasco was going to hurt Republicans, there’s some very bad new polling for them. // Positivityyy1 on Instagram turns out to be a virulent antisemite.
As subjects of the British king, the very idea of criticizing monarchy -- or King George III himself -- was a dangerous one. So how did we become a country where "no kings" is a guiding principle? Something we take for granted? Holly Brewer is our guide to the resistance, risk and eventual revolution that transformed a British colony into a democratic country that would have no king. WIN A NEW CAR OR 25K IN CASH DURING NHPR'S SUMMER RAFFLE! GET YOUR TICKETS HERE.CLICK HERE: Visit our website to see all of our episodes, donate to the podcast, sign up for our newsletter, get free educational materials, and more!To see Civics 101 in book form, check out A User's Guide to Democracy: How America Works by Hannah McCarthy and Nick Capodice, featuring illustrations by Tom Toro.Check out our other weekly NHPR podcast, Outside/In - we think you'll love it!
On this powerful new episode of Friends Talking Nerdy, Professor Aubrey and Tim the Nerd dive into the timeless and timely world of protest music. Together, they explore a curated list of some of the most iconic protest songs in music history—songs that have given voice to social movements, challenged injustice, and inspired generations to stand up and speak out. Tracks discussed include Bob Dylan's rallying cry The Times They Are A-Changin', the haunting reflection of Ohio by Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young, and Sam Cooke's soulful anthem of hope, A Change Is Gonna Come. They also dig into For What It's Worth by Buffalo Springfield, Which Side Are You On by Florence Reece, and Killing In The Name by Rage Against The Machine, among others, exploring the historical and political contexts that shaped each song and the emotional weight they still carry today. Listen to the playlist on YouTube.In the second half of the episode, Professor Aubrey shares a heartfelt and firsthand account of attending the No Kings protest in Portland, Oregon, on June 14th, 2025. She reflects on the power of peaceful demonstration, the courage of everyday people taking to the streets to demand justice, and why exercising our First Amendment rights is more important than ever. In a time of political unrest and deep uncertainty, this episode is a tribute to resistance, resilience, and the enduring impact of collective action.As always, we wish to thank Christopher Lazarek for his wonderful theme song. Head to his website for information on how to purchase his EP, Here's To You, which is available on all digital platforms.Head to Friends Talking Nerdy's website for more information on where to find us online.
Hello to you listening here, there, and everywhere your feet touch the ground! Coming to you from Whidbey Island, Washington this is Stories From Women Who Walk with 60 Seconds (and a bit more) for Motivate Your Monday and your host, Diane Wyzga.We know the power of We the People coming together to defend our democracy against the lawlessness of this administration. We've felt our power at Hands Off rallies! We've seen it multiply at No Kings rallies! Now, are you ready to join the next major national mass mobilization? July 17th is time for getting in “Good Trouble - Necessary Trouble” to defend our democracy, and carry forward the legacy of civil rights hero and Congressman John Lewis. Good Trouble Lives On is a national day of peaceful, non-violent action to challenge injustice, take a stand against the attacks on our civil and human rights by the Trump administration, and remind them that in America, the power lies with We the People. Are you with us?The Trump administration has launched full-scale attacks on our civil and human rights. Good Trouble Lives On is more than a rally; it's a moral reckoning. We the People are establishing new fronts in the struggle to redeem the soul of America! Are you with us?Click HERE to find over 1,300 Good Trouble Lives On events scheduled in all 50 states on Thursday 17th July 2025 and join one near you! Click HERE to sign up for GOOD TROUBLE LIVES ON on WHIDBEY ISLAND! Co-sponsored by: Indivisible Whidbey and Whidbey Island League of Women VotersWHEN: Thursday, July 17 from 11AM to 1 PM PDTWHERE: Intersection of State Route 20 & North Main Street, Coupeville, WA 98239WHAT: Sign waving, singing, and rallying, followed by a symbolic walk across the highway bridge to honor the life of civil rights leader and human rights champion, John Lewis.WHY: Sharing our values and commitment to fight for our nation and our democracy.Click HERE to access, John Lewis: Good Trouble, the documentary film and learn the back story of good trouble, necessary trouble TrailerThanks for listening and see you out there Thursday 17th July You're always invited: “Come for the stories - stay for the magic!” Speaking of magic, would you subscribe and spread the word with a generous 5-star review and comment - it helps us all - and join us next time!Meanwhile, stop by my Quarter Moon Story Arts website to:✓ Check out Services I Offer✓ For a no-obligation conversation about your communication challenges, get in touch with me today✓ Stay current with Diane as “Wyzga on Words” on SubstackStories From Women Who Walk Production TeamPodcaster: Diane F Wyzga & Quarter Moon Story ArtsMusic: Mer's Waltz from Crossing the Waters by Steve Schuch & Night Heron MusicAll content and image © 2019 to Present Quarter Moon Story Arts. All rights reserved.
Participants: John Steppling, John Bower, Hiroyuki Hamada, and Dennis Riches. Topics covered: the disappearing Epstein file, Shakespeare's atypical tragedy “Coriolanus”, what's behind the “No Kings” lawn signs? pro-vaxers who turned anti-vax when they got tired of the official guidelines for mRNA injection, the deep state and “deep events”, Iran-Contra and Tom Cruise's biopic of CIA mercenary Barry Seal, quote from “The Doctrine of Philosophical Necessity.” Music track: “Big Plans” by Jack Littman (used with permission).
Hello, Puzzlers! Today, A.J. and Greg give you a little peek behind the curtain and take you on a tour of the Puzzle Lab. Join host A.J. Jacobs and his guests as they puzzle–and laugh–their way through new spins on old favorites, like anagrams and palindromes, as well as quirky originals such as “Ask AI” and audio rebuses. Subscribe to The Puzzler podcast wherever you get your podcasts! "The Puzzler with A.J. Jacobs" is distributed by iHeartPodcasts and is a co-production with Neuhaus Ideas. Our executive producers are Neely Lohmann and Adam Neuhaus of Neuhaus Ideas, and Lindsay Hoffman of iHeart Podcasts. The show is produced by Jody Avirgan and Brittani Brown of Roulette Productions. Our Chief Puzzle Officer is Greg Pliska. Our associate producer is Andrea Schoenberg.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Originally aired on July 12, 2025. Chance Encounters with Bob Flaherty. Well, Dan has a Chance Encounter with the Daily Hampshire Gazette (DHG) columnist Bob Flaherty. They discuss the meaning of the No Kings protest in Granby, MA (yes, Granby). Bob answers why the Dems are so feckless in their response to the Trump administration. And Bob ends the show with a ringing endorsement of AOC for president in 2028.
Originally aired on July 12, 2025. Chance Encounters with Bob Flaherty. Well, Dan has a Chance Encounter with the Daily Hampshire Gazette (DHG) columnist Bob Flaherty. They discuss the meaning of the No Kings protest in Granby, MA (yes, Granby). Bob answers why the Dems are so feckless in their response to the Trump administration. And Bob ends the show with a ringing endorsement of AOC for president in 2028.
Originally aired on July 12, 2025. Chance Encounters with Bob Flaherty. Well, Dan has a Chance Encounter with the Daily Hampshire Gazette (DHG) columnist Bob Flaherty. They discuss the meaning of the No Kings protest in Granby, MA (yes, Granby). Bob answers why the Dems are so feckless in their response to the Trump administration. And Bob ends the show with a ringing endorsement of AOC for president in 2028.
Originally aired on July 12, 2025. Chance Encounters with Bob Flaherty. Well, Dan has a Chance Encounter with the Daily Hampshire Gazette (DHG) columnist Bob Flaherty. They discuss the meaning of the No Kings protest in Granby, MA (yes, Granby). Bob answers why the Dems are so feckless in their response to the Trump administration. And Bob ends the show with a ringing endorsement of AOC for president in 2028.
Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded its latest Term. And over the past few weeks, the Trump administration has continued to duke it out with its adversaries in the federal courts.To tackle these topics, as well as their intersection—in terms of how well the courts, including but not limited to the Supreme Court, are handling Trump-related cases—I interviewed Professor Pamela Karlan, a longtime faculty member at Stanford Law School. She's perfectly situated to address these subjects, for at least three reasons.First, Professor Karlan is a leading scholar of constitutional law. Second, she's a former SCOTUS clerk and seasoned advocate at One First Street, with ten arguments to her name. Third, she has high-level experience at the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), having served (twice) as a deputy assistant attorney general in the Civil Rights Division of the DOJ.I've had some wonderful guests to discuss the role of the courts today, including Judges Vince Chhabria (N.D. Cal.) and Ana Reyes (D.D.C.)—but as sitting judges, they couldn't discuss certain subjects, and they had to be somewhat circumspect. Professor Karlan, in contrast, isn't afraid to “go there”—and whether or not you agree with her opinions, I think you'll share my appreciation for her insight and candor.Show Notes:* Pamela S. Karlan bio, Stanford Law School* Pamela S. Karlan bio, Wikipedia* The McCorkle Lecture (Professor Pamela Karlan), UVA Law SchoolPrefer reading to listening? For paid subscribers, a transcript of the entire episode appears below.Sponsored by:NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment at nexfirm dot com.Three quick notes about this transcript. First, it has been cleaned up from the audio in ways that don't alter substance—e.g., by deleting verbal filler or adding a word here or there to clarify meaning. Second, my interviewee has not reviewed this transcript, and any transcription errors are mine. Third, because of length constraints, this newsletter may be truncated in email; to view the entire post, simply click on “View entire message” in your email app.David Lat: Welcome to the Original Jurisdiction podcast. I'm your host, David Lat, author of a Substack newsletter about law and the legal profession also named Original Jurisdiction, which you can read and subscribe to at davidlat dot Substack dot com. You're listening to the seventy-seventh episode of this podcast, recorded on Friday, June 27.Thanks to this podcast's sponsor, NexFirm. NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment at nexfirm dot com. Want to know who the guest will be for the next Original Jurisdiction podcast? Follow NexFirm on LinkedIn for a preview.With the 2024-2025 Supreme Court Term behind us, now is a good time to talk about both constitutional law and the proper role of the judiciary in American society. I expect they will remain significant as subjects because the tug of war between the Trump administration and the federal judiciary continues—and shows no signs of abating.To tackle these topics, I welcomed to the podcast Professor Pamela Karlan, the Montgomery Professor of Public Interest Law and Co-Director of the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic at Stanford Law School. Pam is not only a leading legal scholar, but she also has significant experience in practice. She's argued 10 cases before the Supreme Court, which puts her in a very small club, and she has worked in government at high levels, serving as a deputy assistant attorney general in the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice during the Obama administration. Without further ado, here's my conversation with Professor Pam Karlan.Professor Karlan, thank you so much for joining me.Pamela Karlan: Thanks for having me.DL: So let's start at the beginning. Tell us about your background and upbringing. I believe we share something in common—you were born in New York City?PK: I was born in New York City. My family had lived in New York since they arrived in the country about a century before.DL: What borough?PK: Originally Manhattan, then Brooklyn, then back to Manhattan. As my mother said, when I moved to Brooklyn when I was clerking, “Brooklyn to Brooklyn, in three generations.”DL: Brooklyn is very, very hip right now.PK: It wasn't hip when we got there.DL: And did you grow up in Manhattan or Brooklyn?PK: When I was little, we lived in Manhattan. Then right before I started elementary school, right after my brother was born, our apartment wasn't big enough anymore. So we moved to Stamford, Connecticut, and I grew up in Connecticut.DL: What led you to go to law school? I see you stayed in the state; you went to Yale. What did you have in mind for your post-law-school career?PK: I went to law school because during the summer between 10th and 11th grade, I read Richard Kluger's book, Simple Justice, which is the story of the litigation that leads up to Brown v. Board of Education. And I decided I wanted to go to the NAACP Legal Defense Fund and be a school desegregation lawyer, and that's what led me to go to law school.DL: You obtained a master's degree in history as well as a law degree. Did you also have teaching in mind as well?PK: No, I thought getting the master's degree was my last chance to do something I had loved doing as an undergrad. It didn't occur to me until I was late in my law-school days that I might at some point want to be a law professor. That's different than a lot of folks who go to law school now; they go to law school wanting to be law professors.During Admitted Students' Weekend, some students say to me, “I want to be a law professor—should I come here to law school?” I feel like saying to them, “You haven't done a day of law school yet. You have no idea whether you're good at law. You have no idea whether you'd enjoy doing legal teaching.”It just amazes me that people come to law school now planning to be a law professor, in a way that I don't think very many people did when I was going to law school. In my day, people discovered when they were in law school that they loved it, and they wanted to do more of what they loved doing; I don't think people came to law school for the most part planning to be law professors.DL: The track is so different now—and that's a whole other conversation—but people are getting master's and Ph.D. degrees, and people are doing fellowship after fellowship. It's not like, oh, you practice for three, five, or seven years, and then you become a professor. It seems to be almost like this other track nowadays.PK: When I went on the teaching market, I was distinctive in that I had not only my student law-journal note, but I actually had an article that Ricky Revesz and I had worked on that was coming out. And it was not normal for people to have that back then. Now people go onto the teaching market with six or seven publications—and no practice experience really to speak of, for a lot of them.DL: You mentioned talking to admitted students. You went to YLS, but you've now been teaching for a long time at Stanford Law School. They're very similar in a lot of ways. They're intellectual. They're intimate, especially compared to some of the other top law schools. What would you say if I'm an admitted student choosing between those two institutions? What would cause me to pick one versus the other—besides the superior weather of Palo Alto?PK: Well, some of it is geography; it's not just the weather. Some folks are very East-Coast-centered, and other folks are very West-Coast-centered. That makes a difference.It's a little hard to say what the differences are, because the last time I spent a long time at Yale Law School was in 2012 (I visited there a bunch of times over the years), but I think the faculty here at Stanford is less focused and concentrated on the students who want to be law professors than is the case at Yale. When I was at Yale, the idea was if you were smart, you went and became a law professor. It was almost like a kind of external manifestation of an inner state of grace; it was a sign that you were a smart person, if you wanted to be a law professor. And if you didn't, well, you could be a donor later on. Here at Stanford, the faculty as a whole is less concentrated on producing law professors. We produce a fair number of them, but it's not the be-all and end-all of the law school in some ways. Heather Gerken, who's the dean at Yale, has changed that somewhat, but not entirely. So that's one big difference.One of the most distinctive things about Stanford, because we're on the quarter system, is that our clinics are full-time clinics, taught by full-time faculty members at the law school. And that's distinctive. I think Yale calls more things clinics than we do, and a lot of them are part-time or taught by folks who aren't in the building all the time. So that's a big difference between the schools.They just have very different feels. I would encourage any student who gets into both of them to go and visit both of them, talk to the students, and see where you think you're going to be most comfortably stretched. Either school could be the right school for somebody.DL: I totally agree with you. Sometimes people think there's some kind of platonic answer to, “Where should I go to law school?” And it depends on so many individual circumstances.PK: There really isn't one answer. I think when I was deciding between law schools as a student, I got waitlisted at Stanford and I got into Yale. I had gone to Yale as an undergrad, so I wasn't going to go anywhere else if I got in there. I was from Connecticut and loved living in Connecticut, so that was an easy choice for me. But it's a hard choice for a lot of folks.And I do think that one of the worst things in the world is U.S. News and World Report, even though we're generally a beneficiary of it. It used to be that the R-squared between where somebody went to law school and what a ranking was was minimal. I knew lots of people who decided, in the old days, that they were going to go to Columbia rather than Yale or Harvard, rather than Stanford or Penn, rather than Chicago, because they liked the city better or there was somebody who did something they really wanted to do there.And then the R-squared, once U.S. News came out, of where people went and what the rankings were, became huge. And as you probably know, there were some scandals with law schools that would just waitlist people rather than admit them, to keep their yield up, because they thought the person would go to a higher-ranked law school. There were years and years where a huge part of the Stanford entering class had been waitlisted at Penn. And that's bad for people, because there are people who should go to Penn rather than come here. There are people who should go to NYU rather than going to Harvard. And a lot of those people don't do it because they're so fixated on U.S. News rankings.DL: I totally agree with you. But I suspect that a lot of people think that there are certain opportunities that are going to be open to them only if they go here or only if they go there.Speaking of which, after graduating from YLS, you clerked for Justice Blackmun on the Supreme Court, and statistically it's certainly true that certain schools seem to improve your odds of clerking for the Court. What was that experience like overall? People often describe it as a dream job. We're recording this on the last day of the Supreme Court Term; some hugely consequential historic cases are coming down. As a law clerk, you get a front row seat to all of that, to all of that history being made. Did you love that experience?PK: I loved the experience. I loved it in part because I worked for a wonderful justice who was just a lovely man, a real mensch. I had three great co-clerks. It was the first time, actually, that any justice had ever hired three women—and so that was distinctive for me, because I had been in classes in law school where there were fewer than three women. I was in one class in law school where I was the only woman. So that was neat.It was a great Term. It was the last year of the Burger Court, and we had just a heap of incredibly interesting cases. It's amazing how many cases I teach in law school that were decided that year—the summary-judgment trilogy, Thornburg v. Gingles, Bowers v. Hardwick. It was just a really great time to be there. And as a liberal, we won a lot of the cases. We didn't win them all, but we won a lot of them.It was incredibly intense. At that point, the Supreme Court still had this odd IT system that required eight hours of diagnostics every night. So the system was up from 8 a.m. to midnight—it stayed online longer if there was a death case—but otherwise it went down at midnight. In the Blackmun chambers, we showed up at 8 a.m. for breakfast with the Justice, and we left at midnight, five days a week. Then on the weekends, we were there from 9 to 9. And they were deciding 150 cases, not 60 cases, a year. So there was a lot more work to do, in that sense. But it was a great year. I've remained friends with my co-clerks, and I've remained friends with clerks from other chambers. It was a wonderful experience.DL: And you've actually written about it. I would refer people to some of the articles that they can look up, on your CV and elsewhere, where you've talked about, say, having breakfast with the Justice.PK: And we had a Passover Seder with the Justice as well, which was a lot of fun.DL: Oh wow, who hosted that? Did he?PK: Actually, the clerks hosted it. Originally he had said, “Oh, why don't we have it at the Court?” But then he came back to us and said, “Well, I think the Chief Justice”—Chief Justice Burger—“might not like that.” But he lent us tables and chairs, which were dropped off at one of the clerk's houses. And it was actually the day of the Gramm-Rudman argument, which was an argument about the budget. So we had to keep running back and forth from the Court to the house of Danny Richman, the clerk who hosted it, who was a Thurgood Marshall clerk. We had to keep running back and forth from the Court to Danny Richman's house, to baste the turkey and make stuff, back and forth. And then we had a real full Seder, and we invited all of the Jewish clerks at the Court and the Justice's messenger, who was Jewish, and the Justice and Mrs. Blackmun, and it was a lot of fun.DL: Wow, that's wonderful. So where did you go after your clerkship?PK: I went to the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, where I was an assistant counsel, and I worked on voting-rights and employment-discrimination cases.DL: And that was something that you had thought about for a long time—you mentioned you had read about its work in high school.PK: Yes, and it was a great place to work. We were working on great cases, and at that point we were really pushing the envelope on some of the stuff that we were doing—which was great and inspiring, and my colleagues were wonderful.And unlike a lot of Supreme Court practices now, where there's a kind of “King Bee” usually, and that person gets to argue everything, the Legal Defense Fund was very different. The first argument I did at the Court was in a case that I had worked on the amended complaint for, while at the Legal Defense Fund—and they let me essentially keep working on the case and argue it at the Supreme Court, even though by the time the case got to the Supreme Court, I was teaching at UVA. So they didn't have this policy of stripping away from younger lawyers the ability to argue their cases the whole way through the system.DL: So how many years out from law school were you by the time you had your first argument before the Court? I know that, today at least, there's this two-year bar on arguing before the Court after having clerked there.PK: Six or seven years out—because I think I argued in ‘91.DL: Now, you mentioned that by then you were teaching at UVA. You had a dream job working at the NAACP Legal Defense Fund. What led you to go to UVA?PK: There were two things, really, that did it. One was I had also discovered when I was in law school that I loved law school, and I was better at law school than I had been at anything I had done before law school. And the second was I really hated dealing with opposing counsel. I tell my students now, “You should take negotiation. If there's only one class you could take in law school, take negotiation.” Because it's a skill; it's not a habit of mind, but I felt like it was a habit of mind. And I found the discovery process and filing motions to compel and dealing with the other side's intransigence just really unpleasant.What I really loved was writing briefs. I loved writing briefs, and I could keep doing that for the Legal Defense Fund while at UVA, and I've done a bunch of that over the years for LDF and for other organizations. I could keep doing that and I could live in a small town, which I really wanted to do. I love New York, and now I could live in a city—I've spent a couple of years, off and on, living in cities since then, and I like it—but I didn't like it at that point. I really wanted to be out in the country somewhere. And so UVA was the perfect mix. I kept working on cases, writing amicus briefs for LDF and for other organizations. I could teach, which I loved. I could live in a college town, which I really enjoyed. So it was the best blend of things.DL: And I know, from your having actually delivered a lecture at UVA, that it really did seem to have a special place in your heart. UVA Law School—they really do have a wonderful environment there (as does Stanford), and Charlottesville is a very charming place.PK: Yes, especially when I was there. UVA has a real gift for developing its junior faculty. It was a place where the senior faculty were constantly reading our work, constantly talking to us. Everyone was in the building, which makes a huge difference.The second case I had go to the Supreme Court actually came out of a class where a student asked a question, and I ended up representing the student, and we took the case all the way to the Supreme Court. But I wasn't admitted in the Western District of Virginia, and that's where we had to file a case. And so I turned to my next-door neighbor, George Rutherglen, and said to George, “Would you be the lead counsel in this?” And he said, “Sure.” And we ended up representing a bunch of UVA students, challenging the way the Republican Party did its nomination process. And we ended up, by the student's third year in law school, at the Supreme Court.So UVA was a great place. I had amazing colleagues. The legendary Bill Stuntz was then there; Mike Klarman was there. Dan Ortiz, who's still there, was there. So was John Harrison. It was a fantastic group of people to have as your colleagues.DL: Was it difficult for you, then, to leave UVA and move to Stanford?PK: Oh yes. When I went in to tell Bob Scott, who was then the dean, that I was leaving, I just burst into tears. I think the reason I left UVA was I was at a point in my career where I'd done a bunch of visits at other schools, and I thought that I could either leave then or I would be making a decision to stay there for the rest of my career. And I just felt like I wanted to make a change. And in retrospect, I would've been just as happy if I'd stayed at UVA. In my professional life, I would've been just as happy. I don't know in my personal life, because I wouldn't have met my partner, I don't think, if I'd been at UVA. But it's a marvelous place; everything about it is just absolutely superb.DL: Are you the managing partner of a boutique or midsize firm? If so, you know that your most important job is attracting and retaining top talent. It's not easy, especially if your benefits don't match up well with those of Biglaw firms or if your HR process feels “small time.” NexFirm has created an onboarding and benefits experience that rivals an Am Law 100 firm, so you can compete for the best talent at a price your firm can afford. Want to learn more? Contact NexFirm at 212-292-1002 or email betterbenefits at nexfirm dot com.So I do want to give you a chance to say nice things about your current place. I assume you have no regrets about moving to Stanford Law, even if you would've been just as happy at UVA?PK: I'm incredibly happy here. I've got great colleagues. I've got great students. The ability to do the clinic the way we do it, which is as a full-time clinic, wouldn't be true anywhere else in the country, and that makes a huge difference to that part of my work. I've gotten to teach around the curriculum. I've taught four of the six first-year courses, which is a great opportunityAnd as you said earlier, the weather is unbelievable. People downplay that, because especially for people who are Northeastern Ivy League types, there's a certain Calvinism about that, which is that you have to suffer in order to be truly working hard. People out here sometimes think we don't work hard because we are not visibly suffering. But it's actually the opposite, in a way. I'm looking out my window right now, and it's a gorgeous day. And if I were in the east and it were 75 degrees and sunny, I would find it hard to work because I'd think it's usually going to be hot and humid, or if it's in the winter, it's going to be cold and rainy. I love Yale, but the eight years I spent there, my nose ran the entire time I was there. And here I look out and I think, “It's beautiful, but you know what? It's going to be beautiful tomorrow. So I should sit here and finish grading my exams, or I should sit here and edit this article, or I should sit here and work on the Restatement—because it's going to be just as beautiful tomorrow.” And the ability to walk outside, to clear your head, makes a huge difference. People don't understand just how huge a difference that is, but it's huge.DL: That's so true. If you had me pick a color to associate with my time at YLS, I would say gray. It just felt like everything was always gray, the sky was always gray—not blue or sunny or what have you.But I know you've spent some time outside of Northern California, because you have done some stints at the Justice Department. Tell us about that, the times you went there—why did you go there? What type of work were you doing? And how did it relate to or complement your scholarly work?PK: At the beginning of the Obama administration, I had applied for a job in the Civil Rights Division as a deputy assistant attorney general (DAAG), and I didn't get it. And I thought, “Well, that's passed me by.” And a couple of years later, when they were looking for a new principal deputy solicitor general, in the summer of 2013, the civil-rights groups pushed me for that job. I got an interview with Eric Holder, and it was on June 11th, 2013, which just fortuitously happens to be the 50th anniversary of the day that Vivian Malone desegregated the University of Alabama—and Vivian Malone is the older sister of Sharon Malone, who is married to Eric Holder.So I went in for the interview and I said, “This must be an especially special day for you because of the 50th anniversary.” And we talked about that a little bit, and then we talked about other things. And I came out of the interview, and a couple of weeks later, Don Verrilli, who was the solicitor general, called me up and said, “Look, you're not going to get a job as the principal deputy”—which ultimately went to Ian Gershengorn, a phenomenal lawyer—“but Eric Holder really enjoyed talking to you, so we're going to look for something else for you to do here at the Department of Justice.”And a couple of weeks after that, Eric Holder called me and offered me the DAAG position in the Civil Rights Division and said, “We'd really like you to especially concentrate on our voting-rights litigation.” It was very important litigation, in part because the Supreme Court had recently struck down the pre-clearance regime under Section 5 [of the Voting Rights Act]. So the Justice Department was now bringing a bunch of lawsuits against things they could have blocked if Section 5 had been in effect, most notably the Texas voter ID law, which was a quite draconian voter ID law, and this omnibus bill in North Carolina that involved all sorts of cutbacks to opportunities to vote: a cutback on early voting, a cutback on same-day registration, a cutback on 16- and 17-year-olds pre-registering, and the like.So I went to the Department of Justice and worked with the Voting Section on those cases, but I also ended up working on things like getting the Justice Department to change its position on whether Title VII covered transgender individuals. And then I also got to work on the implementation of [United States v.] Windsor—which I had worked on, representing Edie Windsor, before I went to DOJ, because the Court had just decided Windsor [which held Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional]. So I had an opportunity to work on how to implement Windsor across the federal government. So that was the stuff I got to work on the first time I was at DOJ, and I also obviously worked on tons of other stuff, and it was phenomenal. I loved doing it.I did it for about 20 months, and then I came back to Stanford. It affected my teaching; I understood a lot of stuff quite differently having worked on it. It gave me some ideas on things I wanted to write about. And it just refreshed me in some ways. It's different than working in the clinic. I love working in the clinic, but you're working with students. You're working only with very, very junior lawyers. I sometimes think of the clinic as being a sort of Groundhog Day of first-year associates, and so I'm sort of senior partner and paralegal at a large law firm. At DOJ, you're working with subject-matter experts. The people in the Voting Section, collectively, had hundreds of years of experience with voting. The people in the Appellate Section had hundreds of years of experience with appellate litigation. And so it's just a very different feel.So I did that, and then I came back to Stanford. I was here, and in the fall of 2020, I was asked if I wanted to be one of the people on the Justice Department review team if Joe Biden won the election. These are sometimes referred to as the transition teams or the landing teams or the like. And I said, “I'd be delighted to do that.” They had me as one of the point people reviewing the Civil Rights Division. And I think it might've even been the Wednesday or Thursday before Inauguration Day 2021, I got a call from the liaison person on the transition team saying, “How would you like to go back to DOJ and be the principal deputy assistant attorney general in the Civil Rights Division?” That would mean essentially running the Division until we got a confirmed head, which took about five months. And I thought that this would be an amazing opportunity to go back to the DOJ and work with people I love, right at the beginning of an administration.And the beginning of an administration is really different than coming in midway through the second term of an administration. You're trying to come up with priorities, and I viewed my job really as helping the career people to do their best work. There were a huge number of career people who had gone through the first Trump administration, and they were raring to go. They had all sorts of ideas on stuff they wanted to do, and it was my job to facilitate that and make that possible for them. And that's why it's so tragic this time around that almost all of those people have left. The current administration first tried to transfer them all into Sanctuary Cities [the Sanctuary Cities Enforcement Working Group] or ask them to do things that they couldn't in good conscience do, and so they've retired or taken buyouts or just left.DL: It's remarkable, just the loss of expertise and experience at the Justice Department over these past few months.PK: Thousands of years of experience gone. And these are people, you've got to realize, who had been through the Nixon administration, the Reagan administration, both Bush administrations, and the first Trump administration, and they hadn't had any problem. That's what's so stunning: this is not just the normal shift in priorities, and they have gone out of their way to make it so hellacious for people that they will leave. And that's not something that either Democratic or Republican administrations have ever done before this.DL: And we will get to a lot of, shall we say, current events. Finishing up on just the discussion of your career, you had the opportunity to work in the executive branch—what about judicial service? You've been floated over the years as a possible Supreme Court nominee. I don't know if you ever looked into serving on the Ninth Circuit or were considered for that. What about judicial service?PK: So I've never been in a position, and part of this was a lesson I learned right at the beginning of my LDF career, when Lani Guinier, who was my boss at LDF, was nominated for the position of AAG [assistant attorney general] in the Civil Rights Division and got shot down. I knew from that time forward that if I did the things I really wanted to do, my chances of confirmation were not going to be very high. People at LDF used to joke that they would get me nominated so that I would take all the bullets, and then they'd sneak everybody else through. So I never really thought that I would have a shot at a judicial position, and that didn't bother me particularly. As you know, I gave the commencement speech many years ago at Stanford, and I said, “Would I want to be on the Supreme Court? You bet—but not enough to have trimmed my sails for an entire lifetime.”And I think that's right. Peter Baker did this story in The New York Times called something like, “Favorites of Left Don't Make Obama's Court List.” And in the story, Tommy Goldstein, who's a dear friend of mine, said, “If they wanted to talk about somebody who was a flaming liberal, they'd be talking about Pam Karlan, but nobody's talking about Pam Karlan.” And then I got this call from a friend of mine who said, “Yeah, but at least people are talking about how nobody's talking about you. Nobody's even talking about how nobody's talking about me.” And I was flattered, but not fooled.DL: That's funny; I read that piece in preparing for this interview. So let's say someone were to ask you, someone mid-career, “Hey, I've been pretty safe in the early years of my career, but now I'm at this juncture where I could do things that will possibly foreclose my judicial ambitions—should I just try to keep a lid on it, in the hope of making it?” It sounds like you would tell them to let their flag fly.PK: Here's the thing: your chances of getting to be on the Supreme Court, if that's what you're talking about, your chances are so low that the question is how much do you want to give up to go from a 0.001% chance to a 0.002% chance? Yes, you are doubling your chances, but your chances are not good. And there are some people who I think are capable of doing that, perhaps because they fit the zeitgeist enough that it's not a huge sacrifice for them. So it's not that I despise everybody who goes to the Supreme Court because they must obviously have all been super-careerists; I think lots of them weren't super-careerists in that way.Although it does worry me that six members of the Court now clerked at the Supreme Court—because when you are a law clerk, it gives you this feeling about the Court that maybe you don't want everybody who's on the Court to have, a feeling that this is the be-all and end-all of life and that getting a clerkship is a manifestation of an inner state of grace, so becoming a justice is equally a manifestation of an inner state of grace in which you are smarter than everybody else, wiser than everybody else, and everybody should kowtow to you in all sorts of ways. And I worry that people who are imprinted like ducklings on the Supreme Court when they're 25 or 26 or 27 might not be the best kind of portfolio of justices at the back end. The Court that decided Brown v. Board of Education—none of them, I think, had clerked at the Supreme Court, or maybe one of them had. They'd all done things with their lives other than try to get back to the Supreme Court. So I worry about that a little bit.DL: Speaking of the Court, let's turn to the Court, because it just finished its Term as we are recording this. As we started recording, they were still handing down the final decisions of the day.PK: Yes, the “R” numbers hadn't come up on the Supreme Court website when I signed off to come talk to you.DL: Exactly. So earlier this month, not today, but earlier this month, the Court handed down its decision in United States v. Skrmetti, reviewing Tennessee's ban on the use of hormones and puberty blockers for transgender youth. Were you surprised by the Court's ruling in Skrmetti?PK: No. I was not surprised.DL: So one of your most famous cases, which you litigated successfully five years ago or so, was Bostock v. Clayton County, in which the Court held that Title VII does apply to protect transgender individuals—and Bostock figures significantly in the Skrmetti opinions. Why were you surprised by Skrmetti given that you had won this victory in Bostock, which you could argue, in terms of just the logic of it, does carry over somewhat?PK: Well, I want to be very precise: I didn't actually litigate Bostock. There were three cases that were put together….DL: Oh yes—you handled Zarda.PK: I represented Don Zarda, who was a gay man, so I did not argue the transgender part of the case at all. Fortuitously enough, David Cole argued that part of the case, and David Cole was actually the first person I had dinner with as a freshman at Yale College, when I started college, because he was the roommate of somebody I debated against in high school. So David and I went to law school together, went to college together, and had classes together. We've been friends now for almost 50 years, which is scary—I think for 48 years we've been friends—and he argued that part of the case.So here's what surprised me about what the Supreme Court did in Skrmetti. Given where the Court wanted to come out, the more intellectually honest way to get there would've been to say, “Yes, of course this is because of sex; there is sex discrimination going on here. But even applying intermediate scrutiny, we think that Tennessee's law should survive intermediate scrutiny.” That would've been an intellectually honest way to get to where the Court got.Instead, they did this weird sort of, “Well, the word ‘sex' isn't in the Fourteenth Amendment, but it's in Title VII.” But that makes no sense at all, because for none of the sex-discrimination cases that the Court has decided under the Fourteenth Amendment did the word “sex” appear in the Fourteenth Amendment. It's not like the word “sex” was in there and then all of a sudden it took a powder and left. So I thought that was a really disingenuous way of getting to where the Court wanted to go. But I was not surprised after the oral argument that the Court was going to get to where it got on the bottom line.DL: I'm curious, though, rewinding to Bostock and Zarda, were you surprised by how the Court came out in those cases? Because it was still a deeply conservative Court back then.PK: No, I was not surprised. I was not surprised, both because I thought we had so much the better of the argument and because at the oral argument, it seemed pretty clear that we had at least six justices, and those were the six justices we had at the end of the day. The thing that was interesting to me about Bostock was I thought also that we were likely to win for the following weird legal-realist reason, which is that this was a case that would allow the justices who claimed to be textualists to show that they were principled textualists, by doing something that they might not have voted for if they were in Congress or the like.And also, while the impact was really large in one sense, the impact was not really large in another sense: most American workers are protected by Title VII, but most American employers do not discriminate, and didn't discriminate even before this, on the basis of sexual orientation or on the basis of gender identity. For example, in Zarda's case, the employer denied that they had fired Mr. Zarda because he was gay; they said, “We fired him for other reasons.”Very few employers had a formal policy that said, “We discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation.” And although most American workers are protected by Title VII, most American employers are not covered by Title VII—and that's because small employers, employers with fewer than 15 full-time employees, are not covered at all. And religious employers have all sorts of exemptions and the like, so for the people who had the biggest objection to hiring or promoting or retaining gay or transgender employees, this case wasn't going to change what happened to them at all. So the impact was really important for workers, but not deeply intrusive on employers generally. So I thought those two things, taken together, meant that we had a pretty good argument.I actually thought our textual argument was not our best argument, but it was the one that they were most likely to buy. So it was really interesting: we made a bunch of different arguments in the brief, and then as soon as I got up to argue, the first question out of the box was Justice Ginsburg saying, “Well, in 1964, homosexuality was illegal in most of the country—how could this be?” And that's when I realized, “Okay, she's just telling me to talk about the text, don't talk about anything else.”So I just talked about the text the whole time. But as you may remember from the argument, there was this weird moment, which came after I answered her question and one other one, there was this kind of silence from the justices. And I just said, “Well, if you don't have any more questions, I'll reserve the remainder of my time.” And it went well; it went well as an argument.DL: On the flip side, speaking of things that are not going so well, let's turn to current events. Zooming up to a higher level of generality than Skrmetti, you are a leading scholar of constitutional law, so here's the question. I know you've already been interviewed about it by media outlets, but let me ask you again, in light of just the latest, latest, latest news: are we in a constitutional crisis in the United States?PK: I think we're in a period of great constitutional danger. I don't know what a “constitutional crisis” is. Some people think the constitutional crisis is that we have an executive branch that doesn't believe in the Constitution, right? So you have Donald Trump asked, in an interview, “Do you have to comply with the Constitution?” He says, “I don't know.” Or he says, “I have an Article II that gives me the power to do whatever I want”—which is not what Article II says. If you want to be a textualist, it does not say the president can do whatever he wants. So you have an executive branch that really does not have a commitment to the Constitution as it has been understood up until now—that is, limited government, separation of powers, respect for individual rights. With this administration, none of that's there. And I don't know whether Emil Bove did say, “F**k the courts,” or not, but they're certainly acting as if that's their attitude.So yes, in that sense, we're in a period of constitutional danger. And then on top of that, I think we have a Supreme Court that is acting almost as if this is a normal administration with normal stuff, a Court that doesn't seem to recognize what district judges appointed by every president since George H.W. Bush or maybe even Reagan have recognized, which is, “This is not normal.” What the administration is trying to do is not normal, and it has to be stopped. So that worries me, that the Supreme Court is acting as if it needs to keep its powder dry—and for what, I'm not clear.If they think that by giving in and giving in, and prevaricating and putting things off... today, I thought the example of this was in the birthright citizenship/universal injunction case. One of the groups of plaintiffs that's up there is a bunch of states, around 23 states, and the Supreme Court in Justice Barrett's opinion says, “Well, maybe the states have standing, maybe they don't. And maybe if they have standing, you can enjoin this all in those states. We leave this all for remind.”They've sat on this for months. It's ridiculous that the Supreme Court doesn't “man up,” essentially, and decide these things. It really worries me quite a bit that the Supreme Court just seems completely blind to the fact that in 2024, they gave Donald Trump complete criminal immunity from any prosecution, so who's going to hold him accountable? Not criminally accountable, not accountable in damages—and now the Supreme Court seems not particularly interested in holding him accountable either.DL: Let me play devil's advocate. Here's my theory on why the Court does seem to be holding its fire: they're afraid of a worse outcome, which is, essentially, “The emperor has no clothes.”Say they draw this line in the sand for Trump, and then Trump just crosses it. And as we all know from that famous quote from The Federalist Papers, the Court has neither force nor will, but only judgment. That's worse, isn't it? If suddenly it's exposed that the Court doesn't have any army, any way to stop Trump? And then the courts have no power.PK: I actually think it's the opposite, which is, I think if the Court said to Donald Trump, “You must do X,” and then he defies it, you would have people in the streets. You would have real deep resistance—not just the “No Kings,” one-day march, but deep resistance. And there are scholars who've done comparative law who say, “When 3 percent of the people in a country go to the streets, you get real change.” And I think the Supreme Court is mistaking that.I taught a reading group for our first-years here. We have reading groups where you meet four times during the fall for dinner, and you read stuff that makes you think. And my reading group was called “Exit, Voice, and Loyalty,” and it started with the Albert Hirschman book with that title.DL: Great book.PK: It's a great book. And I gave them some excerpt from that, and I gave them an essay by Hannah Arendt called “Personal Responsibility Under Dictatorship,” which she wrote in 1964. And one of the things she says there is she talks about people who stayed in the German regime, on the theory that they would prevent at least worse things from happening. And I'm going to paraphrase slightly, but what she says is, “People who think that what they're doing is getting the lesser evil quickly forget that what they're choosing is evil.” And if the Supreme Court decides, “We're not going to tell Donald Trump ‘no,' because if we tell him no and he goes ahead, we will be exposed,” what they have basically done is said to Donald Trump, “Do whatever you want; we're not going to stop you.” And that will lose the Supreme Court more credibility over time than Donald Trump defying them once and facing some serious backlash for doing it.DL: So let me ask you one final question before we go to my little speed round. That 3 percent statistic is fascinating, by the way, but it resonates for me. My family's originally from the Philippines, and you probably had the 3 percent out there in the streets to oust Marcos in 1986.But let me ask you this. We now live in a nation where Donald Trump won not just the Electoral College, but the popular vote. We do see a lot of ugly things out there, whether in social media or incidents of violence or what have you. You still have enough faith in the American people that if the Supreme Court drew that line, and Donald Trump crossed it, and maybe this happened a couple of times, even—you still have faith that there will be that 3 percent or what have you in the streets?PK: I have hope, which is not quite the same thing as faith, obviously, but I have hope that some Republicans in Congress would grow a spine at that point, and people would say, “This is not right.” Have they always done that? No. We've had bad things happen in the past, and people have not done anything about it. But I think that the alternative of just saying, “Well, since we might not be able to stop him, we shouldn't do anything about it,” while he guts the federal government, sends masked people onto the streets, tries to take the military into domestic law enforcement—I think we have to do something.And this is what's so enraging in some ways: the district court judges in this country are doing their job. They are enjoining stuff. They're not enjoining everything, because not everything can be enjoined, and not everything is illegal; there's a lot of bad stuff Donald Trump is doing that he's totally entitled to do. But the district courts are doing their job, and they're doing their job while people are sending pizza boxes to their houses and sending them threats, and the president is tweeting about them or whatever you call the posts on Truth Social. They're doing their job—and the Supreme Court needs to do its job too. It needs to stand up for district judges. If it's not willing to stand up for the rest of us, you'd think they'd at least stand up for their entire judicial branch.DL: Turning to my speed round, my first question is, what do you like the least about the law? And this can either be the practice of law or law as a more abstract system of ordering human affairs.PK: What I liked least about it was having to deal with opposing counsel in discovery. That drove me to appellate litigation.DL: Exactly—where your request for an extension is almost always agreed to by the other side.PK: Yes, and where the record is the record.DL: Yes, exactly. My second question, is what would you be if you were not a lawyer and/or law professor?PK: Oh, they asked me this question for a thing here at Stanford, and it was like, if I couldn't be a lawyer, I'd... And I just said, “I'd sit in my room and cry.”DL: Okay!PK: I don't know—this is what my talent is!DL: You don't want to write a novel or something?PK: No. What I would really like to do is I would like to bike the Freedom Trail, which is a trail that starts in Montgomery, Alabama, and goes to the Canadian border, following the Underground Railroad. I've always wanted to bike that. But I guess that's not a career. I bike slowly enough that it could be a career, at this point—but earlier on, probably not.DL: My third question is, how much sleep do you get each night?PK: I now get around six hours of sleep each night, but it's complicated by the following, which is when I worked at the Department of Justice the second time, it was during Covid, so I actually worked remotely from California. And what that required me to do was essentially to wake up every morning at 4 a.m., 7 a.m. on the East Coast, so I could have breakfast, read the paper, and be ready to go by 5:30 a.m.I've been unable to get off of that, so I still wake up before dawn every morning. And I spent three months in Florence, and I thought the jet lag would bring me out of this—not in the slightest. Within two weeks, I was waking up at 4:30 a.m. Central European Time. So that's why I get about six hours, because I can't really go to bed before 9 or 10 p.m.DL: Well, I was struck by your being able to do this podcast fairly early West Coast time.PK: Oh no, this is the third thing I've done this morning! I had a 6:30 a.m. conference call.DL: Oh my gosh, wow. It reminds me of that saying about how you get more done in the Army before X hour than other people get done in a day.My last question, is any final words of wisdom, such as career advice or life advice, for my listeners?PK: Yes: do what you love, with people you love doing it with.DL: Well said. I've loved doing this podcast—Professor Karlan, thanks again for joining me.PK: You should start calling me Pam. We've had this same discussion….DL: We're on the air! Okay, well, thanks again, Pam—I'm so grateful to you for joining me.PK: Thanks for having me.DL: Thanks so much to Professor Karlan for joining me. Whether or not you agree with her views, you can't deny that she's both insightful and honest—qualities that have made her a leading legal academic and lawyer, but also a great podcast guest.Thanks to NexFirm for sponsoring the Original Jurisdiction podcast. NexFirm has helped many attorneys to leave Biglaw and launch firms of their own. To explore this opportunity, please contact NexFirm at 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment at nexfirm dot com to learn more.Thanks to Tommy Harron, my sound engineer here at Original Jurisdiction, and thanks to you, my listeners and readers. To connect with me, please email me at davidlat at Substack dot com, or find me on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn, at davidlat, and on Instagram and Threads at davidbenjaminlat.If you enjoyed today's episode, please rate, review, and subscribe. Please subscribe to the Original Jurisdiction newsletter if you don't already, over at davidlat dot substack dot com. This podcast is free, but it's made possible by paid subscriptions to the newsletter.The next episode should appear on or about Wednesday, July 23. Until then, may your thinking be original and your jurisdiction free of defects. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit davidlat.substack.com/subscribe
Co-hosts Robin Renée and Wendy Sheridan get ready for The Leftscape's summer hiatus and share some of their plans for the season. Wendy makes a big announcement about being chosen to create an outdoor fiber arts display for the Rahway Train Station. Robin's season will be a bit more relaxed; they'll perform a couple of shows and go to quite a few more, attend a retreat and plan another for the fall, and catch some time in the sun. Wendy initiates this episode's featured conversation with her July 4th tarot reading. It may or may not be a "reliable source" of information, but it sparks insight and ideas about our current situation, what the future may hold for the United States over the course of the next year, and how we might take action. In an extended Pièce de Résistance, Wendy and Robin offer some activist work we can continue over the season including seeing what's next in the No Kings movement, working with mutual aid groups, and attending a Good Trouble Lives On event on July 17th. The Timeline Cleanse entries touch on challenging topics but are ultimately uplifting; Robin reflects on the the final Ozzy Osbourne/Black Sabbath show and Wendy reports on Australian scientists who have reversed Parkinson's in mice. Have a great summer (or winter, if you're Down Under)! Things to do: Follow The Leftscape on social media @leftscape and give us a shout! Get ICEBlock in the App Store or wherever you get your apps. Learn about what is in the Big (Horrible) Bill. Check out Wendy's stuff on Etsy. Listen to the Saved By Zero show by Robin (DJ Andrew Genus) on Radio PVS and Mixcloud. Listen to Robin Renée on Spotify. Watch two adorable otters on a cat wheel in a pool! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OLGHaMtHYA&t=253s
Topics: Camp Mystic Flood Texas Trump No Kings Monday, July 7th, 2025's LIVE SHOW where David Eon covers today's news. Catch COFFEE TALK every Monday-Friday for ONE HOUR on video LIVE here on the YouTube feed at the YouTube channel COFFEE TALK (with David)
Rosie Bultman, News Director at KCSB, UC Santa Barbara's student-run radio station, joins us with a brand new segment called "Standing-in-Courage." She speaks about the No Kings protests with her first guest, Linda Baker, organizer for the protests in San Luis Obispo County. For Wine Country, host Mira Honeycutt talks to Sherrie Holzer, winemaker of Rava Wines in Paso Robles, about how sparkling wine is made. And then, Meagan Friberg, Director of the Cuesta College Central Coast Writers' Conference, talks with Meher Ali about this year's lineup.
In this episode, we reflect on our experience attending the No Kings protest — a bold stand against abuse of power within activist circles. As driven Latinas, we talk about what it meant to show up, speak out, and be part of a collective call for accountability and justice. This is a conversation about finding our voice, standing in solidarity, and redefining leadership on our own terms.
Send us a textToday, as we celebrate the 4th of July, we have another Beach Talk with Bestey Newenhuyse.This week. Betsey and I consider what July 4th means to us in 2025. A new Gallup poll says only 58% of Americans are proud to be American, down from 85% in 2013. What happened?We also reflect on the tragic Minnesota shooting and the loss of Melissa Hortman, with insights into the memorial and the personal responses from Governor Walz, President Biden, and Vice President Harris.How do we put a human face on the real victims of MAGA extremism? We get some help from our friend, Darcy.We cover everything from DeSantis's “Alligator Alcatraz” in Florida to Joe Walsh's viral tweet about Trump's cruelty. We'll talk about California Governor Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass confronting chaos in Los Angeles, Trump's parade flop, the Uber-backed “Big Ugly” bill threatening Medicaid and clean energy; even Elon Musk hates it.We wrap with reflections on border security, deportation, and a moving video from Pete Buttigieg spotlighting the real stakes for vulnerable families.Support the showBecome a Patron - Click on the link to learn how you can become a Patron of the show. Thank you! Ken's Substack Page The Podcast Official Site: TheBeachedWhiteMale.com
Independence Day 2025 edition! Celebrate! Topics: Trump No Kings 4th of July Mamdani Coffee Talk with David Eon (LIVE WEEKDAY DAILY NEWS TALK) for Friday, July 4th, 2025
We're visiting America in the ICU on her 249th birthday, hoping the old girl still has some fight left in her.A sad day as Trump's disastrous bill passes the House. We are still fighting. This week, we explore the dark matter of American politics - that invisible force that explains why so many voters can't see what's right in front of them. Spoiler alert: it's not really dark at all.We examine the original No Kings manifesto and ask some pointed questions about which "dark matter" has trained so many Americans not to recognize real threats.This isn't the time for half measures and tepid language. We're channeling some serious energy for what these times call for.Episode 914 recorded live from the Cornfield Resistance for the week of July 4th, 2025 - Not safe for workStay in Touch! Email: proleftpodcast@gmail.comWebsite: proleftpod.comSupport via Patreon: patreon.com/proleftpodMail: The Professional Left, PO Box 9133, Springfield, Illinois, 62791Support the show
Welcome back for Episode 112 of The kPodcast! Today we'll be discussing some recent life updates, my recent roadtrip up the east coast, as well as new music from Snoop Dogg & Dr. Dre, Larry June & Cardo, and The Alchemist & Erykah Badu. We're also going to be discussing The All American Rejects going against the grain of the music industry, Travis Barker getting his own street in his hometown, Timbaland creating AI artists, hip-hop competition between the east & west coasts, Diddy's court verdicts, Snoop Dogg's business ventures outside of just music, Tim Robinson going pro for Baker skateboards, Swizz Beats' camel racing team in Saudi Arabia, the NHL Stanley Cup, Happy Gilmore 2, the recent "No Kings" protests against ICE & President Trump, some recently proposed bills within the US government, and Elon Musk butting heads with President Trump. Thank you so much for listening and please be sure to email therealkpodcast@gmail.com with any feedback, comments, suggestions, and/or questions! Also be sure to follow the show on socials @therealkpodcast
En esta edición de Bienvenidos a América, José López Zamorano y el abogado Rafael Borrás analizan la jornada nacional de protestas “NO KINGS”, un movimiento en rechazo a las políticas autoritarias y represivas de la administración actual. Además, el abogado Borrás responde preguntas en vivo del público sobre temas migratorios actuales.
//The Wire//2300Z July 2, 2025////ROUTINE////BLUF: IRANIANS CLOSE AIRSPACE TO COMMERCIAL AVIATION. FBI GETS NEW HEADQUARTERS BUILDING.// -----BEGIN TEARLINE------International Events-Middle East: This afternoon Iranian airspace was closed along the western border of the nation, ceasing all commercial aviation traffic until tomorrow. This comes a few hours after Iranian authorities briefly opened their airspace to commercial traffic for some international flights.Analyst Comment: As this is a developing situation, it's hard to determine what's going on. Normally, the closure of Iranian airspace indicates some sort of security threat, however their airspace has mostly been closed for weeks now. It's possible that a mixup occurred, or that the Iranians changed their mind regarding re-opening their skies to commercial traffic. Either way it's still a tense situation all around.-HomeFront-Washington D.C. - This morning FBI Director Kash Patel announced that the decision to move the FBI's headquarters has been finalized, and that the FBI will be moving from the J. Edgar Hoover Building down the street to the upgraded and modernized Ronald Reagan Building with offices also expanding to include the old USAID offices in the International Trade Center building.Texas: This morning four individuals were arrested in conjunction with an investigation into a kickback scheme in Houston. One of the individuals arrested was an ICE agent, and allegedly worked with a local bail bond company to lift deportation retainer classifications, for a fee.-----END TEARLINE-----Analyst Comments: As a reminder, there are still plans to conduct another round of No Kings protests on July 4th. However, considering the abysmal turnout the first time, most of these events probably won't happen or remain comparatively low-risk. The protests planned for July 4th have received none of the media blitz the first protests experienced, and therefore probably won't be that impactful. However, any event that brings large crowds and poor security practices presents risk in our modern times, so being aware of these events is still worthwhile.Analyst: S2A1Research: https://publish.obsidian.md/s2underground//END REPORT//
This week, Alex and Adrian discuss the intersection of pop culture and real-life protests, especially the recent No Kings protest, and the line between memes as community building and memes as a distraction from the cause.
Why are many women now calling their man a "King? Why are people attending "No Kings" protests? The answer is PURE EVIL!!!
Pastor Bill shows us that rebelling against worldly kings can lead to worldly freedom, just like it did for our great nation, but to attain eternal freedom, we must stop rebelling from the King of Kings and follow the Lord Jesus Christ.
Send us a textIn a world of chaos where unruly crowds scream 'No Kings!', a few stand united - looking to Jesus Christ - and fearlessly say, 'Yes, King!' Join us for a powerful message about our Sovereign: King Jesus!!
Episode 21In this podcast, professional astrologers Chani Nicholas, Thea Anderson, and Eliza Robertson look to the sky to make sense of what's happening here on Earth.This episode brings you into the astrological group chat to talk through how Jupiter's long-awaited entrance into Cancer (and its recent square to Saturn) have landed IRL. Covering everything from Tina Knowles' memoir “Matriarch” and the first-ever CHANI Pop-Up to the No Kings protests, the Israel–Iran conflict, and the NYC mayoral race, we look at how the most anticipated astrology of 2025 has manifested in the collective so far. We also reflect on some of 2025's other milestone astro (hey, Pluto in Aquarius and Neptune in Aries), dig into how those transits have played out historically, and prep for what's ahead with Uranus in Gemini. These are unprecedented — yet eerily familiar — times, and we've got the charts and chats to help make sense of it all. So let's dive in.Content warning: mentions of sexual predation, genocide, murder, police brutality, and forced pregnancyTimestamps:(00:00) - Welcome to Down to Astro episode 21(00:41) - Jupiter in Cancer: An era of hope and connection(01:50) - The CHANI Pop-Up: community engagement and collective care(13:26) - The impact of the Saturn square on Jupiter's abundance(15:32) - Iran's chart and the Israel–Iran conflict(27:13) - Comparing ancient astrological predictions and current events(30:14) - The growing power of local movements with Jupiter in Cancer(32:53) - ICE protests, No Kings, and the misuse of military force(38:48) - Uranus in Gemini: Historical astrological parallels and predictions(44:27) - Neptune in Aries, NATO's chart, and redrawing international alliances(54:40) - Mars square Uranus: Israel's initial strikes on Iran(59:15) - Uranus in Gemini and the US on the brink of war(01:04:30) - The shifting world order and the need for human connection(01:07:40) - The future of intelligence, tech, and critical thinking(01:12:19) - Tina Knowles' memoir “Matriarch” and the power of art and generosity(01:18:45) - Beyoncé's Requiem for America(01:25:11) - Ask us anything: What does it mean if I'm in my Neptune square?This episode was recorded on 06/24/2025.For more astrological insights, download the CHANI app or follow CHANI on Instagram, TikTok, and Bluesky.The song “Midas,” featured in the podcast, was created by NISHA and is available wherever you listen to music.This episode also mentioned the following creative works:Ali A. Olomi's translations from Abu Mashar“Matriarch: A Memoir" by Tina KnowlesThe works of Kelly Surtees The works of Nick Dagan BestP.S. The transcript for this episode is available here.
Bonfire buddy and hilarious comedian Joe List is back to promote his new special on YouTube called "Small Ball." Jay has just been accepted into the "Rogan Sphere" and Joe may also be a member of this private club. Jacob is surprised to learn that the violent homeless problem in Austin is thriving more than ever. | Jay watches the Netflix documentary "Trainwreck: Mayor of Mayhem" about Rob Ford who Jay calls Donald Trump on crack. | Bobby plays a video of a No Kings protestor getting run over and a Florida sheriff encouraging this behavior. | Hugh Hefner used to have a ritual called "Pig Night" when his people would gather prostitutes and bring them back to the mansion for sex. *To hear the full show to go www.siriusxm.com/bonfire to learn more FOLLOW THE CREW ON SOCIAL MEDIA: @thebonfiresxm @louisjohnson @christinemevans @bigjayoakerson @robertkellylive @louwitzkee @jjbwolf Subscribe to SiriusXM Podcasts+ to listen to new episodes of The Bonfire ad-free and a whole week early. Start a free trial now on Apple Podcasts or by visiting siriusxm.com/podcastsplus.
Code Talker - The First and Only Memoir by One of the Original Navajo Code Talkers of WWIIby Chester Nez & Judith Schiess Avila====Sign up for the Ron & Don Newsletter to get more information atwww.ronanddonradio.com (http://www.ronanddonradio.com/)====To schedule a Ron & Don Sit Down to talk about your Real Estate journey, go towww.ronanddonsitdown.com (http://www.ronanddonsitdown.com/) ====Thanks to everyone that has become an Individual Sponsor of the Ron & Don Show. If you'd like to learn more about how that works:Just click the link and enter your amount athttps://glow.fm/ronanddonradio/RonandDonRadio.com (https://anchor.fm/dashboard/episode/ea5ecu/metadata/RonandDonRadio.com)Episodes are free and drop on Monday's , Wednesday's & Thursday's and a bonus Real Estate Only episode on Fridays.From Seattle's own radio personalities, Ron Upshaw and Don O'Neill.Connect with us on FacebookRon's Facebook Page (https://www.facebook.com/ron.upshaw/)Don's Facebook Page (https://www.facebook.com/theronanddonshow
Glenn Beck Special- Iran War & US Riots: An Urgent WARNING About the ‘Death to America' Mob Iran War & US Riots: An Urgent WARNING About the ‘Death to America' Mob | Glenn TV Is the world approaching its FINAL battle? From the anti-ICE rioters to Islamic governments like Iran, the message is the same: “Death to the West… death to America.” Glenn Beck gives an urgent warning about the radical ideologies threatening Western civilization and likens the chaos in American streets to Gotham. Asra Nomani, an expert on Islamic extremism, terrorism, and radicalization, joins Glenn to detail what she saw at a No Kings protest in Philadelphia. Nomani warns that “more blood will spill” due to the dangerous nexus between Democratic organizations, Islamic sympathizers, Marxists, communists, and socialists. “This is the tyranny that will come to your neighborhoods and streets unless we stop it.” Another issue dividing the country and President Trump's MAGA supporters is the war between Israel and Iran. Should the U.S. help destroy Iran's nuclear ambitions or let Israel go it alone? Iranian American journalist Nik Kowsar was arrested and threatened with death for his political cartoon critical of an Islamic cleric in 2003. He reveals the truth about the Islamic regime but tells Glenn why he believes bombs won't bring democracy to the oppressed people of Iran. Watch this video at- https://youtu.be/v1GdLyjxPpE?si=Bmq_AQ0jXkWPCrXa Glenn Beck 1.48M subscribers 205,344 views Premiered Jun 18, 2025 #nokings #glennbeck #israel ► Click HERE to subscribe to Glenn Beck on YouTube: https://bit.ly/2UVLqhL ► Click HERE to subscribe to BlazeTV: get.blazetv.com/glenn ► Click HERE to subscribe to BlazeTV YouTube: / @blazetv ► Click HERE to sign up to Glenn's newsletter: https://www.glennbeck.com/st/Morning_... Connect with Glenn on Social Media: / glennbeck / glennbeck / glennbeck #glennbeck #glenntv #iran #iranwar #nokings #warning #islam #israel #deathtoamerica -------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out our ACU Patreon page: https://www.patreon.com/ACUPodcast HELP ACU SPREAD THE WORD! Please go to Apple Podcasts and give ACU a 5 star rating. Apple canceled us and now we are clawing our way back to the top. Don't let the Leftist win. Do it now! Thanks. Also Rate us on any platform you follow us on. It helps a lot. Forward this show to friends. Ways to subscribe to the American Conservative University Podcast Click here to subscribe via Apple Podcasts Click here to subscribe via RSS You can also subscribe via Stitcher FM Player Podcast Addict Tune-in Podcasts Pandora Look us up on Amazon Prime …And Many Other Podcast Aggregators and sites ACU on Twitter- https://twitter.com/AmerConU . Warning- Explicit and Violent video content. Please help ACU by submitting your Show ideas. Email us at americanconservativeuniversity@americanconservativeuniversity.com Endorsed Charities -------------------------------------------------------- Pre-Born! Saving babies and Souls. https://preborn.org/ OUR MISSION To glorify Jesus Christ by leading and equipping pregnancy clinics to save more babies and souls. WHAT WE DO Pre-Born! partners with life-affirming pregnancy clinics all across the nation. We are designed to strategically impact the abortion industry through the following initiatives:… -------------------------------------------------------- Help CSI Stamp Out Slavery In Sudan Join us in our effort to free over 350 slaves. Listeners to the Eric Metaxas Show will remember our annual effort to free Christians who have been enslaved for simply acknowledging Jesus Christ as their Savior. As we celebrate the birth of Christ this Christmas, join us in giving new life to brothers and sisters in Sudan who have enslaved as a result of their faith. https://csi-usa.org/metaxas https://csi-usa.org/slavery/ Typical Aid for the Enslaved A ration of sorghum, a local nutrient-rich staple food A dairy goat A “Sack of Hope,” a survival kit containing essential items such as tarp for shelter, a cooking pan, a water canister, a mosquito net, a blanket, a handheld sickle, and fishing hooks. Release celebrations include prayer and gathering for a meal, and medical care for those in need. The CSI team provides comfort, encouragement, and a shoulder to lean on while they tell their stories and begin their new lives. Thank you for your compassion Giving the Gift of Freedom and Hope to the Enslaved South Sudanese -------------------------------------------------------- Food For the Poor https://foodforthepoor.org/ Help us serve the poorest of the poor Food For The Poor began in 1982 in Jamaica. Today, our interdenominational Christian ministry serves the poor in primarily 17 countries throughout the Caribbean and Latin America. Thanks to our faithful donors, we are able to provide food, housing, healthcare, education, fresh water, emergency relief, micro-enterprise solutions and much more. We are proud to have fed millions of people and provided more than 15.7 billion dollars in aid. Our faith inspires us to be an organization built on compassion, and motivated by love. Our mission is to bring relief to the poorest of the poor in the countries where we serve. We strive to reflect God's unconditional love. It's a sacrificial love that embraces all people regardless of race or religion. We believe that we can show His love by serving the “least of these” on this earth as Christ challenged us to do in Matthew 25. We pray that by God's grace, and with your support, we can continue to bring relief to the suffering and hope to the hopeless. Report on Food For the Poor by Charity Navigator https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/592174510 -------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer from ACU. We try to bring to our students and alumni the World's best Conservative thinkers. All views expressed belong solely to the author and not necessarily to ACU. In all issues and relations, we hope to follow the admonitions of Jesus Christ. While striving to expose, warn and contend with evil, we extend the love of God to all of his children. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Join Jeremy, Matt and I to discuss the agendas behind the recent "No Kings" protest, the recent actions of Israel and the US involvement, the true nature of empire and the Trump Effect...no longer is the enemy of my enemy my friend. Find Jeremy: https://covertactionmagazine.com/ https://jeremykuzmarov.substack.com/ Check out Matt and The Homeless Left here: https://rumble.com/c/TheHomelessLeft Ways to Support: Support me on Substack for ad-free content, bonus material, personal chatting and more! https://substack.com/@monicaperezshow Become a PREMIUM SUBSCRIBER on Apple Podcasts for AD FREE episodes and exclusive content! True Hemp Science: https://truehempscience.com/ PROMO CODE: MONICA Find, Follow, Subscribe & Rate on your favorite podcasting platform AND for video and social & more... Website: https://monicaperezshow.com/ Rumble: https://rumble.com/user/monicaperezshow Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/c/MonicaPerez Twitter/X: @monicaperezshow Instagram: @monicaperezshow Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Frank Langfitt has covered the world. Now he reports for NPR as a roving correspondent, focusing on stories that help us understand a changing America. Recently, he covered both the military parade that brought tanks and armored personnel carriers rolling through the nation's capital, as well as the No Kings protests where people in dozens of cities across the country rallied against politicization of the armed forces by someone they called a would-be autocrat. Many have dubbed the day as a split-screen moment - and for Frank, going to two events on the same day gave him the sense of looking at America with a lens he had often examined other countries in the past. There are events that become a Rorschach test that brings out America's political and cultural divisions in bold relief. You could look at that day as an example of a divided America — a moment where our differences were placed in pretty stark relief. But perhaps by being in both places on the same day you see something different. For sponsor-free episodes of Consider This, sign up for Consider This+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org. Email us at considerthis@npr.org.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy
You thought those “No Kings” protests were organic? Try $2.1 BILLION in coordinated left-wing chaos—198 groups, media kits, paid agitators, and fake outrage, all designed to take down Trump. I'm bringing all of this to light so you know exactly how to pray and push back in the spirit.
Alaska and Willam dive into the goss this week and talk ‘No Kings' marches, certain new girls skipping Pride gigs, and Cher's new Labubu. Plus they read your DM's about ADA Pride Hikes, Mistress shade, and Reddit threads devoted to douching. Listen to Race Chaser Ad-Free on MOM Plus Follow us on IG at @racechaserpod and click the link in bio for a list of organizations you can donate to in support of Black Lives Matter Rainbow Spotlight: GERM by Kate Nash FOLLOW ALASKA https://twitter.com/Alaska5000 https://www.instagram.com/theonlyalaska5000 https://www.facebook.com/AlaskaThunder https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9vnKqhNky1BcWqXbDs0NAQ FOLLOW WILLAM https://twitter.com/willam https://www.instagram.com/willam https://www.facebook.com/willam https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrO9hj5VqGJufBlVJy-8D1g RACE CHASER IS A FOREVER DOG PODCAST Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
President Donald Trump says he'll decide whether or not to attack Iran within the next two weeks. On this week's On the Media, hear why the right is split on what the president should do. Plus, scrutiny on student journalists has intensified.[01:00] Host Brooke Gladstone on the recent narratives forming around the ‘No Kings' protest and President Trump's military parade. Plus, a look at the lie that the left is more politically violent than the right – a falsehood that has emerged in rightwing narratives about ICE being victimized.[14:03] Brooke speaks with Andrew Prokop, senior politics correspondent at Vox, about the bitter divide growing within the MAGA ranks – between the “America First” faction, who advocate against war with Iran and helping Ukraine, and GOP hawks who want Trump to attack. [30:44] Host Micah Loewinger sits down with Gregorio Olivares Gutierrez, a rising junior at the University of Texas Dallas and editor-in-chief of The Retrograde, to discuss his brief tenure as editor-in-chief of his school's official paper, The Mercury. They examine how The Mercury's coverage of a pro-Palestine encampment last spring ignited a chain of events that led to the university firing him and the entire staff, and the de facto shuttering of the paper. Mike Hiestand, Senior Legal Counsel at the Student Press Law Center, on the chilling effect experienced by student journalists across the country after ICE arrested Tufts grad student Rümeysa Öztürk.Statement from Barnard College: "Barnard respects and supports a robust student press. As students present in Butler Library during the disruption have been confirmed to be working as journalists, we have notified them that their interim suspensions have been lifted. As our review continues, we will issue additional notifications as appropriate." Statement from Columbia University: “The interim suspension on the Columbia student journalist was lifted within hours after it was issued once it was determined that the individual was a member of the student press who was covering the protest as a reporter, not a participant in the disruptions to academic activities that were in violation of University policies and Rules. Columbia University continues to strongly believe in the value of a vibrant and independent student press."Statement from University of Texas Dallas: “UT Dallas has always supported student journalists' editorial control and wants to create an environment where they can learn best journalistic practices and follow professional standards and guidelines. For clarification, the former editor was not removed for editorial content, but because he violated student media bylaws. Over the past few months, a group of university faculty, students, and staff has worked together to establish a new advisory committee for student media. Its goals included reviving the campus newspaper and ensuring the staff has necessary resources to operate with the editorial independence critical for student journalists.”UT Dallas Student Media Memo: “Removal of The Mercury Editor-in-Chief” by Lydia LumGregorio Olivares Gutierrez's Appeal to the UT Dallas Student Media Memo regarding his removal Further reading:“Parsing ICE's mixed-up, hard-to-believe assault claims,” by Philip Bump“‘They're Taking Shirly': An Army Sergeant Thought His Family Was Safe. Then ICE Deported His Wife,” by Sonner Kehrt“The surprising right-wing push to keep us out of war,” by Andrew ProkopQuestion Everything with Brian Reed: “Rümeysa Öztürk is Locked Up for an Op-ed: An Urgent Summit with the Student Newspaper that Published It”The Eagle: A Times Union Podcast, “The Future of Journalism”The Mercury's May 20, 2025 Edition: “Welcome to UTD” On the Media is supported by listeners like you. Support OTM by donating today (https://pledge.wnyc.org/support/otm). Follow our show on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook @onthemedia, and share your thoughts with us by emailing onthemedia@wnyc.org.
Welcome back to The Snack – a lighter serving of Girls Gotta Eat. This week, we're talking about: Raynapalooza (aka Rayna's birthday festival) Ja Rule headlining the party Trump's birthday parade + No Kings protests America's Sweethearts: Dallas Cowboys Cheerleaders is back Donna Kelce cast on Traitors Tourists break a crystal chair in Italy Celeb headlines: Pedro Pascal lookalike contest, Glen Powell's ex pops off, Sabrina Carpenter's clapback Follow us on Instagram @girlsgottaeatpodcast, Ashley @ashhess, and Rayna @rayna.greenberg. Visit girlsgottaeat.com for more. Thank you to our partners this week: Cort Furniture: Build your own furniture rental package today at https://www.cort.com/podcast. America's Sweethearts: Watch season 2 of America's Sweethearts on Netflix. Simply Pop: Go to https://cokeurl.com/simplyPOP to find out where you can try Simply Pop. Skims: Check out the Skims Ultimate Bra Collection at http://skims.com/gge.
Jason Kander and Ravi Gupta break down the escalating tensions with Iran, as Trump signals a possible war and top Republicans like Lindsey Graham and Ted Cruz call for regime change. They analyze Trump's fiery posts threatening “unconditional surrender,” the MAGA rift sparked by isolationist voices like Marjorie Taylor Greene and Tucker Carlson, and JD Vance's loyal defense of Trump's Iran policy. Kander and Gupta also dive into the fallout from the Minnesota assassination, where conspiracy theories are flying and Congress reels from the shock. Plus, they cover the “No Kings” protests versus Trump's lackluster military parade, and what this grassroots movement means for the future of resistance. This and more on the podcast that helps you, the majority of Americans who believe in progress, convince your conservative friends and family to join us—this is Majority 54! Nutrafol: Get results you can run your fingers through! For a limited time, Nutrafol is offering our listeners ten dollars off your first month's subscription and free shipping when you go to https://Nutrafol.com and enter the promo code MAJORITY. Shopify: Sign up for your one-dollar-per-month trial and start selling today at https://SHOPIFY.com/majority Majority 54 is a MeidasTouch Network production. Theme music provided by Kemet Coleman. Special thanks to Diana Kander. Majority 54 is a MeidasTouch Network production. Theme music provided by Kemet Coleman. Special thanks to Diana Kander. Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast The Influence Continuum: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/mea-culpa-with-michael-cohen The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show Burn the Boats: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 Political Beatdown: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/political-beatdown On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Coalition of the Sane: https://meidasnews.com/tag/coalition-of-the-sane Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
SEASON 3 EPISODE 139: COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN A-Block (1:45) SPECIAL COMMENT: So we're going to do that whole Iraq crap again. Only swapping out the last letter. "Iran" instead of "Iraq." Because nobody remembers Bush and people think Trump is somehow anti-war, when he's doing all this because of his desperate FOMO that there is something somewhere on Fox News that he is not being given personal credit for. Only he's skipping the whole phony terrorism-9/11-pancake uranium-manufactured evidence dance and just saying "we're doing it to save Israel" even though the evangelicals who WANT to "save" Israel like Mike Huckabee really want just to make sure nobody but them destroys Israel, since the end of their prophecy is that when there are no Jews anywhere but Israel, there'll be a rapture, and all the Jews will convert or, you know, bye-bye. It's complete delusional snake-handling level religion. And as for the US military, the purpose of war with Iran would be the same as was the purpose of war with Iraq: to HAVE a war in which you can DESTROY B-2 Stealth Bombers and thus increase the Pentagon budget. As Big Jim McBob and Billy Sol Hurok would say: "Blowed 'em up good. Blowed 'em real good!" PLUS: Governor Hochul of New York uses the mot juste about what appears to have been a set-up of NYC Comptroller Brad Lander. ICE swings back towards seizing the people who keep the red states from starving. And those Trump American Phones are made in China. B-Block (32:50) THE WORST PERSONS IN THE WORLD: CNN/MSNBC screw up the ratio of ICE protest coverage to No Kings protest coverage; Stephen Miller runs Trump but Katie Miller runs Stephen Miller; Karoline Leavitt inexplicably posts a photo of Trump wearing a dunce cap. C-Block (43:00) THINGS I PROMISED NOT TO TELL: This week was the 25th anniversary of the day my mother became famous, and loved every moment of it, when she got hit in the face by a baseball thrown by the second baseman of the Yankees - while I was doing the highlights of that game on Fox's national game of the week telecast. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
The same party that made Kamala Harris a nominee without a single vote and which sabotaged Bernie Sanders's presidential runs is now very worried about America being ruled by a king. Also, why were the protesters so old and so lame? Charlie reacts, joined by citizen journalist Nate Friedman who embedded with protesters in New York. Then, Blake offers Daisy and other members of Gen Z a basic Q&A about Iran. Watch every episode ad-free on members.charliekirk.com! Get new merch at charliekirkstore.com! Support the show: http://www.charliekirk.com/supportSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
It's still Pride Month. While it's been overshadowed by No Kings, political assassinations, and Leftist riots, let's check in on how the gays are doing. Tucker Carlson thinks he dunked on Senator Ted Cruz. Except the only people who think he did aren't the kind of people you want agreeing with you. Jon Steward tries to formulate an argument about Republicans and ICE raids. It falls flat.GUEST: Nick Di PaoloLet American Financing help you regain control of your finances. Go to https://americanfinancing.net/crowder or call 1-800-974-6500. NMLS 182334, http://nmlsconsumeraccess.org/Buy the OG Mug Club Mug on Crowder Shop now! https://crowdershop.com/products/og-mug-club-mugLink to today's sources: https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/sources-june-18-2025DOWNLOAD THE RUMBLE APP TODAY: https://rumble.com/our-appsJoin Rumble Premium to watch this show every day! http://louderwithcrowder.com/PremiumGet your favorite LWC gear: https://crowdershop.com/Bite-Sized Content: https://rumble.com/c/CrowderBitsSubscribe to my podcast: https://rss.com/podcasts/louder-with-crowder/FOLLOW ME: Website: https://louderwithcrowder.com/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/scrowder Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/louderwithcrowder Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/stevencrowderofficialMusic by @Pogo
Trump's long-planned birthday parade gets overshadowed by massive "No Kings" protests around the country and the cold-blooded murder of a prominent Minnesota lawmaker and her husband. Meanwhile, Israel launches a preemptive war against Iran—a war that Trump hasn't quite ruled out joining. Jon, Lovett, and Tommy discuss the weekend's competing optics, the deeply troubling rise of political violence in America, and the latest offering from the Trump family hucksters: a shiny gold smartphone from the newly founded Trump Mobile. Then, Jon talks with Maryland Governor Wes Moore about his political future, why he vetoed a reparations bill, and the role that governors can play in this dangerous moment.
Rachel Maddow shows that despite Donald Trump's admonitions against protesting, and despite physical threats from local law enforcement, and despite genuine public safety concerns, Americans would not be denied their right to protest against Donald Trump and came out by the millions on Saturday for "No Kings" marches and rallies.
Tonight's rundown: Hey BillOReilly.com Premium and Concierge Members, welcome to the No Spin News for Monday, June 16, 2025. Stand Up for Your Country. Talking Points Memo: Bill takes a closer look at the ongoing Iran-Israel conflict. Steven Nekhaila, Chairman of the Libertarian National Committee, joins the No Spin News to weigh in on how the U.S should handle the situations involving Iran, Israel, and Ukraine. Who is the group behind the No Kings demonstrations? Representative Nick LaLota enters the No Spin Zone to speak out against a dark money group funding ad campaigns targeting 11 Republican lawmakers in battleground districts. This Day in History: Donald Trump launches his campaign to become president of the United States. Final Thought: Bad weather over the weekend on Long Island. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
“No Kings” protests cause chaos as the Army celebrates its 250th anniversary, a Minnesota manhunt concludes following a political assassination, and Trump ups the pressure on Iran. Get the facts first with Morning Wire. Beam: Visit https://shopbeam.com/WIRE and use code WIRE to get our exclusive discount of up to 40% off. Shopify: Go to https://Shopify.com/morningwire to sign up for your $1 per month trial period and upgrade your selling today. - - - Privacy Policy: https://www.dailywire.com/privacy
Dave Rubin of “The Rubin Report” talks about Pennsylvania Democratic Sen. John Fetterman's appearance on “Real Time with Bill Maher,” where he explained how the Democratic Party and progressives have tried to destroy him over his support of Israel, Donald Trump pushing back against Tucker Carlson's warnings over the potential U.S. involvement in Israel's attack on Iran; how western activists participating in March to Gaza protest to support Palestine were beaten and quickly deported by Egyptian police and civilians; MSNBC's Jacob Soboroff being forced to flee a “peaceful” No Kings protest in Los Angeles, John Fetterman telling “Real Time's” Bill Maher why Democrats are making a massive mistake in not condemning the ICE riots of Los Angeles; authorities scrambling to make sense of the political assassination of Rep. Melissa Hortman as Elon Musk confirms which side he thinks is more violent; and much more. WATCH the MEMBER-EXCLUSIVE segment of the show here: https://rubinreport.locals.com/ Check out the NEW RUBIN REPORT MERCH here: https://daverubin.store/ -------- Today's Sponsors: MD Hearing - Get the high-quality, affordable hearing aids you deserve with MDHearing. Go to: https://ShopMDHearing.com and use promo code RUBIN to get a pair of hearing aids for JUST $297! Shopify - Turn your big business idea into money with Shopify on your side. Shopify is the commerce platform behind millions of businesses around the world from household names to brands just getting started. Go to Shopify and sign up for your one-dollar-per-month trial and start selling today at Go to: http://shopify.com/rubin Morgan & Morgan - Morgan & Morgan is America's Largest Injury Law Firm, with over 1,000 attorneys operating in all 50 states. Go to: https://ForThePeople.com/Rubin
In towns and cities across the country, from blue cities to red states, from Idaho to Georgia and pretty much everywhere else, folks gathered to show their opposition to the Trump Administration. They were standing up against immigration raids with masked federal agents, to devastating cuts to Medicaid, to the President of the United States, quote-unquote “honoring” the United States Army with a birthday parade. If you marched this weekend with hundreds (or even thousands) of your neighbors, what can you do to keep that energy going? We asked Maurice Mitchell, the national director of the Working Families Party.And in headlines: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu launched a preemptive strike against Iran, Minnesota lawmakers were shot and killed in a suspected political assassination, and the Trump administration proposes an expansion of the travel ban. Show Notes:Check out the Working Families Party – https://workingfamilies.org/Subscribe to the What A Day Newsletter – https://tinyurl.com/3kk4nyz8What A Day – YouTube – https://www.youtube.com/@whatadaypodcastFollow us on Instagram – https://www.instagram.com/crookedmedia/For a transcript of this episode, please visit crooked.com/whataday
How much of America would we need to mobilize to stop Trump's power grab? According to political scientist Erica Chenoweth, it takes 3.5 percent—the threshold after which every protest movement, across the world, has been successful. Against the backdrop of the anti-ICE and No Kings protests, the national guard deployment, and Donald Trump's birthday pageant, Chenoweth joins the show to break down the math of the 3.5 percent rule, explain why nonviolence is the key to meeting it, and to share the lessons the civil rights movement can teach us about staying unified, organized, and disciplined in the fight against authoritarianism.
Happy Flag Day, everyone! We're covering all the pomp and circumstance surrounding the 250th anniversary of the United States Army, the army responsible for securing the independence of the greatest nation on Earth. Absolutely nothing could ruin this day!What the hell is No Kings Day? Well, it wouldn't be a day ending in Y if the Leftists didn't try to ruin it.GUEST: Josh Firestine, Data RepublicanBuy the OG Mug Club Mug on Crowder Shop now! https://crowdershop.com/products/og-mug-club-mugLink to today's sources: https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/sources-june-14-2025
Iran and Israel traded military strikes overnight, raising fears of a wider conflict. Plus, a military parade will take place in Washington, D.C. later today, marking the 250th anniversary of the U.S. army. Critics say it's a vanity project of President Trump and are organizing No Kings protests across the country.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
