Trump Just Fired Pam Bondi Right Before Her Epstein Testimony
PDS Published 04/02/2026
-
Pam Bondi is officially out as attorney general — and Tulsi Gabbard may be next on the Trump Cabinet chopping block.
Right, as I was recording today's show, Trump announced on Truth Social that he axed Bondi, and reports are already rolling in that he plans on replacing her with Lee Zeldin, the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.
And this is absolutely massive news — right, we’re talking about one of Trump’s biggest proponents and attack dogs, someone who has gone to bat for him countless times and weaponized the DOJ for him in ways we’ve truly never seen before.
But it also isn’t entirely surprising — right, Trump has been souring on Bondi for a while.
With his biggest complaints being the way she handled the Epstein files — which makes sense because that whole thing has been a shitshow no matter how you look at it. []
And, to that point, the timing here is also incredibly notable — right, it comes just before Bondi is expected to give a deposition to the House Oversight Committee after being subpoenaed over the Epstein files. []
And her firing likely isn’t going to change that, with the committee’s ranking member saying in a statement that she is still legally obligated to appear.
Beyond that, he’s also reportedly doesn’t think she’s been aggressive enough in targeting his political opponents — and that’s something he’s been grumbling about for months.
Right, he was particularly angry that the Justice Department couldn’t get a win against the former FBI director James Comey and the New York attorney general Tish James, though that wasn’t for lack of trying. []
And according to the Daily Mail, her firing was messy as fuck, with the outlet reporting that Bondi “begged” Trump not to fire her “in an explosive showdown at the White House after he accused her of an unforgivable offense.”
Adding that when Trump told her she had been terminated, “Bondi responded by pleading for the President to give her more time in the role.”
Now, as far as the “unforgivable offense” the Daily Mail is referencing there, you had the outlet claiming that:
“Trump's reasoning for the sudden dismissal comes in part because the President believes Bondi tipped off Eric Swalwell about the FBI's efforts to release investigative documents related to his relationship with an alleged Chinese spy.”
Now, that said, as of recording, those claims don’t appear to have been verified by other outlets, but regardless of the exact details, we know for a fact that Trump was done with Bondi.
But despite all that, Trump has generally been in Bondi’s corner publicly.
In fact, when asked for a statement after rumors of her firing first started circulating last night, Trump literally responded:
“Attorney General Pam Bondi is a wonderful person and she is doing a good job.” []
And even in his post announcing her termination, Trump described Bondi as “a Great American Patriot and a loyal friend, who faithfully served as my Attorney General over the past year [...] We love Pam.”[]
Now, as far as what happens from here, unlike we’ve seen with other top loyalists whom Trump has axed, it appears that Bondi WON’T just be reshuffled to some lesser, consolation prize job in his administration.
Instead, Trump said that she “will be transitioning to a much needed and important new job in the private sector, to be announced at a date in the near future.”[]
With him adding that Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche will serve as Acting Attorney General.
But, at least right now, it doesn’t seem like Blanche will be in the role permanently, because the talk we’re seeing is that Trump is planning to tap EPA administrator Lee Zeldin as Bondi’s replacement.
Right, if that name doesn’t ring any bells, Zeldin is a former Republican congressman from New York, who unsuccessfully ran for governor as well.
He’s also been a dedicated Trump foot soldier in his position at the EPA, doing the work to enact Trump’s plans for “energy dominance.” []
But it isn’t just Bondi on the chopping block here - there’s also a report from the Guardian saying Trump is polling his advisors about whether he should replace Tulsi Gabbard as director of national intelligence.
With his big issue reportedly being that she refused to condemn Joe Kent, a former deputy who resigned days after arguing that Iran didn’t pose an imminent threat to the US. []
With Trump giving her lukewarm support in a statement over the weekend when he was asked if he has confidence in her leadership.
Saying,
“Yeah, sure. I mean, she’s a little bit different in her thought process than me, but that doesn’t make somebody not available to serve.” []
With her spokesperson clinging to that for dear life in their own response, saying,
“Over the past two weeks, President Trump said both that he has confidence in the DNI and that she did well at her hearings before Congress. She remains committed to fulfilling the responsibilities the president placed in her.” []
But there’s been a notable back and forth about Gabbard and her place within Team Trump since he came back into office.
With some things earning her public criticism - including a video she recorded warning about the horrors of nuclear war after a visit to Hiroshima or her testimony to lawmakers that Iran had not decided to build a nuclear bomb. []
While others have earned her support from Trump and his loyalists - like producing an official report asserting that Russia didn’t try to boost Trump’s campaign in 2016 against Hilary Clinton. []
Now, at this point, any word on Gabbard is largely just rumor, but this also comes as Trump has been making other major shake-ups in his Cabinet.
Right, just a few weeks ago, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem was ousted and replaced with Markwayne Mullin.
And now with this Bondi news, anyone who has even the slightest doubt about their Trump approval rating should be quaking in their tasteless designer boots.
So this is definitely something we’ll have to keep our eyes on going forward.
But while leadership of some of the biggest departments of our government is in limbo, Trump is still making assurances that no one is buying.
-
Trump’s war in Iran will be over in two to three weeks.
He just has to send them back to the “stone age” and he doesn’t know if they’ll agree to a deal or if he’ll have to deliberately commit a war crime first .
And he doesn’t care if the Strait of Hormuz is opened but it will be and prices will come back down even though they’re not really going up.
And Iran will never be able to get a nuclear weapon but they will get to keep almost a thousand pounds of nuclear fuel.
That is what we learned in Trump’s first primetime address to the nation since the war began.
In other words, we learned nothing.
Or I guess we learned that more than a month into this thing he still has no clear rationale for this war and no real end game.
But if there is one overarching goal behind everything—a goal that Trump suggested has defined both his presidencies—it is that Iran must never have a nuclear weapon.
WIth him saying at the beginning of his address:
“From the very first day I announced my campaign for president in 2015, I vowed that I would never allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon.” (12:38-12:48)
And with that, Trump rehashed his criticism of the nuclear deal negotiated under Obama.
And he repeated his claim that US strikes in June had “obliterated” Iran’s key nuclear sites.
But he also argued that in the months since they had rebuilt their nuclear program—making clear they had “no intention of abandoning their pursuit” of nuclear weapons:
“...they raced for a nuclear bomb, a nuclear weapon, a nuclear weapon like nobody’s ever seen before. They were right at the doorstep.” (17:13-17:21)
But there’s no solid evidence that Iran was actively pursuing a nuclear weapon—and as far as we know it would’ve taken them months or even years to do so if they wanted.
That said, there is believed to be around 960 pounds of highly enriched uranium inside the country—deep underground but potentially within Iran’s reach—and reportedly enough for ten to twelve bombs.
But Trump appeared to rule out an operation to retrieve the material:
“The nuclear sites that we obliterated with the B2 bombers have been hit so hard that it would take months to get near the nuclear dust.” (25:35-35:43)
And he’s not wrong—getting in and out of a hostile country with almost half a ton of radioactive material would be an extremely risky, complex, and time-consuming mission.
And Trump also noted that the US is monitoring these sites via satellite and would attack if Iran attempted to access them.
But if it is as he says and he’s leaving that material exactly where it was before the war started—when the alleged overarching goal of this war is preventing Iran from ever having a nuclear weapon?
It begs the question of what the conflict will have accomplished on that front.
And the administration’s argument has basically been that it has already or almost—you know, depending on the day—eliminated Iran’s ability to hide its nuclear program behind its conventional weapons capabilities.
Which is why the specific “objectives” of the war that have emerged and more or less solidified over the past weeks include destroying Iran’s navy and air force, missiles, and weapons factories.
And with that, last night, Trump insisted last night that these objectives are “nearing completion”:
“....Iran's navy is gone. Their air force is in ruins. Their leaders, most of them, the terrorist regime they led, are now dead. Their command and control of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is being decimated as we speak. Their ability to launch missiles and drones is dramatically curtailed and their weapons, factories, and rocket launchers are being blown to pieces.” (10:33-11:02)
But, of course, Iran? It’s been battered, but not beaten.
And while Trump continued to insist that regime change had been inadvertently accomplished—claiming the country is now being led by a “less radical and much more reasonable” group—it appears that the new Supreme Leader may only be more hardline and the Revolutionary Guards may only have more influence.
And regarding the country’s military capabilities you actually had a spokesperson pushing back against Trump’s claims—saying:
“Your intelligence on our military power and equipment is incomplete. You know nothing of our vast strategic capabilities.”
“Do not assume you have destroyed our strategic missile production sites, long-range attack and precision drones, modern air-defence systems, electronic warfare, or special equipment. Such assumptions will only deepen the quagmire you have fallen into.”
“The sites you think you hit are insignificant; our strategic military production takes place at locations you do not know about and will never reach. Do not bother trying to count our missiles, drones, and strategic systems; you will be wrong and achieve nothing”
And, of course, this guy? He’s probably downplaying the impact of US and Israeli strikes, but the fact remains:
Iran continues to launch attacks across the region—with Israel, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia all responding to drone and missile strikes just today.
And, on top of all, the Strait of Hormuz? It remains on lockdown.
Although Trump continued to play it off as a problem for other countries—even though he had said hours earlier that he would not agree to any cease-fire deal unless the waterway was opened:
“The United States imports almost no oil through the Hormuz Strait and won’t be taking any in the future. We don’t need it. We haven’t needed it, and we don’t need it.”
“And the countries of the world that do receive oil through the Hormuz Strait must take care of that passage. They must cherish it. They must grab it and cherish it. They can do it easily. We will be helpful, but they should take the lead in protecting the oil that they so desperately depend on.” (21:54-22:02, 22:16-22:33)
But with that, of course, Trump is ignoring, well, reality.
One, the reality that opening the Strait is obviously not easy.
I mean, if it was, why can’t the most powerful military on Earth do it?
And two, the reality that oil prices are set globally.
And what’s happening in the Middle East does affect the US despite it not being directly dependent on oil from the region—not to mention this isn’t just about oil but other key commodities like fertilizers.
But Trump barely acknowledged the economic consequences of his war.
He only once recognized “the recent rise in gasoline prices here at home” but argued that this was a “short-term increase” due to Iran’s attacks on ships in the Strait of Hormuz.
And in any event, he claimed that when the war is over the strait will open up “naturally” and prices will “rapidly” come back down.
But, of course, it’s not clear that ending the war opens up the Strait—especially if Trump is actually willing to pull the US and leave it to other countries.
And in any case Trump wasn’t able to clearly lay out how the war will end:
“We are on track to complete all of America’s military objectives shortly, very shortly.” (24:18-24:22)
“We are going to hit them extremely hard. Over the next two to three weeks, we’re going to bring them back to the Stone Ages, where they belong. In the meantime, discussions are ongoing.” (24:25-24:35)
“If there is no deal, we are going to hit each and every one of their electric generating plants very hard and probably simultaneously.” (24:59-25:08)
Right, so first thing’s first, as we’ve talked about, targeting power plants is generally considered a war crime under international humanitarian law—so not really an acceptable way to try and bring someone to the negotiating table.
But also Trump's willingness to resort to extreme force may be exactly why Iran is hesitant to come to the negotiating table.
With a spokesperson for Iran’s foreign ministry saying after Trump’s address:
“We will not tolerate this vicious cycle of war, negotiations, cease-fire and then repeating the same pattern.”
“This is disastrous not only for Iran, but for the entire region and beyond. We are defending against an illegal war.”
Now, that said, you’ve had two Iranian officials and a Pakistani official telling the New York Times that public statements from Iran have been harsher than private messages passed to the United States—also saying that the Iranian government could engage diplomatically under the right conditions.
Which could include something to show the US willing to talk seriously about ending the war permanently []
And with that, Iran’s president actually came out with a letter addressed to the American people yesterday defending Iran’s actions, criticizing the US, and suggesting diplomacy might be possible—writing:
“Today, the world stands at crossroads.”
“The choice between confrontation and engagement is both real and consequential; its outcome will shape the future for generations to come.”
Now, with that, it’s not totally clear who in the Iranian leadership actually has the authority to make a deal right now, and it’s not clear whether the president’s letter was written in coordination with the Supreme Leader or the Revolutionary Guards.
Although hard-liners in the country reportedly went after him for suggesting Iran was open to negotiations.[]
And in the meantime, all this uncertainty, combined with Trump’s escalation and state lack of interest in opening the Strait of Hormuz back up has shaken the markets once again.
Right, the price of oil jumped more than 7 percent after Trump’s speech and stock markets around the world fell.
Especially in Asian countries that are extremely reliant on oil and gas from the Middle East.
And with that, shortages are so bad in some parts of Asia that people are being killed.
In Bangladesh, for example, criminal groups have reportedly raided transport vehicles to stockpile fuel.
And there—as well as in India and Pakistan—some workers have been killed in robberies or attacks stemming from anger over the lack of supplies.
Go to Proton Mail and sign up for Proton Mail's awesome service today.
-
But then getting back to the news, there are new concerns that prediction markets might have an outsized influence over oil markets.
Because energy traders just told The Guardian that Polymarket has been the best predictor of the oil market’s direction since the war with Iran.
Right, data from these platforms is being used in algorithms that advise on trading in the Brent crude futures market.
Goldman Sachs, which forecasts oil prices, now includes prediction market data in its research for investors and clients.
And the Intercontinental Exchange also has a tool that provides a feed of Polymarket’s predictions for traders to use in their assessments.
And this is not too surprising, right, you had a leader at one agency telling the outlet that Polymarket is “having an increased impact on many markets now,” adding:
“Betting markets do have a long history of strong prediction accuracy and since Polymarket is in the ascendancy, traders are indeed increasingly turning to it for market indicators.”
And when it comes to oil, Polymarket has a ton of events to trade on.
But that does not mean it comes without potential consequences, with The Guardian explaining that:
“Energy market traders have said that the deepening ties between prediction platforms and the global oil market could amplify the impact of insider betting on global markets, or even incentivise betting behaviour.”
Because it is worth noting that outside of the Polymarket of it all, we already have tons of concerns regarding insider trading on oil prices amid the war.
So now, there are fears that Polymarket adds fuel to the fire, right, that prediction markets in general could be used to influence the price of oil.
With Axios noting:[]
“As the Iran war sends prices soaring for ordinary Americans, a select few appear to be profiting in plain sight. It's precisely the kind of alleged corruption Trump built his political career railing against.”
But of course, he and his administration don’t actually seem to be motivated to do much about it.
So no one is really expecting him to act here.
But we are seeing at least some baby steps in other areas.
This week CNN reported that federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York are exploring how suspicious bets on these platforms might violate insider trading laws.
No one has been charged or even formally accused of any wrongdoing in the district yet.
Chiefs in the securities and commodities fraud unit simply met with Polymarket reps to discuss how existing laws might apply to potential misconduct.
With an attorney in the district previously sending a warning on this issue, saying:
“Because it’s a prediction market doesn’t insulate you from fraud.”
Then, we also saw headlines over in Congress this week.
Because 40 Democrats in the Senate and House sent a letter to Trump administration officials about training to curb insider trading among government employees.
The letter was specifically sent to leaders of the CFTC and the Office of Government Ethics.
And it noted that not only is there “rising evidence suggesting possible governmental insider trading,” []
But it also appears that there is confusion around the laws that exist in this arena.
So it asks these groups to issue executive-brand wide guidance:
“reminding federal employees of their existing legal obligation to refrain from using their insider governmental information to profit from prediction market trades.”
Though, the White House kind of shot back at the notion that insider trading is even an issue, with a spokesperson telling NBC News that:[]
“All federal employees are subject to government ethics guidelines that prohibit the use of nonpublic information for financial benefit. However, any implication that Administration officials are engaged in such activity without evidence is baseless and irresponsible reporting.”
So this whole prediction market saga is really only in its early stages, and we will just have to see what kind of chaos we allow to happen before meaningful change or reform comes.
-
Meanwhile, Trump’s causing even more chaos by moving to cut a law meant to prevent presidential corruption, despite Trump having 34 felonies that point to that exact problem – I can’t make this up.
And this move risks our national security, but it also makes you wonder what they could be hiding.
They decided that the Presidential Records Act, which requires memos, emails, briefing papers and the like to be turned over at the end of a presidential term, is unconstitutional and an overreach of Congressional power. []
A DOJ official said, "Congress does not have the power to compel an entire branch of government to create and save every single possible piece of paper." []
But they actually do, and for good reason.
After Watergate, Nixon wanted to destroy incriminating recordings. []
So the law was put in place to preempt issues like that from happening again. []
And speaking of Congress, it’s unclear how this administration will get them to budge on this, but they’re preparing for further discussions with the National Archives and Records Administration AKA, NARA.
With this move, Congress would apparently still be able to access these records through the negotiation process, because, of course, that always goes well. []
But even if that’s the case, there’s still so much to question here.
Especially because reports say Trump has already been telling White House employees to preserve these types of documents for “historical value… to explain past actions and guide future ones.” []
But NARA already allows the release of official records five years after every president's term, anyway.
So why is this administration so temperamental about it?
Getting rid of this law also sets him up for more issues after he leaves office, as any move he makes to access classified documents would lead to definite legal challenges, especially if Democrats make any ground in the House or Senate.
And Trump has already had his fair share of legal trouble with official documents. []
He received a 37-count indictment for allegedly mishandling documents that were unsealed and stored throughout his Mar-a-Lago estate, where reports say events and gatherings took place. [] [] []
“I got indicted, and next week I’ll be indicted again. And the following week – again, and again, and again. I did nothing wrong at all. In fact, my boxes were secure. Everything was good. (:39-:47, :37-1:02)
He even infamously stored boxes of documents in his bathroom. []
But Trump maintained his innocence.
Of course, that case was dropped when Trump was re-elected.
And back in February, a Trump-appointed District Judge permanently blocked the release of former special counsel Jack Smith’s final report, keeping us from ever knowing what came of the investigation. [] []
And this speaks to a seemingly rolling cover-up process that contradicts the claims of transparency we’ve heard over and over again from this administration.
And these types of questions seem to keep coming up.
After his first term, he made headlines with a leaked audio where he seemed to mention a classified memo regarding an attack on Iran.
And that audio went against his prior claims.
“I have no classified documents, and by the way, they became automatically declassified when I took them.” (1:20-1:26)
These issues are too sensitive to get glossed over in his normal back-and-forth.
Because the worry here isn’t just that he’ll get rid of these records, even though that does present its own suspicions.
And he’s been caught tearing up documents before.
The bigger worry is that more classified information could just be floating in any insecure place – like a bathroom. []
And as we hear more threats against government officials about hacks and leaks, it’s a wonder why this move isn’t raising more alarms for White House officials.
I mean, if he took documents into his personal possession once, what’s stopping him from doing it again?
And, even worse, what would make those documents any more secure than they were the first time? []
But above all else, the suspicion here is just too much to ignore.
If they’re fine with the public having access to the president’s records of decisions and actions anyway, what else could be in these records that they want to protect?
During this time of war, covered-up scandals and so many other questionable acts coming from the White House, this doesn’t look good. []
And now, without any transparency from this administration that’s filled with yes-men loyalists, what hope do we have to actually get a record of what went on in this administration if this goes further?
-
But if it feels like life down here on Earth keeps getting more and more hopeless, maybe we can find at least a little reason for optimism up in outer space.
Because humanity is going back to the Moon for the first time since 1972. [B roll, 11:10]
With thousands of people camping out on Florida’s Cocoa Beach to gape at the enormous rocket shooting up from Kennedy Space Center just before sunset yesterday. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 00:14 - 00:23]
[Continue clip with light audio and add this audio, 00:46 - 00:51]
Now this mission is called Artemis II [two] because it’s the second out of four missions that NASA has planned. [Continue B roll]
The first went ahead in 2022, but nobody gives a shit about that one — it was uncrewed, boring, lame. [B roll, 00:24]
This one’s actually got people on it — four of them, to be exact, three Americans and one Canadian. [B roll, 00:58]
But it’s not actually gonna land on the Moon; it’s just gonna fly around it. [Same B roll]
With the third mission in 2027 not landing either; it’ll just test the equipment to dock with the landers they plan to use. [Same B roll]
And the fourth, in 2028, is when they’re gonna put boots on the lunar surface again for the first time since the Apollo missions. [B roll]
But just because the astronauts on this current flight aren’t landing doesn’t mean it’s not super fucking cool.
I mean, for one thing, they very well might die.
Okay, nobody’s expecting that to be likely, but this is a dangerous mission.
Right, they’re going into deep space, so to put it in perspective, the ISS orbits just 250 miles above Earth; the Moon is some 250,000 miles away. [
They’re also flying aboard a spacecraft that’s never carried humans before. Ever.
And anything could go wrong; right, during the first, uncrewed mission, the spacecraft’s heatshield suffered unexpected damage, for example. [B roll]
Which is, you know, not good, because the craft will endure heat of up to 3,000 degrees Farenheit when it reenters Earth’s atmosphere. [Same B roll]
So yeah, Trump’s right; these guys and one gal are brave, though fortunately the launch itself went pretty smoothly. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 05:07 - 05:12] Caption: “Outstanding Stan, we see the same, and we have a beautiful moonrise. We’re heading right at it.”
But in fact, they’re not headed there just yet; first they’re gonna circle the Earth and conduct a bunch of tests to make sure everything’s good before making what’s called a translunar injection. [Continue B roll]
Which sounds like something Phyzer and Moderna cooked up in one of RFK Jr’s fever dreams, but it just means getting on a trajectory toward the Moon.
Now assuming everything’s normal, they’re supposed to do that tonight, but there was at least one catastrophic, devastating, gut-wrenching problem with the spacecraft.
The toilet didn’t work.
Right, apparently its fault light was blinking when the astronauts tried to turn it on, so NASA told them to just shit in bags in the meantime. [B roll, 00:31]
Which is actually how the Apollo astronauts did it back in the day; right, they’d just dump all their waste on the Moon, where it’s presumably still sitting today. [B roll]
By contrast, the Artemis crew enjoys the luxury of a dedicated, private bathroom with a toilet. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 00:54 - 01:13] Caption: “You have a urine hose, so this is where you collect all your urine. And then this is just like a toilet seat, and this is where the solid waste is collected. The feces gets sucked down into the bottom into a bag, and you close that off and you squish it down into the bottom into the canister.”
The room also comes with handrails and foot tethers so they’ve got something to hold onto in zero-gravity, or if it’s just a really intense shit. [Continue B roll]
And one more fun fact; instead of recycling their own urine and drinking it the next day like they do on the ISS, the Artemis crew’s just gonna vent it out into space.
So yes, the spacecraft will literally piss into the void, multiple times a day.
But back to the actual news, NASA said they fixed whatever was wrong with the toilet, so barring any other hiccups they should be on their way tonight.
With them expected to reach the Moon by Monday, and since they’ll swing even further past it than the Apollo guys did, they’ll break the record for distance from Earth by over 4,000 miles. [Image]
Then they’ll spend hours gawking at the lunar surface, including portions of the far side that have never been seen by human eyes before. [B roll]
In fact, they were trained by geologists before leaving so they could spot unique features, and snap photos of them for further study. [Same B roll]
Meanwhile, tiny chips containing the astronauts’ cells are distributed throughout the spacecraft so that medical researchers can study the effects of space travel, zero-G and radiation exposure.
Then they’ll slingshot around the Moon, hurdling back toward Earth, where they’ll parachute down in the Pacific Ocean on April 10, completing a nearly 700,000-mile journey.
And then we’re off to the races again, first to put humans on the Moon before China does, then to build a permanent base on the lunar surface (which is fucking awesome), and finally realizing Elon Musk’s dream of reaching Mars.
Speaking of which, his company SpaceX just filed to go public in June, which could be one of the biggest IPOs in history. [Headline/image]
Right, it values itself at over a trillion dollars, and Elon’s hoping to raise another 50 to 75 billion with this.
So yeah, the same money getting us to Mars is also eroding our democracy back on Earth.
![[]](https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2022/09/01/doj-secret-documents-trump-fla-4bd9c2cb1b9ae96b2d6d415b0b552850c35f12a1.jpg?s=1600&c=85&f=webp){kind=link}
![[]](https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2023/06/FyM1f7xWIAsdd6r.jpeg){kind=link}
![[]](https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2023/06/FyM1khnXsAIBRvT.png){kind=link}
![[]](https://images.axios.com/9HepTmPSMv2JW9mvFYfOeHG1oqY=/2023/06/09/1686341631881.jpg){kind=link}
![[]](https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2023/06/FyM1tojWIBACTIT.png){kind=link}
![[]](https://npr.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/6244c78/2147483647/strip/true/crop/6000x3374+0+0/resize/1760x990!/format/webp/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia.npr.org%2Fassets%2Fimg%2F2022%2F02%2F10%2Fap_21016492161896_wide-b2f20c0c738d8474ef04ac020fbb4e706a8d98ca.jpg){kind=link}
![[]](https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/2d2f4c722d7c8ce8d5b582ffabe5384c930fe00a/0_0_3000_2400/master/3000.jpg?width=1200&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=bf89180166a6ccd17c328a430856d9a2){kind=link}
