Podcasts about contentious

WBUR's Simón Rios, the first reporter to break this story, spoke to WBUR's All Things Considered about what he found through public records and conversations with members of Ferreira's and Leavitt's families.

Griffith Mayor Cr Doug Curran joins Matty Wray for Brekkie for weekly updates every Monday Morning.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Life, Culture and Current Events from a Biblical Perspective with Neil Johnson.Your support sends the gospel to every corner of Australia through broadcast, online and print media: https://vision.org.au/donateSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

It is telling and troubling that the annual climate talking-shop's outcome did not even mention fossil fuels. We ask whether the COP process is still fit for purpose. Cryptocurrencies could be heading for an almighty fall: what would they take down with them? And the revealing vowels and diphthongs of whale communications. (Hear much more on animal communication in our series on “Babbage”: part 1 asks whether animals truly have language, and part 2 whether AI could translate it.) Additional audio courtesy of Project CETI. Get a world of insights by subscribing to Economist Podcasts+. For more information about how to access Economist Podcasts+, please visit our FAQs page or watch our video explaining how to link your account. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It is telling and troubling that the annual climate talking-shop's outcome did not even mention fossil fuels. We ask whether the COP process is still fit for purpose. Cryptocurrencies could be heading for an almighty fall: what would they take down with them? And the revealing vowels and diphthongs of whale communications. (Hear much more on animal communication in our series on “Babbage”: part 1 asks whether animals truly have language, and part 2 whether AI could translate it.) Additional audio courtesy of Project CETI. Get a world of insights by subscribing to Economist Podcasts+. For more information about how to access Economist Podcasts+, please visit our FAQs page or watch our video explaining how to link your account. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In a repeat broadcast, Bill McKeever and Eric Johnson talk about the issue of contention in conversations with Latter-day Saints.

In a repeat broadcast, Bill McKeever and Eric Johnson talk about the issue of contention in conversations with Latter-day Saints.

The Connecticut House approves a revised version of a controversial affordable housing bill. A short-term spending bill passed in Congress gets mixed support from our region's lawmakers. One of Long Island's oldest farms took on serious damage in a fire yesterday. The cop charged in the Randy Cox paralysis case will not serve prison time. Plus, an effort in New York to make therapeutic use of cannabis more accessible.

Colin Woodard, a bestselling author, historian, and award-winning journalist, directs the Nationhood Lab at Salve Regina University's Pell Center for International Relations and Public Policy.

In this episode of the Arsenal Women Arsecast, Tim and Jamie rake over the bones of the contentious 1-1 draw with Chelsea on Saturday and consider where it leaves Arsenal's season. There is talk about how Arsenal looked to replace Kim Little, Chelsea springing a slight surprise by starting with a back four, a poor opening 15 minutes before a second half redemption arc and there is conversation over the extraordinary decision to disallow Stina Blackstenius' goal, as well as some close offside calls and a potential red card for Victoria Pelova. In the second half, Tim and Jamie take listener questions from BlueSky and from the Arseblog discord.Get extra bonus content and help support Arseblog's award winning coverage of Arsenal Women by becoming an Arseblog Member on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/arseblog Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

As some doctors voice concern over Florida's controversial plans to eliminate vaccine mandates, a look at the forthcoming debate in the legislature over how to move forward. Plus, Orange County commissioners approve two additional districts.

A contentious bill tightening the test for Māori to win customary marine title has passed its third reading, sparking fiery protest across the country. The protest even made its way to the steps of Parliament, drawing the ire of its speaker. Maōri news journalist Tuwhenuaroa Natanahira reports. 

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

AP correspondent Haya Panjwani reports on the NYC mayoral debate.

In this episode, we sit down with Professor Mohammad Ali Kadivar to explore the urgent and timely question of popular protests amid global democratic backsliding. Drawing from his acclaimed monograph, Popular Politics and thePath to Durable Democracy, Kadivar poses the following questions: What role does dissent play in sustaining democracies? Do protests reinforce or underminedemocratic institutions? The book offers a compelling and often counterintuitive analysis of how mass mobilizations shape democratic trajectories. Through a rich comparative lens—examining cases from Egypt, Tunisia, Pakistan, South Africa, and Poland—Kadivar argues that prolonged prodemocratic mobilizations can in fact fortify democracies. Rather than destabilizing political systems, these extended collective protest movements build the organizational infrastructure and civic capacity necessary for democratic consolidation.Kadivar emphasizes that sustained mobilization fosters stable leadership, cultivates diverse civic participation, and compels states to engage meaningfully with popular demands. By revisiting pivotal uprisings, such as the Arab Spring in Tunisia and Egypt, this conversation reveals underexploreddynamics at the heart of democratic transitions—and challenges conventional assumptions about the disruptive role of protest.

The legal battle between Virginia Roberts Giuffre and Prince Andrew quickly spiraled into one of the most contentious royal scandals in modern memory. From the outset, Andrew's legal team fought aggressively to have the case dismissed, citing Giuffre's prior settlement with Jeffrey Epstein as grounds to shield him from liability. Giuffre's lawyers, however, pushed back just as forcefully, determined to keep the prince from evading accountability. The clash played out in the courts and the press, with each new filing drawing global headlines and deepening the damage to Andrew's reputation.As the pressure mounted, the stakes for the monarchy itself became undeniable. Prince Charles, keenly aware of the danger the scandal posed to the royal family's already fragile standing, was forced to intervene behind the scenes. Reports suggested that he personally assisted in securing the funds needed for the multimillion-pound settlement, effectively ensuring his brother could avoid a public trial. While the payment brought the case to a close, it also underscored the perception that the royals were circling the wagons to protect one of their own, further fueling criticism that accountability had once again been sidestepped through privilege and money.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The legal battle between Virginia Roberts Giuffre and Prince Andrew quickly spiraled into one of the most contentious royal scandals in modern memory. From the outset, Andrew's legal team fought aggressively to have the case dismissed, citing Giuffre's prior settlement with Jeffrey Epstein as grounds to shield him from liability. Giuffre's lawyers, however, pushed back just as forcefully, determined to keep the prince from evading accountability. The clash played out in the courts and the press, with each new filing drawing global headlines and deepening the damage to Andrew's reputation.As the pressure mounted, the stakes for the monarchy itself became undeniable. Prince Charles, keenly aware of the danger the scandal posed to the royal family's already fragile standing, was forced to intervene behind the scenes. Reports suggested that he personally assisted in securing the funds needed for the multimillion-pound settlement, effectively ensuring his brother could avoid a public trial. While the payment brought the case to a close, it also underscored the perception that the royals were circling the wagons to protect one of their own, further fueling criticism that accountability had once again been sidestepped through privilege and money.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Join us on this uplifting episode of Double Edged Sword Podcast as we dive into Acts 15, where the early church in Antioch radiates love, unity, and unwavering faith. Reflecting on the apostles' decree about the Gentiles, we rejoice in the truth that binds us—Jesus Christ, the Prince of Peace. This episode explores how true unity, rooted in His unchanging truth, stands firm against compromise, offering a timeless lesson for our walk with God.Even amidst contention between Paul and Barnabas, we see God's grace at work. Their separation, far from enmity, becomes a beautiful testament to growth and mission, as they each nurture John Mark's faith journey. Beloved, let this inspire us to seek reconciliation and follow-up with one another in love, trusting that the Holy Spirit guides us through every challenge. Tune in for a heartwarming reminder of the apostolic church's enduring strength and the power of God's truth!

The legal battle between Virginia Roberts Giuffre and Prince Andrew quickly spiraled into one of the most contentious royal scandals in modern memory. From the outset, Andrew's legal team fought aggressively to have the case dismissed, citing Giuffre's prior settlement with Jeffrey Epstein as grounds to shield him from liability. Giuffre's lawyers, however, pushed back just as forcefully, determined to keep the prince from evading accountability. The clash played out in the courts and the press, with each new filing drawing global headlines and deepening the damage to Andrew's reputation.As the pressure mounted, the stakes for the monarchy itself became undeniable. Prince Charles, keenly aware of the danger the scandal posed to the royal family's already fragile standing, was forced to intervene behind the scenes. Reports suggested that he personally assisted in securing the funds needed for the multimillion-pound settlement, effectively ensuring his brother could avoid a public trial. While the payment brought the case to a close, it also underscored the perception that the royals were circling the wagons to protect one of their own, further fueling criticism that accountability had once again been sidestepped through privilege and money.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The relationship between Prince Andrew and King Charles III has long been fraught, but it grew far more contentious in the wake of Andrew's association with Jeffrey Epstein. After the disastrous 2019 BBC “Newsnight” interview, Andrew was forced to step back from public duties, and Charles was widely reported to have been the driving force behind sidelining his younger brother to protect the monarchy's image. Their tensions deepened when Charles, then Prince of Wales, allegedly pushed Queen Elizabeth II to strip Andrew of his military titles and patronages, moves Andrew resisted but ultimately could not stop.Since Charles's accession to the throne, the rift has only widened. Charles has refused Andrew any return to public life and has moved to reduce Andrew's role within the family, even limiting his use of royal residences like Royal Lodge. Andrew, meanwhile, has reportedly chafed at his brother's firm stance, feeling abandoned and marginalized. What emerges is a relationship marked by power struggles and mistrust, with Charles prioritizing the survival of the monarchy's reputation over family loyalty, and Andrew left isolated as a disgraced figure still fighting for relevance.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The relationship between Prince Andrew and King Charles III has long been fraught, but it grew far more contentious in the wake of Andrew's association with Jeffrey Epstein. After the disastrous 2019 BBC “Newsnight” interview, Andrew was forced to step back from public duties, and Charles was widely reported to have been the driving force behind sidelining his younger brother to protect the monarchy's image. Their tensions deepened when Charles, then Prince of Wales, allegedly pushed Queen Elizabeth II to strip Andrew of his military titles and patronages, moves Andrew resisted but ultimately could not stop.Since Charles's accession to the throne, the rift has only widened. Charles has refused Andrew any return to public life and has moved to reduce Andrew's role within the family, even limiting his use of royal residences like Royal Lodge. Andrew, meanwhile, has reportedly chafed at his brother's firm stance, feeling abandoned and marginalized. What emerges is a relationship marked by power struggles and mistrust, with Charles prioritizing the survival of the monarchy's reputation over family loyalty, and Andrew left isolated as a disgraced figure still fighting for relevance.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

AP correspondent Charles de Ledesma reports the UK government has announced that British citizens will need a digital ID card to work.

Guillaume Le Roux operates Le Vrai Paris, the Real Paris. He gives guided tours that are focused on helping people to discover Paris through the eyes of a local while challenging their expectations about the city. Guillaume is also a food blogger.

Neta Kligler-Vilenchik— Associate Professor of Communication and Journalism at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem— and Ioana Literat— Associate Professor of Communication, Media, and Learning Technologies Design at Columbia University— discuss their book, Not Your Parents' Politics: Understanding Young People's Political Expression on Social Media. They create a dialogue around the ways young people engage with politics using social media, noting the differences between platforms and regions. Kligler-Vilenchik and Literat tie this into the 2016 and 2024 election cycles, along with international bureaucratic frictions.Both scholars tell us about their growing research on youth cultures' interactions with politics and how those have shifted over time. They cover how younger people are often involved in politics, whether it be via fandom or other forms of civic imagination. They end by suggesting that these intersections between the younger generations and politics can be optimistically inspiring.  Here are some of the references from this episode, for those who want to dig a little deeper:Academic TextsNot Your Parents' Politics: Understanding Young People's Political Expression on Social Media [Oxford, Amazon]By Any Media Necessary The New Youth Activism [NYU Press, Amazon] Fan activism and the Harry Potter Alliance [TWC]The Image War Moves to TikTok Evidence from the May 2021 Round of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict [Taylor & Francis Online]Dynamics of scale shift: Contentious places and hybrid activism on social media [Sage Journal]People MentionedJoe RoganKamala HarrisDonald TrumpBarrack ObamaHillary ClintonXi JinpingNancy PelosiAlexandra PelosiDavid HoggLillian (Lilly) Boxman-ShabtaiTaylor SwiftKeren Tenenboim- WeinblattTV, Films, and Other MediaCaptain America [IMDB]Harry Potter [IMDB]Donald Trump Speech LipSync [YouTube link]Extra Fun Tidbits + NewsCivic Paths [Website Link]Scratch Online Coding Community [MIT Site link]Fandom Forward [Link]Little Pinks [Article Link]South Korea President Removed From Power [Article Link]Romanian TikTok Election Scandal [BBC Link]Teen Activism Against School Shooting After Parkland [PBS Link]Slacktivisim [Article Link]Henry Jenkins on Emma Gonzale's Jacket and youth activism [Brown Journal of Public Affairs] ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––Share your thoughts via Twitter with Henry, Colin and the How Do You Like It So Far? account! You can also email us at howdoyoulikeitsofarpodcast@gmail.com.Music:“In Time” by Dylan Emmett and “Spaceship” by Lesion X.In Time (Instrumental) by Dylan Emmet https://soundcloud.com/dylanemmetSpaceship by Lesion X https://soundcloud.com/lesionxbeatsCreative Commons — Attribution 3.0 Unported — CC BY 3.0Free Download / Stream: https://bit.ly/in-time-instrumentalFree Download / Stream: https://bit.ly/lesion-x-spaceshipMusic promoted by Audio Library https://youtu.be/AzYoVrMLa1Q––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Southwest Michigan's Morning News podcast is prepared and delivered by the WSJM Newsroom. For these stories and more, visit https://www.wsjm.com and follow us for updates on Facebook. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Gemma Bastiani, Sarah Black, and Sophie Welsh unpack round six of the AFLW, including a pattern-breaking Giants win, a ladder-shaping umpiring decision, Anne Hatchard's impact in front of goal, and who can possibly challenge the Roos?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

FBI Director Kash Patel had a tough week. He'd already been slated to appear before both the House and Senate judiciary committees – hearings at which he was sure to be peppered with questions about his leadership of the FBI, his handling of the Jeffrey Epstein saga, and allegations that the FBI had fired people over their political preferences.But his handling of the FBI investigation into the killing of Charlie Kirk has led even some in the conservative base to question his competence.Today on “Post Reports,” Jeremy Roebuck takes us through how Patel handled himself in the week's congressional hearings – which more than once erupted into shouting matches. And he shares his reporting on how Patel came to be President Donald Trump's pick to head the FBI in the first place. Today's show was produced by Rennie Svirnovskiy, with help from Sabby Robinson. It was edited by Reena Flores and mixed by Sean Carter. Thank you to Ted Muldoon and James Martinez. Subscribe to The Washington Post here.

AP Washington correspondent Sagar Meghani reports on FBI Director Kash Patel's testy hearing before a Senate panel.

Ramblers 9/08/2025 - Welcome to the Fall 2025 semester! Listen as our new Sports Directors Adam Gross and John Vu break down the nailbiter Ag day football game that took place over the weekend alongside Rocky Mountain Collegian Sports Editors Sophie Webb and Michael Hovey; particularly the highly contentious touchdown call that gave Colorado State a last-minute lead. Following their chat about the Football game, our directors touch on topics such as volleyball, returning/new players, and more. 

Donna Adelson Trial — Georgia Cappleman's Blistering Cross of Defense Legal Expert on “Contentious” Divorce  This raw courtroom clip captures Assistant State Attorney Georgia Cappleman going toe-to-toe with defense family-law expert Linda Bailey over one deceptively simple question: Was the Wendi Adelson–Dan Markel divorce “contentious” or just another typical case in the trenches of family court? Bailey, called by the defense to cool the temperature, testified that the divorce looked much more amicable than many she's seen and that nothing in Donna Adelson's involvement struck her as unusual. Cappleman then launched into a pointed, methodical cross—pressing Bailey on whether “contentiousness” can look very different to lawyers than it does to the actual people living it, and whether high-stakes motions (like the so-called “grandmother motion”) might land as a five-alarm fire to a layperson even if an attorney views it as routine. You'll hear the prosecution challenge the expert's framing, arguing that in the real world—outside the safe confines of legal jargon—custody, relocation, and grandparent access can feel like the “most important thing in the whole wide world.” Bailey holds the line, reaffirming her view that the divorce was fundamentally typical and that the grandmother-related filing wasn't likely to succeed or restrict Donna's unsupervised time. The exchange matters because the state's motive theory leans on a heated backdrop: long-running conflict, relocation battles, and a family culture of control. If jurors accept Bailey's narrative, the defense gains leverage to argue the divorce itself was not a powder keg. If they embrace Cappleman's, the emotional stakes around Markel's parenting and Wendi's move remain powerful context for what happened next. This segment also unfolds amid a procedural wrinkle: outside the jury's presence, the court addressed concerns that Bailey had watched prior testimony (a no-no under the witness rule). Judge Stephen Everett ultimately allowed her to testify, and the jury returned to hear Cappleman's cross in full. That backdrop adds a layer of credibility chess to what you're watching: the prosecution probing not just what the expert believes, but how she arrived there and whether that lens truly matches the lived experience of the people at the center of this case. For trial-trackers focused on motive, credibility, and juror perception, this is one to study—tight questions, firm answers, and the kind of back-and-forth that can tilt how a jury reads every email, motion, and text that comes next. (Donna Adelson is charged with first-degree murder, conspiracy, and solicitation, and has pleaded not guilty.) #hashtags #DonnaAdelsonTrial #DanMarkel #GeorgiaCappleman #LindaBailey #TrueCrime #CustodyBattle #LegalAnalysis #Courtroom #TrialUpdate #Tallahassee Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

Donna Adelson Trial — Wendi Adelson's Former Divorce Attorney Says the Divorce Was “Not Contentious”   In today's testimony Kristin Adamson—the family-law attorney who represented Wendi Adelson during her divorce from Dan Markel—told jurors the initial divorce proceedings were “not contentious.” Her account undercuts the notion that the legal split itself was a nonstop conflagration; instead, Adamson drew a distinction between a relatively typical divorce process and what came after it. Under further questioning, she acknowledged that post-divorce filings by Markel became more personal and hostile, a shift the state says fed resentment and control battles that ultimately form the backdrop to this murder conspiracy case. Why it matters: motive and narrative framing. Prosecutors have long argued that a bitter custody fight and relocation dispute set the stage for the homicidal plot that killed Markel in 2014. If the jury accepts Adamson's framing—that the core divorce looked fairly standard while later filings grew heated—it subtly reshapes where the real friction lived and when it peaked. That matters for assigning intent and pressure points to the Adelson family's decisions in the months leading up to the murder.  Adamson also faced questions about parental involvement in divorce logistics (how often parents attend client meetings, who shows up in hearings), as the defense tries to downplay the idea of Donna Adelson meddling in legal strategy—arguing that what looked like interference may have been normal family presence during a stressful time. The prosecution, by contrast, wants jurors to see those same moments as control—a pattern consistent with its broader theory of a family mobilized to remove Markel as an obstacle. For viewers tracking continuity across witnesses, this clip is a calibration tool: it doesn't prove or disprove the murder-for-hire plot, but it helps jurors locate the temperature of the Adelson–Markel legal conflict on a timeline—cooler during the divorce itself, hotter in the aftermath. That timeline will echo through testimony about relocation, custody, wiretaps, and alleged conspirators, as the court weighs whether Donna Adelson crossed the line from family advocacy to criminal orchestration. (Donna Adelson is on trial for first-degree murder, conspiracy, and solicitation; she has pleaded not guilty.) #hashtags #DonnaAdelsonTrial #DanMarkel #WendiAdelson #KristinAdamson #TrueCrime #CustodyBattle #LegalAnalysis #Courtroom #MurderForHire #Tallahassee Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

Donna Adelson Trial — Georgia Cappleman's Blistering Cross of Defense Legal Expert on “Contentious” Divorce  This raw courtroom clip captures Assistant State Attorney Georgia Cappleman going toe-to-toe with defense family-law expert Linda Bailey over one deceptively simple question: Was the Wendi Adelson–Dan Markel divorce “contentious” or just another typical case in the trenches of family court? Bailey, called by the defense to cool the temperature, testified that the divorce looked much more amicable than many she's seen and that nothing in Donna Adelson's involvement struck her as unusual. Cappleman then launched into a pointed, methodical cross—pressing Bailey on whether “contentiousness” can look very different to lawyers than it does to the actual people living it, and whether high-stakes motions (like the so-called “grandmother motion”) might land as a five-alarm fire to a layperson even if an attorney views it as routine. You'll hear the prosecution challenge the expert's framing, arguing that in the real world—outside the safe confines of legal jargon—custody, relocation, and grandparent access can feel like the “most important thing in the whole wide world.” Bailey holds the line, reaffirming her view that the divorce was fundamentally typical and that the grandmother-related filing wasn't likely to succeed or restrict Donna's unsupervised time. The exchange matters because the state's motive theory leans on a heated backdrop: long-running conflict, relocation battles, and a family culture of control. If jurors accept Bailey's narrative, the defense gains leverage to argue the divorce itself was not a powder keg. If they embrace Cappleman's, the emotional stakes around Markel's parenting and Wendi's move remain powerful context for what happened next. This segment also unfolds amid a procedural wrinkle: outside the jury's presence, the court addressed concerns that Bailey had watched prior testimony (a no-no under the witness rule). Judge Stephen Everett ultimately allowed her to testify, and the jury returned to hear Cappleman's cross in full. That backdrop adds a layer of credibility chess to what you're watching: the prosecution probing not just what the expert believes, but how she arrived there and whether that lens truly matches the lived experience of the people at the center of this case. For trial-trackers focused on motive, credibility, and juror perception, this is one to study—tight questions, firm answers, and the kind of back-and-forth that can tilt how a jury reads every email, motion, and text that comes next. (Donna Adelson is charged with first-degree murder, conspiracy, and solicitation, and has pleaded not guilty.) #hashtags #DonnaAdelsonTrial #DanMarkel #GeorgiaCappleman #LindaBailey #TrueCrime #CustodyBattle #LegalAnalysis #Courtroom #TrialUpdate #Tallahassee Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

Donna Adelson Trial — Wendi Adelson's Former Divorce Attorney Says the Divorce Was “Not Contentious”   In today's testimony Kristin Adamson—the family-law attorney who represented Wendi Adelson during her divorce from Dan Markel—told jurors the initial divorce proceedings were “not contentious.” Her account undercuts the notion that the legal split itself was a nonstop conflagration; instead, Adamson drew a distinction between a relatively typical divorce process and what came after it. Under further questioning, she acknowledged that post-divorce filings by Markel became more personal and hostile, a shift the state says fed resentment and control battles that ultimately form the backdrop to this murder conspiracy case. Why it matters: motive and narrative framing. Prosecutors have long argued that a bitter custody fight and relocation dispute set the stage for the homicidal plot that killed Markel in 2014. If the jury accepts Adamson's framing—that the core divorce looked fairly standard while later filings grew heated—it subtly reshapes where the real friction lived and when it peaked. That matters for assigning intent and pressure points to the Adelson family's decisions in the months leading up to the murder. Adamson also faced questions about parental involvement in divorce logistics (how often parents attend client meetings, who shows up in hearings), as the defense tries to downplay the idea of Donna Adelson meddling in legal strategy—arguing that what looked like interference may have been normal family presence during a stressful time. The prosecution, by contrast, wants jurors to see those same moments as control—a pattern consistent with its broader theory of a family mobilized to remove Markel as an obstacle. For viewers tracking continuity across witnesses, this clip is a calibration tool: it doesn't prove or disprove the murder-for-hire plot, but it helps jurors locate the temperature of the Adelson–Markel legal conflict on a timeline—cooler during the divorce itself, hotter in the aftermath. That timeline will echo through testimony about relocation, custody, wiretaps, and alleged conspirators, as the court weighs whether Donna Adelson crossed the line from family advocacy to criminal orchestration. (Donna Adelson is on trial for first-degree murder, conspiracy, and solicitation; she has pleaded not guilty.) #hashtags #DonnaAdelsonTrial #DanMarkel #WendiAdelson #KristinAdamson #TrueCrime #CustodyBattle #LegalAnalysis #Courtroom #MurderForHire #Tallahassee Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

Dr. Ed Uszynski (Ph.D.) is back on the podcast to speak with Tim about a provocative cultural moment: when Max Lucado issued an apology to a multi-ethnic church in San Antonio, TX, following the death of George Floyd. The incident received mixed responses, positively received as being an act of racial reconciliation to being negatively critiqued as an act of bowing to the woke mob. So, Tim and Ed practice perspective-taking in order to understand these differing responses, and they explore some of the particulars and nuances that shape a point of view on a contentious issue. Show notes and a full transcript are available.

While many believe that contention is of the devil and therefore shy away from controversy, the scriptures suggest that there are instances in which we should absolutely contend against others.

Bob and Dave react to all the fights that occurred at the Seahawks joint practice with the Packers, they ask if Klint Kubiak's new system will help the offense find their rhythm this season, they break down their expectations for the Mariners lineup in their series against the Athletics, and they look at how much the Seahawks run game can help Sam Darnold during his first season in Seattle. 

Merriam-Webster's Word of the Day for August 5, 2025 is: contentious • kun-TEN-shuss • adjective Contentious describes something that is likely to cause people to argue or disagree or that involves a lot of arguing. When used of a person, contentious describes someone likely or willing to argue. // I think it's wise to avoid such a contentious topic at a dinner party. // After a contentious debate, members of the committee finally voted to approve the funding. // The dispute involves one of the region's most contentious leaders. See the entry > Examples: “Next up will be Peter Shaffer's ‘Amadeus,' which opened in 1979 and won the Tony for best play in 1981 with Ian McKellen winning lead actor honors. ... The story is a fictional account of the contentious relationship between Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and his rival, Antonio Salieri, the court composer of the Austrian emperor.” — Jessica Gelt, The Los Angeles Times, 12 June 2025 Did you know? If everyone has a bone to pick now and then, contentious types have entire skeletons. While English has plenty of words for people prone to fighting—combative and belligerent among them—contentious implies a fondness for arguing that others find particularly tedious or wearying. Thankfully, even the most contentious cranks and crabs among us have no cause to quibble over the history of the word contentious, as its origins are very clear: contentious comes (by way of Middle French) from the Latin adjective contentiōsus, meaning “persistent, obstinate, argumentative, or quarrelsome.”

At a town hall in Lincoln, Nebraska, Rep. Mike Flood faced intense backlash over his support for Trump’s tax and policy bill. The crowd of 750 erupted in boos and chants. Tensions ran high throughout the event. Does anyone think these people are conservatives? Please Like, Comment and Follow 'Broeske & Musson' on all platforms: --- The ‘Broeske & Musson Podcast’ is available on the KMJNOW app, Apple Podcasts, Spotify or wherever else you listen to podcasts. --- ‘Broeske & Musson' Weekdays 9-11 AM Pacific on News/Talk 580 AM & 105.9 FM KMJ | Facebook | Podcast| X | - Everything KMJ KMJNOW App | Podcasts | Facebook | X | Instagram See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Welcome to the Celestial Insights Podcast, the show that brings the stars down to Earth! Each week, astrologer, coach, and intuitive Celeste Brooks of Astrology by Celeste will be your guide. Her website is astrologybyceleste.com.  

On this Tuesday edition of Sid & Friends in the Morning, Sid covers the critical New York Primary Election Day here in The Big Apple. Sid discusses the implications of electing a socialist, anti-Israel candidate amidst the city's Jewish population and the 25-year commemoration of 9/11. Additionally, Sid addresses the recent ceasefire between Israel and Iran brokered by President Trump, who expressed disappointment as both nations allegedly violated the agreement. The episode features opinions from various political figures, including Mike Lawler, Frank Murano, Ina Vernoff, and Curtis Sliwa, offering insights into both local elections and international developments. Frank Morano, Inna Vernikov, Bo Dietl, Mike Lawler, Curtis Sliwa & Michael Goodwin join Sid on this Tuesday installment of Sid & Friends in the Morning. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode of True Crime News The Sidebar Podcast: Neama Rahmani joins host Joshua Ritter to break down the biggest cases making headlines across the nation. They discuss contentious jury deliberations in Harvey Weinstein's retrial, Karen Read's defense resting their case, and shocking testimony in Sean “Diddy” Combs' federal sex-trafficking trial. Tweet your questions for future episodes to Joshua Ritter using the hashtag #TCNSidebar. To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Robach and Holmes cover the latest news headlines and entertainment updates and give perspective on current events in their daily “Morning Run.”See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Robach and Holmes cover the latest news headlines and entertainment updates and give perspective on current events in their daily “Morning Run.”See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Robach and Holmes cover the latest news headlines and entertainment updates and give perspective on current events in their daily “Morning Run.”See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Elizabeth Tulloch (Superman & Lois, Grimm) joins us this week to share reflections on her tumultuous upbringing, inclusive of how it lead to her costarring alongside Superman for 4 seasons and evidently shaping how she parents today. Bitsie talks about the key to gratitude and how she learned about the healing powers behind being of service for others. We also talk about her feelings surrounding Superman & Lois ending, her incredibly wild birthing story, and how her time on Grimm prepared her for new projects. Thank you to our sponsors: