The New Yorker contributing writer Ruth Marcus joins Tyler Foggatt to discuss Donald Trump’s “revenge tour”—his effort to use the levers of government to settle personal and political scores. They talk about the indictment of the former F.B.I. director James Comey, why legal experts see the case against Comey as alarmingly weak, and how Trump’s campaign of retribution has expanded to include prosecutors, lawmakers, and even the families of his critics. They also consider how Trump’s quest for vengeance is testing the limits of American law, and whether the country can avoid a permanent cycle of political retaliation and lawfare. This week’s reading: “The Flimsy, Dangerous Indictment of James Comey,” by Ruth Marcus “What Will Bari Weiss Do to CBS News?,” by Jon Allsop “Who Can Lead the Democrats?,” by Amy Davidson Sorkin “The Volunteers Tracking ICE in Los Angeles,” by Oren Peleg “Why Israel and Hamas Might Finally Have a Deal,” by Isaac Chotiner Tune in to The Political Scene wherever you get your podcasts. 

Robert P. George is not a passive observer of the proverbial culture wars; he’s been a very active participant. As a Catholic legal scholar and philosopher at Princeton University, he was an influential opponent of Roe v. Wade and same-sex marriage, receiving a Presidential medal from President George W. Bush. George decries the “decadence” of secular culture, and, in 2016, he co-wrote an op-ed declaring Donald Trump “manifestly unfit” to serve as President. Although George disagrees with the Administration’s tactics to change universities’ policies by punishment, he agrees with its contention that campuses have become hotbeds of leftism that stifle debate. He regards this not as a particular evil of the left but as “human nature”: “If conservatives had the kind of monopoly that liberals had,” George tells David Remnick, “I suspect we’d have the same situation, but just in reverse.” His recent book, “Seeking Truth and Speaking Truth: Law and Morality in Our Cultural Moment,” tries to chart a course back toward civil, functioning debate in a polarized society. “I encourage my students to take courses from people who disagree with me, like Cornel West and Peter Singer,” the latter of whom is a controversial philosopher of ethics. “Cornel and I teach together for this same reason. Peter invites his students to take my courses. That’s the way it should be.” 

The Washington Roundtable discusses how this week’s government shutdown can be best understood by looking at the background and influence of Russell Vought, the director of the White House Office of Management and Budget. Vought is a Christian nationalist who served in the first Trump Administration. He was a chief architect of the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, and has written that the country is in a “post constitutional moment.” Amid the shutdown, Vought has threatened to lay off federal workers en masse and to withhold funds from Democratic-leaning states. The panel considers whether these moves are not just an expansion of Presidential power but a fiscal “partitioning” of America.  This week’s reading: “Donald Trump’s Shutdown Power Play,” by Susan B. Glasser “Can the Democrats Take Free Speech Back from the Right?,” by Jay Caspian Kang “Why Democrats Shut Down the Government,” by Jon Allsop “Is Donald Trump’s Sweeping Gaza Peace Plan Really Viable?,” by Robin Wright “Eric Adams Slips Out the Side Door,” by Eric Lach “The Politics of Faith After Charlie Kirk,” by Michael Luo “Grace and Disgrace,” by David Remnick  Tune in to The Political Scene wherever you get your podcasts. 

The New Yorker contributing writer Jeannie Suk Gersen joins Tyler Foggatt to discuss the Supreme Court’s new term and the cases that could test the boundaries of executive authority and separation of powers. They talk about challenges to Presidential power under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, disputes over voting rights and racial gerrymandering, and a First Amendment fight over state bans on conversion therapy. They also consider the Court’s increasing reliance on its emergency docket and what John Roberts’s twenty years as Chief Justice reveals about the conservative legal movement’s influence on the Court. This week’s reading: “Harvard’s Mixed Victory,” by Jeannie Suk Gersen “Is Donald Trump’s Sweeping Gaza Peace Plan Really Viable?,” by Robin Wright “Why Democrats Shut Down the Government,” by Jon Allsop “Have Cubans Fled One Authoritarian State for Another?,” by Jon Lee Anderson “The Age of Enshittification,” by Kyle Chayka Tune in to The Political Scene wherever you get your podcasts.

The author and podcaster Ezra Klein may be only forty-one years old, but he’s been part of the political-culture conversation for a long time. He was a blogger, then a Washington Post columnist and editor, a co-founder of Vox, and is now a writer and podcast host for the New York Times. He’s also the co-author of the recent best-selling book “Abundance”.  Most recently, Klein has drawn the ire of progressives for a column he wrote about the assassination of Charlie Kirk, in which he praised the late conservative activist for practicing politics “the right way.” He’s also been making a case for how the Democrats can reëmerge from the political wilderness. But some of his other ideas have also invited their share of detractors.  Klein tells David Remnick, “I try to take seriously questions that I don’t love. I don’t try to insist the world works the way I want it to work. I try to be honest with myself about the way it’s working.” In response to criticism that his recent work has indicated a rightward shift in his thinking, Klein says, “One thing I’ve been saying about the big tent of the Democratic Party is the theory of having a big tent doesn’t just mean moving to the right; it also means accepting in the left.”

The Washington Roundtable discusses how, in the wake of the reinstatement of Jimmy Kimmel’s show, public resistance has a chance to turn the tide against autocratic impulses in today’s politics. They are joined by Hardy Merriman, an expert on the history and practice of civil resistance, to discuss what kinds of coördinated actions—protests, boycotts, “buycotts,” strikes, and other nonviolent approaches—are most effective in a fight against democratic backsliding. “Acts of non-coöperation are very powerful,” Merriman, the former president of the International Center on Nonviolent Conflict, says. “Non-coöperation is very much about numbers. You don’t necessarily need people doing things that are high risk. You just need large numbers of people doing them.”  This week’s reading: “Donald Trump Keeps Finding New Ways to Shock the World,” by Susan B. Glasser “Is Trump’s Attack on the Media Following Putin’s Playbook?,” by Joshua Yaffa “Where Should the Democrats Go from Here?,” by Jon Allsop “Donald Trump’s Firing of a Federal Prosecutor Crosses the Reddest of Lines,” by Ruth Marcus “Seeing Enemies Everywhere,” by Jonathan Blitzer “Can Progressive Mayors Redeem the Democratic Party?,” by Bill McKibben Tune in wherever you get your podcasts.

The New Yorker contributing writer Dhruv Khullar joins Tyler Foggatt to discuss how Donald Trump is transforming the nation’s approach to vaccines and immunization during his second term. They talk about the repopulating of federal agencies and advisory panels with skeptics, the politicization of once technical debates under the “Make America Healthy Again” agenda, and what happens when people distrustful of the medical establishment end up running American public-health policy. They also examine how states are stepping in to fill the vacuum left by Washington, creating a patchwork of approaches to vaccines across the country. This week’s reading: “A New Era of Vaccine Federalism,” by Dhruv Khullar “Can Progressive Mayors Redeem the Democratic Party?,” by Bill McKibben “Donald Trump’s Firing of a Federal Prosecutor Crosses the Reddest of Lines,” by Ruth Marcus “What Trump Wants from a TikTok Deal with China,” by Clare Malone “Can Liberalism Be Saved?,” by Isaac Chotiner Tune in to The Political Scene wherever you get your podcasts. 

“The Constitution gives the states the power to set the time, place, and manner of elections,” the election lawyer Marc Elias points out. “It gives the President no [such] power.” Yet, almost one year before the midterms, Donald Trump has called for a nationwide prohibition on mail-in voting, an option favored by Democrats, as well as restrictions on voting machines. The Justice Department has demanded sensitive voter information from at least thirty-four states so far, with little explanation as to how the information will be used. Will we have free and fair congressional elections in 2026? “I am very worried that we could have elections that do not reflect the desires and the voting preferences of everyone who wishes they could vote and have their vote tabulated accurately,” Elias tells David Remnick. “That may sound very lawyerly and very technical, but I think it would be a historic rollback.” Elias’s firm fought and ultimately won almost every case that Trump and Republican allies brought against the 2020 election, and Elias continues to fight the latest round of incursions in court. And while he rues what he calls “re-gerrymandering” in Texas—designed to squeeze Texas’s Democratic representatives out of Congress—Elias thinks states run by Democrats have no choice but to copy the tactic. “Before Gavin Newsom announced what he was doing, I came out publicly and said Democrats should gerrymander nine seats out of California, which would mean there’d be no Republicans left in the delegation. . . . At the end of the day, if there’s no disincentive structure for Republicans to jump off this path, [then] it just continues.” 

The Washington Roundtable is joined by the former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Keren Yarhi-Milo, the dean of the School of International and Public Affairs at Columbia University, to discuss why interpreting the psychology of world leaders such as Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, and Xi Jinping is essential to understanding global crises. Clinton also shares her thoughts on Gavin Newsom’s plan for redistricting in California, the Trump Administration’s free-speech crackdown in the wake of the Charlie Kirk assassination, and ABC’s decision to pull “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” off the air. “Jimmy Kimmel and all of the late-night comedians have certainly said a lot of things about me that I found painful, offensive, outraging. It never crossed my mind that I could call up and say, ‘Hey, get rid of this guy,’ ” Clinton says. “It’s all at the behest of the President, who wants to stifle and remove any opposition, and certainly anyone who makes fun of him.” Clinton and Yarhi-Milo’s new book, “Inside the Situation Room: The Theory and Practice of Crisis Decision-Making,” was published this week. This week’s reading: “The Grave Threat Posed by Donald Trump’s Attack on Jimmy Kimmel,” by Isaac Chotiner “Israel’s New Occupation,” by Ruth Margalit “J. D. Vance, Charlie Kirk, and the Politics-as-Talk Show Singularity,” by Andrew Marantz “What the Video of Charlie Kirk’s Murder Might Do,” by Jay Caspian King Tune in wherever you get your podcasts.

The New Yorker staff writer Andrew Marantz joins Tyler Foggatt for the latest installment of “How Bad Is It?,” a monthly series on the health of American democracy. Their guest is the Brazilian filmmaker Petra Costa, whose documentaries explore the country’s democratic backsliding. They discuss what the United States can learn from Brazil’s struggles with political violence and the rise of authoritarianism, and they respond to the recent conviction of Jair Bolsonaro for his role in a coup attempt. Tyler and Andrew also consider the possible ramifications of the recent assassination of Charlie Kirk, including the Trump Administration’s threats to target liberal groups. This week’s reading: “Charlie Kirk and Tyler Robinson Came from the Same Warped Online Worlds,” by Kyle Chayka “What the Video of Charlie Kirk’s Murder Might Do,” by Jay Caspian King “The U.S. Government’s Extraordinary Pursuit of Kilmar Ábrego García,” by Cristian Fairas “Donald Trump’s Assault on Disability Rights,” by E. Tammy Kim “How Jessica Reed Kraus Went from Mommy Blogger to MAHA Maven,” by Clare Malone Tune in to The Political Scene wherever you get your podcasts.

For decades, the United States backed efforts to achieve a two-state solution—in which Israel would exist side by side with the Palestinian state, with both states recognizing each other’s claim to contested territory. The veteran negotiators Hussein Agha, representing Palestine, and Robert Malley, an American diplomat, played instrumental roles in that long effort, including the critical Camp David summit of 2000. But, in their new book, “Tomorrow Is Yesterday,” they conclude that they were part of a charade. There was never any way that a two-state solution could satisfy either of the parties, Agha and Malley tell David Remnick in an interview. “A waste of time is almost a charitable way to look at it,” Malley notes bitterly. “At the end of that thirty-year-or-so period, the Israelis and Palestinians are in a worse situation than before the U.S. got so heavily invested.” The process, appealing to Western leaders and liberals in Israel, was geared to “find the kind of solutions that have a technical outcome, that are measurable, and that can be portrayed by lines on maps,” Agha says. “It completely discarded the issue of emotions and history. You can’t be emotional. You have to be rational. You have to be cool. But rational and cool has nothing to do with the conflict.”  “What Killed the Two-State Solution?,” an excerpt from Agha and Malley’s new book, was published in The New Yorker.  New episodes of The New Yorker Radio Hour drop every Tuesday and Friday. Follow the show wherever you get your podcasts. 

The Washington Roundtable discusses the fatal shooting of the right-wing activist and Donald Trump ally Charlie Kirk, who was killed on Wednesday during a speech on a college campus. The panel considers whether the United States risks tumbling into a spiral of political violence, and how the Administration might use this moment to justify a crackdown on political opponents. This week’s reading: “Did Trump Just Declare War on the American Left?,” by Susan B. Glasser “MAGA Reacts to the Assassination of Charlie Kirk,” by Antonia Hitchens “Charlie Kirk’s Murder and the Crisis of Political Violence,” by Benjamin Wallace-Wells “The Epstein Birthday Book Is Even Worse Than You Might Realize,” by Jessica Winter Tune in wherever you get your podcasts.

Fergus McIntosh, the head research editor at The New Yorker, joins Tyler Foggatt to discuss how the magazine is approaching fact -checking in the second Trump era. They talk about how the spread of disinformation and deepfakes has changed the work of verifying facts; why Trump has been more aggressive, in his second term, about restricting the release of government data; and what makes his particular style of spreading falsehoods so difficult to counter. This week’s reading: “The Latest Phase in Trump’s War on Data,” by Fergus McIntosh “Inside the Chaos at the C.D.C.,” by Charles Bethea “Social Media Is Navigating Its Sectarian Phase,”by Kyle Chayka  “Brazil Braces for a Verdict on Its Ex-President—and on Its Democracy,” by Jon Lee Anderson “Does Society Have Too Many Rules?,” by Joshua Rothman Tune in to The Political Scene wherever you get your podcasts.

Speculation, analysis, and commentary circulated all summer, after the announcement, in June, that Anna Wintour would step back from her role as the editor-in-chief of American Vogue. This changing of the guard is uniquely fraught, because Wintour’s name has become nearly inextricable from the magazine, to a degree almost unknown today. And, as New York Fashion Week was set to begin, Wintour spoke with David Remnick about choosing her successor, the Vogue.com editor Chloe Malle. “It felt like this was the right time,” she says. With an unusual number of new creative directors in positions at major fashion houses, “It seemed like a good moment to bring in someone with a different perspective and a different generation who could look at things in a new way.” Wintour was appointed editor-in-chief in 1988, and generations of designers have come up under her famously acute and decisive judgments. She comes from a publishing family; her brother is a well-known journalist, and her father was the editor of the London Evening Standard. She credits him with steering her into a career in fashion, even suggesting that the teen-age Anna write down “editor of Vogue” as her career aspiration on a school form. “Working my first jobs in London, there [was] no money, there’s no staff, there’s no teams, so that you have to learn how to do everything,” Wintour says. “So, when I came to the States and there was a shoe editor and an underwear editor and a fabric editor, it was all so siloed. I felt very confident because I sort of knew how to do everything.” Wintour is also known for bringing politics to Vogue; she’s a noted Democratic supporter and donor. “I’ve been impressed by Governor Newsom, I think he’s certainly making a stand, and obviously I’m sure there’ll be many other candidates that will emerge, hopefully soon.” But, in this political environment, Remnick asks, “How do you make a case that fashion is important?” Fashion, she replies, “is always important. It’s a question of self-expression and a statement about yourself. . . . And, forgive me, David, but how boring would it be if everybody was just wearing a dark suit and a white shirt all the time?” New episodes of The New Yorker Radio Hour drop every Tuesday and Friday. Follow the show wherever you get your podcasts. 

The Washington Roundtable, hosted by the staff writers Susan B. Glasser, Jane Mayer, and Evan Osnos, is back in season. The co-hosts reflect on the news of this summer, discussing President Trump’s imposition of tariffs on nearly every major U.S. trading partner; his deployment of the National Guard on the streets of the capital; and his purges of agencies including the Department of Justice, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. They also discuss what Trump might use emergency powers to do in the near future. “You don’t acquire all this power, and go to all this effort, and then not start to use it,” Glasser says. This week’s reading: “How Many Court Cases Can Trump Lose in a Single Week?,” by Susan B. Glasser “Trump’s Department of Energy Gets Scienced,” by Bill McKibben “Texas Democrats’ Weapons of the Weak,” by Rachel Monroe “Do State Referendums on Abortion Work?,” by Peter Slevin Tune in wherever you get your podcasts.

The New Yorker contributing writer Ruth Marcus joins the guest host and staff writer Clare Malone to discuss Marcus’s recent profile of U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi. They talk about Bondi’s political origins and her unprecedented reshaping of the Justice Department, and how she delivers on President Trump’s desire to use the legal system for revenge and retribution. They also touch on Bondi’s mishandling of the Jeffrey Epstein case, which has drawn the ire of both Democratic politicians and core parts of the President’s base.  This week’s reading: “Pam Bondi’s Power Play,” by Ruth Marcus “Texas Democrats’ Weapons of the Weak,” by Rachel Monroe “Do State Referendums on Abortion Work?,” by Peter Slevin “Why Don’t We Take Nuclear Weapons Seriously?,” by Rivka Galchen “How Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.,’s Anti-Vax Agenda Is Infecting America,” by Isaac Chotiner Tune in to The Political Scene wherever you get your podcasts.

The term “culture wars” is most often associated with issues of sexuality, race, religion, and gender. But, as recent months have made plain, when Donald Trump refers to the culture wars, he also means the arts. He fired the board of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, which Republicans want to rename for him. His Administration fired the national archivist and the Librarian of Congress, and pressured the director of the National Portrait Gallery to resign; it is reviewing the entire Smithsonian Institution, looking for what the President calls “improper ideology.” Some view these moves as low-hanging fruit for Trump, and a distraction from bad press about Jeffrey Epstein, the Putin meeting, and tariffs. But Adam Gopnik believes that interpretation is a misreading. The loyalty purge at institutions such as the National Portrait Gallery is a key part of his agenda. “Pluralism is the key principle of a democratic culture,” Gopnik tells David Remnick. Could we be following the path of Stalinist Russia, where a head of state dictated reviews of concerts, Remnick asks? “I pray and believe that we are not. But that is certainly the direction in which one inevitably heads when the political boss takes over key cultural institutions, and dictates who’s acceptable and who is not.” Gopnik recalls saying after the election that “Jimmy Kimmel and Stephen Colbert would be next.” “You would see them disappear,” he added. “Each time, we find a rationale for it or a rationale is offered. And it’s much easier for us to swallow the rationale than to face the reality.”

The Democratic strategist Lis Smith joins the guest host Clare Malone, a New Yorker staff writer, to discuss the state of the Democratic Party, and how a decade of reliance on anti-Trump rhetoric has left Democrats reactive and directionless. They consider why groups that Democrats once counted on—from young people to communities of color—are shifting rightward, and what new strategies politicians from Gavin Newsom to Zohran Mamdani are testing to prove that the Democratic Party stands for more than opposition to Trump. This week’s reading “The Trump Administration’s Efforts to Reshape America’s Past,” by Jill Lepore “How Former Biden Officials Defend Their Gaza Policy,” by Isaac Chotiner “The Endless August Recess,” by Antonia Hitchens “The Enormous Stakes of Trump’s Effort to Fire the Fed Governor Lisa Cook,” by John Cassidy “What’s Life Like in Washington, D.C., During Trump’s Takeover?,” by Margaret Talbot Tune in to The Political Scene wherever you get your podcasts.

Since the end of the Cold War, most Americans have taken U.S. military supremacy for granted. We can no longer afford to do so, according to reporting by the staff writer Dexter Filkins. China has developed advanced weapons that rival or surpass America’s; and at the same time, drone warfare has fundamentally changed calculations of the battlefield. Ukraine’s ability to hold off the massive Russian Army depends largely on a startup industry that has provided millions of drones—small, highly accurate, and as cheap as five hundred dollars each—to inflict enormous casualties on invading forces. In some other conflict, could the U.S. be in the position of Russia? “The nightmare scenario” at the Pentagon, Filkins tells David Remnick, is, “we’ve got an eighteen-billion-dollar aircraft carrier steaming its way toward the western Pacific, and [an enemy could] fire drones at these things, and they’re highly, highly accurate, and they move at incredible speeds. . . . To give [Secretary of Defense Pete] Hegseth credit, and the people around him . . . they say, ‘O.K., we get it. We’re going to change the Pentagon procurement process,’ ” spending less on aircraft carriers and more on small technology like drones. But “the Pentagon is so slow, and people have been talking about these things for years. . . . Nobody has been able to do it.” Read Filkins’s “Is the U.S. Ready for the Next War?” New episodes of The New Yorker Radio Hour drop every Tuesday and Friday. Follow the show wherever you get your podcasts.

The Washington Roundtable speaks with Jeffrey Rosen, the president and C.E.O. of the National Constitution Center, a nonpartisan nonprofit, about how America’s founders tried to tyrant-proof their constitutional system, how Donald Trump’s whim-based decision-making resembles that of the dictator Julius Caesar, and what we can learn from the fall of the Roman Republic. Plus, how the Supreme Court is responding to the Trump Administration’s broad claims of executive power.  Rosen, a professor at George Washington University Law School, hosts the “We the People” podcast and is the author of “The Pursuit of Happiness: How Classical Writers on Virtue Inspired the Lives of the Founders and Defined America.”  This episode originally aired on March 7th, 2025