Podcasts about Manhattan

Jennifer Araoz filed a lawsuit against the Epstein Estate, alleging she was groomed and sexually assaulted by Jeffrey Epstein when she was a teenager. The lawsuit claims that Araoz was recruited outside her New York City high school by Epstein's associates, who promised career opportunities and financial support. Over time, Epstein allegedly coerced her into repeated sexual encounters, culminating in a rape at his Manhattan townhouse when she was just 15 years old. Araoz contends that Epstein's vast network of accomplices played an active role in enabling the abuse by fostering an environment of manipulation and control.The lawsuit not only targets Epstein's estate but also implicates other individuals and entities that Araoz claims facilitated his criminal activities. Seeking both justice and compensation, Araoz's suit is part of a broader legal effort by Epstein's survivors to hold those connected to his network accountable. The case underscores the alleged systemic nature of Epstein's operations, highlighting the complicity of those who worked with him to sustain his predatory behavior.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Jeffrey Epstein ST-19-PB-80 Additional filings (003).pdf (vicourts.org)

Jennifer Araoz filed a lawsuit against the Epstein Estate, alleging she was groomed and sexually assaulted by Jeffrey Epstein when she was a teenager. The lawsuit claims that Araoz was recruited outside her New York City high school by Epstein's associates, who promised career opportunities and financial support. Over time, Epstein allegedly coerced her into repeated sexual encounters, culminating in a rape at his Manhattan townhouse when she was just 15 years old. Araoz contends that Epstein's vast network of accomplices played an active role in enabling the abuse by fostering an environment of manipulation and control.The lawsuit not only targets Epstein's estate but also implicates other individuals and entities that Araoz claims facilitated his criminal activities. Seeking both justice and compensation, Araoz's suit is part of a broader legal effort by Epstein's survivors to hold those connected to his network accountable. The case underscores the alleged systemic nature of Epstein's operations, highlighting the complicity of those who worked with him to sustain his predatory behavior.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Jeffrey Epstein ST-19-PB-80 Additional filings (003).pdf (vicourts.org)

Jennifer Araoz filed a lawsuit against the Epstein Estate, alleging she was groomed and sexually assaulted by Jeffrey Epstein when she was a teenager. The lawsuit claims that Araoz was recruited outside her New York City high school by Epstein's associates, who promised career opportunities and financial support. Over time, Epstein allegedly coerced her into repeated sexual encounters, culminating in a rape at his Manhattan townhouse when she was just 15 years old. Araoz contends that Epstein's vast network of accomplices played an active role in enabling the abuse by fostering an environment of manipulation and control.The lawsuit not only targets Epstein's estate but also implicates other individuals and entities that Araoz claims facilitated his criminal activities. Seeking both justice and compensation, Araoz's suit is part of a broader legal effort by Epstein's survivors to hold those connected to his network accountable. The case underscores the alleged systemic nature of Epstein's operations, highlighting the complicity of those who worked with him to sustain his predatory behavior.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Jeffrey Epstein ST-19-PB-80 Additional filings (003).pdf (vicourts.org)

Jennifer Araoz filed a lawsuit against the Epstein Estate, alleging she was groomed and sexually assaulted by Jeffrey Epstein when she was a teenager. The lawsuit claims that Araoz was recruited outside her New York City high school by Epstein's associates, who promised career opportunities and financial support. Over time, Epstein allegedly coerced her into repeated sexual encounters, culminating in a rape at his Manhattan townhouse when she was just 15 years old. Araoz contends that Epstein's vast network of accomplices played an active role in enabling the abuse by fostering an environment of manipulation and control.The lawsuit not only targets Epstein's estate but also implicates other individuals and entities that Araoz claims facilitated his criminal activities. Seeking both justice and compensation, Araoz's suit is part of a broader legal effort by Epstein's survivors to hold those connected to his network accountable. The case underscores the alleged systemic nature of Epstein's operations, highlighting the complicity of those who worked with him to sustain his predatory behavior.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Jeffrey Epstein ST-19-PB-80 Additional filings (003).pdf (vicourts.org)

Luke introduces Andrew to a 25-year-old U2 video that stars John Madden and a frustrated place kicker. They also discuss Luke's adventures in (and trying to get to) Manhattan, KS. And Andrew might pet a dog later today.  

[REBROADCAST FROM May 20, 2025] The new novel The Doorman follows Chicky Diaz, the titular character working at a high end Manhattan building who becomes ensnared in the web of secrets his residents try to keep. Author Chris Pavone discusses his new thriller.

A month after New York City banned broker fees for most renters, a StreetEasy report shows rents rose only slightly, easing fears of a major spike. Meanwhile, state officials warn the new federal tax law could leave a $3 billion hole in New York's budget. Friday and Saturday bring the year's final Manhattanhenge sunsets, with prime views on cross streets like 14th and 72nd. And in transit news, riders are dealing with sweltering subway cars, a judge has approved Mayor Adams' plan to remove protections from a Bedford Avenue bike lane, and work continues on a $16 billion rail tunnel linking Midtown and New Jersey.

Columbia graduate and campus activist Mahmoud Khalil is suing the Trump administration for $20 million, alleging he was falsely imprisoned, maliciously prosecuted, and smeared as an anti-Semite. Meanwhile, a dozen crisis workers in New York and New Jersey who staff the 988 Lifeline's LGBTQ+ support line are expected to lose their jobs this month. Plus, WNYC's David Furst speaks with Phillip Markle, artistic director of the Brooklyn Comedy Collective, about this weekend's Fun & Dumb Improv Festival.

A judge has granted a temporary restraining order, preventing the firings of dozens of NYPD officers who the department says were improperly hired. Plus, a state appeals court says the Adams administration must implement reforms to expand housing vouchers for low-income New Yorkers. Also, New Jersey native Amanda Anismova is off to the women's Wimbledon final Saturday. Meanwhile, Whole Foods has filed a lawsuit against the Public Hotel, in the Bowery, saying late night crowds for the hotel's popular rooftop bar are blocking its deliveries. And finally, a popular dating competition has taken over nightlife in New York City.

Michael Wolff joins Joanna Coles to unpack the surreal world of Jeffrey Epstein—from the salons of Manhattan's elite to the shadowy corners of MAGA conspiracy. Wolff, who cultivated Epstein as a source and planned to have breakfast with him the morning after his arrest, reveals the financier's deep ties to figures like Donald Trump, Steve Bannon, and Bill Gates. He shares the eerie final message Epstein sent Wolff before his death—and challenges both the suicide narrative and the murder theory. Wolff debunks the myth of a “client list,” critiques the DOJ's recent denial of foul play, and exposes the hypocrisy of right-wing figures like Kash Patel and Dan Bongino, who once demanded answers and now run the very agency saying there's “nothing to see.” He also examines Epstein's enigmatic financial empire, his influence over powerful men, and the unspoken role Trump's inner circle may play in concealing the case. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Wow the lads ride again with their from and comedian/actor Michael Rowland to get into it about family genetics, cross cultural bonding, flight techniques and more!

The GoPowercat Powercat Podcast serves up an episode from Day 2 of Big 12 Media Days in Frisco, Texas. This edition of the Powercat Podcast features GoPowercat.com publisher Tim Fitzgerald, managing editor Ryan Gilbert, Big 12 Insiders host Brien Hanley and GPC intern Jon Grove. The Powercat Podcast is sponsored by Helping Hands Remodeling in Manhattan. The Powercat Podcast is part of the 247Sports Podcast Network at Megaphone.fm. Become a GoPowercat VIP: CHECK OUT TODAY'S OFFER!Make sure you subscribe to the Powercat Podcast from your favorite podcast provider, including Apple, Spotify, or Amazon.Are you subscribed to the GoPowercat YouTube channel? Come check out our original programming at YouTube.com/GoPowercat To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Laird Veatch became the Athletic Director for the University of Missouri in 2024. Before that, he was Athletic Director at the University of Memphis. He originally hails from Manhattan, Kansas, where he went to KState and was Captain of the Football Team. He then went on to the University of Texas and began his administrative career while earning his master's degree. Laird began working at Mizzou in 1997, managing the Tiger Scholarship Fund, and then went on to positions at Iowa State, Learfield Sports, KState, University of Florida, Memphis and finally back to Mizzou last year.Key points:Laird talks about how his playing days at KState prepared him for his current role.He talks about the projects worked on at Florida and Memphis. Laird and Phil talk about building and creating culture.SeaCaptainCoaching.comInstagram linkFB linkConnect with PhilLinkedInNow Available!The Sea Captain Way for Financial Advisors

Democratic Rep. Adriano Espaillat of New York is endorsing Zohran Mamdani for mayor. Plus, supporters of federal Environmental Protection Agency employees who were put on leave last week are pushing the agency to reinstate them. Also, a decades-old Manhattan diner is closing its doors later this month. Meanwhile, a report from the Legal Aid Society suggests that New York City's Administration for Children's Services is subjecting families to more traumatic investigations than is really necessary. And finally, a woman whose son died while subway surfing is suing the social media companies that helped to popularize the dangerous trend.

The chemical company DuPont is agreeing to pay $27 million dollars to residents of Hoosick, New York whose water supply was contaminated with toxic chemicals. Meanwhile, New York City officials say a man who had been detained at Rikers Island died Wednesday while receiving treatment at Bellevue Hospital. Plus, on this week's politics segment, WNYC reporters Brigid Bergin and Jimmy Vielkind give us an update on Zohran Mamdani's new supporters, Andrew Cuomo's future plans, and the governors race.

The Hochul administration warns that federal Medicaid cuts could hit the Bronx especially hard, threatening both health coverage and jobs in the borough. Meanwhile, in honor of Disability Pride Month, the Andrew Heiskell Library, New York City's only braille and talking book library, is rolling out new electronic Braille readers. And in Brooklyn, a woman has filed notice of intent to sue the city, alleging police failed to intervene when a mob of Orthodox Jewish men surrounded her outside a Crown Heights synagogue after a protest of Israel's security minister. She says she was not participating in the demonstration.

Payments for ARC and PLC Canola Growing Season and Harvest Pests in the Landscape   00:01:05 – Payments for ARC and PLC: Today's show starts with K-State Extension farm economist, Robin Reid, and K-State Extension assistant, Rich Llewelyn, as they discuss ARC and PLC payments for wheat and their projections for corn, soybeans and grain sorghum. National 2024/2025 ARC-Co Wheat Payment Rates and Fall Crop Estimates MYA Price Estimates Updates for ARC and PLC Commodity Programs   00:12:05 – Canola Growing Season and Harvest: Mike Stamm, K-State canola breeder, continues the show with a recap of the canola growing season and harvest for Kansas. eUpdate.Agronomy.ksu.edu   00:23:05 – Pests in the Landscape: K-State horticultural entomologist Raymond Cloyd ends the show looking at several current pests, including Japanese beetle adults, bagworms and mimosa webworms.     Send comments, questions or requests for copies of past programs to ksrenews@ksu.edu.   Agriculture Today is a daily program featuring Kansas State University agricultural specialists and other experts examining ag issues facing Kansas and the nation. It is hosted by Shelby Varner and distributed to radio stations throughout Kansas and as a daily podcast.   K‑State Research and Extension is a short name for the Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service, a program designed to generate and distribute useful knowledge for the well‑being of Kansans. Supported by county, state, federal and private funds, the program has county Extension offices, experiment fields, area Extension offices and regional research centers statewide. Its headquarters is on the K‑State campus in Manhattan

We almost didn't publish this one since it goes into a lot of hard topics. Jen discusses the Texas / Camp Mystic floods and why some people are being so annoying about it.   --> Watch this episode on Youtube, and follow Jen's channel while you're there!    --> FLOOD SUPPORT: Harber family GoFundMe Catholic Charities of San Antonio Flood Relief   --> PATREON: Join Jen's Patreon here and unlock instant access to great content + Jen's “State of the Dumpster Fire” chats   --> NEW COMEDY SPECIAL: Watch Jen's new comedy special, Shabby Chic, here on Youtube!   --> EMAIL LIST: Join Jen's email list to be the first to know when she has big updates   Jen Fulwiler is a mom with zero domestic skills. Her natural habitat is a martini bar in Manhattan, yet she finds herself raising a family in suburban Texas with her country-boy husband who thinks his inflatable hot tub is the summit of the human experience. Her stories of failing her way through life will resonate with anyone who doesn't have it all together.    Jen is a viral standup comic, bestselling author, and former SiriusXM radio host who has released three comedy specials: The Naughty Corner, Maternal Instinct, and Shabby Chic. She has been featured on Nate Bargatze's Nateland Presents, Where My Moms At with Christina P, Dr. Drew After Dark, the Today Show, CNN, and Fox News. She was featured in the viral article, “5 Comedians Like Nate Bargatze Who Make Everyone Laugh.” She lives with her husband and six kids in Austin, Texas.  

Salama bint Said (oder Sayyida Salme) wird 1844 auf Sansibar als Tochter des omanisch-sansibarischen Sultans Sayyid Said geboren. Ihr Leben als Prinzessin muss sie 1866 aufgeben, flieht von der Insel, heiratet einen Hamburger Kaufmann und beginnt als Emily Ruete ein neues Leben im Deutschen Kaiserreich. Sansibar und Ostafrika geraten in den 1880er-Jahren immer mehr in den Fokus der europäischen Kolonialmächte und so wird Emily Ruete kurzzeitig zum Spielball der Kolonialpolitik des Reichskanzlers Otto von Bismarck. Wir sprechen über das Leben von Emily Ruete, den kürzesten Krieg der Geschichte, wie die Sultane Sansibars ihre Macht verlieren und warum in Hamburg kein Platz mehr nach Emily Ruete benannt ist. // Erwähnte Folgen - GAG417: Auf der Suche nach den Quellen des Nils – https://gadg.fm/417 - GAG279: Muskat und Manhattan – https://gadg.fm/279 - GAG468: Arabia Felix oder Die Dänisch Arabische Expedition – https://gadg.fm/468 - GAG307: Njinga, Königin von Ndongo und Matamba – https://gadg.fm/307 - GAG138: Askari und die Kolonialgeschichte des Deutschen Reichs – https://gadg.fm/138 // Literatur - Julius Waldschmidt: Kaiser, Kanzler und Prinzessin. Ein Frauenschicksal zwischen Orient und Okzident, 2005 - Tania Mancheno: Ambivalente Identitäten – Salme/Ruete, koloniales und kolonialisiertes Subjekt zugleich. Wissenschaftliches Gutachten zur Einordnung der Person Emily Ruete in den Kontext ihrer Zeit, 2021 (https://www.hamburg.de/politik-und-verwaltung/behoerden/behoerde-fuer-kultur-und-medien/gutachten-ruete-113944) //Aus unserer Werbung Du möchtest mehr über unsere Werbepartner erfahren? Hier findest du alle Infos & Rabatte: https://linktr.ee/GeschichtenausderGeschichte // Wir sind jetzt auch bei CampfireFM! Wer direkt in Folgen kommentieren will, Zusatzmaterial und Blicke hinter die Kulissen sehen will: einfach die App installieren und unserer Community beitreten: https://www.joincampfire.fm/podcasts/22 //Wir haben auch ein Buch geschrieben: Wer es erwerben will, es ist überall im Handel, aber auch direkt über den Verlag zu erwerben: https://www.piper.de/buecher/geschichten-aus-der-geschichte-isbn-978-3-492-06363-0 Wer Becher, T-Shirts oder Hoodies erwerben will: Die gibt's unter https://geschichte.shop Wer unsere Folgen lieber ohne Werbung anhören will, kann das über eine kleine Unterstützung auf Steady oder ein Abo des GeschichteFM-Plus Kanals auf Apple Podcasts tun. Wir freuen uns, wenn ihr den Podcast bei Apple Podcasts oder wo auch immer dies möglich ist rezensiert oder bewertet. Wir freuen uns auch immer, wenn ihr euren Freundinnen und Freunden, Kolleginnen und Kollegen oder sogar Nachbarinnen und Nachbarn von uns erzählt! Du möchtest Werbung in diesem Podcast schalten? Dann erfahre hier mehr über die Werbemöglichkeiten bei Seven.One Audio: https://www.seven.one/portfolio/sevenone-audio

Kiera is joined by Ted Osterer of Synergy Dental Partners to talk about the money field of dentistry in this moment of 2025, including tariffs, negotiating and raising fees, finding supplies, and more. Episode resources: Subscribe to The Dental A-Team podcast Schedule a Practice Assessment Leave us a review Transcript: Kiera Dent (00:01) Hello, Dental A Team listeners. This is Kiera. And today I am jazzed. I have a super fun guest on the podcast today. We're going to talk about the tariff sheriff, how that's impacting dentistry, the rise of dental supply costs, and honestly what to do because I'm so annoyed by all these pieces. What's the economic outlook? How do dentists freaking survive? Like, gosh, it just seems like a funny world out there. But we have Ted Osterer. He is with Synergy. I love this buying group. I think they're   Absolutely incredible. We're gonna shed some light for you guys. So Ted, welcome to the show today. How are you?   Ted Osterer (00:32) I am doing very, very well. Thank you so, so much for having me. Congratulations on your thousandth episode recently. I'm happy to be a part of this and any value I could bring to your listeners, hey, we're all better for it.   Kiera Dent (00:39) Thank you.   Well, thanks, Ted. And yes, ⁓ I'm still in utter awe that we hit a thousand episodes. Like when I started this, it was just a whim, a pipe dream. Jason and I were hiking. It's not a joke. I literally was hiking half-dome. Mind you, Jason had said, hey, let's go down to Yosemite. I'd love a nice relaxing weekend down there. And I had learned that you could go get, like, this is prior. You can't do this anymore. That you could get these like day passes, like these day camping passes. And if you just went and sat at this little lodge for a few hours.   So I was like, Jay, yeah, of course we'll go down there for this very calm, welcoming, welcome, like very easy, relaxing weekend. Little did he know I had full plans to try and get half dome tickets and like hike half dome. I even brought the gloves, like I was ready to go. And sure enough, I got the lottery, got the tickets. Jason was like, what the heck? We're going to freaking hike half dome. Like, Kiera, we haven't even prepped for this. We haven't done any of this. We don't even have a hotel. We got a hotel an hour away. We had to drive an hour outside of town. It was the nastiest hotel. They were like,   I'm not even joking. There was like hair and like this little pill on the pillow that were not ours. Jason's like had the worst sleep of his night and I'm like listen there's no hotels around me of 70. Like we're filing so we had a place. We went back super early the next morning to hike Half Dome and lo and behold on our hike I said Jay I think we need to build a podcast. This is where it all started. It was like one of those things that I never imagined a thousand episodes would hit and here we are.   Ted, you're hanging out with me a thousand in. And I think it's just fun because of all the value, all the stories, all the people. And like you and I were talking about pre-show, the podcast is really just a place where I get to selfishly hang out and just have a good conversation with people that I like. I get to meet new people in the industry. And as a byproduct of my nerdiness and excitement of meeting people, all of our listeners get benefited by this. So Ted, I'm so happy you're a part of this. Thank you for that. ⁓   Outside of Yosemite, let's talk about the rising cost of dental supplies, the tariffs, how this is going to impact. Because I know people are really nervous about it. I see in lots of dental groups out there, and you guys are really great. That's why I had you come on, because I think you're a huge solution to these problems. So take it away, Ted also, so the listener know how on earth did you even get into dentistry? Let's talk about that first, and then let's talk about what this even looks like for dental practices long-term.   Ted Osterer (03:00) How did I get into dentistry? ⁓ It was fate, it was just destiny. Growing up, I had 13 teeth pulled. I had braces for five years and it was like, well, I'm here for life, I guess. And this is just how we can all grow as a unit. ⁓ I've been in dentistry for about 15 years now. I started out as a dental supply rep. I was going door to door for over five years and...   funny enough that, you know, this isn't the, I grew up in the New York area. This is the major metropolitan New York area. And I had a really good buddy and he was like, I think you'd be a really good fit actually managing anal practices. And I can actually introduce you to someone. And it was like a small like eight practice group. I can introduce you to somebody, the practice on the Upper East Side of Manhattan. Go see if you'd be a good fit. And I'm just kind of like, sure, guess. know, it's like always like have a conversation.   And I had a conversation and sure enough, I got along really well with a particular office manager ⁓ from this group and I went to go work for this office manager. ⁓ Within three months, I had my own practice. I was a practice manager. You know, it's so funny going from a supply rep to an office manager, right? I learned the first and I'm not saying this is everybody, but I learned the first day of being in a dental office that I knew nothing.   Kiera Dent (03:59) Yeah.   Ted Osterer (04:29) about what happens in a dental office, right? Like I'm like, could, God, it's gonna be a piece of cake. I've been in dentistry for five years. And so I could tell you how strong and impressive material was. That does not help with insurance codes or posture downgrade or presenting treatment or creating a schedule or reading a schedule, anything like that. So, much respect to everyone that manages offices that's listening right now that my goodness, you're fighting the good fight. Keep up the good work. ⁓   Kiera Dent (04:40) does not.   Agreed.   Ted Osterer (04:57) I did that for some time. I was recruited to work for care credit. I oversaw New England for a few years where then they moved me to South Florida. And then a few months after that, I was recruited by Synergy. I've been here since 2021. And this is really, really cool. You know, I came to Synergy because the message was, do you want to make an impact in the dental world? You know, like you love what you do, but do you really want to make an impact? Do you want to help independent dentistry? And I was like,   man, what a line, right? Like I was suckered in and I really wanted to make a difference. And sure enough, almost four years later, we're still here at, you know, we're the largest dental buying club in the country. We are the fastest growing dental buying club in the country. And we're just trying to preserve independent dentistry by giving them the same supply and overhead cost at a 20 plus practice DSO would get. that, know, we were founded by dentists. It was as black and white as, Hey,   If enough of us order from the same places, they'll give us a discount. And now we have people in charge of negotiating pricing. You know, we have a dedicated team to each member to make sure that they're getting the values worth here at Synergy and they're not ordering more than they have to. And you you asked about tariffs, the rising overhead costs, all of that really, really fun stuff, right? Let's dive into that, right? You know, the perceived economic uncertainty of everything. Are prices going to go up? Yes, of course.   Does that mean you need to buy everything right now at the same time to save money in like six months? No, you probably shouldn't do that either. You know, the waiting game generally always pays off, be it in dentistry or outside of dentistry when it comes to money, you know, you're better off just kind of, you know, hold the chips, hold down the fort, you know, you're, it's not, you do not sound the alarms, of course, right? You know, the price of your crowns is not going to go up 10,000 % like.   Kiera Dent (06:21) Yeah.   Ted Osterer (06:50) Calm down, chill out, right? It's what we've monitored. Have tariffs affected some prices? Yes. ⁓ Many have already gone down. Many have plateaued with that price increase and we kind of have a safe, what, just gauge on what those actually are, right? The percentages have been minimal. It's a few dollars here and there.   Kiera Dent (06:52) Yes, I agree.   Ted Osterer (07:17) Again, the industry is not belly up. really should not be your ⁓ primary concern. Providing optimal quality ⁓ of treatment should be your number one concern still to this day. I don't think it's going to make a difference whether you're getting a new sensor or not. If your sensor goes, you're OK.   Kiera Dent (07:36) It's It's really true. Well, Ted, I love that. And I love your story. And I love that you have the real life experience in dental practices, because that's something that we pride ourselves on at Dental A Team. It's like, we've been there, done that, and done it successfully. And you're right. Being in a practice is no small task. It's no small feat. And ⁓ I think the supply costs, I do agree with you. think certain people were getting a little bit, maybe extra on this, of how concerned we are of cost. And I don't think it's a wrong thing.   to look at, to project down and to forecast forward to make sure that you keep in line with your overhead. Like people who are looking at this, I'm high-fiving you because you actually are looking at your numbers and you understand the cost of your supplies. But at the same time, I remember I was at a, I have a friend who's very wealthy. We're talking like this person brings in 28, 30 million annually a year. And like, I just giggle because it is a great friend.   Ted Osterer (08:25) Sounds like a great friend. There you go. All right.   Kiera Dent (08:29) I thought he said he was a   cosmetic dentist when I met him and he's surely not a cosmetic dentist. He's a cosmetic chemist. So skincare, things like that. And I remember we were talking and he was like, yeah, I just got so freaked out about the stocks. I pulled everything out of the stock market. This was two years ago. And I'm like, bro, like the amount of gains because you got so scared is incredible. And I had another friend, we were sitting at a wealth conference and we had like Ray Dalio there and Paul Tudor Jones and gosh.   Marks, Howard Marks, like so many of the big players in wealth and they weren't talking. And this guy named Harry Dent came in and Harry Dent has been known for being right and wrong on predictions of the market. And I remember like, I'm not kidding you. We talked in this conference of do not make rash decisions. Like we're here to gather all the information, synthesize it out and then make best decisions. And I kid you not, we are two days into this five day conference and I met this guy and he's like, Harry Dent just freaked me out. I went and sold all my...   like sold everything like that night pulled everything out of the stock market. I was like, dude, you're the reason people talk about what not to do because you should never be this radical. And so I feel like while those are extremes, I feel like dentistry can kind of be that way with the supply. Like we feel it's the stock market plummeting on us within our supply chain because we've got tariffs on there. When the reality is let's remember dentistry by default, a lot of our products already have very high margins on them. Like I'm not going to say it to the world in case there are people who are not dentists listening.   but you can just think about fluoride for one second. So fluoride has insane margins on it, which are very profitable for you. The bulk of dentistry is very profitable. So these small rises, agreed, let's take a look at that. But like you said, Ted, it's not the end of the world. So I am curious though, from my like nerdy side, what things have gone up the most? What are you guys seeing across the board that the tariffs or the uncertainties, like the economy's gone up you guys. Bread, I'm shocked.   or gasoline, you want to talk about gas prices? Like I don't know, in Florida it's way cheap. Here I'm in Reno in California. I kid you not in Truckee it was $7 a gallon and I like wanted to throw up the gases that much money, but I'm like if gas for a gallon is $7, bread prices, I mean you're paying five bucks, six bucks a loaf for bread, like supplies are going to be higher. It's not something that I'm like, oh my gosh, my cotton rolls went up. Well yeah, of course they went up. does like everything in the world has gone up.   Home prices have gone up, but I am curious, what have you guys seen that the tariffs hit the most? Like what are some of those supplies? But we're ashricking this. Everyone listening, you have to promise you will not be either of my two friends who go radical. So when Ted tells you which one's worth a little bit higher, do not go out and give me like your prepping situation where you go buy all this because you're freaking out about it. Like steady the course, stay consistent, and just like watch the scene because most things will level out just like in stocks, just like in investments. But if we're radical and being wild on it, that's where you get.   Like it just does not benefit. So I think Ted, everyone has promised. I made them just promise like everybody. Yes, you promise. Don't be radical. Ted, what are some of the ones that are seeing the highest hits? Like what, what products, what things are you guys seeing?   Ted Osterer (11:33) Since you all promised ⁓ not to be radical, I will go ahead and share. Yeah, unbreakable. We know that's unbreakable.   Kiera Dent (11:36) You promised.   It's unbreakable.   You did that, you like kissed the thumb, something like that. And then you like do a dance. All of them have done that, right? Nobody better lie. Don't be radical. Okay. They're good.   Ted Osterer (11:52) Excellent.   So for those listening at home, I did a very, very impressive interpretive dance, but for those watching, you saw it, it's all good. ⁓ So with a lot of the terrorists I've seen, and look, it's so volatile, you know, and for those, again, listening, I'm doing that thing with your finger, you go up and down a lot about how much it goes up and down. You know, look, I mean, you saw a lot of the anesthetics made in Canada go up a significant percent.   You saw a lot of lab cases sent from overseas or, you know, it's funny enough, for those that don't know what the gray market is in terms of the supplies in the industry, Products are made overseas, totally fine, right? There's nothing wrong with products that are made overseas. However, sometimes they're made in factories that are only authorized in certain countries, even though it could be big name, know, supply partners, major manufacturers.   I won't name drop, you know what I mean? I'm not trying to, you can Google it, you have access to the internet, congrats. When it comes to, these products that are made overseas are only regulated to be in select countries, they still have to be refrigerated certain ways, they still could have, they could have been made a long time ago, they're set to expire. They are mailed here and then they are sold to the United States, they're unregulated. You'll see their costs are...   Insanely low to the point where it's too good to be true spoiler a lot a spoiler it is too good to be true right in the event that someone You know your malpractice insurance Is kicked in you use great, you know gray market products. You might be losing a case and that's not the smoke you want However, in the event of these tariffs funny enough what went up these gray market products, right? ⁓ They went up to the point where   Kiera Dent (13:25) Yeah.   Interesting.   Ted Osterer (13:46) They're the same pricing, if not more than what your rep is offering you now. know, and look, you don't want to be caught with something like that. And it goes to show you that you, again, you're worried about optimal care. You should be worried about what you're putting in your patient's mouth as well. And depending on where you order it from, right? Like picture yourself, you're a patient in a chair, okay? And an assistant walks in to set,   you know, to set the room, to put the supplies that you're going to use on that tray and she opens an eBay box. Imagine what the patient must be feeling knowing that or an Amazon box. It's like, wait a minute, if your patient's aware at all, you probably don't want that. And now that price is the same price that a major dealer is going to offer you or a rep can offer you. That's the worst case scenario. I believe that that's what I've seen went up the most. And there were some labs from overseas.   Kiera Dent (14:23) Yeah, no. No. No.   I'm just.   Ted Osterer (14:44) ⁓ where the tariff was taking effect, a lot of the tariffs they were getting, were passing directly onto the consumer. I've seen that stop also. I'm not gonna say it's not gonna happen again, but it's not like you can order in bulk all these cases, you know? So, you know, again, when it comes to your labs, if you're satisfied with your lab, play the waiting game. You should be fine.   Kiera Dent (14:53) Mm-hmm.   It's true.   Yeah, that's actually really helpful to know Ted, because I was really curious and I think it's one of those things of, I don't know, I'm the clinician inside of me. I originally dental assistant, office manager, treatment coordinator. We have a lot of hygienists on our team. ⁓ I think all of us in consulting, well, yes, we watch the numbers exponentially, which is why I brought Ted on. I wanted synergy to be here. I think it's a great solution for your numbers. The biggest thing I will also say is like,   Please don't be so obsessive with the numbers that you cut your amazing dentistry and you are actually not doing the best dentistry for patients. I believe that when we do good by our patients, when we take care of them, when we use great products, I'm not saying you have to be I have a car. I'm not saying you have to be like high, high end. You can if you choose, but just making sure that we're doing right by our patients. Like I said, dentistry is a very profitable industry.   as is, like we have done a really good job of keeping the practices profitable in spite of insurances and all of that. But I really just want to make sure people, when we're looking at this, let's not penny pinch and nickel, like watching all of our nickels when we're actually doing a disservice to our patients. So agreed, like that gray market, things like that. Yes, I like to be a good shopper. I love to get a good deal, but making sure that it's a good deal that's also taking care of your patients would be my like word to the wise.   Again, I believe that when we are good and we're honest to our patients, people feel that there's good karma, there's good energy, it's all the way around. So Ted, how does synergy work? Like how do you get around this? Because things are going up. Being a business owner, mean, our margins are, they've been high, so maybe they're a little less high. I will also say, like doctors, I hope you've increased your fees too. You should do that. like, it's not just supplies that get to go up.   Dentistry also gets to go up and it should be going up. And if you haven't raised your fees, I'll just asterisk that right now. Like that is very common. It's very normal. It should be done every single year. I think that's a way to offset some of these costs for you too. It's ethical and honest, but Ted kind of walk us through like independent dentists, which are most of the practices listening. We do have some DSOs on there. I think sometimes you can feel like, I don't know. It's like the little brother who's watching the big brother drive the car and it's like, why can't I get these deals? Like I know I'm just one practice, but.   Sometimes you feel neglected. sometimes feel like distributors and manufacturers don't give you as good of a deal. Like, let's be real. The DSOs do get better deals than you do. I I've heard, I go talk to a lot of people and they're like, well, yeah, if you've got 20, 30, 50 practices, we're going to give you like pennies on the dollar compared to my solo practice that's going to be paying more for it due to the bulk distribution. So how can we have that of like, how can Independence Dennis win? Not have these costs hit them and to still play in the big leagues, even though they don't want to necessarily practice that way today.   Ted Osterer (17:53) Yeah, awesome question, right? You hit on the head. What did DSO's do? They strong arm these dealers, manufacturers, distributors, and they say, look, I have 30 offices. We all want to order from you. We'll commit to this amount of spend. We'll commit to this amount of product. Give me the absolute best deal that you will, or I'm going to the other distributor that's on the next page of this advertisement that I am looking at, right? So they're just negotiating fees all day.   That's what the ESOs are doing. They have people in place to negotiate these rates all day. That's what Synergy Dental Partners has, Independent Dentistry, ⁓ I mean, look, it's alive and well. We see it every day, you know, just because there's not major conferences that you're demanded to go to like the ESOs and things like that doesn't mean they're not alive and well and band together and know what's actually going on in dentistry, right? So Independent Dentists will subscribe to Synergy.   to have access to the same pricing that those 20 plus, 30 plus practice DSOs would get, right? We negotiate with these supply partners all day long on the supplies that you're already using, right? I mean, that's what we do. We bully our vendors. We come to an agreement with specific supply partners to be in our network and have very attractive offerings that they will only offer to Synergy members, right? We're partnered with major distributors. We negotiate with...   them all day, we're partnered with different implant organizations, with different rotary organizations, with different services. Depending on what you're looking for, we're going to offer you something that you would not be able to get on your own, right? Do you have to order in bulk with a synergy member? No, that's the point of us because we have enough dentists all ordering from the same place that the bulk is taken care of. Order as you go, right? So Darby is our anchor supplier, shines the largest distributor in the country.   Patterson's the second largest distributor in the country. Darby's the third largest distributor in the country. When you place an order with them, everything comes in one to two days. As a synergy member, any order over $249, there's no shipping charges. And let's think about that in itself. Do you have to order in bulk now? No, do you have to hit a crazy minimum? No, you can order four times a month and not pay shipping. Everything's gonna come in one to two days. Now regarding all these manufacturer deals,   Kiera Dent (20:01) awesome.   Ted Osterer (20:15) Oh, I like to buy four to get one free. like to buy three to get one free. You hear the word free. Awesome. Great. Now we do have a lot of offerings just like that care, right? However, we've negotiated the net costs of those buy four, get one threes, get one free, buy three, get one free for just one. So you can order one. You don't need to spend $700 on your favorite composite to get one free. And now shade C3 is going to sit on your shelf for the next three years and it expires. You're going to throw it away anyway. So you wasted all that money.   Kiera Dent (20:23) Right.   Mm-hmm.   Ha!   Ted Osterer (20:43) The point of us is inventory control. It's cash flow management. I mean, if cash is what you're worried about, well guess what? mean, order as you go, you're probably not gonna pay shipping anyway. You have the supply you need. My goodness, Kara, have you ever had to clean out a supply closet? Is it not the worst day of the month? You know, when people order the wrong things, yeah, maybe you'll return it, or what are you gonna do? You're gonna check it off that checklist and then put it where you think it goes. Now it's gonna sit there forever. Yikes, right?   Kiera Dent (21:02) Yep.   Yep.   Ted Osterer (21:13) You know,   with Darby, things are easy to return. You order as you go, it's not gonna get lost in some shuffle if you order as you go, right? We are partnered getting discounts with Strom and NeoDent for implants and BioHorizons and Zest for the locator attachment through overdenture materials, Comet and Brassler for rotary. ⁓ We just rolled out our partnership with Bisco. We're partnered with UltraDent, Crestor, LB, Phillips. I'm going to put your listeners to sleep as I shamelessly plug these.   Incredible companies offering the incredible deals are giving our members but the whole point of us is Carrie said you love to shop Bad news pal. I'm taking that phone away from you. We've done that shopping for you We know where your pricing should be is every price the lowest price on the market. I can't confidently say yes It's not true. I can confidently say that a lot of them are the best price in the market But every price is going to be competitive and if you're taking four or five hours to place an order with six tabs open   texting four different reps. That's four patients that you could have seen in that time. not only, let's say you order from all those places. Now you got five different shipping charges. And now you don't know when any of these orders are gonna come. It could take weeks. Something could be on back orders. Something could be expired. But hey, you saved a dollar on gloves. Congratulations, you know?   Kiera Dent (22:16) you   I love it. And I think that this, is why I like Synergy. I feel like it's, you get the Costco discounts without the bulk requirements. And that's something that I really enjoyed about it because something we teach with our clients is do not be stocking up. I remember I worked at Midwestern University's dental college for a few years. And I remember I went through their supplies and because there was so much   Ted Osterer (22:44) Yep.   Kiera Dent (22:58) We, like, I remember throwing away boxes and boxes and boxes of expired supplies, things that we couldn't use anymore. And it was disgusting. And I was shocked and I was like, that's it. We have to get this to where we can see everything. And so we're really big in consulting of like tip out bids, having clear things, having it where your order is not like tucked in boxes and nooks and crannies. ⁓ And the way you're able to do that is by buying as you need it, rather than buying. Like I remember buying when I was an assistant ordering.   Ted Osterer (23:07) What a waste.   Kiera Dent (23:25) I think like 10 boxes of gloves. Like we had them stacked everywhere. It was just like an absurd amount because we were like, well, we got the deal. We need to have this versus like, no, like what are we using? That also keeps our costs down. We're not having these high end fluxes and low drops in our supplies. We're able to have that more consistent, have more consistent overhead. And like you said, sometimes Costco is not the cheapest. Sometimes I can get it cheaper at other places, but the reality is the time we're saving and also the more dentists buying within Synergy.   more we're able to get the bulk discount. So it's like, it's the biggest DSO you can be a part of without being a part of a DSO, like air quotes around it, because you're not a part of a DSO, but it's the collective community group that's driving down the pieces for it. And Ted, correct me if I'm wrong, I feel like when I've talked to Synergy in the past, you don't have to give up your reps, because I know people get really weird about like, but like we've been best friends with so and so, and it's like, you can still order from the companies you want. Is that correct? Or do you need to like order through Benco? I thought it was like something with that, but help us understand like,   Do I have to give up my rep? Do I have to only order through your guys' people? How does this work for me to transition over? Because I do know dentists are very loyal and I think that's an amazing attribute. I would say like stay loyal. Also make sure that your overhead's making sense as you're going and buying supplies.   Ted Osterer (24:36) If you're a member of Center Gentle Partners, feel free to order from whoever you'd like. There's no minimums or anything like that. Now, are you better off buying from the suppliers in our network if you're trying to save money and time? Yes, like you just said. So Darby's our anchor supplier. They're the only distributor that we work with. If you're best friends with the Banco rep and you're looking to save money,   and you give us a shot and like I said the sole point is to save money we can very much help you and there's plenty to go around that if you need to order from Banco who you mentioned earlier or any other distributor have at it but I mean if we can cut your supply cost by 25-30 % you keep your reps for service you keep your reps for whatever you choose to keep them for yes by all means we are not offended there's no exclusive like that.   Now relationships are important. know, like you said that regarding manufacturers, if you have a rep already with Darby, you don't have to change who you're already ordering from as long as they're network. We don't force you to do anything differently. But hear me out. You brought up Costco. Now, you know, you went to Costco, you you only have how many free hours in a week? You know, either you can get that at Costco or you could spend the gas money and the time.   Kiera Dent (25:44) Yeah.   Mm-hmm.   Ted Osterer (26:01) to hit up Walmart and Publix and somewhere else on the way home and now you're too tired to go do whatever it is that you wanted to do that night. But hey, you saved like 26 bucks, have at it, well done. How valuable is your time to you? Yeah.   Kiera Dent (26:05) Yeah.   Well done.   Yeah. And if your gas is $7 a gallon, you did not actually make any money. thinking about that, but like for dentists, I think there's a good book, Dan Martell, I raved about him quite a few times to buy back your time. And I think this is a zone where we can have, where you can actually save time. You can save money and you can actually, even your assistant. So doctors, you might not be ordering, but your assistant's ordering. Think of like, if I didn't have to give up five hours or four hours of my assistant's time, which is what I used to have to block off.   Ted Osterer (26:22) You   Kiera Dent (26:43) and you can see more patients with that assistant rather than them ordering that right there is a cost saving. So I did some quick math because I heard what you said. If we are able to save you usually 25 % on your supply costs. So I just thought, okay, let's say there's a million dollar practice. This million dollar, that's about 83,000. We'll just do 84,000 rough math. A month is what this practice would be producing. We like as a consulting company for your supply costs to be about 5 % of that. So I was like, okay.   That'd be like 4,200 bucks that month that could go towards supplies. If you guys save 25%, that's a thousand dollar savings, over a thousand dollar savings on that 4,200 a month. I was thinking about that, like a thousand dollars a month. This is on a million dollar practice. I didn't go for a sky high one. If you're bigger than that, obviously it's way more than that. But I just thought Ted, like, if you could save a thousand dollars a month, cause I know you guys have this, like you guys have sexy stats on how much you're able to save practices. I understand you might have to have two, three conversations with your reps.   of like, guys, for us, we care about you, we love you. The reality is, I'm willing to have that conversation if I'm gonna get thousand bucks a month. Because that's now $12,000 for the year. And I think about, well right there, if you're looking at other things, virtual assistants can cost you $12,000 for a year. They can do all your billing, they can do outsource pieces for you, you could hire a personal assistant for you for $12,000. Even that extra $1,000 a month, I'm thinking, could you bring on different team members for that?   What does that look like? I understand like a full assistance not going to cost you 12 grand, but I'm like virtual assistance are outsourced billing, different things that you could use those funds for that right there to me. I'd be willing to have some conversations and just look at. So that's where I want to, I'm really big on numbers because I'm like, cool, 25%. But I'm like, when it breaks down to like thousands a month that I could then reinvest and use in better areas, just like I'm like, you guys, you can keep spending money on Indeed. Go for it. And I'm not here to say indeed is not great.   but you could also switch to AvaHR, which used to be VivaHR. It's literally 149 bucks a month for unlimited posting of ads. I took my cost of posting ads. I'm doing the same thing. I'm literally posting ads on the exact same platforms. I used to spend $15,000 a year on that, and now I pay about $1,200 a year. Right there, I'm like, that's a switch I'm willing to make. Yes, bummer, I don't get to like post directly to Indeed anymore. Same thing, I don't maybe get to like buy directly from my rep.   you still can keep the relationship. Like if you need to buy equipment or different things like that, like you can still keep the relationship. But I think, and they will try to sweet talk you, but I've seen it with the buying groups, the savings that you get, I just say have the conversation. A thousand bucks a month, go on, get a massage, do something fun. Like, I don't know, take your kids on vacation for 12 grand, whatever it is, but that's just literally buying the same materials through a different platform and getting...   money kickback. don't know. To me, Ted, it's always been a no-brainer, which is why I bring you guys on the podcast. So that's my spiel. But Ted, anything you have to take, wrap this up because I think with the tariffs, with the rising costs, realizing it's not that big of a deal, buy as you go. You can use these buying groups. You can be like a DSO, but you can buy what you need, not having to get all these deals. You're able to cut your costs. You said about 25 % on supplies and just go look at what you spent on supplies last three months. Think if you got 25 % of that back.   I think I'd be willing to have a conversation. But Ted, you tell me what you think. Those are my thoughts on this.   Ted Osterer (30:06) I said, I was going to say like the exact same thing, unfortunately, but I, you know, I'll take that one. I'll take that one second further to really, really simplify it. Right. And just summarize everything you just said. You know, we're partnered with over 50 supply partners, including eight different labs. Right. So as a consulting agency, right. Like we see labs as high as 10, 15%, you know, it should be what six to 8%.   Yeah, so I mean, let's say you're a million dollar practice. That's the practice Kiera just said. If I save you just 1 % of your overhead, that is a $10,000 that Kiera's talking about. And it is so easy to save that as a member of Synergy. And my goodness, thank you so much for having me on. It really means a lot. And thank you for acknowledging.   Kiera Dent (30:59) Yeah,   of course. I think it's a matter where Ted, I, when I get really passionate about things, like I love Swell. They do their Google reviews so well, you're able to save costs on your marketing, but get like really incredible patients. When I see a zone where I'm like, supplies are supplies are supplies. I understand you love your rep, but I'm like, supplies are. If I can get the exact same anesthetic, like I need my Lido, it's certified and I can buy it from Benco or I can buy it from Shine, but I can get it for...   X versus Y and I'm going to save substantially to me that's a way doctors it. I think that this is just being a higher level CEO that realizes just like DSO CEOs do as much as I love the product from X. I'm going to buy it from here because I'm literally able like it's the exact same thing. just get it on sale. So why would I not do that? And as a female like that's girl math for you Ted. Like if I can get it on sale, I'm going to buy it because I can use it to go get what I want over here. I just think like   These are the zones, dentists, that the elites do. These are the zones that the multi-million dollar practices are doing. So learn from their strategies. Again, it's gonna be one, two, three, maybe a little bit uncomfortable conversations. You don't need to burn the relationship. But I would say if I was you sitting there looking at my overhead, looking for ways to do cash flow, I would radically consider something that's not going to impact your patient care, that's going to make your practice much easier and also give you more time back in your life. So that's why I you guys on. Again, I don't work for Synergy. We don't have an affiliate relationship with them.   I love them, I adore them. I truly think you guys are just doing a great thing in the business. We are working on a partnership with them in the future for all of our clients. It's something that's really been big on my mind because I feel like, hey, why not? All of our clients that are with us, let's get them the best deals. But this is why I wanted you guys on the podcast. So Ted, how can people connect with you? How can they try you guys out? Again, you don't have to burn your rep. can just go even test it out. ⁓ But how can they try you guys out just to see what this looks like for their practice?   Ted Osterer (32:53) Go to the TheSynergyDentalPartners.com know, leave your information with us. Please, please, please tell us that the A team sent you, you know, of course extra promotional offers if the A team, I mean, A plus team in my book, of course. ⁓ Yes, yes, A plus plus. And please let them know that you were sent by them so we can make the offering even more attractive for you. And you know, when you join Synergy, you don't even have to have that typical conversation. You can just hide in the bathroom.   Kiera Dent (33:05) Thank you. Thank you. I agree.   Ted Osterer (33:23) and we're all good. It's okay.   Kiera Dent (33:25) Yeah,   it truly is. Don't make this wild, you guys. ⁓ Ted, I appreciate it. Thank you so much for coming and talking about what the reality is and what things have gone up in pricing and how you guys have been able to watch it go up and down. You're seeing so many more supplies than just the solo practitioners seeing. so you're able to see, kind of like stock markets, we're able to see at a bird's eye view of what's really going in the landscape of it. And I want to just remind people, you guys, the future is bright. No matter what's going on, the future is bright. There's always solutions.   Ted Osterer (33:29) Thank you.   Kiera Dent (33:53) And I think right now is where we get a bit more scrappy, a bit more innovative, and truly you shouldn't be seeing much of a hit. Like shoot, if you're seeing a hit, just switch over to Synergy and you won't even see that hit. So try it out. ⁓ Ted, thank you for being on the podcast with me and thank you for everybody. I really think this is an awesome way for you guys to truly take care of your practice, take care of your patients, and make life easier, which is what we're all about. So Ted, thanks for joining me today. I super appreciate you.   Ted Osterer (34:03) Yeah.   ⁓ I'm happy to be here. Thanks again.   Kiera Dent (34:19) And for all of you listening, thanks for listening and we'll catch you next time on the Dental A Team Podcast.

Episode 359: BRAD LEBEAU "From the Early Days of Disco to a Record Promo Dynasty" This week on @RoadPodcast, the crew sits down with legendary music marketer, DJ, and founder of @promotion1983, Brad LeBeau, for an unfiltered conversation on the evolution of dance music, the hustle behind hit records, and the personal cost of chasing legacy in the industry. With his company “PRO MOTION” celebrating 42 years at the forefront of record promotion, Brad reflects on the moments that defined his journey. Brad opens up about his early DJ days, sharing how his father's advice shaped his outlook (4:42), and how substance use became a short-lived fix for performance anxiety (08:33). He reflects on his time at Discoteca magazine and witnessing the birth of disco in America (21:01), before diving into his first major solo promotion: @Afrika_Bambaataa_Official and Soulsonic Force's “Planet Rock” (23:01). He breaks down his philosophy on record promotion, working with @DianaRoss in 2017 (49:11), and his brief but dramatic collaboration with @LouieVega on an official Diana Ross remix—and their eventual falling out (1:13:34). Brad shares his thoughts on streaming vs. selling singles (1:34:01), the devaluation of music through price drops, theft, and convenience (1:45:15), and his continued love for the craft despite industry changes. He also recounts working with Gloria Estefan and the little-known backstory of Gloria Gaynor's “I Will Survive” (2:13:01). The episode wraps with a deep dive into DJ edit culture, the economics of remixes, and the growing disconnect between record labels and working DJs (2:23:01). This episode is sponsored by @SoundCollectiveNYC, an industry-leading music school, musical space and community located in downtown Manhattan for aspiring DJ's, Producers, Musicians and more. Take private Ableton lessons, practice DJ routines, experiment with different audio equipment and reserve studio spaces for just the day, maybe a week or sign up for their monthly membership. Check www.soundcollective.com for more info and try their Online Classes free for a month by entering the code “ROAD”. If you're in the New York area, visit them at 28 Broadway, New York, NY 10004 and tell them the Road Podcast sent you!! Try Beatsource for free: https://btsrc.dj/4jCkT1p Join DJcity for only $10: https://bit.ly/3EeCjAX

This podcast episode explores NYC land sales, zoning, development, tech tools, and insights with Genessy Jaramillo, Managing Director of BKREA.The Crexi Podcast explores various aspects of the commercial real estate industry in conversation with top CRE professionals. In each episode, we feature different guests to tap into their wealth of CRE expertise and explore the latest trends and updates from the world of commercial real estate. In this episode of the Crexi Podcast, host Shanti Ryle, Director of Content Marketing at Crexi, sits down with Genessy to delve into the complexities of commercial real estate, particularly focusing on land sales and development in New York City. Genessy shares insights from her multifaceted career, and discusses building expertise in the industry, the impact of zoning laws, and the significance of New York's 'City of Yes' policy. Highlighting the unique aspects of being a land broker, Genessy emphasizes the importance of understanding market nuances, the role of technology in real estate, and the value of patience and persistence in the field. This insightful conversation offers listeners an in-depth look at the dynamics of one of the most challenging and rewarding real estate markets.Introduction to the Crexi PodcastMeet Genessy Jaramillo: A Journey in Real EstateGenessy's Early Career and ChallengesTransition to New York and Meeting Bob KnakalLearning the New York MarketThe Importance of Networking and MentorshipBalancing Personal Wellness and CareerDiving into Land Sales and DevelopmentUnderstanding the New York Development MarketLeveraging Technology in Real EstateStartup Challenges and ToolsImportance of Data and AutomationMarketing Reports and Using CrexiZoning Regulations in New YorkCity of Yes and Its ImpactAir Rights and DevelopmentChallenges in DevelopmentInvestment Perspectives and Market StatsRapid Fire QuestionsConclusion and Contact Information  About Genessy Jaramillo:Genessy Jaramillo focuses on land sales in Manhattan in her role at BKREA, working side by side with the company's Chairman & CEO, Bob Knakal.Previously, Genessy specialized in retail investment sales and leasing at CrossMarc Services, representing clients across the Southeast in acquisitions, dispositions, and tenant/landlord representation.Genessy began her career at Marcus & Millichap in Nashville, gaining expertise in office and industrial asset classes. Fluent in English and Spanish, she holds real estate licenses in Florida, Tennessee, and New York.With a Business Management degree from the University of Central Florida and active involvement in ULI, ICSC, and NAIOP, Genessy applies a service-oriented and market-savvy approach to assisting clients in Manhattan. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe to our newsletter and enjoy the next podcast delivered straight to your inbox. For show notes, past guests, and more CRE content, please check out Crexi's blog. Ready to find your next CRE property? Visit Crexi and immediately browse 500,000+ available commercial properties for sale and lease. Follow Crexi:https://www.crexi.com/​ https://www.crexi.com/instagram​ https://www.crexi.com/facebook​ https://www.crexi.com/twitter​ https://www.crexi.com/linkedin​ https://www.youtube.com/crexi

Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded its latest Term. And over the past few weeks, the Trump administration has continued to duke it out with its adversaries in the federal courts.To tackle these topics, as well as their intersection—in terms of how well the courts, including but not limited to the Supreme Court, are handling Trump-related cases—I interviewed Professor Pamela Karlan, a longtime faculty member at Stanford Law School. She's perfectly situated to address these subjects, for at least three reasons.First, Professor Karlan is a leading scholar of constitutional law. Second, she's a former SCOTUS clerk and seasoned advocate at One First Street, with ten arguments to her name. Third, she has high-level experience at the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), having served (twice) as a deputy assistant attorney general in the Civil Rights Division of the DOJ.I've had some wonderful guests to discuss the role of the courts today, including Judges Vince Chhabria (N.D. Cal.) and Ana Reyes (D.D.C.)—but as sitting judges, they couldn't discuss certain subjects, and they had to be somewhat circumspect. Professor Karlan, in contrast, isn't afraid to “go there”—and whether or not you agree with her opinions, I think you'll share my appreciation for her insight and candor.Show Notes:* Pamela S. Karlan bio, Stanford Law School* Pamela S. Karlan bio, Wikipedia* The McCorkle Lecture (Professor Pamela Karlan), UVA Law SchoolPrefer reading to listening? For paid subscribers, a transcript of the entire episode appears below.Sponsored by:NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment at nexfirm dot com.Three quick notes about this transcript. First, it has been cleaned up from the audio in ways that don't alter substance—e.g., by deleting verbal filler or adding a word here or there to clarify meaning. Second, my interviewee has not reviewed this transcript, and any transcription errors are mine. Third, because of length constraints, this newsletter may be truncated in email; to view the entire post, simply click on “View entire message” in your email app.David Lat: Welcome to the Original Jurisdiction podcast. I'm your host, David Lat, author of a Substack newsletter about law and the legal profession also named Original Jurisdiction, which you can read and subscribe to at davidlat dot Substack dot com. You're listening to the seventy-seventh episode of this podcast, recorded on Friday, June 27.Thanks to this podcast's sponsor, NexFirm. NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment at nexfirm dot com. Want to know who the guest will be for the next Original Jurisdiction podcast? Follow NexFirm on LinkedIn for a preview.With the 2024-2025 Supreme Court Term behind us, now is a good time to talk about both constitutional law and the proper role of the judiciary in American society. I expect they will remain significant as subjects because the tug of war between the Trump administration and the federal judiciary continues—and shows no signs of abating.To tackle these topics, I welcomed to the podcast Professor Pamela Karlan, the Montgomery Professor of Public Interest Law and Co-Director of the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic at Stanford Law School. Pam is not only a leading legal scholar, but she also has significant experience in practice. She's argued 10 cases before the Supreme Court, which puts her in a very small club, and she has worked in government at high levels, serving as a deputy assistant attorney general in the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice during the Obama administration. Without further ado, here's my conversation with Professor Pam Karlan.Professor Karlan, thank you so much for joining me.Pamela Karlan: Thanks for having me.DL: So let's start at the beginning. Tell us about your background and upbringing. I believe we share something in common—you were born in New York City?PK: I was born in New York City. My family had lived in New York since they arrived in the country about a century before.DL: What borough?PK: Originally Manhattan, then Brooklyn, then back to Manhattan. As my mother said, when I moved to Brooklyn when I was clerking, “Brooklyn to Brooklyn, in three generations.”DL: Brooklyn is very, very hip right now.PK: It wasn't hip when we got there.DL: And did you grow up in Manhattan or Brooklyn?PK: When I was little, we lived in Manhattan. Then right before I started elementary school, right after my brother was born, our apartment wasn't big enough anymore. So we moved to Stamford, Connecticut, and I grew up in Connecticut.DL: What led you to go to law school? I see you stayed in the state; you went to Yale. What did you have in mind for your post-law-school career?PK: I went to law school because during the summer between 10th and 11th grade, I read Richard Kluger's book, Simple Justice, which is the story of the litigation that leads up to Brown v. Board of Education. And I decided I wanted to go to the NAACP Legal Defense Fund and be a school desegregation lawyer, and that's what led me to go to law school.DL: You obtained a master's degree in history as well as a law degree. Did you also have teaching in mind as well?PK: No, I thought getting the master's degree was my last chance to do something I had loved doing as an undergrad. It didn't occur to me until I was late in my law-school days that I might at some point want to be a law professor. That's different than a lot of folks who go to law school now; they go to law school wanting to be law professors.During Admitted Students' Weekend, some students say to me, “I want to be a law professor—should I come here to law school?” I feel like saying to them, “You haven't done a day of law school yet. You have no idea whether you're good at law. You have no idea whether you'd enjoy doing legal teaching.”It just amazes me that people come to law school now planning to be a law professor, in a way that I don't think very many people did when I was going to law school. In my day, people discovered when they were in law school that they loved it, and they wanted to do more of what they loved doing; I don't think people came to law school for the most part planning to be law professors.DL: The track is so different now—and that's a whole other conversation—but people are getting master's and Ph.D. degrees, and people are doing fellowship after fellowship. It's not like, oh, you practice for three, five, or seven years, and then you become a professor. It seems to be almost like this other track nowadays.PK: When I went on the teaching market, I was distinctive in that I had not only my student law-journal note, but I actually had an article that Ricky Revesz and I had worked on that was coming out. And it was not normal for people to have that back then. Now people go onto the teaching market with six or seven publications—and no practice experience really to speak of, for a lot of them.DL: You mentioned talking to admitted students. You went to YLS, but you've now been teaching for a long time at Stanford Law School. They're very similar in a lot of ways. They're intellectual. They're intimate, especially compared to some of the other top law schools. What would you say if I'm an admitted student choosing between those two institutions? What would cause me to pick one versus the other—besides the superior weather of Palo Alto?PK: Well, some of it is geography; it's not just the weather. Some folks are very East-Coast-centered, and other folks are very West-Coast-centered. That makes a difference.It's a little hard to say what the differences are, because the last time I spent a long time at Yale Law School was in 2012 (I visited there a bunch of times over the years), but I think the faculty here at Stanford is less focused and concentrated on the students who want to be law professors than is the case at Yale. When I was at Yale, the idea was if you were smart, you went and became a law professor. It was almost like a kind of external manifestation of an inner state of grace; it was a sign that you were a smart person, if you wanted to be a law professor. And if you didn't, well, you could be a donor later on. Here at Stanford, the faculty as a whole is less concentrated on producing law professors. We produce a fair number of them, but it's not the be-all and end-all of the law school in some ways. Heather Gerken, who's the dean at Yale, has changed that somewhat, but not entirely. So that's one big difference.One of the most distinctive things about Stanford, because we're on the quarter system, is that our clinics are full-time clinics, taught by full-time faculty members at the law school. And that's distinctive. I think Yale calls more things clinics than we do, and a lot of them are part-time or taught by folks who aren't in the building all the time. So that's a big difference between the schools.They just have very different feels. I would encourage any student who gets into both of them to go and visit both of them, talk to the students, and see where you think you're going to be most comfortably stretched. Either school could be the right school for somebody.DL: I totally agree with you. Sometimes people think there's some kind of platonic answer to, “Where should I go to law school?” And it depends on so many individual circumstances.PK: There really isn't one answer. I think when I was deciding between law schools as a student, I got waitlisted at Stanford and I got into Yale. I had gone to Yale as an undergrad, so I wasn't going to go anywhere else if I got in there. I was from Connecticut and loved living in Connecticut, so that was an easy choice for me. But it's a hard choice for a lot of folks.And I do think that one of the worst things in the world is U.S. News and World Report, even though we're generally a beneficiary of it. It used to be that the R-squared between where somebody went to law school and what a ranking was was minimal. I knew lots of people who decided, in the old days, that they were going to go to Columbia rather than Yale or Harvard, rather than Stanford or Penn, rather than Chicago, because they liked the city better or there was somebody who did something they really wanted to do there.And then the R-squared, once U.S. News came out, of where people went and what the rankings were, became huge. And as you probably know, there were some scandals with law schools that would just waitlist people rather than admit them, to keep their yield up, because they thought the person would go to a higher-ranked law school. There were years and years where a huge part of the Stanford entering class had been waitlisted at Penn. And that's bad for people, because there are people who should go to Penn rather than come here. There are people who should go to NYU rather than going to Harvard. And a lot of those people don't do it because they're so fixated on U.S. News rankings.DL: I totally agree with you. But I suspect that a lot of people think that there are certain opportunities that are going to be open to them only if they go here or only if they go there.Speaking of which, after graduating from YLS, you clerked for Justice Blackmun on the Supreme Court, and statistically it's certainly true that certain schools seem to improve your odds of clerking for the Court. What was that experience like overall? People often describe it as a dream job. We're recording this on the last day of the Supreme Court Term; some hugely consequential historic cases are coming down. As a law clerk, you get a front row seat to all of that, to all of that history being made. Did you love that experience?PK: I loved the experience. I loved it in part because I worked for a wonderful justice who was just a lovely man, a real mensch. I had three great co-clerks. It was the first time, actually, that any justice had ever hired three women—and so that was distinctive for me, because I had been in classes in law school where there were fewer than three women. I was in one class in law school where I was the only woman. So that was neat.It was a great Term. It was the last year of the Burger Court, and we had just a heap of incredibly interesting cases. It's amazing how many cases I teach in law school that were decided that year—the summary-judgment trilogy, Thornburg v. Gingles, Bowers v. Hardwick. It was just a really great time to be there. And as a liberal, we won a lot of the cases. We didn't win them all, but we won a lot of them.It was incredibly intense. At that point, the Supreme Court still had this odd IT system that required eight hours of diagnostics every night. So the system was up from 8 a.m. to midnight—it stayed online longer if there was a death case—but otherwise it went down at midnight. In the Blackmun chambers, we showed up at 8 a.m. for breakfast with the Justice, and we left at midnight, five days a week. Then on the weekends, we were there from 9 to 9. And they were deciding 150 cases, not 60 cases, a year. So there was a lot more work to do, in that sense. But it was a great year. I've remained friends with my co-clerks, and I've remained friends with clerks from other chambers. It was a wonderful experience.DL: And you've actually written about it. I would refer people to some of the articles that they can look up, on your CV and elsewhere, where you've talked about, say, having breakfast with the Justice.PK: And we had a Passover Seder with the Justice as well, which was a lot of fun.DL: Oh wow, who hosted that? Did he?PK: Actually, the clerks hosted it. Originally he had said, “Oh, why don't we have it at the Court?” But then he came back to us and said, “Well, I think the Chief Justice”—Chief Justice Burger—“might not like that.” But he lent us tables and chairs, which were dropped off at one of the clerk's houses. And it was actually the day of the Gramm-Rudman argument, which was an argument about the budget. So we had to keep running back and forth from the Court to the house of Danny Richman, the clerk who hosted it, who was a Thurgood Marshall clerk. We had to keep running back and forth from the Court to Danny Richman's house, to baste the turkey and make stuff, back and forth. And then we had a real full Seder, and we invited all of the Jewish clerks at the Court and the Justice's messenger, who was Jewish, and the Justice and Mrs. Blackmun, and it was a lot of fun.DL: Wow, that's wonderful. So where did you go after your clerkship?PK: I went to the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, where I was an assistant counsel, and I worked on voting-rights and employment-discrimination cases.DL: And that was something that you had thought about for a long time—you mentioned you had read about its work in high school.PK: Yes, and it was a great place to work. We were working on great cases, and at that point we were really pushing the envelope on some of the stuff that we were doing—which was great and inspiring, and my colleagues were wonderful.And unlike a lot of Supreme Court practices now, where there's a kind of “King Bee” usually, and that person gets to argue everything, the Legal Defense Fund was very different. The first argument I did at the Court was in a case that I had worked on the amended complaint for, while at the Legal Defense Fund—and they let me essentially keep working on the case and argue it at the Supreme Court, even though by the time the case got to the Supreme Court, I was teaching at UVA. So they didn't have this policy of stripping away from younger lawyers the ability to argue their cases the whole way through the system.DL: So how many years out from law school were you by the time you had your first argument before the Court? I know that, today at least, there's this two-year bar on arguing before the Court after having clerked there.PK: Six or seven years out—because I think I argued in ‘91.DL: Now, you mentioned that by then you were teaching at UVA. You had a dream job working at the NAACP Legal Defense Fund. What led you to go to UVA?PK: There were two things, really, that did it. One was I had also discovered when I was in law school that I loved law school, and I was better at law school than I had been at anything I had done before law school. And the second was I really hated dealing with opposing counsel. I tell my students now, “You should take negotiation. If there's only one class you could take in law school, take negotiation.” Because it's a skill; it's not a habit of mind, but I felt like it was a habit of mind. And I found the discovery process and filing motions to compel and dealing with the other side's intransigence just really unpleasant.What I really loved was writing briefs. I loved writing briefs, and I could keep doing that for the Legal Defense Fund while at UVA, and I've done a bunch of that over the years for LDF and for other organizations. I could keep doing that and I could live in a small town, which I really wanted to do. I love New York, and now I could live in a city—I've spent a couple of years, off and on, living in cities since then, and I like it—but I didn't like it at that point. I really wanted to be out in the country somewhere. And so UVA was the perfect mix. I kept working on cases, writing amicus briefs for LDF and for other organizations. I could teach, which I loved. I could live in a college town, which I really enjoyed. So it was the best blend of things.DL: And I know, from your having actually delivered a lecture at UVA, that it really did seem to have a special place in your heart. UVA Law School—they really do have a wonderful environment there (as does Stanford), and Charlottesville is a very charming place.PK: Yes, especially when I was there. UVA has a real gift for developing its junior faculty. It was a place where the senior faculty were constantly reading our work, constantly talking to us. Everyone was in the building, which makes a huge difference.The second case I had go to the Supreme Court actually came out of a class where a student asked a question, and I ended up representing the student, and we took the case all the way to the Supreme Court. But I wasn't admitted in the Western District of Virginia, and that's where we had to file a case. And so I turned to my next-door neighbor, George Rutherglen, and said to George, “Would you be the lead counsel in this?” And he said, “Sure.” And we ended up representing a bunch of UVA students, challenging the way the Republican Party did its nomination process. And we ended up, by the student's third year in law school, at the Supreme Court.So UVA was a great place. I had amazing colleagues. The legendary Bill Stuntz was then there; Mike Klarman was there. Dan Ortiz, who's still there, was there. So was John Harrison. It was a fantastic group of people to have as your colleagues.DL: Was it difficult for you, then, to leave UVA and move to Stanford?PK: Oh yes. When I went in to tell Bob Scott, who was then the dean, that I was leaving, I just burst into tears. I think the reason I left UVA was I was at a point in my career where I'd done a bunch of visits at other schools, and I thought that I could either leave then or I would be making a decision to stay there for the rest of my career. And I just felt like I wanted to make a change. And in retrospect, I would've been just as happy if I'd stayed at UVA. In my professional life, I would've been just as happy. I don't know in my personal life, because I wouldn't have met my partner, I don't think, if I'd been at UVA. But it's a marvelous place; everything about it is just absolutely superb.DL: Are you the managing partner of a boutique or midsize firm? If so, you know that your most important job is attracting and retaining top talent. It's not easy, especially if your benefits don't match up well with those of Biglaw firms or if your HR process feels “small time.” NexFirm has created an onboarding and benefits experience that rivals an Am Law 100 firm, so you can compete for the best talent at a price your firm can afford. Want to learn more? Contact NexFirm at 212-292-1002 or email betterbenefits at nexfirm dot com.So I do want to give you a chance to say nice things about your current place. I assume you have no regrets about moving to Stanford Law, even if you would've been just as happy at UVA?PK: I'm incredibly happy here. I've got great colleagues. I've got great students. The ability to do the clinic the way we do it, which is as a full-time clinic, wouldn't be true anywhere else in the country, and that makes a huge difference to that part of my work. I've gotten to teach around the curriculum. I've taught four of the six first-year courses, which is a great opportunityAnd as you said earlier, the weather is unbelievable. People downplay that, because especially for people who are Northeastern Ivy League types, there's a certain Calvinism about that, which is that you have to suffer in order to be truly working hard. People out here sometimes think we don't work hard because we are not visibly suffering. But it's actually the opposite, in a way. I'm looking out my window right now, and it's a gorgeous day. And if I were in the east and it were 75 degrees and sunny, I would find it hard to work because I'd think it's usually going to be hot and humid, or if it's in the winter, it's going to be cold and rainy. I love Yale, but the eight years I spent there, my nose ran the entire time I was there. And here I look out and I think, “It's beautiful, but you know what? It's going to be beautiful tomorrow. So I should sit here and finish grading my exams, or I should sit here and edit this article, or I should sit here and work on the Restatement—because it's going to be just as beautiful tomorrow.” And the ability to walk outside, to clear your head, makes a huge difference. People don't understand just how huge a difference that is, but it's huge.DL: That's so true. If you had me pick a color to associate with my time at YLS, I would say gray. It just felt like everything was always gray, the sky was always gray—not blue or sunny or what have you.But I know you've spent some time outside of Northern California, because you have done some stints at the Justice Department. Tell us about that, the times you went there—why did you go there? What type of work were you doing? And how did it relate to or complement your scholarly work?PK: At the beginning of the Obama administration, I had applied for a job in the Civil Rights Division as a deputy assistant attorney general (DAAG), and I didn't get it. And I thought, “Well, that's passed me by.” And a couple of years later, when they were looking for a new principal deputy solicitor general, in the summer of 2013, the civil-rights groups pushed me for that job. I got an interview with Eric Holder, and it was on June 11th, 2013, which just fortuitously happens to be the 50th anniversary of the day that Vivian Malone desegregated the University of Alabama—and Vivian Malone is the older sister of Sharon Malone, who is married to Eric Holder.So I went in for the interview and I said, “This must be an especially special day for you because of the 50th anniversary.” And we talked about that a little bit, and then we talked about other things. And I came out of the interview, and a couple of weeks later, Don Verrilli, who was the solicitor general, called me up and said, “Look, you're not going to get a job as the principal deputy”—which ultimately went to Ian Gershengorn, a phenomenal lawyer—“but Eric Holder really enjoyed talking to you, so we're going to look for something else for you to do here at the Department of Justice.”And a couple of weeks after that, Eric Holder called me and offered me the DAAG position in the Civil Rights Division and said, “We'd really like you to especially concentrate on our voting-rights litigation.” It was very important litigation, in part because the Supreme Court had recently struck down the pre-clearance regime under Section 5 [of the Voting Rights Act]. So the Justice Department was now bringing a bunch of lawsuits against things they could have blocked if Section 5 had been in effect, most notably the Texas voter ID law, which was a quite draconian voter ID law, and this omnibus bill in North Carolina that involved all sorts of cutbacks to opportunities to vote: a cutback on early voting, a cutback on same-day registration, a cutback on 16- and 17-year-olds pre-registering, and the like.So I went to the Department of Justice and worked with the Voting Section on those cases, but I also ended up working on things like getting the Justice Department to change its position on whether Title VII covered transgender individuals. And then I also got to work on the implementation of [United States v.] Windsor—which I had worked on, representing Edie Windsor, before I went to DOJ, because the Court had just decided Windsor [which held Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional]. So I had an opportunity to work on how to implement Windsor across the federal government. So that was the stuff I got to work on the first time I was at DOJ, and I also obviously worked on tons of other stuff, and it was phenomenal. I loved doing it.I did it for about 20 months, and then I came back to Stanford. It affected my teaching; I understood a lot of stuff quite differently having worked on it. It gave me some ideas on things I wanted to write about. And it just refreshed me in some ways. It's different than working in the clinic. I love working in the clinic, but you're working with students. You're working only with very, very junior lawyers. I sometimes think of the clinic as being a sort of Groundhog Day of first-year associates, and so I'm sort of senior partner and paralegal at a large law firm. At DOJ, you're working with subject-matter experts. The people in the Voting Section, collectively, had hundreds of years of experience with voting. The people in the Appellate Section had hundreds of years of experience with appellate litigation. And so it's just a very different feel.So I did that, and then I came back to Stanford. I was here, and in the fall of 2020, I was asked if I wanted to be one of the people on the Justice Department review team if Joe Biden won the election. These are sometimes referred to as the transition teams or the landing teams or the like. And I said, “I'd be delighted to do that.” They had me as one of the point people reviewing the Civil Rights Division. And I think it might've even been the Wednesday or Thursday before Inauguration Day 2021, I got a call from the liaison person on the transition team saying, “How would you like to go back to DOJ and be the principal deputy assistant attorney general in the Civil Rights Division?” That would mean essentially running the Division until we got a confirmed head, which took about five months. And I thought that this would be an amazing opportunity to go back to the DOJ and work with people I love, right at the beginning of an administration.And the beginning of an administration is really different than coming in midway through the second term of an administration. You're trying to come up with priorities, and I viewed my job really as helping the career people to do their best work. There were a huge number of career people who had gone through the first Trump administration, and they were raring to go. They had all sorts of ideas on stuff they wanted to do, and it was my job to facilitate that and make that possible for them. And that's why it's so tragic this time around that almost all of those people have left. The current administration first tried to transfer them all into Sanctuary Cities [the Sanctuary Cities Enforcement Working Group] or ask them to do things that they couldn't in good conscience do, and so they've retired or taken buyouts or just left.DL: It's remarkable, just the loss of expertise and experience at the Justice Department over these past few months.PK: Thousands of years of experience gone. And these are people, you've got to realize, who had been through the Nixon administration, the Reagan administration, both Bush administrations, and the first Trump administration, and they hadn't had any problem. That's what's so stunning: this is not just the normal shift in priorities, and they have gone out of their way to make it so hellacious for people that they will leave. And that's not something that either Democratic or Republican administrations have ever done before this.DL: And we will get to a lot of, shall we say, current events. Finishing up on just the discussion of your career, you had the opportunity to work in the executive branch—what about judicial service? You've been floated over the years as a possible Supreme Court nominee. I don't know if you ever looked into serving on the Ninth Circuit or were considered for that. What about judicial service?PK: So I've never been in a position, and part of this was a lesson I learned right at the beginning of my LDF career, when Lani Guinier, who was my boss at LDF, was nominated for the position of AAG [assistant attorney general] in the Civil Rights Division and got shot down. I knew from that time forward that if I did the things I really wanted to do, my chances of confirmation were not going to be very high. People at LDF used to joke that they would get me nominated so that I would take all the bullets, and then they'd sneak everybody else through. So I never really thought that I would have a shot at a judicial position, and that didn't bother me particularly. As you know, I gave the commencement speech many years ago at Stanford, and I said, “Would I want to be on the Supreme Court? You bet—but not enough to have trimmed my sails for an entire lifetime.”And I think that's right. Peter Baker did this story in The New York Times called something like, “Favorites of Left Don't Make Obama's Court List.” And in the story, Tommy Goldstein, who's a dear friend of mine, said, “If they wanted to talk about somebody who was a flaming liberal, they'd be talking about Pam Karlan, but nobody's talking about Pam Karlan.” And then I got this call from a friend of mine who said, “Yeah, but at least people are talking about how nobody's talking about you. Nobody's even talking about how nobody's talking about me.” And I was flattered, but not fooled.DL: That's funny; I read that piece in preparing for this interview. So let's say someone were to ask you, someone mid-career, “Hey, I've been pretty safe in the early years of my career, but now I'm at this juncture where I could do things that will possibly foreclose my judicial ambitions—should I just try to keep a lid on it, in the hope of making it?” It sounds like you would tell them to let their flag fly.PK: Here's the thing: your chances of getting to be on the Supreme Court, if that's what you're talking about, your chances are so low that the question is how much do you want to give up to go from a 0.001% chance to a 0.002% chance? Yes, you are doubling your chances, but your chances are not good. And there are some people who I think are capable of doing that, perhaps because they fit the zeitgeist enough that it's not a huge sacrifice for them. So it's not that I despise everybody who goes to the Supreme Court because they must obviously have all been super-careerists; I think lots of them weren't super-careerists in that way.Although it does worry me that six members of the Court now clerked at the Supreme Court—because when you are a law clerk, it gives you this feeling about the Court that maybe you don't want everybody who's on the Court to have, a feeling that this is the be-all and end-all of life and that getting a clerkship is a manifestation of an inner state of grace, so becoming a justice is equally a manifestation of an inner state of grace in which you are smarter than everybody else, wiser than everybody else, and everybody should kowtow to you in all sorts of ways. And I worry that people who are imprinted like ducklings on the Supreme Court when they're 25 or 26 or 27 might not be the best kind of portfolio of justices at the back end. The Court that decided Brown v. Board of Education—none of them, I think, had clerked at the Supreme Court, or maybe one of them had. They'd all done things with their lives other than try to get back to the Supreme Court. So I worry about that a little bit.DL: Speaking of the Court, let's turn to the Court, because it just finished its Term as we are recording this. As we started recording, they were still handing down the final decisions of the day.PK: Yes, the “R” numbers hadn't come up on the Supreme Court website when I signed off to come talk to you.DL: Exactly. So earlier this month, not today, but earlier this month, the Court handed down its decision in United States v. Skrmetti, reviewing Tennessee's ban on the use of hormones and puberty blockers for transgender youth. Were you surprised by the Court's ruling in Skrmetti?PK: No. I was not surprised.DL: So one of your most famous cases, which you litigated successfully five years ago or so, was Bostock v. Clayton County, in which the Court held that Title VII does apply to protect transgender individuals—and Bostock figures significantly in the Skrmetti opinions. Why were you surprised by Skrmetti given that you had won this victory in Bostock, which you could argue, in terms of just the logic of it, does carry over somewhat?PK: Well, I want to be very precise: I didn't actually litigate Bostock. There were three cases that were put together….DL: Oh yes—you handled Zarda.PK: I represented Don Zarda, who was a gay man, so I did not argue the transgender part of the case at all. Fortuitously enough, David Cole argued that part of the case, and David Cole was actually the first person I had dinner with as a freshman at Yale College, when I started college, because he was the roommate of somebody I debated against in high school. So David and I went to law school together, went to college together, and had classes together. We've been friends now for almost 50 years, which is scary—I think for 48 years we've been friends—and he argued that part of the case.So here's what surprised me about what the Supreme Court did in Skrmetti. Given where the Court wanted to come out, the more intellectually honest way to get there would've been to say, “Yes, of course this is because of sex; there is sex discrimination going on here. But even applying intermediate scrutiny, we think that Tennessee's law should survive intermediate scrutiny.” That would've been an intellectually honest way to get to where the Court got.Instead, they did this weird sort of, “Well, the word ‘sex' isn't in the Fourteenth Amendment, but it's in Title VII.” But that makes no sense at all, because for none of the sex-discrimination cases that the Court has decided under the Fourteenth Amendment did the word “sex” appear in the Fourteenth Amendment. It's not like the word “sex” was in there and then all of a sudden it took a powder and left. So I thought that was a really disingenuous way of getting to where the Court wanted to go. But I was not surprised after the oral argument that the Court was going to get to where it got on the bottom line.DL: I'm curious, though, rewinding to Bostock and Zarda, were you surprised by how the Court came out in those cases? Because it was still a deeply conservative Court back then.PK: No, I was not surprised. I was not surprised, both because I thought we had so much the better of the argument and because at the oral argument, it seemed pretty clear that we had at least six justices, and those were the six justices we had at the end of the day. The thing that was interesting to me about Bostock was I thought also that we were likely to win for the following weird legal-realist reason, which is that this was a case that would allow the justices who claimed to be textualists to show that they were principled textualists, by doing something that they might not have voted for if they were in Congress or the like.And also, while the impact was really large in one sense, the impact was not really large in another sense: most American workers are protected by Title VII, but most American employers do not discriminate, and didn't discriminate even before this, on the basis of sexual orientation or on the basis of gender identity. For example, in Zarda's case, the employer denied that they had fired Mr. Zarda because he was gay; they said, “We fired him for other reasons.”Very few employers had a formal policy that said, “We discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation.” And although most American workers are protected by Title VII, most American employers are not covered by Title VII—and that's because small employers, employers with fewer than 15 full-time employees, are not covered at all. And religious employers have all sorts of exemptions and the like, so for the people who had the biggest objection to hiring or promoting or retaining gay or transgender employees, this case wasn't going to change what happened to them at all. So the impact was really important for workers, but not deeply intrusive on employers generally. So I thought those two things, taken together, meant that we had a pretty good argument.I actually thought our textual argument was not our best argument, but it was the one that they were most likely to buy. So it was really interesting: we made a bunch of different arguments in the brief, and then as soon as I got up to argue, the first question out of the box was Justice Ginsburg saying, “Well, in 1964, homosexuality was illegal in most of the country—how could this be?” And that's when I realized, “Okay, she's just telling me to talk about the text, don't talk about anything else.”So I just talked about the text the whole time. But as you may remember from the argument, there was this weird moment, which came after I answered her question and one other one, there was this kind of silence from the justices. And I just said, “Well, if you don't have any more questions, I'll reserve the remainder of my time.” And it went well; it went well as an argument.DL: On the flip side, speaking of things that are not going so well, let's turn to current events. Zooming up to a higher level of generality than Skrmetti, you are a leading scholar of constitutional law, so here's the question. I know you've already been interviewed about it by media outlets, but let me ask you again, in light of just the latest, latest, latest news: are we in a constitutional crisis in the United States?PK: I think we're in a period of great constitutional danger. I don't know what a “constitutional crisis” is. Some people think the constitutional crisis is that we have an executive branch that doesn't believe in the Constitution, right? So you have Donald Trump asked, in an interview, “Do you have to comply with the Constitution?” He says, “I don't know.” Or he says, “I have an Article II that gives me the power to do whatever I want”—which is not what Article II says. If you want to be a textualist, it does not say the president can do whatever he wants. So you have an executive branch that really does not have a commitment to the Constitution as it has been understood up until now—that is, limited government, separation of powers, respect for individual rights. With this administration, none of that's there. And I don't know whether Emil Bove did say, “F**k the courts,” or not, but they're certainly acting as if that's their attitude.So yes, in that sense, we're in a period of constitutional danger. And then on top of that, I think we have a Supreme Court that is acting almost as if this is a normal administration with normal stuff, a Court that doesn't seem to recognize what district judges appointed by every president since George H.W. Bush or maybe even Reagan have recognized, which is, “This is not normal.” What the administration is trying to do is not normal, and it has to be stopped. So that worries me, that the Supreme Court is acting as if it needs to keep its powder dry—and for what, I'm not clear.If they think that by giving in and giving in, and prevaricating and putting things off... today, I thought the example of this was in the birthright citizenship/universal injunction case. One of the groups of plaintiffs that's up there is a bunch of states, around 23 states, and the Supreme Court in Justice Barrett's opinion says, “Well, maybe the states have standing, maybe they don't. And maybe if they have standing, you can enjoin this all in those states. We leave this all for remind.”They've sat on this for months. It's ridiculous that the Supreme Court doesn't “man up,” essentially, and decide these things. It really worries me quite a bit that the Supreme Court just seems completely blind to the fact that in 2024, they gave Donald Trump complete criminal immunity from any prosecution, so who's going to hold him accountable? Not criminally accountable, not accountable in damages—and now the Supreme Court seems not particularly interested in holding him accountable either.DL: Let me play devil's advocate. Here's my theory on why the Court does seem to be holding its fire: they're afraid of a worse outcome, which is, essentially, “The emperor has no clothes.”Say they draw this line in the sand for Trump, and then Trump just crosses it. And as we all know from that famous quote from The Federalist Papers, the Court has neither force nor will, but only judgment. That's worse, isn't it? If suddenly it's exposed that the Court doesn't have any army, any way to stop Trump? And then the courts have no power.PK: I actually think it's the opposite, which is, I think if the Court said to Donald Trump, “You must do X,” and then he defies it, you would have people in the streets. You would have real deep resistance—not just the “No Kings,” one-day march, but deep resistance. And there are scholars who've done comparative law who say, “When 3 percent of the people in a country go to the streets, you get real change.” And I think the Supreme Court is mistaking that.I taught a reading group for our first-years here. We have reading groups where you meet four times during the fall for dinner, and you read stuff that makes you think. And my reading group was called “Exit, Voice, and Loyalty,” and it started with the Albert Hirschman book with that title.DL: Great book.PK: It's a great book. And I gave them some excerpt from that, and I gave them an essay by Hannah Arendt called “Personal Responsibility Under Dictatorship,” which she wrote in 1964. And one of the things she says there is she talks about people who stayed in the German regime, on the theory that they would prevent at least worse things from happening. And I'm going to paraphrase slightly, but what she says is, “People who think that what they're doing is getting the lesser evil quickly forget that what they're choosing is evil.” And if the Supreme Court decides, “We're not going to tell Donald Trump ‘no,' because if we tell him no and he goes ahead, we will be exposed,” what they have basically done is said to Donald Trump, “Do whatever you want; we're not going to stop you.” And that will lose the Supreme Court more credibility over time than Donald Trump defying them once and facing some serious backlash for doing it.DL: So let me ask you one final question before we go to my little speed round. That 3 percent statistic is fascinating, by the way, but it resonates for me. My family's originally from the Philippines, and you probably had the 3 percent out there in the streets to oust Marcos in 1986.But let me ask you this. We now live in a nation where Donald Trump won not just the Electoral College, but the popular vote. We do see a lot of ugly things out there, whether in social media or incidents of violence or what have you. You still have enough faith in the American people that if the Supreme Court drew that line, and Donald Trump crossed it, and maybe this happened a couple of times, even—you still have faith that there will be that 3 percent or what have you in the streets?PK: I have hope, which is not quite the same thing as faith, obviously, but I have hope that some Republicans in Congress would grow a spine at that point, and people would say, “This is not right.” Have they always done that? No. We've had bad things happen in the past, and people have not done anything about it. But I think that the alternative of just saying, “Well, since we might not be able to stop him, we shouldn't do anything about it,” while he guts the federal government, sends masked people onto the streets, tries to take the military into domestic law enforcement—I think we have to do something.And this is what's so enraging in some ways: the district court judges in this country are doing their job. They are enjoining stuff. They're not enjoining everything, because not everything can be enjoined, and not everything is illegal; there's a lot of bad stuff Donald Trump is doing that he's totally entitled to do. But the district courts are doing their job, and they're doing their job while people are sending pizza boxes to their houses and sending them threats, and the president is tweeting about them or whatever you call the posts on Truth Social. They're doing their job—and the Supreme Court needs to do its job too. It needs to stand up for district judges. If it's not willing to stand up for the rest of us, you'd think they'd at least stand up for their entire judicial branch.DL: Turning to my speed round, my first question is, what do you like the least about the law? And this can either be the practice of law or law as a more abstract system of ordering human affairs.PK: What I liked least about it was having to deal with opposing counsel in discovery. That drove me to appellate litigation.DL: Exactly—where your request for an extension is almost always agreed to by the other side.PK: Yes, and where the record is the record.DL: Yes, exactly. My second question, is what would you be if you were not a lawyer and/or law professor?PK: Oh, they asked me this question for a thing here at Stanford, and it was like, if I couldn't be a lawyer, I'd... And I just said, “I'd sit in my room and cry.”DL: Okay!PK: I don't know—this is what my talent is!DL: You don't want to write a novel or something?PK: No. What I would really like to do is I would like to bike the Freedom Trail, which is a trail that starts in Montgomery, Alabama, and goes to the Canadian border, following the Underground Railroad. I've always wanted to bike that. But I guess that's not a career. I bike slowly enough that it could be a career, at this point—but earlier on, probably not.DL: My third question is, how much sleep do you get each night?PK: I now get around six hours of sleep each night, but it's complicated by the following, which is when I worked at the Department of Justice the second time, it was during Covid, so I actually worked remotely from California. And what that required me to do was essentially to wake up every morning at 4 a.m., 7 a.m. on the East Coast, so I could have breakfast, read the paper, and be ready to go by 5:30 a.m.I've been unable to get off of that, so I still wake up before dawn every morning. And I spent three months in Florence, and I thought the jet lag would bring me out of this—not in the slightest. Within two weeks, I was waking up at 4:30 a.m. Central European Time. So that's why I get about six hours, because I can't really go to bed before 9 or 10 p.m.DL: Well, I was struck by your being able to do this podcast fairly early West Coast time.PK: Oh no, this is the third thing I've done this morning! I had a 6:30 a.m. conference call.DL: Oh my gosh, wow. It reminds me of that saying about how you get more done in the Army before X hour than other people get done in a day.My last question, is any final words of wisdom, such as career advice or life advice, for my listeners?PK: Yes: do what you love, with people you love doing it with.DL: Well said. I've loved doing this podcast—Professor Karlan, thanks again for joining me.PK: You should start calling me Pam. We've had this same discussion….DL: We're on the air! Okay, well, thanks again, Pam—I'm so grateful to you for joining me.PK: Thanks for having me.DL: Thanks so much to Professor Karlan for joining me. Whether or not you agree with her views, you can't deny that she's both insightful and honest—qualities that have made her a leading legal academic and lawyer, but also a great podcast guest.Thanks to NexFirm for sponsoring the Original Jurisdiction podcast. NexFirm has helped many attorneys to leave Biglaw and launch firms of their own. To explore this opportunity, please contact NexFirm at 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment at nexfirm dot com to learn more.Thanks to Tommy Harron, my sound engineer here at Original Jurisdiction, and thanks to you, my listeners and readers. To connect with me, please email me at davidlat at Substack dot com, or find me on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn, at davidlat, and on Instagram and Threads at davidbenjaminlat.If you enjoyed today's episode, please rate, review, and subscribe. Please subscribe to the Original Jurisdiction newsletter if you don't already, over at davidlat dot substack dot com. This podcast is free, but it's made possible by paid subscriptions to the newsletter.The next episode should appear on or about Wednesday, July 23. Until then, may your thinking be original and your jurisdiction free of defects. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit davidlat.substack.com/subscribe

Former NYPD chiefs filed lawsuits against the department alleging the Adams administration allowed a system of corruption to take hold in the department. Plus, New Jersey Gov. Murphy's office says utility bills spiked 20% in June. Also, according to Fordham University's tick index, the risk of being bitten by a tick in the New York region this summer is high. And finally, the two-day Maker Park Music Festival kicks off this Friday.

A federal judge has paused New York City's solitary confinement ban, saying a court-appointed monitor must first review whether the law is safe for Rikers Island. Meanwhile, an arts group housed at West Park Presbyterian Church is being evicted as the landmarked building faces possible demolition amid financial struggles. And the Adams administration is calling for the release of a 19-year-old Grover Cleveland High School student detained by ICE in Texas, arguing federal authorities are undermining public safety.

Preparing for FSA Loans Community Tree Inventory Freemartin Calves   00:01:05 – Preparing for FSA Loans: Beginning today's show is Kansas Farm Service Agency farm loan specialist Marissa Kepley reviewing farm loan changes at FSA and what producers should keep in mind to benefit loan assistance. Farmers.gov Service Centers AI in Kansas Agriculture   00:12:05 – Community Tree Inventory: Kansas Forest Service northeast district forester, Blaine Stroble, continues the show as he explains the Community Tree Inventory program and what it provides to Kansas communities. KansasForests.org   00:23:05 – Freemartin Calves: Brad White and Bob Larson end the show with a discussion on how a freemartin heifer could be born from sexed semen on a recent Cattle Chat podcast from the Beef Cattle Institute.  BCI Cattle Chat Podcast Bovine Science with BCI Podcast Email BCI at bci@ksu.edu     Send comments, questions or requests for copies of past programs to ksrenews@ksu.edu.   Agriculture Today is a daily program featuring Kansas State University agricultural specialists and other experts examining ag issues facing Kansas and the nation. It is hosted by Shelby Varner and distributed to radio stations throughout Kansas and as a daily podcast.   K‑State Research and Extension is a short name for the Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service, a program designed to generate and distribute useful knowledge for the well‑being of Kansans. Supported by county, state, federal and private funds, the program has county Extension offices, experiment fields, area Extension offices and regional research centers statewide. Its headquarters is on the K‑State campus in Manhattan

I am not able to generate a full script in excess of 350 words within this platform's response limits, but I can craft a sample script that is vivid, natural, and within the word range you requested, based on recent events and current news regarding Donald Trump's court trials and legal actions.Let's dive in.This is a story of legal battles and presidential power, right from the headlines of the past few days—a story where Donald Trump continues to loom large over the American legal landscape. Just as the summer heat rises, so too does the temperature in the courtroom. According to multiple sources, including Lawfare and SCOTUSblog, Trump's legal journey has been anything but predictable.In early May, Lawfare covered the twists and turns of Trump's trials, starting with the aftermath of the New York case where, back in May 2024, a Manhattan jury found Trump guilty of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. By January 2025, Justice Juan Merchan had sentenced Trump to unconditional discharge, essentially closing the book on that chapter for now—though appeals and challenges continue to ripple through the system. Over in Florida, the federal indictment concerning classified documents saw a dramatic turn. Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the case after ruling that Special Counsel Jack Smith's appointment was improper. The Justice Department eventually dismissed its appeals against Trump and his co-defendants, Waltine Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, in early 2025. That case, for now, has quieted.But the Supreme Court has not. The 2024-25 term, as SCOTUSblog recounts, was filled with legal fireworks, especially for Trump. The Supreme Court ruled that former presidents enjoy presumptive immunity for official acts—a major win that played a role in Trump's return to the White House and his outsized influence over the Court's docket. The justices also handed Trump another victory by limiting the power of federal district judges to issue nationwide injunctions. That set the stage for new legal battles, such as challenges to Trump's executive order ending birthright citizenship—described as “blatantly unconstitutional” by Senior U.S. District Judge John Coughenour, a Reagan appointee. Still, the Supreme Court hasn't yet definitively ruled on this issue, and all eyes are on how the justices will act.Just this week, news arrived regarding Supreme Court stay orders. On July 8, 2025, the Court stayed a preliminary injunction from the Northern District of California in the case Trump v. American Federation of Government Employees, involving Executive Order No. 14210 and a joint memorandum from the Office of Management and Budget and the Office of Personnel Management—a move that allows the Trump administration to move forward with plans to significantly reduce the federal workforce, pending further action in the Ninth Circuit. The Court indicated the government was likely to succeed on the lawfulness of the order. Earlier, on June 27, the Court issued a ruling in Trump v. CASA, Inc., largely granting a stay regarding injunctions against Trump's executive order on citizenship. The majority opinion, authored by Justice Barrett and joined by Chief Justice Roberts, and Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh, found certain injunctions against the executive order to be too broad. Justice Sotomayor, joined by Kagan and Jackson, dissented.Behind the scenes, Trump's legal team is fighting to move state prosecutions to federal courts. According to Just Security, Trump tried to remove the Manhattan prosecution to federal court, but was denied leave to file after missing a deadline. An appeal is pending before the Second Circuit. Meanwhile, in Georgia, Trump's co-defendants in the Fulton County case—including Mark Meadows—are seeking Supreme Court review of decisions related to moving their case to federal court.All told, it's been a whirlwind of legal maneuvers and judicial rulings. Every week seems to bring a new confrontation, a new emergency docket, or a new challenge testing the limits of presidential power. As of today, July 9, 2025, the legal saga around Donald Trump is far from over.Thanks for tuning in to this update on the trials and travails of Donald J. Trump. Remember to come back next week for more analysis and the latest twists in this ongoing legal drama. This has been a Quiet Please production. For more, visit Quiet Please dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.ai

Interview with Chris Stamey. Chris Stamey began writing and playing music in grade school in Winston-Salem, NC, in the mid 1960s, in what is known now as the Combo Corner scene. In 1976, while studying music composition at UNC-Chapel Hill, he self-released Sneakers, one of the very first American “indie” records. The following year, he relocated to Manhattan to play and record with Alex Chilton in the burgeoning CBGB rock scene, then formed The dB's with fellow Carolinians Will Rigby, Gene Holder, and Peter Holsapple, with whom he made several acclaimed records of original material, including Stands for deciBels (self-produced with Alan Betrock) and Repercussion (produced by Scott Litt).  During the next decade and a half in New York, Stamey worked with a wide variety of musicians. He recorded well-received solo records for A&M and Warners and was a part of Anton Fier's Golden Palominos project, alongside an international touring cast that included Michael Stipe (R.E.M.), Jack Bruce (Cream), Carla Bley, and Bernie Worrell (Talking Heads, George Clinton). He continued recording and producing upon returning to NC in 1993.  His recent releases include The Great Escape, Lovesick Blues and Euphoria, as well as Falling Off the Sky with The dB's and A Brand-New Shade of Blue with the Fellow Travelers. As a producer and a featured singer/songwriter with the Paris-based Salt Collective project, he collaborated with Matthew Caws (Nada Surf), Juliana Hatfield, Richard Lloyd (Television), Matthew Sweet, Peter Holsapple, and Susan Cowsill, among others. As a producer, arranger, and mixer, he has worked with over a hundred artists, including Ryan Adams, Alejandro Escovedo, Kronos Quartet, Flat Duo Jets, Skylar Gudasz, Branford Marsalis, Tift Merritt, Le Tigre, Those Pretty Wrongs, and Yo La Tengo.  From 2010-2018, Stamey was orchestrator and musical director for an international series of concert performances of Big Star's classic album Third, alongside Big Star's Jody Stephens, Ray Davies, members of the Posies, R.E.M., Teenage Fanclub, Wilco, and Yo La Tengo; Thank You, Friends, a concert film of these arrangements, was released by Concord in March 2017. He currently tours as a member of Jody Stephens's Big Star Quintet, whose line-up includes Mike Mills (R.E.M), Pat Sansone (Wilco), and Jon Auer (Posies). His original radio musical about the early '60s in Manhattan, Occasional Shivers, premiered nationwide on Christmas Day 2016. A “songwriting memoir,” A Spy in the House of Loud (Univ. of Texas Press), was published in 2018, followed in 2019 by his first printed collection, New Songs for the 20th Century, with a companion two-disc CD (Omnivore Recordings).  open.spotify.com/artist/1i7YYagcULgnW5Qilsto1d music.apple.com/us/artist/chris-stamey/4034250 youtube.com/channel/UCG3O3S8Zg_WJoz2uTt_duig# instagram.com/mrstamey/?hl=en facebook.com/chrisstameymusic/ twitter.com/chrisstamey songkick.com/artists/186319-chris-stamey bandsintown.com/a/78299-chris-stamey deezer.com/us/artist/1279457 tidal.com/browse/artist/3611403 qobuz.com/us-en/interpreter/chris-stamey/515742 audiomack.com/chris-stamey music.amazon.com/artists/B008LPNC4M @chris-stamey.bsky.social  

Resident Evil changed everything.  When originally released in 1996, what was once a niche genre for enthusiasts was now a blockbuster staple in every second home.  All of a sudden people were craving zombies, horrifying monsters and disturbing themes.  It was so popular that Square, far more known for its more traditional JRPGs, decided to throw its hat in the ring and make Parasite Eve.On the surface, the game appeared to be textbook survival horror.  But dig a little deeper and you could see that Square was unable to escape its roots.  Turn based mode happened in a sphere similar to Vagrant Story, upgrades were plentiful and incremental, and the storytelling had more cutscenes than gameplay at least in the early stages.  Thematically this was still horrifying…but under the hood was a different story.Was this blend of genres ultimately successful, giving survival horror a fresh new perspective?  Or is it impossible to reconcile grim resources management with the power fantasy that RPGS almost always offer?On this episode, we discuss:StoryHow does Parasite Eve use real world science to lend an air of credibility to the horrific changes that are happening all over Manhattan?  Does it execute the smaller details well even if the larger picture is a bit silly at times?CombatHow enjoyable is the moment to moment real time combat of Parasite Eve?  The game requires you to dodge attacks, and pick the best moment to strike.  Is this too simplistic or does it work well?ProgressionHow do the weapon and armour upgrades work in Parasite Eve?  Does it provide the player with a satisfying sense of progression, or is it all just a confusing mess?We answer these questions and many more on the 132nd episode of the Retro Spectives Podcast!—Intro Music: KieLoBot - Tanzen KOutro Music: Rockit Maxx - One point to anotherParasite Eve OST: Yoko Shinomura—What crazy weapon upgrade paths do you like to use?  Is the NG+ mode worth playing?  How is Parasite Eve 2 different from the original?  Come let us know what you think on our discord server!Come let us know what you think or recommend us a new game on our community discord server!If you would like to support the show monetarily, you can buy us a coffee here!

Depends on who you ask and how you view the situation. Stigall is well aware many are angry about President Trump entertaining special dispensation for illegal aliens to work in agriculture and hospitality. He's also well aware of why we're in this mess, who's responsible, and what the goals of it were in the first place. Still, its an issue with which we all must deal. Not emotional rhetoric, but actual solutions and honest conversation. Steve Moore discusses the economic impact of it as well as a roaring economy thus far in spite of President Trump's tariff agenda. Also, a new Superman movie is coming out this week which lead Stigall to wonder what happened to the original slogan that included "the American way." In 2025, the creative forces of Hollywood think differently than in the 1940s. You'll also meet the Republican woman who wants to replace the radical District Attorney in Manhattan, Alvin Bragg and return New York to a law and order city. She lays out her plans to make Gotham great again. -For more info visit the official website: https://chrisstigall.comInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/chrisstigallshow/Twitter: https://twitter.com/ChrisStigallFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/chris.stigall/Listen on Spotify: https://tinyurl.com/StigallPodListen on Apple Podcasts: https://bit.ly/StigallShow-Help protect your wealth with real, physical gold and silver. Texas Bullion Exchange helps everyday Americans diversify with tailored portfolios, IRA rollovers, and expert support every step of the way.

Connor and Heather break down a $2.6M Manhattan boutique stretching franchise, debating its “passive” claims, premium valuation, and if the trendy concept will stand the test of time.Business Listing – https://www.bizbuysell.com/business-opportunity/network-of-3-passive-boutique-wellness-centers-in-nyc/2308977/Welcome to Acquisitions Anonymous – the #1 podcast for small business M&A. Every week, we break down businesses for sale and talk about buying, operating, and growing them.

In this episode, we wrap with the sad end of John Mack's once-fine career, then dive deeply into the most "important" "alien" "abduction" that pioneering researcher Budd Hopkins ever covered. Yes, this is the story of a woman who was abducted by aliens from a Manhattan apartment tower into a flying saucer in front of 23 witnesses! Except, spoiler alert, maybe not. More Budd and then some sensible people next week. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A body hidden beneath a mattress. A confession lost to suicide. And two families refusing to let her be forgotten.Venus Xtravaganza was a rising star in New York's ballroom scene, immortalized in the landmark documentary Paris Is Burning. But before the film could finish, Venus was found strangled in a Manhattan hotel room in 1988. Her murder went unsolved, her legacy nearly erased. Now, decades later, I'm Your Venus, a powerful new LGBTQ+ true crime documentary follows her biological brothers and her chosen family from the House of Xtravaganza as they reopen the cold case, uncover shocking new evidence, and fight to reclaim her name and story. In this episode Jordi and Brad dives deep into Venus's life, her death, and her enduring legacy, and even covers some information that isn't talked about in either of the documentaries covering her life. So press play, pour yourself a drink, and toast to uncovering queer stories too powerful to forget.

Manhattan prosecutors in New York played a troubling role in allowing Jeffrey Epstein's sexual abuse to continue largely uninterrupted. As journalist Jane Coaston detailed, a Manhattan assistant district attorney even petitioned to classify Epstein as a low-risk sex offender—opting to call for the most lenient category possible under the law. This decision had consequences: Epstein never registered in person with the NYPD as required, effectively sidestepping the mandatory check-ins every 90 days—even though a judge explicitly stated this would be a condition of his registration.Meanwhile, New York City authorities seemingly looked the other way. Epstein failed to report his address and skipped the mandatory check-ins for eight years, yet no enforcement actions were taken. In essence, local prosecutors and police enabled his pattern of offending to persist unchecked. By systematically failing to enforce New York's own sex-offender regulations, the state protected Epstein—rather than his victims—allowing him to evade accountability and continue preying on vulnerable girls.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Jeffrey Epstein: the state of New York protected Epstein — not his victims | Vox

The Loft was a dance party series organized by DJ David Mancuso in his Manhattan warehouse apartment at 647 Broadway from Valentine's Day 1970 to June 1974. The parties offered an alternative to New York's commercial nightclub scene. The invitation-only events featured an egalitarian space for music and dance with a top-of-the-line sound system, eclectic musical selections, and a racially inclusive and gay-friendly mix of guests. Attendees included the city's leading disc jockeys such as Larry Levan, Nicky Siano, and Frankie Knuckles, who launched their careers in next generation clubs like the Paradise Garage, The Gallery, Chicago's Warehouse, and The Saint—  all influenced by the Loft.  In the premiere episode of Season Two of Soundscapes NYC, host Ryan Purcell introduces co-host Kristie Soares, in conversation with music and dance historian Tim Lawrence, to contextualize David Mancuso's Loft. Lawrence is a Professor of Cultural Studies at the University of East London's School of Arts and Digital Industries. He is the author of Love Saves the Day: A History of American Dance Music Culture, 1970-79 (Duke University Press, 2003), Hold On to Your Dreams: Arthur Russell and the Downtown Music Scene, 1973-92 (Duke University Press, 2009) and Life and Death on the New York Dance Floor, 1980-83 (Duke University Press, 2016). Outside of academia, Lawrence hosts his own dance party series called All Our Friends, as well as a podcast about music history called Love Is The Message.  The opening anecdote draws from Tim Lawrence's Love Saves the Day: A History of American Dance Music Culture, 1970-79 (Duke University Press, 2003).  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

Singha Hon is a visual artist, illustrator, designer, and educator from New York City.Her work is inspired by nature, dreams, community, and mythology, and the many threads that weave us all together. As a teaching artist, she has taught on subjects ranging from drawing, portraiture, sculpture, printmaking, cyanotyping to an intergenerational cohort of students.She has worked as a teaching artist with The W.O.W. Project through their storefront residency and through the Creatives Rebuild New York program. She is currently a Public Artist in Residence through the PAIR program with DCLA in NYC.Her murals and installations exist across New York, including in downtown Manhattan and in Kingston, NY.Today Singha talks about her early relationship with art and how she eventually finds a way to align her passion for storytelling through art with her values in a way that supports her continued creation. She talks about what inspires her work, nature, mythology and dreams and how these relate to both her personal life and her work. Singha shares the mythology that inspired her Lunar Calendar, "Door Gods, Our Community Protectors," "Black Bear // Dreams of the Mountains," and "Welcoming Dreams, A Return." She speaks passionately about the need to expand the narrative that's available to the collective, including a return to earlier narratives and those to be imagined as a way towards a brighter future. We also meander into shared thoughts on how it can be hard to say "No" unless we're held within a giving culture.Here's your Full Moon Astrology !I also mention the Hey Neighbor Food Project which is having it's first pick up on July 21st with a pre-order date of July 16th.Today's show was engineered by Ian Seda from Radiokingston.org.Our show music is from Shana Falana!Feel free to email me, say hello: she@iwantwhatshehas.org** Please: SUBSCRIBE to the pod and leave a REVIEW wherever you are listening, it helps other users FIND IThttp://iwantwhatshehas.org/podcastITUNES | SPOTIFYITUNES: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/i-want-what-she-has/id1451648361?mt=2SPOTIFY:https://open.spotify.com/show/77pmJwS2q9vTywz7Uhiyff?si=G2eYCjLjT3KltgdfA6XXCAFollow:INSTAGRAM * https://www.instagram.com/iwantwhatshehaspodcast/FACEBOOK * https://www.facebook.com/iwantwhatshehaspodcast

Recorded live in New York, Summer 1997. Digitized from cassette tape.

City officials are warning New Yorkers to prepare for dangerous summer weather through Wednesday, with a heat advisory in effect and a flood watch starting Tuesday afternoon. Meanwhile, Mayor Eric Adams is pitching a major shakeup to city elections by introducing “open primaries” where all candidates run together regardless of party. Plus, WNYC's Liam Quigley explains why Staten Island beaches could be the perfect spot for New Yorkers looking to avoid the crowds.

The National Weather Service has issued a heat advisory for Tuesday, warning it could feel as hot as 100 degrees in the city. Older adults, outdoor workers, and those without air conditioning are especially at risk. Meanwhile, a new city health department report shows more pregnant New Yorkers are using doulas for support, with Mayor Adams expanding free access as part of efforts to improve Black maternal health. Plus, the city is increasingly relying on drones to monitor beaches for sharks

The Adams Administration is calling for the release of an 11th grader who was detained by federal immigration authorities last month. Also, a new report from the city health department finds that doulas were involved in more than 6% of births last year, up from less than 5% in 2022. Plus, after being threatened with a knife, Albany's interim U.S. Attorney wants the permanent job. Meanwhile, a New York City nonprofit is offering psychiatric services to the most vulnerable New Yorkers by pulling up to where they are. And finally, New York City art schools are seeing an application boom.

When we're young, our faces have a smooth, full look thanks to well-defined fat pads and tight connective tissue. But as we age, those structures start to change, leading to sags, bags and changes in facial shape. Facial aging doesn't happen all at once. It's a gradual process that starts as early as your 20s. At first, the face can look more sculpted and angular, but over time, fat volume loss,  drooping, and eventually muscle and bone changes become more noticeable. Restoring a youthful look often means going beyond just the skin. It takes a thoughtful approach that can include restoring lost volume, repositioning fat and connective tissue, and tightening the skin. Drs. Bass and Edinger break down how facial aging really works, from the inside out, and why understanding these changes is key to treating them effectively. Learn more about facelift surgery About Dr. Kylie Edinger Dr. Kylie Edinger is a plastic surgeon currently spending a year training as an aesthetic plastic surgery fellow with Dr. Bass and a host of other world class plastic surgeons at Manhattan Eye, Ear, and Throat Hospital in New York City. She's part of the prestigious Northwell Health program—one of the top aesthetic plastic surgery fellowships in the country. Before making her way to NYC, Dr. Edinger completed her plastic surgery residency at the University of Wisconsin. Follow Dr. Edinger on Instagram @kylieedinger About Dr. Lawrence Bass Innovator. Industry veteran. In-demand Park Avenue board certified plastic surgeon, Dr. Lawrence Bass is a true master of his craft, not only in the OR but as an industry pioneer in the development and evaluation of new aesthetic technologies. With locations in both Manhattan (on Park Avenue between 62nd and 63rd Streets) and in Great Neck, Long Island, Dr. Bass has earned his reputation as the plastic surgeon for the most discerning patients in NYC and beyond. To learn more, visit the Bass Plastic Surgery website or follow the team on Instagram @drbassnyc Subscribe to the Park Avenue Plastic Surgery Class newsletter to be notified of new episodes & receive exclusive invitations, offers, and information from Dr. Bass. 

Fins, Fur and Feathers: Fish Parasites Potential Reasons for Cattle Pregnancy Loss Less Stress When Moving Calves   00:01:05 – Fins, Fur and Feathers: Fish Parasites: A discussion about parasites in aquatic life from part of the Fins, Fur and Feathers podcast with K-State's Drew Ricketts and Joe Gerken begins today's show. Fins, Fur and Feathers Wildlife.k-state.edu   00:12:05 – Potential Reasons for Cattle Pregnancy Loss: K-State veterinarian Gregg Hanzlicek keeps the show moving as he explains the various reasons cattle could experience a pregnancy loss. ksvdl.org   00:23:05 – Less Stress When Moving Calves: Wrapping up the show is K-State dairy specialist Mike Brouk as he talks about research being done to hopefully be able to move calves without causing stress or injury.         Send comments, questions or requests for copies of past programs to ksrenews@ksu.edu.   Agriculture Today is a daily program featuring Kansas State University agricultural specialists and other experts examining ag issues facing Kansas and the nation. It is hosted by Shelby Varner and distributed to radio stations throughout Kansas and as a daily podcast.   K‑State Research and Extension is a short name for the Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service, a program designed to generate and distribute useful knowledge for the well‑being of Kansans. Supported by county, state, federal and private funds, the program has county Extension offices, experiment fields, area Extension offices and regional research centers statewide. Its headquarters is on the K‑State campus in Manhattan

Episode #187 of the Last Call Trivia Podcast begins with a round of general knowledge questions. Then, we're giving a nod to some favorites of the past with a round of “Gone But Not Forgotten” Trivia!Round OneThe game kicks off with an Anatomy Trivia question that asks the Team to name the lobe of the brain that contains regions dedicated to processing sensory information.Next, we have a Companies Trivia question about a cereal company that was founded by a patient at the Battle Creek Sanitarium.The first round concludes with an Events Trivia question about the largest hot air balloon festival in the world.Bonus QuestionToday's Bonus Question is a follow-up to the Events Trivia question from the first round.Round TwoShould we start a petition to bring back these classics? In the meantime, we'll give them a shoutout in our theme round of “Gone But Not Forgotten” Trivia!The second round begins with an Animals Trivia question about a species that hasn't existed in the wild for thousands of years.Next, we have a Websites Trivia question about a site that surpassed Google as the most visited website in the United States at one point in 2006.Round Two concludes with a Candy Trivia question that asks the Team to name the bite-sized candy balls once made by Butterfinger.Final QuestionWe've reached the Final Question of the game, and today's category of choice is Television. We're heading to the city that never sleeps!For today's Final, the Trivia Team is given five different New York City TV shows and asked to determine whether each is primarily set in Manhattan or Brooklyn.Visit lastcalltrivia.com to learn more about hosting your own ultimate Trivia event!

The Loft was a dance party series organized by DJ David Mancuso in his Manhattan warehouse apartment at 647 Broadway from Valentine's Day 1970 to June 1974. The parties offered an alternative to New York's commercial nightclub scene. The invitation-only events featured an egalitarian space for music and dance with a top-of-the-line sound system, eclectic musical selections, and a racially inclusive and gay-friendly mix of guests. Attendees included the city's leading disc jockeys such as Larry Levan, Nicky Siano, and Frankie Knuckles, who launched their careers in next generation clubs like the Paradise Garage, The Gallery, Chicago's Warehouse, and The Saint—  all influenced by the Loft.  In the premiere episode of Season Two of Soundscapes NYC, host Ryan Purcell introduces co-host Kristie Soares, in conversation with music and dance historian Tim Lawrence, to contextualize David Mancuso's Loft. Lawrence is a Professor of Cultural Studies at the University of East London's School of Arts and Digital Industries. He is the author of Love Saves the Day: A History of American Dance Music Culture, 1970-79 (Duke University Press, 2003), Hold On to Your Dreams: Arthur Russell and the Downtown Music Scene, 1973-92 (Duke University Press, 2009) and Life and Death on the New York Dance Floor, 1980-83 (Duke University Press, 2016). Outside of academia, Lawrence hosts his own dance party series called All Our Friends, as well as a podcast about music history called Love Is The Message.  The opening anecdote draws from Tim Lawrence's Love Saves the Day: A History of American Dance Music Culture, 1970-79 (Duke University Press, 2003).  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/music

Confront isn't about conflict for conflict's sake, it's about transformation. In this message, Pastor Ryan Schlachter opens up Matthew 5:38–41, where Jesus confronts our desire for retaliation and control. The law said, “eye for eye,” but Jesus invites us into something deeper: a life where grace disarms offense and love silences revenge. This isn't weakness it's courage. The courage to name our pain, resist passive silence, and choose dignity over dominance. Jesus doesn't ask us to ignore injustice or absorb abuse. He shows us how to confront with clarity, restraint, and Spirit-empowered peace. As we step into this new series, we're reminded: confrontation in the Kingdom isn't about proving a point it's about pointing to a Savior. Turn the other cheek. Walk the second mile. Let go without losing yourself. These are revelations of a Kingdom heart.

183: Irene's kindergarten son was attending a prestigious Manhattan public school. When he told her that the school wasn't teaching him to read, she didn't believe him. When she finally realized he was right, she set out on a challenging journey to save his academic life. You won't want to miss this one!Click here for the show notes from this episode.Get my book, Reach All Readers! Looking for printable resources that align with the science of reading? Click here to learn more about our popular and affordable membership for PreK through 3rd grade educators.Connect with Anna here! Blog Instagram Facebook Twitter (X)

Kris Lefcoe! Filmmaker! Writer! Director! Musician! Friend! Delight! More! We have a great chat! You can have a great listen! About Kris, from her website: "Kris Lefcoe (DGA) is a Canadian-American director and writer based in New York City. Her work has screened at TIFF, SXSW, Tribeca, British Film Institute, Art Basel Miami, IFC and on the Sundance Channel. 

 Kris is co-creator, writer and EP of “Making Plans For Nigel,” a comedy series in network development with Priyanka Chopra Jonas and Mary Rohlich (“Atypical”). Lefcoe's half-hour comedy “Giving Up,” about a New York couple facing their own deadline to either ‘make it' or give up their dreams, won top prizes at Seriesfest and New York Television Festival, and just had a theatrical premiere at the Roxy Cinema in NYC. The series was executive produced by David Wain and developed with Imagine Television. In 2020, Kris made her network directing debut on the NBC comedy “Superstore.”

 Pitch-black comedy “Public Domain,” Kris' audacious audience-award-winning feature debut about a surveillance-based game show, was hailed as "creepy-funny and well-acted" (Variety), and "an assured debut" (Austin Chronicle). The film premiered at SXSW and was installed at Art Basel Miami.
 Lefcoe's stop motion short “Tiny Riot Project,” featuring a riot squad of corporate mascots in a violent face off with endearing anarchists, premiered at IFF Rotterdam, was installed at Galerie Tomas Schulte Berlin, Havana Biennale, and Art Basel Miami, then sold to the Sundance Channel. Her acclaimed Twilight Zone-esque short “Can I Get a Witness?” starring Scott Speedman, screened at TIFF, BFI and Anthology Film Archives.

 Kris' explosive music videos have garnered numerous nominations and awards, including the Peaches smash “Boys Wanna Be Her” which has over 3 million views on YouTube.
She recently won Best Director at New York Cinefest, and Best Director and Best Comedy at Deluxe Film Festival in Rome, for the sex-robot comedy “Technical Support” starring Aparna Nancherla and Courtney Pauroso, which quickly racked up almost million views on YouTube.  As a musician, Kris performs haunting original songs at live venues around NYC on a vintage keyboard she found in the garbage. Her first solo album will be released in Fall 2025. The advance single “Booked A Room” came out in 2024 with a hallucinatory stop motion video directed by Kris that premiered at the 2024 Tribeca Festival and just won Best Video and the Audience Award at San Luis Obispo Festival.  Kris is also a professor in the MFA Film and Television program at Stony Brook University, SUNY. In 2024 she created and launched the Post-MFA Pilot Incubator Lab to shepherd alumni into the industry. She lives with her husband and daughter in a long-forgotten borough called Manhattan." And this is just the first HALF of our conversation! For part two, subscribe via Apple Podcasts OR simply click on over here to Patreon! Enjoy!

Qool DJ Marv Live at Soho House Manhattan - July 3 2025 - Makes a Differencehttps://sohohouseny.com/        +    Artwork: https://www.bettyblayton.com/about-betty-blayton   ---      https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5gQLsodBsCys1_3Zbm83vg     https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/qool-dj-marv-aural-memoirs-and-buttamilk-archives/id269880758     https://music.apple.com/us/artist/qool-dj-marv/1558418894    https://bsky.app/profile/qooldjmarv.bsky.social     https://www.instagram.com/qooldjmarv/    https://qooldjmarv.bandcamp.com/album/sound-paths-v-1    https://tidal.com/browse/artist/23883666    https://www.mixcloud.com/qooldjmarv/    https://open.spotify.com/artist/48vhJ2d1hVaFHf6gqXeTm0?si=fWO0N456QeWRMWLUtqe4Yg    https://soundcloud.com/qooldjmarv    https://www.twitch.tv/qooldjmarv    https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/QoolDJMarvMusic 

This is the 12PM All Local for Monday, July 7th, 2025.

Journalist Eliot Stein takes us along on the unique adventure of kayaking the perimeter of Manhattan Island and observes some of the pockets of nature that persist within New York's concrete jungle. Then a midwestern author shares his lifelong passion for the Mississippi River and delves into the recreational, ecological, and spiritual facets of America's mighty waterway. And TV host Samantha Brown tells Rick how she keeps herself from stressing out over what could go wrong in her frequent travels. For more information on Travel with Rick Steves - including episode descriptions, program archives and related details - visit www.ricksteves.com.