Podcasts about us justice department

We've launched Minimum Competence CLE, and our first course is now available completely free. Researching Federal Tax Issues After Loper Brightlooks at how the Supreme Court's decision ending Chevron deference changes the way lawyers should research and evaluate Treasury regulations, IRS guidance, and other federal tax authorities.Take the course and earn CLE credit at cle.minimumcomp.com.This Day in Legal History: Communist Control ActOn August 24, 1954, President Dwight Eisenhower signed the Communist Control Act, a law that did something extraordinary in a country built around the First Amendment: it effectively outlawed a political party. The Act declared the Communist Party of the United States an instrument of a conspiracy to overthrow the government. It stripped it of “all rights, privileges, and immunities” available to legal organizations, and made knowing membership in the party potentially criminal.Perhaps more remarkable is how little resistance any of this encountered. This was the height of the McCarthy era, when the political cost of appearing insufficiently hostile to communism was enormous. The bill passed the Senate 79-0 and the House 265-2. Those margins tell you something important about the moment: liberals and conservatives alike had strong incentives to demonstrate their anti-communist bona fides, and almost no one had much incentive to be the person standing up for the constitutional rights of communists. Eisenhower signed the bill, and, at least on paper, an American political party ceased to have any legal existence.The significance of August 24, 1954 is mostly as a lesson in what happens to civil liberties when they are placed under enough political pressure—and in the messier ways our constitutional system often corrects itself. The Communist Control Act was constitutionally dubious from the start; punishing someone for just belonging to a political organization runs directly into the freedoms of speech and association. But the law was rarely enforced, courts largely avoided confronting its most sweeping provisions head-on, and it gradually withered into a stricture approaching a dead letter, though it technically remains on the books. Later Supreme Court decisions made considerably clearer that the government can't punish mere association or abstract advocacy, as opposed to incitement to imminent lawless action.That makes this a fitting anniversary for a day when we also have a story about protesters sentenced for their political activity. The point captured in today's opening quote from Justice Brandeis is easy to endorse when the speaker and the cause are popular. The real test of the freedom to think and speak as you will comes when neither is.A federal judge has struck down one of the administration's broader immigration policies, vacating a State Department decision that suspended immigrant visa processing for applicants from 75 countries.The policy, announced in January, halted immigrant visa processing for nationals of 75 countries—including Afghanistan, Iran, Russia, and Somalia—on the theory that applicants from those countries were likely to require public assistance. U.S. District Judge Jeannette Vargas in Manhattan called the policy “patently unlawful,” but the interesting part of the decision is less the rhetoric than the relatively straightforward statutory problem she identified: Secretary of State Marco Rubio did not have the power Congress gave someone else.Federal immigration law expressly limits the Secretary of State's authority over how consular officers process immigrant visas. The administration therefore could not use the Secretary's general authority to accomplish something Congress had specifically placed beyond his reach. It is a theme we have seen repeatedly this summer: not some enormous constitutional confrontation over presidential power, but the considerably more mundane question of whether the executive branch can point to a statute that actually authorizes what it is doing.Vargas's order also does more than stop the policy going forward. She vacated visa denials based solely on the suspended-processing policy, meaning applicants who were turned away under it can have their applications reconsidered. The lawsuit was brought by immigrant-rights organizations, visa applicants, and U.S. citizens seeking visas for family members.The broader point is that immigration and foreign affairs may be areas in which the executive branch enjoys substantial discretion, but discretion is not the same thing as unlimited authority. The government still needs to identify where Congress gave it the power it claims to possess. Here, the court concluded Congress had done essentially the opposite.US judge strikes down policy suspending immigrant visa processing for 75 nations | ReutersWashington Post · Al JazeeraSeven pro-Palestinian protesters who shut down the Golden Gate Bridge in 2024 have now been sentenced, and the result is a useful little illustration of how the law handles civil disobedience.The seven were among 26 protesters who drove onto the bridge in April 2024, stopped their vehicles, and chained themselves together to protest the war in Gaza, blocking traffic for hours. They were convicted in July of misdemeanor false imprisonment, obstruction of a thoroughfare, and unlawful assembly. On Friday, they were sentenced to 30 days in jail—with an option that could cut that time in half—along with six months of probation and roughly $1,000 in fines and restitution.The First Amendment line here is not especially mysterious. Protest is protected; physically preventing other people from leaving is not. That is the significance of the false-imprisonment charge: motorists were stuck on a bridge with nowhere else to go. You can stand alongside the road holding a sign. You do not acquire a First Amendment right to chain the road shut merely because your reason for doing it is political.But the sentence is interesting in the other direction. The defendants potentially faced years in prison and received 30 days, while prosecutors dropped the most serious felony conspiracy charge after the jury deadlocked on it. That gap illustrates just how much calibration occurs after we decide that conduct is criminal. Prosecutors and judges can recognize both that the protesters deliberately interfered with the rights of hundreds of other people and that they did so as part of nonviolent political expression rather than for personal gain or predatory purposes.That is more or less how a legal system metabolizes civil disobedience: the political motivation does not erase the underlying offense, but neither must the law pretend that motivation is irrelevant when deciding how severely to punish it. On the anniversary of the Communist Control Act, it is an especially useful reminder that the legal treatment of dissent rarely comes down to a simple choice between “protected” and “illegal.” Much of the real work happens in between.Pro-Palestinian protesters sentenced over blocking Golden Gate Bridge traffic | ReutersKQED · Mission LocalAnd finally, TikTok and parent company ByteDance have agreed to pay $400 million to settle the Justice Department's lawsuit accusing the platform of violating federal children's privacy law—an enormous number for a case built around a statute passed before TikTok, or really modern social media, existed.The Justice Department filed the lawsuit in 2024 on behalf of the Federal Trade Commission, alleging that TikTok allowed millions of children under 13 to create accounts without their parents' knowledge or consent and then made it unnecessarily difficult for parents to have those accounts deleted. The statute at issue is COPPA, the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998, which generally requires online services covered by the law to obtain verifiable parental consent before collecting personal information from children under 13.There is an especially interesting wrinkle in how the $400 million settlement is structured. TikTok will pay $300 million now and another $100 million once a court vacates an earlier consent decree entered against Musical.ly, TikTok's predecessor. That matters because this is not the first time the platform has encountered the government over children's privacy. Musical.ly had already been penalized over COPPA violations, and the government's latest case alleged that the problems continued afterward.TikTok is settling without admitting wrongdoing and says it has made substantial changes to its age controls and parental-oversight systems. But whatever one thinks of the underlying allegations, $400 million is a fairly substantial reminder that COPPA is not merely a disclosure statute sitting around from the early Internet.And this case fits into the larger fight over children and social media from a somewhat different direction than the addiction and product-design litigation we have been following. Those cases ask what platforms may design for children and what harms those designs may cause. COPPA asks the considerably less glamorous but foundational question that comes before all of that: who gets to collect information about children in the first place, and on what terms? Four hundred million dollars suggests the government still thinks the answer matters quite a bit.US Justice Department, TikTok settle $400 million children's privacy suit | ReutersAxios · Justice Department 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

This week on the Queer News podcast, fIn politics, trans troops continue fighting for their right to serve in the military and Iowa teachers receive a settlement after being suspended for a drag show. In sports, Cleveland announces a new WNBA team and transphobes have entered the WNBA chat. And last but not least, In culture and entertainment, the thrive fund has opened grant applications for gender-affirming care and you might meet the criteria. Let's get into it! Want to support this podcast?

This Day in Legal History: The Immigration Act of 1882On August 3, 1882, President Chester A. Arthur signed the Immigration Act of 1882, the first comprehensive federal law regulating immigration into the United States. Before this, immigration had largely been left to the individual states; this Act marked the moment the federal government claimed the subject as its own, and it built the first federal machinery for controlling who could enter the country.The Act did two enduring things. First, it imposed a “head tax”—fifty cents on every immigrant arriving by ship—to fund the administration of immigration, and it placed enforcement under the Secretary of the Treasury, creating the country's first federal immigration bureaucracy. Second, and more consequentially for the law that followed, it created categories of people who would be excluded: convicts, the “insane,” and—in language that would echo for the next century and a half—”any person unable to take care of himself or herself without becoming a public charge.” That public-charge concept, born here in 1882, is the same doctrine we discussed just a couple of weeks ago when the current administration revived an expansive version of the public-charge rule.The significance of August 3, 1882 is that it is the taproot of the entire federal immigration system. Coming just months after the Chinese Exclusion Act, it established the foundational premise that the national government decides the terms of admission to the United States, and it introduced the framework—head taxes, excludable categories, federal enforcement—on which everything since has been built. It's worth sitting with the tension in the date: 1882 is also, almost exactly, the moment Emma Lazarus was composing “The New Colossus,” with its welcome to the tired and the poor. The law and the poem were born together, and the distance between them—between the statute's exclusions and the sonnet's embrace—is a distance the country has been arguing about ever since.Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has formally rescinded the $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization fund,” clearing what had been the biggest obstacle to his confirmation. If you were with us last week, this is the resolution of that story. The fund—created by a Justice Department order back in May—would have used taxpayer money to compensate people who claimed to be victims of the prior administration's Justice Department, a group that notably included those convicted in connection with the January 6 Capitol attack. Republican Senator John Cornyn had refused to support Blanche's nomination until the fund was killed, and this week Blanche did exactly that, signing an order declaring the May directive “rescinded” with “no force or effect,” and, as part of the deal, agreeing to limit the related immunity arrangement so it applies only to the IRS and not to other agencies. The significance ties together several threads we've followed all summer. This fund grew out of the same collusive IRS settlement that a federal judge voided as a sham, and it sat at the center of concerns about the Justice Department being used to reward the president's allies. That a senator from the president's own party forced its formal repeal as the price of confirmation is advice-and-consent working as a genuine check—and it means the incoming attorney general takes office having had to publicly dismantle one of the administration's most criticized initiatives before the Senate would trust him with the job.Acting US Attorney General Blanche rescinds ‘anti-weaponization' fund before confirmation vote | ReutersNPR · NBC NewsIn a court filing, Capital One has disclosed for the first time that it closed more than 300 Trump Organization bank accounts back in 2021 after an anti-money-laundering review—the first time a bank has formally tied such concerns to its decision to cut off the president's family business. The context is a lawsuit: the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust and Eric Trump sued Capital One in Florida last year, alleging the bank “debanked” them for political reasons, having notified the Trump Organization of the closures in March 2021, just weeks after January 6. Capital One's filing reframes that story entirely. The bank says its compliance team did precisely what federal regulators expect—flagging accounts that raised anti-money-laundering red flags and acting on them. Here's the legal machinery underneath. Under the Bank Secrecy Act and related anti-money-laundering rules, banks are legally obligated to monitor their customers, file suspicious-activity reports, and, when warranted, close accounts; failing to do so can expose a bank to serious regulatory penalties. Importantly, Capital One did not accuse the Trump Organization of actual money laundering—flagging a risk and proving a crime are very different things. The significance is that this is a clean collision between two hot legal debates: the “debanking” complaint that financial institutions are dropping customers for political or ideological reasons, and the reality that banks operate under mandatory AML obligations that require them to shed risky accounts. A court will now have to decide which of those framings fits what Capital One actually did.Capital One says it closed Trump Organization's accounts after anti-money-laundering review | ReutersCNBC · NPRTom Goldstein, the prominent Supreme Court advocate and SCOTUSblog founder we've been following, has launched his appeal—asking the Fourth Circuit to overturn his twelve convictions for tax and mortgage fraud and to undo his six-year prison sentence. Recall the case: a jury found that Goldstein concealed millions from a secret high-stakes poker life, diverted his law firm's fees to cover gambling debts, and lied to mortgage lenders; he was sentenced to 72 months and ordered to pay more than $3 million in restitution. The appeal is a reminder that even a resource-intensive, headline conviction gets a second look, and Goldstein is raising some genuinely lawyerly arguments. The most interesting is venue—the constitutional requirement that a defendant be tried in the right place. His team argues that while prosecutors proved he filled out loan applications in Maryland, they never proved from where he actually transmitted the documents, leaning on a recent Fourth Circuit decision that took venue seriously. He's also challenging the admission of statements he made in media interviews and the wording of the jury instructions. Commentators describe his path as daunting, and it is—appellate courts rarely overturn convictions, and factual findings get real deference. But the significance is that these are exactly the kinds of technical, procedural issues on which serious appeals are built. Goldstein spent his career winning cases at the top of the appellate system; now he's testing whether that same system will scrutinize the government's work in convicting him.US Supreme Court lawyer Tom Goldstein appeals tax conviction | ReutersLaw360 · Bloomberg LawAnd finally, the Justice Department has moved to drop its criminal case against David Hearn, the former Olympic canoeist charged with vandalizing the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool—and the reason is striking. We covered Hearn's not-guilty plea back in July, when his lawyers called the prosecution an abuse of power built on a “concocted narrative.” It turns out that characterization may have been closer to the truth than the charge. In a 20-page filing, prosecutors acknowledged that evidence received after Hearn was indicted shows the damage to the pool “was the result of flawed installation by the contractor,” compounded by “the rush to complete the project” before the America 250 celebrations around July 4. In other words: not vandalism—shoddy construction. The U.S. Attorney's office said it only learned of the flawed-installation evidence after a grand jury had already indicted him. The significance goes right to prosecutorial power and its risks. A 67-year-old man was detained for hours and charged with a felony over damage that, by the government's own admission, he didn't cause. The case collapsing is the system correcting itself—but only after Hearn spent weeks as a felony defendant. It's a real-world illustration of a point we keep returning to: the decision to charge is one of the most consequential and least reviewable powers in the legal system, and when it's exercised on a flawed factual premise, the damage to the person charged is done long before the dismissal.US Justice Department drops case against former US Olympian over Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool | ReutersPBS NewsHour · CNN 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

This Day in Legal History: The Fourteenth Amendment Is RatifiedOn July 9, 1868, South Carolina and Louisiana became the final two states needed to push the Fourteenth Amendment over the three-quarters threshold, and with their votes the amendment was ratified into the Constitution. It is, by almost any measure, the most consequential of the Reconstruction amendments and arguably the most important addition to the Constitution since the Bill of Rights.The amendment was written to answer the central question left open by the Civil War and the abolition of slavery: what did freedom actually mean, and who was entitled to it? Its first section does an enormous amount of work in a single sentence. It establishes birthright citizenship—declaring that all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to its jurisdiction, are citizens of both the nation and their state. It then forbids any state from abridging the privileges or immunities of citizens, from depriving any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, and from denying any person the equal protection of the laws. Those three clauses—privileges or immunities, due process, and equal protection—became the constitutional text on which vast stretches of modern American law are built.The historical purpose was direct. The framers of the amendment, led in the House by John Bingham, wanted to overrule Dred Scott, which had held that Black Americans could not be citizens, and to constitutionalize the civil rights protections Congress had already tried to enact by statute—putting them beyond the reach of any future hostile Congress or Southern legislature. They understood that emancipation without citizenship and equal protection would be a hollow victory, and they wrote a guarantee that applied against the states, not just the federal government.The significance of July 9, 1868 is hard to overstate, because so much of what we argue about today runs directly through this text. The Equal Protection Clause is the basis of Brown v. Board of Education and school desegregation, of Loving v. Virginia striking down bans on interracial marriage, and of Obergefell recognizing marriage equality. The Due Process Clause became the vehicle for incorporating most of the Bill of Rights against the states, so that free speech, free exercise, and protections for the criminally accused bind state governments too. And the Citizenship Clause is the reason that birthright citizenship is a constitutional guarantee rather than a policy preference—as the Supreme Court reaffirmed just this past term. When you hear debates about who counts as a citizen, what process the government owes a person before it takes something from them, or whether a law treats people equally, you are hearing an argument about the amendment ratified on this date.A federal judge in Florida has ordered the Department of Homeland Security to keep giving four Republican-led states—Florida, Iowa, Indiana, and Ohio—access to a federal database those states use to check whether registered voters are citizens. The order, from U.S. District Judge T. Kent Wetherell II in Pensacola, lets the states continue using the system while the underlying legal fight plays out.The database is called SAVE—Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements—a federal system historically used to verify immigration status for benefits. After a revamp last year, it became far more powerful for election purposes: users could search many records at once, and it exposed individuals' Social Security numbers. Several Republican-led states began comparing their voter rolls against SAVE and canceling the registrations of people the database flagged as noncitizens. The problem is what happens when the database is wrong or out of date—people who are in fact citizens can get flagged and purged.That risk is exactly why this ruling sits in tension with another one. Just weeks earlier, on June 22, a different federal judge in Washington, D.C., restricted broader use of the database, warning that relying on it could result in eligible voters being wrongly stripped from the rolls. So you now have two federal courts pointing in different directions—one worried about wrongful purges and limiting the database's use, and one ordering DHS to keep the spigot open for these four states. When trial courts split like this, the disagreement typically has to be resolved higher up, and it means the rules can differ depending on which state and which courtroom you're standing in.The significance is that this is a live fight over the machinery of voter-roll maintenance heading into a midterm election year. There's a genuine and legitimate interest in keeping noncitizens off the voter rolls—but there's an equally real risk that a blunt, error-prone matching process disenfranchises actual citizens who then have to fight to get back on. This ruling tilts toward giving states the verification tool; the D.C. ruling tilts toward protecting against wrongful removals. Watch the appellate courts, because the boundary between list maintenance and unlawful voter purging is about to get drawn more sharply.US judge orders four states be given access to citizenship data for voter checks | ReutersIn a closely related development, the Justice Department has sent letters to all fifty states warning that state and local election officials could face criminal prosecution if they allow noncitizens to remain on their voter rolls. The letters, from Harmeet Dhillon, who leads the Department's Civil Rights Division, give officials just five days to respond with a plan to comply. The federal government does have statutes on the books aimed at protecting the integrity of elections and barring noncitizens from voting, and the letters invoke several of them. But the ordinary way these laws work is that you prosecute a person who actually votes illegally, or who knowingly facilitates fraud. What's unusual here is the target: the letters put state and local election administrators—the people who maintain the rolls—on notice that they personally could be charged. That reframes routine election administration as potential criminal exposure for the officials doing it.Think about the position this puts an election official in. Maintaining accurate voter rolls is genuinely hard—people move, die, naturalize, and occasionally register in error—and every state already has processes for it. Now imagine being told by the U.S. Department of Justice that if the federal government later decides your rolls were inadequate, you could be a criminal defendant, and you have five days to send in a compliance plan. Even if few or no prosecutions ever materialize, the threat itself is designed to change behavior—to push officials toward more aggressive purging out of fear of personal liability. Critics call that coercion; the Department frames it as enforcement.The significance is about federal pressure on the decentralized American election system. Elections in this country are run by states and localities, deliberately, so that no single national authority controls the vote. Democratic officials in states like Michigan pushed back hard, noting they've already taken extensive steps to ensure only eligible voters can vote. The letters, arriving alongside the SAVE database fight, are part of a coordinated push ahead of the midterms, and they raise a serious question about the line between legitimate federal enforcement of election laws and using the threat of prosecution to lean on the officials who administer them.US Justice Department tells state officials they could be prosecuted over noncitizen voting | ReutersAnd in a very different kind of case, a former Olympic canoe racer, David Hearn, pleaded not guilty in D.C. Superior Court to a felony charge of deliberately damaging the recently renovated Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool. Hearn, who is 67 and competed in three Summer Olympics, entered his plea through an attorney at his first court appearance, and his lawyers have described the prosecution as an abuse of power built on what they call a “concocted narrative.”The Reflecting Pool sits on the National Mall between the Lincoln Memorial and the Washington Monument and had just undergone a roughly $16 million renovation. Hearn has said he was stopped by National Guard troops and U.S. Park Police and detained for about five hours after pausing at the pool during a 64-mile bike ride in June. He was later indicted on a single felony count of property destruction. The top federal prosecutor for D.C., U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, said six other people were arrested on misdemeanor charges connected to damage at the same site.The legal question worth watching is the gap between the charge and the conduct. Property-destruction law generally requires proof that the defendant intentionally caused the damage, and a felony charge usually turns on the dollar value of that damage. Hearn's defense is essentially that the government has manufactured intent and seriousness out of an innocent encounter—that a man pausing on a bike ride has been turned into a felony defendant. The judge apparently agreed there was little flight or danger risk: Hearn was released without court supervision pending an August 5 status hearing, which tells you something about how the court currently views the threat he poses.The significance here is less about one damaged pool and more about the exercise of prosecutorial discretion. Deciding whom to charge, and whether to charge a felony versus a misdemeanor versus nothing at all, is one of the most powerful and least reviewable choices in the legal system. When critics call a prosecution politically motivated or an abuse of power, they're pointing at that discretion. Whether this case is a legitimate property-crime prosecution (it isn't) or an overreach (it is) is exactly what the coming proceedings will test—and it's a useful reminder that the same charging power that holds genuine wrongdoers accountable can also be aimed in ways that raise real fairness concerns.Former US Olympian pleads not guilty in Reflecting Pool vandalism case | 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

Oil prices are currently declining. Mark questions why left-leaning media outlets highlight rising oil prices but rarely mention when prices fall. He discusses the case involving E. Jean Carroll and whether there is substantial evidence to support her claims about President Trump at a Bergdorf Goodman store in New York City spying on her. Mark notes that Carroll now faces lawsuits alleging perjury. Former President Joe Biden has filed a lawsuit against the US Justice Department to prevent the release of certain recordings. On CBS News Sunday Morning, Jill Biden recounted her concerns during the 2024 campaign, saying she thought Joe Biden was having a stroke. Mark interviews economist Steve Moore.  Steve discusses the impact of gasoline prices on inflation. He points out that, aside from gasoline, the US economy appears strong, citing a 4% GDP increase reported by the Federal Reserve. New data centers being built nationwide could advance early cancer detection and other technologies. Steve addresses concerns about artificial intelligence (AI), explaining both the opportunities and the need for caution. He also discusses the ongoing competition between China and the US over AI leadership. Spencer Pratt is highlighted as a potential leader who could drive positive change in Los Angeles by addressing taxes, politics, and oil transportation. A potential deal between Iran and the US is reportedly moving to President Trump's desk for approval. Donald Trump is suing the Wall Street Journal over alleged damage to his reputation. Bruce Springsteen launched into a lengthy critique of President Trump during a recent concert. In New Jersey, there are significant problems at ICE detention centers, drawing concern from Governor Mikie Sherrill. Protests have erupted over reportedly inadequate food at the facilities. DHS Secretary Mullin responded to the unrest by stating, “They can go back to their country.” Mark interviews WOR weeknight host Jimmy Failla. Jill Biden's remarks regarding Joe Biden's health during the 2024 campaign, specifically her fear that he suffered a stroke, are questionable. The guys also cover Governor Hochul's provocative comments about Trump, the Knicks, and overall challenge him on different topics. The debut of Byron Allen's new late-night show replacing Stephen Colbert is in effect, and Jimmy gives his opinion on it, including Mark's. In addition, Jimmy previews his upcoming show on FOX News Channel this Saturday night. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Oil prices are currently declining. Mark questions why left-leaning media outlets highlight rising oil prices but rarely mention when prices fall. He discusses the case involving E. Jean Carroll and whether there is substantial evidence to support her claims about President Trump at a Bergdorf Goodman store in New York City spying on her. Mark notes that Carroll now faces lawsuits alleging perjury. Former President Joe Biden has filed a lawsuit against the US Justice Department to prevent the release of certain recordings. On CBS News Sunday Morning, Jill Biden recounted her concerns during the 2024 campaign, saying she thought Joe Biden was having a stroke. Mark takes your calls! Mark interviews economist Steve Moore.  Steve discusses the impact of gasoline prices on inflation. He points out that, aside from gasoline, the US economy appears strong, citing a 4% GDP increase reported by the Federal Reserve. New data centers being built nationwide could advance early cancer detection and other technologies. Steve addresses concerns about artificial intelligence (AI), explaining both the opportunities and the need for caution. He also discusses the ongoing competition between China and the US over AI leadership. Spencer Pratt is highlighted as a potential leader who could drive positive change in Los Angeles by addressing taxes, politics, and oil transportation.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Oil prices are currently declining. Mark questions why left-leaning media outlets highlight rising oil prices but rarely mention when prices fall. He discusses the case involving E. Jean Carroll and whether there is substantial evidence to support her claims about President Trump at a Bergdorf Goodman store in New York City spying on her. Mark notes that Carroll now faces lawsuits alleging perjury. Former President Joe Biden has filed a lawsuit against the US Justice Department to prevent the release of certain recordings. On CBS News Sunday Morning, Jill Biden recounted her concerns during the 2024 campaign, saying she thought Joe Biden was having a stroke.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Oil prices are currently declining. Mark questions why left-leaning media outlets highlight rising oil prices but rarely mention when prices fall. He discusses the case involving E. Jean Carroll and whether there is substantial evidence to support her claims about President Trump at a Bergdorf Goodman store in New York City spying on her. Mark notes that Carroll now faces lawsuits alleging perjury. Former President Joe Biden has filed a lawsuit against the US Justice Department to prevent the release of certain recordings. On CBS News Sunday Morning, Jill Biden recounted her concerns during the 2024 campaign, saying she thought Joe Biden was having a stroke. Mark interviews economist Steve Moore.  Steve discusses the impact of gasoline prices on inflation. He points out that, aside from gasoline, the US economy appears strong, citing a 4% GDP increase reported by the Federal Reserve. New data centers being built nationwide could advance early cancer detection and other technologies. Steve addresses concerns about artificial intelligence (AI), explaining both the opportunities and the need for caution. He also discusses the ongoing competition between China and the US over AI leadership. Spencer Pratt is highlighted as a potential leader who could drive positive change in Los Angeles by addressing taxes, politics, and oil transportation. A potential deal between Iran and the US is reportedly moving to President Trump's desk for approval. Donald Trump is suing the Wall Street Journal over alleged damage to his reputation. Bruce Springsteen launched into a lengthy critique of President Trump during a recent concert. In New Jersey, there are significant problems at ICE detention centers, drawing concern from Governor Mikie Sherrill. Protests have erupted over reportedly inadequate food at the facilities. DHS Secretary Mullin responded to the unrest by stating, “They can go back to their country.” Mark interviews WOR weeknight host Jimmy Failla. Jill Biden's remarks regarding Joe Biden's health during the 2024 campaign, specifically her fear that he suffered a stroke, are questionable. The guys also cover Governor Hochul's provocative comments about Trump, the Knicks, and overall challenge him on different topics. The debut of Byron Allen's new late-night show replacing Stephen Colbert is in effect, and Jimmy gives his opinion on it, including Mark's. In addition, Jimmy previews his upcoming show on FOX News Channel this Saturday night. 

Oil prices are currently declining. Mark questions why left-leaning media outlets highlight rising oil prices but rarely mention when prices fall. He discusses the case involving E. Jean Carroll and whether there is substantial evidence to support her claims about President Trump at a Bergdorf Goodman store in New York City spying on her. Mark notes that Carroll now faces lawsuits alleging perjury. Former President Joe Biden has filed a lawsuit against the US Justice Department to prevent the release of certain recordings. On CBS News Sunday Morning, Jill Biden recounted her concerns during the 2024 campaign, saying she thought Joe Biden was having a stroke. Mark takes your calls! Mark interviews economist Steve Moore.  Steve discusses the impact of gasoline prices on inflation. He points out that, aside from gasoline, the US economy appears strong, citing a 4% GDP increase reported by the Federal Reserve. New data centers being built nationwide could advance early cancer detection and other technologies. Steve addresses concerns about artificial intelligence (AI), explaining both the opportunities and the need for caution. He also discusses the ongoing competition between China and the US over AI leadership. Spencer Pratt is highlighted as a potential leader who could drive positive change in Los Angeles by addressing taxes, politics, and oil transportation.

Oil prices are currently declining. Mark questions why left-leaning media outlets highlight rising oil prices but rarely mention when prices fall. He discusses the case involving E. Jean Carroll and whether there is substantial evidence to support her claims about President Trump at a Bergdorf Goodman store in New York City spying on her. Mark notes that Carroll now faces lawsuits alleging perjury. Former President Joe Biden has filed a lawsuit against the US Justice Department to prevent the release of certain recordings. On CBS News Sunday Morning, Jill Biden recounted her concerns during the 2024 campaign, saying she thought Joe Biden was having a stroke.

Prime Minister Mark Carney takes his sales pitch for Canada to Economic Club of New York. US and Iran trade fresh military strikes amid a tense ceasefire as diplomatic talks continue. US Justice Department reportedly opens criminal investigation into writer E. Jean Carroll, who sued US President Donald Trump in court. Fire in girls school dormitory kills at least 16 students in Kenya. Dean Penney murder case in Newfoundland reignites debate over Canadian jury secrecy rules. Toronto mosque hosts sensory-friendly Eid service for children with special needs.

This Day in Legal History: Andrew Johnson Impeachment Trial EndsOn May 26, 1868, the United States Senate ended the impeachment trial of President Andrew Johnson, bringing one of the most dramatic constitutional confrontations in American history to a close. Johnson had been impeached by the House of Representatives earlier that year after clashing repeatedly with Congress over Reconstruction. At the center of the dispute was the future of the defeated South and the legal status of formerly enslaved people after the Civil War. Johnson favored a more lenient approach toward former Confederate states, while the Republican-controlled Congress sought stronger protections for freedmen and stricter conditions for reentry. The immediate trigger for impeachment was Johnson's attempt to remove Secretary of War Edwin Stanton, which Congress argued violated the Tenure of Office Act. The Senate had already voted on one article of impeachment on May 16, and Johnson survived by a single vote. Ten days later, on May 26, the Senate voted on two more articles, with the result again falling one vote short of the two-thirds majority required for conviction. The final vote of 35 to 19 meant Johnson would remain in office.After that result, the Senate adjourned as a court of impeachment and the trial came to an end. The acquittal did not make Johnson politically strong, but it preserved the principle that removing a president required more than intense political disagreement. The trial also tested the separation of powers during a period when Congress and the presidency were fighting over who would control Reconstruction. In later years, the Tenure of Office Act was repealed, and its constitutionality remained deeply suspect. Johnson's impeachment became a lasting example of how legal rules, political conflict, and constitutional design can collide in moments of national crisis.The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee has advanced a major five-year transportation funding bill that would send about $580 billion toward roads, bridges, transit, rail projects, and highway safety programs. The measure, called the BUILD America 250 Act, passed the committee by a 62-2 vote after a lengthy markup and now heads to the full House. The bill is meant to replace the current surface transportation law, which was part of the 2021 infrastructure package and is set to expire at the end of September. Supporters from both parties framed the proposal as a way to keep infrastructure funding moving while giving states flexibility and speeding up project delivery.One of the most closely watched additions is a rail safety package inspired by the 2023 Norfolk Southern derailment in East Palestine, Ohio. That section would require at least two crew members on many trains, add inspection requirements, regulate defect detectors, and place limits on certain hazardous-material trains. Rail labor groups and the White House have backed stronger rules, while the major railroads argue the proposal is driven more by politics and labor demands than by the causes of the East Palestine crash.The bill would also create a first federal regulatory structure for autonomous commercial vehicles, including automated trucks, buses, and other larger vehicles. Industry supporters say that framework would help the United States compete globally in autonomous transportation, while transit labor leaders say the bill includes important human-oversight protections to keep workers involved and improve safety. Another contested provision would impose a new annual federal registration fee on electric vehicle owners, starting at $130 and later rising to $150, to help support the Highway Trust Fund.Backers say EV drivers should contribute to road funding because they do not pay federal gas taxes. Electric vehicle advocates, however, call the fee punitive and argue it would discourage EV adoption without meaningfully solving the trust fund's long-term funding gap.What's In The House Surface Transportation Funding Bill? - Law360The Justice Department has asked a federal court to lift an injunction blocking work on President Donald Trump's ballroom project, arguing that a recent shooting outside the White House shows why stronger security is needed. In a short filing Sunday, DOJ said the incident highlights the need for high-level security upgrades at the White House, including the ballroom, and again sought dismissal of the lawsuit challenging the project. The case was brought by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which has opposed the project and previously refused to withdraw its suit after an alleged foiled attack connected to the White House Correspondents' Association dinner in April. DOJ had already cited that earlier incident in asking the court to end the case. According to the Secret Service, the person who fired at a White House checkpoint on Saturday was shot by officers and later died at a hospital. The filing ties the shooting to the government's broader argument that the project is important for national security.US Justice Department seeks to lift injunction on ballroom project after shooting | ReutersMy column for Bloomberg this week argues that Tennessee's recent decision in SAP America, Inc. v. Gerregano shows how poorly traditional state tax categories fit modern software. The court treated SAP's software licenses as nontaxable intangible property, while allowing Tennessee to tax cloud hosting and cloud-based services delivered electronically into the state. That split made sense because SAP's products were cleanly separated into licenses, hosting, and cloud services. But the column argues that most modern software is not so tidy. Even products that seem local often rely on remote tools for logins, updates, syncing, storage, analytics, customer support, or payment processing. As AI becomes built into ordinary software, the line between software and cloud-based service will become even harder to draw.The column focuses on the “true-object” test, which asks what the customer is really buying when a transaction has multiple elements. That test works when the taxable and nontaxable pieces are visible and separately priced, but it becomes much harder to apply when remote processing is hidden inside a product the customer experiences simply as software. The piece argues that states should adopt a software-specific safe harbor rather than treating every remote feature as taxable cloud access. Under that approach, software would be presumed to remain software when remote functions are limited to things like authentication, updates, syncing, security, or modest product enhancements. A state could rebut that presumption if the customer is really buying hosted processing, managed infrastructure, AI model access, inference, or other platform-level functionality. The point is not to abandon the true-object test, but to give it a clearer threshold for hybrid software. Without that guardrail, AI could give states an easy but flawed path to reclassify almost any software product with a remote model feature as taxable cloud access. 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

The US Justice Department has indicted Cuba's former leader, Raul Castro, on criminal charges. The allegations centre on a Cuban military offensive against US civilian aircraft in 1996. The planes were operated by an organisation called Brothers to the Rescue and were searching for people who wanted to leave the island, when they were shot down by the Cuban military, which was led by Castro at the time. We get the latest from the BBC's Cuba correspondent.Also on the programme: Israel's far-right security minister has been condemned for taunting handcuffed Gaza flotilla activists; and we hear from the winner of this year's International Booker Prize. (Photo: Cuba's former President Raul Castro watches a May Day rally in Havana, Cuba 1st May, 2025. Credit: Reuters/Norlys Perez)

US President Donald Trump's allies who believe they have been wrongly investigated and prosecuted could soon have access to a nearly $1.8 billion compensation fund. The US Justice Department has made the announcement in a move to settle a lawsuit against the US Tax Office, heavily criticised by Democratic Party members as unconstitutional and corrupt.

The US Justice Department announced Monday that it was establishing a $1.776 billion fund to compensate Trump allies who claim they were targeted by the Joe Biden administration.Cal Thomas and Marion McKeone join The Last Word to discuss the 'anti-weaponisation' fund, which is expected to pay out money to Jan. 6 rioters, and more of the latest news from the United States.Catch the full chat by pressing the 'Play' button on this page!

Comprehensive coverage of the day's news with a focus on war and peace; social, environmental and economic justice. Strait of Hormuz (image by Goran_tek-en) US announces program to guide ships through Strait of Hormuz, as attacks on ships continue; Israel readies new attacks, buffer zone in Gaza, Palestinians fear new war and genocide as  attacks continue; US Justice Department investigating beef market monopoly based on Trump executive order; Climate researcher Michael Man discusses climate trends with KPFA; Supreme Court restores access to abortion pill mifepristone through telehealth, mail and pharmacies The post US announces program to guide ships through Strait of Hormuz as strikes escalate; Israel readies new attacks, buffer zone in Gaza – May 4, 2026 appeared first on KPFA.

An Australian inquiry into an antisemitic mass shooting at Bondi Beach which killed 15 people has recommended that the authorities should bolster security at Jewish events. The royal commission's interim report revealed that an Australian Jewish group had warned of a terrorist attack just days before the incident. The Australian prime minister Anthony Albanese says major changes have already been made. Also: oil prices have reached their highest point since the US and Israeli war against Iran began in February, amid concerns about how long the conflict will last; the US defence secretary Pete Hegseth is quizzed under oath on the Iran war by the Senate armed services committee; the US Justice Department charges the governor of Mexico's Sinaloa state for allegedly conspiring with the Sinaloa drug cartel to traffic massive quantities of narcotics; and celebrations in Kenya as Sabastian Sawe returns home after becoming the first man to run a marathon in under two hours in competitive race conditions in London. The Global News Podcast brings you the breaking news you need to hear, as it happens. Listen for the latest headlines and current affairs from around the world. Politics, economics, climate, business, technology, health – we cover it all with expert analysis and insight. Get the news that matters, delivered twice a day on weekdays and daily at weekends, plus special bonus episodes reacting to urgent breaking stories. Follow or subscribe now and never miss a moment. Get in touch: globalpodcast@bbc.co.uk

-- On the Show: -- Melania Trump criticizes Jimmy Kimmel over his jokes about her, while Donald Trump calls on ABC and Disney to fire him -- Karoline Leavitt says Americans must tone down the rhetoric after an attempted assassination against Trump while blaming Democrats -- Karoline Leavitt, Mike Johnson, and Lindsey Graham promote a $400 million White House ballroom as a national security need -- Skeptics claim the assassination attempts against Trump were staged, but their observations do not support a broader conspiracy -- Donald Trump's right hand appears swollen and discolored while meeting King Charles III, furthering questions about his health -- Gas prices remain high over the Iran war, despite reduced media coverage showing how economic issues often receive less attention -- The US Justice Department is reportedly scaling denaturalization cases from rare instances to hundreds, with unclear selection criteria -- On the Bonus Show: 8 in 10 of those Trump calls "low IQ" are people of color, Taylor Swift files trademark applications to protect against AI, schools debate getting rid of homework, and much more...

Have you hear of Clavicular? Well, he's the posterboy for "Looksmaxxing" What started as a niche corner of the internet has exploded into a mainstream movement, where young men are obsessed with 'maximising' their physical attractiveness at any cost. But while it might look like a simple 'glow up' on the surface, its origins in incel forums and its link to extreme cosmetic surgery and steroids have experts sounding the alarm. Today, we go inside the concerning rise of the looksmaxxing trend, investigate the 'Clavicular' lore that resulted in an explosive 60 Minutes interview, and find out why this movement is taking a dark and dangerous turn for men's mental health

Today's top stories, with context, in just 15 minutes.On today's podcast:1) The US and Iran are considering a two-week ceasefire extension to allow more time to negotiate a peace deal, according to a person familiar with the matter, reducing the risk of renewed fighting despite an intensifying standoff over the Strait of Hormuz. With the initial truce due to expire next week, mediators are seeking technical talks to overcome the most contentious issues preventing a longer-term agreement, said the person, who asked not to be identified discussing sensitive matters. Those include reopening Hormuz and the future of Iran’s nuclear program. Tensions remain high over the strait, a critical waterway for oil and gas that’s been effectively shuttered since the start of the war almost seven weeks ago. The US has set up a naval blockade to cut off Iranian shipments, and said Wednesday that 10 vessels have been forced to turn around. Tehran is keeping the strait closed to most other traffic. The US hasn’t “formally requested an extension of the ceasefire,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters Wednesday. But she acknowledged “we remain very much engaged in these negotiations.”2) Stocks set new highs as an upbeat forecast from Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. added fuel to technology shares amid rising optimism that the US and Iran are seeking more time to negotiate a peace deal. Futures for the S&P 500 rose 0.2% after the benchmark closed above the 7,000 mark for the first time. Nasdaq 100 contracts rose 0.4% as TSMC’s raised revenue outlook highlighted the resilience of AI chip demand. Adding to the upbeat mood in tech, Elon Musk’s lieutenants have sought quotes and delivery times for chipmaking equipment for his envisioned Terafab. Meanwhile, Brent fluctuated around $95 a barrel as the US and Iran considered a two-week ceasefire extension. Global bonds rose, led by gains in Europe where central bank policymakers signaled they’re in no rush to raise interest rates. The dollar was little changed while gold rose toward $4,825 an ounce. Wall Street veteran Ed Yardeni says investors are looking past the war in the Middle East and focusing on market fundamentals.3) Live Nation Entertainment Inc.’s loss in a landmark antitrust trial follows years of regulatory scrutiny of its dominance in the live events business and sets the stage for a possible breakup of the largest US concert promoter and ticket seller. After a six-week trial in Manhattan, which featured testimony from high-profile figures in the music industry and Live Nation Chief Executive Officer Michael Rapino, a federal jury on Wednesday ruled the company illegally monopolized the live events industry and overcharged fans for tickets to music performances. The verdict marked a major win for a coalition of 33 states and Washington DC that pursued the case despite the US Justice Department’s decision to pull out after the first week of the trial, with a surprise settlement allowing Live Nation to keep its Ticketmaster unit. But jurors concluded the company illegally monopolized ticketing and tied Live Nation venues to its promotion business, leading concert goers to overpay by $1.72 per ticket.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

When you come at the king, you best not miss. Over the past decade it seems the US Justice Department has generated as many headlines as the White House. To understand the political landscape in America, it is vital to understand the law, and how it works. Elie Honig, CNN's senior legal analyst, provides captivating insight to it all with a book that looks at each administration from Nixon to Trump, and everything in between. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This Day in Legal History: Jackie Robinson Signs with DodgersOn April 10, 1947, Jackie Robinson signed his contract with the Brooklyn Dodgers, marking a pivotal moment in both sports and legal history. At the time, racial segregation was deeply entrenched in American society, including in professional athletics, where informal but rigid “color lines” excluded Black players. Robinson's signing, orchestrated by Dodgers executive Branch Rickey, directly challenged this exclusionary system. Although no court decision mandated integration in baseball, the move carried significant legal implications by undermining accepted norms of segregation.Robinson's entry into Major League Baseball occurred just years before landmark civil rights rulings, including Brown v. Board of Education, which declared racial segregation in public schools unconstitutional. His success on the field helped shift public opinion, demonstrating that integration was both possible and beneficial. This cultural shift played an indirect but meaningful role in supporting broader legal challenges to segregation. At the same time, Robinson faced hostility, threats, and discriminatory treatment, highlighting the gap between evolving social practices and existing legal protections.The federal legal framework addressing discrimination was still underdeveloped in 1947, with major statutes like the Civil Rights Act of 1964 nearly two decades away. Robinson's breakthrough contributed to the growing momentum for such legislation by exposing the injustice and inefficiency of segregated systems. His experience also illustrated the limits of private action in achieving equality without formal legal enforcement mechanisms. Over time, his role became part of a larger narrative demonstrating how social change can precede and influence legal reform.Robinson's signing stands as an example of how non-judicial actions can shape the development of law by altering public attitudes and expectations. It underscores the interplay between private institutions and constitutional principles, particularly in the realm of equal protection. The event remains a key reference point in discussions about the relationship between cultural progress and legal change in the United States.A California federal judge has ordered another evidentiary hearing in the ongoing dispute between Epic Games and Google over proposed changes to an antitrust injunction governing Android app distribution. U.S. District Judge James Donato expressed frustration that each revised proposal introduces new elements, warning the parties that the court will not continue reviewing endless iterations. The latest proposal follows Epic's earlier trial victory, where a jury found Google had monopolized the Android app marketplace.Although the companies claim their revised plan better aligns with the original injunction, the judge raised concerns about potential anticompetitive effects. In particular, he questioned Google's idea of a “registered app store” program, suggesting it might create barriers for rival app stores. He also flagged possible issues with fees that could undermine competition. As a result, the court will require more detailed explanations before deciding whether to approve the changes.The dispute stems from litigation filed in 2020 challenging restrictions that limited alternative app stores and required developers to use Google's billing system. After Epic's win, the court imposed an injunction requiring Google to open its platform to competitors. While the revised proposal keeps some pro-competition measures—such as allowing alternative billing and preventing exclusionary deals—it has drawn mixed reactions.Supporters argue the new terms still promote competition, but critics, including Microsoft and advocacy groups, say the changes weaken the original order. They highlight concerns about new fees and provisions that could make it harder for competitors to enter the market. Some also argue that shifting key terms into private agreements reduces judicial oversight. Judge Donato indicated this upcoming hearing will likely be the final step before a decision, emphasizing the need to resolve the matter without further revisions.‘Not Going To Keep Doing This,' Judge Warns Epic, Google - Law360The U.S. Department of Justice has launched an investigation into whether the National Football League is engaging in anticompetitive practices that could harm consumers. While the exact scope of the probe is unclear, it appears to focus on how the league distributes broadcasting rights for its games. Concerns have grown among regulators, lawmakers, and broadcasters about the increasing shift of sports content from free television to paid streaming platforms.Critics argue that this trend makes it harder and more expensive for fans to watch games, with some estimates suggesting it could cost over $1,500 annually to access all NFL broadcasts across multiple services. The NFL has defended itself by noting that most of its games are still available on free broadcast television, particularly in local markets. Meanwhile, the Federal Communications Commission has also begun reviewing the broader migration of live sports to subscription-based platforms.The issue has drawn political attention, including a request from Senator Mike Lee for federal agencies to examine whether the NFL's longstanding antitrust exemption should still apply. That exemption, established by a 1961 law, allows leagues to bundle and sell broadcasting rights collectively.US Justice Department opens probe into NFL over anticompetitive practices, source says | ReutersA federal judge in Washington, D.C. ruled that the U.S. Department of Defense failed to comply with a prior court order protecting journalists' access and reporting rights at the Pentagon. U.S. District Judge Paul L. Friedman found that the department's revised media policy effectively recreated the same unconstitutional restrictions it had already been ordered to remove. The dispute arose after The New York Times and reporter Julian Barnes challenged rules limiting journalists' ability to seek information from government sources.Although the Pentagon changed the wording of its policy, the judge said the new language still prohibited routine journalistic practices, such as requesting non-public information. He rejected the government's argument that the revisions fixed the issue, calling them a clear attempt to sidestep the court's ruling. The opinion also criticized a provision that presumed journalists acted improperly if they offered anonymity to sources, noting that this is a standard practice in reporting.The judge further found that the Pentagon undermined the order by restricting reporters' physical access, including closing a designated workspace and requiring constant escorts inside the building. He dismissed the government's security justification, stating that existing screening procedures were never removed and that the new limitations appeared designed to weaken press access.Ultimately, the court ordered the government to restore prior conditions and comply fully with its ruling. Judge Friedman emphasized that the policy violated First Amendment protections by chilling press freedom and limiting the flow of information to the public. He warned that suppressing political speech and controlling media access are hallmarks of authoritarian systems, underscoring the constitutional importance of an independent press.‘Mark Of Autocracy': Court Says Pentagon Defied Press Order - Law360US judge says Pentagon violated court order to restore press access | ReutersA U.S. trade court is considering whether President Donald Trump's 10% global tariff on imports is lawful. The tariffs, introduced in February, are being challenged by a coalition of 24 states and small businesses, who argue that the policy exceeds presidential authority and improperly bypasses Congress. The case is being heard by a three-judge panel at the U.S. Court of International Trade.The Trump administration defends the tariffs as a valid response to ongoing trade deficits, relying on Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. This provision allows temporary tariffs during serious balance-of-payments issues. However, the challengers argue that the law was intended for short-term economic emergencies, not persistent trade imbalances, and that the administration is stretching its meaning.The dispute comes shortly after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down many of Trump's earlier tariffs imposed under a different statute, ruling he had overstepped his authority. Plaintiffs claim the new tariffs are an attempt to work around that decision using a different legal justification.US trade court weighs legality of Trump 10% global tariff | 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

The 2020 election is apparently still not over. President Donald Trump has two states that he hasn't gotten over losing, Arizona and Georgia, under his conspiratorial microscope again. Tusli Gabbard, the FBI and the US Justice Department are hunting for proof the 2020 election was stolen. And Arizona's Senate President, Warren Petersen, gave the FBI full access to voting records. This week on The Gaggle, we talk about the political fallout of the situation and why the Trump administration is dipping back into this well. Email us: thegaggle@arizonarepublic.com Leave us a voicemail: 602-444-0804 Subscribe to the Arizona Election's Memo, our Tuesday elections newsletter Follow us on ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠X,⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Tik Tok⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Guest: Stacey Barchenger Hosts: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Ron Hansen⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, Stephanie Murray Producer: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Amanda Luberto⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Sussan Ley has formally quit parliament, two weeks after being ousted from the Liberal Party’s top job; Human remains found in a remote wilderness area have been provisionally identified as those of a Belgian backpacker Celine Cremer, who disappeared without a trace more than two years ago; The US Justice Department says it's looking into whether it improperly withheld Jeffrey Epstein-related documents, after several news organisations reported some records of a woman's accusations against President Donald Trump weren’t released; Streaming service Netflix has declined to raise its offer to buy Warner Bros Discovery’s studio and streaming business; and Pink has hit at back at incorrect reports she split from her husband of 20 years, Carey Hart. THE END BITS Support independent women's media Check out The Quicky Instagram here GET IN TOUCHShare your story, feedback, or dilemma! Send us a voice note or email us at thequicky@mamamia.com.au CREDITS Host: Ailish Delaney Audio Producer: Lu Hill Become a Mamamia subscriber: https://www.mamamia.com.au/subscribeSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The New South Wales premier defends the state's protest laws; US Justice Department looking into allegations it withheld Epstein files; and in sport, the Matildas in training ahead of their first Asian Cup game on Sunday.

The US Justice Department buried some Epstein files which included allegations that President Donald Trump sexually abused a minor, according to an investigation by NPR.This comes despite Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche telling Congress that no Epstein records were withheld or redacted “on the basis of embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary.”Cal Thomas and Marion McKeone join The Last Word to discuss this and more of the latest news from the United States.Catch the full chat by pressing the 'Play' button on this page!

Ex-Prince Andrew was the tip of the iceberg. The latest trove of Epstein files reveals new details about former UK envoy Peter Mandelson's ‘best pal’ relationship with the convicted sex offender that have pushed Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s Labour into a new crisis. Is this the scandal that defines Labour? In this episode: Kieran Andrieu (@kieran_andrieu) Political Economist and Novara Media contributor Episode credits: This episode was produced by Melanie Marich, with Sarí el-Khalili, Chloe Li, Spencer Cline, Maya Hamadeh, Tuleen Barakat, Sonia Bhagat and our host, Malika Bilal. It was edited by Tamara Khandaker. Our sound designer is Alex Roldan. Our video editors are Hisham Abu Salah and Mohannad al-Melhemm. Alexandra Locke is The Take’s executive producer. Ney Alvarez is Al Jazeera’s head of audio. Connect with us: @AJEPodcasts on X, Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube

Today's top stories, with context, in just 15 minutes.On today's podcast:1) President Trump’s tariff policies suffered their strongest political blow yet with the Republican-led US House passing legislation aimed at ending the president’s levies on Canadian imports. Wednesday’s vote represents an increase in political pressure to change course on Trump’s signature economic policy just months before the midterm elections, including by forcing swing-district Republicans affected by the tariffs to weigh when or if to cross the president by voting against his agenda. The vote also signals a growing anxiety over the White House’s economic agenda before elections that are expected to focus heavily on affordability. Democrats were quick to attack the Republicans who voted to protect the tariffs, blaming them for shielding policies that increase the cost of living for their voters. While Trump is almost certain to veto any bill calling for a repeal of his tariff agenda, making it unlikely the measure will ever become law, defections from six Republicans alongside opposition from nearly all Democrats underscore his increasingly tenuous hold on the narrow House majority.2) Republicans advanced voter ID legislation over the opposition of most Democrats Wednesday as House GOP leaders seek to convince their Senate counterparts to muscle through the bill. Conservatives are touting the measure, which the House passed by 218-213, as necessary to beef up election security ahead of the November midterms and 2028 presidential race. Most Democrats oppose the legislation, dubbed the SAVE America Act, and argue it would amount to voter suppression, especially for marginalized groups. The bill faces steep obstacles in the Senate, where GOP leaders would need 60 votes to overcome the legislative filibuster. House Republicans are urging Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) to change Senate rules to advance the bill, but the measure’s House backers are also looking at opportunities to tack it onto must-pass bills.3) Democratic lawmakers accused Attorney General Pam Bondi of using the US Justice Department to target enemies of President Donald Trump and bungling the release of files on disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein during a fiery hearing Wednesday. “You’ve turned the people’s Department of Justice into Trump’s instrument of revenge,” said Jamie Raskin, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee in Washington. “Trump orders up prosecutions like pizza. And you deliver every time.” Raskin cited Justice Department probes of former FBI Director James Comey, New York Attorney General Letitia James and six members of Congress who recorded a video urging military service members to refuse unlawful orders. Prosecutors failed to get grand jury indictments of Comey and James, and the New York Times reported Tuesday that the department also failed to secure indictments of the lawmakers.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

① Hong Kong's high court has sentenced Jimmy Lai to 20 years in prison. Why does he deserve it? (00:56) ② The US Justice Department is under scrutiny for revealing information about many of Jeffrey Epstein's victims and concealing the details of individuals who may have aided the convicted sex offender. What systemic problem is it pointing to? (13:48) ③ Canada has announced a new EV strategy, stressing the importance of a strategic partnership with China. How big is the room for China-Canada EV cooperation? (24:54) ④ Israel's president is in Australia to mourn the deaths of last year's anti-Semitic attack at Bondi Beach. Many Australians have protested against his visit, condemning Israel's military actions in Gaza. How is fury over Gaza dividing Australians? (34:14) ⑤ Saudi Arabia has announced a major investment package in Syria spanning energy, aviation, real estate, and telecommunications. What are Riyadh's economic and strategic considerations? (44:22)

Are you enjoying this? Are you not? Tell us what to do more of, and what you'd like to hear less of. The Reykjavík Grapevine's Iceland Roundup brings you the top news with a healthy dash of local views. In this episode, Grapevine publisher Jón Trausti Sigurðarson is joined by guest host Ólafur Jóhann Sigurðsson, and Grapevine friend and contributor Sindri Eldon to roundup the stories making headlines in recent weeks. On the docket this week are: Handball, Handball, HandballThe European Men's Handball Championship took place during the last two weeks of January in Norway, Sweden and Denmark, with the final matches being played in Herning, Denmark. The whole of Iceland seems to have been watching, with local media publishing pictures of empty Reykjavík streets during televised broadcasts of the Icelandic team playing. Iceland came 4th overall, loosing to Croatia in a match for the third place. Icelanders In The Epstein FliesThe latest batch of Epstein files released by the US Justice Department, led to some newsprint being spent on the few Icelanders that appeared there, such as former First Lady Dorrit Moussaieff, her husband former president Ólafur Ragnar Grímsson, former CEO of DeCode Genetics, Kári Stefánsson, and cab driver Kristján Jón Karlsson. As far as we know, non of these Icelanders had any real ties with Epstein.Iceland's Laufey Wins A GrammyLaufey Lín Jónsdóttir, the Icelandic musician and singer, took home her second Grammy for her latest LP A Matter of Time. The also received an Emmy for her 2024 album Bewitched. Gas Prices & InflationInflation in Iceland is now at 5,2%, which is “too damn high”. This may have the result of nullifying recent collective bargaining agreements, which in turn might tip the generally fragile Icelandic economy into turmoil.Iceland's New Defense Policy.Icelands new defense policy was published last week, being immediately criticized for not taking into account the ongoing changes to the global world order. And what is the defense policy you may ask? It's the same as the old defense policy, basically non-existent.Tesla's Fail To Pass InspectionsThe 2021 model of Tesla's are now due for their first law stipulated inspections, which they've been failing, specifically the Y model, of which 30% didn't pass inspection in Iceland, whereas in Denmark 45% of that type of Teslas didn't pass.Support the show------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------SHOW SUPPORTSupport the Grapevine's reporting by becoming a member of our High Five Club: https://grapevine.is/high-five-club/Or donate to the Grapevine here:https://support.grapevine.isYou can also support the Grapevine by shopping in our online store:https://shop.grapevine.is------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This is a Reykjavík Grapevine podcast.The Reykjavík Grapevine is a free alternative magazine in English published 18 times per year, biweekly during the spring and summer, and monthly during the autumn and winter. The magazine covers everything Iceland-related, with a special focus culture, music, food and travel. The Reykjavík Grapevine's goal is to serve as a trustworthy and reliable source of information for those living in Iceland, visiting Iceland or interested in Iceland. Thanks to our dedicated readership and excellent distribution network, the Reykjavík Grapevine is Iceland's most read English-language publication. You may not agree with what we write or publish, but at least it's not sponsored content.www.grapevine.is

We're talking about the final release of the Epstein files today. Three million pages, 180,000 images and 2,000 videos were posted by the US Justice Department last week. Apparently, if you piled them on top of each other, it would be twice as high as the Eiffel Tower! It can all get a bit overwhelming about what and who exactly is in them. But that's what we're gonna explain in this episode.Some of the names include: Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, Donald Trump, Bill Gates and Bill Clinton. Being named in the documents does not mean you're guilty of any wrongdoing and those named have denied any knowledge of what Jeffrey Epstein was doing.To get more background, listen to our episode on Epstein from before the files were released: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/w3ct73xnInstagram: @bbcwhatintheworld Email: whatintheworld@bbc.co.uk WhatsApp: +44 330 12 33 22 6 Presenter: Iqra Farooq Producers: Emily Horler and Chelsea Coates Editor: Verity Wilde

On Friday, the US Justice Department released millions of pages of the Epstein files.Dan Neidle, journalist and tax lawyer, used his investigative skills to uncover some of the most controversial details. In particular, damning emails suggesting ex-Labour business secretary Peter Mandelson shared highly sensitive UK government tax plans with Jeffrey Epstein. Dan joins Oli Dugmore to discuss.SAVE £££ THIS CHRISTMAS:⭐️ Gift big ideas, bold politics, and proper journalism from just £2LISTEN AD-FREE:

On January 3rd, 2026 the United States of America military, under orders from Donald Trump, captured and kidnapped Venezuela's President Nicolas Maduro and his wife, Celia Flores. Despite Maduro's and Flores' indictments from the US Justice Department, accusing them of narco-terrorism conspiracy, this act was, according to many observers, a clear violation of international law. The Trump administration didn't seem to care too much about that. Despite some vague attempts to provide a legal justification for its actions, Stephen Miller, The White House deputy chief of staff for policy, said he had little regard for what he termed “international niceties”: “We live in a world, in the real world…that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power…These are the iron laws of the world since the beginning of time.”These words echo how a particular philosophy of international relations called “realism” has been understanding the world, long before Donald Trump came to office. For realists, what the US did in Venezuela is not too different to what the US has always done (not just in South America, but also in Iraq and Afghanistan), only this time any pretence of morality or legality has been, more or less, dropped, in favour of brandishing brute force and naked self-interest.  So, was international law always just a thin veil of justification for the exercise of brute force? Or are Trump's actions a departure from a more civilised world in which even the most powerful states were constrained by international legal norms. Linda Kinstler is a Junior Fellow at the Harvard Society of Fellows and a scholar of legal and intellectual history. Her first book, Come to This Court & Cry (Public Affairs, 2022) won a Whiting Award in Non-Fiction and was shortlisted for the Wingate Prize for Jewish Literature. She is also a contributing writer to the New York Times Magazine and frequently writes for the New York Review of Books, the London Review of Books, The Atlantic, and elsewhere. Her essay The Theory That Gives Trump a Blank Check for Aggression will form the basis of our conversation.If you enjoyed the episode, please leave us a rating and a review on Apple Podcasts.This podcast is created in partnership with The Philosopher, the UK's longest running public philosophy journalm founded in 1923. Check out the latest issue of The Philosopher and its online events series: https://www.thephilosopher1923.org Artwork by Nick HallidayMusic by Rowan Mcilvride

Topics: Condolence to Catherine O'Hara (7:26) Don Lemon gets arrested for being at a church-protest interruption (12:09) Minnesota could look into the death of Alex Pretti (20:45) US Justice Department releases more Epstein files (29:00) Trump sues IRS & Treasury Department for $10 Billion (33:57) Luigi Mangione update (43:03) Coco Gauff caught backstage breaking her racket (47:03)  Entertainment News (53:43)   Ending Music: Kanye West – Jesus Lord (Instrumental) National Suicide Prevention Lifeline: 1-800-273-8255 Twitter: @My2Podcast Instagram: my2centspodcastg2 YouTube: My2CentsPodcast Business email: my2centspod@yahoo.com

The US Justice Department releases millions more pages of files in its Epstein investigation. Victims of the late sex offender, Jeffrey Epstein, have promised to fight on, after they accused the US Department of Justice of protecting abusers. Also: Mexico's president warns that US tariffs on countries helping Cuba could trigger a humanitarian crisis. Claudia Sheinbaum's comments come after President Trump signed an executive order threatening additional tariffs on countries that sell oil to Cuba. Iran's foreign minister insists his country is ready to discuss its nuclear programme with the US. Anti-ICE protests take place across the US following fatal shootings in Minneapolis. We look back at the life of the Emmy-winning actress, comedian and screenwriter Catherine O'Hara who has died at the age of 71. And, Bridgerton season four is on our screens. The Regency era drama is number 1 on the streaming platform, Netflix.The Global News Podcast brings you the breaking news you need to hear, as it happens. Listen for the latest headlines and current affairs from around the world. Politics, economics, climate, business, technology, health – we cover it all with expert analysis and insight. Get the news that matters, delivered twice a day on weekdays and daily at weekends, plus special bonus episodes reacting to urgent breaking stories. Follow or subscribe now and never miss a moment. Get in touch: globalpodcast@bbc.co.uk

The United States Department of Justice has released 3 million pages of documents as part of its investigation into Jeffrey Epstein. The latest release is the largest to date and includes emails, 2,000 videos, and over 180,000 images. What do we know so far?Also in the programme: who is Kevin Warsh, the man appointed by Donald Trump as next chair of the Federal Reserve? And Nigerian musician Fela Kuti becomes the first African artist to receive a Lifetime Achievement Award at the Grammys.(Photo: Jeffrey Epstein in a photograph taken for the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services' sex offender registry in 2017, Credit: New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services sex offender registry)

The US Department of Justice has released more than three million new documents relating to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Also: President Trump has nominated a conservative Wall Street veteran to be the next chairman of the Federal Reserve. And in tennis, Novak Djokovic has become the oldest men's finalist at the Australian Open in the professional era.

29 Jan 2026. The US Federal Reserve has kept interest rates on hold, as expected and the UAE Central Bank has followed suit, despite renewed pressure from President Trump for lower borrowing costs. Economist Daniel Richards explains what it means for the region. Plus, with gold prices at record levels, we get a first look at the World Gold Council’s annual report and where the yellow metal could be headed. And Emirates is reviving a luxury icon, investing $50 million to transform Wolgan Valley into the world’s first Ritz-Carlton Lodge, Tom speaks to Emirates’ Barry Brown.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Quebec's premier resigned abruptly today; we'll find out what that means for the upcoming provincial election -- and the prospect of yet another Parti Quebecois-initiated referendum on independence. Several top prosecutors resign over the US Justice Department's refusal to investigate the ICE agent who killed Renee Good. We'll hear from a veteran of the department who quit last year to apply pressure from the outside. Months before Rosa Parks, and at just 15 years old, the late Claudette Colvin refused to give up her seat on a segregated bus; a close friend honours a quiet hero of the civil rights movement. Today's big White House meeting does not seem to have diminished Donald Trump's troubling yearning for Greenland -- but the government of Denmark is still very keen on dissuading the president. Health inspectors give a Michelin-starred restaurant in Wales a one-star rating for hygiene -- but the chef says the grossness is grossly exaggerated. A biologist introduces us to the sea lions in the Galapagos Islands known as "supersucklers" -- which, as you may have already figured out, are called that because they milk their mothers for all they're worth. As It Happens, the Wednesday edition. Radio that takes you on an uncomfortable stroll down mammary lane.

Criticism has been pouring in from Republican and Democratic lawmakers, former Fed chairs and top officials after the US Justice Department launched a criminal investigation into Federal Reserve chairman Jerome Powell. After Powell described the move as retaliation against the Fed for not lowering interest rates as quickly as US President Donald Trump wanted, concern over the central bank's independence pushed prices of safe-haven assets like gold and silver higher.  

Thousands of people gathered at Bondi Beach last night for a candlelight vigil, marking one week since a terror attack claimed fifteen lives; At least 16 files have disappeared from the US Justice Department’s public website less than a day after they were posted as part of a major document release related to Jeffrey Epstein; Academy Award winner Kate Winslet is once again speaking out, urging the film industry to embrace ageing rather than erase it. THE END BITS Support independent women's media Check out The Quicky Instagram here GET IN TOUCHShare your story, feedback, or dilemma! Send us a voice note or email us at thequicky@mamamia.com.au CREDITS Host & Producer: Tahli BlackmanBecome a Mamamia subscriber: https://www.mamamia.com.au/subscribeSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

After months of political wrangling, parts of the long-awaited Epstein files have been released by the US Justice Department. The trove consists of thousands of documents related to the late sex-offender. Pictures include the former US President Bill Clinton, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor - Britain's former prince, musicians Mick Jagger and Michael Jackson. Being named or pictured in the files is not an indication of wrongdoing. The justice department did not release all existing files, and the published ones were heavily redacted, prompting frustrated reactions from survivors of Epstein's abuse.Also: the US carries out dozens of strikes against the Islamic State group in Syria. Anti-government youth protesters in South Korea are taking cues from the American right's MAGA movement. Italy announces a fee for tourists to visit the Trevi Fountain in Rome. Putin vows revenge on Ukraine after an oil tanker was blown up in the Mediterranean Sea. Palestinians tell the BBC they were sexually abused in Israeli prisons. And how a lost radio play by Tennessee Williams was found more than four decades after his death, and has now been heard for the first time.The Global News Podcast brings you the breaking news you need to hear, as it happens. Listen for the latest headlines and current affairs from around the world. Politics, economics, climate, business, technology, health – we cover it all with expert analysis and insight. Get the news that matters, delivered twice a day on weekdays and daily at weekends, plus special bonus episodes reacting to urgent breaking stories. Follow or subscribe now and never miss a moment. Get in touch: globalpodcast@bbc.co.uk

AP correspondent Donna Warder reports, Friday's release by the Justice Department of files related to Jeffrey Epstein is a disappointment for many.

The US justice department has released hundreds of thousands of highly anticipated documents related to Jeffrey Epstein ahead of a Congressional deadline. The issue divided the Republican Party after the department initially refused to publish the files, despite President Trump's campaign promises.   Also in the programme: President Putin says Russia is ready to end the conflict in Ukraine, but only on his terms; and a comet, that's only the third known interstellar object to enter our solar system, is making its closest approach to Earth.Photo: One of the Epstein files released today in Washington, DC USA Credit: US Department of Justice

Comprehensive coverage of the day's news with a focus on war and peace; social, environmental and economic justice. Bill of Rights Plaque, photo Davy Jones Brady United advocate discusses gun violence in wake of deadly Brown University mass shooting; Governor Newsom unveils “Phoenix” health information service based on scientific evidence, as alternative to federal health advice; Refuse Fascism movement holds protest near White House to deliver People's Indictment charging undemocratic practices; US Justice Department and California in court over GOP challenge to new congressional redistricting map; UN chief Guterres urges harnessing 3 “powerful forces for positive change”: young people, women and girls, and people of faith; December 15 is anniversary of Bill of Rights, ratified in 1791 The post Governor Newsom unveils “Phoenix” health information service as alternative to federal health advice; Brady United advocate discusses gun violence after Brown University mass shooting – December 15, 2025 appeared first on KPFA.

President Trump has signed a bill that gives the US Justice Department thirty days to release its files on the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Some of the documents could be withheld or heavily redacted. Also: Silicon Valley's Nvidia sees record earnings amid AI boom; Israel conducts major airstrikes in Gaza despite ceasefire; FBI intensifies search for "modern day Pablo Escobar"; Colombia pushes ahead with controversial airstrikes on rebel groups; Ukrainian suspect faces extradition in Nord Stream investigation; the philanthropists filling the gap left by USAID withdrawal; and Gustav Klimt's Portrait of Elisabeth Lederer goes under the hammer. The Global News Podcast brings you the breaking news you need to hear, as it happens. Listen for the latest headlines and current affairs from around the world. Politics, economics, climate, business, technology, health – we cover it all with expert analysis and insight. Get the news that matters, delivered twice a day on weekdays and daily at weekends, plus special bonus episodes reacting to urgent breaking stories. Follow or subscribe now and never miss a moment. Get in touch: globalpodcast@bbc.co.uk

Last week, the US Justice Department published an indictment involving NBA stars and members of the mob for allegedly running a network of rigged gambling games. One of their rigging tactics was a manipulation of a Deckmate 2 automatic shuffling machine — almost identical to the one WIRED's Andy Greenberg and his hacking crew executed using the same machine. Mike and Lauren sit down with Andy Greenberg to break down how they hacked into the machine, and what the vulnerabilities behind it say about our tech devices at large.  Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

The president's case against James Comey doesn't look very strong to outside legal observers. But even the most spurious accusation against the former head of the FBI would matter when it comes from the sitting president. Guest: Ankush Khardori, senior writer for POLITICO Magazine and former federal prosecutor in the US Justice Department. Want more What Next? Subscribe to Slate Plus to access ad-free listening to the whole What Next family and across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to get access wherever you listen. Podcast production by Elena Schwartz, Paige Osburn, Anna Phillips, Madeline Ducharme, and Rob Gunther. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The president's case against James Comey doesn't look very strong to outside legal observers. But even the most spurious accusation against the former head of the FBI would matter when it comes from the sitting president. Guest: Ankush Khardori, senior writer for POLITICO Magazine and former federal prosecutor in the US Justice Department. Want more What Next? Subscribe to Slate Plus to access ad-free listening to the whole What Next family and across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to get access wherever you listen. Podcast production by Elena Schwartz, Paige Osburn, Anna Phillips, Madeline Ducharme, and Rob Gunther. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The president's case against James Comey doesn't look very strong to outside legal observers. But even the most spurious accusation against the former head of the FBI would matter when it comes from the sitting president. Guest: Ankush Khardori, senior writer for POLITICO Magazine and former federal prosecutor in the US Justice Department. Want more What Next? Subscribe to Slate Plus to access ad-free listening to the whole What Next family and across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to get access wherever you listen. Podcast production by Elena Schwartz, Paige Osburn, Anna Phillips, Madeline Ducharme, and Rob Gunther. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices