Stress Test, from Mother Jones

The first presidential debate of the 2020 election was a night of sound and fury, signifying Trumpian nihilism. Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden was visibly trying to stay calm and focus on the camera and speak as directly as possible to the American people—while President Donald Trump attacked, interrupted, and talked over everyone, moderator Chris Wallace included, whose 11th hour recommitment to the rules of the debate came far too late to somehow contain the wreckage.

The experience of watching the debate was unlike any other in American history, debasing democracy thanks to Trump's careening performance. Typically we ask: who won and who lost? But today, that question seems less relevant: This was about a stark choice, laid bare. On today’s show, we’re bringing you some next-day analysis from Mother Jones’ DC Bureau Chief David Corn and DC-based reporter Nathalie Baptiste. They get into the mind-boggling contrast between Donald Trump and Joe Biden on the debate stage, the racism embedded in the debate topics, and whether you might have any reason at all to feel hopeful as November 3 approaches.

Trailblazing Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died last week at 87. President Trump now has the opportunity to remake the court for a generation by replacing R.B.G. with a staunch conservative. On today's show: What happens next? Mother Jones's voting rights reporter Ari Berman discusses what the scorched-earth Republican strategy reveals about the fairness of American democracy, and the battle for free, fair elections come November 3.

Ginsburg’s death comes as President Donald Trump is already trashing the Constitution to stay in power: His attacks on the postal service and the census are laying the groundwork to steal the election. Ari tells host Jamilah King that by eroding Americans’ confidence in the census, the administration may already be accomplishing its goal of rigging the count in its favor. And if voters are afraid to vote in-person believe that postal delays will cause their mail-in ballots not to be counted, they may decide not to vote at all. The extraordinary efforts to undermine the mail and census should prepare us for the possibility of an even more egregious abuse of power to keep Trump in office. Now, with another Supreme Court pick during his presidency, a contested election could be decided by a court with yet another conservative Justice ready to side with Trump. How much damage can he do now, and can it be reversed?

It is impossible to tell the story of President Trump's rise to power without understanding his relationship with Fox News. Together they form one of modern America's most defining duos, argues CNN's chief media correspondent Brian Stelter, who documents their symbiotic dance his new book, Hoax: Donald Trump, Fox News and the Dangerous Distortion of Truth.

Through countless interviews with sources at various of levels of power inside Fox, Stelter reveals how the wildly popular cable channel has subordinated its journalistic integrity to Trump's political interests, while setting the daily agenda for his administration. "Every day's a new episode," Stelter told Mother Jones Editor-in-Chief Clara Jeffery, during a recent livestream event hosted by the Commonwealth Club of San Francisco. "Certainly Fox programs his presidency that way."

The title of Stelter's book was inspired back-to-back use of the word "hoax" by Trump and Hannity, to describe the emerging coronavirus crisis in the U.S. Both Trump and Fox downplayed the threat at the outset, a deadly error for which they face dual culpability (but zero accountability from Fox brass)—a travesty made all the more apparent following the recent release of Bob Woodward's tapes.

This conversation between Brian Stelter and Clara Jeffery is the centerpiece of an episode that explores the toxic feedback loop deepening the crisis in American journalism and democracy.

Mondaire Jones is on the brink of making history. He is in line to become one of the first Black gay men to serve in the US Congress after winning the Democratic primary for New York’s 17th congressional district in June—part of a new class of diverse candidates upending expectations and tapping into a fervour for outspoken progressivism championed by the likes of Alexandria Ocasio Cortez. His policy positions mark him out as part of an influential insurgent Left—making the New York Congressional candidate a darling among grassroots activists—but along with the Working Families Party, he also scored endorsements from liberal mainstays like former President Barack Obama to the New York Times. He’s pro-Green New Deal. He opposes all new fossil fuel infrastructure. He supports Medicare for All and a $15 minimum wage. On today’s episode of the Mother Jones Podcast, Jones tells host Jamilah King what it was like to campaign during the coronavirus crisis, how growing up poor and Black influenced his progressive policy positions, and why running a historic race can feel surprisingly lonely. Alongside Ritchie Torres, an Afro-Latino gay man who won his primary race in New York’s 15th congressional district, Jones stands ready to join the increasingly diverse members of Congress that represent an insurgent left-wing of the Democratic party on Capitol Hill.

As recently as March, "QAnon" was still a mostly fringe phenomenon. The conspiracy theory, which posits that a vast Democrat-led pedophile racket operates at the heart of the U.S. government, was well known among President Donald Trump's hardcore MAGA base, but too hot for anyone in the mainstream to touch. But this summer, the world's darkest and most outlandish political conspiracy is gaining new adherents and influence among conservatives. That's what Mother Jones's Ali Breland reported this month, after a recent press briefing in which President Donald Trump gave an approving answer that the QAnon community has been eagerly awaiting: "I don’t know much about the movement other than I understand they like me very much," he said. "I’ve heard these are people who love our country."

Trump's not alone. The movement has demonstrated real and growing power. Michael Flynn, the former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency and Trump’s first national security adviser, boldly aligned himself with the conspiracy theory on July 4th, when he posted a video reciting a common QAnon motto; QAnon enthusiast Marjorie Taylor Greene just won the primary election for Georgia’s 14th Congressional District; several other Republicans running for Congress have shared QAnon hashtags and used its catchphrases. Followers have been able to launch harassment campaigns so big and vitriolic that several high-profile targets—Wayfair, Oprah Winfrey, and Chrissy Teigen—felt the need to publicly respond. Q’s followers have also mobilized to antagonize and harass a state senator in California in a vicious attempt to get him to drop legislation aimed at addressing LGBTQ inequality. QAnon’s damage is too big to ignore, and so we’re replaying a refreshed and updated version of our February 2020 episode featuring reporter Ali Breland, who takes you inside the conspiracy, traces its roots, and assesses its future.

One reason that the nomination of Kamala Harris is so fascinating is that it comes at a time when we’re completely rethinking criminal justice in the United States. And Kamala Harris was a prosecutor. From her time as San Francisco district attorney and as California’s attorney general, critics argue that she locked up parents of truant children, left a potentially innocent man on death row, and didn’t support a measure mandating statewide standards for police body cameras. She caught a lot of flack over her criminal justice record during the Democratic primary, especially from the progressive wing of the party. Even so, Kamala Harris labels herself a “progressive prosecutor.” She’s far from alone. But what does that label even really mean?

On today’s show, you’ll meet two women who call themselves progressive prosecutors, and hear what it means to reform the system from the inside, while becoming the face of a different kind of culture war.

First: St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner, who was reelected in a landslide victory during this month’s primary, championing police accountability and diversion programs to incarceration. But her progressive approach has made her a target for the Republican establishment. Missouri’s Republican governor Mike Parson is trying to decrease her power. And now she has been rendered a TV villain by pro-Trump pundits for prosecuting RNC stars Mark and Patricia McCloskey, who went viral after brandishing weapons at Black Lives Matter protesters in June.

Next up, you’ll meet Satana Deberry. When she took the oath of office as district attorney of Durham County, North Carolina, in January 2019, it was a momentous occasion—for the city of Durham and for her, as a Black woman elected to an office historically held by white men, whose “tough on crime” policies have devastated communities of color for decades. She ran her campaign being vocal about the over-policing of Black and Brown folks, promising sweeping reform. Now, more than a year into office, she faces the complicated realities of seeking to reform a deeply flawed criminal justice system and support a community ravaged by gun violence. She’s learning that implementing change will be harder than she could have anticipated.

Wednesday night will mark the biggest accomplishment in the already-dazzling career of Senator Kamala Harris, when she takes to the (virtual) stage at the 2020 Democratic National Convention to accept her party’s nomination for vice president. The culmination of many “firsts” accumulated across decades by the 55-year-old Californian, this week, Harris will become the first Black woman and the first woman of Indian decent to run on a major party ticket.

But she has always been a barrier-breaker. On this episode of the Mother Jones Podcast, our in-house Harris expert, Jamilah King, traces the senator’s political awakening back to her progressive-minded Indian mother, and charts her formative years as San Francisco District Attorney,  her elections first as Attorney General of California and then as Senator, to this historic moment—on the precipice of a historic run for the White House.

This time Jamilah will occupy the interviewee hot seat, while Mother Jones reporter Fernanda Echavarri takes over hosting duties, guiding listeners through a detailed assessment of Harris’s time as a prosecutor (and its potential political baggage), her forceful Senate appearances as inquisitor (and antagonist) of Trump appointees, and what her presence on the ticket means for presidential hopeful Joe Biden—and the country.

Representative Barbara Lee is a big fan of fellow Californian Senator Kamala Harris. Last year, she was the first high-profile politician to endorse Kamala Harris' bid for the Democratic presidential nomination. After Joe Biden clinched the top spot in the Democratic primaries, the former vice president's eventual choice of running mate was obvious, at least for Lee. "Kamala should be president," she said last week in a livestream conversation with Mother Jones Podcast host Jamilah King, just days before Harris got the nod. But Veep is the next best thing. “We know how to lead," Lee said of the power of Black women in the Democratic party, and beyond. "We know how to help regain the soul of America. And we have our unique history in this country to be able to lead out of the White House as president and vice president.”

This wide-ranging interview also touches on Rep. Lee's deep history of fighting for justice. She has insisted on a seat at the table at the highest echelons of political power for years. She's served as one of the few Black women in Congress for nearly three decades. She worked on Shirley Chisholm's campaign during Chisholm's historic bid for the White House in 1972—a campaign after which Kamala Harris modeled her own. Now Lee is at work on Capitol Hill trying to get Republicans to deliver much-needed economic relief in a wrecked economy.

Listen to this special Friday bonus edition of the Mother Jones Podcast to hear the full conversation, recorded as part of a livestream event on August 6, 2020. The full video is available on Mother Jones’ Youtube, Facebook, or Twitter accounts.

With schools and parents around the country facing tough decisions about safety and education, one author and academic has become something of a hero to parents everywhere for her sane, data-driven approach to surviving parenting during a pandemic. Emily Oster, a Brown University economist, is the pregnancy and early childhood guru for millennial parents. Expecting Better and her 2019 followup, Cribsheet, rethink the pregnancy-and-baby-literature cannon by adding something that’s been lacking: empiricism. Oster separates the good studies from the bad and lays out the best evidence to answer such critical questions as whether it’s safe to eat sushi while pregnant. Now, as the country finds itself in a fraught and deeply partisan fog of confusion about child care and education, Oster decided to apply the same type of analysis to COVID-19 research as she did to pregnancy and parenthood, through her newsletter and a website she co-authors with Harvard medicine professor Galit Alter and a team of researchers, called COVID-Explained. Aaron Wiener, a senior editor in MoJo’s DC bureau, spoke to Oster to see if she could bring together her research on young children and on COVID-19 to answer key questions about returning to school and day care facilities. And as a new dad himself (Cole is now 10-months-old), Aaron asks her for her guidance on what his young family—and all the other parents out there—should be considering as they decide whether it’s advisable to send their kids back to school.

An embattled president. A mass movement. A military used against citizens. We’ve been here before. In Mayday 1971, thousands of anti-Vietnam War protesters descended on Washington DC to try to shut down the federal government. By 10:30am, more than 5000 protesters had been arrested, stuffed into overflowing jail cells—eventually police had to commandeer RFK Stadium to accommodate all the arrests. It was America’s largest act of mass civil disobedience and ended in America’s biggest mass arrest: over 12,000 people. The Pulitzer-prize winning editor Larry Roberts joins the podcast this week as we bring to life this incredible moment in history. From President Nixon’s unconstitutional tactics, to dragnet mass arrests, to streets filled with teargas, to some unexpected support for these illegal actions from the future Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court, Roberts gets into the untold story of Mayday 1971. It is impossible to ignore one more important fact: This historical event carries eerie echoes of the moment we’re living through today. Roberts’ full investigation is detailed in his book, Mayday 1971: A White House at War, a Revolt in the Streets, and the Untold History of America’s Biggest Mass Arrest, which is out now.