Podcasts about Chambers

Is Enter the Wu-Tang (36 Chambers) the most defining debut in hip-hop history? In this special One Song episode, Diallo and LUXXURY go beyond a single track to unpack how the Wu-Tang Clan built a gritty, cinematic world that unleashed rap's most iconic supergroup. One Song Spotify Playlist Songs Discussed: “Protect Ya Neck” - Wu-Tang Clan “Funky Drummer (Parts 1 &2)” - James Brown “Devika (Goddess)” - Lonnie Liston Smith “Flash Light” - Parliament “Mic Checka” - Das EFX “True Fuschnick” - Fu-Schnickens “Ring the Alarm” - Fu-Schnickens “La Schmoove” - Fu-Schnickens “Bring Da Ruckus” - Wu-Tang Clan “Wu-Tang Clan Ain't Nuthing ta F' Wit” - Wu-Tang Clan “Maria Maria” - Santana feat. The Product G&B “C.R.E.A.M. (Cash Rules Everything Around Me)” - Wu-Tang Clan “As Long As I've Got You” - The Charmels “Method Man” - Wu-Tang Clan “Impeach the President” - The Honey Drippers “Hard to Handle” - Otis Redding “Rock The Bells” - L.L. Cool J “Flick of the Switch” - AC/DC “Brooklyn Zoo” - Ol' Dirty Bastard “Break Your Promise” - The Delfonics “The Grunt” - The J.B.s “Rebel Without A Pause” - Public Enemy “Method of Modern Love” - Daryl Hall & John Oates “Set It Off” - Strafe “Get Off Of My Cloud” - The Rolling Stones “How High” - Redman & Method Man “Purple Haze” - The Jimi Hendrix Experience “Ice Cream” - Raekwon feat. Ghostface Killah, Method Man & Cappadonna “Shadowboxin'” - GZA feat. Method Man “All I Need (Razor Sharp Remix)” - Method Man feat. Mary J. Blige “Live At The Barbeque” - Main Source feat. Nas, Joe Fatal & Akinyele “Bring The Pain” - Method Man “Shimmy Shimmy Ya” - Ol' Dirty Bastard “Daytona 500” - Ghostface Killah feat. Raekwon & Cappadonna “Triumph” - Wu-Tang Clan “Nowhere to Run, Nowhere to Hide” - Gravediggaz Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

om att mötas kring att bära läder med Eric Nilsson från Stockholm Leather Social.I Kinkypodden pratar Eric bland annat om läderkulturen i Stockholm och världen, han berättar om fetischism och utlevnad och de sociala sammanhangen kopplat till att bära läder. Eric ger ett historiskt perspektiv på gay- och läderkulturen som är oerhört viktigt att inte missa eller glömma. Ett fint, viktigt och politiskt avsnitt.Eric Nilsson arrangerar Stockholm Leather Social, en klubb för alla som gillar att bära läder och/ eller umgås tillsammans med andra som gör det på ett öppet och avslappnat sätt. Följ SLS på @stockholm.leather.socialAvsnittet sponsras av Chambers of Love – intim och sexbutik med erotiska kläder som du hittar på Drottninggatan 71D i Stockholm eller på nätet www.chambersoflove.seProgramledare samt inspelning: Aurora BrännströmLjudmix och klippning: Eric BäckmanJingel: Andreas Hedberg med voice over av Carola Alfredsson HedbergStötta Kinkypodden via www.patreon.com/kinkypoddenwww.kinkypodden.se @kinkypodden Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Michael Jaco welcomes Dr. Pete Chambers — a retired Special Forces Green Beret, physician, and candidate for Texas Governor — for a powerful and inspiring conversation about leadership, integrity, and the fight to restore freedom in America. Drawing from decades of military service and frontline experience, Dr. Chambers reveals the truth about border security, election integrity, medical freedom, and human trafficking, offering a fearless vision for the future of Texas. He shares his battle-tested insights on how citizens can reclaim power from corrupt systems and lead their communities through faith, courage, and action. This episode is a must-listen for patriots ready to stand for truth and take back their state — and their country.

Monologue:Deep Eddy ContestReal Estate Tid BitsGovernor FactsGuest:Dr. Pete “Doc” Chambers is a retired U.S. Army Lieutenant Colonel, Green Beret, and physician who served for nearly four decades in both active duty and reserve roles. A decorated combat veteran, Chambers has also been an advocate for veterans' health and medical freedom since leaving the military. He recently announced his candidacy for Governor of Texas, focusing his campaign on border security, personal liberty, and strengthening the state's independence from federal overreach. Chambers brings a unique perspective that blends his background in military leadership, emergency medicine, and public service.Stories that deserve to be told! Based in Dripping Springs, Steve Mallett and Michelle Lewis invite you into their world of engaging conversations with guests who bring fresh ideas, humor, and wisdom to the table. They dive into everything from life's absurdities to community quirks, adding their signature twist of small-town charm and bold candor. Think of them as the funny neighbors with the best stories, the ones who always tell it like it is. With a healthy dose of Hill Country spirit, they explore local gossip and topics that connect us all—proving you don't need to be famous to be extraordinary; you just need a microphone and the courage to share your voice. Every episode is a mix of laughter, insight, and connection, making this podcast one you won't want to miss! Send us a textSupport the show Looking for the best Realtor in Dripping Springs? The #1 choice is the Mallett Integrity Team, led by Steve Mallett. Local expertise, integrity, and results-driven service— Cedric Mills, Carlisle Kennedy, Maury Boyd, and Michelle Lewis. SouthStar Bank a tradition of full-service community banking for over 100 years. Your neighborhood Bank. www.southstarbank.com The Deep Eddy Vodka Tasting Room is in the Texas Hill Country just outside Austin, TX. The venue welcomes over 75,000 visitors annually and sits within the former bottling plant. Family Friendly Fun in the Hill Country! events@deepeddyvodka.com Jovie Belterra-Nestled within the Belterra community, discover your path to joy and wellness at the exquisite 55+ apartment community. Follow us, leave a review, TELL A FRIEND!AppleInstagramWebsite...

Enter the 36 Chambers of intellectual property as hosts Michael Snyder and Joseph Gushue spin the story of Wu-Tang Clan's mysterious, one-of-a-kind album Once Upon a Time in Shaolin, and the first-of-its-kind legal case it inspired. From Staten Island's kung-fu-infused hip-hop origins to a high-stakes sale cloaked in secrecy, Michael and Joe trace how a creative experiment in artistic exclusivity turned into a potential landmark in trade secret law. When Wu-Tang recorded a single physical copy of Shaolin and sold it under an ultra-restrictive contract, few imagined the album would pass through the hands of a disgraced pharma executive, the U.S. Marshals Service, and finally a blockchain collective (PleasrDAO). Now, this rare recording sits at the crossroads of copyright, contract law, and the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA). Listeners will hear how secrecy became the source of value, why traditional copyright doctrines fall short in this context, and what this case reveals about the future of digital ownership, exclusivity, and authenticity. Along the way, the hosts connect the dots from Banksy's self-shredding artwork to Coca-Cola's guarded formula, exploring how the world's rarest album could redefine how we protect creative works.

The GP Owners' Association's backing calls for the Government to make better use of primary care data. A New Zealand Initiative report says information from GP clinics isn't being systematically collected, unlike hospital and prescription data. It argues the information could help identify prescribing issues and prevent unnecessary hospital admissions. Association Chair Angus Chambers told Andrew Dickens this has been an acknowledged gap for a long time. He says it has been collected individually before, but not systematically, which requires investment. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode, we sit down with Ambassador Fidelis Onu, Director General of the Delta Association of Chambers of Commerce, Industry, Mines and Agriculture (DACCIMA), to unpack how #DeltaState can harness opportunities in shipping and the blue economy to drive socio-economic growth and enhance regional security. ⚓

(EN) What does money awaken in you: fear, control, or freedom? Today's episode features Diana Chambers, an English financial mentor who has been investigating the invisible entanglement of money with our emotions, traumas, attachments, and family histories for decades. Diana invites us to look at money as energy and transform it into living consciousness — inspiration that comes, in part, from her work with Thomas Hübl, with whom I also share a deep connection.In this journey of relating to money, I put myself in first person — sharing what my own relationship with money was like, and how, over time, I integrated spirituality, generosity, and abundance as part of the same flow. Finally, we talked about the incredible possibilities of philanthropy, something that excites me a lot, and which Diana sees as a gesture of energy in motion, a way of putting money at the service of life and people! This conversation is a space for learning, enjoy! (PT) O que o dinheiro desperta em você: medo, controle ou liberdade? O episódio de hoje é com a Diana Chambers, uma mentora financeira inglesa que há décadas investiga o emaranhamento invisível do dinheiro com as nossas emoções, traumas, vínculos e histórias familiares. Diana nos convida a olhar o dinheiro como energia e a transformá-la em consciência viva — inspiração que vem, em parte, do seu trabalho com Thomas Hübl, com quem também compartilho uma conexão profunda.Nesse percurso de relação com o dinheiro, me coloquei em primeira pessoa — partilhando como era a minha própria relação com o dinheiro, e como, ao longo do tempo, fui integrando espiritualidade, generosidade e abundância como parte de um mesmo fluxo. Por fim, falamos sobre as incríveis possibilidades da filantropia, algo que me empolga muito, e que Diana enxerga como um gesto de energia em movimento, uma forma de colocar o dinheiro a serviço da vida e das pessoas! Essa conversa é um espaço de aprendizado, bom play! Host:Marcelo CardosoProdução:Gabriela Szulcsewski@travs.estudio

Residents across the Kenai Peninsula and in South-Central Alaska reported shaking this morning; Halloween festivities are kicking off tomorrow in Homer and Seward, organized by their respective Chambers of Commerce; and an art performance at Homer's Bunnell Street Arts Center this Saturday gives new life to 16-millimeter educational films salvaged from an Anchorage dumpster.

Residents across the Kenai Peninsula and in South-Central Alaska reported shaking this morning; Halloween festivities are kicking off tomorrow in Homer and Seward, organized by their respective Chambers of Commerce; and an art performance at Homer's Bunnell Street Arts Center this Saturday gives new life to 16-millimeter educational films salvaged from an Anchorage dumpster.

Welcome to Original Jurisdiction, the latest legal publication by me, David Lat. You can learn more about Original Jurisdiction by reading its About page, and you can email me at davidlat@substack.com. This is a reader-supported publication; you can subscribe by clicking here.Yesterday, Southern California Edison (SCE), the utility whose power lines may have started the devastating Eaton Fire, announced its Wildfire Recovery Compensation Program. Under the program, people affected by the fire can receive hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars in compensation, in a matter of months rather than years—but in exchange, they must give up their right to sue.It should come as no surprise that SCE, in designing the program, sought the help of Kenneth Feinberg. For more than 40 years, often in the wake of tragedy or disaster, Feinberg has helped mediate and resolve seemingly intractable crises. He's most well-known for how he and his colleague Camille Biros designed and administered the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund. But he has worked on many other headline-making matters over the years, including the Agent Orange product liability litigation, the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Trust, the multidistrict litigation involving Monsanto's Roundup weed killer—and now, of course, the Eaton Fire.How did Ken develop such a fascinating and unique practice? What is the most difficult aspect of administering these giant compensation funds? Do these funds represent the wave of the future, as an alternative to (increasingly expensive) litigation? Having just turned 80, does he have any plans to retire?Last week, I had the pleasure of interviewing Ken—the day after his 80th birthday—and we covered all these topics. The result is what I found to be one of the most moving conversations I've ever had on this podcast.Thanks to Ken Feinberg for joining me—and, of course, for his many years of service as America's go-to mediator in times of crisis.Show Notes:* Kenneth Feinberg bio, Wikipedia* Kenneth Feinberg profile, Chambers and Partners* L.A. Fire Victims Face a Choice, by Jill Cowan for The New York TimesPrefer reading to listening? For paid subscribers, a transcript of the entire episode appears below.Sponsored by:NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com.Three quick notes about this transcript. First, it has been cleaned up from the audio in ways that don't alter substance—e.g., by deleting verbal filler or adding a word here or there to clarify meaning. Second, my interviewee has not reviewed this transcript, and any errors are mine. Third, because of length constraints, this newsletter may be truncated in email; to view the entire post, simply click on “View entire message” in your email app.David Lat: Welcome to the Original Jurisdiction podcast. I'm your host, David Lat, author of a Substack newsletter about law and the legal profession also named Original Jurisdiction, which you can read and subscribe to at davidlat.substack.com. You're listening to the eighty-fourth episode of this podcast, recorded on Friday, October 24.Thanks to this podcast's sponsor, NexFirm. NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com. Want to know who the guest will be for the next Original Jurisdiction podcast? Follow NexFirm on LinkedIn for a preview.I like to think that I've produced some good podcast episodes over the past three-plus years, but I feel that this latest one is a standout. I'm hard-pressed to think of an interview that was more emotionally affecting to me than what you're about to hear.Kenneth Feinberg is a leading figure in the world of mediation and alternative dispute resolution. He is most well-known for having served as special master of the U.S. government's September 11th Victim Compensation Fund—and for me, as someone who was in New York City on September 11, I found his discussion of that work profoundly moving. But he has handled many major matters over the years, such as the Agent Orange product liability litigation to the BP Deepwater Horizon Disaster Victim Compensation Fund. And he's working right now on a matter that's in the headlines: the California wildfires. Ken has been hired by Southern California Edison to help design a compensation program for victims of the 2025 Eaton fire. Ken has written about his fascinating work in two books: What Is Life Worth?: The Unprecedented Effort to Compensate the Victims of 9/11 and Who Gets What: Fair Compensation after Tragedy and Financial Upheaval. Without further ado, here's my conversation with Ken Feinberg.Ken, thank you so much for joining me.Ken Feinberg: Thank you very much; it's an honor to be here.DL: We are recording this shortly after your 80th birthday, so happy birthday!KF: Thank you very much.DL: Let's go back to your birth; let's start at the beginning. You grew up in Massachusetts, I believe.KF: That's right: Brockton, Massachusetts, about 20 miles south of Boston.DL: Your parents weren't lawyers. Tell us about what they did.KF: My parents were blue-collar workers from Massachusetts, second-generation immigrants. My father ran a wholesale tire distributorship, my mother was a bookkeeper, and we grew up in the 1940s and ‘50s, even the early ‘60s, in a town where there was great optimism, a very vibrant Jewish community, three different synagogues, a very optimistic time in American history—post-World War II, pre-Vietnam, and a time when communitarianism, working together to advance the collective good, was a prominent characteristic of Brockton, and most of the country, during the time that I was in elementary school and high school in Brockton.DL: Did the time in which you grow up shape or influence your decision to go into law?KF: Yes. More than law—the time growing up had a great impact on my decision to give back to the community from which I came. You've got to remember, when I was a teenager, the president of the United States was John F. Kennedy, and I'll never forget because it had a tremendous impact on me—President Kennedy reminding everybody that public service is a noble undertaking, government is not a dirty word, and especially his famous quote (or one of his many quotes), “Every individual can make a difference.” I never forgot that, and it had a personal impact on me and has had an impact on me throughout my life. [Ed. note: The quotation generally attributed to JFK is, “One person can make a difference, and everyone should try.” Whether he actually said these exact words is unclear, but it's certainly consistent with many other sentiments he expressed throughout his life.]DL: When you went to college at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, what did you study?KF: I studied history and political science. I was very interested in how individuals over the centuries change history, the theory of historians that great individuals articulate history and drive it in a certain direction—for good, like President Kennedy or Abraham Lincoln or George Washington, or for ill, like Adolf Hitler or Mussolini. And so it was history that I really delved into in my undergraduate years.DL: What led you then to turn to law school?KF: I always enjoyed acting on the stage—theater, comedies, musicals, dramas—and at the University of Massachusetts, I did quite a bit of that. In my senior year, I anticipated going to drama school at Yale, or some other academic master's program in theater. My father gave me very good advice. He said, “Ken, most actors end up waiting on restaurant tables in Manhattan, waiting for a big break that never comes. Why don't you turn your skills on the stage to a career in the courtroom, in litigation, talking to juries and convincing judges?” That was very sound advice from my father, and I ended up attending NYU Law School and having a career in the law.DL: Yes—and you recount that story in your book, and I just love that. It's really interesting to hear what parents think of our careers. But anyway, you did very well in law school, you were on the law review, and then your first job out of law school was something that we might expect out of someone who did well in law school.KF: Yes. I was a law clerk to the chief judge of New York State, Stanley Fuld, a very famous state jurist, and he had his chambers in New York City. For one week, every six or seven weeks, we would go to the state capitol in Albany to hear cases, and it was Judge Fuld who was my transition from law school to the practice of law.DL: I view clerking as a form of government service—and then you continued in service after that.KF: That's right. Remembering what my father had suggested, I then turned my attention to the courtroom and became an assistant United States attorney, a federal prosecutor, in New York City. I served as a prosecutor and as a trial lawyer for a little over three years. And then I had a wonderful opportunity to go to work for Senator Ted Kennedy on the Senate Judiciary Committee in Washington and stayed with him for about five years.DL: You talk about this also in your books—you worked on a pretty diverse range of issues for the senator, right?KF: That's right. For the first three years I worked on his staff on the Senate Judiciary Committee, with some excellent colleagues—soon-to-be Supreme Court justice Stephen Breyer was with me, noted litigator David Boies was in the office—and for the first three years, it was law-related issues. Then in 1978, Senator Kennedy asked me to be his chief of staff, and once I went over and became his chief of staff, the issues of course mushroomed. He was running for president, so there were issues of education, health, international relations—a wide diversity of issues, very broad-based.DL: I recall that you didn't love the chief of staff's duties.KF: No. Operations or administration was not my priority. I loved substance, issues—whatever the issues were, trying to work out legislative compromises, trying to give back something in the way of legislation to the people. And internal operations and administration, I quickly discovered, was not my forte. It was not something that excited me.DL: Although it's interesting: what you are most well-known for is overseeing and administering these large funds and compensating victims of these horrific tragedies, and there's a huge amount of administration involved in that.KF: Yes, but I'm a very good delegator. In fact, if you look at the track record of my career in designing and administering these programs—9/11 or the Deepwater Horizon oil spill or the Patriots' Day Marathon bombings in Boston—I was indeed fortunate in all of those matters to have at my side, for over 40 years, Camille Biros. She's not a lawyer, but she's the nation's expert on designing, administering, and operating these programs, and as you delve into what I've done and haven't done, her expertise has been invaluable.DL: I would call Camille your secret weapon, except she's not secret. She's been profiled in The New York Times, and she's a well-known figure in her own right.KF: That is correct. She was just in the last few months named one of the 50 Women Over 50 that have had such an impact in the country—that list by Forbes that comes out every year. She's prominently featured in that magazine.DL: Shifting back to your career, where did you go after your time in the Senate?KF: I opened up a Washington office for a prominent New York law firm, and for the next decade or more, that was the center of my professional activity.DL: So that was Kaye Scholer, now Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer. What led you to go from your career in the public sector, where you spent a number of your years right out of law school, into so-called Biglaw?KF: Practicality and financial considerations. I had worked for over a decade in public service. I now had a wife, I had three young children, and it was time to give them financial security. And “Biglaw,” as you put it—Biglaw in Washington was lucrative, and it was something that gave me a financial base from which I could try and expand my different interests professionally. And that was the reason that for about 12 years I was in private practice for a major firm, Kaye Scholer.DL: And then tell us what happened next.KF: A great lesson in not planning too far ahead. In 1984, I got a call from a former clerk of Judge Fuld whom I knew from the clerk network: Judge Jack Weinstein, a nationally recognized jurist from Brooklyn, the Eastern District, and a federal judge. He had on his docket the Vietnam veterans' Agent Orange class action.You may recall that there were about 250,000 Vietnam veterans who came home claiming illness or injury or death due to the herbicide Agent Orange, which had been dropped by the U.S. Air Force in Vietnam to burn the foliage and vegetation where the Viet Cong enemy might be hiding. Those Vietnam veterans came home suffering terrible diseases, including cancer and chloracne (a sort of acne on the skin), and they brought a lawsuit. Judge Weinstein had the case. Weinstein realized that if that case went to trial, it could be 10 years before there'd be a result, with appeals and all of that.So he appointed me as mediator, called the “special master,” whose job it was to try and settle the case, all as a mediator. Well, after eight weeks of trying, we were successful. There was a master settlement totaling about $250 million—at the time, one of the largest tort verdicts in history. And that one case, front-page news around the nation, set me on a different track. Instead of remaining a Washington lawyer involved in regulatory and legislative matters, I became a mediator, an individual retained by the courts or by the parties to help resolve a case. And that was the beginning. That one Agent Orange case transformed my entire professional career and moved me in a different direction completely.DL: So you knew the late Judge Weinstein through Fuld alumni circles. What background did you have in mediation already, before you handled this gigantic case?KF: None. I told Judge Weinstein, “Judge, I never took a course in mediation at law school (there wasn't one then), and I don't know anything about bringing the parties together, trying to get them to settle.” He said, “I know you. I know your background. I've followed your career. You worked for Senator Kennedy. You are the perfect person.” And until the day I die, I'm beholden to Judge Weinstein for having faith in me to take this on.DL: And over the years, you actually worked on a number of matters at the request of Judge Weinstein.KF: A dozen. I worked on tobacco cases, on asbestos cases, on drug and medical device cases. I even worked for Judge Weinstein mediating the closing of the Shoreham nuclear plant on Long Island. I handled a wide range of cases where he called on me to act as his court-appointed mediator to resolve cases on his docket.DL: You've carved out a very unique and fascinating niche within the law, and I'm guessing that most people who meet you nowadays know who you are. But say you're in a foreign country or something, and some total stranger is chatting with you and asks what you do for a living. What would you say?KF: I would say I'm a lawyer, and I specialize in dispute resolution. It might be mediation, it might be arbitration, or it might even be negotiation, where somebody asks me to negotiate on their behalf. So I just tell people there is a growing field of law in the United States called ADR—alternative dispute resolution—and that it is, as you say, David, my niche, my focus when called upon.DL: And I think it's fair to say that you're one of the founding people in this field or early pioneers—or I don't know how you would describe it.KF: I think that's right. When I began with Agent Orange, there was no mediation to speak of. It certainly wasn't institutionalized; it wasn't streamlined. Today, in 2025, the American Bar Association has a special section on alternative dispute resolution, it's taught in every law school in the United States, there are thousands of mediators and arbitrators, and it's become a major leg in law school of different disciplines and specialties.DL: One question I often ask my guests is, “What is the matter you are most proud of?” Another question I often ask my guests is, “What is the hardest matter you've ever had to deal with?” Another question I often ask my guests is, “What is the matter that you're most well-known for?” And I feel in your case, the same matter is responsive to all three of those questions.KF: That's correct. The most difficult, the most challenging, the most rewarding matter, the one that's given me the most exposure, was the federal September 11 Victim Compensation Fund of 2001, when I was appointed by President George W. Bush and Attorney General John Ashcroft to implement, design, and administer a very unique federal law that had been enacted right after 9/11.DL: I got chills as you were just even stating that, very factually, because I was in New York on 9/11, and a lot of us remember the trauma and difficulty of that time. And you basically had to live with that and talk to hundreds, even thousands, of people—survivors, family members—for almost three years. And you did it pro bono. So let me ask you this: what were you thinking?KF: What triggered my interest was the law itself. Thirteen days after the attacks, Congress passed this law, unique in American history, setting up a no-fault administrator compensation system. Don't go to court. Those who volunteer—families of the dead, those who were physically injured at the World Trade Center or the Pentagon—you can voluntarily seek compensation from a taxpayer-funded law. Now, if you don't want it, you don't have to go. It's a voluntary program.The key will be whether the special master or the administrator will be able to convince people that it is a better avenue to pursue than a long, delayed, uncertain lawsuit. And based on my previous experience for the last 15 years, starting with Agent Orange and asbestos and these other tragedies, I volunteered. I went to Senator Kennedy and said, “What about this?” He said, “Leave it to me.” He called President Bush. He knew Attorney General John Ashcroft, who was his former colleague in the U.S. Senate, and he had great admiration for Senator Ashcroft. And so I was invited by the attorney general for an interview, and I told him I was interested. I told him I would only do it pro bono. You can't get paid for a job like this; it's patriotism. And he said, “Go for it.” And he turned out to be my biggest, strongest ally during the 33 months of the program.DL: Are you the managing partner of a boutique or midsize firm? If so, you know that your most important job is attracting and retaining top talent. It's not easy, especially if your benefits don't match up well with those of Biglaw firms or if your HR process feels “small time.” NexFirm has created an onboarding and benefits experience that rivals an Am Law 100 firm, so you can compete for the best talent at a price your firm can afford. Want to learn more? Contact NexFirm at 212-292-1002 or email betterbenefits@nexfirm.com.You talk about this in your books: you were recommended by a very prominent Democratic politician, and the administration at the time was Republican. George W. Bush was president, and John Ashcroft was the attorney general. Why wouldn't they have picked a Republican for this project?KF: Very good question. Senator Kennedy told both of them, “You better be careful here. This is a very, very uncertain program, with taxpayer money used to pay only certain victims. This could be a disaster. And you would be well-advised to pick someone who is not a prominent friend of yours, who is not perceived as just a Republican arm of the Justice Department or the White House. And I've got the perfect person. You couldn't pick a more opposite politician than my former chief of staff, Ken Feinberg. But look at what he's done.” And I think to Senator Kennedy's credit, and certainly to President Bush and to John Ashcroft's, they selected me.DL: As you would expect with a program of this size and complexity, there was controversy and certainly criticism over the years. But overall, looking back, I think people regard it widely as a huge success. Do you have a sense or an estimate of what percentage of people in the position to accept settlements through the program did that, rather than litigate? Because in accepting funds from the program, they did waive their right to bring all sorts of lawsuits.KF: That's correct. If you look at the statistics, if the statistics are a barometer of success, 5,300 applicants were eligible, because of death—about 2,950, somewhere in there—and the remaining claims were for physical injury. Of the 5,300, 97 percent voluntarily accepted the compensation. Only 94 people, 3 percent, opted out, and they all settled their cases five years later. There was never a trial on who was responsible in the law for 9/11. So if statistics are an indication—and I think they are a good indication—the program was a stunning success in accomplishing Congress's objective, which was diverting people voluntarily out of the court system.DL: Absolutely. And that's just a striking statistic. It was really successful in getting funds to families that needed it. They had lost breadwinners; they had lost loved ones. It was hugely successful, and it did not take a decade, as some of these cases involving just thousands of victims often do.I was struck by one thing you just said. You mentioned there was really no trial. And in reading your accounts of your work on this, it seemed almost like people viewed talking to you and your colleagues, Camille and others on this—I think they almost viewed that as their opportunity to be heard, since there wasn't a trial where they would get to testify.KF: That's correct. The primary reason for the success of the 9/11 Fund, and a valuable lesson for me thereafter, was this: give victims the opportunity to be heard, not only in public town-hall meetings where collectively people can vent, but in private, with doors closed. It's just the victim and Feinberg or his designee, Camille. We were the face of the government here. You can't get a meeting with the secretary of defense or the attorney general, the head of the Department of Justice. What you can get is an opportunity behind closed doors to express your anger, your frustration, your disappointment, your sense of uncertainty, with the government official responsible for cutting the checks. And that had an enormous difference in assuring the success of the program.DL: What would you say was the hardest aspect of your work on the Fund?KF: The hardest part of the 9/11 Fund, which I'll never recover from, was not calculating the value of a life. Judges and juries do that every day, David, in every court, in New Jersey and 49 other states. That is not a difficult assignment. What would the victim have earned over a work life? Add something for pain and suffering and emotional distress, and there's your check.The hardest part in any of these funds, starting with 9/11—the most difficult aspect, the challenge—is empathy, and your willingness to sit for over 900 separate hearings, me alone with family members or victims, to hear what they want to tell you, and to make that meeting, from their perspective, worthwhile and constructive. That's the hard part.DL: Did you find it sometimes difficult to remain emotionally composed? Or did you, after a while, develop a sort of thick skin?KF: You remain composed. You are a professional. You have a job to do, for the president of the United States. You can't start wailing and crying in the presence of somebody who was also wailing and crying, so you have to compose yourself. But I tell people who say, “Could I do what you did?” I say, “Sure. There are plenty of people in this country that can do what I did—if you can brace yourself for the emotional trauma that comes with meeting with victim after victim after victim and hearing their stories, which are...” You can't make them up. They're so heart-wrenching and so tragic.I'll give you one example. A lady came to see me, 26 years old, sobbing—one of hundreds of people I met with. “Mr. Feinberg, I lost my husband. He was a fireman at the World Trade Center. He died on 9/11. And he left me with our two children, six and four. Now, Mr. Feinberg, you've calculated and told me I'm going to receive $2.4 million, tax-free, from this 9/11 Fund. I want it in 30 days.”I said to Mrs. Jones, “This is public, taxpayer money. We have to go down to the U.S. Treasury. They've got to cut the checks; they've got to dot all the i's and cross all the t's. It may be 60 days or 90 days, but you'll get your money.”“No. Thirty days.”I said, “Mrs. Jones, why do you need the money in 30 days?”She said, “Why? I'll tell you why, Mr. Feinberg. I have terminal cancer. I have 10 weeks to live. My husband was going to survive me and take care of our two children. Now they're going to be orphans. I have got to get this money, find a guardian, make sure the money's safe, prepare for the kids' schooling. I don't have a lot of time. I need your help.”Well, we ran down to the U.S. Treasury and helped process the check in record time. We got her the money in 30 days—and eight weeks later, she died. Now when you hear story after story like this, you get some indication of the emotional pressure that builds and is debilitating, frankly. And we managed to get through it.DL: Wow. I got a little choked up just even hearing you tell that. Wow—I really don't know what to say.When you were working on the 9/11 Fund, did you have time for any other matters, or was this pretty much exclusively what you were working on for the 33 months?KF: Professionally, it was exclusive. Now what I did was, I stayed in my law firm, so I had a living. Other people in the firm were generating income for the firm; I wasn't on the dole. But it was exclusive. During the day, you are swamped with these individual requests, decisions that have to be made, checks that have to be cut. At night, I escaped: opera, orchestral concerts, chamber music, art museums—the height of civilization. During the day, in the depths of horror of civilization; at night, an escape, an opportunity to just enjoy the benefits of civilization. You better have a loving family, as I did, that stands behind you—because you never get over it, really.DL: That's such an important lesson, to actually have that time—because if you wanted to, you could have worked on this 24/7. But it is important to have some time to just clear your head or spend time with your family, especially just given what you were dealing with day-to-day.KF: That's right. And of course, during the day, we made a point of that as well. If we were holding hearings like the one I just explained, we'd take a one-hour break, go for a walk, go into Central Park or into downtown Washington, buy an ice cream cone, see the kids playing in playgrounds and laughing. You've got to let the steam out of the pressure cooker, or it'll kill you. And that was the most difficult part of the whole program. In all of these programs, that's the common denominator: emotional stress and unhappiness on the part of the victims.DL: One last question, before we turn to some other matters. There was also a very large logistical apparatus associated with this, right? For example, PricewaterhouseCoopers. It wasn't just you and Camille trying to deal with these thousands of survivors and claimants; you did have support.KF: That's right. Pricewaterhouse won the bid at the Justice Department. This is public: Pricewaterhouse, for something like around $100 million, put 450 people to work with us to help us process claims, appraise values, do the research. Pricewaterhouse was a tremendous ally and has gone on, since 9/11, to handle claims design and claims administration, as one of its many specialties. Emily Kent, Chuck Hacker, people like that we worked with for years, very much experts in these areas.DL: So after your work on the 9/11 Fund, you've worked on a number of these types of matters. Is there one that you would say ranks second in terms of complexity or difficulty or meaningfulness to you?KF: Yes. Deepwater Horizon in 2011, 2012—that oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico blew up and killed about, I don't know, 15 to 20 people in the explosion. But the real challenge in that program was how we received, in 16 months, about 1,250,000 claims for business interruption, business losses, property damage. We received over a million claims from 50 states. I think we got probably a dozen claims from New Jersey; I didn't know the oil had gotten to New Jersey. We received claims from 35 foreign countries. And the sheer volume of the disaster overwhelmed us. We had, at one point, something like 40,000 people—vendors—working for us. We had 35 offices throughout the Gulf of Mexico, from Galveston, Texas, all the way to Mobile Bay, Alabama. Nevertheless, in 16 months, on behalf of BP, Deepwater Horizon, we paid out all BP money, a little over $7 billion, to 550,000 eligible claimants. And that, I would say, other than 9/11, had the greatest impact and was the most satisfying.DL: You mentioned some claims coming from some pretty far-flung jurisdictions. In these programs, how much of a problem is fraud?KF: Not much. First of all, with death claims like 9/11 or the Boston Marathon bombings or the 20 first-graders who died in Sandy Hook, Connecticut, at the hands of a deranged gunmen—most of the time, in traumatic death and injury, you've got records. No one can beat the system; you have to have a death certificate. In 9/11, where are your military records, if you were at the Pentagon? Where are the airplane manifests? You've got to be on the manifest if you were flying on that plane.Now, the problem becomes more pronounced in something like BP, where you've got over a million claims, and you wonder, how many people can claim injury from this explosion? There we had an anti-fraud unit—Guidepost, Bart Schwartz's company—and they did a tremendous job of spot-checking claims. I think that out of over a million claims, there may have been 25,000 that were suspicious. And we sent those claims to the Justice Department, and they prosecuted a fair number of people. But it wasn't a huge problem. I think the fraud rate was something like 3 percent; that's nothing. So overall, we haven't found—and we have to be ever-vigilant, you're right—but we haven't found much in the way of fraud.DL: I'm glad to hear that, because it would really be very depressing to think that there were people trying to profiteer off these terrible disasters and tragedies. Speaking of continuing disasters and tragedies, turning to current events, you are now working with Southern California Edison in dealing with claims related to the Eaton Fire. And this is a pending matter, so of course you may have some limits in terms of what you can discuss, but what can you say in a general sense about this undertaking?KF: This is the Los Angeles wildfires that everybody knows about, from the last nine or ten months—the tremendous fire damage in Los Angeles. One of the fires, or one of the selected hubs of the fire, was the Eaton Fire. Southern California Edison, the utility involved in the litigation and finger-pointing, decided to set up, à la 9/11, a voluntary claims program. Not so much to deal with death—there were about 19 deaths, and a handful of physical injuries—but terrible fire damage, destroyed homes, damaged businesses, smoke and ash and soot, for miles in every direction. And the utility decided, its executive decided, “We want to do the right thing here. We may be held liable or we may not be held liable for the fire, but we think the right thing to do is nip in the bud this idea of extended litigation. Look at 9/11: only 94 people ended up suing. We want to set up a program.”They came to Camille and me. Over the last eight weeks, we've designed the program, and I think in the last week of October or the first week of November, you will see publicly, “Here is the protocol; here is the claim form. Please submit your claims, and we'll get them paid within 90 days.” And if history is an indicator, Camille and I think that the Eaton Fire Protocol will be a success, and the great bulk of the thousands of victims will voluntarily decide to come into the program. We'll see. [Ed. note: On Wednesday, a few days after Ken and I recorded this episode, Southern California Edison announced its Wildfire Recovery Compensation Program.]DL: That raises a question that I'm curious about. How would you describe the relationship between the work that you and Camille and your colleagues do and the traditional work of the courts, in terms of in-the-trenches litigation? Because I do wonder whether the growth in your field is perhaps related to some developments in litigation, in terms of litigation becoming more expensive over the decades (in a way that far outstrips inflation), more complicated, or more protracted. How would you characterize that relationship?KF: I would say that the programs that we design and administer—like 9/11, like BP, plus the Eaton wildfires—are an exception to the rule. Nobody should think that these programs that we have worked on are the wave of the future. They are not the wave of the future; they are isolated, unique examples, where a company—or in 9/11, the U.S. government—decides, “We ought to set up a special program where the courts aren't involved, certainly not directly.” In 9/11, they were prohibited to be involved, by statute; in some of these other programs, like BP, the courts have a relationship, but they don't interfere with the day-to-day administration of the program.And I think the American people have a lot of faith in the litigation system that you correctly point out can be uncertain, very inefficient, and very costly. But the American people, since the founding of the country, think, “You pick your lawyer, I'll pick my lawyer, and we'll have a judge and jury decide.” That's the American rule of law; I don't think it's going to change. But occasionally there is a groundswell of public pressure to come up with a program, or there'll be a company—like the utility, like BP—that decides to have a program.And I'll give you one other example: the Catholic Church confronted thousands of claims of sexual abuse by priests. It came to us, and we set up a program—just like 9/11, just like BP—where we invited, voluntarily, any minor—any minor from decades ago, now an adult—who had been abused by the church to come into this voluntary program. We paid out, I think, $700 million to $800 million, to victims in dioceses around the country. So there's another example—Camille did most of that—but these programs are all relatively rare. There are thousands of litigations every day, and nothing's going to change that.DL: I had a guest on a few weeks ago, Chris Seeger of Seeger Weiss, who does a lot of work in the mass-tort space. It's interesting: I feel that that space has evolved, and maybe in some ways it's more efficient than it used to be. They have these multi-district litigation panels, they have these bellwether trials, and then things often get settled, once people have a sense of the values. That system and your approach seem to have some similarities, in the sense that you're not individually trying each one of these cases, and you're having somebody with liability come forward and voluntarily pay out money, after some kind of negotiation.KF: Well, there's certainly negotiation in what Chris Seeger does; I'm not sure we have much negotiation. We say, “Here's the amount under the administrative scheme.” It's like in workers' compensation: here's the amount. You don't have to take it. There's nothing to really talk about, unless you have new evidence that we're not aware of. And those programs, when we do design them, seem to work very efficiently.Again, if you ask Camille Biros what was the toughest part of valuing individual claims of sexual-abuse directed at minors, she would say, “These hearings: we gave every person who wanted an opportunity to be heard.” And when they come to see Camille, they don't come to talk about money; they want validation for what they went through. “Believe me, will you? Ken, Camille, believe me.” And when Camille says, “We do believe you,” they immediately, or almost immediately, accept the compensation and sign a release: “I will not sue the Catholic diocese.”DL: So you mentioned there isn't really much negotiation, but you did talk in the book about these sort of “appeals.” You had these two tracks, “Appeals A” and “Appeals B.” Can you talk about that? Did you ever revisit what you had set as the award for a particular victim's family, after hearing from them in person?KF: Sure. Now, remember, those appeals came back to us, not to a court; there's no court involvement. But in 9/11, in BP, if somebody said, “You made a mistake—you didn't account for these profits or this revenue, or you didn't take into account this contract that my dead firefighter husband had that would've given him a lot more money”—of course, we'll revisit that. We invited that. But that's an internal appeals process. The people who calculated the value of the claim are the same people that are going to be looking at revisiting the claim. But again, that's due process, and that's something that we thought was important.DL: You and Camille have been doing this really important work for decades. Since this is, of course, shortly after your 80th birthday, I should ask: do you have future plans? You're tackling some of the most complicated matters, headline-making matters. Would you ever want to retire at some point?KF: I have no intention of retiring. I do agree that when you reach a certain pinnacle in what you've done, you do slow down. We are much more selective in what we do. I used to have maybe 15 mediations going on at once; now, we have one or two matters, like the Los Angeles wildfires. As long as I'm capable, as long as Camille's willing, we'll continue to do it, but we'll be very careful about what we select to do. We don't travel much. The Los Angeles wildfires was largely Zooms, going back and forth. And we're not going to administer that program. We had administered 9/11 and BP; we're trying to move away from that. It's very time-consuming and stressful. So we've accomplished a great deal over the last 50 years—but as long as we can do it, we'll continue to do it.DL: Do you have any junior colleagues who would take over what you and Camille have built?KF: We don't have junior colleagues. There's just the two of us and Cindy Sanzotta, our receptionist. But it's an interesting question: “Who's after Feinberg? Who's next in doing this?” I think there are thousands of people in this country who could do what we do. It is not rocket science. It really isn't. I'll tell you what's difficult: the emotion. If somebody wants to do what we do, you better brace yourself for the emotion, the anger, the frustration, the finger pointing. It goes with the territory. And if you don't have the psychological ability to handle this type of stress, stay away. But I'm sure somebody will be there, and no one's irreplaceable.DL: Well, I know I personally could not handle it. I worked when I was at a law firm on civil litigation over insurance proceeds related to the World Trade Center, and that was a very draining case, and I was very glad to no longer be on it. So I could not do what you and Camille do. But let me ask you, to end this section on a positive note: what would you say is the most rewarding or meaningful or satisfying aspect of the work that you do on these programs?KF: Giving back to the community. Public service. Helping the community heal. Not so much the individuals; the individuals are part of the community. “Every individual can make a difference.” I remember that every day, what John F. Kennedy said: government service is a noble undertaking. So what's most rewarding for me is that although I'm a private practitioner—I am no longer in government service, since my days with Senator Kennedy—I'd like to think that I performed a valuable service for the community, the resilience of the community, the charity exhibited by the community. And that gives me a great sense of self-satisfaction.DL: You absolutely have. It's been amazing, and I'm so grateful for you taking the time to join me.So now, onto our speed round. These are four questions that are standardized. My first question is, what do you like the least about the law? And this can either be the practice of law or law in a more abstract sense.KF: Uncertainty. What I don't like about the law is—and I guess maybe it's the flip side of the best way to get to a result—I don't like the uncertainty of the law. I don't like the fact that until the very end of the process, you don't know if your view and opinion will prevail. And I think losing control over your destiny in that regard is problematic.DL: My second question—and maybe we touched on this a little bit, when we talked about your father's opinions—what would you be if you were not a lawyer?KF: Probably an actor. As I say, I almost became an actor. And I still love theater and the movies and Broadway shows. If my father hadn't given me that advice, I was on the cusp of pursuing a career in the theater.DL: Have you dabbled in anything in your (probably limited) spare time—community theater, anything like that?KF: No, but I certainly have prioritized in my spare time classical music and the peace and optimism it brings to the listener. It's been an important part of my life.DL: My third question is, how much sleep do you get each night?KF: Well, it varies from program to program. I'd like to get seven hours. That's what my doctors tell me: “Ken, very important—more important than pills and exercise and diet—is sleep. Your body needs a minimum of seven hours.” Well, for me, seven hours is rare—it's more like six or even five, and during 9/11 or during Eaton wildfires, it might be more like four or five. And that's not enough, and that is a problem.DL: My last question is, any final words of wisdom, such as career advice or life advice, for my listeners?KF: Yes, I'll give you some career and life advice. It's very simple: don't plan too far ahead. People have this view—you may think you know what you want to do with your career. You may think you know what life holds for you. You don't know. If I've learned anything over the last decades, life has a way of changing the best-laid plans. These 9/11 husbands and wives said goodbye to their children, “we'll see you for dinner,” a perfunctory wave—and they never saw them again. Dust, not even a body. And the idea I tell law students—who say, ”I'm going to be a corporate lawyer,” or “I'm going to be a litigator”—I tell them, “You have no idea what your legal career will look like. Look at Feinberg; he never planned on this. He never thought, in his wildest dreams, that this would be his chosen avenue of the law.”My advice: enjoy the moment. Do what you like now. Don't worry too much about what you'll be doing two years, five years, 10 years, a lifetime ahead of you. It doesn't work that way. Everybody gets thrown curveballs, and that's advice I give to everybody.DL: Well, you did not plan out your career, but it has turned out wonderfully, and the country is better for it. Thank you, Ken, both for your work on all these matters over the years and for joining me today.KF: A privilege and an honor. Thanks, David.DL: Thanks so much to Ken for joining me—and, of course, for his decades of work resolving some of the thorniest disputes in the country, which is truly a form of public service.Thanks to NexFirm for sponsoring the Original Jurisdiction podcast. NexFirm has helped many attorneys to leave Biglaw and launch firms of their own. To explore this opportunity, please contact NexFirm at 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com to learn more.Thanks to Tommy Harron, my sound engineer here at Original Jurisdiction, and thanks to you, my listeners and readers. To connect with me, please email me at davidlat@substack.com, or find me on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn, at davidlat, and on Instagram and Threads at davidbenjaminlat.If you enjoyed today's episode, please rate, review, and subscribe. Please subscribe to the Original Jurisdiction newsletter if you don't already, over at davidlat.substack.com. This podcast is free, but it's made possible by paid subscriptions to the newsletter.The next episode should appear on or about Wednesday, November 12. Until then, may your thinking be original and your jurisdiction free of defects.Thanks for reading Original Jurisdiction, and thanks to my paid subscribers for making this publication possible. Subscribers get (1) access to Judicial Notice, my time-saving weekly roundup of the most notable news in the legal world; (2) additional stories reserved for paid subscribers; (3) transcripts of podcast interviews; and (4) the ability to comment on posts. You can email me at davidlat@substack.com with questions or comments, and you can share this post or subscribe using the buttons below. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit davidlat.substack.com/subscribe

Join Matt, Lucas, and Chambers as they descend into Amnesia: The Dark Descent. The start of the Let's Play revolution, the scariest game of all time, but did it age well or is it all hype? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this bonus episode, I tell you about the Virtual Employment Law Academy, which launches in January 2025.

In this episode, we sit down with Tsu Shan Chambers, a former optometrist who transitioned into acting, writing, and producing. Tsu Shan shares the inspiring journey of leaving a stable career in optometry to pursue a life in storytelling, the challenges of breaking into the film industry, and the creative process behind bringing My Eyes to life.Key Takeaways:- Learn how to pivot successfully from one career to a completely different path filled with passion.-The importance of vision, both literal and metaphorical in her creative work-Hear how it can help spread the word about eye care and more& more... Don't miss the game segment where we get to know the lighter side of Tsu Shan Chambers ,  in our "Rapid Fire" game segment.

Former Letcher County Sheriff Mickey Stines faces a murder charge for shooting and killing his onetime friend, Judge Kevin Mullins, in his chambers in September 2024. After Mullins was killed, claims of corruption began to surface and unfounded rumors about Stines' daughter and Mullins began to circulate. Now Mickey Stines' daughter, Lila Stines, has spoken publicly for the first time about the case on TikTok. Law&Crime's Angenette Levy goes through what Lila said in this episode of Crime Fix — a daily show covering the biggest stories in crime.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW: If you're ever injured in an accident, you can check out Morgan & Morgan. You can submit a claim in 8 clicks or less without having to leave your couch. To start your claim, visit: https://www.forthepeople.com/CrimeFixHost:Angenette Levy https://twitter.com/Angenette5Guest:Gavin Fish https://www.youtube.com/@GavinFishProducer:Jordan ChaconCRIME FIX PRODUCTION:Head of Social Media, YouTube - Bobby SzokeSocial Media Management - Vanessa BeinVideo Editing - Daniel CamachoGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSTAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:Watch Law&Crime Network on YouTubeTV: https://bit.ly/3td2e3yWhere To Watch Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3akxLK5Sign Up For Law&Crime's Daily Newsletter: https://bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletterRead Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3td2IqoLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In Episode 95 of the Digital Velocity Podcast, Erik Martinez sits down with Kristin Chambers — social media strategist, agency owner, and founder of Meerkat Media Group — to explore artificial intelligence and its role in social media marketing. With over a decade of experience helping brands navigate the rapidly evolving digital marketing landscape, Kristin shares where human creativity must stay in the loop to build trust and brand loyalty. Listeners will learn: • How AI personalization is changing what users see — and why authenticity still wins • The real-world benefits and limits of AI-generated copy, images, and social ads • Practical steps for training AI tools on your brand voice while keeping content genuine • How to balance automation and human oversight to build trust in an era of misinformation Kristin also offers tactical advice for marketers and small teams on batching content, using tools like Canva, ChatGPT, and Hey Orca, and developing a responsible AI policy that empowers creativity rather than replacing it. Her key takeaway: use AI as an accelerator, not a substitute — because the brands that stay authentic will be the ones audiences trust most. For direct-to-consumer marketers and digital brand leaders, this episode offers a roadmap to navigate the future of AI-powered social media with clarity, strategy, and heart.

As part of a series of three talks together, James d'Apice recently joined eminent senior junior barrister Jonathon Dooley of Greenway Chambers to discuss the law of Just and Equitable Winding Up (s 461(1)(k) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)).This is Jonathon's and James' third talk about the big ticket items when advising your shareholder clients whether they want to *stay* or whether they want to *go*.The three talks they gave on this topic were:1. Corporate oppression (this talk!)2. Derivative actions (to be released in future)3. Just and equitable winding up (to be released in future)Hope this one brings you some value. As you may be able to tell, James and Jonathon had good fun presenting!___Jonathon's profile can be found here: https://www.greenway.com.au/jonathon-dooley/BenchmarkTV's website is here for all of your CLE needs: https://benchtv.com.au/And of course, James' firm Gravamen has its website is here: www.gravamen.com.au

In the most recent installment of Short Story Tuesday, Mr. Chambers reads "Click-Clack the Rattlebag" by Neil Gaiman. This story revolves a young boy describing the terrifying Click-Clacks to his sister's boyfriend, who is babysitting him for the first time.

I am delighted to have renowned hotelier Melanie Harrison for part 2 of my Belfast Special series.Melanie's hotel is the Harrison Chambers of Distinction which is located in the heart of the vibrant Queen's Quarter of Belfast and is a restored, landmark Victorian merchants' residence dating from 1879 designed to serve the culturally curious traveller.This is a boutique hotel is curated by the charismatic and vivacious owner Michelle Harrison whose personality is reflected in the Victorian style where every room is different and often named and styled after artists reflecting the bohemian character and mischievous tongue in cheek humour of Melanie with eccentric curios and surprises and every corner and in every unique room.Belfast feels like a young, vibrant city full of life with great food, nightlife, festivals and of course history. It feels like a city on the cusp of something special with lots of new hotels and bars opening and the Irish Fleadh coming there in 2026.I loved the city so much that I have made this into a three part special series so after this episode make sure to also check out episode 1 with great insider tips from travel writer Erin McCafferty and the brilliant tour guide Barney Gribbin of the famous If Buildings Could Talk Tour. For more information on Belfast check https://visitbelfast.com and https://discovernorthernireland.comAccomodationThe Harrison, 45 Malone Road, Belfast, BT9 6RX | Tel: +44 745630965 | www.chambersofdistinction.com| Twitter & Instagram: @harrison_belfast The HarrisonActivitiesBlack Taxi Tour with Blue Badge Guide Billy Scott,Contact: +44 77 9860 2401 | www.touringaroundbelfast.com | X: @TouringBelfastTitanic Museum Belfastwww.titanicbelfast.com | Instagram @titanicbelfastFoodDeanes at Queens, 1 College Gardens, Belfast, BT9 6BQ |T: +44 28 9038 2111| https://www.michaeldeane.co.uk/deanes-at-queens/| Instagram @deanesatqueenbt9Wolff Grill, Titanic Hotel, Queens Road, Belfast, BT3 9DT, T: +44 28 9508 2000 | www.titanichotelbelfast.com | X: @titanicbelfast | Instagram: titanichotelbelfastSaga, 43 Malone Road, Belfast, BT9 6RX | Tel: +44 7495467341 | https://sagabelfast.com | Instagram: @sagabelfasCoco, 7-11 Linenhall Street, Belfast, BT2 8AA | Tel: +44 2890311150 | www.cocobelfast.com | Instagram @cocobelfast_If you haven't already, I'd ask you to give me a follow on whichever platform you listen to your podcasts and you will be the first to get a new episode. Fergal O'Keeffe is the host of Ireland's No.1 Travel Podcast Travel Tales with Fergal which is now listened to in 130 countries worldwide. The podcast aims to share soul-lifting travel memoirs about daydream worthy destinations. Please follow me onInstagram @traveltaleswithfergalFacebook @traveltaleswithfergalTwitter @FergalTravelYouTube @traveltaleswithfergal -- Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

As part of a series of three talks together, James d'Apice recently joined eminent senior junior barrister Jonathon Dooley of Greenway Chambers to discuss the law of Derivative Actions (ss 236 and 237 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)).This is Jonathon's and James' second talk about the big ticket items when advising your shareholder clients whether they want to *stay* or whether they want to *go*.The three talks they gave on this topic were:1. Corporate oppression (this talk!)2. Derivative actions (to be released in future)3. Just and equitable winding up (to be released in future)Hope this one brings you some value. As you may be able to tell, James and Jonathon had good fun presenting!___Jonathon's profile can be found here: https://www.greenway.com.au/jonathon-dooley/BenchmarkTV's website is here for all of your CLE needs: https://benchtv.com.au/And of course, James' firm Gravamen has its website is here: www.gravamen.com.au

A successful collaboration between brands and retailers rely on a shared understanding of the importance of getting the fundamentals right. There is a lot of noise and upheaval in commerce today, but according to Brooke Chambers, Director of Growth & Strategy Merchandising at Kroger, the strongest relationships come when there is a shared understanding of the consumer's flywheel at that retailer. That fundamental insight becomes the north star for joint business planning, and brings clarity to the drive for growth.

During Ep. 29 of the Ask the Law Firm Seller Show, Jeremy E. Poock, Esq. shares the following Poock's Post: How the One-Two Punch of AI + Google Continues to Decrease the Relevancy of Yester-Year's Rainmaker Attorneys   Poock begins by reminiscing about the Pre-Google “Age of the Rainmaker Attorneys” who built their Books of Business in-person and via Word of Mouth, including: (i) Handing out 1k+ business cards per year; (ii) Leading in-person speaking engagements as often as possible (CLEs, Chambers of Commerce, etc.); (iii) Attending and sponsoring charity events, including placing full page ads in event tribute books; (iv) Investing in print ads in newspapers, journals, legal directories, White Pages, Yellow Pages, etc.; and (v) “Working the room” at networking events.   Post-2020, though, Business Development for lawyers and law firms has pivoted digitally, including the following “One-Two Punch” of AI, plus Google:   Potential clients consult with AI (egs. ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude, and more) to inquire about lawyers and law firms capable of addressing their particular issues, followed by researching those firms via Google . . . doing so while by-passing yester-year's Rainmaker Attorneys.   The rise of Digital Rainmaking in the mid-2020s, as part of today's 3.0 Digital Era for the legal industry, includes the following results for those Senior Attorney-led firms that do not adopt Multi-Channel Digital Marketing to supplement their Word of Mouth business development efforts:   The decreasing relevancy of yester-year's Rainmaker Attorneys in favor of the rise of Digital Rainmakers;   A decrease in revenues for Senior Attorney-led firms that do not adopt Multi-Channel Digital Marketing to supplement old school Word of Mouth rainmaking; and   A decrease in law firm value among Senior Attorney-led firms that do not replenish their Books of Business during today's 3.0 Digital Era as well as during the pre-Google Word of Mouth Era.   Poock also points out the following:   Despite the ongoing disruption to business development that today's 3.0 Digital Era presents, law firm purchasers want and need the following 3 resources that Senior Attorney-led firms offer:   A selling law firm's Book of Business;   Talented lawyers and support staff; and   Subject matter knowledge to convert to digital content to attract the attention of potential clients who search online for lawyers and law firms to retain.   That stated, Poock raises the following forecast for Senior Attorneys to consider:   Once “Digital Rainmaker” law firms can generate new clients for less cost than purchasing a Senior Attorney-led firm's Book of Business, the market value for those Books of Business will decrease.   As Poock states, “We strongly believe that Law Firm Sales 1.0 will come to an end at some point, but that's not going to be in the 2020s . . . I think it's going to be in the in the 2030s, because when law firms can generate new clients for less money than the fee sharing [per] Law Firm Sales 1.0, [they will not] . . . need Senior Attorney-led firms' Books of Business as much as they do now.”   And, as Poock states in conclusion: “Hence why we strongly recommend for those law firms that are committed to Word of Mouth, as compared to today's, Digital Era for generating clients digitally, that now is the right time to consider selling your law firm.”

Thanks to Huel for sponsoring this video! Get 15% off Huel's newest and existing products by heading to https://huel.yt.link/iKGG9Mb and using code JONSOLO (new customers only, min $75 purchase).

This week on the Shoecast our chat is with Clayton Chambers, founder of the Substack newsletter Sprezza and general menswear individual about the world. After running through the footwear signposts in his own life, from churchboy penny loafers to the Clark's Wallabees he just can't quit, Clayton digs in on footwear brands in and outside the welted space he's really feeling, the rise of menswear brand- and product line-building done the slow and steady way, and why the younger generation might just be the unlock to a more widespread quality revival. https://www.sprezza.xyz/https://www.instagram.com/sprezza__/https://www.instagram.com/clayton.chambrs/ Support the Shoecast, get full bonus episode access, and join the most interesting shoe-and-boot-loving community on the internet with a Stitchdown Premium membershiphttps://www.stitchdown.com/join-stitchdown-premium/Check out our site!https://www.stitchdown.com/2025 dates and location for Stitchdown's Boot Camp 3—the world's fair of shoes and boots and leather and more—coming soon.https://www.stitchdownbootcamp.com/

Send us a textColin and Russ discuss the high profile killing of Kentucky Judge Kevin Mullins by Sheriff Shawn "Mickey" Stines, which occurred in September of 2024 when Mr. Stines allegedly shot and killed Mullins while the two were in the Judge's chambers in the Letcher County Courthouse.  Colin and Russ discuss the facts, charges and angles that the prosecution and defense will argue as the case meanders its way toward trial.  Plus a fresh Is this Legal and a hilarious DCOTW.  Check it out!

This week we re-present part 1 of an interview Fr. Scott recorded with a man who literally walked in the snowshoe prints of Bp. Frederick Baraga, (now-Deacon) Curtis Chambers.https://archive.org/download/LetsTalkCatholic/LTC-110RR-SnowshoesPt1.mp3

To get live links to the music we play and resources we offer, visit www.WOSPodcast.comThis show includes the following songs:Liv Fenton - Finding My Way FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYCaitlin Dykes - foot in my mouth FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYPJ Brunson - Promised Land FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYRändi Fay - Moonlight FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYThe Sirens - Texas GirlsHer Mountain Majesty - Echoes FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYGwendolyn Spire - Energy Vampire FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYKristin Chambers - Reconcile FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYMelissa D - Will I Be Bored in Heaven FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYSOLIE - SUMMERTIME SOUNDS FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYMoniq - Sunshine Baby Barbara Romanov - Make Me Stay FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYAnn Sweeten - Distant Clouds FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYmarylefthome - Princess and the Pea FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYSwamp Music Players - Car Wheels On A Gravel Road FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYFor Music Biz Resources Visit www.FEMusician.com and www.ProfitableMusician.comVisit our Sponsor Ed & Carol Nicodemi at edandcarolnicodemi.comVisit our Sponsor Melissa D Moorhouse at melissadmusic.com Visit our Sponsor Kolie Dee at koliedee.comVisit our Sponsor Collaborations at collaborationsmusic.comVisit www.wosradio.com for more details and to submit music to our review board for consideration.Visit our resources for Indie Artists: https://www.wosradio.com/resources

A massive Politico leak just exposed thousands of private messages between Young Republican leaders across the country — and what's inside is beyond vile.Racism. Antisemitism. Homophobia. Even jokes about rape and gas chambers — from people who already hold political power.In this episode, Logan breaks down who these players really are, how deep the rot runs, where the money's coming from, and why the GOP's “next generation” might be even darker than the one before.This isn't locker-room talk. It's the blueprint for America's political future — and it's terrifying.

Who's the Biglaw partner with the most star-studded client roster? Orin Snyder, co-chair of the Trials Practice Group at Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, has to be up there. Consider this: at least a half-dozen of his clients have performed at the Super Bowl halftime show, in Times Square on New Year's Eve, or both. (In case you're wondering, they are Marc Anthony, Mariah Carey, Lady Gaga, Jennifer Lopez, The Rolling Stones, and Bruce Springsteen.)Most lawyers would be thrilled to have just one famous client. But Orin Snyder isn't most lawyers. A former federal prosecutor, he has been recognized as one of the nation's leading litigators—not just by Chambers and Partners and Forbes, but by entertainment-industry publications like Variety and The Hollywood Reporter.In our conversation, we covered Orin's family history in the entertainment industry; his service as an assistant U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York; why celebrity clients are often a joy to represent, not annoying or aggravating (which was my guess); and his forthcoming memoir.As a longtime Biglaw partner and member of Gibson's executive committee, Orin is an expert on the business of law. So we discussed the virtues of boutique practice (he had his own boutique before joining Gibson), why so many Biglaw firms are shifting away from litigation, and why he thinks that's a mistake. Finally, Orin told me how he came to represent the family of the late Professor Dan Markel, pro bono—for which I am, as a friend of Dan, especially grateful.Show Notes:* Orin Snyder bio, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP* Orin Snyder profile, Chambers and Partners* Meet Orin Snyder, the Deadliest Trial Lawyer in Tech, by Greg Sandoval for The VergePrefer reading to listening? For paid subscribers, a transcript of the entire episode appears below.Sponsored by:NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment at nexfirm dot com. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit davidlat.substack.com/subscribe

Hostel, House and Chambers: Accommodating the Victorian and Edwardian Working Woman (Liverpool University Press, 2025) by Emily Gee is the first comprehensive study of the campaigns to house a new generation of working women, the specialised design of the buildings and the women whose lives were changed by this architectural movement. After 1900, the rapid rise of women working as clerks, secretaries or typists, in London and other cities, created an urgent need for affordable and respectable accommodation. Building on models of elegant Victorian ladies' residential chambers and the vast working men's lodging houses, a new type of single working women's hostel emerged. The handsome, if occasionally austere, façades blended into the Edwardian streetscape. However, architectural plans, literary descriptions and historic photographs reveal distinctive interiors. The hostels featured efficiently planned tiny private spaces alongside generous communal dining and sitting rooms, as well as libraries, music rooms and bicycle stores. Emphatically not charitable or municipal affairs, these were business-minded enterprises, established and advocated by other Edwardian women. In turn, these little-known buildings supported, enabled and empowered a new generation of intrepid working women. This book brings the buildings, and the residents, to vivid life through previously untapped sources. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Hostel, House and Chambers: Accommodating the Victorian and Edwardian Working Woman (Liverpool University Press, 2025) by Emily Gee is the first comprehensive study of the campaigns to house a new generation of working women, the specialised design of the buildings and the women whose lives were changed by this architectural movement. After 1900, the rapid rise of women working as clerks, secretaries or typists, in London and other cities, created an urgent need for affordable and respectable accommodation. Building on models of elegant Victorian ladies' residential chambers and the vast working men's lodging houses, a new type of single working women's hostel emerged. The handsome, if occasionally austere, façades blended into the Edwardian streetscape. However, architectural plans, literary descriptions and historic photographs reveal distinctive interiors. The hostels featured efficiently planned tiny private spaces alongside generous communal dining and sitting rooms, as well as libraries, music rooms and bicycle stores. Emphatically not charitable or municipal affairs, these were business-minded enterprises, established and advocated by other Edwardian women. In turn, these little-known buildings supported, enabled and empowered a new generation of intrepid working women. This book brings the buildings, and the residents, to vivid life through previously untapped sources. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/gender-studies

Hostel, House and Chambers: Accommodating the Victorian and Edwardian Working Woman (Liverpool University Press, 2025) by Emily Gee is the first comprehensive study of the campaigns to house a new generation of working women, the specialised design of the buildings and the women whose lives were changed by this architectural movement. After 1900, the rapid rise of women working as clerks, secretaries or typists, in London and other cities, created an urgent need for affordable and respectable accommodation. Building on models of elegant Victorian ladies' residential chambers and the vast working men's lodging houses, a new type of single working women's hostel emerged. The handsome, if occasionally austere, façades blended into the Edwardian streetscape. However, architectural plans, literary descriptions and historic photographs reveal distinctive interiors. The hostels featured efficiently planned tiny private spaces alongside generous communal dining and sitting rooms, as well as libraries, music rooms and bicycle stores. Emphatically not charitable or municipal affairs, these were business-minded enterprises, established and advocated by other Edwardian women. In turn, these little-known buildings supported, enabled and empowered a new generation of intrepid working women. This book brings the buildings, and the residents, to vivid life through previously untapped sources. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/architecture

Hostel, House and Chambers: Accommodating the Victorian and Edwardian Working Woman (Liverpool University Press, 2025) by Emily Gee is the first comprehensive study of the campaigns to house a new generation of working women, the specialised design of the buildings and the women whose lives were changed by this architectural movement. After 1900, the rapid rise of women working as clerks, secretaries or typists, in London and other cities, created an urgent need for affordable and respectable accommodation. Building on models of elegant Victorian ladies' residential chambers and the vast working men's lodging houses, a new type of single working women's hostel emerged. The handsome, if occasionally austere, façades blended into the Edwardian streetscape. However, architectural plans, literary descriptions and historic photographs reveal distinctive interiors. The hostels featured efficiently planned tiny private spaces alongside generous communal dining and sitting rooms, as well as libraries, music rooms and bicycle stores. Emphatically not charitable or municipal affairs, these were business-minded enterprises, established and advocated by other Edwardian women. In turn, these little-known buildings supported, enabled and empowered a new generation of intrepid working women. This book brings the buildings, and the residents, to vivid life through previously untapped sources. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hostel, House and Chambers: Accommodating the Victorian and Edwardian Working Woman (Liverpool University Press, 2025) by Emily Gee is the first comprehensive study of the campaigns to house a new generation of working women, the specialised design of the buildings and the women whose lives were changed by this architectural movement. After 1900, the rapid rise of women working as clerks, secretaries or typists, in London and other cities, created an urgent need for affordable and respectable accommodation. Building on models of elegant Victorian ladies' residential chambers and the vast working men's lodging houses, a new type of single working women's hostel emerged. The handsome, if occasionally austere, façades blended into the Edwardian streetscape. However, architectural plans, literary descriptions and historic photographs reveal distinctive interiors. The hostels featured efficiently planned tiny private spaces alongside generous communal dining and sitting rooms, as well as libraries, music rooms and bicycle stores. Emphatically not charitable or municipal affairs, these were business-minded enterprises, established and advocated by other Edwardian women. In turn, these little-known buildings supported, enabled and empowered a new generation of intrepid working women. This book brings the buildings, and the residents, to vivid life through previously untapped sources. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hostel, House and Chambers: Accommodating the Victorian and Edwardian Working Woman (Liverpool University Press, 2025) by Emily Gee is the first comprehensive study of the campaigns to house a new generation of working women, the specialised design of the buildings and the women whose lives were changed by this architectural movement. After 1900, the rapid rise of women working as clerks, secretaries or typists, in London and other cities, created an urgent need for affordable and respectable accommodation. Building on models of elegant Victorian ladies' residential chambers and the vast working men's lodging houses, a new type of single working women's hostel emerged. The handsome, if occasionally austere, façades blended into the Edwardian streetscape. However, architectural plans, literary descriptions and historic photographs reveal distinctive interiors. The hostels featured efficiently planned tiny private spaces alongside generous communal dining and sitting rooms, as well as libraries, music rooms and bicycle stores. Emphatically not charitable or municipal affairs, these were business-minded enterprises, established and advocated by other Edwardian women. In turn, these little-known buildings supported, enabled and empowered a new generation of intrepid working women. This book brings the buildings, and the residents, to vivid life through previously untapped sources. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Somewhere along the way, modern parenting turned into a battle against biology. In this powerful conversation, Britt Chambers—founder of Goodnight Moodchild—joins Ginny Yurich on The 1000 Hours Outside Podcast to dismantle the myth that babies need to be trained to fit adult schedules. She reveals how industrialized culture, profit-driven baby products, and pressure for independence have pulled parents away from nature's original design: deep, intuitive connection. Together, they explore what it really means to raise the baby with the mother—to rest when your baby rests, to nurture at night and thrive in the day, to trust the signals instead of suppress them. From night waking to outdoor rhythms to the quiet rebellion of slowing down, this episode invites parents to remember what our ancestors never forgot: children who stay close to nature stay close to themselves. Learn more about Britt and all the incredible support she has to offer here Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

4: Former Cisco CEO John Chambers returns to discuss why AI is scaling faster than any tech wave before it, including the internet. Now the CEO of JC2 Ventures, Chambers shares lessons from advising 24 AI-native startups and offers a strategic lens on how leaders, companies, and countries can win or be left behind.

Join Chambers, Matt, and Lucas as they dive into the world of Revachol! It's been years since this game came out and the question everyone has been asking: Is it still that good? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It's Hockey Eve, and the Chambers brothers are back with the official 2025-26 Dallas Stars season preview. Ryan, Chris, and James cover everything from the Pete DeBoer firing and Glen Gulutzan's new system to how Mikko Rantanen changes the top six. They debate whether this team has finally reached “Cup or Bust” status, preview defensive pairings and goaltending workloads, and make bold predictions for Wyatt Johnston, Maverick Bork, and Jake Oettinger's potential Vezina run. If you love sarcasm, stats, and Stars talk that actually feels like fans in the room, this episode's for you. We're Looking for sponsors! If you or your business want to partner with a passionate, growing hockey podcast with a loyal Dallas Stars fanbase, we'd love to connect. Check out our media kit by clicking here to learn how you can support Starcastic Remarks and reach a dedicated NHL audience. JOIN THE Who CARES Club! Love Starcastic Remarks? Join our membership club, The Who Cares Club! For $5/month, you get some exclusive perks and help the most sarcastic Stars podcast continue to grow and continue on! Click here to join! Support Starcastic Remarks! Help us grow by leaving a 5-star review wherever you listen to podcasts—it makes a huge difference! Watch us on YouTube and click like & subscribe and hit that notification bell! Follow us across social media for updates, highlights, and behind-the-scenes content: YouTube: @StarcasticR Twitter (X): @StarcasticR Discord: Join Here TikTok: @StarcasticR Instagram: @StarcasticR Facebook: @StarcasticR Visit our website here for more content! Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

As a parent, one of the hardest questions you'll ever face is this: How do I teach my kids about sex in a porn-filled world—without using fear, shame, or silence?In this episode, I sit down with Taylor Chambers, a licensed marriage and family therapist and the founder of The Good and The Free, to talk about what it really means to raise porn-resilient kids and model fearless sexuality—not just for them, but for ourselves as men.We explore what it looks like to move beyond fear-based parenting and into sexual wholeness, integrity, and self-leadership. Taylor shares his deeply human story of moving from religious shame and willpower-based recovery into an approach grounded in acceptance, integration, and emotional honesty—the same work that helped him build his Porn Resilient Summit and framework for helping families heal from shame and secrecy around sexuality.In this episode, we dive deep into:How fear and shame around sexuality create disconnection and secrecyWhy porn addiction recovery starts with your own sexual integrationThe psychology of how kids internalize sexual shame—and what to do insteadThe neuroscience of fear, desire, and emotional regulationHow to talk with your kids about sex and pornography in ways that build trust, confidence, and self-respectThe true meaning of integrity and why it's impossible to be “whole” while rejecting parts of yourselfHow to raise kids who are resilient, not just “protected,” in a digital worldWhy fearless sexuality doesn't mean indulgence—it means freedom from control, repression, and fearYou'll learn how to reframe sexuality as a relationship rather than a problem to eliminate, and why healing your own sexual shame directly impacts your children's freedom and confidence.We talk about the inner work every man must do to align his psychology, spirituality, and masculinity—so you can live with the kind of integrity your kids can actually feel.If you've ever felt torn between wanting to protect your kids and wanting to raise them to be strong, wise, and connected—you need this conversation.Featuring: Taylor Chambers, LMFT — The Good and The FreeTaylor is a leading voice in porn addiction recovery, healthy sexuality, and shame-free living. He's a licensed Marriage and Family Therapist, creator of the Porn Resilient Model, and founder of The Good and The Free, where he teaches men, parents, and couples how to build sexual wholeness rooted in honesty, integrity, and freedom.Follow Taylor at wearethegoodandthefree.com or on Instagram @thegoodandthefreeDon't miss the Porn Resilient Online Summit (Oct 13–16, 2025), where I'll share The RAIL Method™—a step-by-step system to turn cravings into fuel for recovery. You can watch my interview and 20 other experts free, or grab the All-Access Implementation Bundle for lifetime access to all recorded interviews + courses and resources (including my RAIL Method™ online course)—just $87 if purchased by October 12th.Support the showNo More Desire

In this episode of Chamber Chat, host Brandon Burton speaks with Tonia Stephenson, President and CEO of the Burke County Chamber of Commerce. Tonia shares her journey in community leadership and economic development, emphasizing the importance of member retention and innovative engagement strategies. The conversation highlights the unique approaches Tonia employs to ensure every member feels valued and supported, including personalized outreach, community events, and creative marketing initiatives. Tonia also discusses the future of Chambers of Commerce and the need for relevance in a changing business landscape, encouraging collaboration and mentorship among chamber professionals.   Transcript and show notes found at chamberchatpodcast.com/episode350. Please support this podcast by supporting our sponsors. Community Matters, Inc. chamberchatpodcast.com/podcast App My Community appmycommunity.com/chamberchat Resource Development Group rdgfundraising.com Econ Dev Ops econdevops.com Swypit chamberchatpodcast.com/cc  

Oswald Chambers' classic devotional My Utmost for His Highest has shaped countless lives for more than a century. With support from the Oswald Chambers Publications Association, a modernized edition is now helping a new generation engage with Chambers' timeless insights.Macy Halford, the editor behind the rewrite, spent years studying Chambers' original sermons and notes, which were carefully recorded by his wife, Biddy. In this conversation, Macy shares how the updated edition was developed, the challenges of honoring Chambers' voice while making the content accessible, and what this enduring devotional can offer readers today.

Jack Chambers, Deputy Leader of Fianna Fáil and director of elections for the presidential election (TD for Dublin West and Minister for Public Expenditure, explains the situation that led to Jim Gavin's withdrawal from the Presidential election.

Mix Name: DJ Santana – Wu-Tang Clan – Enter The Wu-Tang (36 Chambers) Album Mix (1993) Website: https://www.iamlmp.com/ Join Our Discord: https://discord.com/invite/iamlmp Join Us DJs New Remixes & Blends: https://www.iamlmp.com/recordpool Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/iamlmp/ DJ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/djsantana Download our DJ Music App Daily Mixes: https://linktr.ee/iamlmp #hiphop #iamlmp #wutang

Pat Leahy and Jack Horgan-Jones join Hugh Linehan to talk about the week in politics: We already know next Tuesday's budget is going to be a much less generous affair than recent years. Jack and Pat share what they know about the tough stance being taken by Ministers Paschal Donohoe and Jack Chambers in negotiations, including one Government source's characterisation of Chambers as akin to Margaret Thatcher: “no, no, no”. Of the three presidential hopefuls, Catherine Connolly has run the strongest campaign so far. But could the news that she employed a woman convicted of firearms offences hinder her in gathering the votes she needs?Fianna Fáil candidate Jim Gavin's campaign also made some missteps this week, hampering the novice politician's campaign as it finds its feet. Security issues are at the top of the European agenda thanks to the ongoing war in Ukraine and the fear of Russian cyberattacks and drone incursions. Finally the panelists pick their favourite Irish Times journalism of the week including Senator Michael McDowell's explanation for why he didn't nominate Maria Steen, the passing of Martin Mansergh and a relatable personal problem. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Join Matt, Lucas, Hyalet, Hot Mickey, and Chambers are they fight hard to draft their favorite sports games of all time! Who will win? Who will die? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Jeannie Rhee is one of the nation's leading litigators, with the awards and accolades to prove it—including, most recently, recognition last month from Forbes as one of America's Top 250 Lawyers. But her legal career is not only impressive; it's also very interesting.The past few years have been extremely eventful for Jeannie. From 2017 until 2019, she worked on a matter you might have heard of: special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. She then became a partner in the Washington, D.C. office of Paul Weiss—her professional home until May 2025, when she and several other partners left (itself a newsworthy event).Together with top trial lawyers Karen Dunn (a past podcast guest) and Bill Isaacson, Jeannie co-founded Dunn Isaacson Rhee—in my opinion, the most exciting new firm to launch in 2025 to date. And since starting DIR, Jeannie continues to handle headline-making cases—most notably, the federal government's antitrust case against Google.Why did Jeannie and her partners leave Paul Weiss? What is their vision for DIR as a firm? Looking back in light of recent events, what does she think about her work on the Mueller investigation? We covered all this and more, including Jeannie's service as a D.C. federal prosecutor and at the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, in the latest Original Jurisdiction podcast.Show Notes:* Jeannie S. Rhee bio, Dunn Isaacson Rhee LLP* Jeannie Rhee profile, Chambers and Partners* Ex-Paul Weiss Stars Balance Big Law Ties, Autonomy at Firm, by Tatyana Monnay for Bloomberg LawPrefer reading to listening? For paid subscribers, a transcript of the entire episode appears below.Sponsored by:NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment at nexfirm dot com. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit davidlat.substack.com/subscribe

Credits: 0.25 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit™   CME/CE Information and Claim Credit: https://www.pri-med.com/online-education/podcast/frankly-speaking-cme-452 Overview: The healthcare landscape is undergoing a sea change, significantly impacting established, evidence-based recommendations. Media coverage suggests that the HHS Secretary plans to release a report linking acetaminophen use during pregnancy with an increased risk of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in offspring as well as linking maternal folate deficiency with ASD—associations that have not been supported by evidence. If promoted by public health agencies, such discrepancies pose a dilemma for clinicians who have relied on and trusted that guidance reflects evidence and is grounded in scientific methods. Join us to review the evidence on acetaminophen and ASD risk and learn strategies to ensure your practice is based on valid findings. Episode resource links: Ahlqvist VH, Sjöqvist H, Dalman C, et al. Acetaminophen Use During Pregnancy and Children's Risk of Autism, ADHD, and Intellectual Disability. JAMA. 2024;331(14):1205–1214. doi:10.1001/jama.2024.3172   Damkier, P., Gram, E. B., Ceulemans, M., Panchaud, A., Cleary, B., Chambers, C., Weber-Schoendorfer, C., Kennedy, D., Hodson, K., Grant, K. S., Diav-Citrin, O., Običan, S. G., Shechtman, S., & Alwan, S. (2025). Acetaminophen in Pregnancy and Attention-Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorder and Autism Spectrum Disorder. Obstetrics and gynecology, 145(2), 168–176. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000005802   Ji Y, Azuine RE, Zhang Y, et al. Association of Cord Plasma Biomarkers of In Utero Acetaminophen Exposure With Risk of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Autism Spectrum Disorder in Childhood. JAMA Psychiatry. 2020;77(2):180–189. doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2019.3259   Hirota T, King BH.  Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Review. JAMA. 2023;329(2):157–168. doi:10.1001/jama.2022.23661   Liu, X., Zou, M., Sun, C., Wu, L., & Chen, W. X. (2022). Prenatal Folic Acid Supplements and Offspring's Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Meta-analysis and Meta-regression. Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 52(2), 522–539. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-021-04951-8   DSM-5-TR: Neurocognitive Disorders Supplement; October 2022. https://psychiatryonline.org/pb-assets/dsm/update/DSM-5-TR_Neurocognitive-Disorders-Supplement_2022_APA_Publishing.pdf https://www.npr.org/sections/shots-health-news/2025/09/06/nx-s1-5532143/hhs-responds-to-report-about-autism-and-acetaminophen Guest: Susan Feeney, DNP, FNP-BC, NP-C   Music Credit: Matthew Bugos Thoughts? Suggestions? Email us at FranklySpeaking@pri-med.com   

On Friday we learned that according to President Donald Trump, when coverage is negative, "It's no longer free speech."  And it seems he's not alone. There's a growing sentiment within the Republican Party, which currently controls the White House and both Chambers of Congress, that actually, free speech doesn't apply if you say mean things about Republicans. This is all in regards to ABC pulling “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” from its usual spot in the nightly lineup, after FCC Chairman Brendan Carr said that Kimmel should face repercussions for comments regarding the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. On this episode, we discuss why the suspension of a late-night talk show host isn't just about a late-night talk show host. It's about speech, and what you can, and apparently can't, say on television. To talk more about the media machinations that got Jimmy Kimmel pushed off the air, and the chilling effect of the FCC's implied threats, we spoke to Brian Stelter, media analyst for CNN. And in headlines, a federal judge in Florida tosses out Trump's $15-billion dollar defamation lawsuit against the New York Times, the United Kingdom, Australia, Portugal and Canada formally recognize a Palestinian state, and new H1-B applicants will have to pay an extra $100,000 fee for their visas.Show Notes:Check out Brian's recent story: https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/20/media/trump-kimmel-disney-bob-iger-abc-fccCall Congress – 202-224-3121Subscribe to the What A Day Newsletter – https://tinyurl.com/3kk4nyz8What A Day – YouTube – https://www.youtube.com/@whatadaypodcastFollow us on Instagram – https://www.instagram.com/crookedmedia/For a transcript of this episode, please visit crooked.com/whataday Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.