Podcasts about Impartiality

Impartiality is a guiding principle in United Nations peace operations that has helped legitimize multilateral intervention in dozens of armed conflicts around the world. In practice, it has long been associated with passive monitoring of cease-fires and peace agreements. In the twenty-first century, however, its meaning has been stretched to allow for a range of forceful, intrusive, and ideologically prescriptive practices, all in the name of building durable peace. In Intrusive Impartiality: Learning, Contestation, and Practice Change in United Nations Peace Operations (Oxford University Press, 2024), Dr. Marion Laurence explains how these new ways of being "impartial" emerge, how they spread within and across missions, and how they become institutionalized across UN peace operations. Dr. Laurence argues that new peacekeeping practices are not only products of top-down pressures from member states or instructions from the UN Secretariat; they often emerge from tacit knowledge and unconscious decisions about how to follow orders or comply with social rules. By foregrounding the creativity and agency of the field staff who are responsible for translating mandates into action, Dr. Laurence shows that new definitions and practices of impartiality are products of contestation, learning, and the interplay between top-down pressures and bottom-up drivers of change in UN peace operations. Drawing on original data gathered through extensive fieldwork, Dr. Laurence uses evidence from UN missions in Sierra Leone, Côte d'Ivoire, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and from UN headquarters in New York, to provide an innovative framework for studying authority and change in global governance. In doing so, Intrusive Impartiality sheds light on controversial changes in peacekeeping practice and yields valuable insights about the practical and ethical dilemmas that confront UN peacekeepers. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose new book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Impartiality is a guiding principle in United Nations peace operations that has helped legitimize multilateral intervention in dozens of armed conflicts around the world. In practice, it has long been associated with passive monitoring of cease-fires and peace agreements. In the twenty-first century, however, its meaning has been stretched to allow for a range of forceful, intrusive, and ideologically prescriptive practices, all in the name of building durable peace. In Intrusive Impartiality: Learning, Contestation, and Practice Change in United Nations Peace Operations (Oxford University Press, 2024), Dr. Marion Laurence explains how these new ways of being "impartial" emerge, how they spread within and across missions, and how they become institutionalized across UN peace operations. Dr. Laurence argues that new peacekeeping practices are not only products of top-down pressures from member states or instructions from the UN Secretariat; they often emerge from tacit knowledge and unconscious decisions about how to follow orders or comply with social rules. By foregrounding the creativity and agency of the field staff who are responsible for translating mandates into action, Dr. Laurence shows that new definitions and practices of impartiality are products of contestation, learning, and the interplay between top-down pressures and bottom-up drivers of change in UN peace operations. Drawing on original data gathered through extensive fieldwork, Dr. Laurence uses evidence from UN missions in Sierra Leone, Côte d'Ivoire, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and from UN headquarters in New York, to provide an innovative framework for studying authority and change in global governance. In doing so, Intrusive Impartiality sheds light on controversial changes in peacekeeping practice and yields valuable insights about the practical and ethical dilemmas that confront UN peacekeepers. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose new book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/military-history

Impartiality is a guiding principle in United Nations peace operations that has helped legitimize multilateral intervention in dozens of armed conflicts around the world. In practice, it has long been associated with passive monitoring of cease-fires and peace agreements. In the twenty-first century, however, its meaning has been stretched to allow for a range of forceful, intrusive, and ideologically prescriptive practices, all in the name of building durable peace. In Intrusive Impartiality: Learning, Contestation, and Practice Change in United Nations Peace Operations (Oxford University Press, 2024), Dr. Marion Laurence explains how these new ways of being "impartial" emerge, how they spread within and across missions, and how they become institutionalized across UN peace operations. Dr. Laurence argues that new peacekeeping practices are not only products of top-down pressures from member states or instructions from the UN Secretariat; they often emerge from tacit knowledge and unconscious decisions about how to follow orders or comply with social rules. By foregrounding the creativity and agency of the field staff who are responsible for translating mandates into action, Dr. Laurence shows that new definitions and practices of impartiality are products of contestation, learning, and the interplay between top-down pressures and bottom-up drivers of change in UN peace operations. Drawing on original data gathered through extensive fieldwork, Dr. Laurence uses evidence from UN missions in Sierra Leone, Côte d'Ivoire, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and from UN headquarters in New York, to provide an innovative framework for studying authority and change in global governance. In doing so, Intrusive Impartiality sheds light on controversial changes in peacekeeping practice and yields valuable insights about the practical and ethical dilemmas that confront UN peacekeepers. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose new book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

Impartiality is a guiding principle in United Nations peace operations that has helped legitimize multilateral intervention in dozens of armed conflicts around the world. In practice, it has long been associated with passive monitoring of cease-fires and peace agreements. In the twenty-first century, however, its meaning has been stretched to allow for a range of forceful, intrusive, and ideologically prescriptive practices, all in the name of building durable peace. In Intrusive Impartiality: Learning, Contestation, and Practice Change in United Nations Peace Operations (Oxford University Press, 2024), Dr. Marion Laurence explains how these new ways of being "impartial" emerge, how they spread within and across missions, and how they become institutionalized across UN peace operations. Dr. Laurence argues that new peacekeeping practices are not only products of top-down pressures from member states or instructions from the UN Secretariat; they often emerge from tacit knowledge and unconscious decisions about how to follow orders or comply with social rules. By foregrounding the creativity and agency of the field staff who are responsible for translating mandates into action, Dr. Laurence shows that new definitions and practices of impartiality are products of contestation, learning, and the interplay between top-down pressures and bottom-up drivers of change in UN peace operations. Drawing on original data gathered through extensive fieldwork, Dr. Laurence uses evidence from UN missions in Sierra Leone, Côte d'Ivoire, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and from UN headquarters in New York, to provide an innovative framework for studying authority and change in global governance. In doing so, Intrusive Impartiality sheds light on controversial changes in peacekeeping practice and yields valuable insights about the practical and ethical dilemmas that confront UN peacekeepers. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose new book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/world-affairs

Impartiality is a guiding principle in United Nations peace operations that has helped legitimize multilateral intervention in dozens of armed conflicts around the world. In practice, it has long been associated with passive monitoring of cease-fires and peace agreements. In the twenty-first century, however, its meaning has been stretched to allow for a range of forceful, intrusive, and ideologically prescriptive practices, all in the name of building durable peace. In Intrusive Impartiality: Learning, Contestation, and Practice Change in United Nations Peace Operations (Oxford University Press, 2024), Dr. Marion Laurence explains how these new ways of being "impartial" emerge, how they spread within and across missions, and how they become institutionalized across UN peace operations. Dr. Laurence argues that new peacekeeping practices are not only products of top-down pressures from member states or instructions from the UN Secretariat; they often emerge from tacit knowledge and unconscious decisions about how to follow orders or comply with social rules. By foregrounding the creativity and agency of the field staff who are responsible for translating mandates into action, Dr. Laurence shows that new definitions and practices of impartiality are products of contestation, learning, and the interplay between top-down pressures and bottom-up drivers of change in UN peace operations. Drawing on original data gathered through extensive fieldwork, Dr. Laurence uses evidence from UN missions in Sierra Leone, Côte d'Ivoire, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and from UN headquarters in New York, to provide an innovative framework for studying authority and change in global governance. In doing so, Intrusive Impartiality sheds light on controversial changes in peacekeeping practice and yields valuable insights about the practical and ethical dilemmas that confront UN peacekeepers. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose new book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Impartiality is a guiding principle in United Nations peace operations that has helped legitimize multilateral intervention in dozens of armed conflicts around the world. In practice, it has long been associated with passive monitoring of cease-fires and peace agreements. In the twenty-first century, however, its meaning has been stretched to allow for a range of forceful, intrusive, and ideologically prescriptive practices, all in the name of building durable peace. In Intrusive Impartiality: Learning, Contestation, and Practice Change in United Nations Peace Operations (Oxford University Press, 2024), Dr. Marion Laurence explains how these new ways of being "impartial" emerge, how they spread within and across missions, and how they become institutionalized across UN peace operations. Dr. Laurence argues that new peacekeeping practices are not only products of top-down pressures from member states or instructions from the UN Secretariat; they often emerge from tacit knowledge and unconscious decisions about how to follow orders or comply with social rules. By foregrounding the creativity and agency of the field staff who are responsible for translating mandates into action, Dr. Laurence shows that new definitions and practices of impartiality are products of contestation, learning, and the interplay between top-down pressures and bottom-up drivers of change in UN peace operations. Drawing on original data gathered through extensive fieldwork, Dr. Laurence uses evidence from UN missions in Sierra Leone, Côte d'Ivoire, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and from UN headquarters in New York, to provide an innovative framework for studying authority and change in global governance. In doing so, Intrusive Impartiality sheds light on controversial changes in peacekeeping practice and yields valuable insights about the practical and ethical dilemmas that confront UN peacekeepers. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose new book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars.

Have you been exposed to bigotry recently? It's a terrible problem in today's world. The problem has reached such heights that people are routinely killed or injured simply because of the color of their skin. Today on The Dwelling Place, we'll be addressing the problem of regarding people based on superficial things.... which is what bigotry is really all about. To support this ministry financially, visit: https://www.oneplace.com/donate/1425/29

In our day and age we're encouraged to have favorites... from our favorite ice cream to our favorite sports team. We have our favorite restaurant, and favorite friends too. On today's program, we'll see James underscore the sin of partiality. We'll soon see that when it comes to the law of love there is no room for prejudice. To support this ministry financially, visit: https://www.oneplace.com/donate/1425/29

Listen Ad Free https://www.solgoodmedia.com - Listen to hundreds of audiobooks, thousands of short stories, and ambient sounds all ad free!

Series: N/AService: Sun AMType: SermonSpeaker: Caleb Wray

In the early hours of January 14, 2024 the Department of Justice released its long-awaited election interference report against President-elect Donald Trump. It was a long and winding road to that moment—and one marked, ultimately, by justice delayed. In November 2022, Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Jack Smith as special counsel to oversee criminal investigations by the Justice Department into former President Donald Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election and his retention of classified documents. The two cases were brought in different jurisdictions—with charges for the classified documents case filed in Florida and the elections case in Washington, D.C. After false starts, the blockbuster Supreme Court ruling on July 1, 2024 that former President Trump is entitled to some immunity from criminal prosecution for actions taken to overturn the results of the 2020 election, and the subsequent re-election of Trump in November, Smith and the DOJ dropped both cases. (Publication of Smith's report regarding the documents case is delayed due to pending charges against co-conspirators.) Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Lawyer Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:David Sklansky >>> Stanford Law pageCriminal Justice in Divided America, Police, Punishment, and the Future of Our Democracy >>> Stanford Lawyer magazine online feature(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and the Role of Special ProsecutorsPam Karlan and David Sklansky discuss the history and purpose of special prosecutors, their use in politically sensitive cases, and the implications of their reports. Sklansky explains the transition from independent counsels to special counsels and highlights examples like the Mueller Report and investigations into Hunter Biden.(00:05:01) Chapter 2: Insights from Jack Smith's ReportThe conversation shifts to Jack Smith's report on Donald Trump. Karlan and Sklansky explore the evidence presented, its connection to the January 6th events, and the debates around releasing such reports. Karlan questions the timing of appointing a special counsel, given much was already public knowledge.(00:08:25) Chapter 3: Prosecution Outcomes and Future ImplicationsKarlan and Sklansky discuss the slow progress of Trump's investigation compared to other January 6th prosecutions. They also cover Trump's promise to pardon convicted January 6th defendants, the fate of unnamed co-conspirators, and the ethical questions surrounding Todd Blanche's involvement at the DOJ. (00:12:16) Chapter 4: Decisions and Legal Strategies in Trump's ProsecutionKarlan and Sklansky discuss the decision not to charge Donald Trump with insurrection, focusing instead on charges like fraud and voter suppression. They analyze why the special counsel avoided certain charges and the challenges of applying existing statutes to unprecedented events.(00:16:30) Chapter 5: The Supreme Court's Role and the Impact on ProsecutionThe conversation explores delays caused by the Supreme Court, including its handling of presidential immunity. Karlan and Sklansky explain how these rulings affected timelines and created legal ambiguities that could influence appeals and the overall process.(00:19:00) Chapter 6: Restoring Trust in Criminal Justice and DemocracyKarlan and Sklansky shift focus to broader implications for democracy, discussing how Trump's prosecutions might deepen distrust in institutions. They consider paths to reform, including bipartisan efforts to reinforce the rule of law and community policing. The episode concludes with reflections on lessons from past legal leaders and the enduring relevance of Robert Jackson's warnings about prosecutorial overreach.

What does spiritual maturity look like in action? James 2 offers a powerful blueprint: impartiality and living works.   Summary: James 2 challenges believers to grow in spiritual maturity by practicing impartiality and linking their faith to action. Impartiality obliterates prejudice by recognizing that all people are equal before God, while living works demonstrate the evidence of a genuine, active faith. Spiritual growth requires stopping favoritism and actively serving others, reflecting God's standards through both belief and behavior.   Reflection and Discussion Questions: Why do you think James emphasizes impartiality as a marker of spiritual maturity? How does prejudice pervert the Gospel, and how can we combat this in our lives? What does James mean when he says faith without works is dead? How can you align your beliefs with your behaviors in practical ways? Why is it significant that works don't save us, but faith produces works? How does favoritism or partiality hinder the mission of the church? What are some ways we can better serve those society often overlooks? How can we apply the principle of “seeing others as God does” in our workplaces, churches, and communities? Why do you think James ties living faith to both beliefs and behaviors? What is one action you can take today to demonstrate your faith through works?  

Today we'll be presenting the second half of Al's message called The Gospel Of Impartiality". Have you been exposed to bigotry recently? It's a terrible problem in today's world. Today on The Dwelling Place, we'll be addressing the problem of regarding people based on superficial things.... which is what bigotry is really all about. To support this ministry financially, visit: https://www.oneplace.com/donate/1425/29

Coimisiún na Meán has today published revised Media Services Codes and Rules, completing the process of updating its regulations to implement changes under the EU Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD) and the Online Safety and Media Regulation Act 2022. Under the Online Safety and Media Regulation Act, Coimisiún na Meán is empowered to develop codes and rules which apply to video-on-demand providers as well as television and radio broadcasters established in Ireland. The AVMSD provides for minimum standards and obligations that video-on demand providers and television broadcasters must adhere to in a variety of areas, including child safety, the accessibility of their services, and the prohibition of content that incites hatred. The Online Safety and Media Regulation Act establishes the regulatory framework for these services and for radio broadcasters. Aoife MacEvilly, Broadcasting and Video-on-Demand Commissioner at Coimisiún na Meán said: ''To ensure a thriving and safe media landscape for Ireland, it is crucial that the Codes and Rules which apply to broadcasters and now, for the first time, to video-on-demand service providers are up-to-date and in-line with EU regulations. We have been engaging with media service providers in recent months and following the conclusion of our public consultations, are happy to have published nine sets of Codes and Rules which are now in effect.'' The nine regulations published include a new Audiovisual On-Demand Media Service Code and Rules, marking the first time that video-on-demand (VOD) services have been subject to formal regulatory oversight by Coimisiún na Meán. These new Codes and Rules were developed following a public consultation which concluded in August 2024. The other existing Codes and Rules have undergone updates to comply with the AVMSD, and includes the Code of Programme Standards, the Access Rules for Television Broadcasters, and the General Commercial Communications Code. These Codes and Rules were updated following a public consultation which concluded in October 2024. The new and revised Media Services Codes and Rules which have been published are: Media Service Code and Rules (Audiovisual On-Demand Media Service Providers) - new rules for audiovisual on-demand (VOD) providers which require the restriction of content that may incite hatred, which provides protections for children from accessing inappropriate content and which obliges providers to ensure their programmes are accessible for people with disabilities. Media Service Code and Rules (Advertising, Teleshopping, Signal Integrity and Information) - revised rules for television broadcasters on advertising and teleshopping, including daily limits for advertising and teleshopping spots. Media Service Code and Rules (Advertising for Radio Broadcasters) - revised rules to ensure that advertising is recognisable and distinguishable from editorial content, and which includes daily limits for radio advertising. Media Service Rules (Access Rules for Television Broadcasters) - revised rules for television broadcasters to ensure that programmes which are produced are made continuously and progressively more accessible to people with disabilities. General Commercial Communications Code - revised code which sets out rules for broadcasters on commercial communications including advertisements, sponsorships and product placement. Children's Commercial Communications Code - revised code which sets out additional rules for commercial communications directed at children and is aimed at protecting audiences under 18 years of age. Code of Fairness, Objectivity and Impartiality - revised code which provides principles for broadcasters to apply in order to achieve fairness, objectivity and impartiality in news and current affairs coverage. Code of Programme Standards - revised code which sets out principles applying to editorial content with a view to minimising harm and undue offence Short News Reporting Code - revised c...

On today's broadcast, Pastor Al Pittman returns to our study of James. On today's program, we'll see James deal with the sin of partiality. We'll soon see that when it comes to the law of love there is no room for prejudice. To support this ministry financially, visit: https://www.oneplace.com/donate/1425/29

Good luck to TVNZ. Good luck to TVNZ trying to convince anyone that they are unbiased, given what's just happened with them in the last week. I just played you the clip of the Breakfast reporter singing with the organiser of the Hikoi - which I think any right-minded person would interpret as an endorsement of the Hikoi. I think this should earn her some serious trouble if TVNZ takes perceptions of bias seriously. What is much more serious for them is that the woman who was tipped to become the top news boss has just been outed today for taking personal leave to go on the Hikoi. The reason we know this is because she loves a social media post, and she's put it up on her Instagram. So just flaunted it for everyone to see. If you are a news boss, or about to become the news boss, you should be smart enough to keep that private emphasis on private - especially if your organisation is trying to pretend that it's unbiased, which is what TVNZ is trying to do. Very hard at the moment in the face of falling public trust in media. Just a few weeks ago, TVNZ self-published its editorial guidelines for journalists. The point of that was to tell us that they take impartiality seriously and that they are impartial. Well, that's just been massively undone by finding out that the woman who will be in charge of all of the journalists actually doesn't really like the current government at all. So, good luck. You can corral those journalists into a neutral space, all you like. But if the lady who is their boss has views so strong about the current government that she wants to go on a protest against them, I think you've got a problem with perception of bias. Now, the important thing here about TVNZ to understand is that it pretends it's impartial, right? It is not, that is the important thing here. Nobody would mind if the editor of The Spinoff turned up at the Hikoi because The Spinoff wears its colours on its sleeve. We know what they're about and that they own it. They're just are completely honest about it. TVNZ though was trying to convince us that they are neutral. The other important thing here is that TVNZ is the publicly owned broadcaster on television, right? So that also means there are standards that we expect from them that are different to what everybody else is subjected to. Now, TVNZ in order to convince us that they are impartial and that they demand impartiality from the people who work within the newsroom and in the editorial team, they would have to a not give that woman the news job and I doubt that's going to happen. They would have to discipline that woman and discipline the reporter for what happened on television and then make that public. Do you think that's going to happen? No, me neither. So good luck to TVNZ trying to convince us from here on that they're impartial. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Excerpts from "Negotiation and Mediation Skills: Chapter 5: Mediation Basics" Main Themes: Mediation as a Collaborative Dispute Resolution Process: Unlike adversarial legal processes, mediation prioritizes cooperation, mutual understanding, and finding solutions that meet the needs of all parties involved. Core Principles of Mediation: The text emphasizes the foundational principles of voluntariness, confidentiality, impartiality, self-determination, and flexibility as crucial for effective mediation. Roles and Responsibilities of the Mediator: The mediator acts as a neutral facilitator, guiding communication, encouraging empathy, clarifying issues, and promoting creative problem-solving. They do not impose solutions but help parties reach agreements themselves. Advantages of Mediation: The document highlights the cost-effectiveness, time efficiency, relationship preservation, and flexibility of mediation compared to litigation or arbitration. Key Ideas and Facts: Voluntariness: "Voluntariness is a cornerstone of the mediation process... When people enter mediation voluntarily, they are more likely to feel ownership over the decisions made." This emphasizes the importance of free will in participation for successful outcomes. Confidentiality: "Confidentiality... encourages open and honest communication, as parties feel secure discussing sensitive or personal issues." This highlights the safe space created by confidentiality, enabling deeper exploration of the conflict. Impartiality and Neutrality: "The mediator must remain impartial and neutral throughout the process... This principle is essential for maintaining the trust of both parties." This underscores the mediator's role as a fair and unbiased guide. Self-Determination: "Self-determination in mediation refers to the concept that the parties themselves retain control over the outcome... This principle is closely tied to voluntariness, as it underscores the idea that parties are more likely to uphold agreements they played a role in creating." This empowers parties and promotes commitment to the agreed-upon solution. Flexibility: "Mediation is generally a more flexible and informal process compared to litigation or arbitration... This flexibility enables creative problem-solving and allows the mediator to introduce innovative approaches." This adaptability allows for customized solutions better suited to the specific conflict. Distinction from Litigation and Arbitration: Mediation is contrasted with these processes, highlighting its cooperative nature, focus on mutual interests, and potential for preserving relationships. The Mediation Process: The document outlines a typical mediation framework, including convening, opening statements, issue exploration, negotiation, agreement, and potential follow-up. Important Quotes: "Mediation has become an essential method for resolving disputes across a wide variety of settings... it seeks to facilitate constructive dialogue and foster mutual understanding." "Mediation is based on several core principles that set it apart from other dispute resolution methods." "A mediator is a trained professional who plays a unique role in guiding the mediation process. Unlike judges or arbitrators, mediators do not issue rulings or impose decisions." "Mediation offers an effective and collaborative alternative to adversarial dispute resolution, focusing on communication, creativity, and mutual respect." Conclusion: This chapter effectively outlines the fundamentals of mediation, emphasizing its collaborative and solution-oriented approach. By understanding its core principles, the mediator's role, and its advantages over other methods, individuals and organizations can utilize mediation as a powerful tool for resolving disputes and building stronger relationships. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

Brian Walshe, accused of killing and dismembering his wife, Ana Walshe, is facing new developments in his murder trial as his defense team raises concerns about the impartiality of the investigation. Walshe's attorneys are demanding access to documents from two other high-profile Massachusetts murder cases, citing potential bias from former Massachusetts State Trooper Michael Proctor, who led the investigation into both Walshe's and Karen Read's cases. Walshe, 48, was arrested in January 2023 and indicted on multiple charges, including murder, misleading a police investigation, and improper conveyance of a human body. He remains in custody without bail as his legal team works to challenge aspects of the investigation. The defense team is particularly focused on Michael Proctor, the former state trooper who led the inquiry into Walshe's case. Proctor's involvement in another high-profile case—the investigation into Karen Read—has come under scrutiny. Read is accused of striking her boyfriend, John O'Keefe, with her SUV and leaving him to die in a snowstorm. Proctor's conduct in Read's case, which ended in a mistrial, led to his suspension following testimony that revealed unprofessional behavior, including disparaging text messages about Read. During her trial, Proctor referred to Read as a “whack job” and used an expletive, later apologizing to the jury for his comments.   Citing this behavior, Walshe's defense team is questioning whether Proctor may have held a similar bias against their client. “Proctor's text messages about Karen Read reveal bias,” Walshe's attorney, Larry Tipton, said during a recent hearing. “We want to ensure there was no bias in Brian Walshe's case, and that's why we're requesting access to these documents.” The defense has asked for a comprehensive list of records related to Proctor's work, including his cellphone data, internet account details, and more than 3,000 pages from an ongoing federal investigation. Walshe's team is also seeking documents tied to Proctor's role in the investigation of Sandra Birchmore, another case where Proctor's actions have come under scrutiny. While Walshe's lawyers have not found concrete evidence of police or prosecutorial misconduct so far, they are pushing for transparency. “And I was going to explain why we filed such a detailed memorandum of law,” Tipton stated, “but I don't think I need to waste the court's time with that.” The Norfolk County district attorney's office, which is prosecuting Walshe, has stated that it will share any information relevant to the case, but they will not turn over sensitive information from other ongoing investigations. In a filing, the office noted that releasing Proctor's phone and work cloud data could expose criminal offender records, confidential informant information, and private data from grand jury proceedings. Prosecutors have made it clear that they do not plan to call Proctor as a witness in Walshe's trial. Instead, Cohasset Police Sgt. Harrison Schmidt has taken on Proctor's role in the investigation. "Dozens" of officers from the Massachusetts State Police and Cohasset Police Department were involved in the case, according to the district attorney's office, which argues that Proctor's absence will not impact the trial. The defense and prosecution are expected to reconvene in December after Walshe's legal team has reviewed the documents provided by the prosecution. As the trial approaches, the defense is continuing to build its case, hoping to uncover any signs of bias or misconduct that could impact the outcome of this highly publicized murder case. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

Brian Walshe, accused of killing and dismembering his wife, Ana Walshe, is facing new developments in his murder trial as his defense team raises concerns about the impartiality of the investigation. Walshe's attorneys are demanding access to documents from two other high-profile Massachusetts murder cases, citing potential bias from former Massachusetts State Trooper Michael Proctor, who led the investigation into both Walshe's and Karen Read's cases. Walshe, 48, was arrested in January 2023 and indicted on multiple charges, including murder, misleading a police investigation, and improper conveyance of a human body. He remains in custody without bail as his legal team works to challenge aspects of the investigation. The defense team is particularly focused on Michael Proctor, the former state trooper who led the inquiry into Walshe's case. Proctor's involvement in another high-profile case—the investigation into Karen Read—has come under scrutiny. Read is accused of striking her boyfriend, John O'Keefe, with her SUV and leaving him to die in a snowstorm. Proctor's conduct in Read's case, which ended in a mistrial, led to his suspension following testimony that revealed unprofessional behavior, including disparaging text messages about Read. During her trial, Proctor referred to Read as a “whack job” and used an expletive, later apologizing to the jury for his comments.   Citing this behavior, Walshe's defense team is questioning whether Proctor may have held a similar bias against their client. “Proctor's text messages about Karen Read reveal bias,” Walshe's attorney, Larry Tipton, said during a recent hearing. “We want to ensure there was no bias in Brian Walshe's case, and that's why we're requesting access to these documents.” The defense has asked for a comprehensive list of records related to Proctor's work, including his cellphone data, internet account details, and more than 3,000 pages from an ongoing federal investigation. Walshe's team is also seeking documents tied to Proctor's role in the investigation of Sandra Birchmore, another case where Proctor's actions have come under scrutiny. While Walshe's lawyers have not found concrete evidence of police or prosecutorial misconduct so far, they are pushing for transparency. “And I was going to explain why we filed such a detailed memorandum of law,” Tipton stated, “but I don't think I need to waste the court's time with that.” The Norfolk County district attorney's office, which is prosecuting Walshe, has stated that it will share any information relevant to the case, but they will not turn over sensitive information from other ongoing investigations. In a filing, the office noted that releasing Proctor's phone and work cloud data could expose criminal offender records, confidential informant information, and private data from grand jury proceedings. Prosecutors have made it clear that they do not plan to call Proctor as a witness in Walshe's trial. Instead, Cohasset Police Sgt. Harrison Schmidt has taken on Proctor's role in the investigation. "Dozens" of officers from the Massachusetts State Police and Cohasset Police Department were involved in the case, according to the district attorney's office, which argues that Proctor's absence will not impact the trial. The defense and prosecution are expected to reconvene in December after Walshe's legal team has reviewed the documents provided by the prosecution. As the trial approaches, the defense is continuing to build its case, hoping to uncover any signs of bias or misconduct that could impact the outcome of this highly publicized murder case. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

Brian Walshe, accused of killing and dismembering his wife, Ana Walshe, is facing new developments in his murder trial as his defense team raises concerns about the impartiality of the investigation. Walshe's attorneys are demanding access to documents from two other high-profile Massachusetts murder cases, citing potential bias from former Massachusetts State Trooper Michael Proctor, who led the investigation into both Walshe's and Karen Read's cases. Walshe, 48, was arrested in January 2023 and indicted on multiple charges, including murder, misleading a police investigation, and improper conveyance of a human body. He remains in custody without bail as his legal team works to challenge aspects of the investigation. The defense team is particularly focused on Michael Proctor, the former state trooper who led the inquiry into Walshe's case. Proctor's involvement in another high-profile case—the investigation into Karen Read—has come under scrutiny. Read is accused of striking her boyfriend, John O'Keefe, with her SUV and leaving him to die in a snowstorm. Proctor's conduct in Read's case, which ended in a mistrial, led to his suspension following testimony that revealed unprofessional behavior, including disparaging text messages about Read. During her trial, Proctor referred to Read as a “whack job” and used an expletive, later apologizing to the jury for his comments.   Citing this behavior, Walshe's defense team is questioning whether Proctor may have held a similar bias against their client. “Proctor's text messages about Karen Read reveal bias,” Walshe's attorney, Larry Tipton, said during a recent hearing. “We want to ensure there was no bias in Brian Walshe's case, and that's why we're requesting access to these documents.” The defense has asked for a comprehensive list of records related to Proctor's work, including his cellphone data, internet account details, and more than 3,000 pages from an ongoing federal investigation. Walshe's team is also seeking documents tied to Proctor's role in the investigation of Sandra Birchmore, another case where Proctor's actions have come under scrutiny. While Walshe's lawyers have not found concrete evidence of police or prosecutorial misconduct so far, they are pushing for transparency. “And I was going to explain why we filed such a detailed memorandum of law,” Tipton stated, “but I don't think I need to waste the court's time with that.” The Norfolk County district attorney's office, which is prosecuting Walshe, has stated that it will share any information relevant to the case, but they will not turn over sensitive information from other ongoing investigations. In a filing, the office noted that releasing Proctor's phone and work cloud data could expose criminal offender records, confidential informant information, and private data from grand jury proceedings. Prosecutors have made it clear that they do not plan to call Proctor as a witness in Walshe's trial. Instead, Cohasset Police Sgt. Harrison Schmidt has taken on Proctor's role in the investigation. "Dozens" of officers from the Massachusetts State Police and Cohasset Police Department were involved in the case, according to the district attorney's office, which argues that Proctor's absence will not impact the trial. The defense and prosecution are expected to reconvene in December after Walshe's legal team has reviewed the documents provided by the prosecution. As the trial approaches, the defense is continuing to build its case, hoping to uncover any signs of bias or misconduct that could impact the outcome of this highly publicized murder case. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

Brian Walshe, accused of killing and dismembering his wife, Ana Walshe, is facing new developments in his murder trial as his defense team raises concerns about the impartiality of the investigation. Walshe's attorneys are demanding access to documents from two other high-profile Massachusetts murder cases, citing potential bias from former Massachusetts State Trooper Michael Proctor, who led the investigation into both Walshe's and Karen Read's cases. Walshe, 48, was arrested in January 2023 and indicted on multiple charges, including murder, misleading a police investigation, and improper conveyance of a human body. He remains in custody without bail as his legal team works to challenge aspects of the investigation. The defense team is particularly focused on Michael Proctor, the former state trooper who led the inquiry into Walshe's case. Proctor's involvement in another high-profile case—the investigation into Karen Read—has come under scrutiny. Read is accused of striking her boyfriend, John O'Keefe, with her SUV and leaving him to die in a snowstorm. Proctor's conduct in Read's case, which ended in a mistrial, led to his suspension following testimony that revealed unprofessional behavior, including disparaging text messages about Read. During her trial, Proctor referred to Read as a “whack job” and used an expletive, later apologizing to the jury for his comments.   Citing this behavior, Walshe's defense team is questioning whether Proctor may have held a similar bias against their client. “Proctor's text messages about Karen Read reveal bias,” Walshe's attorney, Larry Tipton, said during a recent hearing. “We want to ensure there was no bias in Brian Walshe's case, and that's why we're requesting access to these documents.” The defense has asked for a comprehensive list of records related to Proctor's work, including his cellphone data, internet account details, and more than 3,000 pages from an ongoing federal investigation. Walshe's team is also seeking documents tied to Proctor's role in the investigation of Sandra Birchmore, another case where Proctor's actions have come under scrutiny. While Walshe's lawyers have not found concrete evidence of police or prosecutorial misconduct so far, they are pushing for transparency. “And I was going to explain why we filed such a detailed memorandum of law,” Tipton stated, “but I don't think I need to waste the court's time with that.” The Norfolk County district attorney's office, which is prosecuting Walshe, has stated that it will share any information relevant to the case, but they will not turn over sensitive information from other ongoing investigations. In a filing, the office noted that releasing Proctor's phone and work cloud data could expose criminal offender records, confidential informant information, and private data from grand jury proceedings. Prosecutors have made it clear that they do not plan to call Proctor as a witness in Walshe's trial. Instead, Cohasset Police Sgt. Harrison Schmidt has taken on Proctor's role in the investigation. "Dozens" of officers from the Massachusetts State Police and Cohasset Police Department were involved in the case, according to the district attorney's office, which argues that Proctor's absence will not impact the trial. The defense and prosecution are expected to reconvene in December after Walshe's legal team has reviewed the documents provided by the prosecution. As the trial approaches, the defense is continuing to build its case, hoping to uncover any signs of bias or misconduct that could impact the outcome of this highly publicized murder case. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

(WATCH THIS EPISODE ON YOUTUBE) In 500 BC, corrupt judges were treated a little differently than the ones we have today. The punishments have changed, but one question remains the same: What do we do when judges can't stop taking bribes? Hold onto your birthday suit, Reb is slicing open The Judgment of Cambyses (~530 BC). (Side note: A 30-MINUTE EPISODE CAN YOU BELIEVE IT?!) Follow @RebuttalPod on Instagram and Twitter! Follow @Rebmasel on TikTok, Instagram, and Twitter! *** 00:00 - Intro 00:50 - The Cursed Envelope Case 02:38 - Judge Sisamnes gets flayed 11:22 - Impartiality is important... 12:37 - ...but Supreme Court Justices play dirty (gasp) 15:58 - Justice Thomas 18:29 - Justice Gorsuch 19:35 - Recusal reform please 21:31 - Justice Alito 22:28 - Don't get it twisted 23:43 - Justice Alito 25:02 - Justice Sotomayor 26:12 - A CODE OF CONDUCT THAT WORKS WOULD BE COOL 29:53 - Reb's Rebuttal  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Listen Ad Free https://www.solgoodmedia.com - Listen to hundreds of audiobooks, thousands of short stories, and ambient sounds all ad free!

Attorney General Merrick Garland says he will not allow the Justice Department “to be used as a political weapon" and warns about “conspiracy theories and “dangerous falsehoods” targeting federal law enforcement, Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) says Louisiana will 'get the money that we deserve from the federal government' to recover from Hurricane Francine, Senate Health Committee plans to hold CEO of Steward Health Care in contempt of Congress for defying subpoena to testify about the company's bankruptcy, House passes a bill to prohibit the electric vehicle tax credit from being claimed if the EV has batteries manufactured by Chinese entities, Secretary of State Antony Blinken on questions about allowing Ukraine to hit targets inside Russia, former Sen. James Sasser (D-TN) dies. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This sermon emphasizes the importance of openness in the Christian faith, as exemplified by the word "Ephphatha," meaning "be open" in Mark 7. The call in St. James' epistle today is for Christians to be impartial and open-hearted, recognizing the value and dignity of every person, regardless of their status. The overarching theme is that being open to others is the way of Christ, the way of heaven, and should be the way of the Church. We are encouraged to see Christ in everyone and to participate actively in the work of salvation by showing love and compassion to all, without partiality.Openness to God's Word: The sermon emphasizes the importance of keeping our hearts open to welcome God's Word, allowing Jesus to purify and work through us.Ephphatha – Be Open: The call to be open extends beyond just our hearts; it involves every part of us—our ears, eyes, and actions—so that we can fully engage in God's work and see His will for us.Impartiality in Faith: Christians are urged to be impartial, treating everyone with the same love and respect, regardless of their status or appearance, reflecting the reality of heaven on earth.Seeing Christ in Others: The sermon encourages believers to view every person through the lens of Christ, recognizing that each individual is created and redeemed by Him.Active Participation in Christ's Work: Followers of Christ are called to participate in His salvific work by using their unique gifts to bless others, particularly those who are marginalized or in need.

PSNI All Ireland celebration - should police be able to celebrate with the community? Or is impartiality more important?

Send us a Text Message.Support the Show.Stay engaged with new and up-to-date content, including newsletters, articles, podcasts, etc. Download the Teach Me the Bible App from any app store or Apple TV/Roku device.

Amol and Nick take on more questions from listeners – such as whether having younger MPs will lead to a change in policies and why do politicians sound more sensible when ejected from office?Plus they answer questions on the state of political journalism and whether podcasting makes it easier or more difficult to maintain impartiality.If you have a question you'd like to Amol, Nick and the Pod Squad to answer get in touch by sending us a message or voice note via WhatsApp to +44 330 123 4346 or email us Today@bbc.co.ukEpisodes of The Today Podcast land weekly and look out for bonus episodes like this one. Subscribe on BBC Sounds to get Amol and Nick's take to the big stories of the week, with insights from behind the scenes at the UK's most influential radio news programme.The Today Podcast is hosted by Amol Rajan and Nick Robinson, both presenters of BBC Radio 4's Today programme. Amol was the BBC's media editor for six years and is the former editor of the Independent, he's also the current presenter of University Challenge. Nick has presented the Today programme since 2015, he was the BBC's political editor for ten years before that and also previously worked as ITV's political editor.You can listen to the latest episode of The Today Podcast anytime on your smart speaker by saying “Smart Speaker, ask BBC Sounds for The Today Podcast.”The senior producer is Tom Smithard, the researcher and digital producer is Joe Wilkinson, the producer is Hatty Nash. The editor is Louisa Lewis. The executive producer is Owenna Griffiths. Technical production from Mike Regaard.

In this episode, Mariana speaks with Kenneth Smith Ramos, former Chief Negotiator of USMCA from the Mexican side and partner of AGON, about how the Constitutional Reforms proposed by President Lopez Obrador might weaken Mexico's judiciary and in doing so, impact the key principles of USMCA and other trade agreements such as impartiality, transparency, and nondiscriminatory practices. They also discuss measures North America could take to defend itself against predatory practices and the facts behind recent Chinese investments in Mexico. And, they speak about the upcoming 2026 mandatory review of USMCA and the negative implications of opening a full renegotiation.

The post The Myth Of Judicial Impartiality appeared first on Montana Family Foundation.

The gang discusses the upcoming presidential debate and the frustrations with the corporate media's control over the event. Also, the release of Julian Assange from prison and the implications for press freedom. Finally, the New York Times' plan to put its top podcast behind a paywall. Chapters00:00 Surviving the Texas Heat32:51 Impartiality and Corporate Influence in the Debate Format42:18 The Case of Julian Assange01:04:54 The New York Times' Paywall01:18:01 The Power Dynamics of Influential Individuals Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In a society where distinctions based on wealth and status are common, David Fulton reminds us, through the words of James to the early church, to see others how God sees them without judgement and to treat others with mercy guided by the wisdom God gives.

In a society where distinctions based on wealth and status are common, David Fulton reminds us, through the words of James to the early church, to see others how God sees them without judgement and to treat others with mercy guided by the wisdom God gives.

In a society where distinctions based on wealth and status are common, David Fulton reminds us, through the words of James to the early church, to see others how God sees them without judgement and to treat others with mercy guided by the wisdom God gives.

In a society where distinctions based on wealth and status are common, David Fulton reminds us, through the words of James to the early church, to see others how God sees them without judgement and to treat others with mercy guided by the wisdom God gives.

Daily Devotion with Pastor Balla for June 15, 2024 Book of 1st Timothy Upholding Fairness and Impartiality in Church Leadership

June 2, 2024 Peace with God Kindness: God's Impartiality Romans 2:1-3:8 Pastor Jim Rutherford

This week, Emily Bazelon, John Dickerson, and David Plotz discuss Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito's right-wing flag-flying; David Leonhardt's take on A New Centrism; and OpenAI's use – or not – of Scarlett Johansson's voice.    Here are some notes and references from this week's show: Jodi Kantor for The New York Times: At Justice Alito's House, a ‘Stop the Steal' Symbol on Display; Jodi Kantor, Aric Toler, and Julie Tate: Another Provocative Flag Was Flown at Another Alito Home; Jodi Kantor and Abbie VanSickle: Display at Alito's Home Renews Questions of Supreme Court's Impartiality; and Abbie VanSickle: What Do Judicial Rules Say About Alito and a ‘Stop the Steal' Symbol? V: The Original Mini Series on Prime Video  Mark Sherman for AP: Roberts, Trump spar in extraordinary scrap over judges and Mark Sherman and Lindsay Whitehurst: Supreme Court Justices Barrett and Sotomayor, ideological opposites, unite to promote civility David Leonhardt for The New York Times: The Rise of a New Centrism and A New Centrism Is Rising in Washington John Dickerson for Gabfest Reads and New Cold Wars: China's Rise, Russia's Invasion, and America's Struggle to Defend the Westby David E. Sanger Bobby Allyn for NPR: Scarlett Johansson says she is ‘shocked, angered' over new ChatGPT voice Nitasha Tiku for The Washington Post: OpenAI didn't copy Scarlett Johansson's voice for ChatGPT, records show and Molly Roberts: Scarlett Johansson's ChatGPT face-off confirms our fears about AI Midler v. Ford Motor Co., 849 F.2d 460 (9th Cir. 1988) on Justia Blake Brittain for Reuters: New York Times denies OpenAI's ‘hacking' claim in copyright fight Michael Sainato for The Guardian: Consultant behind deepfaked Biden robocall indicated for Democratic primary scheme Her by Warner Bros. Pictures Here are this week's chatters: Emily: Hacks on Max  John: Lauren Aratani for The Guardian: Majority of Americans wrongly believe US is in recession – and most blame Biden David: 99% Invisible: Towers of Silence   Listener chatter from Aaron Tax in Washington, D.C.: Andrea Sachs for The Washington Post: A beloved alley cat now lives in the Watergate. Was she kidnapped, or rescued?     For this week's Slate Plus bonus segment, Emily, John, and David talk about Republican politicians' answers to the question: will you accept the results of the 2024 presidential election? See Alec Hernandez for NBC News: Here's what top Trump VP picks say about the 2020 election results – and whether they'll accept the 2024 outcome; Justin Green for Axios: Listen to Republicans on whether they'll accept 2024 election results; and Patrick Svitek for The Washington Post: Top Republicans, led by Trump, refuse to commit to accept 2024 election results.   In the next Gabfest Reads, David talks with Sierra Greer about her new book, Annie Bot: A Novel.   Email your chatters, questions, and comments to gabfest@slate.com. (Messages may be referenced by name unless the writer stipulates otherwise.)   Podcast production by Cheyna Roth Research by Julie Huygen Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week, Emily Bazelon, John Dickerson, and David Plotz discuss Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito's right-wing flag-flying; David Leonhardt's take on A New Centrism; and OpenAI's use – or not – of Scarlett Johansson's voice.    Here are some notes and references from this week's show: Jodi Kantor for The New York Times: At Justice Alito's House, a ‘Stop the Steal' Symbol on Display; Jodi Kantor, Aric Toler, and Julie Tate: Another Provocative Flag Was Flown at Another Alito Home; Jodi Kantor and Abbie VanSickle: Display at Alito's Home Renews Questions of Supreme Court's Impartiality; and Abbie VanSickle: What Do Judicial Rules Say About Alito and a ‘Stop the Steal' Symbol? V: The Original Mini Series on Prime Video  Mark Sherman for AP: Roberts, Trump spar in extraordinary scrap over judges and Mark Sherman and Lindsay Whitehurst: Supreme Court Justices Barrett and Sotomayor, ideological opposites, unite to promote civility David Leonhardt for The New York Times: The Rise of a New Centrism and A New Centrism Is Rising in Washington John Dickerson for Gabfest Reads and New Cold Wars: China's Rise, Russia's Invasion, and America's Struggle to Defend the Westby David E. Sanger Bobby Allyn for NPR: Scarlett Johansson says she is ‘shocked, angered' over new ChatGPT voice Nitasha Tiku for The Washington Post: OpenAI didn't copy Scarlett Johansson's voice for ChatGPT, records show and Molly Roberts: Scarlett Johansson's ChatGPT face-off confirms our fears about AI Midler v. Ford Motor Co., 849 F.2d 460 (9th Cir. 1988) on Justia Blake Brittain for Reuters: New York Times denies OpenAI's ‘hacking' claim in copyright fight Michael Sainato for The Guardian: Consultant behind deepfaked Biden robocall indicated for Democratic primary scheme Her by Warner Bros. Pictures Here are this week's chatters: Emily: Hacks on Max  John: Lauren Aratani for The Guardian: Majority of Americans wrongly believe US is in recession – and most blame Biden David: 99% Invisible: Towers of Silence   Listener chatter from Aaron Tax in Washington, D.C.: Andrea Sachs for The Washington Post: A beloved alley cat now lives in the Watergate. Was she kidnapped, or rescued?     For this week's Slate Plus bonus segment, Emily, John, and David talk about Republican politicians' answers to the question: will you accept the results of the 2024 presidential election? See Alec Hernandez for NBC News: Here's what top Trump VP picks say about the 2020 election results – and whether they'll accept the 2024 outcome; Justin Green for Axios: Listen to Republicans on whether they'll accept 2024 election results; and Patrick Svitek for The Washington Post: Top Republicans, led by Trump, refuse to commit to accept 2024 election results.   In the next Gabfest Reads, David talks with Sierra Greer about her new book, Annie Bot: A Novel.   Email your chatters, questions, and comments to gabfest@slate.com. (Messages may be referenced by name unless the writer stipulates otherwise.)   Podcast production by Cheyna Roth Research by Julie Huygen Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, Lisa welcomes Lexie Rigden to discuss the delay in closing arguments in the trial of Donald Trump, the impartiality of the judge, the potential bias of the jury, and the weaknesses in the prosecution's case. They also explore the unequal application of the law and the political motivations behind the trial. The conversation raises concerns about the erosion of common sense, reasonableness, and the duty to the law in the pursuit of political agendas. The Truth with Lisa Boothe is part of the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton Podcast Network - new episodes debut every Monday & Thursday.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This week, Emily Bazelon, John Dickerson, and David Plotz discuss Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito's right-wing flag-flying; David Leonhardt's take on A New Centrism; and OpenAI's use – or not – of Scarlett Johansson's voice.    Here are some notes and references from this week's show: Jodi Kantor for The New York Times: At Justice Alito's House, a ‘Stop the Steal' Symbol on Display; Jodi Kantor, Aric Toler, and Julie Tate: Another Provocative Flag Was Flown at Another Alito Home; Jodi Kantor and Abbie VanSickle: Display at Alito's Home Renews Questions of Supreme Court's Impartiality; and Abbie VanSickle: What Do Judicial Rules Say About Alito and a ‘Stop the Steal' Symbol? V: The Original Mini Series on Prime Video  Mark Sherman for AP: Roberts, Trump spar in extraordinary scrap over judges and Mark Sherman and Lindsay Whitehurst: Supreme Court Justices Barrett and Sotomayor, ideological opposites, unite to promote civility David Leonhardt for The New York Times: The Rise of a New Centrism and A New Centrism Is Rising in Washington John Dickerson for Gabfest Reads and New Cold Wars: China's Rise, Russia's Invasion, and America's Struggle to Defend the Westby David E. Sanger Bobby Allyn for NPR: Scarlett Johansson says she is ‘shocked, angered' over new ChatGPT voice Nitasha Tiku for The Washington Post: OpenAI didn't copy Scarlett Johansson's voice for ChatGPT, records show and Molly Roberts: Scarlett Johansson's ChatGPT face-off confirms our fears about AI Midler v. Ford Motor Co., 849 F.2d 460 (9th Cir. 1988) on Justia Blake Brittain for Reuters: New York Times denies OpenAI's ‘hacking' claim in copyright fight Michael Sainato for The Guardian: Consultant behind deepfaked Biden robocall indicated for Democratic primary scheme Her by Warner Bros. Pictures Here are this week's chatters: Emily: Hacks on Max  John: Lauren Aratani for The Guardian: Majority of Americans wrongly believe US is in recession – and most blame Biden David: 99% Invisible: Towers of Silence   Listener chatter from Aaron Tax in Washington, D.C.: Andrea Sachs for The Washington Post: A beloved alley cat now lives in the Watergate. Was she kidnapped, or rescued?     For this week's Slate Plus bonus segment, Emily, John, and David talk about Republican politicians' answers to the question: will you accept the results of the 2024 presidential election? See Alec Hernandez for NBC News: Here's what top Trump VP picks say about the 2020 election results – and whether they'll accept the 2024 outcome; Justin Green for Axios: Listen to Republicans on whether they'll accept 2024 election results; and Patrick Svitek for The Washington Post: Top Republicans, led by Trump, refuse to commit to accept 2024 election results.   In the next Gabfest Reads, David talks with Sierra Greer about her new book, Annie Bot: A Novel.   Email your chatters, questions, and comments to gabfest@slate.com. (Messages may be referenced by name unless the writer stipulates otherwise.)   Podcast production by Cheyna Roth Research by Julie Huygen Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Beneficentric Virtue Ethics, published by Richard Y Chappell on May 17, 2024 on The Effective Altruism Forum. I've previously suggested a constraint on warranted hostility: the target must be ill-willed and/or unreasonable. Common hostility towards either utilitarianism or effective altruism seems to violate this constraint. I could see someone reasonably disagreeing with the former view, and at least abstaining from the latter project, but I don't think either could reasonably be regarded as inherently ill-willed or unreasonable. Perhaps the easiest way to see this is to just imagine a beneficentric virtue ethicist who takes scope-sensitive impartial benevolence to be the central (or even only) virtue. Their imagined virtuous agent seems neither ill-willed nor unreasonable. But the agent thus imagined would presumably be committed to the principles of effective altruism. On the stronger version, where benevolence is the sole virtue, the view described is just utilitarianism by another name.[1] The Good-Willed Utilitarian A lot of my research is essentially about why an ideally virtuous person would be a utilitarian or something close to it. (Equivalently: why benevolence plausibly trumps other virtues in importance.) Many philosophers make false assumptions about utilitarianism that unfairly malign the view and its proponents. For a series of important correctives, see, e.g., Bleeding-Heart Consequentialism, Level-up Impartiality, Theses on Mattering, How Intention Matters, and Naïve Instrumentalism vs Principled Proceduralism. (These posts should be required reading for anyone who wants to criticize utilitarianism.) Conversely, one of my central objections to non-consequentialist views is precisely that they seem to entail severe disrespect or inadequate concern for agents arbitrarily disadvantaged under the status quo. My new paradox of deontology and pre-commitment arguments both offer different ways of developing this underlying worry. As a result, I actually find it quite mysterious that more virtue ethicists aren't utilitarians. (Note that the demandingness objection to utilitarianism is effectively pleading to let us be less than ideally virtuous.) At its heart, I see utilitarianism as the combination of (exclusively) beneficentric moral goals + instrumental rationality. Beneficentric goals are clearly good, and plausibly warrant higher priority than any competing goals. ("Do you really think that X is more important than saving and improving lives?" seems like a pretty compelling objection for any non-utilitarian value X.) And instrumental rationality, like "competence", is an executive virtue: good to have in good people, bad to have in bad people. It doesn't turn good into bad. So it's very puzzling that so many seem to find utilitarianism "deeply appalling". To vindicate such a claim, you really need to trace the objectionability back to one of the two core components of the view: exclusively beneficentric goals, or instrumental rationality. Neither seems particularly "appalling".[2] Effective Altruism and Good Will Utilitarianism remains controversial. I get that. What's even more baffling is that hostility extends to effective altruism: the most transparently well-motivated moral view one could possibly imagine. If anyone really think that the ideally virtuous agent would be opposed to either altruism or effectiveness, I'd love to hear their reasoning! (I think this is probably the most clear-cut no-brainer in all of philosophy.) A year ago, philosopher Mary Townsend took a stab, writing that: any morality that prioritizes the distant, whether the distant poor or the distant future, is a theoretical-fanaticism, one that cares more about the coherence of its own ultimate intellectual triumph - and not getting its hands dirty - than about the fate of huma...

When faced with situations that don't align with our expectations, especially in our interactions with others, it can be a challenging experience. In this episode, we talk about practical steps for conflict resolution and emotional self-regulation. Conflict, though challenging, is an essential part of relationships, providing an opportunity for growth. Demonstrating care involves acknowledging and addressing conflicts, leading to positive improvements, and fostering extraordinary relationships.Here's the list of episodes related to today's discussion, and we highly recommend listening to them as well:#250 | How to Rebuild Trust with Others - https://apple.co/3JuON6G #248 | How to Break Toxic Patterns in Your Life - https://apple.co/3tLRlJs _________________Connect with Emilia, Bianca & the EVOLVE VENTURES Community:Website: http://www.evolveventurestech.com Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/evolveventures/ Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/EvolveVenturesTech  (Public Page)Evolve Ventures Society (Private Facebook Group) - https://www.facebook.com/groups/457130589193794 Emilia's IG - https://www.instagram.com/evolvewithemilia/  Emilia's TikTok - https://www.tiktok.com/@evolvewithemilia  Bianca's IG - https://www.instagram.com/evolvewithbianca/  Bianca's Tiktok - https://www.tiktok.com/@evolvewithbianca?_t=8gq3wqu4fAx&_r=1   Learn more about the On-Demand Therapy - #YouDoYou Program: https://evolveventurestech.com/therapy/ Connect with Emilia & Bianca from Evolve Ventures for FREE: https://bit.ly/3THiEN4 Show notes:(2:35) Sources of conflicts(8:21) Emotional regulation(10:52) Impartiality(11:35) Maintaining humility(14:37) Have productive conversations(17:21) Outro***Leave them a 5-star review if you felt their energy, became inspired, or felt as though the value was added to your life in your EVOLUTION.(Stay tuned for this coming Monday's episode!)

Katie and Ros explore the place of creativity in modern media, from advertising to game show formats. They talk to the producers behind ITV's The 1% Club and Channel 4's Hunted. They'll also hear about concerns over dating app Grindr's use of user data and talk to media regulator Ofcom about new research into how audiences feel about politicians presenting current affairs programmes. Guests: Christina Nicolotti Squires, Group Director, Ofcom; Decca Aitkenhead, Chief Interviewer, The Sunday Times; Matt Bennett, Senior Executive Producer, Shine TV; Dean Nabarro, Co-founder, Magnum Media; Sir John Hegarty, Advertising Executive, The Garage Soho; Josh Parry, Senior Journalist LGBT and Identity, BBC; Zoe Schiffer, Managing Editor, PlatformerPresenters: Katie Razzall and Ros Atkins Producer: Simon Richardson