Podcasts about Ronald Reagan

For part 1 of Odyssey week here on PDA we discuss the geopolitical implications of Christopher Nolan's decision to film The Odyssey in Moroccan occupied West Sahara but first we talk about Ronald Reagan's hair. SOURCE: https://africasacountry.com/location/western-sahara PATREON + DISCORD PATREON.COM/PODDAMNAMERICA MERCH: poddamnamerica.bigcartel.com

  Peter Huessy. The discussion continues with a focus on films like Fail-Safe and The Day After. Huessy highlights how these movies influenced public perception and presidential policy, including Ronald Reagan's drive for arms reduction. They reflect on the devastating human and economic consequences of a potential nuclear exchange. (16)2945 NAGASAKI

SCHEDUKE JBS 7-21-26Elizabeth Peek joins John Batchelor to discuss how rising gasoline prices act as a talisman for consumer sentiment and presidential approval. Despite low unemployment and rising real wages, the public remains fixated on energy costs. Peek criticizes Republican messaging and highlights the massive AI-driven investment boom currently occurring. (1)Elizabeth Peek discusses New York mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani's inability to define the "working class." She argues the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) primarily represent white, college-educated liberals rather than manual laborers. They also discuss Kevin Warsh as a potential Fed chairman and the independence of interest rate decisions. (2)Peter Berkowitz examines Vice President JD Vance's views on restoring Christianity in America. Berkowitz highlights the ambiguity in Vance's stance regarding government involvement in religion. They contrast Vance's rhetoric with James Madison's historical opposition to state-funded religion, emphasizing the constitutional separation of church and state. (3)Ahmad Sharawi reports on Syria's interception of sophisticated Iranian weapons—including cruise missile components—destined for Hezbollah. The weapons were concealed in Iraqi oil tankers. This move is seen as Al-Shara's attempt to gain international trust and investment by demonstrating a commitment to containing Hezbollah's rearmament. (4)Mary Kissel discusses the ongoing conflict with Iran in the Strait of Hormuz. She argues there is no diplomatic overlap because Iran views nuclear weapons as essential for survival. Kissel notes the lack of a broad international coalition and warns that regional allies might seek accommodation with Tehran. (5)Mary Kissel turns to NATO's lack of unity regarding the Ukraine war. Kissel argues that while Eastern Europeannations feel the threat, Western Europe focuses on domestic politics. She highlights the emergence of a "new alliance" of Russia, Iran, and China, which poses a significant hybrid threat. (6)Joseph Sternberg analyzes China's struggling economy, noting that official growth targets are likely overstated. Facing a real estate crater and demographic decline, China is reverting to an export-heavy model. Unlike Japan's past recovery, China's adversarial stance makes trading partners less willing to absorb its gluts. (7)Joseph Sternberg discusses the transition to Prime Minister Andy Burnham in the UK. Burnham, who took office without an election mandate, faces a heavily taxed economy and bond market skepticism. Sternberg critiques Burnham's big-government agenda and resistance to market reforms, suggesting it may drive away wealth. (8)Gregory Copley evaluates Prime Minister Andy Burnham's new cabinet, specifically John Healey as Chancellor and Wes Streeting as Defense Secretary. While the government aims to boost defense spending and support Ukraine, Copley questions its legitimacy without a fresh mandate and notes a lack of long-term global strategic planning. (9)Gregory Copley covers the alienation of Canada under the Trump administration. Copley explains how Canada is diversifying its defense procurement—buying Swedish aircraft and Australian radar—rather than relying on the US. This shift threatens the NORAD partnership and results in billions of dollars lost for US aerospace industries. (10)Gregory Copley explores the "balance of ignorance," where declining literacy and social media lead to a loss of national identity. He argues that governments make poor strategic decisions because they no longer understand their own history or adversaries, citing the current US conflict with Iran as a primary example. (11)Gregory Copley explains King Charles III's role in forming Andy Burnham's government. The King's "blessing" provides constitutional legitimacy to the transition. Copley notes Burnham is the first practicing Roman Catholic Prime Minister and highlights the King's departure to Glasgow to open the Commonwealth Games. (12)Former Congressman Thaddeus McCotter discusses how rising gas prices and inflation hurt Republicans in swing states. They also examine the Trump administration's use of the Smoot-Hawley Act to threaten tariffs on Canada. McCotter views these as punitive measures that weaken the broader argument for necessary trade protections. (13)Thaddeus McCotter comments on a recent presidential address regarding the 2020 election. He argues that claiming the system is "rigged" is counterproductive for Republican turnout. McCotter suggests that voters care far more about the "price of gas" and groceries than relitigating past elections that the party lost. (14)John Batchelor and Peter Huessy review classic nuclear war films like Godzilla, On the Beach, and Dr. Strangelove. Huessy argues that while these films highlight the horrors of nuclear use, real-world focus has evolved toward deterrence and sophisticated safety systems designed to prevent accidental or unauthorized missile launches. (15)Peter Huessy continues the discussion of nuclear films like Fail Safe and The Day After. Huessy disputes claims that The Day After motivated Ronald Reagan's arms control efforts, noting Reagan was a committed advocate for nuclear reductions long before the movie's massive 1983 television broadcast. (16)Corrections applied silently: Ahmad Sharawi (4) and Thaddeus McCotter (13, 14) per the log.

Ronald Reagan said it best: One of the greatest sources of America's greatness are the people drawn to the country from every corner of the globe, who become American and keep the country young, vital, and modern. But Trump and Stephen Miller are sticking to their absolutist deportation plan without regard to history or its political cost. Meanwhile, we are learning in real time that our trillion-dollar weapons systems are (sometimes) no match for Iran's drones—and that the regime can't resist the opportunity to humiliate another U.S. president. Plus, Laura Ingraham spoke truth, Bibi has turned Americans against Israel, Testosterone Pete is making the Pentagon look weak, and the joy of MAGA tears over The Odyssey.Joe Scarborough joins guest host Sam Stein.Show notes: "Morning Joe" on MS NOW Rahm Emanauel's speech on the U.S.-Israel relationship Head to https://forkfulmeals.com/THEBULWARK for 50% off your first order today Get 15% off OneSkin with the code BULWARK at https://www.oneskin.co/BULWARK #oneskinpod

Text the show! George Washington's greatest accomplishment wasn't defeating Britain.It was giving power back.In this episode of Common Sense, Chad Law explores the forgotten principle that built America: stewardship.From Congress and family businesses to churches, corporations, and even our own homes, institutions don't usually collapse because bad people take over.They collapse because caretakers slowly become owners.Using history, psychology, leadership research, and one remarkable painting hanging inside the Capitol Rotunda, Chad examines why America's institutions struggle to renew themselves—and what every one of us can do to reverse the trend.This isn't really an episode about Washington.It's about every chair we'll someday have to leave behind.Chapters00:00 The Empty Chair: A Symbol of Power and Sacrifice03:11 The Mystery of Institutional Decline06:04 Caretakers vs. Owners: A Fundamental Question15:22 Washington's Legacy: The Chair He Refused18:47 The Science of Leadership and Institutional Health28:29 Congress: A Case Study in Institutional Failure35:56 The Role of Civil Servants36:57 Vidal Sassoon: A Legacy of Teaching and Selling39:48 Understanding Psychological Ownership44:00 The Importance of Stewardship in Institutions48:42 The Challenge of Leadership and Mentorship52:20 Building a Legacy Through Stewardship56:32 The Dinner Table: A Call to Action57:59 Final Thoughts on Stewardship and LegacyConnect with Common Sense

Guest host Krish Dhanam reflects on why America still matters as the nation celebrates its 250th anniversary. Drawing from his journey from India to the United States, he recounts the people and moments that shaped his admiration for the American experiment—from John Wayne's screen portrayals of courage and the Apollo moon landing to Ronald Reagan's optimism and his own arrival with nine dollars to his name. Dhanam argues that gratitude is essential to preserving liberty, especially when political anger, historical amnesia, and cultural division threaten to obscure the nation's founding ideals. He revisits the courage of the Founders, George Washington's victory at Trenton, and the responsibility that accompanies constitutional rights. His warning is direct: Americans cannot allow comfort or complacency to blind them to threats within and beyond the country. Remembering America's history, recovering gratitude, and accepting the responsibility of citizenship are necessary if the republic is to endure.

Guest host Krish Dhanam reflects on why America still matters as the nation celebrates its 250th anniversary. Drawing from his journey from India to the United States, he recounts the people and moments that shaped his admiration for the American experiment—from John Wayne's screen portrayals of courage and the Apollo moon landing to Ronald Reagan's optimism and his own arrival with nine dollars to his name. Dhanam argues that gratitude is essential to preserving liberty, especially when political anger, historical amnesia, and cultural division threaten to obscure the nation's founding ideals. He revisits the courage of the Founders, George Washington's victory at Trenton, and the responsibility that accompanies constitutional rights. His warning is direct: Americans cannot allow comfort or complacency to blind them to threats within and beyond the country. Remembering America's history, recovering gratitude, and accepting the responsibility of citizenship are necessary if the republic is to endure.

This week on the Mark Levin Show, Senator Lindsey Graham, a loyal friend and loyal ally to democratic and peace-loving countries around the world, has passed away. He was a friend to Israel, Ukraine, Taiwan, and others. He was a counterbalance to naive Woke Reich isolationists who talk about American sovereignty but don't realize you have to fight for it. Graham had a lot in common in national security matters with Ronald Reagan. Not even a nation as powerful as the United States can go it alone, and Graham understood we have alliances for a reason. The left and Woke Reich isolationists wasted no time attacking him, but he was popular in South Carolina and all over the world. He and his sound advice will be truly missed. Then, the infiltration of America by Islamists and jihadis is really in full force, and no one seems to be doing anything about it. Michigan Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed's father-in-law, Jukaku Tayeb, is a top donor to his super PAC and a longtime leader on ISNA's founding committee and CAIR Michigan president—both groups are co-conspirators in the Holy Land Foundation terror-financing trial that funneled millions to Hamas, tied to the Muslim Brotherhood mothership responsible for groups like Al Qaeda, ISIS, and Hamas, and funded by Qatar and Turkey. Why do Democrats tolerate these ties? Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) seeks to eliminate the U.S. Senate and Electoral College to advance their agenda, though both require constitutional amendments. These institutions exist to protect smaller, less-populated states, ensuring they have a meaningful say in government so they would join the Union during independence. Similarly, the Electoral College ensures smaller states influence presidential elections, countering domination by a handful of large, populous Democrat metropolitan states and cities. Removing these safeguards would enable mob rule, open borders, non-citizen influence, and a centralized Marxist government. Later, the 2028 Republican presidential primary must be competitive and vibrant, with no coronations. The Republican Party needs to be rooted in the principles of Jefferson, Washington, Madison, Reagan, Buckley, Goldwater, and Milton Friedman's free markets—not Democrat-lite nationalism or populism that dismisses history—and we should demand articulate candidates who boldly contrast conservative beliefs with the left. No, we don't want a bold government, which is what the socialists and Marxists desire. We want an effective limited government confined to its constitutional powers, a bold private sector, and individual sovereignty. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

What does it mean to have the American can-do spirit — and who best embodied it during the most turbulent century in our nation's history? Author Richard Battle joins Newt to discuss his new book, AmeriCANS Who Made America: 20th Century — The American Century, the fourth volume in his celebrated series. Battle profiles 43 patriots, leaders, and innovators who carried America forward through the Spanish flu, two World Wars, the Great Depression, the Civil Rights Movement, and the Space Race. The conversation brings several of them to life: Audie Murphy, the orphaned farm boy who became World War II's most decorated soldier; John Wayne, who used film to inspire patriotism; Ronald Reagan, the everyday American who became president; Martin Luther King Jr., who achieved more for civil rights in 13 years than the previous 350; and Hedy Lamarr, the Hollywood star whose wartime invention became the foundation of Wi-Fi, GPS, and Bluetooth.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Live July 18, 2026(The Yaron & Nikos Dialogues, Episode 8)Ronald Reagan -- GOAT or Overhyped? | Yaron & Nikos DialoguesReagan Built the Modern Right—But Was He America's Greatest President or the Beginning of Today's Conservative Crisis?Was Ronald Reagan America's greatest modern president—or is his legacy far more complicated than conservatives admit?In Episode 8 of The Yaron & Nikos Dialogues, Yaron Brook and Nikos Sotirakopoulos dive deep into Reagan's life, philosophy, presidency, and enduring influence. They examine everything from Reaganomics, tax cuts, deregulation, the Cold War, and the Soviet collapse to his relationship with Ayn Rand, religion, foreign policy, and the modern Republican Party.Along the way they debate one of the biggest political questions of our time:Was Reagan the GOAT...or is he vastly overrated?The conversation expands into sports, art, culture, classic films, 70s and 80s music, and an extended audience Q&A covering Ayn Rand's criticism of Reagan, Trump comparisons, Ben Shapiro, JD Vance, military duty, Silicon Valley, capitalism, and much more.Watch now: https://youtube.com/live/XkWHWROlbxoMain Topic Timestamps00:00 Introduction00:41 Opening remarks & The Yaron & Nikos Dialogues01:07 Weekend football, finals & celebrations02:13 Sports and art—what do they have in common?02:45 England's strategic mistakes04:00 The Odyssey review & conservative reactions05:27 Reagan: GOAT or Overhyped?07:09 Reagan's personality, leadership & communication10:20 Reagan's early life & political transformation14:55 WWII service & Hollywood career16:04 Union leadership & becoming a national speaker20:34 The Goldwater speech & Medicare debate24:11 Reagan, Ayn Rand & national prominence27:11 California governor: taxes, welfare, abortion & environment31:08 Nixon, Ford & Reagan's presidential ambitions35:38 America in 198041:31 Reaganomics: tax cuts, deregulation & growth49:28 Social Security reform & free trade55:25 Religion, foreign policy & the Cold War1:00:07 Star Wars Initiative & nuclear negotiations1:05:49 Reagan and the fall of the Soviet Union1:12:41 Dissidents, Israel, Lebanon & Afghanistan1:21:30 Reagan and the Religious Right1:24:39 Music review: Simple Minds1:27:27 Favorite music discussion1:30:11 Christopher Burke concert storyLive Audience Questions1:34:39 Why did Ayn Rand oppose Reagan?1:51:51 Mysticism inside the Reagan administration?1:55:39 Nikos reviews The Odyssey1:59:23 Can investors really profit from Trump's Truth Social posts?2:01:55 Was Reagan ultimately a positive or negative legacy?2:02:44 Why doesn't Yaron like The Breakfast Club?2:04:16 Was America healthier during Reagan's era?2:08:06 Reagan vs. Trump—how big is the difference?2:09:39 Ben Shapiro, JD Vance & the new Right2:11:43 AI videos, Messi, Milei & optimism in Argentina2:17:36 Is military duty morally justified?2:19:48 Are you an Urban Achiever?2:20:20 The connection between sports and art2:25:17 Campaign messaging: optimism vs. aggression2:25:19 Heroes, producers & The Odyssey2:34:10 Yaron's favorite songs of the 60s & 70s2:36:04 Joel Osteen discussion2:36:17 Peggy Noonan's Reagan legacy2:36:29 Does The Odyssey celebrate reason?2:37:36 Would Silicon Valley exist without Reagan?2:38:54 Why do New York and California still outperform?More from Nikos Sotirakopoulos: https://www.nikos.org/Support Nikos: https://www.youtube.com/@nikos_1717

This Day in Legal History: The National Minimum Drinking Age ActOn July 17, 1984, President Ronald Reagan signed the National Minimum Drinking Age Act, the law that effectively set the drinking age at 21 across the entire country. What makes the Act a fixture of law-school classrooms isn't the policy itself—it's the clever, and constitutionally fraught, mechanism Congress used to achieve it.Here's the problem Congress faced. Setting a drinking age is a classic exercise of state police power; the federal government has no general authority to tell states how old someone must be to buy a beer. So Congress didn't order the states to do anything. Instead, it reached for its spending power. The Act directed that any state which failed to raise its drinking age to 21 would lose a percentage of its federal highway funds. States remained technically “free” to keep a lower drinking age—they'd just forfeit a slice of the highway money they depended on. Within a few years, every state had fallen into line.South Dakota challenged the law, and in the 1987 case South Dakota v. Dole, the Supreme Court upheld it. The Court laid out the framework that still governs conditional federal spending: conditions must be unambiguous, related to a federal interest, not otherwise unconstitutional, and—critically—must not be so coercive that they amount to “compulsion” rather than mere “encouragement.” The Court decided that losing about five percent of highway funds was just mild pressure, not coercion. That last piece became enormously important decades later. In the 2012 healthcare decision, NFIB v. Sebelius, the Court for the first time found that a spending condition had crossed the line into unconstitutional coercion, when Congress threatened states with the loss of all their Medicaid funding. The significance of July 17, 1984 is that a law about drinking age quietly established the constitutional playbook for how the federal government leverages its money to steer state policy—and where the limits of that leverage finally lie.A federal appeals court has reinstated the Pentagon's policy requiring journalists to be accompanied by a government escort inside the building, handing the Trump administration a win in its press-access fight with The New York Times. A lower-court judge had blocked the escort requirement in June, but a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit put it back in place. The legal reasoning is worth parsing. The Times argued the escort rule was retaliation against the press in violation of the First Amendment. The panel disagreed—at least for now—finding the Pentagon likely to succeed on its argument that a “generally applicable escort requirement” isn't a “sufficiently adverse action” to support a First Amendment retaliation claim. In other words, because the rule applies to all reporters rather than singling out particular outlets or viewpoints, the court was skeptical it amounts to unconstitutional retaliation. This is an interim ruling on a preliminary question, not a final decision; the Times says it looks forward to litigating the merits on an expedited basis. The significance is part of a broader pattern we've tracked this week—friction between the administration and the press over access and newsgathering. Here the court signaled that neutral, across-the-board restrictions on where reporters can roam are harder to attack than targeted ones, even as the deeper question of press access to the government remains very much alive.US appeals court keeps in place Pentagon's escort policy for journalists | ReutersA federal judge has warned the Justice Department after government lawyers cited a court decision that does not exist—an apparent AI “hallucination”—in an immigration detention case. In the Michigan matter, DOJ lawyers argued that the Sixth Circuit had barred courts from second-guessing an immigration judge's bond decision, and cited a case, Taylor v. Hott, that simply isn't real. Notably, the judge who caught it was appointed by President Trump, and he observed that fabricated AI citations have fueled “a rash of cases” clogging the courts with fake authorities. If this sounds familiar, it should—we covered a nearly identical episode on Monday, when the Eleventh Circuit sanctioned a private lawyer for the same mistake. The rule is the same regardless of who commits it: when you sign a brief, you certify that its legal contentions are grounded in real, existing law, and generative AI tools routinely invent confident, well-formatted citations to cases that were never decided. What makes this one notable is that it's the government's own lawyers doing it, in a case about detaining a human being. The judge declined to impose sanctions but issued a pointed warning that future filings must not contain nonexistent authorities. The significance is that the AI-hallucination problem has reached the Justice Department itself, and the courts' patience—already thin—is not going to extend just because it's the government at the podium.US judge warns Justice Department about AI use in immigration case | ReutersThe Trump administration is reviving the “public charge” rule, a policy that can deny green cards to immigrants deemed likely to rely on public benefits. The rule appeared in the Federal Register on Thursday, will be formally published July 20, and takes effect September 18. Here's the concept. “Public charge” is a very old idea in immigration law—the government has long been able to refuse admission or permanent residency to someone likely to become primarily dependent on government support. The fight is over how broadly to define it. The version being revived, first adopted in 2019, dramatically expanded the definition to sweep in anyone who received a government benefit—things like food stamps, Medicaid, or housing vouchers—for more than twelve months in any three-year period. The Biden administration abandoned that broad approach in 2022 and narrowed the grounds for denial; now the expansive version is back. Immigrant advocates warn of a powerful “chilling effect” beyond the green-card applicants themselves: the fear that using benefits could jeopardize their status leads people—including in mixed-status families with citizen children—to avoid the doctor, skip food assistance, or hesitate to file taxes. The significance is that a technical change to the definition of a single term can reshape the behavior of millions, deterring lawful use of public programs out of fear it will be held against someone later.US to revive rule that could deny green cards to immigrants using public benefits | ReutersAnd finally, DraftKings has sued the city of Philadelphia after receiving a subpoena, arguing that the city's consumer-protection ordinance is preempted by Pennsylvania state law. The dispute is a clean illustration of a recurring structural question: who gets to regulate what. Gambling in Pennsylvania is heavily regulated at the state level, through a comprehensive statutory scheme and a state gaming authority. Philadelphia enacted its own ordinance and issued DraftKings a subpoena as part of an investigation into potential violations. DraftKings' core argument is preemption—the principle that when a higher level of government has occupied a field, a lower one can't layer on conflicting or duplicative rules of its own. The company contends the city ordinance essentially copies Pennsylvania law, and that gambling regulation belongs to the state, not the city, so Philadelphia lacks the authority to investigate and enforce in this space. This is the same preemption logic we've seen play out between the federal government and states—here it's just one rung down, between a state and one of its cities, governed by state law and the limits of municipal power. The significance is both immediate and broad: immediately, it's a bid to quash a subpoena and fend off a city investigation; more broadly, it tests how much room local governments have to police national sports-betting companies when the state has already claimed the field.DraftKings sues Philadelphia after receiving subpoena | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

On a very special episode of How To Really Run A City, our hosts soak up the wisdom of renowned 92-year-old former California Speaker of the House and San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown, a player still at the top of his political game. From jelly bean power plays in front of Ronald Reagan to pressure campaigns to free Nelson Mandela to candid thoughts on how to navigate the Trumpian circus in Washington, D.C., Brown is a well of bipartisan optimism and moral clarity. "I was the guy," Brown told former Atlanta mayor and mentee Kasim Reed, "who could tell you what your bill would do if enacted. And I would support it because it was the right thing to do. And in government, you must always do what is right." "You've laid out so many different examples of doing the right thing," said former Philly Mayor Michael Nutter. "We seem to be somewhat, nationally, dysfunctional these days." "But when you think about Willie Brown," said Citizen Co-Founder Larry Platt, "you think of a happy warrior … someone who fights with a smile on their face. That's what people want." "There's no question, that is my approach," Brown said with a smile. "And besides that, I like to party. No matter where I am, if a party can happen, I'm a participant in that effort." Join us for one of the most memorable and smile-inducing episodes of the podcast, a true masterclass in the art of politics. As cities go, so goes the nation!

In 1912, an axe killed all eight people sleeping in a Villisca, Iowa farmhouse, and the two men suspected of it — a traveling preacher and a business rival — both walked free.EPISODE BLOG PAGE (includes sources): https://weirddarkness.com/VilliscaReverendRivalREAD or DOWNLOAD the full transcript of this episode: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/2p84usw4FEATURED STORIES IN THIS EPISODE: Conspiracy theories, while often dark, can also be kind of humorous due to being so outlandishly unbelievable. For example… is the Earth's moon artificial, and actually an extraterrestrial spaceship? We'll look at the strange theory. (Could Our Moon Be An Alien Spaceship?) *** In 1912 one of the most brutal slayings in America took place in the small town of Villisca, Iowa… a murder so brutal that numerous documentaries have been made about it, books have been written, and amateur detectives have poured over the facts and suspects still trying to find out who the murderer was that swung the bloody axe. (The Unsolved Villisca Ax Murders) *** The President of the United States, no matter who is in the position at the time, is always in danger from those who would like to see someone else in office. We'll hear on the news of the assassination attempts that came close, but we more often than not are completely unaware of the attempts and plans that have been thwarted – and some of those attempts to kill a sitting U.S. President have been extremely bizarre. (Bizarre Assassination Attempts on U.S. Presidents) *** Some Biblical accounts seem unbelievable and we tend to dismiss them as fantasies, or dreams of the person writing the events down. But what if some of the strange creatures described in the bible are actually real – but come from another dimension, or even outer space? (Are Extraterrestrials in the Bible?) *** If you are told there is a city that has been built specifically for the dead, you probably think of some ancient culture that worshipped their ancestors. Personally, I think of pyramids in Egypt… but I never would've thought of the suburbs in California, USA. (California's City of the Dead)CHAPTERS & TIME STAMPS (All Times Approximate)…00:00:00.000 = Show Open00:02:33.183 = Could Our Moon Be An Alien Spaceship?00:08:21.362 = The Unsolved Villisca Axe Murders ***00:20:59.742 = California's City of the Dead00:31:12.990 = Are Extraterrestrials in the Bible? ***00:39:47.780 = Bizarre Assassination Attempts on U.S. Presidents00:48:06.915 = Show Close*** = Begins immediately after inserted ad breakLISTEN ON PODCAST APPS: Look for this podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, iHeart Radio, Amazon Music, Pandora, TuneIn Radio, and other podcast apps. Get a list of free listening apps here: https://weirddarkness.com/wdapps*No AI Voices Are Used In The Narration Of This Podcast*SOURCES and RESOURCES:“Could Our Moon Be An Alien Spaceship?” posted at Anomalien.com: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/bdhz5563“The Unsolved Villisca Ax Murders” by Joe Turner for HistoricMysteries.com: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/2p8mnfp6, and from HauntedRoom.com: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/36b6k2h4“California's City of the Dead” by Hugh Landman for Ranker.com's Graveyard Shift:https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/yckrxjzd“Are Extraterrestrials in the Bible?” by Ellen Lloyd for AncientPages.com: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/mr3d8dpk“Bizarre Assassination Attempts on U.S. Presidents” by Richard Stockton for AllThatsInteresting.com: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/26avtuhr(Over time links may become invalid, disappear, or have different content. I always make sure to give authors credit for the material I use whenever possible. If I somehow overlooked doing so for a story, or if a credit is incorrect, please let me know and I will rectify it in these show notes immediately. Some links included above may benefit me financially through qualifying purchases.)WeirdDarkness® is a registered trademark. Copyright ©2026, Weird Darkness.Originally aired: January, 2022This episode of Weird Darkness runs from a Cold War theory that the Moon is a hollow alien spacecraft, through the 1912 Villisca ax murders that left eight people dead in a single Iowa night, into the California cemetery city of Colma where the dead outnumber the living a thousand to one, on to a former NASA engineer's claim that the prophet Ezekiel witnessed a UFO, and closing with some of the strangest attempts ever made on the lives of sitting U.S. presidents.It opens with the Spaceship Moon Theory, proposed in July of 1970 by Soviet Academy of Sciences members Michael Vasin and Alexander Shcherbakov, who argued the Moon is a hollowed-out planetoid engineered by unknown beings and steered into Earth's orbit. Darren walks through the claims stacked behind the idea — the Moon ringing like a bell for more than an hour after the Apollo 12 crew crashed their lunar module into it on November 20th, 1969, craters of wildly different widths that all share the same shallow depth, moon rocks dated older than the Earth itself, and the near-perfect circular orbit that lets the Moon exactly cover the Sun during an eclipse.From there the episode turns to Villisca, Iowa, and the night of June 9th, 1912, when someone entered the home of Josiah and Sarah Moore and killed all six members of the family along with two young house guests, Lena and Ina Stillinger, striking each victim with an axe as they slept. Darren lays out the crime scene that neighbor Mary Peckham and Josiah's brother Ross discovered the next morning — cloth draped over the mirrors, two cigarette butts in the attic, a slab of bacon left beside the Stillinger girls, and a bloody basin in the kitchen — and the suspects who never brought closure, from traveling minister Reverend George Kelly, who spoke of eight dead bodies before the news broke and later gave a confession the court dismissed, to Josiah's embittered business rival Frank Jones. More than a century on, the boarded-up house survives as a museum where investigators report a heaviness on the stairs, drifting fog, and the sound of dripping blood after the 2 a.m. train whistle.Next the show travels to Colma, California, the suburb built for the dead, where roughly 1,600 living residents share the ground with more than 1.5 million graves across 17 cemeteries. Darren traces how San Francisco banned burials in 1900 and evicted its dead, triggering the largest grave relocation in history after the 1906 earthquake, with more than 150,000 bodies hauled south and tens of thousands reburied in mass graves when families wouldn't pay the ten-dollar transfer fee. He points out the famous names resting there — Wyatt Earp, Levi Strauss, William Randolph Hearst, Joe DiMaggio, brain-injury case Phineas Gage, and self-declared Emperor of the United States Joshua Norton — alongside the darker footnotes of looted skeletons, discarded headstones repurposed as gutters and seawalls, and the town's own gallows-humor slogan, "it's great to be alive in Colma."The episode then examines whether extraterrestrials appear in the Bible, centering on the vision of the prophet Ezekiel by the river Chebar and the four winged creatures with human hands, calf-shaped feet, and four faces that rose out of a fiery whirlwind. Darren details how former NASA chief engineer Joseph F. Blumrich, honored in 1972 for his work on the Saturn and Apollo programs, set out to disprove Erich von Däniken's ancient-astronaut claims and instead became convinced, arguing in his book The Spaceships of Ezekiel that the prophet had described a landing spacecraft — rotor blades, fairing housings, landing legs with round footpads, and remote mechanical arms rendered in the only words an ancient man had for them.The episode closes with a run of bizarre presidential assassination attempts, from John Hinckley's 1981 shooting of Ronald Reagan over an obsession with actress Jodie Foster, to the 2013 ricin letters mailed to the Obama White House by a man framing an Elvis impersonator over an online feud, to truck driver Samuel Byck's 1974 plot to hijack a DC-9 and crash it into the White House to kill Richard Nixon. Darren ends on the two women who tried to kill Gerald Ford seventeen days apart in September of 1974 — Manson follower Lynette Fromme, who never chambered a round, and Sarah Jane Moore, whose shot missed by six inches because her replacement revolver's sights were misaligned.

This groundbreaking book chronicles the little-understood evolution of the neoconservative movement—from its birth as a rogue insurgency in the Nixon White House through its ascent to full and controversial control of America's foreign policy in the Bush years. In eye-opening detail, The Forty Years War documents the neocons' four-decade campaign to seize the reins of American foreign policy: the undermining of Richard Nixon's outreach to the Communist bloc nations; the success at halting détente during the Ford and Carter years; the uneasy but effectual alliance with Ronald Reagan; and the determined, and ultimately successful, campaign to overthrow Saddam Hussein—no matter the cost.Drawing upon recently declassified documents, hundreds of hours of interviews, and long-obscured White House tapes, The Forty Years War delves into the political and intellectual development of some of the most fascinating political figures of the last four decades. It describes the complex, three-way relationship of Richard Nixon, Henry Kissinger, and Alexander Haig, and unravels the actions of Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, and Paul Wolfowitz over the course of seven presidencies. And it reveals the role of the mysterious Pentagon official Fritz Kraemer, a monocle-wearing German expatriate whose unshakable faith in military power, distrust of diplomacy, moralistic faith in American goodness, and warnings against "provocative weakness" made him the hidden geopolitical godfather of the neocon movement. The authors' insights into Kraemer's influence on the neocons—will change the public understanding of the conduct of government in our time.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.

This groundbreaking book chronicles the little-understood evolution of the neoconservative movement—from its birth as a rogue insurgency in the Nixon White House through its ascent to full and controversial control of America's foreign policy in the Bush years. In eye-opening detail, The Forty Years War documents the neocons' four-decade campaign to seize the reins of American foreign policy: the undermining of Richard Nixon's outreach to the Communist bloc nations; the success at halting détente during the Ford and Carter years; the uneasy but effectual alliance with Ronald Reagan; and the determined, and ultimately successful, campaign to overthrow Saddam Hussein—no matter the cost.Drawing upon recently declassified documents, hundreds of hours of interviews, and long-obscured White House tapes, The Forty Years War delves into the political and intellectual development of some of the most fascinating political figures of the last four decades. It describes the complex, three-way relationship of Richard Nixon, Henry Kissinger, and Alexander Haig, and unravels the actions of Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, and Paul Wolfowitz over the course of seven presidencies. And it reveals the role of the mysterious Pentagon official Fritz Kraemer, a monocle-wearing German expatriate whose unshakable faith in military power, distrust of diplomacy, moralistic faith in American goodness, and warnings against "provocative weakness" made him the hidden geopolitical godfather of the neocon movement. The authors' insights into Kraemer's influence on the neocons—will change the public understanding of the conduct of government in our time.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.

Longtime listeners of The Remnant know well Jonah Goldberg's hatred of the extremist, oligarchic, necromantic political conclaves holding our nation hostage, otherwise known as primaries. Nonetheless, listeners are left with many questions unanswered: How did populists seize the GOP in 2016? What should replace primaries for candidate selection? What will go down in 2028? Will Yuval Levin be on the ticket?  Here to put an end to all speculation is political scientist Seth Masket, who joins Jonah to talk about the Tea Party, Donald Trump's charisma, Bill Clinton as a precursor to Trump, primaries, county-scale politics, party leadership, democratization, conventions, Trump's influence over 2028, the next GOP presidential candidate, J.D. Vance, Richard Nixon, and Ronald Reagan's 11th commandment. Show Notes: —Masket: The Elephants in the Room: How Trump Voters Seized the Party from Republican Leaders —Masket's Substack —Masket: Learning from Loss: The Democrats, 2016–2020 —E. E. Schattschneider: Party Government: American Government in Action  —DisPod at the 92nd Street Y —Remnant on Weberian charisma The Remnant is a production of ⁠The Dispatch⁠, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a nonpartisan perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings—including the Saturday Ruminant, audio versions of all our articles and newsletters, and Jonah's twice-weekly G-File—⁠click here⁠. Instructions on how to set up your members-only feed can be found here, and if you'd like to remove all ads from your podcast experience, consider becoming a premium Dispatch member ⁠by clicking here⁠.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Inheritance: Poisoned Fruit of JFK's AssassinationChristopher Fulton's journey began with the death of Evelyn Lincoln, late secretary to President John F. Kennedy. Through Lincoln, crucial evidence ended up in Christopher's hands—evidence that was going to be used to facilitate a new future for America. But the U.S. government's position was clear: that evidence had to be confiscated and classified, and the truth hidden away from the public. Christopher was sent to federal prison for years under a sealed warrant and indictment. The Inheritance, Christopher's personal narrative, shares insider information from his encounters with the Russian Government, President Ronald Reagan, Donald Trump, the Clinton White House, the U.S. Justice Department, the Secret Service, and the Kennedy family themselves. It reveals the true intentions of Evelyn Lincoln and her secret promise to Robert Kennedy—and Christopher's secret promise to John F. Kennedy Jr. The Inheritance explodes with history-changing information and answers the questions Americans are still asking, while pulling them through a gauntlet of some of the worst prisons this country has to offer. This book thrillingly exposes the reality of American power, and sheds light on the dark corners of current corruption within the executive branch and the justice and prison systems.https://amzn.to/44xqWOjBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.

On the 147th Episode of Dorm Damage With Tom & Zeus the guys discuss Hollywood's identity crisis, controversies surrounding films like The Odyssey, Supergirl and more. Lately it seems movies are being discussed more for casting controversies, actor's interviews than the movies themselves. With Christopher Nolan's controversial "The Odyssey" about to be released and the "Supergirl" flop now is great time to have an honest discussion about what's going on in movies. So make sure you listen and look for the new trailer for the movie, "Ronald Reagan" starring Emmanuel Lewis! To Purchase Shout It Out Loudcast's KISS Book “Raise Your Glasses: A Celebration Of 50 Years of KISS Songs By Celebrities, Musicians & Fans Please Click Below:   ⁠⁠⁠Raise Your Glasses Book⁠⁠⁠   For all things Shout It Out Loudcast the #1 KISS Podcast check out our amazing website by clicking below:   ⁠⁠⁠www.ShoutItOutLoudcast.com⁠⁠⁠   Interested in more Shout It Out Loudcast content?  Care to help us out?  Come join us on Patreon by clicking below:   ⁠⁠⁠SIOL Patreon⁠⁠⁠   Get all your Shout It Out Loudcast Merchandise by clicking below:   ⁠⁠⁠Shout It Out Loudcast Merch At Printify⁠⁠⁠   Shop At Our Amazon Store by clicking below: ⁠⁠⁠Shout It Out Loudcast Amazon Store⁠⁠⁠   Please Email us comments or suggestions by clicking below: ⁠⁠⁠ShoutItOutLoudcast@Gmail.com⁠⁠⁠   Please subscribe to us and give us a 5 Star (Child) review on the following places below: ⁠⁠⁠iTunes⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠Podchaser⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠Stitcher⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠iHeart Radio⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠Spotify ⁠⁠⁠   Please follow us and like our social media pages clicking below: ⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠Facebook Page⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠Facebook Group Page Shout It Out Loudcasters⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠   Proud Member of the Pantheon Podcast click below to see the website: ⁠⁠⁠Pantheon Podcast Network⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Ed Morrissey, Managing Editor at Hot Air, and host of the Ed Morrissey Podcast, joins Seth to discuss the legacies of presidents Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon, as well as remember Gerald Ford’s birthday today. Seth and Ed examine the ways in which Nixon's policies, such as his opening of China and his handling of the Soviet Union, continue to influence American foreign policy today. They also touch on the differences between Nixon and Reagan's approaches to communism, with Reagan's more confrontational stance and Nixon's pragmatic approach. Ed talks about President Trump’s upcoming address to the nation and how his leadership style compares to the aforementioned previous Republican presidents. Rep. Ro Khanna’s (D-CA) dishonest tale of his recent trip to Israel.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I will come out of this very surreal moment in American history and in the story of my own life, understanding the basic truth that our goodness is not determined by a political party. It isn't the politics that make us better than anyone else. We all have our own ideas of what matters. Instead, it is our willingness to preserve our humanity when tested that really counts.We can blame the internet and the algorithms for what has happened to all of us in the last 20 years, to our politics, to our culture, to our relationships. But that can only take us so far. At some point, we all have to reckon with who we are and what we've become.I always thought we were the good guys. We didn't mock, degrade, or dehumanize other people. We were decent and were empathetic. That is, until Donald Trump won in 2016 and all of that changed. What I saw happen to my own side was ugly. It was dark. I wanted nothing to do with it.It's been almost two years since Donald Trump was nearly shot and killed on live television. The way the Left dealt with that shooting was shocking. They diminished it. They said it was staged or just shrapnel. They did everything but wake up to the radicalization on their own side. By then, they'd become consumed by hatred, having tried everything they had in their arsenal to take down Trump, and all of it had failed. How could they pivot back to their humanity?So when Charlie Kirk was assassinated on video, with the clip going viral to millions of views in seconds, they were primed and ready to once again leave behind their humanity and celebrate one more battle against their named evil, a guy who said things they didn't like. It became a thing on TikTok:They all took to X and competed for who could be the ugliest and the cruelest. The more disgusting they were, the more their hate and dehumanization were rewarded. Social media has messed with our perception of what defines love and hate, with those tiny deceptive hearts we press every time someone scratches that sadistic itch.The reaction to Charlie's assassination by the Left was unlike anything I've ever seen or anything I thought I would ever see from my former side. It might have been the people of Salem celebrating watching their friends and neighbors hang because they refused to confess. But this was America in 2025, not 1692. How could they not have been shaken out of their decade-long mass hysteria stupor? My mind goes to Charles Manson and his followers, who showed no mercy, slicing up the bodies of the rich in the Hollywood Hills, a pregnant Sharon Tate among them. To hear the Manson family tell it, they deserved it. They were the establishment. They had been dehumanized, and their lives didn't matter. I bring up the Manson murders a lot because that was the last time we saw that same glint, the same wild-eyed happiness and glee at something as gruesome as a murder or someone's death. I thought that would have been the end of it, back then. It was enough to end the 1960s, keep Richard Nixon in power, and send our society tumbling toward Ronald Reagan and the 1980s. But now, that same kind of bizarre, cult-like fury has overtaken the Left once again, and nothing can shake them out of it, not the near assassination of Trump, not the brutal murder of Charlie Kirk. Not the celebrating afterward.The hate bubbled up inside them so profoundly that even when Barack Obama tried to show some grace in the wake of Charlie's death, his biggest applause lines came after he decided to repeat the cherry-picked, out-of-context lies pushed by the Left that led to the dehumanization of Charlie Kirk in the first place. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez took her cue from President Obama and followed the same pattern. She offered a condemnation of political violence, but then launched into the kind of attack that they believe justifies all of what they've been doing for the past ten years.This is a country built on freedom of speech, and yet, the entire Left doesn't believe in it, or they think it's Trump that's doing it. They control the culture, which is why they couldn't even offer a word about Charlie's death, not even at the Emmys or anywhere else. Jamie Lee Curtis had a moment of sorrow for Charlie when she choked up on a podcast. But the activists descended upon her, and of course, she was forced to “clarify” what she meant.All it took was losing one election for my side to transform into monsters who believed that as long as their fellow Americans stood in their way, they could justify anything that happened to them, yes, even an assassination.Even now, I still get twitchy when I see the blind, hot hatred coming from the Left aimed at anyone on the Right. I've never gotten used to it. I've never been able to overlook it. I certainly couldn't be a part of it.I was reminded of that this week after Lindsey Graham's untimely death. I watched the same pattern play out, the same ugliness, the same mocking TikTok videos demanding those inside utopia disconnect from their humanity. Even if Trump danced on the graves of his enemies, Rob Reiner and Robert Mueller, that doesn't mean he spends his days wishing any of them would be murdered or dead. Plenty of people on the Right, even journalists in right-leaning outlets, had no problem condemning Trump for it. Why can't they do that on the Left?Why are we now seeing them once again celebrating the death of a politician for the crime of disagreeing with them? They will keep doing this and as long as they do, someone out there will think picking up a gun will make them a hero. Celebrating the death of evil people should be reserved for mass murderers like Stalin or Hitler. That they believe Lindsey Graham, Donald Trump, or Charlie Kirk are on that level is proof enough that they've lost their minds, and it has taken us to a very dangerous place. Something Wicked This Way ComesWhen Charlie was assassinated, it was like the leg of a pier giving way and the whole thing crashing into the water. He held the MAGA movement together by his optimistic and inclusive nature, but once he was gone, a full-blown war broke out.It all started with the JQ group - the “Jewish Question” white nationalists - who instantly blamed Charlie's death on Israel. This was then picked up and amplified by Candace Owens, who has now become more popular than she's ever been by positioning herself as the anti-Charlie Kirk. She is now attempting to steal his legacy, bully and harass his widow, and destroy everything he ever built.Why? Who knows. Maybe because she's a total zero and her friendship with Charlie was the best it was ever going to get for her. Maybe she was bitter and resentful about being sidelined by Charlie and TPUSA. Either way, she has now done the Left a solid by changing the conversation around Charlie's death. It isn't the rising fanaticism on the Left or their pathological need to control thought and speech. It isn't that they've become so totalitarian that they fantasize about the deaths of their enemies and celebrate when people die?No, it was actually Israel!I didn't think anything or anyone could ever match the level of insanity of the Left, but Candace Owens has done it. For clicks, views, and money, she sold out her so-called friend. Charlie has been dehumanized, yet again, this time transformed into nothing more than a stepping stone to success by a woman who can never get enough of it, who needs people to be talking about her, looking at her, thinking about her, doing anything but ignoring her.She's stolen Charlie's legacy and has now written herself into this story so everyone will notice she was once part of Charlie's world. Not an important part. She was useful, for a time. Maybe she was even his friend, for a time. Now, she has shown her true colors, and it is the most evil thing I've seen in the 30 years I've been online. How lonely and empty does a person have to be to steal someone else's life?That so many have followed her, that there is such a thing as the “woke Right,” that Tucker Carlson and Alex Jones and others have actually indulged this sick fantasy that anyone but Tyler Robinson could have done this, proves that goodness is not about political parties. It is about our humanity, whether we have it or whether we've abandoned it. Charlie's Angels Something real and violent happened on September 10, 2025. The algorithmic, hypnotic churn of the internet, our absurd, pointless Civil War, the obsession on the Right with Israel, none of that could stop what really happened that day.There isn't a person who was there or who was closest to Charlie that Candace Owens hasn't consumed for content and blamed for his death. But she's underestimated the strength of Charlie's widow, his most powerful angel, Erika Kirk. Candace has used her too, laid her out like raw flesh to be consumed by sycophants, but somehow, that has only made Erika stronger, and now, Candace is the one who is about to understand what love really means. And what goodness looks like.Erika is Charlie's angel, but lucky for him, he has a lot of them. They're out there fighting every day to keep his memory alive and the movement he built thriving. And a sculptor is putting a statue of Charlie Kirk in Times Square, New York. We know how that is going to go. We know because we know the Left. The way the Left responded to Charlie's assassination should be something none of us ever forgets. It is something they will all have to reckon with one day, and for many of them, wiping away its shame won't be easy.It will be up to those angels of Charlie's to continue his lifelong devotion to open debate, to talking to those you disagree with, and to preserve our freedom of speech and expression. Above all, let his memory be a reminder of how important it is to hold on to our humanity. The world has changed since Charlie was shot and killed. It's darker, and it's meaner. Holding onto hope is harder than it's ever been. But Charlie Kirk lives on through his widow, his babies, his true friends, and the tens of thousands of young people keeping TPUSA alive.We have his legacy because we still have his voice, and thanks to the internet, it is everywhere, and he will never be forgotten./// This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.sashastone.com/subscribe

On Monday's Mark Levin Show, Senator Lindsey Graham, a loyal friend and loyal ally to democratic and peace-loving countries around the world, has passed away. He was a friend to Israel, Ukraine, Taiwan, and others. He was a counterbalance to naive Woke Reich isolationists who talk about American sovereignty but don't realize you have to fight for it. Graham had a lot in common in national security matters with Ronald Reagan. Not even a nation as powerful as the United States can go it alone, and Graham understood we have alliances for a reason. Marxists/Islamists like Hasan Piker and Woke Reich isolationists wasted no time attacking him, but he was popular in South Carolina and all over the world. He and his sound advice will be truly missed. Also, compare Graham's friendship with Israel to Rep Ro Khanna, who took it upon himself to visit Judea/Samaria, incorrectly called the "West Bank." Khanna didn't bother telling the IDF or police, but he did go with Palestinian activists and NY Times reporters with cameras for good measure. Khanna claims he was "kidnapped" by Israeli "settlers" -- another wrong term, how can you settle on your own indigenous land? -- detained by police and mistreated by the IDF. Video shows Khanna is a liar. Why did he do all this? One, to build support for himself among Jew-hating left wingers and also to defeat Benjamin Netanyahu in Israeli elections. Israel needs friends like Lindsey Graham. Then, we can criticize a document without criticizing the President, who is doing a wonderful job. Trump said he only agreed to the MOU as a "test." The MOU never made sense because this regime was never going to live up to it. Why go through all this for a test? As much as we want to believe a deal can be negotiated, you can't negotiate with a seventh-century ideology. If we don't take this regime out now, our children and grandchildren will still be dealing with them. Also, former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been arrested reportedly over ties to Mossad. According to reports, Mossad wanted him to possibly lead a new Iranian regime. Another report says Israel has signed an agreement with the son of the Shah of Iran, Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, recognizing him as leader of a new Iranian government. It's clear that Israel isn't waiting around to see if any MOU will take effect. Then, there are a lot of mosques in this country that preach anti-American hate, and many of them are celebrating Lindsey Graham's death. But these mosques have a lot of sympathy. A new survey shows almost half of American Muslims - 44% - support Hamas. Only 26% of American Muslims have a favorable view of Israel. Support for Israel is even dropping among younger Republicans. Is Israel losing the PR war among Americans? Finally, Abdul El-Sayed is the left-wing Marxist/Islamist running for the Senate from Michigan. He pushes Medicare for all from cradle to grave, yet his psychiatrist wife doesn't accept Medicare...or any other insurance. Her patients have to pay her out of their own pocket. Furthermore, while El-Sayed hasn't released his tax returns, we find out he and the wife are wealthier than when he first ran for statewide office, and he owns two rental properties worth almost a million dollars. The hypocrisy of the left has to be seen to be believed. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

On this edition of The Federalist Radio Hour, Founder and CEO of American Majority Ned Ryun joins Federalist Senior Elections Correspondent Matt Kittle to discuss virtue as the organizing factor in early America, the founders' concept of self-government versus the modern administrative state, and the plan for Republicans to reclaim institutional power through the upcoming election cycles.You can find Ned Ryun's new documentary, The Thread of Liberty: Keeping Our Republic, here.The Federalist Foundation is a nonprofit, and we depend entirely on our listeners and readers — not corporations. If you value fearless, independent journalism, please consider a tax-deductible gift today at TheFederalist.com/donate. Your support keeps us going.

In this powerful conversation, Gene Valentino joins the discussion to examine the growing influence of democratic socialism, the importance of protecting America's Constitutional Republic, and why local civic engagement matters now more than ever.Gene also shares his thoughts on:The rise of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA)President Trump's economic and tariff policiesNational security concerns involving Iran, Israel, Cuba, and emerging global threatsWhy America must confront the 'enemy from within'The importance of voting, community involvement, and grassroots leadershipLessons from Benjamin Franklin and Ronald Reagan about preserving freedomThis episode is a passionate discussion about patriotism, leadership, and the future of the United States. Whether you agree or disagree, the conversation challenges viewers to think deeply about the direction of the country and their role in shaping it.

Alice and Doug just finished a heavy weekend of yard saling and record shopping. And now they're ready for their heavy weekend of creaming. Er.It's the seventh annual National Ice Cream Day ice cream crawl!Yes, it's just about time for the greatest time of the year. A day to enjoy all the tastiness that Ronald Reagan would have wanted us to. It's true.Other discussion topics may include:- Why doesn't anybody talk about how great Marie Osmond is?- Farting “regular amounts”- The sad part in a romance novel when the dog dies- What if one of the Hansons left Hanson?- The various health benefits of contrast therapy that can benefit your health and wellness in a beneficial manner

In our 43rd episode of This F*cking Guy, Erin and Alyssa dive deep into the past of the Jelly Bean Jack*ss, Ronald Reagan. From his B-list acting days, to "fighting" WWII from Culver City, to being an FBI rat, to his unforgivable  handling of the AIDS crisis, to mucking up foreign affairs for decades to come, this may be one of our most deluded guys yet.For a closed-captioned version of this episode, click here. For a transcript of this episode, please email transcripts@crooked.com and include the name of the podcast, episode title, and episode date.Sources:Ronald Reagan: Informant (Salon)Peeping Ron (Book Forum) Ronald Reagan's shameful legacy: Violence, the homeless, mental illness (Salon)Ronald Reagan's wartime lies: The president had quite a Brian Williams problem (Salon)The Mendacity Index (Washington Monthly)On a wing and a prayer (Alec Nevala-Lee)Tear Down This Myth (Google Books) Reagan & Co. (The Washington Post) California: Credibility in Sacramento (Time) The Lion King: An Exchange (NY Books)Reagan Expresses Horror at Claim That the Holocaust is a Hoax (Jewish Telegraphic Agency) The Myth of Ronald Reagan and the Nazi Death Camps (National Review)The Stupidity of Ronald Reagan (Slate)Paying Lip Service (The Village Voice)The Road to Reagandom (Slate)How Ronald Reagan's Time at General Electric Pushed Him to Conservatism (Lit Hub)Ronald Reagan's Millions (Rolling Stone)How Prop 14 Shaped California's Racial Covenants (PBS Socal)Here's the Rest of Him (Claremont Review of Books) Alla Nazimova (AFI Catalog Spotlight)The Global HIV/AIDS Timeline (KFF)History of the HIV Epidemic (Gilead)When AIDS Was Funny Casts a Harsh Light on the Reagan Administration's Indifference to HIV (HIV Plus Mag)Short film “When AIDS Was Funny,” Reagan Press Secretary laughs off an epidemic (Q Notes Carolinas)‘When AIDS Was Funny': Short film reveals shortfalls of Reagan response to AIDS (MSNOW)HIV/AIDS Timeline (history.com)HIV/AIDS Historical Timeline (Philadelphia Center)Snapshots of an Epidemic: An HIV/AIDS Timeline (amfAR)The Iran-Contra Affair (Bill of Rights Institute) The Iran-Contra Affair (PBS American Experience) 1983 Beirut barracks bombing: ‘The BLT Building is gone!' (Marine Corps Times) H-Gram 080: Paved with Good Intentions—The U.S. Navy in the 1983 Lebanon Crisis (Naval History and Heritage Command)When Reagan Cut and Run (Foreign Policy) 40 Years Later, El Mozote Massacre Victims Vow to 'Keep Demanding Justice' (Common Dreams) The Massacre at El Mozote (Human Rights Watch)Judgment Day's Coming for U.S.-Backed Troops Who Slaughtered Men, Women, and So Many Children at El Mozote (Daily Beast) Pakistan's Nuclear Program Posed “Acute Dilemma” for U.S. Policy (National Security Archive) New Documents Spotlight Reagan-era Tensions over Pakistani Nuclear Program (National Security Archive) New Documents Spotlight Reagan-era Tensions over Pakistani Nuclear Program (Wilson Center)The Pakistan Aid Dilemma (Center for American Progress) Fact Check: It's Rumored that Ronald Reagan Had Alzheimer's Disease While Still in Office. Here's What the Evidence Says (Snopes)Did Reagan Decline? (Sage Journal)Hoover Makes Available the Newly Processed Papers of Nancy's Reagan's White House Astrologer (Hoover Institution)How Nancy Reagan's Secret Phone-In Astrologer Became a Powerful White House Adviser — and Helped Oust the Chief of Staff (People)Nancy Reagan: Controversial Moments During Her Life in the Public Eye (People)Why Ronald Reagan Became the Great Deregulator (JSTOR Daily)Looking Back On When President Reagan Fired The Air Traffic Controllers (NPR)Reagan's Legacy (SFAF)The Other Time a U.S. President Withheld WHO Funds (John Hopkins)How newly discovered audio is reviving debate over Reagan's legacy on race (PBS News)It's Time to End the Racist and Unjustified Sentencing Disparity Between Crack and Powder Cocaine (Civil Rights)Reagan's National Drug Strategy (University of Michigan)The Fairness Doctrine: How We Lost It and Why We Need It Back (SISYPHUS)Portraits in Oversight: The Iran-Contra Affair (Levin Center)Ronald Reagan Made Central America a Killing Field (Jacobin)Guatemalan Slaughter Was Part of Reagan's Hard Line (The New York Times)Remembering US-backed state terror in El Salvador (Al Jazeera)Ronald Reagan's shameful legacy: Violence, the homeless, mental illness (Salon)The Key to Welfare Reform (The Atlantic)

Ralph speaks to historian Omer Bartov about his new book “Israel: What Went Wrong?” with special guest, international law expert Bruce FeinBruce Fein is a Constitutional scholar and an expert on international law. Mr. Fein was Associate Deputy Attorney General under Ronald Reagan and he is the author of Constitutional Peril: The Life and Death Struggle for Our Constitution and Democracy, and American Empire: Before the Fall.Many of the things that you describe in Israel apply in spades in the United States. We also have an administration that says we're being invaded militarily by Venezuela gangs, so we have to go kidnap their president and annex Venezuela. We've stated that Iran is an existential threat to the United States because at some future time, it's conceivable they may get one nuclear weapon. We have 5,000, Israel probably has 300 or 400. Or make the argument that we are being invaded by defenseless immigrants across the southern border. And it does seem to me that all countries—I don't think it's unique anyway to the United States or Israel, but it's generally true those in power are there to manufacture fear, to inflate fleas into elephants and say “My gosh, tomorrow the sky is falling down. We need to have national emergencies, rule by decree.” Everything is “an imminent danger”, the Communist domino theory. It's a very challenging issue. I say what you've described in Israel is not unique to Israel. We confront it every day right in the United States. And it works.Bruce FeinOmer Bartov is the Dean's Professor of Holocaust and Genocide Studies at Brown University. A historian, Professor Bartov was born on a kibbutz, grew up in Tel Aviv, and served in the Israel Defense Forces during the Yom Kippur War. He went on to become a leading scholar of the German army and the Holocaust, before turning his attention to his native country. His early research concerned the Nazi indoctrination of the Wehrmacht and the crimes it committed in World War II. He then turned to the links between total war and genocide and interethnic relations in the borderlands of Eastern Europe. His current interest is reflected in his recent books, Genocide, the Holocaust and Israel-Palestine: First-Person History in Times of Crisis, Israel: What Went Wrong?, and the forthcoming The Broken Promise: A Personal Political History of Israel and Palestine. The whole idea of creating a Jewish state (and it says so in the Proclamation of the State from May 1948) is that it would be a state for Jews—that it would be both Jewish and democratic. And that has proven to be not possible. A Jewish state can be both Jewish and democratic only if the overwhelming majority (if not all) of its citizens are Jews.Omer Bartov[Zionist zealots] believe that history is on their side—so in that sense, they are similar to Communists they're similar to Fascists they're similar to Nazis in that they believe that they can see the way forward, they know the logic of history, and the logic of history as they see it is on their side.Omer BartovIn Israel, since the 1980s (really since after the War of 1973, with the rise of the right wing in Israel in particular) the Holocaust has come to serve a particular purpose. Instead of being commemorated as an event that happened in the past that we should remember and commemorate and research, it's become a kind of image of an imminent danger to Israel. And the farther Israel has moved from the actual event of the Holocaust, and the more the Israeli army has become the military hegemon in its region, the more this alleged threat of an “Auschwitz around the corner” has been used by Israeli governments. Why has it been used? Because Israel actually needs to explain to itself and to its citizens: Why is it bossing it over millions of Palestinians? Half of the population under Israeli control are Palestinians. Two million are citizens, but they don't have equal rights, and the others have no rights at all (they're simply under arbitrary military rule). So how do you explain that? You explain that by telling your population and the rest of the world that those Palestinians—who have no power, who can never pose a threat to you—are an existential threat. And in Israel, that has worked quite well.Omer BartovBecause of the focus on Hebrew—to create Hebrew as a mother tongue for children whose mothers didn't speak Hebrew—because of that, there was a great antagonism towards speaking any other language. And the notion of having bilingual schools (that is, of having schools in Palestine where people would learn both Hebrew and Arabic, the language of the place) is not entertained by the vast majority of educators. Now, if you think about what would have been the result of having bilingual schools already in the 1920s and 30s, that children could speak each other's language and recognize each other's culture—that could have had a huge effect on how Zionism developed and how the state would have developed. But in today's Israel, the only bilingual population are the Palestinians. Palestinian citizens of Israel speak Arabic and Hebrew. Most Israelis don't speak Arabic. And most Israelis who trace themselves (quite large numbers) not to Europe, but to North Africa and the Middle East, where their parents and grandparents spoke Arabic (this was their language) have forgotten that language and were ashamed of their parents speaking it because it associated them with the Arabs. So the loss in this kind of creation of a nation around one language was the ability to imagine yourself as sharing the space with another group.Omer Bartov * Our top story concerns a progressive insurgent running in a must-win Senate race – and not the one you're thinking of. Late last week, Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed won the endorsement of Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. The New York Times notes that this is AOC's first Senate endorsement of this cycle, coming just about a month ahead of the August 4th Michigan primary. El-Sayed is quoted saying that he is “honored for what her support says about what this campaign is building and what we're fighting for,” adding that he thinks that “too many establishment Democrats are…afraid that I will win.” He pointedly attacked Senator Chuck Schumer, charging that the Minority Leader “doesn't want to see me on the inside of the U.S. Senate,” because El-Sayed would “call out the kind of politics where we take money from corporations and AIPAC to run milquetoast campaigns and don't say anything about the problems that everyday people are facing.” El-Sayed has announced that he will campaign with AOC and Senator Bernie Sanders in Detroit, Lansing and Grand Rapids on July 18th and 19th, per MLive.* Another earthquake occurred in the Michigan Senate race on July 5th, when State Senator Mallory McMorrow announced that she would be withdrawing from the race – turning what was a competitive three-way race into a head-to-head between El-Sayed and the Democratic establishment pick, Congresswoman Haley Stevens. The Detroit Free Press notes that this announcement “comes after absentee ballots have already been mailed out to some voters and too late to remove her name from the primary ballot,” though voters are able to rescind their absentee votes and submit new ones up through Friday, July 24th. In a video statement, McMorrow maintained that “People are crying out for change and we need to listen.” McMorrow once led her opponents in this race but saw her support collapse and was trailing in a distant third place in recent polls. Rumor also had it that outgoing Senator Gary Peters was privately calling for her to exit the race so centrists could consolidate around Stevens. While many of her supporters are expected to go to Stevens, El-Sayed is energetically courting McMorrow's voters as well. The Detroit News reports McMorrow herself has announced that she will remain neutral in the remaining days of the primary, leaving her voters to vote their own consciences.* In more Michigan news, DSA-backed congressional candidate Donavan McKinney is running strong in his primary campaign against incumbent Congressman Shri Thanedar, whom McKinney has labeled “​​Detroit's own Elon Musk,” according to the New York Post. If McKinney pulls it off, he will join the growing group of DSA members in the House, along with Claire Valdez, Darializa Avila Chevalier and AOC from New York, Chris Rabb and Melat Kiros from Pennsylvania and Colorado respectively, and Rashida Tlaib from Michigan. Another candidate endorsed by his local DSA chapter, Kyle Blomquist, is running for Congress in Michigan but even if he wins his primary he is not expected to flip the deep red 1st congressional district.* In Missouri, Cori Bush has also won the support of DSA for her comeback congressional run against Wesley Bell, who defeated her in the 2024 primary, Andrew Solender reports. Bush had already won the support of her local DSA chapter, along with many other progressive organizations, and has been endorsed by Senator Bernie Sanders, Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib, and former Congressman Jamaal Bowman. This week though, she won the support of the national DSA. In a statement, Bush wrote “I am honored to be once again endorsed by the Democratic [Socialists] of America as I campaign to return to Congress and keep building our movement to fight for economic justice, Medicare for All, abolishing ICE, and a world where everyday people have a real voice in our workplace's neighborhoods and society.” Bush also praised DSA for its “decades of organizing…[mobilizing] thousands of people across the country to demand an economy that works for all of us…[and] take on war profiteers, the for-profit healthcare industry, and the billionaire funded lobbies that subvert our democracy.” There has been little polling of this race, but what there has been appears to show the race in a statistical dead heat. One sign that Bush is being taken seriously is the new $865,000 ad buy taken out by the United Democracy Project, an AIPAC cutout.* Ironically, it would seem that American Jews have a more favorable view of the progressive left than Israel. According to the Forward, a new AP poll found that “44% of American Jews hold a favorable opinion of Zohran Mamdani, compared with 39% who view him unfavorably.” This is in contrast to the 32% of respondents who said they have a favorable opinion of Netanyahu and 59% who said they have a negative view of the Israeli PM. Perhaps more surprisingly, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, a “staunch supporter of Israel,” garnered only a 41% favorability rating, though far more respondents said they don't know enough about him to have an opinion than said they have a negative view.* Turning back to the Senate, the other major story this week of course is the fall of Graham Platner. Accusations of sexual assault, detailed in a POLITICO article, resulted in a deluge of opprobrium that cascaded upwards culminating in Platner's earliest and highest profile supporter, Senator Bernie Sanders, calling on him to drop out of the Senate race in Maine. In a video message released Wednesday, Platner stated that he would be suspending his campaign effective immediately, later telling staff that he plans to wait until Monday, the final possible day, to formally withdraw from the race, Axios reports. In the same video, Platner categorically denied the accusations calling them “all false,” and maintaining that the “things that have been claimed did not happen.” He implied that the scandal was orchestrated by “those in power“ who would “rather see Susan Collins win than have me be the next Senator from Maine.”* Platner's impending, late-stage withdrawal from the race has set off a chaotic blitz primary to replace him as the Democratic nominee. Numerous candidates have announced they are running including former Maine Senate president Troy Jackson, former Director of Maine's Center for Disease, Control and Prevention Nirav Shah, co-founder of Maine beer company Dan Kleban, Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows and state lawmaker Valli Geiger, along with Jordan Wood and Paige Loud, both of whom ran in the Maine second congressional district Democratic primary. The actual process for selecting a nominee has been the subject of debate – with many progressives arguing for caucuses – but POLITICO reports that by July 27th, “600 delegates must be selected,” including 500 from the state's 16 county parties, and these delegates will decide on a candidate to replace Platner via “an unprecedented nominating convention,” wherein all delegates come in unpledged to any candidate setting the stage for “what could be a raucous and unpredictable free-for-all.” It remains to be seen how this will all shake out, but it is notable that almost all of these candidates poll very strongly against Senator Susan Collins, with many polling higher than Platner ever did, while the Democratic Party's handpicked primary candidate, sitting Governor Janet Mills, still polls lower than Platner even since the scandal broke.* For our final Senate story, we turn to the senior Senator from Kentucky, Mitch McConnell. McConnell was recently found unconscious in his Washington, DC home and has been hospitalized since, and while Republican Senators and media figures like Scott Jennings claim to have spoken with him directly, his being sequestered away from the public has fueled rampant speculation about the severity of his condition and why it is being kept so secretive. Forbes reports that some figures on the right, including Steve Bannon, are “suggesting the Republican establishment is shielding the state of McConnell's health from the public to allow him to remain in office long enough to avoid [Kentucky Congressman Thomas] Massie running for his seat.” Former Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene told TMZ, “Thomas Massie would make a great senator.” The Hill reports that Andy Beshear, the Democratic Governor of Kentucky, sent a letter to McConnell's Senate office strongly requesting an update on the Senator's health, noting that “Over the last several weeks, Kentuckians have grown increasingly concerned about the health and well-being of Sen. McConnell,” and that “Allowing speculation to continue in the media is not fair to the Senator or to Kentuckians, and my hope is that this provides him the opportunity to share the information in a transparent manner, direct from the source.”* In more positive news, AP reports former Wisconsin judge Hannah Dugan, who helped an immigrant escape ICE by ushering him through her jury room door was spared prison time in her sentencing this week. After the incident in her court room, Dugan was convicted of felony obstruction in what was widely seen as a political trial designed to exact retribution on behalf of the Trump administration. Dugan resigned her circuit judgeship under this assault; in her resignation letter, she warned that this prosecution threatened “the independence of our judiciary.” Dugan was fined $5,000.* Finally, in spiritual news, a story in the National Catholic Reporter recounts how Pope Leo XIV excommunicated thousands of clergy and followers of the far right, schismatic group, the Society of St. Pius X. While bishops and priests are judged prima facie schismatic for their consecration in the Society, lay followers of the sect will be judged schismatic if they consciously choose “adherence to the society over obedience to the pope,” and “exclusive participation in Lefebvrian ‘ecclesial' acts, without taking part in the acts of the Catholic Church,” a reference to the group's founder, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. The proximate cause of this excommunication was the Society creating four new bishops in open defiance of Pope Leo, essentially daring the Church to act. This piece notes that the Society “has long been a thorn in the side of Rome,” and notes that the new papal decree rolls back privileges granted to the sect under Pope Francis, including administering the sacrament of penance and solemnizing marriages.This has been Francesco DeSantis, with In Case You Haven't Heard. Get full access to Ralph Nader Radio Hour at www.ralphnaderradiohour.com/subscribe

Today On The Eric Metaxas Show, Eric broadcasts from Las Vegas at Freedom Fest, where he is receiving the Leonard Read Award for his book Revolution. He talks with Victor Marx about winning the Republican nomination for governor of Colorado, disrupting the political establishment, his extraordinary life story, and why Colorado can still be saved. Then Eric and Chris Himes share incredible stories from their dinner with legendary impressionist Rich Little, including stories involving Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, Ronald Reagan, Truman Capote, Paul Lynde, and Julie Andrews. Eric also discusses what he sees as an effort to suppress his bestselling book Revolution.⭐ ORDER NOW:Revolution: The Birth of the Greatest Nation in the History of the World

July 9, 2026On July 9, 1868, Americans changed the US Constitution for the 14th time, The Fourteenth Amendment brought the principles of the Declaration to life, requiring the Federal government to protect the equal rights of all American men, The Thirteenth Amendment prohibited slavery on the basis of race, but did not guarantee equality for Black Americans, The Fourteenth Amendment took on the Dred Scott v Sandford decision and provided that all persons born or naturalized in the US are citizens of the US, It also overturned the idea that democracy was created at the state level, forbidding states from making laws that were discriminatory, The principles of the Fourteenth Amendment were behind civil rights decisions of the 50s, 60s, and 70s, Opponents objected, and called for “originalism,” an idea promoted by Robert Bork who was nominated to the Supreme Court by Ronald Reagan, Reaction to the nomination recognized the importance of the Fourteenth Amendment to equality.Watch today's recording here: https://www.youtube.com/live/g9TUa1Rwd6U?si=T8_KKcHQZElhpnZ-Get full, free access to Letters from an American here: https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/subscribeYou can also find me:Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/hcrichardson.bsky.socialInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/heathercoxrichardson/?hl=enFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/heathercoxrichardson/YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@heathercoxrichardson Get full access to Letters from an American at heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/subscribe

Text the show!

From the publisher: "An in-depth exploration of history of the US Capitol building and the incredible personalities who built it, full of dramatic stories and surprising facts; a powerful testament to what the Capitol has meant to generations of Americans and how it has endured.The Capitol is a unique biography of a place, encompassing architecture, history, politics, popular culture, and race in a fascinating exploration of our Capitol's secret past, one rife with political intrigue, assassination attempts, thwarted bombings, and gunmen on the run. Never mind ghostly cat prints, mysteriously bloodstained steps, and charming “fairy doors” that have delighted visitors for hundreds of years. Spanning three centuries of American history, the book focuses on iconic and notable names and personalities from the past—from George Washington to Davy Crockett to Ronald Reagan—as well as countless colorful characters readers may not have heard of before, with a focus on restoring the narratives of enslaved people and recognizing their contributions. The story of the Capitol is the story of America itself, and, for the first time, that story will be told in this sweeping, aspirational biography of the building at the very heart of the American experiment."Brian's website can be found at: https://brianjayjones.com/Information on his book can be found at https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/672053/the-capitol-by-brian-jay-jones/AxelbankHistory.com is designed by https://www.ellieclairedesigns.com/Axelbank Reports History and Today" can be found on social media at https://twitter.com/axelbankhistoryhttps://instagram.com/axelbankhistoryhttps://facebook.com/axelbankhistory

“We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.” These fundamental truths shape American identity. Ted Widmer explores their origins and impact in The Living Declaration: A Biography of America's Founding Text¸ and joins us to talk about the Declaration as it was written, and how it has impacted Americans and the world  since 1776. Drawing on speeches and writings from the long span of history—John Locke, the Natick Town Meeting, Abraham Lincoln, Frederick Douglass, the Seneca Falls movement, Huey Long, Calvin Coolidge, H.L. Mencken, Emma Goldman, the Black Panther Party, the Tea Party, Ronald Reagan, Barack Obama, and others—wediscuss the enduring importance of the Declaration of Independence.https://www.loa.org/books/the-living-declaration-a-biography-of-americas-founding-text/Tell us what you think! Send us a text message!

On Tuesday's show: We learn how a little-known appeals process allowed thousands of wealthy homes to be removed from floodplain maps. Houston Chronicle investigative reporter Yilun Cheng explains how it happened and what it means.And we get details about a lawsuit filed by Daniel Wong, who had been appointed to serve as Fort Bend Couty Judge, the latest development in a battle over who should be the leader of that county.Also this hour: Houston's Venezuelan community is stepping up after that recent devastating earthquake there. We learn more about the effort here to help.Then, we talk with Houstonians from different generations about their experiences here as teenagers.And, 45 years ago today, President Ronald Reagan announced his intention to nominate Sandra Day O'Connor as the first woman to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court. And, while she was the first woman on the High Court, she was not the first to appear on a presidential short list. We revisit a conversation about O'Connor's career with Renee Knake Jefferson, co-author of Shortlisted: Women in the Shadows of the Supreme Court.https://www.youtube.com/live/k8CpBpRp7Kg?si=i8-R3hLAfZqfpDBk

This Day in Legal History: Sandra Day O'Connor Nominated to the Supreme CourtOn July 7, 1981, President Ronald Reagan announced that he was nominating Sandra Day O'Connor to the Supreme Court of the United States. If confirmed, she would become the first woman ever to serve on the Court in its then-191-year history. The Senate confirmed her later that summer by a vote of 99 to 0, and she took her seat in September 1981.O'Connor's path to the Court was, in its own way, a commentary on the barriers women faced in the legal profession. She had graduated near the top of her class at Stanford Law School in 1952—ahead of, among others, William Rehnquist, who would one day be her Chief Justice—and yet law firms in California would not hire her as a lawyer. One offered her a job as a legal secretary. She built her career instead in public service and in Arizona politics, eventually rising to become the majority leader of the Arizona state senate, the first woman in the country to hold such a post, before moving to the bench as a state judge. When Reagan, who had promised during his campaign to appoint a woman to the Court, chose her, he was reaching past the federal appellate judiciary—which had almost no women on it—into state government.On the Court, O'Connor became famous as a pragmatic, case-by-case decision-maker who resisted sweeping rules, and for roughly a quarter century she sat at the ideological center, casting decisive votes on abortion, affirmative action, campaign finance, religion, and the limits of federal power. Her approach frustrated those who wanted bright-line doctrines from either side, but it made her, for a generation, arguably the most powerful jurist in the country—the swing vote whose reasoning lower courts and litigants had to anticipate.Her nomination matters in legal history not only because it broke a barrier that had stood since 1789, but because of what came after it. Once one woman had sat on the Court and served with distinction, the question was no longer whether a woman could do the job but why it had taken so long. O'Connor herself was characteristically understated about the symbolism, insisting that she wanted to be judged on the quality of her arguments rather than her place in history. But the two are not really separable. The fact that a brilliant lawyer could be turned away from every firm that interviewed her, and then go on to become the deciding vote on the highest court in the land, is a reminder of how much talent the profession wasted for how long—and of how quickly a barrier that seems permanent can fall once someone is finally allowed through it.Meta has disclosed that four states are seeking as much as $1.4 trillion in penalties heading into an August trial over claims that the company deliberately designed Facebook and Instagram to addict young users. The figure—close to Meta's entire market value of around $1.5 trillion—came out in a court filing in which Meta argued the number is wildly excessive and, in its words, “has no analog in the history of consumer protection enforcement.”California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey are among the states suing Meta, alleging that the company engineered features to keep teenagers compulsively engaged—infinite scroll, autoplay, manipulative notifications—while publicly downplaying the harm to young users' mental health. The case is set for trial in Oakland in August. The eye-popping penalty number comes from how state consumer-protection laws are structured: they typically set a fixed statutory fine per violation, and the states arrive at $1.4 trillion by multiplying that per-violation fine by an enormous number of alleged violations, one for roughly every affected young user, across years of conduct.Think about how that math works and why it produces such a staggering figure. If a law says you owe, say, a few thousand dollars per violation, that sounds modest—until the “violations” are counted in the tens or hundreds of millions because each affected teenager, each exposure, is its own violation. Statutes written to punish a corner store for mislabeling a product start to generate astronomical numbers when applied to a platform that touches nearly every teenager in a state. That's the tension at the heart of this filing: the states say they're simply applying the law as written, and Meta says applying it that way produces a number no legislature could possibly have intended.The significance here isn't really the trillion-dollar headline, which almost no one expects to be the actual outcome. It's what the fight over the number reveals. Penalty calculations like this are leverage—they shape settlement negotiations and signal how seriously a court might treat the underlying conduct. The case is one of the most important tests yet of whether decades-old consumer-protection statutes can be turned against the design choices of social media platforms, and whether “we built it to be addictive” can be treated as a deceptive or unfair business practice. However the penalty question resolves, the theory of liability is the thing to watch.Meta says US states are seeking $1.4 trillion in penalties in August youth safety trial | ReutersA coalition of twenty-two Democratic state attorneys general has come out against the Trump administration's plan to impose tariffs of up to 12.5% on 59 countries and the European Union, tariffs the administration justifies as a response to trade in goods made with forced labor. The attorneys general, led by California's Rob Bonta, call the levies unlawful and describe them as a pretext to resurrect tariff authority the Supreme Court has already rejected.Tariffs are taxes on imports, and the Constitution gives the power to levy taxes primarily to Congress. Presidents can impose tariffs, but only when Congress has delegated them that authority through a specific statute, and each of those statutes comes with its own conditions and limits. Earlier tariffs from this administration were struck down when courts found the President had stretched his delegated power past what the law allowed. Now the administration is invoking forced-labor concerns as the legal basis for a new round. The Democratic attorneys general argue that this is the same overreach in a new costume—that dressing tariffs up as a human-rights measure doesn't cure the underlying problem, which is that the President is claiming a taxing power Congress never handed him.Consider the practical reach of what's proposed. The attorneys general say these tariffs would hit roughly 99% of imports. A tariff, whatever its stated purpose, is ultimately paid by importers and passed along to consumers in higher prices. So the debate isn't only an abstract argument about the separation of powers—it's about who gets to decide to raise the cost of nearly everything Americans buy from abroad, and whether that decision belongs to one person in the executive branch or to Congress. The forced-labor rationale is genuinely important on its own terms; forced labor in global supply chains is a real and serious problem. But the attorneys general are making a structural point: even a good goal doesn't authorize a power the law doesn't grant.The significance is that this is another front in an ongoing constitutional struggle over how far presidential trade power extends. The attorneys general are signaling they will litigate, and the courts have already shown, in striking down the earlier tariffs, that they are willing to police the boundary. Watch for whether this dispute follows the same path to the Supreme Court, because the answer will shape not just this set of tariffs but how much unilateral economic power any president can claim by pointing to a sufficiently sympathetic justification.Democratic AGs oppose Trump plan to impose tariffs on forced labor concerns | ReutersThe U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has abandoned an unusual set of trademark applications it had filed to register the phrase “Board of Peace” on behalf of President Trump, walking away from the filings after sharp criticism from congressional Democrats and questions about whether the agency had any legal authority to file them in the first place. The government filed an express abandonment of the applications, ending what one member of Congress called an unlawful venture.A trademark protects a brand—a word or logo used to identify the source of goods or services in commerce. Normally, a person or company files their own application, or has their lawyer file it for them. What happened here is that the Director of the Patent and Trademark Office, the head of the very agency that examines and grants trademarks, filed applications to register “Board of Peace” on the President's behalf. And that raised an immediate legal problem: the Lanham Act, the federal trademark statute, generally forbids filing an application on behalf of another person unless you are that person's attorney—and the Director specifically was not acting as Trump's lawyer.Think about why that rule exists and why the arrangement looked so troubling. The agency that decides who gets a trademark is supposed to be a neutral referee. When the head of that agency personally files an application for the President, the referee has stepped onto the field to play for one team. Even setting aside the specific statutory bar, it collapses the distinction between the government official who grants rights and the private party who receives them. Critics questioned not just the legality but the transparency of the whole exercise—who authorized it, on what authority, and why the trademark office was branding a presidential initiative at all.The significance is less about the phrase “Board of Peace” and more about the guardrails around a powerful administrative agency. Trademark law has technical rules about who may file and on whose behalf, and those rules are part of what keeps the system credible. The abandonment—prompted by oversight from the House Judiciary Committee's Democrats—shows those guardrails still functioning: an irregular filing was flagged, its legal basis questioned, and the agency backed down before a court had to intervene. It's a small episode in the scheme of things, but a clean illustration of how ordinary statutory limits and legislative oversight can check an official who reaches beyond his role.US trademark office abandons ‘Board of Peace' branding rights applications | ReutersIn my column for Bloomberg Tax this week, I take on the administration's threat to hit countries that have digital services taxes with 100% tariffs. My argument, in short, is that this is an ill-advised response—it isn't really a defense of the U.S. tax system at all, but an attempt to use consumer-funded trade pain to shield big tech from foreign tax bills.Let me set up the problem. A digital services tax, or DST, is a levy some foreign governments impose on the local digital revenue of companies like Alphabet, Meta, Apple, Amazon, or Netflix. These firms can earn enormous revenue from users in a country without ever having the kind of physical presence that the traditional international tax system was built to tax. Netflix can stream into a jurisdiction, pull revenue out of it, and never owe local tax. So foreign governments invented DSTs to capture some of that. The U.S. response, apparently, is to threaten tariffs on that country's completely unrelated goods until the tax goes away. The logic is that if Google has to pay France a modest tax on its digital revenue, someone in Cleveland might have to pay more for their champagne.I want to be fair to both sides here, because I actually think both have a point. DSTs genuinely deserve criticism—they're blunt instruments that tax gross revenue rather than profit, which means they can overtax low-margin business, and they're often designed with revenue thresholds conveniently set to catch every big U.S. tech firm while sparing domestic companies. So the U.S. complaint that these taxes are tailored to skim revenue from American firms is not baseless. But foreign governments also have a legitimate grievance: the old international tax rules really do struggle to tax digital businesses that earn a fortune from local users without setting foot in the country.Here's where I think the tariff response falls apart. A blanket 100% tariff doesn't fix any of a DST's design flaws. It doesn't determine where digital value is actually created, it doesn't allocate taxing rights, and it doesn't even fall on the foreign government. Tariffs are paid by importers, and most of that cost gets passed along to consumers. With last year's tariffs, as much as ninety percent of the economic burden landed on domestic firms and consumers. So think about how strange this is as tax policy: the companies facing the foreign tax are the largest and richest technology firms in the world, but the companies and consumers who'd actually feel the tariff are unrelated domestic players. No one is literally cutting Meta a reimbursement check, but the effect is the same—American consumers and importers become the leverage used to protect Silicon Valley from foreign tax exposure.And the bilateral approach has a nasty structural problem. The administration seems emboldened by the Canada episode—Canada moved to collect its DST, the U.S. threatened trade consequences, and Canada backed down. The apparent lesson the administration drew is that a big enough threat can make any foreign tax disappear. But if the U.S. treats tariff threats as a standing veto over other countries' tax policy, then every DST becomes a bilateral confrontation—France, Spain, Italy, the UK, one hostage negotiation after another—and it invites everyone else to adopt the same playbook the moment U.S. firms need something from them.So what I argue for instead is a binding, multilateral framework, and I lay out three pieces it would need. First, countries with DSTs agree to repeal them once a replacement is in place—the goal is to swap the ad hoc levies for something coherent, not stack a new rule on top of them. Second, market jurisdictions get, and help design, a predictable formula for their share of taxing rights over digital multinationals—something administrable and tied to a defensible theory of where digital profits are earned. And third, the U.S. keeps its powder dry: retaliation stays in reserve for countries that refuse the framework or discriminate against U.S. firms, applied with due process and proportionality, not as a one-size-fits-all tariff bazooka every time a foreign tax annoys Silicon Valley. Until we build that kind of system, the DST fight is just going to keep coming back.US Tariff Threat Is an Ill-Advised Digital Services Tax Reaction | Bloomberg Tax This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Ronald Reagan's legendary 1964 speech, “A Time for Choosing,” was more than a campaign address for Barry Goldwater. It became one of the most important conservative speeches in American history and today, its warning about freedom, government power, national decline, and America's role in the world feels more relevant than ever.For free and unbiased Medicare help, dial (656) 218-0931 to speak with my trusted partner, Chapter, or go to https://askchapter.org/nezWATCH THIS NEXT: https://youtu.be/p28xayIO7e4✅ Reach out to me: https://bio.site/professornez✅ ORIGINAL MADE IN U.S.A 250TH AMERICA DESIGNS: https://professornez.myspreadshop.com/✅ Check out our Official Clips Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@professornezclips▶ Support the Channel and Buy us a Coffee: https://buymeacoffee.com/professornezEducational Commentary & Original AnalysisThis channel presents educational, lecture-style analysis created by a university professor and educator. Content focuses on contextual examination, historical background, legal frameworks, and evidence-based analysis of widely reported events, public records, and institutional processes.The approach emphasizes academic methodology, media literacy, and source-driven interpretation rather than advocacy, persuasion, or real-time news reporting. Viewers are encouraged to consult primary sources and form independent conclusions.All content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal, financial, medical, or professional advice. Views expressed are solely those of the creator.This channel may include references or links to third-party websites or products for informational purposes. Some links may be affiliate links, which may generate a commission at no additional cost to the viewer.In this video expert Professor Nez analyzes and educates on what happened and why with fact based, data based, verified and researched expertise reporting.All original content is protected by copyright. Fair use applies where permitted by law.Category: News Analysis & Educational CommentaryMethodology: This report utilizes primary source verification and comparative analysis of public records.Subject Matter Expertise: Political Strategy, Regulatory Policy, and Media Literacy.

Lords: Jenni Tyriq https://store.steampowered.com/app/3276700/Scrubbin_Trubble/ Topics: Doctor Lips Tropic Olds Cold Sri Top Scold It Pro Clod I Sport Pic Rod Lost Disc or Plot Doc Rip Slot Stolid Crop Lo, Cod Strip! Cod Trip Sol Corps Do Lit Cold Pis Tor Clipt Roods Microtopics: Trying to make a joke out of your own name: it's impossible. Listening to this episode first. The ice: it's not gross. (At first.) Reverse osmosis water. Shipping a game and selling more than one copy. Selling enough copies of your game to be in the black with Steam. Repaying debts until you end up in the black, because once you go black you never go back. Getting old and having creaky bones so you like being warmer. Standing in a parking lot in a melancholy mood and looking at the sky. The most genetically and financially successful people you know. Finishing off your successfulness in the Retirement State. Star Tropic Olds. Muppet Geriatrics. Everyone is born the baby of themselves. Geriatric MacGyver training a new younger MacGyver. MacGyver vs. O'Gyver. Going to Target and buying the sriracha t-shirt to establish your allegiance in the sriracha wars. The Hangover and the sequel, Baby Hangover. Too Young or Too Homeschooled? Bruh bruh bruh, pass the sri. Microsoft naming their word processor Word even though there are other kinds of words. Y'all It or It Al as the plural for It. Putting the Skip It around your ankle. Pushing the buttons you understand on a Simon. (Just the volume buttons.) Games you are guaranteed to lose, and soon. Different short term memories for different senses. Dual N-Back. Doing a single bicep curl and deciding that you understand exercise and you're done now. Clod vs. Klutz. The clumsiest people in the world in fierce competition. Things you wish you were allowed to laugh at. Things you're allowed to laugh at as long as you make a donation. Optimizing your laughter to minimize the amount of money you have to put in the laugh jar. Last One Laughing, taking the laughter out of comedy one pained grimace at a time. Clods of peanut butter. Earthen Peanut Butter. Shaping peanut butter with your earth manipulation spell. A device you can use like a dowsing rod to find dick pics in a room full of hard drives. The scene where The Dude shades the notepad. Proof that robots can get embarrassed. Waiting to watch a movie until after you know every plot twist. Everyone's favorite game show: Disc or Plot? Innova Leopard. Some sort of DJ equipment, for spinning records. Disc Golf vs. Disk Golf. Floppy Discs and Compact Disks. Devices Carrying Sound. A guy on Reddit with 8 upvotes. Seeing 8 inch floppy disks in the back of someone's car. Dr. Ripslot. The most stolid vegetable. (Ronald Reagan.) Doozers making their Doozer Sticks out of radishes. Secret Fraggle Lore. Mutualism between Doozers and Fraggles. The most emotive crop. Crop with a c, not with a k. Saying "Lo!" all the time. Thinking "betimes" frequently but never saying it out loud. Always forgetting to use "whilst." Whomst'd've. Pregnancy antihistamines. Different kinds of fake dartboards. Under the thumb of Big Velcro. Throwing fish sticks at the sun and missing. Corps Du Lit, WI Book clubs that only do books that are two or three words long. Librarian: Tidy up the Arcane Library. Relaxing by reshelving books. Complimenting housework any time you see it happen. Picking up trash from the ground and finding a place to throw it away and wishing someone would congratulate you. Hansel and Gretel and Chancellor Stormdancer. Tongue Root Harmony. Paying attention to where your tongue is at all times. What takes your cold piss away? Trunk Kevin Crap, Look at That Low Flying Plane.

Episode 297- SCOTUS Win on Assault Firearms Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode Transcript Page – 1 – of 15 Gun Lawyer — Episode 297 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Supreme Court, assault weapons, Second Amendment, gun rights, New Jersey, NRA, firearm laws, Heller decision, McDonald, Bruen, reparations, gun control, concealed carry, Thomas Jefferson, gun lawyer. SPEAKERS Speaker 3, Teddy Nappen, Evan Nappen, Speaker 1 Speaker 1 00:11 Lawyer, Evan Nappen 00:17 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:19 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:22 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. Well, my friends, I have to tell you, this is just one of the greatest moments in what I would have to say in our fight to destroy gun rights suppression. It is just a banner time right now. Absolutely, a crescendo at a moment here that I’m just so excited about. Truly, truly excited, no joke. The Supreme Court of the United States has granted certiorari, meaning accepted the case, so that it means there will be an opinion, a decision, a rule made by the Court finally on so-called “assault weapons”. (https://thereload.com/supreme-court-to-decide-constitutionality-of-ar-15-bans/) Evan Nappen 01:27 Yes, we’ve done it. We have finally gotten to where the U.S. Supreme Court is going to look at the impact of the Second Amendment on this issue. I can tell you that I’ve personally been battling and fighting in the state of New Jersey since it was first enacted in May of 1990. Looking back to those days, I remember just thinking, man, hopefully we’ll one day get the United States Supreme Court to deal with this issue. But back then there was no Heller decision. There was no Supreme Court decision that even said that the right to keep and bear arms was an individual right. We didn’t even have that back then. And when the anti-gun rights crowd embarked on this brand new approach, which it was at the time. Evan Nappen 02:38 To understand the history and where we are right now, why it just is so meaningful, you need to understand that the gun rights attack, the effort by our adversaries, to destroy our right to keep and bear arms, basically, in modern times, started after World War One. It was essentially imported here Page – 2 – of 15 from the U.K., from Great Britain. It had gotten its roots there, and it came across the pond like a cancer. It percolated to the point where by 1934 we ended up with the first National Firearms Act. Prior to ’34 but after World War One, you saw states passing state laws of what we commonly call gun control laws. And the gun control laws of those days first initiated through the ’20s, and we still have remnants of those laws still on the books, by the way, in New Jersey and other places. They were put forward by state legislatures and enacted, and those gun laws were mirrored and influenced and encouraged by what was taking place originally in Great Britain. Evan Nappen 04:22 These laws in America at that time period, and you may find this surprising, and it’s not meant to be bashing in any way of NRA. But they were even supported and promoted by the NRA at that time. The NRA had even put forward what were called the “model firearm laws”. They put model laws together that they wanted states to pass. The NRA saw its mission then in a naive, unfortunately, you know, very naive, as certain gun laws and such, that they would support. Now, since then, that’s not their position, and they’ve learned from this naive mistake. But it led to the 1934 Act, and we’ve suffered under that this entire time. It became the first national gun rights oppression law. Even at the time in the “American Rifleman”, you could read it, and they even praised it. They said, “Ah, and this is how they viewed it. You’ve got to understand, put yourself in the time. They said, “Ah, we’ve solved the gun problem in America.” We’ve passed this great national law, and now we’ve resolved it. We’ve solved it. We’ve addressed it. It’s done. And, of course, it was far from done. But for approximately 30 plus years, that was about it for our national laws on guns being passed. Evan Nappen 06:00 Then along comes the ’68 Gun Control Act, which built upon, to a certain degree, of course, built upon the NFA. We already had that national law and then the ’68 law. Then ’72 and then ’80s and ’90s, and etc. So that foundation got laid. And in between all this, what you mainly saw the fight as being, though, where the modern day focus, the modern day focus was handguns. I remember through the ’80s, before the invention, and that’s what it was, the invention of the “assault weapon” issue. It hadn’t been invented yet. Everything was, we only want to ban handguns. Handguns were the symbol of crime. Every news show on the major controlled networks, there weren’t any cables, you know. You just had ABC, NBC, and CBS, and you had their nightly news. And anytime they talked about crime, whether there was a gun involved or not, they always showed a handgun on the news screen anytime they talked about crime. So the propaganda was put there. Everything was about banning handguns, and the main gun rights oppression group of the day was known as Handgun Control. Handgun Control was a big group. You had players at the time like Pete Shields and others, and this is where the push was. Then along comes Josh Sugarman, who puts out his manifesto. Teddy Nappen 07:50 Closet hoplosexual. Evan Nappen 07:52 Right. His manifesto of the assault weapons and their accessories. And even in his manifesto, he writes that the American public will be fooled by this, because they don’t know the difference between machine guns and semi-autos. This lays the groundwork for this. And lo and behold, we have California Page – 3 – of 15 with Patrick Purdy and the massacre that occurred in that incident, and that’s all the blood they needed to dance in. Then the assault weapon laws became the biggest threat to our Second Amendment rights, and everything weirdly shifted, weirdly shifted, so that handguns, with the growth of concealed carry, which has been an amazing success for gun rights support. Handguns are not the big issue for banning, except for, of course, a modern day focus on Glocks, because they’re easily convertible, right? Except for that. You don’t see the push like you used to ban handguns. Evan Nappen 09:00 Of course, Heller took care of that as well. Saying you can’t. It’s unconstitutional to ban handguns, too. But the push on semi-automatic rifles under the contrived created term of “assault weapon”. They took the German of Sturmgewehr, which was the true original assault weapon, a medium power round in a long arm that’s designed for urban settings. It is select fire, both full auto and semi-auto. And causing this, creating this, and putting it with that scary “assault weapon” moniker to scare the public and sell it. And it was to their credit, to a certain degree successful. It was successful in a number of states that passed state laws, including New Jersey. They passed one of the one worst, most destructive, horrible gun laws that have ruined good people. We’ll talk more about that in a little bit. Evan Nappen 10:06 And even a federal law at one point through the 1994 bill that was a crime, which they call the Crime Bill, but I call the bill that was a crime. We had the first national assault weapon ban. That law sunset and went away in 10 years, which was 2004, and they’ve not been able to reenact another federal ban since. But that ban did end up living on, by the way, in the state of New Jersey, because New Jersey adopted the language of that to save New Jersey’s assault firearm ban from being declared unconstitutionally vague. Now that was started by a case that I did, State v. Merrill, where I had the law declared unconstitutional for vagueness because of the term “substantially identical”, which was undefined. What does “substantially identical” even mean? How can something be substantially and identical at the same time? It’s like saying almost exact. Nothing is almost exact. It’s either exact or it isn’t. And because of the vagueness of that term, it was found unconstitutional by Judge Michael Farron, Monmouth County. We knocked out the case. Evan Nappen 11:21 That case was then brought into federal court by the gun rights groups, and that’s where the Attorney General, in order to save it, adopted the 1994 federal crime bill standard that was feature specific. We still live by that today in New Jersey, as to what makes a compliant gun or not, as to the definition of “substantially identical”. The court said, well, now that you know the definition, it’s no longer vague, and therefore it’s constitutional, which is, of course, a judicial lie, a fallacy, a falsehood. Because what that means is that somehow in 1990 our legislators passed an unconstitutionally vague law that did not have definition and somehow knew that in 1994 the federal government would pass a law that defines the undefined law in New Jersey. That’s just ridiculousness squared. But nonetheless it is law, at least as it stands in New Jersey now. We saw other states and other counties constantly push on the so-called “assault weapon” ban, a focus being on the big bad AR-15. We’ve had fight after fight. Page – 4 – of 15 Page – 5 – of 15 Evan Nappen 12:35 And as our battle for Second Amendment rights continued through the courts, we got the trifecta. We got the Heller finding of what we all knew in our hearts was true, that the Second Amendment is an individual right. We got McDonald, which said this doesn’t just apply to the federal government, it applies to all states and localities. And then we got Bruen that laid out the test of constitutionality and gave us the requirement that carry permits must be issued, must be issued. With that buildup of having the trifecta, we’ve now gotten more cases from the Supreme Court that solidify this approach. And just now, in this moment in our lifetimes, the Supreme Court has finally accepted the challenge to the bans of so-called “assault weapons”. The name of the case. Teddy Nappen 13:36 Particularly those two cases. Evan Nappen 13:39 Yes, Viramontes v. Cook County, and Grant versus Higgins. Now, those cases, the Cook County case is the Illinois’ local county. It’s a local assault weapon ban ordinance, just an ordinance banning. And then the other case they took was in Connecticut, which is a statewide ban. Why do that? Well, what’s great is they’re going at anywhere and everything, whether it’s local or state. The challenge is across the board, as per McDonald. It’s incorporated both local and state. So we now have a certiorari grant combining two cases, and it isn’t just limited to Connecticut and this one local county in Illinois. Their decision will reach all localities, all states, and stand in the future with our win, that I am confident we will win, to stop future federal laws on this. Here’s the actual. Go ahead, Teddy. Teddy Nappen 14:52 I will point out that this is just something the we. I always keep an eye on, like all the arguments the Left always do. I always love the ad hominem attack, where they say. Well, this is just some Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), which is they are a party to both cases. (https://saf.org/supreme-court-grants-cert-in-saf-assault-weapons-cases/) They’re the ones that brought the cases. Second Amendment Foundation was joined by the Firearms Policy Coalition. They brought the Vermont. Evan Nappen 15:16 And second Amendment Foundation. Teddy Nappen 15:17 And Second Amendment Foundation, along with the Connecticut Citizens Defense League. They always try to say. Evan Nappen 15:21 Teddy, there are also individual plaintiffs that are very important, that have standing, that have gone this distance. So, this is actual people and organizations. Teddy Nappen 15:32 Yeah, astroturf. Page – 6 – of 15 Evan Nappen 15:32 Yeah, well, astroturf, that’s a joke. Teddy Nappen 15:36 Yeah, but that is. Evan Nappen 15:37 I mean. Yeah. Go ahead. Teddy Nappen 15:40 Just to take that in. Throughout history, just look at the cases throughout, like some of the major Supreme Court cases. I think it was, what was it, either.. I think it was like maybe Plessy versus there was one regular Supreme Court case where it was brought by the, the.. it was about segregation. It was the train companies, where they’re trying to make sure they didn’t have to make extra cars for separating blacks and whites. And it was brought, and they actually set it up to have the case, to get the individual arrested for the segregation. It’s not the first time you’ve had organizations, and that’s throughout all, like a vast majority of cases where you have other. Evan Nappen 16:22 Listen, Teddy. Astroturf? Rosa Parks was a setup. Rosa Parks at the back of the bus, racial segregation. What do you think? It was engineered to make the challenge! Yeah, so don’t give me that. You want to put the issues forward and get the issues decided. Good, good. They have actual plaintiffs. They have actual people that are suffering under these laws, and they have organizations that represent vast amounts of members. It’s fine. It’s real. The assault firearm bans are real, and in New Jersey, their impact has been one of absolute destructive power. But let me just tell you what the court, just to close this, so we know exactly what they’re going to decide. Here is the question presented that they have granted certiorari on. Here it is, ready? Whether the Second and 14th Amendments guarantee the right to possess the AR-15 platform and similar semi-automatic rifles. This is great! One of the criteria that the antis are going to use, is they’re going to say, well, it has to be arms that are commonly possessed. Well, the AR-15 is the most commonly possessed rifle in America. As a matter of fact, folks, there are more AR-15s than there are Ford F150 pickup trucks! Let that sink in. Teddy Nappen 18:08 That was the other argument I’ve been seeing from The Trace. (https://www.thetrace.org/2026/06/assault-weapons-bans-supreme-court-2a/) They just did their whole, you know, boo hoo, whining, and crying. It was from Chip Brownlee. Guess the first thing they highlight? This is the fight for the dangerous and unusual AR-15. Like that’s the common use. That’s the spin that they’re going to use. They’re trying to lay the groundwork on, is that whole idea of. Evan Nappen 18:34 Well, you know why? They don’t have historical analogs under the Bruen test anymore, that can help them. Their analogs have had their legs cut off. The one they loved was about the Black Codes, where they banned blacks from Bowie knives and guns, or whatever. And Alito, just in the recent opinion, made it clear that’s a tainted relic. It can’t be taken seriously. So, forget it. That analog is out the Page – 7 – of 15 window. They just revealed, based on research by Stephen Halbrook, that the precedent claimed for carrying – as a matter of fact, this was even in Kuhns. One of the precedents relied upon by the court was a law that never was a law. It was simply something in some Frenchman’s book that talked about it. But the actual law was not how they’re citing it at all. Their analogs are fraught with fraud, fraught with being completely tossed in the garbage can, and they know it. When it comes to that Bruen test of history, text and tradition. In order for a law to be upheld and found not to be unconstitutional under the Second Amendment, the Government has the burden of showing the past analogs that there were other laws that were like that law that make this new law acceptable. And they don’t have that. They do not have it. So, they’re falling back, Teddy, to it’s not common use. Well, that’s falls flat on its face. They’re falling back on what? What’s the classic? Why don’t you tell us? What’s the classic when all else fails for them to cry about? Teddy Nappen 20:34 Blood In The Streets. That’s Blood In The Streets. They always cite two BITS. We have to consider the gun violence when considering this. All that goes right to Brown. Evan Nappen 20:43 Public policy. They always go back to the public policy arguments, public policy, and guess what? That doesn’t cut it! That doesn’t justify infringement of the Second Amendment. That argument is dead in the water. It’s not the test. It’s not a balancing test. Balancing tests aren’t allowed. Done, dead, gone. You can’t balance public policy. Can’t do it anymore. They know they’re going to be crushed, and I cannot wait for that day. I cannot wait till, at the latest, it’ll be next June. We’re going to have a decision that removes finally. I know it in my bones. Gets rid of, ends this travesty called the “assault weapon” ban. Let me tell you something. These laws have destroyed good people. These laws have created more harm than they claim the firearms themselves have created, especially in states like New Jersey. Evan Nappen 22:00 It isn’t just that an individual can’t have that gun or this gun. It’s the aggressive insanity of enforcement destroying people’s lives. If you get convicted of possession of an “assault firearm” in New Jersey, right? An AR-15 that has a bayonet mount on it and a pistol grip. You are now guilty of possession of an “assault firearm” because of a bayonet mount. You’re looking at 10 years in State Prison with a minimum mandatory three and a half years. No chance of parole. Three and a half years – minimum mandatory, folks. No way around it. No way. If you’re convicted of that, the judge has zero discretion. You can be Mother Teresa, and you’ll have to get three and a half years minimum mandatory in State Prison because you had a gun that had a bayonet mount and a pistol grip. You can only have one offending feature, and the pistol grip is one offending feature, right out of the box. And you had two because your other one was a bayonet mount. You know how important bayonet mounts are to crime. I mean, come on. What about all the drive-by bayonetings we have to take care of here, right? Folks, that’s how they.. Teddy Nappen 22:00 I think you also. Just looking at the future, because from the facts of where everything’s lined up, yeah, we’re going to win. And just seeing that right now, the way things lay out, I look to. Page – 8 – of 15 Evan Nappen 23:45 Well, we don’t want to be overconfident, but we. Teddy Nappen 23:48 I understand. Fine, cautiously optimistic. Evan Nappen 23:52 But I am cautiously optimistic. I am incredibly cautiously optimistic with an emphasis on optimistic. Teddy Nappen 23:59 I always look to what is left of their, what would be the next step, then on there on the gun right suppressionist? Because the only thing I could think of is they’re just going to try to put. Evan Nappen 24:09 Wait, wait, wait. Hold that thought for a minute. I just want to finish about the other destruction that has occurred. Like I said, it’s not just that you get arrested and you’re charged with assault firearm. Then you’re thrown in the Gulag, and they want to hold you until your trial. You’re going to spend at least a week, even if your lawyer can get you out before your trial. You have that fight. Then they use it as a licensing disqualifier. If you had an assault firearm, you’re banned from ever having guns again. It doesn’t matter. It’s an assault firearm. On top of that, they have made assault firearm possession not releasable under the Gulag. Remember, we’ve talked about this. It becomes a criteria where there’s a presumption for you to be held in jail. Presumption in favor all over this nonsense. So, you see it’s far-reaching, and what happens when someone inadvertently gets involved in this? Your life gets destroyed. You lose your career. You lose your family. You can lose your freedom. You lose your gun rights, and it’s devastating to people. And then there are those that are doing hard time because they are otherwise lawful possessors. It doesn’t matter. They’re doing the time, having their life destroyed, and having been turned into felons. Evan Nappen 25:40 So, let me just say this. After this decision is a tremendous win for our gun rights and for civil rights, because it’s in the same category as the First Amendment, folks. It’s in the same category as a fundamental right under the Bill of Rights. What I want to see after that decision is reparations to gun owners. That’s right. Reparations to gun owners. You know, they talk on the other side about reparations for slavery to generations later that were never slaves, and they want reparations. Here we will have reparations to individuals who are still alive and have suffered. To anybody that had to give up one of their guns that never should have had to. To those that went into the Gulag and suffered that never should have. To those who have done State Prison sentences that never should have. To those who have lost their gun rights, who have had their families, their lives, their freedom, and their fortunes, all destroyed. Reparations to them. Wait till after this decision comes down. Then we push for reparations. We don’t let it end. Oh, sure. Is that difficult? Will it be hard? Yeah, but it’s no more hard, and frankly, less, way less, of an ask than those asking for reparations for slavery, where we don’t even have the victims of that alive today. Page – 9 – of 15 Teddy Nappen 27:09 It’s also very easy to quantify, because you go into just the legal fees that were brought, the time in jail. Plenty of people have sued and won on those cases. So, it’s something you can actually determine, as opposed to generational racism. It’s ridiculous, as ridiculous sounds, but to this end, where someone who had their life destroyed because of the gun control that they have pushed over the years. Evan Nappen 27:39 That was utterly a violation of our fundamental rights and Second Amendment civil rights. It absolutely is going to lay groundwork for at least tremendous litigation, and really we should have eventually a federal reparations law requiring states to pay that ever had these laws. To compensate individuals who suffered under their tyranny. So, Teddy, you had something else to mention. I know you did. Teddy Nappen 27:39 Yes. So, the one thing I was looking at, whenever I always look to our opponents, because I try not to think of them as being stupid. Even though they are pretty retarded on a lot of different fronts, but they always keep pushing. And I remember this term for it, of what they were described. The Left and the Marxists are line steppers. They go with the idea of what can we get away with, what can we push for, because they always go for that. It’s always just progressivism for progressive sake. Cut to trans ideology. Cut to, you know, we’re going to take your children away and then transition them. Cut to any form of the Left in its insanity. Teddy Nappen 28:16 I always think what will be the next push, and I can see it right now. Repealing the Second Amendment will be the next step. Evan Nappen 28:16 100 percent. Teddy Nappen 28:36 Yes, that will. That’s the only. The only thing I can think of is what they did to Penny, what they did to all the other self-defense cases that we’ve had. Fine, you can have your firearms, but if you ever use them, we will drag you through the courts. We’ll make your life a living hell. We will make it so that people will want to murder you and come to your house and dox you. That’s the only thing at this point. That’s all they have. They are the party of violence, that is shown. You have doxing websites they run. That is the only two avenues I can see for that, and also suing the gun shops into oblivion, which we need to do something with the, I think, what is it, the PLCAA, where it’s the protection. Evan Nappen 29:59 Yeah, PLCAA. (Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act) Right. Teddy Nappen 30:02 We need to improve and expand PLCAA, and just say no. Stop wasting the state’s money. So, I don’t know what the test would be, but we need to. Page – 10 – of 15 Evan Nappen 30:12 Well, the fight will definitely change, and you know, the gun rights oppressors are not going to give up. But. Teddy Nappen 30:21 Of courses not. Evan Nappen 30:21 It will absolutely take away one of their actually most successful modern gun rights oppression tax. This will be one of. This will destroy what has actually been one of their areas of success, to be honest. They have succeeded in multiple states, and even at one point federally over this. This will destroy it, kill it, and they’re going to be knocked back on their heels very hard by it. And then we need to finish the job. Evan Nappen 31:00 Repeal Hughes Amendment. Evan Nappen 31:01 We need to go at reparations and make it so that when any of these governments decide to embark on rights violations, that down the road we make them pay. We just don’t kill the law. We just don’t knock it out, so that it no longer has effect. We have to make them pay for what they did to good people, and we do that through reparations. Teddy Nappen 31:29 We should also repeal the Hughes. Amendment. Evan Nappen 31:31 That’s going to build. Once you get this case, then, of course, the rest of NFA, any other hardware bands, all these things are going to be on the table. We will have even stronger, better case law to take it all out as the house of cards built by the gun rights oppressors collapses. Hey, and by the way, let me tell you about our good friends at WeShoot. WeShoot is a range in Lakewood. It’s where Teddy and I both shoot, and that is, of course, where we get our training. And I want to tell you that they are offering New Jersey concealed carry, so you can get your CCARE so you can get your carry permit out of Jersey. They have a new price for their CCARE. It’s incredible. It’s only $225! You can sign up at WeShoot and get their carry course, and it is great. You’ll get your PTC certification, and they really set the gold standard there at WeShoot. You’ll be able to get re-qualification, too. This is the training that police departments use. They’re also USCCA and NRA backed courses. It’s all combined. This is where you can reserve and get it done, so you can get your carry. Evan Nappen 33:03 Particularly now where we’re knocking out “sensitive places”, as we just did with the Wolford case, which actually impacts New Jersey “sensitive places”. We’re going to see more and more availability of where we can carry, and every carry permit holder is another vote for carry. Probably by now, we are well over 100,000 carry permits in New Jersey. You know, it used to be 600. Literally just 600 carry Page – 11 – of 15 permits. Not 600,000. Six hundred. And now we’re in the 100,000 or damn close, if not over it, of permit carriers. I just showed you how their oppression law was so successful before, and after Bruen, it’s dead. Evan Nappen 33:50 So, go to weshootusa.com. Check out We Shoot, and I know you’ll love WeShoot, too. They have great training, and not only can you get your New Jersey permit certification, your CCARE, but they also offer special training to get that for seniors, 65 or older. They have a special deal for seniors – only $185. You can get your training there. They also offer New York City non-resident carry. They are offering New York City non-resident carry. They have it at a fantastic new low price of $289, and you can get your New York City carry, which also covers New York State non-resident carry permit. They’ll do all the training, and this is really great. Anthony Zalo will be doing this course. It spans two days, and it covers firearm safety and storage, pistol ammunition basics, de-escalation techniques, federal and state law, live fire training. If you’re seeking even more certifications, they offer Maryland Wear and Carry Certification, as well as Washington, D.C. carry permits for just $150 each. On Tuesday, August 4, they will be holding their New York resident and non-resident carry courses. Evan Nappen 35:37 WeShoot also has Civilian Shoot House Training. This is really cool. Their Civilian Shoot House Training, so you can understand how to clear rooms, move with purpose, and make decisions under pressure. This is great for homeowners and parents and security team. Anybody who’s serious about protecting their home and community, check out WeShoot’s Civilian Shoot House Training. They have that scheduled out. You can sign up for Friday, July 31st for that Training. They also have adult CPR / AED and Stop the Bleed, so that you know how to treat wounds. They’re offering that training on Monday, July 20. And for new shooters, they have great training called “From Nervous to Bullseye”. If you’re entry level, you want basic training. Here’s what you can do. They’re also offering weekend classes, and you can “Hit Your Weekend Target” with their great instructors – Grant Gallagher, Tony Zollo, and Lance Hubeny. They’re all there. Sign up at WeShoot. They are a phenomenal resource. We’re talking here about WeShoot in Lakewood. They offer USCCA and Sig Sauer Academy – “Close Quarter Defense Fundamentals. I mean, can you believe this? Just fantastic training. Make sure you check out weshootusa.com. You’ll love the range, you’ll love the pro shop, and you’ll love the people. They are the best. Go to weshootusa.com today, and take a trip down to Lakewood. They are right there in Central Jersey, conveniently off the Parkway. You’ll be glad you did. Evan Nappen 37:40 Let me also shamelessly promote my book, New Jersey Gun Law. It’s the bible of Jersey Gun Law, and you need to get your copy today. Go to EvanNappen.com and get a copy of New Jersey Gun Law. It’ll help keep you from being a GOFU. Hey, we are now celebrating, of course, the 250th Anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. This is a great moment in our history where that fantastic, earth shattering, world changing, humanity changing, document was signed and began the birth of our wonderful America, the greatest country on earth. I have nothing but reverence for our Founding Fathers and our Founding documents, and celebrate 100%. Page – 12 – of 15 Evan Nappen 38:48 Let me tell you about the author. Of course, the Committee of Five technically authored The Declaration, but the majority of the credit is given to, and I hope you know this, Thomas Jefferson. But let me tell you about how great Thomas Jefferson was. Not just because of his phenomenal presidency, his assertion of our national reputation against the Muslim pirates, the pirates of the day, standing up to them, and also the Louisiana Purchase, and so many amazing things under Jefferson. And, of course, the Declaration of Independence. But let me tell you something else about Thomas Jefferson. I want you to know, when it comes to firearms, Thomas Jefferson was one of us. He couldn’t be more one of us. Thomas Jefferson was one of the greatest gun owning founding fathers to live. Evan Nappen 40:04 And let me read you, especially on the 250th Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. The man who wrote that and made us so where we are today, we can be proud and free. Listen to some quotes from Thomas Jefferson, specifically about guns. Here’s a great quote from Thomas Jefferson. “No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.” Yeah, he said that. No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. That’s from Thomas Jefferson in the Virginia Constitution draft of 1776. Here’s another phenomenal quote by Thomas Jefferson. “I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery.” Let that sink in, folks. He preferred dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery. He wrote that in a letter to James Madison in 1787 . Here’s another great quote from Thomas Jefferson. “What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms.” That’s right. Enemies, foreign and domestic, my friends. You heard what Jefferson said. Evan Nappen 41:40 “The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” Pure common sense spoken by Thomas Jefferson in Commonplace Book, quoting the 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria. Here’s another quote from Thomas Jefferson. “A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks.” Let that one sink in, folks. Thomas Jefferson, in his letter to Peter Carr from August of 1785. Evan Nappen 42:27 “The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; and they may exercise it by themselves, and that is their right and duty to be armed at all times. Let all those quotes from Thomas Jefferson sink in. Think about them as we celebrate the 250th Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence and the man that was the chief engineer of that document and how that man viewed our Second Amendment rights. Page – 13 – of 15 Teddy Nappen 43:43 I will also say, like, I don’t know if you did. Did you ever get to go to Monticello? Did you and Mom get to go? Evan Nappen 44:09 Thanks for mentioning it. No, that is on my bucket list, and I’m going there. My wife went. You’ve gone. Teddy Nappen 44:18 No, I didn’t. I didn’t get to go. Evan Nappen 44:20 What? You didn’t either? Teddy Nappen 44:20 Nope. Just Mom. Evan Nappen 44:21 Teddy, you and I have got to go. Teddy Nappen 44:23 Just Mom got to go. That’s why. Evan Nappen 44:25 This is just wrong. I’ve got to go to Monticello. I’ve meaning to get there. And it’s bugging the hell out of me. Teddy Nappen 44:33 If you ever do go there, they have his pistols. His famed pistols that were, I think, gifted to him. (https://www.monticello.org/encyclopedia/firearms) Yeah, his famed twin pocket pistols that were gifts from, I believe it was a pair of Turkish pistols received from General Isaac Zane in place of a monetary bequest. Evan Nappen 45:07 Bequest. He gifted him these pistols. Teddy Nappen 45:11 Okay. Evan Nappen 45:12 Yeah. Teddy Nappen 45:14 It was also kind of interesting that Jefferson loved to go out and do competition shoots. He would do a lot of them, and he was a fairly good marksman. There were marks in his letters showing that he noted Page – 14 – of 15 in his accounts, I won a shooting in one of six, it was a muster with Captain Jacob Moon’s Albany County Militia Company. He lost two to six, but as he grew older, his limited exercise. He moved more to firearms and hunting over his horseback riding. He even had designs, and there was accounting of a double-barreled gun lock that he had drawn. So, there’s various other bits in his accounts. Evan Nappen 46:01 Like I said, he’s one of us, man. One hundred percent. Hey, this is wonderful, an incredibly important part of our heritage and our tradition. Jefferson stands tall. All the Founding Fathers were, of course, gun owners and knew the importance of arms, but Jefferson is special, without a doubt. Jefferson is special. Evan Nappen 46:32 And you know, Teddy, I want to tell you about this week’s GOFU. This is a GOFU that every time in the practice of gun law, there’s something new. Some other GOFU that I’d not even heard about before, and it just blows me away. It constantly gets crazier and worse, and I want everyone to understand this GOFU, which is, of course, a Gun Owner Fuck Up. Where individuals are now experiencing expensive lessons, or have experienced expensive lessons that you can hopefully avoid for free by listening to Gun Lawyer. Evan Nappen 47:16 So, this week’s GOFU concerns the following. We have a couple, a husband and wife, that are not getting along well with one another, and okay, it happens, right? It happens. Well, it ends up where at some point there’s a fight, and like the old kind of comedy issue you’ve seen on TV, where often it’s the woman, it doesn’t have to be, but often is, throws the husband’s clothing or the belongings out the window to get out. That kind of a thing. Well, in this case, apparently his firearms were tossed out onto the lawn. I guess it sends a message as to throwing out things that the other party believes they care about. But whatever. I’m not going to get into the psychology of it. The bottom line is that this takes place. What happens? Well, it ends up where the police get involved. The police get involved because it falls under the so-called banner of domestic violence. Anytime there is domestic violence, police are called in over any claim of domestic violence, and it’s so broad. Remember, domestic violence could be anything, even harassment, which the essence of which is doing something to purposely annoy another. Now, I know none of you have ever purposely annoyed your spouse or your boyfriend or your girlfriend, but if you did, then you arguably committed domestic violence for harassment. Evan Nappen 48:57 Anyway, that can bring the police into your lives, and this is where you get to live the famous saying of Ronald Reagan. “We’re here from the Government, and we’re here to help.” And, of course, that was one of the best, most sarcastic things that Reagan ever said. Because we’re here from the Government and we’re here to help, is of course the exact opposite. And that’s what happened here. The Government gets involved, and both parties are questioned over various allegations. It doesn’t matter what. The bottom line is that the domestic violence forms are filled out where the issue is documented, and the wife is asked, do you want a restraining order? And she wisely says no. This is internal. They’re squabbling, or whatever. She doesn’t need a restraining order. The husband, who related his whole side of everything there too, is asked, “do you want a restraining order? And he wisely said no, as well. Page – 15 – of 15 Evan Nappen 50:11 So, now you have a couple that are trying. They’re going to do whatever, but they don’t want restraining orders. They don’t want the Government in their life. They’re not interested in that. But what happens? The Government files Red Flags, TERPOs, Temporary Extreme Risk Protection Orders on both of them. Neither of them wanted a restraining order. Neither one wanted it, but it didn’t matter. The Government now files to take away both of their gun rights. To take away their guns and put them on a list of extreme risk. This puts you on a database that could even arguably be accessed by TSA or others that you’re a danger. It has farther reaching collateral consequences than just taking guns and taking away your gun rights. Putting you into the court system now to have to individually fight TERPOs, because we’re from the Government and we’re here to help. That, my friends, is the GOFU. Keep it in mind at all times about being from the Government and there to help. Especially on the 250th Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. Evan Nappen 51:37 This is Evan Nappen and Teddy Nappen reminding you that gun laws don’t protect honest citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from honest citizens. Even Thomas Jefferson knew that. Speaker 3 51:50 Gun Lawyer is a CounterThink Media production. The music used in this broadcast was managed by Cosmo Music, New York, New York. Reach us by emailing Evan@gun.lawyer. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state. Downloadable PDF TranscriptGun Lawyer S5 E297 Transcript About The HostEvan Nappen, Esq.Known as “America's Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, and weapons history and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades — it's no wonder he's become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry and national media outlets. Regularly called on by radio, television and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news Evan has appeared countless shows including Fox News – Judge Jeanine, CNN – Lou Dobbs, Court TV, Real Talk on WOR, It's Your Call with Lyn Doyle, Tom Gresham's Gun Talk, and Cam & Company/NRA News. As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists. He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America. Email Evan Your Comments and Questions  talkback@gun.lawyer Join Evan's InnerCircleHere's your chance to join an elite group of the Savviest gun and knife owners in America.  Membership is totally FREE and Strictly CONFIDENTIAL.  Just enter your email to start receiving insider news, tips, and other valuable membership benefits.   Email (required) *First Name *Select list(s) to subscribe toInnerCircle Membership Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)Constant Contact Use. Please leave this field blank.var ajaxurl = "https://gun.lawyer/wp-admin/admin-ajax.php";

Comment en 1985 Ronald Reagan a violé l'embargo qu'il a lui-même instauré sur les ventes d'armes à l'Iran.Plongez au cœur de l'une des plus grandes affaires de la fin du XXe siècle ! Franck Ferrand vous raconte comment le président Ronald Reagan s'est laissé convaincre de négocier secrètement avec l'Iran pour obtenir la libération d'otages américains, au mépris de l'embargo sur les armes imposé à ce pays. Mais cette opération clandestine, connue sous le nom d'Affaire Iran-Contra, a rapidement dérapé, révélant un autre volet encore plus explosif : le financement illégal de la guérilla des Contras au Nicaragua. Une histoire rocambolesque de trafic d'armes, de détournement de fonds et de mensonges d'État qui a failli faire sombrer la présidence de Reagan. Ne manquez pas ce récit passionnant et glaçant de la façon dont le président le plus populaire des États-Unis s'est laissé piéger dans un scandale d'envergure !

In this special 4th of July episode, Morning Wire's John Bickley and Georgia Howe, along with host Wired In Live, Cabot Phillips, swap the usual interview format for a personal roundtable on what makes America special — from Cabot's moving private tour of Ronald Reagan's humble Santa Barbara ranch, to the viral wave of European soccer fans falling in love with American hospitality during the World Cup, to John's unforgettable conversation with Vietnam veteran and medevac pilot Art Jacobs. Three stories, one theme: why this country, 250 years in, still inspires awe. Get the facts first with Morning Wire.- - -Ep. 2875- - -Wake up with new Morning Wire merch: https://bit.ly/4lIubt3- - -Today's Sponsors:Alliance Defending Freedom - If you believe in the freedom to practice your religion — this is an opportunity to take action. Visit https://JoinADF.com/WIRE to sign the petition today.- - -Privacy Policy: https://www.dailywire.com/privacymorning wire,morning wire podcast,the morning wire podcast,Georgia Howe,John Bickley,daily wire podcast,podcast,news podcast Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Two hundred and fifty years of American history is no small thing to celebrate. And as communities of faith mark this momentous milestone, there is a story worth telling and retelling: the story of a nation whose foundations were laid by men and women who looked to God and to Scripture as the source of true freedom. The Founding Fathers themselves declared that the law of nature was the will of God, binding upon all people in all ages. The Bible was not incidental to America's beginnings. It was central to them. The evidence runs deep. The Great Awakening united thirteen separate colonies in a spiritual revival that prepared hearts for the nation's founding. The Black Robed Regiment, a group of bold patriotic pastors, preached liberty from their pulpits and rallied colonists to stand for their biblically grounded beliefs. The Declaration of Independence drew from Christian sources and the writings of men shaped by Scripture. And public schools were established specifically so that children could read the Bible for themselves, the same foundational text that gave rise to Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and William and Mary. As America turns 250, this is a day to praise God with grateful hearts for His hand in establishing this nation, to hold firm to the biblical truths it was built upon, and to ask Him for the wisdom and faithfulness to carry those principles forward into the next generation. Today's Bible Verse "Let everything that has breath praise the Lord. Praise the Lord."— Psalm 150:6, NIV Ponder Today America's founding was deeply rooted in biblical principles. The Founding Fathers did not view faith as separate from governance. They looked to God as the source of natural law, human dignity, and true freedom, and they built accordingly. Spiritual revival preceded national founding. The Great Awakening was not merely a religious event — it was the spiritual preparation that united thirteen separate colonies and forged a people willing to pursue freedom together. Pastors have always had a role in shaping a nation's conscience. The Black Robed Regiment is a striking historical reminder that the Church has a voice in the public square, and that faithfully preaching biblical truth has consequences far beyond the sanctuary walls. Freedom, rightly understood, is a gift from God. The Declaration of Independence grounded its claims in the recognition that certain rights are endowed by the Creator. That foundation is worth celebrating and defending on this 250th anniversary. Every generation is responsible for passing on what was entrusted to them. Ronald Reagan's reminder still rings true: freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. Celebrating America's heritage includes committing to carry it forward with wisdom and faithfulness. A Prayer for You Today Dear Father, we praise You with grateful hearts as we celebrate our nation's 250th birthday. Thank You for the way You guided our Founding Fathers to establish America on solid biblical principles, giving our nation a godly heritage that remains to this day. Fill our lips with praise for Your great and mighty work in establishing this nation. Strengthen America to hold true to the foundational biblical truths it was built upon. Lead us as a people and a nation to yield to Your Almighty guidance, and grant our leaders and citizens the godly wisdom to move forward with steadfast faithfulness and devotion to You. In Jesus' name, Amen. Don't Miss an Episode If today's prayer stirred both patriotism and gratitude in your heart for God's hand on this nation, we'd love to stay connected. Subscribe to the LifeAudio newsletter at LifeAudio.com for daily prayers, devotionals, and more content to nourish your faith and your love for the country God has placed you in. Discover more Christian podcasts at lifeaudio.com and inquire about advertising opportunities at lifeaudio.com/contact-us.

Happy 4th of July, everyone! And welcome to this Happy Birthday Podcast clip show, with your hosts Jaki and Dan, dedicated to the birthdays of presidents, vice presidents, children of presidents and other occupants of that great American house, the White House.Spoiling alert! If you are one of those freaks that likes to guess along, there are spoilers in the description ahead!The famous jolly good fellows:2:00 - Ronald Reagan (episode 102 - Feb 6, 2024)17:45 - James Buchanan (episode 113 - Apr 23, 2024)31:49 - Donald Trump (episode 58 - Jun 14, 2022)44:36 - Laura Loomer (episode 116 - May 21, 2024)54:20 - Chelsea Clinton (episode 105 - Feb 27, 2024)1:07:21 - Chester A. Arthur (episode 33 - Oct 5, 2021)1:14:42 - Dan Quayle (episode 133 - Feb 4, 2025)1:24:48 - Hunter Biden (episode 133 - Feb 4, 2025)patreon.com/hbdpod

During this segment of The Tara Show, guest host Ryan Wrecker and political historian Rich Rubino discussed the uniqueness of sitting members of Congress transitioning directly to the presidency, identifying Warren G. Harding, John F. Kennedy, and Barack Obama as the only sitting senators, and James A. Garfield as the only sitting House member to do so. The conversation then moved to the 1976 election, with Rubino detailing the primary race between Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan, as well as Jimmy Carter's close general election victory after facing tight competition in the Southern states. Reflecting on that era, both agreed that while the nation came together during its Bicentennial year, the current political climate in 2026 represents the deep divisions not seen since the late 1960s. Wrecker concluded the discussion with a lighthearted remark about needing an extraordinary event to unify the country before sharing Rubino's website, RichRubino.com, with listeners.

We talk all the time about how America is a very young country, and that's true when you compare us to Europe, Africa, and Asia, where countries are built around lineages, ethnic majorities, and religions. But not America. We're a melting pot. We're risk takers. It's woven into the fabric of the United States that no matter where you are right now, tomorrow can be better than today was, and your life can be better here than it can be anywhere else in the world. You can gain here. You can lose here, too, so you've got to be careful and you've got to be vigilant. But that lesson is what moves us forward.I keep telling people that, with America, we've got a classic. But what does that mean? In the same way your favorite song is a classic, something you can play over and over again and it never gets old. Your favorite movie that you quote with your friends. Something that lives in your head and every time you think about it, you find a new way to think about it. Two hundred and fifty years ago, we declared independence with the idea that we could make one. We could invent our own set of rules that would not only endure, but allow humans to prosper. What we got from it was the United States Constitution. It continues to endure to this day. We argue about it, we amend it, we challenge it, and we defend it because we know it's worth defending. It's a classic.Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.While we are a young country, we are old in one regard: we are the longest continuous form of government on the planet. Everybody else comes and goes. You don't have to when you're sitting on a classic. I love America. I love talking about our great moments. I love talking about our bad moments. I love learning lessons from the missteps we've made, and I love reveling in our success. Ronald Reagan once said that you could live a hundred years in Japan and not be Japanese, or in Germany and not be German, but if you come to the United States, you can be an American. It is a spirit that beats deep within those of us who are lucky enough to have been born here and lucky enough to live at the bleeding edge of technology, culture, and finance. We have our problems, but there is no better country on the planet to identify them and fix them.So this weekend, raise a glass with your loved ones. Grill whatever you want on that grill. Look around in that humid, hot weather, whether you're by the lake, in your backyard, sitting at your desk, or doing whatever the hell you want. I hope that either physically or in spirit, you're with your friends and family when you say, “Happy Birthday, America.” You absolute classic.Chapters00:00:00 - Intro00:10:17 - America at 25000:17:05 - Interview with Jeff Maurer00:42:55 - AOC Endorses El-Sayed00:48:54 - SAVE America Dead?00:51:18 - OpenAI's 5% Plan00:54:37 - Interview with Jeff Maurer, con't01:21:47 - Wrap-up This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe

You can find the rest of 250 Most Impactful Moments in American History's episodes wherever you listen to podcasts! 140: Jesse James and his gang commit the first train robbery in the American West in Adair, Iowa. In 1876 Lawman Wyatt Earp begins work as a peace officer in Dodge City, KS. The same year outlaw Wild Bill Hickok is shot dead during a poker game in Deadwood, Dakota. In 1881 Tombstone, AZ is sight of the gunfight at the OK Corral. And in 1882 the legendary Jesse James is killed by fellow outlaw Robert Ford in his home in St. Joseph, MO. ft. Author of Bandit Heaven: The Hole-in-the-Wall Gangs and the Final Chapter of the Wild West, Tom Clavin.   139: The first major wagon trail heads west on the Oregon Trail with over a thousand pioneers from Missouri  138: African American teenager Emmett Till is lynched in Money, Mississippi  138: African American teenager Emmett Till is lynched in Money, Mississippi 137: President Reagan announces SDI a missile defense program intended to intercept enemy missiles ft. Senior Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute & author of Ronald Reagan and His Quest to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, Paul Lettow.   136: The Spanish Flu Pandemic hits the US Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

On this episode of The Hillsdale College Online Courses Podcast, Jeremiah and Juan discuss America at the turn of millennium before introducing Wilfred McClay. Americans have overcome many challenges throughout our history, including the American Revolution, the Civil War, the Great Depression, two World Wars, and the Cold War. Studying the great stories from our past inspires us to preserve the blessings of liberty in our day. Now you can study these stories with Hillsdale College. Hillsdale’s free online course, “The Great American Story: A Land of Hope,” explores the history of America as a land of hope founded on high principles. In presenting the great triumphs and achievements of our nation’s past, as well as the shortcomings and failures, it offers a broad and unbiased study of the kind essential to the cultivation of intelligent patriotism. Ronald Reagan restored the office of the presidency to its place of prominence through policies that fostered a productive economy and that led to the collapse of the Soviet Union and an end to the Cold War. Despite the optimism that surrounded the end of the Cold War, the decades since have seen the United States divided over a series of important issues. To restore our common purpose, Americans should learn from the great examples of our nation’s past. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Newt talks with former Senator Tim Hutchinson about his new memoir, From Spavinaw to D.C.: A Conservative's Journey Through Faith, Farm Life, and the Fight for America. Hutchinson reflects on his upbringing on an Arkansas farm, the faith mentors who shaped him, and how Ronald Reagan's 1964 "A Time for Choosing" speech sparked his political awakening as a teenager. He recounts becoming the first Republican popularly elected to the Senate from Arkansas in 1996, his role in the "Gingrich Revolution" and the Cracker Jacks freshman caucus, and the dramatic phone call that pushed him from a safe House seat into a Senate run. Their conversation covers the cultural differences between the House and Senate, formative trips to Israel and China, and his enduring friendships across the aisle, including with Senator Russ Feingold over golf. Hutchinson closes by sharing his Fourth of July plans with family.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Learn more about the podcast hereLearn more about Give Him Fifteen hereSupport the show

Greg Kelly Reports | June 26, 2026 - The episode opens with America 250 momentum building fast, framing the upcoming Fourth of July celebration as a patriotic turning point while warning that the real threat to the country now comes from internal cultural and political decay, not foreign enemies. - A major focus is the contrast between capitalism and communism, with the show using Ronald Reagan, the collapse of the Soviet Union, and Zohran Mamdani's collectivist rhetoric to argue that socialism is making a dangerous comeback among younger Americans who never saw its real-world failures. - The episode highlights falling gas and oil prices after the Iran conflict, presenting the drop as proof that President Trump's strategy is calming markets, lowering costs at the pump, and undercutting the media's nonstop panic coverage. - Another key theme is rising urban disorder, with the show mocking the phrase “teen takeovers” as a euphemism for riots and pointing to violent crowd scenes in cities like Chicago, Washington, and Jacksonville as evidence of a deeper breakdown in law, order, and accountability. - The episode also revisits Barack Obama's role in the Russia-collusion narrative, using new claims from Tulsi Gabbard to argue that Obama's national security team knowingly pushed false intelligence to sabotage Donald Trump before he ever took office. The Greg Kelly Reports podcast is sponsored in part by : PARAMOUNT PLUS - Don't Miss ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠"The Agency."⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ All episodes now streaming on ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Paramount Plus⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Make the switch to NEWSMAX today! Get your 15 day free trial of NEWSMAX+ at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠http://NewsmaxPlus.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Follow NEWSMAX on Social Media:            • Facebook: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠http://nws.mx/FB⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠            • X/Twitter: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠http://nws.mx/twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠            • Instagram: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠http://nws.mx/IG⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠            • YouTube: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://youtube.com/NewsmaxTV⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠            • Rumble: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://rumble.com/c/NewsmaxTV⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠            • TRUTH Social: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://truthsocial.com/@NEWSMAX⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Thousands of records released by former Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard are still making the rounds and are evidence of a broader issue. Glenn discusses how those files, alongside other stories such as a pushback against AI data centers; an election lawsuit from California; and Republicans funding Democratic primaries, all point to a terrifying truth. Glenn breaks down the latest in the negotiations with Iran, the status of the Strait of Hormuz, and gas prices. Glenn reacts to a group of OnlyFans girls who can't answer basic math and history questions. Glenn tells the story of the first time a soldier was executed for treason in American history. Glenn explains why he has grown to hate Father's Day and tells the story of Ronald Reagan and his estranged daughter. Glenn elaborates on the story of an allegedly conservative group that is leading a pushback against AI data centers. Population Research Institute President Steven Mosher joins to discuss the diabolical political theory coming from China. Bishop Ceirion Dewar joins to discuss why the U.K.'s grooming gangs scandal should be a stark warning for the U.S. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It was supposed to be a picturesque and luxurious sightseeing tour over Antarctica. One filled with wonder and awe, in a tour that had cultivated a reputation for giving passengers the “trip of a lifetime.” But what began as an adventurous flight near Mt. Erebus, the southernmost active volcano in the world, became one of New Zealand's most catastrophic accidents. What really happened? And who was ultimately responsible? Meanwhile, President Carter had just lost the election to Ronald Regan, who announced the release of the hostages in Iran the same day he was inaugurated. Was this timing a coincidence, or did President Carter get a bad deal? Join us for the final episode of the series, Mayhem: The 1970s You Never Knew.

Megyn Kelly is joined by John Hinckley Jr., musician, artist, and author of "John Hinckley Jr.: Who I Really Am," to talk about what he thought when he saw another Trump assassination attempt at the "Hinckley Hilton," the rise of political violence in America today, people reaching out to him on X to commit further violence against Trump, what an "erotomaniac" actually is, Hinckley's delusion that led to his Jodie Foster obsession, what happened when he actually saw Foster in person at Yale, what led him to start thinking about hurting someone to impress Jodie Foster, his initial targets of Jimmy Carter and even Ted Kennedy, the circumstances that led to his assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan, how easy it was to get close to Reagan to take the shots, his reaction to Reagan and James Brady's comments about him, what he'd say to their family members now, his communication with Ted Bundy, what life was like in the psychiatric facility, getting released and what life is like now, and more.   More from Hinckley Jr.- https://wbp.bz/johnhinckleyjr   Supersure Insurance: Upgrade your business insurance to a year-round SuperAgency at https://Supersure.com/Megyn Veracity Health: Head to https://VeracityHealth.co and use code Megyn for up to 65% off your order Herald Group: Learn more at https://GuardYourCard.com Sundays for Dogs: Upgrade your dog's food without the hassle—try Sundays for Dogs and get 50% off your first order at https://sundaysfordogs.com/MEGYN or use code MEGYN at checkout.     Follow The Megyn Kelly Show on all social platforms: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/MegynKelly Twitter: http://Twitter.com/MegynKellyShow Instagram: http://Instagram.com/MegynKellyShow Facebook: http://Facebook.com/MegynKellyShow Find out more information at:https://www.devilmaycaremedia.com/megynkellyshow Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.