Deepa Shivaram (3:01)

Okay. And so the court said that it's not legal. And their reason was this ruling is.

Danielle Kurtzleben (3:05)

All about a 1977 law, and it's called IEEPA. You're going to hear me say that a lot today.

Deepa Shivaram (3:10)

Rhymes with deepa.

Frank Ordonez (3:14)

Iipa. Deepa.

Danielle Kurtzleben (3:15)

That's what's important. I'm glad we got that. Yes. So AIPA stands for the International Emergency Economic Powers act, again passed in 1977. Broadly, it gives the President the power to regulate international commerce. That is the phrase in an emergency. So it's not just about tariffs. For example, after 9 11, George W. Bush used this law to freeze the assets of anyone found to be connected to terrorist groups. So presidents can use it for a lot. But Trump, he's the first president to use it to impose tariffs. So the reason that we are talking about that law is this. In imposing these fentanyl tariffs and those global tariffs, Trump said, I am doing this under the authority of ipa. So we have those two sets of tariffs. And the court had two broad arguments for why it was blocking those, the global ones. The court said, look, IPA just doesn't give President Trump the power to do this. These tariffs are so sweeping, they're on nearly every country at once and they're indefinite. The court specifically said in their ruling also Congress has the power to tariff, not the president. If you want tariffs, pass, go to Congress. The fentanyl tariffs, they had a different reasoning. They said the Trump administration reasoned in imposing those fentanyl tariffs that we are using these tariffs to create economic pressure on Canada, Mexico, China to slow the flow of fentanyl. The court said those tariffs do not deal with fentanyl, they just create economic pressure. So therefore, this tariff also can't stand.

Deepa Shivaram (4:46)

Interesting. That is pretty complicated. And I will say, to further complicate the situation, that ruling is now on hold. So, Danielle, what is the state of the tariffs right now?

Danielle Kurtzleben (4:56)

Yes. So three bullet points are really important here. One is that a court granted an administrative say, saying the administration can continue collecting these tariffs. That The Court of International Trade blocked. So those tariffs can be collected for now until this is all decided on appeal.

Deepa Shivaram (5:13)

Okay.

Danielle Kurtzleben (5:14)

That's one thing. To another federal court. In a separate case brought by two toy makers called Learning Resources in Hand to mind, those companies also challenged President Trump's tariffs that were imposed under IPA like we've been talking about. Well, the federal judge said, you're right, these tariffs are illegal under ipa. However, that judge ruled that these two companies do not have to pay the tariffs. But the ruling does not go beyond them. It doesn't stop tariffs altogether. The one other thing is that some tariffs are still in place. The auto and auto parts tariffs and steel and aluminum tariffs. President Trump imposed those under a different law that was not ipa. So those are still there.

Deepa Shivaram (5:54)

Okay, got it. And Franco, let's bring you in here because it's looking more and more like the Supreme Court is going to have to weigh in on this, as it has been with a number of different situations in the Trump administration. And especially that's the case because it seems like Congress is like, we're not. We're not getting involved.

Frank Ordonez (6:09)

So, I mean, look, the White House has made clear that they are going to continue to fight this. They want to take this all the way up to the Supreme Court. I was at the White House yesterday, and Caroline Levitt, the press secretary, was repeatedly calling for the Supreme Court to step in and make a ruling here. But it's probably in most people's interests in global markets, interests and business interests and everyone's interest to basically have the Supreme Court weigh in here and cut through this confusion and kind of bring some global certainty, because it's very hard to kind of parse through all this.

Deepa Shivaram (6:43)

I was gonna say clarity is like the thing that's lack, probably the thing that is the most necessary when we're talking about so many countries involved, so much money, so many markets being moved. To further complicate matters, the president on social media seemed to be threatening China, saying that they are not keeping their side of the deal. That led to a reduction in tariffs. But Franco, kind of catch me up here. What is he talking about?

Frank Ordonez (7:06)

Yeah, I mean, remember that earlier this month, the US agreed to cut Trump's planned 145% tariff on Chinese imports to 30%. And then China, China cut their 125% tariff on American air imports to 10%. In that social media post, he said, so much for Mr. Nice Guy. And I'll just point out that Mr. Nice Guy was in all capital letters. I mean, I Don't think you can discount that this is also happening at a time that the Trump administration is also threatening to revoke the student visas of tens of thousands of Chinese students in the US And I think this is very clearly shows that the talks that the administration is having with China on these various issues are not going well. And the administration is also taking a very aggressive approach to kind of try to, you know, cut traditional ties with China. Clearly, though, there are consequences and we're seeing how tough that is as we kind of see these global markets fluctuate even today.

Danielle Kurtzleben (8:09)

But I want to add one quick thing about that social media post about China, which is it didn't actually say much. It may just be sound and fury. It very much conveyed that President Trump is dissatisfied with how things are going. But this wasn't one of his social media posts where he came out and said, I am changing X tariff to Y.

Deepa Shivaram (8:29)

Right. I feel like, especially when it comes to his conversations with China, like when we talk about lack of clarity, it is the biggest bucket of lack of clarity comes with these conversations over tariffs with China. There is like, along those lines as people are just like, well, what is happening? What isn't happening? Something that popped up this week that President Trump was not particularly happy with, but definitely made the rounds on social media. Is this meme going around related to Trump's trade policy called taco? It was coined by a Financial Times columnist and it stands for Trump always chickens out. And it's the idea that the President's trade policies are these vague sort of interactions. They're bluffs. He keeps walking back. What? He walks back. Trump was asked about it at the White House this week and he did not like it.

Greg Myre (9:13)

But don't ever say what you said. That's a nasty question.

Deepa Shivaram (9:17)

So, yeah, clearly not happy there. But I just want to be really emphatic, like when we're talking about tariffs and like 30%, whatever, like, these are massive market moving numbers that broadly affect so many people around the world and the President isn't exactly consistent. And so my question for both of you is, what does it mean for this administration's economic policy? And probably reputation in a way, if a lot of these global leaders think the President can't be taken seriously.

Frank Ordonez (9:43)

I mean, I would agree that Trump definitely did not take that well. I mean, it goes against his brand of being this tough negotiator that's holding all the best cards. I guess I would push back a teeny bit on the idea that folks are not taking him seriously, though. I mean, there's kind of this strategy, much of Wall street about taking Trump seriously, but just not literally. And I think that has really been tested with many of these trade battles, these trade announcement. And Trump has backed off for sure on some of the most aggressive policies we had. Liberation Day, where he backed off on so much of that. He also backed off on the 50% tariffs on Europe, that threat. I mean, foreign governments do need to be cautious, though. And I would add that I do think it is worth noting that while he has backed off on some of the most extreme measures, he didn't back off or back down on the 10% across the board tariffs. Now, those are, you know, stuck in kind of like this court limbo, of course. But I do think there is an argument to be made, and that's the one that a lot of Republicans are making, is that by slapping these huge tariffs first, he was able to kind of make the 10% more palatable. Those are still a really, really big deal.

Danielle Kurtzleben (11:04)

Yeah, 30% and 10% are both big economy moving tariffs. That is absolutely correct. And one economist I spoke with recently told me that he thinks that markets are starting to act as if 10% is not that big because it's just not as high as Trump's tariffs used to be. Same with that China, 30%. But to wrap this all together, what does it mean for economic policy if people don't take the president seriously? It means potentially very big things, especially if the president keeps doing things or trying to do things unilaterally, because there's the question of is he serious? There's a question of will it be blocked in court. And there's also the very, very big important point, that the United States is a global economic superpower. So when our bond market goes haywire, as it did when Trump imposed those high China tariffs, that can mess up so many things. International investment, how much you and I pay for a mortgage or a car loan. It could go on and on. So there are potentially very economic knock on effects.

Deepa Shivaram (12:13)

Yeah. All right, well, we're going to come back after a quick break. Danielle, you're going to join us back for Can't Let It Go, so you can take an even longer break. And we'll be back in a moment.

Danielle Kurtzleben (12:24)

I'm Tanya Mosley, co host of Fresh air. At a time of sound bites and short attention spans, our show is all about the deep dive. We do long form interviews with people behind the best in film, books, tv, music and journalism. Here, our guests open up about their process and their lives in ways you've never heard before. Listen to the FRESH AIR podcast from NPR and whyy.

Deepa Shivaram (12:50)

This message comes from Saatva.

Frank Ordonez (12:52)

Spring cleaning can be good for your.

Danielle Kurtzleben (12:54)

Home and your mind.

Frank Ordonez (12:55)

It can boost your mood, sharpen your.

Danielle Kurtzleben (12:57)

Focus and fuel productivity. Another way to do all that sleeping well. Voted best luxury mattress by sleepfoundation.org Every.

Deepa Shivaram (13:05)

Saatva is handcrafted for a great night's.

Danielle Kurtzleben (13:07)

Sleep, and they cost far less than retail.

Frank Ordonez (13:09)

Save $200 on $1,000 or more at.

Deepa Shivaram (13:12)

Saatva.Com NPR.

Danielle Kurtzleben (13:17)

Great Conversation makes for a great party. But how do you ask the questions that really make the room come alive? Well, here at Life Kit, we got you. What is a path you almost took but didn't? On our latest episode, how to ask the magical questions that'll make your party sparkle. Listen to the Life Kit podcast from npr.

Deepa Shivaram (13:41)

And we're back. And NPR national security correspondent Greg Myre is here. Hey, Greg.

Greg Myre (13:46)

Hi, Deepak.

Deepa Shivaram (13:46)

Thanks for joining us.

Greg Myre (13:47)

Sure thing.

Deepa Shivaram (13:48)

All right. So you have been looking into the way that diplomacy and foreign policy have shifted from what we would call the norm under the Trump administration. And so I just kind of want to start broadly here. How would you say it's different?

Greg Myre (14:01)

Well, Trump clearly prefers the art of the deal to the art of diplomacy. He looks at foreign policy through a business lens, saying, can we do a deal with this country? Should we punish this country with tariffs? So he was very comfortable doing deals with friends and allies. And we saw this on his recent Middle east trip where he was feted by the leaders in Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. They announced these deals and plans for big investment projects. Now, there's nothing wrong with this. In fact, they'll be very beneficial if, in fact they play out as planned. So it can really be a win win. However, presidents are also expected to engage in diplomacy, and this involves working out tough compromises with rivals and enemies who have opposing interests. So this can be much harder. And it's an area where Trump just shows a lot less interest.

Deepa Shivaram (14:53)

Yeah, that definitely seems to be the case. But I'm curious, how are you seeing this work out in practice?

Greg Myre (14:58)

So there are diplomatic efforts underway on several fronts, but they are proving diffic nowhere as easy to solve as Trump had predicted. I point to three diplomatic engagements right now, and what's really striking about them is that he's chosen one man, his longtime friend Steve Witkoff, to take the lead in all of them. We've just heard in the past day or so here that there is a New ceasefire proposal that Witkoff has worked out trying to get Israel and Hamas to stop fighting be for 60 days, they would exchange hostages and prisoners. This was apparently worked out with Israel. Hamas is studying it, so we'll see if that's going to play or not. It's still very much up in the air now. Witkoff is also leading the effort to work out a nuclear deal with Iran. These talks appear serious, but there's no sign of a breakthrough yet. And of course, Trump pulled out of a deal that may end up being pretty similar, but he pulled out of a deal in his first term. And then there's Russia, Ukraine and that war. Trump is clearly frustrated with Russian leader Vladimir Putin now for these ongoing heavy attacks against Ukraine. Trump says he'll know in two weeks if Putin's serious, but there's no real progress in this conflict. And so all of them are still up in the air as to whether there'll be a breakthrough.

Deepa Shivaram (16:16)

I thought it was really interesting. A couple weeks ago, I was traveling with the president on Air Force One and he was talking about the conflict that was going on in India and Pakistan after there was a gunman attack in Kashmir. And he sort of, you know, was getting asked about how the US Might intervene and he said, oh, well, maybe we'll throw some tariffs into the situation to try and get these countries to stop fighting with each other. And that was almost his go to for solving that situation, which sort of complicates, you know, for some of these countries that have worked with the US in the past, how they are, you know, coming to the table with this administration. Does it sort of shift their position as well?

Greg Myre (16:49)

Yeah, it was interesting because Trump clearly didn't show a lot of interest in that conflict. He said, yes, this is a long running feud. They'll probably just keep fighting or maybe they'll stop. So he didn't show much interest, but Secretary of State Marco Rubio did. So he played, at least in this case, a much more traditional role. He really got on the phone, talked to both sides, and it was sorted out after a few days, and of course, had the potential to escalate and become a very, very nasty conflict. So at the end of the day, Rubio did play this more traditional role, worked it out, but you didn't sense that Trump was deeply involved or cared much about the details. So I think going forward, we'll have to and see which one carries the day. The more traditional approach, maybe that Rubio or the State Department apparatus takes over, or is it just Trump making Decisions from his gut.

Deepa Shivaram (17:42)

Yeah, Franco. I mean, I want to get to the why of this. Like, what is the rationale for doing.

Frank Ordonez (17:46)

This differently, this administration? Trump himself has long felt that traditional allies have taken advantage of the U.S. taken advantage of U.S. generosity. I mean, that involves defense spending. Trump is often complained that the US Spends way too much money on defense and that the European leaders do not. Also talks about trade, which we have been talking about, that allies have been taking advantage of the US on trade. And I think Trump kind of appreciates the transactional relationships that he has with the Gulf leaders. I mean, these are relationships that go back decades. I mean, from times before President Trump was president and to his private dealings and announcing real estate deals. He really, you know, appreciates these relationships and he's just extended them because, like Trump, they wanna make business deals. They don't wanna talk about human rights issues. You know, they speak Trump's language, and I would argue they do it very well. I mean, I was on the trip with Trump when he went to the Middle east, and I saw firsthand, you know, the fighter jet escorts coming up to Air Force One, the lavish welcome ceremony, you know, the camels. I mean, Trump, Trump loves this stuff. I mean, he likes to be treated like royalty. He feels the, you know, the president of the most powerful country in the world should be treated like royalty. It should get a very, very large plane. This is one of the ways that Trump works. It's about trading. It's very transactional, it's about trading favors. And the way he sees it, or at least the case that he is making for it, is that this is something that he can gain. This is a way of winning something for the United States.

Deepa Shivaram (19:30)

Greg, I'm curious though, what are some of the downsides of the Trump administration doing business diplomacy this way?

Greg Myre (19:37)

So I think we'll have to. It will take some time to see how this plays out before we can really decide. But I would mention two things. One is the hotspots we've talked about a little bit. The Israel Hamas war in Gaza, the Russia, Ukraine war. Now, the US can't solve either of these conflicts unilaterally, but the US does have a role to play in trying to end them. And if the US doesn't use its traditional diplomatic clout, these wars could grind on. They could expand. The US does have a role to play there. So that's potentially one thing. I think the second issue would really be the long term relationships with allies. There's simply no other country in the world that has what the US has had for the past 80 years, this network of alliances and partners all around the world that the US Trades with has security relationships, cultural relationships with. Will those be weakened over time? Will those countries that have created economic models, security models based on a certain relationship with the US Will they change, become less dependent, less confident in the.

Frank Ordonez (20:46)

U.S. i mean, and that's a really big deal when as the U.S. for example, tries to take a new approach with China. I mean, having traditional allies aligned with the United States can confront China from a stronger position. Russia as well. I mean, this, you know, the kind of like this rules based system that Greg is referring to, you know, kind of spawned this idea that the United States will be stronger if its allies are stronger. The United States will be richer if its allies are richer. The United States will be more secure if its allies are more secure. And many analysts are arguing that that has kind of been blown up because it's now a go it alone type strategy. And the world has kind of been broken into spheres of influence, and the United States is focused on its sphere of influence, and it's really only listening to the other big superpowers that are focused on their spheres of influence, and there's little collaboration happening to address these very big global issues.

Deepa Shivaram (21:50)

I feel like both of the blocks of this podcast are so related in that way of like, trade and tariffs are one thing and then foreign policy, but it's all like that system of just like we're throwing out the rule book and we're going at it alone has really flipped everything on its head.

Greg Myre (22:04)

Trump clearly likes to do things one on one with one other country, with one other leader. When he's talking about a group dealing with the entire European Community or multiple countries in Latin America, he just, he really clearly has no interest in making that approach.

Deepa Shivaram (22:20)

Yeah. All right. Well, Greg, thank you so much for bringing your reporting to the podcast. We appreciate it.

Greg Myre (22:24)

Sure thing.

Deepa Shivaram (22:25)

We're going to take one more break and then can't let it go.

Danielle Kurtzleben (22:29)

As NPR's daily economics podcast, the Indicator has been asking businesses how tariffs are affecting their bottom line. I paid 800,000 today.

Frank Ordonez (22:38)

You paid $800,000 in tariffs today?

Deepa Shivaram (22:40)

Yes.

Danielle Kurtzleben (22:41)

Wow. And what that means for your bottom line?

Deepa Shivaram (22:44)

Listen to the Indicator from Planet Money.

Danielle Kurtzleben (22:46)

Find us wherever you get your podcasts. Hey, it's Sarah Gonzalez. The economy has been in the news a lot lately. It's kind of always in the news, and Planet Money is always here. To each episode, we tell a sometimes quirky, sometimes surprising, always interesting story that helps you better understand the economy. So when you hear something about cryptocurrency or where exactly your taxes go, Yas Aves. Listen to the Planet Money podcast from npr. Fall in love with new music every Friday at All songs considered. That's NPR's music recommendation. Podcast Fridays are where we spend our whole show sharing all the greatest new releases of the week. Make the hunt for new music a part of your life again. Tap into new music Friday from All Songs Considered. Available wherever you get your podcasts. Short Wave thinks of science as an invisible force showing up in your everyday life, powering the food you eat, the medicine you use, the tech in your pocket. Science is approachable because it's already part of your life. Come explore these connections on the Short Wave podcast from npr.

Deepa Shivaram (23:59)

And we're back. And so is Danielle. Hello, Hello. And it's time for Can't Let It Go. That's the part of the show where we talk about the things from the week. We just can't stop thinking about politics or otherwise. I am going to kick it off. I don't know if you guys know this, but it is peak mango season right now and that's like, peak. And that basically means that, like, every South Asian person is like running to their closest Indian story to get mangoes that get shipped from India, from Pakistan. Like, Alfonso, mangoes are like the, I just feel like if you bought like in the produce section, like the pre cut mangoes or whatever, those are just like, they're kind of raw tasting. They're a little like, like tangy and stringy and it's just like not the joy that people should experience. Like, I have so many memories of just like, oh my God, notching on a mango and there's just like juice running down your arms. Like, and like every family has like a certain way they, like, cut mango.

Danielle Kurtzleben (24:58)

Anyway, I have a store up near me that I know sells mangoes, so I will be looking this weekend.

Deepa Shivaram (25:02)

Please circle back. Yes.

Danielle Kurtzleben (25:04)

And in return for giving you some delicious mango, you need to teach me how to cut one.

Deepa Shivaram (25:08)

Oh, yeah.

Danielle Kurtzleben (25:09)

So I don't, you know, slice open an artery.

Deepa Shivaram (25:11)

No, there's some, there's some hot takes on how to do it. But anyway, the thing I can't let go of is that I looked up, I was like, trying to see, like, okay, how many mangoes are getting shipped. And Air India put out a press release released this week saying that they have transported close to 1,000 tons of fresh Indian mangoes all over the world. So like, to Europe, North America, the Middle east, everywhere. But my favorite bit about the press release is they talk about how they transport them, and there's, like, these cooling blankets that they travel with, like, across tarmacs. And so I'm just imagining, like, little bundles of mangoes and blankets being treated as precious cargo as they travel all over the world. I want pictures anyway. No, I would love some photos. So catch me, like, emailing Air India to be like, please send photographic evidence. But anyway, that's the thing that I cannot let go of this week. Danielle, what is it for you?

Danielle Kurtzleben (25:57)

So what I can't let go of is a column in the Guardian which was brought to my attention by our illustrious podcast producer, Casey Morell. It is a column about meetings and how much we all absolutely detest sitting in unproductive meetings. That's redundant for hours on end. And so this column brings up a suggestion of. Of using magical questions to make meetings more questions that everyone is interested in answering and hearing other people answer some understanding.

Frank Ordonez (26:31)

This is a question that you'd like. You're having a zoom meeting at the office and you like, I'm gonna throw out these new questions to help us get in the energy.

Danielle Kurtzleben (26:39)

Yeah, I think it. My sense, I guess, is, yeah, it's like an icebreaker. Like, all right, let's all have some reason to feel some joy. That's kind of like, I can't let it go.

Deepa Shivaram (26:48)

Oh, what do you got for us?

Danielle Kurtzleben (26:49)

All right, guys.

Frank Ordonez (26:50)

My eyes are rolling a little bit, by the way.

Danielle Kurtzleben (26:52)

How dare you? All right, Franco, your answer had better be good. Okay, guys, what is a topic that you could give a 20 minute presentation on without preparation?

Frank Ordonez (27:04)

Well, we know that Deepa can talk about mangoes for 20 minutes.

Danielle Kurtzleben (27:07)

That's true.

Deepa Shivaram (27:08)

Yes. I could do that. I could do that. Oh, yeah, like the proper way to cut a mango. I could probably do that. Oh, I have to think on this more. What's yours?

Frank Ordonez (27:17)

Greg and I, you know, have talk about, you know, sports and your kids and sports all the time. I'm always listening to him talk about lacrosse. I could talk about, you know, dealing with my son soccer, and how to talk to coaches. Soccer coaches.

Deepa Shivaram (27:32)

Oh, I like that. That's a good one. I've decided to.

Frank Ordonez (27:35)

I'm not sure I'm that an expert on it, but I could.

Deepa Shivaram (27:37)

No, but you could do a presentation on it, which is the point.

Danielle Kurtzleben (27:39)

Absolutely.

Deepa Shivaram (27:40)

Danielle, I'm amending our students all the.

Frank Ordonez (27:41)

Pitfalls of talking to your soccer coach.

Deepa Shivaram (27:44)

No, that's good. I actually would listen to you talk about that. Danielle. I'm amending mine because you and I were part of a very passionate conversation yesterday in the office about the rank thinking of, like, best french fries.

Danielle Kurtzleben (27:54)

Absolutely.

Deepa Shivaram (27:55)

And, like, I feel very passionately that waffle fries are on the bottom.

Danielle Kurtzleben (27:58)

No, steak fries are on the bottom.

Deepa Shivaram (27:59)

Oh, right. We said steak fries are on the bottom. And then, like, second worst is waffle fry. And it ended up being, like, a very long conversation about the rankings of french fries. So I think that would be mine.

Danielle Kurtzleben (28:07)

Yeah. Yeah.

Deepa Shivaram (28:08)

What's yours?

Danielle Kurtzleben (28:09)

I've been thinking about this. I think mine would be a persuasive speech. Stick with me on this, because, like.

Frank Ordonez (28:15)

I was rolling again.

Danielle Kurtzleben (28:17)

Franco.

Frank Ordonez (28:19)

I'm kidding. I'm kidding. No, I'm playing. I'm playing.

Danielle Kurtzleben (28:22)

I'm angry now, so your eyes are gonna roll more. I really like going to the symphony. I like seeing. I like seeing orchestras perform. I would do a speech on how orchestras should have some of their performances, not all. Some be rowdier, like, where you can yell and hoot and holler in the middle.

Frank Ordonez (28:41)

I love it.

Danielle Kurtzleben (28:42)

Like, when the. When the symphony goes da, da, da, da at the beginning of Beethoven's fifth, you kind of want to sing it along with them.

Deepa Shivaram (28:50)

Oh, I kind.

Frank Ordonez (28:51)

I take it.

Danielle Kurtzleben (28:52)

I think the symphony is way too stuffy. And if they want to grow and have bigger audiences and more excitement, you have to let people cut loose a little.

Frank Ordonez (28:59)

A little.

Danielle Kurtzleben (29:00)

Moshe.

Deepa Shivaram (29:01)

Yes. As a former band kid, I support. I support. Thank you.

Danielle Kurtzleben (29:05)

All right, Franco. What can't you let go of?

Frank Ordonez (29:07)

What I can't let go is the spelling bee. I always get excited about the spelling bee every year because I can never, ever be as smart as these little kids and know these words. And the winning words this year. And someone correct me. Cause I know I'm gonna butcher it. Is eclairsament. Eclairsament, which is spelled E C L A I R C I S S E M E N T. For those who did not know, which apparently means the enlightening explanation of something, typically someone's conduct that has been hereto inexplicable. So, good Lord, how the. Exactly how they come up with this? And I just find it's always so fascinating how these kids are able to come these words and how they kind of use all these roots. And I will say, this year was particularly interesting because there was actually a little bit of controversy, a little bit of drama with some of the parents raising concerns that too much geography is being used or was used in this spelling bee. And that's because Scripps, which sponsors the spelling bee has been relying more and more on geographical terms to kind of winnow down the field of spellers. And oftentimes these words are included. And while they're part of the dictionary and they're in the dictionary, they often don't follow kind of the familiar roots and language patterns. So it's much harder to kind of rely on the tools that you usually use to figure out how to spell and form these words. So drama at the scripts spelling bee.

Deepa Shivaram (30:48)

I'm obsessed with that. I totally understand and why you can't let that go. That's a good one.

Danielle Kurtzleben (30:53)

Stage moms and stage dads.

Deepa Shivaram (30:55)

Yeah. Big fan. All right. That's all for today. Our executive producer is Muthoni Muturi. Casey Morell edits the podcast. Our producer is Bria Suggs. Special thanks to Krishna Dev Kalamer. I'm Deepa Shivaram. I cover the White House.

Danielle Kurtzleben (31:06)

I'm Danielle Kurtzleben. I also cover the White House.

Frank Ordonez (31:09)

And I'm Frank Gordonez.

Deepa Shivaram (31:10)

I also cover the White House. And thank you for listening to the NPR Politics podcast.

Danielle Kurtzleben (31:23)

Conductor Robert Franz says a good melody captures our attention and then it moves you through time. Music is architecture in time.

Deepa Shivaram (31:34)

If you engage in the moment with what you're listening to, you do lose.

Danielle Kurtzleben (31:39)

A sense of the time around you, how we experience time. That's on the TED Radio Hour from npr.

Frank Ordonez (31:49)

On the Indicator from Planet Money podcast, we're here to help you make sense of the economic news from Trump's tariffs.

Danielle Kurtzleben (31:56)

It's called in game theory a trigger strategy or sometimes called grim trigger, which sort of has a cowboy esque ring.

Frank Ordonez (32:03)

To it to what exactly a sovereign wealth fund is for insight. Every weekday, listen to NPR's the Indicator from Planet Money Money. When Malcolm Gladwell presented NPR's Throughline podcast with a Peabody Award, he praised it for its historical and moral clarity.

Danielle Kurtzleben (32:23)

On Throughline, we take you back in.

Frank Ordonez (32:25)

Time to the origins of what's in the news, like presidential power, aging and evangelicalism. Time travel with us every week on the Throughline podcast from NPR.