Podcasts about loopholes

This week, host Basant Kumar is joined by Newslaundry's Sumedha Mittal and Pratyush Deep.Sumedha talks about her report on Bihar's Special Intensive Revision (SIR). Her investigation revealed that even after this massive exercise, the ECI has conferred wrong house numbers to lakhs of voters. This, she says, creates the perfect opportunity to fill the lacunae with fake voters. After the ECI's SIR, over 1,000 voters in Bihar were grouped under a single non-existent house. Her investigation highlights that whatever mistakes were there in the electoral roll are still on the list even after the SIR.Pratyush's report highlighted Assam's 3,000-bigha land row and the controversy around it. While the story played out on social media, with claims that the land was being handed over to the Adani Group, Pratyush's report reveals that it is, in fact, Mahabal Cement that had ownership of the land.In another report from Assam, Pratyush follows the complainants behind recent FIRs against journalists, who ostensibly had links to the BJP or the RSS student wing ABVP.Tune in.Timecodes00:00:00 - Introduction00:05:06 - Loopholes in SIR00:23:30 - Illegal land allotment00:33:54 - FIRs against Journalists00:44:25 - RecommendationsRecommendationsSumedhaEP-339 | Political Pressure, TRP War, Media Credibility & Influencers vs Journalists | Kalli PuriePratyushThe Rebel Army Behind One of the World's Major Rare Earth SuppliesBasantSaare Jahan Se AcchaProduced and edited by Saif Ali Ekram, recorded by Anil Kumar. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Today's Headlines: Newly confirmed CDC director, Susan Monarez, was “officially removed” by HHS Secretary RFK Jr.—even though she insisted only the president can fire her, making The CDC mess even messier. Meanwhile, RFK Jr's ally Jim O'Neill has been tapped as acting director, prompting dozens of CDC staff in Atlanta to walk out in protest. Over at the Surface Transportation Board, Trump is trying to oust a Democratic member just as the board weighs a huge merger between Norfolk Southern and Union Pacific that could essentially create one mega-railroad controlling freight across the U.S. At the same time, Trump is also closing the “de minimis” loophole, meaning imported packages under $800 will now get slapped with tariffs ranging from 10–50%—and several countries, including Japan, Germany, and Mexico, say they'll stop sending packages here altogether. In Minneapolis, police gave more details about the horrific school shooting that killed two children and injured 18 others. Officials say the gunman plastered his weapons with over 100 hate slogans and had been openly posting about his plans for weeks, though law enforcement somehow missed it. And in DC, the infamous “sandwich thrower” who hurled lunch at a federal agent during Trump's new troop patrols has been charged only with a misdemeanor after prosecutors couldn't get a felony indictment. Truly, the first time a ham sandwich wasn't indicted. Resources/Articles mentioned in this episode: The Guardian: CDC in crisis: who are the top officials resigning or being forced out? | Trump administration NBC News: Trump administration live updates: White House taps Kennedy deputy as acting CDC director; Fed governor Lisa Cook sues over removal Axios: Massive CDC walkout erupts amid internal chaos Bloomberg: Trump Moves To Fire Rail Regulator WIRED: The Duty-Free Loophole Is Closing. What That Means for You—and Your Packages NBC News: Minneapolis shooting live updates: Shooter 'wanted to watch children suffer' as 120 shell casings are recovered, officials say AP News: DC man seen throwing sandwich at agent charged with misdemeanor after grand jury declines indictment Morning Announcements is produced by Sami Sage and edited by Grace Hernandez-Johnson Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

For this week's News Roundup, Bridget is joined by her longtime friend and colleague Nima Shirazi, co-host of the OG podcast "Citations Needed" about how media shapes power. TikTok Shop Sells Viral GPS Trackers Marketed to Stalkers: https://www.404media.co/tiktok-shop-sells-viral-gps-trackers-marketed-to-stalkers/ ICE Is Using Taylor Swift’s Loophole To Hide Deportation Flights: https://archive.ph/dPDqw#selection-701.0-704.0 Grand jury declines to indict man who threw a sandwich at federal officer in D.C.: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/grand-jury-declines-indict-sandwich-guy-threw-sub-dc-federal-officer-rcna227464 Microsoft Asked FBI for Help Tracking Employee Protests over Palestine: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/microsoft-asked-fbi-help-tracking-204559938.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAALE2eGyVYVuUQ7Iw3XlXK-4gRnbqSdJzXZ25_u0zYLgHcdvssTEXHrj7bNMZM_tlZtpkHkqfKXtoYpqHRsbODfjex4rE0acMyK2n76_-apXRlkREXs1EVL_Dtuxy_HLmIzt0xg-1YLaphFhSffgLJNE-ckWGgjWYy6Dk9NtkGR6c Protesters occupy Microsoft office as company reviews its work with Israel's military: https://www.npr.org/2025/08/27/nx-s1-5518786/microsoft-protesters-office-israel Will Smith tour video criticized for featuring a ‘fake AI crowd’: https://www.the-independent.com/bulletin/culture/will-smith-ai-tour-video-concert-b2813880.html Put on some headphones, listen to all 13 minutes of "Do You Feel Like We Do", and try to remember the last time you felt as excited as the people in the audience: https://open.spotify.com/track/0qqRwBkq7oWv6QnIRLfQKe?si=354474b5d03a4b67 Buy a copy of the important new book "The Podcast Pantheon: 101 Podcasts That Changed How We Listen–From Wtf to Serial." Nima is in there! https://www.publishersweekly.com/9781797232249 Support Citations Needed on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/citationsneededpodcast Listen to Citations Needed: https://citationsneeded.libsyn.com/ Save Our Signs: https://umn.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_4VKNSNsfJuIVOIu If you’re listening on Spotify, you can leave a comment there to let us know what you thought about these stories, or email us at hello@tangoti.com ! Follow Bridget and TANGOTI on social media! Many vids each week || instagram.com/bridgetmarieindc/ || tiktok.com/@bridgetmarieindc || youtube.com/@ThereAreNoGirlsOnTheInternet See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Governor Ferguson continues to defy demands from the Trump Administration to end Washington’s “sanctuary state” policies. But lawmakers say there’s one place here where protections for immigrants are falling short: state prisons. That, says Tacoma state Representative Sharlett Mena, means the state isn’t doing everything it could to keep Washingtonians safe. According to reporting from the Washington State Standard, dozens of lawmakers are calling for the state Department of Corrections to change the way it interacts with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. That effort may see some headwinds, however. Governor Bob Ferguson and Attorney General Nick Brown both say they don’t see any need to alter state policy. Guests: Washington State Standard reporter Jake Goldstein-Street Related stories: Washington governor and AG stand by state prison notifications to ICE - Washington State Standard As DOJ threatens WA over sanctuary laws, state officials double down on protections - KUOW Thank you to the supporters of KUOW, you help make this show possible! If you want to help out, go to kuow.org/donate/soundsidenotes.Soundside is a production of KUOW in Seattle, a proud member of the NPR Network.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Food and Drug Administration or FDA regulates roughly 78% of the US food supply. This includes packaged products, food additives, infant formula, ultra-processed foods, and lots more. However, an analysis by the Environmental Working Group found that 99% of new food ingredients enter our food supply through a legal loophole that skirts FDA oversight and seems, to me at least, to be incredibly risky. Today we're speaking with two authors of a recent legal and policy analysis published in the Journal Health Affairs. They explain what this loophole is and its risks and suggest a new user fee program to both strengthen the FDA's ability to regulate food ingredients and address growing concerns about food safety. Our guests are Jennifer Pomeranz Associate Professor of Public Health Policy and Management at New York University School of Global Public Health and Emily Broad, director of Harvard Law School Center for Health Law and Policy Innovation. Interview Summary So Jennifer, let's start with you, help our listeners understand the current situation with food ingredient oversight. And what is this legal loophole that allows food companies to add new ingredients without safety reviews. Sure. So, Congress passed the Food Additives Amendment in 1958, and the idea was to divide food additives and generally recognized as safe ingredients into two different categories. That's where the GRAS term comes from generally recognized as safe? ‘Generally Recognized As Safe' is GRAS. But it circularly defines food additives as something that's not GRAS. So, there's not actually a definition of these two different types of substances. But the idea was that the food industry would be required to submit a pre-market, that means before it puts the ingredient into the marketplace, a pre-market petition to the FDA to review the safety. And then the FDA promulgates a regulation for safe use of a food additive. GRAS ingredients on the other hand, initially thought of as salt, pepper, vinegar, are things like that would just be allowed to enter the food supply without that pre-market petition. The problem is the food industry is the entity that decides which category to place each ingredient. There's no FDA guidance on which category they're supposed to ascribe to these ingredients. What has happened is that the food industry has now entered into the food supply an enormous amount of ingredients under what we call the GRAS loophole, which is allowing it to just bring it to the market without any FDA oversight or even knowledge of the ingredient. So, in essence, what we're having now is that the food industry polices itself on whether to submit this pre-market petition for a food additive or just include it in its products without any FDA knowledge. When you said ‘enormous number of such things,' are we talking dozens, hundreds, thousands? Nobody knows, but the environmental working group did find that 99% of new ingredients are added through this loophole. And that's the concerning part. Well, you can look at some ultra-processed foods and they can have 30 or 40 ingredients on them. That's just one food. You can imagine that at across the food supply, how many things there are. And there are these chemicals that nobody can pronounce. You don't know what's going on, what they are, what they're all about. So, what you're saying is that the food industry decides to put these things in foods. There's some processing reason for putting them in. It's important that the public be protected against harmful ingredients. But the food industry decides what's okay to put in and what's not. Are they required to do any testing? Are there criteria for that kind of testing? Is there any sense that letting the industry police itself amounts to anything that protects the public good? Well, the criteria are supposed to be the same for GRAS or food additives. They're supposed to be meeting certain scientific criteria. But the problem with this is that for GRAS ingredients, they don't have to use published data and they can hold that scientific data to themselves. And you mentioned food labels, the ingredient list, right? That doesn't necessarily capture these ingredients. They use generic terms, corn oil, color additive, food additive whatever. And so, the actual ingredient itself is not necessarily listed on the ingredient list. There is no way to identify them and it's unknown whether they're actually doing the studies. They can engage in these, what are called GRAS panels, which are supposed to be experts that evaluate the science. But the problem is other studies have found that 100% of the people on these GRAS panels have financial conflicts of interest. Okay, so let me see if I have this right. I'm a food company. I develop a new additive to provide color or flavor or fragrance, or it's an emulsifier or something like that. I develop a chemical concoction that hasn't really been tested for human safety. I declare it safe. And the criteria I use for declaring it set safe is putting together a panel of people that I pay, who then in a hundred percent of cases say things are. That's how it works? I can't say that in a hundred percent of cases they say it's safe, but a hundred percent of the people have financial conflicts of interest. That's one of the major concerns there. Well, one can't imagine they would continue to be paid... Exactly. This sounds like a pretty shaky system to be sure. Emily: I wanted to add a couple other really quick things on the last discussion. You were saying, Kelly, like they're using a panel of experts, which indeed are paid by them. That would be best case in some cases. They're just having their own staff say, we think this is generally recognized as safe. And I think there's some examples we can give where there isn't even evidence that they went to even any outside people, even within industry. I think that the takeaway from all of that is that there's really the ability for companies to call all the shots. Make all the rules. Not tell FDA what they're doing. And then as we talked about, not even have anything on the label because it's not a required ingredient if it's, used as part of a processing agent that's not a substance on there. So I was feeling pretty bad when Jennifer is talking about these panels and the heavy conflict... Even worse. Of interest, now I feel worse because that's the best case. Totally. And one other thing too is just you kind of warmed this up by talking about this loophole. When we put an earlier article out that we wrote that was about just this generally recognized as safe, the feedback we got from FDA was this isn't a loophole. Why are you calling this a loophole? And it's pretty clear that it's a loophole, you know? It's big enough to drive thousands of ingredients through. Yes, totally. Emily, you've written about things like partially hydrogenated vegetable oils, trans fats, and red dye number three in particular. Both of which FDA has now prohibited in food. Can you walk us through those cases? You asked about partially hydrogenated oils or trans-fat, and then red dye three, which are two examples that we talk about a little bit in our piece. Actually, one of those, the partially hydrogenated oils was allowed in food through the generally recognized as safe definition. And the other was not. But they are both really good examples of another real issue that FDA has, which is that not only are they not doing a good job of policing substances going into food on the front end, but they do an even worse job of getting things out of food on the backend, post-market once they know that those substances are really raising red flags. And you raised two of the prime examples we've been talking about. With partially hydrogenated oils these are now banned in foods, but it took an extremely long time. Like the first evidence of harm was in the mid-nineties. By 2005, the Institute of Medicine, which is now the National Academies, said that intake of trans fat, of partially hydrogenated oils, should be as low as possible. And there was data from right around that time that found that 72,000 to 228,000 heart attacks in the US each year were caused by these partially hydrogenated oils. And on FDA's end, they started in early 2000s to require labeling. But it wasn't until 2015 that they passed a final rule saying that these substances were not generally recognized as safe. And then they kept delaying implementation until 2023. It was basically more than 20 years from when there was really clear evidence of harm including from respected national agencies to when FDA actually fully removed them from food. And red dye number three is another good example where there were studies from the 1980s that raised concerns about this red dye. And it was banned from cosmetics in 1990. But they still allowed it to be added to food. And didn't ban it from food until early this year. So early 2025. In large part because one of the other things happening is states are now taking action on some of these substances where they feel like we really need to protect consumers in our states. And FDA has been doing a really poor job. California banned red dye about 18 months before that and really spurred FDA to action. So that 20-year delay with between 72,000 and 228,000 heart attack deaths attributable to the trans fats is the cost of delay and inaction and I don't know, conflicts of interest, and all kinds of other stuff that happened in FDA. So we're not talking about something trivial by any means. These are life and death things are occurring. Yes. Give us another example, if you would, about something that entered the food supply and caused harm but made it through that GRAS loophole. The example that I've talked about both in some of the work we've done together and also in a perspective piece in the New England Journal of Medicine that really focused on why this is an issue. There was this substance added to food called tara flour. It came on the scene in 2022. It was in food prepared by Daily Harvest as like a protein alternative. And they were using it from a manufacturer in South America who said we have deemed this generally recognized as safe. Everything about that is completely legal. They deemed it generally recognized as safe. A company put it into food, and they sold that. Up until that point, that's all legal. What happened was very quickly people started getting really sick from this. And so there were, I think, about 400 people across 39 states got sick. Nearly 200 people ended up in the hospital, some of them with liver failure because of this toxicity of tara flour. And so FDA followed the thread they did help work with the company to do a voluntary recall, but it then took them two years, until May, 2024, to declare tara flour not generally recognized as safe. So I think, in some ways, this is a great example because it shows how it's so immediate, the impact of this substance that, again, was legally added to food with no oversight. In some ways it's a misleading example because I think so many of the substances in food, it's not going to be so clear and so immediate. It's going to be year over year, decade over decade as part of a full diet that these are causing cardiovascular risk, thyroid disease, cancer risk, those kinds of things. I'd love to hear from either of you about this. Why is FDA falling down on the job so badly? Is it that they don't have the money to do the necessary testing? Do they not have the authority? Is there not the political will to do this? Is there complete caving into the food industry? Just let them do what they want and we're going let it go? Jennifer: All of the above? Everything you just said? It's all of the above. Emily: Jen, do you wanna talk about the money side? Because that sort of gets to the genesis of the article we worked on, which was like maybe there's a creative solution to that piece. Yes, I'd love to hear about that because I thought that was a very creative thing that you guys wrote about in your paper. That there would be an industry user fee to help produce this oversight. Tell us what you had in mind with that. And then then convince me that FDA would appropriately use this oversight and do its job. So, the idea in the paper was proposing a comprehensive user fee program for the food branch of the FDA. The FDA currently collects user fees for all of human drugs, animal drugs, medical devices, etc. With Tobacco, it's a hundred percent funded by user fees. But food, it only gets 1% of its funding through user fees. And it's important to note user fees fund processes. They don't fund outcomes. It's not like a bribe. And the idea behind user fees and why industry sometimes supports them is actually to bring predictability to the regulatory state. It brings efficiency to reviews. And then this all allows the industry to anticipate timelines so they can bring products to market and know when they're going be able to do it. In the food context, for example, the FDA is required to respond to those food additives petitions that we talked about within 180 days. But they can't respond in time. And they have a lot of timelines that are required of them in the food context that they can't meet. They can't meet their timelines because they're so underfunded. So, we proposed a comprehensive user fee. But one of the main reasons that we think a user fee is important is to address the pre-market issues that I talked about and the post-market issues that Emily talked about. In order to close that GRAS loophole, first of all, FDA needs to either reevaluate its authorities or Congress needs to change its authorities. But it would need resources to be able to do something pre-market. Some of the ideas we had was that the user fee would fund some type of either pre-market review, pre-market notification, or even just a pre-market system where the FDA determines whether a proposed ingredient should go through the GRAS avenue, or through food additive petition. So at least that there will be some type of pre-market oversight over all the ingredients in the food supply. And then also the FDA is so severely lacking in any type of comprehensive post-market into play, they would have the resources to engage in a more comprehensive post-market review for all the ingredients. Could you see a time, and I bring this up because of lawsuits against the food industry for some of these additives that are going on now. The state attorney's generals are starting to get involved, and as you said, Emily, the some states are taking legislative action to ban certain things in the food supply. Do you think there could come a time when the industry will come to government pleading to have a user fee like this? To provide some standardization across jurisdictions, let's say? So, there's two things. The first is Congress has to pass the user fee, and historically, actually, industry has done exactly what you said. They have gone to Congress and said, you know what? We want user fees because we want a streamlined system, and we want to be able to know when we're bringing products to market. The problem in the context of food for the issues we're talking about is that right now they can use the GRAS loophole. So, they have very little incentive to ask for user fees if they can bring all their ingredients into the market through the GRAS loophole. There are other areas where a user fee is very relevant, such as the infant formula 90 day pre-market notification, or for different claims like health claims. They might want user fees to speed those things up, but in terms of the ingredients, unless we close the GRAS loophole, they'd have little incentive to actually come to the table. But wouldn't legal liability change that? Let's say that some of these lawsuits are successful and they start having to pay large settlements or have the State Attorneys General, for example, come down on them for these kinds of things. If they're legally liable for harm, they're causing, they need cover. And wouldn't this be worth the user fee to provide them cover for what they put in the food supply? Yes, it's great to have the flexibility to have all these things get through the loophole, but it'd be great as well to have some cover so you wouldn't have so much legal exposure. But you guys are the lawyers, so I'm not sure it makes sense. I think you're right that there are forces combining out in the world that are pushing for change here. And I think it's hard to disentangle how much is it that industry's pushing for user fees versus right now I think more willing to consider federal regulatory changes by either FDA or by Congress. At the state level this is huge. There's now becoming a patchwork across states, and I think that is really difficult for industry. We were tracking this year 93 bills in 35 states that either banned an additive in the general public, banned it in schools. Banned ultra-processed foods, which most of the states, interestingly, have all defined differently. But where they have had a definition, it's been tied to various different combinations of additives. So that's going on. And then I think you're right, that the legal cases moving along will push industry to really want clear and better standards. I think there's a good question right now around like how successful will some of these efforts be? But  what we are seeing is real movement, both in FDA and in Congress, in taking action on this. So interestingly, the Health Affairs piece that we worked on was out this spring. But we had this other piece that came out last fall and felt like we were screaming into the void about this is a problem generally recognized as safe as a really big issue. And suddenly that has really changed. And so, you know, in March FDA said they were directed by RFK (Robert F. Kennedy), by HHS (Health and Human Services) to really look into changing their rule on generally recognized as safe. So, I know that's underway. And then in Congress, multiple bills have been introduced. And I know there are several in the works that would address additives and specifically, generally recognized as safe. There's this one piece going on, which is there's forces coalescing around some better method of regulation. I think the question's really going to also be like, will Congress give adequate resources? Because there is also another scenario that I'm worried about that even if FDA said we're going now require at least notification for every substance that's generally recognized as safe. It's a flood of substances. And they just, without more resources, without more staff devoted to this, there's no way that they're going to be able to wade through that. So, I think that either the resources need to come from user fees, or at least partially from user fees, from more appropriations and I think, In my opinion, they are able to do that on their own. Even given where current administrative law stands. Because I think it's very clear that the gist of the statute is that FDA should be overseeing additives. And I think a court would say this is allowing everything to instead go through this alternative pathway. But I really think FDA's going to need resources to manage this. And perhaps more of a push from Congress to make sure that they really do it to the best of their ability. I was going to say there's also an alternative world where we don't end up spending any of these resources, and they require the industry just to disclose all the ingredients they've added to food and put it on a database. This is like low hanging fruit, not very expensive, doesn't require funding. And then the NGOs, I hope, would go to work and say, look at this. There is no safety data for these ingredients. You know, because right now we just can't rely on FDA to do anything unless they get more funding to do something. So, if FDA doesn't get funding, then maybe this database where houses every ingredient that's in the food supply as a requirement could be a low resource solution. Jennifer, I'll come back to you in a minute because I'd like to ask how worried should we be about all this stuff that's going into food. But Emily, let me ask you first, does FDA have the authority to do what it needs to do? Let's say all of a sudden that your wish was granted and there were user fees would it then be able to do what needs to be done? I think certainly to be able to charge these user fees in almost all areas, it right now doesn't have that authority, and Congress would need to act. There's one small area which is within the Food Safety Modernization Act for certain types of like repeat inspections or recalls or there's a couple other. FDA isn't charging fees right now because they haven't taken this one step that they need to take. But they do have the authority if they just take those steps. But for everything else, Congress has to act. I think the real question to me is because we now know so many of these substances are going through this GRAS pathway, the question is really can they do everything they need to do on their own to close that loophole? And again, my opinion is Congress could make it clear and if Congress were to act, it would be better. Like they could redefine it in a way that was much more clear that we are drawing a real line. And most things actually should be on the additive side of the line rather than the generally recognized as safe side of the line. But even with their current authority, with the current definition, I think FDA could at least require notification because they're still drawing a line between what's required for additives, which is a very lengthy pre-market process with, you know, a notice and comment procedure and all of these things. My take is FDA do what you can do now. Let's get the show on the road. Let's take steps here to close up the loophole. And then Congress takes time. But they definitely can even strengthen this and give a little more, I think, directives to FDA as to how to make sure that this loophole doesn't recur down the line. In talks that I've given recently, I've shown an ingredient list from a food that people will recognize. And I ask people to try to guess what that food is from its ingredient list. This particular food has 35 ingredients. You know, a bunch of them that are very hard to pronounce. Very few people would even have any idea at all what those ingredients do. There's no sense at all about how ingredient number 17 would interact with ingredient 31, etc. And it just seems like it's complete chaos. And I don't want to take you guys outside your comfort zone because your backgrounds are law. But Jennifer, let me ask you this. You have a background in public health as well. There are all kinds of reasons to be worried about this, aren't there? There are the concerns about the safety of these things, but then there's a concern about what these ultra-processed ingredients do to your metabolism, your ability to control your weight, to regulate your hunger and things like that. It sounds this is a really important thing. And it's affecting almost everybody in the country. The percentage of calories that are now coming from ultra-processed foods is over 50% in both children and adults. So it sounds like there's really reason to worry. Would you agree? Yes. And also, the FDA is supposed to be overseeing the cumulative effects of the ingredients and it doesn't actually enforce that regulation. Its own regulation that it's supposed to evaluate the cumulative effects. It doesn't actually enforce this. So by cumulative effects do you mean the chronic effects of long term use? And, having these ingredients across multiple products within one person's consumption. Also, the FDA doesn't look at things like the effect on the gut microbiome, neurotoxicity, even cancer risk, even though they're supposed to, they say that if something is GRAS, they don't need to look at it because cancer risk is relegated only to food additives. So here we're at a real issue, right? Because if everything's entering through the GRAS loophole, then they're not looking at carcinogen effects. So, I think there is a big risk and as Emily had said earlier, that these are sometimes long-term risks versus that acute example of tara flour that we don't know. And we do know from the science, both older and emerging science, that ultra-processed food has definite impact on not only consumption, increased consumption, but also on diet related diseases and other health effects. And by definition what we're talking about here are ultra-processed foods. These ingredients are only found in ultra-processed foods. So, we do know that there is cause for concern. It's interesting that you mentioned the microbiome because we've recorded a cluster of podcasts on the microbiome and another cluster of podcasts on artificial sweeteners. Those two universes overlap a good bit because the impact of the artificial sweeteners on some of them, at least on the microbiome, is really pretty negative. And that's just one thing that goes into these foods. It really is pretty important. By the way, that food with 35 ingredients that I mentioned is a strawberry poptart. Jennifer: I know that answer! Emily: How do you know that? Jennifer: Because I've seen Kelly give a million talks. Yes, she has. Emily: I was wondering, I was like, are we never going to find out? So the suspense is lifted. Let me end with this. This has been highly instructive, and I really appreciate you both weighing in on this. So let me ask each of you, is there reason to be optimistic that things could improve. Emily, I'll start with you. So, I've been giving this talk the past few months that's called basically like Chronic Disease, Food Additives and MAHA, like What Could Go Right and What Could Go Wrong. And so, I'm going give you a very lawyerly answer, which is, I feel optimistic because there's attention on the issue. I think states are taking action and there's more attention to this across the political spectrum, which both means things are happening and means that the narrative changing, like people are getting more aware and calling for change in a way that we weren't seeing. On the flip side, I think there's a lot that could go wrong. You know, I think some of the state bills are great and some of them are maybe not so great. And then I think this administration, you have an HHS and FDA saying, they're going to take action on this in the midst of an administration that's otherwise very deregulatory. In particular, they're not supposed to put out new regulations if they can get rid of 10 existing ones. There are some things you can do through guidance and signaling, but I don't think you can really fix these issues without like real durable legislative change. So, I'm sorry to be one of the lawyers here. I think the signals are going in the right direction, but jury is out a little bit on how well we'll actually do. And I hope we can do well given the momentum. What do you think, Jennifer? I agree that the national attention is very promising to these issues. The states are passing laws that are shocking to me. That Texas passing a warning label law, I would never have thought in the history of the world, that Texas would be the one to pass a warning label law. They're doing great things and I actually have hope that something can come of this. But I am concerned at the federal level of the focus on deregulation may make it impossible. User fees is an example of where they won't have to regulate, but they could provide funding to the FDA to actually act in areas that it has the authority to act. That is one solution that could actually work under this administration if they were amenable to it. But I also think in some ways the states could save us. I worry, you know, Emily brought up the patchwork, which is the key term the industry uses to try to get preemption. I do worry about federal preemption of state actions. But the states right now are the ones saving us. California is the first to save the whole nation. The food industry isn't going to create new food supply for California and then the rest of the country. And then it's the same with other states. So, the states might be the ones that actually can make some real meaningful changes and get some of the most unsafe ingredients out of the food supply, which some of the states have now successfully done. Bios Emily Broad Leib is a Clinical Professor of Law, Director of Harvard Law School Center for Health Law and Policy Innovation, and Founding Director of the Harvard Law School Food Law and Policy Clinic, the nation's first law school clinic devoted to providing legal and policy solutions to the health, economic, and environmental challenges facing our food system. Working directly with clients and communities, Broad Leib champions community-led food system change, reduction in food waste, food access and food is medicine interventions, and equity and sustainability in food production. Her scholarly work has been published in the California Law Review, Wisconsin Law Review, Harvard Law & Policy Review, Food & Drug Law Journal, and Journal of Food Law & Policy, among others. Professor Jennifer Pomeranz is a public health lawyer who researches policy and legal options to address the food environment, obesity, products that cause public harm, and social injustice that lead to health disparities. Prior to joining the NYU faculty, Professor Pomeranz was an Assistant Professor at the School of Public Health at Temple University and in the Center for Obesity Research and Education at Temple. She was previously the Director of Legal Initiatives at the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at Yale University. She has also authored numerous peer-reviewed and law review journal articles and a book, Food Law for Public Health, published by Oxford University Press in 2016. Professor Pomeranz leads the Public Health Policy Research Lab and regularly teaches Public Health Law and Food Policy for Public Health.

An expository sermon from Numbers 24:1-14 on the infamous Balaam.

DV charges didn't stop your ex — they taught him to fight dirty through lawsuits instead of fists. How can you repel his legal abuse? It's Feedback Friday!And in case you didn't already know it, Jordan Harbinger (@JordanHarbinger) and Gabriel Mizrahi (@GabeMizrahi) banter and take your comments and questions for Feedback Friday right here every week! If you want us to answer your question, register your feedback, or tell your story on one of our upcoming weekly Feedback Friday episodes, drop us a line at friday@jordanharbinger.com. Now let's dive in!Full show notes and resources can be found here: jordanharbinger.com/1199On This Week's Feedback Friday:Some listener feedback from episodes 1184 and 1187 launches this latest voyage of the dooze cruise. All aboard!You escaped an abusive relationship while pregnant, thinking the nightmare was over. Instead, your ex launched a relentless campaign of lawsuits, false reports, and stalking through the court system. How do you protect yourself and your child when the very system meant to help becomes his weapon? [Thanks once again to attorney Corbin Payne for helping us answer this!]Your dad used his workers' comp settlement to buy rental properties in a distant state, managed by a cousin you've never met who has power of attorney. Now you're drowning in landlord responsibilities, suspicious money requests, and legal brick walls. Can you untangle this mess before it all falls apart? [Big thanks to estate attorney Brent Dille for guiding us through this one!]You're the only one on your team with the required PMP certification for a new management role. But when you checked your boss's calendar, you discovered your coworker already had first and second round interviews scheduled — before your first one. Was this rigged from the start?Recommendation of the Week: A Swim in a Pond in the Rain: In Which Four Russians Give a Master Class on Writing, Reading, and Life by George SaundersAs a stay-at-home mom, you're desperate for adult friendship but keep choosing complicated people or watching relationships mysteriously fizzle out. Your newest friend constantly vents about her marriage but won't take advice. Are you the common denominator in these failed connections?Have any questions, comments, or stories you'd like to share with us? Drop us a line at friday@jordanharbinger.com!Connect with Jordan on Twitter at @JordanHarbinger and Instagram at @jordanharbinger.Connect with Gabriel on Twitter at @GabeMizrahi and Instagram @gabrielmizrahi.And if you're still game to support us, please leave a review here — even one sentence helps! Sign up for Six-Minute Networking — our free networking and relationship development mini course — at jordanharbinger.com/course!Subscribe to our once-a-week Wee Bit Wiser newsletter today and start filling your Wednesdays with wisdom!Do you even Reddit, bro? Join us at r/JordanHarbinger!This Episode Is Brought To You By Our Fine Sponsors: OpenPhone: 20% off 1st 6 months: openphone.com/jordanDeleteMe: 20% off: joindeleteme.com/jordan, code JORDANProgressive Insurance: Free online quote: progressive.comLand Rover Defender: landroverusa.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Send us a textHannah and Laura finish Proven Guilty in today's episode and, shockingly, Harry Dresden was not the guilty party. They also chat about a great horror novel, some manga that Laura read, a fascinating nonfiction book, and some terrifying/enlightening documentaries.*This episode contains SPOILERS for Proven Guilty by Jim Butcher. Spoiler section begins at: 44 min 31 secs. **CW for the episode: discussions of sexual assault, violence, blood, gore, murder, death, religion, Christianity, racism, sex, fat phobia, poverty, reality TV, child stars, eating disorders, manipulation*Media Mentions:Proven Guilty by Jim Butcher The Only Good Indians by Stephen Graham JonesDandadan, Vol. 1 by Yukinobu Tatsu One Punch Man, Vol. 1 by ONE Taskmaster---YouTube There's Always This Year: On Basketball and Ascension by Hanif Abdurraqib Assistant to the Villain by Hannah Nicole Maehrer A Conjuring of Magic by V.E. Schwab Fit for TV: The Reality Behind The Biggest Loser---Netflix Bad Influence: The Dark Side of Kidfluencing---Netflix Support the showBe sure to follow OWWR Pod!www.owwrpod.com Twitter (updates only): @OwwrPodBlueSky: @OwwrPodTikTok: @OwwrPodInstagram: @owwrpodThreads: @OwwrPodHive: @owwrpodSend us an email at: owwrpod@gmail.comCheck out OWWR Patreon: patreon.com/owwrpodOr join OWWR Discord! We'd love to chat with you!You can follow Hannah at:Instagram: @brews.and.booksThreads: @brews.and.booksTikTok: @brews.and.booksYou can follow Laura at:Instagram: @goodbooksgreatgoatsBlueSky: @myyypod

Snag a FREE copy of my book, and get connected to the Military Millionaire community on all of your favorite platforms: https://www.frommilitarytomillionaire.com/free-book

Washington Times Commentary Editor Kelly Sadler's in-depth conversation with White House Trade Adviser Peter Navarro.

Courtney Wild, one of Jeffrey Epstein's underage victims, has waged a prolonged legal battle asserting that federal prosecutors violated her statutory rights under the Crime Victims' Rights Act by secretly crafting a 2007 non-prosecution agreement (NPA) shielding Epstein and his co-conspirators without notifying or consulting her—her “right to confer” and be treated fairly were emphatically ignored. After the district court acknowledged the CVRA violation but declined to provide relief on jurisdictional grounds following Epstein's death, Wild pressed her case through the Eleventh Circuit. In a contentious en banc ruling, the court recognized the profound injustice yet held that the CVRA does not allow victims to enforce their rights via standalone legal action absent a formal criminal proceeding. Feeling thwarted by this interpretation, Wild and her attorneys petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to resolve this critical question of whether the CVRA's protections extend to pre‑charge, behind‑the‑scenes deals that effectively nullify accountability.Wild's Supreme Court petition presents what she and her legal team call a “now-or-never opportunity” for the Court to buttress victim protections and clarify that the government cannot clandestinely dispense with criminal accountability while ignoring victims entirely—especially when the accused wield immense wealth and influence. Without such reckoning, the Justice Department may continue negotiating secret deals that nullify the statutory rights Congress fought to grant crime victims. Despite the urgency and gravity of the case, the Supreme Court ultimately declined to hear the appeal—effectively allowing the Eleventh Circuit's restrictive interpretation to stand and signaling that victims in similar predicaments may remain legally powerless when prosecutors circumvent the formal charging process.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein victim seeks US Supreme Court review of prosecutors' secret deal - ABC News

Courtney Wild, one of Jeffrey Epstein's underage victims, has waged a prolonged legal battle asserting that federal prosecutors violated her statutory rights under the Crime Victims' Rights Act by secretly crafting a 2007 non-prosecution agreement (NPA) shielding Epstein and his co-conspirators without notifying or consulting her—her “right to confer” and be treated fairly were emphatically ignored. After the district court acknowledged the CVRA violation but declined to provide relief on jurisdictional grounds following Epstein's death, Wild pressed her case through the Eleventh Circuit. In a contentious en banc ruling, the court recognized the profound injustice yet held that the CVRA does not allow victims to enforce their rights via standalone legal action absent a formal criminal proceeding. Feeling thwarted by this interpretation, Wild and her attorneys petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to resolve this critical question of whether the CVRA's protections extend to pre‑charge, behind‑the‑scenes deals that effectively nullify accountability.Wild's Supreme Court petition presents what she and her legal team call a “now-or-never opportunity” for the Court to buttress victim protections and clarify that the government cannot clandestinely dispense with criminal accountability while ignoring victims entirely—especially when the accused wield immense wealth and influence. Without such reckoning, the Justice Department may continue negotiating secret deals that nullify the statutory rights Congress fought to grant crime victims. Despite the urgency and gravity of the case, the Supreme Court ultimately declined to hear the appeal—effectively allowing the Eleventh Circuit's restrictive interpretation to stand and signaling that victims in similar predicaments may remain legally powerless when prosecutors circumvent the formal charging process.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein victim seeks US Supreme Court review of prosecutors' secret deal - ABC NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Hour 1 - Jacob, the brown dirt cowboy. Still green & growing. Tommy the city slick captain roll into the Thursday big show as sweet as chocolate biscuits. In this segment they discuss how and why the Chiefs will be good forever and KU 300 million dollar gift.

To celebrate NFL SuperCoach being launched one week ago the Aussie Gridiron Network brings you NFL SuperCoach Halfa!About half an hour of straight NFL SuperCoach talk from Australia's leading NFL Fantasy pair, TALOR and MATTY.Today the fellas look at the most owned Quarterbacks and give strong guidance toward who is a wise choice and who is a poor choice. The lads throw up a POD for QB and also talk about the 'loophole' including a cautionary tale from TALOR.Find excellent NFL analysis and NFL Fantasy support with podcasts and video content 5 days a week: https://linktr.ee/AussieGridironNetworkJoin the free tipping constest or a free fantasy league and be in the running to win free stuff!

Florida's Attorney General proposes a law to block convicted sex offenders from surrogacy, adoption, and foster care, contrasting with California's lack of regulation. PBD covers shocking cases, loopholes, and the urgent call for nationwide laws to protect children from predators.

Looking for a way to reduce your taxes? Have a second property like a vacation home? The short term rental loophole can help you deploy your vacation home to reduce your taxes? How does it work? What are the requirements? My guest today runs an accounting firm that helps their medical clients get efficient on taxes, including using the short term rental loophole when it applies. She'll explain all of this to us.Alexis E. Gallati is the founder and Lead Tax Strategist at Cerebral Tax Advisors and Cerebral Wealth Academy, and she's the author of the book Advanced Tax Planning for Medical Professionals. She has over 20 years of experience in high-level strategic tax planning and multi-state tax preparation, and she has trained at the highest level, holding two master's degrees. Alexis grew up in a family of physicians and is married to a private practice physician. That's why she understands how hard medical professionals work to get where they are and why she provides simple and accessible tax solutions tailored to busy physicians.In this episode Carl White and Alexis Gallati discuss:What the passive income rules areThe benefits of using this loopholeThe requirements to qualifyWant to be a guest on PracticeCare?Have an experience with a business issue you think others will benefit from? Come on PracticeCare and tell the world! Here's the link where you can get the process started.Connect with Alexis GallatiResources from Cerebral Tax Advisors: https://www.cerebraltaxadvisors.com/practicecare/Cerebral Tax Advisors Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/cerebraltaxCerebral Wealth Academy Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/cerebralwealthacademy YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@cerebralwealthacademyPersonal LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/alexis-gallati/Connect with Carl WhiteWebsite: http://www.marketvisorygroup.comEmail:  whitec@marketvisorygroup.comFacebook:  https://www.facebook.com/marketvisorygroupYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCD9BLCu_i2ezBj1ktUHVmigLinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/healthcaremktg

Aug. 12, 2025 - For more than a decade, New York lawmakers have tried to secure a compensation boost for home care workers in the New York City area, but those efforts haven't always resulted in more money in pockets, according to reporting by Sam Mellins, a senior reporter for New York Focus.

Welcome To The Real Oshow,0:00 Intro1:00 WWE UnReal Netflix Show 9:00 Vince McMahon Buying NFL Team13:30 The Billionaire Loophole: Buying an NFL Team22:00 Stan Kroenke Secretly Moved The St Louis Rams24:00 Closing Thoughts On this week's episode of The Real OShow, brothers Joshua and Zachary dive into the brand-new Unreal behind-the-scenes WWE documentary, pulling back the curtain on how matches and storylines are planned. It's a well-deserved hat-tip to Vince McMahon, the mastermind behind some of the greatest storytelling in sports entertainment history. From there, we switch gears to break down a billionaire's favorite tax loophole. How team owners can depreciate their franchises for 15 years, scoring massive tax breaks before flipping the team (and letting the next owner do it all over again). We also share wild stories about Stan Kroenke's empire of pro teams and Donald Trump's four failed attempts to buy into the NFL. All blocked by the league and its owners. It's business, sports, and backstage drama all in one episode.All love,Check out our YouTube page - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCoqz3s_B_VYHuQtuVIDxpiQTikTok - https://www.tiktok.com/@therealoshow?is_from_webapp=1&sender_device=pcTweet @zacharyowings2 with your thoughts about the podcast or suggestions for future shows.Music by Leno Tk - Greatness (Streaming on all platforms)

If you feel like you haven't heard enough about the ins and outs of herb law, you're in luck, because we had to bring back one of the most pivotal younger figures in the world of California ca**abis legal representation to chop it up about some of his biggest horror stories and dive deeper into his litigation lore.Blackleaf is joined in the FSOTD studio once again by Chris Hickok, aka “Alien At Law,” to further uncork the mysteries and hurdles of operating legally today, some of the legal myths still believed by old-school cultivators, the laundry list of culture-shaping brands that Chris represents, the biggest crash-outs he's seen between business partners, the craziest ways he's seen a license get pulled, the importance of having the break-up talk before signing contracts, and so much more.For the uninitiated, Chris Hickok is an attorney based in California who co-founded HK Law and serves as Chief of Legal Compliance at Primary Growth Partners (PGP), where he specializes in boutique regulatory and corporate counsel for

A viral surrogacy video featuring a gay couple sparks outrage after one partner is revealed to be a registered sex offender. The PBD Podcast reacts with a heated debate on child safety, adoption laws, and the moral line between legality and trust in protecting our most vulnerable.

Republicans dominate Fancy Farm with three candidates for U.S. Senate taking the stage, Kentucky's Attorney General issues an opinion about a new controversial law, and a state lawmaker looks to beef up ABC to regulate non-alcoholic substances.

Want to work with us? Reach out! inquiries at milestomemories dot com Episode Description This week Citi finally brought their new premium credit card to market. While many of the leaks were true, does this card measure up to its competition and will it drive further loyalty. Plus Citi added transfers from ThankYou to American Airlines, but is it as good as it sounds and will it drive sign-ups for this card? Most importantly should you get it?   Joe Cheung also joins us to discuss his recent near miss on a welcome offer and how he still managed to save it. Are grace periods a thing? We also discuss international tipping culture as Americans and how we may be expected to tip when traveling even if locals aren't. Episode Guide 0:00 Welcome to MTM Travel 1:27 Royal Caribbean battling back - Loophole closed for viral hack 9:26 Why the future of cruise loyalty says a lot about where we are heading 15:35 Hyatt's Brand Explorer grows to 7 free nights and 35 brands! 21:55 How hotel design has evolved & why it isn't always good 31:05 United's cardholder award sale - Tahiti anyone? 33:45 Ninja tricks - Stacking deals/perks for a VIP tripCiti Strata Elite - https://www.citi.com/credit-cards/citi-strata-elite-credit-card Royal Caribbean drinks - https://www.cruisehive.com/royal-caribbean-tightens-policy-on-drink-package/182785 United sale - https://travel-on-points.com/united-credit-cardmembers-award-sale/   Enjoying the podcast? Please consider leaving us a positive review on your favorite podcast platform! You can also connect with us anytime at podcast@milestomemories.com.  You can subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Google Play, Spotify, TuneIn, Pocket Casts, or via RSS. Don't see your favorite podcast platform? Please let us know!

RED BUBBLE STORE: https://rdbl.co/2BXMEkq DISCORD: https://discord.com/invite/uWZkb2a   6:30 - Read It On Reddit   16:47 - Ask Reddit   30:44 - Today I Advice   40:02 - Shower Thoughts   47:00 - Podnapping - Guess the US State Law    AMA - readitpodcast@gmail.com - Ask Us Anything!

RED BUBBLE STORE: https://rdbl.co/2BXMEkq DISCORD: https://discord.com/invite/uWZkb2a   6:30 - Read It On Reddit   16:47 - Ask Reddit   30:44 - Today I Advice   40:02 - Shower Thoughts   47:00 - Podnapping - Guess the US State Law    AMA - readitpodcast@gmail.com - Ask Us Anything!

A legal loophole allowed Brandon Mitchell to bring home a baby boy via surrogacy, despite the fact that he was convicted of child sex abuse in 2016. Mitchell drew public outrage after posting a disturbing video of the baby on social media, with many calling for Pennsylvania laws to be changed – the state has strict oversight on adoption but different rules for surrogacy. Reduxx reports: “While Pennsylvania's adoption law does prohibits s*x offenders from adopting or fostering children, gestational surrogacy circumvents any such laws through pre-birth parentage orders.” York County DA Tim Barker says the loophole is a critical issue and urged lawmakers to protect kids with new legislation. Mitchell's attorney, Peter Kratsa, defended his client by saying Mitchell completed his sentence, counseling, and that there is no evidence he has reoffended. Sage Steele hosts The Sage Steele Show on Club Random Studios. She was a lead host at ESPN from 2007-2023, anchoring SportsCenter and NBA Countdown. Steele has covered major events like the Super Bowl and hosted ABC's The View. She serves on boards for The Boys & Girls Club and The V Foundation. More at https://sagesteele.com John Leake is a co-author with Dr. Peter McCullough of “Vaccines: Mythology, Ideology, and Reality“. He writes investigative reports for Focal Points on Substack and is secretary of the McCullough Foundation. More at https://focalpoints.com 「 SUPPORT OUR SPONSORS 」 Find out more about the brands that make this show possible and get special discounts on Dr. Drew's favorite products at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://drdrew.com/sponsors⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠  ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ • ACTIVE SKIN REPAIR - Repair skin faster with more of the molecule your body creates naturally! Hypochlorous (HOCl) is produced by white blood cells to support healing – and no sting. Get 20% off at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://drdrew.com/skinrepair⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ • FATTY15 – The future of essential fatty acids is here! Strengthen your cells against age-related breakdown with Fatty15. Get 15% off a 90-day Starter Kit Subscription at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://drdrew.com/fatty15⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ • PALEOVALLEY - "Paleovalley has a wide variety of extraordinary products that are both healthful and delicious,” says Dr. Drew. "I am a huge fan of this brand and know you'll love it too!” Get 15% off your first order at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://drdrew.com/paleovalley⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ • VSHREDMD – Formulated by Dr. Drew: The Science of Cellular Health + World-Class Training Programs, Premium Content, and 1-1 Training with Certified V Shred Coaches! More at https://drdrew.com/vshredmd • THE WELLNESS COMPANY - Counteract harmful spike proteins with TWC's Signature Series Spike Support Formula containing nattokinase and selenium. Learn more about TWC's supplements at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://twc.health/drew⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ 「 MEDICAL NOTE 」 Portions of this program may examine countervailing views on important medical issues. Always consult your physician before making any decisions about your health. 「 ABOUT THE SHOW 」 Ask Dr. Drew is produced by Kaleb Nation (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://kalebnation.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) and Susan Pinsky (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://twitter.com/firstladyoflov⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠e⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠). This show is for entertainment and/or informational purposes only, and is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What if there was a legal way for cannabis companies to eliminate federal income tax and reward employees with ownership at the same time? Darren Gleeman, Managing Partner of MBO Ventures, joins the show to break down the rise of ESOPs (Employee Stock Ownership Plans) in the cannabis industry. In this episode, we explore: Why ESOPs are a "game-changer" for cannabis companies  How they help companies legally avoid the burden of 280E  What MSOs (multi-state operators) and smaller cannabis businesses need to know  How selling your company to your employees can boost valuation, reduce taxes, and create long-term loyalty  The surprising political role cannabis could play in the 2024 election  Whether you're an operator, investor, or just curious about business strategy in cannabis, this is a conversation you won't want to miss.

In this episode, we're investigating the persistent side of security loopholes under the theme of AI and Cybersecurity: The Rise of False Bug Reports. This phenomenon is overwhelming incident response teams, revealing new layers of complexity in cybersecurity defense. We look at what's driving the rise of false bug reports—and how to stay ahead of the curve.Try AI Box: ⁠⁠https://aibox.aiAI Chat YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@JaedenSchaferJoin my AI Hustle Community: https://www.skool.com/aihustle/about

This episode kicks off with a powerful story of malicious compliance from an IT worker denied on-call pay, who made sure the company paid the price literally. We also hear from a retail worker who served a petty refund with a smile, and a group of manufacturing employees who turned a no-loitering rule into a step-counting protest. Other tales include a consulting engineer who billed hard after being denied a simple limo ride and an employee who weaponized a rigid work-from-home policy. It's a full lineup of boss battles, policy blowback, and satisfying consequences.Submit your own stories to KarmaStoriesPod@gmail.com.Karma Stories is available on all major Podcasting Platforms and on YouTube under the @KarmaStoriesPodcast handle. We cover stories from popular Reddit Subreddits like Entitled Parents, Tales From Tech Support, Pro Revenge and Malicious Compliance. You can find new uploads here every single day of the week!Rob's 3D Printing Site: https://Dangly3D.comGet your Custom Hand Turned Pen by Rob at https://CanadianRob.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/karma-stories--5098578/support.

If the client complains directly to your staff member about their poor service, should you go to bat for your team member?  Should you publicly apologise and deal with the errant staff member privately?  Should you make a public show of solidarity with the staff member and criticise the manner in which the complaint was made?  Should you aggressively argue the point with the client?  Should you just ignore it and get back to other pressing matters?  The answers to these real life situations will differ, depending on the culture of your society and your legal system.  America is a very litigious society and there seems to be a built in reflex to not admit guilt, accountability or responsibility.  The upshot of this positioning is to ignore what was said to your staff member and hope it goes away naturally, after the client has gotten their complaint off their chest.  Privately, the boss can then commiserate about the “nasty” client and bond with the staff member. Loopholes are always in high demand in these tense situations.  The favourite one is to complain about how the client communicated the complaint.  If the client is really losing it and abusing the staff member, that is great for the boss.  Now their high horse can be mounted and a full attack on the unreasonableness of the client can be commenced.  It is a bit trickier when there is no name calling and no florid abuse of the staff members stupidity.  A clear outline of the staff member's failings by the client is annoying, because it is hard to beat it back. An attack on the language can be made anyway and various deductions made about the “accusatory” nature of the remarks and appeals made for fair play.  If the labour market is tight, the boss may be prepared to lose a client in order to retain a key staff member. How about Japan?  Arguing the point with the client is unthinkable.  The same applies to taking responsibility and accountability.  Japanese clients expect this and if it is not forthcoming, they will keep pushing until they get it.  No sweeping under the tatami is acceptable here in Japan.  The concept that the client has to be moderate in their communication of their complaint is a non-starter.  The client is allowed to be as obstreperous as they like and the guilty party has to accept it. So as the boss, how do you deal with your staff member?  Do you hang them out to dry and bear the full force gale of invective from the client, as a good lesson in client service requirements?  Do you stand up for them and defend them against the client's claims, while privately reading them the riot act?  Do you decide the staff member is someone you would rather retain than the client?  I have recently been in all three of these scenarios.  I have been the aggrieved client, observing the American style of “shift the blame back to the complaining client” model.  I stood by my team member's claim against the service provider and went hard to support the argument that the service provision wasn't good enough.  When the shape shifting kicked off, I went even harder to counter that nefarious attempt to slip out of the noose.  I have fired the client.  A very unpleasant client began belittling one of my salespeople, when speaking about her.  I did not accept that libellous affront and staunchly defended the staff member, without hesitation.  I then told my salesperson to fire that client and don't deal with them ever again and to keep a note in our CRM, for when they get fired and pop up in another company.  Life is short and they are not the type of person we want to spend any time with, so we should get rid of them forever.  And we did. I have screwed up.  I have had to go hat in hand and apologise to the client for my shortcomings.  I have had to sit there and be berated by the client, at length and in great detail, for the error.  I had to be not only accountable, but also sincerely remorseful and apologetic.  I had to determine to give the money back, without ever being asked to do so. In principle, we should accept responsibility for our service or product provision and when it is inadequate we should accept the blame and do everything we can to fix it. No mealy mouth platitudes or counter offensives about “inappropriate language”.  We should be the one to bear the client's wrath and deal with our staff members in private.  Is the client always right – no.  We should stand ready to fire the client too, if that is what the situation calls for.  None of this is easy, but we have to determine what we mean, when we say we are in the business of serving clients.  We have to set the example for everyone to follow and we have to be consistent.                

One week from today (edit: three days from today) marks the exclusive release of Waiting For Mics Episode 200! If you're not subscribed to the Patreon don't forget to watch the premiere on YouTube at 5PM MST! This episode features the goons riffin' on the woes of the current state of Tucson comedy and if the next comedy Mecca is in the big 520 or not, what constitutes an "artisan" salad, and whether or not it includes a little of Mr. Brownstone's secret sauce, and how Shabos can get around doin' Shabbat stuff. As always, thank you for watching!

More Australians are turning towards using in-vitro fertilisations to have babies, every year. Often it's done through regulated IVF clinic, but sometimes parents - desperate for a child - search for a sperm donor on social media. But as this extraordinary case shows, there can be many more risks associated with - as one lawyer put it - the ‘wild west’ - of online sperm donation. Today, senior reporter Henrietta Cook on the case of a Melbourne man who fathered 27 children, and the fall-out after the women he donated to found each other.Subscribe to The Age & SMH: https://subscribe.smh.com.au/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

More Australians are turning towards using in-vitro fertilisations to have babies, every year. Often it's done through regulated IVF clinic, but sometimes parents - desperate for a child - search for a sperm donor on social media. But as this extraordinary case shows, there can be many more risks associated with - as one lawyer put it - the ‘wild west’ - of online sperm donation. Today, senior reporter Henrietta Cook on the case of a Melbourne man who fathered 27 children, and the fall-out after the women he donated to found each other.Subscribe to The Age & SMH: https://subscribe.smh.com.au/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Well, brethren, today we press into Mark 10:1–12 and tackle a subject nobody loves—divorce. When the Pharisees come testing Jesus, He cuts through their "well-baited" questions and exposes the root sin: hardness of heart. Marriage, He reminds us, is a lifelong covenant—what God has joined, let no one separate. Yet in our fallen world He grants a concession to protect the innocent. We'll wrestle with Deuteronomy's certificate, Malachi's "I hate divorce," and the gospel-powered call to fight for every covenant, extend grace, and lean on Christ's strength.

Well, brethren, today we press into Mark 10:1–12 and tackle a subject nobody loves—divorce. When the Pharisees come testing Jesus, He cuts through their "well-baited" questions and exposes the root sin: hardness of heart. Marriage, He reminds us, is a lifelong covenant—what God has joined, let no one separate. Yet in our fallen world He grants a concession to protect the innocent. We'll wrestle with Deuteronomy's certificate, Malachi's "I hate divorce," and the gospel-powered call to fight for every covenant, extend grace, and lean on Christ's strength.

The new Trump-era bill just brought back 100% bonus depreciation and STR owners are about to get a massive tax break.In this episode, we break down exactly how the short-term rental tax loophole works, how you can use it to eliminate 5–6 figures of taxable income, and what rules you must follow to stay IRS-compliant.Whether you own 1 property or manage dozens, this is one of the most powerful tools in your financial playbook.You'll Learn: • Why this loophole can save you $40K+ per property • The 2 conditions to qualify for non-passive treatment • How cost segregation studies supercharge your deductions • Why co-hosts & PMs can charge consulting fees using this • What to avoid if you don't want the IRS to audit youWant to directly talk about taxes and how you can make use of the tax loophole for STRs? Just click the link below:https://go.strsecrets.com/podcast?utm_source=Podcast&utm_medium=Captivate&utm_campaign=T021&utm_content=Taxes00:05:08 – Powerful Tax Strategy to Slash Your Income00:06:01 – How One Property Saved Me $92,000 in Taxes00:09:02 – Must-Know Criteria to Unlock STR Tax Benefits00:09:11 – Track This or Risk Losing Your Tax Deductions00:10:16 – Use It Wrong, Lose It All00:12:03 – Avoid This Common Mistake with Friends and Family00:13:04 – How to Legally Save $40,000 with Depreciation00:16:06 – Transform OK Deals Into Great Ones00:17:17 – A Brilliant Offer Property Managers Should UseGet FREE Access to our Community and Weekly Trainings:https://group.strsecrets.com

The new Trump-era bill just brought back 100% bonus depreciation and STR owners are about to get a massive tax break.In this episode, we break down exactly how the short-term rental tax loophole works, how you can use it to eliminate 5–6 figures of taxable income, and what rules you must follow to stay IRS-compliant.Whether you own 1 property or manage dozens, this is one of the most powerful tools in your financial playbook.You'll Learn: • Why this loophole can save you $40K+ per property • The 2 conditions to qualify for non-passive treatment • How cost segregation studies supercharge your deductions • Why co-hosts & PMs can charge consulting fees using this • What to avoid if you don't want the IRS to audit youWant to directly talk about taxes and how you can make use of the tax loophole for STRs? Just click the link below:https://go.strsecrets.com/podcast?utm_source=Podcast&utm_medium=Captivate&utm_campaign=T021&utm_content=Taxes00:05:08 – Powerful Tax Strategy to Slash Your Income00:06:01 – How One Property Saved Me $92,000 in Taxes00:09:02 – Must-Know Criteria to Unlock STR Tax Benefits00:09:11 – Track This or Risk Losing Your Tax Deductions00:10:16 – Use It Wrong, Lose It All00:12:03 – Avoid This Common Mistake with Friends and Family00:13:04 – How to Legally Save $40,000 with Depreciation00:16:06 – Transform OK Deals Into Great Ones00:17:17 – A Brilliant Offer Property Managers Should UseGet FREE Access to our Community and Weekly Trainings:https://group.strsecrets.com

The news of Texas covered today includes:Our Lone Star story of the day: Much reform has been accomplished on Texas' local government property tax system but many exceptions that were needed to get bills passed need ending – especially the “hit 'em while they're down” disaster loophole abused by local politicians. A new law takes effect next year that does tighten down the disaster loophole but only time will tell if it is enough.Our Lone Star story of the day is sponsored by Allied Compliance Services providing the best service in DOT, business and personal drug and alcohol testing since 1995.In the border/immigration news stack there is a story that is an example of anti-Trump hyperbolethat only works with voters because of decades of failed public education – it's the proportionality problem as I've long called it.Campaign finance numbers rolling in: Greg Abbott logs $20M campaign haul after school voucher win Big money flows into Texas AG, comptroller GOP primaries Listen on the radio, or station stream, at 5pm Central. Click for our radio and streaming affiliates.www.PrattonTexas.com

Share your own iconic local footy moment for a chance to win a $1,000 donation to your local club thanks to Toyota - ⁠NOMINATE HERE ⁠BRAIN ROT TOUR⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ALL TICKETS!!! SCHEMES: FREE lotto money, & free Italian Money? Ripper Joke Rewind - Is Rachael's gag funny? Harry teases the new Hollywood blockbuster - PLANES Google Reviews - A spooky Ghost Restaurant Harry is mean to Josh ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠HATS HAVE BEEN RESTOCKED - NEW BEERS HAT⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

Send us a textCannabis Legalization News: Weekly Update and Deep Dive into New Hemp DefinitionsOn this episode of Cannabis Legalization News, filmed on Sunday, July 13th, 2025, the hosts delve into the latest updates and stories in cannabis legalization over the past week. They offer crucial insights into new legislative developments, including the Senate's proposed changes to the definition of hemp and their potential impact on the industry. The episode features discussions on the evolution and technical difficulties of using new technology, debates on legal definitions concerning hemp seeds, detailed analysis of Senate and House versions of the appropriations bill affecting hemp, and how the potential rescheduling of cannabis could reshape the industry. Key highlights include the battle over THCA and synthetic cannabinoids, as well as the controversial immigration and labor issues surrounding recent raids on cannabis farms. Interaction with viewers, including super chats and their engagement about personal experiences with cannabis legalization, rounds out this insightful session. Make sure to hit the subscribe button and join the ongoing conversation!00:00 Introduction to Cannabis Legalization News00:44 Senate's New Definition of Hemp01:08 Technical Difficulties and Trending Stories01:28 Farm Bill and Legal Definitions02:04 Hemp Definitions and Legal Implications03:31 Temporal Limitations and Legal Challenges11:12 Public Perception and Legalization Efforts13:57 Base Rates and Public Opinion23:04 Natural vs. Synthetic Cannabinoids30:27 Name That Strain and Cannabis Events33:59 Hemp and Industrial Hemp: Definitions and Regulations35:12 Technical Difficulties and Hemp Market Realities36:45 Cannabinoid Products and Legal Implications40:11 Immigration Raids and Cannabis Industry Impact44:26 Federal Legalization and Market Dynamics54:37 Rescheduling Cannabis and Political Implications01:06:07 Conclusion and Final ThoughtsSupport the showGet our newsletter: https://bit.ly/3VEn9vu

Bizee: Start your business with confidence at Bizee.com/ich Range Rover Sport: Start designing your Range Rover Sport today at https://www.rangerover.com/us/sport Shopify: Sign up for a $1 per month trial period at https://shopify.com/ich Follow Karlton Dennis : On Youtube - https://www.youtube.com/@karltondennis On Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/karltondennis/ Website - https://karltondennis.com/ On TikTok - https://www.tiktok.com/@karltondennis Apply for The Index Membership: https://entertheindex.com/ Add us on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/jlsselby https://www.instagram.com/gpstephan Official Clips Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeBQ24VfikOriqSdKtomh0w For sponsorships or business inquiries reach out to: tmatsradio@gmail.com For Podcast Inquiries, please DM @icedcoffeehour on Instagram! Timestamps: 00:00:00 - Intro 00:01:10 - Is the tax system rigged? 00:05:23 - Can the average person pay $0? 00:05:53 - Abolish taxes? 00:09:09 - Big Beautiful Bill tax impact 00:10:46 - No tax on tips 00:17:18 - Sponsor - Bizee 00:18:29 - $40K deduction cap 00:21:46 - 8150 tax law 00:23:57 - Trump account explained 00:26:00 - $10K auto write-off 00:28:33 - Bonus depreciation 00:29:49 - Self-rental strategy 00:37:17 - Sponsor - Range Rover 00:38:22 - Tax winners and losers 00:43:59 - What an IRS audit is like 00:45:38 - IRS audit red flags 01:01:13 - Why IRS won't calculate your income 01:02:51 - Declined clients & horror stories 01:03:47 - Jail for unpaid taxes? 01:04:18 - Do some never file? 01:05:25 - Sponsor - Shopify 01:06:57 - Shadiest tax moves 01:08:12 - Biggest IRS fines 01:10:14 - Biggest tax bills erased 01:12:29 - Tax loopholes 01:17:09 - Tactics to reduce taxes 01:19:08 - When to stop using TurboTax 01:19:51 - Luxury goods write-offs? 01:20:28 - His income & tax bill 01:27:55 - What luxury items he buys 01:28:38 - Tracking expenses 01:31:55 - 3 tax tips for $60K–$200K earners 01:39:02 - If you rewrote the tax code 01:40:35 - Move to Puerto Rico? *Some of the links and other products that appear on this video are from companies which Graham Stephan will earn an affiliate commission or referral bonus. Graham Stephan is part of an affiliate network and receives compensation for sending traffic to partner sites. The content in this video is accurate as of the posting date. Some of the offers mentioned may no longer be available. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

On this episode of “Sara Gonzales Unfiltered,” a federal court challenged SCOTUS' ruling on birthright citizenship due to a possible loophole left behind by Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Then, the FBI and DOJ might not be done with the Epstein case after all. Next, Oklahoma Superintendent of Public Instruction Ryan Walters joins PragerU to create an assessment that will evaluate teachers for their “America First” values. Finally, American social media influencer Douglass Mackey just had his election interference conviction overturned.   Today's Guests: Sara is joined by Oklahoma State Superintendent Ryan Walters via Zoom, and later by American social media influencer Douglass Mackey via Zoom. She is also joined in studio by BlazeTV contributor Matthew Marsden and host of “The Bottom Line” Jaco Booyens.   Today's Sponsor:   NativePath: Let me get you started with up to 66% off and free shipping. Go to nativekrill.com/unfiltered. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Story at-a-glance Texas Senate Bill 25 requires processed foods with banned ingredients to display a warning label stating they are “not recommended for human consumption.” It was signed into law by Governor Greg Abbott on June 22, 2025 and takes effect September 1 The law targets 44 harmful ingredients already banned overseas, including artificial dyes, seed oils, bleached flour, and chemical preservatives found in everyday snacks Companies like PepsiCo, General Mills, and Walmart lobbied hard to weaken the bill, arguing it would hurt profits and create “confusion” for consumers Industry pressure already forced lawmakers to remove aspartame and high fructose corn syrup — two ingredients with known health risks — from the bill's scope Loopholes in the bill allow old packaging to remain on shelves for years, giving food companies time to keep selling toxic products without new warning labels

These messages are from Ocean City Baptist Church in Ocean City, NJ. Visit oceancitybaptist.org for more information.

On this episode of “Sara Gonzales Unfiltered,” a new bombshell report claims that the TSA, under the Biden administration, was illegally monitoring hundreds of conservative Americans for posts made on social media. Then, a federal appeals court sided with President Donald Trump and will allow Trump to operate a federalized section of the National Guard. Next, a Spanish teacher in the state of Washington is on the verge of being canceled for using the N-word while quoting from the book “To Kill a Mockingbird” in class. GUESTS: Today, Sara is joined by Matthew Mastronardi, host of “The Great Reassessment,” via Zoom. She is also joined in studio by Breanna Morello, host of "The Breanna Morello Show,” and Eric July, founder of Rippaverse Comics. Support Matthew Mastronardi at Change.org: https://www.change.org/p/reinstate-mr-mastronardi-at-west-valley-high-school You can also support him at Give Send Go: https://www.givesendgo.com/Mastronardi Timecodes: 00:00:00 TSA Monitoring Americans 00:17:52 Trump Wins National Guard Case 00:30:55 Matthew Mastronardi Interview Sponsors: Preborn: How many babies can you save? Please donate your best gift today — just dial #250 and say the keyword BABY. Or go to http://www.preborn.com/SARA. Fatty15: Fatty15 is on a mission to optimize your C15 levels to help support your long-term health and wellness. You can get an additional 15% off their 90-day subscription Starter Kit by going to http://www.fatty15.com/SARA and using code SARA at checkout. Royo Bread: Go to http://eatROYO.com and use my promo code UNFILTERED for your 20% OFF. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The lack of legal clarity around consent laws in the U.S. means that many sexual assaults, especially ones on college campuses and involving alcohol, are not legally crimes. But Texas lawmakers recently passed legislation to change that -- and the new law is set to take effect in September. Producer Courtney Norris has our look at the bipartisan bill and the woman it’s named after. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders

Matt ”Money” Smith from Petros & Money on AM 570 L.A. Sports talks about the Lakers being sold for $10B has a great Chick Hearn story // Costco gift cards – always manipulating the discount. Work-around using Costco gift cards // Tom Cruise is finally getting an Oscar — as will Dolly Parton, Debbie Allen and Wynn Thomas WHIP: How much has Tom Cruise grossed worldwide at the box office // Valley Village murder suspect tied to 2nd Murder and attempted murder -Prosecutors have filed new charges against Erick Escamilla, who was arrested last month after a man was murdered in April at an apartment complex in Valley Village Razor Blade Throat symptom from new strain of covid Nimbus  #PMS #AM570 #MattMoneySmith #Lakers #Costco #Coupons #Discounts #Oscars #TomCruise #DollyParton #WynnThomas #ValleyVillageMurder #RazorBladeThroat #Covid #Nimbus 

Trump tries to flex by sending in the military to L.A. Is he trying to exploit legal loopholes? (Spoiler alert: Yes.) Renato and Asha discuss the showcase showdown Trump has instigated between the states and the feds, and how far Trump can push his dictatorial dreams before being stopped by the courts…or by the people. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week, the gals examine some weird workarounds in the justice system. Topics include a cannibal lit major, public nudity, and some major dating app oversights. Get your hands on some California champagne, check your local offender registry, and tune in for Legal Loopholes.  For a full list of show sponsors, visit https://wineandcrimepodcast.com/sponsors. To advertise on Wine & Crime, please email ad-sales@libsyn.com or go to advertising.libsyn.com/winecrime.

Have you ever wanted something so badly you'd do anything to make it happen? Sixteen-year-old Mohamed decides to dig deep in his religion to take the next step with his crush. There's no love like young love… especially when it's a secret. This story contains strong language, discusses sexuality, and mentions corporal punishment. Please take care while listening.BIG thanks to Mohamed Ali for sharing his story with us! Mohamed is an artist and comedian, he just got back to Canada after spending the last few years working and performing in Southeast Asia. Check out his Instagram!Special thanks to Zahra Noorbakhsh. Big thanks as well to Zaiba Hasan & her crew from the podcast Mommying While Muslim.Produced by Regina Bediako, original score by Renzo Gorrio, artwork by Teo Ducot.Snap Music Spotlight: “Honest” by Jada Imani (produced by Dakim)Jada Imani is an East St. Louis-born, Bay Area-raised Hip-Hop R&B artist and organizer. In addition to a whole bunch of great music, Jada recently launched a new product line called “Good For The Soul”. Be sure to check out her Patreon and follow her on social media!This song comes to us from the compilation Water For The Town Vol. 4, a project series from SmartBomb created to raise mutual aid and awareness for various organizations and grassroots movements doing vital work right here in Oakland.The song is produced by Dakim, be sure to check out more of Dakim's music and follow them on Instagram!Season 16 – Episode 22 - Snap Classic  Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices