Podcasts about frivolous

Christian College Sex Comedy: Part 15 Chancellor Gets Boned In 30 parts, By FinalStand. Listen to the podcast at Explicit Novels.             The pursuit of power is pointless unless you know how to use it    The look the Chancellor gave me was filled with hate alright, but it was awash in a desperate sexual hunger too. "You goddamn bastard," she huffed through clenched teeth. My response was to switch finger slamming her, instead rolling her rather large clit between my forefinger and thumb gently. "Gak," she choked out. "You can get on top and ride me," I promised her softly. "You an even tie my hands up with the sash of my robe." "On your back, damn you," Melrose snarled ferociously. As I fell back, she ripped my bathrobe sash off so fast it yanked me off the bed. My ass had no sooner hit the bed again when Bazz pulled my robe open and straddled me. She pulled my arms together and bound my wrists with frightening proficiency. "Not your first time at the rodeo?" I joked. She slapped me across the face; not so hard to break my skin but enough to make me have to rework my jaw to get it set again. "Shut up, Braxton," she gloated over me, "I'm going to treat you like the piece of trash that you are. You are going to regret ever thinking you belonged here." Mel rose up on her knees, maneuvered her hand onto my cock, and aimed it at her cunt lips. "Oh," she gasped as her sex blossomed and let my cockhead in. She slowly began shifting down my cock with ecstatic pleasure written all over her face. "It feels pretty good," I started to say. I was going to finish with 'doesn't it?' but she cut me off. "Shut up!" she seethed. "You exist solely for my pleasure. I don't need to hear your juvenile stumbling at sexual banter." This wasn't the time to start a fight; that would come later. Doctor Bazz kept wiggling her ass down my shaft. She was so lost in her own fulfillment that she almost forgot about me. I grunted when she planted herself down particularly hard as she was humping me. Melrose looked down at me. With one hand she struck snake-like at my throat, squeezing my windpipe shut. "You are just a child," she taunted me wickedly, but then her whole tone changed to a creepy, appreciative voice, "a pretty, pretty child." Okay, I want a psychopath. I want a selfish bitch with no issues beyond insensitivity. I do not want a woman in her forties telling me I'm "a pretty, pretty child." That's just wrong, and that's coming from a guy who screws just about anything that moves. "Is this how you screw those sluts?" she moaned. "Is this how you pack Heaven's tight little ass? Does she scream for you?" Wait; did she call Heaven a 'she'? That's progress! I choked out a non-response. I was getting enough air to breath but not enough vocal freedom to talk, and I had a feeling this was on purpose. "You don't need to answer that," she chuckled eerily. "I've heard reports of their sad little cries as they squirted all over you. You love it when you break their wills to you and this, oh, God, big cock, don't you?" The Chancellor leaned forward, her bra-covered breasts dangling tantalizingly close to my mouth, and rolled her hips so that her clit rubbed against my cock. "You hammer them, hammer them, and hammer them some more until their tight little bodies can't even crawl out of your bed. And you wanted to hammer me with this huge cock of yours; you wanted to make me sweat, make me cry out your name, you wanted to wreck me," she sneered. I reached up with my bound hands and lifted her grip off my throat. "Actually, I'm done. I want you out of my room," I growled back. Melrose's breast heaved and she glared down at me, angry but uncertain. "I was hoping there would be something intriguing about you but seriously, you are just, mediocre. Hell, Heaven is more of a woman than you are and that's kind of pathetic. I wasn't denigrating Heaven, who I cared about, but was using Doctor Bazz's prejudice against the bitch. "How dare you?" she muttered. She hadn't stopped humping me yet. "Get some plastic, a broom handle, I don't care, but get the hell off of me, you evil witch," I insisted. As a counterpoint to that, I began to thrust my cock deeper into her womb. "Ugh, ugh, no," she gasped. "You don't, tell me what, to do." Mel had now positioned her clit so that it received maximum impact with my pelvic bone. I flipped us over; even with her resistance, I was too strong for her. I pushed my bound hands down on her sternum, the fear of sexual frustration written large over her face and burning forth from her eyes. "I want Heaven back," I demanded. "Never," she growled. I began to withdraw my cock from her cunt. She whimpered and tried to hold me to her body by grabbing my shoulders in each hand. "Get off me," I insisted. "Get off of me. If you want some piece of meat between your thighs, go to an over-forties bar and pick up some Momma's Boy who will pop in less than fifteen seconds, then grovel at your feet for an hour like a worm. "It would be better than an immature punk like you," she struggled to insult me and my performance. I took three long strokes inside her, flexing my cock when it was at its deepest, thumping her G-spot each time. I could see tears of pleasure in her eyes. I tried to pull out the fourth time but she hooked her legs behind me and held my shoulders tight. "No," she persisted. "I am going to use you until I'm satisfied." Instead of wrestling with her, I pulled her up so that my hands cupped her ass, her arms remained around my shoulders, letting her kiss me, and her thighs and calves were wrapped around my waist. I bounced her up and down quickly, quickening her passion as each drop onto the fullness of my rod brought her closer to orgasm. "What?" she gasped, "Where are we, " "Outside, so that your security can see us," I explained evilly. "No!" she squeaked. "Heaven," I stated. She shook her head so I took two more steps to the cutback exit in the screens. "No, no," she insisted then as I took the next step. "Fine," she said in defeat, but hating me for it. "You can have her back for the short time she's still here," she seethed. "The Board will support my decision and that will be it for her, and probably the rest of you too." "Don't be bitter, Mel," I teased. "You've been good to me so I'm going to be good to you. How do you want it?" She glared at me so I continued talking as I walked us back to the bed. "You want to be slammed from behind, don't you? It is hard to get those girls you break down to do a convincing job of it, yet you miss being treated like a slut," I verbally prodded her. She'd gone over too fast to face down and ass sticking out for someone who didn't crave it. I gently lowered us down to the bed while keeping eye contact. "Take off your bra, then roll over on your hands and knees right here on the edge of the bed. She was torn; she had hold of me at the moment, but she really wanted to give me my grudge fuck. As she opened her shirt, I dove into her cleavage, kissing and licking. She purred hungrily even as she worked her shirt off and then her bra. While keeping up my torture of her breasts, I hooked her thighs with my hand and hiked up her legs until I had her splayed out, her knees pushed halfway to her breasts. I dove down to her muff and ravaged her clitoris and lips. Doctor Bazz squealed with surprise and pleasure. Right as my vaginal attention got to be too much for her, I yanked her ass over the edge, bent her farther over, and returned to chewing on her nipples. If she was upset that I wasn't immediately fucking her, she was doing a good job of hiding it. The next time I dove on her cunt, I kept my fingers on her engorged nipples, teasing to the point pleasure and pain collided. I tore up her cunt with a total disregard to patience and sensitivity. The Chancellor squealed, squirmed, and thrust against me without inhibition until she growled loud enough to bring any guards, had they been close enough. She hit her second spasm when I rushed one hand down to her twat and began to jackhammer two fingers inside her cunt, unrelentingly driving her eruption from crest to crest. When her eyes rolled back in her head, I released her, but only to move to my next stage. I'd promised her a good hard fucking after all. I took Melrose's hips and repositioned her so that she was face down, her knees on the edge of the bed and her legs dangling over. I knelt between her thighs and began licking her from clit to anus. A few passes into it, I sucked several of my fingers on one hand until they were really slick while working her cunt over with my other hand. I think she was a bit surprised when I pressed my first finger against her anus. As her sphincter gave way, Doctor Bazz finally spoke up. "Don't you dare," she moaned sensually. "Don't do this?" I teased her, as I sunk another half-inch into her rectum. "Oh, God, yes," she groaned like a wanton whore. I wiggled in a little farther; Melrose gasped and shook her big ass in my face. I pulled the finger, she whimpered in need, and I went back to assaulting her cunt with my tongue and teeth. "Put it back," she panted. "If I put it back, I'll have to use two fingers," I informed her. Mel coughed in response. I obliged her quiet acquiescence by teasing her anus once more. "Ugh, bastard," she grunted. It started out angry but transformed to sexual in mid-vocalization. I worked my two fingers in slowly, I didn't want her to scream and I'm basically not a sadist. I also ameliorated the pain by slipping my cock back into her cunt seconds later. I developed a slow rhythm, picking up the pace incrementally until she was really taken aback the moment I bottomed out in her womb, tickled her cervix, and twisted my two fingers 180 degrees in her anus. "Oh, God," she moaned. I began fishing through a list of affections until I found the one that bit - 'Gorgeous'. That word bit into her psyche and I decided to use it. "Oh, fuck, Gorgeous, you are so damn sexy," I whispered to her. Melrose coughed, then growled. I took the moment to lean on her back and cruelly grab a breast and begin to aggressively maul it. "Oh, God, yes!" she exulted heavily. "You are a filthy-minded, little, huge damn delinquent." "And you finally got me to ream you good, didn't you?" I responded. "Play, play all you like," she groaned, "but I know how to break you, now." 'Yes', I thought back, 'but I know you want something too.' About this time I was pretty sure there was no possible way I was getting away with this. I had fucking silk screen walls, for pity's sake. Chancellor Bazz was equally sobbing and cursing into my sheets. One second she was encouraging me to pound her harder, I obliged, and the next second she was telling me how good it felt. I will give her this much; the old bird had a lot of sexual frustration to work out and I was her instrument. Having this game go on and on certainly wasn't going to work so I had to figure out what I could do that I wasn't already doing and what would turn her on. I didn't like my answer. I reached down and took Melrose by the back of her head and pushed her face deeper into the bed. First she moaned louder and then her body started to tremble as she thrust back harder. When the suffocation set in, she struggled to rise but I was too strong and pressing her down with too much force. The Chancellor reached back from her vulnerable position and tried to push me off and remove my hand holding her head down. She became more and more frantic, undoubtedly fuelled by her own sense of rage upon the world and mirroring my own hatred of her as my motivation. Her last explosion of air was a scream into the bed. A fear-fueled orgasm overwhelmed her with her whole body going rigid, then lurching about. Now that I'd gotten her off, I let go of her neck, going so far as to grabbing her shoulder and pull her up for a desperate breath. I withdrew my fingers from her ass and my cock from her flooded cunt. Melrose lay boneless on the bed, dazed and incoherent. I put my fists on either side of her shoulders and leaned over my tormentor and victim. "You damn near killed me, you bastard," she moaned heatedly. "Was the orgasm worth it, knowing this might be the last thing you feel in this life?" I whispered to her. "Don't answer because your body told the story already. As much as you hate me, you loved putting everything on the line like that." "Shut up," she wheezed. "You know nothing, Child." "I know you are lying face-first, mostly naked, on my bed, freshly fucked, covered in sweat, my cock resting on your open, inviting ass with your legs spread wide for me, Doctor Bazz. I know I said that the next time we met I was going to fuck you like I owned you, and I think I've done that." "I am, going to, break, all of your girl, friends," Melrose ground out. "We will see who owns who when this is over, Mr. Braxton," she gasped once she'd finally calmed down and she could take an unlabored breath. As I slowly got off of her, she gave out one last sigh. "Remember your promise, Chancellor," I cautioned her. "I remember all kinds of things," she snapped back. Doctor Bazz resumed a standing position but was polite enough not to kick me when I helped her get her panties back on. "Let's not do this again," I cautioned the Chancellor. "If we do, I'm going to have to tie you up and abuse all three of your holes all weekend long." "The only 'next time' will be my last time using you," she growled. "You didn't let me finish, Mel. Next time, after I've got you warmed up, I'm handing you over to Rio who, trust me, will be a lot less compassionate than I am. Like you, she's got some anger issues to work through," I grinned. "Thank you for putting her back on my radar," she sneered back sweetly. "I'm not too worried, Mel," I replied. "You are a pretty smart woman. You know that with Rio, the pain and risk of permanent harm isn't just play. She'll be looking forward to making you beg for your life." The expectant smile she shot my way chilled the soul. God, can't you give me some not-so-crazy women to deal with? For once, he gave me a reply by way of a sudden insight: try not to solve every problem with my cock and appreciate the sane women who do spend time with me. Doctor Bazz moved past me so I gently stroked her ass. "Done?" she snarled while looking straight ahead. Her anger was betrayed by her hardening nipples. "Yes. And I apologize, Chancellor. I was only thinking about your arms bound behind your back while I pounded your cunt at the same time as Rio slammed you from behind," I said softly. She rotated her gaze to me, lust and hate warring across her countenance. "Every time we are alone together, Melrose," I breathed into the side of her face as I rubbed a hand down from her stomach to her crotch, "I am going to have to check out how wet you are." Her hand flashed down and stopped my progress. "Or would you rather I check you from behind?" I added as I ran a hand down her rump. "Fuck you," she sighed. "Is that an invitation?" I teased. This was killing me inside. "Just remember that next time, you are getting that dildo rammed up your ass." "Damn you," she seethed once more. "I have to go before security suspects something." Like they didn't all know precisely what had been going on? How dumb did she think they were? Without another word she strode out of my bedroom into the main area. "What have you found?" she questioned the guards. Of course they had found nothing damning. They had to be suspicious of all the TVs and computer stations without internet hook-ups but no one mentioned a thing. "This was a colossal waste of time," Melrose said in an exaggerated display. "Let's go." Doctor Bazz led the way down the stairs but stumbled on the first step. The last guard in line smirked at me. "Do you miss Dana much?" I inquired quietly. "And how," she rolled her eyes. "Tonight was a total bust. Anyone with half a brain knew you expected a raid tonight and would have everything stashed somewhere else. All this overtime is good for my paycheck but I'd kill for a good night's sleep." "Oh, you are preaching to the choir, ma'am," I chuckled, "preaching to the choir." I went back to my room and lay down. Sleep did not come easy. I knew that the Science Club's cameras had recorded the events of the past half hour; I just had to figure out what to do with them, besides get Heaven back. Rolling Off the Bottom I had grabbed a shower around 2:00 so I wasn't really surprised that a dozen feet came running up my steps at 6:15. I was barely able to prop myself up in the bed when Rio came storming in. "What's up, dude?" she said as she plopped down. "Planning to forgo cleanliness?" "I showered earlier," I told them. Valerie, Iona, Opal, Brandi and Barbie Lynn all came in and sat around me. Barbie Lynn was the first to clue in that something was off. "What's wrong, Honey?" she asked with concern. "My room was raided last night," I answered. It wasn't the total truth but I wasn't sure how I felt about my actions with the Chancellor the night before, much less how my friends would take it. "Well, you are still here so they didn't find anything, so what is it?" Opal prodded. "Ladies, can I keep this plan to myself?" I requested. "Of course," Iona responded. Sadly, she seemed to be the only one who appeared ready to let the situation lie. "Don't make us get all CSI on your ass," Rio teased. "You know we'll eventually figure it out so you might as well tell us." I studied her for a few seconds. "I ass-raped the Chancellor in order to get Heaven back," I told her in a dead-even tone. It was an empty joy to see that most of them realized too late they really didn't want to know after all. "What did she say?" Barbie Lynn came to my rescue. "Are we getting Heaven back?" "She promised me, and I have reason to believe she'll actually honor it," I replied. "Well, Rio finally kicked in, "How was she?" "Why do you think I took a shower earlier?" I pointed out. "I've never used sex that way and I pray it never happens again." "Don't beat yourself up over this," Brandi consoled me. "You did say that being young means you get to do stupid shit?" I don't recall using those exact words but still, "I think we can agree to not talk about this outside of this room," Opal added. "So do you know of any Thai Sexual Cleansing ritual that will help you get over last night?" Brandi grinned mischievously. I chuckled. "We'd love to help," Barbie Lynn chimed in. "Thank you, ladies," I smiled, "but I think I need to get my head on straight before diving back into the pleasurable side of this school. I need to know if I did the right thing or not." On that cheery note we all began to move toward the stairs and out into the world. In the stairwell Valerie cornered me, put a hand on my chest to impede my progress, and motioned to me that she had something to say. "From the discussion in the Chancellor's office Monday I get the feeling that Heaven is a girl-guy, shemale, what have you; right?" she started off. I nodded. "You clearly like girls but you are real close to Heaven; right?" Val continued. "Yes," I replied. "So you risked something you love, namely, the pleasure you derive from sex, to save her; right?" she prodded. "Yes," I sounded curious. "Then you did the right thing," she concluded. "Zane, I'd kill for the people I love and I imagine you would too. What's death compared to a little rough sex with an evil controlling bitch to get her to release someone as close to you as Heaven appears to be?" "Thanks, Valerie," I grinned. "My heart knows you are right but it is going to take my mind a while to accept that. I guess I'm over-thinking things." "Happens to the best of us," Valerie joked, then punched me in the arm. "Let's catch up with the others before Rio does something stupid, okay, does something more stupid than normal." We were halfway through breakfast when I noted a diminishing of noise from the south entrance of the hall. Being taller than the average female student, I was able to make out the cause of the disturbance. I catapulted out of my seat and raced for the lady at the door; I had the vague impression I wasn't alone. I rushed up within a few feet of Heaven, who had dropped her bags and looked at me with fear and expectation. I didn't want to overwhelm or embarrass her so I pulled up short to make sure the moment was special. I'm an idiot!! Rio slipped past me, grabbed Heaven's cheeks, and planted a deep kiss full of longing on MY GIRL's lips!! "Oh, Babycakes, I've missed you so much," Rio panted passionately to Heaven. "Ah, thanks, Rio," Heaven said, "but if you don't let go of me right now, I'm going to strangle you with your own intestines." Heaven untangled herself from Rio, shot a look my way, then rushed into Christina's arms. Rio smirked at me. The rest of Christina's crew swarmed around Heaven and rejoiced at her return. I took a step back to give them some room. I did note Chancellor Bazz glaring at me from the head table. I looked back to catch sight of Dana Gorman giving me a lopsided grin from the door Heaven had come through, a McDonald's bag in hand. I missed Heaven's arm slipping through her knot of friends and pulling me in. She pressed her body against me and looked up into my eyes. "I want you inside of me so bad," she whispered. Why can't a woman look at me and say "I've missed gazing into your eyes" or something romantic like that? "How about we get Heaven squared away in our room before Assembly?" Christina suggested. "We'll get her bags," Hope volunteered. "I'll come too," I joined in, but Chastity quickly put a hand up. "No, you don't," she smiled. "We'd like Heaven to actually get to Assembly." "There is no Assembly today," Iona pointed out. "Great, I can go straight to Zane's room," Heaven beamed. "I don't think we'll mind the company," Paige announced. I was suddenly left trying to figure out how she'd appeared next to me in this crowd, as well as how my arm ended up around her waist. "Holy Hell, Paige," I hissed. "You are going to give me a heart attack if you keep that up." "It isn't worth it unless you pay the price," she teased me. What the hell did that mean, 'pay the price'? Heaven balled up her fists and I was sure blood was about to be spilled. "Paige, we need to figure out what you are wearing to the party this weekend," Valerie intervened. "Party?" Paige sounded intrigued. Valerie edged Paige away and the situation defused. "Heaven, unpack," I began. "Iona, round up the Coach and get her to our place." "Barbie Lynn, could you and Alice watch over the door to make sure we aren't overwhelmed by non-freshmen?" Alice had been standing on the periphery and was clearly stunned that I was addressing her in this manner, but still rapidly nodded and looked to Barbie Lynn to gauge her perception of the request. Barbie Lynn gave her 'replacement' a smile and motioned Alice away from the group as well. "Alright, everyone," Doctor Larson spoke up, "finish breakfast and then back to your rooms. We are still under twenty-four hours of restricted travel so I do not expect to see any of you again until lunch. Please get about your business. Lastly, I expect some of you will be called before the Board of Directors to give testimony or receive a verdict on your status here; make yourself ready and presentable." "Mr. Braxton," Doctor Topaz Larson fixed me with a deadly eye, "that will require you to remain fully clothed most of the time. Do you understand?" "Of course, Doctor Larson; I'll do my best," I swore. "Sweet! That means I get to run around naked!" Rio exalted. "Ms. Talon, are you taking your anti-psychotic drugs?" Doctor Larson said deadpan. "Nope; I've been slipping them into the Chancellor's tea," Rio grinned all crazy-like. "Do you think anyone has noticed?" "If you want to take credit for the past two weeks, by all means do so," Topaz allowed. "I was looking for a cheap and sleazy way to be despised by everybody, she began, but I headed her off. "She'll stay in clothes and we'll make sure that all her pills are changed to suppositories. I know she won't miss any of those," I taunted my friend. "That may be for the best," Doctor Larson snorted disdainfully, but ruined it with a grin. She turned and strode back to the table. I wasn't sure which one of us the Chancellor hated more; Doctor Larson for keeping order or the rest of us for obeying. "Okay, I'm going to the bathroom. Heaven, can I hope to see you once you are squared away in your room?" I asked as I hugged her once more and headed away. I knew the questions would come soon enough. One aspect of a women's college that guys might not appreciate is that there are only stalls in girl's bathrooms, and since FFU has a grand total of two men's rooms on the entire campus (Administration and Athletics), I was always using a female facility. I was about to finish business, the standing-up kind, when my door rattled as someone tried to get in. "Excuse me?" I inquired. "Let me in," hissed my visitor. Since I clearly knew the voice, I zipped up and unlatched the door. She pushed in and latched the door behind her before pushing me down and straddling my lap. "You did, Heaven kissed me ", something." Kiss, kiss. "Christina says it had to be you who got me back." She went back to kissing me. "You are my girlfriend, Heaven. I don't know what I wouldn't do for you, Babe," I told her. She nestled into my lap and wrapped her arms around my neck. "You make me feel so alive, Zane," Heaven related in a soft vulnerable tone. "Don't get all romantic on me," I teased her between light kisses on her lips. "I've got a whole bottle of Viagra showing up at noon and I need someone to work all that sexual energy out on,  and, okay, I missed you." She wiggled into a more snug fit in my lap. "Did you miss me more than Barbie Lynn, or Paige?" she teased. "They aren't you," I countered. I ran my right hand between us, worked up her skirt, and began rubbing her package, which was clearly straining against the strap-down. Heaven began moaning, then slowly rolling her body against mine. "Come on," she panted, "let's have a quickie." "Can't happen," I whispered. To prove my dedication to my statement, I ran my left hand around her hip, under her skirt, and to her covered ass. I pressed a finger between her ass cheeks until I pressed against her anus. Now I was massaging her front and back. "Oh, God, you bastard," she sobbed while she rocked back and forth. "We really need to get going, though," I sighed. "Bazz will send someone after us soon enough." "I, Gurr, I owe you, Zane," Heaven groaned. "You stood by me. Damn, you fought Gorman by yourself for me and somehow you got me back. I know I can be a horrible person but you've always looked past that and saw who I could be." "I could continue being a jack-ass and say that I looked past your horrible personality to that luscious ass but I think I'd rather remind you that I chose you to be my lover and no one else," I smiled at Heaven. "Your lover, she murmured happily. "And you are my bitch," she tacked on that bit from our sexual encounter in the Kappa Sigma closet hardly one week back. We still managed to stand up and get the door open before Ms. Marlowe came in quietly. She frowned at us while we grinned at her, cleaned our hands, and walked past her back to the Dining Hall. Restructuring We sat outside in the hall opposite the main Administrative conference room. There weren't a ton of us; the individual class presidents plus Heaven, Rio and myself. Christina and Rhaine shared the Senior Class spot. "Drink run," I volunteered. "Who wants what?" "Zane, if they call for you and you're gone, it will be big trouble," Christina pointed out. "If I stay here one more minute, I'll strip off my clothes, paint myself blue, and streak across campus," I grinned piratically. "Sprite," Heaven spoke up. A series of orders followed and I hurried off. Upon my return, I handed Rhaine (last in line) a Doctor Pepper, which caused her to give me an odd look. "I didn't ask for, she began muttering. "Nah, but I always see you drinking the stuff so I figured you could use one," I told her. "Ah, thank you," she responded with a cautious smile. "If it makes you horny then it was my idea too, Rhaine," Rio leaned forward so Rhaine could see her and smiled. "Is she hormonal, dropped on the head as a child, or what?" Simone Brady asked the group of us. She was the Junior Class President and nominally a Rhaine supporter. She'd asked for and received a Sunkist. "Tie me up in your room and we'll find out," Rio licked her lips at Simone. "Isn't that supposed to be the other way around?" Heaven quizzed Rio. "No; Simone looks like a slow learner and I don't want to scare her off on our first date," Rio leered. "Now you know what I went through," Rhaine explained to Simone, who sniffed in derision. "Hey, I don't know this crazy woman at all but even I can tell she's playing with you two," Hannah Cartwright, Sophomore Class President, rolled her eyes. "How about we all try to remember we are all here to save our school?" Christina interrupted. The conversation had died down to nothing when Rio nudged me. "There's this old guy coming down the hallway and he looks like he knows you," she whispered. I looked up and my heart nearly stopped. I'd fucked up even worse than I thought. "Uncle Josh," I said weakly, as I stood and faced him. "Dude, I thought you said your family was dead," Rio continued. "Technically, that would be true," the old man rumbled, "and you would be Rio Talon. I'm Joshua Coppersmith, old family acquaintance and the Braxton family executor." "The last time I saw you I was being placed on a plane to Thailand," I stated somewhat bitterly. "It was part of your father's will, Zane. He was my boss and the son of a friend so I owed it to him to trust his judgment concerning his only child," Uncle Josh explained. "I recall wanting to stay with you," I reminded him. I recalled crying a river of tears, hoping to stay. I actually knew who Josh was, where Tim and Jill were virtual unknowns. "A normal life is not allowed for everyone," Christina spoke up; "Past battles and all." I hate being beaten with my own words. "That was one of your father's favorite sayings," Uncle Josh said. "I am glad to see you living by it. Thank you, Ms. Buchanan." She nodded politely. "Who is this old geezer again?" Rio interjected. "He was a close personal friend of my grandfather. They turned the company from a tired little mining concern to something a bit more. He mentored my father and they worked side-by-side when granddad died. Now he sort of runs thing until I inherit," I outlined. "That is somewhat correct but not why I'm here. I could hardly miss the past week's activities here at Freedom Fellowship University. As the child of Victor and Jenna Braxton, I owed it to them both to let Zane sink or swim on his own. As the future head of the corporation I work for, I need to make sure he doesn't end up in prison," Josh clarified. "Dude," Rio scoffed, then came to my side, "your boy went to jail last week. Where were you then?" "Ms. Talon, I do not have spies watching his every move. By the time I became aware of the matter, it had been resolved," my pseudo-Uncle responded. "I seriously suggest you get a 'minder' for Zane," Hannah Cartwright weighed in. "He's a real nutjob." That assessment would have angered me more had I not seen everyone nod in agreement. Instead, I went for the redirect. "You've been in contact with Aunt Jill?" As far as I knew, Jill despised every aspect of my Dad's life. "Zane, Jill has never handled more than two hundred dollars her entire life; of course I'm keeping an eye on her, and you," Josh stared at me. "I carefully monitor both yours and her finances." "Seriously?" Christina asked skeptically. "He bought a warehouse full of furniture and that didn't appear to you to be frivolous?" "Frivolous would be renting a private jet and a penthouse for a weekend in Las Vegas. Since Zane can't use eight sofas, I made the educated guess he was buying them to help out his dorm mates," Josh countered. "It is a pleasure to meet you, sir. I'm Rhaine Ritchie, Senior Class President," Rhaine jumped in. "I am curious as to your purpose here. Are you here to take Zane away or are you going to help him stay here?" "President Presumptive," Heaven growled. "That's good to know," Josh nodded, "and I'm here to represent the corporation's interests, in this case, avoiding embarrassment to the company's executive branch." "If you want an embarrassment, you don't need to go any further than Heaven," Rhaine insinuated. "She's my transgender girlfriend and we have rocking sex," I blurted out to preempt Rhaine. Heaven's eyes flew open; Joshua looked totally nonplussed. "Did you buy her in a Manila slum?" Josh asked me dryly. "Ahh, no?" I stammered. "Oh, that's alright, then," Uncle Josh mused. "I mean, once I had to fly a fourteen-year-old Tanzanian princess back to her home and explain to her parents why she and Victor weren't really married." He looked at Heaven, "Besides, she's clearly an adult and we could do far worse with photo opportunities." "His father dated his share of actresses and models before he settled down and I have every reason to believe Zane will be just as much trouble before some woman steals his heart and reins him in," Uncle Joshua related. "Too late," Rio snickered, but I cut her off with a painful elbow to the ribs. "Ow!" "That would be me," Christina stood and declared proudly. Josh looked her over. "Little lady, I hope you have patience, iron resolve, and the will to exert them both in equal measure," he informed her. "I am not sure I want him yet," Christina retorted. "Ah, then you are intelligent as well," Josh smiled. "Please make sure that if you do marry, you don't murder him until you have a child. Otherwise, the inheritance will be a bear. I like Jill but she comes from a family of nitwits," Josh continued. "That won't be a problem," Rio grinned evilly. "Zane's adopted a daughter since coming to FFU." "Iona is not my daughter," I snarled at Rio, "but I could do worse than making her my heir." Instead of being shocked, Josh rolled his shoulders. "I'll get the paperwork to you next week." "Are you sure you want to do that to Ms. Beckett?" Christina asked me. "Who else would be saint enough to deal with Rio if I was gone?" I explained. "Just for that, you get to wear the ball-gag and restraints next time," Rio warned me. "Mr. Coppersmith?" an attendant from the Board meeting asked when she poked her head out of the conference room. Her eyes flitted from me to my 'Uncle', locking on him. He nodded and followed her into the room. "Umm, he looks like my first husband," Rio mused. "I'm sure his wife, children, and grandchildren will take to that without protest," I joked. "Fine; I'll settle for being his mistress," Rio sulked. The Inquisition "Okay, I am missing something," Rhaine spoke up. "What is going on, Zane? Now that you know Heaven is a guy, how can the two of you still be going out together? You are not gay." "Rhaine, I already knew about Heaven before we actually had intercourse, though I admit to being attracted to her before then," I responded. "But, he's a guy. What do you do?" Rhaine wondered out loud with a quizzical look on her face. "Rhaine," Christina chimed in, "what kind of sex do you think Zane has been having with all the women he takes to bed? He's not taking their virginity, after all." "Oh, that's sick!" Simone declared. "Simone, have you ever had anal sex?" Rio grumbled. "God, no, that's gross," Simone said indignantly. "So what was it like when you walked the Dolorosa?" Rio queried. I was pretty stunned Rio even knew what the path that Jesus took to Golgotha was called. "What? I've never been to Israel," Simone answered. "I bet you'd like to go and I'd bet you think you'd like it," Rio grinned. "Yes, I would want to go, and I know it would be spiritual, but this has nothing to do with homosexuality being wrong," Simone struck back. "Listen, you stuck up bitch," Rio kept grinning, "Jesus was a pretty smart Son of God so we would assume if something was really important to him, he'd have brought it up before the Romans gakked him. Seriously, how long does it take to say 'homosexuality is wrong; no more butt-sex'?" Rio beamed vile unpleasantness at Simone. "You are an immoral soul," Rhaine jumped in. "If that is how you want to describe someone who is honest, fearless, and who thinks for themselves, then I guess Rio and I are both immoral souls," I defended my best buddy. "Count me in," Christina raised her hand. "Me, too," Hannah and Heaven joined in our little heresy. "Hannah, how can you go down the same way they are?" Rhaine complained. "Heaven is gay and Christina has lied for her since the beginning; Rio is a criminal; and Zane is, a boy." "Listen, Rhaine, I don't claim to understand what is going on with Heaven and Zane but I figure if God is pissed, he'll let them know," Hannah stated. "In the past two weeks, short of dodging you and your enforcers, I haven't known Rio to do anything wrong. She's served her time so we should forgive her and give her a chance. St Paul started out persecuting early Christians before he saw the light. What would have happened if Jesus hadn't given him a second chance?" Hannah sighed. "How could I do less?" "And Zane, face it, he's eye-candy, and I've got a list of ten different things I want to do with him when my time to have him for Handmaiden's Duty comes up," she finished with a grin. "Just once I'd like to have a girl here tell me I'm smart, or funny, or that I have a nice personality," I griped. "But No, it is always 'he's got a fifteen inch cock as thick as his forearm; he can screw for two hours straight; or that I have a prehensile tongue that can tickle the ovaries and bring a girl to multiple orgasms." Simone and Hannah's eyes grew larger as my gross exaggerations persisted. "It's not fifteen inches long," countered Rhaine decisively. Simone missed it. "How do you know how big it is?" Hannah clearly didn't. "I, Rhaine choked. "I was coming out of the shower when Rhaine, Joy Jefferson, and Mercy Chaplain intercepted me. My towel accidently fell off and she got a brief view," I volunteered. Rhaine's look of surprise became one of veiled thanks. "Because it wasn't like Rhaine wanted that massive piece of meat rubbing between her legs until she cried out in ecstasy or anything like that," Rio teased. "That's enough," I cautioned Rio, and put an arm around her waist to pull her in. That calmed things down until we were all called into the meeting. Uncle Josh was sitting against the near wall. Against the North wall sat Ms. Lane and a dark-haired fortyish woman with reading glasses I didn't recognize. They both were taking notes. On the South Wall sat a different woman, early thirties with short black hair and what I could best describe as a casual lethality. Both new women looked over us newcomers but lingered on Christina, Heaven, and myself. Looking at the eight men on the Board of Directors was rather anticlimactic comparatively. "Ms. Ritchie and Buchanan, we have decided to uphold Chancellor Bazz's decision to annul the last election of Senior Class President. The matter will be decided during Freshman elections in October. We find both of your behavior to date this semester to be deplorable and a sad example to your fellow seniors. Do you have any comments? Ms. Buchanan?" "Directors, what do we do if the Chancellor once again annuls the elections?" Christina asked. "You appeal the action to the new Vice-Chancellor, Doctor Victoria Scarlett," the head of the board directed our attention to the woman sitting with Ms. Lane. As if my life wasn't hell already. "Oh, you would so do her," Rio whispered to me with her insane grin. I was so busy praying that no one heard her that I missed Simone being read the riot act next. She'd be facing re-election in a few weeks too, a fact she was distinctly upset by. Hannah was given the same news but her reaction was to flick her hair over one shoulder and give a bored sigh. "What was that, Ms. Cartwright?" the Head Director grilled her. "Reverence, Purity, Integrity, this is what our school supposedly stands for," Hannah faced the man down. "I can vote and fight for my country but you are treating us like children, Sir. The Chancellor was wrong and we fought back against her tyranny because that was the only choice our Christian moral code left us." "It is hardly Christian to physically attack your fellow students, Ms. Cartwright," he shot back. "I didn't tell any of my class to attack anyone but I admit that I punched two girls who I knew attacked other students," she admitted. "I figured it was time for a little Old Testament 'Wrath of the Israelites' kind of thing." "Your intransience is not encouraging," a different man on the board stated. "I apologize, Sir. I was hoping my love of justice would not be misunderstood," she sighed. "Hannah, I'm voting for you as my class president," Rio leaned forward and addressed Hannah. "You can't, Rio; you are a freshman and I'm a sophomore," Hannah grinned back at her. As far as I could tell, this was the most either had ever said to the other. "Obviously you've never heard of gerrymandering and ballot box stuffing," Rio snickered. "This is neither the time to joke nor a subject to joke about, Ms. Talon," the Chairman said crossly. "Sorry, Sir," Rio beamed. "I wasn't trying to be frivolous; elections are a good thing. I'm all for seeing more of the girls here, to see them get excited and come together for their mutual enjoyment, I swear I do." While that seemed to satisfy the Board, Hannah had to look down at her lap and Heaven developed a sudden coughing fit. "Um, um, Vickers, umm, you represent quite a quandary. We suspect you lied on your application to this school three years ago and you absolutely understood you would not have been admitted if you had been honest with us," the Chairman of the Board declared. Heaven shivered so I took one of her hands while Christina took the other. Our motions were noted but I doubt the three of us cared. "Now, Vickers, we could deal with this matter if you would submit to a medical examination," he continued. "Why?" Christina replied. "Is every other applicant to this school required to do the same?" "No other student has their gender called into question," a third board member informed us. "She is not going to go along with this blatantly discriminatory policy," Christina retorted. "If I may," Doctor Scarlett raised her hand. After a moment the Chairman nodded. "Mr. Braxton, as a man and someone with a confessed familiarity with Heaven Vickers, would you assert that said person is a woman?" "She's more than woman enough for me," I quickly answered. "Since it is clear that I have the lowest moral threshold in this room, it isn't going to make anyone think less of me if I attest that I've seen Heaven naked and she's got all the girlie parts I like," Rio threw her soul into the struggle. Heaven virtually froze up at that declaration. "Are, are you saying that you've seen Umm, Vickers naked?" the second director stuttered. "Dude," Rio scoffed, "we have communal showers here. Seeing a girl naked is hardly a rare occurrence. Since you seem like a kindred kinky soul, I'll let you know that I've seen Heaven under the sheets and I can give that body my pseudo-lesbian seal of approval." "Have you had homosexual relations?" the Chairman gasped. "With Heaven, definitely not," Rio swore with an upraised hand. "As for anyone else, what does it matter?" she joked. "You already think I'm a whore." "You should watch your language," the third director warned Rio. I put my hand on her stomach to hold her back from saying something that would only make it worse for her. "To the bitter end," she winked at me. "To the bitter end," I smirked back. She was taking one for the team; drawing off the discussion about Heaven by shocking the Board. Unfortunately, I wasn't alone in seeing that. "Mr. Chairman," Doctor Scarlett addressed the Head of the Board, "perhaps we could return to the agenda if you want to stay on schedule." "Very well," the man allowed. "Umm, Vickers, this matter isn't over but since we do not have conclusive proof about your gender, your application will remain under review." "Thank you," Heaven replied softly. "Don't thank us," the man spat. "Your deviancy will reveal itself soon enough. Evil can never hide from God's Truth." "God is with us," I glowered back. I wasn't winning any friends on the far side of the table. "Your time is coming, Mr. Braxton," the Chairman retorted. "Ms. Talon, we find it miraculous that you haven't racked up more infractions in your short time here. Now, your parents and this board agreed, upon your admittance, that you would live with the strictest discipline and you've attempted every trick in the book to circumvent those intentions." "They did this to me on purpose," Rio moaned over the revelation of her parents' role in events. They'd given the Chancellor and Dana Gorman carte blanche in dealing with Rio. "Nothing has changed," I whispered to Rio. She turned and looked at me with tear-brimmed eyes. She nodded once in understanding. "A special guardian will be assigned to see to your physical and spiritual security," he continued. "Who?" Rio questioned quietly. "Administration will decide on who is most appropriate," he responded snidely. "Now for Mr. Braxton." "I would like to say how much we appreciate you ladies and gentlemen taking time out of your busy schedules to deal with matters here today," I interrupted. I earned several glares for my effort. "Mr. Braxton, you are an unfortunate aberration that should never have been allowed to happen. All disruptions that have happened in the past few weeks can be laid at your feet," he opened with. I raised my hand. The man opened his mouth to continue but seemed annoyed with my gesture. "Yes, Mr. Braxton?" "Sir, how did you come to this conclusion? I'm one guy, and a freshman at that," I countered. "You are the man, of course," the Chairman snorted. "It is only natural that the women of this campus would follow your masculine authority no matter how unfounded and perverse." Wait, did he just call every woman in this room mindless sheep? "Still, we are caught in the same quandary that left you here in the first place. Since we have already isolated you in a Solarium, you will also be assigned a guardian," he grumbled. "Oh, okay," I shrugged. "What happens to Dana Gorman?" "Ms. Gorman has been terminated," he shrugged back. "But it wasn't her fault. I'm no fan; she did knock me out during a practice session once after all," I pointed out. "She is good for this school, though." "We have a new Head of Security and the Athletics Department is being suspended for the rest of the semester," the Chairman informed us. "That would be the neo-fascist in black at the end of the table," I directed my attention to the lone woman on the south end of the table. "Ending our sports programs would be a serious mistake for the morale of the school. Ms. Gorman has done a bang-up job and it would show real concern for the students at this school if you would keep her on as Athletics Dean." "Ask around to any of the hundreds of students who participate; ask Rhaine, she's worked closely with the Coach before," I begged. I had no idea which way Rhaine would jump but she was the only trump I had to play. The big guy didn't seem inclined to listen to Rhaine but that didn't stop her. "Coach Gorman gives every girl an active outlet for our energy," Rhaine volunteered. "She also allowed the reliable elements of the student body to aid with security. It was a shame that Zane's masculinity unbalanced the school populace; the student body does not blame her for what Zane and Christina did." "She should hardly be rewarded for such a catastrophic loss of control," the second director stated. "Reinstating Coach Gorman as Athletics Dean would save us the need for creating new creative programs to provide for the physical well-being of the girls," Doctor Scarlett suggested. "This is a matter for the Board to discuss," the Chairman announced. "You students are released to return to your dorms. Thank you for your attendance. Mr. Braxton and Ms. Talon, you will be assigned your guardians before you arrive at breakfast tomorrow." We took that as our clue to leave. We made it out of the room and almost out of the building. "A moment, Mr. Braxton, Ms. Buchanan," the short-haired woman called out. I turned and met her while the rest of the group slowed down behind me as we started to exit the building. "I'm Gabrielle Black, your new Head of Campus Security. I thought it was important to meet you before classes formally resume." She stepped up and shook Christina's and my hand while we studied her. "You may call me Zane," I offered. "I hope this means we are getting off on the right foot despite that whole neo-fascist thing." "I don't see any panty lines 'Gestapo' Black," Rio interjected herself. "Have you gone commando today?" "I usually make someone earn the right to find out, Ms. Talon," she gave Rio a shark-like grin. "I really don't see how that is relevant and I really don't want to know," Hannah spoke up. "Come on, Zane," Rio persisted, "give it a shot." "Hannah doesn't want to go there so why don't we say good-bye to the nice lady and go," I responded. "What exactly is Ms. Talon asking for?" Ms. Black inquired. "Apparently Zane has a thing for figuring out women and woman's lingerie," Christina said with a degree of caution. "I hope Ms. Cartwright will forgive me but I'd like to test this little trick," Gabrielle requested. "If Hannah doesn't mind," I asked the sophomore class President (sort of). She nodded so I looked to Gabrielle. "Give me a second," I requested. "What's wrong, Zane?" Rio wondered when I didn't immediately start reeling off the facts. "She's good at lying," I informed the group, "but, " "But?" Gabrielle smirked. "Lycra, form-fitting, probably a custom job, dull black, and I guess, with some sort of synthetic weave," I stumbled along. "I've never seen anything precisely like it." "I have," Simone muttered. "A woman in the Presidential Detail for the Secret Service talked about having o

In this personal growth podcast episode, host Monica Packer and author Catherine Price dive deep into how to be happier through the science and practice of true fun. They explore what gets in the way of joy, like perfectionism, guilt, and endless responsibilities and share small, practical steps to rediscover your spark. Whether you're seeking personal development, curious about daily habits that actually improve your life, or searching for the best podcasts for self improvement, this conversation will leave you inspired to bring more playfulness and self-compassion into your days. Perfect for moms craving self care for mothers and anyone learning how to stop being a perfectionist, this self help podcast reminds you that personal growth and development don't have to be serious, they can start with a little fun. Listen to the full episode here: https://www.aboutprogress.com/blog/you-need-to-have-more-fun Sign up as a Supporter to get access to our private, premium, ad-free podcast, More Personal. Episodes air each Friday! More for Moms Conference Leave a rating and review Check out my ⁠workshops⁠! Follow About Progress on YOUTUBE! Book Launch Committee Free DSL Training Full Show Notes Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

** There are less than 10 tickets remaining for the live recording of Uncommons with Catherine McKenna on Thursday Oct 2nd. Register for free here. **On this two-part episode of Uncommons, Nate digs into Bill C-2 and potential impacts on privacy, data surveillance and sharing with US authorities, and asylum claims and refugee protections.In the first half, Nate is joined by Kate Robertson, senior researcher at the University of Toronto's Citizen Lab. Kate's career has spanned criminal prosecutions, regulatory investigations, and international human rights work with the United Nations in Cambodia. She has advocated at every level of court in Canada, clerked at the Supreme Court, and has provided pro bono services through organizations like Human Rights Watch Canada. Her current research at Citizen Lab examines the intersection of technology, privacy, and the law.In part two, Nate is joined by Adam Sadinsky, a Toronto-based immigration and refugee lawyer and co-chair of the Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers' Advocacy Committee. Adam has represented clients at every level of court in Canada, including the Supreme Court, and was co-counsel in M.A.A. v. D.E.M.E. (2020 ONCA 486) and Canadian Council for Refugees v. Canada (2023 SCC 17).Further Reading:Unspoken Implications A Preliminary Analysis of Bill C-2 and Canada's Potential Data-Sharing Obligations Towards the United States and Other Countries - Kate Robertson, Citizen LabKate Robertson Chapters:00:00 Introduction & Citizen Lab03:00 Bill C-2 and the Strong Borders Act08:00 Data Sharing and Human Rights Concerns15:00 The Cloud Act & International Agreements22:00 Real-World Examples & Privacy Risks28:00 Parliamentary Process & Fixing the BillAdam Sadinsky Chapters:33:33 Concerns Over Asylum Eligibility in Canada36:30 Government Goals and Fairness for Refugee Claimants39:00 Changing Country Conditions and New Risks41:30 The Niagara Falls Example & Other Unfair Exclusions44:00 Frivolous vs. Legitimate Claims in the Refugee System47:00 Clearing the Backlog with Fair Pathways50:00 Broad Powers Granted to the Government52:00 Privacy Concerns and Closing ReflectionsPart 1: Kate RobertsonNate Erskine-Smith00:00-00:01Kate, thanks for joining me.Kate Robertson00:01-00:01Thanks for having me.Nate Erskine-Smith00:02-00:15So I have had Ron Debert on the podcast before. So for people who really want to go back into the archive, they can learn a little bit about what the Citizen Lab is. But for those who are not that interested, you're a senior researcher there. What is the Citizen Lab?Kate Robertson00:16-01:00Well, it's an interdisciplinary research lab based at University of Toronto. It brings together researchers from a technology standpoint, political science, lawyers like myself and other disciplines to examine the intersection between information and communication technologies, law, human rights, and global security. And over time, it's published human rights reports about some of the controversial and emerging surveillance technologies of our time, including spyware or AI-driven technologies. And it's also really attempted to produce a thoughtful research that helps policymakers navigate some of these challenges and threats.Nate Erskine-Smith01:01-02:50That's a very good lead into this conversation because here we have Bill C-2 coming before Parliament for debate this fall, introduced in June, at the beginning of June. And it's called the Strong Borders Act in short, but it touches, I started counting, it's 15 different acts that are touched by this omnibus legislation. The government has laid out a rationale around strengthening our borders, keeping our borders secure, combating transnational organized crime, stopping the flow of illegal fentanyl, cracking down on money laundering, a litany of things that I think most people would look at and say broadly supportive of stopping these things from happening and making sure we're enhancing our security and the integrity of our immigration system and on. You, though, have provided some pretty thoughtful and detailed rational legal advice around some of the challenges you see in the bill. You're not the only one. There are other challenges on the asylum changes we're making. There are other challenges on lawful access and privacy. You've, though, highlighted, in keeping with the work of the Citizen Lab, the cross-border data sharing, the challenges with those data sharing provisions in the bill. It is a bit of a deep dive and a little wonky, but you've written a preliminary analysis of C2 and Canada's potential data sharing obligations towards the U.S. and other countries, unspoken implications, and you published it mid-June. It is incredibly relevant given the conversation we're having this fall. So if you were to at a high level, and we'll go ahead and some of the weeds, but at a high level articulate the main challenges you see in the legislation from the standpoint that you wrote in unspoken implications. Walk us through them.Kate Robertson02:51-06:15Well, before C2 was tabled for a number of years now, myself and other colleagues at the lab have been studying new and evolving ways that we're seeing law enforcement data sharing and cross-border cooperation mechanisms being put to use in new ways. We have seen within this realm some controversial data sharing frameworks under treaty protocols or bilateral agreement mechanisms with the United States and others, which reshape how information is shared with law enforcement in foreign jurisdictions and what kinds of safeguards and mechanisms are applied to that framework to protect human rights. And I think as a really broad trend, what is probably most, the simplest way to put it is that what we're really seeing is a growing number of ways that borders are actually being exploited to the detriment of human rights standards. Rights are essentially falling through the cracks. This can happen either through cross-border joint investigations between agencies in multiple states in ways that essentially go forum shopping for the laws and the most locks, that's right. You can also see foreign states that seek to leverage cooperation tools in democratic states in order to track, surveil, or potentially even extradite human rights activists and dissidents, journalists that are living in exile outside their borders. And what this has really come out of is a discussion point that has been made really around the world that if crime is going to become more transient across borders, that law enforcement also needs to have a greater freedom to move more seamlessly across borders. But what often is left out of that framing is that human rights standards that are really deeply entrenched in our domestic law systems, they would also need to be concurrently meaningful across borders. And unfortunately, that's not what we're seeing. Canada is going to be facing decisions around this, both within the context of C2 and around it in the coming months and beyond, as we know that it has been considering and in negotiation around a couple of very controversial agreements. One of those, the sort of elephant in the room, so to speak, is that the legislation has been tabled at a time where we know that Canada and the United States have been in negotiations for actually a couple of years around a potential agreement called the CLOUD Act, which would quite literally cede Canada's sovereignty to the United States and law enforcement authorities and give them really a blanket opportunity to directly apply surveillance orders onto entities, both public and private in Canada?Nate Erskine-Smith06:16-07:46Well, so years in the making negotiations, but we are in a very different world with the United States today than we were two years ago. And I was just in, I was in Mexico City for a conference with parliamentarians across the Americas, and there were six Democratic congressmen and women there. One, Chuy Garcia represents Chicago district. He was telling me that he went up to ICE officials and they're masked and he is saying, identify yourself. And he's a congressman. He's saying, identify yourself. What's your ID? What's your badge number? They're hiding their ID and maintaining masks and they're refusing to identify who they are as law enforcement officials, ostensibly refusing to identify who they are to an American congressman. And if they're willing to refuse to identify themselves in that manner to a congressman. I can only imagine what is happening to people who don't have that kind of authority and standing in American life. And that's the context that I see this in now. I would have probably still been troubled to a degree with open data sharing and laxer standards on the human rights side, but all the more troubling, you talk about less democratic jurisdictions and authoritarian regimes. Well, isn't the U.S. itself a challenge today more than ever has been? And then shouldn't we maybe slam the pause button on negotiations like this? Well, you raise a number of really important points. And I think thatKate Robertson07:47-09:54there have been warning signs and worse that have long preceded the current administration and the backsliding that you're commenting upon since the beginning of 2025. Certainly, I spoke about the increasing trend of the exploitation of borders. I mean, I think we're seeing signs that really borders are actually, in essence, being used as a form of punishment, even in some respects, which I would say it is when you say to someone who would potentially exercise due process rights against deportation and say if you exercise those rights, you'll be deported to a different continent from your home country where your rights are perhaps less. And that's something that UN human rights authorities have been raising alarm bells about around the deportation of persons to third countries, potentially where they'll face risks of torture even. But these patterns are all too reminiscent of what we saw in the wake of 9-11 and the creation of black sites where individuals, including Canadian persons, were detained or even tortured. And really, this stems from a number of issues. But what we have identified in analyzing potential cloud agreement is really just the momentous decision that the Canadian government would have to make to concede sovereignty to a country which is in many ways a pariah for refusing to acknowledge extraterritorial international human rights obligations to persons outside of its borders. And so to invite that type of direct surveillance and exercise of authority within Canada's borders was a country who has refused for a very long time, unlike Canada and many other countries around the world, has refused to recognize through its courts and through its government any obligation to protect the international human rights of people in Canada.Nate Erskine-Smith09:56-10:21And yet, you wrote, some of the data and surveillance powers in Bill C-2 read like they could have been drafted by U.S. officials. So you take the frame that you're just articulating around with what the U.S. worldview is on this and has been and exacerbated by obviously the current administration. But I don't love the sound of it reading like it was drafted by AmericanKate Robertson10:22-12:43officials. Well, you know, it's always struck me as a really remarkable story, to be frank. You know, to borrow Dickens' tale of two countries, which is that since the 1990s, Canada's Supreme Court has been charting a fundamentally different course from the constitutional approach that's taken the United States around privacy and surveillance. And it really started with persons looking at what's happening and the way that technology evolves and how much insecurity people feel when they believe that surveillance is happening without any judicial oversight. And looking ahead and saying, you know what, if we take this approach, it's not going to go anywhere good. And that's a really remarkable decision that was made and has continued to be made by the court time and time again, even as recently as last year, the court has said we take a distinct approach from the United States. And it had a lot of foresight given, you know, in the 1990s, technology is nowhere near what it is today. Of course. And yet in the text of C2, we see provisions that, you know, I struggle when I hear proponents of the legislation describe it as balanced and in keeping with the Charter, when actually they're proposing to essentially flip the table on principles that have been enshrined for decades to protect Canadians, including, for example, the notion that third parties like private companies have the authority to voluntarily share our own. information with the police without any warrant. And that's actually the crux of what has become a fundamentally different approach that I think has really led Canada to be a more resilient country when it comes to technological change. And I sometimes describe us as a country that is showing the world that, you know, it's possible to do both. You can judicially supervise investigations that are effective and protect the public. And the sky does not fall if you do so. And right now we're literally seeing and see to something that I think is really unique and important made in Canada approach being potentially put on the chopping block.Nate Erskine-Smith12:44-13:29And for those listening who might think, okay, well, at a high level, I don't love expansive data sharing and reduced human rights protections, but practically, are there examples? And you pointed to in your writing right from the hop, the Arar case, and you mentioned the Supreme Court, but they, you know, they noted that it's a chilling example of the dangers of unconditional information sharing. And the commission noted to the potentially risky exercise of open ended, unconditional data sharing as well. But that's a real life example, a real life Canadian example of what can go wrong in a really horrible, tragic way when you don't have guardrails that focus and protect human rights.Kate Robertson13:31-14:56You're right to raise that example. I raise it. It's a really important one. It's one that is, I think, part of, you know, Canada has many commendable and important features to its framework, but it's not a perfect country by any means. That was an example of just information sharing with the United States itself that led to a Canadian citizen being rendered and tortured in a foreign country. Even a more recent example, we are not the only country that's received requests for cooperation from a foreign state in circumstances where a person's life is quite literally in jeopardy. We have known from public reporting that in the case of Hardeep Najjar, before he was ultimately assassinated on Canadian soil, an Interpol Red Notice had been issued about him at the request of the government of India. And the government had also requested his extradition. And we know that there's a number of important circumstances that have been commented upon by the federal government in the wake of those revelations. And it's provoked a really important discussion around the risks of foreign interference. But it is certainly an example where we know that cooperation requests have been made in respect of someone who's quite literally and tragically at risk of loss of life.Nate Erskine-Smith14:57-16:07And when it comes to the, what we're really talking about is, you mentioned the Cloud Act. There's also, I got to go to the notes because it's so arcane, but the second additional protocol to the Budapest Convention. These are, in that case, it's a treaty that Canada would ratify. And then this piece of legislation would in some way create implementing authorities for. I didn't fully appreciate this until going through that. And I'd be interested in your thoughts just in terms of the details of these. And we can make it as wonky as you like in terms of the challenges that these treaties offer. I think you've already articulated the watering down of traditional human rights protections and privacy protections we would understand in Canadian law. But the transparency piece, I didn't fully appreciate either. And as a parliamentarian, I probably should have because there's... Until reading your paper, I didn't know that there was a policy on tabling of treaties That really directs a process for introducing treaty implementing legislation. And this process also gets that entirely backwards.Kate Robertson16:09-17:01That's right. And, you know, in researching and studying what to do with, you know, what I foresee is potentially quite a mess if we were to enter into a treaty that binds us to standards that are unconstitutional. You know, that is a diplomatic nightmare of sorts, but it's also one that would create, you know, a constitutional entanglement of that's really, I think, unprecedented in Canada. But nevertheless, that problem is foreseen if one or both of these were to go ahead. And I refer to that in the cloud agreement or the 2AP. But this policy, as I understand it, I believe it was tabled by then Foreign Affairs Minister Maxime Bernier, as he was at the time, by Prime Minister Harper's government.Nate Erskine-Smith17:02-17:04He's come a long way.Kate Robertson17:07-18:12I believe that the rationale for the policy was quite self-evident at the time. I mean, if you think about the discussions that are happening right now, for example, in Quebec around digital sovereignty and the types of entanglements that U.S. legal process might impact around Quebec privacy legislation. Other issues around the AI space in Ontario or our health sector in terms of technology companies in Ontario. These treaties really have profound implications at a much broader scale than the federal government and law enforcement. And that's not even getting to Indigenous sovereignty issues. And so the policy is really trying to give a greater voice to the range of perspectives that a federal government would consider before binding Canada internationally on behalf of all of these layers of decision making without perhaps even consulting with Parliament First.Nate Erskine-Smith18:12-19:15So this is, I guess, one struggle. There's the specific concerns around watering down protections, but just on process. This just bothered me in particular because we're going to undergo this process in the fall. And so I printed out the Strong Borders Act, Government of Canada Strengthens Border Security and the backgrounder to the law. And going through it, it's six pages when I print it out. And it doesn't make mention of the Budapest Convention. It doesn't make mention of the Cloud Act. It doesn't make mention of any number of rationales for this legislation. But it doesn't make mention that this is in part, at least, to help implement treaties that are under active negotiation. not only gets backwards the policy, but one would have thought, especially I took from your paper, that the Department has subsequently, the Justice Department has subsequently acknowledged that this would in fact help the government implement these treaties. So surely it shouldKate Robertson19:15-19:57be in the background. I would have thought so. As someone that has been studying these treaty frameworks very carefully, it was immediately apparent to me that they're at least relevant. It was put in the briefing as a question as to whether or not the actual intent of some of these new proposed powers is to put Canada in a position to ratify this treaty. And the answer at that time was yes, that that is the intent of them. And it was also stated that other cooperation frameworks were foreseeable.Nate Erskine-Smith19:59-20:57What next? So here I am, one member of parliament, and oftentimes through these processes, we're going to, there's the objective of the bill, and then there's the details of the bill, and we're going to get this bill to a committee process. I understand the intention is for it to be a pretty fulsome committee hearing, and it's an omnibus bill. So what should happen is the asylum components should get kicked to the immigration committee. The pieces around national security should obviously get kicked to public safety committee, and there should be different committees that deal with their different constituent elements that are relevant to those committees. I don't know if it will work that way, but that would be a more rational way of engaging with a really broad ranging bill. Is there a fix for this though? So are there amendments that could cure it or is it foundationally a problem that is incurable?Kate Robertson20:58-21:59Well, I mean, I think that for myself as someone studying this area, it's obvious to me that what agreements may be struck would profoundly alter the implications of pretty much every aspect of this legislation. And that stems in part from just how fundamental it would be if Canada were to cede its sovereignty to US law enforcement agencies and potentially even national security agencies as well. But obviously, the provisions themselves are quite relevant to these frameworks. And so it's clear that Parliament needs to have the opportunity to study how these provisions would actually be used. And I am still left on knowing how that would be possible without transparencyNate Erskine-Smith22:00-22:05about what is at stake in terms of potential agreements. Right. What have we agreed to? If thisKate Robertson22:05-24:57is implementing legislation what are we implementing certainly it's a significantly different proposition now even parking the international data sharing context the constitutional issues that are raised in the parts of the bill that i'm able to study within my realm of expertise which is in the context of omnibus legislation not the entire bill of course yeah um but it's hard to even know where to begin um the the the powers that are being put forward you know i kind of have to set the table a bit to understand to explain why the table is being flipped yeah yeah we're at a time where um you know a number of years ago i published about the growing use of algorithms and AI and surveillance systems in Canada and gaps in the law and the need to bring Canada's oversight into the 21st century. Those gaps now, even five years later, are growing into chasms. And we've also had multiple investigative reports by the Privacy Commissioner of Canada being sent to Parliament about difficulties it's had reviewing the activities of law enforcement agencies, difficulties it's had with private sector companies who've been non-compliant with privacy legislation, and cooperating at all with the regulator. And we now have powers being put forward that would essentially say, for greater certainty, it's finders keepers rules. Anything in the public domain can be obtained and used by police without warrant. And while this has been put forward as a balancing of constitutional norms, the Supreme Court has said the opposite. It's not an all or nothing field. And in the context of commercial data brokers that are harvesting and selling our data, including mental health care that we might seek online, AI-fueled surveillance tools that are otherwise unchecked in the Canadian domain. I think this is a frankly stunning response to the context of the threats that we face. And I really think it sends and creates really problematic questions around what law enforcement and other government agencies are expected to do in the context of future privacy reviews when essentially everything that's been happening is supposedly being green lit with this new completely un-nuanced power. I should note you are certainly not alone in theseNate Erskine-Smith24:57-27:07concerns. I mean, in addition to the paper that I was talking about at the outset that you've written as an analyst that alongside Ron Deaver in the Citizen Lab. But there's another open letter you've signed that's called for the withdrawal of C2, but it's led by open media. I mean, BCCLA, British Columbia Civil Liberties Association, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, the Canadian Council for Refugees, QP, International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group, Penn Canada, the Center for Free Expression, privacy experts like Colin Bennett, who I used be on the Privacy Committee and that were pretty regular witnesses. You mentioned the Privacy Commissioner has not signed the open letter, but the Privacy Commissioner of both Canada and the Information Commissioner of Ontario, who's also responsible for privacy. In the context of the treaties that you were mentioning, the Budapest Convention in particular, they had highlighted concerns absent updated, modernized legislation. And at the federal level, we have had in fits and starts attempts to modernize our private sector privacy legislation. But apart from a consultation paper at one point around the Privacy Act, which would apply to public sector organizations, there's really been no serious effort to table legislation or otherwise modernize that. So am I right to say, you know, we are creating a myriad number of problems with respect to watering down privacy and human rights protections domestically and especially in relation to foreign governments with relation to data of our citizens here. And we could potentially cure those problems, at least in part, if we modernize our privacy legislation and our privacy protections and human rights protections here at home. But we are, as you say, a gap to chasm. We are so woefully behind in that conversation. It's a bit of an odd thing to pass the open-ended data sharing and surveillance piece before you even have a conversation around updating your privacy protections.Kate Robertson27:07-28:13Yeah, I mean, frankly, odd, I would use the word irresponsible. We know that these tools, it's becoming increasingly well documented how impactful they are for communities and individuals, whether it's wrongful arrests, whether it's discriminatory algorithms. really fraught tools to say the least. And it's not as if Parliament does not have a critical role here. You know, in decades past, to use the example of surveillance within Quebec, which was ultimately found to have involved, you know, years of illegal activity and surveillance activities focused on political organizing in Quebec. And that led to Parliament striking an inquiry and ultimately overhauling the mandate of the RCMP. There were recommendations made that the RCMP needs to follow the law. That was an actual recommendation.Nate Erskine-Smith28:14-28:16I'm sorry that it needs to be said, but yeah.Kate Robertson28:16-29:05The safeguards around surveillance are about ensuring that when we use these powers, they're being used appropriately. And, you know, there isn't even, frankly, a guarantee that judicial oversight will enable this to happen. And it certainly provides comfort to many Canadians. But we know, for example, that there were phones being watched of journalists in Montreal with, unfortunately, judicial oversight not even that many years ago. So this is something that certainly is capable of leading to more abuses in Canada around political speech and online activity. And it's something that we need to be protective against and forward thinking about.Nate Erskine-Smith29:05-29:58Yeah, and the conversation has to hold at the same time considerations of public safety, of course, but also considerations for due process and privacy and human rights protections. These things, we have to do both. If we don't do both, then we're not the democratic society we hold ourselves out as. I said odd, you said irresponsible. You were forceful in your commentary, but the open letter that had a number of civil society organizations, I mentioned a few, was pretty clear to say the proposed legislation reflects little more than shameful appeasement of the dangerous rhetoric and false claims about our country emanating from the United States. It's a multi-pronged assault on the basic human rights and freedoms Canada holds dear. Got anything else to add?Kate Robertson30:00-30:56I mean, the elephant in the room is the context in which the legislation has been tabled within. And I do think that we're at a time where we are seeing democratic backsliding around the world, of course, and rising digital authoritarianism. And these standards really don't come out of the air. They're ones that need to be protected. And I do find myself, when I look at some of the really un-nuanced powers that are being put forward, I do find myself asking whether or not those risks are really front and center when we're proposing to move forward in this way. And I can only defer to experts from, as you said, hundreds of organizations that have called attention towards pretty much every aspect of this legislation.Nate Erskine-Smith30:57-31:44And I will have the benefit of engaging folks on the privacy side around lawful access and around concerns around changes to the asylum claim and due process from the Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers. But as we do see this move its way through Parliament, if we see it move its way through Parliament in the fall, if they're recognizing that the call was for withdrawal, but also recognizing a political reality where if it is to pass, we want to make sure we are improving it as much as possible. If there are amendments along the way, if there are other people you think that I should engage with, please do let me know because this is before us. It's an important piece of legislation. And if it's not to be withdrawn, we better improve it as much as possible.Kate Robertson31:46-32:02I appreciate that offer and really commend you for covering the issue carefully. And I really look forward to more engagement from yourself and other colleagues in parliament as legislation is considered further. I expect you will be a witness at committee,Nate Erskine-Smith32:02-32:06but thanks very much for the time. I really appreciate it. Thanks for having me.Part 2: Adam SadinskyChapters:33:33 Concerns Over Asylum Eligibility in Canada36:30 Government Goals and Fairness for Refugee Claimants39:00 Changing Country Conditions and New Risks41:30 The Niagara Falls Example & Other Unfair Exclusions44:00 Frivolous vs. Legitimate Claims in the Refugee System47:00 Clearing the Backlog with Fair Pathways50:00 Broad Powers Granted to the Government52:00 Privacy Concerns and Closing ReflectionsNate Erskine-Smith33:33-33:35Adam, thanks for joining me.Adam Sadinsky33:35-33:36Thanks for having me, Nate.Nate Erskine-Smith33:36-33:57We've had a brief discussion about this, by way of my role as an MP, but, for those who are listening in, they'll have just heard a rundown of all the concerns that the Citizen Lab has with data surveillance and data sharing with law enforcement around the world. You've got different concerns about C2 and you represent the Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers. What are your concerns here?Adam Sadinsky33:57-35:31I mean, our biggest concern with this bill is new provisions that create additional categories of folks ineligible to claim asylum in Canada. And specifically to have their hearings heard at the Immigration and Refugee Board. The biggest one of those categories is definitely, a bar on individuals making refugee claims in Canada one year after they have arrived in Canada, and that's one year, whether they have been in Canada for that whole year or they left at some point and came back. Those folks who have been here, who came more than a year ago, if they now fear persecution and want to make a claim for refugee protection, this bill would shunt them into an inferior system where rather than having a full hearing in their day in court.Their application will be decided by an officer of immigration, alone, sitting in the cubicle, probably, with some papers in front of them. That person is going to make an enormous decision about whether to send that person back home where they feared persecution, torture, death. Our position is that this new form of ineligibility. Is unfair. it doesn't meet the government's goals, as we understand them, and we share, we share the views of organizations like, Citizen Lab, that the bill should be withdrawn. There are other ways to do this, but this bill is fundamentally flawed.Nate Erskine-Smith35:31-35:57Let's talk about government goals. Those looking at the influx of temporary residents in Canada specifically, and I don't, and I don't wanna pick on international students, but we've seen a huge influx of international students just as one category example. And they've said, well, if someone's been here for a year and they didn't claim right away, they didn't come here to claim asylum. Because they would've claimed within that first year, presumably, you know, what's the problem with, uh, with a rule that is really trying to tackle this problem.Adam Sadinsky35:57-38:33The issue is, I mean, Nate, you had mentioned, you know, people who had come to Canada, they didn't initially claim and it didn't initially claim asylum, temporary residents. What do we do about it? I wanna give a couple of examples of people who would be caught by this provision, who fall into that category. But there's legitimate reasons why they might claim more than a year after arriving in Canada. The first is someone who came to Canada, student worker, whatever. At the time they came to Canada, they would've been safe going back home they didn't have a fear of returning back home. But country conditions change and they can change quickly. The Taliban takeover of Afghanistan in 2021, was a stark example there may have been people who came to Canada as students planning to go back to Afghanistan and rebuild their country. As the bill is currently written. If there were to be a situation like that, and there will be some other Afghanistan, there will be some other situation down the line. Those people who weren't afraid when they originally came to Canada and now have a legitimate claim, will have an inferior, process that they go through, one that is riddled with issues, examples of unfairness compared to the refugee, the regular refugee system, and a lack of protection from deportation, pending any appeal.So that's one category. A second category is people who were afraid of going back home when they came to Canada but didn't need to claim asylum because they had another avenue to remain in Canada. So the government advertised, Minister Frazier was saying this often come to Canada, come as a student and there's a well-established pathway. You'll have a study permit, you'll get a post-graduation work permit. This is what the government wanted. The rug has been pulled out from under many of those people. Towards the end of last year when Canada said, okay, it's enough, too many temporary residents. But what about the temporary residents who had a fear of returning home when they came? They went through the system the “right way,” quote unquote. They didn't go to the asylum system. they went through another path. And now they're looking at it. They say, well, you know, I came to Canada to study, but also I'm gay and I'm from a country where, if people know about that, you know, I'll be tortured. Maybe since they've been in Canada, that person in that example, they've been in a relationship, they've been posting on social media with their partner. It is very dangerous so why, why shouldn't that person claim refugee protection through regular means?Nate Erskine-Smith38:33-39:06Is this right on your read of the law as it is written right now, if someone were to come with their family when they're a kid and they were to be in Canada for over a year and then their family were to move back to either the home country or to a different country, and, they wake up as a teenager many years later, they wake up as an adult many years later and their country's falling apart, and they were to flee and come to Canada. By virtue of the fact they've been here for a year as a kid, would that preclude them from making a claim?Adam Sadinsky39:06-39:10It's even worse than that, Nate.Nate Erskine-Smith39:09-39:10Oh, great.Adam Sadinsky39:10-39:47In your example, the family stayed in Canada for more than a year. Yes, absolutely. That person is caught by this provision. But here's who else would be someone comes when they're five years old with their family, on a trip to the United States. during that trip, they decide we want to see the Canadian side of Niagara Falls. They either have a visa or get whatever visa they need, or don't need one. They visit the falls, and at that point that they enter Canada, a clock starts ticking. That never stops ticking. So maybe they came to Canada for two hours.Nate Erskine-Smith39:44-39:45Two hours and you're outta luck.Adam Sadinsky39:45-39:47They go back to the USNate Erskine-Smith39:47-39:47Oh man.Adam Sadinsky39:47-40:09They never come back to Canada again. The way that the bill is written, that clock never stops ticking, right? Their country falls apart. They come back 15 years later. That person is going to have a very different kind of process that they go through, to get protection in Canada, than someone who wouldn't be caught by this bill.Nate Erskine-Smith40:09-40:34Say those are the facts as they are, that's one category. There's another category where I've come as a student, I thought there would be a pathway. I don't really fear persecution in my home country, but I want to stay in Canada we see in this constituency office, as other constituency offices do people come with immigration help or they've got legitimate claims. We see some people come with help with illegitimate claimsAdam Sadinsky40:34-42:46We have to be very careful when we talk about categorizing claims as frivolous. There is no question people make refugee claims in Canada that have no merit. You'll not hear from me, you'll not hear from our organization saying that every 100% of refugee claims made in Canada, are with merit. The issue is how we determine. At that initial stage that you're saying, oh, let's, let's deal quickly with frivolous claims. How do you determine if a claim is frivolous? What if someone, you know, I do a lot of appeal work, we get appeals of claims prepared by immigration consultants, or not even immigration consultants. And, you know, there's a core of a very strong refugee claim there that wasn't prepared properly.Nate Erskine-Smith42:46-42:46Yeah, we see it too. That's a good point.Adam Sadinsky42:46-42:46How that claim was prepared has nothing to do with what the person actually faces back home. We have to be very careful in terms of, quick negative claims, and clearing the decks of what some might think are frivolous claims. But there may be some legitimate and very strong core there. What could be done, and you alluded to this, is there are significant claims in the refugee board's backlog that are very, very strong just based on the countries they come from or the profiles of the individuals who have made those claims, where there are countries that have 99% success rate. And that's not because the board is super generous. It's because the conditions in those countries are very, very bad. And so the government could implement policies and this would be done without legislation to grant pathways for folks from, for example, Eritrea 99ish percent success rate. However, the government wants to deal with that in terms of numbers, but there's no need for the board to spend time determining whether this claim is in the 1%, that doesn't deserve to be accepted. Our view is that 1% being accepted is, a trade off for, a more efficient system.Nate Erskine-Smith42:46-43:30Similarly though, individuals who come into my office and they've been here for more than five years. They have been strong contributors to the community. They have jobs. They're oftentimes connected to a faith organization. They're certainly connected to a community based organization that is going to bat for them. There's, you know, obviously no criminal record in many cases they have other family here. And they've gone through so many appeals at different times. I look at that and I go, throughout Canadian history, there have been different regularization programs. Couldn't you kick a ton of people not a country specific basis, but a category specific basis of over five years, economic contributions, community contributions, no criminal record, you're approved.Adam Sadinsky43:30-44:20Yeah, I'd add to your list of categories, folks who are working in, professions, that Canada needs workers in. give the example of construction. We are facing a housing crisis. So many construction workers are not Canadian. Many of my clients who are refugee claimants waiting for their hearings are working in the construction industry. And the government did that, back in the COVID pandemic, creating what was, what became known as the Guardian Angels Program, where folks who were working in the healthcare sector, on the front lines, combating the pandemic, supporting, folks who needed it, that they were allowed to be taken again out of the refugee queue with a designated, pathway to permanent residents on the basis of the work and the contribution they were doing. All of these could be done.Adam Sadinsky44:20-45:05The refugee system is built on Canada's international obligations under the refugee convention, to claim refugee protection, to claim asylum is a human right. Every person in the world has the right to claim asylum. Individuals who are claiming asylum in Canada are exercising that right. Each individual has their own claim, and that's the real value that the refugee board brings to bear and why Canada has had a gold standard. The refugee system, replicated, around the world, every individual has their day in court, to explain to an expert tribunal why they face persecution. This bill would take that away.Nate Erskine-Smith45:05-46:18Yeah, I can't put my finger on what the other rationale would be though, because why the, why this change now? Well, we have right now, a huge number over a million people who are going to eventually be without status because they're not gonna have a pathway that was originally, that they originally thought would be there. The one frustration I have sometimes in the system is there are people who have come into my office with, the original claim, being unfounded. But then I look at it, and they've been here partly because the process took so long, they've been here for over five years. If you've been here for over five years and you're contributing and you're a member of the community, and now we're gonna kick you out. Like your original claim might have been unfounded, but this is insane. Now you're contributing to this country, and what a broken system. So I guess I'm sympathetic to the need for speed at the front end to ensure that unfounded claims are deemed unfounded and people are deported and legitimate claims are deemed founded, and they can be welcomed. So cases don't continue to come into my office that are over five or over six years long where I go, I don't even care if it was originally unfounded or not. Welcome to Canada. You've been contributing here for six years anyway.Adam Sadinsky46:18-46:33But if I can interject? Even if the bill passes as written, each of these individuals is still going to have what's called a pre-removal risk assessment.Nate Erskine-Smith46:31-46:33They're still gonna have a process. Yeah, exactly.Adam Sadinsky46:33-46:55They're still gonna have a process, and they're still going to wait time. All these people are still in the system. The bill is a bit of a shell game where folks are being just transferred from one process to another and say, oh, wow. Great. Look, we've reduced the backlog at the IRB by however many thousand claims,Nate Erskine-Smith46:53-46:55And we've increased the backlog in the process.Adam Sadinsky46:55-48:25Oh, look at the wait time at IRCC, and I'm sure you have constituents who come into your office and say, I filed a spousal sponsorship application two and a half years ago. I'm waiting for my spouse to come and it's taking so long. IRCC is not immune from processing delays. There doesn't seem to be, along with this bill, a corresponding hiring of hundreds and hundreds more pro officers. So, this backlog and this number of claims is shifting from one place to another. And another point I mentioned earlier within the refugee system within the board, when a person appeals a negative decision, right? Because, humans make decisions and humans make mistakes. And that's why we have legislative appeal processes in the system to allow for mistakes to be corrected. That appeal process happens within the board, and a person is protected from deportation while they're appealing with a pro. With this other system, it's different. The moment that an officer makes a negative decision on a pro that person is now eligible to be deported. CBSA can ask them to show up the next day and get on a plane and go home. Yes, a person can apply for judicial review in the federal court that does not stop their deportation. If they can bring a motion to the court for a stay of removal.Nate Erskine-Smith48:19-48:25You're gonna see a ton of new work for the federal court. You are gonna see double the work for the federal courtAdam Sadinsky48:25-48:39Which is already overburdened. So unless the government is also appointing many, many new judges, and probably hiring more Council Department of Justice, this backlog is going to move from one place to another.Nate Erskine-Smith48:39-48:41It's just gonna be industry whack-a-mole with the backlog.Adam Sadinsky48:41-48:52The only way to clear the backlog is to clear people out of it. There's no fair way to clear folks out of it in a negative way. So the only way to do that is positively.Nate Erskine-Smith48:52-49:37In the limited time we got left, the bill also empowers the governor and council of the cabinet to cancel documents, to suspend documents. And just so I've got this clearer in my mind, so if, for example: say one is a say, one is a student on campus, or say one is on a, on a work permit and one is involved in a protest, and that protest the government deems to be something they don't like. The government could cancel the student's permit on the basis that they were involved in the protest. Is that right? The law? Not to say that this government would do that. But this would allow the government to legally do just that. Am I reading it wrong?Adam Sadinsky49:37-50:46The bill gives broad powers to the government to cancel documents. I think you're reading it correctly. To me, when I read the bill, I don't particularly understand exactly what is envisioned. Where it would, where the government would do this, why a government would want to put this in. But you are right. I would hope this government would not do that, but this government is not going to be in power forever. When you put laws on the books, they can be used by whomever for whatever reason they can they want, that's within how that law is drafted. You know, we saw down south, you know, the secretary of State a few months ago said, okay, we're gonna cancel the permits of everyone from South Sudan, in the US because they're not taking back people being deported. It's hugely problematic. It's a complete overreach. It seems like there could be regulations that are brought in. But the power is so broad as written in this law, that it could definitely be used, for purposes most Canadians would not support.Nate Erskine-Smith50:46-51:07And, obviously that's a worst case scenario when we think about the United States in today's political climate. But, it's not clear to your point what the powers are necessary for. If we are to provide additional powers, we should only provide power as much as necessary and proportionate to the goal we want to achieve. Is there anything else you want to add?Adam Sadinsky51:07-51:43I just wanna touch, and I'm sure you got into a lot of these issues, on the privacy side but. The privacy issues in this bill bleed over into the refugee system with broad search powers, um, particularly requiring service providers to provide information, we are concerned these powers could be used by CBSA, for example, to ask a women's shelter, to hand over information about a woman claiming refugee protection or who's undocumented, living in a shelter, we have huge concerns that, you know, these powers will not just be used by police, but also by Canada Border Services and immigration enforcement. I'm not the expert on privacy issues, but we see it we see the specter of those issues as well.Nate Erskine-Smith51:43-52:22That's all the time we got, but in terms of what would help me to inform my own advocacy going forward is, this bill is gonna get to committee. I'm gonna support the bill in committee and see if we can amend it. I know, the position of CARL is withdraw. The position of a number of civil society organizations is to withdraw it. I think it's constructive to have your voice and others at committee, and to make the same arguments you made today with me. Where you have. I know your argument's gonna be withdrawn, you'll say then in the alternative, here are changes that should be made. When you've got a list of those changes in detailed, legislative amendment form, flip them to me and I'll share the ideas around the ministry and around with colleagues, and I appreciate the time. Appreciate the advocacy.Adam Sadinsky52:22-52:24Absolutely. Thank you. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.uncommons.ca

Frivolous lawsuits and 911 conspiracies still floating around on News Radio KKOBSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Nowadays, many people are leaving home with simply a housekey and their phone. The days of carrying a purse or wallet are long gone. It comes as the minority of people use their physical bank card to make payments and in turn, use their phones for all of their purchases.A new report from the Banking & Payments Federation Ireland (BPFI) found that 58% of contactless payments made using the likes of Apple Pay and Google Pay were up from 52% in the same period of last year…With payments now being made so easy, do we take account of what we spend or have contact list payments caused us to become frivolous spenders?Joining guest host Anna Daly to discuss is Lecturer in Retail Management at TU Dublin, Damien O'Reilly, Account from Cloud Accounts, Alan Purcell, Paul Merriman, Financial Consultant at askpaul.ie and more.

Could you go an entire month without ANY frivolous spending? What would it do to the economy? Hour 1 8/29/2025 full 2199 Fri, 29 Aug 2025 19:00:00 +0000 6Yzo7JxuQthwkFQAtuZfCeOlgDBijF4C news The Dana & Parks Podcast news Could you go an entire month without ANY frivolous spending? What would it do to the economy? Hour 1 8/29/2025 You wanted it... Now here it is! Listen to each hour of the Dana & Parks Show whenever and wherever you want! © 2025 Audacy, Inc. News False

How Big Oil is fueling much of the legal opposition to offshore wind in the U.S.—using environmental laws to stall clean energy progress. We break down who's behind the lawsuits, why they matter, and how they threaten America's climate goals. We also look at new research showing that riding a bicycle could reduce your risk of Alzheimer's disease and dementia, thanks to the unique brain benefits of cycling. Meanwhile, here at home in Saskatchewan, the provincial government wants to extend coal power until 2050. But one of our listeners is fighting back with a court challenge, demanding accountability and a livable future. Plus, updates on U.S. tax credits for clean appliances and EVs, listener mail from Europe on smart charging apps, and Mark Jacobson's thought experiment on how little it would cost to power the entire world with solar panels. We begin with a conversation about our weekend which included musician Emm Gryner! And in the Lightning Round: Beyond Meat rebrands to “Beyond” And a Canadian Tesla owner proves you can drive electric all the way to the Arctic Links from this episode: Offshore wind lawsuits and oil ties Cycling and Alzheimer's risk study Rewiring America tax credit hub: https://rewiringamerica.org Saskatchewan climate lawsuit: https://cpj.ca/saskatchewan-legal-action/ Wisconsin youth climate lawsuit: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/aug/22/young-climate-activists-sue-wisconsin Support the show now: Support The Clean Energy Show on Patreon for exciting perks. E-transfer whittingham.james@gmail.com

It's a spit-fire news hour on the Joe Pags Show! First, we remember Judge Frank Caprio — the viral “kind judge” whose heartfelt courtroom clips touched millions — after news of his passing. Then, Pags dives into a wild lawsuit: an airline passenger is suing for buying a “window seat” that didn't actually have a window. Frivolous or justified? The staff weighs in with hilarious hot takes. And finally, Joe Pags sits down with Matt Bowyer — the man who pled guilty in a massive sports betting scandal tied to Shohei Ohtani's translator. Bowyer opens up about taking millions in bets, facing prison time, and his new book Recalibrate. From gambling to motivation to prison walls, this is one story you can't miss. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Syliva Moir and Kristen Ziman dig into the topic of Joy. When we find it at work, we usually think of it as a fortunate byproduct of loving our job and our co-workers. But our chiefs encourage us to seek it out, to schedule it. Joy is something we should make an effort to find, not wait for it to find us.

Send us a textThis week on the ole pod john: New microphone has been secured! Sound quality...raised. Let's go. Also: Japanese walking and life advice from Scottie Scheffler. And yes, I spelled his name correctly.Support the showThanks for listening! Listen, rate, subscribe and other marketing type slogans! Here's my Insta: @dannypalmernyc @thedannypalmershow@blackcatcomedy (NYC stand-up show every Friday at 9 pm. 172 Rivington St.) And subscribe to my Patreon? Maybe? If you know how to? I don't know how it works. Let's just leave this thing be: https://www.patreon.com/thedannypalmershow

The lawsuit claims that Jews for Jesus intentionally associated this Jewish teacher with Bible distributions in the wake of the October 7 attacks. Constitutional expert, lawyer, author, pastor, and founder of Liberty Counsel Mat Staver discusses the important topics of the day with co-hosts and guests that impact life, liberty, and family. To stay informed and get involved, visit LC.org.  

FBI investigating the theft of game-used Miami Heat memorabilia. Gilbert Arenas' reaction while being released from prison after being arrested for hosting an illegal poker game. Luka Doncic's comments on being on the cover of Men's Fitness. UNLV Basketball color commentator, Curtis Terry joins Cofield & Company to discuss Luka Doncic's apparent weight loss in his appearance on the cover of Men's Fitness, review Jonathan Kuminga's decision to decline a two-year extension from the Golden State Warriors, and give his thoughts on Indiana Fevers Sophie Cunningham's comments on the hate the WNBA and Caitlin Clark receive.

07-10-2025 David Dozier Learn more about the interview and get additional links here: https://thedailyblaze.com/frivolous-lawsuits-undercut-press-freedom/ Subscribe to the best of our content here: https://priceofbusiness.substack.com/ Subscribe to our YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCywgbHv7dpiBG2Qswr_ceEQ

Send us a textA bit cheeky, yes. The point is that many roads lead to resilience, I've written a five part series on Substack about this, drawing a clear route to creating a more resilient and less susceptible life. However, many recent tragedies, like the flooding in Texas, reminds us of the fragility of life, how quickly it can all change and what really does matter. Modern day minimalism has many founders, historically its origins are in an artistic movement from New York in the 1960s, or from philosophical teachings in early Japan and the Roman Empire. Prior to the industrial revolution, humanity held onto useful things, devices and accoutrements that lead to the production or sustainment of shelter, food and water. Literal survival. Frivolous items, luxury items in economic speak, were only found in the Lords of the feudal style systems. Simplicity has many modern flavours, from voluntary simplicity - akin to shedding life of commitments, possessions and all that doesn't support a narrow path, to calendar management strategies by Greg McKeweon in his book, Essentialism. It is the intentional design of a life that pursues that which brings joy and essentials - shelter, food, and water. A modern version of returning to the reality of pre-modernism life for the 99% who did not live in castles. I return to these ideas when I reflect on my life's adventures. With 28 years in the Army, I've lost count of the exercises, where for weeks I would live out of a backpack and be fine. Well, cold wet and hungry, but there is a weird romantic ideology of carrying everything you'll need on your back. Several international deployments in different climates and under less permissive environments provides a similar story - the idea that when we break life down to its most basic requirements, not much is necessary. When I consider that I had to physically carry everything I needed, choice becomes a necessity. An 80 pound rucksack sounds cool and makes you look like a warrior and beast, then you turn fifty and can barely climb stairs. Intelligence taught us that you police your gear ruthlessly, to only possess what is absolutely essential to support your ability to complete the task ahead, and nothing else. So if that was successful in the Army across the world, why wouldn't it be for life?Support the showwww.insidemycanoehead.ca

The appeal attempt of Janet Jenkins is a meritless attempt to keep this frivolous case going. Constitutional expert, lawyer, author, pastor, and founder of Liberty Counsel Mat Staver discusses the important topics of the day with co-hosts and guests that impact life, liberty, and family. To stay informed and get involved, visit LC.org.

Stu Burguiere gets ahead of the trends and predicts that next big scam in litigation: personal death and injury from “climate change.” Will the justice system be able to weed out these frivolous lawsuits without sacrificing the work of real cases? Then, Jason Buttrill, chief researcher for Glenn Beck, joins for an update on the various international conflicts heating up around the globe. And Karine Jean-Pierre is heading for the exits of her party, throwing all her friends and colleagues under the bus behind her. TODAY'S SPONSORS   BLUECHEW Use the promo code ‘STU' at http://www.bluechew.com and cover the $5 shipping and try your first month of BlueChew completely FREE   REAL ESTATE AGENTS I TRUST For more information, please visit http://www.realestateagentsitrust.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A lot of solopreneur marketing challenges become easier with a story -- and with knowing the clients' backstory.  In this episode, we're tackling a challenge many solopreneur service providers face: how to sell when your offer seems “non-essential” or even frivolous. From personal shopping to manicures, pantry organizing to lighting setups — these services are often dismissed as luxuries. But as the backstories reveal, the real value often lies beneath the surface. You will learn ... ...  many non-essential services can be critical when you understand why people buy ...  how to uncover the emotional backstories that drive buying decisions  ... how to position your offer as a solution to deep, often unspoken needs. You'll hear real-world examples of frivolous products that become "must haves" when you learn why they're purchased.  If you're a coach, consultant, or creative struggling to articulate your value, this episode will show you how to connect with your audience where it matters most — at the story behind the need. Please leave a review at Apple and/or Spotify. That's how we grow!  Want to learn more about backstories: I have a free guide you can download here. 

As the cost-of-living rises, I'm desperately clinging to the ‘frivolous' spending that gives me joy, so says Saoirse Hanley, writing in the Independent.Saoirse joins Andrea, along with Newstalk's Ciara Tracey and Financial Adviser behind askpaul.ie, Paul Merriman, to discuss.

We're passing the mic to another podcast you may like: Say More with Tulaine Montgomery. Each episode features conversations with changemakers who are making the world a better place- while also prioritizing self-care and community support.In this episode, Tulaine sits down with CeCe Olisa, founder of beauty brand Cocoa By CeCe and theCURVYCon, to discuss why self-love is essential, not frivolous. They dive into the ways we can show up confidently for ourselves and our communities.Follow Say More for more episodes! See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Matt and Jeff Hardy speak with WrestleZone about getting attacked by Ryan and Nic Nemeth, when they'll be cleared to return to TNA, taking Leon Slater under their wing, CM Punk, Matt's new Missouri #MattFact and more.

Are the little things that make us happy frivolous?

Please AI responsibly: Attorneys at a major law firm are making use of ChatGPT. That's not a bad thing normally, but filling in legal cites is not what it's for. The unchecked ChatGPT cases were fake at a rate of 8 out of 9 total cases in a single brief. On this recent legal news episode Jeff and Tim cover:How to AI responsibly (and not get sanctioned).How to challenge arbitration responsibly (and not get sanctioned).How to anti-SLAPP responsibly (and not get sanctioned).Recent court stats and rule updates.Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.Sign up for Not To Be Published, Tim Kowal's weekly legal update, or view his blog of recent cases.Other items discussed in the episode:AI Hallucinations May Lead to Sanctions for Big PI Law firm**.**Changes coming to Legal Specialization Board?Plantations at Haywood 1, LLC v. Plantations at Haywood, LLC*Wash v. Banda-Wash - 40 day period to claim costs after appeal not extended by 2 days - we are sent remands, we are not served with remands*Filmore Center Associates v. Lewis; San Francisco Superior CourtDisbarred in Federal Court, But Welcome in State Court?Frivolous anti-SLAP

We went LIVE with John Bowen (Frivolous Baseball) to talk Brewers, baseball memories, and also debuted the WHEEL OF GRID.This was a long one, so we highly recommend watching on YouTube for the full experience: https://youtube.com/live/wGE824sJWZw?feature=shareFrivolous Baseball on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@frivolousbaseballJohn's Book: https://www.amazon.com/Baseballs-Most-Frivolities-John-Bowen/dp/B0C9SP2DWT/ref=sr_1_1 ------------------

Frivolous employment lawsuits are on the rise, thanks to pro-employee rules under the Biden administration, causing increased Employment Practices Liability Insurance (EPLI) claims and skyrocketing premiums. Dani Smid, Chair of the Employment Practice Group for BrownWinick, joins us to discuss these issues and the potential for sweeping changes in employment law under a Trump administration. With possible shifts at the NLRB, OSHA, DOL, and EEOC, the manufacturing sector may soon see a more employer-friendly regulatory environment. Manufacturers need to be prepared. Dani explains how these changes could relieve the EPLI burden while impacting joint-employer standards, independent contractor classification, and union election procedures. Listen in to learn what adjustments you might consider for a proactive response in the year ahead. Hear the full show: https://iowapodcast.com/dani-smid-trump-25-employment-changes   

In part two of Red Eye Radio with Gary McNamara and Eric Harley, audio from Rand Paul on frivolous spending, more audio falsities from The View, federal dollars financing Hamas and concerns of what the outgoing Biden administration will do in the next 60 days. For more talk on the issues that matter to you, listen on radio stations across America Monday-Friday 12am-5am CT (1am-6am ET and 10pm-3am PT), download the RED EYE RADIO SHOW app, asking your smart speaker, or listening at RedEyeRadioShow.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

T Lo give their thoughts on how to deal with the results of the 2024 election without driving yourself crazy (or off a cliff), give the full rundown on their recent trip to Ireland and why you should go, and go deep into the finale of "Disclaimer" and why the series was such a miss, even with a typically fantastic Cate Blanchett performance at its center.

Donald Trump has made a historic pick for his Chief of Staff. Joe Biden spoke to the nation today for the first time since Trump’s victory. // Bob Ferguson and Nick Brown vow to fight Trump with frivolous lawsuits. // A Seattle Pacific University Study found that restaurants has been mislabeling Salmon on their menus.

On a new TAGSPODCAST aka Talk About Gay Sex podcast Host Steve V and Co-hosts Jeremy Ross Lopez and Kodi Maurice Doggette are back with all new hot LGBTQ topcis, sex and relationship advice keeping it lighter on this stressful election day:Believe it or not there are some gay porn stars supporting Trump? Mariah Carey says NO to overhead lighting and we're here for it! OkaaaayWe talk about our self-care habbits that we've implemented post 30...Are the MC Hammer pants making a comeback???It's Movember - the month to rock a mustache for men's healthcare...here for it?People's Sexiest Men Alive issue only lists one gay celeb...we've got some suggestions...Jason Kelce smashes man's phone after the guys shouts out the gay slur about brother...Kelce then says the gay slur back at the guy 3 more times...was this the right move?Advice: The relationship isn't moving as fast as he'd like and he doesn't wanna lose him...Support TAGS and get extra special perks! Patreon.com/tagspodcastSteve V's Link Tree: https://linktr.ee/tagspodcastFollow Steve V. on IG: @iam_stevevFollow Jeremy on IG: @jrosslopezFollow Kodi on IG: @mistahmauricehttps://linktr.ee/kodimauricehttps://linktr.ee/kodimauriceWanna drop a weekly or one time tip to TAGSPODCAST - Show your love for the show and support TAGS! Visit our website: tagspodcast.comNeeds some advice for a sex or relationship conundrum? Ask TAGS! DM US ON IG or https://www.talkaboutgaysex.com/contactFollow Of a Certain Age on IG: @ofacertainagepod

There is a class action lawsuit brewing in the SDNY that has been filed by multipe survivors of Jeffrey Epstein who claim that the USVI enabled Epstein's abuse of them and that they knowlingly looked the other way when the abuse was happening.    One of the people named in the lawsuit is Stacey Plaskett an according to her, the whole lawsuit is nothing but a scattershot attempt at monetary gain.    What will the court say?   Let's dive in and unpack the latest development.  (commercial at 12:18)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Plaskett Joins Calls for ‘Frivolous' N.Y. Epstein Lawsuit to be Dismissed | St. Thomas Source (stthomassource.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

What happens when legal changes aimed to prevent frivolous lawsuits make it more difficult for shareholders to hold managers accountable? This Journal of Marketing study documents the unintended consequence of firms becoming less likely to recall products. Read an in-depth recap of this research here: https://www.ama.org/2024/05/07/the-boeing-lesson-laws-that-prevent-frivolous-litigation-also-reduce-the-likelihood-of-product-recalls/ Read the full Journal of Marketing article here: https://doi.org/10.1177/00222429241231236 Reference: Arvid O. I. Hoffmann, Chee S. Cheong, Hoàng-Long Phan, and Ralf Zurbruegg, “So, Sue Me…If You Can! How Legal Changes Diminishing Managers' Risk of Being Held Liable by Shareholders Affect Firms' Likelihood to Recall Products,” Journal of Marketing. Narrator: Adalgisa Butkewitsch Acknowledgments: Sushma Kambagowni Topics: product recalls, liability, lawsuits, marketing management The JM Buzz Podcast is a production of the American Marketing Association's Journal of Marketing and is produced by ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠University FM

Bishoy M. Habib Esq., attorney and broker at Levacy Legal, joins host Ash Patel on the Best Ever CRE Show. In this episode, Bishoy discusses the benefits of being an active investor, broker, and real estate attorney simultaneously. He also discusses the value of land trusts, the concept of segregating risk, and why you never want to be accused of “piercing the corporate veil.” Finally, he explains why everything in life — even loan docs — is negotiable. Bishoy M. Habib, Esq. | Real Estate Background Levacy Legal Based in: Tampa, FL Say hi to him at: IG: @attorneybishoy LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/bishoyhabib/ YT: @attorneybishoy TikTok: @attorneybishoy www.levacylegal.com Sponsors: Altra Running

In the latest episode of Lawyer Talk, Steve takes on a challenging question from a listener named Gavin: Why are district attorneys never sued when they bring frivolous lawsuits against people? This question strikes at the heart of the legal system and the protections afforded to government officials. Steve dives deep into the intricacies of prosecutorial immunity, the nuances of Section 1983 civil rights litigation, and the emotional and financial toll of wrongful prosecution.Gavin's question is one that many people have pondered, especially those who have found themselves on the wrong side of the law through no fault of their own. Steve acknowledges the frustration and the seeming imbalance in the system, noting that it often appears to be set up in favor of the government. After all, the government created the system, and it seems designed to protect its own.Steve explains that while there is a mechanism in place—Section 1983—that allows for lawsuits against government officials for civil rights violations, many officials enjoy something called qualified immunity. This legal doctrine shields police officers and local government actors from lawsuits unless they violate clearly established constitutional rights. However, prosecutors, judges, and legislators often have absolute immunity, making it nearly impossible to sue them for actions taken in their official capacity.Despite the grim reality, Steve offers a glimmer of hope. He discusses a recent case that went up to the US Supreme Court, where Justice Sotomayor hinted that the Court might be willing to reconsider the doctrine of absolute immunity for prosecutors. This could signal a potential shift in the legal landscape, offering some hope to those wrongfully prosecuted.Throughout the episode, Steve emphasizes the emotional and financial toll that wrongful prosecution can take on individuals. He shares his own experiences from his law practice, where clients are acquitted but left financially and emotionally drained. The fight for justice is often long and arduous, and even when won, it can feel like a hollow victory.Got a question you want answered on the podcast? Call 614-859-2119 and leave us a voicemail. Steve will answer your question on the next podcast!Submit your questions to www.lawyertalkpodcast.com.Recorded at Channel 511.Stephen E. Palmer, Esq. has been practicing criminal defense almost exclusively since 1995. He has represented people in federal, state, and local courts in Ohio and elsewhere.Though he focuses on all areas of criminal defense, he particularly enjoys complex cases in state and federal courts.He has unique experience handling and assembling top defense teams of attorneys and experts in cases involving allegations of child abuse (false sexual allegations, false physical abuse allegations), complex scientific cases involving allegations of DUI and vehicular homicide cases with blood alcohol tests, and any other criminal cases that demand jury trial experience.Steve has unique experience handling numerous high-publicity cases that have garnered national attention.For more information about Steve and his law firm, visit Palmer Legal Defense. Copyright 2024 Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At Law

Yesterday, A Judge Denied and Rejected Sean "Diddy" Combs bail request. Mr. Combs, AKA Diddy, had put up a 50 million dollar bond. On this episode of The Neoliberal Round Podcast, Renaldo McKenzie provides a powerful commentary that questions this decision as nonsensical and baseless. Listen to the rebuttal by Renaldo challenging the ruling. Renaldo McKenzie is a member of the National Association of Black Journalists, Author of Neoliberalism and a Professor at Jamaica Theological Seminary, PhD Student at Temple University. Subscribe for free on any stream https://anchor.fm/theneoliberal or YouTube https://youtube.com/@renaldomckenzie Support us at https://anchor.fm/theneoliberal/support. Visit us at https://theneoliberal.com and https://renaldocmckenzie.com --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/theneoliberal/support

Press X Join the Press X Discord: https://discord.gg/MAXtvmv2rw  Topics:  “A lot” of developers may have been invited to Nintendo of America recently https://bsky.app/profile/liamrobertson.bsky.social/post/3l4dulqtriy2y Limited Run guy was there yesterday https://x.com/LimitedRunJosh/status/1835864911022583869 Frivolous rumor: The name of the Nintendo Switch successor might genuinely be Switch 2 https://www.reddit.com/r/GamingLeaksAndRumours/comments/1fi0y6i/switch_successor_is_named_switch_2/ Tears of the Kingdom art director says Depths were inspired by “Cretaceous Period-like world with dinosaurs” https://mynintendonews.com/2024/09/15/zelda-tears-of-kingdom-art-director-says-depths-were-inspired-by-cretaceous-period-like-world-with-dinosaurs/ Annapurna Video-Game Team Resigns, Leaving Partners Scrambling - long Bloomberg link Microsoft Lays Off Another 650 Staff From Its Video Game Workforce https://www.ign.com/articles/microsoft-lays-off-another-650-staff-from-its-video-game-workforce-xbox-boss-phil-spencer-sends-memo-to-staff Vince Zampella Confirms Next Battlefield Will Use Modern Setting, First Concept Art Revealed https://www.ign.com/articles/exclusive-first-battlefield-concept-art-revealed-vince-zampella Shin Megami Tensei Devil Summoner: Raidou Kuzunoha HD collection seems to be coming https://www.gematsu.com/2024/09/steam-achievements-update-suggests-shin-megami-tensei-devil-summoner-raidou-kuzunoha-hd-collection-planned Castlevania: Nocturne season 2 premieres in January 2025 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17byolZw8og Questions from Discord:  Joe: What's the best console revision? I think it's the PS2 Slim. What we're playing: Mary: Dragon Age Origins, Baldur's Gate 3 co-op John: Visions of Mana (finished), Cosmic Fantasy Collection (CF1 finished, CF2 started)  Greg: Mafia Remastered, Apex Legends Brett L:  Star Wars: Outlaws, Astro Bot ✅ (plat baby), Plucky Squire? Brett M: It Takes Two, Mario Galaxy, Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine

Christianity is under attack like never before in America. Ridicule. Frivolous lawsuits. Open hostility from the mainstream media as well as social media. How should we respond? For answers, Ron takes us back to the very beginning of the church, and to a body of believers who faced severe persecution of their own.   --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/something-good-radio/support

Rogue One used the likeness of Peter Cushning to bring back  General Tarkin. There is lawsuit from a company that says they had the rights to Cushing and that it should have never happed with Disney. Frivolous or is there a real case here? Dune Messiah is set to be a VERY different film than the first two. Director Denis Villeneuve had some comments of what the third film will be like. The Gollum movie will be two films? Mistake? Josh Brolin says no to Green Lantern series. This and more as we take your questions with Kristian Harloff and Steph Sabraw.  #starwars #disney #legal #dune3 #dune #sequels #dc #dcu #lanterns #casting #lotr  PRIZEPICKS: Download the PrizePicks app today and use code BIGTHING and get $50 instantly when you play $5! That's code BIGTHING on PrizePicks to get $50 instantly when you play $5! You don't even need to win to receive the $50 bonus, it's guaranteed! “PrizePicks. Run Your Game!” LIQUIDIV: GET 20 PERCENT OFF http://www.LiquidIV.com CODE: BIGTHING ROCKETMONEY: Stop wasting money on things you don't use. Cancel your unwanted subscriptions by going to http://www.RocketMoney.com/THING THE PERFECT JEAN: 15 Percent off with the code BIG THING at http://www.theperfectjean.nyc/BIGTHING  

For ad-free and bonus content visit patreon.com/themikeandjdshow. In Episode 73 of The Mike & JD Show, we dive deep into the latest controversies and storylines in AEW. Kevin Kelly and The Tate Twins have launched a significant lawsuit against AEW, challenging the wrestling industry's long-standing independent contractor model and alleging wrongful termination and defamation. Plus, we discuss the shocking Dynamite finale where Adam "Hangman" Page took his feud with Swerve to an explosive level by burning down Swerve's childhood home. We'll also give you a rundown of the upcoming AEW All Out 2024, setting the stage for what's expected to be a heated event.*Episode Highlights:*- *AEW Lawsuit Details*: Kevin Kelly and The Tate Twins have taken legal action against AEW. We break down the specifics of the lawsuit and what it could mean for the future of wrestler contracts in AEW and the industry.- *Hangman vs. Swerve's Feud Escalates*: An analysis of the dramatic and controversial angle on Dynamite where Hangman Adam Page escalated his feud with Swerve by burning down his childhood home. We discuss how this storyline is being received and its implications for their upcoming cage match at All Out.- *All Out 2024 Preview*: Despite the exciting storylines, our match-by-match preview of All Out 2024 might not be the most thrilling. We discuss each matchup and what to expect from the wrestlers involved in this significant pay-per-view event.*Tune in to get the latest on the unfolding drama in AEW and what to expect at All Out. Subscribe and hit the bell for notifications to never miss an episode of The Mike & JD Show.*Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

What do you think will happen at AEW All Out 2024?Join Wrestle League today hereInsane WWE Deal Revealed, ‘Frivolous' AEW Lawsuit, Adam Page Burns House, AEW Dynamite Review: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttc-BtFBMYUCome and see NRB on tour in the UK: https://www.aegpresents.co.uk/event/no-rolls-barred/Listen to the daily WrestleTalk News: https://open.spotify.com/show/7hJ8XNKeUiFN3Ny3pjdTVTJoin the WrestleTalk WhatsApp Channel for news, video releases and behind the scenes content: https://www.whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaWjRis9WtC3S0zSQy0dMore wrestling news on https://wrestletalk.com/Theme: Jordan Olds from Two Minutes To Late NightBuy our new WrestleTalk merchandise hereWrestleTalk In The Office Spotify Playlist: https://open.spotify.com/playlist/2sprWyZxCcqhtbzUuKfd0U?si=txG3hFYjSNOlGYpcDipx2gWrestleTalk Discover Playlist: https://open.spotify.com/playlist/00I22mwo6wwMKdBh6Y8Gtf?si=geesBbqiSuaNkW6SVdn3eQSubscribe to partsFUNknown hereSubscribe to CTRL Freaks hereWatch the video version of this WrestleTalk video hereBecome a Pledge Hammer on Patreon hereFollow Luke Owen @ThisisLukeOwenFollow Oli Davis @OliDavisFollow Pete Quinnell @PeteQuinnellFollow Tempest @TempestWTFollow Laurie Blake @ElFakidor Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

There is a class action lawsuit brewing in the SDNY that has been filed by multipe survivors of Jeffrey Epstein who claim that the USVI enabled Epstein's abuse of them and that they knowlingly looked the other way when the abuse was happening.    One of the people named in the lawsuit is Stacey Plaskett an according to her, the whole lawsuit is nothing but a scattershot attempt at monetary gain.    What will the court say?   Let's dive in and unpack the latest development.  (commercial at 12:18)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Plaskett Joins Calls for ‘Frivolous' N.Y. Epstein Lawsuit to be Dismissed | St. Thomas Source (stthomassource.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

TIMESTAMPS: Intro (0:00) Softball Celebrity Interviews (1:58)  Interview with Aaron Maté (34:22)  Interview with Fred Fleitz (58:52)  Outro (1:39:04) - - - Watch full episodes on Rumble, streamed LIVE 7pm ET. Become part of our Locals community - - -  Follow Glenn: Twitter Instagram Follow System Update:  Twitter Instagram TikTok Facebook LinkedIn Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Master and pupil discuss MBK NYC, Maximum Floorspace and Problematic CDs.

Summer House is back and so are estranged exes Carl Radke and Lindsay Hubbard! Plus, Rachel Leviss is calling out Ariana's motion to be dismissed from her lawsuit. Book a personalized message on Cameo: https://v.cameo.com/e/QxWQhpd1TIb Watch Disaster Daters: https://open.spotify.com/show/3L4GLnKwz9Uy5dT8Ey1VPi Listen to The Pop Report: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-pop-report/id1746150111 Join the Zack Pack Community to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCs3Zs51YaK-xw2U5ypi5eqg/join Like the show? Subscribe at: https://apple.co/2DxTKe6 and listen week days. Don't forget to leave us a nice review, because you love us! Keep up the latest show happenings at @nofilterwithzack Couldn't get enough? Follow @justplainzack or @nofilterwithzack Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Judge Aileen Cannon continues to give defendant Donald Trump - the very person who gave her her lifetime appointment as a federal judge - the delay he so covets. She continues to litigate frivolous motions that are forever being filed by Trump's attorneys, in an apparent attempt to delay Trump's federal prosecution in Florida as long as she can.Glenn discusses how judges nearly always set trial dates as a way to set intermediate deadlines for motions to be litigated and resolved: no trial date, no intermediate deadlines. It is becoming painfully obvious that delay IS the point of Judge Cannon's refusal to set a trial date.Glenn also discusses the fact that the normal practice in federal criminal cases is for judges to quickly and summarily deny motions without hearings when the defense can't meet its "burden of production" - the required showing that there is evidence and law supporting the motion they are filing.Judge Cannon continues to prove that her "impartiality might reasonably be questioned" - which is the legal standard for a judge being required to leave the case - in favor of having a fair, independent, and impartial judge to preside over the case. Glenn takes on the seemingly unending stream of Cannon's shenanigans.To learn more about Team Justice editor extraordinaire Peter Sobyplease visit him at Petersoby.comand on Instagram @donutspiritand on Twitter/X @PeterSobyIf you're interested in supporting our all-volunteer efforts, you can become a Team Justice patron at: / glennkirschner If you'd like to support us and buy Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise visit:https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkir...Check out Glenn's website at https://glennkirschner.com/Follow Glenn on:Threads: https://www.threads.net/glennkirschner2Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/glennkirschner2Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirsch...See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

If you've ever wondered how long it would take to see results if you switched from budgeting by month to budgeting by pay period, today's episode is for you. Kristina is a mom of four, a pastor's wife, a nurse, and a runner. And today she's here to share her story of switching to budgeting by pay period in January, and the amount of transformation she's seen, not only in her finances, but also in her mindset about her money in just three short months.Kristina shares her struggles with traditional monthly budgeting, the financial and mental stress she experienced, and how pay period budgeting has revolutionized her family's finances and mindset in just three months. From overcoming challenges with inconsistent income to establishing emergency funds and tackling high-interest debt, Kristina's story shows the power of accurate, realistic budgeting. We talk about the frequent fresh starts provided by pay period budgeting and how it relieves the stress of managing our home finances. You can get started with pay period budgeting today just like Kristina for just $9! The Debt Free Mom Mini Course + Template will help you take your first steps toward managing your home finances with confidence. Get it today at debtfreemom.co/templateDo you have a money question that you'd like to talk about with Carly? Do you have a story of navigating a tricky financial situation? We'd love to have you on the Debt Free Mom Podcast! Fill out the guest application at dfmpodcast.com. 01:54 Discovering Pay Period Budgeting: A Game Changer03:17 The Practicalities of Pay Period Budgeting06:24 Overcoming Debt and Financial Stress with New Strategies11:22 The Impact of Pay Period Budgeting on Family Finances15:16 Embracing Technology and Mindset Shifts for Financial Freedom16:48 Collaborative Budgeting: A Couple's Journey to Financial Harmony24:57 Budgeting Success: From Credit Card Debt to Planning for the Future25:30 Setting Financial Goals: Trips, Hospital Bills, and Beyond26:29 The Impact of Budgeting on Debt and Savings27:38 Reevaluating Spending: The Shift from Frivolous to Focused28:23 The Power of a Planned Budget: Reducing Uncertainty29:42 Embracing Budget Buffers: A Strategy for Flexible Spending33:57 Celebrating Small Wins: The Importance of Rewarding Progress41:34 Fortune Cookie Finance: The Top 3 Most Common Financial GoalsOur Sponsors:* Visit armoire.style/debtfreemom to get up to 50% off your first month, that's up to $125 OFF! Never worry about what to wear again—try Armoire today!Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

On this episode of Big Facts Friday, the crew's word of the day is “Frivolous.” They discuss frivolous spending- you know, dropping stacks on stuff we don't really need. And the idea of frivolous thoughts is brought to the table.  The squad dives into an open discussion, dishing straight facts.   | Visit: www.bigfactspod.com | Follow: @BigFactsPodSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Jason Rantz provides the week's Double Shots, which includes mocking eclipse coverage, stepping in the 'shoe killer,' and a TMI conversation about cicadas. But Rantz and Jake Skorheim risked cancellation by asking if Jake's pregnant wife is being selfish with one aspect of giving birth... uh oh.

MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas reports on the latest order by Federal Judge Lewis Kaplan denying the latest frivolous motion by Donald Trump and his lawyer Alina Habba. If you head to https://REELPAPER.com/meidas and sign up for a subscription using code MEIDAS at checkout, you'll automatically get 30% off your first order and FREE SHIPPING! Visit https://meidastouch.com for more! Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast The Influence Continuum: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/mea-culpa-with-michael-cohen The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show Burn the Boats: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 Political Beatdown: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/political-beatdown Lights On with Jessica Denson: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/lights-on-with-jessica-denson On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome back to another intriguing episode of The Box of Oddities, the podcast that explores the world's most curious and unexplained phenomena. In today's installment, we dig into three fascinating and enigmatic stories. First, we uncover the mystifying tale of Mitchell-Hedges Crystal Skull. Join us as we explore the history, legends, and mysteries surrounding this eerie artifact. Is it a relic of an ancient civilization, a portal to another dimension, or simply an elaborate hoax? Discover the secrets hidden within the crystal and decide for yourself. Next, we embark on a cosmic journey with the enigmatic Perceval Lowell and his bold belief that life once thrived on the Red Planet. Unearth the tantalizing evidence and audacious theories that fueled his fascination with Mars. Could there be life beyond Earth, and did Lowell's vision hold any truth? Join us as we venture into the realms of extraterrestrial possibilities. And finally, we expose the cunning escapades of E. P. Janes, a notorious con man who used charm and deceit to swindle his way through life. Delve into his elaborate schemes, audacious cons, and the audacity that made him a legendary figure in the world of trickery. Join The Box of Oddities and explore the bizarre, the unexplained, and the downright peculiar. This Box contains the following ingredients: Crystal Skull, Mitchell Hedge, Perceval Lowell, life on Mars, E. P. Janes, and more as we take you on a journey through the strangest corners of our world and beyond. If you would like to advertise on The Box of Oddities, contact sales@advertisecast.com http://www.airwavemedia.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices