The fourth season of The Boys is being review-bombed by some viewers who claim it has suddenly become “woke” or anti–Donald Trump, despite the series having always been an explicit satire of Trump-like authoritarianism, corporate power, and fascist politics. Showrunner Eric Kripke has long described Homelander as a Trump analogue, and season four makes the parallels even more direct by centering a criminal trial and an incited, January 6-like insurrection. The backlash has driven the season’s audience score sharply below its critical reception, reflecting both coordinated rating attacks and a subset of fans realizing belatedly that they are the target of the show’s critique. The episode highlights a recurring pop-culture pattern in which audiences can miss or deny the political intent of s...

Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the federal classified-documents case against Donald Trump, ruling that special counsel Jack Smith’s appointment violated the Constitution’s Appointments Clause and that Congress had not authorized the arrangement or related expenditures. Smith’s office said it will appeal to the 11th Circuit, arguing the decision conflicts with prior court conclusions that the attorney general can appoint a special counsel. The ruling drew sharp criticism from Democrats and some legal observers, while Trump cited it to call for other cases against him to be dropped, and the dismissal stops proceedings with no trial date set. The decision makes a pre-election trial effectively impossible and, if Trump wins in November, his administration is expected to end the prosecutions.

PJ Vogt talks with ProPublica reporter Jesse Eisinger about the leaked “Secret IRS Files” and what they reveal about how some billionaires legally pay little or even nothing in federal income tax. The episode explains the “buy, borrow, die” strategy, in which ultra-wealthy people avoid taxable wages and instead borrow against appreciating assets, letting them spend untaxed money while deferring taxes indefinitely. It then explores policy responses, including the Biden-Harris proposal to tax unrealized gains for the very richest Americans, alongside skepticism about its practicality and alternative fixes like ending step-up in basis and the carried interest loophole. The conversation widens into a historical and political look at why taxing concentrated wealth has been so contentious in the...

The episode investigates why taxing billionaires is so difficult, using ProPublica reporter Jesse Eisinger’s account of receiving and validating a leaked trove of IRS data revealing how the ultra-wealthy can report little taxable income despite massive gains in net worth. It explores the ethical and political rationale for scrutinizing billionaire tax privacy, arguing that extreme wealth confers public power and that transparency can expose legal strategies that undermine fairness. The conversation then traces how the U.S. income tax evolved from a public, war-driven class measure into a permanent mass system shaped by lobbying, loopholes, and shifting economic realities. Through the 20th century, the show explains how progressive rates and salary-based executive pay once made the rich eas...

Tim Miller and Tom Nichols react to Donald Trump’s election victory, arguing that many voters knowingly chose the chaos and “drama” he represents and will now live with the consequences. They debate what Democrats can learn from the loss, focusing less on policy than on cultural signaling, coalition “purity tests,” and the party’s difficulty communicating in a way that feels normal and attentive to working-class voters without abandoning minority rights. The conversation also examines public misunderstandings about executive power and the economy, with Nichols warning Trump will inherit strong economic conditions, claim credit, and then damage them through tariffs while supporters blame Democrats. They wrestle with how much to resist versus letting Trump’s agenda play out, drawing a line a...

The episode examines how Donald Trump won decisively, focusing on a broad rightward shift across the electorate, including notable gains among Latino voters and young Black men, and a weaker-than-expected surge among women after Dobbs. The guests argue that years of norm-breaking and inflammatory rhetoric have helped desensitize many voters to behavior they see as authoritarian, even as many people cast ballots primarily based on economic frustration rather than democracy concerns. They discuss how a second Trump term could test democratic institutions through efforts like politicizing the civil service, pursuing loyalist appointments aligned with Project 2025, and potentially using government power to target opponents. The conversation also weighs major policy flashpoints—including mass d...

The hosts process Trump’s election win and push back on postmortems that blame Never Trumpers, arguing their core warnings about Trump and democratic norms still stand even if some tactical predictions missed. They debate why voters prioritized inflation and personal economic pressure over abstract threats to democracy, and what Democratic losses among non-college and some minority voters say about a shifting, multiracial working-class Republican coalition. A central theme is whether Democrats need a more populist, anti-institution message to compete in a broader anti-elite, social-media-driven culture where authenticity and grievance matter more than traditional political appeals. They also wrestle with how to respond to a second Trump term—whether harm mitigation or letting consequences ...

Elon Musk backed Donald Trump with money and influence and is now positioned to oversee a powerful “government efficiency commission” that could reshape agency rules, potentially including those affecting his own companies. The article argues that a second Trump era would push tech further into a loyalty-and-patronage system where public displays of support matter as much as conventional lobbying, prompting executives like Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos, and others to publicly court Trump after first resisting him. With major federal and military contracts, especially around AI, at stake, tech leaders see cooperation as pragmatic but also fear arbitrary retaliation if they fall out of favor. Musk may gain the most from embracing this dynamic early, while also facing the risks of a system wher...

Donald Trump has nominated former Representative Tulsi Gabbard to serve as director of national intelligence, a role created after 9/11 to coordinate U.S. intelligence agencies and oversee institutions like the CIA. The article argues she lacks relevant intelligence or managerial experience and that placing her atop the intelligence community would be dangerous. It points to her past statements and actions seen as sympathetic to Bashar al-Assad and Vladimir Putin, including repeating claims aligned with Russian propaganda about Ukraine, and suggests Trump may be using the pick as revenge against the intelligence community or as a tactic to enable an even more extreme appointment. The author urges Senate Republicans to reject the nomination as part of their constitutional responsibility to ...

The article argues that putting Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in charge of U.S. health policy would be dangerous not simply because he is wrong about many issues, but because he actively spreads misinformation and frames public health through conspiratorial thinking. It points to his role in amplifying anti-vaccine claims during Samoa’s 2019 measles crisis, where vaccine fears contributed to falling immunization rates, widespread infection, and the deaths of many infants. Beyond vaccines, it cites his promotion of ideas such as endorsing raw milk, linking wifi or antidepressants to severe harms, denying basic facts about HIV/AIDS, and advancing COVID-related conspiracies, portraying this as a consistent pattern rather than isolated errors. Given the broad authority the HHS secretary has over agenc...