Podcasts about case against

In this gripping episode of Gangland Wire, host Gary Jenkins sits down with Robert “Bob” Cooley, the Chicago lawyer whose extraordinary journey took him from deep inside the Outfit's criminal operations to becoming one of the federal government's most valuable witnesses against organized crime. Cooley pulls back the curtain on the hidden machinery of Chicago's underworld, describing how corruption, bribery, and violence shaped the Chicago Outfit's power in the 1970s and beyond. As a lawyer, gambler, and trusted insider, Cooley saw firsthand how mob influence tilted the scales of justice—often in open daylight. Inside the “Chicago Method” of Courtroom Corruption Cooley explains the notorious system of judicial bribery he once helped facilitate—what he calls the “Chicago Method.” He walks listeners through: How defense attorneys worked directly with Outfit associates to buy favorable rulings. The process of approaching and bribing judges. Why weak forensic standards of the era made witness discrediting the key mob strategy. His personal involvement in the infamous Harry Aleman murder case, where clear guilt was erased by corruption. Life in the Outfit: Gambling, Debt, and Mob Justice Cooley recounts his early days gambling with Chicago Outfit associates, including Marco D'Amico, Jackie Cerrone, and John DeFranzo. Notable stories include: The violent implications of unpaid gambling debts in mob circles. Tense interactions with bookmaker Hal Smith and the chaotic fallout of a bounced check involving mobster Eddie Corrado. How D'Amico often stepped in—sometimes with intimidation—to shield Cooley from harm. These stories reflect the daily volatility of life inside the Outfit, where money, fear, and loyalty intersect constantly. Bob Cooley has a great book titled When Corruption Was King where he goes into even greater detail and has many more stories from his life inside the Chicago Mob. Hit me up on Venmo for a cup of coffee or a shot and a beer @ganglandwire Click here to “buy me a cup of coffee” Subscribe to the website for weekly notifications about updates and other Mob information. To go to the store or make a donation or rent Ballot Theft: Burglary, Murder, Coverup, click here To rent ‘Brothers against Brothers’ or ‘Gangland Wire,’ the documentaries click here.  To purchase one of my books, click here. 0:06 Introduction to Bob Cooley 1:32 Life as an Outfit Gambler 2:00 My Relationship with Marco D’Amico 10:40 The Story of Hal Smith 11:05 A Dangerous Encounter 20:21 Meeting Sally D 22:23 A Contract on My Life 22:37 The Harry Alleman Case 34:47 Inside the Courtroom 51:08 The Verdict 52:26 Warning the Judge 53:49 The Case Against the Policewoman 58:36 Navigating the Legal Maze 1:08:14 The Outcome and Its Consequences 1:11:39 The Decision to Flip 1:24:38 A Father’s Influence 1:33:57 The Corruption Revealed 1:50:12 Political Connections 2:02:07 The Setup for Robbery 2:20:29 Consequences of Loyalty transcript [0:00] Hey, guys, my guest today is a former Chicago outfit associate named Robert Bob Cooley. He has a book out there titled When Corruption Was King. I highly recommend you get it if you want to look inside the Chicago outfit of the 1970s. Now, Bob’s going to tell us about his life as an outfit gambler, lawyer, and I use payoff to judges to get many, many not guilty verdicts. Now, I always call this the Chicago method. This happened for, I know, for Harry Ailman, a case we’re going to talk about, Tony Spolatro got one of these not-guilties. Now, the outfit member associate who is blessed to get this fix put in for him may be charged with a crime, even up to murder. And he gets a lawyer, a connected lawyer, and they’ll demand a bench trial. That means that only a judge makes the decision. A lawyer, like my guest, who worked with a political fixer named Pat Marcy. [0:53] They’ll work together and they’ll get a friendly judge assigned to that case and then they’ll bribe the judge. And all that judge needs is some kind of alibi witnesses and any kind of information to discredit any prosecution witnesses. Now, this is back in the olden days before you had all this DNA and all that kind of thing. So physical evidence was not really a part of it. Mainly, it was from witnesses. And they just have to discredit any prosecution witness. Then the judge can say, well, state hadn’t really proven their case beyond a reasonable doubt and issue a not guilty verdict and walk away. Now, our guest, Bob Cooley, is going to take us inside this world. [1:29] And it’s a world of beatings, murders, bribes, and other kinds of plots. He was a member of the Elmwood Park crew. He was a big gambler. He was a big loan shark. And he worked for a guy named Marco D’Amico, who was their gambling boss and loan shark in that crew. Among other bosses in this powerful crew were Jackie Cerrone, who will go on and become the underboss and eventually the boss for a short [1:55] period of time. and John no-nose DeFranzo, who will also go on to become the boss eventually. What was your relationship with Marco D’Amico? I talked about when I first came into the 18th district, when I came into work there, and they put me back in uniform, the first person I met was Rick Borelli. Rick Borelli, he was Marco’s cousin. [2:23] When I started gambling right away with Rick, within a couple of days, I’m being his face, and I’m calling and making bets. There was a restaurant across the street where every Wednesday and sometimes a couple days a week, I would meet with Ricky. And one of the first people he brought in there was Marco. Was Marco. And Marco would usually be with a person or two. And I thought they were just bookmakers. [2:55] And I started being friendly with him, meeting him there. Then I started having card games Up in my apartment And, Because now I’m making, in the very beginning, I’m making first $100 extra a week. And within a couple of weeks, I’m making $500, $600 extra a week. And within about a month, I’m making $1,000, sometimes more than that. So now I’m having card games, relatively big card games, because I’ve got a bankroll. I’ve got probably about $5,000, $6,000, which seemed like a lot of money to me. Initially uh and after a while that was a daily that was a daily deal but uh so we we started having card games up there and then we started socializing we started now he’d be at these nightclubs all the time when when i’d go to make my payoffs he was part of the main group there he was one of the call he was right he was right under jack right under at that time originally Jackie Cerrone, and then he was right under Johnny DeFranco. [4:07] But he was… And we became real good friends. We would double date and we spent a lot of time together. And we had these big card games. And that’s when I realized how powerful these people were. Because after one of the card games, there was somebody that was brought in, a guy named Corrado. I’m pretty sure his name was I can’t think of his first name, but Corrado was this person that somebody brought into the game. And after we finished playing cards, and I won all the time. I mean, I was a real good card player, and I wouldn’t drink. I’d supply liquor and food and everything, but I wouldn’t drink. And as the others drank, they were the same as at my office. After we finish up, this guy says, you want to play some? We can play maybe some gin. just human being. And he was there with another friend of his who just sat there and watched. So we played, not gin, but blackjack. We played and passed cards back and forth when you win. Then you’re the dealer and back and forth. And I lost, I think I lost about $4,000 or $13,000 to him. [5:26] I lost the cash that I had. I had cash about $5,000 or $6,000. And I gave him a check for the rest. You know, but everything I was doing was wrong, you know. Yeah, one of those nights. It’s in there. And it’s funny because you asked about Marco. [5:47] And I thought, you know, oh, well, and whatever. And I gave him a check. I said, no, it’s a good check. And it was. It was for my office. It was an office check that I gave him. And that next morning, I’m meeting with Ricky and with Marco at this restaurant across from the station before I go in and to work. And I said, son of a B. I said, you know, they had a bad night first ever. Marco wasn’t at that game, at that particular game. And what happened? I said, I blew about 12,000. Okay, but you? Wow. And I said, yeah, I said, one of the guys at the game played some, I played some blackjack with somebody. What was his name? Eddie, Eddie Corrado. Eddie Corrado. He said, that mother, he said, stop payment on the check. He said, stop payment on the check. He said, because it wasn’t nine o’clock. It was only like, you know, seven, you know, seven 30 or whatever. He said, and when he gets ahold of you, arrange to have him come to your house. Tell him you’ll have the money for him at your house. So that’s what I, that’s what I do. So I stopped payment on it probably about five after nine. I get a call from, from Mr. Corrado. You mother fucker. [7:17] I said, no, no. I said, there wasn’t enough money in the account. I said, I’m sorry. I said, all right, then I’ll be over. I said, no, no, no. I said, I’m in court right now. I said, I’m in court. I said, I’m going to be tied up all day. I’ll meet you at my place. I’ll meet you back there. Well, I’ll be there. You better have that. I want cash and you better have it. Okay. Oh, I’m sorry. I’m sorry. I’m at home. Marco comes in. And he was there with Tony and Tony was there and Ricky was there. And Ricky was there. And they come over a little ahead of time and he comes in. I live on the 27th floor. The doorbell rings. Up he comes with some big mustache. [8:00] I open the door. You better have the fucking money and whatever. And I try to look nervous. I try to look real nervous. and when you walk into my apartment you walk in and you see the kitchen right in front of you and to the left to the left you’ve got an area away and you’ve got the the kitchen wall blocking what’s behind it over there and these three guys are standing marco and you are standing right there alongside of it and and when he walks in behind me, He sees Marco and all but shit in his pants. When he sees Marco, he goes, and Marco, you motherfucker. And, you know, oh, I’m sorry. I’m sorry. I didn’t know he was with you. He says, how much money you got me right now? And, you know, he says, pull your pockets out. He had about, he had about three or 4,000 with him. [9:02] And he says, you give him that. He says, you, he says, you, and he says, you give him that right now. And you apologize to him. Oh, and he says, he says, and I may give you a number. I want you to call. He says, we can put you to work. Apparently this guy had done the same thing to them a few years before and got the beating of his life somebody brought him into one of their card games, did he have a technique a cheating technique or had some marked cards no it was a card mechanic he could play games with cards they call him a mechanic and, in fact the guy was great at it because he had his own plane and everything else. But again, he had moved from Chicago and had just come back in the area. And they mounted. And so anyhow, he leaves. And he leaves then, and Marco took the money. Marco took the money. Marco took the money. Typical Bob guy, man. [10:19] And I says, what about the cash I lost to him? He says, well, you lost that. He says, you lost that. That’s when I realized how powerful. That’s when I realized how powerful that [10:35] he was part of the mob, not only a part of it, but one of the operational. Yeah, important part of it. That brings to mind another unbelievable situation that occurred. [10:49] The, uh, this is probably the, we’ll know the year by when it happened. There was a bookmaker named Hal Smith. Oh yeah. I remember that name. He got, tell us about Hal Smith. [11:05] Well, Hal Smith was a, he was a big guy too. A real, a real big guy. I met him on Rush street. He knew I was a gambler. He knew that I was a big gambler and I started gambling with him. Thank you. And I was with him probably for about maybe five or six months. And I’d win with him. I’d lose with him. And he would take big places. He would take $5,000 a game for me. And as they say, so the numbers were big. At the end of the week, we were sometimes $60,000, $70,000. [11:42] They were big numbers back and forth. And he was always good for the money. I was always good for the money. And one particular week, it was about $30,000. And I was waiting for money. Somebody else was supposed to give me even more than that. And the person put me off. And it was a good friend of mine. And I knew the money would be there. But a lot of times, these guys are going to collect it at a certain time. And then they’re expecting to give it to somebody else. Well, he was short. So I said, look, I don’t have it right now, but I’ll have it tomorrow, I said, because I’m meeting somebody. Well, okay, it better be there. [12:31] And look, it’ll be there, okay? Not a problem. So the next day, the person I’m supposed to get it from says, I’ll have it in a couple of hours. I don’t have it right now, but I’ll have it by late this afternoon. And I’m in my office when Hale Smith calls me and I said, I’ll have it a little bit later. And he slams the phone bell. I’m downstairs in Counselor’s Row. In fact, I’m meeting with Butchie and Harry. We’re in a booth talking about something. They had just sent me some business or whatever, but I’m talking about something. And George, the owner of the restaurant, comes over and he says, somebody is asking who you are and they want to talk to you. And they point out this guy. It was a guy I had seen before, because a lot of times at two in the morning, I would go down on West Street, and they had entertainment upstairs. And there was this big English guy. He was an English guy, as you could tell by his accent, a real loud guy. And when I walk up to talk to him, and he’s talking loud enough so people can hear him, and he says, you better have that. I’m here for it. You better have that. You better have that money. [13:51] Bob Hellsmith sent me, you get the money and you better have that money or there’s going to be a problem or whatever. And I said, well, the money will be there, but people can hear what this guy, this guy talking that shit. And he leaves. And he leaves. He’s going to call me back. And he leaves. I said, I’m busy right now. I says, give me a call back when I’m in the office and I’ll meet with you. So Butch, he goes, what was that all about? And I said, you know, it’s somebody I owe some money to. Well, who is he? Who is he with? I said, Harold Smith. And he said, who’s Harold Smith? You don’t pay him anything. He said, you don’t pay him anything. And he calls, when he calls back, he says, you will arrange to meet him. And I said, you know, I said, well, where? [14:44] And they knew where I lived. They’d been to my place at that time. I’m living in Newberry Plaza and they said, there’s a, there’s a Walgreens drugstore in Chicago Avenue. Tell him you’ll meet him there at Walgreens, and we’ll take it. And he says, and we’ll take it from there. When he does call me, I said, look, I said, I’ll meet you tomorrow morning for sure at Walgreens. I’ll have the cash. I said, I’ll have the cash, and I’ll have all of it. I said, but, you know, I’m tied up on some things. I said, I’ll go to my own bank when I’m finished here and whatever, and I’ll see you tomorrow morning for sure at 9 o’clock tomorrow morning. Okay. I sit down with them and they just said, I said, they said, go there and go meet them. And we’ll take care of it. The Walgreens is a store right in the corner of Michigan Avenue and Chicago Avenue, south side of the street. And it’s all windows. Huge windows here. Huge windows here. And a bus stop, a bus stop over here. When I get there, I park in the bus stop and I’m looking to my right and here he is sitting in a booth by himself, right by the window. And I look around and I don’t see anybody. I mean, with a lot of people, I don’t see Butchie. [16:06] Uh or red or anybody around but i i go in there anyhow and uh sit down and i uh sit down in the booth across from him and he’s eating breakfast he’s got some food in front of him and uh the girl comes by right away the girl comes by and i says you know just get me a coke and and he says have you got the money and i said yes and why i got i got a lot i got a lot of money in my pocket but not the, whatever it was he wanted, not the 27 or 28,000. There’s nobody there. And, uh, so we’re talking for no more than about two or three minutes. They had a telephone on the counter. I hear the phone ring and the waitress, the waitress is on the phone. And then she comes walking over and she says, it’s a call for you. And, and when I go get in the phone, I woke up and there’s a phone booth there. And here’s Butchie in the phone booth. And he’s there with a couple of other people. I hang the phone up. I walk over and I had my appointment booked. And I walk over and I just pick up the book. And as I’m walking out there, walking in, we pass each other. And so now when I get in my car and he’s looking at me in my car and right next to him is Butchie. And across from him was a red old male and Fat Herbie. [17:34] Herbie Blitzstein? Herbie Blitzstein? No, it wasn’t Herbie. This is another one. That’s one thing of Herbie. We called Herbie Fat. It was Fat Herbie. And the third guy is like sitting facing him. This is like, that weighs about 300 pounds. Oh, Sarno. Make Mike Sarno. Mike Sarno. That was it. And that’s, that’s, that’s who it was. You know, and I, I drive off, go to my office and go about my business. I get a call later that day from, uh, Hale Smith. Where’s my money? Where’s my money? I said, I gave it to your guy. You what? I gave it to him. I met him at nine o’clock this morning and I gave him the money. You did. And I said, yeah. Um, okay. And he hangs, and he hangs up. I don’t hear anything for a while. I never saw him again. I saw Hale a couple of times because he was always in one of the other restaurants. I lived in Newberry right across from there, but he never talked to me. I never talked to him, never said anything. It was about maybe it had to be a good couple of months later, When I read about Hale, Hale’s no longer with us. [18:52] That’s obviously how they found out about him. I never saw the other guy again. I’m hoping they didn’t kill him, but I’m assuming that’s what probably happened to him. In a public place like that, they probably just scared him off. He probably said, you know, I’m way over my head. I’m out of here. [19:15] They didn’t kill him in the public place he wouldn’t have been in the newspapers my little thought is like with the three guys they took him for a ride, I don’t know they just told him to leave town and he realized what it was and he did Hal didn’t get a chance to leave town Hal had other problems if I remember right I’d have to look it back up but he had other problems with the outfit what I found out later what they had done, was they had gotten one of their guys connected with him to find out who his customers were. In other words, one of the other people that he didn’t realize, that Hale didn’t realize was with them, they got him connected with them where he’s the one who’s doing his collecting and finding out who the customers were because they wanted to get all his customers as well as his money. It turns out he was He was a huge bookmaker for years. That’s what happened to him. And they just took his book. Yeah, I remember something about that story because I killed him in his house, I believe. Yeah, Sally D. [20:22] Sally D, yeah. Sally D was one. When I first met Sally D, he was with Marco’s Fruit, too. [20:30] He owned a pizza place up on the north side, north shore, and I broke him. I was betting with him and beating him week after week. And one of the last times I played with him, he couldn’t come up with the money. It took him an extra couple of weeks to get the cash to pay me. But we were real close friends with him. He’s a bizarre character because he was a totally low level at that time. Yeah. When he then connected up with the Cicero crew, with Rocky and Felice, with Rocky and those people, he became a boss with them. It turns out it was after they killed Al Smith. He was part of all that. That’s Salih De Laurentiis. He’s supposed to be a boss. He moved on up after the Family Secrets trial. He didn’t go down with that, I believe, and he kind of moved on up after that. I don’t know what happened to him. What was so funny about that, when he would come into the club, Marco’s club, Bobby Abinati. [21:42] Who was strictly a very low-level player, although we indicted him with the Gambia star. He’s the one who set up the robbery. Would that have been great if that would have gone through? He’s the one who set up that robbery in Wisconsin. He’d be making fun of Salihide all the time. [22:03] When Salihide would come in, he would make fun of him and joke about him and talk about what a loser he was. This is when he’s a boss of that crew. I mean, just a strange, I mean, nobody talked to bosses like that, especially when, when you’re, when you’re what they call Bobby, you know, what was Marco’s nickname for Bobby Knucklehead? [22:23] That was his nickname, Knucklehead. Pat Marcy, uh, contacted me about, you know, handling me in the only own case. [22:32] I couldn’t have been happier because that was a short time after they put a contract on me. So now i realized if they’re going to be making money you know they finally stopped because for good six seven months when i when i came back to chicago uh i was checking under my car every day in case there was a bomb i moved i moved from uh from a place that i own in the suburbs into an apartment complex so i wouldn’t be living on the first floor yeah it’d be impossible to somebody to break into my, you know, took them thrashing into my place. I changed my whole life around in that sense. [23:10] And when I drove everywhere I went, you know, I would go on the highway and then jump over. I would do all, I wanted to make absolutes. Even though nobody came around, I wasn’t taking any chances for a long period of time. And that was too when it cost me a fortune because that’s when I stopped dealing with the bookmakers because I wasn’t going to be in a position where I had to go meet somebody at any time to collect my money and whatever. [23:39] So what had happened, though, was somebody came to see me. And when I was practicing, there’s a lot of things I wouldn’t do. I set my own rules. I would not get involved. After the Harry Alleman case, I never got involved anymore myself fixing certain cases. But even prior to that, I wouldn’t fix certain cases. I wouldn’t get involved in certain cases, especially involving the police, because my father was such a terrific policeman, and I felt I was too in a lot of sentences. I loved the police. I disliked some of the crooked cops that I knew, but on the surface, I’d be friendly with them, etc. Harry Ailman was a prolific hitman for the Elmwood Park crew. He killed a teamster who wouldn’t help set up trucks for the outfit, a guy named Billy Logan. He was just a regular guy. He’s going to take us right into the meeting with the judge. He’ll take us into a counselor’s row restaurant where these cases were fixed. Now, Bob will give us a seat right at Pat Marcy’s table. Now, Pat Marcy was the first ward fixture, and he’s going to take us into the hallway with Pat Marcy where they made the payoffs. [24:57] Now, Bob, can you take us inside the famous Harry Aileman murder case? I know you fixed it. And tell us, you know, and I know there was a human toll that this took on that corrupt judge, Frank Wilson. Okay. The Harry Aileman case was, it was not long after I became partners with Johnny DeArco. I get a call from, I’m in Counselor’s Row at the restaurant. Whenever I was in there now, my spot was the first ward table. Nobody was allowed to sit there day or night. That was reserved for first ward connected people and only the top group of people. [25:40] I’m sitting there at the table and Johnny DeArco Sr. Tells me, you know, Pat wants to talk to you. About something. And I said, you know, sure. Not long afterwards, Pat comes downstairs. We go out. We go out in the hall because we never talk at the table. And he tells me, have you got somebody that can handle the Harry Alleman case? I had seen in the news, he was front page news. He was one of the main mob hitmen. He was partners with Butchie Petrucelli. But it was common knowledge that he was a hitman. He looked like one. He dressed like one. He acted like one. And whatever. And he was one. In fact, he was the one that used to go to New York. And I know he also went to Arizona to do some hits and whatever. He traveled around the country. I said to Pat, they thought the case was a mob hit on a team street. a teamster. I assumed that it was just that. It was people doing what they do. But I said to Pat, I said, well, get me the file. Get me the file. Let me see what the case looks like. Because I would never put a judge in a bad spot. That was my nature. [27:06] When I had cases, a lot of these judges were personal friends of mine. What I would do, if I wanted to have a case, if I wanted to fix a case to save all the time of having to go to a damn long trial, I would make sure that it was a case that was winnable, easily winnable. When I got the file, when I got the file from Pat, he got me the file the next day. The next morning, when he came in, he gave me the file. I looked at the file. It was a throw-out case. When I say throw-out case, absolutely a nothing case. [27:46] The records in the file showed that a car drove up down the street. Suddenly somebody with a shotgun blasted a guy named Billy Logan in front of his house and drove away. They were contacted by a neighbor, this guy, Bobby Lowe. Was it Bobby Lowe? Yeah, I’m pretty sure Bobby Lowe. Who indicated that he opened the door and let his dog run out. And when he looked, he saw somebody. He saw a car, and he gave a description of the car. And he saw somebody pull up, and he saw him shoot with a shotgun. And then he saw the person get out of the car and shoot him with a .45, and shoot him with a .45. And then the car sped away. That was pretty much the case. Some other people heard some noise, looked out, and saw a car driving away. A period of time after that, it had to be about a year or so after that, somebody was arrested driving to Pennsylvania to kill somebody. There was a guy who stopped. [29:16] Louie Almeida was his name. Louie Almeida was stopped in his car. He was on the way to Pennsylvania. And in front of his car, he had shotguns. And he winds up, when he gets arrested, he winds up telling the authorities that he can tell them about a mob murder back in Chicago and winds up cooperating with them. He indicates what happened. He indicated that, you know, he was asked to, you know, or he got involved in it. He got the car and whatever. They did this. They did that. And he pulled up alongside Billy and wound up shooting the victim as he came out of the house. [30:09] Now, I look at some other reports in there, some reports that were made out, new reports. They talk about the Louis Almeida. They talk about the witness that gave the first statement. and they said that they found, or he’s giving us a new statement now where he says he’s walking his dog. He hears a shotgun. His dog runs towards the car where the shooting was coming from. He saw Harry get out of the car and walk over and shoot him, walk over and shoot the victim, and he was looking at him, And then he jumped in the bushes and the car drove away. A complete new story. Yeah. A complete new story. And. I looked at the reports, and this is an easy winner. And so I told Pat, you know, I’ll take it. You know, I’m sure I can handle it. I said, I’m sure I can handle it, but, you know, I’ll let you know. [31:21] That’s when I contacted, I met my restaurant, Greco’s, and I had Frank Wilson there a lot. Well, I called Frank Wilson, invited him and his wife to come to the restaurant. I had done that many times before. When he gets there, I tell him, I have the case. You know, I told him I was contacted on this case, I said. And I said, it’s an easy winner, I said. And I explained to him what it was. I told him, you know, it’s the driver of the car who’s doing this to help himself. And this other guy, Bobby Lowe, that gave a complete new story from the original story that he gave. And I indicated, you know, can you handle the case? And he tells me, I can’t handle the case, he said, because I was SOJ’d. In Chicago, Illinois, they have a rule that makes it easy for people to fool around because for no reason at all you can ask to have a judge moved off the case. And you can name a second judge that you don’t want to handle the case. [32:34] Frank Wilson’s reputation was as such that the lawyer that turned out to be a judge later on, Tom Maloney, who had the case, named him in the SOJ. It was assigned to somebody else, and he indicated he wanted any other judge except Frank Wilson. Frank Wilson on the case. And this was Harry Aileman’s lawyer. Yeah. Okay. And who Tom Maloney, who then ends up being the judge years later. But yeah. Well, because we knew he was going to be a judge. Yeah. We knew ahead of time. I knew at that time. That’s what makes the story so unbelievably interesting. Yeah. Anyhow, he says, I can’t do it because… In Chicago, in Chicago, it’s supposed to keep it honest. I love this. To keep it honest. Yeah. To keep it honest, each judge is supposed to be picked by computer. [33:33] Same thing they’re doing to this day. Trump wondered why the same judge kept getting all his cases. Because they’re doing the same thing we did, some of us could do in Chicago. He was the chief judge in the area. he said to me, I don’t think I can get the case. I don’t think I can’t get the case. I said, I’ll get the case to you. I said, I’ll get, because I already, I, in fact, through Pat Marcy, anytime I wanted a case to go anywhere, I would contact Pat and I’d give him a thousand dollars and he would get me any judge I wanted. Uh, I said, well, I think I can. I said, I said, And I gave him $1,000. [34:16] I said, here, this is yours. And if I can’t get the case to you, you keep it. If I can’t get, I never said to him, will you fix it? Will you this or that? I mean, he understood what it was. I didn’t know how he would react to it. When I asked him, would you handle it? Were the words I used. I had never fixed anything with him before. [34:43] In case he was, you know, he would want to report it to somebody. I wasn’t worried because Frank had a reputation as being a big drinker. After I got the Harry Elliman file, Pat tells me, I’m going to have somebody come and talk to you. Who comes? And we meet in the first ward office, and then we go downstairs into the special room they had for conversations. It’s Mike Ficarro. He’s the head of the organized crime section. He’s the one who prosecutes all the criminals. He’s one of the many prosecutors in Chicago. That’s why there were over 1,000 mob murders and never a conviction from the time of Al Capone. Not a single conviction with over 1,000 mob murders because they controlled absolutely everything. He’s the boss. [35:35] I knew him. I didn’t like him. He had an attitude about him. You know, when I would see him at parties and when I’d see him at other places, and I’d walk by and say, hi, he just seemed coldish. [35:47] I found out later why. He was jealous of the relationship I had with all these people. [35:54] He says, I’ll help you any way I can, anything you need, whatever. So the prosecutors on the Harry Olliman case were our people. That’s who’s prosecuting the case anyhow. But they couldn’t get one of their judges apparently who would handle the case. So, but anyhow, uh, so, uh, when we, um, when we go, when we, when we go to trial, um. [36:25] Before to help me out, I told Pat, I’ll get somebody else to handle the case. I’ll have somebody else. I said, I won’t go in there. I won’t go in there because everybody knows I’m close to Frank, very close to Frank. I said, so I won’t go in there. I’ll get somebody. He says, no, no. He said, I’ll get somebody. And so he gets a guy named Frank Whalen, who I didn’t know at the time. He was a retired lawyer from Chicago. He was one of the mob lawyers. [37:00] He was one of the mob lawyers. And he lived in Florida. He lived in Miami. I think it was, no, Lauderdale. He lived in the Lauderdale area. He was practicing there. So I fly out. I fly out to meet him. I i do all the investigating in the case the i’m using an investigator that harry alleman got from me in fact he was the same investigator that got in trouble in in uh in in hollywood for what for a lot of stuff i can’t think of his name right now but he’s the one who got indicted in hollywood eventually for you know wiretapping people and whatever it was the same one. And he got me information on Bobby on this Bobby Lowe. He found out Bobby Lowe, Bobby Lowe was a drug addict. [37:59] When the FBI got a hold of him, Bobby Lowe was living out in the street because he had been fired from his first job. He had a job in some kind of an ice cream company where they made ice cream, and he got fired there for stealing. And then he had a job after that in a gas station, and he faked a robbery there. Apparently, what he did was he called the police and said he had been robbed. This is before they had cameras and all the rest of that stuff. He said he had been robbed. And somebody happened to have been in the gas station getting gas. It was a big place, apparently. [38:45] And when the police talked to him, he said, I didn’t see anything strange. He said, I saw the attendant walk out to the back about 10, 15 minutes ago. I saw him walk out to the back of the place and then come back in. And so they go out, and he had his car parked behind it, and they found the money that was supposed to have been stolen in the car. So not the best witness, in other words. Well, that’s an understatement, because that was why… That was why now he suddenly shows up, and they know all this. The FBI agents that obviously know all this, that’s their witness. That’s their case. To me, it’s an airtight, you know. Yeah. Anyhow, I developed the defense. I went back to see Frank a second time. I flew out to Florida a second time, gave him all this information. [39:48] I had talked to some other people to a number of people that were going to indicate that Harry played golf with them that day see how they remembered not golf but he was at a driving range with them with about five people they remember what they were three or four years three or four years before that what I also found out now, and I didn’t know and it changed my whole attitude on that this wasn’t a mob killing you, This guy that he killed was married to his, I think it was his cousin or some relation was married. I’m pretty sure it was to his cousin. She had told Harry, I got this from Butchie, Butchie Petrosselli, who had become a close friend of mine after I got involved with Harry’s case, his partner. And that was why he killed them, because apparently the sister, his sister-in-law, whatever she was, had told him, you know, when he was beating her up, she had said, well, my Harry Alameda won’t be happy about this. And he said, supposedly, he said, fuck that, Kenny. [41:02] And that’s why the shooting took place. Wow. This changed me. You know, I’m in the middle of it. There’s no getting out of it now. Yeah, they’ll turn it back. And by now, I’m running around all the time with Butch and Mary at night. I’m meeting them at dinner. They’re coming to one of my places where I have dinners all the time. You know, I’m becoming like close friends, close friends with both of them. Yeah. So anyhow, but anyhow, the lawyer that he got, Frank Whalen, who was supposed to be sharp, turned out like he was not in his, let’s just say he was not in his prime. [41:46] Charitable. And when he went in, you know, while the trial was going on, you know, while the trial was going on, I get a call from Frank. From Frank Wilson, because I told him, you don’t come back into the restaurant now. You don’t come back into the restaurant. I used his office as my office all the time, along with a bunch of other judges. I had a phone, but it cost about a dollar a minute to talk on my phone. I had to talk on my phone. So when I’d be at 26th Street in the courthouse, even though no lawyers are allowed back there in the chamber, so I’m back there sitting at his desk using the phone taking care of my own other business. I stopped going in there while the trial was going on. [42:35] So, anyhow, he calls me, and he wants to meet me at a restaurant over on Western Avenue. And, okay, he called me from one of the pay phones out there in front of the courthouse, and I go to meet him. What did he want? Was he complaining about the lawyer, Waylon? What was he complaining about, Waylon? and I was screwing it up. [42:59] When I meet him, I said, you know, he’s like, you know, he said, you know, we go into the bathroom and he and he said he’s all shooken up. He says, this is going to cost me my job. He said, he said, you know, they’re burying him. You’re burying him. You know, because I had given this information on the two witnesses. And he says, Frank Whalen, he said, isn’t doing a thing and cross-examining these people and whatever. [43:32] And he says, and he’s all upset. And I said, Frank, no, I’m shook up one of the few times in my life where it’s something I can’t handle. He had never told me, you know, I’ll fix the case, never. And I said to him, and I said, Frank, I said, if something goes wrong, I said, I’m sure they’re going to kill me, is what I said to him. Yeah. I said, if something goes wrong, I’m sure they’re going to kill me. And I left. I left the bathroom. Now, I have no idea what’s going on in his mind and whatever. Yeah. I see Pat the next day. And by something goes wrong in this case, you mean if he gets found guilty, that’d be what would go wrong and you would get killed. Is that that’s what you mean? Well, no question, because when I met, I didn’t go into that. I met with Harry Alleman. I get a call after I got involved in the case. A couple days later, I get a call from Markle. Meet me at one of the nightclubs where I was all the time at night with these people. [44:47] Above it, you’ve got a motel, a bunch of hotel rooms. I get a call from Markle. The reason everybody loved me and the mob, I never discussed what I was doing with anybody or any of the other dozens of mobsters I run with that I was involved in Harry’s case. Never said a word to anybody about any of this. That was my nature, and that’s why all these people love me. I never talked about one thing with anybody else or whatever. He says, I want to meet you. When I get over there, he says, let’s go upstairs. Somebody wants to talk to you. And we go upstairs, and there’s Harry Alleman. And Harry, how you doing? How are you? [45:27] And he says, listen, you’re sure about this? And I said, yeah. I said, I’m sure. And he said, well, if something goes wrong, you’re going to have a problem. Those were his words to me. You’re going to have a problem. And I said, you know, he says, because this judge, he says, this judge is a straight judge. And he said, Tom, you mean Tom Maloney. He says, and Tom wants to handle my case. And he tells me he’s going to be named a judge by the Supreme Court real soon. And he wants to handle and he wants to handle my case before he… Uh, you know, before he becomes a Supreme court, before he becomes a judge, I knew the moment he told me that I knew for sure that was the case because we control everything, including the Supreme court. I said, you know, I said, don’t, you know, don’t worry about it. I lied to him. And I said, uh, I said, yeah, the judge is going to, I said, yeah, he’s going to throw it out. He knows, I said, he knows what’ll happen if he doesn’t. That’s what I told Harry. I want to keep him happy. [46:34] I’m going to keep him happy probably for a few hours I’m a little nervous and then that’s all behind me like so many other problems I got in the middle of oh my god talking about walking a tightrope so now the lawyer came into Chicago he was in Chicago I met him when he came in he was staying at the Bismarck was at the Bismarck Hotel right around the corner from you know where Counselor’s Row was that’s where he was staying in the in the hotel right there by the first board office and there was a way to go in there without being seen and there was a, You go through another restaurant and you go through the alley and go up there. And I wouldn’t, I didn’t want to be seen walking into there because I know the FBI are probably, are probably watching and whatever. When he comes into town, they handle the case. So I go upstairs to see him. You know, I said, what the hell’s going on in court? He says, I’m going, it’s going great. It’s going great. I said, it’s going great. I just, you know, I just got a call last night. I had to go meet the judge. And he said, you’re not doing any cross-examining. Oh, I’m doing a great job. You know, I’m doing a great job. So after a few minutes of, I leave. Yeah. [47:52] That’s when I saw Pat Marcy, too. And I said, Pat, I said, the judge is upset about whatever’s going on. I said, maybe we should give him some more because I agreed to give him $10,000. And he said, you know, what a piece of work he is. You know, he said $10,000, and that’s all he’s going to get, not a nickel more or whatever. So now to say I’m nervous again is an ultra statement. The case, I walked over, and I wouldn’t go in the room, but I wanted to just be around that room for some reason. FBI agents all over the place. [48:30] FBI agents all over the place. And so now I’m at home and I’m packed. I’ve got my bags packed because if he finds it, I don’t know what he’s going to do. I’m worried he might find him guilty because of all that had happened. He, when the trial ended a given night, and the next day he was going to give the result. In fact, I didn’t go out and play that night. I was a little nervous, and I stayed home, and I packed up my bags. I packed up my bags, and about 9 o’clock, I got in the car, and I started driving. And by the time he gave the ruling, I was probably about 100, maybe 150 miles away. And I hear on the radio, you know, found him not guilty, found him not guilty. So I turn around. Hit the next exit, turn around and come back. I turn around. Northbound on I-55. [49:27] Probably a couple hours later, here I am parked in my parking spot. My parking spot was in front of my office, right across from City Hall. And I parked in the mayor’s spot when she wasn’t there. And drove probably to drive her crazy. But that was where I parked. That was my parking spot. We’d see my big car with the RJC license plates parked in the bus stop. And so here I am. I parked the car and I go in. I go in. [50:01] And I’m sure Pat told some people, probably not, but I’m sure they told all the mobsters, all the top mobsters, because these guys all wanted to meet me afterwards and get the restaurant. I go in to see them. We walked into the janitor’s closet. You walk out of Counselor’s Row. You go to the left. It goes into the 100 North Building. Now, you’ve got the elevators to the right. And behind that, you’ve got a closet where the janitors keep all their stuff. And you’ve got some stairs leading up to the, there was a, what do you call it? There was an office there where the commodities, big commodity exchange was right there. that there was a stairway leading up to where the offices were with some doors with bars and everything on it. And Pat is standing on those stairs, about two or three stairs. You know, I said, wow. I said, you know, everybody’s going nuts. And he goes, well, you know, you did a good job. And he gives me an envelope. He gives me an envelope. And, you know, I put the money in my pocket. [51:09] We said we had some more. We said a couple other words about, you know, this and that. And then I just go in there. I go back in the counselor’s. [51:21] Now, after the feds started getting indictments, did you try and warn the Aleman case judge, Frank Wilson? Why did you do that? And when I went to see Frank Wilson, I went to help him. I said, Frank, I said, look, I said, I was contacted by, I said, I was contacted by the, by the, by the FBI. They were investigating the Harry Aleman case. I said to him, I said, they, they feel the case was fixed. I said, when they come to see me, I said, you know, I said, I’m not going to talk to them. I said, I’m not going to talk to them. I’m going to take the fifth. And in your case, you can do the same thing. When they, if they come to talk to you, you just take the fifth amendment. If they give you immunity, I said, you know, then you, then you testify, but you tell them the truth. I said, don’t worry about me. Tell them the truth. This is how I talk to him. When I’m talking to him like that, it’s almost like he’s trying to run away from me. [52:27] We’re at a restaurant in a big complex. It was in one of those resorts in Arizona. He’s all but running away from me. I was trying to help him. What I said to him was, Frank, I said, the statute of limitations ran on all this. It’s been more than five years. There’s nothing they can do to you or to me, I said, because the statute ran. I said, so don’t lie to them. What the feds were concerned about, and I don’t know why, that he would deny ever fixing the case when it went through. I don’t know why they’re worried about that, but they were, and I didn’t want to see him get in trouble. [53:13] That’s why I went there to protect him. Hey, Bob, you were asked to represent an outfit associate or an outfit associate’s son who was accused of breaking the jaw of a Chicago policewoman. And you know, when a cop is injured in a fight with somebody, the cops follow that case. And I do not want to see any shenanigans going on. So, so tell us about how you walked that line. And I bet those cops were, were not happy with you in the end. Some people think this is a reason you flipped. Take us inside that case, will you? [53:45] And the reason I mentioned that it had a lot to do with what I eventually did. Now we’ll get back to what made me do what I was going to do. When I was practicing law now, and now I have been away from all this for years, I was out of town a lot because I’m representing the Chinese all around the country. I’m their main lawyer right now. [54:10] And I get a call from Lenny Colella. And he says, my son, he said, my son is in trouble. I want to come in and I want to talk to you about handling his case. This was a heater case, too. This was a front page case because he was charged with aggravated battery and attempted murder. Supposedly, he had beat up a policewoman and it was all over the place. He was a drug addict and whatever, supposedly he did all this. And when he came into the office with his dad, he was high. When I talked to him, he’s got his kid with him. And the kid is a smart aleck. As we’re talking, the kid, and I asked the kid, well, whatever. The kid was a smart aleck. And I just said to him, I said, Len, I can’t help you. I said, get him out of here. I want nothing to do with him. I said, I can’t help you. You didn’t take cases that were involved with cops anyhow, for the most part. No. I didn’t know what had happened in this case. I know what I saw in the paper. I didn’t know what the facts or anything were or whatever. I mean, if it turned out that if I felt when I talked to him that he had done it, whatever, I would not have taken the case anyhow. [55:26] I mean, I would not have. That’s why I say, too, that may be, too, why I was as quick and as rude as I was when he came in there and was acting and was a little bit high. I just wanted nothing to do with him, period. I said to his dad, his father said, you know, if I get him cleaned up, you know, I said, well, if you get him cleaned up, then we’ll talk again. I said, but I can’t help him, and I can’t help him. [55:54] And off he goes. the father re-contacted me about a week later. And he said, I had him in rehab and he straightened out and whatever. And he brought him back in and it was a new person. And when he told me the facts of the case, when he told me what happened, because he was a big, tough kid. He was a big, you know, he was a weightlifter, but he was a big, tough looking kid. [56:19] And it’s a little police woman. When he told me what happened, I believed him. Because I’ve been out in the street and whatever. And he says, you know, he told me what happened, that he had gotten stopped. He was out there talking to her. And when she said, you’re under arrest for DUI, he just walked. He says, I walked. I was going to get in my car and drive away. And she grabbed me and was pulling me or whatever. And I hear all these sirens coming. And within a few minutes, there’s all kinds of police. There’s about half a dozen police there. He says, and then they started jumping on me. He said, she was under me. He was all beaten up. He was all bloody and whatever. And she apparently had her jaw broken. And there’s no doubt in my mind when he’s telling me that, you know, when they were hit with his clubs or with this thing that they claimed he had without his fingerprints, it was a metal bar. Right, a slapper. A chunk of lead covered by leather. Everybody used to carry a slapper. How about you carry a slapper? They claimed, but there was no cloth on this. It was just the metal itself. Yeah, oh really? [57:45] Anyhow, that makes it interesting during the trial when they flat out lied. No, he had no blood. I got the hospital reports. They wouldn’t take him in the station because he was too badly beaten up. But anyhow, he also had two other charges. He had been involved in a fight in a bar. And he had been involved in another situation with the police. And he was charged with resisting arrest and battery on a policeman out in Cicero. So he had these three cases. So I gave the father a fee on handling, you know, the one, I was going to, I gave him a fee one case at a time. I said, you know, first thing we’ll do, I want to get rid of those other two cases. I’ll take them to juries, I said. [58:36] I’ll take them to juries because I wasn’t going to put them. I knew both the judges on those cases, but I wasn’t going to put them in a position on a case like that. I take the first case to trial. And I get him a not guilty. That was the fight in the bar. [58:54] That was out in one of the suburbs. That was out in, I’m not sure which suburb, in the northwest side. After we get that case over with, before that case, I get a call from Pat Marcy. Pat Marcy, I hadn’t seen him probably even for a couple months, but I hadn’t talked to him for quite a long period of time. And he says to me, you got a case that just came in. He said, we’re going to handle it. And I said, there’s no need, Pat. I said, I can win these cases. I said, there’s no need. I can win these cases. And he said, we’re going to handle this. The case is going to go to Judge Passarella, he said, and we’ll take care of it. I said, Pat, there’s no need to. I said, I can win these cases. I said, they’re all jury trials, but I know I can win them all. And he says, you do as you’re told. Pat had never talked to me like that before. [59:54] Powerful as he was and crazy as I am, And he never, you know, you never demand that I do anything or whatever. We had a different type relationship. And although I hadn’t broken away from them by now, it’s been years. I had broken away from them for about, you know, two, three years. And he says, you know, take the case to trial. I said, well, he’s got some other cases, too, and I’m going to take the one. And she says, I’ll take it to a jury, and I’ll win it. You’ll see how I win it. I take her to trial, and I get her not guilty. The second case was set for trial about a month after that. Not even, yeah, about a month or so after that. And during that time, a couple of times I’m in counselors, and Pat says, when are you going to take the case to trial? I said, well, Pat, you know, I won the one case. I got the other case on trial, and it was before Judge Stillo. He was a judge that we eventually indicted. [1:00:51] Stillo was very, very well connected to the first ward. He’s one of the old-time judges out in Maywood. And I told him, you know, when I came in there, he assumed I’d take it to trial and he’d throw it out. And I said, no, no, no, there’s no need to. I says, I’m going to take the jury on this one. Number one, I had stopped fixing things long before this. And, but he was, to make money, he was willing that he would have thrown the case out. It was a battery with a Cicero policeman. And I says, no, no, I’ll take it. I’ll take it to, you know, I’ll take the jury. I said, I don’t want to put you in that pursuit. Oh, don’t worry about me. I take that one to trial and I win that one too. Now Pat calls me, when the hell are you going to take the case to trial? And that’s the original case with the police woman. That’s the main one. The main one. Okay, go ahead. [1:01:44] When are you going to take it to trial? And I don’t want to take it to trial. In fact. I had talked to the prosecutor, and I said, look, I said, because he was charged with, he was charged with, you know, attempted murder and arrest. I said, if you’ll reduce it, the prosecutor was an idiot. He knew me, should have realized that, you know, that I never lose cases. Yeah. You know, but I want to work out something. He was a special prosecutor on it. He said, we’re not going to reduce it. We said, you know, if you want to work out a plea, we went five years, we went five to ten or whatever in the penitentiary. And I said, well, that’s not going to happen. I said, well, then we’ll just have to go to trial. So now, while I’m at Counselor’s Row, on one of my many occasions, because I was still having some card games over there at somebody else’s other lawyer’s office, because I had had big card games going on there for years. I’m sitting at the counselor’s row table, and Judge Passarella comes in. There’s just him and me there, and when he comes in, I say, Oh, you’re here to see Pat? [1:02:56] And he goes, Pat, who? No more conversation. Who the fuck? No more. The guy’s treating me like I’m some kind of a fool or whatever. And I developed an instant disliking to him. I had never seen him around that much or whatever before that. So now, after the second case, you’re going to go to, you know. So I talked to Lenny. When Lenny came in, Lenny came in with him when we were starting to get prepared for the case. And, oh, this is before this is before I talked to the prosecutor. And I said, Lenny, I said, I says, if I can get it reduced to a misdemeanor, to a misdemeanor. I said, you know, can we work with, you know, and work out a plea, let’s say, for maybe a month or two, you know, a month or two. Is that OK with you? Oh, sure. He says, oh, sure. [1:03:57] Now, this Lenny, this was the kid’s dad, your client’s dad. This is his dad. Now, explain who he was, who Lenny was. His dad was. What’s his last name? Yeah, Karela. Karela, okay. Lenny Karela, I’m pretty sure was his name. He owned a big bakery out there in Elmwood Park area. Okay. And he was friendly with all the mobsters. Okay, all right. I got you. For all I knew, he may have been a mobster himself, but I mean, he may have been because we had thousands of people that were connected. He was a connected guy. All right, go ahead. I’m sorry. And he said, oh, yeah, sure, no, not a problem because the papers are meant, they’re still, after a year, they’re still mentioning that case will be going to trial soon and every so often. [1:04:43] What I had also done, I tried to make contact with the policewoman, not with her, but I put the word out and I knew a lot of police and I got a hold of somebody that did know her. And I said, look, I said, no, the case is fixed if I want it. Yeah. But I don’t want it. Even though I know that, you know, that it’s all BS, you know, I said, look, I said, get a hold of her and get a hold of her lawyer and tell them if they want to file a lawsuit, you know, you know, we can, they can get themselves some money on it. Uh, you know, he’ll indicate, you know, he’ll, he’ll, he’ll indicate that, you know, he, he was guilty or whatever, but I wanted to get her some money. The word I get back is tell him that piece of shit, meaning me to drop dead, to drop dead. You know, we’re going to put this guy in prison and that’s where he should be too. When the case now, now when the case goes to trial. [1:05:48] The coppers lied like hell and talk about stupid. I’ve got the police reports there. When they took him into the police station, they wouldn’t take him. The station said take him to a hospital. He goes to the hospital and the reports, you know, bleeding here, bleeding there, and, you know, marks here, marks there. They beat the hell out of him. [1:06:10] You know, nobody touched him. You know, nobody touched him. Nobody touched him. Was he bleeding? No, no, he wasn’t. He wasn’t bleeding. Didn’t have any, you know, along with, you know, along with everything else. Flat out lied. How many policemen were there? There were two or three. There were about 10 by the time it’s over. But it’s an absolute throwout. Any fingerprints on that metal? Well, we had some fingerprints, but not his. And on and on it went. It’s a throwout case to start with. The courtroom now where the case was, was very interesting. You walk in there, and when you walk in there, there’s about 20 people that can sit. And then there’s, it’s the only courtroom in the building where you have a wall, a glass wall, all the way up, all the way up. Covering in the door, opens up and goes in there. You go in there. It’s a big courtroom. A bunch of benches now in there. You go to the left, and here’s the judge’s chambers. You come out of the chambers, and you walk up about four steps. And here the desk is on like a podium. And it’s not where all the others are, you know, where you look straight forward. It’s over on the side. It’s over, you know, to the left as you walk out of his chambers. [1:07:40] When the judge listens to the case he goes in there I’ll come up back with my ruling he comes out about 10 minutes later he walks up the steps, And now he turns off the microphone. Somebody turns off the microphone so the people in the back can’t hear anything. The ones inside there can, you know, can hear. The one back there can’t hear anything because it’s all enclosed. [1:08:11] That’s why they got the microphone back there. Somebody shut it off. He says, basically, I’m not guilty in a real strange voice. And all but runs off the all but run and don’t ask me why this is what he did all but runs off all but runs off into the into his chambers, you know he’s afraid all those cops out in the audience were going to come and charge the stand I guess and put a whack on him. [1:08:43] But think about it this is Chicago he’s with the bad guys but I’m just saying I don’t know why he did all that, but that’s what he did. And so now, as I come walking out with Mike, and they’re all in uniform, and most of them are in uniform, and then you’ve got the press and all kinds of cameras and whatever there. And as I come walking out along with him, some of these guys I know, and these jerk-offs are like calling me names and whatever. I go, I go see Pat. [1:09:23] And when I go back into Counselor’s Row now, he’s there at the table. And when I come in, it’s a repeat of the Harry Allerman thing. He walks out. He walks directly. And I’m following him, and he walks in. He goes back into the same janitor’s closet and stands on the same steps just above me, you know, talking to me. And I said to him I said this judge is going to have a problem, I said, he’s going to have a problem. I said, what if he says something? And he said to me, nobody would dare. He said, nobody would dare cooperate against us. They know what would happen. Or words to that effect. And don’t ask me why. So many other things had happened before this. But now I’m looking at him and I’m thinking, you know, somebody’s got to stop this craziness. All this stuff. I’m thinking that at the moment, but then I’m worried for some reason, I think he can read my mind. [1:10:34] Stupid as all of this seems, I’m afraid to think that anymore. I’m almost, you know, cause Pat’s such a powerful person and every sense I know, I know his power, but anyhow, so I leave. And like I say, 10, 15 minutes later, that’s all forgotten about. He paid me the rest of the money I was supposed to get from them. [1:10:56] Obviously, he wanted to do it because he was probably charging a lot of money. That’s why he didn’t want me to take things. He wanted to collect the money because while the case was going on too, he puts me in touch with the head of the probation department because he was able to help in some way. He knew some of the, you know, some of the, some of the policemen involved in the thing had been contacted too. Yeah. But they were contacted and they messed up by, you know, they messed up by lying about all that. Yeah. When there’s police reports saying, oh, no, but anyhow, that was that particular case. Tell us why you decided to flip. [1:11:38] These had been your friends. You knew you had explosive information. You knew as a lawyer, you knew what you had to say would send these people to prison for many, many years. if not life. It had to be hard. As other things happened, why did I commit the, Probably two or three other times things happened. But the most important thing was to think when my dad was dying, and I was very close to my dad. When my dad was dyi

In this episode, Alex speaks with constitutional scholar Leonid Sirota about the notwithstanding clause—what it does, how it functions within Canada's constitutional architecture, and why its routine use undermines the very rights the Charter is meant to protect. Drawing on arguments from his National Post piece and earlier writing, Sirota explains why Section 33 was intended as an exceptional political safeguard, not a convenient escape hatch for governments, and why treating it as a routine tool erodes constitutionalism, weakens judicial oversight, and shifts the balance of power away from individuals and toward the state. References Leonid Sirota, “Yes, the notwithstanding clause overrides rights. No, it isn't defensible.” — National Post https://nationalpost.com/opinion/leonid-sirota-yes-the-notwithstanding-clause-overrides-rights-no-it-isnt-defensible “The Case Against the Notwithstanding Clause” — Leonid Sirota (Double Aspect) https://doubleaspect.blog/2018/10/04/the-case-against-the-notwithstanding-clause/ “Notwithstanding Myths” — Leonid Sirota (Double Aspect) https://doubleaspect.blog/2025/11/10/notwithstanding-myths/  Peter W. Hogg, Constitutional Law of Canada  https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/faculty_books/219/  The Constitution Act, 1982 (Section 33 — the Notwithstanding Clause) https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art33.html  Thanks to Our Patrons Including Kris Rondolo, Amy Willis, and Christopher McDonald. To support The Curious Task, visit: https://patreon.com/curioustask

This is Paul's Closing Argument in God's Case Against the Human Race, in Romans 3:9-20.  We will find the final answer to our question we asked when this court was convened back in Rom. 1:18-20: What's Wrong with the World?  Paul answers with one word, the last word in both Rom. 3:9 and 3:20:  SIN.  We will take a hard look at our great human enemy, sin ... defining it, considering it, sitting under it without being able to wriggle out from under it.  It is not easy material, but it is priceless in its TRUTH value, because until we have a certain diagnosis, we cannot find a cure!  Come hear God's diagnosis of humanity's greatest problem this Sunday!  And then next Sunday, we will consider His glorious CURE for every believer through Jesus Christ our LORD!visit us at: conejochurch.com

Exhibit C is God's Case Against the Human Race, a representative of humanity that is the Best Case - the Jews, God's Chosen People.  Paul writes as a consummate insider, a Jew writing about Jews, and the Holy Spirit gave Paul profound insights into the Jewish heart and their sacred texts of the Torah and the Prophets.  Paul will reveal how even the Jews, precious to God as the very heart of humanity, the blessed recipients of the oracles of God in the Torah and all the Hebrew Scriptures, still fall short and end up doing the same things as the other Exhibits in the Court.  We will see the genius of God in planning specifically to change the hearts of Jewish believers, His way of making hearts holy like He is holy, determined and written in the Torah itself and in Ezekiel.visit us at: conejochurch.com

In episode 19 of (Pop) Cultural Marxism, Isi and Ajay are joined by fellow BISR faculty Joseph Earl Thomas to discuss Ghost of Yotei, Sucker Punch Productions' much-anticipated sequel to Ghost of Tsushima. To kick off the episode, Isi and Ajay chat about recent cultural news and highlights, from the Japanese government calling on OpenAI to refrain from using anime and manga as training data, to the #SwiftiesAgainstAI campaign, to Paul Thomas Anderson's One Battle After Another (2025). Turning to Ghost of Yotei, Isi, Ajay, and Joseph consider where the game succeeds (its strong start, visual beauty, sharp soundtrack, and the satisfying chunkiness and texture of its combat scenes) and where it doesn't (its loadout system, simplistic puzzles, dearth of opportunities for stealth mode, and social and political quandaries its narrative and design raise). They explore the films and television shows that influenced Yotei—from Lady Snowblood and Samurai Champloo to the films of Takashi Miike, Akira Kurosawa, and Sergio Leone) and ask whether and where the game successfully incorporates cinematic techniques and conventions into its storyline. Along the way, they discuss the game's dicey depiction of the Ainu and the colonization of Hokkaido, consider whether the pleasure of open-world gaming has diminished or transformed in the years between Yotei and Tsushima, and interrogate the shape of the game's revenge plot. (Pop) Cultural Marxism is produced by Ryan Lentini. Learn more about upcoming courses on our website. Follow Brooklyn Institute for Social Research on Twitter / Facebook / Instagram / Bluesky. Show notes On Japan and OpenAI: https://www.ign.com/articles/japanese-government-calls-on-sora-2-maker-openai-to-refrain-from-copyright-infringement-says-characters-from-manga-and-anime-are-irreplaceable-treasures-that-japan-boasts-to-the-world One Battle After Another, directed by Paul Thomas Anderson (2025) Other Paul Thomas Anderson films mentioned: Phantom Thread (2017), Inherent Vice (2014), The Master (2012), There Will Be Blood (2007) Ghost of Yotei (Sucker Punch Productions, 2025) Ghost of Tsushima (Sucker Punch Productions, 2020) Way of the Samurai (Acquire, 2002) Tenchu (Acquire/K2/FromSoftware, 1998-2009) Samurai Champloo (2004) Forspoken (Luminous Productions, 2023) South of Midnight (Compulsion Games, 2025) Infamous (Sucker Punch Productions, 2009-2014) Blue Eye Samurai (2023) The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time (Nintendo, 1998) Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater (2004) Parul Sehgal, "The Case Against the Trauma Plot" (2021): https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/01/03/the-case-against-the-trauma-plot Kuroneko, directed by Kaneto Shindo (1968) Lady Snowblood, directed by Toshiya Fujita (1973) Lady Snowblood: Love Song of Vengeance, directed by Toshiya Fujita (1974) The Samurai Trilogy, directed by Hiroshi Inagaki (1954-1956)

Horror movies are big business: this year, they've accounted for more ticket sales in the U.S. than comedies and dramas combined, bringing in over a billion dollars at the box office. And the phenomenon goes beyond a hunger for cheap thrills and slasher flicks; artists have been using horror to explore deep-seated communal and personal anxieties for centuries. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz, along with the New Yorker culture editor Alex Barasch, use three contemporary entries—“The Babadook,” “Saint Maud,” and “Weapons”—to illustrate the inventive filmmaking and sharp social commentary that have become hallmarks of modern horror. “In the past, the horror would be something external that's disrupting a previously idyllic town or life. Now there's a lot more of: the bad thing has already happened to you,” Barasch says. “You already have a trauma at the beginning of the film—or even before the film begins—and then that is eating you from the inside, or trying to kill you, and you have to grapple with that.”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“The Babadook” (2014)“Rosemary's Baby” (1968)“Scream with Me,” by Eleanor Johnson“Hereditary” (2018)“The Substance” (2024)“Saint Maud” (2020)The “Saw” franchise (2004—)“The Exorcist” (1973)“The Case Against the Trauma Plot,” by Parul Sehgal (The New Yorker)“Weapons” (2025)“Barbarian” (2022) “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre” (1974)“Get Out” (2017)“Alien” (1979)“The Blair Witch Project” (1999)“Talk to Me” (2022)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker that explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture.  Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

We return to the Courtroom, for Exhibit B in God's Case Against the Human Race, a representative of humanity that is the Good Case, in Romans 2:1-16.  How many of us have heard people describe themselves this way: "I'm a good person, I don't hurt anybody.  I'm pretty sure I'm going to heaven because I am a good person..."  Sadly, this prevalent view is woefully inaccurate.  When Jesus was called "Good Teacher," He rightly pointed out, "Why do you call Me good? No one is good except God alone." (Mark 10:18). This week's text will make an epic contrast between our double-standard, 'easygoing on ourselves but harsh on others' human judgment, and the unchanging, fair and impartially applied righteous judgment of God.  And the main thing that makes God's judgment so right and so different is that it always begins with KINDNESS, for "the kindness of God leads you to repentance." (Rom. 2:4).visit us at: conejochurch.com

QUOTES FOR REFLECTION “We have smoothly transitioned from one form of feminine subservience to another, but we pretend that this one is liberation.” “…Western sexual culture in the twenty-first century…promotes the interests of the Hugh Hefners of the world at the expense of the Marilyn Monroes.”~Louise Perry, British journalist in The Case Against the Sexual Revolution “For we were the purpose of [Christ's] embodiment, and for our salvation he so loved human beings as to come to be and appear in a human body.” “He became what we are so that he might make us what he is.”~Athanasius of Alexandria (c.296-373), On the Incarnation “The dignity of human nature, fashioned in the divine image, is such that God can take it for himself—and keep it.”~Nigel Cameron, bioethicist “[The] central doctrines of Christianity prompted and sustained attractive, liberating, and effective social relations and organizations…. [P]erhaps above all else, Christianity brought a new conception of humanity to a world saturated with capricious cruelty and the vicarious love of death…. [W]hat Christianity gave to its converts was nothing less than their humanity.”~Rodney Stark (1934-2022), Professor of Sociology and Comparative Religion “It is a serious thing…to remember that the dullest most uninteresting person you can talk to may one day be a creature which, if you saw it now, you would be strongly tempted to worship, or else a horror and a corruption such as you now meet, if at all, only in a nightmare…. There are no ordinary people. You have never talked to a mere mortal…. But it is immortals whom we joke with, work with, marry, snub, and exploit….”~C.S. Lewis (1893-1963), The Weight of Glory “Christianity's success is to be found in its inclusiveness. More than any other of its [ancient] competitors it attracted all races and classes…. Christianity, too, was for both sexes…. The Church welcomed both rich and poor…. No other [religion]…took in so many groups and strata of society.”~Kenneth Scott Latourette (1884-1986), historian at Yale UniversitySERMON PASSAGEselected passages (ESV)Genesis 1 26 Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” 27 So God created man in his own image,    in the image of God he created him;    male and female he created them. 28 And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” Matthew 22 15 Then the Pharisees went and plotted how to entangle him in his words. 16 And they sent their disciples to him, along with the Herodians, saying, “Teacher, we know that you are true and teach the way of God truthfully, and you do not care about anyone's opinion, for you are not swayed by appearances. 17 Tell us, then, what you think. Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?” 18 But Jesus, aware of their malice, said, “Why put me to the test, you hypocrites? 19 Show me the coin for the tax.” And they brought him a denarius. 20 And Jesus said to them, “Whose likeness and inscription is this?” 21 They said, “Caesar's.” Then he said to them, “Therefore render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.” 22 When they heard it, they marveled. And they left him and went away.... 34 But when the Pharisees heard that he had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered together. 35 And one of them, a lawyer, asked him a question to test him. 36 “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” 37 And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. 38 This is the great and first commandment. 39 And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. 40 On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.” 1 Corinthians 6 18 Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body. 19 Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, 20 for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body. Hebrews 2 14 Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, 15 and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery. 16 For surely it is not angels that he helps, but he helps the offspring of Abraham. 17 Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people.

Music revenue diversification is essential for independent artists, but how do you actually monetize your community of superfans? This follow-up to episode 333's community-building strategies explores the practical side of turning deep fan relationships into sustainable income that goes beyond streaming pennies.   Emerging direct-to-fan platforms like MySeat (highlighted by Dave Cool, formerly of Bandzoogle) allow artists to create branded mobile apps with multiple revenue streams - subscriptions, merchandise, live events, auctions, and exclusive content. Real case studies break down the revenue psychology of membership-based fan relationships and run realistic math on converting followers into paying subscribers.   But this isn't just another "build it and they will come" episode. Kevin Kelly's sobering follow-up research to his famous "1000 True Fans" theory reveals uncomfortable truths, including ambient musician Robert Rich's brutally honest financial breakdown of three decades pursuing direct fan support. The reality check considers platform risks, time costs, creative constraints, and why most successful direct-to-fan artists still need traditional exposure first to build music revenue.   Balancing optimism with realism, this episode explores genuine opportunities while setting appropriate expectations for what "success" in direct fan monetization actually looks like. Whether you're considering app platforms, subscription models, or other community revenue strategies, you'll discover how to approach these opportunities as part of a diversified career strategy rather than a complete solution.   Recommended for independent artists looking to reduce streaming dependence while exploring new music revenue opportunities and understanding the real challenges of direct fan monetization.   Key Topics:   Direct-to-fan mobile app platforms and business models Revenue psychology: consumption vs. membership Real financial case studies and conversion math Platform ownership vs. algorithm dependence Kevin Kelly's "1000 True Fans" follow-up research Robert Rich's 30-year direct fan experience Implementation strategies and cautionary considerations Diversified income approaches for sustainable careers Support the Unstarving Musician The Unstarving Musician exists solely through the generosity of its listeners, readers, and viewers. Learn how you can offer your support at UnstarvingMusician.com/CrowdSponsor This episode of the was powered by Liner Notes. Learn from the hundreds of musicians and industry pros I've spoken with for the Unstarving Musician on topics such as marketing, songwriting, touring, sync licensing and much more. Sign up for Liner Notes. Liner Notes is an email newsletter from yours truly, in which I share some of the best knowledge gems garnered from the many conversations featured on the Unstarving Musician. You'll also be privy to the latest podcast episodes and Liner Notes subscriber exclusives. Sign up at UnstarvingMusician.com/LinerNotes. It's free and you can unsubscribe at anytime. Resources The Unstarving Musician's Guide to Getting Paid Gigs, by Robonzo Music Marketing Method – The program that helps musicians find fans, grow an audience and make consistent income Bandzoogle – The all-in-one platform that makes it easy to build a beautiful website for your music Dreamhost – See the latest deals from Dreamhost, save money and support the UM in the process. More Resources for musicians Mentioned in this Episode  MySeat Media  1,000 True Fans  The Case Against 1,000 True Fans  The Reality of Depending on True Fans  How to Build, Name, and Nurture Your Creative Community (Unstarving Musician episode 333)  Eli Lev – Spiritual Growth: From 250 Shows to Finding Sacred Space in Music (Unstarving Musician episode 332)  JR Richards – Dishwalla, His Tenth Album Forthcoming, Email Marketing, List Building, E-Commerce, Touring (Unstarving Musician episode 284)  Pardon the Interruption (Disclosure)  Some of the links in this post are affiliate links. This means I make a small commission, at no extra charge to you, if you purchase using those links. Thanks for your support! Stay in touch! @RobonzoDrummer on  Instagram @UnstarvingMusician on Facebook  and  YouTube    

The Case Against the Ungodly – Believing in God, and at the same time rejecting His moral standards, is the recipe for judgement.

For decades, we've been told that freedom means throwing off restraint. But what if the sexual revolution didn't liberate us, and instead left us lonelier, unhappier, and adrift?Our culture's promises of autonomy and self-creation have left young people disconnected from family, tradition, and purpose. We're missing something deeper – about what it means to love, belong, and build a life that lasts.To explore this, journalist Louise Perry joins Inside Policy Talks. Perry is the author of the bestselling book The Case Against the Sexual Revolution, which presents a bold challenge to modern sexual ethics. She's also the host of the Maiden Mother Matriarch podcast, and co-founder of The Other Half, a think tank focused on pro-woman, pro-family policy.On the podcast, she tells Peter Copeland, deputy director of domestic policy at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, she discusses a “key historical claim” that progressivism makes about the “shape of history.” It's been argued that “history is linear and has just got better,” says Perry, but now it's time to challenge “this belief that the sexual revolution was obviously good.”

Monique and Kevin dive into the life and philosophy of Booker T. Washington, exploring his seminal work, Up from Slavery. They discuss how his story of resilience, education, and self-reliance contrasts with modern narratives about race and history. Kevin also shares his controversial perspective on why he thinks the Civil Rights Act of 1964 should be repealed, arguing it violates constitutional freedoms of association, creating bureaucratic overreach and unintended consequences. From Washington's vision of black empowerment to the complexities of Jim Crow, integration, and DEI, this episode challenges mainstream views and invites honest dialogue. Time Stamps: 0:00 Intro 2:58 Booker T. Washington's Up from Slavery 38:01 The Case Against the Civil Rights Act 1:04:33 Final Thoughts & Call to Action

Has feminism betrayed the very women it promised to empower? Deborah France-White, Louise Perry, and Erica Komisar go head-to-head on the hidden costs of sexual freedom.  Deborah Frances-White is a bestselling author and host of The Guilty Feminist podcast, Louise Perry is a journalist and author of The Case Against the Sexual Revolution, and Erica Komisar is a clinical social worker, psychoanalyst, and author of books such as, ‘Chicken Little the Sky Isn't Falling: Raising Resilient Adolescents in the New Age of Anxiety'.  In this heated debate, they discuss: What casual sex is really doing to women.  Why relationships are declining. The parenting crisis that no one's talking about. Why fewer people are having children. How modern dating is affecting female self-worth. 00:00 Intro02:29 Introducing the Panel03:43 What Is the Sexual Revolution?10:16 Autonomy, Freedom, and Agency as a Byproduct of the Sexual Revolution15:03 Casual Sex and Hookup Culture31:02 One Sexual Partner for Life33:15 Age of Marriage Increasing Over Time33:55 Emotional Consequences of Sex39:51 Feminists Typically Have Had Trauma43:28 Agency as a Personality Trait47:42 Sex Education in Schools49:34 Female Pleasure51:27 Is Sexual Freedom Making Us Happy?53:51 Feeling Bullied by the Narrative of Freedom57:44 Ads59:47 Manosphere and Tradwives01:07:10 Do Women Want Men to Be Providers?01:08:01 Children and Gender Roles01:12:23 Poor Mothers Looking After Children01:18:32 The Role Feminism Has Had on Motherhood01:22:35 Would Steven Take 3 Years Off Work to Raise Children?01:23:43 Men and Women's Nurturing Hormones01:28:12 We Can't Be Neutral About Policies01:30:39 The Narrative That Having Children Is Miserable01:32:27 Female Guilt01:33:35 Parenthood and Narcissism01:41:42 Birth Rates Declining01:43:06 Traditional Gender Roles01:48:44 Demonizing Feminism01:52:53 Link Between Political Stance and Number of Children01:57:03 Ads01:58:48 Pornography02:06:17 Masculine Virtues02:11:31 Do Boys and Girls Need to Be Parented Differently?02:13:00 Chivalry02:14:05 Evolutionary Differences02:19:20 Quotas in Education02:21:17 Final Thoughts Deborah: Instagram - https://bit.ly/3ZZFB39 Deborah's book, ‘Six Conversations We're Too Scared To Have', here: https://bit.ly/45ufBAh Follow Erica: Instagram - https://bit.ly/4lchbvi Erica's book, ‘Chicken Little the Sky Isn't Falling: Raising Resilient Adolescents in the New Age of Anxiety', here: https://bit.ly/3G2OhyI Follow Louise: X - https://bit.ly/3I1aHRu Louise's book, ‘The Case Against the Sexual Revolution: A New Guide to Sex in the 21st Century', here: https://bit.ly/4kN5QSD The Diary Of A CEO: Join DOAC circle here -https://doaccircle.com/ The 1% Diary is back - limited time only: https://bit.ly/3YFbJbt The Diary Of A CEO Conversation Cards (Second Edition): https://g2ul0.app.link/f31dsUttKKb Get email updates - https://bit.ly/diary-of-a-ceo-yt Follow Steven - https://g2ul0.app.link/gnGqL4IsKKb Sponsors:  Stan Store - Visit https://link.stan.store/joinstanchallenge to join the challenge!KetoneIQ - Visit https://ketone.com/STEVEN for 30% off your subscription order Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

My returning guest is Catherine Liu,‬ a professor of film and media studies at UC Irvine. She is the author of "Virtue Hoarders: the Case Against the Professional Managerial Class". We explore the psychological significance of “trauma” and “care” within the liberal discourse today. Liu describes a moral panic among elites where the language of personal therapy attempts to right social and historical wrongs. These topics will be part of her forthcoming book "Traumatized!", to be published by Verso Books early next year. You can get access to the full catalog for Doomscroll and more by becoming a paid supporter: www.patreon.com/joshuacitarella joshuacitarella.substack.com/subscribe

Joining us on the show for this episode is one of the world's leading pain researchers, Lorimer Moseley, PhD. Having spent thirty plus years in his pursuit of understanding pain through the studies of neuroscience, physiotherapy, and pain science, Lorimer is currently a Professor of Clinical Neurosciences and the Foundation Chair in Physiotherapy at the University of South Australia. He's recently launched his non-profit grassroots movement called ‘Pain Revolution' which is ensuring that all Australians have access to the knowledge, skills, and local support to prevent and overcome persistent pain. For this conversation, we explore some of the key principles of his updated model of pain which draws from 50 years of research and data. It's deeply transformational work that has the potential to dramatically shift our relationship to what makes us hurt. If you wish to continue your journey into the world of pain science, head over to painrevolution.org or check out some of his lectures and Ted Talks over on YouTube. Show Topics - Lorimers Background - Central Sensitization - Pain Variability Between People - Making the Case Against the Structural Explanations of Pain - Pain is a Protective Mechanism, Not Injury Detection - Four Essential Pain Facts - Manual Therapy and Pain - Pain Revolution and Community Building - Challenging Modality Empires - Evidence Based Practice - The Social Element of Healing - What Can Those In Pain Do Right Now?

This is Empires of the Future, conversations to encourage the Church in a time of change.  The First Sexual Revolution Much has been written about the sexual revolution, and in past podcasts we've mentioned a recent book by Louise Perry called “The Case Against the Sexual Revolution”, and believe she makes a strong case that the sexual revolution was actually bad for men, women, and children.  In an article posted at First Things, Kyle Harper explains how Christianity actually drove a completely countercultural sexual revolution in the first century whose effects are not only still felt today, but too often taken for granted.  We explore all this and more in this episode of Empires of the Future.  "The Empires of the future will be Empires of the Mind." - Winston Churchill 

Feedback? Comments? Questions? Send us a text message now! The sexual revolution liberated us and empowered women to enjoy sexual freedoms, no strings attached... right? Wrong! Listen to this episode with author Louise Perry exploring how the sexual revolution has led to a hypersexualised society benefitting only a tiny minority of high-status men. We'd love to hear from you - tabletalkfeedback@gmail.com or get in touch on instagram table.talk.podcast. Buy the book - The Case Against the Sexual Revolution: A New Guide to Sex in the 21st Century: Amazon.co.uk: Perry, Louise: 9781509549993: BooksFIND OUT MORE

Writer and podcaster Louise Perry returns to the pod to discuss her new book, A New Guide to Sex in the 21st Century, in which she takes ideas from her 2022 book The Case Against The Sexual Revolution and adapts them for teenagers and young adults. In this conversation, we pick up from where we left off in our 2022 interview, catching up on the evolving discourse around the winners and losers of the sexual revolution and trying to parse what's going with the “online right” and its Little House On The Prairie fantasies and overall fixation on homestead life. (News alert: People on the American frontier did suffer from depression. There was even a name for it: Prairie Madness.) We also talk about the 4B movement (what does “B” stand for anyway?), conservative matchmaking initiatives (has Louise crowdsourced her own yenta business?), and the need for a more interventionist approach to relationships and family life. Guest bio:  Louise Perry is a writer and activist based in London. This year, she co-founded a non-partisan feminist think tank called The Other Half, where she serves as Research Director. Her debut book is The Case Against the Sexual Revolution: A New Guide to Sex in the 21st Century.

Louise Perry joins John to dissect the UK Supreme Court's recent ruling that anchors “woman” to biological sex in the Equality Act. The verdict, Perry argues, unveils the fraying tapestry of progressivism, which clings to the flawed thesis of human interchangeability. In focusing on women's safety and biological integrity, the Court's decision mirrors a broader recognition of transgender activism's overreach, which demanded a denial of truth and reality. Beneath this legal milestone lies a deeper lament for a civilisation adrift, unmoored from Christian roots and besieged by cultural dislocation. From the fertility crisis to the hollow promises of sexual liberation, Perry and John trace the wreckage of progressive ideals: the allure of OnlyFans, fractured relationships, and a generation craving meaning. Yet glimmers of hope are emerging: rising church attendance and a trend of young minds questioning the chaos around them. Louise Perry is the author of The Case Against the Sexual Revolution, described by the Observer as possibly “one of the most important feminist books of its time.” She hosts the podcast Maiden Mother Matriarch, and is a frequent contributor to The New Statesman, The Spectator, and The Daily Mail.

Today we revisit the topic of sex and dating. How should parents talk about it with their teenagers? What if my teen doesn't seem to have any interest in these sorts of issues? Is it a good idea to get your kid on birth control? Jessica and Dr. Ken talk about all this and more. Dr. Ken references the book "The Case Against the Sexual Revolution" by Louise Perry - https://a.co/d/evvl3pc If you have a minute, please leave us a review. We love hearing listeners encouraging other listeners. You can order Dr. Ken's book "Feeding The Mouth That Bites You" here: https://a.co/d/hBnlbzI Got questions or feedback? We want to hear from you! podcast@feedingthemouth.com Music provided by the great John David Kent - https://www.johndavidkent.com/

This Flashback Friday is from episode 312 published last April 10, 2013. Professor Richard Epstein, pioneering Libertarian legal scholar, joins Jason Hartman to explain how income inequality is good for society, but is very dependent on the methods used to produce the best outcome. The current methods our government are attempting to use are causing job losses, it blocks gains in trade, the need for further public assistance increases, which in turn increases taxes, “yet another implicit drain on voluntary transactions,” Richard illustrates. He provides examples to demonstrate the consequences of equality by egalitarian efforts of our government versus voluntary redistribution.  Listen for more details at:  www.JasonHartman.com.    Richard A. Epstein is the inaugural Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law at NYU School of Law. He has authored several books, including Design for Liberty: Private Property, Public Administration and the Rule of Law, The Case Against the Employee Free Choice Act, Supreme Neglect: How to Revive the Constitutional Protection of Property Rights, and many more. Richard has written numerous articles on a wide range of legal and interdisciplinary subjects. He has taught courses in administrative law, antitrust law, civil procedure, communications, constitutional law, contracts, corporations, criminal law, employment discrimination law, environmental law, food and drug law, health law and policy, legal history, labor law, property, real estate development and finance, jurisprudence, labor law; land use planning, patents, individual, estate and corporate taxation, Roman Law; torts, and workers' compensation.   He also writes a legal column, the Libertarian, found at http://www.hoover.org/publications/defining-ideas/libertarian-archives, and is a contributor to Ricochet.com and the SCOTUS blog.     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  

In a world of hookup culture, casual sex, and dating apps, what relationship advice will actually serve our children well? While many parents avoid these uncomfortable conversations altogether, I believe our children deserve real guidance about dating, relationships, and marriage. They need more than just 'follow your heart' or 'do whatever feels right.' In this honest discussion, I share the dating advice I'll give my own children as they enter their teen years. Drawing from both traditional values and practical wisdom, I cover: - The fundamental purpose of dating (and why 'just for fun' might be setting them up for heartbreak) - The surprising benefits of marrying younger rather than waiting for perfect 'readiness' - Why involving family and friends in relationship decisions is actually wise, not old-fashioned - The hidden costs of casual relationships that most dating advice ignores - How to maintain personal independence while building a strong partnership This isn't about imposing restrictive rules or outdated thinking. It's about equipping our children with the tools to build meaningful, lasting relationships in a culture that often treats commitment as optional and marriage as outdated. Whether you agree with my approach or have a completely different perspective, this conversation matters. Our children need more guidance, not less, when navigating today's confusing relationship landscape. ____________________  Ready to create a family culture that values commitment? Join the Studio waitlist at https://hifam.com/studio and start building the foundation your children need for healthy relationships. Stop waiting to develop relationship skills. Join the Married U waitlist at https://married-u.com and learn to build a thriving partnership. Books mentioned: The Case Against the Sexual Revolution by Louise Perry (https://amzn.to/4izEAWH) A New Guide to Sex in the 21st Century: The Young Adult Adaptation of 'The Case Against the Sexual Revolution' by Louise Perry (https://amzn.to/4kS7rHd) 

Running The Free Press is Bari's hobby, but her true passion is being a yenta. And one thing Bari has learned from talking to young singles is that there is a total breakdown of sexual relations these days between men and women.  Some blame social media, dating apps, or the alleged feminization of men. But Louise Perry blames the sexual revolution. In 2022, Louise wrote this for The Free Press: “The sexual revolution isn't only a story of women freed from the burdens of chastity and motherhood. It's a story about the triumph of the playboy.” This argument is the crux of her book, The Case Against the Sexual Revolution, which has just been adapted for young adults—called A New Guide to Sex in the 21st Century: The Young Adult Adaptation of ‘The Case Against the Sexual Revolution'. This Valentine's Day, Louise is here to explain how we went wrong as a society on dating, sex, porn, and marriage; how it is impacting women and men differently; how and if we can get back on track; how to date effectively in 2025; and how a revival of Christian sex ethics might be the answer. If you liked what you heard from Honestly, the best way to support us is to go to TheFP.com and become a Free Press subscriber today. Header 6: The Free Press earns a commission from any purchases made through all book links in this article. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Louise Perry, author of "The Case Against the Sexual Revolution," joins me to discuss the inevitable self-destruction of modernity, and the potential return of traditional values. - - -  Today's Sponsor: 3 Day Blinds - For their buy 1 get 1 50% off deal, head to https://3DayBlinds.com/KLAVAN

Read the full transcript here. Is the placebo effect bullshit? Are "open-label" placebos just as effective as "closed-label" placebos? How do placebos differ from dummies? Is the placebo effect just a kind of scientific-sounding "woo"? How does social priming differ from word priming? Why is it important in research to have both placebo and no-treatment groups? What is the Hawthorne effect? What is the John Henry effect? When is it useful to express effect sizes using Cohen's d? If there's not a placebo effect, then what's really going on in cases where it seems like there is one? Is meditation a kind of placebo treatment for mental states? How can researchers believe that people's mental states are important and yet that the placebo effect doesn't exist? What is stress-induced analgesia? Does the nocebo effect (if it exists) provide reason to think that the placebo effect exists? Where do psychosomatic effects fit into this picture? What have animal studies found about the placebo effect?Literal Banana is literally a banana who became interested in human social science through trying to live among them. After escaping from a high-tech produce delivery start-up, she now lives among humans and attempts to understand them through their own sciences of themselves. Follow Literal Banana on Twitter at @literalbanana.Further reading"A Case Against the Placebo Effect", by Literal Banana"Placebo interventions for all clinical conditions", by Asbjørn Hróbjartsson and Peter Gøtzsche"Tears", by Kevin Simler StaffSpencer Greenberg — Host / DirectorJosh Castle — ProducerRyan Kessler — Audio EngineerUri Bram — FactotumWeAmplify — TranscriptionistsMusicBroke for FreeJosh WoodwardLee RosevereQuiet Music for Tiny Robotswowamusiczapsplat.comAffiliatesClearer ThinkingGuidedTrackMind EasePositlyUpLift[Read more]

This Day in Legal History: Palmer RaidsOn January 2, 1920, Attorney General Mitchell Palmer orchestrated a sweeping crackdown on suspected radicals in what came to be known as the "Palmer Raids." Over 500 federal agents, joined by local law enforcement, conducted coordinated raids across 33 U.S. cities, arresting between 6,000 and 10,000 individuals. The targets were primarily immigrants accused of being communists, anarchists, or other political radicals. Many of those detained were held without warrants or evidence, and legal proceedings against them often lacked due process.These raids were the culmination of the first Red Scare, a period marked by paranoia about leftist ideologies following the Russian Revolution and a wave of domestic labor unrest. Palmer justified the operation as a necessary defense against a supposed revolutionary threat, publishing his infamous article, The Case Against the 'Reds,' which fanned public fears. However, the raids quickly drew criticism for their unconstitutional practices. Detainees were denied legal counsel, held in overcrowded and unsanitary conditions, and subjected to deportation without fair hearings.Prominent legal figures and organizations denounced the Palmer Raids, seeing them as a gross abuse of government power. Critics argued that Palmer's actions not only violated individual rights but also reflected an opportunistic attempt to bolster his political ambitions. The backlash led to the founding of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which emerged as a leading advocate against such government overreach.In hindsight, the Palmer Raids are a stark reminder of how fear and political expediency can undermine constitutional protections. They stand as a cautionary tale about the dangers of sacrificing civil liberties in the name of national security, a pattern that has echoed through subsequent decades.Law schools are navigating significant changes as they head into 2025, with notable trends shaping the legal education landscape. Enrollment is surging, with applications for fall 2025 up 25% compared to last year. This follows a 6% increase in applicants and a 5% rise in first-year students in 2024. Interest in legal careers appears driven by the prominent role of law in current events, including the recent presidential election. The competition for spots, particularly at elite schools, is intensifying, with a sharp increase in applicants holding top LSAT scores.Diversity in law school classes remains a critical issue. While the overall diversity of the 2024 entering class held steady, Black and Hispanic enrollment at top-ranked "T-14" law schools dropped by 8% and 9%, respectively, following the U.S. Supreme Court's 2023 affirmative action ban. Experts anticipate further impacts on diversity as fewer undergraduates of color enter the pipeline, with effects becoming clearer by 2028. For now, Black and Hispanic applicants are up significantly, reflecting continued interest in legal education.Generative artificial intelligence (AI) is beginning to influence law school curricula, though adoption varies widely. While only a small percentage of faculty actively teach AI-focused courses, some schools, like UC Berkeley and Arizona State, now offer AI-specific degrees or certificates. Legal writing courses and law clinics are increasingly integrating AI tools, responding to the legal profession's rapid adoption of generative AI technologies. Advocates argue that law schools must accelerate these efforts to meet employer and industry demands.Law school trends to watch in 2025 | ReutersA U.S. military appeals court has upheld the validity of plea deals for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the September 11 attacks, and two accomplices. This decision follows an earlier ruling by a military judge stating that Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin's attempt to invalidate the agreements in August was untimely. Under these plea deals, the three men could plead guilty to their roles in the 9/11 attacks in exchange for avoiding the death penalty. The Pentagon has not commented on the ruling but previously indicated that Austin was surprised by the plea deals, which were made independently of his office. The 9/11 attacks killed nearly 3,000 people and led to the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. Mohammed remains one of the most notable detainees at Guantanamo Bay, a detention center established in 2002 to hold foreign militant suspects.The case has renewed criticism of Guantanamo Bay, with human rights advocates condemning the use of torture and calling for accountability. Separately, on the same day as the court ruling, the Pentagon announced the repatriation of Ridah Bin Saleh Al-Yazidi, one of Guantanamo's longest-held detainees, to Tunisia after being detained for over 20 years without charge. The facility currently houses 26 detainees, 14 of whom are eligible for transfer.US military appeals court says plea deals related to 9/11 attacks may proceed | ReutersCorporate diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs faced mounting pressure in 2024, a trend likely to continue into 2025. Conservative activists, such as Robby Starbuck, successfully pushed major corporations like Walmart and Ford to modify or scale back their DEI initiatives. Starbuck's efforts have caught the attention of investors, with some threatening shareholder proposals in response to unwanted changes. Companies are also adjusting their language and communication around DEI to avoid political backlash, with organizations like Citigroup and Uber removing terms like "anti-racist" from corporate filings.The legal and political landscape is shifting as well. Trump's incoming administration, supported by a Republican-led Congress, plans to restrict corporate DEI through measures like prohibiting SEC workforce disclosures and barring government contracts for companies with DEI programs. Simultaneously, legal challenges from groups like America First Legal are targeting DEI policies as discriminatory under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, with lawsuits filed against companies like IBM's Red Hat.Some corporations now list DEI as a potential risk factor in their filings, signaling concerns about legal or reputational fallout from their diversity efforts. Despite the scrutiny, many businesses quietly continue pursuing diversity goals, while some executives maintain that inclusivity is essential for long-term success. This balancing act reflects the growing complexity of navigating DEI in a polarized environment.Corporate DEI Programs Recoil and Rebrand as Pressure MountsIn my column this week, I contend that if the Department of Government Efficiency, which will not be a real executive agency, wants to make the IRS more efficient it should do so by ordering more audits of wealthy taxpayers. Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy's push for government efficiency could start by significantly improving federal revenue by addressing the $696 billion annual tax gap—the difference between taxes owed and collected. Research suggests that better auditing of high-income taxpayers, without requiring new legislation, could recover substantial unpaid taxes, aligning with the duo's mission of improving efficiency. Studies show that audits of wealthier individuals yield a high return on investment, deterring future tax evasion while reinforcing compliance.The IRS, weakened by years of budget cuts, requires more personnel to handle labor-intensive audits of complex high-income returns effectively. Targeted funding has already proven successful, as the Inflation Reduction Act enabled the IRS to recover over $1 billion from high-net-worth taxpayers. For every $1 spent auditing a taxpayer in the 90th percentile, the IRS recouped $12 in taxes owed – a truly staggering return on investment. However, the agency still struggles to match its 1995 staffing levels, highlighting a critical need for further investment.Closing the tax gap would not only generate significant revenue but also restore fairness by ensuring progressive tax rates function as intended. This effort is essential for creating an accurate picture of government resources and addressing fiscal responsibility. Whether Musk and Ramaswamy's commission will embrace this nuanced approach to tax administration remains to be seen, but don't hold your breath. A successful efficiency audit of the IRS hinges on informed decision-making and precision – something neither Musk nor Ramaswamy has evinced having in matters of politics.Musk, Ramaswamy Can Target Inefficiency by Closing the Tax Gap 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

My guest is Catherine Liu, professor of film and media studies at UC Irvine. She is the author of 'Virtue Hoarders: the Case Against the Professional Managerial Class'. We discuss the origin of trauma studies, self branding on social media and the ideology of the professional class. Liu has an unwavering commitment to historical materialism and a fierce critique of elitist academies. She explores the intense moralism of our times as it relates to the Freudian super-ego.

Please like, share, comment, or whatever on your podcast platform! We welcome your comments, questions, topics, and stories. Contact us with topics you'd like us to consider at marriageonthehalfshell@gmail.com. Show Notes: Evie Magazine article: The Argument For Clinging To Your Chastity, From A Feminist Perspective Erin Byrd Youtube Essay: The Negative Consequences of the Sexual Revolution Books:  The Case Against the Sexual Revolution by Louise Perry Feminism Against Progress by Mary Harrington The End of Women: How Smashing the Patriarchy Has Destroyed Us by Carrie Gress

Jen Oshman joins Hunter and Autumn on the podcast today to discuss her book Cultural Counterfeits: Confronting 5 Empty Promises of Our Age and How We Were Made for So Much More. In today's culture, women and girls are influenced by idols that promise purpose and meaning for their lives―outward beauty and ability, sex, abortion, and gender fluidity. Within the church, women may elevate good things like marriage and motherhood to the status of idolatry. Ultimately, these idols are hollow and leave women feeling unsettled, but where should they turn instead?In Cultural Counterfeits, Jen encourages women to reject these idols' empty, destructive promises and embrace real hope and peace in Jesus, calling them to recognize their unshakable and eternal identities in him.Resources mentioned in this episode:Cultural Counterfeits: Confronting 5 Empty Promises of Our Age and How We Were Made for So Much More by Jen OshmanIt's Good to be a Girl by Jen and Zoe OshmanKing: A Life by Jonathan EigVirgil Wander by Leif EngerHow to Know a Person: The Art of Seeing Others Deeply and Being Deeply Seen by David BrooksThe Rise of Christianity by Rodney StarkDominion by Tom HollandThe Case Against the Sexual Revolution by Louise Perry

Today, we discuss: 5:34 The Case Against the Penny 7:12 Daylight Savings Time Debate 8:27 Worthless Financial Instruments 11:24 The Cryptocurrency Conundrum 13:14 Rollover Strategies Explained 23:00 The Weirdness of Today's World Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

As the election season ramps up, we all know the Democrats have a plan to swing things their way. In this episode, I cover what move they can make that I'm really worried about. Brussels slaps down Thierry Breton over ‘harmful content' letter to Elon Musk Joe Biden, His Son and the Case Against a Ukrainian Oligarch Inside Trump's 'meltdown': Ex-president 'is lighting up his staff because he's p*ssed' about picking JD Vance - as insiders fear he's going to fire two 'extremely talented' campaign gurus Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

On this episode of Unsupervised Learning Razib talks to Louise Perry. A British journalist known for her commentary on feminism and gender issues, Perry is the author of the book The Case Against the Sexual Revolution. She also contributes to The New Statesman, UnHerd, and The Daily Mail, and has a Substack at Maiden Mother Matriarch. Perry is a graduate of University of London's School of Oriental and African Studies, with a degree in anthropology. Perry and Razib first discuss Britain's current housing crisis, the reasons and possible solutions. Though the Office for National Statistics estimates the UK's population at 67.1 million, Perry believes that the true number is likely higher because individuals who are present illegally or have a “gray” status are unlikely to respond. But even this population would make the UK over eight times more densely populated than the US, with England being 13 times denser. In fact, England's population density is similar to India's. Perry also brings up the reality of massive immigration flows over the last few years; where before 2020 net migration was around ~200,000 per year, since 2021 the figure has been closer to ~500,000. Additionally, many of these immigrants are placed in “social housing,” subsidized or owned by the government. Perry also points out that the legal regulations in Britain stipulate that about 30% of new developments be allocated for social housing, which incentivizes incumbent homeowners to block construction. Additionally, the rate of population growth is much higher than the British construction industry's capacity to keep up with the theoretical demand. The UK does not produce enough bricks, nor does it have the labor pool of homebuilders. The conversation continues to a broader discussion of the ennui in modern British society. Perry asserts that a major problem driving the housing crisis is that the UK has only one major city, London, and any professional who wants to settle in a more affordable region must also take a major salary cut. Setting aside London, and its economic engines of finance and commerce, Perry characterizes the rest of the UK as more akin to a developing Eastern Europe nation. She also believes that the next decade will see a mass flight of the upper-middle-class, the primary tax base of the state. Perry herself has Australian citizenship through her parents (who immigrated from Australia to the UK), while her husband has an American mother. Her situation is common to many upper-middle-class Britons, who have connections to Canada, the US, New Zealand and Australia. Perry believes this is one reason the British political culture is not reforming itself: so many have in the back of their head that they can jump ship if it starts sinking. Ultimately, her thesis is that British openness and intellectual curiosity make the national character a poor seedbed for nationalism, and it may be inevitable that the UK is caught up and tossed about in a vortex of globalization.   If you have a sibling with autism, your future child's risk for an autism diagnosis is increased by a factor of 2 to 3.5×. Orchid's whole genome embryo reports can help mitigate your child's risk by screening for over 200 genetic variants definitively linked to autism and other neurodevelopmental disorders. Discuss your situation with a genetics expert.

Abby and Patrick welcome writer and academic Joseph Earl Thomas, author of the 2023 memoir Sink and a new novel, God Bless You, Otis Spunkmeyer. Set over the course of a single, chaotic day in a North Philadelphia hospital, Thomas' novel unfolds across a multiplicity of geographies and timelines, and weaves together a dense network of human attachments in all their pleasures and pains. The conversation ranges widely as Abby, Patrick, and Joseph discuss what “trauma” means in popular discourse, literary criticism, and real-world trauma centers; the pleasures of food, video games, and genre expectations; Freud, the family, and authentic human connections sustained online; liberal narratives of universality and the dignity of work; the rhetoric of “boundaries”; and living and working through familial relationships that defy neat categorization and challenge us at every turn.Key texts cited in the episode:Elaine Castillo, How To Read NowOmari Akil, “Warning: Playing Pokémon GO is a Death Sentence if You are a Black Man, “ available at https://medium.com/dayone-a-new-perspective/warning-pokemon-go-is-a-death-sentence-if-you-are-a-black-man-acacb4bdae7fParul Sehgal, “The Tyranny of the Tale,” available at https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2023/07/10/seduced-by-story-peter-brooks-bewitching-the-modern-mind-christian-salmon-the-story-paradox-jonathan-gottschall-book-reviewSehgal, “The Case Against the Trauma Plot,” available at https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/01/03/the-case-against-the-trauma-plot Saidiya Hartman, Scenes of Subjection: Terror, Slavery, and Self-Making in Nineteenth-century America Mat Johnson, Pym Gayl Jones, Mosquito  Patrick Jagoda, “On Difficulty in Video Games,” available at https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/699585 Have you noticed that Freud is back? Got questions about psychoanalysis? Or maybe you've traversed the fantasy and lived to tell the tale? Leave us a voicemail! 484 775-0107A podcast about psychoanalysis, politics, pop culture, and the ways we suffer now. New episodes on Saturdays. Follow us on social media:Linktree: https://linktr.ee/OrdinaryUnhappinessTwitter: @UnhappinessPodInstagram: @OrdinaryUnhappinessPatreon: patreon.com/OrdinaryUnhappinessTheme song:Formal Chicken - Gnossienne No. 1https://open.spotify.com/album/2MIIYnbyLqriV3vrpUTxxOProvided by Fruits Music

In recent years, as our culture has embraced therapy more widely, depictions of the practice have proliferated on screen. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz trace the archetype from the silent, scribbling analysts of Woody Allen's œuvre and the iconic Dr. Melfi of “The Sopranos” to newer portrayals in shows such as “Shrinking,” on Apple TV+, and Showtime's “Couples Therapy,” now in its fourth season. The star of “Couples Therapy” is Orna Guralnik, whose sessions with real-life couples show how these tools can lead to breakthroughs—or, in some cases, enable bad behavior. Since the series débuted, mental-health awareness has only grown, and the rise of therapists on social media has put psychoanalytic language and constructs into the hands of a much broader audience. Is the therapy boom making us better? “There's a way in which jargon or concepts when boiled down can be used to categorize both ourselves and others,” says Schwartz. “Maybe what I'm asking for is a reinvigoration of the idea of therapy—not to close down meaning, but to open up meaning.”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“The Sopranos” (1999-2007)“Couples Therapy” (2019-)“The Therapist Remaking Our Love Lives on TV,” by Alexandra Schwartz (The New Yorker)“The Rise of Therapy-Speak,” by Katy Waldman (The New Yorker)“Dr. Katz, Professional Therapist” (1995-2002)“The Critic” (1994-95)“Annie Hall” (1977)“The Case Against the Trauma Plot,” by Parul Seghal (The New Yorker)“Shrinking” (2023-)“Ted Lasso” (2020-23)The Cut's Overanalyzed series“21 Ways to Break Up with Your Therapist,” by Alyssa Shelasky (The Cut)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts. 

Your AM Now hosts Adam Olsen and Nicole Harger are back again to deliver the recent accounting and finance stories you need to hear, including:Update on the legal proceedings surrounding the SEC's climate-related disclosure rulesFASB has issued the first two Accounting Standards Updates of 2024FASB's tentative decisions on its accounting for internal-use software costs projectUpdate on FASB's proposal over disclosures of the disaggregation of income statement expenseThe SEC's technical amendments in response to a Federal court's decision to vacate rule amendments on repurchases of an issuer's equity securitiesFor insights and tips on ESG reporting from Embark's team of specialists:ESG Reporting Best Practices: Implementation & BeyondFor more this week's topics:The Case Against the SEC's Final Climate Rules Begins in Earnest (and What It Means)FASB Accounting Standards Updates: 2024-01, 2024-02Accounting for and Disclosure of Software CostsTentative Board Decisions - Disaggregation of Income Statement ExpensesSEC: Share Repurchase Disclosure Modernization Final Rule; Technical AmendmentsConnect with Embark on: LinkedInInstagramTwitterFacebookYouTubeListen to AM Now on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

Louise Perry is a British journalist, author and podcast host. She is the author of the best-selling book ‘The Case Against the Sexual Revolution' and the host of the podcast ‘Maiden Mother Matriarch'. Perry co-runs the charity ‘We Can't Consent To This' which campaigns around problems with the rough sex murder defence. She is also the co-founder and research director of ‘The Other Half', a non-partisan feminist think tank which was founded in 2022. Louise's book: https://www.amazon.com/dp/1509549994/ Louise's podcast: Maiden Mother Matriarch https://linktr.ee/maidenmothermatriarch SPONSORS: Go to https://cozyearth.com/ and enter promo code TRIGGERNOMETRY at checkout for up to 35% off. We are proud partners with GiveSendGo - a world-leading crowdfunding platform that believes in free speech. Go to https://givesendgo.com and raise money for anything important to you. Join our Premium Membership for early access, extended and ad-free content: https://triggernometry.supercast.com OR Support TRIGGERnometry Here: Bitcoin: bc1qm6vvhduc6s3rvy8u76sllmrfpynfv94qw8p8d5 Music by: Music by: Xentric | info@xentricapc.com | https://www.xentricapc.com/ YouTube: @xentricapc Buy Merch Here: https://www.triggerpod.co.uk/shop/ Advertise on TRIGGERnometry: marketing@triggerpod.co.uk Join the Mailing List: https://www.triggerpod.co.uk/#mailinglist Find TRIGGERnometry on Social Media: https://twitter.com/triggerpod https://www.facebook.com/triggerpod/ https://www.instagram.com/triggerpod/ About TRIGGERnometry: Stand-up comedians Konstantin Kisin (@konstantinkisin) and Francis Foster (@francisjfoster) make sense of politics, economics, free speech, AI, drug policy and WW3 with the help of presidential advisors, renowned economists, award-winning journalists, controversial writers, leading scientists and notorious comedians. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week we finish our discussion on teens and sociosexuality - an individual's interest in sexual behavior without commitment. Dr. Ken reviews the need to help our daughter's understand the normal differences between male and female sociosexuality. We review the importance of talking to your teens about these differences even though you're sure to get "eye rolls" from a generation that believes everything is about individual differences. Dr. Ken references the following books: "The Case Against the Sexual Revolution" - Louise Perry https://www.amazon.com/Case-Against-Sexual-Revolution/dp/1509549994/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&dib_tag=se&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.VQOg_8sw7jb9T-0fFt9KZCudi7AKKInduM-ES9xPDq4fecfnh-xyNUH5_mErzn25V8VZYfgsM40B8bBbH0MuZhUwKGHw8iio8lGPnP9w9PaGdBFZ4oItBrySGW5vLIDLCjre-SlUEoGFvNOECO56WaFPtxp2nJLX9oLy5mLvIkEMw7ynbQ_h5i2DIATK-wsBpllOsL5fjdYk8yo-xeXjDiKARLptoz3P0SShYQrx8So.BPByX1Va2VbaA8yOQ_1T61tIS9n2pE1ZYKrP3SkfAus&qid=1711545656&sr=8-1 "American Hookup" - Lisa Wade https://www.amazon.com/American-Hookup-New-Culture-Campus/dp/0393355535/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2HWS0SCACFO6A&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.W9K4D6-NKQNtoSlI_ReUXRsV_oCd_70Nnq4u93_VjI7IuEspEXW7D-QFY7F2w9HfFzIfkElqGvqPYsP4ogaxHWeX359PKTMFHGBTsntQ8ky3NVWq-RA4H8Xhqe1hZ2WwFElZacMo5-gsrafyy_Ooe0A06lxrPnheI5dzsRiW61nfN6Dm7RwLGVpH3jYYPLmWN4T3aIoxnUxi_2bJApir87RsTOkdqHgX1WbP9u6eDzM.aLTxpOmvbRd9dT_TNohQYHEeSNmlB5daRoecF6oZB4A&dib_tag=se&keywords=american+hookup&qid=1711545789&sprefix=american+hookup%2Caps%2C104&sr=8-1 Got questions or feedback? We want to hear from you! podcast@feedingthemouth.com Get the book here: https://www.amazon.com/Feeding-Mouth-That-Bites-You/dp/1514762374/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1667269257&sr=8-1 Music provided by the great John David Kent! - https://www.johndavidkent.com/

Church of England revs with a difference Thomas Pelham and Jamie Franklin sit down to talk with journalist and author of The Case Against the Sexual Revolution Louise Perry.In a wide-ranging conversation, Louise shares about her motivations in writing the book, her increasing openness and sympathy toward the Christian outlook on family, motherhood, and sexual relationships, the challenges to contemporary society posed by pornography, the advent of increasingly sophisticated Artificial Intelligence, and low-birth rates. She also talks about the reliance of the secular culture on Christian ideas and why the Church of England is getting it so badly wrong. That and much, much more as always.Please Support!Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/irreverend) or Buy Me a Coffee (https://www.buymeacoffee.com/irreverend). Subscribe to Jamie's Blog here: https://jamiefranklin.substack.comFor Louise Perry: https://www.louisemperry.co.uk/Notices:Find me a church: https://irreverendpod.com/church-finder/Join our Irreverend Telegram group: https://t.me/irreverendpodFind links to our episodes, social media accounts and ways to support us at https://www.irreverendpod.com!Thursday Circles: http://thursdaycircle.comJamie's Good Things Substack: https://jamiefranklin.substack.comIrreverend Sermon Audio: https://irreverendsermonaudio.buzzsprout.comSupport the show

In this episode, I recap the results of the 2024 Super Tuesday election. Joe Biden, His Son and the Case Against a Ukrainian Oligarch Biden Inc. Victoria Nuland says Obama State Dept. informed FBI of reporting from Steele dossier Copyright Bongino Inc All Rights Reserved Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Glen Scrivener reflects on 500 episodes of The Speak Life Podcast. Media Producer Thomas Thorogood asks him about how the faith conversation has changed in the past decade.Episodes referenced in this conversation:- University CU Missions – SLP1- Atheism 2 of 4: What Atheists Get Right – SLP18- Interview With James Cary - SLP198- How Christianity Got Dominion Over The World (An interview with Tom Holland) - SLP269- Douglas Murray | We're Moving From One Belief System To Another | Facing The God-Shaped Hole | RESET - SLP329- Lori Anne Thompson: In Her Own Words || SLP350- My Child Almost Died - Paul Feesey || SLP382- Louise Perry on The Case Against the Sexual Revolution || SLP419- Bishops, Marriage and the Failure of the Church || Paul Blackham and Glen Scrivener || SLP445- Konstantin Kisin: Can We Have Western Values Without Christianity? || SLP462See 321: http://321course.com/Subscribe to the Speak Life YouTube channel for videos which see all of life with Jesus at the centre:youtube.com/SpeakLifeMediaSubscribe to the Reformed Mythologist YouTube channel to explore how the stories we love point to the greatest story of all:youtube.com/@ReformedMythologistDiscord is an online platform where you can interact with the Speak Life team and other Speak Life supporters. There's bonus content, creative/theological discussion and lots of fun. Join our Discord here:speaklife.org.uk/giveContact the show: info@speaklife.org.ukSpeak Life is a UK based charity that resources the church to reach the world.Learn more about us here:speaklife.org.ukSupport the show

Hunter and Autumn share some of the books that challenged, informed, encouraged, inspired, and delighted them during 2023.--Spiritual Life--Timothy Keller: His Spiritual and Intellectual Formation by Collin Hansen (AG & HB)Outgrowing the Ingrown Church by Jack Miller (HB)--Theology and Bible--The Genesis of Gender: A Christian Theory by Abigail Favale (AG & HB)Love Thy Body by Nancy Pearcey (AG)--Biography and History--The Last Lion: Winston Spencer Churchill, Volume 1: Visions of Glory by William Manchester (HB)The Reformation as Renewal: Retrieving the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church by Matthew Barrett (HB)--General Interest--10x is Easier than 2x: How World Class Entrepreneurs Achieve More by Doing Less by Dan Sullivan and Benjamin Hardy (HB)The Art of Loading Brush by Wendell Berry (AG)--General Interest On Helping Us Understand the Modern, Western Culture in Which We Live--Conservatism: A Rediscovery by Yoram Hazony (HB)The Air We Breathe: How We All Came to Believe in Freedom, Kindness, Progress, and Equality by Glen Scrivener (AG - Apologetics / Evangelism)Remaking the World: How 1776 Created the Post-Christian West by Andrew Wilson (HB)Strange New World: How Thinkers and Activists Redefined Identity and Sparked the Sexual Revolution by Carl Trueman (AG)--General Interest On Sexuality and Gender--The Case Against the Sexual Revolution by Louise Perry (AG)Feminism Against Progress by Mary Harrington (AG)--Children's Literature--A Little More Beautiful: The Story of a Garden (picture book) by Sarah Mackenzie, illustrated by Breezy Brookshire (AG)Hotel Oscar Mike Echo (middle-grade novel) by Linda MacKillop (AG)The Lost Tales of Sir Galahad, a compilation of stories by various authors (AG)--Fiction and Literature--Finding Time Again: In Search of Lost Time, Volume 7 by Marcel Proust (HB - Content Warning)A Year in Provence by Peter Mayle (AG)The Portrait of a Lady by Henry James (HB)

What is a TERF? I'm joined for this week's interview by Louise M. Perry, one of the most insightful and thoughtful observers of the wreckage left behind by the sexual revolution. We discuss the “radical” part of being a “Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist,” whether social norms can leave space for abnormality, and the limits of “cultural Christianity” as a sustaining civilizational force. Read Louise's book, The Case Against the Sexual Revolution: https://a.co/d/0nVZ3nD Listen to Louise's podcast, Maiden, Mother, Matriarch: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/maiden-mother-matriarch-with-louise-perry/id1671451793 Check out Louise's website: https://www.louisemperry.co.uk Learn Latin, Greek, Hebrew, and Old English from our friends at the Ancient Language Institute: https://ancientlanguage.com/youngheretics/

The books that have meant the most to Justin and Kylie this year.  Kylie's top 3 books of 2023: The One Hundred Years of Lenni and Margot by Marianne Cronin "A beautiful story about friendship." Homecoming by Kate Morton "Riveting!" Better Than Happy - Jodi Moore "Enlightening and powerful" Justin's 5 star reads of 2023: Silas Marner by George Eliot "The perfect story - sublime, utterly absorbing" The Case Against the Sexual Revolution by Louise Perry Testosterone: The Story of the Hormone that Dominates and Divides Us | Carole Hooven "Brilliant" Everyone In My Family Has Killed Someone by Benjamin Stevenson "A rip-roaring read." The Whole-Brain Child by Daniel Siegel & Tina Payne-Bryson Saving our kids - Madonna King "Vitally important"  Generations by Jean M. Twenge "Compelling." Winners Take All by Anand Giridharadas Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond Happier Hour by Cassie Holmes Come as You Are by Emily Nagoski "Gives people info that really matters." The Emotional Lives of Teenagers: Raising Connected, Capable, and Compassionate Adolescents by Lisa Damour "Solid book, easy to read."   Find us on Facebook at Dr Justin Coulson's Happy Families Email us your questions and comments at podcasts@happyfamilies.com.auSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

One of the biggest taxonomic changes of this year was the long-anticipated lump of the species formerly known as Pacific-slope and Cordilleran Flycatcher back into Western Flycatcher. It's a story with all the taxonomic highs and lows packed into a slightly confusing and cryptic package. Alec Hopping is a birder and researcher whose article in North American Birds called Unraveling Western Flycatchers; A Case Against the Split played a large role in making the case to the relavant authorities. He joins us to talk about how to get a species lumped.  Also, the AOS makes a huge announcement regarding birds named specifically for people.  Subscribe to the podcast at Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts and please leave a rating or a review if you are so inclined! We appreciate it!    

British author and journalist Louise Perry rejects the notion that social change over time indicates “progress.” Instead, she says history is a series of trade-offs that does not guarantee improvements for humanity. In her book, “The Case Against the Sexual Revolution,” Louise proposes that increased sexual freedom has caused harm due to the lack of sexual restraint. Louise writes for the New Statesmen, The Daily Mail, and UnHerd. She is the press officer for “We Can't Consent to This,” an organization addressing increasing incidents of women killed by sexual violence described as consensual. Louise hosts “Maiden Mother Matriarch,” a podcast about sexual politics. She studied anthropology and women's studies at the School of Oriental and African Studies and the University of Oxford. Watch this episode on YouTube.

Christians who work in politics to end legalized abortion do so because innocent lives are at stake. That would be enough cause in and of itself. However, abortion isn't just one of the many issues that we should care about.  In many ways, abortion, perhaps more than any other single issue, symbolizes our society's core beliefs. Simply put, Christian societies do not kill their smallest, most vulnerable members. Pagan societies, on the other hand, do.   In a fascinating recent essay published at First Things, Louise Perry argued that the fight over abortion is really about whether we will remain, in any real sense, a Christian society, or we will re-paganize to the beliefs and values of pre-Christian times. Perry, author of the recent book The Case Against the Sexual Revolution, isn't a Christian, though she admits she finds Christianity attractive. Her academic journey seems to have become a spiritual journey, one that has led to a recognition that many of her secular and humanist values are, in fact, remnants of a Christian morality that remade the world.  Perry opened her article by citing Scottish poet Hollie McNish, who wrote that archaeologists know they've found a Greek or Roman brothel when they unearth “a pit of newborn babies' bones.” Hearing this poem gave Perry the same “painful, squeezing, swooping sensation” she first felt when hearing a graphic description of abortion. She realized something pro-lifers have long argued: abortion is really a form of legalized infanticide and not so different from the baby-killing of the ancient world.  Though Perry is still pro-choice in certain cases, she's clearly uneasy about it. This is in part because she's a mom, and because she sees how abortion and infanticide exist on a “continuum” that includes other ancient practices like slavery, the sexual exploitation of women and children, and general disregard for the weak and poor. Historically, only one group of people objected to these things. As Perry wrote:  The supremely strange thing about Christianity in anthropological terms is that it takes a topsy-turvy attitude toward weakness and strength. To put it crudely, most cultures look at the powerful and the wealthy and assume that they must be doing something right to have attained such might. The poor are poor because of some failing of their own, whether in this life or the last. The smallness and feebleness of women and children is a sign that they must be commanded by men. The suffering of slaves is not an argument against slavery, but an argument against allowing oneself to be enslaved.  Into this predatory, power-centric pagan world stepped Christ, who defeated the powerful through submission to death—“even death on a cross.” After His resurrection, Christ's followers began insisting on the innate and equal value of all human beings and began condemning practices like infanticide.   Christians, of course, have not always lived up to these ideas, but they were unique in holding them. As authors like Tom Holland have argued, these Christian ideals didn't vanish with the rise of secular humanism. Western progressives owe their moral instincts to protect the weak and vulnerable to the Christian revolution, even if they scoff at the idea of the Christian God.   And therein lies Perry's problem. There is no group weaker or more vulnerable than unborn babies. Yet these are precisely the victims that feminists and secular progressives insist we must ignore to advance sexual freedom. We have all seen how much the rhetoric is heating up, both against those who work to save preborn lives and now for the legal extension of so-called “medical aid in dying” to children with disabilities.  This is why, Perry concludes, “The legal status of abortion…represents the bleeding edge of dechristianization.” Stepping decisively away from the influence of Christianity will bring back an “older, darker” set of values in which the strong exploit the weak and no one objects. Such a world would truly be, once again, pagan. At least some non-Christian writers seem to realize that in this world, women, the poor, and other vulnerable classes would not fare well.    Historically speaking, equality, human rights, and protection of the weak aren't “self-evident.” They're part of a distinctly Christian heritage shaped by a distinctly Christian vision of the world. As the values of our pagan past grow more influential and pervasive, progressives should take note. A society built on babies' bones won't long respect the rights of anyone except the powerful. For that, you need Christ.   This Breakpoint was co-authored by Shane Morris. If you're a fan of Breakpoint, leave a review on your favorite podcast app. For more resources to live like a Christian in this cultural moment, go to breakpoint.org.  

Filmmaker Ryan White has made a dizzying array of unique documentaries, including “The Keepers,” about the unsolved murder of a Catholic nun, “The Case Against 8” about the fight for marriage equality, “Good Night Oppy,” which traces the journey of NASA's Mars Rover and “Assassins,” about the murder of North Korean Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un's half-brother. The Emmy-nominated director's latest project, “Pamela, A Love Story,” is a raw look at the life of 90's bombshell Pamela Anderson. It showcases a more vulnerable side of the actress and re-examines the major life events of the star – from her rise to fame to the infamous, stolen sex tape with her then-husband, Tommy Lee. Alec speaks with Ryan White about what he learned filming with Anderson, the impact the documentary had on her life and how he balances the light and the dark of his projects.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Dr Jordan B Peterson and Louise Perry discuss the current state of feminism, the corruption of porn, the gray areas of consent, and the failure of the sexual revolution.  Louise Perry is a journalist and author based in London. Her first book, “The Case Against the Sexual Revolution,” was published in 2022. She is the director of The Other Half, a new non-partisan feminist think tank, and the host of Maiden Mother Matriarch, a podcast about sexual politics.

Megyn Kelly is joined by Carrie Prejean Boller, former Miss USA and mom activist, to talk about the outrageous Balenciaga photos featuring sexualization of children, the #CancelBalenciaga movement, celebrities like Kim Kardashian and Nicole Kidman not taking definitive action, parents taking matters into their own hands, and more. Then Louise Perry, author of "The Case Against the Sexual Revolution," joins to discuss the increase in sexualization of our culture, the role of moms in pushing back against what's becoming more mainstream, the state of feminism in our society today, fundamental differences between men and women, false promises of the sexual revolution and sexual freedom for women, the importance and challenges of parenting, Hugh Hefner and Marilyn Monroe, the danger of extreme porn being accessible to kids through phones, the addictive quality of porn, women fighting their sexual instincts, the disturbing rise of strangulation in sexual encounters, advice for young women, and more. Follow The Megyn Kelly Show on all social platforms: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/MegynKellyTwitter: http://Twitter.com/MegynKellyShowInstagram: http://Instagram.com/MegynKellyShowFacebook: http://Facebook.com/MegynKellyShow Find out more information at: https://www.devilmaycaremedia.com/megynkellyshow

Today we're chatting with British journalist and author Louise Perry about her new book, “The Case Against the Sexual Revolution: A New Guide to Sex in the 21st Century.” In her book, Louise gets into the nitty-gritty of the standard progressive narrative our culture pushes about sex. We discuss the sexual revolution era's promises of liberation, satisfaction, and happiness, when in reality it only brings about pain, confusion, and destruction. We talk about the lie that “consent” is the only standard we should be concerned about when it comes to sex and how the abandonment of Christian sexual ethics has been terrible for women, men, and society as a whole. Through her lens as a secular feminist, Louise gives advice on how we can recover from sexual liberalism. Through both a theological and a secular viewpoint, we discuss how marriage, monogamy, and family are crucial to our society. --- Today's Sponsors: HealthyCell — get 20% off your first order at HealthyCell.com/ALLIE, use promo code 'ALLIE'! A'Del — go to adelnaturalcosmetics.com and enter promo code "ALLIE" for 25% off your first order! Good Ranchers — change the way you shop for meat today by visiting GoodRanchers.com/ALLIE & use promo code 'ALLIE' to save $30 off your order and lock in your price! Raycon — go to BuyRaycon.com/ALLIE today to save 15% off your Raycon order. --- Show Links: Common Sense: "I'm 30. The Sexual Revolution Shackled My Generation." https://www.commonsense.news/p/im-30-the-sexual-revolution-shackled?utm_medium=email&triedSigningIn=true --- Buy Allie's book, You're Not Enough (& That's Okay): Escaping the Toxic Culture of Self-Love: https://alliebethstuckey.com/book Relatable merchandise – use promo code 'ALLIE10' for a discount: https://shop.blazemedia.com/collections/allie-stuckey Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices