Podcasts about federal judges

A federal judge has delivered a significant legal blow to the administration's plans for the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. In a 94-page opinion issued Friday, U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper ruled that the institution's board overstepped its statutory authority by unilaterally adding President Donald Trump's name to the venue. The court has ordered that all physical and digital signage bearing the President's name be removed within 14 days. In this episode, we break down Judge Cooper's landmark decision. We discuss why the court determined that only Congress—not the board of trustees—has the authority to rename the historic memorial. We also examine the second part of the ruling, which blocks the administration's plan to close the facility for a two-year renovation project, calling the board's decision-making process "derelict."In this episode, we cover:The Legal Argument: Why the court ruled that the "Trump Kennedy Center" rebranding was illegal.The Closure Block: Why the two-year shutdown for renovations was halted by the court.Congressional Authority: The judge's clear statement that the Kennedy Center's identity is protected by federal law.The Fallout: President Trump's response to the ruling and his stated intent to facilitate a transfer of the institution.Make sure to subscribe, rate, and leave a review to keep up with our analysis of major legal and political developments.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/chaos-culture-radio--3078307/support.Follow Chaos Culture Radio for real conversations that move culture forward.New episodes every week.Share this episode with someone who needs to hear it.

This time John discusses federal judge Christopher Cooper who ordered Trump's name to be removed from the Kennedy Center. And then another federal judge has temporarily stopped the creation of a $1.8bn government fund to compensate individuals who claimed to be targets of political investigation by previous presidential administrations. Judge Leonie Brinkema barred the justice department from taking any steps to stand up or operate the fund - including processing or dispersing claims - until a preliminary hearing on June 12th. And then another federal judge - Kathleen Williams - ordered the IRS case into Trump re-opened and called his 1776 Terror Slush Fund into question. John then welcomes back journalist and political analyst for CNN, Brian Karem, to talk about the ceasing of the Iran ceasefire and his new podcast "Just Ask the Question". And then finally, TV's Frank Conniff from MST3K returns to joke with John and listeners about Trump's pathetic almost cancelled Freedom 250 concert and birthday UFC cage fight.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

A federal judge just temporarily blocked what critics are calling a billion-dollar Trump slush fund designed to reward political allies — while ordinary Americans are drowning under rising costs, layoffs, debt, and economic anxiety.At the same time, some Republicans are pushing bizarre proposals like putting Donald Trump on the $250 bill as corporations report record profits and working families continue to struggle. With recession fears growing, Trump is now focusing taxpayer dollars on “beautifying” Washington D.C. through contracts many fear will enrich connected insiders and political cronies.This isn't leadership. It's a campaign of greed, spectacle, and cruelty. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hosts: TJ, Brett, & Krissy This week on the show: Segment One (0:00:00) (0:06:27) Despite crazy Montana weather, Brett gets more additions to his burgeoning Chicago Bears card collection. (0:16:06) Krissy regales us with tales of last week's shenanigans, including vertically challenged wrestling matches, shattered windows, and spending time with our Z-list celebrity friend. Oh, The Carlsons are also celebrating their 20th wedding anniversary! Congratulations abound! (0:49:30) TJ gives his collecting updates, upgrades to his mowing equipment, and (finally) a near death Memorial Day experience! Segment Two (1:18:57): (1:22:09) FGS brings us a big Brett announcement as well as an Atlanta Federal Judge turning her private chambers into a den of sin. (1:44:15) HOT TAKES starts off with some classic celebs in THE GRIM REAPER ROUND UP (1:48:08) The gang reviews The Mandalorian and Grogu. Segment Three (2:16:36): (2:18:37) Krissy brings another conspiracy to the table this week in THE KRAZY KORNER: Pandas aren't real. Let the fun begin! (2:42:47) PICKS O' THE WEEK It's THE QUAD M SHOW!

This week on the Queer News podcast, Anna shares the joy for compiling our first Chicagoland lesbian business directory. We're also talking all about the nationwide campaign Seven Days In June: HEALTH IS PRIMARY. In politics, Pattie Gonia Sued By Patagonia, and a Federal Judge in DC Blocked Trump's Plan To Move Trans Women Into Men's Prisons. In culture and entertainment, we roundup Chicago Pride Month Events, and Edgewater Dedicates Street to LGBTQ+ Activist Lori Cannon. Want to support this podcast?

A DUI suspect also had an illegal cannon in the car...an old man admitted to calling 911 several times because he wanted some beer...and a Federal Judge got caught having sex with a high-ranking Atlanta cop in the Judge's chambers!

May 30, 2026, 7 AM; The grown pusback included a judge ordering the removal of his name from the Kennedy Center, a judge's refusal to dimmiss the most serious charges against Oath Keepers leader Stewart Rhodes and his fellow supporters who were convicted on charges of seditious conspiracy, a ruling barring his $1.8 billion slush fund, and accusations that the president has committed fraud when he ended his lawsuit against the IRS. Former Deputy Assistant Attorney General for NSD Mary McCord and Will Sommer join The Weekend to discuss the onslaught of decisions against the president. For more, follow us on social media: Bluesky: @theweekendmsnow.bsky.social Instagram: @theweekendmsnow TikTok: @theweekendmsnow To listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The Big Dumb Podcast S1E18 - Dating Icks, Smuggled Pinot, and Federal Judge Booty Calls - On this episode of The Big Dumb Podcast, Blake and Eric catch up before diving into the wildest headlines of the week: Nicole Kidman chasing a 30-years-younger Jacob Elordi (while he's still cozying up with Kendall Jenner), a woman who tried smuggling a full bottle of wine in her vagina at jail intake, Erin Brockovich taking on power-hungry AI data centers, the most hilariously petty dating “icks,” and a federal judge who got caught having loud lunchtime sex in her courthouse chambers. Plus beer-infused jeans, a bra donation charity, and what's worth streaming right now.

Inside a packed federal courtroom, some of the richest and most powerful figures in artificial intelligence are testifying under oath, and their testimony may be helping and hurting OpenAI at the exact same time. In Round 9 of Musk v. Altman, billionaire witnesses including Ilya Sutskever, Satya Nadella, and Bret Taylor stepped before a federal judge and nine jurors to defend the future of OpenAI, but several of their admissions may have handed Elon Musk critical ammunition. In this episode of The Valley Current®, Jack Russo breaks down the courtroom psychology, billion-dollar financial conflicts, explosive testimony about Sam Altman's leadership, and the growing legal battle over whether OpenAI's nonprofit mission was quietly transformed into one of the most commercially powerful companies on Earth. The stakes are no longer just personal reputations. They may determine the future structure of the AI industry itself. Jack Russo Managing Partner Jrusso@computerlaw.com www.computerlaw.com https://www.linkedin.com/in/jackrusso "Every Entrepreneur Imagines a Better World"®️  

AP's Marissa Duhaney reports that a federal judge is banning most ICE arrests in New York immigration courts.

AP correspondent Julie Walker reports a judge bans most arrests by federal agents in immigration courts in New York.

Leon Black has faced mounting scrutiny over his long and deeply intertwined relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, particularly after newly surfaced court filings revealed an aggressive behind-the-scenes legal effort tied to a woman accusing Black of rape connected to Epstein's network. According to the reporting, Black's legal team privately contacted federal Judge Jed Rakoff in an effort to challenge and ultimately reverse a multimillion-dollar compensation award granted to the accuser through an Epstein victims' settlement fund. The woman, identified as Jane Doe, alleged that Black sexually assaulted her as a teenager at Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. The Guardian's reporting detailed how Black's attorneys argued the settlement process had been manipulated by fraudulent evidence and sought to protect Black's reputation from what they characterized as false allegations. Critics, however, argued the case highlighted how wealthy and powerful figures connected to Epstein continue to wield enormous legal and financial influence long after Epstein's death.The legal battle became even more controversial after a federal judge sanctioned Jane Doe and her former attorney for falsified evidence tied to parts of the case, though the court still allowed portions of the civil rape lawsuit against Black to proceed. Black has vehemently denied ever meeting or assaulting the accuser and has refused settlement offers, framing the allegations as entirely fabricated. Still, the broader controversy surrounding Black has persisted because of the extraordinary extent of his documented relationship with Epstein, including revelations that Black paid Epstein roughly $170 million for financial and tax-related services over several years despite Epstein already being a convicted sex offender. The case has become emblematic of the larger questions surrounding Epstein's network of elite associates, the power imbalance between wealthy defendants and accusers, and the ongoing struggle by survivors to seek accountability within a legal system critics argue often bends toward those with enormous resources and institutional influence.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein-linked billionaire accused of rape privately reached out to federal judge to defend his ‘good name' | Jeffrey Epstein | The Guardian

Leon Black has faced mounting scrutiny over his long and deeply intertwined relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, particularly after newly surfaced court filings revealed an aggressive behind-the-scenes legal effort tied to a woman accusing Black of rape connected to Epstein's network. According to the reporting, Black's legal team privately contacted federal Judge Jed Rakoff in an effort to challenge and ultimately reverse a multimillion-dollar compensation award granted to the accuser through an Epstein victims' settlement fund. The woman, identified as Jane Doe, alleged that Black sexually assaulted her as a teenager at Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. The Guardian's reporting detailed how Black's attorneys argued the settlement process had been manipulated by fraudulent evidence and sought to protect Black's reputation from what they characterized as false allegations. Critics, however, argued the case highlighted how wealthy and powerful figures connected to Epstein continue to wield enormous legal and financial influence long after Epstein's death.The legal battle became even more controversial after a federal judge sanctioned Jane Doe and her former attorney for falsified evidence tied to parts of the case, though the court still allowed portions of the civil rape lawsuit against Black to proceed. Black has vehemently denied ever meeting or assaulting the accuser and has refused settlement offers, framing the allegations as entirely fabricated. Still, the broader controversy surrounding Black has persisted because of the extraordinary extent of his documented relationship with Epstein, including revelations that Black paid Epstein roughly $170 million for financial and tax-related services over several years despite Epstein already being a convicted sex offender. The case has become emblematic of the larger questions surrounding Epstein's network of elite associates, the power imbalance between wealthy defendants and accusers, and the ongoing struggle by survivors to seek accountability within a legal system critics argue often bends toward those with enormous resources and institutional influence.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein-linked billionaire accused of rape privately reached out to federal judge to defend his ‘good name' | Jeffrey Epstein | The GuardianBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Leon Black has faced mounting scrutiny over his long and deeply intertwined relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, particularly after newly surfaced court filings revealed an aggressive behind-the-scenes legal effort tied to a woman accusing Black of rape connected to Epstein's network. According to the reporting, Black's legal team privately contacted federal Judge Jed Rakoff in an effort to challenge and ultimately reverse a multimillion-dollar compensation award granted to the accuser through an Epstein victims' settlement fund. The woman, identified as Jane Doe, alleged that Black sexually assaulted her as a teenager at Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. The Guardian's reporting detailed how Black's attorneys argued the settlement process had been manipulated by fraudulent evidence and sought to protect Black's reputation from what they characterized as false allegations. Critics, however, argued the case highlighted how wealthy and powerful figures connected to Epstein continue to wield enormous legal and financial influence long after Epstein's death.The legal battle became even more controversial after a federal judge sanctioned Jane Doe and her former attorney for falsified evidence tied to parts of the case, though the court still allowed portions of the civil rape lawsuit against Black to proceed. Black has vehemently denied ever meeting or assaulting the accuser and has refused settlement offers, framing the allegations as entirely fabricated. Still, the broader controversy surrounding Black has persisted because of the extraordinary extent of his documented relationship with Epstein, including revelations that Black paid Epstein roughly $170 million for financial and tax-related services over several years despite Epstein already being a convicted sex offender. The case has become emblematic of the larger questions surrounding Epstein's network of elite associates, the power imbalance between wealthy defendants and accusers, and the ongoing struggle by survivors to seek accountability within a legal system critics argue often bends toward those with enormous resources and institutional influence.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein-linked billionaire accused of rape privately reached out to federal judge to defend his ‘good name' | Jeffrey Epstein | The GuardianBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Leon Black has faced mounting scrutiny over his long and deeply intertwined relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, particularly after newly surfaced court filings revealed an aggressive behind-the-scenes legal effort tied to a woman accusing Black of rape connected to Epstein's network. According to the reporting, Black's legal team privately contacted federal Judge Jed Rakoff in an effort to challenge and ultimately reverse a multimillion-dollar compensation award granted to the accuser through an Epstein victims' settlement fund. The woman, identified as Jane Doe, alleged that Black sexually assaulted her as a teenager at Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. The Guardian's reporting detailed how Black's attorneys argued the settlement process had been manipulated by fraudulent evidence and sought to protect Black's reputation from what they characterized as false allegations. Critics, however, argued the case highlighted how wealthy and powerful figures connected to Epstein continue to wield enormous legal and financial influence long after Epstein's death.The legal battle became even more controversial after a federal judge sanctioned Jane Doe and her former attorney for falsified evidence tied to parts of the case, though the court still allowed portions of the civil rape lawsuit against Black to proceed. Black has vehemently denied ever meeting or assaulting the accuser and has refused settlement offers, framing the allegations as entirely fabricated. Still, the broader controversy surrounding Black has persisted because of the extraordinary extent of his documented relationship with Epstein, including revelations that Black paid Epstein roughly $170 million for financial and tax-related services over several years despite Epstein already being a convicted sex offender. The case has become emblematic of the larger questions surrounding Epstein's network of elite associates, the power imbalance between wealthy defendants and accusers, and the ongoing struggle by survivors to seek accountability within a legal system critics argue often bends toward those with enormous resources and institutional influence.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein-linked billionaire accused of rape privately reached out to federal judge to defend his ‘good name' | Jeffrey Epstein | The Guardian

In a recent joint update to Judge Paul A. Engelmayer and Judge Richard M. Berman of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, top Department of Justice officials — including Attorney General Pam Bondi, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, and U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton — acknowledged the massive scope and challenges involved in releasing millions of pages of investigative materials related to the Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell cases under the Epstein Files Transparency Act. In a letter filed with both judges, the DOJ said it has reviewed “millions of pages” of files including documents, audio, and video recordings, and made “substantial progress” in identifying and redacting materials to protect victim identities. However, the department stressed that it cannot provide a specific completion date for when the entire review and release process will be finished, citing continued quality-control checks, document management preparation, and redaction efforts as necessary steps to comply with the law while safeguarding sensitive information.The update came amid political and legal pressure after the statutory deadline of Dec. 19, 2025 passed with only a small fraction of the files publicly released. While the DOJ insists it is working toward releasing the materials “in the near term,” lawmakers, victims' advocates, and the public have sharply criticized the slow pace and heavy redactions, arguing the department is failing to meet both the letter and spirit of the transparency law. Separate court actions around the same time saw Judges Engelmayer and Berman grant motions to unseal certain grand jury and investigative records in the Maxwell and Epstein matters — interpreting the new law as overriding traditional secrecy protections — but the broader document release effort remains ongoing.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:DOJ says it will finish releasing Epstein files "in the near term," but doesn't offer specific date - CBS NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Leon Black has faced mounting scrutiny over his long and deeply intertwined relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, particularly after newly surfaced court filings revealed an aggressive behind-the-scenes legal effort tied to a woman accusing Black of rape connected to Epstein's network. According to the reporting, Black's legal team privately contacted federal Judge Jed Rakoff in an effort to challenge and ultimately reverse a multimillion-dollar compensation award granted to the accuser through an Epstein victims' settlement fund. The woman, identified as Jane Doe, alleged that Black sexually assaulted her as a teenager at Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. The Guardian's reporting detailed how Black's attorneys argued the settlement process had been manipulated by fraudulent evidence and sought to protect Black's reputation from what they characterized as false allegations. Critics, however, argued the case highlighted how wealthy and powerful figures connected to Epstein continue to wield enormous legal and financial influence long after Epstein's death.The legal battle became even more controversial after a federal judge sanctioned Jane Doe and her former attorney for falsified evidence tied to parts of the case, though the court still allowed portions of the civil rape lawsuit against Black to proceed. Black has vehemently denied ever meeting or assaulting the accuser and has refused settlement offers, framing the allegations as entirely fabricated. Still, the broader controversy surrounding Black has persisted because of the extraordinary extent of his documented relationship with Epstein, including revelations that Black paid Epstein roughly $170 million for financial and tax-related services over several years despite Epstein already being a convicted sex offender. The case has become emblematic of the larger questions surrounding Epstein's network of elite associates, the power imbalance between wealthy defendants and accusers, and the ongoing struggle by survivors to seek accountability within a legal system critics argue often bends toward those with enormous resources and institutional influence.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein-linked billionaire accused of rape privately reached out to federal judge to defend his ‘good name' | Jeffrey Epstein | The GuardianBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Leon Black has faced mounting scrutiny over his long and deeply intertwined relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, particularly after newly surfaced court filings revealed an aggressive behind-the-scenes legal effort tied to a woman accusing Black of rape connected to Epstein's network. According to the reporting, Black's legal team privately contacted federal Judge Jed Rakoff in an effort to challenge and ultimately reverse a multimillion-dollar compensation award granted to the accuser through an Epstein victims' settlement fund. The woman, identified as Jane Doe, alleged that Black sexually assaulted her as a teenager at Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. The Guardian's reporting detailed how Black's attorneys argued the settlement process had been manipulated by fraudulent evidence and sought to protect Black's reputation from what they characterized as false allegations. Critics, however, argued the case highlighted how wealthy and powerful figures connected to Epstein continue to wield enormous legal and financial influence long after Epstein's death.The legal battle became even more controversial after a federal judge sanctioned Jane Doe and her former attorney for falsified evidence tied to parts of the case, though the court still allowed portions of the civil rape lawsuit against Black to proceed. Black has vehemently denied ever meeting or assaulting the accuser and has refused settlement offers, framing the allegations as entirely fabricated. Still, the broader controversy surrounding Black has persisted because of the extraordinary extent of his documented relationship with Epstein, including revelations that Black paid Epstein roughly $170 million for financial and tax-related services over several years despite Epstein already being a convicted sex offender. The case has become emblematic of the larger questions surrounding Epstein's network of elite associates, the power imbalance between wealthy defendants and accusers, and the ongoing struggle by survivors to seek accountability within a legal system critics argue often bends toward those with enormous resources and institutional influence.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein-linked billionaire accused of rape privately reached out to federal judge to defend his ‘good name' | Jeffrey Epstein | The GuardianBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A federal judge just apologized in open court to Cole Allen — the man accused of trying to assassinate President Donald Trump and his team at the White House Correspondents' Dinner. U.S. Magistrate Judge Zia M. Faruqui told the 31-year-old suspect he was “sorry” for the harsh conditions in D.C. jail, including suicide watch and solitary confinement. Allen, who allegedly showed up armed and fired shots at Secret Service, received an apology while many January 6 defendants have faced far worse for far less. We also cover: U.S. Park Police officer falls asleep in front of the White House. Is the Obama Presidential Center OPEN? Astronaut Victor Glover asked about his identity. Tucker Carlson asked about Trump being the Antichrist comment. This story exposes the radical two-tiered justice system that protects those who attack conservatives while punishing Trump supporters. If you're tired of the mainstream media covering this insanity, hit LIKE

Kimmer and Pete discuss the Outrage as a federal judge raises concerns about the jail treatment of a Trump assassination suspect. Critics say the focus on his rights ignores the severity of the charges and contrasts sharply with past cases.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In a rare case of denaturalization, a federal judge has stripped the U.S. citizenship of a Chinese couple living here in America. Let's go through what this couple did (with the assistance of the Chinese communist government).

WBZ NewsRadio's Mike Macklin has more.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Host Saeed Khan talks with veteran attorneys Steve Fishman, Bill Seikaly, and Joel Sklar; labor and community activist Barb Ingalls; and Deadline Detroit co-founder Allan Lengel.They discuss: men in Congress taking advantage of women; The DOJ firing of 2 Detroit prosecutors in abortion clinic case causes uproar among criminal defense attorneys and federal judges; Trump disparaging Pope Leo XIV;  Trump/Vance ally Viktor Orban trounced in Hungary's election; Artemis II touching down after a successful moon mission; Detroit getting a WNBA team in 2029; and Schmuck of the Week.

Jennifer Eley – Director of Education at Pennon Education and Caley McGuigan - Secondary Education Program Coordinator at Pennon Education tell us all about what Pennon Education has coming up for the spring and summer at WITF's Public Media Center and Schools across the commonwealth.Legal expert Michael R. Dimino, Professor of Law at Widener University Commonwealth Law School, and Fred Vigeant, Vice President of Media, Production, and Technology at WITF, break down a recent federal court ruling affecting public media and a Trump-era executive order. The conversation clarifies what the ruling does and does not mean for NPR, PBS, WITF, and other public media outlets—especially the key point that federal funding has not been restored. 

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A federal judge dismissed Donald Trump's $10 billion defamation lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal, which stemmed from a report about a sexually suggestive letter allegedly included in a birthday book compiled for Jeffrey Epstein. Trump had claimed the story was false and damaging, insisting the letter was fabricated and suing the paper, its parent company, and associated figures. However, U.S. District Judge Darrin Gayles ruled that Trump's legal team failed to meet the required standard for defamation involving public figures—specifically, they did not plausibly show that the publication acted with “actual malice,” meaning knowingly publishing false information or acting with reckless disregard for the truth.The court noted that the newspaper had taken steps to verify the information and had reached out to Trump for comment before publication, which weakened his claim. While the case was dismissed, it was done without prejudice, meaning Trump has the option to amend and refile the lawsuit with stronger arguments by a set deadline. The ruling represents a setback in Trump's broader pattern of legal challenges against media outlets over coverage tied to Epstein and other controversies, with the judge emphasizing that the original complaint lacked sufficient evidence to proceed.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Judge tosses Trump's $10 billion suit against the WSJ over Epstein birthday book report

ALSO: New Mayor Appointed Oversight Board for Indianapolis Schools Meets... Signs the Indy 500 Is Fast ApproachingSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

A federal judge dismissed Donald Trump's $10 billion defamation lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal, which stemmed from a report about a sexually suggestive letter allegedly included in a birthday book compiled for Jeffrey Epstein. Trump had claimed the story was false and damaging, insisting the letter was fabricated and suing the paper, its parent company, and associated figures. However, U.S. District Judge Darrin Gayles ruled that Trump's legal team failed to meet the required standard for defamation involving public figures—specifically, they did not plausibly show that the publication acted with “actual malice,” meaning knowingly publishing false information or acting with reckless disregard for the truth.The court noted that the newspaper had taken steps to verify the information and had reached out to Trump for comment before publication, which weakened his claim. While the case was dismissed, it was done without prejudice, meaning Trump has the option to amend and refile the lawsuit with stronger arguments by a set deadline. The ruling represents a setback in Trump's broader pattern of legal challenges against media outlets over coverage tied to Epstein and other controversies, with the judge emphasizing that the original complaint lacked sufficient evidence to proceed.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Judge tosses Trump's $10 billion suit against the WSJ over Epstein birthday book reportBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

A federal judge dismissed Donald Trump's $10 billion defamation lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal, which stemmed from a report about a sexually suggestive letter allegedly included in a birthday book compiled for Jeffrey Epstein. Trump had claimed the story was false and damaging, insisting the letter was fabricated and suing the paper, its parent company, and associated figures. However, U.S. District Judge Darrin Gayles ruled that Trump's legal team failed to meet the required standard for defamation involving public figures—specifically, they did not plausibly show that the publication acted with “actual malice,” meaning knowingly publishing false information or acting with reckless disregard for the truth.The court noted that the newspaper had taken steps to verify the information and had reached out to Trump for comment before publication, which weakened his claim. While the case was dismissed, it was done without prejudice, meaning Trump has the option to amend and refile the lawsuit with stronger arguments by a set deadline. The ruling represents a setback in Trump's broader pattern of legal challenges against media outlets over coverage tied to Epstein and other controversies, with the judge emphasizing that the original complaint lacked sufficient evidence to proceed.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Judge tosses Trump's $10 billion suit against the WSJ over Epstein birthday book reportBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In breaking news, a Federal Judge has dismissed Trump's $10 billion dollar defamation case against Rupert Murdoch and the Wall Street Journal for publishing an article detailing what they claim was Trump's hand written pornographic hand drawn “letter” for Epstein's 50th Birthday, pasted into a 2 volume scrap book by Ghislaine Maxwell, the very same birthday submission that was published by the House Oversight Committee. Popok knows the cast of characters well and reports on what happened and what could happen next. Dose: Save 35% on your first month of subscription by going to https://dosedaily.co/LEGALAF or entering LEGALAF at checkout. Subscribe:  @LegalAFMTN  Visit https://meidasplus.com for more! Support the MeidasTouch Network: https://patreon.com/meidastouch Add the MeidasTouch Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-meidastouch-podcast/id1510240831 Buy MeidasTouch Merch: https://store.meidastouch.com Follow MeidasTouch on Twitter: https://twitter.com/meidastouch Follow MeidasTouch on Facebook: https://facebook.com/meidastouch Follow MeidasTouch on Instagram: https://instagram.com/meidastouch Follow MeidasTouch on TikTok: https://tiktok.com/@meidastouch Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A ten billion dollar lawsuit filed by President Trump...against the Wall Street Journal...has been thrown out by a federal judge.  You may recall an article published by The Wall Street Journal last July, which included a letter allegedly written by the president and sent to Jeffrey Epstein.  Joining me now LIVE to talk about the lawsuit...and what comes next...is ABC News Legal Analyst Royal Oakes. 

The Trump administration fired over 300,000 federal employees, with Black women disproportionately represented among those let go. Pete Hegseth purged generals and military personnel. Kash Patel fired more than a thousand experienced FBI agents. Pam Bondi gutted the DOJ of over 6,400 people. The result: the very agencies Trump wanted to weaponize against his enemies are now too hollowed out to function. The Minneapolis U.S. Attorney's Office lost 75% of its staff after prosecutors refused to charge protesters with terrorism-related felonies. Grand juries are rejecting politically motivated cases. Federal judges are throwing out prosecutions targeting figures like Letitia James and James Comey. Illegally appointed U.S. attorneys like Alina Haba and Lindsay Halligan are being blocked by the courts. Hawk identifies three categories of resistance keeping democracy alive: everyday Americans confronting ICE, citizens serving on grand juries and rejecting bad cases, and federal district court judges like Judge Boasberg refusing to rubber-stamp political prosecutions. The episode closes with a brutally honest reflection on Trump voters and a focus group story about a disabled mother on Medicaid who supported stripping healthcare from trans kids even as the big beautiful bill threatened to leave her and her children homeless. SUPPORT & CONNECT WITH HAWK- Support on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/mdg650hawk - Hawk's Merch Store: https://hawkmerchstore.com - Connect on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@mdg650hawk7thacct - Connect on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@hawkeyewhackamole - Connect on BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/mdg650hawk.bsky.social - Connect on Substack: https://mdg650hawk.substack.com - Connect on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/hawkpodcasts - Connect on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mdg650hawk - Connect on Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/mdg650hawk ALL HAWK PODCASTS INFO- Additional Content Available Here: https://www.hawkpodcasts.comhttps://www.youtube.com/@hawkpodcasts- Listen to Hawk Podcasts On Your Favorite Platform:Spotify: https://spoti.fi/3RWeJfyApple Podcasts: https://apple.co/422GDuLYouTube: https://youtube.com/@hawkpodcastsiHeartRadio: https://ihr.fm/47vVBdPPandora: https://bit.ly/48COaTB

The legal architecture of the Duggar coverup is what makes this story about more than one family's failures. It's about how specific legal mechanisms — mandated reporting, statutes of limitations, and the intersection of private settlement with public accountability — were exploited or circumvented at every critical juncture.This week's look back at the most consequential legal developments examines the documented timeline. In March 2002, Jim Bob Duggar learned his teenage son had been molesting his daughters. He did not contact law enforcement. He went to church elders, who recommended a labor program — not licensed therapeutic intervention. In July 2003, Jim Bob brought Josh to a personal friend in Arkansas law enforcement. Under Arkansas law, that officer was a mandated reporter, legally required to contact the Child Abuse Hotline upon learning of sexual abuse of a minor. He did not. He gave Josh a talk and filed nothing. That officer was later convicted on serious criminal charges and is currently serving 56 years in prison.The legal consequence of that 2003 contact was decisive. Under Arkansas's three-year statute of limitations for child sexual abuse, the clock started when the abuse was first reported to a law enforcement officer. By the time police formally investigated in December 2006 — triggered by an anonymous tip to the Oprah Winfrey Show's production company — the window had closed. No charges were filed. The victims never saw a prosecution for what was done to them.According to testimony given under oath at Josh Duggar's 2021 federal pretrial hearing, the conduct had been ongoing since Josh was approximately 12 years old. The youngest person involved was 5. Jim Bob Duggar took the stand at that hearing and testified he could not remember the specifics of what his son had done. Federal Judge Timothy Brooks issued a written finding: not credible. The judge cited selective lapse in memory and obvious reluctance to testify against his son.Meanwhile, the television franchise continued. TLC canceled "19 Kids and Counting" in 2015 after the police report became public, then greenlighted "Counting On" within months. That spinoff ran for over a decade. It ended only when Josh Duggar's federal arrest made continuation untenable. Derick Dillard has publicly alleged Jim Bob controlled family TLC contracts and payments without meaningful consent from his adult children — allegations not adjudicated in court. Whether mandated reporting failures or contractual control structures create any remaining legal exposure for Jim Bob Duggar remains an open question.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#DuggarFamily #JimBobDuggar #JoshDuggar #TrueCrimeToday #DuggarCoverup #19KidsAndCounting #MandatedReporting #StatuteOfLimitations #CriminalJustice #ReligiousAbuse

Hey BillOReilly.com Premium and Concierge Members, welcome to the No Spin News for Wednesday, April 1, 2026. Stand Up for Your Country.  Talking Points Memo: Bill looks ahead to President Trump's address tonight and what to expect on the situation in Iran. Phil Zuckerman, Ph.D., Professor of Sociology at Pitzer College, joins the No Spin News to discuss religion in America and why fewer Americans are identifying as religious. US District Judge Randolph Moss permanently blocks the Trump administration from ending federal funding for NPR and PBS. New polling shows that health care is the top domestic concern. The Supreme Court rules against a law banning “conversion therapy" in Colorado. Final Thought: Bill announces his guest for tomorrow's episode of We'll Do It Live!  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas reports on a federal judge blocking Donald Trump's ballroom for violating the law. Visit https://meidasplus.com for more! Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast Cult Conversations: The Influence Continuum with Dr. Steve Hassan: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show The Ken Harbaugh Show: https://meidasnews.com/tag/the-ken-harbaugh-show Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Federal Judge is blocking construction on what’s going on at the White House. Maryland Drivers and is your car being called “historical” Washington Capitols will be holding Fan Appreciation week coming up. Make sure to also keep up to date with ALL our podcasts we do below that have new episodes every week: The Thought Shower Let's Get Weird Crisis on Infinite Podcasts See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Open chaos, or calculated? The media says the Whitehouse is in disarray while the stock market surges and energy hints at easing. One of the biggest news headlines in the last 24 hours was the Daily Mail releasing photos of Brian Noem, husband of former DHS Secretary Kristie Noem, cross dressing in chat rooms. How was this not vetted before? Plus, Don Lemon ponders running for POTUS, Eric Swalwell fighting to keep the Fang Fang files from going public, the Pope goes after Pete Hegseth, Marco Rubio shines once again, Sunny Hostin says don't have kids under the Trump years, Tiger Woods, and more on your Conservative Circus show.

Thomas Cullen is a federal trial judge and former U.S. attorney in Virginia. He was recently honored as the 2024 Carter O. Lowance Fellow from the William & Mary Law School, which is his alma mater.A native of Richmond, Virginia, Thomas studied history and ran track at Furman University in Greenville, South Carolina, from which he was recently awarded an honorary doctorate.Thomas is also an accomplished writer. For more than ten years, he regularly published op-eds and essays in national and regional media outlets until his appointment to the bench made publishing further such articles prohibitive.However, he didn't stop writing. In 2025, he published his first novel, Charlie-Man, which I've read and can tell you is a beautifully written, fictional coming-of-age story that reads like a powerful, heartfelt memoir. Charlie-Man is for readers of all ages, from teens on up. It will have a strong resonance for anyone who has ever struggled with love and loss throughout their teenage years.

Plus: China's Moonshot AI is considering restructuring ahead of a possible IPO in Hong Kong. And Mitsubishi Electric, Toshiba and Rohm propose merging their power semiconductor businesses. Danny Lewis hosts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It only took: (a) a chief judge threatening literally to open the doors of federal prisons to release convicts and dismiss indictments; and (b) another judge tossing a senior DOJ official out of his courtroom and threatening to put Alina Habba under oath at a hearing about whether she was secretly and illegally running a prosecutor's office after being fired; for the Trump Administration to cave in and allow for a proper US Attorney to be appointed in NJ. Popok is on the scene and reporting. Check out the Popok Firm: https://thepopokfirm.com Visit https://meidasplus.com for more! Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast Cult Conversations: The Influence Continuum with Dr. Steve Hassan: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show The Ken Harbaugh Show: https://meidasnews.com/tag/the-ken-harbaugh-show Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Send Zorba a message!Zorba's thoughts on recent news that a federal judge thwarts Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr's continued efforts to overhaul the nation's vaccine policies.Support the showProduction, edit, and music by Karl ChristensonSend your question to Dr. Zorba (he loves to help!):Phone: 608-492-9292 (call anytime)Email: askdoctorzorba@gmail.comWeb: www.doctorzorba.orgStay well!

In recent years, a judge in one state had gained the power to halt policies across the entire United States. Known as nationwide or universal injunctions, these actions have become one of the sweeping tools in the federal court—affecting cases ranging from student loan forgiveness to environmental policies to birthright citizenship. How did universal injunctions become such a central feature of modern constitutional battles? And should one judge really be able to block a policy for the entire country? In this episode, UChicago legal scholar Samuel Bray explains the history and legal debate behind such actions, including his research which was cited more than a dozen times in the 2025 Supreme Court case Trump v. Casa, which examined how courts use this remedy—and whether injunctions fit within the Constitution's design. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

A fresh wave of semi catalysts lining up for next — from Nvidia's GTC event to Micron earnings and an AWS–Cerebras tie-up. What Fast Money Friend Gene Munster is watching, and what to expect from Nvidia's CEO Jensen Huang when he takes the stage. Plus Jefferies' David Zervos joins us with a simple message for investors: “Don't panic,” as traders weigh inflation risks, Meta's reported AI delay, and Boeing's push to fix wiring issues. Fast Money Disclaimer Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In our news wrap Friday, a federal judge blocked a set of Justice Department subpoenas related to its investigation of Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, federal prosecutors charged a man who they believe sold the weapon used in a shooting at Old Dominion University and TSA workers missed their first full paychecks amid the ongoing shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy

The Dean's List with Host Dean Bowen – Judge Giles said that the measure, which went into effect on Jan. 1, 2026, likely violates First Amendment free speech protections for minors and adults. She further stated the law didn't go far enough by exempting addictive interactive gaming from coverage. While Virginia contends the law is a reasonable response to...

At long last, it looks like federal judges have run out of patience with Trump administration officials who keep ignoring, defying, and violating federal court orders in immigration cases. Multiple judges are now moving toward holding Trump administration officials in not just civil contempt but criminal contempt.Glenn reviews some of the most recent rulings detailing the ongoing violations of court orders by the Trump administration. Find Glenn on Substack: glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In case you're worried that the federal courts - the federal judges - are weakening in their resolved to hold Donald Trump and his flunkies accountable for their lawlessness and unconstitutional conduct, a federal judge of more than 30 years has said that, regarding masked federal agents roaming the street of American cities: "An anonymous government is no government at all." Longtime federal judge, Joseph Goodwin, excoriated the Trump administration for sending masked agents into the streets of American cities to deprive people of their 4th Amendment right against an unreasonable searches and seizures and their 5th Amendment right to due process of law.The courts continue to be points of light – beacons of light – amidst the Trump-induced darkness.Find Glenn on Substack: glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

A battle is brewing between an angry Federal Judge in Philadelphia, the Third Circuit Court of appeals and the Trump Administration, that wants to deny that slavery existed in this country and white wash immutable facts that our founding fathers owned slaves and erase that fact from a tribute to George Washington's slaves at a historic site in Philly dedicated to our nation's founding. Popok reports on Judge Rufe second order in 48 hours compelling the Trump Administration to restore the site they defaced WITH A CROWBAR, as Trump runs to the Third Circuit hoping that he will get one of his former criminal defense lawyers as a judge on the case! Factor: Head to https://FACTORMEALS.com/legalaf50off and use code legalaf50off to get 50% off Visit https://meidasplus.com for more! Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast Cult Conversations: The Influence Continuum with Dr. Steve Hassan: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show Burn the Boats: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Do not miss the first part of Amanda's Epstein files conversation. To listen, click here: THE EPSTEIN FILES, EXPLAINED: Everything You Need to Know. Brad Edwards – who has represented 200 Epstein survivors for almost two decades – is the attorney who sued to expose what was later found by a federal judge to be the federal prosecution's prolonged, coordinated collusion to protect Jeffrey Epstein from facing justice for his crimes.   In this exclusive conversation with Amanda, in which Brad shares experiences during his advocacy for survivors he has never shared before, he walks us through: The incredible courage and resilience of the survivors The secret immunity deal between federal prosecutors and Epstein and the government cover-up How the DOJ seems to be intentionally revictimizing survivors in the way they are releasing the Epstein Files How he secretly worked with the SDNY to finally arrest Epstein in 2019  What the path forward is for accountability.  This episode centers survivors and the people who never stopped fighting for them, and asks what comes next. About Brad Edwards: Brad Edwards is the founding partner of Edwards Henderson and the author of Relentless Pursuit: My Fight for the Victims of Jeffrey Epstein.  He is a nationally recognized Board Certified Civil Trial attorney who specializes in providing civil representation for children, survivors of sexual abuse, and victims of violent crimes. From 2008 through 2019, Brad served as pro-bono lead counsel on behalf of the survivors of Jeffrey Epstein in the seminal case upholding crime victims' rights in this country. In 2019, the Federal Judge on the case ruled in favor of the victims, holding that the government had violated the rights of Epstein's victims under the Crime Victims' Rights Act when Epstein entered into a Non-Prosecution Agreement without the knowledge of his victims in 2008. In 2023, Brad spearheaded unprecedented litigation as lead counsel against the banking institutions that facilitated Epstein's sex-trafficking operation for decades. The litigation ended in a $290 million settlement with JP Morgan Chase and a $75 million settlement with Deutsche Bank on behalf of hundreds of survivors from all over the world. Follow We Can Do Hard Things on:  Instagram — ⁠https://www.instagram.com/wecandohardthings⁠ TikTok — ⁠https://www.tiktok.com/@wecandohardthingsshow⁠