On the Issues with Michele Goodwin

Unpacking the Chaos of the Trump Years (with #SistersInLaw Hosts Jill Wine Banks and Kimberly Atkins Stohr)


July 6, 2024

With Guests:

Jill Wine-Banks: Jill Wine-Banks served as one of the Watergate prosecutors, and is the author of The Watergate Girl. She was the first female general counsel of the U.S. Army and first female executive director of the American Bar Association. She appears regularly on MSNBC as a legal analyst.

Kimberly Atkins Stohr: Kimberly Atkins Stohr is a senior opinion writer at The Boston Globe and a regular contributor to MSNBC. A former lawyer, she served as the first Washington, D.C.-based news correspondent for WBUR and as the Boston Herald’s Washington bureau chief.

Listen, Rate, Review and subscribe on:

In this Episode:

In this episode, we’re joined by two co-hosts of the Webby Award-winning #SistersInLaw podcast to discuss where our nation stands as we approach the 2024 elections—from the ongoing trials faced by former president Donald Trump, to Nikki Haley, to the Supreme Court’s recent opinions and so much more. Joining us for this episode are two very special guests:

*Jill Wine-Banks
*Kimberly Atkins Stohr

Background Reading:


00:00:05.8 Michele Goodwin:

Welcome to On the Issues with Michele Goodwin at Ms. magazine. As you know, we’re a show that reports, rebels and we tell it just like it is. On this show, we center your concerns about rebuilding our nation and advancing the promise of equality. So, join me as we tackle the most compelling issues of our times. On our show, history matters. We examine the past as we think about the future. This week, you’re hearing a pre-recorded broadcast right in front of our Supreme Court term in review.

In this episode, I’m so pleased to be joined by Jill Wine-Banks and Kimberly Atkins Stohr, both from The Webby Award-winning #SistersInLaw podcast, as we discuss exactly where our nation stands as we approach the 2024 elections. My special guest Jill Wine-Banks served as one of the Watergate prosecutors, and is the author of The Watergate Girl. She was first female general counsel in the United States Army and first female executive director of the American Bar Association. You’ve seen her regularly on MSNBC as a legal analyst.

I’m also joined by Kimberly Atkins Stohr. She’s a senior opinion writer at The Boston Globe and a regular contributor to MSNBC. A former lawyer, she served as the first Washington, D.C.-based news correspondent for WBUR and as the Boston Herald’s Washington bureau chief. So sit back, and take a listen.

I want to thank you both for joining me as we discuss some of the most compelling issues that are presented, and have a little bit of fun in the process, because it’s wonderful to be joined by the two of you, these two badass women… can I say that? Yes, I can, it’s my podcast, but also who are fellow podcasters, as well. So, I know you’ve been covering the Trump trials extensively on your podcasts. I’m wondering, as we start this off, because we’re in the thick of it still, how do you expect for the indictments, these trials, to impact the 2024 elections? Kim, I’ll start with you and then switch it over to Jill.

00:02:34.3 Kimberly Atkins Stohr:

Yeah, that’s a great question. I think, if anything… and I think we’ve already begun to see that a little bit with the New York trial, that it brings back to consciousness… for a lot of people who were tuned out about the election and what the stakes are and who the individuals who are nominated are, it brings back to consciousness just who Donald Trump is, what he stands accused of doing, and the kind of people that he has dealt with in his world to help provide a contrast between Joe Biden.

I don’t think, particularly because the January 6-related trials won’t happen before the election, that it will crystalize Donald Trump’s role on January 6 the way that the House Committee, the special committee, did, for example, before the election. That’s too bad, because I think that the nation needs that kind of reminder. I think that does create a greater contrast between him and President Biden.

00:03:56.8 Jill Wine-Banks:

And of course, I agree with everything that Kimberly said, but I don’t think it’s going to make much difference because, one, his people, his cult, are totally loyal, and nothing will matter.

00:04:10.3 Michele Goodwin:

Jill, you just used the term cult, you know, and I know many people are using that term to describe the people who follow Trump, and I want you to finish out answering the question, but I wanted to toss that in just a little bit. What do you mean by cult?

00:04:27.5 Jill Wine-Banks:

Okay, well, let me finish answering, and that might help, which is that facts no longer matter. I still remember when facts mattered, and if facts mattered, then this would lead to a different outcome in the election, but it wouldn’t be just this. It would be the indictments. It would be what everybody saw with their own eyes. They would not believe only Donald Trump. They would believe what they had seen.

And so, what I mean by a cult is people who follow, blindly, a leader who has them so mesmerized, that they ignore reality around them. So, it really does come down to facts, and facts need to matter again, and I don’t know how to make that happen. I’ve tried arguing with members of the Trump cult or supporters of Trump, MAGA people, and they just simply reject the facts, and they believe what he says. So, there you are. That’s why I think it’s a cult.

00:05:28.9 Kimberly Atkins Stohr:

Can I just add one thing in terms of how these trials…

00:05:30.8 Michele Goodwin:

Oh, please do, because, right, I mean, what Jill said is really so powerful, and I don’t think that Jill is alone. So yes, Kim, please.

00:05:39.2 Kimberly Atkins Stohr:

No, no, I think that she’s absolutely right. There is this just entrenched intractable level of support for Donald Trump in this country. That we have seen just how inelastic it is, which, you know, alarms me in a way, because people are either misinformed, or they don’t care about what the stakes are, but I’m also worried… and if we are to believe the polls that the election is as close as it is, two people who, at least at some point, both voiced an understanding of who Donald Trump is…

I’m thinking of some of the big donors we’ve seen recently that… where it said they were going to sit this election out, Republican donors, and you know, they really criticized Trump in the past, and now they’re coming on board and saying they’re going to help underwrite his campaign and that they want something different than Biden. It’s like, really? You’ve seen Trump for who he is. You’re a reasonable person. You are not part of this cult, and you are still supporting him. I’m hearing people like Nikki Haley, who had a wonderful opportunity.

00:06:50.4 Michele Goodwin:

Yeah, okay, so, Kim, you tossed in Nikki here. I didn’t know that we were going to get to the Nikki, right? So, Nikki Haley has been so… what a complicated journey, right? There was the… you know, what was the cause of the Civil War? And she said, well, it was just a state’s rights issue. A few days after that, she capitulated, came back, said, well, of course, everybody knows that it had something to do with slavery. Of course, that was also ironic, considering that she was the governor of South Carolina, the first state to secede from the Union.

And in its succession documents, it’s in the very beginning of it. The very first words of it were about this and about slavery. We don’t want people interfering with our ability to be able to own this property and our ability to be able to capitalize off of owning this human property, and their perception was that the coming president could be somebody who would be in opposition to slavery. So, if we could take a moment to just circle back to what you were saying. That even folks like Nikki Haley, who once said that they wouldn’t vote for Trump, now back at it again.

00:08:06.9 Kimberly Atkins Stohr:

Yeah, and it just shows how powerful proximity to power is, even if that power is vitriolic and dangerous and hateful and bigoted and all the negative things that you hit upon, and just that comment about the Civil War from Nikki Haley alone, even given all of that nastiness and the attack on democracy itself, people will still align with that power, and that’s something that we’ve learned about our nation in the last decade or so that is really enlightening.

00:08:42.8 Michele Goodwin:

You know, I’m still taking a pause on Jill bringing us straight up to cult and the fact that facts do matter, but it seems that there are so many who simply don’t care about that. I do want to talk about the Supreme Court, but before we get there, I really respect the wisdom and analysis that you bring to the table, including on your own podcast. So, I want to turn back one more time to this cult-ish behavior that has now enthralled and trapped so many, so many Americans. What would that mean, even if Biden is able to pull out a victory, which many hope that he will, you know, because that will be a sign toward fighting for our democracy. What will that mean with nearly half of American voters still sharing some of the values that Donald Trump does. Jill?

00:09:50.7 Jill Wine-Banks:

It is terrifying to me, because I think we’re in a situation where, win or lose, there is going to be… I don’t know whether it’ll rise to the level of January 6, but there will be some sort of response that will be bad. I think that he’s already pre-rebutted the results of the election, saying the only way I can lose is if it’s stolen from me again, and people actually believe that. So, we have people still believing, almost four years later, that the election was stolen from Donald Trump, despite all the evidence to the contrary, despite everything that will be done to suppress the vote, despite the efforts to keep Biden off the ballot in Ohio and other places. I think we’re in a very frightening heart of America. You have him telling you what he will do if he’s reelected.

The Project 2025 is the most terrifying thing I’ve ever read, and people are ignoring that as if, well, it can’t happen here, but it can, and he is better prepared to carry out those… I don’t want to call them threats, but those promises than he was four years ago. Four years ago, he didn’t have the team behind him. Now, one of the first things he will do is abolish the civil service and put in loyalists who will carry out his exact orders, and so, if we don’t stop him at the ballot box, I don’t know what we’re going to do.

It’s going to require winning the presidency, winning the Senate, winning the House, and winning many states. We, Democrats, have not paid enough attention to what the Republicans have been doing for years, which is to build state power that has led to the threat that, for example, the Electoral College, if there was ever a tie, would go to the small states who are Republican, because they get the same vote as New York and California and Illinois, Massachusetts, all of that.

So, I think we really have to pay attention to this election and to the binary choice that it is. It really is a binary choice. Even the libertarians couldn’t tolerate Donald Trump, or for that matter, RFK Jr. They booed both of them, and so, it is down to two candidates, and we know what one of them promises, and we know what the other promises, and one is liberty and democracy and protection for all of the rights we already have, and the other is the opposite. So, it’s up to the voters to make sure that we don’t lose our democracy.

00:12:50.8 Michele Goodwin:

So, as you’ve talked about the ways in which our democracy is so incredibly vulnerable and fragile in this space and the promises, as you mentioned, that Donald Trump has put on the table, I want to turn to a body that there’s been deep investment in. As you said, Republicans have been investing in the day that we find ourselves in. I want to turn to the Supreme Court.

There are significant consequential cases that are being deliberated right now by the justices. Just a couple weeks ago, we have Justice Sotomayor saying that, while she was at Harvard, that there are days in which she goes into her office and chamber, and she shuts the door, and she weeps. So, I want to ask if you have any… before I get to predictions about the court, I want to pause there, because that says a lot, a justice going to her office, her chambers, shutting the door, and weeping. Wow.

00:13:57.3 Kimberly Atkins Stohr:

Yeah. Just, you know, as Jill was talking about, the installation of loyalists, if Donald Trump returns to office. One thing that came to my mind is, well, he’s already installed his loyalists in one very important institution, which is the judiciary. Not just at the U.S. Supreme Court, but the flurry of federal lifetime appointments that he made throughout the federal courts at all levels in the country, it was him installing his loyalists, and they are still there.

It will take a generation… even though President Biden has also made a lot of appointments to the federal courts and one to the Supreme Court, it’ll take a generation to balance out the courts, but at the Supreme Court, we have seen, in recent weeks alone just the impact of that. I mean, since Dobbs, the decision overturning Roe v Wade, which is something, as a lawyer, I never thought I’d see the wake of that, and now you have a justice, not installed by Donald Trump, but one who is empowered because of the supermajority that Donald Trump installed on the court to really show that he is a religious crusader.

And I’m talking about Justice Samuel Alito, the author of the Dobbs decision, who envisions our country in a very specific way and is using his position to help effectuate that, and it’s not just when it comes to reproductive rights, which is scary enough, but the opinion he wrote on voting rights. As Jill said, the importance of being able to have a democracy, be able to vote and have your vote counted, and he blessed the kind of racial gerrymandering that, you know, led to our country being torn apart, almost, and ensures that those who are seeking this power and those who are aligning themselves with Donald Trump will have an unfair advantage at our election.

So, what has happened to the Supreme Court is really… as somebody who went to law school, who wanted to study the principles of justice and bring that about as an officer of the court, it’s really been gutting to me. So, I understand Justice Sotomayor’s sentiment completely.

00:16:31.8 Jill Wine-Banks:

If I could just add,

00:16:33.6 Michele Goodwin:

Please do, Jill.

00:16:34.7 Jill Wine-Banks:

As what Justice Sotomayor, you quoted as, she added, and I expect more tears to come, with considering the decisions that are still pending and to be announced. I’m terrified. Are they going to grant full immunity, even partial immunity? Are they going to send the case back to Judge Chutkan for an opinion about what constitutes official acts, when it’s clear that nothing that he is charged with doing could possibly, even remotely, be within the outer parameters of his official conduct?

I’m really, really worried, and what does that mean in terms of whether people are willing to accept the Supreme Court’s opinions, and we’ve already had indications from some states, well, we don’t care what the Supreme Court says, we’re not going to follow them. And so, if they don’t go extreme enough for the states, they may not be followed, and it’s terrifying. So, unless we do something to change… for example, add four justices so that we have the same number of circuits and justices. The nine was when there were nine circuits. There aren’t nine circuits anymore, so it’s not unreasonable to think that we should enlarge the court.

Now, I certainly wouldn’t want the court enlarged if Donald Trump were president, because we know what we will get, and that would only be worse. So, it’s a tricky political issue, and it’s a tricky moral issue, and talking about democracy doesn’t seem to get through to people for whom they already think that democracy hasn’t worked so well for them, and that’s why they’re following Donald Trump. So, we have to put it in terms that are more understandable to people. A specific right that they will lose, a specific something that will resonate with them as to why they should vote for someone other than Donald Trump.

00:18:36.1 Michele Goodwin:

Well, that brings us to the cases of this term, and here, I’m wondering if there are any predictions in sight. Jill, you mentioned the immunity case. Can you tell our listeners just a little bit about that and what you think… how you think the court might decide that case?

00:18:59.3 Jill Wine-Banks:

Let me start, Michele, with the harder part of that, which is predicting the Supreme Court, and it’s almost impossible, because precedent doesn’t mean anything anymore. They are willing to throw away 50 years or more of precedent and a lot of issues, including, obviously, Roe. So, it’s impossible to predict what they will do. Their opinion in the voting rights case, in a sense, follows their last decision that said political gerrymandering is okay.

I don’t get when the two are so closely aligned, that you could say that political and racial are separable. They aren’t. In terms of immunity, the case involves whether or not a former president, while he is president, can commit certain heinous acts and be held not accountable for them, given total immunity for anything that he does.

And that means whether it’s part of his mandatory job or not, and it seems to me that, in a case where a federal official is charged with interfering with elections, which are assigned by our Constitution to the states, has no role in it, how that could possibly fall within the ambit of his official job is ridiculous, and this should’ve been an easy case. It should not have been postponed for argument until April, because it was fully briefed at the District Court of Appeals, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.

And there was no need for delay for having more briefing done, and there’s no reason for the decision to have been put off, to almost guarantee that this trial cannot happen before the election. This trial should’ve happened… the argument that the speedy trial is a right only of the defendant is absurd. It is a right for all of us. It’s the right for the people to have a trial when memories are fresh, when witnesses are still around, when the issues matter to the outcome of an election.

To not know the answer, we’ve already talked about whether it will affect people’s vote, and there’s some polling that definitely indicates that a conviction of a felony will change votes. That’s why we need to get to the important felonies, and I do believe that the New York case is an important one. I think it is an election interference case. It is not a hush money case. It is election interference, and so, I think it’s an important one, but I think people really would be swayed more by having the January 6 and the espionage case, the Florida documents case…

00:21:42.1 Michele Goodwin:

Well, the Florida documents case, maybe this gets back to the cult-ish-ness, that it’s not just the American voting public, but also, perhaps, might you say, some of the people who’ve been installed by the former president? Kim, you look like you’re ready to jump in on that.

00:21:58.4 Kimberly Atkins Stohr:

No, that’s absolutely true. It’s that case in particular, and I wanted to give a long… you know, a lot of leeway to Judge Aileen Cannon and not jump to a conclusion that she is trying to game the outcome of this case, but it’s really impossible for me to come to any other conclusion than that. The rulings that she’s made and then the decision to basically put this case on ice indefinitely is just outrageous.

00:22:33.9 Michele Goodwin:

I mean, it’s hard to fathom when we’ve ever seen anything like that.

00:22:39.6 Kimberly Atkins Stohr:

It’s incredible, and this case is often seen as… you know, described, in order of the New York cases, the least important or the… no, no, this is about national security. This is a person who had national security-related classified documents on his person, in his home that could be accessed by guests at Mar-a-Lago, like, who knows.

00:23:05.2 Michele Goodwin:
At his resort. I mean, it’s Mar-a-Lago a resort, right?

00:23:08.2 Kimberly Atkins Stohr:

Yes, there is no…

00:23:10.4 Michele Goodwin:

I mean, people come in and out that stay at Mar-a-Lago.

00:23:12.3 Kimberly Atkins Stohr:

There is no SCIF, you know, secured location to view such documents there, and we know that this person is deeply indebted, is seeking foreign funders for his indebtedness, has hobnobbed with Russia and China, and other people have shown already classified documents to a Russian official while he was in… I mean, this is a terribly important case and that we don’t have resolution on that before the election is really outrageous.

Because you touched on, you know, deeply indebted, even to pay off the debts from a prior trial. Had to go and seek resources elsewhere. So deeply indebted.

00:24:02.6 Kimberly Atkins Stohr:

So deeply indebted, and even aside from… as Jill very importantly pointed out, this immunity case, which just cuts to the heart of our democracy and the ability to say, no, you cannot attack it. Even if you are a president, you are not above the law. There are so many other cases that we… that they haven’t even gotten to talk about that are going to be decided before the end of June.

There is a case that will decide whether people who are unhoused even have rights, essentially, or can they just be imprisoned for their poverty? We have a case that will decide if the rich Sacklers can get out of paying for the impact that they have had on opioid abuse from their marketing practices or if they can use bankruptcy courts to skirt that. We have a case that will decide whether people have a constitutional right to bump stocks, which allows a gun to be turned into a machine gun. We have a case… I mean, these are just a sampling of the cases that still have yet to…

00:25:15.1 Michele Goodwin:

It’s just so…

00:25:16.6 Kimberly Atkins Stohr:

Mifepristone, whether people can second-guess the FDA in their approval of an abortion… I mean…

00:25:23.9 Michele Goodwin:

The EMTALA case, Kim. I mean, whether…

00:25:27.3 Kimberly Atkins Stohr:

EMTALA. Exactly.

00:25:31.2 Michele Goodwin:

And you can’t even make that up. It’s an Emergency Treatment and Labor Act, and the fact that we’re even here, for people who are textualists and originalists when they text, the actual name of the law itself says “and Labor Act” to help women when they are in need and suffering during a period of pregnancy, and yet, the possibility that this law would not apply to them.

This is the law that allows hospitals… that mandates that hospitals that receive federal funds—virtually every hospital in the United States—that they must stabilize and provide care to individuals who need that kind of care, and certainly, this would apply to people who are in emergency medical need due to some crisis that has come about due to pregnancy, and you have the State of Idaho challenging that and the Supreme Court taking that up, which, again, we’re the land of unheard of. Jill, I see that you’re about to jump in.

00:26:36.3 Jill Wine-Banks:

Well, two things. One, I just want to add one of my favorite cases for the most important of this term, and that’s one which determines whether federal agencies will continue to have any rights and powers to use their expertise, and that, to me, is frightening because Congress cannot possibly take on the role of all the federal agencies. Of course, you’re right about EMTALA.

You’re right about… you know, Kim mentioned all of the really significant cases that are still pending, and you know, they’re the Supreme Court. There is no appeal from that, other than federal laws that will be signed into law. So, again, we’re back to it’s up to the voters to make sure that if they take away the powers of federal agencies, that somehow, we are able to, through legislation, return those powers to the agencies where they belong.


So, what you’re basically sharing is there’s an awesome, deep, heavy weight in front of us for this election and for voters. So, we’ve talked about it, but I’m wondering, then, what you think will be the defining issues for the 2024 elections? What will they be? I mean, there are some people who say that… and this is interesting. That, well, the people who care about abortion rights, that’s all they care about, and it will be insignificant to everything else.

And then I think, that’s ridiculous, because people who care about abortions are women and men, but women care about the economy, and they know that childcare and what it costs to educate children and house them and clothe them, and women think about that. Women think about their ability to be able to vote and be engaged in democracy and so much more, but I want to turn it over to you. What do you two think will be the defining issues in this election? I’ll start with you, Jill, then ping back over to you, Kim.

00:28:59.3 Jill Wine-Banks:

I think all of those issues combined. I think voters…there are, of course, one-issue voters. No doubt about that, but I think most voters balance out all the different issues. The economy is clearly, based on polling, maybe the number one issue for men and women alike. I think people have to worry about the promise of what’s to come. I mean, we’ve talked about, you know, the right of abortion. What about the right to contraception, which now seems to be a possible thing that could be taken away?

Imagine that. It’s a woman’s right to not only control her body, but her entire life by family planning, and deciding when she will have a child. It’s just unthinkable to me that that right could be taken away, and yet, that is something that is almost promised if Donald Trump is reelected. So, I think we have to just hope that people will take into account one piece of advice… you know, people sometimes come to me and say, I don’t know, what can I do? What can I do? And you know, obviously, I always say, you know, be informed, be involved, get out the vote, but there are so many issues.

How do I learn them? Just learn one. Pick your favorite issue, the one you’re the most passionate about, and learn enough about that to argue it well, to convince someone that that alone is reason to vote for the candidate that you support. Obviously, if you can learn two or three, that’s even better, but even just learning one can make a difference, and personal contact with other voters is really important. It makes a difference. Whether it’s a postcard that you helped send, whether it’s knocking on doors, it’s really important to reach people on a personal level.

And so, I think that’s really what we have to do and to be aware of enough issues. Campaigns put together very good documents that sort of focus on here’s the position of my candidate on X. Here’s the position of the other candidate, and even if that’s all you know, that’s enough to perhaps engage in a conversation, because you probably will know more than the person you’re speaking to, because you are involved enough to get out there to help get out the vote.

00:31:17.0 Kimberly Atkins Stohr:

Yeah. You know, when we talk about issues that matter, so-called kitchen table issues, elections have always been, but have become more increasingly so… I should say have long been and have been come increasingly harder for Democrats because the Republican base, the Trump base particularly, is a lot more homogenous than the coalition that Joe Biden and other Democrats have to reach out to in order to get a majority of the vote, right, and Republicans, the party is shrinking.

And so, they’re becoming more homogenous racially, ethnically, geographically, otherwise, whereas Democrats are becoming more diverse racially, generationally, geographically, economically and otherwise. So, the issues that people care about are a lot bigger, and it’s harder to make that case and keep all the different parts of that coalition together. There are people and also even individuals who have big issues that they care about, you have to keep them engaged, people who care both about reproductive rights and also what is happening in Gaza.

People who care both about, you know, tax rates when they have a small business, and care very much about voting rights. It’s so much harder for Democrats. So, this whole… like, when I see the polls about the top three issues, I’m like, that only works for one party, you all. Only one party are people in it with the privilege to say, oh, I just want lower taxes. Only one party do people have the privilege that are just like, no, I want traditional marriage, you know? That’s something that works.

But for Democrats, we have to make the case across the board that you’re good on national security, economics, racial justice, you know, democracy, voting rights, all the things, reproductive rights, all the things, and sometimes, even those things compete with one another. So, only Republicans can have a top issue. I think Democrats really can’t. They have to campaign on everything, and that’s hard.

00:33:31.0 Michele Goodwin:

Well, that is really hard, isn’t it, because that also means inner divides where, on one hand, the landscape has been, in recent years, the sort of consolidation behind an idea, behind a particular aspect of the Republican Party, and it’s very different when you think about where the Dems are. There’s a whole episode that we could just do on that, just unpacking that piece, but we’ve come to this part in our show where we look for silver linings, and so, we’ve had a lot to discuss about the status of our democracy right now, the election, the former president, his trials, and I know, for so many, that can seem so incredibly dark, but is there some glimmer of hope that you can see on the horizon? And I’ll start with you, Kim.

00:34:27.7 Kimberly Atkins Stohr:

Yeah. So, with all of this, there is still a power that the people have, and we still have our democracy, and this is why voting is so important. I know for some, when they ask, as Jill said, what can we do… and she’s absolutely right. I think talking to people, engaging, is really important. When the answer is vote, they say that that feels insufficient.

You know, they’ve been told for years that all you have to do is vote, and these bad things keep happening, but you have to understand that that is a fundamental part. When we’re talking about holding the Supreme Court accountable to adhere to ethics rules, Congress can do that, but only if you vote for those people in Congress. When you talk about having fair maps, we can have that, but only if you vote for people in your state houses that have an interest in drawing fairer maps.

It really does come to not just national, but state and local, too. All of these people affect what kind of schools you have, what kind of economy you have, what kind of democracy you have, what kind of future you have. So, remember that, even when you despair, the importance of that vote, and get out and do it. Take your mom. Take your aunties. Take your church people. Take your neighbors. Vote.

00:35:51.1 Michele Goodwin:

Jill, a silver lining.

00:35:51.7 Jill Wine-Banks:

You know, I think Kim has really mentioned it already, but it is that we still have a democracy, and that’s a silver lining, is that we still have it. We won’t if we don’t act. This election, I know everybody says this is the most important election of our lifetime. Well, you know, I’ve lived through a lot of things. The Vietnam War, the Civil Rights Movement, and all of those elections were important, but none of them threatened democracy and our fundamental rights in the way that this election does. Please familiarize yourselves with Project 2025 and see what would happen if there is another… it’s supposedly for the next conservative president, but obviously, it was written for Donald Trump, and I think that that’s really where we’re at. Is the silver lining is that doesn’t have to become reality. It’s up to all of us to make sure it doesn’t happen.

00:36:53.4 Michele Goodwin:

It’s been such a pleasure to have both of you with us for this On the Issues episode. I look forward to the next time that we do this, and so, I hope it will be soon. Thank you so much, Jill. Thank you so much, Kim. It was such a pleasure.

00:37:12.6 Kimberly Atkins Stohr:

Thanks for having us.

00:37:12.0 Jill Wine-Banks:

Thank you. Hope we’ll see you soon.

00:37:18.4 Michele Goodwin:

Guests and listeners, that’s it for today’s episode of On the Issues with Michele Goodwin at Ms. Magazine. I want to thank each of you for tuning in for the full story and engaging with us. We hope you’ll join us again for our next episode, where you know we’ll be reporting, rebelling and telling it just like it is. For more information about what we discussed today, head to MsMagazine.com, and be sure to subscribe.

And if you believe, as we do, that women’s voices matter, that equality for all persons cannot be delayed, and that rebuilding America and being unbought and unbossed and reclaiming our time are important, then be sure to rate, review, and subscribe to On the Issues with Michele Goodwin at Ms. Magazine in Apple Podcasts, Spotify, iHeartRadio, Google Podcasts, Stitcher, wherever it is that you receive your podcast. We are ad free and reader supported.

Help us reach new listeners by bringing this hard-hitting content, which you’ve come to expect and rely upon, by subscribing. Let us know what you think about our show, and please support independent feminist media. Look for us at MsMagazine.com for new content and special episode updates, and if you want to reach us, please do so. Email us at OnTheIssues@MsMagazine.com. We do read our mail. This has been your host Michele Goodwin reporting, rebelling, and telling it just like it is.

On the Issues with Michele Goodwin is a Ms. Magazine joint production. Michele Goodwin and Kathy Spillar are our executive producers. Our producers for this episode are Roxy Szal, Oliver Haug and also Allison Whelan. Our social media content producer is Sophia Panigrahi. The creative vision behind our work includes art and design by Brandi Phipps, editing by Natalie Holland, and music by Chris J. Lee.