Meet You at the Hawks Game

Hello and welcome to the Slate Political Gap Fest.

October 1st, 2026, the Meet You at the Hawks Game edition.

I am David Plott, CityCast and Washington, and see at the Hawks Game in New Haven, Connecticut

is New York Times Magazine and Yale University superstar Emily Bazelon.

Hello.

What position do I play?

I think I want to be the playing part.

You can be Caitlin Clark.

Wait, you know what?

I don't even know what position she plays.

Uh-oh, this does not pose well for a Gavagas performance.

She's basically a point.

She basically runs point, but she also shoots.

So I don't know.

David Lienhardt, an expert in basketball and women's basketball in particular.

What position are you playing?

Yeah, that's a good question.

It's great to be back here.

Maybe I'm a small forward or shooting guard.

Emily, I think you're a stretch four.

A stretch four is someone who can both get under the hoop and rebound, but also has a good outside shot.

Oh, that sounds like a great compliment.

I'm going to take it.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Uh, David Lienhardt, also of the New York Times, back with us.

Always great to have David Lienhardt.

Don is who knows doing something.

Some where.

Self-actualizing.

This week on the Gavfest, the bizarre failed which hunt against Jack Smith, then the Supreme

Court permits the Trump administration's third country deportation policies to continue.

For now, what are they?

How should we feel about them?

Then why is Congress, which cannot do anything about anything that really matters, interfering

to protect the NCAA and the Poo-Boss that run college sports, plus with up cocktail

chatter?

And we are going to have a live show in Providence, Rhode Island.

Look, we don't do a lot of live shows.

And we've never done one in Providence.

If you were anywhere in New England on Wednesday, October 21st, it would be remiss of you.

It would be wrong of you not to show up and hang out with us.

And you will miss you and be sad.

So please come.

Yeah.

We're going to be at the Strandball Room for a live take me to this show.

There's going to be cocktail chatters.

We also have a limited number of VIP packages for hanging out before the show with drinks.

And you can ask us your burning questions.

And you get premium seating.

And those hangouts are so fun.

It is really one of the highlights of my year.

I won't speak for you, Emily.

And certainly won't speak for John.

But hanging out with Gaffer's listeners is so great.

And if you're a slate plus member, you get discounts.

So you can find your code on the event page in your account.

And if you're not a member yet, you can join at slate.com slash Gaffer's Plus because

right now there's a 50% off sale for slate plus.

So you should definitely do that now.

And then you can come see us at the Strandball Room Wednesday, October 21st in Providence,

Rhode Island.

For more information, tickets go to slate.com slash Gaffer's Live.

I'd love Providence.

Can't wait to hang out in Providence.

Great town.

Agree.

Support comes from wise.

The smart way to manage the currencies you need around the globe.

Fed up with losing out to hidden fees when you send money abroad with your everyday bank.

Choose the smart way.

Wise.

You can count on the exchange rate you'd usually find on Google.

No unwelcome surprises.

Plus, ditch that.

Where's my money feeling?

Most transfers arrive in under 20 seconds.

Join millions, saving billions on hidden fees.

Be smart.

Get wise.

Download the Wise app today.

Tease and seize apply.

This episode is sponsored by Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

We're watching the devastating consequences of policy decisions play out in real time.

The Trump administration is going after a little known program called Title 10 Family

Planning.

The only federal program devoted solely to funding care like birth control, cancer screenings,

STI testing and treatment, and more for uninsured, underinsured, and low income people.

If you want to do something concrete to help protect and defend access to reproductive

rights and care, visit planparenthood.org slash defend.

Your gift built a future where everyone can get the care they need and deserve.

The thing about witch hunts is you catch witches because you just find witches and you catch

them.

What do you call a witch hunt that does not even manage to catch a witch?

The Senate this week managed to waste more taxpayer time and money.

We'll talk about different ways they're wasting taxpayer time and money throughout the

show.

One example was a ridiculous hearing convened by the Judiciary Committee to entrap Jack

Smith, the former prosecutor.

This was the third time that Smith has been hauled before Congress.

And despite colossal amounts of time and energy and money having been devoted to trying

to show him as a liar, prove him a liar, prove him a political weapon by Republicans and

Congress and by Trump's Department of Justice, they have come up with nothing or really like

negative.

They've come up with less than nothing.

They've come up with they've entrapped themselves somehow.

So Emily, can you just talk briefly about the outlines of this project to discredit Jack

Smith?

I mean, so this is one of the Jack Smiths, not the only person on Trump's enemies list

who has been targeted in such a way, but he is a particularly red target in Trump's

head.

What have they been doing?

What are they trying to show?

Why are they doing it?

Jack Smith indicted President Trump for his role in the January 6th effort to overturn

the 2020 election and then also for keeping documents at Mar-a-Lago that he wasn't supposed

to have.

And that's the reason that Congress is targeting him.

It's pretty much that simple.

They were really determined to go after him from the beginning.

And so when he left the Justice Department, he knew that and I think he and his team were

as careful as they could have been.

The sort of smoking gun to Republicans, though I don't think it is a real smoking gun, is

that in the course of his investigation, he subpoenaed several members of Congress about

their calls on January 6th.

And what he was trying to do was to gather evidence about President Trump.

He's made that really clear and the record all along in the case shows this.

There were people who were talking to Trump during the day and he was thinking of calling

them as witnesses about what he saw as Trump's criminal behavior.

And so he wanted the phone records.

They were not the records of what was said on the phone calls.

They were the metadata showing which numbers were called and how long the calls transpired

for.

You know, we've been all this, overall this a bunch of times since these quote revelations

and there's pretty much all there is to it.

I guess the one other part is that when the subpoenas were filed, Smith and his team

asked to keep them secret.

He explained that the reason for that is not that he thought that the members of Congress

were going to obstruct justice by doing something to hide their trail or whatever, but that

he thought President Trump and people who worked for him would obstruct justice by threatening

and intimidating witnesses, which indeed people associated with the president did.

So you know, this is the record.

This is a public servant who was given this completely thankless task.

There's got to be a better word than thankless.

And now he is, you know, in the spotlight.

And then of course, you know, at the actual hearing, there was this kind of incredible turn

of events where Missouri Senator Eric Schmidt thought he had the goods on this pretty

cockamani theory.

He had that Smith had gone to it land on a particular date and had somehow colluded

with Fannie Willis, who was the prosecutor in Georgia, who was also inditing Trump.

And then it turned out he just had the wrong basketball game.

And you know why?

Because I don't think he knows that there are women's basketball games.

Yeah, let's, we'll dig into that in a minute.

But David, I understand why Trump himself is obsessed with Fauci.

I mean, not with Fauci, but obsessed with Jack Smith.

Why are Republicans in the Senate who, you know, they were not, they've not been harmed

by Jack Smith.

Why are they spending time and embarrassing themselves as Eric Schmidt did on this?

What do they gain from this?

I mean, the Republican Party over the last decade has really become a personality cult

around Donald Trump.

Trump is now being in American politics for more than 11 years.

He came down the escalator in the summer of 2015.

I first the Republican Party, a large part of it resisted him.

That melted away and in relatively short order and certainly during Biden's presidency

and then the start of Trump's second term, there's been this period in which Republicans

have been terrified of defying Trump, not just defying Trump, but not doing exactly what

he wants.

If we want to spend a minute being totally amoral and just analyzing it from their political

perspective, there is a rationality to that.

The people who have defied Trump in any way or raised questions about him have typically

had their political careers ended.

So obviously that is Liz Cheney, but it is also people who even kind of raised questions

about him and then decided that they couldn't run for office again.

I'm not defending any of that, but if what you're asking, David, is how do we get in their

heads and understand why they would make fools of themselves and why they would just defend

him?

What I think the answer is that they think their options are either to do that or have their

political career in.

But I guess it's absolutely the case that you cannot oppose Trump, run, go against him,

deride him, suggest that he is responsible for anything and expect to stay in their Republican

Party.

That to me is different from we're actively going to use our Senate committee to make Trump's

enemies our enemies and make ourselves look like idiots in the process.

I don't understand why it's bad for them to annoy Trump.

I don't understand why it's bad for them to literally make themselves look ludicrous

by carrying out his deeds.

His justice department is fully capable of harassing Jack Smith on its own.

I think once you start prostrating yourself to someone and it's really hard to stop.

And so I assume the White House has pushed them to do things like this.

And then once you end up in a hearing, if you are not seen as sufficiently loyal and sufficiently

aggressive, then by definition you almost become insufficiently loyal and aggressive.

And again, I'm not defending any of it.

I'm just trying to think about the mechanics here of how it happened.

I think there are some other players who matter here.

And one of them is Chuck Grassley, who chairs the Judiciary Committee in the Senate.

He has had a long time suspicion of the FBI.

And in that sense, the Justice Department for Overreach in cases involving members of Congress.

He's really like kind of had it in for the FBI.

And so part of what's happening here is this effort that Grassley really has been leading

to sometimes leak, sometimes just like publish information that's damning about FBI agents

and also prosecutors who participated in the investigations and the prosecutions of January

6th.

These people as far as anyone can tell, we're doing their job.

But there's been a lot of effort to tarnish people, to ruin them, to ruin their reputations

that's all tied in.

It's like this long trail of cans that the Jack Smith obsession is trailing behind it.

And so to me, the most important part of the whole Jack Smith day, except for the Eric

Schmidt humiliation, was Smith's opening statement where he was saying the people who worked

with me did a good job.

They did the best they could.

Like they were all honorable.

They conducted themselves according to the highest standards of professionalism because

for Smith and all of these agents and prosecutors, this is this whole group of people who have

been smeared by this Republican campaign and Grassley has been at the center of that.

So there is a way in which Congress itself is implicated.

Why do you think, and this is really a question for you, Emily, they have been so unsuccessful

at catching Smith out.

Is he just the most perspicacious, careful lawyer in the history of mankind?

Certainly, if anyone looked, if anyone tried to catch me out for something that I'd done

over three years, they would, I would have committed like 20 crimes.

And we have, yes, that's a good question myself.

That were just like rumbly and embarrassing where you were bitching about something.

Yeah, no, me too.

I mean, I think, look, these prosecutors and FBI agents knew that everything they did

could well be scrutinized by an incoming administration.

I don't think they predicted that Trump would be reelected, but they certainly weren't

ruling it out.

And so, yeah, I think we are seeing what incredibly careful, painstaking, loyering and investigating

can look like.

I think we're also, it's a good reminder.

Jack Smith is a particularly honorable and careful figure, but it's a good reminder, I think,

of how much competence and honor and fairness were central to the culture of the justice

department until Trump came in and corrupted it.

I've known a lot of people who have worked in the justice department in both Republican

and Democratic administrations.

David, I'm sure you have to, Emily, I bet you've known more than either of us.

And they're incredibly earnest.

They take their jobs incredibly seriously.

They think really hard about these things.

Of course, they're imperfect because all human beings are imperfect.

But it is a place, including US Attorney's Office, is out in the country in which the basic

standard of conduct is extremely high.

And it's one of the really outrageous things about what Trump has done is he's not only

smeared so many of these people, but he has then put in place the regime that he falsely

claimed existed before he was president at the justice department.

I worked in the justice department under a Republican and a Democratic president when

at the beginning of my career.

And it was when that switch happened from George H.W. Bush to Bill Clinton, there was nothing,

nothing, nothing notable happened, nothing happened.

It was just like business as usual.

And all the people I worked with are all gone because they're like, this is terrible.

One of the points that Smith made that I thought was quite perceptive is that there's

attempt to paint him as a partisan warrior, a person who is doing, who's a political

missile fired by Democrats at their political enemies.

And he emphasized that the people who drove this prosecution, the very witnesses who are identifying

crimes committed by President Trump or potentially committed by President Trump, were Republicans,

generally.

Republicans who were concerned about what had happened on January 6th, and Republicans were the ones

who were raising the flag and testifying about this.

And it's not, I mean, so this idea that he is a Democrat working with Democrats

to go after their political enemies or Republicans is just false.

He's a prosecutor who's working with people who are witnesses, many of whom are Republicans

who are concerned about this corruption and degradation of their own party.

Yeah, that was sort of a point, it wasn't it, because it takes us back to the immediate days

after January 6th, in which there was bipartisan condemnation. And Republicans really seemed to be

realizing that something devastating had happened. And then of course, we know how far they

have moved from that.

David Lianhart, do you think that Senator Eric Schmidt, who really just like

ate a worm there, will bear any consequence? You'll pay any price for that idiocy of trying to

entrap Jack Smith and entraping himself instead.

I do actually. So let me just back up and for people who didn't follow it describe exactly

what happened. And I actually have some original reporting I am bringing.

Oh, yes.

You're for TMZ, who knew?

So during the attempt to smear Jack Smith, in which Eric Schmidt, the Missouri Senator,

called Jack Smith a dirt bag, which is just sort of shows you how soft morric and ludicrous

this witch hunt is, Eric Schmidt got in his mind that he had Jack Smith nail because he had text

messages showing that Jack Smith had gone to a basketball game on February 3rd, 2024.

And he got in his mind that the basketball game he had gone to that night was an Atlanta

Hawks NBA basketball game. And they honestly, why would anyone go to that?

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Speaking of an NBA fan, like unlikely.

Yeah.

But go ahead.

I mean, the Atlanta Hawks, I believe I've never wanted an NBA title.

I think they want to title as the St. Louis Hawks in an earlier iteration, but that's before

any of us were born.

But you should fact check that.

So I am also not committing Atlanta Hawks related errors.

So he got it in his mind that Schmidt got in his mind that that Jack Smith was going to this

February 3rd, 2024 game with the Atlanta Hawks and that he was there with Fanny Willis,

the district attorney down in Atlanta who pursued this doomed case against Trump in part because

she was acting your moral herself and having an affair with an employer working for her.

So it completely collapsed.

So Schmidt put up these text messages and thought that he had Smith nailed for burjory.

And Smith at first is sort of confused.

He's a very careful witness.

He often pauses.

And then at some point, Smith realizes that it probably was a real basketball game,

but it wasn't the Atlanta Hawks game that Senator Schmidt was referring to.

And here is where my reporting comes in.

I was at a basketball game on February 3rd, 2024.

And it was in fact the game that Jack Smith said that he was at.

It was the Iowa Hawkeyes.

You may notice that Hawkeyes has some linguistic similarity to Hawks.

We're visiting the University of Maryland Terrapins in women's basketball.

It was a sold out game.

It was one of the most electric basketball games I've ever been at.

It was Caitlin Clark's visit to Maryland.

The place was absolutely packed.

So my exclusive reporting is that there was in fact basketball game at the University of Maryland

I cannot confirm that Jack Smith was there.

There were many men with beards there.

So he may have been one of them.

And basically what it turns out is that Schmidt just in an incredibly amateur way

had the wrong basketball game.

And so yes, this makes Schmidt look ludicrous.

And yes, we should all laugh about this.

And Amy Klobuchar did a nice job of kind of slamming shot the case.

I think from the hearing room, she looked up the existence of that Iowa Maryland game.

I just want to end with two points.

The second one will answer your question, David.

The first is let's imagine that some

Democrat, some liberal Democrat, someone like Elizabeth Warren

confused the Iowa Hawkeyes and the Atlanta Hawks.

And would be accused of being an Ivy Leager who's out of touch with Real America.

Eric Schmidt, a Republican Senator from Missouri, managed to not know the difference between

the Atlanta Hawks and the Iowa Hawkeyes.

There was a large difference between those two sport programs.

They don't even have the same colors.

Iowa uses yellow.

The Atlanta Hawks use red.

And it would just be a source of kind of constant mocking.

And it should be a source of constant mocking.

Your question was whether he'll play a price.

I obviously Republicans are still going around defending him.

He even went on some right wing media and they pretend that he had nailed Smith.

And so there's this attempt to say that in fact,

King Schmidt is still wearing clothes.

But I think it meaningfully hurts him.

I think it's the kind of humiliation that for example makes him

much less likely to say BJD vans is running mate in the future.

It doesn't hurt him nearly as much as it should.

But I think it still hurts him.

And he becomes a laughingstock like surely even in his life,

people are making fun of him over it because it was so dumb.

Yes.

I think Missouri and Iowa play in the same conference.

They certainly used to.

Well, I think Iowa State and Missouri used to play in the same conference.

But they're very near each other.

So a senator from Missouri should not think that the Iowa Hawkeyes

are the Atlanta Hawks.

Emily, I want to close with a slight turn to the future,

which is that this is widely seen as probably the last of these

gotcha hearings.

The Senate just adjourned for the midterms.

The House is already adjourned.

They'll have a rum session in the late fall.

But there will be a new House and a new Senate.

And if the Republicans do not hold the House or Senate,

they will not be able to organize such hearings.

So if they do, they could still continue.

But if the Democrats take the House and Senate,

are they just going to relitigate all the things that annoy them

about what Trump has done?

And is Congress going to be in a state,

a constant state of historical grievance,

like we all live in the Balkans now?

It's just every time the Congress turns over,

the number one task will be let's hold a bunch of hearings

about all the stupid villainous things that our political enemies did

when they had power.

And that that's going to be the business of Congress

primarily because that's sort of depressing.

I'm not saying that they're not all sorts of terrible things going on

that in the Trump administration that shouldn't be investigated,

they probably should be.

But the idea that that is the primary task of Congress

is to be a kind of historical grievance commission,

seems depressing.

Yeah, so I guess I see this as a proportionality problem.

I mean, if the Democrats take the House and Senate are both,

they're not going to be able to pass legislation

because Trump is still going to have veto power,

or at least they won't be able to pass most of the legislation

that would, that they want to pass.

So then, subpoena power becomes incredibly important, right?

I mean, in a Congress in which you have the party in controls,

not the party of the presidency,

you would expect more subpoenas and more investigation.

I think the problem is that there are, you know,

worthwhile investigations, and then there are kind of dumb ones.

And Democrats have pursued some really worthwhile ones in the past.

I mean, I think the January 6 hearings are an example of that.

And then they've also pursued some dumb ones.

And if they really go all the way down this path,

as you're suggesting and spend all their energy on this,

I think that they will be, you know,

satisfying parts of their base,

but not signaling that they're really making America a better place

for people who care about affordability,

the issue that everybody's running on.

And that tension is going to be really present.

There's going to be a lot of pressure to set up an impeachment

of President Trump, which we've already been through twice.

And yes, David is shaking his head.

And I have the same sense of dread.

The plot is shaking his head.

Sorry, David Lee.

The plot is, David Lee and Hart is neutrally listening to me.

I have the same sense of dread about that

because it is such a rabbit hole

and it has only brought President Trump, you know,

more political triumph.

It's different.

He's a lame duck, etc.

But I don't know.

It just seems like if you really make that the headline

for years, you create more sense of grievance

and more mega energy.

And I just feel very uncertain about that.

This episode is sponsored by Bill.

Look, I pay mortgage.

I used to pay a lot of rent.

Now I pay a lot in the mortgage.

It's painful every month.

It is painful.

That cost really hits you.

And I've been hearing people talk about Bill for a while now.

And my first reaction was why didn't this exist sooner?

Becoming a built member means earning points

on every housing payment, whether it's rent

or mortgage, it doesn't matter.

You're paying it anyway,

so you should get something back for it.

And built points can be redeemed for flights, hotels,

lift rides, Amazon purchases.

I would use them for lift rides.

I really like the idea of getting around town

without having to use my car and it would be great to

have a way of funding my transit.

And there's an unexpected benefit

which gives every built member access

to its agentech neighborhood concierge in the built app.

So you can ask it to pay your rent,

make a dinner reservation, book a fitness class,

schedule a lift, and more.

Get started by first, download the build app,

second link any credit or debit card to the app.

So purchases at your local spots become even more rewarding.

And third, ask the neighborhood concierge

in the app pretty much anything.

Download the build app and join the membership

for where you live at joinbuild.com slash gabfest.

That's j-o-i-n-b-i-l-t.com slash gabfest.

Use our link so they know we sent you.

This episode is sponsored by

Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

We're watching the devastating consequences

of policy decisions play out in real time.

The Trump administration is going after a little known program

called Title 10 Family Planning.

The only federal program devoted solely

to funding care like birth control,

cancer screenings,

STI testing and treatment,

and more for uninsured,

underinsured, and low income people.

If you want to do something concrete to help protect and defend access

to reproductive rights and care,

visit planparenthood.org slash defend.

Your gift built a future where everyone can get the care they need and deserve.

Hi, I'm Angie Hicks, co-founder of Angie.

When you use Angie for your home projects,

you know all your jobs will be done well.

Roof Repair Done Well

Kitchen Sync Install Done Well

Deck Upgrades Done Well

Electrical Upgrade Done Well

Angie's been connecting homeowners with skilled pros for nearly 30 years,

so we know the difference between done and done well.

Angie, the one you trust to find the ones you trust,

find a pro for your project at Angie.com.

The Supreme Court this week allowed

the Trump administration to continue with wicked, wicked policy of deporting

some migrants to countries with which they have no ties.

What this means in practice is that some

set of people who refuse to go back to their country of origin

or whose country of origin refuses to take them are now being sent

to random countries around the world.

Usually random countries with a lot of problems around the world

that the Trump State Department has paid off to accept people

like what's real, Gany, Esquatini,

Honduras, Costa Rica, Mexico, and elsewhere.

It is cruel and it is immoral, but maybe it is legal.

So Emily, to start with what is it that the Supreme Court has ruled around this

and what will they what do they still need to rule on?

Well, the Supreme Court issued a, you know,

brief one paragraph order on its emergency

docket saying that these they're called third country deportations.

We really should come up with a more visceral term for this

that they can continue in the meanwhile.

Exile?

Yeah, exile, torture, it just seems really bad.

What actually happens anyway, they're allowed to continue in the meanwhile.

The court promised to fast track its actual,

you know, more considered look at this on the merits in its regular docket.

There's two things that are kind of astonishing about this interim decision.

One is that there's a really clear record and justice so to my or her laid this out in descent

of the lower court orders in this case being defied by the government.

Like this is one of these cases where a lower court judge

ordered the government to do things that the government did not do.

And so just from the point of view of respect for the lower courts,

making sure that the Trump administration understands that the rule of law still

obtained in the Supreme Court does not think it's okay to defy a district court judge.

This is a really troubling decision because the government is getting a pass for all of this,

like really, really serious misconduct, I would argue.

And then the second part are the, you know, what we know about what's happening to people when

they get deported. So these are people who are difficult to figure out how to deport, right?

If you're the government, you're talking about often people who are convicted of serious crimes,

whose countries of origins do not want them back, or who have presented some credible evidence

that it's not safe for them to return to their countries of origin.

And so there is like a question of what to do with them.

What the Trump administration is doing is going around the world and making deals with countries

to send people who have no ties to those countries. And we know that they're sometimes then

detained in really terrible conditions or just sent back to these countries of origin that they

have said are not safe for them. That is a violation of international law. There's this principle

called refuelment, which you're not allowed to just turn someone around and send them back to a

place that you know could be seriously unsafe for them. Isn't it refivalent?

Probably. There's an E on the end. I don't really know.

It's not that word. Emily was doing the French pregnancy.

Yeah, thank you. Refuelment. There we go.

To David, the administration always, whenever they talk about anyone who's being deported,

they always have this one phrase they use over and over again, the worst of the worst.

It's the worst of the worst. Like everybody is the worst of the worst.

Now what nobody is just like a person who lives a life and even a person who lived a life

who may be committed a crime years ago. I mean, there's this incredible gruesome story that

I think your New York Times focused on about a Cuban man who had committed a crime in the United

States as a younger person had served as time and then it lived a kind of very busy,

functional, admirable life as a plumber, has American children and then was deported to Eswatini

and is in prison in Eswatini for no particular. I mean, indefinitely.

What is the point of all of that? Is there any argument that the administration can make that,

like, well, these are actually really deeply problematic people who shouldn't be in the United

States and like we have to find solution because they certainly cannot be allowed to walk our streets?

I mean, what the administration is doing on immigration is just so outrageous. It's illegal,

it's immoral, Emily covered, a whole bunch of the things that are going on. First of all,

they're, they're racially profiled and the Supreme Court has allowed that to happen. They're stopping

people who are dark-skinned. At the times we did a video on which we showed people some of the footage,

you can see how differently agents interact with white people and with dark-skinned people,

they stop. They are holding people in pretty terrible conditions and they are deporting people

to countries where they are being held indefinitely or where they have absolutely no ties and are

some of these people violent criminals? Surely, but even violent criminals deserve process,

and many of them are not. And so I think the entire way the administration is dealing with this is,

I mean, it really is, this is a strong word, but it's almost seconding. And so could they make some

argument about some people? Sure, but I just, I think they have no credibility on this and I think

what they're doing is terrible. I think the larger question of third-country deportations is much

more complicated. And I think that if you end up being against all third-country deportations,

not, I don't mean the Trump administration's version, but I mean all versions of it, I do think

you end up encouraging substantial amounts of illegal immigration. And so I think it's worth

maybe talking through that for a minute because I think what people, it's a classic thing where

Trump is doing this horrible thing. And so I think a lot of people have decided, well, obviously

everything he's doing is wrong and we want to get to the opposite of what he's doing. I don't

think it's that simple. Right, you're saying that there are countries where we, people migrate from

this country they make to the United States. Like we simply cannot send it people back to that

country out of it because that country won't accept them or because that country is so dangerous

and it would be like profoundly immoral to send it back. And so then you're facing a situation,

which is what do you do with somebody who is in this country in an unauthorized way and cannot

go back to their home country because it's and so there has to be what's the, what's the,

what's the solution you're saying the solution is in some cases there should be third-party deportations

or that has to be available. I'm saying you have two choices, right? So there are a long list of

countries that make it hard to send people who immigrate illegally back there. And it's not just

the kind of countries you would expect although of course it is those, it is Cuba, it is Iran,

it is Venezuela. I mean over time it's also been India, it's been Pakistan, it's been Jamaica,

it's been Vietnam, it's been a whole bunch of countries, it's been some countries in Eastern

Europe. And so and then there are also the countries that are going to oppress people and make

go back. And so right, you have only two choices really if someone enters your country illegally

and you can easily send them back, you can allow them to stay indefinitely in your country illegally

or legalize them which really does encourage illegal immigration. This is a bigger issue for Europe

than the US given where Europe is or you can find a third country to send them through. Those are

really the only two options, they're both pretty unpleasant. Where you would carstrate them in your

country which is sort of a version of one which is also really quite bad and so

look the economist which is you know a pro immigration publication had a really phenomenal

package of stories that I would encourage people to read back in 2025 in which they did a

whole bunch of reporting on this and in their opening editorial they endorsed third country deportations

as the best option in a situation in which there aren't good options. That is not the version

of the Trump administration's third country deportations. It's more like the kind of thing that

Italy has tried to do with Albania but I think this is a legitimately hard issue.

Well it's a legitimately hard issue because asylum law is broken and was created in a different

moment for a different world and has not been like properly updated right. I mean there's a

this is never going to happen but there's another alternative here which is like the world gets

together and hammers out immigration treaties and asylum arrangements that are actually

global and makes you know give people places to go if they're economically desperate as well as

if they're in you know they're in political um jeopardy in some way that they can prove and

that actually just like resorts people and that we just don't live in a world in which that is

going to happen right because what usually happens now is that you have masses of um people who

really are desperate to flee from war torn countries and they go mostly to the neighboring country

and we expect countries like Turkey or you know Mexico right now given some of the conditions

in some Latin American countries to absorb tons of people and the West gets away with fewer people

but then gets really mad when there are these boatloads of people you know coming over to Europe

in this way that is super dangerous for them and also if the old destabilizing to Europe it's just

this huge problem and the third country removal I can understand why the economists would take that

position because if you're looking at this particular problem of what to do with the people whose

countries won't take them back that seems rational but actually it's part of this like whole much

bigger um huge just kind of it just totally dysfunctional system that we live in. But like Emily you

make it seem like the that oh it's so you know it's so crazy that Latin American migrants end up in

Mexico when you know they you know they should end up in the United States I mean they end up in

Mexico because it's close because they're like these ties across these nations like cultural ties

linguistic ties like it's easier if if your country of origin settles of Guatemala settles

back down it's much easier for you to get back there. Sure but we don't compensate the countries

that get the burden in this way right like the world does not yes the world does not like it's just

the world just sort of turns its back most of the time and there are all these like if you were

actually trying to map out the burden of immigration asylum refugee status you would not show that

the United States is like suffering terribly because there is a number of people who committed

crimes here who cannot be returned to Vietnam that's like a relatively small problem so if you focus

on the problem then here's this supposed solution but actually like there's this whole other thing going

on I don't know the irony of the United States does not suffer at all in fact it benefits enormously

because almost everyone is like a incredibly economically productive person who is

desperate to make it and works hard and will break the nation overall sure true but it is also fair

that we would want to deport people who committed murder went to prison and we want to send them back

like I that seems okay that we send them back and that's our circumstance and not just that I

would say it is also fair that we cannot allow everyone to stay here who comes and says I am here

to claim asylum right because what has happened is that people have learned that is what you say

should say when you arrive in in the United States or in Europe and we need a process for deciding

whether that's real or whether in fact it's not real and Emily I think you're absolutely right

about what the what the solution to this needs to be some sort of new global system it should

absolutely involve richer countries paying significantly more to help poorer countries

absorb more immigrants actually the economists shining example of a country doing this well

is Chad and is a country that deserves more support from the rich world I just think it's also

important to say that there has been there has been in the 21st century this kind of sense among

what I would say is both the sort of corporate right and the kind of affluent progressive left

that we should just encourage more and more and more immigration and one of the reasons why we see

middle class and working class people in so many countries angry at policymakers and politics

is that policymakers and political leaders have consistently ignored their concerns about immigration

they've said you're wrong more is better you're being racist often and having concerns about the scale

of immigration is a legitimate thing that you see all over the world you see it in the United States

you see it in South Africa you see it in Turkey you see it in Europe you see it in Japan

and and and so I do think we need a better system and I think the global system that you're talking

about in which we kind of rationalize immigration and protect people's human rights almost certainly

would include third country deportations because otherwise what you do is you give people an incentive

not to go to the first safe country but to go to the richest country and to say they're there for

asylum and to know that basically there's no way that they can be removed if their home country

you would be talking about third country deportations in which you don't end up detained and

potentially beaten up in torture obviously right like that would be okay well I mean yeah

I just to bring it back to the third country deportations is to wrap us here like one of the things

that so disturbing to me is that you know as a human human beings are fundamentally entitled to

society we're entitled to connection with other human beings we're entitled to family

uh and you know and the right to try to make a productive life for yourself and you can forfeit

that by committing some criminal act you can truly you know people who commit certain crimes we

say you know you actually are not entitled to this and we're going to lock you away from others but

otherwise as a human being you're basically entitled to human society connection family and opportunity

like that seems fundamental to me and what I find so grotesque about this particular version of

the third party deportation is it's essentially saying these people are no longer like entitled to

those fundamental human rights we're taking you to a place you you may have committed a crime but

you've been your crime has been adjudicated you've served your time you're not in prison you

you you you did your time you did your time so now you're you're you're free you would know it but

you annoyed us by being an America and we're saying you're going to go to a place where you don't

speak the language where you are in permanent some kind of permanent detention you have no connection

literally literally no connection to your family and no opportunity to make a life for yourself

and that's like that's just uh that's wicked it's just wicked it's a wicked it's a wicked it's wicked it is

wicked also finally just like to mention and Emily maybe you mentioned this this disappearing people

who have permanent removal orders from this ice database that allowed it allowed lawyers and family

members to keep track of people they need to keep track of and potentially help them file habeas

cases but now the the ice is said once you have a permanent removal order you are no longer in this

database you you cannot be found it's really some 1970s hunt a shit there yep i mean i the way i

would think about it is there are really important things we need to think about for long-term global

migration policy but the emergency in the United States is to stop the Trump administration's illegal

immoral cruel i'll use your word david wicked policies um and and get to something that is legal and

vastly more humane and then we can think about solving these long-term issues which are genuinely hard

and the supreme court has not been on the side of what you just laid out right there like

permitting the Trump administration to do these bad things and that is really bad sign and bad

for the country it's an emergency Emily it's a national security emergency always

a beautifully designed square space website is the difference between thinking about photography

school and selling your portraits online it's the difference between giving away those cookies

you just made for free and running your cookie empire a beautifully designed square space website

is the difference between having a movie reviewing hobby and a movie reviewing career

square space because no matter what you're into a website makes it real use offer code difference

for 50% off select plans terms and conditions apply my sapphire preferred card we took a trip to a

desert oasis earning five times the points on chase travel two times points on all other travel plus

a hundred dollar of dealt credit chase sapphire preferred a card that's preferred for a reason

guards issued by JP Morgan j's bank and a member of dse subject to credit approval terms apply

David leanhard if you had an NIL deal what kind of NIL deal we're starting with an acronym please

what would you what would you post N name image and likeness thank you thank you what would you post

on Instagram what product would you be posting on Instagram yeah I think if I were a college

actually with a with an NIL deal what I would want is the most amount of money for the least

amount of time and something that wasn't embarrassing I think that those would be the principles there

so otherwise I would have a very wide range of products I'd be happy to endorse my girlfriend

and I were talking the other day about you know this pharmaceutical ads and they find some

celebrity often like a C tier celebrity who that who suffers from whatever it is and gets them to

say you know I have you know chronic eczema and it's it's you know it's it's like the third member

of destinies child this it has chronic eczema and doesn't add for it I was like what ad would you

be willing to what product what pharmaceutical would you be willing to take if you they gave you a

million dollars would you be willing to say I have chronic explosive diarrhea that's why I use

limited not I would not be willing to do a hair regrowth product on on on moral they would they

would need a really really really good air cream oh my god you could be like I shake my head

and now I don't have to anymore look at all my hair uh uh David David has a David has a has

I think there are various kinds of egg shaped head and David and I are David and I are in the same

type but David's whenever I see David I'm always like his head is slightly more shiny and elegant

than mine all of you just through an elegant and savior we found my product something about making

your head shiny all right to get to the topic the senate and it's surprisingly bipartisan vote

passed the protect college sports act this week uh it is on its way to the house so that we'll not

get a vote before the midterms because the house is in recess a fact I just learned

god they don't do any work uh and then present trump hopes uh it will land on his desk Ted Cruz the

main Republican sponsor of the bill Maria Cantwell the Democrat who let it on the left uh Ted Cruz

wants Trump to sign it on espn's college game day um so David what broadly with the protect

college sports act do and what and why is the senate fired up about it um it would do I think the

senate's fired up about it because a lot of people in the senate maybe not senator Eric Schmidt but

are big sports fans and so they they care a lot about this issue and they actually are moved to

pass legislation when they're not passing it on many more important issues but so this is a

funny piece of legislation um it does I would vote against it if I were in the senate because I

think it does a couple things that are really quite bad and essentially empowers universities and

coaches to do things that I think are unfair and have power over college athletes it also does a

bunch of things that are pretty good um it um makes it possible for athletes essentially to get a

10-year scholarship guarantee so that if you don't manage to graduate college when you're essentially

a full-time athlete you can go back and go to college after your stopping uh after you're no

longer an athlete um it does some stuff around long-term injuries which is obviously important for

football it does some stuff about health care um uh it it makes sure that there will be a significant

number of women sports and Olympic sports um uh so that we don't end up with gender inequities more

gender inequities in sports and so we are still able to continue to produce athletes who participate

in Olympic sports both men and women which if we're being honest tend not to attract very many fans

but we still need training programs if we care about the Olympics the reason I'd vote against it

is um it limits athletes to a single transfer where they're in cut while they're in college before

they have to take time off and a lot of sports fans have gotten worked up about this idea of athletes

transferring I don't even know what team I'm rooting for and I miss the old days of good old amateur

or pretend amateur sports when they would be on a team for four years and I get that as someone

who watches a lot of college sports I would prefer to root for someone on the same basketball team

for four straight years um but I think it's fundamentally misplaced because um if you think about an

athlete who's in a situation where the coach makes a bunch of promises about how much playing time

she's gonna get and then the athlete gets there and the coach essentially renegs on the promise

the athlete has no recourse the coaches are super empowered and so I think we need uh to allow

college athletes to transfer not just once but if they end up at a second place with a coach who

lies to them or or misleads them or the situation just changes or maybe the coach quits at the

last second um I think athletes need to be able to transfer it and so I think fundamentally

this is a bill that if you think about it in kind of labor terms um uh helps employers and

and hurts workers and Emily it doesn't really address the kind of fundamental legal question

about whether college athletes are workers right is yeah and leave that unsettled right and it also

doesn't help them unionize which seems like if we are going to keep this current system is important

right I mean this is a group of people who have a collective interest and who are up against

powerful moneyed interests in the form of the NCAA some of these giant sports franchises at

universities and the donors who are interested in and supporting all this and so if you're thinking

about this as labor versus capital this seems like a bad bill that is on the side of capital

it's more complicated than that because universities are not what we typically think of as capital

and I have these totally wildly inconsistent responses to this which I am going to throw out there

for you guys to uh tell me why I'm wrong about so my first general feeling is that we should just

get rid of college athletics except for the teams at every but the sports that people actually

like really care about and root for um which for men sports tend to be basketball hockey and football

right the things where you're really creating school spirit and you're filling the stadium and

it's really a part of the university life I get why we have those things at colleges

bracket that in this world of otherwise getting rid of college sports detaching them from

schools we would need to also have equal sports for women via title nine and so whatever the schools

were investing in their giant football programs they would also have to have some equality uh for

women and they're absolutely but my reason for talking about this for feeling this way is that I

just feel like lots of sports at college take the students out of student life much more than they

really connect them to the school and it's just kind of an insane way to spend your college years

spending like four hours a day at gymnastics practice um as opposed to having that be something

that is outside of your university activity you know the Europeans do not do it this way they do

not have all these teams that are part of the university and I just sort of don't get that

but then my other this is the totally inconsistent part like if we're going to have them then I

want these players to have much more power and and to be compensated more than they are not less

and my understanding of this bill is what's going to happen is that there's a cap on how much you can

um spend on the athletes but not how much you can spend on the coaches of the programs and so

you're just going to enrich um the people who are not actually playing the sports and by the way as

you know Chris Murphy senator from Connecticut pointed out and I'm sure others have done too like

a lot of the players who are actually benefiting right now are young black men and they are the ones

who are going to be out some of the money they would be otherwise getting. I uh yeah I mean

we are unique the United States is unique there no other country has college sports

that have this kind of outsized importance in national and local and regional identity one of the

things that really strikes me and I noticed this when I've gone to places that are sort of second homey

places I've I noticed this when I was in Trapper City Michigan not long ago that you drive down

a street and what you will see outside people's houses is not American flags you'll see

flags for their college which is almost always like you know university Michigan University with

big state universities and there's those flags are not up because it's commencement day those

flags are up because it's game day like it's their flags not for we want to pull it surprise

they're up because like oh we're playing Iowa the Iowa Hawkeyes and it's almost always basketball

football or hockey right well you can't yeah you can't tell but yes but like the people's the

people's patriotism people are incredibly patriotic about their colleges and universities and that

patriotism is vastly disproportionately tied up in sports but it's these particular sports I'm okay

with those sports I get the school spirit part of that it's all the other sports that seem to

me like they should not be part of school I know it doesn't really make sense what I'm arguing but

I really feel like that like if it's contributing I mean universities need to feel attached to their

communities like it's real problem right now that they seem elitist and a feat and unattached

especially the really expensive ones but even the you know state and local ones can seem that way

to people and so I'm all for the things that actually connect them in the way that you're

describing what doesn't make sense to me is all the other sports that you know especially at

schools where you get a preference for getting in because you're good at sailing like that just

makes no sense yeah I think my my youngest is sorry David my youngest just started college and he's

you know walked on to the cross-country and track teams at his small D3 college and it's clearly

the biggest expenditure of his time and energy like overwhelmingly where he's spending his time

of energy is in this and much I mean he seems to be working hard at school he seems to be having

a great time but it is interesting like why why should he's not gonna he's not gonna be

Usain Bolt he's not gonna he's not gonna make a living as a track and field athlete but you don't

think there's something important Emily about that that community and that sense of purpose and

discipline that comes from sports I think that we're all looking for tribes we're all looking for

kind of ways to discipline ourselves and and give ourselves both the community and a sense of

purpose and sports is one useful way that people get that at colleges yes but it has ratcheted

way up right so like if what we were talking about is the equivalent of what some schools now

call club sports where like you're spending an hour or two a day you have a season you do some

games you travel a little bit like sure fine but varsity sports at a lot of schools has become

year round four hours a day you don't eat meals with the rest of the student population you wear

special branded clothes and backpacks that mark you as an athlete you're like part of this

separate layer of existence at your school and I just don't get that it just doesn't make sense

I do think I mean I think I mostly probably disagree with you Emily but partially agree like I

think schools should try to think a little bit about what the purposes are of different sports and

there are certain community building sports the list actually ends up being somewhat longer when

you think about it right in different regions it's football it's basketball it's soccer it's lacrosse

it's hockey baseball it's baseball in the south so it does end up being somewhat longer I think it's

swimming in a few colleges but I I agree with you that particularly smaller schools I mean you know

it's some smaller ball arts club colleges something like 40% of the students are recruited athletes

and they essentially have kind of set two separated missions tracks and I think it's worth

thinking a little bit about that but I would say overall even though we're unique we're not going

back to some European system wear track and these other sports are disconnected from colleges because

it's so embedded in our culture and I think if you go to a big state university it ends up being a

relatively small percentage of the athletes I think there's this stat that Harvard either has more

sports teams than the University of Alabama or the same number as the University of Alabama and so

when you think about the percentage of students at the University of both crimson's both crimson's

maybe that's why people make the comparison you know it's actually pretty small and I guess I think

back to my own time at college when I often spent eight hours a day at an activity that wasn't

my classes okay you're talking about the Yale Daily News that was really integral to the

University right it wasn't on us in a separate place it didn't take you out of the student life

in the same way yeah I didn't I just think like I guess I think for I think students get huge

returns from sports there's been some good research on this Betsy Stevenson an economist who's

now at the University of Michigan who has served in Democratic administrations actually looked at

women just before and just after title nine and their career trajectories and use that to kind of

see how the benefit that sports can have so I guess I'm I'm I'm really quite open to the idea

that if that's how people want to spend a lot of part of their a lot of their time in college

they should be able to I still think even short of like massive reform in which we take all

kinds of sports out of college I really do think that if Congress actually set its mind to try

to get rid of some of the ludicrous aspects of college sports that are not good for for young

adults it could do so and part of what's disappointing about this bill is it's really a big missed

opportunity to to actually try to improve the system that we have one one little final note on

this bill what one reason why Congress has given it attention why the Senate which is as far as

I can tell I don't know if they passed any other bills this this year I mean they probably passed

something but can't remember it but they've given a lot of attention is that I mean a a lot of

senators and members of Congress are big sports fans so that's it but be there are a bunch of

billionaires who are really interested in this yeah really willing to spend on it and there's

just especially in Texas where tech cruises there's this one guy who I think the times profiled not

long ago who's a huge supporter of Texas tech the the university and their football program and

is just willing to literally spend millions and millions and millions and millions of dollars on

this unadvancing Texas tech but also just creating a sports ecosystem a sports landscape that

they want to have and billion billion it's a it's a billionaire pet project and billionaire pet

projects get attention from Congress let us go to cocktail chatter when you're tailgating outside

the big game when you're outside the Yale Bowl Emily getting ready for a game this weekend and

you're with your usual tailgating crowd all the law school professors have their crazy wild tailgate

they sit around talk about different amendments every week it's a different amendment

just fitting this picture in your having a you're having an so an old lime beer whatever they call it

and yet in New Haven what are you going to be chattering about I just got a book out of the library

that I am so excited to read it's called a woman's work reclaiming the radical history of mothering

it's by Eleanor Clegg Warren who is cultural historian living in Sussex and it's about the world

like from the beginning of time until now kind of history of motherhood of midwives of birthing

of having small children of all the dying along the way that women unfortunately had to do

until very recent times having a baby was incredibly dangerous and I'm really excited to read this

so I don't know how I'm going to talk about it tailgating but then again I'm not going to be

tailgating so it's all going to work out for me um David Lee and Hart when you're

outside the big game when you're going to see a New York Liberty game and you're tailgating pre

I don't think you can tailgate in New York City it's just not possible because you can't park

you have a problem but if you were tailgating in New York City and you're having a drink what are

you going to be chattering about? Well David you already guessed it this is apparently the hang up

and listen edition of the cab fest I would be talking about the New York Liberty and the WNBA playoffs

because I went to a New York Liberty game this week um I've been to a lot of WNBA games but never

a New York Liberty game and the version of tailgating before the game um was um sitting out on the

sidewalk with a folding chair and having a slice of pizza um uh because the pizza shops seats

were filled and they let us take the folding chairs out on the sidewalk on a beautiful

Brooklyn night um and the WNBA playoffs um uh are very exciting the semi-finals will start this

weekend the Liberty pulled off a huge upset by beating the top seeded Minnesota links and here's

what I would encourage people to do tune out all of the really exhausting political chatter about the

WNBA and um enjoy the basketball um uh it's really good basketball um any one of the remaining

teams it feels like could win the championship and we all in the United States spend too much time

I'm screaming about politics and turning everything into politics and a healthy society doesn't do

that so um enjoy the WNBA okay uh my chatter um first of all it will just a self-promoting

chatter as you may have heard on the show before I lead this tour of a secret civil war fort in

Rock Creek Park um it was named best of Washington and Washington in this year uh really that's so

awesome I love that congratulations well it was it was also the highest rated uh experience on

Airbnb in Washington as well also awesome double congratulations so uh but you can get tickets for

it at secret fort DC I I realized I just listed some for next spring uh and if you want to get tickets

uh go to secret fort DC and I still have some tickets I think for for maybe some this fall but

certainly next spring but that's not my chatter my chatter is I saw a movie that kind of affected

me more deeply than probably any movie I have ever seen this house begin and it's I mean it's

gonna sound ridiculous it is a new Brad Pitt movie with the dog a part yeah it's a Brad Pitt and a

dog they are kind of stranded in the Alaskan wilderness Brad Pitt is an ex uh special forces soldier

and this is his dog was the dog key he had in uh in combat in a rock and they're now in retirement

in Alaska and they get stranded in Alaska and they have to make their way across the Alaskan

wilderness which is played uh starring role of the New Zealand wilderness plays the Alaskan wilderness

in the in the movie uh and it's an incredible movie it is so grueling and heart-rending

and Brad Pitt's a wonderful actor and this dog is phenomenal also wonderful actor it is it did

you see it no but I'm going to because oh my god it just it made me it it I was on the edge of my

seat I like nearly like torque holes in my clothing with this tension and I was weeping it was uh

it was just if you love dogs uh or if you love Brad Pitt then this is the movie for you

and or if you love Alaska um so check it out heart of the beast listeners you've got chatters you

have emailed them to us at gaffessitslate.com thank you so much please keep them coming to us and our

listener chatter this week comes from a deliep row in Los Angeles. This scientific project blew my

mind scientists spent a decade using largely intact fossils of Jurassic era arthropods specifically

the ancestors of modern crickets and katie dids to construct credible versions of what their sounds

were like they did this by studying 10,000 frames a second video of their modern descendants

they were then able to reconstruct the same movements of the same or similar appendages

and then use both machine learning and AI to output the sounds but results 135 million years later

is a beautiful if eerie soundscape of what a Jurassic insect symphony might sound like

keep up the great work and I hope you check this out in this New York Times article it's really terrific

also don't forget listeners please join us on Wednesday October 21st in Providence

for our live show go to slate.com slash gaffess live it's our first live show in Providence

Rhode Island please come and spend some time with us it'll be a great evening and there are

these VIP packages available slate.com slash gaffess live for tickets slate has other podcasts this week

and I would recommend you give it listen to hit parades choosing dolly edition

I absolutely love christmolampis hit parade podcast he examines sort of how songs go up and down the

charts and he has an episode about dolly partan and dolly partan's hits and and how she finally crossed

over to the pop charts and he puts out in a context of this wonderful l l a langley song choosing

texas that's been number one for really long time number one for i think almost half a year

so check it out choosing dolly on hit parade that's all for episode this week we also have a bonus

episode in your feed but the viral story around the collapse or the near collapse of a masking

mandatory lesbian bar in Massachusetts we sorry lost my turn of thought in that

just to call out the lesbian bar story that's why that's why yes well we'll get to that but do you

only will find out why that is if you stay for slate plus anyway if you are a slate plus member

you get that for free thank you and joy if you're not a member subscribe to slate plus directly

from the political gaffess show page on apple podcasts and Spotify or visit slate.com slash gaffess

plus get access wherever you listen that's our show for today the political gaffess is produced by

Nina or zuki our researchers only did our theme music is by date might be giant spenders for

podcasts ops yellow bell is executive producer slate podcast Hillary fri is editor chief slate

Emily baselon and always game David leanhart and David plots thanks for listening talk to you next week

there's rewarding and then there's remarkably rewarding with chase sapphire reserve like enjoying

access to our award winning lounges with two complimentary guests every time you travel learn

more at chase.com slash sapphire reserve cards issued by jp morgan chase bank and a member fdic subject

to credit approval terms apply when you're running a growing business the right systems can unlock

your full sales potential and make fulfilling every order effortless switch to ship station before

peak season so you're prepped and ready before the rush hits ship station connects Shopify Amazon

tiktok shop and over 200 more marketplaces with one platform that does it all you can manage orders

sink inventory track returns all automatically everything your operation needs all in one place

upgrade your shipping operations to stress proof your biggest sales days and capture every bit

of potential revenue go to shipstation.com and use code audio and get 30 days free