Kate and Josh talk Kimmel’s return, the corruption of the White House and how regular people keep smacking down Trump’s authoritarian attacks.

For the last 48 hours or so, Trump’s toadies and martinets have been putting on a performance which is one half gaslighting, one half effort to create a bit of distance between FCC Chair Brendan Carr’s extortion and ABC’s decision to (now-temporarily) pull Jimmy Kimmel off the air. Then, late last night, President Trump busted all of their knees by insisting it was him doing it all along and says now he’s going to go to war even harder against ABC/Disney for having the temerity to bring Kimmel back after (Trump claims) telling him they canceled his show.

On November 6th and 7th we’re celebrating the 25th anniversary of TPM. It’s a two-day event in New York City — a TPM mini-festival: night one a discussion and oral history of TPM featuring TPM alums, current staff and special guests, followed by a live podcast and mega cocktail hour at the historic Metrograph Theater Manhattan. Night two a big party at The Bogart House in Brooklyn. Tickets are officially on sale now. We’re also offering sponsorship passes for those who’d like a few extra goodies and also help defray the costs of the event to keep ticket prices reasonable for other attendees. If you’re a member, there’s an email you received this morning with links to purchase your tickets. We can’t wait to see you.

Bloomberg columnist Ron Brownstein posted this this morning on Twitter.

Disney’s initial surrender over [Jimmy] Kimmel marked another ominous advance in Trump’s campaign to suppress dissent. Kimmel’s restoration shows those willing to resist that campaign can tap into a deep well of public concern. But this fight is hardly over, for any of Trump’s targets.

He’s exactly right. This goes to a topic we’ve frequently discussed: not simply the deep well of public concern but the civic totems that makes American blanch at the idea that the chair of the Federal Communications Commission should act like a Minister of Propaganda or Speech Commissar.

As Ron says, this is far from over. This morning, Nexstar has announced that it won’t resume airing Jimmy Kimmel’s show on the ABC affiliates it owns. I believe Sinclair, a far-right company which also owns a large number of affiliates, says the same.

There are many threads surrounding the MAGA right’s ongoing martyr-making and canonization of Charlie Kirk. We know about the tendentious rewriting of history both from Kirk’s stalwarts and his fellow travelers; we know how his death is being used as the pretext for various crackdowns on free speech and domestic enemies. But the part of this saga that is most interesting to me is the part that is based on a fairly simple and lazy misunderstanding. It’s not a terribly large part of the story but it contains some interesting dimensions.

Ezra Klein, rather notoriously, eulogized Kirk as someone who was doing politics right. He wanted to debate everyone. He was a master of persuasion, Klein claimed. California Gov. Gavin Newsom made similar points. Each of them made slightly better points than their one-line quotes that have gotten the most circulation. But in those comments and in their penumbras an idea got hatched that Kirk was an example of people debating their disagreements, engaging rather than retreating to their echo-chamber bubbles.

The Trump administration is preparing to bail out the Argentine economy, whose current President is Trump ally Javier Milei. Says Reuters, “Markets have been roiled by corruption allegations inside Milei’s circle and a larger-than-expected loss in a local election in Buenos Aires …”

Over the weekend we had a confluence of three stories which together illustrate where the federal government is eight months into the second Trump administration. 1. The U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia was either fired or resigned under pressure (probably the latter) for his refusal/inability to prosecute designated Trump enemies like New York Attorney General Letitia James. 2. We learned that last fall, Tom Homan was the subject of an investigation in which he had accepted a literal bag of $50,000 cash for corrupt actions during the second Trump administration should Trump again be elected. Investigators were waiting to see if Homan, who is now Trump’s border czar, would follow through on those promises once in office. (If you stiff the folks who bribed you it’s still a crime but it’s a lesser offense.) However, the Trump DOJ shut down the investigation. 3. Finally, NOTUS reports this morning that Department of Justice’s Public Integrity Section has gone from 36 “experienced attorneys assigned full-time to investigate corrupt politicians and police officers” to two. That’s two as in double of one. The departures are a mix of firings, pressured or forced resignations, resignations on principle and reassignments.

We live in an age of monsters: Elon Musk, Donald Trump, the Ellison family, Mark Zuckerberg, Peter Thiel, the sundry billionaires who don’t own apps. This may sound like a caustic and dramatic comment coming from me. Some of them are genuine monsters: Musk, Trump, probably Thiel. In other cases, like with Zuckerberg, they are probably more or less normal and might even be okay to have lunch with. But functionally, in the role they play and power they wield in our society, they are monsters. And the function of the Trump era has been to wind them all together into a single formation, first by allurement and then by force.

This realization first started to dawn on me in the years after Citizens United, the court decision that essentially ended meaningful campaign finance law in the United States. It came in the first reactions to Citizens United or more specifically the spending it made possible. Billionaires and centi-millionaires started gaining publicity and critical reactions to the scale of their spending and the impact it had on elections. Political giving at scale by the extremely wealthy wasn’t new. It had just taken a half-century hiatus. Perhaps the difference was the internet. Whatever it was, the years after 2010 spawned the idea that the very wealthy and the extremely powerful needed to be afforded more protections, more privacy for their giving then ordinary people who might donate $50 or even $5,000 up near the candidate donation limit.

Kate and Josh discuss the Charlie Kirk killing and its fallout, the Republicans’ stopgap bill and leadership’s refusal to endorse Zohran Mamdami.