Podcasts about federal election commission fec

This Day in Legal History: Henderson v. United States DecidedOn June 5, 1950, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Henderson v. United States, 339 U.S. 816 (1950), a significant civil rights ruling concerning racial segregation in interstate transportation. Elmer W. Henderson, an African American passenger, had been denied equal dining services on a train operated by the Southern Railway Company under a policy that enforced segregation. Although a dining car had a partition supposedly to accommodate Black passengers, in practice Henderson was often unable to access equivalent service due to timing and seat availability.The case reached the Supreme Court after the Interstate Commerce Commission failed to provide meaningful relief. In a unanimous opinion written by Justice Fred Vinson, the Court held that the railway's practices violated the Interstate Commerce Act, particularly its provision requiring carriers to provide equal treatment and avoid undue prejudice. Importantly, the Court based its reasoning not on constitutional grounds (such as the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment), but on statutory interpretation, finding that the carrier's conduct constituted an unjust and unreasonable discrimination.This ruling marked an early and important step toward dismantling legally sanctioned segregation in public accommodations, prefiguring later landmark decisions like Brown v. Board of Education (1954). Although not framed as a constitutional equal protection case, Henderson nonetheless contributed to the legal groundwork of the civil rights movement and challenged the legitimacy of the “separate but equal” doctrine in practical terms.SAP, Europe's largest software company, has petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a decision that revived an antitrust lawsuit brought by its competitor, Teradata. The case centers on allegations that SAP unlawfully tied its business-planning applications to a required purchase of its own database software, which competes with Teradata's products. SAP argues that such software integration benefits consumers and constitutes healthy competition, not anti-competitive conduct.The lawsuit was initially filed by California-based Teradata in 2018 after the companies ended a joint venture. SAP had prevailed in the lower court, but the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed that decision in December, stating a jury should decide the case. SAP's petition criticizes the appellate court's reliance on a version of the “per se rule,” under which the conduct is presumed illegal without a detailed analysis. Instead, SAP advocates for applying the more nuanced “rule of reason” standard, which considers both competitive harms and justifications.SAP also claims the ruling conflicts with how a different federal appeals court treated a similar antitrust issue in the historic Microsoft case. The Supreme Court has not yet decided whether to hear the case.This case hinges on the concept of “tying,” where a company conditions the sale of one product on the purchase of another, potentially stifling competition. It's significant because whether courts apply a strict “per se” rule or the more flexible “rule of reason” can dramatically affect the outcome in such antitrust disputes.Tech giant SAP asks US Supreme Court to reconsider rival's antitrust win | ReutersA federal judge in Washington, D.C., has dismissed a lawsuit filed by three Democratic Party committees accusing President Donald Trump of trying to undermine the independence of the Federal Election Commission (FEC). U.S. District Judge Amir Ali ruled that the Democratic National Committee, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee failed to demonstrate any “concrete and imminent injury” necessary to sustain a legal challenge.The lawsuit, filed in February 2025, contested an executive order issued by Trump that aimed to increase White House control over independent federal agencies, including the FEC. The order stated that the legal views of the president and the attorney general would be “controlling” for federal employees and prohibited them from expressing opposing positions. Democrats claimed this language threatened the FEC's independence and could deter campaign planning.Judge Ali, however, noted that administration lawyers had assured the court that the executive order would not be used to interfere with the FEC's decision-making. He also found the plaintiffs' concerns too speculative, emphasizing that the Supreme Court requires a demonstrated change in the relationship with the agency in question, which the plaintiffs had not shown.The judge's decision hinged on the plaintiffs' lack of standing, a fundamental requirement in federal court. To proceed with a lawsuit, plaintiffs must show a specific, actual, or imminent injury caused by the defendant. In this case, speculative harm and vague concerns about agency behavior were insufficient. This principle helps prevent courts from weighing in on political disputes where no direct harm can be proven.Trump defeats Democrats' lawsuit over election commission independenceThe Trump administration is pursuing a new $25 million contract to allow U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to conduct DNA testing on families facing deportation. The goal, according to ICE, is to verify family relationships—but critics warn the program could lead to unnecessary family separations, especially in cases involving non-biological caregivers like godparents. Civil rights advocates also raise concerns that the DNA data could be misused for unrelated criminal investigations and stored indefinitely.The contract was initially awarded in May to SNA International, a firm specializing in forensic identification. However, Bode Cellmark Forensics filed a protest with the Government Accountability Office, arguing the contract wasn't competitively bid. ICE subsequently issued a stop-work order on the contract pending resolution of the protest, with a decision expected by September 2.This is not ICE's first attempt at rapid DNA testing. A similar program began in 2019 during Trump's first term to detect alleged “fraudulent” parent-child relationships, often targeting migrant families. Though handed over to Customs and Border Protection in 2021, the Biden administration ended it in 2023. Reports since then have highlighted issues with consent, with some migrants mistaking DNA swabs for COVID-19 tests or feeling coerced into participation under threat of legal consequences.Privacy advocates argue that such widespread collection of genetic data lacks transparency and oversight. The Georgetown Law Center on Privacy and Technology recently sued the Department of Homeland Security for failing to provide records on how DNA samples from migrants are collected and stored.The revived DNA testing raises key legal questions about informed consent and the scope of data use by federal agencies. When individuals are unaware of what they're consenting to—or coerced into it—the practice may violate federal standards for ethical data collection, especially under the Privacy Act and due process protections.ICE Moves to DNA-Test Families Targeted for Deportation with New Contract This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

As I delve into the intricacies of Project 2025, a sense of unease settles in, akin to watching a seismic shift in the foundations of American governance. This initiative, spearheaded by conservative organizations, aims to reshape the federal government in ways that are both profound and troubling.At its core, Project 2025 is rooted in the unitary executive theory, an expansive interpretation of presidential power that seeks to centralize control over the government in the White House. Kevin Roberts, a key proponent, succinctly captures this vision: "all federal employees should answer to the president."[4]One of the most striking aspects of Project 2025 is its plan to dismantle the independence of various federal agencies. Agencies like the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and the Federal Election Commission (FEC), which have historically operated with a degree of autonomy to ensure they are not swayed by political whims, are now in the crosshairs. These agencies, designed to be quasi-legislative or quasi-judicial bodies, are protected by Supreme Court precedents such as *Humphrey's Executor v. United States*, which shields their commissioners from removal except "for cause." However, Project 2025 seeks to overrule this precedent, granting the president the power to remove these commissioners at will if they do not align with the president's agenda[5].The implications are far-reaching. For instance, the Department of State is slated for a significant overhaul. Kiron Skinner, who authored the State Department chapter of Project 2025, advocates for the dismissal of all leadership roles within the department before January 20, 2025. She intends to replace these positions with ideologically vetted leaders appointed to acting roles that do not require Senate confirmation. Skinner's rationale is stark: she believes most State Department employees are too left-wing and need to be replaced by those more loyal to a conservative president[4].This ideological purge is not limited to the State Department. The plan extends to other federal agencies, with the aim of ensuring that every branch of the executive government is directly answerable to the president. The White House's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) is proposed to play a more intrusive role, reviewing and potentially revising or blocking rules and significant guidance issued by independent agencies. This would further erode the independence of these bodies, aligning them more closely with the president's policies[5].The potential consequences of such reforms are daunting. Experts warn that these changes could destroy the system of checks and balances that has been a cornerstone of American democracy. As the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) notes, the re-election of a president aligned with these policies could have "immense" implications, potentially leading to an "imperial presidency" with almost unlimited power to implement policies without significant oversight[1][5].The broader theme here is the erosion of democratic guardrails. Project 2025 represents a fundamental shift away from the principles of separation of powers and towards a more authoritarian form of governance. This is not merely a theoretical concern; it has real-world implications for workers, consumers, and the general public. For example, the Federal Trade Commission, which plays a crucial role in protecting consumers from unfair business practices, could find its ability to act independently severely curtailed. Similarly, the National Labor Relations Board, which safeguards workers' rights, might see its authority diminished under a president who prioritizes corporate interests over labor rights[5].As I reflect on the scope and ambition of Project 2025, it becomes clear that this initiative is not just about policy reforms; it is about redefining the very fabric of American governance. The project's proponents argue that these changes are necessary to streamline government and ensure efficiency, but critics see it as a power grab that undermines the democratic process.Looking ahead, the next few months will be critical. As the 2024 elections approach, the fate of Project 2025 will likely be tied to the outcome. If a president aligned with these policies is elected, we can expect a swift and decisive push to implement these reforms. The Supreme Court, which has already shown a inclination towards a stronger unitary executive, may play a pivotal role in upholding or challenging these changes[4].In conclusion, Project 2025 is a stark reminder of the ongoing battle for the soul of American democracy. As we navigate these uncharted waters, it is imperative that we remain vigilant and informed, ensuring that the principles of democracy and the rule of law are not sacrificed at the altar of political ideology. The future of American governance hangs in the balance, and the decisions made in the coming months will have lasting impacts on the nation's trajectory.

As I delve into the intricacies of Project 2025, a sense of unease settles in, not just because of the far-reaching implications it holds for American governance, but also due to the sheer ambition and controversial nature of its proposals. This initiative, spearheaded by conservative organizations, aims to reshape the federal government in a way that centralizes executive power to an unprecedented degree.At the heart of Project 2025 lies the unitary executive theory, an expansive interpretation of presidential power that seeks to consolidate control over the entire executive branch under the direct authority of the White House. Kevin Roberts, a key proponent, succinctly captures this vision: "all federal employees should answer to the president."[4]One of the most striking aspects of Project 2025 is its plan to dismantle the independence of various federal agencies. Agencies like the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and the Federal Election Commission (FEC), which were designed to operate without political interference, are now targeted for overhaul. These agencies, established by Congress to ensure impartial oversight, are dismissed by Project 2025 as "so-called independent agencies," reflecting a disdain for the checks and balances they provide[5].For instance, the FTC, a quasi-judicial body, has long been shielded from presidential removal by the Supreme Court's ruling in *Humphrey's Executor v. United States*. However, Project 2025 seeks to overrule this precedent, allowing the president to remove commissioners at will if they do not align with the president's agenda. This move would fundamentally alter the operational independence of these agencies, subjecting them to direct presidential control[5].The Department of State is another focal point of Project 2025's reforms. Kiron Skinner, who authored the State Department chapter of the project, advocates for the dismissal of all Department of State employees in leadership roles before January 20, 2025. These positions would then be filled by ideologically vetted leaders appointed to acting roles, bypassing the need for Senate confirmation. Skinner's rationale is telling: she believes most State Department employees are too left-wing and need to be replaced by those more loyal to a conservative president[4].The implications of such changes are profound. By placing the entire executive branch under direct presidential control, Project 2025 would effectively create an "imperial presidency," where the president has almost unlimited power to implement policies without the traditional checks and balances. This would not only undermine the independence of critical agencies but also erode the democratic guardrails that have long protected American governance[5].Experts and critics alike warn of the devastating consequences of these proposals. The Center for Progressive Reform is tracking Project 2025's executive action proposals across 20 federal agencies, highlighting the potential for "devastating consequences for workers, the environment, and public health"[3].The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) has also sounded the alarm, noting that Project 2025 could lead to the termination of up to 1 million federal workers. This would not only disrupt essential government services but also have a crippling impact on the lives of those employees and their families[2].As I reflect on the scope and ambition of Project 2025, it becomes clear that this initiative represents a seismic shift in how the federal government could operate. The project's proponents argue that it is necessary to streamline government and ensure loyalty to the president's agenda. However, critics see it as a dangerous erosion of democratic principles and the rule of law.Looking ahead, the next few months will be crucial. As the 2025 deadline approaches, the fate of Project 2025 will likely be decided through a combination of legislative actions, judicial challenges, and public discourse. Whether this initiative succeeds in reshaping American governance or is thwarted by opposition, one thing is certain: the future of the U.S. government hangs in the balance.In the words of the American Civil Liberties Union, "the re-election of Donald Trump as president will have immense implications" for the success of Project 2025. As the nation navigates this critical juncture, it is imperative that we remain vigilant and engaged, ensuring that the principles of democracy and the system of checks and balances are protected for generations to come[1].

As I delve into the intricacies of Project 2025, a sense of unease settles in, not just because of the far-reaching implications it holds for American governance, but also due to the sheer ambition and controversial nature of its proposals. This initiative, spearheaded by conservative organizations, aims to reshape the federal government in a way that centralizes executive power to an unprecedented degree.At the heart of Project 2025 is the unitary executive theory, an expansive interpretation of presidential power that seeks to place the entire executive branch under direct presidential control. Kevin Roberts, a key proponent, has made it clear that all federal employees should answer directly to the president, a stance that echoes the stronger unitary executive vision embraced by the Supreme Court since the Reagan administration[4].One of the most striking aspects of Project 2025 is its plan to dismantle the independence of various federal agencies. Agencies like the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and the Federal Election Commission (FEC), which were designed to operate without political interference, are now targeted for overhaul. These agencies, created by Congress to ensure impartial oversight, are seen as obstacles by the architects of Project 2025. The initiative calls for overruling landmark Supreme Court decisions, such as *Humphrey's Executor v. United States*, which protected the independence of these agencies by limiting the president's ability to remove commissioners without cause[5].The proposed changes are not merely theoretical; they have concrete, real-world implications. For instance, Project 2025 advocates for the dismissal of all Department of State employees in leadership roles before January 20, 2025, to be replaced by ideologically vetted leaders appointed to acting roles that do not require Senate confirmation. Kiron Skinner, who authored the State Department chapter of the project, has expressed her belief that most State Department employees are too left-wing and need to be replaced by those more loyal to a conservative president. When questioned about specific instances where State Department employees obstructed Trump policies, Skinner admitted she could not name any such instances, highlighting the ideological rather than practical basis of these recommendations[4].The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) is another key component in this plan. Project 2025 proposes that OIRA should have the authority to review, revise, or block rules and significant guidance issued by independent agencies, further eroding their autonomy. This move would essentially allow the White House to dictate the regulatory agenda of these agencies, undermining their ability to function independently[5].The potential impacts of these changes are profound and far-reaching. Experts warn that Project 2025 would destroy the system of checks and balances that has been a cornerstone of American democracy. By giving the president almost unlimited power to implement policies without oversight, the initiative threatens to create an "imperial presidency" where the executive branch operates with minimal accountability[5].The plan also includes drastic measures for the federal workforce. Up to 1 million federal workers could face termination as part of the broader effort to dismantle and consolidate federal agencies. This not only jeopardizes the livelihoods of these employees but also risks disrupting critical government services and undermining public trust in the government[2].As I reflect on the scope and ambition of Project 2025, it becomes clear that this initiative is not just a set of policy proposals but a fundamental challenge to the democratic fabric of the United States. The project's disdain for independent agencies and its push for centralized executive power raise critical questions about the future of American governance.Looking ahead, the next few months will be crucial. As the 2025 deadline approaches, the fate of Project 2025 will likely be decided through a combination of political maneuvering, legal challenges, and public scrutiny. Whether this initiative succeeds in reshaping the federal government or is met with robust resistance will determine the course of American democracy for years to come.In the words of those who oppose it, Project 2025 represents a "far-right road map" to shatter democracy's guardrails. As the nation stands at this crossroads, it is imperative to engage in a nuanced and informed discussion about the implications of such a radical transformation. The future of American governance hangs in the balance, and the decisions made now will shape the country's trajectory for generations to come.

Donald Trump took office as president on January 20, 2025, having already served one term. Immediately, however, he made clear his second term would be even more unpredictable than his first. He put one of the world's richest men — and his biggest campaign donor — in charge of a shadowy new entity with seemingly unfettered access to government data. Trump also blitzed the system with a barrage of executive orders, which have seemingly upended the government. He has done everything from threatening judges and lawyers to attacking the very concept of birthright citizenship, while Congress has remained largely on the sidelines.In short, Trump has moved aggressively against many of the checks and balances that American democracy has built in. As he works to consolidate power for the executive branch, other players have stepped up to challenge the president's moves — Campaign Legal Center among them. In this special episode of Democracy Decoded, our host Simone Leeper speaks with Trevor Potter, the president and founder of Campaign Legal Center, and Adav Noti, the executive director of Campaign Legal Center, to discuss what they've seen and what they're doing during this unprecedented moment.Host and Guests:Simone Leeper litigates a wide range of redistricting-related cases at Campaign Legal Center, challenging gerrymanders and advocating for election systems that guarantee all voters an equal opportunity to influence our democracy. Prior to arriving at CLC, Simone was a law clerk in the office of Senator Ed Markey and at the Library of Congress, Office of General Counsel. She received her J.D. cum laude from Georgetown University Law Center in 2019 and a bachelor's degree in political science from Columbia University in 2016.Trevor Potter is President at Campaign Legal Center. A Republican former Chairman of the Federal Election Commission (FEC), Trevor was general counsel to John McCain's 2000 and 2008 presidential campaigns and an adviser to the drafters of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law. To many, he is perhaps best known for his recurring appearances on The Colbert Report as the lawyer for Stephen Colbert's super PAC, Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow, during the 2012 election, a program that won a Peabody Award for excellence in reporting on money in politics. The American Bar Association Journal has described Trevor as “hands-down one of the top lawyers in the country on the delicate intersection of politics, law and money.” He has provided testimony and written statements to Congress on federal election proposals, campaign finance regulation and, recently, the effects of the January 6th attack on our democracy. During the 2020 election season, Trevor was named to the cross-partisan National Task Force on Election Crises.Adav Noti is Executive Director at Campaign Legal Center. He has conducted dozens of constitutional cases in trial and appellate courts and the United States Supreme Court. He also advises Members of Congress and other policymakers on advancing democracy through legislation. Prior to joining CLC, Adav served for more than 10 years in nonpartisan leadership capacities within the Office of General Counsel of the Federal Election Commission, and he served as a Special Assistant United States Attorney for the District of Columbia. Adav regularly provides expert analysis for television, radio, and print journalism. He has appeared on broadcasts such as The Rachel Maddow Show, Anderson Cooper 360, PBS NewsHour, and National Public Radio's Morning Edition, and he is regularly cited in publications nationwide, including the New York Times, Washington Post, USA Today, Politico, Slate, and Reuters.Links:The Trump Administration's (Second) 100 Days: What You Need to Know – Campaign Legal CenterIt's almost Inauguration Day. Will there be any checks on Trump's power? – The Hill op-ed by Trevor PotterBad Signs for Democracy as First 100 Days Begins – CLC newsletter, From the Desk of Trevor PotterOn the Question of Crisis – CLC newsletter, From the Desk of Trevor PotterAbout CLC:Democracy Decoded is a production of Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan nonprofit organization which advances democracy through law at the federal, state and local levels, fighting for every American's right to responsive government and a fair opportunity to participate in and affect the democratic process. Learn more about us.Democracy Decoded is part of The Democracy Group, a network of podcasts that examines what's broken in our democracy and how we can work together to fix it.

In the intersection of politics and technology, few innovations have had as significant an impact as online donation platforms. ActBlue, the Democratic Party's premiere fundraising tool, has revolutionized small-dollar contributions since its inception in 2004. However, recent internal turmoil at the organization is raising serious questions about both its future and about the broader landscape of political donations.A Game-Changer for DemocratsActBlue was an early pioneer in digital fundraising, allowing Democratic candidates and progressive causes to tap into small-dollar donors efficiently. Through gamification and mobile accessibility, the platform made it easy for supporters to donate with just a few clicks, contributing billions of dollars to campaigns over the years.By 2024, ActBlue played a crucial role in helping President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris amass over $1.5 billion in campaign funds, outpacing the Republican counterpart, WinRed, which raised $900 million for Donald Trump. The platform also helped Democrats dominate small-dollar fundraising in Senate races, with candidates like Sherrod Brown (Ohio) and John Tester (Montana) outraising their Republican opponents, despite ultimately losing their races.A Leadership Exodus and Rising ConcernsDespite its success, ActBlue is now facing a crisis. In February 2025, seven senior staff members resigned suddenly, including the organization's chief legal officer, vice president for customer service, and a technical expert with 14 years of experience. This mass departure was alarming enough that two employee unions publicly voiced concerns, warning that confidence in the organization's stability was eroding.This followed a December 2024 letter from over 140 political stakeholders — consultants, campaign staff, donors, and academics — urging ActBlue to implement stronger safeguards to prevent donor exploitation.One particularly cryptic development came when a newly appointed technical leader at ActBlue reminded employees of whistleblower protections, a warning that suggests internal concerns about potential misconduct.Allegations of Financial MisconductWhile ActBlue's success has been attributed to its superior technology and network effect, some critics argue that there may be fraudulent activity behind its fundraising dominance.A GOP strategist, Mark Block, filed a racketeering lawsuit against ActBlue, alleging that his identity was stolen to make 385 fraudulent donations totaling $884. He claims that these small donations — each under $200 — were used to exploit a loophole in Federal Election Commission (FEC) reporting requirements.This practice, known as “smurfing,” is a form of money laundering that involves breaking large donations into smaller, untraceable amounts to avoid detection. Block's lawsuit cites donation receipts from an old campaign email account, showing repeated micro-donations averaging just $3.24 each, many of which he did not authorize.Additionally, there have been reports of:* Elderly individuals discovering numerous small donations in their names without their knowledge.* Foreign nationals using surrogates to funnel money into U.S. elections, a violation of campaign finance laws.These allegations, combined with the sudden staff exodus, suggest that ActBlue could be facing a major financial scandal.The Potential FalloutIf these accusations are substantiated, the implications for ActBlue — and Democratic fundraising — could be severe:* Small donors may hesitate to contribute if concerns about fraud persist, resulting in a loss of trust in one or both parties.* The FEC or other watchdogs may launch formal investigations, leading to stricter oversight.* With ActBlue in turmoil, Democrats may struggle to replicate their past fundraising successes in upcoming elections.There is also speculation that WinRed, the Republican alternative, could face similar scrutiny. If both major fundraising platforms are found to have engaged in unethical practices, the entire online political donation system could be upended.Looking Ahead to 2028ActBlue's situation is still unfolding, but one thing is clear: The Democratic Party's dominant fundraising machine is in serious jeopardy. If ActBlue collapses or loses credibility, Democrats will need to quickly find an alternative — something that won't be easy given the platform's deep integration with campaign operations.With the 2026 midterms and the 2028 presidential race on the horizon, the future of small-dollar political fundraising is more uncertain than ever.Chapters00:00:00 - Intro00:01:05 - Interview with Matt Laslo00:21:00 - ActBlue Chaos00:32:22 - Update00:33:46 - US/Canadian Tariffs00:35:29 - Ukraine Ceasefire00:37:35 - Mahmoud Khalil's Arrest00:40:17 - Interview with Jen Briney01:15:08 - 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

With the midterm elections coming up, there's a legal battle starting over election laws and who controls them. President Donald Trump signed an executive order to bring the Federal Election Commission (FEC) under White House scrutiny. Democrats say that this could undermine the independence of the FEC, which is in charge of enforcing campaign finance laws, and a new lawsuit could soon determine the legalities of Trump's order. Meanwhile, the Trump administration has reportedly paused aid to Ukraine.

Does your nonprofit want to build power and amplify its impact by engaging in robocalling and texting campaigns? Would it surprise you to find out that while this type of advocacy can effectively boost your reach and put you in touch with thousands (even millions) of supporters, it also comes with rules related to opt-out requirements, mandatory disclaimers, prior consent, and more? On this episode, we'll introduce you to our new Robocalling guide and walk through several of the issues your nonprofit needs to think about before you pick up the phone or click send on a robocall or robotext campaign.     Attorneys for this Episode  Monika Graham  Melissa Marichal Zayas  Natalie Ossenfort    Robotext and Robocall Campaigns  Federal Communications Commission (FCC), Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and Federal Election Commission (FEC) each regulate robocalls and robotexts  For example, the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), enforced by the FCC, strictly limits when organizations can make robocalls and robotexts. Violations of TCPA can result in stiff fines, so know the rules before you launch your next campaign.  Keep in mind that many states also have their own rules on these communication methods.  Federal Restrictions on Robocalls / Robotexts  What are robocalls and robotexts? Calls or texts made with an autodialer or using an artificial or pre-recorded voice.   Under federal law (the TCPA), a nonprofit organization must obtain an individual's “prior express consent” to: (a) send a call or text to a cell phone using an autodialer, a prerecorded voice, or an artificial voice, or (b) to send more than three prerecorded or artificial voice calls to a landline in a 30-day period.  Express consent requires:  The person gave permission to be contacted at their cell phone number.  The call is within the scope of the consent given.  The person hasn't revoked their consent.  Prior express consent is not the only consideration you need to think about before engaging in robocall or robotext campaigns. Identification, opt-out, and disclaimer requirements are going to be relevant too.  For example, federal law requires that all pre-recorded voice telephone messages to cell phones or landlines must include a specific identification disclaimer. Disclaimer must:  Clearly state at the beginning of the message the official registered name of the organization initiating the call, and  The telephone number of the organization (not the number of the vendor who placed the call, a 900 number, or a number for which charges exceed normal local or long-distance transmission charges).  Disclaimers may also be required if a non 501(c)(3) organization expressly advocates for or against a federal candidate or solicits contributions in relation to a federal election --> triggering federal campaign finance law, which is enforced by the FEC.  This type of disclaimer should not apply to 501(c)(3)s which are prohibited by the Internal Revenue Code from supporting or opposing candidates for public office.  Likewise, the IRS may require a disclaimer if fundraising solicitations are made by non-501(c)(3)s reminding the potential donor that contributions are not tax deductible.    Remember: State Law Matters Too!  Many states restrict certain types of calls, like robocalls. When they do, they often apply to both cell phones and landlines.  In many instances, state laws are similar to the federal rules, but variations between state and federal law do exist, and some states restrict calls that would otherwise be allowed under federal law.  Consult with counsel before launching your campaign because common state law requirements include:  Notification or self-identification requirements  Time restrictions  Geographic limits  Permit requirements  Prohibitions on caller ID blockers  And more!  State law may also require lobbyist or campaign finance registration and reporting in some instances.    FAQ New Robocalling guide contains a handy FAQ, where you can find answers to common questions like:  What are the best ways to collect cell phone numbers for these types of campaigns?  Are landlines treated differently than cell phones?  What happens when a cell phone number is reassigned to someone other than the person who provided consent?    Resources  Robocalling Rules: Before You Pick Up the Phone, Hold That Call. What You Need to Know about Robocalls, Robotexts, and Autodialers 

WMAL GUEST: 7:05 AM - INTERVIEW - HANS VON SPAKOVSKY - the manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative at The Heritage Foundation, a former member of the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and formerly served on Fulton County Board of Registration and Elections, which administered elections in the largest county in Georgia – discussed Biden’s last-minute pardons and Trump’s executive actions SOCIAL MEDIA: https://x.com/HvonSpakovsky Biden issues pre-emptive pardons for members of his family in one of his final acts as presidentBiden pardons Fauci, Milley and the Jan. 6 panel. It’s a guard against potential ‘revenge’ by Trump Trump pulls security clearance of 51 national security officials Trump pardons about 1,500 Jan. 6 defendantsTrump signs flurry of executive actions and memos on Day 1 Where to find more about WMAL's morning show: Follow the Show Podcasts on Apple podcasts, Audible and Spotify. Follow WMAL's "O'Connor and Company" on X: @WMALDC, @LarryOConnor, @Jgunlock, @patricepinkfile, and @heatherhunterdc. Facebook: WMALDC and Larry O'Connor Instagram: WMALDC Show Website: https://www.wmal.com/oconnor-company/ How to listen live weekdays from 5 to 9 AM: https://www.wmal.com/listenlive/ Episode: Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / 7 AM Hour See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In the 7 AM Hour: Larry O’Connor and Julie Gunlock discussed: WMAL GUEST: 7:05 AM - INTERVIEW - HANS VON SPAKOVSKY - the manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative at The Heritage Foundation, a former member of the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and formerly served on Fulton County Board of Registration and Elections, which administered elections in the largest county in Georgia – discussed Biden’s last-minute pardons and Trump’s executive actions SOCIAL MEDIA: https://x.com/HvonSpakovskyBiden issues pre-emptive pardons for members of his family in one of his final acts as presidentBiden pardons Fauci, Milley and the Jan. 6 panel. It’s a guard against potential ‘revenge’ by Trump Trump pulls security clearance of 51 national security officials Trump pardons about 1,500 Jan. 6 defendantsTrump signs flurry of executive actions and memos on Day 1WMAL GUEST: 7:35 AM - INTERVIEW - MARC MORANO - Climate Depot – Discussed Trump’s executive action on climate change and the environment SOCIAL MEDIA: https://twitter.com/ClimateDepot President Donald Trump is withdrawing the United States from the Paris Agreement – again.Donald Trump signs EV order Monday, hold off on tariffsBarron Trump and Joe Biden talk Where to find more about WMAL's morning show: Follow the Show Podcasts on Apple podcasts, Audible and Spotify. Follow WMAL's "O'Connor and Company" on X: @WMALDC, @LarryOConnor, @Jgunlock, @patricepinkfile, and @heatherhunterdc. Facebook: WMALDC and Larry O'Connor Instagram: WMALDC Show Website: https://www.wmal.com/oconnor-company/ How to listen live weekdays from 5 to 9 AM: https://www.wmal.com/listenlive/ Episode: Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / 7 AM Hour See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

When it was revealed that Oprah Winfrey's production company, Harpo Productions, was paid $1 million in conjunction with Oprah interviewing Kamala Harris, many people were surprised and some were upset. This payment, however, was consistent with campaign finance law. This podcast addresses the payments to celebrities for appearing at campaign events, whether for Democrat or Republican candidates. The podcast argues that the Federal Election Commission (FEC) should create a new rule stating that campaigns must disclose the payments to the celebrities at the time of the performances.

We continue our Best of 2024 episodes with an  episode from the Democracy Decoded podcast, with host Simone Leeper.In the end, the worst of everyone's election fears — political violence, overt foreign interference or a razor-thin margin between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump leading to a hotly contested legal battle — did not come to pass. Instead, Donald Trump won a plurality of votes for president, and did so decisively. On January 20, 2025, he will once again become the country's most powerful executive.His victory raises weighty questions for the experts at Campaign Legal Center. Trump ran explicitly on a platform of behaving like an authoritarian, promising to fire U.S. civil servants, threatening opponents with jail, and brandishing military force against would-be dissenters. As his return to power approaches, we grapple with a paradoxical election, in which voters declared their preference for the candidate who repeatedly threatened the American system as we know it.Joining Simone in this episode are Trevor Potter, CLC's president and founder, and CLC senior vice presidents Paul M. Smith and Bruce Spiva. They offer their forecasts for the uncertain years ahead and explain what this election did (and did not) signify about the health of American democracy.Read the full transcriptHost and Guests:Simone Leeper litigates a wide range of redistricting-related cases at CLC, challenging gerrymanders and advocating for election systems that guarantee all voters an equal opportunity to influence our democracy. Prior to arriving at CLC, Simone was a law clerk in the office of Senator Ed Markey and at the Library of Congress, Office of General Counsel. She received her J.D. cum laude from Georgetown University Law Center in 2019 and a bachelor's degree in political science from Columbia University in 2016.Trevor Potter is President at Campaign Legal Center. A Republican former Chairman of the Federal Election Commission (FEC), Trevor was general counsel to John McCain's 2000 and 2008 presidential campaigns and an adviser to the drafters of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law. To many, he is perhaps best known for his recurring appearances on The Colbert Report as the lawyer for Stephen Colbert's super PAC, Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow, during the 2012 election, a program that won a Peabody Award for excellence in reporting on money in politics.The American Bar Association Journal has described Trevor as “hands-down one of the top lawyers in the country on the delicate intersection of politics, law and money.” Trevor is the author of several books and manuals on lobbying regulation and disclosure, campaign finance and federal election law. He has provided testimony and written statements to Congress on federal election proposals, campaign finance regulation and, recently, the effects of the January 6th attack on our democracy. He has also taught campaign finance law at the University of Virginia School of Law and Oxford University, and he has appeared widely in national broadcast and print media. During the 2020 election season, Trevor was named to the cross-partisan National Task Force on Election Crises.Bruce Spiva is Senior Vice President at Campaign Legal Center. He is an attorney and community leader who has spent his over 30-year career fighting for civil rights and civil liberties, voting rights, consumer protection, and antitrust enforcement.Over the past three decades, he has tried cases and argued appeals in courtrooms across the country, including arguing against vote suppression in the United States Supreme Court in 2021. In 2022, in his first run for public office, Bruce mounted a competitive run in the primary election for Washington, D.C. Attorney General.In addition to founding his own law firm where he practiced for eleven years, Bruce has held several leadership and management positions as a partner at two national law firms. Most recently, Bruce served as the Managing Partner of the D.C. Office and on the firm-wide Executive Committee of Perkins Coie LLP, where he also had an active election law practice. He first-chaired twelve voting rights and redistricting trials across the country, and argued numerous voting rights appeals in U.S. circuit courts and state supreme courts during his tenure at Perkins.Paul M. Smith is Senior Vice President at Campaign Legal Center. He works directly with CLC's talented team of litigators to protect and advance American democracy through innovative litigation strategies.Paul has four decades of experience litigating a wide range of cases. He has argued before the U.S. Supreme Court 21 times and secured numerous victories, including in the important cases advancing civil liberties and civil rights, Lawrence v. Texas, the landmark gay rights case, and Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Ass'n, which established First Amendment rights of those who produce and sell video games.In addition, Paul has argued several voting rights cases at the Supreme Court, including Vieth v. Jubelirer and Gill v. Whitford, involving partisan gerrymandering, LULAC v. Perry, involving the legality of Texas's mid-decade redrawing of congressional districts and Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, involving the constitutionality of a voter identification law. He served as counsel for amici in several key campaign finance merits cases including McCutcheon v. FEC (on behalf of Democratic House members), Arizona Free Enterprise Club's Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett (on behalf of the Committee for Economic Development) and Citizens United v. FEC (on behalf of the Committee for Economic Development).Additional InformationDemocracy Decoded PodcastMore shows from The Democracy Group

In the end, the worst of everyone's election fears —political violence, overt foreign interference or a razor-thin margin between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump leading to a hotly contested legal battle — did not come to pass. Instead, Donald Trump won a plurality of votes for president, and did so decisively. On January 20, 2025, he will once again become the country's most powerful executive.His victory raises weighty questions for the experts at Campaign Legal Center. Trump ran explicitly on a platform of behaving like an authoritarian, promising to fire U.S. civil servants, threatening opponents with jail, and brandishing military force against would-be dissenters. As his return to power approaches, we grapple with a paradoxical election, in which voters declared their preference for the candidate who repeatedly threatened the American system as we know it.Joining Simone in this episode are Trevor Potter, CLC's president and founder, and CLC senior vice presidents Paul M. Smith and Bruce Spiva. They offer their forecasts for the uncertain years ahead and explain what this election did (and did not) signify about the health of American democracy. Host and Guests:Simone Leeper litigates a wide range of redistricting-related cases at CLC, challenging gerrymanders and advocating for election systems that guarantee all voters an equal opportunity to influence our democracy. Prior to arriving at CLC, Simone was a law clerk in the office of Senator Ed Markey and at the Library of Congress, Office of General Counsel. She received her J.D. cum laude from Georgetown University Law Center in 2019 and a bachelor's degree in political science from Columbia University in 2016.Trevor Potter is President at Campaign Legal Center. A Republican former Chairman of the Federal Election Commission (FEC), Trevor was general counsel to John McCain's 2000 and 2008 presidential campaigns and an adviser to the drafters of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law. To many, he is perhaps best known for his recurring appearances on The Colbert Report as the lawyer for Stephen Colbert's super PAC, Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow, during the 2012 election, a program that won a Peabody Award for excellence in reporting on money in politics. The American Bar Association Journal has described Trevor as “hands-down one of the top lawyers in the country on the delicate intersection of politics, law and money.” He has provided testimony and written statements to Congress on federal election proposals, campaign finance regulation and, recently, the effects of the January 6th attack on our democracy. During the 2020 election season, Trevor was named to the cross-partisan National Task Force on Election Crises.Bruce Spiva is Senior Vice President at Campaign Legal Center. He is an attorney and community leader who has spent his over 30-year career fighting for civil rights and civil liberties, voting rights, consumer protection, and antitrust enforcement.Over the past three decades, he has tried cases and argued appeals in courtrooms across the country, including arguing against vote suppression in the United States Supreme Court in 2021. In 2022, in his first run for public office, Bruce mounted a competitive run in the primary election for Washington, D.C. Attorney General. In addition to founding his own law firm where he practiced for eleven years, Bruce has held several leadership and management positions as a partner at two national law firms. Most recently, Bruce served as the Managing Partner of the D.C. Office and on the firm-wide Executive Committee of Perkins Coie LLP, where he also had an active election law practice. He first-chaired twelve voting rights and redistricting trials across the country, and argued numerous voting rights appeals in U.S. circuit courts and state supreme courts during his tenure at Perkins. Paul M. Smith is Senior Vice President at Campaign Legal Center. He works directly with CLC's talented team of litigators to protect and advance American democracy through innovative litigation strategies.Paul has four decades of experience litigating a wide range of cases. He has argued before the U.S. Supreme Court 21 times and secured numerous victories, including in the important cases advancing civil liberties and civil rights, Lawrence v. Texas, the landmark gay rights case, and Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Ass'n, which established First Amendment rights of those who produce and sell video games. In addition, Paul has argued several voting rights cases at the Supreme Court, including Vieth v. Jubelirer and Gill v. Whitford, involving partisan gerrymandering, LULAC v. Perry, involving the legality of Texas's mid-decade redrawing of congressional districts and Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, involving the constitutionality of a voter identification law. He served as counsel for amici in several key campaign finance merits cases including McCutcheon v. FEC (on behalf of Democratic House members), Arizona Free Enterprise Club's Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett (on behalf of the Committee for Economic Development) and Citizens United v. FEC (on behalf of the Committee for Economic Development).Links:www.campaignlegal.org/support-our-workAbout CLC:Democracy Decoded is a production of Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan nonprofit organization which advances democracy through law at the federal, state and local levels, fighting for every American's right to responsive government and a fair opportunity to participate in and affect the democratic process. Learn more about us.Democracy Decoded is part of The Democracy Group, a network of podcasts that examines what's broken in our democracy and how we can work together to fix it.

An incumbent president drops out, mid-race. A former president becomes a party's nominee for the first time in more than a century. There are multiple occurrences of political violence against a candidate. Newly emergent AI tools spread disinformation. And a Supreme Court that may be called upon to decide the race is perceived by the electorate as increasingly politicized.The 2024 election cycle has already made its share of history. With Election Day now just a week away, we bring you another of this season's up-to-the-minute episodes. This time we're speaking with Trevor Potter, president of Campaign Legal Center, who joins Simone to explain how this election has been playing out, and what it all means for you, the voter, as the deadline nears to cast your ballot.Nationwide nonpartisan Election Protection (EP) hotline:866-OUR-VOTE (866-687-8683)Host and Guests:Simone Leeper litigates a wide range of redistricting-related cases at CLC, challenging gerrymanders and advocating for election systems that guarantee all voters an equal opportunity to influence our democracy. Prior to arriving at CLC, Simone was a law clerk in the office of Senator Ed Markey and at the Library of Congress, Office of General Counsel. She received her J.D. cum laude from Georgetown University Law Center in 2019 and a bachelor's degree in political science from Columbia University in 2016.Trevor Potter is President at Campaign Legal Center. A Republican former Chairman of the Federal Election Commission (FEC), Trevor was general counsel to John McCain's 2000 and 2008 presidential campaigns and an adviser to the drafters of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law. To many, he is perhaps best known for his recurring appearances on The Colbert Report as the lawyer for Stephen Colbert's super PAC, Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow, during the 2012 election, a program that won a Peabody Award for excellence in reporting on money in politics. The American Bar Association Journal has described Trevor as “hands-down one of the top lawyers in the country on the delicate intersection of politics, law and money.” Trevor is the author of several books and manuals on lobbying regulation and disclosure, campaign finance and federal election law. He has provided testimony and written statements to Congress on federal election proposals, campaign finance regulation and, recently, the effects of the January 6th attack on our democracy. He has also taught campaign finance law at the University of Virginia School of Law and Oxford University, and he has appeared widely in national broadcast and print media. During the 2020 election season, Trevor was named to the cross-partisan National Task Force on Election Crises.Links:Count Every Vote, So Every Vote Counts - Campaign Legal CenterWhat Happens To My Ballot After I Vote? - Campaign Legal CenterWant Election Results Sooner? Allow Election Officials to Process Mail Ballots Early - Campaign Legal CenterElectoral Count Reform Act Makes It Harder to Undermine Presidential Elections - Campaign Legal CenterAbout CLC:Democracy Decoded is a production of Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan nonprofit organization which advances democracy through law at the federal, state and local levels, fighting for every American's right to responsive government and a fair opportunity to participate in and affect the democratic process. Learn more about us.Democracy Decoded is part of The Democracy Group, a network of podcasts that examines what's broken in our democracy and how we can work together to fix it.

In the 7 AM Hour: Larry O'Connor and Mercedes Schlapp discussed: WMAL GUEST: 7:05 AM - INTERVIEW - HANS VON SPAKOVSKY  -  the manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative at The Heritage Foundation, a former member of the Federal Election Commission (FEC) – discuss Early Voting and DOJ goes after Elon Musk  SOCIAL MEDIA: https://x.com/HvonSpakovsky Biden's Justice Department tells Elon Musk his $1 million voter giveaways could be illegal HANS VON SPAKOVSKY: No, Elon Musk Is NOT Breaking Federal Election Law WMAL GUEST: 7:15 AM - INTERVIEW - NICOLE HARRIS - Chair of the Maryland GOP - to talk Maryland Early Voting Day WEBSITE: https://mdgop.org/ WMAL GUEST: 7:35 AM - INTERVIEW - REP. MIKE WALTZ - Florida Congressman, Colonel (ret.), U.S. Army Green Beret and author of new book “Hard Truths” SOCIAL MEDIA: https://x.com/michaelgwaltz Harris says Trump ‘is a fascist' after John Kelly says he wanted generals like Hitler's Michael Keaton posts message to Trump and Musk's supporters: ‘They don't really respect you' Where to find more about WMAL's morning show:  Follow the Show Podcasts on Apple podcasts, Audible and Spotify. Follow WMAL's "O'Connor and Company" on X: @WMALDC, @LarryOConnor,  @Jgunlock, @patricepinkfile, and @heatherhunterdc.  Facebook: WMALDC and Larry O'Connor Instagram: WMALDC Show Website: https://www.wmal.com/oconnor-company/ How to listen live weekdays from 5 to 9 AM: https://www.wmal.com/listenlive/ Episode: Thursday, October 24, 2024 / 7 AM Hour  O'Connor and Company is proudly presented by Veritas AcademySee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

WMAL GUEST: 7:05 AM - INTERVIEW - HANS VON SPAKOVSKY  -  the manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative at The Heritage Foundation, a former member of the Federal Election Commission (FEC) – discuss Early Voting and DOJ goes after Elon Musk  SOCIAL MEDIA: https://x.com/HvonSpakovsky Biden's Justice Department tells Elon Musk his $1 million voter giveaways could be illegal HANS VON SPAKOVSKY: No, Elon Musk Is NOT Breaking Federal Election Law Where to find more about WMAL's morning show:  Follow the Show Podcasts on Apple podcasts, Audible and Spotify. Follow WMAL's "O'Connor and Company" on X: @WMALDC, @LarryOConnor,  @Jgunlock, @patricepinkfile, and @heatherhunterdc.  Facebook: WMALDC and Larry O'Connor Instagram: WMALDC Show Website: https://www.wmal.com/oconnor-company/ How to listen live weekdays from 5 to 9 AM: https://www.wmal.com/listenlive/ Episode: Thursday, October 24, 2024 / 7 AM Hour  O'Connor and Company is proudly presented by Veritas AcademySee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Donald Trump's campaign has filed a Federal Election Commission (FEC) complaint against the UK's Labour Party, accusing it of "blatant foreign interference" in the US election in aid of the Harris-Walz campaign.

WMAL GUEST: 7:05 AM - INTERVIEW - HANS VON SPAKOVSKY  -  the manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative at The Heritage Foundation, a former member of the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and formerly served on Fulton County Board of Registration and Elections, which administered elections in the largest county in Georgia – Discussed Early Voting and latest Election Integrity Issues SOCIAL MEDIA: https://x.com/HvonSpakovsky Early voting has started in more states including still hurricane ravaged North Carolina WASHINGTON EXAMINER HANS VON SPAKOVSKY OP-ED: How states can protect the right to vote in hurricane-ravaged areas Fulton County judge decides seven Georgia State Election Board rules are 'illegal' RNC sues Detroit over deleted ballot dropbox surveillance footage after FOIA request Michigan voter rolls inflated by 500K. State says it's no issue. GOP disagrees 672K absentee ballots cast in Michigan three weeks out from Election Day PA Supreme Court Effectively Preserves Requirement to Date Mail-Ins | RealClearPennsylvania 2 election officials in a rural Virginia city sue the state over ballot-counting machines Where to find more about WMAL's morning show:  Follow the Show Podcasts on Apple podcasts, Audible and Spotify. Follow WMAL's "O'Connor and Company" on X: @WMALDC, @LarryOConnor,  @Jgunlock, @patricepinkfile, and @heatherhunterdc.  Facebook: WMALDC and Larry O'Connor Instagram: WMALDC Show Website: https://www.wmal.com/oconnor-company/ How to listen live weekdays from 5 to 9 AM: https://www.wmal.com/listenlive/ Episode: Friday, October 18, 2024 / 7 AM Hour  O'Connor and Company is proudly presented by Veritas AcademySee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In the 7 AM Hour: Larry O'Connor and Patrice Onwuka discussed: WMAL GUEST: 7:05 AM - INTERVIEW - HANS VON SPAKOVSKY  -  the manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative at The Heritage Foundation, a former member of the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and formerly served on Fulton County Board of Registration and Elections, which administered elections in the largest county in Georgia – Discussed Early Voting and latest Election Integrity Issues SOCIAL MEDIA: https://x.com/HvonSpakovsky Early voting has started in more states including still hurricane ravaged North Carolina WASHINGTON EXAMINER HANS VON SPAKOVSKY OP-ED: How states can protect the right to vote in hurricane-ravaged areas Fulton County judge decides seven Georgia State Election Board rules are 'illegal' RNC sues Detroit over deleted ballot dropbox surveillance footage after FOIA request Michigan voter rolls inflated by 500K. State says it's no issue. GOP disagrees 672K absentee ballots cast in Michigan three weeks out from Election Day PA Supreme Court Effectively Preserves Requirement to Date Mail-Ins | RealClearPennsylvania 2 election officials in a rural Virginia city sue the state over ballot-counting machines WMAL GUEST: 7:35 AM - INTERVIEW - BRAM WEINSTEIN - (wine-stine) – Play by Play Announcer for the Washington Commanders and ESPN 630 host to preview this weekend's game SOCIAL MEDIA: https://x.com/RealBramW Panthers game will reveal much about 2024 Commanders Elon Musk holds his first solo event in support of Trump in the Philadelphia suburbs Where to find more about WMAL's morning show:  Follow the Show Podcasts on Apple podcasts, Audible and Spotify. Follow WMAL's "O'Connor and Company" on X: @WMALDC, @LarryOConnor,  @Jgunlock, @patricepinkfile, and @heatherhunterdc.  Facebook: WMALDC and Larry O'Connor Instagram: WMALDC Show Website: https://www.wmal.com/oconnor-company/ How to listen live weekdays from 5 to 9 AM: https://www.wmal.com/listenlive/ Episode: Friday, October 18, 2024 / 7 AM Hour  O'Connor and Company is proudly presented by Veritas AcademySee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Chris Murray speaks with Hans von Spakovsky, An Attorney & Former Member of the Federal Election Commission (FEC).See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This Day in Legal History: Fugitive Slave Act SignedOn September 18, 1850, U.S. President Millard Fillmore signed the Fugitive Slave Act into law, a key and highly controversial component of the Compromise of 1850 and a dark moment in American history – unfortunately, one among many in the 19th century. The Act required that escaped slaves, even if they had reached free states, be captured and returned to their enslavers. It also imposed heavy penalties on anyone who aided a fugitive slave, including fines and imprisonment. Disturbingly, the law authorized federal marshals and local law enforcement to arrest individuals based on little more than a slaveholder's claim, placing free Black men and women at risk of being falsely accused and sold into slavery.The Fugitive Slave Act enraged abolitionists and free states in the North, who viewed the law as a gross infringement on their legal sovereignty and moral principles. Northern citizens were now legally obligated to participate in the enforcement of slavery, a practice many detested. Conversely, slaveholders in the South celebrated the law as a victory, seeing it as essential for the preservation of their economic system. This deepened the divide between North and South, escalating tensions that would eventually lead to the Civil War. The Act's passage not only exposed the fragility of compromises between pro-slavery and anti-slavery factions but also galvanized the abolitionist movement. It showed how far the federal government was willing to go to protect the institution of slavery, making resistance increasingly inevitable.In a piece I wrote for Forbes, I weighed in to a tax policy proposed by former President Donald Trump. Floated by Trump at a rally in Arizona, the "No Tax on Overtime" policy aims to eliminate income tax on overtime pay, echoing a previous proposal to end taxes on tips. While the policy is presented as a way to relieve tax burdens on hourly workers, a closer analysis reveals several potential issues. By creating a tax-free incentive for overtime, the policy could favor workers able to put in extra hours, leaving others—like working parents—disadvantaged. This could deepen income inequality, as those unable to work overtime would continue paying taxes on their standard wages, while others benefit from a lighter tax burden. Additionally, employers may shift compensation structures to push for longer working hours, leading to lower base wages and a culture of overwork. Implementation of the policy would also create administrative challenges for employers and the IRS. Instead of targeted tax breaks, broader reforms like increasing the federal minimum wage might better address wage inequities without distorting the labor market.‘No Tax On Overtime' Policy Would Be Even Worse Than ‘No Tax On Tips'In the first 10 days of Kamala Harris's presidential campaign, lawyers contributed more to her than they did to Donald Trump's campaign over nearly two years, according to Federal Election Commission (FEC) data. Harris received nearly $8.3 million from around 26,000 contributions from individuals listing "attorney" or "lawyer" as their occupation after Joe Biden endorsed her in July 2024. In comparison, Trump's campaign, which began in November 2022, raised about $6.88 million from lawyers over that entire period. Lawyers have historically favored Democratic candidates, with Harris's and Biden's campaigns together raising significantly more from the legal profession than Trump's campaign. In previous elections, Democratic candidates like Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Joe Biden have all received much more financial support from lawyers than their Republican counterparts. The data reflects a broader trend where large law firms and individual lawyers increasingly lean toward Democratic candidates.Lawyers Give More to Harris in 10 Days Than Trump in Entire RaceDonald Trump recently pledged to restore the state and local tax (SALT) deduction, a tax break he limited during his presidency as part of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. In a post on Truth Social, Trump promised to reverse the $10,000 cap on SALT deductions, which has disproportionately impacted residents in high-tax areas like New York, especially in suburban areas where property values are high. The cap was initially supported by Republicans as it helped balance tax cuts elsewhere in the law. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer criticized Trump's reversal, pointing out that Trump himself had imposed the cap. Repealing the limit could add an estimated $1.2 trillion to the cost of extending the tax law. Trump's focus on this issue, particularly in Long Island, reflects the area's significance in ongoing battles for control of the U.S. House of Representatives.Trump Pledges to Restore SALT Write-Off, Tax Break He Curbed (1)Yesterday, on September 17, 2024, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed two bills designed to protect actors and performers from unauthorized use of their digital likenesses by artificial intelligence. One bill mandates that contracts specify when AI-generated replicas of a performer's voice or image will be used, requiring the performer to have professional representation in contract negotiations. The other bill prohibits the commercial use of digital replicas of deceased performers without consent from their estates. These laws respond to growing concerns in the entertainment industry about AI's potential to exploit performers' likenesses without permission, part of broader fears about AI's ethical and legal implications.California governor signs legislation to protect entertainers from AI | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

WMAL GUEST: 7:05 AM - INTERVIEW - HANS VON SPAKOVSKY  -  the manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative at The Heritage Foundation, a former member of the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and formerly served on Fulton County Board of Registration and Elections, which administered elections in the largest county in Georgia SOCIAL MEDIA: https://x.com/HvonSpakovsky Georgia judge dismisses two criminal counts against Trump, court filing shows Attorney General Merrick Garland says Justice Department ‘will not bend' to political pressure Loudoun Parent's Story About Teen Being Given Voter Registration Where to find more about WMAL's morning show:  Follow the Show Podcasts on Apple podcasts, Audible and Spotify. Follow WMAL's "O'Connor and Company" on X: @WMALDC, @LarryOConnor,  @Jgunlock, @patricepinkfile, and @heatherhunterdc.  Facebook: WMALDC and Larry O'Connor Instagram: WMALDC Show Website: https://www.wmal.com/oconnor-company/ How to listen live weekdays from 5 to 9 AM: https://www.wmal.com/listenlive/ Episode: Friday, September 13, 2024 / 7 AM Hour  O'Connor and Company is proudly presented by Veritas AcademySee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In the 7 AM Hour: Patrice Onwuka and Andrew Langer discussed: WMAL GUEST: 7:05 AM - INTERVIEW - HANS VON SPAKOVSKY  -  the manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative at The Heritage Foundation, a former member of the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and formerly served on Fulton County Board of Registration and Elections, which administered elections in the largest county in Georgia SOCIAL MEDIA: https://x.com/HvonSpakovsky Georgia judge dismisses two criminal counts against Trump, court filing shows Attorney General Merrick Garland says Justice Department ‘will not bend' to political pressure Loudoun Parent's Story About Teen Being Given Voter Registration WMAL GUEST: 7:35 AM - INTERVIEW - BRAM WEINSTEIN - (wine-stine) – Play by Play Announcer for the Washington Commanders and 630 ESPN host – Previewed this weekend's game Social Media: https://x.com/RealBramW Giants-Commanders Preview Trump promises to end taxation of overtime pay: 'Your overtime hours will be tax-free' Where to find more about WMAL's morning show:  Follow the Show Podcasts on Apple podcasts, Audible and Spotify. Follow WMAL's "O'Connor and Company" on X: @WMALDC, @LarryOConnor,  @Jgunlock, @patricepinkfile, and @heatherhunterdc.  Facebook: WMALDC and Larry O'Connor Instagram: WMALDC Show Website: https://www.wmal.com/oconnor-company/ How to listen live weekdays from 5 to 9 AM: https://www.wmal.com/listenlive/ Episode: Friday, September 13, 2024 / 7 AM Hour  O'Connor and Company is proudly presented by Veritas AcademySee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On this episode of the podcast, host Amanda Head is joined by political attorney Dan Backer from Chalmers, Adams, Backer & Kaufman, LLC, to break down the complexities of campaign finance in today's political arena. Known for his landmark Supreme Court victory in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission (FEC) and for holding Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) accountable, Backer shares his expert insights on the challenges both parties face under current campaign finance regulations. The conversation zeroes in on the fundraising strategies used by Democrats, particularly through processing platforms like ActBlue, exposing potential legal loopholes and vulnerabilities that will only create further controversy across the nation. As House Republicans look to investigate and remedy the existing issues, Backer and Head discuss their main concern of foreign money laundering by Democrat donors taking place across the country. Nevertheless, the inconsistent enforcement by the FEC over the years paints a clear picture of the current political landscape as we head towards the 2024 presidential election.With predictions of increased legal battles and the looming threat of fraud, this podcast episode offers a critical look at how money, law, and politics intersect in today's fragile America. Be sure to follow Dan Backer on X (formerly Twitter) @DanBackerEsq. If you're looking for a consultation or you're interested in learning more about Chalmers, Adams, Backer & Kaufman, LLC you can visit their website: www.ChalmersAdams.com. You can also find this podcast and host Amanda Head on X by searching @AmandaHead or @FurthermorePod.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This Day in Legal History: Nixon ResignsOn this day in legal history, August 8, 1974, President Richard Nixon announced his resignation from the office of the President of the United States, becoming the first and only president to do so. This unprecedented event followed the Watergate scandal, a complex political affair that began with a break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters and led to a series of revelations about abuses of power by the Nixon administration. Facing almost certain impeachment by Congress on charges of obstruction of justice, abuse of power, and contempt of Congress, Nixon chose to resign rather than prolong the national crisis.In his televised resignation speech, Nixon acknowledged that he no longer had a sufficient political base in Congress to continue effectively governing. He expressed regret for any injuries caused by his actions and highlighted his achievements while in office, yet he did not admit to any wrongdoing in the Watergate affair. Vice President Gerald Ford was sworn in as President on August 9, 1974, and later granted Nixon a full pardon for any crimes he might have committed against the United States while in office.Nixon's resignation marked a significant moment in American legal and political history, underscoring the constitutional processes in place to address presidential misconduct. It also led to reforms aimed at increasing transparency and accountability in government, such as the Ethics in Government Act and amendments to the Freedom of Information Act. This event reshaped public trust in the presidency and highlighted the importance of upholding the rule of law at the highest levels of government.A federal judge indicated that the attorneys in a class action lawsuit against Google over Chrome's “Incognito” mode are unlikely to receive their full $217 million fee request. During a hearing in Oakland, Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers also showed skepticism towards Google's proposal to cut the plaintiffs' attorney fees by 25%. She criticized Google's legal team for suggesting she personally review thousands of time sheet entries.The case, which began four years ago, was settled in April with Google agreeing to delete billions of records from Incognito mode users and make some reforms, but without providing monetary damages to users. The plaintiffs' attorneys, from firms including Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, claimed their fees were justified by 78,880 hours of work and sought a “lodestar multiplier” of 3.5, bringing their total request to $217 million.Judge Rogers commented that she rarely awards multipliers above three and noted the case's partial success. Google's attorney, Andrew Schapiro, argued that the plaintiffs' fees were excessive, pointing out that Google spent only $40 million on the case. The lawsuit initially filed in 2020 alleged that Incognito mode improperly retained user data despite claims of privacy.The settlement requires Google to clarify data collection practices and allow Incognito users to block third-party cookies for five years. Individuals can also seek monetary damages in California state court. The plaintiffs originally sought $9 billion in damages, but Google's attorney argued the final settlement warranted a lower fee due to its limited success. The case is Brown v. Google LLC.Google ‘Incognito' Case Attorneys Unlikely to Win $217 MillionThomas Girardi concealed a $53 million settlement from a young man, Joseph Ruigomez, whose home exploded, and misled him about the funds' status, a Los Angeles federal jury heard. Ruigomez and his family, receiving inconsistent interest payments, repeatedly asked Girardi for settlement details after their 2013 agreement with Pacific Gas & Electric, but Girardi never complied. Girardi claimed he held the funds for Ruigomez's protection, citing his youth and alleged drug dependency, though Ruigomez clarified he was on narcotics for pain management due to extensive medical procedures.During the trial, the defense presented numerous financial documents, while the prosecution did not clarify the annuity terms or the full distribution of the $53 million settlement, which included a $25 million annuity and $12.7 million in legal fees. Kathleen Ruigomez, Joseph's mother, testified that she only learned of the full settlement amount two years later and didn't suspect the discrepancy initially. She later sued Girardi with the help of Robert Finnerty, a former Girardi Keese lawyer.Girardi faces charges of wire fraud for allegedly stealing $15 million in settlement funds meant for clients. He pleaded not guilty, with prosecutors claiming he delayed payments under false pretenses. Girardi, who avoided disciplinary action despite over 200 misconduct complaints, also faces fraud charges in Illinois federal court and multiple civil lawsuits. His firm, Girardi Keese, went bankrupt in 2020. Girardi's mental competency to stand trial is contested, yet he was seen taking organized handwritten notes during the proceedings. The case is USA v. Girardi, in the Central District of California.‘Kingpin' Girardi Hid $53 Million Settlement, Client Says (1)Delta Air Lines Inc. is facing a proposed class action lawsuit following a software outage on July 19 caused by CrowdStrike, which led to widespread flight delays and cancellations. The lawsuit, filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, claims that Delta failed to adequately refund passengers or provide the promised meal, hotel, and transportation vouchers. Instead of issuing refunds, Delta allegedly offered e-credits without informing passengers of their legal right to cash refunds, resulting in many passengers accepting the e-credits.The plaintiffs argue that Delta did not fulfill its commitments to passengers affected by cancellations within the airline's control, leading to breaches of contract, fraud, unjust enrichment, and violations of state consumer protection laws. They are seeking class certification and damages, representing all passengers whose flights were canceled between July 19 and July 31, with specific subclasses for California, Colorado, Florida, and Washington state.The CrowdStrike software update that caused the outage disrupted millions of devices using Microsoft Windows, impacting thousands of flights globally. Delta, the official airline of Team USA, struggled particularly hard, affecting nearly 2,000 athletes and staff traveling to Paris for the Olympics. While other airlines recovered quickly, Delta continued to cancel flights into the following week, even though they announced normal operations by July 25.The US Department of Transportation is investigating Delta's response to the glitch after receiving 3,000 complaints from passengers. Delta has declined to comment on the lawsuit, which is being handled by Webb Klase & Lemond LLC and Sauder Schelkopf LLC. The case is Bajra v. Delta Air Lines Inc.Delta Sued Over Inadequate Refunds Following CrowdStrike OutageThe FCC's proposed rules for disclosing AI-generated content in political ads on radio and television have sparked a jurisdictional dispute with the Federal Election Commission (FEC). The FCC's rules, announced on July 25, would require broadcasters to announce when AI is used in political ads. FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel emphasized the need for voter transparency, comparing the requirement to existing rules about disclosing ad sponsors.Supporters, including AI regulation advocates, see it as a positive step amidst increasing deepfake use in campaigns. However, critics, including the FCC's two Republican commissioners and their FEC counterparts, argue that regulating political disclosures should fall under the FEC's jurisdiction.The proposed FCC rules, now open for public comment until September 4, face uncertainty about whether they can be finalized before the upcoming election. This uncertainty is compounded by the US Supreme Court's decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which limits federal agencies' regulatory powers.The FEC had already been considering similar AI content regulations since last year and recently sought public input on deepfakes in political ads. FCC critics argue that the FCC's efforts overlap and potentially conflict with the FEC's authority. Democratic FEC Vice Chair Ellen Weintraub, however, supports the FCC's initiative, suggesting that both agencies can complement each other.Despite the challenges, proponents believe the FCC's move will raise public awareness about AI in political ads, though the timeline for finalizing these rules remains unclear. The case's complexity is heightened by the evolving legal landscape and potential challenges to the FCC's authority following recent Supreme Court rulings.FCC Election Deepfake Ads Proposal Sparks Turf Fight With FECRipple Labs has been ordered by a Manhattan court to pay the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) approximately $125 million in penalties for the improper sale of XRP tokens. This decision follows the SEC's lawsuit against Ripple, CEO Brad Garlinghouse, and co-founder Chris Larsen, accusing them of raising over $1.3 billion through an unregistered securities offering by selling XRP. Although the SEC initially sought $2 billion in fines and penalties, the court's ruling resulted in a significantly lower amount.The SEC had dropped its claims against Garlinghouse and Larsen in October, but the case remained significant as one of the largest enforcement actions in the cryptocurrency sector. Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse acknowledged the court's decision, expressing respect and a commitment to continue the company's growth. The SEC emphasized that securities laws apply to investment contracts irrespective of the technology or labels used.This ruling marks a critical moment in the regulation of cryptocurrency sales and enforcement of securities laws within the digital asset space.By way of brief background, the determination of whether a cryptocurrency qualifies as an "investment contract" is pivotal in deciding its classification as a security. This central question hinges on the application of the Howey Test, which examines whether an investment is one of money in a common enterprise with the expectation of profits primarily from the efforts of others–if it is, it constitutes an investment contract. If a cryptocurrency meets these criteria, it falls under the regulatory purview of securities laws, significantly impacting its issuance and trading.Ripple ordered to pay $125 million in penalty for improperly selling XRP tokens | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Amanda Seales speaks on the latest political and cultural news making waves. First, we discuss former President Trump's campaign filing a complaint with the Federal Election Commission (FEC), accusing President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris of violating campaign finance laws. Next, we highlight the kickoff of the 2024 Olympic Games in Paris, where Snoop Dogg will carry the Olympic torch through Saint-Denis, and tennis star Coco Gauff and NBA legend LeBron James will serve as the flag bearers. We also cover a massive virtual rally where thousands of Black women showed their support for Vice President Kamala Harris, while over 53,000 Black men participated in a call with Win With Black Men, raising $1.3 million. Amanda explores how violence and convenience shape American culture's past, present, and future. Comedian Keith Robinson, co-host of the Wanda Sykes Show, joins us to talk about his journey, mentoring Kevin Hart, and his new Netflix stand-up special, "Different Strokes." Plus, our listeners share their thoughts on Forbes' list of the top 25 R&B artists, showcasing the genre's vast talent across generations. FOLLOW THE SHOW ON ALL SOCIALS:@Sealessaidit@Amandaseales@thesupremeexperienceIf You Have A Comment Leave Amanda A Message At 1 855-Amanda-8 That's 1-855-262-6328See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This Day in Legal History: Scopes Monkey TrialOn July 24, 1925, John Scopes, a high school teacher in Dayton, Tennessee, was found guilty of teaching evolution, a violation of the Butler Act. This state law prohibited the teaching of any theory that denied the divine creation of man as taught in the Bible, specifically targeting Charles Darwin's theory of evolution. The trial, famously known as the Scopes Monkey Trial, became a focal point for the intense debate between modern science and religious fundamentalism. Scopes was represented by the prominent attorney Clarence Darrow, while William Jennings Bryan, a three-time presidential candidate, argued for the prosecution.The courtroom drama was a media sensation, highlighting the cultural clash of the Roaring Twenties. Although Scopes was found guilty and fined $100, the trial's significance extended far beyond the verdict. It sparked national discussion on academic freedom, the separation of church and state, and the role of science in education. The conviction was later overturned on a technicality, but the Butler Act remained in force until 1967. The trial's legacy endures, symbolizing the ongoing struggle between progressive and conservative values in American society.Attorneys are rallying behind Vice President Kamala Harris as she ascends to the top of the Democratic ticket following President Joe Biden's decision to step down. Around 100 law firm partners showed interest in fundraising for Harris right after Biden's announcement. Jon Henes, a former Kirkland & Ellis partner, is organizing a significant event for her campaign, highlighting a vigorous four-month effort to the election. Harris has a history of strong support from the legal community, with lawyers contributing over $5 million to her previous campaigns. Notable attorneys like David Frederick and Roberta Kaplan have pledged their support, emphasizing the importance of defeating the former president and preserving the rule of law. The legal sector has proven to be a reliable fundraising source for Harris, with her receiving substantial donations from firms such as Paul Weiss and Kirkland. Prominent figures like Brad Karp and Brian Mathis are mobilizing Democratic supporters, while liberal mega-donors have already begun to contribute significantly. The Biden campaign infrastructure has transitioned to support Harris, with key leaders and an experienced legal team staying in place. Former US Attorney General Eric Holder and his firm are assisting in vetting potential running mates for Harris.Big Law Donors Jump to Pad Harris' War Chest for White House BidTop Industries, federal election data for Kamala Harris, 2020 cycle • OpenSecretsDonald Trump's campaign filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission (FEC), contesting Vice President Kamala Harris's takeover of funds raised by President Joe Biden's reelection campaign. After Biden, who was competing closely with Trump, endorsed Harris and ended his bid for reelection, Harris assumed control of Biden's campaign accounts. The Trump campaign accused Harris of committing a significant campaign finance violation, describing it as a "brazen money grab."David Warrington, Trump's campaign general counsel, asserted that Harris's actions represented the largest campaign finance violation in American history. However, Saurav Ghosh from the Campaign Legal Center stated that Harris, as the vice presidential candidate, should legally have access to the funds. The FEC has not commented on the unresolved matter and is unlikely to settle the dispute before the November 5 presidential election.Meanwhile, Harris's campaign has dismissed the complaint, emphasizing their strong fundraising success, having raised $100 million since Biden's endorsement. Harris campaign spokesperson Charles Kretchmer Lutvak criticized the complaint as a baseless legal tactic by Republicans to distract from their efforts to mobilize voters and win the election.Trump campaign files complaint against Harris taking over Biden war chest | ReutersTrump Files Complaint Over Biden Giving Harris $96 MillionElectric vehicle manufacturer Rivian Automotive will face trial over allegations that it encouraged employees who left Tesla to steal trade secrets. This decision follows a tentative ruling by Judge Theodore C. Zayner of the Santa Clara County Superior Court, who denied Rivian's motion to dismiss the lawsuit. The judge determined that Tesla had provided sufficient evidence to proceed to trial, citing that some Rivian employees were not thoroughly investigated or disciplined regarding the alleged thefts.The dispute began in 2020 when Tesla accused Rivian of systematically poaching its employees and misappropriating confidential information. Although Rivian presented evidence of its internal investigation into the allegations, the judge found it insufficient to conclusively prove the adequacy of their efforts. Rivian has consistently denied the accusations, while Tesla has yet to comment on the recent ruling. A final hearing on the matter is scheduled for Wednesday in Santa Clara court.Rivian to face trial in Tesla trade secrets theft case, judge says | ReutersA federal judge has upheld the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) ban on noncompete agreements, rejecting a challenge by ATS Tree Services, a small Pennsylvania company. Judge Kelley Brisbon Hodge ruled that the FTC has clear authority to issue rules to prevent unfair competition methods. ATS Tree Services, which employs about 12 people, failed to show it would suffer irreparable harm if the ban took effect and could not prove the FTC lacked authority.This ruling contrasts with a July 3 decision by Judge Ada Brown in Texas, who sided with a Texas tax firm and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, arguing the FTC lacks the authority to enforce such rules. The White House praised Hodge's decision as a victory for workers and small businesses, while the FTC spokesperson highlighted that the ruling supports the FTC's role in banning noncompete clauses.ATS Tree Services argued that banning noncompete agreements would harm its business by undermining employee training investments, but the judge found insufficient evidence to support this claim. The case reflects a judicial split, with another final ruling on the challenge due by August 30, potentially impacting the rule set to go into effect on September 4.FTC Gets Win on Noncompete Ban After Loss in Another Court (3)A bipartisan group of Congress members introduced the Ending Corporate Bankruptcy Abuse Act to target the "Texas Two-Step" bankruptcy tactic used by companies like Johnson & Johnson to manage mass liabilities. The tactic involves placing an affiliate into bankruptcy to evade responsibility and delay justice for consumers. The proposed legislation aims to prevent such maneuvers by presuming bad faith in bankruptcies with clear signs of being a Texas Two-Step.Indicators of bad faith include manufacturing a connection to the bankruptcy venue, gaining a litigation advantage, prearranged deals capping liability funds, recent formation through divisional mergers, fraudulent transfers, or lack of valid reorganization purpose. The bill seeks to standardize federal rules for dismissing such bankruptcies across circuit courts. Additionally, it prohibits litigation pauses for nonbankrupt affiliates involved in a Texas Two-Step within the past four years, specifically targeting cases with over 100 tort claims.Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), a co-sponsor, emphasized that the bill ensures victims get their day in court. Rep. Lance Gooden (R-Texas) criticized corporations for using the tactic to avoid accountability. The bill is also backed by Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) and Rep. Emilia Sykes (D-Ohio).Bipartisan Bill Aims to Deter ‘Texas Two-Step' Bankruptcy Tactic This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

WMAL GUEST: 7:05 AM - INTERVIEW - HANS VON SPAKOVSKY  -  the manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative at The Heritage Foundation, a former member of the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and formerly served on Fulton County Board of Registration and Elections, which administered elections in the largest county in Georgia - shared his thoughts on the Dems legal options on how to deal with replacing Biden: ARI EMANUEL lays out all of the legal issues of switching out BIDEN: We're in a pickle VAN JONES: Behind the scenes LEGAL MEMOS are being passed around Speaker Johnson says ‘25th Amendment is appropriate' to remove Biden Dems are hysterical about Project 2025. Project 2025 is a broad coalition of conservative organizations that have come together to ensure a successful administration beginning in January 2025. The project will build on four pillars that will collectively pave the way for an effective conservative administration: a policy agenda, personnel, training, and a 180-day playbook. The Heritage Foundation is joined by more than 110 partner organizations in this effort to ensure that the transition team is ready on Day One.  House passes bill to ban noncitizens from voting in federal elections Where to find more about WMAL's morning show:  Follow the Show Podcasts on Apple podcasts, Audible and Spotify. Follow WMAL's "O'Connor and Company" on X: @WMALDC, @LarryOConnor,  @Jgunlock, and @patricepinkfile.  Facebook: WMALDC and Larry O'Connor Instagram: WMALDC Show Website: https://www.wmal.com/oconnor-company/ How to listen live weekdays from 5 to 9 AM: https://www.wmal.com/listenlive/ Episode: Thursday, July 11, 2024 / 7 AM Hour  O'Connor and Company is proudly presented by Veritas AcademySee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In the 7 AM Hour: Larry O'Connor and Patrice Onwuka discussed: WMAL GUEST: 7:05 AM - INTERVIEW - HANS VON SPAKOVSKY  -  the manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative at The Heritage Foundation, a former member of the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and formerly served on Fulton County Board of Registration and Elections, which administered elections in the largest county in Georgia - shared his thoughts on the Dems legal options on how to deal with replacing Biden: ARI EMANUEL lays out all of the legal issues of switching out BIDEN: We're in a pickle VAN JONES: Behind the scenes LEGAL MEMOS are being passed around Speaker Johnson says ‘25th Amendment is appropriate' to remove Biden Dems are hysterical about Project 2025. Project 2025 is a broad coalition of conservative organizations that have come together to ensure a successful administration beginning in January 2025. The project will build on four pillars that will collectively pave the way for an effective conservative administration: a policy agenda, personnel, training, and a 180-day playbook. The Heritage Foundation is joined by more than 110 partner organizations in this effort to ensure that the transition team is ready on Day One.  House passes bill to ban noncitizens from voting in federal elections WMAL GUES: 7:35 AM - INTERVIEW - SEN RON JOHNSON - R- Wisconsin – discussed the SAVE Act, talks about Biden and the upcoming RNC convention in Milwaukee. PAGE SIX: Newly engaged Huma Abedin flashed her stunning diamond ring from billionaire Alex Soros while going out in New York City Wednesday. Page Six exclusively confirmed earlier Wednesday that billionaire Alex Soros, the son of famous investor George Soros, asked Abedin for her hand in marriage about six weeks ago. Ex-Clinton aide Huma Abedin engaged to George Soros' son Where to find more about WMAL's morning show:  Follow the Show Podcasts on Apple podcasts, Audible and Spotify. Follow WMAL's "O'Connor and Company" on X: @WMALDC, @LarryOConnor,  @Jgunlock, and @patricepinkfile.  Facebook: WMALDC and Larry O'Connor Instagram: WMALDC Show Website: https://www.wmal.com/oconnor-company/ How to listen live weekdays from 5 to 9 AM: https://www.wmal.com/listenlive/ Episode: Thursday, July 11, 2024 / 7 AM Hour  O'Connor and Company is proudly presented by Veritas AcademySee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This Day in Legal History: Operation SataniqueOn July 10, 1985, French intelligence agents bombed the Greenpeace ship Rainbow Warrior in Auckland Harbor, New Zealand. This covert operation, codenamed "Operation Satanique," aimed to prevent the vessel from protesting French nuclear tests in the South Pacific. The attack resulted in the sinking of the Rainbow Warrior and the tragic death of Portuguese photographer Fernando Pereira.The incident quickly escalated into an international scandal, straining diplomatic relations between France and New Zealand. In the aftermath, two French agents, Alain Mafart and Dominique Prieur, were apprehended and sentenced to ten years in a New Zealand prison for manslaughter. However, under international pressure, a deal was struck that allowed the agents to serve their sentences on a French-controlled island in the Pacific.Litigation between France and New Zealand ensued, culminating in a case before the International Court of Justice (ICJ). In this landmark case, New Zealand sought compensation for the attack and the breach of its sovereignty. The ICJ ruling required France to pay New Zealand $7 million in damages and issue a formal apology, marking a significant moment in international law and state accountability.This event highlighted the tensions surrounding nuclear testing and environmental activism during the Cold War era. It also underscored the importance of respecting international law and the sovereignty of nations. The bombing of the Rainbow Warrior remains a poignant reminder of the lengths to which states might go to protect their interests, often at great moral and legal cost. The case of New Zealand v. France before the International Court of Justice demonstrated the legal processes and repercussions when a nation's sovereignty is violated by another state. This case emphasized the role of the ICJ in resolving international disputes and upholding international law.Alec Baldwin's trial for the 2021 fatal shooting of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins on the "Rust" movie set has turned its focus on the Colt .45 "Peacemaker" revolver involved. Jury selection occurred in Santa Fe, New Mexico, with Baldwin and his wife in attendance. The trial, starting almost three years after the incident, sees prosecutors and defense lawyers questioning jurors about their knowledge of the case and Baldwin's influence as a public figure.The case is unprecedented in U.S. history, as actors rarely face criminal charges for on-set fatalities. Baldwin could face up to 18 months in prison if convicted. The "Rust" armorer, Hannah Gutierrez, was previously found guilty of involuntary manslaughter for mistakenly loading a live round into the gun, receiving an 18-month sentence.A crucial point in the trial is whether Baldwin should have inspected the gun after being told it was "cold," meaning it should have been empty or contained dummy rounds. Baldwin has stated he did not pull the trigger, but an FBI examination found the gun would not fire without the trigger being pulled. Baldwin's defense argues that the gun was modified, potentially allowing it to fire without a trigger pull, but the FBI destroyed the gun during testing, complicating the defense's ability to prove this claim. Legal experts suggest that the condition of the firearm and its modifications will be central to the trial's outcome.Alec Baldwin manslaughter trial revolves around Wild West gun | ReutersJudge Pauline Newman, a 97-year-old member of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, lost her lawsuit seeking reinstatement after being suspended for alleged cognitive and physical impairments due to age. Newman challenged her suspension, arguing that the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980, which governs the removal of judges, was unconstitutional. However, U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper dismissed her claims, asserting that the law does not violate due process rights. Newman's attorney announced plans to appeal the decision.The Federal Circuit suspended Newman in September for at least a year or until she complies with court-ordered medical examinations. Chief Judge Kimberly Moore highlighted Newman's alleged cognitive decline and lack of cooperation with mental health inquiries. Newman, a notable figure in patent law, has defended her fitness for duty, citing favorable medical reports and maintaining public appearances.This case marks a rare public debate over judicial fitness, coinciding with broader discussions about age and capability in public office. The Federal Circuit's judicial council has demanded further explanation from Newman regarding her suspension, signaling potential for the suspension's extension due to her continued non-cooperation.US judge, 97, loses lawsuit seeking reinstatement | Reuters97-Year-Old Judge Newman to Appeal Loss in Suspension Suit (3)A D.C. Circuit panel ruled that Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign and a pro-Clinton PAC, Correct the Record, must face claims of improperly disclosing millions in expenditures. The Federal Election Commission (FEC) dismissed a complaint from the Campaign Legal Center, alleging violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act. The court found that the FEC's dismissal was "contrary to law" as it stretched exemptions for internet spending beyond legal limits.The court emphasized that campaign committees must disclose coordinated expenditures as contributions, with exemptions only for unpaid internet communications. The Campaign Legal Center accused the Clinton campaign of accepting undisclosed contributions from Correct the Record, including opposition research and media activities. The ruling requires the FEC to clarify the internet exemption's bounds and consider enforcement actions against the Clinton campaign and Correct the Record. If the FEC does not act within 30 days, the Campaign Legal Center can pursue a private lawsuit.The D.C. Circuit's decision upholds a lower court ruling that the FEC's dismissal was unlawful. It also highlighted how the FEC's interpretation of exemptions could allow circumvention of campaign finance laws. The case has been remanded to the district court and then back to the FEC for further action. Judges J. Michelle Childs and Harry T. Edwards joined in the opinion.Clinton Campaign Case to Prompt Review of Disclosure Exemption This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

In the 6 AM Hour: Larry O'Connor and Mercedes Schlapp discussed: Hunter Biden trial enters day 4 after wild testimony from exes on rampant drug use, trashed hotel rooms House Republicans file criminal referrals for Hunter and James Biden https://x.com/jsolomonReports/status/1798414986198290711 Hunter Biden told Congress he didn't work on visa for Burisma boss, but emails suggest otherwise https://x.com/jsolomonReports/status/1798313078230057140 Hunter Biden trial enters day 4 after wild testimony from exes on rampant drug use, trashed hotel rooms FBI witness tells Hunter Biden's jury that NO TAMPERING occurred with his laptop https://x.com/GOPoversight/status/1798392640792150141 WMAL GUEST: 6:35 AM - INTERVIEW - HANS VON SPAKOVSKY  -  the manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative at The Heritage Foundation, a former member of the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and formerly served on Fulton County Board of Registration and Elections, which administered elections in the largest county in Georgia.  He discussed Trump's Georgia Case Halted Indefinitely   Trump's Georgia election case halted by court until Willis appeal is resolved BIDEN IN FRANCE TODAY: President Biden will participate in a ceremony honoring the 80th anniversary of D-Day at the Normandy American Cemetery in Normandy, France. ‘Back in time': House lawmakers parachuting from WWII-era plane in Normandy to mark D-Day Where to find more about WMAL's morning show:  Follow the Show Podcasts on Apple podcasts, Audible and Spotify. Follow WMAL's "O'Connor and Company" on X: @WMALDC, @LarryOConnor,  @Jgunlock,  @patricepinkfile and @heatherhunterdc.  Facebook: WMALDC and Larry O'Connor Instagram: WMALDC Show Website: https://www.wmal.com/oconnor-company/ How to listen live weekdays from 5 to 9 AM: https://www.wmal.com/listenlive/ Episode: Thursday, June 6, 2024 / 6 AM Hour  O'Connor and Company is proudly presented by Veritas AcademySee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

WMAL GUEST: 6:35 AM - INTERVIEW - HANS VON SPAKOVSKY  -  the manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative at The Heritage Foundation, a former member of the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and formerly served on Fulton County Board of Registration and Elections, which administered elections in the largest county in Georgia.  He discussed Trump's Georgia Case Halted Indefinitely   Trump's Georgia election case halted by court until Willis appeal is resolved Where to find more about WMAL's morning show:  Follow the Show Podcasts on Apple podcasts, Audible and Spotify. Follow WMAL's "O'Connor and Company" on X: @WMALDC, @LarryOConnor,  @Jgunlock,  @patricepinkfile and @heatherhunterdc.  Facebook: WMALDC and Larry O'Connor Instagram: WMALDC Show Website: https://www.wmal.com/oconnor-company/ How to listen live weekdays from 5 to 9 AM: https://www.wmal.com/listenlive/ Episode: Thursday, June 6, 2024 / 6 AM Hour  O'Connor and Company is proudly presented by Veritas AcademySee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today's show opens with House Leadership motioning to table Rep. Anna Paulina Luna's (R-FL) motion for a re-vote. In essence, this killed the attempt to ask for a vote to add the 4th Amendment reminder to the FISA re-authorization bill. So much for the Bill of Rights. Of course, Congress carved out their exception for themselves. This leads to AG Alvin Bragg who has invented a new law and found a judge who is okay using that make-believe law in an effort to go after Donald Trump. It's great to have laws, but when those in power refuse to enforce the laws, what is our recourse? And worse, what is the recourse for those who invent law and find judges okay using those pretend laws to go after people they don't like? For fun, we go through the elements of the “hush money” timeline and play along with Bragg's invented lawfare. Even if the alleged affair and alleged payoff is true, the time of the payoff could not have had any impact on the election. That's why the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and the DOJ both agreed there was no crime here. To lighten the mood a bit, we play a little ditty by Jim Gossett who recognizes this whole thing is a “Show Trial.” An NGO in Mexico is putting up fliers encouraging illegals to vote for Biden. The group has ties to organizations like Soros's Open Borders Foundation and the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS), where it just so happens DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas was a former board member. Will Biden really still be the nominee by the time of the DNC convention in Chicago? Let's remind you how key Democrat strategists have been ramping up the pressure and suggesting Biden should step down. While the Legacy/mainstream media isn't talking about it, the primaries are still taking place. Would it surprise you to know that around 10% of Democrats are voting “undecided” or are picking someone other than Biden. DNC representatives may be okay lying on network television, but behind closed doors they are panicking. Looks like NPR has decided to punish Uri Berliner for speaking the truth. After his op-ed exposed the liberal groupthink that has taken over NPR, the CEO, Katherine Maher, has decided to suspend him. This is remarkably similar to the way CISA advised Twitter on how to judge if a post is spreading misinformation. If the comment, even if truthful, runs afoul of the approved government narrative, it can be considered misinformation nonetheless. Joe Scarborough had an adult-sized temper tantrum on MSNBC's, “The Morning Joe.” The derangement and lunacy was on full display with a rant by an empty head who doesn't get a single fact correct in his opening and by the end, is openly mocking and deriding the vast majority of Americans. When elites can't get their way, they show us the toddlers they really are. In closing, we illustrate the same issue we saw with Joe Scarborough, only this time, with singer John Mellencamp. After pausing his show for minutes to lecture the crowd about voting for Biden, someone suggested he play some music. The crowd didn't want to attend a lecture. So, in typical elitist fashion, Mellencamp took his ball and went home. Take a moment to rate and review the show and then share the episode on social media. You can find me on Facebook, X, Instagram, GETTR and TRUTH Social by searching for The Alan Sanders Show. You can also support the show by visiting my Patreon page!

Robert F. Kennedy Jr's speculated vice presidential pick, Nicole Shanahan exhibits a tendency towards left-leaning ideologies, particularly, her notable support for 'criminal justice' initiatives. This is a surprising turn as Kennedy Jr. staunchly showcased a newfound political independence this past October, parting ways with his previous affiliation - the Democratic Party. He announced, 'It's time I charted my independent course, away from the Democrats and indeed, all political factions.' Despite this declaration, Shanahan's record places her firmly within the Democrat camp, with multiple contributions towards Joe Biden and the Democratic Party. Kennedy Jr. has significantly distanced himself from the Democratic Party, seeking to cultivate an independent presence in the political realm. However, his veep choice, Shanahan, does not display a similar political middleground. Her historical affinities lean towards Democrats, with ample financial support for Joe Biden, reaching into the thousands. Drawing from a report by the New York Times, Shanahan, once married to Google's co-founder Sergey Brin, bears a long history of bankrolling Democratic campaigns. This included President Biden's 2020 race when she offered substantial donations. Interestingly, she also backed Kennedy Jr.'s presidency campaign in May 2023 when he still identified as a Democrat. Additional details reveal that Shanahan provided considerable contributions towards the Biden campaign in 2020, a hefty sum of $30,000, as indicated by Federal Election Commission (FEC) data. Moreover, she has made recurring donations to ActBlue, the Democratic fundraising entity, and even the Democratic National Committee (DNC). Beyond this, Shanahan has actively participated in influencing political decisions regarding 'criminal justice.' In an interview with San Francisco Magazine in 2021, she proudly referred to herself as a significant funding contributor for 'Measure J' in Los Angeles County. The said 'Measure J' involves changes to the local charter. It stipulates that no less than 10% of locally created unrestricted income must be re-invested in community development and alternate solutions to incarceration. The measure also prohibits the misappropriation of these funds towards carceral systems and law enforcement agencies. In that same 2021 San Francisco Magazine interview, Shanahan put forth her perspective on the George Floyd incident. She proposed that the presence of a mental health professional at the scene could have potentially altered the course of the tragic event. According to the magazine, Shanahan's commitment to transformative justice predates the rise of the Black Lives Matter movement. Shanahan shared, 'About five years ago, I suggested to the head of Sergey's foundation that 'criminal justice reform' was poised to be one of the defining issues of our generation. I am proud to have contributed significantly to 'Measure J' in Los Angeles County, rerouting some of the law enforcement budget towards mental and social support services.' Expanding upon her thoughts, Shanahan argued that the arrival of a mental health professional during George Floyd's arrest could have defused the tension, maybe even saving his life. These sentiments reflect Shanahan's deep-rooted belief in transforming the criminal justice system. Moreover, Charlie Kirk, founder of the conservative youth organization Turning Point USA, highlighted an additional aspect of Shanahan's political inclinations. According to him, Shanahan is a substantial donor to George Gascon, the prosecutor reputed for his pro-crime stance and backed by Soros. Gascon achieved notoriety for his role in upsetting the San Francisco status quo and is currently viewed as detrimental to Los Angeles. Concluding his assessment, Kirk labelled Shanahan's selection as a clear left-leaning tactic by Kennedy Jr., aimed at consolidating his progressive credentials. He noted this move could potentially alienate common-sense independents and centrist voters, who are wary of escalating crime rates yet intrigued by Kennedy Jr.'s campaign. Kirk further explained his concern: 'Kennedy Jr.'s VP pick, Nicole Shanahan, has financially backed George Gascon, the pro-crime, Soros-backed prosecutor whose tenure has led to negative consequences for San Francisco and is currently disturbing the peace in LA.' He also acknowledged her support for 'Measure J,' a Los Angeles initiative that rerouted spending from law enforcement, a detail that further corroborates Shanahan's alignment with left-leaning ideologies. Her involvement with these initiatives signals her political persuasion. The dynamics of Kennedy Jr.'s political campaign continue to evolve with Nicole Shanahan's potential inclusion as his vice-presidential pick. Though he aims to redefine himself as an independent candidate, his choice in Shanahan, with her well-documented support for Democratic causes, blurs this self-professed independence. The objective now lies in whether this would impact Kennedy Jr.'s campaign, especially in terms of attracting centrist voters and those with a practical approach to crime prevention. Only time will tell if this mixture of independence and distinct left-leaning sympathies can strike a favorable chord with the electorate. Real News Now Website Connect with Real News Now on Social Media Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/RealNewsNowApp/ X Twitter: https://twitter.com/realnewsapp Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/realnews/ TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@realnewsnowapp Threads: https://www.threads.net/@realnews/ Tumblr: https://www.tumblr.com/realnewsnow Truth Social: https://truthsocial.com/@RealNews YouTube:https://www.youtube.com/@realnewsnowapp End Wokeness: https://endthewokeness.com #realnewsnow See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Recent electoral data provides illuminating insights into the significant traction Nikki Haley has garnered among Republican primary voters, underscoring her entrenched establishment appeal within the party. Concurrently, her political counterpart, President Joe Biden, epitomizes a similar establishment ethos, setting the stage for a nuanced analysis of contemporary political dynamics. A salient statistical revelation emerges: a mere 18 percent of Haley's supporters expressed disapproval of President Biden, while a substantial 78 percent of those who backed former President Donald Trump registered their dissent towards the Biden administration. This stark divergence in opinion highlights the deeply polarized nature of contemporary American politics and underscores the complexities of ideological allegiance within the Republican base. While Haley steadfastly positions herself as a conservative standard-bearer, a critical examination of her policy stances reveals potential discrepancies with this ideological label. Notably, her departure from the America First agenda manifests in various policy positions, including advocating for stringent measures such as social media verification by real names and endorsing the allocation of American taxpayer funds to fortify Ukraine's eastern border. Additionally, her stance on parental autonomy regarding procedures like "transgender" surgeries on minors and her support for importing migrant labor are areas of contention within conservative circles, prompting nuanced discussions about the definition and boundaries of conservatism in contemporary political discourse. Financial disclosures from the Federal Election Commission (FEC) offer valuable insights into the robust financial apparatus underpinning Haley's political endeavors. During her Republican primary bid against Trump, her campaign expenditure surpassed an impressive $114 million, demonstrating the formidable resources mobilized in pursuit of her political ambitions. However, despite the significant investment, the FEC filings reveal a more modest $17 million in cash reserves at her disposal, signaling the imperative of sustained fundraising efforts to maintain momentum in the fiercely competitive electoral landscape. Haley's proactive approach to augmenting her financial resources is evidenced by the additional $12 million raised in February, reflecting the pivotal role of fundraising in contemporary electoral politics. Notably, a significant portion of Haley's campaign funding, exceeding 75 percent, emanates from large donors, as analyzed by Open Secrets. This reliance on high-dollar contributions underscores the intricate interplay between money, influence, and electoral success in modern politics, prompting broader discussions about campaign finance reform and the role of special interest groups in shaping political outcomes. An intriguing aspect of Haley's fundraising strategy is her willingness to accept contributions from a diverse array of donors, including Democrats such as Reid Hoffman, the billionaire co-founder of LinkedIn. This pragmatic approach underscores Haley's ability to cultivate support across partisan lines, positioning herself as a candidate capable of transcending ideological divides in pursuit of her political objectives. However, this cross-partisan fundraising strategy also invites scrutiny and raises questions about the potential influence of donors from opposing political camps on Haley's policy agenda and decision-making processes. In conclusion, the confluence of electoral data, policy positions, and campaign finance dynamics offers a multifaceted portrait of Nikki Haley's political trajectory and underscores the complexities of contemporary American politics. As Haley navigates the intricacies of primary contests and broader electoral battles, her ability to reconcile ideological principles with pragmatic political considerations will likely shape her prospects for success and influence in the evolving landscape of American governance. Nikki Haley Voters Show Strong Approval for President Biden - Real News Now Real News Now WebsiteSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Teamsters Union, a considerable force among unions in the United States, recently broke a tradition that has been in place since 2004. This group elevated its strategic profile with a financial contribution to the Republican Party, following a visit from the 45th President, Donald Trump. Federal Election Commission (FEC) records indicate a significant $45,000 commitment to the Republican National Committee (RNC) convention fund on the 25th of January. The political currents are visibly shifting as the Democrats' long-established influence over the unions seems to be under pressure. The Teamsters, known for their consistent backing of Democratic presidential runners since 2000, have signaled a fresh alignment. The transaction, currently in process, represents the maximum sum permissible for donation from the union's PAC. This virtual clip note marks a significant turn of events after Trump's successful meeting with the union's president, Sean O'Brien, earlier this year. An optimistic O'Brien commented on the discussions, highlighting the importance of confronting robust Challenges facing workers across the nation. In his words, 'The Teamsters Union is committed to ensuring the concerns of our members are recognized and addressed as we approach a crucial election year', following the private engagement with Trump. Notably, the high-profile meeting held at Mar-a-Lago with Trump attracted the ire of union leaders tending to the left of center. The Washington Post highlighted rebukes from a board member who leveled sharp accusations at Trump, branding him a 'notorious union breaker, strikebreaker and insurgent.' Nevertheless, such dissenting voices did not deter O'Brien and the union's Secretary-Treasurer, Fred Zuckerman, from proposing that the Pac donate to the RNC.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

We want to hear from you! Thank you for taking a few minutes to complete our survey. Your feedback helps understand what you love about Democracy Decoded and how we can make it even better. To show our thanks, you'll be entered into a drawing for a chance to win a $50 American Express gift card. We appreciate your time!----------------Campaign contribution limits are one of the few mechanisms in place to prevent wealthy special interests from spending unlimited money to rig the political system in their favor. But there are some states where it's just too easy to skirt around these limits and other states that actually don't have limits at all. In this episode of Democracy Decoded, host Simone Leeper highlights how without campaign contribution limits, the vast financial resources of special interests can outweigh the priorities of everyday citizens. Experts and advocates discuss the intricacies of the electoral playing field, and how to best protect the voter's right to elect candidates who truly represent their values. They highlight the work of grassroots coalitions and advocacy groups working together for fair and equitable campaign finance laws in states like Illinois and Oregon.Simone speaks with Alisa Kaplan, the Executive Director of Reform for Illinois, who illustrates how a provision in state law allows candidates to amass unlimited campaign contributions. Campaign Legal Center's founder and President Trevor Potter, and Patrick Llewellyn, Director of State Campaign Finance, offer insights into the broader landscape of states without contribution limits, and the importance of these laws in preserving the integrity of the democratic process. Simone also speaks with Kate Titus, the executive director of Common Cause Oregon, about a recent amendment in Oregon that introduced the possibility of contribution limits in the state, and the years of advocacy by voters that led to change.Host and Guests:Simone Leeper litigates a wide range of redistricting-related cases at CLC, challenging gerrymanders and advocating for election systems that guarantee all voters an equal opportunity to influence our democracy. Prior to arriving at CLC, Simone was a law clerk in the office of Senator Ed Markey and at the Library of Congress, Office of General Counsel. She received her J.D. cum laude from Georgetown University Law Center in 2019 and a bachelor's degree in political science from Columbia University in 2016.Alisa Kaplan is the Executive Director of Reform for Illinois. She joined the organization in 2018, drawn to its long history of fighting for campaign finance reform and against systemic corruption. As Executive Director, she leads RFI's policy development, advocacy, and educational initiatives and oversees operations. A Yale graduate with a J.D. and Ph.D. in Political Science from Northwestern University, Alisa brings expertise in law and the political process and a background in community organizing, grassroots activism, and nonprofit administration. She has been a Faculty Lecturer at Northwestern, teaching Constitutional Law, Civil Rights, and Law and Politics. In her role at RFI, Alisa feels fortunate to be able to spend every day fighting for a more ethical and equitable Illinois government that works not just for the wealthy and well-connected, but for everyone.Trevor Potter is the founder and President of Campaign Legal Center. He leads CLC in its efforts to advance democracy through law. A Republican former Chairman of the Federal Election Commission (FEC), Trevor was general counsel to John McCain's 2000 and 2008 presidential campaigns and an adviser to the drafters of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law. To many, he is perhaps best known for his recurring appearances on The Colbert Report as the lawyer for Stephen Colbert's super PAC, Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow, during the 2012 election, a program that won a Peabody Award for excellence in reporting on money in politics.  Trevor has provided testimony and written statements to Congress on federal election proposals, campaign finance regulation and, recently, the effects of the January 6th attack on our democracy. He has also taught campaign finance law at the University of Virginia School of Law and Oxford University, and he has appeared widely in national broadcast and print media. During the 2020 election season, Trevor was named to the cross-partisan National Task Force on Election Crises.Patrick Llewellyn is Director, State Campaign Finance at Campaign Legal Center. He directs CLC's work with state and local stakeholders and policymakers to advance innovative campaign finance policies. Prior to joining CLC, Patrick worked as an attorney at Public Citizen Litigation Group, where his practice focused on government transparency and he represented nonprofits, journalists and researchers at all levels of federal court, and as a staff attorney/teaching fellow in the Civil Rights Clinic at Georgetown University Law Center, where he supervised law students on voting rights, workers' rights and other civil rights matters in state and federal courts.Kate Titus serves as executive director of Common Cause Oregon. She brings to this work a background in public policy and community organizing, having worked previously for a number of other public interest organizations including Public Citizen and Oregon Action. Kate is a graduate of Connecticut College, and earned a Masters in Public Administration from Harvard. Links:Campaign Contribution Limits: OverviewState-by-state comparison of campaign finance requirementsCampaign finance requirements in IllinoisCampaign finance limits could come up short in Oregon Legislature — againPublic Financing of Elections About CLC:Democracy Decoded is a production of Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan nonprofit organization which advances democracy through law at the federal, state and local levels, fighting for every American's right to responsive government and a fair opportunity to participate in and affect the democratic process. Learn more about us.Democracy Decoded is part of The Democracy Group, a network of podcasts that examines what's broken in our democracy and how we can work together to fix it.

Since SCOTUS 2022 Dobbs ruling, seven states - California, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Montana, Ohio and Vermont - have voted on ballot measures that relate directly or indirectly to reproductive rights. Reproductive rights advocates have come out on the winning side in all seven. J. Miles Coleman discusses the first installment of his analysis on how these initiatives fared relative to other elections in Kansas, Michigan and Ohio. Dr. Craig Holman of Public Citizen also joins Carah Ong Whaley, Marina George and Keshav Hajarnavis to discuss a new public comment opportunity to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) on amending regulations to include deliberately deceptive Artificial Intelligence in campaign ads.  Links in this episode:  ·      The Atlas of Post-Dobbs Abortion Ballot Measures: Part One ·      Comments sought on amending regulation to include deliberately deceptive Artificial Intelligence in campaign ads

Good day, listeners! Welcome to "The NeoLiberal Round" News. Today, we bring you updates on the legal battles surrounding former President Donald Trump and the ongoing "Castro V Trump" trial. In recent developments, former President Donald Trump has pleaded not guilty to four criminal charges linked to his efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election. The backdrop for his arrest and arraignment is none other than the Washington, DC, courthouse, which had a front-row view of the violence during the January 6, 2020, Capitol attack. It is also the same courthouse where over 1,000 Trump supporters, who participated in the insurrection, have made appearances. Trump's indictment has raised eyebrows as it is perceived by him as a "persecution of a political opponent," something he believes should never have happened in America. The charges against him include conspiring to defraud the United States and obstructing an official proceeding. Prosecutors are relying on a Reconstruction-era civil rights law to accuse Trump and his co-conspirators of attempting to deprive individuals of their right to vote and have their votes counted. In an extraordinary turn of events, the next hearing in Trump's case is scheduled for August 28, just five days after the first Republican presidential primary debate. The timing underscores the unprecedented federal court schedule for a front-runner in the 2024 nomination race. Meanwhile, in the "Castro V Trump" trial, the legal battle between John A. Castro and Donald Trump continues to capture attention. Castro, a US 2024 Presidential Candidate, initially filed a suit against the Federal Election Commission (FEC), arguing that they should not allow Trump to run for office due to his involvement in the January 6th insurrection, which he claimed violated the 14th amendment. However, the court dismissed the case on standing grounds. Undeterred, Mr. Castro filed a new lawsuit against Trump in January 2023, setting the stage for the legal showdown. The presiding Judge, Aileen Cannon, a Trump-appointee, has been accused by Castro of displaying bias towards Trump, adding complexity to the proceedings. The ruling was further delayed, and in July, the case was dismissed, with the court concurring with Trump's motion that Castro lacked standing as a candidate. Mr. Castro promptly filed an appeal to the 11th district court to overturn Judge Cannon's decision and requested her recusal from all cases involving Trump. However, on August 1, 2023, Mr. Castro reported that he and his legal team have filed an emergency petition to the United States Supreme Court. This move indicates Castro's determination to pursue justice at the highest level of the judiciary. Critics have raised concerns about Trump's surrogates influencing the outcome of the trial, allowing them to define a candidate's standing in a way that aligns with their desired rulings. Stay tuned to "The NeoLiberal Round" podcast news for further updates as these legal battles unfold. We will continue to bring you in-depth coverage and analysis of the ever-evolving developments in the world of politics and law. Thank you for tuning in! Visit the story at https://theneoliberal.com and https://renaldocmckenzie.com. Subscribe for free on any stream. Find your stream here: The NeoLiberal Round • A podcast on Spotify for Podcasters Donate to us at: The NeoLiberal Round • A podcast on Spotify for Podcasters Follow on Twitter: https://twitter.com/renaldomckenzie and https://twitter.com/theneoliberalco. Announcement: My new book Neoliberal Globalization Reconsidered, Neo-Capitalism and the Death of Nations will be out August 15th, 2023. In mean time, Neoliberalism Book 1 is available worldwide online at Amazon, Barnes and Noble and with us at The NeoLiberal Corporation Online Bookshop. Visit our website and scroll to our Shops and services. We're all about "serving the world today to solve tomorrow's challenges by making popular what was the monopoly." --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/theneoliberal/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/theneoliberal/support

The Rich Zeoli Show- Hour 1: According to The Wall Street Journal, the U.S. Supreme Court has temporarily blocked the Biden Administration from ending Title 42. The decision halts a lower court's order to end the Trump-era border policy. Does the Biden Administration have a plan in place to stifle illegal border crossings in the event Title 42 is eventually ended? Twitter Files Part 8: In a series of tweets on Tuesday, Lee Fang—investigative journalist for The Intercept—documented how Twitter “directly assisted the U.S. military's influence operations.” According to a report from Fox News, the Republican National Committee is now demanding the Federal Election Commission (FEC) “reopen an investigation into Twitter's censorship of the Hunter Biden laptop story” and whether it amounted to an illegal campaign contribution to the Biden campaign. WPHT's Dawn Stensland joins The Rich Zeoli Show to talk about her role hosting the 2023 Mummers Parade on January 1st for MeTV2. Learn more about the event, and when to watch, at: https://www.metv2.com

The Rich Zeoli Show- Full Episode (12/20/2022): 3:05pm- According to The Wall Street Journal, the U.S. Supreme Court has temporarily blocked the Biden Administration from ending Title 42. The decision halts a lower court's order to end the Trump-era border policy. Does the Biden Administration have a plan in place to stifle illegal border crossings in the event Title 42 is eventually ended? 3:15pm- Twitter Files Part 8: In a series of tweets on Tuesday, Lee Fang—investigative journalist for The Intercept—documented how Twitter “directly assisted the U.S. military's influence operations.”  3:20pm- According to a report from Fox News, the Republican National Committee is now demanding the Federal Election Commission (FEC) “reopen an investigation into Twitter's censorship of the Hunter Biden laptop story” and whether it amounted to an illegal campaign contribution to the Biden campaign.  3:40pm- WPHT's Dawn Stensland joins The Rich Zeoli Show to talk about her role hosting the 2023 Mummers Parade on January 1st for MeTV2. Learn more about the event, and when to watch, at: https://www.metv2.com 4:00pm- On Tuesday, Democrats and Republicans unveiled a $1.7 trillion budget deal designed to avert a government shutdown. The measure is a reported 4,155 pages and includes an estimated 7,500 earmarks. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (NY-D) was asked how he expects members of Congress to read the enormous omnibus bill before voting on it later this week.  4:25pm- While speaking to members of the press, Senator Mike Lee (UT-R) slammed party leaders for demanding Congressmembers vote on the 4,155-page omnibus bill without having a chance to read it beforehand.  4:45pm- In August 1975, Senator Frank Church appeared on Meet the Press and discussed surveillance technology being used by the American government to monitor foreign enemies—but he warned that it could, in the future, be used by the government to infringe upon the rights of American citizens. His warnings proved to be prophetic. In 2022, how do we begin to reform the surveillance state?  5:00pm- Gabriel Nadales—National Director for Our America—joins The Rich Zeoli Show to discuss Stanford University's new list of harmful language which includes words like master, gangbusters, and blind study. Nadales also tells his amazing life story—immigrating to the United States from Mexico and briefly participating in activist   organizations like Antifa before ultimately rejecting the ideology and embracing freedom of speech, unity, and American values.   5:30pm- Is Rich about to be cancelled? Stanford University's Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative (EHLI) has created a comprehensive list of offensive language that should no longer be used under any circumstances—Rich reads the list on-air anyway! 6:00pm- While speaking with the press, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell defended the proposed $1.7 trillion omnibus bill by arguing, “providing assistance for Ukrainians to defeat Russians is the number one priority for the United States.” The measure sends an additional $44.9 billion in military assistance to Ukraine.  6:15pm- The Biden Administration has formally asked the U.S. Supreme Court to allow for the end of Title 42.   6:20pm- Zeoli is preempted for college basketball…again!

The 2020 election was…unique. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, many states took steps to make voting safer and more accessible. After that, we saw a backlash and some states erected barriers to voting access. The 2022 midterm election then offered an opportunity to assess our voting landscape. In this episode, we discuss what we learned from the 2020 presidential election, the 2022 midterms, and how we can work together to make the promise of democracy real for us all.Host and Guests:Simone Leeper litigates a wide range of redistricting-related cases at CLC, challenging gerrymanders and advocating for election systems that guarantee all voters an equal opportunity to influence our democracy. Prior to arriving at CLC, Simone was a law clerk in the office of Senator Ed Markey and at the Library of Congress, Office of General Counsel. She received her J.D. cum laude from Georgetown University Law Center in 2019 and a bachelor's degree in political science from Columbia University in 2016.Trevor Potter is the founder and President of Campaign Legal Center. He leads CLC in its efforts to advance democracy through law. A Republican former Chairman of the Federal Election Commission (FEC), Trevor was general counsel to John McCain's 2000 and 2008 presidential campaigns and an adviser to the drafters of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law. To many, he is perhaps best known for his recurring appearances on The Colbert Report as the lawyer for Stephen Colbert's super PAC, Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow, during the 2012 election, a program that won a Peabody Award for excellence in reporting on money in politics.  Trevor has provided testimony and written statements to Congress on federal election proposals, campaign finance regulation and, recently, the effects of the January 6th attack on our democracy. He has also taught campaign finance law at the University of Virginia School of Law and Oxford University, and he has appeared widely in national broadcast and print media. During the 2020 election season, Trevor was named to the cross-partisan National Task Force on Election Crises. Aseem Mulji is Legal Counsel for Redistricting at Campaign Legal Center. He litigates voting rights, redistricting and campaign finance cases, and supports advocacy efforts to improve democracy at the federal, state and local levels. Aseem previously worked at the Participatory Budgeting Project, where he supported efforts to expand participatory democracy in the U.S. At CLC, Aseem has served as counsel in voting rights and redistricting cases such as TN NAACP v. Lee (M.D. Tenn.), VoteAmerica v. Schwab (D. Kans.), and Soto Palmer v. Hobbs (W.D. Wash.). He supports CLC's actions against the Federal Election Commission for failures to enforce campaign finance laws. He also works to advance various democracy reforms, including state-level voting rights acts, ranked-choice voting, public financing and measures to ensure ballot access for justice-involved voters.  Derek Perkinson is the New York State Field Director and Crisis Director for the National Action Network (NAN).  He oversees NAN's advocacy and organizing efforts throughout the state of New York, the thirteen New York City chapters and coordinates national crisis concerns. Derek was recently a part of the coalition which helped bring about the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act of New York. He has moderated  and served as a panelist on numerous occasions to speak up against discriminatory practices. Before joining NAN, Derek worked at the Black Institute – a think tank and nonprofit advocacy organization – where he served as the Chief Community Organizer in their New York City office. He has years of experience organizing communities of color to advocate and engage in political campaigns, criminal justice reform, economic justice, census, and voting rights, civic engagement, and immigration policy.Gilda Daniels is a Voting Rights Consultant for Campaign Legal Center. She provides her expertise and support on CLC's Voting Rights cases. Gilda has served as a deputy chief in the Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Voting Section, in both the Clinton and Bush administrations. She has more than a decade of voting rights experience, bringing cases that involved various provisions of the Voting Rights Act, the National Voter Registration Act and other voting rights statutes. Before beginning her voting rights career, Gilda was a staff attorney with the Southern Center for Human Rights, representing death row inmates and bringing prison condition cases.Links:New York Joins Other States in Enacting State-Level Voting Rights Act (Campaign Legal Center)Virtual Event Video — Barriers to the Ballot Box: A Conversation with Author Gilda Daniels (Campaign Legal Center)Ranked Choice Voting (Campaign Legal Center)About CLC:Democracy Decoded is a production of Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan nonprofit organization which advances democracy through law at the federal, state and local levels, fighting for every American's right to responsive government and a fair opportunity to participate in and affect the democratic process. You can visit us on the web at campaignlegalcenter.org.

Today's Topics:  SCOTUS considers racism in University Enrolment offices. An analysis of the blindness the Democratic Party to the needs of America. Harris County races are closer than the average race across America, so Houston Republicans must get their friends to the polls if we are to take back our land. 00:00 – Sam's introduction for TUESDAY NOVEMBER 1, 2022 00:51 – Hans Von Spakovsky – attorney and a former member of the Federal Election Commission (FEC) – 8 min – Hans and Sam discussed the Asian American lawsuit against Harvard University for enrolment discrimination. The case has gone to the U.S. Supreme Court, and has a bearing on schools across America. The racial profiling has been used against minorities for over a hundred years and is being used against Asians, Jews, and Whites. 08:36 – Frank Vernuccio – Editor-in-Chief of New York Analysis & Policy – 9 min – Frank said the reason Kathy Hochulis messed up her chance to get reelected is because she is out of touch with the citizens. The Democrat plan is “managed decline,” only it has gotten a little out of hand. Since the Democrat leaders don't live in the neighborhoods they rule, they don't see the problems, and don't understand them. 17:32 – Jessica Colon – Republican Strategist –12 min – Jessica and Sam marvel that Democrats are pulling in extreme far left names to stump for Lina and Beto. Jessica said we must fight to regain the streets of Houston from the Democrat crime machine. She said the race here will be much tighter than in the nation as a whole. She said that Dems are pushing the margins by lying about emotional issues to get unsuspecting voters to vote Democrat, 29:14 – CloseSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

U.S. Representative Cori Bush (D-Missouri) has shelled out nearly $400,000 for personal security this election cycle while simultaneously demanding that police be defunded.According to Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings, the staunch Defund the Police advocate doled out a whopping $89,265.67 for her private security detail during the second quarter alone, FOX News reported.It was her largest campaign expenditure between April 1 and June 30, coming in $50,000 higher than her fundraising bill, which was her second-largest expenditure, according to the news outlet.LIKE & SUBSCRIBE for new videos everyday. https://bit.ly/3KBUDSK

During his 2018 Senate reelection campaign and consistent with federal law, see 11 CFR §110.10; 52 U. S. C. §30101(9)(A)(i), appellee Ted Cruz loaned $260,000 to his campaign committee, Ted Cruz for Senate (Committee). To repay these and other campaign debts, campaigns may continue to receive contributions after election day. See 11 CFR §110.1(b)(3)(i). Section 304 of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA) restricts the use of post-election contributions by limiting the amount that a candidate may be repaid from such funds to $250,000. 52 U. S. C. §30116(j). Relevant here, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) has promulgated regulations establishing three rules to implement that limitation: First, a campaign may repay up to $250,000 in candidate loans using contributions made “at any time.” 11 CFR §116.12(a). Second, to the extent the loans exceed $250,000, a campaign may use pre-election funds to repay the portion exceeding $250,000 only if the repayment occurs “within 20 days of the election.” §116.11(c)(1). Third, when the 20-day post-election deadline expires, the campaign must treat any portion above $250,000 as a contribution to the campaign, precluding later repayment. §116.11(c)(2). The Committee began repaying Cruz's loans after the 20-day post-election window for repaying amounts over $250,000 had closed. It accordingly repaid Cruz only $250,000, leaving $10,000 of his personal loans unpaid. Cruz and the Committee filed this action in Federal District Court, alleging that Section 304 of BCRA violates the First Amendment and raising challenges to the FEC's implementing regulation, §116.11. The District Court granted Cruz and his Committee summary judgment on their constitutional claim, holding that the loan-repayment limitation burdens political speech without sufficient justification, and dismissed as moot their challenges to the regulation. Held: Appellees have standing to challenge the threatened enforcement of Section 304. Credit: Justia US Supreme Court, available at: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/596/21-12/ --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/scotus-opinions/support

Retraction: An earlier episode of the Cyberlaw Podcast may have left the impression that I think Google hates mothers. I regret the error. It appears that, in reality, Google only hates Republican mothers who are running for office. But to all appearances, Google really, really hates them. A remarkable, and apparently damning study disclosed that during the most recent federal election campaign, Google's Gmail sent roughly two-thirds of GOP campaign emails to users' spam inboxes while downgrading less than ten percent of the Dems' messages. Jane Bambauer lays out the details, which refute most of the excuses Google might offer for the discriminatory treatment. Notably, neither Outlook nor Yahoo! mail showed a similar pattern. Tatyana thinks we should blame Google's algorithm, not its personnel, but we're all eager to hear Google's explanation, whether it's offered in the press, Federal Election Commission (FEC), in court, or in front of Congressional investigators after the next election. Jordan Schneider helps us revisit China's cyber policies after a long hiatus. Things have NOT gotten better for the Chinese government, Jordan reports. Stringent lockdowns in Shanghai are tanking the economy and producing a surprising amount of online dissent, but with Hong Kong's death toll in mind, letting omicron spread unchecked is a scary prospect, especially for a leader who has staked his reputation on dealing with the virus better than the rest of the world. The result is hesitation over what had been a strong techlash regulatory campaign. Tatyana Bolton pulls us back to the Russian-Ukrainian war. She notes that Russia Is not used to being hacked at anything like the current scale, even if most of the online attacks are pinpricks. She also notes Microsoft's report on Russia's extensive use of cyberattacks in Ukraine. All that said, cyber operations remain a minor factor in the war. Michael Ellis and I dig into the ODNI's intelligence transparency report, which inspired several differed takes over the weekend. The biggest story was that the FBI had conducted “up to” 3.4 million searches for U.S. person data in the pool of data collected under section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FSA). Sharing a brief kumbaya moment with Sen. Ron Wyden, Michael finds the number “alarming or meaningless,” probably the latter. Meanwhile, FISA Classic wiretaps dropped again in the face of the coronavirus. And the FBI conducted four searches without going to the FISA court when it should have, probably by mistake.  We can't stay away from the pileup that is Elon Musk's Twitter bid. Jordan offers views on how much leverage China will have over Twitter by virtue of Tesla's dependence on the Chinese market. Tatyana and I debate whether Musk should have criticized Twitter's content moderators for their call on the Biden laptop story. Jane Bambauer questions whether Musk will do half the things that he seems to be hinting.  I agree, if only because European law will force Twitter to treat European sensibilities as the arbiter of what can be said in the public square. Jane outlines recent developments showing, in my view, that Europe isn't exactly running low on crazy. A new court decision opens the door to what amounts to class actions to enforce European privacy law without regard for the jurisdictional limits that have made life easier for big U.S. companies. I predict that such lawsuits will also mean trouble for big Chinese platforms. And that's not half of it. Europe's Digital Services Act, now nearly locked down, is the mother lode of crazy. Jane spells out a few of the wilder provisions – only some of which have made it into legal commentary. Orin Kerr, the normally restrained and professorial expert on cyber law, is up in arms over a recent 9th Circuit decision holding that a preservation order is not a seizure requiring a warrant. Michael, Jane, and I dig into Orin's agita, but we have trouble sharing it.   In quick hits: Jane looks at a report expressing shock that Amazon uses data from Alexa smart speakers pretty much exactly the way you'd expect it to.   Michael and I unpack the latest move in the prosecution of Uber's former Chief Security Officer, Joe Sullivan. Jane lays out what's different in Colorado‘s new privacy law. Spoiler:  Just enough to make the likelihood of a federal privacy law with preemption look good to business. Michael and I wish the Biden administration well in its effort to get much-needed new authorities to address the risks of drone attacks here at home. Download the 405th Episode (mp3) You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@steptoe.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

Retraction: An earlier episode of the Cyberlaw Podcast may have left the impression that I think Google hates mothers. I regret the error. It appears that, in reality, Google only hates Republican mothers who are running for office. But to all appearances, Google really, really hates them. A remarkable, and apparently damning study disclosed that during the most recent federal election campaign, Google's Gmail sent roughly two-thirds of GOP campaign emails to users' spam inboxes while downgrading less than ten percent of the Dems' messages. Jane Bambauer lays out the details, which refute most of the excuses Google might offer for the discriminatory treatment. Notably, neither Outlook nor Yahoo! mail showed a similar pattern. Tatyana thinks we should blame Google's algorithm, not its personnel, but we're all eager to hear Google's explanation, whether it's offered in the press, Federal Election Commission (FEC), in court, or in front of Congressional investigators after the next election. Jordan Schneider helps us revisit China's cyber policies after a long hiatus. Things have NOT gotten better for the Chinese government, Jordan reports. Stringent lockdowns in Shanghai are tanking the economy and producing a surprising amount of online dissent, but with Hong Kong's death toll in mind, letting omicron spread unchecked is a scary prospect, especially for a leader who has staked his reputation on dealing with the virus better than the rest of the world. The result is hesitation over what had been a strong techlash regulatory campaign. Tatyana Bolton pulls us back to the Russian-Ukrainian war. She notes that Russia Is not used to being hacked at anything like the current scale, even if most of the online attacks are pinpricks. She also notes Microsoft's report on Russia's extensive use of cyberattacks in Ukraine. All that said, cyber operations remain a minor factor in the war. Michael Ellis and I dig into the ODNI's intelligence transparency report, which inspired several differed takes over the weekend. The biggest story was that the FBI had conducted “up to” 3.4 million searches for U.S. person data in the pool of data collected under section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FSA). Sharing a brief kumbaya moment with Sen. Ron Wyden, Michael finds the number “alarming or meaningless,” probably the latter. Meanwhile, FISA Classic wiretaps dropped again in the face of the coronavirus. And the FBI conducted four searches without going to the FISA court when it should have, probably by mistake.  We can't stay away from the pileup that is Elon Musk's Twitter bid. Jordan offers views on how much leverage China will have over Twitter by virtue of Tesla's dependence on the Chinese market. Tatyana and I debate whether Musk should have criticized Twitter's content moderators for their call on the Biden laptop story. Jane Bambauer questions whether Musk will do half the things that he seems to be hinting.  I agree, if only because European law will force Twitter to treat European sensibilities as the arbiter of what can be said in the public square. Jane outlines recent developments showing, in my view, that Europe isn't exactly running low on crazy. A new court decision opens the door to what amounts to class actions to enforce European privacy law without regard for the jurisdictional limits that have made life easier for big U.S. companies. I predict that such lawsuits will also mean trouble for big Chinese platforms. And that's not half of it. Europe's Digital Services Act, now nearly locked down, is the mother lode of crazy. Jane spells out a few of the wilder provisions – only some of which have made it into legal commentary. Orin Kerr, the normally restrained and professorial expert on cyber law, is up in arms over a recent 9th Circuit decision holding that a preservation order is not a seizure requiring a warrant. Michael, Jane, and I dig into Orin's agita, but we have trouble sharing it.   In quick hits: Jane looks at a report expressing shock that Amazon uses data from Alexa smart speakers pretty much exactly the way you'd expect it to.   Michael and I unpack the latest move in the prosecution of Uber's former Chief Security Officer, Joe Sullivan. Jane lays out what's different in Colorado‘s new privacy law. Spoiler:  Just enough to make the likelihood of a federal privacy law with preemption look good to business. Michael and I wish the Biden administration well in its effort to get much-needed new authorities to address the risks of drone attacks here at home. Download the 405th Episode (mp3) You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@steptoe.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

Eighteen months since the New York Post originally broke the story, the infamous Hunter Biden laptop is back in the limelight after the Washington Post and New York Times report that they've verified thousands of emails from the laptop. At the time, dozens of high-level intelligence community officials—including a former director of national intelligence and three former directors of the CIA—signed a letter claiming the emails looked like Russian disinformation. It was right in the midst of a heated election cycle. Fast forward to this week, the assistant director of the FBI's cyber division, Bryan Vorndran, testified under oath that he did not know the location of the laptop, which had been seized by the FBI in 2019. Also, this week the Washington Examiner broke the story that the Federal Election Commission (FEC) has fined the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Clinton campaign for secretly funneling money to ex-British spy Christopher Steele for the creation of the Steele dossier. The DNC and the Clinton campaign are not contesting the fine. Kash Patel gives us his take on what's going on.

In a massive development, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) has announced the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) will be fined $113,000 dollars for falsely claiming that they were paying legal bills to the Clinton campaign law firm while actually funding opposition research of Donald Trump — the proven to be phony, Steele Dossier. Jay, Jordan, and the rest of the Sekulow team provide the latest details and give their expert analysis. This and more today on Sekulow.

Hans von Spakovsky is a former member of the Federal Election Commission (FEC). He is the manager of the Heritage Foundation's Election Law Reform Initiative and a senior legal fellow in Heritage's Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies. President Donald J. Trump named him to be a member of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity. Hans will discuss Joe Biden's and Kamala Harris' lies in Georgia trying to promote a federal takeover of election law and campaign funding. He will also discuss how making COVID treatments available based on racial factors rather than health issues violates the rule of law, common decency, and the Civil Rights Act. Phil Kerpen is the Founder and President of American Commitment. He is also President of the Committee to Unleash Prosperity (founded by Steve Forbes, Steve Moore, Art Lauffer). Phil is a leading free-market policy analyst and advocate in Washington. Phil will discuss the latest science and data on COVID — something that Dr. Fauci, the CDC, the entire Biden Administration, and the lame stream media and social media won't do. Phil will also discuss the latest economic news — everything from energy, to inflation, to supply chain disruptions — that Biden and various leftist governors have screwed up and exacerbated. Michael Morris is the Media Research Center's Free Speech America & MRC Business Managing Editor. While earning his undergraduate degrees, Michael interned for then-Congressman Mike Pence. And while going to law school, he interned for then-Congressman Randy Forbes. Michael will discuss Big Tech's censorship of anyone who points out misinformation coming from the government, or even renowned doctors and scientists who point out the government's misinformation. He will discuss how Big Tech even sided with the Communist Party of China over fact and reason. Michael will also discuss how the lame stream media protects Biden from being associated with his policy failures, and how the media ignored the scandal of Biden's Education Secretary soliciting the letter that falsely accused parents of being “Domestic Terrorists.”

Louis Avallone and Stephen Parr consider the consequences of the Biden Administration's “American Families Plan”. It's purpose seems to be to grow Big Government even further into American person, private family business, never mind if it is actually a States Rights matter or not…..or even if it is actually legal. It is all part of the Marxist Socialist goals of the Democrat Party to transform America into something the Founding Fathers never intended. There is reason to be concerned about what the children will be taught by the schools, especially considering the false teachings of history and of critical race theory.Gov. Abbott has announced that Texas has no choice but to start arresting every illegal coming into Texas along the southern border with Mexico. He said it won't just be for trespassing, but also for smuggling, human trafficking, and other crimes. In addition, all child care facilities which cooperate with the Federal Government in providing shelter those not legally in Texas will lose their license to operate.If you are doing your family's shopping, be aware of what is happening to the packaging. Our American Mamas, Teri Netterville, explains the concept of “shrinkflation” and how it is being used to hide true price inflation in the products available for sale on the shelves.Louis Avallone and Stephen Parr explain Facebook's blocking all of Donald Trump's accounts until January 2023 is effectively an “In Kind” financial donation to the Democrat Party, and as such, it must be reported to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) for the next 2 years. “In Kind” donations are donations of goods, services, or other items of value to a political campaign. Completely blocking the former President and the leader of the Republican Party from being able to speak at all on Facebook throughout the entire 2022 Election Cycle is a very substantial political donation! So, exactly how is that going to work? Tyton Partners and the Walton Family Foundation studied how the Pandemic impacted education within the families and schools with no warning. Utilization and opportunities of systems of learning, outside the formal classroom, have rapidly grown because parents were forced to take greater responsibility for their children's education. Regular public and private school enrollments decreased by 2.6 million students, while “charter schools, homeschooling, learning pods [adult supervised, small groups often meeting in someone's home], and microschools” grew. But the real tragic losses hit the poorest families and families where all the adults had to work.

Alexandra Shapiro, J.D., and Peter Ackerman, Ph.D. join T. J. O'Hara, the host of Deconstructed, to discuss the incredible imbalance in our Nation's presidential election that makes it almost impossible for independent and Third-Party candidates to gain any traction with their campaigns. Ms. Shapiro is a partner and co-founder of Shapiro Arato Bach and has the distinction of being one of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's first clerks. She has served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Southern District of New York and has represented Dr. Ackerman's interests in a variety of lawsuits against the Federal Election Commission (FEC) on behalf of organizations he has founded to combat the major Parties' stranglehold on the presidency. Dr. Ackerman's pursuit of fairness within presidential and other elections is legendary. He served on the Board of Unity08 to fund independent candidates and then founded and chaired Americans Elect, whose mission was to stage a national online convention to select a nonpartisan ticket for the 2012 presidential election that would be on the ballot in all 50 states. The rules of the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD), run by Democrat and Republican operatives, effectively destroyed Americans Elect effort to provide a viable alternative by preventing that organization's ultimate ticket from being included in the presidential debates. Dr. Ackerman and Ms. Shapiro discuss a number of lawsuits they have pursued against the FEC on behalf of Unity08 and Level the Playing Field (an organization that Dr. Ackerman formed after the demise of Americans Elect) and the uphill battle they have encountered when taking on that agency. The FEC has authorized the CPD to establish the rules of the presidential debates, but the CPD has created rules that essentially bar competition. Listen to learn just how unfair those rules have become and how they are protected to maintain the dominance of the Democrat and Republican Parties. Dr. Ackerman also discusses Ranked Choice Voting as a critical element to overcoming the duopoly that maintains the status quo in favor of itself. He founded the Chamberlain Project with Cara McCormick, who helped lead the successful Ranked Choice Voting campaign in Maine. Dr. Ackerman discusses why he thinks Ranked Choice Voting may be the key to creating elections that may begin to change the hyper-partisan nature of our government. The discussion is enlightening and presents a ray of hope for a better political future. Listen to learn how the system has been engineered to provide a limited choice to the people but a consistent source of power for the two major Parties. You will also learn how hard people like Ms. Shapiro and Dr. Ackerman are fighting on your behalf.

Hans von Spakovsky is a former member of the Federal Election Commission (FEC). He is the manager of the Heritage Foundation's Election Law Reform Initiative and a senior legal fellow in Heritage's Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies. President Donald J. Trump named him to be a member of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity. TOPIC: Election litigation before the Supreme Court!! Angela Box is a popular conservative personality and host of the radio show Angela’s Soap Box. She’s also a political consultant who works to help conservatives get elected in all levels of government. Angela is a former teacher and actress. And she writes original content for her own website — www.AngelasSoapBox.com. We will discuss with Angela the case that the State of Texas has brought against Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan for violating the Constitution in how it conducted the 2020 presidential election. TOPIC: Chinese spy scandal and Congress Erik Swalwell!!

Metallica “For Whom The Bell Tolls” Ride the Lightning is the second studio album by American heavy metal band Metallica, released on July 27, 1984, by the independent record label Megaforce Records. The album was recorded in three weeks. Steve and Joe join the show. November 3rd has come and gone.. The official announcement of The Disgruntled American Podcast. Presidential election. December 14th The media called the presidential election?! Dominion Voting systems Corp. Clip 1:Russ Ramsland Co-owner of Allied security operations group explains how the voting system is vulnerable and broken. Clip 2: Sidney Powell appeared on America This Week w/ Eric Bolling Trey Trainor, head of the Federal Election Commission (FEC), said in a tweet Tuesday that he believes Trump campaign lawyer Sidney Powell's claim of widespread election fraud. Toilet paper is flying off the shelves again, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo ($25,000 raise) exploded during his press briefing Wednesday; berating a reporter from the Wall Street Journal when asked to comment on New York City school closures. Canceling ThanksGiving? Christmas? RI Gov Gina Raimondo announced 14 day pause/Lockdown after Thanksgiving holiday. Vaccine Moderna 95%, Pfizer 94%, 25 million available in December initially for elderly and first responders and then March, April for the rest of us. Will you get the vaccine? The word “Fuck” and all its glory and uses. A system of people riding the train. Teachers are a majority of liberals; they spend more time with your kids than you do. Do not defund the police! Police are not responding. Law enforcement not renewing LTC's “Stand your ground” law in Florida. BLM is a money machine. They create the hate to stay relevant. Trump supporters are being physically attacked. Antifa leaders have given the order. To attack. Install ventilation systems in our schools so kids can go back. 911 brought America together. What will bring us together again? The end of Fox News? Is all News Corrupt and controlled by a higher power, the deep state? Would Trump run again if he doesn't win this time? Steve needs to smoke weed. www.TheBobbyCoutoShow.com https://anchor.fm/thebobbycoutoshow https://www.etsy.com/shop/thebobbycoutoshow https://thebobbycoutoshow.podbean.com/ https://www.Loveshriners.org “All Roads Lead Here” Bobby Couto --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/thebobbycoutoshow/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/thebobbycoutoshow/support

Metallica “For Whom The Bell Tolls” Ride the Lightning is the second studio album by American heavy metal band Metallica, released on July 27, 1984, by the independent record label Megaforce Records. The album was recorded in three weeks. Steve and Joe join the show. November 3rd has come and gone.. The official announcement of The Disgruntled American Podcast. Presidential election. December 14th The media called the presidential election?! Dominion Voting systems Corp. Clip 1:Russ Ramsland Co-owner of Allied security operations group explains how the voting system is vulnerable and broken. Clip 2: Sidney Powell appeared on America This Week w/ Eric Bolling Trey Trainor, head of the Federal Election Commission (FEC), said in a tweet Tuesday that he believes Trump campaign lawyer Sidney Powell's claim of widespread election fraud. Toilet paper is flying off the shelves again, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo ($25,000 raise) exploded during his press briefing Wednesday; berating a reporter from the Wall Street Journal when asked to comment on New York City school closures. Canceling ThanksGiving? Christmas? RI Gov Gina Raimondo announced 14 day pause/Lockdown after Thanksgiving holiday. Vaccine Moderna 95%, Pfizer 94%, 25 million available in December initially for elderly and first responders and then March, April for the rest of us. Will you get the vaccine? The word “Fuck” and all its glory and uses. A system of people riding the train. Teachers are a majority of liberals; they spend more time with your kids than you do. Do not defund the police! Police are not responding. Law enforcement not renewing LTC's “Stand your ground” law in Florida. BLM is a money machine. They create the hate to stay relevant. Trump supporters are being physically attacked. Antifa leaders have given the order. To attack. Install ventilation systems in our schools so kids can go back. 911 brought America together. What will bring us together again? The end of Fox News? Is all News Corrupt and controlled by a higher power, the deep state? Would Trump run again if he doesn't win this time? Steve needs to smoke weed. www.TheBobbyCoutoShow.com https://anchor.fm/thebobbycoutoshow https://www.etsy.com/shop/thebobbycoutoshow https://thebobbycoutoshow.podbean.com/ https://www.Loveshriners.org “All Roads Lead Here” Bobby Couto --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/thebobbycoutoshow/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/thebobbycoutoshow/support

Hans von Spakovsky is an attorney and a former member of the Federal Election Commission (FEC). He is the manager of the Heritage Foundation's Election Law Reform Initiative and a senior legal fellow in Heritage's Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies. President Trump named him to be a member of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity. TOPIC:How voter fraud works!! Dan Gainor is the Vice President for Business and Culture for the Media Research Center and a veteran editor whose work has been published in more than a hundred publications and who appears regularly on news and commentary programs. We will discuss with Dan the Democrat’s call for unity. Do they actually want unity? Or do they just want the Right to close their month and fall in line? TOPIC: Senate hearings involving Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey and FaceBook CEO Mark Zuckerberg!! Craig Huey is a business owner, marketing expert, author, speaker and former Republican Party candidate who owns two direct marketing companies as well as several websites that provide guidelines for voting. Considered an expert in direct response and digital marketing, Craig will discuss how massive mail-in ballots, ballot harvesting, and traditional voter fraud contributed to a very close election. Likewise, Craig will discuss how Biden targeted the evangelical christian vote to limit Trump’s support and suppress that vote. TOPIC: Ballot harvesting opens up elections to massive fraud!!

Thursday, DOW stocks were down again yesterday but that isn't even above the fold news.Which is the bigger story, the Biden email release by the New York Post or Twitter and Facebook refusing to allow links or posting of the story?The basis of the story is political but the investment implications are enormous. My personal opinion is that Twitter and Facebook have guaranteed their regulation and most likely breakup. Watch for the Federal Election Commission (FEC) to charge them with interfering in an election. This could be 2020's version of the Watergate break-in.A question that keeps coming up is the long term viability of the US dollar. Investors should know and understand the difference between worthless and worth less. Currency crisis often accompanies political crisis.

In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court forcing Wisconsin residents to the polls during a global pandemic, many are wondering how 2020’s remaining elections may unfold. Congress is debating a massive expansion of absentee voting, and questions around microtargeting and dark money have resurfaced. Amid public health concerns and an increase in online campaigning, how do we protect the integrity of our elections? Ellen Weintraub joins Julian Zelizer and Sam Wang to talk about how to make voting available to every citizen. Weintraub discusses the importance of an informed electorate and the regulatory jurisdiction of the U.S. Federal Election Commission (FEC), where she has served as a commissioner since 2002. Weintraub most recently served as chair of the Commission in 2019 — her third time in this role. She has called for meaningful campaign-finance law enforcement and robust disclosure. Prior to her appointment to the FEC, Weintraub served as counsel to the House Ethics Committee.

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) is an independent regulatory agency whose purpose is to enforce campaign finance law in US federal elections. The FEC provides a REST API to query all campaign data of every candidate. By collecting and analyzing the direct and indirect (Super PAC) contributions, Splunk can show the relative influence of each candidate of the midterm. Also learn how Splunk powers the Splunk for Good midterm website using Splunk's REST API, HEC, and Amazon S3 hosting. This talk is an update of the 2016 Presidential Election talk from .conf16. Speaker(s) Satoshi Kawasaki, Splunk for Good Ninja, Splunk Corey Marshall, Director, Splunk Slides PDF link - https://conf.splunk.com/files/2019/slides/DEVS4G2287.pdf?podcast=1577146225 Product: Splunk Enterprise Track: Developer Level: Advanced

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) is an independent regulatory agency whose purpose is to enforce campaign finance law in US federal elections. The FEC provides a REST API to query all campaign data of every candidate. By collecting and analyzing the direct and indirect (Super PAC) contributions, Splunk can show the relative influence of each candidate of the midterm. Also learn how Splunk powers the Splunk for Good midterm website using Splunk's REST API, HEC, and Amazon S3 hosting. This talk is an update of the 2016 Presidential Election talk from .conf16. Speaker(s) Satoshi Kawasaki, Splunk for Good Ninja, Splunk Corey Marshall, Director, Splunk Slides PDF link - https://conf.splunk.com/files/2019/slides/DEVS4G2287.pdf?podcast=1577146193 Product: Splunk Enterprise Track: Developer Level: Advanced

Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar’s political campaign ramped up it's spending to a firm owned by the man she’s alleged to be having an extramarital affair within the third quarter of 2019, according to Federal Election Commission (FEC) records. Omar’s campaign disbursed about $146,713 to Democratic consultant Tim Mynett’s E Street Group LLC between the beginning of July and the end of September, according to records the campaign filed with the FEC. Far-left Democrat Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, and Rashida Tlaib have made it clear that they are going to endorse socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders to be the Democrat nominee to face President Donald Trump in the 2020 election.

Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar’s political campaign ramped up it's spending to a firm owned by the man she’s alleged to be having an extramarital affair within the third quarter of 2019, according to Federal Election Commission (FEC) records. Omar’s campaign disbursed about $146,713 to Democratic consultant Tim Mynett’s E Street Group LLC between the beginning of July and the end of September, according to records the campaign filed with the FEC. Far-left Democrat Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, and Rashida Tlaib have made it clear that they are going to endorse socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders to be the Democrat nominee to face President Donald Trump in the 2020 election.

THE PETE SANTILLI SHOWEpisode #1613 - Wednesday - August 28, 2019 - 6PMLive Broadcast Link - https://youtu.be/BwcQaH3oIAM  BREAKING: FEC Complaint Accuses Ilhan Omar of Breaking Law to Fund Affair - 1613-6P A complaint filed with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) on Wednesday alleges freshman Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) illegally used campaign money to help carry on an extramarital affair with a Democrat consultant whose firm she paid tens of thousands of dollars. Federal campaign finance records show that Omar’s campaign has paid nearly $230,000 since 2018 to the E. Street Group, a political strategy firm of which the lawmaker’s alleged married lover, Tim Mynett, is a partner of. On Tuesday, Mynett’s wife, Dr. Beth Jordan Mynett, filed for divorce in a D.C.-area court, alleging her spouse confessed to having an affair with Omar in April, the same month FEC documents show that the lawmaker’s campaign began issuing payments to E. Street Group for “travel expenses.” E-Militia Article: FEC Complaint Accuses Ilhan Omar of Breaking Law to Fund Affair http://ow.ly/bYJb30pqXRb  Guest: Leo Hohmann is the communications Director for The Thomas More Law center  — The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America’s Judeo-Christian heritage and moral values, including the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life.  It supports a strong national defense and an independent and sovereign United States of America. 

#MagaFirstNews 8.29.19https://youtu.be/eSFAH1qatxkMSNBC's O'Donnell retracts unverified Trump-Russia story, makes on-air apologyMSNBC host Lawrence O'Donnell on Wednesday night retracted a story that directly tied President Trump's finances to Russia and made an on-air apology for running the unverified report. "Last night on this show, I discussed information that wasn't ready for reporting," O'Donnell said. "I repeated statements a single source told me about the president's finances and loan documents with Deutsche Bank. Saying 'if true' -- as I discussed the information -- was simply not good enough. I did not go through the rigorous verification and standards process here at MSNBC before repeating what I heard from my source. Had it gone through that process, I would not have been permitted to report it. I should not have said it on-air or posted it on Twitter. I was wrong to do so." High-profile Democrats fail to qualify for primary debates in SeptemberSeveral struggling Democratic presidential candidates have failed to qualify for the next round of primary debates scheduled in September. Those missing the cut include U.S. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii, U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet of Colorado, billionaire climate-change activist Tom Steyer, Montana Gov. Steve Bullock and self-help guru Marianne Williamson. To appear on stage in Houston next month, they had to hit 2 percent in at least four approved public opinion polls while securing 130,000 unique donors.Hours ahead of a midnight Wednesday deadline to qualify, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York announced she was dropping out of the race. In an interview on "Tucker Carlson Tonight," Gabbard complained that the Democratic National Committee lacks "transparency" in the debate qualification process. Omar hit with FEC complaint, accused of paying alleged lover's travel expenses with campaign fundsThe conservative, Virginia-based National Legal and Policy Center filed a complaint against Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) on Wednesday, alleging that the lawmaker used campaign funds to illegally reimburse her purported paramour for personal travel expenses. The complaint also charges that Omar failed to itemize travel reimbursements as required by the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 -- and that the travel expenses increased during the same month that Omar's alleged affair with married Washington, D.C., political consultant Tim Mynett, 38, heated up. Omar has denied that she had an affair with Mynett, and her attorneys have dismissed the FEC complaint as a baseless "political ploy."Dorian takes aim at FloridaHurricane Dorian moved out over open waters early Thursday after doing limited damage in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, and forecasters warn it could hit Florida over the weekend. The U.S. National Hurricane Center said Dorian was expected to strengthen into a dangerous Category 3 hurricane as it stayed well to the east of the southeastern and central Bahamas over the next two days. The forecast called for the storm to pass near or over the northern Bahamas on Saturday and close in on Florida by Sunday afternoon.DHS bars Dem staffers from visiting border facilities after 'rude' and 'disruptive' behavior The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has barred Democratic staffers from the House Oversight Committee from visiting Customs and Border Protection (CBP) facilities at the U.S.-Mexico border as part of a planned trip this week after committee staff allegedly were “disruptive” and refused to follow instructions during their last trip. Committee Chairman Elijah Cummings, D-Md., had sent his staff to visit border facilities for “oversight inspections” last week and planned to send staff again to view Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and CBP centers.DHS has revoked access to CBP facilities for the upcoming visit, citing staff behavior that “interfered” with law enforcement operations -- including refusing to leave one site after their scheduled window, skipping some tours and being "rude" to officers. A DHS official said that ICE visits will still be allowed the rest of this week, but with a two-hour time limit.Uber driver bitten in Georgia attack that left car damaged, woman arrestedA Georgia woman was arrested after police say she was caught on camera attacking an Uber driver — by biting him and trying to damage his car.Tasheena Campbell, 26, was taken into custody Aug. 20 -- days after the incident in which she allegedly attacked driver Yasser Hadi in midtown Atlanta on Aug. 18.A video uploaded to Twitter of the attacks begins with a woman — identified by WAGA as Campbell — sitting on the hood of a car, breaking off a windshield wiper. Bystanders and Hadi encourage her to stop, before the woman throws a punch at Hadi.The woman hops off the car and enters the vehicle through the driver-side door while Hadi tries to stop her. "Get out my car!" he shouts, as he pulls the woman out to the ground. The woman tries punching the Uber driver — before biting him, prompting him to scream.Tasheena Campbell, 26, was charged with battery and criminal trespass following the incident. It's unclear what sparked the altercation. Hadi said Campbell appeared out of nowhere and randomly attacked him."She's acting weird, she's acting wild, and she's on the car hitting it, telling me I need to die, to kill me," Hadi told WAGA of the encounter. "The pain, I said, "God, just let her take my flesh, I don't care. I want her to go away from me."The Uber driver said the situation is "horrible.""She's hit me in my job, my health and my financial pocket money, it's hard," said Hadi, noting he doesn't have insurance. "I'm in a bad situation. I wish people see this and help." Campbell was arrested and charged with battery and criminal trespass, according to online records from the Fulton County Jail. She was still in custody as of Thursday.Kentucky mother Andrea Knabel, a volunteer who searches for missing people, reported missingA Kentucky mother of two who searches for missing people has now seemingly disappeared herself.Andrea Knabel, 37, was last seen leaving a relative's home in the Audubon Park neighborhood of Louisville around 1 a.m. on Aug. 13, according to Missing in America, the organization for which she volunteers. Around 1:30 a.m., she used her cellphone to call her friend and ask for a ride, the Louisville Courier-Journal reported. Several security cameras are located in the neighborhood, but many weren't active when she was in the area.A friend of Knabel's told WAVE the single mother "was upset and she needed a ride" — and was too trusting of other people."Obviously she was trying to get ahold of people, maybe she got in the car with the wrong person," said Maricia Kidd, who has known Knabel for 30 years. She noted Knabel's car was recently totaled in a hit-and-run accident and said she'd been laid off at work."Here she is helping to locate people and she comes up missing herself," said Tracy Leonard, a private investigator and friend of Knabel. “She’s just a super great girl. She helped me locate a missing teen about a year and a half ago."The group's founder, Nancy Schaefer Smith, said that Knabel, a "dedicated member" of Missing in America, is the first volunteer ever to disappear like this."She is loved by so many people," Smith told the Courier-Journal. "It's all hands on deck. She's my girl...We're going to find her."Knabel is described as a white female with light brown hair. She weighs between 190 to 200 pounds and is around 5 feet 7 inches tall. She was last seen wearing a "light color tank top and white shorts."Anyone with information is urged to contact Leonard at 502-618-9337 or Smith at 502-500-3026, or the Louisville Metro Police at 502-574-5673.Pennsylvania man's 'gunlike hand gesture' toward neighbor was a crime, court rulesA Pennsylvania court ruled Tuesday that making a "gunlike hand gesture" is a crime after a man-made the hand motion during an argument with his neighbor — an act which reportedly made several nearby residents nervous and prompted a call to police.Stephen Kirchner, 64, made the gesture toward his neighbor in Manor Township in June 2018, according to surveillance video. Kirchner, walking alongside a female neighbor, "stopped, made eye contact with [the male neighbor] and then made a hand gesture at him imitating the firing and recoiling of a gun," according to court documents.The action made one neighbor feel "extremely threatened" and he called 911. Another neighbor said she saw Kirchner “put his finger up like he was going to shoot [the neighbor]", "insecure," prompting her to call 911.Kirchner and the female neighbor Kirchner had been walking with previously had issues and confrontations, sparking the neighbor to install six security cameras on his property. At the time of the incident in 2018, the female neighbor had a "no contact" order against the neighbor who felt threatened, court documents indicate.Kirchner was issued a citation for disorderly conduct following the incident. He said in district court he made the "gunlike" gesture after his neighbor gave him "the finger with both hands."The 64-year-old was found guilty, but appealed, arguing the hand gesture didn't "create a hazardous or physically offensive condition." Kirchner said he didn't mean to cause public alarm, and there wasn't really any harm done to the neighbor or others.On Tuesday, however, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania found the gesture "served no legitimate purpose, and recklessly risked provoking a dangerous altercation."Kirchner was ordered to pay a $100 fine and court costs.

Jacob Weisberg is joined by Trevor Potter, Former Commissioner & Chairman of the Federal Election Commission (FEC), to talk about how Trump may have violated campaign finance laws. Also, why has the FEC been so ineffective enforcing the laws and why is Trump's case different from John Edwards? Plus, the up and down day of the White House flag as imagined by Steve Waltien and Asher Perlman. This episode is brought to you by the new documentary Active Measures, opens in theaters, on digital platforms and on HULU this Friday. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Jacob Weisberg is joined by Trevor Potter, Former Commissioner & Chairman of the Federal Election Commission (FEC), to talk about how Trump may have violated campaign finance laws. Also, why has the FEC been so ineffective enforcing the laws and why is Trump's case different from John Edwards? Plus, the up and down day of the White House flag as imagined by Steve Waltien and Asher Perlman. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

  Chelsea Barabas: How to balance AI and criminal justice (Ep. 136) MIT Research Scientist Chelsea Barabas and Joe Miller discuss how to balance AI and criminal justice to affect better defendant outcomes. Bio Chelsea Barabas (@chels_bar) is a research scientist at MIT, where she examines the spread of algorithmic decision making tools in the US criminal justice system. Formerly, Chelsea was the Head of Social Innovation with the MIT Media Lab’s Digital Currency Initiative. She has worked on a wide range of issues related to the use of emerging technologies to serve the public good around the world. Chelsea’s graduate research at MIT was on understanding the U.S.’s ongoing struggle to cultivate and hire a diverse technical workforce, and she conducted her graduate thesis in partnership with Code2040. She attended Stanford as an undergraduate, where she earned a B.A. in Sociology.  Resources Chelsea Barabas, Karthik Dinakar, Joichi Ito, Madars Virza, and Jonathan Zittrain. 2018. Interventions over Predictions: Reframing the Ethical Debate for Actuarial Risk Assessment. In Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAT*) conference (FAT* 2018). ACM, New York, NY, USA. Virginia Eubanks, Automating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor (2018) News Roundup T-Mobile and Sprint announce merger plans T-Mobile and Sprint have announced merger plans again. It’s a $27 billion deal that would include Softbank giving up control of Sprint.  The combined company would be called T-Mobile and, with 98 million subscribers, the combined company would become the second largest wireless carrier, behind Verizon’s 116 million. Brian Fung and Tony Romm report in the Washington Post. Comcast launches bidding war against Fox for Sky Comcast announced that it would seek to acquire European pay TV provider Sky for $31 billion. The Murdoch’s 21st Century  Fox already has a bid for Sky on the table, but it’s $15 billion lower than Comcast’s, even though Fox already has a 39% stake in Sky. 21st Century Fox had rejected a separate bid by Comcast to acquire Fox’s entertainment assets, which Disney is now planning to purchase for $52.4 billion, which was also lower than Comcast’s proposal. Shalani Ramachandran, Amol Sharma and David Benoit report in the Wall Street Journal. EU investigates Apple’s Shazam bid EU antitrust regulators are investigating whether Apple’s bid for music identification service Shazam is anticompetitive. Apple had announced back in December that it was looking to acquire Shazam for an undisclosed amount. The EU is concerned the acquisition could limit consumer choice. Foo Yun Chee has more at Reuters. Senate confirms Nakasone to Lead NSA/Cyber Command The Senate unanimously confirmed U.S. Army Command Chief Lt. Gen. Paul Nakasone to serve as both the head of the National Security Administration and U.S. Cyber Command. He’ll replace Mike Rogers. Nakasone will also get a fourth star. SEC fines company formerly known as Yahoo! $35 million The Securities and Exchange Commission fined Altaba, the company that now owns Yahoo!’s remaining assets, over $35 million. The fine is for failing to disclose a 2014 data breach that compromised the data of over 500 million Yahoo! users. Jacob Katrenakes reports in the Verge. FTC warns app firms about collecting children’s data The Federal Trade Commission has warned app firms in China and Sweden about collecting the data of U.S. children. The Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act prohibits the collection of such data and applies to foreign companies. The China based- Gator Group and Sweden-based Tinitell, both sell smartwatches to children. In other news related to Children's privacy, YouTube has announced new parental controls for YouTube kids. Parents will now be able to limit recommendations and suggestions will now be made by humans. Did Diamond and Silk commit perjury? In testimony before the House Judiciary Committee last week, conservative African American internet personalities Diamond and Silk said under oath that President Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign never paid them. But there’s a 2016 Federal Election Commission (FEC) filing showing that the campaign paid them $1,275 for “field consulting”. Harper Neidig reports in the Hill. CBC members to meet in Silicon Valley to discuss diversity The Congressional Black Caucus is sending the largest delegation of lawmakers it has ever sent to Silicon Valley to discuss diversity. Just 3% of Silicon Valley tech workers are black, according to a Center for Investigative Reporting study. Shirin Ghaffary reports in Recode. Facebook warns SEC about more data misuse In a Securities and Exchange Commission filing, Facebook indicated that additional reports of the misuse of user data are likely forthcoming. The social media giant said it is conducting a third-party audit which it anticipates will reveal additional improprieties. Google’s Sergey Brin warns about AI threat Finally, Google co-founder Sergey Brin warned in the company’s annual Founders’ Letter about the future of AI and the fact that it is already transforming everything from self-driving cars to planetary discovery. Brin said he is optimistic about Artificial Intelligence and said that Alphabet is giving serious consideration to the ways in which AI will affect employment, how developers can control for bias in their algorithms, and the potential for AI to “manipulate people.” James Vincent notes in the Verge that Brin’s letter does not discuss the dangers of using AI for military intelligence, although the company has said its technology would be used for “non-offensive purposes only”. Still, several employees at the company are urging Alphabet to withdraw from its plans to work with the Pentagon.

Ep. 140: Ciara Torres-Spelliscy is an associate professor, teaching courses in Election Law, Corporate Governance, Business Entities, and Constitutional Law. Prior to joining Stetson's faculty, Professor Torres-Spelliscy was counsel in the Democracy Program of the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law where she provided guidance on the issues of money in politics and the judiciary to state and federal lawmakers. She was an associate at Arnold & Porter LLP and a staffer for Senator Richard Durbin. Professor Torres-Spelliscy has testified before Congress, and state and local legislative bodies as an expert on campaign finance reform. She has also helped draft legislation and Supreme Court briefs.  She is the editor of the 2010 edition of the Brennan Center's campaign finance treatise, "Writing Reform: A Guide to Drafting State and Local Campaign Finance Laws." She researches and speaks publicly on campaign finance law as well as judicial selection. She has spoken at symposia at 26 universities around the nation. She presented at the 2013 and the 2015 Annual Conventions of the Association of American Law Schools (AALS) and at the 2014 Annual Convention of the American Constitution Society, and the 2011, the 2014, and the 2016 Annual Conventions of the Council on Governmental Ethics Laws (COGEL). In 2016 she spoke at the Federal Election Commission (FEC) at a forum on dark money and foreign money in U.S. elections. She is the author of the book Corporate Citizen? An Argument for the Separation of Corporation and State (Carolina Academic Press, 2016).  As well as publishing in law reviews, such as the NYU Law Review, the University of Pennsylvania Law Review, the Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy, and the Montana Law Review,  Professor Torres-Spelliscy has been published in the New York Times, New York Law Journal, Slate, L.A. Times, U.S. News and World Report, Boston Review, Roll Call, Business Week, Forbes, The Atlantic, USA Today, Business Ethics Magazine, San Francisco Chronicle, The Hill, Huffington Post, The Root.com, Judicature, The Nation, Salon.com, Tampa Bay Times, The Progressive, CNN.com, Medium, and the ABA Judges Journal. She has also been quoted by the media in The Wall Street Journal, The Economist, The New York Times, Time, Bloomberg, Mother Jones, Newsweek on Air, SCOTUS Blog, Politico, Slate, The National Journal, USA Today, L.A. Times, Boston Globe, NBC.com, WMNF, Sirius Radio, National Public Radio, Fox, Voice America, CSPAN, DNA TV, and NY1. In 2014, Stetson University College of Law awarded Professor Torres-Spelliscy the Dickerson-Brown award for Excellence in Faculty Scholarship. In 2013, Professor Torres-Spelliscy was named as a member of the Lawyers of Color's "50 Under 50" list of minority law professors making an impact in legal education. In 2012, Professor Torres-Spelliscy was named as a Top Wonk by the website TopWonks.org. She was awarded tenure in 2016. In 2017, she was elected to be Chair of the AALS Section on Election Law for a term that starts in 2018. Professor Torres-Spelliscy is a Brennan Center Fellow, a member of the Scholars Strategy Network, a member of the Board of Directors of the Mertz Gilmore Foundation, a former member of the Board of Directors of the National Institute on Money in State Politics, which was awarded the 2015 MacArthur Award for Creative and Effective Institutions. Listen as Professor Torres-Spelliscy tells Alex about her life's journey, her Multiracial experience, and her journey. For more on host, Alex Barnett, please check out his website: www.alexbarnettcomic.com or visit him on Facebook (www.facebook.com/alexbarnettcomic) or on Twitter at @barnettcomic To subscribe to the Multiracial Family Man, please click here: MULTIRACIAL FAMILY MAN PODCAST Intro and Outro Music is Funkorama by Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com) Licensed under Creative Commons - By Attribution 3.0 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/

In episode 7, we smash through the League of Women Voters terms so you are in the know and fully participate in League activities and leadership! We also share an activist alert. DEEDS NOT WORDS SEGMENT - LWV LINGO EXPLAINED What is Program Planning? Program Planning usually happens in the first of the year. Be sure to check out episode 3: value of nonpartisanship and episode 1: advocacy versus lobbying. Program planning is the first in the process to create an action agenda. For example, Campaign to Make Democracy Work For All from 2016 National Convention. Short summary of the League’s Public Policy Positions and LWV's Impact on Issues 2016-2018. What is the difference between "Program" (positions, action, advocacy) versus hosting programs like events or forums? What is Voter Service? Activities that include educational tools and events that help grow the electorate and help voters make informed decisions at the polls. It is the most sacred nonpartisan work we do. It can include creating voter guides for elections, voter registration, Vote411.org, hosting candidate and issue forums. What is Calendaring? Creating a plan for the year. Calendaring resources from LWV: 360 Degree Look at Calendaring for 365 Days and Calendaring Part 2 (PDF) What is Leaders Update? The LWVUS Leaders' Updates are sent out weekly to state and local presidents. These updates keep state and local Leagues informed about LWVUS actions, upcoming events, and opportunities. Visit lwv.org for more information, including how to sign up. Another tip: the state league will often also have a newsletter you can be added to. What is MAL? MAL stands for Members-at-Large and can be pronounced as an acronym or phonetically as "mal." It refers to League members may not belong to a local league chapter or the local league chapter is new and hasn't yet received its official status. Many leagues are now using the term "State Unit" or "Geographical Unit" in its place. Find out more in this PDF, Starting Strong for State Leagues: Building a League Presence and Local Leagues at the Community Level. What is a PMP? It stands for Per Member Payment and refers to the dues paid to state and national league from the local leagues. It is similar to a franchise fee. Find out more at LWV.org. What is forum.lwv.org? It is a member-focused section on the League of Women Voters of the United States' website. It is also called the League Management Site. Pro tip: Search for ideas on other local League websites using your favorite search engine like Google. What is the Clearinghouse? The Clearinghouse is a location for all Leagues to share their positions. You can do a concurrence of these positions, if you want to adopt them at your local league. What is an ILO? An ILO is a Inter-League Organization. Find out more at the Upper Mississippi River Region ILO. What is the difference between a debate and a forum? The Federal Election Commission (FEC) defines a debate as an event that (1) includes at least two candidates; (2) is staged in a way that does not promote or advance one candidate over another; and (3) allows the candidates to appear concurrently, in face-to-face confrontations, with opportunities to respond to each other. Non-Debate Candidate Appearances (also known as Candidate Forums or Speeches) are other formats outside those described above are considered “Non-debate Candidate Appearances” – defined as a place, meeting or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue are exchanged. Find out more at LWV.org. Why doesn't the League of Women Voters sponsor the Presidential Debates anymore? Find out more about the League and its history with the presidential debates and check out this LWV press release from 1988. ACTIVIST ALERT - STOP VOTER SUPPRESSION! Peeing in their boots! Stop Voter Suppression. Now more than ever! Election Integrity Commission, voter rolls, scare tactics. What is flippin' going on?? We are fighting back! Sign the petition and be counted! Alice Paul wouldn’t take this and neither will we! Call your U.S. Rep and your U.S. Senators to tell them the Election Integrity Commission is a sham and was only developed to create more suppressive election policies and to deny voters their right to vote. CONNECT WITH US! Follow us on Facebook Follow us on Instagram Subscribe to us on iTunes Subscribe to us on Stitcher LEAVE US AN ITUNES REVIEW!