POPULARITY
Categories
We begin on a positive note by welcoming a “doer,” citizen extraordinaire, Jon Merryman, who couldn't stand the trash, especially old tires, being dumped in his neighborhood. So, he took it upon himself to clean it up and has now expanded his efforts across the country. Then co-president of Public Citizen, Robert Weissman, joins us to explain how spending in the recent bill passed by the Republican controlled Congress prioritizes the Pentagon and deportation enforcement at the expense of the social safety net, essentially trading life for death.Jon Merryman was a software designer at Lockheed Martin, who after retiring found his true calling, cleaning up trash in every county in America.When I first started looking at the environment next to my place of work, one of the things I did uncover was tires. And they were definitely there from the '20s, the '30s, and the '40s, they've been there for decades. And then just after a while, the soil and the erosion just covers them up. And you just discover them, and you realize this has been going on forever.Jon MerrymanNature is innocent. It really doesn't deserve what we've given it. And I feel like someone's got to step up to undo what we've done.Jon MerrymanRobert Weissman is a staunch public interest advocate and activist, as well as an expert on a wide variety of issues ranging from corporate accountability and government transparency to trade and globalization, to economic and regulatory policy. As the Co-President of Public Citizen, he has spearheaded the effort to loosen the chokehold corporations, and the wealthy have over our democracy.The best estimates are that the loss of insurance and measures in this bill will cost 40,000 lives every year. Not once. Every year.Robert Weissman co-president of Public Citizen on the Budget BillPeople understand there's a rigged system. They understand that generally. They understand that with healthcare. But if you (the Democrats) don't name the health insurance companies as an enemy, as a barrier towards moving forward. You don't say United Health; you don't go after a Big Pharma, which is probably the most despised health sector in the economy, people don't think you're serious. And partially it's because you're not.Robert WeissmanNews 7/11/251. This week, the Financial Times published a stunning story showing the Tony Blair Institute – founded by the former New Labour British Prime Minister and Iraq War accomplice Tony Blair – “participated” in a project to “reimagine Gaza as a thriving trading hub.” This project would include a “Trump Riviera” and an “Elon Musk Smart Manufacturing Zone”. To accomplish this, the investors would pay half a million Palestinians to leave Gaza to open the enclave up for development – and that is just the tip of the harebrained iceberg. This scheme would also involve creating “artificial islands off the coast akin to those in Dubai, blockchain-based trade initiatives…and low-tax ‘special economic zones'.” The development of this plot is somewhat shadowy. The FT story names a, “group of Israeli businessmen…including tech investor Liran Tancman and venture capitalist Michael Eisenberg,” who helped establish the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation in February 2025. GHF has been accused of using supposed aid distribution sites as “death traps,” per France 24. Boston Consulting Group, also named in the FT story, strongly disavowed the project, as did the Tony Blair Institute.2. In more positive news related to Gaza, the National Education Association – the largest labor union in the United States – voted this week to sever ties with the Anti-Defamation League. The ADL, once an important group safeguarding the civil rights and wellbeing of American Jews, has completely abandoned its historic mission and has instead devoted its considerable resources to trying to crush the anti-Zionist movement. The NEA passed a resolution stating that the NEA “will not use, endorse, or publicize materials from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), such as its curricular materials or statistics,” because, “Despite its reputation as a civil rights organization, the ADL is not the social justice educational partner it claims to be.” Labor Notes writes that the ADL “has been a ubiquitous presence in U.S. schools for forty years, pushing curriculum, direct programming, and teacher training into K-12 schools and increasingly into universities.” One NEA delegate, Stephen Siegel, said from the assembly floor, “Allowing the ADL to determine what constitutes antisemitism would be like allowing the fossil fuel industry to determine what constitutes climate change.”3. Another major labor story from this week concerns sanitation workers in Philadelphia. According to the Delaware News Journal, AFSCME District Council 33 has reached a deal with the city to raise wages for their 9,000 workers by 9% over three years. The union went on strike July 1st, resulting in, “massive piles of trash piling up on city streets and around trash drop-off sites designated by the city,” and “changes to the city's annual Fourth of July concert with headliner LL Cool J and city native Jazmine Sullivan both dropping out,” in solidarity with the striking workers, per WHYY. The deal reached is a major compromise for the union, which was seeking a 32% total pay increase, but they held off on an extended trash pickup strike equivalent to 1986 strike, which went on for three weeks and left 45,000 tons of rotting garbage in the streets, per ABC.4. Yet another labor story brings us to New York City. ABC7 reports the United Federation of Teachers has endorsed Democratic Socialist – and Democratic Party nominee – Zohran Mamdani for mayor. This report notes “UFT is the city's second largest union…[with] 200,000 members.” Announcing the endorsement, UFT President Michael Mulgrew stated, “This is a real crisis and it's a moment for our city, and our city is starting to speak out very loudly…The voters are saying the same thing, 'enough is enough.' The income gap disparity is above…that which we saw during the Gilded Age." All eyes now turn to District Council 37, which ABC7 notes “endorsed Council speaker Adrienne Adams in the primary and has yet to endorse in the general election.”5. The margin of Mamdani's victory, meanwhile, continues to grow as the Board of Elections updates its ranked choice voting tallies. According to the conservative New York Post, Zohran has “won more votes than any other mayoral candidate in New York City primary election history.” Mamdani can now boast having won over 565,000 votes after 102,000 votes were transferred from other candidates. Not only that, “Mamdani's totals are expected to grow as…a small percent of ballots are still being counted.”6. Meanwhile, scandal-ridden incumbent New York City Mayor Eric Adams has yet another scandal on his hands. The New York Daily News reports, “Four high-ranking former NYPD chiefs are suing Mayor Adams, claiming they were forced to retire from the department after complaining that his ‘unqualified' friends were being placed in prestigious police positions, sometimes after allegedly bribing their way into the jobs.” Former Police Commissioner Edward Caban, who was already forced to resign in disgrace amidst a federal corruption investigation, features prominently in this new lawsuit. Among other things, Caban is alleged to have been “selling promotions” to cops for up to $15,000. Adams is running for reelection as an independent, but trails Democratic nominee Zohran Mamdani and disgraced former Governor Andrew Cuomo.7. Turning to the federal government, as the U.S. disinvests in science and technology, a new report published in the Financial Times finds that, “Almost three-quarters of all solar and wind power projects being built globally are in China.” According to the data, gathered by Global Energy Monitor, “China is building 510 gigawatts of utility-scale solar and wind projects… [out of] 689GW under construction globally.” As this report notes, one gigawatt can potentially supply electricity for about one million homes. This report goes on to say that, “China is expected to add at least 246.5GW of solar and 97.7GW of wind this year,” on top of the “1.5 terawatts of solar and wind power capacity up and running as of the end of March.” In the first quarter of 2025, solar and wind accounted for 22.5% of China's total electricity consumption; in 2023, solar and wind accounted for around 14% of electricity consumption in the United States, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.8. Developments this week put two key rules promulgated by the Federal Trade Commission under former Chair Lina Khan in jeopardy. First and worse, NPR reports the Republican-controlled FTC is abandoning a rule which would have banned non-compete clauses in employment contracts. These anti-worker provisions “trap workers and depress wages,” according to Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy, who has introduced legislation to ban them by statute. Perhaps more irritatingly however, Reuters reports the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis has blocked the so-called “click to cancel” rule just days before it was set to take effect. This rule would have, “required retailers, gyms and other businesses to provide cancellation methods for subscriptions, auto-renewals and free trials that convert to paid memberships that are ‘at least as easy to use' as the sign up process.” A coalition of corporate interests sued to block the rule, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and a trade group representing major cable and internet providers such as Charter Communications, Comcast and Cox Communications along with media companies like Disney and Warner Bros. Discovery. Lina Khan decried “Firms…making people jump through endless hoops just to cancel a subscription, trapping Americans in needless bureaucracy and wasting their time & money.”9. In another betrayal of consumers, Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. continues to break promises and speak out of both sides of his mouth. A new report in NPR documents RFK Jr. speaking at a conference in April, where he “spoke about the health effects of exposure to harmful chemicals in our food, air and water…[and] cited recent research on microplastics from researchers in Oregon, finding these tiny particles had shown up in 99% of the seafood they sampled.” Yet Susanne Brander, the author of the study, had gotten word just an hour earlier that “a federal grant she'd relied on to fund her research for years…was being terminated.” Brander is quoted saying "It feels like they are promoting the field while ripping out the foundation." Ripping out the foundation of this research is felt acutely, as “regulators are weakening safeguards that limit pollution and other toxic chemicals.” So Mr. Secretary, which is more important – stopping the proliferation of microplastics or slashing funding for the very scientists studying the issue?10. Finally, in Los Angeles masked federal troops are marauding through the streets on horseback, sowing terror through immigrant communities, per the New York Times. President Trump mobilized approximately 4,000 National Guard members – putting them under federal control – alongside 700 Marines in response to protests against immigration raids in June. As the Times notes, “It has been more than three weeks since the last major demonstration in downtown Los Angeles,” but the federal forces have not been demobilized. While some have dismissed the shows of force as nothing more than stunts designed to fire up the president's base, Gregory Bovino, a Customs and Border Protection chief in Southern California told Fox News “[LA] Better get used to us now, cause this is going to be normal very soon.” As LA Mayor Karen Bass put it, “What I saw…looked like a city under siege, under armed occupation…It's the way a city looks before a coup.”This has been Francesco DeSantis, with In Case You Haven't Heard. Get full access to Ralph Nader Radio Hour at www.ralphnaderradiohour.com/subscribe
The Washington Roundtable's Susan B. Glasser interviews the Russia expert Fiona Hill about Vladimir Putin's long reign and Trump's dismantling of American institutions. Hill, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, previously served in the National Security Council and National Intelligence Council. She gained national attention as a star witness during the first impeachment inquiry against Donald Trump, in 2019. Additionally, Hill, who is also a member of Harvard's Board of Overseers, talks with Glasser about the Trump Administration's war on academic institutions.This week's reading: “Did Trump Really Just Break Up with Putin?” by Susan B. Glasser “Why a Devoted Justice Department Lawyer Became a Whistle-Blower,” by Ruth Marcus “Sheldon Whitehouse's Three-Hundredth Climate Warning,” by Elizabeth Kolbert “The Supreme Court Sides with Trump Against the Judiciary,” by Ruth Marcus Tune in wherever you get your podcasts. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices
This Flashback Friday is from episode 345, published last November 5, 2013. Karen Hudes studied law at Yale Law School and economics at the University of Amsterdam. She worked in the US Export Import Bank of the US from 1980-1985 and in the Legal Department of the World Bank from 1986-2007. She established the Non Governmental Organization Committee of the International Law Section of the American Bar Association and the Committee on Multilateralism and the Accountability of International Organizations of the American Branch of the International Law Association. In 1999 Karen reported the corrupt take-over of the second largest bank in the Philippines. The Bank's Country Director in the Philippines reassigned Karen when she asked him to sign a letter warning the Philippines' government that the Bank could not disburse its loan. Two days after informing the Board's Audit Committee of the cover-up in the Philippines, Karen was reprimanded and placed on probation. The Chair of the World Bank's Audit Committee requested an inquiry into the World Bank's Institutional Integrity Department. The Senate Committee on Foreign Relations followed up with three letters to the World Bank. The World Bank forged documents and fired Karen in contempt of Congress. In 2007 Karen advised the US Treasury Department and US Congress that the US would lose its right to appoint the President of the World Bank if the current American President of the World Bank did not play by the rules. The 66 year old Gentlemen's Agreement that Europe would appoint the Managing Director of the IMF and US would appoint the World Bank President ended in 2010. Follow Jason on TWITTER, INSTAGRAM & LINKEDIN Twitter.com/JasonHartmanROI Instagram.com/jasonhartman1/ Linkedin.com/in/jasonhartmaninvestor/ Call our Investment Counselors at: 1-800-HARTMAN (US) or visit: https://www.jasonhartman.com/ Free Class: Easily get up to $250,000 in funding for real estate, business or anything else: http://JasonHartman.com/Fund CYA Protect Your Assets, Save Taxes & Estate Planning: http://JasonHartman.com/Protect Get wholesale real estate deals for investment or build a great business – Free Course: https://www.jasonhartman.com/deals Special Offer from Ron LeGrand: https://JasonHartman.com/Ron Free Mini-Book on Pandemic Investing: https://www.PandemicInvesting.com
This episode is a proud partnership with American Herbal Products Association (AHPA) & United Plant Savers (UpS) This week on Everything You Didn't Know About Herbalism, we are joined by two dedicated and passionate advocates, educators, and leaders within the herbal industry, Alexis Durham and Susan Leopold. Tag along with Tommy and these two inspiring women for an episode exploring the six days of back-to-back educational botanical events coming to the Cincinnati area this September! Join us for the 17th Biennial International Herb Symposium, the AHPA Small Business Bootcamp—led in part by Tommy Nevar, our very own host of Herbal Radio—and the first-ever AHPA Botanical Congress: Back to Our Roots, to gain invaluable knowledge alongside the ever-growing plant people community. As always, we thank you for joining us on another botanical adventure and are so honored to have you tag along with us on this ride. Remember, we want to hear from you! Your questions, ideas, and who you want to hear from are an invaluable piece to our podcast. Email us at podcast@mountainroseherbs.com to let us know what solutions we should uncover next within the vast world of herbalism. The American Herbal Products Association (AHPA) is pleased to invite customers of Mountain Rose Herbs to register for the 2025 AHPA Botanical Congress and Small Business Bootcamp at the discounted AHPA member rate. To redeem this special offer, please contact Alexis Durham at adurham@ahpa.org.
Stephen Murphy is a cinematographer known for his work on MR. & MRS. SMITH, ATLANTA, and HEART EYES. In 2025, Murphy received a BAFTA TV Craft nomination for Photography & Lighting in Fiction for the mini-series SAY NOTHING, as well as a nomination for Best Cinematography from the Irish Film and Television Awards for the same project. He currently presides on the Board of Governors for the British Society of Cinematographers and is the former president of the Irish Society of Cinematographers. In this interview, we talk about prep vs. spontaneity in cinematography, how he got involved in ATLANTA and MR. & MRS. SMITH, changes in the industry, and much more! Want more? Steal my first book, INK BY THE BARREL - SECRETS FROM PROLIFIC WRITERS, right now for free. Simply head over to www.brockswinson.com to get your free digital download and audiobook. If you find value in the book, please share it with a friend as we're giving away 100,000 copies this year. It's based on over 400 interviews here at Creative Principles. Enjoy! If you enjoy the podcast, would you please consider leaving a short review on Apple Podcasts? It only takes about 60 seconds, and it really helps convince some of the hard-to-get guests to sit down and have a chat (simply scroll to the bottom of your iTunes Podcast app and click “Write Review"). Enjoy the show!
Episode Summary: In this deeply moving and honest episode, Amy Wheeler welcomes Lisa Becks—a yoga teacher, clinical social worker, and long-time practitioner—who shares her lifelong journey with yoga as a steady companion through grief, motherhood, cancer, and healing. Lisa recounts how she first encountered yoga in her early twenties while grieving the sudden loss of her mother, and how that one class at a Zen Buddhist center in Michigan led to decades of inner transformation.From the profound influence of her first teacher Barbara Linderman (a direct student of Śrī T. Krishnamacharya) to her healing experience with Kate Holcombe after a breast cancer diagnosis, Lisa's story reminds us that yoga isn't about performance or ambition—it's about returning to ourselves, again and again. Throughout this conversation, Amy and Lisa reflect on parenting without a mother, the reverberations of our actions and emotions, and how the most healing practices are often the simplest and most sincere.Listeners will be inspired by Lisa's vulnerability, her gentle wisdom, and the way she lives the teachings she practices. Whether you're new to yoga or have been on the path for years, this episode is a tender reminder that yoga, when approached with sincerity and self-awareness, meets us exactly where we are. Key Topics Covered:Grieving the loss of a parent and finding yoga as a healing anchorThe sacred presence of humble teachers and quiet transmissionEvolution of practice across life stages: young adulthood, motherhood, illnessSelf-awareness, self-regulation, and the nervous systemUsing observation instead of judgment to shift behaviorTeaching yoga as a form of service and continued self-discoveryCancer recovery, the role of gentle discipline, and meeting yourself with graceYoga as a way to parent consciously without inherited patternsComing home to the self—again and again Mentioned in This Episode:Barbara Linderman (student of Śrī T. Krishnamacharya)Kate Holcombe (teacher in the tradition of TKV Desikachar)Inward Bound Yoga Collective, Ann Arbor, MIOptimal State Yoga Therapy Training About Lisa Becks: Lisa is a yoga teacher, clinical social worker, and mother of two. She offers private yoga therapy sessions by request and believes in the quiet, transformative power of personalized practice. Lisa does not actively market her services, but those who find her often discover a steady, compassionate guide.Amy Wheeler, Ph.D. is the Chair of the Department of Yoga Therapy and Ayurveda at Maryland University of Integrative Health (MUIH) and a leader in the fields of yoga therapy and Ayurveda. She played a key role in helping to set standards for Ayurvedic Yoga Therapists at the National Ayurvedic Medical Association (NAMA) and served as President of the Board of Directors for the International Association of Yoga Therapists (IAYT) from 2018 to 2020. www.TheOptimalState.comMaster of Science in Yoga Therapy https://muih.edu/academics/yoga-therapy/master-of-science-in-yoga-therapy/ Explore MUIH's Post-Master's Certificate in Therapeutic Yoga Practices, designed specifically for licensed healthcare professionals. https://muih.edu/academics/yoga-therapy/post-masters-certificate-in-therapeutic-yoga-practices/ Try our Post-Bac Ayurveda Certification Program at MUIH: https://muih.edu/academics/ayurveda/post-baccalaureate-ayurveda-certification/
What does someone on the Seminary's Board of Regents do, and why is this work important? Matt Kenitzer, a member of the Board of Regents for Concordia Seminary in St. Louis, joins Andy and Sarah to talk about his upbringing in the church, what drew him to the LCMS, why faithful leadership in the church is important to him, how he became a member of the Board of Regents, and all the critical work the Regents do for the good of the Seminary. This episode originally aired on January 24, 2025. Christ's church will continue until He returns, and that church will continue to need church workers. Set Apart to Serve (SAS) is an initiative of the LCMS to recruit church workers. Together, we pray for workers for the Kingdom of God and encourage children to consider church work vocations. Here are three easy ways you can participate in SAS: 1. Pray with your children for God to provide church workers. 2. Talk to your children about becoming church workers. 3. Thank God for the people who work in your congregation. To learn more about Set Apart to Serve, visit lcms.org/set-apart-to-serve. Have a topic you'd like to hear about on The Coffee Hour? Contact us at: listener@kfuo.org.
Christoph Gerber, Gründer von Talon.One, nimmt dich mit auf den Weg von Lieferando zu einem führenden Enterprise-SaaS-Unternehmen. Mit mehr als 100 Millionen Euro Funding und Kunden wie H&M, Adidas und Ticketmaster teilt Christoph, wie sich seine Sicht auf Unternehmertum verändert hat und warum Work-Life-Balance heute wichtiger ist als "Work Hard, Play Hard". Was du lernst: Von der Idee zum Enterprise-Produkt: Wie Talon.One in 6-9 Monaten das erste MVP entwickelte Warum sie sich gegen Use-Case-basierte Entwicklung entschieden Die Bedeutung von unopinionated Software-Entwicklung Führung & Teamaufbau: Warum Christoph keine direkten Reports mehr hat Die Bedeutung von erfahrenen Mitarbeitern vs. Juniors Wie man eine nachhaltige Unternehmenskultur aufbaut Fundraising & Investoren: Wie Talon.One ohne klassisches Board arbeitet Die Unterschiede zwischen deutschen und US-Investoren Warum faire Terms für alle Beteiligten wichtig sind Work-Life-Balance: Warum 8 Stunden fokussierte Arbeit besser sind als 12 Stunden Präsenz Die Bedeutung von Familie und Freizeit Wie man ein erfolgreiches Unternehmen ohne Burnout aufbaut Deutscher Markt vs. International: Die Herausforderungen beim Software-Verkauf in Deutschland Warum US-Kunden schneller Enterprise-Software adoptieren Die Chancen für europäische SaaS-Unternehmen ALLES ZU UNICORN BAKERY: https://zez.am/unicornbakery Mehr zum Gast: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/christophgerber/ Website: https://www.talon.one/ Join our Founder Tactics Newsletter: 2x die Woche bekommst du die Taktiken der besten Gründer der Welt direkt ins Postfach: https://www.tactics.unicornbakery.de/ Kapitel: (00:00:00) Was würde Christoph heute anders machen, wenn er nochmal gründen würde? (00:13:11) Das richtige Level an Seniorität für einen erfolgreichen Aufbau (00:17:14) Worauf achtet Christoph in Interviews? (00:19:23) Das Founding-Team von Talon.one & das erste MVP (00:26:04) Wie hat Talon.one den idealen Kunden identifiziert? (00:31:47) Wie du effizient Probleme löst (00:43:58) Vom "first working product" bis heute: Die Entwicklung von Talon.one (00:52:45) Warum hat Talon.one doch nochmal finanziert statt auf profitabel zu drehen? (00:59:12) Wann sind Terms "gut genug"? (01:09:33) Sieht sich Talon.one als Marktführer? (01:16:23) Christophs Einschätzung zur KI-Bubble: AI-Wrapper & Defensibility (01:27:43) Christophs Blick auf die deutsche Startup-Szene im Vergleich zu Europa/USA (01:36:12) Christophs persönlicher Blick auf die Arbeit - Lieferando vs. heute (01:42:52) Wie abhängig ist das Unternehmen noch von der Person Christoph Gerber?
As the dust has settled in the NHL, we're joined by Max Bultman of The Athletic Detroit on this remote episode of the Winged Wheel Podcast! Tune in as we start with Max's read on the Detroit Red Wings 2025 NHL Draft class headlined by Carter Bear, as well as an update on the Red Wings Development Camp (and how Kiiskinen, Brandsegg-Nygard, Finnie, and others stood out) (4:50). Next, we discuss Steve Yzerman's approach to NHL Free Agency, how Bernard-Docker, van Riemsdyk, Appleton, and other signings can slot into the Hockeytown roster, who will play in the top 6 alongside Dylan Larkin, Lucas Raymond, Marco Kasper, Patrick Kane, and Alex DeBrincat, if a defenseman is on the way to join Moritz Seider, Simon Edvinsson, Ben Chiarot, and Albert Johansson, whether Nate Danielson, Carter Mazur, Axel Sandin Pellikka, or other prospects could make the difference, & much more (15:25). After that, notes on trade rumors surrounding Erik Karlsson, Dougie Hamilton, and Jordan Kyrou (40:55) before we discuss the statistics behind rebuilds in the NHL and just how far along Steve Yzerman and the Detroit Red Wings are (52:45). Finally, NHL news including the Isaac Howard for Sam O'Reilly trade & Gavin McKenna going to Penn State (1:05:50) before we take your questions and comments in our Overtime segment (1:08:05) - enjoy! Head over to wingedwheelpodcast.com to find all the ways to listen, how to support the show, and so much more! Go to TempoMeals.com/WINGEDWHEEL for 60% off your first box! #ad Support the Jamie Daniels Foundation through Wings Money on the Board: https://www.wingedwheelpodcast.com/wingsmotb
In this episode of the Healthy, Wealthy, and Smart Podcast, host Karen Litzy welcomes Dr. Linda Bluestein, a recognized expert in hypermobility disorders and founder of Hypermobility MD and Bendy Bodies Podcast. Dr. Blustein shares her journey with hypermobility, detailing how health issues impacted her early aspirations of becoming a ballet dancer. After years as an anesthesiologist, she discovered her connection to connective tissue disorders, which led her to focus on this patient population. Together, Karen and Dr. Bluestein dive into the complexities of hypermobility disorders, the importance of research, and the support available for individuals affected by these conditions. Tune in for valuable insights and information that can help those navigating hypermobility disorders. Time Stamps: [00:01:27] Personal journey to hypermobility focus. [00:05:00] Joint hypermobility disorders explained. [00:10:43] Generalized joint hypermobility assessment. [00:12:22] Ehlers-Danlos syndrome overview. [00:15:52] Patient education on EDS concerns. [00:19:40] Connective tissue and its importance. [00:25:08] Research funding for EDS. [00:29:27] Misconceptions about hypermobility and talent. [00:30:59] Forced hypermobility in dancers. [00:34:27] Chronic pain and validation. [00:38:20] Treatment for connective tissue disorders. [00:42:05] Importance of recognizing hypermobility. [00:47:40] Believe in yourself. [00:48:42] Self-compassion and personal growth. More About Dr. Linda Bluestein, MD: Dr. Linda Bluestein, MD, is a multifaceted professional renowned for her expertise in hypermobility disorders. As the founder of Hypermobility MD, she offers specialized medical care to individuals grappling with these conditions. Additionally, Dr. Bluestein is the driving force behind Bendy Bodies, a worldwide coaching practice aimed at empowering and supporting individuals with hypermobility. Her influence extends beyond clinical practice. Dr. Bluestein is the founder and host of the esteemed podcast, "Bendy Bodies with the Hypermobility MD," where she shares valuable insights and resources, enriching the lives of her audience. Dr. Bluestein's dedication to advancing knowledge and awareness of hypermobility disorders is evident in her extensive publications and international lectures. Notably, she contributed two chapters to the influential book, "Disjointed – Navigating the Diagnosis and Management of Hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome and Hypermobility Spectrum Disorders." In addition to her clinical and coaching endeavors, Dr. Bluestein actively engages in advocacy and research. She serves on the Allergy and Immunology Working Group for the International Consortium on EDS and HSD, the Medical Advisory Board for Standing up to POTS, and the Board of Directors for both the Bridge Dance Project and EDS Guardians. Dr. Bluestein's commitment to education and mentorship is exemplified through her involvement in initiatives such as the creation of the first online EDS Continuing Medical Education (CME) program with Chronic Pain Partners. She also volunteers as a medical consultant for the organization. As an assistant professor at the Medical College of Wisconsin, Central Wisconsin, Dr. Bluestein has played a pivotal role in directing the RISHI Healer's Art Program, nurturing compassionate healthcare providers. For more information about Dr. Bluestein and her comprehensive approach to hypermobility care, please visit her website at www.hypermobilitymd.com. Resources from this Episode: July 17th Jane Q&A Webinar Bendy Bodies Podcast Dr. Bluestein on Instagram Dr. Bluestein's Website Dr. Bluestein on Substack Dr. Bluestein on TikTok Dr. Bluestein on X Dr. Bluestein on YouTube Jane Sponsorship Information: Book a one-on-one demo here Mention the code LITZY1MO for a free month Follow Dr. Karen Litzy on Social Media: Karen's Twitter Karen's Instagram Karen's LinkedIn Subscribe to Healthy, Wealthy & Smart: YouTube Website Apple Podcast Spotify SoundCloud Stitcher iHeart Radio
Have you ever wondered how to garner the support of loved ones while pursuing your goals? Join us as we unravel the secrets to effective communication and maintaining commitment.We'll talk about : Communicating Your Dreams: Learn why it's crucial to share your aspirations openly and specifically with your loved ones.Managing Expectations: Discover the importance of setting clear expectations to foster understanding and patience.Celebrating Small Wins: Understand how acknowledging progress can motivate and maintain momentum.Involving Loved Ones: See how involving others in your journey can enrich the support network you build.and so much more!Key TakeawaysCommunicate effectively about your goals.Understand the dynamics of giving and receiving support.Appreciate small victories on the path to achieving your dreams.Maintain a strong commitment to your goals to garner genuine support.Build a network of support that includes family, friends, and mentors.Connect with us on social media.https://www.instagram.com/darnell_selfhttps://www.instagram.com/traciselfhttps://www.instagram.com/theselftalkexperience/Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy
You KNOW we love talking about training animals that people don't always think of when they think about animal training, so we are thrilled to welcome Melissa Paynter to the show! Mel shares the path that took her from the Moorpark Program to her current role as Assistant Curator of Ocean Journey at Georgia Aquarium, why fish training right now is "a dumpster fire, in the best way," how her desire to make sure the aquarium side of the field gets a seat at the table lead to her current position on the Board of Directors of the Animal Behavior Management Alliance, and the amazing ins and outs involved when a staff of 14 people are responsible for a single exhibit with 6,000 animals in it. If you have a shout-out you'd like us to share, a question or a topic you'd like us to discuss, or a suggestion for a guest we should have on the show, let us know at podcast@naturalencounters.com!
On this episode of the Mile High Podcast you'll hear a powerful and timely conversation with one of the chiropractic profession's most strategic voices: Dr. Steve Tullius. Dr. Tullius is the founder of Waitlist Workshops and serves as Secretary of the Board of Trustees at Sherman College. With over 7,000 community workshops delivered, he's built a movement around effective communication and creating real demand for subluxation-centered chiropractic. Steve is a board member of the IFCO, International Federation of Chiropractors Organization. He is also heading up the Chiropractic Freedom Coalition. https://chiropracticfreedomcoalition.org/ Steve will be speaker at Mile High 13 in Denver, September 25th - 28th.
Dan Engelhart is running for the Minneapolis Park & Rec Board in District 1. We took a bike ride through NE Minneapolis and talked about why he's running for such an unpleasant, low pay elected office.Watch: https://youtube.com/wedgeliveJoin the conversation: https://bsky.app/profile/wedge.liveSupport the show: https://patreon.com/wedgeliveWedge LIVE theme song by Anthony Kasper x LaFontsee
Send us a textSchedule an Rx AssessmentInventory management...One of the top contributors to profit loss in independent pharmacies.Yet many owners still rely on outdated systems and reactive strategies.So how can pharmacy leaders optimize inventory, adapt to market shifts, and still maintain community connection?In this episode of The Bottom Line Pharmacy Podcast, Scotty Sykes, CPA, CFP®, Bonnie Bond, CPA sit down with Wade Hinkle, and Jared Barton of Pharmacy Marketplace and Inventory IQ to share real-world lessons from the front lines of pharmacy business.This episode covers:Why accurate inventory systems are a cornerstone of financial healthMarketplace realities and how pharmacies can strategically respondTransitioning to perpetual inventory and how it changes the gameAnd more!More About Our Guest:Jared Barton:Jared Barton is the CEO of Inventory IQ and the Secretary of the Board of Pharmacy Marketplace. With 9 years in the independent pharmacy industry and 600+ independent pharmacies served; Inventory IQ is the nation's premier independent pharmacy inventory management firm. We focus on maximizing efficiency through inventory management and assisting with perpetual inventory implementation/maintenance. They help pharmacies optimize their inventory through their monthly Inventory Mining program, and they also provide inventory count services for tax purposes, transitions of ownership, and third-party audits.Wade Hinkle:Wade Hinkle is the Founder and CEO of Pharmacy Marketplace, an all-in-one purchasing solution that considers primary vendor agreements and key metrics to help you make better real-time purchasing decisions.Prior to Pharmacy Marketplace, Wade studied at the University of Auburn where he obtained a degree in finance. This degree ultimately led him to become a partner and Owner of Hinkle Pharmacy in Alabama where he later used the insights he learned in owning a pharmacy to Co-found Inventory IQ, a service based business focused on helping independent pharmacies implement perpetual inventory systems.Learn more about Jared, Wade, InventoryIQ and Pharmacy Marketplace:Jared Barton LinkedInInventory IQ Website Wade Hinkle LinkedInPharmacy Marketplace WebsiteCheck out all our social media:FacebookTwitterLinkedInScotty Sykes – CPA, CFP LinkedInScotty Sykes – CPA, CFP TwitterMore resources on this topic:Master The MarginPodcast - Driving Independent Pharmacy Profitability in 2025Podcast - Improving Cash Flow with Inventory ManagementPodcast - Navigating the Pharmacy Marketplace
Your nonprofit's 501(c)(3) status just got revoked – now what? Don't panic! Your organization still exists, but here's what you need to know. It's Jess Birken here, and I'm back with co-host Meghan to tackle one of the most common (and scary-sounding) nonprofit disasters: losing your tax-exempt status. Real Listener Question: "Our 501(c)(3) was revoked last year, and we have a community cleanup event coming up. Can we still do this event? Are we open to more liability?" We're breaking down the biggest misconception about revoked tax status – your nonprofit doesn't disappear when you lose 501(c)(3) status! Plus, we're calling out "Uncle Larry" (you know, that volunteer who promised to handle your 990s for free) and explaining why delegation doesn't absolve board responsibility. What You'll Learn: Why nonprofits lose tax-exempt status – the "three strikes" auto-revocation rule What revoked status actually means vs. what people think it means Whether you can continue operations and events without 501(c)(3) status The real liability risks (spoiler: probably not what you think) Why your insurance policies don't automatically change when status is revoked Board responsibility for compliance – delegation isn't abdication How to move forward without beating yourself up over past mistakes Bottom line: Losing 501(c)(3) status is like changing your tax filing status from "married" to "single" – you still exist, you just need to get your label back. Remember: This happens to small nonprofits all the time. You're not alone, and it's fixable. Focus on moving forward, not beating yourself up. Resources from this Episode IRS Auto-Revocation Information: https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/automatic-revocation-of-exemption Form 990 Filing Requirements: https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/form-990-resources-and-tools Previous Episode: Can Trump Revoke Harvard's Tax Status? - https://birkenlaw.com/charity-therapy-podcast/ct138/ Episode Transcript: https://birkenlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/CT142_Transcript.pdf Connect with Us Jess Birken: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jessbirken/ Meghan Heitkamp: https://www.linkedin.com/in/meghan-heitkamp-829254115/ Listen & Engage Listen on Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTube | Amazon Music Rate & Review on Apple Podcasts: Click "Ratings and Reviews" then "Write a Review" Send us your nonprofit questions: https://birkenlaw.com/podcast/#podcast-story Stay Connected Sign up for the Birken Law Email list: https://birkenlaw.com/signup/ Follow us on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter Share this episode with fellow board members who need this info!
Are you struggling with symptoms of hyperthyroidism like anxiety, insomnia, or heart palpitations? In this video, Dr. Anshul Gupta, a functional medicine expert and former Cleveland Clinic physician, shares a science-backed herbal tea recipe that may help support your thyroid health naturally.This herbal tea uses lemon balm, bugleweed, and motherwort—three powerful herbs shown in research to help calm the thyroid, reduce anxiety, and support better sleep without harsh side effects.Don't forget to Like, Subscribe & Share with someone who needs this!Buy Advanced Thyroid Wellness Bundle -https://functionalwellbeingshop.com/collections/thyroid-bundle/products/advanced-thyroid-wellness-bundle?variant=50481711055129Consult Dr. Anshul Gupta from anywhere in the world for personalized, root-cause solutions to your thyroid and health concerns." link below for booking consultation.Work With Me -https://www.anshulguptamd.com/work-with-me/Don't forget to like, subscribe, and hit the notification bell for more health tips and treatments from Dr. Anshul Gupta.Take The Thyroid Quiz & Evaluate Your Thyroid Health -https://www.anshulguptamd.com/thyroid-quiz/To Buy Good Quality Supplements Goto -https://functionalwellbeingshop.com/To Buy Good Quality Supplements Goto (For India) -https://www.drguptafunctionalcenter.com/shop/Free Gift 3-day Mito-Thyroid Diet Meal Plan) -https://reversinghashimotobook.com/3-day-meal-planCheck Out More Useful Videos -1 Cup of This Alkaline Water STOPS Inflammation (Backed by Science)https://youtu.be/R-4C2j9wQk8?si=f69QRm19p09r4AOd#1 Natural Supplement For Inflammation & Thyroid (Stronger Than Turmeric)https://youtu.be/jtB_Qryb5fw?si=9gF2LRPRRprOI9VY#1 Habit To Get Rid Of Gut Inflammation (Don't Ignore) -https://youtu.be/0CoXDrgAFFk#1 Natural Remedy To Clear Mucus And Beat Allergies -https://youtu.be/dteX2hOjpBcConnect With Me -Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/anshulguptamd/WhatsApp - https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VbAWez9HAdNSEf2Wse2rTwitter - https://www.twitter.com/anshulguptamdFacebook - https://www.facebook.com/drguptafunct0:00 – Introduction & Caution 1:07 – What is Hyperthyroidism? 2:00 – 3 Powerful Herbs That Help 4:04 – Herbal Tea Recipe & How to Make It 4:42 – When to Drink & Final Tips 5:05 – ConclusionFor personalized thyroid treatment plans and expert guidance, reach out to Dr. Anshul Gupta.Our approach focuses on holistic and sustainable methods to manage thyroid health and enhance energy levels.Connect With Me -Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/anshulguptamd/Twitter - https://www.twitter.com/anshulguptamdFacebook - https://www.facebook.com/drguptafunctPinterest - https://www.pinterest.com/anshulguptamdTo Buy Good Quality Supplements Goto -https://functionalwellbeingshop.com/Work With Me -https://www.anshulguptamd.com/work-with-me/Take The Thyroid Quiz & Evaluate Your Thyroid Health -https://www.anshulguptamd.com/thyroid-quiz/About Dr.Anshul Gupta MD -Dr. Anshul Gupta Md Is a Board-certified Family Medicine Physician, With Advanced Certification In Functional Medicine, Peptide Therapy, And Also Fellowship training in Integrative Medicine. He Has Worked At The Prestigious Cleveland Clinic Department Of Functional Medicine As Staff Physician Alongside Dr. Mark Hyman. He Believes In Empowering His Patients To Take Control Of Their Health And Partners With Them In Their Healing Journey.He Now Specializes As A Thyroid Functional Medicine Doctor, And Help People Reverse Their Unresolved Symptoms Of Thyroid Dysfunction.
Matt Stevens transitioned from the U.S. Navy in 2017 after serving for 26 years as a SEAL.Transitioning from the SEAL teams to civilian life brought him to The Honor Foundation, a national nonprofit dedicated to supporting U.S. Special Operations Forces as they transition from elite military careers into impactful civilian roles. Matt attended The Honor Foundation's (THF) inaugural East Coast class in the spring of 2016, joined their SOF Advisory Board in the spring of 2017, and then joined their Board of Directors in February 2018. A native of Charlotte, NC, Matt graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy in 1991 with a B.S. in Ocean Engineering. He graduated BUD/S in 1992 with class 179 and was assigned to the East Coast, where he served in various SEAL Teams, SEAL Delivery Vehicle Teams, and Naval Special Warfare Development Group (NSWDG).Matt commanded at every level in the Naval Special Warfare Community, including a Squadron at DEVGRU, SEAL Team Two, Naval Special Warfare Unit Three, and Naval Special Warfare Group Four. He served on staff tours at the Joint Special Operations Command in Fort Bragg, North Carolina, as the Operations Officer at Naval Special Warfare Group TWO in Virginia Beach, Virginia, and in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict (ASD SO/LIC) in the Pentagon. Matt served on the leadership team of an emerging technology company from 2017 to 2019, before assuming the role of CEO of The Honor Foundation.Learn more about The Honor Foundation at www.Honor.orgTimestamps:00:00:22 Introduction to Matt Stevens00:02:00 26 Years in the Teams00:03:25 DEVGRU and Seal Teams00:04:36 The Hardest Part of BUD/S00:06:16 Sponsor Note: Our Book Building The Elite00:07:03 Toughest Moments of Matt Stevens' Career 00:09:32 Giving Bad News About Performance00:11:12 Becoming a Good Leader00:15:08 Becoming Better at Public Speaking00:17:04 Transitioning Out of the Military00:20:21 How Did Mentorship Affect Matt Stevens' Career?00:23:20 How Did the Honor Foundation Come About?00:26:28 The Honor Foundation's Three-Phase Program00:31:09 Impacting Veterans Lives00:34:31 What a Special Operations Background Brings to the Table00:37:23 Surviving in the Civilian World00:40:31 Who is the Honor Foundation For?00:41:45 Honor Foundation's Goals00:45:19 Supporting the Honor Foundation00:46:09 Advice for Special Operators Transitioning Out00:49:00 One Book Everyone Should Read00:49:43 Best and Worst Advice Ever Received00:50:25 Outro
Welcome to Episode 54 of the Win the 16 Podcast! Dave sits down with his first leadership mentor and still a friend, Tom Dooley, a seasoned executive with a wealth of experience across the globe. Tom's impressive career includes serving as President and General Manager for Alcon Japan, General Manager for Australia and New Zealand, and as an advisor to the Board of Directors at Visioneering Technologies. He was also the CEO and Owner of Cove Services and currently serves as the President of the Board of Directors for One Man's Treasure in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.Join Dave and Tom as they delve into a captivating discussion on global leadership, career management, and the essential qualities of effective leadership. They will explore the importance of patience as a vital skill and share insights on leading people in today's dynamic environment.
Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded its latest Term. And over the past few weeks, the Trump administration has continued to duke it out with its adversaries in the federal courts.To tackle these topics, as well as their intersection—in terms of how well the courts, including but not limited to the Supreme Court, are handling Trump-related cases—I interviewed Professor Pamela Karlan, a longtime faculty member at Stanford Law School. She's perfectly situated to address these subjects, for at least three reasons.First, Professor Karlan is a leading scholar of constitutional law. Second, she's a former SCOTUS clerk and seasoned advocate at One First Street, with ten arguments to her name. Third, she has high-level experience at the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), having served (twice) as a deputy assistant attorney general in the Civil Rights Division of the DOJ.I've had some wonderful guests to discuss the role of the courts today, including Judges Vince Chhabria (N.D. Cal.) and Ana Reyes (D.D.C.)—but as sitting judges, they couldn't discuss certain subjects, and they had to be somewhat circumspect. Professor Karlan, in contrast, isn't afraid to “go there”—and whether or not you agree with her opinions, I think you'll share my appreciation for her insight and candor.Show Notes:* Pamela S. Karlan bio, Stanford Law School* Pamela S. Karlan bio, Wikipedia* The McCorkle Lecture (Professor Pamela Karlan), UVA Law SchoolPrefer reading to listening? For paid subscribers, a transcript of the entire episode appears below.Sponsored by:NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment at nexfirm dot com.Three quick notes about this transcript. First, it has been cleaned up from the audio in ways that don't alter substance—e.g., by deleting verbal filler or adding a word here or there to clarify meaning. Second, my interviewee has not reviewed this transcript, and any transcription errors are mine. Third, because of length constraints, this newsletter may be truncated in email; to view the entire post, simply click on “View entire message” in your email app.David Lat: Welcome to the Original Jurisdiction podcast. I'm your host, David Lat, author of a Substack newsletter about law and the legal profession also named Original Jurisdiction, which you can read and subscribe to at davidlat dot Substack dot com. You're listening to the seventy-seventh episode of this podcast, recorded on Friday, June 27.Thanks to this podcast's sponsor, NexFirm. NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment at nexfirm dot com. Want to know who the guest will be for the next Original Jurisdiction podcast? Follow NexFirm on LinkedIn for a preview.With the 2024-2025 Supreme Court Term behind us, now is a good time to talk about both constitutional law and the proper role of the judiciary in American society. I expect they will remain significant as subjects because the tug of war between the Trump administration and the federal judiciary continues—and shows no signs of abating.To tackle these topics, I welcomed to the podcast Professor Pamela Karlan, the Montgomery Professor of Public Interest Law and Co-Director of the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic at Stanford Law School. Pam is not only a leading legal scholar, but she also has significant experience in practice. She's argued 10 cases before the Supreme Court, which puts her in a very small club, and she has worked in government at high levels, serving as a deputy assistant attorney general in the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice during the Obama administration. Without further ado, here's my conversation with Professor Pam Karlan.Professor Karlan, thank you so much for joining me.Pamela Karlan: Thanks for having me.DL: So let's start at the beginning. Tell us about your background and upbringing. I believe we share something in common—you were born in New York City?PK: I was born in New York City. My family had lived in New York since they arrived in the country about a century before.DL: What borough?PK: Originally Manhattan, then Brooklyn, then back to Manhattan. As my mother said, when I moved to Brooklyn when I was clerking, “Brooklyn to Brooklyn, in three generations.”DL: Brooklyn is very, very hip right now.PK: It wasn't hip when we got there.DL: And did you grow up in Manhattan or Brooklyn?PK: When I was little, we lived in Manhattan. Then right before I started elementary school, right after my brother was born, our apartment wasn't big enough anymore. So we moved to Stamford, Connecticut, and I grew up in Connecticut.DL: What led you to go to law school? I see you stayed in the state; you went to Yale. What did you have in mind for your post-law-school career?PK: I went to law school because during the summer between 10th and 11th grade, I read Richard Kluger's book, Simple Justice, which is the story of the litigation that leads up to Brown v. Board of Education. And I decided I wanted to go to the NAACP Legal Defense Fund and be a school desegregation lawyer, and that's what led me to go to law school.DL: You obtained a master's degree in history as well as a law degree. Did you also have teaching in mind as well?PK: No, I thought getting the master's degree was my last chance to do something I had loved doing as an undergrad. It didn't occur to me until I was late in my law-school days that I might at some point want to be a law professor. That's different than a lot of folks who go to law school now; they go to law school wanting to be law professors.During Admitted Students' Weekend, some students say to me, “I want to be a law professor—should I come here to law school?” I feel like saying to them, “You haven't done a day of law school yet. You have no idea whether you're good at law. You have no idea whether you'd enjoy doing legal teaching.”It just amazes me that people come to law school now planning to be a law professor, in a way that I don't think very many people did when I was going to law school. In my day, people discovered when they were in law school that they loved it, and they wanted to do more of what they loved doing; I don't think people came to law school for the most part planning to be law professors.DL: The track is so different now—and that's a whole other conversation—but people are getting master's and Ph.D. degrees, and people are doing fellowship after fellowship. It's not like, oh, you practice for three, five, or seven years, and then you become a professor. It seems to be almost like this other track nowadays.PK: When I went on the teaching market, I was distinctive in that I had not only my student law-journal note, but I actually had an article that Ricky Revesz and I had worked on that was coming out. And it was not normal for people to have that back then. Now people go onto the teaching market with six or seven publications—and no practice experience really to speak of, for a lot of them.DL: You mentioned talking to admitted students. You went to YLS, but you've now been teaching for a long time at Stanford Law School. They're very similar in a lot of ways. They're intellectual. They're intimate, especially compared to some of the other top law schools. What would you say if I'm an admitted student choosing between those two institutions? What would cause me to pick one versus the other—besides the superior weather of Palo Alto?PK: Well, some of it is geography; it's not just the weather. Some folks are very East-Coast-centered, and other folks are very West-Coast-centered. That makes a difference.It's a little hard to say what the differences are, because the last time I spent a long time at Yale Law School was in 2012 (I visited there a bunch of times over the years), but I think the faculty here at Stanford is less focused and concentrated on the students who want to be law professors than is the case at Yale. When I was at Yale, the idea was if you were smart, you went and became a law professor. It was almost like a kind of external manifestation of an inner state of grace; it was a sign that you were a smart person, if you wanted to be a law professor. And if you didn't, well, you could be a donor later on. Here at Stanford, the faculty as a whole is less concentrated on producing law professors. We produce a fair number of them, but it's not the be-all and end-all of the law school in some ways. Heather Gerken, who's the dean at Yale, has changed that somewhat, but not entirely. So that's one big difference.One of the most distinctive things about Stanford, because we're on the quarter system, is that our clinics are full-time clinics, taught by full-time faculty members at the law school. And that's distinctive. I think Yale calls more things clinics than we do, and a lot of them are part-time or taught by folks who aren't in the building all the time. So that's a big difference between the schools.They just have very different feels. I would encourage any student who gets into both of them to go and visit both of them, talk to the students, and see where you think you're going to be most comfortably stretched. Either school could be the right school for somebody.DL: I totally agree with you. Sometimes people think there's some kind of platonic answer to, “Where should I go to law school?” And it depends on so many individual circumstances.PK: There really isn't one answer. I think when I was deciding between law schools as a student, I got waitlisted at Stanford and I got into Yale. I had gone to Yale as an undergrad, so I wasn't going to go anywhere else if I got in there. I was from Connecticut and loved living in Connecticut, so that was an easy choice for me. But it's a hard choice for a lot of folks.And I do think that one of the worst things in the world is U.S. News and World Report, even though we're generally a beneficiary of it. It used to be that the R-squared between where somebody went to law school and what a ranking was was minimal. I knew lots of people who decided, in the old days, that they were going to go to Columbia rather than Yale or Harvard, rather than Stanford or Penn, rather than Chicago, because they liked the city better or there was somebody who did something they really wanted to do there.And then the R-squared, once U.S. News came out, of where people went and what the rankings were, became huge. And as you probably know, there were some scandals with law schools that would just waitlist people rather than admit them, to keep their yield up, because they thought the person would go to a higher-ranked law school. There were years and years where a huge part of the Stanford entering class had been waitlisted at Penn. And that's bad for people, because there are people who should go to Penn rather than come here. There are people who should go to NYU rather than going to Harvard. And a lot of those people don't do it because they're so fixated on U.S. News rankings.DL: I totally agree with you. But I suspect that a lot of people think that there are certain opportunities that are going to be open to them only if they go here or only if they go there.Speaking of which, after graduating from YLS, you clerked for Justice Blackmun on the Supreme Court, and statistically it's certainly true that certain schools seem to improve your odds of clerking for the Court. What was that experience like overall? People often describe it as a dream job. We're recording this on the last day of the Supreme Court Term; some hugely consequential historic cases are coming down. As a law clerk, you get a front row seat to all of that, to all of that history being made. Did you love that experience?PK: I loved the experience. I loved it in part because I worked for a wonderful justice who was just a lovely man, a real mensch. I had three great co-clerks. It was the first time, actually, that any justice had ever hired three women—and so that was distinctive for me, because I had been in classes in law school where there were fewer than three women. I was in one class in law school where I was the only woman. So that was neat.It was a great Term. It was the last year of the Burger Court, and we had just a heap of incredibly interesting cases. It's amazing how many cases I teach in law school that were decided that year—the summary-judgment trilogy, Thornburg v. Gingles, Bowers v. Hardwick. It was just a really great time to be there. And as a liberal, we won a lot of the cases. We didn't win them all, but we won a lot of them.It was incredibly intense. At that point, the Supreme Court still had this odd IT system that required eight hours of diagnostics every night. So the system was up from 8 a.m. to midnight—it stayed online longer if there was a death case—but otherwise it went down at midnight. In the Blackmun chambers, we showed up at 8 a.m. for breakfast with the Justice, and we left at midnight, five days a week. Then on the weekends, we were there from 9 to 9. And they were deciding 150 cases, not 60 cases, a year. So there was a lot more work to do, in that sense. But it was a great year. I've remained friends with my co-clerks, and I've remained friends with clerks from other chambers. It was a wonderful experience.DL: And you've actually written about it. I would refer people to some of the articles that they can look up, on your CV and elsewhere, where you've talked about, say, having breakfast with the Justice.PK: And we had a Passover Seder with the Justice as well, which was a lot of fun.DL: Oh wow, who hosted that? Did he?PK: Actually, the clerks hosted it. Originally he had said, “Oh, why don't we have it at the Court?” But then he came back to us and said, “Well, I think the Chief Justice”—Chief Justice Burger—“might not like that.” But he lent us tables and chairs, which were dropped off at one of the clerk's houses. And it was actually the day of the Gramm-Rudman argument, which was an argument about the budget. So we had to keep running back and forth from the Court to the house of Danny Richman, the clerk who hosted it, who was a Thurgood Marshall clerk. We had to keep running back and forth from the Court to Danny Richman's house, to baste the turkey and make stuff, back and forth. And then we had a real full Seder, and we invited all of the Jewish clerks at the Court and the Justice's messenger, who was Jewish, and the Justice and Mrs. Blackmun, and it was a lot of fun.DL: Wow, that's wonderful. So where did you go after your clerkship?PK: I went to the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, where I was an assistant counsel, and I worked on voting-rights and employment-discrimination cases.DL: And that was something that you had thought about for a long time—you mentioned you had read about its work in high school.PK: Yes, and it was a great place to work. We were working on great cases, and at that point we were really pushing the envelope on some of the stuff that we were doing—which was great and inspiring, and my colleagues were wonderful.And unlike a lot of Supreme Court practices now, where there's a kind of “King Bee” usually, and that person gets to argue everything, the Legal Defense Fund was very different. The first argument I did at the Court was in a case that I had worked on the amended complaint for, while at the Legal Defense Fund—and they let me essentially keep working on the case and argue it at the Supreme Court, even though by the time the case got to the Supreme Court, I was teaching at UVA. So they didn't have this policy of stripping away from younger lawyers the ability to argue their cases the whole way through the system.DL: So how many years out from law school were you by the time you had your first argument before the Court? I know that, today at least, there's this two-year bar on arguing before the Court after having clerked there.PK: Six or seven years out—because I think I argued in ‘91.DL: Now, you mentioned that by then you were teaching at UVA. You had a dream job working at the NAACP Legal Defense Fund. What led you to go to UVA?PK: There were two things, really, that did it. One was I had also discovered when I was in law school that I loved law school, and I was better at law school than I had been at anything I had done before law school. And the second was I really hated dealing with opposing counsel. I tell my students now, “You should take negotiation. If there's only one class you could take in law school, take negotiation.” Because it's a skill; it's not a habit of mind, but I felt like it was a habit of mind. And I found the discovery process and filing motions to compel and dealing with the other side's intransigence just really unpleasant.What I really loved was writing briefs. I loved writing briefs, and I could keep doing that for the Legal Defense Fund while at UVA, and I've done a bunch of that over the years for LDF and for other organizations. I could keep doing that and I could live in a small town, which I really wanted to do. I love New York, and now I could live in a city—I've spent a couple of years, off and on, living in cities since then, and I like it—but I didn't like it at that point. I really wanted to be out in the country somewhere. And so UVA was the perfect mix. I kept working on cases, writing amicus briefs for LDF and for other organizations. I could teach, which I loved. I could live in a college town, which I really enjoyed. So it was the best blend of things.DL: And I know, from your having actually delivered a lecture at UVA, that it really did seem to have a special place in your heart. UVA Law School—they really do have a wonderful environment there (as does Stanford), and Charlottesville is a very charming place.PK: Yes, especially when I was there. UVA has a real gift for developing its junior faculty. It was a place where the senior faculty were constantly reading our work, constantly talking to us. Everyone was in the building, which makes a huge difference.The second case I had go to the Supreme Court actually came out of a class where a student asked a question, and I ended up representing the student, and we took the case all the way to the Supreme Court. But I wasn't admitted in the Western District of Virginia, and that's where we had to file a case. And so I turned to my next-door neighbor, George Rutherglen, and said to George, “Would you be the lead counsel in this?” And he said, “Sure.” And we ended up representing a bunch of UVA students, challenging the way the Republican Party did its nomination process. And we ended up, by the student's third year in law school, at the Supreme Court.So UVA was a great place. I had amazing colleagues. The legendary Bill Stuntz was then there; Mike Klarman was there. Dan Ortiz, who's still there, was there. So was John Harrison. It was a fantastic group of people to have as your colleagues.DL: Was it difficult for you, then, to leave UVA and move to Stanford?PK: Oh yes. When I went in to tell Bob Scott, who was then the dean, that I was leaving, I just burst into tears. I think the reason I left UVA was I was at a point in my career where I'd done a bunch of visits at other schools, and I thought that I could either leave then or I would be making a decision to stay there for the rest of my career. And I just felt like I wanted to make a change. And in retrospect, I would've been just as happy if I'd stayed at UVA. In my professional life, I would've been just as happy. I don't know in my personal life, because I wouldn't have met my partner, I don't think, if I'd been at UVA. But it's a marvelous place; everything about it is just absolutely superb.DL: Are you the managing partner of a boutique or midsize firm? If so, you know that your most important job is attracting and retaining top talent. It's not easy, especially if your benefits don't match up well with those of Biglaw firms or if your HR process feels “small time.” NexFirm has created an onboarding and benefits experience that rivals an Am Law 100 firm, so you can compete for the best talent at a price your firm can afford. Want to learn more? Contact NexFirm at 212-292-1002 or email betterbenefits at nexfirm dot com.So I do want to give you a chance to say nice things about your current place. I assume you have no regrets about moving to Stanford Law, even if you would've been just as happy at UVA?PK: I'm incredibly happy here. I've got great colleagues. I've got great students. The ability to do the clinic the way we do it, which is as a full-time clinic, wouldn't be true anywhere else in the country, and that makes a huge difference to that part of my work. I've gotten to teach around the curriculum. I've taught four of the six first-year courses, which is a great opportunityAnd as you said earlier, the weather is unbelievable. People downplay that, because especially for people who are Northeastern Ivy League types, there's a certain Calvinism about that, which is that you have to suffer in order to be truly working hard. People out here sometimes think we don't work hard because we are not visibly suffering. But it's actually the opposite, in a way. I'm looking out my window right now, and it's a gorgeous day. And if I were in the east and it were 75 degrees and sunny, I would find it hard to work because I'd think it's usually going to be hot and humid, or if it's in the winter, it's going to be cold and rainy. I love Yale, but the eight years I spent there, my nose ran the entire time I was there. And here I look out and I think, “It's beautiful, but you know what? It's going to be beautiful tomorrow. So I should sit here and finish grading my exams, or I should sit here and edit this article, or I should sit here and work on the Restatement—because it's going to be just as beautiful tomorrow.” And the ability to walk outside, to clear your head, makes a huge difference. People don't understand just how huge a difference that is, but it's huge.DL: That's so true. If you had me pick a color to associate with my time at YLS, I would say gray. It just felt like everything was always gray, the sky was always gray—not blue or sunny or what have you.But I know you've spent some time outside of Northern California, because you have done some stints at the Justice Department. Tell us about that, the times you went there—why did you go there? What type of work were you doing? And how did it relate to or complement your scholarly work?PK: At the beginning of the Obama administration, I had applied for a job in the Civil Rights Division as a deputy assistant attorney general (DAAG), and I didn't get it. And I thought, “Well, that's passed me by.” And a couple of years later, when they were looking for a new principal deputy solicitor general, in the summer of 2013, the civil-rights groups pushed me for that job. I got an interview with Eric Holder, and it was on June 11th, 2013, which just fortuitously happens to be the 50th anniversary of the day that Vivian Malone desegregated the University of Alabama—and Vivian Malone is the older sister of Sharon Malone, who is married to Eric Holder.So I went in for the interview and I said, “This must be an especially special day for you because of the 50th anniversary.” And we talked about that a little bit, and then we talked about other things. And I came out of the interview, and a couple of weeks later, Don Verrilli, who was the solicitor general, called me up and said, “Look, you're not going to get a job as the principal deputy”—which ultimately went to Ian Gershengorn, a phenomenal lawyer—“but Eric Holder really enjoyed talking to you, so we're going to look for something else for you to do here at the Department of Justice.”And a couple of weeks after that, Eric Holder called me and offered me the DAAG position in the Civil Rights Division and said, “We'd really like you to especially concentrate on our voting-rights litigation.” It was very important litigation, in part because the Supreme Court had recently struck down the pre-clearance regime under Section 5 [of the Voting Rights Act]. So the Justice Department was now bringing a bunch of lawsuits against things they could have blocked if Section 5 had been in effect, most notably the Texas voter ID law, which was a quite draconian voter ID law, and this omnibus bill in North Carolina that involved all sorts of cutbacks to opportunities to vote: a cutback on early voting, a cutback on same-day registration, a cutback on 16- and 17-year-olds pre-registering, and the like.So I went to the Department of Justice and worked with the Voting Section on those cases, but I also ended up working on things like getting the Justice Department to change its position on whether Title VII covered transgender individuals. And then I also got to work on the implementation of [United States v.] Windsor—which I had worked on, representing Edie Windsor, before I went to DOJ, because the Court had just decided Windsor [which held Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional]. So I had an opportunity to work on how to implement Windsor across the federal government. So that was the stuff I got to work on the first time I was at DOJ, and I also obviously worked on tons of other stuff, and it was phenomenal. I loved doing it.I did it for about 20 months, and then I came back to Stanford. It affected my teaching; I understood a lot of stuff quite differently having worked on it. It gave me some ideas on things I wanted to write about. And it just refreshed me in some ways. It's different than working in the clinic. I love working in the clinic, but you're working with students. You're working only with very, very junior lawyers. I sometimes think of the clinic as being a sort of Groundhog Day of first-year associates, and so I'm sort of senior partner and paralegal at a large law firm. At DOJ, you're working with subject-matter experts. The people in the Voting Section, collectively, had hundreds of years of experience with voting. The people in the Appellate Section had hundreds of years of experience with appellate litigation. And so it's just a very different feel.So I did that, and then I came back to Stanford. I was here, and in the fall of 2020, I was asked if I wanted to be one of the people on the Justice Department review team if Joe Biden won the election. These are sometimes referred to as the transition teams or the landing teams or the like. And I said, “I'd be delighted to do that.” They had me as one of the point people reviewing the Civil Rights Division. And I think it might've even been the Wednesday or Thursday before Inauguration Day 2021, I got a call from the liaison person on the transition team saying, “How would you like to go back to DOJ and be the principal deputy assistant attorney general in the Civil Rights Division?” That would mean essentially running the Division until we got a confirmed head, which took about five months. And I thought that this would be an amazing opportunity to go back to the DOJ and work with people I love, right at the beginning of an administration.And the beginning of an administration is really different than coming in midway through the second term of an administration. You're trying to come up with priorities, and I viewed my job really as helping the career people to do their best work. There were a huge number of career people who had gone through the first Trump administration, and they were raring to go. They had all sorts of ideas on stuff they wanted to do, and it was my job to facilitate that and make that possible for them. And that's why it's so tragic this time around that almost all of those people have left. The current administration first tried to transfer them all into Sanctuary Cities [the Sanctuary Cities Enforcement Working Group] or ask them to do things that they couldn't in good conscience do, and so they've retired or taken buyouts or just left.DL: It's remarkable, just the loss of expertise and experience at the Justice Department over these past few months.PK: Thousands of years of experience gone. And these are people, you've got to realize, who had been through the Nixon administration, the Reagan administration, both Bush administrations, and the first Trump administration, and they hadn't had any problem. That's what's so stunning: this is not just the normal shift in priorities, and they have gone out of their way to make it so hellacious for people that they will leave. And that's not something that either Democratic or Republican administrations have ever done before this.DL: And we will get to a lot of, shall we say, current events. Finishing up on just the discussion of your career, you had the opportunity to work in the executive branch—what about judicial service? You've been floated over the years as a possible Supreme Court nominee. I don't know if you ever looked into serving on the Ninth Circuit or were considered for that. What about judicial service?PK: So I've never been in a position, and part of this was a lesson I learned right at the beginning of my LDF career, when Lani Guinier, who was my boss at LDF, was nominated for the position of AAG [assistant attorney general] in the Civil Rights Division and got shot down. I knew from that time forward that if I did the things I really wanted to do, my chances of confirmation were not going to be very high. People at LDF used to joke that they would get me nominated so that I would take all the bullets, and then they'd sneak everybody else through. So I never really thought that I would have a shot at a judicial position, and that didn't bother me particularly. As you know, I gave the commencement speech many years ago at Stanford, and I said, “Would I want to be on the Supreme Court? You bet—but not enough to have trimmed my sails for an entire lifetime.”And I think that's right. Peter Baker did this story in The New York Times called something like, “Favorites of Left Don't Make Obama's Court List.” And in the story, Tommy Goldstein, who's a dear friend of mine, said, “If they wanted to talk about somebody who was a flaming liberal, they'd be talking about Pam Karlan, but nobody's talking about Pam Karlan.” And then I got this call from a friend of mine who said, “Yeah, but at least people are talking about how nobody's talking about you. Nobody's even talking about how nobody's talking about me.” And I was flattered, but not fooled.DL: That's funny; I read that piece in preparing for this interview. So let's say someone were to ask you, someone mid-career, “Hey, I've been pretty safe in the early years of my career, but now I'm at this juncture where I could do things that will possibly foreclose my judicial ambitions—should I just try to keep a lid on it, in the hope of making it?” It sounds like you would tell them to let their flag fly.PK: Here's the thing: your chances of getting to be on the Supreme Court, if that's what you're talking about, your chances are so low that the question is how much do you want to give up to go from a 0.001% chance to a 0.002% chance? Yes, you are doubling your chances, but your chances are not good. And there are some people who I think are capable of doing that, perhaps because they fit the zeitgeist enough that it's not a huge sacrifice for them. So it's not that I despise everybody who goes to the Supreme Court because they must obviously have all been super-careerists; I think lots of them weren't super-careerists in that way.Although it does worry me that six members of the Court now clerked at the Supreme Court—because when you are a law clerk, it gives you this feeling about the Court that maybe you don't want everybody who's on the Court to have, a feeling that this is the be-all and end-all of life and that getting a clerkship is a manifestation of an inner state of grace, so becoming a justice is equally a manifestation of an inner state of grace in which you are smarter than everybody else, wiser than everybody else, and everybody should kowtow to you in all sorts of ways. And I worry that people who are imprinted like ducklings on the Supreme Court when they're 25 or 26 or 27 might not be the best kind of portfolio of justices at the back end. The Court that decided Brown v. Board of Education—none of them, I think, had clerked at the Supreme Court, or maybe one of them had. They'd all done things with their lives other than try to get back to the Supreme Court. So I worry about that a little bit.DL: Speaking of the Court, let's turn to the Court, because it just finished its Term as we are recording this. As we started recording, they were still handing down the final decisions of the day.PK: Yes, the “R” numbers hadn't come up on the Supreme Court website when I signed off to come talk to you.DL: Exactly. So earlier this month, not today, but earlier this month, the Court handed down its decision in United States v. Skrmetti, reviewing Tennessee's ban on the use of hormones and puberty blockers for transgender youth. Were you surprised by the Court's ruling in Skrmetti?PK: No. I was not surprised.DL: So one of your most famous cases, which you litigated successfully five years ago or so, was Bostock v. Clayton County, in which the Court held that Title VII does apply to protect transgender individuals—and Bostock figures significantly in the Skrmetti opinions. Why were you surprised by Skrmetti given that you had won this victory in Bostock, which you could argue, in terms of just the logic of it, does carry over somewhat?PK: Well, I want to be very precise: I didn't actually litigate Bostock. There were three cases that were put together….DL: Oh yes—you handled Zarda.PK: I represented Don Zarda, who was a gay man, so I did not argue the transgender part of the case at all. Fortuitously enough, David Cole argued that part of the case, and David Cole was actually the first person I had dinner with as a freshman at Yale College, when I started college, because he was the roommate of somebody I debated against in high school. So David and I went to law school together, went to college together, and had classes together. We've been friends now for almost 50 years, which is scary—I think for 48 years we've been friends—and he argued that part of the case.So here's what surprised me about what the Supreme Court did in Skrmetti. Given where the Court wanted to come out, the more intellectually honest way to get there would've been to say, “Yes, of course this is because of sex; there is sex discrimination going on here. But even applying intermediate scrutiny, we think that Tennessee's law should survive intermediate scrutiny.” That would've been an intellectually honest way to get to where the Court got.Instead, they did this weird sort of, “Well, the word ‘sex' isn't in the Fourteenth Amendment, but it's in Title VII.” But that makes no sense at all, because for none of the sex-discrimination cases that the Court has decided under the Fourteenth Amendment did the word “sex” appear in the Fourteenth Amendment. It's not like the word “sex” was in there and then all of a sudden it took a powder and left. So I thought that was a really disingenuous way of getting to where the Court wanted to go. But I was not surprised after the oral argument that the Court was going to get to where it got on the bottom line.DL: I'm curious, though, rewinding to Bostock and Zarda, were you surprised by how the Court came out in those cases? Because it was still a deeply conservative Court back then.PK: No, I was not surprised. I was not surprised, both because I thought we had so much the better of the argument and because at the oral argument, it seemed pretty clear that we had at least six justices, and those were the six justices we had at the end of the day. The thing that was interesting to me about Bostock was I thought also that we were likely to win for the following weird legal-realist reason, which is that this was a case that would allow the justices who claimed to be textualists to show that they were principled textualists, by doing something that they might not have voted for if they were in Congress or the like.And also, while the impact was really large in one sense, the impact was not really large in another sense: most American workers are protected by Title VII, but most American employers do not discriminate, and didn't discriminate even before this, on the basis of sexual orientation or on the basis of gender identity. For example, in Zarda's case, the employer denied that they had fired Mr. Zarda because he was gay; they said, “We fired him for other reasons.”Very few employers had a formal policy that said, “We discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation.” And although most American workers are protected by Title VII, most American employers are not covered by Title VII—and that's because small employers, employers with fewer than 15 full-time employees, are not covered at all. And religious employers have all sorts of exemptions and the like, so for the people who had the biggest objection to hiring or promoting or retaining gay or transgender employees, this case wasn't going to change what happened to them at all. So the impact was really important for workers, but not deeply intrusive on employers generally. So I thought those two things, taken together, meant that we had a pretty good argument.I actually thought our textual argument was not our best argument, but it was the one that they were most likely to buy. So it was really interesting: we made a bunch of different arguments in the brief, and then as soon as I got up to argue, the first question out of the box was Justice Ginsburg saying, “Well, in 1964, homosexuality was illegal in most of the country—how could this be?” And that's when I realized, “Okay, she's just telling me to talk about the text, don't talk about anything else.”So I just talked about the text the whole time. But as you may remember from the argument, there was this weird moment, which came after I answered her question and one other one, there was this kind of silence from the justices. And I just said, “Well, if you don't have any more questions, I'll reserve the remainder of my time.” And it went well; it went well as an argument.DL: On the flip side, speaking of things that are not going so well, let's turn to current events. Zooming up to a higher level of generality than Skrmetti, you are a leading scholar of constitutional law, so here's the question. I know you've already been interviewed about it by media outlets, but let me ask you again, in light of just the latest, latest, latest news: are we in a constitutional crisis in the United States?PK: I think we're in a period of great constitutional danger. I don't know what a “constitutional crisis” is. Some people think the constitutional crisis is that we have an executive branch that doesn't believe in the Constitution, right? So you have Donald Trump asked, in an interview, “Do you have to comply with the Constitution?” He says, “I don't know.” Or he says, “I have an Article II that gives me the power to do whatever I want”—which is not what Article II says. If you want to be a textualist, it does not say the president can do whatever he wants. So you have an executive branch that really does not have a commitment to the Constitution as it has been understood up until now—that is, limited government, separation of powers, respect for individual rights. With this administration, none of that's there. And I don't know whether Emil Bove did say, “F**k the courts,” or not, but they're certainly acting as if that's their attitude.So yes, in that sense, we're in a period of constitutional danger. And then on top of that, I think we have a Supreme Court that is acting almost as if this is a normal administration with normal stuff, a Court that doesn't seem to recognize what district judges appointed by every president since George H.W. Bush or maybe even Reagan have recognized, which is, “This is not normal.” What the administration is trying to do is not normal, and it has to be stopped. So that worries me, that the Supreme Court is acting as if it needs to keep its powder dry—and for what, I'm not clear.If they think that by giving in and giving in, and prevaricating and putting things off... today, I thought the example of this was in the birthright citizenship/universal injunction case. One of the groups of plaintiffs that's up there is a bunch of states, around 23 states, and the Supreme Court in Justice Barrett's opinion says, “Well, maybe the states have standing, maybe they don't. And maybe if they have standing, you can enjoin this all in those states. We leave this all for remind.”They've sat on this for months. It's ridiculous that the Supreme Court doesn't “man up,” essentially, and decide these things. It really worries me quite a bit that the Supreme Court just seems completely blind to the fact that in 2024, they gave Donald Trump complete criminal immunity from any prosecution, so who's going to hold him accountable? Not criminally accountable, not accountable in damages—and now the Supreme Court seems not particularly interested in holding him accountable either.DL: Let me play devil's advocate. Here's my theory on why the Court does seem to be holding its fire: they're afraid of a worse outcome, which is, essentially, “The emperor has no clothes.”Say they draw this line in the sand for Trump, and then Trump just crosses it. And as we all know from that famous quote from The Federalist Papers, the Court has neither force nor will, but only judgment. That's worse, isn't it? If suddenly it's exposed that the Court doesn't have any army, any way to stop Trump? And then the courts have no power.PK: I actually think it's the opposite, which is, I think if the Court said to Donald Trump, “You must do X,” and then he defies it, you would have people in the streets. You would have real deep resistance—not just the “No Kings,” one-day march, but deep resistance. And there are scholars who've done comparative law who say, “When 3 percent of the people in a country go to the streets, you get real change.” And I think the Supreme Court is mistaking that.I taught a reading group for our first-years here. We have reading groups where you meet four times during the fall for dinner, and you read stuff that makes you think. And my reading group was called “Exit, Voice, and Loyalty,” and it started with the Albert Hirschman book with that title.DL: Great book.PK: It's a great book. And I gave them some excerpt from that, and I gave them an essay by Hannah Arendt called “Personal Responsibility Under Dictatorship,” which she wrote in 1964. And one of the things she says there is she talks about people who stayed in the German regime, on the theory that they would prevent at least worse things from happening. And I'm going to paraphrase slightly, but what she says is, “People who think that what they're doing is getting the lesser evil quickly forget that what they're choosing is evil.” And if the Supreme Court decides, “We're not going to tell Donald Trump ‘no,' because if we tell him no and he goes ahead, we will be exposed,” what they have basically done is said to Donald Trump, “Do whatever you want; we're not going to stop you.” And that will lose the Supreme Court more credibility over time than Donald Trump defying them once and facing some serious backlash for doing it.DL: So let me ask you one final question before we go to my little speed round. That 3 percent statistic is fascinating, by the way, but it resonates for me. My family's originally from the Philippines, and you probably had the 3 percent out there in the streets to oust Marcos in 1986.But let me ask you this. We now live in a nation where Donald Trump won not just the Electoral College, but the popular vote. We do see a lot of ugly things out there, whether in social media or incidents of violence or what have you. You still have enough faith in the American people that if the Supreme Court drew that line, and Donald Trump crossed it, and maybe this happened a couple of times, even—you still have faith that there will be that 3 percent or what have you in the streets?PK: I have hope, which is not quite the same thing as faith, obviously, but I have hope that some Republicans in Congress would grow a spine at that point, and people would say, “This is not right.” Have they always done that? No. We've had bad things happen in the past, and people have not done anything about it. But I think that the alternative of just saying, “Well, since we might not be able to stop him, we shouldn't do anything about it,” while he guts the federal government, sends masked people onto the streets, tries to take the military into domestic law enforcement—I think we have to do something.And this is what's so enraging in some ways: the district court judges in this country are doing their job. They are enjoining stuff. They're not enjoining everything, because not everything can be enjoined, and not everything is illegal; there's a lot of bad stuff Donald Trump is doing that he's totally entitled to do. But the district courts are doing their job, and they're doing their job while people are sending pizza boxes to their houses and sending them threats, and the president is tweeting about them or whatever you call the posts on Truth Social. They're doing their job—and the Supreme Court needs to do its job too. It needs to stand up for district judges. If it's not willing to stand up for the rest of us, you'd think they'd at least stand up for their entire judicial branch.DL: Turning to my speed round, my first question is, what do you like the least about the law? And this can either be the practice of law or law as a more abstract system of ordering human affairs.PK: What I liked least about it was having to deal with opposing counsel in discovery. That drove me to appellate litigation.DL: Exactly—where your request for an extension is almost always agreed to by the other side.PK: Yes, and where the record is the record.DL: Yes, exactly. My second question, is what would you be if you were not a lawyer and/or law professor?PK: Oh, they asked me this question for a thing here at Stanford, and it was like, if I couldn't be a lawyer, I'd... And I just said, “I'd sit in my room and cry.”DL: Okay!PK: I don't know—this is what my talent is!DL: You don't want to write a novel or something?PK: No. What I would really like to do is I would like to bike the Freedom Trail, which is a trail that starts in Montgomery, Alabama, and goes to the Canadian border, following the Underground Railroad. I've always wanted to bike that. But I guess that's not a career. I bike slowly enough that it could be a career, at this point—but earlier on, probably not.DL: My third question is, how much sleep do you get each night?PK: I now get around six hours of sleep each night, but it's complicated by the following, which is when I worked at the Department of Justice the second time, it was during Covid, so I actually worked remotely from California. And what that required me to do was essentially to wake up every morning at 4 a.m., 7 a.m. on the East Coast, so I could have breakfast, read the paper, and be ready to go by 5:30 a.m.I've been unable to get off of that, so I still wake up before dawn every morning. And I spent three months in Florence, and I thought the jet lag would bring me out of this—not in the slightest. Within two weeks, I was waking up at 4:30 a.m. Central European Time. So that's why I get about six hours, because I can't really go to bed before 9 or 10 p.m.DL: Well, I was struck by your being able to do this podcast fairly early West Coast time.PK: Oh no, this is the third thing I've done this morning! I had a 6:30 a.m. conference call.DL: Oh my gosh, wow. It reminds me of that saying about how you get more done in the Army before X hour than other people get done in a day.My last question, is any final words of wisdom, such as career advice or life advice, for my listeners?PK: Yes: do what you love, with people you love doing it with.DL: Well said. I've loved doing this podcast—Professor Karlan, thanks again for joining me.PK: You should start calling me Pam. We've had this same discussion….DL: We're on the air! Okay, well, thanks again, Pam—I'm so grateful to you for joining me.PK: Thanks for having me.DL: Thanks so much to Professor Karlan for joining me. Whether or not you agree with her views, you can't deny that she's both insightful and honest—qualities that have made her a leading legal academic and lawyer, but also a great podcast guest.Thanks to NexFirm for sponsoring the Original Jurisdiction podcast. NexFirm has helped many attorneys to leave Biglaw and launch firms of their own. To explore this opportunity, please contact NexFirm at 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment at nexfirm dot com to learn more.Thanks to Tommy Harron, my sound engineer here at Original Jurisdiction, and thanks to you, my listeners and readers. To connect with me, please email me at davidlat at Substack dot com, or find me on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn, at davidlat, and on Instagram and Threads at davidbenjaminlat.If you enjoyed today's episode, please rate, review, and subscribe. Please subscribe to the Original Jurisdiction newsletter if you don't already, over at davidlat dot substack dot com. This podcast is free, but it's made possible by paid subscriptions to the newsletter.The next episode should appear on or about Wednesday, July 23. Until then, may your thinking be original and your jurisdiction free of defects. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit davidlat.substack.com/subscribe
In this episode: Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis just slashed millions of dollars in funding for river restoration, public radio, and well-behaved inmates who want to phone their families. But the Republican governor also approved pork-barrel projects supporting the Inter Miami Major League Soccer team, owners and breeders of thoroughbred racehorses, and a giant real-estate developer near Daytona Beach. We take a closer look at what DeSantis decided to veto — and, more importantly, what he chose to approve — in Florida's new $115 billion state budget. Show notesPeople in Florida prisons will get free calls for good behavior in new programFree prison call program rewarded good behavior, cost taxpayers zero. DeSantis killed itRon DeSantis just pocketed nearly $1 million from an industry he helpedAfter a personal meeting, and a $10,000 donation, DeSantis approved a $10 million earmarkFlorida lawmakers may unleash a last-second expansion of school privatizationA billionaire is showering cash on Florida politiciansFlorida taxpayers will help fund a lavish pay package for a new university presidentA few quotes referenced in the show from Ron DeSantis' June 30th budget news conference: Schools of Hope charter schools“We got an overhaul to our Schools of Hope program. So you're going to have groups — like there's a group in New York City, Success Academy, and they've been able to do very well in New York City, which is very tough because the unions want to kill charter schools up there and the elected officials are negative — they're going to be able to go in the most dire areas of Florida and open up these schools and potentially change people's lives for the better…I'm glad we were able to work with the Legislature to get that through in this extended session.”Civics Seal of Excellence teacher training“We created this Civics Seal of Excellence program. We created a 50-hour course — well, we didn't, we got scholars from, like, Hillsdale, Heritage Foundation, all these places, and they devised this programming, basically lectures — about all these different things that went into the formation of the country and the values and principles that made us a unique experiment.” New College of Florida takeover“We made sweeping appointments to the Board of Trustees, they replaced the president with a conservative who had been the commissioner of education under our administration in the first term, and now, all of a sudden, they're bringing in these professors that are, like, really, really strong. And that is being transformed almost into, like, our version of a Hillsdale College.”Questions or comments? Send ‘em to Garcia.JasonR@gmail.comListen to the show: Apple | SpotifyWatch the show: YouTube Get full access to Seeking Rents at jasongarcia.substack.com/subscribe
An Allegheny County state House member has led the charge to repeal a 150-year-old ban on Sunday hunting in Pennsylvania. Governor Josh Shapiro is expected to sign it into law this week. A state appeals court ruled that a Western Pennsylvania municipality violated its own zoning law when it allowed a natural gas well to be built in a residential area. The future of the federal food benefits program known as SNAP - the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program - is unclear. Nearly 2 million Pennsylvanians depend on SNAP benefits, and it costs about $500 million to administer SNAP annually in Pennsylvania. But there are sweeping changes to the program's state and federal funding formula going into effect, as a result of President Trump's newly-signed spending law. Governor Shapiro has said Trump's plan might mean the end for SNAP benefits. A Lancaster County lawmaker has introduced a bill to clarify the role of constables in the Commonwealth. Rep. Tom Jones, an East Donegal Township Republican, introduced a bill to modernize the regulations governing constables and clarify their roles in the court system and law enforcement. Tower Health is eliminating 50 positions across four hospitals, including Reading Hospital, and outpatient services. The nonprofit company says it's part of a streamlining process at the healthcare system. The Schuylkill County borough of Saint Clair is celebrating its 175th anniversary this week. And a deeper dive: Pennsylvania needs more power to meet growing demands for electricity. As a result, Governor Shapiro has proposed a statewide board to expedite the siting of large-scale electricity projects such as those needed to power data centers.Support WITF: https://www.witf.org/support/give-now/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Thinking about running for school board, or just curious what the role actually entails? In this bonus episode of Elevate Education, guest host and former Jeffco Board President Stephanie Schooley sits down with current Board members Paula Reed and Erin Kenworthy for a conversation about what it's like to campaign, serve, and make decisions that impact students. This episode offers valuable reflections and practical advice for anyone considering stepping up to serve their community. Whether you're ready to run or just exploring the idea, this is a must-listen conversation that pulls back the curtain on one of the most important civic responsibilities in public education. Learn more about running for the Jeffco Public Schools Board here: https://www.jeffcopublicschools.org/about/board-of-education/board-elections
Questions, comments? Shoot me a text.Are your meals filling — but your results stalled? If you're eating “healthy” but still feeling hungry, struggling to lose weight, or finding it hard to hit your protein goals, this episode is for you.Board-certified holistic nutritionist and women's weight loss specialist Amy White explains the sneaky concept of Protein Appetite Dilution — when carbs and fats satisfy your appetite before you've eaten enough protein to fuel fat loss, muscle maintenance, and balanced hormones.This episode breaks down why fullness isn't the same as nutrient satisfaction, how under-eating protein disrupts your metabolism, and what to look for in your meals to stay on track — especially if you're a woman over 40 navigating menopause, cravings, and hormonal shifts.You'll learn:What protein appetite dilution is and why it mattersThe difference between fullness and true satietyHow “healthy” meals like toast, potatoes, or fruit can derail protein intakeA client case study that shows exactly how to fix it without dietingIf you're ready to feel full, nourished, and finally in control of your appetite and results — tune in now.Schedule Your Free Consult: Lose Weight For The Last TimeStart Now: Protein Packed Snack ChallengeWebsite: The Simplicity of WellnessFollow Me on InstagramFollow Me on Youtube
Episode 562 - Kate Maruyama - The Collective and The Alterations - Hollywood History, Horror and Family DynamicsKate Maruyama is the author of Harrowgate, Bleak Houses, and The Collective and her novella Family Solstice was named Best Fiction Book of 2021 by Rue Morgue Magazine. Her short work has appeared in numerous journals and anthologies and she is a two-time Pushcart Prize nominee, and winner of the Uncharted Short Story Prize. She served on the working Board for Women Who Submit, and the Board for the Shirley Jackson Awards. She writes, teaches, cooks, and eats in Los Angeles.https://www.katemaruyama.com/Support the show___https://livingthenextchapter.com/podcast produced by: https://truemediasolutions.ca/Coffee Refills are always appreciated, refill Dave's cup here, and thanks!https://buymeacoffee.com/truemediaca
Springing from a great conversation over on the PU&D Guild forums on Boardgamegeek, Brendan reflects on what makes for a great first play. Join us, won't you?“The Poisoned Chalice”A Great Teach“How to Teach Games Like a Pro”The Party Game CastNucleum (2023)Happy Salmon (2016)Everdell Farshore (2023)Nanty Narking (2019)Life & Mood & AtmosphereTiny Towns (2019)Carpe Diem (2018)The Hunger (2021)Rats of Wistar (2023)MindsetAndroid: Netrunner (2012)John's criteriaPredisposition – Sidereal Confluence (2017)Surprise – Free Radicals (2022)Atmosphere – Bärenpark (2017)What makes a good play for you? Share your thoughts over on boardgamegeek in guild #3269.
This Day in Legal History: 14th Amendment RatifiedOn July 9, 1868, the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified—one of the most sweeping and hotly contested legal transformations in American history. Drafted during Reconstruction, its promise was bold: birthright citizenship, due process, and equal protection under the law. In theory, it was the legal nail in the coffin for Dred Scott v. Sandford, the 1857 decision that declared Black people could never be citizens. In practice? A more complicated story.The amendment aimed to redefine American citizenship in the wake of emancipation—but its language proved a double-edged sword. While Section 1 is the cornerstone of modern civil rights litigation, it was also the platform for corporate personhood and Lochner-era judicial activism. The same equal protection clause used to dismantle segregation in Brown v. Board (1954) was first deployed to protect railroad companies from state taxes. So the question isn't whether the Fourteenth Amendment mattered—it's whether it served the people it was meant to protect.Southern states ratified the amendment under duress, often as a condition for rejoining the Union. The Supreme Court, for decades, narrowed its reach, refusing to apply most of the Bill of Rights to the states and sidestepping racial injustice entirely. Only in the 20th century—through selective incorporation and the civil rights movement—did its full potential begin to manifest.Today, the Fourteenth Amendment remains a constitutional battleground: cited in cases on abortion, marriage equality, affirmative action, and beyond. But the fight over its meaning is far from settled. July 9 isn't just a date on the calendar—it's a reminder that even the most powerful legal language is hostage to interpretation, and that equality under the law has always been a work in progress.Retired NBA star Charles Oakley is seeking sanctions against Madison Square Garden (MSG) and Randy Mastro, a top NYC official and MSG attorney, alleging they made false statements in a long-running legal battle over Oakley's 2017 ejection from a Knicks game. In a recent court filing, Oakley accused Mastro of repeatedly lying to the court about MSG owner James Dolan's involvement, despite Dolan admitting under oath that he played a role. Oakley wants the judge to award attorney fees, censure Mastro, and require him to attend an ethics class.This move follows MSG's own motion last month asking the court to sanction Oakley and his lawyers for allegedly promoting a "false narrative" and to dismiss the case. The dueling motions are part of an eight-year legal dispute that began after Oakley was forcibly removed from MSG. Oakley, a Knicks fan favorite from 1988–1998, has claimed excessive force was used during the incident and has recently amended his lawsuit to focus on assault and battery.Ex-NBA player seeks sanctions against Madison Square Garden, lawyer Mastro | ReutersLaw school deans across Texas are pushing back against a proposal to eliminate the requirement that attorneys graduate from American Bar Association (ABA)-accredited schools. In a letter to the Texas Supreme Court, deans from eight of the state's ten ABA-accredited law schools argue that scrapping the rule—which has been in place since 1983—would hinder graduates' ability to practice in other states and reduce transparency for students and consumers.The court's review of the ABA requirement follows a similar move by Florida, where justices cited the ABA's paused diversity mandate and political activity as reasons for reconsideration. Critics of the proposal warn that removing ABA accreditation could isolate Texas law schools, make legal education less portable, and ultimately increase costs for students.Notably, the dean of the University of Texas School of Law, Robert Chesney, did not join the group letter. Instead, he suggested the court explore alternative or supplementary accreditation pathways. Texas A&M's law dean, Robert Ahdieh, also withheld endorsement but emphasized the importance of maintaining national recognition for Texas law degrees. The state's high court, composed entirely of Republican-elected judges, has not indicated when it will issue a decision.Eliminating ABA accreditation for Texas law schools is flawed proposal, some deans say | ReutersA U.S. district judge temporarily halted the bankruptcy sale of genetic testing company 23andMe, giving California three days to argue that the deal violates its genetic privacy law. California had earlier failed to convince a bankruptcy judge to block the $305 million sale to TTAM Research, a nonprofit founded by 23andMe co-founder Anne Wojcicki.The state contends that transferring genetic data to TTAM without explicit consumer consent breaches California's Genetic Information Privacy Act. With roughly 1.8 million California residents among 23andMe's 10 million users, the state argues the sale could lead to unauthorized data transfers.Bankruptcy Judge Brian Walsh previously ruled that consumers could delete their data post-sale, minimizing potential harm. TTAM has promised to honor 23andMe's existing privacy policies. A federal court hearing on whether to extend the pause is scheduled for Thursday. The bankruptcy follows declining demand and a major 2023 data breach at 23andMe.Judge briefly pauses 23andMe bankruptcy sale amid California's appeal | ReutersThe IRS has agreed—at least for now—not to penalize churches for discussing political candidates or campaigns during religious services, provided that such speech is framed as a matter of faith. This move comes as part of a proposed consent decree intended to resolve a constitutional challenge to the Johnson Amendment, a 1954 law barring 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations—including churches—from participating in political campaigns.The settlement, filed in a Texas federal court, reinterprets the Johnson Amendment narrowly: religious speech about politics during worship services is not “political intervention” if it occurs through traditional, faith-based communication. The IRS now claims enforcing the Johnson Amendment against such speech could raise serious First Amendment concerns, especially if it treats politically silent religious organizations more favorably than outspoken ones.Critics warn this reinterpretation risks turning churches into tax-sheltered political operations. Diane Yentel of the Council of Nonprofits argues it opens the door to tax-deductible donations for de facto political activity—effectively subsidized by taxpayers who may disagree.While the lawsuit originally sought to strike down the Johnson Amendment entirely, this settlement attempts to sidestep the constitutional minefield through interpretation, not invalidation. But here's the legal paradox: the IRS is effectively rewriting statutory law without legislative input, relying on what it calls "constitutional avoidance." That raises real questions—can an executive agency unilaterally redefine the scope of a congressional statute to avoid a constitutional fight? Or is this a policy pivot masquerading as judicial restraint?For now, the constitutional showdown is paused. But if this consent decree is approved, it will mark a major shift in the legal boundaries between church, state, and campaign finance—without any actual change to the law's text. Whether that holds up under future scrutiny remains very much an open question.IRS Says Religious Groups Can Discuss Politics During Services (1) This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe
Carmen Sebe e genul de om care nu povestește succesul din vârful unei funcții, ci îl explică prin decizii luate la timpul lor, într-un ecosistem care nu a fost niciodată comod. Cu un parcurs care trece prin Gecad, Avangate și mai recent prin poziția de President of the Board la SeedBlink, Carmen a fost prezentă în momentele în care tehnologia din Europa Centrală și de Est începea să înțeleagă ce înseamnă să construiești, nu doar să vinzi. La SeedBlink, nu s-a mulțumit să observe de la distanță cum crește o platformă de investiții în startupuri – a fost parte din arhitectura ei, din felul în care s-a conturat cultura echipei și în special din deciziile care țin de ownership.În acest episod, am vorbit despre ce înseamnă, în practică, să oferi acțiuni angajaților. Nu doar ca un gest simbolic, ci și ca alegere de cultură. Am explorat împreună cum se schimbă relațiile dintr-o echipă atunci când oamenii devin, într-un fel sau altul, și co-proprietari.Ce influențează un astfel de pas? Cum se reflectă în motivație, în retenție, în implicare și în felul în care oamenii simt că locul lor contează?Ne-am apropiat și de latura mai puțin vizibilă: provocările. Când apar deciziile grele – între echitate și sustenabilitate, între viziune și birocrație. SeedBlink a trecut, de altfel, printr-o transformare interesantă odată cu trecerea spre noua entitate juridică din Austria, iar Carmen a explicat cum au gândit acest pas, de la procese simplificate la reacția echipei. Într-un startup care se dezvoltă european, astfel de alegeri nu sunt doar tehnice, ci și personale.Am atins și teme legate de leadership și mentalitate: cum construim un plan de acțiuni care să nu rămână o promisiune vagă, ci să fie trăit de oameni ca parte reală din ceea ce li se oferă? Iar într-un mod care amintește de ideile lui Dan Ariely în The Upside of Irrationality, Carmen sugerează că implicarea reală nu vine din obligație sau bonusuri, ci din acea senzație că ceea ce facem chiar contează – și că avem ceva de spus în mersul lucrurilor.Acest episod nu e doar despre equity, ci despre cum creștem companii în care oamenii aleg să rămână. Despre ce oferim, ce pierdem dacă evităm conversația și cum putem construi echipe care nu se opresc la fișa postului.
Every year, AAAS Congressional Fellows travel to the Hill to bring their expertise of STEM and evidence-based decision-making into the offices of senators, representatives and committees. From the outside, the Hill can feel opaque and its inner workings are hard to understand, especially to academic researchers. On this episode of Sci on the Fly, host and current fellow Mark Feuer DiTusa sits with current fellow Dr. K Joel Berry, a recently retired professor of mechanical engineering from Kettering University in Flint, to learn more about his time in Senator Mark Kelly's office, what it's like to be a scientist fellow joining a policy office, the bills he's writing, and how being in Congress in this particular moment in history speaks to him. This podcast does not necessarily reflect the views of AAAS, its Council, Board of Directors, officers, or members. AAAS is not responsible for the accuracy of this material. AAAS has made this material available as a public service, but this does not constitute endorsement by the association.
Growing up, Durran Dunn, CPA, had drive and discipline, but he didn't have any aspiration of using those qualities to become a CPA. He didn't even know what a CPA was. Dunn, now a partner in Bennett Thrasher's Risk Advisory Services practice, based in greater Atlanta, overcame “whiplash” in the form of two moves – from Jamaica to New York, from New York to Mississippi – and now mentors students on the merits of the profession. In addition to sharing strategies for success, Dunn spoke about the high-profile-yet-anonymous role he had at a Major League Baseball stadium. He was a social media and YouTube sensation, even though his identity was hidden by a full bodysuit. What you'll learn from this episode: Dunn's introduction to the accounting profession. The cultural whiplash he experienced, twice, upon leaving his native Jamaica. The running role Dunn performed for about seven years at a Major League Baseball stadium. Dunn's path from not knowing what a CPA was to becoming a firm partner. Details of Dunn's service on the AICPA's Board of Examiners. Why he is passionate about volunteering and mentoring young accounting candidates. His emphasis on discipline – a message he shares with student groups.
DAMIONThe next phase of Starbucks' turnaround plan is offering executives up to $6 million in stock grants, as baristas scrap to get annual raises above 2%Starbucks will reward company executives with up to $6 million in stock grants should they effectively fulfill cost-saving and timely rollout goals of the company's “Back to Starbucks” turnaround strategy. Starbucks Workers United representatives dubbed the move “ridiculous and irresponsible” amid contract negotiations over barista wages.WHO DO YOU BLAME?Double boomerang CEO and founder Howard Schultz1987-2000; 2008-2017; 2022-2023CEO and Chair Brian Niccol and his $113 million golden hello packageThe company's work-from-home policy which allows its CEO to work remotely from his home in Newport Beach, California, while the company's headquarters are in Seattle, Washington. As part of his employment agreement, Starbucks pays for him to travel between his home and the Seattle headquarters on the company's private jet.Former failure Yahoo! CEO Marissa Mayer who was appointed as a director to Starbucks 4 days before the announcement of the new retention awards. Compensation Committee chair Ritch Allison: The guy passes every pay plan for whoever; is the former CEO of Domino's Pizza so is here to enrich executives; and owns $3M is SBUX stock so doesn't really care: someone should be responsible for a CEO pay ratio of 6666:1Agios Appoints Dr. Jay Backstrom to Board of DirectorsJay Backstrom appointed as Class III director as of July 8, 2025, 20 days after the company held an election to appoint two Class III directors.WHO DO YOU BLAME?The top 4 institutional investors (35% of voting power):Farallon Capital 10% Vanguard 10%BlackRock 9% BB Biotech 6%The company's childish bylaws which separate directors into three classes that are voted on every three yearsFormer CEO Jacqualyn Fouse (23%) who stuck around to serve as board chair after being CEO for only 3 yearsNominating Committee chair and Lead independent director Kaye FosterEmasculated CEO Brian GOff (15%) who presides over a board with a +7% gender influence gapAn anti-DEI investment firm postponed its Tesla ETF, saying Elon Musk has 'gone too far' by launching a political partyWHO DO YOU BLAME?Its BS mission statement: “Azoria is an investment firm with the mission of compounding capital for investors through a commitment to free thinking, excellence, and meritocracy.”Wouldn't that include Elon?James T. Fishback, Founder and CEO of Azoria, a free-thinking investment firm“We have an anti-American subculture that cancels the science fair in favor of drag queen story hour, forces colleges to spend more time teaching micro-aggressions than microbiology, and teaches kids in America that Cardi B is a role model and Thomas Jefferson is a racist.”“Fishback will become a major Gen Z star in our pro-American movement.” — Vivek Ramaswamy, 2024 Presidential Candidate.“dropped out of Georgetown University to establish a hedge fund at 21 years old”Azoria partner Sol Ehrlich:“For my last day at Spectra, it's important that I share just how much this opportunity has meant to me. In June of 2023, I was a 28 year old mediocre Euro League baseball player with no job prospects outside of coaching. My only qualification to work in finance was my work ethic, which Brent Donnelly recognized when he met with me over Zoom and saw the litany of Post-It tabs I used to annotate his book”“It's with great excitement that I'll be taking this skillset to Azoria as a partner and its Head Trader- an opportunity I couldn't have imagined 18 months ago.”While the internet was introduced to James Fishback's talents this year, I've been aware of them since 2009 when we competed against each other in high school debate. (His meme game was A+ even then- I still remember him closing a speech on U.S. sanctions with 4 Russian leader puns.)”Me. Because somehow I'm connected to Fishback on linkedin.Greenlight Capital, for making James angry:In a lawsuit: “Greenlight Capital says James Fishback is a liar. The 29-year-old hedge fund manager and former employee, contrary to his own proclamations, was never “head of macro” at Greenlight, never had any “authority or discretion” over investments, and certainly wasn't responsible for an “insane” $100 million in profits as a mere research analyst. In fact, his contributions were so not “insane” that the hedge fund was about to fire him before he chose to leave of his own accord.”Greenlight's alleged former head of macro is hoping to get at least $5 million from David Einhorn, claiming age discrimination"Mr. Einhorn dismissively told Mr. Fishback that his compensation was 'a lot of money for a kid,'" the filing states, and Fishback argues the comment "demonstrates that Defendants' decision about Mr. Fishback's compensation was driven largely by his age — a protected characteristic."Tech founders call on Sequoia Capital to denounce VC Shaun Maguire's Mamdani commentsMaguire, an outspoken supporter of President Trump, posted on X over the weekend that Democratic mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani “comes from a culture that lies about everything.”WHO DO YOU BLAME?Shaun Maguire: “My whole life I've sought out people that I think are really talented but a little bit off the radar.”Shaun Maguire: “[E]ven more important to me is someone that's just irrationally motivated. For whatever reason, it's their life mission to try to revolutionize the industry they're going after.”Shaun Maguire: “Should I go public with the story about the time I was told I can't be promoted for being a white man? Fuck it, This happened at Google. That company is an absolute trash can dumspeter fire.”Sequoia Capital: for proudly endorsing some of its most insipid founders: Sam Altman, Elon Musk, Vlad Tenev (Robinhood, online betting on stocks), Keller Rinaudo (Zipline, autonomous delivery), Winston Weinberg (Harvey, AI for lawfirms), Brian Chesky (Airbnb, rent killer)MATTForward Air, after their AGM battle with Ancora, still hasn't released their 8K after a MONTH despite Ancora announcing it was a “landslide” directly afterWHO DO YOU BLAME for not releasing an 8k?Charles Anderson, Robert Edwards Jr, Michael Hodge who own roughly 25% of the voting power, even if FF data doesn't properly show them as having all the influence on the boardAncora, who just couldn't help but IMMEDIATELY put out a press release stating: “Absent the more than 30% of shares that were legally committed to vote for the incumbent Board, Chairman George Mayes, Jr., Javier Polit, and Laurie Tucker lost in a landslide, highlighting the substantial level of concern regarding the legitimacy of the Board's strategic review. We believe the resignations of these legacy directors will empower the Board to carry out a thorough assessment of value-maximizing opportunities.”Christine Gorjanc, chair of the audit committee, who was chair of the audit committee at Invitae from 2015 to 2024 when it declared bankruptcy despite getting her degree in accounting and a MS in “taxation”Michael L. Hance, chief counsel who also holds a masters in Divinity, who couldn't find the “submit” button on his iPhoneNo, Carnival Cruises is not banning rap musicCarnival Cruise Lines denied reports circulating online that DJs aren't playing hip-hop.The cruise line has responded to claims circulating online that DJs aren't including hip-hop music in their sets or honoring song requests, with some social media users saying the alleged move is racially motivated.WHO DO YOU BLAME for this malicious rumor?Carnival's ZERO BLACK leadership team, lead by Mickey Arison - they do have two Hispanic men, Enrique Miguez (General Counsel) and Gustavo Antorcha (President of Princess Cruises), but it's balanced out by the Scandinavian (Lars Ljoen, Chief Maritime Officer) and other Euro men (Felix Eichhorn, Paul Ludlow)Carnival's Board of Directors, which has 11 members and is 91% white, with one black woman, Nelda Connors. Nelda's background is in hydraulics and metals with a degree in mechanical engineering, so she's probably too “nerdy” for rap anywayChristine Duffy, the head of Carnival Cruises, whose prior role was President of the Cruise Lines International Association which put out a report in 2008 showing that 93% of cruise passengers were white, and in 2025 said that 1 in 4 passengers came from either Texas or Florida. Duffy grew up in Northwood Philadelphia, which in 1950 was three quarters white but by 2020 is 93% black.Thinking hip hop is “black music”DAMIONPeople are boycotting Etsy over ‘Alligator Alcatraz' merchCalls to boycott Etsy are growing since “Alligator Alcatraz” merch popped up on its marketplace. The term refers to the Trump administration's new migrant detention facility in the Florida Everglades.WHO DO YOU BLAME?The 48% influence duo: CEO Josh Silverman (25%) and longest-tenured director (2007): Board Chair and Nominating Committee chair Fred Wilson (23%)The -13% gender influence gap at a company where: “approximately 80% of Etsy's buyers and sellers are women.Leadership is 6 men and 2 women, one of who is CHROThe company's dumb classified board structureThis year's 3 directors: 24%, 28%, 22% againstTokens to Access Private Companies, or to Investor Trouble?Robinhood is the latest to offer investors a novel, and potentially risky, investment opportunity: crypto that's meant to give exposure to the likes of OpenAI.WHO DO YOU BLAME?CEO/founder/Chair Vladimir Tenev: 47% influence; 24% voting power Baiju Bhatt: 37% influence; 36% voting powerThe pesky Class B share: for being worth ten votes per shareThe non-democratic Founders' Voting Agreement: Our Co-Founders have agreed: “to vote all of their shares in favor of the election of each Co-Founder”Lead Independent Director Jonathan Rubinstein: for being the most pointless Lead Independent Director of all time: Lead Independent Director at Robinhood since 2021 and Lead Independent Director at Amazon.com from 2017-2023OpenAI Says It's Hired a Forensic Psychiatrist as Its Users Keep Sliding Into Mental Health Crises"We're developing ways to scientifically measure how ChatGPT's behavior might affect people emotionally."WHO DO YOU BLAME?Sam AltmanBret Taylor (Chair)Sam AltmanMatt: AI itself for being a jerk
Scott Love is the President of The Attorney Search Group and host of The Rainmaking Podcast, which helps attorneys, professional service firms, and B2B salespeople get more and better business from all their clients. As a prolific thought leader on the topics of rainmaking, recruiting, and leadership, he helps law firm partners mitigate risk and maximize opportunity when transitioning from one organization to another. With his nuanced understanding of high-stakes negotiations, effective partner transitions, and the delicate risks that come with complex career moves, he has placed attorneys among the Am Law 100 and 200 in corporate, finance, private equity, and investment management practices. Scott has also written numerous articles and authored three books on his expertise, been quoted in dozens of premium publications (such as the Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg, and Business Insider), and been a popular speaker at conferences, retreats, conventions, sales meetings, and trade associations. Additionally, he served for seven years as a member of the Board of Directors of the National Association of Legal Search Consultants and is a member of the National Association for Law Placement. WHAT'S COVERED IN THIS EPISODE ABOUT LATERAL MOVES FOR LAW FIRM PARTNERS Law firm partners often find themselves at a crossroads, wondering if they've outgrown their current firm, or if the grass really is greener elsewhere. The thought of making a lateral move can feel risky and emotionally charged, but what if there's a more strategic way to approach these career decisions? Scott Love, who has spent 30 years helping partners navigate these transitions, reveals that the best moves aren't driven by money or ego, but by a clear understanding of what serves your clients best. He breaks down the two main reasons partners actually leave firms, explains why some lawyers hold themselves back from reaching their potential, and shares his proven framework for evaluating whether to stay put or make a move. In this episode of The Lawyer's Edge podcast, Elise Holtzman and Scott explore the strategic approach to lateral partner moves, the critical questions to ask before entertaining any offers, and how focusing on your clients' needs often leads to the most successful career decisions. 1:44 - How you can succeed where you are right now and fulfill your potential 4:55 - Two primary reasons why partners leave law firms 5:55 - What your main motivation for a lateral move should be 7:15 - Internal barriers that can block you from realizing your potential as a rainmaker 11:00 - Scott's recommendations to help you navigate a lateral transition 17:20 - Two questions to consider when choosing or trying to decide between firms 20:01 - What you need to understand about compensation before you engage with new firms 23:30 - How to mitigate risk and increase the likelihood of a successful move 30:32 - Two things you can do to successfully bring your clients to a new firm 33:55 - The strategic question lawyers forget when making a major business move MENTIONED IN STRATEGIC LATERAL MOVES FOR LAW FIRM PARTNERS The Rainmaking Podcast The Attorney Search Group “TRP 252: [Lega] Avoid Landmines in Lateral Partner Moves with Hilary Gerzhoy” 10x Is Easier Than 2x: How World Class Entrepreneurs Achieve More By Doing Less by Dan Sullivan with Dr. Benjamin Hardy Get connected with the coaching team: hello@thelawyersedge.com The Lawyer's Edge SPONSOR FOR THIS EPISODE... Today's episode is brought to you by the Ignite Women's Business Development Accelerator, a 9-month business development program created BY women lawyers for women lawyers. Ignite is a carefully designed business development program containing content, coaching, and a community of like-minded women who are committed to becoming rainmakers AND supporting the retention and advancement of other women in the profession. If you are interested in either participating in the program or sponsoring a woman in your firm to enroll, learn more about Ignite and sign up for our registration alerts by visiting www.thelawyersedge.com/ignite.
What a long, strange trip it's been! For my final episode as host of Talking Marketing, I (Allen!) brought a portable mic to our annual board retreat to chat with each member of the current and incoming board that I could get time with. Much was learned, good times were had, but for now, this season of Talking Marketing comes to a close. Stay tuned soon for our new host, who I'm positive will outclass anything I've done here and make an even better show for you all. Sincerely, to anyone who's listened to Talking Marketing the past three years: thank you, and I will see you out there! -Allen Ibrahim, former VP of Podcast for AMA Boston This episode was sponsored by MarketingHQ! Find their free newsletter, job board, career coaching, and AI resume and cover letter builder at https://apps.marketinghq.io. https://amaboston.org is your #1 source for all things AMA Boston, including our job board, sponsor opportunities, blog, podcast, and events calendar! Interested in sponsoring Talking Marketing? Email sponsorship@amaboston.org and get involved today!
- Biggest Question of the Day- How easy is it to build culture?- Bet the Board & Beat the Streak- What We Learned & 3 Stars of the DaySee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Sergeant Marlon Marrache recently retired from the Los Angeles Police Department after 24 years of service. He now is focused full time on helping agencies and individual officers understand the internal affair process. Marlon's 24 years at LAPD included 12 years of Police Misconduct Investigation, adjudication, and examination experience. Much of his experience comes from when Marlon was assigned to Internal Affairs (IA) in a prosecutorial role, representing the Chief of Police conducting Board of Rights, a unique Tribunal Hearing (the only agency with such a process in the nation). The numerous cases he tried involved “False & Misleading” allegations and termination was at issue. However, Marlon has also been assigned to Officer Representation Section (ORS) defending, representing the rank and file in Skelly Responses and most important, during the administrative process in an OIS or other critical incidents. Marlon ensured IA Investigators were not violating the Peace Officer Bill of Rights Act (POBRA). In 2023, Marlon launched a podcast called The IA GUY A Police Podcast. Marlon interviews guests who have been on all sides of an I.A., from investigators to the subject officers themselves. Further, Marlon provides analysis on critical incidents through the lens of an IA. This podcast is the only place you can get “transparency” and a behind the scenes look into what really happens in IA investigations including the process. Want to watch: YouTube Meisterkhan Pod (Please Subscribe)
In this episode of NucleCast, host Adam Lowther speaks with Dena Volovar, president of Bechtel's Nuclear Security and Environment Global Business Unit. They discuss Bechtel's extensive role in national security, particularly in managing operations at NNSA labs, and the company's commitment to nuclear power as a sustainable energy solution. Dena shares insights on the challenges faced in nuclear facility management, the transition from private to public sector projects, and the future of nuclear engineering careers. The conversation highlights the importance of innovation and collaboration in the nuclear industry.Dena Volovar is President of Bechtel's Nuclear, Security & Environmental (NS&E) global business unit. She has more than 26 yearsof experience in project management, operations, business development, and engineering. Her current portfolio includes the oversight of U.S. and allied government projects and nuclear power projects with missions focused on ensuring the world is cleaner, safer and more secure.Bechtel's NS&E global business unit encompasses all the company's government contracts including work for the U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Department of Energy, and NASA, as well as nuclear power projects worldwide.Prior to her current role, Dena served as Executive Vice President and General Manager of NS&E's Environmental and Security business line. She managed oversight of government projects, operating sites, and national laboratories focused on nuclear security and nuclear wastemanagement for the U.S. Department of Energy. Previously, Dena served as the Manager of Functions for NS&E and was responsible for all of the people, processes, and execution in the areas of engineering, procurement, construction, startup and operations as well as their supporting functions. Dena has held leadership roles on a variety of projects, including project director of the National Nuclear Security Administration's Uranium Processing Facility project, a multi-billion-dollar complex in Oak Ridge, Tennessee for processing highly enriched uranium for U.S. nuclear defense and naval nuclear propulsion. She also served as project manager of the Sabine Pass Liquified Natural Gas facility in Cameron Parish, Louisiana and operations manager for all of Bechtel's nuclear operating plant services.Dena was elected a Bechtel senior vice president in 2019. She holds a Bachelor of Science in Nuclear Engineering from the University of Maryland and is a Project Management Professional. She is the chair of the Board of Visitors for the University of Maryland's Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and an executive committee board member of the Nuclear Energy Institute.Socials:Follow on Twitter at @NucleCastFollow on LinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/company/nuclecastpodcastSubscribe RSS Feed: https://rss.com/podcasts/nuclecast-podcast/Rate: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/nuclecast/id1644921278Email comments and topic/guest suggestions to NucleCast@anwadeter.org
In this episode of "Ask the Expert," Dr. Matthew Bellman joined Dr. GG deFiebre of SRNA to explain the basics of functional electrical stimulation (FES) and its applications. Dr. Bellman outlined how FES differs from other electrical stimulation techniques and its role in improving mobility for those with neuroimmune disorders [00:03:35]. He discussed the specific benefits of FES, including muscle strengthening and managing spasticity, and shared success stories demonstrating its impact [00:09:53]. Dr. Bellman also highlighted new developments in FES technology, particularly the integration of AI [00:33:28].Matthew Bellman, PhD is a Founder and the Chief Technology Officer for MYOLYN, Inc. Dr. Bellman is a Triple-Gator with bachelor's, master's, and doctorate degrees in mechanical engineering from the University of Florida (UF). In 2013, Dr. Bellman co-founded MYOLYN to commercialize his doctoral research on mobility assistance for people with paralysis and muscle weakness using functional electrical stimulation (FES) and robotics. In his time at MYOLYN, Dr. Bellman has been responsible for building a certified medical device quality management system, managing a team of engineers in the design and development of two Class II medical devices, obtaining grant funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and growing a small business. Dr. Bellman has been awarded the Entrepreneurial Spirit Award by UF's Center for Entrepreneurship and Innovation, the O. Hugo Schuck Best Paper Award by the American Automation Control Council, and the Outstanding Young Alumnus Award by the UF Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering. In 2019, Dr. Bellman secured MYOLYN's place as a finalist in the Toyota Mobility Unlimited Challenge. In addition to his role at MYOLYN, Dr. Bellman has also served as a member of the Board of Directors for NextStep Orlando's Paralysis Recovery Center and as a member of the Advisory Council for the American Bionics Project. Dr. Bellman's work has been published in high-impact scientific journals including Muscle & Nerve, IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, and The Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, and he has been an invited guest speaker at universities around the world including UF, École Normale Supérieure (ENS) de Lyon, and the Tokyo Institute of Technology. When not at work, Dr. Bellman can be found trail running or relaxing at home with his wife and family.00:00 Introduction00:31 Meet Dr. Matthew Bellman00:52 Understanding Functional Electrical Stimulation (FES)01:30 Historical Context and Early Applications of FES03:35 How FES Works in the Body07:05 FES for Spinal Cord Damage and Neuromuscular Disorders09:53 Benefits of FES for Various Symptoms13:44 Evidence and Secondary Benefits of FES17:47 Typical FES Session and Accessibility24:06 Success Stories and Patient Feedback29:25 Barriers to FES Adoption33:28 Future Developments in FES Technology36:46 Final Thoughts and Encouragement
In Part Three of our series with Dr. Naved Fatmi, D.M.D. (@drnavedfatmi), we dive into the side of dentistry no one wants to face—but everyone needs to understand: malpractice and ethics. Dr. Fatmi, who was appointed in 2015 as the youngest dentist ever to serve on the Florida Board of Dentistry, offers an inside look at what actually gets dentists into trouble, the blind spots many overlook, and how to protect your license—and your reputation.We explore:Common patterns behind board investigations and malpractice claims The legal gray zones dentists don't even realize they're inWhy proper documentation and patient communication are your best legal armorHow to handle pressure when patient satisfaction clashes with ethical careWhat dentists misunderstand about the role of the Board—and how it's not just about punishment, but protectionWhether you're a new grad or a seasoned practice owner, this episode will change the way you think about risk, responsibility, and the ethics that shape your career.To learn more about or connect with Dr. Naved Fatmi, go to:Website: https://www.healthandwellness-dentistry.com/Instagram: @drnavedfatmi_______Don't miss out on these deals: Prioritize your wellness—shop my daily essentials here: https://teethmatterpod.com/storeCOCOFLOSS - Use code TM20 to get 20% off https://cocofloss.com/ FIGS - Use referral code to get 20% off https://fbuy.io/figs/elliehalabianIf you want to join the conversation about the realities of dentistry, follow: Instagram: @_teethmatter LinkedIn: Ellie Halabian__________________________If you enjoy the podcast, subscribe and rate ⭐️. If you think a friend will enjoy it, please share it with them.
Synopsis: When an introverted engineer becomes the President & CEO of REGENXBIO, transformation follows. Curran Simpson joins host Rahul Chaturvedi to unpack his unlikely journey from biotech operations to the C-suite—and how that hands-on experience is reshaping gene therapy's future. They dive into the evolution of REGENXBIO's pipeline, tackling ultra-rare diseases like MPS II, ambitious plans for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy, and commercial partnerships with giants like AbbVie. Curran offers hard-earned leadership lessons, honest reflections on scaling science, and insights into how one-time gene therapies could revolutionize treatment in both rare and common diseases. From clinical nuance to strategic boldness, this is a masterclass in biotech leadership, platform focus, and staying patient-first—no matter how complex the science or market. Biography: Curran M. Simpson is the President and Chief Executive Officer and member of the Board of Directors at REGENXBIO. Mr. Simpson previously served as the Company's Chief Operating Officer. In that role, he led key business functions including Research & Clinical Development, Corporate Strategy, Manufacturing & Quality, Regulatory, and Commercial Operations. Mr. Simpson joined REGENXBIO in 2015 with extensive leadership experience across biopharmaceutical operations and served as the Company's Chief Technology and Operations Officer before becoming COO. Prior to joining REGENXBIO, he was the Regional Supply Chain Head for North America and Interim Chief Operating Officer at GlaxoSmithKline (GSK). Mr. Simpson earlier served as interim CEO of Human Genome Sciences (HGS), where he led the integration of HGS into GSK, and as Senior Vice President of Operations and Vice President of Manufacturing Operations at HGS. Prior to HGS, Mr. Simpson was Director of Manufacturing Sciences at Biogen. Earlier in his career, Mr. Simpson served in an overseas assignment at Novo-Nordisk Biochem in Denmark and in various senior development and engineer roles at Genentech, working on Herceptin and Avastin, among other roles. Mr. Simpson has an M.S. in surface and colloid science from Clarkson University and a B.S. in chemistry from the Clarkson College of Technology.
BTCS Inc. has announced its strategic intent to raise $100 million in 2025 to acquire Ethereum and support the growth of its ETH-first infrastructure model. The strategy is designed to increase ETH per share, drive scalable revenue, and minimize shareholder dilution.~This episode is sponsored by Tangem~Tangem ➜ https://bit.ly/TangemPBNUse Code: "PBN" for Additional Discounts!Guest: Charles Allen, CEO and Chairman of the Board at BTCSBTCS Website ➜ https://bit.ly/BTCSethereum00:00 intro00:15 Sponsor: Tangem00:55 Four Years Later01:20 What is $BTCS?01:49 Ethereum Treasury Strategy02:50 Bitcoin vs ETH Business Model04:10 Tom Lee on Circle IPO05:20 BTCS name change?06:19 Record Revenue07:35 Sharplink vs BTCS08:34 Aave Borrowing09:14 Buying $100 Million More ETH!10:16 Tom Lee: ETH Company Mergers Incoming?11:00 BTCS + Tom Lee Merger?12:48 Bitcoin exiting to Ethereum14:56 Schwab Excited About Tokenized Stocks16:05 Ethereum Hype Incoming17:29 Tom Lee: Ethereum "WallStreet Put"19:25 Technical Expertise Needed20:26 Polymarket Dominates Politics21:41 Gaming Will Surpass Countries21:56 Michael Saylor Buying ETH?23:33 outro#Crypto #Ethereum #bitcoin ~$100mil Ethereum Mega-Strategy!
In this episode of I501(c)You, we sit down with estate planning attorney and seasoned nonprofit board chair Mark Martella to explore what makes board service meaningful—and effective. Mark shares powerful lessons from decades of leadership across organizations like the Charlotte County Homeless Coalition, Charlotte County Chamber, and Senior Friendship Centers. From navigating financial crises to developing earned income strategies and building trust with executive leadership, Mark offers practical insights for current and aspiring board members. Whether you're leading a nonprofit or considering joining a board, this episode is packed with real-world advice on governance, fundraising, and finding the right mission fit. Tune in for a candid, inspiring conversation that highlights why nonprofit board service is one of the best ways to grow as a leader. Mark's Website: https://www.martellalaw.com/ Timestamps: (00:00) Introducing Mark Martella, Esq. of Martella Law Firm (04:30) Why do you serve on nonprofit boards? (06:25) I501(c)3 vs 501(c)6 (08:45) What made you say “yes” to board service? (10:15) Board chair philosophy (11:30) Engaging all the board members (12:40) What makes a good board member? (14:10) How has being a board member helped you in business? (16:30) Advice for young people to join a board (18:00) Encouragement to join a nonprofit board (19:50) Recapping with Read Join us every week as we release a new podcast with information about how you can be the best board member and provide great service to your organization. Listen to the podcast on any of the following platforms: YouTube Apple Podcasts Spotify Podcasts Amazon iHeartRadio Visit us at: www.thecorleycompany.com/podcast
Ready to dive into the wild world of credit union predictions? Want to know what's next for the financial landscape in 2025? Join host Mark Ritter and COO of MBFS Jeff Lyons in this lively episode of Credit Union Conversations as they toss out bold forecasts for the rest of the year! From the chaotic twists of the NCUA board saga to the buzz around potential interest rate cuts by the Federal Reserve, Jeff and Mark unpack what's shaking up the industry. Expect spirited banter on how tariffs might play out as a cheeky negotiation tool and why the loan marketplace is hotter than a summer barbecue. Tune in for a quick, fun ride through the economic crystal ball!IN THIS EPISODE:(00:00) Introduction(01:14) Discussion on NCUA board chaos, highlighting legal ambiguity in removing board members, predicting Supreme Court resolution(04:25) Prediction on interest rates, expecting a half-point Federal Reserve cut by year-end (06:41) Tariffs discussed as a negotiation tool and the budget deal in Congress (11:15) Discussion of the loan marketplace outlook for credit unions and home values(13:00) Focus on SBA loans and home-based businesses, predicting a boom in startups due to economic conditionsKEY TAKEAWAYS: Legal uncertainty surrounds the removal of NCUA board members, which is likely to be upheld after Supreme Court appeals.Anticipated a half-point Federal Reserve interest rate cut by year-end, with stable inflation and low unemployment.Tariffs are being used as a negotiation tool, with minimal impact on trade, and modest 10% tariffs are expected, particularly on manufacturing from China.RESOURCE LINKSMark Ritter - WebsiteMark Ritter - LinkedInJeff Lyons - LinkedInKEYWORDS: Credit Union, MBFS, NCUA Board, Interest Rates, Federal Reserve, Inflation, Unemployment, Tariffs, Negotiation Tool, Trade, Loan Marketplace, SBA Loans, Home-based Businesses, Budget Deal, Economic Conditions, Supreme Court, Business Startups, Consumer, Tax Cuts, Credit Union Predictions, Financial Landscape 2025
This week, Jack Sharry talks with Colleen Bell, President of Innovation and Experience at Cambridge Investment Research. Colleen is also a member of the Office of the CEO, the Board of Directors, and the Executive Council, and a part of Cambridge's Executive Administration team. She focuses on driving associate engagement and financial professional satisfaction while advancing and discovering new ways to meet ongoing client needs. Colleen shares how she transforms client and advisor experiences by eliminating friction, digitizing legacy processes, and designing products that meet the increasingly complex needs of today's investors. From AI-powered solutions to driving paperless processes, Colleen walks us through the behind-the-scenes work that powers innovation at scale and how Cambridge is rethinking service models, collaborating across custodians, and pulling together fragmented account data. In this episode: (00:00) - Intro (01:52) - Colleen's role at Cambridge Investment Research (03:36) - Pain points advisors face around customer experience (06:08) - Cambridge's technology solutions for advisors (07:22) - Cambridge's "Paper Not Alive in '25" (11:17) - The role of financial planning in providing comprehensive advice (13:01) - The integration of non-traditional assets (14:57) - Colleen's thoughts about the future of the industry (17:01) - The current and future of AI in wealth management (19:11) - AI adoption among advisors (21:28) - The importance of human interaction and building relationships (23:28) - Colleen's key takeaways (24:14) - Colleen's interests outside of work Quotes "Anything that we can do to automate that experience, remove the need to provide information, or remove all paperwork from the industry is my goal, and that's what we're looking for." ~ Colleen Bell "Artificial intelligence will completely transform the way that our advisors interact with the home office and how they interact with the clients." ~ Colleen Bell "AI is never going to replace what we, as humans, and our advisors do. It's those advisors who don't adopt it who will be left behind because they're not taking the next step to become efficient and effective." ~ Colleen Bell Links Colleen Bell on LinkedIn Cambridge Investment Research Unreasonable Hospitality Will Guidara The Coming Wave How to Know a Person Frances Frei Connect with our hosts LifeYield Jack Sharry on LinkedIn Jack Sharry on Twitter Subscribe and stay in touch Apple Podcasts Spotify LinkedIn Twitter Facebook
And we're back...sort of. Welcome to Season 2.5, episode 1 (of 1) - Andy, Ant and Dun (Sorry about Dun's audio quality) take a look at the summers coming and goings in Shepherd's Bush and New York City ahead of the new season- All aboard HMS P*ss The League - QPR 5 Stevenage 0- Dembele (2), Chair (Direct Free Kick), Harvey Vale and New signing Taylor Richards....TAYLOR RICHARDS with the goals- Marti's finally left the Garden- SNL's Stephan Rennes the show now - Bould move as a lad we once remembered joins the R's- Ben Williams is BACK! A full season from JCS?- Jimmy's contract Dunne. (and so's Sam's and Varane's)- Aussie, Aussie, Aussies- Amadou M'Bengue finally gets to wear some proper hoops- Poku's Bright future at QPR not Birmingham, who's future is Bright- Squad Game. Any position left (back) to fill?- Palace are now Bricking it, as Woody Jets in.- Does Eze drive to North London or Jets off to Munich?- Reading between the lines of the Board's statement.- After Preston the next Saturday 3pm kick off is 1st November. Thanks again Sky.- QPR the best run club in the Championship? OH YEAH!- Subway series in Baseball and Politics. - Ant's Glow up and World Tour - Lovely Stuff- Dun's Fantasy Festival - Crayon Erection et al - Lovely Stuff- Andy's Waterfall - Lovely Stuff- Intertoto Club World Cup brought to you by Blargeybet.tv- QPR NYC The Shop is back! with a 20% discount! - QPR Players in songs XI. Bobby Zamora, I saw him on the bus- A surprising amount of French rap, and Leroy Fer, and Stephane Mbia.- RIP Gordon Jago
Clement Manyathela speaks to Karabo Khaukhau, who is a Member of the Portfolio Committee on Higher Education to discuss the latest revelations around the SETA board panel that Minister Nobuhle Nkabane claims selected disputed SETA board members. The Clement Manyathela Show is broadcast on 702, a Johannesburg based talk radio station, weekdays from 09:00 to 12:00 (SA Time). Clement Manyathela starts his show each weekday on 702 at 9 am taking your calls and voice notes on his Open Line. In the second hour of his show, he unpacks, explains, and makes sense of the news of the day. Clement has several features in his third hour from 11 am that provide you with information to help and guide you through your daily life. As your morning friend, he tackles the serious as well as the light-hearted, on your behalf. Thank you for listening to a podcast from The Clement Manyathela Show. Listen live on Primedia+ weekdays from 09:00 and 12:00 (SA Time) to The Clement Manyathela Show broadcast on 702 https://buff.ly/gk3y0Kj For more from the show go to https://buff.ly/XijPLtJ or find all the catch-up podcasts here https://buff.ly/p0gWuPE Subscribe to the 702 Daily and Weekly Newsletters https://buff.ly/v5mfetc Follow us on social media: 702 on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/TalkRadio702 702 on TikTok https://www.tiktok.com/@talkradio702 702 on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/talkradio702/ 702 on X: https://x.com/Radio702 702 on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@radio702See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Riding Shotgun With Charlie #233 Phil Journey NRA BOD Member I had a chance to catch up with Phil Journey at the NRA Annual Meetings back in April. He's quite an interesting man with some long roots in the Second Amendment and with the NRA. He was on the list of four reform candidates last year in 2024. This year, of course, there were 28 reformers that people were supporting, many who did get onto the Board of Directors of the NRA. He spends times telling us about his collection of firearms, how he got into politics and ran for office, and some of the inside dirt on what was going on with NRA leadership. Phil is from Kansas and grew up with a couple of uncles, one was a gunsmith and the other was an inventor. His father used to hunt and got him into shooting. In law school, he got into competitive shooting and made it to second place in IPSC in Oklahoma. At one point, he spent more time making sure everyone else had the rights to keep shooting and owning firearms. While in law school he had three semesters on Constitutional law, one semester was only on the First Amendment, but nothing on the Second Amendment. Working on his dissertation, he pointed out that at that time, much of the thought was that it was a collectivist theory right and the courts reflected that. But he realized it was an individual right. That's when he decided this was going to be his cross to bear. Getting out of law school, he started working on some campaigns for the US Senate. He learned a lot in those days, thinking candidates would read some of the pro-gun literature he would give candidates. Back then he started his ties with the NRA as an election volunteer coordinator, He got 5,000 people to come to a city council meeting. This was how he got involved in political action committees. Phil's career was as a practicing attorney. He was appointed to the Kansas Senate in 2003. After a handful of years in the state Senate, he was elected to the Judicial District Court. Having these positions did interfere with his business. He also got into other businesses like storage rentals. At one point, he sold several firearms to fund one of his campaigns so he didn't have to ask for money. Phil is also into collecting cars as well as guns. We learn about the extensive collection, how he acquired some of the guns and cars. Back in 1995, Neal Knox helped get him elected to the NRA Board of Directors. Even back then there were issues with Wayne LaPierre. One is that if there was a contract that was more than $100,000, it had to be in writing and passed by two of the three executive officers. LaPierre would make them oral contracts and not run them by the executives. Journey and Knox did get pushed off the board, but only Phil was able to get back on it. During the years when he wasn't on the board, he still kept an eye on the goings on, including what Leticia James was up to in New York. With some help, he was able to get back onto the board in 2020. He noticed that the board meetings were much shorter than they used to be and he realized that wasn't quite right. There was a lot of ‘go along to get along' happening with the BOD. Reading the petition from James, he saw that the things that were wrong in the 1990's were four times worse. Phil gets into several things that were going on with the NRA and how it needed to be changed. In 2024, he got together with Rocky Marshall, Dennis Fusaro, and Jeff Knox and started a small reform team. They all got elected onto the board to start making changes. This year, there were many more reformers on the ballot, and many were elected. However, he does get into how it was a mess and how much of a mess it was. Personally, I did vote for the 28 reformers. I have had the new EVP, Doug Hamlin, on the show (episode 213). I do believe we need to keep the NRA and make the changes necessary to maintain our Second Amendment rights. The NRA has been around for over 150 years and want to see it for another 150 years. WIth Phil and the new reformers, I think we're in good hands and onto a better and stronger NRA. Favorite quotes: “What have they not taught me about? And it was the Second Amendment.” “The whole legislative process is to keep things from becoming law.” “It's easier to kill legislation than it is to get it passed.” “It was a cultural problem inside the organization.” National Rifle Association https://home.nra.org/ NRA ILA https://www.nraila.org/ YouTube https://www.youtube.com/user/NRAVideos X https://x.com/NRA Instagram https://www.instagram.com/NRA/ NRA Publications YouTube https://www.youtube.com/@NRApubs Second Amendment Foundation https://secure.anedot.com/saf/donate?sc=RidingShotgun Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms https://www.ccrkba.org/ Please support the Riding Shotgun With Charlie sponsors and supporters. Self Defense Radio Network http://sdrn.us/ Buy a Powertac Flashlight, use RSWC as the discount code and save 15% www.powertac.com/RSWC SABRE Red Pepper Spray https://lddy.no/1iq1n
Four seasoned CCD leaders dive into the 8 Key Components of the Christian Community Development philosophy. Discover how this approach to ministry can restore and transform lives, communities, and systems. This audio is from the 2024 Conference workshop, Overview of CCD Philosophy, Theology, and Practice.Timestamps(~02:55) - Relocation (Jonathan Brooks)(~10:11) - Reconciliation (Sandra Maria Van Opstal)(~15:47) - Redistribution (Mary Nelson)(~23:44) - Leadership Development (Sandra Maria Van Opstal)(~29:33) - Church-Based (Eun Strawser)(~34:17) - Listening to the Community (Mary Nelson)(~40:00) - Wholistic Approach (Eun Strawser)(~46:30) - Empowerment (Jonathan Brooks)To go deeper with the CCD philosophy, read Making Neighborhoods Whole, or complete the Immerse course.Rev. Dr. Eun K. Strawser (she/her) is the co-vocational lead pastor of Ma Ke Alo o (which means "Presence" in Hawaiian), non-denominational missional communities multiplying in Honolulu, HI, a community physician at Ke Ola Pono, and an executive board member of the Christian Community Development Association (CCDA) with 20 years in both local and trans-local church planting work at executive levels. She is the author of Centering Discipleship: A Pathway for Multiplying Spectators into Mature Disciples (IVP). She and Steve have three, seriously, amazing children.Jonathan Brooks currently serves as Lead Pastor at Lawndale Christian Community Church. He was the former pastor of Canaan Community Church in Chicago for 15 years. He is also an adjunct Professor for Northern Seminary in their Christian Community Development Program and Trinity Christian College's Chicago Semester program. He has a deep desire to impress this virtue on all who will listen whether congregation, classroom, or community. He is the author of the book “Church Forsaken: Practicing Presence in Neglected Neighborhoods” published by InterVarsity Press. Lastly, Pastah J has also recorded four hip-hop albums with the group Out-World and a mixtape to accompany the book Church Forsaken.Rev. Dr. Mary Nelson brings over 50 years of experience to the Christian Community Development Association as a Founder and former Board Member. Mary is President Emeritus of Bethel New Life, a faith-based community development corporation, where she served for 26 years. She still lives, works, and worships in the same low-income African American community. Mary actively participates in city-wide, national policy advocacy efforts. She is also on the faculty of the ABCD (Asset Based Community Development) Institute at DePaul University, on the Board of Christian Community Development Association, and served on the Board of Sojourners. Mary has her PhD from Union Graduate School and six honorary PhDs and is now doing consulting, writing, and teaching. She is the author of the handbook Empowerment, published by CCDA (2010), and has authored chapters in a number of books on sustainable community development.Sandra Maria Van Opstal, a second-generation Latina, is Co-Founder and Executive Director of Chasing Justice, a movement led by people of color to mobilize a lifestyle of faith and justice. She is an international speaker, author, and activist, recognized for her courageous work in pursuing justice and disrupting oppressive systems within the church. As a global prophetic voice and an active community member on the west side of Chicago, Sandra's initiatives in holistic justice equip communities around the world to practice biblical solidarity and mutuality within various social and cultural locations.Connect with CCDA on Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn. Follow CCDA on YouTube.
Administrative law is in flux, nowhere more so than at the National Labor Relations Board. The Board has long made labor law (or “policy”) by issuing decisions and applying its own precedent. But in a recent oral argument at the Seventh Circuit, one member of the panel suggested that he didn't want to hear about […]
Have you ever dreamed of boating through the French countryside? In “Exploring the Canal du Midi on a Rental Boat,” host Annie Sargent talks with John and Sally Capets about their week-long adventure on this historic waterway. They rented a boat with friends and spent their days slowly drifting past vineyards, plane trees, and medieval villages in southern France. Listen to this episode ad-free They share what it's really like to rent a boat on the Canal du Midi, navigate the many locks, and live in close quarters while exploring the beauty of Occitanie. John and Sally talk about practical details like packing light, using bikes along the towpath, and finding places to eat along the canal. They also explain why traveling slowly by boat gives you a deeper connection to France and its people. They share highlights like seeing La Cité de Carcassonne from the water, visiting the Malpas Tunnel, and dining canal-side in Colombiers. They offer helpful advice for those curious about a Canal du Midi boat rental, what it costs, and what to expect during a week on the water. If you love slow travel, French culture, and practical travel tips, you will enjoy this episode. Subscribe to the Join Us in France Travel Podcast for weekly episodes that bring you closer to France, whether you are planning your next trip or just dreaming about it. Listen now to discover how exploring the Canal du Midi by boat could be the relaxing adventure you didn't know you needed. Table of Contents for this Episode [00:00:15] Intro [00:00:31] Today on the podcast [00:01:02] Podcast supporters [00:01:52] Magazine segment [00:02:09] John and Sally [00:04:07] Boat travel on Canal du Midi [00:05:28] Selecting the Boat [00:05:55] No experience needed and no license required [00:08:51] Kitchen on Board of the Boat [00:13:09] Riding the Bikes along the Canal du Midi [00:16:05] Boat Pickup and Drop Off: How Much Distance Is Too Much? [00:17:44] Going through the locks [00:18:22] Visiting La Cité de Carcassonne. [00:20:50] THe Fonseraneses Locks [00:24:58] Dining Canal side in Colombier. [00:25:38] Malpas Tunnel [00:28:51] Folk Art at the Ecluse de L'Aiguille? [00:30:46] Sleeping on a small boat [00:33:20] Travel Light! [00:35:08] Pont Canal sur l'Orb [00:36:00] Sightseeing in Toulouse [00:44:17] Late September Weather on the Canal du Midi [00:46:02] Who Is It For? [00:48:57] Thank You Patrons [00:49:47] Zoom meetings with Patrons [00:50:39] Tour Reviews [00:53:29] Podcast Listeners Discount Codes [00:54:23] The Tour de France 2025 [00:56:21] Next Week on the Podcast [00:56:49] Copyright More episodes about the Occitanie region of France
Steve Yzerman has spoken as NHL Free Agency Frenzy has come to a close...but does that mean the Detroit Red Wings are done making moves? Tune in as we discuss what Steve Yzerman told the media about not getting a chance to pitch free agents like Marner or Ehlers to come to Hockeytown, the Detroit Red Wings' interest in Marchment, Arvidsson, and others, who could step into the top 6 alongside Dylan Larkin, Lucas Raymond, Marco Kasper, Patrick Kane, and Alex DeBrincat (Soderblom or Berggen, or trade for Rust or Rakell?), whether a trade is the best route (Bowen Byram? Rasmus Andersson? Erik Karlsson?) to get a top 4 defenseman alongside Mortiz Seider, Simon Edvinsson, and Albert Johansson, how much of a difference the John Gibson & Cam Talbot tandem can make, & more. Also, Christian Fischer's retirement from the NHL (4:25)! After that, we take a look at potential 2026 NHL free agents, including Connor McDavid, Kirill Kaprizov, Kyle Connor, Jack Eichel, & many more big names and whether they could potentially be targets for Steve Yzerman & the Detroit Red Wings (plus notes on Mason McTavish, Nikolaj Ehlers, and Orlov) (35:10) before jumping into the new agreement between the NHL & NHLPA, and what the updated CBA has in store for the league's rules (45:25). All of that & plenty more before we take your questions and comments in our Overtime segment (1:09:50) - enjoy! Head over to wingedwheelpodcast.com to find all the ways to listen, how to support the show, and so much more! Support the Jamie Daniels Foundation through Wings Money on the Board: https://www.wingedwheelpodcast.com/wingsmotb Max's Articles: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/author/max-bultman/