Podcasts about K Street

In this fiery episode, Tara and Lee dismantle the false financial narratives pushed by Wall Street elites and the mainstream media. Remember April? It was supposed to be the worst stock market month since the Great Depression—thanks to Trump's tariffs. But instead? Consumer confidence soared, stocks rebounded, and mom-and-pop investors held strong while hedge funds quietly bought back in. Tara exposes how fear-mongering was weaponized to sabotage Trump and mislead the public—again. The second half turns local and political, diving deep into why Senator Lindsey Graham continues to survive primary challenges in South Carolina despite widespread grassroots opposition. From open primaries to the influence of K Street money and Charleston moderates, Tara and Lee break down how the state's political machine keeps conservatives sidelined. This episode is a sharp wake-up call for investors, voters, and anyone fed up with being gaslit by both Wall Street and Washington.

Leigh Ann Caldwell joins Peter Hamby to dig into the messy Senate G.O.P. primary showdown brewing in Texas between John Cornyn and Ken Paxton—a race which riled up the White House after Paxton hired political strategist Jeff Roe, a Trump bête noire, to run his campaign. Then they chronicle the hard times facing Democratic lobbyists in Trump's D.C. 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

Doge exposes waste at its finest! Chris Markowski rages over the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS)—a 9-story K Street tower for 60 employees, most working from home, with luxury suites and taxpayer-funded perks. Luke Rosiak's Daily Wire exposé reveals it all. www.watchdogonwallstreet.com

Shaun talks to John O'Connor, author of Postgate: How the Washington Post Betrayed Deep Throat, Covered Up Watergate, and Began Today's Partisan Advocacy Journalism, about who the REAL bad guys are....and it all traces back to K Street.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Shaun discusses Trump's speech and loser Brandon Johnson testifying to Congress. PLUS, The Heartland Institute's Donald Kendal talks to Shaun about the high cost of the climate scams in the Inflation Reduction Act. And Shaun talks to John O'Connor, author of Postgate: How the Washington Post Betrayed Deep Throat, Covered Up Watergate, and Began Today's Partisan Advocacy Journalism, about who the REAL bad guys are....and it all traces back to K Street.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Situations involving stalking can be a gray area.Does the person mean well but are just awkward in their approach? Are you reading too much into it? Let's not jump to conclusions and end up smearing an innocent person. We should give the benefit of a doubt until we have our facts straight.All of these are very natural impulses, rooted in solid values that generally speaking serve us well. And they could have cost Idy Marcus dearly.Idy was raised in a very loving home by parents who married and started their family later in life. They adored each other and were connected in every way. This sentiment passed down to Idy and her sister, who picked up values like your handshake is your bond, present yourself well, give people the benefit of a doubt, and be honorable in all things.She also learned to be bold, take chances, and not be afraid to take the plunge. Her family encouraged her to be curious, courageous, and not fear failure. These traits all served Idy well as she grew her career as a leadership management and corporate conflict resolution expert. When she started her own company, she figured if it didn't work out, she had enough contacts eating lunch on Washington DC's K Street that she wouldn't go hungry. After her sister passed and then suddenly her dad two years later, Idy insisted her mother come live with her. Her mom attended events with her and served as a fantastic business resource. Just before they were to move overseas for work with a corporate client, her mom suffered a massive and debilitating stroke, rendering her unable to speak and with limited mobility. Idy immediately put her career on hold to stay at the care facility with her mom full-time. In her unique way, Idy carved out a path where everything was fine, until it wasn't – after all, Fine is a 4-Letter Word.One of her mother's caretakers seemed nice enough, if a bit awkward. Idy didn't make a whole lot of his obsession with her and minimized others' concerns. Then she found black roses left on her car. Then her car was broken into. At first she tried to reason with the man, to give him the benefit of a doubt… until he started stalking others.In a moment, when you meet Idy, you'll discover how dealing with this situation led her to take on the role of CEO for Pro-Tect Services, LLC, a startup that uses trained U.S. veterans to provide on-demand close protection security service to those confronting domestic and intimate partner violence and stalking.Idy's hype song is "Let's Go Fly a Kite" from the "Mary Poppins" Soundtrack.Resources:Idy Marcus' LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/idy-idora-marcus-520513277/ Invitation from Lori:This episode is sponsored by Zen Rabbit. Smart business leaders know trust is the foundation of every great workplace. And in today's hybrid and fast-moving work culture, trust isn't built in quarterly town halls or the occasional Slack message. It's built through consistent, clear, and HUMAN communication. Companies and leaders TALK about the importance of connection and community. And it's easy to believe your organization is doing a great job of maintaining an awesome corporate culture. Because there are… Annual all-hands meetings where once a year you hear a well-rehearsed speech, employees clap politely, and everyone leaves with the same unanswered questions they came in with. "Open door policies" that no one ever uses because people are uncomfortable walking in to talk with someone they don't feel like they know very well. "Fun" team-building events like escape rooms, trust falls, and awkward,...

À Washington D.C., un célèbre gang de trafiquants de drogue menace tout un quartier. Les témoins sont intimidés ou tués. Alors que la police et le FBI montent un dossier contre les tueurs, le nombre de cadavres ne cesse d'augmenter. Les ventes de drogue montent en flèche alors que le quartier devient une véritable zone de guerre. Le FBI doit maintenant trouver la clé pour détruire un gang mortel connu dans toute la ville sous le nom de K Street Crew.“Les dossiers du FBI” est un podcast coproduit par Initial Studio et New Dominion Pictures, adapté de la série documentaire audiovisuelle "FBI Files" produit par New Dominion Pictures. Cet épisode a été écrit par Kevin Barry et Alison Erkelens. Il a été réalisé par David Haycox Bonne écoute ! Pour découvrir nos autres podcasts, suivez Initial Studio sur Instagram et Facebook. Crédits du podcastProduction exécutive du podcast : Initial StudioProduction éditoriale : Sarah Koskievic et Marie Agassant, assistées par Marine Boudalier Montage : Camille LegrasAvec la voix d'd'Emmanuel Rehbinder Hébergé par Audion. Visitez https://www.audion.fm/fr/privacy-policy pour plus d'informations.

À Washington D.C., un célèbre gang de trafiquants de drogue menace tout un quartier. Les témoins sont intimidés ou tués. Alors que la police et le FBI montent un dossier contre les tueurs, le nombre de cadavres ne cesse d'augmenter. Les ventes de drogue montent en flèche alors que le quartier devient une véritable zone de guerre. Le FBI doit maintenant trouver la clé pour détruire un gang mortel connu dans toute la ville sous le nom de K Street Crew.“Les dossiers du FBI” est un podcast coproduit par Initial Studio et New Dominion Pictures, adapté de la série documentaire audiovisuelle "FBI Files" produit par New Dominion Pictures. Cet épisode a été écrit par Kevin Barry et Alison Erkelens. Il a été réalisé par David Haycox Bonne écoute ! Pour découvrir nos autres podcasts, suivez Initial Studio sur Instagram et Facebook. Crédits du podcastProduction exécutive du podcast : Initial StudioProduction éditoriale : Sarah Koskievic et Marie Agassant, assistées par Marine Boudalier Montage : Camille LegrasAvec la voix d'd'Emmanuel Rehbinder Hébergé par Audion. Visitez https://www.audion.fm/fr/privacy-policy pour plus d'informations.

Steven Soderbergh isn't just a prolific director with 35 feature-length films to his credit—he also finds time to make TV shows, too! In today's episode, Keir and Mike discuss his work on “Fallen Angels,” “K Street,” “The Knick,” “Mosaic,” “Full Circle,” and “Command Z.” Social media Instagram @thefilmographers Twitter/X @filmographerpod Letterboxd @filmographers YouTube @TheFilmographersPodcast Website: https://filmographerspodcast.com/ Join our Pateron! Credits Keir Graff & Michael Moreci, hosts Kevin Lau, producer Gompson, theme music Cosmo Graff, graphic design

Jeho fotky znáte ze sociálních sítí. Fotí nádherné černobílé fotky. Fotí na ulici a jeho hlavním rajónem je Most, Žatec a také Roudnice nad Labem. Možná se na jeho fotce objevíte i Vy, protože fotí na ulici. Nemá rád prázdné ulice, na jeho fotkách jsou důležití lidé. Nejraději má zastávky, centra měst, nádraží, ale také má sérii fotek z mosteckého blešáku. Jak si vybírá, co a kde bude fotit? Musel někdy před někým utíkat? Jak poznáte, že Vás fotí? To vše a mnohem víc se dozvíte v rozhovoru se street fotografem Davidem Fraňkem v Ponte Reports.

1UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXASHOUSTON DIVISIONIn re:INTRUM AB, et al.,1Debtors.Chapter 11Case No. 24-90575 (CML)(Jointly Administered)NOTICE OF APPEALPursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(a) and Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure 8002 and 8003,notice is hereby given that the Ad Hoc Committee of holders of 2025 notes issued by Intrum AB(the “AHC”) hereby appeals to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texasfrom (i) the Order Denying Motion of the Ad Hoc Committee of Holders of Intrum AB Notes Due2025 to Dismiss Chapter 11 Cases Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1112(b) and Federal Rule ofBankruptcy Procedure 1017(f)(1) (ECF No. 262) (the “Motion to Dismiss Order”) and (ii) theOrder (I) Approving Disclosure Statement and (II) Confirming Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11Plan of Intrum AB and Its Affiliated Debtor (Further Technical Modifications) (ECF No. 263) (the“Confirmation Order”). A copy of the Motion to Dismiss Order is attached as Exhibit A and acopy of the Confirmation Order is attached as Exhibit B. Additionally, the transcript of theBankruptcy Court's oral ruling accompanying the Motion to Dismiss Order and ConfirmationOrder (ECF No. 275) is attached as Exhibit C.Below are the names of all parties to this appeal and their respective counsel:1 The Debtors in these Chapter 11 Cases are Intrum AB and Intrum AB of Texas LLC. The Debtors'service address in these Chapter 11 Cases is 801 Travis Street, Ste 2101, #1312, Houston, TX 77002.Case 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 1 of 62I. APPELLANTA. Name of Appellant:The members of the AHC include:Boundary Creek Master Fund LP; CF INT Holdings Designated Activity Company; CaiusCapital Master Fund; Diameter Master Fund LP; Diameter Dislocation Master Fund II LP; FirTree Credit Opportunity Master Fund, LP; MAP 204 Segregated Portfolio, a segregated portfolioof LMA SPC; Star V Partners LLC; and TQ Master Fund LP.Attorneys for the AHC:QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLPChristopher D. Porter (SBN 24070437)Joanna D. Caytas (SBN 24127230)Melanie A. Guzman (SBN 24117175)Cameron M. Kelly (SBN 24120936)700 Louisiana Street, Suite 3900Houston, TX 77002Telephone: (713) 221-7000Facsimile: (713) 221-7100Email: chrisporter@quinnemanuel.comjoannacaytas@quinnemanuel.commelanieguzman@quinnemanuel.comcameronkelly@quinnemanuel.com-and-Benjamin I. Finestone (admitted pro hac vice)Sascha N. Rand (admitted pro hac vice)Katherine A. Scherling (admitted pro hac vice)295 5th AvenueNew York, New York 10016Telephone: (212) 849-7000Facsimile: (212) 849-7100Email: benjaminfinestone@quinnemanuel.comsascharand@quinnemanuel.comkatescherling@quinnemanuel.comB. Positions of appellant in the adversary proceeding or bankruptcy case that isthe subject of this appeal:CreditorsCase 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 2 of 63II. THE SUBJECT OF THIS APPEALA. Judgment, order, or decree appealed from:The Order Denying Motion of the Ad Hoc Committee of Holders of Intrum AB Notes Due2025 to Dismiss Chapter 11 Cases Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1112(b) and Federal Rule ofBankruptcy Procedure 1017(f)(1) (ECF No. 262); the Order (I) Approving Disclosure Statementand (II) Confirming Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Intrum AB and Its Affiliated Debtor(Further Technical Modifications) (ECF No. 263); and the December 31, 2024 Transcript of OralRuling Before the Honorable Christopher M. Lopez United States Bankruptcy Court Judge (ECFNo. 275).B. The date on which the judgment, order, or decree was entered:The Motion to Dismiss Order and the Confirmation Order were entered on December 31,2024. The Court issued its oral ruling accompanying the Motion to Dismiss Order and theConfirmation Order on December 31, 2024.III. OTHER PARTIES TO THIS APPEALIntrum AB and Intrum AB of Texas LLCMILBANK LLPDennis F. Dunne (admitted pro hac vice)Jaimie Fedell (admitted pro hac vice)55 Hudson YardsNew York, NY 10001Telephone: (212) 530-5000Facsimile: (212) 530-5219Email: ddunne@milbank.comjfedell@milbank.com–and–Andrew M. Leblanc (admitted pro hac vice)Melanie Westover Yanez (admitted pro hac vice)1850 K Street, NW, Suite 1100Washington, DC 20006Telephone: (202) 835-7500Facsimile: (202) 263-7586Email: aleblanc@milbank.commwyanez@milbank.com–and–PORTER HEDGES LLPJohn F. Higgins (SBN 09597500)Case 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 3 of 64Eric D. Wade (SBN 00794802)M. Shane Johnson (SBN 24083263)1000 Main Street, 36th FloorHouston TX 77002Telephone: (713) 226-6000Facsimile: (713) 226-6248Email: jhiggins@porterhedges.comewade@porterhedges.comsjohnson@porterhedges.comIV. OTHER PARTIES THAT MAY HAVE AN INTEREST IN THIS APPEALThe following chart lists certain parties that are not parties to this appeal, but that may havean interest in the outcome of the case. These parties should be served with notice of this appealby the Debtors who are aware of their identities and best positioned to provide notice.All Other Creditors of the Debtors, Including, But Not Limited To:• Certain funds and accounts managed by BlackRock Investment Management (UK)Limited or its affiliates;• Capital Four;• Davidson Kempner European Partners, LLP;• Intermediate Capital Managers Limited;• Mandatum Asset Management Ltd;• H.I.G. Capital, LLC;• Spiltan Hograntefond; Spiltan Rantefond Sverige; and Spiltan Aktiefond Stabil;• The RCF SteerCo Group;• Swedbank AB (publ).Any Holder of Stock of the Debtors• Any holder of stock of the Debtors, including their successors and assigns.Case 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 4 of 65Respectfully submitted this 13th day of January, 2025.QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &SULLIVAN, LLP/s/ Christopher D. PorterChristopher D. Porter (SBN 24070437)Joanna D. Caytas (SBN 24127230)Melanie A. Guzman (SBN 24117175)Cameron M. Kelly (SBN 24120936)700 Louisiana Street, Suite 3900Houston, TX 77002Telephone: (713) 221-7000Facsimile: (713) 221-7100Email: chrisporter@quinnemanuel.comjoannacaytas@quinnemanuel.commelanieguzman@quinnemanuel.comcameronkelly@quinnemanuel.com-and-Benjamin I. Finestone (admitted pro hac vice)Sascha N. Rand (admitted pro hac vice)Katherine A. Scherling (admitted pro hac vice)295 5th AvenueNew York, New York 10016Telephone: (212) 849-7000Facsimile: (212) 849-7100Email: benjaminfinestone@quinnemanuel.comsascharand@quinnemanuel.comkatescherling@quinnemanuel.comCOUNSEL FOR THE AD HOC COMMITTEE OFINTRUM AB 2025 NOTEHOLDERSCase 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 5 of 6CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEI, Christopher D. Porter, hereby certify that on the 13th day of January, 2025, a copy ofthe foregoing document has been served via the Electronic Case Filing System for the UnitedStates Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas./s/ Christopher D. PorterBy: Christopher D. PorterCase 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 6 of 6EXHIBIT ACase 24-90575 Document 296-1 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 1 of 31IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURTFOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXASHOUSTON DIVISION)In re: ) Chapter 11)Intrum AB, et al.,1 ) Case No. 24-90575 (CML)))Jointly AdministeredDebtors. ))ORDER DENYING MOTION OF THE AD HOCCOMMITTEE OF HOLDERS OF INTRUM AB NOTES DUE 2025TO DISMISS CHAPTER 11 CASES PURSUANT TO 11 U.S.C. § 1112(B) ANDFEDERAL RULE OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE 1017(F)(1)(Related to Docket No. 27)This matter, having come before the Court upon the Motion of the Ad Hoc Committee ofHolders of Intrum AB Notes Due 2025 to Dismiss Chapter 11 Cases Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §1112(b) and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 1017(f)(1) [Docket No. 27] (the “Motion toDismiss”); and this Court having considered the Debtors' Objection to the Motion of the Ad HocCommittee of Holders of Intrum AB Notes Due 2025 to Dismiss Chapter 11 Cases Pursuant to 11U.S.C. § 1112(b) and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 1017(f)(1) (the “Objection”) andany other responses or objections to the Motion to Dismiss; and this Court having jurisdiction overthis matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1334 and the Amended Standing Order; and this Court havingfound that this is a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2); and this Court having foundthat it may enter a final order consistent with Article III of the United States Constitution; and thisCourt having found that the relief requested in the Objection is in the best interests of the Debtors'1 The Debtors in these Chapter 11 Cases are Intrum AB and Intrum AB of Texas LLC. The Debtors' serviceaddress in these Chapter 11 Cases is 801 Travis Street, STE 2101, #1312, Houston, TX 77002.United States Bankruptcy CourtSouthern District of TexasENTEREDDecember 31, 2024Nathan Ochsner, ClerkCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29662-1 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 2 o of f2 32estates; and this Court having found that the Debtors' notice of the Objection and opportunity fora hearing on the Motion to Dismiss and Objection were appropriate and no other notice need beprovided; and this Court having reviewed the Motion to Dismiss and Objection and havingheard the statements in support of the relief requested therein at a hearing before this Court; andthis Court having determined that the legal and factual bases set forth in the Objectionestablish just cause for the relief granted herein; and upon all of the proceedings had beforethis Court; and after due deliberation and sufficient cause appearing therefor, it is HEREBYORDERED THAT:1. The Motion to Dismiss is Denied for the reasons stated at the December 31, 2024 hearing.2. This Court retains exclusive jurisdiction and exclusive venue with respect to allmatters arising from or related to the implementation, interpretation, and enforcement of this Order.DAeucegmubste 0r 23,1 2, 0210294CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29662-1 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 3 o of f2 3EXHIBIT BCase 24-90575 Document 296-2 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 1 of 135IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURTFOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXASHOUSTON DIVISION)In re: ) Chapter 11)Intrum AB et al.,1 ) Case No. 24-90575 (CML)))(Jointly Administered)Debtors. ))ORDER (I) APPROVINGDISCLOSURE STATEMENT AND(II) CONFIRMING JOINT PREPACKAGED CHAPTER 11PLAN OF INTRUM AB AND ITS AFFILIATEDDEBTOR (FURTHER TECHNICAL MODIFICATIONS)The above-captioned debtors and debtors in possession (collectively, the“Debtors”), having:a. entered into that certain Lock-Up Agreement, dated as of July 10, 2024 (asamended and restated on August 15, 2024, and as further modified,supplemented, or otherwise amended from time to time in accordance with itsterms, the “the Lock-Up Agreement”) and that certain Backstop Agreement,dated as of July 10, 2024, (as amended and restated on November 15, 2024 andas further modified, supplemented, or otherwise amended from time to time inaccordance with its terms), setting out the terms of the backstop commitmentsprovided by the Backstop Providers to backstop the entirety of the issuance ofNew Money Notes (as may be further amended, restated, amended and restated,modified or supplemented from time to time in accordance with the termsthereof, the “Backstop Agreement”) which set forth the terms of a consensualfinancial restructuring of the Debtors;b. commenced, on October 17, 2024, a prepetition solicitation (the “Solicitation”)of votes on the Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization of IntrumAB and its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code (asthe same may be further amended, modified and supplemented from time totime, the “Plan”), by causing the transmittal, through their solicitation andballoting agent, Kroll Restructuring Administration LLC (“Kroll”), to theholders of Claims entitled to vote on the Plan of, among other things: (i) the1 The Debtors in these chapter 11 cases are Intrum AB and Intrum AB of Texas LLC. The Debtors' serviceaddress in these chapter 11 cases is 801 Travis Street, STE 2102, #1312, Houston, TX 77002.United States Bankruptcy CourtSouthern District of TexasENTEREDDecember 31, 2024Nathan Ochsner, ClerkCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 2 o of f1 133452Plan, (ii) the Disclosure Statement for Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate (as the same may befurther amended, modified and supplemented from time to time, the“Disclosure Statement”), and (iii) the Ballots and Master Ballot to vote on thePlan (the “Ballots”), (iv) the Affidavit of Service of Solicitation Materials[Docket No. 7];c. commenced on November 15, 2024 (the “Petition Date”), these chapter 11 cases(these “Chapter 11 Cases”) by filing voluntary petitions in the United StatesBankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas (the “Bankruptcy Court”or the “Court”) for relief under chapter 11 of title 11 of the United States Code(the “Bankruptcy Code”);d. Filed on November 15, 2024, the Affidavit of Service of Solicitation Materials[Docket No. 7] (the “Solicitation Affidavit”);e. Filed, on November 16, 2024 the Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11of the Bankruptcy Code (Technical Modifications) [Docket No. 16] and theDisclosure Statement for Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Intrum AB andits Debtor Affiliate [Docket No. 17];f. Filed on November 16, 2024, the Declaration of Andrés Rubio in Support of ofthe Debtors' Chapter 11 Petitions and First Day Motions [Docket No. 14] (the“First Day Declaration”);g. Filed on November 17, 2024, the Declaration of Alex Orchowski of KrollRestructuring Administration LLC Regarding the Solicitation of Votes andTabulation of Ballots Case on the Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11of the Bankruptcy Code [Docket No. 18] (the “Voting Declaration,” andtogether with the Plan, the Disclosure Statement, the Ballots, and theSolicitation Affidavit, the “Solicitation Materials”);h. obtained, on November 19, 2024, the Order(I) Scheduling a Combined Hearingon (A) Adequacy of the Disclosure Statement and (B) Confirmation of the Plan,(II) Approving Solicitation Procedures and Form and Manner of Notice ofCommencement, Combined Hearing, and Objection Deadline, (III) FixingDeadline to Object to Disclosure Statement and Plan, (IV) Conditionally (A)Directing the United States Trustee Not to Convene Section 341 Meeting ofCreditors and (B) Waiving Requirement to File Statements of Financial Affairsand Schedules of Assets and Liabilities, and (V) Granting Related Relief[Docket No. 71] (the “Scheduling Order”), which, among other things: (i)approved the prepetition solicitation and voting procedures, including theConfirmation Schedule (as defined therein); (ii) conditionally approved theDisclosure Statement and its use in the Solicitation; and (iii) scheduled theCombined Hearing on December 16, 2024, at 1:00 p.m. (prevailing CentralCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 3 o of f1 133453Time) to consider the final approval of the Disclosure Statement and theconfirmation of the Plan (the “Combined Hearing”);i. served, through Kroll, on November 20, 2025, on all known holders of Claimsand Interests, the U.S. Trustee and certain other parties in interest, the Noticeof: (I) Commencement of Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Cases; (II) Hearing on theDisclosure Statement and Confirmation of the Plan, and (III) Certain ObjectionDeadlines (the “Combined Hearing Notice”) as evidence by the Affidavit ofService [Docket No. 160];j. caused, on November 25 and 27, 2024, the Combined Hearing Notice to bepublished in the New York Times (national and international editions) and theFinancial Times (international edition), as evidenced by the Certificate ofPublication [Docket No. 148];k. Filed and served, on December 10, 2024, the Plan Supplement for the Debtors'Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization [Docket 165];l. Filed on December 10, 2024, the Declaration of Jeffrey Kopa in Support ofConfirmation of the Joint Prepackaged Plan of Reorganization of Intrum ABand its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code [DocketNo. 155];m. Filed on December 14, 2024, the:i. Debtors' Memorandum of Law in Support of an Order: (I) Approving, on aFinal Basis, Adequacy of the Disclosure Statement; (II) Confirming theJoint Prepackaged Plan of Reorganization; and (III) Granting Related Relief[Docket No. 190] (the “Confirmation Brief”);ii. Declaration of Andrés Rubio in Support of Confirmation of the JointPrepackaged Plan of Reorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate.[Docket No. 189] (the “Confirmation Declaration”); andiii. Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization of Intrum AB and itsDebtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code (FurtherTechnical Modifications) [Docket No. 191];n. Filed on December 18, 2024, the Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11of the Bankruptcy Code (Further Technical Modifications) [Docket No. 223];CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 3 4 o of f1 133454WHEREAS, the Court having, among other things:a. set December 12, 2024, at 4:00 p.m. (prevailing Central Time) as the deadlinefor Filing objection to the adequacy of the Disclosure Statement and/orConfirmation2 of the Plan (the “Objection Deadline”);b. held, on December 16, 2024 at 1:00 p.m. (prevailing Central Time) [andcontinuing through December 17, 2024], the Combined Hearing;c. heard the statements, arguments, and any objections made at the CombinedHearing;d. reviewed the Disclosure Statement, the Plan, the Ballots, the Plan Supplement,the Confirmation Brief, the Confirmation Declaration, the SolicitationAffidavit, and the Voting Declaration;e. overruled (i) any and all objections to approval of the Disclosure Statement, thePlan, and Confirmation, except as otherwise stated or indicated on the record,and (ii) all statements and reservations of rights not consensually resolved orwithdrawn, unless otherwise indicated; andf. reviewed and taken judicial notice of all the papers and pleadings Filed(including any objections, statement, joinders, reservations of rights and otherresponses), all orders entered, and all evidence proffered or adduced and allarguments made at the hearings held before the Court during the pendency ofthese cases;NOW, THEREFORE, it appearing to the Bankruptcy Court that notice of theCombined Hearing and the opportunity for any party in interest to object to the DisclosureStatement and the Plan having been adequate and appropriate as to all parties affected or to beaffected by the Plan and the transactions contemplated thereby, and the legal and factual bases setforth in the documents Filed in support of approval of the Disclosure Statement and Confirmationand other evidence presented at the Combined Hearing establish just cause for the relief grantedherein; and after due deliberation thereon and good cause appearing therefor, the BankruptcyCourt makes and issues the following findings of fact and conclusions of law, and orders for thereasons stated on the record at the December 31, 2024 ruling on plan confirmation;2 Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein have meanings given to them in the Plan and/or theDisclosure Statement. The rules of interpretation set forth in Article I.B of the Plan apply to this CombinedOrder.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 4 5 o of f1 133455I. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAWIT IS HEREBY FOUND AND DETERMINED THAT:A. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.1. The findings and conclusions set forth herein and in the record of theCombined Hearing constitute the Bankruptcy Court's findings of fact and conclusions of law underRule 52 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as made applicable herein by Bankruptcy Rules7052 and 9014. To the extent any of the following conclusions of law constitute findings of fact,or vice versa, they are adopted as such.B. Jurisdiction, Venue, Core Proceeding.2. This Court has jurisdiction over these Chapter 11 Cases pursuant to28 U.S.C. § 1334. Venue of these proceedings and the Chapter 11 Cases in this district is properpursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409. This is a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C.§ 157(b)(2) and this Court may enter a final order hereon under Article III of the United StatesConstitution.C. Eligibility for Relief.3. The Debtors were and continue to be entities eligible for relief under section109 of the Bankruptcy Code and the Debtors were and continue to be proper proponents of thePlan under section 1121(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.D. Commencement and Joint Administration of the Chapter 11 Cases.4. On the Petition Date, the Debtors commenced the Chapter 11 Cases. OnNovember 18, 2024, the Court entered an order [Docket No. 51] authorizing the jointadministration of the Chapter 11 Case in accordance with Bankruptcy Rule 1015(b). The Debtorshave operated their businesses and managed their properties as debtors in possession pursuant toCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 5 6 o of f1 133456sections 1107(a) and 1108 of the Bankruptcy Code. No trustee, examiner, or statutory committeehas been appointed in these Chapter 11 Cases.E. Adequacy of the Disclosure Statement.5. The Disclosure Statement and the exhibits contained therein (i) containssufficient information of a kind necessary to satisfy the disclosure requirements of applicablenonbankruptcy laws, rules and regulations, including the Securities Act; and (ii) contains“adequate information” as such term is defined in section 1125(a)(1) and used in section1126(b)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code, with respect to the Debtors, the Plan and the transactionscontemplated therein. The Filing of the Disclosure Statement satisfied Bankruptcy Rule 3016(b).The injunction, release, and exculpation provisions in the Plan and the Disclosure Statementdescribe, in bold font and with specific and conspicuous language, all acts to be enjoined andidentify the Entities that will be subject to the injunction, thereby satisfying Bankruptcy Rule3016(c).F. Solicitation.6. As described in and evidenced by the Voting Declaration, the Solicitationand the transmittal and service of the Solicitation Materials were: (i) timely, adequate, appropriate,and sufficient under the circumstances; and (ii) in compliance with sections 1125(g) and 1126(b)of the Bankruptcy Code, Bankruptcy Rules 3017 and 3018, the applicable Local Bankruptcy Rules,the Scheduling Order and all applicable nonbankruptcy rules, laws, and regulations applicable tothe Solicitation, including the registration requirements under the Securities Act. The SolicitationMaterials, including the Ballots and the Opt Out Form (as defined below), adequately informedthe holders of Claims entitled to vote on the Plan of the procedures and deadline for completingand submitting the Ballots.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 6 7 o of f1 1334577. The Debtors served the Combined Hearing Notice on the entire creditormatrix and served the Opt Out Form on all Non-Voting Classes. The Combined Hearing Noticeadequately informed Holders of Claims or Interests of critical information regarding voting on (ifapplicable) and objecting to the Plan, including deadlines and the inclusion of release, exculpation,and injunction provisions in the Plan, and adequately summarized the terms of the Third-PartyRelease. Further, because the form enabling stakeholders to opt out of the Third-Party Release (the“Opt Out Form”) was included in both the Ballots and the Opt Out Form, every known stakeholder,including unimpaired creditors was provided with the means by which the stakeholders could optout of the Third-Party Release. No further notice is required. The period for voting on the Planprovided a reasonable and sufficient period of time and the manner of such solicitation was anappropriate process allowing for such holders to make an informed decision.G. Tabulation.8. As described in and evidenced by the Voting Declaration, (i) the holders ofClaims in Class 3 (RCF Claims) and Class 5 (Notes Claims) are Impaired under the Plan(collectively, the “Voting Classes”) and have voted to accept the Plan in the numbers and amountsrequired by section 1126 of the Bankruptcy Code, and (ii) no Class that was entitled to vote on thePlan voted to reject the Plan. All procedures used to tabulate the votes on the Plan were in goodfaith, fair, reasonable, and conducted in accordance with the applicable provisions of theBankruptcy Code, the Bankruptcy Rules, the Local Rules, the Disclosure Statement, theScheduling Order, and all other applicable nonbankruptcy laws, rules, and regulations.H. Plan Supplement.9. On December 10, 2024, the Debtors Filed the Plan Supplement with theCourt. The Plan Supplement (including as subsequently modified, supplemented, or otherwiseCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 7 8 o of f1 133458amended pursuant to a filing with the Court), complies with the terms of the Plan, and the Debtorsprovided good and proper notice of the filing in accordance with the Bankruptcy Code, theBankruptcy Rules, the Scheduling Order, and the facts and circumstances of the Chapter 11 Cases.All documents included in the Plan Supplement are integral to, part of, and incorporated byreference into the Plan. No other or further notice is or will be required with respect to the PlanSupplement. Subject to the terms of the Plan and the Lock-Up Agreement, and only consistenttherewith, the Debtors reserve the right to alter, amend, update, or modify the Plan Supplementand any of the documents contained therein or related thereto, in accordance with the Plan, on orbefore the Effective Date.I. Modifications to the Plan.10. Pursuant to section 1127 of the Bankruptcy Code, the modifications to thePlan described or set forth in this Combined Order constitute technical or clarifying changes,changes with respect to particular Claims by agreement with holders of such Claims, ormodifications that do not otherwise materially and adversely affect or change the treatment of anyother Claim or Interest under the Plan. These modifications are consistent with the disclosurespreviously made pursuant to the Disclosure Statement and Solicitation Materials, and notice ofthese modifications was adequate and appropriate under the facts and circumstances of the Chapter11 Cases. In accordance with Bankruptcy Rule 3019, these modifications do not require additionaldisclosure under section 1125 of the Bankruptcy Code or the resolicitation of votes under section1126 of the Bankruptcy Code, and they do not require that holders of Claims or Interests beafforded an opportunity to change previously cast acceptances or rejections of the Plan.Accordingly, the Plan is properly before this Court and all votes cast with respect to the Plan priorto such modification shall be binding and shall apply with respect to the Plan.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 8 9 o of f1 133459J. Objections Overruled.11. Any resolution or disposition of objections to Confirmation explained orotherwise ruled upon by the Court on the record at the Confirmation Hearing is herebyincorporated by reference. All unresolved objections, statements, joinders, informal objections,and reservations of rights are hereby overruled on the merits.K. Burden of Proof.12. The Debtors, as proponents of the Plan, have met their burden of provingthe elements of sections 1129(a) and 1129(b) of the Bankruptcy Code by a preponderance of theevidence, the applicable evidentiary standard for Confirmation. Further, the Debtors have proventhe elements of sections 1129(a) and 1129(b) by clear and convincing evidence. Each witness whotestified on behalf of the Debtors in connection with the Confirmation Hearing was credible,reliable, and qualified to testify as to the topics addressed in his testimony.L. Compliance with the Requirements of Section 1129 of the BankruptcyCode.13. The Plan complies with all applicable provisions of section 1129 of theBankruptcy Code as follows:a. Section 1129(a)(1) – Compliance of the Plan with Applicable Provisions of theBankruptcy Code.14. The Plan complies with all applicable provisions of the Bankruptcy Code,including sections 1122 and 1123, as required by section 1129(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code.i. Section 1122 and 1123(a)(1) – Proper Classification.15. The classification of Claims and Interests under the Plan is proper under theBankruptcy Code. In accordance with sections 1122(a) and 1123(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code,Article III of the Plan provides for the separate classification of Claims and Interests at each Debtorinto Classes, based on differences in the legal nature or priority of such Claims and Interests (otherCaCsaes e2 42-49-09507557 5 D oDcoucmumenetn 2t 9266-32 FFiilleedd iinn TTXXSSBB oonn 1021//3113//2245 PPaaggee 91 0o fo 1f 3143510than Administrative Claims, Professional Fee Claims, and Priority Tax Claims, which areaddressed in Article II of the Plan and Unimpaired, and are not required to be designated asseparate Classes in accordance with section 1123(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code). Valid business,factual, and legal reasons exist for the separate classification of the various Classes of Claims andInterests created under the Plan, the classifications were not implemented for any improperpurpose, and the creation of such Classes does not unfairly discriminate between or among holdersof Claims or Interests.16. In accordance with section 1122(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, each Class ofClaims or Interests contains only Claims or Interests substantially similar to the other Claims orInterests within that Class. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of sections 1122(a),1122(b), and 1123(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Codeii. Section 1123(a)(2) – Specifications of Unimpaired Classes.17. Article III of the Plan specifies that Claims and Interests in the classesdeemed to accept the Plan are Unimpaired under the Plan. Holders of Intercompany Claims andIntercompany Interests are either Unimpaired and conclusively presumed to have accepted thePlan, or are Impaired and deemed to reject (the “Deemed Rejecting Classes”) the Plan, and, ineither event, are not entitled to vote to accept or reject the Plan. In addition, Article II of the Planspecifies that Administrative Claims and Priority Tax Claims are Unimpaired, although the Plandoes not classify these Claims. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of section1123(a)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 101 o of f1 1334511iii. Section 1123(a)(3) – Specification of Treatment of Voting Classes18. Article III.B of the Plan specifies the treatment of each Voting Class underthe Plan – namely, Class 3 and Class 5. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of section1123(a)(3) of the Bankruptcy Code.iv. Section 1123(a)(4) – No Discrimination.19. Article III of the Plan provides the same treatment to each Claim or Interestin any particular Class, as the case may be, unless the holder of a particular Claim or Interest hasagreed to a less favorable treatment with respect to such Claim or Interest. Accordingly, the Plansatisfies the requirements of section 1123(a)(4) of the Bankruptcy Code.v. Section 1123(a)(5) – Adequate Means for Plan Implementation.20. The Plan and the various documents included in the Plan Supplementprovide adequate and proper means for the Plan's execution and implementation, including: (a)the general settlement of Claims and Interests; (b) the restructuring of the Debtors' balance sheetand other financial transactions provided for by the Plan; (c) the consummation of the transactionscontemplated by the Plan, the Lock-Up Agreement, the Restructuring Implementation Deed andthe Agreed Steps Plan and other documents Filed as part of the Plan Supplement; (d) the issuanceof Exchange Notes, the New Money Notes, and the Noteholder Ordinary Shares pursuant to thePlan; (e) the amendment of the Intercreditor Agreement; (f) the amendment of the FacilityAgreement; (g) the amendment of the Senior Secured Term Loan Agreement; (h) theconsummation of the Rights Offering in accordance with the Plan, Rights Offering Documentsand the Lock-Up Agreement; (i) the granting of all Liens and security interests granted orconfirmed (as applicable) pursuant to, or in connection with, the Facility Agreement, the ExchangeNotes Indenture, the New Money Notes Indenture, the amended Intercreditor Agreement and theCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 112 o of f1 1334512Senior Secured Term Loan Agreement pursuant to the New Security Documents (including anyLiens and security interests granted or confirmed (as applicable) on the Reorganized Debtors'assets); (j) the vesting of the assets of the Debtors' Estates in the Reorganized Debtors; (k) theconsummation of the corporate reorganization contemplated by the Plan, the Lock-Up Agreement,the Agreed Steps Plan and the Master Reorganization Agreement (as defined in the RestructuringImplementation Deed); and (l) the execution, delivery, filing, or recording of all contracts,instruments, releases, and other agreements or documents in furtherance of the Plan. Accordingly,the Plan satisfies the requirements of section 1123(a)(5) of the Bankruptcy Codevi. Section 1123(a)(6) – Non-Voting Equity Securities.21. The Company's organizational documents in accordance with the SwedishCompanies Act, Ch. 4, Sec 5 and the Plan prohibit the issuance of non-voting securities as of theEffective Date to the extent required to comply with section 1123(a)(6) of the Bankruptcy Code.Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of section 1123(a)(6) of the Bankruptcy Code.vii. Section 1123(a)(7) – Directors, Officers, and Trustees.22. The manner of selection of any officer, director, or trustee (or any successorto and such officer, director, or trustee) of the Reorganized Debtors will be determined inaccordance with the existing organizational documents, which is consistent with the interests ofcreditors and equity holders and with public policy. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies therequirements of section 1123(a)(7) of the Bankruptcy Code.b. Section 1123(b) – Discretionary Contents of the Plan23. The Plan contains various provisions that may be construed as discretionarybut not necessary for Confirmation under the Bankruptcy Code. Any such discretionary provisionCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 123 o of f1 1334513complies with section 1123(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and is not inconsistent with the applicableprovisions of the Bankruptcy Code. Thus, the Plan satisfies section 1123(b).i. Section 1123(b)(1) – Impairment/Unimpairment of Any Class of Claims orInterests24. Article III of the Plan impairs or leaves unimpaired, as the case may be,each Class of Claims or Interests, as contemplated by section 1123(b)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code.ii. Section 1123(b)(2) – Assumption and Rejection of Executory Contracts andUnexpired Leases25. Article V of the Plan provides for the assumption of the Debtors' ExecutoryContracts and Unexpired Leases as of the Effective Date unless such Executory Contract orUnexpired Lease: (a) is identified on the Rejected Executory Contract and Unexpired Lease List;(b) has been previously rejected by a Final Order; (c) is the subject of a motion to reject ExecutoryContracts or Unexpired Leases that is pending on the Confirmation Date; or (4) is subject to amotion to reject an Executory Contract or Unexpired Lease pursuant to which the requestedeffective date of such rejection is after the Effective Date. Thus, the Plan satisfies section1123(b)(2).iii. Compromise and Settlement26. In accordance with section 1123(b)(3)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code andBankruptcy Rule 9019, and in consideration for the distributions and other benefits provided underthe Plan, the provisions of the Plan constitute a good-faith compromise of all Claims, Interests,and controversies relating to the contractual, legal, and subordination rights that all holders ofClaims or Interests may have with respect to any Allowed Claim or Interest or any distribution tobe made on account of such Allowed Claim or Interest. Such compromise and settlement is theproduct of extensive arm's-length, good faith negotiations that, in addition to the Plan, resulted inCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 134 o of f1 1334514the execution of the Lock-Up Agreement, which represents a fair and reasonable compromise ofall Claims, Interests, and controversies and entry into which represented a sound exercise of theDebtors' business judgment. Such compromise and settlement is fair, equitable, and reasonableand in the best interests of the Debtors and their Estates.27. The releases of the Debtors' directors and officers are an integral componentof the settlements and compromises embodied in the Plan. The Debtors' directors and officers: (a)made a substantial and valuable contribution to the Debtors' restructuring, including extensive preandpost-Petition Date negotiations with stakeholder groups, and ensured the uninterruptedoperation of the Debtors' businesses during the Chapter 11 Cases; (b) invested significant timeand effort to make the restructuring a success and maximize the value of the Debtors' businessesin a challenging operating environment; (c) attended and, in certain instances, testified atdepositions and Court hearings; (d) attended and participated in numerous stakeholder meetings,management meetings, and board meetings related to the restructuring; (e) are entitled toindemnification from the Debtors under applicable non-bankruptcy law, organizationaldocuments, and agreements; (f) invested significant time and effort in the preparation of the Lock-Up Agreement, the Plan, Disclosure Statement, all supporting analyses, and the numerous otherpleadings Filed in the Chapter 11 Cases, thereby ensuring the smooth administration of the Chapter11 Cases; and (g) are entitled to all other benefits under any employment contracts existing as ofthe Petition Date. Litigation by the Debtors or other Releasing Parties against the Debtors'directors and officers would be a distraction to the Debtors' business and restructuring and woulddecrease rather than increase the value of the estates. The releases of the Debtors' directors andofficers contained in the Plan have the consent of the Debtors and the Releasing Parties and are inthe best interests of the estates.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 145 o of f1 1334515iv. Debtor Release28. The releases of claims and Causes of Action by the Debtors, ReorganizedDebtors, and their Estates described in Article VIII.C of the Plan in accordance with section1123(b) of the Bankruptcy Code (the “Debtor Release”) represent a valid exercise of the Debtors'business judgment under Bankruptcy Rule 9019. The Debtors' or the Reorganized Debtors' pursuitof any such claims against the Released Parties is not in the best interests of the Estates' variousconstituencies because the costs involved would outweigh any potential benefit from pursuingsuch claims. The Debtor Release is fair and equitable and complies with the absolute priority rule.29. The Debtor Release is (a) an integral part of the Plan, and a component ofthe comprehensive settlement implemented under the Plan; (b) in exchange for the good andvaluable consideration provided by the Released Parties; (c) a good faith settlement andcompromise of the claims and Causes of Action released by the Debtor Release; (d) materiallybeneficial to, and in the best interests of, the Debtors, their Estates, and their stakeholders, and isimportant to the overall objectives of the Plan to finally resolve certain Claims among or againstcertain parties in interest in the Chapter 11 Cases; (e) fair, equitable, and reasonable; (f) given andmade after due notice and opportunity for hearing; and (g) a bar to any Debtor asserting any claimor Cause of Action released by the Debtor Release against any of the Released Parties. Theprobability of success in litigation with respect to the released claims and Causes of Action, whenweighed against the costs, supports the Debtor Release. With respect to each of these potentialCauses of Action, the parties could assert colorable defenses and the probability of success isuncertain. The Debtors' or the Reorganized Debtors' pursuit of any such claims or Causes ofAction against the Released Parties is not in the best interests of the Estates or the Debtors' variousCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 156 o of f1 1334516constituencies because the costs involved would likely outweigh any potential benefit frompursuing such claims or Causes of Action30. Holders of Claims and Interests entitled to vote have overwhelmingly votedin favor of the Plan, including the Debtor Release. The Plan, including the Debtor Release, wasnegotiated before and after the Petition Date by sophisticated parties represented by able counseland advisors, including the Consenting Creditors. The Debtor Release is therefore the result of ahard fought and arm's-length negotiation process conducted in good faith.31. The Debtor Release appropriately offers protection to parties thatparticipated in the Debtors' restructuring process, including the Consenting Creditors, whoseparticipation in the Chapter 11 Cases is critical to the Debtors' successful emergence frombankruptcy. Specifically, the Released Parties, including the Consenting Creditors, madesignificant concessions and contributions to the Chapter 11 Cases, including, entering into theLock-Up Agreement and related agreements, supporting the Plan and the Chapter 11 Cases, andwaiving or agreeing to impair substantial rights and Claims against the Debtors under the Plan (aspart of the compromises composing the settlement underlying the revised Plan) in order tofacilitate a consensual reorganization and the Debtors' emergence from chapter 11. The DebtorRelease for the Debtors' directors and officers is appropriate because the Debtors' directors andofficers share an identity of interest with the Debtors and, as previously stated, supported and madesubstantial contributions to the success of the Plan, the Chapter 11 Cases, and operation of theDebtors' business during the Chapter 11 Cases, actively participated in meetings, negotiations, andimplementation during the Chapter 11 Cases, and have provided other valuable consideration tothe Debtors to facilitate the Debtors' successful reorganization and continued operation.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 167 o of f1 133451732. The scope of the Debtor Release is appropriately tailored under the factsand circumstances of the Chapter 11 Cases. In light of, among other things, the value provided bythe Released Parties to the Debtors' Estates and the critical nature of the Debtor Release to thePlan, the Debtor Release is appropriate.v. Release by Holders of Claims and Interests33. The release by the Releasing Parties (the “Third-Party Release”), set forthin Article VIII.D of the Plan, is an essential provision of the Plan. The Third-Party Release is: (a)consensual as to those Releasing Parties that did not specifically and timely object or properly optout from the Third-Party Release; (b) within the jurisdiction of the Bankruptcy Court pursuant to28 U.S.C. § 1334; (c) in exchange for the good and valuable consideration provided by theReleased Parties; (d) a good faith settlement and compromise of the claims and Causes of Actionreleased by the Third-Party Release; (e) materially beneficial to, and in the best interests of, theDebtors, their Estates, and their stakeholders, and is important to the overall objectives of the Planto finally resolve certain Claims among or against certain parties in interest in the Chapter 11Cases; (f) fair, equitable, and reasonable; (g) given and made after due notice and opportunity forhearing; (h) appropriately narrow in scope given that it expressly excludes, among other things,any Cause of Action that is judicially determined by a Final Order to have constituted actual fraud,willful misconduct, or gross negligence; (i) a bar to any of the Releasing Parties asserting anyclaim or Cause of Action released by the Third-Party Release against any of the Released Parties;and (j) consistent with sections 105, 524, 1123, 1129, and 1141 and other applicable provisions ofthe Bankruptcy Code.34. The Third-Party Release is an integral part of the agreement embodied inthe Plan among the relevant parties in interest. Like the Debtor Release, the Third-Party ReleaseCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 178 o of f1 1334518facilitated participation in both the Debtors' Plan and the chapter 11 process generally. The Third-Party Release is instrumental to the Plan and was critical in incentivizing parties to support thePlan and preventing significant and time-consuming litigation regarding the parties' respectiverights and interests. The Third-Party Release was a core negotiation point in connection with thePlan and instrumental in developing the Plan that maximized value for all of the Debtors'stakeholders and kept the Debtors intact as a going concern. As such, the Third-Party Releaseappropriately offers certain protections to parties who constructively participated in the Debtors'restructuring process—including the Consenting Creditors (as set forth above)—by, among otherthings, facilitating the negotiation and consummation of the Plan, supporting the Plan and, in thecase of the Backstop Providers, committing to provide new capital to facilitate the Debtors'emergence from chapter 11. Specifically, the Notes Ad Hoc Group proposed and negotiated thepari passu transaction that is the basis of the restructuring proposed under the Plan and provideda much-needed deleveraging to the Debtors' business while taking a discount on their Claims (inexchange for other consideration).35. Furthermore, the Third-Party Release is consensual as to all parties ininterest, including all Releasing Parties, and such parties in interest were provided notice of thechapter 11 proceedings, the Plan, the deadline to object to confirmation of the Plan, and theCombined Hearing and were properly informed that all holders of Claims against or Interests inthe Debtors that did not file an objection with the Court in the Chapter 11 Cases that included anexpress objection to the inclusion of such holder as a Releasing Party under the provisionscontained in Article VIII of the Plan would be deemed to have expressly, unconditionally,generally, individually, and collectively consented to the release and discharge of all claims andCauses of Action against the Debtors and the Released Parties. Additionally, the release provisionsCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 189 o of f1 1334519of the Plan were conspicuous, emphasized with boldface type in the Plan, the DisclosureStatement, the Ballots, and the applicable notices. Except as set forth in the Plan, all ReleasingParties were properly informed that unless they (a) checked the “opt out” box on the applicableBallot or opt-out form and returned the same in advance of the Voting Deadline, as applicable, or(b) timely Filed an objection to the releases contained in the Plan that was not resolved beforeentry of this Confirmation Order, they would be deemed to have expressly consented to the releaseof all Claims and Causes of Action against the Released Parties.36. The Ballots sent to all holders of Claims and Interests entitled to vote, aswell as the notice of the Combined Hearing sent to all known parties in interest (including thosenot entitled to vote on the Plan), unambiguously provided in bold letters that the Third-PartyRelease was contained in the Plan.37. The scope of the Third-Party Release is appropriately tailored under thefacts and circumstances of the Chapter 11 Cases, and parties in interest received due and adequatenotice of the Third-Party Release. Among other things, the Plan provides appropriate and specificdisclosure with respect to the claims and Causes of Action that are subject to the Third-PartyRelease, and no other disclosure is necessary. The Debtors, as evidenced by the VotingDeclaration and Certificate of Publication, including by providing actual notice to all knownparties in interest, including all known holders of Claims against, and Interests in, any Debtor andpublishing notice in international and national publications for the benefit of unknown parties ininterest, provided sufficient notice of the Third-Party Release, and no further or other notice isnecessary. The Third-Party Release is designed to provide finality for the Debtors, theReorganized Debtors and the Released Parties regarding the parties' respective obligations underthe Plan. For the avoidance of doubt, and notwithstanding anything to the contrary, anyparty who timely opted-out of the Third-Party Release is not bound by the Third-PartyRelease.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 290 o of f1 133452038. The Third-Party Release is specific in language, integral to the Plan, andgiven for substantial consideration. The Releasing Parties were given due and adequate notice ofthe Third-Party Release, and thus the Third-Party Release is consensual under controllingprecedent as to those Releasing Parties that did not specifically and timely object. In light of,among other things, the value provided by the Released Parties to the Debtors' Estates and theconsensual and critical nature of the Third-Party Release to the Plan, the Third-Party Release isappropriatevi. Exculpation.39. The exculpation described in Article VIII.E of the Plan (the “Exculpation”)is appropriate under applicable law, including In re Highland Capital Mgmt., L.P., 48 F. 4th 419(5th Cir. 2022), because it was supported by proper evidence, proposed in good faith, wasformulated following extensive good-faith, arm's-length negotiations with key constituents, and isappropriately limited in scope.40. No Entity or Person may commence or continue any action, employ anyprocess, or take any other act to pursue, collect, recover or offset any Claim, Interest, debt,obligation, or Cause of Action relating or reasonably likely to relate to any act or commission inconnection with, relating to, or arising out of a Covered Matter (including one that alleges theactual fraud, gross negligence, or willful misconduct of a Covered Entity), unless expresslyauthorized by the Bankruptcy Court after (1) it determines, after a notice and a hearing, such Claim,Interest, debt, obligation, or Cause of Action is colorable and (2) it specifically authorizes suchEntity or Person to bring such Claim or Cause of Action. The Bankruptcy Court shall have soleand exclusive jurisdiction to determine whether any such Claim, Interest, debt, obligation or Causeof Action is colorable and, only to the extent legally permissible and as provided for in Article XI,CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 201 o of f1 1334521shall have jurisdiction to adjudicate such underlying colorable Claim, Interest, debt, obligation, orCause of Action.vii. Injunction.41. The injunction provisions set forth in Article VIII.F of the Plan are essentialto the Plan and are necessary to implement the Plan and to preserve and enforce the discharge,Debtor Release, the Third-Party Release, and the Exculpation provisions in Article VIII of thePlan. The injunction provisions are appropriately tailored to achieve those purposes.viii. Preservation of Claims and Causes of Action.42. Article IV.L of the Plan appropriately provides for the preservation by theDebtors of certain Causes of Action in accordance with section 1123(b) of the Bankruptcy Code.Causes of Action not released by the Debtors or exculpated under the Plan will be retained by theReorganized Debtors as provided by the Plan. The Plan is sufficiently specific with respect to theCauses of Action to be retained by the Debtors, and the Plan and Plan Supplement providemeaningful disclosure with respect to the potential Causes of Action that the Debtors may retain,and all parties in interest received adequate notice with respect to such retained Causes of Action.The provisions regarding Causes of Action in the Plan are appropriate and in the best interests ofthe Debtors, their respective Estates, and holders of Claims or Interests. For the avoidance of anydoubt, Causes of Action released or exculpated under the Plan will not be retained by theReorganized Debtors.c. Section 1123(d) – Cure of Defaults43. Article V.D of the Plan provides for the satisfaction of Cure Claimsassociated with each Executory Contract and Unexpired Lease to be assumed in accordance withsection 365(b)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code. Any monetary defaults under each assumed ExecutoryCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 212 o of f1 1334522Contract or Unexpired Lease shall be satisfied, pursuant to section 365(b)(1) of the BankruptcyCode, by payment of the default amount in Cash on the Effective Date, subject to the limitationsdescribed in Article V.D of the Plan, or on such other terms as the parties to such ExecutoryContracts or Unexpired Leases may otherwise agree. Any Disputed Cure Amounts will bedetermined in accordance with the procedures set forth in Article V.D of the Plan, and applicablebankruptcy and nonbankruptcy law. As such, the Plan provides that the Debtors will Cure, orprovide adequate assurance that the Debtors will promptly Cure, defaults with respect to assumedExecutory Contracts and Unexpired Leases in accordance with section 365(b)(1) of theBankruptcy Code. Thus, the Plan complies with section 1123(d) of the Bankruptcy Code.d. Section 1129(a)(2) – Compliance of the Debtors and Others with the ApplicableProvisions of the Bankruptcy Code.44. The Debtors, as proponents of the Plan, have complied with all applicableprovisions of the Bankruptcy Code as required by section 1129(a)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code,including sections 1122, 1123, 1124, 1125, 1126, and 1128, and Bankruptcy Rules 3017, 3018,and 3019.e. Section 1129(a)(3) – Proposal of Plan in Good Faith.45. The Debtors have proposed the Plan in good faith, in accordance with theBankruptcy Code requirements, and not by any means forbidden by law. In determining that thePlan has been proposed in good faith, the Court has examined the totality of the circumstancesfiling of the Chapter 11 Cases, including the formation of Intrum AB of Texas LLC (“IntrumTexas”), the Plan itself, and the process leading to its formulation. The Debtors' good faith isevident from the facts and record of the Chapter 11 Cases, the Disclosure Statement, and the recordof the Combined Hearing and other proceedings held in the Chapter 11 CasesCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 223 o of f1 133452346. The Plan (including the Plan Supplement and all other documents necessaryto effectuate the Plan) is the product of good faith, arm's-length negotiations by and among theDebtors, the Debtors' directors and officers and the Debtors' key stakeholders, including theConsenting Creditors and each of their respective professionals. The Plan itself and the processleading to its formulation provide independent evidence of the Debtors' and such other parties'good faith, serve the public interest, and assure fair treatment of holders of Claims or Interests.Consistent with the overriding purpose of chapter 11, the Debtors Filed the Chapter 11 Cases withthe belief that the Debtors were in need of reorganization and the Plan was negotiated and proposedwith the intention of accomplishing a successful reorganization and maximizing stakeholder value,and for no ulterior purpose. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1129(a)(3) of the BankruptcyCode are satisfied.f. Section 1129(a)(4) – Court Approval of Certain Payments as Reasonable.47. Any payment made or to be made by the Debtors, or by a person issuingsecurities or acquiring property under the Plan, for services or costs and expenses in connectionwith the Chapter 11 Cases, or in connection with the Plan and incident to the Chapter 11 Cases,has been approved by, or is subject to the approval of, the Court as reasonable. Accordingly, thePlan satisfies the requirements of section 1129(a)(4).g. Section 1129(a)(5)—Disclosure of Directors and Officers and Consistency with theInterests of Creditors and Public Policy.48. The identities of or process for appointment of the Reorganized Debtors'directors and officers proposed to serve after the Effective Date were disclosed in the PlanSupplement in advance of the Combined Hearing. Accordingly, the Debtors have satisfied therequirements of section 1129(a)(5) of the Bankruptcy Code.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 234 o of f1 1334524h. Section 1129(a)(6)—Rate Changes.49. The Plan does not contain any rate changes subject to the jurisdiction of anygovernmental regulatory commission and therefore will not require governmental regulatoryapproval. Therefore, section 1129(a)(6) of the Bankruptcy Code does not apply to the Plan.i. Section 1129(a)(7)—Best Interests of Holders of Claims and Interests.50. The liquidation analysis attached as Exhibit D to the Disclosure Statementand the other evidence in support of the Plan that was proffered or adduced at the CombinedHearing, and the facts and circumstances of the Chapter 11 Cases are (a) reasonable, persuasive,credible, and accurate as of the dates such analysis or evidence was prepared, presented orproffered; (b) utilize reasonable and appropriate methodologies and assumptions; (c) have not beencontroverted by other evidence; and (d) establish that each holder of Allowed Claims or Interestsin each Class will recover as much or more value under the Plan on account of such Claim orInterest, as of the Effective Date, than the amount such holder would receive if the Debtors wereliquidated on the Effective Date under chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code or has accepted the Plan.As a result, the Debtors have demonstrated that the Plan is in the best interests of their creditorsand equity holders and the requirements of section 1129(a)(7) of the Bankruptcy Code are satisfied.j. Section 1129(a)(8)—Conclusive Presumption of Acceptance by UnimpairedClasses; Acceptance of the Plan by Certain Voting Classes.51. The classes deemed to accept the Plan are Unimpaired under the Plan andare deemed to have accepted the Plan pursuant to section 1126(f) of the Bankruptcy Code. EachVoting Class voted to accept the Plan. For the avoidance of doubt, however, even if section1129(a)(8) has not been satisfied with respect to all of the Debtors, the Plan is confirmable becausethe Plan does not discriminate unfairly and is fair and equitable with respect to the Voting Classesand thus satisfies section 1129(b) of the Bankruptcy Code with respect to such Classes as describedCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 245 o of f1 1334525further below. As a result, the requirements of section 1129(b) of the Bankruptcy Code are alsosatisfied.k. Section 1129(a)(9)—Treatment of Claims Entitled to Priority Pursuant to Section507(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.52. The treatment of Administrative Claims, Professional Fee Claims, andPriority Tax Claims under Article II of the Plan satisfies the requirements of, and complies in allrespects with, section 1129(a)(9) of the Bankruptcy Code.l. Section 1129(a)(10)—Acceptance by at Least One Voting Class.53. As set forth in the Voting Declaration, all Voting Classes overwhelminglyvoted to accept the Plan. As such, there is at least one Voting Class that has accepted the Plan,determined without including any acceptance of the Plan by any insider (as defined by theBankruptcy Code), for each Debtor. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1129(a)(10) of theBankruptcy Code are satisfied.m. Section 1129(a)(11)—Feasibility of the Plan.54. The Plan satisfies section 1129(a)(11) of the Bankruptcy Code. Thefinancial projections attached to the Disclosure Statement as Exhibit D and the other evidencesupporting the Plan proffered or adduced by the Debtors at or before the Combined Hearing: (a)is reasonable, persuasive, credible, and accurate as of the dates such evidence was prepared,presented, or proffered; (b) utilize reasonable and appropriate methodologies and assumptions; (c)has not been controverted by other persuasive evidence; (d) establishes that the Plan is feasibleand Confirmation of the Plan is not likely to be followed by liquidation or the need for furtherfinancial reorganization; (e) establishes that the Debtors will have sufficient funds available tomeet their obligations under the Plan and in the ordinary course of business—including sufficientamounts of Cash to reasonably ensure payment of Allowed Claims that will receive CashCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 256 o of f1 1334526distributions pursuant to the terms of the Plan and other Cash payments required under the Plan;and (f) establishes that the Debtors or the Reorganized Debtors, as applicable, will have thefinancial wherewithal to pay any Claims that accrue, become payable, or are allowed by FinalOrder following the Effective Date. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of section1129(a)(11) of the Bankruptcy Code.n. Section 1129(a)(12)—Payment of Statutory Fees.55. Article XII.C of the Plan provides that all fees payable pursuant to section1930(a) of the Judicial Code, as determined by the Court at the Confirmation Hearing inaccordance with section 1128 of the Bankruptcy Code, will be paid by each of the applicableReorganized Debtors for each quarter (including any fraction of a quarter) until the Chapter 11Cases are converted, dismissed, or closed, whichever occurs first. Accordingly, the Plan satisfiesthe requirements of section 1129(a)(12) of the Bankruptcy Code.o. Section 1129(a)(13)—Retiree Benefits.56. Pursuant to section 1129(a)(13) of the Bankruptcy Code, and as provided inArticle IV.K of the Plan, the Reorganized Debtors will continue to pay all obligations on accountof retiree benefits (as such term is used in section 1114 of the Bankruptcy Code) on and after theEffective Date in accordance with applicable law. As a result, the requirements of section1129(a)(13) of the Bankruptcy Code are satisfied.p. Sections 1129(a)(14), (15), and (16)—Domestic Support Obligations, Individuals,and Nonprofit Corporations.57. The Debtors do not owe any domestic support obligations, are notindividuals, and are not nonprofit corporations. Therefore, sections 1129(a)(14), 1129(a)(15), and1129(a)(16) of the Bankruptcy Code do not apply to the Chapter 11 Cases.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 267 o of f1 1334527q. Section 1129(b)—Confirmation of the Plan Over Nonacceptance of VotingClasses.58. No Classes rejected the Plan, and section 1129(b) is not applicable here,but even if it were, the Plan may be confirmed pursuant to section 1129(b)(1) of the BankruptcyCode because the Plan is fair and equitable with respect to the Deemed Rejecting Classes. ThePlan has been proposed in good faith, is reasonable, and meets the requirements and all VotingClasses have voted to accept the Plan. The treatment of Intercompany Claims and IntercompanyInterests under the Plan provides for administrative convenience does not constitute a distributionunder the Plan on account of suc

So yesterday, President Trump actually demanded a TWO YEAR lifting of the debt ceiling.This is frankly insane given the fact that he won the election campaigning against the ‘Biden Economy' and profligate government deficit spending which he promised to cut! How pray tell, do you cut spending while simultaneously ramping up the debt?What is the point of electing Republicans when they spend like drunken Democrats? It's all patently absurd and apparently there is only one guy in Washington, DC with the balls to call him on it.Chip Roy deserves an enormous amount of credit for standing firmly in the truth space regarding the nightmare economic situation.Despite relentless pressure to cave from the incoming president and his acolytes, Roy is at the very least shining a spotlight once again on the unsustainable spending situation in Washington, DC.

This Astonishing Healthcare podcast episode covers the potential future of US healthcare policy under the Trump administration, focusing on the business of healthcare services and possible changes to Medicare and Medicaid, support for telehealth, solving workforce issues, and managing chronic diseases. Our guest from Episode 13, Redefining Virtual Care: A Blueprint for Effective RPM, Robert Longyear, Co-Founder of Avenue Health, returns to the show and shares his view from K Street after reviewing Project 2025 and evaluating what RFK Jr. and Dr. Mehmet Oz could prioritize in their roles.Robert shares the highlights of his analysis, including what he found most interesting and what he'll be watching for on payment policy (e.g., there's bipartisan support for payment reform and price transparency), potential changes to Medicare Advantage and Medicaid, pediatric care, how to reduce administrative burden and alleviate provider burnout, abortion policies, the use of artificial intelligence, and access to patient data. If health policy matters to you, this episode is a "must-listen!"Related ContentAnalyzing Health Policy Priorities under RFK, Jr. and Dr. Oz (Nov 27)What to Expect in Health Policy from the Next Trump Administration (Project 2025 Analysis; Nov 7)Digital Health Technologies in Rural Health: Bridging the Gap in Care Access and Delivery (Nov 26)AH046 - What's Hot In and Around the Pharmacy Supply Chain, with RSM's Tom EveganVisit Health Tech Happy Hour for more of Robert's work.For more information about Capital Rx and this episode, please visit Capital Rx Insights.

John Slattery is an American actor and director. He is best known for his role as Roger Sterling in the AMC drama series Mad Men. He has received four Primetime Emmy Award nominations and two Critics' Choice Television Awards for AMC's series Mad Men. He was also part of the Mad Men ensemble cast that won two SAG Awards. In 2013, Slattery directed his first feature film, God's Pocket, which premiered at the 2014 Sundance Film Festival. He is currently on the HBO series Veep. Apart from his role on Mad Men, Slattery is also known for roles on Homefront; the HBO miniseries From the Earth to the Moon; the HBO series K Street; guest appearances on Will & Grace; Judging Amy; Sex and the City and Desperate Housewives. Other films include Mona Lisa Smile, Flags of our Fathers, Charlie Wilson's War and The Adjustment Bureau. In 2015, Slattery portrayed journalist Ben Bradlee Jr. in the Academy Award winning film Spotlight, and also appeared in the Netflix comedy series Wet Hot American Summer: First Day of Camp, for which he earned a nomination for the Critics' Choice Television Award for Best Guest Performer in a Comedy Series. Little Known Fact - He is an avid surfer. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

John Slattery is an American actor and director. He is best known for his role as Roger Sterling in the AMC drama series Mad Men. He has received four Primetime Emmy Award nominations and two Critics' Choice Television Awards for AMC's series Mad Men. He was also part of the Mad Men ensemble cast that won two SAG Awards. In 2013, Slattery directed his first feature film, God's Pocket, which premiered at the 2014 Sundance Film Festival. He is currently on the HBO series Veep. Apart from his role on Mad Men, Slattery is also known for roles on Homefront; the HBO miniseries From the Earth to the Moon; the HBO series K Street; guest appearances on Will & Grace; Judging Amy; Sex and the City and Desperate Housewives. Other films include Mona Lisa Smile, Flags of our Fathers, Charlie Wilson's War and The Adjustment Bureau. In 2015, Slattery portrayed journalist Ben Bradlee Jr. in the Academy Award winning film Spotlight, and also appeared in the Netflix comedy series Wet Hot American Summer: First Day of Camp, for which he earned a nomination for the Critics' Choice Television Award for Best Guest Performer in a Comedy Series. Little Known Fact - He is an avid surfer. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Today, The Two Mikes spoke with Dan McMillan who is the Executive Director of Save Democracy in America (https://savedemocracyinamerica.com). He holds doctoral degrees in law and history. Dr. Mcmillan argues that the biggest problem Americans' face today is the amount of money in the political system, claiming that "campaign finance is a far bigger problem than almost anyone seems to think." That the system is awash with money is obvious, but the disastrous downside of that flood is less apparent. Once elected, members of both houses of Congress are effectively the employees of their donors and not of the citizens who pay their salaries, which can be easily seen by them as paltry when compared to their donations.

Talmage Boston holds a live cross-examination style interview of Brody Mullins, Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporter and author of The Wolves of K Street. Previously, Brody spent nearly two decades covering the intersection of business and politics for The Wall Street Journal.

404 Media's Jason Koebler returns to discuss AI in the classroom, Balaji's private island/supervillain lair, and the growing deluge of AI generated slop by US political campaigns. Not so much in the form of deepfakes or Midjourney memes on social media, but rather by making a larger tidal wave of more personalised spam. Also, we discuss a hot new startup that's ruffling a lot of feathers on K Street in Washington using artificial intelligence, and (more importantly) artificial names. Check out 404 Media here! https://www.404media.co/ If you want access to our Patreon bonus episodes, early releases of free episodes, and powerful Discord server, sign up here: https://www.patreon.com/trashfuture *MILO ALERT* Check out Milo's UK Tour Here: https://miloedwards.co.uk/live-shows Trashfuture are: Riley (@raaleh), Milo (@Milo_Edwards), Hussein (@HKesvani), Nate (@inthesedeserts), and November (@postoctobrist)

On this week's Stansberry Investor Hour, Dan and Corey welcome Brody Mullins to the show. Brody is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporter and author of the new book The Wolves of K Street. He joins the podcast to share insights from his two-plus decades spent investigating the Washington political scene.  Brody kicks off the show by discussing his history reporting on antitrust regulation. He notes that recently, both major political parties in D.C. have become less friendly to Big Tech companies and are using antitrust regulation to slow their growth. After, Brody talks a bit about how he got started in journalism, the importance of holding those in power accountable, and why he has dedicated his life to investigating companies. (1:27) Next, Brody shares some details about his book. He points out that for most of this country's history, companies had very little influence in Washington. Things only changed in the 1970s once the economy cratered and stagflation hit. Then, companies began to lobby in order to twist regulations and gain an advantage in the market. Brody also explains lobbying in simple terms, including how lobbyists raise money for members of Congress. He argues that legal loopholes and undisclosed funds to influence constituents have made companies nearly untouchable. (15:10) Finally, Brody discusses why there's still hope for the American people to fight back. He explains that negative public perception about these big, powerful corporations (such as Amazon and Google parent Alphabet) has influenced antitrust regulators to begin taking action. He also talks about insider trading among members of Congress and emphasizes that all of these conflicts of interest are not limited to one party. (33:38)

On this week's Stansberry Investor Hour, Dan and Corey welcome Brody Mullins to the show. Brody is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporter and author of the new book The Wolves of K Street. He joins the podcast to share insights from his two-plus decades spent investigating the Washington political scene.  Brody kicks off the show by discussing his history reporting on antitrust regulation. He notes that recently, both major political parties in D.C. have become less friendly to Big Tech companies and are using antitrust regulation to slow their growth. After, Brody talks a bit about how he got started in journalism, the importance of holding those in power accountable, and why he has dedicated his life to investigating companies. (1:27) Next, Brody shares some details about his book. He points out that for most of this country's history, companies had very little influence in Washington. Things only changed in the 1970s once the economy cratered and stagflation hit. Then, companies began to lobby in order to twist regulations and gain an advantage in the market. Brody also explains lobbying in simple terms, including how lobbyists raise money for members of Congress. He argues that legal loopholes and undisclosed funds to influence constituents have made companies nearly untouchable. (15:10) Finally, Brody discusses why there's still hope for the American people to fight back. He explains that negative public perception about these big, powerful corporations (such as Amazon and Google parent Alphabet) has influenced antitrust regulators to begin taking action. He also talks about insider trading among members of Congress and emphasizes that all of these conflicts of interest are not limited to one party. (33:38)

If you've ever been to Capitol Hill, you've likely met today's guest. Mike Johnson got his start as a journalist in a small corner of Illinois, but quickly was recognized as an excellent communicator -- and his D.C. story began. From the White House to Capitol Hill and ultimately K Street, Mike Johnson's experience and understanding of the halls of Congress is unmatched. It's in his newest book, Fixing Congress - Restoring Power to the People -- that he outlines some of what could be restored and what needs to be revamped. Tune in today to hear more about the importance of teaching civics and giving power back to the people. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Lobbying in the 1950s and 60s was a small-time, sleepy industry without much impact. How did it grow to the behemoth political force it is today? Brody Mullins is the author of the new book The Wolves of K Street, and he joins the podcast to talk about corporate lobbying power, how lobbyists actually influence politicians, and how to design a better system.   To get bonus episodes, support us at patreon.com/newliberalpodcast or https://cnliberalism.org/become-a-member Got questions? Send us a note at mailbag@cnliberalism.org. Follow us at: https://twitter.com/CNLiberalism https://cnliberalism.org/   Join a local chapter at https://cnliberalism.org/become-a-member/  

On K Street, a few blocks from the White House, you'll find the offices of some of the most powerful people in Washington. In the 1970s, the city's center of gravity began to shift away from elected officials in big marble buildings to a handful of savvy, handsomely paid operators who didn't answer to any fixed constituency. The cigar-chomping son of a powerful Congressman, an illustrious political fixer with a weakness for modern art, a Watergate-era dirty trickster, the city's favorite cocktail party host—these were the sorts of people who now ran Washington. Investigative journalist Brody Mullins, working with Luke Mullins, says that over four decades, these lobbyists would chart new ways to turn their clients' cash into political leverage, abandoning favor-trading in smoke-filled rooms for increasingly sophisticated tactics like “shadow lobbying,” where underground campaigns sparked seemingly organic public outcries to pressure lawmakers into taking actions that would ultimately benefit corporate interests rather than the common good. With billions of dollars at play, these lobbying dynasties enshrined in Washington a pro-business consensus that would guide the country's political leaders—Democrats and Republicans alike—allowing companies to flourish even as ordinary Americans faced stagnant wages, astronomical drug prices, unsafe home loans and digital monopolies. A good lobbyist could kill even a piece of legislation supported by the president, both houses of Congress, and a majority of Americans. Yet, nothing lasts forever. Amidst a populist backlash to the soaring inequality these lobbyists helped usher in, this Washington alliance suddenly began to unravel. The Mullins say that while new ways for corporations to control the federal government would emerge, the men who'd once built K Street found themselves under legal scrutiny and on the verge of financial collapse. One had his namesake firm ripped away by his own colleagues. Another watched his business shut down altogether. One went to prison. And one was found dead behind the 18th green of an exclusive golf club, with a bottle of $1,500 wine at his feet and a bullet in his head. Join us to hear Brody Mullins sketch a dazzling portrait of 50 years of corporate influence in Washington, as laid out in the Mullins' new book The Wolves of K Street. They trace the rise of the modern lobbying industry through the three dynasties—one Republican, two Democratic—that they say have enabled corporate interests to infiltrate American politics and undermine our democracy. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The denizens of “Gucci Gulch” have fallen on hard times. For even the largest lobbying firms, average monthly retainers have declined during the last decade. To add insult to injury, this lobbying recession has occurred amidst unprecedented overall prosperity for Washington, D.C. Episode 22 of the Political Risk Brief podcast explores this curious trend and corporate political competition in an era of lobbying stalemate.

On Saturday, June 8th, 2024, the headline in the Wall Street Journal Saturday review section read: "The Hidden Life of Google's Secret Weapon." The author was Brody Mullins, a veteran investigative reporter for the Journal. The series ran over 3 days. The focus was on a man named Joshua Wright, a lawyer and former law professor at George Mason University Law School. Under the Journal headline, the paper declares that: "Joshua Wright cleared a path to domination for the world's biggest tech companies, keeping regulators at bay while juggling inappropriate relationships and skirting conflict-of-interest standards at every turn." Brody Mullins, with his brother Luke, also has a new book out called "The Wolves of K Street." Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On Saturday, June 8th, 2024, the headline in the Wall Street Journal Saturday review section read: "The Hidden Life of Google's Secret Weapon." The author was Brody Mullins, a veteran investigative reporter for the Journal. The series ran over 3 days. The focus was on a man named Joshua Wright, a lawyer and former law professor at George Mason University Law School. Under the Journal headline, the paper declares that: "Joshua Wright cleared a path to domination for the world's biggest tech companies, keeping regulators at bay while juggling inappropriate relationships and skirting conflict-of-interest standards at every turn." Brody Mullins, with his brother Luke, also has a new book out called "The Wolves of K Street." Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In Today's special live-to-tape episode of Moment of Truth, Saurabh and Nick sit down with Brody Mullins, Author of "The Wolves of K Street" and former investigative reporter for the Wall Street Journal, to discuss the rise of corporate power in Washington, how lobbying has evolved over six decades as seen through the stories of mega-lobbyists like Thomas Hale Boggs Jr., Paul Manafort, Tony Podesta, and Evan Morris and why grassroots activism holds the keys to the future.#BrodyMullins #TheWolvesOfKStreet #BookReview #BookTalk #Investigation #TonyPodesta #EvanMorris #PaulManafort #TommyBoggs #Lobbying #Campaign #Election #Power #Politics #WashingtonDCBrody Mullins is the Author of "The Wolves of K Street" an investigative book the exposes the rise of corporate power in Washington DC. He was formerly an investigative reporter in the Washington bureau of The Wall Street Journal, where he covered business, lobbying and campaign finance. Recently he covered the political intelligence industry and how investors mine Washington for market-moving information.Learn more about Brody Mullins's work:https://www.wsj.com/news/author/brody-mullinshttps://x.com/brodymullinsdcPurchase Brody's new book, "The Wolves of K Street":https://www.simonandschuster.com/authors/Brody-Mullins/156463980Become a 'Truther' or 'Statesman' to get access to exclusive perks. Watch ALL EPISODES a day before everyone else, and enjoy members-only bonus content: youtube.com/channel/UC4qmB5DeiFxt53ZPZiW4Tcg/join––––––Follow American Moment across Social Media:Twitter – https://twitter.com/AmMomentOrgFacebook – https://www.facebook.com/AmMomentOrgInstagram – https://www.instagram.com/ammomentorg/Rumble – https://rumble.com/c/ammomentorgCheck out AmCanon:https://www.americanmoment.org/amcanon/Follow Us on Twitter:Saurabh Sharma – https://twitter.com/ssharmaUSNick Solheim – https://twitter.com/NickSSolheimAmerican Moment's "Moment of Truth" Podcast is recorded at the Conservative Partnership Campus in Washington DC, produced by American Moment Studios, and edited by Jake Mercier and Jared Cummings.Subscribe to our Podcast, "Moment of Truth"Apple Podcasts – https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/moment-of-truth/id1555257529Spotify – https://open.spotify.com/show/5ATl0x7nKDX0vVoGrGNhAj Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

President Joe Biden continues to face questions about his ability to serve another four-year term following his disastrous debate performance last week. Plus: Keith Stern heads to K Street. And, the latest from The Canvass. Want more in-depth daily coverage from Congress? Subscribe to our free Punchbowl News AM newsletter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today, we're talking about politics and lobbying in America. It's hard to imagine a time when the influence of big corporations and billionaires didn't touch every part of American politics, but the kind of lobbying we have now didn't really exist before the 1970s. Now, our political debates about everything from energy, finance, and healthcare are deeply intertwined with corporations and their money — and new big players in tech now spend tons of political money of their own. To understand the structure of today's political lobbying and how we go here, I brought Pulitzer Prize winner Brody Mullins on the show. Brody has a new book he co-wrote with his brother Luke Mullins called The Wolves of K Street: The Secret History of How Big Money Took Over Big Government, which came out last month. It's a definitive history of modern lobbying in America, told through the lens of some of the industry's most unsavory characters and the influence they've exerted on DC politics across decades.  Links: If Donald Trump Wins, Paul Manafort Will Be Waiting in the Wings | NYT Meta had its biggest lobbying quarter ever | The Verge Apple quietly bankrolled a lobbying group for app developers | The Verge The Many Reinventions of a Legendary Washington Influence Peddler | Politico  The Wolves of K Street review: how lobbying swallowed Washington | The Guardian Big Tech Has a New Favorite Lobbyist: You | WSJ SOPA bill shelved after global protests from Google, Wikipedia and others | WashPo The Russia Inquiry Ended a Democratic Lobbyist's Career. He Wants It Back. | NYT The Swamp Builders | WashPo The Rise and Fall of a K Street Renegade | WSJ Credits:  Decoder is a production of The Verge, and part of the Vox Media Podcast Network. Today's episode was produced by Kate Cox and Nick Statt and was edited by Callie Wright. The Decoder music is by Breakmaster Cylinder. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Will Saletan guest hosts as Tom Edsall joins the panel to discuss rising political polarization, Biden's latest moves on immigration, and the crackdown on social media and kids using smartphones. Highlights / Lowlights Tom: The book 'Wolves of K Street' by Brody and Luke Mullins and a story from  his weekly poker game. Linda: Experts Handicap the Trump-Biden Debate (Karl Rove, WSJ) Damon: No, I Don't Want to Protest (Pamela Paul, NYT) Why Activists Keep Failing the Causes That Fire Them Up (Sarah Isgur, NYT) Bill: The Return of Peace Through Strength by Robert C. O'Brien (Foreign Affairs) Biden and Trump tied in the Emerson Poll in... Minnesota. Will: Louisiana Requires All Public Classrooms to Display Ten Commandments (NYT) Bibi's shameful Biden attack video

Longtime GOP strategist and expert on Latino voting trends Mike Madrid joins us to talk about his new book, The Latino Century: How America's Largest Minority Is Transforming Democracy. Madrid served as the political director for the California Republican Party, and has been senior adviser to both Democrats and Republicans. He is perhaps best known as a cofounder of The Lincoln Project.Madrid will be no stranger to our regular listeners - he has for years been making his case for questioning the 'conventional wisdom' regarding Latino voters, and argues that both parties are stuck in an out of date orthodoxy - and has the data to back it up.The Latino Century will be released on June 18. Sacramento listeners are invited to Join Madrid Tuesday, June 18 at Mayahuel, 1200 K Street, for a discussion with Chris Cadelago of POLITICO from Noon to 2PM, or at reception from 5 to 7PM at the same address..50 The Latino Century2:46 Challenging the notion of race in both parties4:42 How is the GOP getting it wrong8:12 The Monoculture10:35 Are Dems really in lockstep?13:01 How do we get past the ultra polarization?17:36 Brian Dahle's gubernatorial performance19:15 Crime, housing, education and healthcare23:06 Who are some politicians getting it right?24:54 Looking nationally27:03 "The Republican Party in California is 80% white"31:25 What is the takeaway from the book?35:03 Mike Madrid: artist39:45 WWCA: Water is for fightingWant to support the Capitol Weekly Podcast? Make your tax deductible donation here: capitolweekly.net/donations/Capitol Weekly Podcast theme is "Pickin' My Way" by Eddie Lang"#WorstWeekCA" Beat provided by freebeats.io

Anna and Jake go over what's in store for this abbreviated work week on Capitol Hill. Plus: Checking in on The Canvass — how does K Street feel about election interference? Want more in-depth daily coverage from Congress? Subscribe to our free Punchbowl News AM newsletter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Major sits down with authors Brody and Luke Mullins to talk about Washington's favorite pastime - and it's not baseball. Their new book, “The Wolves of K Street,” argues that the last few decades of lobbying members of congress and policymakers has only benefited corporations and the lobbyists themselves, leaving behind the general public. Join us at The Dubliner on Capitol Hill (where lawmakers and lobbyists have been meeting for 50 years!). See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Andy engages in a riveting conversation with journalist Brody Mullins, author of "The Wolves of K Street: The Secret History of How Big Money Took Over Big Government." Mullins shares insights into the rise of corporate power and lobbying in Washington from the 1970s to today. The discussion delves into the transformation of lobbying tactics, the impact of corporate influence on legislation, and the critical need for an educated electorate. Packed with fascinating anecdotes and thought-provoking analysis, this episode sheds light on the intricate dance between government and big business, offering listeners a deeper understanding of the forces shaping policy and democracy.

Jason brings on Wall Street Journal reporter Brody Mullins to discuss his new book, The Wolves of K Street: The Secret History of How Big Money Took Over Big Government. They discuss the rise of corporate power in Washington, D.C., beginning with the Nixon administration and its dynamic shift upon former President Trump's arrival in Washington. Brody also sheds light on how a good lobbyist could ghostwrite a bill or even secretly kill a piece of legislation supported by the president, both houses of Congress, and many Americans.   Jason also delves deep into the political corruption of the Pritzker family and their involvement funding the pro-Palestinian protests on college campuses.   Bringing On The Stupid: Runner Disqualified As Marathon Winner For Receiving Water Bottle From Dad Follow Jason on Twitter: @JasonInTheHouse Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On this episode, Wall Street Journal investigative reporter Brody Mullins joins Oren Cass to discuss his new book, coauthored with Politico's Luke Mullins, about the corrosive influence of corporate power in politics, the evolution of the lobbying industry, and changes that could make Congress more responsive to the will of the voters.For more, check out The Wolves of K Street, out now.

Once upon a time, in a land far away, corporate interests didn't rule the political roost. It's hard to imagine today, when Big Oil, Big Tech and Big Finance (among other 'bigs') all muscle in on US democracy, grappling for the attention and affections of elected representatives. Indeed, a whole industry has sprung up to mediate this muscling, and you can find it on K Street. Home to Washington DC's lobbyists, K Street is also the topic of Brody Mullins' new book, The Wolves of K Street. This week on Whale Hunting, host Bradley Hope chats to Brody about the book, which he co-authored with his brother, Luke Mullins, and what they uncovered on their deep dive into the world of American corporate lobbying. Together, they discuss why lobbying came about in the first place and how powerful forces have changed over time, from the influential civil rights and environmental groups of the 1970s to today's big players on K Street. From mysterious deaths to dirty tactics and signs of change on Capitol Hill, Brody unravels this filthy rich industry, its biggest personalities, and its most questionable practices. Brody and Luke Mullins' book, The Wolves of K Street, is out now. You can find it online and in all good bookshops. Want more from Whale Hunting? Head to our website at whalehunting.projectbrazen.com to subscribe to our newsletter delving into the murky worlds of money and power. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, the fellas kick things off with a deep dive into a delicious treat for political enthusiasts: James Carville's latest commentary. Known as the architect of the Clinton '92 campaign, Carville's recent remarks are causing waves. He's not holding back, claiming that what the Democrats are doing simply isn't working. They break down Carville's blunt assessment and discuss its implications for the Democratic Party, highlighting the growing gap between traditional Democratic strategies and modern party dynamics. As the political landscape heats up earlier than usual, the fellas explore the shifting focus from legislative activities to intense political reporting and general election preparations. With elections looming, everything is under the microscope until November. They also bring you the latest election analysis, including the New York Times/Siena poll showing significant movement towards Trump in key swing states. What does this mean for the Democrats? The potential impact is discussed, and what strategies might be needed to change course. The featured guest today is Brody Mullins, a journalist who dives into the influence-peddling industry in his new book, "The Wolves of K Street." Hear about his journey and insights as he tackles the swamp, offering a fresh perspective on the inner workings of Washington. Visit ElectronicPaymentsCoalition.org and tell your Senators to oppose the Durbin-Marshall credit card bill  Check out this great new site from our sponsor Americans for Prosperity: Bidenomics.com  Go to our sponsor ZBiotics.com/RUTHLESS to get 15% off your first order, or use code RUTHLESS at the checkout.

Episode 3598: The Wolves Of K Street; Peter Navarro For VP

Brody Mullins, an investigative reporter in the Washington D.C. bureau of The Wall Street Journal, joins Federalist Culture Editor Emily Jashinsky to trace the evolution of K Street lobbying and explain how it affects the current political climate. You can find Mullins' book, The Wolves of K Street: The Secret History of How Big Money Took Over Big Government, here.If you care about combatting the corrupt media that continue to inflict devastating damage, please give a gift to help The Federalist do the real journalism America needs.https://surfshark.deals/FEDERALIST

Brody Mullins, an investigative reporter in the Washington D.C. bureau of The Wall Street Journal, joins Federalist Culture Editor Emily Jashinsky to trace the evolution of K Street lobbying and explain how it affects the current political climate. You can find Mullins’ book, The Wolves of K Street: The Secret History of How Big Money […]

James Walter Moore, electrical engineer, data systems consultant and an unsuccessful 2006 Democratic candidate for the 3rd Congressional District (who lost to John Yarmuth), discusses insights gained from that race in his 2023 book, Exile on K Street. His experience taught him a lot about why the current political system is not working to give constituents the politicians who actually represent them. And he points out what can be done to make it easier for citizens to get the information they need to make informed choices at the polls and to bring the polls to them instead of having to find the polls and oftentimes stand in long lines in order to vote.

Don't miss this week's episode with Brody and Luke Mullins -- two D.C.-native, investigative journalist brothers who teamed up to report on the dynamics of lobbying and it's origins in the nation's capital. These two superstars (one at Wall Street Journal and the other at Politico Magazine) have produced one of the most anticipated books of the year -- illustrating the contours of lobbying through the investigation of the most-known characters in the business. Tune in today to hear how the project came to be, the process of producing this killer book and the difference between reporting and now selling a sure to be best-seller. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

“In the 1970s and 1980s, a portion of 14th Street became known primarily for its red-light district. Several strip clubs and massage parlors were concentrated roughly between New York Avenue and K Street, while prostitutes plied their trade around Logan Circle. However, rising land values eventually pushed out the adult businesses. The Source Theatre, founded by Bart Whiteman in 1977, was given some credit for the area's revival. Whiteman stood outside the theater to escort people inside in order to make them feel safer.[5] During the 1980s and 1990s, Logan Circle, although dominated by Victorian homes that had survived mostly untouched by redevelopment or riots, was considered an unsafe neighborhood by many due to overt drug use and prostitution that existed in the neighborhood.[17][18] During this period, property values in the area began to increase, but issues of homelessness in the area came to the forefront. Fourteenth Street, NW became widely viewed as Washington's red light district. It also became an area for small, independent theater companies that acquired relatively cheap space north of the circle.” -Wikipedia. “I sat on the benches, walked on the streets, moved on the grass, and roamed the parks within Logan Circle, Shaw neighborhood, The U Street Corridor, and 14th Street NW in Washington D.C. as a five-year old in the late 1990's. I frequently encountered, conversed with, saw the sex work, saw the sex workers, and hung out with pimps, brothel keepers, clients, customers, madams, procurers, and panderers the most in Logan Circle, The Shaw neighborhood, The U Street Corridor, and 14th Street NW at that time. I saw pimping, brothel keeping, madaming, procuring, pandering, customering, and clienteling the most at Logan Circle, 14th Street NW, Shaw neighborhood, and The U Street Corridor.” Antonio Myers. “Procuring, pimping, or pandering is the facilitation or provision of a prostitute or other sex worker in the arrangement of a sex act with a customer.[1] A procurer, colloquially called a pimp (if male) or a madam (if female, though the term pimp has often been used for female procurers as well) or a brothel keeper, is an agent for prostitutes who collects part of their earnings. The procurer may receive this money in return for advertising services, physical protection, or for providing and possibly monopolizing a location where the prostitute may solicit clients. Like prostitution, the legality of certain actions of a madam or a pimp vary from one region to the next.” -Wikipedia. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/antonio-myers4/support

Anna and Jake look at Speaker Mike Johnson and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries; what challenges will they face when they return from Easter Recess? Plus: Israel's key moment with the U.S. over Rafah and who K Street thinks will be Trump's VP pick. Want more in-depth daily coverage from Congress? Subscribe to our free Punchbowl News AM newsletter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Judy Reed: Follow Me Judy Woodford Reed's birth was commemorated around the year 1826. Reed was one of the few African American women known for her prolific invention throughout the 1880s. There are tons of attributes that are not notorious regarding Reed. She primarily showed up at the 1870 Federal Census as a 44-year-old sempstress. This took place at Fredericksville Parish next to Charlottesville, Virginia which is in Albemarle County. Reed was with her spouse, Allen Reed, and the horticulturist as well as her five kids. Once ten years went by, Mr. and Mrs. Reed stayed in Virginia to be with their grandchild. In mid-1880 and 1885, Mr. Reed passed away. Mrs. Reed labeled herself as “widow of Allen” after her husband's death. She relocated to Washington D.C. upon the place she lived alongside by her kids at 1906 K Street, N. W. The sole recognized history which Mrs. Reed had was the US patent-of-invention. Mrs. Reed was deemed to be the first African American female to acquire a patent. On September 23, 1884, Reeds Patent No. 305,474 for a “Dough Kneader and Roller” was endowed. The patent-of-invention was there to ameliorate the construction upon an existent rolling pin. This is for the flour to blend extra smoothly when it remains concealed and secured. Regarding if Mrs. Reeds had the capability of reading, writing, or printing her name on the patent as an “X” was not known. An African American female that was at a prior term had the likelihood to obtain patent-of-invention entitlement. Although there was a chance to acquire patent authority, this remains obscured because there are no obligations to signify ethnicity. In addition, females frequently applied just the initial letter so they can conceal their sex. Being intellectual was against the law at the time. Anyone who was caught reading, writing, or providing education was likely to face severe punishment or the death penalty. In 1905, Mrs. Reed passed away. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/momentsofgrace/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/momentsofgrace/support

Ralph sits down with three guests straight out of the latest edition of the Capitol Hill Citizen. First, world-renowned food politics expert and public health advocate Marion Nestle joins Ralph to discuss America's voracious junk food lobby. Then, Ralph speaks to legal expert Bruce Fein about Congressional staffers and the part they can play in making Congress stronger. Finally, Ralph welcomes Vishal Shankar from the Revolving Door Project to explain why President Biden is letting Postmaster General Louis DeJoy continue wrecking the Post Office. Marion Nestle is the Paulette Goddard Professor of Nutrition, Food Studies, and Public Health, Emerita, at New York University. She is the author of a wide range of books about the politics of food, nutrition, health, and the environment, including Eat, Drink Vote: An Illustrated Guide to Food Politics, Unsavory Truth: How Food Companies Skew the Science of What We Eat, and Slow Cooked: An Unexpected Life in Food Politics. If you want to make a profit and grow your profit every 90 days, you have to sell as much food as possible. And what that food does to public health is not your responsibility, because that's the way our system works. Marion NestleWe have a law on the books that says that the Federal Trade Commission can do nothing to restrict the marketing of foods to children on television. They're not allowed to do that. So what we're talking about here is a situation in which Congress is so corrupt that it cannot take on anything that will fight the food industry.Marion NestleBruce Fein is a Constitutional scholar and an expert on international law.  Mr. Fein was Associate Deputy Attorney General under Ronald Reagan and he is the author of Constitutional Peril: The Life and Death Struggle for Our Constitution and Democracy, and American Empire: Before the Fall.You really can't make a career anymore of being in the legislative branch as an employee or as an aide. And so everybody leaves after a couple years to go to K Street and become a lobbyist. And so with this rapid turnover, you have a lobotomized Congress. And what this letter was attempting to do was to say, listen, Congress still—when the architecture of the Constitution is honored—is the primary predominant branch among the three branches. It's simply that you're not exercising it.Bruce FeinVishal Shankar is a Senior Researcher at the Revolving Door Project, which scrutinizes executive branch appointees to ensure they use their office to serve the broad public interest, rather than to entrench corporate power or seek personal advancement. He has also worked at Inequality Media, as well as several government offices, nonprofits, and policy research projects. His work has appeared in The American Prospect and Common Dreams, and he has been quoted in The New Republic, The Lever, and the Capitol Hill Citizen.The crisis [with Louis DeJoy] is not as immediate to Biden, his voters, his supporters, and they very wrongly believe—in my opinion—that they can work with this man who has proven to be untrustworthy, a Republican mega-donor and partisan hack, and most importantly a committed privatizer of the United States Postal Service. Vishal ShankarDeJoy has been one of the single biggest impediments to piloting or expanding to creative new ideas that can grow out the Postal Service for decades to come…DeJoy has very stubbornly refused to consider these great potential ideas and is doubling down on service cuts and rate hikes as the only way he thinks he can run the agency.Vishal ShankarIn Case You Haven't Heard with Francesco DeSantis1. Democracy Now! Reports the United Autoworkers union has called for a ceasefire in Gaza. They are the largest and most mainstream labor union to publicly come out for a ceasefire, joining the American Postal Workers Union, United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America, the California Nurses Association and the Chicago Teachers Union. UAW Region 9A Director Brandon Mancilla said "UAW International is calling for an immediate, permanent cease-fire in Israel and Palestine so that we can get to the work of building a lasting peace, building social justice, and building a global community of solidarity," per CBS News. At the same time, UAW is “launching simultaneous, public organizing campaigns at more than a dozen automakers including Toyota… Volkswagen…and Tesla…aiming to organize nearly 150,000 employees…which would double the number of autoworkers in the union,” per Bloomberg. In short, UAW is setting a new standard for labor. We hope other unions follow their lead.2. A new Gallup poll shows the Israeli campaign against Gaza is underwater among key segments of American public opinion. Some top line numbers: 63% of Democrats oppose Israel's military actions in Gaza, as do 67% of adults under 35, 64% of people of color, and 52% of women. Moreover, this poll was conducted in the first weeks of November, so it is likely these attitudes have hardened since then.3. Responding to the protests against Israel's campaign, the House has passed a resolution classifying anti-Zionism as anti-Semitism, even among American Jews. In a surprising move, high ranking Jewish Democrat Jerrold Nadler took to the floor to decry this resolution, saying “the resolution suggests that ALL anti-Zionism is antisemitism. That is either intellectually disingenuous or just factually wrong. And it unfairly implicates many of my orthodox former constituents in Brooklyn, many of whose families rose from the ashes of the Holocaust…the authors, if they were at all familiar with Jewish history and culture, should know about Jewish anti-Zionism that was, and is, expressly NOT antisemitic.”4. Semafor reports MSNBC has canceled Mehdi Hasan's news program. This article implies MSNBC canceled the show because it was a “cult favorite” which never “translated to ratings successes,” though it seems likely that Hasan's willingness to push back on Israeli talking points during this recent conflict played a role as well. Lest we forget this is the network that canceled Phil Donahue's blockbuster news program for criticizing the Iraq War.5. Just Foreign Policy's Aída Chávez reports “Sen[ator] Rand Paul is forcing a vote this week on getting US troops out of Syria. His Syria War Powers Resolution would remove all US troops – approx. 900 [US military personnel] – from Syria in the next 30 days.” Chávez highlights that “US forces have been targeted with dozens of attacks in Syria [in recent days] over US support for war in Gaza.”6. From OtherWorlds.org: the Pentagon has failed yet another audit. The mammoth Department of Defense has never passed an audit, and only even completed its first in 2018. In this most recent iteration, “the Pentagon was able to account for just half of its $3.8 trillion in assets (including equipment, facilities, etc)…[leaving] $1.9 trillion…unaccounted for — more than the entire budget Congress agreed to for the current fiscal year.” Congress is now set to allocate an additional $840 billion for the agency.7. The Intercept is out with a story that could have made headlines during the Populist Era of the 1880s and ‘90s. According to the report, Dan Osborn, a military veteran and labor leader who was a key figure in the 2021 strike against Kellogg's, is running for Senate as an independent – and leading Republican incumbent Senator Deb Fischer in the polls. Osborn told the Intercept “Nebraskans have had it with Washington. We've been starving for honest government that isn't bought and paid for…This poll shows that Nebraska's independent streak is alive and well.” The article notes Nebraska Democrats have not yet fielded a candidate in this Senate race and are considering backing Osborn. Nebraska Democratic Party Chair Jane Kleeb said many Nebraska voters tired of one-party control in the state, arguing it “Makes politicians lazy…[and] more beholden to corporate interests since they don't have to answer to voters.”8. NBC is out with a bombshell report on carbon monoxide deaths among Airbnb renters. According to the report, “NBC News has identified 19 deaths since 2013 that occurred at Airbnb properties and are alleged to have involved carbon monoxide poisoning, according to interviews with family members of victims and a review of news articles, autopsy reports, police records, and court and government documents. The company is currently facing at least three lawsuits pertaining to carbon monoxide deaths or poisonings.” Perhaps most damningly, following one carbon monoxide related death in 2014, the company made a blog post promising “By the end of 2014, we'll require all Airbnb hosts to confirm that they have [carbon monoxide detectors] installed in their listing.” The company never made good on that promise, and that post has since been deleted.9. Tesla has released its long awaited Cybertruck, and along with it, videos of the vehicle's crash testing. These are distressing to say the least. As the American Prospect notes, “the Cybertruck's body panels…are made of stainless steel…[which] is much stiffer than…ordinary [automobile body materials], which makes it dangerous. Since the 1950s at least, automakers have understood that stiffer cars are more dangerous to people inside and outside the car, because in a crash they deliver energy to other parties rather than absorbing it. In early crash test experiments with more heavily built cars, collisions often did only minor damage to the car but turned the test dummies into paste. Since then, cars have been designed with progressively more sophisticated crumple zones to absorb impact forces. Musk's boasts of a Cybertruck “exoskeleton,” if true, are a recipe for gruesome carnage.”10. Finally, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger has died at 100 years old. A Rolling Stone obituary, which ran under the headline “Henry Kissinger, War Criminal Beloved by America's Ruling Class, Finally Dies,” argues that while Kissinger deserves to be remembered as one of “history's worst mass murderers,” he instead has been given a place of honor, even in death, among the American elite. One can only hope that his many, many victims will someday see justice served.This has been Francesco DeSantis, with In Case You Haven't Heard. Get full access to Ralph Nader Radio Hour at www.ralphnaderradiohour.com/subscribe

Episode 3131: K-Street Fears Mike Johnson

Episode 3111: K Street Vs. Mainstreet

Kannon Shanmugam rejoins Sarah and David for another SCOTUS opinion wrap-up and barbecue showdown for this live taping in front of a lucky audience of summer associates. The trio discuss the implications of SCOTUS cases versus the notoriety of them and: -Sarah and David's SCOTUS beefs -Sarah's impasse for longer arguments and more cases -Attire for oral arguments (don't forget the lucky suspenders) -A review of Judge Jackson's first term -Barbecue and burger debates -Summer Associate questions Show Notes: -Matt Levine for Bloomberg Opinion on Twitter/Musk saga Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices