Podcast
The Intercept Briefing
Hosted by The Intercept · EN
Cut through the noise with The Intercept’s reporters as they tackle the most urgent issues of the moment. The Briefing is a weekly podcast delivering news, incisive political analysis and deep investigative reporting, hosted by The Intercept’s journalists and contributors including Jessica Washington, Akela Lacy, and Jordan Uhl.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
44episodes
Episodes
Newest firstAll episodes
“We Will Find You and We Will Kill You”
2d ago00:41:46Tap to summarizeRSVP for The Intercept Briefing Podcast’s Live Conversation on Gaza. Sign up to join us on Tuesday, May 19, at 5 p.m. ET/2 p.m. PT.Join The Intercept Briefing podcast for a special live episode taping with Intercept journalist Jonah Valdez and Tariq Kenney-Shawa, an Al-Shabaka U.S. policy fellow and co-host of Al-Shabaka’s Policy Lab series.Show description:In 16 pages, the Trump administration’s new official counterterrorism strategy outlines in broad terms who it views as terrorist threats and priority targets, ranging from anti-fascist activists to ISIS and so-called narco-terrorists. The line “We will find you, and we will kill you” appears in the memo.“[The] strategy brings together Trump's war on the wider world, which stretches from interventions and wars in Yemen and Somalia to Venezuela and the Caribbean Sea,” says Intercept senior reporter Nick Turse. “It combines it with the administration's war on dissent at home which has also been lethal, as we saw on the streets of Minneapolis. ... We can consider this strategy a new declaration of war by the Trump administration on its enemies both foreign and domestic, both real and imagined.”This week on The Intercept Briefing, host Jessica Washington and colleagues Turse and Noah Hurowitz, who covers federal law enforcement, dissect how the Trump administration is painting anyone it wants to go after — state and non-state actors — as terrorists. “Fundamentally, this document is a list of the administration's enemies and a promise of what they're going to do to them,” says Hurowitz. “This anti-terror imperative makes for a very flexible and useful means of tamping down on dissent.”“We're not just talking about rhetoric here,” says Washington. “We've seen the administration actually use these terms in action when it comes to the boat strikes in the Caribbean and Pacific that killed nearly 200 people as of early May.” “The actual legal justification for the strikes is, like so much else, secret,” says Turse, who has been covering the attacks on so-called narco-terrorists. “We're talking about a fake war in which the enemies aren't even read into the fact that they're in an armed conflict with the United States.” He adds, “It's really built on a quarter-century of executive overreach and targeted killings around the world. It's the price of Congress allowing Presidents Bush, Obama, Biden, and Trump to hunt and kill people by drone from Afghanistan and Pakistan to Yemen and Somalia. It took this legally dubious, at best, post-9/11 drone war and laid the groundwork for a completely illegal one in the Caribbean and the Pacific Ocean.”“Say what you will about the people around President Trump,” Hurowitz notes, “but they have proved very adept at finding levers of power and levers of pain to go after their enemies.”For more, listen to the full conversation of The Intercept Briefing on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you listen.Keep our investigations free and fearless at theintercept.com/join. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Transcribe →
The Supreme Court Ends Multiracial Democracy as We Know It
1w ago00:43:49Tap to summarizeThe U.S. Supreme Court dealt a fatal blow to the Voting Rights Act, triggering a new wave of redistricting fights in the midst of midterm primary elections. Last week, the court struck down a Louisiana congressional map with a second majority-Black district. The decision requires there to be evidence of intentional racism to prove that a map is discriminatory, making it nearly impossible to successfully challenge racial gerrymandering. Following the 6-3 decision along partisan lines, Louisiana suspended its already active congressional primary, throwing out cast ballots. Alabama’s Republican governor took steps to gerrymander her state's maps ahead of November elections. Tennessee GOP leaders also convened a special session to eliminate the last remaining Democratic stronghold in the state, home to Memphis, a majority-Black city and district; the new map would split Memphis into three districts and further split Nashville and the surrounding counties into five districts. On Thursday, Tennessee Gov. Lee signed a bill that repealed a state law prohibiting mid-decade redistricting, and the new map was passed by Tennessee Republicans.“The primary goal of what they're doing. It is to dilute Black political voting power and representation, and it's starting at the U.S. congressional level,” state Rep. Justin J. Pearson tells The Intercept Briefing. The Democratic Tennessee state representative for Memphis is running for U.S. Congress in the district at the heart of the state’s re-districting fight. “When you look across the South, the truth is about at least a dozen seats are likely to be taken in this very racist redistricting era that we are in, but it won't stop there," Pearson says. "We have over 200 legislative seats in the House and the Senate that are also likely to be eliminated through racist redistricting that is happening.” Voting rights journalist and author Ari Berman says SCOTUS’s latest blow to voters’ rights is a “power grab.”This week on the podcast, Berman and Pearson speak to host Jessica Washington about how the latest Supreme Court decision bolsters President Donald Trump and Republicans' aims to take control of voting in the country.“This is now the third major decision by the Roberts court gutting the Voting Rights Act,” says Berman. “You can't understand this latest attack on the Voting Rights Act unless you understand the attacks that came before it, and how this is part of a pattern. ... This is part of a larger conservative counterrevolution against the civil rights movement of the 1960s.”Berman says that this ruling could bring us back to the “dark days” before the Voting Rights Act made the United States a “multiracial democracy.” Now you look at what's going to happen in these places, in places like Tennessee, in places like Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi. If they eliminate all of their Black members of Congress, that's going to make politics a white-only game." Pearson says that the Supreme Court’s assertion that these protections are no longer necessary is a lie. “The hatred that hung us on lynching trees did not disappear. It dissipated into institutions of power, into state houses, into governor's mansions, into the U.S. Senate, into the U.S. House, into the presidency of the United States,” says Pearson. “Everybody has to do more than they are currently doing in this moment in time in order for us to preserve this modicum of a democratic constitutional republic. … Because what is likely to happen is the most significant purging of Black political power and elected Black leaders since the end of Reconstruction.”For more, listen to the full conversation of The Intercept Briefing on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you listen.Keep our investigations free and fearless at theintercept.com/join. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Transcribe →
Another Assassination Attempt, More Fertilizer for Conspiracy Theories
2w ago00:46:11Tap to summarizeThe White House Correspondents’ Dinner last weekend became the site of the third failed attempt to assassinate President Donald Trump. “I remember the feeling was very similar to when it was clear that the House had been invaded on January 6, 2021,” Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., who was in attendance, tells The Intercept Briefing. “Everybody was afraid that somebody had come in with an AR-15 or something like that.”This week on the podcast, host Akela Lacy speaks to Raskin about his experience at the dinner and later being asked by CNN’s Dana Bash about whether he’s thinking twice about his “heated rhetoric” toward Trump. “It was curious that, in the wake of this terrible episode, that she would try to equate the way that Democrats talk and the way that President Trump talks,” says Raskin. “He calls people crazy, insane. He calls people evil, wicked. He will buttonhole reporters and tell them that they're stupid, they're ugly. ... But we try to keep it at the level of policies and their actions.” Some examples, which Raskin discusses, is his forthcoming investigation into Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner’s role in the administration and conflicts of interest, and his fight in Congress to stop the reauthorization of warrantless surveillance on Americans.After this latest assassination attempt on Trump’s life, claims that it was staged flooded the internet, from comments section to social media posts to videos of influencers dissecting alleged evidence.“We are so conditioned to distrust what we are being told by authorities that people immediately began concocting conspiracy theories about it even before we even knew what had happened. Whether it was a shooting or just dishes breaking,” says journalist Mike Rothschild. He’s the author of “The Storm is Upon Us,” the first complete book on the QAnon conspiracy movement, and more recently, a 200-year history of conspiracy theories called “Jewish Space Lasers.”Rothschild joins Lacy to unpack the growing world of conspiracy theories that question whether the multiple assassination attempts against Trump were staged. They also dive into other conspiracy theories currently capturing the public imagination, such as the dead and missing scientists and a wildfire in Georgia. “This is one of our more fun and disturbing interviews,” says Lacy.Correction: May 4, 2026In a previous version of this episode, there was an errant reference to Janet Mills and Graham Platner being close in the polls before Mills dropped out. That reference has been removed; Platner was ahead of Mills in polls just before Mills dropped out.For more, listen to the full conversation of The Intercept Briefing on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you listen.Keep our investigations free and fearless at theintercept.com/join. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Transcribe →
“Me Too” Comes Back To Congress
3w ago00:35:20Tap to summarizeIt’s primary season, this time against a backdrop of heightened concerns and awareness of powerful figures skirting accountability for sexual abuse and misconduct. Survivors of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein have “made accountability for sexual abuse and sexual violence an electoral issue,” says Intercept politics reporter Jessica Washington. One of the biggest stories to shake up politics in recent weeks are sexual assault allegations that upended Rep. Eric Swalwell’s bid to become the next governor of California, forcing the Democratic front-runner to also resign from his House seat. “You also have to give some credit to Democrats as well for immediately moving on these allegations very swiftly,” says Washington.This week on The Intercept Briefing, Washington and Intercept senior politics reporter Akela Lacy speak to host Jordan Uhl about the themes emerging this midterm election season. They talk about how the crowded California gubernatorial race is boosting Republicans to the top of the ticket to why powerful factions of the Democratic Party are hyperfixating on Twitch streamer Hasan Piker, rather than leveraging Trump’s sinking approval rating. “This is about not wanting to share power with the left,” notes Washington.They also discuss what makes a candidate or elected official a progressive. “We've seen a lot of candidates, particularly 2028 candidates, whether senatorial or gubernatorial, who have had long-standing relationships with AIPAC or demonstrated pro-Israel policy records like Rahm Emanuel, Cory Booker, Josh Shapiro, Ruben Gallego, all come out now against AIPAC or distancing themselves from AIPAC,” says Lacy. “It doesn’t really matter if you’re rejecting AIPAC money, if you aren’t changing any of the policies that you adopt with respect to how the U.S. treats Israel.”For all that and more listen to the full conversation of The Intercept Briefing on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you listen.Keep our investigations free and fearless at theintercept.com/join. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Transcribe →
When Anti-War Candidates Become War-Monger Presidents
Apr 1700:44:46Tap to summarizeSen. Bernie Sanders forced a vote on Wednesday to block the sales of bombs and bulldozers to Israel. The resolutions failed mostly along party lines with a handful of defections to the Republican side, but a record number of Democrats voted against sending weapons to Israel. “A supermajority of Democrats oppose this war, are generally against America's global military interventions,” former Sanders foreign policy adviser Matt Duss tells The Intercept Briefing. Yet Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., joined 11 Democrats in voting against the measure to block the sale of 1,000-pound bombs to Israel, and seven Democrats against the sale of bulldozers used in Israel’s military occupations.“We do have a Democratic Party leadership that still is part of this very small — and thankfully dwindling, though not fast enough — hawkish faction that is wedded to this idea of American global military domination,” says Duss.This week on the podcast, Duss speaks to host Akela Lacy about how Democrats should use the overwhelming unpopularity of the war to push an anti-war agenda that brings about real change. “There's a real constituency here for this message,” says Duss, “We need a foreign policy for this era that is based around building peace rather than making war, that is focused on foreign policy that benefits American communities and American workers, but also does not export insecurity and poverty onto others in the world. And I think this is a really opportune moment.”The watershed moment in the Senate came against the backdrop of President Donald Trump’s hyper-aggressive military adventurism.“My concern about blaming this all on Israel is that it lets Washington off the hook,” says Duss. “We have a foreign policy establishment that is addicted to militarism, that is addicted to war, who work at think tanks that are largely funded by the military–industrial complex. They are funded by weapons manufacturers. We have a political class that is really deeply committed to an almost religious degree to American primacy in the world, to American global hegemony. Which means that we are up in everyone's business all over the place all the time.”“This Iran war is the most egregious and horrible expression of trends in our foreign policy that have been building for a long time, so are these boat strikes,” he says, referring to the Trump administration’s ongoing assassinations of alleged drug traffickers. “We've been killing people with flying robots in the Middle East and Africa and elsewhere for decades now.”Listen to the full conversation of The Intercept Briefing on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you listen.Keep our investigations free and fearless at theintercept.com/join. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Transcribe →
Amy Goodman on the Media’s “Access of Evil”
Apr 1400:32:12Tap to summarizeVote here to help The Intercept Briefing win its first Webby Award for best news and politics podcast.Show description: As talks to end the U.S.–Israel war on Iran break down and President Donald Trump demands a naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, journalist Amy Goodman says that in times of war and conflicts, “What I care about is the answer, and I care that people in this country don't get health care at the same time that money goes to kill others in another country.”This week on The Intercept Briefing, Goodman speaks to host Akela Lacy about a new documentary called “Steal This Story, Please!” The documentary follows Goodman’s life, journalism career, and the building of the independent news program “Democracy Now!” which just celebrated its 30th year. Recalling times when networks used their video footage, says Goodman, “I encourage that. Steal this story, please. It's a failure if it's an exclusive. We are covering these critical issues of the day, and we want to ensure that these stories get out because independent media is essential to the functioning of a democratic society.”Many journalists and news outlets don’t ask tough questions to maintain what she calls the “access of evil — trading truth for access,” and to that, Goodman says, “Then it's not worth being there at all. It's our job to hold those in power to account.” She adds, “We can't have weapons manufacturers, who provide millions to networks to advertise determining our coverage of war. We can't have oil, gas, and coal companies determining our coverage of climate change, or banks and other financial institutions determining how we cover inequality. We need an independent media.”Listen to the full conversation of The Intercept Briefing on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you listen.Keep our investigations free and fearless at theintercept.com/join. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Transcribe →
Putting Fuel on a Ceasefire: Israel Tries to Kill U.S.–Iran Talks
Apr 1000:45:43Tap to summarizeVote here to help The Intercept Briefing win its first Webby Award for best news and politics podcast.Show description: Vice President JD Vance is set to lead renewed negotiations with Iran this weekend to bring an end to the U.S.–Israel war on the country that stretched into a second month. The talks come after a roller coaster of a week, which began with President Donald Trump threatening genocidal war crimes against Iran. “A whole civilization will die tonight,” he wrote on social media, “never to be brought back again.” Trump urged Iran to make a deal with the U.S. and fully open the Strait of Hormuz by Tuesday at 8 p.m. ET. Then, shortly before the deadline, Trump took to social media again to say Iran and the U.S. had reached a two-week ceasefire agreement brokered by Pakistan. Trump said the U.S. received a workable 10-point plan from Iran to begin negotiations on a durable ending to the war. In the meantime, Iran said it would allow for safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz. Israel, however, immediately intensified its attacks on Lebanon, jeopardizing the already tenuous ceasefire. More than 300 people were killed in Lebanon by Israeli airstrikes the day after the ceasefire was announced. The terms of the plan are not yet clear but there are some key factors for Iran, says Narges Bajoghli, a professor of Middle East Studies at Johns Hopkins University. “One is that Iran is asking for non-aggression from the United States into the future. It won't take the United States's word for it. It's already been burned by the U.S. multiple times,” Bajoghil tells The Intercept Briefing. “Then the other big thing is sanctions relief.” But “Iran's biggest red line is its sovereignty and independence.”This week on the podcast, Bajoghil speaks to senior Intercept editor Ali Gharib about the path that led the U.S. back to the negotiating table with Iran. This war has proven, Bajoghil says, “both to the decision-makers in Iran, to the Iranian population, and then more importantly to the international world, is that Iran's real deterrence actually doesn't come from a potential nuclear bomb, but it comes from the ability to be able to stop or regulate traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.” She notes, “In many ways, what actually has potentially led to this ceasefire is the fact that Iran is able to create a chokehold over 20 percent of the world's oil and gas trade. That is an extremely powerful weapon that they have in their hands and in many ways can force shifts to happen geopolitically in a much faster way than a nuclear bomb can.”Listen to the full conversation of The Intercept Briefing on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you listen.Keep our investigations free and fearless at theintercept.com/join. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Transcribe →
Trump’s Holy War Abroad and at Home
Apr 300:40:10Tap to summarizeVote here to help The Intercept Briefing win its first Webby Award for best news and politics podcast. Show description: After more than a month into the U.S.–Israel conflict with Iran, President Donald Trump addressed the nation directly for the first time on Wednesday about why he dragged the country into an unprovoked illegal war. During his wide-ranging speech, Trump made numerous false claims, including repeatedly emphasizing the nuclear threat Iran posed.The reasons the Trump administration have given for partnering with Israel in this war have been varying and at times include religious undertones, especially from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. Hegseth regularly infuses Christian right rhetoric in how he speaks about the war on Iran and the military more broadly.During a recent religious service at the Pentagon, Hegseth prayed for God to give U.S. troops “wisdom in every decision, endurance for the trial ahead, unbreakable unity, and overwhelming violence of action against those who deserve no mercy.”“Hegseth belongs to a denomination called the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches. ... [He] believes that he is carrying out a spiritual and actual war to vanquish a Christian nation's enemies and protect and promote a Christian nation,” explains investigative journalist Sarah Posner, who covers the religious right, on The Intercept Briefing. “For Hegseth, biblical law is the only law he feels obligated to obey. The law of war, international law governing military conflicts, and human rights and civilian rights in war — he believes don't apply to him.”This week on the podcast, Posner speaks to host Jessica Washington about how various factions of the Christian right are shaping U.S. foreign and domestic policies. “I don't think the mainstream media has ever taken the Christian right seriously enough. They have consistently viewed Trump's relationship with white evangelicals as ranging from harmless to purely transactional. When in fact, I think that they're very deeply ideologically embedded with one another,” she says.Listen to the full conversation of The Intercept Briefing on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you listen.Keep our investigations free and fearless at theintercept.com/join. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Transcribe →
Protesting the Smash-and-Grab Presidency With Nikhil Pal Singh
Mar 2700:43:09Tap to summarizeDonald Trump’s second term has been broadly defined by an overwhelming sense of chaos. Every week the U.S. finds itself in a new crisis of the president’s making. The war in Iran and the broader Middle East is stretching into its fourth week, as the administration prepares to send thousands of troops to the region for a possible ground invasion. The U.S. oil blockade on Cuba has plunged the country deeper into a humanitarian crisis. The Department of Homeland Security sent ICE to airports across the country on Monday to allegedly assist TSA agents who have gone without pay due to a partial government shutdown over congressional efforts to apply the most minimal of reforms to ICE. Meanwhile, Trump’s sons are backing a new drone company vying for a Pentagon contract as the president and his family have amassed about $4 billion in wealth this term, according to the Wall Street Journal. “It’s a constant stream of violence, corruption, spectacle,” Nikhil Pal Singh tells The Intercept Briefing. “They smash, grab, move on. But I think now they've actually broken something.” The professor of social and cultural analysis at New York University and the author of several books, including “Race and America’s Long War” joins host Akela Lacy in a conversation about protests and movement-building in the latest Trump era.Trump “said the real enemy — the real threat — was within. He reversed the Bush priority, which said, we fight the terrorists over there so we don't have to fight them at home. And instead said, no, we actually have to bring the fight home. And he brought the fight home,” says Singh. “The idea there then also is that Americans themselves — that is us — we need to be governed violently first and foremost.”“What we saw in Minneapolis and in Chicago and other places is almost like a really spontaneous emergence of that civic energy where people are basically like, ‘No, this is not OK in my city,’” says Singh. With the upcoming nationwide No Kings protests on Saturday, Lacy brings up the challenges of protesting under the second iteration of the Trump administration, and whether it's fair to question the efficacy of protests at a time when they're being met with paramilitary forces.“We've lived through a period where the protests against the war in Gaza were pretty brutally suppressed by the Democratic Party and by the very institutions that the Trump administration is trying to destroy,” notes Singh. For there to be long-term meaningful change during this increasingly hostile environment to dissent or opposition, big alliances are needed, including with parts of the Trump coalition, he says. “Those kinds of cross-class alliances that cross the parties that are oriented around what we might call left economic populist politics and anti-war politics are going to have to be built.”Listen to the full conversation of The Intercept Briefing on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you listen.Keep our investigations free and fearless at theintercept.com/join. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Transcribe →
“Liberate Their Bodies From Their Souls”: The Lies That Sell the Iran War
Mar 2000:46:51Tap to summarizeFrom the White House to Iran’s former crown prince, proponents of the U.S.–Israel war on Iran sell it to the American people — and Iranians themselves — as a crusade for liberation. Instead, the regime remains in place as the death toll grows, environmental hazards proliferate, and civilian infrastructure is decimated. As if the destruction inside Iran itself wasn't enough, the war is starting to have serious ramifications for the global economy and, more to the point, expanding into neighboring countries.Lebanon, in particular, has come into Israel’s crosshairs, with increasing Israeli incursions and missile strikes deeper into the country. The number of dead there is approaching 1,000 with Israeli missiles razing entire apartment blocks in central Beirut this week and a ground invasion getting underway. More than 1 million Lebanese people have been displaced.“I think the Lebanese are suffering now, and there's not really anyone who's trying to save them,” says Afeef Nessouli, a Beirut-based journalist, speaking to The Intercept Briefing. “They know that, and they know that they're just political pawns who are always at the worst end of the stick along with Palestine.” He adds, “The fear is that [Israel] will occupy south of Litani [River] ... and just take people's homes, take their land, and never give it back, make settlements for their country.”“It's been really stunning to watch that so many people fall for this idea of ‘This is a human rights intervention’ — and yet it's accomplished through massive human rights violations,” says Ali Gharib, a senior editor at The Intercept. Commenting on Israel's strategy of making failed states out of its adversaries in the region, he notes, the Israelis “don't need [Reza] Pahlavi to work. They don't need him to go in there and become this democratic leader. They just need him to lead a movement that damages the regime enough to put Iran into some kind of fractured state or state failure where it's not a threat to Israel anymore.”“We've had in the last 20 to 25 years, especially since the Iraq War in 2003, a lobby pushing for regime change in Iran,” says Sanam Naraghi-Anderlini, a veteran peace strategist. “The Iraq version of regime change ended up being a catastrophe from a U.S. perspective, but actually from an Israeli perspective and from a Saudi perspective, and even from a UAE perspective, the decimation of Iraq has been a success because if Iraq had turned out to be a liberal democracy, it would've challenged Israel on the question of Palestine. It would've challenged Saudi Arabia on the question of Islam and what is Islam.”It’s a region in upheaval, and at the center are Israeli and American fictions about liberatory bombs.“I've been on podcasts with Israeli journalists where they're telling me the Iranians wanted us to go in and liberate them,” says Naraghi-Anderlini, “And my response to them is: Liberate their bodies from their souls?”Listen to the full conversation of The Intercept Briefing on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you listen.Keep our investigations free and fearless at theintercept.com/join. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Transcribe →