Podcasts about dismissing

Becoming an astronaut now or in the past was and remains a strict and demanding process. One needs 1,000 hours of pilot-in-command time in a jet aircraft, or two years of relevant professional training, along with a master's degree in STEM fields (not all degrees count), or a Ph.D. and test pilot training, etc. This is just to apply, not to mention 20/20 vision and meeting strict anthropometric requirements, before going through years of tough training. Astronauts are, in essence, the best of the best. And since American space work in particular got off the ground both men and women have made an impact in areas where others would simply not succeed. Therefore it is odd that Jeff Bezos is using his Blue Origin New Shepard rocket, actually shaped like a real penis, to shoot his girlfriend, Lauren Sánchez, and a crew of women into a suborbital flight for 15 minutes in the name of ‘women'. Sánchez, who is a trained pilot, will lead the crew, stating: “It's going to be women who are making a difference in the world and who are impactful and have a message to send.” But perhaps Bezos, Sánchez, and corporate media have forgotten about the countless pioneering women from all over the world who have already done what Blue Origin seeks to do as part of what could be just a PR stunt using women as the hook - Bezos, after all, did cheat on his ex-wife. For example, Kalpana Chawla, the first Indian astronaut, with two advanced engineering degrees and a Ph.D. in aerospace engineering, pioneered vertical take-off and landing concepts now being used by… SpaceX and Bezos' Blue Origin. Peggy Whitson holds the record for the most cumulative days in space period at 665. Christina Koch holds the record for the longest extended stay in space for a woman - 328 days. She also participated with Jessica Meir in the first all-female spacewalk. Kate Rubins was the first astronaut period to sequence DNA in space. Eileen Collins earned four degrees in STEM, economics and management while finding time to become a U.S. AF pilot, and eventually become the first woman ever to pilot a space shuttle. She also docked with the Russian space station and facilitated the deployment of the Chandra X-ray Observatory. The first African American woman in space, Mae Jemison, born in 1956 in Alabama went on to earn an engineering degree in her teens, and a doctorate shortly after, before becoming an astronaut and carrying out 44 science experiments in space. Nicole Mann become the first Native woman in space in 2022. Then there is the first American woman in space, Sally Ride, with a Ph.D. in physics and several NASA missions to her name. She also investigated the Challenger disaster and the Columbia crash. The first two women in space, however, were Russian, paving the way for all others: Valentina Tereshkova and Svetlana Savitskaya. Dismissing this inspiring history demeans and degrades and erases women from history.*The is the FREE archive, which includes advertisements. If you want an ad-free experience, you can subscribe below underneath the show description.-FREE ARCHIVE (w. ads)SUBSCRIPTION ARCHIVEX / TWITTER FACEBOOKMAIN WEBSITECashApp: $rdgable EMAIL: rdgable@yahoo.com / TSTRadio@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-secret-teachings--5328407/support.

Plus: UnitedHealth Group's share price sinks after it reported disappointing earnings. And the European Central Bank cuts interest rates to their lowest level since early 2023. Alex Ossola hosts.  Sign up for the WSJ's free What's News newsletter.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome back to a new episode of Operation Be: The Podcast.    This show is all about how to STOP dismissing parts of self. Our confidence and belief systems are the ultimate drivers of how we move through our life and our ability to find real peace.    There is a distinct difference in the language that we use with ourselves too. Understanding the difference between “BUT” vs. “AND” is a great place to start honoring self, while remaining true to what you're going through.  Have you ever thought about how the word “but” limits our abilities, discounts our real experiences, and excludes parts of self? Real talk…I had to rewire my brain to change this habit, which was so worth it! Replacing it with “and” allowed me to learn to create intention, bridge multiple phases of my reality at once, and validate what I was feeling moment to moment.   I hope you enjoy the show!   *Mentioned in this show - Episode 8: Do vs. Be https://youtu.be/bG2tbzYve4I   Email Me! me@jamiethurber.com Please like, comment, subscribe, and share this episode and tag us with @jamie.thurber on Instagram or Jamie Thurber on Facebook. #OperationBe   Want to connect with me on social media? www.instagram.com/jamie.thurber www.facebook.com/jamiethurber.biz www.jamiethurber.com  https://www.youtube.com/@JamieThurber   If you're interested in getting the exclusive content I put out on the newsletter, sign up here: https://jamiethurber.com/newsletter   Join my community and let's take this conversation even deeper! Operation Be: The Podcast is where I teach personalized lessons on intentional living & creating a lifestyle by design. https://operationbe.com   #operationbe #bethechange #intentionalliving #invisibleillness #polyvagaltheory #partswork #operationdo #getshitdone #healingjourney #unbusy #slowdown #awareness #youfirst #selfawareness #chronicillness #but #and #stopdismissing

In this episode Jim Chapman joins Kiran Chawla as they break down the 1995 shooting of Michael Gerardi, the subsequent conviction of Shareef Cousin in the murder and the turn of events that would release Cousin from prison.Timestamps07:19 A Shocking Turn of Events07:58 Investigating the Murder11:26 Eyewitness Reliability Issues13:37 Trial and Testimony16:07 The Verdict20:19 A Historic Sentencing22:41 Appeals and Reversals23:08 Dismissing the Case24:20 Cousin After Prison28:38 A Return to CrimeLocal Sponsors:     Neighbors Federal Credit Union:   Neighbors FCU is a community chartered Baton Rouge credit union that has served the community for over 60 years.For more information visit them by Clicking Here       Another Chance Bail Bonds  Their goal at Another Chance Bail Bonds is to reunite families and reconnect friends.  They accomplish this goal by providing many services which aide in the bonding process.You can learn more by visiting them Here        Video, Sound and Editing for this podcast by the podcast experts at Envision Podcast Studios in Denham Springs, LA.

Well I hope not but that might be a wise thing to consider. And I am sure that many others are doing just that. This is April 1 and I'm not fooling around about anything. I am discovering that we are going to be in for some real turbulence in life and business and perhaps we need to know how to handle things and take advantage of other things in this time of turbulence, transitions, and possible transformations, So please give me just 15 minutes to challenge your thinking and perhaps see if I can help you do some things that will make things better for you... Because I think I can. Now let me introduce you to what Stosh the radio robot had to say aout the program ... He is pretty smart so take some time to listen and to read.... Should my Jewish and Tesla-Driving Friends Start Carrying a Gun? By Stan the Radio Man This isn't a question I ever thought I'd ask out loud. But here we are. April Fool's Day isn't hitting the same this year. Maybe because the joke's on all of us. Or maybe because things have gotten so absurd, so twisted, that even asking “should my Jewish and Tesla-owning friends start carrying a gun?” doesn't feel like satire anymore. I'm not trying to be sensational. I'm trying to sort things out—just like I asked God in a recent prayer. Help me sort things out… and then sort me in. Show me where I belong in all this. Where we all belong. Because 2025 isn't just a year on the calendar—it's a turning point. A time of turbulence, yes. But also a time of transition, and if we're wise and brave, maybe even transformation. That's the tension we're living in. That's what today's “Interesting Ideas” is all about. The Underlying Fear Across campuses like Harvard and Columbia, reports are rolling in that Jewish students don't feel safe. We're seeing a rise in antisemitism, not whispered but shouted in the open. Vandalism of Tesla cars—just because they represent a certain class, or carry perceived political weight. And in the middle of it all are real people—your neighbors, your friends, your family—wondering, Am I next? It makes you wonder: what would you do to protect yourself, your family, your peace? One friend of mine—Jewish, peace-loving, and proud—told me recently, “I carry.” In Arizona, that's legal. Open carry, just like the Old West. He's got an ankle holster, ready if things go sideways. Not because he wants to use it. But because he doesn't want to be caught unprepared. The painful part is—this isn't just paranoia. It's remembering history. Echoes from Amsterdam Years ago, when I lived in Amsterdam, I often took visitors to the Anne Frank House. There was a quiet protest once by a Jewish group—not anti-Anne Frank, not anti-anything really. Just a plea: Let's not let it happen again. They pointed out something I'd never fully grasped: What if someone had been ready when the Gestapo came? What if resistance started sooner? Would it have changed anything? Some argue yes. The Warsaw Ghetto uprising, for instance, proved that resistance can exact a cost—even when ultimately crushed. It was a declaration: We will not go quietly. But is that where we are now? Back at the edge of the abyss? Tesla, Symbols, and Targets Teslas have become more than just electric cars. For some, they symbolize progress. For others, elitism. Either way, they've become targets—scratched, keyed, smashed. A strange sort of backlash. When objects become symbols, and people get targeted for owning them, we're in dangerous territory. When identities—Jewish, tech-forward, urban, progressive, whatever—are turned into excuses for violence, we all lose. So the question I asked—about Jews and Tesla drivers carrying weapons—isn't just about guns. It's about fear. And choice. And where we go from here. The Drip Effect I've got a little background behind me when I broadcast, a reminder of what I call the “drip effect.” Sometimes it's the little things, drop by drop, that wear us down. But it can also be the small efforts, one at a time, that make things better. It's not all doom and gloom. I believe in the drip of kindness, of community, of resilience. That's the part we can't lose. Takeaways to Consider Fear is real. Dismissing it doesn't help. Neither does giving in to it. History teaches—but we must listen. “Never again” means vigilance, not silence. Symbols matter. Cars, identities, beliefs—these can inspire or inflame. Be mindful. Protection is personal. The right to defend oneself is real, but so is the cost of living on edge. Connection is key. Talk to your neighbors. Know their stories. Build the kind of world where guns aren't necessary. Moving Forward, Together These are turbulent times. Like that bumpy flight from Minneapolis to Phoenix—seatbelts fastened the whole way—we're riding through unknown skies. But turbulence doesn't mean the plane will crash. It just means we need to hold on, be aware, and trust each other a little more. So here's the encouragement I leave you with: Choose to be one of the good drips. Be the one who checks on a friend. Who speaks up when something's not right. Who listens deeply to the fear and the frustration—and then does something helpful, not harmful, in response. We don't all need to carry weapons. But we do need to carry each other. Reach out to me. Share your story. Tell me what you're seeing, what you're feeling, what ideas you have for helping people through this. I'm at stan@witradio.net, and I mean it when I say—I want to hear from you. Till next time, I'm Stan the Radio Man Still believing in Interesting Ideas Still believing in you    

​In the case of Jane Doe v. Sean Combs et al. (Civ. No. 1:24-cv-08054-MKV), Defendant Marriott International, Inc. has submitted a reply memorandum in further support of its motion to dismiss the complaint. Marriott argues that the plaintiff's allegations fail to establish a legal basis for holding the company liable for the alleged actions of the co-defendants. They contend that the complaint lacks specific factual assertions linking Marriott to any wrongful conduct and that mere association with other defendants does not suffice to state a claim.Furthermore, Marriott emphasizes that the plaintiff's claims against it are speculative and unsupported by concrete evidence. The company asserts that the complaint does not demonstrate how Marriott had any control over or direct involvement in the alleged incidents. As a result, Marriott requests that the court dismiss the claims against it, arguing that allowing the case to proceed without substantive allegations would set a concerning precedent for corporate liability based on tenuous connections.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Microsoft Word - Reply ISO MTD (Marriott _ McCrary)(1618681774.5).docx

Para muchos, cuando viene el día de juicio, estarán en un pavor. Pero nosotros llegaremos a aquel día con confianza.

Many people with Hashimoto's have experienced it—the frustration of knowing something is wrong but being repeatedly dismissed by doctors. This week, Inna welcomes Dr. Efrat Lamandre (Dr. E) to uncover why so many thyroid patients struggle to get answers and how medical gaslighting keeps them stuck in a cycle of misdiagnosis and neglect.Dr. E, a best-selling author and expert in patient advocacy, explains why conventional medicine often overlooks key thyroid issues. She shares how doctors are trained to rely on a limited set of tools, without digging deeper. When those tests come back “normal,” patients are told their symptoms aren't real or that their fatigue, weight gain, and brain fog must be due to stress or aging. But the reality? Hashimoto's and thyroid dysfunction go far beyond TSH, and without the right tests, people can go undiagnosed for years.Inna and Dr. E dive into the most common signs of medical gaslighting and why it happens, from unnecessary weight loss advice to outright dismissal of symptoms. They also reveal why conventional providers often refuse to run crucial tests. Heather's story, a real-life case from Inna's Thyroid Mystery Solved program illustrates how damaging this dismissal can be and why proper testing and advocacy make all the difference.Beyond lab tests, Dr. E emphasizes an often-overlooked key to healing: nervous system regulation. Before addressing diet, supplements, or detox, the body needs to feel safe, something many Hashimoto's patients don't even realize is missing. She shares simple yet powerful ways to support the nervous system that anyone can do right away.If you've ever felt dismissed by your doctor or wondered why your symptoms aren't taken seriously, this episode will open your eyes to the truth about thyroid care—and, more importantly, empower you with the knowledge to take control of your health.See full show here:https://innatopiler.com/podcasts/doctors-dismissing-hashimotos-symptoms-medical-gaslighting/For more information about everything Hashimoto's please visit InnaTopiler.comIf you are struggling to lose weight with Hashimoto's, Inna has a 10 day plan just for you at InnaTopiler.com/jumpstartIf you don't yet know your thyroid type, please be sure you sign up for Inna's next free training at InnaTopiler.com/training

Can we talk about women masking at work? I spend a lot of time in conversation with women who are the only woman or one of very few women in the room at work. There is a fatigue and malaise that comes from being in this position long term - even if you enjoy and respect many of the men you're sitting beside. When a person is notably different from the majority of the people around them, they mask themselves to fit in, be taken seriously, gain a competitive advantage, and maintain safety. Here are some of the ways many women routinely mask in male-dominated workplaces: Altering vocal pitch and language Modifying speech patterns to avoid feminine speech markers and amplify masculine ones Dressing to look “good” but also professional, well kept, not too showy, not too sharp Having hair and makeup done in a way that suits the room vs suiting comfort Suppressing natural emotional reactions Avoiding vulnerability Maintaining a calm and demure demeanor no matter how heated others are getting Controlling facial expressions Laughing at jokes even if uncomfortable Participating in meaningless conversations (sports, tech, male-dominated hobbies) Dismissing or hiding personal interests and hobbies Avoiding or downplaying family situations Positioning self as “one of the guys” Avoiding asking questions or seeking help Many women are so conditioned to masking that they don't know they are doing it until they are in an environment where they no longer have to do it. One of the reasons I have built so many group coaching programs for women over the last decade is because of how deeply impactful it is when women come together and drop their masks. In these containers, deep growth and transformation transpire. No facades. No faking it. Only full transparency. All you. All out. THIS is the key to your future as a woman leader. In this episode, I talk through what masking looks like, what masking is costing you, and how you can start to drop your mask to show up more fully as you. All you.   Episode Highlights: 00:00 Understanding Masking in Women at Work 02:46 The Impact of Masking on Emotional Well-being 06:01 Navigating Gender Dynamics in Professional Spaces 09:06 Recognizing and Supporting Masking Behaviors 11:48 The Costs of Masking: Emotional and Professional 15:06 Strategies for Unmasking and Authenticity 18:00 Creating Supportive Spaces for Women 21:08 How You Can Take Action on This Episode Links Mentioned: Join Aligned, my Women's Leadership Incubator for values-driven women leaders looking to be more loud in their leadership in 2025: saradean.com/aligned Interested in becoming a sponsor of the Shameless Mom Academy? Email our sales team at sales@adalystmedia.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

NPR CEO Katherine Maher came for a 15-minute interview at a Semafor summit on "trust in media," but it was a softball session. Instead of being pressed on NPR's liberal tilt, Semafor reporter Maxwell Tani was incredibly vague: "What have you done in your first year to build or restore trust in NPR?" I was in the room, and suppressed the desire to yell about the answer (and the question).

Sixteen years ago, CNBC commentator Rick Santelli stood on the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange and delivered an impassioned rant against federal plans to bail out struggling homeowners. “Do we really want to subsidize the losers' mortgages?” he shouted, calling for a “Chicago Tea Party” to protest government intervention.That moment became the rallying cry for a movement that would reshape conservative politics, define opposition to the Obama presidency, and eventually evolve into the MAGA movement that has since won the White House twice.Lately, the Tea Party has been on my mind because of the way political movements are often dismissed by their opponents. In liberal circles, one word was frequently used to wave off the Tea Party: astroturf.“This isn't a grassroots movement,” critics insisted. “It's funded by billionaires to look like a populist uprising.” After all, it started on CNBC—hardly a blue-collar favorite.But that's not the whole story. And now, in 2024, astroturfing accusations are being hurled in the opposite direction.Last week, Republican Rep. Rich McCormick of Georgia faced a hostile crowd at a town hall in Roswell. The moment (captured in a widely circulated video) showed Democrats in his district voicing their frustration, pushing back forcefully against GOP policies.In response, conservatives dismissed the backlash as manufactured outrage, a coordinated effort by the so-called “deep state” to rattle the Republican establishment.Sound familiar?To understand whether today's Democratic anger is real or manufactured, it's worth looking back at how the Tea Party took shape.While Santelli's on-air rant is widely credited with sparking the Tea Party, grassroots opposition to Obama's policies had already begun. Keli Carender, a blogger in Seattle, organized an anti-stimulus protest even before Santelli's speech. Her February 2009 demonstration—dubbed the “Porkulus Protest”—drew about 100 people.But once Santelli's rant went viral, Tea Party protests exploded across the country. Social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter helped coordinate events, and by April's Tax Day, an estimated quarter-million people took to the streets in organized demonstrations. Conservative media played a crucial role in amplifying the movement. Fox News hosts like Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity championed Tea Party causes, helping grow its ranks. Soon, prominent Republican figures lent their support, though the movement remained largely decentralized.By the summer of 2009, as Obamacare made its way through Congress, Tea Party activists shifted their strategy. Instead of street protests, they flooded town halls, confronting Democratic lawmakers with fiery opposition. Videos of these clashes—angry constituents challenging their representatives—became a defining image of the movement.And electorally, the Tea Party had teeth. While it failed to topple the Republican establishment entirely (Mitt Romney still won the 2012 nomination), it helped flip House seats and push the GOP further to the right.What does the Tea Party teach us about today's Democratic opposition?* It's never too early to be angry. Santelli's rant came barely a month after Obama took office. Right now, Trump's disapproval ratings are rising, but Democrats haven't yet rallied around a singular issue.* Movements can make an impact—especially in the House. The Tea Party didn't need to control the White House to change the political landscape. A handful of flipped seats can shift the balance of power.* Dismissing protests as ‘astroturf' is risky. If the same kind of town hall showdowns seen in McCormick's district begin happening elsewhere, they could turn into a trend.The Tea Party was fueled by a raw, pent-up anger over fiscal conservatism. Many conservatives felt betrayed by their own party—George W. Bush had campaigned on balanced budgets, only to expand deficits through wars and bailouts. Obama's presidency, with its ambitious government programs, only amplified those frustrations.The question for Democrats now is: What's their version of that anger?If it's simply opposition to Trump, that's not enough. Even figures like Elon Musk—despised by many progressives—aren't sustainable political villains. “Musk sent another email” isn't a battle cry that will mobilize voters in the long run.That's why Democratic strategists should be tickled by what just happened in the House. They (impressively) passed a budget that, while avoiding direct mention of Medicaid, includes $880 billion in cuts overseen by the Energy and Commerce Committee—which just happens to control Medicaid.Why the cuts? Because fiscal hawks in the House need a way to offset the Trump tax cuts.For Democrats, that's a classic, politically potent message: Republicans are cutting your Medicaid to give tax cuts to the rich.If they can harness that into a movement—one that gets people angry enough to show up at town halls, knock on doors, and vote—then history might just be repeating itself.Podcast Chapters & Timecodes* 00:00:00 – Introduction* 00:01:58 – The Tea Party's Legacy and Lessons for Democrats* 00:14:55 – Dan Bongino Becomes FBI's Second-in-Command* 00:19:15 – MSNBC's Prime-Time Shake-Up & Network Struggles* 00:22:58 – NYC Mayor Eric Adams' Re-Election Challenges* 00:26:27 – Interview with Brian Sack on Ukraine & DEI Policies* 01:05:28 – Wrap-Up This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe

Can You Withdraw a Divorce Filing After Submitting? | Los Angeles Divorce

The pro-life argument is either sound or unsound. Dismissing it with a phony appeal to tolerance is not going to work.Be sure to subscribe to The Case for Life Podcast on iTunes, Spotify, YouTube, or your favorite podcast app so you never miss a single episode.Follow Scott Klusendorf on Rumble, Youtube, Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter to be kept up to date on everything God is doing through my pro-life work.Book me for an event or partner with Life Training Institute as a donor at https://prolifetraining.com.

Become a PHNX Diehard for just $4 a month! http://gophnx.com/intro-offer-youtubeBobby Hurley's Arizona State Sun Devils snapped their Big 12 losing streak with a 66-54 win over the Kansas State Wildcats. Jayden Quaintance and Amier Ali stole the show offensively with BJ Freeman missing from the lineup. Arizona State dismissed Freeman from the program after an accumulation of conduct detrimental to the team. Hurley's squad looked more efficient on offense and stingy on defense. It's time to Meet Anthony Totri and Kyle Cooper on Mill as the guys break down the game on the PHNX Sun Devils show!An ALLCITY Network ProductionSUBSCRIBE to our YouTube: https://bit.ly/phnx_youtubeALL THINGS PHNX: http://linktr.ee/phnxsportsMERCH https://store.allcitynetwork.com/collections/phnx-lockerALLCITY Network, Inc. aka PHNX and PHNX Sports is in no way affiliated with or endorsed by the City of PhoenixPHNX Events: Get your tickets to PHNX events and takeovers here: https://gophnx.com/events/Gila River: Win a Lamborgini! Visit https://playatgila.com/promotion/350k-lamborghini-luxe-giveaway/ for detailsBranded Bills: Use code PHNX at https://www.brandedbills.com/ for 20% off your first order!Gametime: Download the Gametime app, create an account, and use code PHNX for $20 off your first purchase. Terms apply.Circle K:  Join Inner Circle for free by downloading the Circle K app today! Head to https://www.circlek.com/store-locator to find Circle Ks near you!DFCU: Show your ASU team spirit: Open a Free Checking account online and get your choice of three Arizona State University VISA® Debit Cards. Go to https://www.desertfinancial.com/ASUto get started.Check out FOCO merch and collectibles and use promo code “PHNX10” for 10% off your order on all non Pre Order items.Rugged Road: Gear up for your next adventure with Rugged Road Coolers - Your ultimate outdoor companion! Head to http://ruggedroadoutdoors.pxf.io/ALLCITY and use code PHNX for 10% off!When you shop through links in the description, we may earn affiliate commissions. Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.

In Case No. 1:24-cv-07778-JLR, the Combs defendants have filed a Memorandum of Law supporting their Motion to Dismiss the complaint brought against them. The defense argues that the plaintiff's allegations are legally insufficient, lacking the necessary factual specificity to substantiate claims of misconduct. They contend that the complaint relies heavily on conclusory statements and unsubstantiated assertions, failing to meet the required pleading standards. Furthermore, the defendants assert that certain claims are time-barred due to the expiration of the statute of limitations, rendering them ineligible for legal action.Additionally, the memorandum challenges the applicability of specific statutes cited in the complaint, arguing that the plaintiff has misinterpreted or misapplied these laws in an attempt to support their claims. The defense emphasizes that the plaintiff has not demonstrated a direct causal link between the defendants' actions and any alleged harm suffered. They also highlight procedural deficiencies, such as the failure to properly serve all parties involved, which they claim undermines the court's jurisdiction over the matter. In light of these arguments, the Combs defendants request that the court dismiss the complaint in its entirety, asserting that it fails to establish a viable legal basis for proceeding.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.629911.49.0.pdf

In Case No. 1:24-cv-07778-JLR, the Combs defendants have filed a Memorandum of Law supporting their Motion to Dismiss the complaint brought against them. The defense argues that the plaintiff's allegations are legally insufficient, lacking the necessary factual specificity to substantiate claims of misconduct. They contend that the complaint relies heavily on conclusory statements and unsubstantiated assertions, failing to meet the required pleading standards. Furthermore, the defendants assert that certain claims are time-barred due to the expiration of the statute of limitations, rendering them ineligible for legal action.Additionally, the memorandum challenges the applicability of specific statutes cited in the complaint, arguing that the plaintiff has misinterpreted or misapplied these laws in an attempt to support their claims. The defense emphasizes that the plaintiff has not demonstrated a direct causal link between the defendants' actions and any alleged harm suffered. They also highlight procedural deficiencies, such as the failure to properly serve all parties involved, which they claim undermines the court's jurisdiction over the matter. In light of these arguments, the Combs defendants request that the court dismiss the complaint in its entirety, asserting that it fails to establish a viable legal basis for proceeding.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.629911.49.0.pdf

In Case No. 1:24-cv-07778-JLR, the Combs defendants have filed a Memorandum of Law supporting their Motion to Dismiss the complaint brought against them. The defense argues that the plaintiff's allegations are legally insufficient, lacking the necessary factual specificity to substantiate claims of misconduct. They contend that the complaint relies heavily on conclusory statements and unsubstantiated assertions, failing to meet the required pleading standards. Furthermore, the defendants assert that certain claims are time-barred due to the expiration of the statute of limitations, rendering them ineligible for legal action.Additionally, the memorandum challenges the applicability of specific statutes cited in the complaint, arguing that the plaintiff has misinterpreted or misapplied these laws in an attempt to support their claims. The defense emphasizes that the plaintiff has not demonstrated a direct causal link between the defendants' actions and any alleged harm suffered. They also highlight procedural deficiencies, such as the failure to properly serve all parties involved, which they claim undermines the court's jurisdiction over the matter. In light of these arguments, the Combs defendants request that the court dismiss the complaint in its entirety, asserting that it fails to establish a viable legal basis for proceeding.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.629911.49.0.pdf

In Case No. 1:24-cv-07778-JLR, the Combs defendants have filed a Memorandum of Law supporting their Motion to Dismiss the complaint brought against them. The defense argues that the plaintiff's allegations are legally insufficient, lacking the necessary factual specificity to substantiate claims of misconduct. They contend that the complaint relies heavily on conclusory statements and unsubstantiated assertions, failing to meet the required pleading standards. Furthermore, the defendants assert that certain claims are time-barred due to the expiration of the statute of limitations, rendering them ineligible for legal action.Additionally, the memorandum challenges the applicability of specific statutes cited in the complaint, arguing that the plaintiff has misinterpreted or misapplied these laws in an attempt to support their claims. The defense emphasizes that the plaintiff has not demonstrated a direct causal link between the defendants' actions and any alleged harm suffered. They also highlight procedural deficiencies, such as the failure to properly serve all parties involved, which they claim undermines the court's jurisdiction over the matter. In light of these arguments, the Combs defendants request that the court dismiss the complaint in its entirety, asserting that it fails to establish a viable legal basis for proceeding.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.629911.49.0.pdf

In Case No. 1:24-cv-07778-JLR, the Combs defendants have filed a Memorandum of Law supporting their Motion to Dismiss the complaint brought against them. The defense argues that the plaintiff's allegations are legally insufficient, lacking the necessary factual specificity to substantiate claims of misconduct. They contend that the complaint relies heavily on conclusory statements and unsubstantiated assertions, failing to meet the required pleading standards. Furthermore, the defendants assert that certain claims are time-barred due to the expiration of the statute of limitations, rendering them ineligible for legal action.Additionally, the memorandum challenges the applicability of specific statutes cited in the complaint, arguing that the plaintiff has misinterpreted or misapplied these laws in an attempt to support their claims. The defense emphasizes that the plaintiff has not demonstrated a direct causal link between the defendants' actions and any alleged harm suffered. They also highlight procedural deficiencies, such as the failure to properly serve all parties involved, which they claim undermines the court's jurisdiction over the matter. In light of these arguments, the Combs defendants request that the court dismiss the complaint in its entirety, asserting that it fails to establish a viable legal basis for proceeding.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.629911.49.0.pdf

In Case No. 1:24-cv-07778-JLR, the Combs defendants have filed a Memorandum of Law supporting their Motion to Dismiss the complaint brought against them. The defense argues that the plaintiff's allegations are legally insufficient, lacking the necessary factual specificity to substantiate claims of misconduct. They contend that the complaint relies heavily on conclusory statements and unsubstantiated assertions, failing to meet the required pleading standards. Furthermore, the defendants assert that certain claims are time-barred due to the expiration of the statute of limitations, rendering them ineligible for legal action.Additionally, the memorandum challenges the applicability of specific statutes cited in the complaint, arguing that the plaintiff has misinterpreted or misapplied these laws in an attempt to support their claims. The defense emphasizes that the plaintiff has not demonstrated a direct causal link between the defendants' actions and any alleged harm suffered. They also highlight procedural deficiencies, such as the failure to properly serve all parties involved, which they claim undermines the court's jurisdiction over the matter. In light of these arguments, the Combs defendants request that the court dismiss the complaint in its entirety, asserting that it fails to establish a viable legal basis for proceeding.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.629911.49.0.pdf

In Case No. 1:24-cv-07778-JLR, the Combs defendants have filed a Memorandum of Law supporting their Motion to Dismiss the complaint brought against them. The defense argues that the plaintiff's allegations are legally insufficient, lacking the necessary factual specificity to substantiate claims of misconduct. They contend that the complaint relies heavily on conclusory statements and unsubstantiated assertions, failing to meet the required pleading standards. Furthermore, the defendants assert that certain claims are time-barred due to the expiration of the statute of limitations, rendering them ineligible for legal action.Additionally, the memorandum challenges the applicability of specific statutes cited in the complaint, arguing that the plaintiff has misinterpreted or misapplied these laws in an attempt to support their claims. The defense emphasizes that the plaintiff has not demonstrated a direct causal link between the defendants' actions and any alleged harm suffered. They also highlight procedural deficiencies, such as the failure to properly serve all parties involved, which they claim undermines the court's jurisdiction over the matter. In light of these arguments, the Combs defendants request that the court dismiss the complaint in its entirety, asserting that it fails to establish a viable legal basis for proceeding.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.629911.49.0.pdf

In Case No. 1:24-cv-07778-JLR, the Combs defendants have filed a Memorandum of Law supporting their Motion to Dismiss the complaint brought against them. The defense argues that the plaintiff's allegations are legally insufficient, lacking the necessary factual specificity to substantiate claims of misconduct. They contend that the complaint relies heavily on conclusory statements and unsubstantiated assertions, failing to meet the required pleading standards. Furthermore, the defendants assert that certain claims are time-barred due to the expiration of the statute of limitations, rendering them ineligible for legal action.Additionally, the memorandum challenges the applicability of specific statutes cited in the complaint, arguing that the plaintiff has misinterpreted or misapplied these laws in an attempt to support their claims. The defense emphasizes that the plaintiff has not demonstrated a direct causal link between the defendants' actions and any alleged harm suffered. They also highlight procedural deficiencies, such as the failure to properly serve all parties involved, which they claim undermines the court's jurisdiction over the matter. In light of these arguments, the Combs defendants request that the court dismiss the complaint in its entirety, asserting that it fails to establish a viable legal basis for proceeding.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.629911.49.0.pdf

In Case No. 1:24-cv-07778-JLR, the Combs defendants have filed a Memorandum of Law supporting their Motion to Dismiss the complaint brought against them. The defense argues that the plaintiff's allegations are legally insufficient, lacking the necessary factual specificity to substantiate claims of misconduct. They contend that the complaint relies heavily on conclusory statements and unsubstantiated assertions, failing to meet the required pleading standards. Furthermore, the defendants assert that certain claims are time-barred due to the expiration of the statute of limitations, rendering them ineligible for legal action.Additionally, the memorandum challenges the applicability of specific statutes cited in the complaint, arguing that the plaintiff has misinterpreted or misapplied these laws in an attempt to support their claims. The defense emphasizes that the plaintiff has not demonstrated a direct causal link between the defendants' actions and any alleged harm suffered. They also highlight procedural deficiencies, such as the failure to properly serve all parties involved, which they claim undermines the court's jurisdiction over the matter. In light of these arguments, the Combs defendants request that the court dismiss the complaint in its entirety, asserting that it fails to establish a viable legal basis for proceeding.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.629911.49.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In Case No. 1:24-cv-07778-JLR, the Combs defendants have filed a Memorandum of Law supporting their Motion to Dismiss the complaint brought against them. The defense argues that the plaintiff's allegations are legally insufficient, lacking the necessary factual specificity to substantiate claims of misconduct. They contend that the complaint relies heavily on conclusory statements and unsubstantiated assertions, failing to meet the required pleading standards. Furthermore, the defendants assert that certain claims are time-barred due to the expiration of the statute of limitations, rendering them ineligible for legal action.Additionally, the memorandum challenges the applicability of specific statutes cited in the complaint, arguing that the plaintiff has misinterpreted or misapplied these laws in an attempt to support their claims. The defense emphasizes that the plaintiff has not demonstrated a direct causal link between the defendants' actions and any alleged harm suffered. They also highlight procedural deficiencies, such as the failure to properly serve all parties involved, which they claim undermines the court's jurisdiction over the matter. In light of these arguments, the Combs defendants request that the court dismiss the complaint in its entirety, asserting that it fails to establish a viable legal basis for proceeding.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.629911.49.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

“Our dear friend Yashoda, your son sometimes comes to our houses before the milking of the cows and releases the calves, and when the master of the house becomes angry, your son merely smiles. Sometimes He devises some process by which He steals palatable curd, butter and milk, which He then eats and drinks. When the monkeys assemble, He divides it with them, and when the monkeys have their bellies so full that they won't take more, He breaks the pots. Sometimes, if He gets no opportunity to steal butter or milk from a house, He will be angry at the householders, and for His revenge He will agitate the small children by pinching them. Then, when the children begin crying, Krishna will go away.” (Shrimad Bhagavatam, 10.8.29)

Key Take aways-The speaker emphasizes the need to balance seriousness in business with the enjoyment of life. -Katie shares a personal story about a business trip where they allowed themselves to explore the Mall of America and watch Seinfeld reruns, realizing that indulging in fun activities can enhance productivity and creativity.-The narrative highlights how self-denial of enjoyable experiences can lead to extreme behaviors, such as feeling guilty for taking time for oneself.-The speaker challenges the notion that being taken seriously in business requires sacrificing fun. -The speaker invites listeners to reflect on their own experiences and consider whether they are allowing fun in their business and life. Join The “Now” Newsletter: https://now.katierichardson.com/newsletterAbout Katie Richardson:Katie, once a girl who just liked to have fun, transformed into a globally recognized designer and entrepreneur. With expertise in woodworking, welding, drawing, and sewing, she crafted her own path. Despite initial doubts and imposter syndrome, Katie defied expectations by establishing Puj, a business that now boasts its products in 2,000 US stores and 26 countries, delighting over 1 million customers worldwide. Her greatest aspiration is to inspire women across the globe. Renowned shows like the Ellen Degeneres Show, Rachael Ray Show, Today Show, and Entrepreneur Magazine have featured her, while influential figures like Martha Stewart, Matt Damon, Camilla Alves, Mario Lopez, Robert Downey Jr., Kourtney Kardashian, Bill & Giuliana Rancic, and Pam Beesley have embraced her products. Today, Katie is a coach, mother of four, wife, author, and powerful speaker.Connect with Katie:Website: https://katierichardson.com/CASE STUDIES: https://now.katierichardson.com/casestudyLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/katie-richardson-creatorApple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/whats-working-now/id1515291698BuzzSprout: https://www.buzzsprout.com/1847280Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/2kV8cL7eTZ70UAXMOtcBbrNewsletter: https://now.katierichardson.com/newsletter

In Case No. 1:24-cv-07778-JLR, the Combs defendants have filed a Memorandum of Law supporting their Motion to Dismiss the complaint brought against them. The defense argues that the plaintiff's allegations are legally insufficient, lacking the necessary factual specificity to substantiate claims of misconduct. They contend that the complaint relies heavily on conclusory statements and unsubstantiated assertions, failing to meet the required pleading standards. Furthermore, the defendants assert that certain claims are time-barred due to the expiration of the statute of limitations, rendering them ineligible for legal action.Additionally, the memorandum challenges the applicability of specific statutes cited in the complaint, arguing that the plaintiff has misinterpreted or misapplied these laws in an attempt to support their claims. The defense emphasizes that the plaintiff has not demonstrated a direct causal link between the defendants' actions and any alleged harm suffered. They also highlight procedural deficiencies, such as the failure to properly serve all parties involved, which they claim undermines the court's jurisdiction over the matter. In light of these arguments, the Combs defendants request that the court dismiss the complaint in its entirety, asserting that it fails to establish a viable legal basis for proceeding.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.629911.49.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In Case No. 1:24-cv-07778-JLR, the Combs defendants have filed a Memorandum of Law supporting their Motion to Dismiss the complaint brought against them. The defense argues that the plaintiff's allegations are legally insufficient, lacking the necessary factual specificity to substantiate claims of misconduct. They contend that the complaint relies heavily on conclusory statements and unsubstantiated assertions, failing to meet the required pleading standards. Furthermore, the defendants assert that certain claims are time-barred due to the expiration of the statute of limitations, rendering them ineligible for legal action.Additionally, the memorandum challenges the applicability of specific statutes cited in the complaint, arguing that the plaintiff has misinterpreted or misapplied these laws in an attempt to support their claims. The defense emphasizes that the plaintiff has not demonstrated a direct causal link between the defendants' actions and any alleged harm suffered. They also highlight procedural deficiencies, such as the failure to properly serve all parties involved, which they claim undermines the court's jurisdiction over the matter. In light of these arguments, the Combs defendants request that the court dismiss the complaint in its entirety, asserting that it fails to establish a viable legal basis for proceeding.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.629911.49.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Hochul fires back after Trump administration pulls congestion pricing... Judge weighs dismissing case against Adams... New York Republicans push back against the Trump administration full This is the All Local morning update for February 20, 2024 343 Thu, 20 Feb 2025 10:31:42 +0000 FxqfQiq3dv3bD4dR4hPfKOvL0QeaHffz news 1010 WINS ALL LOCAL news Hochul fires back after Trump administration pulls congestion pricing... Judge weighs dismissing case against Adams... New York Republicans push back against the Trump administration The podcast is hyper-focused on local news, issues and events in the New York City area. This podcast's purpose is to give New Yorkers New York news about their neighborhoods and shine a light on the issues happening in their backyard. 2024 © 2021 Audacy, Inc.

The resistance and opposition from within Donald Trump's Department of Justice is building. Rather than comply with an unethical directive from DOJ leadership, the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Danielle Sassoon, resigned. Emil Bove, a member of Trump's team at the DOJ, directed the acting US Attorney in Manhattan, Danielle Sassoon, to dismiss the case against New York City Mayor Eric Adams, not based on the evidence but because they wanted Adams to help the Trump administration with some of it's goals and priorities. But rather than agree to dismiss the case for political reasons, US Attorney Sassoon chose to resigned. Trump's DOJ officials then tried to move supervision of the Adams case down to Washington D.C., and following that - the top two supervisors in the DOJ's Public Integrity Section resigned as well. In a staggering display of retaliation, Bove, one of Trump's former criminal defense attorneys now a top DOJ official, told Ms. Sassoon that both she and the prosecutors who worked on the Adams case would be investigated by the DOJ. Just days earlier, when he was first directing Sassoon to dismiss the case, "Mr. Bove in his order to drop the case said that the directive 'in no way calls into question the integrity and efforts' of the prosecutors working on the case, nor Ms. Sassoon's efforts in leading them".If you're interested in supporting our all-volunteer efforts, you can become a Team Justice patron at: / glennkirschner If you'd like to support Glenn and buy Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise visit:https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkir...Check out Glenn's website at https://glennkirschner.com/Follow Glenn on:Threads: https://www.threads.net/glennkirschner2Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirsch...Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/glennkirschn...TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/glennkirschner2See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

The resistance and opposition from within Donald Trump's Department of Justice is building. Rather than comply with an unethical directive from DOJ leadership, the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Danielle Sassoon, resigned. Emil Bove, a member of Trump's team at the DOJ, directed the acting US Attorney in Manhattan, Danielle Sassoon, to dismiss the case against New York City Mayor Eric Adams, not based on the evidence but because they wanted Adams to help the Trump administration with some of it's goals and priorities. But rather than agree to dismiss the case for political reasons, US Attorney Sassoon chose to resigned. Trump's DOJ officials then tried to move supervision of the Adams case down to Washington D.C., and following that - the top two supervisors in the DOJ's Public Integrity Section resigned as well. In a staggering display of retaliation, Bove, one of Trump's former criminal defense attorneys now a top DOJ official, told Ms. Sassoon that both she and the prosecutors who worked on the Adams case would be investigated by the DOJ. Just days earlier, when he was first directing Sassoon to dismiss the case, "Mr. Bove in his order to drop the case said that the directive 'in no way calls into question the integrity and efforts' of the prosecutors working on the case, nor Ms. Sassoon's efforts in leading them".If you're interested in supporting our all-volunteer efforts, you can become a Team Justice patron at: / glennkirschner If you'd like to support Glenn and buy Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise visit:https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkir...Check out Glenn's website at https://glennkirschner.com/Follow Glenn on:Threads: https://www.threads.net/glennkirschner2Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirsch...Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/glennkirschn...TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/glennkirschner2See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

“You're Fired!” Two words that are never easy to speak and are even harder to hear. Dismissing employees is complicated — legally, emotionally, and professionally. Mastering the art of letting employees go isn't taught in business school, and too many managers fumble the process. Mahesh Guruswamy, chief technology officer at Kickstarter, has spent much of his career delivering tough news — not just to employees but also to customers, investors, and even higher-ups. Now, he's sharing his hard-earned wisdom in a new book — How to Deliver Bad News and Get Away With It: A Manager Guide. Whether you're a seasoned executive or a first-time manager, Mahesh's insights will arm you with tools to handle difficult conversations while building trust, retaining talent, and, yes — keeping your sanity intact. Monday Morning Radio is hosted by the father-son duo of Dean and Maxwell Rotbart. Photo: Mahesh Guruswami, How to Deliver Bad News and Get Away With ItPosted: February 17, 2025 Monday Morning Run Time: 52:16 Episode: 13.36 RELATED EPISODES: Lee Caraher on Business “Alumni” Networks and Boomerang Employees Discover the Power of Effective Communication to Support Career Advancement and Life Satisfaction Every Owner and Manager Needs to Have ‘The Revelation Conversation' With Their Employees

Where do you find yourself wanting to say something, do something, BE someone, but you are dismissing your desires & dismissing what you want?! Get HOT AF

In his further reply supporting the motion to dismiss Jane Roe's lawsuit, Garth Brooks contended that Roe's allegations were not only baseless but also strategically filed in California to circumvent ongoing legal proceedings in Mississippi. Brooks emphasized that he had initiated a defamation lawsuit against Roe in Mississippi prior to her California filing, accusing her of attempting to extort him with false claims. He argued that Roe's lawsuit was a retaliatory action designed to undermine his preemptive legal measures and to exploit California's legal system.Brooks' legal team asserted that the California court should dismiss Roe's lawsuit to prevent duplicative litigation and potential conflicting judgments between the two states. They maintained that the Mississippi court was the appropriate venue to adjudicate the disputes between the parties, given the pre-existing lawsuit and the substantial overlap in the issues presented. Despite these arguments, the California court denied Brooks' motion to dismiss without prejudice, opting to stay the proceedings pending the outcome of the Mississippi case.In December 2024, U.S. District Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald denied Garth Brooks' motion to dismiss a sexual assault lawsuit filed against him by a former makeup artist, identified as Jane Roe. Brooks had sought dismissal on the grounds that a related defamation lawsuit he filed in Mississippi should take precedence. However, Judge Fitzgerald ruled that the California case would be stayed pending the outcome of the Mississippi proceedings, emphasizing that dismissal at this stage was inappropriate.The judge's decision underscores the complexity of concurrent legal actions in different jurisdictions. By staying the California proceedings, the court aims to prevent conflicting judgments and ensure a fair adjudication of the intertwined issues. Brooks is required to inform the California court of any developments in the Mississippi case within ten court days, highlighting the ongoing nature of this legal matter.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.cacd.946930.28.0.pdfsource:gov.uscourts.cacd.946930.25.0.pdf

In his further reply supporting the motion to dismiss Jane Roe's lawsuit, Garth Brooks contended that Roe's allegations were not only baseless but also strategically filed in California to circumvent ongoing legal proceedings in Mississippi. Brooks emphasized that he had initiated a defamation lawsuit against Roe in Mississippi prior to her California filing, accusing her of attempting to extort him with false claims. He argued that Roe's lawsuit was a retaliatory action designed to undermine his preemptive legal measures and to exploit California's legal system.Brooks' legal team asserted that the California court should dismiss Roe's lawsuit to prevent duplicative litigation and potential conflicting judgments between the two states. They maintained that the Mississippi court was the appropriate venue to adjudicate the disputes between the parties, given the pre-existing lawsuit and the substantial overlap in the issues presented. Despite these arguments, the California court denied Brooks' motion to dismiss without prejudice, opting to stay the proceedings pending the outcome of the Mississippi case.In December 2024, U.S. District Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald denied Garth Brooks' motion to dismiss a sexual assault lawsuit filed against him by a former makeup artist, identified as Jane Roe. Brooks had sought dismissal on the grounds that a related defamation lawsuit he filed in Mississippi should take precedence. However, Judge Fitzgerald ruled that the California case would be stayed pending the outcome of the Mississippi proceedings, emphasizing that dismissal at this stage was inappropriate.The judge's decision underscores the complexity of concurrent legal actions in different jurisdictions. By staying the California proceedings, the court aims to prevent conflicting judgments and ensure a fair adjudication of the intertwined issues. Brooks is required to inform the California court of any developments in the Mississippi case within ten court days, highlighting the ongoing nature of this legal matter.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.cacd.946930.28.0.pdfsource:gov.uscourts.cacd.946930.25.0.pdf

In his further reply supporting the motion to dismiss Jane Roe's lawsuit, Garth Brooks contended that Roe's allegations were not only baseless but also strategically filed in California to circumvent ongoing legal proceedings in Mississippi. Brooks emphasized that he had initiated a defamation lawsuit against Roe in Mississippi prior to her California filing, accusing her of attempting to extort him with false claims. He argued that Roe's lawsuit was a retaliatory action designed to undermine his preemptive legal measures and to exploit California's legal system.Brooks' legal team asserted that the California court should dismiss Roe's lawsuit to prevent duplicative litigation and potential conflicting judgments between the two states. They maintained that the Mississippi court was the appropriate venue to adjudicate the disputes between the parties, given the pre-existing lawsuit and the substantial overlap in the issues presented. Despite these arguments, the California court denied Brooks' motion to dismiss without prejudice, opting to stay the proceedings pending the outcome of the Mississippi case.In December 2024, U.S. District Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald denied Garth Brooks' motion to dismiss a sexual assault lawsuit filed against him by a former makeup artist, identified as Jane Roe. Brooks had sought dismissal on the grounds that a related defamation lawsuit he filed in Mississippi should take precedence. However, Judge Fitzgerald ruled that the California case would be stayed pending the outcome of the Mississippi proceedings, emphasizing that dismissal at this stage was inappropriate.The judge's decision underscores the complexity of concurrent legal actions in different jurisdictions. By staying the California proceedings, the court aims to prevent conflicting judgments and ensure a fair adjudication of the intertwined issues. Brooks is required to inform the California court of any developments in the Mississippi case within ten court days, highlighting the ongoing nature of this legal matter.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.cacd.946930.28.0.pdfsource:gov.uscourts.cacd.946930.25.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Boxing Podcast - Sports -

With billions of dollars of damage to L.A, and the destruction ongoing, Mayor Karen Bass, and Governor Newsom are on the hot seat. Dismissing this disaster a Climate Change won't cut it. Are you Ready for Rain?  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWD-x3GIUFA

Cases involving public officials charged with misappropriation of public funds typically involve spending money on fancy dinners, cars, houses, lavish trips — and worse. The unusual case against Chamise Cubbison, Mendocino County's former Auditor-Controller/Treasurer-Tax Collector, involves an obscure payroll code. Allegedly, a county employee in charge of payroll used the code to compensate herself after Cubbison told the employee she was exempt from overtime rules. This morning, Superior Court Judge Ann Moorman will consider testimony from Cubbison's manager at the time, former auditor Lloyd Weer, as well as Andrew Porter, the sheriff's investigator before ruling on a motion to dismiss. Tom Rakes, head of the county's IT services when the county's email archival system mysteriously collapsed, has also been subpoenaed.

In his further reply supporting the motion to dismiss Jane Roe's lawsuit, Garth Brooks contended that Roe's allegations were not only baseless but also strategically filed in California to circumvent ongoing legal proceedings in Mississippi. Brooks emphasized that he had initiated a defamation lawsuit against Roe in Mississippi prior to her California filing, accusing her of attempting to extort him with false claims. He argued that Roe's lawsuit was a retaliatory action designed to undermine his preemptive legal measures and to exploit California's legal system.Brooks' legal team asserted that the California court should dismiss Roe's lawsuit to prevent duplicative litigation and potential conflicting judgments between the two states. They maintained that the Mississippi court was the appropriate venue to adjudicate the disputes between the parties, given the pre-existing lawsuit and the substantial overlap in the issues presented. Despite these arguments, the California court denied Brooks' motion to dismiss without prejudice, opting to stay the proceedings pending the outcome of the Mississippi case.(commercial at 8:43)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.cacd.946930.25.0.pdf

In his further reply supporting the motion to dismiss Jane Roe's lawsuit, Garth Brooks contended that Roe's allegations were not only baseless but also strategically filed in California to circumvent ongoing legal proceedings in Mississippi. Brooks emphasized that he had initiated a defamation lawsuit against Roe in Mississippi prior to her California filing, accusing her of attempting to extort him with false claims. He argued that Roe's lawsuit was a retaliatory action designed to undermine his preemptive legal measures and to exploit California's legal system.Brooks' legal team asserted that the California court should dismiss Roe's lawsuit to prevent duplicative litigation and potential conflicting judgments between the two states. They maintained that the Mississippi court was the appropriate venue to adjudicate the disputes between the parties, given the pre-existing lawsuit and the substantial overlap in the issues presented. Despite these arguments, the California court denied Brooks' motion to dismiss without prejudice, opting to stay the proceedings pending the outcome of the Mississippi case.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.cacd.946930.25.0.pdf

In his further reply supporting the motion to dismiss Jane Roe's lawsuit, Garth Brooks contended that Roe's allegations were not only baseless but also strategically filed in California to circumvent ongoing legal proceedings in Mississippi. Brooks emphasized that he had initiated a defamation lawsuit against Roe in Mississippi prior to her California filing, accusing her of attempting to extort him with false claims. He argued that Roe's lawsuit was a retaliatory action designed to undermine his preemptive legal measures and to exploit California's legal system.Brooks' legal team asserted that the California court should dismiss Roe's lawsuit to prevent duplicative litigation and potential conflicting judgments between the two states. They maintained that the Mississippi court was the appropriate venue to adjudicate the disputes between the parties, given the pre-existing lawsuit and the substantial overlap in the issues presented. Despite these arguments, the California court denied Brooks' motion to dismiss without prejudice, opting to stay the proceedings pending the outcome of the Mississippi case.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.cacd.946930.25.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In his further reply supporting the motion to dismiss Jane Roe's lawsuit, Garth Brooks contended that Roe's allegations were not only baseless but also strategically filed in California to circumvent ongoing legal proceedings in Mississippi. Brooks emphasized that he had initiated a defamation lawsuit against Roe in Mississippi prior to her California filing, accusing her of attempting to extort him with false claims. He argued that Roe's lawsuit was a retaliatory action designed to undermine his preemptive legal measures and to exploit California's legal system.Brooks' legal team asserted that the California court should dismiss Roe's lawsuit to prevent duplicative litigation and potential conflicting judgments between the two states. They maintained that the Mississippi court was the appropriate venue to adjudicate the disputes between the parties, given the pre-existing lawsuit and the substantial overlap in the issues presented. Despite these arguments, the California court denied Brooks' motion to dismiss without prejudice, opting to stay the proceedings pending the outcome of the Mississippi case.(commercial at 7:48)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.cacd.946930.25.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A memorandum of law in support of a motion to dismiss a complaint is a legal document prepared by an attorney that outlines the legal arguments and authorities supporting the dismissal of a lawsuit.When a defendant files a motion to dismiss a complaint, they are essentially asking the court to throw out the case against them. The memorandum of law serves to explain to the court why the complaint should be dismissed based on legal principles, statutes, regulations, and relevant case law.Typically, a memorandum of law in support of a motion to dismiss will:Outline the Legal Standard: It will begin by stating the legal standard for dismissing a complaint in the jurisdiction where the case is being heard. This often involves citing relevant rules of civil procedure or case law.Present Legal Arguments: The memorandum will then present the specific legal arguments as to why the complaint fails to state a valid claim for relief. This might include arguments that the complaint lacks legal merit, fails to establish jurisdiction, or is barred by a statute of limitations.Cite Case Law and Precedent: The attorney will cite relevant case law and legal precedent to support their arguments. They may show how similar cases were dismissed by courts in the past under similar circumstances.Address Counterarguments: If there are potential counterarguments that the opposing party might raise, the memorandum may also address these and explain why they do not undermine the motion to dismiss.Conclusion: Finally, the memorandum will conclude by summarizing the key points and reiterating why the court should grant the motion to dismiss.Overall, the memorandum of law is a critical tool in the litigation process, as it helps the court understand the legal basis for the defendant's request to dismiss the case.In this episode we are diving into the Memorandum of Law in Support to dismiss Doe's claims against the corporate defendants.  (commercial at 9:17)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.611545.43.0_1.pdf (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A memorandum of law in support of a motion to dismiss a complaint is a legal document prepared by an attorney that outlines the legal arguments and authorities supporting the dismissal of a lawsuit.When a defendant files a motion to dismiss a complaint, they are essentially asking the court to throw out the case against them. The memorandum of law serves to explain to the court why the complaint should be dismissed based on legal principles, statutes, regulations, and relevant case law.Typically, a memorandum of law in support of a motion to dismiss will:Outline the Legal Standard: It will begin by stating the legal standard for dismissing a complaint in the jurisdiction where the case is being heard. This often involves citing relevant rules of civil procedure or case law.Present Legal Arguments: The memorandum will then present the specific legal arguments as to why the complaint fails to state a valid claim for relief. This might include arguments that the complaint lacks legal merit, fails to establish jurisdiction, or is barred by a statute of limitations.Cite Case Law and Precedent: The attorney will cite relevant case law and legal precedent to support their arguments. They may show how similar cases were dismissed by courts in the past under similar circumstances.Address Counterarguments: If there are potential counterarguments that the opposing party might raise, the memorandum may also address these and explain why they do not undermine the motion to dismiss.Conclusion: Finally, the memorandum will conclude by summarizing the key points and reiterating why the court should grant the motion to dismiss.Overall, the memorandum of law is a critical tool in the litigation process, as it helps the court understand the legal basis for the defendant's request to dismiss the case.In this episode we are diving into the Memorandum of Law in Support to dismiss Doe's claims against the corporate defendants.  (commercial at 9:17)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.611545.43.0_1.pdf (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A memorandum of law in further support of dismissal is a legal document submitted by a party in a lawsuit to reinforce and elaborate on their arguments for why the case should be dismissed. Here's a breakdown of its components and purpose:Purpose: The memorandum aims to persuade the court to dismiss the case, often for reasons such as lack of jurisdiction, failure to state a claim, or procedural deficiencies.Content:Legal Arguments: It contains detailed legal arguments, citing statutes, case law, and other legal precedents that support the motion to dismiss.Factual Basis: It may also include a recitation of the facts, demonstrating how they fail to meet the legal standards required to proceed with the case.Rebuttal: If there has been an opposition to the initial motion to dismiss, this memorandum will address and counter those points, providing further clarification and evidence to undermine the opposing arguments.Format:Introduction: A summary of the reasons for dismissal.Argument: A structured and detailed presentation of legal reasons and supporting authorities.Conclusion: A concise restatement of the request for dismissal and a summary of the key points.In essence, this document strengthens and elaborates on the initial request for dismissal, aiming to convince the judge that the case should not proceed to trial.(commercial at 7:54)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.611545.62.0.pdf (courtlistener.com)

In the case of Doe v. Black (Case No. 1:23-cv-06418-JGLC), Defendant Leon Black filed a reply memorandum supporting his motion to dismiss Plaintiff Jane Doe's complaint. Black's legal team argues that Doe's allegations are time-barred under the applicable statute of limitations and fail to meet the necessary legal standards for the claims presented. They assert that the complaint lacks specific factual details to substantiate the accusations, rendering the claims insufficient under federal pleading requirements.Additionally, the defense contends that certain claims are legally deficient, as they do not establish essential elements required for such causes of action. Black's attorneys emphasize that the complaint does not provide adequate grounds to proceed and request the court to dismiss the case in its entirety. The reply memorandum serves to reinforce these points, aiming to persuade the court to rule in favor of dismissal.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.602764.70.0.pdf

In the case of Doe v. Black (Case No. 1:23-cv-06418-JGLC), Defendant Leon Black filed a reply memorandum supporting his motion to dismiss Plaintiff Jane Doe's complaint. Black's legal team argues that Doe's allegations are time-barred under the applicable statute of limitations and fail to meet the necessary legal standards for the claims presented. They assert that the complaint lacks specific factual details to substantiate the accusations, rendering the claims insufficient under federal pleading requirements.Additionally, the defense contends that certain claims are legally deficient, as they do not establish essential elements required for such causes of action. Black's attorneys emphasize that the complaint does not provide adequate grounds to proceed and request the court to dismiss the case in its entirety. The reply memorandum serves to reinforce these points, aiming to persuade the court to rule in favor of dismissal.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.602764.70.0.pdf

As a 30-year federal prosecutor - a rule-of-law guy - Glenn wonders whether the often heard refrain "no one is above the law" still rings true in today's America. Glenn reads his new article and gives his take on that question.If you're interested in supporting our all-volunteer efforts, you can become a Team Justice patron at: / glennkirschner If you'd like to support us and buy Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise visit:https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkir...Check out Glenn's website at https://glennkirschner.com/Follow Glenn on:Threads: https://www.threads.net/glennkirschner2Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/glennkirschner2Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirsch...See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Michael Cohen and Ben Meiselas react to new updates in the Manhattan DA Case and Trump's new cabinet appointments. This and more on a NEW episode of Political Beatdown. HumanN: Get a FREE thirty-day supply of SuperBeets Heart Chews on ALL bundles and 15% OFF your first order by going to https://getsuperbeets.com and use code BEAT. The Perfect Jean: F*%k your khakis and get The Perfect Jean 15% off with the code BEAT15 at https://theperfectjean.nyc/BEAT15 #theperfectjeanpod SOUL: This holiday season, give the gift of Soul. Head to https://GetSoul.com and use code BEAT for 30% off your order. Subscribe to Michael Cohen's NEW Channel for daily episodes! https://www.youtube.com/@TheMichaelCohenShow/featured Join us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/PoliticalBeatdown Add the NEW Mea Culpa podcast feed: https://linktr.ee/meaculpapod Support Michael's Legal Fund: http://donald4prison.com Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast The Influence Continuum: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/mea-culpa-with-michael-cohen The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show Burn the Boats: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 Political Beatdown: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/political-beatdown Lights On with Jessica Denson: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/lights-on-with-jessica-denson On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Coalition of the Sane: https://meidasnews.com/tag/coalition-of-the-sane Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices