Lena Waithe shares why her least favorite thing is being wrong.
Vivien Killilea/Getty Images for Palm Springs In
hide caption
toggle caption
Advertisement
Vivien Killilea/Getty Images for Palm Springs In
Lena Waithe shares why her least favorite thing is being wrong.
Vivien Killilea/Getty Images for Palm Springs In
A note from Wild Card host Rachel Martin:
Lena Waithe knows what she wants. She wants people to look outside of their own lives to try to understand other people and the choices they make. Her TV shows and films are these powerful little empathy engines.
Advertisement
Waithe became the first Black woman ever to win an Emmy for comedy writing on the show Master of None. She’s also the creator of the comedy series Boomerang and Twenties. She wrote the film Queen & Slim and was a producer on the movie Dear White People.
But for me, Waithe’s real triumph is The Chi. The show takes place where she grew up on the south side of Chicago. It’s about Black people living at the margins of society with little to no room for error. It is also about family and loyalty and joy. I love this show because every character is given their full humanity. You cannot put anyone in a tidy column of good or bad or say, “This person is worthy of respect and this person’s not.” People are complicated, beautiful and broken, and Waithe doesn’t want you to look away because if you do, you’re going to miss the truth that she’s putting out into the world – which is that judging people is harder when you start to understand them.
The trailer for season 6 of The Chi.
Advertisement
YouTube
This Wild Card interview has been edited for length and clarity. Host Rachel Martin asks guests randomly-selected questions from a deck of cards. Tap play above to listen to the full podcast, or read an excerpt below.
Question 1: When did you feel like you found your people?
Lena Waithe: Michael Svoboda – who was a writer’s PA on The Game when I was an assistant at Girlfriends – he and I just really vibed. And he was just like, “Yo, I got a writer’s group that I do where we sit and write original pilots that we’re working on to kind of help us get some stuff done.” And I walked into that writer’s group and I just like found all these amazing people that I’m still tight with today.
Rachel Martin: Tell me how that jibes with your hometown Chicago and your experience there, because it sounds like your people were writers. Did you not have that in some way in Chicago?
Waithe: I was a bit of an oddball in Chicago because I was obsessed with TV, obsessed with movies. Like, people go to the movies and watch TV shows – it’s a pastime. And I think my family could tell it was more than that for me – I would be just enthralled by it and be thinking about it.
Like, I have like a Wizard of Oz tattoo. I have Judy Garland. I have the lion. I have the scarecrow. I have all of it, because that movie was more than a movie for me. It was almost like a Bible to life.
Advertisement
It’s like – you always think there’s something out there that’s better than where you’re at right now. But the truth is, when you go out there and get to the Emerald City and meet the wizard, you realize it’s not really what you thought it was. And then all you long for when you’re in the Emerald City is to go where?
Martin: Home.
Waithe: Exactly. And it’s a lesson none of us really learn, still. You know, we still are trying to go, like, “I gotta get to the Wizard – if I could just get to the Emerald City, everything will be fine.”
And then you get there, you’re just like, “I’m still not fine.” And so I think the big reason why Wizard of Oz is such a religion and a reminder for me is that there is no Emerald City that will feel like home.
Martin: Was that sad for you? Was there a grief attached to that?
Advertisement
Waithe: No, it helped me to slow down. Because the truth is, there’s always something you want. And that’s fine, you know, you need that thing to make you want to go. But you got to remember that it’ll be nice if it happens. It’ll be cool. But you don’t want it to be a thing that, if you don’t get it, you can’t find happiness.
Question 2: What makes you irrationally defensive?
Waithe: Irrationally defensive? (laughs) Oh my gosh.
I don’t like to be wrong. My least favorite thing is getting something wrong. And that can be in many ways, you know, it’d be a relationship, you know, some trivia, you know what I mean?
Martin: I love that those were in the same breath..
Waithe: I know it’s like relationship, like Taboo, you know what I mean? I’m not good at not being good at things. So I can get defensive when I’m not like succeeding at something.
Advertisement
Martin: When’s the last time you were wrong about something?
Waithe: Oh, recently. I thought a particular actress was in Game of Thrones. And she wasn’t, and I was so ticked because I was like, “Are you sure that’s not her?” And I looked it up too. I was like, “Let me see, let me see!”
Martin: Right, of course! Because you believed with every fiber of your being that she was in Game of Thrones.
Waithe: I really did. That’s what I’m saying. Like, I was so not happy about that in that moment because I never get that stuff wrong, but it’s okay.
Martin: We’re going to forget you were wrong about that one. No one has to know.
Advertisement
Waithe: Now everybody knows.
Question 3: What’s your best defense against despair?
Waithe: Ooooooh. I love this Baldwin quote. He says to Nikki Giovanni in a beautiful conversation that they’re having where she thinks she’s a pessimist. And he says, “No, you’re a realist. You’re cool, but you’re not a pessimist.” He’s like, “Because you’re alive.” And I think my biggest defense against despair is the fact that I’m alive. Is that I’m here. And even though it can feel like a curse, it is the greatest gift to be Earthside at this time.
And you can’t run away from despair. You can try. I love that Solange song, “Cranes in the Sky,” because it’s all about ways in which we try to run away. So you can try to shop it away, smoke it away, you know, like sex away. You can’t.
The music video for Solange Knowles’ song “Cranes in the Sky.”
Advertisement
YouTube
Martin: So in the particular, when it has come for you, do you just sit there and like say an affirmation? Like, “I’m alive?” You look in the mirror, you pinch yourself like…
Waithe: No, I’m a sleeper. I’ll try to sleep it away. I try to watch The Comeback, you know, which is my favorite go-to.
Martin: Really? That brings you back from the brinks of despair?
Waithe: No, it just reminds me of a character that is so flawed. But yet, I love and root for so much. Like, Valerie Cherish is a game changing character for me. When I watch that show, I can’t help but look at Valerie Cherish and go, “Alright. I’m alright, I’m okay, I’ll be alright,” You know – that character and that show, The Comeback, ladies and gentlemen, go find it.
Advertisement
Martin: Despair beware!
Waithe: When you are in despair, go watch the first season of The Comeback, okay? And you will be like, “What am I experiencing? And I feel better now cause I’m laughing and also like completely have secondhand embarrassment.”
Three more people have been criminally charged with destruction of property at the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool.
Officers say they detained Cameron Thiers, Sophie Dennison-Gibby and Justin Carreno one Saturday afternoon in June and described in court documents witnessing them peeling and removing pieces of blue paint from the Reflecting Pool.
One officer “witnessed Carreno reach down into the reflecting pool and pull up a piece of the blue paint,” according to the court documents.
The officer who detained Dennison-Gibby “found 1 additional piece of the reflecting pool liner” in her purse, the documents said.
All three incidents were recorded on the officers’ body worn cameras, they said in the court documents.
Advertisement
Several “partnering law enforcement agencies assigned to the Reflecting Pool” working with US Park Police were involved in detaining the two men and one woman — including officers from Texas, Oklahoma, Montana and California.
One of the officers said in court documents that Thiers “admitted to removing a piece of blue sealant from the Reflecting Pool and still had it in his hand when I made contact with him.”
The three defendants were arraigned in court Wednesday and pleaded not guilty to the misdemeanor charges of destruction of property with a value less than $1,000. The judge ordered them to stay away from the Reflecting Pool.
Lawyers for Thiers and Dennison-Gibby declined to comment. CNN has reached out to Carreno’s attorney.
If found guilty of destruction of property, the defendants could be fined up to $1,000 and face a maximum of 180 days behind bars.
Advertisement
The New York Times first reported that three additional people had been charged with damaging the Reflecting Pool.
President Donald Trump has repeatedly claimed that vandals caused major damage to the pool by gashing the lining after his administration spent more than $14 million on renovations, though he has not provided evidence to support that claim. The officers who charged Carreno, Thiers and Dennison-Gibby did not accuse them of gashing the lining.
Former Olympic canoeist David Hearn was indicted by a grand jury in Washington, DC, last week for allegedly damaging the Reflecting Pool. Hearn — unlike Carreno, Thiers and Dennison-Gibby – was charged with destruction of property with a value of more than $1,000 which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison, if convicted. He is set to be arraigned in court Thursday.
Crews began draining the Reflecting Pool over the weekend to make repairs, according to Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, for the second time in three months.
The move comes after weeks of problems – algae blooms, green-hued water, a chipping bottom and the administration’s allegations of vandalism – that have plagued the iconic landmark, making its woes the subject of national interest.
Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett speaks at the Reagan Library on Sept. 9, 2025, in Simi Valley, Calif. Barrett discussed and signed copies of her new book, Listening to the Law: Reflections on the Court and Constitution.
Mario Tama/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Advertisement
Mario Tama/Getty Images
Even as the Supreme Court was handing down one legal thunderbolt after another last week, the justices were quietly releasing their annual financial reports. Justice Samuel Alito was the only sitting justice to request an extension, which he has done for 15 years. The disclosures do not give a complete account of the justices’ total income and wealth, but they give insights into their concertgoing, guest professorships and even their involvement in youth sports.
In addition to their salaries, much of the justices’ reported income came from their book deals. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson led the pack earning more than $1.1 million last year for a total of roughly $4 million since her memoir, Lovely One, was published in 2024.
Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett and retired Justice Anthony Kennedy also reported income from published books. Earnings from their books ranged from $849,000 for Barrett, to $300,000 for Gorsuch and $88,000 for Sotomayor, whose books include her 2013 autobiography and five children’s books. Justice Clarence Thomas, who previously earned $1.5 million for his 2007 memoir, listed no publisher payments last year, and Justice Brett Kavanaugh, one of 13 co-authors of a 2016 legal treatise, also received no payments last year. Kavanaugh is said to be working on a memoir but he listed no payments for the anticipated book. Alito does have a book coming out in the fall, but with his financial report still outstanding, there is no data on how much he was paid for the work in 2025.
Advertisement
The only two sitting justices who have not written books are Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Elena Kagan.
Many justices also earned income from teaching at law schools. Roberts reported income from New England Law, located in Boston, and Gorsuch reported teaching income from George Mason University in Virginia. Thomas taught classes at Catholic University in Washington, D.C., and Barrett and Kavanaugh taught at Notre Dame Law School. Barrett graduated from the school and began teaching there 23 years ago; Kavanaugh has family connections to Notre Dame.
The disclosures also report gifts, travel, food and lodging that the justices received in 2025. Jackson and Sotomayor were the only two to report gifts. Jackson was given a painting for her chambers valued at $2,500, and Sotomayor reported a trip to Kansas City to watch the opening of a musical based on her children’s book, Just Ask.
In addition, she reported receiving free tickets worth $4,333 while on “a private trip to Puerto Rico.” The tickets were from the record label that represents Bad Bunny, and her trip coincided with the artist’s months-long concert series in San Juan. Sotomayor’s parents were from Puerto Rico, and she has spent much time there over the years.
Advertisement
The justices also disclosed significant reimbursements for travel throughout 2025. Thomas’ travel, food and lodging expenses were paid for by the Hoover Institution for speaking at a celebration of conservative economist Thomas Sowell.
Sotomayor, Gorsuch, Barrett and Jackson were reimbursed for international travel, where they gave speeches, spoke about their books or taught. Roberts was the only sitting member of the court not to report any gifts or travel reimbursements.
The annual filings also shed some light on the justices’ activities off the bench. Kavanaugh reported that in addition to his duties as a Supreme Court justice, he serves as a coach to multiple D.C.-area Catholic Youth Organization girls’ basketball teams. Coach K, as he is known by his players, wrote the court’s June decision declaring that states can ban transgender women and girl athletes from playing on women’s and girls’ sports teams.
The justices’ salaries are established by law. The chief justice earns the most, at $320,700 per year. The eight associate justices earn $306,600 per year. While that is a lot of money to most Americans, the justices and even their law clerks could earn more the minute they leave their Supreme Court jobs for large law firms.
Roberts was the only member of the court to report investing in individual stocks. Alito in the past has also owned shares of individual stocks, but his report is not due for three months when his extension runs out. For the most part, the justices do not own individual stocks, but do invest in index funds, mutual funds and other such investment programs in order to both make money and limit potential conflicts of interest that would require their recusal from certain cases.
Advertisement
However — and this is a big however — the financial reporting forms the justices are required to fill out are so unspecific and the reporting ranges for investment earnings are so broad that it is impossible to determine any justice’s overall wealth. In addition, the current value of the justices’ homes isn’t reported. Neither is their spouses’ income, which in the case of the chief justice, for instance, likely far exceeds his take-home pay.
At least two structural columns buckled and failed in a 37-story office tower in Midtown Manhattan on Tuesday, prompting evacuations of nearby streets and buildings. While city officials asserted that the tower was in no danger of collapsing completely, outside engineers said further failures in the structure could not be ruled out.
A pair of columns that failed completely were part of the tower’s existing structure. A New York Times review of images and videos from inside the building has found that several floors were added atop these columns.
Advertisement
City officials said in a news conference on Tuesday that the building was continuing to move, while they simultaneously assured the city that the building would not suffer “total collapse.” “The way this building is constructed, it’s a steel-frame building,” John Esposito, a chief in the Fire Department in New York, said at the afternoon news conference. “So, it would not be a total collapse. It would be more of a localized collapse.” Still, he said, “that remains our concern, that it’s moved.”
Advertisement
Engineers said that the movement itself was cause for concern. In a properly designed steel building, they said, loads should redistribute quickly to surviving structural supports if columns failed.
Joe DiPompeo, a former president of the Structural Engineering Institute at the American Society of Civil Engineers, said that if the structure had been overloaded, he would expect any movement “to happen very quickly,” rather than gradually.
“Generally when a column buckles, it’s a sudden failure,” Mr. DiPompeo said. He said that a full collapse remained unlikely given the redundancies built into the building codes.
Advertisement
Engineers often refer to the most dangerous possibility as a progressive collapse, a process in which structures near the initial failure become overstressed and also fail, potentially bringing down the building if the sequence continues. While unlikely, it cannot be ruled out, Mr. DiPompeo said.
Footage recorded from inside the building shows at least two structural columns appear to have failed completely, Mr. DiPompeo said. Other nonstructural, interior walls — or at least the metal “studs” that were in place to hold them up — also appear to have deformed.
Advertisement
“The only way that really happens is if the floor above them dropped. It looks like the floor above could have dropped a foot or two, which is obviously not a good situation,” Mr. DiPompeo said.
@fernando40tiktok.commarc via Storyful
Advertisement
Advertisement
Image from @fernando40tiktok.commarc via Storyful
Advertisement
Image from @Bogs4NY via X
Advertisement
The 37-story building is in the process of being converted from office space into residential units. Four new floors and a large vertical portion were added onto the existing building in recent months. The vertical portion consists of a stack of over a dozen new floors cantilevered out over the existing building below.
Engineers said that there was nothing inherently wrong with adding residential floors or the cantilevered section above the columns that failed, as long as the original structure and the modifications had properly accounted for the added weight and wind loads.
“The cantilever alone doesn’t change anything,” Mr. DiPompeo said, but it does put additional load on the columns underneath — a factor that should have been reflected in the design.
Advertisement
Nathan Berman, managing principal and founder of MetroLoft, the developer overseeing the conversion, said on Tuesday that “this incident is nothing more than a typical construction mishap.”
He said two columns near the northwest corner of the tower had bent under the weight of additions to the building above, most likely because those columns had not been properly reinforced, though he said an investigation would determine the cause. The rest of the columns, he said, “picked up the weight.” He estimated the affected floors above the failed columns had sagged by a maximum of four inches.
Advertisement
Mr. Berman said that he expected the problems to be fixed and the project to be completed with, at most, a slight delay.
On Tuesday evening, installation of temporary shoring was set to begin shortly, in order to help stabilize the 20th and 21st floors of the building.