app_store_button

google_play_button

Device Banner Block-copy 894x1036

Astu lugude lõputusse maailma

Loe ja kuula

WNYC Studios and The New Yorker

Join The New Yorker’s writers and editors for reporting, insight, and analysis of the most pressing political issues of our time. On Mondays, David Remnick, the editor of The New Yorker, presents conversations and feature stories about current events. On Wednesdays, the senior editor Tyler Foggatt goes deep on a consequential political story via far-reaching interviews with staff writers and outside experts. And, on Fridays, the staff writers Susan B. Glasser, Jane Mayer, and Evan Osnos discuss the latest developments in Washington and beyond, offering an encompassing understanding of this moment in American politics.

Please help us improve New Yorker podcasts by filling out our listener survey: https://panel2058.na2.panelpulse.com/c/a/661hs4tSRdw2yB2dvjFyyw

The Political Scene | The New Yorker

When President Donald Trump began his tariff rollout, the business world predicted that his unprecedented attempt to reshape the economy would lead to a major recession, if Trump went through with it all. But the markets stabilized and, in recent months, have continued to surge. That has some people worried about an even bigger threat: that overinvestment in artificial intelligence is creating a bubble. Andrew Ross Sorkin, one of today’s preëminent financial journalists, is well versed in what’s happening; his début book, “Too Big to Fail,” was an account of the 2008 financial crash, and this year he released “1929: Inside the Greatest Crash in Wall Street History—and How It Shattered a Nation.” He tells David Remnick that the concern lies in the massive borrowing to build the infrastructure for a future A.I. economy, without the sufficient revenue, currently, to pay off the loans. “If I learned anything from covering 1929, [and] covering 2008, it is leverage,” Sorkin says, “people borrowing to make all of this happen. And right now we are beginning to see a remarkable period of borrowing to make the economics of A.I. work.” Sorkin is the co-anchor of “Squawk Box” on CNBC, and he also founded the New York Times’ business section, DealBook. 

Please help us improve New Yorker podcasts by filling out our listener survey: https://panel2058.na2.panelpulse.com/c/a/661hs4tSRdw2yB2dvjFyyw

Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Andrew Ross Sorkin on What 1929 Teaches Us About 2025

The Washington Roundtable discusses the trove of Jeffrey Epstein correspondence released by Congress this week, the fractures it has caused in the Republican Party, and the potential political ramifications for President Trump. Their guest is the investigative reporter Michael Isikoff, who has spent decades reporting on major scandals in American politics, including the affair between President Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky, and Russian interference in the 2016 election. The panel considers the factors that made other scandals in the past, such as Watergate, break through the public consciousness and change the course of Presidencies. 

This week’s reading:

 • “
The Epstein Scandal Is Now a Chronic Disease of the Trump Presidency • ,” by Susan B. Glasser

 • “
Did Democrats Win the Shutdown After All? • ,” by Jon Allsop

 • “
Socialism, But Make It Trump • ,” by John Cassidy

 • “
Governments and Billionaires Retreat Ahead of COP30 Climate Talks • ,” by Elizabeth Kolbert

 • “
Laura Loomer’s Endless Payback • ,” by Antonia Hitchens

 • “
J. B. Pritzker Sounds the Alarm • ,” by Peter Slevin 

Tune in wherever you get your podcasts.

Please help us improve New Yorker podcasts by filling out our listener survey: https://panel2058.na2.panelpulse.com/c/a/661hs4tSRdw2yB2dvjFyyw

Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Is the Epstein Scandal Trump’s Kryptonite?

The New Yorker staff writer Eric Lach joins Tyler Foggatt to discuss Zohran Mamdani’s victory in the New York City mayoral race, and what his time in office might look like. They talk about some of his early appointments to his administration and how his ambitious agenda may be at odds with other wings of the Democratic Party. They also look at how members of both parties are interpreting Mamdani’s win, and how the new mayor might respond to President Donald Trump’s threats to withhold federal funds from the city. 

This week’s reading:

 • “
The Mamdani Era Begins • ,” by Eric Lach

 • “
Did Democrats Win the Shutdown After All? • ,” by Jon Allsop

 • “
Laura Loomer’s Endless Payback • ,” by Antonia Hitchens

 • “
In Gaza, Home Is Just a Memory • ,” by Mohammed R. Mhawish

 • “
The Mess at the BBC Will Never End • ,” by Sam Knight

Tune in to The Political Scene wherever you get your podcasts. 

Please help us improve New Yorker podcasts by filling out our listener survey: https://panel2058.na2.panelpulse.com/c/a/661hs4tSRdw2yB2dvjFyyw 

Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

How Zohran Mamdani Won, and What Comes Next

Few Democratic officials have been more outspoken in opposition to the Trump Administration than J. B. Pritzker, the governor of Illinois. He seems almost to relish antagonizing Trump, who has suggested Pritzker should be in jail. Meanwhile, ICE and Border Patrol have targeted Chicago, and elsewhere in Illinois, with immigration sweeps more aggressive than what Los Angeles experienced earlier this year; they refused to pause the raids even on Halloween. The President has called Chicago a “hell hole,” but, in Pritzker’s view, immigration sweeps do nothing to reduce crime. “He’s literally taking F.B.I., D.E.A., and A.T.F.—which we work with all the time—he’s taking them out of their departments and moving them over to ICE, and they’re not . . . helping us catch bad guys,” Pritzker says in an interview with the reporter Peter Slevin. “He’s creating mayhem on the ground because you know what he wants? He wants troops on the ground in American cities, and the only way he can get that done is by proving that there’s some sort of insurrection or revolution or rebellion.” And yet, as Slevin tells David Remnick, a governor’s power to resist the federal government depends largely on the courts. Thus far, “the district courts have acted quite favorably toward the plaintiffs in various lawsuits against these actions by the federal government.” 

Please help us improve New Yorker podcasts by filling out our listener survey: https://panel2058.na2.panelpulse.com/c/a/661hs4tSRdw2yB2dvjFyyw

Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

What Resistance Means to Governor J. B. Pritzker

The Washington Roundtable kicks off the 2026 election season by answering questions from listeners about the forces most likely to shape next year’s midterm elections. They discuss the ascendancy of Zohran Mamdani in New York City, bitter redistricting battles in the states, the high number of elected officials retiring, and much more. Plus, the hosts reflect on the legacy of former Vice-President Dick Cheney, who died on Monday. 

This week’s reading:

 • “
America Begins Clapping Back at Donald Trump • ,” by Susan B. Glasser

 • “
California Strikes Back in the Redistricting War • ,” by Jon Allsop

 • “
How Far Can Donald Trump Take Emergency Power? • ,” by Jeannie Suk Gersen

 • “
A Next-Generation Victory for Democrats • ,” by Benjamin Wallace-Wells

 • “
The N.Y.C. Mayoral Election, as Processed in Therapy • ,” by Tyler Foggatt

 • “
What Zohran Mamdani’s Bid for Mayor Reveals About Being Muslim in America • ,” by Rozina Ali

 • “
Voting Rights and Immigration Under Attack • ,” by Jelani Cobb

Tune in wherever you get your podcasts.

Please help us improve New Yorker podcasts by filling out our listener survey: https://panel2058.na2.panelpulse.com/c/a/661hs4tSRdw2yB2dvjFyyw

Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

The Washington Roundtable Answers Your Questions

The New Yorker staff writer Benjamin Wallace-Wells joins Tyler Foggatt to discuss Democrats’ sweeping victories in the first major elections of Donald Trump’s second term. They talk about what the results—from Zohran Mamdani’s record-turnout win in New York City to victories in the Virginia and New Jersey gubernatorial races—reveal about Trump’s weakening hold on voters and a generational shift inside the Democratic Party. They also explore how a focus on affordability and economic anxiety fuelled Democrats’ success, and how these outcomes may shape the strategies of both parties heading into next year’s midterms. 

This week’s reading:

 • “
A Next-Generation Victory for Democrats • ,” by Benjamin Wallace-Wells

 • “
What the Democrats’ Good Night Means for 2026 and Beyond • ,” by Isaac Chotiner

 • “
California Strikes Back in the Redistricting War • ,” by Jon Allsop

 • “
The Mamdani Era Begins • ,” by Eric Lach

 • “
The N.Y.C. Mayoral Election, as Processed in Therapy • ,” by Tyler Foggatt

Tune in to The Political Scene wherever you get your podcasts. 

Please help us improve New Yorker podcasts by filling out our listener survey: https://panel2058.na2.panelpulse.com/c/a/661hs4tSRdw2yB2dvjFyyw

Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Have the Democrats Figured Out How to Win Again?

Jon Stewart has been a leading figure in political comedy since before the turn of the millennium. But compared to his early years on Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show”—when Stewart was merciless in his attacks on George W. Bush’s Administration—these are much more challenging times for late-night comedians. Jimmy Kimmel nearly lost his job over a remark about MAGA supporters of Charlie Kirk, after the head of the F.C.C. threatened ABC. CBS recently announced the cancellation of Stephen Colbert’s program. And Stewart now finds himself very near the hot seat: Comedy Central is controlled by David Ellison, the Trump-friendly C.E.O. of the recently merged Paramount Skydance. Stewart’s contract comes up in December. “You’re going to sign another one?” David Remnick asked him, in a live interview at The New Yorker Festival. “We’re working on staying,” Stewart said. “You don’t compromise on what you do. You do it till they tell you to leave. That’s all you can do.” Stewart, moreover, doesn’t blame solely Donald Trump for recent attacks on the independence of the media, universities, and other institutions. “This is the hardest truth for us to get at, is that [these] institutions . . . have problems. They do. And, if we don’t address those problems in a forthright way, then those institutions become vulnerable to this kind of assault. Credibility is not something that was just taken. It was also lost.” In fact, Stewart also directs his ire at “the Democratic Party, [which] thinks it’s O.K. for their Senate to be an assisted-living facility.” “In the general-populace mind, government no longer serves the interests of the people it purports to represent. That’s a broad-based, deep feeling. And that helps when someone comes along and goes, ‘The system is rigged,’ and people go, ‘Yeah, it is rigged.’ Now, he’s a good diagnostician. I don’t particularly care for his remedy.”

This episode was recorded live at The New Yorker Festival, on October 26, 2025. 

New episodes of The New Yorker Radio Hour drop every Tuesday and Friday. Join host David Remnick as he discusses the latest in politics, news, and current events in conversation with political leaders, newsmakers, innovators, New Yorker staff writers, authors, actors, and musicians.

Please help us improve New Yorker podcasts by filling out our listener survey: https://panel2058.na2.panelpulse.com/c/a/661hs4tSRdw2yB2dvjFyyw

Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Jon Stewart on the Perilous State of Late Night and Why America Fell for Donald Trump

On August 7, 1985, five family members were shot dead in their English country manor, Whitehouse Farm. It looked like an open-and-shut case. But the New Yorker staff writer Heidi Blake finds that almost nothing about this story is as it seems. 

New Yorker subscribers get early, ad-free access to “Blood Relatives.” In Apple Podcasts, tap the link at the top of the feed to subscribe or link an existing subscription. Or visit newyorker.com/dark to subscribe and listen in the New Yorker app. 

Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

From In the Dark: “Blood Relatives,” an investigative series

The New Yorker staff writer Andrew Marantz joins Tyler Foggatt for the latest installment of “How Bad Is It?,” a regular checkup on the health of American democracy. Their guests are the Rutgers historians Mark Bray and Yesenia Barragan, a married couple who recently left the United States after Bray became the target of a right-wing doxing campaign. Bray and Barragan share the events leading up to their decision to leave the country with their family, including the death threats that followed Bray’s addition to a right-wing “professor watch list” and the portrayal of his work in conservative media as promoting political violence. Bray, who is the author of “Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook,” also speaks with Tyler and Andrew about his research into militant antifascism and how those ideas resonate in Donald Trump’s second Presidential term. They discuss the debates his work has sparked over political violence, free speech, and how his arguments about antifascism challenge conventional ideas of liberalism and academic freedom. 

This week’s reading:

 • “
When the Government Stops Defending Civil Rights • ,” by Eyal Press

 • “
What if the Big Law Firms Hadn’t Caved to Trump? • ,” by Fabio Bertoni 

 • “
Trump and the Presidency That Wouldn’t Shut Up • ,” by Jill Lepore

 • “
Why Biden’s White House Press Secretary Is Leaving the Democratic Party • ,” by Isaac Chotiner

 • “
Why Trump Tore Down the East Wing • ,” by Adam Gopnik

Tune in to The Political Scene wherever you get your podcasts. 

Please help us improve New Yorker podcasts by filling out our listener survey: https://panel2058.na2.panelpulse.com/c/a/661hs4tSRdw2yB2dvjFyyw

Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

How Bad Is It?: Why an Antifascism Scholar Fled the Country

Since Zadie Smith published her début novel, “White Teeth,” twenty-five years ago, she has been a bold and original voice in literature. But those who aren’t familiar with Smith’s work outside of fiction are missing out. As an essayist, in The New Yorker and other publications, Smith writes with great nuance about culture, technology, gentrification, politics; “There’s really not a topic that wouldn’t benefit from her insight,” David Remnick says. He spoke with Smith about her new collection of essays, “Dead and Alive.” “The one thing about talking about essays,” she notes, ruefully, “is you find yourself saying the same thing, but worse—without the commas.” One of the concerns in the book is the role of our devices, and social media in particular, in shaping our thoughts and our political discourse. “Everybody has a different emphasis on [Donald] Trump and what’s going on. My emphasis has been on, to put it baldly, mind control. I think what’s been interesting about the manipulations of a digital age is that it is absolutely natural and normal for people to be offended at the idea that they are being manipulated. None of us like to feel that way. And I think we wasted about—whatever it’s been since the invention of the Iphone—trying to bat away that idea, calling it a moral panic, blaming each other, [and] talking about it as if it were an individual act of will.” In fact, she notes, “we are all being manipulated. Me, too. . . . Once we can all admit that, on the left and the right, then we can direct our attention to who’s been doing this and to what advantage.” 

Please help us improve New Yorker podcasts by filling out our listener survey: https://panel2058.na2.panelpulse.com/c/a/661hs4tSRdw2yB2dvjFyyw

Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Zadie Smith on Politics, Turning Fifty, and Mind Control

How has a phrase that just a decade ago had a narrow, technical definition come to essentially represent anything political that we don’t like? Jon Allsop, who writes Columbia Journalism Review’s daily newsletter and contributed this week to The New Yorker, joins Tyler Foggatt to discuss how “election interference” has become a ubiquitous term and what that indicates about the future of American political discourse. “It’s a project that is designed to insulate candidates against losing, whether they actually lose or not,” Allsop said. 

Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

What Does “Election Interference” Even Mean Anymore?

Loe ja kuula

Muud podcastid, mis võivad sulle meeldida ...