Ralph welcomes back union organizer, Chris Townsend, to discuss the reasons why the AFL-CIO shrinks from effectively fighting for its members and expanding the power of workers. Then, political scientist Lee Drutman lays out a system of proportional representation that would take away the incentive to gerrymander congressional districts. Plus, Ralph gives some quick takes on Thomas Massie’s primary loss, fish hopped up on cocaine, and the situations in Lebanon and Ukraine.Chris Townsend has been a union member and labor leader for more than 45 years. He was most recently the Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) International Union Organizing Director. Previously, he was an International Representative and Political Action Director for the United Electrical Workers Union (UE), and he has held local positions in both the SEIU and UFCW.[The upcoming AFL-CIO] convention is deliberately kept secret. It’s what I describe as sort of a hideout strategy. It enables the leadership to not have to discuss or take positions that for them are difficult, such as: What is the labor movement going to do to confront the rampant lawlessness and criminality of the Trump regime? What is the labor movement going to do to address the rampaging inflation that is eating up living standards? There’s no wage policy. There’s no bargaining policy of the Federation. What are they going to do to address the ongoing national health care crisis and disaster?... And what are they doing about the crisis of the unorganized?Chris TownsendThe labor movement finds itself (I would submit) with the leadership disinterested in going out and organizing the unorganized. But even for those who do (and there are some), the laws—Taft-Hartley primary among them—provide such a minefield that we have to run through, that our ability to organize on any scale for decades has been stopped. And therefore, we are condemned to a perpetual shrinking size, resources, and whatnot. [And what] might help for folks to figure out how or why this is happening is that the labor movement is systematically being converted from trade union fighting organizations, membership-driven fighting organizations, to harmless not-for-profit organizations. And this is today’s administrative layer of trade union l

Ralph speaks to Dr. Marina Nord of the V-Dem Institute about this year's V-Dem Democracy Report and how the Trump Administration is dismantling democracy in the US. Then, Ralph welcomes Dr. Ralph Estes to discuss corporations' shady accounting practices.Dr. Marina Nord is a postdoctoral research fellow at the V-Dem Institute. She is co-author of V-Dem’s Democracy Report 2026: “Unraveling The Democratic Era?”.Only six countries during the 21st century have registered larger one-year drops on the aggregate Liberal Democracy Index [than the United States] —and all of them are coups. If you look at the last almost 250 years (so for which we have data going back to 1789), there were only thirty-five instances of more rapid dismantling of democracy—almost all of them were either military coups or international interventions.Dr. Marina NordWe do not measure [Trump’s] words. We measure how institutions function de facto. And what is a lot more important for us is not only what he says, but how other institutions (checks and balances) function to constrain him. And one of the things that we see, for example, is that Congress is not constraining him in any way. And this is very, very serious, because if you have a President who violates the law, who violates the Constitution, you should have the judiciary who stand up, the Supreme Court who should stand up to protect the Constitution. You should have the Congress who is not allowed to [abdicate power to the executive]. And this is something that is very, very concerning, a lot more concerning than what Trump is saying. What I find a lot more concerning is that there are no checks and balances to constrain him.Dr. Marina NordWhen looking at the data, we also looked at the countries who managed to stop autocrats similar to Trump. And we tried to analyze which factors contributed to stopping democratic backsliding and turning it around. So research shows that, of course, there is no single recipe, but there are several combinations of factors that may help. One of them is: use whatever institutional safeguards that you still have in the United States…The second thing that we know that still works quite

Ralph welcomes back Adolph Reed, Professor Emeritus of political science at the University of Pennsylvania and Distinguished Visiting Professor at Mount Holyoke College to discuss the latest Supreme Court decision gutting the Voting Rights Act. Then, Ralph and our resident constitutional scholar, Bruce Fein, talk about what ordinary citizens can do to pressure their reps to impeach Donald Trump.Adolph Reed is Professor Emeritus of political science at the University of Pennsylvania and Distinguished Visiting Professor at Mount Holyoke College. His most recent books are The South: Jim Crow and Its Afterlives, No Politics but Class Politics (co-authored with Walter Benn Michaels), and Black Studies, Cultural Politics, and the Evasion of Inequality: The Farce this Time (co-authored with Kenneth W. Warren).I think the issues are a lot more complex than they seem to be or than seems to be the way that they are represented in the debate [over the Voting Rights Act]…To cut straight to the political case, I think there’s a distinction between the Act’s guarantee that black citizens and others (where pertinent) who live in areas where there’s been a history of suppression of the right to vote have the support of the federal government to make certain that Black voters have the ability to vote for and to elect candidates of their choosing. Which is not the same thing as a right of Black individuals to be elected to office. And I think that’s one of the confusions that characterizes, frankly, both sides of the debate at this point. And I think that’s definitely something that needs to be clarified.Adolph ReedSome of my friends and I have been talking about this, and have been bouncing this idea back and forth since, frankly, even before the court handed down the [Louisi

Ralph welcomes six authors to discuss their books: “Beyond Nuclear” founder Linda Gunter; trial lawyer Sean Simpson; law professor Elizabeth Burch; naturalist David Schmidt; industrial hygienist Marc Axelrod; and educator and advocate Jonathan Kozol.Linda Gunter is the founder of the US-based non-profit Beyond Nuclear and serves as its international specialist. Previously, she was a journalist at USA Network, Reuters, and The Times. She launched, and writes for Beyond Nuclear’s online magazine, Beyond Nuclear International. And she is the author of No To Nuclear: Why Nuclear Power Destroys Lives, Derails Climate Progress and Provokes War.We need to reduce the most carbon, the fastest, for the least cost—and that’s renewables every time. But it’s also an issue of: as we divert funds towards nuclear power (new reactors, which are not here now, they’re just aspirational ideas on paper, none of the designs have certifications or licenses yet) as we divert time and our money towards waiting for something that will perhaps take a decade or two (or never) to materialize, and as we squeeze out renewables in the process, what do we do? We continue to burn fossil fuels. So actually, choosing nuclear as an answer to climate makes the climate crisis worse.Linda GunterSean Simpson is an attorney specializing in civil jury trials, representing individuals who have been harmed by someone else’s carelessness or intentional wrongdoing. He is the author of Punitive Damages: The Lawyer’s Tool for Shaping Society.[Punitive damages are] typically not covered by insurance. But oddly enough, there’s a trend coming now where these corporations—because they’re in control, we’ve let them have the reins, and now they’re getting insurance companies to sell them coverage to cover their punitive damages, which is totally a 180. If somebody else is going to pay your punishment for you, it’s not going to sting your rump if somebody gets spanked on som

Ralph welcomes Professor Nicholas Chater, co-author of “It's on You: How Corporations and Behavioral Scientists Have Convinced Us That We’re to Blame for Society's Deepest Problems.” Then, as most of the media turns its attention to Iran, we return to the ongoing genocide in Gaza and welcome back Dr. Feroze Sidhwa to break down his three-part series published in Zeteo called “The Truth About Gaza's Dead.”Nick Chater is Professor of Behavioural Science at Warwick Business School. He has written and co-written more than two hundred research papers and six books, including It’s on You: How Corporations and Behavioral Scientists Have Convinced Us That We’re to Blame for Society’s Deepest Problems (co-written with George Loewenstein).I was on a UK government committee as the representative of behavioural science for six years, where my role was (at least I understood my role to be) coming up with smart-aleck ideas about what individual nudges or bits of useful information we could give to the public—how that would help people reduce their carbon emissions. And I came away from that experience extremely chastened. Because almost all the interesting issues were nothing to do whatsoever with individual behavior. They were all about big systemic changes… And the shock for me was realizing that the tools that I was hoping to wield were in fact completely ineffective.Nick ChaterI think it’s absolutely true that many of the things that behavioral scientists are supposedly “discovering” [are] the things that campaigners and activists and indeed people in the political world generally and journalists intuitively have long known, and indeed probably have good evidence for. It’s simply— it’s sort of a sad process of trailing-along-behind which I think the academic world has been engaged in, where we’ve been slowly realizing that things that everybody else knew initially are actually true after all.Nick ChaterOne of the most powerful things that each of us has is the ability to propagate our own perspective and to campaign for change…I think getting people pulling together and pu

Ralph welcomes journalist and author Megan Greenwell to discuss her book "Bad Company: Private Equity and the Death of the American Dream." Then, Ralph speaks to James Zogby (co-founder and president of the Arab American Institute) about the recent Israeli attacks on Lebanon.Megan Greenwell is a journalist who has written or edited for publications including the New York Times, the Washington Post, New York Magazine, WIRED, and ESPN. She is also the deputy director of the Princeton Summer Journalism Program, a workshop and college-access initiative for students from low-income backgrounds. She is the author of Bad Company: Private Equity and the Death of the American Dream.The real trick with private equity (and this was the thing that made me want to write a book on it) is that when they take out those billions of dollars worth of loans (if you’re buying a bigger company), the private equity firm is not responsible for paying those loans back. Only the portfolio company in whose name the private equity firm has taken the money out is on the hook for that money. And so what you end up with is this split in incentive where what’s good for the private equity firm is not necessarily what’s good for its own portfolio company.Megan Greenwell[Congress hasn’t repealed the carried interest loophole] because Congress is in the pocket of the private equity industry. 88% of members of the House and Senate take donations from private equity. Interestingly, Donald Trump has called twice for the carried interest loophole to be closed. And still, even he, as much of a stranglehold as he has on the Republican Party, he can’t build support for it among Republicans. Because they’re all taking private equity money, as are the vast majority of the Democrats. So this is not a partisan issue.Megan GreenwellOne of the reasons I was really interested to write this book as a series of narrative profiles of people trying to do something about [private equity] is: none of them are trying to do something about it through the federal government. And I think when we talk about “Only the federal government can save us,” we really risk turning people away from t

Ralph welcomes Haley Hinkle, policy counsel at Fairplay to tell us about how a New Mexico jury ordered Meta to pay $375 million for harming children’s mental health and safety, violating state law. Then when present highlights from last week’s symposium on impeachment, featuring Dennis Kucinich, CIA whistleblower, Jeffrey Sterling, Public Citizen co-president, Rob Weissman, GW law dean Alan Morrison and many more.Haley Hinkle is policy counsel at Fairplay, where she advocates for laws and regulations that protect children and teens’ autonomy and safety online. Ms. Hinkle has also worked on issues at the intersection of government surveillance technology and civil liberties.We saw a lot of that in the discovery for these cases and other lawsuits that are currently being brought against the companies—that they have a lot of internal research where they’re very specific with their features. And also their safety features. They test them to make sure safety features aren’t too effective. They don’t reduce too much screen time. And this is completely overwhelming for young brains. And it’s completely overwhelming for families that are trying to make the choice between protecting their children and isolating them from the virtual spaces where all of their friends and classmates are gathering. And so it’s not straightforward. And in many cases, the parental controls or settings that may give a family some semblance of control are not usually very effective.Haley HinkleI think if juries continue to make such resounding decisions on behalf of families, that’s maybe going to motivate these companies to try to find ways to avoid further jury trials and to settle. But all of this raises the fact that as these processes continue (and they’re so important), we can’t wait for lawmakers to do their part to also step in and act and try to get some strong rules of the road in place to fill the void that has created this situation.Haley HinkleWe’re in a moment right now where we have to decide who we are as a people—not who the President is. We already have an estimation of that. The question is who we are. Because, with few exceptions, almost each and every statement the President has made in the last month has been an impeachable offense. He is a walking, talking impeachment mach

Ralph welcomes international security expert Paul Rogers to discuss the US-Israeli war on Iran. Then, Ralph speaks to constitutional law experts Bruce Fein and John Bonifaz about their upcoming impeachment symposium.Paul Rogers is Emeritus Professor of Peace Studies in the Department of Peace Studies and International Relations at Bradford University, and an Honorary Fellow at the Joint Service Command and Staff College. He is open Democracy’s international security correspondent.I think if you look at the war overall, then essentially of the three (I use the term as a crude term) participants, the one that is basically doing most badly is the United States, followed by Israel, followed least by Iran. Relatively speaking, the Iranians (particularly the Revolutionary Guard Corps) are closer to where they wanted to be, which is not true of the United States and certainly isn’t true to a very large extent of the Israelis as well. In other words, the war is going badly. for the people who are determined to try and defeat Iran.Paul RogersPeople tend to think Iran is on its own against these huge odds. Well, it isn’t. In many ways, certainly Russia and certainly China have a real interest in what is happening. But as far as China is concerned, they will not help directly. They will not, in other words, as far as we know, arm Iran without payment. They will see them as a reasonable customer. I think (more widely than we realize) as far as you get away from D.C., then I think you see the world in a rather different way, particularly across the global south it is certainly seen in a different way…And I would come back to a point which I think is a fair point made earlier—essentially, the Iranian Republican Revolutionary Guard Corps has been working towards this time for decades. And they will not be easily dislodged. It could happen eventually, but I think it’s highly unlikely.Paul RogersJohn Bonifaz is a constitutional attorney and the co-founder and president of

Ralph welcomes Wes Bryant, a retired Air Force special operations master sergeant and former analyst at the Civilian Protection Center who talks to us about how civilians, either through incompetence or negligence, are not being protected during American missile strikes. Then our resident constitutional scholar, Bruce Fein, joins us to break down his latest op-ed “The Power to Declare War Belongs to Congress Alone.”Wes Bryant is a defense and national security analyst with focus on foreign policy and global conflict, counterterrorism and extremism, strike and joint targeting operations, and civilian harm. He retired from the U.S. Air Force in 2018 at the rank of Master Sergeant after twenty years of active duty service. He was formerly a senior policy analyst and advisor on precision warfare and civilian harm mitigation at the Pentagon’s Civilian Protection Center of Excellence, where he led as the first-ever Branch Chief of Civilian Harm Assessments.This strike [on the girls’ school in Minab, Iran] violated standing practices and doctrine we’ve had in place for two, three decades. That’s aside from even the work we were doing at the Pentagon in civilian harm mitigation to get better at this sort of thing and prevent these things from happening…This is just one of many. My colleagues at Airwars who track civilian harm incidents in conflict zones—right now, they’re tracking over 130 separate incidents throughout Iran (that’s between the U.S. and Israel) and that number is going to spike. And of course we’re tracking, I believe, it’s over 2,000 civilian casualties. That number is surely going to spike once the smoke clears.Wes BryantI believe that right now, with the way we are conducting ourselves as a nation on the international stage—and most importantly, the way we’re using or abusing our military and the use of lethal military force—we are carrying out state terrorism. Israel assuredly has been for years.Wes BryantWe hear all these people (especially Hegseth most recently) talking about “precision” —”precision strikes” and “no one’s more precise” and “precision warfare”. Well, I was an expert in precision warfare. I was one of the people helping develop our standards for precision

Ralph welcomes international human rights lawyer Craig Mokhiber to discuss the U.S. and Israel’s illegal war on Iran. Then, Ralph speaks to investigative reporter David Cay Johnston about the finances of Donald Trump.Craig Mokhiber is an international human rights lawyer and activist, and a former senior United Nations human rights official. A human rights activist in the 1980s, he would go on to serve for more than three decades at the United Nations, with postings in Switzerland, Palestine, Afghanistan, and UN Headquarters in New York. In October of 2023, he left the United Nations, penning a widely read letter criticizing the UN’s human rights failures in the Middle East, warning of unfolding genocide in Gaza, and calling for a new approach to Palestine and Israel based on international law, human rights, and equality.Anyone who pays attention knows that Iran wasn’t attacked because it has nuclear weapons. It was attacked because it doesn’t have nuclear weapons, and was therefore viewed by Israel and the U.S. as being a state that could be overcome militarily. But what really is, I think, most telling about this is the hypocrisy of the claims, because the only party in the region that has stockpiles of nuclear weapons (which are entirely undeclared and unsupervised) is the Israeli regime, not the Iranian. And the Israeli regime was joined in attacking Iran by another nuclear power—the United States.Craig MokhiberIsrael (which has attacked the United Nations throughout its entire life and declared that the United Nations is an anti-Semitic terror organization) fights like hell to stay in the United Nations, pays its dues every year to make sure that it stays in…and renews its treaty obligations as a member of the United Nations (that, of course, it violates with impunity). So it’s very funny that Israel calls the UN an anti-Semitic terror organization, yet it insists on being a member and paying its dues to fund that so-called anti-Semitic terror organization.Craig MokhiberI don’t think that putting Iran in an existential crisis is the best way to tell them you don’t need nuclear weapons. I think stopping attacking them, their economy, their currency, their scientists, their political leaders, their military personnel, their civilians, their girls’ schools—if you want a country to believe that it doe

Ralph spends the whole hour with progressive activist, Corbin Trent, former communications director for Alexandria Ocasio Cortez to discuss the lack of vision and the spineless leadership in the corporate Democratic Party.Corbin Trent is a co-founder of Brand New Congress and former co-director of Justice Democrats, two grassroots organizations working to elect progressive Democrats to Congress. He was the National Campaign Coordinator for the Bernie Sanders Presidential campaign, and recently served as the Communications Director for Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. He writes about rebuilding America at AmericasUndoing.com.This is a [Democratic] Party that is led by sinecurists and apparatchiks who never look at themselves in the mirror after they lose to the most vicious, cruel, ignorant, anti-worker, anti-women, anti-environment, anti-small taxpayer, pro-war Republican Party. They never look into it. It’s always: they blame the Greens or they blame some third party or Independent candidate. And they never ask themselves why as a national party did they abandon half the country, which are now called red states?Ralph NaderThe Democratic Party I think, ultimately, is leaderless because it’s visionless. It doesn’t really see. I don’t think the Democratic Party as an entity or as an ideology has a real vision for how to go forward differently. And, therefore, it’s hard to be led. It’s hard to lead if you don’t have a direction.Corbin TrentThe Democratic Party—like your Chuck Schumers, like your Hakeem Jeffries, and like most of the people that are elected there and in leadership positions at all, look at this system, the system of neoliberalism, and they think that somehow it’s going to magically start working again. And the fact is that it’s not. They have been unable so far to internalize the depth of the brokenness of this system. And then really unable to, I think, really internalize why Trump was powerful, why his messages were powerful. They want to look at it through this extremely narrow and negative lens of racism, bigotry and fear. As opposed to a complete and utter disdain for the system which is sucking from their lives and extracting from their communities. And I think that spells trouble.Corbi

Ralph welcomes sociologist and historian Behrooz Ghamari-Tabrizi to discuss the United States' war of aggression on Iran.Behrooz Ghamari-Tabrizi is an Iranian-born American historian and sociologist. He is a Research Fellow at the Center for Place, Culture, and Politics at the CUNY Graduate Center. He was the Chair of the Department of Near Eastern Studies and Director of the Sharmin and Bijan Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Iran and Persian Gulf Studies at Princeton University. He is the author of four books on different aspects and historical context of the Iranian revolution of 1979 and its aftermath.The only countries that I see that are in constant violation of international law is the United States and Israel. And frankly, I am speechless, although I’m speaking, but I am speechless—in what universe can this war be justified as self-defense? You listened to Secretary Rubio’s speech in Munich where he laments 400 years of colonial rule being lost to this international law and laws of fighting wars because they want to go back to the way things were in the 18th and 19th century. This is a naked expansionist, extortionist administration here, and that’s the only reason they have launched this war, and there is absolutely no justification for it.Behrooz Ghamari-TabriziFor years and years, the Israelis have been assassinating Iranian scientists. They were sabotaging Iranian industries. And actually, the Iranian government showed tremendous restraint in responding to these Israeli provocations because they didn’t want to create the situation in which we find ourselves today. But then at the end of the day, calling Iran the aggressor here I think is a total ignorance of history and the context in which this war has started.Behrooz Ghamari-TabriziAll these things are not to suggest that the Iranian government in any form or shape is a democratic and just state. But the question here is about th

Events are moving rapidly in the Middle East, so we wanted to provide our loyal podcast listeners with some context to help digest everything that’s happened so far. We hope to provide a longer view of the what, where, who, how and why and offer some perspective on this military action’s broader historical, political, and legal implications.Ted Postol is Professor of Science, Technology and National Security Policy Emeritus in the Program in Science, Technology, and Society at MIT. His expertise is in nuclear weapon systems, including submarine warfare, applications of nuclear weapons, ballistic missile defense, and ballistic missiles more generally. He previously worked as an analyst at the Office of Technology Assessment and as a science and policy adviser to the chief of naval operations. In 2016, he received the Garwin Prize from the Federation of American Scientists for his work in assessing and critiquing the government’s claims about missile defenses.Ambassador Chas Freeman is a retired career diplomat who has negotiated on behalf of the United States with over 100 foreign governments in East and South Asia, Africa, Latin America, the Middle East, and both Western and Eastern Europe. Ambassador Freeman was previously a Senior Fellow at Brown University’s Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs, and served as U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense, U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia, acting Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, and Deputy Chief of Mission and Chargé d’Affaires in the American embassies at both Bangkok and Beijing. He was Director for Chinese Affairs at the U.S. Department of State from 1979-1981. He was the principal American interpreter during the late President Nixon’s historic visit to China in 1972. In addition to Chinese, Ambassador Freeman speaks French and Spanish at the professional level and can converse in Arabic and several other languages.Bruce Fein is a Constitutional scholar and an expert on international law. Mr. Fein was Associate Deputy Atto

Washington Post personal finance columnist, Michelle Singletary, tells the moving story of how a visit to her grade school by the Reverend Jesse Jackson inspired her life and career as described in her column, “How the Rev. Jesse Jackson Taught Me to Keep Hope Alive." Then Ralph welcomes Professor Eric S. Fish from U.C Davis School of Law to explain how grand juries are no longer rubber-stamping frivolous cases brought to them by the Trump Administration. Plus, Ralph gives us his take on Trump’s marathon State of the Union speech and the Democratic response.Michelle Singletary writes the nationally-syndicated personal finance column “The Color of Money,” which appears in the Washington Post on Wednesdays and Sundays. In 2021, she won the Gerald Loeb award for commentary. She has written four personal finance books, including, What to Do With Your Money When Crisis Hits: A Survival Guide and The 21-Day Financial Fast: Your Path to Financial Peace and Freedom.The Trump administration’s destruction of diversity, equity, and inclusion—they misunderstand what that means. It doesn’t mean that you’re giving jobs to people who are unqualified. It means that you recognize that the playing field wasn’t even, and let’s even this playing field. I liken it to a football team. You can’t have a football team of all quarterbacks and win. You have to have a quarterback, a running back, a linebacker, you have to have a good kicker. It’s the same thing—your team has to encompass people that represent all kinds of abilities to have a winning team. So DEI isn’t a giveaway. It isn’t charity. It recognizes that when you have people from different backgrounds and different perspectives and different skill levels, you have a winning team.Michelle SingletaryEric S Fish is professor of law at the UC Davis School of Law. Professor Fish’s primary research is in criminal law, with particular focus on the ethical duties of participants in the criminal process, the structure of immigration crimes, and the system’s emphasis on administrative efficien

Ralph welcomes J.B. Branch (Public Citizen's Big Tech accountability advocate) to discuss some of the sectors that Big Tech is disrupting with artificial intelligence. Then, Steve, David, and Hannah speak to Russell Mokhiber about the latest issue of the Capitol Hill Citizen. Finally, Ralph speaks on the legacy of the late Rev. Jesse Jackson.J.B. Branch is the Big Tech accountability advocate for Public Citizen’s Congress Watch division. He leads Public Citizen’s advocacy efforts on artificial intelligence accountability, consumer data and privacy rights, tech product safety, platform oversight, and child online safety protections.What’s happening is these AI companies are taking a page out of the playbook of the social media days. When social media was brand new, they were trying to say that this technology is going to lead to people being more connected, it’s going to lead to efficiencies, it’s going to lead to overall positives. And in fact, there were times where you had big tech CEOs who were saying that a lot of this money was going to trickle down. And you look down, and you look up, and I’m not any richer because Facebook stock is soaring or Microsoft’s is soaring. What we’re really seeing is the same thing that’s happened with these large tech companies—which is that they promised the world, they offer back very little, and in fact, what they offer up is a series of harms.JB BranchCongress has been really bought into AI. They’re buying into this idea that it’s a race for the world between us and China. So you have some congressional folks who believe that this is a race against China and that we need to harness this weapon. And then you have a lot of corporate money from these AI companies…They’re dumping a lot of money into congressional races, to ensure that they’re propping up candidates who align with this deregulatory scheme.JB BranchRussell Mokhiber is editor of the Corporate Crime Reporter and the Capitol Hill Citizen. He is also founder of singlepayeraction.org, and editor of the website Mo

Ralph welcomes, Robert Weissman co-president of Public Citizen, to discuss his Senate testimony about the many ways the Trump Administration’s assault on fraud is itself fraudulent. Plus, Ralph informs us of a report from Aljazeera about the MK-84 weapon the IDF is using in Gaza that is designed to generate so much heat it literally vaporizes people.Robert Weissman is a staunch public interest advocate and activist, as well as an expert on a wide variety of issues ranging from corporate accountability and government transparency, to trade and globalization, to economic and regulatory policy. As the president of Public Citizen, he has spearheaded the effort to loosen the chokehold corporations and the wealthy have over our democracy.Every American should be worried about fraud. So it’s fine for the committee to be talking about fraud, but it should be based on actual facts and what’s actually happening, which is not what’s going on with this focus on Minnesota… And without a doubt, if the concern is about fraud in the public or the private economy right now, the number one problem with fraud is the Trump administration.Robert WeissmanThanks to the Supreme Court decision on Presidential immunity, Trump believes (correctly) that he will not be held criminally accountable for anything that he does while he’s President. And that is true so long as that Supreme Court decision stands. And I think it’s fair to say that basically everyone who’s working for him right now—who I think are committing all kinds of crimes, including through the sale of pardons and through the outrageous use of ICE in Minnesota and around the country—I think they expect they’re going to get pardoned before he goes. So I think they think they too will be (and they’re probably not wrong in expecting it) that they too will be immune from criminal prosecution (at least federal criminal prosecution) for any crimes they commit while they’re in the administration.Robert WeissmanIn Case You Haven’t Heard with Francesco DeSantisNews 2/13/26* Our top stories this week concern the Jeffrey Epstein case. According to POLI

Ralph welcomes Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson to discuss a wide range of topics, including NATO, Greenland, Gaza, and more. Then, Ralph speaks to Rabbi Alissa Wise (founding director of Rabbis for Ceasefire) about the “Jews for Food Aid for People in Gaza" campaign. Finally, Ralph and the team address some current events.Lawrence Wilkerson is a retired U.S. Army colonel. Over his 31 years of service, Colonel Wilkerson served as Secretary of State Colin Powell's Chief of Staff from 2002 to 2005, and Special Assistant to General Powell when he was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 1989 to 1993. Colonel Wilkerson also served as Deputy Director and Director of the U.S. Marine Corps War College at Quantico, Virginia, and for fifteen years he was the Distinguished Visiting Professor of Government and Public Policy at the College of William and Mary. He is currently a Senior Fellow at the Eisenhower Media Network, senior advisor to the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, and co-founder of the All-Volunteer Force Forum.You aren't a newspaper, not really, if you don't have the guts to go out and get the news wherever it's happening. And you're reporting, nonetheless, to the American people [on the truth]. And it's nothing about the truth. It's as bad as what Netanyahu does in his own country in Hebrew. It's propaganda. And in many cases, it's not even accurate propaganda. It's falsified propaganda. You know, there used to be a law. And the law prohibited anyone in the Defense Department, for example, but any of the government agencies (Defense Department was the most guilty) that said: you cannot propagandize the American people. You can propagandize foreign audiences—even in wartime, you can propagandize those audiences, but you must not propagandize the American people. You have to tell them the truth or tell nothing at all. And if you're a media outlet, you should be telling them the truth, or the truth as you best can determine it. We don't honor that law anymore.Colonel Lawrence WilkersonI think [NATO and the EU are] gone, but I think the prospect for the future ought to be that we replace them. We don't just

Capitalism as an economic system has been around in various forms for over a thousand years and according to our featured guest this week, it keeps evolving. Join us for a lively and challenging discussion between Ralph and Harvard history professor, Sven Beckert, as they discuss his book “Capitalism: A Global History.”Sven Beckert is the Laird Bell Professor of History at Harvard University. He has written widely on the economic, social, and political history of capitalism. His book Empire of Cotton won the Bancroft Prize and was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize. His latest book is Capitalism: A Global History.Capitalism has existed within a whole range of political systems of organizing political power. And this includes authoritarian regimes; this includes fascist regimes; and this includes also liberal democratic regimes such as Great Britain and the United States. And you see this kind of tension emerging today within the United States in which there is a kind of concern, I think, among some capital-owning elites about liberal democracy. They see that as being limiting to some of their business interests.Sven BeckertIn a way, the book tries to not make us to be just powerless cogs in a machine and not powerless cogs in the unfolding of history. But the book very much emphasizes that the particular shape that capitalism has taken at any particular moment in time has a lot to do also with questions of the state. It has a lot to do with questions of political power. It has a lot to do with questions of social contestation. And sometimes capitalism has been reshaped drastically by the actions of people with very little power. And I show that in particular when I look at the end of the slave-based plantation economy in the Americas, which is very much driven by the collective mobilization of some of the poorest and most exploited people on planet Earth—namely the enslaved workers who grow all that sugar and all that cotton or that tobacco in the 16th, 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries.Sven BeckertI think markets and market activities have existed in all

Ralph welcomes professor and historian Daniel Immerwahr to discuss the history of the United States' overseas possessions and his book "How to Hide an Empire: A History of the Greater United States."Daniel Immerwahr is a professor and historian at Northwestern University. He is the author of Thinking Small: The United States and the Lure of Community Development and How to Hide an Empire: A History of the Greater United States.What I wanted to do in the book was to look at the United States and to take seriously the parts of the United States that don’t always feature in the textbooks—that are outside of the mainland, the contiguous blob. And what I discovered when I did that was that these places were often in the mainland’s mind seen as peripheral places, but this was not a peripheral history…It turns out that once you’ve got the territories in view, you have a different understanding of them. And so a lot of US history (and really important parts of US history) has actually taken place outside of the part of the country that we normally think of as the United States.Daniel ImmerwahrI got really interested in the book in how it came to be and why it mattered that US standards prevailed and how other countries dealt with that by either jumping on the ship or trying to resist and that became difficult for them. And how emotionally hard it is for other parts of the world to [face] this onslaught of not just the US military, not just US planes, its bombs—we know all that stuff, and I don’t want to diminish it, but all the US stuff and ways of talking and the English language and the dollar. And each one of those comes as a kind of challenge: Are you going to adopt this or not? Because life’s going to be a little harder if you don’t, but if you do, you’re kind of a puppet. And everyone in the world has had to deal with that challenge on a daily basis—what screws they use, what language they speak, all that kind of stuff. And we don’t talk about that a lot, but that actually strikes me as a really important facet of US power.Daniel ImmerwahrNews 1/23/26* Our first two

With the American republic hanging in the balance, Ralph calls on Democrats to pressure Republicans in the House and Senate to impeach Trump before the midterms or suffer the consequences. Then, we welcome Dino Grandoni, co-author of a Washington Post report on the surprising ways various species of animals and plants help advance our own health and longevity.Dino Grandoni is a reporter who covers life sciences for the Washington Post. He was part of a reporting team that was a finalist for the 2025 Pulitzer Prize in National Reporting for coverage of Hurricane Helene. He previously covered the Environmental Protection Agency and wrote a daily tipsheet on energy and environmental policy. He is co-author (with Hailey Haymond and Katty Huertas) of the feature “50 Species That Save Us.”The Democrats—while there are people like constitutional law expert Jamie Raskin (who has said a shadow hearing to publicly educate the American people on impeachment “is a good idea”) he’s been muzzled by Hakeem Jeffries and Charlie Schumer, who basically don’t want the Democrats to use the word impeachment. So who’s using the word impeachment the most? Donald Trump—not only wants to impeach judges who decide against him, but he’s talking about the Democrats impeaching him, and he uses the word all the time. So we have an upside-down situation here where the opposition party is not in the opposition on the most critical factor, which is that we have the most impeachable President in American history, getting worse by the day.Ralph NaderIf the founding fathers came back to life today, would any of them oppose the impeachment, conviction, and removal of office of Donald J. Trump, who talks about being a monarch? That’s what they fought King George over. Of course, they would all support it.Ralph NaderWhat we have in these cards and in our stories at the Washington Post here are examples of the ways we know, the ways that scientists have uncovered how plants and animals help us. But we don’t know what we don’t know. There are likely numerous other ways that plants and animals