Podcasts about The Washington Post

Preet recently sat down with Washington Post columnist Jonathan Capehart at the Aspen Ideas Festival to discuss his new memoir, Yet Here I Am: Lessons from a Black Man's Search for Home. They also dissect the current state of our politics and how to remain hopeful amid the political chaos stemming from Trump's presidency. Join the CAFE Insider community to stay informed without hysteria, fear-mongering, or rage-baiting. Head to cafe.com/insider to sign up. Thank you for supporting our work. Show notes and a transcript of the episode are available on our website.  You can now watch this episode! Head to CAFE's Youtube channel and subscribe. Have a question for Preet? Ask @PreetBharara on BlueSky, or Twitter with the hashtag #AskPreet. Email us at staytuned@cafe.com, or call 833-997-7338 to leave a voicemail. Stay Tuned with Preet is brought to you by CAFE and the Vox Media Podcast Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

MAGA has been infighting over the Jeffrey Epstein files. And that's because the conspiracy theories around Epstein hit at the very core of MAGA's whole worldview.Today's episode looks closer at that worldview. Will Sommer has been tracking conspiracies for years now. He was a reporter at The Washington Post and is now at The Bulwark, and he's the author of “Trust the Plan: The Rise of QAnon and the Conspiracy That Unhinged America.”In this conversation, we discuss the rise of QAnon, Donald Trump's slippery relationship to the more conspiracy-minded factions of his base and how the intrigue around the Epstein files has challenged his credibility as an outsider taking on the “corrupt elites.”This episode contains strong language.Mentioned:“MAGA Is Tearing Itself Apart Over Jeffrey Epstein” by David FrenchP.R.R.I. SurveyNixonland by Rick PerlsteinBook Recommendations:Buckley by Sam TanenhausAmerican Tabloid by James EllroyLow Life by Lucy SanteThoughts? Guest suggestions? Email us at ezrakleinshow@nytimes.com.You can find the transcript and more episodes of “The Ezra Klein Show” at nytimes.com/ezra-klein-podcast. Book recommendations from all our guests are listed at https://www.nytimes.com/article/ezra-klein-show-book-recs.htmlThis episode of “The Ezra Klein Show” was produced by Annie Galvin and Jack McCordick. Fact-checking by Michelle Harris, Mary Marge Locker, Jack McCordick and Kristin Lin. Our senior engineer is Jeff Geld, with additional mixing by Aman Sahota and Isaac Jones. Our executive producer is Claire Gordon. The show's production team also includes Marie Cascione, Rollin Hu, Elias Isquith, Marina King and Jan Kobal. Original music by Pat McCusker. Audience strategy by Kristina Samulewski and Shannon Busta. The director of New York Times Opinion Audio is Annie-Rose Strasser. Special thanks to Mia Bloom and Sophia Moskalenko. Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

Trump has been going back and forth on his desire to fire Fed Chair Jerome Powell. Neil Irwin from Axios discusses whether the president has the power, and why a recent Fed building renovation matters. The Senate just passed a bill that would cut more than $1.1 billion in previously allocated federal funds for public media. The Wall Street Journal reports. The president of PBS tells the Washington Post the move would result in an existential crisis for member stations that depend on federal dollars. Umair Irfan with Vox describes why it has been so challenging for Los Angeles to rebuild after its devastating fires. Plus, Trump hit out at his own supporters over the Epstein files, why Israel just bombed Syria, and how a major breakthrough in IVF treatment that involves using the DNA of three people could prevent disease. Today’s episode was hosted by Shumita Basu.

Today I have your news and clips show plus 2 guests. My talk with David Litt is at 41 minutes and David Daley is at 1:14 Stand Up is a daily podcast that I book,host,edit, post and promote new episodes with brilliant guests every day. Please subscribe now for as little as 5$ and gain access to a community of over 750 awesome, curious, kind, funny, brilliant, generous souls Check out StandUpwithPete.com to learn more Buy David Litt's new book!  "It's Only Drowning A True Story of Learning to Surf and the Search for Common Ground" David Litt entered the White House as a speechwriter in 2011, and left in 2016 as a senior presidential speechwriter and special assistant to the president. In addition to writing remarks for President Barack Obama on a wide range of domestic policy issues, David served as the lead joke writer for several White House Correspondents' Dinner monologues. Since leaving government, David's work has appeared in the New York Times, The Atlantic, The Washington Post, The Guardian, and The Boston Globe, among others. From 2016-2018 he was the head writer and producer for Funny Or Die D.C., and he has developed TV pilots for Comedy Central and ABC.  David's New York Times bestselling memoir, Thanks, Obama: My Hopey Changey White House Years, was published in 2017. His second book, Democracy in One Book Or Less: How It Works, Why It Doesn't, and Why Fixing It Is Easier Than You Think, was published in June 2020. David Daley is a senior fellow at FairVote. He is the author of the national best-seller Ratf**ked: Why Your Vote Doesn't Count, which has been credited with sparking the modern drive to reform redistricting and end partisan gerrymandering, and the basis for the award-winning documentary Slay The Dragon. His second book, Unrigged: How Americans Are Battling Back to Save Democracy, chronicles the victories and defeats in state efforts to reform elections and uphold voting rights. A frequent lecturer and media source about gerrymandering, he is the former editor-in-chief of Salon.com, and the former CEO and publisher of the Connecticut News Project. David's journalism has appeared in the New Yorker, the New York Times. the Washington Post, the Atlantic, Slate and many other publications, and he has been a guest on CNN, MSNBC, NPR's Fresh Air and Comedy Central. He has taught political science and journalism as a visiting fellow at Wesleyan University, Boston College and the University of Georgia. Join us Monday's and Thursday's at 8EST for our Bi Weekly Happy Hour Hangout's !  Pete on Blue Sky Pete on Threads Pete on Tik Tok Pete on YouTube  Pete on Twitter Pete On Instagram Pete Personal FB page Stand Up with Pete FB page All things Jon Carroll  Follow and Support Pete Coe Buy Ava's Art  Hire DJ Monzyk to build your website or help you with Marketing Gift a Subscription https://www.patreon.com/PeteDominick/gift

In this live episode from the SIAL Canada show floor in Toronto, we welcome a very special guest: Laura Brehaut, Food Reporter at the National Post. With a thoughtful blend of experience in anthropology, media production, culinary training, and a deep journalistic instinct, Laura offers a compelling perspective on Canada's evolving food landscape and how stories around food intersect with culture, politics, health, and economics.Co-hosts Michael LeBlanc and Dr. Sylvain Charlebois flip the script by interviewing Laura, who is usually the one asking the questions. Laura shares how her journey began in anthropology and linguistics before transitioning into media, where her love for storytelling led her to online radio and digital journalism, long before podcasts were mainstream.As a seasoned journalist, Laura offers a behind-the-scenes look at the tradecraft of reporting in today's rapidly changing media landscape. Despite the pressures of multi-platform content, Laura remains grounded in the written word, driven by a sense of purpose and a commitment to serving her readers. Her curiosity and dedication to integrity shape her reporting, which spans a wide range of topics, from Canadian whiskey to protein trends and food sustainability.The conversation dives into key themes for 2025, including the continued momentum of the "Buy Canadian" movement, the impact of GLP-1 drugs like Ozempic on food choices, and a renewed focus on fibre and functional ingredients. Laura also weighs in on the rise of alternative proteins and blended meat products, highlighting recent research showing their increasing consumer acceptance, especially among omnivores.She speaks candidly about the role of AI in journalism, the importance of authentic storytelling, and why she would never buy an AI-generated cookbook. Her advice for aspiring reporters? Stay curious, stay humble, and never assume you know how an interview will go. The Food Professor #podcast is presented by Caddle. About UsDr. Sylvain Charlebois is a Professor in food distribution and policy in the Faculties of Management and Agriculture at Dalhousie University in Halifax. He is also the Senior Director of the Agri-food Analytics Lab, also located at Dalhousie University. Before joining Dalhousie, he was affiliated with the University of Guelph's Arrell Food Institute, which he co-founded. Known as “The Food Professor”, his current research interest lies in the broad area of food distribution, security and safety. Google Scholar ranks him as one of the world's most cited scholars in food supply chain management, food value chains and traceability.He has authored five books on global food systems, his most recent one published in 2017 by Wiley-Blackwell entitled “Food Safety, Risk Intelligence and Benchmarking”. He has also published over 500 peer-reviewed journal articles in several academic publications. Furthermore, his research has been featured in several newspapers and media groups, including The Lancet, The Economist, the New York Times, the Boston Globe, the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, BBC, NBC, ABC, Fox News, Foreign Affairs, the Globe & Mail, the National Post and the Toronto Star.Dr. Charlebois sits on a few company boards, and supports many organizations as a special advisor, including some publicly traded companies. Charlebois is also a member of the Scientific Council of the Business Scientific Institute, based in Luxemburg. Dr. Charlebois is a member of the Global Food Traceability Centre's Advisory Board based in Washington DC, and a member of the National Scientific Committee of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) in Ottawa. Michael LeBlanc is the president and founder of M.E. LeBlanc & Company Inc, a senior retail advisor, keynote speaker and now, media entrepreneur. He has been on the front lines of retail industry change for his entire career. Michael has delivered keynotes, hosted fire-side discussions and participated worldwide in thought leadership panels, most recently on the main stage in Toronto at Retail Council of Canada's Retail Marketing conference with leaders from Walmart & Google. He brings 25+ years of brand/retail/marketing & eCommerce leadership experience with Levi's, Black & Decker, Hudson's Bay, CanWest Media, Pandora Jewellery, The Shopping Channel and Retail Council of Canada to his advisory, speaking and media practice.Michael produces and hosts a network of leading retail trade podcasts, including the award-winning No.1 independent retail industry podcast in America, Remarkable Retail with his partner, Dallas-based best-selling author Steve Dennis; Canada's top retail industry podcast The Voice of Retail and Canada's top food industry and one of the top Canadian-produced management independent podcasts in the country, The Food Professor with Dr. Sylvain Charlebois from Dalhousie University in Halifax.Rethink Retail has recognized Michael as one of the top global retail experts for the fourth year in a row, Thinkers 360 has named him on of the Top 50 global thought leaders in retail, RTIH has named him a top 100 global though leader in retail technology and Coresight Research has named Michael a Retail AI Influencer. If you are a BBQ fan, you can tune into Michael's cooking show, Last Request BBQ, on YouTube, Instagram, X and yes, TikTok.Michael is available for keynote presentations helping retailers, brands and retail industry insiders explaining the current state and future of the retail industry in North America and around the world.

Six ans après sa mort, « Jeffrey Epstein est en train de semer la zizanie dans la coalition trumpiste, » écrit le Figaro. Le scandale couve depuis plusieurs jours, sans s'éteindre, au contraire : il semble s'étendre, et gagne la presse des deux côtés de l'Atlantique. Il faut dire, souligne le Guardian, que Donald Trump « peine à contenir la crise politique naissante au sein de sa base Make America Great Again, habituellement loyale ». En cause ? « Des soupçons, selon lesquels l'administration cache des détails des crimes d'Epstein », accusé de diriger un réseau de trafic sexuel pédocriminel avant de se suicider en prison. Et ce silence serait orchestré « pour protéger les riches élites avec lesquelles Epstein était associé, dont Donald Trump ».  Au premier abord, l'affaire a tout de la « théorie du complot, » reconnaît le New York Times. Pourtant, on le sait désormais, c'est bien vrai : « parmi les associés d'Epstein se trouvaient beaucoup des personnes les plus puissantes de la planète ». Bill Gates, le couple Clinton, ou encore le prince Andrew en font partie. Au point, retrace le Figaro, de devenir « une obsession chez nombre de membres de la faction d'extrême droite trumpiste (…). C'est un des éléments fondateurs de la philosophie de leur mouvement : les élites dirigeantes sont capables du pire, puisqu'elles ont pris la défense d'un ramassis de pédophiles ». Le camp MAGA a donc réclamé sans relâche la publication d'une supposée « liste de clients » qui permettrait d'y voir plus clair.  L'arroseur arrosé  Après avoir remué le sujet pendant sa campagne et « généré une profonde paranoïa » chez ses soutiens, écrit le Guardian, voilà que l'administration du magnat « affirme qu'il n'existe pas de liste de clients d'Epstein à publier ». Conclusion, constate le Figaro : « Donald Trump est coincé : s'il n'y a réellement pas de liste, cela signifie qu'il a menti, et exploité une affaire sordide à des fins politiques ; si elle existe, cela laisse entendre qu'il veut cacher son contenu, car elle comprend des noms qu'il veut protéger – dont peut être le sien ». Par ailleurs, renchérit le Washington Post, si les électeurs « ultra » de Trump « pensent que Trump peut trahir leur confiance pour protéger ce qu'il y a dans les supposés "dossiers Epstein", ils pourraient commencer à se demander si [le président] leur a menti à d'autres sujets », là aussi dans l'objectif de protéger ses amis « riches et puissants ».  Pendant un temps, Trump et son entourage ont espéré que « la controverse se calme avec le temps, » comme cela a toujours été le cas jusqu'à présent. Raison pour laquelle, rappelle le Guardian, le président a balayé les interrogations, déclarant par exemple qu' « il ne comprend pas pourquoi cette affaire plutôt ennuyante intéresserait qui que ce soit ». Sans succès.  Une nouvelle stratégie  Inspirée du célèbre dicton selon lequel la meilleure défense, c'est l'attaque, le président américain vise large : « il s'en est pris à ses propres supporters, raconte le Guardian, qu'il a qualifiés de "faiblards naïfs" ». Surtout, il fait ce qu'il sait faire de mieux : il s'en prend aux démocrates. « Dans son scénario, analyse ainsi le New York Times, les dossiers ne font plus partie d'un complot, mais sont en réalité un "canular" et une campagne de diffamation des démocrates à l'encontre de son administration ». La colère de ses soutiens ne serait plus liée à la gestion de l'affaire, mais, « un stratagème mijoté par la gauche ». Là encore, sans succès. Pour le Post, ce moment est crucial pour les démocrates qui ont l'occasion de « rappeler aux votants que le véritable populisme consiste à demander des comptes au pouvoir, même quand il réside au Bureau ovale » - et pour ce faire, les élus de gauche devraient, juge le titre, « traiter l'affaire Epstein comme un scandale de corruption orchestré par les élites » plutôt que « comme une théorie du complot ». La gauche pourra-t-elle, avec cette affaire, éloigner certains électeurs du camp MAGA ? Seul l'avenir le dira, mais, une chose est sûre, pour le Figaro : « des tensions sont apparues ces dernières semaines » et « pas seulement sur l'affaire Epstein ». Bref, « cette rébellion de la base ultra semble signer la fin de la lune de miel avec le président ». 

The executive director of Camp Mystic, the all-girls camp in Texas, received a severe flood warning on his phone in the early-morning hours of July 4. According to an investigation by Annie Gowen and her colleagues at the Washington Post, it took more than an hour after that for a frantic evacuation to begin. The Trump administration is leaving Congress in the dark about critical spending decisions. Reuters’s Bo Erickson joins to explain the dynamic and its consequences. For years, women told medical providers that IUD procedures were painful. Allie Volpe, a senior reporter with Vox, joins to discuss why their voices are finally being taken seriously. Plus, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is pulling some of the National Guard from LA, unreleased music was stolen from Beyoncé, and a chunk of Mars is going to auction. Today’s episode was hosted by Shumita Basu.

Dear Humans, Today Jesus and I are joined by Washington Post writer and author Faiz Siddiqui, who recently wrote the book Hubris Maximus: The Shattering of Elon Musk. (A title we can definitely get behind!) We had a fascinating discussion with Faiz about Elon's fall from grace, including recent headlines he's been making in MAGA world. We Discuss: How Musk sees himself as a gladiator or Alexander the Great. Musk's potential to form the “America Party” and whether it could split the GOP vote. If Americans can adopt Mandela-style radical forgiveness for political enemies. TV! Faiz and God bond over their mutual love for The Simpsons, Succession, and The Rehearsal. And lots more! Don't forget: God and Jesus stream daily. Catch God Pod LIVE every weekday at 2 PM ET / 11 AM PT. Tune in. Tell a friend! Remember to add the God Pod wherever you listen to podcasts, like Apple Podcasts or Spotify.              

Day 1,239.Today, as mass attacks struck Ukraine overnight, we continue analysing the latest developments from Washington as Trump, when probed by reporters, seemed to shy away from the promises he'd made to Zelensky on July 4th. Finally, we have a conversation with Ukrainian Cultural Forces on the role of music in cultural diplomacy and in rehabilitation for wounded soldiers. Contributors:Adélie Pojzman-Pontay (Reporter and Producer). @adeliepjz on X.Joe Barnes (Brussels Correspondent). @Barnes_Joe on X.Content Referenced:Cultural Forces of Ukraine:https://culturalforces.org/en/Donald Trump asked Volodymyr Zelenskyy if Ukraine could hit Moscow, say people briefed on call (Financial Times)"https://www.ft.com/content/b66f03b5-e295-4f8c-92ba-516a527d588cIn squeezing Putin, Trump 'escalates to de-escalate' (Washington Post):https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/07/14/trump-ukraine-war-missiles-russia-arms-package/SIGN UP TO THE NEW ‘UKRAINE: THE LATEST' WEEKLY NEWSLETTER:https://secure.telegraph.co.uk/customer/secure/newsletter/ukraine/ Each week, Dom Nicholls and Francis Dearnley answer your questions, provide recommended reading, and give exclusive analysis and behind-the-scenes insights – plus maps of the frontlines and diagrams of weapons to complement our daily reporting. It's free for everyone, including non-subscribers.Subscribe: telegraph.co.uk/ukrainethelatestEmail: ukrainepod@telegraph.co.uk Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

John discusses Trump telling Texas Republicans to redraw their state congressional districts and make it so 5 Democratic seats vanish into a gerrymandered abyss. He also talks about House Republicans continuing to block efforts by democrats to force the release of files related to Jeffrey Epstein. Then, he speaks with Professor Corey Brettschneider and they analyze the Trump administration's latest alarming moves, including mass firings at critical federal agencies like Education and State, and Trump's controversial threats to remove the Federal Reserve Chair. And finally, he interviews Cristina Jiménez. She's an award-winning community organizer and a leading voice in movements for social justice. She is Co-Founder and former Executive Director of United We Dream, the largest immigrant youth-led organization in the country. She came to the U.S from Ecuador in 1998 and grew up undocumented in Queens, N.Y. Cristina is a veteran organizer who helped lead the fight for DACA and resist family separation. Her new book, Dreaming of Home, was called “part memoir, part guide for community organizing” by The Washington Post.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In episode 426 of the "Smashing Security" podcast, Graham reveals how you can hijack a train's brakes from 150 miles away using kit cheaper than a second-hand PlayStation. Meanwhile, Carole investigates how Grok went berserk, which didn't stop the Department of Defense signing a contract with Elon's AI chatbot. So who is responsible when your chatbot becomes a bigot?Plus: Email headaches, SPF rage, and a glowing review for... Taskmaster SuperMax Plus?All this and more is discussed in the latest edition of the "Smashing Security" podcast by cybersecurity veterans Graham Cluley and Carole Theriault.Warning: This podcast may contain nuts, adult themes, and rude language.Episode links:Schoolboy hacks into city's tram system - The Telegraph.Caboose - Wikipedia.Neil Smith discusses his findings - Twitter thread.End-of-Train and Head-of-Train Remote Linking Protocol - CISA.The Cheap Radio Hack That Disrupted Poland's Railway System - Wired.Grok, Elon Musk's AI Chatbot, Shares Antisemitic Posts on X - The New York Times.X ordered its Grok chatbot to ‘tell like it is.' Then the Nazi tirade began - Washington Post. Hacker uses Elmo's X account to post antisemitic rant and demand release of Epstein files - ABC News.Elon Musk Announces Sensuous Grok AI Companion - Mashable.Grok Rolls Out Pornographic Anime Companion, Lands Department of Defense Contract - The Rolling Stone. Learn DMARC. TASKMASTER SUPERMAX+.Smashing Security merchandise (t-shirts, mugs, stickers and stuff)Sponsored by:Adaptive Security - request a custom demo featuring a real CEO deepfake simulation today from adaptivesecurity.com.Vanta– Expand the scope of your security program with market-leading compliance automation… while saving time and money. Smashing Security listeners get $1000 off!

This week, NerdWallet's Sara Rathner makes a second appearance on the show to talk about the changes to the Chase Sapphire Reserve card. As one of the most prominent travel cards and the market, and one that Ross happens to personally use... this was of particular interest. Sara Rathner is a NerdWallet travel and credit cards expert. She has appeared on the “Today” show and CNBC's “Nightly Business Report,” and has been quoted in The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, Yahoo Finance, Time, Reuters, NBC News, Business Insider and MarketWatch. Learn more about her work here: https://www.nerdwallet.com/author/sara-rathnerSend us a textSend your questions for upcoming show to checkyourbalances@outlook.com @checkyourbalances on Instagram

Jerry Brewer from The Washington Post joins Dick Fain and Gregg Bell to talk about Cal Raleigh winning the Home Run Derby yesterday, the All Star Game today, the Mariners sitting at the break, looking ahead to the deadline, plus possible NBA expansion news.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

What's your favorite snack in the workplace? It turns out a new tax law could push those snacks out of the office due to costs. According to the Washington Post, starting in 2026, businesses won’t be able to deduct the cost of company cafeterias and certain other food and beverage perks for workers. Greg and Holly discuss.

Well, I gather I'm not the only one who spends a lot of time thinking about AI these days. And by think I mean panic.嗯，我想，最近花大量时间思考人工智能的人不止我一个。我说的“思考”指的是恐慌。I'm not even worried about the doomsday scenarios because I have no way to assess those. I just think about what's going to happen to jobs, because even if we solve the AI safety problem, it's still going to displace a lot of workers, maybe including me.我甚至不担心末日景象，因为我无法评估。我只是在想工作岗位会发生什么变化，因为即使我们解决了人工智能的安全问题，它仍然会取代很多工人，也许包括我在内。Twenty years ago, I decided to take my very expensive MBA and use it to become a journalist. That decision did not have what we MBAs like to call a "positive expected cash flow."二十年前，我决定攻读昂贵的MBA学位，并利用它成为一名记者。这个决定并没有带来我们MBA们所说的“正预期现金流”。When I was interviewing for a job at "The Economist," one of the interviewers actually just asked me, "Why are you doing this?" I told him, "I only have so much time on this planet, and I want to spend it doing something that matters. And also, by the way, something I really, really, really love to do."我在《经济学人》面试的时候，一位面试官直接问我：“你为什么要做这份工作？” 我告诉他：“我的生命有限，我想用这段时间做一些有意义的事情。顺便说一句，也做一些我非常非常热爱的事情。”I got lucky and it worked out. Today I'm a columnist at the "Washington Post." But every day, AI seems to get better and better at writing competent prose. And I don't know what I'm supposed to do if typing words in a row stops being a semi profitable occupation.我很幸运，成功了。如今我是《华盛顿邮报》的专栏作家。但人工智能似乎每天都在写出越来越优秀的文章。如果打字不再是一项半盈利的职业，我真不知道该怎么办。Now I'm a libertarian columnist, which means I believe in progress and creative destruction. But here's something I also believe: The Luddites had a point.现在我是一位自由意志主义专栏作家，这意味着我相信进步和创造性破坏。但我也相信一点：卢德分子说得有道理。Look, you don't normally hear libertarians praising Luddites, so let me explain. Today, Luddite is a broad-spectrum term for technophobes. But the Luddites weren't your mom using a landline instead of a cell phone or sending you Hallmark cards with little words underlined. They were skilled artisans who made handcrafted textiles in an era when everyone wore lovingly handcrafted textiles.听着，你通常不会听到自由主义者赞扬卢德分子，所以让我解释一下。如今，“卢德分子”是一个泛指科技恐惧者的术语。但卢德分子可不是你妈妈用座机代替手机，也不是你妈妈给你寄带有下划线小字的贺卡。他们是技艺精湛的工匠，在那个人人都穿着精心制作的手工纺织品的时代，制作手工纺织品。Then mechanized mill owners started underpricing them using some of the most cutting-edge technology of their day, like, spinning jennies that could spin thread at record speeds. So they decided to destroy the machines.后来，机械化工厂的老板们开始压低价格，使用当时最先进的技术，比如能以创纪录的速度纺线的珍妮纺纱机。于是他们决定毁掉这些机器。Honestly, I have some sympathy. In fact, every time one of these companies issues a new model, I get more sympathetic.说实话，我有点同情他们。事实上，每当这些公司发布新车型，我的同情心就增加一分。We libertarians like to talk about the glories of freedom and progress, and they are glorious. But they are not free. Sometimes people get hurt. Often lots of people.我们自由意志主义者喜欢谈论自由和进步的荣耀，它们的确很荣耀。但它们并非自由。有时人们会受到伤害。通常情况下，很多人会受到伤害。The printing press democratized knowledge and also witch burnings and wars of religion. The Industrial Revolution raised living standards and offset them with grim factory jobs, squalid urban living conditions and choking pollution. Now modern governments can allay many of those costs, but they can't give people back the life they had. And we have an obligation to count those costs. I mean, if only because no one was ever persuaded by being told "Your fears are stupid."印刷机使知识民主化，也带来了焚烧女巫和宗教战争。工业革命提高了生活水平，但也带来了残酷的工厂工作、肮脏的城市生活条件和令人窒息的污染。如今，现代政府可以减轻许多此类成本，但却无法让人们重回他们曾经的生活。我们有义务计算这些成本。我的意思是，即使没有人会因为被告知“你的恐惧是愚蠢的”而被说服。So here's why, even after a full accounting, I think we should be willing to bear those costs and let the future unfold, because we're all the beneficiaries of previous decisions to prioritize future growth over protecting the present.因此，即使在全面核算之后，我认为我们仍然应该愿意承担这些成本，让未来自然发展，因为我们都是先前决定优先考虑未来增长而不是保护现在的受益者。

New reporting from the Miami Herald reveals that a significant portion of detainees held at an immigration detention facility in the Florida Everglades do not have criminal charges. Reporter Ana Ceballos joins to discuss that story and another highlighting conditions inside. Some Trump supporters inside and outside of the White House are disappointed with how the administration handled the Jeffrey Epstein case. The Washington Post’s Natalie Allison reports on how the broader MAGA movement is reacting. Anas Baba, NPR’s producer in Gaza, took the harrowing journey to get food through the new Israeli- and U.S.-backed aid distribution system. He shares what the experience was like. Plus, the Supreme Court ruled on Trump’s plans to dismantle the Department of Education, a new weapons deal for Ukraine, and the strange secret to picking the perfect watermelon. Today’s episode was hosted by Shumita Basu.

Jeffrey Epstein, a well-connected financier, was found dead in his jail cell in 2019 following his arrest on child sex-trafficking charges. The circumstances around his death, which was ruled a suicide by hanging, and crimes have spurred fringe conspiracy theories, mostly on the far right. Some believe Epstein was actually killed as part of a cover-up; they also believe the “deep state” is hiding information about Epstein's rich and powerful friends, who they say could also be implicated on sex trafficking chargesTrump did nothing to tamp down his base's Epstein fixation during his reelection campaign. He even hinted he might release secret government documents that his supporters hoped would validate their conspiracy theories. But the Department of Justice said recently that there's nothing more to reveal. Host Colby Itkowitz speaks with White House reporter Natalie Allison about how Trump's conflicting messages about Epstein are unsettling his base and causing strife within his administration.Today's show was produced by Laura Benshoff and Thomas Lu. It was edited by Ariel Plotnick with help from Reena Flores and mixed by Sam Bair. Subscribe to The Washington Post here.

Marc Thiessen, columnist at The Washington Post, Fox News contributor, a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute & co-host of the podcast ‘What the hell is going on: Making sense of the world”, joined Guy Benson to discuss President Trump's announcement yesterday alongside NATO Security General Mark Rutte. Thiessen credited the President on the deal he reached with NATO, while also crediting the First Lady on her perspective regarding Russia. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

On June 7th 1907, a ship packed with Russian Jews sets sail not to Jerusalem or New York, as many on board have dreamt, but to Texas. The man who persuades the passengers to go is David Jochelmann, Rachel Cockerell's great-grandfather. It marks the beginning of the Galveston Movement, a forgotten moment in history when 10,000 Jews fled to Texas in the lead-up to WWI. In today's episode historian and author Rachel Cockerell tells this fascinating story in conversation with James McAuley, journalist and Global Opinions contributing columnist at the Washington Post. If you'd like to become a Member and get access to all our full ad free conversations, plus all of our Members-only content, just visit intelligencesquared.com/membership to find out more. For £4.99 per month you'll also receive: - Full-length and ad-free Intelligence Squared episodes, wherever you get your podcasts - Bonus Intelligence Squared podcasts, curated feeds and members exclusive series - 15% discount on livestreams and in-person tickets for all Intelligence Squared events  ...  Or Subscribe on Apple for £4.99: - Full-length and ad-free Intelligence Squared podcasts - Bonus Intelligence Squared podcasts, curated feeds and members exclusive series … Already a subscriber? Thank you for supporting our mission to foster honest debate and compelling conversations! Visit intelligencesquared.com to explore all your benefits including ad-free podcasts, exclusive bonus content and early access. … Subscribe to our newsletter here to hear about our latest events, discounts and much more. https://www.intelligencesquared.com/newsletter-signup/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In the first six months of his second term, President Trump has done a lot of what he said he would do, from proposing sweeping tariffs to gutting federal agencies and their workers to deporting thousands of immigrants. And Americans now await the effects of Republicans' massive bill cutting taxes and expanding immigration enforcement while slashing popular programs. We check in on Trump's ambitions and the ways Congress and the courts are expanding, or checking, his presidential power. Guests: Philip Bump, national columnist, Washington Post; author of "The Aftermath: The Last Days of the Baby Boom and the Future of Power in America" Claudia Grisales, congressional correspondent, NPR David Graham, staff writer, The Atlantic Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What if your skincare routine started in your gut? Danielle Duboise and Whitney Tingle are joined by integrative gastroenterologist and microbiome expert Dr. Robynne Chutkan for a deep dive into the powerful connection between the gut and the skin. Dr. Chutkan unpacks how your gut health directly impacts the appearance, texture, and vitality of your skin—especially during hormonal shifts in your 40s and 50s. Plus, Dr. Chutkan shares her science-backed, food-first protocols for creating a glowing complexion from the inside out. Check out the video version on the Sakara Life YouTube channel here: https://youtu.be/HMGRo28Z6zs Dr. Chutkan shares:  The gut-skin axis explained: how it works and why it matters What skin symptoms can tell you about your internal health How hormone changes during perimenopause impact the microbiome and the skin Dr. Chutkan's approach to healing skin through gut-supportive foods The truth about stool tests, food sensitivity panels, and skincare fads About Dr. Chutkan:  Robynne Chutkan, MD, FASGE, is a gastroenterologist, the author of the digestive health books Gutbliss, The Microbiome Solution, The Bloat Cure and The Anti-Viral Gut, and the host of The Gutbliss podcast. Dr. Chutkan received her bachelor's from Yale University and her medical degree from Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, where she also did her internship and residency and served as chief resident. She completed her fellowship in gastroenterology at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York. Dr. Chutkan has been on the faculty at Georgetown University Hospital since 1997. In 2004 she founded the Digestive Center for Wellness, an integrative gastroenterology practice dedicated to uncovering the root cause of GI disorders. Dr. Chutkan incorporates microbial optimization, nutritional therapy, mind-body techniques, and lifestyle changes into her therapeutic approach to digestive disorders. A former Board member of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE), Dr. Chutkan also chaired the ASGE Training Committee and Public Relations Committee. She has authored dozens of academic journal articles and book chapters and lectures frequently on the microbiome and gut health throughout the United States and Europe. Dr. Chutkan has been the medical expert on The Today Show, CBS This Morning, The Doctors, The Dr Oz Show, The Megyn Kelly Show, and has her own PBS Special entitled “Gutbliss”. She's been interviewed by numerous publications, including the NYT, WSJ, The Atlantic, and the Washington Post, and served as on-air talent and a medical consultant for Discovery Health Channel. Resources & Links: Dr. Robynne Chutkan: gutbliss.com | @gutbliss Books by Dr. Chutkan: Gutbliss, The Microbiome Solution, The Bloat Cure, The Anti-Viral Gut The Gutbliss Podcast

Dr. Stacey Hettes joins Let's Talk Memoir for a conversation about therapeutic writing and how she crafted a memoir about childhood sexual abuse without revictimizing herself, metabolizing childhood trauma, inviting readers into our physiological response, the role of our limbic systems, deciding whether to share specifics about abuse in our manuscripts, italicizing difficult material for readers so they can decide, approaching a story of child sexual abuse in a protective way, putting therapy into our memoirs, demonstrating our character's progress in our narrative, remembering we can write beautifully about hard things, and her new memoir Dispatches from the Couch.   Also in this episode: -sharing a memoir with family -the amygdala and child trauma victims -deciding whether to share specifics about abuse   Books mentioned in this episode: -Bodywork by Melissa Febos -Wintering by Catherine May -Writing a Woman's Life by Caroline G. Heilbrun -Learning to Walk in the Dark by Barbara Brown Taylor   Professor Stacey Hettes teaches biology and neuroscience to undergraduates eager to enter the worlds of science and medicine at Wofford College in Spartanburg, SC. She holds a PhD from the University of California, Riverside, and is the youngest winner to date of the Milliken Award for Excellence in the Teaching of Science. Her classes are difficult because life is difficult. They are also full of wonder, joy, and triumph because, like her students, she is a hard-working seeker. She relishes in shared struggle and shared discovery, even when the topic is long-buried child sexual abuse. Reemerging from the shadows of her past was only possible once she resolved to carry the story found in her Debut memoir, Dispatches from the Couch, into the light. Connect with Stacey: Website: https://www.staceyhettes.com/ Facebook: Stacey Hettes, https://www.facebook.com/stacey.hettes Instagram: @staceyhetteswrites, https://www.instagram.com/staceyhetteswrites/ If you'd like to know more about Wofford College: https://www.wofford.edu/ Books may be purchased from all major outlets   – Ronit's writing has appeared in The Atlantic, The Rumpus, The New York Times, Poets & Writers, The Iowa Review, Hippocampus, The Washington Post, Writer's Digest, American Literary Review, and elsewhere. Her memoir WHEN SHE COMES BACK about the loss of her mother to the guru Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh and their eventual reconciliation was named Finalist in the 2021 Housatonic Awards Awards, the 2021 Indie Excellence Awards, and was a 2021 Book Riot Best True Crime Book. Her short story collection HOME IS A MADE-UP PLACE won Hidden River Arts' 2020 Eludia Award and the 2023 Page Turner Awards for Short Stories.  She earned an MFA in Nonfiction Writing at Pacific University, is Creative Nonfiction Editor at The Citron Review, and teaches memoir through the University of Washington's Online Continuum Program and also independently. She launched Let's Talk Memoir in 2022, lives in Seattle with her family of people and dogs, and is at work on her next book. More about Ronit: https://ronitplank.com Subscribe to Ronit's Substack: https://substack.com/@ronitplank Follow Ronit: https://www.instagram.com/ronitplank/ https://www.facebook.com/RonitPlank https://bsky.app/profile/ronitplank.bsky.social   Background photo credit: Photo by Patrick Tomasso on Unsplash Headshot photo credit: Sarah Anne Photography Theme music: Isaac Joel, Dead Moll's Fingers

In real estate, we're expected to connect with every personality type under the sun. That usually means working really hard to match how someone else communicates. Most of us are doing it on the fly. Winging it. Pivoting mid-conversation and crossing our fingers that our style clicks with theirs. That might have cut it back in the day, but now it's a liability. What if you could walk into every client meeting already knowing how to win them over? That's exactly what myYenta gives you: the blueprint to connect, build trust, and close the deal, by aligning with your client's psychology from the start. Jay Groah knows this world inside out. He's been a practitioner, flipper, and coach for nearly two decades.  But it was one mismatched homebuying experience that sparked the idea for a tool that's now boosting conversion rates for teams, brokerages, and even MLS boards. In this episode, Jay breaks down how top agents are using personality data to reduce friction, cut dead weight, and close more deals with less time wasted on people who were never a match to begin with.   In real estate, we literally deal with 100% of the world's population. People discount our intelligence, but we expertly communicate with absolutely every personality type out there. -Jay Groah   Things You'll Learn In This Episode  The referral-killing mistake agents don't see coming You matched your client with a top-producing agent, but the deal fizzled. How do personality mismatches kill great referrals? The conversion advantage you're probably ignoring Teams using myYenta's personality alignment tool are seeing 15%+ increases in conversion. What are they doing differently, and why does it work before you ever meet the client? The truth about being a real estate chameleon We've been taught to mold ourselves to every client. But what if some personalities just aren't a good fit? Could knowing that early make you more money, not less?   Guest Bio Dr. Jay Groah is the CEO of myYenta, award-winning Realtor, serial house-flipper, and the only tech founder you'll ever meet who moonlights as Eufegenia Housefire, a divine little old lady with a flair for matchmaking (and mischief). When he's not revolutionizing how professionals connect with clients—think more referrals, more loyalty, and a lot less boring using the brilliance of AI and Personality Analysis—he's probably building wild epoxy furniture, puffing on a good cigar, or nerding out over classic cars using his metric ton of academic degrees. Serious about results, never about himself, Dr Jay lives by one rule: if it's not fun, it's not worth doing. Whether he's teaching, speaking, or just living out loud, he brings joy, curiosity, and a dash of eccentricity to everything he touches. To learn more and get a 30-day free trial, visit https://myyenta.com/.    About Your Host Marki Lemons Ryhal is a ​​Licensed Managing Broker, REALTOR® and avid volunteer.  She is a dynamic keynote speaker and workshop facilitator, both on-site and virtual; she's the go-to expert for artificial Intelligence, entrepreneurship, and social media in real estate. Marki Lemons Ryhal is dedicated to all things real estate, and with 25+ years of marketing experience, Marki has taught over 250,000 REALTORS® how to earn up to a 2682% return on their marketing dollars. Marki's expertise has been featured in Forbes, Washington Post, http://Homes.com , and REALTOR® Magazine.   Check out this episode on our website, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify, and don't forget to leave a review if you like what you heard. Your review feeds the algorithm so our show reaches more people. Thank you! 

President Trump has ripped the heart out of Leftism, and he's showing it to them as their brains contemplate what just happened.In yet another sign that the world is realigning, we get this media update. The New York Post writes, that WaPo is tired of being considered “fake news”.Watching the mainstream media squirm in the post-Trump era is like binge watching The Walking Dead - Media Edition.And now, in a twist nobody saw coming (except everyone with a functioning brain), The Washington Post—yes, that bastion of democracy-defending journalism—is undergoing what can only be described as a corporate exorcism.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

On this episode, Amber and Erika are joined by Dr. Calvin Schermerhorn, author of “The Plunder of Black America: How the Racial Wealth Gap Was Made”, to discuss the economic status of Black Americans. Despite the propaganda that Black people have less wealth due to poor choices, laziness, and missed opportunities, Dr. Schermerhorn points us to the historical data that clearly demonstrating that Black Americans have been continuously and systematically exploited and de-capitalized through racist laws, racial violence, and outright theft. We also examine Malcolm X's vision for economically independent and vibrant Black communities and the extent to which integration distracted us from building and maintaining wealth within our own communities. Finally, Dr. Schermerhorn helps us identify reasons to be optimistic in the present fight for liberation and steps we can take to keep the past from repeating itself. Press play to hear what we have to say! Homework: Purchase and read Dr. Schermerhorn's book: The Plunder of Black America: How the Racial Wealth Gap Was Made Guest Name: Dr. Calvin Schermerhorn Guest Bio: Dr. Calvin Schermerhorn grew up in Southern Maryland. After graduate degrees at Harvard Divinity School and the University of Virginia, he became an historian of slavery, capitalism, and African American inequality. He teaches courses in nineteenth-century American history and advises Honors, Masters, and Ph.D. students. He was a Fulbright Scholar to the University of Nottingham in 2022. He has contributed to The Atlantic, The Daily Beast, Time and The Washington Post, among other popular venues, and his work has been featured in national discussions of racial inequality. He is author of four books on American slavery and inequality including The Plunder of Black America: How the Racial Wealth Gap Was Made, which was published by Yale University Press in early 2025.

The weapons deal President Trump announced this week marks a shift in his attitude toward Russian President Vladimir Putin and the full-scale invasion in Ukraine. But can it shift the trajectory of the war? If not, what will? Damir Marusic, Max Boot and Kori Schake discuss what the deal means for Ukraine and how Trump's growing hawkishness will play to his “America First” supporters. Read more from our columnists:Max Boot: Putin took Trump for granted. He's going to pay for his mistake.David Ignatius: In squeezing Putin, Trump ‘escalates to de-escalate'Subscribe to The Washington Post here.

The Best of the BBI with Chuck Culpepper of the Washington Post, Cats' Pause founder Oscar Combs and UK commit Matt Ponatoski...

According to the Washington Post, The average American vacation is looking smaller by taking shorter trips, driving instead of flying and staying closer to home.  Many of this stemming from families having financially uncertainty. Greg and Holly discuss how they have downsized their vacations without downsizing the fun.

Interview Summary So, you two, along with a number of other people in the field, wrote a chapter for a recently published book called The Handbook of Children and Screens. We discussed that book in an earlier podcast with its editors, Dmitri Christakis and Kris Perry, the executive director of the Children and Screens organization. And I'd like to emphasize to our listeners that the book can be downloaded at no cost. I'd like to read a quote if I may, from the chapter that the two of you wrote. 'Screen time continues to evolve with the advent of continuous and immersive video reels, voice activated assistance, social media influencers, augmented and virtual reality targeted advertising. Immersive worlds where children can virtually shop for food and beverages, cook or work in a fast-food outlet from a smartphone, a tablet, a computer, or an internet connected tv and more.' So as much as I follow the field, I still read that and I say, holy you know what. I mean that's just an absolutely alarming set of things that are coming at our children. And it really sounds like a tidal wave of digital sophistication that one could have never imagined even a short time ago. Amanda, let's start with you. Can you tell us a little bit more about these methods and how quickly they evolve and how much exposure children have? I think you're right, Kelly, that the world is changing fast. I've been looking at screen media for about 20 years now as a researcher. And in the earlier years, and Tom can attest to this as well, it was all about TV viewing. And you could ask parents how much time does your child spend watching TV? And they could say, well, they watch a couple shows every night and maybe a movie or two on the weekend, and they could come up with a pretty good estimate, 1, 2, 3 hours a day. Now, when we ask parents how much time their children spend with media, they have to stop and think, 'well, they're watching YouTube clips throughout the day. They're on their smartphone, their tablet, they're on social media, texting and playing all these different games.' It really becomes challenging to even get a grasp of the quantity of screen time let alone what kids are doing when they're using those screens. I will say for this book chapter, we found a really great review that summarized over 130 studies and found that kids are spending about three and a half or four hours a day using screens. Yet some of these studies are showing as high as seven or eight hours. I think it's probably under-reported because parents have a hard time really grasping how much time kids spend on screens. I've got a one-year-old and a five-year-old, and I've got some nieces and nephews and I'm constantly looking over their shoulder trying to figure out what games are they playing and where are they going online and what are they doing. Because this is changing really rapidly and we're trying to keep up with it and trying to make sure that screen time is a safe and perhaps healthy place to be. And that's really where a lot of our research is focused. I can only imagine how challenging it must be to work through that landscape. And because the technology advances way more quickly than the policies and legal landscape to control it, it really is pretty much whatever anybody wants to do, they do it and very little can be done about it. It's a really interesting picture, I know. We'll come back later and talk about what might be done about it. Tom, if you will help us understand the impact of all this. What are the effects on the diets of children and adolescents? I'm thinking particularly when Amanda was mentioning how many hours a day children are on it that three to four hours could be an underestimate of how much time they're spending. What did kids used to do with that time? I mean, if I think about when you and I were growing up, we did a lot of different things with that time. But what's it look like now? Well, that's one of the important questions that we don't really know a lot about because even experimental studies that I can talk about that look at reducing screen time have not been very good at being able to measure what else is going on or what substitutes for it. And so, a lot of the day we don't really know exactly what it's displacing and what happens when you reduce screen time. What replaces it? The assumption is that it's something that's more active than screen time. But, you know, it could be reading or homework or other sedentary behaviors that are more productive. But we really don't know. However, we do know that really the general consensus across all these studies that look at the relationship between screen time and nutrition is that the more time children spend using screens in general, the more calories they consume, the lower the nutritional quality of their diets and the greater their risk for obesity. A lot of these studies, as Amanda mentioned, were dominated by studies of television viewing, or looking at television viewing as a form of screen use. And there's much less and much more mixed results linking nutrition and obesity with other screens such as video games, computers, tablets, and smartphones. That doesn't mean those relationships don't exist. Only that the data are too limited at this point. And there's several reasons for that. One is that there just haven't been enough studies that single out one type of screen time versus another. Another is what Amanda brought up around the self-report issue, is that most of these studies depend on asking children or the parents how much time they spend using screens. And we know that children and adults have a very hard time accurately reporting how much time they're using screens. And, in fact when we measure this objectively, we find that they both underestimate and overestimate at times. It's not all in one direction, although our assumption is that they underestimate most of the time, we find it goes in both directions. That means that in addition to sort of not having that answer about exactly what the amount of screen time is, really makes it much tougher to be able to detect relationships because it adds a lot of error into our studies. Now there have been studies, as I mentioned, that have tried to avoid these limitations by doing randomized controlled trials. Including some that we conducted, in which we randomized children, families or schools in some cases to programs that help them reduce their screen time and then measure changes that occur in nutrition, physical activity, and measures of obesity compared to kids who are randomized to not receive those programs. And the randomized trials are really useful because they allow us to make a conclusion about cause-and-effect relationships. Some of these programs also targeted video games and computers as well as television. In fact, many of them do, although almost all of them were done before tablets and smartphones became very common in children. We still don't have a lot of information on those, although things are starting to come out. Most of these studies demonstrated that these interventions to reduce screen use can result in improved nutrition and less weight gain. And the differences seen between the treatment and control groups were sometimes even larger than those commonly observed from programs to improve nutrition and increased physical activity directly. Really, it's the strongest evidence we have of cause-and-effect relationships between screen use and poor nutrition and risk for obesity. Of course, we need a lot more of these studies, particularly more randomized controlled studies. And especially those including smartphones because that's where a lot of kids, especially starting in the preteen age and above, are starting to spend their time. But from what we know about the amount of apparent addictiveness that we see in the sophisticated marketing methods that are being used in today's media, I would predict that the relationships are even larger today than what we're seeing in all these other studies that we reviewed. It's really pretty stunning when one adds up all that science and it looks pretty conclusive that there's some bad things happening, and if you reduce screen time, some good things happen. So, Amanda, if you know the numbers off the top of your head, how many exposures are kids getting to advertisements for unhealthy foods? If I think about my own childhood, you know, we saw ads for sugar cereals during Saturday morning cartoon televisions. And there might have been a smattering if kids watch things that weren't necessarily just directed at kids like baseball games and stuff like that. But, and I'm just making this number up, my exposure to those ads for unhealthy foods might have been 20 a week, 30 a week, something like that. What does it look like now? That is a good question. Kelly. I'm not sure if anyone can give you a totally accurate answer, but I'll try. If you look at YouTube ads that are targeting children, a study found that over half of those ads were promoting foods and beverages, and the majority of those were considered unhealthy, low nutritional value, high calorie. It's hard to answer that question. What we used to do is we'd take, look at all the Saturday morning cartoons, and we'd actually record them and document them and count the number of food ads versus non-food ads. And it was just a much simpler time in a way, in terms of screen exposure. And we found in that case, throughout the '90s and early 2000s, a lot of food ads, a lot of instances of these food ads. And then you can look at food placement too, right? It's not an actual commercial, but these companies are paying to get their food products in the TV show or in the program. And it's just become much more complicated. I think it's hard to capture unless you have a study where you're putting a camera on a child, which some people are doing, to try to really capture everything they see throughout their day. It's really hard to answer, but I think it's very prolific and common and becoming more sophisticated. Okay, thanks. That is very helpful context. Whatever the number is, it's way more than it used to be. Definitely. And it also sounds as if and it's almost all for unhealthy foods, but it sounds like it's changed in other ways. I mean, at some point as I was growing up, I started to realize that these things are advertising and somebody's trying to sell me something. But that's a lot harder to discern now, isn't it with influencers and stuff built in the product placements and all that kind of stuff. So, to the extent we had any safeguards or guardrails in the beginning, it sounds like those are going to be much harder to have these days. That's right. It really takes until a child is 6, 7, 8 years old for them to even identify that this is a commercial. That this is a company that's trying to sell me something, trying to persuade. And then even older children are having to really understand those companies are trying to make money off the products that they sell, right? A lot of kids, they just look at things as face value. They don't discriminate against the commercial versus the non-commercial. And then like you're suggesting with social influencers, that they're getting paid to promote specific products. Or athletes. But to the child that is a character or a person that they've learned to love and trust and don't realize, and as adults, I think we forget sometimes too. That's very true. Amanda, let me ask about one thing that you and Tom had in your chapter. You had a diagram that I thought was very informative and it showed the mechanisms through which social media affects the diet and physical activity of children. Can you describe what you think some of the main pathways of influence might be? That figure was pretty fun to put together because we had a wonderful wealth of knowledge and expertise as authors on this chapter. And people provided different insight from the scientific evidence. I will say the main path we were trying to figure out how does this exposure to screen really explain changes in what children are eating, their risk for obesity, the inactivity and sedentary behavior they're engaging in? In terms of food, really what is I believe the strongest relationship is the exposure to food advertisement and the eating while engaging in screen time. You're getting direct consumption while you're watching screens, but also the taste preferences, the brand loyalty that's being built over time by constantly seeing these different food products consistently emerge as one of the strongest relationships. But we identified some other interesting potential mechanisms too. While kids are watching screens or engaging in screens, there's some evidence to indicate that they're not able to read their body as well. Their feelings of hunger, their feelings of satiety or fullness. That they're getting distracted for long periods of time. Also, this idea of instant gratification, just like the reward process of instant gratification with using the screen. They're so interactive. You can go online and get what you want and reach what you want. And the same thing is happening with food. It becomes habitual as well. Children get off of school and they go home, and they grab a snack, and they watch tv or they watch their YouTube clips or play their games. And it becomes an eating occasion that may not have otherwise existed. But they're just associating screen time with eating. There's some evidence even on screen time impacting inhibition and controlling impulse and memory. And that's more emerging, but it's interesting to just consider how this prolonged screen time where you're not interacting with someone in person, your eyes are focused on the screen, might actually be having other cognitive impacts that we may not even be aware of yet. If we ask the question why Is screen time having a bad impact on children and their diets? It's almost let us count the ways. There are a lot of possible things going on there. And speaking of that, there's one question in particular I'd like to ask you, Tom. Certainly marketing might affect what kids prefer. Like it might make them want to have a cereal or a beverage A or snack food B or whatever it happens to be. But could it also affect hunger? How much kids want to eat? I mean, you think, well, hunger is biological, and the body sends out signals that it's time to eat. How does that all figure in? The research suggests it can. Advertising in particular but even non-advertising references or images of food can trigger hunger and eating whether or not you felt hungry before you saw them. And I'm guessing almost everyone's experienced that themselves, where they see an image of food, and all of a sudden, they're craving it. It can be as simple as Pavlov's dogs, you know, salivating in response to cues about food. In addition, I think one of the mechanisms that Amanda brought up is this idea that when you're distracted with a screen, it actually overruns or overwhelms your normal feelings of fullness or satiety during eating. When distracted, people are less aware of how much they're eating. And when you're eating while using a screen, people tend to eat until they've finished the plate or the bag or the box, you know? And until that's empty, till they get to the bottom, instead of stopping when they start to get full. Well, there's sort of a double biological whammy going on there, isn't there? It is affecting your likelihood of eating in the first place, and how hungry you feel. But then it also is affecting when you stop and your satiety happening. And you put those two together there's a lot going on, isn't there? Exactly. And it's really one of the reasons why a lot of our programs to reduce weight gain and improve nutrition really put a lot of emphasis on not eating in front of screens. Because our studies have shown it accounts for a large proportion of the calories consumed during the day. Oh, that's so interesting. Amanda, you mentioned influencers. Tell us a little bit more about how this works in the food space. These social influencers are everywhere, particularly Instagram, TikTok, et cetera. Kids are seeing these all the time and as I mentioned earlier, you often build this trusting relationship with the influencer. And that becomes who you look to for fads and trends and what you should and shouldn't do. A lot of times these influencers are eating food or cooking or at restaurants, even the ones that are reaching kids. As you analyze that, oftentimes it's the poor nutrition, high calorie foods. And they're often being paid for the ads too, which as we discussed earlier, kids don't always realize. There's also a lot of misinformation about diet and dieting, which is of concern. Misinformation that could be harmful for kids as they're growing and trying to grow in a healthy way and eat healthy foods. But kids who may look to overly restrict their foods, for example, rather than eating in a healthier manner. So that's definitely a problem. And then also, oftentimes these social influencers really have these unattainable beauty standards. Maybe they're using a filter or maybe they are models or whatnot. They're projecting these ideal body images that are very difficult and sometimes inappropriate for children to try to attain. Now, we've seen this in other forms, right? We've seen this in magazines going back. We've seen this on websites. But now as soon as a kid turns on their smartphone or their tablet and they're online, it's in front of them all the time. And, and they're interacting, they're liking it, they're commenting and posting. I think the social influencers have just really become quite pervasive in children's lives. Somebody who's an influencer might be recording something that then goes out to lots and lots of people. They're eating some food or there's some food sitting in the background or something like that. And they're getting paid for it, but not saying they're getting paid for it. Probably very few people realize that money is changing hands in all of that, I'm suspecting, is that right? Yes, I do believe they're supposed to do hashtag ad and there are different indicators, but I'm not sure the accountability behind that. And I'm also not sure that kids are looking for that and really understand what that means or really care what that means. Okay. Because they're looking to sense what's popular. But there's an opportunity to perhaps further regulate, or at least to educate parents and kids in that regard that I think would be helpful. Tom, while we're on this issue of conflicts of interest, there was recent press coverage, and then there were reports by reporters at the Washington Post and The Examination showing that the food industry was paying dieticians to be influencers who then posted things favorable to industry without disclosing their funding. How big of a problem do you think this is sort of overall with professionals being paid and not disclosing the payments or being paid even if they disclose things. What kind of a negative impact that's having? Yes, I find it very concerning as you would guess, knowing me. And I believe one of the investigations found that about half of influencers who were being paid to promote foods, drinks, or supplements, didn't disclose that they were paid. It was quite a large magnitude. It goes throughout all types of health professionals who are supposed to be sources of quality information and professional organizations themselves which take advertising or take sponsorships and then don't necessarily disclose it. And you know in this day when we're already seeing drops in the public's trust in science and in research, I think this type of information, or this type of deception just makes it a lot worse. As you know, Kelly, there's quite a bit of research that suggests that being paid by a company actually changes the way you talk about their products and even conduct research in a way that's more favorable to those products. Whether you think it does or not, whether you're trying to be biased or not. Tom, just to insert one thing in my experience. If you ask people in the field, does taking money from industry affect the way scientists do their work and they'll almost always say yes. But if you say, does it influence your work, they'll almost always say no. There's this unbelievable blind spot. And one might conclude from what you were telling us is that disclosure is going to be the remedy to this. Like for the half of people who didn't disclose it, it would be okay if they took the money as long as they disclosed it. But you're saying that's obviously not the case. That there's still all kinds of bias going on and people who are hearing some disclosure don't necessarily discount what they're hearing because of it. And it's still a pretty bad kettle of fish, even if disclosure occurs. It's especially pernicious when it doesn't, but it seems even when disclosure happens, it's not much of a remedy to anything. But you may not agree. No, I definitely agree with that. And that's only, you know, part of it too because there's the other side of the audience that Amanda brought up as well. And in particular what kids, but also adults, how they react to disclosures. And, while it's been possible to teach people to recognize potential bias, you know, when there's a disclosure. And to make people aware, which is a good thing, we want disclosure, I guess, so people are aware to be more vigilant in terms of thinking about what biases may be in the messages. There's not much evidence that teaching people that or making them aware of that changes their behavior. They still believe the advertising. Right. They still act in the same way. It's still just as persuasive to them. One more little editorial insertion. The thing that has always puzzled me about disclosure is that it implies that there's something bad going on or else, why would you have to disclose it? And the solution seems not to disclose it, but not to do the bad thing. And it's like, I could come up and kick you in the leg, but it's okay if I disclose that I kick you in the leg. I mean, it just makes no sense to me. But let me move on to something different. Amanda, I'd like to ask you this. I assume the food industry gets a lot more impact and reach per dollar they spend from when the only option was to run ads on national television and now, they're doing things at much less expense, I think, that can have, you know, orders of magnitude more impact and things. But is my perception correct? And how do you think through that? I think of it like the Tupperware model, right? You're building these trusted local or national celebrities, spokespeople for kids. Oftentimes these young adults or teenagers who are doing funny things and they're engaging, and so you're building this trust like you did with the Tupperware. Where you go and train people to go out to people's homes and their neighbors and their friends and their church and sell the product. It's really similar just in an online space. I think you're right; the cost is likely much less. And yet the reach and even the way these influencers are paid is all about the interaction, the likes, the comments, that sort of thing. The reposts. It's become quite sophisticated, and clearly, it's effective because companies are doing this. And one other thing to mention we haven't talked about yet is the food companies themselves have hired young people who use humor as a way to create a following for the different brands or products. It's not a person now, it's either the branded character or the actual company itself. And I think that has great influence of building some loyalty to the brand early in life. So that child is growing up and not only persuading their parents to purchase these products, but as they have more disposable income, they're going to continue purchasing the product. I wonder if Edward Tupper or I don't know if I remember his first name right, but I wonder if you could have ever imagined the how his plastic invention would permeate more of society than he ever thought? Tom, what about the argument that it's up to parents to decide and to monitor what their children are exposed to and the government needs to back off. Oh, it would be so nice if they were that easy, wouldn't it? If we could depend on parents. And I think every parent would love to be able to do that. But we're talking about individual parents and their kids who are being asked to stand up against billions, literally billions and billions of dollars spent every year to get them to stay on their screens as long as possible. To pay attention to their marketing, as Amanda was talking about the techniques they use. And to really want their products even more. If you could think of a parent with endless knowledge and time and resources, even they are really unable to stand up to such powerful forces working against them. Unfortunately, and this is not unique to the issues of screens in children's health, but really many of the issues around health, that in the absence of government regulation and really lack of any oversight, this really difficult job is dumped on parents. You know, not their choice, but it's sort of in their lap. We still try and help them to be better at this. While we're waiting for our elected representatives to stand up to lobbyists and do their jobs, we still in a lot of our interventions we develop, we still try and help parents as well as schools, afterschool programs, teachers, health professionals, develop the skills to really help families resist this pool of media and marketing. But that shouldn't be the way it is. You know, most parents are really already doing the best they can. But it's drastically unfair. It's really an unfair playing field. That all makes good sense. We've been talking thus far about the negative impacts of media, but Amanda, you've done some work on putting this technology to good use. Tell us about that if you will. I do enjoy trying to flip the script because technology is meant to help us, not harm us. It's meant to make our lives more efficient, to provide entertainment. Now with video chatting, to provide some social connection. A lot of my work over the past 20 years has been looking at what's commercially available, what kids are using, and then seeing let's test these products or these programs and can we flip them around to promote healthier eating? To promote physical activity? Can we integrate them for kids who are in a weight management program? Can we integrate the technology to really help them be successful? It doesn't always work, and we certainly aren't looking to increase screen time, but we also need to recognize that achieving zero hours of screen time is really unattainable pretty much universally. Let's try to evaluate the screen time that is being used and see if we can make it healthier. A few examples of that include when the Nintendo Wii came out about 18 years ago now. I was part of a group that was one of the first to test that video game console system because up until that point, most of the games you sat down to play, you held a remote in your hand. There were Dance Dance Revolution games and arcade halls so you could do a little bit of movement with games. But pretty much they were sedentary. Nintendo Wii came out and really changed a lot because now you had to get up off the couch, move your body, move your arms and legs to control the game. And we found it cut across all demographics. Men, women, boys, girls, different age groups. There was content available for a lot of different groups. These types of games became really popular. And I did some of the earlier studies to show that at least in a structured program that kids can engage in what we call moderate levels of physical activity. They're actually moving their bodies when they play these games. And over time, I and others have integrated these games into programs as a way to be an in with kids who may not be involved in sports, may not go outside to play, but they're willing to put on a video game and move in their living room at home. Building from that, we've developed and tested various apps. Some of these apps directly reach the parents, for example, teaching the parents. These are strategies to get your child to eat healthier. Prepare healthier meals, grocery shop, be more physically active as a family. We've looked at different wearables, wristwatches that can help kids and parents. Maybe they'll compete against each other to try to get the most steps of a day and that sort of thing. And then some of my recent work is now integrating chatbots and artificial intelligence as ways to provide some tailored feedback and support to kids and families who are looking to be more physically active, eat healthier. And then one study I'm really excited about uses mixed reality. This is virtual reality where you're putting on a headset. And for that study we are integrating children's homework that they would otherwise do on their Chromebook. And we're removing the keyboard and computer mouse so that they now have to use their body to click and point and drag and move the screen. And these are just a few examples. I do not think this is the magical solution. I think as Tom alluded to, there are different levels of government regulation, educating parents, working with schools. There's working with the food industry. There's a lot that we need to do to make this a healthier media space for kids. But I think this is something we should be open to, is figuring out if people are going to spend a lot of time using screens, what can we do to try to make those screens healthier? You make me smile when I'm hearing that because all these things sound really exciting and like there's plenty of potential. And you're right, I mean, if they're going to be on there anyway, maybe there can be some positive way to harness that time. And those all sound really important and really good. And let's hope that they spread enough to really touch lots and lots of children and their families. Tom, you and I keep caught up. We see each other at professional meetings or we just have periodic phone calls where we tell each other what we're up to. And you've been telling me over the past couple years about this really amazing project you're heading up tracking screen usage. Could you tell us a little bit about that? I'd love to. Really it addresses the problem that came up before, which is really how we measure what people are doing and seeing on their screens. Basically all the studies of media effects for the past a hundred plus years that the field has been studying media, has been dependent on people telling us what they do and what they saw. When in fact, we know that's not particularly accurate. So now we have technology that allows us to track exactly what people are doing and seeing on their screens. We call this screenomics, like genomics, except instead of studying how genes affect us, it's studying how screens affect us and how the screens we experience in our lives really are a reflection of our lives. The way we are doing this is we put software on your phone or your laptop, and it can be on other screens as well, and it runs in the background and takes a screenshot every five seconds. And it covers everything on the screen because it's just taking a picture of the screen. All the words, all the images. Then we use AI to help us decipher [00:34:00] what was on those screens. And so far, we've collected over 350 million screenshots from several hundred adults and teenagers who've participated in our studies for periods of six months to a year. Some of our most interesting findings, I think, is how much idiosyncrasy there is in people's screen use. And this has a huge impact on how we do research on the effects of screens, I believe. Because no two people really have the same screenomes, which is what we call the sequence of screenshots that people experience. And even for the same person, no two hours or days or weeks are the same. We're looking at both how different people differ in their screen use, and how that's related to their mental health, for example. But also how changes over time in a single person's screenome is related to their mental health, for example. Comparing your screen use this afternoon to your screen use this morning or yesterday, or last week or last month. And how that changes your health or is at least associated with changes in your health at this point. Eventually, we hope to move this into very precise interventions that would be able to monitor what your screen experience is and give you an appropriate either change in your screen or help you change your behavior appropriate to what you're feeling. One of our current studies is to learn really the details of what, when, how, why, and where foods and beverages appear in adolescent screenomes. And how these factors relate to foods and beverages they consume and their health. In fact, we're currently recruiting 13- to 17-year-olds all over the US who can participate in this study for six months of screenome collection and weekly surveys we do with them. Including detailed surveys of what they're eating. But this sort of goes back to an issue that came up before that you had asked us about how much is advertising? I can tell you that at least some of our preliminary data, looking at a small number of kids, suggests that food, it varies greatly across kids and what they're experiencing, especially on their phones. And, we found, for example, one young girl who 37% of all her screens had food on them. About a third, or more than a third of her entire screenome, had food in it. And it wasn't just through advertising and it wasn't just through social media or influencers. It was everywhere. It was pictures she was taking of food. It was influencers she was following who had food. It was games she was playing that were around food. There are games, they're all about running a restaurant or making food and serving and kitchen work. And then there were also videos that people watched that are actually fairly popular among where you watch other people eat. Apparently it's a phenomenon that came out of Korea first. And it's grown to be quite popular here over the last several years in which people just put on their camera and show themselves eating. I mean, nothing special, nothing staged, just people eating. There's all kinds of food exists everywhere throughout the screenome, not just in one place or another, and not just in advertising. Tom, a study with a hundred data points can be a lot. You've got 350 million, so I wish you the best of luck in sorting all that out. And boy, whatever you find is going to be really informative and important. Thanks for telling us about this. I'd like to end with kind of a basic question to each of you, and that is, is there any reason for hope. Amanda, let's, let's start with you. Do you see any reason to be optimistic about all this? We must be optimistic. No matter how we're facing. We have no choice. I think there's greater awareness. I think parents, policy makers, civic leaders are really recognizing this pervasive effective screen use on mental health, eating, obesity risk, even just the ability to have social interactions and talk to people face to face. And I think that's a good sign. I've seen even in my own state legislature in Louisiana, bills going through about appropriately restricting screens from schools and offering guidance to pediatricians on counseling related to screen use. The American Academy of Pediatrics changed their guidelines a number of years ago. Instead of just saying, no screens for the really little ones, and then limit to fewer than two hours a day for the older ones. They recognized and tried to be more practical and pragmatic with family. Sit down as a family, create some rules, create some boundaries. Make sure you're being healthy with your screen use. Put the screens away during mealtime. Get the screens out of the bedroom. And I think going towards those more practical strategies that families can actually do and sustain is really positive. I'd like to remain optimistic and let's just keep our eyes wide open and talk to the kids too. And ask the kids what they're doing and get them part of this because it's so hard to stay up to date on the technology. Thanks. I appreciate that positive note. Tom, what do you think? Yeah, I agree with Amanda. I can be positive about several things. First of all, I think last year, there were two bills, one to protect child privacy and the other to regulate technology aimed at children. COPPA 2.0 (Children's Online Private Protection Act) and KOSA (Kid's Online Safety Act). And they passed the Senate overwhelmingly. I mean, almost unanimously, or as close as you can get in our current senate. Unfortunately, they were never acted upon by the house, but in the absence of federal legislature regulation, we've had, as Amanda mentioned, a lot of states and also communities where they have actually started to pass bills or regulate social media. Things like prohibiting use under a certain age. For example, social media warning labels is another one. Limiting smartphone use in schools has become popular. However, a lot of these are being challenged in the courts by tech and media industries. And sadly, you know, that's a strategy they've borrowed, as you know well, Kelly, from tobacco and food industry. There also have been attempts that I think we need to fight against. For the federal legislature or the federal government, congress, to pass legislation to preempt state and local efforts, that would not allow states and local communities to make their own laws in this area. I think that's an important thing. But it's positive in that we're hearing advocacy against that, and people are getting involved. I'm also glad to hear people talking about efforts to promote alternative business models for media. I believe that technology itself is not inherently good or bad, as Amanda mentioned, but the advertising business models that are linked to this powerful technology has inevitably led to a lot of these problems we're seeing. Not just in nutrition and health, but many problems. Finally, I see a lot more parent advocacy to protect children and teens, especially around tech in schools and around the potential harms of social media. And more recently around AI even. As more people start to understand what the implications of AI are. I get the feeling these efforts are really starting to make a difference. Organizations, like Fair Play, for example, are doing a lot of organizing and advocacy with parents. And, we're starting to see advocacy in organizing among teens themselves. I think that's all really super positive that the public awareness is there, and people are starting to act. And hopefully, we'll start to see some more action to help children and families. Bios Developmental psychologist Dr. Amanda Staiano is an associate professor and Director of the Pediatric Obesity & Health Behavior Laboratory at Pennington Biomedical Research Center at Louisiana State University. She also holds an adjunct appointment in LSU's Department of Psychology. Dr. Staiano earned her PhD in developmental psychology and Master of Public Policy at Georgetown University, followed by a Master of Science in clinical research at Tulane University. Her primary interest is developing and testing family-based healthy lifestyle interventions that utilize innovative technology to decrease pediatric obesity and its comorbidities. Her research has involved over 2500 children and adolescents, including randomized controlled trials and prospective cohorts, to examine the influence of physical activity and sedentary behavior on body composition and cardiometabolic risk factors. Thomas N. Robinson, MD, MPH is the Irving Schulman, MD Endowed Professor in Child Health, Professor of Pediatrics and of Medicine, in the Division of General Pediatrics and the Stanford Prevention Research Center at Stanford University School of Medicine, and Director of the Center for Healthy Weight at Stanford University and Lucile Packard Children's Hospital at Stanford. Dr. Robinson focuses on "solution-oriented" research, developing and evaluating health promotion and disease prevention interventions for children, adolescents and their families to directly inform medical and public health practice and policy. His research is largely experimental in design, conducting school-, family- and community-based randomized controlled trials to test the efficacy and/or effectiveness of theory-driven behavioral, social and environmental interventions to prevent and reduce obesity, improve nutrition, increase physical activity and decrease inactivity, reduce smoking, reduce children's television and media use, and demonstrate causal relationships between hypothesized risk factors and health outcomes. Robinson's research is grounded in social cognitive models of human behavior, uses rigorous methods, and is performed in generalizable settings with diverse populations, making the results of his research more relevant for clinical and public health practice and policy.

Gail A. Eisnitz, winner of the Albert Schweitzer Medal for outstanding achievement in animal welfare, is the chief investigator for the Humane Farming Association. Her work has resulted in exposés by ABC's Good Morning America, PrimeTime Live, and Dateline NBC, and her interviews have been heard on more than 1,600 radio stations. Her work has been featured in such newspapers as the New York Times, Washington Post, San Francisco Chronicle​, Miami Herald, Detroit Free Press, Texas Monthly, Denver Business Journal, Los Angeles Times, and US News & World Report. Gail's first book, Slaughterhouse, The Shocking Story of Greed, Neglect, and Inhumane Treatment Inside the U.S. Meat Industry was published in 1997. More at https://www.gaileisnitz.com/.     Things you can do! Oppose the so-called Fair Access to Agriculture Disaster Programs Act HR 2156/S 984 Oppose the “Food Security and Farm Protection Act,” S. 1326 The Save America's Forgotten Equines (SAFE) Act – H.R. 1661 and S. 775 Prevent All Soring Tactics (PAST) Act – H.R. 1684 Soring—intentionally injuring the feet of Tennessee Walking horses to produce an exaggerated gait—has been outlawed since passage of the Horse Protection Act of 1970. Yet some abusive trainers still subject horses to this inhumane practice through the use of blistering agents—mustard oil, diesel fuel, and kerosene—as well as through mechanical means—the use of foreign objects inside shoes, and the use of heavy chains that irritate chemically treated tissue. Soring causes excruciating pain to horses when their feet touch the ground, causing them to lift their feet higher than normal. The Prevent All Soring Tactics (PAST) Act would strengthen existing law by ending industry self-policing, banning certain devices, and generating stiffer penalties for trainers who sore their horses. Visual Snow  

Plus d'une tonne de cocaïne, répartie dans 49 sacs, a été trouvée ce dimanche, par des agents de la police nationale. C'est l'une des saisies les plus importantes de ces 30 dernières années, précise le correspondant de RFI à Port-au-Prince, Peterson Luxama. Haïti est une plaque tournante du trafic de drogue dans la région, complète Gotson Pierre, directeur de l'agence Alterpresse. Cette situation est due à l'expansion des gangs armés, mais pas seulement. Un réseau international «structuré composé d'anciens militaires, de membres de la police, de parlementaires et de chefs d'entreprises, actif en Haïti et aux États-Unis, s'est formé, depuis les années 1980», explique Gotson Pierre. Ces trafiquants utilisent notamment le commerce de l'anguille pour blanchir leurs revenus. «Les multiples saisies de drogue sur les côtes nord et sud d'Haïti montrent que c'est une organisation bien rodée», ajoute le journaliste d'Alterpresse.   Le Premier ministre haïtien est aux États-Unis La situation en Haïti est au cœur du voyage d'Alix Didier Fils-Aimé aux États-Unis. Le Premier ministre, qui n'a rencontré aucun responsable américain de premier plan, sera de retour le 17 juillet. Les États-Unis tirent la sonnette d'alarme. Ils estiment que la crise sécuritaire haïtienne constitue une menace directe pour la sécurité régionale et nationale du pays. Ce déplacement suscite, par ailleurs, des tensions internes. L'agenda d'Alix Didier Fils-Aimé n'a pas été communiqué à tous les membres du gouvernement, précise Gotson Pierre. À trois semaines de la fin de la présidence de Fritz Alphonse Jean, «échéance hautement symbolique dans le calendrier de la transition» selon le directeur d'Alterpresse, le CPT est à nouveau dans la tourmente.   Donald Trump peut poursuivre le démantèlement du ministère de l'Éducation La Cour suprême a validé les licenciements ordonnés par le président américain et comme il s'agit d'une procédure d'urgence, elle n'a pas motivé sa décision, précise le Washington Post. On ne sait pas non plus qui a voté pour ou contre. Mais les trois juges progressistes de la Cour (sur un total de 9) ont fait savoir leur opposition, raconte le journal. Dans un communiqué, ils ont dénoncé une «décision indéfendable». «Quand le pouvoir exécutif annonce son intention de violer la loi, puis met cette promesse à exécution, le devoir du pouvoir judiciaire est de faire barrage à cette illégalité, pas de la faciliter», peut-on lire. Ces trois juges estiment que la Cour suprême a accru les prérogatives du président. Comme le rapporte le New York Times, selon eux, seul le Congrès, qui a créé ce ministère il y a environ un demi-siècle, a le pouvoir de le supprimer. La décision de Donald Trump n'a jamais été soumise à l'approbation des parlementaires, précise le quotidien. Le pouvoir de l'exécutif se trouve ainsi renforcé, et le ministère de l'Éducation est lui affaibli, juge le New York Times. Comme le raconte le quotidien, en marge de cette bataille judiciaire, des employés ont déjà été renvoyés : ceux qui avaient un contrat précaire. L'administration a également offert à certains de partir en retraite anticipée. Enfin, en mars, Donald Trump a ordonné des licenciements massifs et bien que la justice ait suspendu cette décision, très peu de fonctionnaires ont été réintégrés. Résultat, le ministère de l'Éducation qui comptait 4.000 employés au début de l'année, ne fonctionne aujourd'hui qu'avec la moitié de ces effectifs, explique le New York Times.   À quoi sert le ministère de l'Éducation américain ? Si l'éducation est surtout gérée par les autorités locales aux États-Unis, le ministère de l'Éducation joue quand même un rôle important dans certains domaines. «Il est responsable de la gestion du programme fédéral de prêts aux étudiants qui s'élève à 1,6 milliard de dollars, des subventions aux écoles primaires et secondaires, des tests de réussite et des réglementations sur les droits civiques dans les écoles», détaille le Washington Post. Autant de missions que le ministère n'a plus vraiment les moyens d'accomplir, juge le New York Times pour qui «ces efforts pour abolir ce ministère font partie d'un agenda plus large des conservateurs qui veulent que plus d'argent aille aux écoles privées et à l'enseignement à la maison.» La grande loi budgétaire voulue par Donald Trump et approuvée récemment prévoit d'ailleurs d'importants crédits d'impôt pour l'enseignement privé, souligne le quotidien. Le ministère de l'Éducation continue de jouer un rôle en ce qui concerne les droits civiques. Là encore, Donald Trump s'en sert pour son agenda politique, raconte le New York Times. Le président l'utilise pour obliger les établissements scolaires à faire machine arrière en matière de lutte contre les discriminations. Finies par exemple, les équipes de sport composées d'étudiants transgenres ou les toilettes ouvertes à tous les élèves. En revanche, pour ce qui est de l'accès à l'école des enfants handicapés, cela n'intéresse pas Donald Trump, pointe le quotidien qui relève qu'il s'agit pourtant d'un droit civique.   Le Mexique voit rouge au sujet des tomates Les droits de douane de 17% sur les tomates importées de ce pays, décidés hier par Donald Trump, provoque des remous. «Aucun pays ne peut nous remplacer», mettent en garde les producteurs mexicains de tomates, dans les colonnes du quotidien argentin Infobae. 90% des tomates mangées aux États-Unis, viennent du Mexique, précise El Financiero. Un fruit difficile à transporter car il contient beaucoup d'eau, précise un expert au journal Milenio. Les États-Unis ne peuvent donc pas se passer du Mexique, se rassurent les fermiers mexicains, indique Infobae. Ils rappellent qu'en 2019, les États-Unis avaient déjà suspendu l'accord de libre-échange qui lie les deux voisins, avant de faire marche arrière 4 mois plus tard. «La raison va prévaloir» cette fois, encore estiment-ils.   L'Argentine déclassifie des archives nazies Le président Javier Milei a décidé de rendre public des archives liées à l'accueil de nazis après la Seconde Guerre mondiale. Alors que l'Europe peinait à se relever, l'Argentine, elle, était en plein boom économique. Pour soutenir cette croissance, le président Juan Perón a fait venir des milliers d'Européens. Les conditions d'accueil étaient généreuses, et les contrôles d'identité quasiment inexistants. Environ 12.000 nazis ont ainsi trouvé refuge en Argentine sous la présidence de Perón. «Ils menaient une vie discrète, sous un faux nom, parce qu'ils savaient qu'ils étaient recherchés», raconte l'historien Julio Mutti interrogé par Achim Lippold. «Plus tard, un décret d'amnistie du gouvernement péroniste leur a permis de reprendre leur vrai nom sans trop d'explications. Ils n'avaient pas de rôle social notable. Leur impact sur la société argentine de l'époque était très limité.» Il faut attendre le retour de la démocratie pour que la vérité émerge et que les archives soient déclassifiées sur décision du président Carlos Menem, en 1992. Grâce à ces documents, «nous savons désormais clairement qui est venu, où ils ont vécu, comment ils sont arrivés, sous quel nom, comment ils se sont cachés — tout cela est connu et a déjà été publié. Ce qui, en revanche, reste obscur, c'est l'origine des ressources financières ayant permis leur fuite. Pour une opération de cette ampleur, il a fallu de l'argent. Ce n'était ni simple, ni bon marché», explique Ariel Gelblung, directeur du Centre Simon Wiesenthal à Buenos Aires. Pour approfondir les recherches sur ces financements, le Centre Wiesenthal s'est tourné directement vers Javier Milei, en février 2025. Le président a accepté de leur faciliter l'accès à toutes les archives et «depuis, chaque fois que nous avons une requête, les services nous transmettent les documents. Il y a une directive en ce sens», poursuit Ariel Gelblung. Le gouvernement argentin a également commencé à mettre les documents en ligne. Mais les experts ne s'attendent pas à faire des découvertes majeures. Comme l'explique Julio Mutti, «90% de ce qu'il y avait à découvrir l'a déjà été (...) Le seul élément vraiment nouveau, ce sont des procès-verbaux de l'entreprise publique « Fabricaciones Militares ». Il y avait un projet de faire venir des techniciens étrangers, qui a bien eu lieu. On estime qu'environ 300 techniciens sont venus, dont des Polonais et d'autres pays qui étaient en guerre avec l'Allemagne nazie. Mais il y avait aussi des Allemands. Le problème, c'est qu'on ne sait pas encore si certains d'entre eux étaient des criminels de guerre ou des membres du parti nazi.» Selon le directeur du Centre Wiesenthal, Ariel Gelblung, les résultats des recherches menées par son équipe seront publiés au printemps 2026, le temps d'examiner tous les nouveaux documents disponibles, soit environ 38 kilomètres d'archives.   Le journal de la 1ère En Martinique, la gendarmerie reçoit des renforts.

It’s one year since the assassination attempt against Trump, and a damning Senate committee report just described the event as a “preventable tragedy.” Carol Leonnig at the Washington Post explains what went wrong and what we know about the shooter’s motives. New reporting from CNN indicates that recently implemented cost controls may have delayed FEMA’s response to the deadly floods in Texas. Scott Peterson was convicted of killing his wife in 2002. He always professed his innocence, and now the Innocence Project is taking on his case. Harriet Ryan at the Los Angeles Times tells us why. Plus, more details emerged about what went wrong in the India air crash, and one man died amid the chaos of an immigration raid. And at the Wimbledon finals, one star delivered demolition, and another was dethroned. Today’s episode was hosted by Shumita Basu.

This episode starts with a Very Special introduction in which I explain what's been going on with the podcast over the last six months (lots of different offerings, which possibly caused some confusion) and talk about the ongoing challenges of the subscriber model. (Short version, please stick around!) I then have the great pleasure of interviewing evolutionary biologist Dr. Carole Hooven, who's been a speaker at several Unspeakeasy events but never actually a guest on the podcast. As we approach the four-year anniversary of the publication of her book, T: The Story of Testosterone, the Hormone that Dominates and Divides Us, Carole recounts how a media appearance defending “male” and “female” as meaningful scientific categories led to unexpected controversy and her eventual departure from Harvard, where she'd taught for many years. She talks about how ideological influence has made even basic scientific facts about sex contentious and cites the importance of precise use of language, especially on topics like sex differences and women's rights, which she feels have been muddied by cultural and political agendas. Most fascinatingly (to me, anyway), Carole argues that a predominantly female, progressive teaching culture favors girls' learning styles—while boys, wired differently by biology, are stigmatized and alienated. Meanwhile, it's become culturally verboten to even acknowledge men's intense sexual drives and emotional vulnerability, and she calls for a return to rites of passage that acknowledge male biology without shame. Finally, we talk about a recent controversy surrounding her husband, MIT philosophy professor Alex Byrne (who was a guest on the podcast back in March 2024), after he was invited to contribute to a U.S. Health and Human Services report on sex and gender. Although the team was politically diverse, Alex's name was leaked via PDF metadata, and he faced fierce criticism from activist students and colleagues. He responded with a Washington Post op-ed explaining his position. GUEST BIO Dr. Carole Hooven is a human evolutionary biologist, the author of T: The Story of Testosterone, the Hormone that Dominates and Divides Us, and a nonresident senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. HOUSEKEEPING

President Trump’s big policy act on tax cuts, spending cuts and immigration also has a number of other key provisions that are getting less attention but include big changes. That includes what amounts to a new national school voucher program. Stephanie Sy discussed more with Laura Meckler of The Washington Post. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders

7.14.2025 Hour 3 1:00 - Varun Shankar, the Wizards beat reporter for The Washington Post, joins the Beltway Blitz to talk about the Wizards' most recent Summer League performance. 15:11 - The Commanders are the oldest team in the NFL. Is that concerning? 27:37 - Fans aren't too concerned that the Commanders are the oldest team

Varun Shankar, the Washington Post's Wizards beat reporter, joined to break down Washington's most recent Summer League performance.

Danny Seo was just 19 years old when the Washington Post wrote an article about him, rhetorically asking their readership: “Is this the next Martha Stewart?” At the time, the comparison felt lofty and overwhelming to Danny… but the reality is, over the past twenty years, Danny has created a new space all his own as a sustainable style expert and eco-living consultant for celebrities and major national media outlets. Basically, he was green before green was cool. In fact, he was so ahead of the curve that he was literally BORN on Earth Day. (no, seriously!)What many don't know is just how committed Danny really is to the cause… he was so called to help the planet that he chose it over finishing his formal education, dropping out of High School to instead lobby for environmental issues as a teenager.While it may have seemed a risky strategy at the time – especially back in the 90s, before saving the environment was such a big topic – eventually, it paid off.From landing on Oprah's couch at just 19 to collaborating with A-list celebrities, such as Drew Barrymore and Kerry Washington, Danny reveals how he turned his love for the Earth into a vibrant career dedicated to making the world a greener, better place.We'll also hear about his decade+ love for Boiron, the French Homeopathic company who makes many of the products you may already use in your own home.Danny shares insider secrets from his recent star-packed trip to Boiron's French HQ, and why aligning with brands who you believe in is so important in today's world.Danny is smart and successful, humble and hilarious… so come along as he spills his secrets to making it BIG in business by doing things on your own terms, and remaining authentic and aligned with your belief systems.*Today's episode is presented by Boiron USA.[0:45] Danny Seo talking about how he does what he does because he is mission driven [9:25] Danny Seo explains how his passion for the planet became a career and the challenges he faced as a high school drop out [11:11] Danny Seo talks about how he was given the opportunity to write a book and it changed the trajectory of his career [17:55] Danny Seo explains the cultural shift of people caring for the planet [20:30] Danny Seo talks about Boiron and why he loves the brand [32:00] Danny Seo explains how a media trip works and how fortunate he has been to experience them [33:33] Danny Seo tells what he is working on next Key Takeaways [2:24] Danny Seo reflecting about his birthday being on Earth Day and seeing all the sadness in the world and at the age of 12 he decided to do something about it[14:00] Danny Seo reflects on how he began working with celebrities and he would jump at every opportunity he was given [26:59] Danny Seo reflects on the trip to France with Boiron and how educational it was Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brands

In “Backroom Deals in Our Backyards: How Government Secrecy Harms Our Communities and the Local Heroes Fighting Back,” Miranda Spivack tells the stories of ordinary citizens who discovered that local and state governments they thought were there to protect them weren't doing their jobs. Instead, these “accidental activists” found not only a lack of transparency but also often resistance when searching for information about how to resolve community issues. Does their work provide a roadmap – and hope – for others? Spivack, author and former Washington Post editor and reporter, is this episode's guest on Equal Time. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The federal workforce may be in trouble, but Mayor Muriel Bowser is poised to replace it with a pivot to a sports economy. We sat down with two Washington Post reporters who have been covering the mayor's efforts to build a new stadium — Meagan Flynn, who covers City Hall, and Sam Fortier, who writes for the sports section.  Want some more DC news? Then make sure to sign up for our morning newsletter Hey DC. You can also become a member, with ad-free listening, for as little as $10 a month. Learn more about the sponsors of this July 14th episode: Library of Congress DC Sustainable Energy utility Rock & Roll Hall of Fame Interested in advertising with City Cast? Find more info HERE. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In “Backroom Deals in Our Backyards: How Government Secrecy Harms Our Communities and the Local Heroes Fighting Back,” Miranda Spivack tells the stories of ordinary citizens who discovered that local and state governments they thought were there to protect them weren't doing their jobs. Instead, these “accidental activists” found not only a lack of transparency but also often resistance when searching for information about how to resolve community issues. Does their work provide a roadmap – and hope – for others? Spivack, author and former Washington Post editor and reporter, is this episode's guest on Equal Time. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

President Trump’s big policy act on tax cuts, spending cuts and immigration also has a number of other key provisions that are getting less attention but include big changes. That includes what amounts to a new national school voucher program. Stephanie Sy discussed more with Laura Meckler of The Washington Post. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders

News & features from the July 14th, 2025 edition of the Washington Post

Dix jours après les crues meurtrières du fleuve Guadalupe, qui ont fait 129 morts et plus de 170 disparus, le futur rôle de l'agence fédérale est encore flou. Depuis son retour à la Maison Blanche en janvier dernier, Donald Trump a promis une réduction drastique des dépenses fédérales – et a ainsi promis de fermer l'agence de gestion des urgences, la FEMA. Inutile, trop couteuse, disait-il. Au lendemain des inondations meurtrières du Texas, terre républicaine où plus de 300 personnes pourraient avoir perdu la vie, potentiellement à cause du retard dans les secours, cette position est plus difficile à tenir. Le président refuse de définir quel rôle exact il pense réserver maintenant à cette agence. Mais sa ministre de l'Intérieur, Kristi Noem, a commencé à donner des indications, lors d'une interview sur la chaîne NBC : « Son rôle doit changer, et nous devons nous appuyer sur les autres ressources du gouvernement fédéral », soutient-elle, avant de reprendre la ligne idéologique trumpiste, de déléguer un maximum de tâches aux États fédérés. « Le président souhaite donner les moyens aux États de gérer eux-mêmes leurs situations d'urgence », sans préciser de quels moyens elle pense, considérant qu'on parle ici de désengagement fédéral avant tout.   La FEMA, du reste, est critiquée pour sa mauvaise gestion en amont : son rôle est aussi d'évaluer les risques d'inondations pour les permis de construire. Or, le Washington Post révèle que le fameux camp pour enfants Mystic, où 27 personnes ont été emportées par les crues, n'avait pas été placé en zone inondable – il avait donc pu étendre son empreinte. Ces permis ont été donnés entre 2013 et 2020, rappelle le quotidien, ce qui indique à quel point les agences fédérales peuvent sous-estimer les risques, mais aussi que ces derniers évoluent rapidement à cause du changement climatique. À lire aussiÉtats-Unis: après les inondations au Texas, Trump rétropédale sur la Fema et son démantèlement En attendant, la population essaie de se relever par tous les moyens. Et même les enfants s'y mettent, comme le raconte le Dallas Morning News. Le quotidien décrit cette belle histoire de Graham Goodin et des deux frères Wallace, âgés de 10 à 12 ans, qui ont ouvert leur stand de limonade glacée dans une rue de Dallas. Un dollar le jus rafraichissant, mais rapidement, les passants paient 5, 7, voire 100 dollars le verre. « C'est la meilleure limonade du monde », assure un client. Ces ventes doivent en effet servir à reconstruire le camp pour enfants Mystic, ravagé par les inondations. Ces jeunes entrepreneurs ont récolté 550 dollars en une journée, ce qui prouve la solidarité qui a emporté les Texans : on ne compte plus les restaurants qui reversent leurs profits ou les cagnottes d'anonymes en faveur des sinistrés, rapporte le journal de Dallas.   « Ce genre d'inondations devrait se répéter avec l'intensification du réchauffement climatique, surtout dans cette région du centre du Texas, aux terrains vallonnés et au climat propice aux fortes tempêtes. Pour y faire face, les autorités règlementent de plus en plus les constructions au bord de l'eau. Ils demandent à ce que les maisons soient construites sur des piliers ou que les fondations permettent à l'eau de passer dessous en cas de crue », explique Mark Gonzalez, un ingénieur de l'immobilier. Reportage d'Edward Maille au Texas. L'Argentine s'enfonce dans la crise politique La guerre est ouverte au plus haut sommet de l'État. Elle a éclaté avec l'adoption de l'augmentation des retraites la semaine dernière, malgré l'opposition du président Javier Milei. Et ce dernier d'attaquer sa vice-présidente, Victoria Villaruel, qui ne l'a pas appuyé au Parlement dans ce dossier. Le quotidien Pagina 12 nous livre les détails croustillants de cette acrimonie. « Traitresse, populiste, âne », tels sont les noms colorés que donne Javier Milei à son ancienne alliée. Victoria Villaruel, qui avait apporté le vote religieux au président, « est maintenant considérée comme une opposante », analyse le journal, et les spéculations commencent sur sa possible candidature à la présidence de 2027, face à Javier Milei. À lire aussiArgentine: rupture entre le président Milei et sa vice-présidence Victoria Villarruel Au Brésil, front commun contre les nouveaux droits de douane annoncés par Donald Trump Le président brésilien Lula pourrait bénéficier de cette nouvelle attaque du président américain. Donald Trump assure que ces tarifs sont imposés pour faire pression sur Brasilia et arrêter les poursuites contre son allié, Jair Bolsonaro, accusé de tentative de coup d'État. Résultat, c'est le camp Bolsonaro qui en paie le prix, analyse le quotidien O Globo, et Lula en sort renforcé. « Après des mois d'usure et de confrontations avec les députés, le président jouit d'une amnistie », commente le quotidien. Mais beaucoup estiment que « cet alignement est temporaire et risque de s'effondrer une fois la crise avec Trump résolue », prévient O Glogo.  À lire aussi«Chasse aux sorcières», «qu'il se mêle de ses affaires»: Trump et Lula s'écharpent autour de Bolsonaro Le Mexique, destination en pointe pour la chirurgie esthétique La correspondante du quotidien espagnol El Pais nous emmène dans un cabinet de chirurgie esthétique de Guadalaraja, à la frontière états-unienne. Comme beaucoup, ce cabinet est pris d'assaut : le Mexique est devenu la deuxième destination de tourisme médical au monde pour la chirurgie esthétique, après la Colombie. Une recette gagnante, qui repose sur des prix abordables, de bons chirurgiens et des plages agréables pour se rétablir – tout cela à deux pas des États-Unis et du Canada. 1,4 million de patients ont fait le voyage l'année dernière, pour faire surtout des liposuccions, des facelift ou se gonfler les seins. Mais attention aux arnaques, prévient El Pais: pour certains, le chirurgien était en fait un dentiste ! Et surtout, quid du post-opératoire : il faut s'assurer du suivi à distance et de la bonne coordination avec des médecins dans votre pays, conclut El Pais. Ceci, afin que ce nouveau visage dont vous rêvez ne se transforme pas en un cauchemar indélébile.  En Haïti, reportage dans les Gonaïves Une ville qui doit se débrouiller sans pompiers. La semaine dernière, un camion d'essence a pris feu suite à une collusion avec un autre véhicule. Huit personnes sont décédées, dont trois élèves d'une même famille. Les incendies sont fréquents dans cette ville et touchent des marchés publics, des résidences privées, des entreprises ou bâtiments publics. À chaque fois, il faut attendre que le feu détruise tout sur son passage. Pourtant, en 2016, la ville avait deux camions de pompiers qui faisaient régulièrement des interventions. Ils ont disparu après le mandat du maire de l'époque en 2020. Reportage de Ronel Paul.

S.E. Cupp is a nationally syndicated columnist, author, podcaster and TV commentator. She hosts Off the Cupp, a podcast which focuses on mental health, and which features interviews with celebrities and newsmakers. She is a columnist at the New York Daily News and has also been published in the New York Times, Vanity Fair, Rolling Stone, Washington Post and many other publications. She is currently a political commentator at CNN. She regularly interviews authors for CSPAN's BookTV, and is a regular guest on The View, Real Time w/Bill Maher, Jimmy Kimmel Live!, Watch What Happens Live and others. S.E. has also consulted on Aaron Sorkin's The Newsroom and AppleTV's The Morning Show, and has made cameos on House of Cards and SNL. As an author SE has written two books, Losing Our Religion: The Liberal Media's Attack on Christianity, and co-authored Why You're Wrong About the RIght. She is on the Advisory Board of Cornell University's Institute of Politics and Global Affairs and INARA.org, and is a No Kid Hungry ambassador. Just us for this insightful, fun live chat and Q&A at Rhinebeck, NY's Upstate Films. We discuss it all...politics, pop culture, podcasting, producing and caffeine! Got somethin' to say?! Email us at BackroomAndy@gmail.com Leave us a message: 845-307-7446 Twitter: @AndyOstroy Produced by Andy Ostroy, Matty Rosenberg, and Jennifer Hammoud @ Radio Free Rhiniecliff Design by Cricket Lengyel

One year ago in Butler, Pennsylvania, 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks was able to get onto a nearby roof and take shots at Donald Trump. In the aftermath many wondered — who was this man who shot the presidential candidate, and how was he allowed to get so close to killing him? Host Colby Itkowitz speaks with investigative reporter Carol Leonnig about the mystifying search for a motive and what she and others have concluded about what went wrong that day, one year later. Today's show was produced by Sabby Robinson. It was edited by Maggie Penman and mixed by Rennie Svirnovsky.If you want to learn more about how the shooting in Butler changed Trump, our colleague Isaac Arnsdorf was on “Post Reports” on Friday to talk about that. His new book is “2024: How Trump Retook the White House and the Democrats Lost America.”Subscribe to The Washington Post here.

Varina Howell Davis, wife of Jefferson Davis and First Lady of the Confederacy played the part well. She was educated, graceful, the picture of antebellum perfection. She hosted elegant soirees at the Confederate white house in Richmond, Virginia and managed a household of around 20 workers, black and white, enslaved and free. But Varina, when examined closely, was not what she seemed. In writing, she referred to herself as a “half-breed” born of the North and of the South. Her political loyalties were suspect as she found herself torn between both causes. And her dark skin and hair. What was that about? People whispered behind closed doors. Was the First Lady of the Confederacy… could she possibly be… Black? Let's fix that.Support the show! Join the Patreon (patreon.com/historyfixpodcast)Buy some merchBuy Me a CoffeeVenmo @Shea-LaFountaineSources: Encyclopedia Virginia "Varina Davis"Washington Post "Jim Limber: the myth of Jefferson Davis' adopted Black son"Clark University "The Forefathers of the English People"Shoot me a message!

Not all that long ago, people felt paying bills by sending a check in the mail was the best way to do it. Today, it seems like a bad idea. In fact, banks and the post office are recommending against it. Listen as I reveal why. https://www.businessinsider.com/post-office-check-fraud-mailing-be-careful-usps-scam-2023-6 There are a lot of weird but true stories out there. And this episode offers you several of them!. For instance, how one U.S. President prevented his own assassination and how Beatles' drummer Ringo Starr's unique drumming style is due to exorcisms. And, how the Los Angeles Dodgers paid someone to cosmically beam positive messages to players during games from 3000 miles away. And there's more... These stories all come from my guest Dan Schreiber. Dan hosts a podcast called There is No Such Thing As a Fish (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/no-such-thing-as-a-fish/id840986946) and he is author of the book The Theory of Everything Else: A Voyage Into the World of the Weird (https://amzn.to/43eruph) How the very best athletes perform at their peak can teach us all something about life and how to do our best at what we do. Here to explain this is Sally Jenkins who has been a columnist and feature writer for The Washington Post for over twenty years. She was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize in 2020 and in 2021 was named the winner of the Associated Press Red Smith Award for Outstanding Contributions to Sports Journalism. She is the author of 12 books including The Right Call: What Sport Teaches Us About Work and Life (https://amzn.to/44wtc6y). If you have been to Trader Joe's, I'm sure you have noticed that the people who work there wear different colored Hawaiian shirts. Perhaps you have wondered what the different kind of Hawaiian shirts mean or why they are so friendly and why they keep ringing that bell? Listen as we peak behind the curtain at Trader Joe's. https://www.businessinsider.com/trader-joes-slang-terms-only-employees-know-2023-7?utm PLEASE SUPPORT OUR SPONSORS!!! SHOPIFY: Shopify is the commerce platform for millions of businesses around the world! To start selling today, sign up for your $1 per month trial at⁠ https://Shopify.com/sysk⁠ QUINCE: Stick to the staples that last, with elevated essentials from Quince! Go to ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://Quince.com/sysk⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ for free shipping on your order and 365 day returns! HERS: Hers is transforming women's healthcare by providing access to affordable weight loss treatment plans, delivered straight to your door, if prescribed. Start your initial free online visit today at ⁠https://forhers.com/something⁠ DELL: The Black Friday in July event from Dell Technologies is here. Upgrade for a limited-time only at ⁠https://Dell.com/deals⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A conversation with the Atlantic Council's Jared Holt, one of the foremost experts fighting online extremism today. His work has lead to the de-platforming of Infowars founder Alex Jones from Paypal, Facebook and YouTube. In addition, his articles and research are cited by everyone from the Washington Post to today's Impeachment where prosecutors cited an op/ed he wrote as proof of Donald Trump's complicity in an insurgent coup attempt. He joins Mea Culpa on Day II of the trial and lead Michael on an illuminating journey into the conspiracy hive mind that threatens our democracy. For cool Mea Culpa gear, check out www.meaculpapodcast.com/merch To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices A conversation with the Atlantic Council's Jared Holt, one of the foremost experts fighting online extremism today. His work has lead to the de-platforming of Infowars founder Alex Jones from Paypal, Facebook and YouTube. In addition, his articles and research are cited by everyone from the Washington Post to today's Impeachment where prosecutors cited an op/ed he wrote as proof of Donald Trump's complicity in an insurgent coup attempt. He joins Mea Culpa on Day II of the trial and lead Michael on an illuminating journey into the conspiracy hive mind that threatens our democracy. For cool Mea Culpa gear, check out www.meaculpapodcast.com/merch To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In a truly bizarre Washington Post article, penned by a literal clown… Excuse us, a Clown. As we learn the grammatical rules of using Clown in a sentence, Subway Takes spiked their interview with Kamala because it was embarrassing. Release the tapes!   Plus, Hakeem's bad photoshop is not a first-time problem.    ️ Then, anti-ICE violence is springing up around the country and yet, no one is wondering how we got here. From the shooting last year, the fire-bombing of Gov. Shapiro, to the LA riots and more — we get to the permission structure the left built for its violent tendencies.    If you have a round of golf planned, please take this opportunity to make sure you don't pick a fight with the wrong former NHL player in our favorite video of the week.    And American Beverage President and CEO, Kevin Keane on the growth of MAHA and their efforts at transparency. For more info visit https://goodtoknowfacts.org/   00:00 - Democrats and the "Hamas Caucus" 02:30 - The Infamous Clown Article 11:00 - MORE Hakeem Jeffries' Photoshopped Pics 15:30 - Kamala Harris's Shelved Podcast Interview 22:30 - The Violence Against ICE 36:00 - The Democratic Party's Silence and Captivity to Radical Elements 48:30 - A Very Polite Golf Fight 59:59 - Kevin Keane on MAHA and The Beverage Industry Efforts   Our Sponsors: ➢Find out the true power of America's oil and natural gas. Go to https://lightsonenergy.org/ ➢Help fuel America's energy advantage. Visit https://www.chevron.com/America to learn more

Katherine Boyle is a General Partner at Andreessen Horowitz and cofounder of its American Dynamism practice, investing in sectors such as defense, aerospace, manufacturing, and infrastructure. She serves on the boards of Apex Space and Hadrian Automation, and is a board observer for Saronic Technologies and Castelion. Previously, she was a partner at General Catalyst, where she co-led the seed practice and backed companies like Anduril Industries and Vannevar Labs. She was also a reporter at The Washington Post. Katherine holds a BA from Georgetown, an MBA from Stanford, and a Master's from the National University of Ireland, Galway. She sits on the boards of The Free Press and the Mercatus Center. Shawn Ryan Show Sponsors: https://americanfinancing.net/srs NMLS 182334, nmlsconsumeraccess.org https://tryarmra.com/srs https://betterhelp.com/srs This episode is sponsored. Give online therapy a try at betterhelp.com/srs and get on your way to being your best self. https://meetfabric.com/shawn https://shawnlikesgold.com https://hillsdale.edu/srs https://masachips.com/srs – USE CODE SRS https://paladinpower.com/srs – USE CODE SRS https://patriotmobile.com/srs https://rocketmoney.com/srs https://ROKA.com – USE CODE SRS https://trueclassic.com/srs https://USCCA.com/srs https://blackbuffalo.com Katherine Boyle Links: Website - https://a16z.com/author/katherine-boyle X - https://x.com/KTmBoyle Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices