Podcasts about Flushing

Read the original article and comments Leave a voice note: https://www.speakpipe.com/baggagereclaim  Support the podcast and leave a tip: https://baggagereclaim.ck.page/products/podcast  Sign up to get first dibs on How to Say No: The Scripts, including special extras Relevant links and resources on the topic Ep. 197: Using Code Amber and Red Alerts to Be More Boundaried Ep. 185: The Emperor DOESN'T Have Any Clothes On. Let's Talk About Gaslighting Sometimes a Discussion Doesn't Cut It. Stop Discussing; Get to Flushing! Ep. 205: Four steps to help you have an assertive response when you recognise that you don't want to do something The Joy of Saying No  

This is the All Local for November 16, 2025.

In this episode, with Prof. Tilo Kölbel, we discuss the significant risks associated with air embolism during aortic surgery, the innovative technique of CO2 flushing of aortic endografts, and the practical tips and tricks of implementing this technique in clinical practice. The conversation also touches on current guidelines and the future of CO2 flushing in endovascular protocols, emphasising its potential to improve patient outcomes. Unmissable!Also, check out these papers that we mentioned in the podcast:https://www.ejves.com/action/showPdf?pii=S1078-5884%2825%2900409-5https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1526602816633705https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10151986/https://www.ejves.com/action/showPdf?pii=S1078-5884%2818%2930692-0

How are the federal courts faring during these tumultuous times? I thought it would be worthwhile to discuss this important subject with a former federal judge: someone who understands the judicial role well but could speak more freely than a sitting judge, liberated from the strictures of the bench.Meet Judge Nancy Gertner (Ret.), who served as a U.S. District Judge for the District of Massachusetts from 1994 until 2011. I knew that Judge Gertner would be a lively and insightful interviewee—based not only on her extensive commentary on recent events, reflected in media interviews and op-eds, but on my personal experience. During law school, I took a year-long course on federal sentencing with her, and she was one of my favorite professors.When I was her student, we disagreed on a lot: I was severely conservative back then, and Judge Gertner was, well, not. But I always appreciated and enjoyed hearing her views—so it was a pleasure hearing them once again, some 25 years later, in what turned out to be an excellent conversation.Show Notes:* Nancy Gertner, author website* Nancy Gertner bio, Harvard Law School* In Defense of Women: Memoirs of an Unrepentant Advocate, AmazonPrefer reading to listening? For paid subscribers, a transcript of the entire episode appears below.Sponsored by:NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com.Three quick notes about this transcript. First, it has been cleaned up from the audio in ways that don't alter substance—e.g., by deleting verbal filler or adding a word here or there to clarify meaning. Second, my interviewee has not reviewed this transcript, and any errors are mine. Third, because of length constraints, this newsletter may be truncated in email; to view the entire post, simply click on “View entire message” in your email app.David Lat: Welcome to the Original Jurisdiction podcast. I'm your host, David Lat, author of a Substack newsletter about law and the legal profession also named Original Jurisdiction, which you can read and subscribe to at davidlat.substack.com. You're listening to the eighty-fifth episode of this podcast, recorded on Monday, November 3.Thanks to this podcast's sponsor, NexFirm. NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com. Want to know who the guest will be for the next Original Jurisdiction podcast? Follow NexFirm on LinkedIn for a preview.Many of my guests have been friends of mine for a long time—and that's the case for today's. I've known Judge Nancy Gertner for more than 25 years, dating back to when I took a full-year course on federal sentencing from her and the late Professor Dan Freed at Yale Law School. She was a great teacher, and although we didn't always agree—she was a professor who let students have their own opinions—I always admired her intellect and appreciated her insights.Judge Gertner is herself a graduate of Yale Law School—where she met, among other future luminaries, Bill and Hillary Clinton. After a fascinating career in private practice as a litigator and trial lawyer handling an incredibly diverse array of cases, Judge Gertner was appointed to serve as a U.S. District Judge for the District of Massachusetts in 1994, by President Clinton. She retired from the bench in 2011, but she is definitely not retired: she writes opinion pieces for outlets such as The New York Times and The Boston Globe, litigates and consults on cases, and trains judges and litigators. She's also working on a book called Incomplete Sentences, telling the stories of the people she sentenced over 17 years on the bench. Her autobiography, In Defense of Women: Memoirs of an Unrepentant Advocate, was published in 2011. Without further ado, here's my conversation with Judge Nancy Gertner.Judge, thank you so much for joining me.Nancy Gertner: Thank you for inviting me. This is wonderful.DL: So it's funny: I've been wanting to have you on this podcast in a sense before it existed, because you and I worked on a podcast pilot. It ended up not getting picked up, but perhaps they have some regrets over that, because legal issues have just blown up since then.NG: I remember that. I think it was just a question of scheduling, and it was before Trump, so we were talking about much more sophisticated, superficial things, as opposed to the rule of law and the demise of the Constitution.DL: And we will get to those topics. But to start off my podcast in the traditional way, let's go back to the beginning. I believe we are both native New Yorkers?NG: Yes, that's right. I was born on the Lower East Side of Manhattan, in an apartment that I think now is a tenement museum, and then we moved to Flushing, Queens, where I lived into my early 20s.DL: So it's interesting—I actually spent some time as a child in that area. What was your upbringing like? What did your parents do?NG: My father owned a linoleum store, or as we used to call it, “tile,” and my mother was a homemaker. My mother worked at home. We were lower class on the Lower East Side and maybe made it to lower-middle. My parents were very conservative, in the sense they didn't know exactly what to do with a girl who was a bit of a radical. Neither I nor my sister was precisely what they anticipated. So I got to Barnard for college only because my sister had a conniption fit when he wouldn't pay for college for her—she's my older sister—he was not about to pay for college. If we were boys, we would've had college paid for.In a sense, they skipped a generation. They were actually much more traditional than their peers were. My father was Orthodox when he grew up; my mother was somewhat Orthodox Jewish. My father couldn't speak English until the second grade. So they came from a very insular environment, and in one sense, he escaped that environment when he wanted to play ball on Saturdays. So that was actually the motivation for moving to Queens: to get away from the Lower East Side, where everyone would know that he wasn't in temple on Saturday. We used to have interesting discussions, where I'd say to him that my rebellion was a version of his: he didn't want to go to temple on Saturdays, and I was marching against the war. He didn't see the equivalence, but somehow I did.There's actually a funny story to tell about sort of exactly the distance between how I was raised and my life. After I graduated from Yale Law School, with all sorts of honors and stuff, and was on my way to clerk for a judge, my mother and I had this huge fight in the kitchen of our apartment. What was the fight about? Sadie wanted me to take the Triborough Bridge toll taker's test, “just in case.” “You never know,” she said. I couldn't persuade her that it really wasn't necessary. She passed away before I became a judge, and I told this story at my swearing-in, and I said that she just didn't understand. I said, “Now I have to talk to my mother for a minute; forgive me for a moment.” And I looked up at the rafters and I said, “Ma, at last: a government job!” So that is sort of the measure of where I started. My mother didn't finish high school, my father had maybe a semester of college—but that wasn't what girls did.DL: So were you then a first-generation professional or a first-generation college graduate?NG: Both—my sister and I were both, first-generation college graduates and first-generation professionals. When people talk about Jewish backgrounds, they're very different from one another, and since my grandparents came from Eastern European shtetls, it's not clear to me that they—except for one grandfather—were even literate. So it was a very different background.DL: You mentioned that you did go to Yale Law School, and of course we connected there years later, when I was your student. But what led you to go to law school in the first place? Clearly your parents were not encouraging your professional ambitions.NG: One is, I love to speak. My husband kids me now and says that I've never met a microphone I didn't like. I had thought for a moment of acting—musical comedy, in fact. But it was 1967, and the anti-war movement, a nascent women's movement, and the civil rights movement were all rising around me, and I wanted to be in the world. And the other thing was that I didn't want to do anything that women do. Actually, musical comedy was something that would've been okay and normal for women, but I didn't want to do anything that women typically do. So that was the choice of law. It was more like the choice of law professor than law, but that changed over time.DL: So did you go straight from Barnard to Yale Law School?NG: Well, I went from Barnard to Yale graduate school in political science because as I said, I've always had an academic and a practical side, and so I thought briefly that I wanted to get a Ph.D. I still do, actually—I'm going to work on that after these books are finished.DL: Did you then think that you wanted to be a law professor when you started at YLS? I guess by that point you already had a master's degree under your belt?NG: I thought I wanted to be a law professor, that's right. I did not think I wanted to practice law. Yale at that time, like most law schools, had no practical clinical courses. I don't think I ever set foot in a courtroom or a courthouse, except to demonstrate on the outside of it. And the only thing that started me in practice was that I thought I should do at least two or three years of practice before I went back into the academy, before I went back into the library. Twenty-four years later, I obviously made a different decision.DL: So you were at YLS during a very interesting time, and some of the law school's most famous alumni passed through its halls around that period. So tell us about some of the people you either met or overlapped with at YLS during your time there.NG: Hillary Clinton was one of my best friends. I knew Bill, but I didn't like him.DL: Hmmm….NG: She was one of my best friends. There were 20 women in my class, which was the class of ‘71. The year before, there had only been eight. I think we got up to 21—a rumor had it that it was up to 21 because men whose numbers were drafted couldn't go to school, and so suddenly they had to fill their class with this lesser entity known as women. It was still a very small number out of, I think, what was the size of the opening class… 165? Very small. So we knew each other very, very well. And Hillary and I were the only ones, I think, who had no boyfriends at the time, though that changed.DL: I think you may have either just missed or briefly overlapped with either Justice Thomas or Justice Alito?NG: They're younger than I am, so I think they came after.DL: And that would be also true of Justice Sotomayor then as well?NG: Absolutely. She became a friend because when I was on the bench, I actually sat with the Second Circuit, and we had great times together. But she was younger than I was, so I didn't know her in law school, and by the time she was in law school, there were more women. In the middle of, I guess, my first year at Yale Law School, was the first year that Yale College went coed. So it was, in my view, an enormously exciting time, because we felt like we were inventing law. We were inventing something entirely new. We had the first “women in the law” course, one of the first such courses in the country, and I think we were borderline obnoxious. It's a little bit like the debates today, which is that no one could speak right—you were correcting everyone with respect to the way they were describing women—but it was enormously creative and exciting.DL: So I'm gathering you enjoyed law school, then?NG: I loved law school. Still, when I was in law school, I still had my feet in graduate school, so I believe that I took law and sociology for three years, mostly. In other words, I was going through law school as if I were still in graduate school, and it was so bad that when I decided to go into practice—and this is an absolutely true story—I thought that dying intestate was a disease. We were taking the bar exam, and I did not know what they were talking about.DL: So tell us, then, what did lead you to shift gears? You mentioned you clerked, and you mentioned you wanted to practice for a few years—but you did practice for more than a few years.NG: Right. I talk to students about this all the time, about sort of the fortuities that you need to grab onto that you absolutely did not plan. So I wind up at a small civil-rights firm, Harvey Silverglate and Norman Zalkind's firm. I wind up in a small civil-rights firm because I couldn't get a job anywhere else in Boston. I was looking in Boston or San Francisco, and what other women my age were encountering, I encountered, which is literally people who told me that I would never succeed as a lawyer, certainly not as a litigator. So you have to understand, this is 1971. I should say, as a footnote, that I have a file of everyone who said that to me. People know that I have that file; it's called “Sexist Tidbits.” And so I used to decide whether I should recuse myself when someone in that file appeared before me, but I decided it was just too far.So it was a small civil-rights firm, and they were doing draft cases, they were doing civil-rights cases of all different kinds, and they were doing criminal cases. After a year, the partnership between Norman Zalkind and Harvey Silverglate broke up, and Harvey made me his partner, now an equal partner after a year of practice.Shortly after that, I got a case that changed my career in so many ways, which is I wound up representing Susan Saxe. Susan Saxe was one of five individuals who participated in robberies to get money for the anti-war movement. She was probably five years younger than I was. In the case of the robbery that she participated in, a police officer was killed. She was charged with felony murder. She went underground for five years; the other woman went underground for 20 years.Susan wanted me to represent her, not because she had any sense that I was any good—it's really quite wonderful—she wanted me to represent her because she figured her case was hopeless. And her case was hopeless because the three men involved in the robbery either fled or were immediately convicted, so her case seemed to be hopeless. And she was an extraordinarily principled woman: she said that in her last moment on the stage—she figured that she'd be convicted and get life—she wanted to be represented by a woman. And I was it. There was another woman in town who was a public defender, but I was literally the only private lawyer. I wrote about the case in my book, In Defense of Women, and to Harvey Silvergate's credit, even though the case was virtually no money, he said, “If you want to do it, do it.”Because I didn't know what I was doing—and I literally didn't know what I was doing—I researched every inch of everything in the case. So we had jury research and careful jury selection, hiring people to do jury selection. I challenged the felony-murder rule (this was now 1970). If there was any evidentiary issue, I would not only do the legal research, but talk to social psychologists about what made sense to do. To make a long story short, it took about two years to litigate the case, and it's all that I did.And the government's case was winding down, and it seemed to be not as strong as we thought it was—because, ironically, nobody noticed the woman in the bank. Nobody was noticing women in general; nobody was noticing women in the bank. So their case was much weaker than we thought, except there were two things, two letters that Susan had written: one to her father, and one to her rabbi. The one to her father said, “By the time you get this letter, you'll know what your little girl is doing.” The one to her rabbi said basically the same thing. In effect, these were confessions. Both had been turned over to the FBI.So the case is winding down, not very strong. These letters have not yet been introduced. Meanwhile, The Boston Globe is reporting that all these anti-war activists were coming into town, and Gertner, who no one ever heard of, was going to try the Vietnam War. The defense will be, “She robbed a bank to fight the Vietnam War.” She robbed a bank in order to get money to oppose the Vietnam War, and the Vietnam War was illegitimate, etc. We were going to try the Vietnam War.There was no way in hell I was going to do that. But nobody had ever heard of me, so they believed anything. The government decided to rest before the letters came in, anticipating that our defense would be a collection of individuals who were going to challenge the Vietnam War. The day that the government rested without putting in those two letters, I rested my case, and the case went immediately to the jury. I'm told that I was so nervous when I said “the defense rests” that I sounded like Minnie Mouse.The upshot of that, however, was that the jury was 9-3 for acquittal on the first day, 10-2 for acquittal on the second day, and then 11-1 for acquittal—and there it stopped. It was a hung jury. But it essentially made my career. I had first the experience of pouring my heart into a case and saving someone's life, which was like nothing I'd ever felt before, which was better than the library. It also put my name out there. I was no longer, “Who is she?” I suddenly could take any kind of case I wanted to take. And so I was addicted to trials from then until the time I became a judge.DL: Fill us in on what happened later to your client, just her ultimate arc.NG: She wound up getting eight years in prison instead of life. She had already gotten eight years because of a prior robbery in Philadelphia, so there was no way that we were going to affect that. She had pleaded guilty to that. She went on to live a very principled life. She's actually quite religious. She works in the very sort of left Jewish groups. We are in touch—I'm in touch with almost everyone that I've ever known—because it had been a life-changing experience for me. We were four years apart. Her background, though she was more middle-class, was very similar to my own. Her mother used to call me at night about what Susan should wear. So our lives were very much intertwined. And so she was out of jail after eight years, and she has a family and is doing fine.DL: That's really a remarkable result, because people have to understand what defense lawyers are up against. It's often very challenging, and a victory is often a situation where your client doesn't serve life, for example, or doesn't, God forbid, get the death penalty. So it's really interesting that the Saxe case—as you talk about in your wonderful memoir—really did launch your career to the next level. And you wound up handling a number of other cases that you could say were adjacent or thematically related to Saxe's case. Maybe you can talk a little bit about some of those.NG: The women's movement was roaring at this time, and so a woman lawyer who was active and spoke out and talked about women's issues invariably got women's cases. So on the criminal side, I did one of the first, I think it was the first, battered woman syndrome case, as a defense to murder. On the civil side, I had a very robust employment-discrimination practice, dealing with sexual harassment, dealing with racial discrimination. I essentially did whatever I wanted to do. That's what my students don't always understand: I don't remember ever looking for a lucrative case. I would take what was interesting and fun to me, and money followed. I can't describe it any other way.These cases—you wound up getting paid, but I did what I thought was meaningful. But it wasn't just women's rights issues, and it wasn't just criminal defense. We represented white-collar criminal defendants. We represented Boston Mayor Kevin White's second-in-command, Ted Anzalone, also successfully. I did stockholder derivative suits, because someone referred them to me. To some degree the Saxe case, and maybe it was also the time—I did not understand the law to require specialization in the way that it does now. So I could do a felony-murder case on Monday and sue Mayor Lynch on Friday and sue Gulf Oil on Monday, and it wouldn't even occur to me that there was an issue. It was not the same kind of specialization, and I certainly wasn't about to specialize.DL: You anticipated my next comment, which is that when someone reads your memoir, they read about a career that's very hard to replicate in this day and age. For whatever reason, today people specialize. They specialize at earlier points in their careers. Clients want somebody who holds himself out as a specialist in white-collar crime, or a specialist in dealing with defendants who invoke battered woman syndrome, or what have you. And so I think your career… you kind of had a luxury, in a way.NG: I also think that the costs of entry were lower. It was Harvey Silverglate and me, and maybe four or five other lawyers. I was single until I was 39, so I had no family pressures to speak of. And I think that, yes, the profession was different. Now employment discrimination cases involve prodigious amounts of e-discovery. So even a little case has e-discovery, and that's partly because there's a generation—you're a part of it—that lived online. And so suddenly, what otherwise would have been discussions over the back fence are now text messages.So I do think it's different—although maybe this is a comment that only someone who is as old as I am can make—I wish that people would forget the money for a while. When I was on the bench, you'd get a pro se case that was incredibly interesting, challenging prison conditions or challenging some employment issue that had never been challenged before. It was pro se, and I would get on the phone and try to find someone to represent this person. And I can't tell you how difficult it was. These were not necessarily big cases. The big firms might want to get some publicity from it. But there was not a sense of individuals who were going to do it just, “Boy, I've never done a case like this—let me try—and boy, this is important to do.” Now, that may be different today in the Trump administration, because there's a huge number of lawyers that are doing immigration cases. But the day-to-day discrimination cases, even abortion cases, it was not the same kind of support.DL: I feel in some ways you were ahead of your time, because your career as a litigator played out in boutiques, and I feel that today, many lawyers who handle high-profile cases like yours work at large firms. Why did you not go to a large firm, either from YLS or if there were issues, for example, of discrimination, you must have had opportunities to lateral into such a firm later, if you had wanted to?NG: Well, certainly at the beginning nobody wanted me. It didn't matter how well I had done. Me and Ruth Ginsburg were on the streets looking for jobs. So that was one thing. I wound up, for the last four years of my practice before I became a judge, working in a firm called Dwyer Collora & Gertner. It was more of a boutique, white-collar firm. But I wasn't interested in the big firms because I didn't want anyone to tell me what to do. I didn't want anyone to say, “Don't write this op-ed because you'll piss off my clients.” I faced the same kind of issue when I left the bench. I could have an office, and sort of float into client conferences from time to time, but I did not want to be in a setting in which anyone told me what to do. It was true then; it certainly is true now.DL: So you did end up in another setting where, for the most part, you weren't told what to do: namely, you became a federal judge. And I suppose the First Circuit could from time to time tell you what to do, but….NG: But they were always wrong.DL: Yes, I do remember that when you were my professor, you would offer your thoughts on appellate rulings. But how did you—given the kind of career you had, especially—become a federal judge? Because let me be honest, I think that somebody with your type of engagement in hot-button issues today would have a challenging time. Republican senators would grandstand about you coming up with excuses for women murderers, or what have you. Did you have a rough confirmation process?NG: I did. So I'm up for the bench in 1993. This is under Bill Clinton, and I'm told—I never confirmed this—that when Senator Kennedy…. When I met Senator Kennedy, I thought I didn't have a prayer of becoming a judge. I put my name in because I knew the Clintons, and everybody I knew was getting a job in the government. I had not thought about being a judge. I had not prepared. I had not structured my career to be a judge. But everyone I knew was going into the government, and I thought if there ever was a time, this would be it. So I apply. Someday, someone should emboss my application, because the application was quite hysterical. I put in every article that I had written calling for access to reproductive technologies to gay people. It was something to behold.Kennedy was at the tail end of his career, and he was determined to put someone like me on the bench. I'm not sure that anyone else would have done that. I'm told (and this isn't confirmed) that when he talked to Bill and Hillary about me, they of course knew me—Hillary and I had been close friends—but they knew me to be that radical friend of theirs from Yale Law School. There had been 24 years in between, but still. And I'm told that what was said was, “She's terrific. But if there's a problem, she's yours.” But Kennedy was really determined.The week before my hearing before the Senate, I had gotten letters from everyone who had ever opposed me. Every prosecutor. I can't remember anyone who had said no. Bill Weld wrote a letter. Bob Mueller, who had opposed me in cases, wrote a letter. But as I think oftentimes happens with women, there was an article in The Boston Herald the day before my hearing, in which the writer compared me to Lorena Bobbitt. Your listeners may not know this, but he said, “Gertner will do to justice, with her gavel, what Lorena did to her husband, with a kitchen knife.” Do we have to explain that any more?DL: They can Google it or ask ChatGPT. I'm old enough to know about Lorena Bobbitt.NG: Right. So it's just at the tail edge of the presentation, that was always what the caricature would be. But Kennedy was masterful. There were numbers of us who were all up at the same time. Everyone else got through except me. I'm told that that article really was the basis for Senator Jesse Helms's opposition to me. And then Senator Kennedy called us one day and said, “Tomorrow you're going to read something, but don't worry, I'll take care of it.” And the Boston Globe headline says, “Kennedy Votes For Helms's School-Prayer Amendment.” And he called us and said, “We'll take care of it in committee.” And then we get a call from him—my husband took the call—Kennedy, affecting Helms's accent, said, ‘Senator, you've got your judge.' We didn't even understand what the hell he said, between his Boston accent and imitating Helms; we had no idea what he said. But that then was confirmed.DL: Are you the managing partner of a boutique or midsize firm? If so, you know that your most important job is attracting and retaining top talent. It's not easy, especially if your benefits don't match up well with those of Biglaw firms or if your HR process feels “small time.” NexFirm has created an onboarding and benefits experience that rivals an Am Law 100 firm, so you can compete for the best talent at a price your firm can afford. Want to learn more? Contact NexFirm at 212-292-1002 or email betterbenefits@nexfirm.com.So turning to your time as a judge, how would you describe that period, in a nutshell? The job did come with certain restrictions. Did you enjoy it, notwithstanding the restrictions?NG: I candidly was not sure that I would last beyond five years, for a couple of reasons. One was, I got on the bench in 1994, when the sentencing guidelines were mandatory, when what we taught you in my sentencing class was not happening, which is that judges would depart from the guidelines and the Sentencing Commission, when enough of us would depart, would begin to change the guidelines, and there'd be a feedback loop. There was no feedback loop. If you departed, you were reversed. And actually the genesis of the book I'm writing now came from this period. As far as I was concerned, I was being unfair. As I later said, my sentences were unfair, unjust, and disproportionate—and there was nothing I could do about it. So I was not sure that I was going to last beyond five years.In addition, there were some high-profile criminal trials going on with lawyers that I knew that I probably would've been a part of if I had been practicing. And I hungered to do that, to go back and be a litigator. The course at Yale Law School that you were a part of saved me. And it saved me because, certainly with respect to the sentencing, it turned what seemed like a formula into an intellectual discussion in which there was wiggle room and the ability to come up with other approaches. In other words, we were taught that this was a formula, and you don't depart from the formula, and that's it. The class came up with creative issues and creative understandings, which made an enormous difference to my judging.So I started to write; I started to write opinions. Even if the opinion says there's nothing I can do about it, I would write opinions in which I say, “I can't depart because of this woman's status as a single mother because the guidelines said only extraordinary family circumstances can justify a departure, and this wasn't extraordinary. That makes no sense.” And I began to write this in my opinions, I began to write this in scholarly writings, and that made all the difference in the world. And sometimes I was reversed, and sometimes I was not. But it enabled me to figure out how to push back against a system which I found to be palpably unfair. So I figured out how to be me in this job—and that was enormously helpful.DL: And I know how much and how deeply you cared about sentencing because of the class in which I actually wound up writing one of my two capstone papers at Yale.NG: To your listeners, I still have that paper.DL: You must be quite a pack rat!NG: I can change the grade at any time….DL: Well, I hope you've enjoyed your time today, Judge, and will keep the grade that way!But let me ask you: now that the guidelines are advisory, do you view that as a step forward from your time on the bench? Perhaps you would still be a judge if they were advisory? I don't know.NG: No, they became advisory in 2005, and I didn't leave until 2011. Yes, that was enormously helpful: you could choose what you thought was a fair sentence, so it's very advisory now. But I don't think I would've stayed longer, because of two reasons.By the time I hit 65, I wanted another act. I wanted another round. I thought I had done all that I could do as a judge, and I wanted to try something different. And Martha Minow of Harvard Law School made me an offer I couldn't refuse, which was to teach at Harvard. So that was one. It also, candidly, was that there was no longevity in my family, and so when I turned 65, I wasn't sure what was going to happen. So I did want to try something new. But I'm still here.DL: Yep—definitely, and very active. I always chuckle when I see “Ret.,” the abbreviation for “retired,” in your email signature, because you do not seem very retired to me. Tell us what you are up to today.NG: Well, first I have this book that I've been writing for several years, called Incomplete Sentences. And so what this book started to be about was the men and women that I sentenced, and how unfair it was, and what I thought we should have done. Then one day I got a message from a man by the name of Darryl Green, and it says, “Is this Nancy Gertner? If it is, I think about you all the time. I hope you're well. I'm well. I'm an iron worker. I have a family. I've written books. You probably don't remember me.” This was a Facebook message. I knew exactly who he was. He was a man who had faced the death penalty in my court, and I acquitted him. And he was then tried in state court, and acquitted again. So I knew exactly who he was, and I decided to write back.So I wrote back and said, “I know who you are. Do you want to meet?” That started a series of meetings that I've had with the men I've sentenced over the course of the 17-year career that I had as a judge. Why has it taken me this long to write? First, because these have been incredibly moving and difficult discussions. Second, because I wanted the book to be honest about what I knew about them and what a difference maybe this information would make. It is extremely difficult, David, to be honest about judging, particularly in these days when judges are parodied. So if I talk about how I wanted to exercise some leniency in a case, I understand that this can be parodied—and I don't want it to be, but I want to be honest.So for example, in one case, there would be cooperators in the case who'd get up and testify that the individual who was charged with only X amount of drugs was actually involved with much more than that. And you knew that if you believed the witness, the sentence would be doubled, even though you thought that didn't make any sense. This was really just mostly how long the cops were on the corner watching the drug deals. It didn't make the guy who was dealing drugs on a bicycle any more culpable than the guy who was doing massive quantities into the country.So I would struggle with, “Do I really believe this man, the witness who's upping the quantity?” And the kinds of exercises I would go through to make sure that I wasn't making a decision because I didn't like the implications of the decision and it was what I was really feeling. So it's not been easy to write, and it's taken me a very long time. The other side of the coin is they're also incredibly honest with me, and sometimes I don't want to know what they're saying. Not like a sociologist who could say, “Oh, that's an interesting fact, I'll put it in.” It's like, “Oh no, I don't want to know that.”DL: Wow. The book sounds amazing; I can't wait to read it. When is it estimated to come out?NG: Well, I'm finishing it probably at the end of this year. I've rewritten it about five times. And my hope would be sometime next year. So yeah, it was organic. It's what I wanted to write from the minute I left the bench. And it covers the guideline period when it was lunacy to follow the guidelines, to a period when it was much more flexible, but the guidelines still disfavored considering things like addiction and trauma and adverse childhood experiences, which really defined many of the people I was sentencing. So it's a cri de cœur, as they say, which has not been easy to write.DL: Speaking of cri de cœurs, and speaking of difficult things, it's difficult to write about judging, but I think we also have alluded already to how difficult it is to engage in judging in 2025. What general thoughts would you have about being a federal judge in 2025? I know you are no longer a federal judge. But if you were still on the bench or when you talk to your former colleagues, what is it like on the ground right now?NG: It's nothing like when I was a judge. In fact, the first thing that happened when I left the bench is I wrote an article in which I said—this is in 2011—that the only pressure I had felt in my 17 years on the bench was to duck, avoid, and evade, waiver, statute of limitations. Well, all of a sudden, you now have judges who at least since January are dealing with emergencies that they can't turn their eyes away from, judges issuing rulings at 1 a.m., judges writing 60-page decisions on an emergency basis, because what the president is doing is literally unprecedented. The courts are being asked to look at issues that have never been addressed before, because no one has ever tried to do the things that he's doing. And they have almost overwhelmingly met the moment. It doesn't matter whether you're ruling for the government or against the government; they are taking these challenges enormously seriously. They're putting in the time.I had two clerks, maybe some judges have three, but it's a prodigious amount of work. Whereas everyone complained about the Trump prosecutions proceeding so slowly, judges have been working expeditiously on these challenges, and under circumstances that I never faced, which is threats the likes of which I have never seen. One judge literally played for me the kinds of voice messages that he got after a decision that he issued. So they're doing it under circumstances that we never had to face. And it's not just the disgruntled public talking; it's also our fellow Yale Law alum, JD Vance, talking about rogue judges. That's a level of delegitimization that I just don't think anyone ever had to deal with before. So they're being challenged in ways that no other judges have, and they are being threatened in a way that no judges have.On the other hand, I wish I were on the bench.DL: Interesting, because I was going to ask you that. If you were to give lower-court judges a grade, to put you back in professor mode, on their performance since January 2025, what grade would you give the lower courts?NG: Oh, I would give them an A. I would give them an A. It doesn't matter which way they have come out: decision after decision has been thoughtful and careful. They put in the time. Again, this is not a commentary on what direction they have gone in, but it's a commentary on meeting the moment. And so now these are judges who are getting emergency orders, emergency cases, in the midst of an already busy docket. It has really been extraordinary. The district courts have; the courts of appeals have. I've left out another court….DL: We'll get to that in a minute. But I'm curious: you were on the District of Massachusetts, which has been a real center of activity because many groups file there. As we're recording this, there is the SNAP benefits, federal food assistance litigation playing out there [before Judge Indira Talwani, with another case before Chief Judge John McConnell of Rhode Island]. So it's really just ground zero for a lot of these challenges. But you alluded to the Supreme Court, and I was going to ask you—even before you did—what grade would you give them?NG: Failed. The debate about the shadow docket, which you write about and I write about, in which Justice Kavanaugh thinks, “we're doing fine making interim orders, and therefore it's okay that there's even a precedential value to our interim orders, and thank you very much district court judges for what you're doing, but we'll be the ones to resolve these issues”—I mean, they're resolving these issues in the most perfunctory manner possible.In the tariff case, for example, which is going to be argued on Wednesday, the Court has expedited briefing and expedited oral argument. They could do that with the emergency docket, but they are preferring to hide behind this very perfunctory decision making. I'm not sure why—maybe to keep their options open? Justice Barrett talks about how if it's going to be a hasty decision, you want to make sure that it's not written in stone. But of course then the cases dealing with independent commissions, in which you are allowing the government, allowing the president, to fire people on independent commissions—these cases are effectively overruling Humphrey's Executor, in the most ridiculous setting. So the Court is not meeting the moment. It was stunning that the Court decided in the birthright-citizenship case to be concerned about nationwide injunctions, when in fact nationwide injunctions had been challenged throughout the Biden administration, and they just decided not to address the issue then.Now, I have a lot to say about Justice Kavanaugh's dressing-down of Judge [William] Young [of the District of Massachusetts]….DL: Or Justice Gorsuch, joined by Justice Kavanaugh.NG: That's right, it was Justice Gorsuch. It was stunningly inappropriate, stunningly inappropriate, undermines the district courts that frankly are doing much better than the Supreme Court in meeting the moment. The whole concept of defying the Supreme Court—defying a Supreme Court order, a three-paragraph, shadow-docket order—is preposterous. So whereas the district courts and the courts of appeals are meeting the moment, I do not think the Supreme Court is. And that's not even going into the merits of the immunity decision, which I think has let loose a lawless presidency that is even more lawless than it might otherwise be. So yes, that failed.DL: I do want to highlight for my readers that in addition to your books and your speaking, you do write quite frequently on these issues in the popular press. I've seen your work in The New York Times and The Boston Globe. I know you're working on a longer essay about the rule of law in the age of Trump, so people should look out for that. Of all the things that you worry about right now when it comes to the rule of law, what worries you the most?NG: I worry that the president will ignore and disobey a Supreme Court order. I think a lot about the judges that are dealing with orders that the government is not obeying, and people are impatient that they're not immediately moving to contempt. And one gets the sense with the lower courts that they are inching up to the moment of contempt, but do not want to get there because it would be a stunning moment when you hold the government in contempt. I think the Supreme Court is doing the same thing. I initially believed that the Supreme Court was withholding an anti-Trump decision, frankly, for fear that he would not obey it, and they were waiting till it mattered. I now am no longer certain of that, because there have been rulings that made no sense as far as I'm concerned. But my point was that they, like the lower courts, were holding back rather than saying, “Government, you must do X,” for fear that the government would say, “Go pound sand.” And that's what I fear, because when that happens, it will be even more of a constitutional crisis than we're in now. It'll be a constitutional confrontation, the likes of which we haven't seen. So that's what I worry about.DL: Picking up on what you just said, here's something that I posed to one of my prior guests, Pam Karlan. Let's say you're right that the Supreme Court doesn't want to draw this line in the sand because of a fear that Trump, being Trump, will cross it. Why is that not prudential? Why is that not the right thing? And why is it not right for the Supreme Court to husband its political capital for the real moment?Say Trump—I know he said lately he's not going to—but say Trump attempts to run for a third term, and some case goes up to the Supreme Court on that basis, and the Court needs to be able to speak in a strong, unified, powerful voice. Or maybe it'll be a birthright-citizenship case, if he says, when they get to the merits of that, “Well, that's really nice that you think that there's such a thing as birthright citizenship, but I don't, and now stop me.” Why is it not wise for the Supreme Court to protect itself, until this moment when it needs to come forward and protect all of us?NG: First, the question is whether that is in fact what they are doing, and as I said, there were two schools of thought on this. One school of thought was that is what they were doing, and particularly doing it in an emergency, fuzzy, not really precedential way, until suddenly you're at the edge of the cliff, and you have to either say taking away birthright citizenship was unconstitutional, or tariffs, you can't do the tariffs the way you want to do the tariffs. I mean, they're husbanding—I like the way you put it, husbanding—their political capital, until that moment. I'm not sure that that's true. I think we'll know that if in fact the decisions that are coming down the pike, they actually decide against Trump—notably the tariff ones, notably birthright citizenship. I'm just not sure that that's true.And besides, David, there are some of these cases they did not have to take. The shadow docket was about where plaintiffs were saying it is an emergency to lay people off or fire people. Irreparable harm is on the plaintiff's side, whereas the government otherwise would just continue to do that which it has been doing. There's no harm to it continuing that. USAID—you don't have a right to dismantle the USAID. The harm is on the side of the dismantling, not having you do that which you have already done and could do through Congress, if you wanted to. They didn't have to take those cases. So your comment about husbanding political capital is a good comment, but those cases could have remained as they were in the district courts with whatever the courts of appeals did, and they could do what previous courts have done, which is wait for the issues to percolate longer.The big one for me, too, is the voting rights case. If they decide the voting rights case in January or February or March, if they rush it through, I will say then it's clear they're in the tank for Trump, because the only reason to get that decision out the door is for the 2026 election. So I want to believe that they are husbanding their political capital, but I'm not sure that if that's true, that we would've seen this pattern. But the proof will be with the voting rights case, with birthright citizenship, with the tariffs.DL: Well, it will be very interesting to see what happens in those cases. But let us now turn to my speed round. These are four questions that are the same for all my guests, and my first question is, what do you like the least about the law? And this can either be the practice of law or law as an abstract system of governance.NG: The practice of law. I do some litigation; I'm in two cases. When I was a judge, I used to laugh at people who said incivility was the most significant problem in the law. I thought there were lots of other more significant problems. I've come now to see how incredibly nasty the practice of law is. So yes—and that is no fun.DL: My second question is, what would you be if you were not a lawyer/judge/retired judge?NG: Musical comedy star, clearly! No question about it.DL: There are some judges—Judge Fred Block in the Eastern District of New York, Judge Jed Rakoff in the Southern District of New York—who do these little musical stylings for their court shows. I don't know if you've ever tried that?NG: We used to do Shakespeare, Shakespeare readings, and I loved that. I am a ham—so absolutely musical comedy or theater.DL: My third question is, how much sleep do you get each night?NG: Six to seven hours now, just because I'm old. Before that, four. Most of my life as a litigator, I never thought I needed sleep. You get into my age, you need sleep. And also you look like hell the next morning, so it's either getting sleep or a facelift.DL: And my last question is, any final words of wisdom, such as career advice or life advice, for my listeners?NG: You have to do what you love. You have to do what you love. The law takes time and is so all-encompassing that you have to do what you love. And I have done what I love from beginning to now, and I wouldn't have it any other way.DL: Well, I have loved catching up with you, Judge, and having you share your thoughts and your story with my listeners. Thank you so much for joining me.NG: You're very welcome, David. Take care.DL: Thanks so much to Judge Gertner for joining me. I look forward to reading her next book, Incomplete Sentences, when it comes out next year.Thanks to NexFirm for sponsoring the Original Jurisdiction podcast. NexFirm has helped many attorneys to leave Biglaw and launch firms of their own. To explore this opportunity, please contact NexFirm at 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com to learn more.Thanks to Tommy Harron, my sound engineer here at Original Jurisdiction, and thanks to you, my listeners and readers. To connect with me, please email me at davidlat@substack.com, or find me on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn, at davidlat, and on Instagram and Threads at davidbenjaminlat.If you enjoyed today's episode, please rate, review, and subscribe. Please subscribe to the Original Jurisdiction newsletter if you don't already, over at davidlat.substack.com. This podcast is free, but it's made possible by paid subscriptions to the newsletter.The next episode should appear on or about Wednesday, November 26. Until then, may your thinking be original and your jurisdiction free of defects. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit davidlat.substack.com/subscribe

Great news! If you make a purchase from any link of the links below, the channel earns a small affiliate commission from the site. Many thanks ahead of time. BETTER HELP: https://www.betterhelp.com/JAYREELZ save 10% OFF of your first month. OLIPOP Soda: https://www.drinkolipop.com use promo code JAYREELZ for 15% off of your purchase. BOMBA SOCKS: https://www.gopjn.com/t/2-561785-354075-142593 SAVE 20% CONSUMER CELLULAR: https://www.pntrs.com/t/2-593611-354075-293459 Closing out the first week of November with a busy podcast that'll satiate the appetite for any sports fan out there as the latest podcast is here. On deck: (6:34) It was an interesting final few hours of the NFL trade deadline as the Jets moved on bringing back serious draft capital. The Colts making a huge splash. While the Cowboys try to remain relevant with deals that make you scratch your head. Week 10 has a few big games on the schedule as I'll take a peek at those matchups with the whole league passing the halfway point of the season.

 (32:55) The college football playoff committee has lined up who'll be in the tournament as of today. I'll dive into that and what the Saturday slate looks like as we close in on the final few weeks of their year. (41:42) Memphis Grizzlies star Ja Morant has had his share of run-ins with the only organization that he's known. Is it time for them to take a long look in the mirror to possibly deal him elsewhere? If so, what is the best landing spot for the former All-Star? And would that help his career at this point? (59:03) Washington Capitals legend Alex Ovechkin has reached the 900 goal club, the only player to do so in NHL history. But what happened right after he scored the goal will surprise you.

 (1:04:25) With a classic World Series over, we look ahead to the baseball offseason as a few more big names have opted out of their deals. Also, there's a new manager in Atlanta with some familiar faces joining him on the coaching staff that may miff the fans from Flushing. A little gamesmanship on their end? And MUCH MORE in between. Please subscribe, leave a rating and post a review on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify, Audacy, Amazon Music and iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts. For daily shorts, weekly vlogs and then some, please subscribe to my YouTube channel at: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMucZq-BQrUrpuQzQ-jYF7w If you'd like to contribute to the production of the podcast, please visit my Patreon page at: www.patreon.com/TheJAYREELZPodcast   Many thanks for all of your love and support.   Intro/outro music by Cyklonus. LINKS TO SUBSCRIBE, RATE & REVIEW: APPLE: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-jayreelz-podcast/id1354797894 SPOTIFY: https://open.spotify.com/show/7jtCQwuPOg334jmZ0xiA2D?si=22c9a582ef7a4566 AUDACY: https://www.audacy.com/podcast/the-jayreelz-podcast-d9f50 iHEARTRADIO: https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-the-jayreelz-podcast-43104270/ AMAZON MUSIC: https://www.amazon.com/The-JAYREELZ-Podcast/dp/B08K58SW24/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=the+jayreelz+podcast&qid=1606319520&sr=8-1

This is a recap of the top 10 posts on Hacker News on October 31, 2025. This podcast was generated by wondercraft.ai (00:30): Attention lapses due to sleep deprivation due to flushing fluid from brainOriginal post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45771636&utm_source=wondercraft_ai(01:53): John Carmack on mutable variablesOriginal post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45767725&utm_source=wondercraft_ai(03:17): How OpenAI uses complex and circular deals to fuel its multibillion-dollar riseOriginal post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45771538&utm_source=wondercraft_ai(04:40): Futurelock: A subtle risk in async RustOriginal post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45774086&utm_source=wondercraft_ai(06:04): AMD could enter ARM market with Sound Wave APU built on TSMC 3nm processOriginal post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45767916&utm_source=wondercraft_ai(07:27): Ask HN: Who uses open LLMs and coding assistants locally? Share setup and laptopOriginal post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45771870&utm_source=wondercraft_ai(08:51): Show HN: Strange AttractorsOriginal post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45777810&utm_source=wondercraft_ai(10:14): Just use a buttonOriginal post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45774182&utm_source=wondercraft_ai(11:38): Another European agency shifts off US Tech as digital sovereignty gains steamOriginal post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45773974&utm_source=wondercraft_ai(13:01): Addiction MarketsOriginal post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45774640&utm_source=wondercraft_aiThis is a third-party project, independent from HN and YC. Text and audio generated using AI, by wondercraft.ai. Create your own studio quality podcast with text as the only input in seconds at app.wondercraft.ai. Issues or feedback? We'd love to hear from you: team@wondercraft.ai

This weekend, Flushing Town Hall hosts MexFest, a Día de los Muertos celebration honoring those who have passed and those separated from loved ones through immigration. Artists and co-curators Xtian Ávila and Arantxa Araujo explore the holiday through a participatory altar, storytelling, and performances.

Bob and Sheri Are Headed to the Hall of Fame. Talkback Callers. Morons in the News.   Everyone Needs a Laugh. Flight Attendant Accidentally Deployed Evacuation Slide. A Part of the Family.   Flushing the Fish. Can You Believe This? Life is Different for Rich People.   Talkback Callers. From the Vault.

People from both sides of the Taiwan Strait said that no separatist forces can erase the shared history and national identity that bind people across the Strait, as the 80th anniversary of Taiwan's restoration to China was commemorated in Beijing.在北京纪念台湾光复80周年之际，海峡两岸同胞表示，任何分裂势力都无法抹去联结两岸同胞的共同历史与民族认同。A grand gathering celebrating the anniversary was held in Beijing on Saturday. It marked the first Commemoration Day of Taiwan's Restoration, following an official designation on Friday by the Standing Committee of the 14th National People's Congress, China's top legislature.周六，北京举行纪念台湾光复80周年盛大集会。此前一日（周五），中国最高立法机关——第十四届全国人民代表大会常务委员会正式设立“台湾光复纪念日”，本次集会是该纪念日设立后的首次纪念活动。Wang Huning, chairman of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, addressed the event, calling on compatriots on both sides of the Strait to work together to advance national reunification and to firmly oppose all forms of "Taiwan independence" separatist activities.全国政协主席王沪宁在集会上发表讲话，呼吁海峡两岸同胞共同努力推进祖国统一大业，坚决反对任何形式的“台独”分裂活动。Wang stressed that the establishment of the commemoration day demonstrated the unwavering commitment of all Chinese people to uphold the one-China principle and safeguard national sovereignty and territorial integrity.王沪宁强调，设立“台湾光复纪念日”，彰显了全体中国人民坚定维护一个中国原则、捍卫国家主权和领土完整的不变决心。After the event, several guests from Taiwan said the commemoration had strengthened their confidence in the nation's eventual reunification.集会结束后，多位台湾嘉宾表示，此次纪念活动增强了他们对祖国最终实现统一的信心。Justin Lin Yifu, a Taiwan-born economist and professor at Peking University, said that Taiwan's restoration to China and the victory in the Chinese People's War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression (1931-45) should be remembered by all Chinese people.出生于台湾的经济学家、北京大学教授林毅夫指出，台湾光复回归中国与中国人民抗日战争（1931-1945年）的胜利，是全体中国人民应当铭记的历史。"The course of history will not be altered by the obstruction of a small handful of people," he said, adding that the commemoration day strengthens pride in being Chinese.“历史进程不会因少数人的阻挠而改变，”林毅夫表示，“设立这一纪念日，进一步增强了我们的民族自豪感。”WuRong-yuan, chairperson of Taiwan's Labor Party, said the establishment of the commemoration day demonstrated to the world that commemorating Taiwan's restoration is the heartfelt, shared wish of compatriots on both sides of the Strait.台湾劳动党主席吴荣元表示，“台湾光复纪念日”的设立向世界表明，纪念台湾光复是海峡两岸同胞共同的深切心愿。"Our shared bonds and memories cannot be severed by any external forces or separatists," he emphasized.“我们之间的血脉联结与共同记忆，任何外部势力和分裂分子都无法割裂。”他强调道。Wu added that the decision provided strong legal and political support for all patriotic forces committed to advancing the cause of national reunification.吴荣元补充称，这一决定为所有致力于推进祖国统一事业的爱国力量提供了坚实的法律与政治支撑。On Oct 25, 1945, the ceremony to accept Japan's surrender in the Taiwan province of the China war theater of the Allied powers was held in Taipei. From that moment, Taiwan and the Penghu Islands were restored to China's sovereign jurisdiction.1945年10月25日，同盟国中国战区台湾省受降仪式在台北举行。自那一刻起，台湾及澎湖列岛重新回归中国主权管辖之下。Shaw Kai-ping, honorary president of the association for relatives of patriots in Taiwan who fought against Japanese aggression, said it was a great honor for Oct 25 to be established as a national commemoration day. Shaw's father and grandfather both took part in the resistance against Japanese occupation.台湾抗日爱国志士亲属联谊会荣誉会长萧开平表示，将10月25日设立为国家级纪念日，是一件意义重大的事。萧开平的父亲与祖父均曾参与反抗日本殖民统治的斗争。"This decision shows that the motherland has not forgotten the people of Taiwan, and that reunification is destined to be achieved," Shaw said.“这一决定表明，祖国没有忘记台湾同胞，统一大业注定实现。”萧开平说。Chi Hsing, honorary chairman of the Reunification Alliance Party in Taiwan, said he had long awaited the establishment of the commemoration day. "As the historical truth comes to light, more and more people are gaining a clearer understanding of what really happened," Chi said.台湾统一联盟党荣誉主席纪欣表示，她一直期盼“台湾光复纪念日”的设立。“随着历史真相的不断揭示，越来越多的人开始清晰了解当年的真实情况。”纪欣说。The Taiwan Work Office of the Communist Party of China Central Committee and the Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council hosted a reception in Beijing on Saturday, attended by guests from both Taiwan and the mainland who had participated in the earlier gathering.中共中央台湾工作办公室、国务院台湾事务办公室于周六在北京举办招待会，出席此前纪念集会的两岸嘉宾受邀参加。Song Tao, head of both offices, said at the reception that establishing the commemoration day on the occasion of the 80th anniversary of Taiwan's restoration fully reflects the will of the people and the resolve of the nation.两办主任宋涛在招待会上表示，在台湾光复80周年之际设立这一纪念日，充分体现了人民的意愿与国家的决心。"We are confident in advancing the great cause of national reunification and enhancing the well-being of our Taiwan compatriots," Song said.“我们有信心推进祖国统一伟大事业，增进台湾同胞福祉。”宋涛说。Chi Hsing, publisher of The Observer magazine in Taiwan, said the decision reflects the shared aspirations of the vast majority of Taiwan compatriots.台湾《观察》杂志发行人纪欣表示，设立“台湾光复纪念日”的决定，反映了绝大多数台湾同胞的共同心声。"It will carry forward the patriotic tradition, reaffirm that both sides of the Strait belong to one China, and inspire pride in being Chinese," she said.“这将传承爱国传统，重申海峡两岸同属一个中国，激发民族自豪感。”她说。Ji Bin, vice-chairman of the All-China Federation of Taiwan Compatriots, said the restoration of Taiwan is solid evidence of the Chinese government's resumption of sovereignty over Taiwan and a crucial link in the historical and legal chain of Taiwan being part of China.中华全国台湾同胞联谊会副会长纪斌指出，台湾光复是中国政府恢复对台湾行使主权的铁证，也是台湾作为中国一部分的历史与法律链条中的关键一环。"No matter how the Democratic Progressive Party and its politicians distort the truth of the war of resistance against Japanese aggression, deny the achievements of the war victory, downplay or deny the historical significance of Taiwan's restoration, and collude with external forces to promote the fallacy of 'Taiwan's undetermined status', they cannot distort or undermine the historical and legal fact that Taiwan belongs to China," Ji said.“无论民进党及其政客如何歪曲抗日战争史实、否认抗战胜利成果、淡化甚至否定台湾光复的历史意义，勾结外部势力宣扬‘台湾地位未定论'谬论，都无法歪曲和改变台湾属于中国的历史与法律事实。”纪斌说。In Taipei, the memorial association of the Chinese war of resistance against Japanese aggression in Taiwan and the Chinese Kuomintang party jointly held a celebration on Saturday marking the anniversary of Taiwan's restoration.在台北，台湾抗日民族统一战线纪念会与中国国民党于周六联合举办台湾光复80周年纪念活动。Overseas Chinese from both sides of the Strait also celebrated the commemoration day in various forms. Chinese embassies in countries including the United States, Japan, Brazil and Indonesia held symposiums marking the 80th anniversary of Taiwan's restoration on the day of commemoration.海外两岸侨胞也以多种形式庆祝这一纪念日。中国驻美国、日本、巴西、印度尼西亚等国的大使馆，均在纪念日当天举办台湾光复80周年座谈会。In New York City, hundreds of Chinese compatriots from both sides of the Strait gathered in the Flushing neighborhood of Queens borough on Friday to celebrate the anniversary.在纽约，数百名两岸同胞于周五齐聚皇后区法拉盛社区，共同庆祝台湾光复80周年。separatist/ˈseprətɪst/adj.分裂主义的，分离主义的sovereignty /ˈsɒvrənti/n.主权；最高统治权jurisdiction/ˌdʒʊərɪsˈdɪkʃn/n.管辖权，司法权

This is the All Local afternoon update for October 16, 2025

The Happy Hump Day Trump Day edition of the Bob Rose Show on Trump's heartfelt Charlie Kirk remembrance, local pot, no Dems budging on federal government shutdown, and NY's governor buddying-up to socialist NYC mayoral candidate's stunning list of government handouts. Plus Wednesday morning's breaking news for 10-15-25

How to flush coolant at home yourself with Dehumidifier water Ford Truck How to fill coolant and avoid air pockets GMC Top Kick How to remove a stuck rear hub 14 Caravan Do I have to replace all 4 tires on an AWD car? 22 Lexus 16 Mitsubishi Outlander or 13 Equinox which is a better vehicle? Buying a used engine off of the internet 16 Tacoma used engine install questions

This morning Joe saw a palmetto bug creep into his car... so he and Jed try their best to flush this thing out!

This morning Joe saw a palmetto bug creep into his car... so he and Jed try their best to flush this thing out! See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

pWotD Episode 3069: Assata Shakur Welcome to popular Wiki of the Day, spotlighting Wikipedia's most visited pages, giving you a peek into what the world is curious about today.With 280,211 views on Friday, 26 September 2025 our article of the day is Assata Shakur.Assata Olugbala Shakur ( ə-SAH-tə shə-KOOR; born JoAnne Deborah Byron; July 16, 1947 – September 25, 2025), also known as Joanne Chesimard, was an American political activist who was a member of the Black Liberation Army (BLA). In 1977, she was convicted in the murder of state trooper Werner Foerster during a shootout on the New Jersey Turnpike in 1973. She escaped from prison in 1979 and was wanted by the FBI, with a $1 million FBI reward for information leading to her capture, and an additional $1 million reward offered by the New Jersey attorney general.Born in Flushing, Queens, Shakur grew up in New York City and Wilmington, North Carolina. After she ran away from home several times, her aunt, who would later act as one of her lawyers, took her in. Shakur became involved in political activism at Borough of Manhattan Community College and City College of New York. After graduation she began using the name Assata Shakur and briefly joined the Black Panther Party, before joining the BLA.Between 1971 and 1973, she was charged with several crimes and was the subject of a multi-state manhunt. In May 1973, Shakur was arrested after being wounded in a shootout on the New Jersey Turnpike. Also involved in the shootout were officers Werner Foerster and James Harper, and BLA members Sundiata Acoli and Zayd Malik Shakur. Harper was wounded, and Zayd Shakur and Foerster were killed. Between 1973 and 1977, Shakur was charged with murder, attempted murder, armed robbery, and kidnapping in relation to the shootout and six other incidents. She was acquitted on three of the charges and three were dismissed. In 1977, she was convicted of the murder of State Trooper Foerster and of seven other felonies related to the 1973 shootout. Her defense argued that medical evidence exonerated her, i.e., her right arm was shot and paralyzed while her hands were raised, and she would have been unable to fire a weapon.While serving a life sentence for murder in New Jersey's Clinton Correctional Facility for Women, Shakur escaped in 1979, with assistance from the BLA and the May 19 Communist Organization. In 1984, she was granted political asylum in Cuba, where she remained for the rest of her life despite U. S. government efforts to have her extradited. In 2013, she was added to the FBI Most Wanted Terrorists list, as Joanne Deborah Chesimard, and was the first woman on the list.Shakur died on September 25th, 2025 at the age of 78 due to "health problems and advanced age" according to the Cuban Foreign Ministry.This recording reflects the Wikipedia text as of 01:26 UTC on Saturday, 27 September 2025.For the full current version of the article, see Assata Shakur on Wikipedia.This podcast uses content from Wikipedia under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License.Visit our archives at wikioftheday.com and subscribe to stay updated on new episodes.Follow us on Mastodon at @wikioftheday@masto.ai.Also check out Curmudgeon's Corner, a current events podcast.Until next time, I'm neural Ayanda.

09-22-25 - WWBD - His Wife Has Stopped Flushing When She Pees - He Gave His Son His First Car Jeep CJ7 - Her MIL Calls Her Husband Every Morning And She's Tired Of ItSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

09-22-25 - WWBD - His Wife Has Stopped Flushing When She Pees - He Gave His Son His First Car Jeep CJ7 - Her MIL Calls Her Husband Every Morning And She's Tired Of ItSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Palestinian-American Human Rights lawyer Noura Erakat & Palestinian-Dutch analyst Mouin Rabbani talk about the new UN report which found that Israel is committing genocide & whether that even matters or changes anything. Then Due Dissidence's Russell Dobular & Keaton Weiss join to talk about Charlie Kirk, his killer & Kirk's relationship to Israel. For the full discussion, please join us on Patreon at - https://www.patreon.com/posts/patreon-full-139074119 Mouin Rabbani is a researcher, analyst & commentator specializing in Palestinian affairs, the Arab-Israeli conflict & the contemporary Middle East. He has among other positions previously served as Principal Political Affairs Officer with the Office of the UN Special Envoy for Syria, Head of Middle East w/the Martti Ahtisaari Peace Foundation, Senior Middle East Analyst & Special Advisor on Israel-Palestine w/the Int'l Crisis Group. Rabbani is Co-Editor of Jadaliyya, & a Contributing Editor of Middle East Report. Noura Erakat is a human rights attorney, Professor of Africana Studies & the Program of Criminal Justice at Rutgers University, New Brunswick. She recently completed a non-resident fellowship of the Religious Literacy Project at Harvard Divinity School & was a Mahmoud Darwish Visiting Professor in Palestinian Studies at Brown University. Noura is the author of Justice for Some: Law & the Question of Palestine (Stanford University Press, 2019), which received the Palestine Book Award & the Bronze Medal for the Independent Publishers Book Award in Current Events/Foreign Affairs. She is co-founding editor of Jadaliyya & an editorial board member of the Journal of Palestine Studies as well as Human Geography. She's a co-founding board member of the DC Palestinian Film & Arts Festival. She has served as Legal Counsel for a Congressional Subcommittee in the U.S. House of Representatives, as Legal Advocate for the Badil Resource Center for Palestinian Refugee & Residency Rights, & as nat'l organizer of the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation. Noura has also produced video documentaries, including "Gaza In Context" & "Black Palestinian Solidarity.” Her writings have appeared in The Washington Post, The New York Times, The Los Angeles Review of Books, The Nation, Al Jazeera, & The Boston Review. She's a frequent commentator on CBS, CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, BBC, NPR, among others. Her awards include the NLG Law for the People Award (2021) & the Marguerite Casey Foundation Freedom Scholar award (2022). Russell Dobular is a New York native, born & raised in Flushing, Queens. He worked in New York's independent theater scene for over 20 years as a writer, director, producer, & theater owner, drove a Hansom Cab in 3 cities & is a licensed tour guide in both NYC & New Orleans. He is currently the co-host of Due Dissidence podcast. Keaton Weiss is the co-host of Due Dissidence podcast on YouTube, Rumble & Spotify. He also writes occasionally on Substack. ***Please support The Katie Halper Show *** For bonus content, exclusive interviews, to support independent media & to help make this program possible, please join us on Patreon - https://www.patreon.com/thekatiehalpershow Get your Katie Halper Show Merch here! https://katiehalper.myspreadshop.com/all Follow Katie on Twitter: https://x.com/kthalps Follow Katie on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/kthalps Follow Katie on TikTok: https://tiktok.com/@kthalps

Episode 127 | DP & McGheeThis week's episode features a wide-ranging conversation with Mark Wright, VP of Media & Sponsorships at AT&T. From his early career at AB InBev to leading sponsorship strategy at one of the world's biggest brands, Mark shares insights on career growth, brand respect, and the importance of measuring partnerships.Alongside our guest spotlight, DP & McGhee dive into the week's biggest stories shaping the business of sports:

This week, I went live at Subs Summit with my girl Ren Fuller-Wasserman, Senior Director of CX at Tushy, the brand that made bidets cool (and fun to talk about).We cover startup grit, customer obsession, and why CX is never just about support tickets. Ren gets real about:Her unlikely path into CX, starting in a call center and turning it into a career superpowerWhat it was like building Tushy's CX team from scratch (and the wild stories that came with it)Why humor, empathy, and product knowledge are the not-so-secret sauce of customer retentionSubscription loyalty, cross-sell opportunities, and how to keep customers engaged after the first purchaseThe balance between automation, AI, and the very human work of talking about… well, poop

“Train the young in the way they should go; even when old, they will not swerve from it.” Proverbs 22:6    “In the absence of a faith environment where the child may live, of which he feels himself a part and in which he feels himself almost held, we risk cultivating hothouse flowers in the atrium, which are incapable of enduring the severity of the external climate. On the other hand, without a place where the child can come in touch with the religious reality in a way and at a rhythm suitable to children, there is the danger the child will pass by great things without ever being able to grasp, interiorize, and make these realities his own. The initiation of a child into Christian life is not a work that can be fulfilled by the catechist alone, nor by the parents alone, It is the whole Christian community that proclaims Christ, and the child must enter into contact with the entire Christian community. The catechist's work – valuable as it is- must be sustained and confirmed by a community that lives what the catechist proclaims.” Sofia Cavalletti, The Religious Potential of the Child page 30-31    Submit a Podcast Listener Question HERE!    Podcasts by Series  Level One Book Study  Level Two Book Study    Hannah Marconeri shares with us idea on how to get parents involved in the CGS program as an aid to the CGS program but also for their own personal spiritual growth as well as to aid in the prayer life of their domestic churches.   Hannah Marconeri began her journey with The Catechesis of the Good Shepherd in 2011 and currently serves as a catechist and Director of Discipleship at St. Robert Bellarmine in Flushing, MI. She works with families in the Catholic school and in the parish setting.  She is a Level One and Two Formation Leader and has a masters degree in Pastoral Studies and Catechesis of the Good Shepherd (MAPS-CGS) from Aquinas Institute of Theology in St. Louis, MO.     Episode 96 – MAPS-CGS Degree  Episode 74 – Spiritual Preparation of the Adult  Episode 98 - Welcoming the Children  Episode 122 - Welcoming the Level 2 and 3 Child PART ONE  Episode 123 - Welcoming the Level 2 and 3 Child PART TWO  Episode 124 - The Work of the Second Plane Child      A List of Podcast Episodes for Parents  Parent Pages  Baptism as a Beginning  The Good Shepherd and the Child: A Joyful Journey    CGSUSA Store        BECOME AN ORGANIZATION MEMBER!  Organization Members are any entity (church/parish, school, regional group, diocese, etc.) that either offers CGS and/or supports those who serve the children as catechists, aides, or formation leaders) Organization Members also receive the following each month:  Bulletin Items - 4 bulletin articles for each month. We have a library of 4 years of bulletin items available on the CGSUSA Website.  Catechist In-Services to download TODAY and offer your catechists. We have six in-services available on the website.  Assistant Formation - prayer service, agenda, talking points, and handouts.  Seed Planting Workshop - prayer service, agenda, and talking points.  Family Events: downloadable, 1/2 day events for Advent, Christmas/Epiphany, and Lent.  Catechist Prayers and prayer services  and so much more!  Click Here to create your Organizational Membership!      AUDIOBOOK:    Audiobook – Now Available on Audible  CGSUSA is excited to offer you the audio version of The Religious Potential of the Child – 3rd Edition by Sofia Cavalletti, read by Rebekah Rojcewicz!  The Religious Potential of the Child is not a “how-to” book, complete with lesson plans and material ideas. Instead it offers a glimpse into the religious life of the atrium, a specially prepared place for children to live out their silent request: “Help me come closer to God by myself.” Here we can see the child's spiritual capabilities and perhaps even find in our own souls the child long burdened with religious information. This book serves as a companion to the second volume, The Religious Potential of the Child 6 to 12 Years Old. The desire to have this essential text available in audio has been a long-held goal for many. The work of many hands has combined to bring this release to life as an audiobook.    Find out more about CGS:       Learn more about the Catechesis of the Good Shepherd     Follow us on Social Media-  Facebook at “The United States Association of the Catechesis of the Good Shepherd”  Instagram-  cgsusa  Twitter- @cgsusa  Pinterest- Natl Assoc of Catechesis of the Good Shepherd USA  YouTube- catechesisofthegoodshepherd 

Dr. Robin McCutcheon returns to discuss race wars, the corrupt judiciary, the truth rollout of the medical industry, trade schools, economic powers shifting and how it's being done at a controlled pace for the wake-up.   Book Websites: https://www.moneytreepublishing.com/shop PROMO CODE: “AEFM” for 10% OFF https://armreg.co.uk PROMO CODE: "americaneducationfm" for 15% off all books and products. (I receive no kickbacks). Q posts book: https://drive.proton.me/urls/JJ78RV1QP8#yCO0wENuJQPH

(Episode 215): Greg Prince joins Subway To Shea's Anthony Rivera to recap Brandon Sproat's MLB debut, breakdown the latest Mets news, and discuss the passing of former Mets Manager, Davey Johnson.Greg Prince, Co-Creator & Writer for Faith and Fear in Flushing.____________________________________________Greg Prince on X: https://x.com/greg_prince Faith & Fear In Flushing Website: https://www.faithandfearinflushing.com/ ____________________________________________Follow on X, Instagram, & Tik Tok: @SubwayToSheaSubscribe on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@subwaytosheaIntro Song: Ride It Like You Mean It- Kristian LeoOutro Song: Sky- OBO

Jimmy and Brett are joined once again by friend and tennis connoisseur Spencer Segura to break down all things US Open after attending the final weekend. Carlos Alcaraz has been amazing since Monte Carlo and continued his hot play in Flushing the past two weeks. He has now won 7 or the last 8 matches against Sinner and won his 6th major at just 22 years old. Djokovic is still the third best player in the world, he just can't beat Sinner and Alcaraz. Sabalenka was on a mission to win a slam after coming so close in the first 3 majors of the year. Beating 2 straight Americans to do so. Amanda Anisimova bounced back after her heartbreaking loss at Wimbledon. She has the game to win a major, and now has the experience to build on. shopify.com/connors⁠⁠⁠⁠ for your $1 per month trial period  Follow us on - Twitter - @AdvConnors @JimmyConnors @Brett_Connors Instagram - @AdvConnors @Bretterz @GolddoodIsabella Facebook - Jimmy Connors official Facebook page Leave your questions/topics/or links to stories you want us to talk about next week on Jimmy's official Facebook page. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, playwright and memoirist Alvin Eng joins Shoshana Greenberg of the Thornton Wilder Society to discuss his book Our Laundry, Our Town. Eng reflects on growing up as the son of Chinese immigrants in 1970s Flushing, Queens—balancing life inside his parents' hand laundry with the turbulent, inspiring world outside. His memoir traces the journey from punk rock and downtown theater to discovering the Chinese influence on Thornton Wilder's Our Town––a result of Wilder spending part of his childhood in China.  This discovery of this influence, ultimately, helped Eng to reconnect with his ancestral and artistic roots in China. Together, Eng and Greenberg explore themes of identity, culture, and storytelling, while considering Wilder's lasting legacy in American theater. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode of The Birdshot Podcast, host Nick Larson welcomes Randy Shepard, lifelong upland hunter and host of the My Dog Hunts podcast. With over five decades of bird hunting experience, Randy shares stories that span from the pheasant fields of Iowa to the sage country of the Intermountain West. Randy Shepard grew up pheasant hunting in Iowa, eventually expanding his pursuits to ruffed grouse, prairie grouse, quail, and beyond. Through his My Dog Hunts podcast, Randy tells reflective hunting stories, weaving together decades of personal experiences, lessons learned from great dogs, and observations about changing landscapes. Expect to Learn Randy's background in bird hunting and how his storytelling podcast came to life. The story of his first lab, Pitch, and reflections on the best bird dogs he's owned. Labs vs. Springers: the strengths of each for pheasants, grouse, and prairie hunting. The decline of Iowa's ruffed grouse population Strategies for hunting sharptails and prairie chickens with flushing dogs, including the importance of timing and wind. Memorable stories of getting lost, losing gear, and learning from the unpredictability of the uplands. Episode Breakdown with Timestamps: [00:00:00] - Introduction [00:04:00] - Starting the My Dog Hunts podcast [00:10:50] - Growing up pheasant hunting in Iowa [00:22:01] - Switching between labs and Springers [00:42:05] - Flushing dogs vs. pointing dogs for prairie birds [00:57:32] - Tips for early season sharptail hunting with flushers [00:11:23] - Approaching Sharp-Tailed Grouse in other hours [01:18:45] - Hunting rig setup and van modifications [01:21:20] - Closing thoughts and where to find Randy Follow Guest Randy: Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/p/My-Dog-Hunts-100046437775994/  Website: https://mydoghunts.com/  Email: shepard.randy@yahoo.com  Listening Links: Apple Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/my-dog-hunts-upland-birds/id1508319093  BuzzSprout: https://www.buzzsprout.com/959107  Spotify:https://open.spotify.com/show/5a4BnZXPTSdRjTQJODtauK?si=57b93a92960642c5 Follow Host Nick: Instagram: @birdshot.podcast Website: www.birdshotpodcast.com Listening Links: Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/17EVUDJPwR2iJggzhLYil7 Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/birdshot-podcast/id1288308609 YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/@birdshot.podcast SUPPORT | http://www.patreon.com/birdshot Use Promo Code | BSP20 to save 20% on https://www.onxmaps.com/hunt/app Use Promo Code | BS10 to save 10% on https://trulockchokes.com/ The Birdshot Podcast is Presented By: https://www.onxmaps.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Send us a textThe Texas Longhorns opened their season with a 14-7 loss at Ohio State, where Arch Manning faced significant challenges in his first true road start but showed promising signs of growth during the second half.• Arch Manning's first major road start came in one of college football's most hostile environments• Texas defense held Ohio State to just 203 total yards of offense and 77 rushing yards• Defense played exceptionally well with freshman Grayson Littleton earning an 86.6 PFF rating, highest among Texas DBs• The offensive line featuring four new starters showed promise in the run game but struggled in critical short-yardage situations• Arch Manning improved noticeably in the second half when moving away from the scripted plays• The expanded 12-team CFP format means this loss doesn't derail Texas' championship aspirations• Three consecutive home games coming up provide opportunity for growth and development• Parker Livingstone's touchdown reception showcased the potential of Texas' passing gameJoin us at DKR for the home opener this weekend as Texas looks to bounce back against San Jose State!Support the showPlease like and follow each of Stories Inside the Man Cave Podcast social media links on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, and Tik Tok.

President Donald Trump has signed an executive order that could withhold federal resources from states with cashless bail policies, potentially affecting billions in funding for New York. Meanwhile, fans at the US Open in Flushing are paying steep prices for tickets and concessions, with some ground passes reselling for more than $300. Plus, State Comptroller Tom DiNapoli is seeking a fifth term and faces a Democratic primary challenge from Drew Warshaw, who says the office should do more to address affordability. WNYC's Jimmy Vielkind joins us to explain.

LISTEN and SUBSCRIBE on:Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/watchdog-on-wall-street-with-chris-markowski/id570687608 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/2PtgPvJvqc2gkpGIkNMR5i WATCH and SUBSCRIBE on:https://www.youtube.com/@WatchdogOnWallstreet/featured  Chris Markowski rips into America's broken education system, where spending has surged 56% since 2013 but test scores are circling the drain. From flatlined reading and math results to the COVID-era collapse, he argues that the problem isn't money—it's culture, parenting, and priorities. Throwing more dollars per student won't solve anything if parents don't care and kids are glued to their phones.

Learn more at TheCityLife.org

Episode 204 - Aug. 24th, 2025 - DJ Intence CrashOut Moment (Finally Happened)  - Violations Counter - DJ Intence - 27, Walt - 8, Ceddy - 23 - Introductions  - Donald Trump Rant by @Ceddy55  - FAKE ICE Agent(s) getting shot  - Las Vegas Tourism Down & Housing Market Collapse & Other States Falling Apart  - Texas Low Bailing The Federal Government (Withholding Taxes with the Nation)  - California Jury Rules That META Violated Privacy (FLO x META Scandal)  - Sex Offender Registry Look Up  - Sachia Vickery Dating Donations  - Raja Jackson Wrestling Crash Out (Wrestling Receipts) ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-ujRK7UNUU )  - The Unaliving of Kevin Mullins (The Story of Kevin Mullins)  - RIP Judge Frank Caprio  - @DJIntence RANT against Jillian Michaels (Eff That Chick)  - Wise Guy's Segment - Kentucky Woman is charged after causing roughly $12,000 in damages on a vehicle  - Wise Guy's Segment - Sha'Carri Richardson & Not the Norm of Public Disturbance within the airport  - Wise Guy's Segment - New Jersey woman arrest for receiving Child Support Payments from 3 DIFFERENT MEN for a SINGLE CHILD  - Wise Guy's Segment - Walt's Hot TAKE on MANDATORY PATERNITY TEST  - Wise Guy's Segment - 39 Kings Cafe (Flushing, Queens, NY) Review From Episode 156 ( https://www.podcastics.com/podcast/episode/episode-156-july-7th-2024-happy-4th-of-july-recaps-305422/ ) 

“The final tennis Grand Slam of the year, the US Open, is getting underway this week at Flushing Meadows in New York. This year marked the 50th anniversary of Arthur Ashe for whom the main tennis stadium in Flushing is named winning the Wimbledon men's singles title. But it's also 75 years this very week since the first African-American player was allowed enter the US Open Althea Gibson. To tell us more about this pioneering tennis star, is Cameron Hill from Off The Ball.

DON'T WAKE UP AARON!See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

July 25, 2025 - Join us for a conversation on the enduring legacy and impact of The Korean War and the U.S.-Korea Alliance. The Korean War Armistice Agreement, which remains in effect today, was signed 72 years ago on July 27, 1953.  The program opens with prerecorded remarks from Korea Society president and CEO Tom Byrne filmed at the base of the Korean War Memorial in Kissena Corridor Park in Flushing, Queens titled: Remembering ‘The Forgotten War.'  Introductory remarks are provided by Consul Choong-geon Lee from the Republic of Korea New York Consulate, Korean War Veteran Mr. Jack Foley, and Brigadier General (Ret.) Chris Stockel, NYC Metro Area chapter president of the Korea Defense Veterans Association (KDVA). This program is produced in collaboration with KDVA. Following the introductions, author Dr. Michael Devine discusses his book, The Korean War Remembered: Contested Memories of an Unended Conflict (for sale here at 40% discount with the code 6AS23), which explores how conflicting “theaters of memory” in the United States, South Korea, North Korea, and China “have evolved over decades and how they continue to shape the domestic and foreign policies of the countries still involved in this unresolved struggle...” The moderator is policy program director Jonathan Corrado.  This program is also a collaboration with The Korea Society education department and is attended by participants from The Korea-America Student Conference (KASC18), consisting of 24 student members from undergraduate and graduate universities in both the United States and South Korea. This program is made possible by the generous support of our individual and corporate members and the Korea Foundation. For more information, please visit the link below: https://www.koreasociety.org/policy-and-corporate-programs/2021-remembering-the-korean-war

CardioNerds (Dr. Claire Cambron and Dr. Rawan Amir) join Dr. Ayan Purkayastha, Dr. David Song, and Dr. Justin Wang from NewYork-Presbyterian Queens for an afternoon of hot pot in downtown Flushing. They discuss a case of congenital heart disease presenting in adulthood. Expert commentary is provided by Dr. Su Yuan, and audio editing for this episode was performed by CardioNerds Intern, Julia Marques Fernandes. A 53-year-old woman with a past medical history of hypertension visiting from Guyana presented with 2 days of chest pain. EKG showed dominant R wave in V1 with precordial T wave inversions. Troponin levels were normal, however she was started on therapeutic heparin with plan for left heart catheterization. Her chest X-ray revealed dextrocardia and echocardiogram was suspicious for the systemic ventricle being the morphologic right ventricle with reduced systolic function and the pulmonic ventricle being the morphologic left ventricle. Patient underwent coronary CT angiography which confirmed diagnosis of congenitally corrected transposition of the great arteries (CCTGA) as well as minimal non-obstructive coronary artery disease. Her chest pain spontaneously improved and catheterization was deferred. Patient opted to follow with a congenital specialist back in her home country upon discharge.   US Cardiology Review is now the official journal of CardioNerds! Submit your manuscript here. CardioNerds Case Reports PageCardioNerds Episode PageCardioNerds AcademyCardionerds Healy Honor Roll CardioNerds Journal ClubSubscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!Check out CardioNerds SWAG!Become a CardioNerds Patron! Pearls- A Case of Congenital Heart Disease Presenting in Adulthood Congenitally Corrected Transposition of the Great Arteries (CCTGA) is a rare and unique structural heart disease which presents as an isolated combination of atrioventricular and ventriculoarterial discordance resulting in physiologically corrected blood flow.   CCTGA occurs due to L looping of the embryologic heart tube. As a result, the morphologic right ventricle outflows into the systemic circulation, and the morphologic left ventricle outflows into the pulmonary circulation.   CCTGA is frequently associated with ventricular septal defects, pulmonic stenosis, tricuspid valve abnormalities and dextrocardia.   CCTGA is often asymptomatic in childhood and can present later in adulthood with symptoms of morphologic right ventricular failure, tricuspid regurgitation, or cardiac arrhythmias.   Systemic atrioventricular valve (SAVV) intervention can be a valuable option for treating right ventricular failure and degeneration of the morphologic tricuspid valve.  notes- A Case of Congenital Heart Disease Presenting in Adulthood Notes were drafted by Ayan Purkayastha.  What is the pathogenesis of Congenitally Corrected Transposition of the Great Arteries?   Occurs due to disorders in the development of the primary cardiac tube   Bulboventricular part of the primary heart forms a left-sided loop instead of right-sided loop, leading to the normally located atria being connected to morphologically incompatible ventricles   This is accompanied by abnormal torsion of the aortopulmonary septum (transposition of the great vessels)   As a result, there is ‘physiologic correction' of blood flow. Non-oxygenated blood flows into the right atrium and through the mitral valve into the morphologic left ventricle, which pumps blood into the pulmonary artery. Oxygenated blood from the pulmonary veins flows into the left atrium and through the tricuspid valve to the morphologic right ventricle, which pumps blood to the aorta. Compared with standard anatomy, the flow of blood is appropriate, but it is going through the incorrect ventricle on both sides.  Frequent conditions associated with CCTGA include VSD, pulmonic stenosis and dextrocardia  

Thankfully the Mets were able to finish an epic comeback, otherwise the it would have been an even worse trip to Baltimore. To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

A new artificial intelligence training center for New York City teachers is raising concerns among some educators about creating a harmful environment that stunts student learning and critical thinking. Meanwhile, the United Federation of Teachers has voted to endorse Zohran Mamdani in the mayoral election. Also, a WNYC analysis finds Mamdani won about 30 percent of districts that previously voted for Donald Trump. Data show many of the voters in those Trump-Mamdani neighborhoods are Asian American. WNYC's Joe Hong has been speaking with some of those voters in Bensonhurst and Flushing. He discusses his findings.

(00:00-31:01) Brad Thompson joins us. Cards pitching woes. Manipulating the IL. Pozo, Pages, and the Cardinals catchers. AAA stats are hard to judge. Flushing that trip to Chicago and moving on. Compartmentalizing the wins and losses as a broadcaster. Players mic'd up during games. Good for fan access.(31:09-42:46) Peace and love, peace and love. The Home Run Thief. Diamondbacks fan has been banned for the season for reaching over the wall to grab a ball. Ohtani's 50th homerun in 2024 was the most expensive ball ever sold at $4.39M. We just have to break.(42:56-44:38) Doug meant a million, not a billion baseballs per year. We gotta get that clock right.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Matt and EzRaw discuss the latest in boxing news including:News and NotesDavid Benavidez has signed a deal to fight Anthony Yarde on Riyadh Season in November.The rubber match between Dmitry Bivol and Artur Beterbiev will not take place in 2025.Movement for tickets for next week's Ring III event in Flushing, New York, headlined by the two main events, is non existent.Mario Barrios: Pacquiao Choosing Me is Disrespectful, I'm Champion For a Reason.Julio Cesar Chavez Jr. was arrested and is being held at a Los Angeles detention center, pending deportation to Mexico.Tyson Fury has said that he is available for a Jake Paul fight, ends his retirement.Ryan García wants to run it back with Rolly.Eubank-Benn rematched announced for September.Chocolatito Return Finally Set: Roman Gonzalez vs. Hector Robles.Abdullah Mason will take on Sam Noakes for the vacant WBO Lightweight Championship.EZ Money Parlay of the Day, EzRaw Report Card, EzRaw BreakdownEzRaw Report Card & EzRaw BreakdownKatie Taylor vs. Amanda Serrano full cardJack Catterall vs. Harlem EubankEzra's Raw Hard CashMike's EZ moneyMatt's Best Bet.Rumor ReportWhat is expected to happen to the PBC schedule now that David Benavidez is out of the mix?Booking the Damn TerritoryWhat would you do with the PBC schedule?Quick HitsJake Paul has officially entered the WBA cruiserweight rankings at #14.Jesse “Bam” Rodriguez will take on Fernando “Puma” Martinez in November in Riyadh,Gary Russell Jr. ends his unofficial retirement.Frank Martin is expected to make his return to the ring against Rances Barthelemy on the Tank-Roach 2 undercard.Chordale Booker is expected to return to the ring by the end of the summer.Turki Alalshikh says he wants British flyweight Mikie Tallon (8-0, 1 KO) on the undercard for Canelo vs. Crawford. Tallon is currently fighting at the area level.Impromptu EzRaw Report Card: 09/13 - Canelo vs. Crawford, Two random guys from the boxraw sparring club event, the British guy, maybe Serhii Bohachuk vs. Brandon Adams rematch#MrOneTake's One TakeWhere the hell did Gervonta Davis go?Read the latest news at Brunch BoxingThoughts or questions? Email us at brunchboxingqa@gmail.comHosts: Matt, and EzRawSocial: MikeProducer: Huey

To have your question featured in a future video, please email: questions@morses.tv Please include at least: Age, Weight and as much history as possible.

Braves bats go cold in Flushing. Ace Bailey hesitates in Utah. Heckler crosses the line in Chicago. Jim Ross cancer-free. Diego Segui remembered, and moreSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Braves bats go cold in Flushing. Ace Bailey hesitates in Utah. Heckler crosses the line in Chicago. Jim Ross cancer-free. Diego Segui remembered, and moreAtlanta's ONLY All Conservative News & Talk Station.: https://www.xtra1063.com/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this special interim episode of Quakers Today, Sweet Miche shares how Quakers strive to embody religious freedom and the sacred right to provide sanctuary. We feature excerpts from the Quaker Walk to Washington, a remarkable 300-mile trek from Flushing, Queens—a place steeped in the origins of religious freedom in America—to Washington, D.C. This journey of deep spiritual conviction and witness highlights the ongoing Quaker commitment to justice. You'll hear from: Max Goodman & Ross Brubeck: Attenders at Brooklyn Monthly Meeting who grew up at Sandy Spring Monthly Meeting, and two of the core organizers of the walk. Diana Mejia and Stuart Sydenstricker: Quakers from Plainfield Monthly Meeting, who lead Wind of the Spirit, an immigration advocacy center.  Imani Cruz: Global Policy Coordinator for Migrant Justice at the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC). A Journey of Faith and Action for Justice This episode delves into the "Quaker Walk to Washington," a pilgrimage rooted in the historical fight for religious freedom and the Quaker testimony of peace and justice. The walk draws direct inspiration from the 1657 Flushing Remonstrance, a courageous declaration written for Quakers facing persecution in New Netherland. This document, which asserts the right to religious liberty and the protection of all people, served as a foundational text for the walk's purpose. The episode also connects the walk to a recent lawsuit filed by Quaker meetings against the Department of Homeland Security, challenging policies that undermine the sanctity of worship spaces. The 300-mile trek itself became a profound spiritual experience. The walkers reflect on the physical challenges and unexpected moments of deep connection, such as canoeing through dense fog—a powerful metaphor for walking forward in faith even when the path ahead is unclear. The walk fostered a sense of solidarity with migrants, mirroring their uncertain journeys, and demonstrated how Quaker meetings along the route extended radical hospitality and welcome, regardless of resources. Beyond the symbolic act of walking, the episode explores the practical dimension of Quaker witness. Imani Cruz from AFSC outlines current legislative efforts to advocate for just immigration policies, including resisting increased funding for immigration enforcement and championing the Sensitive Locations Act, which aims to protect places like houses of worship from immigration intrusions legally. The walkers brought their message of justice to Washington, D.C., culminating in a powerful symbolic act of nailing a contemporary remonstrance to a door on the National Mall. Question for Next Season: What is your favorite Quaker term that is common among Friends, but strange to outsiders? Share your response by emailing podcast@quakerstoday.org or call/text 317-QUAKERS (317-782-5377). Please include your name and location. Your responses may be featured in our next season! Resources To learn more about the Quaker Walk to Washington and read the two remonstrances, visit QuakerWalk2025.org. Quakers Sue DHS over Immigration Enforcement and Religious Freedom from Friends Journal and QuakerSpeak Six Ways to Support Immigrants Right Now by AFSC Just Immigration from FCNL   Quakers Today is the companion podcast to Friends Journal and other Friends Publishing Corporation content. It is written, hosted, and produced by Peterson Toscano and Sweet Miche. Season Four of Quakers Today was sponsored by American Friends Service Committee and Friends Fiduciary. American Friends Service Committee: Vulnerable communities and the planet are counting on Quakers to take action for a more just, sustainable, and peaceful world. The American Friends Service Committee, or AFSC, works at the forefront of many social change movements to meet urgent humanitarian needs, challenge injustice, and build peace. Find out more about how you can get involved in their programs to protect migrant communities, establish an enduring peace in Palestine, de-militarize police forces worldwide, assert the right to food for all, and more. Visit AFSC.ORG. Friends Fiduciary: Since 1898, Friends Fiduciary has provided values-aligned investment services for fellow Quaker organizations.  Friends Fiduciary consistently achieves strong financial returns while witnessing to Quaker testimonies. They also help individuals support organizations they hold dear through giving strategies, including donor-advised funds, charitable gift annuities, and stock gifts. Learn more about FFC's services at FriendsFiduciary.org. Feel free to email us at podcast@friendsjournal.org with​​ comments, questions, and requests for our show. Music from this episode comes from Epidemic Sound.  Follow Quakers Today on TikTok, Instagram, X, and visit us at QuakersToday.org.

Thank you for joining us for our 2nd Cabral HouseCall of the weekend!   I'm looking forward to sharing with you some of our community's questions that have come in over the past few weeks…   Samantha: Hi Dr. Cabral, I was hoping you could help me find out what happened to me this morning. While getting ready for work, I felt a prickly heat sensation on my scalp that spread to my face and arms, which turned bright red—like a sunburn, but not raised. It then moved to my legs, and the prickling became so uncomfortable I had to take off my pants. The redness lasted about 30 min, slowly faded and back to normal in 90 minutes. Afterward, I felt cold and started shivering. I'd had my usual breakfast, nothing out of the ordinary. Just for background: I'm a 47-year-old woman, healthy and active, with regular periods and mild hypothyroidism that I manage with diet and supplements. I'm not on any meds or hormones. Thanks so much in advance!                  John: Hey doc . Hope all is well. Im 50 years old and have some arthritis and nerve pain in my elbow probably from overuse between work hitting the gym and being a weekend warrior . Would like to know your recommendations I do take your dns and detox every 3 months thanks                                                                       Bettina: Dear Dr. Cabral. We don't have a water filter yet. I am curious on your thoughts on the range measured of our water in 2024. Hardness measured in °dH 9,3-15. Iron mg/l Complete Minerals & Metals Test (Test for mineral imbalances & heavy metal toxicity) - - - > Complete Candida, Metabolic & Vitamins Test (Test for 75 biomarkers including yeast & bacterial gut overgrowth, as well as vitamin levels) - - - > Complete Stress, Mood & Metabolism Test (Discover your complete thyroid, adrenal, hormone, vitamin D & insulin levels) - - - > Complete Food Sensitivity Test (Find out your hidden food sensitivities) - - - > Complete Omega-3 & Inflammation Test (Discover your levels of inflammation related to your omega-6 to omega-3 levels) - - - Get Your Question Answered On An Upcoming HouseCall: StephenCabral.com/askcabral - - - Would You Take 30 Seconds To Rate & Review The Cabral Concept? The best way to help me spread our mission of true natural health is to pass on the good word, and I read and appreciate every review!  

This pathetic franchise just keeps flushing away Paul Skenes. Hear award-winning columnist Dejan Kovacevic's Daily Shots of Steelers, Penguins and Pirates -- three separate podcasts -- every weekday morning on the DK Pittsburgh Sports podcasting network, available on all platforms: https://linktr.ee/dkpghsports Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

RealDGC.com

On December 27, 1657, a group of Dutch colonists in New Netherland took a stand for religious liberty. Today, Stephen Nichols tells the story of the Flushing Remonstrance, one of the earliest American documents to defend religious freedom. Read the transcript: https://ligonier.org/podcasts/5-minutes-in-church-history-with-stephen-nichols/the-flushing-remonstrance A donor-supported outreach of Ligonier Ministries. Donate: https://donate.ligonier.org/ Explore all of our podcasts: https://www.ligonier.org/podcasts